Hello Readers !!!
Greetings, this blog is based on an Assignment Paper : 109 :- Literary Theory & Criticism and Indian Aesthetics. And topic is,
{Indian Aesthetics and Cognitive Poetics: Can Rasa Theory Meet Modern Neuroscience?}
🔷 Details of Assignment :
Topic :- Indian Aesthetics and Cognitive Poetics: Can Rasa Theory Meet Modern Neuroscience?
Paper :- Paper No. 109 : Literary Theory & Criticism and Indian Aesthetics
Submitted to :- Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardi, Department of English, MKBU, Bhavnagar.
Submission date :- 17,April, 2025
🔷 Table of Contents :
- Abstract
- Keywords
- Introduction
- Rasa Theory: A Brief Overview
- Cognitive Poetics: Foundations and Concerns
- The Emotional Core: Rasa and Neuroscience of Emotion
- Sadharanikarana and Theory of Empathy
- language, Metaphor, and Imagination
- Bharata’s Rasa and the Neuropsychology of ‘Flow’
- Literary Aesthetics across Cultures: Toward a Cross-Cultural Poetics
- Critiques and Cautions cautions
- conclusion: Towards a Sahridaya Sciences
- References
🔷 Abstract :
This paper explores the potential dialogue between ancient Indian aesthetic theory, specifically the Rasa theory articulated in Bharata’s Natyashastra and later expanded by Abhinavagupta, and contemporary developments in cognitive poetics and neuroscience. Indian poetics, especially the concept of Rasa (aesthetic relish or emotional essence), is grounded in the universal emotional response evoked through artistic representation. Cognitive poetics, emerging from cognitive science, focuses on the psychological processes involved in reading and interpreting literature. By examining how the Rasa experience can align with cognitive-affective theories of emotion, mirror neuron activation, and empathetic imagination, this paper aims to bridge cultural and disciplinary divides. The conclusion argues for a cross-cultural aesthetics where ancient insights from Indian poetics enrich modern scientific understandings of literary experience.
🔷 Keywords:
Rasa Theory, Cognitive Poetics, Neuroscience, Bharata, Abhinavagupta, Emotion, Empathy, Mirror Neurons, Indian Aesthetics, Literary Response
🔷 Introduction:
Indian aesthetics, rooted in texts like Bharata’s Natyashastra (circa 2nd century BCE–2nd century CE), presents an enduring model of emotional engagement with art, particularly through the Rasa theory. This ancient model perceives art as a space for emotional transformation and transcendence. On the other hand, Cognitive Poetics, a modern interdisciplinary approach, draws from psychology, linguistics, and neuroscience to explain how readers understand and feel literature. This paper explores the intellectual and conceptual intersections between these two traditions and asks a provocative question: Can Rasa Theory meet modern neuroscience in the realm of literary and aesthetic experience?
.jpg)
1. Rasa Theory: A Brief Overview:
➡️ This introduces Bharata’s foundational aesthetic model from the Natyashastra, where Rasa is the emotional essence evoked through performance. Expanded by Abhinavagupta, the theory includes Sthayi Bhava, Vibhava, Anubhava, and Vyabhichari Bhava, culminating in a universalized aesthetic experience.
1.1 Origins in the Natyashastra
-
Bharata identified eight Rasas (Shringara, Hasya, Karuna, Raudra, Veera, Bhayanaka, Bibhatsa, Adbhuta), later expanded to nine (Shanta added).
-
Each Rasa emerges from a combination of:
-
Sthayi Bhava (stable emotion)
-
Vibhava (stimulus or cause)
-
Anubhava (external expressions)
-
Vyabhichari Bhava (transitory emotions)
1.2 Abhinavagupta’s Contribution
-
Emphasized Sahridaya (empathetic spectator) and Sadharanikarana (universalization of emotion).
-
The aesthetic experience is not personal but a shared emotional state, making it universally accessible.
2.1 Definition and Scope
-
Cognitive poetics explores the mental processes involved in interpreting literature.
-
It considers embodied cognition, conceptual metaphors, schema theory, and emotional resonance.
2.2 Key Theorists
-
Reuven Tsur, Peter Stockwell, Margaret Freeman, and others.
-
Emphasis on reader’s perspective, narrative immersion, and emotional simulation.
2.3 Cognitive Neuroscience and Literature
-
Neuroscientists like Antonio Damasio and Vittorio Gallese have studied how the brain reacts to art and narrative.
-
Mirror neurons play a role in emotional and physical empathy while reading or watching.
.png)
➡️ This point draws parallels between Rasa as simulated emotional experience and neuroscience models involving empathy, mirror neurons, and embodied cognition, suggesting emotional responses to art are neurologically grounded.
3.1 Rasa as Emotional Simulation
-
Rasa theory treats emotion as evoked, aesthetic, and shared, not real or personal.
-
Similarly, neuroscience explains aesthetic emotion through:
-
Simulation theory
-
Embodied cognition
-
Empathy networks
-
3.2 Mirror Neurons and Empathetic Engagement
-
Mirror neurons activate both when an action is performed and when it is observed.
-
When a spectator sees a tragic play (Karuna Rasa), their brain mirrors the character's emotions.
-
This aligns with Sahridaya – the sensitive viewer in Indian poetics.
3.3 Neuroaesthetics and Emotional Flow
-
Neuroaesthetics, pioneered by Semir Zeki, studies how the brain reacts to beauty, harmony, and emotion in art.
-
Bharata’s Rasa mechanism works on similar premises—emotional arousal without real-world consequence.
4. Sadharanikarana and Theory of Empathy:
➡️ The concept of Sadharanikarana in Indian poetics resonates with contemporary empathy studies, where emotional responses are universalized and de-personalized, echoing brain mechanisms involved in affective and cognitive empathy.
4.1 The Concept of Sadharanikarana
-
Emotional experiences are universalized in art.
-
The viewer is detached from personal stakes and absorbs the generalized emotion.
4.2 Empathy in Neuroscience
-
Empathy is both cognitive and affective, enabled by networks in the brain (like the anterior insula and medial prefrontal cortex).
-
Cognitive poetics calls this the "transportation effect"—when readers feel what the characters feel.
-
Both frameworks share a belief in shared affective experience.
🔹5.1 Metaphor and Conceptualization
-
Indian poetics treats language as powerful in evoking Rasa, not literal but suggestive (Dhvani).
-
Cognitive linguistics (Lakoff and Johnson) states metaphors structure thought, not just decorate language.
-
Both Indian and cognitive traditions believe language is embodied and emotionally charged.
🔹5.2 Vyanjana (Suggestion) and Literary Mind
-
Dhvani theory by Anandavardhana posits that meaning lies beyond the literal.
-
Similarly, cognitive poetics focuses on blending theory and schema disruption to evoke meaning.
Extending this convergence further, cognitive poetics employs tools like conceptual blending and schema disruption to explain how readers derive deeper meanings from literary texts. According to Fauconnier and Turner, readers unconsciously fuse multiple mental spaces to create new meanings, much like the vyanjana mechanism in Indian poetics which relies on the power of suggestion and the reader’s intuitive grasp. Similarly, schema disruption refers to literature’s tendency to defamiliarize and challenge cognitive patterns, thereby intensifying emotional and intellectual engagement. In both traditions, the act of reading becomes a transformative process, where the literal is just the surface and meaning unfolds through emotional resonance and imaginative participation. Ultimately, both Dhvani theory and cognitive poetics affirm that language, especially in poetry, is not about what is directly said but about what is silently evoked, making the metaphor the true engine of aesthetic and cognitive insight.
-
Described by psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, flow is a state of deep engagement.
-
Indian aesthetics believes Rasa creates a transcendental moment where the ego dissolves.
-
The Rasa experience could be seen as a form of aesthetic flow.
6.2 Time Perception and Neural Transport
-
In deep Rasa states (e.g., watching Abhijnanashakuntalam), spectators lose awareness of time.
-
Neuroscience links this to dopaminergic activity and default mode network suppression.
7. Literary Aesthetics across Cultures: Toward a Cross-Cultural Poetics
.png)
➡️ While cultural specifics vary, both Indian and cognitive traditions recognize the universality of emotions and the transformative power of art, pointing toward a shared, cross-cultural aesthetic language.
7.1 Cognitive Universality vs. Cultural Specificity
-
While emotions are universal, their triggers are culturally mediated.
-
Indian aesthetics provides a model of universal emotion, but filtered through culturally refined stimuli.
7.2 A Shared Aesthetic Language?
-
Both traditions believe:
-
Emotion is central to art.
-
Art offers a controlled space for emotional rehearsal.
-
The aesthetic experience transforms the self.
-
➡️ This section warns against the reductionism of neuroscience, which may oversimplify the spiritual and philosophical depth of Rasa, and highlights challenges in translating Sanskrit concepts into empirical models.
8.1 Problems of Reductionism
-
Neuroscience risks reducing rich, cultural experiences into measurable neural firings.
-
Rasa theory, in contrast, emphasizes qualitative depth and spiritual dimensions.
8.2 Translation Issues
-
Terms like Karuna, Sringara, or Vibhava have no exact neural correlates.
-
The metaphorical and philosophical depth may resist empirical measurement.
Indian Rasa theory and modern neuroscience offer complementary, not competing, visions of aesthetic experience. While Bharata and Abhinavagupta articulate a philosophy of emotional transformation through art, neuroscience and cognitive poetics examine how such transformations occur in the brain. Together, they open up possibilities for a cross-cultural, interdisciplinary aesthetics grounded in empathy, imagination, and shared emotion. As we increasingly value interdisciplinary and transcultural knowledge, these bridges between Rasa and cognitive poetics might help build not just better art theory, but a more empathetic and connected humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment