व्यतीत्य भावनावर्त्म यश्चमत्कारभारभूः ।
हृदि सत्त्वोज्ज्वले बाढं स्वदते स रसो मतः ॥
भावनायाः पदे यस्तु बुधेनानन्यबुद्धिना ।
भाव्यते गाढसंस्कारैश्चित्ते भावः स कथ्यते ॥
vyatītya bhāvanā-vartma yaś camatkāra-bhāra-bhūḥ |
hṛdi sattvojjvale bāḍhaṁ svadate sa raso mataḥ ||
bhāvanāyāḥ pade yas tu budhenānanya-buddhinā |
bhāvyate gāḍha-saṁskāraiś citte bhāvaḥ sa kathyate ||
(Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 2.5.132–133)
“That which completely surpasses the scope of bhāvanā (meditation), is a cause of an abundance of wonder, and is relished in a heart bright with [śuddha-] sattva [i.e., a sthāyi-bhāva] is known as rasa. That which is meditated on (bhāvyate) by a wise person (budha) of one-pointed (ananya) mind (buddhi) in a heart (citta) which is a seat of meditation (bhāvanā) [on the vibhāvas, vyabhicāri-bhāvas, and so forth] by virtue of deep saṁskāras is called bhāva.”
Commentary
atha kāraṇa-kāryādy-astitvena sāmye’pi rasa-bhāvayor bhedam āha vyatītyeti dvābhyam | sattvaṁ bhāva-kāraṇatvena pūrvam uddiṣṭaṁ śuddha-sattva-viśeṣaḥ | samādhi-dhyānayor ivānayor bheda iti bhāvaḥ |
(Durgama-saṅgamanī-ṭīkā)
“Now, although equal with respect to being cause and effect and so forth [of one another], the author states with two verses (beginning vyatītya … ) the distinction between rasa and bhāva [i.e., rati]. Sattva is the particular [form of] śuddha-sattva described earlier [in BRS 1.3.1] as being the cause of bhāva [i.e., rati]. The distinction between the two [i.e., between rasa and rati, syn., bhāva] is like that between samādhi [i.e., the attainment of absorption] and meditation [i.e., the practice of meditation (dhyāna)]. This is the purport.”
athātra vibhāvādibhir ādau bhāva-sākṣātkāro jāyate | tad-anantaraṁ bhāva-svarūpo bhavati | paścāt tair eva vibhāvādibhiḥ rasa-sākṣātkāro bhavatīti kramaḥ | tatra rati-rasayor viśeṣam ālakṣya bhedam āha—vyatītyeti dvābhyam | vyabhicāry-ādīnāṁ bhāvanā-mārgaṁ vyatītya yo rasaḥ svadate ity anvayaḥ | rasaḥ katham-bhūtaḥ? raty-apekṣayā atiśaya-camatkāra-janakaḥ | bhāvas tu vibhāva-vyabhicāry-ādīnāṁ bhāvanāspade citte bhāvyate | tathā ca—rasa-sākṣātkāra-kāle vibhāvādīnāṁ svātantryeṇānubhavo nāsti | rati-sākṣātkāra-kāle tu vibhāvādīnāṁ svātantryeṇāpy anubhavo’py asti | rasa-sākṣātkārāpekṣayā rati-sākṣātkārasya gāḍhatvābhāvād iti rati-rasayor bhedo jñeyaḥ |
(Bhakti-sāra-pradarśinī-ṭīkā)
“Now, in this regard, first, direct perception (sākṣātāra) of bhāva [i.e., rati] with the vibhāvas and so forth occurs. Thereafter, the nature (svarūpa) of bhāva arises. Then, with only those vibhāvas and so forth, direct perception (sākṣātāra) of rasa occurs. This is the sequence. In this regard, he states in two verses [beginning] vyatītya … the distinction between rati and rasa after observing their [respective] speciality. Rasa is that which is relished after surpassing the scope of meditation (bhāvanā) on the vyabhicāris and so forth. This is the syntactic connection (anvaya). Rasa is of what nature? It is productive of extreme wonder in comparison to rati. Bhāva [i.e. rati], however, is meditated on (bhāvyate) in a heart (citta) which is a seat of meditation (bhāvanā) on the vibhāvas, vyabhicāri-bhāvas, and so forth. Thus, at the time of direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of rasa, there is no experience of the vibhāvas and so forth independently, whereas at the time of direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of rati, there is also experience of the vibhāvas and so forth independently as well. Because of the absence of depth in direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of rati in comparison to direct perception (sākṣātkāra) of rasa, this distinction between rati and rasa is to be understood.”