D Angelika Heckel To turn again to the rasa-sutra: 'The appearence of rasa takes place by the composition of elements which establish the constellation of the plot, by the conveyance of elements corresponding to this constellation to the audience and the transitory modes of being/ Rosa as the specific quality of theatre stands, like theatre itself, in a special relationship to the world. As theatre takes place in the world, the world too has a presence in the theatre which has a reality irreducible to other 'more real' forms. The essential trait of a theatrical performance is to be sought in the presence of the situation, the sphere between the stage and the audience is the place ^ of this presence. This structure of presentation, as opposed to re-presentation, can be observed in the importance that is ascribed to abhinaya for the possibilities and the success of the performance. Abhinaya, as an act of conveyance, uses the means of the stage to establish the 'between' of the theatrical situation. However it cannot transport rasa. Rasa only appears when the correspondence between the audience and the stage is realized as event; for which realization there are also certain requirements on the part of the spectator. This 'between' appears when the spectator is grasped by the sense (artha) or the play through the bhava which is unfolded. The relationship with the world and its history, and not with something other-worldly, is that in which and out of which theatre and rasa takes place—according to the description offered by the Natyashastra. NOTES AND REFERENCES 1. See for example the explanations given by S. Levi, Le theatre Indien, Paris, 1963, p. 30 or the judgement of Winternitz, who thinks that a valuable piece of psychology is contained in the system of aesthetics presented in the Natyashastra, in: Geschichte der indischen Literatur, Vol. 3, pp. 9-10. See also, S.K. De, Sanskrit Poetics as a Study of Aesthetics, Berkeley, 1963. Gnoli sees in the Natyashastra an "empirical psychology', in: The Aesthetic Experience according to Abhinavagupta, Varanasi, 1968, p. xiv. 2. What is understood here by 'aesthetics' is the mainstream European aesthetic tradition based on the dichotomies indicated. Authors like Kant or Holderlin have to be discussed separately, because they differ from this 'mainstream' in decisive points. 3. See note 1. 4. M. Ghosh, for example, translates bhava as 'psychological state'; see The Natyashastra: Text and Translation, Calcutta, 1967, Vol. 1, p. 218. 5. On this point in connection with andent Greek tragedy see, D. Jahnig, Welt-Geschichte: Kun-stgeschichte, Koln, 1975, pp. 137-54. 6. As.it is the tendency in H.W. Wells, The Classical Drama of India, Berkeley, 1983. 7. Suggestions as to the difference between the European and Indian concept of 'personality' in S. Kakar, The Inner World, Delhi, 1981; see Introduction. 8. A discussion of the situation to be found in L. Rocher's, 'The Textual Tradition of the Bharatiyanatyashastra-A Philological Assessment', in Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde Sudasiens, XXV, 1981, pp. 107-30. 9. S.A. Srinivasan, 'On the Composition of the Natyashastra', Reinbek, 1980, Studien zurlndologie und Iranistik. 10. Quotations are from the Baroda Edition of the Natyashastra: R.M. Kavi, Natyashastra with the Commentary of Abhinavagupta, Baroda (Gaekwad's Oriental Series), 1926-1964. Vols. 1-4; in the following: NS. 11. NS, 1,54. The relation of the recital to the episode with Siva in Chapter 4 will not be discussed here. 12. See also C.M. Byrski, Concept of Ancient Indian Theatre, Delhi, 1974. Numbers 17-18