Rasa: "The Life of Poetry"

Ingalls uses the Ramayana to illustrate the aesthetic pleasure( in which he identifies as rasa) that one gains from poetry. He shows how Abhinava "distinguishes the primary production of the rasas (flavors) from the secondary production of pleasure and pain" (112). In other words, Abhinava argues that the literal meaning of a word suggests the rasa, and does not generate it. He clearly shows that when there are words directly naming the rasa, then and only then is there a rasa-experience (112). In contrast, Ananda argues, "rasa derives from both meaning and word" (113), and thus the words give a rasa experience and does not only suggest it like Abhinava states. Through the mention of their arguments, Ingalls argues that it is this element (rasa) that arises in the Ramayana; weather one regards it with Abhinava or Ananda. In his essay, ‘The Ramayana in the Theology and experience of the Srivaisnava Community", Narayanan discusses this rasa element that is present in the Ramayana, through the eyes of the Srivaisnava community.

With the introduction of the mythology of Sanskrit epics in Tamil literature, Tamil poets for the first time were able to participate in the story of Rama. Narayanan clearly depicts the differences between the Tamil interpretation of the Ramayana and the Sanskrit Ramayana, in which I believe this process allows for the commonality between them to become visible. As Ingalls stresses the rasa experience remains the same regardless of the process that is used to arise this experience. Narayanan states: "the mention of jasmine flowers will reinforce in the minds of the Tamil audience, the grief of separation that Sita feels (not sure because where I got it from it did not have page numbers). Therefore, through the use of symbols the Tamil audience is able to gain a rasa experience by looking beyond the literal meaning of the symbols for example, Sita comes to represent the human soul and Lanka represents this life. With this representation on stage the story becomes relevant to every human being as we become the characters and thus, this participation yields an aesthetic experience.

Does the Tamil interpretation of the Sanskrit epic, in a sense de-secularize the Sanskrit Ramayana by bringing back the focus to the veneration of God, which in turn gives rise to the bhakti tradition? Where the recounting of the Rama story becomes a symbol of God, and a tool through which one can worship God. If this is the case, the aesthetic experience becomes a religious experience as well, as this life (Lanka) is destructed and the human soul (Sita) is free.
In this case the audience members do not only experience compassion (grief), from the Ramayana, but they also have an experience that is beyond explanation. Can this experience be related to the experience of a Vedic performance? Or does this experience go beyond that as well?

In the Tamil interpretation of the Ramayana, rasa experience becomes an experience related to God. Any emotion expressed becomes symbolic of the emotions individual encompass in relation to God. When the audience becomes the cowhide girl they express the emotion of love, which is symbolic of the love we give to God, the grief that is experienced, becomes the grief of the human soul (Sita) when we are separated from God and also when become part of this life which is filled of "captivating worldly objects (Lanka). In a sense the Tamil interpretation of the Ramayana is intrinsically related to ones relationship with God, and thus we can call it a religious performance similar to that of the Vedic sacrifice.