365bet娱乐

230
but rather included as two sub-varieties of preyas.
82 Madhusudana, furthermore, gives full recognition to several
varieties of bhaktirasa that the Gosv膩mins de-emphasize or
ignore completely.
Of course, these differences may well be
little more than minor variations on the same theme.
It
remains, nevertheless, that the correspondences between
these two systems of cataloging devotional sentiment are not
always easy to discern. This fact, combined with
Madhusudana's willingness to give emotions not directed
toward the Lord the status of rasa, may be taken as evidence
of the independence of his work from that of the Bengal
school.
It is significant, however, that Madhusudana's
Suddha, even though he rejects the aestheticians' s膩nta, is
hard to distinguish from the Vai峁ａ箛avas' version of the
latter sentiment. The term suddha, we have seen, is
sometimes used by the Gosv膩mins themselves to designate the
sth膩yibh膩va of santa. Is this an indication that
Madhusudana was borrowing from the Vai峁ａ箛ava tradition?
cannot be sure. In any case, the most important difference
between Madhus眉dana's system and that of the Vai峁ａ箛avas has
yet to be discussed. It is not so much formal as
We
axiological; that is to say, it concerns the valuation of
the rasas listed rather than the question of which
sentiments happen to be included in the lists themselves.