1. Theory of Rasa in Sanskrit Drama A Comparative Study of General Dramatic Literature Hari Ram Mishra

THE

Theory of Rasa in Sanskrit Drama WITH A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF GENERAL DRAMATIC LITERATURE

HARI RAM MISHRA, M. A. (English), M. A. (Sanskrit) Gold Medallist, B.T., LL.B., D.Litt., SOMETIME HONORARY RESEARCH FELLOW,

Department of Sanskrit, BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY; & HEAD Of the Department of Studies in Oriental Learning, UNIVERSITY OF SAUGAR

VINDHYACHAL PRAKASHAN, PUBLISHERS & BOOKSELLERS, BHOPAL, SAGAR & CHHATARPUR,

Head Office-CHHATARPUR ( Madhya Pradesh ).

C Hari Ram Mishra, 1964

Published by : M. K. Manav, Vindhyachal Prakashan, Chhatarpur, M. P. ( India ).

First edition-1000 Copies

Published under the authority of the University of Saugar. This thesis was accepted for the D. Litt. Degree of Banaras Hindu University in 1947.

Price Rs. 41=00

Printed by : Narendra Bhargava, Bhargava Bhushan Press, Varanasi.

To

My Revered Parents :

LATE PANDIT KANHAIYA LAL SHASTRI

&

LATE SHRIMATI POONA BAI

-- HARI RAM MISHRA

FOREWORD

Dr. H. R. Mishra has written 'The Theory of Rasa in Sanskrit Drama with a comparative study of General Drama- tic Literature'. It has an Introduction, a Bibliography and nine chapters. The first three chapters deal with Drama, chapters four to six are devoted to the treatment of Rasa and the last three show the application of Rasa to Drama. The Western Dramaturgy has been drawn upon both in theory and practice wherever comparison is natural, illustrative, enlightening and instructive. The work has the stamp of originality. It bears testi- mony to the profundity of thinking, the width of erudition and the critical acumen of the author. It is a very valuable contribution to the literary criticism in general and to the Eastern and Western Dramaturgies in particular. Such a thorough and comprehensive comparative study is sure to engross attention of scholars of all climes. It marks an advancement in human knowledge and I feel great pleasure in recommending it to scholars.

Nishat Manzil, D. P. Mishra Bhopal. Chief Minister, 27-12-1964 Madhya Pradesh. Ex-Vice-Chancellor, University of Saugar.

PREFACE

Dr. Hari Ram Mishra has produced an interesting work on the problem of Rasa with special reference to its relation with Sanskrit Drama. He has studied the subject in its different aspects and has tried to present it, as far as possible, in a comprehensive form. He has written on the origin and evolution of Sanskrit Drama and on its constituents and types. Having accepted the traditional viewpoint on the essence of Rasa he has made a sustained and commendable attempt to follow the course of the development of the conception through successive stages in different centuries. Ultimately he has sought to find out and reveal the relation which subsists between Rasa and Drama as a work of Art. It seems to me, as the Siva Sūtras appear to suggest, that the ancient Indian conception of Drama consists in the realisation that Atma endowed with its inherent Power and playing all possible parts is the Nata, the senses are the spectators (Preksakāņi) and the Antarātmā is Prekșāgrha or stage. The object of Abhinaya is evidently taken to be the manifestation of Rasa. This sums up the entire philosophy of Rasa and Drama. | It is a valuable work and I commend it with great pleasure to the attention of scholars interested in the subject.

Gopinath Kaviraj, M. A., D. LITT., 2 (A) Sigra, Mahamahopadhyaya, Varanasi. Padma Vibhushana. 11.11.1964

CONTENTS Page

i. Introduction .. 3

ii. Bibliography 15

iii. Transliteration of the Devanāgarī alphabet into the Roman alphabet (with diacritical marks) 29

PART ONE-SANSKRIT DRAMA Chapter 1. Sanskrit Drama as an Art 1

2. Evolution of Drama (Sanskrit) with an appendix on 'Origin of Drama (Sanskrit)' 46

3. Sanskrit Drama-Its constituents

and types 99

PART TwO-RASA 4. Concept of Rasa-Its evolution and development 197

5. Some Considerations of the Con- cept of Rasa 309

6. Rasa-Its constituents and relation with Nātya 404

PART THREE-RASA IN SANSKRIT DRAMA

7. Rasa-The predominant factor in Sanskrit Drama 481

2

8. Different Rasas predominant in different types of Sanskrit Drama .. 549

9. Sanskrit Dramaturgy and English Dramaturgy-A brief Comparative Study from the Standpoint of Rasa .. 583

INTRODUCTION

The publication of Bharata's 'Nātyaśāstra' gave an impetus to a critical study, not only of Rasa as an essence of literary compositions ( and among them of drama in particu- lar ) advocating the predominance of the Rasa school but also of drama and its structure. Since then several old Sanskrit dramas have been newly published ; so also many standard works on literary criticism in which theories of Rasa and the laws of dramatic compositions have been ex- pounded. Several discourses devoted to a methodical dis- cussion, each in its own way and from its own peculiar standpoint, of most of the relevant points have also been published. The above discourses are, no doubt, ample, admirable and enlightening on particular points, but in none of them is to be found a comprehensive treatment of the relation of Rasa to Sanskrit drama and of its place in the latter. This is a subject of great importance and demands careful attention of a scholar. I, therefore, set myself to this study and tried to bring out the results of my investigations in the form of a monograph presented in the following pages. Such a study, however, requires a full consideration of Sanskrit drama and of Rasa. But most of the works availa- ble in this connection, though illuminating, do not fully meet this requirement as they are more or less of a partial character, each of them being confined to a particular aspect or phase and not dealing in an integral way with the subject. Hence enough space has been devoted to separate consi-

4

derations of Sanskrit drama and of Rasa before illustrating fully the relation of Rasa to drama and its place in the latter. Drama represents the culmination of the development of art. It is, therefore, the highest point of interest in the field of Aesthetics. It is the flowering of a nation's mind which ever endeavours to express itself in the best form possible. The development in this direction corresponds with the march of civilization towards progress. Countries as Greece and India are credited with very ancient civilizations. The literary remains of the countries mentioned above stand out very prominently. Works on criticism as well as dramatic works written in these countries clearly bear out that there was an all round development of arts. In Greece Aristotle has made contributions to almost all arts and sciences. His 'Poetics' is a compendium which deals with the canons of criticism on various literary forms evolved and developed by his time. It is even now a source of inspiration as it serves as the 'Pierian spring' to Western scholars. The verdict of centuries stands justly and sincerely in favour of the 'Poetics.' In India Bharata still stands as honoured and authoritative as he must have been in his time. His 'Natyā- śāstra' is a compendium which sums up various traditions and views current in his time as well as his ideas and theories in connection with Sanskrit dramaturgy. His work deals mainly with the various rules of dramaturgy. It presupposes the development of different arts as Histrionics, Scenics, Music, Architecture etc. which have all been handled therein very cautiously and carefully. Of them some have under- gone subsequent development. Chapters on Music as dealt with by him contain details which baffle now even expert intellect. Rules on Sanskrit dramaturgy elaborated by the time of Bharata were binding in his time. But gradu-

5

ally many of the details as recorded by him began to lose importance and significance, so much so that many of them began to be simply hinted at by later dramaturgists. The preliminaries connected with the Pūrvaranga are instances in point. How they were considered. later on as insigni- ficant is reflected in the works of the dramatists who simply refer to them in some cases, while in others even maintain silence. These rules, however, are fine and subtle, and they bear testimony to the keen insight of the dramaturgists into human nature. Before Bharata many of these rules had been formulated ; whatever in this connection was left untouched was handled by Bharata. He, therefore, recorded what had already been done as well as made his contribution to the subject. After Bharata the period of the formulation of rules on dramaturgy was over. Later Sanskrit dramatur- gists followed him either slavishly or with departures which were unimportant or negligible. The study of these rules is a matter of great interest and importance. Modern scho- lars have attempted it from different points of view. S. Lévi in 'Le Théâtre Indien' and S. Konow in 'The Indian Drama' (both translated into English by Dr. S. C. Mukerji, the manuscripts of which I had the privilege of using) have tried to study these rules. Keith in 'The Sanskrit Drama' has also tried to study these rules in an exhaustive and com- prehensive way as far as possible. Though his canvas is sufficiently wide, full justice to the subject in all its details seems not to have been done. The author has attempted the study of the rules from the theoretical and the practical points of view separately. As has been shown in the course of the present exposition the two aspects cannot be separated. Another scholar, Kulkarni, in his 'Sanskrit Drama & Drama- tists' has summarized these rules in the first two chapters,

6 c

curtailing some of them to suit the canvas of his work. Miss Godavari Ketkar in her 'Bhāratīya Nātyasāstra' has studied them, and it is a study based solely on Bharata's Nātyaśāstra. Dr. Yajnik in 'The Indian Theatre' has made a rapid and preliminary study of these rules in the first part. Mankad in 'The Types of Sanskrit Drama' deals with the evolution of drama and records the constituents of different types of Sanskrit drama. Dr. Mainkar in 'The Theory of the Samdhis and Samdhyangas.'1 studies the rules principally in connection with the ingredients of the plot in the Sanskrit drama. The necessity, therefore, of a separate study of these rules in an exhaustive manner is keenly felt. But the study of these rules can be attempted only when the central aim of the dramaturgists and the dramatists is fully considered. It has been shown in the following pages that the principal aim of the dramatists as recognized by the dramaturgists is to evoke in the spectators the different Sthāyibhavas maturing into Rasas. Rasa may, therefore, be looked upon as the predominant constituent of Sanskrit drama. It controls the other constituents. The dramatists treat it in its different ways and arrangements in their works. Being of so much importance and significance, its study on a comprehensive scale is felt as a necessity for a clear under- standing of the rules on Sanskrit dramaturgy. Questions as the evolution and development of the concept of Rasa,

1. The Theory of the Samdhis and Samdhyangas by Dr. T. G. Mainkar, 9 Extension, Sangli. (An unpublished thesis approved for the Ph.D. Degree of the University of Bombay, which I had the privilege of using through the courtesy of Dr. Mainkar himself, 1946) Recently Published by Messrs. Joshi and Lokhande, Tilak Road, Poona 2.

7 the process of its realization, its classification etc. need full consideration. A few original and enlightening treatises dealing with various aspects of the problem of Rasa may better be very briefly surveyed here. Max Lindenau in his 'Rasa Lehre' and Dr. S. C. Mukerji in his 'Le Rasa' (both translated into English by Dr. S. C. Mukerji, the manuscripts of which I had the privilege of using ) have each attempted a study of Rasa. The above studies, though comprehensive in their own way, take into consideration only the orthodox and popular writers on Rasa. Sankaran in his 'Some Aspects of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit' discusses the problem of Rasa mainly in its evolution and development though other aspects of the problem are also touched upon. P. Śāstrī's 'The Philosophy of Aesthetic Pleasure'1 gives much more than a detailed description of the four orthodox theories ; it, however, hardly falls within its scope to consider almost all the aspects of the problem of Rasa. Vatve's 'Rasavi- marśa' is a study of Rasa on the basis of modern European psychology and is, therefore, concerned with the discussion of the aspects of the problem of Rasa mostly connected there- with. De's 'History of Sanskrit Poetics' and Kane's 'History of Alankära Literature'2 are general works on poetics and, as such, give the same significance to Rasa as to other constituents of poetry. Keith in 'A History of Sanskrit Literature'3 has, according to his scheme, devoted

1. The Philosophy of Aesthetic Pleasure by Pañcāpagesa Śāstrī, Annamalai University, Annamalainagar, 1940. 2. History of Alankāra Literature by P. V. Kane (An introduction to the Sāhityadarpana edited by P. V. Kane). 3. A History of Sanskrit Literature by A. B. Keith, Oxford, at the Clarendon Press, 1928.

8

a narrow space to the study of Rasa mainly in its evolution and development. The concept of Rasa as studied in Lahiri's 'Concepts of Rīti and Guna in Sanskrit Poetics' is connected with, and subordinate to, the concepts of Rīti and Guna. The treatment of Rasa in Joga's 'Saundaryaśodha Āni Ānandabodha' is mainly interpretative. De's 'Vaișņava Faith and Movement in Bengal' is naturally confined to the Bengal Vaisnava section of the Rasa writers. The canvas of Raghavan's 'Bhoja's Śņngāra Prakāśa' is, no doubt, wide but it is professedly based on, and devoted to the study of, Bhoja's work. His 'Some Concepts of the Alankāra Śāstra'1 deals with some of the constituents of poetry and other literary topics ; and his 'The Number of Rasas' does not at all go into the essential problem of Rasa but deals with its varieties only as recognized in the canonical works on the subjects. Dr. Bhagvan Das in his 'Science of Emotions'2 considers emotions and sentiments mainly on the basis of the Yoga system. R. N. Tagore in his lecture on art refers in his own way to the theory of Rasa, but it is only a passing reference and does not amount to a systematic ana- lysis of the concept. He says, "Our emotions are the gastric juices which transform this world of appearance into the more intimate world of sentiments. On the other hand, this outer world has its own juices, having their various qua- lities which excite our emotional activities. This is called in our Sanskrit rhetoric Rasa, which signifies outer juices having their response in inner juices of our emotions. And

1. Some Concepts of the Alankāra Śāstra by V. Raghavan, The Adyar Library, Adyar, 1942. 2. Science of Emotions by Dr. Bhagvan Das, Third Edition, The Theosophical.Publishing House, Adyar, Madras.

9

a poem, according to it, is a sentence or sentences containing juices, which stimulate the juices of emotion. It brings to us ideas, vitalized by feelings, ready to be made into the life- stuff of our nature."1 The above survey makes it quite evident that none of the aforesaid works in the avowed scheme has put before it a comprehensive study of the problem of Rasa, both in its historical and interpretative aspects, as a subject of its special investigation. But as without such an analysis it is not possible to make a critical study of Sanskrit drama of which Rasa is held to be the predominant element, it has been thought proper to attempt it in a separate section of the present study. The present work is divided into three parts, each having three chapters. In European literature drama is considered as an art. In Indian literature also it is enumerated as one of the sixty-four arts. Hence in the first chapter of the first part the Sanskrit drama has been studied as an art in its origin, its excellence over other forms of art and its being the best form even among all the literary forms ; questions as to whether drama is realistic or idealistic from different points of view have also been discussed here as they are quite re- levant. The second chapter deals with the evolution of Sanskrit drama as a literary form of art from different points of view and an appendix on the origin of Sanskrit drama has been added to it in order to show the origin of different constituents from different sources. The third chapter studies the different constituents and the different types of

1. Personality (pp. 14-15) by Rabindranath Tagore, Macmillan & Co. Limited, St. Martin's Street, London, 1942.

10

Sanskrit drama. Questions as to which type came first have also been discussed as far as possible. These three chapters constitute the first part. In it the effort has been directed to arrange in a regular and systematic form the materials that lie scattered here and there, and a comparative study has been undertaken which has not been made till now. Sanskrit drama has been treated in some details in order that the background may be fully prepared for a detailed study of Rasa, its chief constituent. This study forms the subject-matter of the second part. The fourth chapter is devoted to the question of the evolution of Rasa. It may be pointed out that in this connection the established chronology of the classical authorities has been accepted. In the fifth chapter an approach has been made to the problem, so far as the essentials are concerned, from different points of view. The process of the realization of Rasa, its classification, the various Rasa-syntheses, the contradiction between Rasa and Rasa and the ways in which they are reconciled etc. have all been dealt with. In the sixth chapter the constituents of Rasa have been considered. Problems in connection with their conjoined operation, different kinds of one and the same Rasa on the basis of the Vibhavas, the possibility of the Bhā- vas producing Rasas and the relation of Rasa with Nātya have been taken up. The arrangement in these chapters is novel and the contents are claimed to be mostly original. This part, too, contains a comparative study not only with the current literary criticisms of the West but also with some authors in modern Indian Languages. The third patt of the work is mostly original. The seventh chapter has been devoted to the illustration of Rasa as the predominant constituent of Sanskrit drama, whereas the eighth chapter illustrates its predominance in different

11

types of Sanskrit drama. The ninth chapter is a comparative study of English and Sanskrit dramaturgies. Significant and important departures from English dramaturgy have been noted. This comparative study was long felt as a great necessity for a clear understanding of drama. Yajnik in 'The Indian Theatre' in its first part only touches a few points in this connection. P. S. S. Pattar's 'Studies in Dhvanyā- loka'1 also makes an attempt at such a study but it is very meagre. The lines of study adopted have varied according to necessities. Due emphasis has been laid on the orthodox views of Sanskrit scholars. Where necessary they have been compared to the views of Western scholars. The psychological principles and rules have generally served as guide when attempting this comparison. At places detailed reports of the views of Western scholars have been given, as for instance accounting for the pleasure accruing to the audience at a dramatic representation. In this connection the views of some writers in modern Indian Languages on the subject have also received attention. A brief survey of the history of literary criticism in the West, summing up its views on tragedies, comedies and tragi-comedies, has been made in order that it may throw some light on the differences of the Eastern and the Western standpoints. This will account for the apparent impropriety and discursiveness of these details. Care has been taken to ensure freedom from prolixity : what appears as a repetition of thought or lan- guage here and there is really not repetition but mere summ- 1. Studies in Dhavanyāloka by P. S. Subbarama Pattar, Siromani, Printed at The Mangalodayam Press, Trichur, First Impression, 1938.

12

ing up of previous thoughts in the interest of clarification. The chronology of Sanskrit poeticians and dramaturgists followed in connection with the study of the evolution of Rasa is based on the conclusions1 arrived at by De in his standard work. An apology is needed for the technical terms. As the technical vocabulary of rhetorical terms in English corresponding to their Sanskrit originals is still in an imperfect condition, liberty has been taken in the use of these terms as accepted by standard writers. By way of illustration it may be pointed out that such terms as Rasa, the Sthāyibhāva ( sometimes written as the Bhāva only where the sense of the Sthayibhava is easily inferred from the con- text ), the Vyabhichāribhāva, the Ālambana Vibhāva, the Uddīpana Vibhāva and the Sāttvikabhāva have been rendered respectively as sentiment, permanent emotion (sometimes rendered as emotion only where the sense of permanent emotion is easily inferred from the context), transitory or impermanent emotion or accessary, dependent, excitant and psychic condition. It will not be out of place to consider in brief the impli-

1. The following works have also been consulted and utilized, when necessary, in connection with the chronology :- (a) Samskrta Sāhitya Kā Samkșipta Itihāsa by Profs. S. J. Joshi & V. N. Bharadvaja, Benares, 1933. (b) History of Alankāra Literature by P. V. Kane. (c) A History of Sanskrit Literature by A. B. Keith. (d) History of Classical Sanskrit Literature by M. Krishnamachariar, Madras, 1937. (e) Some Aspects of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit by Sankaran. (f) Rasavimarśa by K. N. Vatve. (g) The Theory of the Samdhis and Samdhyangas by Dr. Mainkar. (h) Samskrta Sāhitya Kā Itihāsa pt. I by K. L. Poddar.

13

cations of the title of the present work. The Sanskrit drama has many and different constituents. To study it from the standpoint of each and every constituent surely requires a very wide canvas. And the narrow limits of a single ex- position do not allow such a vast study. The present attempt has, therefore, been confined to the study of Sanskrit drama in the light of its predominant constituent, that is, Rasa which is the main consideration in a literary composition. It is only the ten principal types of Sanskrit drama to which the detailed study has been directed as it is in them that Rasa predominates. In other types the Bhāva predominates ; therefore they have been left out of consideration. As shown in the outlines of the present work as well as in the lines of study adopted, the study for thoroughness has been made a comparative one, that is to say views of European and other scholars on different points connected with dra- maturgy have received attention. Keeping all these consi- derations in mind it is not inappropriate to call this work, 'The Theory of Rasa in Sanskrit Drama with a Comparative study of general dramatic literature.' I have tried to make this study as thorough as possible, but in view of the vastness of the subject and of the peculiar difficulties involved in its study, it is very likely that inspite of utmost efforts for accuracy and precision there have been lapses here and there. I am conscious of the inadequacy of my equipment and of the limitations under which I had to work. Under such circumstances I can only look up to the indulgence of the scholarly readers. I consider it here my bounden duty to express my heart- felt gratitude to the learned professors of the Benares Hindu University, both of the Department of Sanskrit of the Central Hindu College and of the College of Oriental

14

Learning who have always extended their kindness in guiding and helping me in my study. I am deeply indebted to other renowned Sanskrit scholars and professors who have very kindly given me occasional guidance and help even at the expense of their precious time. I am thankful to the staff of the Benares Hindu University Library and of the Library of Sarasvatī Bhavana, Benares for all possible help rendered to me in procuring books, journals etc. for me and allowing me use of their volumes. In the end I also acknowledge my indebtedness to institutions, writers and others whose books, journals etc. I used as and when needed. HARI RAM MISHRA

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ABBREVIATIONS OF PUBLISHING AGENCIES AND

PUBLISHED SERIES

B. O. R. I. .. Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona. C. O. S. .. Calcutta Oriental Series, Calcutta. C. S. S. .. Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, Benares.

G. N. C. .. Gopala Narayan & Co., Bombay. G. O. S. .. Gaekwad's Oriental Series, Baroda. G. P. .. Government Press. : K. M. .. Kāvya Mālā, Bombay. K. S. S. .. Kashi Sanskrit Series, Benares. MM. & Co ... MM. & Co. Ltd., St. Martin's Street, London. N. P. S. .. Nāgarī Prachāriņī Sabhā, Benares. N. S. .. Nirņaya Sagara, Bombay. S. B. T. .. Sarasvatī Bhavana Texts, Benares. V. P. .. Venkateshvara Press, Bombay.

ABBREVIATIONS OF BOOKS

A. A. . Coquelin : The Art of the Actor, London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd. Museum Street, 1932. A. A. A. .. : Appendix to the above. A. C. Śaktibhadra : Āścharyachūdāmaņi, Śrī Bāla- manoramā Press, Mylapore, Mad- ras, 1926. A. C. M. .. Appayya Dīkșita : Chitra Mimāmsā, K. M. 38, 1893. A. D. .. Mahādeva : Adbhutadarpaņa, K. M. 55, 1896.

A. D. M. .. Nandikeśvara : Abhinayadarpaņa, Calcutta Sanskrit Series, No. V, 1934.

16

A. H. P. S. .. K. C. Pandeya : Abhinavagupta, An Historical and Philosophical Study, C. S. S., Studies Vol. I, 1935. A. K. N. .. Appayya Dīkşita : Kuvalayānanda, N. S., 1907. A. P. .. : Agnipurāņa, Gaņeśa Press, Cal-

A. P. C. Abercrombie cutta, 1879. : Principles of Criticism, London, Victor Gollancz Ltd., 14 Henrietta Street, Convent Garden, 1932. A. R. .. Murāri : Anargharāghava, K. M. 5, 1894. A. S. .. Keśava Miśra : Alankāraśekhara, K. M. 50, 1895. A. S. S. .. Śrīmadachyutarāya Sāhityasāra, N. S., 1906. A. S. T. .. Ruyyaka : Alankārasūtra, Travancore G. P. Trivandrum, 1915. A. V. C. .. Kșemendra : Auchityavichāracharchā, K. M. Pt. I, 1886.

B. A. L. .. Bacon : The Advancement of Learning, Government Central Book Depot, Bombay, 1882. B. B. D. .. Baladeva Upa- dhyaya : Bhāratīya Darśana, Sachchid Gran- thmālā No. 1, Benares, 1945. B. C. K. .. Rai Krishna Das : Bhārata Kī Chittrakalā, N. P. S., Samvat 1996. B. H. C. .. Bāna : Harsacharita, Ed. with notes etc. by P.V. Kane, First Edition, 1918. B. K. D. .. Bāna : Kādambarī, N. S., 1890. B. M. K. .. Rai Krishna Das : Bhāratīya Mūrtikalā, N. P. S., Samvat 1996.

B. M. M. .. Bhavabhūti Mālatīmadhava, Pub. by C. R. Devadhara & N. G. Suru, Fer- gusson College, Poona 4, 1935. B. N. .. Hariharopādhyāya Bhartrharinirveda, K. M. 29, 1892. B. N. C. .. Bhāsa : Bhāsanāțakachakra (A Collection of Bhāsa's 13 plays). Oriental Book Agency, Poona, 1937.

17

B. P. Śāradātanaya : Bhāvaprakāśana, G. O. S. No. XLV, 1930

B. R. .. Rājaśekhara : Bālarāmāyaņa, New Vālmīki Press, Calcutta, 1884.

B. R. M. .. Bhānudatta : Rasamañjarī, Hari Krishna Niban- dhamala No. 4, 1929.

B. R. T. .. Bhānudatta : Rasatarangiņī, V. P., Samvat 1971.

B. S. K. .. Bhoja : Sarasvatīkaņțhābharaņa, Nārāyaņa Press, Calcutta, 1894. B. S. P. .. Bhoja : Extract summaries from all chapters with some chapters in full from Bhoja's Sṛńgāraprakāśa, Law Printing House, Madras, 1926.

B. S. T. .. Bradley : Shakespearean Tragedy, MM. & Co., 1937.

Br. Up. .. : Brhadāraņyakopanișad.

B. U. K. .. Bhavabhūti : Uttararāmacharita Ed. by Kale, Messrs. Ramachandra Govind & Sons, 147 Kalbadevi Road, Bom- bay, 1901.

B. V. S. R. .. Baladeva Vidyā- bhūșaņa : Siddhāntaratna Pt. I, S. B. T. No. 10, 1924.

C. K. .. Kșemīśvara : Chaņdakauśika, Kāvyaprakāśa Press, Samvat 1924. C. K. V. .. Chirañjīva Bhațțā- chārya : Kāvyavilāsa, S. B. T. No. 16., 1925.

C. O. D. .. Fowler : The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English, Oxford, At the Clarendon Press, 1934.

C. R. G. .. P. C. Lahiri : Concepts of Rīti and Guna in Sanskrit Poetics, Pub. by the University of Dacca, Ramna, Dacca, 1937.

18

Ch. Up. .. : Chhāndogya Upanișad.

D. D. .. Elizabeth Drew : Discovering Drama, Jonathan Cape, Thirty Bedford Square, London, 1937. D. D. L. .. Dataller : Drama and Life, Thomas Nelson & Sons Ltd., London Edinburgh Paris Melbourne Toranto and : New York, 1938.

D. K. M. .. Dāmodara Miśra : Kuțțanīmata, K. M. Pt. III, 1887. D. L. .. Ānandavardhana : Dhvanyāloka, K. S. S. No. 135, 1940.

D. P. .. Elizabeth Drew : Discovering Poetry, Oxford Uni- versity Press, London : Hum- phrey Milford, 1933. D. R. .. Dhanañjaya : Daśarūpaka, Gujarati Printing Press, Bombay No. 1, 1927.

D. S. P. .. S. K. De :. Sanskrit Poetics, Luzac & Co., 46, Great Russell Street, London W. C. Vol. I, 1923 & Vol. II, 1925.

D. V. .. Kāñchanāchārya : Dhanañjayavijaya, K. M. 54, 1895. E. D. P. .. Dryden : An Essay of Dramatic Poesy with A Defence of an Essay of Dra- matic Poesy, Oxford, At the Clarendon Press, Third Edition.

E. V. Vidyādhara : Ekāvalī, Bombay Sanskrit Series No.63,Government Central Book Depot, Bombay, 1903. F. I. P. · .. Nobel : The Foundations of Indian Poetry, C. O. S. No. 16. E. 9., 1925.

G. A. .. Gokulanātha : Amrtodaya, K. M. 59, 1897. G. B. N. .. Godavari Ketkar : Bhāratīya Nāțyaśāstra, Āryabhū- șana Press, 1928.

G. E. I. .. Hopkins : The Great Epic of India, New Haven : Yale University Press MDCCCCXX.

G. K. P. .. Govinda : Kāvyapradīpa, K. M. 24, 1891.

19

G. K. T. : Gadya-Kāvya - Tarańgiņī, Ed. by Dr.J. P. Sharma, Pub. by Nand- kishore & Bros., Benares, 1944. G. T. R. .. P. K. Guha : Tragic Relief, Oxford University. Press, London : Humphrey Mil- ford, MCMXXXII. H. I .L. .. Hudson : An Introduction to the Study of Literature, George G. Harrap & Co.Ltd., London Bombay Sydney, 2nd Edition Enlarged. H. K. S. .. Hemachandra : Kāvyānuśāsana, K. M. 70., 1901. H. O. I. L. .. Weber : The History of Indian Literature, London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. Ltd., Paternoster House, Charing Cross Road, 1892. H. P. .. Jagadīśvara Bhatțāchārya : Hāsyārņava Prahasana, Calcutta Press, Calcutta, 1896. H. P. V. Hazari Pd. Dwivedi: Prāchīna Bhārata Kā Kalāvilāsa, Abhinava Bhāratī Grantha- mālā 7. H. T. M. : Hindu Theatre by Mankad in the I. H. Q. I., C. .. Meredith The Idea of Comedy, London, Con- stable & Co. Ltd. I. H. Q. .. : Indan Historical Quarterly Vol. VIII, 1932 I. I. .. Moritzen : Henrik Ibsen : His Life, Aim and Influence, Ten per cent Pocket Series No. 436, Ed. by E. Halde-

J. A. S. man-Julius, 1923. .. J. Addison J. C. L. : Spectator (No. 40) April 16, 1711. .. Jayadeva : Chandrāloka, C. S. S. Nos. 458- 459, 1938. J. D. P. R. .. Jayadeva : Prasannarāghava, N. S., 1914. J. N. P. .. V. A. Rāma Svāmī Śāstrī : Jagannatha Pandita, Annamalai- nagar, 1942.

20

J. P. R. Jayadeva : Prasannarāghava, Śrī Rāmapura Maheśa Satya Press, Calcutta, 1872. Kirāt. .. Bhāravi : Kirātārjunīya, N. S., 1929. K. A. K. .. Kavi Karņapūra Gosvāmī : Alankārakaustubha, Pub. by the Varendra Research Society, Raj- shahi, Bengal, Dec. 1926. K. A. S. .. Kālidāsa : Abhijñānaśākuntala, G.N.C., 1934. K. D. .. Dandin : Kavyādarśa, Government Oriental Series-Class A No. 4, B. O. R. I., 1938. K. G. .. Kālidāsa : Kālidāsa Granthāvalī(Raghuvamśa- R. V .; Kumārasambhava-K. S .; Meghadūta-M. D .; Rtusamhāra- R. S .; Abhijñānaśākuntala-A. S .; Vikramorvaśīya - V. V .; Māla- vikāgnimitra - M. A. and some articles.) Akhila Bhāratīya Vikrama Parişad, Kashi, Samvat 2001. K. I. D. .. Sten Konow : The Indian Drama ; Manuscript Translation by Dr. S. C. Mukerji, Head of the Department of Sanskrit, Benares Hindu Uni- versity. K. L. Bhāmaha : Kāvyālańkāra, K. S. S. 61, 1928. K. L. S. .. Vāmana : Kāvyālankārasūtra, Benares Sans- krit Series 134, Vidya Vilas Press, 1907. K. M. .. Rājaśekhara : Kāvyamīmāmsā, G. O. S. No. 1., 1934. K. P. .. Mammața : Kāvyaprakāśa, B. O. R. I., 1933. K. P. B. .. Knight : The Philosophy of the Beautiful, John Murray, AlbemarleStreet, Part I, 1895 & Part II, 1898.

21

K. S. .. Udbhața Kāvyālankārasārasangraha, Pub. by Dr. V. G. Paranjpye, B. O. R. I., 1925.

K. S. D. .. Keith : The Sanskrit Drama, Oxford, At the Clarendon Press, 1924.

K. S. T. .. Kşemendra : Suvrttatilaka, K. M. Pt. I, 1886.

Kațha. Up. .. Kațhopanișad.

K. V. .. Śeşakrșņa : Kamsavadha, K. M. 6, 1894.

K. V. V. .. Kālidāsa : Vikramorvaśīya, Ed. by R. D. Karmarkar, Damodar Villa, Poona 4, 1932.

L. L. M. .. Lillo : The London Merchant, The Belles- Letters Series (The Eng. Drama), Ed. by A. W. Ward, D. C. Heath & Co., Publishers, 1906.

L. M. Śankhadhara : Lațakamelaka, K. M. 20, 1900.

L. T. .. Lucas : Tragedy, Hogarth Lectures, First Series : No. 2,1935.

L. S. H. .. Chakravarti : The Linguistic Speculations of the Hindus, Pub. by the Uni- versity of Calcutta, 1933.

L. T. I. .. Sylvain Lévi : Le Théâtre Indien; Manuscript Translation by Dr. S. C. Mukerji, Head of the Department of Sanskrit, B. H. U.

M. B. .. Kāśīpati : Mukundānanda Bhāņa, K. M. 16, 1889.

M. B. S. : Mahābhārata, Pub. by Śrīpāda Dāmodara Sātavadekara, Svā- dhyāyamandala, Aundh Dist. Satara, Samvat 1980.

Mah. Bhas .. : Mahābhāșya.

M. C. .. Bhavabhūti : Mahaviracharita, N. S., 1926.

M. G. .. vara Nandikeśvara : The Mirror of Gesture, Translated by A. K. Coomaraswamy, E. Weyhe, New York, 1936.

22

M.H.S.L. .. Macdonell : A History of Sanskrit Literature, London, William Heinemann, MCMIX.

M. K. .. Sūdraka : Mrchchhakatika, Ed. by V. R. Nerurkar, The Bombay Book Depot, Girgaon, Bombay, 1937.

M. M. .. Bhavabhūti : Mālatīmādhava, N. S., 1918.

M. M. C. .. Krşna Kavi Mandāramarandachampū, K. M. 52, 1895.

M. R. .. Viśākhadatta : Mudrārākșasa, Pub. by The Stan- dard Publishing Co., Bombay, 1927.

M. R. P. .. Yaśaḥpāla : Moharājaparājaya, G. O. S. No. IX, 1918.

M. Smr. : Manusmțti.

M. S. A. .. Milton : Samson Agonistes, Cambridge, At the University Press, 1916. M. S. D. A ... Moulton : Shakespeare As A Dramatic Artist, Oxford, At the Clarendon Press, Third Edition : Revised and Enlarged.

M. S. L. .. Moulton : The Modern Study of Literature, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.

M. V. .. Bhāsa : Madhyamavyāyoga, The Bhāskara Press, Trivandrum, 1932.

M. V. P. .. Mahendravikrama Varman : Mattavilasa Prahasana, G. P., Trivandrum, 1917.

M. V. V. .. Mahimabhațța : Vyaktiviveka, K. S. S. No. 121, 1936.

N. B. S. Nārada Bhakti Sūtra.

N. C. Trivikramabhatța : Nalachampu, K. S. S. 98, 1932. N. D. Ramachandra Guņachandra : Nāțyadarpaņa, G. O. S. XLVIII, 1929.

23

N.L.R.K. .. Sāgaranandin : Nāțakalakșaņaratnakośa Vol. I. Text, Oxford University Press, London : Humphrey Milford, 1937.

N. N. .. Harsa : Nāgānanda, Master Khelari Lal & Sons, Benares, 1931.

N. S. .. Bharata : Nāțyaśāstra, G. O. S., Vol. I. (G. O. S.) No. XXXVI, 1926 & Vol. II. No. LXVIII, 1934. N. S. (K. S. S.) .. Bharata : Nāțyaśāstra, K. S. S. No. 60., 1929. N.S.(N.S.) .. Bharata : Nāțyaśāstra, N. S., 1894. N.S.S.I. .. : Notes to Selections from Sans- krit Inscriptions, Vol. I. pt. II. by D. B. Diskalkar, Curator, Watson Museum, Rajkot.

N. V. .. Rāmachandra Sūri: Nirbhayabhīmavyāyoga, Śrī Yaśo- vijaya Jaina Granthamālā, Vīra Samvat 2437.

N. V. P. .. Yadunandana Nāțavāța Prahasana, G. N. C.

O. L. P. .. Bradley : Oxford Lectures on Poetry, MM. & Co. Ltd., London, Bombay etc.

P. A. S. .. Pater : Appreciations with an Essay on Style, MM. & Co., 1913.

P. C. .. Krșņa Miśra : Prabodhachandrodaya, N. S., 1924.

P. D. .. Harșa Priyadarśikā, G. N. C., 1928.

P. D. L. .. Henri Delacroix : Psychologie De L'art Paris, Felix Alcan, 1927.

Pa. Pu. : Padmapurāņa, Ānandāśrama Press, 1894.

P. R. .. Vidyānātha : Pratāparudrayaśobhūșaņa or Pra- tāparudrīya, Ed. by K. P. Trivedi, Bombay Government Sanskrit Series, 1909. P. V. .. Paramāra Prahlā- danadeva : Pārthaparākramavyāyoga, G. O. S. No. IV., 1917.

24

R. A. S. .. Ruyyaka : Alankārasarvasva, K. M. 35, 1893.

R. B. .. Yuvarāja : Rasasadana Bhāņa, K. M. 37, 1893. R. G. ... Paņditarāja Ja- gannātha : Rasagangādhara, K. M. 12, 1916. R. H. S. .. Rūpa Gosvāmī : Haribhaktirasāmrtasindhu, Achyuta Granthamala No. 6, Samvat 1988. R. K. D. .. Rājachūdāmaņi Dīkşita : Kāvyadarpaņa, Śrī Vāņī Vilāsa Press, Srirancam.

R. K. L. .. Rudrața : Kāvyālańkāra, K. M. 2, 1909. R. K. M. .. Rājaśekhara : Karpūramañjarī, K. M. 4, 1927. R. N. R. .. Raghavan : The Number of Rasas, The Adyar Library, Adyar, 1940. R. P. .. Prabhākarabhațța : Rasapradīpa, S. B. T. No. 12, 1925.

R. S. .. Śinga Bhūpāla : Rasārņavasudhākara, Trivandrum, G. P., 1916.

R. U. M. Rūpa Gosvāmī : Ujjvalanīlamaņī, K. M. 95, 1913. R. V. .. Harsa : Ratnāvalī, G. N. C., 1925. S. A. K. .. Muni Sundara Sūri : Adhyātmakalpadruma, N. S., 1906. Śiśupāla. .. Magha : Śiśupālavadha, N. S., 1927. S. A. L. C. .. Sankaran : Some Aspects of Literary Criticism in Sanskrit, Pub. by the Uni- versity of Madras, 1929. S. A. S. J. .. : Sir Asutosh Mookerjee Silver Jubilee Volumes, Vol. III, Orientalia-Part 2, Calcutta, 1925. S. B. .. Rāmabhadra Dīkșita : Sṛńgāratilaka Bhāņa, K. M. 44, 1910. Śrī Bhāga. .. : Śrī Bhāgavatapurāņa. S. B. B. R. .. Madhusūdana Sarasvatī : Śrī Bhagavatbhaktirasāyana, Achyu- ta Granthamālā No. 2, Kashi Samvat 1984.

25

Śrì. Bhag. Gi. .. : Śrīmad Bhagavat Gītā, V. P., Samvat 1986.

S. D. .. Viśvanātha : Sāhityadarpaņa with notes by P. V. Kane, Second Edition, 1923. S. D. D. .. Kulkarni : Sanskrit Drama & Dramatists, Pub. by K. P. Kulkarni, M. A., B. T., Yadogopal Peth, Satara City, 1927. S.D.D.R. .. Śārngadeva : Sańgītaratnākara, Ānandāśrama Sanskrit Series No. 35, 1896 & 1897.

S. D. S. .. : Sarvadarśanasangraha, Govern- ment Oriental (Hindu) Series No. 1, Pub. by B. O. R. I., 1924. S. D. P .. .. S. K. Das : Śakti or Divine Power, Pub. by the University of Calcutta, 1934.

S. E. M. A ... : Selected Essays from Matthew Arnold, Ed. by Rawlinson, MM. & Co., 1924.

S. H. .. Viśvanātha Kavi: Saugandhikāharaņa, K. M. 74, 1902. S. I. L. .. A. X. Soares : An Introduction to the Study of Literature, MM. & Co., 1930.

San. Kā. .. Īśvarakṛșņa : Sānkhyakārikā, University of Madras, 1935.

S. K. S. R. .. Śrī Kumāra : Silparatna, Ananta Śayana Sans- krit Series 75, 1922.

S. P. R. .. Raghavan : Bhoja's Srńgāra Prakāśa, Vol. I, Karnatak Publishing House, Bombay, 1940.

Saras. Su. .. : Sārasvatīsușumā, December, 1943, A Journal of the Government Sanskrit College, Benares. S. S. A. B. .. R. S. Joga : Saundaryaśodha Āņi Ānandabodha, Pub. by R. J. Deśamukha, Deśa- mukha Āņi Co., 191 Śanavāra, Poona No. 2, 1943.

26

S. S. B. : Śāndilyasūtrīya Bhāşya (Bhakti Mīmāņsā), V. P., Samvat 1944. S.S. K. I. .. K. Poddar : Sanskrit Sāhitya Kā Itihāsa, Śrī Rāmabilāsa Smāraka Grantha- mālā Samiti, Navalagarh. S. T. .. Rudrabhațța : Sṛgāratilaka, K. M. Pt. III., 1887. T. A. .. Aristotle : Theory of Poetry and Fine Art with a critical text and transla- tion of the poetics by Butcher, MM & Co., 1927. T. C. .. Thorndike : English Comedy, The Macmillan Company, New York, 1929. T. D. .. Nicoll : The Theory of Drama, George G. Harrap & Co. Ltd., London, Bombay, Sydney, 1931. T. I. S. H. N. Das-gupta : The Indian Stage, Pub. by Metro- politan Printing and Publishing House, Ltd., 56, Dharamtala Street, Calcutta. T. L. .. Upham : The Typical Forms of English Literature, New York, Oxford University Press, 1927.

T. P. E. .. Cowl : The Theory of Poetry in England, MM & Co., 1914. T. S. D. .. Mankad : The Types of Sanskrit Drama, Urmi Prakashan Mandir, Denso Hall, Karachi, 1936. T. T. .. Thorndike : Tragedy, New York, 1908. T. T. D. .. Vaughan : Types of Tragic Drama, MM & Co., 1936. T. Up. : Taittirīya Upanișad. T. W. A. .. Tolstoy : What is Art ? And Essay on Art, The World's Classics, 1938. U. R. .. Bhavabhūti : Uttararāmacharita, N. S., 1919. U. R. A. .. Bhaskarabhațța : Unmattarāghava Anka, K. M. 17, 1889.

27

V. A. K. .. Viśveśvara Pandita: Alankārakaustubha, K. M. 66, 1898. V. D. P. .. V. Venkațarāma : Dāmaka Prahasana, Pub. by Moti Lal Banarasi Das, Lahore, 1926. V. F. M. B ... S. K. De : Vaișnava Faith and Movement in Bengal, General Printers and Publishers Ltd., Calcutta, 1942.

V. J. .. Kuntaka : Vakroktijīvita, C. O. S. No. 8, 1928.

V. K. .. A.Venkatasubbiah: The Kalas, The Vasanta Press, Adyar, Madras, 1911. V. K. N. .. Vāgbhața (Junior) Kāvyānuśāsana, K. M. 43, 1915. V. M. .. Rūpa Gosvāmī : Vidagdhamādhava, K. M. 81, 1903.

Viş. Pu. .. : Vișņu Purāņa.

V. R. .. Vālmīki : Rāmāyana, Ram Narayan Lal, Allahabad, 1927. V. R. C. .. Viśveśvara Pāņdeya : Rasachandrikā, K. S. S. No. 53, Samvat 1983.

V. R. S. .. Vatsarāja : Rūpakașațkam (A Collection of six dramas, viz. Kirātārjunīyavyā- yoga, Hāsyachūdāmaņi Pra- hasana, Karpūracharita Bhāņa, Rukmiņīpariņaya Īhāmṛga, Tripuradāha Dima, and Samu- dramathana Samavakāra.) G. O. S. No. VIII., 1918. V. R. V. .. K. N. Vatve : Rasavimarśa, Pub. by Vidyadhara Damle, Navina Kitabakhana, . Poona No. 2, 1942.

V. S. .. Bhatta Nārāyaņa : Veņīsamhāra, G. N. C., 1936. V. S. K. .. Vidyābhūșaņa : Sāhityakaumudī, K. M. 63, 1897.

V. V. .. Kochchuņņirāja : Vițarājavijaya, The Mangalodayam Co. Ltd., K. K. Press, Trichur.

V. V. L. .. Vāgbhața (Senior): Vāgbhațālankāra, K. M. 48, 1916. W. D. .. Wilson : Dramas, Pub. by the Society for the Resuscitation of Indian Literature, 1900.

28

W.H.I.L ... Winternitz : A History of Indian Literature, Vol. I, Pub. by the University of Calcutta, 1927. W. J. L. .. Worsfold · Judgment in Literature, The Temple Primers, 1937 W. P. C. .. Worsfold : The Principles of Criticism, London: George Allen & Un- win Ltd., Ruskin House, 40 Museum Street W. C. 1., New Edition.

Y. I. T. .. Yajnik The Indian Theatre, London, George Allen & Unwin Ltd. Museum Street. N. B .- The following abbreviations may be kept in mind :- Com .- Commentary. K. M .- Kāvyamīmāmsā (as occurring in the text of the book). A. S. in K. G .- Abhijñānaśākuntala in Kālidāsa Granthāvalī. K. S. in K. G .- Kumārasambhava M. A. in K. G .- Mālavikāgnimitra M. D. in K. G .- Meghadūta R. S. in K. G .- Rtusamhāra R. V. in K. G .- Raghuvamśa V. V. in K. G .- Vikramorvaśīya N. S .- Nāțya Śāstra, but N. S. (N. S.)-Nāțya Šāstra (Nirņaya Sāgara, Bombay).

Transliteration of the Devanāgarī alphabet into the Roman alphabet (With diacritical marks)

अ = a; आ =a; इ=i; ई=i; उ=u; ऊ= u; ऋ=1;

लृ=1; ए=e; ऐ=ai; ओ=0; औ=au; अं=am; अ := ah;

क्= k; ख्=kh; ग्=g; घ्=gh;

च् =ch; छ्=chh; ज्=j; झ् =jh; ञ्= i;

ट्=t; ठ=th; ड्=d; ढ्=dh; ण्=n;

त्=t; थू=th; द्=d; ध्=dh; न्=n;

प्=P; फ्=ph; ब्=b; भ्=bh; म् =m;

य्=V; र=1; ल्=1; व् = V; श्=5 ;

ष्=$; स् =S; हू=h;

क्ष्-KS; त्र् =tr; ज्ञ = jn.

PART ONE-SANSKRIT DRAMA

CHAPTER ONE. SANSKRIT DRAMA AS AN ART. The human babe is the most helpless of all the young ones of living beings. It is so not only in that a long period of nurture is required for it to grow into a self-supporting man but also in the fact that as compared with others its helplessness continues practically till the end of its career. But in this very helplessness lies its superiority over others. Whereas the young ones of others when fully grown have their energy exhausted in procuring food and making of nests or other habitations etc. for them, the human being does not run short of energy. The latter he has in plenty. He utilizes it first in getting together the necessaries of life, such as, food-stuff, clothing, habitation etc. The energy that is yet left in him is constantly trying to express itself in some form. The form that it assumes naturally is not so much concerned with utility. It is concerned rather with the satisfaction of the inner longing towards perfection1 which is all truth, all beauty and all goodness. It, therefore, finds vent in the form of play2 which expresses itself in various arts of which the drama marks the culmination. This is an evolutionary approach to art as explained by Western psycho- logists. The Indian Science of dramaturgy which deals with the principles of drama-the best form of art-propounds 1. Mendelssohn says, " ... art is the development of the beautiful obscurely recognized by feeling till it becomes the true and good. The aim of art is moral perfection." (T. W. A. p. 93). 2. P. D. L. ch. I ..

2

a similar view though in the usual orthodox manner. Mytho- logy shrouds things in mystery, no doubt ; the fact, however, shines out. The god Indra with others approached the Grand-father Brahma and said, "We want a plaything which may be fit for spectacle and audience."1 And this demand was reciprocated by the Grandfather with the gift of the Science of dramaturgy to the divine beings. That it was given as a plaything to the Apsaras as has been re-affirmed.2 The Western Science of Aesthetics accounts for the origin of art in the same way. Schiller influenced by Lessing, Kant and Aristotle had his affinities with the second to whom he clung to the end. His theory of the origin of art from the play- impulse ( Spiel-trieb ) centred round Kant's statement: "Art, compared with labour, may be considered as play."3 The Indian and the European theories, thus, both meet at one point as regards the origin of drama. Indian drama like European drama is an art which had its birth when enough time as leisure was left after the fulfilment of the necessities of life. Drama had its place among the ancient Kalās '(arts or sciences) or (arts and sciences).'4

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) I. 11. 2. Ibid XXXVI. 66. 3. K. P. B., pt. I., p. 62. 4. In V. K. 'Kalās ' are translated as 'arts and sciences ' in the preface and as ' Arts or sciences' on p. 5. In the different lists in this book explicit mention of 'Nātakākhyāyikādarśanam' on pp. 29 & 33, 'Nātyam' on pp. 22 & 32, 'Nāțakāni' on p. 37 occurs. In some lists 'Kavya' has been enumerated as one of the arts. H. P. V. gives certain lists in the appendix. In the IV list which is traced to some source other than V. K. is to be found the mention of 'Kavya'. In the absence of clear mention of Nātya, Kāvya in- cluded Nätya as will be seen later on when dividing Kāvya, accor- ding to Sanskrit writers, into Drsya and Sravya,

3 Leaving aside the arts catering to the necessities of man's life the consideration of those other arts which satisfy his aesthetic longing is but pertinent. Man builds habita- tions for himself with different materials. He may place rocks in any random order with the sole object of providing himself with shelter. But when this necessity in the form of shelter has been fulfilled, there may arise in him the desire for making it strong, massive, delicate but durable, sublime etc. Then symmetry, strength, delicacy, sublimity and such other qualities weigh in his mind. Here the art of Architec- ture has its birth. But this art has been placed lowest1 as it employs media which are most concrete and tangible. Bricks, stones, lime, mortar etc. supply the media which are visible, lasting and stable. The range or scope of this art is, therefore, limited. The life of this art fully depends upon the media used. No marble can defy the wear and tear of weather and no pigment is ever lasting. The effects also of a piece of this art are not the expressions of those emotions which go to the very foundation of the human heart and make the whole frame vibrate. It is only certain elementary emotions that find expression here. The art of Architecture could succeed only so far in satisfying the inner longing towards perfection. It resorted, however, to another means and a more subtle means too, though unconsciously. The archives of grand halls, the corners of huge mansions, the massive pillars of large buil- dings looked empty and did not convey the impressions 1. In W. J. L. on p. 4 Hegel is mentioned placing Architecture lowest and poetry highest in order of dignity due to their dependence upon various grades of material basis.

4 intended. Hence images of different designs, wonderful make and strange patterns came to fill up these gaps. This was a stage marking an advance towards the ultimate goal. The media here became a bit less concrete, the three dimensions practically fading in significance. The range became less limited and the length of life more lasting due to the pieces of this art being of decorative nature and hence mostly placed in protected spots. More subtle emotions could be con- veyed and sentiments could have their full scope here,1 but then only one phase could be represented. Sentiments give rise to various expressions on the face but in the statue only one found favour. Only one pose was represented. If any motion was to be represented, it could be the representation of arrested motion in one pose.2 The aesthetic sense could hardly remain satisfied with the art of Sculpture. It sought its partial satisfaction in depicting figures of different living beings on different plates which served the media. The three dimensions reduced themselves to two. The range grew wider as background could be represented and the painting could be expected to last longer. Sentiments found full expression3 but only in poses. They, however, were more clear and expressive than their representations in Sculpture. But then this art of Painting could represent only selected poses and motion was also arrested here. The art of Music could give higher satisfaction to the 1. B. M. K., pp. 84, 96 & 98 (referring respectively to the images at Amravati, those of the Gupta period and the statue of the Buddha at Sarnath). 2. Ibid p. 132. (ref. to Națarāja's image). 3. B. C. K. p. 49.

5

inner craving for perfection. The media here became more abstract, mere tunes and notes supplanting the tri-dimensional or bi-dimensional materials. The range or scope became much wider and vaster than in the case of previously con- sidered arts. The musician is concerned 'not with mere sounds, but with those thoughts and emotions of which they are the symbols ......; not with material elements-though the medium he employs is half physical -- but with the joys and sorrows, the aspirations, the struggles, the losses and the triumphs of the race.'1 The limitation is no more felt, it is, as it were, thrown to the winds. With its tunes ' we find ourselves suddently freed from limitation. We have the consciousness not only of liberty, of joy, and of insight, but also of the Illimitable opening up before and around us.'2 The life of the composition was prolonged as tunes and notes could be reproduced based as they were on materials almost abstract. The effects also were the expressions of almost all kinds of emotions as music could play the whole gamut of them -- joy, sorrow, fear, hope, longing, triumph, love, admiration, ecstasy, wonder etc. Even though the sense of limitation was in a way felt as if dispensed with, yet im- perceptibly it existed. Certain tunes have been enjoined to be played upon in certain seasons or fixed occasions. Others are to be sung in particular parts of the day and night.3 Emotions also were vague4 as they were excited by sounds which were not so precise by themselves. Full satisfaction of the longing

1. K. P. B. pt. II. p. 141 2. Ibid p. 131. 3. Cf. for example, the particular times when the Ragas as Bhairavi, Vihāga etc. are sung. 4. Cf. K. A. S. V. 2.

6 lying at the root of aesthetic creation was not yet obtained. In other words art was yet to reach a stage which would mark its culmination. This it, after all, reached in Poetry where the media became words, instead of tunes of the previous art (Music), much more abstract in this sense that a single word could suggest remote associations and excite a wide emotional context.1 The range or scope became very very wide and vast as anything and every thing normal or abnormal, natural or supernatural, earthly or divine, human or superhuman, hellish or terrestrial etc. could find satisfactory representa- tion in this art. The life of the art was still more prolonged as any number of reproduction was possible in every case. The media also contributed towards the length of its life.2 The effects were the expressions of emotions of all kinds, elementary or otherwise. The vagueness that attended the tunes and notes of Music disappeared here due to emotions given an intellectual setting.3 Here there was no vague longing but precise emotions at first aroused from the state of dormancy and then intensified. 'The effect of this ( poetry ) is to intensify the emotion aroused ..... '4 This effect was achieved in Poetry only when the mind of the poet was seized, and his heart taken by storm by some happening great or small but momentous and stirring in nature and after 1. The mere mention of the Kadamba before the devotees of Lord Krșna revives a whole series of emotions, associated as that tree is with the love of Radha-Krsna and the rainy season. 2. Various recensions of different Vedas are still available even after the lapse of so many centuries since they were first composed. 3. K. P. B. pt. II. p. 69. 4. Ibid p. 115.

7 sustained brooding found outlet. It had its counterpart in the arousal of latent emotions in the reader or the hearer. Poetry, thus, was the highest stage in the development of the five fine arts. As art developed from the lowest to the highest stage there was a marked change from all points of consideration. The media most material in the beginning ( for example, in Architecture ) lost their grossness, gradually growing finer and finer till it was etherealized into the waves of musical Poetry. The range or scope also widened, new vistas opening at every advance and finally any and every- thing could come in properly and appropriately. Man and Nature with every thing around and about them found expression. The life of the work of art formerly depending on material basis became more and more lasting as the media grew independent of the inclemency of weather, and such other affecting elements. The effects gained in intensity with gradual progress and the final step was taken towards the arousal of emotions, mild or violent, ordinary or momentous, thrilling and shaking the living frame. The appeal of these effects added more and more to its width. Architecture, Sculpture and Painting touched the human beings only and among them, too, practically those more, who were initiated into the subtle technicalities of these arts. Music and Poetry had their appeal driven home to the world of beasts as well.1 The means of this appeal grew more subtle. In the case of Architecture, Sculpture and Painting the appeal was through the eye, "Arts of the 'Eye',"2 as Worsfold 1. The antelopes are charmed with the tunes of the lyre. The sound of the musical instrument, qamarū, fascinates snakes. The poet Guņādhya's work in Paiśāchi charmed the beasts. 2. W. J. L. p.4.

8

describes them and the sense of touch co-operated where the materials were tangible. Music appealed through the ear. It, therefore, tended to vagueness. Poetry harnessed both the eye and the ear for its appeal. It set aside vagueness and tended towards preciseness handling themes from all regions and fields : material, spiritual and psychic. Poetry, thus, comprised all that could be experienced through any sense but aimed primarily at the arousal of emotions culminating into sentiments. But Poetry is not to be taken only in the sense of expressions in all recognized technical forms characterized by finish and polish prescribed. It also stands here for any spontaneous and unpremeditated expression of emotions so powerful and vehement as seeking keenly for outlet. Poetry is 'the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings'1 as Words- worth puts it. The form which the expression assumes need not invariably be the prescribed one. It rather becomes prescribed when once unconsciously arranged. The great sage, Vālmīki, had not premeditated over, and fixed from beforehand, the stanza or verse. He was touched with the incident to the core, his heart was magnetized and mono- polized by it. The emotion that was vehemently aroused became inevitable and irresistible. The outlet that it sought and got was bound to be harmonious and rhythmic as it indicated the inner harmony and rhythm. This consonance of the innermost emotions combined with the consequent rhythmic movement of the limbs and parts of the body resul- ted in the corresponding rhythmic expression in the form of verse. ' ... And, in hoary past, of the first poet, sorrow born of the separation of the Krauñcha couple found expression 1. K. P. B. pt. II. p. 97.

9

through the śloka metre.'1 The poet himself was hardly aware of the miracle he had done. He was surprised at the first introduction of metre other than the Vedic in the world.2 Others, no doubt, were wonderstruck. 'Wonderful ! A new revelation of metre different from that of the Veda.'3 The acceptance of such conception of Poetry hardly left room for the heated discussions and controversies which arose in the West as regards the form of Poetry. Metre is an essential element in no case dispensable; metre is not indispensable as it is not essential -- are not the cries of Sans- krit rhetoricians.4 To them what mattered was the spon- taneous expressions of emotional experience of the soul. The Western critic also realised it in the long run.5

1. D. L. I. 5.

2. V. R. I. II. 16.

3. B. U. K. II. p. 54.

4. 'The doctrine that prose is the opposite, not of poetry, but of verse, which began to be realised rather late in European critical theories, was very early admitted without question by Sanskrit authors with whom metre does not play the same part as it does in European poetry ; for in India from the earliest time, it was usual to put down even the driest teachings in a metrical form.' D. S. P. Vol. II. p. 58. 5. Literary art, that is, like all art which is in any way imitative or reproductive of fact-form, or colour, or incident,-is the representa- tion of such fact as connected with soul, of a specific personality, in its preferences, its volition and power.' P. A. S. p. 10.

10

With this conception of Peotry the division they made was the most comprehensive. The tablel given below

Kāvya

Śravya Drśya Rūpaka (10 Rūpakas) (The Uparupakas are mainly based on the Nrtya, hence not considered as will become clear later on.)

Padyamaya Gadyamaya Gadyapadyamaya

Koșa Mahākāvya Viruda Karambhaka Champū Khaņdakāvya

Ākhyāyikā Kathā

will facilitate the understanding. Explanation of each division will also be given. Poetry is divided firstly into two kinds : Śravya ( audible ) and Drśya ( visible ). The first kind is the art of the ear, as it is meant to be listened to. The second is the art of the eye but the help of the ear is not eliminated. These two divisions are, however, not mutually exclusive. They do not constitute two watertight compartments cancelling the probability of flowings-in from the one into the other and vice versa. The Uttararāma- charita of Bhavabhuti and the Faust of Goethe are dramatic poems rather than pure dramas. On the other hand, the Krauñcha incident in the Rāmāyaņa of Vālmīki is more of a drama. The actions and speech of man are based on imita- tion, no doubt, but the Drśya Kāvya requires a simultaneous development of many factors before it can be produced.

1. S. D. VI. 1. & 313 and following.

Only a very high type of civilization and culture can produce dramatic works in their finished form.1 The germs of the drama are present at all times, indeed but the production marks a high tide in life. The Śravya Kävyas, on the other hand, have been produced even in the infancy of civilization of mankind. Vālmīki's Rāmāyana, Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, the German Nibelungenlied etc. are styled as the 'Natural' Epics for the above reason. They mostly recorded the traditions of yore as they were handed down from ge- neration to generation. The Drśya Kāvya required the full maturity of civilization when advance on all sides had been made. Music, Dancing, Scenic and Histrionic arts and other arts were to be first cultivated and harmoniously combined before the drama could be produced. Literary forms other than the drama had also to contribute their quota to this literary type which required high demands from the genius of the dramatists.2 Comparison of other forms with the drama will make the comprehensiveness of the latter quite clear. This will be seen later on. The Śravya Kāvya is further divided into Padyamaya (metrical), Gadyamaya(prose)and Gadyapadyamaya(mixed). The first is subdivided into Koşa, Khaņda Kāvya and Mahā Kāvya. The second is subdivided into Ākhyāyikā and

1. Greece, India and China-these three countries only have left dra- matic literatures of which others had no idea. It is curious that Egypt and Babylon with their highly developed civilization did not produce any drama. 2. Vaughan says, "It is something surely to study the growth of any one form in which the imagination of man has taken body; above all, when the form in question is that on which the highest poetic genius has been spent." T. T. D. p. 1.

12

Katha. The third has three sub-divisions : Viruda, Karam- bhaka and Champū. Sanskrit rhetoricians define Padya as Chhandobaddhapada ( metrical ). One stanza is called Muktaka, two together Yugmaka, three together Sandānitaka, four together Kalā- paka and five together Kulaka.1 A collection of independent stanzas or of stanzas of the same kind is called a Kosa.2 A Khanda Kāvya is one wherein the conditions of the Mahā Kāvya are partially fulfilled.3 The Mahā Kāvya is the most comprehensive form as it has in its compass the requirements of the above two kinds together with others which do not find place in them. Its definition is to be analysed and arranged into (1) Plot, (2) Hero, (3) Aim and (4) Effect. The plot either is based on history or treats of the lives of great and good persons. It has to be divided into cantos called in Sanskrit Sargas ( in case of the Mahā Kāvya written by a Rsi a canto is called an Ākhyāna; when it is written in Prakrit a canto is called an Āśvāsa, the metres then are Skandhakas and sometimes Galitakas; when it is written in Apabhramśa a canto is called a Kadavaka; and sometimes due to the peculiarity of the rules of languages and dialects it is devoid of cantos, then it has got metres con- verging to one sense but the Sandhis etc. are absent ) neither very short nor very long, which are to be eight or more in number. The beginning is to be made with the salutation unto the presiding deities or cherished god or gods, or with the indication of the subject-matter itself or with censure

1. S. D. VI. 314-15. 2. Ibid VI. 329-330. 3. Ibid VI. 329.

13 of the wicked and praise of the good. A canto is to be in the same metre throughout but the concluding stanzas are to be in a different metre. A certain canto is even seen with stanzas in different kinds of metres. The concluding portion of each canto should indicate the incidents of the succeeding one. The dramatic Sandhis are to be observed. The follow- ing items with their accessaries and ancillaries are to be described according to requirement : twilight, sunrise, moonrise, night, evening, darkness, days, morning, midday, hunt, mountains, seasons, forests, oceans, union, separation, hermits, heaven, cities, sacrifices, wars, departure, marriage, counsel, birth and prosperity of sons etc. Every canto is to be named after its contents and the Mahā Kāvya after the poet or the plot or the hero. The hero is a god or a Ksattriya of good family, endowed with the qualities of the Dhirodatta type. Many kings of one family or many persons of high and pure families also figure therein. All the four Vargas-Dharma, Artha, Kāma and Mokşa- are to have their full scope, but the predominant aim to be achieved by the hero must be one. The Śrngāra, the Vīra and the Sānta-only one of these is to be principal, others should be made subordinate to it. This injunction has obviously been laid down to bring about a unitary effect.1 The Mahā Kāvya deals sometimes with a whole dynasty of kings or with the lives of persons of good family, the drama in its major types, on the other hand, concentrates on one personality. The Mahā Kāvya is named after

1. S. D. VI. 315-328.

14 the hero, no doubt, but the hero here must be the originator of the dynasty or the most illustrious among all those figuring who do not act as satellites but independent entities. There are certain types of drama which have got many heroes. The canvas of the Mahā Kāvya is very very wide1 whereas the drama treats of a particular portion of life and that, too, from a particular angle of vision.2 This curtail- ment in width has, however, a corresponding gain. The subject-matter in the Mahā Kāvya appears mostly loose and unwieldy whereas that in the drama compact and well arranged. In the Mahā Kāvya the writer can express his own thoughts and give his own opinions but not often to advantage; the reader may not have left anything for his thinking. The length, sometimes enormous, of the Mahã Kāvya makes it impossible to finish it at one sitting and the white heat of suspense is not maintained. Drama, on the other hand, is the shortest distance from sentiment to sentiment where the interest of the spectator is not allowed to flag. The hero of the Maha Kāvya is to be of the Dhīrodātta kind; in the drama heroes of different kinds-Dhīrodātta, Dhīralalita, Dhīroddhata and Dhīrasānta-may lead the action. In such types of drama as the Bhana the heroes can belong even to low strata of society. The aims of the Maha Kāvya have full application to the drama as all those aims are also to be kept in view in the latter case for achievement. 1. The Raghuvamsa of Kalidāsa treats of the whole family of Raghu, that is his ancestors and descendants. 2. The Mrchchhakatika of Śūdraka shows Chārudatta mainly as a lover, his other qualities are depicted only to emphasize his con- centrating love.

The Rasas ( sentiments ) which the Mahā Kāvya depicts are limited in number. Those in the drama, on the other hand, have no such limit. All the orthodox eight or nine sentiments find scope here. Viewed as such, the Mahā Kavya stands much inferior to the drama. The writer of the Maha Kāvya does not emphasize the effect whereas with the writer of the drama the effect is the primary con- sideration. The Maha Kāvya stands indebted to the drama. The first treatise of Sanskrit literary criticism is the Nātyaśāstra of Bharata. Different kinds of heroes have been enu- merated there. The injunction that the hero of the Dhiro- dätta type should be the hero in the Mahā Kāvya is to be traced to that source. Added to it, the harnessing of the dramatic Sandhis is another proof of its indebtedness to the drama.1 Despite these efforts to bring the Mahā Kävya on a par with the drama, the former remained much inferior to the latter. The latter utilized one means which lifted it very high in point of effect and this was the theatre.2 The Maha Kāvya described action which remained rather static. Everything was left to the imagination of the readers or those who listened to its recitations. Imagina- tion may work in a wrong direction, be misguided or even fail to work, being left without any aid. All this is not possible in the drama. Even those, in whom imagination ran riot or in whom it became perverted, found sufficient aid in the means, theatre. Heroes in action are represented 1. 'The term Sandhi is taken from the drama.' F. I. P. p. 140 (Foot-note). 2. How far the Sanskrit drama utilized the theatre will be discussed later on in the third chapter of this part,

16 on the stage. Action which was static in the Mahā Kāvya became dynamic in the drama. That the Drśya Kāvya is to be acted, represented on the stage, is the verdict of the Sanskrit rhetoricians.1 The appeal, therefore, of the drama is very direct and goes home. The Mahā Kāvya, on the other hand, has its appeal limited to those who read or listen to, and understand, it. No such restriction imposes itself on the drama when staged.2 The writer who has seen through the reality and has had a vision of 'the light that was never on sea or land', is under agonies to express it to be shared with sympathetic persons. He utilizes all kinds of means to effect this purpose. Of these means the drama naturally effects this purpose most satisfactorily as its appeal goes direct to the heart. The drama, thus, stands superior to the Mahā Kāvya. The Khanda Kavya partially fulfils the conditions laid down for the Mahā Kāvya. The Kosa is much inferior even to the Khanda Kāvya, as it is a mere collection of stray stanzas or stanzas inter-connected. The drama, thus, stands very superior to these two kinds. All these three kinds of the Śravya Kāvya, are, therefore, inferior to the drama. The Gadyamaya, the second sub-head of the Śravya Kāvya, is divided into the Ākhyāyikā and the Kathā. The Sanskrit rhetoricians include the gadya in the Kāvya. They have exalted it to a height which is the standard for

1. S. D. VI. 1. 2. The Śakuntalā episode as it occurs in the Mahābhārata is a closed book for the mass, but the Abhijñānaśākuntala of Kālidāsa on the stage is accessible and intelligible to all and sundry.

17

the poets.1 Such was their estimation of it in their eyes. The gadya has been defined as the Vrttagandhojjhita, devoid of metres. It is called the Muktaka when there are no compounds; the Vrttagandhi when it contains metrical parts; the Utkalikāprāya when it is rich in long compounds; and the Chūrnaka when the compounds are short. The two divisions of the gadya, the Ākhyāyikā and the Katha, engaged many rhetoricians in hot contro- versies which arose in connection with their necessary ingredients. Bhāmaha, Dandin and Rudrata have des- cribed their requirements, form etc. but their descriptions are mostly the criticism of the predecessors' opinions. Moreover the extant instances of the two kinds do not fully bear them out. The instance of the Ākhyāyikā is fur- nished by the Harsacharita of Bana and those of the Kathā by the Kādambarī of Bāņa and the Vāsavadattā of Suban- dhu. Nobel in 'F. I. P.' has paid attention to these defi- nitions and has come to the conclusion that they have been arrived at on consideration of different instances and not the Harsacharita, the Kādambarī and the Vāsavadattā as these lead to different results. In the seventh century the chief characteristics of the Ākhyāyika were as follows : '(1) The subject-matter gives historical facts. (2) It is not necessary that the hero himself is the narrator. (3) There are chapters called Uchchhvāsas. (4) Every Uchchhväsa, but not the first, opens with two stanzas (metre usually Āryā ), which indicate what will happen in the Uchchhvasa in question.

1. K. L. S. I. 3. 21 (Vrtti). 2

18

(5) The whole story begins with a metric introduc- tion of a literary character.'1 The treatment of the historical facts combined with the injunction that the hero himself narrates his own deeds, for in point No. (2) the hero himself may sometimes be the narrator to which Bhämaha bears testimony,2 naturally makes one take the Ākhyāyikā to be an autobiography.3 On the other hand, the criticism of this point to the effect that in the Ākhyāyikā persons other than the hero speak and consequently there cannot be such restriction4 leads one to take it as a biography. It may be an autobiography or a biography but its inferiority to the drama will become quite obvious. The Ākhyāyikā, when considered as an autobiography, deals with different incidents in the life of the hero who is himself the narrator. This aspect evidently will put it on a level lower than that of the drama. The incidents in the life are dark and bright, interesting and dull, attracting and repulsive etc. and the autobiography has to take stock of all of them. The drama, on the other hand, concentrates only on the bright, interesting and attracting incidents from a particular angle of vision. Its whole canvas, there- fore, appears attractive. With the autobiography it is bound to be otherwise where sincerity to reality has got a greater value. Then again with a number of incidents the subject-matter in arrangement may become loose and un-

1. F. I. P. p. 184. 2. K. L. I. 26. 3. ' The Ākhyāyikā, then is, as it were, an autobiography' F. I. P. p. 174. 4. K. D. I. 25.

19

wieldy; this, however, can never happen in the drama. The division of the subject-matter into the Uchchhvāsas or the Aśvāsas may correspond to the division into Acts, but then the end of one Act naturally leads to the beginn- ing of the other and no breathing space seems to be required. The Uchchhvāsas or the Āśvāsas, on the other hand, do mean 'breaths' and they, as it were, mark the pauses for breathing. It is quite another consideration that the godd- ess Sarasvati does not feel fatigued at the end of an Uch- chhväsa.1 With such a wide canvas the whole work can- not be finished at one sitting meant as it is to be read out or listened to. The drama, on the other hand, can be seen on the stage at one sitting. The harnessing of the metres is not a distinctive feature of the Ākhyāyikā, for the drama utilizes many kinds of metres. The indication of what is to happen in the name of another2 is enjoined in the be- ginning of an Uchchhvāsa; this device is out-numbered by the dramatic devices of a like nature, such as, the Patākāsthānaka, the Ankāsya etc. The hero of the Ākhyāyikā may not have the qualities enumerated in the types of heroes of the drama. The qualities required of the heroes in the drama raise them very high and they differ from type to type. Want of mention in this respect bears witness to the fact that this aspect hardly engaged the attention of the rhetoricians in connection with the Ākhyāyikā. The drama is more fasti- dious in this matter and hence superior to the Ākhyāyikā. The aims to be attained in an Ākhyāyikā have not been

1. B. H. C. I. 10. 2. S. D. VI. 336.

20

put down whereas those of the drama have found express mention. As regards the effect no express mention has been made. It has, however, been written that the 'Ākhyāyikā should be like the Katha.'1 And it has been said that the 'plot in the Katha should be rich in sentiments.'2 It, therefore, can be concluded that the plot oft he Ākhyāyikā also should be rich in sentiments. The Ākhyāyikā, thus, aims at producing sentiments in the readers. But these sentiments are not so vividly and directly aroused as in the case of the drama where every item is directed to this effect. The drama, thus, is far superior to the Ākhyāyikā. Considered as a biography also, it can hardly be placed on a par with the drama. Instead of the hero himself being the narrator some other person or persons narrate the experiences of the hero. The narration could not in some cases be as graphic or vivid as it ought to be, for it found mediate expression. The hero, the aim and the effect practically remained the same as in the autobiography, hence no point to raise it higher was added. The drama outstripped both nearly in all points of comparison, partly because of its excellence in these points and partly due to its use of the theatre-a means of the use of which these two kinds, the autobiography and the biography, were quite devoid. The characteristics of the Katha have been summarised as follows :

1. S. D. VI. 334. 2. Ibid VI. 332

21

'(1) The subject-matter is a story for the most part invented by the poet, a love story ending with the union of the lovers. (2) The narrator is not the hero himself. (3) The story is not divided into chapters. (4) At the beginning there is a literary introduction in verse.'1 The subject-matter here dealing with a love story in- vented by the poet and containing 'the description of the seizure of the girl, of a struggle, of the separation ( of the lovers ) and the prosperity of the hero'2 combined with point (2) gives ground for assumption that the Kathā is a novel or a romance.3 The Katha deals with a very wide canvas; in the drama, however, the canvas has to be straitened. This is required to be done because other means, as theatre, come to help in making the appeal direct. The Kathā has subject- matter as vast as that in the Maha Kāvya but there is the corresponding disadvantage. As in the Mahā Kāvya, the subject-matter of the Kathā may become unwieldy in arrangement and links in the plot may be broken. The novel consists of everything for the enjoyment of the reader, it 'is self-contained; that is, it provides within its own compass everything that the writer deemed necessary for the comprehension and enjoyment of his work.'4 The drama, on the other hand, requires the aid of the theatre

1. F. I. P. p. 187. 2. K. L. I. 27. 3. 'Katha is the novel.' 'F. I. P. p. 175 ; The Katha is, if we may be allowed to say so, a novel.' Ibid p. 176. 4. H. I. L. p. 229.

22

where the actors represent the action. Therefore the drama merely in the form of the book is only in its, so to say, incomplete form. The book merely gives the outline which is to be filled in by the actors. But when the drama is represented on the stage, it gives the greatest enjoyment to the spectators as no imagination is to be exercised there. On the other hand, imagination to a certain extent is to be exercised in the reading of the Kathā, as so many details have to be filled in. The Kathā and the Ākhyāyikā have many points in common; the comparison, therefore, of the Kathā and the drama in points of hero, aim and effect is practically the same as of the Ākhyāyikā and the drama. It has been made quite clear by comparison that the drama is superior to the Ākhyāyikā; it, therefore, stands superior to the Kathā also. The two sub-divisions of the Gadyamaya Kāvya, the Ākhyāyikā and the Kathā, are, thus, not on a par with the drama. The third sub-head of the Śravya Kāvya is the Gadya- padyamaya. It is divided into Viruda, Karambhaka and Champū. The Viruda is the praise of the ruler or the rulers com- posed in prose and verse; and the Karambhaka is the praise composed in various languages.1 The Champū is the poetic composition partly in prose and partly in verse.2 It is like the Ākhyāyikā, may have Anka and be divided into Uchchhväsas.3 Little recognizing the differ-

1. S. D. VI. 337. 2. Ibid VI. 336. 3. H. K. S. p. 340.

23 ence between the Akhyayika and the Katha the author, Trivikrama Bhatța, of the Nala Champū styles it as Kathā.1 This Champū satisfies the definition given by Hema Chan- dra. At the end of each Uchchhvasa the line occurs, 'Iti Śrī Trivikrama Bhatța Virachitāyām Damayantīkathāyām Haracharaņasarojānkāyām Prathama (Dvitīya etc. ) Uch- chhvāsah.' The drama stands on a level higher than that of either the Viruda or the Karambhaka. At the most they can be called approximations to the Mahā Kāvya. Even considered as such, they cannot equal the drama, not to say of excelling it. The Champū is a story or a novel in prose and verse. It, therefore, also does not reach the level of the drama. The three forms of the Gadyapadya- maya, thus, stand inferior to the drama. This admitted superiority of the drama in point of technique and appeal attracted people from all ranks of society.2 The young and the old jostled one another in the theatre. Ladies of family also formed the audience.3 They fully realized that of all the divisions of the poetry, the drama was the best and highest. (Kāvyesu Nāțakam Ramyam). The rhetoricians recognized this fact. It was quite another thing that because of the affinities to differ- ent schools, all of them did not express it open-heartedly. Yet there were some who did not fail to do so. Vāmana, who belonged to the Riti School in Sanskrit poetics, has written most emphatically that 'among compositions the drama is the best. It is variegated like a picture due to the

1. N. C. I. 24. 2. M. A. I. 4 in K. G. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIV 289.

24

complete presence of all characteristics therein. Out of that, other kinds of literary compositions have come.'1 Abhinava corroborates Vāmana when he says that com- plete Rasāsvāda is posible only in the representation of the drama. And that poetry is but drama.2 The Science of dramaturgy was a complete source of highest pleasure to 'all kinds of peoples of all the worlds ( Sarvalokānurañ- jinī )3. It attracted and pleased the mortals, the denizens of the nether world, the aerial beings and the divine beings who had realized the ultimate truth, and 'was, thus, higher than the ultimate bliss otherwise how it could fascinate the minds of Närada and others.'4 Even the four Vedas contributed their quota to this form of poetry and added to its superiority.5 Every knowledge, every sculpture, every learning, every art, dexterity and minute work- all these were to be utilized in the drama.6 All the other fine arts-architecture etc .- were harnessed to the service of drama. The stage required the first three with their auxiliaries and the orchestra was the prominent element. Recitations and lyric effusions scattered here and there were the instances of musical elements. Such was its estimate in the eyes of the people that huge amounts of money were spent over it. It is said that the Athenians were ready to spend a large amount of money for one tragedy of Sophocles as they regarded the drama to be the

1. K.L. S. I. 3. 30-32. 2. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 288 (com.) 3. N. L. R. K. p. 2. 4. A. D. M. 10-11. 5. N. S. (K. S. S.) I. 17. 6. Ibid. I. 113-114.

25

most rational, most instructive and most delightful com- position the human wit arrived at. The drama, thus, stood as the culmination of art in point of unity and artistic harmony. Many artists had made it their aim to harness the different arts to the service of the drama. 'More than any other artist in Music he ( Richard Wagner ) made it his aim that all the arts should contribute their share towards the production of Drama; not Music and Poetry only, but Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture as well; so that perfect unity, or full artistic harmony, may be reached.'1 The highest development in art had been reached in the drama, no doubt; but its contents kept the scholars engaged in a hot controversy. The problem whether the drama is realistic or idealistic loomed large with them awaiting solution. The two words, realistic and idealistic, are used in different senses. It is due to this fact that in different con- texts, different arts and sciences these words convey differ- ent meanings. The word realistic on the most material level stands as expressive of objects which can be perceived by the senses. Here the objects are generally those which have got dimen- sions. They may be material, animate or inanimate. The stones, the earth, the flora, the fauna, the birds, the beasts and the human beings-all come under them. All and sundry present in Nature furnish items in the list of objects. There is no doubt that to the subtle senses there are objects which are very abstract, yet 'realistic' in this sense applies

1. K. P. B. pt. II. p. 153.

26

to those which are very gross, concrete and material. The Latin term 'Res' ( material thing ) conveys the sense very appropriately. The drama deals with these objects. Its contents are the treatment of what is in Nature. The word 'realistic' is, therefore, not applicable to the drama here as it cannot be placed on the same level as objects in Nature. Drama, no doubt, deals with Nature but it is not crude Nature as we see her. The drama is not gross or material as the objects of Nature are. It may be contended here that drama in the form of a written book is an object in Nature, hence it can be called realistic. That drama is not merely the written book but has got some cons- tituents by virtue of which it is called drama will become clear later on when those constitutents are considered. It is, therefore, something quite other than those objects. The word 'realistic' as regards the contents of a written dramatic piece may also mean that what the drama presents is the exact prototype of what is seen or perceived in the material world. Particular phases of lives of persons with objects in Nature in different combinations are the subject- matter in the drama. It is said that just as a camera takes. the photograph of man or Nature, so the drama records. the photographic replica of the world of everyday life. Drama, being an art, never does it or even attempts to do it. What the camera does is to reproduce the original in all its exactitude and details at a particular moment. It is a machine which catches the pose of a particular moment and adds nothing of itself to that pose. It has no life, it is dead. The historiographer may approximate to the camera as his function is merely to write down, without any exercise of intellect of his own, the events in the lives.

27

of persons. Even when he compiles the, events, he does it dispassionately. Whatever exercise of intellect is re- quired is merely for the arrangement of the matter. With the playwright the case is quite the reverse. He sees what is happening in this world; he sees the dark and bright phases of persons' lives set in the background of those happenings. Or he reads books and comes across illu- minating events and incidents in the lives of certain per- sons. He also sees the black, shady and sunny aspects of Nature. Then he cogitates over one particular aspect and with the alchemy of brain, produces a work totally different from what he perceived. Thus the original in Nature passed through the alembic of his genius which enabled him to see through her ( Kavayah Krānta-Darśinaḥ) and also urged him on and made him create something quite new and at the same time much above her. The mind and the soul both co-operated in this creation. In the case of the camera it records the pose then and there without allowing a single moment of time to pass. The accuracy and promptness of the machine worked here on the spur of the moment. But the playwright stands on a different level. He is not an automaton producing the same thing in any number without even the least change. He is all instinct with life. Time is passing. Its passage brings change in his cogitations and the final product, after the mental agony, is a thing which is not the exact photogra- phic replica of what he perceived. This accounts for the fact that two works on the same subject by the very same writer are never alike. In the third sense as it is understood by some the word 'realistic' is applied to those works which are mere imita-

28 tions of Nature. What is this imitation ? Is it the bare copying of what is perceived in Nature ? Is it reproduc- ing her slavishly in all her details ? Certainly this is not the sense intended. 'If art were reduced to the imitation of Nature, to mere copying, Nature would soon supersede it, for the simple reason that the artist would be eliminated from his art.'1 Nature has objects in all their details. They are present in all their possible combinations. The playwright will find it out of his power to have in his scope these objects in their accurate details. And even if the artist succeeds to some extent in doing so, he is a mere imitator. The qualifying word 'artist' will hardly apply to him. It is when these details have touched the play- wright, excited his dormant emotions and made him aflame, keenly longing for the expression, that a composi- tion can be called art and the writer the artist. The agony of the soul is the determining element in art. 'Were I called on to define, very briefly, the term "art", I should call it the "reproduction of what the senses perceive in nature through the veil of soul." The mere imitation, however accurate, of what is in nature, entitles no man to the sacred name of "artist".'2 Bharata, time and again, specially towards the end of chap. 14 of the N. S. (K. S. S.) lays emphasis on the fulfilment of certain requirements which he classifies under the dramatic needs. He calls these the Nātyadharmī as distinguished from realities, the Lokadharmi. As the drama is an imitation of the world, the propriety or adequacy in the presentation of

1. K. P. B. pt. II. pp. 23-24. 2. E. A. Poe (1809-1849), Marginalia in T. P. E. p. 46.

29

life on the stage is rightly stressed. No doubt each item must conform to what obtains in life. Hence are the prescriptions of the Muni in connection with languages. and dialects used, forms of addresses adopted, ornaments worn etc. etc. All the above, however, have also to obey the needs of the drama. For instance, people standing very near overhear one another in everyday life but the needs of the drama prescribe them as not doing such in case of the 'Svagata', or the 'Janantika' which are the 'Natyadharmīs'. Again the theatrical properties used, the different kinds of abhinaya and sundry others are ex- amples of the Natyadharmi. The Nartyadharmi, thus, turns verity into verisimilitude, realitiy into simulation of reality and actual truths into imaginative truths. The representation on the stage may be said to make the drama realistic, for the actors by many different means imitate the original character. The latter's actions etc. are taken up for imitation. The dresses they wore and their speech are also imitated. But is all this a slavish copying ? Decidedly it cannot be. The original characters were once real and their representation is being put up by the actors in all possible reality. 'But the representation of the real by the real is not identical with the reality of ordinary life ...; the fact that actuality, not reality, reality heightened and intensified by concentration, something that is not less, but more than reality, is the essence of drama.'1 The play- wright aims at presenting Nature as transformed by his genius, the baser metal transmuted into pure gold, as it were. Nature cannot fetter his imagination in its work-

1. W. P. C. p. 184.

30

ings; on the other hand, she has to undergo transforma- tion in the alchemy of his imagination. This is the aim of all arts. No art keeps before it imitation in bare details as its aim, much less the drama. 'This ( that the true func- tion of the drama is to "copy nature," to "hold up the mirror to nature," to reproduce human life exactly as it is. ), however, is hardly the function of art in any shape. It has certainly not been the function of the drama, as under- stood by its greatest masters.'1 These three different interpretations put on the word 'realistic' may now be illustrated, for the second and the third seem to be overlapping. In Nature there are objects and objects which are gross, concrete and tangible. According to first interpretation the drama is not one of them as it is much more than a mere written literary piece. The second interpretation says that what is contained in the drama is not merely the exact replica of a series of objects in the same form in which they are selected from Nature. Then again these objects of Nature may be copied in all exact and accurate details and these imitations may be the subject-matter of the drama. The third interpretation seems to tend towards this view, but such, however, is not the real position. Mere objective side does not cover the whole distance. Attention has to be paid to the subjective side also so that the com- bination of the two may produce the work of art. The word 'idealistic' may mean something which is ideal, 'embodying an idea.'2 Here the particular 'idea' may work in two ways. Firstly, it may have suddenly flashed in the mind of the playwright and guided him through 1. T. T. D. p. 5. 2. C. O. D. p. 562.

31

all his mental workings. What he perceived in the world, what he experienced in the light of it here supplied him the subject-matter for his work. Secondly, some idea, as for example, connected with the rampant social evil may suddenly come to have a firm grip over his mind trying to find expre- ssion. The author, however, has his activities restricted because of the medium, for in the drama no scope exists for indulgence in direct expression of views. He, therefore, arranges his experiences according to the way he thinks suitable within the limitations of the particular art. The whole subject-matter in this case passes under his soul's magnet. The particular idea here is seen not mixed inextricably with the author's views. The work closes without giving any conclusion. It is left for the spectators to adjudge the solu- tion. Such are the modern problem plays which paint particular social evils or conventions and leave solutions to the discretion of the spectators. Or 'idealistic' may mean something existing in ideas only. This something generally answers to the highest conception of the playwright. It may take a strange turn. The fact goes that a man can conceive only those things of which the basis is supplied by the experiences gained through the senses. But the playwright may form such permutations and combinations of these experiences as may appear fantastic. The world of everyday life in that case comes to be totally left far far behind and ideals kept up as aims are much above human attainment. The whole atmosphere of fairy land where nothing but magic and witchcraft work, where strange screams are heard pronouncing upon the destiny of man without any scope allowed for improvement, where man appears totally helpless and forlorn, where strange animals as

32

chimeras and dragons are to be encountered with at every step, where, in short, there is nothing but a constant pageantry of phantasmagoria-all this is an instance of a conception mis- guided wherein imagination is running riot. Or imagina- tion may make him conceive the other way. He may place before mankind such objects as are not within the reach of the average man. The heavenly objects in all their varieties may be put, and then Herculean tasks set, before mortals for performance, each task carried to its successful completion being awarded one such divine object. Or again the conception of the playwright may be rich in devilish and hellish pictures. Non- conformity to a particular code of morals, the least departures from which are inflicted with punishment contrived with demoniac machines, is also another instance of imagination let loose indiscriminately. These and their likes are instances which are existing in ideas, for their counterparts are not to be seen on this earth. Such ideals are not to be found in normal people in whom imagination works properly. It is another thing that ideals of the above nature are to be found in certain people determined by their particular view of life. For example, the Hindu view of life makes provision for beings of all regions coming in contact with one another, but therein are to be seen prescribed regulations for their beha- viour and treatment. Lest there be confusion and mistake in connection with different kinds of characters, there is a code of conduct which has to be observed and any deflection from the most insignificant prescription is adjudged a punishable neglect. 'Idealistic' may also mean that the subject-matter is so presented as to impart morals. This is an ethical approach

33

to the point at issue. According to it the drama must deal with a subject which conforms to the moral code binding in the field of behaviour, conduct and treatment meted out by one towards others. Those who act upto the prescribed rules attain to prosperity, while the defaulters are inflicted with deserved punishment. Prosperity comes to the conformists as a matter of course and punishment to the defaulters is well deserved. But here what strikes one is if the two con- sequences are always well deserved and whether they mean the distribution of justice. That the playwright's world is the actual world as it is seen can hardly be believed. It is, so to say, a world where is given 'the representation of an object in its permanent and essential aspects, in a form that answers to its true idea, disengaged from the passing accidents that cling to individuality, and from disturbing influences that obscure the type.' This was the sense of ' the ideal' as 'the universal' of the Poetics1. The popular sense of ' the ideal' marks an improvement as it prescribes 'a positive accession of what is beautiful.'2 It may, thus, be said to be instructing but hardly meting out proportionate reward and punishment to the good and the bad. In Nature also dis- tribution of justice among the good and the bad is not a regular phenomenon. This point brings in here the dis- cussion of the doctrine of 'Poetic justice'. This doctrine came to have its vogue due to the idea that ' Because true history propoundeth the successes and issues of actions not so agreeable to the merits of virtue and vice, therefore poesy feigns them more just in retribution and more according to revealed providence.'3 And it found favour because in

1. & 2. T. A. pp. 368-369. 3. B. A. L. p. 144. 3

34

history the unequal distribution of rewards and punishments was a cause of annoyance to the wise, and the atheist thereby scandalized the Divine Providence. In the drama, specially in tragedy, this doctrine was enjoined to have its full applica- tion. '(E)very tragedy ought to be a solemn lecture, inculcating a particular providence, and showing it plainly protecting the good and chastising the bad ...... '1 But has this doctrine any scope in Nature ? No doubt, some- times an evil man is seen overtaken by calamity and a good man rewarded with prosperity. This, however, does not take place invariably. The bad are seen flourishing and the good in most miserable conditions. Even in tragedy such a doctrine is not the rule.' ...... but I am sure it has no Founda- tion in Nature, in Reason, or in the Practice of the Ancients. We find that Good and Evil happen alike to all Men on this side the Grave; as the principal Design of Tragedy is to raise Commiseration and Terror in the Minds of the Audience, we shall defeat this great End, if we always make Virtue and Innocence happy and successful.'2 In the anicents' tragedies the suffering which comes to the hero in the end is the result of his own sin through the working of the retribution on the hero's family. This, however, can be traced to the fatalistic working of Nemesis. It simply connects the effect with the cause. But that the effect in its gigantic dimension and most oppressing nature is always the logical outcome of the cause often baffles understanding. And further, is the effect well- deserved ? Should Cordelia die for the truth she spoke when asked by her father, King Lear, as to which person she loved

1. J. Dennis, Advancement of Modern Poetry (Epistle Dedicatory), 1701 in T. P. E. p. 91. 2. J. A. S

35

most ? Should Aśvatthāmā lose his father and suffer so much as he did because he allied himself with the cause of the Kauravas ? The term, Poetic justice, is more than' Nemesis.' The former ' means that prosperity and adversity are distri- buted in proportion to the merits of the agents.'1 In the tragedies of Shakespeare this doctrine as such has no scope. There is no doubt that the doer suffers but there is no pro- portionate distribution of happiness and misery. Considered from the view of everyday experience, it is untrue. The audience witnessing the representation of a tragic dramatic piece only experiences various sentiments. This holds good also when the reader with a strong imagination is deeply engrossed in the dramatic piece. No thought of prosperity to the good and adversity to the wicked comes at that time. It is only afterwards when the work is closed that such a thought flashes in the mind. The doctrine, therefore, hardly finds favour if considered dispassionately. But the imagina- tive experience after the representation is over may make the spectators sympathetic to some characters and antagonistic towards others. In such cases legal justice may be corrected according to the requirements of art. Shylock does not receive equity and is made to forgo fortune to his daughter. This seems justified because the latter has won general sympa- thies. The dramatic necessity of providing for such persons was felt ; it has, therefore, been fulfilled. That it may be a case of Poetic justice is doubtful but it has satisfied the dramatic necessity.2 This is not the working of the doctrine

1. B. S. T. p. 31. 2. 'Again, viewed as a piece of equity the sentence on Shylock-a plaintiff who has lost his suit by an accident of statute-law seems highly questionable. On the other hand, this sentence brings a

36 of ' Poetic justice 'as such; it is rather the justification of what is painted in the drama. The doctrine has no binding force. It was enunciated on the ground that Nature is not perfect in all her workings and as the poet's world is more perfect, represents not how things obtain in this world but as they should be, rewards and punishments in due proportion should be conferred on and inflicted upon the good and the bad respectively in the composition. And it also came to satisfy the craving for didacticism of the ethically minded people. Sanskrit rhetoricians, it seems from an apparent consi- deration, favoured the third interpretation of the word 'reali- stic' and resorted to the imitation of what they saw in Nature. They saw people of various status in life as the hermits, the householders etc .; they saw all of these engaged in their various pursuits of life. They also saw the four varnas ( castes ) carrying out their prescribed duties. The people in various walks of life experienced pain and pleasure in this world. The sages endowed with the power of 'Yoga' rich in intuition, could see of the condition in which denizens of other worlds happened to be placed from time to time. Not only this, even the living beings of all the worlds were seen experiencing pain and pleasure under different conditions. This formed the canvas of the playwright. He had not to

fortune to a girl who has won our symapthies inspite of her faults ; it makes provision for those for whom there is a dramatic necessity of providing; above all it is in accord with our secret liking that good fortune should go with the bright and happy and sever itself from the mean and sordid. Whether this last is justice, I will not discuss ; it is enough that it is one of the instincts of the imagination, and in creative literature justice must pay tribute to art '. M. S. D. A. p. 384.

37

leave anything as everything was to find representation in the drama. 'I have composed the drama in imitation of the worldly behaviour;'1 this will imitate ( what happens in ) the seven continents;2 it should be known as the spectacle of the life-sketches of the gods, the Rsis etc;3 it is possible to depict in the drama the conditions of the world, arising out of pleasure and pain and teeming with the activities of many and varied people;4 the material of the drama is supplied by the output in the form of imitation of the various worldly objects having many characteristics;5 what is well accomplished in the world is really well accomplished, the drama arose out of the nature of the world, therefore in the representation of a dramatic piece the world is taken up as the standard;6 the drama is really to be called that which imitates the past lives of the divine beings, humanity at large, the great kings, the high sages of the world and such others.'7 The frequent recurrence of the word ' Anukarana' ( imitation ) and the emphasis on the 'wordly happenings in various forms' stress the view that the drama is the bare copying of them. Those who were really very deficient in imagination and consequently whose grip on reality had come to be very firm subscribed fully and whole-heartedly to the view. They little considered that even if desired by the playwright the bare copying of Nature in all details with accuracy and exactitude is an impossible task and

1. N. S. (K. S. S.). I. 109. 2. Ibid I. 116. 3. Ibid I. 118. 4. Ibid XXI. 121. 5. Ibid XXIII. 191. 6. Ibid XXVI. 113. 7. N. L. R. K. p. 2.

38

will hardly interest him, as it will make him encroach on the function of a scientist. It will also lead to clumsiness in his work. The drama never aims at the depiction of the exàct copy of the details of Nature. What obtains in this world is limited in time and space. Life in this world is a continuous flow like the flame of a lamp which is ceaselessly burning or the flow of water in the river. The flame at one moment cannot be said to exist at the other, but to an observer it appears that it is the same throughout its duration. In the same way the water flowing at one moment at a particular spot of the river is not the same there at the next moment, but to the eye it appears the same. What has happened once in one's life cannot be made to rehappen exactly in the same way and in the same circumstances. Therefore the exact imitation of a particular portion of life is impossible. People, however, are led away by the deception and think that Nature can be copied exactly as She is. Even the Daityas fell a victim to this misunderstanding and came to the conclusion that the drama was a bare imitation of what really takes place. The victory of the gods over the demons was being represented on the boards. 'When the representation of the destruction of demons had commenced, all the demons who had gathered there were agitated and irritated. They collec- ted together and headed by Virūpākșa began to present various kinds of impediments and obstructions. "We do not want this kind of drama." Then with the Asuras they assumed their devilish practices and began to stun the speech, the actions and the memory of those dancing on the stage.'1 When asked by Brahmā as to these impediments, Virūpākșa

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) I. 65-68.

39 said, "This the Natya Veda, that your Lordship has created to fulfil the desire of the gods, is a humiliation and an insult created by you for us at the hands of the gods. Therefore it should not be so done by you, Oh ! the Grandfather of the world. As the gods, so the demons-all have come out of you."1 The Grandfather at once understood that the demons had been deceived. They had misunderstood the whole thing and what their leader had said was the expression of those who laboured under misapprehension. In order to enlighten them on the point he said, " Away with this anger, Oh Daityas, and this grievance which has come about, do give up, Oh innocent beings ! This Nātya Veda I have created to represent the fortunes and the calamities of yourselves and the gods. This Natya Veda connects the actions and the internal Bhävas (of which the actions are the outward ex- pressions). And it is not that the canvas is exclusively devoted to the representation of yourselves or the gods, but it is a representation of the (various) conditions of the three worlds."2 The warning sounded by the Grandfather is not meant for the Daityas only ; it is a general warning meant to be attended to by all. The drama never takes fundamentally to copying particular wordly events as they happened in a particular time and at a particular place but takes stock of general events as described by the Grand- father. But the subject-matter provided by these general events does not suffice by itself. If only it is presented therein, it will appear like an extract from history. As such it will not be relished ; and those who demand the presenta-

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) I. 101-104. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) I. 102-104.

40

tion of such subject-matter in the drama are deficient in the qualities of a true spectator. ' He is a man of deficient intellect who says that the result aimed at in the dramas overflowing with pleasure is only ( the imparting of) knowledge as in history etc. Salutations to him, he is averse to pleasure !'1 But the subject-matters taken from the world do not undergo such transformation as may lose the worldly touch. That the full-fledged drama came from the Grandfather, Brahmā, seems to go in support of the view that the drama is not at all worldly but divine. When the god Indra says to the Grand- father, " Of receiving, retaining, knowing and practising it, Oh the Best One ! the gods are incapable ; for its representa- tion they are unfit,"2 the view seems to be corroborated. It, however, stands challenged by the recurring expressions emphasizing its subject-matter from the world. Bharata has described in details the Nātyasāstra and the Rsis heard him patiently. Then they wanted to be clear on certain points. They, therefore, said to him, "You have told us that the drama deals with worldly affairs, so please let us know the decisions in the secrets of the world."3 Bharata's words had been accepted by the Rsis as true and the former also resumed the thread in elaboration. What greater proof is requisite when the author of the compendium attaches special impor- tance to it. The playwright, therefore, takes his materials from the world, but he combines them in such a way as to form an ideal of beauty which is not to be found in Nature. Realism in its extreme form is not favoured by the drama as it is debase, mean and uninteresting. Extreme idealism in

1. D. R. I. 6. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) I. 22. 3. Ibid XXVI. 11.

41

the drama having no moorings on the wolrd is also discarded as it becomes fantastic, fabulous and receives no approbation. The playwright's material is a happy combination of the two. When he has been touched by some stirring incident, when his contemplation has been transformed into brooding after his dormant emotions have been awakened, when these emotions have assumed such dimensions as to be hardly con- tained within, it is then that art has its birth. The subject- matter taken from the world undergoes transformation through the medium of soul's experiences as affected by the emotions; what comes out is a thing which is real and at the same time ideal. 'Poetry is at bottom a criticism of life.'1 Every activity has its relations with, and effects on, life. No human activity can be severed from life. Therefore what the poet writes is meant for producing effect on life, rather to instruct. 'For undoubtedly there is no one tale among all the poets, but under the same is comprehended something that pertaineth, either to the amendment of manners, to the knowledge of the truth, to the setting forth of nature's work, or else the understanding of some notable thing done. For what other is the painful travail of Ulysses, described so largely by Homer, but a lively picture of man's misery in this life.'2 The Indian view of life advocated this point of view. The influence of the Dharma is to be seen permeating every- where. The poet's creation can be no exception to it. The preference given to Rāma and Krsna legends in all sorts of literary compositions bears witness to it. Even where the subjects came from other sources, it was seen to that the

1. S. E. M. A. p. 52. 2. T. Wilson, Art of Rhetoric 1553 in T. P. E. p. 298.

42 person around whom the events and other persons centred should be an ideal one. But then the compositions aim. primarily at the provocation of emotions resulting in a pleasurable experience. The two things, therefore, have to be combined in a way as to serve the double purpose ; producing a pleasurable effect primarily and imparting instruc- tion secondarily. 'The right use of poetry is ... to mingle profit with pleasure, and so to delight the reader with pleasantness of his art, as in the meantime his mind may be well instructed with knowledge and wisdom.'1 Delight was always as the foremost aim, instruction came secondarily. 'Delight is the chief, if not the only, end of poesie : instruc- tion can be admitted but in the second place, for poesie only intsructs as it delights.'2 The moral aim and the emotional effect of the compositions were combined together and advocated together by Sanskrit rhetoricians, for they fully realized that the two should receive general attention. The different objects or aims of the compositions have been summed up as follows :' Peotry is for (attaining) fame ; for earning wealth; for (acquisition of) wordly knowledge ; for the destruction of other than good ( that is, evils ) ; for ( ex- periencing ) immediate transcendental bliss ; and for ( impar- ting) instruction in the pleasing manners of a loving wife.'3 Whether the fifth aim and the sixth aim be construed together as has been done by Nobel4 or whether they should be 1. W. Webb, A Discourse of English Poetry in T. P. E. p. 302. 2. E. D. P. p. 104. 3. K. P. I. 2. 4. 'The composition of a Kāvya leads to fame, to wealth, to under- standing of all worldly business, to removal of all sorts of evils, to immediate or later pleasure joined with an instruction similar

43

understood as separate, as Bhämaha mentions the last one separately,1 does not matter. What really matters is present in both the positions. According to Nobel the 'ideal' for instruction will be mixed with 'pleasure', while the other according to which it is counted as separate repeats the same thing with greater emphasis as it comes as the last aim. The doctrine of ' Art for Art's sake ' deserves a brief considera- tion at this stage. That art has nothing to do with life, that it has got its own conventions, rules and regulations to follow and that its purpose is fulfilled if it has duly staisfied them are the explanations advanced confidently in its justification. But this justification tries to sever life from art which is an activity of life itself advancing towards perfection. No person collects money for its own sake but for personal welfare and higher advancement in all directions. In this doctrine an effort is made to do away with the real and the ideal aspects of art. But this is hardly possible. As Mahatma Gandhi puts it, ' ..... Art grows out of life ; it is fed by life ; it reacts upon life. This being so, it cannot disregard its responsibilities to life. It is, therefore, to the last degree absurd to talk of the artist, whatever his line of work, as if he stood without the field of ethics.'2 The real and the ideal in the sense of the moral are both mixed together. Then they have to pass through the mint of the playwright's soul wherein any bitterness or nakedness of either loses its sting. What comes out then depends, of course, on his attitude towards life. He

to that, which may be given by a beloved woman.' F. I. P. p. 41. This translation goes against the author's own commentary which keeps the aims as six and not five. 1. K. L. V. 3. 2. S. I. L. p. 47.

44 may give the ideal in the end as mostly obtains in the dramatic pieces dealing with Räma and Krsna legends, where the final victory over the diabolic forces is represented as conclusively achieved. Or he may simply depict the aggrandizement of the above forces suggesting at the same time by means of slight touches that excess inevitably leads to precipitate fall. In both the cases, however, the soul is the determining element which gives art its capacity to arouse pleasurable emotions maturing into sentiments. This spiritual element making an appeal to heart is the distinguishing feature of fine arts. It accounts for the inti- mate relation that exists among the different forms of art. One art can be expressed in the language of another. "For example, we speak of the architecture of a poem or of a piece of music, of musical poetry,of pictorial music, of the poetry of Landscape art, of the sculpture, the music, or the colour of a poem, and so on. Noble architecture has even been described as 'frozen music'. These correlations of visible, audible, and structural Beauty bring out its underlying unity, and explain it."1 The inner urge of soul for perfection towards all truth, all beauty and all goodness found expression in fine art which ultimately culminated in Poetry ( and there too in drama ), the medium of which is word which lit the whole three worlds. 'If the light, called word, did not shine into this existence, then these three worlds would be in complete darkness.'2 That such expression of the spiritual longing should come out through play was most natural, for play even in its most earthly sense has practically no leanings

1. K. P. B. pt. II p. 73. 2. K. D. I. 4. ( Translation from F. I. P. p. 38 ).

45

towards earthliness. The gods considered drama as a play- thing and demanded it of the Grandfather for play. It was given also as such. 'This Science which is a means for play or which is an instrument for play, '1 is the note which recurs in course of Bharata's replies to the queries of the Rsis. That the drama marked the highest development in art goes without saying, as all other arts, so to say, got combined together to produce this artistic unity in diversity. How this unity in diversity was gradually achieved, how this particular art of drama came to be evolved in its finished and full-fledged form with all its technical ingredients etc. are points which now demand full attention and thorough consideration.

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXVI. 66.

CHAPTER TWO

EVOLUTION OF DRAMA (SANSKRIT).

When a force acts on a body, the latter expresses the reaction in one way or another. It may be in a favoura- ble adjustment of one to another or it may be expressed in total antagonism. The iron filings placed on a level surface arrange themselves into different patterns when magnet is passed over them. 'The vibrations of musical sound can throw into forms of exquisite beauty the molecules of dust that have been spread upon a prepared surface for the purpose,'1 is an instance of reaction in adjustment. The same molecules thrown far away by the strongest gust of wind can be instanced as reaction in antagonism. This, however, is also a form of adjustment. The formation of massive rocks, the piling up of huge mountains and the wide expanse of water with ripples give one the idea of the action of different forces. The material world on all sides furnishes countless examples. Even objects as pictures, statues, works of architecture etc. made by man show how forces exercised by authors have worked in different manner. The floral world is seen subject to the same law. Different seasons are the workings of natural forces bringing with them heat, cold and rains when Nature puts on aspects : cheery, gloomy or indifferent. The world of fauna obeys the same law as any external force affects it. When such is the case with objects, animate or inanimate, of Nature, man, who is the most susceptible to external forces, who is seen all rife with activity and thus

1. K. P. B. pt. II. p. 74.

47 furnishes an instance of life in its fullness, is bound to react to the least action brought to bear upon him from outside. A mere consideration of this matter makes one naturally reflect if all this process of action and reaction is regular and maintains some order. In other words, whether the same thing happens under the same circumstances, whether it happens at fixed intervals etc. are questions demanding full investigation. In the above instances the iron filings form themselves into regular patterns. A regular order in rocks, mountains and watery expanse is clear to ima- gination. Rhythm is visible in works of art to connoisseurs; different flowers disclose regular arrangements to expert eyes. Trees in their development also reveal it. In their construction, in their growth etc. there plainly appears a regular order. Even when any element of Nature exerts its force over or through them, a regular order is main- tained. Wind blowing through the limited space of a cluster of trees makes a regular sound. It often becomes musical as it did when the monarch Dilīpa heard the musical sound produced by bamboos, their holes being filled up with wind.1 Seasons which bring about the greatest amount of effect occur at stated and fixed intervals, and the changes they cause are regular. Among birds and beasts there are periods such as mating and nestling which occur at fixed times. When any bird or beast is made to receive an external shock, there is to be seen a corresponding effect on its body. This effect is sometimes a reflex act, while at others conscious. But it is always regular and systematic. Man who stands at the highest rung of the ladder of crea-

1. R. V. II. 12 in K. G.

48

tion furnishes a glaring instance in this direction. The reaction he exhibits is brought about in two ways : man as an individual and man as a social being. Man as an individual being feels his existence separate. He knows that there are many objects in Nature, and that some of these constitute her dark and dismal expressions. The thunder of lightning, the thunderbolt, the cyclone, the strong storm, the hails, the elephantine showers of rains, the great mountains with heavy rocks rolling down by some dashing force, the rolling waves on the river teeming with large and fierce aquatic animals, the seas and oceans with innumerable and many such dreadful objects, winter and autumn make Nature look most dreary and dreadful. Man in their presence feels a sense of insignificance. He has, however, been provided with a system which reacts to any action of them. Thunder and lightning stun him for a moment; cold produces a shivering all over his body. This is the adjustment towards natural forces which act dreadfully. But this adjustment strains the human or- ganism. This strain is, however, neutralized in its harmful effect in an other way. As Nature furnishes countless ins- tances of her darkness and dreadfulness, so does she also abound in bright, cheerful and invigorating expressions. The flash of lightning in the midst of showers on a summer day, the first appearance of cloud in the rainy season when separated lovers feel pangs of affectionate longings,1 the beautiful dawn where harmony of colours is simply fasci- nating and inspiring,2 the spring when Nature puts on a

1. M. D. pt. I. 2 & 3 in K. G. 2. It is said that Late Dr. Rabindra Nath Tagore sat upstairs in the dawn looking constantly towards the east when harmony of colours

49 new garment variegated in colours, and such other phe- nomena amply relieve the dismal aspect of Nature. They not only counteract the strain caused any way on the hu- man organism but also excite pleasurable emotions making it vibrate and give rhythmic expression. It is the stage when the shaking of limbs represents the rhythmic adjust- ment of the organism to the external influence. But man is also a social being. Society even in primi- tive times had its existence constituting the individual as a unit. No individual by himself can live without caring for others. He must come into contact with, and be res- ponsive to, them. If any dreadful sound is uttered by one, others respond by bodily adjustment, for instance, by being surprised or stunned. In the midst of fighting when war cry is made by one the rest join making themselves equally expressive. The musical notes pronounced by some will naturally make others expressive. They may express this effect by direct manifestation of trembling or shaking of limbs or placing the latter in a way as best suits the response. The particular individual, thus, communi- cates the influence which is brought to bear upon him or her by the society. All the individuals which make to- gether the society, thus, make themselves responsive to one another. This sort of mutual adjustment benefits them mainly in two ways. Firstly, each individual main- tains the harmony of his organism. This harmony is very necessary to each organism for its welfare. Even the machine constantly strained on one of its parts loses its balance and ceases to work if that part is not replaced

and fresh rays of the rising sun would gradually send him into a deep reverie. 4

50

soon. The human organism has many nerves and fibres which are very subtle and susceptible to even the least external stimulus. They work automatically, as it were, in adjustment to it. When prevented from doing so, they are highly strained and may even be injured. The organism may lose its balance. It is impossible to replace an injured nerve as in the case of a machine. Thus it becomes quite plain how the human organism keeps its harmony. Sec- ondly, the society at large understands its effect on a par- ticular individual. It realizes that the rhythmic expression is the effect of what the individual experiences moving widely in its midst. This expression is a sort of connection between the society and the particular individual. In this way all the individuals get connected together. This stage is represented in folk dances on religious occasions mostly where there is no particular emphasis on any thing. A number of people join together and dance to the tunes or clappings made at that time. Hardly any expression to emotions is given.1 It was 'mere rhythmic dancing',2 'mere shaking of the limbs'3 as the Sanskrit dramaturgists put it. 'That is called Nrtta which is devoid of emotions and acting'4 clearly witnesses to the fact of its being the most crude form of dance. There is no doubt that any action on, and reaction from, the human organism can hardly take place without the medium of mind and soul. There are, of course, certain reactions which become automatic and seem to require no such medium. On consideration, how-

1. D. R. I. 9 (Nrttam Tālalayāśrayam). 2. T. S. D. p. 22. 3. Commentary under 1 (given above). 4. A. D. 15 (Bhāvābhinayahīnam Tu Nrttamityabhidhīyate).

51

ever, it becomes clear that they are so by practice. Hence all objective expressions on the human organism do have subjective basis which in some cases is scarcely discerni- ble. That the Nrtta stage was this crude stage is evident as objective expression is the chief effect aimed at. But human nature does not remain satisfied with gross and material things. It wants to go deep into their very basis where their informing principle appears in its true colour. The Nrtta has minimum of subjective expression, minimum to such an extent as is almost inappreciable. Hence transition to another stage was inevitable. Pro- gress was made in the direction of the inward rather than the outward, because it was realized that the former was more important than the latter. The different human emotions came to be the centre of interest. They assumed utmost importance and all efforts began to be directed in appropriating and expressing them. Emotions in their latency brought to provocation when concentrated on a particular object were expressed through acting. The different psychic conditions were also acted. And this was effected through various gesticulations of hands and feet.1 A particular person, thus, helped himself in expressing his own emotions to others. Others' emotions could also be expressed, though crudely, through gesticulations. Indi- viduals, therefore, as units of society came much closer to one another as one could make known to other the different emotions that surged within. Music was an accompani- ment as an ancillary and not as an indispensable element. The indispensable element was the gesticulation in its differ- ent varieties of which three ( the fourth utilized only in the

1. D. R. I. 9 (Anyad Bhāvāśrayam Nrtyam).

52 dress of the dancers ) principally were utilized. They were the Āngika (bodily ), the Vāchika ( verbal ) and the Sāttvika (psychic). The second, that is, the Vächika was used in different tunes and notes of instrumental music which was only an accompaniment. This stage represented, therefore, more a sort of pantomime in its beginning which 'was more or less a dumb show.'1 Only the emotions were expressed-through gesticulation, a few instances of which, for elucidation, would suffice. The 'bee incident' from the Abhijñānasākuntala is to be acted thus : 'Move the head quickly to and fro ( vidhutam), the lips quivering, while Pataka hands are held unsteadily against the face, palms inward.'2 Music might be added to it and, thus, serve as help in the effectiveness of the expression. This stage seems to approximate to that of ballad dance where 'Nothing of the nature of a theater must be supposed; only a level orchestra, and a band of performers habited as Satyrs, who bring out the story somewhat in this way.'3 The description that follows makes one conclude that it is an attempt at mere expression of various surging emo- tions. The subjective element here scored a triumph over the objective as the demonstration concerned itself now with emotions. The strain on the human organism, thus, came to be relieved and its harmony and balance secured. How the disturbance in this harmony and balance leads to disastrous results is quite evident in cases of persons who become abnormal by suffering from dementation etc. Effort is always made strenuously in this world to bring

1. S. I. L. p. 86. 2. M. G. p. 19. 3. MS. L. p. 164.

53

about a discharge of the inwardly vehement emotions.1 The stage of Nrtya, therefore, marks a step of progress in the direction of the expression of the inward emotion- which is abstract. But the abstract utilized in the Nrtya was limited in this sense that mostly the emotions of the dancer consti- tuted the stock. They, thus, were particular emotions. The general emotions of the world were hardly taken notice of. Consequently an insight into the probings of mankind's hearts in general was not given. The Nrtya, therefore, could not give full satisfaction. Society at large was in it a mere sharer of pleasure which was limited in width. But it was keenly felt that all strata of humanity should be drawn upon.2 Not only this but also all objects, animate or inanimate, should be represented. This could be done through imitation ( Anukarana). Mimesis came to have its scope mainly because of two reasons. In the first case, the man in the Nrtya who gave pleasure to others wanted that others also should give him pleasure. It was also felt, in the second case, that great heroes of the race should be imitated and, thus, with pleasure instruction should be mixed. The satisfaction to these two longings was fully given by Mimesis which is ingrained in human nature. Imitation to be accomplished successfully required various kinds of devices, therefore different kinds of Abhinaya

1. Cf. the central idea of the poem entitled ' Home they brought her warrior dead' where an effort to make the widow weep engages the concerned, so that emotion of extreme sorrow may not bring about a nervous break-down. The effort finally is crowned with success. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) I. 109 ( Lokavṛttānukaraņam Nāțyam ).

54

were fully utilized. The Angika, the Vāchika, the Sāttvika and the Āhārya (sartorial)-these kinds of Abhinaya fully helped the actor in representing the objects, animate or inanimate, subjective or objective, earthly or divine etc. The various circumstances in which the persons happened to be placed from time to time were fully represented in all their details which were significant and attractive fea- tures. The acting in all its divisions necessarily implied that there must be a place well decorated and exclusively meant for representation. But as mostly the representa- tion concerned itself with the emotions of the world at large, the number of actors was generally more than one. When these actors gave the representation, an audience was bound to be present to witness it and have the full enjoyment from it. This full enjoyment was the prin- cipal aim. At this stage the drama in its fully evolved form is to be seen. Variously denominated it was sure to be, as its consideration was made from different points of view. It was imitation of the different situations which summed up together some traditional story or the story invented by the playwright. In this form it was called the 'Nātya' or the 'Nataka'.1 The same was termed the 'Rūpa' (show )2 because it could be seen (being represented on the stage before the audience) and it was again designated as the Rūpaka (representation )3 because of the imposition of the

1. D. R. I. 7 ( Avasthānukrtir Nātyam) ; A. D. M. 15 (Nāțyam Tannāțakam Chaiva Pūjyam Pūrvakathāyutam). 2. D. R. I. 7 (Rūpam Drśyatayochyate ). 3. Ibid ( Rūpakaņ Tatsamāropāt).

55

original characters in different situations over the actors. The characters when imitated by the actors had their mental qualities and functions also depicted. In this lay the centre of attraction as hereto could be traced the bonds of affinity between man and man. Even Nature was depicted in close sympathy, or in any other relation, with man.1 The Sanskrit dramaturgists were fully awake to the impor- tance of the human appeal-a fact which they have ex- pressed with the deepest concern, made it as they have the substratum of drama because the drama is classified on this basis.2 It is to bring this human appeal to prominence that all kinds of efforts are made in the drama. That the Nätya summed up the ingredients provided in the stages of the Nrtta and the Nrtya goes without saying. Not only this much, but also it marked a refinementt over them. In the stage of the Nrtta the expression was only rhythmic though it was combined with music, for it de- pended on tunes, notes and clappings. This was a stage which corresponds to "rhythmic movement without any theme and therefore without any 'flavour'" answering to the modern European conceptions of dance.3 The four kinds of Abhinaya had no proper emphasis. The ex- pression was of an objective nature where outward mani- festation counted most; no account of the subjective factor was taken. The appeal, therefore, did not go deep and it did not require any training in special technique. Conse-

1. Cf. Abhijñānaśākuntala where Nature weeps at the separation of Śakuntalā from the hermitage of Kaņva. 2. D. R. I. 7 (Daśadhaiva Rasāśrayam). 3. M. G. p. 22.

56

quently its importance attenuated as advance was made a step further to the Nrtya where the subjective element came into prominence and began guiding the objective ele- ment. The outward expression now indicated what was internally going on in the human organism. The service of the different kinds of Abhinaya was, therefore, requisi- tioned though all kinds were not fully utilized. The Āngika, the Vächika and the Ahāraya-these three kinds were used only in parts and not fully. The person who demonstrated the Nrtya drew mostly upon his personal emotions, therefore the appeal was not directed to humanity at large. But as it consisted of the expression of the sub- jective element, it came to be of special interest to man- kind. Man, however, was not totally satisfied with the Nrtya due to its being limited to particular emotions; he wanted a medium for the expression of emotions in general. That the medium was to be a step further in the line of evolution was but natural. This was the Nātya stage which was the imitation of the conditions in which per- sons were placed from time to time. The Nātya was variously called the 'Rupa' and the 'Rupaka' because the actors were identified with the original characters they represented. Because of the representation by the actor the appeal went home directly to the human heart where- to it was addressed. The Nrtta stage represented crude dancing with music and the Nrtya stage refined dancing and music with acting but the Nātya stage combined danc- ing and acting with stage technique which was most effec- tive, as all kinds of Abhinaya were fully utilized for making the appeal direct and intense. This may be as much as to say that the Nrtta had nothing to do with those gesti-

57

culations, which were utilized for expressing emotions; speech also was not required. The Nrtya utilized those gesticulations but the Natya utilized those gesticulations, the speech and other factors as dress etc. also. Considered as art the three stages, the Nrtta, the Nrtya and the Nätya, show gradual evolution leading to the cul- minating point in the last stage where perfection to the extent humanly possible is attained. 'In joyous moods the latent energy of body and mind-whether gently excited or violently stirred-would force itself forward, and de- mand a physical as well as a mental path to work in.'1 It came out in one way through the rhythmic expression which was the crude dance. This could not satisfy the aesthetic standard, hence progress towards the refined and expressive dance was made, though in both the stages music co-operated. But the dance being limited in plea- sure at these stages had to march forward towards perfec- tion where it assumed the form of an elaborate spectacle as reproduction of the traditional stories, legends and myths came to be associated with it. The media in the first stage were the rhythmic bodily expressions; in the second, the studied gesticulations and poses, but in the third all these were combined with speech in all its branches and also with stage properties which helped in fully expressing the pur- pose of the spectacle. The range in the Nrtta was very limited as only the bodily movements with musical notes could be taken notice of. In the Nrtya it became widened as the subjective element expressed through the body and combined with music formed the stock. In the Nātya

1. K. P. B. pt. II. p. 238.

58

the range grew the widest as emotions of humanity in ge- neral came to engross the attention. As all varieties of Abhinaya were utilized, the latent emotions got transfor- med into respective sentiments. The duration in the Nrtta stage was not lasting because mere rhythmic danc- ing with music was vague and there was no permanent basis to admit of reproduction. In the Nrtya stage the basis acquired general stability as human emotions were expressed. Its reproduction was, therefore, possible. In the Nätya stage the basis became permanent as senti- ments centred on particular objects could be reproduced any number of times. With regard to effects there could be traced a gradual progress. In the first stage the effects were rather mere reflex actions meant to give an elementary pleasure to the spectators. In the second stage they pleased amply both the parties. But in the third stage the ecstasy of the spectators was the principal aim, the actors enjoyed, if at all, only as spectators. Thus as an art the Natya stage marked the highest point in the line of evolution as it fully satisfied the requirements and the criteria on which the five fine arts discussed in the previous chapter were tes- ted and found as adequate vehicles of expression. The last stage, Natya, represented the final stage in evolution.1 Here drama was to be seen in its full-fledged

1. D. R. Mankad in T. S. D. fully recognizes on pp. 22 & 23 this gradual evolution of drama, the final stage being reached in the 'Natya' which was called 'Rupa' when it was made visible and 'Rupaka ' when the actor assumed the part (role) of the original character and was identified with him. On page 32 he explains thus : (a) Nrtta : Dancing.

59 form. It, therefore, could be described thus : Drama is the representation by actors (imitators) put up for show at a certain place before spectators (audience) in the form of imitation of conditions and situations in which persons (imitated, 'original characters') are placed from time to time, by certain means, leading to enjoyment of a parti- cular pleasure. AN APPENDIX ON 'ORIGIN OF DRAMA ( Sanskrit ).' Drama as an art had to evolve gradually to reach the final stage. The three stages : the Nrtta, the Nrtya and the Nātya represent this evolution as has been considered above. The various elements constituting these stages could be traced to so many different sources as efforts by scholars were made to locate the dramatic art in its evolving stages in different branches of learning. The Veda, the Epic, the Grammar etc. were all considered. External influence of, and contact with, the Westerners were also considered as factors determining the point at issue. These efforts resulted in theories propounded by authorities, Eastern and Western, the latter mostly who took into account parallels from the west.

(b) Nrtya : Dancing plus music plus a little of acting. This is based on Bhāvas. (c) Nāțya : (a) plus (b) plus full histrionics. This is [based on Rasas. (d) Rūpaka : Nātya plus taking the role of some one else. Here Mankad counts Rūpaka separately. It is, however, to be borne in mind that it is the Nätya itself which is called 'Rūpa' and 'Rūpaka ' under various con- ditions as already elaborated.

60

The Vedas present the most ancient scriptures of India, and, therefore, engaged the attention of scholars first. Many hymns of the dialogue type have been expressly mentioned as such by Indian tradition. The Yama and Yamī hymn (Rv. X. 10), the Purūravas and Urvaśī hymn (Rv. X. 95) the Sarama and the Panis hymn (Rv. X. 108) etc. are instances in point. These hymns had not, it seems, much to do with the ritual; in the later Vedas their traces are hardly to be found as only one such hymn is to be met with in the Atharva Veda which occurs in V. 11. Absence of mention as to the original purpose served by such hymns gave scholars ample scope for speculations. Max Müller suggested in connection with Rv. I. 165 that the 'dialogue was repeated at sacrifices in honour of the Maruts or that possibly it was acted by two parties, one representing Indra, the other the Maruts and their follow- ers.'1 Prof. Levi approved of the above suggestion and Pischel explained the exchange of prose and verse in Indian drama as a legacy from this old poetry. Prof. L. V. Schroeder's view on the point marked an advance for he saw in these hymns the relics of vedic mysteries. He re- called the close connection between Music, Dance and Drama among many peoples and said that the mysteries existed even in the Indogermanic prehistoric period. Many gods were called dancers in the Vedas and the origin of drama from the phallic gods was not recognized due to the moral strictness of the priests, but the Gandharvas and the Apsarasas connected with the origin of drama pointed that way. These mysteries marked the end, not the advent

1. K. S. D. p. 15.

61 of the development and the Yātras were the parallel survi- vals from the cult of Krsna-Visnu and Rudra-Siva. Hertel was of opinion that the Rg Vedic hymns as referred to above were always sung, and to mark the difference in song and spoken parts the dramatic art had its birth. He tries to see the development of the drama in the Suparnā- dhyāya and the continuation in the Yātrās. Profs. Windisch, Oldenberg and Pischel advocated that these hymns were the preserved portions representing the points of highest emotions. In the actual dialogue the prose portion was improvised. Winternitz saw in some of these hymns the old narrative hymns while in others the old-cult drama. He further said that in the ritual drama- tic elements could be shown, but all these were very far from the classical drama, for he says, "But most of these hymns are simply ballads of the half-epic, half-dramatic type, though not real dramas, as some scholars have thought them to be."1 Prof. Geldner, at first a follower of Oldenberg in his views, later sought to explain them as ballads. These different views about the hymns prove to be of no avail. The ethnological example advanced by Prof. Von Shroeder on the analogy of the Cora Indians is far- fetched and idle expenditure of energy. Dr. Hertel's theory also appears to be on shaky grounds as it is not necessary to have two sets of singers of these hymns.2 To accept that the drama did not develop because the priests disapproved of the fertility ritual is also unfounded as the 1. W. H. I. L. p. 103. 2. Cf. Bhana where only one Vita, the hero, assumes different roles and imitates various voices simultaneously.

62

ritual is recognized in the Mahävrata ceremonial and in the horse sacrifice. The theory of Oldenberg, no doubt, once found an all round favour but there is nothing actually in this form in the whole of the Vedic literature to warrant its correctness. Leaving aside these dialogues the germs of the drama can be seen in these rituals. They involved not only the recitation of the parts in the dialogue but also necessitated the assumption of different roles by the priests as in the ritual of Soma purchase for the Soma sacrifice. This whole process was, however, unconscious, as Keith puts it; he says, " ...; if a ritual includes elements of re- presentation, the aim is not the representation, but the actors are seeking a direct religious or magic result."1 Therefore the drama in its established form as advocated in the form of mysteries seems hardly a believable fact. The ritual ceremony may, however, stand as an unconscious approach to, though at a long distance from, drama proper. As Keith says the Yajur Veda mentions no such term as Nata though the word Sailūșa occurs, maybe, in the sense of a dancer or a musician due to the close proximity of the arts of dancing and singing. In these rituals Prof. Hille- brandt sees actual drama and Prof. Konow insists on their being ritual drama but says that they are borrowed from the popular mime obtaining at that time, the mime which knew dialogue, abusive language and even repartee in blows. The Kauşītaki Brāhmaņa ( XXIX. 5) mentions dance, song and music as arts and the popular mime had these as its chief parts, but the Pāraskara Grhya Sūtra ( ii.7.3 ) disapproves its use for the three higher castes.

1. K. S. D. p. 24.

63

The above view cannot be tenable in the absence of men- tion of Nata and lack of evidence about the existence of secular mime prior to the religious one. The Sāma Veda affords example of songs and ceremonial dances in the Mahāvrata and other religious ceremonies; but drama in its full-fledged form is not an established fact here. The priests were concerned principally with the ritual per- formances and, therefore, only those things could find place which were connected with the rituals. In the Br. Up. excellent conversations between Gārgī and Yājñavalkya and between the latter and Maitreyi are to be met with. Similar instance is to be found in the Katha Up. also in the dialogue between Yama and Nachi- ketā. But these instances may simply be distant approach. to the dramatic spirit, hence they hardly need any further consideration. The Epics came next for consideration. Whether the Mahabharata should be taken first or the Rāmayana should claim priority is a problem difficult to decide. Winternitz in some points decides one more ancient than the other and vice versa, but in one point his leaning in matter of priority goes to the Mahabhārata when he says, "(1) The older nucleus of the Mahābhārata, however, is probably older than the ancient Rāmayana. (2) In the Veda we find. no trace of the Rama epic and only very faint traces of the Rama legend."1 The Mahābhārata has certain references. in lines as 'Oh Sairandhri, thou does not know the pro- priety of time, thou weepest like an actress,'2 but in the absence of mention of the word 'Nātaka', the term Śailūși

1. W. H. I. L. p. 516. 2. M. B. S. IV. 16. 43.

64

( actress ) might refer only to the actress in a pantomime. There is one line1 which mentions the term 'Nātaka' but it seems to be a later interpolation for Hopkins says about it, "which is anything but an early verse."2 There are found dancers mentioned here hence it stands reasonable that the word 'Nata' is to be construed in connection with pantomimes. In the Harivamsa which is a continuation of the Mahābhārata is found Pradyumna playing different roles. Winternitz says, "In order to win Prabhāvatī, Pradyumna, disguised as an actor, comes with a whole troupe of actors to the court of Vajranbha. Then all sorts of plays are performed with which the Asuras are greatly charmed."3 In this Purana are also found 'not only pantomime, abhinaya, but even dramatic representa- tions of the "great Rāmāyana poem" in which the vidū- şaka, or stage-jester of the regular drama, takes part.'4 But 'the Harivamsa is of uncertain date.'5 The Rāmāyaņa mentions the Natas and the Nartakas6 and it also speaks of Nātakas,7 but these references according to Keith are not of early dates8 hence no light is shed on the early existence of drama in its full-fledged form. Though the Epics cannot be definitely credited with the mention of the full-fledged drama, yet their influence

1. M. B. S. II. 11.35. 2. G. E. I. p. 55. 3. W. H. I. L. p. 451. 4. G. E. I. p. 55. 5. K. S. D. p. 28 ; W. H. I. L. p. 451 ( Footnote 1.) 6. V. R. II. 67. 15. 7. Ibid II. 69.4. 8. K. S. D. p. 29.

65

over its development is undoubtedly ample. The author, Bāna, refers to the epic recitation; for example, queen Vilāsavatī is described as having heard the recitation of the Mahābhārata.1 Again Kādambarī is depicted to be attentive to the recitation of the Mahābhārata.2 Keith mentions Ksemendra as remonstrating with his contem- poraries for eagerly listening to, but not following the pieces of advice contained in, the epic recitation.3 Such recita- tions are still a practice obtaining in villages in Bengal specially where the reciters dividing themselves as Pāthakas ( called Kathakas in Bengal) and Dhārakas repeat and ex- pound portions, with embellishments as songs and music, from the epic. The Rāmāyaņa itself records Vālmīki teaching it to Kuśa and Lava who related it before Rāma.4 In the above stanza as also in others5 the term Kuśīlava occurs which became the appellation of actors. Later on, however, it indicated by witticism a hit at the morals of actors whose wives may be called Rūpājīvās as Patañjali in the Mahābhāsya records that when the wives of the actors playing roles as actresses entered upon the stage, they wer- asked by others as to whose wives they were. To them they replied that they were their wives.6 Manu also makes no prohibition in respect of conversation with the wives of the Natas .? The term 'Bhat' denoting a class of reciters

1. B. K. D. p. 128. 2. Ibid p. 395. 3. K. S. D. p. 29. 4. V. R. I. 4. 26. 5. Ibid I. 4. 4, 5, 17 & 32. 6. VI. 1.2. (Mah. Bhās.) 7. VIII. 362. (M. Smr.) 5

66

is a modern survival of the term 'Bharata' which stands as 'an appellation of the comedian in the later texts.'1 The epic is meant to be recited and the recitation, no doubt, involved a certain amount of acting (modulation of voice, gestures, facial expressions etc.). The connection of epic and drama, therefore, becomes quite evident. Last but not the least is the fact that the two Epics became the regular quarry for plots, main and subsidiary, for a large number of playwrights. This fact bears eloquent witness to their influence over the development of drama. The Puranas have references to actors. Śrīmad Bhāga- vata Purāņa mentions the occasion of Śrī Krsna's state- entry to the capital, Dvārakā, as marked with the fitting reception given by Vāsudeva and other citizens (I. 11. 20). Śrī Mārkaņdeya Purāņa describes Rtadhvaja alias Kuvala- yāśva, the son of Satrājita, whiling away his time sport- fully in poetical discourses, singing, and Nātakas (XX. 4.). The grammar of Panini mentions for the first itme the Nața Sūtras,2 the text books for Natas. The term 'Nata' thus occurs but in the absence of any other thing definitely establishing his being an actor in the drama it may be in- terpreted in connection with the pantomime. In the Mahābhāșya of Patañjali is quoted for his criticism a rule of Kātyāyana indicating the use of phrases describing the past event as if the spectator has seen it. In the Mahā- bhasya are to be found such words, 'He causes the death of Kamsa, and, he causes the binding of Bali.'. The use of verbs here is justified on the ground that though those

1. K. S. D. p. 30. 2. IV. 3. 110.

67

persons are no more living in the present, yet any incident in their connection can be so described. The mode of description is in three ways. 'In the first case, the Śaubhi- kas actually perform the killing of Kamsa, and the binding of Bali. In the second case, hands are seen raised and blows rained over Kamsa. The latter is also shown being dragged about. In the third case, the Granthikas relate the fortune of their subjects from birth to death and ex- press what is already present in mind. They divide them- selves, some as party to Kamsa, others as devotees of Krsna. The former paint their faces black, while the latter red.'1 In the first case, only the action is performed for no use of words is mentioned. In the second, the con- cern is with what is depicted in pictures. In the third, however, many points come in for consideration. In this context the expression 'Sabdagrantha gadumātram' occurs. Its meaning is not wholly unknown2 but has been clearly explained by Nāgojī Bhațța in his commentary. The 'Sabda' means what is being uttered by the Kathaka, 'reciter,' the 'Grantha' means 'the book placed in his hand,' and 'Gadda (Gadu )' means 'the collection of men.' Looking to the explanation of Saubhikas as given by Kaiyata Prof. Lüders took the Śaubhikas to be persons explaining the shadow pictures to the audience. But these shadow pictures came very late and, therefore, the conjecture becomes untenable. Prof. Levi takes the literal meaning and makes them the teachers of the actors imitating Kamsa etc. (Śaubhikā Iti-Kamsānukārinām

1. III. 1. 26. 2. K. S. D. p. 35.

68

Națānām Vyākhyānopādhyāyāh ) but they can be their heads as also actors as the Sutradhara in the drama. The view, therefore, is not remarkable. Prof. Lüders explains the version given by Prof. Levi to the effect that what the actors presented on the stage was explained by these aubhikas, thus establishing the existence of dumb actors by quoting parallels in the Jhamkīs of Bombay and Ma- thura in modern India; but there is no certainty of the existence of these Jhāmkīs in ancient India, hence no guarantee for its weight. Weber's view that here a re- ference to the pantomimic killing and binding is made is quite natural for incidents in their original state are not happening. Prof. Lüders was no doubt mistaken in his theory, for instead of keeping the first and the second modes as described above separate he mixed them and, thus, came to the conclusion that Saubhikas offered ex- planation of what the shadow pictures depicted. It is quite wrong as explained by Haradatta also,1 as only the pictures are to be of consideration and no mention of the persons explaining incidents therein is made. Prof. Lüders again does not believe that the Granthikas in the third mode divided themselves into two parties. This goes against the Mahabhasya which gives their division into two parties. They used words, books and were not one but many in number. In order to recite home the portions they not only divided themselves into two oppo- sing parties but also painted their faces differently. That this painting of the faces differently in no way applies to the audience has been accepted by Prof. Hillebrandt. It

1. K. S. D. p. 34 & (Footnote).

69

is untenable on two grounds. Firstly, no Hindu will rejoice in the prosperity of Kamsa hence no affiliation to his party ; and secondly, the audience can never even now as in ancient times allow the faces to be painted. Prof. Hillebrandt holds that the Granthikas took part and the different colours on their faces represented the sentiments experienced. The Nāțyaśāstra in support enumerates the appropriate colours to different sentiments.1 Since Kielhorn2 read the text not as given above but in inverted order, that is, ' the Raktamukha for Kamsa bhaktas and the Kālamukha for Krsņa bhaktas.' Prof. Hillebrandt also believes that the party of Kamsa expressed the sentiment of fury and that of Krsna of fear. The inverted order is untenable because it is inconsistent with the continuous victories, past and present, of Krsna who is regarded as god-head incarnate. It may apparently be held tenable in part in that the party of Kamsa may be shown in fury till Kamsa is shown completely vanquished and that of Krsna in fear out of the thought in the beginning that the other party may achieve victory. But looking to what turns out as conclusion the appearance gives ground before reality. The Grammar of Pāņini, the Mahābhāsya of Patañjali etc. give only indication that some sort of dramatic activities were known but no regular code containing the details of all the constituents of drama in its full-fledged form is available in Pānini, maybe, due to the fact that the Nata Sūtras men- tioned by him are now lost to us. The Mahābhāsya records evidence effectively bearing on the existence of drama, but

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. 42-43. 2. K. S. D. p. 36.

70 the instances quoted bear witness to religious shows. It, therefore, leads one to the idea that religion was the originator of drama. That religion furnished drama many ingredients is evidenced by the legend of Kamsa and Krsna. Keith interprets this legned in his own way. He sees in it ' the refined version of an older vegetation ritual in which the representative of the outworn spirit of vegetation is des- troyed.' In the colours of the two parties he sees the aspects of winter and summer, that of Kamsa being black and of Krsna red standing for the victory of the summer over the winter. He quotes parallel in the Mahävrata where the white Vaisya fights with the black Sūdra for the sun and achieves victory in the end. He also seeks analogy in the view of Dr. Farnell on the theory of the origin of the Greek drama from the mimic conflict of summer and winter. But the analogy is only partially applicable as instead of summer getting the upper hand it is winter which is finally victorious. This in a way accounts for the dirge-like nature of the Greek drama. The comparative view as advanced above is apparently tenable but it is difficult to say when the vegetation ritual was named the Krsna legend specially when, as Winternitz says, " Single myths, legends and poems which are included in the Mahabhärata, reach back to the time of the Veda."2 Another proof of religious origin of drama is available in the character of the Vidūșaka analogous to the Śüdra in the ceremony of the Soma purchase. Prof. Hille- brandt matches his history with that of Harlequin, ' A repre-

1. K. S. D. p. 37. 2. W. H. I. L. p. 474.

71 sentative of the Devil and not a figure of mirth.'1 But the fact that the Vidūsaka's character in its abusive aspect is important here as he is treated as a Brāhmana goes against the above view. The opposition has been admitted by the Professor as he suggests a change in the later character of the Vidūsaka-a suggestion which finds no support for its validity. The representation from the lives of the gods as Krsņa, Rāma, Śiva etc. are evidences bearing on the question in hand. The various incidents from the life of Krsna are still staged all over India. The Yātrās represent the lyric recitations of those incidents. The use of Śaurasenī Präkrit testifies to the relation of drama with the Krsna legend as the Śaurasena part of India is the place associated with Krsna. Mathura within this part still celebrates the Holi festival with ceremonies which led Growse2 to compare it with the May-day rites. Haraprasāda Śāstrī took up this comparison and advocated it on the ground that, as described in Bharata's N. S., special worship is enjoined to the flag pole ' Jarjara' of Indra. He says ' ... this has developed into the drama of the Indian plains and the mask-festival of Nepal. Even today in Nepal the Indrayātrā is the most important ceremony in which pictures of Indra with out-stretched hands but without banner, are set up.'3 The theory by itself does not stand as drama did not thus originate in the description but it sheds light over the connection of drama with religion. The link between drama and religion is also proved as Śiva occupies a reverential position in drama. The Tāndava and the Läsya kinds of dance are ascribed respectively to Śiva and 1. K. S. D. p. 39. 2. Ibid p. 41. 3. K. I. D. p. 59.

72

and Pärvatī, a his spouse. Though in some dramas prayer is offered to Krsna, yet there are many poet-dramatists, Kālidāsa among them, who pray to Śiva. Kālidāsa even expresses Siva as the creator of dance and its close connection with drama.1 Puspadanta in the 16th stanza of the Siva- mahimnastotra says that Śiva acts like a Nata for the pro- tection of the world. 'In the Sangitavidyavinoda and in the Kashika of Nandikeshvara, Shiva has been called Mahanata and Adinata, the greatest and the first of the actors.'2 The four Vrttis came out of Visnu's different activities in the fight with the demons. Bharata offers salutations to Brahmā and Śiva in the first line of the N. S. Räma is another god whose relations with drama are amply visible. The epic recitation of the Rāmāyana even now is a regular phenomenon. The Rāma līlā shows all over the country are a regular programme during the Daśaharā festival. The Rāmāyaņa has been an inexhaustible quarry for plots in dramas. This connection between drama and religion can also be distinctly traced to Buddhism. The Buddhist Suttas can with difficulty be located exactly and accurately in time and the facts, therefore, remain dubious. But there are references such as Nacca, Pekkhā and Samajjas3 which state that some sorts of amuse- ment existed though not the actual drama. This fact can, however, be explained on the condemning attitude of the sacred canons towards drama. On the modification of this attitude the Lalitavistara(XII. p. 178) records that the Buddha was accomplished in drama also. The Avadānaśataka (II. 24 '75') says that the drama was in existence since long ago. The

1. M. A. I. 4 in K. G. 2. T. I. S. p. 1. 3. K. S. D. p. 43.

73

Kanavera Jātaka gives an interesting story about the Buddha's previous birth wherein words Nata, Samaja and Samaja- mandali occur. Natas here are actors, Samaja means thea- trical show and Samaja-mandla the stage.1 The dramatic representations would take place on the occasions of ceremo- nies according to Mahāvamsa.' ... in Tibet are to be found the relics of ancient popular religious plays in the contests between the spirits of good and those of evil for mankind, which are part of the spring and autumn festivals.'2 The first drama in Sanskrit, that of Aśvaghosa (if the chronology of Keith is decisive) is a Buddhist drama. It points out the attitude of Buddhism towards drama. Jainism disparages arts akin to drama, but the canon recognizes song, dance and scenic representation.3 The uncertainty in the dates of these renders the dating of dramas a haphazard task. It requires to be noted, however, that Jainism later developed a liking for dramatic art for the propagation of its teachings as the dramas like the Moharājaparājaya show.4 The religious origin of drama is proved in an other way by Dr. Ridgeway who propounds the theory that dramas all over the world 'are the outcome of the reverence paid to the spirits of the dead, which again is the source of all religion, a revival in fact of the doctrine of animism in one of its connotations.'5 It finds illustrations in the representations from the lives of the dead for the gratification of the dead according to the theory. But this can hardly be proved as the gods Rāma,

1. T. I. S. pp. 35-37. 2. K. S. D. p. 44. 3. Ibid. 4. M. R. P. 5. K. S. D. pp. 46-47.

.74

Krsna and Śiva are not respected as dead personalities but as ever living deities outward and inward and at all times. Moreover, the gratification of the dead is something which cannot be realized by the theorist himself. The analogy from other countries also cannot be proved as Keith says, " Whether elsewhere the worship of the dead resulted in drama is a matter open to grave doubt ; certainly in the case of the Greek drama, which offers the most interesting parallel to that of India, the evidence of derivation from funeral games is wholly defective.'1 Keeping in view the above considerations the conclusion naturally comes that drama had its origin in religion. From the Vedic ritual to the epic recitation are to be seen some elements coming into being. The dialogue in recitative was supplied by the epic but the dramatic contest came from such ceremonies as the Mahavrata. The Indian view of life did not give this contest that predominance which it received in other countries. 'In the Greek drama in its development this conflict came to dominate the play, and in the Indian drama this characteristic is far less prominent.'2 The Mahābhāsya records the existence of drama in a sufficiently developed stage as the Natas sang, recited and even acted in dumb shows, thus they were more than mere dancers or acrobats. As the epics supplied the recitative Sanskrit played an important part, it being the language of the exalted characters as Rāma, Krsna etc. And the low characters spoke their mother tongue which was their dialect in the form of Prākrit. These Prākrits were possibly known in the time of Mahābhāsya. 'Though

.K. S. D. p. 47. 2. Ibid p. 39.

75

with them Sanskrit was evidently a spokenlanguage, Kātyayana and Patañjali seem to have been familiar with Prākrtas, as is evident from their using such forms as ānapayati, vaddhati, vatțati, gāvī, gonī etc. (the Sanskrit equivalents of which are respectively ājñāpayati, varddhate, varttate and gauḥ ).'1 This introduction of the Prākrits as Saursenī etc. was to make the drama popular-one of the chief motives of its origin. Making the Präkrits as the ground Prof. Levi has advanced the theory that ' the drama sprang first into being in Prākrit, while Sanskrit was only later applied at the time when Sans- krit, long reserved as a secular language, re-entered into use as the language of literature.'2 He adduces a few arguments in its support. He says that India never felt the necessity of coming into contact with reality, hence the Präkrit should not be considered to have been introduced as actual spoken dialects of the home of origin of dramas and he adds that the N.S. records certain technical terms of strange appearance aboun- ding in cerebral letters suggesting their Präkrit origin. The above arguments of Prof. Levi implying the popular origin of drama stands quite opposed to his emphasis on the depen- dence of the origin of drama on the Krsna cult. The evidence of Patañjali also goes against his contentions. The Mahā- bhāsya records the origin of drama from the Krsna cult and if the Präkrit origin is to be admitted it will go many centuries earlier than Patañjali among a milieu not Brahmanical. 'It was admittedly in the traditionally cultured community of the Brahmins, and to a certain extent, in that of ruling race, that Sanskrit prevailed as a spoken language.'3 Prof. Levi says

1. L. S. H. p. 288. 2. K. S. D. p. 46. 3. L. S. H. p. 287.

76

that Sanskrit was introduced in dramas later when it was elevated to the rank of the language of literature instead of remaining restricted to the Brāhmanas. This happened in the time of Rudradaman whose Girnār inscription of A. D. 150 is wholly in Sanskrit, though Usavadāta's inscription of A. D. 124 is partly in Sanskrit. The Western Ksatrapas, therefore, were the first to bring Sanskrit to general use according to him. The character of Sakāra points the same way. It may either stand for one opposed to the Śaka rule or remind of its recent fall. The terminology of the inscrip- tions is seen reflected in the N. S. The terms as Svāmin, Bhadramukha and Rāștriya are to be seen in one form or other in dramaturgy. The use of Präkrits is due to their being languages radiating round Ujjayinī, the capital of the Western Ksatrapas of Mālavā. Prof. Konow, on the other hand, accepts Mathura as the home of drama and advances proof in the use of Sauraseni. But the theories of both the pro- fessors do not stand. The discovery of the dramas of Aśvaghoşa tells a different tale. He preceded Rudradāman by at least half a century.1 As he was the exponent of the popular faith, that is, Buddhism he could hardly have used Sanskrit even partially. That the use of Sanskrit had been an established fact is, thus, clearly proved. Morever, the term as Svämin is not addressed to the king in the N. S. The term Bhadramukha is used of the royal prince and not of the king and Rāstriya is used in the sense of the brother-in-law and not the governor2 as used in the inscription. The language of Ujjayini or of Mathura, therefore, of the time of

1. K. S. D. p. 72. N. S. S. I. p. 9.

77 Ksatrapas would have not suffered such departures from the official language. This useless and far-fetched effort was, no doubt, made to establish the origin of drama from Präkrit. The connection of drama with religion solves the problem easily and summarily disposes of the two theories. That the epics gave Sanskrit stands without any doubt and the ceremonies constituting the Mahävrata furnished the Prakrits, for Keith says, " ... in the Vedic Mahāvrata we cannot suppose that the Çudra who contested the right of the Vaiçya to the symbol of the sun spoke in Sanskrit, nor that the Brahmin and the hetaera exchanged their ritual abuse in the classical tongue, or its Vedic antece- dent."1 Prof. Levi's opinion of the Prākrit origin of Vidūşaka depicting him as the type of the Brähmana bringing about liaison and cloaking his degraded business under religion, cannot stand as it is inconceivable as to how and why the Brähmanas could have allowed this character to so remain and be a regular wormwood for them. Even if Konow's suggested origin of drama from the popular mime is taken for granted-a view which is next to be discussed -- the Prākrit origin cannot be accepted as the contribution of epics will have to be admitted. Consequently the theories of Prof. Levi and Prof. Konow cannot receive approval. Prof. Konow believes in the existence of a popular mime from which elements came to give birth to drama. He says that the religious ceremonies 'have a share in the development of the drama, but they themselves are merely the introduction into the ritual of elements which have a popular origin.'2

1. K. S. D. p. 73. 2. Ibid p. 49.

78

The proof for the existence of the popular mime is not at all available. Prof. Konow rests his arguments either on the Mahābhāsya or on later sources. The Natas are mentioned in the former who may as well stand for genuine actors. The Jātaka prose mentions the connection of Natas with sweet words, but the Jātaka is dated several centuries after the existence of the true drama.1 The Professor says that Yatras are proof of the popular origin of drama, little keeping in mind that they are wholly connected with the Krsna worship. Other such demonstrations also on the occasions as Holi festival, Daśaharā celebrations etc. point the same way. The theory, therefore, is hypothetical. Prof. Hillebrandt supports its existence advancing 'that the drama as comedy is a natural expression of man's primitive life of pleasure and appreciation of humour and wit.'2 The reply to it is given by Dr. Gray to the effect if actors receive any pleasure from the primitive drama.3 Even in the advanced stage of drama if the actors have any pleasure it is only as spectators.4 Other points in the argument of Prof. Hille- brandt are ambiguous. The use of Sanskrit and Prākrits according to him accounts for the popular origin, but they as well explain the religious origin. The elements such as prose, song, music and dance in combination can prove both the origins. The scantiness in the stage properties is as clear as it is in case of the ceremonies and rites of the Vedic religion. The Vidūșaka is of religious origin as the Mahā-

1. K. S. D. p. 49. 2. Ibid p. 50. 3. Ibid. 4. S. D. III. 20.

79 vrata shows. Prof. Konow's view that the Vidūsaka is from the popular mime and his role was to make fun of the higher classes, especially the Brähmanas, is unconvincing. If the public delighted in ridiculing the Brähmanas they could have equally done so in the case of the Ksattriyas, but in their case no such particular ridiculous figure exists. Secondly, when the use of Sanskrit language was allowed, the Brāhmanas would never have permitted such a figure as the Vidūșaka to remain in the drama as a butt for them. The point that the Sūtradhāra and the Natī opening the drama appears to establish the popular origin is obviously in ignorance of the device contrived to 'bridge over the transition from the preliminaries of the drama to the drama itself.'1 The pre- liminaries were the concern of the Sūtradhāra and were of religious nature ; to find in them a popular origin is to demonstrate ingenuity. Moreover, the professor himself adduces the Vidūșaka's Western parallel connected with religion. The popular mime cannot be proved to have existed on the evidences brought forward by Profs. Konow and Hillebrandt. Pischel wants to prove the popular origin in an other way. He says that the Sanskrit has its origin in the puppet- play which 'has its home in India, whence it has spread over the world.'2 The art of puppet-play may have an Indian origin as references to it are found in the Mahābhārata and the Kathāsaritsāgara as Keith says.3 In the Bālarāmāyaņa also it is to be seen.4 In the Mahābhārata the antiquity is uncertain; the Kathāsaritsāgara possibly is of the third century

1. K. S. D. p. 51. 2. K. S. D. p. 52 3, Ibid. 4. B. R. V.

80

A.D. and the Bālarāmāyaņa of Rājasekhara is placed in the beginning of the tenth century. These are, therfore, works which in no way shed light on the antiquity of the puppet- play. 'Śankara Pāndurang Pandit concludes from the designation Sūtradhära, thread-holder, for the director of the theatre that representations with puppets and paper figures, which nowadays constitute the most important amusements of Indian country folk, must have preceded representations with living persons.'1 Pischel also derives the terms, Sūtra- dhāra and Sthāpaka, from the puppet-play. The Vidūșaka has also his origin from it. Prof. Hillebrandt assumes the pre-existence of drama and makes the puppet-play its imita- tion on a smaller scale. The puppet-play is an imitation of play with puppets. 'The use of puppets is primarily, of course, derived from the make-belief of children in playing with dolls ; the terms for puppets which denote "little daughter " (putrikā, puttalī, Puttalikā, duhitrkā ), show this clearly enough, and the popularity of puppets is indicated by the erotic game known as the imitation of puppets, where the word for puppet ( Pañcali ) suggests that the home of the puppet-play in India was the Pāñcāla country. The growth of the drama doubtless brought with it the use of puppets to imitate it in brief, and from the drama came the Vidūșaka, and not vice versa.'2 The Sūtradhāra may also be interpreted as one, 'who, through the benedictory stanza, at the end of the Nändi, joins together in harmony the plot, the hero and the sentiment as depicted in the book he is about to represent,' or 'who joins together in harmony the merits of the hero and the plot of the poet and is deft in decora-

1. K. I. D. p. 73. 2. K. S. D. p. 53.

81

ting the stage or pleasing the audience.'1 The Sūtradhāra directs the actors who move like puppets at his bidding. The above interpretations do not stand consistent with the theory of the puppet-play. Pischel also laid emphasis on the shadow play which Prof. Lüders counted as an essential element in the develop- ment of the Sanskrit drama. The passage mentioning the Śaubhikas in the Mahābhāsya was the clue though it was misinterpreted. The Śaubhikas accordingly were held to be persons who explained matters to supplement either the dumb actors or shadow figures. The professor himself is in doubt as to the correctness of either2 but he holds that shadow figures illustrated the epic recitations and combined with the Natas with their old art, the drama came into being. He, however, does not seem to be certain about the existence of drama in the time of Patañjali. Prof. Konow supports the theory advocated by Prof. Lüders. In support he advances a few arguments. In the term Rupa in the IV Rock Edict of Aśoka he sees a reference to a shadow device 'in apparent ignorance of the true sense abundantly illustrated by the attested facts as to the mode of such representations in Budd- hist literature.'3 Then he misinterprets the word Rūpaka in the sense of drama derived from such shadow projections. The word Rūpaka is so called because the actor has the original character superimposed on him.4 Besides in ceratin texts Rūpaka and Rūpa are identical ; there the sense is visible representation.5 Then again the professor discovers in the Sītābenga cave in the signs of grooves in front the

1. B. P. Lines 7-10. p. 288. 2. K. S. D. p. 53. 3. Ibid p. 54. 4. D. R. 1.7. 5. Ibid. 6

82

place to fix the curtain necessary for shadow play. According to the inscription found in the same cave, it (the cave) was used for production of practical works. Prof. Konow thence comes to hold that 'perhaps we should think of representations of the same kind as those mentioned in the places in the Mahābhāsya, according to which phantoms were produced as illustrations of the recital of epic poems ... the word Nepathya itself, ... may as well be a false Sanskritisa- tion of a Präkritic Nevaccha, and this can, on the other hand, correspond to a Sanskirt word Naipathya or Naipāthya. This word would naturally range itself with Nipatha or Nipātha, to read given by Pāņini 3.3.64, so that Nepathya properly designates the place of the readers-aloud or reciters.'1 All this shows how the professor is ready to try any shift for establishing his point. There are certain dramas styled the Chhāyānātakas which Pischel interprets as 'shadow- dramas.' The first instance is in the Dūtangada of the thirteenth century A.D. 'The exact meaning of the term ( Chhāyānāțaka ) is uncertain as it might denote a "drama in the state of a shadow ", and this would accord perfectly with the Dūtāñgada itself.'2 The Dharmābhyudaya of Meghaprabhāchārya, another drama, records that a puppet in the dress of an ascetic is to be placed behind the curtain at the time when the king intends to become an ascetic. But the uncertainty as to its date leaves the problem unsettled. Prof. Lüders' attempts to accept the Dūtängada as the type of shadow play prove to be of no avail. The Sūtradhāra and the Sthäpaka have been reinterpreted with emphasis in connection with the puppet-play or the shadow play by Dr.

[ 1. K. I. D. pp. 72-73. 2. K. S. D. p. 55.

83

Hultzsch but to no purpose. If the Sthāpaka comes from the puppet-play the Sūtradhära being in charge of the puppets cancels his necessity. He is in a way the director. Prof. Hillebrandt quotes from Java parallels of shadow drama but the question whether there the real drama did not precede the shadow play yet remains open. Hence the secular origin of drama from the popular mime, puppet-play or shadow play cannot be established as in the first case the origin is sought to be proved on the wrong interpretation of the passage in the Mahābhāsya, whereas in the second and the third on wrong interpretation combined with ingenious efforts at wrong derivation and false analogy. That elements which lay scattered in various forms needed a synthesis by impetus through actual representation and the impetus might have been received from the Greek contact was Weber's view based on historical possibility.1 He admitted later on only some influence on Sanskrit drama in the light of the record in the Mahābhāsya bearing on the existence of the Indian drama. Pischel did oppose this view of Weber very vehemently but Windisch tried to support it through so many arguments. Windisch recognized the epic recitations and mimetic art of the Nata as elements for developing Sanskrit drama but he distinguished between the dramatization of epic material suggested in Patañjali and the features of the classical form of the drama. In the different constituents of the latter he tried to trace the Greek influence. The Greek influence was visible in some respects in other directions as the image of the Buddha was due to

1. H. O. I. L. p. 207.

84

Greek artistic influences. As regards the Greek influence on the dramatic representation the question arises if the dramatic representations were held before the Greek princes when they were in India. The information on this topic is very scanty. That there were performances of Greek dramas throughout the provinces which formed the Empire of Alexander is affirmed by Keith,1 but there is no express mention of these dramatic performances in India. Windisch held that the New Attic Comedy ( 340-260 B. C. ) influenced the Indian drama. It is true that there were no records of this influence available but Alexandria and Ujjayinī were connected in trade through the port of Barygaza ( modern Bhadoncha ) and during this time an intellectual contact was possible. Even if this intellectual connection be taken for granted, the actual points of comparison might be mere coincidences, for examples, the number of acts as five as normal ( which is based in the Sanskrit drama on the analysis of the action ) and actors departing from the stage. The word Yavanikā which in Sanskrit works on dramaturgy somewhere occurs as Javanikā (D. R. I.61. ) and at other places as Yavanikā (R. S. pp. 280 & 282. ) also becomes a matter of contention. It is just possible that the Yavanikā was so called from well dressed Ionian maidens ( Yavanīs) pulling the strings of the curtain to reveal the stage. The old name of the curtain might have been only 'Pata '2 later on "hanged into 'Yavanika' a term which is mentioned by Bharata also (N. S. 'K. S. S.' V. 11 ). It is, no doubt, primarily an adjective in the sense of ' Ionian', but ' it applies to anything connected with the Hellenized Persian Empire,

1. K. S. D. p. 59. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XIII, 3.

85

Egypt,Syria, Bactria, and it therefore cannot be rigidly limited to what is Greek.'1 The material of the curtain is intended by it which might be imported from foreign countries. That the curtain as such was borrowed from the Greek theatre, as advocated by Windisch, is totally wrong as there was no curtain in the Greek drama. Dr. De is, however, of opinion that the right word may be Yamanikā which would mean a 'covering or a curtain' from the root Yam, to restrain.2 The Yavanīs, the Greek maidens, are also not a case of borrowing, as mentioned in the Abhijñānaśākuntala and the Vikramorvaśīya, for their parallels do not exist in the Greek drama. The Indian princes' fondness for them may be accounted for on the ground of their beauty and on the analogy of the still-prevailing fashion obtaining among rich persons, as princes, of having white-complexioned and beautiful faces in their retinue. Some similarity seems to exist between the stock themes of the Natika and the New Comedy. "But", as Keith says, "we do find in the epic indications that it was necessary for Greece to give to India the ideas presented in the drama. The story of the love of Kīcaka for Draupadi, when disguised as handmaiden she served Sudenā, wife of the king Virāta, has a tragic outcome,for his love is repulsed, but it has undoubted affinities with the plot of the Nātikā."3 The use of marks of recognition, as in Kālidāsa's dramas and Bhavabhūti's dramas, obtaining in the Sanskrit dramas as well as in the New Comedies offers another gound for assuming a case of borrowing on the part of the Indians. But here, too, the Rāmāyana disposes of the assumption by

1. K. S. D. p. 61. 2. Y. I. T. p. 39 (Footnote). 3. K. S. D. p. 63.

86

giving parallel in the case of the jewels dropped by Sītā when being stolen away by Ravana. Rāma also sends the ring to Sītā as a mark of recognition. In the Indian dramas the devices, as letters, portraits etc. are also recognized by the theory of Sanskrit dramas. Windisch tried to establish the Greek influence on the basis of the Mrchchhakatika. He considered the Mrchchhakatika of a very early age and said that it bore close relation to a Greek model in its title, plot, court scene, meeting of the hero and the heroine, theft, setting free of the heroine from social barriers and her con- sequent elevation to a high social status. But its very early date has been rejected as it is based on a drama of Bhäsa where there is no mingling of plots. The play as it is available may be a deliberate attempt at quite a novel type. And the points of comparison are vague. The political plot is of vital interest as it is the new king who saves the hero from being executed and raises the heroine to high status. The emphasis on the rule that the events of a drama should be confined as far as possible to a single day based on the rule of Aristotle that an act must generally contain events of a single day is not observed in Sanskrit dramas, hence comparison does not last. Other points also hardly hold ground. The heroine of the Nāțikā not allowed by the crowned queen to join the king easily, compared with far-fetched parallels, does not suffer similarity. Windisch then advanced comparison on the basis of the Vita, the Vidūsaka and the Sakāra. He compared them with the parasite, the servus currens and the miles gloriosus respectively of the Greek drama. The above three combined with the Sūtradhāra and his assistant ' corres- pond fairly closely with the male personnel of a Greek drama ; it is also true that, while Kālidāsa and the Mrcchakatikā with

87

the Carudatta know the Çakāra, he vanishes from the later drama, and the Vita shows comparatively little life, suggesting that the Greek borrowings were gradually felt unsuited to India and died a natural death. But the argument is inadequate to prove borrowing.'1 The parasite hardly can stand on a par with the Vita who is refined and cultured. That the Vidūșaka is drawn from the religious ceremonies has already been shown. The Śakāra can be explained as a mercenary soldier as Keith puts it.2 The generally large number of actors in the Indian dramas finds no counterpart in the Greek dramas. The Indian prologue goes in some respects with the Greek one, but the former is closely related to preliminaries and, thus, has an independent character and existence of its own. The comparison of Siva with Dionysos and that of the times of representing the dramas in the two countries do not stand. In the Indian drama other gods are also presiding deities and the time of the production of dramas on the stage was not merely spring but many other occasions.3 The attempt of Bloch4 to prove the Greek affinity in the theatrical building is a failure, as the Sītābengā cave bears no resemblance to the Greek amphitheatre. Windisch has been supported in his view of the Greek influence by the view of Reich who says that the Greek mime exerted influence on the Indian drama. He finds out from it points of comparison in the absence of masks and buskins, its having a curtain (Siparium) when it was with the Romans, want of scene painting, different dialects used and con-

1. K. S. D. p. 65. 2. Ibid p. 66. 3. A. D. M. 12. 4. K. S. D. p. 67.

88

siderable number of actors and specially in the zelotypos and the mokos corresponding with the Śakāra and the Vidūșaka. These points of comparison can come in when mime may be proved to exist but no such proof is available. Other points, therefore, become idle attempts. The word Yavanikā, as has been shown above, refers to the material only and no proof exists as to the use of curtain in the Greek mime.1 No positive proofs, therefore, come in for establi- shing the definite influence. Some may say that India transformed2 what it borrowed, thus implying the foreign debt to India. It may, however, be interpreted in other ways. Firstly, it may be said that no borrowing was done and if borrowing was made at all it was openly acknowledged, for example, Romaka Siddhanta in Astronomy etc .; secondly, this is a tribute to Indian genius of transmuting beyond recognition the baser metal, if borrowed at all, into pure gold ; and thirdly, it proves the tantalizing effort of the persons who want to establish the Greek influence. The affinities, if any, between the dramas of India and Greece should show marked resemblances but the Sanskrit dramas have greater affinities to the romantic dramas of Shakespeare who little cared for the Greek dramatic rules. Macdonell confirms the above statement when he says, "The improbabi- lity of the theory is emphasized by the still greater affinity of the Indian drama to that of Shakespeare."3 The Greek influence has again been endeavoured to be proved on the basis of the influence of Aristotle on the Indian dramaturgy as Prof. Konow says, "Finally Lindenau has sought to

1. K. S. D. p. 68. 2. Ibid. 3. M. H. S. L. p. 416.

89

establish an influence of Aristotle on the (dramatic) theory of the Indians. With Jacobi, I am of opinion that no proof has been established and generally the Greek hypothesis has found little agreement among Sanskritists."1 The refutation of the above view is contained in the above words of Prof. Konow. It, therefore, needs no further refutation. The similarity in some points may exist and it is bound to exist in the same form of art developed in different countries even at different times. And there is no doubt that between earliest plays of Indian and Greek periods centuries yawned as Macdonell says, "The earliest Sanskrit plays extant are, moreover, separated from the Greek period by at least four hundred years."2 These points of similarity do not prove borrowing definitely. Keith says, "In all the instances enumerated there is no doubt similarity, but there is also essential difference such as renders independent development of the Indian doctrine at least as probable as borrowing."3 Macdonell puts the same thing but disposes of the foreign debt when he says, " The Indian drama has had a thoroughly national development, and even its origin, though obscure, easily admits of an indigeneous explanation."4 The Greek influence, therefore, hardly stands even as a historical possibi- lity, not to say as a definite factor. Dr. Ward writes, " There is no real evidence for assuming any influence of Greek examples upon the Indian drama at any stage of its progress."5 Having traced the origin of Sanskrit drama to different

1. K. I. D. p. 65. 2. M. H. S. L. p. 416. 3. K. S. D. p. 356. 4. M. H. S. L. p. 416. 5. T. I. S. p. 1.

90

sources it seems now pertinent to consider what some of the treatises on dramaturgy and Sanskrit dramas have to say on the point. The oldest treatise on dramaturgy is the N. S. which accounts for its origin in the following way :-- 'When the Krta Yuga in the domination of Svāyambhuva Manu was already over and the Treta Yuga had commenced with the domination of Vaivasvata Manu, when the Grāmya- dharma had come into force and the people had come into the grasp of greed and desire, jealousy and anger, pleasure and pain, when the Jambudvīpa presided over by the Loka- pālas was overwhelmed by the Devas, Dānavas, Gandharvas, Yakşas, Rakşasas and Mahoragas, then the gods headed by Indra said to Brahma, the Grandfather, " We desire to have a plaything which may be visible and audible. What is contained in the four Vedas is not meant for the ears of the Śūdras ; pray, therefore, create a fifth Veda for all castes." The Grandfather then said to them amen, and giving them a send-off, sat in the Yoga posture. He then recollected all the four Vedas thinking that he would create a fifth Veda to be called the Natya Veda in which the epic would be combined. It would tend to virtue, yield wealth and fame, impart instruc- tion and set forth all the events of the world to be. It would contain all sciences and be a guide for different arts and crafts. With this determination he created it out of the parts of the four Vedas. From the Rg-Veda he took the recitative, from the Sama Veda the songs, from the Yajur Veda acting and from the Atharva Veda the sentiments. The science then was transferred to Bharata1-a tradition which, so far as this transfer goes, is mentioned in the Sangīta-ratnākara also.'2

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) pp. 1-3. 2. S. D. S. R. VII .. 4.

91 After some years king Nahusa requested the gods to have the dramatic representation at his palace and his request was granted. The king then begged Bharata to establish it on the earth. Bharata called his troupe and asked it to give representation on the earth promising in return the cancella- tion of the curse pronounced upon it by the Rsis for their caricaturing. He also said that the boon granted to Nahusa by the gods had to be fulfilled. The troupe obeyed and, thus, the dramatic represnetation was first held at the palace of the king Nahusa.1 The Kuttanimata also mentions the origin of the N. S. from Brahma.2 The second treatise to be considered because of its encyclopaedic nature is Śāradātanaya's Bhāvaprakāśana. It relates the origin of drama in the following way :- 'Formerly Manu looking after the world with seven continents thought of finding out respite from the burden of cares. He looked at the sun who descended to him. He related to the sun his trouble upon which he was told to approach Brahma who, when tired with the sustenance of the whole world, had approached Vișnu in the hope of being pointed out a way of diversion from the burden. Visnu had told him to go to Śiva. The latter ordered Nandī to teach Brahmā the Nātya Veda which was imparted to him. Nandī did so. Brahmā then came back to his abode and remembered the sage practising the Nātya Veda. At once the sage with five disciples appeared before him. He taught them the Nātya Veda. They re- presented the past incidents of gods. Through various representations of sentiments, emotions and acting they gave 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) pp. 473-475. 2. D. K. M. 75.

92

him pleasure to satisfaction. Brahmā being much pleased granted them the boon of being called Bharatas as they were maintaining the Natya Veda lore. He also said that the Nātya Veda itself would be called by their names. Thus Brahmā refreshed himself from the constant care of pro- tecting the world. Manu being thus told by the sun went to Brahmā and prostrated before him. He, then, related to him his exertion. Brahma called all Bharatas and ordered them to in- habit the Bhäratavarsa with Manu. Bharatas, therefore, went with Manu to Ayodhya. There they took up the plots from the lives of the kings of other Kalpa, assumed different roles and representing them through sentiments, emotions and acting all combined with music in accordance with the injunctions in the Nātya Veda, and removed Manu's fatigue caused by bearing the burden of the world. Bharatas then accepted a few Dvijas as disciples and gave amusement to kings in different countries. These Bharatas, when requested by Manu, extracted the essence from the Nātya Veda and arranged it in a collection as may be easily practicable. One was composed in 12,000 stanzas and the other had half the number, that is, 6,000 stanzas.'1 The Daśarūpakāvaloka mentions the latter work and gives one quotation in support2 which is to be found in the N. S. also.3 The third treatise worth considering is the Rasārnavasudhākara of Singa Bhūpala. It describes the origin of dramaturgy thus. 'For- merly Indra and other gods bowed before the four-headed god Brahmā and with folded hands requested him to let

1. B. P. pp. 284-287. 2. D. R. IV. p. 122. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 80.

93

them know the fifth Veda, audible and visible, tending to virtue, yielding fame and wealth, exhibiting all arts and crafts and meant for all castes. Thus requested the god Brahmā remembered all the Vedas. He took up their essence and composed the Nātya Veda. He taught it to Bharatāchārya and told him to propagate it with his sons by actual representation. Thus directed Bharata with his sons represented it in the assembly of gods and composed the Natyasāstra for the benefit of all the worlds. Then in its wake Śāndilya, Kohala, Dattila, Matanga and his other sons produced different kinds of compositions which became famous on the surface of the earth.'1 Kulkarni mentions one tradition which deserves consideration. He writes, " Another tradition tells us that it was Brahmadeva who put together the science of singing or music from the Sāmveda and taught it to his five disciples-भरत, नारद, रंभा, हुहु, d45, who were exultant on learning it and gave an ex- amination in it before Mahadeo who was a great appreciator. These five disciples wrote five Samhitas. The Bharat Samhita came to this world, that of ?HT went to heaven, those of Tumburu and Huhu went to the nether region. Bharat started the dramatics, Narada started the instrumental or the stringed music and Rambha started dancing."2 The greatest poet-dramatist of India, Kālidāsa, does deserve mention in preference to others. In the mixed explanatory scene ( Miśra Viskambhaka ) in the beginning of the third act of the Vikramorvaśīya is described through the dialogue of Galava and Pelava, two disciples of Bharata, how the

1. R. S. pp. 7-8. 2. S. D. D. p. 23. The author does not mention any authority for this tradition.

94

nymph Urvaśī erred in acting in the Lakșmīsvayamvara. She was playing Laksmī and Menakā had assumed the role of Vāruņī. Upon being asked by the latter as to the persona- lity on whom her heart was set, she uttered the name of Purūravas instead of Purusottama. She was then cursed by the preceptor though afterwards favoured by Mahendra. The preceptor said that as she had acted against his instruc- tions she did not deserve a divine abode. Mahendra at the end of representation told her, whose head was bent down due to shame, that the person of her heart was his succour in war. She should fulfil his desire and stay with him till he had seen his son born of her. She, thus, brought about her descent to the mortal world. All this may account for the descent of dramatic art in this world. Yajnik gives another such ancient tradition. It 'gives a curious mythical account of the origin of the Indian dramatic art. A play, styled Laksmīswayamvara ( The Choice Marriage of Laksmī ), was being produced at the celestial theatre of Indra (the Indian Jupiter ). The principal nymph, Urvaśī, in the role of Lakșmī, the consort of Vișnu, was now dancing and singing, now displaying her skill in clever pantomime and now giving vent to her erotic emotions by means of appro- priate gesture and vocal expression. Losing herself in a momentary reverie concerning her earthly paramour, she blundered in the midst of her dialogue, whereat Great Jove frowned and cursed her to descend to earth. Good, how- ever, came out of this evil, for Urvasi brought her theatrical art to the world.1 Bhavabhuti, the poet-dramatist who stands next only to Kālidāsa in some respects though in

1. Y. I. T. p. 20. Yajnik gives no reference in this connection.

95 point of expressing intensity and vehemence of emotions even sometimes excels him, records the representation of an episode from the Rāmāyana in the fourth act of the Uttara- rāmacharita. Lava, upon being asked by Janaka to relate to him the progeny of the sons of Daśaratha, replies that he or any body else has never before heard of the part of the story dealing with it. Janaka, at that, asks him if the poet Vālmīki did not compose it, whereupon Lava replies that it has been composed, no doubt, but not published. A portion of it has been composed as a separate work full of sentiments and adapted to theatrical exhibition. In its very manuscript form it has already been sent to Bharata, the director of the triple symphony ( Tauryatrikasūtradhārasya ) .. Janaka wants to know the purpose for which it was sent. Lava replies that the venerable Bharata will have it represented on the stage by the nymphs. This whole activity of Vālmīki bewilders Janaka. At the demonstration of Janaka's bewilder- ment Lava expresses the importance and the significance attached to it by the sage Vālmīki as he has the manuscript sent to the abode of Bharata through certain disciples. And for its vigilant and careful representation ( Pramāda- chchhedanārtham-Pramādasyānavadhānaprayuktapratītasya Chchhedanārtham Nivrtyartham ) his ( Lava's brother, Kuśa ) brother with a bow in his hand has also been sent in their following. This tradition connects the names of the sage Vālmīki and the venerable Bharata with drama. The sage has been mentioned not only as a composer of the dramatic piece, thus adept in theory only, but he has been mentioned as expert in theatrical adaptation and representation also. Another tradition is available in the Bālarāmāyaņa of Rāja- śekhera. In the mixed explanatory scene ( Miśra Viskam-

96

bhaka) to the third act Chitrasikhanda, the male vulture, relates to Suvegā, the female vulture, thus. At the behest of the god Purandara, the venerable Bharata composed a dramatic piece dealing with the Sītāsvayamvara. It was represented in the divine assembly. Rāvaņa requested Drauhiņi (Bharata) to let him have a sight of the representa- tion. In response to the request Bharata sent his hundred sons with Apsarasas to Lanka for that purpose. The Sītāsvayamvara which was then represented to pacify Rāvana formed the Garbhanka ( the act within an act ) of the third act. These different traditions meet at one point in that they all emphasize the religious origin of drama. Any other origin was not known. The Grandfather Brahmā is associated with it. In some of the above traditions the representation is given in the assembly of gods. The connection of Śiva and Pärvatī with dancing in its two divisions, Tāndava and Lāsya, proves drama to be of religious origin. The Vedas, the Epics, the folk lore, the local conventions, the different arts, crafts and sciences -- all were drawn upon for the con- struction of drama. The traditions thus collected together the ingredients available in different sources. All kinds of Abhinaya were included in drama and each one was equally emphasized. The view, therefore, suggested by a scholar that the ' Hindus had their plays "danced" and not "acted, '1 is quite groundless. The argument advanced in support is the expression 'Natakam nanrtuḥ' ( danced a play ) from the Harivamśa (Vișnuparva, ch. 93. Ś 1.28). This is quite in ignorance of the fact that in the same Purana is mentioned

1. A. D. M. p. XXIV (Introduction).

97 that, ' In order to win Prabhāvatī, Pradyumna, disguised as an actor, comes with a whole troupe of actors to the court of Vajranäbha. Then all sorts of plays are perfor- med.'1 The expression, perhaps, stood for those dramatic pieces which represented the second stage in evolution. They were thus based on dance 'Nrtya'. And the second argument quoted from prologue to the Karpūramañjarī in the 'expression like "Sattam naccidavvam" (a satțaka is to be danced )' equally proves that there was a dramatic kind based on the Nrtya, the testimony to which is borne by the predominance of different kinds of dance in the Karpūramañjarī itself as also in the Trotaka kind of drama, for instance, in the Vikramorvasīya. These kinds either represent a transition from the dramatic types based on the Nrtya to those based on the Natya or stand for those wherein the Nrtya was retained. The Bhana type of drama amply retains such reminiscence in the form of ten kinds of Läsya. The argument, therefore, that the Sanskrit drama was 'danced' and not 'acted' hardly holds for the above reason. In the Karpūramañjarī the two bards read verses in praise of the season. How is this reading to be danced ? Further, in dramas directions as 'Iti Pathati' occur. Are these again to be danced ? If so, how ? The view, thus, is quite groundless and appears to have been advanced on the exaggerated consideration of the bodily gesticulation (Āngikābhinaya), elaborated as it is in the introduction to the Abhinayadarpana which deals mostly with gesticulations, poses and postures. All this, however, goes to prove that drama had to evolve from stage to stage. Maybe, some stage in the pro- 1. W. H. I. L. 451. 7

98

cess may have been mistaken for the culminating one as it happened in the case of the above view as also in the case of those who tried to prove the existence of drama where only a so-called pantomime could be presumed to exist. The full-fledged drama marked only the final stage in evo- lution when all the elements summed up in the definition given in the end of the second chapter had engaged absorb- ing attention.

CHAPTER THREE.

SANSKRIT DRAMA-ITS CONSTITUENTS AND TYPES.

Drama is the representation by actors (imitators) put up for show at a certain place before spectators ( audience) in the form of imitation of conditions and situations in which persons (imitated: 'original characters') are placed from time to time, by certain means, leading to enjoyment of a particular pleasure. Section A-The constituents of drama. The above definition, on analysis, yields the following constituents : (1) The subject-matter in the form of con- ditions and situations in which persons ( imitated) are placed from time to time, that is, the plot; (2) persons imitated, that is, heroes, heroines and other characters; (3) imita- tors, that is, actors, actresses etc .; (4) means through which imitators ( actors ) imitate persons ( imitated) in their different actions, that is, acting ( Abhinaya); (5) the place where re- presentation for show is put up, that is, theatre (stage etc.); (6) persons before whom representation is put up and to whom appeal is intended to be driven home, that is, spec- tators (audience ); and (7) the particular pleasure aimed at to be realised by spectators, that is, Rasa. (1) Plot. The plot in Sanskrit dramaturgy is the sum-total of conditions, situations and circumstances in which charac- ters are imitated.1 In them they are to be seen carrying

1. D. R. I. 7.

100

on various activities by themselves, among themselves or in relation to worldly objects. These various activi- ties, therefore, supply in a way the background in which characters are seen. Some of these may be static and others dynamic in that the latter may show characters in action. They may also show the development of the plot as a whole from stage to stage. But these activities may not all be the imitation of their past and real counter- part in the world ( Prasiddha), they may be invented ( Ut- pādya ) by the playwright, or they may be partly historical and traditional and partly invented by the playwright (Miśra )1. Some of them taken as plot may be depicted as principal, thus forming the principal plot ( Ādhikārika Vastu) in a dramatic piece, while others which help the principal plot in their intended development may be allowed scope not so extensive ( Prāsangika Vastu : Patākā ) as the principal plot but more extensive than others ( Präsan- gika Vastu : Prakarī ) which also help the principal plot but on a small scale.2 These activities belonged to charac- ters who are fully or half divine, infernal, human beings etc. Sometimes there may be ascribed activities to objects and phenomena of Nature or to animals and beasts. The Sanskrit drama, thus, in its plot has canvas so extensive and comprehensive as to include any and everything -- animate or inanimate-in this world.3 These objects and their different activities are not all of them equally attrac- tive, and, therefore, all do not receive equal treatment at the hands of the playwright. It is the difference in their

1. D. R. I. 15. 2. D. R. I. 13. 3. N. S. (K. S. .S) I. 104.

101 treatment which makes him a superb artist. Only those which are engrossing due to fascination deserve detailed treatment, others to keep the link unbroken are only hinted or accorded summary disposal in suggestion.1 When they are pleasure-giving but inappropriate, indecent and dry they are indicated in any of the following ways : Praveśaka (the introductory scence), Viskambhaka (the Explanatory scene ), Chūlikā (the Intimation), Ankāsya (the Anticipa- tory scene) and Ankāvatāra (the Continuous scene ). In the Praveśaka low characters figures carrying on conversa- tion which is not dignified and hinting at incidents, past and future. It occurs between two acts. It can, thus, never come before the first act.2 The Viskambhaka indicates briefly the portions bearing on past and future of the story through characters of middle status. It occurs before an act and is either pure ( Suddha ) when one or more middle characters figure or mixed (Miśra) when characters are middle and low.3 The Chūlika intimates incidents through characters standing behind the curatin.4 It has been fur- ther divided by some authorities into two kinds : Chūlikā and Khandachūlika. In the first, only those characters who stand behind the curtain intimate events. This inti- mation may be made either at the beginning, or in the middle, of an act, and as characters do not make entry or exit it is not reckoned as a part of the act. In the second, that is, the Khandachūlikā some characters stand behind the curtain and others are seen on the stage. They all

1. D. R. I. 57. 2. Ibid I. 60-61 (with com.) 3. Ibid I. 59-60. 4. Ibid I. 61.

102

carry on detailed conversation. It, therefore, occurs at the beginning of an act, and as there is no necessity for the characters to make entry or exit it is not considered as forming part of an act.1 Some say that it is to be regarded as the Vişkambhaka but Śinga Bhūpāla rejects the view on the ground that, in the latter, conversation with a character who has not entered the stage is not possible. It may, however, be regarded as the beginning of the Viskambhaka ( Vişkambha).2 The Ankāsya indicates the events of the succeeding act through characters at the end of the act.3 The Ankāvatāra is the continuous opening of the succeeding act with the act. In other words, it is the starting of the succeeding act in continuation with the events depicted at the end of the act.4 When the incidents are intimately connected with what is to be indicated or actually repre- sented they are to be inferred. Others which are dis- gusting or obscene are to be avoided. Then again these events may be such as some of them may be heard by all, others may be meant for select ears and a few not to be heard by any other except the speaker. . This is a division of the plot wholly controlled by the requirement of the stage and, thus, wholly restricted to the stage. That which is to be heard by all is Prakāśa ( Aloud ) and that which is to be heard by the speaker alone is Aśrāvya (Aside ). That which is meant for a select few is Niyataśrāvya which is of two kinds. The first is Janāntika (Personal, address ) in which mutual invitation is made with the Tripatāka hand

1. R. S. III. 183-186. 2. Ibid III. 187-188. 3. D. R. I. 62. 4. Ibid.

103

and the course of the story is obstructed; the second is Apavārita (a Confidence) when a character turns aside and discloses the secrets to other. There is, however, an other device which fulfils the requirement of the stage. It is the Ākāśabhāșita ( Speaking in the air ) wherein a character addresses another ( though none else is present) as 'What do you say ?' and poses hearing even though no reply is received.1 Another method usually met with in the Sanskrit drama is Karne (In the ear, i. e., Whispering ). The plot which consists of all the above detailed activities is just like an organism and is to be seen first in its germs ( Bīja ). The germs or seeds are slightly seen in the begin- ing but attain expansion in many ways. 'It is the cause which results in the final aim and is to be shown in five stages namely, (1) sown, (2) sprouted, (3) obstructed ( or rising aloft), (4) sought after and finally, (5) fructified.'2 The seeds finally go to the stage of fruition (Kārya). The Kārya is the final fruition in the form of attaining the Dharma or the Artha or the Kama or the Moksa. It is the last stage in the evolution and development of the Bīja. The seeds may become entangled with other events and thus checked in, or diverted from, their right path. The necessity, there- fore, of a connection is felt. It is satisfied by the connecting link ( Bindu) which is variously interpreted and classified. 'Its analogy is described in a drop of oil expanding on the surface of ocean.'3 'It is of two kinds due to haughtiness (Māna ) and adversity (Vipatti). The first arises out of

1. D. R. I. 63-67. 2. N. L. R. K. p. 7. 3. D. R. I. 17 (with Com.)

104

anger, the second from sorrow.'1 'Just as the drop of water falling at intervals from the ends of hem ( of a cloth ) suggests the fall of water even though its current has been obstruc- ted, so this ( Bindu ) does the main purpose, for example, when the purpose has been impeded (in its course) that which brings about a connection till the attainment of the final fruit is called the Bindu. Others say that it is the real nature of Nataka and is all along talked about through in- sult ( Avamāna ) and encouragement ( Utsāha ) in every act.'2 These three elements together with the Patākā which has been interpreted thus, 'As the flag wrapped over the staff and posted at only one place indicates the presence of the whole army so this ( Patākā ) though occurring at one place in Nāțaka illuminates the whole of it ...... Others des- cribe grossly the Patākā as nothing but the incidents of the Upanāyaka ( the secondary hero ),'3 and the Prakarī are called the five Arthaprakrtis ( elements ) of the plot. The seeds if not properly seen to their development are sure to die. They have potentiality but are in a way lifeless. The Kārya also is lifeless as it does not develop further. It depends on the seeds, which form the principal thing and the Kārya the secondary, though both are inanimate. The Bindu, the Patākā and the Prakarī help the seeds to grow into the Karya hence they appear as animate. The Bindu ( among these ) is the principal thing, others are secondary as their introduction in between the germs ( seeds ) and the Kārya is not equally necessary.4 The plot at first in seeds finally

1. B. P. lines 15-16. p. 204. 2. N. L. R. K. pp. 7-8. 3. Ibid pp. 8-9. 4. N. D. pp. 41-42.

105 leading to the Kārya is to be marked in its stages of develop- ment as in the case of every other organism. The sowing of the seeds is its beginning towards the final stage, the Kārya. It is marked by curiosity for the attainment of the final result. This constitutes the first stage ( Arambha) but when it is not attained, hasty effort towards the result is the second stage (Prayatna). The effort made is continued but chances of destrucion are also coming in, hence the state of suspense is maintained though the possibility of attainment is also seen. This stage is the third ( Prāptyāśā) in the development of plot. Chances of destruction gra- dually evaporate and the attainment of the final aim becomes definite. This is the penultimate stage (Niyatāpti), the last one representing the final fruit attained ( Phalayoga or Phalägama ). These are the stages of the incidents and events forming the plot.1 They allow scope to the play- wright for his dexterous hand. As the plot is like an or- ganism wherein everything is well ordered and connected, the five Arthaprakrtis (elements) and the five Avasthās (stages ) of the plot are so combined as to make every inci- dent connected. The Bīja, the Bindu, the Patākā, the Prakarī and the Kārya are respectively combined with the Ārambha, the Prayatna, the Prāptyāśā, the Niyatāpti and the Phalagama.2 The combinations give birth to the Mukha (opening ), the Pratimukha ( Progression), the Gar- bha (Development), the Avamarśa (Pause) and the Nirvahana (Conclusion ) Sandhis ( Junctures ) which may be analogous to the different junctures of the development of the human body with advancing age (Vayahsandhis ). In

1. D. R. I. 20-22. 2. Ibid I. 22-23.

106

the third and the fourth Sandhis the Patāka and the Prakarī are not the indispensable elements. They may or may not be combined respectively with the stages: the Prāptyāśa and the Niyatapti.1 In the absence of the Patāka in the Garbha Sandhi, the introduction of the Bindu or the Bīja ( seed) may be made.2 As a general rule all the Sandhis must be present. But due to certain reasons some of these may even be dropped, and, thus, all may not be used. When one is to be left out it should be the fourth, when two are to be left out they should be the third and the fourth and when three are to be left out they should be the second, the third and the fourth. The above rule as to the dropping of the Sandhis has scope in the main plot. In the subsi- diary plot it has no scope as the subsidiary plot is to serve the purpose of the main plot. These different Sandhis are not arbitrary but have well defined parts. The first Sandhi has twelve parts in which seeds germinating and expanding in various ways are to be seen. They are (1) Upaksepa (Suggestion. It is the sowing of the germs. ), (2) Parikara ( Enlargement. It is the increase of the germs. ), (3) Pari- nyāsa (Establishment. It is the lodgment of germs.), (4) Vilobhana ( Allurement. It is the mention of good quali- ties. ), (5) Yukti (Resolve. It is the determination upon purposes. ), (6) Präpti (Success. It is the attaining of happi- ness. ), (7) Samādhāna ( Settling. It is the appearance of the germs. ), (8) Vidhana (Conflict of feelings. It is that which causes both joy and sorrow.), (9) Paribhāvanā ( Surprise. It is intentness upon something marvellous.), (10) Udbheda ( Disclosure. It is the disclosing of something 1. D.R. I. 36 & 43. 2. B. P. Line 8. p. 210.

107

previously hidden. ), (11) Bheda (Incitement. It is the term for an urging on) and (12) Karana (Activity. It is the beginning of the matter in question. ) The second Sandhi has thirteen parts wherein the seeds are somewhere visible while at other places invisible. The thirteen parts are (1) Vilāsa ( Amorousness. It is the desire for the object of pleasure. ), (2) Parisarpa (Pursuit. It is the pursuing of one seen and then lost.), (3) Vidhūta ( Unrequitedness. It is the absence of pleasure due to unrequitedness of love. ), (4) Śama ( Alleviation. It is the allaying of this unrequited- ness. ), (5) Narma (Joke), (6) Narmadyuti (Amusement), (7) Pragamana (Response), (8) Nirodha (Frustration. It is a beneficial prevention. ), (9) Paryupāsana (Courtesy ), (10) Vajra ( Thunderbolt. It is a cruel remark made to one's face. ), (11) Puspa ( Gallantry. It is a remark in re- lation to special or excellent qualities. ), (12) Upanyāsa (Intimation. It is a remark embodying a stratagem. ) and (13) Varnasamhāra (combination of the castes. It is regarded as a coming together of the four castes.). The third Sandhi depicts the search after the seeds which were first seen but afterwards became invisible. It has twelve parts (Bharata adds a thirteenth called Prarthana N. S. 'K. S. S.' XXI. 64). They are (1) Abhūtāharaņa (Mis- statement ), (2) Märga (Indication. It is the pointing out of one's real purpose. ), (3) Rūpa (Supposition), (4) Udāharaņa (Exaggeration), (5) Krama (Progress. It is the attainment of what one is thinking earnestly about.), Samgraha (Propitiation ), (7) Anumāna (Deduction), (8) Toțaka (Quarrel. It is an angry speech. ), (9) Adhibala (Outwitting), (10) Udvega (Dismay. It is fear caused by an enemy.), (11) Sambhrama (Consternation) and (12)

108 Ākșepa ( Revelation ). In the fourth Sandhi a pause in the development occurs due to anger, calamity or persuasion and the seeds sprout out of the stage in the third Sandhi. It has thirteen arts which are (1) Apavāda (Censure), (2) Sampheta ( Altercation ), (3) Vidrava (Tumult. It is slaying, taking prisoner etc.), (4) Drava (Contempt), (5) Śakti ( Placation ), (6) Dyuti ( Rebuke ), (7) Prasanga ( Reverencce. It is mentioning one's elders. ), (8) Chhalana (Humiliation), (9) Vyavasāya ( Assertion ), (10) Virodhana (,Opposition ), (11) Prarochana (Foresight. It is seen what is to come because of an assurance of success. ), (12) Vichalana ( Boast- fulness) and (13) Adana (Summary ). In the fifth Sandhi all the various objects which were lying scattered in previous Sandhis are made to converge to the principal object and aim. It has fourteen parts which are (1) Samdhi ( Junc- tion. It is the coming up of the germs. ), (2) Vibodha ( Vigilance. It is the search for the final fruit.), (3) Grathana (Hint. It is an intimation of the final fruit.), (4) Nirnaya (Narration. It is relation of experience. ), (5) Paribhāsaņa ( Conversation ), (6) Prasāda (Graciousness ), (7) Ānanda ( Bliss. It is the attainment of one's desire. ), (8) Samaya ( Deliverance. It is escape from misfortune. ), (9) Kti ( Confirmation. It is substantiation of the result attained. ), (10) Bhāșā (Expression of satisfaction), (11) Upagūhana ( Unforeseen circumstances ), (12) Pūrvabhāva (Anticipa- tion ), (13) Upasamhāra (Termination. It is obtaining a boon. ) and Praśasti ( Benediction. It is a prayer for good things. ).1 The purposes which these parts serve are no doubt the arrangement of the desired objects, concealment of what is to be kept as concealed, disclosure of what is to

1. D. R. I. 24-54.

109 be made open, creation of, and addition to, the interest in what is being represented, creation of wonder in the re- pesentation and the presentation of details in the subject- matter.1 It can, therefore, be concluded that as these di- fferent purposes are the controlling factors, only those parts ( out of the above 64) which are needed by them should be used. There are, however, different injunctions in this connection. Vidyänātha, under each of the first three Sandhis, classifies them into two categories, dispensable and indispensable,2 but he devotes pp. 131-218 (P. R. ) to illustrating all of them in only one dramatic type, that is, the Nataka which is of his own composition. Singa Bhūpāla, claiming his expert knowledge in the 64 arts illus- trates all these 64 parts in the Bālrāmāyana though he says that Bharata and others have fixed no order among them and have even placed them in disorder. He also notes a few opinions. One opinion says that all these parts are to be used in fitness with the sentiments in the work and according to the purposes to be served. Other says that some of these parts may not be used.3 In order that these parts in the Sandhis may not appear disconnected and loose and some strikingness may be created in their connection, some Sandhyantaras (the intervals between the Sandhis) are enu- merated. These, however, did not receive recognition of all the dramaturgists and efforts were made to show how ome of them could be merged in the elements already recognized.4' The different Sandhyangas (parts of the

1. D. R. I. 55. 2. P. R. pp. 109-111. 3. R. S. III. 75-78. 4. Ibid III. 93-96 ; N. D. p. 116.

110

Sandhis ) may also appear in the subsidiary plots as the Patākā and the Prakarī.1 All the Sandhyangas, however, cannot have scope as the Patāka and the Prakarī are to help on the development of the main plot and, thus, their purpose is served only incidentally, meant as they are to serve the purpose of another. Lest the Patākā which is longer than the Prakarī may attain dimension telling upon the main plot, it has been enjoined that the Patākā should be wound up in the third or the fourth Sandhi.2 It has also been enjoined that it may have one or no Sandhi.3 Thus the subsidiary plots imitate the main plot, though the latter is helped by the former in many ways. There are also other means as the Patākāsthānakas which serve the similar pur- pose, though they are not subsidiary plots by themselves.4 The Patākāsthānakas give indications of what has happened, what is to happen and what will happen.5 Some authorities have recognized only two6 out of the four kinds which are as follows : (1) Where suddenly the desired object is achieved; (2) Where there is pun on the expression and which is redolent of poetic beauty; (3) where the indi- cation of the object is modestly put and is not obvious but combined with the answer which has a pun and (4) Where it has got two senses based on beautiful pun indicating the object in hand and some other object.7 Singa Bhūpāla

1. B. P. lines 4-5 p. 214. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXI. 30. 3. Ibid XXI. 29. 4. N. D. p. 44. 5. D. R. I. 14. 6. Ibid. 7. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXI. 32-35 ; N. D. pp. 44-46; N. L. R. K. pp. 42-44.

111

conciliates the two positions by recognizing two kinds and then dividing the first kind into three sub-kinds, thus making four in all. In all these, however, no difference from the definitions given by others is observed.1 The plot as the sum total of all the attracting and interesting incidents which are primary and secondary in their different stages of growth with various indications has to be arranged in a way as to be made fit for representation on the stage. The patience of the audience has in especial to be kept in view. Conse- quently it has to be cut up into portions. Each of such portions is called an Anka (Act). It may or may not correspond with the different stages in growth (Avasthā ), that is, one stage may run into several acts. Due to some particular business also there may occur a pause in the course of the stage of growth where an Anka may become complete as one unit. An Anka may depict the close of subsidiary object and the partially complete stage of the Bija. The injunction of some authorities that the Bindu, though not distinctly, must continue deserves modification in that in the type of drama, the Anka, in all the final acts of other types of drama and in the different acts of the types of drama as the Samavakāra etc. the Bindu has no place.2 Three or four characters carrying on the business intended must be present and should leave the stage at the end of every act. Either the hero should be present or his personality is to be hinted. It is not necessary that the hero should invariably be present in all the acts. An act may have a particular name also. Sometimes all the acts in a drama may have definite names. An act should not have in its scope plenty

1. R. S. III. 16. 2. N. D. p. 34.

112

of incidents and there ought not to be such incidents as stand in opposition to the main events. Opinions con- verge to the acceptance of one day's incidents as the contents of an act.1 But some authorities also note variations as half- a-day's incidents or a day's and a night's incidents accord- ing to them may form the contents of an act.2 Between one act and other a period of one month or even one year may be allowed to intervene but it should not go beyond.3 The limit, however, is not so strictly observed though events covering a longer period can be reduced to a short period.4 These acts may vary in number in different types of drama. They may be from one to ten. This injunction is in connec- tion with the Nataka and the Prakarana.5 This, however, is to be modified in the light of the fact that some Nātakas have even one act (K.I.D. p. 45) while others, though they are called the Mahānātakas, have acts numbering even fourteen. An act sometimes contains a sub-act within itself.6 It has the preliminaries as the Rangadvāra, the Āmukha etc.7 It is devoid of the five ways of indicating objects. Its subject matter is not very extensive and it lasts till the end of the act, its substratum. It depicts the achievement of the action in hand and its limit is confined to the exit of characters. It is not to be introduced in the first act.8

1. N. S. (K. S. S. ) XX. 24 ; D. R. III. 36. 2. N. L. R. K. p. 13. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 29. 4. K. S. D. p. 301. 5. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 19 & 58. 6. S. D. VI. 20 ; R. S. III. 207. 7. S. D. VI. 20. 8. R. S. III. 207-210.

113 At this stage it is necessary to touch in brief the Pūrva- ranga Vidhi, the preliminaries observed on the stage, before the dramatic representation proper begins, to propitiate the deities and obtain their favour. Before the beginning of the dramatic representation of the subject-matter forming the plot, certain preliminaries had to be gone through. The first item according to Bharata was the Pūrvaranga so called because it came before the representation of the dramatic piece. Its various parts, viz., the Pratyāhāra, the Avataraņa, the Ārambha, the Āśrāvaņā, the Vaktrapāni, the Parighațt- anā, the Samghoțanā, the Mārgotsārita and the Āsārita were all to be observed behind the curtain ( Yavanikā) whereas the Utthapana, the Parivartaka, the Nāndī, the Śuskāpakrsțā, the Rangadvāra, the Chārī, the Mahā- charī, the Trika and the Prarochana were to be performed out of the curtain. The different items concern themselves with the arrangements on the stage, dance, music and other allied activities as praise of the gods, the Brāhmana, the kings etc. combined with benedictory stanza consisting of eight or twelve Padas, talk among the different characters as in the Trigata etc. which are done to please and delight the audience. The last one, the Prarochana, clearly testi- fies to its being observed mainly with the purpose of making the audience attentive towards the representation. Besides, they secured the divine favour.1 Immediately after the Pürvaranga was over, another person called the Sthāpaka akin to the Sūtradhāra entered the stage. His duty was to propitiate the audience through various ways as music, song etc. and then tell the name of the author of the work

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) V. 7-57. 8

114

going to be represented. Dhananjaya here adds that he is then to take resort to the Bhāratī Vrtti (verbal style) through the Prarochana, or the Vithi or the Prahasana or the Āmukha or the Prastāvanā,1 but Bharata says that he is to introduce the Prastāvanā2 only through the devices, accord- ing to Keith, of the Kathodghata, the Pravrttaka and the Prayogātiśaya.3 Dhanañjaya also accepts the above three devices but Viśvanātha gives two more, the Udghātyaka and the Avalagita.4 His illustration of the Avalagita is just that of the Prayogātisaya of Dhanañjaya; he, therefore, defines the Prayogātiśaya in a different way. Many points here as fixed by Bharata lost their order later on. Some did not receive any consideration at all. For instance, the Pūrvaranga was safely left out in hints by Dhanañjaya, Viśvanātha etc.5 They, therefore, began with the exit of the Sutradhara and the entry of the Sthapaka whom they afterwards denominated as the Sutradhara.6 About the recitation and the nature of the Nändi there was a lot of controversy and confusion. In the Bālarāmāyana the Nāndī recited by Kohala is of twelve Padas (Words-com- pound and simple taken together as Rāvana says.). The reciter of the Nāndī also could not be definitely settled as in some dramas he was the Sūtradhära while in others he was not. In the Chitra Purvaranga another item, the Vardhamana, should be used in the midst of the parts of the

1. D. R. III. 2-8. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) V. 164 & 168. 3. K. S. D. p. 340. 4. S. D. VI. 33. 5. D. R. III. 2; S. D. VI. 26. 6. D. R. III. 21; S. D. VI. 41.

115

Nāndīs whereas in the Suddha Pūrvaranga it is to come after the song.1 These are the two kinds (Variegated and Pure) enumerated and thus differentiated by Bharata. The details of the Pūrvaranga are found in the Nātyaśās- tra as in the chap. V of the N. S. (K. S. S.) but most of the extant Sanskrit dramas do not observe it in all its details. The controversy and confusion as regards the nature of certain of its items, for example, the Nāndi, were reflected in dramas also. The fact was that in ancient India the dra- matic entertainment was a combined entertainment of music, song, dance and dramatic representation. As the dramatic representation grew in volume and importance, the other items of entertainment became subject to con- troversy, were curtailed and even fell into disuse. (2) Characters. The incidents and events that constitute the plot of drama may hardly have any value if the interest is not dy- namic. The Indian view of life favours more the mytho- logical, traditional or historical stories dealing with the lives of persons of high status. These stories are generally known. It is true that the interest that attaches to them as stories can never flag to the point of total annihilation as they are mostly ingrained in their religious tendencies, but the mere static aspect of these stories is not sufficient to produce lasting impression. It is, therefore, that characters in various relations are presented active in the plot which cannot have all the stages from the sowing of the seeds to the final fruition developed by themselves. In connection with the Nataka type of drama Sagaranandin says, "The 1. N. S. (G. O. S.) V. p. 219.

116

hero (Nāyaka) is one who brings the representation of the Nātaka, wherein inhere the Bīja, the Bindu etc. to a close."1 The very name 'Rūpaka' given to drama is because the actors assume the roles of the original characters.2 And it is the imitation of these characters' different situations, incidents etc. which is called Nātya.3 These original characters can belong to the various hierarchy of castes and creeds as well as to diffrent sexes. Difference in their nature is bound to be and all the different kinds of temperament may be reflected by them. They may be placed in variòus walks of life entrusted with different duties. But they all stand related either to the hero (Nāyaka) or to the heroine (Nāyikā) favourably or otherwise. Between the hero and the heroine there exists mutual relation but the prominence goes to one, hence all of them ultimately become related to one only. In those dramas where heroes are many, others are related to them. In the above case the heroes are mu- tually related or connected. This fact testifies to the play- wright's superb genius of establishing unity in diversity. All the characters comprising of males and females may be mortals, divine beings or partly divine and partly human beings. They have been first described as belonging to three different types, high or middle or low, according to the qualities, high or middle or low.4 Some authorities fix the above distinction quantitatively. Sāradātanaya enumerates a number of qualities and says that the high character has all of them, the middle character has a few

1. N. L. R. K. p. 11. 2. D. R. 1. 7. 3. Ibid. 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXIV. 2 .; N. D. p. 195.

117 less and the low character has much less.1 There are cer- tain other characters who are neither male nor female. They are the persons who are avowed celibates or who have their virility lost. These fill up neuter roles in the drama. They are of low status and are called Sankīrnas.The heroes have certain qualities as modesty etc.2 but it is not necessary that all of them must exist and express themselves simul- taneously in each and every hero. The Indian dramaturgy, however, insists invariably on the hero being Dhīra (Self- controlled) otherwise he will not be able to achieve his desired object. The heroes in general are of four kinds : (1) the Dhirodtta (the self-controlled and exalted), (2) the Dhiralalita (the self-controlled and light-hearted), (3) the Dhīrasānta (the self-controlled and calm) and (4) the Dhīroddhata (the self-controlled and vehement). The Sāhityasāra accepts only three kinds as it excludes the fourth kind.3 Among the four kinds the first is 'of great excellence, very serious, forbearing, not boasting, resolute, of suppressed egoism and firm in purpose.' 4 The second is 'free from cares and anxieties, devoted to arts, happy and gentle.'5 The third is 'a Brähmana etc. and is possessed of the common qualities of a hero.'6 The fourth has 'in amplitude pride and jealousy, whole-hearted devotion to magic practices and deceit and egoism predominating. He is fickle, violent and a braggart."7 Keeping in view the love relation of the 1. B. P. lines 20-22. p. 91 & line 1. p. 92. 2. D. R. II. 1-2. 3. A. S. S. XI. 2. 4. D. R. II. 4-5. 5. Ibid 11.3. 6. Ibid II. 4. 7. Ibid II, 5-6.

118

hero with the heroine he may be her Pati (husband) by re- gular marriage or an Upapati 'who is brought to the rende- zvous by the lady who may be either somebody else's married wife or a maiden and who has transgressed the moral code'1 or a Vaiśika 'who enjoys the company of courtezan.'2 Each of these may stand in any one of the following relations. He may be 'Dakşina (clever) in being kind to his former love,'3 or 'Satha (deceitful) hiding his unfaithfulness to her,'4 or 'Dhrsta (shameless) in displaying change on various parts of his body before her,'5 or 'Anukūla (faithful) in having only one love in her.'6 The hero is divided according to the Kāmaśāstra into four kinds. They are (1) the Datta, (2) the Bhadra, (3) the Pāñchāla and (4) the Kūchimāra according as he is the lover of the Padmini, the Chittrini, the Hastini and the Sankhini -- the four kinds of heroines.7 The author of the Mandāramarandachampū also mentions other ways of classification which, however, are not so deserving of notice. The hero has certain persons who help him on in his love affairs. They are the Vidūsaka, the Vița, the Cheta etc. Rudrabhatta calls such a help the Narmasa- chiva (Minister in love) and gives three kinds : the Pītha- marda, the Vita and the Vidūşaka.8 'The Vidūşaka should have knowledge of the Vedas and of secrets of love of the

1. R. S. I. 83. 2. Ibid I. 87. 3. D. R. II. 7. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid. 7. M. M. C. p. 79. 8. S. T. I. 29-30.

119 hero. He should be bald-headed, yellow-eyed, yellow- haired and green-bearded. He should be a dancer.'1 Some authorities fix four kinds of Vidūsaka for four kinds of heroes in love. They are thus, 'of the Dhiroddhatas etc. who are suffering from pangs of separation the Vidūsakas are Lingī (the Brahmachärin), the Dvija, the servant of the king and the pupil. The com. notes the order as the Dhiroddhata, the Dhīrodātta, the Dhīralalita and the Dhīraśānta .... In propriety it should be thus : the Lingi of the gods, the pupil of the Brähmana, all except the pupil of the kings, in this way of the Vanig etc. also.'2 The Vita should be expert in behaviour with courtezans, a poet, sweet-tempered, clever and talkative. He must be resplendent with garlands and ornaments and should be pleased or displeased without any reason. He generally speaks in Prākrit and is able to express many different sentiments.'3 'The Cheta is fond of quarrels, has a fund of stories, is ugly and uses perfumes. He can discriminate between what is to be respected and what not.'4 These characters, though they do not find much favour with the playwright in types of drama as the Nātaka, the Prakarana etc, are yet the heroes in some of the minor types as the Bhana and the Prahasana. The Vita is the hero in the Bhana whereas the Cheta and other low characters figure as heroes in the Prahasana. The hero employs messengers in his love affairs. Some persons are required to look after his government, his religious ceremonies etc. They are his Artha-Kāma-Sahāyas (persons helping him in 1. B. P. lines 5-7. p. 289. 2. N. D. p. 199. 3. B. P. lines 8-11. p. 289. 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 58.

120

procuring wealth for him and in his love affairs) and Dharma- Sahāyas (those helping him in religious performances).1 They are the Rājās, the generals, the priests, the counsellors, the ministers, the judges and the princes.2 Their merits and equipments have been described in details. All these help him in his public life. The Vaitālikas, the Chāranas etc. praise him and bring his qualities to public light. There are other characters who help him inside the palace whrein the heroines are seen in action. These characters, therefore, help the heorine also. The latter, therefore, requires first con- sideration. The heroine in accordance with her relation to the hero may be Svā, Svīyā or Svakīyā (his wife), Anyā, Anyastrī or Parakīyā (the maiden or the wife of another) or Sādhāranastrī (a hetaera proficient in arts, bold and deceitful). The Agnipurāņa recognizes a fourth kind, Punarbhū3 explained in the Amarakoșa as 'a lady married twice.'4 The hero's wife has been classified into three kinds which appear to be depending on the growing experience of affection by her and her temperament. She may be Mugdha (inexperienced) 'desirous of new youth, coy in love and gentle in anger,' or Madhyā (partly inexperienced) 'having a love of rising youth and capable of indulging in love even to fainting,' or Pragalbha (experienced) 'blind by youth, mad with love and merging, as it were, out of joy into the body of her husband even at the beginning of amorous dalliances.' The second and third kinds, that is, Madhya and Pragalbha may each behave towards her husbands in different ways which

1. N. D. p. 200. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXIV. 67-68. 3. A. P. 338. 41. 4. II. 6.23.

121

may show each as Dhīrā (self-controlled), Dhīrādhīrā (partly self-controlled) and Adhīra (lacking in self-control). Each of these may be older or younger. Each of the Anyā in her two divisions, the Sādhāranastrī and the Svīyā with all her kinds (13 in all as shown above) may occupy eight different relations to her lover. She may be Svādhīnabhartrkā (she his absolute mistress and he always exclusively devoted to her), or Vāsakasajjā (fully dressed and delightfully awaiting his arrival) or Virahotkanthitā (uneasy on his delay due to no fault of his own) or Khandita (harsh with jealousy on knowing on his body the marks of the company with another lady) or Kalahāntaritā (driven him away by a quarrel and then felt remorse; Rudrabhatta calls her Sandhitā, Abhisandhitā and Atisandhitā)1 or Vipralabdhā (deceived by his failure to come to the appointed place) or Prositapriyā (her husband gone away to a distant place on some business) or Abhisārikā2 (smitten with love going herself to him or making him come to her to an appointed place as farm, garden, dilapidated temple, house of the go-between, forest etc.3). Rudrabhatta says that Abhisārika is of three kinds according as she is one's own wife, another's wife or coutezan.4 The love-tryst may be kept either in day or in moonlit night or dark night. These different times give three kinds of Abhisārikās as Bhanudatta in the Rasamañjarī puts it.5 He also establishes after a hard discussion a ninth kind called Pravatsyatpatikā (whose husband is about to depart).6 All these different kinds

1. S. T. I. 72 & 77. 2. D. R. II. 15-20 ; 23-27. 3. S. D. III. 80. 4. S. T. I. 84. 5. B. R. M. pp. 140-142. 6. Ibid p. 146.

122 of heroines may be of high, middle, or low status, thus all coming to three hundred and eighty four in number.1 There may be other divisions by permutation and combination which, however, can be multiplied to a still larger number.2 All this testifies to the keen insight of the Sanskrit dramatur- gists into the human nature which was their main concern in the drama as it helped them to produce the effect intended. Inside the palace there are other female characters some of whom occupy very high positions by virtue of their affectionate relations with the hero, while others look after different duties and attend upon him. These are Mahadevīs who are crowned queens coming of high family, having high character, endowed with qualities, of middle age, becoming angry at times, free from jealousy, familiar with nature of the king (who is the hero), passing through thick and thin with their lord, ever wishing and seeking for their lord's welfare, calm and quiet, self-controlled and engaged in the welfare of the inner apartments. These, however, sometimes serve as Pratināyikās of heroines. The Nāțikā type of drama furnishes the instance. Pratināyikās have also been recognized by some authorities. Then there are Devīs who are endowed with above qualities but lack in fine impressions, proud of their good fortune, given to affectionate enjoyments, of pure and brilliant appearance, jealous of their rivals and beautiful on account of youth and handsome form ; and Svāminīs who are the daughters of generals, ministers or servants honoured by the king (the hero) with affection ; they are the beloved of the king because of their beauty, qualities and habits.3 Some other types of

1. S. D. III. 56-87. 2. Ibid III. 88. 3. N. S. (K. S. .S) XXXIV. 32-38 ..

123

concubines are Sthāpitās and Bhoginīs. There are other female characters as Silpakāriņīs, Nāțakīyās, Nartikās, Anuchārikās, Parichārikās, Sañchārikās, Preșaņachārikās, Mahattarīs, Pratihārīs, Kumārīs (young maidens), Sthavirās ( old ladies ) and Ayuktikäs.1 These all serve the hero ( and the heroine) in various capacities as described by Sanskrit dramaturgists.2 Bhoja recognizes four kinds of Nāyikās. They are Nāyikā ( the heroine endowed with all the qualities figuring throughout the whole plot), Pratināyikā ( the heroine's rival and cause of jealousy etc. ), Upanāyikā ( venerable and possessed of qualities and merits less than the heroine's ) and Anunāyikā (the heroine's younger sister on the same level with, or a little deficient than, the heroine ). Those who appear like the Nāyikā may be Nāyikābhāsa.3 He also recognizes four kinds of Nāyakas. They are Nāyaka (the hero endowed with all the qualities figuring through the whole plot), Pratināyaka (the hero's rival, unjust, stubborn and the hero's victim), Upanāyaka(venerable and possessed of qualities and merits less than the hero's) and Anunāyaka ( the hero's younger brother on the same level with, or a little deficient than, the hero ).4 Those who appear like the hero may be Nāyakābhāsa.5 He recognizes one more kind, Ubhayābhāsa (Nāyakanāyikābhāsa ).6 In case of birds figuring as heroes and heroines he recognizes Nāyakābhāsas and Nāyikābhāsas.7 Bhānudatta also recognizes Nāyakābhāsa.8

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXIV. 29-31. 2. Ibid XXXIV. 39-56. 3. B. S. K. V. 105-107. 4. Ibid V. 103-104. 5. Ibid V. 107. 6. Ibid V. 102. 7. Ibid. 8. B. R. M. p. 181.

124

To the heroine the persons as help are Dūtīs (messengers), Dāsīs (maid-servants ), Sakhīs (companions ), Kārūs (washer-women), Dhātreyīs ( foster-sisters ), Prativeśikās (female neighbours), Linginīs (Buddhist-Nuns) and Śilpinīs (female painters) etc.1 The heroine when becoming affectionate towards the hero displays certain expressions as Bhāva, Hāva, Helā etc. some of which areexpressed through the body voluntarily. Some are involuntary while others natural.2 In the communication of news or in escort of ladies Kārakas, Kañchukīyas, Varşavaras, Aupasthāyikas and Nirmuņdas (eunuchs) are to be employed. For different duties of Devīs Brähmanas, old in age, skilful and free from defects in arts are to be appointed.3 Vaitālikas praise the hero and describe particular seasons. There are also other persons who are to be engaged inside the palace. They are Kiratas, Mūkas, Vāmanas, Mlechchhas, Ābhīras and Śakāra.4 The latter's sister is the concubine of the king ; he, therefore, exercises his powers to unpardonable limits and can pose as very high as well as very low. The hero has his help in an other character who figures as hero in the Patākā. He is called Pīthamarda who is clever and devoted to the principal hero. Rudra- bhatta says that he may also be the attendant of the heroine.5 He stands lower than the principal hero because of being deficient in ceratin qualities. In the main plot there is another male character, Pratināyaka, who is avaricious, self-controlled and vehement, stubborn, sinner, vicious and the enemy of the

1. D. R. II. 29. 2. Ibid II. 30-42. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXIV. 62, 65-66. 4. D. R. II. 44-45. 5. S. T. I. 30.

125 principal hero. He is far surpassed by the principal hero who is rich in qualities springing from the essence of nature (Sāttvika)1 which make the opponent pale into insignificance in all possible ways. The principal hero, therefore, appears in more brilliant colours when placed in contrast with him. In the Bengal Vaişnava system, however, Krșna is the hero possessed of all qailities. He may be present in ' Svarūpa, that is ,as Krsna in himself, or 'Anyarūpa', that is, as some- times he appears as a boy. When in Svarupa, he may be Āvțta (assuming disguise) or Prakața (without any disguise). He is possessed of 64 qualities. With reference to devotees (Bhaktāpekșika) he is of three kinds : (1) Pūrnatama (most complete when all the qualities became expressed in him as in Gokula), (2) Pūrņatara (more complete when all the qualities were not expressed as in Mathurā) and (3) Pūrņa (complete when only a few qualities were expressed as in Dvārikā). As Rūpa Goswāmī himself says, they correspond to kinds of heroes as Śrestha, Madhyama etc. in orthodox Sanskrit dramaturgy. Krsna is again of four kinds as Dhīrodātta, Dhīralalita, Dhīrapraśānta and Dhīroddhata. These kinds, no doubt, correspond with those in the ortho- dox system but the difference lies in this that whereas in the latter the heroes belonging to these kinds are different, the hero in the former is only one, that is, Krsna. Rūpa Gosvāmī says that no objection can arise here as Krsna possesses various qualities and activities. In case of the kind, Dhiro- ddhata, wherein many defects are present, the author points out that because Krsna is engaged in special sports these defects lose their vitiative touch and turn into merits. The hero is possessed of eight Sāttvika qualities as said in the 1. D. R. II. 10.

126

orthodox dramaturgy also.1 Krsna may be Pati or Upapati. In his character as a lover he may be Anukūla or Dakșiņa or Satha or Dhrsta. The above relationship is in consonance with the standpoint in the orthodox Sanskrit dramaturgy.2 The hero has certain characters to help him on in his various activities. In the pursuit of religious activities they are Garga etc .; in the war Yuyudhana etc .; in counsel Uddhava etc.3 and in love affairs Cheta, Vita, Vidūşaka, Pīțhamarda (who helps in the Vīra also), Priya- narmasakha, Svayamdūtī and Āptadūtī. Each has been defined as a helpto the hero; the last two are female characters as Vīrā, Vrndā etc.4 He has out of the kinds of these female characters others who help the heroine also.5 The considera- tion of the heroine (Nāyikā), therefore, is to be made first. The heroines are styled first as Hariballabhas. They may be Svīyā or Parakīyā. The latter may be Kanyakā (virgin) or Parodhā (wife of another).6 The kind, Sāmānyā, is also accepted.7 Each of the kinds, Svīyā and Parakīyā, may be Mugdhā or Madhyā or Pragalbhā. Of these three Madhyā and Pragalbhā may each be Dhīrā, Adhīrā and Dhīrādhīrā. They have, according to their condition and relation to the hero, been further divided into eight kinds as Abhisārikā etc. According to the rank they hold in the affection of the hero each may be Uttamā or Madhyamā or Kanișthā.8 All

1. R. H. S. 17-100. pp. 123-181. 2. R. U. M. 9-36. pp. 8-31. 3. R. H. S. 101-102. p. 182. 4. R. U. M. 1-37, pp. 32-37. 5. Ibid 17, p. 37. 6. Ibid. pp. 39 & 43. 7. Ibid 8 p. 85. 8. Ibid. pp. 87-115.

127

these kinds fairly correspond with those in orthodox Sanskrit dramaturgy with this difference that in this system the kind, Parakīyā, is recognized as the highest type of heroine, and Krsna as the best type of lover as an Upapati. In the above classification of the heroine this school, as already pointed out, resembles the rhetorical classification, but there is a further classification in this system which is not available in school of rhetorics. Nāyikās are Hariballabhhās and are of three kinds. They are Sādhanaparās, Devīs and Nitya- priyās mentioned as Sādhanasiddhās, Devīs and Nityasiddhās by De.1 Sādhanaparās are those engaged in efforts and have realized ; they are again of two kinds : Yauthikīs (belonging to a Yūtha or combinations of either Munis who became Gopīs as related in the Padmapurāņa or Upanișads who became Gopīs as said in the Purāņas) and Ayauthikīs (belonging to no combination but born alone, two or three in Vraja who, therefore, may be Prāchīnās or Navās). Devīs are Devayonis incarnated with Krsna; Nityapriyās are those who have perpetully attained realization without any effort. Out of these the set of eight consisting of Rādhā and Chandrāvali etc. is the most fortunate. They both stand out prominently but between them Rādhā is more prominent as she represents Mahābhāva and is possessed of all qualities.2 A whole section is devoted to the description of her qualities. The compa- nions of Rādhā have been described to be of five kinds : Sakhī, Nityasakhī, Prāņasakhi, Priyasakhī and Paramaśresthasakhī.3 According to her fortune in love each of the heroines may be Adhikā (excessive who may be Ātyantikyadhikā or Āpe-

1. V. F. M. B. p. 156. 2. R. U. M. pp. 51-59. 3. Ibid. pp. 78-79

128

kşikādhikā), Samā (even) and Laghu (light who may be Āpekşikalaghu or Ātyantikalaghu). Of these each may be Prakharā (sharp), Madhyā (equable) and Mrdvī (mild).1 Hariballabhas according to the attitude towards the rival may again be divided into four kinds : Svapakșā (interested in self), Suhrtpaksā (partial to her friend), Tatasthā (indiffe- rent) and Pratipakşakā (hostile). De calls Pratipakșakā as Vipakșā.2 Rūpa Gosvāmī says that the second and the third have been mentioned only incidentally and that it is only the first and the fourth who are conducive to Rasa. The second kind may again be Iştasādhaka (doing good) or Anișțabā- dhaka (averting evils) ; and the fourth may be Istahā (destro- ying the desired object) or Anistakāraka (doing undesired object) through various causes and devices.3 To the kinds of Sakhī according to such consideration as her nature etc. a whole section is devoted, most probably to bring out her importance in this system . Even among these kinds some are more important than others.4 As De says, "Without her the blissful erotic sport of Krsna and Rādhā is not nourished, nor does it expand. No one has access to the sport except the privileged Sakhis and those devotees who imitate (through Rāgānugā mode) their attitude."5 Out of these Sakhīs who act as help to the hero and the heroine both, some act as Dutīs who are of two kinds : Svayamdūtī (who acts as her own messenger bringing about union through words, gestures and expressions of the eye) and Āptadūtī (a

1. R. U. M. pp. 118-125. 2. V. F. M. B. p. 157. 3. R. U. M. pp. 194-197. 4. Ibid. pp. 154-193. 5. V. F. M. B. p. 158 (Footnote).

129 freind reliable to death is employed as messenger). The latter is again of three kinds : Amitārthā (who brings about the union of the lover and the beloved after having known emotions of either through signs), Nisrstārtha (who fulfils the activities of both completely) and Patrahārī(who carries messages of both). The last kind includes the Śilpakārī (female artisan), Daivajñā (female astrologer), Linginī (female ascetic), Parichārikā (maid-servant), Dhātreyī (foster sister), Vanadevī (silvan deity) and Sakhī (female com- panion) etc.1 (3) Actors, Actresses, their Assistants. The actors etc. are imitators of the characters in different situations and circumstances. When a particular dramatic piece is represented on the boards, the actors carry on activi- ties in place of the original characters identifying themselves with them both in appearance and action to as great an extent as possible. They resort to various devices through which the spirit of the original activities of the characters is brought home to the spectators. The devices serve as media which received a thorough consideration at the hands of the dramaturgists. The acting, therefore, of the actors is an art which requires study and practice. 'Indian acting or dancing-the same word, Nātya, covers both ideas-is thus a deliberate art. Nothing is left to chance; the actor no more yields to the impulse of the moment in gesture than in the spoken word.'2 The actor has to undergo a regular training. An amateur actor has, practically speaking, no place in the Indian dramatic representation, for his personal

1. R. U. M. pp. 126-145. 2. M. G. p. 18. 9

130

skill and dexterity have hardly any scope here. 'Precisely as the text of the play remains the same whoever the actor may be, precisely as the score of a musical composition is not varied by whomsoever it may be performed, so there is no reason why an accepted gesture-language (angikābhinaya) should be varied with a view to set off advantageously the actor's personality.It is the action, not the actor, which is essential to dramatic art. Under these conditions, of course, there is no room for any amateur upon the stage ; in fact, the amateur does not exist in oriental art.'1 The above passage does not accept variation in the Āngikābhinaya only, but other kinds of Abhinaya also cannot suffer variation. It is true that in the Vāchikābhinaya there may be difference in tone and modulation of voice which is a personal factor, but the particular injunctions in that Abhinaya also have to be followed ; the actor who ignores them and merely exhibits himself through his personal dexterity is altogether eliminated and as such no difference exists between good and bad actor considered on his own particular merits. The beauty and excellence in acting, of course, lie in making the studied things appear perfectly spontaneous and natural. And to effect this there have been laid down some dramatic con- ventions (Natyadharmī). The body, health, actions and the nature of the actors should as far as possible be in fitness with all these equipments in the original characters in order that the former may be fully taken up for the latter.2 The servants and the slaves must be represented by persons who are slow, dwarfish, crooked, distorted, of ugly face, squint-

1. M. G. p. 18. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 6-8.

131 eyed, fat, of very prominent chins and noses, of ugly dress and bad-natured; those who are physically lean and thin must represent the fatigued, the exhausted and the sick ; whereas others who are fat should take roles of the healthy characters.1 The different roles should be assigned in accordance with the suitability in points of the particular regions from which characters hail, their dress and resemblance in their personal appearance and make-up2 in order that representation may appear natural. Men may take men's roles and women women's in fitness with their age and sex. The young may take the role of the old and vice versa and the role of men may be taken by women and vice versa. These three kinds of representation have been mentioned by Bharata. They are called the Anurūpā, the Virūpā and the Rupānusāriņī.3 The first and the third receive his approval.4 The third was prevalent even in times of Patañjali in whose Mahābhāsya the word, Bhrūkumśa, in the sense of man in the role of female occurs (VI. 1. 103 ; see Pradīpa and Udyota also). The mild representation wherein mortals exclusively or mortals and gods both figure is to be made by ladies for they are fit persons for such things. The lady who is to take the role of the heroine should have beautiful and handsome appearance, merits, character, youth, sweetness and vitality. She should be of fair complexion, affectionate, sweet-tempered, of sweet words, capable, agitated within restraint, conversant with tunes and notes and possessed of the knowledge of senti- ments.5 The courtezan should be well efficient in graceful

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 2-5. 2. Ibid. XXXV. 8. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 17-19. 4. Ibid. XXXV. 20. 5. Ibid. XXXV. 62-64.

132

manners, fully adept in emotions, possessed of vitality, modesty and sweetness, conversant with 64 arts, clever in the prescribed behaviour towards kings and free from female defects. She should speak sweet words, should have a fund of sweet stories and should be expert in sweet things. She should not show herself easily fatigued.1 In the violent representation wherein gods and demons figure, where fierce and tumultous deeds are perpetrated, where there is no chance for women except one or two to figure, men of violent temperament, of great strength and power should take roles. Bharata calls these two kinds of repre- sentation Sukumāra (mild or soft) and Āviddha (turbulent or agitated).2 Persons imitating the activities in these repre- sentations go under various particular names but there are ceratin general names also. These general names are Śailūșa, Bharata, Kuśīlava, Nata etc. out of which the last is mostly used. He is called a Nața because 'he gives representation of the affairs of the world with sentiments and emotions.'3 'He is devoted to fame and religion, calm, acquainted with the lives of persons of reputed familes, expert in Nātya in its six divisions, adept in the four kinds of Atodya (musical arts), pious, clever, well-versed in acting, discriminating in sentiments and emotions, possessed of the knowledge of costumes and the dialects and the languages of different regions, proficient in arts and crafts, conversant with words, metres and vocabulaty, equipped with the understanding of all the fundamental principles, rid of jealousy and defects, bold in actual representation, well-steeped in the knowledge

1. N. S. (K. S. S. ). XXXV. 60-62. 2. Ibid. XXXV. 30. 3. Ibid. XXXV. 73.

133 of the signs, facial expressions and physical manifestations, fully conversant with nature and temperament of different types of people, knowing science, capable of identifying himself as one with characters as the hero etc., appreciative of paintings, a connoisseur of the pigments and colours used in painting and fully adept in mixing the prime colours to produce mixed colours of various tints.'1 'A Śailūșa is so called because after having assumed the concerned roles he manifests emotions of people of different nature. He is called a Bharata who imitates others in dress, age, actions and gestures through their languages, dialects, colours and other means.'2 'Kusilavas are those who are expert in identifying themselves with the original characters through assumption of different kinds of roles, and representation of action, speech and gestures.'3 Bharata, however, makes them expert in instrumental music and engaged in the arrange- ment of different Atodya.4 The chief of these Natas who is to look after the whole affair of representaion is the Sūtradhāra. He is the man at the helm and is the instructor of other actors in the art. As he is the head, he is to be the ideal for others ; consequently he is to be possessed of many qualities natural, physical and intellectual.5 The other character who helps him is the Pāripārśvaka who has a few qualities less than the Sūtradhāra's .6 The Sūtradhāra may be objected to being mentioned above as one of the Natas because his function

1. B. P. Lines 10-20 p. 226. 2. Ibid. Lines 1-4. p. 288. 3. Ibid. Lines 19-20. p. 288. 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 84. 5. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV, 45-53 ; B. P. Lines 7-10 & 13-14. p. 288. 6. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 53; B. P. Lines 11-12. p. 288.

134

is general and he does not take a particular role. But the objection appears groundless on two considerations. Firstly, he is mentioned as such in the Avaloka com. on D.R. III.2 and is to be deduced in the following way :'The two words, Anyo Natah, mean another Nata which may stand for the Sthäpaka. As he is another Nata, there must be one who is to be mentioned before him. The Sūtradhāra is mentioned before him, therefore, the Sūtradhāra is a Nața ;' and secondly, he took the role of the hero Vatsa in the Ratnāvali and the Priyadarsikā. He also assumed the female role as he played Kāmandakī in the Mālatīmādhava. The Pāri- pārśvaka, too, assumed role as he played Kāmandakī's pupil, Avalokitā in the above drama.1 In some treatises the Sūtradhāra is called Bhāva and the Pāripārśvaka Mārșa. The Sthäpaka is another character who had certain duties to perform. He was not on a par with the Sūtradhāra as his qualities were less than the Sūtradhāra's. He was not to aid the Sūtradhāra in the construction of the stage as Keith puts it,2 but was to indicate the main object of the dramatic work.3 In some dramas, therefore, he does not appear as his function is performed by the Sūtradhāra.Other Națas assume roles of characters in the dramatic work to be represented on the boards, but they have to satisfy as far as possible the requirements of such characters in order to appear like them to the spectators. To help these Natas in successful assumption of the above roles there are other characters also whose roles have to be taken. These are Mukutakaras (makers of crowns or head-gears), Ābharanakrts (makers

1. K. S. D. p. 362. 2. Ibid. p. 361. 3. D. R. III. 2 (Com. Sa Cha Kāvyārthasthāpanāt Sūchanāt Sthāpakaḥ).

135 of ornaments), Mālyakrts (makers of garlands), Veșakaras (makers of dresses), Chitrakaras (painters), Rajakas (washer- men), Kārukas (makers of things with lack, stone, iron and wood) and Śilpins (sculptors) etc. All these characters, principal and secondary, are of high status or middle status or low status. All these are to be in keeping with those of the original characters themselves. This accounts for the fact that in the dramatic representation as far as possible resemblance should always be the main consideration. The aim, however, is not achieved merely if the actor appears outwardly just like the original character whose role he has taken ; he should also think in his mind that he is nothing but that particular character and thus play his part through the graceful manifestation of speech, movements of limbs and gait and gesticulation in the same manner as the soul which has relinquished one body and has occupied another body behaves in an other way and expresses itself as possessed of another nature.1 It is this graceful acting as a profession which gave to an actor the privilege of the company of high persons. Bharata, the father of Sanskrit dramaturgy, ranks as Muni and is the director of the dramatic representation in heaven as mentioned in the seventeenth stanza of the second act of the Vikramorvaśīya. Vatsa in the Priyadarśikā plays the part with pleasure. Such references occur in dramatic and other works in plenty which testify to the high esteem in which the eminent exponents of the profession were held. In social matters, however, the actor occupied a low position. In the beginning of the Adbhutadarpana disgust is expressed

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 13-14.

136

at the livelihood of a Sailūsa. References of this nature occur at several places ; but the consideration from the two aspects is from two angles of vision. That the art of actor as such was honoured stands as an undoubted fact. (4) Abhinaya (Acting). The actors imitate the characters in their different activi- ties. In order to do this they have not only to carry out actions which the characters once performed but have also to imitate them in their dress, speech and movements with the imitation of various objects, articles and materials which the characters really used. The actors, therefore, have to be first acquainted with the ways, manners etc. involved in the characters' different activities which go under the name ' Vrtti'.1 Bharata gives a mythical account of the different kinds of Vrtti. 'When the god Visnu had reduced the world to an ocean after having contracted the world through his power of Maya, he slept on the serpent bed. At that time two demons, Madhu and Kaitabha, intoxicated with prowess wished to fight and challenged Visnu. They ran towards him and produced tumultous noise throwing taunts and aspersions. When the Grandfather Brahma heard them roaring he shook in his mind and said, " Is it that the Bhārati Vrtti is evolved out of words ? Kindly do bring them, who are gradually becoming more and more violent, to destruction." The god Visnu replied, "This, the Bhāratī Vrtti, is created in order to serve the performance of the actions. This Bharati Vrtti will consist mostly of words as it is used in speech. I am this day killing them." With pure and unchanged Angas and Angahāras (bodily postures

1. B. P. Line. 14. p. 12; D. R. II. 47.

137 and gestures) Visnu fought the two demons expert in warfare. With the plantings of feet and contacts with the spots on the ground the earth was heavily burdened. Out of it came the Bharatī Vrtti. The Sāttvatī Vrtti was porduced out of Visnū's leapings and jumpings which were violent, brilliant, bold and confident and predominating with Sattva. When the god tied the braid of the top with wonderful Angahāras born out of the graceful movements the Kaisiki Vrtti had its birth. The Arabhati Vrtti came into being from the wonder- ful Karanas as used in fight, full of violence and force of wrath and born of the different kinds of Chārī. '1 'After that, these were called the Vrttis of the Natya connected with different emotions and sentiments and also the bases of different emotions and sentiments.'2 'Then by the order of Brahma, I (Bharata) arranged these, born out of the Nātya Veda and conisting of Abhinaya of speech and movement of the body, for the composition of poetry, the Bhāratī Vrtti from the Rg Veda, the Sattvati from the Yajur Veda, the Kaisiki from the Sāma Veda and the Ārabhațī from the Atharva Veda.'3 'That in which the speech predominates, which is to be used by men, in which women have no place, in which Sanskrit sentences are used, which is used by Bharatas (actors) and is connected with their names is called the Bharati Vrtti. It has four kinds which serve as its parts. They are the Prarochana, the Mukha, the Vithi and the Prahasana.'4 'That which has got the Sattva attribute, is

1. N. S. (K. S. S.). XXII. 2-14. 2. Ibid XXII. 20-21. 3. Ibid XXII. 22-24. 4. Ibid XXII. 25-26.

138

connected with appropriate subject-mater, full of happiness and delight and in which the sorrowful emotions have been compressed is called the Sāttvatī Vrtti. It has four kinds : the Utthapaka, the Parivartaka, the Samlāpaka and the Sanghātaka.'1 'That is called the Kaisikī Vrtti which is variegated with the particular graceful costumes, which is connnected with ladies, which is rich in rhythmic movements and songs and in which civilities born of the enjoyment of love predominate. The Narma, the Narmasphūrja, the Narmasphota and the Narmagarbha are its four kinds.'2 'The Ārabhațī Vrtti abounds in qualities as boldness, tricks and deceitful words, bragging and false statements. Allusions, falls, jumpings, crossings and such others, conjurings etc. arranged through illusions and other wonderful deeds occur in it. The Sanksiptaka, the Avapāta (the Avaghāta), the Vastūtthāpana and the Sampheta are its kinds.'3 Sāradātanaya also records the above tradition with one change which is to the effect that the Bharati Vrtti was uttered by the Bharatas hence called after their name. He mentions one more view. When the god Brahmā was witnessing the representation, the four Vrttis along with the four primary Rasas came out of his four mouths.4 Singa Bhūpāla records the origin of the four Vrttis in the same way as Bharata.5 The above detailed account of the Vrttis clearly bears witness to the fact that the Vrttis comprehended under them everything connected with the heroes in any way. Rājaśekhara describes the origin

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXII. 38 & 41. 2. Ibid. XXII. 47-48. 3. Ibid. XXII. 56-57 & 59. 4. B. P. Lines. 8-11. p. 12. 5. R. S. I. 244-260.

139 of Pravrttis, Vrttis and Rītis in a dramatic way. Aumeīy was pleasing Särasvateya and in that connection they came into being. He explains each of the three as a separate thing. The Pravrtti deals with the manner of arrangement of dress, the Vrtti with that of the graces and the Riti with that of words.1 But as discussed above the Vrtti is a very wide concept and it includes the Pravrtti and the Rīti also. 'In a way, Vrtti comprehends both the Pravrtti and the Riti, for it is the name of the whole field of human activity. Therefore it is that we find the inclusion of graceful dress -- Ślakşņa-Nepathya -- which is Pravrtti (Dāksiņātyā), as part of the definition of the Kaisikī Vrtti. Similarly the Sättvatī has exchange of hot words and thus comprehends the realm of the Rītis also.'2 Bharata mentions four Vrttis only but later on there arose another one called the fifth Vrtti which was an Artha Vrtti.3 Śāradātanaya refutes it and says that some authorities advanced in its absence an other one called the Viśrāntā.4 Bhoja adds two more Vrttis to the traditional four. They are the Madhyama Kaiśikī and the Madhyama Ārabhațī.5 Vidyānātha also mentions these two.6 All these Vrttis contain every activity, every 1. K. M. p. 9. N. B. It is to be remarked here in connection with the above Foot- note 2 that the Kaisiki Vrtti was the exclusive concern of the ladies, for when Bharata submitted to the Grandfather that males were unable to act it, the Grandfather created for it the Apsarasas out of his mind. (N. S. 'K. S. S.' I 46-47). 2. S. P. R. p. 209. 3. D. R. II. 61. 4. B. P. Lines. 6-7. p. 12. 5. S. P. R. p. 204. 6. P. R. 23. p. 61.

140

movement, in a word every detail connected with the charac- ters. They are, therefore, called the mothers of represen- tation 'Natyamatarah.'1 'The poet first fixes all these Vrttis in his mind and then produces the particular work. They exist even in a composition which is not meant for repre- sentation as nothing devoid of activity is fit to be described. The representation of the dramatic piece proper starts after the preliminaries called the Pürvaranga have been obser- ved. During that time hardly any activity is depicted hence no Vrtti is to be seen. This, however, should not be counted as a defect, for even with it (the so called de- fect) the drama can be called Vrttimaya because it abounds in Vrttis. Similarly when a character goes into trance it cannot be said that the representation at that time is not Vrttimaya. The Nātya is called Vrttimaya due to abun- dance of activities in it.'2 In these Vrttis various items for imitation are to be found. They were all intermixed in the sense that elements present in one were not its exclu- sive and particular contents. But they were so named due to the predominance of one element or another. 'Though they are intermixed they are counted as four because of particular constitutents predominating in each.'3 Sāgaranan- din specifies the element preponderating in each in the following way : 'The Vāchika (verbal) in the Bhāratī, the Sāttvika (psychic) in the Sāttvatī, the Āhārya (sartorial) in the Kaisikī and the Āngika (bodily) in the Ārabhațī.'4

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 4; N. D. p. 152. ?. N. D. p. 152. 3. Ibid. p. 152. Ataḥ Sankīrņatvepyamśaprādhānyāpekśayā Vrttayaś Chatasraḥ, 4. N. L. R. K. p. 44.

141

The dramatists wrote the plot and showed characters in different activities. When the dramatic piece is put on the boards, those different activities in their suggestions have to be made clearly intelligible to the spectators. For this the actors make use of different means the majority of which may be relating to his own physique. A clear proof is thus borne to the fact that the actors have to be perfect masters over their own movements and actions. These means the actor in the dramatic representation em- ploys making them as his own by demonstrating them as his personal concern. He thus brings to the understanding of the spectators1 what was actually or apparently done by characters. These different means have been classified into four kinds : the Āngika, the Vāchika, the Sāttvika and the Āhārya. The Āngika Abhinaya may be relating to body, face or movements. All these have to be demons- trated with all their parts and sub-parts.2 The parts are the head, hand, breast or chest, sides, waist and feet, and the sub-parts are eyes, brows, nose, lower lip, cheeks and chin. The movements, poses and gesticulations with their various parts make the actor suggest different objects to the spectators.3 The morning, persons on the earth, differ- ent planets, different seasons, beasts, gods, demons, rivers, the five Arthopaksepakas (means of indication of objects which are obscene etc.), poison etc. have all to be suggested through gesticulations and poses.4 Gestures for repre- senting the ten Avatāras (incarnations) of Vișnu, different 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VIII. 6. 2. Ibid. VIII. 11. 3. Ibid. VIII-XII. 4. Ibid. XXVI.

142

castes and various relations have been recorded in details along with others by Nandikeśvara also.1 The manners of walking of living beings according to their nature, different kinds of gait prescribed for persons filling up various offices, the gait of women taking up male roles and vice versa, speeds of different kinds of conveyances, velocity and movements of things falling down from higher places-are all to be represented through bodily gesticu- lations.2 The movements of the different parts of the body were utilized in dancing which should in a way be included in the Angika Abhinaya. Siva while witnessing the dra- matic representation of the Tripuradāha on the Himalayas was reminded of the dance with different postures and ges- tures of the body (Angahāras with Karanas and Rechakas). Śiva asked Tandu to tell it to Bharata at the request of Brahmā. Tandu did so.3 Śiva had indulged in this dance after the destruction of Daksa's sacrifice and the different postures were named Pindībandhas by Nandī etc.4 This type of dance was expressive of violent emotions; it was called Tandava because it was transferred by the god to Tāndin (Tandu).5 Pārvatī originated the mild type of dance when she saw Siva dancing.6 It was later on called Lāsya. It is to be borne in mind here that dancing was not enjoined as an indispensable element; it was simply to serve as an aid to beauty as Bharat's response to the

1. A. D. M. 216-244. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XIII. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) IV. 9-18. 4. Ibid. IV. 248-255. 5. Ibid. IV. 257-258. 6. Ibid. IV. 247.

143

query of the Rsis shows.1 The second kind, that is, the Vāchika Abhinaya deals with speech in all its constituents and parts. It constitutes the foremost means among all. Efforts should be made in practising it accurately as it is the structure of the representation, and all the parts of the human body, dress and essential factors suggested. The different Śāstras are composed of speech, they are based on speech, therefore, there is no other thing except speech. Speech is the cause of all effects. The substantive, verb, indeclinable, preposition, compounds, Taddhita, Sandhis (combinations) and the terminations are included in this kind. The Päthya (that which is to be read out) is of two kinds : Sanskrit and Präkrit.'2 The letters are to be pro- perly studied in their origin and use which should be appro- priate. For instance, the short, the long and the prolated vowels should be used in specific purposes.3 The different metres come under this kind of Abhinaya. They are to be read thoroughly and mastered for proper occasions. The 36 Laksanas were regarded by Bharata as a matter of Vāchika Abhinaya, though later on they became the subject of hot controversy. Dhanika says that they are absorbed in figures of speech as Simile etc.4 Viśvanātha also accepts at first no distinction between the Laksanas and the Nātyalankāras and then says that they are absorbed in some of the Gunas, figures of speech, Bhāvas and Sandhyan-

1 N. S. (K. S. S.) IV. 260-261 (The dance comprised of elements from different kinds of Abhinaya hence it will receive further attention later on.). 2. Ibid XV. 2-5. 3. Ibid XVII. 115. 4. D. R. IV. 84.

144

gas. But he says that they should be given place in the Nataka and effort should be made in this direction.1 The Prākrit Pāthya is the opposite of the Sanskrit Pāthya as it is devoid of refinement.2 The assignment of different languages to different characters is a matter of the Vächika Abhinaya. It is a matter worth consideration in that the languages and the dialects are assigned to different characters on the basis of their differents ocial status as also their cul- ture which may account for the phonetic capacities. The languages and the dialects wherein Sanskrit and Prākrit are used have been classified into four kinds : the Atibhāșā, the Āryabhāșā, the Jātibhāșā and the Jātyantarībhāșā. The last one, it should be kept in mind, is the imitation of the different sounds made by wild and tame beasts, birds etc.3 The Präkrit dialects, originated in different parts of the country, are to be used by persons of those places. The dialect of the rustics, having very low position in the society, is called the Vibhāsā.4 Different forms of address befitting the status and the dignity of persons and different walks of life, the seven Svaras, the three Sthanas, the four Varnas, the Kākus, the six Alankāras, the six Angas etc. are included in the Vächika Abhinaya.5 The constituents of music as the Jatis etc. also received consideration. Music was put in as a part of the Vachika Abhinaya. Some

1. S. D. VI. p. 96. (For a detailed study of these Laksanas see chap. 1. in 'Some concepts of the Alankāra Śāstra' by Raghavan, The Adyar Library, Adyar, 1942.) 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XVIII. 2. 3. Ibid. XVIII. 23-25 & 27-28. 4. Ibid. XVIII. 36-37. 5. Ibid. XIX.

145 have attached so much importance to it that they have tried to see even in the name Bharata nothing but a summary of the different constituents of music. In the word Bharata the constituents are explained thus : 'Bha-Bhava, feeling or emotion, Ra means Raga or musical mode and Ta means Tala-beating time in music by means of cymbals.'1 The third kind of Abhinaya is the Sattvika which deals with the representation of psychic conditions arising from the vital principle itself. Sveda (perspiration), Stambha (motion- lessness), Romāñcha (horripilation), Svarabhanga (change of voice), Vepathu (trembling), Vaivarnya (change of co- lour), Aśru (tears) and Pralaya (fainting) are the eight psy- chic conditions. It is but pertinent here to distinguish them from the Angika Abhinaya as some scholars seem to have misinterpreted them.2 They express the psychic conditions and do not depend on external things as the Āngika Abhinaya does. Being the product of the psyche, they pervade the whole body and cannot be put under con- trol or restraint as the Āngika Abhinaya can be. How they are to be represented on the stage has been treated in details in order to make spectators convinced as to their genuineness in the representation.3 One kind of Abhinaya sums up the ingredients of all the above three kinds with the addition of those of the fourth kind Āhārya to be con- sidered later on. It is born of speech, the parts of the body and the psyche and it also makes use of such things as or- naments etc. This fact accounts for its appellation, the Sāmānya Abhinaya (the common acting or the acting in which 1. T. I. S. p. iii (Introductory chap., Footnote). 2. K. S. D. p. 368. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. 93-105. 10

146

ingredients of all kinds of Abhinaya are found together). The predominance of the Sättvika element is, however, asserted, as the Jyestha (high) Abhinaya has excess of the psychic manifestation. That in which the psychic element is equal in proportion with others is the Madhyama (middle). The Adhama (low) is devoid of the psychic element.1 The fourth kind of Abhinaya which is of high importance is the Āhārya Abhinaya. It depends on the Nepathya which may include the general make-up of the actors in dress, ornaments with paraphernalia, decorating and em- bellishing of the body, different stage properties and drama- tic devices as machinery, living beasts allowed to be intro- duced in course of the dramatic representation, different kinds of weapons to be used etc. It is of four kinds : the Pusta, the Alankāra, the Angarachanā and the Sañjīva. The Pusta is of three kinds : the Sandhima, the Vyājima, and the Chestima. The Sandhima is the object made up of boards, cloth, skins etc. The Vyajima is the object manipulated with the machine. The Chestima is the ob- ject which is moved about. Forests, conveyances, aerial cars, objects covered with skin, armours, banners and mountains shown in the representation go under the general name, the Pusta.2 The Alankāra includes Mālās (garlands), Ābharanas (ornaments) and Vāsas (dresses and robes). The garlands are of five kinds : the Chestita (moving about), the Vitata (extended), the Sanghātya (collected together), the Granthima (knotty) and the Pralambita (pendulous). The ornaments are of four kinds : the Avedya (earrings etc.), the Bandhanīya (armlets etc.), the Praksepya (anklets

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIV. 2. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIII. 5-9.

147 etc. ) and the Āropya (necklace etc.).1 These ornaments differ in different parts of the country and according to different castes. They also differ as to fit different parts of the body of living beings of different regions. Bharata at first divides all sorts of covering into three kinds : the Śuddha (pure ), the Rakta ( red ) and the Vichitra ( variegated ). Then he says that dresses and robes are to be of three kinds: the Suddha ( pure ), the Vichitra ( variegated ) and the Malina ( dirty ).2 Persons in various walks of life, in different mental states and following various pursuits or belonging to differ- ent order are to put on dresses suitable to them. The Angarachanā consists in painting and decorating the parts of the body in fitness with the country, castes, age and nature. It also includes the general make-up of the beard, hair of the head etc.3 The Sañjiva is the introduction of living beings as quadrupeds ( wild and village cattle ), bi- peds (birds and human beings ), the footless (snakes etc.). These are to be introduced in battles, sieges and the like operations with many kinds of weapons and armours which should be in proportion to the size of persons using them.4 Other equipments as flag-staff, rod, head-gear, umbrella, chowrie, banner, jar etc. are also to be utilized. Special care is to be taken in the selection of the flag-staff of Indra's banner called the Jarjara which is used in the preliminaries of the dramatic representation. As said before dance has constituents which comprise elements from different kinds of Abhinaya, hence to treat it here is quite pertinent. The 1. N. S. (K. S. S. ) XXIII. 10-14. 2. Ibid. XXIII. 115-116. 3. Ibid. XXIII. 88-89. 4. Ibid. XXIII. 152-155.

148

N. S. as shown before recognizes two kinds : the Tāndava (the violent dance of Siva ) and the Lāsya or Sukumāra ( the mild dance of Parvatī). The Tandava consists of poses and violent movements of the different parts of the body called the Rechitas, the Angaharas and the Pindibandhas. It was imparted by Siva to Tandin who in his turn changed it into a form of dance accompanied with songs and instru- mental music. Because of this fact it was called the Tān- dava. The Lāsya has been mentioned as having the follow- ing kinds : the Geyapada, the Sthitipāthya, the Āsīna, the Puspagandhikā, the Prachchhedaka, the Trimūdha, the Saindhava, the Dvimdha, the Uttamottaka, the Vichi- trapada, the Uktaprayukta and the Bhāva or Bhāvita.1 Dhanañjaya in the Daśarūpaka calls the Nrtya as the Mārga and the Nrtta as the Desi. He divides each into two kinds : the Madhura and the Uddhata. The Madhura is the Lāsya and the Uddhata is the Tandava.2 He again considers the former in connection with the Bhana where he says that the Lasya is of ten kinds : the Geyapada, the Sthitapathya, the Āsīna, the Puspagandikā, the Prachchhedaka, the Tri- gūdha, the Saindhava, the Dvigūdha, the Uttamottaka and the Uktapratyukta.3 The Abhinaya was, thus, one of the most cultivated arts in India. In it lay the highest contribution to the dramatic art. 'The highest contribution, however, to the art of the theatre, perhaps, lies in the Hindu actor's duty of represen- tation ( abhinaya ) of the states or conditions of the personage

1. N. S. (K. S. S.). XX. 138-139 & 152. 2. D. R. I. 9-10. 3. Ibid. III. 52-53.

149 for whom he stands.'1 The four kinds of Abhinaya supple- mented one another in a way which did not leave any defi- ciency, small or great, incomplete or unremoved. The invective, therefore, of some authorities to the effect that there was no introduction of scenery in the representation and that use was made of minor properties to a limited extent only2 hardly stands justified. (5) Theatre. The four kinds of Abhinaya naturally implied the exis- tence of a place where a representation could be given. The Sanskrit dramas were meant to be staged on various occasions such as the celebration of the vernal festival, of the victory of a king etc. The first chapter of the N. S. mentions the representation of the destruction of demons which excited them-a fact which unmistakably proves that the Sanskrit drama is for representation if the intended effect is to be produced. Traces of dramatic representation are to be found in cave inscriptions also. 'As a matter of fact we find traces of dramatic representations in the cave inscription of Nasik during the time of Sri Pulumayi (2nd century A. D.) and in the Hatigumpha inscription of Kha- ravela of Kalinga (2nd century B. C. ).'3 'The Sanskrit drama of the theorists is, despite its complexity, essentially inten- ded for performance, nor is there the slightest doubt that the early dramatists were anything but composers of plays meant only to be read. They were connoisseurs, we may be certain, in the merits which would accrue to their works

1. Y. I. T. p. 46. 2. K. S. D. pp. 364-365. 3. T. I. S. p. 45.

150

from the accessories of the dance, music, song and the attractions of acting; the Vikramorvasī must, for instance, have had much of the attraction of an opera, and as a mere literary work loses seriously in attraction.' The drama is termed not the Śravya but the Drśya Kāvya, the Rūpa which conclusively proves it to be intended for representa- tion. Kālidāsa, the poet-dramatist, voices the same view when the elected judge, Kauśikī, recognized as the great connoisseur in the dramatic art, says that the Nātyaśāstra is mainly intended for representation.2 The four orthodox theories which arose as interpretations of the famous but cryptic formula in the form of the Sūtra of Bharata centre round the skilful performance of the Nata and it is only in two of them that the word Kävya has been inserted as indi- cating composition other than the drama. The poet-dra- matist, no doubt, furnishes his work with all possibilities and potentialities for their development in a full picture before an acute and constructive imagination; it is, how- ever, the actor who brings them to full maturity and pre- sents a complete and living picture before the audience, but for whose acting the picture is dead and, in some cases, even distorted. It is sometimes said that a great drama needs no theatre. It is perhaps intended thereby that in case of a great drama the sympathetic readers can supple- ment the requirements of the stage from their own imagi- nation. Here, however, one consideration is ignored. Even in case of the sympathetic readers or spectators there are times when their minds are otherwise distracted and to bring them back to their mood of appreciation preli-

1. K. S. D. p. 358. 2. M. A. I. p. 193. in K. G. (Prayogapradhānam Hi Nāțyaśāstram).

151 minaries as the Pürvaranga etc. have to be observed (in case of the spectators ). But this can only be done when the dramatic work is represented, therefore representation has ultimately to be resorted to even in the case of the great drama. 'The drama and the theatre produce each other. A dramatic work becomes most impressive when acted within the four walls of a theatre; and a theatre is a most powerful engine for the development of the drama.'1 Bhoja considered the subject from the view of the poet- dramatist and, therefore, shifted the whole importance to their dexterity. He was not primarily concerned with dramaturgy but with poetics. He, therefore, little cared for the fact that Bharata's N. S. was a treatise on the Drya Kāvya, that is, the Nātya dealing in extenso with Abhinaya. It is the acting which infuses life into the dead pages of the playwright. Dramas are always meant for representation, it is quite an other thing that they may become poems rather than remain as dramas for representation. Bharata in the N. S. fixes the times of day and night for representation. He calls them the Nātyavāras and enumerates them as Prādoșika (evening ), Ardharātra (midnight ), Prābhātika (morning ), Paurvāņhika (before noon) and Āparāņhika ( after noon ) times. He points out particular kinds of sub- ject-matter for representation with respect to the above fixed times. He, however, excludes midnight out of the above list. He also expressly excludes noon and the time of evening meal.2 The Sanskrit dramas generally mention the occasions of their representation and count their success in the favourable verdict of the assemblage before which

1. T. I. S. p. ii (Introductory Chap.) 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXVII. 85-87 & 93.

152

the representation is given. The statement, therefore, that 'great dramas need no acting, and acting, however great, cannot make insipid plays great,'1 does not hold. The representation is to be given on the stage for which infor- mation, though very scanty and less definitive, is available in some cases as an ancient theatrical stage unearthed by Dr. Bloch in a cave in Ramgarh, the ruins being proved 2,300 years old. The dramas were mainly staged in the palaces of princes and rulers. The directions given by Bharata about the construction of the theatre house may apply to royal theatres in the palaces of kings. Rehearsals were perhaps usually held in the music hall ( Sangītasālā ) as in the Mālvikāgnimitra. Temporary construction might have been put up at festivals. Hence no permanent stage is available even as ancient relics as in the case of the Greek theatre which was wholly a democratic institution. The Indian dramaturgy, however, mentions different kinds of theatres and gives details of construction and arrange- ment of the stage. These theatres were very likely public theatres, as we hear of troupes of actors and actresses tra- velling in different parts of the country. Bharata, the acknowledged and original authority on Indian dramaturgy, records in the first chapter of the N. S. the orders of the Grandfather Brahmā to Viśvakarmā to construct a theatre hall furnished with all equipments and satisfying the ne- cessary requirements. The second chapter of the N. S. dilates on the details of the theatre hall. Three kinds of theatres have first been mentioned. They are the Vikrsta, the Chaturasra and the Trysra. The first is a rectangular

1. S. P. R. p. 85.

153 formation and not a square. This has been so explained by Abhinava in the Abhinavabharati.1 The second and the third kinds are square and triangular plans. Just after the enumeration of these three have been mentioned their three measures, the Jyestha (big), the Madhya (middle) and the Avara or the Kaniya (small ). This close proximity gave scope for speculation in that some scholars applied the Yathāsankhya Nyāya and said that the rectangular, the square and the triangular theatres were respectively of the big, the middle and the small dimensions, whereas others held that each of the three kinds was of three dimensions. The first camp, therefore, held only three kinds but the second believed in nine kinds. All this may not be of particular use, but it proves keen insight of the dramatur- gists into details and points out the tenets of different schools.2 As regards the measures, the Jyestha, the Madhya and the Avara are to be 108 hands, 64 hands and 32 hands respectively. The first is prescribed for gods, the second for kings and the third for others. The Madhya kind of theatre is praised for mankind on acoustic grounds. The various instruments being played upon and the different songs being sung can without any difficulty be listened to in the theatre of this kind. Bharata then gives the dimen- sion of this kind as 64 hands in length and 32 hands in breadth. He describes how the selection and ground- planning are to be done. The length of 64 hands is to be equally divided. The back portion is to be equally divided into the Rangasīrsa and the Nepathyagtha. The religious element is to be seen in commencing the work under aus-

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) II, p. 50. 2. Ibid.

154

picious constellations. Those persons who are in any way of evil dispositions, given to display, devoted to particular sects or wear yellow clothes are to be discarded. The perliminaries as offerings of oblations to respective quarter deities, the Brähmanas and the kings are to observed when the walls are being constructed. Then the four pillars dedicated to the four castes in four directions with various ceremonies are to be erected. The Rangapītha then is to be made after which the Mattavarani with four pillars of the dimension of the Rangapitha and half a hand higher than the former is also to be made. The Ranga- mandapa is to be of the same height with them. The Rangaśīrsa should have six planks and two entrances to the Nepathyagrha, it should never be like the back of either the tortoise or the fish. It should be even like the surface of the mirror and there should be made two doors here lead- ing to the Nepathyagrha. The walls and other parts of the theatre should be profusely decorated with wooden net-work, statues etc. designed and cut beautifully and they should be plastered. They should have the paintings of ladies and gents. The Nātyamandapa should be like the mountain-cave and should have two Bhūmis (stories) with a small window not exposed to draught and should have good acoustic qualities. Abhinava records different opin- ions on the two Bhumis. One view held that the Rangapī- tha had two portions, higher and lower, thus believing in the play house having two stories; these were the two Bhumis. Some said that there must be another wall running all round the Mattavāraņīs, just as in a temple there always stood two walls with an intermediate passage for going round. These, therefore, were the two Bhūmis. Others went in for another mandapa on the terrace. Still

155

others gave the view that the compound should be read as Advibhūmiḥ (in the Sanskrit text). The personal view of Abhinava, however, was his own master's view which ran thus. From the Rangapitha, whence the seats for the spectators begin, to the exit-door Bhūmis should be erec- ted, the hind ones higher than the front ones, thus, the last equalling the height of the Rangapitha so that the front tiers of seats with the spectators may not shut out the back ones.1 This explanation is in fitness with the model arrange- ment of seats in a theatre where every spectator was sui- tably accommodated.2 The first explanation which des- cribes the stage as double-storied appears more in consonance with the necessities of the Sanskrit dramas extant, for ex- ample, the hermitage of Mārīcha in the Abhijñānaśākun- tala, the magician's scene in the Ratnāvalī etc. These scenes must have been staged in the upper story. The Chaturasra kind of theatre is then described. It has been enjoined to be 32 hands in length as also 32 hands in width. Ten pillars strong enough to support the Mandapa are to be driven. By the side of these pillars the Pitha of the shape of steps (Sopāna) is to be made. The auditorium is to be made up of bricks and wood. The seating arrangement is to be in a way as different rows of seats may be each one hand higher than other in order to ensure visibility of the Rangapītha. After that six more pillars are to be erected in various directions to support the mandapa. The eight pillars are again to be raised after which the Pitha of the dimension of eight hands is to be made. The Nepathya- grha is to be made; it should have one door for entering

1. N. S. (G. O. S.). II. p. 65. 2. S. D. S. R. VII. 1351-1360 ; Cf. K. M. pp. 54-55.

156

into the Rangapītha. The audience is to be given admi- ssion through the front side where there should be made a second door. The Mattavaranī, square in dimension, even in surface and decorated with a mound should be made of the measure indicated previously. The Rangapītha is to be made here beside the mounds; it is to be elevated in case of the Vikrsta theatre and even in case of the Cha- turasra. These are the details of the Chaturasra theatre. The details as given above do not furnish one with accurate information about the build of the theatre. It has, there- fore, to be elaborated from the exaplanation recorded by Abhinava in his com. to the text of the N. S. In it he has made clear the different positions and localities of the differ- ent partitions of the theatre.1 The third kind of theatre, the Trysra, is thus described only in hints. It should be in a triangular form. The Rangapitha which is of triangu- lar form in the middle is also to be triangular and should have one door in that very corner for entry into it. Ano- ther door should be made at its back. What has been enjoined upon in case of the Chaturasra theatre in matters of walls and pillars should be followed in the construc- tion of this kind of theatre as well.2 Here, too, Abhinava is to be resorted to for elaboration. It is to be noted, how- ever, that no specific measurement here as in cases of the Vikrsta and the Chaturasra has been given which may be taken as a hint that this kind was not much in vogue. The above three kinds of theatre have been mentioned for various kinds of audience and not exclusively for kings as is the case in the B. P. In it Śāradātanya mentions

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) II. 2. Ibid. II. p. 71.

157

three kinds of theatre, the Chaturasra (square), the Trysra (triangular) and the Vrtta (circular). The author gives no other description of these kinds but only determines their nature with reference to the audience, though the king is invariably one of the audience in all the three. That theatre is called the Vrtta where the king along with good men, citizens and prominent men in the country has songs and music played upon. That is called the Chaturasra where the king has songs and music with the audience con- sisting of courtezans, ministers, traders, generals, friends and sons. In the Trysra theatre the king is present with sacrificial and religious priests, preceptors, ladies of the royal household and the crowned queen. In the Trysra kind the music should be the Märga (high style) whereas in the Chaturasra the Mārga and the Deśa (popular style) should be mixed. In the Vrtta theatre the beautiful mix- ture of the two should be used.1 Like the B. P. the Śil- paratna also has some discussion about the theatre, which description clearly seems to be of the Nātyamandapa attached · to the royal palace. It runs, 'before the palace, four man- dapas, the Mukhamandapa, the Pratimāmaņdapa, the Snā- namandapa and the Nrttamandapa (Nrtta here stands for Natya ) are to be made.'2 Some details have been devoted to the Natyamandapa. In the absence of any ancient thea- tre being available no definite information as to the exact build and construction of the theatre is in possession. Scholars have variously interpreted the instructions supplied by Bharata and his commentators, and have attempted to draw plans of different kinds of theatres. Miss Godavari

1. B. P. lines. 9-18. p. 295. 2. S. K. S. R. XXXIX. 35-36.

158

Ketkar in her 'Bhāratīya Nātyaśāstra' gives the diagrams of the Vikrsta, the Chaturasra and the Trysra theatres. The plan of the Vikrsta follows the dimension of 64 hands in length and 32 hands in breadth and that of the Chaturasra 32 hands each side. Of the Trysra no dimension has been noted.1 R. K. Yajnik in 'The Indian Theatre' supplies the diagram of the Vikrsta theatre.2 D. R. Mankad in 'Hindu Theatre' also furnishes diagrams of the three kinds of theatres.3 The Vikrsta kind of theatre illustrated in three diagrams by the above scholars differs according to their interpretations. The Chaturasra and the Trysra kinds illustrated by Ketkar and Mankad differ as regards the shape, the locality of pillars etc. Each seems to be correct is his or her own way, with, however, one exception. It is not to be understood as to why Ketkar has left some open space between the Rangapītha and the Preksāgrha. As has been observed before Bharata praises and recommends the Madhya kind of theatre on the ground that human senses · can best adapt themselves to different activities going on there. The descriptions afforded are of the Vikrsta and the Chaturasra kinds having dimensions, 64 hands in length and 32 hands in breadth, and 32 hands each side respecti- vely. As is obvious the dimension of the Vikrsta is of the Madhya Vikrsta and of the Chaturasra also the dimension is of the Madhya Chaturasra. This has been ingeniously shown by Mankad. Of the Trysra he himself is not quite definite as its dimension is not mentioned by Bharata. For want of any ancient theatre the efforts of these scholars can 1. G. B. N. pp. just following the 30th., the 34th. and the 36th. pages. 2. Y. I. T. p. 41. 3. H. T. M. in I. H. Q. Vol. VIII.

159

best be construed as approximate approaches. A few points here crop up for consideration. The first is if there was any curtain used. Bharata mentions 'Pata'.1 Scho- lars contend that it was 'Yavanika'-a word, which is also mentioned by Bharata (N. S. 'K. S. S.' V. II). Windisch believed that there was only one curtain which was hung up between the Nepathyagrha and the Rangasīrsa. It does not stand to reason here as to why the curtain is to be hung up here at all when a wall is already constructed between these two partitions.2 Keith also drives the same way in the words, "Behind the curtain are the actors' quarters ( nepa- thyagrha ) or tiring rooms."3 That he has misconstrued the text is quite clear. Wilson believes that in some cases there was used a transverse curtain, 'but this is doubtful' as Yajnik puts it.4 There was a curtain, no doubt, but it was hung up between the Rangaśīrsa and the Rangapītha.5 When one would enter on the stage suddenly, it was done violently with a toss of the curtain (pati ) which was also called the apatī, the tiraskariņī or the pratisīrā.6 'Nor- mally the entry of any character is effected by the drawing aside of the curtain by two maidens, whose beauty marks them out for this employment (dhrtir yavanikāyāh).7 This entry of the character on the Rangapitha is called the descent on it ( Rangävatarana) which suggests the re-

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XIII. 3. 2. N. S. (G. O. S.) II. p. 62 (Nepathyagrhabhittilagnau). 3. K. S. D. p. 359. 4. Y. I. T. p. 44. 5. N. S. (G. O. S.) V. p. 212 ( Tatra Yavanikā Rangapīthatachchhira- sormadhye ). 6. K. S. D. p. 359. 7. Ibid. pp. 359-360.

160

lative height of the Rangasirsa. The view of Weber to the effect that Nepathya denotes a place which was lower than the Rangaśīrșa also corroborates the above position. That both these views are consistent and not opposite is borne out by Bharata who says that the Rangasīrsa should be elevated and even in cases of the Vikrsta and the Chaturasra theatres respectively.1 On either side of the Rangapītha the Mattavaranīs are erected. These Mattavāranīs also have been variously explained by scholars, Keith perhaps interprets the Mattavāranī as 'a verandah with four pillars.'2 Mankad holds that it was a special portion of the Ranga- pitha.3 Prof. Bhanu says that it was a fence to check the entry of the mad or intoxicated persons.4 The Mattavāranī was neither the verandah nor the special portion of the Ranga- pitha nor the fence as explained above. It was rather the side wing, one on each side of the Rangapitha supported on four pillars. And it was to be one and half hands higher than the auditorium. Yajnik concurs with the view of Abhinava when he says, " An interesting feature of the scene-building is a set of two side-buildings or wings ( Mattavāranīs ) or 'Parascenia' ( 12 by 12 ft. each )."5 Here different places in the economy of the theatre occupied by singers, spectators, connoisseurs etc. may briefly be hinted at. Abhinava has mentioned, between the Nepathyagrha and the Rangaśīrșa,

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) II. 104. 2. K. S. D. p. 359. 3. H. T. M. in I. H. Q. p. 485 ( Footnote ) & p. 491 ( Footnote ). 4. G. B. B. N. p. 30. 5. Y. I. T. p. 40. Rājaśekhara says about the Kavisamāja, "It should have 16 pillars, four doors and 8 Mattavāranīs." Eight Mattavā- ranīs, in case of four doors clearly prove their being side-wings, two for each door. (K. M. p. 54).

161 a wall with two doors.1 In the space between these two doors singers and dancers would take their seats resting themselves against the wall.2 Bharata mentions the places to be occupied by singers and persons playing on different kinds of musical instruments facing different directions.3 At a distance of twelve hands from the Rangaśīrsa, that is, at a distance of four hands from the Rangapitha the seats for the spectators would commence1 and the connoisseurs(Prāśnikas) would occupy the front seats with persons ( Siddhilekhakas ), who noted the merits and the defects of the dramatic works being represented, very near them.5 One more point deserves a passing reference here. It is in connection with those places in the stage from where the characters effected their entry upon, and exit from, the stage as Abhinava puts it.6 They are called Kaksyās. They were three : the Abhyantara, the Madhyama and the Bahya. Bharata in the N.S. ( chapter XIV of K. S. S. and chapter XIII of G. O. S.) gives their details and different ways of using them. Different kinds of scenes, stage properties etc. to be exhibited and arranged in these Kakşyās have also been mentioned. That these Kaksyās, therefore, were not less important places in the economy of the theatre stands clear. (6) Spectators (Audience ). The spectator in the Sanskrit dramaturgy has been accepted as the standard. It is on his verdict that a particular 1. N. S. (G. O. S.) II. 72 ( with Com. pp. 62-63 ). 2. Ibid. XIII. 2. 3. N. S. (N. S.) XXXIV p. 429. 4. G. B. N. p. 32. 5. Ibid. p. 41. 6. N. S. (G. O. S.) XIII. 3 ( with com. p. 197). 11

162

dramatic work is to stand or fall. The dramatists even of the highest order as Kālidāsa, Bhavabhūti, Harșa etc. voice their opinions as to the judgment of the spectators. The Sūtradhāra in the second stanza of the Prastāvanā to the first act of the Abhijñānaśākuntala says to the Națī that he does not regard the science of representation upto the mark till the learned ( spectators ) are not wholly staisfied. Such a verdict of the spectators was a great appreciation of his works to the dramatist who could fully count them as lasting un- scathed through times immemorial. Kālidāsa's works furnish an instance in point. Centuries have rolled on, yet his works are as new and fascinating as ever. The verdict, then, of the spectators will stand good for all times if it is impartial and sincere in the right direction. The author of the Dhvanyāloka records the view of one school which says that the Dhvani is beyond the scope of speech and can only be perceived by a man endowed with aesthetical judgment.1 Bhatta Nāyaka who advances his own interpretation of the Rasasūtra of Bharata postulates one function called the Bhojakatva or the power of enjoyment which has exclusive reference to the spectators. If this power is not postulated, or if its absence is admitted in the spectators, the whole interpretation falls down. Kuntaka, the author of the Vakroktijīvita, who includes Rasa in one of the striking ways of expression, also relies on the appreciation of the writer's work by one who knows it well ( Tadvidālhādakāriņi).2 This view in a way esta- blishes well the importance of the sympathetic connoisseurs. Bhavabhūti, on not receiving due recognition of his works, clamours in the 8th stanza of the Prastavana to the first act

1. D. L. p. 33. 2. V. J. I. 7.

163

of the Malatīmadhava for an appreciative person having the same qualities and merits as he (Samānadharmā). Rūpa Gosvāmī in the Prastāvanā to the first act of the Vidagdha- mādhava, through the words of the Pāripārśvaka, says that the Sahrdayas excel gods even in point of learning etc. The qualities and merits in the spectator have been very con- cisely put together by Abhinava. He calls an appreciative reader or spectator a Sahrdaya, possibly suggesting that he should have the same heart as the author, that is, he should appreciate the work with the same emotions and sentiments as moved and prompted the author to compose the work. Abhinava in the Lochana com. to the Dhvanyāloka calls the Sahrdayas those who have the capacity to become one with the description, their minds like mirrors, as it were, having become clear and pure due to practice by study of the Kāvyas.1 This view emphasizes mainly practice, though purity of heart is also mentioned as the result of it. Viśvanātha also recognizes one kind of Vāsanā which consists of experience in this life (Idānīntanī) and says that one may develop the capacity of appreciation by study of poetry and experience of life. According to him this capacity may also be acquired from previous births ( Prāktanī ).2 In case of the grammarians and the philosophers this capacity becomes deadened even if it exists at all in any form in them. But some rhetoricians say that this capacity is inborn ; it is a kind of Śakti which is present in the particular person in the form of the latent emotion ; when it is aroused it makes the reader or the spectator feel one with the description or the spectacle. In case of the Madhura Rasa of the Vaisnava school of Bengal

1. D. L. pp. 38-39. 2. S. D. III. p. 3.

164

the same Sahrdaya comes to be called Bhakta.1 The Krsna- bhaktas are of two kinds : Sadhakas and Siddhas. The former are those who are in the process of realization whereas the latter are those who have already realized. The latter are further divided into two kinds : Samprāptasiddhaya, who have realized through either Sadhana ( effort ) or Krpā ( grace ), and Nityasiddhā whose realization is eternal and spontaneous in that they are ever full of eternal bliss. They are like Mukunda himself and are possessed of his qualities. The Gopis etc. are prominent among them. According to their nature or position in life they are further divided into five kinds : Śānta, Dāsa-suta ( servants etc. ), Sakhās, Guru- vargas, ( elders etc. ) and Preyasīs (beloved as Gopīs ).2 The above five kinds have further divisions which will be con- sidered later on. All this, however, explains clearly the different states of the Sahrdaya's mind when his dormant emotion becomes awakened. Viśvanātha says that the Sahrdaya by whom this bliss is enjoyed is, like the Yogin, deserving of this preference due to his accumulated merits ( Prāktanapuņyaśālibhiḥ ).3 The acceptance or the rejection of the Santa Rasa depends on the experience of the people ( Akhilalokānubhavasiddhatvāt ).4 Nāgeśa in the com. to the above establishes the Sänta Rasa in the drama on the basis of the universal recognition of the Prabodhachandrodaya as drama.5 Thus both Jagannātha and Nageśa rely on the Sahrdayas as regards the recognition and establishment of

1. D. S. P. Vol. II p. 336. 2. R. H. S. pp. 182-187. 3. S. D. III. p. 1. 4. R. G. p. 30. 5. Ibid.

165 the Sänta Rasa. There may, however, be some Sahrdayas who may not appreciate the work. Rājaśekhara calls them Bhävakas and classifies them into three categories : Aro- chakinah ( those having natural aversion which can hardly be effaced or which may prove to be the origin of knowledge ), Satrnābhyavahārinah (the vulgar persons having indiscri- minate faculty ) and Matsarinah ( the envious ). Those who truly and impartially appreciate are really very few.1 This justifies the remark of De that ' the critic as well as the poet is born, and not made.'2 Both have been mentioned together as both the artists, that is, the poet or the dramatist and the critic or the spectator have to share a common inspiration. The Sahrdaya and the object of appreciation have to be simultaneously present. How for this is true may be under- stood from the remarks of the dramatic critic as Dhanañjaya when he says that ' this experience depends upon the specta tor's own capacities, and does not arise from the perfections of the hero, or because the work was deliberately designed to create a beautiful effect ; it is their own effort by which the audience is delighted, just as in the case of children playing with clay elephants, whose imagination bestows upon their toys a varied and abundant life.'3 In the above quotation two things have to be kept in view. Firstly, the emphasis is laid on the subjective element in the spectator ; and secondly, though the perfection of the hero or the deliberate design of the work to create a beautiful effect is not the main consideration, yet the indispensable element is the work itself, for without it no complete self-concentration is possible in

1. K. M. p. 14. 2. D. S. P. Vol. II. p. 271 ( Footnote ). 3. M. G. p. 21.

166

the same way as the children require for their concentra- tion the toys, no matter whether the latter have fascinating names, beautiful forms etc. or not. The spectator or the Sahrdaya or the man of taste must be ' not only well read and wise, and initiated into the intricacies of theoretic require- ments, but also possessed of the fine instincts of aesthetic enjoyment.'1 But this capacity of aesthetic enjoyment some- times becomes obstructed in function. It becomes ' Kal- ușavikșipta' that is hearts are turbid and minds distracted.2 To remove this obstruction from the Sahrdayas and to turn even Ahrdyas into Sahrdyas the preliminaries etc. are resorted to and various other decorative effects are tried.3 Thus the spectators in all possible ways are brought to a mood to enjoy the dramatic representation and give their judgment on it. Their appreciation may be inferred from the movements of their different parts of the body or their activities. The success of the representation depends on these expressions of the spectators. Bharata records them under the name, Siddhi ( success ). He first divides it under two heads : the human and the divine. The latter depends partly upon the dexterity of the actors and partly on averting the elemental, pheno- menal and divine inclemency. The first (former) consisted in the spectators' expressions, eight of which were mainly verbal, the remaining two physical. The eight are Smita ( smile ), Ardhahāsa ( half-laughter ), Atihāsa ( over-laughter ), Sādhu ( well done ), Aho ( alas ), Kasta (pity ), Pravrddhanāda ( rising uproars ) and Avakrusța or Avakrsta (fie, fie). The two physical are Horripilation and standing up by the specta-

1. D. S. P. Vol. II. p. 55 2. S. P. R. p. 83. 3. N. S. (G. O. S. ) VI. pp. 281-284 (Com.).

167 tors unconsciously on their seats with the upper garments flying up, raising up of the finger etc.1 In order that the above expressions may be fully marked in course of the representation the spectators must be endowed with some general qualities. Bharata sums up nearly all of them. He says that the spectators must be persons 'of character and good family ; calm and learned ; devoted to fame and duty ; impartial ; of age ; expert in the six parts of the Nātya ; wise; pure ; just; expert in four kinds of Ātodya ; conversant with dressings ; given whole-heartedly to religion ; knowing the arrangement and manners of diffrent countries and languages; adept in arts and crafts ; clever in four kinds of Abhinaya ; endowed with subtle distinction ( distinctive power ) between sentiment (Rasa) and the emotion (Bhäva) ; well versed in words and metres and proficient in many Sāstras'. 'He is a spectator who is pure, his senses being under his control, who can consider a subject into its pros and cons, who can easily spot the defects of the representation and who is of affectionate disposition. He who becomes satisfied when there is a matter for satisfaction, who is aggrieved with a sorrowful matter and who becomes depressed and dejected with disappointment is a spectator.'2 'He is a spectator who endowed with the above qualities can enter into the spirit of the representation by the imitation of emotions.'3 Higher in qualities stand the Prāśnikas ( connoisseurs ) who are to be appointed when there is an intricacy or competition in matter of judgment. Their qualities and requirements are more 1. N. S. (N. S.) XXVII.2-15;N. S. (K. S. S.) XXVII. 2-15; G. B. N. pp. 42-43. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXVII. 50-55. 3. Ibid XXVII. 62.

168

particular; they have been enjoined upon by Bharata. The connoisseurs were ten. In the following cases the following persons should act as connoisseurs ( Prāśnikas, literally questioners): A person conversant with sacrificial rules and practices should be the connoisseur in matters of sacrifice; a dancer in matters of representation ; one conversant with the rules of metre in matters of prosody ; a trained phonetician in matters of recitation ; a king as the connoisseur in matters of the combination of dignity and merit in the etiquettes of the royal household as also in the propriety of the behaviour of ( the actor when he represents ) a king; a good speaker in matters of ( verbal) decency ; a painter in matters of measure- ment, composition, action, in arrangement of clothes and dress and the tiring ( of actors and actresses ) which is the basis of the Nātya ; a courtezan in matters of amour ; a musician in matters of tunes and musical measures and a trained servant in matters of service.1 These persons got the Siddhis (successes) written out by the persons appointed for counting (Siddhilekhakas) in course of the representation and their final judgment decided the fate of the dramatic work re- presented. However, if they could not come to any con- clusive judgment, the matter was referred to the king who generally acted as president and thus was highest in status as a Sahrdaya. He was quite impartial, seeing both the parties with unprejudiced eyes. ' He should be rich, intelligent, discriminating, expert in distribution (of rewards), well- versed in the musical science, omniscient, reputed, endowed with mild and soft qualities, conversant with the expression of Hāva and Bhāva, free from jealousy and envy, benevolent by nature and of good character, kind-hearted, steady, self-

1. N. S. (K. S. S. ) XXVII. 65-68.

169

controlled, adept in arts and clever in representation and acting.'1 Such a Sabhäpati was to be the president of the assemblage. It consisted of all the four Varnas (castes ) as the four pillars in the construction of the theatre suggest, though entry was restricted to the cultured only. On the occasions of festivals there was no restriction as to admission as the representations then were open to all. All and sundry were, of course, not Sahrdayas but as Keith puts it, 'the fact that the dramas must have been largely unintelligible to all save a select few of the audience would not matter much; a drama was essentially a spectacle ; in many cases its subject was perfectly familiar to the audience, and the elaborate use of conventional signs must have been enough to aid many of the audience in following roughly the nature of the proceedings.'2 It (the dramatic representation), therefore, was somehow or other understood by all. It was, of course, natural that in private exhibitions admission should be restricted, for it was kept in view that only the Sahrdayas should be present at, enjoy and judge the success of, the representation. The Sahrdayas, therefore, were, to speak metaphorically, the key-stone in the Sanskrit dramaturgy as their verdict was the deciding factor in matter of representation and they were the substrata of Rasa-the life of representation. (7) Particular Pleasure ( Rasa). Bharata, the father of Indian dramaturgy, says that there is nothing in this science which is not animated with Rasa (sentiment).3 It is, therefore, the life of dramaturgy. The dramatic rules all converge to the delineation of objects

1. A. D. M. 17. 2. K. S. D. pp. 370-371. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. p. 71.

170

in such a way as may arouse latent emotions in the spectators before whom the dramatic representation is being put up. Rasa is a particular kind of pleasure experienced by the specta- tors involving particular states. The famous Rasasūtra of Bharata was the starting point of different interpretations and controversies which gave enough scope to scholars to enter into ingenious and hair-splitting arguments. They con- sidered the subject in all its possible details such as its nature, its kinds which according to some were eight : Śrngāra, Hāsya, Karuņa, Raudra, Vīra, Bhayānaka, Bībhatsa and Adbhuta, while others wanted to add one or more to this number etc. As these details are varied and many and as Rasa is the life of drama it is but incumbent that the details should receive thorough and separate consideration and treatment.1 Section B-The types of drama. The above detailed study of the different constituents of Sanskrit drama was entered into with a view to show that the drama required consideration from both aspects, the theoretical and the practical, combined harmoniously. For instance, the drama is worth the name when it is enacted, otherwise, it is on a par with other literary forms. When it comes out of the mind of the playwright before it is represented by actors on the boards it is seen in a form where only the theoretical aspect is all in all. It is this theoretical aspect which determines the types of drama. Many are these types but they are the variations according to the different kinds of adjustment of the one type called the Nātaka. 'Because it is the original nature of other types, because of 1. The whole of the second part of the thesis has been exclusively devoted to the consideration of Rasa in all its details.

171

its comprising all the sentiments ( Rasas ) and because it has all the constituents with their varieties and kinds etc., it deserves precedence ( in point of consideration )', such and like are the opinions about the Nätaka held by most authori- ties on dramaturgy.1 The word, Nātaka, was sometimes used as the generic name for the drama as a substitute for the word, Rūpaka.2 The Nātaka, therefore, is the original nature, the Prakrti, of other types which are its derivations, the Vikrtis, made in order to suit different necessities as, for instance, satisfaction of persons of different taste and nature at different times and circumstances etc. The Natya, the art of re- presentation takes on its canvas the depiction of emotions of three worlds ( Trailokyabhāvānukīrtana ). The types, the Samavakāra and the Dima, recorded by Bharata as represented before the gods and the demons,3 well bear it out. The demons have always been depicted as quarrelsome and malicious, given to fault-finding and fond of aggression. The high morals and ideals placed by high and noble personalities in the Nätaka would have gone quite against their grain. According to their nature they liked the representation of fights, workings of malicious and evil tendencies, magical sieges, feats and illusions of which they themselves as heroes were the authors. The fights, sieges etc. have neen prohibited from being represented but as they suited the nature of the audience, the prohibition had no scope. They found their ownselves reflected therein. The representation, therefore, gave them pleasure when they knew that it was a mere dramatic representation. One scholar advancing the theory of 1. D. R. III. 1; N. L. R. K. p. 1 ; R.S. III. 128-130. 2. P. R. p. 222. ( Com. Kāvyanāțakavyāpārajanitena ). 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) IV. 4 & 10.

172

evolution says that the Dima, the Samavakāra and the Ihāmrga represent the intermediate stage in the evolution of the Sanskrit dramatic types. The Bhana is taken as the first type, but for this presumption no support in the authorities as the N.S. is to be found. As said above mention of the representation of the Dima and the Samavakāra types is found. In the attempt to prove the Prahasana a further development of the Bhana, there occurs the unconscious admission, 'For, natural growth takes place both ways (1) towards a greater simplicity by analysis or (2) towards a great- er complexity by synthesis i. e. by additions, reduplications, joining various threads etc.'1 It as much supports his view in one way as goes agaist it in the other. Then again the endeavour to support the view by saying that 'condensation of many actors into one is neither more artistic nor more convenient nor more natural ; and HTo by this feature alone is fully entitled to be taken as the first type'2 is weak and can be interpreted both ways. In the private apartments of the rich big dramas are often condensed due to want of space and time, the nature of the audience etc. Then again the statement occurs, 'This monologous character of "TUT needs an expert actor to play the role of faz, but at the same time dispenses with almost all the theatrical accessories ; for an audience who can imagine the character and the con- versations represented as taking place between them, as real, can certainly visualise the scenes and other devices.'3 Here the actor is to be an expert in acting, the audience must be endowed with a high type of imagination and the scenes and the devices are to be visualized. In the primitive society

1. T. S. D. p. 82. 2. T. S. D. p. 82. 3. Ibid p. 158.

173

almost all the three things are not developed. The actor is never an expert ; the audience, if rich in imagination, is never rich in constructive imagination and the scenes and the devices to be visualized are not at all known as they are later developments. The device, the Ākāśabhāșita (in the air) is very advanced in technique which is the main factor in the Bhana. This evolution, therefore, sounds analogous to the Greek evolution where one character after the other was gradually introduced by the succeeding dramatists ; here it has to be borne in mind that the Greek drama took account of the Chorus as well. It is just an effort to apply the European theory of the evolution of drama to the Indian products in definace of the Indian theory. The Indian dramaturgy makes the Grandfather Brahmā the composer of drama. According to the authorities therefore the Nātaka type should be taken to be the first in origin. It was to prove the persuasive and delightful ideal to humanity in general which was to be delighted and instructed . This purpose could be served by the Nätaka which idealized the lives of personalities and was saturated through and through with all kinds of Rasa. It may be said here that the Dima and the Samavakāra types may be taken as the starting points of evolution. This seems corroborated by the fact that they are first mentioned in the N. S. as represented before the audience. These plays deal with fights etc. as also with the supernatural element to excess. Mankind in its infancy believes in the supernatural element and indulges in such violent and vigorous activities as fights etc. But the view stands militated in that the construction and the composition of the two types show such exactness and accuracy as cannot even be expected of primitives. Besides, their representa-

174

tion on the stage presupposes high watermark in the develop- ment of acting otherwise the whole display may reduce itself to bombast and absurdity. The different types can also be grouped as under :--

Those types (1) Where the interest and importance are attached to characterization, plot and other necessary constituents of drama. Such types are the Nātaka and the Pra- karaņa ; (2) Where the importance of the above constituents is as much as of the processional demonstration, show etc. The types are the Bhana, the Prahasana, the Vīthī, the Anka and the Vyāyoga ; and (3) Where the importance and interest are attached to procession, show, demonstration etc. with the minimum significance of other constituents. Such are the Dima, the Samavakāra and the Ihāmrga. The above grouping appears fully confirmed by Bharata as in his N. S. the Dima and the Samavakāra are first mentioned, thus showing the reflection of the taste of primitives revelling mostly in procession, demonstration, display etc. But the same argument as regards accuracy, exactness and efficiency in acting stares boldly, and successfully disposes of the pre- sumption. In the last chapter while tracing the evolution of the Nātya it was clearly pointed out that the Rūpaka stage of drama was the culminating point. Before that, many experiments on the Nrtya stage would have been made and the various Uparūpaka types, based on the Bhāva (emotion ), would have come into being. The possibility, therefore, may also

175 arise that the Rūpaka types may be developments of the Uparūpakas. In the absence, however, of any authentically confirmed data except those, such as the one asserting the Nātakas as the original nature of all other Rūpaka types, available in works on dramaturgy, the Nātaka has to be accepted as the original nature ( Prakrti) whereas other types as only its derivations ( Vikrti). The theoretical constitutents of each type can, on analysis, be reduced to three in number : Vastu (the plot), Neta (the hero) and Rasa (the sentiment ). All the dramaturgists agree unanimously that the principal types of drama are ten in number : Nāțaka, Prakaraņa, Bhāņa, Prahasana, Dima, Vyāyoga, Samavakāra, Vīthī, Anka and Īhāmrga.1 There are, however, some dramaturgists who advocate other types either by inclusion in, or in addition to, the above ten ; they are Nāțikā, Prakaraņī, Satțaka and Troțaka.2 The above ten principal types of drama can with reference to scope, extent and importance be grouped under three heads : (i) Group : Nāțaka and Prakaraņa; (ii) Group : Dima, Samavakāra and Īhāmrga ; and (iii) Group : Bhāņa, Vīthī, Prahasana, Anka and Vyāyoga. First Group :-- (1) Nātaka. The plot :- The plot is to be of the Prakhyāta or Prasiddha (famous ) kind, that is, taken from any source which is famous. Life- 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 2-3 ; D. R. I. 8 ; B. P. lines 4-5 & 11. p. 221; R. S. III. 3. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 60-64 ; D. R. III. 43 ; N. D. 3-4. p. 1 ; R. S. III. 218 ; N. L. R. K. p. 114.

176

incidents of the divine heroes or kings may form the plot of the Nataka.1 The hero must be a king having only divine help as explained in com.2 The plot must be famous but slightly imaginary as advocated by Mātrgupta.3 These incidents must have all the Sandhis made up of the combina- tions of necessary elements (Arthaprakrtis) with stages (Avasthäs) of the subject-matter. Where the matter is to be indicated it is done through any of the five ways (Artho- pakşepakas); the Patākā and the Patākāsthānakas (episodical indications) should also be used. The subject-matter is to be arranged in acts. According to Bharata and others the number of acts may range from five to ten.4 B.P. instances some dramas even in support of the above statement. There are, however, some dramas which have even fourteen acts ; they are called the Mahānātakas. There are also others which as said before have even one act. These acts must be arranged after the pattern of a cow's tail (Gopuchchhāgra),5 the com. to the above in S. D. gives various interpretations. According to some it means that the acts should become gradually shorter and shorter than the previous ones. Others . say that even as in the tail of a cow some hair is short and some long, so here also some actions should come to a close in the Mukha Sandhi, some in the Pratimukha Sandhi and so on. The common sense view would be thus. As in a cow's tail the tuft at the root is thick gradually tapering off to the end, so the incidents and problems are thick in the beginning of the drama gradually solving out at the con-

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 10. 2. H. K. S. p. 317. 3. K. A. S. p. 6 (Kinchidutpādyavastu). 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 19 ; B. P. Line 1. p. 223. 5. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 46 ; S. D. VI. 11.

177 clusion. In some Nātakas there may be an act (Garbhānka) within an act. Śāradātanaya notes a few kinds of Nāțaka stated by Subandhu which have their own characteristics as regards nomenclature, necessary constituents etc. These kinds are the Pürna, the Prasānta, the Bhāsvara, the Lalita and the Samagra. The Pürna may have all the recognized Sandhis, as the Mukha etc. The Prasanta should have the following Sandhis : the Nyasa, the Nyasasamudbheda, the Bījokti, the Bījadarśana and the Anuddistasamhāra. The subdivisions : Yukti, Prāpti, Samādhāna, Vidhāna and Paribhavana should be present in this kind only. It should have the Sattvatī Vrtti. The Bhāsvara kind may have the following Sandhis : the Māla, the Nāyakasiddhi, the Angaglāni, the Angaglāniparikșaya and the Mātrā- vaśiștasamhāra. The sub-divisions : Ajñāpavāda, Sampheța, Prasanga, Vidrava and Sangraha with all their varieties are to be present here. It may have in full the Bharatī Vrtti. The Lalita kind has the following Sandhis : the Vilasa, the Vipralambha, the Viprayoga, the Visodhana and the Uddişțārthopasamhrti. The sub-divisions : Virodha, Praņaya, Paryupāsana, Pușpa and Vajra should invariably be woven in this kind. It has the Kaisikī Vrtti. The four sub- divisions : Upakşepa, Parikara, Parinyāsa, and Vilobhana are to be elements of all the kinds. The Samagra kind will have all the constituents, characteristics etc. and is called the Mahānataka. That kind is also Samagra wherein the various elements of all the kinds are seen ; it is called the Nrttachara.1 These kinds have been summarily disposed of by Śinga Bhūpāla. He says that they are not very 1. B. P. pp. 238-241. 12

178

fascinating, inscrutable and not respected or recognized by Bharata Muni.1 The hero :- The hero is to be the renowned personality as the king or the divine being. He may be a mortal having divine support or a Ksattriya. He must be of the Udātta kind. Dhana ñjaya also accepts him as of the Dhīrodātta kind having all the qualities of an ideal hero. The sentiment :- Bharata says that there should be many Rasas in the Nataka and the act should be teeming with Rasa2. Dhanañjaya, however, accepts the Srngära or the Vira as the main senti- ment in the Nätaka and the Adbhuta in the Nirvahana Sandhi. Other Rasas should be subsidiary. This view has been accepted by other authorities also as Śāradātanaya and Viśvanātha,3 but the former notes as shown before the view of Subandhu advocating five kinds of Nātaka out of which one kind, the Prasanta is to have the Praśānta Rasa in abundance. (2) Prakarana.

The plot :- The plot is to be imaginary, a product of the author's brain. Life-story of a Brähmana or a merchant or a minister or a priest or a counsellor or a businessman is to form the plot. There should be no divine element and no kingly luxury. The acts must be from five to ten. What has been said

1. R. S. III. 213-214. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 12 & 14. 3. D. R. III. 33-34 .; B. P. Lines 3-4. p. 236; S. D. VI. 10.

179 about the plot of the Nātaka applies here also.1 The imagi- nary nature of the plot is accepted by all the dramaturgists. The hero :- The hero should be a Brähmana or a merchant or a minister or a priest or a counsellor or a businessman. The hero should not be of the Udätta type according to Bharata.2 Other dramaturgists enjoin him to be of the Dhīrapraśānta type. One of them, however, advocates the Dhīrodātta also as the hero. He also says that the hero can be of low birth or low character also where the heroine is also the same.3 The heroine plays an important part here. She is to be either Kulajā ( of a good family ) or a courtezan. Bharata is of opinion that in case of a minister or a Brāhmana or a priest or a merchant or a counsellor or a businessman figuring as a hero the courtezan should not be the heroine, and if she is the heroine there should be no other heroine of a good family ( in that dramatic work). This can be also interpreted to the effect that there should be no contact between the Kulajā and the courtezan. This interpretation suggests that both may figure as heroines. Dhanañjaya seems to accept the above interpretation as he says that both can figure ( as heroines ) but they should not come in contact with each other, the Kulajā remaining in the inner apartments. According as one or the other or both are the heroines, there are three kinds of Prakarana.4 In the N. D. the Prakarana has been mentioned to be of seven varieties, according as the hero, the result achieved by the hero or the 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 49-59. 2. Ibid XX. 53. 3. N. D. p. 117 (Com.) 4. D. R. III. 41-42.

180

plot or all are imaginary.1 Śinga Bhūpāla accepts its three kinds : pure, artful and the mixed on the basis of the heroine being either the lady of a good family or a courtezan or both.2 The minor characters also attract importance accor- ding to Dhanañjaya who styles one kind of Prakarana as the Sankīrna where clever and cunning characters as the servants, the Vita, the maids etc. figure.

The sentiment :-

As said in the case of the plot, Rasa also should be depicted here as in the Nātaka, which D.R. also confirms.3 Śinga Bhūpāla and Viśvanātha, however, explicitly mention that the Śrngara Rasa should be the principal sentiment here.4 The dramatic types as Nāțikā, Prakaraņī, Sațțaka and Toțaka or Troțaka may be considered here as their con- stituents can be analyzed into one or other belonging to either of the above two kinds of major dramatic form. That is why some dramaturgists include them in the above two types as pointed out before. Nāțikā.

The plot :- A mixture of the plots of the above two types of drama makes the plot of the Nātīka.5 Others say that the plot should be invented.6 Bharata and Dhanañjaya say that it

1. N. D. p. 118. (Com.) 2. R. S. III. 215-217. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 51 ; D. R. III. 40. 4. R. S. III. 215; S. D. VI. 225. 5. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 60; R. S. III. 219. 6. B. P. Line. 20. p. 243.

181 should have four acts.1 Some say that there is no Vimarsa Sandhi here.2 The hero :- The hero is to be of the Dhiralalita kind.3 There should figure two ladies, one the elder queen, the other the youthful maiden. The latter's union with the hero depends upon the former's sweet will.4 Either or both may be renowned, thus the Nātikā may be of four kinds.5 The sentiment :- The Śrngāra Rasa is the principal sentiment here.6 Prakaraņī or Prakaraņikā. The plot :- The plot here should be as in the Nāt kā. The hero :- The hero should be as in the Prakarana and the heroine should be suitable to the hero. The sentiment :- The sentiment that is depicted as principal here is the Śrngāra Rasa. Rāmachandra and Gunachandra advocate the separate existence of the Prakarani which is accepted by Viśvanātha also.7 Dhanañjaya refutes it as a separate type.8 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 62 ; D. R. III. 44. 2. B. P. Line. 4. p. 244. 3. D. R. III. 44; B. P. Line. 19. p. 243. 4. D. R. III. 48; B. P. Line. 3. p. 244. 5. N. D. 71. p. 120. 6. D. R. III. 44; B. P. Line. 21 p. 243. 7. N. D. 73 (with com.) p. 122; S. D. VI. 306. 8. D. R. III. 43 (with com).

182

Satțaka. The plot :- It is a variety of the Nātikā ( based on the Nrtya )1 perhaps due to predominance of Nrtya in it. It should have acts called the Javanikās2 or Javanikāntaras as in the Karpūra- mañjarī. It should have no Viskambhaka or Praveśaka. It should have only one language and not a mixture of Sanskrit and Prākrit.3 Some say that it must be full of Śaurseni, Mahārāsțrī etc. According to some authorities the king may not speak Präkrit while others prescribe for him Māgadhī or Saurseni. Still others say that it must be wholly in Prākrit.4 The last view is also held by Viśvanātha.5 It should have no Sandhi.6

The hero :- The hero should be as in the Nātikā. The sentiment :- The sentiment should be depicted as in the Nāțikā. Viśvanātha, however, prescribes the predominance of the Adbhuta Rasa.7 The Raudra Rasa etc. should not be depicted.8 Totaka or Troțaka. The plot :- The plot should be as in the Natika, but it should arise out of the contact of divine and human elements.9 It is

1. B. P. Line. 1 p. 269. 2. S. D. VI. 277. 3. N. D. 1. p. 213. 4. B. P. Lines 4 & 7-10. p. 269. . 5. S. D. VI. 276. 6. B. P. Line. 3 p. 269. 7. S. D. VI. 276. 8. B. P. Line. 2. p. 269. 9. N. L. R. K. p. 114 ; B. P. Line. 4. P. 238.

183

also to be marked with the presence of the Vidūsaka in every act.1 It should have five or seven or eight or nine acts.2 The hero :- Human and divine beings should figure as heroes. The sentiment :- The sentiment should be the same as in the Nātikā. Viśvanātha, however, prescribes the Śrngāra Rasa as the principal sentiment on the ground of the Vidūsaka being present in each and every act.3 Second Group :- (1) Dima. The plot :- The plot should be famous ( Prakhyāta). There may be fighting, tugging, striking, magical illusions and other magi- cal feats. There should also be seen eclipses of the moon and the sun, shooting of meteors etc. It should have four acts. The Vimarśa Sandhi should not be observed here.4 It should have Praveśaka and Viskambhaka according to Śāradātanaya and Śinga Bhūpāla who also adds Chūlikā. Viśvanātha, however, says that Praveśaka and Viskambhaka have no scope here.6 The hero :- Bharata says that the heroes should be Udatta7 whereas 1. N. L. R. K. p. 114 ; S. D. VI. 273. 2. B. P. Line 7. p. 238 ; S. D. VI. 273. 3. S. D. VI. 273 (Com). 4. D. R. III. 60 ; S. D. VI. 244 ; B. P. Line 20. p. 247. 5. B. P. Line 2. p. 248 ; R. S. III. 283. 6. S. D. VI. 242. 7. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 88.

184 other dramaturgists are of opinion that they should be Uddhata. According to all they are gods, Gandharvas, Yakśas, demons and Nāgas etc. and are generally to be six- teen in number. The sentiment :- Bharata says that there should be all Rasas except the Śrngāra and the Hāsya1. According to others the principal sentiment is to be the Raudra ; the Hasya and the Śrngāra are to be totally avoided and others may be depicted as secondary. The Śanta Rasa should also be avoided.2 (2) Samavakāra. The plot :- The plot is to depict the incidents of gods and demons. It is to have three acts. The first act is to be of 12 Nādikās, the second of 4 and the third of 2. It should depict three kinds of Kapata (deceit), three kinds of Vidrava (calamity ) and three kinds of Śrngära.3 The deceits may be due to the nature of the thing ( Vastusvabhāva), fate or enemy ; the calamity may be due to siege, war or the action of natural phenomena. The Śrngāra may be for the Dharma, the Artha and the Kama.4 There should also be observed Āmukha etc. as in the Nataka.5 Nearly all dramaturgists say that there should be no Vimarśa Sandhi, no Bindu and Praveśaka. The Vithyangas should be used according to suitability.

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 89. 2. N. D. 86. p. 129. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 66-67 & 70-71. 4. D. R. III. 66-67. 5. Ibid. III. 62.

185

The hero :- The heroes should be gods and demons, Udātta by nature and tweleve in number according to all dramaturgists. The sentiment :- Bharata says that there should be three kinds of Śrngāra but makes no explicit mention of the principal sentiment. Others advocate the Vira as the principal sentiment.1 There is, however, one opinion which prescribes the Raudra and the Vira both as principal sentiments,2 though the com. in one way prescribes either as principal in the words, 'Tena Triśrngāratvepi Vīro (ra-) raudro (drau ) Pradhānam.' (3) Ihāmrga. The plot :- The plot consists of the actions of divine beings. Battles etc. take place for the attainment of the divine lady difficult to get as a gazelle. All kinds of agitation, confusion, disturbances etc. are seen and the fight is suppressed on some pretext. The death of the Pratināyaka even though resulting as a logical conclusion is avoided.3 Other dramaturgists advocate the inclusion of mortals as heroes, the mixed plot, three Sandhis and four acts. Some, however, advocate one act also as an alternative.4 The hero :- Divine beings are to be the Uddhata type of heroes. The Pratināyaka must not be able to attain his object. 1. D. R. III. 64;B. P. Line 19 p. 248; R. S. III. 250 ; S. D. VI. 236. 2. N. D. 76. p. 124. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 84 ; D. R. III. 75. 4. S. D. VI. 249.

186

Saradātanaya says that there can be four or five or six heroes.1 Śinga Bhūpāla says that there may be five or six Pratināyakas.2 Viśvanātha says that the heroes must be ten comprising the principal heroes, Pratināyaka and the Patākānāyaka.3 The heroine must be a divine lady. The sentiment :- Bharata says that the sentiments of the Vyāyoga ( to be described later on ) must be depicted here.4 According to Dhanañjaya the Śrngārābhāsa (the semblance of the erotic sentiment) must be suggested in slight touches on the part of the Pratināyaka trying to abduct the heroine5- which view Viśvanātha also advocates.6 āradātanaya and Śinga Bhūpāla prescribe the exclusion of the Bhayā- naka and the Bībhatsa7 whereas in the N. D. the inclusion of the Śrngārābhāsa and the depiction of the Vira, the Raudra etc. have been enjoined.8 As the hero gets the heroine the Śrngāra Rasa should be the principal sentiment. Third Group :- (1) Bhāna. The Plot :- The plot consists of the experiences of the hero himself or of other person. The device, Akāśabhāșita (in the air ).

1. B. P. Line 12 p. 253. 2. R. S. III. 286. 3. S. D. VI. 248. 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 85-86. 5. D. R. III. 74. 6. S. D. VI. 247. 7. B. P. Line 15 pp. 253 ; R. S. III. 287. 8. N. D. 92. p. 132 (com.).

187

of which Bharata gives the description only, is to be used. There is to be only one act dealing with all the incidents.1 Other dramaturgists say that the plot can be invented also. The subject-matter is to be arranged into two Sandhis, the Mukha and the Nirvahana, and the Läsya in its ten sub- divisions is to have full scope here.2 One view holds that there should be one act, for the action must last only for one day.3 The hero :- According to all the dramaturgists the hero is to be the Vita. One dramaturigst, however, says that the Vita or the Dhūrta (a clever man ) can be the hero.4 The sentiment :- Bharata makes no mention of any Rasa but all the other dramaturgists advocate the Vīra and the Śrngāra as the principal sentiments. The B. P., however, records the view of Bhoja and others which prescribes the Śrngāra as the principal sentiment.s The Häsya can also be depicted but as subsidiary.6 (2) Vīthī. The plot :- The plot is to be arranged into one act according to all dramaturgists. Authorities other than Bharata say that

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 112-114. 2. D. R. III. 51 ; B. P. Lines 12 p. 245; R. S. III. 233 & 236 ; S. D. VI. 230. 3. N. D. p. 127. (Com. Tathā Mukha-nirvahaņasandhisampūrņa Ekāhanivartanīyatvādekānkaḥ). 4. N. D. 82. p. 127. 5. B. P. Line 5. p. 245. 6. N. D. p. 127 (Com. Śrngārāngatvāt Hāsyopyatrāngatayā Varņanīyaḥ)

188

the Mukha and the Pratimukha Sandhis should be observed and that its thirteen parts must also be shown. For the observance of the ten Lāsyāngas Sāradātanaya quotes the opinion of Kohala-which also regards these as optional.1 The opinion is accepted by Śinga Bhūpāla also.2 Viśva- nātha says that Ākāśabhāșita should be used.3 The hero :- Bharata accepts the introduction of the three Prakrtis ( characters ): Uttamā (high ), Madhyā ( middle ) and Adhamā (low), but says that the characters may be one or two.4 Viśvanātha allows only one character of any one of the three Prakrtis.5 Śinga Bhūpāla allows the courtezan or other's wife as the affectionate heroine and says that the mistress of the family ( Kulapālikā) must never figure here.6

The sentiment :- Bharata enjoins all Rasas which Rāmachandra and Gunachandra also accept.7 Dhanañjaya, Śāradātanaya and Viśvanātha accept the Śrngāra as the principal sentiment; other sentiments, they say, are only to be touched upon.8 Śāradātanaya, however, quotes Bhoja who advocates the Śngāra as the principal sentiment.9

1. B. P. Line 6. p. 251. 2. R. S. III. 266. 3. S. D. VI. 253. 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 116. 5. S. D. VI. 253 (with com.). 6. R. S. III. 267. 7. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 117 ; N. D. 93. p. 132. 8. D. R. III. 69 ; B. P. Line 3. p. 251; S. D. VI. 254. 9. B. P. Line 7. p. 251.

189

(3) Prahasana. The plot :- The plot is divided into kinds according as it deals with the incidents of the lives of different persons. Bharata and Rämachandra and Gunachandra divide it into two kinds : Śuddha ( pure ) and Sankīrņa (mixed). The first contains the humorous speeches of the rich, the hermit, the Vipra etc. It should have no Prakrit language. The second has hetaerae, servants, eunuchs, parasites, cunning persons etc.1 Dhanañjaya says that it must have plot, Sandhis, their divisions, the Lasya etc. as in the Bhāna, but he divides it into three kinds : Śuddha (pure ), Vikrta ( deviated ) and Sankīrna (mixed ). The first is the same as in Bharata. The Sankīrna kind of Bharata seems to have been divided into two kinds : Vikrta and Sankīrņa by Dhanañjaya. The Vikrta has characters as eunuchs, ser- vants etc. and the Sankīrna has mixture with the parts of the Vīthī.2 Śāradātanaya follows Dhanañjaya in toto.3 Śinga Bhūpāla also follows him with two exceptions; firstly, that he enumerates and defines its kinds in an other way and secondly, he enumerates its ten elementary parts(Angas) not given by others.4 The hero :-- The heroes are devotees, hermits, Vipras, Vitas, he- taerae, eunuchs, parasites, servants and all other low characters who can be objects of ridicule and laughter.

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 106-109 ; N. D. 83-85. p. 128. 2. D. R. II. 54-56 (with com.). 3. B. P. Lines 1-12. p. 247. 4. R. S. III. 268-270.

190

The sentiment :- Bharata makes no mention of any particular Rasa. Others, however, prescribe the Hasya as the principal sentiment. (4) Aka or Utsrstikānka. The plot :- Bharata says that the plot here may be famous or other- wise, though seldom.1 Dhanañjaya says that it must be famous, but its details may be arranged by the author with the help of his own intellect. Viśvanātha agrees with him.2 Śāradātanaya and Śinga Bhūpāla say that it may be famous or invented.3 Ramächandra and Gunachandra, how- ever, advocate that it must deal with subject-matter based on the famous war.4 Dhanañjaya, Rāmachandra and Gunachandra and Viśvanātha say that it must have act, Sandhis etc. as in the Bhāna.5 Sāradātanaya records that according to Bharata there must be one act, according to Kohala two and according to Vyāsāñjaneya three and the Sankīrna Viskambhaka and Praveśaka must be intro- duced.6 He also records that death may be represented if revival is to be shown.7 In all these respects Singa Bhūpāla follows him with, however, certain exceptions. While enumerating the acts as one, two or three he does not quote any authorities, he does not call the Viskambhaka

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 98. 2. D. R. III. 70 ; S. D. VI. 251. 3. B. P. Lines 11-12. p. 251 ; R. S. III. 224. 4. N. D. 88. p. 130. 5. D. R. III. 71 ; N. D. 88. p. 130 ; S. D. VI. 252. 6. B. P. Lines 19-22. p. 251. 7. Ibid. Line 5. p. 252.

191

the Sankīrna and he adds one more condition for represen- ting death. He says that death may be represented if the result to be achieved is to be more delightful and heart- ravishing than the revival.1 Sāradātanaya further records that there should be the Mukha and the Nirvahana Sandhis according to Kohala or the Sandhis may be as in the Dima or the Ihämrga.2 According to all authorities wailings of ladies are to be amply shown. The hero :-- The heroes are to be ordinary people and not divine beings in the opinion of all dramaturgists. The sentiment :-- All the dramaturgists prescribe the Karuna as the princi- pal sentiment. Sāradātanaya also advocates bright patches of the Bhyānaka at some places in the canvas.3 (5) Vyāyoga. The plot :-- The plot is to be of the famous (khyāta) kind. All dramaturgists except Bharata ( who mentions only fight ) say that the battle should not be caused by a woman. That the subject-matter should consist of the incidents of one day is also the view of nearly all dramaturgists except Viśvanātha who is silent on the point. The two Sandhis, the Garbha and the Vimarsa, should not be observed. Bharata, however, mentions no opinion of his own on the point. The rest of the Sandhis should be fully observed

1. R. S. III. 226-227. 2. B. P. Lines 23-24. p. 151. 3. Ibid. Line 18. p. 251.

192

and according to all authorities in only one act. Śinga Bhūpāla says that there should be Praveśaka and Chūlikā also in this type.1 The hero :-- The hero is to be a famous personage. The divine hero should not figure according to Bharata, Dhanañjaya and Rāmachandra and Gunachandra2 while Śāradātanaya and Viśvanātha say that he can be a divine hero.3 He should be a king of good family. Dhanañjaya and Viśvanātha say that the hero should be Uddhata4 whereas Śāradātanaya says that he should be Udatta.5 Ramachandra and Guna- chandra say that this type should be devoid of heroine.6 Śāradātanaya fixes the number of heroes as three, four, five but not more than ten.7 Singa Bhūpāla says that the hero must be one and that too helpless and there should figure less than ten Pratināyakas.8 The sentiment :-- Bharata, Dhanañjaya, Śāradātanaya and Rāmachandra and Gunachandra say that Rasas depicted here should be the Dipta Rasas, that is, the Vira, the Raudra, the Bībhatsa, the Adbhuta, the Karuna and the Bhayānaka.9 Sāradā-

1. R. S. III. 231. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 96 ; D. R. III. 60 ; N. D. 75. p. 123. 3. B. P. Line 8. p. 248 ; S. D. VI. 233 4. D. R. III. 60 ; S. D. VI. 233. 5. B. P. Line 8. p. 248. 6. N. D. 75. p. 123. 7. B. P. Line 9. p. 248. 8. R. S. III. 229. 9. N.S.(K.S. S.) XX. 97 ;D. R. III. 61 ; B. P. Line 14. p. 248 ; N. D. 75. p. 123.

193 tanaya recommends a little touch of the Śrngāra also.1 Viśvanātha excludes the Śrngāra, the Hāsya and the Śānta Rasas from being principal sentiments.2 Śinga Bhupala says that it should be devoid of the Hasya and the Śrngāra. He gives the Raudra as principal.3 One work on dramaturgy enumerates the Uparūpakas along with the Rūpakas under the generic name, the Nātaka, without drawing a line of demarcation between the two.4 Other does practically the same but at the end of the enu- meration explicitly says that the first ten types are based on Rasa and the remaining twenty on the Bhäva; the Up- arūpakas are often called the Rūpakas because they can be represented and seen.5 The ten Rūpakas, therefore, were based on Rasa though the Uparūpakas also to a certain extent depicted it. The predominance in the Uparūpakas was of the Bhäva and according to the dictum : Prādhān- yena Vyapadeśāh Bhavanti (an object is named after the most predominant factor in it), they were called the Uparū- pakas. Because of their being based on the Bhāva no consideration is opportune as well as relevant here, hence they have been left out. The ten Rūpakas have their basis in Rasa which, therefore, requires now comprehensive consideration.

1. B. P.Line 14. p. 248. 2. S. D. VI. 233. 3. R. S. II. 230. 4. A. P. 337. 1-4. 5. B. P. Lines 4-12. p. 221. 13

PART TWO-RASA

CHAPTER FOUR

CONCEPT OF RASA-ITS EVOLUTION AND DEVELOPMENT. Rasa in the field of Sanskrit learning has a very wide scope. Various are its connotations in different sciences. No science, practically speaking, seems to do without it. The sense, therefore, attached to it in each differs according to the context. The precedence in point of consideration, however, goes to the most ancient scriptures, the Vedas, which are the earliest literary monuments of Indian culture. They are the quarries to which every precious gem in learning is, or is tried to be, traced. This fact accounts for the attempts of some rhetoricians to discover the concept of Rasa adum- brated in the Upanisads, the concluding portions of the Vedas. In the Rg Veda the word, Rasa, is found occurring in the senses of water,1 Soma juice,2 cow's milk,3 and flavour.4 The Atharva Veda extends the sense to the sap of grain5 and the taste,6 the latter becoming very common. In the Upanişads Rasa stands for essence or quintessence7 and self-luminous consciousness8 though the sense of taste9 is at places conveyed. In Sanskrit other than the Vedic the word, Rasa, is used for water, milk, juice, essence, tasteful liquid etc. The

1. III. 48. 1 .; X. 9.2. 2. IX. 63. 13 .; VIII. 3. 20 .; IX. 65.15. 3. I. 37. 5 .; VIII. 72. 13. 4. V. 44. 13 .; VI. 44. 21. 5. II. 26. 5. 6. III. 13. 15 .; VIII. 4. 10. 7. Br. Up. I. 3. 19 .; Ch. Up. I. 1. 2 & III. 5. 4. 8. T. Up. II. 7. 1. 9. Br. Up. III. 2. 4 .; Kațha Up. IV. 3.

198

Āyurvedic science recognizes the six rasas, which, how- ever, are the props to support its whole superstructure. The Rasāyanaśāstra (Chemistry) moves round the pivot of rasa. Mercury, which is called rasa, plays here a very important part. In the above two contexts rasa denotes mostly some concrete objects as liquids etc. and thus remains on a physical plane. The knowledge of rasa and the con- crete objects denoted by it in the Indian medical system do cater to the weal, welfare and happiness of the living organism, yet human beings feel highly delighted with the abstract pleasure which is superphysical. In the Śaiva Darśana Mercury (Pārada) is also called the semen of Lord Siva;1 though physical yet it raises here in a way rasa from the physical to the super-physical plane, as it gets connected as the vital element with Siva. According to this Darsana this very rasa (mercury) in the T. Up. is called the Ultimate Reality on the attainment of which one be- comes all bliss.2 In the world, however, it is equated in a sense akin to the above with the aesthetic pleasure which is the life of literature. It retains its superphysical plane at this level also. The aesthetic pleasure is experienced at the recital of a literary work, prose or poetry, or at the re- presentation of a dramatic work. The manifestation of this delightful experience, on the practical side, is seen either in sudden activities and movements, rapt attention etc. of the readers and the spectators during the recital and the representation, or in the verbal expressions and statemcnts made at their completion. Rasa in the above context plainly stands for delightful and pleasurable experience relating to emotions which were as true, powerful and

1. S. D. S. p. 204. 2. B. B. D. p. 573.

199

vehement before as they are now or as they will ever re- main. Consequently any concept evolved on them as the basis will safely and unscathingly bear the verdict of time, if not in nomenclature, then assuredly in contents. The Sanskrit poeticians, rhetoricians and dramaturgists fully realized this latter aspect of Rasa in their works. Rājaśekhara mentions one Nandikeśvara1 to whom the Science of Rasa was entrusted, and Keśava Miśra whose views will receive due consideration also quotes the view of one Sūtrakāra Bhagavān Sauddhodani who formulated for the first time that Rasa is the essence of poetry;2 but no regular works by the above two authorities are yet availa- ble. Bharata, therefore, stands as the first authority in this Science as it is from him apparently that all later schools and theories sprang.3 He, no doubt, records the views of different authorities but only in fragments. These authori- ties naturally preceded him but in the absence of any work by them, they do not demand attention and cannot receive priority in matter of importance to Bharata who gives his view in the N. S., wherein he says that the Kāvya is that composition which requires a harmonious combination of sense and action (Arthakriyāpeksam Kāvyam).4 He is, thus, mainly concerned with dramaturgy. Bharata enu- merates the items5 that he has considered in his compendium in connection with Sanskrit drama. This he does in the beginning of the sixth chapter, the first five chapters being; devoted to the consideration of the theatre, preliminaries

1. K. M. p. 1. 2. A. S. p. 2. 3. S. A. .S. J. p. 208. 4. N. S. (N. S.) XVI. 83. 5. N. S. (K. S. S. ) VI. 10.

200

etc. He, then, points out the foremost importance of Rasa and gives the famous formula1 which educed different interpretations from authorities in different fields. He, however, gave his opinion not in the regular form. It has, therefore, to be worked out from the statements made here and there. He has defined the terms, the Bhava, the Vibhava, the Anubhāva, the Vyabhichāribhāva, the Sāttvikabhāva and the Sthäyibhäva in the seventh chapter and has men- tioned in the sixth chapter that the sympathetic and res- ponsive spectator at a dramatic representation enjoys the Sthayibhava evoked and consummated as Rasa. The analogy afforded is that of the pleasure experienced mentally by the person after having tasted food dressed with spices etc.2 In the seventh chapter he points out the importance of the Sthāyibhäva as he says that like the king the Sthayibhava gets the name of Rasa;3 and further that it is the Sthāyibhäva which matures into Rasa.4 Briefly speaking, the view of Bharata can be stated thus. Through several operations and then a harmonious blending of appropriate Vibhāvas, Anubhāvas, Vyabhichāribhāvas and Sāttvikabhāvas when represented on the boards by skilful and expert actors, the latent Sthāyibhava in the spectator is aroused and consummated into a relishable condition. This is Rasa, the aesthetic pleasure enjoyed by the spectator. It has, however, to be noted here that this Rasa theory arose in the school of dramaturgy because Bharata's N. S. as its very name implies is a treatise on Sanskrit dramaturgy.

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. p. 71. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid. VII. p. 81. 4. Ibid. VII. p. 120.

201

Rasa, therefore, was considered as an ancillary though the predominating one. It depended upon the dramatic re- presentation only for its consummation. But it seems it had become such an established fact and had gathered so much importance that even other schools which were busy in emphasizing other poetic elements had to give some con- sideration to it. Bhämaha is the next writer, who comes before, for consideration after Bharata .. He belonged to the Alankāra school in Sanskrit poetics. He was not the originator of the school, as he mentions others in the field,1 but only its ardent advocate. As an exponent of a rival school his attitude was bound to be not only unfavourable but dis- tinctly hostile. He advocated the view that Alankāras only are essential for the best form of poetry and gave prominence to the underlying principle of Atiśayokti or Vakrokti.2 As a necessary corollary Rasa was given no importance in Kāvyas other than dramas. It was included in an ordinary Alankāra as the Rasavat.3 Two others, the Preyas (spiritual love)4 and the Ūrjasvin (consciousness of superior might)5 were added to the list. He had knowledge of all Rasas6 as also of their delectable nature7; but as his aim was to emphasize the predominance of Alankāras he gave subordinate treatment to Rasa taking it something insignificant. In his opinion Rasa need not be invariably present in poetry ; it may sometimes be delineated in Vakrokti. He enjoins that all Rasas should find place in

1. K. L. I. 31, II. 37, III. 12, IV. 12, V. 69. 2. Ibid. II. 84-85. 3. Ibid. III. 6. 4. Ibid. III. 5. 5. Ibid. III. 7. 6. Ibid. I. 21. 7. Ibid. V. 3.

202

the Mahakavya1 and says that the Kavya Rasa removes the bitterness of the Sästra.2 The latter statement perhaps gave an idea to writers later on to call the Kāvya jāyā, or kāntā- sammita. Abhinava tries to interpret Bhāmaha's Vakrokti on the basis of the word, Vibhāvyate, as rendering poetry into a suitable factor of Rasa and thus establishes Rasa as an equally important factor with the Alankāras, but this reflects only scholarly effort, for the technical terms as Vibhāvas etc. are not used by Bhāmaha.3 He was so much prejudiced against Rasa that he hastily disposed of even the Nāțaka4 ( a term which he seems to use as a generic one for the Rūpaka and the Uparūpka as well). Dandin's attitude towards Rasa is not so hostile as his predecessor's. He attached importance to the collocation of words harmonized with agreeable sense as the chief characteristic feature of poetry,5 and recognized the Alan- kāras as elements which beautify it.6 He emphasized the qualities ( Gunas ) on the presence of which depended the excellence of the arrangement. He, therfore, belonged to the Guna school of poetry and not to the Alankara school. His affinities with Bhamaha appear in this that he brought Rasas under the Alankaras: the Rasavad, the Preyas and the Ürjasvin.7 But he has admitted the importance of Rasa in poetry and has asserted in the description of the quality called the Mädhurya that Rasa makes a sentence or a statement delectable,8 though De shows that the word Rasa here 'has a distinct technical connotation different from that imparted

1. Ibid. I. 21. 2. Ibid. V. 3. 3. D. L. p. 467 (with com.) 4. K. L. I. 24. 5. K. D. I. 10. 6. Ibid. II. 1. 7. K. D. II. 275. 8. Ibid. I. 51.

203

to it by the exponents of the Rasa school.'1 While describing the above three Alankaras he has fully expounded the most striking characteristic of each of the eight Rasas, illustrating; them in beautiful verses.2 He was also conversant with the: process of the realization of Rasa.3 His Preyas Alankāra is like that of Bhämaha consisting in the affection of the object of love.4 In the case of affection towards the woman it is called the Śrngāra.5 He betrays his knowledge of distinction between Rasa and the Bhāva (Sthāyibhāva).6 According to Abhinava Dandin's conception of Rasa is similar to Bhatța Lollata's which is objective. Rasa is developed as an effect from Vibhavas and Anubhāvas. The Śrngāra and the Raudra are illustrated as instances.7 But he (Dandin) recognized Rasa only as an Alankāra, thus, only as subordinate to the latter. Dandin, thus, knew Rasa in most of its details, maybe due to either the recognition of the importance of Rasa in a literary piece or his partiality for Rasa as a delectable feature thereof, but as he was the avowed champion of the Guna school, the utmost that he could do for Rasa was to assign it an appeal through the quality ( Guna).8 He enjoins that a Mahākāvya should be pervaded all through with poetic sentiments ( Rasas ) and emotions (Bhvas ).9 He, however, treated them as only objectively present in the literary composition. Udbhata's favourable attitude towards Rasa becomes more pronounced . He had affinities with the Alankara school

1. S. A. S. J. p. 212. 2. K. D. II. 275-292. 3. Ibid. II. 281 and 283. 4. Ibid. II. 275. 5. Ibid. II. 281. 6. Ibid. II. 281 and 283. 7. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 274. (com.) 8. K. D. II. 292. 9. Ibid. I. 18.

204

of Bhämaha as he mentions with illustrations like him the three Alankāras: the Preyas, the Rasavad and the Ūrjasvin, but a difference creeps in when he defines them. The first Alankāra, that is the Preyas, is the development of emotions like love through the manifestation of Anubhāva etc. to the extent of Bhava only and not to the fully matured stage of Rasa.1 The second Alankāra, the Rasavad, depicts the fully developed stages of the different Rasas through the express reference, the Sthāyibhāva, the Sañchāribhāva, the Vibhava and the Abhinaya.2 The first means, that is, the express reference, has not received general approval later on; on the contrary it has been severely criticized. Here the fact worth notice is the mention of the Santa Rasa along with the eight orthodox Rasas as fit to be represented in the drama.3 Udbhata could not check himself from expressing his leanings towards the Rasa school as expounded by Bharata in the N. S. The third Alankāra, the Urjasvin, concerns itself with the depiction of the Sthāyibhāvas and Rasas which are either incongruous or misplaced.4 It is just like the conception of the Rasābhāsa or the Bhāvā- bhasa developed later on. Udbhata adds a fourth Alankāra called the Samähita. It presents the suppression of Rasa or the Bhava, the Rasābhāsa or the Bhāvābhāsa and is devoid of the Anubhavas etc. of another Rasa.5 The gist is expressed by Pratihārendurāja in the words that every Rasa, every Bhāva or their incongruous or misplaced forms or any other Rasa etc. (if depicted at all) are suppressed in this Alankāra.6 De says that Udbhata 'apparently designates

1. K. S. IV. 2. 2. Ibid. IV. 3. 3. Ibid. IV. 4. 4. Ibid. IV. 5. 5. Ibid. IV. 7. 6. Ibid. IV. 7 (com. on the verse)

205

Rasa as the " soul " of poetry, without, however, setting up an aesthetic system on its basis.' The verse providing the basis for the above remark occurs in one edition whereas in the Nirnaya Sägara edition it is wanting. De, however, doubts the validity and the authenticity of the verse and disposes of the question very lightly.1 Udbhata, no doubt, shows in a way his acquaintance with the Rasa theory in that he uses terms as Vibhāva, Sthāyibhāva etc., but all this consideration is simply to constitute the charm of the particular poetic figure. Udbhata, therefore, appears as much a representative of Rasa school as that of the Alankāra even though he names his work as the Kāvyālankārasā- rasangraha, a treatise meant to contain the collection of the essence of the Alankāras in the Kāvya. He knew the process of the realization as he has distinguished the immature stage, Bhäva, from the mature stage, Rasa, of the Sthāyi- bhäva. He, however, describes them objectively in con- nection with literary composition. Vāmana, the next writer, belongs to the Rīti school in Sanskrit poetics as he holds the Rīti as the soul of poetry.2 His immediate predecessors had all recognized Rasa as a very insignificant factor and brought it under Alankāras. Vāmana, however, broke with them in that he included it in one of the qualities ( Gunas ) which he considered as the essential elements of poetry, whereas he recognized the Alankāras as mere ornaments.3 He said that in the quality called the Känti all Rasas were brilliant. He illustrated it with reference to the Srngara Rasa.4 It occurred to him to include Rasa in one of the qualities from a consideration,

1. S. A. S. J. p. 214. 2. K. L. S. I. 2.6. 3. Ibid. I.I.1-2. 4. Ibid. III. 2.15.

206

probably, of Bharata's definition of the Udāra Guna.1 He thus advanced Rasa one stage further but yet due importance was not given to it. He, however, asserted the drama as the best form of poetry2 and, thus, indirectly paid tribute to Rasa as it could be best developed in dramas only. Rudrata gave prominence to Rasa in literary composi- tions other than dramas. The poet attains fame by writing a work full of sentiments,3 with a great effort literary works other than dramas should be composed teeming with senti- ments4-such are his statements which express his attitude towards Rasa. The status, therefore, formerly given to Rasa either in the Alankāra or in the Guna school was raised higher ; it was recognized as an independent entity. He has recognized nine Rasas and has added a tenth, the Preyān,5 to the list. His definition of the Preyan corresponds partially to that of Bhäva (immature stage of Rasa) de- veloped later. It is the affection existing between two friends.6 He gave the status of Rasa to the Vyabhichāri- bhävas as Nirveda etc. when they developed into particular Rasas.7 He shows his mature knowledge of Rasa in that he classifies the Vira into three kinds : the Yuddhavira, the Dharmavīra and the Dānavīra.8 He asserts the Srngāra as the main sentiment.9 He considers Rasa both objectively and subjectively, objectively in that the literary composition other than the drama must be teeming with Rasa, and subjectively in this that when full of Rasa it gives knowledge of the four Vargas to the persons fond of Rasa, devoid of which it

1. N. S. (N. S. ) XVI. 102. 2. K. L. S. I. 3.30. 3. R. K. L. I. 4. 4. Ibid. XII. 2. 5. Ibid. XII. 3. 6. Ibid. XV. 17-19. 7. Ibid. XII. 4. 8. R. K. L. XV. 1. 9. Ibid. XIV. 38.

207

is just like the Śāstra.1 He describes the Rasābhāsa etc.2 and prescribes Rītis for various Rasas.3 Rudrata, there- fore, represents Rasa in a much advanced stage when it came to be recognized as an important element in the literary composition other than the drama. But he names his book as the Kāvyālankāra, a treatise dealing with poetic figures. Rudrata, therefore, had his affinities with the Alankāra school. Moreover, the fact that he did not precisely indicate the position of Rasa in poetry points the same way. His commentator Nami Sādhu, however, while explaining XII. 2 says in connection with the position of Rasa that Rasa is like natural attributes as beauty etc. ( Rasās Tu Saundaryādaya Iva Sahajā Gunāh). The testimony to the above presump- tion is borne by Ruyyaka who says that Rudrata emphasized the Alankāra. The three kinds of suggestion ( Pratīya- mäna ) including the Rasadhvani were comprised in the Alankāra. In figures like Rasavat Rasa, the Bhāva etc. enhanced the charm of the Vächya ( the expressed idea ).4 Rudrabhatta held the same views, practically speaking, as Rudrata. These two authors are generally identified as one as Pischel, Buhler etc. have done. De, however, on very cogent and reasonable arguments in his 'Sanskrit Poetics Vol. I' has proved that the two authors are different personalities ; therefore no confusion in this connection should prevail. Rudrata is, thus, a different writer from Rudrabhatta. The latter deserves distinction in as much as the keynote of his work is the idea of Rasa. His work is an attempt to prove the development of Rasa in poems

1. Ibid. XII. 1. 2. Ibid. XIV. 36. 3. Ibid. XIV. 37. 4. R. A. S. pp. 5-6.

208

other than dramas.1 He asserts that the vital element in literary composition is Rasa in the absence of which it is as uninteresting and dreary as the night without the moon.2 He also calls the Kävya defective when it is Virasa, Du- sandhānarasa and Nīrasa.3 He defines and illustrates nine Rasas with their constituents as Vibhāvas etc. in several beautiful stanzas. Special treatment is accorded to the Śrngāra Rasa after which the book is named. He calls the Śrngāra the leading Rasa (Nāyako Rasaḥ ).4 This fact explains the importance which Rasa gradually attained at the hands of the scholars after Bharata. The Agnipurana which comes next for consideration is a compilation of so many items from various sources. Though it enumerates constituents as Alankāras, Rīti, Rasa etc. yet emphasis is laid on Rasa.5 It is a treatise dealing with literary works, both dramas and others, hence Rasa is predominant in both. The origin of Rasa is recorded in it in a peculiar way. The ultimate reality, Brahman, is in- destructible, it is eternal and without any origin and all pervasive. In the Vedanta it is called the one without the second, consciousness, effulgence and lord. Bliss is in- herent in it and it is sometimes apprehended by suggestion. That manifestation is called Rasa of the nature of wonder of (at the apprehension of transcendental) consciousness. Its first transformation is called Ahankāra (self-consciousness ) out of which comes Abhimana( conceit). Out of the latter comes Rati (pleasure ) which nourished by the Vyabhichārins etc. is called the Srngara. It then describes that Rati

1. S. T. I. 5. 2. Ibid. I. 6. 3. Ibid. III. 46. 4. Ibid. I. 20. 5. A. P. 336. 33.

209 (pleasure ) is transfomed into other Rasas as the Hāsya etc.1 It recognizes nine Rasas2 but gives prominence to the Srngāra Rasa. The Bhävas are fully described and knowledge of the process of the Sthāyibhāva maturing into Rasa is also hinted at.3 Special predilection, thus, for Rasa becomes quite obvious but 'the Agnipurana cannot be relegated entirely to the Rasa school; for it does not make any attempt to correlate with this central principle the other factors of poetry, viz. rīti, guņa, alamkāra, which are also recognised as of great, if not of equal, importance. '4 Ānandavardhana, the author of the Dhvanāylokakārikās and the Vrtti thereon,5 became famous as the greatest ex- ponent of the Dhvani school which according to his own admission had its origin centuries before him.6 The theory of Dhvani was based on the Sphotavāda of grammarians who hold that the Sphota is the permanent capacity of words to signify their imports and is manifested by the experience of the last sound of a word combined with the impressions of the experiences of the previous ones. The formulation of the doctrine of Sphota was made in order to determine the significative seat of a word and the Ālankārikas concerned themselves first with this grammatico-philosophical problem about the relation of a word to its connotation in order to get support, strong and confirmatory, for their theory. According to this school the best poetry is not only that which suggests Rasa but also others, such as, the statement of some fact or imaginative element and poetic figures. This redounds to

1. Ibid. 338. 1-5. 2. Ibid. 338. 8-9. 3. Ibid. 338. 4. 4. D. S. P. Vol. II. pp. 256-257. 5. S. A. L. C. pp. 50-60. 6. D. L. I. 1. 14

210

the credit of this school as it enunciated a definition of poetry which was much more comprehensive than that of the Rasa school. But even then Rasa held the predominant position, considered and declared as it was the soul of poetry.1 Unlike previous writers who allowed Rasa to come in only through the back door, Rasa became the principal and the unifying factor. The Gunas, the Alankāras and the Rītis which were severally established as the life of poetic compositions by preceding writers, who had scarcely troubled themselves with, or were highly prejudiced against, working out and establishing Rasa as the ulterior aesthetic principle, had to do service to Rasa.2 They were all harnessed to beautify the soul, Rasa, and it was enjoined that the poet should be very careful in the Rasadhvani as objects already seen when touched with Rasa appear quite new as the trees in the month of Chaitra.3 The Alankāras and the Gunas are dependent entities and, therefore, adorn the principal element which is Rasa. As Dhvani had a much wider scope, there naturally came in some points of difference between Bharata and Ānanda in the process of the realization of Rasa. According to the former the factors as Vibhävas etc. whether expressed or suggested by words created pleasure in the minds of spectators whereas the latter attributed the pleasure in the minds of the readers or the spectators to the suggestion of words. More- over, the function of poetry was to suggest Rasas or Alan- kāras or Vastus as applied to both poems and dramas according to Ananda whereas Bharata called the best poetry that which suggested Rasa only through the representation of Vibhāvas etc., but in spite of this difference Ananda put a special

1. D. L. I. 5. (Vrtti) 2. Ibid. II. 6 and III. 6. . 3. Ibid. IV. 4.

211

premium over Rasa as has already been said. He recognized both the aspects, objective ( as residing in the Kāvya) and subjective (as enjoyed in themselves by Sahrdayas )1, of Rasa. His preference to Rasadhvani is confirmed by his recognizing the Santa Rasa as the pr ncipal one in the Mahābhārata.2 He also recognized the Rasābhāsa, the Bhāvā bhāsa, their Praśama etc.3, topics connected with Rasa. Rasa, though accepted as the soul of a literary piece, was put on a par with the statement of fact or poetic figure- all the three suggested by words and comprised under the Dhvani. This was not liked by certain critics who became famous as the opponents of the Dhvani doctrine. Pratihā- rendurāja said in his com., the Laghuvrtti, to the Kāvyā- lankärasārasangraha, that the three kinds of the suggested sense could very well be brought under the head of Alankāras like Paryāyokta, Śleșa, Rasavad etc.4 But he accepted Rasa as the soul of poetry. He clears up Udbhata's position in this respect . He says , 'As to what is said before (in this work) that rasas constitute alankāras, such as aa etc., it is said in a condition when this discrimination about the real nature of T s was not meant (by the author).'5 BhattaNāyaka was another writer who opposed the Dhvani theory. He was a staunch follower of Rasa as his view quoted by Abhinava in his com. to the N. S. makes it evident. He gave no recognition to the Vyañjanā Vrtti. Instead, he said that the words in the Kävya were endowed with three functions : Abhidhā, Bhāvakatva, and Bhoja- katva. Through the above three functions the aesthetic

1. D. L. I. 7. 2. Ibid. IV pp. 529 & following. 3. Ibid. II. 3. 4. K. S. VI. 8. (Laghuvrtti) 5. Ibid. VI. 7. (Laghuvttti) & p. 155 (Notes)

212

pleasure is enjoyed mentally by the readers or the spectators. His detailed view on the Rasasutra of Bharata will be taken up later on. Dhanañjaya and Dhanika were some other opponents of the Dhvani theory. The treatise, the Daśarūpaka, and its com., Avaloka, deal with ten types of drama and make them dependent on Rasa.1 This makes clear their attitude which is akin to BhattaNāyaka's. Dhanañjaya includes the Vyañjana Vrtti in the Tātparya Sakti (intention of the speaker). When a word is uttered by the speaker, it is not only understood by the hearer but it also actuates him to work. In the same way the desire or the Tätparya of the poet makes the reader or the spectator understand the Vibhava etc. from poetry as also act accordingly. The resulting activity is the enjoyment of the aesthetic pleasure. Thus through this Tātparya Sakti poetry becomes Bhāvaka of the Rasasvada and the connection between the Kāvya and Rasa is Bhāvyabhāvakabhāva (cause and effect) and not Vyangyavyañjakabhāva (suggestor and the suggested) as maintained by the Dhvani school. It is not the Janyajanaka- bhava of the logicians as Rasas exist in the Sahrdayas' minds in the form of permanent moods, but according to the Sankhyas poetry manifests them in the form of Rasas.2 As Dhanañjaya was almost contemporaneous with Abhinava his theory of Rasa agrees with that of the latter, though the Vyañjanā Vrtti is not admitted by him. A permanent emotion matures into a relishable condition through the combined operation of the dependents, the excitants, the ensuants, the transitory emotions and the psychic conditions.

1. D. R. I. 7. 2. Ibid. IV. 37. (Avaloka Com.)

213 This is Rasa. The com. makes it clear that it is enjoyed by the reader or the spectator through reading or representa- tion. It is characterized by consciousness full of complete bliss experienced by Sāmājikas. A Kāvya is also called Rasavat, that is, full of sentiments.1 Dhanañjaya, thus, had knowledge of the process of the realization of Rasa as also of the objective and the subjective aspects of Rasa. The Tātparya Śakti made so capital of by him, however, asserted over Rasa also, for he not only did not recognize the Śānta Rasa but also refuted the arguments advanced by others in support of it, on the ground that no activity could take place in case of the Śänta Rasa, which meant a state of complete cessation of activities. He puts forward for consideration the Prīti, the Bhakti etc. as the Bhavas and the Mrgaya and the Aksa as ceratin Rasas but shows that they are included in the Harsa and the Utsaha; hence they cannot receive separate recognition.2 These opponents of the Dhvani school, however, dwindled into insignificance like pigmies before the towering and gigantic personality of Abhinava, a renowned philoso- pher noted as the great exponent of the Kāśmīrian philo- sophy of Saivism and a great poet and a recognized critic of extraordinary acumen and calibre. He championed the theories of Dhvani and Rasa so convincingly and successfully that he was admitted as one of the greatest authorities in poetics and dramaturgy. In his two commenaries, the Abhinavabharatī or Natyavedavivrti on Bharata's N. S. and the Lochana on the Dhvanyāloka, which are taken as masterpieces in themselves he has given his own interpreta- tion of the Rasasūtra of Bharata. Before Ananda and

1. Ibid. IV. 1. (Avaloka Com.) 2. D. R. IV. 83.

214

Abhinava Rasa was mainly a dramatic consideration as it was chiefly related to the dramatic art. The importance of Rasa as one of the essentials of poetry 'was probably for the first time ably set forth by the Kashmirian Anandavardhana in the ninth century, and subsequently elaborated with such mastery by his commentator Abhinavagupta that it became thenceforth an accepted fact in Sanskrit Poetics, never to be set aside by rival systems and improved only in detail by later speculations.'1 As preliminaries and as is the wont with Sanskrit theorists he has recorded his predecessors' interpretations also, important and significant as they are to indicate the gradual advance and improvement finally culminating in his (Abhinava's) view. They demand immediate attention here. These views are to be found in many authors as Hemachandra's Kāvyānuśāsana, Mammața's Kāvyaprakāśa etc. wherein some are to be seen quoted almost verbatim while others with slight modifications or even wholesale change in wordings. Abhinava gives the interpretation, of the Rasastra of Bharata, of Bhattalollața first ; he, therefore, may be the earliest to advance a theory of Rasa based on Bharata's famous but ambiguous Rasasūtra. The interpretation, as will be ere now evident, is crude and hardly convincing yet it is the pioneer work making way for others to go deeper and deeper into the problem and discover unexplored regions. Bhattalollata says that the Sthāyibhava is first generated by the Vibhavas etc. ; it is manifested by the Anubhāvas and is intensified by the Vyabhichāribhāvas. At this stage it becomes Rasa. It exists primarily in the original characters as Rama etc. and then in the actor also as he cleverly and

1. S. A. S. J. p. 207.

215 successfully imitates the original characters. As the actors are taken up for the original characters, the spectator is deluded into the belief that the actors possess their emotions also. This gives him pleasure. To sum up, the emotions (Sthāyi- bhāvas) were generated into the original characters ; they were then superimposed on the actors mistaken for the original characters. This superimposition is the cause of pleasure in the spectator. According to Bhattalollata the two terms, Nispatti and Samyoga, occurring in the original sütra of Bharata were thus connected with the Vibhāvas, the Anubhavas and the Vyabhichāribhavas. Both the above terms with reference to the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhicharibhavas meant generation, inference, and intensification respectively. In other words, the relations were Utpādya-utpādaka, Gamya-gamaka and Posya-poșaka respectively. This interpretation was called the Causation or Generation theory with respect to the generation of the Sthāyibhāvas in the original characters. It was also called the Superimposition theory as the knowledge of the original characters and their Sthāyibhavas are superimposed on the actors. The interpretation as given above is obviously open to criticism. Taken first as the Generation theory, it cannot stand the test. According to the doctrine of Causation the cause and the effect can never be perceived simultaneously. For example, the perception of the touch of the sandal wood and the resulting pleasure do not take place at the same moment, separated though they may be by an infinitesimal period of time. In case of Rasa, however, its relish is contemporaneous with the Vibhavas.1 Then again the 1. S. D. III. 21. (Com.)

216

effect exists even when its efficient cause is no more. But Rasa cannot exist at the disappearance of the Vibhāvas. Con- sidered as the Superimposition theory also it is hardly con- vincing. The original characters are first superimposed on the actors. How will it take place ? The spectators have never seen the original characters. If it is said that they have read about them in the books the objection will come in another form. The spectators have never experienced the emotions of the original characters and no superimposi- tion can take place with respect to them. If it is submitted in reply that they, too, have been described with regard to their Anubhävas etc. the objection still remains in the form of the indifference (Tätasthya) of the spectators as no body takes pleasure in other's emotions. Again the mere knowledge of superimposition never yields pleasure. In reply it may be said that the snake when superimposed on the rope causes fear in the beholder. It may be given as an answer here that it is not the knowledge of superimposi- tion but the belief of the existence of snake in the rope that causes fear. The counter reply may be given that it is the belief of original character in the actor that gives pleasure to the spectator. But the argument cannot stand. As such the belief should give greater pleasure when a pair of lovers are actually seen in the world carrying on amorous dalliances. This, however, is not the case as the beholders feel disgust with, and shun, such scenes. The theory of Superimposi- tion based on false knowledge defeats one great end of literature. The great end of all literature is instruction rendered sweet with pleasure. It should never achieve that end by imparting false knowledge.1 Both the theories taken

1. R. P. p. 21.

217

separately or even together cannot explain pleasure enjoyed by the spectators from the representation of pathetic scenes. According to the theories the emotion of pathos will first be created in the original character and then superimposed on the actor. When the belief is in the spectator that there is sorrow in the actor, that belief will make the spectator also sorrowful as the sorrow created in the original character has been transferred to the actor. But this is contrary to experience. No sorrow is felt by the spectators, the tears are of joy and not of sorrow. The experience of the specta- tors is the sole test and no repetition of sorrowful experience is ever liked.1 Considered again from the view-points of the original character, the actor and the spectator the interpretation of Bhattalollata is not found satisfactory. Firstly, it may be considered from the view-point of the original character. The emotion that was experienced by the original characters was their particular experience as limited to them. It could not have been experienced by others as their own. As it was experienced by the original characters at first hand, it was worldly also. Hence it is only the Bhäva and not on the same level with what is depicted in literary com- positions. And the Bhava that was enjoyed by them could not be available now as aeons have yawned between them and the spectators. Therefore Rasa could never be enjoyed if it belonged to the original characters.2 Secondly, it may be considered from the view-point of the actor. Rasa cannot be generated in the actors. If they really share the emotions they pretend as their own they cannot go on with acting. They are instructed in the art of acting which they master by 1. S. D. III. 4-5. 2. Ibid. III. 18.

218

practice.1 Moreover, the Vibhavas in the representation are not their Vibhavas in reality. Rasa, therefore, cannot be generated in the actors. Lastly, it may be considered from the view-point of the spectator. It may be said that Rasa is generated in the spectator at the time of representation. But the Vibhavas on the boards are not the Vibhävas of the spectator. Even if they may be allowed to serve so, for example, the lady on the boards may be taken not in her individual capacity, but in her general character as a lovely maiden, only a few cases can be explained. What when Sītā, the goddess, is the Vibhäva ? The spectator can consider himself Räma. A spectator will consider himself Rama with a great deal of audacity. If he does so at all, he will do so in cases where no grand achievement is expected of him. On considering the gigantic achievements of Rāma he will feel shrunken. If it is advanced here that he remem- bers his own sweetheart at the sight of Sītā in love scenes the question arises as to what will happen with regard to other scenes. It can be said that he remembers the original characters in love and because of this recollection he enjoys pleasure. But this stands rebutted as he has never actually seen or known them. Again on seeing the enactment of love scenes he enjoys pleasure, therefore in sorrowful scenes he must experience sorrow; but this is not the case. Further if love is generated at the enactment of a love scene, that love must persist after the performance is over. But no such persistence is ever heard of. Even if it is accepted as generated in him, he will feel ashamed and would have to check himself from expressing it. But the spectator has been seen to express the pleasure experienced at areresenta-

1. S. D. III. 19.

219

tion through physical movements or allied activities.1 Rasa, therefore, is not generated in the spectator. If it is accepted to generate in the original character, the spectator will not enjoy it as the cause is in the original character and the effect is presumed to take place in the spectators; the cause and the effect must exist at the same place. If it is believed to exist in the actor, then it will be vitiated with the defect of indifference ( Tätasthya ). The spectator, therefore, cannot in either case enjoy pleasure. Śrī Śankuka, who advances his own interpretation of Bharata's Rasasūtra, brings forward some other objections against Bhattalollata's interpretation. He levels his volley specially at the Sthayibhava. He says that as the original characters have not been seen, nor their Vibhāvas or Anubhavas from which their emotions could be inferred, no superimposition of the emotion can take place. Rasa can be enjoyed by only those who have the Sthāyibhāvas in them. If the original characters have Sthāyibhāvas gene- rated in them, they should enjoy Rasa. The spectator can never enjoy it. The smoke and the fire producing it must reside in the same place and not at two different places. The original characters and the actors are different from the spectators. Besides, if the mere knowledge of superimposi- tion of the Sthayibhavas leads to the enjoyment of pleasure, the mere knowledge of Rasas as the Śrngāra etc. consisting in the hearing of their names and understanding of their meanings should give pleasure. The mere name of the word, happiness, also should result in happiness. This, however, is not the case. Bharata never meant that Rasa was generated in the original character, otherwise he would 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXVII. 4-5.

220

have defined the emotion, the Vibhavas etc. first and then Rasa. The order, however, is reversed in the N. S. It can thereby be deduced that he maintained no distinction bet- ween Rasa and emotion (Sthayibhava) which when inferred was called Rasa. The absence of mention of the Sthāyibhava is thus justified. Then again Bhattalollata says that the emotion (Sthāyibhāva) intensified is Rasa. An implication coming out for notice here is that before intensification the emotion was unintensified ; but no such condition of the Sthāyibhāva has been predicated of in the original Sūtra. Then intensification has various degrees, consequently Rasa must have many degrees. The six divisions of the Hāsya Rasa and the ten stages of love will also have many degrees. If, on the other hand, it is submitted that it is only at a certain point of intensity that Rasa is realized, the above divisions of the Häsya and love will then not be possible. Hence under both the conditions intensification of the Sthāyibhāva into Rasa cannot be admitted. Even if it is admitted it will not cover all the cases. Some Sthāyibhāvas as the Soka, the Krodha and the Vismaya never admit of intensification in the beginning but die out gradually. So the Karuna, the Raudra and the Adbhuta Rasas can never be enjoyed according to Bhattalollata, if his intensification of the Sthāyibhāva is accepted. Śrī Śankuka then brings forward his own interpretation which he thinks fully convincing and satisfactory. When the skilful actor on the stage successfully represents through imitation the various emotions of the original character, it is by virtue of his superior imitative faculty that the difference between him and the original character is forgotten by the spectators. He is taken up for the hero on the analogy

221

by which a horse in a picture is called a horse, the Chitratura- ganyāya as it is denominated. This knowledge is different from (i) the true cognition, this is Rāma, as it does not imply the restrictive determination in either of the two ways, viz. the strict or undeniable attribution of a quality to an object, for example, this is Räma himself and none else ; or the exclusive predication of a quality to an object, as this and none else is Räma ; (ii) the false knowledge in that the knowledge of the spectators that 'the actor is Rama' is never cancelled ; (iii) the doubtful knowledge as no incompatible attributes in the actor are perceived at the time of representation to give rise to suspicion if he is Rāma or not ; and (iv) the knowledge of similarity as the spectators' cognition takes the form 'this is Rama', and not 'this is like Rāma.' The permanent emotion is then inferred to exist in the actor and a sort of identity with the emotions of the original character is established. The mood of the original character is inferred by the spectators through its exquisite beauty and it develops into a delectable condition of their mind which is called Rasa. This inferential knowledge thus leads him to ex- perience the emotion of the original character ; but it has to be remembered that this experience of emotion through very similar to, is but a semblance of, the original emotion in the actor. The use of the word, Rasanispatti, instead of the word, Sthayinispatti, testifies to the inferred emotions being only reflex ones. Śrī Śankuka little thought from beforehand that his interpretation was also open to objections. His opponents were fully prepared for it, awaiting only its publication. They made their target the inference itself. They say that the knowledge of inference as advocated here is an invalid

222

knowledge on the ground that it makes the spectator believe that the actor is Räma, the original character, whereas in reality he is not. The theorist may submit in reply that it is not, as afterwards it does not receive cancellation but the counter reply is that the definition of the invalid knowledge is fully applicable here, hence it is invalid. The theorist can hardly account for the attribution of real and personal pleasure to the spectator on the basis of this invalid cognition. He, however, refutes the above statement. He says that some- times even false knowledge leads to delight, as in the case of the lamp and the gem where the rays of the former only lead the spectator into delusion while those of the latter help him to discover the gem and thus lead to consequent delight. In the above arguments the theorist has taken for granted that it is false knowledge as he has tried to prove that even false knowledge sometimes gives pleasure. But this presumption is fatal to his theory. Here the mistaken knowledge of the rays as the gem itself did not give him the gem itself, on his approaching it, it is the real perception of the gem that led to its gain and the consequent delight over possession. The analogy, therefore, fails to explain the pleasure of the spectator on this false knowledge. That this knowledge is false is further supported by the opponents on the basis of the Vibhavas, the Anubhavas and the Vyabhi- chāribhāvas as unreal and artificial at the time of representa- tion. According to the theorist they are artificial as they are imitations of their originals in the original characters. But imitation can be resorted to only when the original is known. Has anybody a direct knowledge of the love of the hero ? How can, therefore, the hero be imitated with respect to his love ? The reflection of the original love might be

223

urged on the ground that as real Vibhavas lead to the inference of the real love, so their imitations might make one infer the existence of love in the actors. The reasoning is totally unwarranted as the imitation of the major term (Sādhya) can never be inferred from a semblance of Hetu (Hetvābhāsa). From a knowledge of mist which is similar to smoke one can never infer the bright red China roses which are similar to fire. The pretended pose of the actor also is not an imitation. Imitating an angry man does not mean imita- ting angry Bhīmasena. Bharata never meant by imitation mere machanical copying. His imitation always meant selection, rearrangement, regrouping of qualities etc. and then idealizing them into personages. Śri Śankuka, on the other hand, meant machanical imitation of one person by another. It is due to this conception that there is no justifica- tion for his use of the word, imitation. Again the actor has no experience about the original character or of his emotions ; how, therefore, can he imitate him ? Even if he be acquainted with the historical personages, what about the fictitious ones in works as the Prahasanas ? He may imitate some noble person in his different activities. The objection persists as the actor has no definite idea of that person also. The actor, therefore, only represents by virtue of his training, imagination and imaginative identification with the character, the Vibhavas etc. in their generic aspect ; and this is not imitation. The actor may look like the original character, but this is not imitation ; it is a case of similitude only. It is said that Bharata also emphasized imitation ; but there is a lot of difference between Bharata's conception of imitation and Śrī Śankuka's conception of imitation. Moreover, the artificial Vibhāvas etc. cannot

224

give rise to inference. The answer, however, comes that the spectator does not know them to be such and, therefore, inference becomes possible as the mistaken knowledge of a cloud of dust for a column of smoke gives ground for inference of the existence of fire. The objection comes that the above argument is baseless. The spectator very well knows that the actor does not exhibit any emotion of his own in the representation and this knowledge, therefore, can never give scope for any inference. The opponent, however, takes for granted that it is inferential knowledge and then further criticizes it. How can an inferential knowledge lead to pleasure ? The knowledge of fire inferred on the basis of smoke does not give pleasure. The spectators witnessing the performance realize pleasure. This realiza- tion of pleasure is immediate and connected with direct apprehension. Inference is not direct knowledge, hence through it dramatic thrill is not possible. Besides, inferential knowledge lacks fullness present in the joyful experience. Rasa cannot be made an object of cognition by the ordinary means of arriving at knowledge. Räma has flourished in the past and his feelings cannot be cognized directly by sense organs belonging to the present. The theorist meets the objec- tion by submitting that, no doubt, the inferential knowledge in the outside world does not cause pleasure, but in the world of poetry or drama it does as in either it depends not on the nature of the cognition but on the objects which are here the mental conditions capable of producing delight by force of their exquisite charm. Here, says the opponent, if the pleasure depends upon the objects, then in the ordinary world also objects, more charming and beautiful, must give greater pleasure, and the hearsay knowledge (Sābdabodha) that a

225 man is in love with a woman must also be pleasure-giving ; but this is not the case. And again if the pleasure depended upon the nature of the object, then pleasure resulting from the inference of grief and terror in pathetic and horrible scenes cannot be justified. On the other hand, sorrow and terror must be experienced by the spectator. The reply is given that in the ordinary world these all are called the ordinary causes, the Hetus, and the inference, therefore, does not lead to pleasure, but in the poetic world they are the Vibhavas and not mere cause of the ordinary world hence inference gives pleasure. But the above statement is questionable as the inference cannot give supreme pleasure. A father hearing of his son's honours and respects is not so much pleased as he is when he actually sees him so honoured and respected. And even if pleasure based on inference be admitted, how can it be a sustained pleasure lasting throughout the duration of the representation ? The logicians assert that all knowledge is momentary (Ksaņadvayāvasthāyi- lasting for two moments only), and once when the inference of a thing is over there cannot be scope for a series of inference as prior suspicion has matured into certainty. The con- tention is met in two ways by the theorist. Firstly, any- thing inferred is often and often meditated upon by the spectator, man of culture and taste, throughout the representa- tion or the recital and this meditation, not the mere inferential knowledge of love etc. is the realization of pleasure. Second- ly, in the presence of desire a further inferential knwoledge about the same thing is never barred by the logician. Hence a series of inference by cultured spectators with respect to love etc. is quite permissible. Here the succession of inferences 15

226

is called the realization of pleasure.1 The defect of momenta- riness in respect to inferential knowledge cannot stand. But this is refuted by the opponent on practical ground. If a spectator, returning from the dramatic representation, is asked as to what he has all along been doing, he will reply that he has been directly experiencing pleasure ; and not that he has been inferring things in course of the representation.2 And the spectator while witnessing the representation is so much absorbed, his mental condition being all joyful and uninterrupted by anything, akin to the unalloyed mental condition of a Yogin who enjoys the supreme Brahmānanda, that he will not have any desire for further inference as it will obstruct the realization of Rasa. Moreover, the inference of love etc. as existing in the actor cannot cause pleasure to the spectator as the latter has no Vibhāvas etc.3 Śri Śańkuka makes use of expression as 'looks like angry' and thus becomes inconsistent in his statements. Is this not indirectly admitting it as the knowledge based on similarity instead of the inferential knowledge ? The analogy of ' the horse in the picture' is obviously based on similitude. The skill of the painter makes people say that ' this is like a horse '. Even at the use of such expressions as ' this is a horse ' the knowledge is based on similarity. It is only the painter's supreme skill which is responsible for the deception and the consequent use of such identifying expressions. Further, Śrī Śankuka cannot say that the knowledge is neither valid nor invalid. Some knowledge is truly valid while other invalid though the invalidity may not be understood by one through all the life. The knowledge of ' this is Rāma ' with

1. R. P. p. 24. 2. Ibid. p. 25. 3. R. K. D. pp. 145-146.

227 respect to the actor is quite invalid. The interpretation even though an improvement upon the previous one of Bhatta- lollata is yet vitiated equally with it by one great defect. Love and other mental conditions are explained to exist not in the spectator but the pleasure is his. In such a case Rasa becomes objective and the pleasure in the spectator is sub- jective. How is this possible ? The two must exist at the same place if the realization of Rasa is to take place at all. Hence the interpretation fails to carry conviction. Some of the above criticisms as the refutation of the Semblance theory ( Anukārānumiti ) from all possible standpoints ; the expression ' Kruddha Iva Bhäti' which comes under the Sadrśyajñāna though this is not accepted by the theorists, the knowledge 'Ramoyam' which the theorist accepts neither valid nor invalid contrary to experience; the knowledge according to the ' Chitraturaganyäya' which the theorist accepts a cognition distinct from the Samyag, Mithyā, Samśaya and Sādrśya Jñānas though it is based on similitude; the difference between imitation of Bharata and that of Śrī Śankuka etc. were advanced as mentioned in the Abhinavabharati on pp. 275 and ff. by BhattaTauta, the preceptor of Abhinava and the author of the Kāvyakau- tuka mentioned in the Abhinavabhāratī but unfortunately now lost to us. On the realization of Rasa no opinion, either in original or in gist, of BhattaTauta is recorded by Abhinava as in cases of BhattaLollata etc. It is, therefore, impossible to ascertain the theory of BhattaTauta. As Abhinava was his disciple, perhaps, Abhinava might have held his view in concurrence with his preceptor's. BhattaNāyaka, the next writer to put forward a better view, ranges a series of strictures upon the Inference theory.

228

The series, however, mainly and mostly centres on the defect of indifference (Tatasthya). He considers this defect from almost all points of view. Śrī Śankuka's inference of love relating to either the original character or the actor is vitiated with the defect of indifference as the spectator has nothing to do with it. The spectator can never infer the existence of the original character's mental conditions in the actor, as the original character does not exist at the time of representa- tion. He cannot infer the emotions as existing in himself, for here two points crop up for consideration. Does the spectator infer the existence of original character's mental conditions in himself ? If so, his enjoyment of pleasure comes to be based on a false inferential knowledge. Does he then infer his own mental condition as existing in himself ? But he has no Vibhāvas and no man infers his own mental conditions ; he, rather, perceives them directly. In the circumstances it has to be said that he perceives mental conditions as generated in himself. But this places the theory of inference on a par with the Generation theory of BhattaLollata. The imperfections and defects of the latter theory, therefore, come to contaminate the theory of In- ference. For instance the tragic pleasure resulting from the representation of pathos, terror etc. can in no way be explained satisfactorily here. Rasa cannot also be a revela- tion as in that case it is to be accepted as something potentially existing ; and if the latter condition is accepted, the potentially present emotions once aroused would act in diverse degrees and contradict the nature of Rasa as one. Added to it will arise the difficulty of explanation as to the substratum of Rasa in one self or in the other. BhatțaNāyaka, thus making the defect of indifference the

229 principal plank of platform, finds glaring fault with the two previous views and then, by way of solution, expounds his own theory which he endeavours his utmost to make as com- plete as possible as becomes evident from his criticism of the thoery of Suggestion as expounded by Abhinava. He says that in poetry there functions a power called the Abhidhā ( denotation ). It simply makes one understand a word in its delimited and particular context, for example, Śakuntalā as the foster-daughter of the sage Kanva and the wife of Dusyanta. But this power by itself is not able to accomplish the purpose, as words thus understood in restricted sense will not lead the spectator to realize pleasure, for the defect of indifference will persist. The spectator, no doubt, first takes in this delimited and particular meaning. Due to graces and beauty of poetry, for example, Gunas, Alankāras, Vrttis, Rītis and absence of defects as well as the poetic or dramatic devices as different kinds of Abhinaya and music, he, however, gets absorbed and is enabled to contemplate repeatedly over what is read or witnessed. This all-absor- bing contemplation makes him capable of considering the objects as general divested of particularities. This process is called the Bhävana and the poetic power which effects it is called the Bhävakatva. Because of its function the spectator or the reader at the representation or the recital forgets his own self and is lifted above the environment he happens to be in at that time. He is, thus, free from all mental distrac- tions. It also universalizes everything in the poetic world. The restrictions and limitations around the object vanish and Śakuntalā in the above instance appears only as a lovely maiden. The generation or inference of love in the stage- Dusyanta is not necessitated, nor is the spectator required

230

to consider her as his. She appears in general as a lovely mai- den and Dusyanta also appears as a noble and valiant person; the love passages, their indications and mainfestations also appear universalized and the defect of either indifference in, or self ascription of emotion to, the spectator is thus removed. The theorist here sounds a note of warning. He says that the universalization of the Vibhāvas as ladies (Kāntātva) etc. as criticized by him in connection with the Generation theory is not to be confused with the universalization (Sādhāraņīkarana) as advocated by him. The Generation theory ascribes no Bhāvakatva power to poetry, hence objectionable. On the other hand, he does attribute such power. Then again in the Generation theory universaliza- tion serves the purpose of generating emotion in the spectator, whereas in his theory it is only for the purpose of seeing her not as belonging to any other person ; for it will then not interest the spectator. When the Vibhavas, the Anubhavas, the Vyabhicharibhavas and the Sthāyibhavas have become universalized, a third power comes into operation. By it the Sattva Guna in the mind of the spectator predominates over the Rajas and the Tamas. The mind becomes steady and any distraction by an outward object ceases. According to the philosophers the preponderance of the Sattva element produces illumination and results in happiness. This power of poetry is called the Bhogakrttva or Bhojakatva; it renders any scene : erotic, pathetic, horrible or otherwise, charming, inte- resting and pleasure-giving. The enjoyment that is spectator's at this stage is an impersonal pleasure, different from (i) the direct experience as no mental condition is generated in the spectator at the representation ; (ii) the recollection as everything being represented is new and recalls no past ;

231 (iii) the wordly pleasure in that it is impersonal and (iv) the yogin's supreme bliss as it is derived from objects like emotions etc. The relation that exists between the Sthāyi- bhava and the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas, the Vyabhichāribhā- vas is of the thing enjoyed and the things causing it to be enjoyed, the Bhojyabhojakabhāva as it is termed ; the words, Samyoga and Nispatti, thus mean the cognition of things in a generalized form and the enjoyment of the Sthāyibhāva as Rasa respectively. BhattaNāyaka falsely laboured under the impression that his theory on the Rasasutra marked the last word in the matter. He could not conceive of the improvements and modifications yet to be made for satisfactory explanation of all possible points demanding full attention. It, no doubt, goes to the credit of the theorist when he convincingly silenced one camp of critics who attributed the funct- ion of generalization to Lakșanā and thereby tried to prove the importance of the Bhāvakatva as needless. According to them the Bhāgatyāga Lakșaņā can divest the object of its particularities and present it in its universal aspect. Sakuntalā, they say, can easily signify a woman bereft of her relation with either Kanva or Dusyanta. The theorist expresses his gladness at the admission of the need of generalization of the Vibhāvas etc. by the opponents but runs amuck on them in their failure to explain the absorption of the spectators or the readers at the representation or the recital and the consequent inability of those critics to mark and point out the operation of the complicated process as the result of the three necessary conditions for the functioning of the Laksanā, the power of indication. And even if the Lakșaņā is admitted to effect the generalization, it may do

232

so only in the case of the Vibhavas (It has been proved that even here it cannot due to non-fulfilment of three necessary conditions.). How will it cope with the situation when the question of generalizing the mental conditions comes ? Where the Laksanā is to operate, the Abhidhā must also operate though the primary sense may be incompatible. In the universalization of the mental conditions the Abhidhā has no scope whatsoever, hence the Laksanā, the tail of the Abhidhā as Mammata1 puts it, clearly misses to have any operation. The theorist says that this objection may be preferred against the Bhāvakatva also, but he exposes in reply the barrenness of the contention. Firstly, he says that the Bhāvakatva generalizes the mental conditions also ; and secondly, whereas the Laksanā invariably presupposes the operation of the Abhidha, the Bhāvakatva does not do so, as what is required as the pre-requisite of the operation of the Bhävakatva is the knowledge of the thing or the person or mental conditions which may be obtained not necessarily by means of the Abhidha but by any other power also. BhattaNayaka, thus, apparently sealed the mouths of the advocates of the Laksaņā and triumphed in glory over the establishment of the Bhavakatva. His triumph, however, was not conclusive as his theory was made the target, vulnerable as it was at some points. That the power of the Bhävakatva as well as that of the Bhojakatva were needlessly imported was constantly repeated. It is admitted that they are neither wrong nor harmful, but no other authoritative and authentic recognition or mention is available. They, there- fore, do not so much as ever receive support from the Alan- kārikas. Moreover, their functions are fully discharged by

1. K. P. V. p. 248.

233

an all-acknowledged power, suggestion. In spite of the importation of the above two powers, the power of sugges- tion has to be requisitioned. In understanding the mental conditions of the characters, suggestion (Vyañjanā) operates as the Abhidhā and the Laksaņā have no scope. If it is contended that the Vibhāvas and the Anubhāvas duly presented by either of the above two powers would make those mental conditions understood, the point which remains unanswered is as to the power through which the process is effected. And the Bhāvakatva as said by Bhatta Nāyaka only generalizes these emotions. The latter, there- fore, are first presented in particular aspects. The necessity of suggestion thus becomes quite obvious and clear. Even the theorist has to admit its function before the operation of his Bhävakatva and Bhojakatva, the latter operating only after the former has functioned. And once the power of suggestion has been admitted by the theorist, his two new powers auto- matically become useless. Through suggestion the Gunas, the Rītis, the Alankāras etc. in a literary work free the mind from all distractions. The result is the restfulness of the mind, which, in other words, means the predominance of Sattva. In this stage it understands objects in their universa- lized forms and enjoys them. Prabhākarabhatta in the Rasapradīpa meets the theorist on his own grounds and proves that only Bhāvakatva is quite sufficient to serve the purpose of both ; the power of Bhojakatva is, therefore, unnecessary. The power of the Bhāvakatva not only presents things in their universalized forms but also removes the distractions from the mind which can again and again con- template over the generalized objects and thus enjoy them. The theory is criticized on other grounds. It is vulnerable

234

at some points in respect of its wording also. Some words in the theory can also mean ' Rasa never becomes an object of congnition ' ( Raso Na Pratīyate-Raso Na Pratītisāmānyasya Vişayo Bhavati ). If they are to be so construed at all, surely they are objectionable. Rasa is enjoyed by Bhoga according to the theorist himself. This Bhoga is itself a kind of cognition. If it does not come within any of the recognized varieties of cognition, it can be established as a new variety. The process differentiates the cognition ; in case of the Bhoga it is attained by a peculiar process as the process of generalization of things. Criticism on this score, therefore, is quite justified as the theorist contradicts himself in his own statement. The case stands justified only if the words mean 'Rasa is not inferred'. The theorist's other words meaning ' Rasa is neither generated nor suggested' are also unsound. His admission that the spectator or the reader enjoys the emotions becomes an object of criticism if the above meaning is fully considered. The emotions enjoyed must be newly created in case of their previous non-existence, or suggested if already existing. No one can predicate of a thing which is neither existing nor non-existing, as the two categories include all things in the universe. Last but not least is the defect of indifference (Tätasthya) which could not be satis- factorily and convincingly removed in the theoty. According to it what the spectators or the readers enjoy are not their own emotions but the emotions of the original characters presented in their generalized forms. This generalization, in a way, removed the above defect, yet the anomaly remained as to why they enjoyed others' emotions. The above anomaly was fully taken into consideration and completely removed by the next theorist Abhinava who

235

propounded his view based on the Rasasūtra of Bharata so cogently and comprehensively that no shade of opinion remained unsatisfied. Instead of explaining Rasa as some- thing objective or realization of another man's emotions generalized and deprived of imitations, he sought to explain Rasa as the enjoyment of the spectator's or the reader's own emotions realized in a generalized form. The approach is psychological in that it has been established that every mind, specially of sympathetic critics, is endowed with latent impressions, natural and implanted in the previous birth or acquired in this life by study and experience. In some cases these impressions, no doubt, become deadened, effete and even completely effaced as in the Mīmānsakas on whom Viśvanātha throws so much contemptuous ridicules,1 yet the majority of mankind have them. Hence is the wide extent of the appeal to the human heart. These impressions are of many varieties determined mainly by happiness and unhappiness clung to and abhorred respectively. Some of these are of stable nature while others are not. One category includes the former ones which are called the permanent emotions (Sthāyibhävas) whereas the latter belong to a different cate- gory. The former constitute the nucleus of the whole process as it is they which are ultimately realized as Rasa. When the spectators see the representation of a dramatic work, men and women as actors and actresses move before them carrying out different activities. Thus these Vibhāvas and their Anubhävas suggest to them ( the spectators ) the original characters' mental conditions presented at first in individual forms but later on generalized due to the efficiency and excell- ence of the actors and the actresses, the effectiveness of the

1. S. D. III. p. 3. (Com.)

236

scenic arrangements and the genius of the poet who alchemizes the ordinary utterances with the Gunas, the Alankaras, the Vrttis, the Rītis etc. The particular individual then becomes divested of personal characteristics and peculiarities. The emotion also becomes generalized, for example, mutual love becomes love in general between man and woman. Then the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the mental conditions thus generalized reveal and excite the latent impressions in the spectator. At this stage the individuality of the spectator is also lost as these Sthāyibhāvas called into play by genera- lized Vibhāvas etc. as mentioned above correspond to the latter. This is impossible if the individuality of the spectator is allowed to interfere. At this stage the mind is also free from the barriers due to poetic skill and stage craft. The result, therefore, in the mind of the spectator is the realiza- tion of pleasure, Rasa as it is termed. The emotion of the original character in time past is not aroused by the dramatic representation ; what is intended is only to call up a reflection of it which is similar in some respects. The realization of pleasure is nothing but the concentration on the evoked Sthāyibhāva wherein the latter is perceived and relished along with its Vibhāvas, Anubhāvas, Sañchāribhāvas and Sāttvikabhāvas, the perception being free from the obstacles, seven in number as enumerated and their neu- tralizing agencies pointed out by Abhinava.1 This easily solves the problem which arises as to the nature of the Karuna Rasa. The Generation and the Inference theories failed to offer the satisfactory solution. Bhattanāyaka succeeded but his solution was based on the generalized mental conditions of the original characters-the basis

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 281-282. (Com.)

237

which was obviously vitiated with the defect of indiffer- ence; Abhinava, however, expounds the most satisfactory solution. He says that a particular Rasa is delectable not exclusively because of its nature as such but because of the spectator's mind being free from distractions. He attri- butes the experience of unhappiness to distractions of mind. Hence if once these distractions are removed, the experience is unalloyed bliss. The sorrow loses its sting and converts into bliss. Hence is Rasa as the Karuņa experienced as all joy and pleasure and nothing else. This pleasure is not due to mental conditions of the original characters in the literary works as BhattaNāyaka puts it; it is due rather to the spectator's native pleasurable im- pressions aroused. These impressions are left behind by emotions once experienced in the actual world. As these impressions and not the actual worldly ones are aroused, developed and relished as Rasa, joy is the result, as Kāli- dāsa says, "In the Dandaka forests those miseries which were even experienced transformed into joys when later concentrated upon."1 The same poet, however, appears to explain Rasa as recollection, instead of concentration on the Sthayibhāva as said before, at another place. When he says, "He, verily, remembers unconsciously in his mind the affections experienced formerly in his previous birth but now firmly seated in impressions."2 Abhinava warns the people not to take the word 'remembers' ( Smarati) occurring in the above quotation in its logically accepted sense, for the spectator is not recollecting pleasures similar to those he now experiences.3 Further, there is no previous

1. R. V. (in K. G.) XIV. 25. 2. A. S. (in K. G.) V. 2. 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 281. (Com.)

238

proof for it.1 The defect of indifference, the shadow of which, if not the substance, still clung to the previous theory, is, thus, completely removed, the cause and its effect being traced to the one and the same place. No other function after the generalization of the characters' Bhavas is requisite; the very perception of the dormant Sthāyibhāvas, free from the screen of impediments, is the enjoyment. The causes as the Gunas, the Alankāras etc. which are responsible for the Bhāvakatva in the previous theory remove the above screen. Hence the importation of the two powers is unauthorized as the Vyañjanā Vrtti ( suggestion ) admitted by the predecessor does the function of both. To the objection advanced by BhattaNāyaka on the theory of the revelation of Rasa to the effect that in order to be revealed Rasa must have already existed and before being revealed Rasa cannot be called as such, the reply is that it does exist as latent Sthāyibhāva before being revealed. The appellation, however, is used by prolepsis on the analogy of the statement 'Rasa Pratīyanta Iti Odanam Pachatītivat Vyavahāraḥ'. BhațțaNāyaka betrays his own incomplete knowledge when he passed the remark to the effect that to evoke the latent impression by the Vibhavas and the Anubhavas, the latter should vary in various cases of revealing. For has it not been pointed out that there should be the combination of the Vibhavas, the Anubhavas and the Vyabhichāribhavas in the original Sūtra itself ? Has any mention, explicit or even implicit, been made that there should not be varying degrees of strength in them ? And again, have not different degrees in the spectators been recognized ? This is surely the

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 286. (Com.)

239 reflection of the mind obsessed with faultfinding though the faults may be even groundless as in the previous case as also in the subsequent wherein exception is taken to the causality admitted by the advocates of the revelation theory. It is said that according to the law of causality, Rasa and its Vibhāvas, Anubhāvas etc. must not appear at the same time, but in the theory they do, therefore inconsistency comes in. The exception, however, falls to the ground when the reply comes that causality here is not an ordinary one. For if it is admitted to be the causality as it obtains in this world, the causes as the Vibhāvas etc. producing it must be either the Kārakahetus or the Jñāpakahetus. They are not of the first variety as has been made clear in the criticism of the first theory, that is, the Generation theory. They are neither of the second variety as they do not reveal something which already exists. That Rasa is revealed by the Vibhavas etc. like the object lit by the lamp is only by Prolepsis as said before. The revealer and the revealed are not separately congnized in the case of Rasa whereas in the case of the lamp and the object they are so cognized. In the latter case there is the group-cognition but in the former case there is the cognition of all factors as one entity only like the beverage which though made up of many ingredients tastes as one compound. The revelation process can better be described as similar to that by which buttermilk dropped into milk converts it into curd as Prabhākarabhatța in the Rasapradīpa points out.1 This establishes Rasa as Alaukika ( transcendental), some perception transcending the limits of earthly experience. Further support in confirmation of its being transcendental

1. R. P. p. 29.

240

is found in the nature of the perception which is neither Nirvikalpaka ( indeterminate ) knowledge, nor Savikalpaka ( determinate ) knowledge. It is not the former as it is not absolutely unconnected because it is available by, and with, the Vibhävas etc. though generalized. It is not the latter in that the experience is indescribable. It is one blissful whole hardly coming within the scope of language. It cannot also be explained as Yogic experience of either type, viz. of the Yogin who observes Yogic practices to be one with the Supreme Spirit and of the other who has already attained union with it. Rasa is the pleasurable experience unlike the troublesome experience of the first and also different from the experience of the Supreme Spirit of the second where no difference of any kind exists. In the bliss- ful experience called Rasa differences do exist. It lasts so long as its relish is had and as that relish is something produced Rasa may be called an effect. It is an object of knowledge as it is experienced only by one's own self. During its experience it appears to be violently throbbing before the sympathetic person; it appears to be entering into the very heart and embracing all the parts of the body, as it were. It looks as if suppressing every other thing and, so to say, making the experience of the Brahman the object of cognition. All these opposite attributes estab- lish the transcendental nature of Rasa. The description of its Abhivyakti (manifestation or suggestion) as given by Abhinava admits of various interpretations in respect of its different parts. On one hand, the statement 'Rasa- nātmakavītavighnapratītigrāhyo Bhāva Eva Rasaḥ'1, repeated by subsequent writers in a different garb as 'Bhag-

1. N. S. (G. O. S.). VI. p. 281. (Com.).

241 nāvaranachitvisiso Ratyādiḥ Sthāyibhāva Rasa Iti Sthi- tam',1 furnishes clues of its connection with the teachings of the Vedanta, whereas on the other hand words as 'Tatra Sarvemī ... Antarāyaśūnyaviśrāntiśarīratvāt ( Sukhasya ), Aviśrāntirūpataiva Duḥkham. Tata Eva Kāpilairduḥ- khasya Chāñchalyameva Prānatvenoktam Rajovțttim Vadadbhirityānandarūpatā Sarvarasānām,'2 establish its relation with the Sankhya. In such circumstances what further proof of its being one with, and at the same time different from, all such similar concepts, in a word, of its ineffable and transcendental nature, is required ? Its unearthly nature is, prima facie, evident from the terms, the Vibhavas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas which, though corresponding to causes, effects and access- aries, are not called the Kāranas, the Käryas and the Saha- kārins. The function of the Vibhāva is known as Vibhā- vana, the process through which a germ is brought to the status of a sprout; that of the Anubhava is Anubhāvana, the process of making a thing capable of being experienced and enjoyed while the function of the Vyabhichāribhāva is Samuparañjana, the process which makes an object fully visible. According to this interpretation the Samyoga, that is, the relation that exists between the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas, the Vyabhichāribhāvas and the Sthāyibhāva is the Vyangyavyañjakabhāva, that is, the relation of the suggestor and the suggested in case of the Bhävas of the original characters, and of the revealer and the revealed from the view-point of the Sthāyibhāvas of the specta- tors. The term, Nispatti, therefore, respectively means the

1. R. G. p. 23. 2. N. S. (G. O. S.). VI. p. 283. (Com.). 16

242

suggestion and the revelation (further development and enjoyment) in the above two cases. This theory of Abhinava was in accordance with the view of Bharata. For example, both admitted the function of the Vyañjana and both explained the realization of Rasa due to the innate or acquired latent impressions in the spectators which were revealed at a dramatic representa- tion by Vibhāvas etc., then developed and relished as Rasas. Other theorists as Bhattalollata and Śrī Śańkuka were either misled by such expressions of Bharata as 'Tatra Śrngāro Nāma Ratisthāyibhāvaprabhavaḥ,'1 'Vibhāvenā- hrto Yorthastvanubhāvena Gamyate,'2 where the words 'Prabhavah' in the first and 'Gamyate' in the second made them think that Rasa was a case of generation or Rasa was inferred respectively, or their deep-seated affinities with the schools they belonged to made them budge no inch from the views they held in conformity with the tenets of the respective schools. They, therefore, wilfully interpreted the words as suited their views, as was done by Bhatta Nāyaka, who, as a follower of a particular school, would not admit the Vyñjana as a separate power, hence he cons- ciously interpreted the Sūtra as suited his own will. In order to satisfy his whims he even postulated the two func- tions, the Bhavakatva and the Bhojakatva, though both were quite useless and unauthorized. Abhinava appro- ached Bharata nearest. His exposition, therefore, receives general approval and is considered as the most authorita- tive. He thus proved his preference of Rasa to any other element in poetry as he dilated most on it. The founda- tion of the Dhvani theory shaken to the bottom by destruc-

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. p. 73. 2. Ibid. VII. 1.

243

tive criticism of opponents was, no doubt, once more made so firm by him as the later writers instead of being arrogant and critical towards it paid tribute to his words. Yet he could not check himself from asserting the Rasadhvani as the soul of poetry. He, thus, once for all established the unsurpassable importance and predominance of Rasa. That Rasa was given a firm footing is clearly corrobo- rated in its tacit recognition as the soul of poetry by the next writer, Rājaśekhara. His definition of poetry as 'a sentence having literary excellences (Gunas) and adorned with poetic figures'1 can be fairly interpreted to ally him with Vamana who explains the use of the word Kāvya for 'words and meanings well-refined with literary excellences (Gunas) and poetic figures.'2 His affinities with Vāmana are confirmed by his partiality towards the Rītis as explained by him. He also accepts Vāmana's classification of Rītis.3 On the other hand, he criticizes Rudrata4-a fact which proves his disfavour towards him. He only emphasizes the imprortance of Rasa when he gives with implicit approval others' opinion that 'only the composition of what is full of sentiments is proper and not of what is devoid of senti- ments.'5 But this importance assumes predominance. While describing the Kāvyapurusa (the literary personality), he enumerates the different parts of his body. The meta- phor is drawn upon literary devices, for example, the lan- guage, the literary excellences (Gunas) etc. Rasa, here, is described as the soul of the Kāvyapurușa.6 Rājaśekhara could have been dubbed as the follower of the Riti or the

1. K. M. VI. p. 24. 2. K. L. S. I. 1. 1. (Vrtti) 3. K. M. p. 31. 4. Ibid. p. 31. 5. Ibid. p. 45. 6. Ibid. p. 6.

244

Rasa school or of 'some old tradition, which stands apart from orthodox schools, but which has many things in com- mon with the older currents of thought and opinion,'1 as De puts it, but his acceptance of Rasa as the soul of the Kāvyapurușa (an idea which is quite novel and favourite with him) undoubtedly testifies to his recognizing Rasa as superior to other elements. Kuntala or Kuntaka, the author of the Vakroktijīvita, probably sails in the same boat as Rājaśekhara in respect of his attitude towards Rasa. He is said to be the advocate of the Vakrokti school, a school which was regarded as rival to the Dhvani or the Rasa school. The points that arise here for consideration are if it is to be regarded as a school at all, and if so, is its attitude hostile to Rasa ? A school is said to be such when it has traditionally been coming down from generation to generation and has a long and permanent following. It was never expounded as a school before Kuntaka nor could it command any follow- ing. Hence it should be recognized only as a doctrine and not as a school.2 Kuntaka got hints and suggestions for this doctrine in Bhāmaha who recognized Vakrokti as the underlying principle of all figurative expressions.3 By it Kuntaka means a departure from the common mode of speech as it consists in some strikingness of expression.4 Considering himself, thus, the propounder of a new doc- trine, he naturally included the different poetic elements, variously emphasized by previous writers, in the different combinations or modes of striking expressions which he recognized as principally six in number : (1) Varna-

1. D. S. P. Vol. II. p. 371. 2. S. S. K. 1. pt. II. p. 179. 3. K. L. II. 85. 4. V. J. I. 10 (With Com.).

245 vinyāsa-vakratā corresponding to the Śabdālankāras, (2) Padapūrvārdhavakratā or the selection of word-stems, (3) Padaparārdhavakratā or Pratyayavakratā or the use of affixes, (4) Vākyavakratā including all the Arthālankāras, (5) Prakaranavakratā or choice of, or change made in, the incidents of the plot and (6) Prabandhavakratā or the construction of the plot itself.1 He gave much consi- deration to the analysis of the poetic figures. He ridiculed Dandin's Svabhāvokti though implicitly feeling its aes- thetic delectableness,2 as like Bhämaha he said that it in- volved no strikingness; thus he advocated Bhāmaha's Atiśaya in the Vakrokti. Bhāmaha's Atiśaya consisting in its Lokātikrāntigocharatā,3 that is, a heightened charm of expression standing above personal connections and depending for appreciation and ultimate test upon the 'Tadvidālhāda', pleasure in the appreciating person, pro- bably stood as regards its aesthetic delectableness on the same level with Rasa. When such was the stand taken by him he could not lay much stress on Rasa and the Bhāva as the most important and prominent elements in poetry, though he indirectly admitted that the principal function of the poet is to depict objects animated with Rasa4 and the words of the poets live not because of their plots but due to their being saturated with Rasa.5 Rasa finds place in the economy of the Vakrokti in connection with the poetic figures and the different Märgas and in the treatment of Prakarana-, and Prabandha-, Vakratā. In the styles

1. V. J. I. 19-21. 2. Ibid. I. 11. pp. 23 & 25 (Com. on 15th Karika). 3. K. L. II. 81. 4. V. J. III. 6-7 (With Com.). 5. Ibid. IV (Resume) p. 225.

246

called the Sukumāra and the Vichitra, Rasa has to play some role. In the former Svabhava is delineated and Rasa becomes a part (Anga)1 whereas in the latter Rasa becomes the motivating factor.2 He considers that Vichchhitti should be Sarasatvasampaduchita, endowed with the ex- cellence of being rich in sentiments. In the Vākyavakratā where the theme is the Svabhava of the object it is shown how suitable development of Rasa can make the descrip- tion of the sentient beings attractive.3 He goes so far as to be one with Anandavardhana in saying that Rasa cannot be expressed through its own name either in general as the word Rasa itself or in particular as the Śrngāra etc. and again establishes the delectable nature of Rasa by citing verses from dramas. Here Kuntaka grows eloquent over Rasa as in the discussion of the Vastuvakratā he takes up the Rasavat and criticizes severely the definition as given by Bhamaha, Dandin and others.4 The Rasavat to him is an Alankārya as it is 'Rasena Tulyam Vartate,'5 awakened for its own sake and not for any other purpose. This Alankara is the foremost among those touched with sentiments.6 This is a position even one stage further than Anandavardhana's who accepts it as involving Rasa only secondarily. In the Prakaraņavakratā Rasa again is given importance. It is the controlling factor as any change in incidents are permissible so far as contributory to its de- velopment.7 In this Prakaraņavakratā there may occur a case where the dominant Rasa is developed to the extent

1. V. J. I. 26. 2. Ibid. I. 41. 3. Ibid. III. 6-7. 4. Ibid. III. pp. 159 & (following) 5. Ibid. III (Resume) p. 175. 6. Ibid. III (Resume) p. 177. 7. Ibid. IV (Resume) p. 224.

247 unattained either before or after in the same work as in the Vikramorvaśīya, act IV.1 Sometimes the same Rasa is developed by its constant repetition throughout without any satiety woven as it happens to be with new surprises and shining with Rasa and Alankāra as the pathos is de- picted in the Tāpasavatsarājacharita.2 It is in the Pra- bandhavakratā, however, that Rasa is made the determin- ing factor. The charm is to be achieved chiefly by the aid of pleasing Rasas and if any Rasa other than that depicted in the original story is desired to be preferred in order to impart a new charm to the plot, the change is declared as permissible. The Venīsamhāra and the Uttararāmacharita, though based respectively on the Mahābhārata and the Rāmāyana which have the Santa as the predominant sen- timent, have been shown as the dramas of the Vira and the Karuna Rasa respectively as the authors desired to give them a new charm.3 Rasa, considered so extensively, naturally gives reason to think that its predominance was admitted, but as the new doctrine, the Vakrokti, was to be advanced at all cost, Rasa had to be admitted in different modes of striking expressions. Rasa, therefore, did receive recognition though indirectly from Kuntaka included as it was in different kinds of the Vakrokti. Just as Kuntaka got hints and ideas from Bhāmaha for building up the superstructure of his doctrine, the Vakrokti, so did Ksemendra receive hints and suggestions from Anandavardhana4 for his doctrine of the Auchitya, which he explains thus. Great scholars are of opinion that a thing is thought to be suitable to another when the former

1. V. J. IV (Resume) p. 232. 2. Ibid. IV (Resume) p. 228. 3. Ibid. IV (Resume) pp. 238-239. 4. D. L. III. p. 330.

248 fits the latter. This suitableness is called the Auchitya (propriety or appropriateness).1 Thus propriety is a cer- tain harmony of different constituents in a work of litera- ture. It has been regarded by Ksemendra as the life of poetry.2 Anandavardhana says that want of propriety is the only cause of the violation of Rasa. Thus he regards propriety necessary for the depiction of Rasa counting it as he does as one of its conditions. Kşemendra makes it the essence of Rasa for according to him it is Rasajīvita- bhūta.3 As the Auchitya has been raised to the highest rank in poetry, in other words, as it is declared to be the very life of poetry, the presence of Rasa in a poem contri- butes to the vital principle, viz. the Auchitya.4 This, in a way, reverses the opinion held by Ananda-vardhana. Kșemendra includes all the poetic elements, word, sentence, poem, the Guna, the Alankāra, Rasa, verb, case, gender, number, adjective etc. in his Auchitya and thus makes it quite comprehensive. Like all other above elements Rasa also became subsidiary in consideration, but more exten- sive scope assigned to its consideration in comparison with scope alloted to other elements witnesses to the author's preference and predilection for it. His favourable and patronizing attitude towards Rasa finds confirmation in the treatment of metres in respect of their choice and their contribution to the development of different Rasas as given in his other work, the Suvrttatilaka. He has illustrated in the Auchityavichäracharcha the different Rasas, admitt- ing also the Sānta as one, from different authors as Kāli-

1. A. V. C. 7. 2. Ibid. 5 & 7. 3. Ibid. 3. 4. Ibid. 5.

249

dāsa, Śrī Harșa etc.1 He has also considered the principal and the subsidiary relation between the different Rasas. A fit and suitable combination of them where one Rasa is principal and others nourish it either by contrast or by excitement etc. leads to a peculiar pleasure as that of the beverage. Propriety, therefore, is always to be observed as inharmony is always jarring and disgusting.2 The comparison of the peculiar aesthetic pleasure to the taste of the beverage and the analogy of the harmonious com- bination of Rasas to the mixing up of the different ingre- dients in the beverage clearly testifies to the full and clear knowledge of Ksemendra in point of the process of the realization of Rasa. But as he advanced the doctrine of Auchitya and made it all-comprehencive, he had to assign Rasa a secondary place. Rasa, no doubt, had become an established fact and had received general recognition and approbation as the most important element in a literary work. Like Ksemendra Bhoja got hints for the doctrine of his theory in the Agnipurana. The Agnipurāna advocated that from the Ananda (the infinite bliss) comes out the Ahankāra (self-consciousness) from which proceeds Abhimāna (conceit). This conceit gives rise to Rati (plea- sure) of which the Srngära, the Häsya etc. are the modifi- cations. Bhoja does not accept this whole process but fastens on the Abhimäna (which he also calls Ahankāra)3 as the starting point. The Abhimana, the supreme egoism, is the cause of the experience of the delightful condition of the mind due to the absence of impediments. It is

1. A. V. C. 16 (With Com.) ... 2. Ibid. 17-18 (With Com.) 3. B. S. K. V. 1.

250

capable of being relished when developed through Vibhā- vas etc. in poetry by an appreciative spectator or reader and is to be called Rasa. The Rati etc. are not to be called Rasas. The Rati etc. as emotions have their birth in a person who is possessed of Abhimana and they are never converted into Rasas. Bhoja refutes the position that the Śrngāra is born of the Rati and accepts the reverse of it. He establishes that there is no such distinction as the Sthāyibhāva, the Sāttvikabhāva, the Vyabhichāribhāva etc. among the forty nine Bhävas; they are all on the same level. Bhoja thus tries to establish that the Śrngāra is the only Rasa. 'There is some truth in this extreme position of Bhoja as all the world is pervaded by love and there is not one who is unaffected by it,'1 as Sankaran puts it, but it is not the whole truth. It is in direct ignorance of the latent impressions permanently seated in the human mind and is a doctrine exaggerating the importance of the su- preme ego. That Bhoja could not be consistent with his own view becomes clear from what he says of the distinc- tions of the Bhāvas into the Sthāyibhāvas, Sāttvikabhāvas and Vyabhichāribhāvas.2 He accepts the awakening3 of the Sthayibhavas for their developing into Rasas. He counts the Sthayibhavas as eight in number.4 At some places his views are not even well assimilated as is quite evident from his definition of the Kanti Guna5 which is directly borrowed in full from Vamana. In matter of the definition of poetry he agrees with the Agnipurana, but makes an addition. He says that it should have Rasa also.6 He emphasizes that Rasa is an extremely useful 1. S. A. L. C. p. 145. 2. B. S. K. V. 14-24. 3. Ibid. V. 19. 4. Ibid. V. 14. 5. Ibid. I. 102. 6. Ibid. I. 2.

251

element. 'Of the body of poetry which is devoid of the Dosas, endowed with the Gunas and ornamented with the poetic Alankāras, like the physique of a lady, the connec- tion with Rasa is highly useful for the protection of ex- cellence in beauty.'1 He counts the Rasokti as most im- portant.2 He, however, makes no mention of the relation that Rasa is to be in with other constituents of poetry. To some his conception of Rasa seems to bear resemblance to that of the Utpattivādins like Dandin and others; in this connection the emphasis on the Guna as mentioned by Bhoja is disposed of either as a eulogistic statement or as a mere record due to the composite and unassimilated nature of the work.3 It may also seem to bear a resemblance to the conceptions of the Bhaktivädins or the Abhivyakti- vādins who believe in the removal of the mental distrac- tion as a necessary condition before the function of the Bhojakatva for the enjoyment of Rasa and the removal of the distractions from the mind as the realization of Rasa respectively. Bhoja gives ground for the above specula- tion in the use of the word, Aprātikūlikatayā.4 He makes mention of ten Rasas, the Vatsala and the Santa being added to the orthodox eight, but only to refute the number and reduce it to one as the Bhävas cannot transform them- selves into Rasa.5 In the Sarasvatīkanthābharaņa V. 23 he hints at the Uddhata and the Udatta Rasas also expressed later on page 607 which were criticized by Śinga Bhūpāla in his R. S. pp. 168-172. He, thus, accepts in a way twelve Rasas. He also indirectly refuted the origin of one set of Rasas from the other as advocated by Bharata etc., for

1. B. S. P. IX. (Prose) p. XII. 2. B. S. K. V. 8. 3. D. S. P. Vol. II. p. 263. 4. B. S. P. I. 8. 5. Ibid. I. 6.

252

he ultimately accepted only one Rasa as shown before. All these points go to show that Bhoja had conceived ex- aggerated notions of the Śrngāra Rasa and had become exclusively obsessed by it. His decided preference for Rasa over other factors has, however, proofs positive, probably due to the influence of the importance of Rasa and obviously due to his advocacy of his own doctrine, viz. the Śrngāra as the only Rasa. To whatever cause may the influence be traced Rasa had decidedly gained the upper hand among the constituents of poetry. Mahimabhatta, who comes next for consideration, pro- bably got inspiration for his view in the interpretation of Bharata's Rasasūtra by Śrī Śankuka as the two views are almost identical recognizing Rasa as an object of inference (Anumiti) and not of suggestion (Abhivyakti). His atti- tude is not hostile towards Rasa. In his work, the Vyak- tiviveka, he engages himself in the hair-splitting argu- ments over the suggestion, that is, Vyakti. He proves that suggestion is useless, unauthoritative and invalid and it merges completely into inference.1 In other words, in- ference discharges its function completely. He accepts meaning of two kinds : the Vächya (expressed) and the Anumeya (inferrible) including both, the Laksya (indicated) and the Vyangya (suggested), in the latter. The latter, he further says, is threefold : the Vastu (consisting of mere matter), the Alankāra (poetic figure) or Rasa, making the last invariably inferrible, the first two, how- ever, being expressible also.2 Mahimabhatta thus accepts Rasa but aims his stroke exclusively at the power of sugges- tion. As regards the process of the realization of Rasa

1. M. V. V. I. 1. 2. M. V. V. I. p. 39.

253

wherein the sequence as to the functions of the Abhidha and the Vyañjanā are not traceable according to the Dhvani- vädins, he has to say that reasoning establishes that the sequence can be traced, hence, really speaking, the power of inference works here. Being questioned again as to the presence of the required members of a syllogism in poe- tical sentences, he replies that for an intelligent man mere knowledge of the middle term is sufficient.1 To the ob- jection that inferential knowledge does not give pleasure he submits that it is the Kāvyānumiti, a peculiar variety of immediate inference.2 He, thus, fully recognizes the de- lectable nature of Rasa where the critic atonce understands the ideas through the Vibhavas etc. and has the aesthetic pleasure. The Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vya- bhichäribhävas which are depicted in poetry act as arti- ficial causes, effects and accessaries for kindling up some unreal emotion like love. The spectator or the reader then infers this unreal emotion in the actor whom he takes as the original character. Through his imaginative sym- pathy it becomes pleasurable and is called Rasa.3 It is the nature of these ideas inferred to contribute to that pleasure.4 In course of discussing a couplet where inference is mediate he says that the inferred ideas should lead to the develop- ment of Rasa, otherwise they become mere conundrums.5 This is rather an indirect admission of the predominance of Rasa in poetry. It becomes direct and explicit when he says that all accept Rasa as the soul of poetry6 and poetry is to be recognized as having its soul in Rasa as the author

1. M. V. V. I. pp. 64 .- 65. 2. Ibid. I. p. 105. 3. Ibid. I. p. 79. 4. Ibid. I. pp. 66-67. 5. Ibid. I. p. 86. 6. Ibid. I. p. 105.

254

wishing its success in attracting the soft-hearted necessarily makes it saturated with Rasa.1 Therefore poetry, accord- ing to him, is that composition wherein Rasa is invariably manifested through the representation of the Vibhāvas etc.2 Mahimabhatta thus followed fully Śrī Śankuka's view of Rasa. He recognized Rasa as a delectable experience available through the process of inference. Reasoning when made fetish of invariably becomes dull and unin- teresting; consequently much of the charm of poetry was lost when Mahimabhatta proved the inclusion of the power of suggestion into the inference. But that Rasa as such held supreme command is undoubted, declared as it was the soul of poetry. Mahimabhatta's theory could not find many adherents. Mammata, the next writer, did not catch up hints and suggestions from the previous writers to expound any new theory of his own but brought about a harmonious fusion of their theories assigning therein proper places to different constituents. His attitude to Rasa, therefore, has nothing novel in it. He recognizes Rasa as an important element in poetry. This recognition remains implicit at some places whereas at others it becomes explicit. In his very first verse of the voluminous Kāvyaprakāśa he accepts that Rasas impart charm and delectableness to poetry, thus making it full of nothing but delight. In the definition of poetry of which he accepts three kinds he makes no explicit inclusion of Rasa in it. The admission of the Chitra Kāvya admitted by Ānandavardhana, too, as a division of poetry would also, according to Viśvanātha,3 show that

1. M. V. V. I. p. 97. 2. Ibid. I. p. 95. 3. S. D. I. pp. 4 & 5.

255

Rasa did not form an essential element. Yet the explicit injunction as to the presence of the Guna in, and the ab- sence of the Dosa from, it would imply the importance of Rasa, explained as the former two concepts are in direct connection with the latter one. The absence of the mention of the word, Rasa, from the definition of poetry may be justified due to the concept of Rasa being an established fact in poetics and hence understood by implication in such important cases, but the three kinds of suggested sense, viz. the Vastu, the Alankāra and Rasa appear rather inconsistent as Rasadhvani has been mentioned as one of the kinds and, therefore, it cannot cover all the cases. The irregularities as appearing here as well as at other places are reconciled if this idea is kept in view that Mammata's task was that of compiling, and if some inconsistencies creep in they should be made light of in consideration of the bigger problems wherein he could effect reconcilia- tion. He considered the Gunas, the Rītis, the Dosas and the Alankaras in their relation to Rasa. He also con- sidered the different Rasas in relation to one another; and after having given his view on Rasa he gave it a detail- ed consideration. He agrees with Abhinavagupta in his view of Rasa.1 Do not the above things clearly prove that Mammata fully recognised the importance of Rasa ? Ruyyaka, who comes up after Mammata for conside- ration, shows avowed influence of the Alankara school. This fact is quite evident from the name of his work, the Alankārasūtra, and the Vrtti, the Alankārasarvasva, on it. That the author of the Alankārasarvasva is Ruyyaka has been shown by T. Ganapati Śastrī in the introduction

1. K. P. IV. p. 95. (Com.)

256

to the Alankārasūtra. The author first surveys the differ- ent views held by his predecessors in the field. In the Alankārasarvasva he calls the Rasadhvani the Samlaksya- kramavyangya (the suggested sense wherein the sequence is well marked)1 whereas in the Alankārasūtra he calls it the Asamlakşyakramavyangya (the suggested sense wherein the sequences is inappreciable.)2 That the Rasā- didhvani has been treated in the Alankāramañjarī is a proof of the author's favourable attitude to that kind of sugges- ted sense. It shows his acceptance of suggestion advoca- ted by some of the previous writers. He, however, be- trays his affinities with either the author of the Agnipurā- na or Bhoja when he declares that the Śrngāra Rasa pre- dominates in the Kävya.3 He shows his 'knowledge of Rasa when he discusses the difference between the Bhāvika Alankara on one hand and the Svabhavokti and the Rasavat on the other. One point of distinction is the Sādhāranī- karana (generalization). Another point constantly em- phasized is the appeal to the sympathetic heart of the cri- tic in whom there are impressions which are the causes of the excitement in his mind and its consequent modification of various kinds (Chitta Vrttis). The author, then, gives further on the four Alankaras based on Rasa, the Bhava, the Rasabhasa and the Bhāvābhāsa.4 In his com. to the Sūtra enumerating the above four Alankāras, the author incidentally gives the definition of Rasa. The Rati, a particular kind of the modification of the mind, revealed by the Vibhava, the Anubhāva and the Vyabhichāribhāva is Rasa. That this definition is in the wake of the one given

1. R. A. S. pp. 14-15. 2. A. S. T. p. 13. 3. R. A. S. p. 15. 4. A. S. T. p. 229.

257

by Abhinava is quite clear. Ruyyaka had, however, taken in his hands a thorough discussion of the poetic figures which he performed with such a remarkable degree of insight and independence that Viśvanātha, Vidyādhara etc. accept his views in this connection as authoritative. It may, perhaps, be due to his occupation with the poetic figures that he calls the subject, which kept the intellect of his predecessors engaged, very abstruse and worthy of sharp and probing minds and summarily deals with suggestion before starting his avowed task. Hemachandra, the Jain writer, has to his credit a volumi- nous work, the Kāvyānuśāsana which is almost a com- pilation. He borrows from nearly all the standard works on poetics and dramaturgy. The borrowings from Mammata are more obvious than those from others. The concept of Rasa1 as defined by him agrees with that of Abhinava. He says that the pleasure in poetry is born of the taste of Rasa2. The author defines poetry according to Mammata. He, however, makes the addition of one element to it,3 viz. the Alankāra ; but the com. to the Sūtra says that sometimes poetry devoid of the Alankāra is also called as such. He considers the Dosas, the Gunas and the Alankāras in relation with Rasa. He considers the Alankāras in different aspects4 wherein they can help the maturing of Rasa. Walking in the footsteps of Mammata he accepts nine Rasas5, the Śānta being added to the orthodox eight. He shows his originality, though a little, in giving the Śrngāra Rasa priority in point of consideration due to its pervasion over, and intimacy

1. H. K. S. pp. 56-66. 2. Ibid. p. 3. 3. Ibid. p. 16. 4. Ibid. p. 17. 5. Ibid. p. 67. 17

258

with, the whole of mankind ; and then shows other Rasas in relation with it.1 Hemachandra, thus, accepted the pro- minence of Rasa. The other Jain writer, Vägbhata, the senior, uses Mammata's text to a great extent. His definition of poetry includes Rasa which is easily realized2, but it is to be an element there like the Gunas, the Alankāras and the Rītis through the appropriate word and its sense. He, no doubt, defines the Mädhurya Guna as consisting of the word and its sense saturated with Rasa.3 Poetry devoid of Rasa is not palatable as something even though well cooked is not delicious without salt.4 Accepting such a position of Rasa as the above in poetry, he proceeds to the definition of Rasa. The Sthayibhava brought to culmination by the Vibhāvas, the Anubhävas, the Sāttvikabhāvas and the Vyabhi- charibhavas is Rasa5. The nine Rasas, the Santa being added to the list, are accepted by him.6 The author makes no mention of the Dhvani. He may, therefore, have affinities with the pre-Dhvani writers but it is difficult to declare his decided adherence to any school. Rasa, however, received recognition from him, though not as the predominant element in poetry. Vāgbhata, the junior, deserves consideration here. He was a Jain writer following mostly Hemachandra in the definition of poetry.7 As the Guna, the Alankara etc. recieve no consideration in their relation with Rasa, his attitude to Rasa would have been a matter of deduction had not the author

1. H. K. S. pp. 67-68. 2. V. V. L. I. 2. 3. V. V. L. III. 15. 4. Ibid. V. 1. 5. Ibid. V. 2. 6. Ibid. V. 3. 7. V. K. N. I. p. 14.

259

himself in the gloss made it clear. In the beginning of the fifth chapter he declares Rasa as the life of poetry.1 According to him the senior Vägbhata also can be deduced to recognize Rasa as the life in poetry, as in support of his view he quotes his predecessor's illustration.2 Though he includes the Dhvani in the poetic figure called the Paryāyokti,3 yet he uses the word, Abhivyakta, in connection with the realization of Rasa which shows that according to him Rasa is suggested. The nine Sthāyibhāvas ( Śama added) when suggested and revealed by the Vibhävas, the Anubhävas and the Vyabhi- charibhavas become the nine Rasas.4 He describes the defects of Rasa also. He accepts Rasa as the most promi- nent element and is, thus, ahead of his senior in explicitly mentioning it as the life of poetry. Hemachandra had affixed a chapter on dramaturgy to his work whereas the two Vägbhatas' works were rather epitomes to serve as practical manuals as they presented views on nearly every topic in a brief form. With the other two Jain writers, Rämachandra and Gunachandra the case becomes different. They engaged themselves exclusively with dramaturgy and jointly produced a work called the Nātyadarpana. Their attitude towards Rasa is clear from the wide scope given to its consideration in the third Chapter. In opposition to so many writers they stand for the depiction of the Santa Rasa also in the drama.5 The definition of Rasa strikes a new note. The Sthāyibhāva brought to culmina- 1. He admits the suggestivity of the Gunas in connection with Rasas, but their relation with Rasa is not disccussed. The defects are not generally discussed so ; some particular defects of Rasa have been considered towards the end of the work. Ibid. V. p. 53. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid. III. p. 36. 4. Ibid. V. p. 53. 5. N. D. III. p. 163.

260 tion by the Vibhavas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas and rendered capable of being sensed by the Anubhvas is Rasa which is either pleasurable or painful.1 They regard Rasa etc. as the mother of dramaturgy. They consider the defects paricular to Rasas. They try to establish the enjoyment of Rasa in the actor also on the analogy of the prostitute who, though giving pleasure to others, may also feel pleasure by herself.2 They accept Rasa as the predominant element in drama. That they differed from other writers with regard to the definition etc. of certain concepts and views goes to their credit as all these points establish that theirs was an independent and original thinking. With Jayadeva the reversion to the old practice of writing epitomes again becomes obvious. His works, the Chandrā- loka, is, no doubt, modelled on the same lines as the Kāvya- prakāśa; a larger scope, however, is accorded to the con- sideration of the poetic figures. The author gives such a definition of poetry as includes as its constituents all the elements variously emphasized by previous writers. The absence of the defect and the presence of the Laksana, the Rītis, the Gunas, the Alankaras and the Vrttis have been enjoined upon here.3 But the stress is laid upon the Alankāras as words and sense devoid of them have been declared on a par with fire without heat.4 That the author's attitude towards Rasa is not hostile becomes clear as he devotes the whole of one chapter, that is, the sixth to a consideration of it. The Sthāyibhāva being aroused and brought to culmination by the Vibhāvas etc. in the Kāvya and the Nātya and in the actions (of actual life) becomes Rasa. It gives 1. N. D. 109. p. 158. 2. Ibid. p. 160. 3. J. C. L. I. 7. 4. Ibid. I. 8.

261

rise to pleasure in the hearts of the sympathetic persons, the pleasure wherein the experience as if of the whole body being besmeared with the sandal paste is felt and in which the cognition of the rise of any other knowable object is dissolved.1 The author considers the Bhava also wherein the Rasa stage is not completely reached.2 In considering the kinds of suggestion, mention of the Rasābhāsa etc. is made.3 He considers the Rasavat, the Preyas etc. under poetic figures. All these scattered considerations on Rasa and the connected topics prove that even in the works of the avowed champions of the Alankaras the inclusion of the discussion on Rasa was considered to be a necessary element without whch the epitome would have remained incomplete. Sāgaranandin, the author of the Nātakalaksanaratna- kośa, concerns himself exclusively with dramaturgy. Hence his remarks, observations and views are to be understood as advanced from the view-point of a dramaturgist. He comes in line with Bharata dealing, as he does, with Rasa topically as an elemnt in dramaturgy. He devotes to it a very limited canvas.4 He accepts the orthodox eight as the dramatic Rasas. In the sequel he reduces them to four principal Rasas of which the other four are only deriva- tives. He, here, gives the definition of Rasa. The Sthāyi- bhava it is which is aroused by the conjunction of the Vibhava, the Anubhava and the Vyabhichāribhava and is transformed into Rasa. He provides an alternative definition. The Rasas and the Bhavas through mutual assistance and in conjunction attain to the culminating stage. The analogy instanced is of the food and the tasty articles which make

1. J. C. L. VI. 2-3. 2. Ibid. VI. 14. 3. Ibid. VII. 5. 4. N. L. R. K. pp. 77-78.

262

each other palatable. He also considers in this connection the view held by the Satkāryavādins in the form of cause and effect of the Bhava and Rasa where the Bhavas and Rasas are the causes and the effects respectively. Where the Bhävas are the effects and Rasa the cause the two concepts exist simultaneously and bring about the accomplishment through mutual assistance. Sägaranandin, thus, rather compiles the different views given by the predecessors, but his leaning is clear towards that of Bharata whom he follows mostly in his ideas, not only in the treatment of Rasa but also in other topics dealt with in his work. Before passing to the next writer it seems incumbent to pause and devote a little space here to a writer who has avowed himself to the consideration of the Science of music. He is Śārngadeva and his work is the Sangītaratnākara. The consideration of Rasa, therefore, comes in only topically though its prominent and foremost importance has been openly recognized in the very first verse1 on the subject. The com. to the above verse calls Rasa either the Dhīviśeșa (a particular mental power) or the Ichchhāviśeșa (a particular desire). The stanzas that follow define Rasa thus. By the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas as represented by the actor there is generated (in the spectator according to the com.) a consciousness called the Āsvādanā (delectableness or relish) which has no reference to self, friend, enemy or indifferent person or to the conditions, place, time etc. which assumes the forms of the Sthāyibhāvas, which because of the absence of any impediment attains to perfect equipoise, which is different from knowledge of other kinds as intuition, experience, memory and the like, which 1. S. D. S. R. VII. 1362.

263 due to the presence therein of different Sthāyibhāvas etc. is dissimilar to the consciousness of Brahman, the form of which, however, is all bliss and which is experienced by the self. The com. to the above finds points of similarity to the Brahmäsvāda in the last part of the definition. Either the above consciousness is Rasa or the Sthāyibhāva which is apprehended through it becomes Rasa. The analogy of the realization of Rasa is that of the compound formed with the curd etc. which tastes quite different from its ingredients. The author then enumerates nine Rasas and discusses the Śänta Rasa as capable of being represented on the stage. By cogent argument it is established as a dra- matic Rasa.1 Towards the end of the chapter the author puts forward according to some theorists the Bhakti, the Sneha and the Laulya as Rasas with the Śraddha, the Ardrata and the Abhilāsa as their respective Sthāyibhāvas. He shows their inclusion in the Śrngāra and the Hāsya. He thus establishes nine Rasas only.2 The conception of Rasa as shown here probably gave hints and suggestions to Pandita- rāja Jagannātha for his Vedāntic approach to the problem of Rasa. It is confirmed in that the Panditarāja quotes him in connection with the establishment of the Śānta Rasa.3 Vidyādhara, the author of the Ekāvalī, models his work on the Kāvyaprakāśa in that he draws mostly upon it. He recognizes the Dhvani Kävya and says that the Dhvani should be accepted as the soul. Like the Dhvanikāra he also tries to establish it in the teeth of opposition from different direc- tions.4 He says that the Kāvya contains much pleasurable Rasas and brings a great satisfaction to the mind.5 In the

1. S. D. S. R. VII. I. 369-1372. 2. Ibid. VII. 1530-1532. 3. R. G. p. 30. 4. E. V. I. 13. 5. Ibid. I. 9.

264

third chapter under the first stanza the author engages himself in the discussion of Rasa which he places under the Asamlakşyakramavyangya. He recognizes eight kinds of it, viz. Rasa, the Bhāva, the Rasābhāsa, the Bhāvābhāsa, the Bhavasānti, the Bhāvodaya, the Bhavasandhi and the Bhāvaśavalatva. The author draws upon the analogy of the growth of a tree in connection with explaining the various stages in the maturing of the Sthayibhava, located in the form of impression in the Sāmājikas, into Rasa. The Ālambana Vibhāvas make the Sthāyibhāva sprout ; the Uddīpana Vibhāvas, bud forth; the Anubhāvas, capable of being perceived and the Vyabhichāribhāvas make it put forth leaves. No other Śakti (power ) except the Vyañjanā can function in the realization of Rasa. The Pramānas (means of knowledge ) also cannot comprehend it. This explains the transcendental nature of Rasa. The author discusses in extenso this nature of Rasa. That the Gunas are the attri- butes or excellences of Rasa1 is a fact which shows the author's insight into the problem. Rasa, therefore, had gained prominence and was recognized as an important element in poetry. Vidyānātha, the author of the Pratāparudrayaśobhūșaņa or the Pratāparudrīya, makes the first mention of Rasa as one of the knowable objects in the Sastra. The word and its sense, he says, are to have Rasa as the predominant element.2 The definition of poetry is plainly based on Mammata's as it runs thus. The word and its sense, endowed with the Guna, decorated wih the Alankāra and devoid of the Dosas, arranged in either prose or verse are known as the Kävya to critics. The different relations in which these

1. E. V. V. 1. 2. P. R. 4. p. 4.

265

constituents of poetry stand in the whole arrangement are next described. The word and its sense are the body of poetry ; the suggestion, the life ; the Alankāras, the orna- ments ; the Gunas as the Ślesa, valour etc .; the Rītis: leading to the excellence of the soul, character; the Vrttis, the functions which have attained beauty of arrangement ; the Sayyā in which there is perfect harmony among the Padas, the bed itself ; the Päkas which are the kinds of tastes of Rasa, the well-dressed objects-these are the ingredients of the Kävya1. The author considers the Vrttis in con- junction with the author of the Daśarūpaka as the indicators of the substratum of Rasa.2 The Asamlaksyakramavyangya is Rasa etc.3 which Rasa is the life, as it were, of all literary compositions. The Sthāyibhāva brought to a relishable condition by the Vibhāva, the Anubhāva, the Sāttvikabhāva and the Vyabhicharibhava is Rasa.4 The nine Rasas, the Śanta added to the orthodox eight, are accepted by him on the support of the ancient authors.5 The secondary nature of Rasa as the Rasavat Alankara, that of the Bhava as the Preyas Alankāra etc., are also taken into consideration.6 In the three concluding stanzas of the chapter on Rasa the author gives the nature of Rasa as considered along with the Vibhavas etc.7 The attitude of Vidyanatha towards Rasa becomes clear. It is one with Abhinava's8. The inclusion of the consideration on dramaturgy gives added importance to the work. This importance is further

1. P. R. 1-5. p. 42. 2. Ibid. pp. 46-47. 3. Ibid. p. 76. 4. Ibid. p. 219. 5. Ibid. p. 221. 6. Ibid. p. 290. 7. Ibid. 88-90. pp. 291-295. 8. In the Com. Kumārasvāmī makes clear the author's recognition and acceptance of Abhinava's view. (P. R. p. 219).

266

enhanced due to the fact that the different rules on dramaturgy in connection with the plot, its divisions etc. are illustrated in one drama specially composed by him for the purpose which forms a part of the present work. Viśvanātha's work, the Sāhityadarpaņa, also conatins a thorough discussion on the technicalities of the dramatic art and thus is more important than his predecessor's work, the Pratāparudrīya. The Dhvanikāra and Abhinava had, no doubt, pointed out the predominance and the foremost importance of Rasa, yet the admission was not so direct and explicit as it was said that other kinds of suggestions were not less important though ultimately they resulted in the Rasadhvani. This sort of admission which was in a way implicit was taken up as a hint and carried to extreme by Viśvanātha as he defined the Kāvya to be that sentence of which the soul was Rasa. The elements such as the Dosas, the Gunas, the Alankaras, the Rītis etc. are considered by him in relation with Rasal. The influence of Mammata is quite evident in all these matters. In the third chapter the author gives the definition which bears the definite and obvious influence of Abhinava. The Sthayibhava as the Rati etc. attains the stage of Rasa when suggested by the Vibhāva, the Anubhāva and the Vyabhichāribhāva. It is enjoyed by the sympathetic critics within their own selves as it is their Sthāyibhāva which gets converted into Rasa.2 The com. to the above explains that this conversion is just like the transformation of milk into curd. In the stanzas that follow the author describes its form and the nature of its relish which make the agreement of the author with Abhinava's view quite evident. This stand-point of the

1. S. D. I. 3. 2. Ibid. III. 1.

267 author dismisses the objections against the pleasurable nature of the Karuna Rasa. He confirms the delectable nature of the Karuna Rasa by the experience of sympathetic persons who frequent dramatic representations. In this connection he makes capital of the latent impression in the sympathetic critic and says that it is aroused at the representa- tion and not in worldly matters, hence it is pleasure-giving as it is transcendental. Like Abhinava he explains the generalization of the Vibhävas etc., which removes the limita- tion and presents things in their universal aspects. These Vibhāvas etc. are first separately cognized and then con- jointly like the beverage in which the different elements get so mixed together as to be tasted as one drink only. He then tries to explain that the substratum of Rasa is not the original character who is being imitated as he existed in the past, belonged to this world and was separated from the representation by a long gap. It is neither the actor whose acting is studied. If the actor is at all to be accepted as enjoying Rasa at a dramatic representation, he can be so accepted only as one of the spectators. This. last position makes the spectators the enjoyers of Rasa. He seems to become a bit loose in his language when he uses the words, 'Rasasyacha Vibhāvādisamūhālambanātmakatayaiva Pratīter .... '1 which, even though used by the author in the sense that Rasa is realized just as the beverage is enjoyed where- in the tastes of the different ingredients are not separately felt, may still suggest Rasa as the stage of which the soul is the conjoint knowledge of the Vibhāvas etc. as in this conjoint knowledge each constituent is separately cognized whereas in reality in the realization of Rasa no separate cognition

1. S. D. III. p. 5. .

268

of the Vibhäva etc. is had. It does not become the object of any cognition but is the cognition itself and in this con- sists its transcendental nature. It is something which is self-illumined as the use is only metaphorical when it is said to be produced on the basis of the production of its relish which is Rasa itself. And as this relish is one continuous whole, Rasa is said to be impartible. In this very third chapter the author considers the kinds of heroes according to their love relations with the heroines. Such and other allied considerations amply prove the whole-hearted partiality of the author towards Rasa. Though the author accepts the orthodox eight Rasas frankly with the half-hearted admission of the Santa and the Vatsala on the authority of the best sage, yet in the com, he expounds the one Rasa theory of one Nārāyana, his great grandfather as recorded by Dharmadatta in his work. The Chamatkära which is another name for the expansion of the mind is made the basis and the Adbhuta Rasa is advocated as the only Rasa. Though this one Rasa theory is advocated under the name of another, yet it proves how implicitly the author desired to give wholesale importance to Rasa. Viśvanātha, thus, stands as the extreme exponent of Rasa in its predominance over all other poetic con- stituents. Śāradātanaya's work, the Bhāvaprakāśana, is a volu- minous compendium on dramaturgy. As the author makes clear towards the end of this work his attitude towards Rasa is that of a follower of the Rasa school as propounded by Bhatta Abhinava. The Rīti, the Vrtti, the Guna and the Alankāra-all receive treatment as subsidiary to Rasa. There are, however, certain points of difference in the view of this author. He tackles the different views suggesting his own solutions at places. By the Vibhavas etc. duly placed

269

as also by the four kinds of Abhinaya the Sthāyibhāvas attain to the stage of Rasa. The Sthāyibhava being brought to a relishable condition by the Vibhavas, the Anubhavas, the Sāttvikabhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas is Rasa.1 As the mixing with the tasty elements makes the food palatable, so do others bring the Sthayibhava to a relishable condition. This view the author gives in the name of Bharata but just below he gives the prose text in the name of Bharatavrddha.2 This prose text is mainly explanatory of the above stanzas. It explains Rasa as the conversion of the Spectators' Sthāyi- bhävas by the Vibhavas etc. into Rasa in their minds and acounts for the different kinds of Rasa on the basis of the difference of their mental conditions coming into existence at particular times. That it is from the Bhavas that Rasas originate is confirmed by the author in the name of Vāsuki.3 The author then confirms the view of Bhatta Lollata in that he says that Rasas emanate from the original characters as heroes and heroines and to a certain extent from the actors who imitate them cleverly and skilfully. The spectators in the dramatic representation witness the emotions as shown by the actors and feel pleasure. This is one view which is criticized by the next in which substratum of Rasa (Rasāśraya) is the mind ( of the spectator ) itself as Rasa is the sentiment which brings pleasure to the mind. And as the Srngāra Rasa is invariably all blissful, it is the only Rasa. Other Rasas are only so called for some reason or other. The analogy afforded is very homely as the six wordly tastes ( Şadrasas ) allgo under the one name, Rasa, though one is sweet, the other is bitter etc. People at different times

1. B. P. lines. 7-10. p. 36. 2. Ibid. line. 14. p. 36. 3. Ibid. Lines 1-2. p. 37.

270

and places experience delectable taste even from bitter things. They in this world in future, present and past shall be, are and were, born with different latent impressions ( Samskāras ) of friendliness, indifference and enmity. Therefore the representation of the Vira, the Hāsya, the Karuna and the Adbhuta gives pleasure to them at different places and in different times. The same dramatic representation produces diverse moods in them according to their latent impressions. The difference in nature, in place and time as also the fickleness of mind are some other factors which count here.1 The whole elucidation as given above is, no doubt, an excellent exposition of the different kinds of Rasa, but it is in the third view that the approach becomes psychological as the ego etc. are here tapped. As the author informs it was imparted to Vivasvān by Śiva and is described in the Yogamālāsamhitā.2 The ego (Ahankāra) has one function called the Abhimana and the Tanmatras with the ego are respectively the originators of the ten sense organs. The ego through the Abhimāna Vrtti and sense organs comes into touch with the external objects. It is then transformed into Rasa with all its different manifestations. This happens in accordance with the Sattva, the Rajas and the Tamas-the three qualities which make the Ahankāra Sāttvika, Rājasika and Tämasika. The Sānkhya doctrine according to which there are evolutes from the Prakrti is a guide here. Rasa, thus, is nothing but a transformation of the Abhimāna Vrtti assuming different forms according to different Bhāvas and Gunas. Due to this Abhimana Vrtti the spectator is placed mentally on a par with the hero and the heroine whose Abhimana Vrtti is equated by the spectator with his own

1. B. P. Lines. 14-15. p. 40. 2. Ibid. Lines 15-16. p. 45.

271

and, thus, Rasa is enjoyed. That the spectator feels the eight kinds of emotions as the various transformations of his Ahankāra Vrtti is, thus, quite clear. The fourth view which accepts the above explanation of origin of eight Rasas refutes the Santa Rasa. This view is advanced in the name of Padmabhū.1 The fifth view is in some respects similar to the third but stands opposed to the fourth in as much as it recognizes the Śānta Rasa. According to this view, spon- sored as it is in the book by Nārada2 who changes his position at every time, Rasas are the changes of the mind ( Manovi- kāra ). The helping factors in these changes are the Ahankāra and the Gunas. As in the third theory the mind endowed with the Guna etc. comes into contact with the outward phenomena and evolves Rasas. In case of the Śānta Rasa no contact with the external object is necessary; the pre- dominance of the Sattva in the mind renders its realization possible. Some of the above traditions either are original which were lost but which betray influence over the view as advocated by Bhoja or were evolved very late as to show borrowings from the views of authors as Bhoja etc. and have been put under the names of Rsis etc. so as to impart to them an air of originality dating from ancient times. Śāradātanaya gives the above views and then discusses the nature of cognition the spectators have when they witness the actors representing the diverse roles of the original characters. When the spectators see the actors representing Rāma etc., they take Nața (the actor ) as Rāma himself. This knowledge is fit to serve the purpose (Arthakriyākarmasa- marth) and, therefore, it is true.3 This remark is made in

1. B. P. Line. 10. p. 47. 2. Ibid. Line. 12. p. 47. 3. B. P. Line. 21. p. 51.

272

criticism of Śrī Śankuka's view and in the wake of Bhatta- Nayaka's theory which the author modifies very little. He believes in the function of the three powers as Bhatta Nāyaka did; the departure, however, came in respect of the enjoy- ment of Rasa. Bhatța Nāyaka says that the predominance of the Sattva causes pleasure and hence Rasānubhava is compared to Parabrahmānanda; the experience of Rasa is unalloyed bliss as it is different from cognition or memory. The world is composed of Tattvas ( elements ) from the Māyā to the earth and the Rasanubhava according to Sārada' anaya is similar to the Jivātaman's enjoyment of the world which though full of miseries is enjoyed through the three functions, Rāga, Vidyā and Kalā. At a dramatic representa- tion the spectator sees different Bhavas and through Rāga, Vidyā and Kalā enjoys them as Rasas. In other words, clever actors represent the worldly things and Jīvas who have in them similar impressions of their own deeds identify them- selves with the original characters and then enjoy pleasure after having forgotten themselves. This view is in accordance with the one advocated in the Saivägama wherein even troublesome and pain-giving objects are realized as delecta- ble. The author, therefore, compares the Rasānubhava to Samsārānanda (worldly pleasure ) as the actors represent the happenings of the world. As the dramatic representa- tion is of daily life the Rasānubhava well deserves to be compared with the Samsārānanda. Śāradātanaya, no doubt, is the first man to make this comparison. Making this comparision the author allies himself with one author, Dhanañjaya, who accepts Rasa but does not recognize the power of suggestion ( Vyañjanā Vrtti) as he says that the Tātparya Sakti can serve its purpose well, rather it includes it. The authors desire that Rasas should be produced in

273

the minds of the readers or the spectators and the desire is fulfilled as the readers or the spectators enjoy Rasa; the Tātparya Śakti is nothing but this desire on both sides, hence Rasa is obtained through the Tātparya Śakti. The relation between a poem or a drama and Rasa is the Bhāvyabhāvakabhāva and the Pratipādyapratipādakabhāva and that between Rasa and the readers or the spectators is Bhoktrbhogyabhāva. Śāradātanaya is seen here owing affinities with Dhanañjaya and Bhatta Nāyaka in different matters. The author treats the Dhvani but takes it as a part of the Tatparya Sakti. As the author says the Dhvani is found only in poetry whereas the scope of the Tātparya Śakti is much wider as it is found in the speech, Laukika ( worldly ), Vaidika ( Vedic) and Poetical. The difference that the author recognizes between the Dhvani and the Tātparya Śakti is as that of a Brāhmaņa and a Brahmachärin1, as in the example the Brahmachārins may include the Brähmanas but not the other way. Sāradātanaya shows the influence of so many authorities as Bhatta Nāyaka, Dhanañjaya etc. Even betraying such influence he accepts the prominence of Rasa, as it is the purpose of the dramatic pieces, when read or represented on the stage, to excite emotions in the persons. And it is because of this that the author devotes so much attention to its comprehensive consideration in all its details and names the work as the Bhāvaprakāśana, the work which gives a clear and com- prehensive exposition to all the Bhāvas. Śinga Bhūpāla is to be classed as a writer on dramaturgy. He considers Rasa as the life of dramatic compositions.2 The Sthāyibhāva brought to a relishable condition by the

1. B. P. Line. 5. p. 150. 2. R. S. I. 58. 18

274

Vibhavas, the Anubhāvas, the Sāttvikabhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas is Rasa.1 This definition of Rasa is evidently that of Dhanañjaya whom the author also follows in point of refuting the Santa Rasa in dramas.2 But as he considers every item in relation with Rasa he attaches the utmost importance to Rasa establishing it as the very life of dramaturgy. He names his work itself as the Rasārna- vasudhakara which deals mostly with the accessaries of the Śrngāra Rasa and, thus, implicitly accepts its all importance. The above acceptance of the Srngāra Rasa remains implicit in Bhānudatta's work, the Rasataranginī, which evidently deals with all Rasas. The various constituents of Rasa receive attention in the first five chapters. The sixth chapter deals with Rasa. The author gives the defini- tions in such forms as cover the views put forward by Bhatta Lollata, Srī Sankuka, Bhațța Nāyaka and Abhinava. The first definition covers in brief the views of Bhatta Lollata and Śrī Śankuka. The Sthāyibhāva being fully accomplished ( Paripūrņa ) being brought to apprehension in various ways ( Upanīyamāna ) and being made pleasurable ( Rasyamāna ) by the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas, the Sāttvikabhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhavas is Rasa.3 As the Hindi com. puts it the words, Paripūrna and Upanīyamāna, are to be variously construed in connection with the Vibhavas etc. In other words, the Alambana Vibhavas generate the Sthāyibhāva, the Uddīpana Vibhāvas excite it, the Anubhāvas make it capable of being sensed and the Vyabhichāribhāvas make it matured. These different functions of the Vibhāvas etc. are included in the word, Paripūrna, whereas the word,

1. R. S. I. 58-59. 2. Ibid. II. pp. 140-141. 3. B. R. T. p. 115.

275

Upanīyamāna, means that the Sthāyibhāva is located in the original characters as Rāma etc., and is superimposed on the actor who personates the original character so skilfully. It is then felt as pleasurable and is Rasa. Interpreted differently the word, Upanīyamana, means that through the Vibhāvas etc., which though artificial are not cognized as such, the Sthāyibhava is inferred to exist in the actor on the analogy, Chitraturaganyāya (horse in the picture ) and hence becomes accomplished ( Paripūrna ), that is, transformed to another stage and relished as Rasa. The second view as expressed by the author obviously covers the theory of Bhatta Nāyaka. Where the mind comes to an equipoise through the Bhava, the Vibhavas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas it is Rasa.1 The inclusion of the word, Bhava, for the Sthāyi- bhava is to hint that the function of generalization has to be recognized here. The word, Viśrānti, in the Sūtra stands for the predominance of the Sattva over the Rajas and the Tamas, in which state of mind the generalized Vibhāvas etc. are relished as pleasurable due to the function called the Bhojakatva. The third view of the author is evidently advanced to cover the theory of Abhinava. The latent impression brought out, awakened, that is, revealed ( and matured ) is Rasa.2 The word, Prabuddha, is purposely put here to show that the author was well acquainted with the technicalities of the view of Abhinava ; he knew that the basis of the realization of Rasa was the dormant emotion in the sympathetic critic ( spectator or reader ) but for which Rasa can never be relished. In this connection the author says in the next sentence that the awakening factors are the Vibhavas, the Anubhavas and the Vyabhichāri-

1. B. R. T. p. 117. 2. Ibid. p. 118.

276

bhavas.1 If it is objected that in case of the first love of the pair the above definition of Rasa will not do as the Sthāyi- bhavas will not be awakened, the reply is that even here the presence of emotions in latent state has to be recognized on the basis of experience in the previous life. Rasa, the author says, is of two kinds, Laukika ( worldly ) and Alaukika ( trans- cendental). That born of the six kinds of worldly relations (as pointed out in the Nyāya-Vaiseşika Philosophy ) is the Laukika whereas the Alaukika Rasa is that obtained from the superphysical relations. The latter is again divided into three kinds, Svāpnika (that pertaining to dream), Mānorathika ( that pertaining to desire ) and Aupanāyika ( that pertaining to the hero). The last one is realized in the Kāvya and the Nātya where there is Chamatkāra available from the words and their meanings or from the objects and what is conveyed by them.2 According to Bharata the author accepts eight Rasas only.3 He puts forward for discussion the Vātsalya, the Laulya ( fickleness), the Bhakti ( devotion ) and the Kār- panya ( imbecility ) to be accepted as Rasas but shows their inclusion in the recognized eight.4 The author also accepts the Śānta Rasa but only in compositions other than dramas.5 In contradistinction to the Sānta Rasa the Māyā Rasa is first put forward by Bhänudatta and then recognized as a Rasa by him. The Sthayibhavas of the eight orthodox Rasas are to act as its Vyabhichāribhāvas as its own Sthāyi- bhāva is the Mithyājñāna (false knowledge ).6 The author contemplates three kinds of Rasa as regards its suggestion : Abhimukha, that is, where the Vibhāvas etc. explicitly suggest

1. B. R. T. p. 120. 2. Ibid. pp. 121-123. 3. Ibid. p. 124. 4. Ibid. p. 125. 5. Ibid. p. 163. 6. Ibid. pp. 161-162.

277

it ; Vimukha, that is, where the Vibhāvas etc. are not explicitly mentioned and Rasa is manifested with difficulty ; and Paramukha, that is, through the Alankāras and the Bhavas in which cases the Alankāras and the Bhavas are the principal (Mukhya) factors to which Rasa stands as sub- sidiary (Gauna) as the mind gets repose in the Alankāras and the Bhavas (Manoviśrāmahetutvāt ).1 The criterion, viz. Manoviśrāma, hints the affinities of the author towards the second view ( Bhatta Nayaka's ) in which it occurs but the mention of Abhinava's view in the end with added explanation gives firm ground to believe that the author allied himself with him. The author, having enumerated the eight orthodox Rasas, establishes the foremost importance and predominance of the Śrngāra Rasa on two grounds. Firstly, Visnu is the chief among the gods and the very same Visnu is the presiding deity of this Rasa ; and secondly, all beings have desires in them2. This partiality towards the Śrngāra Rasa becomes quite clear when the author engages himself in the exclusive consideration of that Rasa in his other work, the Rasamañjarī, as it dilates on the Nāyikā, the Śņngāra Nāyaka, his assistants, their qualities etc .-- all in connection with the Śrngāra Rasa. The Śrngāra Rasa so much emphasized by Bhānudatta takes a new turn and assumes quite a different shape with the next writer, Rupa Goswamī. It loses its earthly touch and gets connected with the god Krsna. Consequently it becomes the ultimate stage in the Bhakti Rasa. This ultimate stage is preceded by other four stages which mark the realization of the Bhakti Rasa at different levels. The ulti- mate stage is called the Madhura or the Ujjvala Rasa. The

1. B. R. T. p. 181. 2. Ibid. p. 124.

278

suggestion for this name is probably to be found in the description of the Śrngāra Rasa by Bharata.1 Rūpa Gosvāmī names his work dealing exclusively with the Madhura Rasa in all its details as the Ujjvalanīlamani, wherein Krsna is the hero2 and cowherd maidens figure as the heroines. The Madhura Rasa therein is called the Bhakti rasarāt.3 The position of the author in thus assigning the highest and the greatest importance to the Madhura Rasa resembles that of Bhoja ; but the difference is remarkable as the Śrngāra Rasa here is evaluated in terms of Viasnava devotion. The author's other work, the Haribhaktirasāmrtasindhu, treats of the Bhakti Rasa as a whole in wider details. Here in this book the author shows the difference in the Bahkti Rasa on the basis of primary and secondary consideration of the Rati, the Sthāyibhāva.4 The Mukhya Bhakti has five kinds which are, so to say, the five stages of the Bhakti Rasa. They are the Śanta Bhakti, the Prīta Bhakti, the Preyo Bhakti, the Vatsala Bhakti and the Madhura Bhakti. In the Gauna Bhakti the Hasya, the Adbhuta, the Vira, the Karuna, the Raudra, the Bhayanaka and the Bībhatsa have been included5. The author thus recognizes the Santa as a Rasa even though it is a stage in the Bhakti Rasa. Its Sahrdayas (sympathetic persons who realize it ) are those who are Śamins ( endowed with the Sama ) and its Sthayibhava is the Santi Ratis. The author discusses the realization of Rasa and establishes its blissful nature7. The blissful nature of Rasa as the Karuna is proved on valid grounds, viz. firstly, the experience of the spectators or the readers testifies to its being of a blissful

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. p. 73. 2. R. U. M. p. 4. 3. Ibid. p. 3. 4. R. H. S. p. 283. 5. Ibid. p. 309 6. Ibid. p. 315. 7. Ibid. pp. 305-308.

279

nature ; and secondly, the blissful nature of the Rati Sthāyi- bhäva is accepted without which the Karuna can never be realized as Rasa.1 The Śrngāra Rasa given this erotico-religious turn in the Vaisnava school of Chaitanya and culminating in the Madhura Rasa otherwise called the Ujjvala Rasa became quite religious in its nature in the treatment accorded to it by rī Madhu- sūdana Sarasvatī in his Śrī Bhagavatbhaktirasāyana. The author begins his work with the word, Navarasamilitam (mixed with nine Rasas) thereby tacitly extending recognition to them but they mix with the Purusartha concentrated in Lord Mukunda. It is, thus, the Bhakti. It is in the form of consciousness consisting of unique bliss not touched with misery or evil.2 The Chitta ( mind) is like the lac which is by nature hard and stiff, it melts in contact with the heating causes which are the Käma, the Krodha, the Bhaya etc. When an object leaves its impression on this melted Chitta, that impression is called the Samskāra, the Vāsanā, the Bhava or the Bhavana.3 Such impression once hardened in the stiff condition of the Chitta is not effaced even at its melting next time.4 This form of the object is called the Sthäyibhava which again attains the stage of Rasa due to extreme pleasure as it is the Lord Himself, whose form is the highest bliss and who has impressed Himself on the mind, that attains fully to the stage of Rasa in that form. Even in respect of the Rati as connected with a lady etc., the cause is the same consciousness of extreme pleasure, as here the same Lord is covered with His own Maya though He is the

1. R. H. S. pp. 312 & 458. 2. S. B. B. R. I. 1. 3. Ibid. I. 4-6. 4. Ibid. I. 8.

280 effect.1 But in such cases the delectableness is on a lower level2 than that of the Bhakti, hence the latter is to be ever preferred. The Sthayibhava when revealed as of blissful nature by the Vibhävas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhi- charibhavas is called Rasa.3 As the (eternal) bliss is of the form of self it has no substratum, but the Vrtti which reveals it is in the mind of the spectator or the reader.4 Hence the mind can be said to be its substratum. The anuthor tries to establish the transcendental nature of the Sthāyibhāvas in the spectator. The Sthāyibhāvas as the Rati etc. in the Kāvya are worldly, but others located in the spectators, though similar to the worldly ones, are yet transcendental. The latter, therefore, are nothing but causes of delight though their counterparts in the original characters cause pleasure and pain. It is because of this fact that in Rasas as the Karuņa the delectable pleasure cannot be denied.5 The author then accounts for the supramundane nature of the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas and explains this trio as the cause of the awakening of the Rati etc. in the mind of the spectator or the reader. This trio gets universalized instead of remaining particular. The group-cognition of the Sthāyibhāva awakened, sensed and nourished by the above trio results in a state of mind wherein the Sattva predominates, and immediately it reveals the highest pleasure which is Rasa, whereas others call that very state Rasa.6 Rasa is included in the Asamlaksyakramavyangya because of its above immediacy in cognition. The author considers the other kind of Dhvani, viz. the Samlaksya- 1. S. B. B. R. I. 8-11. 2. Ibid. I. 13. 3. Ibid. III. 2. 4. Ibid. III. 3. 5. Ibid. III. 4-6. 6. Ibid. III. 12.

281

kramavyangya which is either a mere statement of fact ( Vastu) or a suggested Alankāra.1 He points out the relation of the Dosas, the Rītis and the Gunas with Rasa.2 The blissful nature of Rasa is described on the support of the statement from the Śrutis. That cognition is the revelation of one's own self, characterized by indeterminate delight, and as the Śrutis say, "Verily it is Rasa ", it is the eternal bliss which becomes revealed.3 The supreme bliss, the Ātman it is which is Rasa.4 The author, thus, attains to the highest level in the explanation of Rasa when he establishes perfect identity between the Paramänanda, the highest bliss which exists in its complete form in the Lord and the Chit, the utter consciousness, which is also the essential nature of the Brahman as also of the individual soul covered as it remains with the Maya of the Brahman. In the Alankārakaustubha of Kavi Karņapūra Gosvāmī, ' the Vaisnavite proclivities are not so prominent',5 as De puts it. The author, therefore, does not dwell upon the details as was done by Rūpa Gosvāmī. He, however, quotes illustrations from the Vaisnava scriptures dealing mainly with the life-incidents of Lord Krsna and the cowherd maidens. The first two verses devoted to the Mangalā- charana mention the words, the Lord Krsna and Sudrśām meaning the Gopānganās. The inclusion of the word, Rasa, as the greatest bliss of the self and the Dhvani com- pared to the notes of the flute of the Lord point out the author's recognition of these two fundamental principles of Sanskrit literary criticism. But Rasa as occurring in the

1. S. B. B. R. III. 15-16. 2. Ibid. III. 18-20. 3. Ibid. III. 22. 4. Ibid. III. 24. 5. D. S. P. Vol. I. p. 258.

282

present context is the Madhura Rasa of the Vaisnava school though it has not been so mentioned by the author. He recognizes the Dhvani as the vital airs and Rasa as the soul of poetry and considers other elements in relation with Rasa1-a fact which clearly proves the predominance of Rasa. It finds confirmation in as much as the Kavi has to be a man full of sentiments.2 He considers Rasa as the Asamlakşyakramavyangya.3 The author first quotes the definition from Bharata and explains it later on. The Vibhā- vas are of two kinds : the Alambana and the Uddipana. The Alambana is the prop of the Sthayibhāvas and the Uddīpanas excite them. By these three ( the Anubhävas and the Vyabhi- chāribhāvas included) which serve as revealers or suggestors and which have become clearly visible, the Sthāyibhāva which is, as it were, bulbous root of the sprout of taste, becomes Rasa. This bulbous root of the sprout of taste is called by the author the Sthayibhava. It is an attribute of the Chitta devoid of the Rajas and the Tamas wherein the Sattva predominates.4 The author, therefore, accepts the predominance of the Sattva element and, thus, links his affinity with the view of Bhatta Nāyaka. Rasa is again described as that happiness which blocks other functions of external as well as internal organs. Thus it is only that function which is suitable to, or in accordance with, that happiness which is allowed free and smooth operation. It is a happiness wherein the causes mentioned above all get combined and conjoined. This happiness, therefore, is something very striking.5 The author describes twelve Rasas

1. K. A. K. I. I. P. 5. 2. Ibid. I. 3. p. 11. 3. Ibid. III. 39. p. 70. 4. Ibid. V. 62-63. pp. 120-122. 5. Ibid. V. III. 70. p. 129.

283 adding the Santa, the Vātsalya, the Prema and the Bhakti to the orthodox eight. Under the description of the Prema Rasa a peculiar doctrine recognizing it as the only Rasa is referred to. It is disposed of only in hints for fear of increasing the bulk of the work. The illustrative stanza is. quite consistent with the view of those who advocate the Śrngāra as the only Rasa, for in it the Srngara may be principal and the Prema as its subsidiary, though sometimes the latter becomes predominant. The author, however, reverts the order and accepts the Prema as principal and the Śrngāra subordinate to it. The Prema has inherent in it delectableness which is continuous and ceaseless hence all Rasas and the Bhāvas merge into it as the waves in the ocean.1 The author also suggests the Śrngära as the only Rasa as the Lord is the Śrngāra incarnate. This position is accepted on two grounds. Firstly, the Lord and the Śrngāra Rasa have the same complexion which is dark blue and secondly, Lord Krsna Himself is the presiding deity of the Śrngāra Rasa.2 This is a position indicating the indirect recognition of the Šrngāra as the only Rasa and thus joining hands partially with Bhoja whose number of Rasa, though with a little addition, is also recognized. The admission of the Santa, the Bhakti, the Prema and the Vatsalya in the number of Rasas should not sound strange as the author belonged to the Vaisnava school, the doctrines of which are to be found in details in the works of Rupa Gosvāmī wherein as shown above love of Lord Krsna and the Gopānganās attains various stages and assumes different forms. Keśava Miśra in the Alankāraśekhara draws largely upon previous writers, Mammata and the junior Vāgbhața in 1. K. A. K. V. p. 148-149. 2. Ibid. V. pp. 150-151.

284

especial. He names one Śauddhodani whose definition of poetry is quoted. The definition includes Rasa as one of the elements and says that poetry leads to a particular pleasure.1 The author describes metaphorically the body of poetry in which connection Rasa is said to be the soul whereas according to others it is the mind.2 The Rītis,3 the Dosas,4 the Gunas,5 the arrangement of letters suitable to Rasas6 etc. are all con- sidered in connection with Rasa. Rasa is the soul because the poetic composition devoid of it is as useless as the body without the soul in it.7 That the stage in which the Sthāyi- bhava with the Vibhava, the Anubhava and the Vyabhichāri- bhäva gets converted into Rasa is not the stage of the group- cognition ( Samūhālambanajñāna ) is plainly refuted by the author by pointing out the principal and the subordinate relation existing among them. The author recognizes the Rasatva as a Jāti. He says, "Tattra Rasatvamangāngī- bhāvāpannasakalavibhāvādi Sākșātkāratvam. Angāngītyādi Samūhālambanavāraņāya. Rasatvamapi Jātiriti Vayam." 8 By the causes, the effects and the accessaries the Sthāyi- bhäva brought to revelation, that is, that stage where it is fully relished is Rasa. This is the view of those according to whom the causes are the ladies etc., the effects the eight Sāttvikabhāvas and the accessaries the gardens etc. The Vyabhichāribhāvas have also been mentioned, for instance, the Glani etc. Others describe Rasa in this way. The Sthāyibhava brought to its culmination by the Vibhāvas, the Anubhavas, the Sattvikabhavas and the Vyabhichāri-

1. A. S. I. 1. 2. Ibid. II. 2. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. IV. p. 12. 5. Ibid. VII. p. 20. 6. Ibid. XXII. pp. 81-83. 7. Ibid. XX. p. 68. 8. A. S. XX. p. 69.

285

bhavas is Rasa. The author accepts in accordance with the latter view nine Rasas ( the Santa added to the orthodox eight ) in the poetic composition.1 The Alankāraśekhara, a book on the poetic figures as its name indicates, accords a wide scope for the consideration of Rasa. Hence the affinities of its author are definitely linked with the Rasa school. It seems quite pertinent here to devote a little space to the discussion of the views of Prabhākarabhatta who advances criticism on the views of the previous writer, Keśava Miśra. Prabhākarabhatta, the author of the Rasa- pradīpa, frankly recognizes the predominance of Rasa as he says that the principal aim of the Kāvya is pleasure born of the knowledge of Rasa ( Rasasamvedanajanyam Sukhameva Mukhyam Prayojanam )2, and one writes or reads the Kāvya for Rasa ( Rasārthameva Kāvyapravrtteḥ).3 The name of the book also shows it. It is rather a survey with criticism of the views of renowned predecessors. The three kinds of the Kävya are recognized.4 The Adbhuta synthesis of Nārāyaņa is criticized.5 The Vyañjanā Vțtti is accepted and those criticizing it are themselves severely criticized.6 The special point worth notice in this work is the criticism of the view of Keśava who advanced that the Vibhävatva, the Anubhāvatva and the Vyabhichāritva are the Jātiviśeșas ( particular essential characteristics ) inherent in particular Chitta Vrttis ( mental functions ) in the opinion of Abhinava whereas they inhere in the Kārana, the Kārya and the

1. A. S. XX. 1. 2. R. P. I. p. 3. 3. Ibid. II. p. 17. 4. Ibid. I. pp. 15-16. 5. Ibid. II. p. 40. 6. Ibid. III.

286

Shahakarin of the worldly Rati according to Bhatta Lollata. And these Jativisesas as such should be aceepted for, as the process ( Prakriyā ) differs here from that recognized in the Vaiśeşika system, the defect, viz. the Sankara ( admixture ) will not arise. To explain in the Vaisesika system the defect, viz. the Sankara (admixture) arises in recognizing the Murtatva (abstract quality in all things having form ) and the Bhūtatva (abstract quality inherent in the elements ) as Jātis. The first inheres in the mind ( Manas ) and the second in the ether ( Akāśa) and both inhere simultaneously in the earth ( Prthvī ). The last is an example of the Sankara if the above two are accepted as Jätis. Hence are these two recognized as Dharmas ( qualities ) only. In case of the Vibhavatva, the Anubhävatva etc. no such thing happens for the Vibhāvatva, the Anubhavatva etc. do not simultaneously inhere in one object as in the above case. The criticism points out that in the opinion of Abhinava, no doubt, Smrtitva, the Anu- bhavatva etc. are many Jātis, yet the question of one being wider in scope than other has not been considered. Same is the case with what Bhatta Lollata holds. Hence in the absence of the admission of one Jati's being wider than other ( Parāparabhāvānupapattau ), the Sankara of these Jātis will surely come in. Then the statement about the difference of process ( Prakriyā) from that advocated in the Vaiśeșika comes up for criticism. Prabhākara wants to know if this difference means either that the Vibhävas etc. having inherent in them the particular Jātis are substances ( Padārthas ) other than the recognized ones, or the non-acceptance of the defect of the Jäti Sankara. In case the first meaning is accepted Prabhākara points out that no proof (Pramāna) for its acceptance is available. In the acceptance of the second meaning where one Jäti is not wider in scope than

287 other the defect, viz. Sankara, will invariably creep in, for no alternative provides itself here. Further, in the opinion of Abhinava, it is not necessary to accept that, as the Vibhāvas etc. are particular Chitta Vrttis and their being of particular nature will have to be admitted, they are substances ( Pada- rthas ) other than the recognized ones, for the above parti- cular Chitta Vrttis will surely come under the Jñāna ( know- ledge ) or the Ichchhā (desire). In the opinion of Bhatta Lollata, however, they have already been recognized among the Kāraņas, the Kāryas and the Sahakārins. Prabhākara then gives his own opinion in the words that the Vibhāvā- ditva is nothing but the cause of the function of the Vibhā- vanā ( Vibhāvanādivyāpāranibandhanameva ) and the Vibhā- vanā is defined as the function bringing about the capability of the shooting forth of sprouts ( of the Sthayibhavas as the Rati etc. ) in the form of Rasa.1 Appaya or Appayya Dīksita accepts three kinds of the Dhvani but pays little attention to the last kind as the poets do not accord much reception to it for it is almost devoid of Rasa.2 He hints at the suggestion of Rasa (Rasadhvani )3 and afterwards gives illustrations wherein the three kinds of suggestion are to be clearly perceived.4 The question, here, is raised as to the process of suggestion. How is it possible to allow scope to suggestion when Rasa is Asamlakşyakramavyangya? The reply to the above query is. that in cases where the realization of Rasa takes place immedia- tely after the cognition of the Vibhāvas etc. the Asamlaksya- krama is to be accepted, but in other cases the Rasādidhvani is Samlakşyakramavyangya. The latter statement is sub-

1. R. P. II. p. 19. 2. A. C. M. p. 4. 3. Ibid. pp. 18, 28, & 29. 4. Ibid. p. 29.

288

stantiated by the words of Abhinava as also by the Dhvanikāra who furnishes instance of the suggestion of the Sañchāri- bhäva. The author in his other work, the Kuvalayānanda, considers Rasa in its other aspects whrein it becomes sub- ordinate and does not play the principal role. The Sthāyi- bhäva as the Rati etc. suggested and revealed by the Vibhāva, the Anubhāva and the Vyabhichāribhāva matures into Rasa. It is a case of the Rasavat Alankāra wherein Rasa becomes subordinate to some other factor. The Bhava is defined either as the Rati suggested in the god, preceptor, disciple etc., or the Vyabhichāribhavas fully suggested. The instance of the Preyo Alankara is one where the Bhava defined above becomes subordinate. There are certain cases where Rasa and the Bhäva defined above are inappropriately and indecently used and are called the Rasābhāsa and the Bhāvābhāsa. The Urjasvat Alankāra deals with the Rasābhāsa and the Bhāvā- bhasa when they become subordinate. When the Bhāvaśānti, an instance furnishing the stage when the Bhāva becomes cooled down, is subordinate, it is a case of the Samāhita Alankāra. The stages which represent the rising of the Bhava (emotion ), the mutual rivalry between two anta- gonistic Bhāvas (emotions) and the rising of many Bhāvas when the succeeding has suppressed the preceding are respectively called the Bhāvodaya, the Bhāvasandhi and the Bhāvaśabalatā. They are all classed as poetic figures by their same respective names.1 All this consideration of Rasa with suitable illustrations clearly shows the author's full acceptance and recognition accorded to Rasa, but as the work was designed to deal with poetic figures Rasa in its principal aspect was hardly to get wide consideration.

1. A. K. N. pp. 169-172.

289 From Appayya Dīkșita there is a logical and psychological transition to Jagannätha who advances his vehement criti- cism against him. The Chitramīmāmsākhandana in refuta- tion of Appayya's Chitramīmāmsā bears witness to it. Jagannātha's originality, critical acumen and masterly and logical exposition of his views deservedly brought to him the title, Panditarāja. The above qualities made him severely criticize the opinions of his predecessors and put them in his own style which is erudite and in involved language. His definition of poetry as 'a word ( or a literary composition ) involving an idea capable of giving pleasure'1 though reminis- cent of older definitions has yet a note of novelty. The ex- planation that follows characterizes the pleasure as striking, disinterested, a fact of internal experience caused by the continued contemplation of something very delightful. And this pleasure is different from its worldly counterpart. As De puts it, it includes 'all the elements of poetry recognised by previous theorists, without specifically naming them.'2 This is clear from the elucidation that follows. Rasa which is universal, impersonal and disinterested pleasure differs from the wordly pleasure derived from objects, as these objects can also be painful. As it is this disinterested pleasure which is involved in the enjoyment of Rasa, and as it is the same disinterested pleasure which is recognized by Jagannätha as the life of poetry, it may be said that Rasa is an essential element of poetry according to him. He finds fault with his predecessors for providing incomplete, erratic and even absurd definitions of poetry, criticizing them on points as the Gunas etc. One-sided definition as Viśva- nätha's is criticized on the basis of narrowness, as two kinds

1. R. G. p. 4. 2. D. S. P. Vol. II. p. 319. 19

290 of the Dhvani have been neglected at the exaggeration of only one, viz. Rasadhvani. This recognition of the Dhvani does not mean that he followed the time-honoured classifica- tion of poetry. Instead of accepting the three kinds he classified it on cogent reasons into four -- a fact which bears testimony to his independent thinking. He considers the Gunas etc. in connection with Rasa. He enumerates the ten Śabda Gunas and the ten Artha Gunas according to Vāmana but recognizes only three, viz. the Mādhurya, the Ojas and the Prasada.1 Panditaraja describes Rasa as follows. The Rati etc. which is located in the form of the mental impression already seated from beforehand, is realized with his self- consciousness, indeed, with his own self-bliss, by the spectator or the reader whose limited apprehension about his own self gets suppressed due to the temporary removal of ignorance serving as sheath over the self-bliss. This removal is effected by a transcendental process which comes into being by the joint operation of the dependent causes ( Ālambanakāraņas ) as Šakuntalā etc., the exciting causes ( Uddīpanakāranas ) as the moonlight etc., the ensuing effects ( Anubhavas ) as the shedding of tears etc. and the accessaries ( Vyabhichāribhāvas ) as the anxiety etc. which, though they are called causes and effects and accessaries in the world, come to be so denominated as their appropriate and beautiful disposition in poetry drives their appeal home to the symapthetic persons along with whose symapthetic imagination they present the heroes and the heroines not as particular individuals but in their universalized forms.2 In elucidation of the above the author quotes just below a line

1. R. G. p. 53. 2. Ibid. pp. 21-22.

291

from Mammata's definition and explains in his own way the word, Vyakti, as the consciousness from over which the cover has been taken off. This uncovered consciousness shines by itself and illuminates the Rati etc. which have got mixed with the Vibhāvas etc. just as the lamp, when its covering has been removed, shines by itself as well as illuminates the objects placed in its vicinity. After having considered such problems as the generation and destruction of Rasa in a metaphorical way the author summarizes the view of Abhinava, Mammata etc. to the effect that Rasa is the Sthāyibhāva as the Rati etc. characterized by conscious- ness from over which the sheath of obstructions has been removed. Herein Chit (consciousness) is used as the Viśeşaņa (adjective ) and the Sthāyibhāva as the Viśeșya (Noun ). This is, no doubt, an explanation according to Panditarāja's affinities with the Vedānta ; it, therefore, brings the theory of Abhinava nearer the tenets of the Vedanta, though the theory of Abhinava has got only a strong analogy with the theory of the realization of the Moksa as pro- pounded in the Vedānta. The Vītavighnā Pratīti was used by Abhinava to indicate the removal of obstacles, as the possession of the audience with personal pain and happiness ( Nijasukhādivivaśībhāva ) by means of music, acting etc., the awakening of the latent impressions and the consequent realization of Rasa. And these two words were understood by Panditarāja in the sense of the Bhagnāvaraņā Chit, con- sciousness of the Atman from over which the screen has been temporarily removed leading to its manifestation. He explained the Sūtra at first in a way which made the con- sciousness adjective but he did not rest satisfied as he wanted his interpretation to be in terms of the Vedānta as far as

292

possible. He, therefore, made the Sthāyibhāva the adjective qualifying the consciousness. When the sympathetic person, spectator or reader, under favourable conditions, as at a dra- matic representation where all possible efforts to make him attuned to the show are attempted to success, begins to meditate repeatedly on the Vibhāvas etc. the obstacles in the way of realizing his own Ātman in its true nature get removed. And the moment the cover is thus laid aside, the blissful Atman is manifested and shows his Sthāyibhāva also evoked along with the evoking factors as the Vibhāvas etc. The analogy of the previously covered but later on uncovered lamp and the previously dark but afterwards illuminated objects near it supports the above statement quite clearly. Rasa, therefore, consists in the enjoyment of the blissful aspect of the Atman qualified by the Rati etc. revealed by it. The bringing back of the screen marks the covering of the Atman and the cessation of its enjoyment, viz. Rasa. The perception of Rasa is a peculiar, immediate and direct one brought about by words ( Sābdī and Aparokşātmikā ) just on a par with the enjoyment of the Atmänanda which is an immediate and direct perception effected by the sentence as Tattvamasi. This, he says, is the real position.1 Panditarāja cites support for his establishing Rasa as the experience of the blissful Atman itself in the Śrutis.2 That it is the view of Panditarāja stands as an undoubted fact. V. A. Rāmaswāmī Śāstrī also gives this view as Paņditarāja's.3 It should, therefore, not be advanced that Panditarāja has given his view under the name of the Navyas, whose view will shortly be considered. In the sequel he explains the transcendental

1. R. G. p. 23. 2. T. Up. II. 7.1 3. J. N. P. p. 95.

293

nature of Rasa, for instance, its Nityatva ( ever existing nature ) and at the same time its Anityatva ( temporary nature), its Svaprakāśatva ( self-illuminatingn ature) and its Itara- bhāsyatva (its nature as being illuminated by others). Jagannātha thus explained the Abhivyakti or revelation of Abhinava as not only the mere awakening of the Sthāyibhāva but also the removal of the cover of the Atman leading to its manifestation in its true nature. The latter process took place first and it was afterwards that the Sthayibhavas were illuminated. Thus Jagannātha differentiated the function of the Abhivyakti from that explained by Abhinava though he quoted him many times in support of his explanation. Bhatta Nāyaka's theory is then considered with criticism of the various views describing the realization of Rasa as a mental cognition, memory etc. As discussed before, the three powers : the Abhidha, the Bhävakatva and the Bhoga- krttva, and their functions are explained. Panditaraja concludes the consideration of his theory with the words that Rasa is the Rati etc. being enjoyed or the enjoyment of the Rati etc. is Rasa. It approaches the Brahmāsvāda ( it is not the Brahmāsvada itself ) as it is mixed with objects.1 The author then considers the view of some scholars under the name, Navyas ( moderns ). The definition of Rasa according to them runs thus. Rasa is the Rati etc., concentrated on Śakuntalā etc. ; it is illuminated by the light of one's self- consciousness and is indescribablein its nature; it comes into existence like a piece of silver when a shell is mistaken for silver due to one's ignorance; Rasa arises when the Ātman of the spectator or the reader has been identified with the artificial Dusyanta due to the defect called the Bhāvanā ( a 1. R. G. pp. 24-25.

294 particuar kind of imagination); this kind of imagination is brought about by reason of the spectator's or the reader's culture after the love of Sakuntalā has been accepted in the character, Dusyanta, by the function of suggestion when the poet or the actor has given expression to the Vibhāvas in poetry or drama.1 In other words, by the description of the Vibhävas etc. in the poetic composition or their repre- sentation by actors in a dramatic piece love between the hero and the heroine is first suggested to the sympathetic person in whom, due to his culture, a defect called the Bhāvanā is generated which makes him think himself one with the hero. This identification is, no doubt, responsible for the production of love ( existing between the hero and the heroine ) in him but he cannot predicate of its being real or otherwise ( Anirvachaniya ). Rasa is this love and the sympathetic person's thrill of pleasure is its enjoyment. The importance of the defect mentioned above which has to be admitted,2 is regarded as a key opening all previous locked doors. It is considered to offer solution to every inexplica- ble position. The old theorists' objection to the identifica- tion of the spectator or the reader with the hero as Dusyanta, Rama etc. on the basis of the former's limitations now melts away as the defect can effectively bring it about and make Śakuntalā or Sītā his Vibhāva.3 The objectors then advance another attack. Because the spectator has identified himself with the hero, the emotion of love which is indefin- able is born in him which led to his enjoyment of Rasa. Similarly the emotion of sorrow in the hero must cause indefinable sorrow in the spectator. The reply to the above 1. R. G. p. 25. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid. p. 25.

295

that only the real sorrow and not the indefinable sorrow gives rise to sorrow in the spectator is counteracted on the ground that the indefinable love cannot give pleasure. In support a fact from the real life is quoted. An indefinable serpent found to exist in the rope due to ignorance is seen to cause real fear, hence the indefinable sorrow must cause real sorrow or the indefinable love must not give pleasure. The above objection is answered on the consideration of the difference that exists between the experience in actual life and that in literature. Those very things which appear disgusting and obnoxious in real life become delightful. The things in literature become pleasing because of the peculiar power in poetry which cancels pain and produces pleasure. The instance of the devotees of Lord Krsna shedding tears at the description of the incidents of His life or even at hearing them is a case where only pure pleasure is experienced. If from literaty works having the Karuna Rasa as the principal sentiment pleasure is experienced as it ensues from those wherein the Srngāra Rasa predominates, it must be admitted that some power has robbed the sorrow of its sting and has made it an object of aesthetic enjoyment, just as the peculiar function of poetry to give pleasure is accepted. But in the case where the sorrow is as well established as the pleasure no such position as the above will have to be recognized. One may then object to the favourable attitude of the poet and the audience in com- posing and hearing it. It may, however, be answered that the poet and the audience do so because of the presence of pain in a lesser degree whereas that of pleasure in a much greater degree. Thus in actual life no identification with the hero etc. can take place, hence the spectator or the reader cannot enjoy Rasa. It is only in literature that Rasa is thus

296

enjoyed even from indescribable sorrow, therefore, even in dreams the pain of identifying with a hero in misery is never either removed or converted into pleasure.1 In the light of the above explanation of the whole theory Bharata's Rasasūtra can be interpreted to mean that the Vibhāvas etc. represented in a poetic composition suggest to the spectator or the reader the mental conditions of the hero etc. By contemplation over the Vibhavas etc. the defect ( imagination ) arisen in him renders him able to identify himself with the hero resulting in the generation of indefin- able love etc. which is Rasa. The words, Samyoga, Rasa and Nispatti, respectively mean the defect (Bhāvanāviśeșa ), indefinable mental conditions like love etc. ( Anirvachanīya Rati ) and accomplisment or generation of these indefinable mental conditions. The view is obviously open to criticism. It takes no notice of the latent impressions which are hard facts to ignore. The creation of the defect is postulated which makes the audience identify with the hero etc. Attribu- tion of power cancelling pain and producing pleasure is needless in the face of the Vyañjana Vrtti which, even though accepted, has been depicted as circumscribed in its function. The Vyañjana Vrtti is by itself sufficient to fulfil this function; there is no reason why it should be ignored and a new power postulated. The position is, no doubt, inexplicable. The opinion of some persons that this is Panditarāja's view is evidently groundless. That a scholar approaching Pandita- rāja's calibre, least of all the great Pandita himself, would have never entertained such an objectionable view, not to say of advancing it. Why should he postulate the creation of the defect in his view when he stood miles away from

1. R. G. p. 26.

297

defects pointing at others' ? The acceptance of the Sthāyi- bhāvas as the Vāsanās (latent impressions ) also goes against it.1 Moreover, Panditarāja gives the view of Appayya Dīkşita in the Lakșanā section under the name, the Navyas,2 which confirms the fact that it was not Panditaraja's view. It is a vain fancy. to ally him with Appayya Dīksita on whom he runs amuck. Panditarāja then gives the view of some other scholars. In it no recognition is accorded to the power of suggestion and to the indescribable emotion as propounded in the previous view. It is only the defect explained in the previous view that fulfils the whole function. Due to it the spectator or the reader feels perfect identity with Dusyanta in his condition of love with Sakuntala. This identification with Duşyanta in love with Sakuntalā is a peculiar mental cognition born of the contemplation of the Vibhāvas etc. in the poetic composition and has been called Rasa. Though this knowledge is a superimposition, yet identification gives the sympathetic person, the spectator or the reader, a thrill of pleasure. In this superimposition consists the transcen- dental nature of Rasa. The mental cognition (Bodha) may take any of the three forms due to the difference in identifica- tion. The spectator may feel himself thus : Dusyantoham Śakuntalāvişayakaratimān, that is, I am Dusyanta having love for Śakuntalā; or Aham Šakuntalāvişayakaratimad Dusyantah, that is, I am Dusyanta who has love for Śakun- talā; or Aham Duşyantaḥ Śakuntalāvișayakaratimānścha, that is, I am Duşyanta and have love for Śakuntalā. It is to be noted here that difference lies in connection with the

1. R. G. p. 30. 2. Ibid. p. 149. (Please see this view in its original in the Chitrami- māņsā, K. M. 38).

298

understanding ( Sabdabodha), where some words are used as Viśeşyas ( nouns) and others as Viśeșaņas (adjectives) or as Uddeśyas (subjects) and Vidheyas (predicates ). These forms are, however, kinds of knlowledge ( Jñānaprakāratā) of the one and the same Visaya (object ). In dream and in real life such cognition does not arise from the poetic com- position, hence no thrill of pleasure can be experienced from it. It does not exist in reality, it is true ; but it is a peculiar mental cognition in the poetic compositions and has nothing to do with the actual and the real world wherein the existence of things has to be proved.1 In the absence of the function of the suggestion love between Dusyanta and Śakuntalā is first inferred by the spectator from the way in which the stage Dusyanta and the stage Sakuntalā act on the boards. Bharata's Sūtra, therefore, according to this view would mean that after the apprehension of the Vibhāvas etc. a peculiar mental cognition indentifying him with the hero in love etc. with the heroine is produced in the spectator or the reader. This mental cognition is Rasa. The terms, Samyoga, Rasa and Nispatti, thus, respectively mean the apprehension of the Vibhāvas etc., the peculiar mental cogni- tion and its generation. This view when scrutinized closely is vitiated with some defects. The non-acceptance of the Vyañjanā Vrtti and the importation of the Anumāna to do its work mark a position which is clearly open to objection. All the defects pointed out before in connection with the Inference theory will automatically come in here ; moreover, the acceptance of the defect as mentioned above is also objectionable as already shown. It would make Rasa an erroneous experience. The next view receiving considera-

1. R. G. p. 27.

299

tion is that of Bhatta Lollata. Rasa as the Rati etc. primarily residing in Dusyanta etc. is experienced or realized when it has been superimposed on the actor who is expert in demonstrating by representation the beautiful Vibhāvas and imitates Dusyanta etc. In this view the realization that this is Dusyanta having love for Sakuntalā is of the worldly nature as regards the knowledge of Dusyanta in actor but is transcendental with regard to the superimposition of the love of Sakuntalā. The terms, Samyoga, Rasa and Nispatti stand for relation ( Sambandha ), love etc. (the Rati etc. ) and generation ( Utpatti ) respectively. Srī Śankuka's view is next considered. The Rati in the original character as Dusyanta is, by force of inference through the Vibhāvas which though artificial are regarded as real and natural, taken to be existent in the actor who is the Paksa ( the minor term ) on his being accepted as Dusyanta. This inferred Rati becomes Rasa. The terms, Samyoga, Rasa and Nispatti, mean the power of inference, the Rati etc. and the inferential knowledge ( of the Rati in the actor, the Paksa ). The two views just considered above hardly need any criticism as they have been thoroughly considered before. The succee- ding view says that the group cognition of the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas is Rasa. Here the words, Samyoga and Rasanispatti, respectively mean the group ( Samudäya ) and the use of the word Rasa ( Rasapada- vyavahāra ). This view has already engaged the attention and has received due criticism. There is another view which says that out of the three, viz. the Vibhava, the Anubhāva and the Vyabhichāribhāva, that which is striking is Rasa. Herein the word Samyoga is interpreted as Samyak Yoga where Yoga means Chamatkāra (strikingness ). That this marks a very elementary stage of the realization of Rasa

300

is quite clear. There are, however, some other views which look even more elementary. Three of them have been mentioned which recognize (i) the Vibhāva only when it has constantly been contemplated upon, or (ii) the Anu- bhäva only when it has been repeatedly meditated upon or (iii) the Vyabhichāribhava only which has been the object of ceaseless concentration, as Rasa. Panditarāja, however, sounds a note of warning here. He says that these three views are opposed to the Rasasutra of Bharata wherein the three factors, the Vibhäva, the Anubhāva and the Vya- bhichāribhava have been mentioned together. The naming of only one may result in confusion as it may be common to other Rasas also. He vindicates the above statement on the ground that if in some cases, where all the three factors have been found to suggest some Rasa, only one due to its extraordinary nature suggests Rasa, the remaining two have to be understood by implication. Panditarāja then launches a discussion of the Santa Rasa. By convincing arguments he establishes it as one of the dramatic Rasas. Even those, he says, who do not accept it in dramas, will have to admit it in other kinds of poetic compositions ; thus the Śānta Rasa will have to be accepted by them.1 Panditarāja, as shown above, gives different views on Rasa beginning from the most elementary right up to the most learned as Abhinava's which rests on the pivots of the Vāsanās ( dormant impre- ssions ) in mankind. Some of these views have, no doubt, been only mentioned by Abhinava in his Lochana2, as there they receive a mere summary disposal at his hands. In the Rasagangädhara, however, they are given a detailed treat- ment. The views of the Navyas, Bhatta Nayaka and

1. R. G. pp. 29-30. 2. D. L. II. p. 186. (Com.)

301

Abhinava have been discussed in minute details ; the last has, however, been interpreted in his own way and thus brought much nearer the Vedantic view of the realization of Brahman by the learned and profound scholar as he equated Rasasvada with Brahmasvada on the support of the statement in the Śrutis. After Panditarāja Jagannātha the period of originality is over and the beginning of com- pilation commences. The later authors, therefore, are reckoned as minor ones even by scholars as De. A brief survey of only a very few of them devoting to each a limited space will not be out of place. Śrī Krşna Kavi's work, the Mandāramarandachampū is a treatise dealing with various topics on poetics and drama- turgy though the word, Champū, denotes that it ought to be a poetic composition and not a work treating of defini- tion etc. The book is rather a compilation of items from many sources as the N. S., the D. R. etc. and has eleven chapters describing the different metres, the heroes, the figures of speech etc. In the seventh chapter the author gives detail on drama. He accepts the Nātya as Rasāśraya1 and classifies drama on the basis of the Natya. The eighth chapter deals with the heroes, the heroines, their qualities and other characters. It is in the ninth chapter that the author discusses Rasa. The Bhava has been defined as a change appropriate to Rasa ( Rasānukūlavikrtir Bhāvaḥ ). The Bhäva is divided into two kinds : internal and bodily. The former is again of two kinds : the Sthāyibhavas and the Vyabhicharibhavas.2 The author obviously follows here Bhanudatta in this classification. He says that Rasa is of two kinds : the Alaukika and the Laukika. The Alaukika 1. M. M. C. VII. p. 59. 2. Ibid. IX. p. 91.

302

is born simply of the contact of the consciousness of the Ātman whereas the Laukika is born when the Ātman comes in contact with outward objects. Under each he accepts the eight orthodox Rasas.1 The author divides the bodily changes into the Sāttvikabhāvas and the Anubhāvas.2 He says that it is the Sthāyibhāva which when awakened by the Vibhāvas etc. becomes Rasa. He also gives the opinions of others on Rasa. There are those who say that Rasa is relished where the mind is refeshed through the Vibhāvas etc. According to others Rasa is the Sthāyivāsanā when awakened. The author then gives the ninth Rasa, the Santa and the tenth, the Vātsalya.3 He also gives the Māyā Rasa on the basis of the Pravrtti as the Santa which is advocated on that of the Nivrtti.4 All this is obviously in the following of the Rasataranginī. He then gives the opinion of king Bhoja on Rasa. The Sruti propounds only one Rasa as it says, "Verily it is Rasa". This one Rasa is the Śrngāra which is of four kinds : the Dharma, the Artha, the Kāma and the Moksa.5 In the tenth chapter he recognizes the Rasadhvani as the Asamslaksyakramavyangya.6 In the last chapter, that is, the eleventh the Gunas are accepted as the essential qualities of Rasa.7 The defects of Rasa are also given with reconciliation where possible.8 The definition of the Kävya is also given which contains all the elements to which different writers attach importance, great or small.9 This work, thus, is more a handy compendium of the princi-

1. M. M. C. IX. p. 100. 2. Ibid. IX. p. 97. 3. Ibid. IX. p. 100. 4. Ibid. IX. p. 106. 5. Ibid. IX. p. 107. 6. Ibid. X. p. 157. 7. Ibid. XI. p. 175. 8. Ibid. XI. p. 183. 9. Ibid. X. p. 186.

303 ples on poetics and dramaturgy. Rasa, described cursorily, does not seem to be given less importance in any way. The author, however, has no original theory of his own to propound. Chirañjīva Bhațțāchārya, the author of the Kāvyavilāsa which is a handy treatise of two chapters dealing in clear and easy style with Rasas and the Alankāras, gives different definitions of poetry furnished by previous scholars. He begins with Mammata's. He tries to explain it. Then he gives Śaradāgama's view which he explains on a small scale. Lastly he tackles the view of the moderns ( Atinavīnas as he calls them ). In explanation of it he says that poetry is that composition which has some peculiar strikingness. The words used in explanation make one think as if the author's leaning is towards this last view, though the author has not committed himself expressly.1 In this implied accep- tance, it may seem that the author did not give any con- sideration to Rasa and consequently attached no importance to it. That Rasa did weigh well with the author, however, becomes clear when its subsequent detailed description, which covers the rest of the chapter, comes in view. Just in the beginning of this description the author says that he is tackling Rasas etc. as they have been predicated to con- stitute the form of the Kāvya ( Atha Pūrvam Kāvyasvarūpa- sampādakatayoktā Rasādayaḥ Nirūpyante ).2 It confirms that the author did attach a great importance to Rasa. He recognizes nine Rasas (the Śānta added to the orthodox eight ) and gives their Sthāyibhāvas. He says that the Sthāyibhāva nourished by the Vibhāvas etc. turns into

1. C. K. V. p . 2-3. 2. Ibid. p. 3.

304

Rasa.1 After that he takes up all one by one giving their Vibhāvas etc. and illustrations of his own composition. He divides the Śrngara Rasa into two kinds : the Sambhoga (love in union ) and the Vipralambha ( love in separation ) which he further divides into the Bhāviviyoga (impending separation ) and Viyoga ( separation ).2 After the description of all Rasas he tackles the Māya Rasa as given by Bhānu- datta, whom, however, he does not mention by name. He severely criticizes it on two grounds. Firstly, the Māyā is beginningless hence unborn, therefore there cannot be any such Rasa as the Maya Rasa because all Rasas are pro- duced (Janyāḥ ) ; secondly, the false knowledge ( Mithyāj ñāna ) is said to be its cause which is against the injunction of the Śastras. In reality in the opinions of the Ālankārikas Rasa is eternal ( Nitya) and bliss ( Anandarūpa), hence it is the essential form of the Brahman ( Brahmarūpa ) and as such the Māya which is base (Tuchchhā), destructible ( Vināśa- śālinī) and distinct from the Brahman (Brahmabhinnā) cannot be Rasa.3 The author expresses his concurrence with the ancient writers in the recognition of nine Rasas. He then gives the distinction of the Vipralambha Śrngāra and the Karuna after which he, in agreement with some scholars, defines the Bhäva which includes love ( the Rati) towards gods etc.4 The author here makes no mention of the inclusion of the suggested Vyabhichāribhāva. He proposes to discuss some more peculiarities of Rasas in the end of the work.5 This discussion, however, is not to be met with in the present edition, but the proposal shows that

1. C. K. V. p. 4. 2. Ibid. p. 5. 3. Ibid. p. 10. 4. Ibid. p. 11. 5. Ibid. p. 12.

305 the author attached a great importance to Rasa and was not satisfied with so much description of it. Srī Viśveśvara Pandeya, the author of the Rasachandrikā, is one of the writers whose work deserves consideration. He accepts the Dhvani1 and Rasa as the Asamlaksyakrama- vyangya. He then discusses the views of Bhatta Lollata, Śrī Śankuka, Bhatta Nāyaka and Abhinavagupta. He interprets the last one in terms of the Vedānta philosophy as far as possible, attributing the removal of the cover from over the Atman to the Sahrdayatva (the qualities of the sympathetic spectator or the reader) and thus defining Rasa as the consciousness delimited by the Rati etc. manifested as all bliss due to the removal of the screen of ignorance2. The cogent arguments advanced for the acceptance of the Santa as the ninth Rasa in dramaturgy go to the credit of the author who stands against most of his strong predecessors3 in the above two positions, viz. attempt of making success- fully a Vedantic approach to Rasa and admission of the Śanta as one of the dramatic Rasas. He walks in the foot- steps of Jagannātha, which his language and arguments amply corroborate. The discussion of the Māya Rasa is obviously in the following of Bhānudatta who pays con- sideration to it in his Rasatarangiņī, butViśvesvara criticizes and refutes it. The author also considers the Rasābhāsa and the Bhavabhasa.4 The work is rather a compilation than any original contribution. The author, however, attached much importance to Rasa as seen above. Śrīmadachyutarāya's work, the Sāhityasāra, is a com- pendium which well recognizes Rasa as one of the essentials

1. V. R. C. p. 43. 2. Ibid. p. 47. 3. Ibid. p. 67-68. 4. Ibid. p. 50. 20

306

of poetry.1 He divides poetry into two kinds of which one is saturated with Rasa and is called Sarasa.2 He also recognizes the Dhvani.3 The Dhvani is divided into three kinds4: the Vastu, the Alankara and Rasa of which the last is the Asamlakşyakramavyangya. The author then defines Rasa on the lines of Panditarāja Jagannātha. Rasa is nothing but the Sthāyibhāva when the latter is made perceptible by the consciousness from over which the darkness ( of ignorance ) has been removed by the Vibhāvas. Or Rasa is the consciousness itself delimited by the Sthāyibhāva revealed or suggested by the joint operation of the Vibhāva etc.5 In the com. the author recognizes the Sthāyibhāva as seated in the mind in the form of the Vasana6 or the latent impression. Out of the two definitions of Rasa given above the author decides the second as the better one as it is in accordance with the Srutis.7 He accepts the nine Rasa8 ( the Santa added to the list ) and counts them as the Sāttvika, the Rajasa and the Tamasa thus analysing the Santa, the Śrngāra, the Karuņa, the Hāsya, the Adbhuta, the Bhayānaka, the Vira, the Bibhatsa and the Raudra as the Sāttvika Sātt- vika, Sāttvika Rājasa, Sāttvika Tāmasa, Rājasa Sāttvika, Rājasa Rājasa, Rājasa Tāmasa, Tāmasa Sāttvika, Tāmasa Rajasa and Tāmasa Tāmasa respectively. He divides the Vīra Rasa into twelve kinds9 to which he adds more.10 These Rasas, the author further divides, into two main classifica- tions, the Laukika and the Alaukika ; the latter has three kinds : (i) the Svāpnas (pertaining to dreams ), (ii) the Māno-

1. A. S. S. I. 20. 2. Ibid. I. 28. 3. Ibid. I. 29. 4. Ibid. IV. 4. 5. Ibid. W. 14. 6. Ibid. IV. p. 87. 7. Ibid. IV. 15. (with com.). 8. Ibid. VI. 47 (with com.). 9. Ibid. IV. 99. 10. Ibid. IV. 112.

307

rathas (pertaining to desire) and (iii) the Aupanāyikas (pertaining to heroes etc. ), the last one is Rasa depicted in the representation.1 This is reminiscent of Bhānudatta's classification of Rasa in his Rasataranginī as shown before. The author describes the inclusion of the Bhakti Rasa into the Śānta Rasa.2 The Rasābhāsa, the Bhāvābhāsa, the Bhāva- śānti, the Bhāvodaya, the Bhāvasandhi, the Bhāvaśabalatā as also the Rasavat, the Preyas, the Urjasvin, the Samahita, the defects of Rasa, the contradiction that exists between one Rasa and another etc. have received due consideration. One chapter called the Rambhäratnam has been fully devoted to the description of the heroines, their qualities, kinds etc. whereas the succeeding chapter dilates on the heroes whom he divides into three kinds only ruling out the Dhīroddhata type from the recognized list. As is obvious from the above description the work is a compendium summing up the views from different sources. The author, therefore, has little original to say. The attitude towards Rasa is quite favourable as enough space has been devoted to its con- sideration. This closes the consideration of Rasa in its development as no further stage either in its conception or its growth is to be marked. In the preceding pages Rasa in its concep- tion and treatment at the hands of the different writers has been examined in chronological order as far as possible. A few of these writers stand apart as original thinkers putting forward novel theories about Rasa, some specious while others marked with depth, sound and thoroughly convin- cing. Other writers present their own theories, modifying the original ones in the light of their personal conceptions.

1. A. S. S. IV. 130-131. 2. Ibid. IV. 136.

308

There are still others who merely copy and rearrange their predecessors' views and thus are more or less mere com- pilers. Out of these some have even tried to reconcile the opposing theories. Among these different categories of writers Bharata, Ānanda, Abhinava, Mammata, Viśvanātha and Jagannatha stand out head and shoulder above their co-workers -- predecessors, contemporaries or successors -- in the one and the same field by virtue of their mental equip- ments and contributions. In the history of the theory of Rasa the formative period ends with Anandavardhana (and his commentator, Abhinavagupta ), the critical period with Paņditarāja Jagannātha. As the above consideration of Rasa does not exhaust its whole scope it is but meet and proper that further atten- tion should be devoted to it with regard to its other aspects as its form, its classification etc. These aspects of Rasa will be considered next.

CHAPTER FIVE.

SOME CONSIDERATIONS OF THE CONCEPT OF RASA. 1. Rasa-Its Nature and Process of Realization. The literary Rasa is generally asserted to be of relishable or delectable nature. The reference to Rasa in the Upanisad runs, 'Verily it is Rasa ; he becomes all bliss on getting it.'1 Its attainment making one all bliss suggests its being of blissful nature. Bharata's description gives it as pleasure- giving and the analogy of relish is to be found in the pleasure experienced on tasting food dressed with various spices.2 He, thus, implicitly accepts on the basis of the above analogy the relishable nature of Rasas as the Karuna etc. as his word, 'Nānāvyañjanasamskrta' expressly means the various kinds of edibles as the sweet, the sour, the bitter etc. The Nātyaśāstra unlike later authorities does not dilate on the blissful nature of Rasa, yet the author furnishes only in hints and suggestions what later on was given a clear exposition by Abhinava. Bhāmaha recognized in hints the relishable nature of Rasa (Svādukāvyarasonmiśra).3 Daņdin admitted the relishable nature of Rasa4 and allied himself with Bhatta Lollata in the realization of Rasa5 but gave this process only in suggestions.6 Vämana accepted that Rasa had a sort of brilliance,7 thus hinting at the delectable nature of Rasa. The Agnipurana derives the Rati from the Ānanda of

1. T. Up. II. 71. 2. N. S. (K. S. S. ) VI. p. 71. 3. K. L. V. 3. 4. K. D. I. 51. 5. Ibid. II. 281-283. 6. Ibid. 7. K. L. S. III. 2. 15.

310

Brahman,1 thus expressing Rasa as all bliss. It is, however, Rudrabhatta's Rasakalikā quoted by Raghavan2 that recogni- zes the division of Rasas into pleasurable and painful. Bhatța Lollața explains the realization of Rasa as a matter of superimposition ; how far this knwoledge is pleasure- giving has been seen before. Śrī Śankuka explained it as a matter of inference which could hardly satisfy the aesthetic standpoint. It is in Bhatta Nāyaka that the pleasurable nature of Rasa can be seen in its process of realization. The function called the Bhävakatva is according to him res- ponsible for only presenting things in their universalized aspects devoid of their particular characteristics. He, there- fore, postulates one more function called the Bhojakatva. Through this function Rasa which is different from memory etc. is enjoyed in the mind when it expands and blooms due to the predominance of the Sattva over the Rajas and the Tamas which, therefore, get suppressed. The mind is in equipoise and the self-consciousness is here all light and bliss. The bliss of Rasa is of the nature of the bliss called the Brahmänanada but the two are not the same.3 This theory is obviously influenced by the doctrines of the Sānkhya philosophy, though the influence is not traceable in all respects as the theory is an attempt to explain pleasure in the field of Aesthetics. In the Sankhya system the evolution from the Prakrti takes place for Bhoga of the Prakrti and through it for the attainment of Kaivalya by means of dis- criminatory knwoledge of the Purusa. The three Gunas in a state of equilibrium constitute the Prakrti and evolution starts when this equilibrium is disturbed due to Karma by

1. A. P. 338. 1-5. 2. R. N. R. p. 155. 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 278-279.

311

the proximity of the Purusa. The whole creation comes into being as a result of this evolution. It exists only so long as the Purusa considers himself identified with the Prakrti. When discriminatory knowledge ( Tattvajñāna ) is attained the creation dissolves. And the Purusa ( soul) attains libera- tion ( Kaivalya ). The true knower ( Tattvajñānī) at that time is in a state where there is complete detachment from pleasure and pain. His egoistic impulses are got rid of from the Buddhi which is transcended. All this is brought about through the predominance of the Sattva Guna which also disappears in the end. According to the interpretation of Bhatta Nāyaka put on the Rasasūtra of Bharata the mind of the spectator is dissociated from all personal and particular interests as the Bhävakatva presents things in their generalized forms. The result is the Viśrānti consequent on the pre- dominance of the Sattva, but this detachment is not com- plete and lasting as it is only a temporary relief from personal troubles. The Buddhi here is not transcended for good and the person does not become Jīvanmukta. Therefore he is led to Bhoga. The condition at this time though obviously of pleasure is not one detached from either pleasure or pain as in the Sānkhya system. This interpretation of the aesthetic pleasure unnecessarily postulates two functions, the Bhävakatva and the Bhojakatva, as shown previously. Explained in the light of the principles of the Sänkhya system the Väsanās of the true knower either get purged or become useless and hence cannot be realized as Rasa. Again it is difficult according to the fundamental principles of this system to explain Rasa as experienced in the Nātya. This will become clear when the consideration of Rasa is made in connection with the Nātya. The Yogamālāsamhitā view which has already been described in connection with the

312

origin of different Rasas isakin in some respects to the Sānkhya view. It is, therefore, in the interpretation of Abhinava that the delectable nature of Rasa and its realization in its satisfac- tory aspect is to be seen. Abhinava was a Kāśmīrian Śaivaite belonging to the Pratyabhijñā school of the Śaiva philosophy. This system believes in the existence of one Supreme Being who is Parameśvara, the Great Lord. His mere will is sufficient for the creation of this universe as no sooner does He wish to create than the Sakti appears. Then follow other elements. He does not need any material to work with.1 He has two aspects : the Viśvottīrna and the Viśvātmaka. The latter aspect is permeating every object in this creation. Siva binds Himself with various bonds, restrictions and limitations though all these are His forms and comes to be called the Pasu otherwise called the Purușa. It is due to this fact that Siva in His Viśvottīrņa aspect is called the Pasupati. He is the consciousness itself other- wise known as the bliss in which no sequence is perceptible (Akramānandachidrūpaḥ Pramātā Sa Maheśvara).2 He is the illuminator of all the objects in this world which are the manifestations of His own intrinsic power. These objects appear diverse due to diversity of tints in them as the words run, 'Vivrtam Chabhinavavaguptacharyaih. Tameva Bhāntamanubhāti Sarvam Tasya Bhāsā Sarvamidam Vibhāti (Ka 2/2) Iti Srutyā Prakāśachidrūpamahimnā Sarvasya Bhāvajātasya Bhāsakatvamabhyupeyate. Tataścha Vișaya- prakāśasya Nīlaprakāśaḥ Pītaprakāśa Iti Vișayoparāga- bhedad Bhedah.'3 According to the Pratyabhijna system, therefore, the Purusa is only in need of recognition of his

1. S. D. S. Lines. 1-2. p. 199 2. Ibid. Line. 72. p. 195. 3. S. D. S. Lines. 80-83. p. 196.

313

former self having the perfection of Maheśvara in omniscience, omnipotence etc. He transcends such limitations as the Kalā, the Vidyā, the Rāga, the Kāla and the Niyati-the five sheaths (Kañchukas) as they are called as they cover the true nature of Parameśvara ( though by His own will ). When he has recognized his true self he is at one with Parameśvara ( Samarasa ), and it is at this stage that perfect bliss is experienced. Abhinava's affinities towards the Pratyabhijñā system were sure to be reflected in his ex- planation of the Rasasutra of Bharata. That Rasa is the highest bliss in literature without its sequence being realized in poetry or dramatic performance after the representation of the Vibhavas etc. has unequivocal reference to Parameś- vara who is Akramānandachidrūpa. When the Purușa has realized his identity with Parameśvara, the question of one Purușa being friend, another enemy and the third indifferent does not arise. It is due to this that in the Samarasa stage the particularities and special characteristics lose their particular references and exclusive restrictions and appear in general and universal aspects. At that time the all blissful aspect of Parameśvara is realized in full by the Purușa who feels himself as one with Him. At this stage he feels I am Parameśvara' and therefore does not become Bhāvātīta, above the different powers, as the attributes of Parameśvara as the Chit, the Ananada, the Ichchha, the Jñana and the Kriyā are realized as his own attributes. Any other cogni- tion, therefore, gets suppressed by this bliss. This blissful aspect of the Purusa is not something produced as it already exists in a concealed state. These Purușas appear diverse because of their individual diversities. The earthly counter- part of this pleasure is to be realized at the recital of the poetic piece or the dramatic representation where the Vibhāvas

314

etc. become generalized and universalized. The reader or the spectator has his latent emotions ( Bhavas ) aroused and he is transported to the all blissful state wherein personal differences and peculiarities are lost. This state, however, is not permanent but exists so long as the Vibhāvas etc. are cherished ( Charvyamāņataikaprāņa ),1 all the factors being realized not separately but together on the analogy of the beverage. The pleasurable state is, therefore, equated with Rasa. Rasa is fundamentally one but is enjoyed as different due to the difference of the Sthāyibhavas which in their turn have got their psychological basis. The com- parison of this experience to that of the Brahmāsvāda is only to give an idea of the highest stage of the realization of Rasa and not to estimate its nature. As the commentator in the com. points out2 in the realization of Brahman it is only Brahman which is experienced whereas in the realization of Rasa the Vibhāvas etc. are also experienced. It is due to this fact that such a word as Brahmāsvādamivānubhāvayan3 and not Brahmāsvādamanubhāvayan is used. This position evidently proves that the interpretation of the Rasasūtra of Bharata in terms of the popular Advaita Vedānta philosophy does not go the whole way. Viśvanātha, therefore, has also a similar expression in this connection, though his theory is a Vedantic approach to Rasa. He uses the word, Brahma- svādasahodara,4 calling Rasa the brother of, that is, having a family affinity to the bliss of the realization of Brahman and not Brahman itself. Jagannatha propounds the theory of Abhinava in terms of the Advaita Vedānta. He explains that the removal of the sheath of ignorance from over the Ānandāmśa of the self is due to the transcendental power

1. K. P. IV. p. 93. 2. Ibid (Com.). 3. Ibid. IV. p. 93. 4. S. D. III. 2.

315

born of the functioning of the Vibhavas etc. in the literary piece ; the result is that the latent impressions deeply seated inside assume a corporeal shape and are realized as Rasa with the self's illumination, rather with the self's blissful aspect. This is an approach from the standpoint of the Advaita Vedanta. He established Rasa as the Chit itself delimited by the Sthayibhavas as the Rati etc. from over which the cover has been laid aside. Because of Rasa being dependent on the literary composition he was constrained to recognize the limiting factors as the Rati etc. and had also to accept Rasa as a temporary realization. The relish ( Charvanā ) con- sisted in either the removal of the screen from over the Chit or the particular state of the Antahkarana having assumed that form. He fully knew the difference of Rasa from the Brahmasamādhi as the former depended on the Chidānanda delimited by the Vibhāvas etc, and was to be brought about by the functioning ( of objects ) of the literary composition. In support of his view he quotes the Śruti.1 According to the Advaita Vedānta when Brahman has been realized, the realized and the realizer ( Brahman and the Yuktayogin) become one, as perfect identity between them is established. Hence the Vasanas get effaced or completely eradicated and no enjoyment whatsoever can take place. It is only the Ānanda aspect of Brahman, its bliss so to say, which is the sole pleasurable experience. The realizer, therefore, becomes Bhavatīta and cannot experience the aesthetic Rasa which is nothing but the conjoint experience of the Sthāyibhāva, Vibhävas etc. Hence it is that at the highest stage according to the principles of the Advaita Vedānta no realization of Rasa can take place. It has been explained to take place

1. R. G. p. 23.

316

on a level much lower than the highest. The Advaita Vedäntic interpretation like the Sānkhya one can hardly account for the enjoyment of the Madhura Rasa of the Chaitanya school to which Rūpa Goswāmī belonged, or of the Bahkti Rasa of the Vaisnava school as advocated by Madhusūdana Sarasvatī. According to the Chaitanya school the Madhura Rasa at its highest stage, the Mahābhāva, is experienced by the Gokula Devīs as Rādhā fully enamoured of Lord Krsna. An idea of it can be had from the harmo- nious living of a husband with his wife amidst all pleasures in the world, but this instance, after all, remains earthly as the Madhura Rasa not only far excels it but becomes trans- cendental ; at its highest stage, though apparently the feeling of duality comes to view, in reality such feeling of duality completely disappears and is out of question. Accor- ding to Madhusūdana Sarasvatī the Bhakti is of two kinds. One is the Sādhanarūpā (means) and the other the Sādhyarūpā (end). In the latter the duality of the devotee and God remains only in name, as the devotee feels himself as one with God. In other words, the devotee is Samarasa with God. This Bhakti is different from Jñāna due to difference in the Anubandhachatustaya.1 It is not on a lower stage than that of Jñāna but in some respects stands even higher, for even those who have no doubts to be cleared off and who delight in Self, have devotion which has no ulterior purpose behind- such is their devotion towards Hari of great prowess.2 At the Sämarasya stage the apparent duality leads to the highest bliss. The Bhakti Rasa and the Madhura Rasa,therefore, have no place in the economy of the Advaita Vedantic interpretation. It is only the Jñana which has the exclusive

1. S. B. B. R. p. 11. 2. Ibid. p. 13.

317

and emphatic significance. In the Pratyabhijna school, however, the Paśu when it realizes its inherent status as Parameśvara is in a state of Sāmarasya akin to that enjoyed by the devotee and God ; hence the Bhakti Rasa can be explained according to the Iśvarādvayavāda of the Pratya- bhijña school. That it is difficult to explain Rasa in the Nātya according to the principles of the Advaita Vedānta will become clear later on. Rasa is not Kārya, a product of any cause (Karana ) as it should survive the disappearance of the Vibhāvas etc. ( Nimitta Kāraņas ). That it disappears with the Vibhavas is a well recognized fact. It can yet be called a product because of the production of relish ( Char- vanā) with which it is generally identified. It is not some- thing already existent and hence something to be indicated, and yet it is something capable of being realized by self only as it is different from the worldly knowledge received through such means as perception etc., the knowledge of the Yogin who is on way to realization though it might have been received independent of worldly means and the knowledge of the Yogin who has completely realized. It cannot be said that Rasa is an indeterminate knowledge as the Vibhāvas etc. are realized in it and yet it cannot be called a determinate knowledge as only the relish of the transcendental pleasure is to be had. The theory of Bhatta Lollata, Śrī Śankuka etc. can thus be beautifully and convincingly explained from the standpoint of Abhinava's interpretation which also takes into consideration BhattaNāyaka's interpretation as it includes its universalizing factor, the Sādhāraņīkaraņa as it is called, the absence of which had given BhattaNāyaka license of criticism against the theories of inference and generation. Rasa, thus, brings about a transcendental strikingness.

318

( Alaukikachamatkārātmā )1 and stands above all cognitions as its causes are all transcendental (Alaukika). The delectable nature of Rasa in one way or another was recognized by almost all later writers though some of them included Rasa in Vakrokti, others in Auchitya and still others in Anumiti, while a few placed it under Tātparya Śakti. Bhoja expresses the dual nature of Rasa as Raghavan says.2 King Haripāladeva, the writer of the Sangītasudhā- kara,3 accepts the Vipralambha, which is recognized as altogether a different Rasa, as painful. There were, of course, a few others who not only did not agree in full in according recognition to all Rasas as pleasurable and suggested the dual nature of Rasas in mere hints but also pointed out on the basis of reasoning that of all Rasas some were pleasurable while others painful. Such, for instance, is the position of Ramachandra and Gunachandra, the joint authors of the Nātyadarpana.4 They classified the Srngāra, the Hāsya, the Vira, the Adbhuta and the Santa as pleasurable while the Karuna, the Raudra, the Bībhatsa and the Bhayānaka as painful on the basis of the Vibhāvas etc. which according to them were the Ista (desired-for ) in case of the first set and the Anista (undesired-for ) in the second set. In reply to the argument that as regards the pleasurable nature of Rasas as the Karuna etc. the experience of the sympathetic critics is the sole test, they say that this experience as pleasurable is totally barred by the experience itself. The Bhayānaka, the Bībhatsa, the Karuna and the Raudra even when shown as consummated in poetry or in dramatic re- presentation produce in readers or spectators some indescriba-

1. N. S. (G. O. S. ). VI. p. 286. 2. R. N. R. p. 155. 3. Ibid. p. 145. 4. N. D. p. 159.

319

ble painful experience ; and it is due to this that the society gets afflicted. Had this experience been pleasurable there ought to have been no affliction. This reply is not quite convincing. People in general take pleasure in the recital or the dramatic representation of Rasas as the Karuna etc. without being in any way agitated. There are, no doubt, a few people who so completely identify themselves with the particular characters imitated by the actors that they get perturbed, as then they do not keep at the same time their individuality separate, which is the position of the spectator. To generalize on the basis of a few cases as the above is not sound. Moreover, in cases of identification as shown above, the particular characteristics of the original characters are not universalized, that is to say the Sādhāraņī- karaņa does not take place ; therefore, the question of literary Rasa does not arise. Besides, the all blissful aspect of the individual Ātman seems to be quite ignored here. Again to the argument that if it is so, no body should feel eagar to read such portions or witness such representations the reply is that this eagerness can be accounted for in three ways: firstly, it is due to the demonstration of the proper dis- position of objects by the dexterity of the poet and the efficiency of the actor even after the realization of Rasa is over on the boards, for even wonder is experienced when the dexterous stroke of the enemy beheads one proud of one's valour. Deceived, thus, by the all pleasurable strikingness born of the efficient powers of the poet and the actor wise persons experience a great pleasure even in such painful Rasas as the Karuna etc. The spectators also desirous of realizing it become eager for it ; secondly, the poets and the playwrights compose works in imitation of the world which is both pleasurable and painful, hence when

320

composing works dealing with the life-incidents of such great persons as Rāma etc. painful and pleasurable elements do come in. Like the sweetness of the beverage the sharp and the bitter tastes are relished as pleasurable. In incidents as the kidnapping of Sītā, the dragging of the hair and the pulling of the dress of Draupadi etc. how can pleasure be experienced by symapthetic persons ? The pathos etc. of the original character is after all painful. If it is turned into pleasure in imitation, the imitation will be false as in it the pleasure would be felt as perverted ; thirdly, the pleasure experienced by those afflicted with the destruction of their desired objects at the recital or the representation of the pathetic is, really speaking, the experience of pain. The afflicted derive pleasure from the painful news but feel agitated with the pleasurable news, hence the Karuna etc. are painful.The three ways in which the authors accounted for the eagerness of the audience are open to criticism. In the first the authors have already assumed the cessation of the realization of Rasa, and then advanced that the proper arrangement and disposition of words etc. make the audience eager for it. The ancillaries only bring the audience in a fit mood to witness the representation, they thus bring about only the preparatory stage pointed out by Abhinava and it is afterwards only that Rasa is realized. The authors, however, have reversed the order of the two functions in order to maintain their ground. This is evidently absurd as it goes totally against the facts of experience because verbal arrangement through the Abhidha functions before the Rasadhvani can be had. In the second the authors have accepted the pleasurable nature of Rasa on the analogy of the beverage wherein the sweet, the bitter etc. are tasted as sweet, but the confusion has come due to the wrong sense

321 attached to the word, imitation, in literature. That every- thing in literature becomes transcendental and the objects do not have earthly touch in all respects seem to have received no consideration. Pains, sorrows etc. of the original characters are their own pains and sorrows. Why should they be felt as such by the readers or the spectators also ? When presented in a literary piece and experienced by the audience do they not appear universalized, for how can the audience identify with the original characters who are separated in certain cases by centuries of times ? Be- sides, in literary pieces the life-incidents of original charac- ters are not slavishly imitated as shown previously, there- fore the question of the falsity of imitation in literature does not arise. In the third the authors have taken into con- sideration only those persons who are in any way in trouble, Do these people really feel troubled at the recital or the representation of the pathetic ? Speaking on the material plane are not their sympathies widened and do they not feel solace ? Then is it the work of painful experience ? The universalized presentation or representation and the realization of the blissful nature of the Atman fully solve this problem. The authors themselves admit that painful news give pleasure to the afflicted, then the representation of the pathetic should also give them pleasure. On the other hand, they say that pleasurable news agitates them. Do all kinds of pleasurable news agitate them or only those which remind them of their own troubles ? The authors have taken into consideration only the afflicted ; what about those who are not afflicted ? Do these also feel pain at the recital or the representation of the pathetic ? Such are some of the queries which have evidently not attracted the attention of the authors. Their condition before 21

322

establishing some Rasas as pleasurable and others as painful would have been a sort of dilemma when it becomes difficult to decide the exact nature of sensation. 'Sometimes one is baffled as to the pleasurable or the painful nature of a sensat- ion', as Bhavabhūti puts it.1 This condition has been well got cleared off by Vidyanātha who says that the worldly sorrow or pleasure might have been experienced as such by the original characters but in the Sahrdaya they all convert into pleasure which is intense.2 The mention of the name of Bhavabhūti here rouses the curiosity if the poet-dramatists and the poets have also expressed their views in connection with the nature and the process of the realization of Rasa. Vālmīki comes first whose experience of the tragic Krauñcha incident automati- cally found spontaneous expression in the Śloka metre. It furnishes hints on the conception of Rasa. In the state- ment, 'Let my utterance, I who am deeply touched with pathos, become Śloka metre and nothing else,'3 Ānanda sees the critic in Välmīki and finds in him the germs of the Rasa theory.4 Vālmīki was a great poet as his genius was creative and he could vividly visualize situations etc. But he was a critic also as he realized that it was his intense emotion finding outlet in rhythmic expression. That the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas con- vert the Sthayibhavas along with themselves into Rasas- the stage in which the personality is lost and which consists of nothing but indescribable joy, though not expressed explicitly by the poet, seems to have received his implicit attention and recognition. And herein lay the germs for

1. U. R. I. 25. 2. P. R. 88. p. 292. 3. V. R. I. II. 18. 4. D. L. I. 5.

323 later scholars for their various conceptions of Rasa. Kālidāsa is the next great writer deserving full attention. When witnessing the dramatic performance the spectators lose themselves in it completely.1 The poet-dramatist thereby tacitly recognizes Rasa as pleasurable. He is the master of the Śrngāra Rasa indulging in special depiction of the Vipralambha.2 He is also adept in the delineation of the Vīra and the Karuņa Rasas. He follows Vālmīki in ex- pressing poetry as the rhythmic expression3; but whereas Vālmīki throws only vague hints Kālidāsa gives obviously suggestions as to the presence of the Sthayibhavas, though implanted in previous births, in the persons and recognizes the functions of the Uddīpana Vibhāvas.4 Bhavabhūti seems to be an adherent of Vālmīki as he gives prominence to the Karuna Rasa and evolves the Karuna-synthesis to be considered later on, though in his dramas he makes the Vīra and the Śrngāra Rasas also as principal. Murāri is called Bālavālmīki.5 He considers the Vipralambha and the Sambhoga 6 as different. Bharavi regards the Vipralambha as delectable .? Māgha fully knew that it was the Sthāyi- bhava when nourished by the Sañcharibhavas that matured into Rasa.8 When various characters develop various Bhāvas, the spectators realize Rasa and are delighted.9 The delectable nature of Rasa is thus expressed and its transcendental nature admitted.10 These poet-dramatists and poets are representa- tive, therefore the expansion of list seems unnecessary. They 1. M. A. (in K. G.) II. 8 .; V. V. (Pelava's speech on p. 134) in K. G. 2. Meghadūta. 3. R. V. (XIV. 70) in K. G. 4. A. S. (V. 2) in K. G. 5. A. R. p. 19. 6. Ibid. VII. 37. 7. Kirāt. XI. 27. 8. Siśupāla. II. 87. 9. Ibid. XIV. 50. 10. Ibid. XIII. 69.

324

show how Rasa had a strong hold over them and how they felt delighted in the delineation of different Rasas and thus delighted the spectators and the readers. The majority of these scholors do not accept Rasas as the Karuna etc. as painful. Rasa is recognized by them as all bliss, transcendental and indescribable. But the point that comes up for consideration is if all Rasas are equally pleasurable, that is, if the pleasure is of the same nature. Madhusudana Sarasvatī points out the difference in the pleasurable nature of Rasas. He says that it is the Sattva which makes the Sthayibhava. The Sattva is of pleasurable nature hence all Rasas are, no doubt, pleasurable but as this Sattva gets mixed with the Rajas and the Tamas in various proportions in different Rasas, the pleasure differs in extent. Hence the experiences of different Rasas are not equally pleasurable.1 This fact has been only hinted by Śrīmada- chyutarāya in the Sāhityasāra in pointing out in the com. the constituents in reference to Gunas in different Rasas.2 Madhusūdana's contention is obviously based on the Sāņkhya doctrine as Raghavan says3 whereas Śrīmadachyutarāya's view is Vedantic, follower of Jagannātha as he was. But then the true solution is to be sought in the Pratyabhijñā system. There the difference is not based on the Gunas as the Sattva, the Rajas and the Tamas as in the above two views. The Gunas in this system function on a very lower plane. As has already been pointed out before, the difference comes in due to the difference of objects. Hence the cogni- tion of one object must differ from the cognition of another object, though the cognition in its abstract form is one

1. S. B. B. R. I. p. 22 ; II. 79. 2. A. S. S. V. p. 103 (Com.) 3. R. N. R. p. 156.

325 and the same. In the same way the bliss also must differ. One bliss delimited by one object must be different ( Vilak-' sana) from the bliss delimited by another object. There- fore one Rasa must also differ from another Rasa in the nature of pleasure due to difference in the delimiting factors as the Sthayibhavas, the Vibhavas, the Anubhavas etc. Even in the case of one individual Rasa, for instance, the Śrngāra the experience of pleasure will be different according to the Alambana Vibhāvas, that is, the Āśraya and the Vișaya, the Uddīpana Vibhāvas etc. as also in reference to the different spectators. The experiences in all these cases will, therefore, be different and of particular nature ( Vilak- șana ). The different mental conditions involved as relish in different Rasas or equated with Rasas themselves and the difference in the Vibhāvas etc. particular in cases of different Rasas explain the pleasures as different in different Rasas. A few recent scholars have also tried to account for the pleasure experienced at the recital or the dramatic representa- tion of a literary composition. These views have been given with due criticism in S. S. A. B. and V. R. V. which are in Marāțhī language. N. C. Kelkar has attempted to expalin it on the basis of the Savikalpaka Samādhi ( deter- minate concentration ). The mind with the help of imagina- tion gives the objects literary forms and this imagination expresses itself either through Rasa or through the Alankāra which are the indispensable constituents of literary com- position. The pleasure that ensues from the study of litera- ture is due to many causes. The individual self longs to encompass, and assume the form of, the world at one moment. This task of the self is restricted by sense organs delimited in time, place and action ; the self, therefore, spreads itself

326

all round with the help of the transcendental imagination. In this state it not only retains its individuality but also assumes that of others. The bliss of the realization of Rasa takes place when this assumption (identification with the characters represented etc. ) is effected by the self. The intensity of this pleasure, however, depends upon the pro- portion of the success achieved. When there are many kinds of Rasas to be realized, the pleasure will proportionately be enhanced.1 As regards the poetic figures also the juxta- position of the Upameya ( object to be compared) and the Upamāna (object of comparison) in the simile, for instance, gives rise to pleasure. Such pleasure leads to absorption and further on to Samädhi. The word, Samädhi according to him is generally understood in the sense of the Nirvikalpaka Samādhi of the Yogaśāstra. It is, however, used by him in the sense just the opposite to the above. In the Samādhi caused by the contemplation of literature the knwoledge of one's own self as well as others' exists ; and if that literature is of high order, its study and contemplation will give rise to many kinds of imagniation within and many objects, therefore, will be experienced by the mind.2 This, there- fore, is the true function of literature. The view as expressed above has certain defects. Rasa and the Alankāra are kept on a par ; the case, however, is not so. Experiencing other's emotions without losing one's own consciousness can only be done on the basis of mutual sympathy, respect and love, which cannot be felt for characters like Rāvana etc. Hence in such cases no pleasure will be experienced. Rasas depicted and poetic figures used in a large number at one time can only lead to pleasure in a few well managed cases, because

1. V. R. V. pp. 178-179. 2. S. S. A. B. p. 181.

327

the greater the number, the better the arrangement should be. Deficiency in it will surely lead to confusion. This view ignores other poetic constituents as the Rīti etc. The attribution of the self's longing for expansion can equally hold good in other branches of learning. Many other objections have also been brought forward. D. K. Kelkar, another scholar, advances his theory of the Svāyatta Tādātmya (self-controlled identification ). The identification which is established by the spectator with the original character is under the control of the spectator. All kinds of pleasure from literary com- position are the workings of imagination. Through it identity with the desired object can be established. The extent and the duration of the identity remain under the control of the self. In everyday affairs of the world that control is lost, but it remains in hold in the enjoyment of Rasa. That is how the difference can be shown between the practical and the literary worlds.1 The view is open to criticism for many objections can be preferred against it. For instance, when a good work is read or its representation on the boards seen, the control is gradually lost and anything standing in the way at that time is felt as utterly disturbing. The scholar himself attests to the effect that there ought to be some corresponding qualities for identity ; it, therefore, seems that it is difficult to establish it with all the characters. Further on it is expressed that it is not necessary to establish identity with low and vile characters. Such statements evidently go against the view.2 R. S. Joga gives his view of the Sahānubhūtipūrvaka Tātasthya (indifference with sympathy ).3 This view has been worded by him in order

1. S. S. A. B. p. 187. 2. V. R. V. p. 181. 3. Ibid. p. 182.

328

to do away with a little of the excess from the identity ( Tādātmya ) established between thespectator and the original character, the restriction and the effort from the Svāyatta ( self controlled) and the depth of concentration from the Samādhi ( absorption). The question that remains unans- wered is as to the way the identity can be established between the spectator and the low character. On a par with the above view is one advanced by V. R. Joshi which is the Ātmaupamya- buddhīnem Parakāyāpraveśa (entering into other's body through the knowledge of comparison with self). N. C. Phadake and K. P. Kulkarni have both tried to explain the aesthetic pleasure in literature on the basis of the Punah- pratyaya and the Pratyabhijñā which practically mean one and the same thing and aim at the same object. R. S. Joga, however, distinguishes them by pointing out rhat the Punahpratyaya has more of Anubhava ( experience ) whereas in the Pratyabhijñā Jñāna ( knowledge ) has a greater share.1 K. N. Vatve calls the two as practically the same and says that on the study of literature or at the sight of the characters the experiences mixed with pain, pleasure etc. described therein or represented on the boards lead to the remembrance of such previous experiences by the self.2 The views, no doubt, have wider scope than that of the previous theory yet many things seem to have been left out of consideration. What about the experiences which are described in the literary composition but which have not at all been ex- perienced before ? Literature does not take stock of past experiences only. Novelty in matter is also one of its quali- ties. New ideas, new characters, new technique etc. are ever welcomed and liked by readers or spectators. Phadake

1. S. S. A. B. p. 197. 2. V. R. V. p. 183.

329

accounts for the literary pleasure by giving another view to the effect that literature pacifies the unsatisfied longing.1 This view will fully meet the above objection, yet the pacified longing also has to be consoled sometimes. D. N. Apte advances his theory which in other words is the same as the Punahpratyaya or the Prathyabhijñā view. The pleasure that ensues even in cases where there is no correspondence of emotions between the reader or the spectator and the original character is so felt because the keen longing of the experiences to find expressions is satisfied in literature.2 Late Dr. M. R. Patavardhan has also tried to account for literary pleasure. He says that literature gives knowledge of new things and curiosity is satisfied. According to him man has a natural curiosity to have knowledge of the ex- periences of mankind. The satisfaction of this curiosity results in pleasure. In such cases the absence of identity or mutual sympathy is not felt and concentration results.3 This theory takes account, of the past experiences as well as of new things, but it postulates inquisitive indifference ( Jijñāsu Tätasthya ) for the reader or the spectator. Y. R. Agashe calls literary pleasure the Lalitānanda.4 Man has got curiosity as a natural instinct. This inner urge indicates his keen longing for self-expression. The whole life, therefore, is the expression of the ego which is constantly seen busy in expressing itself, in bringing about its full development and realizing its inherent knowledge. This longing for knowledge is pacified with new experiences. It is also satisfied through imagnination as with the perceptual ex- perience. It is in fine arts that this longing for knowledge is

1. V. R. V. p. 184. 2. Ibid. pp. 184-185. 3. Ibid. p. 185. 4. V. R. V. p. 186.

330

satisfied with the help of imagination. P. K. Guha accounts for the relief from tragedy in two ways: one affirmative, the other negative. The first aspect ' consists in the exaltation tragedy brings to the mind of the audience by its artistic presentation, in different plays, of different phases of the tragedy of life,'1 whereas the second aspect 'consists in the palliation, which we meet with in all tragic drama of the inherent painfulness of its theme, by the employment of various devices of art'.2 The first aspect concerns itself with the human appeal differing in different arts according to the nature of subject-matter etc. The second, however, depends upon the use of various devices which suggest that what is visible to the eye is merely an appearance and that there is an inner world wherein the intangible forces are seen operating before which this outward appearance is nothing. Lascelles Abercrombie calls this inner world 'the poetic world',3 the function of which 'is not to advance the action of the play but to iterpret or rather to illumine it.'4 It is this duality of impression which takes away from the painful effect of tragedy which on analysis will be found to be 'a double-chambered drama.'5 This duality of impression is kept in view by the writer in heroes, plots etc. in order to mitigate the painful effect in as greater a measure as possible. It serves the purpose of producing illusion in the minds of the spectators who take fictitious representation as true. This illusion in tragedy discharges the complex function of suggesting that behind the outer world, there is a world of mind and soul which is no less true than the outer world.

1. G. T. R. p. 34. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid. pp. 36-37. 4. Ibid. p. 37. 5. Ibid. p. 42.

331 Guha's view takes into consideration the nature of the sub- ject matter of the tragedy and the artistic devices of dramatic compositions. It calls the dramtic effect an illusion. It hardly takes into consideration the subjective factor present in the spectator which is, as it were, the pivot of the whole superstructure. The view is more guided by the views of European theorists who paid more importance to the piece of art itself. Most of the scholars whose views have been described have obviously borrowed the wordings from, and formulated their peculiar views on, the theories of Sanskrit scholars ; and as such those views can easily be read, understood and criticized in the light of the original theories of Sanskrit scholars. Some of these views also seem to have taken into consideration a few points from the theories of European scholars. This kind of influence they reflect in the use of curiosity as the prime cause of the pleasure experienced on witnessing a dramatic representation etc. It is meet, there- fore, to pass over the views of European scholars only summarily. Unlike Indian scholars, they have tried to explain pleasure resulting from tragic scenes mostly. In this field of criticism Aristotle, the Greek savant, comes first for consideration. Aristotle has emphasized two emotions, pity and fear, and thus the pathetic and the fearful sentiments have been considered by him in connecticn with his theory. According to him 'tragedy effects a " Katharsis " ( purga- tion ) of these and kindred emotions.'1 Many and varied are the interpretations put on this view. Robertelli said that the tragic representation made people accustomed to the terrible, hence life, a bed of thorns as it is, became tolerable. Giraldi

1. T. D. p. 122.

332

interpreted 'purgation' as applying not only to pity and fear but to similar emotions. Lessing said that ' Katharsis' stood for purification. In worldly life people lack balance. Some have too much of pity and fear whereas others little. In order to strike a balance or to bring about the golden mean the tragedy has come into existence. As others have said, the pity and the fear are purified at the representation of the tragedy, as they lose personal touch and become impersonal. It is because of this that pity etc. for others are experienced. This is the sublimation of the emotions ; in other words it is their purification. Some recent scholars have tried to interpret the word, Katharsis, as applied to the medical science. According to them it means purgation whereby 'it is not the passions that are purged of their impurities; it is the human soul that is purged of its excessive passions.'1 It is also to be understood as a reply to the stricutres passed by Plato on the art of poetry. Plato attributed a very bad effect to poetry whereas Aristotle stood for the defence of poetry. This, however, was something topical as it depended on the views of life the Greeks conceived. For instance, at one end stood such persons as Plato, the great philosopher, who advocated complete subjugation of passions whereas at the other stood Aristotle who allowed them reasonable indulgence. The first became so vehement for righteousness every- where that in the end he denounced even art as wicked because he gave such arguments as the art was twice removed from reality and 'Poetry feeds and waters the passions, weeds that ought rather to be killed by drought.' The second, on the contrary, said that art like fiction, 'is more philosophic than the history of actual events,' and he

1. L. T. p. 24.

333 remarked concerning poetry that 'it makes them less, not more, emotional, by giving a periodic and healthy outlet to their feelings.'1 The theory of purgation sounds like the modern psychological theory according to which the repressed emotions have to be given a safety valve, otherwise having remained long in pent-up condition they might give rise to complexes. But the above view of purgation deals mainly with the effect whch is moralistic. Moreover, no body goes to the theatre for a mental dose. Butcher, there- fore, tries to see 'a further meaning. It expresses not only a fact of psychology or of pathology, but a principle of art. The original metaphor is in itself a guide to the full aesthetic significance of the term.'2 He accepts that the Katharsis 'denotes the removal of a painful or disturbing element from the organism, and hence the purifying of what remains, by the elimination of alien matter,'3 and applies it to tragedy. He establishes that the medium of art gives distinctly an aesthetic satisfaction. He also tries to arrive at the nature of the process of purgation on the basis of hints etc. supplied by Aristotle. Pity and fear in everyday life have each pain or disturbance due to imminent evil, destructive or painful. Each may have reference to self or to someone very near to self. But in the dramatic representation both these emotions as they are experienced in actual life undergo sufficient modification in that pity is therein appealed to for a character 'not a wholly innocent sufferer, but rather a man who meets with sufferings beyond his deserts,'4 and fear instead of remaining ' the direct apprehension of misfortune impending over our own life,' turns into ' the sympathetic shudder we

1. L. T. pp. 32-33. 2. T. A. p. 253. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. p. 258.

334

feel for a hero whose character in its essentials resembles our own.'1 He must be an ordinary man but at the same time standing above in external status and dignity and also placed at an ideal distance in order that the spectators may not be reminded of their own troubles, cares and personal affairs. It is under such conditions that identification takes place, the characters being presented in universalized aspects. The feeling experienced at this time is immediate. Because of the identification, the spectators feel that they are con- cerned with the incidents and yet their personal safety is not threatened, because union here is through imagination as the spectator 'becomes one with the tragic sufferer, and through him with humanity at large.'2 'The sting of the pain, the disquiet and unrest, arise from the selfish element which in the world of reality clings to these emotions. The pain is expelled when the taint of egoism is removed.'3 Butcher, when questioned if the above explanation is not reading modern conceptions into old theories, replies, 'that if this is not what Aristotle meant, it is at least the natural outcome of his doctrine ; to this conclusion his general theory of poetry points.'4 Butcher says it is, thus, that art is made a source of joy to the people in general and redounds to the credit of the poets. 'The poets found out how the transport of human pity and human fear might, under the excitation of art, be dissolved in joy, and the pain escape in the purified tide of human sympathy.'5 Abercrombie calls the attempts of Aristotle at defining the tragic pleasure 'as an attempt in the right direction.'6 He says that 'tragedy

1. T. A. pp. 258-259. 2. Ibid. p. 266. 3. Ibid. p. 268. 4. Ibid. pp. 268-269. 5. Ibid. p. 273. 6. A. P. C. pp. 109-110.

335 certainly does produce an enjoyable and wholesome effect, by rousing in us emotions which in real life would be un- pleasantly and perhaps dangerously disturbing ....... '1 He is not prepared to accept that the meaning attached to the word, Katharsis, in the medical science or other religious sense, that is, purification, stands quite admissible. He, however, accepts that something like 'purification ' may be alleged as tragedy presents evil things deprived of their evil effect.2 R. S. Joga quotes the interpretation of B. Croce put on the word, Katharsis. 'By elaborating his impressions, man frees himself from them. By objectifying them, he removes them from him and makes himself their superior. The liberating and purifying function of art is another aspect and another formula of its character of activity. Activity is the deliverer just because it drives away passivity.'3 That the above interpretation in one way or another accepts the unburdening of emotions and their purification as the function of art is quite obvious. The great poet Milton interpreted ' purgation ' thus. 'Tragedy, as it was anciently composed, hath been ever held the gravest, moralest, and most profitable of all other poems : therefore said by Aristotle to be of power, by raising pity and fear, or terror, to purge the mind of those and suchlike passions ; that is to temper and reduce them to just measure with a kind of delight, stirred up by reading or seeing those passions well imitated.'4 Herein emotions like but not identical are estimated to produce delight. These interpretations are only efforts to explain the effect of tragedy. It has, however, to be kept in mind here that with the Greeks only two

1. & 2. A. P. C. p. 110. 3. S. S. A. B. pp. 233-234 (Footnote). 4. M. S. A. (Preface).

336

sentiments, the pathetic and the fearful, counted in the drama. Their aim was to depict mainly the tragic incidents, the working of Nemesis over the doomed families etc., hence their canvas was not so wide as that of Oriental theorists. Still the Greeks considered the above two sentiments as principal in the drama. The Greek dramatists also realized great pleasure in writing out tragedies. For Aeschylus the tragedy was, 'A means of uttering his exultation in human greatness and heroism, his troubled groping to find the gods behind the gods, the hidden springs of the justice of the world.'1 Sophocles believed that the tragedy demonstrated the marvellousness of man-the theme which also found favour with Shakespeare. These dramatists, therefore, con- sidered the human qualities the principal things in the tragedy. With Euripides the tragedy concerned itself with truth and thus grew moralistic. Racine treated the tragedy more as a school mistress. In the above two dramatists, however, the moral did not find favour at the total expense of the delightful. With Ibsen the delightful finds favour as he declares his aim to be an artist above all. Coleridge says that the spectator comes to have a particular state of mind when witnessing a dramatic representation. Even impossible things are taken up as real, and disbelief in their not being real is thus suspended. That state of mind is, therefore, called the 'suspension of disbelief.' This position, how- ever, stands open to criticism as suspension of diebelief requires effort on the part of the spectator. No spectator seated in a theatre-hall ever thinks, while enjoying pleasure, that this pleasure of his is being enjoyed because he has already considered the characters before him as real, though

1. L. T. p. 35.

337

in fact they are not really the original characters but actors impersonating them. The list of the dramatists and the poets can be enlarged but disagreement in their theories will be the most marked feature, though in practice the same hearty interest will come to view. The opinions of the philosophers and the critics also do not agree. Pleasure as the result, however, has received the general approval and sanction. It is, therefore, in the mode of explanation that disagreement is seen. Rousseau said that the pleasure accruing from witnessing the tragic representation was largely sadistic, that is, it pleased man to hear related the torments of others. Segni also explained this as the func- tion of the tragedy during the Renaissance. This theory may contain a grain of truth as human nature is a complex problem ; it cannot, however, be given much weight. It might account for the pleasure of the primitives but that stage of humanity has long passed away. Malicious persons may feel satisfied to a certain extent. The theory, viewed thus, is a crude one. Others say that instead of watching other persons undergoing torments, it gives pleasure to watch one's own self troubled and tormented. This is how the pleasure explained as sadistic in the above theory be- comes masochistic here. This masochistic theory is as crude as the sadistic one just considered. That pleasure accrues to one from self-torture is rather strange. It may accrue to a few persons who are stoics or stoically-minded. Moreover, pains less intense might give pleasure but what about those which are disastrous ? From such pains, painful experience will ensue. Abbe Dubos says that people ' go to tragedies because it is pleasanter to be grieved than bored; '1

1. L. T. p. 38. 22

338

Fontenelle ( with whom Shelley also concurred ) believes that in a painful and a pleasurable emotion the difference is only of degree, and the knowledge of unreality in the theatri- cal representation makes even a painful object pleasant. Abbe Dubos' position that people go to the representation of a tragedy to be grieved does not stand as no body is willing to court pain. Fontenelle's postulation that the effect of the tragedy is weakened because the spectator has the sense of the unreality is rather weak by itself. In the emotional stage, the sense of either unreality or reality does not intervene. Moreover, the question of pain and pleasure being a matter of degree does not mean that the two are equally liked. No body wants to experience pain instead of pleasure. Hume accepts in parts the explanations of both the above theorists but supplements them as he says that there also exists here the pleasure felt ' in the activity of the imagination as it mirrors life.'1 The emphasis is put by Hume on the activity of the imagination but the imagination may not be seen active at all places. According to Guha, Hume gave credit to eloquence which Guha criticizes as reflecting indiscrimination between different forms of art.2 Hegel was a pure idealist. His theory of the tragic fact was surely influenced by his idealism. 'The essentially tragic fact is the self-division and intestinal warfare of the ethical substance, not so much the war of good with evil as the war of good with good. Two of these isolated powers face each other, making incompatible demands. The family claims what the state refuses, love requires what honour forbids. The competing forces are both in themselves rightful, and so far the claim of each is equally justified ; but

1. L. T. p. 39. 2. G. T. R. p. 24.

339

the right of each is pushed into a wrong, because it ignores the right of the other, and demands that absolute sway which belongs to neither alone, but to the whole of which each is but a part.'1 Pleasure accrues from seeing characters per- fectly indentify themselves with their isolated causes and compete vehemently and violently for asserting their indivi- dual and several claims, as also from witnessing the final re- conciliation wherein the exclusive claim is generally denied self-assertion, the conflict seldom ending peacefully and the tragedy thus closing with a solution. Hegel was an idealist. Hence his theory, too, has much of idealism. As Lucas puts it, ' In a Utopia peopled by Hegels tragedy might perhaps be what he describes, but that is no concern of ours.'2 Modern theorists concentrate too much on the individual character and do not show the final merging of discords into a high harmony. They cannot, therefore, explain things on the basis of this theory. Schopenhauer has his gospel of life in the phrase, Vanity of vanities. He considers life full of miseries. Joys here on this side of the globe are of impermanent nature, fleeting at every moment. The tragedy emphasizes this miserable and serious side of life. It, thus, represents worthlessness of life. Wise men come to feel a sort of resignation and renuncia- tion for all the things here. 'We should go home from a play, he thought, having realised more clearly than ever the worthlessness of life, freer than ever from that will to live which comedy on the contrary encourages.'3 And in this consists the tragic pleasure. Schlegel concurs with Scho- penhauer in his view.4 Minturno also emphasizes the same

1. O. L. P. pp. 71-72 2. L. T. p. 43. 3. Ibid. p. 44. 4. T. D. p. 134.

340

point when he expresses his disbelief in worldly prosperity and in the duration and stability of worldly things, faith in their perishable nature and in the fact that every happiness changes into misery.1 Schopenhauer's view has too much of pessimism. Life may often seem sad but is it really worthless ? The theorist seems to teach a sort of resigna- tion towards, and contempt for, life. Is it not plainly an utterly moralistic approach to a piece of art ? This view has affinities with Bhavabhuti's which advocates the Karuņa as the only Rasa. P. K. Guha brings 1 forward some objections on the basis of the tragedy being a piece of art having wide appeal and arousing zeal in activity. Moreover, he says that if tragedies taught complete pessimism and comedies gave enjoyment according to Schopenhauer, the two species could not flourish side by side.2 In Nietzsche this complete disillusion of Schopenhauer gets mixed with illusion ; 'the essence of tragedy is not simple disillusion, but alternate illusion and disillusion, ' as Lucas puts it.3 The visions of the grandeur and littleness of life here alternate : in other words, here is visible a struggle of opposite feelings. This theory recognizes truth to a certain extent but it is again a theory which comes from a philosopher. The tragic experience cannot be called alternating. It is not only the struggle of opposite feelings that interests the spectator. Many other factors as imaginative presentation of objects also interest him ; he thus gets pleasure from the dramatic art as such. Nietzsche's view seems to make no distinction between the dramatic and other forms of art in point of effect. I. A. Richards believes that in the tragedies is to be

1. T. D. P. 134 (Footnote). 2. G. T. R. pp. 14-15. 3. L. T. pp. 46-47.

341

found reconciliation of opposite and discordant qualities. He instances the two emotions, pity and fear. Pity makes the people approach the object towards which it is felt whereas fear takes them away far from it. The tragedy depicts the two and shows in a way their reconciliation as to be satisfying to the spectator. He also 'suggests that many other such discordant impulses might perhaps also be finding themselves reconciled in the tragedy. The word, Katharsis, used by Aristotle means according to Richards this re- conciliation for he says, "Their union in an ordered single response is the Catharsis by which tragedy is recognised, whether Aristotle meant anything of this kind or not."1 That Aristotle never used Katharsis in the sense of anything of the kind expressed in the above theory is fully shown by Lucas. Moreover, does tragedy represent a tug of war between emotions as pity and fear ? Do these emotions never come in separately ? That it cannot account for all the tragedies has been admitted by the theorist himself by dismissing the Greek tragedies as 'pseudo-tragedy' and 'almost all Elizabethan tragedy outside Shakespeare's six masterpieces. '2 Lucas calls curiosity the basis of tragedy and says that because of it man has a longing to have different and various experiences from life which tragedy depicts in its opposite phases. A sort of pleasure is thus given by the tragedy as the love of beauty and truth and of truth to life and about it is satisfied. The satisfaction comes through many ways. 'It may be the thought that the hero, like Samson, has at least got cleanly off the stage.' Or 'it may be simply the consolation of perfect language, as when Antigone passes with that last great cry down to her living

1. L. T. p. 49. 2. Ibid. p. 51.

342

tomb.' 'Or it may be simply the consolation of the sheer integrity which faces life as it is.'1 At times the characters may lack tragic splendour, and yet the play may remain a tragedy ; the tragedy in such cases even though depicting human unhappiness pleases due to the truth with which it is described and its skilful communication to the audience. The universe seems quite disordered, it affords great miseries to man. It sometimes even crushes him under its feet very mercilessly. Man, therefore, gets satisfaction by painting this cruel working of the inexorable destiny. The instinct of curiosity in man works on a lower level. Its satisfaction, therefore, cannot be equated with the Rasāsvāda which becomes transcendental. Moreover, curiosity can be res- ponsible for the desire to know and study sciences and arts, to see performances other than dramatic also, hence it can hardly account for the pleasure ensuing from witnessing a dramatic representation. In the case of spectators who witness the same tragic representation twice or thrice, this theory cannot be satisfactory. Allardyce Nicoll says that in the tragedy there are many factors which give pleasure. Some of the characters possess heroic grandeur. When such characters move in action, the mind of the audience soars into very high regions. This nobility of characteriza- tion, therefore, serves as a relief from tragedy. The feeling of nobility involving moral problems is another source of this relief, though the conception of morality differs in different contexts. Pleasure also ensues from the sense of universality which is 'some form of contact with infinity.'2 To the religious persons it means a contact with divine forces whereas in case of the atheists the contact takes place

1. L. T. p. 57. 2. T. D. p. 131.

343

with illimitable forces of the universe staggering and bewilde- ring understanding. These two aspects are fully reflected in the old and the new dramas depicting the religious and the scientific tendencies and forces. Poetical effect also caters to this pleasure, by taking away much from the gloom of the tragic plot. This poetical effect is the result of ' the creative artistic power of the dramatist himself',1 and it serves ' to reave away our minds for a moment from the gloomy depths of the tragedy.'2 The view takes into con- sideration the moralistic as well as the artistic factors. But it is more moralistic as the qualities of the characters are more to be seen coming into prominence and engaging atten- tion whereas the artistic finish is simply to throw into tempo- rary oblivion the gloomy depths of the tragedy. C. T. Winchester says that in a tragic representation the character in suffering demonstrates his virtues and merits. For some time the hero appears to get the better of the elementary forces acting against him. The hero comes to command respect from the audience which results in their pleasure, even though he meets the tragic end. If in the dramatic representation murders in cold blood without the expression of virtues are enacted, no pleasure will accrue.3 That this view is moralistic is quite obvious. K. N. Vatve records one view under the name of some scholars. When the characters are seen in troubles, sympathy, compassion etc. are felt for them. It is a sort of help rendered to them, for instances, the dramatic representation or the recital of the life-incidents of a poor starving beggar fallen into the clutches of cruel oppressors brings tears into the eyes of the spectators or the readers. These tears give the readers or

1. T. D. p. 132. 2. Ibid. 3. V. R. V. p. 200.

344

the spectators some consolation and lead to their pleasure.1 The view contemplates cases as they happen in actual life. The spectacle of poor beggars starving and oppressed in everyday life, no doubt, brings tears but those tears do not indicate pleasure. Therefore tears here will give one some relief on the expression of sorrow for others, but no pleasure will ensue. John Dennis says that provocation to virtues and restraint over evils are shown in the representation of a tragedy. This spectacle, therefore, gives pleasure to the spectators.2 This view is also moralistic because it con- templates encouragement to virtues and control over the evils as the subject of the tragedy. The spectators do not always expect to see virtue triumphant and vice punished, as sometimes the reverse is to be seen in drama as in actual life. These views of European scholars on a reflection seem to arrange themselves into some definite categories. Some reflect a moralistic approach to the subject whereas others deal with the enumeration of the various factors as merits and virtues of characters responsible for the pleasure ensuing from the representation of a tragedy. Some of these views take into consideration the pacification of the instinct of curiosity, the activity of imagination, the suspension of ' disbelief, life as a banquet to be seen etc. etc. But no theory makes any approach taking into consideration the inherent goodness, beauty and truth of the human soul as the Orienta- lists did. Aristotle has considered the subject in a way which fairly resembles the Indian standpoint. He took into consideration the emotions of pity and fear and gave the verdict that tragedy effected the Katharsis, which was interpreted by some to the effect that the human soul it was

1. V. R. V. pp. 200-201. 2. Ibid. p. 199.

345

which was purged of these emotions, thus implying the purification of the soul of its impurities.1 Butcher's interpretation makes the characters universalized where objects have no reference to self. Personal cares, troubles etc. also do not find any scope as all these are completely removed. Complete identification with characters, therefore, takes place. In all these points there is resemblance with the Indian standpoint. But then the insufficiency of the Western standpoint stares in. Firstly, Aristotle does not furnish any such warranted interpretation as Butcher's. Secondly, Butcher himself says that this interpretation has been reached from the hints furnished in Aristotle's work. Hence the objection to this interpretation can arise. Taking then the interpretation as such, it is clear that it does not reach the satisfactory solution. The inherent blissful state of the Purusa as recognized in the economy of the Indian philosophy seems to have received no consideration by Western philosophers. Their thinking had not dived deep into the very core of the subject though some of them tried to make the best approach possible in the circumstances. Some of their solutions were akin to those mentioned by Sāradātanaya. Just as the sweet, the sour, the bitter etc. become delicious to persons according to place, time etc. so do the Śrngāra Rasa etc. to the spectators in various and different circumstances. And as such they are called Rasas. They are also called Rasas because they are in- dividually relished by individuals due to difference in their nature, in circumstances and transitoriness and fickleness of mind.2 The Pratyabhijñā school of the Kāśmīrian Śaiva philosophy propounded the Rasa system in a way which

1. L. T. p. 24. 2. B. P. Lines 5-16. p. 40.

346

satisfied the different standpoints. That the tenets of this system found reflection in the exposition of Rasa stands as an un- doubted fact, as the life-principles of personalities stand as whole and not demarcated into different sections. Satisfac- tory solution is, therefore, to be found in it. 2. RASA ONLY ONE Rasa in literature is the pleasure which is born of the recital of a poem or the spectacle of a dramatic representa- tion. It is the pleasure of the self as the Sthāyibhāvas implanted inside with the conjoint operation of the Vibhāvas etc. mature into Rasa. It is all bliss wherein the difference in reference to self and non-self sinks. Rasa, thus, as an ineffable bliss, is fundamentally one. It is called one but appears different due to delimiting factors. It is to express this one Rasa that Bharata uses the word Rasa in singular number in the expression, 'Na Hi Rasad Rte Kaśchidarthaḥ Pravartate.' It is called the Mahārasa by Abhinava who says that, viewed from the standpoint of the Sphota, the Mahārasa may be likened to the Sphota which is permanent whereas other Rasas are only unrealities.1 It is also likened to Brahman from the standpoint of which the different many Rasas appear as unrealities. It receives different names due to its constituents as the Sthāyibhāvas, the Vibhāvas etc.2 Abhinava explains that God ( Parameśvara ) is without plura- lity, that is, He has no kinds as He transcends all limitations of space, time and form.3 Just before this has been described the apparent plurality. One com. in manuscript form on Sarasvatīkanthābharana of Bhoja says that Rasa as relish is one.4 Kavi Karņapūra Gosvāmī establishes one funda-

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) II p. 269 (Com.). 2. Ibid. VI p. 273 (Com). 3. S. D. S. p. 196. 4. R. N. R. p. 177.

347

mental Rasa of which he postulates one Sthāyibhāva. He calls the latter the Āsvādānkurakanda which is an attribute of mind wherein pure Sattva completely devoid of the Rajas and the Tamas predominates. It becomes separately and diversely named due to the different Vibhavas.1 The com. to the above gives the analogy of the crystal which though white appears different in colours when placed in the vicinity of different flowers having different hues. The author again describes Rasa as fundamentally one and says that the limiting factors as the Rati etc. make it look as many.2 The last view postulates one definite Sthāyibhāva for the one fundamental Rasa and accounts for the different Rasas on the basis of the different Vibhavas. Abhinava did not postulate any such Sthayibhava. He called the mental function, however, the Rasana, another name for Rasa, which was variously called the Svāda ( relish ) by some and the Charvanā by others. 3. RASA-ITS CLASSIFICATION. Bharata, the father of Sanskrit dramaturgy, has at the very outset of the description of Rasa in the sixth chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S. ) raised the question as to why Rasa is so called and what it is.3 The question is answered forthwith that it is an entity and is so called because of being Āsvādya ( of a relishable nature ). The subsequent writers as Mammata, Viśvanātha etc. have also equated it with the Charvaņā ( relish ); it is, therefore, a particular relish. Any classification of Rasa must have reference to the relish and its nature. Bharata has counted the four Rasas, viz. the Srngāra, the Raudra, the Vira and the Bībhatsa as the primary ones and the Hāsya,

1. K. A. K. V. 63. 2. Ibid. V. 71. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. p. 71.

348

the Karuna, the Adbhuta and the Bhayānaka as their respec- tive derivatives.1 The raison d'être of the above position is, however, to be found in the Daśarūpaka where the dra- ·maturgist Dhanañjaya takes the very word from Bharata and calls Rasa the Svāda ( relish ). In the Śrngāra, the Vīra, the Bibhatsa and the Raudra this Svada is of four kinds involving as it does four mental conditions : the Vikāsa (blooming or unfolding), the Vistāra (expansion), the Ksobha ( agitation ) and the Viksepa ( distraction ) respectively. The other four Rasas, viz. the Hasya, the Adbhuta, the Bhayānaka and the Karuna, have been described as products not in the exact sense of being generated from them but coming out of them in various relation.2 The examples quoted in support are from Bharata and, thus, the author and the commentator both based themselves on Bharata's Nātya- śāstra. This position has been so tenaciously adhered to that the Santa as a dramatic Rasa has been completely refuted, without paying attention to the fact that Bharata has accepted it in hints as will be seen later on. That he has also described it in the line, Bībhatsādbhutasāntānām Traividhyam Nātra Kathyate,3 and given it a separate treatment4 as in the case of other eight Rasas is borne testimony to by the N. S. (G. O. S.). The closing stanza of the sixth chapter counts Rasas as nine ; the com. makes it more clear. The Agni- purana also gives the list of the primary and the derivative Rasas in conformity with Bharata. In this respect it may be said to occupy the same position as Dhanañjaya. The departure, however, comes in the mode of explanation. The Śrngāra comes out of the Rāga ( attachment ), the Raudra

1. N.S. (K.S. S.) VI. 39-41. 2. D. R. IV. 43-44 (and Com. pp. 162-163). 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 386. 4. Ibid. VI. pp. 333-342.

349

from the Tīkşna ( Taikşnya) (intensity and vehemence ), the Vīra is the Avastambhaja (born of stupefaction ) and the Bībhatsa is the Sankochabhūḥ (produced from contraction ).1 Śinga Bhūpāla mentions2 the four mental conditions put forward by Dhanañjaya and accepts the four primary and the four derivative Rasas. 3 Rupa Gosvāmī accepts the above mental conditions with one addition. In the Sänta Rasa he accepts the Pürti ( the feeling of complete- ness or surfeit) whereas he admits the Vikāsa in the Prīti, the Preyan, the Vatsala, the Madhura and the Hasya ; the Vistāra in the Vīra and the Adbhuta ; the Viksepa in the Karuna and the Raudra ; and the Ksobha in the Bhayānaka and the Bibhatsa.4 The above two authors do not equate the different kinds of Rasas with these mental conditions, for they say that these mental conditions are involved as relish in different Rasas. The different kinds of relish are brought about by different Vibhävas etc. which are particular in different Rasas. Bharata's statement5 that the Anukrti ( imita- tion) of the Śrngära is the Häsya, the action of the Raudra is the Karuna, that of the Vira is the Adbhuta and the spectacle of the Bibhatsa is the Bhayānaka is not a conclusive one. For instance, love poses and love passages between the lovers. become, no doubt, an object of laughter for the spectator but often they are felt as disgusting by them. No body while witnessing a spectacle of the Häsya Rasa thinks first that it is the imitation of the Śrngära Rasa and hence a case of the Hāsya Rasa. Moreover, the Hāsya Rasa can be relished without the Śrngara Rasa. A well-dressed strong and cautious person suddenly slipping on the road furnishes the instance. 1. A. P. 338-6-8. 2. R. S. II. p. 175. 3. Ibid. II. 166-167. 4. R. H. S. p. 310. 5. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. 40-41.

350

The last argument applies to the Raudra and the Karuna Rasas also as they have been regarded by Bharata as the cause and its effect. The Karuna can exist without the Raudra. The difference in the standpoint can also account for them separately. Viewed from the standpoint of the sufferer the whole sight appears pathetic whereas the whole position will appear terrific when looked at from the point of view of the oppressor. It, therefore, becomes clear that in a drama both the oppressor and the sufferer must be present in order to remind that the Karuna is the effect of the Raudra. In the Uttararamacharita Rāma and Sītā are the sufferers. Who is the oppressor of Rāma ? Is it the situa- tion ? But the situation is not a person incarnate. More- over, a person may be an object of pity without in any way being connected with anger. The Vira may sometimes result in something marvellous but the marvellous may be brought about without the agency of the Vira. The coming of Menakā in the form of light to take away Sakuntalā in her distress in the Abhijñānaśākuntala is an instance of the Adbhuta brought about by the Karuna. The spectacle of the Bibhatsa may result in the Bhayanaka but the latter does not invariably depend on the former. The deer being pursued by Duyanta in the Abhijñānaśākuntala furnishes an instance of the Bhayānaka brought about by the Vīra in the king. Such are some of the arguments against the conclusiveness of the statement. That is why Sarngadeva says that all Rasas can mutually stand as the producer and the produced. He says that the Raudra is the cause in the Bhayānaka, from the Vipralambha Śrngāra the Karuņa is produced, the Vira serves as the cause in the Bhayānaka and the Adbhuta, and the laughter of the Vidūșaka is the cause

351 of the hero's Hasya.1 Later on Bhanudatta is seen testifying to the above position. He quotes at first Bharata but gives the opinion of some old authority as the Pūrvagranthakāra- sammatih in accounting for some other relations of the producer and the produced not mentioned in Bharata. He gives illustrations also wherein the Karuna and the Bībhatsa serve as cause to the Vīra, the Śrngāra to the Bhayānaka and the Vira to the Śrngära.2 The statement of Bharata, how- ever, bears testimony to the keen insight of the Sanskrit dramaturgist into human nature. This knowledge becomes more clear in the hands of other Sanskrit scholars. Abhinava mentions Bhatta Nāyaka as postulating the third function, the Bhoga, which is of the nature of the Vistara and the Vikāsa as explained in the com. to the N. S. (G. O. S. ),3 and of the nature of the Vistāra, the Vikāsa and the Druti (melting) as set forth in the Dhvanyālokalochana.4 Bhatta- Nāyaka does not give any particular technical names to these mental states. Abhinava, however, calls these mental states or conditions as the Gunas (Dīptih Pratipattur Hrdaye Vikāsavistāraprajvalanasvabhāvā. Sācha Mukhyatayā Ojaśśabdavāchyā).5 The Guņas, viz. the Ojas, the Prasāda and the Madhurya exist respectively as the Dīpti ( illumination of and unfolding ), the Samarpakatva or the Vyāpakatva (pervasion ) and the Ardratä or the Druti -- the three mental conditions evoked only in the process of the realization of Rasa. Hence Rasas and the Gunas are invariably connected as the effects and their causes. The statement, therefore, that the Dipti is the character of Rasas like the Raudra has been well explained by Lahiri as showing the superimposition of 1. S. D. S. R. VII. 1384-1385. 2. B.R. T. p . 168-169. 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 279 (com.) 4. D. L. II. pp. 183 & 189 (Com.) 5. Ibid. II. p. 208 (Com.)

352

the effect (Karya) on the Kārana (cause ).1 If this is the position of the Guna, why has it been accepted as a separate element ? The answer is that, though the above position has fully been accepted, in the economy of the Dhvani the Guna was to receive recognition as a separate factor, as long before it had become the pivot of one of the schools in Sanskrit poetics. Here if it is said that 'a peculiar associ- ation with the vibhāva, anubhāva and vyabhicāribhāva rouses the sthayin to a stage of relish,'2 the question will again crop up if this relish is had only as one of the above mental conditions. Hence is the Guna realized as essential as the Sthayibhava. 'If it is true that the Guna comes into existence on account of the Rasa, it is equally true that the Guna ( in the form of the Cittavrtti) constitutes a part and parcel in the actual realisation of Rasa. Nay, in the ultimate stage of relish Srngāra has no other existence except a supreme delight in the form of the melting of the heart which is the character of the Guna Mädhurya; Raudra has no other ex- istence except in the form of a brilliant expansion of the heart which is the character of the Guna Ojas. Similarly, Prasāda in the form of a pervasion of the heart is an essential character of all the Rasas. Thus, although in theory the Guna is swallowed up in the Rasa, in practice it makes the Rasa what it is.'3 Ananda, thus, accepts the Guna as a separate element in his Dhvani theory and says that in the Sambhoga Śrngāra ( as Abhinava points out), the Vipralambha and the Karuna there is a proportionately advancing degree of the Mädhurya as the mind melts in them; the Ojas, involving an expansion, resides in the Raudra ( as also in the Vira and the Adbhuta, as pointed out by

1. C. R. G. p. 206. 2. Ibid. p. 207. 3. Ibid.

353 Abhinava) ; and the Prasāda is common to all.1 Lahiri explains well the presence of the Prasāda in all Rasas. He says, "It has been seen that the perception of Rasa depends on understanding the composition in which some of the accessories of Rasa find their expression, and thus the quality of pervading is the character of this Guna in the sense that in every Rasa the mind must be prepared to grasp at once the situation depicted in the conception."2 The Śrngāra, the Karuna, the Raudra, the Vira and the Adbhuta have been expressed by Ananda as involving different mental conditions. What about others ? Abhinava says that Ānanda has already referred to a peculiar association of more than one mental condition in each of the rest. He elucidates Ananda's hints as he lays down that in the Hāsya the Mādhurya and the Ojas are present in equal degree, for the Hāsya is subordinate to the Śngāra ( Abhinava is seen here still adhering to Bharata whose influence he is unable to shake off comple- tely ) and it involves an expansion of the heart. Similarly in the Bhayanaka and the Bībhatsa the Madhurya and the Ojas are both present but the former is present in a lesser degree than the latter, for though the mental function is of absorption and hence melting yet the expansion predominates due to the Vibhavas being of this nature. In the Śanta sometimes the Ojas predominates whereas at others the Mädhurya according to the variety and peculiar nature of the Vibhava.3 Mammata says in the definition of the poetry that it should be endowed with the Guna, implying thereby the Gunas as the essential attribute (Nitya) and thus also making one think that the Gunas can exist without bearing any relation to Rasa. But later on this relation becomes quite 1.D.L. II. 8-10. 2. C. R. G. p. 210. 3. D. L. II. p. 212. (Com.) 23

354

clear when they are described as causes of bringing about the various mental conditions in different Rasas. Mammata at first gives a general definition1 and then the particular characteristics of each of the three. The Madhurya, which gladdens the heart by bringing about a melting thereof, resides in increasing degree in the Sambhoga, the Karuna, the Vipralambha and the Santa (in admitting this nature of the Santa Mammata differs from Abhinava). The Ojas which is a glow in the form of an expansion of heart is present in increasing degree in the Vira, the Bībhatsa and the Raudra ( again a departure from Abhinava in putting the Bībhatsa here). The Prasāda exists in all Rasas.2 Hemachandra follows Mammata closely but differs from him slightly in that he accepts the presence of the Mādhurya Gūna in increasing degree in the Sambhoga, the Sānta, the Karuna and the Vipralambha.3 Viśvanātha adheres to the position of Mammata to a certain extent but wisely differs from him inasmuch as he says that the Guna does not bring about the mental condition but is identical with it.4 He disposes of in the com. under the second stanza of the eighth chapter of S. D. the argument by saying that the mental condition melting the heart cannot be regarded as an effect of the Mādhu- rya as it is the same as the literary bliss in the form of a mental relish. Panditarāja Jagannātha follows the previous writers with but one difference. Unlike them who say that the Gunas belong to Rasa primarily and to the word and its sense only secondarily he appears to hold that the Gunas belong primarily and not secondarily to the word and its sense both.5 The

1. K. P. VIII. 66. 2. Ibid. VIII. 68-71. 3. H. K. S. IV. p. 201. 4. S. D. VIII. 2, 4, 7 & 8. 5. R. G. p. 55.

355

psychological approach which has been seen above at the hands of the different writers assumes quite a new form in the treatment of Sāradātanaya. He accounts for the difference in Rasas in point of origin on the basis of the function of the ego with the ten sense organs coming in contact with the external objects and the different kinds of the Vibhāvas fixed for different Rasas.1 The mind, at that time, in different relations with the three Gunas, viz. the Sattva, the Rajas and the Tamas, combined with different sense organs under- goes different transformations otherwise called Rasas. The author elucidates his point as follows. When the Lalita Vibhävas finding representation suitable to them in con- junction with the Sāttvikabhāvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas excite the Sthāyibhāvas, at that time the mind of the spectators is permeated with the Rajas and the Sattva. The mind then undergoes a transformation which is blissful. It is called the Srngara and is relishable. The process is as above in all other Rasas with the difference in the Vibhavas, in the function of the Gunas and of the sense organs. The Sthāyibhāvas undoubtedly differ in all Rasas -- a fact which hardly requires any special notice. In the Häsya, the Vīra, the Adbhuta, the Raudra, the Karuna, the Bībhatsa and the Bhayānaka the Vibhāvas respectively are the Lalitā- bhasas, the Sthiras, the Chittras, the Kharas, the Rūksas, the Ninditas and the Vikrtas. The mind is touched with the Rajas, has a trace of the Tamas and rests in the Chaitanya in the Hasya; it is permeated with the Sattva, has a trace of the Rajas and is combined with the Abhimāna in the Vira ; it is resplendent with the Rajas and the Sattva and is combined with the Buddhi in the Adbhuta ; it has traces

1. B. P. Lines. 12-18. p. 4.

356

of the Rajas and the Tamas and is combined with the Ahankāra in the Raudra; it is predominated by the Tamas, assumes the form of the Chitta, is of insentient nature and has traces of the Sat in the Karuna ; it assumes the form of the Buddhi, is devoid of the Sattva and has traces of the Chit in the Bibhatsa ; and it assumes the form of the Chitta and has traces of the Tamas and the Sattva in the Bhayanaka. This explanation of the origin of Rasa is as described in the Yogamālāsamhitā.1 On the basis of the above explanation only eight Rasas are recognized. According to some scholars there is a ninth transformation of mind which is the Santa Rasa; whereas according to others there can be no such transformation, for austerities etc. cannot be represented. The latter view is given under the name of Padmabhu who accepts only eight Rasas.2 This opinion has undoubted reference to Bharata's mention of only eight Rasas under the name of Druhina as has been pointed out by Raghavan.3 The author then gives another view under the name of Närada where the mental transforma- tions are akin to those in the previous views. The difference that exists here is that the helping factors are the three Gunas, viz. the Sattva, the Rajas and the Tamas, and the Ahankāra. When the mind comes into contact with external objects and has the Rajas in predominance, it along with the Ahankāra is transformed into the Srngāra Rasa. The above transforma- tion with the replacement of the Rajas by the Sattva is called the Hasya Rasa. The Vira is the mental transformation wherein are to be found the Ahankara, the Rajas and the Sattva functioning as also the contact of the mind with external objects. The above transformation devoid of the

1. B. P. II. pp. 43-45. 2. Ibid. II. p. 47. 3. R N. R. p. 4.

357

Ahankara and the Rajas is the Adbhuta Rasa. The Raudra Rasa is the transformation of the mind wherein the Rajas, the Tamas and the Ahankara function and which has come into contact with external objects. The Karuna Rasa is the above transformation devoid of the Rajas and the Ahankāra. The Bibhatsa Rasa is the transformation of the mind which has assumed the form of the Chitta, has the Tamas and the Sattva functioning, and has come into contact with external objects. From the mind which is devoid of the Sattva, the Buddhi and has distinct traces of the Tamas comes into origin exclusively from outside the Bhayānaka Rasa. The Śānta Rasa is the transformation of the mind when it is very slightly touched with external objects, which is devoid of the Rajas and the Tamas and when it has assumed the form of the Sattva in the pure form of the Chitta.1 In the above view has been expressed some justification for the classification of Rasas as primary and their derivatives, as can be illustrated from the fact that the descriptions of the Hasya, the Adbhuta, and the Karuna have been given as produced from the Śrngāra, the Vīra and the Raudra. It is, however, quite plain that in the above two theories the mental transforma- tions are said to be Rasas themselves. Śāradātanaya gives some other views also on the classification of Rasa. He says that from the Sāmaveda the Śrngāra came out, from the Rg the Vira, from the Atharva the Raudra and from the Yajus the Bībhatsa. Lord Paramātmā remembering the Sāmans and desirous of creating the world cherished the wish of manifesting His form by Himself. This wish addicted to sens ualobjects is called the Rati which is the Śrngāra. His consciousnesss in the form of desire and action, when He

1. B. P. II. p. 47-48.

358

remembers the Rks, comes into contact with external objects. It is then of the nature of the Utsāha ( enthusiasm ) and is called the Vira. When remembering the Atharvamantras His intellect bent on doing harm is put into action by anger. It is called the Raudra. When remembering the Yajus His tendency in the form of action actually terminating in some result is called the Bibhatsa. The author then counts the above four sentiments as principal and primary, the other four as their derivatives.1 That the author here is to a certain extent following Bharata is clear. He gives another view on the origin of different Rasas. Vyāsa is said to be its propounder. When in the assembly of the god Brahmā the Bharatas gave the dramatic representation of the Tripura- dha, out of the four mouths of the god, who was witnessing the show very attentively, came the four Rasas with the four Vrttis. When the Bharatas acted the enjoyment in union of Śiva and Śivā, the Śrngāra came forth from the Kaiśikī Vrtti from the mouth facing the East. When they acted well the destruction of Tripura the Vira came out of the Sattvatī Vrtti from the mouth facing the South. On the representation of the destruction of the sacrifice of Daksa, the Raudra came forth out of the Arabhati Vrtti from the mouth facing the West. And when the actors represented Maheśvara's activities at the destruction of the whole universe, the Bibhatsa came forth out of the Bharati Vrtti from the mouth facing the North. Here the author puts forth a suggestion that according to Sankara etc. Rasas got mani- fested and were not produced from the respective mouths, thereby probably hinting that Rasa is suggested and not produced. He then shows that other four Rasas have

1. B. P. III. pp. 54 55.

359

come out of the previous four. When Lord Parameśvara putting on matted locks and deer skin, ornaments in the form of serpents, with one eye emitting fire and with His body smeared with ashes, desired amoruous sports with the goddess Śivā, the goddess and Her companions burst into uproarious laughter. Hence is the Hāsya Rasa said to have originated from the Śrngāra Rasa. When Tripurāsura built the three Puras ( cities or fotresses ) of iron, silver and gold and posted hundreds of thousands of crores of active demons around them for their defence, Lord Parameśvara, all alone bearing their violent showers of arrows, looked with the corner of His eye at Ambikā who, too, was seeing Śiva in the same way ; and laughing, He, the destroyer of love, reduced to ashes all of them with one arrow. At that time all living beings were struck with wonder. Hence is the Adbhuta said to come out of the Vira. When Rudra Vīra- bhadra destroyed the sacrifice of Daksa and inflicted punish- ment on the gods with various instruments, at that time the goddess and Her companions, seeing the sufferers with their ears, eyes and noses cut off, felt a great pity for them. It is due to this that the Karuna Rasa is said to be produced from the Raudra. On the destruction of the Adidevas when Bhairava took up their bones and besmeared up His body with their ashes and danced on their cremation ground, the demons etc. got frightened with these activities and resorted to Him for shelter struck dumb with violent fear as they were. It is because of this that the Bhayanaka is said to have originated from the Bībhatsa.1 Thus does Śāradā- tanaya fancifully records the origin and classification of different Rasas. In certain respects he follows Bharata

1. B. P. III. pp. 56-58.

360

whereas in others he shows his affinities with later writers as Bhoja etc. who as seen before exploited the Abhimāna Vrtti to the utmost. Sāradātanaya accepts as also rejects the Śanta Rasa in conformity with the two views quoted by him under the names of Nārada and Padmabhū. The Santa Rasa, therefore, became the battle-ground for writers and scholars of Sanskrit poetics, some of whom rejected it wholly, whereas others accepted it in literary works other than dramas. There were still others who gave it recognition even in dramas.1 It may be conceded here as a ground for contention as to how far it can be represented directly on the stage through the performance of various activities, just as heroic activities dramatically represented directly suggest the Vira. The Santa Rasa, however, may be said to represent a stage which is the result of the activities depicted through other Rasas, and perhaps it was with this reason that individual Sthayibhava or all combined together were put forward as its Sthāyibhāva. This will receive treatment in the chapter following. Abhinava postulated the Ātman as its Sthayibhava and hence all other Sthāyibhāvas became its Vyabhichāribhāvas. It, therefore, appears cogent to say that the representation of the Vira etc., where any of them is not intended to be the principal Rasa, finally leads to the enjoyment of the Santa in the spectators. This position represents the Santa as a Rasa suggested through other Rasas and not as a mental state in the audience before the dramatic representation -- which perhaps is intended to be understood by Wilson when he says, "The advocates for its exclusion2 suggest a compromise, and transfer it from

1. R. N. R. p. 44. 2. 'Exclusion' here means 'exclusion from dramatic composition. '

361

the persons of the play to the audience, who are thus fitted for the impressions to be made upon them. It is highly proper, it is urged, that they should exhibit the Santa Rasa, and sit in silent attention, their tempers perfectly passive, and their hearts free from every external influence."1 Wilson here not only goes against several authorities in Sanskrit poetics but virtually ignores some very weighty considera- tions. For example, some of the dramas themselves aim at the representation of the Santa Rasa, the activities of the Yatamāna Yogin (Yogin putting in efforts to achieve the highest stage of truth and reality) etc. Moreover, the psychological explanation of the different Rasas makes provision for the Santa also inasmuch as the mental con- dition in, or equated with, the Santa Rasa has been expressly pointed out. Tranquillity comes only after struggle, there- fore in the representation of the Santa Rasa all other Rasas are contributory factors. The recognition of the Sānta as a dramatic Rasa was responsible for the advocacy of an other Rasa called the Māyā Rasa. Bhānudatta mentions it and advances psychological grounds for its acceptance. In the Nivrtti is to be accepted the Santa Rasa whereas on the basis of the Pravrtti is to be recognized the Māyā Rasa. This Rasa cannot be included in, or be identical with, the eight orthodox Rasas. The eight Sthāyibhāvas become its Vyabhichāribhāvas. The Mithyājñāna is postulated as it Sthāyibhāva.2 Chirañjīva Bhatțāchārya in the Kāvya- vilasa buotes the above view and criticizes it. He gives no recognition to the Māyā Rasa but accepts only nine Rasas including the Santa.3 The Rasachandrikā also cri- sicizes and refutes it completely.4 Raghavan, too, rejects 1. W. D. pp. 90-91. 2. B. R. T. pp. 161-162. 3. C. K. V. p. 10. 4. V. R. C. pp. 68-69.

362

it.1 It was the advent and admission of the Śanta which became responsible for the consideration if the established number of Rasas is sufficient or other Rasas should also be recognized and the number increased. The names of such Rasas as the Preyas, the Vätsalya, the Prīti, the Sneha, the Bhakti, the Śraddhā, the Laulya, the Kārpaņya, the Udātta, the Uddhata, the Vyasana, the Duhkha, the Sukha, the Vrīdanaka etc. have been mentioned. Many of these have been seen engaging the attention of very early scholars. Bhämaha, for example, has considered the Preyas as the Bhakti etc. Many of them as the Preyas, the Vātsalya, the Priti, the Sneha, and the Bhakti have also been con- sidered by some scholars, as Mammata and Hemachandra, under the Bhäva which in its turn is, in one aspect, only another form of the Rati converting into the Śrngāra Rasa. Even if separately cognized the mental condition involved is only the Druti, hence they do not need separate mental conditions. The Mandaramarandachampu postulating the Karuņā as the Sthāyibhāva of the Vātsalya Rasa2 is an instance in point. The Karuņā here is different from the Karuna Rasa as the former is a mixture of affection with other emotions for the child. But the Druti is assuredly the mental con- dition involved. Out of the above the Bhakti Rasa assumed two different aspects later on at the hands of the Bengal Vaisnavaite of the Chaitanya school and the Advaitī as Madhusudana Sarasvatī. The effort made was to include other Rasas in its whole economy as will be seen later on. The Laulya has been put forward byAbhinava and its inclu- sion in the Hasya shown by him3-a fact which is testified to

1. R. N. R. p. 139. 2.M.M. C. p. 100. 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 342 (Com.).

363

by Bhoja also. Bhānudatta discusses the Kārpanya along with the Laulya and shows their inclusion in the Hāsya Rasa.1 The Udatta and the Uddhata Rasas put forward by Bhoja have been so advanced to fix one Rasa for each of the four types of heroes. For instance, the Dhīrasānta hero has the Santa Rasa, the Dhīralalita the Preyas, the Dhīrodātta the Udātta or the Ūrjasvin, and the Dhīroddhata the Uddhata Rasa.2 That the Vyasana, the Duhkha and the Sukha Rasas come under one or another of the recognized Rasas is shown by Rämachandra and Gunachandra when advancing them for consideration.3 Lastlty comes the Vrīdanaka which has replaced the Bhayānaka which in its turn is recognized as included in the Raudra in the Anuyoga- dvarasutra of the Jains.4 The illustration brings out the emotion of modesty and is, therefore, rightly considered by Raghavan as a Vyabhichāribhāva.5 It, therefore, attains the stage of the Bhava according to its conception by Mammata etc. These different Rasas put forward for discussion indicate the efforts of the writers who wanted to suggest that there should be Rasas other than the re- cognized ones. This attitude was not a sudden growth as hints in as early writers as Bhatta lollata are to be found as mentioned by Abhinava,6 though the number nine is re- cognized because of the established nine Rasas having the capacity to be useful for the four great objects-the Pumarthas as they are called -- and give much greater delight to people. Rudrata also hints at the same point,7 which is made clear by his commentator, Namisādhu. Pratihārendurāja limits

1. B. R. T. p. 125. 2. R. N. R. p. 122. 3. N. D. p. 163. 4. R. N. R. pp. 140-141. 5. Ibid. p. 143. 6. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 299 & 341 (Com.). 7. R. K. L. XII. 3.

364

the number to nine only technically.1 Bhoja hints at other Rasas by saying that all the Bhavas can also be relished as Rasas.2 Bhoja goes to such a length as to recognize as Rasas even the Sāttvikabhāvas which are physical manifesta- tions mostly as will be seen later on. He, however, does not recognize that the Vibhāvas etc. can mature into Rasas- a position which is referred to in the Lochana3 and made explicit by Panditarāja in the Rasagangādhara.4 This position is, no doubt, found in practice when Dhanañjaya advances for consideration Rasas as the Mrgaya and the Aksa, though at the same time he points out their inclusion.5 That this state of affairs subsided of itself can be seen very clearly in the work of the latest great authority on Sanskrit poetics, Panditarāja Jagannātha. He accepts the orthodox eight Rasas in conformity with the standpoint of all the ancient authorities. He also accepts the Santa even in dramaturgy thus recognizing the number of Rasas as nine. Other views recognizing Rasas other than the established nine have received summary disposal at his hands. Herein stands the authority of Bharata and Abhinava unchallenged who gave the number as nine only, even though the ninth may be recognized as suggested in hints according to some, inspite of the fact that in some edition of the Nātyasastra ( as in the G. O. S. ) the text on the Śānta is available.6 4. Rasa-Synthesis. (i) Karuņa. The first great poet of India is Valmīki whose very first verse is the expression of deep pathos for the separation of

1. K. S. pp. 52-53. 2. B. S. P. I. 11. 3. D. L. p. 186 (Com.). 4. R. G. p. 28. 5. D. R. IV. 83. 6. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 333-336 & VII. 386.

365

the Krauñcha pair. The poet was so deeply touched to the core with the wailings of the bird that the vehement passion found outlet in the Śloka metre. No other passion had ever before so much agitated within him and so much brought about the melting of his mind as to make the poet lose himself in total absorption. The rhythmic expression of pathos leads one to think that it was so vehement, so absorbing and at the same time so beautiful that it sponta- neously chose its fitting medium. Various other incidents in the life of other living beings would have been witnessed by the first poet, but the vehemence of the Karuna Rasa was experienced by him very keenly. This automatic and natural preference for the Karuna Rasa to others proves it to be of the most primary importance. Bhavabhūti, the poet-dramatist, had the same vehement and all-engrossing experience of the Karuna Rasa. Speaking of the Karuņa Rasa he says that it is the only one Rasa which undergoes various tranformations like water which variously assumes the forms of whirlpools, bubbles, ripples and waves.1 The com. to the above makes the position quite clear. It runs, 'though fundamentally one it looks different like the different relations of companion, husband and wife. It assumes different conditions in Vāsantī, Sītā, Rāma etc.' Here the commentator bases his interpretation as regards other Rasas as transformation on the ground that the author has himself used the word, Vikāra. The commentator clearly points out that the different forms are the Śrngāra Rasa etc. And finally he says that though the author of the Śņngāra-prakāśa maintains the Śrngāra Rasa as the only Rasa, yet he establi- shes the Karuna as the only Rasa as it is to be experienced

1. U. R. III. 47.

366

in plenty and is common to those fond of this world as well as to those who have renounced it completely, and other Rasas are merely its transformations. Later on is to be found Ananda who bears testimony to the fact that the Karuna Rasa it is which has been depicted by the first poet as the principal Rasa, thoroughly sustained as it is till the separation of Sīta.1 Ananda has here pointed out that the first Rasa is only the Karuna Rasa. He did not mean to say like Bhavabhūti that is was the only Rasa. It is, there- fore, the view of Bhavabhūti which advocates this synthesis. The poet-dramatist experienced to the full the vehemence and the intensity of the Karuna Rasa. He was keenly sensitive to every external influence, so much so that in the Mālatīmādhava he expresses his condemnation for his contemporaries who did not give him his due praise and credit.2 To a mind so sensitive, naturally pessimism appeared rampant and it is obviously this fact which is expressed by the commentator in the word, Prāchuryad.3 Life thus becomes a burden to the sensitive man, but the question that arises here is if life is an incessant misery or it is not inters- persed with the oases of happiness. Even the dramatist had to go against his grain in bringing about the final meeting between Rama and Sīta and not letting the play end with their separation. Then as opposed to the all prominence of the Karuna stands the predominance of the Śrngāra Rasa which finds much more favour with not only human beings but with living beings in general. Bhavabhūti perhaps got the idea of this synthesis in Bharata who advocated the origin of one set of sentiments from the

1. D. L. pp. 529-530. 2. M. M. I. (Prastāvanā). 8. 3. U. R. III. 47 (Com.).

367

other ; but he changed the order. The mental condition involved in, or equated with, the Karuna Rasa is the melting of the heart. It is one of the mental conditions and as such how can it include others ? The insufficiency of the view, therefore, appears quite evident. It is an other consideration that in a literary piece the Karuna Rasa may predominate, others being subsidiary to it, but to establish the Prakrti-Vikrti-Bhāva is really not sound as it ignores other mental conditions. Raghavan in support of the Karuņa-synthesis says, "In English, the word ' Symapthy' meaning 'response to another's feeling of sorrow,' has come to be used in an enlarged sense to mean all forms of aesthetic response and attunement of heart, Cittasamvāda ; and here is a linguistic argument in favour of a Karuņa- synthsis. For it seems, the model and the supreme example of a complete attunement of heart, which poetry and drama effects, is certainly the attunement of hearts in Karuna".1 His acceptance of the word 'sympathy' in its modern extended sense certainly covers every case and places it high above all ; but whether Bhavabhūti used it in this com- prehensive sense is doubtful. He did not mean to cover all the cases but advocated the origin of other Rasas from the Karuna-a position which seems hardly contemplated in the above quotation.

(ii) Śānta.

The Śānta Rasa synthesis is to be found in Bharata's Nātyasāstra itself. The Bhāvas as the Rati etc. are the transformations (Vikāras) whereas the Sānta is the original

1. R. N. R. p. 165.

368

nature (Prakrti). The transformations have come out of this original nature and they finally merge into it. The particular Bhäva with its cause comes out of it on the destruc- tion of which it sinks back into it. Abhinava builds his own opinion on the above statement. He calls the Santa the greatest Rasa due to its being connected with the Moksa, the greatest Puruşārtha. It is transcedental also as it has not got so much of earthly touch as other Rasas have and further that the Atman, the Sthāyibhāva here as recognized by Abhinava ( this marks a departure from Bharata ), is the substratum of all the activities as it is this factor which assu- mes different Vrttis in other Rasas as the Srngāra etc. It is, thus, the Sthayibhava even of other Sthayibhavas as the latter rather become the Vyabhichāribhāvas in it.1 The Śānta Rasa has been recognized as a dramatic Rasa by Bharata and after him even by Udbhata. It is not on the same level with other Rasas, as like them it cannot be directly represen- ted. That the Prabodhachandrodaya furnishes an instance in point will be seen later on. Other Rasas finally merge into it just as in a work like the Mahābhārata, as Ānanda points out, other Rasas finally merge into, and suggest, it ultimately.2 The advocates of the Santa as that stage of Rasa which is devoid of any Vrtti better establish the Santa-synthesis than those who recognize it as any of the Vrttis or as an individual Rasa involving any of them. In the absence of any mental condition, obviously it is the original nature and other Rasas will only be its modifications. In case any one Vrtti is admitted the synthesis is sure to ignore other mental conditions. The theory, thus, will appear inadequate.

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 336-337 (Com.). 2. D. L. pp. 530-531.

369

(iii) Śrngāra. A-RATI ŚRNGĀRA. The Agnipurana puts forth the synthesis of the Rati Śrngāra according to which various Rasas are modifications of the Rati. The inherent bliss of the Ultimate Reality called Parabrahma which is indestructible, eternal, unborn, all pervading etc. sometimes becomes manifested. That manifestation is called Rasa of the nature of wonder of ( at the apprehension of transcendental) consciousness. Its first transformation is the Ahankara from which proceeds the Abhimana which is pervading the three worlds. Out of this Abhimana proceeds the Rati of which Rasas as the Śrngāra, the Hāsya etc. are modifications.1 B-AHAŃKĀRA ŚRNGĀRA Bhoja has given another synthesis called the Ahankāra Śrngāra synthesis which establishes the function of the Ahankāra everywhere. This Ahankāra is also otherwise called by him the Abhimāna and the Śrngāra. It is a Guņa of the Atman and Rasa has Rasatva because of the relishable power of the Atman. It is, therefore, this Ahankāra, that is, self-love which is the one Rasa. The Śrngara, other name for the Ahankāra, is, therefore, the only Rasa. This basic Śrngāra is different from its derivatives as the Śṛngāra, the Häsya etc. It is to be marked here that this synthesis is not akin to those advocated previously, as here the Śrngāra is not one of the recognized nine Rasas but altogehter a different element serving as the basic principle. In cons- sistency with this attitude Bhoja does not accept the nine recognized Rasas as Rasas but recognizes them only as the

1. A. P. 338. 1-5. 24

370

Bhävas. Rasa in his theory can be called only an experience of absolute and unconditioned bliss. If this experience becomes in any way conditioned by the Śrngāra, the Hāsya etc, it means that it has not reached the highest stage. Hence the Śrngara, the Hāsya etc. are only the Bhāvas. Keeping this principle in view, Bhoja even advocated the relishable nature of the Vyabhichāribhāvas etc. on the same level with the Śrngāra, the Hāsya etc.1 That Bhoja got suggestions from the Agnipurāna synthesis is quite evident. As pointed out previously in the last chapter, he did not follow it in toto but equated the Ahankāra with the Abhimana and the Śrngāra. In the Agnipurāna theory itself as the Rati comes out of the Abhi- māna, the Śānta Rasa is not properly contemplated. Its mention is, no doubt, to be found2 but it seems that the underlying mental condition is not considered. Besides, it is not clear how the Śrngara can transform itself into the Raudra etc. where there is fundamental difference in the Vrttis (mental conditions ). It is apparently a Vedāntic approach to the synthesis as the terminology shows. With Bhoja it becomes the Sänkhya approach utilizing the Sānkhya and the Nyāya phraseology. Bhoja's Abhimāna or Ahankāra was something gross and not pure' I' as advocated in the Trika system, hence the theory can hardly be said to be in conformity with the Trika system. The acceptance of the nine recognized Rasas as only Bhävas and of the delectable- ness of even the Vyabhichāribhāvas is, no doubt, novel, striking and original in the light of the particular theory, but this is surely either in ignornace or in non-acceptance of the fundamentals of psychology. That these Rasas are

1. B. S. P. I. 3-12. 2. A. P. 338. 9.

371

relished as such has already been shown. Vatve has pointed out that this synthesis of the Ahankāra Srngāra has its support in the Gita.1 It seems to be ignored here as to how the Häsya in one of the aspects wherein it is Parastha ( where the other man is laughed at and his Abhimāna is wounded) can be accounted for. Had other Rasas been recognized as Rasas the point would not have arisen as the experience in every case would have been unconditioned bliss. This bliss according to Bhoja is disturbed by the knowledge of the Śrngära, the Häsya etc., hence the latter are only the Bhävas. Further Bhoja gets inconsistent with his own theory when he says that the Santa attains the stage of the Bhava on this Abhimana. The Santa means a stage of total disappearance of the Abhimāna according to scholars. Vatve gives here a view propounded by Prof. Chaphekar which advocates the Rati or the expression of the vehement emotion as the origin of Rasa. Various Rasas get their names in accordance with the forms of the objects which give outlet for this Rati. The view gives three kinds of the Rati, viz. the Śrngāra, the Vīra and the Karuna,and out of the Vira comes the Radura, the Bībhatsa and the Bhayānaka. The Häsya and the Adbhuta have not been accepted as Rasas.2 That the theory is partial is quite clear.

(iv) Preman.

Bhoja suggests another synthesis in Preman. The Rati lies at the root of all the Bhavas. It reaches the culminating stage when it leaves the Bhäva stage and attains the Rasa stage. At that point it becomes the Preman. Other Bhāvas

1. V. R. V. p. 230. 2. Ibid. p. 231.

372

also at this stage become Rasas. Hence all Rasas merge in the Preman.1 Bhoja recognizes three stages of his Rasa, viz. the Parākoți, the Madhyama Avasthā and the Uttarākoți. In the first it is the one Ahankara otherwise called the Śrngāra, in the second the Śrngāra becomes manifest in various ways in the forms of the Rati etc. each growing to its climax through the Vibhavas etc., and in the last all these become aspects of the Preman which is the transformation of the Rati.2 He has, however, suggested this synthesis under the Preyas Alankāra. He says in the Srngāraprakāśa that the Preman is the only Rasa.3 It is later on in Kavi Karnapūra that the synthesis finds advocacy. The Kavi does not dilate upon this synthesis but disposes it of very summarily as he is afraid it will fatten the bulk of his work, the Alankārakaustu bha.4 He says that in the Preman all other Rasas get merged. As the Preman is one indivisible Rasa, all other Rasas and the Bhävas emerge from, and submerge into, it like the waves and currents in the ocean.5 The melting of the heart has been recognized as the Sthāyibhava of this Rasa. The synthesis, therefore, is partial as all other mental conditions have been ignored. The Kavi had religious proclivities as pointed out before. Hence is this special favour towards Chittadrava which is the menatl condition in the Bhakti Rasa. The tendency is quite obvious even though the Bhakti has been recognized as a separate Rasa. The Kavi is influenced in this synthesis by Rūpa Gosvāmī etc. who establish Premā as the stage which turns into different kinds of Sthāyibhāvas which, therefore, may be said to emerge from, and sub- merge into, it.

1. B. S. K. V. p. 760. 2. Ibid. pp. 759-760. 3. R. N. R. p. 170. 4. K. A. K. p. 148. 5. Ibid. pp. 148-149.

373

(v) Adbhuta. The Adbhuta-synthesis, though not regularly expounded as early as Bharata, seems to be present in hints even so early in that the pervasiveness of this Rasa is to be found enjoined even in the Nātyasāstra. 'The plot is to be full of wonder,'1 bears witness to it. 'Those expert in the depiction of the Adbhuta Rasa should invariably depict it in the Nir- vaha na Sandhi'2 is another instance wherein Bharata attaches importance to this Rasa. Later writers took up this thread. Bhämaha even propounded the Atisayokti3 which Dandin accepted.4 Änanda and Abhinava also recognized it.5 It is in Kuntaka, however, that Bhämaha's doctrine of the Atiśayokti found all possible scope. The Chamatkāra with him counted most. This Chamatkāra with him is nothing but 'strikingness and novelty.' The poet-dramatist Bhav- abhuti who had expounded the Karuna-synthesis accepted the importance of the Adbhuta Rasa as it is suggested many times in the seventh act of the Uttararamacharita, but the regular Adbhuta-synthesis is to be found in the Sāhityadarpana mentioned by Viśvanātha under the name of his great grandfather, Nārāyana, quoted in the writings of one Dharmadatta. Viśvanātha gives this view in course of the explanation of the word, Chamatkāra. He says that the Chamatkāra consists in the expansion of the Chitta ; it is otherwise called the Vismaya ( wonder). That this is the life of Rasa has been said by the revered Nārāyana. Dharmadatta in his work says, "The essence in Rasa is the Chamatkāra experienced at every

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXI. 54. 2. Ibid. XX. 47. 3. K. L. II. 85. 4. K. D. II. 214 & 220. 5. D. L. pp. 467-468. 6. V. J. I. 2 & 10 (With com.).

374

step. In that Chamatkara which is the essence, it is the Adbhuta experienced every where. It is due to this that the great Nārayana called the Adbhuta the only Rasa."1 That is how the Adbhuta-synthesis is held. That this Chamatkära had a firm hold on most of the writers in this field can be shown by the fact that even Panditarāja Jagan- nātha, always averse to take anything on trust because of its antiquity, tradition or advocacy by former great scholars, accepts it and builds on it his definition of poetry ; for what does his Ramanīyatā consist in but the Lokottaratva of which the equivalent is the Chamatkara.2 Bhanudatta has shown that the Chamatkara is present in every Rasa as its ancillary, becoming the predominant Rasa ( Adbhuta) where others become subordinate to it.3 This is a position recognizing the all pervasiveness of the Adbhuta Rasa. Kavi Karņapūra quotes the very verse given in the Sähityadarpana with some modification which though slight comes to place the utmost importance on the Chamatkāra, as it is said that without it no realization of Rasa can take place.4 The Kavi, however, does not intend to expound the Adbhuta-synthesis but merely points out the presence of the element of wonder which in the susceptible spectators produces a delectableness. This intention of his has been made quite clear in the footnote.5 Thus the Adbhuta Rasa has been holding ground in Sanskrit poetics and dramaturgy. It is not something unexpectd as the soul itself of which the art is the expression of perfec- tion towards the true, the good and the beautiful has itself been always regarded as something mysteriously wonderful as in the Gita.6 But it has to be remembered here that the

1. S. D. III. p. 1. 2. R. G. p. 4. 3. B. R. T. p. 28. 4. Κ. Α. K. p. 137. 5. Ibid (Footnote). 6. Śrī. Bhag. Gī. II. 29.

375

wonder element does not last long ; on the satisfaction of the longing for novelty it vanishes. Prabhākara rightly points out that as human natures differ the wonder may not appeal to all. Moreover, it is not present in the Vyabhichā- ribhavas as well as in all the Sthayibhavas. For instance, there is no tinge of wonder in the Soka.1 It may further be pointed out here that recognition of the Adbhuta synthesis means the ignoring of the importance of other mental conditions. (vi) Bhakti. The hints of the Bhakti Rasa are to be found as early as Bhämaha in the Preyas Alankāra2 which Dandin also accepts.3 But the Bhakti as a separate Rasa received no recognition as it was included in the Bhäva, the immature Rasa stage of the Rati. There were some efforts at its implicit acceptance as Rasa and not merely as the Bhäva, but the attitude of strict adherence to the traditional position rendered the above efforts useless. All this is finally illustrated in the Rasagangā- dhara wherein Panditarāja raises the problem by pointing out the Bhakti as Rasa and giving his verdict to the effect that all kinds of the Rati except the Rati between man and woman are to be included in the Bhäva. With the staunch advocates of the Bhakti, however, it held its supremacy. It was regarded not only as one of the recognized Rasas but the only Rasa ; all other Rasas were to be included in it. The Bhakti-synthesis received its advocacy in two schools, viz. the Chaitanya school of the Bengal Vaisnavism and the Advaitavādin as Madhusūdana Sarasvatī. A-Bhakti according to the Bengal Vaişnavism.

1. R. P. p. 40. 2. K. L. III. 5. 3. K. D. II. 276-277.

376

In this school the erotico-religious ideas are brought to bear upon the general theme of Rasa. Both the tendencies, the religious and the literary, come to have a contact and each receives a new turn in that one gets modified by the other ; thus the mediaeval sentiment of love gets sublimated into a deeply religious sentiment. The advocates of this Bhakti Rasa, therefore, as Rūpa Gosvmāmī etc. furnish in their works 'a kind of Rhetoric of Bhakti, with all its psychology, conceit and imagery. If the mediaeval Troubadours of France and Italy conceived the love of Christ as an aspect of the Law and wrote a Grammar of the amorous sentiment, the mediaeval Vaisnavas of Bengal conceived the love of Krsna as an aspect of Psychology, and wrote a Rhetoric of the erotic sentiment.'1 The love of Krsna ( Krsna-Rati ) as the Sthāyibhāva with appropriate Vibhāvas, Anubhāvas and Vyabhichāribhāvas culminates into a supreme relishable condition as the Bhakti Rasa in the susceptible mind of the religious Bhakta who is the Sahrdaya with a finely attuned sensibility. The Karma is regarded by those expert in the Bhakti as a part of it. The Jñana and the Vairāgya are useful to it only in the beginning, hence they should not be regarded as parts of the Bhakti, for both are causes of stiffness whereas the Bhakti is by nature soft. The object, however, to be achieved by the Jñana and the Vairāgya can really be attained through the Bhakti.2 That is why all the four Purușārthas become, as it were, grass before it.3 The Sthayibhava of the Vaișnava Bhakti Rasa is the emotion which concerns Krsna Himself ( Śrī Krşņa Vişaya Rati) The Sthayibhavas of the traditional eight Rasas as also of the

1. V. F. M. B. pp. 123-124. 2. R. H. S. 48-50. pp. 82-83. 3. Ibid. 18. p. 18.

377

Śanta, the Prīti, the Preyān and the Vatsala are evaluated in terms of Krsna Rati according as the latter is primary or secondary. In the Santa, the Prīti, the Preyan, the Vatsala and the Śrngära which is here denominated the Madhura, Krsna Rati is primary as it is principal without being sub- ordinate whereas in the Häsya etc. it is secondary as it becomes subordinate to their particular Sthāyibhāvas. The author thus, no doubt, admits twelve kinds but says that in the Puranas and other scriptures the primary five kinds are to be met with.1 The secondary Rasas are not so important and are not always even present ; they, therefore, become Rasas only when they concern themselves with Krsna Rati. The merging of these seven in the five primary Rasas is expressed by the author very clearly.2 These different kinds of the Bhakti Rasa involve five different mental conditions which constitute their relish.3 In this connection De's remark, 'This is a further working out of the attributes of Vistāra ( expansion ), Vikāśa (pervasion ) and Druti (melting ) of orthodox poetics,'4 loses much of its force when the fact is considered that the four mental conditions had already been recognized by the author's predecessors as Dhanañjaya etc .; he, therefore, may be said to have worked out only one, viz. the Pürti, as original for which hints were available in Bharata who recognized the Śanta as the Prakrti.5 In the five primary Rasas, viz. the Śānta, the Prīti, the Preyān, the Vatsala and the Madhura there is a gradual increase in point of importance so that the last, that is, the Madhura is the most important and significant of all.6 The last assumes so much importance

1. R. H. S. 99. p. 309. 2. Ibid. p. 472. 3. Ibid. 102-104. p. 310. 4. V. F. M. B. p. 150. 5. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. 107. 6. R. H. S. 96-97. p. 309.

378 that a separate treatise, the Ujjvalanīlamani, is devoted to its detailed treatment. Krsna is here the hero and as said before the Madhura is the Śrngära of the literary Rasas. The detailed treatment, therefore, has almost the terminology of the literary Srngara. The heroines, the qualities of the heroes and the heroines etc. engage the attention of the author. The departure from the established canons of literary orthodox system does come in but the departure is such that it con- stitutes the very life-principle of this system ; it, therefore, engages attention. The amours with a married woman are hardly permitted in the orthodox theory, though the heroes by some authorities have been classified into the Pati, the Upapati and the Vaisika,1 and the heroines by all into the Svīyā, the Parakīyā and the Sāmānyā. In this system, how- ever, such amours are not only allowed but constitute the very essence. Rūpa Gosvāmī quotes Bharata in support and says that they are indicted in case of ordinary mortals and not in case when Krsna, incarnated for tasting the essence of Rasa, is the hero.2 While explaining the Ālambana Vibhāva as principal and subordinate Śārngadeva explains how the love of the heroine for a person other than the husband mars the Śrngāra Rasa.3 But according to this system she is the highest type of heroine, her love being of the highest type furnishing 'the later Parakīya doctrine of the school, in which the love of the mistress for her lover becomes the universally accepted symbol of the soul's devotion to God.'4 The heroines are the Harivallabhas who are classified almost according to the orthodox canons ; the Gopīs in Vraja are said to be married to Krsna according to the Gāndharva form 1. R. S. I. 79. 2. R. U. M. 17-18. pp. 11-12. 3. S. D. S. R. VII. 1423-1424. 4. I. H. Q. p. 675.

379

of marriage but as this marriage was not known to all, their love was secret.1 The Gopas never envied Krsna as they had each an apparent wife with them through the Maya of Krsna,2 therefore, the Gopīs who loved the Lord had actually no union with the Gopas.3 Among them Rādha occupies the first place ; she is declared to be the Hlādinī Mahāśakti of the Tantra,4 she is the Mahābhāva incarnate.5 She is des- cribed in the Gopālottaratāpinī, the Rkpariśista and the Padmapurāna.6 These important details7 have engaged atten- tion simply to show that this Vaisnava system developed a kind of mystic attitude where Rasa was a mystic experience. The soul being extremely transparent in its nature through dissociation from the Māyā becomes identified, as it were, with the Supreme Reality, God. The Bhakti Rasa, the Madhura kind in it specially, engrossed the attention. As with the Bhaktas the Bhakti Rasa weighed most, its syntheis was the natural outcome of this attitude. Later on this Vaişnava Bhakti has some of its ideas expressed in Kavi Karnapūra. Its classification into the Mukhya and the Gauna Rasas is not made; there are also some other differences. For instance, he recognizes the Bhakti Rasa as one of Rasas. The point worth notice is that he calls the divine Rasa bet- ween Rādhā and Krsna the Preman. It may be equated with the Madhura Rasa as Raghavan says,8 but the certainty comes to be tinged with doubt when the Kavi quotes the Śrngāra Rasa between Rādhā and Krsna as the view of some people.9 The Kavi, however, stands on his ground

1. R. U. M. 15. p. 41. 2. Śrī. Bhāga. X. 33. 37. 3. R. U. M. 31. p. 47. 4. Ibid. 6. p. 61. 5. Ibid. 3. p. 59. 6. Ibid. 4. p. 60. 7. See I. H. Q. & V. F. M. B. 8. R. N. R. p. 131. 9. K. A. K. p. 149.

380

saying that even if the above view is accepted, his Preman will hold as the subordinate Rasa, though in his opinion the Preman is the principal Rasa. The Kavi then summarily describes the Preman synthesis1 which may be considered as the Madhura Rasa synthesis as the theme is the love of Rādhā and Krsna. This is a position reflecting the importance and influence of the Vaisnava Rasa which became, so to say, a creed with the Vaisnavaites. It assumed wider dimensions as subtle investigation into deep psycho- logical facts recorded each and every item furnishing the basis of all the functions involved. B-Bhakti according to Madhusūdana Sarasvatī. The Bhakti Rasa as expounded by Madhusūdana Sarasvatī has got its own peculiarities. It has got its own aims and objects and, therefore, cannot be included among the four Puruşārthas. It is a Purușārtha by itself and is the best one as it is untouched with any kind of misery.2 Madhusūdana suggests a compromise with those who are not prepared to accord the Bhakti the independent status of the Purusārtha. He says that they should regard it to be a Purusartha forming part of the Dharma or the Moksa.3 It is separated from the Jñana as the aspirants whose Chittas have become pure, that is, Sättvika through the Karma begin to differ in character in respect of these two paths : those firm in mind go in for the Jñanamärga whereas others with soft sensibilities take to the Bhaktimarga.4 He is not content with this position of the Bhakti ; he even puts it higher by saying that even the Jñana born of words listened to in connection with God serves as a means to it.5 He classifies this Bhakti Rasa

1. K. A. K. pp. 148-149. 2. S. B. B. R. I. p. 5. 4. Ibid I. p. 2. 5. Ibid I. p. 3. 3. Ibid I. p. 6.

381

into two kinds, viz. the Sädhana and the Sādhya, the former leading to the latter ; hence the latter is the real Bhakti. He is so much taken away with the Bhakti that he defines it as the melted Antahkarana assuming the form of blissful Bhagavan. It is thus equated with the mental condition;1 he also calls the permanent impression of Bhagavan in the melted Chitta the Bhakti,2 hence here the Bhakti stands for the Sthayibhava. The Bhakti Rasa is the highest pleasure which is also the form of God. Madhusudana explains all this as follows. The Alambana is God and the Sthāyi- bhäva is also God ; here the Sthāyibhāva is the Pratibimba ( reflection ) of God ; the two should not be taken as identical as in this world this discrimination between the Bimba and the Pratibimba is made.3 He accepts the highest bliss in the Bhakti Rasa and accounts for the pleasure in respect of the ladies etc. due to the inherent Māyā by which Brahman covers itself.4 Brahman which is eternal and unknown is inferred through proofs as the ladies etc., hence for a moment when the cover of Maya is removed it is revealed. In the Bhakti Rasa, however, this bliss of Brahman is without any limiting factor, hence the pleasure enjoyed in it is far greater than, and superior to, what is realized in those Rasas where Brahman is covered with its Maya. Thus does the author give the Vedantic view of Rasa.5 He also records the Sänkhya view wherein the Prakrti is the primordial cause having the three attributes, viz., the Sattva, the Rajas and the Tamas which are by nature pleasurable, painful and delusive respectively. Everything which is characterized by these Gunas is viewed in three different aspects by persons accor-

1. S. B. B: R. I. 3. 2. Ibid I. 8-9; II. 1. 3. Ibid I. 10 (Com.). 4. Ibid I. 11. 5. Ibid I. 12-14 (With Com.).

382

ding as each of the three preponderates in their minds. For instance, a beautiful lady is pleasure-giving to her husband, painful to co-wife and delusive to the lover according to their respective minds ; when a pleasurable form enters, it becomes the Sthāyibhāva which matures into Rasa.1 It is a Sāttvika state of the mind, henceis Rasa always pleasurable. When the melted mind has assumed the form of Bhagavān, what else remains ?2 The mind when it is in a stiff condition "or has only become loose does not assume a permanent form.3 hence no Samskāra, Vāsanā, Bhāva or Bhāvanā comes to have its being. The causes bringing about the melting of the heart are the Käma, the Krodha, the Bhaya, the Sneha, the Harsa, the Soka, the Dayā and the Sama.4 The permanent assumption of the form of Lord Govinda by the Chitta when it has melted is called the Bhakti which differs according to the causes noted above bringing about its melting. He then records in the second chapter (S. B. B. R. ) how the Kāma becomes the Sambhoga and the Vipralambha ; the Krodha becomes the Dvesa and the Rati (called the Manavipralambha in the com.) ; the Bhaya comes to be produced through the Dvesa or one's own fault ; the Sneha becomes the Dāsya, the Sakhya, the Vätsalya and the Preyas ; the Harsa becomes the Sadhana, the Hasa, the Vismaya and the Utsaha which is divided into the Dayotsāha, the Dānotsāha and the Dharmotsāha; the Soka is produced as a result of the separation of the beloved persons ; and the Jugupsā comes to have three kinds, viz. the Udveginī, the Kșobhiņī and the Śuddhā. Last comes the Śama which involves negation of all desires. In all these the Chitta is melted

1. S. B. B. R. I. 14-18. 2. Ibid. I. 28. 3. Ibid. I. 29. 4. Ibid. I. 5.

383

as said above but the author mentions some other states also as the Vikāsa in the Hāsa and the Visamaya, the Vistāra in the Utsaha and the Prakāśa in the Śama. The author does not attribute the melting of the heart to any other cause than those mentioned above, hence he calls them the Bhavas. He believes in the conversion of these Bhavas into Rasas but says that, as the Dharmotsaha, the Dayotsāha, the Jugupsā and the Śama have no connection with Lord, Rasas they convert into, that is, the Dharmavīra, the Dayävīra, the Bībhatsa and the Santa are not parts of the Bhakti Rasa. The Dvesas born of the Irsyā and the Bhaya though connected with Lord cannot be parts of the Bhakti as they do not fit in with the melting of the heart for the Śuddha Raudra (of which the Sthāyibhāva is the Krodha born of the Irsyā) and the Raudra Bhayānaka (of which the Sthäyibhāva is the Bhaya mixed with the Dvesa born of the Irsyā)1 are not relished. These are the cases where no pleasure accrues as in them the mental conditions have pre- dominance of the Rajas and the Tamas respectively instanced in Chaidya Śiśupāla and Kamsa2 who though constantly thinking of Lord Krsna cannot be called the Bhaktas, for their ceaseless thinking is due to the Bhaya and the Dvesa.3 The author considers different Rasas as the Kevala-Sankīrņas, the Sankīrnamiśritas, the Kevalamiśritas and the Śuddhas, and then describes various instances of the devotees as also of persons averse to the Bhakti. Among the devotees he

1. Raghavan keeps the Bhayānaka for the Raudra Bhayānaka and also interprets the stanzas Nos. 29 & 30 (Chap. II, of S. B. B. R.) as separate though they are connected in the text. This goes against the text (R. N. R. p. 136). 2. S. B. B. R. II. 53-54. 3. Śrī Bhag. Gī. VII. 16. (Madhusūdanī Com.).

384 counts the Vrajadevis also. Showing thus the inclusion of all other Rasas into the Bhakti Rasa the author says that the name Bhäva given by his predecessors to the Rati in connection with the god etc. is with reference to other gods and not to Paramātmā who is all bliss. Rasas in connection with the lady etc. are of a much lower order : they are not all bliss as they compare with the Bhakti Rasa as fireflies with the light of the sun1. The two forms which the Bhakti assumed in the hands of the two schools have their own characteristics. They reflect the ideas which reigned supreme with them as also the different attitudes conditioned by them. The background for them is, however, to be found regularly in the Bhakti Sūtras such as the Sāmdilya Bhakti Sūtras and the Nārada Bhakti Sūtras, though the Bhakti is very subtly suggested in the Upanişads ( as in the Mantra 22, Valli 2, chapter 1 of the Kathopanisad). Both of these Sūtras recognize the Bhakti as the highest and the deepest devotion to God.2 The Sāmdilaya Sūtras even call that devotion Rasa.3 Both regard it higher than the Jñana and the Karma4 and both recognized the Karma, the Jñana and the Yoga as leading to the Bhakti and thus forming parts of it. Both instance the Gopis6 as the highest among the devotees as their love has got no ulterior purpose but the selfless devotion to Lord who by Śämdilya has even been shown to be Brahman itself.7 Sāmdilya goes so far as to say that the Deva Bhakti classed with the Guru Bhakti is to be understood with re- ference to other gods and not in respect of the highest God 1. S. B. B. R. II. 75-78. 2. S. S. B & N. B. S. Sūtra 2 of both. 3. S. S. B. Sūtra 6. 4. S. S. B. Sūtra 22 & N. B. S. Sūtra 25. 5. S. S. B. Sūtra 22 & N. B. S. Sūtra 26. 6. S. S. B. Sūtra 14 & N. B. S. Sūtra 21. 7. S. S. B. Sūtra 52.

385

as here the Bhakti leads to immortality ( Amrtaphalā )1. Such and other instances as the means leading to the ulti- mate stage of the Bhakti clearly show that the hints were all here and the two schools drew upon them and built up their systems. Many points, therefore, seem to be common in both the systems but their presentation differs. The Bengal Vaişnavism took the mystic turn emphasizing the love between all kinds of devotees, attaching, however, the highest significance to the love between Rādhā and Krsņa- a fact which was only hinted at by the other school. The first school, therefore, differed from the second for whereas in it the idea is erotic, mystic, religious and literary, that in the second is more religious and less literary ; it may also be said that the mystic side is rather missing. The differences are obvious in the very fundamentals, as in the first the Sthāyibhāva is the Masrnatā ( melting of the heart ) whereas in the second it is the stiffening of the melted mind in the form of Lord Himself. In the former the Santa, the Bībhatsa and others have been given full recognition, the Śānta has even been regarded as the first stage leading to the highest one, whereas in the other school it along with a few others have been rejected as unsuitable in the Bhakti Rasa. No systematic process of the Bhakti Rasa beginning from its lowest to the highest stage has been attempted in the second school. The first school placed the love for Lord Krsna as a thing of the highest importance and significance and hence little cared for any other aim except the systematic working out of the phases of that love whereas the second school attempted to show that the Bhakti was higher than the Jñana and the latter merged into the former. One was

1. S. S. B. Sūtra. 18. 25

386 busy with the depiction of the real experience of love for Lord whereas another was concerned with the importance of the Sastra. Both the syntheses made capital of the melting of the heart and hence recognized only the melted mental condition and tried to show others as related or un- related to it. The syntheses were, therefore, partial, as all shades of opinion could not be satisfied. It, no doubt, was all in all with the Bhaktas but what about others, who were non-Bhaktas or anti-Bhaktas ? No satisfaction could be had for them in these syntheses. This closes the survey of the various Rasa-syntheses, advocated explicitly by different theorists. That they were partial because in each only one mental condition ( Chitta- vrtti ) and consequently one mental impression ( Vāsanā or Sthayibhava ) was given unduly absorbing attention to the underserved treatment of others as these latter were syn- thesized into the former is quite clear. The implicit re- ference of one more view can be traced, though the regular synthesis is not to be found. It attaches predominant im- portance to one Rasa of which several kinds have been re- cognized ; Other Rasas are also recognized as independent and separate. The view has its germination in the opinion which advances the Utsaha as the Sthayibhava of the Sānta and thus includes the Sänta in the Vīra Rasa,1 though the Mahābhārata already mentions many varieties of the Sūra (Vīra) in the Dānadharmaparvan, Chapter 110 of the Anuśā- sanaparva. Paņditrāja Jagannātha makes the statement to the effect that like the Śrngāra the Vīra also can have many varieties. Besides the recoznized four kinds he gives four more, viz. the Satyavīra, the Pāņdityavīra, the Kșamāvīra 1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 269 (Com.).

387

and the Balavira.1 Further expansion of the list is to be seen in the Sāhityasāra which gives as many as twelve varieties of the Vira.2 The instances given can explain other Rasas also as the Śānta etc. but this cannot be said to be a conscious effort at synthesis ; it marked, on the other hand, the keen insight of the scholars into the very subtle kinds of one Rasa. Great importance and much significance is attached to the Vira Rasa when Abhinava calls it the Dharmapra- dhäna3-the view which with slight change is given by Vidyādhara in his book Ekāvalī on page 99. It is again given with slight modifications in the Ratnapana com. to the Pratāparudrīya. Herein, no doubt, Kumāraswāmī says that it is to explain the order in which his predecessors have enumerated Rasas, and, therefore, the above importance is visible to the keen eye only. The author explains the order on the basis of the four Purusarthas. The Vira is the Dharmapradhana and the Dharma is the root of the earth and the Käma. The Śrngāra which aims at the Kāma, its derivative the Häsya, the latter's opposite the Karuna and the latter's cause the Raudra which is the Arthapradhāna- all come under the Vira. The Bhayanaka is mentioned after the Vira as the latter consists in removing the fear of the frightened ; the cause of the Bhayanaka is the Bībhatsa which comes after. Then is mentioned the Adbhuta where- in the Vira has thrown aside the Bhaya ( fear). Thus the last three are also related to the Vira. The Santa aims at the Moksa hence it stands apart.4 It is to be remembered here that Vidyädhara makes the Pravrtti the basis of the Käma, the Artha and the Dharma, and the Nivrtti that of the

1. R. G. 41. 2. A. S. S. IV. 98-99. 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 269 (Com.). 4. P. R. p. 221 (Com.).

388

Mokşa. Kumārasvāmī, however, makes no mention of either the Pravrtti or the Nivrtti. It may be added here that all this is nothing short of a synthesis of the Vira in respect of the eight orthodox Rasas. If it is accepted as such, it will come to be vitiated, for it reflects the greatest importance attached to the Dharma to which the Kāma and the Artha will stand as subordinate-a view which may not be acceptable to all. In Abhinava one more synthesis is to be found. It is, however, a synthesis which is dissimilar to the above ones as in each of them one Rasa is advocated as the only Rasa and others are declared as its modifications. This synthesis, on the other hand, admits that the Abhasas of all other Rasas except the Hāsya (its Ābhāsa also ) are nothing but cases of the Hasya Rasa. The Abhasa is based on acts which in- volve impropriety. Even in the case where love of Rāvana proceeds towards Sītā, where the Vibhāva, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhicharibhavas are all present in their Ābhāsas, the Rati, really speaking, is not the Sthāyibhāva as it pro- ceeds from passion ( Kāmaja Moha) and hence it is the Ābhasa of the Rati Sthāyibhava; it appears there as silver does in the shell. But as Ravana does not know that Sītā hates, and is indifferent to, him it is a case of the Ratyābhāsa, that is, the Śrngārābhāsa. The disparity in age turns the Vibhāva into Vibhāvābhāsa and the Anubhāvas into the Anubhāvābhāsas. These, therefore, become the Vibhavas of the Hasya Rasa. This applies in the case of the Ābhāsas of the Karuna etc. As the Hāsya Vibhāva is that which is the result of some act of impropriety, it holds good in cases of the Vibhvas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhi- charibhavas of all other Rasas. The Rasābhāsas described in particular ways by later writers are all justified when

389

considered in this light.1 For instance, when the Bhayā- naka is depicted in the Vīra, it is a case of the Vīrābhāsa2. A brave person exhibiting fear really becomes an object of laughter. Hence he becomes the Vibhāva of the Hāsya Rasa, though in the Vīra Rasa his is a case of the Nāyakā- bhāsa. The Vibhāvas present in their Ābhāsa forms have explicitly been recognized by Bhoja when in course of enu- merating the kinds of heroes he mentions the Nāyakābhāsa, the Nāyikābhāsa etc.3 One synthesis of two-Rasa-theory is to be found in the Rasatarańgiņī of Bhānudatta who recognizes two kinds of the Chittavrttis, viz. the Pravrtti and the Nivrtti. As on the basis of the latter the Santa is advocated, so on the basis of the former the Māyā Rasa can be advocated. This Maya Rasa cannot be identified with any of the Śrngāra, the Häsya, the Karuna, the Raudra, the Vira, the Bībhatsa, the Bhayanaka and the Adbhuta Rasas as all these are present in it. On the other hand, this Māyā Rasa cannot be ad- vocated as the universal Rasa as the Santa is not there but is excluded. Therefore, it should be recognized as a se- parate Rasa in which the Sthäyibhävas of the eight ortho- dox Rasas act as the Vyabhicharibhavas appearing and disappearing like lightning. Its Sthāyibhāva is the Mithyā- jñana, the Dharmas and the Adharmas causing the worldly Bhoga its Vibhavas. Its Anubhāvas are sons, wife, victory, empire etc.4 This view finds expressions in later works also. Srī Krşna Kavi in the Mandāramarandachampū says that according to some the Maya Rasa is on the basis of the Pravrtti whereas the Śanta on that of the Nivrtti. Its

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 296-297. 2. R. S. II. p. 202. 3. B. S. K. V. 102. 4. B. R. T. pp. 161-162.

390

Sthayibhava is the Mithyamati, and its Vibhavas are the Bhukti, the Bhoga etc; its Anubhāvas are sons etc. and its Vyabhichāribhāvas are joy, sorrow etc. It is the Mithyā- mati, thus, which thoroughly nourished matures into the Maya Rasa. Here the fact worth notice is that the author makes no mention of other Rasas coming in any form1 as in the Rasatarangiņī. Chirañjiva Bhațțāchārya in the Kāvyavilāsa mentions the Māyā Rasa as the tenth Rasa only to criticize it. The Sthāyibhāva, the Vibhāvas and the Anubhavas are the same as in the Rasataranginī; the Vyabhichāribhāvas, however, are desires etc. as the author makes no mention of other Rasas acting as its Vyabhichāri- bhavas. The criticism of it is based on two grounds. The first is that as the Māya is beginningless hence unborn, the Māyā Rasa also cannot be produced; Rasas are all, however, produced. The second is that the Mithyajñana cannot be the cause of the Mya for such acceptance goes against the injunctions of the Śāstras. The Ālankārikas recognize Rasa as eternal and blissful. It is the form of the Brahman, it, therefore, is different from the Māyā which is mean and destructible.2 Viśveśvara Pāndeya in his Rasachandrikā gives the description according to Bhänudatta. He, how- ever, does not accept it but criticizes it on many grounds. He says that the Santa Rasa should not be considered as excluded from it, for its object ( Visaya ) is also the Avidyā or any of its effects. Then the impression ( Vāsanā) of the Mithyājñāna is always awakened hence the Mayā Rasa will be produced simply with the cognition of objects born of the study of the poetic composition ; therein no Cha- matkāra will be experienced and the distinction also as to

1. M. M. C. p. 106. 2. C. K. V. p. 10.

391

the Vyabhichāribhāvas and the Sthāyibhāvas will not hold1. The Māya Rasa should not be accepted as the arguments above point out. This synthesis is really speaking not akin to other syn- theses as here altogether a separate Rasa is postulated. Other Rasas excepting the Santa are not its derivatives but simply its Vyabhichāribhāvas. This Rasa, therefore, is never relished at all. On the other hand, the above so- called Vyabhichāribhāvas are separately relished as Rasas hence no such Māyā Rasa is ever realized. 5. Rasas-Their Interrelation, Contradiction etc. Bharata's remark about the four primary Rasas and their four derivatives shows its validity here as each primary with its derivative can never be opposed but always mutually help- ing. In Bharata no mention of the contradiction between Rasa and Rasa is to be found. Bhänudatta, however, men- tions Bharata in this connection in the 8th stanza of the eighth chapter of his Rasatarangini. In case of other Rasas there are mental conditions which according to their nature are sometimes contradictory and sometimes not ; in such cases the transference from one mental condition to another is worth consideration. For instance, the Vīra and the Srngära are not opposed but friendly as the Dhvanyā- loka points out2, but the Srngära may not be friendly to the Vīra as the Sāhityadarpana puts it3. Only one Rasa depic- ted to the exclusion of others in the whole literary piece becomes monotonous and if many Rasas are depicted with- out any relation, there is a chaos and the unitary effect of the literary piece is marred, as no Rasa appears predominating.

1. V. R. C. pp. 68-69. 2. D. L. p. 381. 3. S. D. III. 254.

392 The depiction of one Rasa as principal should, therefore, be the aim of the author. Ananda says that according to the aim of the author one Rasa should be kept as the prin- cipal Rasa.1 The question of compatibility or opposition comes only when the author has put before him the aim of depicting one Rasa as principal and others subsidiary to it. The opposition between Rasa and Rasa is to be experienced when the one intended to be kept as principal has its full scope not attained due to interference by another. Hence it is that different ways of removing this opposition have to be adopted. When, therefore, one Rasa has been kept up as principal and others subordinate to it, this opposition ought to disappear ; but there are cases when simply making one Rasa as principal with others subordinate to it does not solve the problem. For instance, the Srngāra and the Bī- bhatsa are never compatible, the latter totally marks the effect of the former. In such cases the subordinate Rasa, whether compatible or not with the principal Rasa, should never be brought to its full stage of maturity. Sometimes in case of the Srngära and the Vīra, even when both have attained equal maturity, the opposition is removed2. Mammata notes that sometimes the subordinate Rasa, even though opposed to the principal one, does not mar the full enjoy- ment of the principal Rasa when remembered with it3. In case of the two opposed Rasas instanced above, though Ānanda has not marked it, there is a deciding factor dis- tinguishing the principal from the subordinate as the word, 'Bhatasya' used here is pointed out in the Daśarūpaka4. Panditarāja Jagannātha also points out the same thing when 1. D. L. III. 21. 2. Ibid. pp. 382-383. 3. K. P. VII. 65. p. 453. 4. D. R. IV. pp. 144-145.

393

he says that in such cases the special signification of ordinary adjectives serves as the deciding factor1. The Vyabhi- chāribhavas opposed to the principal Rasa should not be brightly depicted. This is obviously to show that the subordinate Rasa opposed to the principal Rasa has not matured to its final stage. · If, however, the above Vyabhi- chäribhāvas have been depicted too brightly, those of the principal Rasa should be repeated. In cases when the subordinate Rasa has been brought to its full maturity, it should be repeatedly suggested as the subordinate Rasa. In the above three cases the subordinate Rasa serves the purpose of bringing the principal Rasa to its full stage of maturity as Ānanda points out. He also points out that in the opinion of those who use through the Upachara the word Rasa for the Sthayibhava, such relation of the prin- cipal and the subordinate is accepted without any hitch.2 When two Rasas are mutually opposed their opposition may be set aside by making them both subordinate to a third which in such cases becomes the principal Rasa ; for instance, the Srngära and the Karuna are both mutually- opposed but when they become parts of the Bhāva (devo- tion to the king ) the opposition is not experienced.3 When two Rasas are mutually opposed and have the same Āśraya (substratum), one of them is to be made to have some other substratum. Under such circumstances the latter even if fully matured will not have any destructive effect. If, however, two Rasas, directly opposed, are to be depicted in the same Āśraya, some other Rasa should be interposed to avoid this direct opposition. No case of opposition arises when a Rasa opposed to the principal Rasa is made

1. R. G. p. 49. 2. D. L. p. 387. 3. R. G. pp. 48-49. :

394

subordinate to a Rasa which is already subordinate to the principal one Rājñi ( Senāpatitadbhrtyavat ).1 When there are many Rasas in a literary work they are, thus, interrelated and the opposition and contradiction reconciled. Any dereliction is sure to bring in defect in the realization and enjoyment of the principal Rasa. There may, however, arise some other defects in every Rasa as pointed by Ananda and Mammata. The mention of the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas etc. of the opposite Rasa, ex- pressing Rasa meant to be suggested through the general word as Rasa or the particular word as the Srngara etc., naming the Vyabhichāribhāvas or the Sthāyibhāvas directly and the suggestion of the Anubhava and the Vibhava with a great deal of difficulty, untimely elaboration and breaking up of a Rasa, giving a wide canvas to an ancillary, negligence of the important and the main factor as the hero etc., des- cribing different characters as performing activities and works quite incompatible with their nature,status etc., describing an element which does not function as a part and hence is not helping to Rasa, harnessing the Vrttis in a manner unsuitable to their nature-such and like are the causes which bring about defects in Rasa. Some of these defects may be removed. Sometimes the Sañchāribhāva even if expressed may not bring about the defect ; it may also not bring about the defect in Rasa when it is expressed as suppressed by other ones. The defects based on the external factors may also be brought about by inappropriate use of such elements as the Gunas, the Ragas, the metres etc. In the previous section the Gunas have primarily been equated with the Chitta-

1. K. P. VII. p. 456 (Com.).

395

vrttis ( mental conditions ) themselves. In their opinion, therefore, the Gunas in the sense of factors bringing about these mental conditions are so called only secondarily whereas according to others these Gunas are so called not secondarily but primarily also. There are some letters prescribed for bringing about these mental conditions in different Rasas. The Madhurya and the Ojas Gunas have different letters, their conjunction and combination regulated in cases of different Rasas. Departures from them bring about defects in the suggestion of Rasas concenrned. In cases when these departures are in conformity with certain rules enjoined upon in connection with the propriety of the speaker etc., they do not turn into defects.1 In the same way the Alankära where used to help the enjoyment of Rasa would bring about a defect in it if it is used inappropriately2. Bharata notes particular Alankāras appropriate to particular Rasas3. Certain metres have been prescribed as appropriate to certain Rasas. Bharata, Ksemendra etc. have all noted these metres4. Ksemendra has mentioned metres in con- nection with the description of the Srngāra Alambana Vibhāvas etc5. Mammața has noted cases where inappropriate use of metres has marred the enjoyment of Rasas6. Certain Rägas have also been prescribed in connection with certain Rasas. In connection with them tunes also have been prescribed. Bharata, Sārngadeva etc. note it.7 Inappro- priate use of them will surely bring in defects. Some writers were very particular in maintaining the delicacy of Rasa. It is said that as Rasa is the main thing in a literary piece all

1. K. P. VIII. 77. p. 487. 2. A. V. C. 15. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) XVII. 109-111. 4. Ibid. XVII. 111-114. 5. K. S. T. III. 17-19 & 21-22. 6. K. P. VII. p. 338. 7. N. S. (K. S. S.) XIX. 38-39; XXIX. 1-18; S. D. S. R. II. pp. 157-226.

396

things, the word with its sense etc., should be so appropriately used as not to interfere in any way with the enjoyment of Rasa.1 Ananda maintains the delicacy of the Śrngāra above all others. He says that any defect, howsoever slight and insignificant, mars the enjoyment of the Śrngāra rasa; therefore, the writer should be very careful, otherwise the slightest inattention will at once become obvious.2 In the above cases it is clear that the defects in the enjoy- ment of Rasa come from external factors, hence reconcilia- tion and removal of defect are possible by the study of the prescribed rules and codes in connection with those factors. But the enjoyment of Rasa may again become defective when its different constituents become defective. Almost all Sanskrit poeticians and dramaturgists admit that such a defect comes in mainly due to lapse in the rules of propriety. Cases of this lapse can be multiplied. Love centering on one's own wife or an unmarried girl receives sanction of the rules which, of course, differ according to the tenets of the particular school, country, conventions, traditions etc.3 Even in the case of one's own wife it becomes defective ( Abhāsa) if one's love to her is described when she is immersed in sorrow; here the propriety is not maintained4. If love is with respect to another's wife, maybe with re- ference to the teacher's wife, the enjoyment is defective, This is a case where the Visaya is defective. A heroine loving many persons is another such instance. In the Prakarana etc. where the courtezan acts as the heroine, love is depicted centred on the hero to the exclusion of other

1. D. L. III. 32 ; K. P. VII. 49. 2. D. L. III. 28-29. 3. Love of the Gopis is to be considered as an exception. 4. K. P. IV. p. 121 (Com.).

397

characters. When love is depicted as existing in the Upanā- yaka or in the Pratināyaka it is a case of Rasābhāsa. In the same way the defect may be in the Āsraya. The love of a man for a lady if proceeding from him before she is des- cribed as love-smitten for him is also defective1. Another case of defect arises when on either side love remains un- responded. The description of the love of a lady for a man whose love has not been described or even hinted at is also a case of Rasābhäsa ( though the variant reading here describes it as Anābhāsa). Here love is possible to arise by sight etc. Śrī Śinga Bhūpāla calls it a case of Prāgabhāva. He also gives other kinds as Atyantābhāva and Pradhvamsā- bhäva, where even in the presence of the causes, love does not arise.2 Love depicted in respect of very low persons as the Mlechchhas and love sports of the birds are also regarded as defective Rasas. The latter point, however, is con- troversial in which many scholars have arranged themselves on one side and many on the other. Bhoja recognizes it as Rasābhāsa3. Hemachandra recognizes love among things devoid of sense organs and birds as Rasābhāsa and Bhāvā- bhāsa4. Vidyādhara recognizes Rasa in birds etc. He calls love in them Rasa. Among them also are the Vibhavas. The objection that the birds have no knowledge of the Vibhāvas etc. is equally applicable in case of some uncultivated persons; and further it is not the knowledge of the Vibhāvas but the latter themselves which lead to the enjoyment of Rasa. Hence is the enjoyment of Rasa recognized in birds5. Vidyānātha accepts love in birds as Rasābhāsa

1. K. P. IV. p. 123 (Com.). 2. R. S. II. p. 203. 3. B. S. K. V. p. 667. 4. H. K. S. II. p. 201. 5. E. V. III. p. 106.

398

but Kumāraswāmī in the Ratnāpana com. notes the view of Vidyādhara.1 Viśvanātha recognizes it as Rasābhāsa.2 Śinga Bhūpāla notes the view of Vidyādhara and passes it under his critical eye. He brings forward his objection that among the birds there cannot be the Vibhavas as the Muni has enjoined a Śuchi and Ujjvala object as the Vibhava. The brids cannot be Suchi etc. Towards the female elephant the elephants are causes of love and not the Vibhävas. In such cases the mind of the Sahrdaya cannot experience Rasa. In the case of the low people also Rasa will be experienced as Rasābhāsa.3 The author recognizes in connection with the Bhāvas certain lapses in the rules of propriety. They are of two kinds, viz. the Asatyatva and the Ayogyatva.4 Rājachūdāmaņī Dīkșita recognizes love of birds as Rasa5 and instances Mammata's description® of the frightened deer under the Bhayānaka Rasa as a correct example of the Bhayānaka Rasa. Viśvanātha gives the defects which turn other Rasas into Rasābhāsas. Anger directed towards the Gurus etc. turns into the Raudrā- bhäsa. When the Santa is depicted in low characters it becomes the Sāntābhāsa. When in the Hāsya the Gurus are the Alambanas it is the Hasyabhasa. When in the Vira the character is low and the Utsaha is directed towards the murder of Brähmanas etc. it is a case of the Vīrābhāsa. In the Bhayānaka when the characters are high it is a case of the Bhayānakābhāsa7. The Vāmanī com. to the Kāvyaprakāśa notes such factors in cases of all Rasas

1. P. R. p. 281. 2. S. D. III. 264. 3. R. S. II. pp. 206-207. 4. Ibid. II. p. 142. 5. R. K. D. IV. pp. 211-212. 6. K. P. IV. p. 109 (Com.). 7. S. D. III. 264-266.

399

turned into respective Rasābhāsas.1 The Bhāvaprakāśana records how Rasas as the Śrngāra etc. turn into the Śrngārā- bhäsa etc. When the Śrngāra is suppressed by the Hāsya, the Hasya is mixed with the Bibhatsa, the Vira is permeated with the Bhayanaka, the Adbhuta is touched by the Bībhatsa and the Karuna, the Raudra is permeated with the Śoka and the Bhaya, the Karuna is mixed with the Häsya and the Śrngāra, the Bībhatsa is mixed with the Adbhuta and the Śrgāra and the Bhayānaka is mixed with the Raudra and the Vira, they all turn into respective Rasābhāsas. The author explains all these elaborately.2 Śinga Bhūpāla gives the above opinion with slight changes.3 Bharata's statement that the Hasya is the imitation of the Śrngāra4 gives scope for inference that the Srngārābhāsa may be a case of the Hāsya Rasa for the word Anukrti may mean Ābhāsa as Abhinava puts it.5 The instance quoted describes the love of Ravana for Sītā. Abhinava himself says that, though here Rasa is of the same form as the Hāsya, the Sāmājikas experience here the Śrngārābhāsa first ; the Hāsya is ex- perienced only afterwards when discrimination works ; it, therefore, is a case of the Śrngārābhāsa.6 Hence the Śṛńgārābhāsa is different from the Hāsya. Love in respect of a god ( ascetic, preceptor, teacher, king, son etc. included ) is called the Bhāva by most rheto- ricians, though the Vaisnavas call it the highest Rasa. That it was so regarded by the rhetoricians does not appear to be unjustified when it is considered that in the melted heart of worldly persons love for a lady makes a more lasting

1. K. P. IV. p. 121 (Com.). 2. B. P. pp. 132-133. 3. R. S. II. pp. 202-203. 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) VI. 40. 5. D. L. p. 179 (Com.). 6. D. L. pp. 78-89 (Com.).

400

impression than love for gods as MM. Pandita Khiste puts it.1 Exceptions may occur but in this world the above type of persons consititutes the majority. According to the rhetoricians, breach of the rules of propriety will result in Rasa being defective. With the Vaisnavas, however, Rasa of God in case of other's wife does not become Rasābhāsa.2 Rasābhāsa is described by Rūpa Gosvāmī as based on the consitituents of Rasa being either insufficient (Anga-hīnatva) or improperly developed (Anga-vairūpya). It is accordingly of three kinds, viz. Uparasa, Anurasa and Aparasa.3 The first includes cases where the twelve Rasas, that is, the Santa etc. with their forms distorted by the Vibhavas etc. turn into Uparasas. In this case the Vibhāvas etc. become impro- per. Each and every detail has been elaborately described by the author.4 Rasas, that is, the seven Gaunas with one Mukhya, viz. the Śānta, become Anurasas when the Vibhāvas etc. have connection with Krsna.5 Rasas as the Hasya etc. become Aparasas when Krsna remains the Vişaya and his opponents become the Asrayas, that is to say when it is developed in hostile persons.6 The feeling of the Rati or the Bhava ( the two taken in the same sense as will be pointed out later on ) may be present in Ābhāsa (semblance ) only and not in reality. It may take the form of either the Pratibimba ( reflection ) where the thirst for the Bhoga or the Moksa remains ; or the Chhāyā ( shadow ) where a little of curiosity ramains.7 Kavi Karņapūra Gosvāmī recognizes the Ābhāsa to be of three kinds, viz,, the Prasiddha, the Krtrima and the Siddha. The first is only known ( Prasiddha) not really

1. Sāras. Su. p. 37. 2. K. A. K. V. p. 133. 3. R. H. S. 2. p. 494. 4. Ibid. 3-19. pp. 494-500. 5. Ibid. 20. p. 500. 6. Ibid. 22-23. p. 501. 7. R. H. S. pp. 110-112.

401

happened as in cases of ordinary persons ( Prākrta ); Mālatī's love for Nandana became only proclaimed ( Prasiddha ) but in reality she loved Mädhava ; in case of persons of higher status (Aprākrta) the instance is Rukmini's love which was for Krsna though at first it was announced for Śisupāla. The instance of the Krtrima is available in Makaranda who in the robes of Malatī expressed his love for Nandana. The Siddha is, no doubt, that which has violated the rules of propriety. The case of the want of propriety occurs when love in a lady is directed towards many lovers. Love of many ladies for Krsņa is not to be regarded as Rasābhāsa, for it is a case of the best form of love.1 The above is one aspect of the Bhava connected as it is with god etc. as recognized by many of the Ālankārikas ; its other aspect comes in when the Vyabhichāribhāva, instead of maturing along with the Sthāyibhāva into Rasa, becomes suggested by itself. Rūpa Gosvāmī recognizes this aspect of the Bhava as that when the Rati of friends either attains a level of equality with, or is a little lower than, the Krsna- Rati but is being profusely nourished. Here the Krsna-Rati is the main thing ; therefore, in a way this case is nothing but the coming into prominence of the Sañchāribhāva as pointed out in the com2. Viśvanātha mentions one case also as the Bhava where the Sthāyibhāva is simply excited (Udbuddha )3-which is also confirmed inthe Vāmanī com.4 to the Kāvyaprakāśa. The above two cases of the Bhāva as also the Rati etc. connected with god etc. which is the third kind of the Bhava have all been described in the above com. as cases where Rasa cannot be realized for its

1. K. A. K. V. pp. 131-133. 2. R. H. S. 110. p. 312 (With Com.). 3. S. D. III. 260-261. 4. K. P. IV. p. 118 (Com.). 26

402

constituents become separately suggested instead. When considered from their own standpoint these are the lower stages of enjoyment, the highest stage being Rasa. When considered from the standpoint of Rasa they are lower stages as defect in one form or another has interfered in their attaining to the highest stage of Rasa. The Bhāva has four kinds where the Vyabhichāribhāvas have become relishable due to Śānti ( allayment ), Udaya ( manifestation ), Sandhi ( conjunction ) and Śabalatā ( admixture ) of or with other Bhāvas. Rūpa Gosvāmī recognizes these four in connec- tion with the Vyabhicharibhavas.1 He also recognizes the Ābhāsa of the Vyabhichāribhāvas firstly in two ways, viz. the Prātikūlya (presence in the opponents, that is, the Vipakse Vrtti) and the Anauchitya ( impropriety ). The latter is then divided into the Asatyatva ( falsity ) and the Ayogyatva. These two cases occur when the Vyabhichāribhāva is attributed to the lifeless things and the birds respectively.2 It has, however, to be noted here that in the devotee there may be a longing to become a lifeless object as the Venu etc. closely and intimately connected with Krsna. This is not a stage of the Abhasa as Krsna here is the principal Vișaya.3 In case of the Rati connected with gods which becomes the Bhäva and the Sthāyibhāva when it is simply excited ( Ud- buddha), the above four kinds of the Bhāva are not possible, as the Sthayibhavas stand by themselves and cannot suffer allayment etc. by others. Anandavardhana, however, mentions the Praśama etc. of Rasa4. Abhinava instances in the Lochana the Praśama of the Irsyā Vipralambha Rasa5. As Rasa turns into Rasābhāsa when it is inappropriately directed

1. R. H. S. pp. 274-277. 2. Ibid. pp. 272-273. 3. R. U. M. p. 375. 4. D. L. II. 3. 5. D. L. p. 176 (Com.).

403

or used, the Bhāva also becomes the Bhāvābhāsa when it is inappropriately depicted as the Lajjā ( shame ) in the courtezan.1 Leaving aside the Bhäva in its different aspects as shown above the Bhavas in general include, according to the authorities in Sanskrit poetics, the Sthāyibhāvas, the Vyabhi- chāribhāvas and the Sāttvikabhāvas as will be seen in the chapter following. The Abhasas of the Sthāyibhavas and the Vyabhicharibhavas have already been explained and illustrated. Rūpa Gosvāmī gives the Ābhāsas of the Sāttvikabhāvas as of four kinds, viz. the Ratyābhāsabhava ( arising from the semblance of the Rati), the Sattvābhāsa- bhava (arising in feeble hearts as old Mīmāmsakas ), the Nihsattva (arising from habit in people extremely soft- hearted but hard-hearted internally ) and the Pratīpa ( arising in people inimical to Krsņa ).2 In the above discussion such terms as the Sthāyibhāva, the Vyabhicāribhāva etc. as the constituents of Rasa have occurred. Their clarification as to their nature etc. and other problems connected with them is necessary. It is but pertinent, therefore, to turn to them next.

1. S. D. III. 266. 2. R. H. S. 38-44. pp. 223-226.

CHAPTER SIX

RASA-ITS CONSTITUENTS AND RELATION WITH NĀTYA.

SECTION A.

1. Rasa-Its constituents.

In the last chapter in the section of the classification of Rasa it has been seen how different mental conditions ( Chittavrttis ) are themselves Rasas according to some authori- ties and how they are involved in the relish of Rasa as others say. These mental conditions come into being at the recital of a poetic composition or the sight of a dramatic representa- tion. When these mental conditions come into being, the whole man is under their influence. Every chord, every nerve then vibrates ; and when they have subsided they leave behind them impressions which remain dormant till revoked. When these mental conditions came into existence for the first time in everyday use in this world is a question which is concerned with philosophy rather than with lierature. There is, no doubt, that when man wanted to have for himself an object, he made efforts for it. When he got it he experienced pleasure. On the other hand, if his efforts failed he was sorry. He was even angry with the factors that impeded its attainment. Thus he experienced different mental conditions. These mental conditions are called the Chittavrttis-a word which is also used for im- pressions ( Bhvas )1 left by them. As reagrds the Chitta-

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VII. p. 343 (Com.).

405

vrtti as impressions some of them are had in this birth but they are also said to have been handed down even from previous births as they exist in the subtle body ( Sūksma Śarīra ).1 The soul, therefore, in the subtle body becomes endowed with these impressions which lie in a dormant state and are thus left as faint reminiscences just as the smell ( of flowers etc. ) lingers in a piece of cloth long after the flowers etc. are removed.2 Abhinava testifies to the fact of the soul being possessed of these impressions when he says that by birth the living being is possessed of the different kinds of knowledge ( Samvit)3 which he describes in details. They pervade the mind, so great is their influence. They are variously called the Vāsanās, the Chittavrttis and the Samvits.4 They are also called the Bhävas and are of different kinds when considered from different points of view. They are of different nature according to different persons. For instance, some persons have some of these in their fullness and intensity whereas others have them in name only with no intensity and strength. Such impressions even get effaced due to two reasons : firstly, when they are fully satisfied they get exhausted and secondly, they become worn out when long left out of use. This explains clearly the fact that those who have such types of impressions even from previous births can hardly have any kind of pleasure based on the provocation of the above impressions, if at all present within them. Exceptions also occur when such faint impressions by constant use and concentration get strengthened and pleasure on their basis is enjoyed. Some of these impressions are confined to proper objects whereas others become aberra-

1. Sān. Kā. 40. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 79. 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 284 (Com.). 4. Ibid.

406

tions. In the same way some prove to be of use towards the attainment of the Purusartha whereas others not.1 According to their intensity, duration, permanence etc. these impressions ( Bhāvas ) are, therefore, of many kinds. According to the Bengal Vaisnavism of the Chaityanya school, however, the Bhäva in the Bhava-bhakti is explained in its own way. The Bhäva-bhakti may be the frther maturing of the Sädhana -- bhakti2 which is of two kinds : the Vaidhī and the Rāgānuga both attained by means and ways prescribed in the Sastras as described in the second Laharī of the Pūrvavibhāga in the Haribhaktirasāmrtasindhu. The Vaidhi concerns itself more with the outward rule and form but the Rāgānugā passes from this outwardness 'to an inner and more esoteric way of realisation, based upon the cultivation of inward feelings of devotion,'3 for 'in the Vaidhi the realisation is through the injunction ( vidhi) of the Sästra, but here it is through the greed (lobha) of realising the feelings of the people of Vraja.'4 The latter is achieved through living imaginatively in one of the ways as Sakhī- bhava etc. as a beloved of Krsna and it is by visualizing such scenes as the whole Vrndāvana Līlā that the passionate feelings are realized. It is mainly of two kinds : the Kāmarūpā and the Sambandharūpa. The former leads to the Sambhogatrsna ( desire for enjoyment ) where the effort is only to please Krsna ; the latter consists in establishing various relationship ( as that of father etc. ) with Krsna. The Rāgānugā is further divided into the Kāmānugā or the Sambandhānugā according to the above two divisions. The Bhäva-bhakti may also develop merely through the

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 284 (Com.). 2. V. F. M. B. p. 133. 3. Ibid. p. 130. 4. Ibid.

407 grace of the devotees of Krsna or his own grace.1 The Bhāva, therefore, may be the Sādhanābhiniveśaja (born of the two kinds of Sādhana, the Vaidhī and the Rāgānugā described above ) or the Krsnatadbhaktaprasādaja ( born of the grace of the devotees of Krsna ) or the Krsnaprasādaja (born of the grace of Krsna ) through his word ( Vāchika) or gift of light ( Ālokadāna ) or cordiality ( Hārda). The two latter cases do not require any effort, but they are rare. The Bhäva is of the nature of a particular pure Sattva feeling bearing resemblance to the rays of the sun of Preman and bringing about the smoothness of the mind through desires explained in the com. as the Bhagavatprāptyabhilāșa (desire for the attainment of the Lord), the Tadānukūlyābhilāșa ( desire for his favour ) or the Tatsauhārdābhilāșa ( desire for his friendship).2 The Bhäva at this stage is another name for the Rati etc. and not for Preman which is a higher stage of the Bhäva when it gets rivetted to Krsna. The author expressly points out here that the Rati and the Bhäva in the Purāņa and the Nātyasāstra have been taken here as the same.3 The Bhäva at first in its semblance may arise in the seekers after the Bhoga ( worldly enjoyment) and the Moksa ( liberation ) or in those who are a bit curious. It may suddenly turn into the real emotion. The Bhāva may also disappear due to offence done to Krsna or his devotees.4 The Bhāva requires further maturing into Preman so that the love rivetted to any other object may be removed and got concentrated on Krsna. The Bhāva then becomes solidified into Preman which renders the soul wholly smooth, and is teeming with excessive attachment.5 The Preman may be Bhavottha

1. V.F. M. B. p. 133. 2. R. H. S. p. 101. Com. 3. Ibid. 8-9. p. 104. 4. Ibid. 28-29. p. 113. 5. Ibid. 1. p. 115.

408

( arising from the Bhava ) or Hareh Atiprasadottha ( arising as an excessive grace of Hari ).1 The former may be either Vaidhabhävottha ( arising from the observance of the injunc- tions prescribed in the Śāstras ) or Rāgānugābhāvottha (arising out of the Rāgānugābhāva). The latter, that is, Hareh Atipra- sādottha may originate from Hari's grace which may be either Kevala ( not dependent on any other circumstance hence being Rāgānugā) or Māhātmyajñānayukta ( consequence of the knowledge of his greatness hence following the Vaidhī Mārga ). The order in which the Prema bhakti develops is Śraddhā ( faith ), Sādhusanga ( company of saints ), Bhajana- kriyā ( acts of worship ), Anarthanivrtti ( withdrawal from unworthy objects ), Nisthā ( devotion ), Ruchi ( desire), Āsakti (attachment), Bhava ( emotion) and finally Preman ( developed form of emotion ).2

(1) Sthāyibhāvas (Permanent emotions). Those of these impressions which remain permanent even after the mental conditions have subsided are called perma- nent emotions. It is these emotions which finally mature into Rasas as they do not lose their individuality in others. They are like kings or preceptors whereas others serve them like subjects or pupils.3 They are like lords attended upon by others as servants ; other Bhavas, therefore, become subordinate to them.4 It is in keeping with the statement that, where many Bhävas have combined together, the Bhäva which assumes the biggest dimension is the Sthāyi- bhava, others are only transitory.5 This, in other words, means that they are not suppressed or have their sequence

1. R. H. S. 3. p. 115. 2. Ibid. 6-7. p. 117. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. 8. 4. Ibid. VII. p. 81. 5. Ibid. VII. 119.

409

broken either by opposite or non-opposite Bhavas;1 on the other hand, they bring these latter to fit in with their own selves, like the ocean. These are the principal factors as other Bhāvas do not suppress them but make themselves subordinate to them.2 This clearly puts forward the im- portance of the Sthayibhava as capable of assuming the biggest dimension and converting itself into Rasa with the subordinate co-operation of others.3 Abhinava advances some other arguments for its importance. He says that the Sthayibhava it is which is the object of relish ; therein are present some impressions attached to the Purusarthas, hence it is important;4 he explains this position in continuation. Abhinava, thus, puts two more arguments, viz. those of relish and utility for the Purusārthas, in the importance of the Sthayibhava. The relishable nature of the Sthāyibhāva is also attested by Viśvanātha.5 Bhāndudatta gives one more characteristic of the Sthāyibhava. He says that the Sthāyibhāva lasts so long as the relish continues.6 thus implying that others simply come and go. This is just like the position hinted at by Viśvanātha when he says that just as the thread runs through the whole garland, so does the Sthāyibhāva underlie all others7 (Bhāvas )-a fact which in connection with the transitory emotions was long ago predicated of the Sthāyibhāvas by Abhinava also.8 The above views establish the foremost importance of the Sthāyibhāva for various reasons adduced above. Śārnga- deva maintains the importance accruing to the Sthāyibhāva

1. D. R. IV. 34 .; S. D. III. 174 ; R. G. p. 31. 2. B. R. T. p. 11. 3. B. S. K. V. 19. 4. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 383 (com.). 5. S. D. III. 174. 6. B. R. T. p. 12. 7. S. D. III. 174(Com.). 8. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 284 (Com.).

410

in some other way. He says that the Rati etc. are the Sthāyi- bhävas when they are provoked by plenty of the Vibhāvas ; when, however, awakened by a few Vibhāvas, they become the Vyabhichāribhāvas.1 This keeps the Sthāyibhāva on a par with the Vyabhichäribhäva when both are in a dormant and unprovoked state, but it is in no way an attempt to diminish the importance otherwise coming to be attached to the Sthayibhavas as he intends simply to point out that when the Vibhāvas are in plenty, the impressions become firm whreas in case of the paucity of the Vibhavas they become suppressed.2 It is to be noted here this statement never means to say that the Vybhichāribhāvas when provoked by plenty of the Vibhavas become the Sthāyibhāvas. As the statement goes it is concerned mainly with the function of the Sthāyibhāvas which become either the permanent emotions or the transitory emotions accor- ding as they are evoked by plenty of the Vibhāvas or not. The above writer then describes which Sthayibhava func- tions as a Vyabhichāribhāva where another Sthāyibhāva. remains as the Sthāyibhāva. He describes the Sama as the Sthāyibhāva only in the Sānta Rasa, in other Rasas it. functions as a Vyabhichāribhāva.3 Panditarāja Jagannātha accepts the above view. He points out that in the Vira the Krodha, in the Raudra the Utsāha and in the Śrngāra the Hāsya should function as respective Vyabhichāribhāvas. Each Vyabhichāribhāva is indispensable (Nāntarīyaka ). Explaining the word, Nantariyaka, the com. says that without the Vyabhichāribhāva the Sthāyibhāva is impossible to be

1. S. D. S. R. VII. 1533. 2. Ibid. (Com.). 3. S. D. S. R. VII. 1534-1535.

411 provoked. This is, no doubt, explaining the function of the Vyabhichāribhāva, but it also bears witness to the keen and subtle insight of the scholar into the human mind. He says that when to help the maturing of the principal Sthāyi- bhāva such Vyabhichāribhāva comes to be provoked by many Vibhavas, it becomes the Rasavat etc.1 Considering all the impressions in the light of the above points Sanskrit scholars have come to the conclusion that the Sthāyibhāvas are nine in number out of which the Sthāyibhāva of the Śānta Rasa is present in all other Rasas as a Vyabhichāri- bhāva whereas the Śānta has also been recognized as the original nature of other Rasas. The Sthāyibhāvas usually counted by them are the Rati, the Häsa, the Soka, the Krodha, the Utsäha, the Bhaya, the Jugupsa, and the Vismaya though at one place Sāgaranandin counts the Trāsa as the Sthāyi- bhava while in the regular list of the Sthāyibhāvas he gives the Amreda in place of the Utsāha.2 Hot controversies, however, have ranged round the Sthāyibhāva of the ninth Rasa, that is, the Śanta. Raghavan has considered the question in details. He concludes in agreement with Abhinava that the Atman, or the Atmajñana, or the Tattvajñāna should be the Sthāyibhāva of the Sānta Rasa.3 Vatve's statement that the Nirveda has been postulated as the ninth Sthāyi- bhāva is only partially acceptable4 and his final acceptance of the Śama as the Sthāyibhāva not because it deserves to be the Sthāyibhāva but because the Sānta Rasa has to be re- cognized as a Rasa5 cannot hold ground. Vatve does not accept the Jugupsa and the Krodha as separate Sthāyibāvas, consequently he does not accept the Bībhatsa and the Raudra

1. R. G. p. 31. 2. N. L. R. K. pp. 11 & 83. 3. R. N. R. chap. IV. 4. V. R. V. p. 111. 5. Ibid. p. 125.

412

Rasas.1 For the Vira Rasa he does not accept the Utsaha as the Sthāyibhāva but replaces it by the Amarsa.2 The author appears to have been influenced by the idea that just as the Sthāyibhāvas become the Sañchāribhāvas they can be interchanged. For all this considertion his basis is the modern psychology as developed by European scholars. He, however, seems unable to shake off the leanings which he might have unwillingly developed due to forced respect towards the ancient tradition, to Bharata or to Abhinava, as he makes the number, that is, nine, complete by adding the Bhakti and the Vatsala to the list of the recognized Rasas.3 He has made the modern European psychology the touchstone of the Rasasastra of Sanskrit scholars. He, however, seems to have paid no attention to certain funda- mentals of the Rasaśāstra. For example, the question as to the place accorded to the doctrine of the belief in previous births seems to have been hardly considered. The impre- ssions ( Vāsanās) coming from previous birth did not receive any recognition. Moreover, the modern psychology deals with the material as it actually happens on the perceptual plane; Rasa, on the other hand, is transcendental ( Alaukika ) in the sense that it is enjoyed when the actual things and happenings are dramatically represented. How far Rasa can be interpreted in terms of the modern Europen psycho- logy is a question which requires to some extent non-recogni- tion of the fundamentals of Sanskrit literature. It is strange here to think as to why the Hāsya and the Bhayānaka Rasas have been given the same importance as other Rasas when their Sthayibhavas cannot be maintained for a long time.

1. V. R. V. pp. 348-349. 2. Ibid. pp. 125-127 & 348. 3. Ibid. pp. 326-330.

413

The Adbhuta Rasa, too, should share the same fate for the Vismaya does not last long. Abhinava's enumeration of the Sthayibhavas seems to be the standard one. While deciding the Sthayibhava as superior to other Bhāvas he says that when a statement as 'Rāma Utsāhaśaktimān' is made, no further question is necessary but when the statement is in the form 'Glānoyam' the question as to the cause of the Glāni (dejection ) at once arises.1 This brings out the dependent and the evanescent nature of the Vyabhicharibhavas. The other kind of the Bhavas, there- fore, are the transitory emotions. According to the Bengal Vaisnavism of the Chaitanya school the Preman stage is the stage of the Sthāyibhāva which can mature into Rasa. This Preman stage is the Krsna Rati which is the Sthāyibhāva. The Vāsanā of this Sadbhakti is to be found existing in the form of latent germs in the devotees. The Vāsanā may be the Prāktanī ( coming from previous births ) or the Ādhunikī ( coming into existence in this birth ). In matter of this recognition the school is in accord with the tenets of the orthodox Sanskrit poetics.2 . The Krsna Rati may be the Mukhya (principal ) or the Gaunā ( secondary ) according as it is directly or indirectly connected with Krsna. The Mukhya is of the nature of a particular pure Sattva and has two kinds : the Svärthā ( which streng- thens itself by non-opposite Bhāvas and gets weak by opposite Bhāvas ) and the Parārtha ( which contracts in itself all the opposite and the non-opposite Bhavas and takes after the Bhava ). Both kinds have five sub-divisions : the

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 284 Com. 2. R. H. S. p. 121.

414

Śuddhā, the Prīti, the Sakhya, the Vātsalya and the Priyatā. The first, that is, the Śuddhā is the Sāmānyā(found in children and ordinary people, not attaining to any speciality hence unfit to mature into Rasa ) or the Svachchhā ( clear and reflec- ting the difference of the devotees as in a mirror, and unfit to develop into Rasa as the devotion does not get deeply fined ) or the Sänti ( representing the Nirvikalpatva in mind hence fit to be developed into Rasa ; it is placid and undisturbed). The Śanti Rati is the stage which as said above culminates into Rasa but as it is unmixed with the Priti etc. it is called the Śuddhā. The next three, that is, the Prīti, the Sakhya and the Vātsalaya are called the Hrdyā as in them the affection thic- kens. Each is of two kinds : the Kevalā and the Sankulā. The former is unmixed with others while the latter is mixed with others. The Santi ( the third kind of the Suddhā ), the Prīti, the Sakhya, the Vātsalya and the Priyata are the five Sthayibhavas of the five kinds of the Mukhyā Rati. Of the Gauni Rati the Sthayibhavas are the Hasa Rati, the Utsāha Rati, the Soka Rati, the Krodha Rati, the Bhaya Rati, the Vismaya Rati and the Jugupsa Rati.1 Out of these the first six can have Krsna as the Vibhāva though in cases of the Krodha Rati and the Bhaya Rati the opponents can also be the Vibhävas. Due to this the above two have two kinds each. In case of the Jugupsā, however, Krsna is never the Vibhäva. In it the body, the skin etc. are the Vibhāvas. It is of two kinds : the Vivekajā and the Prāyikī.2 The Hsa Rati has been recognized to be of six kinds : the Smita, the Hasita, the Vihasita, the Avahasita, the Apahasita

1. R. H. S. pp. 283-292. 2. Ibid. p. 470.

415

and the Atihasita.1 The Vismaya Rati is of two kinds : the Sākșāt (perceptual) and the Anumita ( inferred ).2 (2) Vyabhicharibhavas ( Transitory Emotions ). These transiory emotions, therefore, depend on some Sthayibhavas for they by themselves are weak. They strengthen the Sthayibavas. They are so called because they function favourably in different Rasas in many ways.3 As they are connected with the Sthayibhavas, the latter run through them like thread in the garland.4 It has already been seen that the mental conditions ( Chittavrttis ) invariably leave behind them those impressions which predominate in them. These impressions exist as the Vāsanās even in the absence of their provoking factors as the Vibhāvas. This, however, is not the case with the Vyabhichāribhāvas. In the absence of the Vibhävas etc. they have no independent existence,5 for they are not invariably left behind as impressions by the mental conditions after they have subsided. They function favourably towards the Sthāyibhāvas emerging out of, and submerging in, the Sthāyibhāvas like ripples on the surface of the ocean.6 Bhoja says about them that they are produced but do not remain7 long-a satement which is confirmed by Panditarāja Jagannātha when he says that the manifestation of the Vyabhichāribhavas is like the flash of lightning.8 Bhoja also recognizes them as the cause of the

1. R. H. S. p. 437. 2. Ibid. p. 441. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 84. 4. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 284 (Com.). 5. Ibid. VI. p. 285 (Com). 6. D. R. IV. 7. 7. B. S. K. V. 22. 8. R. G. p. 31.

416

Anubhavas.1 The other name for the Vyabhichāribhāvas is the Sañcharibhavas. The Vyabhicharibhava and the Sañchāribhāva have been respectively explained in the Sāhityakaumudī as that which goes towards the Sthāyibhāva as a help and that which accelerates the speed of the Bhava.2 Bhānudatta gives the definition in a comprehensive way when he says that they function in Rasas, they reside in many Rasas and pervade many Rasas.3 The Sañchāribhāvas or the Vyabhichāribhāvas are, thus, the transitory emotions having no permanent character ; they arise and help the Sthayibhavas to attain their fully matured stage, Rasa. The generally recognized list of these Vyabhicharibhavas gives their number as thirtythree. Sagaranandin puts the Saucha4 in place of the Supta or the Supti in the list. This replacement seems to be made on the reflection that as the Nidra already includes the Supta, a new Vyabhichāribhāva can convincingly be advanced. This line of argument as also that the Sthayibhavas become the Vyabhichāribhāvas, perhaps, suggested to Raghavan that the number of the Vyabhicharibhavas in the recognized list can be reduced or enhanced. Out of so many suggested cases of reduction is one which considered the Nidra and the Supta as repetitions and hence recommended that one of them should be removed from the list, though the delicate distinction between the two is accepted.5 Raghavan again says that the number can be changed as attempts are visible

1. B. S. K. V. 21. 2. V. S. K. IV. pp. 29-30. 3. B. R. T. V. p. 71. 4. N. L. R. K. p. 83. 5. R. N. R. pp. 158-159.

417

on the part of so many Sanskrit scholars. He shows how Bhoja in the Śrngāraprakāśa has no place for the Apasmāra and the Marana in the list but adds the Irsya and the Sama. Bhoja again counts the Sneha in the list in the Sarasvatī- kaņthābharaņa. Śinga Bhūpāla rejects the Īrșyā and the Sneha and says that the Vyabhichāribhāvas cannot be more. By way of an example he mentions the Udvega, the Sneha, the Dambha and the Irsya and points out their inclusion in the recognized number, that is, thirtythree.1 Bhānudatta also at first raises the point that the ten Madanāvasthās (stages of growing love ) are no doubt, the Vyabhichāribhāvas but later on their inclusion in one or the other of the recognized Vyabhichāribhāvas is shown; only one, the Chhala, is given an independent existence.2 But Raghavan points out its inclusion in the Avahittha.3 In the Haribhaktirasämrtasindhu the recognized thirty- three Vyabhichāribhāvas have been accepted as such. Thirteen more have been advanced for consideration, but their inclusion in the above thirtythree has been shown. The point worth notice here is the classification of these Vyabhichāribhāvas into the Paratantra ( dependent on the dominant emotions ) and the Svatantra ( independent ). The former has been sub-divided into the Vara and the Avara. The Varas have been further divided into the Sākșāt and the Vyavahita. These two respectively bring about the maturity of the Mukhya Rati and the Gauni Rati. The Avara is that which is not subordinate to either of the two Rasas (though De defines it as that which 'may be sub-

1. R. N. R. p. 160. 2. B. R. T. V. p. 109. 3. R. N. R. p. 160. 27

418 ordinated to two different Rasas' in the V. F. M. B. p. 142 ). The latter, that is, the Svatantra may be of three kinds : the Ratisūnya ( in those persons who are devoid of the Rati ), the Ratigandhi ( even independent showing a smell of the Rati ) and the Ratyanusparsana ( devoid of the smell of the Rati incidentally touching it ).1 De gives only the first and the second kind.2 This consideration is in connection with the Vyabhicharibhavas as dealt with in the Vaisnava school of Chaitanya in Bengal in which love of Krsna is the prin- cipal point. Raghavan puts the Vyabhichāribhāvas recognized by the Ālankārikas into different categories. He says, "But out of these numberless subsidiary mental states, there are a few which are more major, ...... but they are more definitely mental states than others which are physical manifestations."3 Raghavan in the above words is not so definite about some Vyabhichāribhāvas as mental states though he says that they are physical manifestations. He does not negate their being mental states. But Vatve interpreting perhaps the clue wrongly and taking avowedly his stand on the modern European psychology classifies these Vyabhichāribhāvas into four different but definite categories.4 According to his classification a particular set of the Vyabhichāribhāvas is recognized as mental, some Vyabhichāribhāvas as ex- pressions of emotions while others as physical conditions etc. In connection with their classification as physical conditions the point that arises for consideration is as

1. R. H. S. pp. 269-271. 2. V. F. M. B. p. 142. 3. R. N. R. p. 159. 4. V. R. V. pp. 128-129.

419

follows. If they are physical expressions what is the necessity of each being represented by particular Anubhāvas as mentioned by Bharata in the seventh chapter of the N. S. ? Is it not inconsistent with what Vatve himself has admitted just before ? For instance, while enumerating the thirty three Vyabhichäribhāvas he counts the Marana which just after it in the bracket he explains as 'the mental condition before death.'1 Have they not been recognized as transi- tory emotions by almost all Sanskrit authorities ? That they are such and not merely physical manifestations has been attested by all. Though some of these are so out- wardly expressed that it is open to doubt if they are emo- tions, yet that they are such stands as an undoubted fact. That others are more mental than physical has been recognized by Sanskrit authorities. It is quite certain that these Vyabhichāribhāvas are not permanent like the Sthāyibhāvas as the latter do exist independently by themselves. There are, however, some other emotions about which a lot of discussion has been raised. They are the Sāttvikabhāvas. (3) Sāttvikabhāvas (Emotions arising from the very essence of the being ). The Sāttvikabhāvas appear more as physical manifes- tations but they are counted among the Bhavas. They are called the Sāttvikabhāvas arising from the essence of the being. Their nature becomes quite clear when the answer to the question just following is received. If other Bhavas are represented without the Sattva (the essential nature of the being ) and if all are represented on the same basis, why are they specifically called the Sāttvikas ? The

1. V. R. V. p. 128.

420

reply comes thus. The Sattva in the Sāttvikabhāvas is born of the mind. When the mind is in concentration, then is the Sattva born. Therefore the horripilation, tears, pallor etc. in fitness with different Bhāvas cannot be represented if the mind is divided.1 As, thus, they cannot arise without the concentration of the mind they are called the Sättvikabhāvas. The Sattva has been generally defined as the mind untouched with the Rajas and the Tamas.2 Viśvanātha puts the same more clearly when he says that the Sattva is that internal attribute ( Antaradharma ) illumi- nating the state of equipoise of the mind. The distinction between the Sattvikabhavas and the Anubhāvas rests, therefore, on the basis of the Sattva.3 It is a fact worth notice that it is to emphasize this distinction that Śāradā- tanaya enumerates the different Vibhāvas and Anubhāvas for different Sattvikabhavas.4 Does it not clearly establish the importance of the Sāttvikabhāvas as well as their dis- tinction from the Anubhavas ? Bhanudatta calls the Sāttvikabhāvas the Śārīrabhāvas and differentiates them from the Vyabhicharibhavas on the ground that the latter are internal whereas the former are external and physical. They are called the Sattvikas as they are born of the living body. No doubt they are present in many Rasas and thus are on the same level with the Vyabhichāribhāvas, yet it is they which really bring about the experience of sorrows of others. He, thus, gives others' opinion ; for himself, however, he says that the Sattva is an equivalent of the

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 95. 2. B. S. K. V. 20. 3. S. D. III. 134 (Com.) and 135. 4. B. P. Lines 9-24. p. 14. & Lines 1-6. p. 15.

421

Jīvaśarīra (the living body ) as said before.1 He advances one more Sāttvikabhāva besides the recognized eight. It is the Jrmbha. In order to establish it he does not admit the Sattva as the favourable attitude towards the Paraduh- khabhāvanā but a Jīvaśarīra and distinguishes the Sāttvi- kabhavas from the Vyabhicharibhavas on the basis of the external and the internal functions. This stand of the author has affected the conception of the Bhava itself. Instead of defining the Bhäva as the Chittavrtti in agreement with the general opinion he defines it as the Rasānukūlavikāra (modification favourable to Rasa) which he divides into two kinds : the Āntara (the Sthāyibhāvas and the Vyabhichā- ribhāvas ) and the Śārīra (the Sāttvikabhāvas etc). He excludes too palpably physical acts as contraction of the parts of the body etc. and calls them the Sarīrachestā which can be performed at the mere will-which, however, is not the case with the Sattvikabhavas. There is an implicit acceptence of the Sāttvikabhāva as the Anubhāva when the author in connection with the Jrmbha says that because it expresses itself as an Anubhäva there is no reason why it should not be regarded as a Sāttvikabhāva. He in the end establishes the Jrmbha as the ninth Sattvikabhāva, the recognized eight being the Sveda, the Stambha, the Romāñ- cha, the Svarabhanga, the Vepathu, the Vaivarnya, the Aśru and the Pralaya. His clue here obviously is in one verse of the Śrngāratilaka which he quotes.2 A clear ex- position is to be found in Kumārasvāmī's Ratnāpaņa com. to the Pratāparudrīya. The Sattva is defined as an attitude

1. B. R. T. IV. pp. 57-58. 2. Ibid. IV. pp. 66-69.

422

of the mind very sympathetic to the experience of happiness and misery of others through acting etc. The Bhavas coming out of the Sattva are called the Sāttvikas. It is on this basis that the Sāttvikabhāvas are distinguished from the Anubhavas as side glances etc. The state of mind in the spectator when he is one with the Bhävas of the original character is the Sattvika state of mind. It is then that the Anuräga, the Nirveda and such other mental functions arisen from the sight of the Vibhävas, having become one with the Vibhavas and being called by the word Sattva grow, due to an extraordinary cause born of the utmost favourable attitude of the spectator's mind, into his other conditions called the Bhävas as the Stambha etc. which are the Sāttvi- kabhävas. These are manifested by their effects called the Sāttvikas, external, material and physical as the Stambha etc. which are therefore the Anubhavas. The upshot of this whole is that it is the Rati, the Nirveda etc. which are manifested. Hemachandra is quoted in support. The author reveals the secrets that it is the group of the Sthayi- bhavas and the Vyabhicharibhavas which having become the mental condition of the living being becomes the Sāttvikabhāvas as effect and cause which are external and internal of these as said before the external are the Anu- bhavas. The Sattvika, thus, are in one way the Anubhavas, but they are a special kind of the Anubhava in that they are based on the Sattva hence involuntary. The writer gives other opinions but in the end sticks to this distinction. Some say that the group of the Rati etc. present in the Manomaya sheath enters into the Pränamaya sheath which is dominated over by the Sattva which is pure and hence called by the word Sattva after it ( the Prānamaya sheath )

423

has already become one with the Manomaya due to agitation into the Annamaya sheath composed of five elements. The Präna has the Stambha when the earthly portion predomi- nates ; it has the Väspa when the watery portion predomi- nates ; the Sveda when the intensive heat predominates ; it has the Vaivarnya when the opposite is the case and it has the Pralaya when the ethereal portion predominates. This view is evidently influenced by the Vedāntic tenets. The other view is to the effect that a particular power ( Balaviśesa ) which makes Rasa realized without the help of any other Bhäva is called the Sattva ; the Sāttvikabhāvas are born of the Sattva. The third view says that though manifested due to the predominance of the Annamaya and though the characteristic of being originated from the Sattva is common to the side-glance etc., the Stambha etc. are called the Sāttvikas as a result of the usage ( Yogarūdhatva). Others say that just as in the Kanadasāstra the word, Artha, is used for the Dravya, the Guna and the Karma, so in the Alankāraśāstra the word, Sāttvika, is used for the set of the Bhāvas as the Stambha etc. Kumārasvāmī concludes by saying that these several opinions may be held by different persons, but what he holds is this. Though the Stambha etc. come under the Anubhvas, yet they stand distinguished due to some peculiarity.1 In the Sangītaratanākara Sarngadeva records a few opinions. When the Samvit ( Principle of consciousness ) undergoes transformation due to the Bhavas as the Rati etc., the changing consciousness superimposes itself upon the Prāna. The Prāna makes the body assume the form of the superimposed consciousness. At that time the changes as the Stambha etc. are manifested

1. P. R. pp. 223-224. Com.

424

in the body. Then they shine in the Prana on which the consciousness has superimposed itself as they are manifested on the body through the physical changes as the Stambha etc. produced by the Vibhāvas particular to the Rati etc. being relished at that time. The internal changes are the Sāttvikabhāvas as they shine in the Prāna called the Sattva. The author gives the Sankhya conception in the words that the Guna is the Sattva or the Sadhutva which is equi- valent to the body with the Prana without any impurity. The Bhävas born in the Sattva are regarded as the Sāttvi- kabhävas. The author then describes like the latter por- tion of the view given above by Kumārasvāmī how the Prana as the principal factor moving in the body and taking help of the elements as the Artha etc. gives rise to the Stam- bha etc.1 This view thus recognizes the Sāttvikabhāvas as the Bhavas and the Anubhavas. In Rūpagosvāmī the approach made to this problem is similar to one given in the Sangītaratnākara. The dual nature of the Sāttvikabhāvas is freely admitted and thus they are accepted as the Anu- bhavas also.2 The Sattva is defined as the Chitta filled with the Bhavas connected with Krsna directly or indirectly. The Bhavas born of the Sattva are the Sāttvikabhāvas. They are eight in conformity with the general opinion but the departure comes in point of their classification into the Snigdha (soft) which may be connected with Krsna either directly ( through the Mukhya Rati ) or indirectly ( through the Gauni Rati ), the Digdha (arising in a persons's mind when it has become full of the Bhavas not born of the two

1. S. D. S. R. pp. 852-853. 2. R. H. S. 8-14. pp. 211-212.

425

kinds of the Rati. In a case like the above the person be- comes affectionate towards Krşna ), and the Rūkșa (harsh) occurring as a result of the sweet and wonderful talks and surprises about Krsna in persons who have no Rati for Krsna.1 These and their further classifications either with reference to the degree of excitement produced by the pre- sense of one or more Sāttvikabhāvas into the Dhūmāyi- ta ( smouldering ) when there are one or even two Sāttvika- bhāvas (De mentions the presence of only one, in V. F. M. B. p. 141), the Jvalita ( flaming ) when there are two or three Sattvikas, the Dīpta ( burning ) when there are three, four or five Sattvikas (De mentions four or five only, V. F. M. B. p. 141 ) and the Uddīpta (brightly burning) when five or six or all are there ( De mentions six or all only ); or with reference to the duration of the excitement into the Bhūrikālavyāpi (when the excitement lasts long), the Bahvangavyāpi ( when it pervades many parts of the body ) and the Svarūpena Utkarsa (when it attains the climax by its own nature )2-are all particular and peculiar to the Vais- nava system only where love in its various forms predomi- nates. It has, however, to be noted here that the copious illustrations of the Sāttvikabhāvas are to be seen used by the poets mostly in connection with the Rati though they are said to be present in all Rasas.3 Bharata himself points out that the Sveda, the Vepathu, the Romañcha etc. are to be shown in the Bhayanaka Rasa.4 Even though Bharata has not mentioned the word Sāttvika in the Rasasūtra, yet

1. R. H. S. 1-7. pp. 209-211. 2. Ibid. 25-28. p. 220. & 33-37. pp. 221-223. 3. S. D. S. R. VII. 1681. 4. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. 114.

426

he has given a special consideration to it in the seventh chapter of the N. S. and counted it among the Bhavas which Abhinava defines as the Chittavrttis.1 The conclusion, therefore, is reached that the Sattvikabhavas were both internal and external ; the internal in the sense of the Chittavrttis and the external in that of the physical mani- festations. This gave ground to some scholars to treat them as the Anubhavas. The Sättvikabhävas are both external and internal, when latter they are the Chittavrttis as pointed out above. The Chittavrttis are, therefore, the Sāttvikabhāvas, the Vyabhi- charibhavas and the Sthayibhavas. The first and the se cond kinds both almost depend on the third as it is the Sthāyi- bhävas which remain latent in the form of the Vāsanās. In the latent state they remain in a form which is gen eral and weak. They, therefore, require something which may serve as the pivot to hang upon. This so mething is external, no doubt, and it, so to say, impinges on a parti- cular Vāsanā which gets provoked. The function of this external object is, thus, quite important and significant. It with its helping factors is called the Vibhāva. (4) Vibhāvas ( Dependents and Excitants ). That the Vibhavas are the external factors and not the Chittavrttis has been well explained by Abhinava. Bharata gives the equivalents of the Vibhāva as the Kārana, the Hetu etc. He also says that the verbal, the physical and the psychic representation ( Abhinaya) is known through it. Abhinava gives the following explanation in connection with the above statement of Bharata. He says that the

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VII. p. 343. Com.

427

Bhävas make the various Chittavrttis, which are suitable to different Rasas, the objects of knowledge. The different kinds of representation are also made the objects of know- ledge. And it is particularly through the Vibhāvas that all these are cognized.1 This is the function of the Vibhāva. Bharata does not enter into details as regards the Vibhāvas for he says that they are quite well known and he should, therefore, turn away from their detailed description.2 The Agnipurāna defines the Vibhāva as that through which the Rati etc. are known and gives its division into two kinds : the Ālambana ( dependents ) and the Uddīpana ( excitants ).3 Other writers as Dhanañjaya etc. define it as that which can be known ( as they are external factors ) and which strengthen and nourish the Bhava. They testify to its two kinds as given above.4 Bhoja recognizes the Vibhāva as the Kāraņa of knowledge and its excitant.5 Hemachandra follows Bharata when he says that it is the Vibhävas through which the Chitttavrttis as the Sthāyibhāva etc. are realized.6 Viśvanātha says that the Vibhāvas in the Kāvya and the Nātaka are causes which provoke the Sthāyibhāvas as the Rati etc. He explains the word Vibhavyante as 'through these Vibhavas the Sthayibhavas as the Rati etc. are made capable of putting forth sprout of relish.' He accepts the division of the Vibhavas into the Alambanas and the Uddī- panas. The first is the dependent cause (on which the

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VII. pp. 347-348 (with Com.). 2. Ibid. VII. p. 349. 3. A. P. 338. 36. 4. D. R. IV. 2. 5. B. S. K. V. 36-37. 6. H. K. S. II. p. 56.

428

Sthāyibhäva fixes itself) as it is dependent on it when Rasa originates ;1 and the second serves to excite it.2 Śinga Bhūpāla calls the Vibhāva the Kāraņa of the know- ledge of Rasa and classifies it into the Alambana and the Uddīpana. He also goes a bit deeper into the matter as he further considers the Alambana from the points of its being subjective or objective ( Ādhāravișayatvābhyām).3 Paņdi- tarāja Jagannātha accepts the two kinds : the Ālambana and the Uddīpana as causes of the Sthayibhava ; they are called the Vibhāvas in the Kāvya and the Nātya. He men- tions the Alambana only as the Visaya ( objective).4 Vidyā- bhūşana in the Sāhityakaumudī explains the whole thing very clearly when describing the functions of the Vibhāvas and recognizing their two kinds as the Alambana and the Uddīpana. He divides the Alambana into two kinds : the Vişaya ( object ) and the Āśraya ( its locus or substratum ). He defines the first as the object of the Rati and the second its locus. The Uddipana is the exciting cause.5 Almost all rhetoricians have recognized the hero or the heroine as the Alambana. They mutually become the object and the locus ( the Visaya and the Asraya respectively ) of the Rati, for instance, the Rati for Rama may be in Sītā and vice versa. In the Bengal Vaisnavism, however, this is not so though there are a few exceptions. In cases of the Raudra and the Bhayanaka Rasas the Alambana Vibhāvas as the

1. S. D. III. 29 (with Com.). 2. Ibid. III. 131. 3. R. S. I. 59-60. 4. R. G. p. 33. 5. V. S. K. p. 29.

429

Visayas can also be the opponents of Krsna.1 In case of the Bībhatsa the Ālambana Vibhāva as the Vișaya is one's own body etc.2 In other cases Krsna is invariably the Visaya of the Rati etc. Others are the Āśrayas as it is to be borne in mind here that in the Bhaktas ( devotees ) even the Gopīs who have been counted as the Nāyikās are included as fore- most ones.3 The Uddīpana Vibhāvas as said above are those causes which excite the provoked Sthāyibhāvas. Bharata does not dilate upon them and only leaves them to be inferred according to place, tradition etc. He has accordingly made even no distinction between the Alam- banas and the Uddīpanas but has mentioned them together when describing separately each Rasa. These Uddīpana Vibhavas may excite the provoked Sthāyibhāvas through various ways. For instance, it may have become ingrained in the nature of an object to be excited in the proximity of another. A man coward by nature will have his fear excited when present in the midst of dreary and dreadful spectacles. These Uddīpana Vibhāvas also provide themselves in time, place, tradition etc. Youth is more prone to passion which gets excited very easily. They also get changed according to the changing times. The dress of the ladies as worn by them in old times excited love in the people at those times ; now with the march of times the new dress serves the same purpose while the old dress has turned into the exciting cause of laughter in people of modern times. These Vibhävas, therefore, are innumerable. They work in various relations. For example, there are some which by

1. R. H. S. 52 & 54. pp. 297-298. 2. Ibid. 32. p. 292. 3. Ibid. 111. p. 186.

430

association excite passion. A devotional song about Krsna played upon the flute by an expert at once excites in the sympathetic devotee the Bhakti of which Krsna becomes the Alambana. There is no doubt that these Vibhāvas should differ in different cases though in other cases some may have combined operation. Their analysis according to function and classification into different kinds are to be found in the Bhāvaprakāśana of Sāradātanaya. They are the Lalitas, the Lalitabhasas, the Sthiras, the Chittras, the Kharas, the Rūksas, the Ninditas and the Vikrtas in the Śrngāra, the Hāsya, the Vīra, the Adbhuta, the Raudra, the Karuna, the Bībhatsa and the Bhayānaka respectively. The author defines them very clearly. The Lalitas are those which bring about the excellence of the Śrngara, they cause delight to the mind and are to be perceived through various senses. The Lalitäbhāsas show the excellence of the Hāsya ; when hinted at, heard, seen or remembered they cause laugh- ter. Those which become the causes of steadiness ( Sthair- yahetavaḥ ) when heard, seen, remembered or meditated upon and nourish the Vira are the Sthiras. Those which when being experienced always cause wonder in the heart are the Chittras which show the excellence of the Adbhuta. The Rūksas are those objects which on perception pain the sense organs. They, thus, bring about the Karuna. The Kharas when merely perceived bring about timidity of mind and enhance the excellence of the Raudra. Those at which the eyes at once close and have no further desire for them are the Ninditas ; they cause the excellence of the Bībhatsa. The Vikrtas when merely contacted by the sense organs bring about changes. They are the Vibhāvas of the Bhayā- naka. After this description the author gives the Alam-

431

bana Vibhāvas of different Rasas. They are young tender ladies and youths in the Śrngāra ; the imitators, the jugglers etc, imitating others' activities, of distorted and deformed faces in the Häsya ; the warriors, brave, powerful, possess- ing prowess, of sacrificing nature and beautified with scars and wounds of arms and weapons in the Vira ; those re- velling in display of the feats of illusion, wearing wonderfui dress, putting on wonderful faces and having wonderful behaviour and ways in the Abdhuta ; rogues, knaves etc., of cruel character, having many arms, many mouths, fearful teeth and white limbs in the Raudra ; the lean, the dejected, the dirty, the sick, the sorrowful and those afflicted with poverty in the Karuna ; those having disgusting forms and dresses and those of censurable behaviour and diseased limbs as well as the devils etc. in the Bībhatsa ; and those who have done offences to the teachers or the preceptors and the kings, those who are lost in big forests and those who wonder here and there in big wars in the Bhayānaka.1 These things clearly show that the Alambana Vibhāvas are the persons and the Uddīpanas are the circumstances etc. The writers like Viśvanātha clearly point out that the Alambana Vibhavas are the heroes etc. They are the Alambanas of the realization of Rasa.2 The Uddīpana Vibhavas are the activities of the Alambana, the time, place etc.3 Dharma Sūri mentions the same thing in other words when he counts the Uddīpana Vibhavas as the merits, the qualities, the activities and the ornaments of the Ālambanas;

1. B. P. pp. 4-6. 2. S. D. III. 29. 3. Ibid. III. 132.

432

he also mentions some other factors which are independent.1 In the independent factors are no doubt implied time, place, circumstances etc. The beautiful sights in the forest, the dreary aspects of Nature, therefore, are effective only as the Uddipana Vibhavas ; they are not by themselves the Ālambana Vibhāvas. It has been advanced that the depic- tion of beautiful scenes in Sanskrit poetic compositions provokes the Sthāyibhāvas in readers ; these scenes, there- fore, become the Alambana Vibhävas of Rasa in them. It has, however, been partially ignored that beautiful scenes depicted are to furnish as background for the heroes or the heroines appearing later on. In those cases where the saints are described as fascinated with the beautiful sylvan scenes or with those scenes where the birds are described cooing sweetly, the latter do really remind the reader of some other factor. A lover wandering in the midst of these beautiful scenes has his provoked Sthāyibhāva as the Rati for his absent heroine all the more excited. The ring in the Abhi- jñānaśākuntala serves as the excitant of Dușyanta's sorrow already provoked at his unjustified rejection of Śakuntalā. By themselves, thus, these Uddīpana Vibhāvas can hardly be the Alambanas of any Rasa. If they at all figure as such, the case becomes that of Rasābhāsa as has already been con- sidered before. And when any Sañchāribhāva is attributed to scenes or birds and thus experienced by the responsive reader as shown by the writer advancing his position for consideration, the case is again of the Abhasa of that Sañchāribhāva.2 In Rasas, therefore, such factors as scenes etc. can only be the Uddīpana Vibhāvas. The Bengal

1. V. R. V. p. 133. 2. G. K. T. pp. 157-159.

433

Vaișnavism makes the position clearer by mentioning the Uddīpana Vibhāvas as qualities, merits, activities, decoration of Krsna and such factors as his smile, fragrance of the body, Śrńga ( trumpet ), Śankha ( conch shell ), footprint, places of sport, the Tulsī plant, the devotee, days of fast etc. His qualities and merits, his activities, his decoration and his flute receive detailed consideration with kinds and classifi- cations.1 These are, therefore, distinctions which keep the two divisions quite separate. The Alambana is very nece- ssary as without it the Sthāyibhāva present in its latent form cannot fix itself on a particular object ; the Uddīpana, however, comes in only when the Sthāyibhāva has fixed itself upon the Alambana. When the Sthāyibhāva has fixed itself upon the Alambana and is excited by the Uddī- pana Vibhavas and is nourished by the Vyabhichāribhāvas, there appear naturally some outward signs to show this process. These are called the Anubhāvas. (5) Anubhāvas ( Ensuants ). The Anubhavas are, thus, the outward manifestations of the provocation of the Sthayibhava. The word Anu- bhäva itself means either that which is produced afterwards ( Anu Paśchad Bhāvo Yasya Saḥ) or that which makes the reader or the spectator apprehend a particular emotion ( Anu Bhāvayanti Iti ).2 Bharata says that the Anubhāva is so called because the representation given by the verbal, the physical and the psychic means is known through it.3 Dhanañjaya calls the Anubhāva an indicator of the Bhāva,

1. R. H. S. pp. 187-204. 2. R. G. p. 33 .; V. S. K. p. 29. 3. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 80. 28

434

it thus is an effect ; it makes the spectator understand the Sthāyibhāva and nourishes Rasa.1 Hemachandra says that through the Anubhavas the sympathetic persons while experiencing the Chittavrttis as the Sthayibhavas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas are given direct perception of the Sthāyi- bhāvas.2 Śāradātanaya defines the Anubhāva as that by which the Bhäva existing in the heart is suggested,3 and divides the Anubhavas into four kinds according as they proceed from the mind, the words, the body and the intellect. Those proceeding from the mind are the Bhäva etc. ten in number and displayed by the ladies, those from the words are twelve in number beginning with the Alāpa etc., those from the parts of the body are ten beginning with the Līla etc. of the ladies, and those from the intellect are the Rītis, the Vrttis and the Pravrttis.4 The author dilates on each of these and says that many other Anubhavas are to be seen in cases of different Rasas enumerated there.5 Śinga- Bhūpāla defines the Anubhavas as those which suggest the Bhava which is present in the mind and which is their cause. The author thereby imples that they are effects. They are of four kinds originating from the Chitta (mind), the Gatra (parts of the body), the Väg (words) and the Buddhi ( in- tellect ). This position is just in the following of the above.6 Later on Bhānudatta defines the Anubhāvas as those factors which make Rasas realized as the side-glances

1. D. R. IV. 3. 2. H. K. S. II. p. 56. 3. B. P. Line 14. p. 13. 4. Ibid. Lines 13-17. p. 6. 5. Ibid. Lines 20-21. p. 13. 6. R. S. I. 190-191.

435

etc. as the Kāranas. He also recognizes them as the Uddi- pana Vibhāvas. This position will be considered later on. He classifies them according as they are the Kāyika ( bodily ), the Mānasa ( mental ), the Āhārya ( sartorial ) and the Sāttvika (psychic).1 The Anubhavas are, thus, the effects of the Bhavas already provoked and excited. Their function, therefore, is to make the Bhavas apprehended. As the Bhävas, as said before, are the Sthāyibhāvas, the Vyabhi- chāribhāvas and the Sāttvikabhāvas ( in their internal aspect ), Śāradātanaya has given the Anubhāvas of the last two also.2 In the Bengal Vaisnavism the Anubhāvas have been defined as those factors which make one understand the Bhāvas present in the mind. The Haribhaktirasāmrtasindhu gives only the Udbhāsura Anubhāvas as the Nrtya ( dancing ), the Viluthita (rolling on the ground ), the Gita (singing ), the Krośana (loud crying ), the Tanumotana (twisting of the body ), the Hunkāra (shouting ), the Jrmbhana (yawning) etc. These have been classified into two kinds : the Śītas (the Gita, the Jrmbha etc. ) and the Ksepana ( Nrtya etc. ).3 The Ujjvalanīlamani, however, divides the Anubhāvas into three kinds : the Alankāras (beginning with the Bhāva and ending with the Vikrta to which two more are added, thus twentytwo in all), the Udbhāsvaras ( Nīvisramsana etc., several in number) and the Vächikas (beginning with the Alapa and ending with the Vyapadesaka, thus twelve in all ).4 These, then, are the different constituents of Rasa.

1. B. R. T. III. pp. 45-49. 2. B. P. pp. 14-15 & 15-25. 3. R. H. S. 1-4. p. 205. 4. R. U. M. pp. 245-269.

436

They operate together and the Sthāyibhāva suggested etc. by them matures into Rasa.

2. The Conjoined Operation of the Constituents. The Sthayibhava latent in the spectator is thus provoked at the sight of a particular object on which it comes to fix itself also, the latter, therefore, becomes its Ālambana Vibhava. The other causes then excite the provoked Sthāyibhāva and are the Uddīpana Vibhāvas. The pro- vocation and the excitation of the Sthayibhāva then results in some effects on the body. They are called the Anubhāvas. The objection here as to their being called the effects may come in as the causes are internal and the effects are external and the law of the Sāmānādhikaranya is violated. The answer to it is satisfying in this that when the Sthayibhāva is provoked and excited the whole body shares in that state ; every nerve is strung and the body and the heart become identical as it were ( Dehatādātmyasambandha ). The above law, therefore, is not violated. The Anubhāvas are, thus, the external effects of what is passing inside. The Vyabhi- charibhavas at that time coming in and disappearing bring about the culmination of the Sthāyibhava into Rasa wherein no constituent is experienced separately but all together are experienced as one whole having a relish different from that of any of them. This is the meaning of the Rasasutra of Bharata. There is one question which requires conside- ration here. What is the relation of these different constituents with Rasa in which they ultimately culminate ? Mammața's line 'Vyaktaḥ Sa Tairvibhāvādyaiḥ Sthāyibhāvo Rasah Smrta' clearly explains that all the constituents have a combined operation and function. Other writers as Panditaraja Jagannātha also testify to the above combined

437

function. These constituents, therefore, function as the rod, the wheel etc. function together and not separately in the production of an earthen jar though here also the analogy is only partially applicable as in the cognition of the pot, the rod etc. are not at all cognized whereas in Rasa the Vibhavas etc. are all cognized together as one. They do not function as the grass, the fire-producing stick and the gem, each of which separately produces the fire. But then the counter question comes in the form that there are certain descriptions where only the Alambana or the Uddīpana or the Anubhäva makes the sympathetic person realize the particular Rasa. In such cases other constituents have to be understood by implication, for all writers as Mammata, Panditarāja Jagannātha etc. have recognized their combined cognition as the Samūhālambanajñāna. This position gives scope for one consideration which is striking and novel. The description of one constituent where others are to be understood by implication and their combined operation to culminate into Rasa call to mind the Pañchī- karana process as expounded in the Vedānta philosophy. There are five elements, the Pañchamahābhūtas, in the Vedānta, viz. the earth (Prthvi), the water ( Jala ), the fire ( Tejas ), the air ( Vāyu) and the ether (Ākāśa ). In each of the five elements as found in Nature according to the Vedānta only half of that element in its purity is present, the other half is made up of equal parts of the other four elements. The sanction behind this position is the Trivrtkarana of the Vedas. In case of Rasa the five constituents are the Sthāyi- bhāvas, the Ālambana Vibhāvas, the Uddīpana Vibhāvas, the Sañcharibhavas and the Anubhavas. The predominance of one constituent consists in the fact when one is either suggested or described profusely and others are either given

438

in hints or understood by implication. No exact proportion as expounded in the Vedänta can be given here. Even in the Vedänta the whole thing even though confirmed on analogy is theoretical. To this comparison of the process of the Pañchikarana of the Bhavas the objection can be raised that the Pañchīkarana has scope where the objects have parts ( Sāvayavapadārthas ), the Vibhāvas are not such. The reply is given that the comparison is only with reference to their conjoined operation culminating into Rasa which is realized on the analogy of the beverage (Prapānakarasanyāya- vat). The function, thus, of all these constituents is con- joined in the realization of Rasa. It has been seen that Bhattalollata and Śrī Śankuka recognize these constituents in the original characters and thus the realization of Rasa is limited to them only. BhattaLollata accepts Rasa as worldly (Laukika ), and effect ( Kärya) and the realization of Rasa as a knowledge of superimposition. Śri Śańku accepts the realization of Rasa as an inferential knowledge. Bhatta- Nāyaka and Abhinava, however, accept that because of the latent impressions in the sympathetic persons Rasa is enjoyed and suggested. In the sympathetic persons, readers or spectators, the latent impressions ( Vāsanās ) have corres- pondence ( Vāsanāsamvāda ) with those in the original characters which, however, are worldly in the sense that their operation was to be seen in the practical world. Duşyanta loves Śakuntalā means that in Dușyanta the Rati depended itself on Śakuntalā . It got excitement in external and surrounding factors and was duly accompanied with external manifestation. The transitory emotions matured love. Pleasure was thus enjoyed by Dusyanta. In this case the causes ( Kāraņas) of Dușyanta's love ( the Rati as

439

the Sthāyibhāva ) were Śakuntalā and the surrounding circumstances etc., the effects (Käryas ) were the external manifestations and the transitory emotions ( Vyabhichāri- bhavas ) the accompaniments of love. The effects, how- ever, of Dusyanata may serve as the excitants of love in Śakun- talā for Dușyanta. This is what is meant by Bhānudatta when he says that they can be excitants also.1 The pleasure enjoyed by Dusyanta as a result of love for Śakuntalā is only worldly. When the same love of Dusyanta for Śakuntalā is described in a literary composition or is dramatically represented, the pleasure enjoyed by the reader or the specta- tor is Rasa which is transcendental (Alaukika). The causes, the effects and the accompanying factors are here respectively called the Vibhavas, the Anubhāvas and the Vyabhichāri- bhävas. They are not present here as they actually were in the world ; they underwent modification as they passed through the alembic of the poet's mind after the incidents concerned had touched his heart. The poet's intensity of experience in such cases becomes the effective factor ; their presentation in the literary work, however, did not become quixotic but followed some rules also. The ring episode in the Abhijñānaśākuntala is an innovation but it is pro- bable, ideal and tending to the excellence of Rasa. More- over, these factors present themselves before the sympathetic persons, readers or spectators, in their universalized and not particular aspects. Thus while reading the literary piece or witnessing the dramatic representation, as it is the Sthāyi- bhäva of the sympathetic reader or the spectator which comes into operation, some writers as Dhanañjaya describe the presence of the Vibhāvas, the Anubhāvas, the Sāttvika-

1. B. R. T. pp. 48-49.

440

bhävas and the Vyabhichāribhāvas in the literary com- position or the dramatic representation and the presence of the Sthayibhava in the Samajika who enjoys pleasure. Dhanañjaya says that as the literary composition serves as the cause of giving that pleasure it is called the Rasavat (having Rasa ) on the analogy of the statement that the Ghrta ( clarified butter ) is Āyu ( life ), which, however, is by secondary use ( Lākşanika ).1 As has been shown above all these constituents are present in the Kāvya or the Nātya but as the pleasure is enjoyed by the spectator the Sthāyi- bhäva is not mentioned in the Rasasūtra. It may be under- stood by implication as the Sthāyibhava of the spectator corresponds with that in the original character. All the constituents, therefore, are present in the literary composi- tion, but whereas in the case of the original characters the pleasure or any other result in the presence of other factors was worldly, in the literary work it is nothing but pleasure in the sympathetic reader or the spectator. At this stage two questions come up for consideration. Firstly, it is to be seen if all the above constituents are to be necessarily present in all Rasas and secondly, in cases of different Rasas what position is occupied by the sympathetic person. As to first question the answer is furnished by Panditarāja Jagannā- tha. He says that in the Rati, the Krodha, the Utsaha, the Bhaya, the Soka, the Vismaya and the Nirveda the Ālambana Vibhāvas both as the Vișaya and the Āśraya are cognized, but in the Hasya and the Jugupsa the case is not so as it is only the Visaya which is cognized.2 Here it has to be

1. D. R. IV. 1. Com. 2. R. G. p. 45.

441 said that it is not always that the Asrayas are invariably absent. The Vidūsaka imitating the love affairs of the hero before his other companions furnishes the instance in the- Hāsya. The heroes killed in battles and flying afterwards in divine aerial cars see their own corpses being torn to pieces and their blood being sipped by the female jackals. The particular Rasa is the Bībhatsa of which they are the Āśrayas. In the example1 of the Bībhatsa Rasa given by Panditarāja Jagannātha the description is that the female demons besmear their faces with pus and blood of the cor- pses of which the intestines have been torn by them with their nails. Here if the female demons are taken as the Aśrayas, no case of the Bībhatsa would arise as they in themselves do not have their Jugupsā provoked by the corpses ; on the other hand, they take delight in them. Hence they cannot be the Asrayas. In the example2 of the Hāsya Rasa the Āśraya is not at all described. Paņditarāja at first raises this point and then gives his solution to the effect that in such cases the particular spectator or the reader is to be understood as the Āśraya by implication, as no objection arises even in the case of the Śrngāra in such a position as given above.3 The statement of Jagannätha in a way furnishes the reply to the second question. The implied presence of a particular person as the Āśraya in cases of the Häsya and the Bībhatsa Rasas indicates that the spectator at a dramatic representation or the reader of a poetic com- position is to place himself in the position of the Āśraya. He is to feel his identity with the Āśraya who becomes

1. R. G. p. 44. 2. Ibid. p. 43. 3. Ibid. p. 45.

442

universalized and thus is devoid of peculiarities and parti- cularities. In the Āśraya the worldly enjoyment is ex- perienced. What happens in the Kāvya or the Nātya is that this worldly enjoyment with its causes etc. in the original characters is so depicted as to be aroused in the reader or the spectator and in this provocation consists its transcenden- tal nature. In the representation of Dusyanta's love for Śakuntalā, the spectator unconsciously but imaginatively becomes Dusyanta and experiences love for Sakuntalā. As Duşyanta was the Āśraya in the Laukika Rasa ( Bhoga), the spectator becomes the Aśraya in the Alaukika Rasa. This is further confirmed in another way. The presence of the Sthāyibhāva has been shown already in the original charac- ters also. If Duşyanta has his love provoked for Śakuntalā, it means that the Rati Sthāyibhāva in Dusyanta is pro- voked. The Sthāyibhāva as the Vāsanā in the reader or the spectator corresponds with the Sthāyibhāva in the original character ; it, therefore, comes to this that the spectator is on the same level with that orginal character in whom the Sthāyibhāva is provoked, that is to say, who is the Āśraya of love. The spectator, therefore, becomes one with the Āśraya and the latter's Anubhāvas, Sāttvikabhāvas etc. become the spectator's Anubhāvas, Sāttvikabhāvas etc. On the other hand, if the Āśraya becomes the Ālambana Vibhāva of the spectator who in his turn becomes the Āśraya, with whose Sthāyibhāva will the Sthāyibhāva as the Vāsanā in the spectator will correspond as there is no parity between the two ? The Anubhävas etc. in the above case will not be identical on both sides. The pleasure enjoyed will be worldly as no scope for the identification of the spectator with the Asraya is present. It has already been shown that what

443

is aroused as Rasa in the spectator is merely a reflection of what passed in the world. The Bhayanaka Rasa in the deer chased by the king as instanced in the Kāvyaprakāśa is enjoyed in the spectator only when he has established his identity with the deer ; on the other hand, if the spectator has not done so, but has made the deer his Ālambana Vibhāva, how will the Bhaya exist in the deer whose Visaya is not present ? Again the Vīra Rasa in Rāma as instanced1 in the Rasagangädhara is enjoyed in the spectator only when he has indentified himself with Rāma. If Rāma has become his Ālambana, no Vīra Rasa can be depicted in Rāma as Śankara, Rāma's Vișaya, is absent. The position becomes clearer in case of the Śrngāra Rasa. Dușyanta is the Āśraya of the Rati for Sakuntalā who is the Visaya. If for the spectator Dusyanta becomes the Vișaya, the Rati experienced will be Duşyantavişayakarati and not Śakuntalāvișayakarati. Will the Rati of which Dusyanta is the Visaya and the specta- tor or the reader the Asraya mature into the Śrngāra Rasa ? Will it not go against the principle which enunciates that the Śrngāra Rasa is the Rati suggested with reference to a lady ?2 A man's love for a lady is a case of the Śrngāra Rasa; a man's love for another man is not the Śrngāra Rasa. This consideration seems to have been ignored by Vatve who established the Aśraya in the poetic or the dramatic piece as the Visaya for the spectator.3 The position becomes still clearer in the Bhakti Rasa of the school of Bengal Vaisnavism. As has been said Krşna is always the Vişaya and the Krsna Bhaktas are the Āśrayas. Exceptions occur only in a few

1. R. G. p. 40. 2. K. P. IV. p. 118. 3. V. R. V. pp. 304-305.

444

cases as the Bībhatsa when the body of the Aśraya becomes the Visaya, the Bhayänaka where the hard-hearted opponents of Krsna also become the Visayas and the Raudra Rasa where Krsna's opponents become the Visayas. These are counted as the kinds of the Bhakti Rasa as in these exceptions every- thing has reference to Krsna. Here in the Bhakti Rasa if the Aśraya becomes the Visaya of the spectator or the reader, what kind of Bhakti Rasa will it be ? In the Bhakti Rasa the spectator or the reader identifies himself with any one of the Bhaktas who figure as the Asrayas. Thus the position of the spectator is that of the Aśraya and not of the Visaya. The spectator enjoys Rasa when he has identified himself with the Āśrayālamabana Vibhāva. Rasa which is enjoyed at that time is self-sufficient in itself. Even a child playing with dolls feels in himself the self-sufficiency of the particular pleasure he is experiencing at that time. This, however, is the static side viewed from the standpoint of the person enjoying the pleasure. From the standpoint of the disinterested person the various levels of Rasa become clear. This is the dynamic aspect of the same pleasure. It explains the various kinds and sub-kinds of one and the same Rasa. All this becomes very clear when the different levels of the Bhakti Rasa in the school of Bengal Vaişnavism are taken into consideration. 3. Different Kinds of One and the Same Rasa on the Basis of the Alambana Vibhavas. (Vişaya and Aśraya)

The writer of a literary work aims at the production of particular kinds of pleasure in the hearts of the sympathetic persons. In other words, he chooses particular Rasas which he depicts in his work. The latent impressions, that is, the

445

Sthāyibhavas in the form of the Vāsanās are then provoked in those sympathetic persons but this is done through the particular Ālambana Vibhāvas which De depicts appropria- tely in his work. These Ālambana Vibhāvas may, there- fore, be said to determine the kinds and the subkinds of that pleasure, that is, Rasa. This position will be ere now clear. The Śrngāra Rasa is generally accepted to be of two kinds : the Sambhoga ( love in union ) and the Vipralambha ( love in separation ). Śāradātanaya mentions a third kind also, viz. the Ayoga (love in the absence of union ).1 That these kinds have obvious reference to the presence of the Visaya before the Āśraya or their mutual absence or their mutual disagreement even in presence of both the parties stands without any doubt. The second kind, that is, the Vipra- lambha, is generally recognized to be of four kinds : the Pūrvarāga ( affection beforetheir meeting ), the Māna (pride), the Praväsa (one party going away) and the Karuna(pathos). Mammata, however, enumerates five kinds which come under one or the other of these four. On the other hand, the fourth kind here has not at all been considered by him. The Pūrvarāga corresponds to the Ayoga of Śāradātanaya. It has ten stages of love, the final being the Marana which, however, is not described for fear of obstructing the realiza- tion of Rasa. These stages refer to the mental or physical conditions ( sometimes resulting even in outward activities ) of the Ālambana Vibhāvas. The Māna is the Kopa ( anger ) born of either the Pranaya (love) orthe Irsyā (jealousy ) which both refer to the inner conditions of the Ālambana Vibhāvas. The Praväsa refers to the absence of either party due to departure to a distant place on account of some work, curse

1. B. P. line 14. p. 85.

446

etc. The Karuna Vipralambha refers to the disappointment and dejection of one at the death of other who, however, is restored to life. Rudrabhatta mentions this kind but explains it differently. According to him it occurs when one of the parties is dead and the other being grieved so much as to be almost dead laments and bewails out of deep affectionate love for the dead.1 He further says that some may mistake it for the Karuna Rasa but it ought to be avoided on the ground that here the pair stands on the basis of the Rati and the union is desired.2 This kind, that is, the Karuna Vipralambha, is not mentioned by most of the writers. Rudrabhatta also mentions the two kinds : the Prachchhanna ( concealed ) and the Prakāśa ( open ), of the Śrngāra Rasa.3 They, too, have obvious reference to the Vibhavas. The Hasya Rasa is at first divided into the Atmastha and the Parastha. Bharata defines the first as when the character laughs by himself and the second as when he makes others laugh. Abhinava, however, agrees to the definition of the first and explains the second as that when the character seeing others laughing laughs by himself without seeing the Vibhävas etc. And he says that even those who have seen the Vibhavas but have not laughed being of grave and serious nature do laugh when they see others laughing.4 Each is again divided into six kinds : the Smita, the Hasita, the Vihasita, the Upahasita, the Apahasita and the Atihasita. The first and the second have reference to the characters of high status, the third and the fourth to those of middle status

1. S. T. II. 60. 2. Ibid. II. 62-64. 3. Ibid. I. 22. 4. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 313-317 (with Com.).

447

whereas the fifth and the sixth to low characters. Some recognize only three kinds instead of the above six. For instance, the Hasita is mixed with the Smita.1 But Abhinava leaves this view aside as he says it will occupy a wide space.2 Each kind is, thus, limited to the Vibhävas in each of whom the Hāsya reaches a particular stage of sublimation. The Hasya of which the Hasa is the Sthāyibhāva may be said to reach the six stages ; but they are reached only in the appropriate Vibhavas. Hence it may be concluded that the determining factors are the Vibhāvas. The Raudra Rasa as said before has a special reference to demons who are by nature given to anger. They have many arms and faces, standing, scattered and yellow hair, red fearful eyes and fearful black forms. Hence whatever they do is fearful (Raudra). It is, therefore, said that the Raudra Rasa is theirs. Other Rasas as the Śrngāra is relished by them by force. The Raudra Rasa is said to be relished by those characters also who have nature similar to theirs. Evidently the Raudra Rasa has reference to the Vibhāvas.3 The Vira Rasa is generally regarded to be of four kinds though the author of the Agnipurana regards it to be of three kinds only as the Dayavira4 is excluded. The four kinds are the Dānavīra, the Dharmavīra, the Yuddhavīra and the Dayāvīra. These have reference to the Āśraya Vibhāva. The other kinds recognized by Paņditarāja. Jaganātha have reference to the Vibhāvas.

1. N. S. (G. O. S.). VI. p. 316 (Com.). 2. Ibid. VI. p. 318 (Com.). 3. Ibid. VI. pp. 322-323. 4. A. P. 341. 14.

448

Some Rasas are also differently classified. The Śrngāra is of three kinds according as it is produced from words, dress and activities. All these three have reference to the Vibhavas. The Hasya and the Raudra are also of three kinds each according as it proceeds from the parts of the body, dress and words. All these have reference to the Vibhāvas. The Karuna is of three kinds according as it originates from the breach of the Dharma, loss of wealth or sorrow. That each has reference to the Vibhāvas ( the second may be the Vibhāva by itself ) goes without saying. The Bhayänaka is of three kinds proceeding from the pretext ( Abhinava explains it as the Krtaka, that is, the affected ), the fault and the fright. The three have obvious reference to the Vibhavas. The Bībhatsa is recognized as of two kinds ( some mention that it is of three kinds though no difference in texts occurs ) as the abhorrent proceeding from stools, worms etc. and the agitating proceeding from blood etc. They are the Vibhävas themselves. The Adbhuta Rasa is of two kinds : the divine (proceeding from the sight of the divine beings and objects ) and that proceeding from joy. Here, too, they either are the Vibhävas or have reference to the Vibhavas. Thus in all the above cases it is the Vibhāvas which determine the kind.1 In the Bengal Vaisnavism the different kinds of the Bhakti have come into being because of the difference in the Vibhavas. The set of the Gauni Bhakti is the secondary one. As said before it is in two ( the Raudra and the Bhayā- naka ) of the set that Krsna's opponents can also be the Vişayas. In the Bībhatsa Krşna is not the Vișaya at all, but

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. 97-102.

449 the body, impure objects etc. become the Visayas. The Hāsya here, too, has six kinds. The thing worth notice is that the Vihasita etc, are possible here even in cases of persons occupying high position.1 Here the determining factor is the Vişaya. In the Vīra Rasa where Krsna is the Vișaya, the Aśraya determines the four kinds by being the Yuddha- vira (where Krsna or at his will his substitute is the rival in the mock fight), the Dānavīra (who is again of two kinds: the Bahuprada, that is, who gives much, all his belongings and even himself for the pleasure of Dämodara ; and the Upasthitadurāpārthatyāgī, that is, who does not accept even the boon being granted by Hari ), the Dayāvīra who with his heart melting with pity gives in bits his body to Krsna who is present in disguise (here one case is to be distinguished as that of the Dänavira when such offer is made with due insight into the concealed form of Krsna), and the Dharmavira who is ever engaged in the Dhārmika activities merely to please Krsna.2 In the Karuna in which, however, no kind is recognized, three kinds of the Visaya and three kinds of the Āśraya have been mentioned. It is also stated that the intensity or the mildness of the Soka is due to the intensity or the mildness of the Rati3 ( which, however, depends upon the Aśraya). Same is the case with the Raudra Rasa where the Visaya is also of three kinds and the Asrayas are many. The Krodha assumes three forms with reference to three different persons. The Kopa, the Manyu, and the Rosa are with reference to the enemy, the

1. R. H. S. 11-12. p. 437. 2. Ibid. pp. 444-455. 3. Ibid. p. 458. 29

450

relations (venerable, equal or lower in status ), and the beloved respectively. The last one, that is, the Rosa is a Vyabhichāri- bhava.1 The Vibhavas, thus, are evidently the determining factors. The Bhayānaka Rasa has no sub-class. Its Vișayas are of two kinds. The Bībhatsa, too, has no subdivisions. The Visayas are blood, pus and such other impure objects whereas the Āśrayas are the calm and tranquil persons. Thus it is the Vibhävas which determine every kind and subkind in all the Gaunī Bhakti Rasas. In the Mukhya Bhakti Rasas the position becomes clearer still. The Mukhya Bhakti Rasas are of five kinds : the Sānta Rasa, the Prīti Rasa, the Preyan Rasa, the Vatsala Rasa and the Madhura Rasa. Rūpa Gosvāmī himself throws a hint in the com. in con- nection with the order of intensity or excellence of these kinds2 and makes the hint quite clear in the text itself when enumerating them3 The ascending order of excellence recognized by the author is as given above. In the Śānta Rati the Visaya is the Chaturbhuja Hari and the Asrayas are the Atmārāmas (those experiencing delight in the self as Sanaka etc. ) and the Täpasas ( the ascetics who seek salvation through the Bahkti ). As the Visaya here is Hari who is the Paramātmā, the Parabrahma etc. and as the Āśrayas are those experiencing delight in the self and the ascetics with the desire of attaining salvation through the Bhakti, naturally the Rati is to be of a lower order. The second kind, that is, the Prīti Rasa, is of two kinds according as the Āśrayas are the Dāsas (servants) or the relations (inferior and to be fondled). Many are the kinds and the sub-kinds of the servants and

1. R. H. S. 16. p. 465. 2. Ibid. p. 113 Com. 3. Ibid. 96-97. p. 30.

451

the relations described by Rūpa Gosvāmī. The Prīti in the Däsas is the Sambhrama Prīti in which Krsna in his Dvibhuja or sometimes even the Chaturbhuja form is the Vişaya. It reaches different stages viz. the Preman, the Sneha and the Räga with sub-kinds in the different kinds of the Āśrayas among the Dāsas.1 Some object to this kind of the Bhakti being recognized as Rasa as they count it only as a Bhāva. Rūpa Gosvāmī silences them by pointing out abundant instances of it in the Bhägavat.2 The Prīti in those to be fondled is the Gaurava Prīti where Krsna is the Vișaya and the Ārayas are the Kanisthas ( younger brothers ) or the Putras (sons). Here also the Prīti attains different levels, viz. the Preman, the Sneha and the Räga with sub-kinds as in the above case. These different levels have, no doubt, obvious reference to the Vibhavas. The third kind, the Preyān Rasa, has the Dvibhuja Hari as the Visaya and the companions as the Āśrayas. The Ārayas have been divided into kinds and subkinds. The Visrambhātmā Rati,3 that is, the Rati in which there is the sense of confidence, is called the Sakhya Rati. It has stages as the Pranaya, the Preman, the Sneha and the Räga. Here also these stages are reached as shown previously in the different Āśrayas. The fourth kind, the Vatsala Rasa, has Krsna as the Visaya and the elders as the Asrayas. The Asrayas are arranged in order of ascending excellence. Many of them have been counted as the Vrajeśvara and the Vrajrājñī or the Vrajeś- varī, Rohiņī, Kuntī, Sāndīpanī etc. Among them the first

1. R. H. S. pp. 341-344. 2. Ibid. 61-63. p. 355. 3. R. H. S. 54-56. p. 386.

452

two stand formost.1 Here also the Vātsalya Rati attains its culmination in Yasoda.2 Does it not clearly show that the Vibhävas are the determining factors ? The author makes a remark which proves more the importance of the Āśraya Vibhava. He says that in cases of the Priti and the Preyān if the Rati of Hari is not cognized, it will not be properly matured. It can be inferred from this that there should be co-operation between the Visaya and the Asraya. In case of the Vätsalaya Rati, however, it is not so.3 Even in the absence of the above cognition the Vätsalaya Rati stands as no impediment comes. It is, therefore, a position con- firming the importance of the Āśraya's capacity and intensity of emotions. This becomes quite clear in the fifth kind, the Madhura Rasa, in which Krsna is the Vişaya and his beloved the Asrayas. The Asrayas are of many kinds as described in the Ujjvalanīlamani. The Madhura Rati as the Sthayibhāva here attains various levels in different Aśrayas. As the Asrayas are his beloved they may be the Sādhāraņī ( courtezan ), the Svīyā (wife) and the Parakīyā (maiden or married woman). In the first, that is, the Sādhāraņī, the Rati may be Sādhāraņī ( general ) as in Kubjā. It is like the Mani (gem) which the com. explains as available to others also by efforts. This Rati arises only at the direct sight of Hari, is not very deep and is actuated by the desire of enjoyment for self. And as this desire gradually dis- appears it also shares the same fate. It, therefore, reaches only the Preman stage. In the second, that is, the Svīyā, the Rati may be Samañjasā ( well-proportioned ). Here the

1. R. H. S. p. 397. 2. Ibid. 25. p. 407. 3. Ibid. 28. p. 424.

453

feeling of husband and wife exists. Because of the relation of husband and wife, adherence to codes of morality and worldly behaviour exists. It is deep. Here the desire of enjoyment merely for self is not the actuating motive. The enjoyment is as much for Krsna as for self. It is like the Chintämani which the com. explains as attainable by others than the queens with a great difficulty by virtue of great luck. It rises upto the Anuräga stage, that is, after the Preman stage it ascends the Sneha, the Māna, the Pranaya and the Raga stages. In the third, that is, the Parakīyā, the Rati may become Samartha ( capable ). The Rati is the deepest here. Here the efforts of the Gopīs are entirely for the pleasure of Krsna, no idea of self-enjoyment is entertained. Hence it is that Krsna is ever at their beck and call. The Rati in them reaches the final stage, that is, the Mahābhäva.1 It is like the Kaustubhamani hence not attainable by any other than the Gokuladevīs. The above stages from the Preman to the Mahābhāva require a little dilation, giving them only in their essence, for clarifying the position. That these various stages of the Rati attained by them do mark its intensity is clear. The first stage, the Preman, is the bond of emotion ( Bhäva ) between youthful persons which is not to be destroyed even in the presence of the cause of destruction ; it is of three kinds, viz. the Praudha, the Madhya and the Manda according as it is mature, middling and slight. The author, Rūpa Gosvāmī, defines these kinds in two ways. The second stage, the Sneha, is the Preman sublimated ; it causes melting of the heart. At its rise no satisfaction is had from sight etc. It is of three kinds, viz. the Kanistha ( lowest ), the Madhyama

1. R. U. M. 37-51. pp. 335-341 (with Com.).

454

( middling ) and the Śrestha ( best ) according to its intensity. The Sneha may be the Ghrta-sneha where there may be constant fondness and honour and where other emotions ( Bhävas ) are mixed. It has no taste of its own. It is so called because it solidifies like Ghee ; or the Sneha may be the Madhu-sneha characterized by too much fondness. It is like honey and produces its own sweetness. The third stage is the Mäna where the Sneha reaches excellence and a new sweetness. It, however, causes repulse as emotion becomes excessive. It is of two kinds ; viz. the Udātta and the Lalita. The Udätta is the Ghrta-sneha getting thicker whereas the Lalita is the Madhu-sneha having tortuousness, accessible to heart, free and sportive. The fourth stage is the Pranaya where the Mana comes to have confidence. Its form is described by the wise as the Visrambha ( confidence ) which is of two kinds, viz. the Maitrya ( friendship ) where the Visrambha is mixed with humility, and the Sakhya ( fellowship ) where the Visrambha is free. from fear. Mixed with the Udatta and the LalitaMana, each of the above two may again be of two kinds ; the Su-maitrya ( good or solid friendship ) and the Su-sakhya ( good or close com- radeship ). The author says that some Pranaya arising from the Sneha may become the Mana or the Mana arising from the Sneha may become the Pranaya ; thus do the Māna and the Pranaya act mutually as cause and effect. The fifth stage is the Räga where the Pranaya attains excellence and sorrow is transformed and suggested as joy. The Rāga may be the Nilima or the Raktima. The first may again be the Nīlī-rāga or the Syāmā-rāga and the second the Kusumbha- rāga or the Mañjistha-rāga. The sixth stage is the Anurāga which ever experienced is ever fresh and dear. Its aspects

455

are : the Parasparavaśībhāva ( self-surrender to each other ) the Prema-vaichitrya ( otherwise called the Vipralambha ), the Aprāņinyapi-Janma-lālasābhara ( having desire for being born even as an inanimate object associated with Krsna ) and the Vipralambha-Visphūrti ( direct sight of the beloved in separation). The seventh and the highest is the Bhāva or the Mahabhāva where the realization of love is supreme. As the com. (p. 376 ) puts it, the Anuräga is cognized through its own Anuräga, hence it is illuminated. In the absence of this illumination it remains as the Anurāga and does not become the Bhava. As said before this stage is reached only in the Vrajadevīs and is called the Mahābhāva. It is of two kinds. The first is the Rūdha (where the Sāttvikas are highly excited ). It has got many characteristics both in the Sambhoga ( union) and the Vipralambha ( separation ). The second is the Adhirudha where the characteristics of the Rūdha attain a special sublimation. It is of two kinds. The first is the Modana where the Sāttvikas produce a heightened charm. It is found only in the Rādhikā group. It becomes in separation the Mohana where the Sāttvikas get more excited.1 It has got many characteristics. The second is the Mādana found beautified only in Rādhikā.2 All these stages have been entered into such details to show that the intensity of the Rati depends upon the capacity of the Vibhavas specially the Aśrayas. These various stages have been compared by the author to the various prepara- tions of the juice of the sugar-cane. The Rati develops into the Preman just as the sprout of the sugar-cane does into the sugar cane plant. The Sneha is like its juice, the

1. R. U. M. pp. 344-391. 2. Ibid 202. p. 409.

456

Māna like the Molasses (Guda), the Pranaya like the Khanda ( a little refined form of the molasses ), the Raga like the sugar, the Anuräga like the white sugar and the Mahābhāva like the sugar-candy.2 It has to be noted here that each stage is sweet but gradual refinement and thickness become perceptual. The qualitative difference in the Rati rising to so many stages has reference to the various Aśrayas who in their turn reflect the qualitative stages. As in the poetics so here also the Madhura Rasa is of two kinds : the Vipra- lambha and the Sambhoga. The first, the Vipralambha, takes place when one is absent resulting in the other's pining or even when both are present but mutual reciprocity is lacking. It is, therefore, of four kinds : the Pūrvarāga, the Māna, the Prema-vaichitya and the Pravāsa. The first arises before the meeting of the lover and the beloved. It may arise from many factors as hearing of the lover's quali- ties and merits, seeing him in a picture etc. The Pūrvarāga may again be of three kinds : the Praudha, the Samañjasa and the Sadhärana. These kinds have reference to the three kinds of the Rati, viz. the Samartha, the Samañjasa and the Sādhāranī described before. The various stages to which these kinds attain have been graphically described. It has been suggested in the end that the sequence of Hari's love also is the same. This may imply that the Visaya Alambana is also conditioned by the Aśraya Alambana wherein are represented both the qualitative and the quantitative aspects of the Krsna-Rati. The second kind, the Mana, is the affectionate jeaslousy when the lover and the beloved even present are not responsive. Its seat is the Pranaya. It has kinds and sub-kinds. In the end the remark is made that the

1. R. U. M. 53-54. pp. 342-343 (with Com.).

457

various degrees in the Mana depend upon the variety of the factors ( Hetus ) bringing it about. These have always reference to the Vibhävas. The third kind, the Prema-vai- chitya, occurs when due to the excellence of love the lover and the beloved even though together think of separation. The fourth kind, the Praväsa, occurs when separation is caused due to the departure of the lover to a distant place. The departure may be the Buddhipūrva due to some work which is known or the Abuddhipürvaka which is unforeseen. It may be due to compulsion or dependence ( Pāratantrya).1 Rūpa Gosvāmī devotes one section to the condition which he calls the condition of both union and separation.2 Here he says that the various kinds of the Vipralambha are only with reference to Krsna and his beloved as those kinds become expressed and manifested in this world. In their other aspect, that is, that which is hidden and concealed, no separation takes place. It is a case where union is ever existing. After finishing the consideration of the Vipra- lambha which is considered necessary for the excellence of the Sambhoga, the Sambhoga comes forward for consideration. The author describes it in its various kinds and sub-kinds, devoting one separate section each to its two principal kinds : the Mukhya3 and the Gauna.4 The Mukhya is of four kinds, viz. the Samksipta, the Sankīrna, the Sampanna and the Rddhimat according as it pacifies the longing caused by the Pūrvarāga, the Māna and the Pravāsa (in its two aspects, the Buddhipūrva and the Abuddhipūrvaka ). Of

1. R. U. M. pp. 415-458. 2. Ibid. 458-460. 3. Ibid. pp. 467-475. 4. Ibid. pp. 483-497.

458

the above kinds the third, that is, the Sampanna, has two sub-kinds : the Agati and the Pradurbhava. The fourth kind represents the highest stage. The Gauna is of two kinds : the Chhanna (covert) and the Prakāśa (overt), but as they do not lead to any pleasure they do not merit des- cription. Does this not clearly imply that this kind is not of as excellent an order as the Mukhya ? The author, how- ever, devotes sufficient space to its details in dealing with its kinds and sub-kinds. All these various details have been dealt with to show that it is the Vibhavas which are the determining factors in different kinds and sub-kinds of one and the same Rasa. The conjoined operation of the various factors leads to the particular Rasa in the spectator or the reader when he has established his identity with the Āśraya, Alambana. The spectator will relish Rasa at the same level at which he is one with the Āśraya, who, how- ever, is represented here in the universalized aspect and not in the particular one. The pleasure experienced is on the analogy of the beverage where the taste is not of any parti- cular ingredient but of all of them as one whole. Bharata gives the invariable concomitance of the Bhava and Rasa when he says that no Rasa is without the Bhava and no Bhava without Rasa. One brings about the accomplish- ment of the other when a representation is held. Just as the conjunction of the taste-giving elements and vegetables with food imparts palatableness to the latter, so do the Bhävas and Rasas render each other relishable.1 With a view to settling as to which produces the other Bharata in the sixth chapter of the N. S., before giving the above statement, starts the discussion if Rasas produce the Bhāvas

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. 40-41.

459

or the Bhavas produce Rasas. He also gives the view of others in the words that they mutually produce each other. The position can be analyzed into three parts : whether Rasas produce the Bhavas, or whether the Bhāvas produce Rasas, or whether they mutually produce each other. 4. Bhavās produce (turn or mature into) Rasas. Abhinava in the com. to Bharata's position thoroughly discusses the different points. One view requires special consideration. Those who say that Rasas produce the Bhävas advance that when a dramatic representation is given, the Vibhāvas etc. come to be so termed and before it no such technical terms are heard of. It is, therefore, that Rasas depend on the Vibhāvas etc. and the Vibhāvas etc. also depend on Rasas. The defect born of mutual depen- dence ( Parasparāśrayatva), thus, creeps in. Abhinava takes the statement of Bharata and interprets it as follows. The combination of the taste-giving elements (spices etc.) and vegetables imparts palatableness to food and vice versa, similarly the Bhävas produce Rasas which in their turn give the former such technical names as the Vibhāvas etc. The defect of mutual dependence comes in only when the verb (Kriyā) involved is the same ; where it is not the same but there are two different verbs this defect has no scope. Just as in the analogy the taste-giving elements make food sweet, sour etc. and the latter renders the former pleasurable, so do the Bhävas make Rasas relishable which in their turn give the former such names as the Vibhāvas etc. Abhinava gives one more illustration for clarification. He says that the threads viewed from the standpoint of cloth are called its causes whereas cloth viewed from the standpoint of threads is the effect. Here the mutual dependence does

460

not creep in. Abhinava is not satisfied with so much. He says that one more objection can be raised to the position establishing the Bhavas as the causes of Rasas. It is, this. If the above position is real, why has it been said that nothing proceeds without Rasa ? And, therefore, Rasas should be taken up first. Abhinava again interprets Bharata's statement which runs thus. Just as from seed grows the tree from which comes out the flower which produces fruit, so are Rasas at the root of all and the Bhavas are so termed because of them. Abhinava explains the above as follows. Rasa in the poet is the seed. The work composed is the tree of which flowers are the various activities of the Nata. The fruit is the relish of Rasa in the spectator. In this way the whole universe is full of Rasa. Those who say that the seed is the Bhava from which grows the tree of Rasa which blooms out into the beautiful representation by the Nata from which the fruit in the form of the Bhāva comes out have undoubtedly given an explanation which is not true to its nature. Thus do Bharata and Abhinava establish the relationship of cause and effect, though not of ordinary kind as seen many times, between the Bhavas and Rasas. Rudrabhatta hints at one of the illustrations given above when he says, "Just as leaves, flowers and fruits grow in the tree, so do the beautiful and particular Bhāvas in Rasa."1 Rasas do presuppose the existence of the Bhavas. If it is said that Rasas produce new Bhavas, the position is weak for pre-existence of the Bhävas which turn into Rasas has already been accepted, and the new Bhävas may only be the variegated forms of the pre-existing Bhavas or they may be

1. S. T. I. 17.

461 such Bhävas as are in one way or another connected with them. The new Bhävas, therefore, are only new products in the sense of their being permutations and combinations of old ones. They are hardly capable of producing new Rasas; the utmost they can do is to impart variety to Rasas. The Vaișnava school of Bengal clarifies the position by admitting the pre-existence or pre-cultivation of the Bhāvas already present in the latent forms of impressions as a sine qua non for the realization of Rasa. As already seen the Bhāva here has to be raised even a stage higher into the Preman capable of maturing into Rasa. Thus the pre-existence of the Bhava for the realization of Rasa has to be admitted. The above discussion in the form of Rasa as seed etc. suggests one thing for consideration. The Nata's activities in the form of representation is described as the flower from which comes out the fruit in the form of the realization of Rasa in the spectator. Does it not suggest a relationship of the activity of the Nata with the realization of Rasa in the spec- tator ? The activity of the Nata as representation ( Abhi- naya ) is nothing but the Nätya which as seen long before aims at the realization of Rasa and not at mere provocation of the Bhavas which, however, is the aim of the Nrttya. Abhinava says the same thing when he makes the dramatic representation the flower and the relish of Rasa in the spectator, the fruit. SECTION B.

Rasa-Its relation with Nātya. There is, thus, a close relation of Nātya ( dramatic re- presentation ) with the provocation of the Bhavas in the spectators and their consequent maturity into Rasas. That

462

this Abhinaya which as means has been arranged into four kinds for the provocation of the Sthāyibhāvas is necessary has been established by Bharata plainly in so many ways. In the seventh chapter in the definition of the Bhavas he says that they are the Bhavas as they bring to realization the objects in the Kävya which are present there with verbal, physical and Sāttvika aspects. A Bhāva is brought to manifestation by the Vibhavas and expressed by the Anubhāvas through verbal, physical and Sāttvika repre- sentation. Through words, physical and facial painting and the representation of Sattva the Bhava expresses the internal Bhäva of the poet. The Bhāvas are so called be- cause they bring into knowledge Rasas connected with different kinds of Abhinaya. The Vibhavas are so called because it is through them that the verbal, physical and Sāttvika representation is realized. That is to say, when the Sthāyibhava has fixed itself upon some object, the re- presentation is experienced. The Anubhāvas make one realize the verbal, physical and Sāttvika representation. Bharata while describing the different Rasas always enu- merates different expressions : facial, physical etc. through which they are to be represented on the boards. All this explains the necessity of representation. It may be said here that Bharata concerned himself with the exposition of the rules of dramaturgy and that consequently his em- phasis on the representation for the realisation of different Rasas is not necessary in all cases. In literary compositions other than dramas pleasure as Rasa is experienced by readers ; no necessity of representation seems, therefore, to be pre- sent. Hence the representation is not necessary in all cases of the realization of Rasa. The above position can be tackled from various points

463

of view. It has been said that it is the spectator or the reader who experiences Rasas ; therefore, to tackle it from the view point of the spectator or the reader deserves notice. The spectator or the reader experiences Rasa as he has in him the Sthāyibhāvas present in a latent state as the Vāsanās ( impressions ). The Yoga recognizes the presence of the impressions as the Bhāvas in four conditions : the Prasupta ( latent, that is, present in seeds ), the Tanu ( attenuated), the Vichchhinna ( intercepted ) and the Udāra (manifested). The first is the general condition in the latent state of all the impressions. The last is their manifested stage when they have fixed themselves on some objects ( Ālambanas ) and thus become expressed. The second is that stage when the Bhā- vas lose their inherent strength under the action of sub- versive forces brought into conscious play through Kriyā- yoga by persons in whom the Bhavaszexist. And the third is the stage when one Bhāva is intercepted by another, as during love anger is not seen. In order to know the reality the Yogin has to resort to various means which facilitate the above knowledge. According to the quality of the means the Yogins are classified as the Mrdu (soft ), the Madhya ( middle ) and the Adhimātra ( sharp ) and each is again classified according to the intensive aspiration (Samvega) into three kinds: the Mrdusamvega, the Madhyasamvega, and the Tīvrasamvega. Thus nine kinds have been recognized. The means applied will lose their intensity and capability as the Yogin is soft, middle or sharp. The relation between the Samvega and the Upāya (means ) is such that the deficiency of one in a mind can be adequately made up by a corresponding preponderance of the other so that even the softness of the means in the Yogin does not

464

stand in the way of his realization when the Samvega is proportionately Tīvra. Adopting this analogy in the case of the realization of Rasa the necessity of representation becomes quite clear. The representation is resorted to in order to provoke the latent Sthāyibhāvas in the spectators who are susceptible to the least external stimulus. That the Vāsanās as the Sthāyibhāvas have various degrees according to intensity and time required for their provo- cation in cases of different spectators is well known. On this basis the spectators can be divided into several kinds. But the external means is necessary in all cases though in some cases it may not be so prominent. And in a few cases the means may even seem to become internal. There are persons who do not actually see the representation but have sensibility and imagination keen enough to present it before their mind's eye. It is to help the imagination of such persons that in the Kavyas the proper arrangement of the kinds of heroes and heroines, the appropriate disposition of plot with its division and sub-division into the Sandhis and their ancillaries, the description of such factors as season, moon etc. have been enjoined. Such cases, however, are very rare. Therefore, the representation on the boards becomes the general necessity for the realization of Rasa. Hence the means whether internal or external is necessary in all cases. This explains why Abhinava calls the Nātya Rasa itself. In view of the above emphasis on, and 'inevi- tability' of, representation in various interpretations, on the lines of different systems of philosophy, put on the Rasasūtra of Bharata the question arises if Rasa can be explained accord- ing to the basic and fundamental principles of different sys- tems of Philosophy.

465

Rasa on the basis of the fundamental principles of Nyāya, Sānkbya, Advaita Vedānta, Pratyabhijñā ( Trika) Darśana and Chaitanya school of Bengal Vaişnavism. Before starting the inquiry itself the question requires to be analysed into its component parts. The Sthāyibhāva is provoked in the spectator ; it, then, matures into Rasa. This provocation, however, results from the Abhinaya. The spectator here stands aside and is not the part and parcel of the Abhinaya. He thus is a person witnessing the re- presentation ; but in order to have pleasure from the sight he identifies himself with the original characters or the actors who impersonate them. He is separate, no doubt, but according to the above position he also feels his identity with them. On the other hand, if he is actually one of the original characters, he will not experience Rasa, but plea- sure and pain according to the wordly circumstances he happens to be in. The experience, then, will be Bhoga and not Rasāsvāda, as the Bhaya, the Krodha etc. which in worldly affairs are painful are nothing but pleasurable as the Bhayanaka and the Raudra Rasas. The consideration, then, will have to be made from the view-point of the person who is quite separate and on a par with one who has reached the highest stage of the ultimate Reality. For examining the different positions in the philosophical systems he will be taken up for granted as the spectator with the Sthāyi- bhavas as the Vāsanās latent in him, otherwise no pleasure will be experienced. And before him the representation also. should go on to provoke the Sthāyibhāvas maturing into Rasas. Here the objection will at once arise as to how the Bhävas can remain functioning in the spectator when he is on a par with the person who has reached the highest Reality. 30

466

The answer is that it is to examine the above different posi- tions that this hypothesis is taken up for granted. Keeping, thus, the Purusa, who has realized, with the Sthāyibhāvas latent in him and the Abhinaya going on before him in view, it is now pertinent to start with consideration. The three sets of Nyāya-Vaiśeşika, Sānkhya-Yoga and Mīmāmsā- Vedānta are to be considered. Coming to the Nyāya, the Purușa in the liberated stage is free from all the particular Gunas, which are the basis of pleasure and pain ; he has no Bhāvas ; there is complete cessation of pain and misery; and there pleasure does not exist ( Sukhābhāva). When such is the Svarupa of the Purusa what is the scope for the realization of Rasa ? If it is said here that Iśvara may be recognized as the spectator of the whole creation, the ques- tion arises if He has got Vāsanās in Him. He is, however, recognized as the Nimitta Kärana of the creation, and is the Great Dispenser according to the previous actions of the Purușas. How can he feel interested in the creation ? If Rasa is regarded as the experience of a person not wholly liberated, consideration comes in if there are degrees in liberation-which, however, is against experience. More- over, even if such partial liberation is accepted, experience at this stage will be Bhoga and not Rasasvada. With the Sānkhya, however, the case is different. In it there are two elements which remain at the final stage. They are the Purușa and the Prakrti. The Purușa is consciousness itself (Chaitanya-Svarūpa ), above the three Guņas ( Triguņātīta ) discriminate ( Vivekī), having no objectivity (Avișayī ), particular (Viśeșa.), conscious ( Chetana ) and non-productive ( Aprasavadharmī ).1 As the Purusa is above the three

1. Sān. Kā. 11.

467 Guņas, Ānanda is absent from him, as Ānanda depends upon the Sattva Guna which here is essential to the Prakrti. The liberated Purusa has nothing to do with the Prakrti Here the Abhinaya of creation also ceases because the Prakrti realizes that the Purusa who has liberated and con- sequently experienced his separateness from her, has seen her at play.1 The Ananda aspect does not exist in the li- berated Purușa, as his Vāsanās get burnt like parched grain which has lost its power of germination. He, thus, lacks in the Bhävas, and as the Prakrti has ceased to play her role, the Abhinaya also ceases. Here again if it is said that Rasa may be experienced by partially liberated persons, the same argument as advanced above will silence the question. Under such conditions what scope is there for the realiza- tion of Rasa ? Coming then to the Advaita Vedantic position the liberated soul becomes Brahman which is His real form. He is all existence, all consciousness and all beatitude. The Ananda aspect which was absent in the Nyāya and the Sānkhya is present here. But the Bhāvas as impressions present in the spectators have all been des- troyed as the soul has become Bhāvātīta and there is no scope for any Vrtti (mental function) here. There is nothing else realized but Brahman ; Māyā at this stage ceases to function and disappears in Brahman which, thus, is the Adhikarana (locus). Māyā is not essential but ad- ventitious to Brahman which covered with it is called Iśvara. When the soul has realized its identity with Brah- man, Māyā disappears and there remains no such entity as Iśvara. Brahman and the soul become one and indivisible, no other thing existing. There is nothing to be seen and

1. Sān, Kā. 59.

468

there is no body to see. Hence though Brahman is all pleasure, yet this pleasure is not on the basis of the Vasanās, as it is the essential nature of Brahman itself. There is no Abhinaya going on for the provocation of the Sthāyibhāvas. If it is advanced here that Iśvara is the spectator of the Abhi- naya of Māyā, the objection arises that Māyā is not experi- enced as separate by Iśvara, as Iśvara is the form of Brah- man limited by Māyā in its entirety and with the Sattva predominating (Sattvapradhana Samastimayopadhika Chaitanya). Therefore to a liberated soul there exists neither Māyā nor Iśvara; the soul attains its original identity with Brahman. Hence in no case is the realization of Rasa possible. The question of Rasa-experience to a partially liberated soul does not arise here as Ananda which is the Svarupa of Brahman is realized directly in the ultimate stage only. There are no such degrees in that bliss. Any other pleasure realized before the final stage is Bhoga. This above description explains how the different in- terpreters of Rasa had realized the above positions ; they, therefore, confined themselves to the worldly plane and did not rise high upto the ultimate level as elaborated in the different systems. For example, the Naiyāyikas explained Rasa as an inferential knowledge giving pleasure to the spectators. No account was taken of the Vāsanās in the spectators. The Abhinaya was the representation given on the boards in the world. The inadequacy and insuffi- ciency of the Naiyayikas' view have already been seen in all possible details in the fourth chapter of the second part. The Sankhya view trod the same path. The Abhinaya was the representation on the boards in the world and the pleasure as Rasa was explained due to the process called the

469 Bhoga in the spectator which consisted in the predominance of the Sattva over the Rajas and the Tamas. As has just been seen the three Gunas are the attributes of the Prakrti, they were in the Purusa at the stage when he identified himself with the Prakrti, hence the spectator who enjoyed Rasa remained in the unliberated stage. Coming to the Advaita Vedāntic view, practically the same moorings to the worldly plane are to be seen. Rasa was explained as the realization of the Rati etc. along with the bliss of self which is Chit itself and from over which the sheath of ignorance has been removed temporarily due to the peculiar and extraordinary function born of the Vibhāvas etc. becoming universalized as a result of the Bhāvanā (imagination ) of the sympathetic and responsive persons to whose hearts they have appealed when recited or presented on the boards. A nearer approach was attempted when instead of making the bliss aspect of self as the qualifier and the Rati etc. as the qualified the posi- tion was reversed thus making the Rati etc. and the bliss aspect of self the qualifier and the qualified respectively. As Rasa was realized so long as the recital or the dramatic representation lasted, the removal of the cover from over the self was considered only as temporary. As a necessary corollary from this temporary removal of cover, it follows that here the ultimate aim was not to realize identity with Brahman, but only to give a glimpse into the all-blissful nature of self not in its pure and unalloyed form but as delimited by Rati etc., for all other conditions except the ultimate one were sure to be delimited by one or other fac- tors. As Rasa could be explained only in this way, attempts were made in this direction. This explains why writers like Viśvanātha call it Brahmāsvādasahodara, a relish akin to the realization of Brahman.

470

But these are not the only explanations which exhaust the meaning of the Rasasutra of Bharata. Bharata was a Śaivaite as it appears from his writings. Later writers like Abhinava and Ānanda were all Śaivaites having affinities with Kāśmīrian Śaivism of the Advaita type called the Trika system. It is then meet to see if any explanation can be given satisfactorily according to the fundamental tenets of that system. Parameśvara here is all consciousness and bliss. He is Kartā (doer ); He is Svatantra ( free ). He has Chit ( consciousness ), Ānanda ( bliss ), Ichchhā ( will ), Jñāna ( knowledge ) and Kriyā (action ). According to the Trika system the five kinds of supersensuous and supernatural beings, in no way connected with body, senses, vital airs, intellect or mind, are designated according as each of the above five powers predominates in each. They are Sām- bhava, Śaktīśa, Mantramaheśvara, Mantreśvara and Mantra.1 In the evolution, however, all the above powers of Para- meśvara are present and one manifestsation differs from another according as one power or another is predominant. Thus Chit predominates in Śiva. In this state the experience, if at all, is pure 'I'.2 This state is like that of the indeterminate contemplation ( Nirvikalpaka Samādhi ). Self conscious- ness and object are manifestations which come out later on. Siva here is pure. In order to have consciousness of the above manifested Śiva, Śakti is counted as the second mani- festation. This Śakti is called the Chit Sakti and it evolves simultaneously with Śiva from Parameśvara. At this stage the experience is 'I am' and in it Ānanda predominates.3

1. A. H. P. S. p. 235. 2. Ibid. pp. 239-240. 3. Ibid. pp. 240-241.

471

In the third category, that is, Sadāsiva Ichchhā predomi- nates. Here Ichchha has some objective reference but the object is not so distinct as in the later stage. The ex- perience of the beings of this Tattva is 'I am this '1 where 'this' represents the universe very indistinctly. This stage represents the transition from the unaffected state of Siva and Śakti to that of Iśvara wherein due to the predominance of Jñāna the objective element becomes distinct. In it this objective element becomes so predominant that even in its experience the emphasis comes to be attached to it. The experience is 'This I am'.2 The fifth category is the Sadvidyā where Kriyā predominates. In this stage the experience is 'I am this' marking an even and equal importance to both 'I' and 'this'3. It has to be marked that here the objective element is not so vague as in the Sadāśiva stage, nor so pre- dominant as in the Iśvara stage but it is evenly balanced. This is the order of evolution from Parameśvara. At the time of merging of the above stages into Parameśvara the process is reversed and the universal beings classed as Mantra, Mantreśa, Mantramaheśa and Śiva (Śakti being taken along with Śiva) belonging respectively to Sadvidyā, Iśvara, Sadāśiva and Śiva-Śakti Tattvas have to pass through the successive stages. The experience of the Tattvas realizing themselves as the universal beings which they really are is free from all limitations. This is pure creation. The impure creation begins with Māyā which breaks the unity of the Universal self in that diversity is manifested by it independent of any external help or prompter4 as opposed

1. A. H. P. S. p. 241. 2. Ibid. p. 242. 3. Ibid. pp. 242-243. 4. Ibid. p. 244.

472

to the pure creation where in the above mentioned five manifestations of the Universal self the objective universe is purely ideal and realized in its real aspect. This is Mayā. It is the power which conceals the real nature of the Universal self. It is also the cause of all limited mani- festations. Its second aspect is effected by its products : Kalā, Vidyā, Rāga, Kāla and Niyati. The Universal self under the influence of the above Māyā assumes countless forms of limited selves. The Universal self thus comes to be covered with five products of Mayā which counted together with Māyā are called the six covers ( Kañchukas ). Moksa, that is, self-realization according to Trika is nothing but self-recognition ( Pratyabhijña). The self recognition here may be explained as the act of recall of, and reunion with, the former states of consciousness. Therefore, when the Purușa has recognized his former self as Parameśvara, he has attained self-realization. Rasa according to the Trika system can be explained thus. When the soul is restored to his original divine status of Siva, he has a vision of his own self which repre- sents a playful self-delight of the absolute as Śiva and Śakti. This vision is Rasa-Sākşātkāra. 'Sakti is the divine Nature which supplies the ground of Siva's realisation of His own- self,' as Das puts it.1 It is said that Maheśvarānanda 'describes the "Sakti principle" as that slightly swelled up aspect of Siva in which he possesses the tendency of visuali- sing (Ikshitum ) maintaining ( Sthätum ) and projecting the world while experiencing the most supreme felicity of joy which he feels by feasting, as it were, upon his own self ( the triangular heart ) sweetened by the honey of the spon-

1. S. D. P. p. 61.

473

taneous outburst of his inner content of joy.'1 Hence nothing but pleasure is experienced. The Purusa when he has recognized his original nature as Parameśvara realizes Rasa when he is in the Siva state watching from there the Abhinaya which is going on in the form of the world. Thus Parameśvara is the actor ; He is also the spectator of His own roles. Siva as the spectator has also the Bhāvas as Śakti is essential to Him. Śiva is called Nātyakartā, Națavara, Națarāja and Mahānātyaviśārada. The very first stanza uttered by the Sütradhāra in the beginning of the Mattaviläsa Prahasana well depicts these different con- ditions and attitudes of Siva as He is described therein as the dancer, the spectator etc. Rasa, thus, can be explained on the basis of the fundamental principles of the Trika system. There was no question of partial or total liberation here. As Śiva was the symbol of everything in the universe, every position could be explained well. In the dramatic repre- sentation in the world the pleasure which is experienced by the spectators is, thus, devoid of pain even when painful scenes are being enacted. The pleasure as well as the pain are both relished as nothing but pleasurable. This pleasure resulting from witnessing a dramatic representation is Rasa. It is a universalized pleasure and it is pure because tempo- rarily the spectator is on the level of pure Siva experiencing pure 'I' as said above. Rasa can also be explained on the basis of the fundamental principles of the Bengal school of Vaisnavism connected with the Chaitanya Movement. The Supreme Reality,

1. S. D. P. p. 62.

474

Bhagavān, is described here as possessed of infinite powers ; out of these three are most prominent. They are the Svarūpa Śakti, the Tatastha Śakti and the Māyā Śakti.1 The first is the very form of Bhagavan and is called the Chit Sakti or the Antarangā Śakti ( essential ). Though it is of one form, yet as Bhagavān is Sat, Chit and Ānanda it manifests in triple forms : (1) Sandhini, through which Bhagavān Himself exists, makes others exist and pervades time, space and every object ; (2) Samvit, through which Bhagavān knows Himself and makes others conscious and (3) Hlādinī, through which Bhagavän delights Himself and makes others delighted.2 Through the Tatastha Śakti infinite entities as Jīvas delimited in nature and Anus in dimension, come into being. The Māyā Śakti which is also called the Bahirangā Sakti is responsible for the manifestation of the universe. Therefore, the Universe as manifested is eternal and indestructible.3 According to this school Bhagavān Krsna who is the Supreme Reality carries on His Līlā which is either unmanifested (Aprakata) or manifested ( Prakata ). In the unmanifested Līlā Vrndāvana and other places remain as eternal where the Gopīs as Rādhā, Chandrāvalī etc. are the eternal consorts of Śrī Krsna.4 The consorts and the retinue of Śrī Krsna have been described in the Padmapurāna.5 In the manifested Līlā, however, the con- ditions of union and separation obtain though in the un- manifested Līlā there is eternal union. In this manifested

1. Viş. Pu. VI. 7.61. 2. Ibid. I. 12.68 ; B. V. S. R. pp. 39-40. 3. Viş. Pu. I. 22.60. 4. R. H. S. p. 392 ; R. U. M. pp. 458-460; Pa. Pu. IV. 74. 5. Pa. Pu. IV. 69 & 74.

475

Līlā the Srutis.1 the Munis,2 the Upanisads3 etc. who had constant incessant and deep-rooted devotion to Śrī Krsna incarnate as His beloved. In the unmanifested Līlā the Śrutis and the Munis have also been described as His beloved.4 The different Sādhakas and Siddhas ( Samprāptasiddhayas and Nityasiddhas ) are conceived as possessed of various degrees of Samvit and Hlādinī Saktis. Both these aspects are necessary, because in the absence of Samvit pleasure will not be experienced, and in the absence of Hlādinī the cognition will be pure consciousness. But the Samvit finally merges into the Hlādinī as in the case of Rādhā who is represented as Hlādinī ncarnate.iSheis called the rAoot- form (Mūlaprakrti). The Āśrayālambana Vibhāvas of the Śānta Rasa here are the Atmārāmas ( those delighting in self) and the Täpasas ( who think of Mukti through Bhakti). That they have, no doubt, more of the Samvit and less of the Hlādinī is clear. Such consorts of Śrī Krsņa as Rukmiņī do not attain the stage of the Mahabhava reached by Rādhā, though the Hlādinī Sakti is recognized in the former. It is in Rādhā, therefore, that the highest love is attained. She is called the Hlādinī incarnate. The above position of the Gopīs has been made clear in the com. where they have been established on the authority of the Brahma-Samhitā as filled with bliss and consciousness ( Anandachinmayatvena Sthapitah ). That these different kinds of the Sādhakas and the Siddhas have these two Saktis is borne testimony to by the fact that the Bhava which as the Rati attains different levels in them has been described as consisting of the grace 1. R. U. M. p. 15. 2. Ibid. p. 52. 3. Ibid. p. 53. 4. Pa. Pu. IV. 74.103.

476 of the Mahāśakti explained in the com. as the Hlādinī ;1 again the Rati is identified with the Great Bliss ( Paramānanda) explained in the com. as the Hladini.2 The countless Jīvas come into being through the Tatastha Sakti. They are delimited in nature and Anus in dimensions as said before. A Jīva is explained in the com. as 'Sachchidānanda Īśvara connected with the Hladini and the Samvit but covered by Avidyā, hence the mine of a multitude of troubles.'3 The Avidyā is the Māyā Śakti of Bhagavān. When, there- fore, the Jiva thinks that liberation is to be attained through the Bhakti of Bhagavan or when even without paying any thought to liberation the Bhakti to Bhagavan is made the aim, and when through the Sadhana Bhakti or the grace of Bhagavan or of His devotees etc. the Bhavas arise in him, it is then that the Samvit and the Hlādinī Saktis begin to be manifested in him. Avidyā, then, has no scope. The Jīva at that time gets an access to the sports of Bhagavān ( Bhagavallīlā ) and enjoys Rasa. The Jīva is liberated from Avidyā but he is fully devoted to the duties of Bhagavān. The Hlādinī Śakti in him is the pleasure realized from different sports of Bhagavän. In the dramatic representation of the world the spectator witnessing the representation gets nothing but pure pleasure, as at that time the Bhäva as the Hlādinī Śakti arises in him and he is momentarily free from Avidyā. As everything represented becomes connected with the Supreme Reality which, therefore, appears uni- versal and as everything is relished because of the Hlādini Śakti of that Supreme Reality, Rasa is relished as pure plea-

1. R. H. S. 74. p. 302 (with Com.). 2. Ibid. 93. p. 308 (with Com.). 3. R. U. M. p. 61 (Com.).

477 sure. At that time his existence which is experienced as universal finally merges into pleasure. Thus it may be said that the Sandhini merges into the Samvit which in its turn merges into the Hlādinī. Thus nothing but pleasure remains.

PART THREE - RASA IN SANSKRIT DRAMA

CHAPTER SEVEN

Rasa-The predominant factor in Sanskrit Drama.

Bharata, the father of Sanskrit dramaturgy, says that there is no object, no activity in dramaturgy which is devoid of Rasa.1 Abhinava commenting in respect to the above statement says that in drama it is Rasa which runs through and through like a thread.2 This statement, therefore, may be taken as the assertion about the predo- minance of Rasa in drama. It may be objected to here that this assertion is with respect to drama only and not to other forms of the Kvya. The answer to it is satisfactorily available in Bharata and Abhinava. Bharata recognizes drama as a Kāvya;3 at some places he simply uses the word, Kāvya,4 without any such qualifying word as the Nātaka etc. as in the above case. Bharata, therefore, may be asserting the predominance of Rasa in the Kāvya in what- ever form it may be. Abhinava also gives his as well as his preceptor's view on the point. He says that Rasas are not in the Nätya only but also in the Kāvya wherein they appear as if represented, for in the latter case, according to his preceptor, they arise when the imagination is excited. He quotes the statement of his preceptor from the Kāvya- kautuka which is not available. On his own account,how- ever, he says that the Kävya is in reality in ten forms of

1. & 2. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 273 & 274 (with Com.). 3. N. S. (K. S. S. ) XVI. 148. 4. Ibid. XXIV. 49. 31

482

drama.1 It is akin to Vāmana's view which he endorses fully.2 Accepting, thus, the predominance of Rasa in the Kāvya, both Bharata and Abhinava say that it ( Rasa ) is in drama because of the Nātya which is representation. Bharata often uses the words, Nātye Rasāḥ,3 and Nātya- Rasah.4 Commenting on the first Abhinava says that Rasa is nothing but the Nätya whereas in connection with the second he says that the Nātya is Rasas. Śinga Bhūpāla also aims at the same thing though he puts it in a more emphatic form when he says that the excellence of Rasa is the life of the Natya.5 Because of the representation, the Nātya, the predominance of Rasa in drama becomes clear. Sanskrit dramas, thus, are invariably connected with repre- sentation. The realization of Rasa in the spectator ( Sahr- daya ) points the same way. In order that the spectator may be brought to an appropriately receptive attitude, such cere- monies as the Pürvaranga before the commencement of the dramatic piece proper are gone through as preliminaries. The Rangapūjā as an auspicious ceremony is mentioned by the Sutradhara in the Adbhutadarpana. In the Amrto- daya are mentioned such parts as the Pratyaharana of the Pūrvaranga. The Pūrvaranga consists of various items as already shown and its observance aims at the removal of the seven obstacles from the spectator, within and without as seen before. At the instance of the Sūtradhāra the Natī also indulges in song as in the Prologue to the Rasasadana

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. pp. 291-292 (Com.). 2. Ibid. VI. p. 288 (Com.). 3. Ibid. VI. 16. 4. Ibid. VI. 36. 5. R. S. I. 58.

483

Bhäna. This song goes a long way in making the specta- tors lose their personal element in the representation ; they at that time appear as if painted in the picture as described in the 16th stanza. The Siddhis already mentioned which are manifestations and expressions of the spectators with respect to the success of a dramatic piece when represented on the stage do nothing but point out that the appeal to the heart is complete and full. The spectators when witnessing the dramatic representation have to identify themselves completely with the original characters who become universalized. The spectators lose their individua- lity. If, on the other hand, complete identification does not take place and the spectators do not lose their individuality and do not get totally absorbed, the result is the same which Bhavabhūti depicts in the seventh act of the Uttara-rāma- charita where Rāma considers the sorrow of Sītā as due to him and feels mortified, though Sita's sorrows and miseries were then being enacted upon the stage and Rāma was there only as a spectator. Another such illustration is to be seen in the Bālarāmāyana where in the third act Sītā's marriage is dramatically represented before Rāvaņa to distract his amorous sorrow and give him pleasure. But Rāvaņa is unable to merge his individuality as a spectator ; he interrupts which results in the breach of the scene. The illustration is again to be found in the third act of the Priyadarsikā where the queen watches the drama dealing with the marriage of Vatsa and Vāsavadattā represented on the boards. Love-making, fully ardent, causes anxiety to the queen even at the reminder that it was only a play. The queen is perturbed ; her mental condition requisite in the spectator is disturbed. She, therefore, leaves the hall. Further instance is to be found in the eighth act of

484

the Adbhutadarpana where Ravana watching the illusion of war produced by Trijata gets infuriated on hearing of his being dragged by hair by Laksmana. Mahodara reminds him that it is only a Preksanaka ( show ). The predominance of Rasa thus becomes the principal aim. The Pūrvaranga etc. presuppose the existence of the stage before which the spectator sits and watches the representation of the dramatic piece going on. Because of the spectators the stage has to be in existence. The invariable connection between the spectators and the stage form the realization of Rasa is proved by the illustrations already quoted. The stage is to bring home the effect to the audience. In order that the effect may be immediate, sometimes even some of the characters are not allowed to come on the scene. They are simply suggested as determined to do an act which does not spoil the effect ( Rasa ) as in the Mrchchhakatika when the wife, the son etc. of the hero are not brought on the stage. The entry of the wife on the stage would surely have caused an interruption in the maturing of the principal Rasa wherein the hero was to be depicted firmly devoted to, and finally united with, the heroine who is not the hero's wife. Different kinds of stage are so constructed as to give in full relief the scenic view to the spectator in order that his pleasure may not be marred due to the spoiling of the effect. Yuvaraja in the 219th stanza and the following in the Rasasadana Bhāna describes the representation of some dramatic piece where the attentive attitude of the spectators and the stage are referred to. Harsa in the Priyadarśikā gives through Sankrtyāyanī the description of the theatre hall likening it to a divine aerial car in the 2nd stanza of the third act. Bharata in the second chapter prescribes the different kinds of stage in connection with persons of different

485

regions ; for example, the Jyestha Preksagrha for gods, the Madhyama for kings and the Kaniya for others.1 Then again he says that for mortals it should be 64 hands in length and 32 hands in width. He further says that this prescription for mortals is to be observed to avoid things from becoming indistinct. If, on the other hand, it is of vast dimension the words uttered will become indistinct ; the Raga also connected with emotions and sentiments will not be quite audible. In order, therefore, that the tunes and notes of the musical instruments be easily audible the Madhyama Preksāgrha is recommended.2 The prescription for gods that they should have the Jyestha Preksagrha shows that in case of gods etc. no such difficulty arose ; moreover, the representation ( Prayoga ) in their case was often violent ( Āviddha ), hence more space was required. In their case Rasas also were such as are duly depicted in the Dima, the Samavakāra, the Vyāyoga and the Ihāmrga.3 The theatre was thus constructed in appropriateness with different Rasas. Different arrangements with regard to its construction were also in reference to Rasa. For example, Śarvilaka, the theif, after having comitted theft in the house of Chāru- datta as described in the third act of the Mrchchhakatika sees Madanika, his beloved, in the fourth act. They talk of love and are watched secretly through a window ( Gavākșa ) by Vasantasena. But for this watching Vasantasena would not have given Madanikā to Śarvilaka for his wife. Indirectly it enhances the love in Vasantasena for Chārudatta as he is praised. There were prescriptions about the colour of the

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) II. 11. 2. Ibid. II. 18-21. 3. Ibid. XXXV. 35-36.

486

curtain in fitness with sentiments. 'The colour of the curtain is given in some authorities as necessarily in harmony with the dominant sentiment of the play, in accordance with the classification of sentiments already given, but others permit the use of red in every instance.'1 In respect of representa- tion different times out of day and night fixed by Bharata have been mainly considered in appropriateness with Rasa. That which is pleasing to the ears and dealing with the religious subjects is to be represented before noon. The representation here may be pure ( Suddha) or mixed and distorted (Vikrta). In the afternoon the representation should be teeming with qualities arising from the Sattva and should have plenty of musical instruments and accom- plishments ( Siddhis ). The evening representation is to be with the Kaisiki Vrtti, the Śrngāra Rasa and plenty of songs and instrumental music, whereas that intended to be re- presented in the morning is to have a subject of momentous significance, teeming with the Karuna Rasa and removing sleep. In the above description the subject-matter in the first two cases implies Rasas as the Santa, the Vira etc., whereas in the last two cases Rasas are expressly mentioned. Rasa, therefore, functions as the guiding factor. Rasas as already seen are eight or nine according to the general opinion. The Bhakti Rasa is a sentiment which assumes different forms according to the attitude of the Bhakta towards Lord Krsna. It can be included in the Rati which reaches the stage of immature Rasa, that is, the technical Bhāva, or even kept aside as a separate Rasa, though, according to its advocates, it is the universal Rasa as has been made clear in the synthesis of the Bahkti Rasa. The Bhakti Rasa of this school cul-

1. K. S. D. p. 359.

487

minates in the Madhura Rasa also called the Ujjvala Rasa in the 2nd stanza of the first act of the Vidagdhamadhava. It is called the Rasaraja in the 51st stanza of the fifth act and the Prathama Rasa in the 2nd stanza of the seventh act of the same drama. In this drama it is depicted as the principal sentiment whereas others are subordinate to it. This is obviously to make the effect unitary. Other Rasas also are taken up as principal as the Vira Rasa in the Mahavīracharita by Bhavabhūti whose germs of the Karuņa Rasa as the universal sentiment is found in slight suggestions in this very drama in such expression of Laksmaņa as ' Ïdrśoyamāpātakarunasnehassamvega ' in the fourth act, though the regular theory was propounded in the 47th stanza of the third act of the Uttararāmacharita. Kālidāsa refers to the Śrngära as the only Rasa in the 10th stanza of the first act of the Vikramorvasīya. Murāri in the Anargharäghava also hints in the seventh act at the Srngāra as the only Rasa in the 62nd stanza, and in the words as ' Śrngārasārvabhaumasya ' and 'Śrngāradevatāgar- bha .... ' just after the 89th stanza and the 107th stanza respectively. Yuvarāja in the Rasasadana Bhāņa accepts the predominance of the Śrngāra Rasa in the word' Śrngāraika- pradhäne ' which occurs just before the 216th stanza. Some- times the predominant Rasa in the particular dramatic piece is explicitly expressed as in the Bhartrharinirveda where the Sūtradhāra calls it the Sāntarasapradhāna. It so happens sometimes that even the sub-kind of one Rasa is depicted over a certain part of the whole canvas. The rest of the canvas then is occupied by other sub-kinds as Bhavabhūti in the 11th stanza of the seventh act in the Mahaviracharita makes Maheśvara say in respect of Rāma as being Yuddhavīra from the start till then after which he has to be Dharma-,

488 Dāna-, and Dayā-, vīra. This makes clear how even one sub- kind of a Rasa becomes the controlling factor in a dramatic piece. Only one Rasa running throughout is never delineated to the exclusion of others as it would then become monoto- nous and cloying even when present in its most fascinating, absorbing and complete aspects. Hence other Rasas are also depicted but they are of secondary importance only. Those other Rasas which are not incompatible with, or con- tradictory to, the principal one but are friendly to it leading to its maturity and excellence are freely used, whereas others rallying under the hostile flag are handled with care and caution. The different ways in which they are harnessed to do service to the principal Rasa should be pointed out. The Vīra Rasa in Bhīma and the Bhayānaka in the enemies as depicted in the Venīsamhāra lead well to the excellence of principal Rasa in the dramatic piece which is the Vīra Rasa. This is an illustration of the two contradictory Rasas residing in two different loci but leading to a unitary effect. Another case occurs when such contradictory Rasas reside in the same locus and lead to one whole effect as in the first act of the Nagananda where the Santa Rasa and the Śrngāra Rasa have been depicted in Jīmūtavāhana, the hero, to the total disappearance of spoiling the unitary effect by interposing the Adbhuta Rasa between them through the hero's such words as, 'Oh, the marvellousness of the song ! Oh, the fascina- tion of the instrumental music !, in respect of Malayavatī, the heroine. Yet another case comes in when in the words of Purūravas on seeing Urvaśī1 the Śrngāra Rasa is alternated with the Sänta Rasa. Though the two Rasas stand indepen- dent yet the total effect in the above case is the Śrngāra Rasa

1. K. P. IV. p. 126 (Vāmani Com.).

489

as the role of the Santa is only secondary and hence helpful. When one Rasa is accepted as principal in a dramatic piece care is taken that it is not hampered in its full development in any way. To illustrate a few cases is pertinent. In the Mahāvīracharita Bhavabhūti has made the Vīra Rasa the principal sentiment. In the second act where the Vīra is depicted growing unimpeded between Rāma and Paraśu- räma, the former's being suddenly called inside to have the wristlet (Kangana) unbound somewhat spoils the effect. This is a case in illustration of the abrupt break in a sentiment. In the Venīsamhara wherein theVira Rasa predominates the intervention of Duryodhana's amours with Bhānumatī in the second act is a case of irrelevancy spoiling the unitary effect. The naming of Rasa itself by either mentioning it directly as the Śrngära Rasa or using such general words as Rasa is defective as in the 23rd stanza of the Mahāvīracharita where Rāma gives a glowing description of Paraśurāma. It terminates with the words ' Viro Rasah.' This is a defect which, however, is not so detracting as the description amply suggests the Vira Rasa. Many illustrations are to be found in the Anargharäghava. In the 64th stanza of the second act the description of Tadaka involves the direct mention of the Bibhatsa etc. Same is the case with the description of Räma and Laksmana in the 34th stanza of the third act where the words, Santa and Vira, are used. In the 22nd stanza of the fifth act also the author uses the word Rasa in explaining how Rasa is nothing but the maturing of a parti- cular Bhäva, for example, the Soka here. But when quota- tions involving such items are given, no case of defect arises. Words and letters suggesting particlar Rasas when used inappropriately lead to the defect in those Rasas, but the defect subsides when the nature of the particular character

490 using them becomes the deciding factor as in the 22nd stanza of the first act of the Venisamhara Bhimasena, on hearing the thundering peals of war drums, questions the name of the drummer. In his interrogatory the letters and words used are suggestive of the Krodha though no such emotion of the speaker is intended to be suggested through them. The case ought to be, as a rule, a case of defect, yet on the consideration that Bhima is the speaker the rule is deprived of its scope. The mention of the Sthāyibhāva or the Anubhāva or the Sañchāribhāva directly leads to the defect in Rasa. Bhavabhūti in the 20th stanza of the first act of the Mahaviracharita uses such words as Krodha and Śoka in describing the condition of Rama at his separation from Sītā. Murāri in the Anargharāghava mentions such words as Soka in the 2nd stanza of the seventh act and Hāsa, Trāsa and Krodha in the 64th stanza of the second act. The ex- ception to the direct mention of the Sañchāribhāva occurs when it is used as the determining factor in a particular Rasa leading to its development as in the 2nd stanza of the Prastā- vanā to the Ratnāvalī where the word as Autsukya deter_ mines that the other word, Tvara, is with reference to love and not to fear etc. It thus brings about the excellence of the sentiment. The particular Rasa is, thus, made free of all defects and kept up as principal in a dramatic piece. It governs other factors which serve in a way as causes to bring it about as the effect. Realizing this very fact Ananda has said that the Vibhäva etc. must determine the arrangement of the plot whether historically actual or invented; the inadaptable portion of the historical situation is to be rejected and new one adapted to Rasa in hand invented ; the Sandhis and their parts are to be manipulated in suitablility with Rasa,it is not necessary that they should strictly con-

491

form to the injunctions of the Sästra etc. etc.1 In the above words Rasa has undoubtedly been considered as the guiding and controlling factor. Ananda in the explanatory portion mentions Bharata several times and says that these prescrip- tions equally apply to the compositions meant for representa- tion as well as to those not meant for representation. As the drama aims at the effect directly and immediately the above injunctions should, no doubt, be more carefully and cautiously followed. As the Sthāyibhāva has to depend upon a particular factor, the Vibhāva, for its provocation, the consideration of the Vibhavas as controlled by particular Rasas naturally deserves preference. This is also in con- currence with Ananda in the statement of his above position. When the playwright composes a particular dramatic piece he chooses a particular Rasa to be depicted therein as the principal sentiment. He arranges the Ālambana Vibhāvas which suit it. These Alambana Vibhāvas are shown in suitable surroundings according to Rasa to be suggested by them. That is why in dramas lovers meet in gardens, in lonely places etc., the Piśāchas roam on the crematory grounds etc. etc. These Alambana Vibhāvas are the original characters figuring in the drama. As shown before they may be fully divine, half divine, human beings etc. They are either high or middle or low in status. The gods are the divine beings, the kings are partly divine and partly human etc. What is appropriate to each of the above should be duly depicted. For instance, kings as Sātavāhana etc. have been appropriately described to have journeyed to the serpent world, for such activities are in fitness with them. The journey of Dusyanta to the divine city of Indra is quite

1. D. L. III. 10-14.

492

appropriate as he was a king of a high lineage. In the same way the carrying away of Sakuntalā to the ethereal region by her mother is quite in fitness with the state of affairs as Śakuntalā is of semi-divine origin. Urvaśī with her com- panions in the Vikramorvaśīya of Kālidāsa described as flying in air is also not depicted as doing something inappro- priate. All these do not detract from the maturity of Rasas of which they are the Vibhavas as these activities and con- ditions are suitable to them. The supernatural element can, thus, be freely used appropriately with reference to characters of particular status. On the other hand, if it is inappropriately used it leads to jarring effects and renders the particular Rasa defective. In order to depict a particular Rasa in its gradual intensification sometimes even characters not found in the basic story are created as Anasūyā and Priyamvadā in the Abhijñānaśākuntala. These two female companions further love in Śakuntalā for Dușyanta. They are her confidantes and interested, though unselfish, companions. The hero has been described to be of four kinds, viz. the Dhiroddhata, the Dhiralalita, the Dhīrodatta and the Dhīrasānta. That these also are controlled by Rasa is clear. When the senti- ments of serious, grave and lofty nature are to be depicted the hero is to be of the Dhirodatta kind as in the depiction of the Vīra, the Śrngāra ( of a serious type ) etc. When the sentiment is of a frolicking type as love intrigues of the king within his palace depicted in the Ratnāvali, the hero is of the Dhiralalita kind. Such sentiments as the Raudra have Dhiroddhata hero and the Śrngāra which is neither very serious nor very fickle has the Dhīraśānta hero. Any change in the above position will surely mar the effect, that is, Rasa. For instance, the Śrngāra of the type aimed at in the Nāțikā will not admit of the Dhirodātta hero. The love intrigues

493

rampant there will find no scope with the Dhirodātta hero as they will be inconsistent with his nature, qualities etc. It is, therefore, proper that characters figuring as heroes of different types must have surroundings etc. appropriate to them. The killing of Vali by Rama through trick would surely have stood inconsistent with the latter's character as the Dhirodätta hero. Bhavabhūti, therefore, in the Mahā- vīracharita brought about a change by making Vālī the ally of Rāvana through his minister Mālyavān, as Vālī opposes Rāma on the insitigation of this minister. This is obviously to keep the character defectless. The propriety and its observance become clear in the Śrngra Rasa which recieved wide treatment. The hero in his love relation with the heroine has been described as the Anuküla, the Daksina, the Śatha and the Dhrsta. Rāma is the Dhīrodātta hero of the Anukūla kind. He is perfectly and exclusively devoted to Sīta. The slightest departure in this relation is sure to mar the effect intended, viz. Rasa. Hence all the dramatists have been caatious in this kind. Such cases are present in the kinds as the Dhirasanta hero of the Anukūla type. Bhavabhūti's drama, the Mālatīmādhava, is an instance in point. Mādhava is exclusively devoted to Mālatī. Śrī Krsna Kavi in the ninth chapter of the M. M. C. gives under the Śrngära synthesis of Bhoja these different kinds of heroes restricted to the four phases of the Śrngāra with respect to the Dharma, the Artha, the Kama and the Moksa. In the Dharma Śrngāra, the Artha Śrngāra, the Kāma Śrngāra and the Moksa Śrngāra the heroes respectively are the Dhiro- dātta, Dhīroddhata, the Dhīralalita and the Dhīraśānta. Where the hero has many beloved he can stand in any relation with them. He can be the Daksina as Udayana in

494

the Svapnavasavadatta attributed to Bhāsa where his affection for both Vāsavadattā and Padmāvatī is depicted as balancing. He pines in the absence of one, no doubt, but does not let his mind out before the other. On the other hand, he expresses his love equally for the other. The case seems otherwise with Dusyanta whose affection for all the beloved is not expressed in such a way. This may account for the taunt flung at Dusyanta by Hamsapadikā in her song in the beginning of the fifth act of the Abhijñānaśākuntala. But the taunt may also be interpreted as an expression of love of the king for all the beloved and not exclusively to one. Hence he is a Dhīrodātta hero of the Daksiņa type. The Dhīralalita kind of hero may be of the Dhrsta type but even then he is not generally represented such as in the Ratnāvali and the Priyadarsikā where though the love intrigues of the king are fully rampant the king is shown under the control of the chief queen in whose hands completely lies the union of the king, her husband, with his new love. Thus in such cases the Dakșiņa type is preferred. The Dhīīraśānta hero may also be of the Dakşina kind as in the Mrchchhakatika where though his love is not depicted for his wife, who hardly comes in the forefront, yet absence of indifference on his part towards her and her devotion to him bear out his being of the Daksina kind. The Dhīroddhata type of character is generally in the Nātaka the antagonist as Duryodhana and Aśvatthāmā in the Veņīsamhāra and Paraśurāma in the Mahavīracharita. In case of such an antagoinst, he may not belong to any one particular kind, for example, to the Dhiroddhata kind only. He may appear in different lights in different circumstances. 'Thus Parasurāma appears in the Mahaviracharita as exalted in his attitude to the evil

495

Ravana, as haughty towards the untried Rāma, and as calm when he has experienced the superior prowess of that hero.'1 In the Dima, however, where the heroes are the gods, the Gandharvas, the Yaksas, the Rāksasas and the Uragas they are mostly of the Dhiroddhata type, for the Dima though having many Rasas aims mainly at the depiction of the Raudra Rasa as pointed out in the Avaloka com.2 in the D. R. Same is the case pointed out with the Vyāyoga wherein persons figuring are haughty ( Uddhata ) by nature.3 In the 6th Stanza in the Prastāvanā of the Saugandhikāharaņa Vyāyoga the hero is expressly mentioned as the Dhīroddhata. In the ihämrga also the hero ought to be of the Dhīroddhta kind.4 The case differs with the Vaisnava school where Krsna can be of any kind, that is, the Dhīrodātta or the Dhiralalita or the Dhirasanta or the Dhīroddhata. In love matters also He can be the Anukūla or the Daksiņa or the Śatha or the Dhrsta as pointed out before. These heroes may be the Patis (husbands ) or the Upapatis ( the lovers of the married ladies or maidens) or the Vaisikas ( lovers of the courtezans ). The heroines are the wives of the heroes or maidens or others' wives or the courtezans. In major types of drama amours of the heroes with others' wives are not depicted. They are, however, depicted in the dramas of the Chaitanya school of Bengal Vaisnavism where the Parakīyā doctrine is freely allowed on cogente arguments already given before. The heroine may be the Mugdhā or the Madhya or the Pragalbha according to her age and

1. K. S. D. p. 306. 2. D. R. III. p. 117. 3. Ibid. III. 60. 4. Ibid. III. 73.

496

adroitness in love etc. She has been further divided on the basis of love relations into eight kinds as the Svādhīnapatikā, the Vāsakasajjā etc., the ninth kind, the Pravatsyatpatikā being recognized by Bhänudatta. Some playwrights have expressly mentioned these kinds as Murāri in the Anargharā- ghava makes Mālyavān call the eastern direction the Vāsaka- sajjā1 or as Śrī Seșa Krsna mentions the word, Proșita- bhartrkā, in the 53rd stanza of the fourth act of the Kamsa- vadha or as Yuvaraja in the 24th stanza of Rasasadana Bhāņa calls Sandhyā (evening ) the Khanditā. The charm really lies in suggesting the kind as Vasantasena while going to Charudatta's house has been described as the Abhisārikā in the fifth act of the Mrchchhakatika. The lady also makes the hero come to her love appointement as Krsna is described in the 34th stanza of the third act of the Vidagdhamadhava. The ladies of importance other than the heroines are the Mahādevīs (the crowned queens ). The examples are to be found in the Ratnavali and the Priyadarsika where the final union of the hero with the heroine rests in the hands of the crowned queen, Vasavadatta. Other illustrations are to be found in the Karpūramañjarī and the Viddhaśāla- bhañjikā where the crowned queen brings about the union of the hero with the heroine after some deception and inducement though in the later play deception has more scope. Another imporatnt female figure is the Devi whose jealousy in love affairs is more prominent. Illustrations are to be found in Hamsapadikā of the Abhijñānaśākuntala and in Irāvatī of the Mālavikāgnimitra. In the Vaișņava system, however, such minor characters are to be amply seen

1. A. R. IV. 2.

497

figuring round the heroine, Radha. The heroes and the heroines have certain helping persons, male and female, in their love affairs. The most prominent among them is the Vidūşaka. His utmost importance is to be seen in such dramas as the Ratnävalī where his inadvertence discloses the king's love for the heroine but who undergoes all troubles with the heroine. In other dramas as the Karpūramañjarī the Vidūsaka is instrumental in bringing about the union of the hero with the heroine. He is, thus, a help through and through in the love affairs of the hero. In the Adbhutadar- pana he is required by the Sūtradhāra to assume the role of Mahodara, the Narmasuhrd of Rāvana. Thus he played the friend and adviser in love affairs ; here, of course, he is painted as an ally to the Pratināyaka, Rāvana, who is the hero's rival. Wherever he is felt as an obstruction to the developing love, he is cleverly removed off the scene as in the Abhijñanasākuntala towards the end of the second act. He appears again but only in course of the king's love affairs. Thus helping in the development of Rasa he so much gains the favour of the hero that any trouble to him from the external agency atonce enrages the hero. That explains why Mätali chooses him as the instrument for exciting anger in the hero. The Vidūsaka, thus, figures in the develop- ment of the Srngära Rasa even though he is to exert himself most as he does in the Mrchchhakatika. Even where the hero displays his unsusceptibility to love the Vidūșaka makes all efforts to make the hero fall in love with the heroine as in the first act of the Nagananda. The Vidūsaka just in the beginning tries, though unsuccessfully, to turn the hero towards the worldly enjoyments. Then after sometime he actually drags the hero in the presence of the heroine, 32

498

thus making love arise at first sight. The Vita and the Cheta are some other characters appearing as help in love affairs as in the Mrchchhakatika and the Nāgānanda. The hero has another help in his affairs. He is the Pīthamarda, the hero of the episode ( Patākā ) in some of the dramas. In such dramas as deal with Rāma legends Sugrīva furnishes the example as in the sixth act of the Mahaviracharita where Rāma is described by Sampāti, a monkey, as residing in the Rsyamūka on a footing of friendship with Sugrīva and Bibhīşaņa. Makaranda in the Mālatīmādhava furnishes another example. Corresponding to the Pithamarda in case of the hero the mention of the Pīthamardikā also occurs in some dramas as in the seventh and the eighth acts of the Adbhutadarpaņa Saramā is advised by Trijațā to play the Pīțhamardikā to Sītā in different Rasas. The Pratināyaka is the rival of the hero and serves as the Ālambana Vibhāva of Rasa which is, no doubt, subsidiary but which generally contributes to the nourishment of the principal Rasa of which the hero is the Alambana Vibhava. He is generally of the Dhīroddhata kind. In the Venīsamhāra Duryodhana furnishes the instance as a contrast to the hero. He is all along depicted as overbearing and haughty ( Dhiroddhata ). The second act of the same play may be explained as a desire to paint the Pratināyaka in such colours as may lower him in comparison with the hero. Rāvana in the Rāma dramas is another such instance where his inappropriate love for Sītā is depicted. Nandana in the Mālatīmādhava is the Pratināyaka of Mādhava in his love for Mālatī. In this respect Śakāra is a wonderful invention by Śūdraka in the Mrchchhakațika. Chārudatta, the hero, in his ideal love for Vasantasena is very strikingly contrasted with the mean,

499

abject, dare-devil but at the same time coward Śakāra whose professions of love for Vasantasenā are absurd and shocking to the cultured and refined taste. Chārudatta only ex- presses his attachment to, and never runs after, Vasantasenā. She, on the other hand, keeps her love tryst with Chārudatta. The case is reverse with Sakāra. He gives a hot pursuit to Vasantasenā who detests his amorous advances and keeps herself at a safe distance from him as far as possible. Ultima- tely frustrated in securing her love he even to his knowledge strangles her. What a contrast to the ideal love of the hero ! The heroes and the heroines are much helped in their love affairs by certain other characters who are males, females or those filling the neuter roles. The males are the Kañchukīs appearing in most of the plays as gate-keepers or chamber lains. The females are instanced in such characters a sthe nun, Kauśikī, in the Mālavikāgnimitra, the fellow com- panions, Priyamvadā and Anasūyā in the Abhijñānaśākun- tala, Manoramā in the Priyadarśikā, Kāmandakī in the Mālatīmādhava and Vichakșaņā in the Karpūramañjarī. Those filling the neuter roles are in charge of the inner apart- ments and engaged in accompanying the heroines etc. in their love appointments. The low characters thus helping on love between the hero and the heroine themselves become the heroes and the heroines in minor types ofdramas as in the Bhäna where the Vita figures as the hero, though he is the only character there ; and as in the Prahasanawhere very low characters figure as carrying on their amours which excite hilarious laughter due to want of propriety and decency. But they furnish instances of how particular Rasas determine the particular Vibhavas. The low character as theVarsavara as a servant in the inner apartments of the kings is seen

500

discharging this function in the fifth act of the Ascharya- chūdāmaņi in the inner apartments of Rāvana. Another low character as the Malakāra is mentioned in the second act of the Rukmiņīharaņa Īhāmrga of Vatsarāja when Priyamvada brings in the Mālatī garland for Krsna. Mention also occurs of the dwarfish, the crooked etc. in the 2nd stanza of the fourth act of the same drama. It is to be noted here that they are mentioned indirectly in connection with the hero and the heroine. All these characters amply bear out how they are controlled by different Rasas of which they generally serve either as the Alamabana Vibhāvas or as persons helping those Ālambana Vibhāvas. The heroes and the heroines, when they have been selected as the particular Vibhavas in particular Rasas, are to be shown engaged in different activities which come under the Vrttis. That these Vrttis also are controlled by Rasas has been expressly mentioned by the dramaturgists. These Vrttis are four in number as shown before. They are the Kaiśiki, the Sātvatī, the Ārabhațī and the Bhāratī. The Kaisiki is connected with the Śrngāra and the Hāsya Rasas. It concerns itself with song, dance, lovely and variegated garments and depicts love, gallantry, jokes and such other objects as are instrumental in exciting love. Its four kinds are (i) the Narma, (ii) the Narmasphiñja ( the Narmasphurja according to Bharata), (iii) the Narmasphota and (iv) the Narmagarbha.1 The first, that is , the Narma, which is full of decent sports aiming at the pleasing of the beloved,

1. In these kinds as well as in the following description Dhanañjaya has been mainly followed. Bharata (in his N. S., K. S. S.) and Viśvanātha agree with him with slight variations.

501

has three sub-kinds according as it is purely through the Hasya or the Hasya mixed with the Srngāra or the Hāsya mixed with the Bhaya. The Śrngara mixed with the Hāsya may be to express one's affection or longing for union or imputing a fault to the lover. The Bhaya mixed with the Hāsya may be pure in its being the predominant factor or [secondary in its being ancillary. Each of the above six kinds may differ according to speech, dress and movement. Thus eighteen kinds in all obtain. Dramas furnish illustrations of these kinds out of which a few may be quoted. The Hāsya Narma with respect to dress occurs in the third act of the Nāgānanda when the Vita, Sekharaka, misled by the female dress of the Vidūşaka, mistakes him for his beloved, Nava- mālikā. The example of the Hāsya Narma in respect of movement is to be found in the fourth act of the Mālavikāgni- mitra where Nipuņikā plays a trick upon the Vidūşaka by dropping upon him a stick which is taken by him for a serpent. The Narma in respect of the Bhaya is illustrated in the second act of the Ratnāvalī where Susangatā makes fun of the king by saying that she has known not only the presence of the king there but also of the picture-board along with the necessary details which she would disclose to the queen.1 Th second, the Narmasphiñja or the Narmasphurja, is pleasure-giving in the beginning but ending in a note of fear at the meeting of the first lovers. The illustration is to be seen in the fourth act of the Mālavikagnimitra where the king and Mālavikā meet together but the latter expresses

1. Keith gives a different version of this which is in conformity with that quoted in the second chapter of the D. R. Instead of the king with whom the joke is cracked Sāgarikā is mentioned there (K. S. D. p. 326.).

502

her apprehension of the queen. The third is the Narmas- phota, in which through partial manifestations of emotions affection is suggested as in the 20th stanza of the first act of the Mālatīmādhava where Makaranda describes the slight affection of Madhava for Malatī. The fourth, the Narmagarbha, shows the development of love ; the hero here puts on disguise to achieve his end as in the third act of the Priyadarsikā where the king puts on the garb of Manoramā1. The Sättvati is connected with the Vira, the Adbhuta and the Raudra Rasas. It is without sorrow and abounds in the Sattva, courage, self sacrifice, compassion and straightfor- wardness. Its four kinds are (ii) the Samlāpaka, (ii) the Utthāpaka, (iii) the Sānghātya and (iv) the Parivartaka. The first, the Samlāpaka, consists in serious dialogues full of many Bhavas and Rasas as in the second act of the Mahā- vīracharita where Rāma and Paraśurāma engage in serious dialogue full of Bhävas and Rasas. The second, the Utthā- paka, is a challenge for fight as in the fifth act of the above drama Vālī defies Rāma. The third, the Sanghātya, is the division brought about among the foes collected together through good counsel, wealth, fate etc. The illustra- tion of the breach through good counsel is to be seen in the Mudrārākasa where Chānakya through his intellect brings about a division among the characters helping Rāksasa. In the same drama is to be found the illustration of the breach occurring between Rāksasa and Malayaketu by letting the ornaments of Parvataka come into the hands of the former. The illustration of the breach through fate is to be found

1. The D. R. mentions Susangata in place of Manoramā. Haas in his translation to the above notes this error. (The Daśarūpa, New York, Columbia University Press, 1912. p. 70).

503

in the Rāma dramas wherein Bibhīșana severs his connection with Rävana. The fourth, the Parivartaka, consists in a change of the action in hand by doing another as in the second act of the Mahaviracharita where Paraśurāma who came to overthrow Rāma wishes to embrace him. This obviously detracts from Rasa of which he is the Ālambana Vibhāva. The Arabhațī is appropriate to the Bhayānaka, the Bībhatsa and the Raudra Rasas. In it the activities are teeming with magic, conjuration, war, anger, frenzy etc. Its four kinds are (i) the Sanksiptikā, (ii) the Sampheta, (iii) the Vastūtthā- pana and (iv) the Avapātana. The first, the Sankșiptikā, consists in the construction of some objects by artificial means as in the first act of the Pratijñāyaugandharāyana the use of the elephant made of mats etc. is made. Another interpretation enjoins either a change of the hero as in the Rāma dramas the substitution of Sugrīva for Vālī or a change of heart in the hero as in Paraśurāma in the 22nd stanza of the fourth act in the Mahaviracharita. It is to be kept in view here that substitution of the hero or change of heart in the hero should take place only with respect to the secondary hero otherwise the effect, Rasa, will suffer. Bharata is clearer here when he says that suitable arts are used here as also many stage properties ( elephants, chariots etc. ), and the objects aimed at are indicated briefly. The second, the Sampheta, is the angry meeting between two angry persons as that of Madhava and Aghoraghanta in the fifth act of the Mālatīmādhava. The third, the Vastūtthāpana, consists in creating some objects by magic etc. Here Bharata differs as according to him the Vastūtthäpana is that in which the representation consists of a compounding of all Rasas ; there might be fights or not. The fourth, the Avapatana or the

504

Avapāta, consists in the tumultous disturbances as in the second act of the Ratnāvalī where the monkey escapes or as in the first act of the Priyadarsika in the attack on Vin- dhyaketu. Bharata is clearer here when he says that the situation here arises from fright or delight, quick dialogue takes place with sudden flights and panic and sudden entries and exits take place. The Bhāratī is based on word ( Sabda) as others on sense ( Artha ), that is why it consists of different activities in words, mostly in Sanskrit. It is connected with the Karuna and the Adbhuta Rasas according to Bhatara whereas others connect it with all Rasas. Its kind are (i) the Prarochana, (ii ) the Vīthī, (iii) the Prahasana and (iv) the Āmukha. The Prarochana is bringing the spectators through praise of the work in hand to a receptive mood as in the 5th stanza of the Prastavana of the Ratnavali where the Sutradhara praises the poet etc. The Vithi and the Prahasana are the types of drama hence already considered. The Amukha otherwise called the Prastavana consists in the striking conversation of the Sutradhara with the Natī or the Pāripārśvaka or the Vidūșaka introducing the subject in hand. The subject is introduced through the Kathod- ghata which consists in some original character catching up some sentence or sense expressed by the Sūtradhāra and effecting the entry as in the first act of the Ratnāvali Yaugandharayana catches up the 6th stanza uttered by the Sūtradhāra and appears on the scene ; or in the first act of the Venīsamhāra Bhīmasena denounces the Sūtradhāra for his benediction upon the Kauravas uttered in the 7th stanza of the first act. The subject may also be introduced through the Pravrttaka or Pravartaka ( as Viśvanātha calls it ) which consists in the mention of the character in com-

505

parison with the season of the year as in the stanza given as illustration in the third chapter of the D. R. wherein Rāma has been mentioned in connection with the season.1 The introduction of the subject may be made through the Prayogā- tiśaya wherein the Sūtradhāra actually mentions the entry of the character as in the 5th stanza of the Prastavana of the Abhijñānaśākuntala where the expression of the Sūtradhāra admitting the fascination of the Nati's song actually mentions the entry of the king. Viśvanātha gives the above illustra- tion in connection with the Avalagita which he defines as the procedure ( Prayoga ) wherein another action occurring simultaneously is accomplished. He, therefore, defines the Prayogātiśaya as that procedure in which the introduction of another procedure effects the entry of the character as in the Prastāvanā of the Kundamālā the Sūtradhāra renders the words uttered behind the curtain as a help to his calling out the Nati, which words actually introduce Sītā and Lakşmana. He also gives one more kind, the Udghātya in which words uttered by the Sutradhara are connected with other words by the character in his own context, thus bring- ing about his entry on the stage as in the 6th stanza uttered by the Sūtradhāra in the Prastāvanā of the Mudrārākșasa. The stanza is interrupted in the fourth Charana and the words in his own context are uttered by Chānakya who subsequently enters. The Ämukha utilizes the thirteen parts of the Vithi. Bharata enumerates them as the Udghātyaka, the Avalagita, the Avasyandita, the Asatpralāpa, the Prapa ñcha, the Nālikā, the Vākkelī, the Adhibala, the Chhala, the Vyāhāra, the Mrdava, the Trigata and the Ganda2; Dhanañjaya

1. Keith cites the illustration from the Priyadarsikā. (K. S. D. p. 340). 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) XX. 118-119.

506

and Viśvanātha, however, mention them in the following order : the Udghātyaka, the Avalagita, the Prapañcha, the Trigata, the Chhala, the Vākkelī, the Adhibala, the Gaņda, the Avasyandita, the Nālikā, the Asatpralāpa, the Vyāhāra and the Mrdava.1 The Udghätyaka may be in the form of a series of either the statement of words having hidden mean- ings or questions and answers. Bharata defines it as that in which the Padas coming without context are eagerly taken hold of and joined with other Padas by characters in the drama. The Avalagita is that where other action because of simultaneous occurrence is acomplished as in the Uttararā- macharita where Sītā deciding to go to the forest for pleasure is sent into exile. The above is one kind, the other is that which marks a turn of event in progress. Bharata considers only the first kind. Viśvanātha considers them in connec- tion with the Prastāvana. The Prapañcha is a mutual com- pliment, untrue and exciting laughter as in the first Javani- kāntara of the Karpūramañjarī where Bhairavānanda praises the Kaula Dharma. Viśvanātha defines it as a dialogue which is based on false knowledge and excites laughter as the dialogue between the Vidūsaka and the Chetī in the Praveśaka of the second act of the Vikramor- vaśīya where she worms out the secret of the king's love from the Vidūsaka. The Trigata is that which admits of various meanings due to similarity of sounds ; it is to be used by the trio of actors in the Pūrvaranga. Bharata says that in the Trigata the words are exalted and distributed among the three characters in the representation. They are mixed with the Hāsya Rasa. ( That is, a whole sentence is divided up as being spoken in sections by three characters

1. D. R. III. 12-13; S. D. VI. 255-256.

507

each putting his own interpretation upon the portion he pronounces). The Chhalita ( Chhala) is deception through seemingly loving but in reality harsh words as in the 26th stanza of the fifth act of the Venīsamhāra wherein Bhīma enquires about Duryodhana. Viśvanātha notes the view of some writers who say that the Chhalita is the statement causing deception, laughter and anger uttered by some one with an end in view. The Väkkeli is either the repartee or a series of questions and answers. The first is illustrated in the 26th stanza uttered by Vasantī in the third act of the Uttararāmacharita; the second is illustrated in the first act of the Ratnāvalī in the dialogue of the Vidūsaka with Ma- danikā and Chūtalatikā in connection with the Charcharī. Viśvanātha gives it as consisting of a single reply to many questions. The Adhibala is the dialogue where one vies with the other through envy as in the fifth act of the Veni- samhāra in the violent discussion of Bhīma and Duryodhana. The Ganda is an object suddenly mentioned. It is connec- ted with what is in hand as in the first act of the Uttararā- macharita when just after the intolerableness at the se- paration of Sīta expressed by Rāma in the 38th stanza the appearance of Durmukha to bring about the separation of Sītā is announced by the Pratiharī to Rāma; and as just after the utterance of Duryodhana expressing that his thigh is sufficient to seat his wife on it in the 22nd stanza of the second act of the Venīsamhāra, the Kañchukī suddenly pronounces the words, 'Bhagnam, Bhagnam', which give just the opposite sense as they predict the impending break- ing of the thigh and the consequent insufficiency to provide a seat for his wife. Bharata defines it as consisting in dis- cussion or bondage brought about suddenly with fear or

508

calumny or through the use of many words. The Avasyan- dita is the re-interpretation of a sentimental statement made in another sense. Bharata defines it as the attribution of some sense arisen out of good and evil and creating a new sense due to ingenuity of intellect. The Nālikā is the enig- matic statement full of jokes and with sense concealed as in the dialogue between the spy and the pupil preceding the statement of Chänakya who comes to understand the con- cealed sense of the words of the spy just following the 19th stanza in the first act of the Mudrārāksasa. The Asatpralāpa is the series of unconnected and incoherent talks as the random statements of Vikrama in the fourth act of the Vi- kramorvaśīya. Viśvanātha gives one more sense which means the good counsel rejected by the fool as in the fifth act of the Venīsamhāra Duryodhana turns a deaf ear to Gandharī's wise advice. Bharata notes both these de- finitions. The Vyahara is the remark exciting laughter and desire made with some other object in view as in the second act of the Mālavikāgnimitra where the Vidūsaka's words make all the people including Mālavikā laugh, thus giving an opportunity to the king to gaze longer at her charms. Bharata defines it as consisting of conversation which allows the hero, who is present, to have a look without apprehen- sion ( that is, at the object of his love without being detected and reprimanded by his consort ). The Mrdava is the turning of evil into good and vice versa. The illustration of evils turning into merits is to be seen in the 5th stanza of the second act of the Abhijñanasākuntala where the so-called evils of hunting are extolled as virtues. These thirteen constitute the parts of the Amukha or the Prastāvana ; the Sūtradhāra, therefore, can select any of them befitting his

509

purpose and introduce the subject-matter or the character. The Vrttis thus present the Vibhavas in action. They also show how different objects are presented on the stage and how the representation is made dramatically ; they thus involve various kinds of the Abhinaya also. The fact has already been attested to by Sägaranandin who describes the predominance of one kind of the Abhinaya in each Vrtti, that is, of the Angika, the Vächika, the Sāttvika and the Āhārya in the Arabhațī, the Bharatī, the Sattvatī and the Kaiśiki respectively. These various kinds have, therefore, to be used in appropriateness to Rasas. The Kuttanīmata towards its end records the dramatic representation of the the Ratnävali, though only of the first act, in which direc- tions as regards the Abhinaya as given in the text of the Ratnavalī were followed with very slight changes ; for example, in the text of the drama it is the queen, Vāsava- dattā, herself who questions Sāgarikā as to the safety of her charge, the Sārika bird, and asks her to leave the place immediately to look after it, whereas in the recorded re- presentation it is the queen's attendant, Kāñchanamālā, who at the order of the queen does it. The Angika is concerned with the various movements and gestures of the different parts and sub-parts of the body as the head, the hand etc. and the eyes, the brows etc. The bee incident in the first act of the Abhijñanasakuntala furnishes the instance of the movement of the head etc. As Rāghavabhatta in his com. puts it, the head ought to be 'Vidhuta' which is the movement of the head described by Bharata to indicate the condition of one who has caught chill, is struck with fear, is troubled, is in fever or in hurry, has taken some intoxicant or is drunk.1

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VIII. 24.

510

At that time the lower lip ought to be quivering and the hand to be in the Patāka form defined and its use pointed out by Bharata.1 Here it is to ward off the attack of the bee. This sort of representation is described in the 21st stanza of the first act of the same play. Such representation in respect of the heroine before the hero admittedly excites his love for her. This device is also used in the Priyadarśikā in the second act, but Āraņyikā soon covers her face there with the upper garment. This device is again to be found in case of Laksmī in the first act of the Samudramathana Samavakāra. More illustrations of the movements of the head etc. are available in such instances as 'Śṛngāralajjām Rūpayati' in connection with Śakuntalā in the first act, 'Madanabādham Nirupya' with regard to the king in the third act and 'Mukhamasyāh Samunnamayi- tumichchhati. Śakuntalā Pariharati Nātyena' in the third act of the Abhijñanasakuntala. In the first illustration the head is to be in the Parävrtta2 pose, and the eyesight to be Lajjitā3; in the second the head is to be the Lolita (or Pari- lolita)4, the hand the Dola5 and the eyesight the Śūnya6; and in the third the head is to be in the Paravrtta pose, the hand to be the Tripatāka7. In such illustrations as 'Sakhyau Vişādam Nāțayitvā Parasparamavalokayataḥ' in the third act ; 'Tatah Pravisataḥ Kusumāvachayam Nāțayantyau Sakhyau' and 'Ityaśrūņi Pramrjya Nātyena Prasādhayataḥ' and 'Ubhe Natyenalankurutaḥ' in the fourth act ; the head is to be the Dhuta8 and eyesight the Visanna ;9 the hand is

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) IX. 18-25. 2. Ibid. VIII. 32. 3. Ibid. VIII. 65. 4. Ibid. VIII. 35. 5. Ibid. IX. 138-139. 6. Ibid. VIII. 62. 7. Ibid. IX. 26-31. 8. Ibid. VIII. 23. 9. Ibid. VIII. 68.

511

to be the Arala1; the hand is to be the Tripatāka ; the hand is again to be the Kartarīmukha2 when applying vermilion and the Hamsäsya3 when putting on dress respectively. The different position, movements etc. of the parts of the body are given by Räghavabhatta in the com. to the Abhi- jñānaśākuntala in cases of the above illustrations. In the texts of the dramas also such directions are to be seen as in the sixth act of the Abhijñānaśākuntala where before offering the mango blossom to Kāma ( Cupid) Madhurikā holds it in the Kapota4 hands ( Iti Kapotahastakam Krttvā) or as in the seventh act of the Anargharāghava where Sītā holds her hands in the Kapota form and offers her salutations to the Janasthānadevatās ( Smayamānā Kapotahastakam Krttvā). These are some of the illustrations which involve many kinds of movements of the parts of the body. In directions as the Janäntika the injuction that the hand should be the Tripatākā is to be observed. Bharata has given many other kinds of the shaking of the head in conn- ection with the Sthayibhavas or the Sañchāribhavas as the Parivahita5 or the Anchita6 in respect of the Vismaya and the Chinta. He describes in the ninth chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S.) the various poses of the hands when they are the Asamyutahastas, the Samyutahastas and the Nrttahastas and also their Karanas. He points out their application also. All these with many others are to be used appropriately with respect to emotions etc. In the tenth chapter he describes the various poses and movements of the chest ( Urah), the

1. N. S. (K. S. S. ) IX. 39-45. 2. Ibid. IX. 32-35. 3. Ibid. IX. 98-99. 4. Ibid. IX. 124-126. 5. Ibid. VIII. 25-27. 6. Ibid. VIII. 29.

512

loins ( Pārśva ), the abdomen ( Jathara ) and the waist ( Kati). Of the five kinds of the Ürukarma (movement of the thigh) he points out their application with respect to Rasa and the Bhävas. Of the five kinds of the Janghākarma (movement of the legs ) he also points out their application to Rasa and the Bhavas. He also describes the five poses of the feet. In the eleventh chapter he describes various simul- taneous poses of the Padas, the Jangha, the Ûru and the Kati which are called the Chārīs. Their various kinds under the Bhaumīchārīs and the Ākāśikīchārīs, the Sthānas in connection with throwing weapons etc. have been duly described. The Nyāyas, that is, various kinds of poses in connection with the throwing of various arms and weapons (in battles ) have also been pointed out. In the twelfth chapter many kinds of the Mandala which is born of the conjunctions of the Charī have been described as the Ākāśagāmi and the Bhauma each of which has many di- visions. In the thirteenth chapter the Gatis ( gaits ) with respect to the characters, high or middle or low have been described with reference to Rasas and various Bhavas. The gaits of the followers of some religious sects as the Pāsupatas or of the persons belonging to some social order as the Lingins or of the persons, young, old, demented, intoxi- cated, fat, thin, lame, dwarfish etc. or of the persons in various services as the Kañchukīs or of the persons seated on conveyances as the boat etc. or of the conveyances as the chariot or of the persons filling up neuter roles or of the males acting as females or vice versa etc. etc. have been prescribed. This is intended obviously to produce the desired effect which is Rasa. In cases where in dramas the directions are as 'Sānurāgam Anyonyam Pasyatah' where

513

Madanikā and Śarvilaka look at each other with love in the fourth act of the Mrchchhakatika or 'Sāsūyam Susangatām Ālokya' where Sāgarikā looks at Susangatā with jealousy in the second act of the Ratnavali Bharata's injunctions have to be followed. He has given different kinds of the eye- sight ( Drsti ) for Rasas, the Sthāyibhāvas and the Sañchāri- bhāvas. For the Śrngāra, the Bhayānaka, the Hāsya, the Karuna, the Adbhuta, the Raudra, the Vira and the Bibhatsa Rasas, the Drsțis respectively are the Kāntā, the Bhayānakā, the Hasyā, the Karuņā, the Adbhutā, the Raudrī, the Vīrā and the Bibhatsa1 which are duly described in details.2 For the Sthāyibhāvas, viz. the Rati, the Hāsa, the Soka, the Krodha, the Utsāha, the Bhaya, the Jugupsa and the Vis- maya, the Drstis respectively are the Snigdhā, the Hrsțā, the Dīnā, the Kruddhā, the Drptā, the Bhayānvitā, the Jugupsitā and the Vismita3 which have been duly des- cribed.4 For different Sañchāribhāvas the Drstis are di- fferent5 which, too, have been described in details.6 Differ- ent kinds of the Drstis enumerated above are amply illus- trated in Mādhava's description of different looks of Mālatī in the first act of the Malatīmadhava. This description also gives the movements of the eyebrows, the poses of the neck etc. In the 2nd stanza of the fourth act of the same drama Kāmandakī's words in description of Madayantikā's and Makaranda's reciprocal love also mention different kinds of the Drstis. The different kinds of movements of the pupils7 and of looking at things8 in expression of different 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VIII. 38. 2. Ibid. VIII. 44-51. 3. Ibid. VIII. 39. 4. Ibid. VIII. 53-60. 5. Ibid. VIII. 40-42. 6. Ibid. VIII. 62-81. 7. Ibid. VIII. 93-100. 8. Ibid. VIII. 101-105. 33

514

Rasas and the Bhavas have been described. Accompany- ing the movements of the pupils the different movements of the eyelides with their appropriate use in connection with the different Rasas and the Bhavas have also been pointed out.1 The movement of the eyeborows in accompaniment with those of the eyelids in fitness with different Rasas and the Bhavas have been duly shown2. The different poses and movements of the nose3, the different functions of the temples,4 the movements of the lower and the upper lips5, the functioning of the chin6, the actions of the mouth7, the colour of the face8 and the movements and poses of the neck9 have received detailed treatment in expression of different Rasas and the Bhavas or of different activities appropriate to Rasas and the Bhävas. In dance which is utilized in dramas various poses of the body are required. Bharata enjoins the use of the different kinds of dance given with ancillaries in the fourth chapter in connection with the Pūrvaranga10. The above kinds, however, are the divisions of the Tandava dance which is of the violent type. The other kind which is mild is the Lasya. As pointed out before it was originated by Śiva's consort, Pārvatī, and, therefore, is of mild type. The second kind of the Abhi- naya is the Vächika dealing with speech. Bharata in the eighteenth chapter of the N. S.(K. S. S.) prescribes the different kinds of dialects etc. for persons of different status, dignity and position. Any dereliction from the prescri-

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) VIII. 106-113. 2. Ibid. VIII. 114-123. 3. Ibid. VIII. 124-129. 4. Ibid. VIII. 130-134. 5. Ibid. VIII. 135-140. 6. Ibid. VIII. 141-146. 7. Ibid. VIII. 147-154. 8. Ibid. VIII. 155-163. 9. Ibid. VIII. 164-170. 10. Ibid. IV. 14.

515

ption is sure to mar the effect, that is, Rasa. For instance, the dialect of the Vanecharas is called the Vibhāsā1; if, on the other hand, they are made to speak refined Sanskrit of the sacrificial priests and kings, it will appear inconsistent. This prescription shows how every effort was made to tend to- wards the maturing of Rasa. The blundering language of Śakāra in the Mrchchhakațika is quite in fitness with his character as he is painted there. The dialect of the Rāksasa and the Rāksasī in the Praveśaka to the third act of the Venī- samhära is the prescribed one and fulfils the purpose well. The different forms of address as prescribed in the nineteenth chapter have also to be observed as they express well the Bhävas cherished by one towards the other. For instance, the charioteer is to address the person seated inside the chariot as Āyuşman as Dusyanta is addressed by his chario- teer in the first act of the Abhijñānasākuntala. The reversal of this order is sure to mar the effect, Rasa. In the same way the Pāripārśvaka is to address the Sūtradhāra as Bhava and is himself to be addressed by the latter as Mārisa. As the terms, Bhāva and Mārișa, denote respectively superi- ority and inferiority, the reversal in the order is sure to interfere with the effect. The Janāntika (personal address ), the Apavārita ( a confidence ), the Ākāśabhāșita (speech in the air ) and the Svagata are all dramatic devices relating to speech which have to be carefully observed as any deficiency will make the effect, Rasa, defective. The two kinds of the Alankäras relating to the word ( Sabda) and the sense ( Artha ) numbering four in all, namely, the Upamā, the Rūpaka, the Dīpaka and the Yamaka according to Bharata as given in the seventeenth chapter have been shown in

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XVIII. 37.

516

propriety with Rasa. In the same way different metres also as the Jagati and the Atijagatī have been enjoined upon in connection with fights and tumults and the Śakvarī in connection with the Karuna1. The Dosas have to be avoided and the Gunas observed in order to maintain pro- perly the effect. The Pāthyālankāras (different ways of reading ) which are the Uchcha, the Dipta, the Mandra, the Nīcha, the Druta and the Vilambita are to be used in fitness with Rasas and the Bhavas as prescribed by Bharata in the nineteenth chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S.) in the 45th stanza and the prose portion following. In this connection Bharata discusses the Kākus and points out their suitabi- lity to different Bhāvas. The Șadangas (six ancillaries ) have also to be used in suitability to different Rasas as pres- cribed in the nineteenth chapter where they are mentioned just after the 58th stanza. The Virama (Pause ) is also necessary to make the sense clear, hence they have been prescribed as suiting different Rasas.2 In case of the Varņas (letters ), viz. the Udātta, the Anudātta, the Svarita and the Kampita, the propriety in reference to different Rasas has to be observed in order that the realization of Rasa may not be spoiled. This accounts for the prescrip- tion of Bharata to the effect that the Svarita and the Udatta are to be used in the Hāsya and the Śrngāra ; the Udātta and the Kampita in the Vira, the Raudra and the Adbhuta ; and the Udätta, the Svarita and the Kampita in the Karuņa, the Vatsalya and the Bhayanaka3. The illustration of the Druta, the Vilambita etc. is to be found in the 15th stanza

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XVII. 112-113. 2. Ibid. XIX. 59-64. 3. Ibid. XIX. 43 & following.

517

of the first act of the Nagananda wherein the hero, Jīmū- tavāhana, utters his appreciation of Malayavatī, the heroine's music. The propriety of letters in the Mädhurya and the Ojas in suggesting different Rasas was well observed by Ānanda, Abhinava, Mammața and others in consideration of the Gunas. The suggestion of different Rasas by the Sanghatanās through the Gunas also received their consi- deration as elaborated by Lahiri in his C. R. G., p. 214. Music was included in the Vachikabhinaya. Most of the divisions of the Lasya dance as given before are verbal ( Vächika ) which consist of love effusions in words as the Prachchhedaka division of the Läsya in the song of Hansa- padikā in the beginning of the fifth act of the Abhijñānaśā- kuntala. The seven Svaras in connection with music have to be used in fitness with Rasas as the Madhyama and the Pañchama in the Hāsya and the Śrngāra ; the șadja and the Rsabha in the Vira, the Raudra and the Adbhuta ; the Gāndhāra and the Nișāda in the Karuna and the Dhai- vata in the Bībhatsa and the Bhayānaka1. Bharata gives details on music in its instrumental and vocal aspects in the twentyeighth, the twentyninth, the thirtieth, the thirty- first and the thirty second chapters of the N. S. (K. S. S. ). For instance in cases of the Jātis2 he gives prescription as to their use in suitability to different Rasas. The thirty- third chapter is devoted to the discussion of the musical instruments. The notes to be played upon them as suita- ble to different Rasas have also been poninted out.3 Differ- ent kinds of songs are to be found introduced in the fourth

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XIX. 38-39. 2. Ibid. XXIX. 1-16. 3. Ibid. XXIX. 17-18.

518

act of the Vikramorvasīya as edited by Karmarkar, Poona. This act is introduced with the Āksiptikā, a kind of song. Others as the Dvipadī, the Khandadhārā, the Khandaka, the Charchari and the Ardhavichaturasraka also occur therein along with musical terms as the Pātha, the Kutilikā etc. and the Ragas as the Bhinnaka, the Valantika and the Kakubha. All these have been well explained by the editor in the annotations. In the first act of the Ratnavali the two female servants effect their entry singing a part of the Dvipadī song. In the fourth Javanikāntara of the Karpūra- mañjarī also the Charcharī song is recited by the Vidūșaka before the king. Bharata in the fifth chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S.) describes five kinds of the Dhruvā, viz. the Utthā- panī, the Parivartā, the Apakrșțā, the Additā and the Vikșiptā. The Dhruvā was a song chosen to intimate the arrival of particular characters. It referred to particular Rasas1. The Dhruva beginning the fourth act of the Prasannarāghava intimates the arrival of Paraśurāma and suggests the Raudra Rasa. The other instance is to be found in the act inserted within the third act of the Bāla- rāmāyana. There the Dhruva announces the arrival of Rāma and Lakșmaņa with Viśvāmitra and suggests the Vira Rasa in that it refers to the breaking of the bow. Under the Samanyabhinaya in the twentyfourth chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S. ) Bharata gives twelve kinds of the Vāchikā- bhinaya which consist of words. They are the Alapa, the Pralāpa, the Vilāpa, the Anulāpa, the Samlāpa, the Apalāpa, the Sandeśa, the Atideśa, the Nirdeśa, the Vyapadeśa, the Upadeśa and the Apadeśa. Their relation with Rasa is also indicated as in the case of the Vilapa which consists

1. J. P. R. IV. p. 74 (Footnote).

519

of words born of pathos (Karunaprabhavo )1. All these are of seven kinds according as they refer to one's own self or other and according as they are uttered in the present, the past or the future and again according as they are before one or in one's absence2. The third kind of the Abhinaya, that is, the Sāttvika Abhinaya, is to be found illustrated in such instances as 'Iti Stambham Nāțayitvā Chiram Samjñām Labdhva Sasram' in the fifth act of the Chandakausika3 or as 'Pulakam Darśayati' in the first act of the Pratimānātaka4. Bharata in the seventh chapter gives a detailed description of the causes which give rise to the eight Sāttvikabhāvas. How they are to be represented on the stage is also described ; for example, the Vepathu is to be represented through the Vepana (trembling), the Sphurana (throbbing) and the Kampa ( shaking )5. In the 35th stanza of the third act of the Vi- dagdhamädhava the Kampa, the Sveda etc. are found men- tioned. In case of different Rasas they have been enumerated as in the Bhayanaka they are the Sveda, the Vepathu, the Romāñcha, the Gadgada (due to Svarabhanga) and the Vaivarnya6. In the sixth chapter also in connection with the representation of the Bhayānaka Rasa they are mentioned. As said previously in the twentyfourth chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S. ) under the Sāmānyābhinaya the Sattva is stressed. Various expressions on the face and different parts of the body serving as the natural embellishments of females and males are then enumerated and explained. The Bhāva, the Häva and the Hela are at first recognized as the different

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIV. 53. 2. Ibid. XXIV. 158. 3. C. K. V. p. 85. 4. Pratimā (in B. N. C.) p. 253. 5. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. 102. 6. Ibid. VII. 114.

520 kinds of the Sattva.1 Their modes of representation on the boards are also given ; for example, the Bhāva involves change in the eye and the brow, is attended with a particular position of the neck and is indicative of the Śrngāra Rasa2. The ten natural qualities of the females are the Līla, the Vilāsa, the Vichchhitti, the Vibhrama, the Kilakiñchita, the Mottāyita, the Kuttamita, the Vibboka, the Lalita and the Vihrta. The direct mention of the Vibboka is to be found in the 94th stanza of the Rasasadana Bhana. The seven qualities manifesting themselves spontaneously in females, viz. the Śobhā, the Känti, the Dīpti, the Mādhurya, the Dhairya, the Pragalbhya and the Audārya also come under the Sattva. The illustrations of the Sobha and the Madhurya are to be found in the 10th stanza of the second act and the 18th stanza of the first act of the Abhijñānasa- kuntala where in the former the immaculate beauty of Śakuntalā is expressed through comparison with a flower not smelt etc. etc. and in the latter it is expressed that every object becomes an embellishment for a handsome form. The males also have eight qualities which are different ex- pressions of the Sattva. They are the Sobha, the Vilāsa, the Madhurya, the Sthairya, the Gambhīrya, the Lalita, the Audārya and the Tejas. Bharata as in the above mentioned cases describes them and hints as to their representation, though with regard to only a few cases. The fourth kind of the Abhinaya is the Aharya. This Abhinaya helps much in making the character being taken up for the original character. It, thus, makes the Vibhāvas accomplish their function fully. Bharata treats this kind in all its sections

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIV. 6. 2. Ibid. XXIV. 10.

521

and sub-sections in the twentythird chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S. ). As described before this Abhinaya is of four kinds, viz. the Pusta, the Alankāra, the Angarachanā and the Sañjīva. The Pusta itself is of three kinds, viz. the Sandhima, the Vyajima and the Chestima. The example of the San- dhima is to be found in the Pratijñāyaugandharāyana where in the first act Hamsaka when asked by Yaugandharāyana describes the approach of the artificial elephant ( Krtakahastī) before Vatsaraja. Another such instance is to be found in the Mrchchhakatika in the third act where Sarvilaka, the thief, having dug a breach in the wall of the mansion of Chärudatta thinks of, and then actually inserts, the dummy of a man (Pratipurusa). Another such instance is again to be found in the fifth act of the Balaramayana where the dummy of Sītā was produced before Rāvaņa. There was a particular kind of bird ( Sārikā) placed in its mouth to deceive him by its sound. The use of machinery is also men- tioned ( Sārikādhişthitavaktram Sītāpratikrtiyantram ). This, therefore, may be taken as an instance of the Vyājima. The aerial cars described in such dramas as the Abhijñāśākun- tala, the Vikramorvaśīya, the Anargharāghava etc. furnish instances of the Vyäjima where some sort of mechanism was used to show them flying at different speeds. The third kind, the Chestima, is in the N. S. (N. S. ) given as the Vesțita. Under this head, therefore, can come various kinds of weapons used. Different kinds of spear, the bow, the arrow, the mace, the thunderbolt and the different kinds of sword are instances in point. They were made of bam- boos etc. with cloth or lac wrapped round them. In this connection Bharata considers such things as the Chhatra ( umbrella), the Chamara (chowrie), the Dhvaja ( banner, )

522

and the Bhrngara (jar ). The Jarjara ( the flag of Indra ) and the various kinds of rods for sticks or handles of spears etc. also receive consideration in details. Various illustrations of these are to be found in dramas as the Khadga (sword) in the sixth act of the Mrchchhakatika where Chārudatta gives the sword to Aryaka seated in the cart of Chārudatta in place of Vasantasena or in the third act of the Avi- māraka where Avimāraka enters with a sword in hand. The example of the mace is to be found in the sixth act of the Venisamhära where Bhima enters with a mace in hand. In the same act is to be seen earlier the chamberlain entering with the Bhrngra in order to pacify the thirst of Chārvāka, the Räksasa, who came in the guise of a Muni to deceive Yudhişthira. The Vidūşaka is often seen with a stick in his hand as in the second act of the Abhijñānaśākuntala. The umbrella is mentioned in the fifth act of the Mrch- chhakatika where Vasantasenā goes to her love tryst with her umbrella-bearer. The Laguda (stick) is mentioned in the first act of the Latakamelaka Prahasana where Jatāsura takes up suddenly the stick to drive away others. The Chhatra, the Chamara and the Bhrngara are mentioned in the fifth act of the C. K. where Dharma orders them to be brought in connection with the installation of Rohitaśva. The Bhrngära is again mentioned in the second Sandhi of the Nātavāța Prahasana where Nidrāluthakkura sends for it in order to sip water and adore gods. Other things mentioned in dramas may also be considered here. The fetters are mentioned in the seventh act of the Mrchchha- kațika where Āryaka is relieved of them by Vardhamānaka, the Cheta, under the commands of Chārudatta ; the Kaman-

523

dalu (bowl) in the beginning of the fourth act of the Māla- tīmādhava where Kāmandakī is seen sprinkling water from the bowl; the picture boardsin the first act of the Uttararāma- charita ; the Śayyā (bed-stead) in the seventh act of the Mālatīmādhava where Makaranda is seen on the bed ; the Vīņā (lute ) in the third act of the Priyadarśikā where Kāñ- chanamala is seen with a lute which is afterwards handed over to Āranyikā ; the Bherī ( kettle-drum ) in the seventh act of the Āscharyachūdāmani where Jāmbavān is seen beating it ; the Kanduka (ball) in the second act of the Svapnavāsavadatta where Padmāvatī is seen playing with the ball ; the Bhramarakaranda (box for moths ) in the third act of the Charudatta of Bhasa where Sajjalaka, the thief, lets out one moth from the box in order to quench the flame of the lamp in Chārudatta's house ; the Pratimā ( statue ) in the Pratimānāțaka ; the Pāśa (noose) in the second act of the Nägänanda where the heroine is placing it round her neck to commit suicide etc. etc. The pleasure hills ins- tanced in the second act of the Venīsamhara as the wooden pleasure mountain on which stood the palace of Duryo- dhana ; the Hemakūtasikhara in the first act of the Vikramorvaśīya, the different conveyances as the Śibikā (palanquin) mentioned in the second Sandhi of the Nāta- vāța Prahasana, vehicles as the clay cart and the bullock cart in the Mrchchhakatika, the Kavacha ( armour ) described as being worn by Laksmana in the third act of the Aścharya- chūdāmanī etc. etc. are according to the prescriptions of Bharata, the examples of the Pusta. The Alankāra is of three kinds, viz. the Abharana, the Māla and the Vāsas. The Abharanas ( ornaments ) are of four kinds as described before. They are the Avedya (earrings etc. ), the Bandhanīya

524 ( armlets etc. ), the Praksepya ( anklets etc. ) and the Āropya (necklaces etc.). The Karnabhāra of Bhäsa furnishes the instance of the Kundalas ( earrings ) where Karna is depicted as putting on two earrings. In the first act of the Mrch- chhakatika is to be found the example of anklets where Vasantasenā hotly pursued by Śakāra and his party removes the anklets in order to give no scent through sound and thus elude the pursuit of Sakara. In the 4th stanza of the third act of the Priyadarsika are to be found mentioned, in case of the servant of the queens, all these kinds of ornaments with others with their proper places over the different parts of the body as the anklets on the feet, the girdles round the loins, the necklaces round the necks and pendulous over the breasts, the armlets round the arms, the earrings in the ears, the bracelets round the hands etc. Another instance is to be found in the 6th stanza of the third act of the Nagananda in which the necklace, the girdle and the anklets on their proper places of the parts of the body are mentioned. Bharata prescribes different kinds of ornaments in case of gods, kings and ladies. They are made of gold, silver and gems. In the end he says that they should be in fitness with the different Bhavas and Rasas.1 He, however, gives one warning that they should not be too many as they may bring about exertion and fatigue. Keeping this very con- sideration in view he says that they should be made of lac with a few gems.2 In case of the crown as the head dress the consideration should be made here, though Bharata tackles this consideration along with that of the Vāsas (dress), as the turban etc. as head dress are also prescribed. In this connection the prescription at once suggests whether the 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIII. 42. 2. Ibid. XXIII. 48.

525

character represented is a god or the denizen of other re- gions as the Vidyādharas, the Chāranas etc. or mortals. Among the gods even there are grades as the superior, the middle and the lower. Other kinds of head dress as the turban tied and wrapped round the heads of the ministers, the chamberlains, the rich, the priests etc. also receive atten- tion.1 This is evidently to make the effect, Rasa, realized. Bharata, however, clearly says that the ornaments should not be such as to cause exertion and fatigue ; hence they should be of brass, lac, wax, mica etc2. This clearly ex- presses how things as they are in real life are modified accor- ding to the requirements of the stage. The Mālās as des- cribed before are of five kinds, viz. the Chestita, the Vitata, the Sanghatya, the Granthima and the Pralambita. The example of the garlands used is to be found in the first act of the Mrchchhakatika where Vasantasenā removes the garlands along with the anklets in the stanza already referred to. The third kind, the Väsas, is first dealt with in connection with the dress etc. of ladies of different regions. For instance, the dress of Vasavadatta when she is placed as a charge with Padmavatī in the Svapnavasavadatta is to be of that of the lady belonging to Avanti, modern Ujjain. Bharata also describes dress in fitness with the condition of the ladies in their love relations with their lovers. For instance, the Prositapatikā (one whose husband has gone away on some work) or the Vyasanābhihatās ( those ladies who are afflicted with some troubles ) should wear dress which is dirty and they should have one braid of hair on their heads.3 This is fully borne out in case of Śakuntalā

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIII. 132-140. 2. Ibid. XXIII. 209-210. 3. Ibid. XXIII. 70-71.

526

in the seventh act of the Abhijñānaśākuntala where before Dusyanta she appears with one braid of hair. In the same act in the 21st stanza which the king utters in her descrip- tion she is related as wearing dirty clothes, having one braid of hair with her face emaciated due to observance of various religious rites and injunctions. In cases of persons belonging to different orders of society as the Muni, the Śrotriya etc. or in different conditions as the Unmatta, the Pramatta, that is, the demented, the intoxicated etc. Bharata prescribes the dresses. For instance, the Tāpasas ( those given to austerities ) are to put on the dress of barks of trees and they should have skins of wild beasts1. The instance is furnished in case of Śakuntalā who being brought up as a hermit girl is described as wearing barks in the first act of the Abhi- jñānaśākuntala where she taunts Priyamvadā for having tied her breasts fast with the Valkalas ( barks ) or as in the first act of the Pratimānataka where Rāma puts on the Valkalas while leaving for the forest. Various directions suggesting the different Rasas are to be found in dramas as in the second act of the C. K. where the Vighnarät ( chief of the impedi- ments ) enters in a dress suggesting the Raudra Rasa ( Rau- drojjvalaveśah Sambhrānto Vighnarāt ) or as in the third act of the same drama where the Pāpapurusa ( sinner ) enters in a dress suggesting the Bībhatsa Rasa ( Bībhatsaveșaḥ Pāpapurușaḥ ) or as in the fifth act of the same drama where the king enters in robes suggesting his helpless and pathetic condition ( Vikrtamalinaveșo Rājā ). The instance in sugges- tion of the Śrngāra Rasa is to be found in the first act of the Āścharyachūdāmaņi where Śūrpaņakhā enters dressed in a beautiful and delicate garb ( Lalitasukumāraveșā Śūrpa-

1. N. S. (K. S. S. ) XXIII. 127.

527

ņakhā ). The Abhinaya under the Angarachanā is concerned with the general make-up such as painting with different paints, make-up of the beard, hair on the head etc. Under this head comes up first for consideration the different paints used. Bharata gives different colours, the original ones and their combinations and points out their importance in the words that the person painted with appropriate colours makes himself or herself taken up for the original character1. In this connection he says that the gods, the demons, the oceans, the conveyances, the different weapons, the mountains etc. are supposed to be endowed with life. These also become embodied ( Śarīrinaḥ) due to ceratin reasons., Hence he prescribes different colours in their connection. Bharata also prescribes here colours for the people hailing from different regions. In the Bhāratavarsa his prescriptions in connection with colours of kings, happy people, different castes and persons belonging to different status of the society accomplish well the effect described above. In ancient India colour as distinguishing different classes of society ( Varnas ) had, thus, a great significance. To take an example of the weapons endowed with life, the weapons of Krsna are represented as personified in the Bālacharita by Bhāsa. They figure there as Chakra ( discus ), Śārnga ( bow ), Kaumodakī ( mace ), Śańkha ( conch ) and Nandaka (sword) in the very first act. To take another example is pertinent. In the third act of the Uttararamacharita the two rivers, the Tamasa and the Murala, are to be seen conversing that the Ganges preserved Sīta in her abandonment. In the fifth act of the Prasannarāghava are to be seen the Ganges, the Yamunā, the Sarayu, the Godavarī and the Tungabhadra along with 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIII. 83-84.

528

the Sägara (ocean). The rivers, thus, are to be seen per- sonified. It becomes clear that it is to have the effect, Rasa, accomplished that Bharata gives such prescriptions. He then gives directions as to the make-up of the beard which is to be of four kinds, viz. the Śukla ( white), the Śyāma ( dark ), the Vichitra ( variegated ) and the Romaśa ( shaggy ). Their propriety in case of different Rasas is pointed out as he says that those persons who are the Śrngārīs should have the Vichitra beard whereas those who are Duhkhitas ( afflicted ) should have the Syama beard. In case of the make-up of the hair also some directions are furnished which are to be observed ; for example, the hermits are to have long hair whereas the Sakyas, the Śrotriyas etc. should have shaven head. This is obviously in propriety with the Bhavas cherished towards such perons. In case of Rasa also Bharata makes express mention as for the Śrngārīs the pres- cription is that the hair on the head should be curled ( Sirah Kuñchitamūrdhajam )1. Thus giving details in connection with the Angarachana Bharata says that it arises because of different characters, hence it should be thus known.2 The Abhinaya under the Sañjīva treats of the entry of the living beings ( Prāņinām Praveśo )3. The introduction of live cattle on the stage is admitted even by Wilson as he says, " The introduction of the latter is frequent, and could not always have been imaginary, being, as in the Mricchhakati especially, indispensable to the business," wherein the word 'latter' is used by him in reference to the ' cars with live cattle' in the sentence just preceding4. These are as said before the Chatuspadas ( quadrupeds ), the Dvipadas ( bipeds ), and

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXIII. 147. 2. Ibid. XXIII. 151. 3. Ibid. XXIII. 152. 4. W. D. p. 108.

529 the Apadas ( footless ). The example of the quadrupeds is to be found in the first act of the Abhijñānaśākuntala where the charioteer is introduced as speaking to the king, Dus- yanta, in connection with the condition of the antelope hotly chased. The direction occurring just before his utterance is 'Rājānam Mrgañchāvalokya' which means looking at the king and also at the deer. As some actor represented Dusyanta it follows that in the absence of any other direction suggesting the dummy deer the living deer was also introduced. The running horse is well described there. Another instance is to be found in the seventh act of the same drama where Sarvadamana, the son of Dusyanta, is seen playing with the cub of the lion. No direction as to the cub being a stuffed representation is given, con- sequently the living cub was introduced. In case of the peacock introduced there the directions are explicitly men- tioned. They are, 'Mrttikāmayūras Tișthati ' and 'Praviśya Mrņmayūrahastā Tāpasī', wherein the words, Mrttikā and Mrnmaya, mean clay. Hence in this case the peacock was not living but only of clay. In the fifth act of the Bāla- rāmāyaņa a living bird ( Sārikā) was placed in the dummy of Sītā to deceive Rāvana. The above are instances of the bi-peds. The footless may be instanced in the fourth act of the Bālacharita by Bhāsa where Kāliya (a snake with five hoods as the direction points out ) is introduced. Dāmo- dara (Krsna) is seen effecting the entry with the serpent and then dancing the Hallisaka on its five hoods. It also utters the 7th stanza. This makes clear that the serpent was a stuffed representation with some mechanism. The Abhinaya in all the above kinds and divisions, no doubt, constitutes the activities of the original characters who have, therefore, to be represented. The necessity, thus, 34

530

of the actors crops up. These actors should so far as possible represent the original characters in various aspects. As pointed out before Bharata in this connection lays down some prescriptions in the thirtyfifth chapter of the N. S. (K. S. S.) ; for instance, he says that the servants should be represented by those actors who are slow, dwarfish, crooked etc. etc. and those fatigued and tired should be represented by the lean and the thin whereas those without any disease by fat persons.1 The actors should represent in fitness with the country and the dress. The Sukumāra kind of representa- tion should be made by the ladies as it is they only who are full of graces2. Bharata gives answer to the question as to how a Nata may look like a king in the representation. He says that the Nata will look like a king when painted with colours, decorated with ornaments and putting on the dress suggesting grandeur3. Other qualities, physical and mental, required in the characters are pointed out in accor- dance with which the actors are to be selected. It is quite evident that these long prescriptions are to make the re- presentations seem appropriate and natural and, thus, make the spectators realize Rasa. In some dramas there occur descriptions which give graphically the physical forms as in the Madhyamavyayoga of Bhāsa where Bhīma describes in the 26th stanza the form of Ghatotkacha who also des- cribes Bhima's in the 27th stanza. The 4th and t e 5th stanzas in the second act of the Abhijñānśākuntala mainly detailing the merits of the chase and giving the description of the physique of the king incidentally are instances in point.

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 2-5. 2. Ibid. XXXV. 23-24. 3. Ibid. XXXV. 39-40.

531

The 23rd and the following stanzas in description of Paraśu- rāma in the second act of the Mahavīracharita ; the 54th stanza describing the form of Tādakā in the second act of the Anargharaghava and the 18th and the 19th stanzas des- cribing the form of Parasurāma in the fourth act of the same drama are some other instances. The description of Tādakā in the above mentioned stanza gives her as moving with tongue the human bone stuck between her teeth. The human bone, the long tongue and teeth are all to be false and consequently made of paper, lac etc. In the Rāma dramas Rāvaņa is represented as ten-headed ( Daśānana, Daśagrīva, Daśakandhara etc. ) which points out that he is to have ten heads. In order to meet such requirement and others of a like nature Bharata lays down that in case of characters having many arms, mouths, deformed face etc. etc. the dis- criminating skill should be used and such forms should be represented using clay, wood and skins1. All this is very cleverly prescribed in order that the actors may fully represent the original characters and there may be no deficiency what- soever in the complete realization of Rasa. The actor was called the Śailūșa, the Nața and the Kuśīlava as the conversa- tion of the Vidūsaka with the Sūtradhāra in the Prastāvanā to the Adbhutadarpana shows. In the Nirbhayabhīma- vyāyoga also the actor is called the Kusīlava in the words of the Sutradhara. As pointed out before the actor was to have a regular training as can be borne testimony to by the state- ment of the Sūtradhāra in the Prastāvanā of the Karpūra- charita Bhana. He says that in the representation devised to be given by only one actor, his younger brother has been trained well ( Suśiksita ). The skill and the merits of a

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) XXXV. 9-10.

532

trained actor were the most needed for the intended effect when it is seen that even the Stradhāra, his brother and the Pāripārśvaka who were the directors took roles of the principal characters as the Sūtradhāra in the Ratnāvalī and the Priyadarsikā plays the parts of Vatsa ; his younger brother those of Yaugandharāyana and Drdhavarman in the above two plays respectively as Kieth says1, though it is only his younger brother who is mentioned in the words of the Sūtradhāra in the Prastāvanās of the two plays as taking the roles of Yaugandharāyaņa and the Kañchukī of Drdhavarman and not of Drdhavarman himself. The Pāripārśvaka plays the Vița in the Rasasadana Bhāna. They may take such other roles also as affect powerfully the various currents in dramas. The instances are available in the Mālatīmādhava wherein the Sūtradhāra and the Pāripārśvaka assume respectively the roles of Kāmandakī, the Nun and Avalokitā, her pupil. Instances of other actors are to be found in the Dhanañjayavijaya where the Sūtradhāra says that Śyāmalaka has already assumed the role of Arjuna ; in the Śrngāratilaka Bhāna where the Sūtradhāra says that his paternal aunt's son, Kamaleksana, expert in various acting, has already entered the stage in the role of Bhujangaśekhara and in the Adbhutadarpana wherein the Sūtradhāra reminds in anticipation Romanthaka for playing the role of Mahodara, Rāvana's help in love affairs. The actors, thus, had to be very careful, cautious and possessed of skilful training in order that the intended effect may be fully accomplished. How far the actors themselves realized Rasa is a point already considered in the discussion of the various interpretations of

1. K. S. D. p. 362.

533 the Rasasutra of Bharata. That their activities were needed to make the spectators realize Rasa stands as an undoubted fact constantly emphasized. The actors, however, represented the characters who were seen moving through various situations and circumstances which formed the plot of the drama. Hence these situations, circumstances etc. also were arranged in a manner as to lead to the intended effect, Rasa. This arrangement, no doubt, had two purposes to serve from two standpoints, viz. from the standpoint of the hero who was to achieve some definite object from among the Dharma, the Artha, the Kāma and the Moksa ( as dramas as the Bhartrharinirveda proves ), each either separately or mixed with the other, and from the standpoint of the spectator in whom the realization of Rasa was to take place. The first standpoint was the basic con- sideration with the compilers of traditions, stories, conve- tions, annals etc. whereas in case of the dramatic piece the second one was the guiding factor and the first one was kept only secondary. This accounts for the changes introduced in the plot of a dramatic piece and the consequent variation of the subject-matter of the plot from that of its counterpart in traditions, stories etc. dealing with subjects, divine or heavenly or infernal or human or belonging to any other region. No such question arises in those cases where the plot is wholly invented. It is there that Rasa becomes the guiding factor. The cases of borrowing and modification in the light of Rasa can be attested to by many dramatic pieces. The story forming the basis of the plot of the Abhijñāna- śākuntala, for example, is simple and short. Many motives, devices, characters and many other elements are not to be even found there which, however, are centres of interest in

534

the drama. In the Mahabharata the Adiparva version of the story which deserves consideration due to being older than Kālidāsa's work, the other version as given in Svargakhanda of the Padmapurāna being later than even Kālidāsa's as Kale concludes1, simply gives Dusyanta as reaching in course of hunting the hermitage of Kanva during his absence when his foster-daughter, Sakuntalā, entertains him. The king is fascinated by her charms. He learns from her the account of her birth etc. The Gandharva marriage results by mutual consent on condition of her son being made the successor. After sometimes the king returns to his capital but does not send for her as he feels afraid of the sage, who, however, divines everything. He approves of the marriage of the daughter who is after sometime delivered of a son. The sage, then, without waiting for the king's message, sends her to his residence. The king discards her in order to avoid public censure, but a voice in the air exhorts him to accept her and her son as his own wife and his own son. He obeys and Śakuntalā is made the chief queen. It may be said here that in the above version love between the pair and the attainment of Śakuntalā is the aim but the version as it stands is prosaic and dull. It receives life when touched with the magic of the dramatist's genius. The various movements and expressions of the king, the two female companions serving as mouthpiece of Śakuntalā, the lack of any mention of the condition of Sakuntala's son being the successor in order to remove the sense of bargaining, the introduction of the sage, Durvasas ' curse and the ring as its antidote, the loss of the ring and the consequent forgetfulness of Dusyanta, the fisherman's getting the ring and the restora- 1. K. A. S. p. 51 (Introduction).

535

tion of the king's memory, Matali's troubling the Vidūsaka, Dusyanta's journey to heavenly regions, Mārīcha's hermi- tage etc. etc. are items brought in by the skilful hand of the artist in order to keep aflame the interest and show Rasa in various stages of development and growth. The Rāma drāmas as the Adbhutadarpaņa, the Āścharyachūdāmaņi etc. show to what extent the modification in the basic story is made in the light of a particular Rasa kept up as principal. Further instance is to be seen in the plot of the Mālatīmādhava. Here the skilful artist gets a freer latitude than that in cases where the basic story is adhered to as in the above instance. In con- formity with the injunctions of dramaturgy which say that the subject-matter of a Prakarana type of drama must be invented, Bhvabhūtī has, practically speaking, invented the plot as the elements culled from different books of the Kathāsaritsāgara transform in his crucible beyond recogni- tion. The artist has got suggestions from other sources also as the Vikramorvaśīya of Kālidāsa, the Kāmasūtra of Vātsyāyana etc. but the baser metal has been transmuted into pure gold. The Srngāra Rasa has been kept up as the principal sentiment while others as the Raudra, the Bibhatsa, the Bhayanaka, the Karuna and the Adbhuta do its maiden service. The artist's hand at work with the utmost freedom is to be seen in those dramatic types whre the plot is wholly his creation as in the Bhana etc. In them Rasa intended to be depicted as principal is seen in full and unchecked by any impediment whatsoever. Rasa, thus, is the guiding factor in determining the subject-matter forming the plot. The subject-matter, however, may have such incidents as are indispensable and at the same time devoid of Rasa ( Nīrasa ). These incidents have to be given place in the plot, therefore

536

they are indicated through the Viskambhaka or the Praveśaka or the Chūlika or the Ankāsya or the Ankāvatāra as seen in the dramatic pieces. These means are not supposed to be included in the body of the plot which is enjoined to be overflowing with Rasa. But then the body of the plot even though overflowing with Rasa may cover such a wide canvas as to try the patience of the spectator, and thus, tell upon his pleasure. This wide canvas, therefore, is reduced to a short one by such means as keep the interest alive. These means consist mainly of narrations as in the fourth act of the Venisamhara where Duryodhana and Sundaraka enter into a series of questions and answers for- ming the narration of the battle. Such instances are also to be found in the Rama dramas as in the sixth act of the Anargharäghava where the two Vidyādharas, Ratnachūda and Hemängada seated in an aerial car, narrate the battle between Ravana and Rama and their troops or as in the seventh act of the Prasannaraghava where the Vidyadhara and his mate narrate the battle between Rāma and Rāvaņa. Such means serve to reduce the plot to a tolerable limit. This purpose is sometimes served by those means also which are employed for indication, that is, the Viskambhaka, the Praveśaka etc. as in the Śuddhaviskambhaka to the fifth act of the Mahāvīracharita Sampāti and Jațāyu engage themselves in narrating Rama's doings in the forest and destruction of Khara, Dūșana etc. or as in the Praveśaka to the third act of the Venisamhara in which the Rāksasa narrates in a few sentences the destruction of so many Kșattriyas as may cover a long space if depicted in detail. It becomes clear, therefore, that all these means were to shorten the wide canvas to a tolerable limit in the light of

537

the principal sentiment. The division of the plot into the Sarvaśrāvya, the Niyataśrāvya and the Aśrāyya in suita- bility with the stage requirements are without any doubt to help the maturing of Rasa as the stage aims at that function. The Ākāsabhāșita ( speech in the air ) is a device which is the backbone in the Bhäna type of drama, for without it the whole fabric falls and consequently no Rasa, either the Vira or the Śrngāra, can be suggested. When the subject-matter of the plot has been determined in the light of Rasa it is seen growing like an organism. It starts with the Bīja (first seeds ) and culminates into the Kārya (final fruition ). The Bīja is the laying of the foundation of the particular Rasa in its initial stage as in the Viskambhaka of the first act of the Ratnāvalī Yaugandharayana's first words uttered behind the curtain express it. When the Bija is intercepted in its growth, there must come some connection which may renew it. This connection is obviously to renew the growth of the sentiment initially depicted as in the first act of the Ratnāvali Sāgarikā on hearing the bard's recitation uttered behind the curtain in praise of Udayana is reminded of her father's promise to give her hand in marriage to Udayana. The Śrngra Rasa that was to be depicted between Udayana and Sāgarikā seemed to have gone into background due to the subsidiary thing, the worship of the god of love. The sentiment thus shown growing, intercepted and connected may be further helped by comparison or contrast when a similar or dissimilar sentiment is depicted simultaneously on a smaller or a larger scale. The incident treated on a larger scale ( the canvas here is smaller than that in the main plot ) is the Patākā. The instance is furnished in the episode of the love of Makaranda and Madayantikā in the Malatīma-

538 dhava very cleverly woven together with the main plot. The sentiment in this episode is the same as the principal one in the main plot; how it helps the development of the principal sentiment in the main plot is clear when it is seen that it is Makaranda who puts on the dress of Mälatī who in her turn gets a chance to elope with Mädhava. The incident treated on a scale smaller than that of the Patākā is the Prakarī. An instance of it is to be found in the same drama where Saud- āmanī finds out Mālatī and helps Mādhava to save his beloved.1 There may be some indications which suggest the incidents and thus help on the development of Rasa. These are the Patākāsthānakas ( the episode indications ) recognized to be of four kinds as already said. For example, the illustration of one kind is to be found in the fourth act of the Ratnävalī where the king at first removes the noose from the neck of Sāgarikā taking her to be Vāsavadattā whose dress she wore but later on discovers his mistake, consoles Sāgarikā in her grief and rejoices in the unexpected union. All these are to be seen coming into use before the culmina- tion, that is, attainment of the desired object by the hero and the realization of pleasure in the spectator. Then again the seeds sown in the beginning may be seen at various stages along with the different stages in the development of the principal Rasa. The beginning, the Arambha, marks the anxiety for attaining the copious fruit as in the Viskambhaka of the first act of the Ratnāvalī where Yaugandharāyana in the 7th stanza expresses his anxiety to attain the result ( fruit ) which is the union of Udayana with the princess of Ceylon. Hence the sentiment to be developed is the Śrngāra. The second stage, the Prayatna, marks the effort made 1. R. S. III. 13-14.

539

to attain the aim when it is not obtained as in the second act of the same drama where Sāgarikā unable to obtain sight of the king draws his picture on the board in order to have his full view. All this shows how the sentiment of love in the form of longing for a sight of the king long cherished in Sgarikā is satisfied through indirect method. The third satge, the Prāptyāśā, is the possibility of success with effort and with fear of failure. The illustration is to be found in the third act of the same drama where the king is unexpectedly united with Sāgarikā. He cannot check himself from ex- pressing this sudden turn of fortune as he calls it rains without clouds.The Vidūsaka at that expresses his suspicion to the effect that the queen Vasavadatta may reach there and acting as an untimely gale bring about separation. The union hangs in the balance. Various emotions, thus, make the main sentiment chequered and more attractive. The fourth stage, the Niyatāpti, marks the certainty of success for the risk is absent as in the third act of the same drama the Vidūşaka at first brings Vāsavadattā herself taking her to be Sāgarikā and finding out later on his mistake says that Sāgarikā will have to live a hard life thenceforth. This is the beginning of doubt about the union which, however, becomes certain when the king decides in the last sentence of the act to appease the queen. The last stage, the Phala- yoga or the Phalägama, is the attainment of the desired object. The illustration is the attainment of Sāgarikā by the king leading to the consequent culmination of the Śrngāra in its Sambhoga aspect. From the view point of the minister Yaugandharayana the main object to be achieved was the attainment of monarchy by the king, and as it was predicted by a seer that Ratnāvalī's (Sāgarikā's ) suitor would become

540 monarch Sāgarikā was to be obtained by the king. The aim of the king was to gain the hand of Sāgarika. These were the aims and objects to be achieved by the original charac- ters but from the view point of the spectator the realization of the Śrngaa Rasa was the main object. The Bija, the Bidnu, the Patākā, the Prakarī and the Kārya respectively combine with the Arambha, the Prayatna, the Prāptyāśā, the Niyatäpti and the Phalagama and give rise to the five Sanshis respectively. They are the Mukha (opening), the Partimukha (progression), the Garbha(development), the Avamarśa (pause) and the Nirvahana or the Upasamhrti (conclusion). As said before in the third and the fourth Sandhis the Patākā and the Prakarī may not be present for they are not the indispensable elements. To what extent the poet has to exert himself for the proper and appropriate arrangement of the plot in respect of its development from the Bija to the Kärya through the Mukha to the Nirvahana Sandhi is lucidly described by Viśākhadatta through Rākșasa in the 3rd stanza of the fourth act of the Mudrārāksasa. The trouble experienced by a playwright and a politician is the same. The Sandhis described above are undoubtedly concerned with the object, at its various degrees of attainment, placed before the original characters for achievement. They mark the different gradual stages of the development of the main plot. From the view point of the spectator they show the development of the principal Rasa at its different stages. The Abhijñānaśākuntala depicts the Śrngāra Rasa. Dușyanta starts for the hunt and is shown chasing a deer of the hermi- tage of the sage, Kanva. The background for Rasa is pre- pared. Dusyanta reaches the hermitage and is blessed by a Vaikhānasa (sage) with the future birth of a son to him.

541

The seed is cast when the Vaikhanasa says that the king should go to Kanva's hermitage and accept hospitality from his foster-daughter, Śakuntalā, in charge of the place in his absence. The Śrngāra Rasa receives here an open start. It goes on developing through the various reflections of the king and Śakuntalā in respect of their union when it seems to be intercepted for some time by such incidents as the chase etc. This whole canvas marks the Mukha Sandhi. The sentiment thus intercepted is revived when Dusyanta says to the Vidūșaka, his companion, that the latter has not obtained the fruit of his eyes as he has not seen the object worthy to be seen ( Śakuntalā ). This statement of Dusyanta serves as the Bindu ( connecting link ). Dusyanta, however, thinks that he is recognized by some of the sages, therefore he asks the Vidūsaka to tell him the pretext under which he may visit the hermitage again. This is the Prayatna on the part of the king. These two factors, viz. the Bindu and the Prayatna clearly testify to the Srngāra Rasa being continued and developed further. This is the Pratimukha Sandhi. The effort that is made bears fruit as Dusyanta is successful in securing union with Śakuntalā. The Śrngāra Rasa is develo- ping; it, however, is again intercepted by the curse of the sage, Durvasas. The hope of its continuation is there as the words uttered by Kanva in reply to Śakuntalā's query as to how she would live when removed so far away from the hermitage and separated from him, show. The words are benediction wishing her placed as the housewife. This is, no doubt, the Prāptyāśā ( the hope of success ). The Śrngāra Rasa again comes into view when the chance of union comes up. Śakuntalā has bidden farewell to the hermitage and is present in the open court of the king, Dusyanta. The two

542 disciples of Kanva convey their preceptor's message to the king. He forgets everything done by him at the hermitage. Gautamī then uncovers the face of Sakuntalā in order that the king may recognize her, but that means fails. This is the Garbha Sandhi. The Śrngāra Rasa goes into oblivion as the attainment of the desired object is thwarted by the curse which takes effect. The stop occurs but the certainty of union and the culmination of the Śrngāra Rasa is assured when the invitation from Indra is received. This marks the Niyatäpti stage of the seed developed in the previous Sandhi. Here Räghavabhatta in the com. points that the description of Madhurikā and Parabhrtikā in connection with the spring till the arrival of the king in mournful dress is the Prakarī according to its definition given in the Bhāvaprakāśikā as quoted by him. This whole canvas, therefore, constitutes the Avamarśa Sandhi. The king while returning victorious over the enemies of Indra happens to pass through the blissful region inhabited by the sage, Mārīcha, and is there united with his son and Śakuntalā. Here is to be seen the convergence of the various incidents so long diverging to different directions. The Śrngāra Rasa in its Sambhoga aspect thus reaches its culmination when the two long-separated lovers are ultimately united together. The whole canvas is devoted to the Nirvahana Sandhi. All these Sandhis have different parts numbering 64 as already described. The sentiment kept up as the principal is shown in its various stages simultaneously with the gradual achieve- ment of the principal object by the hero. The Bālarāmā- yana depicts the achievement of extraordinary excellence Lokottarotkarsa )1 by Rāma, for the Ārambha is made with 1. R. S. III. p. 214.

543

an action with that end in view; the Bija is the Utsaha of Rama1. The principal Rasa, therefore, is the Vira with plenty of the Adbhuta as the skill ( Kauśala) has to be un- common (Lokottara )2. The Adbhuta Rasa is here mostly used by, and in respect of, the party rival to Rāma who is the hero. Though Rama's extraordinary deeds are also described which suggest the Adbhuta Rasa, yet the Adbhuta Rasa comes in explanation of his heroic achievements. Rāma surmounts every barrier by virtue of his superior equipments, hence the principal Rasa is the Vira. The first Sandhi wherein the Bija and the Arambha combine and develop has twelve parts which show Rasa at various stages of development. The first is the Upaksepa, which is the sowing of the seed, which commences when Śunahśepha says that the venerable Viśvāmitra has sent him as his repre- sentative to Janaka who has invited Viśvāmitra to the sacrifice. He has come as the representative as Viśvāmitra himself has gone to Ayodhyā to fetch Rāma, the enemy of the Rāksasas. The Upaksepa (suggestion), thus, is the beginning of the Vīra Rasa. It has its Parikara ( enlarge- ment ) when a Rāksasa in the deceitful garb of a hermit says that he has been sent by Malyavān to bring information of Viśvāmitra and visit the cities of Mithilā and Ayodhyā. He cogitates over the impending evils. He says that Viśvā- mitra capable of doing things by virtue of religious prescrip- tions etc. is the natural enemy of the Rāksasas ; and so is Daśaratha. This gives scope for the enlargement of the Vīra Rasa as Rama's heroism over them will come into display. The Parinyäsa ( establishment) of the seed is its lodgment as when the Räksasa in the false garb of the hermit

1. R. S. III. p. 210. 2. B. R. I. (Āmukha). 2.

544 sees Sunaḥepha and asks him as to his studies, his preceptor, the latter's whereabouts etc. As a spy he also extracts from him the information as to his own wherabouts. This dialogue makes clear the prowess of Viśvāmitra and the apprehensions of the Rāksasa; it marks the establishment of the seed and paves the way for the excellence of Rama and the consequent depiction of the Vira Rasa. Thus all the parts of all the Sandhis can be illustrated in reference to the principal Rasa directly or indirectly. All these 64 parts form together with other incidents the main body of the dramatic piece. This whole body, if presented continuously and ceaselessly on the boards, will lose its fascination. The delectableness even if present there to the greatest extent is sure to be lost in effect by the diffusiveness, hence it (plot) is presented in several portions called the acts. The Nāțavāțaprahasana has two Sandhis instead of two Ankas ( acts ). These acts are to be overflowing with Rasa. To suggest the particular Rasa depicted therein sometimes even the acts are named, as the third act of the Bālarāmayana is named the Vilaksalankeśvara ( distracted Rāvaņa) wherein Rāvana is depicted distracted with love for Sītā, the fifth act is named the Unmattadaśānana (mad Rāvaņa ) wherein Rāvana is again depicted as love-sick and the eighth act is named the Viravilasa which overflows with the Vira Rasa. Any incident which is inseparably connected with the acts but at the same time is devoid of Rasa is to be indicated through one of the ways pointed out before. The act, thus, is to concern itself with the depiction of Rasa. It may be that one act may depict Rasa which is subsidiary, but it should in one way or the other tend to the development of the principal Rasa. As said above the principal Rasa in the Bālarāmāyaņa

545

is the Vira. There are other Rasas also depicted in the piece but they are all subsidiary to the Vira Rasa. In the beginning following the 2nd stanza the Sūtradhāra says to the spectators that he should be examined in the extraordinary skill of representing a dramatic piece teeming profusely with the Vira and the Adbhuta Rasas ( Vīrādbhutaprāyarase Prabandhe ). The Adbhuta Rasa, however, comes in as the effect of the Vira. Moreover, in the last but one stanza of the tenth act Räma utters words which express that what was dear to his heart has already been fulfilled. They also express Rama's heroism in various aspects as the Yuddha- vīra in matters of the breaking of Śiva's bow and the making of the bridge over the ocean, the Dayävira in installing Bibhīsana on the throne of Ceylon, and the Danavīra in the gift of the Puspaka to Kubera. Hence the Vīra Rasa figures as the principal sentiment. The contents of the Bāla- rāmāyana begin with the going of the sage, Viśvāmitra, to Dasaratha's court for fetching Rama. They end with Rama's installation on the throne of Ayodhya after the destruction of the Rāksasas during his fourteen years' exile in the forest. These contents have been based by the skilful hand of the artist on various motives and arranged in ten acts. The first act concerns itself mainly with the suggestion of Ravana's love for Sītā whom he wants to marry ; he thinks of drawing and stringing Siva's bow in fulfilment of Janaka's oath but does not do so under pretext and leaves the place threatening evil to any future husband of Sītā. This depiction of the Śngārābhāsa with the Raudra pre- pares the ground for the Vira Rasa of Rāma who is to act more heroically towards such a formidable rival to Sītā's hand. In the second act Rāvana is at first seen seeking 35

546 through his man the aid of Parasurama -- a plan in which he is repulsed. Then he is to be seen lovesick for Sītā. In this condition he is intercepted by the arrival of Paraśurāma. Both are then seen engaged in exchange of hot words. Thus the presence of the Śrngārābhāsa is alternated with the Raudra Rasa. But both Rasas tend to the development of the Vira Rasa in Rāma who is to face victoriously later on both these personalities. Thus whatever the motive handled by the artist the subsidiary Rasas in different acts may be shown as helping the principal Rasa. Sometimes an act within an act is also to be seen as in the seventh act of the Uttararämacharita the representation of a collection of the sad incidents of Sītā's troubled life is held. The purpose served here is the intensi- fication of the pathetic condition of the hero and the consquent intensification of the Karuna Rasa. In the third act of the Bālarāmāyana the representation of the choice marriage of Sītā ( Sītāsvayamvara ) takes place which according to Śinga Bhūpāla leads to the excellence of the hero. Śinga- Bhūpāla cites one instance in excellence of the subject-matter.1 As the hero and the subject-matter both ultimately lead to the excellence of Rasa, any kind of act within an act con- cerns itself ultimately with Rasa. The acts into which the subject-matter is thus arranged in portions do not generally coincide with the five Sandhis. That is to say it happens that one Sandhi sometimes covers one or two or more complete acts with a portion of the succeeding act. Then again the illustration of the combintion of the five elements (Arthaprakrtis ) with the five stages ( Avasthās ) respectively is also rare. The Mālatīmādhava furnishes an instance where the acts, the Sandhis and the combination of 1. R. S. III. 210-211.

547

the five elements with the five stages all coincide as shown by Devadhara and Suru.1 Here the Śrngāra Rasa in its various stages of development is to be marked more clearly. The Mukha Sandhi covers the first two acts. As the Kārya is the attainment of Mālatī by Mādhava its Bīja is their mutual love. The Ārambha is the anxiety of Kāmandakī to unite them together. All the incidents in these two acts converge to that end. The Śrngāra Rasa is intercepted as Nandana is to marry Mālatī for her father thus wanted to please the king. It is, however, resumed in the Pratimukha Sandhi which extends over the next two acts, as in the third act the Bindu comes in when Madhava and Mālatī meet again. This meeting continues in the fourth act where in the 5th stanza Kämandakī says that she will make effort for bringing about the union even at the cost of her life. This is the Prayatna. The Śrngāra Rasa thus develops on through circuitous course. Then comes the Garbha Sandhi com- prising of the fifth, the sixth and the seventh acts. The Patākā dealing with the love affairs of Makaranda and Madayantikā and the Prāptyāśā (hope of attainment of Mālatī by Mādhava ) through various stratagems of Kāman- dakī etc. are to be found. The Śrngāra Rasa is seen develo- ping in which a pause comes in the Avamarśa Sandhi which covers the next two acts, that is, the eighth and the ninth. Here the Prakarī is the street fight to save Makaranda accord- ing to Devadhara and Suru and the Niyatāpti is to be seen when the king has appeased Bhūrivasu and Nandana. But according to Singa Bhūpāla as pointed out before the episode of Saudaminī in the ninth act is the Prakarī. In this case

1. B. M. M. (Introduction) pp. 43-44.

548

the Niyatäpti may be interpreted that stage where Saudāminī says that she has saved Mālatī from being killed by Kapāla- kundalā. The union is certain as all impediments have been removed. The Śrngāra Rasa here is variegated by other Rasas but it reaches its culmination in its Sambhoga aspect when in the tenth act Madhava is seen actually in union with Malati. This is the attainment, the Phalāgama, of the desired object, the Kärya, and this marks the Nir- vahaņa Sandhi. The Śrngāra Rasa seen in its various stages of development reaches culmination here. Rasa, thus, is the guiding factor of all the other consti- tuents of a dramatic piece, whether in a book form or re- presented on the boards. As has been seen it determines the nature of the spectators, the theatre, the character etc. That it determines the different types of drama also will be considered next.

CHAPTER EIGHT.

DIFFERENT RASAS PREDOMINANT IN DIFFERENT TYPES OF SANSKRIT DRAMA.

All other constituents of drama have always a reference to Rasa as has already been seen. There is no knowledge, there are no arts etc. in this world which do not find a place in drama as Bharata puts it.1 Hence everything in one way or another is controlled by Rasa in a dramatic piece. It is, therefore, natural that the kinds of drama should be based on the kinds of Rasa. Dhanañjaya's statement that dramas are classified according to the subject-matter, the hero and Rasa2 ulti- mately points the same way when it is taken into conside- ration that the fitst two factors, viz. the subject-matter and the plot are by themselves subject to adjustment in suitability to Rasa. As shown before, the object in a dramatic piece to be attained by the original characters may be one of the Dharma, the Artha, the Käma and the Moksa, separately or mixed up together. In case the principal character, that is, the hero is one, the object on the way to gradual attainment can clearly be marked as in the Abhijñānaśākuntala, the Mrchchha- kațika etc. There are cases, however, wherein more than one character figure as the heroes with different objects kept up to be finally achieved. The Samavakāra type of drama may be taken as an instance in point. In this type there are to be as many as twleve heroes, each striving for, and attain- ing, a separate object3 as illustrated in the Prastāvanā of the Samudramathana Samavakāra in the words of the Sūtra-

1. N. S. (K. S. S.) I. 113-114. 2. D. R. I. 11. 3. Ibid. III. 63-64.

550 dhära when he asks the Sthāpaka to point out to him the way in which all his twleve brothers ( including him ) may have their several ends simultaneously accomplished.1 In such cases it becomes incumbent to keep in view these different objects very attentively in order to understand the activities of so many heroes. Looked at from the point of view of so many different activities the unitary effect in the sympathetic spectator appears to be spoiled, as the effects of these acti- vities may be different. The heart of the spectator, how- ever, cannot respond to these different effects if they are more than one and at the same time of equal importance and significance in point of intensity and scope. As pointed out before other Rasas have to be made subordinate to one parti- cular Rasa which is depicted as principal ; they have to play part in such ways as may contribute to its excellence and predominance. This is a psychological fact which takes stock of the total position and accounts satisfactorily for the Chitta Vrttis (mental functions ) of the spectator. It is, therefore, the beacon light for the artist in his work of art which aims at the unitary effect in the midst of diversities. The principal Rasa, therefore, is always the unitary effect in a dramatic piece which is recognized and established as the best piece of art in the field of literary work. The statement of Dhanañjaya that in the Bhana type of drama the Vira and the Śrngära are to be suggested through the descriptions of prowess and of beauty2 requires consideration in that it pres- cribes two Rasas simultaneously without saying anything in connection with their relation of the one being principal and the other subordinate to it. The Avaloka com. to the above also points out nothing in expression or even indica-

1. V. R. S. p. 149. 2. D. R. III. 50.

551

tion of one Rasa being subordinate to the other. The consi- deration, however, of the hero and the plot etc. in the light of the principal Rasa as attempted before throws full light here as it provides the satisfactory solution. The hero in the Bhāna type of drama is a Vita. According to the descrip- tion in connection with his nature, behaviour etc. as given before he is an appropriate figure in the Śrngāra Rasa. Then the plot is a skilfully arranged pattern of the experiences of the Vita himself or of other, but it is in either case the Dhürtacharita, the description of roguish exploits in connec- tion mostly with love affairs. The plot, therefore, consists of the description of incidents suggesting the Srngara Rasa. Allied incidents may come in but only to bring about the excellence of the main ones. The instance may be furnished in the Śrngāratilaka Bhāņa where Bhujangaśekhara en- courages his friend Mandāraka, who is actually not present though posed to be such, through the Akāśabhāșita ( speech in the air). He exhorts him to shake off his fears as he is at his beck and call with sword in hand. The 24th stanza just following is in description of his future heroic deed for which, however, no opportunity arises. The lovers as described in the Bhana type were equipped with such weapons as the sword in order to serve as safeguard against any mishap and thus give scope for the enactment of some heroic deed ; but no such opportunity ever crops up. The illustration is to be found in the Mukundānanda Bhāna where Bhujangaśe- khara poses to see his servant, Kalakantha, coming to him with speed. This servant, he says, was posted by him in the outer verandah with his sword for his protection.1

1. M. B. p. 12.

552 Such instances may suggest the Vira Rasa but it has to be borne in mind that it is obviously in service of the Śrngāra Rasa. That the Śrngāra Rasa is the principal sentiment in the Bhana is clear when it is considered that the Pāripārśvaka in the Prastāvanā of the Vițarājavijaya says to the Sūtradhāra that according to his opinion it is only the Bhäna among the dramatic types which can delight the audience immersed completely in the Śrngāra Rasa.1 This bears testimony to the fact that the Śrngara Rasa is the principal sentiment in the Bhana. Later dramaturgists as the author of the Bhāvaprakāśana realized this position and that is why the latter gives the opinion of Bhoja and others advocating the Śrgāra as the principal Rasa in the Bhāna as seen before. In cases of other types of drama definite opinions as to one Rasa being the principal one are to be had at the hands of a few dramaturgists. For example, take the case of the Dima type of drama. Bharata is of opinion that it should have six Rasas and the Śrngāra and the Hāsya Rasas should not be present in it. This opinion mentions no particular Rasa as the principal one. It is only the later dramaturgists as Dhanañjaya, Śāradātanaya, Rāmachandra and Guņachandra, Śinga Bhūpāla and Viśvanātha who say that the Raudra Rasa should be the principal sentiment in it. That the Raudra is the principal Rasa in the Dima is borne out by the Tripuradāha Ņima of Vatsarāja. The principal Rasa in it is the Raudra. The consideration of one more type of drama will suffice. In the Vyayoga type of drama Bharata prescribes the Dīpta Rasas, that is, the Vira, the Raudra, the Bībhatsa, the Adbhuta, the Karuna and the Bhayānaka.

1. V. V. p. 3.

553

Other dramaturgists as Dhanañjaya, Śāradātanaya, Rāma- chandra and Gunachandra, and Viśvanātha concur with Bharata in the above opinion. It is only Śinga Bhūpāla who says that the Raudra Rasa should be the principal senti- ment. He uses the word, Raudrasamśraya, which may mean that the Vyayoga depicts the Raudra Rasa ; the mean- ing, however, points out the definiteness as regards the Raudra being the principal Rasa when it is considered that he uses mutatis mutandis the like word, Karuņāśraya, in case of the Anka type of drama wherein the principal sentiment according to all dramaturgists is the Karuna. The point worth notice is that the second parts in the two compounds are the 'Samsraya' and the 'Asraya', having practically the same meaning, the first one being more emphatic and force- ful. Though Śinga-Bhūpāla's opinion is definite in fixing the Raudra Rasa as the principal sentiment, yet some examples depict the Vira Rasa as the principal one. The Madhya- mavyāyoga of Bhāsa may be taken as an illustration. The Karuna Rasa is suggested by the bewailings of the Brāhmana, his wife and his sons, the Bhayanaka in the description of the form of Ghatotkacha, the Raudra in the exchange of words between Ghatotkacha and Bhimasena and the Vira in the excelling prowess of either. As Bhīma excels Ghatot- kacha, he is the Yuddhavira. He abides by his words to go with Ghatotkacha even when victorious. This is a noble trait of a Vira. Hence the Vira may be said to be the princi- pal Rasa. This is corroborated by T. Ganapati Sastri who in the com. says that the Vira Rasa is the principal sentiment here.1 D. R. Mankad points out on the basis of suggestion

1. M. V. p. 4 (Com.).

554 one point of difference between the Vyayoga and the Ihamrga depending as he does upon the reading in connection with the Ihämrga in the N. S. (N. S. ). He concludes by sugges- tion that in the Vyyoga the union with the heroine should not be effected. Accordingly he expresses his hesitation in accepting the Madhyamavyāyoga of Bhāsa as an example of the Vyāyoga type of drama.1 Some points in this matter deserve consideration. The hesitation in acceptance is based solely on the N. S. (N. S. ). Other editions of the N. S. have received no consideration. Besides, other dramatur- gists as Viśvanātha etc. give no such point of distinction. Moreover, the intention of Bhasa who wrote and named it as a Vyayoga is set at naught. Another instance of the Vyāyoga, the Dhanañjayavijaya, also has the Vīra Rasa as the principal sentiment. In it Arjuna in disguise defeats the Kauravas. In the Prastāvanā of the Kirātārjunīyavyāyoga by Vatsarāja the Sthapaka says to the Sūtradhāra that the lord of Kālañjara, Trailokyavarmadeva, in whom the only impression of the Vira Rasa is deeply seated ( Virarasai- kavāsanāvāsita ) has ordered the representation of the above mentioned Vyāyoga ; he has, therefore, read other four Nāndīpadas in which the Vīra Rasa is depicted.2 This makes clear that in this Vyäyoga also the Vira Rasa is the predomi- nant sentiment. The Pārthaparākramavyāyoga3 also depicts the Vira Rasa as the principal sentiment dealing as it does with the victory of Arjuna over the Kurus when they tried to steal away the cows of the king Virāta. One Vyāyoga, however, seems to depict the Raudra as the principal Rasa. It is the Nirbhayabhīmavyāyoga wherein Bhīma is repre- sented in a haughty and angry mood using harsh words

1. T. S. D. p. 60. 2. V. R. S. p. 1. 3. P. V.

555

but taking into consideration the nature of Bhima, the fact that he protected the Brähmana from the demon and, thus, established himself as the Dayavira towards him as also the Yuddhavīra against the terrible demon, Baka, the conclu- sion is reached that the work depicts the Vira Rasa. Sing- Bhūpāla perhaps took into consideration the Jāmadagnyajaya mentioned in the D. R. and prescribed the Raudra Rasa as the principal sentiment in the Vyāyoga type of drama. In cases of some other types of drama also such varying opin- ions are available. As regards the Dima Bharata says that all Rasas except the Śrngara and the Häsya should be depic- ted there ; thus he makes no particular Rasa as the principal sentiment. Dhanañjaya and others prescribe the Raudra as the principal Rasa. The Tripuradāha Dima1 of Vatsarāja depicts the Raudra Rasa. The Samavakāra in the opinion of Bharata should depict the three kinds of the Śrngāra but no mention of any particular Rasa as the principal sentiment is made. Dhanañjaya and others make the Vīra as the principal Rasa though Rämachandra and Gunachandra say that the Vira or the Raudra can be the principal Rasa. The Samudramathana Samavakāra2 by Vatsarāja depicts the Vīra Rasa as the principal Rasa as it concerns itself with the prowess of different characters. In case of the Ihamrga Bharata says that Rasas depicted here should be the same as in the Vya- yoga ; Šāradātanaya and Śinga Bhūpāla prescribe the exclusion of the Bhayānaka and the Bībhatsa ; Dhanañjaya mentions the Śrngārābhāsa in case of the Pratināyaka to which Viśvanātha refers, but no opinion as to one Rasa being the principal one is mentioned in the above prescriptions. The Rukmiņīharaņa3 Īhāmrga by Vatsarāja represents the

1. V. R. S. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid.

556 attainment of Rukmiņī by Krsna. The Śrngāra is the prin- cipal sentiment in that the mutual love of Rukmini and Krșņa is depicted. The Śrngārābhāsa is also represented in the Pratināyaka, Śiśupāla, as Rukmiņī is never depicted in a loving mood towards him. In case of the Vīthi, though Bharata prescribes all Rasas, other dramaturgists are agreed in making the Śrngāra as the principal Rasa, hence no scope for consideration is present here. The above discussion points out conclusively that in a dramatic type only one Rasa figures as the principal sentiment ; others if depicted come in only as subordinate Rasas leading in one way or another to the excellence of the principal Rasa. The point that arises now for consideration is as to which Rasas of the generally recognized list can figure as the principal sentiments in the different dramatic types. The consideration here is to be made from the standpoint mainly of the spectator who enjoys Rasa, but as it is the dramatic piece the represen- tation of which makes him enjoy Rasa, the consideration is also to be made from the playwright's point of view. The psychological approach will explain the two view points. As shown before in connection with the classification of Rasa it is the various mental conditions which are involved in the enjoyment of Rasa. The opinion here may differ for some call even these mental conditions the sentiments themselves in that at first the Pratīti, the Asvadana and the Bhoga are all said to be synonymous ( Pratītiścharvaņāsvādanabhogāparanāmā), the Pratiyamana as Rasa and the Pratīti as the particular Rasanā ( Pratīyamāna Eva Hi Rasaḥ, Pratītireva Viśișțā Rasana ) thus equating the Pratīti or the Bhoga with Rasa1 and later on the Bhoga is recognized of the nature of the

1. D. L. p. 187 (Lochana).

557

Druti, the Vistara and the Vikāsa;1 but what is of purpose here is the consideration of those mental conditions. Dhan- añjaya as seen before recognizes the mental conditions to be of four kinds, viz. the Vikäsa, the Vistara, the Ksobha and the Viksepa. These have reference to the spectator when he is witnessing the dramatic representation. The Vikāsa is the blooming forth of the heart of the spectator. It is, therefore, a mental condition which is beneficial to the human organism and can long subsist in the spectator. He may even be said to have a keen longing to maintain it for long. Dhanañjaya associates it primarily with the Srngāra Rasa. On the basis of the above mental condition the Śrngāra Rasa has the widest appeal to mankind. This fact may account for its being recognized as even the Rasarat, the foremost among Rasas. Its generally accepted two kinds, the Sambhoga and the Vipralambha or even the third one, the Ayoga according to Saradātanaya which corresponds to the Purvaräga subkind of the Vipralambha as shown pre- viously, are experienced as pleasurable, as the Ayoga and the Vipralambha bring about the excellence of the Sambhoga which is the culminating effect. Hence there is the rule that without the depiction of the Vipralambha, the Sam- bhoga coming later on is not relished in its fullness and excellence. The Śrngāra Rasa, therefore, can figure as the principal Rasa. In the Hāsya the same mental condition, viz. the Vikāsa comes into being in the spectator. It is, therefore, said to be a product of the Śrngära according to Dhanañjaya etc. The Prabhā Com. to the D. R. argues that because the mental condition in the Śrngāra is the Vikāsa, therefore in the imitation of the Śrngāra the Vikāsa must

1. D. L. p. 189 (Lochana).

558

subsist, and as the imitation of the Śrngāra is the Hāsya, therefore in the Hasya the Vikasa must subsist. Whatever may be the line of argument the Vikāsa is also associated with the Hasya Rasa, but this imitation theory of the Hasya Rasa may affect its recognition as the principal Rasa. Then the Vistara is associated with the Vira Rasa. The Vistara is the expansion of the heart ; this function naturally should be beneficial to the human system as it is a very agree- able sensation. The spectator, therefore, comes naturally to like it, so to say, to be prolonged. The partiality of the spectator for it becomes clear when he is willing to enjoy the Vira Rasa at a dramatic representation for as many times as possible. It is, therefore, recognized as one of the principal Rasas. This expansion of the heart also results so far as the Adbhuta Rasa is concerned, but, as ordinary expreience of the spectator confirms, the element of wonder loses its attrac- tion after a short time during which its novelty and striking- ness become known, and, therefore, it cannot subsist long. If it is desired to be kept up long, it is to be constantly propped up through various means and devices as the demonstration of something extraordinary in form, action or things out of the common run, for example, the wonderful mirror re- flecting at one place every incident happening at some other place. Wonder is a very transient emotion and marks only the first moment of aggreeable surprise. In brief, the object of wonder has to be changed in order to keep up the conti- nuity of the sentiment. Its being the principal Rasa in a dramatic piece is thus affected, for, as said above, without the use of the above means it is difficult to be maintained at a wide stretch. The Ksobha is associated with the Bībhatsa. The Ksobha is the agitation and the chopping of the heart. This mental condition is sure to strain the human organism

559 if it is allowed to subsist for long. Sometimes it is seen happening that a man long remaining agitated comes even to lose his balance of mind, hence the Bībhatsa Rasa is never the principal sentiment. Same is the case with the Bhayā- naka Rasa which, too, is associated with the Ksobha. It is a matter of common experience that a man is seen even to die when struck with utmost fear. Hence it, too, can never be the principal Rasa in a dramatic piece. The question, however, may arise here as to why this prohibition be con- sidered at all when all Rasas are ultimately relished as plea- surable, and specially when this relish is different from the pleasurable and painful experiences in everyday life. It is deferred for the present as it will be duly and presently answered when consideration over Rasas being recognized as principal and subordinate in different dramatic pieces is made later on from other points of view. The Viksepa is distracting of the heart associated with the Raudra Rasa. It is, however, straining to the human system but not to such an extent as the Ksobha. Its being the principal Rasa, therefore, is affected. The case, however, is different with the Karuna Rasa which, too, is associated with the Viksepa. In the Karuna Rasa the heart goes out, as it were, to the object of pity ; it, therefore, gets enlarged. This is the effect of sympathy which is reciprocity towards the condi- tion of the sufferer. It, therefore, can be the principal Rasa. As said before Dhanañjaya has paid no attention to the Śānta Rasa adhering strictly to the position of Bharata as given in some of the editions of the N. S. wherefrom the description given to the Śānta Rasa is absent. Dhanañ- jaya does not recognize the Śānta Rasa which is given in slight hints even in those editions which do not describe it in details as shown by Raghavan in 'The Number of

560

Rasas' and so refutes it. He says that no activity is inyolved in the Sänta Rasa and it can never be represented ; there- fore it cannot be accepted as Rasa fit for dramatic treatment. One edition of the N. S., that is , the G. O. S., gives in details the description of the Santa Rasa. From it the mental condition in the Santa Rasa can be deduced to be the ori- ginal mental condition ( Prakrti), as it were, from which others have their birth. That is to say, other menal con- ditions originate from it and finally disappear in it when their respective causes have disappeared. It may, there fore, be construed as the complete filling up of the mind. The Vaisnava school of Bengal accepts the Santa Rasa openly and associates with it the Purti Chitta Vrtti, the complete filling up of heart. Viewed from this standpoint the specta- tor can enjoy this Rasa, hence it can figure as the principal Rasa. The above school also recognizes the other four mental conditions, hence other Rasas also receive their recognition, but the Madhura Rasa is made the principal one. These mental conditions are recognized as the Vistara ( expansion ), the Vikāsa ( unfolding ) and the Druti (melting) by Bhattanayaka. At the hands of Abhinava these mental conditions are called the Gunas, viz. the Ojas, the Prasāda and the Mädhurya existing respectively as the Dīpti ( expan- sion ), the Vyāpakatva (pervasion ) and the Druti (melting) of the heart. Abhinava makes this position clear in the Lochana com. to the D. L. in connection with the explana- nation of the words mainly of Ananda. Ananda says that Rasas as the Raudra etc. generate intensive Dīpti, they are called the Dīpti by Laksaņā. He expressly names the Śrngāra and the Karuņa in connection with the Mādhurya and the Raudra etc. (which Abhinava interprets as the

561

Raudra, the Vira and the Adbhuta )1 in connection with the Dīpti. The Vyapakatva is necessary for all Rasas, hence no particular conditions are pointed out by Ananda in cases of Rasas as the Hasya, the Bhayanaka, the Bībhatsa and the Śānta. This indifference may be construed as non-recognition of these Rasas as the principal ones. Abhinava, however, takes pains to point out that Ananda has hinted at the pre- sence of the Mādhurya and the Dīpti in various proportions in them. The Hasya is recognized as the part of the Srngāra. This recognition evidently has a trace of Bharata's influence. In pointing out the proportion of the Mädhurya and the Ojas in cases of the Bhayanaka, the Bībhatsa and the Santa the nature and the variety of the Vibhavas are considered. Hence the consideration of Rasas as principal and sub- ordinate is to be made from the view point of the Vibhāvas. This consideration seems pertinent as the theories of the Yogamālāsamhitā and Nārada, given by Sāradātanaya in the B. P. and described previously, about the different Rasas as different mental modifications wherein the three Gunas, viz. the Sattva, the Rajas and the Tamas operate in various ways also take into account the Vibhāvas. Bharata says that whatever is Suchi (pure ), Medhya ( sacred ), Ujjvala (resplendent) and Darśanīya ( worth seeing ) is compared to the Śrngāra. The Srngāra Rasa, therefore, is that which appeals to the heart and has resplendent dress. It is of the nature of the best youth ( Uttamayuvaprakrti or Uttama- yuvatiprakrti) and has for its cause woman and man ( Strī- purușa Hetuka). These are the Ālambana Vibhāvas whereas the Uddīpana Vibhāvas are seasons, garlands, fragrant ointments, beautiful places, forests etc. This is in case of the

1. D. L. p. 208 (Lochana). 36

562 Sambhoga Śrngāra. In the Vipralambha Śrngāra these very factors become objects of poignance as they turn up reminiscences of the beloved who is separated due to some cause. The union of the two, however, is to take place finally as the parties know that after the separating cause has ceased to operate they will again be closed together in happiness. A sort of longing for reunion ( Sāpekşabhāva) , is present here as Bharata puts it.1 It is, therefore, that, though in matters of love the Marana stage is enumerated as the tenth stage, it is strictly prohibited from being represented on the stage. Sāradātanaya calls the Vibhāvas of the Śrngāra Rasa the Lalitas and says in course of the definition given previously that they cause delight to the mind. When such is the nature of these Vibhāvas, the Srngāra Rasa can be depicted as the principal Rasa in a dramatic piece. In the Hāsya Rasa the Vibhavas are those which cause laughter. They are the persons putting on distorted robes, have dis- orderly make-up, talk absurdly, make satirical remarks etc. As Bharata says the laughter may be with reference to one's own such distortions ( Atmastha ) or relating to others' ( Parastha ). The first is illustrated in case of the Vidūsaka who laughs at his own distorted face, dress etc. and the second in case of others who laugh at the deformi- ties of the Vidūsaka. It is a point worth consideration here if such a laughter can long be sustained. The Vidūşaka, though a well remunerated character for this purpose, becomes angry when abused beyond limits. In that case he is to be cajoled. Even the kings, the queens etc. who laugh at the Vidūșaka have, therefore, to maintain modera- tion in this matter. Bharata says that it is seen mostly in 1. N. S. (K. S. S.) p. 73.

563

women and low characters ( Strīnīchaprakrțāveșa Bhūyiș- tham Drśyate Rasah )1 though its six kinds are pointed out with refrence to high, middle and low charatcers. Sāradā- tanaya calls these Vibhavas the Lalitābhāsas which when indicated, heard, seen or remembered become the cause of laughter. The very denomination, Lalitābhāsa, shows its dependence on the Vibhavas of the Srngara Rasa. Such nature of the Vibhävas should, therefore, naturally affect its being the principal Rasa. In the Vīra Rasa the Vībhāvas according to Bharata are the best and highest persons. Śaradātanaya calls them the Sthiras which when heard, seen, remembered or thought of become the cause of Sthairya (steadiness). The Vira Rasa can, therefore, be the principal Rasa. In the Adbhuta Rasa the Vibhavas are the persons, divine or human, doing activities of extraordinary nature etc. Sāradātanaya calls them the Chitras which cause wonder and engender sense of variety. Here the point worth consideration is that the wonderful causes are sure to lose their novelty when long contacted. Hence their strikingness is to be repeatedly demonstrated in order to maintain wonder for long. The Adbhuta Rasa, thus, can be depicted as the principal Rasa. In the Bībhatsa Rasa the Vibhāvas are those causing disgustful contraction as Bharata says. Sāradātanaya calls these Vibhävas the Ninditas and says that on their sight the eyes at once close and have no further desire to see them. The writers as Mammata etc. say that in the Bībhatsa Rasa the mind expands. Vamana Jhalkikara, however, points out in the com. that, because in the Bibhatsa the object is dis- gusting, the desire to give it up is intense (Bībhatse Tu Jugupsitavişayetyantam Tyāgechchhā )2. When such is the

1. N. S. ( K. S. S. ) VI. 51. 2. K. P. p. 476 (Com).

564

nature of the Vibhävas, it can never be the principal Rasa in a dramatic piece. In the Bhayānaka Rasa the Vibhāvas are such as cause trembling, pallor, contraction of limbs etc. Śāradātanaya calls these Vibhāvas the Vikrtas which cause change. Abhinava says that fear is seen mostly in women, low persons, children etc.1 The Bhayānaka Rasa, therefore, can never be the principal Rasa. In the Raudra Rasa the Vibhāvas are the Rākșasas, the Dānavas and human beings of ferocious and violent nature using angry words, doing insult etc. Sāradātanaya calls these Vibhāvas the Kharas which bring about the timidity of mind. Mammata says that in the Raudra Rasa the mind expands. Vamana Jhalki- kara says that in the Raudra Rasa the effort goes on till the destruction of the evil-doer.2 It is not really an expansion but a burning of the heart which longs to express itself in destruction of the evil-doer. Such being the nature of the Vibhavas, its being the principal Rasa is affected. In the Karuna Rasa the Vibhavas are those who are afflicted, troubled etc. by curse, calamities etc. They cause distrac- tion of the mind. Śāradātanaya calls these Vibhāvas the Rüksas which at once give pain to the sense organs. But these Vibhavas by virtue of their helplessness are objects of pity, hence the Karuna Rasa can be the principal sentiment in a dramatic piece. It is to be noted here that, though it is painful to see distress, the mind of the audience undergoes a melting in sympathy with the object distressed, therefore it proves agreeable to the audience. In the Santa Rasa the Vibhāvas must be such as bring about perfect peace of mind, a sort of complete filling up of the mind as pointed out by Rūpa Gosvāmī. Mammata says that in the Santa Rasa the 1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VI. p. 327 (Com.). 2. K. P. p. 476 (Com.).

565

mind undergoes the highest degree of melting. Hence the Śanta Rasa can be the principal Rasa in a dramatic piece. As these Vibhavas excite the dormant impressions in the spectator the consideration from the point of view of the Sthāyibhāvas is opportune. It is pertinent because of one more reason. The drama as pointed out is, if at all to convey instructions, to do so through amusement. It, therefore, is to discharge the above function by rousing the latent impressions in the spectator. The artist's dexterous and skilful hand is here to be marked engaged in delicate touches and cautious manipulation of those latent impressions. The Rati Sthāyi- bhāva is full of delight ( Pramodātmikā or Āmodātmako Bhāva ) as Bharata puts it.1 It is sweet to the taste ( Svādvī) as Śāradātanaya says.2 It, therefore, is an impression the arousal of which is to make the spectator feel nothing but pleasure and delight during the time it is excited. It also goes back to its dormant state much better strengthened than before and gives tone to the system. The artist here gets full opportunity as the spectator's liking for the Srngāra Rasa gets fully reciprocated. The ideals of love presented by modification of the realistic counterparts can be well represented on a wide canvas by the dramatist. The Śrngāra Rasa, therefore, can be the principal Rasa. The Häsa is the Sthayibhava which is the expansion of the heart as Sāradā- tanaya puts it.3 Its arousal can serve as a successful means to laugh away evils in self and in others and thus tone the system and purge the society of its many-sided deficiency. The artist, therefore, can use it for useful ends but the point worth consideration is as to how long it can be sustained. It will

1. N. S. (G. O. S.) VII. p. 351; N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 81. 2. B. P. Line 20. p. 34. 3. B. P. Line 21. p. 34.

566

have to be used very cautiously, otherwise it will degenerate into mere buffoonery with no purpose. The object of the dramatist, however, is to place high ideals for emulation in a society which has very little of evil. Hence the Hāsya Rasa in its being the principal Rasa is affected. The Utsāha Sthāyibhāva is the latent impression characterized, on its arousal, by quick mental activity according to Śāradātanaya.1 It is of the best nature ( Uttamaprakrtiḥ) as Bharata says.2 It means that it is to be found in high persons. The spectator, therefore, feels delight at the excitement of this Sthāyibhāva. The artist's object in presenting high personanges doing high, noble and magnanimous deeds is also served well. The society is thereby rendered a great service and the indivi- dual is highly benefited. This Sthāyibhāva in its excited stage can usefully be maintained long, hence it can very well be depicted as the principal sentiment in a dramatic piece. The Vismaya Sthāyibhāva is excited by objects of uncommon run causing delight. It is the wonderful attitude of the mind ( Chittavaichitrya ) as Śāradātanaya says3. As it causes delight it can be excited in the spectator without any harm. The artist here has got full opportunities to represent his ideals in their different and many varieties. The extraordinary bravery, magnanimity, nobility, strength, and power of high personages belonging to heavenly or infernal regions, and ordinary human beings' such activities as are above the average level are all objects of his representation. The Hindu view of life believing in reciprocal and mutual communication of the beings of different regions finds full scope for representa- tion here as modified, of course through the alembic of the

1. B. P. Line 2. p. 35. 3. B. P. Line 4. p. 35. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 83.

567

artist's genius. But then he has to be very cautious here as such extraordinary activities as mentioned above lose their uncommonness when become known. The Vismaya Sthäyibhäva, therefore, in the spectator is sure to lose ex- citement and go back to its former latent state if not care- fully sustained. The artist engages himself in delicate suggestive touches which keep on the Sthāyibhāva in its excited stage. Thus can the Adbhuta Rasa be made the principal sentiment in a dramatic piece. The Jugupsā Sthäyibhava is excited by objects which are disgusting. It is the contraction of the mind ( Chittasankocha) and consists of the censure ( Nindatma ) as Saradātanaya says.1 It is found in women and low persons ( Strīnīchaprakrtikā) as Bharata says.2 The artist has got an opportunity here to excite this dormant impression in the spectator and arouse in him a detestation for various objects. But as pointed out just before he is to do so through the Vibhävas which are the Ninditas, the detested ones, which he will hardly use to a large extent. His object is to place high ideals of bravery, nobility etc. and not breed primarily a detestation for objects by presenting them in their loathsome aspects. Hence it is never the principal sentiment in a dramatic piece. The dramatist, even if he may like for certain reasons to depict it as the principal Rasa, is psychologically barred from doing so as the human system will be strained and the impression left behind may even prove harmful. The Bhaya Sthāyi- bhäva is excited by objects which are fearful. It is the agitation of the heart. The Vibhāvas as said before are the Vikrtas. This Sthāyibhāva is to be excited generally in women and low persons as Bharata says.3 The artist has

1. B. P. Line 9. p. 35. 3. N. S. (G. O. S.) VII. p. 354. 2. N. S. (K. S. S.) VII. p. 84.

568

here opportunity for producing fear for dreadful persons and things ; but this weak point of the human being is not excited to a large extent, for the aim of the dramatic piece is to place high ideals for emulation through amusement. It, no doubt, sometimes so happens in life that a person struck with utmost fear even dies, but as the dramatic piece is concerned with the representation of life idealized the Bhaya Sthāyibhāva is not so much aroused in order to avoid its worldly sting. It is, therefore, never made the principal sentiment in a dramatic piece. The Krodha Sthāyibhāva is excited by objects which are insulting, quarrelsome or bring about something which is inimical or hostile. It produces the Tejas ( strength not bearing insult ) as Śāradātanaya puts it.1 According to him the exciting causes are the Kharas, the cruel ones etc. The artist gets here an opportunity for showing the violent tempers of the ferocious persons pitted against one another. It goes to some extent in showing the excellence of strong but noble and magnanimous persons who stand as suppressors of the above mentioned violent and ferocious persons. This state of excitement cannot be sustained long as it also proves straining to the human system, though it is the nature of the Daityas, the Danavas etc. This Sthāyibhava is, therefore, not made much of. Hence the Raudra Rasa in its being the principal Rasa is affected. The Śoka Sthāyibhāva is excited by objects which are pitiable for some reasons. The Vibhavas are the Rūksas as shown previously. This Sthāyibhāva when excited causes strain to the human system as it is troubling to all the sense organs. It is, however, utilized on a wide scale to show the helpless condition of the character whose nobility in renunciation and

1. B. P. Line 5. p. 35.

569

such other unselfish deeds for the benefit of others stand out prominently. The artist's opportunity here for the representa- tion of great and noble ideals is full, hence this Sthāyibhāva in the spectator is excited by him on a wide scale. The Karuna Rasa, therefore, can be the principal Rasa in a drama- tic piece. Lastly comes the Sthayibhava of the Santa Rasa. Its excitement consists in bringing into perceptual being the originally peaceful, blissful and undisturbed nature of the self through the Sthayibhavas of other Rasas. It is a state which is ever blissful, hence delightful to the spectator. The artist here has opportunity to depict the nothingness of worldly objects and place the highest ideal, the attainment of the blissful nature of the self. It, therefore, can be the principal Rasa in a dramatic piece. It has been seen through the different view points of consideration that even though all Rasas are pleasurable, the dramatist in making them experienced by the spectator is barred by many factors which guide him in presenting some Rasas as principal while others as subordinate. These different Rasas as principal and subordinate are well illustrated in the different types of drama. The Śrngara occupies the widest scope in them. It is made the principal Rasa in the Nātaka type as in the Abhijñāna- śākuntala. It is the principal Rasa in the Prakaraņa type as in the Mrchchhakatika and the Mālatīmādhava. It is again the principal Rasa in the Bhāna type as in the Rasasa- dana Bhāņa, the Śņngāratilaka Bhāņa, the Mukundānanda Bhana etc. It is the principal Rasa in the Vīthi type of drama according to all the dramaturgists as shown above. It is also the principal Rasa in the Ihamrga type as in the Rukmiņīharaņa Īhāmrga by Vatsarāja. The Śrngārābhāsa is illustrated in the Ihāmrga in case of Śiśupāla in the above

570 mentioned drama as he is chosen as the selected bridegroom by the party of the bride who, however, never loves him but Lord Krsna. The latter also responds to her love which is, thus, the Śrngāra Rasa standing out prominently against its Ābhāsa (semblance ). The Śrngāra as the subordinate Rasa is, practically speaking, depicted wherever considered necessary in other types of drama as in the Samudramathana Samavakāra where the mutual love of Vāsudeva Krsna and Lakşmī is depicted. The Śrngāra Rasa which is Anauchitya- pravartita ( incongruous and inappropriate and hence rough and coarse ) is depicted in the Prahasana type of drama. The Lațakamelaka, the Hāsyārņava, the Nāțavāța etc. depict profusely this aspect of the Śrngāra Rasa. It is the Śrngārā- bhasa, the semblance of the Śrngāra Rasa. Here this aspect of the Śrngra Rasa is to be distinguished from the one depicted in the Bhana type. In the Prahasana the characters are mostly of the higher status of society as the priests, the Brāhmanas and the Ksattriyas even occupying the highest position as that of the king as illustrated in the Hāsyārnava Prahasana1; they are seen engaged in immoral actions as making advances to go-betweens, prostitutes etc. though at the same time they take advantage over others by virtue of their higher status in society. The characters thus do not all belong to the same category. In the case of the Bhanas the characters are such as befit well the love affairs. The principal character is the Vita who as already seen is an cxpert in love affairs, and the contents of the Bhana are his love experiences with amorous ladies. It is, therefore, the Srngāra Rasa, though of the lower order, and not the Śṛngārābhāsa as in the Prahasana. A glimpse of the

1. H. P.

571

Śrngārābhāsa may be instanced in the Mrchchhakațika in the love of Śakāra for Vasantasenā. The latter, though a hetaera, is depicted as unresponsive to the former's love. Vasanta- senā's love, however, for Chārudatta cannot be instanced as the Śrngārābhāsa, as she is depicted as exclusively devoted to him. The Śrngārābhāsa in case of Sakara figures as subordinate to the Śrngāra Rasa, the principal sentiment in the above Prakarana. It, however, is depicted as principal in the Prahasana as shown above. But in the Prahasanas this Śrngārābhāsa is recognized as the Hāsya by the drama- turgists. How the Śrngārābhāsa which consists in the unresponded offers of the lover to the beloved becomes the Hasya is illustrated in the Pravesaka of the fifth act of the Āścharayachūdāmani in the words of Mandodarī who says to her maid servant, " Oh, Maid-servant, come along. Un- noticed by the king let us enter the Aśoka garden. Con- cealed in the midst of thick creepers let us witness and mock at the king's unresponded wooing of Sita." In the above recognition of the Śrngārābhāsa as the Hāsya is to be traced clearly the influence of Bharata who said that out of the Sngāra Rasa came the Hāsya Rasa. This theory may be said to account for the limited development of the Hāsya Rasa in Sanskrit Drama on an independent line. The indepe- dent development of the Häsya Rasa is to be seen in such Prahasanas as the Damaka1 where the entry of the dog in the hermitage and its running away with the barks cause laughter. Dämaka himself placed in the hermitage of Paraśurāma is a cause of laughter. In plays such as the above, manners inconsistent with the prescribed ones are described. On the other hand, in the plays as the Matta-

1. V. D. P.

572

vilāsaprahasana, the Hāsyachūdāmani etc. though the various religious orders of the society are lashed the love affairs do come in. Dämaka, however, corresponds with the Vidūşaka found in dramas. The Vidūsaka represents laughter, pure and simple. He is the whip of the degraded manners of the society. But he, too, is unable to shake off the connections with love affairs as in the Adbhutadarpana where Mahodara, the Vidūșaka, is of service to Rāvana in connection with his love for Sītā. In other dramas also he serves to advance the love of the hero for the heroine and sometimes even vice versa. In the Nagananda in the beginning of the third act he even puts on the dress of a lady and deceives the Cheta and the Vita in their amorous advances. Thus the Vidūsaka, though representing sometimes the independent develop- ment of the Hasya Rasa, is yet not quite rid of the influence of the Srngāra Rasa. The Vīra Rasa figures as principal in the Nāțaka type of drama as in the Mahāvīracharita where, as shown before, it is to be seen in almost all its recognized kinds. It is also the principal sentiment in the Samavakāra type of drama as in the Samudramathana Samavakāra by Vatsarāja. It also figures as the principal Rasa in the Vyā- yoga type of drama as in the Dhanañjayavijayavyāyoga, the Madhyama vyāyoga etc. It is utilized by the dramatist as profusely as the Srngāra Rasa. The Bhāna type of drama illustrates the Vira Rasa suggested as secondary to the Śrngāra Rasa. In the Dima the Vīra Rasa figures as a subordinate Rasa. Thus the Vira Rasa is depicted by the dramatist to show the different activities which express zeal and enthusiasm in the dramatic piece. The Adbhuta Rasa is also depicted as principal in the Nātaka type of drama as in the Adbhutadar- pana. The effort of the artist in sustaining the Adbhuta Rasa becomes clear when the expressions of the characters uttered

573

on different occasions are taken into consideration. The name of the dramatic piece, the Adbhutadarpana, is by itself suggestive of the Adbhuta Rasa. The wonderful mirror, which is made the pivot of the suggestion of Rasa, belongs originally to the father-in-law of Rāvana.1 It, therefore, is implied to be associated with the magical power of reflecting events happening at distant places. Then Laksmana's words in the 18th stanza of the second act, Rama's words in the 8th stanza of the fourth act, Maya's words in the 16th stanza in the Viskambhaka of the fifth act wherin he says that the minds of their party are always engrossed in magic ( Māyā ), his words again as reminder of the magical power of the wonderful mirror in the same Viskambhaka of the same act2, Räma's words in the sixth, the seventh and the eighth acts reminding the magical power of the mirror,3 Laksmana's words in the sixth act to the above effect,4 Rāvana's words in the seventh act expressing to Mahodara that it is a matter of curiosity to him that Trijatā is demonstrating to Sītā the celebrations of his victory5 and his words in the eighth act expressing to Mahodara his confusion because of the wonder- ful story though projected by magic6, the words of Sūrpana- khā expressing wonder in the tenth act7, Laksmana's words expressing wonder in the 24th stanza of the tenth act and finally the words uttered in the Nepathya expressing Rāma as the object of the three worlds' rejoicings and celebrations8 are some of the instances of the effort of the dramatist which help in exciting and sustaining the Adbhuta Rasa. Another

1. A. D. I. p. 12. 2. Ibid. V (Vişkambhaka) p. 45. 3. Ibid. VI. p. 55., 62 ; VII. 70 ; VII. 89, 91. 4. Ibid. VI. p. 61. 5. Ibid. VII. p. 86. 6. Ibid. VIII. p. 94. 7. Ibid. X. p. 118. 8. Ibid. X. p. 123.

574 illustration of the Nātaka depicting the Adbhuta Rasa as principal is the Āścharyachūdāmani. Here also the name of the dramatic piece, Āścharyachūdāmani, suggests by itseff the Adbhuta Rasa. The wonderful crest jewel with the wonderful ring come as presents from the Janasthāna sages and hermits through Laksmana to Sītā and Rāma.1 Here also the effort of the dramatist to excite and sustain the Adbhuta Rasa is to be seen at work at many places. The last words of the Sūtradhāra in the Sthāpana suggest the Adbhuta Rasa2. Laksmana's words in the 6th stanza of the first act in ex- pression of his wonder at the false appearance and make-up of Śūrpaņakhā, Rāma's words in the 21st stanza of the same act in expression of the wonderful achievements of Laksmana, the expression of wonder by Rāma and Sītā on Lakșmaņa's producing the wonderful crest jewel and the wonderful ring in the third act3, Rama's words in the 12th stanza of the third act in the description of the golden deer, Ravana's words in expression of Sita's wonderfully fascinating form in the 20th stanza of the same act, Rama's throwing away Marīcha with his foot after having described the wonderful power of the ring in the same act4, Hanuman's wonderfully flying over the ocean and his expresssing wonder at the sight of the beautiful city of Lankā and his entering Rāvana's garden and expressing wonder at its beauty in the beginning of the sixth act5, Sīta's expression of wonder on Hanūmān's produc- ing the wonderful ring before her in Rāvana's garden®, Vidyā- dhara's expression of wonder at the wonderful appearance of earth etc. from above in the 2nd stanza of the mixed

1. A. C. III. p. 87. 2. Ibid. pp. 10-11 (Sthāpanā). 3. Ibid. III. p. 89. 4. Ibid. III. p. 122. 5. Ibid. VI. pp. 179-181. 6. Ibid. VI. p. 196.

575

Viskambhaka of the seventh act, Laksmana's words des- cribing the fire ordeal of Sīta in a wonderful manner and Räma's expression of wonder on hearing it in the seventh act1, the presence of the gods and manes of the ancestors during the ordeal preceded by songs of the Gāndharvas in praise of Rāma and Sītā,2 Sītā's again expressing the wonderful power of the two wonderful gems3 etc. are some of the means through which the artist is to be watched in his laboratory springing up surprises and maintaining the Adbhuta Rasa. These are after all some factors of exciting wonder. Other factors as the characters themselves in matters of their achievements etc. as Hanūmān also excite wonder. In the Adbhutadarpana the wonderful mirror comes into view even in the first act ; the Adbhuta Rasa, therefore, centres more around it. It is a device which has been used all along and constantly reminded of. As described by Mālyavān to Maya it was originally in possession of the Rāksasas. It fell from the crown of Ravana, and was shown by Sampati to Bibhīsana who knowing its wonderful power handed it over to Rama.4 This makes clear that the mirror came to the hands of Rama by chance. In the Āscharyachūdāmaņi, however, the wonderful crest jewel and the wonderful ring were presented to Sītā and Rāma for the latter's bravery in destroying the impediments of the hermitage as described in the third act. The Adbhuta Rasa thus comes out as a result of the Vira Rasa. The Sutradhara begins the play proper describing his wonder at the bravery of Laksmana. Rāma expresses wonder at an all round efficiency of Laksmana in the 21st stanza of the first act. Thus the play has till the

1. A. C. VII. pp. 220-223. 2. Ibid. VII. pp. 223-226. 3. Ibid. VII. p. 233. 4. A. D. V. p. 45.

576 receipt of the wonderful crest jewel and the wonderful ring as presents from the sages in the third act the Adbhuta Rasa excited through the Vira Rasa. For example, the descrip- tion of the bravery of Laksmana expressed through various deeds as driving off the wild beasts with the mere twang of the bow, cutting of the nose and the ears of Śūrpaņakhā etc. springs up surprise and wonder. After that the jewel and the ring are made the pivots. Thus the artist seems here to be influenced by the theory which says that the Adbhuta Rasa is the product of the Vira Rasa. This may account for the limited development of the Adbhuta Rasa. Here in this connection it has to be remembered that, besides the above, one particular reason is seen at work. The Adbhuta Rasa is excited so long as the exciting causes are perceived from a distance ; but the contact and the fami- liarity diminish the novelty and the strikingness, hence at that time Rasa is no more realized. Rama's words in the 1st stanza of the second act of the Ascharyachūdāmaņī and Sīta's following words well illustrate the above position. It is, therefore, that the artist reserves its use in the final Sandhi of the drama in order to solve those problems which are otherwise insoluble, for the appearance of something wonderful makes one accept even an incredible object as credible. The excitement of the Adbhuta Rasa is, thus, quite justified. An illustration may be pointed out ; it occurs towards the end of the fifth act of the Nāgananda wherein the goddess Gauri is introduced. She brings back the hero to his former healthy condition. The devoured snakes are also revived with the shower of nectar by Garuda, the lord of the birds. The Raudra Rasa is depicted as the principal sentiment in the Dima type of drama. This type of drama is concerned mostly with the depiction of the ac-

577

tivities of the gods, the demons etc. who are of a violent temperament. Hence the Raudra Rasa is prescribed as the principal Rasa in it. The Raudra Rasa is generally made subordinate to the Vira Rasa in order to show the latter's excellence. The Vira Rasa is the principal sentiment in the Mahavīracharita. Rāma is the Vibhava here of this Vīra Rasa ; pitted against him is to be seen Paraśurāma who is the Vibhava of the Raudra Rasa. Rāma excels Paraśurāma, thus the Raudra Rasa is excelled by the Vira Rasa, the pro- minence of which is all the more increased. The Raudra Rasa is also to be seen suggested very slightly in the sage Durvasas in the Viskambhaka of the fourth act of the Abhijñānaśākuntala where it serves to account for the for- getfulness of the king, thus bringing about the excellence of the Vipralambha Śrngära. It is again to be seen sugges- ted secondarily in Viśvāmitra in the second act of the C. K. where it brings about the pitiable condition of the king Hariśchandra who is depicted as the hero of the dramatic piece. From the very beginning the king is seen happy with the Vidüsaka and the queen and engaged in religious ob- servances to avert impending evils. While chasing the boar, the impediment incarnate, he reaches the hermitage of the sage Viśvāmitra who is seen engaged in certain rites intended to achieve the three Vidyās. He proves himself as an impediment which enrages the sage whose wrath brings about his pitiable condition. Thus it is the Raudra Rasa resulting in the Karuna Rasa. Here again Bharata's influence is to be traced as his theory propounding the Karuna Rasa as an effect of the Raudra Rasa is seen at work. Another instance where the Karuna is depicted as the principal senti- ment is the Uttararämacharita. Here, however, it figures 37

578 independent of the Raudra Rasa. The Karuna Rasa figures as the principal sentiment in the Anka type of drama as in the Unmattaräghava.1 The Karuna Rasa as depicted in the above types of drama is to be distinguished from the Vipra- lambha Śrngāra in that whereas the latter is the Sāpeksabhāva, as pointed out before, the former is the Nirapeksabhāva, that is, of a nature wherein neither of the separated parties knows that the reunion will take place, though in the end the union is shown as brought about. The Bībhatsa Rasa never figures as the principal sentiment in any type of drama. It is to be seen always figuring as a subordinate Rasa doing service to other Rasas. In the Pravesaka to the third act of the Venisamhara the Bībhatsa Rasa is depicted. The Àlambana Vibhāvas are the Rākșasa and the Rākșasī who are to be seen engaged in collecting marrow etc., drinking blood and hoarding all these as provision for future. The joy of the Räksasa in collecting all these is brought about by the excelling bravery of Arjuna on the battlefield as the Rākșasa says just in the beginning,2 hence the Bībhatsa Rasa may be said to be the effect of the Vira Rasa. The artist has very dexterously utilized the depiction of the Bībhatsa Rasa in the narration of the bravery of the heroes on the battlefield, thus advancing the action of the dramatic piece. In the fifth act of the Mālatīmadhava the Bībhatsa Rasa is depicted . It comes in as an aid to Mādhava in his love affairs, hence it may be said to be harnessed to the service of the Śrngara Rasa. The fiends and goblins engaged in their joyful sports with Madhava himself selling human flesh to them form the nucleus of the scene. The various activities of the goblins strike terror into the heart 1. U. R. A. 2. V. S. III (Praveśaka) p. 53.

579

as Madhava himself says just after the 15th stanza. In the fourth act of the C. K. the depiction of the Bibhatsa Rasa is again to be found in the description of the goblins etc. in their sportful activities on the cremation ground. The king himself on various occasions uses the word, Bībhatsa.1 The tumultuous activities strike terror into the heart of the persons who try to run away as can be illustrated from the words of the two Chandālas.2 The above instance can well be said to show the influence of Bharata as the Bhayā- naka is here represented as the effect of the Bībhatsa Rasa in persons who are low characters as the Chandālas. Hariś- chandra, however, is shown not at all affected with the dreadfulness of the scene. The Bhayānaka Rasa is never depicted as the principal Rasa in a dramatic piece. It comes in only as subordinate to other Rasas. In the second act of the Mahaviracharita Sīta etc. are seen struck with fear at the sight of Paraśurāma who is the Ālambana Vibhāva of the Raudra Rasa. The Bhayānaka Rasa here may be said to result from the Raudra Rasa. It figures here as a sub- ordinate Rasa. In the Abhijñāśākuntala the Bhayānaka Rasa is depicted in Priyamvadā and Anasūyā with reference to the sage Durväsas who is the Ālambana Vibhāva of the Raudra Rasa. The Bhayanaka thus results from the Raudra Rasa. It is, however, harnessed to the service of the Srn- gāra Rasa as the two companions of Śakuntalā propitiate the fiery sage and thus make the future union of the lover and the beloved possible at the sight of the ring. The Bhayānaka Rasa recognized by Mammata of which the Alambana is the deer in the same drama results from the strength and capacity of the king. It, therefore, may be 1. C. K. IV. pp. 67, 68, 69, 72, 73 etc. 2. Ibid. IV. p. 72.

580

said to be the effect of the Vira Rasa. It, however, does service to the Śrngāra Rasa, the principal sentiment of the piece, in that the frightened deer brings the king to the hermitage where his meeting with Śakuntalā takes place. The Santa Rasa is depicted as the principal Rasa in the Nātaka type of drama as the Amrtodaya wherein the Santa Rasa is depicted towards the end after the depiction of the efforts of all the sciences in bringing about the realization of the self. The Nata only suggests in the Prastāvanā the depic- tion of the Santa Rasa in his conversation with the Sūtra- dhära,1 whereas in the Nātaka as the Prabodhachandrodaya the Sūtradhāra in the Prastavana expresses his wish of pleasing himself by the representation of the Śānta Rasa,2 though it has not been expressly mentioned as the principal Rasa of the dramatic piece. Here in this drama the position is as follows. The Supreme Reality, ( Prathamamaheśvara ) united with Illusion (Māya), gota son Spirit (Mana) to whom Worldly enjoyment (Pravrtti) bore Confusion (Moha) whereas Detachment from the world (Nivrtti) did Discri- mination ( Viveka ).3 The posterity of the former has gained much strength menacing that of the latter. The efforts, therefore, are made to bring about the union of the latter with Theology ( Upanisad ) who are long since separated in order that Science ( Vidyä ) and Knowledge ( Prabodha ) may be born. These efforts are seen graually advancing and frustrating by the counter efforts of the other party. In the end, however, the desired union is achieved which leads to the recognition of the Being (Purusa) as the supreme Lord ( Parameśvara ).4 There is, thus, the demonstration

1. G. A. p. 4. 2. P. C. pp. 13 & 17. 3. Ibid. I. 17 & the prose following. 4. P. C. VI. p. 233.

581

of constant efforts and warfare between the two rival parties. Other Rasas as the Vira etc. finally lead to the suggestion of the Santa Rasa. In another Nāțaka, the Bhartrharinir- veda, the Santa Rasa has been explicitly mentioned as the principal Rasa in the words of the Sūtradhära just after the Nändī.1 The stanza following describes the Śrngāra etc. as momentary Rasa ( Ksaniko Rasah ) as against the Śānta Rasa which is of the nature of unique pleasure of the Brah- man, and which is the final resort ( Paramaviśrānto). The play opens with the depiction of the Śrngāra Rasa as the queen Bhänumatī is seen telling her husband Bhartrhari, the king, her inability to brook even the least separtation from him. The king wants to test if her words are true and, therefore, arranges the false rumour of his death by the beast of pray. The queen dies and the king is depicted desolate by her death. He bewails her death and does not allow even her cremation and is prepared to be burnt with her so that he may be united with her in his next birth. A Yogin appears in the Viskambhaka of the third act. He promises the minister Devatilaka to remove the king's sorrow. The whole of the third act is devoted to fulfil this promise. The desired effect is achieved. In other two acts various efforts are made by the minister, the revived queen and the little prince to turn the king's mind towards worldly affairs but all to no purpose as indifference reigns supreme in him. The nothingness of this world is thus depicted on a sufficiently wide canvas in this drama. The Madhura Rasa of the Chaitanya school of Bengal is also depicted as the principal Rasa in the Nātaka type of drama as the Vidagdhamādhava. It is, however, a mystic type

1. B. N. p. 1.

582 of the Śrngāra Rasa as discussed previously. Considering the predominance of different Rasas in the Nātaka type of drama the statement of Dhanañjaya etc. to the effect that it is only the Śrngära or the Vīra which can figure as the principal Rasa there requires modification in that besides the prescribed two Rasas the Karuna, the Adbhuta and the Śānta can figure as principal Rasas as shown above. The illustrations of different Rasa-syntheses are to be found in different dramatic pieces. The Śrngāra synthesis has al- ways received priority, maybe, due to its occupying the widest scope in many dramatic pieces as shown above. The Abhijñānaśākuntala and many other dramatic pieces illus- trate it. The Häsya synthesis as the synthesis of the Rasā- bhāsa expounded by Abhinava as shown above is to be illustrated in the Prahasana type of drama. The Mahāvi- racharita illustrates the Vira synthesis which was suggested in hints by some scholars as shown previously. The Āścharyachūdāmaņi and the Adbhutadarpaņa are to be instanced in illustration of the Adbhuta synthesis. The Karuņa synthesis is represented on its practical side in dramas as the Uttararāmacharita. The Śānta synthesis is represented in the Prabodhachandrodaya, the Bhartrharinir- veda etc. The Madhura synthesis of the Bengal Vaisnavism of the Chaitanya school is to be seen in practice in the dra- matic pieces as the Vidagdhamädhava. In all these syn- theses different Rasas after which the syntheses are named play the predominant role over other Rasas in the relations of either the Prakrti-Vikrti-bhāva or the Pradhāna-gauna- bhāva. Different Rasas, thus, in various forms and aspects are to be seen predominant in different types of Sanskrit drama.

CHAPTER NINE SANSKRIT DRAMATURGY AND ENGLISH DRAMA- TURGY-A BRIEF COMPARATIVE STUDY FROM THE STANDPOINT OF RASA. Drama, both Eastern and Western, is an art and has its origin from the natural tendency in man to express himself in play. It aims through the utilization of the surplus energy in man at the attainment of an all round perfection. The achievement of this aim is, however, to be done through affecting the minds of the spectators. How this purpose is effected in the two systems, therefore, crops up here for a comparative consideration. The dramatic study is entire, complete and comprehensive when both of its aspects, theoretical and practical, are taken into consideration. Drama considered apart from its theatrical requirements is a maimed study. Various dramatic forms in any literature reflect their theatrical associations in one way or another. The series of preliminaries observed in the beginning of the representation of the Sanskrit dramas, different directions as the Nepathyābhimukhamavalokya (looking towards the tiring room) etc. in them and such directions as 'tugging in Polonius' in Hamlet are a few facts which stand against any attempt at separating the theoretical aspect from the prac- tical one. The two aspects are supplementary making up the whole picture. As an illustration Thorndike's words may be quoted. 'Tragedy has always owed a double allegiance, to literature and to the theatre. A tragedy is a play, not merely a dialogue in poetry or prose, but a play to be interpreted by actors before an audience in a theatre. To these two factors it has had first of all to suit itself. And

584 these factors have constituted conditions and standards, different and not less variable and transient than those of the literary tradition.'1 The same author's words in connection with comedy point to the same direction. 'Comedy is still more dependent on the stage for the essentials of its form and the very purpose of its being.'2 'It is a form of literature, determined by the requirements of the stage, and its aim is in unison with the main purpose of the modern theatres.'3 The seven necessary elements of constituents of drama, viz. impression ( which the Sanskrit dramaturgists recognize as Rasa ), original character as the hero etc., plot, actor, representation ( Abhinaya according to the Sanskrit dramaturgists ), theatre and spectator, therefore, come in as well in the Western system as in the Eastern. But as this comparative study is intended to be brief, attention has to be restricted to the three main constituents, viz. impression, original character and plot which are the common consti- tuents of dramas whether meant for closet study or for representation on the boards. These three will be dealt with on a modest scale whereas a few salient points of the others will be touched upon. In course of comparison consideration will be directed mainly to the English system for it represents nearly all what is available in the European system. Any particulars not obtaining therein will also receive consideration, for which, however, occasions arising will be very few. Nicoll's words, mutatis mutandis, con- firm the above position. He says in connection with tra- gedy, "As practically none of the main types of tragic ende- avour is unrepresented in English, it may be well to confine all remarks here to the development of tragedy in this lan- 1. T. T. pp. 12-13. 2. T. C. p. 16. 3. Ibid.

585

guage, with but occasional reference to the practice of other lands."1 Confining the attention mainly to the English system with occasional departures, the comparison between the two systems is pertinent. It is to be made first in res- pect of the three major constituents and then with regard to the others on a very small scale. It, however, requires to be prefaced by a short survey of the main dramatic forms in the English system along with departures from other European systems in order to help clearly in this purpose. It will prove helpful in solving a few problems which are sure to arise later on. These dramatic forms on the basis of the primal and essential distinction can be generally classified according to the impression into three major heads : firstly, those that are serious, profoundly dark and sad ; secondly, those that are gay, bright and animated ; and thirdly, those that produce both the above two impressions inextricably mixed together. The calssifications are generally and respectively called the tragedy, the comedy and the tragi-comedy. According to the degrees in the intensity of the various constituents of the total impression, and according to the centre of gravity and importance shifting from one constituent to the other therein in adjustment to the circumstances obtaining in different periods of time, the three major heads come to have many sub-heads. Thus the classification in its variety includes many divisions. The survey under the three major heads is now pertinent. The word, tragedy, comes from Greece. It originated there with the authors of the dithyramb. The Greeks regarded it as a type of poetry. Aristotle defines it as

1. T. D. p. 158.

586 follows : 'Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude ; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play ; in the form of action, not of narrative ; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions.'1 Aristotle while analyzing the constituents of the above definition as six, viz. plot, character, diction, thought, spectacle and song makes the plot the principal one. 'The plot, then, is the first principle, and, as it were, the soul of a tragedy :... '2 By plot is meant here 'the imitation of the action :... '3 as given in the above definition. Every other constituent is made subordinate to the plot. This importance of the plot necessi- tated it to be serious, complete and of a certain magnitude. The mythology of high personages supplied the stories of tremendous dimensions. The hand of Fate was visible everywhere, though the tragic error in the character bring- ing about his doom is also to be marked. The ruthless hand of Fate could be traced back to the forbears of the sufferers on the scene and seen controlling the actions and the activities of the scions, mostly innocent people. Conflict within them was present but as every other thing was sub- ordinate to the plot, it was relegated to a subservient posi- tion. The scene presented on the boards excited only pity and fear, the latter because of the inexorableness of the ancestral Fate, the former due to helplessness of its victims. This fact combined with the peculiar stage conditions and such elements as the chorus which was an integral part of the Greek tragedy can well account for the narrow canvas of the Greek tragedy which restricted itself to only two emo-

1. T. A. p. 23. 2. Ibid. pp. 27-29. 3. Ibid. p. 25.

587

tions of pity and fear. The knowledge of the Greeks was lost during the mediaeval ages. In the separation of the mediaeval world from the classical the terms, tragedy and comedy, ceased to be connected restrictedly with dramatic works. They could be used for all forms of narrative, whether dialogue or not. In connection with tragedy Chaucer's Monk sums up the accepted opinion of the day in the words : Tragedie is to seyn a certeyn storie, As olde bokes maken us memorie, Of him that stood in greet prosperitee, And is y-fallen out of heigh degree Into miserie, and endeth wrecchedly. Tragedy dealt with history, exiles, murders, important and horrible deeds, with persons of rank and importance, king or great leaders. It began prosperously but ended miserably and terribly. This was the content of a tragedy as fixed in the minds of all persons in the 16th century. In England Miracle and Mystery plays or Moralities sprang up from the religious observances. The former dealt with the lives of saints or episodes from the Bible whereas the latter portrayed personifications of abstract virtues aiming at edification. These were the direct ancestors of the Elizabethan tragedy over which the influence of other tendencies is also seen at work. For instance, the influence was there of the Sene- can plays, themes of which were 'borrowed from Greek mythology, with a strong preference for the most sensational and bloody stories of adultery, incest, the murder of parents by their children or of children by their parents. What- ever the revolting and bloody details, crime and its retribu- tion make up the burden of each story.'1 The various ten- 1. T. T. p. 33.

588

dencies from which the Elizabethan drama arose can be succintly put together as the Aristotelian idea of magnitude; the mediaeval idea of fall from happiness into unhappiness ; the pagan idea of fortune ; and the Christian idea of moral punishment. Many attempts at writing dramatic pieces were made. University Wits, too, tried their hands at various dramatic forms. Among these writers Marlowe tried to establish the tragic type in England and his efforts supplied a great want. 'That conception of Renascence virtue battling onward to success and then falling unconquered before fate gave to English tragedy a theme of greatness and strength which before was wanting in it.'1 His plays, however, were not truly great, they only paved the way for the plays of Shakespeare who achieved a consummate success ; his conception of tragedy, therefore, deserves special notice. His major tragedies, though all in the nature of experiments, have characteristics which are common. For instance, 'there is an outer and an inner tragedy, the outer sometimes working in direct contrast to the inner. The outer tragedy is laid down on lines of the utmost sensationalism, dealing with murder and torture and bloodshed ; the inner tragedy is quieter and more poignant, involving usually a struggle between emotion and intellect, or between emotion and traits of character which have arisen out of habit and custom.'2 Then 'there are the hint at supernatural forces operating unseen but surely, and the peculiar relationship which the hero bears to his surroundings,'3 as all the 'heroes are set in positions where they, and they alone, cannot battle with fate.'4 These above characteristics point at the importance

1. T. D. p. 170. 2. Ibid. p. 171. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. p. 172.

589

attached to the character round whom conflicts of various nature and form revolve. Many imitations followed but the standard once attained could not be reached again. The transition, however, brought about the Restoration tragedy called the Heroic tragedy which had some features of the Elizabethan tragedy plus others borrowed from the French dramas. From among the Elizabethan influences though the fatal relationship of the hero with his surroundings is absent, yet such features as the outer and the inner conflict where the latter is restricted to struggle between emotion of love and intellect narrowed down to duty, the supernatural element etc. are to be seen. The French influence is to be marked in many ways. 'The use of the heroic couplet was its distinguishing mark ; of course, an imitation of French practice. The plots, too, were direct borrowings, or close imitations, of contemporary French romances or dramas. Moreover, the themes and their treatment, the conception of honor, the importance given to love, and the pseudo- history, all followed French ideas. The unities were atten- ded to, if not striclty observed ; incidents, persons and scenes greatly reduced in number in comparison with Eliza- bethan practice ; and fixed rules of propriety in characteriza- tion and language observed, all in French fashion.'1 The writers endeavoured to excite admiration even with exaggera- tion and bombast. The above two influences were working. The worst excesses, the most undesirable conventions as well as the excellences of the Elizabethans excited imitation, but in all these it was a case of the Elizabethan bloom gone to seed in unfavourable soil. The result was the origin of the Sentimental tragedy. Of this type .... few reveled in

1. T. T. p. 254.

590 horrors and bloodshed, the majority observed the unities, nearly all had few persons, a restricted action, and themes and situations confined to slight variations of a stereotyped love story ; and nearly all had regard for poetic justice.'1 This type is another form of the Heroic tragedy. The centre of attraction then shifted towards the incidents which be- came the prime point of interest. The transition was made to the Horror tragedy. The inner struggle ending dis- astrously may be present but it figures only secondarily; it is, therefore, that it is not the characters who assume im- portance but the incidents and the situations in which they are placed which drew the first notice. And in this consists its primary significance which makes it counted as a separate type. 'It is not, of course, a strictly separate species, for ele- ments of horror may enter into tragedies of quite a different type, as in Hamlet and in Lear ; but stands apart in having all or most of the stress on the outward elements with what- soever there may be of inner tragedy closely interwoven with and depending upon the stage sensationalism. Horror from situation and incident thus dominates The Duchess of Malfi, Vottoria Corombona, and The Broken Heart, three plays which may be taken as characteristic of the species.'2 The importance and significance afterwards came to be attached to the subject-matter and its special tone. The subject- matter comes from the middle-class society which is so arranged as to enforce moral plainly and directly. Here is to be marked the birth of the Domestic tragedy. Many elements can, no doubt, be traced back to Elizabethan practice but the species as such originated here. Lillo's pioneering work, The London Merchant gives the plea 1. T. T. p. 296. 2. T. D. p. 173.

591 for this type. In the dedication to Sir John Eyles the words occur : 'What I wou'd infer is this, I think, evident truth ; that tragedy is so far from losing its dignity, by being accommodated to the circumstances of the generality of mankind, that it is more truly august in proportion to the extent of its influence, and the numbers that are properly affected by it. As it is more truly great to be the instru- ment of good to many, who stand in need of our assistance, than to a very small part of that number.'1 In this type the atmosphere of majestic grandeur is generally missing. Tragedy had taken possession of domestic sentiment and morality as in the above play ; therefore, it could not be put on a par with high tragedies though there were other plays having a note which makes them rank above it. The prevailing tendencies in the field of tragedy in the present century can adequately be represented by the three standard dramatists : Ibsen, Maeterlinck and Shaw. Ibsen, the Norwegian playwright, thus writes of his aim in his play, Hedda Gabler. 'It was not my desire to deal in this play with so called social problems. What I principally wanted to do was to depict human beings, human emotions and human destinies, upon a groundwork of certain of the social conditions and principles of the present day.'2 The author here in these words gives his aim in respect of a particular play in which 'Hedda is a woman whose restlessness and lack of any controlling purpose save the satisfaction of her own selfish desires are such that a tragic end is inevitable.'3 It depicts here mainly the vehemence of emotions. He concerns himself with social problems, as indicated above, 1. L. L. M. (Dedication) pp. 3-4. 2. D. D. p. 122. 3. I. I. p. 46.

592 in his other plays. In these plays, however, his characters are figures which stand as ideals of human life. 'Dr. Stock- mann, in An Enemy of the People, is not merely an ordinary man : he embraces in himself a complete ideal of human life,' as Nicoll puts it1. His characters represent in a symboli- cal manner the universal patterns of love, jealousy etc. Characters show conflict and work out their dooms. ' Relent- less psychological truth, the remorseless interplay of cause and effect in human destiny, is the whole motive power in Ibsen's plays' as Elizabeth Drew puts it.2 Ibsen never aims at provoking theatrical remorse. He, however, implicitly passes strictures on the sordid and the dull, the shackled and the warped life. The impediments and obstructions between man and liberty as conventions, stupidity, pettiness, jealousy etc. receive indictment at his hands. Ibsen is to be watched at his best and most interesting task when the parti- cular character is seen forging some action which modifies him. In A Doll's House it is Nora Helmer who living so long in the family ultimately leaves her husband and her children to assert her rights as a human being. How these social barriers victimize persons is represented in Ghosts whrein Helene Alving has ultimately to submit herself to her husband in spite of her sufferings and troubles. Maeter- linck comes forward as the pioneer of the Poetic Drama. The origin of this species is thus accounted for. 'Drama is human life presented in terms of the theatre. Its medium is words : and since poetry is of all the uses of words the widest, deepest and richest, it follows that the highest achieve- ments of drama have always been conceived and written

1. T. D. p. 115. 2. D. D. p. 179.

593

in poetry.'1 The dullness and deadness of the work in this species is mainly due to poetry taken as the medium. What the writers of nineteenth century poetic drama did was that they decorated with poetic diction some romantic or historical story. In Maeterlinck the centre of attraction lies in the conflict which is of a nature different from its prevailing kind. As Nicoll puts it, 'In the works of Maeterlinck and his school there is an inward and outward conflict ; but the inward conflict is not the conflict of Shakespeares's heroes. There is a struggle here, not between love and honour, not between two thoughts or two emotions, but between the conscious and the sub-conscious mind, between human ties and ties of the soul. In Pellèas et Mèllisande we have the outward struggle between Pellèas and Golaud ; but that is of small importance when placed alongside of the deeper struggle in the soul of Pellèas and in the soul of the husband.'2 Maeterlinck is aware of the fact that behind all human life there is a romantic fatalism in the shape of huge malevolent powers which are never to be appeased. They are always inimical to human happiness in that they bring death, despair and destruction indifferently to all. The inwardness of the soul in Maeterlinck marks a stage onward than what was uptill his time depicted. With Shaw transi- tion is made to a different period wherein new ideas reign. He concerns himself with life as it is to be seen in his own age. His contention is that in every age a new statement of the problems of man and the universe is needed as no age is exactly like any other age nor are men and women living in one age exactly like those in the other. Shaw's attitude, therefore, in his dramas is to see life as it exists in his own

1. D. D. p. 212. 2. T. D. p. 95. 38

594

time. He depicts various phases of life. He ridicules the prevailing fashions of the day and thus tries to debunk society of its affectations and false associations. His fuller con- sideration is opportune in the discussion of the tragi-comedy coming later on. The form called Melodrama deserves passing reference here as it is only a type of tragedy which is 'increasingly more sensational, neglecting the characteriza- tion and the true tragic spirit for the sake of mere effect. Song, show and incident became the prevailing characteristics in it, ..... '1 This was the conception of Melodrama as evolved in the 18th century. In the consideration of comedy it has to be seen, to begin with, what the Greek scholar, Aristotle, has said on the point. It is to be borne in mind here that comedy had a slow growth and was not attached so much importance as was given to tragedy. Aristotle came before the comic muse of Greece had developed fully, hence his verdict here is only incidental having no great significance. As Nicoll puts it, 'The date at which he lived prevented him from realizing completely the worth and the possibilities of the comic spirit of his land. As a consequence, the Poetics deals most largely with tragedy and with the epic-the two types of literature which Greece had in his time developed finely -- and hardly at all with comedy.'2 He defines comedy as follows : 'Comedy is, as we have said, an imitation of characters of a lower type,-not, however, in the full sense of the word bad, the Ludicrous being merely a subdivision of the ugly. It consists in some defect or ugliness which is not painful or destructive. To take an obvious example, the comic mask is ugly and distorted, but does not imply pain.'3

1. T. D. p. 88. 2. Ibid. p. 11. 3. T. A. p. 21.

595

It has to be marked here that the Greek scholar's conception of laughter was an outlet for scorn and derision of something inferior which, however, caused no pain. As in the case of tragedy, the comedy in whatever form or bulk available was lost during the middle ages. Leaving aside other points of consideration, the test sometimes depended only on the happy or the unhappy ending. 'During the middle ages, the terms tragedy and comedy were applied to narra- tives according as the wheel of fortune turned from good to bad or from bad to good.'1 Hence it is that Dante's work was named Divine Comedy. In England the mediaeval drama in its Miracles and Moralities was benefited in mingling the sublime and the ridiculous, for this juxtaposition was found very effective. As Thorndike says, "They were devoted to a seriouspurposeand were often extremely didactic in tone, but they soon found a little comic business helpful in holding the attention of their audiences.'2 These Miracles and Moralities were religious and didactic. A turning from this aspect to the secular one is to be seen in France of the 15th century. It was called the farce, the aim of which was to amuse. The two elements gradually coalesced though farce in an integral form was also to be seen in England. The Miracles, the Moralities and the Farce provided edifica- tion and amusement. These forces of the mediaeval times had practically spent themselves. Then came renaissance with its humaism. The Renaissance Comedy had its birth, the models for which were provided by the plays of Terence. 'The plot is usually a conflict of tricks. A pair of young lovers are engaged in deceiving their elders. The slaves are the go-betweens and the manipulators. Mistakes, misunder-

1. T. C. p. 6. 2. Ibid. p. 24.

596 standings, disguises make up the intrigue. Twins are numerous, mistaken indentity common, and the recovery of long lost children or parents, a frequent conclusion. But the course of tricks runs no smoother than that of true love. The best planned device usually meets unexpected obstacles, intrigue is met by counter intrigue, and the situation reaches a happy complication when the trickster is tricked. The persons employed in these entanglements conform to rather fixed types. Along with the sputtering old men and love- sick youths are misers, pedants, jealous husbands, braggart soldiers and parasites, whose procilivities are open to easy ridicule.'1 The above imitation combined with elements as the Farce, Moralities, the romantic chronicle and the court show gave birth to the Comedy of Romance. Many writers produced works but it was Shakespeare who attained mastery. His comedies have elements which are noticeable. In his earlier plays the scenes are set in natural surroundings in which the characters could be fittingly placed and the emo- tions suitably depicted. The characters represent the manners and the types of the Elizabethan age. Humour appears in most of these plays ; wit is not so predominant ; wherever it wants to be uppermost it is subdued and chastened. Laughter is also subdued by being kept subordiante to the plot wherein evil is present which is afterwards set aside. This type of comedy is a compromise between idealism and realism. In his later plays the tragic element comes in which is stressed. The element of intrigue also finds scope in them. The main point of importance is the character placed in the midst of situations which have got realistic and romantic colouring made more pleasing because of humour in the 1. T. C. p. 31.

597

character. As said above, because of the preponderance of humour this type of comedy would have got the name of the Comedy of Humour, but as it will result in confusion due to the fact that the comedies of Ben Jonson are so named, they are called the Comedies of Romance. As Nicoll says, "In many ways it would be more correct to style this drama the comedy of humour ; and such a title might have been given to it, if that title had not raised a confusion between Shakespeare's comedy and the satiric comedy of Jonson, to the latter of which, rather erroneously, has been given the name of the comedy of 'humours."1 It was Ben Jonson who introduced the Comedy of Humours. It is a strange paradox that though the nomenclature is such, humour is disregarded. Wit finds favour but only occasionally as it is satire which is most relied upon. Here the types of characters constantly obtrude upon the notice. Everyone of the characters is depicted as an eccentric of some kind or the other. Intense realism abounds in these plays. It is in accord with the aim of Ben Jonson as given by him in the lines :-

Deeds and language, such as men do use, And persons, such as comedy would choose, When she would show an image of the times, And sport with human follies, not with crimes. The Comedy of Humours dealt with the follies of particular men or of particular groups of men and not with social affectations, customs and ways of mankind. It should not be confused with the Comedy of Manners which concerned itself with the depiction of manners and which, therefore,

1. T. D. pp. 215-216.

598 constitutes an entirely different species. The manners, the social follies and conventions are presented in this type of comedy. The word, manner, stands here for the conventions of an artificial society or a grace or a habit of refined culture. The scenes were confined to the town. As in the Comedy of Humour, satire was present in this type also but it was 'the gentle satire of the fine world at the follies of those who strove to enter into its elegant circle.'1 A few characteris- tics of this type may be summarized thus. Firstly, the intellec- tual element predominates, hence no appeal to emotion is directed ; as appeal is primarily to reason, the wit is intellec- tual ; secondly, it reflects a real life artificialized. The picture presented here is only of certain aspects of that contemporary life treated in its own peculiar way ; thirdly, the conception of eccentricity at which the laughter of the society is directed differed. For instance, a jealous husband was considered a comic figure. All these characteristics were of the 18th century society, therefore, with its passing away the comedy also lost favour. The Comedy of Manners though killed in its original form by the later inrush of sentimentalism yet continued in the Genteel Comedy. This type represents the Comedy of Manners adapted to the depiction of characters who do not act under the urge of their natural feelings but as they are controlled by the high social affecta- tions. The age that is depicted was characterized by effii- minacy. The indecencies rampant in previous dramas are discarded in this type, and the intrigue finding scope here is shrouded in the midst of the artificial and is sentimentalized. An atmosphere of decorum is sought to be made present here. The distinguishing characteristic of this type from

1. T. D. p. 223.

599 its immediate predecessor consists not only in the moral tone but also in the laughter arising out of the affectation of the artificial society instead of the one arising out of the playful fancies of brilliant and highly intellectual men. The follies, thus, provide here the central part of the dramatic pieces. One more type of comedy called the Comedy of Intrigue deserves notice. The laughter that arises here is due largely or even solely to the disguises, intrigues and complications of the plot. There is little wit, no humour and no satire in this tye. The interest concentrates on the complicated and arresting development of the plot. This factor of novelty in the plot construction may at some places lose its attraction and thus the type may not be centre of attraction. However, it is this dependence of interest on the well constructed plot which gives the type a universal appeal, as the clever intrigues etc. present here are independent of time and place. It, therefore, does not represent the manners of particular persons of a particular time and place, but the sportive merriments of mankind. In the 18th century some forms of dramatic representation as the Pantomime, the Opera and the Farce attracted the attention of the people. The first one, the Pantomime, could be traced back as early as the Elizabethan times to the dumb shows etc. but it took a new turn in this century. 'Lun's creations came to take a fairly definite form. A story, usually based on classical myth or fable, was presented by means of scenery, ballets and music, and this was interspersed by the adventures of Harlequin and Columbine in pantomime, often grotesque or acrobatic, and with tricks and transformations accompanied by Harlequin's wand.'1 The term, Opera, stands for drama 1. T. C. p. 388.

600

'in blank verse or rhyme, interspersed with songs and dances and furnished with elaborate scenes and machines. This new musical drama virtually absorbed two Elizabethan forms, the masque and the pastoral.'1 The Beggar's opera by Gay is, however, in prose interspersed with songs. Its success in the union of comedy and song encouraged further attempts. Experiments were made which were designated as ballad farce, burlettas, burelesques, extravaganzas, masques, pastorals etc. which competed with the spoken drama. The third term, Farce, admits of many definitions. For example, 'Farce in the medieval drama denoted a short play on a secular theme, usually realistic and gross.'2 And in Elizabethan literature farces as distinguished from comedies were plays 'more improbable in plot, more extravagant in character, more boisterous in humour.'3 In this type of drama the character and the dialogue are subordinated to mere situation, most exaggerated and improbable, not depending upon clever plot construction but upon the improbable incongruities which are the coursest and the crudest. It was extravagant in character and boisterous in humour. The germs of the tragi-comedy can be traced back to the Greek days when the satyric drama existed as a species distinct from the tragic and the comic expressions. ' Still further, at least one Roman dramatist, possibly following the free traditions of the mime, experimented in the writing of a comic play with characters taken from heroic legend and the tales of the gods.'4 In England of the renaissance the tendency to mix the two species found full scope and bore fruit in such dramatic forms as the comedy of Romance, the tragi-

1. T. C. p. 390. 2. Ibid. p. 396. 3. Ibid. 4. T. D. p. 230.

601

comedy of Beaumont and Fletcher etc. Still later came the Sentimental comedy wherein laughter was replaced by moral reflections and sympathetic pathos. It has to be noted that the comic used in tragic plays served three purposes, viz. contrast, relief and intensification by running on parallel lines with the main element or by being placed largely independent of it. The Sentimental comedy arose in the last years of the 17th century and extended successfully in the Victorian Era. It then merged with other forms. Thus it assumed several forms ; for instance, to begin with, the Sentimental comedy at first was the Comedy of Manners upto the last but one act, the last act, however, depicting some sudden revulsion of character or some swift change in the conduct of the plot. The change that occurred in the character was some such thing as the dawning of repentance and opening up of a new way of life. Later on in the 18th century a proper drama of sentiment emerged which might or might not include the comic matter. Where the comic was included, it was seen in those sections of the play in which an ordinary comic atmosphere was created for the purpose. Out of this Sentimental drama originated the later problem drama. The Sentimental drama usually called the drame was distinct from tragedy in that it did not deal with the gloom and misery of existence. It was also distinct from comedy as it depicted to emphasis the virtue and the duties of man. Therefore in this type of drama the unhappy ending is missing and there is no thrill or awe from the scenes presented. On the other hand, moral aims are inculcated. The problem play arising out of this Sentimental drama differed from it in only a few aspects. In the Sentimental drama the problem and the solution based on belief in natural

602 virtue are present whereas in the problem play life is looked at philosophically and the solution is often absent. In the drame ( Sentimental drama ) the attempt is made 'to deal with human existence from the standpoint of ordinary civiliza- tion, conscious of death, but treating it without reference to metaphysical considerations, more intent on social relation- ships than on abstract problems, and eager to discuss, not merely transitory joys, but the securing of a happiness which shall at least outlive the passing moment.'1 The problem play, therefore, was its natural outcome absorbing the atten- tion of the writers at a time when scoial problems of the conscious civilization demanded consideration. The Drama of Ideas as represented by Shaw is only a species of the problem play. The Allegorical plays dealing with symbo- lism are represented in the works of Maeterlinck whereas Plays of Mood and Atmosphere 'without theories to advance or traditions to demolish '2 are represented in Rostand's work, Cyrano de Bergerac, wherein appeal is directed to 'sympathy and the childlike delight in color and light and motion.'3 The tragi-comedy, thus, in its various phases ultimately brought forth the modern drama where intellect came to have the predominant function in the tackling of the problems present in the social status and affairs. The gloomy and all engrossing note of the tragedy or the joyful and care- free atmosphere of the comedy has been replaced by an atmosphere where the intellect is to be found functioning in different forms with an undercurrent of suppressed emotion in most of the cases. One kind of dramatic form, viz. the Historical play in which the story is borrowed from history or biography or 1. T. D. p. 240. 2. T. L. p. 253. 3. Ibid.

603

chronicles deserves mention. Every detail here need not be true to historical facts ; the presentment of characters and incidents in the main veracious is enough. It has to be just touched upon as some historical plays come under the tragedies whereas others under the comedies. It is only a very few which come under the historical plays. As Soares puts it, ' Some of the historical plays have a tragic interest, and are more properly called tragedies : such are, for instance, Julius Caesar and Macbeth ; there are again others in which the historic interest may be said to be subordinated to the comic : for example, the first part of Henery IV. But a play like Henry V can neither be regarded as a tragedy nor as a comedy, and more properly comes under the head of Historical Plays.'1 After this brief survey of the English system it is but pertinent now to consider the constituents in the two systems in a comparative way. As seen before Rasa is the predominant factor in Sanskrit drama. It is, however, a consideration from the standpoint of the spectator. That it is predominant from other considerations also will become clear ere now. It is, thus, the central impression governing all other elements. In case of the English system Nicoll says, "It is the central impression, after all, which counts for most, and to that all else must be subservient."2 The two kinds of impression in the two systems deserve consideration first. Mammata, the famous rhetorician, sums up well the different objects the writers of the poetic pieces may place before them while producing their works. They are as seen before attainment of fame, earning of wealth, acquisition

1. S. I. L. p. 93. 2. T. D. p. 243.

604 of the worldly knowledge, destruction of evils, experiences of immediate transcendental bliss and imparting of instruc- tions leavened with the pleasing manners of the loving wife. The aims may better be considered first in a general way. The aim of the attainment of fame can be achieved through other ways also. Same is the case with the aim of the earning of wealth. Worldly knowledge can be gained through contact with social persons etc. and evils can be destroyed by such acts as the worship of deities. Philosophy deals in a plain and elaborate way with the various means through the practising of which the experience of immediate transcendental bliss can be had. The knowledge of the ultimate reality thus can be much more easily and clearly gained by the study of philosophical treatises. The instructions as one should behave and act in this world as Rama and not as Rāvana can also be imparted in ways more than one. For instance, they can be directly enjoined for practice like the injunctions in the Vedas or they may be advisably enjoined for practice as the injunc- tions in the Puranas. In the first case the injunctions willy- nilly have to be observed, whereas in the second they are, though advised for practice, yet left to one's pleasure and discretion. But there is a third way whereby these instruc- tions may so pleasingly be imparted as even though apparently left to one's discretion have yet the binding force which makes them more compulsory than even the Vedic injunc- tions. This third way is the way the loving wife adopts when she wishes her husband to do something. And this way the writer adopts in order to make his instructions-the ideal of his life, his experiences crystallized into a definite conception of life, the utterances of his soul-go home to the sympathetic person. It is, thus, this third way which can

605 be achieved only by the poetic pieces. And this the drama aims at primarily as its appeal to the sympathetic person is direct and immediate. It is to be noted here that the leaven which results in the appeal gathers more force and the instruc- tions become secondary even to insignificance. All these aims may again be considered from another point of view, that is, from the standpoint of the author of the poetic piece. Suppose the author aims at the attainment of fame and with that object in view writes the literary piece. For the attain- ment of fame the work is to be so written as to impress the largest number of persons. He has, therefore, to take into consideration the appeal to persons. He has to compose his work in a way as to affect the largest number of persons. If he does not do so, his fame suffers in width. Same is the case with the aim of the earning of wealth. In case of the third aim, the acquisition of wordly knowledge, it is plain that if it is imparted in a dry-as-dust and matter-of- fact way the persons better resort to the Śästras which deal with it more authoritatively and clearly. The poetic piece, therefore, finds preference in such cases only by virtue of its larger and deeper appeal. Same is the case with the fourth and the fifth aims. The destruction of evils can be brought about by the literary appeal as the emotions and sentiments expressed therein make direct and deep appeal to the deity, the object of worship. The immediate transcendental bliss may be realized by virtue of the same depth of appeal. In case of the sixth aim, however, it can be said without any exaggeration that this appeal to the heart is the prime element coming as it does in a sweet manner. The appeal, there- fore, to the human heart has to be constantly and regularly kept in view by the writer whatever the aims may be. Thus

606 it becomes the prime centre of importance. It is not in- compatible with any of these aims ; it may be said that it is due to it that they are fully accomplished. On the other hand, other aims among themselves may stand inconsistent with one another. In point of appeal, thus, the last aim stands highest. These aims may further be considered from the point of view of the reader or the spectator who has a responsive and sympathetic heart. From his point of view the first two aims, viz. the attainment of fame and the earning of wealth, have no significance. The fame is to be attained by the writer and not by the reader or the spectator ; simi- larly the monetary gain is to accrue to the writer and not to the reader or the spectator. In case of the acquisition of knowledge in worldly affairs the person will profitably go to those authoritative works which lucidly and elaborately deal with it ; he will only turn to the poetic piece which deals with this knowledge when its appeal to his heart is deep and absorbing. This appeal makes up the deficiency which otherwise this knowledge loses in point of its being of an authoritative nature. Same is the case with the other two aims, viz. the destruction of evils and the realization of immediate transcendental bliss. In case of the last aim, that is, the imparting of instructions in the pleasing manner the loving wife adopts, the instructions are to be gained by him not as in the above cases but in a pleasing and absor- bing way. The appeal to the reader's or the spectator's heart is, thus, implied here ; the author here cannot but resort to this device for effecting this purpose of his. The appeal, thus, to the human heart is ultimately recognized as the prime point of importance. When the drama is considered from the point of view of art, the importance of the appeal to the human heart stands out as all important.

607 As already shown a dramatic work is the finest point art reaches. It is a combined effort fructifying into a master- piece. All other arts have to do maiden's service to it. It aims, as said before, at an all round perfection. But this it does through the widest appeal to the human heart for which purpose all the sciences as Acoustics etc. are harnessed to its service. And it is because of this appeal that persons of various tendencies, likes and proclivities get pleasure simultaneously. Kālidāsa, the greatest dramatist of India, and one of the best and most recognized dramatists of the world, clearly testifies to the above position.1 What this appeal consists in is now the question. Is it not the pleasure that is experienced by the readers or the spectators ? It is clearly and evidently Rasa, in other words, which is the predominant element. It accounts for the dictum of Bharata when he says that there is no other element so primarily sought to be suggested as Rasa ( Na Hi Rasäd Rte Kaśchidar- thah Pravartate). It also accounts for Rasa being one, and pri- mary at that, of the three fundamentals on the basis of which the dramatic pieces have been classified into ten kinds. Nicoll after surveying the different kinds and sub-kinds of drama enumerates four different impressions depending on the philosophic attitude of the writers towards life. He says, "In tragedy man is viewed, not as a mere piece of animal existence, but as a soul sub specie aeternitatis ; in the Comedy of humour, too, he is viewed thus, but, whereas in tragedy the poet is serious and awestruck in face of the vastness of the universe, in the comedy of humour he regards everything as a rather pathetic jest-for him life is truly a dream ; in ordinary comedy the attitude is entirely different :

1. M. A. I. 4. in K. G.

608 here life is regarded as a thing of the moment only, a thing of laughter and smiles without a thought for the morrow, a cruel thing perhaps, for sympathy cannot enter here, and he who troubles his head about aught else than his own happiness is merely absurd and a fitting butt for ridicule ; while, finally, in the drame man is viewed as a social being and as little else, as a person surrounded by laws and conventions, as one whose happiness can be secured only by two things -- by the improvement of too harsh social regulations and of evil conditions and by the developing in himself of an adaptability to his circum- stances."1 The impressions sought to be conveyed by the writer as pointed out above are his conceptions of life ; and they are to be conveyed to mankind as morals, instructions. Life, Death and Universe are viewed from different stand- points, different angles of vision. His dexterity lies in imparting them in as appealing a manner as possible. And here comes the province of art wherein the appeal assumes the primary importance. Roger Dataller in his work, Drama and Life, considers dramas in which various motives have been dealt with. Some dramas he mentions, Brewster's Millions for example,2 in which the money motif is the principal subject. Other dramas as Nicolai Gogol's Inspe- tor General3 and Ibsen's the Doll's House4 have propa- ganda motif behind them. They are the expressions of the writers' views on life and various problems : social, economic etc. Thus though both the systems say that the impressions of the playwright are conveyed through the dramatic pieces,

1. T. D. p. 243. 2. D. D. L. p. 28. 3. Ibid. p. 59. 4. Ibid. p. 66.

609

the manner in which the appeal is directed and the nature of the appeal in the two systems differ. As emphasized repeatedly, drama is an art and as such its distinguishing feature should be the utilization of the appeal to human heart to as great, intense and deep an extent as possible. The Sanskrit system constantly, repeatedly and regularly emphasizes the fact that the appeal in the drama should consist in the provocation of the latent impression as the Rati etc. through the characters etc. culminating along with the knowledge of these into the pleasurable experience. It is, thus, the emotional appeal ; and on the basis of this appeal to emotions the classified types of drama come into existence. Thus when the Sanskrit writer takes pen to write a dramatic piece, he keeps particular emotional appeals, Rasas, before his mental vision. There may be ulterior purposes to be served thereby but the principal aim is the emotional appeal. The Mahāvīracharita may be taken as an illustration. It is mentioned therein that it was going to be represented on the occasion of the festival of Lord Kālapriyānātha. Because of its being represented in celebration of the festival, the gathering would have been very large and much money would have come to the manager leading perhaps to the high remuneration to the author. Being skilfully written it might have led to his fame also. But these are only secondary considerations when it is seen that the author expressly and in hints says as seen before that here in this piece he depicts the Vīra Rasa in its various and different phases. In the English system the stress as a predominating element does not lie on the appeal to emotion. To begin with, it may be said that the Greek scholar had quite realized the importance of the emotions. His canvas, however, was restricted due to choice of the subject-matter. 39

610

The fondness of the dramatists for depicting the full working of the Nemesis also made the canvas cribbed within certain limits. Aristotle, therefore, takes note of only two emo- tions, pity and fear, and accounts for their moralistic purpose. It was all in connection with tragedy, hence the emotional appeal is to be found in tragedy. Though the English authors are not found theorizing about the emotions in tragedy as the Greek scholar had done, yet the appeal to emotions was directed in tragedy. As Nicoll puts it, 'That which is appealed to most in a tragedy is the emotions. Tragedy does not often direct itself to the intellect as such; it deals always with the deepest moments of human feeling. There are few tragedies of pure thought ; even Hamlet, which is more philosophical than the majority of the Elizabethan dramas, has emotion constantly threading the intellectual framework of Hamlet's character.'1 The emotions sought to be aroused were mostly of the gloomy sort, for as seen before through tragedy the author wanted to convey his gloomy attitude towards life. The names of the different types of tragedy already described suggest this. In the Heroic tragedy every- thing is presented in an exaggerated way. For example, in some place as All for Love, the love motif is exaggerated with the idea that the spectacle of a great hero forsaking all for passion will excite wonder and admiration. Thus the emotions of love, heroicism and admiration are sought to be depicted. In the Horror tragedy it is horror which is the dominating emotion. In the tragedies of Shakespeare as Othello the passion of love which at first results in the union of Othello with Desdemona turns on the vile and vicious instigation of Iago into the jealous anger to which

1. T. D. pp. 140-141.

611 Desdemona falls the victim. Bharata's dictum that the Karuna Rasa is the effect of the Raudra Rasa has a good illustration here as Othello represents the Raudra Rasa whe- reas Desdemona the Karuna Rasa. Thus emotions were, no doubt, depicted in tragedies by the playwrights in the English system also, but they were not emphasized by them as the predominant elements as was done by the Sanskrit drama- tists and dramaturgists. They were, on the other hand, sometimes subordinated to characters, sometimes to incidents and sometimes to other factors. As seen before in the Greek tragedies the plot predominates and it is the skilful arrange- ment of the plot, therefore, which excites pity and fear. In the Shakespearean tragedies it is the character element which absorbs attention, hence all other elements are made sub- ordinate to it. It is not excessive love emotion in Romeo and Juliet which is of absorbing interest and the prime point of importance ; it is, however, the characters of Romeo and Juliet going deep down vehemently in love which is placed in the most hostile context. In the same way in the Horror tragedy horror results from the incidents which are the prime point of significance. The Centre of gravity, thus, shifted from element to element. While in the Sanskrit system the emotions governed other factors, here other factors governed one another at different times. But the appeal to emotions in one form or the other was present. With the comedy in the English system the case was not always of this sort. In the Shakespearean comedy emotion finds place in the scheme of things as shown before. Though wit flashes, yet it 'is never allowed free play ; if it begins to become scintillating then of a sudden a turn is made and there is a strong appeal to the feelings.'1 Benedick and 1. T. D. p. 216.

612

Beatrice in Much Ado About Nothing show sparks of wit which they flash at each other, but the emotions in them control wit from developing in an untoward manner. Take the case of the Comedy of Manners which came later on. While enumerating the characteristics of this type it has been shown that the intellectual appeal was the predomina- ting elemnt, no appeal to emotion was directed. The modern problem plays which deal with intellectual concepts of pre- sentday social theories direct their appeal to intellect. Hence it may be said that comedy largely directs its appeal to intellect and not to emotion. At this point it is pertinent to see the conception of laughter as the Western theorists have evolved. It will throw light on how intellect comes to have an all round sway. It is to be noted that laughter is directed at a type, anti-social and at the same time below the usual level ; for instance, a miser is anti-social and because of his meanness is below the average, hence he is presented as a laughable figure. Insociability on the part of the object of laughter holds good in the majority of cases. The question was investigated into long ago. Various factors were sought to be explained as causes of laughter. It was engaging attention even at the time of Aristotle who said that 'Comedy is , as we said, an imitation of characters of lower type .... ' as quoted before. To him, therefore, degradation of characters in comedy was a source of providing laughter. Ben Jonson was also of the above opinion. Kant, Schopenhauer, Hazlitt etc. have held the opinion that it was incongruity which was a source of laughter. The in- congruity here may be the 'incongruity of two facts, two ideas, two words, or two associations .'1 M. Bergson

1. T. D. p. 194.

613

advanced his theory which was an improvement upon the above two theories. He emphasized automatism. Accor- ding to him 'the conditions of comedy are insociability on the part of the object of laughter, insensibility on the part of the laugher, and a certain automatism in the situation, in the words, or in the character that appears ludicrous .'1 'This theory M. Bergson has traced out along the three lines of repetition, inversion, and interference de series, seeing in each a certain reduction of the living thing to a machine- like raideur or inelasticity.'2 Nicoll says that the above three views fairly account for the laughter but they do not go the whole way. He says, "There is, for example, the laughter that arises at times out of an exceedingly solemn and serious situation, not because of some incident or word or person that may appear incongruous, but because of some mood working within us. There are not, I presume, many people who on some such occasion when they themselves felt serious and even sad have not broken into a smile, if not into open laughter. It may be that there is subconsciously an incongruity presented either between the normal mood of man and this exceptional solemnity, or between the solemnity and some unacknowledged idea or reminiscence which comes dimly to the consciousness and arouses the laughter ; but it would appear more propable that the merri- ment comes straight from the sacred or solemn occasion itself, that the smile or the laugh is an unconscious attempt of our only half-conscious selves to escape from the bonds of the solemn and the sacred. This merriment at sacred things or on solemn occasions is a spontaneous merriment; it is aroused apparently by none of those springs of the ri-

1. T. D. p. 194 2. Ibid

614 sible which have been indicated above. This spontaneous laughter must, naturally, be carefully distinguished from the laughter that may arise as a secondary result of it. The contrast of the spontaneous laugh and the solemnity of the occasion may cause others, through the sense of incongruity, themselves to burst into merriment, merriment that is clearly explainable under the theory of Hazlitt. The essen- tial source of the spontaneous laugh would seem to be a desire for liberation, liberation from the restraints of society, and as such it is entirely the opposite of the social laughter analysed by M. Bergson."1 Thus does he propound his view and believes that laughter is caused by a desire for liberation. He further argues for this view as regards laughter with reference to the indecent. He says, "What is it that makes us laugh at a reference to the indecent ? There may, of course, be a double reason for merriment expressed at a 'smoking-room' story, or at a Restoration comedy. There may be wit in the uttterance, or there may be incongruity of a rougher sort; but even a tale or a dia- logue that is not essentially witty or incongruous may cause merriment. There is nothing here of automatism; other reasons must be sought for if we are to explain it aright. Mr. Sully has suggested that the reasons for this laughter lie in a breach of rule or of order and in a loss of dignity, but even these do not seem to meet the case. The real cause would appear to lie in the sense of liberation which the laugh itself involves. It is the liberation of the natural man from the ties and conventions of society."2 In the above argument Nicoll points out the view of Sully which accounts for laughter to lie in a breach of rule or of order and 1. T. D. p. 195. 2. Ibid. pp. 195-196.

615

in a loss of dignity. He also mentions such causes of laughter as wit. Wit is always purely conscious. In wit there is a play with words. In flashes of wit there is a swift work- ing of fancy and the phrases and ideas are so arranged as to cause laughter. Others laugh with the witty writer. Wit sometimes can be biting and cynical. The absurd also provides a source of laughter. It is, however, purely un- conscious. The person who is the object of laughter due to his being absurd is quite unconscious of the cause of merri- ment. Another source of laughter is humour. Hazlitt thus distinguishes it from wit. 'Humour is the describing the ludicrous as it is in itself; wit is the exposing it, by comparing or contrasting it with something else.'1 The difference between the absurd, wit and humour is thus des- cribed. The absurd character puts forward all his follies, unconsciously, to the world ; the man of wit sneers and mocks at everything which is different from himself ; the humorist is himself an eccentric who sees the fun of his eccentricity.'2 Humour has a history of its own. Many scholars have tried to analyze its elements. Of them Sully's analysis is the most comprehensive. According to him some of the distinguishing traits of the humorous temperament are the qualities of restraint, of reflection, of pity and of kind- ness. He recognizes humour as a sentiment but at the same time as markedly intellectual. Meredith puts graphically the conception of humour. He says, "If you laugh all round him (Meredith means by the word him the ridiculous person) tumble him, roll him about, deal him a smack, and drop a tear on him, own his likeness to you and yours to your neighbour, spare him as little as you shun, pity him as

1. T. D. p. 198. 2. Ibid. p. 199.

616 much as you expose, it is a spirit of Humour that is moving you."1 Satire and Irony also, in order to differentiate, have been thus described. 'If you detect the ridicule, and your kindliness is chilled by it, you are slipping into the grasp of Satire. If instead of falling foul of the ridiculous person with a satiric rod, to make him writhe and shriek aloud, you prefer to sting him under a semi-caress, by which he shall in his anguish be rendered dubious whether indeed anything has hurt him, you are an engine of Irony.'2 M. Bergson calls humour the inverse of irony. 'In irony we pretend to believe what we do not believe ; in humour we pretend to disbelieve what we actually believe.'3 These are the different sources of laughter as analyzed and described in the English system. This brief survey has made quite clear that there is little scope for emotion in the comic. Whatever scope it has got is in connection with humour which, too, is markedly intellectual according to Sully as shown above. The intellectual appeal basing as it does on the changing moods and fashions also changes. It is not so permanent as the emotional appeal under the influence of which the whole organism vibrates. All these may account for the permanent nature of the types of Sanskrit drama which are relished as fresh as ever. No change in time or circumstances has any effect on them. The width of the emotional appeal in case of Sanskrit drama has, there- fore, no fear of being lessened at any time as is the case with the English system where it is dependent on attitudes and changing factors. In the Sanskrit system as seen before Rasa determines the nature of the hero, the heroine and other characters. And all

1. I. C. pp. 79-80. 2. Ibid. p. 79. 3. T. D. p. 198.

617 these original characters are many as seen previously. Out of these the hero stands out as the principal figure when others appear as his satellites. The hero in all the major types of drama is enjoined to be well-bred, charming, liberal, clever, affable, popular, upright, eloquent, of exalted lineage, resolute, young, intelligent, energetic, endowed with memory, wise, skilful in arts, proud, heroic, mighty, vigorous, conversant with the codes and religious.1 The Sattvika qualities in the hero are the beauty of character, vivacity, equanimity, poise, firmness, sense of honour, lighthearted- ness and magnanimity.2 The hero should have the above requirements in order to satisfy the standard. The hero is divided into four kinds : the Dhīralalita, the Dhīraśānta, the Dhirodatta and the Dhiroddhata. Each has got certain distinguishing qualities as pointed out before. The Dhīrala- lita is characterized by self-control and at the same time by lightheartedness. He is a king who is not concerned so much with major problems and state affairs as he depends mainly on his minister in state affairs. He is free from anxiety, more given to, and very fond of, arts. His activities do not become a matter of consideration or concern to the state. He is, therefore, depicted as a hero in the Nātikā wherein the love intrigues predominate. The Dhīrasānta is the self-controlled and the calm hero possessed of common qualities. He is a Brāhmana, a minister etc. His activi- ties, thus, do not become a matter of great concern to the State. He is the hero in the Prakarana. The Dhīrodātta hero is self-controlled and exalted. He is a king who is possessed of extraordinary qualities. His activities are of very great concern to the State. His movements are watched 1. D. R. II. 1-2. 2. Ibid. II. 10.

618

with keen interest by all and sundry. His joys, sorrows, rise, fall etc. duly affect all. He is, therefore, the hero in the Nataka, the best and the foremost type of drama. The Dhiroddhata is self-controlled but vehement. As pointed out before pride and jealousy reign supreme in him and the attending evils as deceit, boastfulness etc. are present in him. He is , therefore, the hero in such types of drama as the Dima, the Vyäyoga, and the Ihämrga wherein violent activities have full play. The Dhiroddhatas are generally the Räksasas and the like who are by nature vehement. It need not be repeated here that a close communication among the beings of different regions is an event of every- day occurrence as advocated in the Hindu view of life. The superphysical and the supernatural beings are thus placed here not as wide apart from, and stranger to, mortals. They are always seen jostling their shoulders with, helping, and sometimes even presenting impediments to, them. The Vita is the hero in the Bhāna type of drama, whereas in the Prahasana the Cheta, the Vipra etc. figure as heroes. On a footing of friendship with the hero is the Pithamarda, the hero of the Pataka. He helps the hero on in his work. The hero has also a rival who is called the Pratināyaka. The Vidūsaka is a character who is generally the friend of the hero. These are some of the male characters who centre round the hero. The heroine as already pointed out can hail from different regions as Urvaśi, the celestial nymph, Hidimbā, the female demon, Śakuntalā of semi-celestial origin etc. but mostly they are mortals as queens and daughters of kings. The heroine may be the hero's wife or an un- married girl or a courtezan exclusively devoted to the hero. The hero's wife may be Mugdha ( inexperienced ), or Madhyā (partly inexperienced ) or Pragalbhā (experienced ). All

619 these heroines are always to be seen in love relation with the heroes. If they rejoice, the joys are due to their lords' being under their control. If they are angry, that anger is because of some lapse in love affairs on the part of the hero. If they have donned beautiful dress, it is in the expectation of the arrival of their lords. Thus their every activity, internal or external, is with reference to the love affairs with their lovers. Even in case of women of loose morals as described in the Bhana the love theme predominates. All these heroines have qualities as the heroes. There are several other female characters who are in service of the heroine in matters of love. The heroines and the persons helping them are all painted here in connection with love. In the English system as seen before it is mainly the impression which the author wishes to convey ; and though the centre of importance is seen to shift from one consti- tuent to the other as from the plot to the character and from the character to the incident, and then in modern times back to the character, yet the character is, really speaking, the means of conveying the impression. In connection with the tragic hero Nicoll says, "So far attention has been paid to the final aim, to the medium and spirit of tragedy; there remains the question of that which is commonly the means by which the dramatist expresses both aim and spirit-the tragic hero."1 The above statement can, mutatis mutandis, apply in case of other types of character and thus confirm the above position. The heroes in the English system are of varied kinds : the tragic hero, the hero in the comedy and the hero in the tragi-comedy. There are sub-divisions to the above as 1. T. D. pp. 145-146.

620 will be clear. To begin with, the tragic hero are of many kinds. Artistotle here deserves first consideration. In respect of the qualities in the character he prescribes four, viz. he must be good, he must be depicted in consonance with the sense of propriety, he must be shown true to life and he must be painted consistent. Though he is thus required to be good and noble, the tragic hero according to him is 'a person neither eminently virtuous or just, nor yet involved in crime by deliberate vice or villainy, but by some reason of human frailty (si' auapríav rivá).'1 Thus there is the tragic hero acting wrongly through an unconscious error. Then there is the second kind of the hero who acts wrongly with conscious intent. This type covers most of Shakes- peare's tragic heroes. The third kind of the tragic hero reflects his impotence and his ambition. He is here painted as faced by a task which he is unable to cope with. In this case the human frailty is present but it does not find ex- pression in any wrongful action. The tragic end, therefore, comes as a result of the impotence expressing itself in his inability to do action at the required moment or as a result of the unsatiated ambition of extraordinary dimensions thwarted by some force beyond, and more powerful than, it. The fourth kind of the tragic hero is one who is flawless, that is, without any human frailty. In accordance with this conception, the saint could be suitably painted as hero in the tragedy. The fifth kind of the tragic hero is one who has two ideals placed before, and thus lead to an internal warfare within, him. One of the two alternatives placed before him may represent the power of common duty and law while the other the power of some emotion. 'Here

1. T. D. p. 147.

621

the tragic action may be brought about by a conscious or unconscious deed springing from some auapría, but the interest of the play lies rather in the inner struggle between two desires or ideals in the mind of the hero than in the wrong action committed.'1 The sixth kind of the hero is one who due to hostile circumstances accepts a life of crime. He has no flaw or any frailty, therefore, even in the midst of crime he is to be seen honest with a pure soul. The tragedy ge- nerally depicts one character as the principal figure. He is the tragic hero swaying the entire action of the piece, as anything and everything arising in the course of the plot comes from his thoughts and emotions. Sometimes, how- ever, a tragichero is seen who though starting the action has yet to suffer more at the hands of others than due to his own folly. In cases of some tragedies there are two heroes figur- ing as principal figures. As Nicoll puts it, 'In some dramas, particularly of the Elizabethan period, there is not merely one hero, but two, and the tragic emotion arises out of the clash or conflict of their personalities.'2 The characters in the comedy are according to Aristotle of lower type as pointed out before. He says that the character in the comedy is not bad but ludicrous. As said before the Greek philosopher's remarks about comedy are not of vital interest as in the case of tragedies. Comedies in general have a large number of characters and out of these it is not generally one character as the hero who absorbs attention. And in the comedies where there is one character absorbingly depicted as the hero, a sort of serious atmos- phere prevails. As Nicoll says, "There may be comedies where one figure so abosorbs all, or nearly all, the attention

1. T. D. p. 152. 2. Ibid. p. 154.

622

of the audience, but such comedies are both rare and inclined to approach toward more serious realms."1 'They appeal not only to the risible faculties, but to the more serious part of our being as well.'2 Leaving these few examples aside, comedy as a type vividly depicts the interplay of characters ; this makes the characters more than of absorbing interest where they are to be watched placed in juxtaposition. These characters will represent one of two things : several will represent a class or only one will stand as the represen- tative of a class. In the comedy the characters drawing attention are generally represented in groups as in Shakes- peare's comedies and the comedies of manners. No doubt they mainly represent particular follies, fashions, fads etc. of the particular age, yet the subtle, dexterous and delicate hand of the artist gives them such touches as, even though representative of one age, make them the possession of all times. In the tragi-comdey of which the modern drama is the latest form the hero or the heroes have, so to say, no indi- viduality or personality of their own. They represent a class, a faith or some such concept. They may even re- present a force. Thus the individuality of the character painted before is not to be found in modern times. Even where the hero is one and seems to stand for the type as in previous plays he is really a force symbolized in a man. In the tragedy there are female characters seen functioning in various ways. Those who figure as heroines in the tra- gedy have qualities which are masculine. Firmness of purpose, adamantine attitude, initiative in action are, however, some of the qualities which are to be found in them. Other

1. T. D. p. 146. 2. Ibid.

623 female characters have feminine qualities in them. They have no direct share in the tragic conclusion. They, how- ever, affect it indirectly in other ways ; for example, by influencing the mind of the hero. In the tragedies where the masculine qualities are not present in the heroines the true tragic effect is lacking as from some of the tragedies in the middle of the Restoration period and the 18th century. In the comedy the heroines as such have no exclusive impor- tance. As in the case of the hero here, they share the atten- tion with others when they are presented in pairs. They indulge in witty remarks, crack jokes and do all sorts of activities exciting the risible. In the modern drama, how- ever, they represent a class, a faith, a power and a right like the heroes. Ibsen's heroine, Hedda Gabbler, represents a right in the assertion of which she ultimately leaves her husband, children and house. Comparing then the characters of the Sanskrit system with those of the English system in the field of tragedy and tragi-comedy it is to be seen that some of the qualities pres- cribed by Aristotle in the tragic heroes fairly resemble those of the heroes as enumerated in the Sanskrit system. Aris- totle says as seen previously that the hero in the tragedy should be good; thus nobility is required in him. The Sanskrit dramaturgists also enjoin qualities which make him more than noble as represented in the Dhīrodātta kind of hero. All these heroes here are said to be the Dhīra ( self- controlled ); in this aspect they can be fairly compared. Then again Aristotle's conception of the tragic hero as one of high reputation and prosperity is to be considered. It corresponds with the Sanskrit conception where the hero in the high types of drama is to hail from the higher strata of society. The mediaeval conception of the tragic hero

624

tacitly assuming him to be one of kings or princes also tended towards the Aristotelian one as pointed out before in Chau- cer's words. But then do all these tragic heroes conform to the Aristotelian standard ? The norm presented by him has been departed from in suitability to the changing times. In Shakespeare's tragedies the tragic heroes belong to the higher strata in society. The importance, thus, of a single tragic hero is concentrated in him. In Sanskrit dramas also the heroes in the higher types of drama come from the higher strata of society and in this respect there is a fair resemblance. The fall of a high personality from prosperity into misery and wretchedness affected others as the latter's interests were bound up with those of the former. William Painter writes, 'So lykewys the fall of a heigh and lofty Tree maketh greater noyse than that which is low and little Hygh Towers and stately Palaces of Prynces bee seene farther off than the poore Cabans and homely shepheardes sheepecotes : the Walles of lofty Cittyes more a loofe doe Salute the Viewers of the same, than the simple Caves, which the Poore doe digge belowe the Mountayne Rockes.'1 Though this conception of the tragic hero held ground for a long time, yet it was felt that it should change with times. The departure came glaringly with the appear- ance of the characters in the Domestic tragedy. As seen before Lillo places the plea very cleverly for presenting such tragic characters hailing from ordinary life. There is no doubt that these tragic characters do not strike the effect as was to be produced by the previous tragic ones. In the modern drama the tragic heroes as presented in the problem plays represent symbolically a class. There have also been

1. L. T. p. 116.

625 attempts at the revival of the tragic hero answering to the old conception. Where the tragic hero hails from the or- dinary level the deficiency in his being of vast interest is made up by identifying him with a class, a force etc. Thus in the English system the conception of the hero in the serious type of drama changed with changing times whereas in the Sanskrit system no such thing happened. The types were fixed and they were utilized accordingly. No change was felt necessary as the types once evolved were found true for all times ; such was the deep probing of the dramaturgists into the human heart. Though the types were fixed it can- not be said that they were stereotyped for ever and, there- fore, could not be presented as living personalities differently. Chārudatta and Mādhava belong to the Dhīraśānta type and yet the two are experienced as two different living per- sonalities. Again Rāma and Dusyanta are both of the Dhīrodātta type and yet the two personalities are experienced as living and different. Both have engaged the attention of the audience. It is only the permanent states and qualities which were enumerated together in one type. The artist then with these as the skeleton creates the personality which answers the type and yet is experienced as a living perso- nality different from another belonging to the same type. Had the case not been so, Goethe's high appreciations of the Abhijnānaśākuntala would not have come. The com- parison so far shown ceases when the different kinds of the tragic heroes are considered along with the heroes of the major types of Sanskrit drama. There is no tragic error, conscious or unconscious, in the case of the Sanskrit heroes ; the heroes are not impotent characters unable to cope with the situation. The flawless hero as the victim of peculiar circumstances as instanced in Romeo is also not present in 40

626

the Sanskrit system. 'As presented by Shakespeare, he indulges in no fatal error, the reasons for his destruction lying entirely in outward circumstance.'1 The hero swayed by two ideals also writhing within himself in confusion and going straight to his doom is also not present in the Sans- krit system. Then finally the honest and pure-souled tragic hero accepting a life of crime due to outward hostile cir- cumstances and thus being sent to his doom is absent. The consideration of a few heroes of the major types can better explain the absence of the conceptions of the above tragic heroes from the Sanskrit system. Rāma, Dusyanta, Hariś- chandra and Charudatta will suffice. Rama in the Uttararāmacharita is seen determined to renounce every- thing in the interest, and for the welfare, of his subjects as is clear from his words in reply to Vasistha's instructions conveyed to him through Astavakra in the first act. This determination is the rule of law. Rāma renounces Sītā for the pleasure of his subjects. He courts a life of sufferings. He weeps, wails and laments, but all patiently. The renuncia- tion of Sita which causes him mortifying pain is not a tragic error, conscious or unconscious ; it is a deliberate act as the result of determination of the well-wisher of the subjects, who though the ruler always considered himself as the ser- vant of his subjects and saw to their welfare whole-heartedly. The conflict, therefore, that is presented in Rama after the news of Sītä's name being falsely tarnished due to her resi- dence in Lanka is not a conflict which is towering over the whole action. It has got intensity to the extent that he feels solitary even in the midst of a vast empire. It may be com- pared to that of Othello but with the difference that whereas 1. T. D. p. 151.

627

Rāma's emotional intensity is under his control, Othello's is not, as the latter utltimately leads to a tragic end. Rāma's conflict is more the expression of a sort of sympathetic attitude towards one who has to be renounced and exposed to dangers totally undeserved. Duşyanta in the Abhijñānaśā- kuntala is a hero who has always the duties of a Ksattriya king towards the subjects in different strata of society weigh- ing uppermost in his mind. He enters the hermitage of Kanva but, as he says, according to the prescribed codes of behaviour. He halts there to see to the welfare of the her- mits in discharge of his duties. He sees Śakuntalā there and is smitten with love. He, however, does not go deep down into love for he thinks that she might be a Brāhmana girl. He reflects and reflects and then decides in obedience to the dictates of his conscience that as his conscientious heart is set on her, she must be a girl fit to be married by a Ksattriya. He shows how unfailingly correct the dictates of his conscience are ! In due course the love is reciprocated. What a contrast is here presented to the love of Hamlet for Ophelia ? Hamlet always ponders within himself and is sometimes seen throwing his volleys of taunts at Ophelia. After the rejection of Sakuntalā in the open court, Dusyanta is seen in his repentance and bewailings. But are they not the bewailings of a self-controlled hero ? Does not Dus- yanta go on discharging his duties of a king ? On the other hand, Hamlet after the death of Ophelia loses his balance of mind. His life is felt by him as a burden to him. Hariśchandra in the Chandakauśika is again a hero who is devoted to the performance of the duties of a Ksattriya. He thinks it his duty to save the three Vidyas who are being sacrificed by Viśvāmitra whom he is unable to identify as such. Later on when he comes to know of his mistake he

628

says that he has been deceived by the three Vidyas due to their maidenly form. This position, no doubt, points out that by chance the error has been made unwittingly by the king, yet it also makes clear that as the three Vidyās had assumed the maidenly form it was his duty to lend a pro- tecting hand to them. It was one of the prescribed duties of a Kşattriya as enumerated by him in reply to the sage's query as to his duty. He did it in discharge of one of these duties and, therefore, is fully prepared to appease the in- furiated sage in any way the latter wants. No conflict finds scope here when the hero is so resolute and determined. Chärudatta in the Mrchchhakatika is depicted as very careful about his name and fame. He does not want that his name should be sullied in any way. Once accepted as his beloved, he is prepared to put up with any troubles for Vasantasena. Hence no conflict arises in him. Whatever conflict is pre- sented in the heroes as instanced above it is chastening and ennobling. It is not uncontrollable, vehement and di- mensional leading to a tragic conclusion. Even in such characters as Valī the conflict is presented in the fifth act of the Mahaviracharita when Mālyavan has instigated him to fight with Räma. It is, however, a conflict which is finally determined by his friendship with Rāvana. Vālī does not go headlong into the conflict. He ponders and ponders and then decides the action on the basis of some principles. There is, thus, no tragic hero of the conceptions as found in the English system. Like the English system sometimes the hero in the major types of drama is one as in the Abhijñā- naśākuntala or two as it appears in the Chaņdakauśika. Here in the latter case one point of resemblance to the English system is to be noted. Though it is Hariśchandra who

629

offends the sage Viśvāmitra and thus gives cause for suffer- ings for himself, yet the sufferings to him come from the sage. He stands on a par with Lear who is 'more sinned against than sinning.' Hariśchandra is, thus, more passive than active. In some Sanskrit dramas there are as many as twelve or even sixteen heroes as in the Samavakāra or the ima. Here, however, one thing is to be borne in mind. In case of the English tragedies the supernatural is introduced as a separate element though in some cases so intimately bound up as to be felt an integral part of the main plot. The ghost in Hamlet may be an external projection of the overcharged feelings of Hamlet, the witches in Macbeth may also re- present the inner workings in Macbeth's mind, yet as de- picted in these plays they stand as one with the characters. Though in some people the faith with regard to the existence of the ghost is present even in modern times, the ghosts are unsuited to general tastes and beliefs of mankind of the 20th century. In the Sanskrit plays, on the other hand, they move as the principal characters in the Dima type of drama and are not of minor importance as in the English system. The nymph Urvaśī figures as the heroine in the Vikramorvaśīya. All these compete, and have relations, with the mortal heroes. The gods also freely act in the Sanskrit dramas. Dusyanta is a friend of Indra. The device of the Deus ex Machina in some cases appeared as thrust in from outside and hence was rejected by later dra- matists in the English system. In the Sanskrit system, however, it became the part and parcel of the plot. The goddess Gaurī appearing towards the end of the Nāgānanda to solve the tangle does not appear out of joint due to the religious tendencies of the characters. Other means of introducing the supernatural are through reference to fate or

630

to the heavenly bodies in the English tragedies. On Mer- cutio's death Romeo's words run, 'This day's black fate on more days doth depend.' Hamlet realizes his peculiar situation when he says, "Oh, cursed spit thate ever I was born to set it right." Both in the above refer to fate. But these are expressions which reflect the gloomy tendency. Sītā and Śakuntalā also refer to fate in respect of their troubles. Their fate, however, is modified with religious faith and hence it is not characterized by hopelessness and disappointment as in the above two cases. In Sanskrit drama the heavenly bodies etc. are represented personified as characters as Rahu and Brhaspati in the Tripuradāha Dima ; the chance element is also to be found in the Sans- krit system. It was chance which brought Harischandra before Viśvāmitra engaged in austerities, but the inter- vention in those austerities was a deliberate act of the king in discharge of his duties as a Ksattriya. No change in the hero's action is, therefore, to be attributed to the element of chance. In the case of the tragi-comedies of which the latest development is the problem play where the hero or the heroine represents a faith, a belief or a force, the means of introducing the supernatural is heredity as society places its curse upon a family to which its members fall victims. In the tragedy of Nan 'The tragedy of Nan arises out of heredity, out of the curse laid, not by the gods but by society, upon an innocent girl.'1 In the Sanskrit system such acts of heredity are hardly given scope. Vasantasenā is a courtezan, but she loves, and is loved by, Chärudatta who is a Brahmana. Her status in the society does not allow her to marry, but the restriction is lifted up towards the end 1. T. D. p. 118.

631 of the play. Hereditary social status, thus, does not make the condition of either Vasantasena or Charudatta pitiable. Comparing now the heroes of the comedies to those in minor types as the Prahasana in the Sanskrit system it is found that in the types of above dramas of the two systems the characters figuring as heroes are not one but many. In the comedies these characters are to be seen arranged in groups or pairs. In the Prahasana also the heroes are many and arranged in groups. In the comedies the characters represent the particular follies, the fads, the traits of charac- ters etc. ; in the same way those of the Prahasana represent the particular professions, the Varnas etc. in a ridiculous way. Jantuketu, the doctor, using strange methods to extract the fish bone from the throat in the Latakamelaka Prahasana and Mahāyātrika, the astrologer, who fixes the time for a journey when the stars conjoined together pre- sage death in the Hāsyārnava are the professions ridiculed. The low characters excite laughter in this way. Here it will not be out of place to discuss the character of the Vidūşaka along with that of the fool and other comic characters in the English system. The Vidūșaka appears in the major types of drama as the Nātaka and the Prakarana, the fool appears both in tragedies and in comedies. The fool in the tragedies, however, is a person who mostly gives vent to very wise opinions, though from the comedies also this aspect of the fool is not always absent. The fool in King Lear and Jacques in As You Like It illustrate the above two positions. Some- times the fool and the Vidūsaka serve the purpose of caustic commentators on the actions of the hero, a remote echo of the Greek chorus which served as the citizen's commentary on the action of the piece. Laughter in both the systems

632

is excited through various means and ways. Some physical attributes as deformity etc. arouse it. In Merry Wives of Windsor Bardolph's nose is a deformity ; the Vidūșaka in the Sanskrit system is described to be slightly deformed. In case of Malvolio in Twelfth Night and the Gallicized fops of the Restoration period the ridiculous dress excites lau- ghter ; the dress ( Vesas) of the Vidūșaka is enjoined to be ridiculous. Physical incongruity as the. frail and ethereal Titania beside Bottom with ass ears in a A Mid-summer Night's Dream excites laughter ; the Vidūsaka beside the tender ladies of the palace of an Indian prince produces the same effect. Mental deformity as the stupid conceit of Malvolio in Twelfth Night, the porcine stupidity of Dog- berry and Verges in Much Ado about Nothing, the irritating and the irritated vanity of others well find a resemblance in the characters of the Vidūsaka and the Sakāra. Laughter arising from situation brought about by the character as is often represented in The Comedy of Errors or in Twelfth Night is to be found to a certain extent in the Nāgānanda wherein the Vidüsaka in the garb of the maiden receives all sorts of praises and advances in love from the Vita and the Cheta. Laughter arising from the deformity of manners which consists in the awkwardness of a character can well be instanced in the coarse and uncivilized manners of the Vidūșaka in the stately company of the king. Laughter excited through humour is instanced in such characters as the Vidūșaka, the Vița, the Cheța and the Sakāra. 'He (the Vidūșaka ) and the maid, both figures from old popular dramatic representations are conjointly responsible for giving food for humour in the dramas.'1 'The other characters of

1. S. D. D. p. 48.

633

parasite type that create a sort of rollicking humour in a Sanskrit play are Vita, Cheta and Shakār.'1 The Vidūsaka also employs wit to excite laughter. 'His attempts at wit which are never very successful and his allusions to the pleasures of the table of which he is a confessed votary are absurdly contrasted with the sententious solemnity of the despairing hero crossed in the prosecution of his love-suit.'2 As seen previously the comparison of the Vita, the Vidūsaka and the Sakāra has been made to the parasite, the servus currens and the miles gloriosus of the Greek drama. Com- parison, no doubt, goes to a certain extent but there is also a great difference. The parasite has not got that refinement and culture which the Vita has. The Sakāra is a character in the Sanskrit system who stands unique and unparalleled. He is base and at the same time poses as exalted. He is, thus, comparable to Sir John Falstaff in Shakespeare's comedies. He utters incongruous words, blunders in the accuracy of facts and yet boasts of expert knowledge of the Śastras. He can stoop to any mean thing and also most dangerous things as murder etc. and yet fall at the feet of the person harmed by him when utterly helpless. His sense of vanity receives offence at the slightest but he comes back to his self- complacency with the smallest false praise. With all this opposition in his equipments he never loses sight of his desired object. He is a character who excites laughter more by his being absurd in many ways : in his boastfulness of possessing the knowledge of the volumes but at the same time quoting them in a blundering way, in his acclaiming high connections and associations but at the same time

1. S. D. D. p. 49. 2. Monier William Śakuntalā quoted in S. D. D. p. 48.

634

stooping to the most nefarious action as the murder of a woman. The characters as the Vice and other abstract virtues in the English system find resemblance in the abs- tract characters as presented in such dramas as the Pra- bodhachandrodaya. The comparison of the heroines in the two systems shows that whereas in the Sanskrit system the heroine is always one's wife or a maiden to the exclusion of another's wife, in the English system it is not so. It is a point of credit to the high idealism of the system. As Wilson says, "We may observe, however, to the honour of the Hindu drama, that the Parakiya, or she who is the wife of another person, is never to be made the object of a dramatic intrigue : a prohibition that would have sadly cooled the imagination and curbed the wit of Dryden and Congreve."1 It is to be borne in mind here that the Prakīyā as a heroine figures according to the Bengal Vaisnava literature of the Chaitanya school where the literature is religious and mystic rather than material and worldly. The Mugdha, the Madhya and the Pragalbha types of heroines in the Sanskrit system may be illustrated with due reservations in the English system in the cases of Viola, Lady Percy and Hermione respectively. The tragic heroine of the English system taking initiative and possessed of masculine qualities has, however, no counter- part in the Sanskrit system. There is the queen Śaivyā, the wife of the king Harischandra in the Chandakauśika, who shares willingly the troubles imposed on her husband by Viśvāmitra, but she is not a tragic heroine. Sītā, Śakun- talā etc. are also not tragic heroines answering to the English

1. W. D. p. 60.

635

conception. They have soft hearts with enough milk of human kindness and instead of upbraiding their consorts for their kindness and goading them on in their fell purpose as Lady Macbeth does, they excercise a softening influence on them. The halo of romance to be seen round Juliet, Miranda etc. is also to be marked round Śakuntalā, Mālatī, Ratnāvalī etc. Śakuntalā and Sītā are rejected by their royal consorts ; they are ideal wives, hence they put up with the rejection. Hermione and Imogen, too, are rejected. All these suffer grievous and unmerited wrong but do not com- plain loudly. At the most they murmur in righteous in- dignation and find fault with their lot or fate and not with their too dear husbands. Desdemona shows a similar atti- tude. In her last moment she wishes to be commended to her kind lord. Malatī and Juliet are in passionate love with Mādhava and Romeo respectively. Mālavikā, Ratnāvalī and Viola are in foreign kingdoms secretly in love with the several rulers of whom they had heard before. Among other characters Beatrice may be instanced in the fickle and witty female maidens of the royal household who tease very much the Vidūșaka. Gautamī displays the qualities of Paulina whereas Kāmandakī with her cares and anxieties for Malatī may be compared to Friar Lawrence. In the Sanskrit system there is no heroine answering to the con- ception of that in the tragi-comedy. As shown previously the heroines in the Sanskrit system have softening feminine qualities, hence they exert a purifying effect over the at- mosphere they breathe and lend a grace to whatever they touch or is associated with them. This comparison has put clearly many points which may answer many objections against the Sanskrit system. It is

636

urged against the Sanskrit system that high personages monopolized it. This, however, is a charge which falls to the ground when only one fact is taken into considesation. In certain types of drama as the Bhāna the hero is a Vita who has a low status in society. It has also been seen that in the Sanskrit system all kinds of beings hailing from different regions figure as characters with life and blood whereas in the English system most of them are only suggested or referred to. It has also been urged against the Sanskrit system that the characters there are stereotyped. That the stereotyped characters hardly maintain perennial interest is a matter of common experience and, therefore, with the change of times and the prevailing circumstances the interest wanes. This, however, is not the case with the Sanskrit drama. The characters there hold the interest of the spectators as much now as they did before. They cannot be dubbed as old curiosities. They are ever new, attracting the spectators at all times. On the other hand, the reverse holds good in the case of the dramas in the English system where the conceptions changed along with the times. The con- ception of today is not what it was sometimes back. As Lucas puts it, 'Today all is changed. The aristocracy holds the stage only of melodrama ; and the modern spectator goes above all to see people like himself, characters who are not screened by any divinity of rank from that close scrutiny of the tiniest motives and emotions for which we have come above all to care. Men as they are, not nobler than they are -- truth, not splendour -- the reactions of the human heart to love and personal relations rather than to crownings and dethronements -- these are the subjects of our age.'1 Hence

1. L. T. p. 117.

637 if an Elizabethan tragedy is represented on the stage, the spectator thinks in himself that the piece deals with past interests. No such thought comes to the spectator when he sees a Sanskrit drama represented. The interests are as fresh and attracting today as they were yesterday ; that they will remain so even in future will be confirmed by the verdict of time which has all along been found sincere and true till now. What is the raison d'etre of this position ? The Sanskrit dramaturgists had probed into human heart long long before. They had considered this aspect in respect of the beings of other regions as well. The action upon, and reaction to, one another had also been fully analyzed. Then these living beings of different regions in their different positions as high, middle or low, were utilized as the Vibhāvas for exciting the emotion in the spectator. And it is this excited emotion which ultimately culminates into Rasa. There was no question here of primarily representing the changing temporal aspects of society and its views of life as in the English system. Therefore while the English system attached more importance to one factor or other according to the changing times, the dramaturgists and dramatists in the Sanskrit system made all other factors subordinate to Rasa. The pleasurable enjoyment in the spectator was kept by them as the principal aim and such characters etc. were chosen as were found suitable to the particular Rasa selected by them. This explains clearly the position of the master dramaturgist Bharata when he says that there is no other factor regularly and predominatingly suggested as Rasa. And it is of this Rasa that the Vibhavas, that is, the characters of all varieties and the scenes etc. become the Ālamabana and the Uddīpana causes ( Vibhāvānubhāvavya- bhichārisamyogāt Rasanișpattiḥ ).

638

The heroes, the heroines and other characters are seen carrying on different activities in the midst of different situations and circumstances which constitute the plot as a whole. The plot ( Vastu ) in the Sanskrit drama is first divided into two kinds: the principal ( Ādhikārika ) and the subsidiary ( Prāsangika ). The latter is again divided into two sub- . kinds : the episode (Patāka) and the episodical incident ( Prakarī ). The former is long in duration while the latter is short. These two are the sub-plots which further the interests of the hero of the dramatic piece, though in the former the interests of its hero who is a help to the main hero are also served. These three, that is, the principal plot and the subsidiary in its two kinds, may make use of famous legends, stories etc. ( Prakhyāta ) or they may be of the dramatists' own composition ( Utpadya ) or they may be in part famous and in part of the dramatists ' invention ( Miśra). These above nine kinds may again be such as deal with interest, human or divine or of any other region. Thus, roughly speaking, there are eighteen kinds of plot. In these kinds of plot the subject-matter differs in the different types of drama. It ranges from the lives of great, noble and high personalities to beings of ordinary level -- all belong- ing to different regions. It, thus, represents the life incidents of all strata of society. The plot consists of some work which begins from the very beginning called the germ (Bīja) and culminates in the full fruition called the effect ( Kārya). Sometimes the work from the germinating stage to the final one may be intercepted. Consequently there has to be provided some connecting link called the expansion ( Bindu). This principal work has to be intensified by means of an episode ( Patākā ) or an episodical incident ( Prakarī ). These five, therefore, are the five elements ( Arthaprakrtis )

639 of the plot. Then again the work taken by the dramatist has to be shown in its various stages of development in order that it may seem natural and logical. These stages mark the beginning ( Aramabha ) of the work, the effort ( Prayatna ) made on the non-achievement of the desired object, the prospect of success (Prāptyāśā), that is, the possibility of achievement through means and with fear of failure, the certainty of success (Niyatäpti), that is, the assurance of success due to absence of failure, and lastly the attainment of the result ( Phalagama ), that is, the accomplishment of the entire result. The five elements, viz. the Bīja, the Bindu, the Patākā, the Prakarī and the Kārya, and the five stages, viz. the Āramabha, the Prayatna, the Prāptyāśā, the Niyatāpti and the Phalagama combine respectively and form the five junctures ( Sandhis ), viz. the opening ( Mukha), that is, the origination of the Bīja, the progression ( Pratimukha ) wherein the Bija is partly visible and invisible, the development ( Garbha ), that is, the search for the Bija seen and lost alterna- tely, the pause (Avamarsa), that is, the stop due to anger, calamity or temptation, and lastly the conclusion (Nirvahana ) wherein all developments tend to the final fruition. It has to be borne in mind here that in the third and the fourth Sandhis the Patākā and the Prakarī may not be present, for as seen before they only further the principal action. It is not necessary that all these Sandhis should be present in all the types of drama. Some types as shown before have even three or four Sandhis. These five Sandhis have parts which as shown previously all come to sixty four. The whole plot thus analyzed has certain parts which are to be seen ( Drśya ) and some only to be indicated ( Samsūchya ). This is another way of arranging the plot. The matter which is intended to be seen is to be arranged in portions called

640 the acts ( Ankas ) which may be from one to ten generally and even fourteen in exceptional cases. Sometimes even an act within an act ( Garbhanka ) occurs. The means through which the indications are made are the explanatory scene ( Vişkambhaka ), that is, that means through which parts of the past or future stories are presented briefly through middling characters (Śuddha) or combined with inferior characters ( Sankīrņa) ; the introductory scene ( Praveśaka ), that is, that means through which parts of the omitted stories are presented between two acts in low language through inferior characters ; the intimation scene ( Chūlikā), that is, the means through which matter is presented by characters behind the curtain ; the anticipatory scene ( Ankāsya), that is, the means through which an allusion by characters at the end of an act to the subject of the succeeding act is made and finally the continuation scene (Ankāvatāra), that is, the means through which the occurrence of the act in continua- tion of the previous act takes place. Another way of division involves threefold classification, viz. some matter is to be heard by all ( Sarvaśrāvya ), some matter to be heard by none ( Aśrāvya ) and some to be heard by limited presons ( Niyata- śrāvya). The first is aloud (Prakāśa), the second is aside ( Svagata ) while the third has further sub-divisions, viz. personal address (Janāntika ), that is, mutual conversation by excluding others in the course of the story through the Tripatākā hand, and confidence ( Apavārita ), that is, a secret told by turning towards the person spoken to. Here conver- sation with an imaginary person ( Ākaśabhāșita ), that is, the speech in the air through questions is also to be taken into consideration. From this plot as a whole some activities are to be excluded as they stand opposed to the sense of decorum and decency. They are a long journey, murder, fighting,

641 revolt in a kingdom or a country etc., a siege, eating, bathing, intercourse, anointment of the body, dressing and the like. These are, however, to be excluded from such types of drama as the Nātaka, the Prakarana etc. The circumstances and situations may as shown before have reference to Nature, animals and beasts. These are to be seen in suitability to the characters in their different mental or physical conditions. The above is the brief survey of the plot in the Sanskrit system: The plot is considered by Aristotle to be one which is complete, whole and of a certain magnitude. Because it is whole, therefore, it must have a beginning leading naturally and logically to a middle which also comes logically and naturally to an end. And it must have a magnitude which may depict well the changes from good to bad or vice versa. Because the tragedy is to arouse the two emotions of pity and fear, the tragic theme should in order to effect this purpose deal with the life incidents of a character who, as pointed out before, ' is not eminently good and just, yet whose mis- fortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty. He must be one who is highly renowned and prosperous,-a personage like Oedipus, Thyestes, or other illustrious men of such families.'1 The plot thus deals with the incidents of high families. Aristotle says that the plots may be either simple or complex. The latter involves a change by Reversal or Recognition or by both, whereas the former is one and continuous with a change without being brought about by either the Reversal or the Recognition. He approves the latter in a good tragedy. He is further of opinion that 'A well constructed plot should, therefore, be

1. T. A. pp. 45-47. 41

642 single in its issue, rather than double as some maintain. The change of fortune should be not from bad to good, but, reversely, from good to bad.'1 The Reversal implies some happening which is just the opposite of what was desired and the Recognition a change from ignorance to knowledge. The third part ( the Reversal and the Recognition constituting the first and the second parts ) is the scene of suffering. The quantitative parts into which a tragedy was divided were the Prologue, the Episode, the Exode, and the Choric song. The last one had two divisions : the Parode and the Stasimon. 'The Prologue is that entire part of a tragedy which precedes the Parode of the Chorus. The Episode is that entire part of a tragedy which is between complete choric songs. The Exode is that entire part of a tragedy which has no choric song after it. Of the Choric part the Parode is the first und- ivided utterance of the Chorus: the Stasimon is a Choric ode without anapaests or trochaic tetrameters : the Commos is a joint lamentation of Chorus and actors.'2 Thus the parts were only three: the Prologue, the Episode and the Exode as the Chorus concerned itself with music and songs. Aristo- tle further says that the plot of the tragedy must have a unity in such a way as all the parts must be organically connected together. He never gave theories about the unity of place or the unity of time. When differentiating the tragedy from the epic in point of length he only says, " ... for tragedy endeavours, as far as possible, to confine itself to a single revolution of the sun, or but slightly to exceed this limit ; "3 These two unities, however, were observed as a matter of necessity. The Chorus in the Greek tragedy was an integral part. In the absence of a curtain it was difficult 1. T. A. p. 47. 2. Ibid. p. 43. 3. Ibid. p. 23.

643

for the Chorus to assemble again and again now at one place, now at another. Moreover, it was difficult for it to appear punctually after a fixed period of time, say, twelve years. Hence the unities of time and place had to be observed. There were some dramatists who did not observe them. They were, however, generally observed. Because of the restric- tion due to the nature of the Greek stage, the Chorus etc. the story chosen by the dramatist did not cover a long canvas in one dramatic piece. It began generally not with the beginning preparing the ground for the changes coming to a critical point but a little before the catastrophe so that the disastrous end may come with full force. Aristotle makes no particular mention of the Suspense and the Tragic irony in the plot though he furnishes instances of the Irony as his plot mostly depends on the irony of fate when it is seen that the very means meant to secure the welfare brings about ruin, in other words, where the Reversal is complete. The instances, therefore, of the Suspense and the Tragic Irony are to be found in the plays of the Greek dramatists. The Suspense is to be found in the plays of Aeschylus and instances of the Tragic Irony, conscious and unconscious, in word and in deed -- thus four kinds in all, are to be found in the close of the Electra of Sophocles. The element of Surprise was not much favoured as it had little scope. The story in the Greek plays was known to the audience, hence there was no occasion for creating surprise. Thus the Greeks, though impeded due to many factors could yet produce grand trage- dies. The Greek philosopher little discussed the comedy as is clear from what he says. He says that this form was not seriously treated by the Greeks. According to him, however, the lives of low persons supplied the subject- matter for the plot in a comedy.

644

As said previously the Greek literature during the mediaeval ages was lost, yet the plot dealing with the life story of a prosperous man ending miserably was the accepted rule in the tragedy. With the appearance of the Miracles or the Moralities the lives of saints and the Biblical subjects became the plots in the plays. In Elizabethan times the Senecan influence on the choice of the subjects was remarka- ble. It will not be a repetition to say that the different elements of plot came from four tendencies, viz. the Aristote- lian idea of magnitude ; the mediaeval idea of fall from happiness into unhappiness ; the pagan idea of fortune and the Christian idea of moral punishment. How far Shakes- peare's tragedies embodied the above has already been seen. His tragic heroes as shown before were men of status hence the lives of the great formed the plots of his tragedies. His tragedies deal with subjects culled from chronicles, histories, traditions etc. Afterwards the French influence was to be seen ; the plots dealt with pseudo-history and there were set rules to be followed. The rebirth of many Greek items as the three unities is to be observed. Then the domestic themes came to be selected. The lives of ordinary persons fighting for their rights or standing as the representatives of forces, powers etc. supply the plots of the modern dramatic pieces in the field of tragedy. The subjects of the plots, thus, gradually changed in adjustment to the prevailing influences or circumstances. As in the case of the tragedy so in that of the comedy the Greek literature during the mediaeval period was lost. The Miracles and the Moralities mixed the comic elements and these combined with the French farce also furnished instances in the English system. The birth of Renaissance resulted in the birth of some comedies wherein the subject for the

645

plots were provided by the plays of Terence. The subject- matter of Terence's plays has already been described. Shakes- peare's comedies are the representatives of this age. The subject matter of most of his comedies comes from Italy but it is mostly set in local surroundings. The change in tone comes with Ben Jonson who deals with particular follies or exaggerated characteristics of the age. Later on the manners of the refined society of the town supplied the plots. High social affectations ruling the characters formed the plots of the comedies. The change in the subject- matter came when the plot was the sum-total of disguises, intrigues and complications. In the 18th century the Pantomime dealt with a story based on the classical myth or the fable. Other forms as the Farce dealt with secular themes. The plot in the Sentimental comedy consisted of the manners of the refined society with repentance or opening up a new way of life in the last act. With the emergence of the Sentimental drama the subject- matter became neither of tragic nor of comic tone ; it was not gloomy as in the tragedy and it dealt with the virtue and duties of man. It was this drama which gave birth to the modern problem play of which the subject-matter in the plot is lives of ordinary people wherein certian phases are depicted to present problems without solutions. The subject-matter in the plot in respect of the tragedy, the comedy and the tragi-comedy at various times, thus, changed in adjustment to the various conditions, circum- stances and influence. After the subject-matter was thus selected, it was to be shown in its development in a very natural way. Various stages in the development thus required the skill of the dramatist. The centre of interest in the plot was generally the conflict of one kind or another.

646

' Some kind of conflict is, however, the datum and very backbone of a dramatic story, ' as Hudson puts it.1 And on the basis of this conflict the different forms of drama came into being. As Upham says, "Forms of the drama itself are distinguished chiefly by the way these conflicts and crises are presented and the angle from which the audience is asked to view them."2 This conflict is to be shown in its beginning and with its end the real plot comes to an end. Between these the various phases of the conflict are to come. 'With the opening of this conflict the real plot begins ; with its conclusion the real plot ends ; and since, between these two terms, the essential interest of the story will be com- posed of the development and fluctuations of the struggle, the movement of the plot will necessarily follow a fairly well- defined and uniform course. The complications which arise from the initial clash of opposed forces will, as a rule, continue to increase until a point is reached at which a decisive turn is taken in favour of one side or the other ; after which, the progress of events will be inevitably, though often with many minor interruptions, towards the final triumph of good over evil or of evil over good. Through every plot we may thus trace more or less clearly what is sometimes called " the dramatic line".'3 Thus whether the triumph of good over evil as in the comedy or that of evil over good as in the tragedy is depicted, or whether the whole thing ends in a problem as in the modern plays, the conflict is to be shown from its start to finish at various stages of development. The accepted opinion divides this whole growth into five stages beginning with firstly, the Initial Incident from where

1. H. I. L. p. 264. 2. T. L. pp. 255-256. 3. H. I. L. pp. 264-265.

647

the conflict between the two forces begins to grow ; secondly, the Rising Action, Growth or Complication wherein the growth goes on becoming more and more intensive keeping, however, the outcome uncertain ; thirdly, the Climax, Crisis or Turning Point wherein one force gets the better of the other with an assurance of its final success ; fourthly, the Falling Action, Resolution or Denouement wherein the stages leading to the above final success are to be clearly seen ; and fifthly, the Conclusion or Catastrophe which depicts the conflict in its close and the above final success achieved. This is the fivefold division of the conflict. It may or may not correspond exactly with the five acts of a play. It is, however, to be found also in the four-act dramas of the modern times and even in the brief one-act play. The conflict, thus, shown in its natural five divisions has to be put in certain circumstances and preliminary situations. Without the description of these conditions and circumstances it is difficult to depict the conflict, hence the need of an Exposition or Introduction. It has to be borne in mind that in certain plays this line of development is not so clearly marked and many dramatists like Henry Becque and Gerhart Hauptmann deliberately disregarded it. It is also subject to change in adjustment to the nature of the particular point of view adopted by the writer. It is, however, a general and common way of dividing the dramatic plot. The plot is divided into acts which are generally five. Sometimes a representation within an act is also arranged as in Hamlet. Instances of dramatic irony when the characters say one thing and the spectators understand something different are to be found in the plot. The irony in the above case is verbal ; there may also be an irony of situation or incident. There may also be instances of Concealment and Surprise

648 through which the dramatist tries to maintain the interest of the play. Nature outside may be depicted in sympathy with the condition of the tragic characters or those in the comedy. The three unities of action, time and place also engaged the attention. In their faithful observance wide deparatures were to be marked. It is true that those who belonged to the neo-classic school as the French writers of the 17th and the 18th centuries observed them but the writers of the romantic school, Shakespeare at their head, ignored the unities of time and place and paid attention to the unity of action according to the interpretation quite different from that of the followers of the neo-classic school. The romantic dramatists made free use of subordinate plots and incidents when the neo-classic writers emphasized only one plot without its being in any way diversified by other episodes and incidents. Consequently the use of the sub-plots for parallelism or con- trast with the incidents etc. of the principal plot was freely made by the romantic writers. Because of this departure the romantic writers employed action in the representation. Even the activities of violent type as battle etc. were freely represented. On the other hand, some dramatists as the neo-classicists made ample use of narration for such activities. It is not that narration is not at all used by the romanticists ; they did make use of it but not for the purpose of relating violent activities. In matters of the three unities, narration, action, sub-plots etc. the modern drama largely follows the Romantic drama but in certain points it observes the rules of the neo-classic school also. There are devices used in the plot. They are the Soliloquy and the Aside. These throw light, no doubt, on the particular character. They also show what the attitude of that character is in respect of the line of action he is to adopt.

649 Comparing now the Sanskrit system with the English system in respect of plots it is seen that like the Sanskrit drama- turgists the Greeks did lay emphasis on the lives of the great and the prosperous as forming the subject-matter in the plot of a tragic dramatic piece. This idea of the Greeks prevailed for a pretty long time, but then a change came. In Shakes- peare the great personages are to be seen supplying incidents from their lives as subject-matter for the plot but the surroun- ding circumstances far differed. Then as time went on, a change in attitude tended towards taking the subject-matter from the lives of ordinary people which finally resulted in the modern problem play. In the comic pieces the Greeks took the life incidents of low people. This idea of the Greeks obtained in one way or another. Lives of ordinary people generally formed the subject-matter of the plot, though in some of the comedies as of Shakespeare the incidents of the lives of dukes are also depicted. Thus whereas in the English system changes in subject-matters of the plots took place as time went on, in the Sanskrit system it was not so. In it every stratum of society as shown before was drawn upon and the life incidents chosen were allocated to different types of drama. In the nature of the subject-matter there is a fair resemblance. The ghosts etc. supplying incidents in the Senecan influence can be put beside the Rākasas, the Dānavas etc. in the Samavakāra and the Dima types of Sanskrit drama. Same is the case with battles etc. which as much figure in the plays of Shakespeare as in the Sanskrit types just referred to. The historical plays of Shakespeare can be compared to such dramas as the Mudrārākșasa and the Mālavikāgnimitra in the Sanskrit system. The life incidents of low characters of the comedies are on a par with the subject-matter in the Bhāna and the Prahasana. Ben Jonson's humours and follies

650

of the age can be compared to the professions ridiculed in the Prahasanas. Disguises, intrigues and complications of the Comedy of intrigue find parallels in the Nāțikā type of Sanskrit drama. The arrangement of the plot also pro- mises comparison. In the English system some kind of con- flict is taken as the subject-matter in the piece ; in the Sanskrit system any one of the Dharma, the Artha, the Käma and the Moksa is to be attained. Very little conflict, if at all germane, is shown in connection with the achievement of the above object and that conflict is quite controllable. In the Uttara- ramacharita Rāma's renunciation of Sītā in obedience to the wish of the subjects is depicted. In Rama as already pointed out the conflict takes place, but it is a conflict subordinated to the duty ( Dharma ) of the king. Any of the four objects becomes a thing of accomplishment. And its germ becomes the beginning. The Patākā and the Prakarī of the Sanskrit dramas are to be compared to the sub-plots of the English dramas. Then the five stages, that is, the Arambha, the Prayatna, the Prāptyāśā, the Niyatāpti and the Phalāgama in the Sanskrit system correspond with the five stages of the conflict, viz. the Initial Incident, the Rising Action ( or Growth or Complication ), the Climax ( or Crisis or Turning Point), the Falling Action ( or Resolution or Denouement ) and the Conclusion (or Catastrophe ). Herein one point deserves to be borne in mind. It is this that whereas in the English system the third stage, the Climax, represents that point where either the good force triumphs over the ° evil force or vice versa, in the Sanskrit system the evil force, if depicted at all, is always shown defeated. If at this stage there are any complications or obstructions in the path of the achievement of the desired object, they disappear and the achievement becomes certain. The Exposition in the

651

English dramas corresponds generally with the dialogue that is held between the Sūtradhāra and the Pāripārśvaka in the Prastävana before the beginning of the first act. Wilson has even shown the five Sandhis of the Sanskrit system in the subject-matter of the plot of Romeo and Juliet. 'In Romeo and Juliet, the ball at the house of Capulet may be considered the Mukha : the Pratimukha is the interview with Juliet in the garden : the Garbha is Juliet's apparent assent to the marriage with Paris : the Vimarsha is the despair of Romeo, consequent on a contrivance intended to preserve Juliet's faith. The Catastrophe needs no elucida- tion'.1 In the two systems the whole subject-matter is divided into acts and in both of them the different stages of the development and the divisions called acts do not always coincide. The device of a representation within an act is to be found in both as illustrated in the Uttararāmacharita where Sītā's miserable life is represented and in Hamlet where Hamlet, the prince of Denmark, arranges a dramatic representation to detect the crime of his guilty uncle. Irony of comic and tragic sorts is available in the Sanskrit system. The comic irony is to be found in the Ratnāvalī. The king embraces the queen taking her to be Sāgarikā. The comic irony of situation giving rise to laughter is to be seen where Makaranda in a maiden's robe is married to Nandana in the Malatīmādhava. The tragic sort of irony is to be marked in many instances. Sītā reposes on the lap of Rāma at a time when he is compelled to renounce her in the Uttara- rāmacharita. In the Svapnavāsavadatta, Vāsavadattā by virtue of her position as a companion to Padmāvatī has to weave a garland for the latter on the occasion of the latter's

1. W. D. p. 47.

652

marriage with her husband. Rāvaņa in the Abhișekanāțaka shows Sita two heads which, he says, are those of Rāma and Laksmana, when just afterwards is announced to him the death of his own son at their hands. The prophetic irony can be instanced in the curse of the sage Durvāsas to Śakun- talā with its atonement on the production of the king's ring placed round her finger by the king at the time of his departure. The curse was thought to come about in a very easy, smooth and speedy way and not as miserably and painfully as it actually did. It is on a par with that which is to be instanced in the predictions of the witches in Macbeth in respect of his future sovereignty. Instances of the subtle type of irony can also be pointed out in both the systems. The throbbing of Śakuntalā's left limb, the screaming of Sītā in the dream etc. are prognostications of impending evils. The instance of Surprise is not so much made use of. There are a few instances as when some god or goddess appears towards the end of the play to solve the knotty point as the goddess Gaurī appears and brings Jīmūtavāhana to life towards the end of Nāgānanda. The audience is rather informed of the plot and a sort of suspense is maintained. Chārudatta is about to be executed. Though the audience knows that Vasanta- senā is alive, yet the discovery as the evidence of the servant of Samsthānaka about the innocence of Chārudatta is turned down and the spectators are in a suspense if other evidence also may not be slighted when just in the nick of time Vasantasenā with the monk appears on the scene and Chāru- datta is saved. Even Nature sympathizing with the charac- ters is to be illustrated in the Abhijñānaśākuntala where at the time of Śakuntalā's departure from the hermitage of Kanva whole Nature weeps. In the sorrows of Rāma external Nature also sympathizes. It can be compared to the different

653

states of external Nature at the death of Caesar and Duncan or the storm outside in Lear. The unity of action received the attention of the Sanskrit dramatists ; those of time and place hardly kept their canvas restricted. The scenes are laid far distant apart in the major types of drama. The unity of place may be instanced in such dramas as the Dūtavākya where the act is laid in the court of Duryodhana but such instances are rare. The Sanskrit dramatists took general liberty with the unities of time and place as the Romantic dramatists did. An interval of years elapsed between Śakun- talā's rejection and her reunion with the king. The unity of action did not consist in a single plot only. The rule in general was complexity in the plot leading, however, to one unitary effect, a practice followed by the Romantic dramatists also. Ample use of action was made by the Sanskrit dramatists in such dramatic types as the Dima and the Samvakāra wherein all sorts of violent actions have free play. There is, thus, little scope for the charge that Sanskrit dramas do not represent action. The violent actions taking place in such types of drama as the Dima and the Samavakāra are, however, prohibited from being represented in such dramatic types as the Nātaka, the Prakarana etc. They are, therefore, represented, if necessary at all, not directly but through narration as the neo-classic dramatists did. The narration was also one of the devices used to economize the plot. It is to be seen thus utilized in the Sanskrit dramas. The narration used in the Venīsamhāra in the fourth act much shortens the play. Shakespeare also uses this device for this very purpose. As Hudson puts it, 'Sometimes we shall find that he has substituted narrative for action for the purpose of condensing a large

654

amount of material which would otherwise have become unmanageable, or which would have occupied too much space.'1 ' The flight of Malcolm and Donalbain to England and Ireland provides an example of narrative condensation.'2 The Samśrāvya, the Aśrāvya and the Niyataśrāvya in the Sanskrit system correspond with the Aside, the Soliloquy etc. in the English system. This comparison between the Sanskrit system and the English system in respect of plots shows that there are many points of resemblance. The fundamental points of basic difference, however, are to be always kept in view. The plots of the Sanskrit system were considered separately by the Sanskrit dramaturgists and dramatists. The lives of all strata of society supplied the subject-matters which were dealt with in different types of drama. There was no question here of historical evolution as in the English system where the subject-matters for plot came from the changing circumstances and society. In the Sanskrit system the lives of beings of other regions also supplied events and incidents which figured principally in some of the types of drama. This was not the case in the English system. In respect of the plots in the major types of drama the cases of the Sanskrit system and the Greek system were similar. The spectators were in full possession of the subject-matter, hence what they eagerly awaited was the way in which their interest was maintained and they were provided amusement. In case of the plots of the writers' composition the same desire of the spectators to be provided with amusement was the principal factor. In both the above cases the desire of the spectators was fulfilled through exciting their latent

1. H. I. L. p. 330. 2. Ibid. p. 331.

655 emotions which culminated into the pleasurable experience, that is, Rasa. As Wilson puts it, 'The purposes that are to be aimed at in dramatic composition are described as the same with those of poetic fiction in general : they are, to convey instruction through the means of amusement; and, with this view, they must affect the minds of the spectators with the sentiments which they express.'1 As seen before Ānanda recognizes this pleasurable experience as the main factor. He says that changes even in famous plots, legendary, mythical or traditional, should be made in order that the enjoyment of pleasure may not be affected. Other ingredients of plot as the Sandhis etc. should also be changed accordingly. The English system made, as seen before, an appeal to emotions in tragic dramatic pieces, whereas in the comedies and the modern plays the appeal was to the intellect. And even in case of tragedies their avowed aim was never ex- pressed in the words that their appeal was to emotions hence sometimes much incoherent material crept in the works. This was not so in the Sanskrit system where the appeal was made invariably to emotions in all the types of drama. Hence every ingredient in the plot was controlled by Rasa. Bharata's dictum that it is Rasa which is the main factor was the guiding rule here. The three major constituents in the two systems have been surveyed in a comparative way ; the remaining minor constituents essential to a drama now demand attention. In order to represent the original characters on the boards, persons are needed to impersonate them. These are the actors. As has been seen before the actor in the Sanskrit system has to undergo a regular training. The actor's personal dexterity and skill have no much independent use. 1. W. D. p. 66.

656

They are harnessed to the service of this training. Of course when the actor is to impersonate a particular character, he is to think in himself that he is none other than that particular character and is to behave as the latter did. While impersonating the particular character, he does not experience pleasure which is rightly the spectator's. And if he does so, he is considered to be on a level with the spectator. The English system placed emphasis on the training which was to be of much importance. As Coquelin puts it, ' Study your part, enter into the skin of your character but never abdicate, hold the reins.'1 When such was the importance of the training, naturally the actor should not feel the senti- meats in himself. 'Briefly, he must not experience a shadow of the sentiments he is expressing-at that very moment when he is expressing them with the greatest truthfulness and power.'2' ... the truth according to my mind is that in order to call forth emotion we ourselves must not feel it ; and that the actor must in all circumstances remain the absolute master of himself, and leave nothing to chance.'3 But there were opinions which gave the verdict otherwise. Dame Madge Kendal says, "Irving contended that the actor felt, and Coquelin that the actor only simulated feeling."4 And further, 'Salvini was of the opinion that whether the actor shed real tears or not had to be left to the particular mood in which he was at the time of playing.'5 A com- promise between the two positions is suggested in the words, 'It, therefore, seems to me that both heart and art must be embodied by the actor if he is to sway his audience. If only the latter part of the word (by the latter part of the

1. A. A. p. 71. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid. pp. 84-85. 4. A. A. A. p. 100. 5. Ibid. p. 101.

657

word the writer means 'art' in the word 'heart') is used, the actor becomes too cold and classical. If he employs only his heart, unrestrained by art, he becomes too impulsive, too quick. Using both words properly, art inside the pulsations of the human heart, the actor can carry the world within him, and the actor's world for the time is bounded by the walls of the theatre.' This is in some respect akin to the position which the actor in the Sanskrit system is to be in. The difference, however, comes in this that whereas in the English system the heart is also to cooperate, in the Sanskrit system the actor is only to think in himself that he is none other than the particular character and behave accordingly. It is because of this latter attitude of the actor that he is successful in exciting the latent emotions in the spectators which ultimately culminate in the pleasurable experience, that is, Rasa. On the other hand, if the actor himself feels the emotions it is difficult for him to represent truly and accurately the particular character leading to defect in the ultimate pleasure. Hence from the view point of Rasa, the position of the actor as propounded in the Sanskrit system effects well the purpose as generally desired. The actors make use of actions, mental conditions, speech, dress, and various objects used by the original characters in order that the impersonation may be as far as possible effective and excite the latent emotions in the spectators. The representation by the actors is called the Abhinaya which has been classified as shown before into four kinds : the Angika, the Vächika, the Sāttvika and the Āhārya. The first kind includes the various poses, movements etc. of the body. Dancing was also included. The second deals with

1. A. A. A. p. 104. 42

658

conversation, dialogue, different forms of address, music etc. The third represents the psychical condition of the characters. The fourth deals with dress, costumes, stage devices and properties. In the English system the Āngika Abhinaya is to be seen in the gesticulation etc. which the actor resorts to in order to represent to the spectators the story in a dumb way. The element of dance is to be traced back to the very beginning of tragedy which originated from dance. In the Opera also there is dance interspersed with music etc. The Vächika Abhinaya is to be seen in the con- versation held by actors. Diction, enumerated as one of the six elements of tragedy, comes in here. Music is to be traced back to the very beginning, that is, the Chorus of the Greek tragedy. The word, tragedy, itself means the Goat song. The lyric outbursts of the Chorus were instances of fine music relieving its tedium. The Sāttvika Abhinaya depended upon the skill of the actor who could represent clearly and successfully the psychic conditions of the original character. The Ahārya Abhinaya is also to be marked from the very beginning when in the Greek times, the use of the cothurnus or buskin (a thick wooden-soled boot intended to lend height to the actor ) by the tragic actor and of the sock (a light shoe) by the comic actor was made. In the Sanskrit system there is the mention of the Nepathyaja Rasa, that is, the experience of pleasure on the basis of dress, costumes, decorations etc. which, however, is missing in the English system. Shaw provides ample directions with regard to costumes etc. but as shown previously his appeal is directed to intellect. Some suggest that the goat skin was used in tragedy. The stage properties and the stage devices are also parts of the Ahārya Abhinaya. Letters, rings, statues etc. figure freely in both the systems. As

659

shown before, all these kinds of the Abhinaya in the Sans- krit system are resorted to by the actor in order to evoke the latent emotions in the spectators which ultimately result in his pleasurable experience. In the English system they are used for the purpose of making appeal to the emotions in tragedies but to the intellect in comedies and modern plays. The actor resorts to these various kinds of the Abhi- naya on the stage. As pointed out before, the stage is abso- lutely necessary for the enjoyment of Rasa in the spectator, who as such has no existence apart from the stage. In the Sanskrit system various kinds of theatre are described as seen previously. Their description occurs in details. Out of those kinds the Madhyama is prescribed for mortals. The prescription is evidently according to the acoustics, so that the enjoyment of Rasa in the spectator may not be spoiled. For such violent activities as war etc. in connection with the Rākșasas another kind is prescribed. Because the Madhyama kind has no wide space to permit the above activities, this prescription occurs in order to give free scope for their per- formance. It has to be borne in mind that such activities belonging as they do to the Rāksasas are in connection with the Raudra Rasa. While composing the different dramatic pieces the writers, as seen before, keep in view the different Rasas to be evoked in the spectators. At the time of writing a dramatic piece in which the activities of mortals are des- cribed, violent activities as war etc. are not included, for firstly, they do not stand completely consistent with human nature as they do in the case of the Rāksasas, and secondly, the Madhyama kind will not admit of their performance. Lastly, Rasa as the Raudra is not intended to be evoked in the spectator. Thus the different Rasas in the Sanskrit system prescribed different activities to be carried on parti-

660

cular kinds of stage in order that those Rasas may be ex- perienced in the spectators. In other words, Rasas governed the different kinds of stage. In the English system the theatre was a matter of historical evolution. The condi- tions of the Greek stage permitted only two emotions to be depicted. Later on also the conditions of the stage pres- cribed activities. No particular emotion was intended to be conveyed and such emotions as of sorrow etc. were only suggested in the tragedy; in the comedy, however, the intellect had the upper hand and in the modern problem play it is mainly appealed to. Thus emotions as such have no principal place in all kinds of drama. There is no such prescription here implied or expressed to the effect that for different emotions different kinds of stage must be cons- tructed as is the case in the Sanskrit system. When the representation on the stage is given by the actor, the particular Rasa intended to be suggested thereby is experienced by the spectator. But it is not every man who experiences the pleasure, viz. Rasa. Certain preliminary conditions are to be present in him as seen before. Because they do not exist in them or are worn out due to constant use or want of use, the Vaiyākaraņas and the Mīmāmsakas are severely criticized by the Sāhityikas. The conditions are therefore sine qua non for the enjoyment of Rasa. Rasa as the aesthetic pleasure is nothing but the excited latent emotion of the spectator culminating with its Vibhāvas etc. into the indescribable pleasure. In course of its experience the spectator feels himself largely expanded. Some similar remarks in connection with the reader of poetry are found in the English system. 'That, in fact, when the reader says that a poem is good or beautiful, what he really means is that it has a particular effect upon him : that beauty is an

661

experience.'1 Here the pleasurable experience is described to be present in the reader. 'And curiously enough, instead of this impairing the unity of the reader's personality, it seems to enhance it.'2 But this experience can only be had on the emotional basis. 'The quality of experience can only be tasted by getting the same flavour ourselves upon the emotional palate.'3 The pleasure, thus, is of emotions which makes the person enjoying it feel the expansion of his personality. It is not the intellectual pleasure which enhances his personality. It, on the other hand, makes it rigid and tense. 'Alternatively, the intellectual, rational approach to poetry is like tenseness and rigidity in muscular effort. It at once inhibits free co-ordination, causes a stasis in the nerve centres and interferes with the harmonizing power which is struggling to work towards greater fullness of life.'4 Thus while in the tragedy an appeal to emotions leads to greater fullness of life, in the comedy the life is not so full as the intellectual appeal is the principal thing in it. In modern plays it is the intellect which predominates. In the Sanskrit system, however, the appeal is aimed at emo- tions in all the types of drama. Hence in these types full- ness of life is realized. As pointed out before art aims at this fullness in respect of all truth, all beauty and all good- ness. Rasa, therefore, by becoming the guiding factor has made drama one of the best forms of arts. This brief comparative study, so far pursued, requires to be continued in respect of one more consideration, viz. how far can the English types of drama be said to be represented in the Sanskrit system ? In other words, are tragedies or come- dies present in the Sanskrit system ? Or are they absent ?

1. D. P. p. 48. 2. Ibid. p. 53. 3. Ibid. p. 52. 4. Ibid. p. 53.

662

As seen already there is a vast difference between the constituents of the dramatic types in one system and those of the dramatic types in the other. In the English system the aspect of life as impression in tragedy is gloomy, dejecting and disappointing. In the comedy and the modern play it is superficially joyful as it is based on intellect. On the other hand, in the Sanskrit system the pleasure in all the kinds is of emotions where even the emotions of sorrow, anger, fear and disgust are invariably experienced as pleasurable when they all culminate into Rasa. The different principal characters as presented in the English system are tragic in tragedy, comic in comedy and intellectual in modern plays. There is one kind of conflict or other present in them. It may be all absorbing and dimensional as in the Greeks and Shakespeare or it may be very very light as in the comedies. It may be based on emotions, duty and right as in the pro- blem plays. It may be beyond the control of the parti- cular character when he is unable to cope with the situation. It may be of the character's own initiative or it may be promp- ted by destiny and fate. Such principal characters as already seen are not to be found in the Sanskrit system. The charac- ters in the Sanskrit system are self-controlled, noble and magnanimous having sympathy for all. The plot in the English system consists of conflict ; in the Sanskrit system it consists of the deeds of the principal characters in the pursuit of one of the four principal objects. It depicts the triumph of the noble, magnificent and good forces over the devilish powers as the victory of Rama over Rāvana which is the typical example where Rāvana's sufferings and troubles are well deserved. Besides, Rāvaņa furnishes an instance of the antagonist. With such vast and gaping differences it is not at all possible to use the terminology

663

of one system in the case of the other. To call the Sanskrit types, the Nātaka, the Prakarana, and the Prahasana res- pectively the Heroic comedy, the Bourgeois comedy and the Farce following the nomenclature of the English system as Keith1 does seems illogical, because, for example, the Prahasana in the Sanskrit system is far far different from the Farce as defined in the brief suvery of comedy where the appeal depends on mere situation and which is mostly in- tellectual. In the same way it hardly seems proper to call such Sanskrit dramas as the Mālavikāgnimitra the historical plays in the sense in which some of the English dramas are so called. The different activities of the Indian writers were moulded by the religious view of life. The religion was the guide, rather the force which gave life to any and every activity. The foremost principle was the law of Karma. It stood as an article of strong religious faith. It was a belief that the deeds committed in past life or lives bore fruits in the next life. The re-birth was its necessary corollary. The suffer- ings, troubles, heart-rending agonies, therefore, are pati- ently put up with. Fate is represented as simply the accumu- lation of past deeds bearing fruit which, too, is very silently borne. Death which sweeps the stage in the English tra- gedies and adds to the intensity of gloom becomes only a condition of renewal when re-birth is recognized. With this idea about death it is but natural that it should not be attached much importance. Even as such it is thought unfit for representation upon the stage, for the spectacle of a dying man is considered shocking to the sense of decency. Even a devilish antagonist is represented as cornered and

1. K. S. D. pp. 345 & 348.

664 discomfitted in all possible ways. Wherever death occurs, it is only narrated and not directly represented. The high idealism of the Indian writers rejoices in the depiction of the virtue encouraged and not stifled by evil forces. In the Uttararāmacharita the death of Sītā would have occurred in the beginning of the play when she is being renounced. She lives on for such a death would have deprived the world of a yet nobler ideal of Indian wifehood than what was represented by her before. In the Abhijñānaśākuntala the tragedy would have occurred in the court scene when Śakuntalā is rejected. It is, however, averted as a life of repentance on the part of Dusyanta and that of austerities on the part of Sakuntalā necessary for the fullness of life were to be represented. In the Mrchchhakatika, contrary to the rules of decency, Vasantasenā is represented as strangled by Samsthänaka who takes her to be even dead. Yet her last breath is saved from coming out of her physical body by the monk in order that such a noble soul should live and save others. It is to be remembered that it is only her timely appearance upon the scene that saves Chärudatta from being executed. In the Nāgānanda the appearance of the goddess Gaurī saves the hero from death. The tragedies are thus averted. The evil forces trying to bring about the tragic end are depicted as overpowered. Rāma ultimately triumphs over Rāvana. It is, however, not the invariable conse- quence that they should be duly punished and thus afford the illustration of poetic justice. Samsthānaka, who leaves no stone unturned to bring about the end of Chārudatta, is ultimately forgiven. Paraśurāma who proves a formidable rival to Rāma is only shown discomfitted ; he is not killed by Rāma who routs him in every way. He is let go even physically unharmed. This was the kind of high idealism

665

of the Sanskrit writers which they wanted to represent before their patrons, the kings, at their palaces in obedience to their wishes or before the public on the occasions of fes- tivals, religious or secular. Interpreted in this light the Ūrubhanga of Bhāsa ceases to be a tragedy. In it Dur- yodhana is represented suffering in agonies as his thigh is broken by Bhima. It is the representation of the triumph of good forces over the evil ones. Duryodhana has per- petrated all sorts of atrocities on the Pāndavas, he has even slighted in ways more than one Lord Krsna. And as such his sufferings are well deserved. As Keith puts it, 'the wicked man who perishes is merely, in the view of the Sanskrit drama, a criminal undergoing punishment, for whose sufferings we should feel no sympathy whatever ; such a person is not a suitable hero for any drama, and it is a mere reading of modern sentiment into ancient literature to treat Duryodhana in the Ürubhanga as the hero of the drama. He justly pays the full penalty for insolence and contempt of Vișnu.'1 And 'the Ūrubhanga, which has erroneously been treated as a tragedy is, on the contrary, the depicting of the deplorable fate of an enemy of Krsna, ... '2 A closer study of the play shows that Duryodhana is not the hero, for he achieves no desired fruit of his own. He suggests that his pathetic condition is the achievement of the vow of Bhīma,3 and it is Hari ( Krsna ) who has brought about his death.4 The hero in no case is depicted as incapacitated in any respect. Duryodhana, therefore, is an example of evil antagonistic forces suppressed by good ones which should always be triumphant. It may be high idealism, but that

1. K. S. D. p. 278. p. 38. 2. Ibid. p. 38. 3. Ūrubhanga (in B. N. C.). 33. 4. Ibid. 35.

666 was so in the view of the Sanskrit dramaturgists and dramatists who arranged it thus in the dramatic pieces. It is, therefore, an idle and frivolous way to say that there are no tragedies and no comedies in the Sanskrit system as they are in the English system ; and that the dramatic types of the Sans- krit system are inferior to those of the English system. Drama is the flowering of the national mind in the do- main of literary art and will naturally differ in different climes. It cannot be said that some forms in one clime are superior or inferior to others in other clime. It is idle to apportion praise or blame to different types in different literatures and languages. The prevailing standards based on the views of life in different cases should function as the respective criteria. There should not be haphazard and inconsistent methods to judge all the forms which are prompted and produced by altogether different standards and principles. Considered thus in their proper and right perspective, drama of any clime or region is sure to prove itself as an art where humanity has tried to tend towards all truth, all beauty and all goodness-in a word, towards an all round perfection.