14. CHAPTER EIGHT.

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.

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.