7. CHAPTER TWO

CHAPTER TWO

EVOLUTION OF DRAMA (SANSKRIT).

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

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

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

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

48

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

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

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

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

50

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

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

51

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

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

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

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

53

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

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

54

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

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

55

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

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

56

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

57

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

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

58

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

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

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

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

60

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

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

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

62

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

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

63

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

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

64

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

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

65

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

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

66

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

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

67

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

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

68

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

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

69

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

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

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

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

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

72

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

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

73

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

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

.74

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

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

75

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

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

76

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

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

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

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

78

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

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

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

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

80

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

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

81

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

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

82

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

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

83

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

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

84

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

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

85

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

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

86

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

87

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

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

88

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

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

89

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

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

90

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

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

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

92

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

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

93

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

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

94

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

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

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

96

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

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

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

98

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