You are on page 1of 88

CHAPTER6

Paradise in a Prison CelI

It takes a determined skeptic to doubt the attribution of the


Saapnavasavadafia 6V to Bhas4 a playnnight Kelidasa himself named
as so Favored in his time that the younger generation of nalyakdrashad
a difficult time getting a hearing.rAfter sifting through the widence,
the most likely conclusion is that the play we have of that name (or
a variant), first discovered for Indology by T. Ganapati Sasri in 1909,
is a somewhat shorter version of the play known to Saradatanaya,
Ramacandra and Guqacandra, Segaranandin, AbhinarraguPta, BhojE
and others.2And one can scarcely admit the genuineness of SVwith-
out acceptingthe Pratijft.ayaugand'hnreyar.ta (PY): the two are perfectly
complementary in plot, theme, treatrnent, and style.tBut even ifwe
could not locate these two plays among the earliest extant of the
whole Sanskrit corpus, we would be justified on aesthetic and the-
matic grounds in including them in any study of the key works of
Sanskritpoetry. The plays are simple, yet charming and sophisticated,
and more genuinely dramatic--giving us a more complicated sense of
conflicting human interests (especially SV)-th".t any play except the
Mudrd,rahsasa (MR) ofVi6akhadatta, who, howwer, completely lacks
Bhasa's lightness of touch. The two plays provide a thematic bridge
between Kalidasa airdVi6akhadatta" combining the latter's focus on
sentiment-negating political demands (anlu" utaha) with the former's
lnxuriating treatrnent of the inner world of erotic emotion (kd.ma,
ffigara).aBhasa gives us a perspective on love thatis much differgnt
from Kalida*a's : more comic, we would have to say, because it is
contrasted not so much with d'u,ty (ilha,nna) as with a practical sense
of reality, yet not so ironic that it alienates our sympathy for the hero.
It is that balance of perspectives that I would like to address in this
chapter: how itis, for example, that the hero (nayala), Udayana, can
seem to us both foolish and ideally sympathetic. Like all
'steadfast-andallant' (dlfiralalita) ndyakas, aswell as some others (e.g.,
Rnkgasa and Carudatta of the MRand Wcchahalika[M7cch] respec-
tively), Udayana is a projection of the rasifta sensibility.sWhat this
means for us is that the stakes are higher than they would be if we
were dealing with a mere individual hero. The plays allow us to reflect
132 Thz Playwodd. of SanskritDrama

on the rasika's special relation to practical reality, his self<onscious


awareness of insulation from it, his apparent powerlessness, the sig-
nificance of his sentimental values and erotic aspirations, his foolish-
ness in the eyes of the world and perhaps even his own eyes. Once
again, the basic guestion concerns the nature of the playworld of
Sanskritpoery.
The PYand SVwork dialectically toge ther. The former sets up the
idea that play (Ela, kidil in its most insouciant aspe ct triumphs over
wery negative force practical reality and duty can bring to bear, while
the latter makes play seem problematic, vulnerable, tingedwith sad-
ness, and implicating a certain ethics of sensitivity to others' feelings.
In the P{ the problems confronting the romantic hero King Udayana
are externalized. Despite the fact that it is his incorrigible penchant
for recreation and extravagantly impolitic behavior that brings him
to a state of imprisonment in his enemy's capital, the very fact of his
ironic triumph over good sense makes it seem as if the real barriers
to his freedom are creations of the unimaginative, pragmatic,
duty-boundworld around him. In the SI1 on the other hand, desprte
the hct that all Udayana'sproblems resultfrom specific decisions of
his minister Yaugandhariyana in conjunction with the will of Fate,
the focus of our attention is always on his-andhiswives'-emotional
life. Ln the first play, a prison cell becomes a pleasure garden, and the
woman whose beauty performs this magic rides offwith the hero to
extend the charmed circle of happiness into the broader world be-
yond. In the second, happiness is so hedged roundwith ignorance
and illusion that it seems only a fragile dream, and pragmatic intel-
ligence (anha) reveals its power to cancel pleasure (hama) even as it
faithfully delivers it the pleasure garden becomes again a prison cell.
What follows will be in three parts, as we consider each play separately
in the light of basic themes and then reflect on our findings in a
conclusion.

L haAj;ayaqmdhoq@ra

a. TluTnumphof Plol
The first Act of Plpresents us with the basic theme ofwork rn. play,
aftlw (in league with dhurrno) as. hi.ma.It opens with the bustle in the
Vatsa capital, Ibu6dmbi. Spies have reported to the minister
Yaugandhariyaqa that the ministers of the Avanti King Pradyota
Mahdsena have prepared an ambush for his own King Udayana. He
Parad.ise in a Pri.son CelI 133

is about to dispatch a messenger to warn his prot6g6, who is at the


moment hunting elephants on the Kingdom's border, when another
arrives to tell the minister it is too late. Udayana has walked into the
trap in a characteristically grand and thoughtless manner. In the first
place the ambush has occurredwhile the Kingwas engaged in sport
instead of attending to state business. Secondly, itis romance thathas
lured him into the catastrophe. A stranger had approached the hunt-
ing party on footwith news of the fabled blue elephant Nilakuvalaya
('Blue Lotr-rs,' a Moby Dick of elephants) notfar away. Unable to resist
the appeal of such aprize and ignoring the advice of his attendant
minister Ruma4van to be cautious, Uda;'ana set outimmediatelywith
a small party, determined to caPture the beast not with the usual
weapons, ropes, and trenches, but by ca.sting a musical spell over him
with his marvelous dqtd ('lute') Ghogavati.6 Thus we have the extrava-
gant image of a charismatic rasila walking blindly into a clever trap,
armed with mythic illusions and poetic incantations, like the Fool
pictured on the Tarot card, stepping offa precipice with his eyes-lifted
io ,o*. enchanting distraction. Once aware of the treachery,? how-
ever, Udayana suddenly becomes a swashbuckling Kqatriya hero. He
leaps back onto his horse, rouses his men's spirits, calling each by
narne, then plunges,' as if playi ng' (krid.ann iva, 1.6+), into the fray,
only to be tragically overwhelmedbywounds andlose consciousness
just as the sun goes down.8 And shortly thereafter he is carried off
wounded on a litter to Mahasena's prison in Ujjayini.
Without discounting the thematic value of the pathos these events
arouse in other characters in the play as well as the audience, we can
nevertheless look quickly, as the play itself does, to the brighter side
of things. Act 2 puts the matter in its proper perspective: there are
marriage preparations taking place in Ujiapni. They are still at an
early stage-Mahasena is receiving ambassadors from neighbouring
princes for the hand ofhis daughterVdsavadatti-but a contmPorary
pohoho,like the modern reader, could have no doubt that Uda;'ana
will walk offwith the prize. The situational ironies ofAct 2 are only
too obviousin making the poinr Sowe know already thatUdayana's
imprisonmentwill prove to be a blessing in disguise; the only ques-
tion is how he will pull it off. A little vignette from the same Act
provides a hint ofwhat is to come in Acts 3 and 4. Mahisena is alone
withhis queen, when she remarks on his uncommonjubilation over
the capture of his enemy. She wonders why she has not heard his
narne among the suitors.
134 Thz Ptaywoful of SanskritDrama

King: My queen, he ignores my very name, not to speak of desiring


an alliance by marriage.
Queen: Ignoresi Is he a boy (bala) or a fool (apar.Ldita\?
King: He may be a boy, he is no fool.
Queen: What makes him so haughty?
King: The Bhirata dynasty, with is long roll of famous Royal Sages
arrd its tradition of deep learning. He is proud of his hereditary
knowledge of music. His youthful beauty makes him vain. His
people's remarkable attachment (anurdga) makes him confident.
Queen: The very qualities one would desire in a son-in-law. Bywhat
perversity does one find fault in him?s

The Queen sees immediately that his 'childishness',r0 buttressed by


good lineage, etc., is an essential part of his charm, which marks him
out over the other suitors.rr Udayana will eventually emerge trium-
phant because of the very qualities that led to his ostensible downfall
in Act l.r2Just after this scene, the chamberlain enters with a query
about what to do with Udayana's lute. Mahisena says it should be
given to vasavadatta, since neither of his sons wants itll andvasavadatti
has already requested instruction on the instrument. We find out in
Act 4 that, some time after the events reported in the third Act,
Udapna was appointed Vasavadatta's teacher. Thus the elephant that
has proved to be a willow-the-wisp in Act I actually points ahead to
the lovelyprincesswhom the herowill conquerwith the same musical
charms. The apparent catastrophe of defeat and imprisonment is
revealed as a portal to the garden of delights located at the heart of
the courtly playr,r'orld.
What Udayana lacla in prudence the play shows him as more than
making up for in imagination. Nowhere does this come out more
forcefirlly than in the 3rdActwhenwe leam that the hero has 'honed
his cell into a pleasure garden' (3.b+) by the pure enchantment of
his fascination with vasavadatta, whom he has seen onry once from
a distance-laTtris does not, however, come across initiallyas a positive
event. The news comes to Yaugandharayana on the eve
'of
thi imple-
mentation of an elaborate covertaction to spring udayana nomjal.
Panic was to have been created :rmong the palace elephants so ihat
Mahasena would have had to call upon udiyana to calm them with
his lute, after which he would have leapt on the back of the fastest and.
been back in KauSambr almost befor. th. enemy had time to reacl
But now the Vidusaka informs him and their confed.erate Rumar.zan,
as all three meerin disguise in a Siva-temple in Ujiayiru, rhat
rhe King
Paradise in a Prison Ccll 135

no longer wishes to go through with the plan. He has fallen in love.


Yaugandharaya4a's exasperation provokes him to uncharacteristic
sarcasm (3.6), but he soon regains his poise with both resignation
and resolve. He chides the Vidusaka, who has actually gone so far as
to suggest that they leave him to his own devices:

Shall we abandon one who


is smitten by woe and by love,
who depends on his friends
and cannot awake when he should?r5

We will discuss the loyalty-issue a little later. For the time being, we
should simply note that Yaugandharayaqa's is the voice of worldly
intelligence in a benign, paternal disposition to the hero's childish
extravagance. Love, from thisvantage, is simply one of life'svariables,
in this case an affliction ('smitten') or blinding delusion ('cannot
awake'). But the political strategist cannot let emotional accident
destroy his designs. Yaugandharayar.ra therefore simply extends his
earliervow to deliver the King to include the young Princess too. And
we see in Act 4, in which, ofFstage, the King rides away with his Sri
on her elephant, that the plan succeeds.
'Fancying his prison cell a pleasure garden he is set to engage in
the royal sport of love.'16So the Vidrlqaka sums Udayana's attitude at
this critical juncture. A few lines earlier he had characterized his
motivation as 'self-interest' (at nakaryatd.). This is a loaded word, be-
cause karyais a technical dramaturgical term for the motivating goal
of all action in the plot. For all other characters in this play, except
perhaps the counter-hero (pratinayaka) Mahasena and his
ministers,rTAarya falls under the headings of artha and d.harma.
Yaugandharayaqa is their chiefrepresentative: all his efforts (prayatna)
are directed atfurthering the public enterprise (arambhn) of restoring
the 'master' (ndmin) to power. He never thinks of himse[ except to
take pride in his success or deplore the humiliation of his failure
(ailowing his prot6g6 to be captured). He explicidy states hiswilling-
ness to die in the efiort so long as the goal is achieved (e.g. 1.14, 4.8).
In otherwords, he andhis confederates are motivated by paraka.ryata
'action for another.' For the King alone the goal of action coincides
with private pleasure (kama) rather than work or duty. In his privi-
leged sphere rrr-r decision is really painful, basically because he is not
called upon to make decisions. As Cat:akya says in the MR
136 The Playworld of SanskritDrama

But then Kingship cannot give pleasure unless it is free from the
special vexations that accompany it:
. If they must forage for themselves,
Then, however strong they are,
Lords of men and lords of the herds alike
Grow vexed and weary.r8

It is, therefore, easier for Yaugandharaya4a to revise his earlier vow to


include the King's new erotic interest than to educate him to the
responsibility of his political position.
After all, what is the King's responsibilig, when he has ministers
who can attend to all the practical aspects of rule much better than
he could himself.r [n a monarchical system there is always the ten-
dency for the kingship to acquire symbolic value at the expense of
practical function. The king becomes the public symbol of human
aspirations to paradise: he is the focus of government qua ritual
pageantry, which itself represents the aestheticization, and so tran-
scendence, of the mundane. The Leader is the charismatic personality
whom all admire and dote upon: an emotional linkage that allows
one a special feeling of participation in the Great One's aura. He is
the privileged child the rest of us have had to abandon in the process
of growing up; he alone has neverleft the paradise of infancy; and he
thus expresses our own emotional potential.le We have ample evi-
dence that in his nobility of character he loves us as we love him.20
Besides, is it not auspicious to have a leader whose way of life ap
proaches the divine?Are not the women with whom he takes his ease
all embodiments of Sn, the feminine genius of sovereigntywho also
represents wealth and fertility for the whole Kingdom? Udayana escap
ing imprisonment and paternal marriage-sanctions2r: this is Krsqa
himself dancing on the heads of Kaliya, the snakedemon, or prank-
ishly seducing the cowherds'wives. Even Mahdsenagives the ebullient
young couple his blessing (4.2a+).
So, the play as whole endorses the King's dtmakd.ryataas a kind of
inspiration that complements Yaugandharaya4a's parakony ata and
brings it to the level of emotional ft'uition. For all that Udayana's
success (siddhi, phalayoga, etc.) depends on his minister's concerted
efforts, the final irony is thathis own childishwaywardness is the key
element in the larger strategy of Fate,zz viz. the cementing of an
alliance between Vatsa and Avanti. Yaugandharayana rightly inter-
preted the sage Dvaipayana's enigmatic actions in Act I as 'instruc-
Parad,ise in a Prison CelI 137

tton' (upafusd, 1.,16+) to assume a disguise andwork covertly in the


enemy's capital, but he did not understand ihe significance of the
Brahmin's laugh as he predicted prosperity (udoy) for the house of
Udayana. Though he is the principal intelligence figure in the play,
Yaugandharaya0a fails at first to comprehend the intelligence of
Destiny, which awards a privileged place to the romantic imagination.
The King is no mere child. he is the supreme Feeler of emotional
effects, a true hero of the imaginative life. Despite disaster and humili-
ation he keeps his sensibility attuned to the regenerative power of
Eros. He allows the aura of the Radiant Female of all Sanskrit poetry
to pervade, illuminate, and transform his prison cell into a garden.
His irrepressible readiness for E/d assures us that victory cannot be
fully understood in merely political or pragmatic or even moral terms.
His championing of the erotic and aesthetic dimension of life tends,
at least in its results, to break down the barriers-so prominent in
dharmic ideology-betiveen the public and private spheres, for it an-
nounces in effect that things have no value if they cannot be savored.
Success and rectitude withoutpersonal happiness have no meaning
for the rasiha.

b. Faling us. Intzlligmce


In order for El"d. to triumph, as it seems to in this play, intelligence
has to be seen as subordinate to feeling, since it is in the affective
sphere that sport has its chiefvalue. Yet how can this subordination
be made belieyab.le, when we see that the chief intelligence figure,
Yaugandharayaqa, stands in aprotective relation to the hero? Part of
the answerwe have alreadygiven, viz., thatYaugandharayz!a's intel-
ligence is humanly limitedwhenjuxtaposed with the intelligence of
Fate. But Fate's concrete spokesman in this play is the astetic
Dvaipayana, and in factwe could regard the me tonymy as an identi-
fication. Though Fate as an objective force may be considered either
as the net result of myriad karma or an independent force limiting
human etrort (pauru,Ia), as an intelligent design guiding events to
their successful conclusion it is one with the occult Brahmanical
intelligence that 'represents it in the popular imagination.
Yaugandharaya4a, himself a Brahmin, also has a certain ascetical
aspect,23 though not as much as Canakya in the MR Rather, he is a
cross between Caaakya and Raksasa, representing a successful hybrid-
ization of intelligence and emotion. But the two are not of equal
weight in his character. In him intelligence clearly holds sway over
138 Thc Playamld of Sanskri.tDrama

emotion. In fact, he is emotional only to the extent thatitguarantees


his paraharyatd. For without some basic affective link to the hero and
the symbolic order he figureheads what is to keep his intelligence
from being indifferent or even subversive? A pure intelligence, as in
the case of Dvaipnyana for instance , cannot eyen be held by ordinary
dharmic ties. Strictly spefing, in the Indian world-vis\,v a pure intel-
ligence can exist only on the level of renunciation. So the solution
of the play, which is the solution of the popular imagination in
various legends, is to make the minister an ascetic with regard to
sexual feeling but a veritable rasikawith regard to other kinds of
afiection.
We can express this relationship in terms borrowed from
sixteen th-ce ntury bhaWi aesthe tics. 2a Traditional rasa theory has one
very obvious flaw: it does not recognize the importance of non-erotic
human affection, thus excludingfrien&hip, parental feeling, love of
child for parent, e tc., from the aesthe tic domain. This would not be
a significant lack if some of these themes were not so important in
actual Sanskrit dramas. Thus the Vaiq4ava aesthetic, despite its late-
ness andwhatever its religious motives, fills avoid in Sanskrit critical
theory and practice.zsThe system, as articulated by Rnpa Gosvamin,
recognizes five levels of bhaktior dwotion, which apply to the worship
of Krsga. The hierarchical structure is a reversal of orthodox notions
of salvation based on tranquility and purity, so that the more emo-
tional one's devotion the closer one comes to complete release. Here
is the pyramid:

1)
/ \ritsal),a \

/ sakhp \
/ dery. \
/ Sante \
Paradise in a fuison CclJ 139

S*rto lthe state of transcendental equipoise) is at the bottom with


merely a token presence in the system, since it is not really an emo-
tional state at all.26 Next up is the state of servile devotion (fisya) . Still
more emotive is the friendship relation (saklrya), and more heartfelt
than that is parental love (vdtsalya) : but the culmination of emotional
intensity is erotic love (mdd,hulra, a synonym for S"yngara).Ifwe apply
this to the PY, what we find is that Yaugandharayar.ra-let us bracket
his confederates.<mbodies all the lower relations. As a dispassionate
intelligence figure he is in the Santa statum, but this is precisely the
area where his allegiance to Udayana is least convincing, which ac-
cords exactly with the Vai.snava understanding. It requires an empha-
sis on his intellectual pride (his refusing to accept having been
outrnaneuvered by the enemy's ministers) to make it at all credible.
On the other hand, Act I makes repeated allusions to his d.asya
relation, as for instance in I . 14.27 The attitude of uncritical devotion
to the Charismatic Leader is that in which Yaugandharayaqa most
represents the naive disposition of the popular audience.zs But even
this is unconvincing, precisely because the minister's uncommon
intelligence sets him apart how could he accept without serious
qualification the fiction ofUdayana's leadership, charismatic or oth-
erwise?nln regard to friendship (sdkhya bhaktl we are perhaps on
firmer ground. The appeal from the Queen Mother in Act I and his
own statement in Act 3 (that they must help a friend awaken from his
affliction) lend support to this idea. But even here we have trouble:
how can there be genuine friendship between someone of
Yaugandharaya4a's intellechral caliber and a naive emotionalist like
King Udayana? At best it will involve condescension and pre tence.
And it is not friendship that explains the a-ffective relationship be-
tween the adult and the child. Thus, the most convincing explanation
ofYaugandharayar.'ra's emotional ties to Udayana is parental feeling
(adtsalya), against which the other two seem merely ideological fa-
cades. The minister is his 'master's' guardian, a benevolent father,
who despite an even mocking exasperation, humors his prot6g6's
incorrigible addiction to fantasy.s
Thus, though in Yaugandharayana taken by himself emotion is
subject to intelligence (or else, like Raksasa in the Mft, his plans
would result in failure), that same intelligence is subordinate to
emotion in the larger sense, since Yaugandharayar.ra, lacking the
sexual dimension, cannot climb to the top of the pyramid. In this
purely structural perspective the dasyaclairyrs of the text are persuasive
140 Thc Playwodd of Sanskrit Drama

after all: in romance terminology Yaugandharaya4a is essentially a


helper figure. It is the romantic hero who functions as the Indian
Everyman.ll And at the center of the utopian advenhrre is erotic love
with at least the nascent implications of wealth and power: the hero
'getting the girl' and winning or recovering the Kingdom. [n San-
skrit court poetry and drama the erotic element of romance under-
goes a hypertrophy unparalleled in world literature, since erotic lild
offers a psychological experience of freedom unattainable in any
other area except extreme ascesis, which is obviously less appealing.
In Indian court culture's 'kidnapping' of romance the zenith of
attainment is reached in the dalliance of the early stages of the
advenhrre: itis all downhill from there, as the poetry fies to reconcile
quasi-mystical heights of pleasure with the social system. Thus, only
King Udalana in our play, along with his partner Vasavadatta, knows
what it is to be emotionally free, to savor the juice (rasa) of happi-
ness.!2
Yaugandhardya4a is in effect Udayana's ego, in the Freudian sense,
whereby the ego mediates pleasure and realityprinciples for the psyche.
The King lives by the pleasure-principle alone. We might go even
further, still using Freudian terminology, and call his standard the
nirvana-principle, since the pleasure he seeks smacks of the transcen-
dent.$ In this perspective, the outside world is, reductively, only a
disturbance, aview shared by Indian metaphysics across the board.
Thus, we can see that in a sense Udayana is about that most serious
business of finding bliss, while Yaugandhariyaqa provides the neces-
sary defences against assault from without= Obviously, on a naive
psychological level, this is wish-fulfilment. The rasihn imagines a
world in which he has to do nothing but be a 'beautiful soul', sen-
sitive to nuances offeeling,while the Brahmanical or ascetical intel-
ligence, accounting in real life for all those bothersome dharmic
regulations which limit one's sense of personal importance,
prestidigitates the happy conclusion (wealth, power, univeisal admi-
ration, and the ease to enjoy erotic EIi).There is, of course, a cost,
but it is hardly contemplated in this play, which maintains a comic
view of the situation. But it is nonetheless clear that the rasikain effect
renounces all claims to genuine power and authority: he is content
to remain emotionally an infant, with ostentatious displays of cha-
risma substituting for even the smallest measure of intellectual and
moral self de terminatio n.
Paradise in a Prison C,ell 141

Let us recapitulate with another look at the emotional pyramid.

/\
/;;. \
/ patental \
/ affection \

/ friendship \
/ seruce \
/ indifference \
The four lower levels are occupied by Yaugandharayznaand the royal
subjects in general, but the radiant peak is occupied oriy by the rasika-
There the energy is sexual in that blissfully aestheric, playful mode
celebrated by ka,trya We can think of this peak as all area of freedom:
the pleasuregarden of the imagination created by the partnership of
the rasikaand his feminine Sri or Sakti. From tire world's poinl of
view it is a prison. But it symbolizes the fantasy potential of the inner
life where the laws of romance replace those of nahrre and society. If
we were to look down on the pyramid from directly above the peak it
would appear as a ring of concentric circles:
142 TfuPlulwoflnof SanskritDrama

The inmost circle is the prison/pleasuregarden, surrounded by the


outer world with its superior intelligence and powers, but also its
much diminished capacity for pleasure; for its pleasures are, so to
speak, only Platonic reflections of the bliss at the heart of the charrned
circle. By giving Yaugandhariyaqa an affective dimension the play
situates him within the sphere of emotionality and thus within the
utopian framework of kivyic wish-fulfilment.

2. Suapanaaasaaqdo.ftn

a. Tfu Cou,rtly Ethns


The sequel play continues the plot in such a way that we see the
implications of hlain a rather di-fferent emotional register, one that
acknowledges the existence of melancholy and establishes a certain
ethical dimension within the charmed circle itself. I do not know of
another Sanskrit play that affords us a deeper appreciation of the
human me aning of courtline ss (ilak;iqtya) in the context of Indian
palace culture and the associated nagarikaideal.eLe t us revrew the
plotvery briefly here so thatwe are spared the touble of collas6alizing
the specific incidents discussed below. In the Pf Udayana triumphs,
.r.upittg imprisonment in Ujjayini, and eloping with 'the boss's
daughter' in the process. But the SVopens with Udayana and his
entourage still in exile , while an usurPer (named Aruqri) sits on the
throne in Kau6imbr. To make matters worse, Yaugandharayaqa has
engineered a plan to seParate the King from Vasavadatta, for two
reasons: (1) with her Udayana seems to regard exile as a sort of
honeymoon, i.e., he seems in no hurry to return to his duties in the
capital; and (2) there have been prophecies from (probably Brah-
min55) soothsayers to the effect that Udayana must marry a certain
Padmavatl, sister of the King of Magadha (named Dar6aka), before
returning to power. OnlyYaugandhariya4a and his associate minis-
ters know of this need, so that even Vasavadatta, who-alonC with
Yaugandharal"aqa-<stensibly dies in a fire while the King is out hunt-
ing, is ignorant of the full import of her removal.
Vasavadatta andYaugandharaya4a now come in disguise+he as a
woman whose husband is abroad, he as her brother a wandering
ascetic (pariwAjah.a)-to a hermitage where they chance to meet
Padmavati. Yaugandharqrar.ra dwedy places Vasanadatti in Padmavad's
safekeeping, and the two develop a sisterly a.ffection for each other
thatwill serve to defirse mutr.raljealousy later on. Meanwhile, Udayana"
Parad.ise in ahison &ll 143

after languishing pathetically for awhile, comes by'accident' (actu-


ally steered by his attendant minister Rumanvan) to Rajagrha, the
Magadha capltal. There he is persuaded to foliow the advice of scrip
ture and maffy again. Though he is not without erotic feeling for
Padmavatr (4.1), this is really a marriage of convenience-later
alat.nka,rikasregarded it as an example of arthainigd,raas opposed to
hdmairigdm (political marriage us. love marriage).!6 His heart" as he
confesses at a key moment in the play (4.4), is still under the spell
ofVisavadatta's magic. Eventually Udayana recovers his throne, and
Vasavadatta, who has had to witrress her husband's marriage to an-
other in silence, is triumphantly re.vealed to both Udayana and
Padmivati. As a result, happiness prevails in the harem as it does in
the Kingdom.
Thematically, first complication in the relationship between the
two heroines comes in the firstAct" when a brahmacdrin enters the
hermitage with the news of recent events in the royal camp.
Vasa\radatt4 ostensibty dead is nevertheless praised as the happiest of
women because of the ardor of the husband's lamentations (1.13).
The incident has a rwealing metadramatic dimension. Padmavati,
noticing Visavadatta's tears, concludes that they are brought on by
her' tender-heartedness' (sam.bo ia, 1 . l 2+ ). She concludes, in o ther
words, that Vasavadatta is a sabdaja or rasi.hd.listener, responding
sympathetically to a tale of ragic romance.rTThe immediate irony is
thatVasavadatta's gridis not at all aesthetically detached, but there
are other ironies as well. First, Padmavatr's own response to the
student's tale, apparently only aesthetic, soon reveals its germ of
personal interesL At l.l5+ she is asking herselfwhether or notUdayana
will marry again, and finally in Act 2 we learn, with VasavadattS, that
she has fallen in love with him. A4dwhy? Here is the second irony:
becanse of iistender-heartedness (shwboia rt0.We need hardly add
that it is Padmavati's own sdnukroiatua or sahTdayatva that makes it
possible for her to react this way. But can it be merely a quirk of this
play that aesthetic capacity is robted in natural sympathy and what
Anandaardhana calls simply'passion' (nigz)?$ We are reminded of
Bhatta Tauta's dictum that poe! listener, and protagonist share the
sarne experience.te The 'sympathy of hearts' (h.rdoyasat.nudda) that
qualffies one as a genuine connoisseur of poetry according to
Anandarardhan4 Abhinavagupta, and most of their successors is also
a bond of sentimental feeling thatlinks the members of the courtly
or ndguihacommunlty to one another.a0 Udayana" Visarradatti and
144 The Playworld' of Sansbit Drama

Padmavati are erotically linked because of their sah4dayatuaUdayana's


spotlight self-demonstration of aggrieved love for Vasavadatta, i'e', of
ii" ,inuk oiatua'or sahrdayataa, brings her to tears of relief, but also
stirs a sympathetic resPonse in Padmavati that inevitably takes on
e, o tic vul r.. S ahrd. ayti a, as th e Ku 7.t an'im at a say s, is sexu
ally appe al-
itg.nt
But this little incident is only Act 4, in which
a foreshadowing of
Udalrana gets to play before the same audience directly, this time with
the aid of the Vidusaka, whose comic presence adds poignant subtlety
the
to the interpersonal relationships. Itis important to understand
concerne d
implications ofwhat is going on here. The play is basicall-y
*ithu specific problem which is almost precisely the inverse "lt|r'
probl.m in tlte .ptt There itwas amatter of the PrePosterousnes ofthe
iomantic temPerament in the context of affairs of state : away had to
be found to integrate Udayana's sahrdayatuainto the arthic sphere'
and we see in the end that it emerges triumphant' In the SV
the
problem is extricatin g the rdkahero morally from entanglel d:t'
,iorr. t...rritated by'a practical affairs' In other words, in order for
Udayana to remain rasikahemust show himself to be innocent
of
..ry.o*promise in his love forvasavadatta. The external situation is
thatKingudayanaofKausamabi is required to marry Princess PadmaTli
of Rajaflha, a matter of political expediency' The first step in the
King;s exculpation is made in the ascription of the requirement to
frte(f .f l).'ihus the motivation for the marriage is overdetermined.
we would not have blamed udayana for a calculating decision anyway'
because the burden of responsibility has already been assumed
by
Yaugandharaya\a. But thi very fact of the overdetermination of
Udayana,s innocence indicates the seriousness of the issue: whymust
he be ,o decisively distanced from practical responsibility for the
marriage? After all, we are in a cultural contextwhere polygyny is the
norrn, td, **. discover inAct 5, Udayana, despite his enthrallment
with vasavadatta, has already had a little affair with a maid-servant.
The answer is complex. we are meant to take the enthrallment
completely seriously. th. rff.ir with Viracika (5.6+) is regarded as
,o*ithirrg utterly minor, of no more imPortance than Purlravas'
momenht fascination with the Vidyndhari in V4, where the text is
very insistent on his innocence. On the other hand, the marriage with
padmivatr cannot be so treated, because of her social status, and
because the text gives us Padmavati as a character of nayiki'proPor-
tions whose sensibility we share. But the principle is plain' Full
Paral.iw in a Prison CcIl 145

sahyd,ayataarequires the hero to be in love, which by the conventions


of this poetry means that he must be under the spell of only one
woman. Without being in love he is for all practical PurPoses tita'rdga
and therefo re no rasika (see note 38) . Erotic fascination is the state
that fully activates the raika's capacity for nuanced feeling; without it
he is only the promise of himself. But there is also a fu facto mo-
nogyny<r rather'henogyny'-involved in the kavyic ideal, at least in
its deeper sense, i.e., in passageswhere the Poets are concernedwith
showing depth of passion whether in pTntd,tturd.gaor virahastzges.lf
Udayana, therefore, where simply to give in to the practical demand
of taking another wife, itwould indicate a concession on his part to
a realitywhich has no importance n the ffiga.rin. Thewhole point of
Anandavardhana's cited praise of poetry is that its world mirrors the
demands of the heart unlike the real one; and the true (which is to
say rasika) lover is a natural inhabitant of that poetic world. So, if
concession to reality must be made, it must be made in ignorance,
for in this case ignorance is innocence and ideal. Udayana marries
again in complete good faith thatVasavadatta is dead.
Yet, widently, this is not good enough. Vasavadatt5, as soon as she
hears the news (Act 2) , re gisters disbelief and in this she represents
the rasika reaction as well. How can one whose melancholy was
near-suicidal in the student's account now seem to have become
'indifferent' (udd,nnaa2). Do not all the lists of the stages of love
indicate that the final stage of love-in-separation is death? (The liter-
ary model is Rama's ancestor King Aja of Raghuaaryia 8). The text
provides Udayanawith excuses: the 'hearts of the great are ruled ba
Scriptr,rre' (aganaprailhd.nd,ni . . . . mah"dpuru;ahrylaydn) and he only
passively accepted the proposal made by King DarSak4 Padmavad's
brother, which was based on that King's admiration of our hero. But
the problem is not so easily erased. Thatis the reason for the careful
delineations ofAct 4, set in the wisffirlly erotic garden afinosphere so
central to ha.vya. Engaged in banter with the Vidnqaka the King is
trappe d into making the confession of his preference for Vasavadartta:

Though I esteem Padmivati


for her beauty, character, and charm
she does not ravish my heart
which is still bound to Visavadatti.$
146 TluPlaywodd'of Sansbi.tDrama

This settles the issue forVasavadatta She-and the rarikaspectator-is


hrppy to confirm that there is a gap between public show and private
feeling. Whatever the tender-hearted hero is required to do by circum-
stances does not touch the nuclear Purity of his feeling.
Buthaving solved this problem, is the hero notleftwith another
almost as significant? What about Padmavatr's feeling? Do not the
King's overheard remarks indicate a certain lack of feeling for her,
an unforgivable udd,si.natua? This is precisely what Padmavatt's
maid-servant urges and Padmavatl herself reflects, but the issue is
nonetheless a significant one. Padmavatr's response implies such an
ambiguous definition of 'courtesy' (ilah;i.qtya) thatwe are not quite
sure whether she is simply being brave and compassionate or el-
egaltly inventing a1 excuse for her husband.a Butwhatever its exact
meaning in context, we can appreciate how necessary it is for the
saluydayahero not to offend her. This is why the text is careful to
establish the fact the the second marriage is not entirely devoid of
erotic idealism: Udayana's firstwords inAct 4 refer to Padmavatr as
the result of the lovegod's '6th arrow' (4.1). Thus the situation is a
very subtle mix. Udayana, in order to be a convincing sentimental
hero, must demonstrate perfect allegiance to Vasavadatta (thus the
pains to show that the marriage is merely an arranged one) as well
as genuine sympathy and even erotic appreciation for Padmarrad. He
must navigate between Scylla and Charybdis, showing neither too
great nor too little love for eitherwoman. He must tell the truth that
erotic idealism demands (monogyny) without offending the second
wife who, though required by the circumstances of life, is nevertheless
a sharer in the rasrAa sensibility.
But he can only do this by putting the spotlight on himself and
acting to arouse a rzrdlresPonse. Direct appeals would have as litde
efiect as direct statment in poetry. We would have the ornament
(alar.nka.ra) and elegant style (nlz) of the dah;inya code, butwithout
indirection (ilhaarn) there would be no sharing of an emotional
understanding (rasa). Ral,r-is the bonduniting the community of the
tender-hearted, but it exists primarily on a level that eludes even its
own formal causes. Interestingly though-since Eros is at the heart of
rasila sensitivity-the rasa in question here is nor Srngd.ra' but kant4.a-6
Ultimately, the hero can only show his innocence by revealing him-
self as uncomprehending victim of his own destiny. He is the pure
soul, the 'beautiful soul,' who lives by the heart's promptings in a dark
and confusing world of unfeeling practical and ethical demands.
Parad.ise in a Pri.son &lI 147

Thus the clima:r of Act 4 really comes when, having momentarily


succumbed to the banter-induced illusion thatVasavadatta still lives,
he falls back into the real worldwith a thud. His tears elicit heartfelt
sympathy from both wives, andvasavadatta urges Padmavatr to step
forward discretely and comfort him in his grief'
It is a poignant moment. vesavadatta is now able to rise above he r
own pain in order to be generous to her co'wife, who must remain,
for ntw, unaware of that generosity. Udayana, for his part, is still
further in the dark, being comforted by a woman who he not only
thinks knows nothing about his true emotional state, butwhom he
regards as too weak by nature to be able to bear the truth:

This newlY-married girl


would tremble if she heard *re truth.
Though she is firm bY nature,
a woman's nature is skittish.6

we shall have more to about the irony of this statement in the


say
conclusion. Let us content ourselves now with pointing out the dis-
tinction between the bearing of the women and that of the hero,
which is basically this: they knowwhat they are doing, while he-at
leastostensiblyJoes noL Bothvasavadattt and Padmavati show con-
siderable generosity of spirit and tact in the 4th Act. They are con-
scious sufferers of moral and emotional ambiguities, who are not
allowed to speakrrhat they know and have no Power-to alter their
circumstancir. piamayaU knows less than Vasavadatti about the com-
plex situation that unites the three of them, yet her graciousness
ihows itself most clearly in her ethical demeanor: she refixes to blame
her husband or the ghost of the woman who dominates his imagina-
tion. She does not Pout or play the martyr. By contrast, the hero's
moral case is all bound up in his ignorence. He makes no decisions,
except to remain silent on the cause of his tears. since he is the
apparent cause of his wives' su-ffering, his selfdisplay is directed at
demonstrating his perfectincomprehension of the moral dimensions
of his actions. Powerlessness before destiny and childlike incompe-
tence in the morally ambiguous world of practical reality are the chief
ingredients of his self-exonerating pose.

b. Dreamas. Rcabty
The preceding discussion aptly illusFates the tact that as we approach
148 Tfu Playuorld of SanskritDrama

the ethical dimension of the play-and the same is true of other plaln-
we find ourselves inevitably involved in epistemological questions,
such as the extent to which the hero suffers under a delusion and
what it means to do so. There is no question that it is precisely here
that Udayana emerges as the hero who ca.rries the emotional weight
of the play. Vasavadatte's problem is fundamentally resolved in Act 4:
it is nowjust a matter of waiting for Yaugandharayala to stage the
proper momentfor her triumphant sel-Fdisclosure. Padmavati is still
in the dark, but she has learned the essential truth of her situation.
VasavadattS's appearance will not change that; in fact, due to the
'sisterly' understanding they have already built up,a? it may help her
to be dealinC with an affectionate co-wife rather than a haunting
erotic ideal. But Udayana still has to be let in on the secret. So in the
course of Act 4 the play's center of gravity shifts to him and his
unconscious quest for enlightenment. In Act 4 it is banter with the
Vidusaka that makes Vasarradatta's presence real, so real that the King
falls under the spell of its illusion. The woman whose image was still
enshrined in his heart (4.4) seems to step out of the imaginary
endosure-i.e. his heart, a gardenworld held hostage by Destiny-into
the actual garden setting of the Act. But this is only the first of several
such evocations, the final one indeed delivering its promise, the
Dream-Woman come to life.
The main event occurs in Act 5. Udayana and the Vidrigaka go to
the Ocean Roomwhere they expectto console Padmarrati in a sudden
illness. It turns out she is not there, but the entry into the enclosure
anticipates the ambiguity of the vision thatwill take place there. The
Vidnsaka is startled by what he takes to be a snake writhing at the
threshold, but the more preceptive King sees that it is only a fallen
festoon stirring in the twilight breeze (5.3)-an apparent advertence
to the snake-rope paradigm of Indian epistemology and metaphysics.
Once inside and not finding his wife the hero decides to take a nap.
The Vidusaka's botched bedtime story again evokes the memory of
Vasarradatta, so it is no accident that he begins dreaming of her. The
Vidupaka departs to get a blanket" but meanwhile Vdsavadatta enters.
She too has come to comfortPadmavatr, and now, in the dark, mis-
takes the form on the couch for her dear friend. It is important to
remember that Udayana has not yet laid eyes on her even in her
disguise, since propriety forbids that a married woman be seen pub-
licly without her husband. Visavadatta lies down beside him, and then
suddenly startles as a voice that is clearly her husband's begins to
Parad,ise in a Pri.son Cell 149

address her. It is part of the ingenious twilight-ambiguity of this scene


that neitherVasarradattd" nor Udayana himself, nor the reader-sPectator
is really sure to what extent he is dreaming. Vasavadatta thinks at fust
that he is only talking in his sleep. But, uncannily, he sees her in her
ornamentless state (Yaugandharayana's story in Act I was that her
husbandwas traveling). Under the spell of the'illusion'his guilty
conscience compels him to interpret her attire as a signal that she is
still angry him for a re cent flirtation with the maid+ervantViracika
at
(see preceding section). The allusion has the interesting effect of
drawing her out of the fiction of her decease: she bristles at the
memory and scolds him aloud. He reaches for her entreatingly, when
suddenly she realizes the danger and flees. Yaugandharaya4a's plan
and therefore her husband's andher own ProsPerity depend on her
maintaining the fiction. Udayana leaps up to catch her but bumps
into a door, the fateful material barrier to the world enshrining the
ideal. when the viduqaka returns the King insists that he has really
seen vasavadatta. The vidnqaka objects, voicing the common-sense
wisdom of the world, prompting the rasikohero to the following
marrifesto:

If this was merely a dream, then how happy never to awaken'


If this was delusion, let me always be deluded's

As in the lGlidasaplays, the mirror-playbetween dream andreality


is interesting and significant. vasavadatta's pique is, from a certain
angle, a momentary surrender to illusion, an entanglement in an
emotional complex that draws her out of her appointed role' It has
the feel of Udayana's mistake in the precedingAct, when the clever
mix of eros, pathos, and humor brought him to the point of telling
the Vidisaka he would report the latter's words to Vasavadatta. Or it
is not unlike Urva6i's mistake in confusing her fictive love forViq4u
in the play-within-the-play with her actual Iove for Purfiravas: reality
breaking in on illusion, but in such a way that reality itself takes the
form of an illusion (since Puriravas is not Present). Meanwhile
Udayana, for his part, is the victim of a fiction who sees through it
by means of a dream. But the point of all this ambiguity is contained
in Udayana's declaration of allegiance to the ideal over the phenom-
enal. If he must accept the common-sense judgment of the world,
which says that his dream-world is only a fantasy, then the world is
not good enough for him. T}:,e rasika-sahrday chooses to live in a
150 ThzPlayuilt of SansfuitDrama

world that mirrors the desires and sentiments of the heart, the world
of hi.vyawhich exists, according to Anandavardhana, Mammata- and
other praisers of 'Poetic light' (pratibhd), to supplant the real world.
But the dichotomy is notjust between poetry and fantasy on the one
hand and reality and common sense on the other. It is between the
private and the public life, between hi.rnaar;d" dhannanhau.Thus, when
we see Udayana at the beginning ofAct 6, even though he has risen
to the clarioncall of military heroics at the end ofAct 5 and recovered
his Kingdom, he haswithdrawn to a private chamber to brood over
the melodies of the lute Ghosavatr, so redolent of lostmomentswith
Vasavadatta. Public success, though graced by Padmavatii's s\,veetness
and loyalty, cannot overcome a sense ofvacuitywithin. The raikaha.s
become, rnutatis matand.is, a reluctant stoic with respect to duty.
But with the er<ception of a few plays bke Urublwngaard, Ih .nablnra
Sanskrit drama knows no tragedy. We know that there will be a
reconciliation between privat and public, pleasure (hnmQ and
workduty (dharmarthat), poetic dream and reality. The envoys from
Mahasena's court bring not only the belated blessing ofVasavadaile's
parents on the elopement but celebratory images of the married
couple. In a cleverly milked recognition scene, Vasavadatta emerges
finally from the world of poetic image (in the marriage-poru'ait) into
life, becoming once again the inspirational Sn whore auspiciousness
extends fiom the emotional life to the prosperity of subjects, abun-
dance of crops, resplendence of sovereignty, etc. The rasifra is not
forced to choose between life and art the latter performs its utopian,
wish-fulfilling magtc. Harmony reigns in the harem, in the Kingdom,
and in Udayana's heart. There is only one discordant note, faintly
heard in thejubilance of the resolution, but once heard, altering the
major triad to a dominant seventh. It is the matter of Udayana's
consciousness of being duped.
The series of 'poetic' intimations of Vasavadatta's presence (ban-
ter in Act 4, dream in Act 5, tEn&melodies and portrait in Act 6),ae
though ultimately productive, depends on a larger fictive framework
Yaugandharayana has all this time been behind the scenes pulling
the appropriate sfings to bring the whole puppet+how to ic harme
nious conclusion. He isthe s,ttradha.m (lir 'suing-holder's) inwhich
the three protegonists have actedwith more or less awareness of their
role-playing. Or we may think of him as the play's author with his
kd.rayihi pratibhd,sr artfully constructing a plot which will deriver the
fruit of zuccess (si.ddhi phalagama, etc.) on both political and affective
Paradise in a hi.son &ll l5l
levels.52 Yaugandharayar.ra hasmade it possible for his 'master' to have
the best of both worlds: public acclaim and private delight" executing
Fate's intentions with what is ultimately only a minor disturbance in
the courdy rasiha's emotional life (which, if anythisg, he has deep
ened by arranging a temporarywithdrawal of its Sri).
But is he really the court?oet as seryant, delivering the rasa bo-
nanza by ever more artfirl constructions, Kosambi's 'talking house-bird
of higher rank'?B!This can hardly be the case. The first indication
comes in a small incident occurring in the context ofVasavadatta's
disclosure. Yaugandharaya4a arrives on the scene in the character of
the paiwd.jaka claiming his 'sister' of Padmavati. Behind a purdah
curtain the Nurse has alreadyvouched forVasarradatta's identity and
the King has, without seeing her yet, directed her to the women's
quarters, butYaugandharayala keeps up the pre tence, accusing him
of taking another's wife:

Born in the Bharata clan, you are self-controlled, enlightened,


and pure. To take her by force were unworthy of you, a model
of kingly duty.6{

Purely in terms of artfirl dramatic construction this incident seryes to


force the King to draw the curtain before the eyes of all in a last flutter
of doubtfirl expectation. Butitis nwer enough to explain significant
events in formalistic terms. Yaugandharaya{ra's teasing is a subtle
assertion of power over the King's contentmenf a reminder that all
has depended aird will continue to depend on his good will. His
subsequent gesture of obeisance (prostration with a humble request
for forgiveness)-like his earlier soliloquized foreboding (6.15) , which
echoes Udayana's own foreboding of Mahisena's displeasure (6:4)-
does little to mitigate our sense ofwho is really in charge. As in the
PI{ the effortis made to situate Yaugandhariya+awithin the affective
orbit of the King, but this time it does not succeed in establishing the
desired hierarchy of emotion over intelligence. This ascetical
minister-poet55is no mere deliverer of commissioned services.
Thus, the conclusion is less happy than it might be. There is the
formulaic bharataudkya, in which Yaugandhardyaqa pronounces bless.
ing over the realm (the fictive one and that in which the play is
performed), butjustbefore this comes the King's melancholy aware-
ness of his delusion:
152 ThzPlayumtdof SanskritDrama

King: Tell me, my dear Yaugandhariyana, whar was your object in


concealing the queen?
Y My one idea was to save Kau5imbi.
King: Whatwas your reason for putting her in the hands of padmavad
as a ward?
Y The soothsayers, Puspaka and Bhadraka, had predicted that she
was destined to become your queen.
King: Did Rumanvin [i.e., the ministerwho remained in attendance
on him throughout] know of this?
Y Sire, they all knew.
King: Oho! what a rogue he is Ruma4van.56
The word for 'rogue' is fiatha" a loaded term, since itis used bywomen
who bitterly accuse their husbands of infidelitt'T and is even fixed in
the dramaturgical handbooks as the name of the hero who deceives
women. In other words, Udayana's discovery puts him in a feminine
relation to Yaugandharayana and his confederates, including even
Vasaladatta. Not even Padmavati has been as deluded as he, thanks to
her eavesdroppinC in Act 4.
We can see this better, perhaps, by using an amplffiedversion of
the concenFiccircle diagramwe employedwith the PI{ Udayana, the
Paradise in a Pri.son &Il 153

fictive rasika, is in the center enshrining the image of Vasavadatta.


This isVasavadatA in her capacity as the RadiantFemale o. Sn of the
imagination, an image or ideal more than a personality or sensibility
in he own right (thus the broken line, indicating her dreamlike
status). That central locus-including hero and heroine-is either an
enchanted garden or a prison cell, according to which criterion
is applied, the rasika's or the world's. As we progress through the
outer rings we have increased awareness of what is going on.
P is Padmavati. \F isVasavadatta qza subjecl Ris Rumaqvan, who as
Yaugandharayana's agent knows less than he. Beyond
Yaugandharayaqa are the ddeiikaswho have direct insight into the
a
inscrutable intelligence only identified as Fate in these plays. But
whereas the Plleft us with a sense of the rasavision's triumph, here
even Udayana shares the sense of its fragility. He is aware of being in
a gilded cage. He is no longer riding charismatically beyond impris-
oning barriers on an elephant's back, his Sri clasping him tightly
from behind. He is rather the-literally-disillusioned keeper of the
rasikafaith, now cognizant of the meaning of his own practical im-
potence (the feminization of his relation to his ministers registers a
subtle consciousness of emasculation). The price of sahrdayatuaisthe
sacrifice of claims to charismatic autonomy, even in the private sphere.
Rasd.wddaitself is seen to depend on outside forces.

C.onchrsion

We said at the outpet that the PYand ^lVwere complementary plays.


The crucial issue is the nahrre of the poetic playworld: Is this charmed
circle more of a pleasure garden than a prison or vice versa? It is hard
to avoid the impression that the second play takes a much more
profound look at what is involve d for the rasikahero. It is not simply
because it is less comic in tone, or that it deals with love-in-separation
(virahq vipralambha) rather than love-before.union (pilrud:nurd.ga). lt
is rather because its perspective is-implicitly, at least-more ethical:
how the three protagonists, all saltdayas, act with respect to each
other.
The poignancy of the dream-reality issue is in a certain sense an
epistemological red herring. The deeper issue , as in SahmtalZ 6, is the
hero's good faith. Act 4 centers on a demonstration of the rasika
hero's good faith thatis premised cn the formula'ignorance equals
innocence.' But what kind of rationale is this? The rasaAa hero uses
154 TlwPlaywodd'of SanskritDrama

his sensibility as a device to silence criticism which centers on the


question of callousness (uildsLnatva, adaksinya). He says'Behold my
beautiful soul' rather than 'This is what I do and these are my
reasons.' We do notwant to seem insensitive to the delicacy of courtly
evasions. The morality of simplistic frankness atwar with all illusion
is ultimately a form of brutality, as, for instance, Ibsen shows in his
parable Ttw WiA Duch- We can' furthermore, see that it is moral
sensitivity that informs Act 4; if this were not the case, there would
be no reason why Udaltana could not openly hurt either Vasavadatta's
or Padmavatr's feelings. He could simply have married Padmayatr for
reasons of state on Yaugandharayar.ra's advice. But thatwas impossible
at the outse ! because wen at that stage (before there was any Padmavati
in the picture) sahydayahtaimplied an intrinsically moral standard:
one must not hurt the feelings of alother sahfda'la Nevertheless, the
fact remains that the avoidance of the problem leaves us with an
impression of weakness in the rasika charzcter. The blame is all
assigned to the outsideworld, an inscrutable Fate, Brahmanical cun-
ning.
This is a question of good faith in another sense too, because the
rasikaenjoys the benefits of success in the outside worldwhile refus-
ing to admit complicitywith its purposes. We have found Udayana at
the end of the second play in a position of feminized impotence with
regard to the creative forces that underlie sentimentality. But could
this not be a ploy? The rasihaaudience must have found the pathetic
self-portrait pleasing (just as the troubador Poet and his audience
tookpleasure in the posurre of selFabasement). The question is'why?'
Probably there is no definitive answer' butl would like to suggest two
possibilities, which in fact are not mutually exclusive. The first is that
the rasikavnsgenuinely aware of a fundamental powerlessness vis'a-vis
the transcendental authority figurally rePresented by the
ascetic-sage.minister but diffirsely Present throughout Indian culhrre
in guru-reverence, the aairagaideal, etc. There is a deeprooted con-
viction in the Indian world-view that power and insight come only
through self-restraint, i.e., through the denial of the emotional life.
Not even the rasika, who may have been a Person of tremendous
wealth and power in actual life, can have escaped the sense that his
happiness was not only transient, but deluding and radically
disempowering. The metaphysical weight given to rasa' by poeticians
of mystical bent did not succeed in stabilizing it against the ascetical
scorn of the cultural superego, except insofar as rasa itself is tinged
Paradise in a Prison CeII 155

with a solipsistic ascetical detachment (aairaga).8


The second explanation is that the rasikaby portraying himself as
impotent avoids bad conscience resulting from his privileged position
in society. We should be wary of retrojecting a Marxist sensibility into
the past, but let us admit that we are simply being heuristic here .
While not every rasikawas a prince, we can nevertheless say that the
cultural center of Sanskrit poetry was the court. Even when it is being
experienced imaginatively in the family or monastic library, it is still
the courtly atmosphpre, its codes and sensibility, that kaayacelebrates.
Even a bohemian like Baqa in his youth must have shared a feeling
of privilege simply by belonging to the rasika community (not to
mention his high birth and good. connections). 'Let us grant this,'
the skeptic will say, 'butwhy should any rasikahave felt the need to
exonerate himself for his privilege?'We may, of course, harbor the
suspicion that good fortune is nwer free, never, that is, without that
sense of anxiety and guilt that, for instance, underlay tragic
consciousness in preMarxist Hellas. Butletus follow the hints of the
txL
There are two areas in which the rasika hero shows himself an
innocent with regard to women andwith regard to the ouside world.
As to women we need hardly scratch the surface to see that the
relationship be tween the hero and his beloved(s) is unequal. If she
has the magic to transform his world into a pleasure garden, it is
basically in her role as Radiant Female. That is to say, she is not a
genuine subject in this role, but in hct as much of a ghostly presence
as Vasavadatta becomes in the second play. Though physically present
in pl,ruanurdgaanrJ sar.nbhogaphases, her body enshrines an ideal that
will soon depart and take up other residence. It is his-the rasiha.'*
imagination that lends her whatever momentary power she has over
him. Vasavadatta's reign as the Sri of Udayana's imagination will be
short-lived, even if we grant that it has survived intact to the end of
Act 6. There is the shadow of the affairwith Viraciki, which the text
treats as less significant but which, because it suggests a real infatu-
ation, we may see as more significant than the marriage with Padmavatr.
But there is also the legendwhich the plays drawfrom, inwhich-as
Harqa's plays show-Udayana carries on as a playboy. Given the fact
that the SVrecords a moral sensitivity to the feelings ofwomen, it is
not implausible that polygyny-<ven on the imaginative levelse<n-
teiled a certain sense of guilt and required protestations of good Faith
on the rasika's behalf.
156 The Playworld. of Sanshit Dromn

And with regard to the outside world, the texts show the hero
benefiting fiom actions taken by others in his behalf, principally
Yaugandharalz4a, but Yaugandhardyana himself metonymically sug-
gests the whole range of so<alled 'dependents' (bhga). We may think
back to the bhaktipyramidwhich shows the whole society supporting
the privileged sensibility's enjoyment of power, wealth, and happiness.
Could it not be that the rasikahimself is dimly aware of owing a debt
to the vast human infrastructure supporting his privilege? This will
have meant something different to princes and Potentates than it did
to bourgeois rasikaswho might have had a hard time making ends
meet (cf. Cirudatta). We have verses in various plays depicting Kings
as weary leaders who have earned a moment of respite from their
duties, but these of course carry litte dramatic weight. More signifi-
cant as expiation is the princely rasika's self-depiction as a man of
sorrow, with no intrinsic interest in Polrer or wealth, more troubled
by the demands of hisworldly stahrs than pleased by its rewards. Thus
the irony with which the SVe nds says to al} 'Behold your Power over
me, despite appearances. If even Iam aware ofmyimpotence, how can
anyone deny my entidement to such fragile happiness as comes my
way?'
In the section entitled'The Courdy Ethos'we said that the distinc-
tion between the hero and his wives was that 'they are conscious
sufierers of moral and emotional ambiguities, who are not allowed to
speakwhat they know and have no power to alter their circumstances,'
while his whole concern is to demonstrate ignorance. They are the
model, in a sense, of the rasikaas courtier (or otherwise dependent)
rather than as prince, wer mindful of their obligation to forbear and
keep silent. Whatwe have tried to show here is that Udayana's behav-
ior is more conscious than it seems. As rasika he stands outside his
own self-dramatics savoring its effect through all other subjective
sensibilities in the play. We called attention to the verse in Act 4 that
ironically depicts Padmavad as too skittish to bear the truth. Padmarati,
and by implication Vasavadatte bo, thus emerges as a moral heroine,
whose superior vision obliges her to actwith restraint. The King in
his epistemological prison-horxe is, paradoxically, not so limited: he
is free to fall in and out of love, to exercise his emotional impulses,
according to the inspiration of the moment. What seems to be a
liability is actually a reinforcement of privilege. But is there any use,
on the otherhand, in praising thewomen for amoral sensibility that
is forced upon them by circumstances? The fact is that they lack the
Parad.ise in a Prison Cell t57

power or freedom to do as the hero does, so that they have nothing


to exonerate: there is nc question of Vasavadatta' exploiting' Udayana,
i.e., regarding him as the temporary shrine of an exquisite male
beauty. It is telling that in the Vaisnava mythology reflecting kevyic
erotics KI$qa, the love-object sans pareil inspires absolute Faithfulness
in his female devotees, while he himself is playfully here-and-gone.
Indian culture does not seem to support the enshrinement of the
female person as permanent erotic object. Radha is the woman of
privilege, but she has rivals. And the Goddess generally, in her great
variety of forms, is more mother than beloved.
I have said that these two takes on the hero's ironization are not
mutually exclusive. 'Overdeterminations' of this type are normal in
literature as in life, as is acknowledged in the basically formalist New
Criticism, not to speak of later 'anticlosural' approaches.60Itis im-
possible to exhaust the meaning of a complex work of literature (like
SI{ drawing Pl'into its orbit) because we can only speak of such
meaning in relation to ari author and an audience. However formu-
laic the rasa aesthetic appears, it does no! in my judgmen! mean that
emotional symbols (the nibhavas, in aword) were feltwithout compli-
cation. The very existence of the ironies we have discussed (e.g,,
Udayana's patronizing remarks on Padmavati, 4.8) argues against
that, as does the practical assumption that the human mind is too
complicated for the systems it sets up for itsel{ especially in the area
of the emotions. The interpretations offered here are, as we have
indicated, heuristic: the goal is to understand and appreciate what has
gone into the making of Sanskrit drama. To deny multivalence, to
refuse to allow that beautymay co-existwith all-toehuman emotional
feints, is to deny the rasiha his-and her-psychological complexity,
and this, I think, is the gravest disservice we can do to Sanksrit
literature.
158 Tlu Playworful of SanskritDrama

Notes
l. Mdlaaaikdgnimitra 1.2 and. preceding.
2. Saradatanaya's testimony is the most persuasive, since he gives a rudimentary
sketch of the plotwhich includes the lute-verse of Act 6 (6.3). He also cites
a portion of a verse we do not have, one which indicates a missing episode:
UdeJana tentatively conduding from Padmivatl's arful make-up thatVasavadatta
still lives. Abhinavagupta also cites a verse, not in our play, as do Rimacandra
and Gu4acandra in their N;ryad arparn (where they name Bhisa as the author) .
Rija(ekhara's dictum-that Bhisa's SVsurvives the fire<rdeal of caiticism-is
borne out by modern teste as well. See the cotlected evidence in Ch. 2 of A.
D. Pusalker's Bhtua: A Slzd which one should also consult for bibliography
on the whole attibution debate. The most recent summary kno*rn to me is
V. Venkatachalam, a Bhasa advocate.
3. I am agnostic with regard to the claims of other plays in the corpus of thirteen.
I see little of Bhisa's characteristic intelligence and graceful humor in the
hatimatit&a,for example. On the other hand, I feel certain thatthe Avimdraka
and fragmentary Dariilracdnt"datta are his. The PY is probably also somewhat
abbreviated too much gos on between the extant Acts 3 and 4, and it is after
dl surprising that we do not erten see the conventional hero (see Bharata's
definition, Nara.ia.$rd34.22-23,I$S ed.) on stage. In this essay my citations in
both plays are from the Poona edition ofC. R Devadhar, Bhdsonilahncakram:
Plnys Asnibed b Bhds* I have also used the editions with commentary of T.
Ganapati Sastri.
4. Which is not to say that Svngdra is not present in the M4 as we saw in the
last chapter.
5. The distinctions are in a sense arbitrary. Carudatta, who is regarded as
'steadfast-and-tranqnil' (d.htra.Ftaianta), clear\ has some of the prominent
ithirolatita qualities of a romantic hero, but according to NJ 34.17-19, or its
interpreters, Brahmins and merchants (and Carudatta is both) must be
ilhirQraidnb. Rakgasa, a Brahmin, strikes us as dhtrdafta (steadfastand-exalted),
though, strictly speaking, that slot is reserved for Kings. Conventionaly, Rat-gasa
scaps such dassification altogether. Since the plot can be seen as hinging
on the success or failure of Candragupte's bid for power, Rikqasa becomes
a secondary hero (pratindyaka), T}l.e same is true for c;+akya, and for
Yaugandharaya4a in tlre PI4 Thus Ganapati Sastri regards Udayana as the hero
of. the PY, and we shdl follow his practice. This makes more sense with regard
to PY, than MR for two reasons. Udayana remains the focus of sentimental
interest as the rasr&a figure, while Candragupta is only marginally so. Secondly,
while both Yaugandharayaga and Raksasa see themselves primarily as loyal aides
and dependents of their sovereigns, in Ril$asa's-case tJris becomes almost a
soul-searching issue, since \is devotion forces him into rebellion against t}le
status quo. In other words it becomes an ideologically marked locus of feeling
tlat shifts the center of gradty away from the issue of Candragupta's or
c;r,rakya's success. Butwhether one regards Udayana or Yaugandhartyana as
tlre Pfs nayaha t}re relationship between them is the sarne, and that is what
we are interested in here.
6. Udayana, according to som versions of the legend, was taught this skill by
a Niga. An Indian Orpheus, he charms wild animals, especially elephants, with
a sfinged instrument. However that may be, the play itself regards the skill as
Paradise in a Prison C.eII 159

a family inheritance (2.10+). See, for all variants of the Udayana story, Niti
Adaval, The Story of Kittg Ulayarn.
7. A Trojan Horse situation: the blue elephant was artificial, manned by soldiers.
8. The sun-symbolism with its mytho-ritual overtones should not diminish our
sense of the Udayana's romantic exuirvagence. The hero of Sanskrit drama is
not an archaic warrior with an exuberant bloodlust. The ethos is courtly, and
we are rather to understand such depictions in the spirit of panegyric and
aesthetic posture. Ultimately their function is sentimental, adding to his roman-
tic charisma or eliciting patlos for a noble spirit caught in the nets of
deception.
9. 2.10+, trans. Woolner and Sarup, except for final sentence.
10. Mahisena has also.already called attention in soliloguy to Udayana's addiction
to 'play' (Eln, 2.6).
I l. She shows herself as susceptible to his appeal as innumerable Indian matrons
to that of the childgod Krqna; see l{zker, Innn WnA, p. 153.
12. The sage Dvaipayana Vyisa at the end of Act I has already predicted his
resurgence, but left the impression that it would be due solely to Yaugandha-
reya4a's covert activity.
13. One of them is interested only in atthaSistra, the other in warrior's training
(tryd.yama = hsotradharma): neither sees the value of mrnic (ganlhanaueda).
I-acking courtly polish, they are philistines who wor,rld be incapa.ble of attracting
sahydayawomen (d. the list of desirable qualities in a suitor, 2.4, one of which
is sdmtkroiatua I tende r-heartedness] ) , a practical synonym of bdayusar.nailda) ,
14. A modern version of Udayana, with Napoleonic trappilgs, is Fabrice del
Dongo in Stendhal's Chartahoue of Parm*
15. 3.7, trans. Woolner and Sarrp (I have versified it):
p aril aj Ano s olntdptar.n du[khma mailanenz ca/
sahTijatnm upAinla yab kdlary nd.vobuilhyate/ /
16. 3.5+: h.ndha4aq ilnniry pamadzwtnp sanilfivia fuuto raaglaahznry/ lhndhanom
iddnt4 pamadavatwp saqbhd.vya ptaqrtto rQa-/rdgahtnt.n kantml The fiaTda4 af
the Prakrit yields both rdjo znd, rdgalildmin Sanskrit.,Woolner and Sarup have
chosen the latter, but it seems to me that the pun is too good to lose.
17. Yet they too serve the purposes of the rnyaka's final ,success' (siddhr.
18. MRl.lE (numbering according to C,oulson's translation, which is is used here)
and preceding; othdra yat s1)ayanwbhiogaituhkhair uddhdra4air apdkrtam tail eua
rajy ary rukhay a ti / klddl*
nayam dhfiia bhuftjam batino'pi' nabhaaatah/
gajmdrai ca narand.rd-e ca prayah ndanti d.uhhhifift//
'Lords of the herds' are elephants.
19. Cf. Freud's essay'On Narcissism: An Introduction'; also C,rwp psychohg anit
the Arnlysk of the Ego (1921) on the Subject of identification.
20. E.g., verses like 1.8 which depict him as a generous friend to thc good, etc.
Or see the panegpic verses at the beginning of Sakuruln b. The ra.nliras_King
may be impractical and little inclined to duty by temperament but hc is
clepicted as sentimentally bound tb his subjects.
21. The elopement is technically either gdndhanaor ra.hs*amarriage, depending
on one's point of view; d. Mamsmfii 3.52-33.
22. An important motif in this play and the next. A list of allusions to Fate or related
Fortune: PY 1.3 ( da;ua), 1.5+ ehaga\, 1.6+ (k\anta), l.l2 (kat4, bhape, 1,li+
(vidharn),2.U (dahta),2.5 (hhapa),3.4 (dziaa); Wl.4 (Mage,l.ll (uidtu), S.0+
160 The Plalwodd" of SanskritDrama

(bhaganhqa), 4.6+ (vidh|, 6.4 (tkaaga), 6.5 (daiua), 6.18+ (bhaga).


23. He has no observable sexual dimension, for example, and acts as an agent of
Dvaipiyana's omniscient intelligence. His anger, which comes to the fore in the
final Act, has overtones of explosive tap6. ln the second play he is in fact
disguised as a wandering ascetic.
24. The classical work on the subject is S.K De, 'The Bhakti-Rat^(dtt o of Bengal
Vaisnavism.' The latest treatment known to me is Nrisinha P. Bhaduri, 'Blra&td
(Devotion) as an Aesthetic Se ntiment.' The ese nce of the system fln aesthetics
is the granting of graduated rasa status to all positive affective relationships with
the charismatic personality.
25. For other systematic attempts to solve the problem see V. Raghavan, The Numbn
of Rasas, pp. ll9-25, 201-03, and passim.
26. For idnta rasa in general the basic source is Raghavan's Number of Rasas. See
Masson and Patwardhan, Sor*oroto, for a speculative treatment of its place in
Abhinavagupta.
27. punuantarit on mfu,n drahn a ti n d mt-
ripunypanagare ad banlharu vd uane ud
samupagatauiniiah pretya ud tuly anktham/
jitam iti btabuddhim uafrcayitud mfiary
tar.n purnr adhigatardjyah parnatah ilighanlam/ /
The Master will see me a changed man-
Sharing his condition in the enemy's city,
his jail, the forest, or in the next world,
or, by tricking the King [Mahisena] who thinks he has won,
at his side to be praised with his kingship restored.
28. It is clear from NS 27.40 ff. that the audience of Sanskrit drama did not consist
exclusively of rasikas. But even the rasika shzred the naive sentimentality of the
popular imagination. Daiaiht sitldhi complements and enhances, rather than
excludes, md,nrui, as we have arguecl in the Introduction.
29 There are two issues here. One is formula, according to which it would be
impossible for Yaugandharayana not to show ddsya sentiment. The other is the
contradiction between the formula and the idealization ofyaugandharaya4a's
intelligence which requires that he have a renouncer's inclepe ndence of mind.
See the preceding chapter for a fuller discussion.
30. C,an even parental love survive continued exaspration? It woulcl require, at
least, a perfect lack of suspicion of bad faith in the indulged child. But this
is precisely what Sanskrit drama seeks to demonstrate: that the rasiha, for zll
his privileges of power and sexual freedom, is in perf'ect good faith. One coutcl
say that this is the fundamental theme of SV
3l In innumerable stories in world literature, from high romance to fairy_ ancl
folk-tale, a disarnringly passive ancl ignorant, trut noble-hearted, hero achieves
the pinnacle of success (kingdom, wealth, princess). See Max Luthi, Once upon
a Tirne, Ch. lO. Katrla has clothed the romance logic in the courtly incl
dharmic ideological codes of Indian culture, a phenomenon Northrop Frye
refers to as 'kidnapped romance': The SeruIar Snipture, p. b7.
\9 A phrase borrowed from MR 3,4: rasam pnteh, See also the image of
Mdlauikdgnimitra 4.1, where rasa is the juice of the tree of love.
33. Beyond the Pleasure hincipla secrion 6.
34. The ndgaika is the urbane townsman (mgara = city) whose culture is a
conscious imitation of courtly life. But the relationship was reciprocal:
Parad.iw in a Prison &ll l6l
Puniravas, the royal hero of Kilidisa's Vikramorvaiiya is called .a nngarika
(3.13+, Ve lankar ed.). The model lover of tt'e Kdmastttrais called both nigaih'a
entl niyaka (prot2gonist), showing that life imitated art. See the remarks of
F.BJ. Kuiper, Varuna and Vidryaha: On the Oigin of Sorxkrit Drama, pp. 227-28.
35. The occult intelligence need not always be Brahmanical, though it usually is
in these plays with their Hindu perspective.
36. Cf,. Sarvinanda as cited in Pusalker, B&isa, pp. 3tL31.
37. cL Ns 27.55 (KSS):
,as tugau h$6n AlAfi Soke Sokam upaiti ca/
dainye dtnatvam abhleti sa nntye pefuaka$ snfab//
Likewise this is the kind of gentle spectator Kilidasa calls for in yf .2. S g.l l+-
in which Sakuntale's friends cleduci that she is in love through their familiarity
with romances-shows us that the romandc story literature appealed to young
girls of court and city (in g transposecl to the hermitage).
38. Being 'without passion' one cannot be a poet or rasika-
apare kd.tryasamsdre kauir ekah pajapatih/
ythdsmai rocate uihtar.n tathedap pariaarlate / /
Srigari cet kavifi kavye jdtaln rosamaya\n jagat//
. sa ara vttardgai cnt nirasam saruarn (ua tat// DhA 3.42+//
Snrgdin is z de facto synonlm of sdmtkroia. Cf. the title chapter, section 2.
39. niyakaga kaueh Stotuh samdrn' nubhaaas tatab, cited by Abhinavaguptl, DLAL
1.6+.
40. The cornmunity rnay even inclucle tle ascetic, as shown by the example of
Valmiki, whose art clerives from real-life sympathy for a forlorn kraufrca
bircl. See Dhuanyaloka 1.5 with Abhinava's commentary. Of greater interest,
perlraps, is the passage of the Abhirnvabhdrati which notes that women
are capable of bringing natural sympathy to a state of rasdndda repose:
tatha hyekagharnSokuarywiccaruanw'pi loke shihkaga hTilayavihdntir antura!&funy
aviydntiSanratad, (Gnoli, AEAG, p. l7). But AG neecl not have singled out
women (though his remarks are, inciclentally, suggestive of ttie idea that, as in
the west, courtliness indicates a certain feminization of social values). Is not
cerudatta of the MTcchaka.tikt the epitome of the tencler-h ezrted sahrdoya? To
insist on a bounclary be tween his aesthetic capacity (M7ccL 3.Li) and hiswhole
sentimental bearing in life is to miss the point of the characterization: see the
next chapter.
41. Danroclara, Kuttanimata 54Q (Tripathi ecl.): see Introcluction, note 14. we
neecl hardly mention that such appeal is a cross-cultural phenomenon. poets
ancl nrrrsicians have often found that to move hearts has more tian a spiritual
lalue.
42. A key norion, broached, at 2.0.72 in Devadhar's eclition. Again vasavadatli's
complaint seems to be made on 'aesthetic' grounds: she complains, in other
words, that it is out of character for e rasika like Udayana to act with
'inclifference' to his deceased wife by marrying again ,o ."riry. cf. a passage
in whichAbhinavagupta deplores t}'e ascerical-philistine mentaiity incapable of
being affectecl by beauty: PTV, ecl. Gnoli, p. 202, translated ln Cl,r. t, note 3i.
43. 4.5, trans. mine.
padmauati bahtmati mama
ladyapi rupafilamadhuryaih /
adsavadattdbaddham na tu td.uan nv matn harati//
'14. cf. ch. 3, section entitled 'c-ourtly Love.' c-onstrued one way what she says is
tlrat tme tldhsiryya is the avowar of heartfelt sentir'ent; but aiso present is the
162 'Th"e Playwodd, of Sanskrit Drama

hint that Udayana's confession is in a sense the polite lie required by the
d^a@Ird code when a woman questions her husband about his infidelities. In
other words, she may be implying (and this does not ngate the first construc-
tion) that Udayana is gallandy denying his love for her, Padmarad, in the evoked
ghostly presence of Visavadatt5. By offering this fiction she maintains face in
a society that appreciates gallant facades.
45. Technical discussion of whether we do not in fact have vipralnmbha frgdra,
since Vasavadatta is not actually dead, is beside the poinL APPeals to pity are
an essential part of rasika selfdisplay and need to be regarded as such.
46. 4.8, trans. mine.
iap bAla navoduddhd saqa\n intild qathd4 tnajet/
hamaln dhiranabhduq a4 stisuabhduas tu litaraf/ /
47. A motif sounded several times in the Play, e.g., 1.7+ (twice).
48. 5.9, trans. mine.
yadi tdvad ayam s'uaprw dhanlam aptatibod.harnm/
athdlam uibhramo ad gad. vibhrarno lryastu me ciram/
This could be the motto of any rasika: the poetic world drenched with
sentiment is axiomatically better than the real one.
49. Compare the series of disclosures in M see Ch. 4.
50. I do not accept Pischel's idea that Sanskrit drama originates in PuPPet-theater
and am agnostic as to whether 'string-holder' is to be taken literally with respect
to the Stage Manager. The pun is apropos here though.
51. The term is borrowed from RAja5ekhara (Katryamrmdmsd4),who distinguishes
between the constructive or strategic (harayitrfl and emotive (bhduayitn) aspects
of the poetic imagination. See J. Nobel, The Fwril.ations of Indian Pltny, pp.
6467, for a short discussion. Bhd.uayiti pratil'Ad belongs to Udayana, the rasiha
capable of realizing the affective meaning of aesthetic fictions, i.e., the series
of intimations we have discussed.
52. The Sanskrit terms for the elernents of plot{onstruction are borrowed from
the arthic sphere)See Chs. 4 and 5.
53. D.D. Kosambi's characteristically acerbic assessment of the poet's role in
Indian aesthetic culture: The Subhdgitaratnako;a,'Introduction,' p. xlvii.
54. 6.16, trans. Woolner and Sarup:
bhdrotdnim kule jato uinito jfiirnudft chucift/
ton nirhui baladdhartury raj adhannaga detikab/ /
Interestingly this harks back to accusation leveled by Mahasena's minister in PY
4 regarding the elopement-abduction.
55. His ascetical aspect is suggested in three ways. First, he is asexual (as in the
PY-see note 23). Second, his clecisiveness cuts through the impotence of
sentimentality, thus ruanifestirrg the Cinakya rather than the R;k;asa side of
his character. Thircl, the rnetonymy of his disguise aligns him with samnydsa
and its associatecl intelligence.
56. 6.18+, trans. Woolner ancl Sanrp.
57. 8.g., M 4.19+.
58. Discussed in Ch. l; cf. Ch 2, section 2.
59. Not every rasikawas polygyrrous, we can be sure, but the roika ideal itself is.
Just as toclay a male does nr,rt have to have enjoyed much 'male privilege' to
feel defensive about it.
60. Chari's apt terrn for various rrew tendencies in literary criticism: Sarxkrit
Ctiticisn, p. 189.
CI{APTERT

Carudatta in Love

The play Mrcchakatika or The Little Clay Cart, attibuted to a certain


king Sudraka, about whom we have no reliable information,r has
always been praised for its 'realism' in a body of literature-not simply
d.rama @aUq nalaka) butall of Sanskritpoetry (kat1a)-notedrather
for its refined, idealizing, courtly sentiment centering in erotic fasci-
nation. We welcome Thc Little Clay Cart's bourgeois setting and
picaresque characters, more typical of the less exalted genre of story
literatnre (kathA thar' of kdvya Critics likewise praise it for the sweet-
ness of its protagonists, the Brahmin merchant Carudatta and the
nobel prostitute Vasantasena, whose love for each other, in the words
of S. K De, is 'pure, strong and tender' for all the simphcity of its
presentation.zYet this blanket praise, which extends to Sidraka's
'genius' as a constructor of plots and a writer of muscular verse,
conceals certain problems. How realistic, for instance, can melo-
drama be? In what sense can Carudatta's love be called'strong', even
if we were willing to admit that it is 'pure and tender'? Whatwas the
meaning to a contemporary audience of a play which celebrate s the
ascendaniy of an obscure'man of heart'who never acts in his own
beha$ though he spends a remarkable amount of time lamenting his
condition? Criticism of the play has to this time hardly scratched the
surhce.
The principal problem posed by the play is the hero's displace-
ment, and this inevitably involves us in the question of his status as
a lover.s Like the hero (nayka) of every play treating love in a serious
way, Carudatta is a rasika ('man of feeling') or sahrdaya ('man of
heart')-synonymous terms for the idealized rePresentative of India's
classical aesthetic culture. But Carudatta, an imPoverished Brahmin
merchan! is different from most sahrdaysrepresented in drama. First
of all, most of them are kings, whose charismatic centrality to the
socio-political system is taken for granted. Cherished simultaneously
as master, friend, childlike prot6g6, and lover, the royal hero's sensi-
bility represents the privilege of power and sets the standard of taste
and feeling for the whole society. The situation is apt enough: few
would disagree with the idea that India's aesthetic culture radiate d out
164 The Playworld of Sanskrit Drama

from the courts. But more important as a marginalizing factor than


Carudatta's hybrid social class as such-a Brahmin functioning as a
Vaifya-is his poverty. There are other non-royal nalakas, srrch as
Madhava of Bhavabhitl's Malatimadhava (8th century) who like
Carudatta is a Bphmin, but nevertheless functions as a typical
lovestruck hero (dhtralalita nayaka).a We should not forget either that
when we speak of Indian court culture we are in fact referring a hybrid
of the courts and the urban elite.s But Carudatta cannot be a Madhava
primarily because he has the not-smurious idea that beautiful women
belong to the world ofwealth and power in which he no longer has
a share. Thus, the problem of the hero's displacement hinges on the
batrier that lack of means creates between the refined rasifta sensibil-
ity and the nagarika lifestyle that typically goes with it. This in turn
implicates love, because erotic feeling (ffi7*d is at the very heart of
the rasiha sensibility and indeed of the whole classical Indian aes-
thetic. What does it mean to be a man of 'heart' or 'feeling' with tastes
and inclinations that one cannot afford to indulge? No doubt there
were many real-life sahrd.ayasin Carudatta's situation, and we would
probably not be \ryrong in seeing this play as speaking directly to their
concerns, and incidentally providing them with a wish-fulfilment
conclusion.
Let us look first at Carudatta's credential s as a sahrdaya. We see
from his appreciative remarks on music at the beginning of Act 3
(stanzas 3-5) that he has command over the technical vocabulary of
connoisseurship, but also, and more importantly, that he has the
sahrdaya's imaginative capacity, as when he praises the lute as 'com-
panion to the longing lover's heart' and'the deli.ght that increases
the passion of the impassioned', and hears in the sin.ger's voice the
hidden presence of a beautiful woman. He thus exhibits that subtly
erotic sensibility that Anandavardhana sees as the lifeblood of the
'poetic universe'. Carudatta also has clear-if erotically muted-links
with the nagarikaas described in Kamarutra 1.4: I ar.n thinking espe-
cially of the litter of musical instruments in his house, which makes
the Brahmin thief Sarvilaka think he has broken into the house of
a dance-teacher (3. l8+) . But more important than these more or le ss
technical recommendations is carudatta's tender-heartedness
(sanukroiatua, hrdayasamrada). Nl sahrylayaheroes and heroines have
this quality to a marked degree, as when Udayana, the royal protago-
nist of Bhasa's Saapnaaasauadatta (Vision ofVasavadatta), rifuses to
disturb a bough on which male and female bees may be enjoying love.
Cdrudattain Loae 165

The princess Padmavati in the same play falls in love with Udayana
simply by hearing an account ofhis agonies upon the supposed death
of his wife Vasavadatta. Tenderheartedness is thus a sympathy that
unites all exemplary 'persons of heart' in a selfconscious community
of feeling. Carudatta has this to an exceptional degree, indeedwe
know from several passages that he has lost his father's fortune by
lavishing wealth on those who have provoked his sympathetic re-
sponse and we see ample evidence of his generosity even with the little
he has throughout the play.
The point of this review is to see that the aesthetic, erotic, social,
and ethicaf features of 'being a person of heart' (sahrd,aytua) are all
part of one emotional complex. The last i6m-d1s ethical perspec-
tive-is of special import in The Littlz Clay Cart. Much is made of
Carudatta's 'virtue' or 'merit' (g"frd in this play. But when we
examine this concept we see that it is in fact a synonym for sympa-
thetic generosity, i.e., acting on the basis of 'concord of heart'
(hrdayasarnuada)-what in aesthetic terms is the basis of rasn-feeling.6 In
other words, here we have a concept of dharma (moral duty) that has
little to do with ritualistic nbedience to caste norms (saadhnrma),but
rather represents an aesthetic-sentimental ideal parleyed into a uto-
pian ethical principle. If everyone were like Carudatta, if everyone
acted upon the impulses of a refined and generous sensibility, then
dharma would mean the satisfaction of the heart's desire for love,
fi:iendship, and an honored place in aworld that set the truth of inner
goodness over words and appearances. The ending of the play is
utopian in just this sense : Carudatta is made a prince, Vasantasena is
released from prostitution, a fugitive becomes king, a former thief
becomes a minister, etc. AII men of heart emerge from the obscurity
where they had been marginalized by a ruling class that cared only
for money, power, and luxury, to inaugurate a new world-orde r based
on respect for the sentimentalized concept of virtue as sympathetic
generosity (gunaas sahrdaytua). Carudatta even extends his generos-
ity to his former tormentor, the Sakara, the previous king's
brother-in-law and a grotesque parody ofwhat it is to be a nagariha
without the inner sensibility that makes for true aesthetic taste and
courtly erotism.
The mention of the Sakara brings us back to the question of
Carudatta's character as a lover. Here we encounter a fundamental
paradox. The logic of the play demands thatwe think ofVasantasene
:u the ideal beloved ("olikd of Carudatta. She is the beautiful woman
166 Thz Playwmlt, of &nsbitDrama

not of the courtwho in the corruptworld order can only function as


a prostitute, whose we ar remindedin the play (1.31-32), is
to give herself to whoever can afford her. But beneath the veneer of
appearances she is as true a heart as Carudatta himself, praised by
those who know as the virtual goddess of the city (1.27 ,1.55+,5.12,
6.14, 8.39). Thus we would expect Carudatta, who in fact shares this
view, to act upon it or at least to pine for her secretly. And to a limited
extent he does. When accident takes her to his house in Act I he
remarks to himself,

Ah, it is Vasantasena-
The desire inspired by whom
has, with the end of my wealth,
subsided within my body
like the anger of a coward.T

Such words would seem to indicate that he has longed for Vasantasena
ever since he met her in the garden of the Love-god's shrine, as she
has for him (e.g., 1.32+). ButCarudatta can never make up his mind
which Vasantasena he believes in-the fellow sahrilayd or the venal
prostitute who belongs to the power structure from which he is barred-
To wit, the 9th verse of the 5th Act:

The man who has money will be her lover for she can be won with
wealth.
(No, she can be won witJr virtues!)
As wealth has abandoned us, so I must abandon her.8

Thus Carudatta as a lover is a great puzzle. Rehrrning to the verse cited


above ('Ah, it is Vasantasena . . . . .'), we can only say that this is a
very tepid response for any hero of Sanskrit drama who has been
pining for his dream woman. Externally his speech is elegant and
deferential: disgusted by the Sakara's pursuit of her he calls her rather
a 'woman Frt to be worshipped as a goddess' (dantopasthdnayogd.
yuaatir iyam), and Vasantasene is srrffi6isntlt impressed by signs of his
urbanity (nagarikatva) to plan a strategy for seeing him again. But
when he walks her home at the end ofAct I he recites averse on the
moon that seems to raise erotic expectations only to dash them with
a comic ineptitude worthy of his rival the Sakara.

Behold the rising moon, pale as a lovely woman's cheek,


Cd,rudanain Loae 167

beacon of ttre highway, with his retinue of stars,


whose bright rays fall amidst the darkness .
like streams of milk in liquid mud.e

And this is the way it goes throughout the play, with only one
signi-ficant exception in Act 5, which I will describe in a moment.
Although we have ample evidence of Vasantasena's pining for
Carudatta (absorption in a love-portrait, inconsequential conversa-
tion, virtual death with his name on her lips, etc.), there is not one
direct indication in the play of his pining for her. [n the scene I
mentioned earlier where , walking home at night from a concert, he
reveals a sensitivity to music's erotic overtones-one would expect this
to lead to some recollection ofVasantasena's beauty, as itwould for
any other love-hero in such a situation, but it never comes. He falls
into an easy sleep a short time later, having thought of her only in
connection with his promise to guard her ornarnents. In fact his
reference to her in this regard is hardly flattering: he wants the
Vidisaka to keep thejewels out of the inner quarters since 'they have
been worn by a public woman' (prakalanAnilryta qa,3.l) .10In' AcrT ,
though he ostensiblywaits for her arrirral in an abandoned garden at
the edge of town (a situation fraughtwith potential for poetic expree
sions of longing), he never spares a thought for her, even before he
meets the future king Aryaka who arrives in the coach that was
supposed to carry her. In Acts 9 and 10, when he is, respectively, on
trial for murdering her and on the way to execution, his thoughts
concerning her (with one formulaic exception) have nothing to do
with her own plight but rather the ignominy that has fallen on
himself in being accused of murder and theft.rr Carudatta is an ex-
tremely self-absorbe d lover-not in the sense that he loses interest,in
the day-today world ofwork and duty that surrounds him, as other
love-heroes do, but in the sense that he can only think of his own
miser/, society's apparent disregard and contempt of him.
Yet there is the blip in Act 5: Vasantasend comes to his house as
an abhisdrikar2 and teases and cajoles him into making love with her.
It is hard to avoid the impression of a certain maternal solicitation
in this scene: a beautifirl woman wise in the ways of the world doting
on a bashful quasi-adolescenl But surprisingly enough Carudatta
rises to the challenge with the aplomb of an inveterate 'man of
feeling', delivering several $igd,raverses on the torture of his lonely
vigils, the ecstasy ofher touch, the excitatory stimulus of the rains, etc.
168 The Playworld of SanskritDrarna

We should not downplay this scene, because it does reveal Carudatta's


rasika sortl in the classical pattern; yet we cannot help seeing it as
something of an irregularity in this play. It establishes Carudatta's
credentials as a bona fide sahrd,aya, alive to the quasi-mystical satisfac-
tions of erotic thrill, but it does not tip the scales in the direction of
erotic love as a rapturous transcendence of mundanity, which is the
typical kavyic treatrnenl It does not remove the impression that love
in this play is the prime example of sentiment as an ethical principle.
To see this in all its clarity we have to move to the climactic
moment in Act l0 when Vasantasena virtually rises from the dead to
save him. Just before she arrives, while he is still in the depths of
despair, he invokes her in heaven to bear witness to his innocence:

lf dharma still prevails for me,


ruined by Fortune through the lies of the powerful,
may she herself, in Indra's world or elsewhere,
remove my crime by her own rue being.ls

The structural opposition expressed here is between true being


(wabhnaa) and virtue (gtr") on the one hand and false speech ("oba)
andwealth-and-power (d.hana, artha) on the other. Carudatta has so
little confidence in his own speech as to have allowed himself to
subscribe to the confession that his enemy has put in his mouth. But
whereas before this he has always tended to include Vasantasena
among those who live in and for the world of appearances, now he
explicitly includes her in the circle of mute, inglorious sahrdqaswho
constitute the inner substance, the saabhdva, of society. If d,hnrmaisa
matter of saabhavarather than adkya, then somehow a miracle will
happen and Vasantaseni will pierce the tissue of corrupt social dis-
course with the hidden truth. And, of course, this is precisely what
happens. She arrives in the nick of time, as he dqscribes her in two
apt similes, like 'rain to awithering crgp and 'saving knowledge to
a dying man'.14
Thus we have to evaluate the significance of love in this play in the
socio-e thical contextwe have described. It is therefore not a matter
of momentary transcendence in an aestheticerotic bliss and its prob
lematic consequences, as we find in other plays (e.g., Kalidasa's
Safu.ntald). Rather here the accent is on love as the most concrete
instarrce of sah:d,atasohdarity. Love isthe wabhaua, the true being that
triumphs over deceptions. As Carudatta says to his savioress:
(in^tdatta in Loae 169

You yourself have redeemed the body


that was being destroyed because of you.
How powerful in the lovers' union,
when even the dead come back to lifelts

For the sahrday on the margins of wealth and power, true feeling
(rasa) is both more and less than a rapturous shiver of delight. It is
the ticket to utopia that the proprietors of the beautiful have cor-
rupted by setting a price on it, i.e., by making it a matter of style rather
than substance.16
Thus it is of critical importance for two reasons that Vasantase na
be the pu/rsuer rather than the pursued in this love affair. Carudatta
is a rynnbol of the sahrdaya's essential purit/, which in this context
means a free-floating emotional sympathy devoid (at least ostensibly)
of selfinterest. Taking a hintfrom the vaguely Buddhist atmosphere
of the play we might refer to him a secular Bodhisattva, interested in
everyone's salvation but his own. Such a function does not sit well
with erotic infatuation, which removes lovers emotionally or psycho-
logically from society into a charmed private sphere.rTNwertheless,
erotic feeling (irngara) is too important to the rasikasensibility for it
to be altogether absent. Thus it is given a certain scope to appear in
its customary dimensions, but beyond that it is sublimated as a form
of devotion to goodness (gt o), not essentially differentfre6-41d 6n
th e whole inferior to-the zrll-male friendshipbond. r8
The second reason is closely related. Vasantasena is one of several
figures in the play who are implicated in the old order but change
sides. A good example is the guard Candanakawho lets Carudatta's
coach pass with Aryaka safely inside (Act 6). All of these people
choose to follow the dictates of the heart to their own pracqical
disadvantage, and all do so with a direct reference either to Carudatta
or to the affective idea ofvirtue that he epitomizes.reSeen in this light
Vasantasena's choice of Carudatta despite his poverty and her rejec-
tion of wealthy but insensitive clients is an act of self-redemption.
Thus her'death' at the hands of the Sakara symbolizes her complete
severance of ties with the world of venal prostitution,2o and her
recovery-aided by the Buddhist monk whom she had e arlier helped
in carudatta'5 p21ng-ls her decisive rebirth into the value-worrd of
sympathetic generosity (hyd^ryasaqtvad@. Cdrudatta, we remember, was
never able to decide who the real vasantasenawas. This is because the
buden of the decision has been entirely upon her shoulders. canrdaua
170 Thz Playwodd. of Sanskrit Drama.

remains what he is throughout the play, the lodestar of virtue by


which others guide their actions. His generosity to Arfaka, his fellow
victim, is less a defining moral choice than another instance of his
essential character (nabhdua).21It is for others to make such a choice,
and in so doing they choose Carudatta, the unsung hero of society,z
or his proxy Aryaka, who regards him as the patron saint of the
utopian order ushered in by the successful revolution.a
But we cannot end this chapter without reverting to the play's
incidental function as wish-fulfilment. For all the ideality of his char-
acter we have no trouble seeing that Carudatta himself is not really
free of the idea thatwealth andvirtue are closely related. He spends
an inordinate amount of time brooding on his povertywith its con-
comitant loss of friends and reputation. Yet why should one who
represents true being (saabhaaa) over aPPearan ce (a aky a) be so con-
cernedwith thejudgement of superficial people? How, furtherrnore,
can he be so blind to the general esteem inwhich he is held among
all persons of heart? He is never so ashamed as when he cannot
display his generosity in material terms. Thus when he has to le t the
good news whispered into his ear byVasantasena's Maid go unrewarded
it launches a series of verses on the theme of impotence:

Oh misery!
For a man without money what is the trse
of living in this world at all?
In his inability to reciprocate
both his anger and favor are vain.
Furthermor-
A wingless bird, a withered tree, a waterless pond,
a toothless serpen[ a poor man in the human world.
Furthermore
Poor men are like uninhabited houses,
waterless wells, withered trees,
for, forgetting their woes in union with a friend,
their momeats of pleasure thus prove empty.t'

Again, at that point in Act 3 when his wife provides him with the
means of compensatingVasantasena extravagantlyfor the loss of her
jewels, his first reaction is extreme embarrassment:
Catrudatta in Love 17t

What, my wife pities me! Alasl Now I am poor-


My wealth destroyed by a personal fate
and I pitied with a woman's wealth.
Through wealth a man becomes a woman
and a woman a man through wealth.25

If we put all these hints together we emerge with the portrait of


a man who sees generosity as a sort of sexual potency and a claim on
the general admiration of society. Carudatta is not vulgar, like the
Sakara and the corupt ruling class the latter represents. there can be
no questioning the sensibility that makes this meek, displaced hero
a genuine sahrdaya. But at the same time there is a psychological
dimension thatwe cannotignore. Carudatta'sversion of potency is
based on money, not as a means of direcdy purchasing aesthetic-erotic
satisfactions but as a means of inspiring others to love him and act
on his behalf. For this 1sas6n-and because his very desire for potency
is surreptitious-he is essentially passive. It is no accident that when,
in the scene mentioned above, Carudatta reaches for a rin.q to reward
Vasantasena's maid and then shows embarrassment, Vasantasena's
response is: 'This is why I love you!' (ata eua kamyase), words that
almost exactly echo her earlier response when the Vidusaka arrived
at the brothel with the gift of Carudatta's wife's heirloom $.32+).
The very manifestion of what he himself feels as impotence wears a
charm that borrows power from the admirin.g beholder. Carudatta's
.gestures have, directly or indirectly, the same effect on all noble souls,
who rally to his cause, rescue him from his.qood-hearted passivity, zurd
make him the prince he was always meant to be.26Thus the utopian
order based on sympathetic generosity corresponds exactly with the
acknowledge and empowerment of the sahrdaya, the secular Bodhisattr"a
who, like fairy-tale heroes everywhere , gets the girl and the kingdom
too.

Notes

I . He is first mentioned as an author by the poetician Vamana (fl. AD 800). For


further information see such handbooks as M. Krishnamachariar, History of
Classical Sarckrit Literature, Keitl', The Sarckrit Drama, anrl Dasgupta and De,
A History of Sansbit Litentwe.
2. Dasgupta and De, History, p. 245.
3. I am bracketing problems of textual accretion, authorship, and where the play
stands in relation to the fragment in the Bhasa corpus called, Daridracarudatta
L72 Tlu Playworill of SanskritDrama

or Utudatta in Potaty. Like most scholars I regard Srldraka's play as an


elaboration of Bhisa's. Sfidraka's dependence on the Bhasa play was estatr
lished by Georg Morgenstierne, Ufu, a^ Verhdltnis ztttischen Cdrudatta und
Mrcchakatika (1920), though some have contested it, most recently G. H.
Schokker, 'SUdr"kr, the Author of the Original Cdrudatta.' See Pusalkar
Bhdsa,Zncl ed., for further bibliography.
4. The Little Cla2 Catt zr,cl Mdlaf'rmdilhaua zre the two prime examples in the
extant literature of a type knorm as t}:.e prukarar,ta, The requirements of this
subgenre are basically that the plot be invented or borroved from popular
stoies (katha) as opposed to history and legend (itihdsapurAlta), and that the
hero (ndlaka) tre other than a king, typically a Rrahmin, a merchant, or a
minister. The heroes of Sanskrit drama are divided into four basic types-
exalted (dhirod.Atn), amorous (ilhiralalita),serene (dhirapraidnra), andvehe-
ment (dhirodilhata). According to most sources the hero of z prakaraTtn mttst
be serene. Although not entirely artificial, these distinctions (l) are mainly er
post facto, (2) cannot be made to fit certain obvious cases, and (3) belie the
fact that most niyakas are composit types.
5. Thus the greatest of Sanskrit playwrights, Ka.lidasa (probably 5th century AD),
can have one of his characters call the royal hero of the Vikramolafiya a
nigariha ('urbane townsman') in order to explain his sophistication (dafuiryya)
as a lover (3.13+). It was the nigarika for whom the Kdmasiltra, Vats',ayana's
celebrated treatise on erotics (3rd century?), was written. Kdmasutra 1.4 de-
scribes the ideal day of the ndgaika, which was devoted entirely to refined
amusements and capped by amorous spon. It tells us of nigarihas who joined.
in go;ths (literary 'clubs'), enjoying cultivated conversation with hetaeras,
music, poetry, jaunts to the countryside, etc. Such go5s1hr, or individrtzl nigaika1
provided important patronage for the arts including troops of actors. In ?[e
Linlc Clay Cart Czn)d^tta' s friend Rebhila entertains the members of his go,srli
with a concert. There is inciclentally a whole subgenre of drama devoted to
the amorous emploits of the rfigarika: the bha1ta or 'monologue play'. Unfor-
tunately it has not received its share of serious study.
6. C.f. the celebrated definition of Abhinavagupta in his commentary on
Anan davardh an a' s D hav any dloha:
who share in a concordance of heart, i,e., who have
Sahrdayas are those
an aptitud for identification with what is depicted [by poets] in a
mirrorlike mind made clear by familiarity with and practice of poetry.
yEdp kdvyanufrlarnbhy dsauaiad uiSadibhftu manwmukue var4an$atanmayi-
b h aa arwy o g at d t e hrd ay as a ryv dd abhaj ah s ahrd afih /

7. 1,55: a:re ,Ja\n aasantaseni/


yayd mc janitah kamah hine vibhaaavistare/
hrodhah kupunuasyno nagd.tregteuo stdati/ /
8. 5.9:
ygafihas taga sd. kantd ilharnharyo hyasau janalS/
(rn garnhdryo hyasau jarnft)
uoyam ar-thailp parityaktaly rnrat tyaktaiaa sd maya//
9. 1.57:
F6F-
udayati hi Saidnkal kdminigandafdndur
gr ahn garnp ada aro r aj amargapra ilip ah /
timiranihnramadhye raimayo yaga gau6l.t
Cdrudattain Loue 173

mrtajala iua pai&e hiradhArAb patanti//


Some believe that t}lis is intended to be beautiful and that it only strikes a sour
note to our modern sensibility. Parallel examples would have to bc adcluccd
to defend this point of view. But even if one could find thcm, it would still
be striking that such z relatively unusual simile is the one that occurs to our
hero as a romantic gambit, especially in the context of a play which ridicules
poetic malapropisms in the SaLara.
10. It has been suggested that Cerudatta's status as an exemplary hbuseholder
(gyhastha) explains apparent lack of erotic interest in the heroine: it would not
be 'appropriate' for such a hero to pine for a courtesan. Thus, in this instance
of the jewels, Cn'rudatta e stablishes his credentials as a devout Hindu of his
social station, which has the effect of making the love more honorable when
it finally gets its due. There is much to this, yet surely the playwright would
have been deft enough to infuse his hero with a little more eros (one or two
pining soliloquies), if that had be en his interest, witlout damaging our respect
for him. After all, if propriety is the deciding factor, why not avoid the love
of Brahmin and courtesan altogether? One might indeed point to an underlying
ritual pattern, such as the part of the mahduard rite in which a Brahrnin student
exchanges smutcy invective with a prostitute, which Gonda ('Ascetics and
C-ourtesans') and others have seen as suggestive of an earlier pattern of sexual
intercourse (cf. /yll.5).
But ritual intrepretations of literature, like psycho
analytic interpretations, interesting and revealingas both are, provide only one
set of influencing factors, which do not constitute a sufficient cause. (See
Goncla's 'Zur Frage nach dem Ursprung und Wesen des indischen Dramas' for
an example of the anthropologicalgenetic method taken too far.) There is still
the question as to why the love of Cerudatta and Vasantasena was consciously
chosen over other literary subjects and why it was treated as it was in this play.
The exception is 10.13, repeated after 10.24 and 10.36, according to stage
directions:
O woman with teeth white as pure moonbeams
and lower lip red as coral,
after drinking t}le nectar of your mouth
must I now drink the poison of infamy?
! eiivimalamaylith aiubh r a d a nti sttruciravi
drumrc autnibhd ith araus thi/
tava uadarwbhavdmTtaln nipiya hatham avaio hyayaSovisaa pibani//
But even this, though it does raise the spcter of her erotic charm, ends in
the familiar refrain of selflamentation.
t2. A 'woman who goes (to her lover)', one of eight types of heroine (ndyikA)
classified according to her disposition to her lover. See Shastri, Laus and
hactice, pp. 2l&20, or any hand-book.
13. I 0.34:
prabhavati yaili dharmo du.sitajApi me'dya
praba lapureav dky air bhdg adosdt katha4cit /
snapatibhavantsthd yatra tatra sthilA vA
t)apdwlatu kalaiika4 sanabhduana saita/ /
14. 10.39 and 42:
Who is this who has come to me
like rain to a withering crop,
when the sword was poised
and I was in the jaws of death?
174 TIu Playworld, ol S anskrit Dramn

keym obhyudyate Sastre mfuuuaktragate maf/


onir4g\ihate sasle thonatns[ir iaagatd,/ /
Whence have you come
with tear-soaked breasts
like saving knowledge
to this dlng man?
kut o ba;pdmbu ilh arAbhil s nap ay anti p ay o tlharou /
mayi nqtyuvaiaT prapte aidyna samupdgad/ /
L5. L0.43:
t1) adafiham et a.tl uinip dty amdrwln dehatn tv ay a,ia a prdtino citan me /

aho prabhAaah priyasa1nganara mrto'pi ko ntuna punar d,hriyeta/ /


16. By pertinent andogy, one of tJle main issues of Sanskrit poetics is the distinction
made between genuine poetry, which is suggestive and principally concerned
with raso, and pseudo-poetry, which does not get beyond rhetorical sport.
Anandavardhana calls all such poetry citrakduya ('picture poetry'), referring to
poems whose syllables placcd in certain arrangements form a schematic whecl
or the like. The only criterion of true poetry is that it please the 'man of heart'.
Se e Anandavardhana, Dhaaanyoloka l.l, 1.13,3.4142
L7. Cf. Freud., Gailization anil Its Discontmts, section 4.
18. Note the terms in which the Brahmin thief Sarvilaka make s his decision before
exiting in Act 4 (4.25\:
Two things{iend and woman-
are dear to men in this world,
but now I would chose my friend
over a hundred beautiful women.
ilaayam iilom atba loke priyaln nardnim suhrc ca aanitd ca/
saryprati ht, sundaindm iatad, api suhrd viiistatamah//
He has willingly sacrificed his reputation as a Brahmin out of love for Madanika"
Vasantaseni's servant, yet no sooner does he win hcr than he gives her up
bccause his friend Aryaka is in trouble. It is no accident, either, that he more
than regains his social status as a result.
19. It might be well to refer here to tlre four 'human goels' (purus6.rthns) under
which rubric all human behavior can be classilied in the Hindu world-view:
dharma (law, dvfiy), ortlw (profit), hdmo (desire, pleasure), and moksa (sabtz-
tion). Under tJ:e old regime dharmo is confuscd with artht: for example, it is
Candanaka's 'duty' t9 arrest the fugitive Aryala,just as it is Vasantasena's duty
to surrender to the Sakira, though both of these actions would really be only
sclf-serving. But in the new order dharmawrll be aligned pimzrily with kdma,
with the latter understood alruistically as sympathetic gen erosity (hTiloyasaqudd.o) ,
though evenhrelly artha follows suit, i.e,, once the revolution succeeds. How
different is this notion of ilharmafrom the model of hormayoga ('the discipline
of action') in the BhagaaaiLGto, where the ideal is disinterested ritualistic
performance of prescribed duty in the spirit of rcnunciation regardless of the
heart's inclinations. Such a notion of tlharmawould offer no hope for Vasanta-
sena and the other sahTdayas except in the ultimate sense of zrolr. a, The affective
model of ilhotma in this play is distinctly antinomian, since it offered the
possibility of a more fluid social structur than the castc system.
20. Lestwe dismiss this aspect of Vasantasna as mere facade we should recall the
Vidirsaka's carnivalesque description of brothel decadence in Act 4. Even if this
scene-worthy of a Petronius or a Fellinijs an accretion, it has hermeneuticd
Cfuudattain Love t75
value as an indication of the way the indigenous tradition understood the issue
at point. vasantasene is by implication a queen who presides over a realrn of
emasculating decadence.
2l .
furaka is carudatti's active double, the revolutionary his sympathetic generosity
does not allow him to be. By contrast the sakara is his 'shadow' or tvil twin;,
absorbing all carudatta's potential sexual aggressiveness, so that his love can
be 'pure' and'tender' (in S. K. De's terminoloCy).Any anger Cdmdatta might
feel toward courtesans, who sell their beauty to the highest bidder rather than
award it to those with the sensitivity to appreciate it, is transferred to the Sakara.
22. See the references to his role as 'wishing-tree' (kalpatn*sa): 1.4g, 9.30+,
10.30+ (cf. 2.15+, 4.32, 6.13-14, 10.4).
23. 1O.52+'Good sir, King Arayaka proclaims: "l have acquired this kingclom by
your goodness. Therefore receive [the principate I confer upon you.].,' , drya
,Mnvorarn Aryako rajd uijfrdpayti-idar.n mayd yt$madgunabarjita4 rajyam/ tad
upayujyatdm/
24. 5.40-42:
bhoh kastam/
dhamir utyuknga naraga loke kiry ftaiwnttita eua tdaat/
asy a pai:rkdranirarthakatu dt kopapras a d a viphahbaa anti
7 //
api ca/
pah;aaikalni ca pah;t &skai ca tarul sarai ca jalahitnm/
satpai coddhnailalnptras tulyam loke daridrai ca//
api ca/
iunyair gThaih khalu samah fu.t:aso dariitrah
hupaiS ca tqarahitais traubhii ca 6rnaih/
ya d d n t apfu rzt aj a na s a m ga m avis mg d ni m
euam bhavanti aiphalnh paritosakalAh//
25. 3.27:
katha4 brdhmalti mam anukampate/ kastam/ iddnim umi daridrah/
d tma bh d g aks a t adraq a h s fi dlauy minr tka mpi tah
/
afihatafi puru;o nnn yd nii sdrthanhpuman//
For further expressions of impotence see 1.55 (citecl previously) anct 5.g.
26. Thus to his composite character of Brahrnin ancr (virtuar) vai(ya he acrcrs the
quality of being a (virtual) Ksatriya: thus emerging as Everyman.
APPEI{DIX

Rasa Poetics

The sptem of rasapoeics is outlined in detail in chapters 6 and 7 of


the Nayyaiaslra. Despite certain confusions, which I shall mention
below, there is a basic theoretical principle, namely that the aesthetic
depiction of a group of eight emotional states (the stha,yibh.a'aas) g1ves
rise to a corresponding relishable emotional 'savor' (rasa). This emo
tional savor is regarded as the ine qua non of stccessful drama: 'with-
orat rasa nothing useful is achieved' (na hi rasad rte kaicid' aplarthah
praantate).1
We can show the relation between sthdryibhavaand rasaby lining
them up in parallel columns:
Principal Emotion Savor
rati (love) ffigara (erotic)
hasa (lntghter) hasya (comic)
iola (sorrow) kantna (pathetic)
utsdha (energy) tnra (mariy, heroic)
krod.ha (anger) raudra (furious)
bhay (fear) bh"ayanaka (fearful)
jugupsa (disgust) blbhntsa (grotesque)
vismaya (amazement) aibhuta (wondrous)2

The transmu tzuon of sthoJibhaua to r&sa can only occur when there
is an aesthetic enhancement of mood through poetic treatment of
certain details. In the doctrine laiil out ln Ali O.gl+ -33+ such treat-
ment entails a careful delineation of the causes (uibhaaa) and effects
(anubhaaa, sottvika bhaaa) of the emotion as well as a depiction of
subsidiary emotions that give the basic mood its color. For example ,
fear, considered as an abiding feeling (the sth"ayi- of sthayibhnaameans
' abiding'
) may indude momentary feelin gs (uJ abhican, or sar.ncMbhtuns)
of apprehension, worry, fright, alarm, fatigue, frenzy, and others, in
various combinations. Thus the aesthetic enhancement of emotion
thatproduces rasaresults from a subtle mix of the appropriate 'objec-
tive correlatives' of the basic emotion (sthayibhaua) and the depiction,
again via objective correlatives, of related secondary feelings.! The
178 Tfu Plny World. of Sanskrit Drama

operating metaphor is that of a beverage whose basic substance is


enhanced by herbs, spices, sweeteners, etc. (- the vibhtr.uas, anubhd.aas,
and ryabhicaribha,uas), producing a subtle, delicious flavor (the word
ras a actuzlly means'fl avor' ) .
Given the Indian penchant for theorerjcal itemization, it was
natural that some of these ingredients would become fixed in
canonical lists. Thus the tryabhicaribhauas were fixed as a grouP of
J5:
The 33 Transitory Statns (qabhictuibh"daas)

niruerla (world-weariness) g/ani (weakness)


ilahki. (apprehension) anrya (enty)
mal,a (intoxication) iama (faigue)
alasya(arpor) dainya (misery)
moha (berilderment) cintd' (worry)
smrti (remembrance) rlh.rti (contentment)
uidi (embatrassment) harsa (1oy)
capalata (rashness) atega (alarm)
jadata (stupor) gan,a (pide)
autwkla (longing) uisdd.a (dejecion)
zeZra (sleepiness) apasmara (derangement)
sr,rpfa (dreaming) vibodha (wakefulness)
amnrya (indignation) mati (intelligence)
aaahittah(dissimulation) ugrata(cruelty)
tryadhi(sickness) unmad.a (fr.nty)
rnarana (dyr"g) trasa (fright)
a
uit arka ( deliberation )

There was also a special group of effects (anubhdaas) known as the


'natural states' (saflzika bhavas), which numbered 8:
The 8 Natural States (sattvika bhdaas)

stambha (paralysis) sveda (xveat)


romahca (horripilation) narabhanga (falteringvoice)
vepathu (trembling) uaiaarnla (loss of color)
ava (tears) Foloryo (swoon)

No such attemptwas made, however, r,rith respect to the vibhaaasor


'causes' of the emotional states in the fictive subjects. Later than the
Na{yaiastd a distinction was made between two t}?es of vibhaua: one
Appmdix 179

called alambana (basic) and the oLher ud'dipana (excitztory); but this
was already implicit in the ltri. ttre paradigm case for kdvyo is a
nd.yaha'sapprehension of a beautiful woman. She is the 'basic cause'
(d,tambana vibhaaa) of his erotic feeling, and mt ch care is expended
in building up a detailed sense of her physical charm and aura. The
'excitatory causes' are the contextual factors that contribute to the
.growing erotic mood (ffi'gara rasa): sweet fragrances, luxuriant vegeta-
tion, a full moon, music, ornaments, etc-5
T}ne anubhduas, excePt for the specialized grouP of sattvikabhaaas,
also escaped canonical itemization because of their greatvariability in
context. They are the visible or otherwise concrete signs by which a
fictive subject in drama or Poetry reveals his emotion: facial exPres-
sions, gestures, and words that express delight, sorrow, longing, e tc.,
in relation to his or her basic emotional state.
The system's ambiguities, both semantic and substantial, are also
worthy of comment. We detect a certain looseness in the use of the
word for 'emotion' or 'state' (bhaaa). The 'natural states', for in-
stance, are physical conditions which reveal emotion. Even some of
the 'transitory states' seem more like physical conditions than feel-
ings: sickness, dying, sleepiness. Others, on the other hand, are mental
without appearing to be emotional: intelligence, deliberation, dream-
ing. Vibhaua and anubhdua (whatever the value of the etymological
explanations at Ni 73 + - 5) were obviously chosen because they
incorporate the essential term bhiaa. Thus, though they a.re categor-
ically referred to as bhaaas themselves in certain Passages, they are
semantically concrete signs relating to 'states' rather than 'states'
themselves.
A more substantial problem has to do with the status of rasa in
relation to sthayibhaaa. In Ni 6 it is said that the rasas themselves are
'represented' (prayhtauya) or 'discerned' (jirEq driyate) through the
trse o f vibh aa as, anu,bhav as, and uy abhi dribh av as, as if th ey were th em-
selves emotional states rather than the delicious taste resulting from
poe tic treatment of the emotional states. The confusion grows when
we read Ni7, where the same exact language is used of the sthdji-and
uyablicdribhaaas, lhey are also 'represented', and by the very same
vibh.auas, etc. Perhaps we could explain this confusion on the basis of
metonymy: the rasas are treated like their material causes the
sthayibhaaas, even though their existence is outside of the play or text
proper in the delectation of the hearer or spectator. We have to make
some such assumption to preserve the theorywe have outlined al>ove
180 Thz PlqWorld. of SanskritDrama

which is in facr clearly stared in .lfj O.gl+ - 33+ (cf. 7.3). But the
probability is that this theoretical formulation is later than the ele-
ments of the system; rasa and bhdva probably existed as practical
synonyms in early dramatic nomenclature, and only gradually did
their semantic connotations, based on their etymological distinction
('flavor, juice'vs. 'state of being, mental state'), harden into a theo-
retical relationship.6
However this may be, the confusion over the status of rasagener-
ated a series of positions on the nature of the aesthetic experience.
Abhinavagupa (fl.AD 1000) singled out theviews of rhree predeces-
sors, all lhshmiri theoreticians like himself.TBhatfa Lollataand Bhatta
Sankuka (both early to mid-9th century eo) tended ro an objectivist
interpretation, seeing rasaassomething to be perceived as immanent
in the text or play. AG's criticism of their arguments is often tenden-
tious sophism, but his main pointis that they cannot accountfor the
fact that rasaperception is inherently pleasant. On the whole AG
subscribes to the view of Bhatfa Nayaka (fl. ao g00), though only with
certain theoretical corrections. But before I can describe BhN's view
I have to backtrack a bit and explain how rasa crept into poetic theory
at large.
Rasawas initially a concept that belonged to the technical and
theoretical writing on drama andwas not a part of standard poetics,
which dealt with verbal poetry (iravya kavya) and focused on the
question ofwhat made poetic speech different from ordinary speech.
Thus standard poetics revolved around questions offigurality ( io*rou;,
alamkara) and heightened diction (pr.ro, fit).Itwas almort entirely
practical and descriptive rather than theorettcal. Rasawas acknowl-
edged as having a certain value-even the early poeticians Bhamaha
and Darrqlin (both 8th centuryeo) say that a m{or poem (mahnkAvya)
must includ e all I rasa*but its place was distinctly secondary. It r,ras
accommodated to the alamkdra system as a vague figure olspeech
called rasantat ('having rasa') or in connection with sweetn-ess in
diction. The poetician Rudrafa (fl. 880) was the first to give rasamqjor
attention, focusing on irigara, but he left it unclear how it fit iito
ltandld linguistically-oriented poetics. This siruarion changed with
Anandavardhana (fl. 875), the first to elevate poetics to sophisticated
theory.
_ AV shared the linguistic assumptions of his of his predecessors, but
he distinguished three levels of linguistic meaning. The first was
Denotation (abhidhd), in which words mean exactly what they say:
Appmdix 181

'The village is near the Ganges'' The second is Indication (Iak;atl'a),


in which the literal meaning has to yield, however slightly, in order
to convey the intended meaning: 'The village is on the Ganges',
where onreally means 'near'. This second level of signification is a
feature of both ordinary language and poetry, and with regard to
poefy it covers all figurality (alamkara) as such. But AV goes a.step
iurther. There is a third level, suggesion QryafrjanQ, in which lan-
guage may or may not be figural but the words conYey a meaning
which goes beyond direct or indirect denotation. The example he
gives here is again 'The village is on the Ganges', where the impli-
cation is of cool bre ezes and proximity to the sacred. It is only when
language is suggestive, he argues, thatwe have Poetry' He then distin-
guishes three kinds of suggested meaning: content (aastu), figure
(alamkara),and emotion (ra.sa). Thus if awoman in a poem speaks to
a traveler of a lonely spot in the forest where nobody comes, the
attentive reader understands that she is suggesting a rendezvous: this
is suggestion of content (vastudhttani)- Or if a Poem speaks of the
beauty of the moon in a certain way the reader may perceive the
intended comparison with a woman's face: suggestion of figure
(alar.nkarad.haani).Butthe most significant, most poetic form of sug-
gestion is rasailhuani, when the words evoke a delicious emotional
response in the sensitive reader (safud'aya). This is achieved, as we will
.roi b. surprised to learn, through the careful depiction of aibh'd'aas,
etc., as in dramatics. Butwhereas in drama these preconditions were
conveyed through actions and even costume as well as speech, in
verbaf poetry lairguage bears the whole burden.s Thus it was
Anandavardhanawho fully accommodated drama's poetics of rasata
verbal poetry and poetics.e
BhattaNayaka, to return to the question of rasds character, did hot
accept Anandavardhana's theory, but he was likewise interested in
adapting rasa Lo a general poe tic the ory. He likewise distinguished
three levels of language, beginningwith Denotation. Instead of Indi-
cation, however, his second level was called Realization (bhauahawa).
Here he was speaking only of poetic language. By judicious use of
speech (including figures and diction) in describing the objective
correlatives of emotion (the vibhfureand aru,bhanta) the poetreleased
language from its normal referential function so that it generalized
whatit described as an experience common to every sensitive reader'ro
Beyond this he proposed a third function called bhnjakatva (the faculty
of 'causing delight') which would explain how the generalization of
182 I'hz PlnlWorld, of SanshritDra.ma

the vibhaaas, etc., could lead to the delicious savoring of emotion in


the sensitive aesthetic recipient.
Abhinavagupta's principle correction of BhN is the rejection of
-latter two levels: they are nothing, he ways, but what AV means by
suggestion (ryahjg.na, dhaani). But he retains BhN's key concept of
gen eralizatio n ( s adharanikaran a), now ascribed to suggestion, though
ignored by AV, as the device by which the magic oiioro.*p.rience
is explained. Thus the question of where rasa resid.es is resolved. [t
resides in the reader-hearer-spectator of kat4a (poetry and drama). So,
in fact, does the sthafbhaaa. Katrya's role is to present generalized.
depictions of the causes and effects of emotion, a virtual rearity that
touches the chord, so to speak, of the reader's own resident emotional
states (slialibhaaas) but depersonalizes and sublimates them to a
condition in which they can be enjoyed as pure savor. Thus poetry
becomes a means of savoring the emotional facets of oneis own
consciousness.
This places the aesthetic subject in the position of a religious
adept, who, in AG's brand of Tantra, seeks not to obliterate worldly
experience but to experience it as the divine subjectwho savors the
cosmic manifestation as a form of play. For AG perception on the
highest level is not distinct from feeling. The rasa experience in
poetry is a foreshadowing of the permanent transcendence of the
personal limitations that occurs only with religious enlightenment.
One does not need to believe this, however, to appreciate the high
value placed on rasa experience by most poeticians from AV's time
onward- Katyafrom Bhamaha and Danrlin had always been idealized.
Dandin, for instance, wrote :

By the favor of words does the cou.se of the world proceed. If the
light called 'word' did not shine into this exisrence, then these three
worlds would be in complete darkness. The image of the fame of
the earliest kings, reflected in the mirror of speech is rightly called
the cow which yields all desires; badly composed, howevei, it an-
nounces the oxlike nature of its user.n

This is nothing, however, compared with AV's adulation of the ,po_


etic universe' (hd.tyasamsara) quoted.severar times in this book (see
Ch. l, section 2).
Appm"dix 183

Notes

l. The precise translation of afihah prauartate in this context is elusive. I myself


have translated it somewhat clifferently in Ch. 3.
2. Bytheendofthe8thcenturyatlatesta9thrasaut^saccepted:ldnta(tranquil).
Udbhata (f1.775) was the first poetician to mention it in the extant literature,
but it became general. Both Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta accepted ir
for instance. It was, interestingly, never quite clear what its proper sthayibhaua
was: see Raghavan, Number of Rasas, Ch. 4.
3. The use of Eliot's terrn seems warranted, as others have noted as well. One
wonders if Eliot's poetic theory might not derive from some familiarity, even
if slight, with rasa poetics. He did study Sarrskrit at Harvard for a time before
expatriating.
4. The English translations are approximate, since there is no one-for-one fit of
English and Sanskrit words. The real meanings of these conditions are elu-
cidated by the particular situations in which they occur.
5. It is especially in the area of the dbhaaas, that one comes to appreciate the
primary place of ffigdra in this poetic system. When we read in the NS and
other manuals and treatises about the uibhauas of other major emotions, the
vividness of detail that makes aesthetic depiction successful is either reduced
or absent. Here is Nf O.OO+ on the heroic r6u:
Now the Heroic (vira) sentiment relates to the superior type of persons
and has energy [utsdha) as its basis [ahayibhAu]. This is created by
Determinants [aibhauas] such as presence of mind, perseverance, diplo
macy, cliscipline, military strength, aggressiveness, reputation of might,
influence, and the like.
Presence of mind (asammoha) and perseverance (adhyaaasdla) are qualities in
the heroic character, but can hardly be seen as emotional causes. One might
see them as a rype of tryabhicaribhaua, but not z uibhava. Nothing in this whole
list has any objective or concrete poetic value. (The above translation is that
of Manmohan Ghosh; insertions in square brackets are mine.)
6. Kalidasa uses /zsa znrl bhdaa together but apparently as stnonyms in M2.8.
7. None of their uritings are extanr except in fragments quoted by other poeticians.
8. In drama one speaks of the four modes of representation (the four abhinayas) :
verbzl (vdcika), bodily (angika),'natural' (sdt*iko: this refers to the sdtwika
bhdau listerl above), and costume (ahAryQ AII these together comprise the
'language' of drama as 'spectacle poety' (fuiakdtrya) zs opposed to verbal
poetry (havlakavya).
9. I clo not rnean to imply that standard linguistic poetics was in fact foreign to
dramatics. Under the heacling of the verbal mode of represntation (udnlrz
abhitnya: see preceding note) the Ndylaidstra itemizes four figures of speech
and ten excellences (Sufos) of diction among other things. The Nj is in fact
the earliest source oflinguistic poetics, though by the time ofAnandavarclhana
the number of alnrykdras had risen to over 60. However, the NS did not try
to adapt rasa to verbal poetry as such.
10. Thus we can see that in doing away with lnclication (lak+"qn) as a separate
function of language BhN assigns ligurality to the ordinary ancl poetic iealms
either as a subsidiary form of Denotation or kind of heightened discourse for
the Realization of generalized aesthetic experience.
184 Tfu Play World, of Sanskrit Drama

11. K1{ l.3cd-6:


vdcdm eua prasadena lokaydtri, pravartate//
idam onilhaut tamal kylsnary jdyeta bhuuarntrayam/
yadi Sabddhaayar.n jlotir dsaynsdroln m diplate//
hilirdj ay aiobimbam d.dari aq prapl o v d.imay am/
tuam asamnidhd.n4'pi rn s'uayam palya miyati//
gaur gauh kdmailughd somyak prayuhta smarlatc budhaib/
dus.fiayuhta PuMr qoh)arp praroktuh saiaa iaqsati//
Glossary

abhinqa means ofhistrionic representation; in drama there are


four types: vdcika (verbal), aigika (bodily: gesrure,
eLc.), sattvika (emotive: tears, etc.), and dbhdrya (cov
urme)
adiksinya lack of ddhinya: gaucheness
anaeiha unspecified type of foreteller of events, such as an
astrologer
adblwn the *ondrous or marvelous sentiment (rasa)
alat.nkAra 'ornament'; in kd.vya, any figure of speech
AlamkArika used in two senses: (l) a proponent of the point of
view that figurality is the most important element in
katrya, or a practitioner of this kind of poetics; (2)
(by metonymy) a poetician of any sort
alankiha extraordinary, supranormal
anxmaya act of conciliation
artha profit, advantage, success,wealth; one of the purusafih.a
arya honorable person, usually as a title (e.g. bywhich the
Actress addresses the Stage-Manager); also a mem-
ber of the dharmic community as opposed to an
outsider (see mbccha)
asraffut (l) hermitage;(2) stageoFlife, ofwhich there are four,
viz. the lives of the student, householder, hermit,
and renouncer
Arman soul, self; with a capital ,4 it is the self of the universe
as described in the Upanisads
aaalara 'descent'; the worldly form taken by a major deity, e.g.,
Visnu as Rama or Kflqu
balwnana respect, esteem
bhakti devotion, loyalty, love; devotional, theistic religion as
opposed to austere ritual, meditation, asceticism, etc.
Ithaua dominantfeeling; used here primarily in the sense of
slhayibhdva, the raw mate rial of rasa
bhAuaha in Bhatla Nayaka's poetics, kdtya,s bhauaka capacity
makes emotion into an aesthetic universal
bh"jok" for Bhatta Nayaka, kduya's blwjahacapacity makes the
aesthe tic universal intrinsically relishable
186 Tfu PlnyWoild of SanskritDrama

kahmn divine personification of hrahman, t}r,e ultimate sub-


stance or essence of the universe in the Upanisads;
synonymous wi th Praj apati
Brah:rnana a Vedic text concerned principally with ritual
Brahdn see VaiSya
camathara thrill, rapture; a synonym of rasanada
c,a4,& angry woman; Candi is the angry goddess or goddess
of destruction
fuiiaa 'divine'; fate
daiuiki 'divine' success (sidd.hi);what a drama achieves when
it arouses rasanada
dahsinya courtes/, urbane or courtly aplomb
dharma law, duty; one of thepurusarthas
dharmAnhau d,h atm a and cnth a to gether

dhtralalita 'steadfast and gallant'; the amorous hero of drama and


Poetry
dhxrodartu 'steadfast and exalted'; the noble hero
dhaani 'sound, overtone'; in poetics, dhuaniis innuendo or
suggestion, and includes the evocati on of rasa
d,rnakatrya 'visual poetrf,' i.e. drama
gandharva a form of marriage in which mutually desired sexual
intercourse takes the place of familial arrangements
and the usual rituals; a gandharaa is a kind of lesser
divinity associated with music and eros
got[hn club of nagarihasdedicated to literary discussion, music,
e0c.
gw virtue ; in poetics, a positive feature or 'merit' of dic-
tion; the word originally means 'strand' or 'cord'
hydaysaryaada 'concord ofheart'; the sympathetic temperament that
qualifies one as sahrdaya
Inara Lord: the highest god, personification of the absolute
Fro individual soul/self
koma desire, pleasure; one of the pzrusarlhas
harma (n) act, activity; specifically, action or behavior conceived
as entailing necessary consequences which have to
be lived through; may also refer to the ritual act
(whose consequences are always beneficial)
kantna, pathos the pathetic sentiment (rasa)
karha tale, story; storyliterah-rre as distinctfrom kat4a, though
often versffied
Glassary 187

kovla poetry: the term includes both prose and verse but
only on the sophisticated level; ordinary verse is not
included
kaqasar.nsara the poetic universe, poetry as an imaginaryworld
h.rtayuga theHinduequivalentoftheGoldenAge, when dhanna
was perfectly observed, there was no disease, and
people lived for 400 years; followed by the tretd,
d.adpaya, and. kali yugas, eachworse than the other;
we are nor Hince the endof the Bharatawar-in the
h,aliyuga, characterized by unrighteousness, etc.
K;"tA" see Vai6ya
Eln play, sport
Elonwhsa liberation conceived as sport or play
Elivad;in a proponent of play as a metaphysical doctrine
mahakarya elaborate poetic narrative of m4jor scope, typically in
verse; often translated as'court epic'
mun@ 'human' success (siddhil; in dramatics this refers to a
play's popular success on a Ievel beneath rasdwdd.a;
see daivihi
map magic, illusion; specffically the world-illusion created
by desire and ignorance
rnbccln a barbarian or non-Aryan
maha liberation from the cycles of existence (samsdrQ' one
of the pmt;afih"as
naguiha urbane townsma.n
mlaka dramain general; also aspecific dramatic genrewith
a royal protagonist and a major scope
ndlika a nalaka of smaller scope: Malavikognimitra as cottl^-
paredwith Saku.ntali,
,rn\o drama in general; also mimetic dance
nalyacatya teacher of dance or drama
m$akaa playr,vright
naJaha protagonis! hero, lover
nqka female protagonis! beloved
niyati fate, destiny
pA" 'foot'; the fourth part of a stanza considered as a
prosodic unit
pary4ira learnedperson
pumt;a 'human'; human effort as opposed to liate (daiaa)
plnlAarna attainment of the fruit of action: the final stage of
188 flu PIay World of Sanskrit Drama

concerted action in drama


Ph"lolog synonym of phalagama
hqj"pori. 'master of creatures': the creator god or demiurge
pratibha 'light'; the imaginative capacity: in poetry one of the
requirements of a true poet (and safuilaya);in Saiva
metaphysics the female power bywhich the universe
is manifested (see .(a&li)
FoJogo 'application'; in drama this refers to performance or
plactical application as opposed to learning; also
ritual performance and performance of a strategic
action
@;aha 'beholder'; spectator of drama
pxnryaftho 'hunian goal'; the four puru"sanhas slurrtup goaloriented
human behavior: duty Qlhama\, pr ofit (anha), plet
sruire (kdma), and salvation (mohsa); the first three
are subcategorized as the worldly goals
parua'Mraga the initial stage oflove before sexual union, character-
ized by flirtation and longing
rasa aestheticized sentient; the terms originally means
Juice, liquid' and comes to mean 'flavor'
rasandda rasa+avoring, aesthetic raphrre
rasiha person of feeling, $ynonym of sahrdaya
nti 'p.th'; poetic style catagorized according to certain
formal criteria of diction; a synonym is rnd.rga
sa@a1a 'having heart'; person of heart the ideal re cipient of
kaulo
sa,hqdqetln the state of being a sah:rd.oya (the suffx -tua-Eng.'nas)
iahi energy; the energetic or immanent Power of a tran-
scendent divinity, personified as female and taken
as the god's .o.trort; used mostly in Saivism; also
poetic imagination
saanbhqa 'enjoyment'; love in fulfilment or enjoyment, one of
the phases of figara rasa
wTrnyA,m renunciation of the world
nqar.ydsin renouncer; one who renounces theworld to achieve
neta
sot.nshv theworld, conceived as arealm of ignorance through
which one is constantly recycled in changing guises;
also, the process of continuous rebirth or reincar-
nation
Glnssary 189

sam&dm 'impression, configuration'; synonym of adsand.


sandhi 'joint'; as used here, one offive possible plot divisions
in drama
nndhyanga 'san"ilhLpart'; one of many incidents which may occur
within a sand.hi; there is a possible total of 64 in a
whole play
sdnuhon having a sympathetic temperanent
idstra any body of learning
siddhi success, fulfilment
*,rd* love, loyalty
Sa goddess ofwealth, fertility, sovereignty
s'tlgara the erotic sentiment (rasa); dividedrna sambhnga (en-
joyment) and nipralambha (fiustration) phas-s
ffigarin having an urbane erotic sensibility
stlnyibhaaa principal emotion such as love, sorrow, fury, regarded
as the raw material of rasa
S.tara the lowest of the 4 social order s (see aaisya), the class
of menial and servile workers
ntradham stagemanager:rnd leader of an acting troupe
nailtdua 'selFbeing'; essence
rua.bhewhri poetry in the descriptive mode, not utilizing alamki.ras,
but still quite elaboraile; wabhd.aoftri is sometimes
considered a figure in its own right
nn)am)cftt 'self-choice'i type of marriage in which the bride
chooses her husband among competing suitors
npas 'heat', especially the heat of asceticism
tejas 'fiery brilliance '; tlpically associatedwith royal m4iesty,
butmay also be a synonym for tapasaswellas aword
for semen
ulastrnna indifference
aairaga dispassion
voiga the merchant, farmer, herder, artisan, or otherwise
productive class in the dharmic hierarchy, ranked
third after Brahmin (priest) and IGatriya (warrior,
prince)
o4o what is said: appearance as opPosed to reality (snhaw)
rxivni. unconsciousproclivityresultingfrom karmainapre_
vious existence
ddhi ordained rule in ritual; fate
vtlilp.h,a the ndyaka's buffoonish companion, the parody of a
190 Thz Play World of Sansbit Drama

food-loving Brahmin who does not even speak San-


skrit
aipalmbha 'disappointment'; love in a state of frustration, either
not yet fulfilled (puraaru'raga) or enduring sePara-
aon (uiraln), aphase of Srngararasacharacterized by
longing
tfira the heroic rasa
airalw separati on, spe cifi cally I ovein-separati on
viiistadtaita 'qualifi ed nondualism': Ramanuja's Vedanta, wherein
the individual soul (f.va) is notwholly identical with
the Lord
dtard,ga devoid of passion: what a poet o r s ah4day a must not be
Abbreviations

ABh Abhinaua,bhnrarr.ofAbhinavagupta
AMG R. Gnoli, The Aesthetic Expnimce According to
Abhirwngupta
AG Abhinavagupta
AO Aaa Orinrtaka (Hungary)
AOS American Oriental Series
AS Ammlialaka
AV Athaaoada
AV Anandarrardhana
BAU Qrhad*ar.tyahaU@l.;oA
BhN BhattaNeyaka
BORI Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute
BOS Bhandarkar Oriental Series
BS Brahmasuna(Vdnntustt'tra) of Bddarapr.ra
BSBb Brahmastr,.trabha.ryaof Sankara
BSS Bombay Sanskrit Series
AU Chnn"d.ogaUpant$ad
CxS Cnntributions to Indian Sociolag
CSS Chowkhamba Sanskrit Studies
DM Dhaanyalnh^zof Anandarrardhana
DML Dlwanyalnlnlncanaof AbYrrtavagupta
DR DasariltpahaofDhanafrjaya
COS Gaekwad Oriental Series
HCIP History and Culture of the Indian People (series
tide)
HDS P.V. Kane, Hittsrj of Dharmaiastra
HIL History of Indian Literature (series title)
HOS Harvard Oriental Series
I1SP S. K De, History of Sansl<rit Poetics
IA K. C. Pandey, Indian Aesthztia
IHQ Ind:ian Historical Quartnly
IPW Inarapratyabhijnavivrtiuimarinr of Abhinavagupta
lA JoumalAsiatique (Paris)
JAOS Jrurnal of tlu American Onmtal Society
lP Joumalof Ind,ian Philasophy
JOf Joumal of tfu Oiental Institute (Baroda)
192 T'hc PlqWorld. of SanskritDrama

IRAS Journal of tlu RoyalAsiatic Society


ISAL Jownal of SuuthAsiart Litqature
KA liaqddniaof Dandin
KM l(ullammataofDdmodaragupta
KP KAvya,prakAiaofMammata
KSS Kashi Sanskrit Series
I(STS Kashmir Series of Texts and Studies
M MalaaikAgnimitraof l{AfidAsa
MBh Mahdbhamta
MR Mudrd.rd.h4asaofVifakhadatta
We&. Mrcchaha.pihaof SUdraka
IUIUU Munilakaupan@
llf Naqyasastra
PWV PhilosophyEast and.West
PICI Publications de I'Institut de Civilisation Indienne
Yw Paratrimiikaviaaranaof Abhinavagupta
W Pratijfrayaugandhnroyanaof Bhasa
Y
S
*sdo
Sa.kuntald.ofKalidisa
SAS SanskritAcademy Series
Snn Sn-nhasaofRamanuja (comm. on Brahmasirtra)
SBE Sacred Books of the East
SD SAhiryadarpanaofVi3rranitha
SOR Serie Orientale Roma
SR J. L. Masson and M. V. Patwardh an, Santu oro
SY Saapanaadsavad"ataofBhdsa
SWSS Sri Vani Vilas Sanskrit Series
fA Tantra.lokaofAbhinavagupta
V Vkramoraafiyaof lGlidasa
W WweslwamnandlilalngicalJoumal
Bibliography

Note : This list contains some works which, though not cited in the
book, have nevertheless had a signi-ficantinfluence on iL The intent
is to provide students and others with a basic but also reasonably
extensive and uptodate bibliography on the subject of Sanskrit drama,
its background, and the authors treated here.

A EDITIONS AND TMNSTATIONS

Translations listed after editions despite alphabetical order.


Abhinavagupta.
Abhinavabheru6
Nd.tyaid.stra of Bharatatnuni with the cornrnentary
AbhinaaabhnraE b1 Abhinaaaguptdcorya. Ed. with in-
troduction by R. S. Nagar. 4 vols. 2nd ed. Delhi:
Parimal, 1988. See also Gnoli, Aestfut:icExpoima.
Dhaanyalokalacana
Anandaaardhanacaryaviracitah Dhvanyatokah Si-o-
dabhin aa aguptaairacitala can atryalhy asahinh^ Ed. wi th
Hindi commentary by Ramsagar Tripathi. 3 vols.
2nd ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1973-81.
TfuDhvanlaloka of Anandaaard.hanauith tfu Locana of
Abhina.aagupta Trans. Daniel H. H. Ingails,Jeffery
MoussaieffMasson, and M. V. Patwardhan. Ed.
with an Introduction by Daniel H. H. Ingalls.
HOS 49. Cambridge MA: Harv-ardUP, 1990.
iivarapratyabhijnatiu.rtivimnriini. Ed. M. S. Kaul. 3 vols.
KSTS 60,62, 66. Srinagar, 1938, 1941, 1943.
Paratrimiikatattaavivaranarn: Il Commento de
Abhinavagupta allz Paratrimikn- Ed. with o-ans. (Ital-
ian) by Raniero Gnoli. SOR 58. Rome: Instituro
Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1985
Thc Tantralnka of Abhinavagupta ttith thz Commzntary of
Jayaratha- Ed- R. C. Dwivedi andNavajivan Rastogi.
lst ed. Srinagar (I(STS), l9l8-38. Enlarged ed.
with introduction. 8 vols. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1987.
194 Tlu PlajWodd of SanshttDrarna

Amaru.
Amaruiatakam: A Cmtum of Ancimt Loue Lyrics of
Amaruha. Ed. with English trans. by C. R.
Devadhar. RpL Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984.
Anandavardhana.
Dlwanyalnka of Anantlavardhana. Ed. with trans. by K.
Krishnamoorthy. Znd ed. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1982.
Dhvanyaloka. See Tripathi ed., S. V. Abhinavagupta,
Dhuanyalokaloeana.
Tfu Dhaanyd,loha of Anantt"auardhana uith tlw Locana of
Abhinaaagupta Trans. Daniel H. H. Ingalls,J.ft.y
MoussaieffMasson, andM.V. Patwardhan. See s.
v. Abhinavagu ptz, Dlwany ahkaLo cana
Anon.
b Vijftana Bhairava. Ed. with translation (French)
and commentary by Lilian Silburn. PICI 15.
Paris; E. de Boccard, 1983.
Bharata.
Naryaidstra of Blnrata. Ed. Bahrka Natha Sharma and
Baladeva Upadhyaya. Znd ed. Varanasi:
Chowkhamba, 1980.
Nalyaiastra of Bharatamuni with the Commentary
Abhinaaabhiratt. by Abhinaaaguptu Ed. R. S. Nagar.
See s. v. Abhinavagupta, Abhinawbharaft.
Thc Nagyaiastra (A Treati.* on. Ancimt Indian Dramaturg
and. Histrionics), Aicribed. to Bharcta-muni. Trans.
Manomohan Ghosh. Vol. I (chs. l-27).2ndrev.
ed. Calcutta: Manisha Granthalaya, 1967. vol. 2.
(chs. 2&36) . Calcutta: The Asiatic Society, I 961 .
The Nayya Satt* o7 Bhoratamuni. Trans. 'a board of
scholars'. Delhi: Sri Satguru, 1981.
Bhasa.
Bhasanayakacakram: Plays Ascribed to Bhd.sa. Ed. C. R.
Devadhar. POS 54. Poona Oriental BookAgency,
1962.
Pratijfi.ayaugand.harayana. Ed. with Sanskrit Commen-
t^ry by T. Ganapati Sasri.3rd ed. Trivandrum, 1920.
Saapnaudsaaadatta. Ed. with Sanskrit commentary by T.
Ganapati Sastri. Trivandrum, I924.
Bi.bli.ography 195

Thhtzerl Trfu an'ilum Play s Attributed to Bhiso^ Trans. A C'


Woolner and Lakshman Sarup. 2 vols. London:
OxfordUP,1930.
Dhananjaya.
TheDaiafipaka of Dhanafr,jaya Wth the commentary of
Dhanika and the subcommentarY of
Bhattanrsir.nha- Ed. with introduction and notes
by T. Venkatacharya- Madras: Adlar Library, 1969'
The Daiantpa: A Treatise on Hindu Dramaturg, by
Dhanaft.iayaTrans. George C. O. Haas' l9l2' Rpc
New York: AMS Press, 1965-
Damodaragupta.
Kullantmata. Ed. T. M. Tripathi. Bombay: Gujarati
Press, 1924.
Inscriptions.
Inscriptions of tfuEarly Gupta Kings and'Tlwir Successors'
Corpus Inscriptions Indicarum III. Revised by D'
R Bhandarkar. Ed. B. ChhabraandG. S. Gai. New
Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India, 1981.
Inscriptions of thc Eady Gupta Kings and' Their Successors'
Ctr 3. Ed.John Faithful Fleer 1988- Rpt Varanasi:
Indological Bookhouse, 1963.
Kalidasa.
Mal"aaihagnimitra
Matavikagnirnitra. With the Commentaries of
Nilakaptha and Katayavema. Ed. anon. SWSS 5'
Srirangam: Sri Vani Vilas Press, 1908.
Malattikagnikitra: A Sanshrit PIay by Kalidasa' With the
commentaryof Katayavema. Ed- with English notes
by Shankar Pandurang Pandit. BSS 6. Znd ed-
Bombay: Centr-al Book DePot, 1889.
Malavikagnimitram of Kakdi'sa. Ed. with English notes
and translation by C. R. Devadhar. 3rd ed. Rpl
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980.
Malauika and.Agnimitra. Trans. Edwin Gerow. ln The
ato of Memory, ed. BarbaraStoler Miller. NewYork:
Columbia UP, 1984.
fufunnla
Abhq aAnaSeth"rntatmt of lhliinsa Ed- with English notes
and translation by C. R. Devadhar and N. G. Suru.
196 Thz PlayWmld. of SanskritDrama

Rpt. Delhi; Motilal Banarsidass, 197t.


Tfu Abhijnana&knntala,m of KakdosaWth the Sanskrit
commentaries of Sankara and Narahari. Ed.
RamanathJha. Darbhanga: Mithila Institute of
Post-Graduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit
Literature, 1957.
Abhij ftAn a-Sakuntala of Kakd.as a With the Sanskrit
Thz
commentaryofRighavabhaua- Ed- N. R Codahole.
Revised by Wasudev Laxman Shasri Fanasikar.
5th ed. Bombay: TukaramJavaji ar the Nirnaya
Sagara Press, 1 909.
KAkdisa's Sakuntali.Ed.Richard Pischel. Znd ed. HOS
16. CambridgeMA: HanardUP, 1922.
A fumnstn^tction of thz Abhijfrd.naiahtntalarn Ed. Dileep
. Kumar I{anjilal. Calcutta: SanskritCollege, 1980.
Sahtntala by Kalidasa: TIu Dnanagari fucension of thc
Text. Ed. with English notes and partial transla-
tion by Monier Williams. Znd ed. Oxford;
Clarendon Press, 1 876.
Abhijfi.anaidkuntalam. Trans. Chandra Rajan. In
Kalidasa: Thz Loorn of Timc, a Selzction of His Plays
arul Poems. Ed. Rajan. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
1990.
Sakuntala. Trans. Michael Coulson. In Three Sanskrit
Plays. Ed. Coulson. Harmondsworth: Penguin,
I 98 I . Irrcludes also Vi6akhadatta' s Mud,rarah;asa
and Bhavab h uld' s M alatim aihav a
Sakuntala arul the Ring of fucotlection.Trans. Barbara
Stoler Miller. In Theatn of Memory. See s.v.
Malauikngnimitra.
Vilu'a:rnorafiya
Vibarnoruaiiyam of Kalida.ra. Ed. with English notes
and Translation by C. R. Devadhar. 3rd ed. Rpt.
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1979.
Vilu'amtnvailyam of Kalidasa With the commentaries of
Rrn.qaneth4 Ifu ne6var4 and Katayavema Ed. anon.
SAS 14. Hyderabad: The Sanskrit Academy of
Osmania University, I 966.
Tfu Vikramontafiya of Kakdasa. Ed. with English notes
by H. D. Velankar. New Delhi: SahityaAkademi,
Bibliograplq 197

1961.
\ Vabr Trans. David Gi tom er. In T hzatcr of
Ura afi. Won
Munny. See s.v. Malavikd.gnimitra
frauglya.
Thz KnrlilyaArthniastra Ed. and trans. With analytical
study by R. P. Ibngle. 3 vols. Rpt. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1986.
Kqemar{a
Sivasil,travimariini. Ed. J. C. Chatterjee. IGTS l.
Srinagar, l9ll.
MaheSvarananda.
La Mahd,rthamafrjan d.e Mah"eiaardnanda. Ed. Lilian
Silburn. PICI29. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1968-
MammaF
Thz Kavyaprakaia of Marnmala. Ed. with trans. by
GanganathaJha. 2 vols. Rpt. Varanasi: Bharatiya
Vidya Prakashan, 1967.
Manu.
Manusm{ti. With the commentary of Medhatithi. Ed.
anon. 2 vols. Calcutta : Udayacala Press, 1976.
Tfu l-aws of Manu. Trans. Georg Buhler. SBE 25. 1886.
Rpt. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1984.
R{aSekhara.
Ka:ulamimaansaof Rajasikhara Ed. C. D. Dalal and R. A.
Sasry. GOSl. Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1934.
La Kavyamtrnarysa, fu Rajasikhara. Trans. Nadine
Stchoupak and Louis Renou. Paris: Imprimerie
Nationale, 1946.
Ramanuja
Bhagauad, Balarayana's Brahma Snta m Sairaka uith Sn
Bhaga by &i Bhagaaad. Ramanuja. With the
subcommentary of Abhinavade6ika. Ed. Sri
Uttamur T. Viraraghavacharya. 2 vols. Madras:
Sreevathsa Press, 1963.
The Verlanta-Sutras uith tfu Commentary of Romanuja.
Trans. George Thibaut- SBE 48. 1904. Rpt. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass, 1976.
Sankara.
Brahmastttra-Sankarabhasyam. With the subcom-
mentaries of Govin dananda. Vacaspatimi6ra, and
198 Play World of San skrit Drama

Anandagiri. Ed. J. L. Shastri. Delhi: Motilal


Banarsida.ss, 1980.
Vdi.r*o-Siltras with the Conmentol bJ Sanhom&rya Trans.
George Thibaut. 2 vols. SBE 34, 38. 1904. Rpt.
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980.
S.,ar*".
TIu luhcchakapka of SadrakaWth the commentary of
Prthvidhara. Ed. with English notes and transla-
tion byM. R lhle. Rpr Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass,
1982.
Tfu Mrcchakagika of Sadraha. With the commentary of
Prthvidhara. Ed. with English notes by Hirananda
Mularqia Sarma Sastri and Kasinath Pandurang
Parab. 2nd ed. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagar, 1910.
The Littlc CIay Can. Trans.J. A. B. Van Buitenen. In
Two Play of Anciznt Ind.ia, ed. Van Buitenen. New
York Columbia UP, 1968.
Upanisads.
Brhadarar.uaka Upani;ad^ ln Tm Principal Upanisans with
Sankarabhasya. Ed. anon. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1964.
Chandng a Upanisad ln Tm Principal Upani;ads.
Tfu Thirtcen Principal Upanisi.ads. Trans. R. E. Hume.
2nd rev. ed. London: Oxford UP, 1931. Rpr 1979.
Utpaladeva
With the com-
Thz Siaastotrdaak of Utpatadndcharya.
mentary of Ksemaraja. Ed. Rajanaka Laksmana.
Varanasi: Chowkhamba, 1964.
Vetsyayana.
Si Vatsydyana Muni.Wih the com-
The Kamasfi,tram of
mentary ofYa6odhara. Ed. with Hindi commen-
tary by Sri Dwduth Sastri. I{SS 29. 3rd ed. Varanasi:
Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sansthan, I 982.
The Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana. Trans. Sir Richard F.
Burton. NewYork: E. P. Dutton, 1962.
Vidyakara.
Compiltt by Vdyahara Ed. D. D.
The Subha^sitaratnah.osa
Kosambi andV. V. Gokhale. HOS 42. Cambridge
MA: HarvardUP, 1957.
An Antholog of Sanskrit Court Poetry: Vidyd,kara's
Bibliography 199

Subhd,sinratnaka;a. Trans. Daniel H. H. Ingalls.


HOS 44. Cambridge lvIA: Harv-ard UP, 1965.
Vffnkhadatta.
Vi ahhadatta. Ed'- Alfr ed Hillebrandt.
Mu.d.rd,rah4as a by
Breslau: M. & H. Marcus, 1912.
Mudrarak; as a by Vi"Sahhadaaa with the commentary of
Dirrrndhiraja. Ed. with English notes by Ikshinath
Trimbak Telang. Bombay: Government Central
BookDepot" 1884.
Mudrarahsha^sa of Wahhanauawith the commentary of
Dhu4dhir{a. Ed. with English notes and transla-
tion by M. R. Ible. 6th ed. Delhi; Motilal
Banarsidass, 1976.
The Min:kter's&aI Trans.J. A B- van Buitenen' ln Two
Plays of Ancim.t Inilii. See s.v. S"at*u'
Rnhshasa'sRing Trans. Michael Coulson. lnThnz San-
skrit Plays. See s.v. Kilidds a, Sah'tnnlL'
Vi3r'anatha.
Ed. with Hindi commentary bJ
Sahityad'arpalt'a.
Shalgran Shasui- Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1977'
Thc Minor of Composition- Trans.J. R. Ballantyne and
Pramadadasa Mitra. 1865. Rpt. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1956.

B. SECqNDARY LITERATURE

Adaval, Mti. Tne Srory of King Udny ana Yararrasi: Chowlhamb a, 197 0'
Altekar, A. S. Catalogue of tlw Gupta Gold' Coins in thc Bayana Hoard"
Bombay: Numismatic Society of India, 1954.
Barthes, Ronald. Iltlythologizs. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1957. Trans.
Annette Lavers. New York Hill and Wang, 1975-
Basham, A L. Ttuwannzr TlwtWas Ind'ia-NewYork Grove Press, 1959.
Basie, Mliam ('Count' ), and Albert Murray. Gootl Moming Bfua: Thz
Autobi.ography of Count Basie as Told. to Albat Munay. New York:
Primus, 1985.
Bdumer, Bettina Sehiipfung ak $izl: Do @riff Ela im Hiruhtistmts, seiru
phitnsophisdu und tfuologi.sclu Dattung. Diss. Munchen, 1969.
Baumer, Rachel van M., andJames R. Brandon. Sanskri.t Drama in
Perfomance. Honolulu: University of Hawaii, l98l-
Bhaduri, Nrisinha P.'Bhakti (Dwotion) as anAesthetic Sentiment.'
200 Thz play World, of Sanskrit Drama

JIP 16.4 (1988): 377-4t0.


Bhat, G. K. Appointmmtwith Kakdasa. Ahmedabad: L. D.Institute of
Indology, 1982.
Bhat. Bharata Nalya-Manjan: Bhnrata on thzThzory and pradice of Dramn
A selection from the Niin Sanskritwith English tra;slarion,
notes, and introduction. poona: BORI, lg7b.
Bhat. Natva-Mafi.jati-saurabha: sanskrit Dramatic Theory. Selections in
Sanskrit From post-NS writers on drama with fninsfr notes and
introduction. Poona: BORI, lg8l.
Bhat Prefacc to lulrcchakatiko^Ahmedabad: New Order Book Co., 19b3.
Bhat. ThzVid,usaka. Ahmedabad: New Order Book Co., 19b9.
Bhattacharya, Bisnupada. 'Aesthetic Meaning of Nature-Mode of
Refl ection: Idealism.' Our Hoitage, I b0th Anniversary Volume
(182+1974):32944.
Bloch, Ernst. Gaist dnUtopie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1964.
Bloch. Das Prinzip Holfnuzg. Frankfurt am llfain: Suhrkamp, 1959.
Bose, Mandakran a" fuprnantml Intatm.tion in Tfu 7:oftp6t an"d kkuntata.
Jacobean Drama Studies 99. Salzburg: Institutfur Anglistik and
Amerikanistik, 1980.
Brandon,James R. Asian Thzahe: A study Guidz and.Annotated Biblio-
graphy.No place given: University and College Theatre Associa-
tion, 1979.
Brown, W. Norman. 'The Creative role of the GoddessVic in the Rig
Veda.' In Pratidinarn: Ind,ian, Iranian, and Ind.o-Eu.ropean Studizs
presmted, toF. B.J. furpn, pp. 39192. The Hague: Mouton, 196g.
Byrski, Maria christopher. hnept of an Anci^ent Inl:ian Tfuatre.Delhi:
Munshiram Manoharlal, I 974.
Byrski, Methodalog of tluAnabsis of SarcbitDrama warsaw: Rozprawy
Uniwersitetu Warszawskiego, I 929.
Byrski. 'sanskrit Drama as an Aggregate of Model situations. ln san-
ykrit dramainPafonnance, ed. Baumer andBrand.on (q..v.), pp.
l4l-66.
Carstairs, G. Morris. Tlu Twic*Bom: A Study of a Comru.nity of HigftCaste
Hindus. London: Hogarth press, l9b7.
Charrd, Hafi . Kdkdisa et I' afi poAique fu I' Inde paris: Champion, I 9 I Z.
chari, Y-K sanskrit criticism" Honolulu: university oruawaii, tggo.
christie, Elizabeth. 'Indian philosophers on poetic Imagination
(Pratibha)., JIP 7 (t979) : t53i?07.
Dasgupta, S. N., and S. I( De. A History of Sanskrit Litaature.2nd ed.
calcutta: university of calcutta, 19745. The body of the text is
Bibliography 201

by De, the introduction and 'Editor's Notes' by Dasgupta.


De, S. K. Anciznt Indian Erotics and. Erotic Litqahtre. Calcutta: Firma IL
L. Mukhopadhyay, 1959.
De.' The Bhahtiras asdtraof Bengal Vaiqnavism.' IH QB (1932) : 64&88.
De. A History of Sanskrit Literahne. See Dasgupta and De.
De. Histuy of Sanskrit Poaics. Znd ed. 1960. Rpt. Calcutta: Firma KLM,
1976.
De. Sanskrit Poetia as a Study of Aesth"etic (sic). With notes by Edwin
Gerow. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963.
De. Somz Problzms of Sanskrit Poetics. 1959. Rpt. Calcutta: Firma KLM,
1981.
Devasthali, G. Y . Introduction to thz StudJ of tlu Mrcchakalika. Poona:
Oriental Book House, 1951.
Devasthali. Introd.uaion to thz Shtdy of thz Mudrarah;asa Bombay Keshev
Bhikaji Dhavale, 1948.
Dimock, Edward C.,Jr., et al. Tfu Litcratures of Ind.ia Chicago: Univer-
sity of Chicago,1974.
Dumont Louis. Horno Hioarchia,r. Trans. Mark Sainsbury. Chicago:
University of Chicago, 1970.
Dumont. 'World Renunciation in Indian Religions.' C1S4 (1960):
33$2.
Dyczkowski, Mark S. G. ThzDoctriw of Vbration Albany: SUNY, 1987.
Frank, Manfred. What Is NeoshucturalismTTrans. Sabine Wilke and
Richard Gray. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1989.
Freud, Sigmund. Beynd thc Plzasure Principle- 1920. Trans. James
Strachey. Standard (English) Edition. SE Vol. 18, pp. 764. Rpr
London: Hogarth, 1986.
Freud. Gailuatian and lts Dismnbnts. 193O. Trans. James Strachey.,SO.
Vol. 21. pp.62-145. Rpt. London: Hogarth, 1986.
Freud. TIuEgo andtfu Id 1923. Trans.James Strachey. SE Vol. 19, pp.
1266. Rpt. London: Hogarth, 1986.
Freud. hup Psycholng aniltlwAnalysi^s of tluEgo.l92l. Trans.James
Strachey. SE. vol. 18, pp.69-143. Rpt. London: Hogarth, lg86
Freud. 'On Narcissism: An lntroduction.' 1914. Trans.James Strachey.
SD. vol. 14, pp. 7Y102. Rpt. London: Hogarth, 1986.
Freud. Totan an^dTaboo. 1913. Trans.James Strachey. SE Vol. 13, pp.
l-161. Rpt. London: Hogarth, 1986.
Frye, Northrop. Anatom.y of C/liticisn. Princeton: Princeton UP, lgb7.
Frye. Tlu &atlar Soiphnv: A Stutly of thz Struaun of Romanca Cambridge
MA: HarvarduP, 1976.
202 TIU Play World' of Sansbit Drama

Gerow, Edruin. A Glossary of Ind.ian Figurc of $a&^ The Hague: Mouton,


197r.
Gerow. Indian Poetics. HIL 5.3 Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1977.
Gerow. 'Plot Structure and the Developmen t of Rasatnthe Sakuntala-,
JA}S 9s.4 (1979) : 559-72; 1 00.3 (1980) : 267-82.
Ghosal, S. N. Thc Inception of thc Sanskrit Drama- Calcutta: Calcutta Book
House, 1977.
Ghose, Sri Aurobin do. Kalidasa. Calcutta: Arya Sahiq'a, I 929-
Gnofi, Raniero. Ttw Aathztic Experimce Aecordi.ng to Abhinavagupta 2nd
rev. ed. Varanasi: Chowkhamba, 1968. Text and trans-, with
introduction and notes, of AG's commentary on the
rasarispattixt'tra of Ndly asatra 6.
Goldman, Robert P.'Fathers, Sons and Gurus: Oedipal Conflict in the
Sanskrit Epics.' JIP 6 (1978): 325-92.
Goldman. 'Matricide, Renunciation, and Compensation in the leg-
ends of Two Warrior-Heroes of the Sanskrit Epics.' Ind'ologica
Taurinznsia 10 (1982): l17-31.
Goldman. 'Mortal Man and Immortal Woman: An Interpretation of
Three Akhyana Hymns of the $.gveda,' JOI 18.4 ( I 969) : 27 T303.
Gonda, Jan. Ancicnt Intlian Kingship from thz fuIigious Point of viatt'
Leiden: E. J. Brill. 1969.
Gonda. 'Ascetics and Courtesarrs.' Brahmat)idYaz\ (1961): 78-102-
Gonda. 'Zur Frage nach dem Urasprung undWesen des indischen
Dramas.' AOlg (1943): 329453.Rpt &lzad Sndies- Leiden: E'
J. Brill, 1975.
Goodwin, Robert E. 'Aesthetic and Erotic Entrancement in the
Sakuntali..' AO 43.1 (1989): 99-123.
Go odwin.' D ah;iq.y a and Rnsa in the Vkramnv a.fr1a' .,1RAS I 9 8 8, No - 2,
PP.28&304.
Goodwin. 'The Divided World of Sanskrit Drama: Vi3akhadatta's
Mudrardk;asa' ln Tfu Sape of Words : In H onm of Albat S. Cnok Ed.
Peter Baker, Sarah Webster Goodwin, and Gary Handwerk New
York PeterLang, 1991.
Goodwin.' Kalidasa' s Metadrama.' ISAL 23.1 ( I 988) : I 99-36.
Goodwin. 'Paradise in a Prison Cell: The Yaugandhariyaqa Plays of
Bhasa.' ;R S Series 3, 3.I (1993): 53-76.
Goodwin.'The Playworld of Sanskrit Poetry: Model Sahtntali-'ln Gd's
PIay: Lilain SouthAsi.a, edd. William S. Sax andJohn Carman.
NewYork Oxford UP, 1994.
Goodwin. Review of Ratnahara's Haravijaya: An Introdudi.on to tlu San-
Bibkograplry Z0g

skrit CourtEpia by David Smith.../AOS 110.2 (1990): 27476.


Goodwin. Review of Sanskrit Criticism, byV. K Chari. IAOSlll.z
(1991):593-96.
Gupta, Chandra Bhan. The Ind:ian Tltmtre Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass,
1954.
Hart, George L. Thz Pomrs of Anciutt TarniL Berkeley: University of
California, 1975.
Hartmann, Gerda. Beitftige dur C,eschichtc dq Gittin Laksmi. Diss. Kiel,
1932.
Heesterman,J. C. Tfu Innn Canflict ofTrad,it:ion: Essays in Indian Rinal
Kingfuip, and. Socizty. Delhi: Oxford UP, 1985. (Also published by
the University of Chicago.)
Herder, Johann, Gottfired.'Ueber ein rhorgenlindisches Drama.'
I Sakunnla] In &imtkdw We*2, ed. B. Suphan. Vol. I 6, pp. 841 04.
Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1967.
Hillebrandt, Alfred. fna' aU ln|ang des ind.ischat. Draaras. Munchen:
Koniglich-Bayerishe Akademie der Wissenschaften, I 9 I 4.
Hiltebeire l, ltlf . Thz Ritual of Battlz. Irhaca: Cornell Up, 1976.
Hiriyanna, M. Ad E.poiznce- 1954. Rpt. Mysore; Kavyalaya, 1978.
Ingalls, Daniel H. H.'Anandavar dhana' s D a.Estaha.' IAO S I 0 -4 ( I 989 ):
56675.
Ingalls. 'General Introduction .'In AnAnth.olng of Sanskrit C-oun Poary:
Vdyakara's Subhasitaratnaho,f4.pp. l-53. See S. V. Vidyakara.
Ingalls. 'Kilidasa and the Attitudes of the Golden Age .'JfAOS 96.1
(1976): l5-26.
Ingalls. 'Words for Beauty in Classical Sanskrit Poetry.' It Ind.ological
Studies in Honm of W. Nonnan Broum, ed. Ernest Bender, pp.
87-107.AOS 47. New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1962.
Jakobson, Roman. 'Linguistics and Poetics.' 1958. In Shuchtralislfwt.
Marxto LeviStra:u,ss, ed. RichardT. andFernande M. de George,
pp.85-122. Garden City: Anchor Doubleday, 1972.
Jagirdar, R.Y. Drama in Sanskrit Litaature. lg47.2nd ed. Bombay:
Popular Prakashan, 1967.
Jauss, Hans Robert. AestlnicExpaiatec antl Literary Hameneutirs. Trans.
Michael Shaw. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1982.
Jhala, G. C. Kdlid.asa: A Srzdy. Bombay: padma publications,lg4g.
Kaka.r, Sudhir. Tfu Innq Wodd.: A Psydn-anatytic Study of Chililhood. and
in Ind.ia.2nd rev. ed. Delhi: Oxford Up, lg8l.
Soci.ety
Kane, P. Y. History ofDhamasastrasvols.2ndrev. ed. poona: BORI,
t96&77.
Thz PlayWorld. of SansbitDrama

l{zne. History of Sanshrit Poetics.4th ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass,


1971.
Karmarkar, R.D. KAkil^a. Dharwar: Karnatak University, 1960'
Kavi, M. Ramakrishna. See Ramakrishna'
Kaviraj, Gopinath. 'The Doctrine of Pratibhd..' ln Aspects of Indian
ThuugfutBurdwan, 1966.
Kcirh, A ril. g.oi.dut e. AHistmy of sarukritlitaahne.London: o:dord
Up, 1920.
Keith. itu San"shtt nrama. London: OxforC UP, 1924'
Kinsley, David. Hinitu God.dzsses: visions of tfu Divine Fnni'nine in thz

ii"A" na$i^u Trad'itinn-Berkeley University orCdifolil


^tel!
Konow, Sten. Ois;naxcfuDramaBerlin; Walter de Gruyter,1920' Thz

Ind'ianDrama.Trans.S.N.Ghosal'Calcutta:GeneralPrinters
and Publishers, 1969.
Kosambi,D.D.'Introduction.'lnTfusubhasita'ratnako;aCompiledby
V tty ak^ara See s.v. VidYakara
Krishnarnachariar, M. Histuy of classi.cal sanskrit Litzraatre. 1937
.3rd
ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1974'
Krishnamoorthy, K Kolitti.sa.NewYork Twayne, 1972' -- ^
Krishnamoorthy. 'The Sanskrit Conception of a Poe t'' ln Essays
in
sansfui.t Liinary &itici.srypp. I 67A6. Dharwar: Karnatak univer-
sity, 1974.
Kuiper, i. S.J. Vantna and'Vdil;aha: On tfu Oigi'n of tlu San'&rit Dra'ma^
' Amsterldam: North HollandPublishing Company, 1979'
Sym-
Kulshreshtha, R. B. 'Svapnand.saaal'afia AStudy in Mythological
bolism. WJB (1970): 109-15'
Kulshreshth a., iaapnaadsavadattaA Study in the subconscious.' wJ6
(1967): 63-70.
Kunharr R{a, C. Ki.Iid^dsa. A CwInnaI Stuly.Waltair: Andhra University,
1956.
Kunjunni Raja, K IntlianTfumics of Meaning' 2nd ed' Madras: Adyar
Library,1969.
Lacombe, Otivier. L'Absoht' selon lzVd'anta Annales de Mus6e Guimet
49. Paris, 1937-
Larson, Gerald J. 'The Aesthetic (rasdnada) and the Religious
(brahmon)Adn) in Abhinavagupta's Ikshmir Stivitm'' PEW 26'4
(1976):37r-87.
L6vi, Sylvain . Iz thidtre initim- 1890. RpL Paris: College de France'
1963.
Lienhard, Siegfried. A History of classical Poetry: sanskrit-Pak-Prakrit-
Bibkograplry 205

HIL 3.1. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1984.


Lingat, Roberl Tfu ClassicalLaw of Ind.ia.1967. Trans.J. Duncan M.
Derrett. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973.
Liithi, Ma:r.
Once upon a Timc : On tfu Nature of Fauy Talzs. 197 0. Trans.
Lee Chadeayne. Bloomington: lndiana UP, 1976.
Manikar, T. G. Kakd.asa, His Art and Thought. Poona: Deshmukh
Prakashan, 1962.
Mainkar. fhz fhery of thc Sarpd.his anil Sar.nd,lryangas. Delhi: Ajanta I 978 .
Madan, T. N. Non-Rmunciatim.: Therncs and Intaprdation s of Hind,u Cuknz
Delhi: Oxford UP, 1987.
Madan. Way of Life: King, Household,u, Renounc,er. Essays in honour of
Louis Dumont. Ed. T. N. Madan. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing
House, 1982.
Majumdar, R C.,A D. Pusalker, andA. K Majumdar,edd. TfuAgeof
Imperialunity. IH.CIP 2.] 5th ed. Bombay: Bhar-atiyaVidya, 1980.
M4jumdar, Pusalker, and M4jumdar. Tfu ClnssicalAga HCIP 3. 4th ed.
Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya, I 988.
Mankad, D.R. TIuTypa of SanskritDrama. Karachi: Urmi Prakashan,
1936.
Marcuse, Herbert. Eros and Civikzation. New York Random House
1955.
Masson,J. L. and M. V. Patwardhan. Aathctic Rapnre: Thz RnsAdlryaya
of thz Nagyasastra.2vols. Poona: Deccan College Postgraduate
and Research Institute , 1970. Trans. and Commentary of
Nalyatastrat, based on the Abhinaaabharatt
Masson and Patwardh Sontu ota and. Abhinaaagupta's Philnsophy of
^rr.
Aesthetia. BOS 9. Poona: BORI, 1969.
Morgenstierne, Georg. Ubn das Verhtiltnis zttisehen Can"td,atta und.
Mycchakayika. Halle, I 920.
Miller, Barbara Stoler. 'Kilidasa's World and His Plays.' In Tluatu of
Memory, ed. Miller, pp. 3-41. NewYork: ColumbiaUP, 1984.
Narang, Satya Pal. Kalid.dsa Bibliogra.plA. New Delhi: Heritage, 1976.
Nobel,J. ThcFoundations of Inilian Poetry. Calcutta: R. N. Seal 1925.
O' Flaherty, Wendy Doniger. Hinnu A\ths. Harmondsworth: Penguin,
1975.
O' Flaherty. Siva: Thz Erotic Asutic. New York Oxford UP, 1981. =
Asceticism and Eroticism in thc Mytlnlag of Siaa. London: Oxford,
1973.
Pandey, Kanti Chandra Abhinaaagupta: An Historical arul Philosophieal
Stud). 2nd ed. Varanasi: Chowkhamba, I 963.
206 T'h, PloyWorld' of SansbitDrama

Parrdey. Indian Aesthctia. Znd ed. Varanasi: Chowkhamba, 1959.


Pargiter, F . E. Thz Purana Text of tfu Dynastizs of tfu Kali Age- London:
OxfordUP.l9l3.
Parikh, J. T. Thi Vd'u;aka: Tfuory and Practiu. Surau Shri Chunilal
Gandhi, 1953.
Pusalker, A. D, Bhasa: A Study. 1940. 2nd ed. Delhi: Mushiram
Manoharlal, 1968.
Raghavan, V. Bhoja's Smgara Prakaia 3rd rev. ed. Madras: Punawasu,
1978.
Raghavan. Loue in tfu Pouns and' Ptays of Kd.kd'd'sa. Bangalore: Indian
Institute of Culture, 1955.
Raghav-an. Ttw fuIudrffikasahaihn, of Mahadn a Znd rev. ed- Rpr Tanjore:
Sarasvati Mahal LibrarY, l97l
Raghavan. TIu Numbo of Rasas. Srdrev. ed. Madras: Adyar Library,
1s75.
.sanskrit Drama in Performance.' In Sanskrit Drama in
Raghavan.
Perfuman'ce,ed. Baumer and Brandon, PP. $44' See s'v' Baumer,
Rachel.
Raghavarr. Stud:ies on Somz Cancepts of tfu Alar.nkara Satt a' Rev' ed' Ma-
dras: Adyar Library, 1973.
Rajan, Chandra. 'Introduction.' In Kd.Iidasa: Thz Loom of Tirne'
Harmondsworth: Penguin, I 990.
Rakesagupta (sic) . Srrdrel i n Nayak*NaykoBhzda^ AJigaxh: Granthal"an,
1967.
Ramakrishtra Kavi, M. BharatakoSa: ADaionary of TechnicalTerms with
Def.nitions Coltzcted from thz Wofis on Music and' Drarnaturg by
Biarata an"d Ahns.2nd ed. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal,
1983. (Sanskrit without trans.)
Ramanujan, A. K 'The Indian Oedipus.' ln Ind:ian Litnaht're, ed'
Arabinda Poddar, pp. 127'37. Simla: Indian Institute of Ad-
vanced Study ,1972.
Rao, K L. Seshagiri. Thzconceptof *oAaana Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass,
1974.
Raychaudhuri, Hemchandra, PokticalHittoty of Ancim.t Intlia- 6th ed'
Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1953.
Renou, Louis. 'La recherche sur le thEire indien depuis 1890.' In
Sylvain Levd., Iz thidtre indi.ur, pp. ix-xxxii. (English trans- 'Re'
search on the Indian theatre since l89O.'SamsbtaRangaJumal
4 [966]: l-25.)
Renou.'Sur la structure du kiqa.' JA247 (1959): l-l 13.
Bibliograplry 207

Rhys Davids, 'f. W. Buddhist Inilia. New York G. p. putnam, 1903.


Rosenfield,John M. TluDynasticArts of tlu lQuhans. Berkeley: univer-
sity of California, 1967.
Ruben, Walter. Kaliddsa: Thz Human Meaning of His Worfu. Trans.Joan
Becker. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, I 957.
Ruben.' The Mre ehakafrha, rts Folkloric and political Interpretation.'
Orims I (1948):7+104.
Ruben. Der Sinn Des Dramas 'Das Siegel und. Rd,ksasa'. Berlin:
Akademie-Verlag, I 956.
Sanderson, Aleis. 'Purity and Power among the Brahmans of Kash-
mir.' In Tfu Catzgmy of thz Pasory ed. M. Carrithers et al., pp. l9G
216. Cambridge: Cambridge Up, 1985.
Sarrderson. 'Trika S"ivi.m.' ln Thz Eicyclopedia of Rzligion, ed. Mircea
Eliade et al., vol. 13, pp. lFl6. New York: Macmillan, 1987.
Sankaran, A. Some Aspeds of Iituary &iticis/n in Sanskrit. Nternate title:
Tltz Tfuorht of Rnsa and. Dlwani. 1929. 2nd ed. Madras: University
ofMadras, 1973.
Sarma, Dimbeswar. Kaliddsa: An Intnputat:iaeStzdl. Diss. University of
Calcutta. Published by author. Distributed by Chowkhamba.
1968.
Sastri, Gaurinath. Thc Philosophl of Word, and Meaning: Somc Indian
Approachcs ruith Special Rzfermces to the Philosoplay of Bhartrhari.
Calcutta: Sanskrit College, I959.
Scheftelowitz, lsidor. Diz Apowhm do figrdo I 90G. Rpr Hildesheim:
Georg Olms, 1966.
Schiller, Friedrich Yon. Naiae and Smtirnmtal Poe\. l7gtg6. Trans.
with Introduction and notes byJulius A. Elias. Rpt. New york:
Ungar, 1975.
Schokker, G. H. 'Sudraka, theAuthor of the Original Cdrud.atta., ln
Praridinarn: In"dian, Iranian and I'hdaEutpean. Studics hwentd toF.
B.J. ItuipA ed.J. C. Heestrman etal., pp. b8b400. The Hague:
Mouton, 1968.
Schuyler, Montgomery . Bibliography of Sansbit Drama 1906. Rpr New
York AMS Press, 1965.
Sharma, Chandradhar. Ind,ian Philosoph,y: A Citicat Study. New york:
Barnes and Noble, 1962.
Shastri, Surendra Nath. zaus and Practice of sanskrit Drama. vol. l.
Varanasi: Chowkhamba, 1961.
Shekhar, Indu. SaruftntDrama: Ix Oi$n andDeclita Leiden: E.J. Brill,
1960.
208 Thz PlayWmld' of SanskritDrama

silburn, Lilian. IQ.tndatira: Enag of thzDeplfts. Trans.Jacques Gontier.


Albany: SUNY, 1988.
,Date of the Mahnbha"l)amdNa.DaSdstra.'In Sircar, studizs
Sircar, D. C.
in tfu Yugapuroq'a and, Otha Texts, pp' 17'23' Delhi: Oriental
Publishers, 1974.
smith, David. Ratndkara's Haruvi.jaya: An Introiluction to the sanskrit
Court Epi.c. Delhi: Oxford UP, 1985'
Spratg P. Hiniht canlture antlPmonalif. Bombay: Manaktalas, 1966.,
t'.gor., Rabindranarh.'sakuntala lts Inner Mearring.' Trans.Jad'nath
Sarkar. In Sakuntala, trans. l,aurence Binyon and K N' Dasgupta'
London: Macmillan, 1920-
.Das indische Theater.' In Fmtijstkcfus Th,eatn, ed. H.
Thieme, Paul.
Kindermann, PP. 2G120. Stuttgaru A' Kriiner, 1966'
Upadhyaya, B. S. Ind,ia in Kdlidd'sa.Allahabad: Kitabistan' 1947'
.,"" g"it;.n, J. A. B.'The Classical Drama.' In thz Litnaht'res of Intlia,
ed. E. C. Dimock,Jr., etal', pp' 81-ll4' Chicago: University
of
Chicago Press, 1974.
van Buitenen. 'Dharma and Moksa'' PEW 7 (1954): 3Y4O'
Vatsyayarr, Ibpila' in l;itsaturc antl tfuAtts New
Classical Ind'ian Dance
' 1968'
Delhi: Sangeet NatakAkademi,
Venkatachalam, V. Bhasa. New Delhi: Sahiqra Akademi, I 986'
Warder,A.KInitianKfuryaLitnature'6vols'todate'Delhi:Motilal
Banarsidass, 1972-92'
Wells, Henry W. TIv Classicat Drama of India London: Asia
Publishing
House, 1963.
Wilson, H. H. Setzd Specimms of thz Thzahe of tfu Hin'd'ug 2vol$ Calcutta'
182G27.2nd ed. London, 1835'
Zvelebil, KamilV. Litn*y Convmti'onsinAkamPoetry' Madras: InsL
of
Asian Studies, 1986.
Index

abhidha 182-3 anunaya 74-5


Abhinavabhavagupta x, xii, 1, 7- arthax, xv, xix, 2,91,97,100-03,
8, 12, 14-6, r8-9, 2r, 36, 86, 131-2, 135-6, 150, 170-73,176
125, 131, 143, 158, 16r, r82, Arthasastra ll7
r845 afihairigara 143
abhinaya f7, 93, 185 arthic idrelligence 102, 116-24
Abhisdkaa afi.citaka 109, ll2 arthic terminology of drama l0l,
Adaval, Niti 84, 159 108, 123, 128
aesthetic rapture see' rasdsttdda' ascetic (see also 'sage,' 'tapas) si
adbhuta2l,4l,46-7,54 asceticism (see also 'tapas,'
aesthetic capacity see' sahyd,oyaht a' 'renunciation') 4,7
aesthetical mysticism G7 dirama 2&30, 37-8, 47-9,54
aggressive sexuality 31, 4?-8 Afuaghoqa xxi, 9, 57
Agnimitra 72, 77, 89-104 passim dtmakaryatd 128, 135-6
Aihole inscription 57 Atman/dtmen 4, 6
Aja r45 Aurobindo Ghose, Sri 59
dlarnbana vibhara l8l Aurva 117
alzmkara xii, xviii, 34,39,56, 80- AuSinari 67-83 passim
81, 86, 146, 182-3 author-figure 97, ll7, 12T4, 128,
alnr.nkdra d,haani 183 150
Alexander *re Great ll3 authorial intelligence xd, ll7-24
Altekar, A.S. 22 authority (see also 'power') xvi,
Amaravati sculpture 23 53, r12, 120-24, 140, 154
Amaruiataka xtii autonomy 9, I I
anamnesis 6l avasthd, xx
Anandavardhana xix, l0-11, 14, avoidance of conscious issues 43,
18-20, 4r, 55, 81, 92,125,145, 45, 55,122-4
150, r66, t74, t82-5 awakening 347
anger see 'krodha,' 'tapas'
antinomian view of dharma 176 bad fate 32, 62,64
anubhdva 58,99, f79{1, 183 bahumana 70, 73, 76, 78
210 The Playworld. of Sanskrit Drama

Birra 155 caqfr 68,70, 104


Barthes, Roland xxi Candragrrpta Maurya I 12-24 p assint
Baumer, Bettina 15, 16 carnivalesque 176
'beautiful soul' 146 Carstairs, G. Morris 62
beautiful woman as symbol of Carudatta xii-xiii, l3l, 156, l6f ,
kaaya (see also 'Radiant 165-77 passim
Female', 'Sri') ll-12, 30 catharsis ll3
bee-motif in Sahrntotd 27, 29, 3l- Chand, Hari 57
3, 36 Charuloga Upaniaad 4-5
betrayal 42-6 Chari, V.K 163
Bhaduri, Nrisinha 160 charismatic hero xvi
bhakti xtti, 3, 40, 85, 115-6, 171 childlike hero 42, 46, 51, 55, 57,
bhakti aesthetics 138-9, l4l 82,134,136, 139
Bhamaha 19, 182, 184 Christie, Elizabeth l9
bhar.ta ><x, xxii, 174 citrakatya 176
Bharata xix concordance of heart: see
Bharqhari 19 'hrtlayasaTrwd^tla'
Bhisa x, xiv, xviii, xxi, 13, 105, connoisseur, hero as 94
118, 131, 158, 166, 173 cosmic artist I
Bhat, G.K. xx, 59, 105, 129 cosmic drama 6, l7
Bhagta Lollala 182 cosmic process xxi
Bhatta Nirayar,ra 6 Coulson, Michael ll7, 125
Bhalta Niyaka 8, 10, 17, 18, 20, court poetry xvii
21, t25,182-5 courtly ethos ix-x, xii-xiii, xv, 3,
Bhatta Santuta t82 5, t+5,55, 68, 72-9,89-90, r42-
Bhatta Tauta 18, 19, 143 7, 165-6
Bhattacharya, Bishnupada 106 criticism of Sanskrit drama ix-x,
bhdaa xi-xli, xx, 58, 80, 93, ll2, x-xv, xvii
r81-2 curse 28, 32, 36, 45, 46-7, 49,
Bhavabhtrti xvii, 166 52,64
bhduakataa 183
bhdaayitri pratibhd f9, 162 daiaa lO2-Z
bhaydnaka 2l daiviki siddhi xi-xiii, 27, 38, 58
bhibatsa 54 Dakqa 48
bhojakataa 183 dafuiq.a 69, 72-3
Bloch, Ernst 35, 6l dafui4.ya 67 -8, 7 l-3, 7 5-80, 90, 142,
Brdhmaq.as xxi 146
Brahmasutra 3 Damodaragupta xiii, 161
brahrndnada 8, 18 dancedrama 105-6
Byhaddra4.y aka Upani; ad 4-5 Daldin 19,106, 182, f84-5
Byrski, M. Christopher xiv, 22 ilr ac aru.tl atta | 7 3
D ari
DaSanrpaka xxii, 9, 85
cam.atkdra G7, 12, 11 , 22 darya 138-9
Ciqrakya ll2-24 passirn, 135, 137, De, S.K. xiv, xx, 15, 85, 106, 160,
r62 165
Ind,ex 2rr
death-drive xvi, 7, 128 emotion (see also 'bhdua,' 'rasa)
deer in Sakuntali2l,29, 4l xv-xvi, xviii, 86, ll2, 120-24,
dtja au 33-5, 4l r37- 42
Derrida, Jacques 20 entrancemenr 2&30, 33-9
desire: see 'kdma,' 'eros' epistemological issues 35-6, 42,
Deutsch, Sanna 65 148
Devasthali, G.V. 125 eros (see also 'kdma,' 'irigara')
Dnicandragupta ll2 xv-xvi, 4, 35, 45-6, 137
Dhanamjaya 9 erotic sensibility (syhgAritaa) 166
Dhanika l8 ethical dimension 142, 147-8,153
Dhirini 69, 89-104 passim Everyman xv, 35, 37, 42,6f , f 40,
dhanna ix-x, xiv-xvi, xu, 2, 28, 34, r77
42, 44, 4.7, 5t,53, 65, 120- fairy tale 30,32, 42,62, 173
24,132,135, 150, 167-8, 170, fate (see zlso'daiva,''vidhi) 32,
t76 62,64,65, 102, llG7, ll8, 119,
dhiral.alitanqaka 30, 59,ll2, 131, l2l-2,127 , 136-7 , lM,l54, 15$
r58, 174 60
tlhirapraSd.nta ndyaka 158, 174 father-figure 26, 32, 38, 4G57, 122,
dhirodd.tta ndyaka 59, 158, 174 135, 139
dhiroddhata ndyaka 174 feeling: see 'emotion'
dhrsta 72-3 Fellini 176
Dhundhirnia 114 fertility magic of heroine 100
dhaani 13, 33,56, 68, 70,73,92, fire-symbolism in Sakuntali 48-9,
146, t83-4 52-3,63,64
disgust: see bhibatsa forgetfulness 27-8, 32-7, 50-51
displaced sahydaya 166 formalism 86
double (of hero) 172,177 Frank, Manfred 125
drama defined in Mdluikd.gninitra Freud/Freudian 61,63, 123, 128,
90 140, 159, 176
dramaturgy (see also 'author- friendship (see also 'bhakti,'
figure') xiv, 101, 108,123,128 'sakhga) xvi, 85, 116
draaana 12,21 Frye, Northrop 62, 160
dream 148-9
dysyakaqax, 185 Ganapati Sastri, T. l3l, 158
Duhsanta 28-56 passim,89, f 2f gdndhanta marriage 23, 50, 59
Dumont, Louis 126 garden-world (see also'paradise')
Durvisas 28, 32, 46, 50-52, 14, 39, 57, t3+5, t4r-2
tr8,124 Gauri 85
duty: see 'dharma' generalisation : see sd.dh.dra:qtiharann.
Dvaipiyana 136, 138 Gerow, Edwin xiv-xv, 25, 62, 63,
Dyczkowski, Mark 16 65, 96, lo7
Gnoli, Raniero 16, 17,21,86, 161
Edenic world: see' krtayuga' Ghosh, Manmohan 185
Eliot, T.S. 185 Godabole, N.R. 58
212 The Playwoild, of Sanskrit Drama

Golden Age: see krtayuga incest-pattern in Sakuntati 64


Golden,A.(oka 92, 95-6, 100, 107 indifference: see uddsina
Goldman, Robert P. 84 Indra 50
Gonda, Jan 22, 174 Ingalls, Daniel H.H. x, 57, 84, 86,
gogfDi xiii, 79, 174 87, 105, 106
Greek tragedy 68 . intelligence xvi, xviii, ll2, ll9-
guilt 44, 6l 24,135, 137-40
gu1rain aesthetics: xviii, 34, 182; Irivatr 72-3, 89-104 passim
as moral term: 167, 170-71 irony xvi
Gu4acandra 131, 158 livara 4
gunt 120, l2l
Jauss, Hans Robert xx
Harqa xxi, 70, 84, 104 Jha, Ganganatha 19
Hart, George 59 Jha, Ramanath 58
Hartmann, Gerda 22 Jones, Sir William 25,57
hdsya 94 Junagadh inscription 22
hedonism 28, 39
Heesterman, l.C. 126-7 Kaikeyi 44
helper-figure 140 Kakar, Sudhir 62, 63, 159
henogyny 86, f45 Kale, M.R. 125
hermitage: see dirama Kalidisa xvii, xxi, 21,25,57,72,
hero: see 'niyaka' 89, 1045, ll8, l3l, 174,185
heroine: see 'nd.yika' h,aliyuga 128
hidden observer 4l-6, 74 hama tx-x, xiv-xv, xix, 2, 18, 49,
Hillebrandt, Alfred 125 53, 59, l3t-2,135, r50, 176
Hiltebeitel, Nt 22 Kamadeva 60, 64
Hiriyanna, M. 106 h,amasyhgdra 143
Homeric gods I Kamasutraxi-xiii, 59, 60, I 61, I 66,
hydayasamaaila xi, xviii, ll3, 143, t74
16f-7, r7r Kane, P.V. xix, 65
hrdayasamaad,in xi Ibnjilal, D.K 58
human effort: see paun^t;a Kanva 32, 44,50,52,54
human meaning of kauya 9 karayitn pratibha 19, f50, 162
hanna 2
idealisation of emotion: xvi; of Kanl.abhdra 150
kduya in criticism: xvii hant4.a ix, 41, 61,75, 146
identifi cation : see' tanmayibhaaana' harya 135
ignorance 6, 145-7, 153 Kashmiri Saivism 2, G8, 10
illusion 27 -8, 35-7 , 76, f f 6, I 19, hatha literatttre 165, 17 4
132, 147-50 Kaviraj, Gopinath 19
imaginative character of eros 39 hayaa symbolized in
immanence l5 Molauikagnimitra 92-3
impotence 49-51, 147, 1534, 172- Kaayaprakdia l0
3 hi.vlasat.nsdra (see also'play,rrorld' )
impoverishment of affect 7-9, 33 xv, ll, 92, 184
Index 213

Keith, A.B. xx, xxii, 87, 129, 173 Milavika 69, 72, 75, 80, 89-109
king as symbol 136 passim
Kinsley, David 22 xxii, 22, 23,
M alno ikd gnimitr a xv ii,
knowledge 3-4,7, 11 68-9, 72,75, 89-109, 160
Kosambi, D.D. l5l,
162 Mammata 10-12, 14,20, 150
Krishnamacharier, M. 57, 173 mdnu;i sidtlhi xi, 58
Krishnamoorthy, K. f9 Marcuse, Herbert 6l
hrodhax, 49,53, 64,114-5, 123'4 Minca 46, 49-50, 52, 54, Ll8, 124
KrC+a 3, f36, 157 Masson and Pawardhan xii, 17,
kfiayuga 25,37,39, 55 20,2t,22,160
fuatria 177 materiality of signilier 20, 40
KsemaraJa b, / maternal aspect of heroine (see
Kuiper, F.BJ. 22,84, 161 also 'maternal cosmos') 42,169
hutdJaga t maternal cosmos 42, 55
Kumarasambhava 57 rnayd (see also 'illusion'\ 4, 6, 42
Kunhan Raja, C' 59 merit: see gupa
Kuntaka 8l Miller, Barbara Stoler xiv, 22, 107
Kullanim.ata xiii, 144 minister figure as Paradox 119
minister's lack of erotic dimension
Lacan Jacques 40, 122 139
Lacombe, Olivier 15, l8 mirror 36
laghukauya 57 mithuna 5, 14, 23, 9l
82, 185
Iafua:r.ra f mok;axtt, xix, xx-xxi, 2, 5, 8, 113'
Larson, Gerald 18 t76
L6vi, Sylvain xx, xxii, 105, 129 Morgenstierne, Georg 17 4
EIn xvi., l-23, 35, 38, 40-41, 45, Mtrcchaka4ika xii, xviii, :o<ii, 85, 1 31,
47, 55-6, 73, 75, 80-81, 85, 90, 165-77
t32,135, 137,140,142 Mudrardksasaxii, xviii, 22, 85, lll-
Dlimok4a 5, 14 29, 135, 137, 160
Eld,rasa 4, l0 muktaka xiii
limitations of kduya 45, 81, 85-6, Muller, Max 86
122-4, t38 myth: the rasika mYth xv-xvii, 2,
longing 34 25-6, 30, 44, ll3
love (see zlso 'kd,ma,' 'SYngara)
9, 82-3, 131 nagarika x, xii-xiii, xviii, 69, 78,
loyalty: see'bhakti' 142-3,161,16G8, r74
Luthi, Max 160 Nala 43-4
Nandas 5, ll'L5
madhurya 138-9 narcissism 8,40-41
Mahabhdrata ll7 na{aka xix, xxi, xxii, 89
mahdkdtya xix,57, 182 nalasutra xix
MaheSvarananda l6 ndlika 89
Mainkar, T.G. xx, 59, 6l nd.lya xix, xxi
Malatimid'hatta 166 NdPyaid.straxi, xix, xxii, 9, 52,94,
214 The Plnywmld. of Sanskri.t Drama

r04, 179-80, 185 poetic unive rse (see also


nayaka xii-xiii, xv, 3, 9, 13, 30, ' kdtry as alnsara,''playworld' ) xv-
59, 72-3,79-90, t58, t74 xvi, 150, 166
ndyikd. xii-xiii posture (see also'selfdisplay') 55,
nintatta x><i 82
nirvana-principle 140 power xvi, 2, 4654, ll2, ll4, ll7-
Nobel, J. 62, 162 24,140,142, l4l, t'l
prahasana xxii
objective correlative 179 Prajapati ll, 38
obstacles: see'vighna' prakarana xxii, 174
oedipal theme (see also 'incest- pratibhd 6, 18, 19, 39, 150
pattern') 48 Pratijft dy augandhdray arya *viii, f 3,
O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger 63, 64 85, ll8, t3t-42
onanism 7, 40 prayoga 97, l0l, 108
Other 4, 69, 40-41,51, 56 problem-play xviii, ll2
outside world xv-xvi,142, l5+5 prostitute's dharma 168
Purtfravas 67-83 passim
Padmavati 70, 76, 77, ll2, 142- puru,sdrtha (see also 'dharma,'
57 passim, 158, 167 'artha,' 'hima,' 'rnoha) xiv, xix,
Pandey, KC. 16, f7, 2f 176
Panini xix, xxi Pusalker, A.D. f58, 16l,l74
paradise (see also'garden-world')
xvi, 13, 29-30,37,136 Redhe 157
parakaryatd 128, 135, 138 Radiant Female (see also 'Sri')
Para6urama I l7 9, t2-4,26,30, 33, 40,69, 92,
Pargiter, F.E. 105 137, 153, 155
passivityof hero xvi raga 27-9, 69
pathos (see also 'karu4.a') xvi, 41, Raghavabhagta 59
45-6 Raghavan, V. 21,85, 109, 125, 128,
paun"rsa 103, 137 160, 185
pearl-fruit synbol 93 Raghuaarnia 57, 84, 145
performance (see also 'prayoga') Rija6ekhara 19, 158, 162
93-4,97 Rakesagupta 85
Peuonius 176 Raksasa xii, ll2-24 passim, l3l,
phallic symbolism 47-49 137, 158, 162
philistinism 28, 87, 159, 16l Rnma 4&'4
Pischel, Richard 58, 162 Rimacandra l3l, 158
play: see ELa Ramakrishna Kavi, M. 106
playworld (see also 'lila,' Rimanuja 34, 7, 10, 18, 85
'kduyasamsdra) xv-xvi, xviii, 2, Ramayana 124
4, 8; 10, 26, 38, 40-43,56 rasa ix-xviii, xx,2,6-7, 10-12, 14,
pleasure-principle 4l-2, f 2l, 140 20, 34, 37, 58, 67-8, 73, 7G7,
poet as Prajapati fO-ll, 18, 19 80-81, 85, 86, 91, 93, 97, tO7,
poet's position 123, 15l rt2-3, 122, 146, t7t,179-85
poetic cultivation: see'ayutpatti' rasa dhaani 183
Inilzx 215

rosaonasa
h6
I c Sakti 6,7,14,18,19
rasd.ndd,a xii, xiv, 7-8, f 0, l2-3, Sakuntali ix , 25 , 2U56 passin" 7 0 ,
r8, 20, 2f.7,34,39, 95, 99 75, 89
rasaaat 182 Sakuntali x, xiv, xvii, 14,21,25-
rasika: see sahyd'aya 65, 70, 80, 105, ll8, l2l, 124,
Raychaudhuri, Hemachandra 57 153; recensions and verse-
reality as theme 132, 147-9 numbering: 58
reality-principle 41, 149 sarnbhoga x, 70,90
real-life concerns ix-x, 2 saqud.ra 5-7, 33, ll3
recollection: see srnara?a sar.nskdra 17
remorse (anutapa') 53 Sanchi sculpture 23
renunciation (see also 'tapas) xvi, Sanderson, Alexis 15, 16
7, tl6, 126, r38, r54 sand,hi-sandhyaiga scheme xiv, xx
replaced woman 33, 56, 68 Sandrocottus 113
f;gued,axxi, 19 Sankara 3-4, 6, 8, 17,18,56, 85
Rhys Davids, T.W. 22 Sankara (commentator on
ring in Sakuntald': 34; in Sakuntob) 59
M dlattihd gnimitra:. I l -3 Sanskrit 68
r,ti 34, 146, 182 ianta 138-9, 185
ritual,/ritualism (see also sdnuhroSa (see also 'sahTday) 143-
'sacrifice') 65,79, 175 4, 159, 166
romance (see also'fairy tale') 140, Saradatanaya l3l
160 Sarma, Dimbeswar 6l
Rosenfield, John M. 22 Sarvinanda 16l
fftusa4hara 57 iagha 72-3, 152
Ruben, Walter 84, 117,119, 125 Sati 48
Rudrala 182 sdttvikabhdaa 58, I 79-81
Ripagosvimin 138.. scaPegoar 32, 5l
Scheftelowitz, Isidor 22
sacrifi.ce (see also 'yajma) xxi, 48, Schokker, G.H. 174
52-3 self-display 41, 43-5, 55, 74, 77-8,
s a ilh d.r aryik ar aqr a 18 4 82
Sagaranandin 131, 158 self-interesu see dtmak'd'ryatd
sage (see also 'father-figure,' sentimentalism xiv, xvi-xvii, 45,
'intelligence,' 'tapas) xvi, xxi, il3, n9-24
tt7-8, t22,127 Shastri, S.N. xx, 129, 175
sahrdala x-xvii, xx, 2,8,9-13,21, Shekhar, Indu 57
22, 26, 29, 3+9, 45, 74, 78-9, siddhixi-xi\, xvii, 26, 51, 58, 98-
90, ll3, 122-4, 132, 137, 140- l0l, 108, 136, 150, 160
4t, t43-5, 149-50, 1546, 165- Silburn Lillian 16
73, 174, r83 Sircar, D.C. 57
salqdayatua 39, 78, 145 sisterly affection 143, 148
Sakara as parody of ndgarikal6T Sitn 43
sdkhya 138-9 Siva 7, f8, 47-8, 54, ll8, 128
216 The Playworld of Sanskrit Drarna

Siaasutra 6 Telang, K.T. f25


srnar(nta 34-6, 6l tender-heartedne ss: see
Smith, David xx ' hyd,ay asar.naada,'' s dnukroi a'
snake 91, 99, 103-4, 148 Thieme, Paul xx
snake-rope paradigm 148 tragic perspective 43, 46
sneha: see 'bhakti' transcendence xvi, 2, 8, 15, ll7-
solipsism. 2,8, 14,38-9, 56, 155 8, 120, 122, t54
song in Sakuntali 26-9, 33, 37, 38 transformativ! power of heroine
spanda G.7, 16-7, 40 (see also'Sri') 40
Spratt, P. 62 Trika 3, 16
Sri xvi, 124, 22,23, 25, 29, 33, tro(aka xxii
3948 passim,55-6, 69, 71,82, true being: see 'nabhdla'
9t-2,9+5, 100, 105, 108, 136,
l4l, 150, 153 udasina 145-6
Srngdrarx-x, xiv, 9, 10, 20,21,46, Udayana xii, 13, 70, 76, 77, ll2,
51, 55, 73,94,139,143, t46, ll9, l2l, l3l-57 passim,166-7
166, r70-7r, 182 uddlpa:na dbhaaa l8l
Smgarin ll uncomprehending hero (see also
stages of love 60 'ignorance) 45
Stendhal 159 Upadhyaya, B.S. 57, 105
Stevens, Wallace xv Urubhahga 150
sthayibhdua 179, 181 Urva6i 67-83 passim
strategy (see also 'arthq' 'prayoga) utopian theme/function xviii, 35,
96-9, 136 ll3,142,167, l7l-3
Sudraka xvii, 165, 174 Utpaladeva 18
Sunga period,89
sunstone in Sakuntala 48-9 Vnc 6, 18,19,22
superego 123,154 aaiSya 177
sutradhdra-frgure 96-8, 150 Vilmiki 124
suabhaua 170-72 values reflected in Sanskrit drama
Saapna:uasauadattd x, xii, xviii, 68, ix-xvii
70, 7fJ.7, 80, ll8, l2l, l3l, 142- Vnmana 173
57,166 van Buitenen, J.A.B. 125
sympathetic ge nerosity: see uarya 125
'hyd,ayasatwdda' Vasantaseni 167-73 passim
Visavadatta 70,76, 133-57 passim,
Tagore ix, xiv, 30,42,47,50-51, 167
59, 61, 64, 83 aastu d,haani 183
Tamil poetry 59 Vasugupta 19
tamnayibhaa al- an a xi-xii, xv, | 2-3, vdtsa\a 138-9
17, 2t Vatsyayan, Ibpila 106
tapos ix-x, xv-xvi, xx-xxi, 2, 4, 33, Viayiyana xiii, 174
46-9, 5t-4, 6T4, 83,86, rr7-9, Vedanta 2-4
160 vegetal symbolism 92, 94-6, f00
tejas 49, 52-3, 63 Velankar, H.D. 84
Index 2t7

Venkatachalam, V. 158 wealth f 66, 170-73


aibhdaa 58,99, 179-81, 183 White-Rabbit figure 29
vibration: see'sPand'a' Wild Duck, The 154
aidhi 65, 102 wish-fultilment 15, 35, 140, 142,
Viduqaka 31,33,93, 96-9, 135 150, r72
aighna26, 38, 46, 5l-2, 98-9, 104 withdrawal of heroine 7l
Vikramoru airy a xttii, 67 -87 woman as aesthetic object 26,39'
vipral.ambha x, 61, 71, 90, 1 16, 153 40
rira xiv woman in garden (see also
airya 22, 63 'garden-world,''Sri') 26
Vi6ikhadatta xvii, 109, l1l, 119, wonder: see'adbhuta'
123-4, l3l world literature xvii, xxi
Viqlu 13 Wulff, Donna 18
ViSvimitra 25,50,64
Vi6vanatha 18, 2l Yama ll7,l27
vitaraga ll Yaugandhariyaqa l19, 124, 135-
tyabhcdribhdua 179-81 57 passim, 158
ayafijana 1834 Yogasutra 59
vyutpatti 39
Zvelebil, Kamil V. 59
Warder, A.K. 57