ABHINA¥AGUPTA~S CONCEPTION OF

HUMOUR
Its resonances in Sanskrit Drama, Poetry, Hindu
mythology and spiritual practice

By

'D. Sunt haralingam '

'.

"

qhfSis subY'litt~J l or tk ~ g)~gr~~ 0/

DOCTOR OF PH ILOSOPHY
IN
PHI LOS O P H Y
,

[Jnder tlte Supervision of

PROF. A. K. CH ATTERJEE

DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY
BANARAS HI D UNIVERSITY

..Yay, 1983
Enrolment No. 1153'3
 "'1 ·6 . . . . \..
.. -! #

'"\,~
,

:..," \p v
.> "

..... '"

..­
/' ­

!ar:.~~a.; ;'J:.;' .~ r:.:v~~r·,;i!y#

ABUINAVAGUPTA'S CONCEPTIOU OJ' HttM»ltftl ,~2i.r~ RESONANCES IN

SANSKRIT DRAHA, ilOETR'.(, tUNDU H~THOlaOGY AND
SPIRITUAL PRACTICE

(ABSTRACT)

ThJ.s contribution to the psycholo9Y and :3Ociology of humou.r

• aDd laughter and t.o tha aesthetics of hasYa is primarily conceiwd

of as a stepping-st.one to a total understanding of the function and

significance of the ·yidu,~ who, though the prime focus of haSYa

on t.he Sa..'1skrit st.age, has alwa1s been criticized for not serving

this function aaequ ate ly • His st:.ereotyped traits in all the

Classical play s and the inexplicable and seemingly unconnected

prescriptions laid down by the dramaturgists with regard to him

point insistently to some other function than th-a comic one, and

this has led Prof. F .B.J. !<Uiper in his maanum oeus to assert that

his original role was a non-comic one rooted in certain fundamental

metaPhysical ana mythological representations of Vedic cosmogony.

Though Kuiper has brought forth cogerE. arguments for identifying

him with Vax'una

. there ace so many other fea.tures that tn.i. idoantity
i3 (adrnitt.elllY) unaole to aCoount for and whiCh moreover tend to
ass~late ~r~ vidu§aka to other real or symbolic figures (Brahma,
,. - i-, I
purohita, or prallman-pr.lest, brahmacarin, Vrskapi" I? asupat a, Ganesa,
-/.. • .
etc.) outside the tneatre, some of whom are charact:.e.rized by comic

elements absentia VaruQ.a. The problerr. befC're me was to isolate

thE: cent.ral non-comic function that wou.ld not only explain the

imbrication of all these disparate identities in the vidii~~ but

 , ,<

also accomrnodate his haSYA aspect so that the OD::! does not negate the

other. Abhinava' s attr ibu.tion of the mere semblance of hisya

(lJ.iay;l?baaa) to the yidusak., whose hA§1a function he nowhere denies"
•
convinced me I was OIl t,he ri9ht track.

In delving into the complex symbolism of the vidusaka, more

•
and more of his features show themselves to refer back, directly or

indirectly, to a central function of bein9 the institutionalized

tranS9ressor of brahminical socio-reli9ious norms and taboos,

• especially founded on the pure/impure opposition which sustains the

Hindu socio-reli9ioLls hierarchy. The vidusaka is a comic figure

preCisely because he re-enacts this esoteric transgressive function"

in a purely symbolic mode, before an exoteric audience in the public
SOCial setting of the Sanskrit drama, where these taboos still b:lve

all their binding force. .Further research revealed that this trans­
gressive dimension, retained and elabor atea in the latez: T antr ic

systems (like the Kaula/rrika)J is rooted in Vedic religion where

it is integrated harmoniously into a total system that finds
expression in cosmogony, ritual (esp. the pre-classical sacrificial
system centexeo on tr~ impure gIka+ta as a basic type comprising
•
other figures lik.a the granm'n-gij.l\OhilK5ii, brQhmacarin, etc .. )" society.
(saturnalia) and. other planes as well, and "Chat these other aspects
of the system have be~n deliberately retained in the symbolism of

the yiduiu\ka and determine his relati.on and interaction with the

hero a..nCi other characters. Ma't.hodologically, our approach presupposes

that Hindu culture and especially its symbolic universe forms a total
coherent system that has been oerived, tbro-.lQl1 a series of socio­
religious transformations, from an e~ally coherent Vedic system of

reli.gious representations. All the Indologist.s whose work.s we have

 #
reliea upon for ou.r- general frameworJ~ (Kuiper, Durnezil, Heestennan,

Rer}C)<.l, Dumont, diarcieau), whatever their individual differences,

share this totalizin;;:,; O1lC\ synthe sizing approach. The relation

betvreen the nayaKa (hero) ana the vid~~aka especially seems to

reflect t.nat .between the Y.ajamana (or king) aaa Lhe brahmcill (or

2urohita), ti'1e latc.er in fact repr'e senting a.'1d COIDLJr isingt.he

d.ik~itg-aspect. of tne Y;S}iarnana' s own ,;>er sonalitj intne rit.ual drama

of tnG pre-classiCal sacr ifice. 1'1any ota€l<,'lise inex...;:>licable fa aturE:: s

.
of ,-he yidUsar\.g, become inc..~lli.~ible in terms of c.nec..ransposition

of this monel intQtde ae St.fl.<;;; cic anu liter ary aec:.erminati.:.>us .)f the

Classical (llama a.<lai.l a socio-c<.llt'-lral n~ile..l governed ;:;y the

refonneci classical saC! ii:ice i:l1'l,ere <:.ilis impure ::)01<:;: had. been

All o;ltline of oU.r <,;,ederaldorJ(ing

hYi->0thesis on trl€ y'iC1\l~i!.':5:a a~lCl tne wanner in INhicn it is Capable

of synthesizin:J, on tne Oasis of: nis tran.'39res~3ive d.ibension, the

mutu.allj 2xclu.siv02 Hr..) (.<els ;>ro)oseuoJ earliel. senolar snip, bas been

given in tne Int100.Uction. Ii::. is als:) sho'.vo 1:.i1at. '':'llis theory, which

insist.s on t.he ,..m ity of coace,;:>t.ion under.ly iL19 t.he viQU~aka and his

specificity to tne sym£lOlic univer..3'E:: of radian "Craai'Cion, is neve:r:­

tnelBss ill i'1a:r:mony with c.ne ethLlolo-.Jj.:::>t ::.h": comic transgressive

function 0:1: ell€ ritu.al clovln as a u.n,iversal .;>henoJuenon (l'akarius)

1,vhich .?resupposes a t.t1F..:ory of tra.nsgression being the founuation

of t.ne original Sacred (Caillois, r3ataille, l'JaKarius).

In this thesis, Vie are only interestea in demonstrating that

there is a bisociative theory 0:1: nasia {and nasa) implicit in

Abhinavagupta' s sCat~ered. 9r;.)I1o.J.acements on the same and exploring

how precisely this stJ:<.lctur6 ;>ermits hasYa to effectively vehicle a

non-comic function in the Y1dusalsa and how, to some extent, even
•
this hiSVa function itself comes to signify something that is
independent: of it. Thus, whereve.t incursions are made into various

aspects of the Vidufaka's symbolic behaviour, it is primarily with

the view of determining hoW' it has been adjusted and accommodated

to better serve his hasYa-function. One of our aims here is to

question the validity of a purely "PSYChological" approach to the

problem of humour and laughter drawing inspiration from primarily

biologiCal models based on analyses in terms of function/norm or at

most from" sociologizing" models based on analyses in terms of

conflict/rule. Our intention is to shift the emphasis to a linguis­

tic mooel that, though derived from and accommodating the above

perspectives, is based primarily on analyses in terms of significa­

tion/system. Laughter is the pleasurable dischaJ:ge of superfluous
energies OCCasioned by the mutual neutralization of two opposing

siml.lltaneous impressions (cognitive, emotional and/or sensory-motor)

of a single stimulUS. our method is to show how tnis basic blsoci.;!.­

tive structure rooted in the physiology and functioning as a safety­

valve for superflu.ous eneqjjies in the organism, inevitably lends

itself--by its very structure--to social exploitation of laughter

as a censure-meChanism against transgressions of SOCia-religious

norms. This situation is exploited in inverse by an esoteriC

perspective valorizing taboo-violation to the point that it

preseribes a generalized comic behaviour (as in the PaLpata ascetic)

even independently of sj?ecific modes of transgression. 1"i1<ew.-,

since laughter as an uncontrolled "natural" waste of energ. s is

frowned u.pon by cultu.ral norms that recommend its repression, the

 5
taboo-violator laughs freely and loudly (even when there is nothing

..
to laugh at) because such sacred laughter (e.g. the attaha§a of

Rudra imitated by his P~~pata devotee) has thereby corne to signify

his transgressive function which is greeted by society with profane

laughter. Ultimately, a signify in9 function (worked into a rigorous.

system of representations) derived fronl the psychology and sociology

of laughter begins to react in turn upon this psychology ana

sociology. not only interfering with their regular functioning but,

under certain conditions, itself becoming primary and reorientating

the Be .. infrastructure s" • Not only is such an apprQach the only

adequate one to the clowning of l:".l1e lauli)hing P aJLpata (and sacred

ritual clowning in other societies) but it alone Can do full justice

to the exploitation of hasya. in the yiaUsaka •

•

,
Ln order to establish the possibility of c~ vidusaka's haSiI
function simultaneously, and without contradiction, vehicling a

pI:ofou,nd oon-comic one, it is not.. sufficient to o.emonstrate that

Abhinava has an implicitly bisociative concept.i,.)n of hClilCa t.hat

'WOulc. permit. it to serve both exigencies; ie nas to be further

shown tnat. this conception COl:L"esponO.s t.v reality and reflects the

basic structure of humour anti laughter as a universal phenomenon.

Here" r have restricted Iny efforts t.o t.he follolllin;a tasksl­

1) To show that humour-a,nd-laughter remains an unsolved problem

of Western philosophy, psyChology, aesthetics and sociology and

that the variety of conflicting approaChes" theories and conclusions

should warn against scholars of Indian aesi;.htH.. ics and literature­

especially sl;udents of the yipMfua (or of the anthropology of

-.I
laughter and clowning in cult, e.g. the Pasl.lpatas)--from mechanicall"

applying 80m3 ready-made West.9rn conceptions to the problem ~f biaa/

 6

naSla or to evaluating the comic exploitation of the yidusalsa in

•
the Indian context (ch. I, III-VI). What is needed is to analyse

Indian theory and practice in terms of each other and in the light
of the discussions of the problems involved by native commentators

like Abhinava (Jagannatha etc.~, not hesitating to draw amply upon

parallel Western concepts wherever these axe ablll:! to clarify the

more obscure points of the treatment of t.he comic in Indian

tradition, In this way, whatever is specific to the latter and its

tacit inner unity, however complex, will not be lost in the attempt

to arrive at a universally valid definition of humour and laughter.

2) To bring together in a single work not only all of Abhinava's

more significant remarks directly tOUChing upon aA.u and haSls (ch.

IV, VII, IX) but also other relevant passages and some examples of

his practical literary criticism (eh. VIII, X) that may contribute

towards clarifying his insi~hts thereon. Special care has been

taken to show, by internal criticism and by replacing it. within his

total aesthetics of kasa, the inner coherence of Abhinava' s

pronouncements from different point s of view on naSi .aw! hasla.

3) To show that coherence can be restored to Abh1nava' s

SCattered insights on incongruity, superiority, role of pain,

social-censure mechanism, identifiCation, pan-emotionalism (of hasya) I

r asAbhasa, hasl§bhasa, etc. only on the basis of an impliCit biso­

ciative theory, whiCh can provide the framework for synthesizing

whatever is of value in the sociologiCal; psychoanalytic, behaviour­

1stie etc. approaches to humour, and 1s moreover capable of aCcommo­

dating recent ethnological data on the comic aspects of ritual

clowning.
 7

4) Since Western theorising on hwnour and laughter is far

more explicit and offers a variety of systematically constructed

models each accounting for specific aspects of the phenomenon, we

have found it much more convenient to arrive at Abhinava ' s implicit

bisociation-theory by starting off from a presentation of Gurjieff' s

model which is not only explicitly bisoCiative but finds this

structure at every level (intellectual, emotional, mo~ instinctive)

from which laughter may spring (ch. II). We then proceed t.o refine

this basic structure with the help of the conceptual tools (Qoperative
fields," "selective operators," "bisociative junction," et.c.) contri­

buted by A. Koestler and show how it alone Can simultaneously

acoomnodate .Bergson' s theory of laughtel: as a social censur e-mechanism

and Freud's theory of jokes (and the laughter provoked) as vehicles

of represaed ten.dencies and pre-logical modes of thought (t'irtlO theories

which are otherwise aifficult to reconcile with each other)--ch. III.

The remainin<;j three chapters are a.evoted to showing how the re sults

of experimental psychology bear out this theory of bisociation, which

alone again accounts for the role of variable negative emotions inl1

the genesis of laughter lch. I:V), for the differing roles of sudden­
ness in laughter (Hobbes, et.c.) ana in surprise (ch. V), and for the

validity of the incongru.ity principle, central to the Indian aesthe­

tics of h;sva and to the comic function of the viciusMa despite the
•
criticisms of Bergson, Freud and some contemporary behaviourists

lch. VI).

£5) The chief objection, shared by Bergson, Freud and others,

to tneories of the bis:lciatioa/incongruity type, that they leave

the p~siology of the laughter mechanism unaccounted for, is antici­

pated in advance by starting from Gurdjieff I s presentation of the

 8

the bisociat.ion theory in order to arrive, through successive clari­

fications, at Abhinava' s understanding of the same. The convulsion

(0) consisting in the mutual neutralization of the two opposing

irreconciliable impressions of a single stimulus not only provides

the bisociative structures responsible for hUlTPur a firm rootedness

in the physiological mechanisms responsible for the pleasurable

laughter-d.ischarge but also accounts for the tacit sk.ill of recogni­

zing ana. ewking humour. This phenomenological aspect is especially

important for the relishing of hasYa which, as a ua.s. (for Abhinava,

not an object of cognition but the relishable cognizing itself-­

pratIti, l:?odha), is primarily the skilful exploitation of cognitive

structures for bringing about bisociative emotional effects. Whereas

in compulsive (siddha) worldly h.i.u, the bis::>ciated perception imposed

by the stimulus automatiCally provokes laughter through the passive

mediation of the convulsion 0, in the aesthetic relish of hasl a the

sUbject (swgaya) actively exploits 0 as a sensor for reorganizing

•
the given stimuli so as to heighten and diversify the bisocl ative

possibilities offered ana no more than suggested by the objective

form and content of the poem, joke etc., fo

6) Abhinava' s most original and promising insight for the

psychology of hunour is the structural definition implied itl his

d<aclaration that all the other (aesthetic) enotions are comprehended

within nisya which is generat.ed by incongruities in some of the

members of the operative field that would normally have evoked the

emotion concerned alone (ch. IX). The fact that any of the other

emotions Can be an ~ffe9tiv§ constituent of hasY"a, clearly reveals

that Abhinava conceived the latter as a structure that includes
 9

within itself any emotion whatever and also at the same time some

other element that opposes and impedes the development of this

emotion. The analysis of hasYa in love-poems (Ch. VIrI) reveals

that this opposing element is itself most often a contrary

incompatible emotion, and the "theory· behind the exploitation of

this em:>tional bisociation for hasYa-effects is deduced from

Abhinava's interpretation of the maxims governing the delineation

, .­
of love-in-union ( sambho9asrnQarg,) • Though privileging in this
•

context, and in keeping with the ~ae8thetic, the emotional

components and J?Qssibilities of bisociation, Abhlnava is alive to

its cognitive aspect as well, as is evidenced by his introduction
of the incongruity principle in the genesis of rasAbhasa, and by

his appealing to the same in order to reject t".he imitation theory

of drama, for the bisociated cognition of both the ~tated and

the imitating elements can result. only in haSii (eh. VII, n. 20).

It. is on the basis of emotional bisociation again that an attempt

is made to explain Abhinava's otherwise cryptic remark. on the

• component of momentary pain or distress in determinate laughter

(sAny.sandhana-!li.u), and it is further demonstrated that such an

interpretation is in harmony with Freud's insight into "humour" as

a defence~chanism against incipient unpleasure, and also supported

by the experimental results of behavioural and social psychology

and. by ethnographic data on ritUal clowning (ch. IV). The relevance

of these findings for contemporary humour research and theorising

are two-fold. 1) the pre sent models whiCh seek to isolate specific
laughter- (or hwnou:r-) st.imuli from those of other emotions, or

which seek. to separate the laughter from other emotional affects

 10

in their examination of sl:.imuli which seem to generate bo1.h (either

simultaneously, alternately, or alternatively), could more profitably

be replaced by a struct.ural model that reveals how the stimuli of

these ot.her emotions are reorganized to produce the bisociative

effects responsible for laughter (or humour); 2) the reinterpretation

of incongruity as the object.ive correlate of bisociated perception

and response will obviate t.he more serious of t.he current objections

to incongruity theory.

7) To pro~jQse that f.r.om the point of view of aesthetics,

Abhinava ' s principal contribution 't:.o moci.ern humour-theo:rising would

lie in his having provided the necessary theoretical framework for

distinguishing between ~ as worldly self-subsisting emotional

bisociation provoked by common (s~d.haraIja) stimuli (and normally

immediately discharged as pleasurable lauvhte:r) ana its transformation

into the transcendental (alaukika) relish of ha§Ya whiCh is deliCately

-I
sustained through aesthetic identification with charaCters (asraYA)

•
representeo as reacting in emot.ionally incompatible ways t.o stimuli

t.hat are peCUliar to them alone (ch. VII). Through a literary

critiCism of several verses, depicting mut.ual love (sambbOge) as

prime sentim::nt but yet overflowing with ha@Ye/ in terms of the

psychology of the Characters represented ana the mode of participa­

tion of the connoisseur (~~), it is shown that this theoretical

aist.inction merely reflects the t.echniques for evoking hig§. exploit.ed

by the poets in act.ual practice (en. VIII). It is argued moreover

that the prescript.ion of hasYa as an inevitable ancillary of (Sambho9a-)

.
knsara, though partlY accountea for by the pleasurable nature of
laughter that makes it. a natural stimulant and side-effect of kama
 11

as a purusKth., is primarily intelligible only in terms of its

•
essentially bisociative strllcture and the aesthetic norms governing

the poetic delineation of sambhog q • The analysis relies primarily

on Abhinava' s own critical comments on the aesthetic techniques

utilized and comes to the conclusion that the rasa-aesthetic

privileges above all the "epptional centre" in its treatment of

haiya.

The ~plicat:1.on of this distincc.ion to Western aesthe't.ics

would require not the abandonment of the stiltUlus-organism-response

model of behaviourism (which is also basic to the ~-aesthetic)

but its refinement to include processes, like tanmavThhavAP:i

. .
(aesthetic identification) and iadhiranIk,arana (universalization),

based on and cie1- iwd from this model but becoming primary and
modifying its whole functioning in certain contexts, esp. that of

aesthetics. This is wholly clear in Abhinava's third criterion that,

unlike the stimulus of hasal the vibhiva of haSYa is uncomrron

• (asadhMa,na), i.e. uniquely related to a particular ilrala whose

•
perceived responses and the transitory emotions they sU9gest are
integral and indispensable to the relishing of hasYa. It is here

that the principle of tanmavIbhavana intervenes to make the crucial

separation between the ~-aesthetics with its sthiYin/~

distinction and the behavioural approach of those like I.A. Richards

(cf. his" synaesthesislt) which is unable to distinguish between the

two though the neea. is acutely felt. .Nevertheless, Abhinava himself

admits that the distinction ~haSyg, though perfectly valid in
theory and easily recognizable in privileged cases like the love-

verses above, is often blurred and difficult even in theatre

 12

(QrahASana., vidU,.Mil): it. would therefore l:::le preferable to speak

in terms of degrees of aestheticization of hasa into hasYa.

It is clear moreover that the ~ha~ya dist.inction cannot.

be applied as such and wit.hollt modification t.o Western or other

literatures which are not. organically and self-consciously dependent

on an aesthetic tradition of t.he !:.Sl§A-t.ype. 1'1or to a whole Cat.egory

of jokes and witticisms which, though possessed of a certain

aest.hetiC appeal, hover in a kind of limbo between art and worldly

life. Though unable to aevote special attention to such frequent.

instances of -hwrour" which do not. exploit. bisociative strategies

for primarily emotional effects l we nevertheless try to show (Ch. VIr)

that similar mechanisms of identification with the emotional attitudes

of others are often involved even i f subordinated t.o other purposes

like satirical intent. Often again t.he humour lies rather in the

ingenuit.y and artistry with which the bisociative Clash is brought

about or t.he brilliant non-comic ideas t.hat. are vehicled by the formal

technique of the bisociated patt.ern: to achieve a st.r iking contrast

of ideas, to question t.he field operat.ors involved, t.o bridge different

planes of thought. so as to present. t.hem in an ent.irely novel light,

or to reveal their hidden connections or similarities, and so on.

An essential component of su.ch wit or humour is no doubt the separa­

t.ion of thought. from the inertia of the emotions as rooted in the

biologiCal instincts (separ atien of t.he cortical layers from the

sympathetic system on the physiological level)1 so much insist.ed upon

by Koest.ler. Being a comment.ator on an existing artistic practice

based on t.he rasa-aesthetic and not a systema~ic theoret.ician aiming

at a universal theory of h~ur and laught.er, Abhinava has naturally
 13

COIn;;>lel:.ely neglected t:.he se aspect.s of humour-theory. Ilhat:. is

significant however is that hasYs., insofar as it is t:.he aestnetici­

zation or relishing of the emotional bisociation that constit:.utes

hasa « is based not on .:.he aivorce of thought from the inertia of

the constituent emotions but. x'at..I:ler on their reconciliation. t.!bre

than that, the cognitive st.rategies and idenl:.ificatory mechanisms

involved are subordinated to tne evocation of emotion and it is

t.heir ino.ispensable mediation that ensures that the emotions evoked

aXe purified of their biolo;;,ical inertia into the relishable state

ot~. vne would be justified in Claiming tnat the ~-aesthetic

including hasYa, is based not:. so much on the principle of Conscious­

ness seekin'dt.o esCape its biological determinations but Iather on

l:.he quasi-tantric principle of its turning baCk to infuse t:.he

oiological tunct:.ions, in their emotional expressio(1, with its own

lightness, mobilitj and detaChment. Unless this principle is kept

in mina . . OLle is aouna t.o lose si~ht of what is specific to t:.he

exploitation of t:.he universally valid bisociaeive structure L~ t.he

aesthetics of hisYa.

8) Another irnJ..JOIta11t contribution of Abhinava to humour-theorj

is his advocation of che exploitation ot hasYa (or hasa) as a means

of reinfolciag t.he (proper p\.lX suit. oi) the purui'~rthas through

negative exarilple (cll. LX). dis assirnila1:.ion ;Jf incongruity (a

cognit.ive/aesthetic p:rinciple) to s0cio-religio<.ls irn.:?roprietj, despit:.e

the £ aCe. tnat the two, ehough of1:.en coincidin':i I are no1:. synonymous,

reflects his concern to harmonise and mutually super.:.Jose the aesi:.h.etic

(or pleasuraoly cathar1:.ic ... in t:.he Case of laughter) and the social­

cenSUl-e funct:.ions of naSia and it:. is precisely t.ne bisociat.ive

structure of the latter: t.nat naturally lends itself to such eX,910ica­

tio11. wherever this social fu.nction ana the enjoyment of laughtc;;r

t;iains ttle up;>erhana over the J?urely aesthet.ic dimension, c.hE:~ L:1C­

tion retvJe,,;;:n ~ and hasia loses most of its relevance. 1'nou.'.;)h

chis ideolo~ical anll\"3xation laughter in t.he ser vice of safe­

9uaraing social nor.rns is haro.lt a.lfierent. frol" 3eI.g SO{l I s essenLial

contr .ibution to hurnour-t.i:leorj (~s..;>eciallj as tur 1:.11\".::1 claDor aced

L::ttQ behavi'JUlal models chat syntnesize Llco11yruitf, social-cc.:flsor­

shi~.) anu enhaHceo self-esteem), the vital Ciif1.:ereilCe is that Abhinava

',;lith t.he bu1:.t. as cOilstitutive vf l1.~.sYa even when ic. functiolls as a

censurc:-mecnanism, sowetning tIl. at. 3er.9SOH ;Jlimpsea bULiJaS unable

"5
'LO recOflcile wi't.h 1:.h~ cnastzin g eftec1:. of ridiculin;;; 1 augh:c.er' and

0·J.r. o.issociat.ion from the laughable social lnisaemeanou.r. It

on Lne basis oi si.lch iaent.i:r:ication t!lat Mhill,:lVa reco;..uizes a

lo,;ical uisti(iction--even tempo! al sequence--betweenc.he .. semblance

vt (any) rasSl" (r.asabhasa) and. 1:.he ensi.lii.l9 hasya, chat iuterru.;>t.s

tais momt:!nt.al.Y or pal.tial iaentiiicat.l.on. .it. is his irnplicit

bisociation tneory alone tnat. Can justiiy chis simultaneous identi­

ticat.ion with ana rejec1:.ion of t.ne butt, ana i't. is sug:;:;ested that,

~ ar irU!1l det.r actiug frol!! tile chastising ef:tect of the lau.ghwr,

it is this ;J~xtial ia.entification t.:na1:. reilo.er s it 9ar,ticul3.rly

numiliating for the butt.. A fu.rt.her aifference is the ,,)ossibly

cm:.).tio(lal nat.ure of this partial id~ntification, whereas for Be:rgson

all partici;>ative emotion is uetrin,ental to SOCialized laughter.

lhou<;n tilrougn its soc.ial function haS'la b""comes ancillary to all

.
1:.h".; fc>i.lI. c)rimar:y puru.sartha-..:>riew::'ated ~s, it nevert.heless stands

.
in a s;:Jecially f>r ivileged. relation wit.h (sambho9a-) £ni.gara and karna

un account ot the catnaltlc pleasure it.

 ..l.5

9) l"1Ost :sit;,nii:iCant anG. with far-reaChL'19 repercussions oui:.siac

tile r\:,:alnl :):;.; aE scheeics ana the social hierarchy, especially 1fJhen

le.)laced .'lithia his tot.al concepti0n of: hasYa, is his attribution

,..)1: tae rnere It semblance of hasta" to tne Y...:Ldu~ak.a whose haSYa funcLion

Inte:r:j.jreteCi in t.he light ot all t.ne r it.ual

not.ations that.. hi3.Ve 10(19 been rec.:)gnized (culminating Prof. Kui;)er ' s

recent co n.t r ibution} anCl E's~eciallt those tl1at. converye to unoerline

• his c;:,;ntral :ei..l.nctlon as the tr'ansr;resso.t: oi: bIahw.L.lical

re 1i;iou;3 norITl5, this necessar ili irn(?lie s t.tlat, fOl

SOC1·.J­

Abniuava, ti'l8

dimensions ao not exnaUst the e}q?loic.ation 01 haeLd in loLL;;:: vid.il~M.sl.

t.har. hasta coulu Silhul't:.aneousli serve the Giarnetr ic ?i.lly or?90site

function of ;.)e:r:n.ittiLl9 the exteriorizatioLl Qf an esoteric crans,::!ress­

• yidU:sgKil,' s c0.mic lJei1..J.vioJr, ::)uc the ir.t:'2:;t;ular mod,,::'s \ooscene,

•

t.e. )

Cannot De at C.! iou t8a tv 1:.n~ lack i:Jt cr:ea,~i V8 ,in: ag inatiol.l in t.he

J?.:,)So'(. s, tor the se aonormal and inexcllicably r-e .str J.\;(.eu moues of

conV8Llt.i0l1, Llto ddri3lIi.:ltic nQill {into "lawful irre9.J.larities"i, to

the play ana the i10rms governin.; that function alrE:ady strongly
 16

SUi:)':;1<:oatst:..i.lat. en.e nasia is simult:.aneouslj servin~ as tn.e vehicle

enat exa9~Jel ate s C(;rtaill comic LJO ssibilit S ,vhil,:,; inj:lioit.ing

elillliuatL1l::! Ot.l1,! 5. Tnat tile hasia oa t.he aesc.hG1:.ic level is

mod.el 01: t.ne orthociox .or ahmin, sc go ac. tIe atll;e nl:.,

cou.,-Jled.~itil claims \.:..0 1:.11(; sCat-us 0L.

.
lli.;3.~lci~dJ.~lHIa!="li.l.--

5Lnul tal'le":Y-..l5ly exc>loit the haSi a fUnc'cion ,tor cnastisL1S) tn is

d u t. \.:..he

C'
- ,,")' an
Jl,,' _ .-.;,.'Ll, e,·"1.....
i" a1 'la' c -,'", ....{'c"_, J..J": r'"'"
,"1-
- 0'" ,-'c' vF t
"'1" '--........
' - """"'-' i -,,,,,
u~ h~~ ~ -,
-.J...., ('" ~ ,
"- .::>.,;. "''-.I.
, '1'", - k ....
{ '"1'"
\;;! ) I

mo::;tel of ;)urusartha­
I • -
- ,' ' ' ­
~ ;1pl'1 d.L a):J i. (. ~l;':)

'. of its cnastisifl:J role in tile conflict

'eL)C, comiC c.Jnflict Oil t,hE: :;?Oci

OE:t~veen brahItlLllcal soclo­

.al110iQuousU resolves c.hat contlic'c. scrol1;ly sug':;:iests tl1at t.he has/a

is :'3imult':1ileOu3ly s("~ v ins to dis:;u ise an int.Gntional valor. ation of

ana .)artly neut.ralizes its role as an instrument at social censure.

L1a1neS ()f ;>urE: bralll11inical "-Jeo.igree , central role in c.l1c drama

 17

u£ Si!nll1t.aneO~5 (exo"Cer ie) ueva1o:r iza"Ciof1 adO (e sJtel. iC) valor izo.­

. the ae st.hetic leW:d.

L1 ra1 as a mooe of inc oi.19IUOUS boh2Lvi;)Ul acting as a comic

st.in;u1us. 'l'h.oui;;n SLlcn tr aasg!E; ssian Can p:tvVo lJUl.e1l nE~9 0.<: i ve

kutilaka
,­i '

c.ill.e au,

0ncectlis
 18

centered arounu tr ansgression,both airectly and./or ii1.directly

through symbolic assimilation with other (comiC or non-comic) figures

.:.hat belong to the same sys.:.em (something which is facilicated by

the polyvalence of symbols). This would immeuiately explain the

irregularity of tl1.e !1OrmS governing his hasta function at the aesthe­

tic level, for they w:Juld have simultaneouslY sel:ved to ensure the
signify ing function of these ostensibly comic stimuli" Likewise,

c.he valorization of the viouiaka is only the deli:berate valorization

o£ .:.he symbolic W1iverse mediated by him whereas his eX91icit

o.evalorization an,a rio.iculous aspect would be a function of that

central transgressive aimension which is wnolly censurable from the

purely e}(Qteric point of view of life-in-society governed. by the

.
9raded hierarchy of the 2uru sirthas. This tot:.al a,tJ.proach to the

viau~~ that consiaers him pr imar ily as a sign, and only second a-

r ily in te:r:ms of his social and ae sthetic function by aetermining

how these latter are reintegrated into this signifying function,

is alone capable of explaining all the otherwise impossible cont.ra­

dictions in his individual "psychology" (wise fool, indis.f,'e;Dsable

but bungling helper, lewd cnastity I ueformed and monkey-like

favourite of the queen's maius, etc.), his literary I·characteriza­

tion" (stupid brahmin counselloJ: of the exemplary king, obscene

bu.t free access to harem, nonsensical jokes, Prakrit-sp€ : aking,

me at-eating and wine-dr inking br ahrnin, etc.) ana. social status

("boy" ~, abused by lower cha:r: acteJ:s but honourea by the hero,

•
ete.) •

To the esoteric gaze, that has already lealnt to accord

supreme valorization to the most. raoical modes of transgression

when replaced within their delimited context governed by a profourd

 19

metaphy sical and/or r itua! motivation.. the recognition of the

transgressive function invested in the vidu~m' s symbolism Can be

no cause for laughter. On the contrary, the recognition of the

significations hidden in the various signifiers brought together

in his comic lntex'ventions and t.he displacement of the al:.t.ention

towards restorin9 their coherence on the esoteric plane can only

detract from, 1£ not largely efface I his hasXe function. M::>reover

even the instances of really incongruous behaviour, speech or

co stume, and the comic aura that surrounds them, are now rather

perceived as the tranSj;>arent symbols of a transgressive function

that has nothing intrinsically comic a.bout it. For these symbols,

despite their adaPtation and elaboration to suit the comic.r ole of

the y'idU~~ in the drama, acquire their capacity to signify only

by virtue of their participation in a pre -oxist in 3 5i9nifjin9 syst~,

that encompasses the entire doma.in of Iiindu culture a... .l d reaches back

to its Vedic origins, where they recur in an arunistak.eably non-comic

<ritual, cosmogonic, ep.1c, etc.) context ,:>r at lea.st with a primarily

non-comic Irotivation (Gax.teJia'.s or Agni's enornlOus appetite, or the

former' oS DRdakas1 the contrary speech or donkey-like :::>raying of

Brahma' s fifth heach the bra.!'ynacil'.L.'11 s abl.lse of the hetaera in the
Ilahavrata, etc.). Replaced in this total system by an esoteric gaze
forearmed with the comprehension and mastery of its secret correspon­

dence s .. the hasye aspect. of the vidufaka' 5 interventions-on the

aestll.::tlc literary level of the 'ploy and in the' t.;;xot.erlc soc1o­

religl,;)U5 context that encompasses thE: performance of t.he drama-

is redu:=ed to a mere semblance. To just. "Ii/hat extent Abhinavagl.lpta

had assindlated the traditional symbolic u.niverse underlying the

figure of the vidu~~ and to what extent he effectively recognized

 20

it in the latter's traits (e_g_ Varuna) and interventions can only

•
be matter of futile speculation for us who have ourselves only just

cOJ'l'l{(1enced the task of deciphering. What matters is that he himself

waS the crowning theoretician of the transgressive ideology of

Trika (rather Kaula) tantrism, att.ributing his hignest metaphysical

realization of the supreme all-devouring Bhairava-Consciousness to

precisely su.ch transgressive praxis, At the same tine, he clearly

I recognized the dichotomy between the esoteric and the exoteric domain

• the latter governed by rigorous socio-religious norms from which

perspective alone he comments on the Sanskrit drama. He even

insists on the continuity oatween the Vedic and the T antr ic tradition
of esotericism exploiting extreme impurity and radiCal transgression

in order to transcend the pure/impure distinction and attributes

t.he reticence of t.he Vedic R~is on this transgressive dimension of

their realizations t.o their concern with preserving the exoteric

order founded on norms of purity I avikalgena bhavena my.nayo·.e.!

tathaanavan //243// lokasaruraksaoarthem tu ~ tattvam taih

••• ••
praaopitam/... / /244. TA. IV. As such, it seems to us that Abhinava

combines in himself all the necessary conditions for recognizing a

central transgressive function in the viOuiaka that, though deeply
rooted in Vedic esotericism, would have also found manifold expression

in the symbolic universe of Hinduism. But like the Vedic Rsis

••
he describes, he would have been even more committed to preserving

and reinforcing the exoteric order, OOW governed by the graded

hit:!I a1chy of the Quru ~irtbas which it was the duty of the 1'<1a1;.1 aveda
to inculcate" And it is in the midst of this order that the

yiduialsa appears at the centre of the stage to hold us laughing,

spellbound by his own laughter. Indeed, seen in this light., what is
 21
really striking is not Abhinavagupta's reticence on the true role

of the xidU,aka but, on the contrarY, the various hints he has

dropped for us-at least for those among us who are prepared to

take him wholly seriously-that the vidu~~' s role is not exhausted

by hisYa, i.e. his properly aesthetic ana. SOCial, aspect. He has

no hesitation in emphasizing, to explain the vidusaka's being

protected by OMkara, that he is, along with the nay aka, the principal
male character of the play. Taken together with his casual remarks

•• attributing not hasya but the semblance of hasya (hasy3bhasa) to

the ~=,.a&&, this valorization of his otherwise inexplicable role

proves conclusively tnat not only did Abhinavagupta know a great

deal more about his role than he ever put into his AbhinayabharatI
but that he had deliberately left these clues behind for the

initiated like himself to recognize and fOllow up systematiCally.

It will be clear by now that a cOflvincll'lg exposition of

the es::>teric significatioJ.ls ~rked into the hasYa function of the

~~~ will first o£ all have to reconstitute the total signifying

systenl (the basic principles un6erlying it, t.he symbolic techniques

i·t employs, an inventory of its chief motifs and their complex

interrelations and substi~utions, the his~orical ~ransformations

and distortions it has undergone, etc.) by virtue of which the

clusters of signs that fuse to constitute even a single comic

intefvention of the yidUlaka are able to evoke an entire complex of

ideas, practices and doctrines. Though we have already deciphered

a great portion of this symbolism and at least enough to confirm

beyond any doubt the transgressive function we have only presented

some of these materials in the body of this thesis, and that too only
 22

sporadically, wherever the possibility showed itself of demonstrating

hoW' they have been exploited for hasya effects. The reason Was not

only limitations of space but that, whereas the focuss of this

thesis is on hasya (humour and laughter) and hasyAbhasa and their
mode of superposition, such an undertaking would have lifted us
out completely from the domain of hasya and the Sanskrit drama
as an aesthetic spectacle into the vast symbolic universe of

•• Indian religious li£e. Even the x1dUsak.. would have to be ruthlessly

•
dissected to systematiCally compare the individual elements of his

symbolism with the same dispersed elsewhere in the tradition, before

we reintegrate them-with all their fullness of signification-to

resuscitate his comic essence. Even then, since this symbolism is

scarcely explicitated in an overt sy stematic manner anywhere, we

'WOuld have to linger long over these va.riol.ls models to demonstrate

conclusively that these inaividual symbols which they share with

the yidu,.A§A indeed do have the precise meaning we attribute to

them and are ultimately fragments or facets of a single semiotic

-- 8Y stem. Though this is impossible within the scope of this thesis

it would suffice if we have convinced our readers that the vidU$~'s

hASV a function also vehicles a non-comic symbolic function and
provided ample indications that the latter comprises an essential

transgressive dimension.

10) But as a preparation to this larger undertaking we have

attacked the xJ"g,iisaka' s incongruous speech as a form of ·poetic

•
humour" (kaVYallasYA) to show that it is indeed teeming with the
kind of comic riddle-o.evioes that would have served to transpose

complex symbolic equivalences, like those found in the ritual

brahmodYgs or the Rigvedic hymnology # into the aesthetic setting
 23

of the drama. OUr analy sis of the vrthI in terms of the at first

sight arbitrary definitions of its thirteen constituent elements,

and in the light of both their comic exploitation by the vid~,~

in the ritual verbal contest of the - .

puryaranga-~ata and the non­

comic mechanisms., moments and roodes of the brahmod.Ya, led to the

conclusion thatl- 1) the vlthI was originally the comic exposition

of enigmas by a single pers:>n or a comic wit-combat between two

pers:>ns fully ex.ploiting a rich variety of riddle-mechan1smsl

2) these riddle-mechanisms of the vltny:af1gas }:)etray a scheme to

facilitate the deliberate transposition of the riddle-cotltests,

with their profound cosmo-ritual mot.ivations., of the brahmodYas

onto the aesthetico-literary medium of the drama; 3) despite their

progressive exploitation for purely literary effects, their original

function would have been best :tetained. in the COmic yid\iea!s.2 with his

licence to speak iocongruously I 4) the predominance of hasya in the

yItb¥aOgas is primarily to permit. the super:position of the exoteric

incongruity and the esoteric coherence of the hidden equivalences

• that constitute the enigma. (cf. esp. g~A and Asatpralapa, both

.
charaCteristic of the yidUsaka)j S) their exploitation by the vidu§~
­
in both ritual trigata (prolongation of the Vedic Vivie) and the

profane plaY confirms his Itready-wit" (pratibha" prescribed by

the NS) but of a type akin to that of the Rigvedic poet-seers­

his Itfoolishness" I like his comic function, is the secondary elabora­

tion of the exoteriC incongruity of his interventions at the purely

literary level (WhiCh harmonizes with the explanation of the same

in terms of his transgressive function) I 6) as bearer of the

~11aka presented by Brahma (himself the projection of the branmAn)

and as the protJ9~ of OMkira, taken together with the monotonous

 24

insistence on his brahminhood par excellence, the xkdusoka is

•
indeed a comic "caricature" of the brahm4n (or '!HrohitA) precisely

because he is the revelation of the esoteric dimension of the latt.er

as bearer of the brahmtn-enigma. Taken together with his primary

cooperation with the (Indra-)nAyaka of the play, this implies the

yid[,,~s symbolic identity with the Brahma-atradhara of the

p,urYara69a-trigata and the latterts partial identity with the

•• Varu.na-~e.aka (whose antithesis he reintegrates into the thesis

•
of the
~I-

Indra-giriRiJ;~vika so as to arrive at an~comprehend.iI1g

synthesis). The vidusaka of the 91ay proper, as Brahma with an

•
exaggerated VarUIJ.ic aspect, wou.ld represent that Mitra-VarUQa

incal-nated in the brahmAn-purghitas par excellence like the Vasisthas • ..

.For it is by regressing as the (pre-classical) d1ksita, in what
•
amounts to a metaphysical transgression, to the embryogonic chaos

(Asat) of Varuna t s realm (Varuna's 2!!ingax:a-pot held by the viduOaka,

•
like the largE basket-ears of the Brahma-v.1dUaaka, is clearly a womb­
•
/

•
symbol), that the bro!!nAl! attains to the totality of cosmic connectbns

constitut.ing the jatavidva. In this way # the vidU:,aka ' s ku'!ilaka

would symbolize not only his mastery of the "crooked" speech of the

enigma but also signify (among other things) the "perversity·· of

the transgression (~dayaku\ila) that lies at the heart of the enigma.

Abhinava ' s contribution to these conclusions is amb.4luous,

and necessarily so, for the very principle of esotaricism excludes

the possibility of his dwelling explicitly upon this hidden function

of the y!thYaiigas or their ritual exploitation in the yidusak.a •

•
'iet it is relevant to note the striking discrepancies between his

(already slightly aestheticized) interpretations of these formulas

 2S

and the (highly aestheticized) illustrations he provides of them.

He is clearly aware that it is the enigma and its I11E9chanisms that

holds these formulas to;ether and often provides details of context,

motivation, procedure that clarify the manner in which they could

have served as transpositions. Yet as a traditional commentat;or

faced with the double task of being faithful to the definitions

handed down by Bharata and at the same time registering and legitimi­

zing the current practice of adapting them for purely aesthetiC

effects (independent of ritual notations), he also often inflects

the terms of each definition so as to justify and facilitate this

later usage. Only an independent analy sis, in terms of the symbolic

.
function, of the vidisAka's comic utterances in the plays can reveal

the precise extent and varied modes in which these formulas have

been exploited to retain his hidden role as the bearer of the

braPm~-enigma (in Prakrit~).

But to do this we would have to leave .behind the aesthetics

•
and psychology of hiS1a to delve into the total symbolic universe

in which the yidusaka participates. In this thesis, we have restric­

•
ted ourselves to drawing out the inpl1cations of Abhinava* 13 implicit

theory of haS¥a and to showing how, in the :v:igiifak.sh the structure

of haaya permits it to simultaneously serve and disguise a non-comic

symbolic function. This function is centered on ritual transgression

from which we have suggested that most of his attributes and behaviour
Can be derived either directly or indirectly. It is the biaociative

structure of hasYa. that in this way permits the vidU:aag to mediate

between these two opposing yet complementary domains of Indian

religious life governed respectively by the sacred of interdiction

and the sacrality of transgression. It is through the as it were
 -
26
...
unconscious identificat.ory pole of the bisociated perception that
the e:xoteric vision comes to participate in spite of itself in a

symbolic universe whose coherence it does not recognize and whose

values it is as yet not prepared to accept. In the laughing

:v;idu,~~ an exoteric vision wholly enmeshed in the hierarchical

order of the puru.sarthas,which he entertainingly reinforces by his

•
laughable negative example~ is nevertheless forced to submit it.self

to the claims of an esoter ie vision that encompasses it and is all

the more effective for the reason that it is carefully hidden •