365bet娱乐

Under this and the next chapter we shall study the poet and the plays under different topics. In a subsequent chapter will be given the plots and general features of the plays-a sort of running commentary on the plays. 1. TEXT MATERIAL OF THE PLAYS. In his introduction to the Svapna, MM. Dr. T. Ganapati Sastri gave details of his tour for the search of MSS, in the course of which he "came across a palm-leaf Maharastra Sahitya of Natakas in the Manalikkara Matham near Padmanabhapuram". The Maharastra Sahitya was over three hundred years old and contained one hundred and five leaves written in Malayalam characters. In subsequent tours different MSS of the Svapna and other plays were found. Dr. Sastri brought out a critical edition of the plays discussing variant readings in the foot-notes. In view of the date we have assigned to Bhasa, the texts certainly do not represent the original plays. It would be interesting to get the original MSS and to see the script and characters in which they were written. It is certainly not impossible to come across the originals, judging from a similar case of Asvaghosa. The texts presented to us probably represent southern versions, which in Pischel's opinion "present abridged and otherwise interpolated recensions."" There is also no warranty for taking the northern (Bengali) recensions as preserving the texts with absolute fidelity; they might have modified the texts "perhaps to a lesser degree." Prof. K. R. Pisharoti speaks very slightingly of the printed Trivandrum texts and pronounces them as "cooked up" by the editor, who, according to the Professor, was "ignorant of the manuscript traditions of the land", It may be noted, 1 Svapna, Intr., p. 1. 2 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1927, p. 868. 4 Indian Historical Quarterly, 5, p. 557. 3 3 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1927, p. 868.

83 that with this single exception, the Trivandrum editor has not been accused of manufacturing texts. Dr. Keith, on the other hand, seems to attach much value to the Trivandrum texts as 'critical editions' while denouncing the Indian editions e. g., that of the Ascarya as not Leven the value of manuscripts"." 2 There are editions of the Bal, Panc, Svapna, Prat, Abh etc. brought out by different writers, but they are generally based on the Trivandrum texts. Dr. Weller has brought out, for instance, an edition in Devanagari characters of the Balacarita, but for the most part he follows Dr. T. Ganapati Sastri's emendations and chaya. "In a number of passages Dr. Weller has introduced corrections of his own or has followed some valuable suggestions of Prof. Jacobi. .... To a certain extent he has regularized the Prakrit spellings". This also proves the value of the Trivandrum texts. Prof. Pisharoti in translating the Svapna, Prat, Avi, Dgh, Karna, and Abh has given variant readings from other manuscripts available to him. Prof. Dhruva in his Gujarati translations of the Mv, Svapna and Pratijna proposes various emendations, and has brought out a Sanskrit text of the Prat; but the emendations are only conjectural, not supported by manuscripts. The editions of the Svapna and Abh brought out respectively by Dr. Sarup and Pandit Venkatarama Sarma are based on different manuscripts from the South. But they do not offer any material variations from the Trivandrum texts. It was confidently hoped that many manuscripts of similar natakas would be 'discovered' in the South;" but the difficulties experienced by Dr. Raja in getting even one more manuscript, necessitating his reliance on a single manuscript for the publication of the Vina effectively answers those entertaining the hope. Government Oriental MSS Library in Madras, the Palace Libraries in the South as well as some of the College and University Libraries now possess MSS of the Trivandrum Bhasa plays. The Bhandarkar Institute of 1 Keith, History of Sanskrit Literature, p. XII n 3. 2 All references can be found in 'BibliographyA, 'Text editions and Translations' given towards the end of the book. 3 Thomas, Indian Antiquary, 1923, p.186. 4 Full references in 'Bibliography-A' 5 Cf. A. K. Pisharoti, Criticism, pp. 39-40; Raja, Journal of Oriental Research, 10, 1936, supplement, p.11. 6 Journal of Oriental Research, Dec. 1936, supplement, pp. 1-11.

84 Poona and the School of Oriental Studies, London, have also secured MSS of the Bhasa plays in their collection." It is said that even now it is possible to procure manuscripts from private collections, if a thorough search is made. That is, of course, a difficult task. 2. SOURCES OF THE PLAYS. In considering the sources of the plays we shall adopt the following order: i. The Mahabharata plays: Mv, Dv, Dgh, Karna, Uru and Panc. ii. The Krsna plays: Bal. iii. The Ramayana plays: Prat and Abh. iv. Udayana plays: Pratijna and Svapna. v. Legendary plays; Car and Avi. (2) Turning to the Mahabharata plays first, we find in general that the poet is much indebted to the epic. In the one-act plays, "some short episode is taken from the Mahabharata and freely dramatized".2 The Madhyama Vyayoga, according to Dr. Keith, has "a reminiscence of the tale of the love of the demon Hidimba for Bhima", while Pavolini points out that the Bakavadha Parva of the Mahabharata is used.* We are, however, inclined to follow Prof. Dhruva who divides the story of the Mv into the main plot and the by-plot, taking the reunion of Bhima and Hidimba as the mukhya-katha and the story of Kesavadasa as an upakatha. No trace of the former being found in the Mahabharata, it is said to be of the poet's own creation; while Sunahsepakhyana in the Aitareya, VII. 3, is sought to be the original for the Brahmin story that is woven into the main story. I The Dutavakya, a Vyayoga in one act, is again from the Mahabharata, but deals with the Krsna legend. The fact of Krsna being sent as a messenger for peace negotiations. is mentioned in Mahabharata, Udyogaparva, Adhyayas 94, 95, 1 Vide Nos.35 (Avimaraka), and 36 (Balacarita) of 1925-26; and Nos. 6 (Svapna), 7 (Dutaghatotkaca), 8 (Urubhanga), 9 (Madhyamavyayoga), 10 Karnabhara), and 11 (Pratijna) of 1926-27 in the MSS. collection of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona. The Institute possesses transcripts in Devanagari characters of these and some other Bhasa plays. My authority for the statement in connection with the School of Oriental Studies, London, is Mahopadhyaya Pandit Venkatarama Sarma of Madras. 2 Winternitz, Problems, p. 111. Parva). 3 Sanskrit Drama, p. 95. The reference is to Mahabharata, 1, Adh. 160-161 (Bakavadha 4 Madhyama, second edition, pp. 12-13; 13-16.

85 1 124 and 131. There is the description of a picture depicting the denuding of Draupadi at the time of the gambling episode. The description does not mention the miracle by which Krsna himself supplies Draupadi with the garments as each one is taken off. Omission of this detail has led Dr. Winternitz to assume that "this miracle of garments is a very late interpolation". The conclusion seems unwarranted as the omission may be deliberate, since its mention would have Duryodhana enjoy the sight of his own shame; further, as observed by Dr. Keith, this omission may be due "to the difficulty of exhibiting this by the painter's art"." The embassy (of Krsna) has been dramatized to glorify Krsna and proclaim his identity with Vasudeva, Narayana and Visnu. The scene about the various divine weapons appearing in human form is a speciality of Bhasa. made The Dutaghatotkaca depicts Ghatotkaca as an envoy to the Kauravas and predicts their punishment at the hands of Arjuna. Ghatotkaca delivers the message of Krsna to Dhrtarastra. As no such incident appears in the Mahabharata, of Ghatotkaca going as the envoy either after the death of Abhimanyu (as told in the drama) or at any other time, the plot seems to have been the poet's invention, the epic having supplied him with the characters only. The Karnabhara follows the epic in the main. Karna details the story of his obtaining the astras from Parasurama, which occurs in the Karnaparva, Adhyaya 42, and Santiparva, Ahdyayas 2-3. The main incident of Karna giving away his armour to Indra in disguise is found in the Mahabharata, Vanaparva, Adhyaya 310, and Santiparva, Adhyaya 5. Bhasa has transposed the incident occurring in the forest to the battlefield, has changed the characters of Karna and Salya making them more noble and saintly than in the epic, and introduced minor changes. The Urubhanga has for its basis the Salyaparva, Adhyayas 56-58, with slight changes, describing the fight of Duryodhana and Bhima. In the play, Srikrsna throws a suggestion to Bhima by patting his thigh to p. 98. 1 Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, 1, p. 344 n 2; Festschrift Kuhn, pp. 299 ff. 2 Sanskrit Drama,

86 strike Duryodhana on the thigh, while in the epic it is Arjuna (Mahabharata IX. 58. 21). The epic does not speak of the dialogue between Balarama and Duryodhana; Dhrtarastra and Gandhari were at Hastinapura and not on the battle-field as depicted in the drama. Such changes are the poet's own inventions for dramatic purposes. The. The Pancaratra is a play in three acts, dealing with the incidents that are told in the Virataparva of the Mahabharata The raid on cows, (Adhyayas 35-69), the slaughter of the Kicakas hinted in the Panc (Adh. 22-24) and the marriage of Abhimanyu with Uttara (Adh. 71-72) are related in the Mahabharata The poet has taken considerable liberties with the epic story, and the sacrifice of Duryodhana, the promise to grant half the kingdom to the Pandavas on their news being heard of within five nights, and Abhimanyu's siding with Duryodhana, are among the main changes introduced by the poet. It will thus be seen that the Mahabharata serves as a source for nearly all the plays, but the originality of the poet is seen at various places, in inventing new situations and episodes, or in investing the epic heroes with new characteristics. (ii) Coming next to the Krsna drama, the Balacarita, we find that there are grounds for difference of opinion. It cannot, of course, be denied as Dr. Weller has said, that the absence of the erotic element indicates an early version of the Krsna story as the source of our play." Dr. Sarup indicates the source as the Harivamsa and Prof. Dhruva also. holds a similar view. But in view of the date we have assigned to Bhasa, viz. 4 th or 5 th century B. C., it seems difficult to recognize as the source, the Harivamsa which has been placed in the third century A. D., as it uses the word Dinara.³ Further, the drama differs widely in detail from the stories of Krsna in the Harivamsa. So it is necessary to look elsewhere for the source of the Bal. The Visnu 1 Die Abenteuer des Knaben Krischna, German Translation, Intr., p. 13; also Sten Konow, Indian Antiquary, 49, p. 234; Woolner and Sarup, Thirteen Trivandrum Plays, Vol. 2, p. 109; Winternitz, Calcutta Review, Dec. 1924, p. 331. The bearing of the latest article by Dr. Winternitz on the Bal (Bulletin of the Ramavarma Research Institute, 5, pp. 1-15) is considered in a subsequent chapter. 2 Hindustan Review, 50, p. 120; also Dhruva, Madhyama, second edition, Intr., p. 5 Tatake, Maharastra Sahitya, 5, p. 164. 3 Bhandarkar, Vaisnavism, Saivism etc., p. 36.

87 and Bhagavata Puranas also are ruled out as "none of these works as we have it, is probably older than Bhasa."1 But we have already found Bhasa to be indebted to the epic, of which the Harivamsa forms an appendix. It seems therefore that his source for the Krsna story was an earlier version on which the Harivamsa and the As in the Dv, the weapons appear Puranas are based. in human form in the Bal also. (iii) Out of the Ramayana plays, the Pratima draws its inspiration from the second and third books of the Ramayana. The poet takes only the story, but builds a superstructure of his own. The statue-house, the genealogy of Rama, the abduction of Sita by Ravana under the guise of an expert on Sraddha, and the absence of Laksmana at the time, and Rama's coronation in the penance forest are the poet's departures from the epic. He has further presented Rama, Sita, Dasaratha, Bharata, Kaikeyi, etc. on a higher level than in the epic. The Abhiseka Nataka deals with the story as given in the Kiskindha, Sundara, and Yuddha Kandas of the Ramayana, and follows the epic very closely. The most striking divergence from the epic, however, is the manner in which the waters of the ocean are divided to provide way for the Lord. The Abh deals with the ha of Rama and according to Dr. Keith, "is a somewhat dreary summary of the corresponding books (4-6) of the Ramayana". Hence we may conclude with a good deal of certainty that the story in the epic is the mainstay for the two Rama plays. "It seems possible that our dramatist had known only the older or shorter redaction of the epos which did not include the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda". (iv) Coming to the Udayana or historical plays, we find it asserted that the Brhatkatha of Gunadhya is the source of Bhasa.* The work being referrable to the first century B. C., conflicts with the date we have assigned to Bhasa. Further, we find many discrepancies between the Brhatkatha (as we take it from its copies, the Kathasaritsagara and Brhatkathamanjari) and the two plays. The elephant incident as given in the former is 1 Keith, Sanskrit Drama, p. 100, 2 Sarup, Hindustan Review, 50, p. 118. 3 Sanskrit Drama, p. 105. 4 Meerwarth, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1917, p. 279. 5 Keith, Sanskrit Drama, pp. 102-103; Winternitz, Problems, p. 113.

88 changed in the latter; the KSS and BKM differentiate between Mahasena and Pradyota, making Mahasena the ruler of Avanti and Pradyota the ruler of Magadha, thus striking out Darsaka from the list. The existence of Darsaka has been historically proved.' The genealogy of Udayana as given in the KSS and the Puranas differs from that given in the Pratijna. Mr. Ogden opines: "Bhasa treats the incident in a more realistic and serious fashion than does the light-hearted account of the KSS and herein he is probably more faithful to the Udayana legend". Now Udayana, Darsaka, Mahasena etc. are all known to history and are proved to belong to the 6 th or the 5 th century B. C. We have already assigned the 4 th or the 5 th century B. C. to Bhasa. It seems, therefore, probable that, coming as he does shortly after Udayana, Bhasa employed the stories about Udayana current in his time. 2 In an introductory article to his Kannada translation of the Pratijna which has recently been published, Mr. L. Gundappa discusses at length the bearing of the Tamil Perungatai (Brhatkatha) on the plot of the Pratijna, and tries to show that the story of the play agrees to a greater extent with the version of the Perungatai than with those contained in the Sanskrit descendants of the Brhatkatha. Another Kannada scholar, Prof. Krishna Sastri, also seems to hold a similar view. The date of Perungatai is not yet settled, but it cannot be earlier than the second century A. D., and hence Bhasa who flourished centuries before this date, cannot be said to have been indebted to this work for the plot of his Pratijna. (v) No definite source has been found for the Carudatta. The love of a hetara for a merchant is a common topic in literature, and hence the story may be taken. to be of the poet's invention. Sundari-Katha from the Jatakas is suggested as the possible source, and it is not unreasonable to suppose that the poet made, use of that story as he heard it from oral traditions . That the Brhatkatha cannot be the source is indicated above. 4 1 Smith, Oxford History of India, p. 70; Early History of India, 3 rd edition, p. 51; Roy Chaudhari, Political History of Ancient India, 2 nd edition, p. 130; Saisunaga Statues, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, Vol.5, 1919; Dec, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1933, pp. 333-337, 342. 2 Journal of the American Oriental Society, 43, p. 169. 3 Sanskrit Drama, Bangalore, p. 67. I am indebted Prof. H. L. Hariyappa for this information. He further states that Prof. Krisna Sastri places the Tamil work in the second or third century A, D. while Mr. Gundappa assigns it to the fifth or sixth century A. D. 4 Kirata, Bhasa's Works, Marathi translation, pp.115-119.

89 According to Dr. Sarup, the story of the Avimaraka is probably the poet's own creation." Prof. Dhruva assigns it it to folklore. Dr. Weller's theory about Avimaraka being the spirit of monsoon who destroys the demon of drought has already been discredited by Dr. Barnett as "highly speculative and supported by no evidence whatever". Dr. Keith states that Bhasa derived his story from the Katha literature.' Dr. A. Venkatasubbiah compares the stories as given in the KSS, Jayamangalatika on Vatsyayana's Kamasutra, Jataka and the Nataka. It appears from that comparison that Jayamangala follows the Nataka in giving the same etymology as given in the Nataka, in saving the life of the princess, in making Avimaraka the son of Agni, etc. The story of Elaka Maraka as given in the Jatakas must have been current among the people, and probably Bhasa also knew it. So, it seems that the story is not invented by the poet. In the light of the data supplied by the Mrcchakatika, it seems to be a plausible inference that Bhasa extracted the main story from folklore, and added the supernatural element of the ring incident to cater for public taste. 3. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE i. PLAYS. CHARACTERIZATION. Bhasa being a realist portrays men and women of this world. His characters do not wear the aspect of fairyland. He does not invest the characters with superhuman, imaginary or inconceivable qualities, and hence the spectators-and also readers for the matter of that-find themselves quite in tune with their psychology and can easily follow and sympathize with them in their ups and downs. The divinities such as Rama, Laksmana, Sita etc., as also the Raksasas and Vanaras such as Ravana, Vali, Sugriva etc., are placed before us with human sentiments and characteristics. are Most of the characters in these plays. psychological studies, and "in psychological subtlety Bhasa is almost "e The intricate workings of human emotions are shown by a flash, and no energy is spent unnecessarily for expressing that struggle in the mind of 1 Hindustan Review, 50, p. 118. 2 Madhyama, second edition, p.5. 3 Weller, Avimaraka, Schauspiel von Bhasa, Intr.; Barnett, Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 3, p. 591. 4 Sanskrit Drama, p. 101. 5 Indian Antiquary, 1931, pp. 113-115. 6 Meerwarth, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1917, p. 278.

90 the characters. Thus, for example, the self-sacrificing nature of Vasavadatta is admirably shown and the tragic irony touches our heart in Svapna, Act III. In all these plays, the poet has employed nearly 230 characters, male and female, besides many others that are only mentioned, justifying the remark : bahubhumikaih (:) of Bana. Even with such a large number, every character serves some purpose; not one of them can be dispensed with. The Bal comes with the highest number of characters, and the Karna has the minimum number. It is a peculiarity of our poet that he paints individuals, not types. Even minor characters, such as chamberlains or maids, are also invested with special individuality distinguishing each of them from similar characters. The characters never talk more or less. They live a plain, straightforward life. In the Mahabharata plays, we do not get instances of the poet's skill at characterization as he is tied down to the epic for the main features of his characters. Duryodhana and Karna are presented here in a favourable light, the poet treating the former almost as a 'Hero'. The Prat shows all the characters in a more elevated atmosphere than their portrayal in the Ramayana. They all wear a human aspect. In Sita we have an ideal wife, having deep respect for the elders and prepared to follow her Lord cheerfully through thick and thin. It is when we get glimpses of t come to the legendary plays that we get glimpses of the poet's skill at characterization. At his hands, the Vidusaka has lost his stereotyped gluttony, and has become a constant companion and a helpmate of the hero. Unlike the co-wives in later plays, both Vasavadatta and Padmavati in the Svapna are free from the slightest taint of jealousy, and vie with each other in their love for, and sacrifice for the sake of, their husband. Udayana also, though. though agreeing to marry again, cherishes the sweet memory of his dead wife; and is careful enough not to trouble his second wife by disclosing these painful thoughts. Thus the trio, though ideal, is none the less quite huma n. Yaugandharayana is a clever minister, more than a match for his rivals, and ready to give his life for his master. In Avimaraka, we have the character of a young hero who

91 falls in love at first sight, which is, of course, pure love, and at great risk, he meets his beloved who reciprocates his love. An ideal courtesan, equalling if not surpassing, ladies in their love and devotion to their husbands, is portrayed in the Car. Judging from Brunetiere's standpoint that drama is nothing but the spectacle of a will striving towards a goal and conscious of the means which it employs, many dramas of our group would be found to stand high." The characters of Bhasa are not so romantic and imaginative as those of Kalidasa and Bana, not so poetic and sentimental as those of Bhavabhuti, not so vigorous as those of Bhatta Narayana, not so unsteady and fairylike as those of Sri Harsa, not so humorous and realistic as those of Sudraka, where the latter has outshone his master. ii. STYLE AND DIALOGUES. The metrical portions of Bhasa's works are dealt with separately. Prose is said to be the chief factor and the real merit in a poet so far as a dramatic piece is concerned. In Bhasa, "the sentences are everywhere replete with a wealth of ideas beautifully expressed, which cultured minds will easily appreciate"." Bhasa shows his mastery over prose by employing "short bits of prose highly charming in sense and expression". The language. is very simple, natural and touching, alternated with simple figures of speech like simile and metaphor. The verbal flow is unimpeded and limpid. The date assigned by us to Bhasa also would confirm the impression these dramas make, that Sanskrit was a spoken language of the time. "The superior excellence of sentences which are not subject to the restrictions of versification is everywhere to be observed in these Rupakas. It really surpasses in grandeur, the style of other works and is incomparable." The next approach to the language of our plays is the Sanskrit used in the epics. Bhasa's fondness for pithy proverbial phrases will be evident from their large number in each play. Prasada, Ojas and Madhurya may be said to be the characteristics of Bhasa's style. There is a change in 914 1 Cf, Sarup, Vision, Intr., pp. 61-62. 2 G. Sastri, Critical Study, p. 27. 3 G. Sastri, Critical Study, p. 51. 4 G. Sastri, Critical Study, p. 33.

92 style as befits the occasion and sentiment, as is ordained by the Natyasastra. "He is terse and sparse in his expression. He tells us more by the things he does not say than by the things he says. He is the master of silence"* Dialogue is a necessary element of the drama, and the above observations necessarily apply to the conversational language of Bhasa; his dialogues are intensely dramatic. The speeches of the characters are natural, realistic and vigorous. There is nothing of effort, bookishness, unnecessary predominance of figures etc., that characterize the dialogues of later dramatists. The dialogues in the Svapna, Avi and Uru especially, would bear ample testimony to the poet's power. He is certainly the master of dialogues as well. Not only that. Verse is successfully employed in dialogue. A verse is occasionally split into padas or smaller bits and each is taken up by a different character. In spite of the criticisms levelled against this practice that it is mechanical and prosaic, we are inclined to agree with Prof. Devdhar that "for quickness of repartee and dazzling play of dialogues, this device is admirably suited".* iii. RASAS AND ALAMKARAS Rasa is the soul of poetry. In dramatic literature, a poet cannot ignore it but must possess a minute knowledge of its constituents etc., as the aim of every drama is 'the creation in the mind of the audience of sentiment." The main object of a dramatic work is the evolution of some rasa by means of vibhavas and anubhavas. Works on rhetorics give psychological and physiological details and subdivisions of rasas etc., with which we are not concerned now. In our running commentary on each play, we have mentioned the dominant sentiment in it, and have also given some striking instances of the figures of speech employed by the poet. It would appear from it that our poet has a special liking for Vira, Vatsala, Hasya, 1 Bharata Natya Sastra, XVI, 105-109. Samata, Arthavyakti, Kanti and Audarya may be stated as the Kavya-Gunas of Bhasa. 2 Meerwarth, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1917, p. 273. Cf. a: (Prat, II. 17). What wealth of information is supplied by these simple words? Keith, Sanskrit Drama, p. 276. 3 Johnston, Indian Antiquary, 62, p. 98. 4 Plays etc., p. 65.

93 Adbhuta, Raudra and Karuna Rasas. Bhasa serves as a good instance to show the futility of the impression of some, that a dramatic piece does not appear at its best unless Srigara plays a prominent part in it. Only two dramas of Bhasa have that sentiment to some degree, viz. the Svapna and Avi, but there also the poet does not leave proper bounds. bounds. It is love of the highest kind. ones. is As for the different figures of speech, Bhasa content only with the simple He employs only Upama, Utpreksa, Rupaka, Arthantaranyasa, Anumana It is not necessary to give examples, generally each verse exemplifying one or the other of the above alamkaras.³ etc. Kalidasa takes ideas from Bhasa, and at times, the figures also, but he presents them in quite a different garb owing to his superior genius. The greatness of Bhasa in the domain of alamkara is attested thus by Kalidasa who, in imitating our poet shows "his practical appreciation of the merits of the dramatist with whose established fame his nascent genius had to " iv. DESCRIPTIONS OF NATURE etc. " Bhasa being a close observer of nature, his descriptions are interesting and realistic. He gives diverse details and various facts connected with the phenomenon he wishes to describe. Thus, e. g., sunset is pictured in all its details in the Svapna, I. 16; khaga vasopetah salilamavagadho munijanah pradipto'gnirbhati pravicarati dhumo munivanam | paribhrasto durad ravirapi ca samksiptakirano ratham vyatyasau pravisati sanairastasikharam || 1 Anticipating some objections to the inclusion of Vatsala as a sentiment, the following quotation from the Sahityadarpana III. 251-254 is given. sphutam camatkaritaya vatsalam ca rasam viduh | sthayi vatsalata snehah putradyalambanam matam || uddipanani taccesta vidyasauryadayadayah | alinganangasamsparsasirascumbanamiksanam 11 pulakanandavaspaca anubhavah prakirtitah | sancarino'nistasanka harsagavadayo matah 1 padmagarbhacchavirvarno daivatam lokamatarah | 2 In a subsequent chapter dealing with each play we have quoted some verses as illustrating some figures. The subhasita as given in an appendix also serve as instances of many alamkaras found in every one of the plays. 3 Keith, Sanskrit Drama P. 120.

94 and so is darkness with all its effects in the Bal, I. 16; III. 19 etc. Bhasa paints nature as sympathizing with the feelings of the person that observes it. Avimaraka, who, being disappointed in love and desperate at the idea of not meeting his beloved again, finds the earth emaciated, the trees consumptive, mountains bewailing and the whole world swooning as it were. Cf. Avi, IV. 4: loko'yam ravipakanastahrdayah samyati murcchamiva | The hot sand troubled him, the heat of the sun. made him perspire and the whole earth seemed to him as if it were a whole boiling mass. Cf. Avi, IV. 5: sradityapakacalitah phalativa lokah | Earlier, when Avimaraka was in optimistic moods, thinking about the variety of human nature, he found the earth also putting on a different garb at night fall. Cf. Avi, II. 13: vesantaram racayativa manusyalokah | The whole stanza beautifully describes the approach of night. A Vidyadhara couple was viewing the same earth at the same time when it appeared to be swooning and boiling to Avimaraka. They observed it from above and as they were in a joyous mood, the earth presented quite a different aspect to them. Cf. Avi, IV. 11: sailendrah kalabhopama jaladhayah kridatatakopama vrksah saivalasannibhah ksititalam pracchannanimnasthalam | simanta iva nimnagah suvipulah saudhasca bindupama drstam vakramivabhibhati sakalam samksiptarupam jagat || As they were high up in the air, everything appeared so small that they thought that the world was as it were epitomized. Cf. Avi, IV. 11 d: fa asd efaasi and when the couple was coming down, the earth appeared to them as if running with the encircling ocean. Cf. Avi, 12 d: abhipatativa mahi samudramudra | Later on, after meeting his beloved, the thundering clouds, terrifying lightening and heavy showers of rain which

95 greatly upset his beloved suggest only similes of love and amorous sport to Avimaraka. Cf. Avi, V. 7 d: prapto'prayauvanaghanastanamardakalah | Thus nature responds to the feelings of the beholder. The descriptions of nature are accurate and appropriate. To Bharata on his way to Ayodhya in a chariot, on account of the high speed the trees appeared as if running with the chariot, the dust in the spokes looking like the waters of a river passing through them, etc.-a very realistic description, barring of course the improbability of Bharata seeing the wheels or spokes while seated in the chariot. Cf. Prat, III. 2: druma dhavantiva drutarathagatiksina visaya nadivovrttamburnipatati mahi nemivivare | aravyaktirnasta sthitamiva javaccakravalayam rajasvasvodbhutam patatti purato nanupatati || The poet has also interspersed many similes and metaphors concerning the natural phenomena in a number of verses. The similes and poetic imageries are not only apt but being suitable to the context, increase its beauty. We get descriptions of the ocean, or similes about it only in the Abh. Cf. Abh, IV. 3, 17: kvacit phenodvari kacidapi ca minakulajalah kvacicchamkhakirnah kvacidapi ca nilambudanibhah | kacid vicimalah kvacidapi ca nakrapratibhayah kvacid bhimavartah kvacidapi ca niskampasalilah || gives a beautiful description of the ocean, calm here ruffled there, as it stood parted affording a passage for Rama. Besides descriptions of nature, our poet has shown his mastery in giving vivid, accurate, realistic accounts of battle. Such are those, e. g. in the Abh (VI. 1-18) and Uru (vv. 16-26) describing the fights between Rama and Ravana, and Bhima and Duryodhana respectively. e Mention may also be made of the description of the sacrifice and sacrificial fire in the first act of the Panc, and of the sacerdotal similes that are found in many places, e. g. in the Uru (vv. 4-14) there is a perfect comparison between the battle-field and sacrifice. Cf. Uru, v. 6:

96 karivarakara yupi baga vinyastadarbhi hatagajacayanoco vairavahnipradiptah | vanfaaafania: farmzina: patitapasumanusyah samsthito yundayajnah || Hanuman in the Abh supplies us with a description of Lanka with its palaces, pleasure gardens etc.(Abh, pp. 21-24). The description of night and darkness seems to be a favourite one with our poet as it occurs in the Avi (pp. 43-46), Car (pp. 25-26) and Bal (pp. 7, 9). In all these places, effects of darkness are artistically depicted. All these descriptions pronounce Bhasa to be a realist, pure and simple; he does not go beyond enumeration of the facts constituting the particular scenes, places or action; no flights of imagination are to be met with in Bhasa. His sense of tact is much stronger than his imagination. This peculiarity of Bhasa will be evident when we compare Bhasa's descriptions with similar ones from Kalidasa, Harsa, etc. v. NANDI. MSS of Sanskrit dramas present two different styles in their opening portions. Most of the dramas begin with a benedictory stanza called Nandi followed by the stage direction nandyante tatah pravisati sutradharah | But in Bhasa's works as well as a number of South Indian plays including the Southern MSS of the Malavikagnimitra, Vikramorvasiya, etc. the stage direction nandyante etc. precedes the benedictory stanza, generally known as Nandi. In the latter case, some different meaning for 'Nandi' other than 'a benedictory verse' will have to be sought; otherwise the whole thing would amount to this: after the performance of Nandi the Sutradhara enters the stage and again recites Nand (the benedictory stanza). This is meaningless. Visvanatha, as we have seen, has noticed this difference in the MSS, and Saradatanaya has tried to get over the seeming difficulty." According to him, in the first case, where e stage direction Nandyante etc. comes after the benedictory stanza, the word nandyante is to be taken as Tatpurusa "After finishing the Nandi (a: :)", while 1 Sahityadarpana, p. 63 (Kane's edition); Bhavaprakasana, Gaekwad鈥檚 Oriental Series No. 40, p. 200, also Intr., pp. 45-46.

97 in the latter case, the expression nandyante is to be taken as Bahuvrihi ( nandi antah yasya sa nanyantah ) meaning "After finishing the preliminaries (of which Nandi is the last act.") Thus, "Sutradhara reciting Nandi after the stage direction nandyante etc. after finishing preliminaries (of which Nandi is the concluding function)" appears quite appropriate. In this connection, it may be noted that Prof. Pisharoti's explanation of Nandi as a long process. of religious ceremony conducted in the green-room and on the stage behind the curtain, is more suitable than Dr. Sarup's "flourish of trumpets." 1 sutradharakrtarambha, On the strength of the testimony of Bana about Bhasa's dramas being much capital has been made of this peculiar mode of opening in the Bhasa dramas, taking it to refer only to this particular mode which these dramas share with a number of other Southern MSS and South Indian plays. The arguments are not strong enough to convince one as to this mode being a speciality of Bhasa. It may be an old practice of MSS which has been preserved in Bhasa and the Southern manuscripts, while the usual opening is frequently due to a remodelling under the influence of 'kascit' referred to by Visvanatha. Probably, as already stated, Bana simply wanted to tell about the general characteristic of Bhasa's works comparing them. with temples. There is also a possibility that Bana may have referred to some stage reform of Bhasa: but at present no case has been made out for such an assumption." 2 The information given by Prof. Pisharoti throws some doubt as to the authenticity of some of these so-called benedictory verses to our plays, especially those employing the Mudralamkara, as would appear from the introductory 1 Pisharoti, Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 6, p. 820; Sarup, Vision, Trans., p. 1. 2 Cf. Konow, Indian Antiquary, 49, p. 234. 3 We have consulted all the articles on the subject that we came across and our considered opinion is as stated above; among others we referred to Asuri, (Sanskrit Bharati, 5, p. 13); Banerji Sastri (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1921, pp. 368-370); Barnett (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1921, pp. 587-588); Devdhar, (Plays etc., pp. 42-44); G. Sastri (Critical Study, pp. 17-18, 94, 121); Hirananda Sastri (Memoirs of the Archaological Survey of India, 28, pp. 4-6); Khuperkar, (Lokasiksana, 5, pp. 326-329); Keith (Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 3, p. 297); Konow (ID, p. 25; Indian Antiquary, 49, p. 234); Lindenau (Bhasa-Studien, pp. 1, 37); Paranjape (Pratima, Intr., pp. XII-XIV); A. K. Pisharoti (Criticism, pp. 8-12); K. R. Pisharoti (Shama'a, 1924, pp. 141-142 n 1; 1925, pp. 181-184; Annamalai University Journal, 3, p. 150; Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 3, p. 113 n 3; 6, pp. 819-821; Bal, Trans., reprint, Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society, p. 1, n 1); Raja, (Zeitschrift fur Indologie und Iranistik, 2, pp. 252-255; Journal of Oriental Research, 1, pp. 227-230); Ramaswami Sastri, (Bhasana, Gaekwad鈥檚 Oriental Series, Intr., pp. 45-47); Sarup, (Vision, Intr., pp. 20-21); Shivadatta Sarma (Nagari Pracarini Patrika, 4, p. 142); Venkatarama Sarma (Indian Historical Quarterly, 5. pp. 725-726); Winternitz, (Problems, pp. 127-128); Woolner and Sarup (Thirteen Trivandrum Plays, 1, p. IX note).

98 verses to some acts of the Svapna, Pratijna and Dgh." The non-mention of the names of the poet and the work in the prologues of the plays as we have them today was not to be seen in Bana's days as would appear from the latter's statement; this would have been a singularly distinctive characteristic of Bhasa, and hence it seems that there has been some mangling with the prologues to some extent. But we cannot concede more than this. The other portions are certainly by Bhasa as we have seen in the case of the Svapna. So, this 'Nandi' business cannot be taken to indicate the Southern origin or the Cakyar authorship of these Bhasa plays. vi. BHARATAVAKYAS. 2 MM. Dr. Ganapati Sastri speaks with reference to the Bharatavakyas that they do not refer to any particular king but "only speak of one's own king in general." We do not take Rajasimha as the proper name of the king, but to us the change in the toning of the Bharatavakyas in different plays seems to refer undoubtedly to the vicissitudes in the life of some particular king. The prayers paracakram prasamyatu and laksmya samayukto, raja bhumim prasastu nah tell in clear unmistakable terms of foreign invasion and possibly of the king's losing, regaining and expanding his kingdom during the period these plays were written. The prayer would be meaningless unless there were these obstacles of inland and foreign invasions and hence we are inclined to take these Bharatavakyas to refer to historical facts. The extent of the kingdom is given as "bounded by Vindhya and Himalayas and the oceans". Now we shall briefly state the views as to the identity of Rajasimha put forth by different scholars and try to meet their arguments. Beginning from the lower limit, the views of Dr. Barnett and Prof. Pisharoti identifying him with some Pandya or Pallava king are obviously untenable, since the dramas are written much earlier, the boundaries of Bhasa do not tally and the evidence is not supported by history. The dramas, 1 Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 6, pp. 820-821; Annamalai University Journal, 3, pp. 150-151; Shama'a, 1924, pp. 141-142. 2 Critical Study, pp. 93-94; also cf. Winternitz, Calcutta Review, Decr. 1924, p. 344; Sukthankar, Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1925, p. 140. 3 Barnett, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1919, p. 233 (Pandya Ter. Maran Rajasimha ); Hirananda Sastri, Memoirs of the Archaological Survey of India, 28, p. 25 (Two Pallava chiefs, namely Simha-Visnu and Narasimhavaraman Rajasimha I); Kane Vividha Jnana Vistara (Marathi Monthly Magazine), 1920, p. 99 (Pandya Rajasimha); Kavi, Journal of the Andhra Historical Research Society, 2, p. 143 (Pallava Rajasimha I or Simha-

ww 2 further, proceed from the North. Dr. Sten Konow would find in Rajasimha a reference to a Ksatrapa king, by placing Sudraka in the third century A. D., and assuming that the word Rajasimha refers to Rudrasimha I. But, "two weak arguments combined do not make a strong argument". No special reason is shown why 'Rajasimha' should refer to the particularly selected king, there being among the Western ksatrapas three kings of the name Rudrasimha, one Simhasena and one Visvasimha, who all ruled between 180 and 388 A.D. The territorial boundaries also do not coincide. Dr. K. P. Jayaswal and Mr. P. Chaudhury come next, championing the cause of Narayana Kanva.³ But "the theory seems more ingenious than probable" as the interpretations and allusions in 'Narayana,' "Barhadrathapahrta' and 'Upendra' etc. are far-fetched, unwarranted and ill-suited to the context, The descriptions further "would better suit the Sunga king." The attempt is said to have been made "with more imagination than historical facts". No case is made out for foreign invasion. It militates against the vicissitudes of the king, and is not borne out by historical material. Prof. Dhruva next deserves our attention by making Bhasa the court poet of Pusyamitra, and referring the 'paracakra' to the invasion by Menander. In addition to the ignorance of the South that our poet displays for so late a period, there are historical facts that do not lend their support to this theory. Prof. Dhruva finds allusions to the invasion and 19 4 Cost of Magadha under Pusyamitra by Kharavela and Menander, Pusyamitra's subsequent victory and performance of the Asvamedha, in the Bharatavakyas. But all this is wrong. It is shown by Dr. Roy Chaudhury that Kharavela cannot be the comtemporary of Pusyamitra, and 'Menander could not have been the IndoGreek contemporary of Pusyamitra Sunga"." Thus the contemporaneity of Pusyamitra, Kharavela and Menander is open to much doubt. Internal evidence, again, will go against any such identity; for, there is much change in Visnu); Raddi, Vividha Jnana Vistara (Marathi Monthly Magazine), 47, p. 135 (Kerala Rajasimha); Saraswati, Indian Historical Quarterly,1, pp. 263-264 (Pallava Rajasimha ). 1 ID, p. 51. 2 Winternitz, Problems, p. 124. 3 pp. 264-265; Chaudhuri, Modern Review, Oct. 1913, pp. 384-387. 1914, p. 598. 5 Winternitz, Calcutta Review, Dec. 1924, p. 343. 11-12, 30-59. 7 Political History of Ancient India, pp.237-249, on p. 249. Jayaswal, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1913, 4 Venkataraman Modern Review, 6 Svapnani Sundari, pp.

100 the sociological conditions of the Sunga period and of the period of these plays. Then remain two claimants to the title 'Rajasinha', viz., Candragupta and Nanda. The reign of Candragupta would suit the description of the Bharatavakyas; but from the fact of the Kautiliya Arthasastra containing a quotation from Bhasa, we are inclined to place Bhasa as the senior contemporary of Kautilya, and hence of Candragupta. The reign of Mahapadma also answers the territorial limits as he was the first to bring the whole of Northern India under his sovereignty. The choice, therefore, remains to be made between Mahapadma and Candragupta and we would vote in favour of the former.* Thus, Bhasa was the court poet of Ugrasena Mahapadma, as the description of the Bharatavakyas suits him and the sociological conditions depicted in these plays fit in very well with the Mauryan epoch. vii. ANACHRONISMS Late date was assigned to these plays on account of the mention of statue-houses and Nyayasastra of Medhatithi in the Prat, deification of Rama and Krsna in the Abh and Bal, mention of Kharapata in the Car, naming of a Brahmana as Kesavadasa in the Mv, and the use of metronyms in some of the plays." All of these can be shown not to be real anachronisms. 2. i. We have already shown that there is historical evidence for the existence of statue-houses since very long in India, and that the so-called South Indian statuehouses are quite different from those mentioned in the Prat. There is no sense in identifying Medhatithi's 1 Contra, Dhruva, Svapnani Sundari, Intr., p. 12. But Candragupta had to contend with Seleucus Nicator, There is further, a close correspondence between the sociological conditions as depicted by Bhasa and those of the Mauryan period. The famous Greek invasion led by Alexander, the Great, took place in the reign of Ugrasena Mahapadma, who was "the sole king," ruling the whole earth under one umbrella,, (Modern Review, Octr. 1930, p. 438). It cannot be said that Bhasa could not have praised a Sudra king (Mrcchakatika, Ed. by Mehta and Dave, Intr., p. VI) since the divine origin of kings (f) is an ancient Indian dictum. 2 For Mahapadma's history, Cf. Smith, Early History of India, p. 51; Rapson, Cambridge History of India, pp. 313-314; Roy Chaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, 1927, pp. 140-145. Bhasa's works show slight priority to Candragupta, and Kautilya quotes from Bhasa, hence our preference for Ugrasena Mahapadma. 3 Cf. Pisharoti, Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 3, p. 108 n 2; Winternitz, Problems, p. 123; Kane, Vividha Jnana Vistara (Marathi Monthly Magazine), 1920, pp. 100-102; Devdhar, Plays etc. pp. 36-37 Sankar, Asutosh Memorial Volume, 2, pp. 56, 62-64. 4 Chapter II Supra. Cf. G. Sastri, Critical Study, pp. 99-100; Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 3, pp. 629-630; Haraprasad Sastri, OC, V. pp. 97-98 Jayaswal, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, 5, pp. 98-99.

101 Nyayasastra with Manubhasya; even some of the antagonists have taken Medhatithi to be Medhatithi Gautama. Further, we do not find any instance of such glaring anachronisms in Bhasa. 1 ii. As for the deification of Rama and Krsna, it has not been conclusively shown that Rama and Krsna were not regarded as manifestations of Visnu before the first or the second century B. C. That Krsna was worshipped in the fourth century B. C. would be evident from the fragments of the Indika of Megasthenes. The deification must have been a slow process and we feel certain that it was long before the 6 th century B. C. that Krsna was deified. The case of Rama is also similar and there is nothing to contradict the conjecture that they were deified before Bhasa's time, or at any rate, by Bhasa. . iii. 'Kharapata' as an author of the science of thieving is known since the time of the Arthasastra and it is more reasonable to suppose that the Mattavilasa copied the tradition from the Arthasastra or the Carudatta than to assume the reverse, in face of the priority of the Arthasastra at least. At any rate, the tradition making Kharapata the guardian deity of thieves is a fairly old one, not inconsistent with the date we we have have assigned to Bhasa.³ iv. With regard to the rule of Manu that the name of a Brahamana should end in sarman (Manu, II. 32. sarmavad brahmanasya syat |, it is not shown that this was an ancient rule invariably followed. Further, it is inconceivable that our poet, a strong upholder of orthodox Brahmanism as he is, would ignore such a directory rule especially as he seems to be so particular in the very same play, in such minute details as to the particular form ':' to be used in addressing Brahmanas. Contravention of the rule of Manu does not necessarily mean posteriority to Manu. s. The use of metronyms does not put a work to a late date. In fact it is an old practice found in ancient Sutra works and Upanisads. It is said that the use of the words Svamin, 1 Devdhar, Plays etc., p. 55 n 90. 2 Macdonell, History of Sanskrit Literature, p. 411. Cf. also Bhandarkar, Epigraphica Indica, 1934, pp. 198-205. 05. Hathi-Bada inscription refers to the temple of Sankarsana and grants for its upkeep in the second century A. D. 3 Arthasastra, IV. 8, p. 221; cf. also G. Harihar Sastri, Asutosh Memorial Volume, 1. pp. 224-227,

102 Bhartrdaraka, Bhadramukha, etc. in the terminology of Sanskrit dramaturgy is due to the influence of the Ksatrapas as is evident from their inscriptions; and as Bhasa employs those expressions in his works dealing. with the incidents of the earlier period, this would be an instance of an anachronism. We think with Prof. Kane, that the Ksatrapas were not the originators, but "that the inscription was composed by one who was thoroughly imbued with the dramatic terminology contained in the Natyasastra". Hence this also does not necessarily prove to be an anachronism. Thus the so-called anachronisms are non-existent. We could not come across any instance that could be included in the list, and hence it seems to us that Bhasa. is free from the defect of anachronism. viii. DEFECTS. The praise that has been showered on Bhasa should not make us oblivious of his defects. Nothing is perfect in this world of human beings and Bhasa is no exception to this rule. It should, however, be borne in mind that Bhasa's works are the first specimens of Sanskrit drama and hence we should not expect them to be the finished products of a tried hand, being the works of a pioneer Sanskrit dramatist. Again we have to take into account the popular beliefs in those days as to the use of magic etc., which may not be appreciated by the present day critics. The first drawback that would strike one after a study of these works is that the poet ignores the unity of time. In the Bal towards the close of the first act when Vasudeva delivers Krsna to the care of Nandagopa, night is said to have ended (p. 18) and Vasudeva sets out to go back to Mathura; but on his arrival there, he finds Mathura under the spell of night (p. 20 aaa ngan agerat aat am: 1). In the beginning of the third act of the Avi, the moon is said to have risen (p. 42 gadha啶紁ao poso | arudha johva | ) ; but after a time when the hero starts on his mission, he finds darkness everywhere (p. 43). During the course of the conversation in the first 1 Levi, Indian Antiquary, 33, p. 163. 2 Sahityadarpana, Intr., pp. VII-IX.

103 act of the Svapna the time is indicated to be the mid-day (p. 24 :), while towards the close of it, after a lapse of half an hour or so, the sun is said to have set (p. 37, Act 1. 16). The fourth act of the Avi also has got some contradictory statements about the lapse of time. Avimaraka after leaving the Kanyantahpura, says that he has been wandering for a number of days (p. 58) but his friend Santusta whom he meets the same day, in his soliloquy says that he was told of Avimaraka's flight that very day (p. 69). Small one-act plays, however, are quite perfect in observing the unity of time, the time of their action being that required for the actual representation on the stage of the play. The tithi scheme of the Car is faulty, being repugnant to the unity of time, while the Mrcchakatika has improved it." Many Sanskrit dramatists of quite late times are found to violate the rule as to the unity of time and hence Bhasa may be said to be in good company. Another defect of the same kind, which is peculiar to Bhasa alone is found in the use of. The chamberlains, door-keepers, messengers etc. are sent out either to bring some characters or some news; they start out and return immediately with the person called or twith the news of events which must have taken long to happen. This tells very heavily on the sense of time and proportion as well as the credulity of the spectators and appears quite unnatural. is orr Similarly the poet uses the device of Akasabhasita by which a person is represented as speaking with some one not on the stage and himself repeating what the latter to him with the words ff etc. Though this minimizes the number of characters it takes the elements of reality and naturalness out of the dramatic piece, the spectators requiring some strain of imagination. The method is not impressive, though of practical utility from the point of stage economy, as it saves a number of characters. 1 Sukthankar, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 42, pp. 70, 73-74; Paranjape, Sahitya Samgraha, 1, Pp. 103-127.

104. The audience receives another blow to its imagination when some characters appear on the stage quite unannounced, without any intimation, in contravention of the specific dictum : asucitasya patrasya praveso nopapadyate | Grammatical solecisms, faults in versifications, use of such padapuranas as a, a, a, a etc. very often, some verses being quite plain and devoid of sentiments or poetic fancy, are some of the minor defects of Bhasa. Some of the former in the above may be justified on the ground of epic usage and influence, and possibly they were not looked as defects in those days. 4. PERSONAL HISTORY OF BHASA. In this age when every one tries to blow his own trumpet and widest publicity is sought for any third-rate composition and the particulars about the name etc. of the author are given, it seems rather strange that the renowned author of this precious treasure should keep such merciless reticence about himself, as not to mention even his name!" We had to depend on inference for attributing the works to Bhasa; and the information about Bhasa as given below is nothing more than our impressions about the author after a close study of his works. Prof. Dhruva says that there was a tradition to mention the name of one's gotra, and it is in accordance with this, that we get such names as Patanjali,Yaugandharayana. Bhasa is a gotra in Haimodaka division of Agastya gotra and Bhasa is the corrupt form." That he was a Brahmana, an orthodox follower of the caste-system and a firm believer in the practice, utility and efficacy of sacrifices etc., seems to follow from the views he takes of these things. We have already shown that Dhavaka is quite a distinct person from our author and hence it follows that the description of the latter as a 'washerman' by caste, on the strength of the alleged identity is not correct. There is no internal evidence to support the inference. 1 Cf. Paranjape, Sahitya Samgraha, 1, pp. 18 32, at p. 27. The whole chapter is a beautiful piece, a striking instance of Gadya Kavya in which the celebrated Marathi writer specialized. One is tempted to find autobiographical references in the chapter. 2 Dhruva, Svapnani Sundari, Intr., p. 14, 3 Supra, Chapter II; Cf. Narayana Sastri, Priyadarsika, Intr., pp. XXI-XXIV.

105 Mr. Sankar takes Bhasa to have been the ruling king on account of the use of a ("may Balarama protect thee etc."), and ("may Narayana award thee the entire earth") in the benedictory stanzas of the Svapna and Avi. The benedictions, according to him, refer to the royal author himself, otherwise "the plural should have been used if they were meant for the audience". It would be more reasonable, we think, to suppose that the poet used or purposely in these two tvam dramas only, as he was sure of the king's presence at the first performance of the dramas. This explains the absence of such words from the benedictory stanzas in the Pratijna, Panc, Prat, as the poet was not sure whether the king would grace the occasion by his attendance. The prayer in the remaining benedictory stanzas is for the protection of the audience, viz. : (" of you all"). This fact, coupled with the epilogues of the dramas, seems to suggest that Bhasa was a court poet of some king, rather than the king himself. The absence of the benedictory. stanza and the epilogue to the Car shows that the poet could not give final touches to the same, owing perhaps to his death. His ignorance of the South and mention of countries, towns, rivers and specialities (e. g. talipatra in the Car, p. 82) of the North proclaim the poet to be a northerner; the characters of his plays are from the North and the scenes in almost all the plays lie in Northern India. So it seems to be a more reasonable assumption to take the poet to be an inhabitant of the North than to have him as a Southerner. 2 The benedictory stanzas as well as the introductory verses and the general tone of the plays show that Bhasa was a Vaisnava of the Bhakti cult. He also knew the Pancaratra system of philosophy. He was a champion of the Brahmanas, a staunch upholder of the caste-system and a firm believer in the efficacy of the sacrificial oblations. He seems to be well-versed in all the Sastras and conversant with all the conventionalities of behaviour according to the orthodox systems. Truth in thought, word and deed was his motto. He seems to have been an obedient and dutiful 1 Asutosh Memorial Volume, 2, p. 61. 2 As taken by all the Anti-Bhasaites. Dr. Keith and Weller also suggest likewise. Cf. Sanskrit Drama, p. 105.

106 son, full of respect for the elders, a born conversationalist holding the assembly spell-bound, humorous and witty. by nature, and modest. He was a minute observer of nature and humanity. A loyal and patriotic subject of the king, he was never a slavish flatterer, and his self-respect brooked no insult or indignity from his master. His message of optimism shows that Bhasa probably lived in peaceful and affluent circumstances. He voices forth the general disregard towards the Jain and Buddhist monks and nuns. He was also well-read in various aspects of politics and knew a good deal about art, painting and sculpture. Being connected with the courtlife, he was quite aware of the plots and counterplots daily hatched within the four walls of the palaces. Bhasa is reputed to have written a work on the Natyasastra; and the fact of his dramas being found admirably suited for the stage has led Kirata to hazard the inference that the poet may have been connected with professional actors in his early life. Dr. Keith tells us that actors used to go from town to town even in Buddha's time.' So Kirata's guess may be correct. 5. OTHER WORKS OF BHASA. Years before the present works appeared before the public Mr. S. Narayana Sastrigal in his introduction to the Ratnavali had stated that Kiranavali, Mukutataditaka and Udattaraghava from amongst the Bhasa dramas were to be found in a private library and that in the prologue to the last-named of these, Bhasa had mentioned himself as the author of twenty-three dramatic compositions.* Mr. Krishnamacharya doubted the authority of these statements, and as none of the above works have come forth as yet, the doubts seem to have been confirmed. Mr. K. Sampathagiri Rao also notes the tradition that "Bhasa wrote thirty plays and more"." Mr. Narayana Sastri in the same connection ascribes the Ghatakarpara Kavya to Bhasa, after attempting to prove the identity of Bhasa, Dhavaka and Ghatakarpara on the authority of Kavyanusasana of Hemacandra which is not yet out. This authority also is 1 Keith, Sanskrit Drama, p. 105; Sarup, Vision, Intr., p. 37. 2 Marathi translation, Intr., p. 151. 3 Sanskrit Drama, pp. 43-44. 4 Cf. Krishnamacharya, Priyadarsika, Bhumika, pp. XXI-XXXI. 5 All India Drama Conference, p. 131. 6 Cf. Krishnamacharya, op. cit. pp. XXII-XXIII.

107 not trustworthy, as said by Krishnamacharya. Now, one Ghatakarpara Kavya by Ghatakarpara Kavi has been published by the Venkateshwar Press, and it must be the same work as referred to by Narayana Sastri, since the last verse etc. as quoted by the learned Sastri occurs in the book as No. 22, and etc., alleged to be quoted in the Kavyanusasana, also finds its place as No. 9 in the book. But this Ghatakarpara Kavya does not appear to be the work of Bhasa, the author of our plays. The identity between him and Ghatakarpara is yet to be established as the argument rests on very flimsy grounds. Further, even if the same be proved, we shall have to take him as another Bhasa, since the matter and manner of the book are strongly against the authorship of Bhasa, the writer of our plays. It is full of Sabdalamkaras and Yamakas, end and middle rhymes,and it will be readily accepted that Bhasa is quite innocent of such devices. With Bhasa the tendency to use alliteration, rhyming, and other figures of words is the exception rather than the rule. The similes and metaphors from the sphere of Srngara employed in the Kavya are of such a nature as to preclude the possibility of their having ever been composed by Bhasa. Too much attention towards the outer form and word-jugglery were the characteristics of the later age and hence the Ghatakarpara cannot be ascribed to our Bhasa. It will be noted, further, that none of the verses praising Bhasa mention Yamaka as his characteristic. Mr. Guleri pointed out the existence of "A poem by Bhasa", its name being fan (plural). This has been inferred from a verse in the Prthvirajavijaya by Jayanaka (12 th century A. D.) satkavyasamharavidhau khalanam diptani vahnerapi manasani | bhasasya kavyam khalu visnudharman (?) so'pyananatparatavanmumoca || Jonaraja (15 th century A. D.), while commenting on the verse, refers, inter alia, to the competition between Bhasa and Vyasa and the fire-ordeal, incidentally mentioning Bhasa as Bhasa Muni. Dr. T. Ganapati Sastri proposed an emendation by reading fan for 1 Indian Antiquary, 42, pp. 52-53. ha hum bethi e vadhu sa

108 fan, took the word as an epithet of 'Fire'- 'autsargika dahakasvabhavavan ' - and by the insertion of tayormadhyat in the third line, rendered the verse as meaning "Fire left unburnt the poems of Bhasa like mercury"; while the reading, as it stood, meant, according to Dr. Sastri, "Fire did not burn those portions of both Bhasa and Vyasa which described Visnudharma". He, however, concludes that the exact meaning is to be got at by having other manuscripts of the original and the commentary. We think that the word fan in the quotation does. not refer to any works of Bhasa, but the whole verse is meant to state the tradition of Bhasa's works having survived the fire ordeal. Mr. Sankar successfully tries to extract the required confirmation of the tradition from the verse by emending visnudharman to visnudharman, and paratavat to bharatavat . He takes the verse to mean that the Svapnavasavadatta in Bhasa's works equals Bharata in merits. There is thus no necessity to suppose the transference of the tradition of the Svapna as done by Dr. Bhandarkar," because the verse confirms the tradition and is not at variance with it. That really seems to be the sense. Hence the attempts to identify the Visnudharma with some published or unpublished works seem to us rather futile and baseless." Mr. R. Kavi of Rajahmundry in a paper read at the Third Oriental Conference held at Madras, attributed the Damaka Prahasanam and Traivikrama to Bhasa.5 Dr. Jolly in a learned article in Festgabe Garbe has disproved the alleged connection in the case of Damaka Prahasana, and Prof. K. Rama Pisharoti, one of the leaders of the opposition, places the Traivikrama in the 12 th century A.D., and ascribes it to some Cakyar, possibly Nilakantha. 6. some Damaka Prahasana would serve as the best illustration of what may be called a 'compilation'. Traces of borrowing from different sources are evident in many parts of the work. Thus, the first scene has been patched 1 Critical Study, pp. 48-49; App. II b. 2 Asutosh Memorial Volume, 2, pp. 42-43. 3 Indian Antiquary, 42, p. 53 note. 4 Bhandarkar (op. cit) refers to two works of the name of Visnudharma or Visnudharmottara, both Puranas. Hirananda Sastri (Memoirs of the Archaological Survey of India, 28, p. 27) identifies the Visnudharma of Bhasa with Visnudharmottariya published at Bombay. One Visnudharmottara, containing one of the oldest and most exhaustive Kramrisch, Calcutta, 1928. 5 OC, III, pp. 80-85, 6 Jolly, Festgabe Garbe, pp. 115-121; Pisharoti, Shama'a, 1924, pp. 213-222 at p. 214; Damala, edited by V. Sarma, Lahore, 1926. treatises on Indian painting has been published by Dr. Stella

109 1: up by passages bodily taken from the Karna, Svapna, Avi and Mattavilasa. The name Damaka appears in the Bal, and the confusion between Brahmadatta and Kampilya is taken from the Svapna and Avi. The description of Asrama shows borrowing from the Svapna, and the reference to is from the Mattavilasa. The story of Karna and Parasurama is identical with that in the Karna, and so is the Bharatavakya. The mangala stanza has been incorporated from the Arthasastra. Mr. R. Kavi could not venture an opinion about the portions borrowed from the Mattavilasa, and yet he concluded that this work must take the seat in the thirteen works! Damaka may have been the compilation of a single 'lucky' Cakyar, but the mass of evidence given above speaks conclusively against its being an original composition. We concur with Dr. Jolly in assigning it to Cakyar workmanship after the seventh century A.D. By no stretch of imagination are we able to ascribe the term 'drama' to Traivikrama. "It is but an apology. There is no plot, no construction, no characterization in the dramatic form". It is no doubt unique in that there is no prologue, the stage manager enters with his mistress, and there are no characters besides these two. It is only a dialogue about Vamanavatara in which the Sutradhara narrates the events in verse, while the Nati's task is only to say at intervals. The later limit for the date of the Traivikrama has been supplied by the Sakuntalacarcana, which has been placed in the fourteenth century. The play itself speaks of its date as twelfth century. So its ascription to Bhasa, or to any other dramatist prior to the twelfth century, is quite impossible. Prof. Pisharoti is right in fathering it on some Cakyar, preferably Nilakantha. Mr. Sankar ascribes to Bhasa in addition to the Svapna, Pratijna, Abh, Panc, Dv, Bal and Avi, the authorship of the Padmaprabhrtaka and Mrcchakatika His identification of Bhasa with Sudraka does not seem to be based on conclusive grounds. 'Vatsarajacarita' may be the scribe's alternative title for the Pratijna; this cannot 1 Arthasastra, XIV, 3, p. 421; suvarnapuspi brahmanim brahmanam ca kusadhvajam | sarvasca devata vande vande sarvosca tapasan || 2 Pisharoti, Shama'a, 1924, p. 214. 3 Problem of Bhasa, Asutosh Memorial Volume, 2, pp. 59, 60, 164.

110 serve to establish their identity. He takes the Car as an abridged version of the Mrcchakatika compiled in 750 A.D., whereas we credit the author of the Car with originality. Internal evidence is against the ascription of the Padmaprabhrtaka to Sudraka, the author of the Mrcchakatika; both are different persons. Vinavasavadatta, which is at present being serially published in the Journal of Oriental Research, Madras, bears many resemblances to the Bhasa plays; but the treatment is quite different, and there are discrepancies in the originals of the Udayana legends used by Bhasa and the author of the Vina. The reference to a dattamatmanamudayanaya prayacchat which is also found in the Malati-Madhava, places the work after the 7 th century, as suggested by Prof. Dhruva. This accords well with the date of Saktibhadra, and lends some support for our assumption that it may be the Unmada by Saktibhadra, especially as the latter is found to know Bhasa's works well. The title Unmada may have been changed by some irresponsible scribe, such cases, fortunately, being very rare; and the absence of the names of the author and the work can be explained on the ground of the Maharastra Sahitya being neither complete nor correct. The find of complete MSS, especially from the other parts of India, will set all doubts at rest as to the authorship and title of the Vina. Thus we find that there are at present no other works of Bhasa besides those published in the T.S.S. No other confirmation besides the statement in the Arthadyotanika on the Sakuntala has been found so far, for the inference of a work on dramaturgy by Bhasa. The catalogues of MSS of various libraries consulted by us do not show traces of any of the still undiscovered compositions of Bhasa. Private communications from Dr. Keith, Dr. Barnett and Dr. Winternitz also confirm the view that there is at present no Maharastra Sahitya that is, or can be, ascribed to Bhasa in the British or Continental Libraries. The Curator of the Government Manuscripts 1 Kavi, Avantisundarikatha, Intr., p. 8, identifies Vatsarajacarita with Vinavasavadatta; cf. Sarasvati, Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society, 12, p. 276. 2 Pradhanani Pratijna, 2 nd edition, Intr. p. 19, n. 25 & 26; also Bhattanatha Swami, Indian Antiquary, 45, p. 192. The reference is to tamasmakesvarasutasya suniscito'pi datum ... ( I, 4, p. 2 ) and sanjayaya dasyamiti sulkam pratigrhya na gaanfala acqzung: 1 (p. 8) from the Vinavasavadatta, Madras Or. Ser. 3 Keith, Sanskrit Drama, p. 105; Sarup. Vision, Intr., p. 37.

111 Library, Madras, says the same with reference to that Library. 6. ANTHOLOGY VERSES AND VERSES QUOTED BY RHETORICIANS. Great capital is made of the non-occurrence of a single stanza out of those ascribed to Bhasa in the published Trivandrum texts. It is argued that as none is found in these plays they are not genuine Bhasa plays. Dr. Winternitz describes this circumstance as 'fatal'." Mr. R. Raddi further says that these verses are quite different in structure from those that we have in the Trivandrum plays. But the argument is not so sound as it at first sight appears. The absence can be satisfactorily explained. 2 3 i. It is not yet proved that Bhasa wrote only the works that are now available to us. Besides twenty-three or thirty plays, he is said to have composed a poem and also a work on dramaturgy. So, the anthology verses may have been excerpted from such works now lost to us, or the verses may be sphuta slokas by Bhasa,-general verses of a miscellaneous character, without forming part of any particular work. ii. It may further be urged with some plausibility that these, or at least some of these verses, may have been taken out from some lost recensions of these dramas.* Some MSS of the Abh are found to contain three stanzas less than the others coming from the same region." The Svapna may have contained etc., and 6 c; and the Bal and the Abh the verses utsahatisayam vatsa etc., and tretayugam etc. respectively. We have attempted to show later on in this chapter that some of the anthology verses may have formed part of some of the Trivandrum plays. as 1 222 Again, these anthologists are not trustworthy are found to be wrong in various ways and particulars. 1. They are sometimes found to misquote the 1 Calcutta Review, Dec. 1924, p. 346 ; (cf. Hirananda Sastri, Memoirs of the Archaological Survey of India, 28, p. 27. 2 Vividha Jnana Vistara (Marathi Monthly Magazine), 47, p. 230. 3 Cf. last section. 4 Cf. Sukthankar, Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1925, p. 129. Similar hypothesis as to the verses being from the undiscovered works of Bhasa has been put forth by Sarup, Vision, Intr., p. 37; Ghataka, Journal of the Department of Letters, 12, pp. 8-10; Khuperkar, Lokasiksana 5, pp. 324-325, etc. 5 Cf. Abhiseka, Lahore edition, pp. 23 n 4; 38 n 4; 75 n 3. 6 As shown by us in earlier sections.

112 names of the authors, e.g., different verses of Bhallata in his Bhallata-sataka are ascribed to various authors by the anthologists; e.g. verses numbers 25, 26, 35 39, etc. are ascribed to Jayavardhana, Janavarma, Induraja, Trivikrama, Amrtadatta, etc. in the Subhasitavali and Sarngadharapaddhati. Out of the verses ascribed to Bhasa, one, viz., etc, is found to occur in the Mattavilasa of Mahendravikramavarma which shows that frequently these anthologists depended on memory. 2 2. Similar with the above is the ascription of the same verse to different writers by different anthologists; and instances will be found in these verses themselves which are ascribed to Bhasa. The verse etc. has been ascribed to Bhasa by the Sarngadhara, to Kalasaka by the Subhasitavali, and to Syamala by the Saduktikarnamrta. Similarly: etc. has been assigned to Bhasa by the Sarngadhara and Subhasitavali, but the Suktimuktavali by Jalhana ascribes it to Rajasekhara. It is also well known that fetc. is ascribed to Vikramaditya (Subhasitavali), Vikramaditya and Mentha (Sarngadhara), Dandin or Sudraka. iv. Many verses ascribed to Kalidasa, Asvaghosa and other celebrated dramatists by the anthologists are not found in their extant works, while no one assumes thereby that the extant works are not genuine. Why not have the same treatment to Bhasa? The above statements satisfactorily explain the absence of the anthology verses from our plays. But we shall deal with them separately in the light of the previous contributions on the subject. The stanzas, fifteen in all, are given in an appendix. 1. tiksnam ravistapati etc. We have already shown that this verse, which has been unanimously attributed to Bhasa by the Subhasitavali, Sadukti, and Sarngadhara as also by Dr. Thomas, Dr. Weller and Dr. Sarup, shows many features common to the Bhasa plays published in the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series and hence the latter can 1 Khuperkar, Lokasiksana, 5, pp. 324-325; also Paranjape, Pratima, Intr., pp. XX-XXIII. 2 Cf. References in the above foot-note; also Sivadatta Sarma, Nagari Pracarini Patrika, 4, pp. 129-133; Ghataka Journal of the Department of Letters, 12, pp. 2-5. 3 Cf. Sukthankar, Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1925, p. 129; Sankar, Asutosh Memorial Volume, 2, p. 44.

113 justifiably be attributed to Bhasa.' The simile of a man made newly rich is heightened in its effect by being qualified by the term 'low-caste man', and aptly describes the fierceness of the sun; the other objects of comparison chosen by the poet, viz. ungrateful man and his friend, sage and his inner consciousness, and poor lover and his love, show the same keen observation of humanity and the same word echoes that are met with in our Bhasa plays. 2. fan etc. describes an ideal wife. This recalls to one's mind, as rightly pointed out by Dr. Sarup, the lines of the famous poem of Wordsworth: "A perfect woman nobly planned, To warm, to comfort and command"; 1; 2 This verse finds its counterparts in many plays of our group. Cf. Bal, poll:gia gia, va dem di; Prat, 1.25: anucarati sasankam rahudose'pi tara ; Svapna, VI. 11 : sisya devi ca me priya | ; Car, 1.7: favi, IV. 21: meg: 1; etc. The qualities enumerated of an ideal wife in this verse, conform to those which our poet paints his female characters, such as Sita, Vasavadatta, etc. to possess. The happiness of her husband is the sole aim of the wife, and her conduct is always regulated by his likes and dislikes, and has to enact many roles as befit the occasion. This verse is uttered by the speaker, presumably in the absence of his wife or during the period of separation, and the sense of the verse shows that he is not newly married. Out of the published texts in the Trivandrum series, we are afraid, the Mahabharata and Krsna Mahabharata and Krsna plays would not accommodate this verse, and Rama (in the Prat and Abh) has no occasion to recall the virtues of Sita, and Avimaraka and Udayana (in the Pratijna) are yet to lead a marital life; so, if at all, we must find a place for the verse in the Svapna in the fifth Act, before the famous dream-scene, when the king is reminded of Vasavadatta by the mention of Ujjayini in Vidusaka's story, and expresses himself in metrical lines (p. 104); or, the verse may occur in the sixth act, in the lamentations of the king 1 Chapter II, pp. 44-45. Supra. Thomas, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1928, pp. 884-885; Weller, Festgabe Jacobi, pp. 117, 120-122; Sarup, Vision, Intr., p. 3. 2 Vision, Intr., p. 5. 嘟斷舰 嘟�嘟� | 1:|:嘟� 嘟� 嘟� 1|:嘟�嘟�

114 after Vasavadatta's nurse comes to him with a message from Mahasena (p. 133). 3. virahivanita vaktraupamyam etc. is the description of winter with similes, at once apt, striking and original. We again get here 'a man deserted by fortune', 'a newly married bride' and 'a woman separated from her husband', all of whom have their counterparts in the Trivandrum plays. Cf. Car, I. 28 : ksine vibhavasancaye | ; Panc, I. 17 : vibhavanam parijnayat | This is a general description; and as none of the plays in our group relates to the freezing wind, we are unable to include it in any of the plays. On account of the similarities of ideas and expressions between between the Trivandrum Bhasa plays and this Bhasa verse, it may safely be assumed that the verse belonged to some other work of Bhasa now lost to us. 4. etc. admirably brings out the apparent contradiction (Virodhabhasa) in the first two padas. A similar instance of Virodhabhasa from our plays is found in the Avi, p. 6 : ( darsaniyo'pyavismitah taruno'pyanahamkarah suro'pi daksinyavan, sukumaro'pi balavan ) Our plays do not contain any heroine that can be said to be young and at the same time expert in all amorous sports; taking, however, the description to be applicable to Kurangi, we may place the verse somewhere in the fifth act of the Avi, where the hero has a chat with his friend (pp. 76 et seq). the 5. yadapi vibudhaih etc. has been ascribed to Bhojadeva in Sukti and to Laksmid hara in the Kavindravacanasamuccaya (No. 163), while the Sadukti, Yasastilaka and Jalhana attribute it to Bhasa. This ascription to different authors in different anthologies casts some doubt on Bhasa's authorship of this verse, and Dr. Sarup's acceptance of this verse as composed by Bhasa is open to objection according to his own dictum, as this stanza has been attributed to different poets and hence 'should be regarded as of doubtful authorship'." Dr. Weller finds a parallel for visam ca vilocane in the Avi, II.7 : drstivisa manojnam . The poet has shown the play of his vivi imagination by comparing various parts of the face of a beautiful damsel to the celestial flowers (:), moon, ambrosia and poison, and stating that all of these latter, d 1 Weller, Festgabe Jacobi, p. 118. 2 Sivadatta Sarma, Nagari Pracarini Patrika, 4, p. 131. 3 Vision, Intr., p. 3. 4 Festgabe Jacobi, p. 117.

1:15 each one of which gods obtained with great effort by churning the ocean, are to be found on the faces of beautiful women, without any effort. 6. pratyasannavivahamangala etc. has been ascribed to Bhasa in the Sadukti, and the Sarngadhara does not mention the name of the poet. Dr. Thomas, on the strength of the striking resemblance between this verse and the opening verses of the Ratnavali, Priyadarsika and Parvatiparinaya, concludes that it may be "old, and connected with Bhasa."" This verse is of the nature of a mangala stanza, and hence, though it may have come from Bhasa, it would not find a place in our Bhasa plays. As regards (7) etc. (8): etc., and (9) etc. we are inclined to doubt the authorship of Bhasa as the ideas they express are foreign to him, and there is no occasion for such sentiments in the Trivandrum plays. Sarngadhara, moreover, speaks about : etc. as coming from an unknown poet ( kasyapi ). dagdhe manobhavatarau etc. is a good instance of paronomasia. 10. etc. has been ascribed to some unknown poet (f) by the Subhasitavali. Similar ideas are found expressed in the Avi and perhaps it may be located in that play on p. 78. 11. etc., in spite of its ascription to Rajasekhara in the Sukti, may have come from Bhasa. The tricks played by the moon, proud of its splendour, with different persons when its rays cast their resplendence on different objects in succ are beautifully told in this verse. The description of the moon is a favourite one with Bhasa and is found in various plays of our group. dayita bahupasasya 2 12. etc. has been ascribed to Bhasa by the Sarngadhara, while the Subhasitavali states Kalasaka as its author and Sadukti states Syamala. But Dr. Thomas finds a similarity between this verse and Ratnavali (III.60-61), which latter he takes as containing Bhasa echoes and states "that the verse may be really of Bhasa". It may, however, be stated that it cannot find any place in our group. 13. etc. which is found in the Mattavilasa peya ERT 1 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1928, p. 884. 2 Cf. Weller, Festgabe Jacobi, pp. 123-124; also Deodhar, Plays etc., pp. 3, 5. 3 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1928, p. 884. The comparison of Mistress' arms to the hangman's noose is common.

116 (p. 7, v. 7) has been ascribed to Bhasa by Somadeva; he is obviously wrong in the ascription and this fact does not warrant any inference as to the authorship of the Mattavilasa as the verse occurs there as a Subhasita. Somadeva need not be accused of gross negligence as it may be that he knew of the verse as not the composition of Mahendravikramavarman (the author of the "Mattavilasa) and ascribed it to Bhasa, possibly on account of similar Bacchic songs found in the Pratijna (Act IV. 2, 11). Bhasa's works had long been out of currency in the public, and hence Somadeva had to depend on oral tradition only. 14. padakrantani puspani etc. and (15) tretayugam etc. have already been shown to find their places in the Svapna and Abh respectively.' Mr. Narayana Sastri of Madras has ascribed eko hi doso gunasannipate nimajjatindoriti yo babhase | nunam na drstam kavinapi tena daridryadoso gunarasinasi || to Bhasa without giving any authority for the statement ; and has woven a fabric out of this slender evidence as to Bhasa's being distressed by poverty etc. But that this stanza cannot be ascribed to (the pre-Kalidasan) Bhasa is evident from the fact that it refers to the well known saying of Kalidasa in the Kumarasambhava, viz. eko hi doso gunasannipate nimajjatindoh kiranesvivankah | and the latter certainly came after Bhasa. Dr. Sarup regards those stanzas as composed by Bhasa "which are unanimously attributed to Bhasa by all the anthologists"." According to him, ten stanzas out of the collection (which are Nos. 1-10 in our list) may be accepted as from Bhasa. Dr. Weller, in a learned and thoughtful article contributed to Festgabe Jacobi, has proved on internal evidence that six of the stanzas (i.e. Nos. 1-5 and 11 in our list) are similar in thought, ideas and expression to those contained in the Trivandrum 1 Supra, pp. 30-31; 45-47. 2 Cf. Priyadarsika, Intr., pp. XXII-XXIII. It may be noted that the stanza has been put in the Subhasitavali as 3 Vision, Intr., p. 4.

117 plays; but his suggestion that the anthologists ascribed verses to Bhasa as they felt the spirit of his poetry in them seems to be far-fetched.' Dr. Thomas, as already stated, considers four stanzas (viz. Nos. 1, 6, 10 and 12 in our list) as coming from Bhasa; he further finds that four stanzas in the collection are "of a tenor which would not admit of a place in any of the Trivandrum plays". We have expressed our views on the point. We cannot close our investigation without quoting in extenso from the critical appreciation of these stanzas, admirably expressed by Dr. Sarup: "These stanzas display keen observation, vivid imagination, great power of description, a remarkable intellectual quality and a refreshing originality. Their substance and their style, their matter and their manner, stamp them with a rare mark of beauty. These lyrics are the impassioned expressions of the poet's inmost soul. They breathe the genuine accents of poetry. They are chiselled pieces of marble. They are exquisite little pictures".* 1 Festgabe Jacobi, pp. 114-125, at p. 125. "It is of course, 'commonsense to assume", with Dr. Keith, "that the ascriptions are correct". (History of Sanskrit Literature, Preface, p. xvi). 2 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1928, p. 883. 3 Hindustan Review, 50, p. 117.