Essay name: Bhasa (critical and historical study)
Author: A. D. Pusalker
This book studies Bhasa, the author of thirteen plays ascribed found in the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series. These works largely adhere to the rules of traditional Indian theatrics known as Natya-Shastra.
Page 52 of: Bhasa (critical and historical study)
52 (of 564)
External source: Shodhganga (Repository of Indian theses)
Download the PDF file of the original publication
32
Dr. L茅vi, in the same article, refers to another
treatise on dramaturgy quoting an extract therefrom bearing
on the present question.
in
厂脛骋础搁础狈础狈顿滨狈
his Natakalak峁峁嘺ratnakosa while discussing the
manner of transition from the prologue to the main scene,
apparently cites from a Svapnavasavadatta.- 啶ぅ啶� 啶膏啶掂お啷嵿え啶掂ぞ啶膏さ-
啶︵い啷嵿い啷�, 啶ㄠ啶ぅ啷嵿く啷� 啶膏啶む啶班ぇ啶距ぐ啶� ( 啶夃い啷嵿じ啶距ぐ啶｀ぞ啶� 啶多啶班啶む啶掂ぞ 啶啶むた ) 啷� 啶多啶班く啷� 啶曕ぅ啶� 啶むお啷嬥さ啶ㄠ啶洁お啷嵿く啷佮い啷嵿じ啶距ぐ啶｀ぞ (啶掂た啶侧-
啶曕啶� ) 啶曕ぅ啶� 啶え啷嵿い啷嵿ぐ啷� 啶啶椸え啷嵿ぇ啶班ぞ啶ぃ啷� 啶掂い啷嵿じ啶班ぞ啶溹じ啷嵿く 啶班ぞ啶溹啶お啷嵿ぐ啶む啶ぞ啶ㄠく啶ㄠ 啶曕ぐ啷嵿い啷佮啶距ぎ啶� 啶う啷嵿ぎ啶距さ啶む啶啶ㄠ啶ㄠ-
啶膏ぞ啶班啶い啷� 啷� 啶囙い啷嵿く啷佮い啷嵿じ啶距ぐ啶｀ぞ 啶多が啷嵿う啷嬥そ啶� 啶啶班啶掂啶啶班く啷嬥啶啶む啶膏ぞ啶班啶� 啶ㄠぞ啶熰啶距ぐ啷嵿ぅ啶膏啶氞 啶囙い啶� 啶啶班く啷嬥啶距い啶苦ざ啶 啷�
[yath膩 svapnav膩sava-
datte, nepathye s奴tradh膩ra岣� ( uts膩ra峁嚹佱箖 艣rutv膩 pa峁環ati ) | 艣raye katha峁� tapovane'pyuts膩ra峁嚹� (vilo-
kya ) katha峁� mantr墨 yaugandhar膩ya峁嚹� vatsar膩jasya r膩jyapraty膩nayana峁� kartuk膩ma岣� padm膩vat墨yajaneno-
s膩ryate | ityuts膩ra峁嚹� 艣abdo'na p奴rvakaprayogamuts膩rya n膩峁璦k膩rthas奴caka iti prayog膩ti艣aya岣� |
] not tally with the printed text.
prologue is worded thus : 啶膏啶む啶班ぇ啶距ぐ啶� - 啶多啶班啷嵿 啶ざ啷嵿く啶距ぎ啶� |
[s奴tradh膩ra岣� - 艣ra峁単a pa艣y膩mi |
] This doe
(啶ㄠ啶ぅ啷嵿く啷� ) 啶夃じ啷嵿じ啶班す 啶夃じ啷嵿じ啶班す 啷� 啶呧く啷嵿く啶� [nepathye ) ussaraha ussaraha | ayy膩 ] ! 啶夃じ啷嵿じ啶班す 啷�
啶膏啶む啶班ぇ啶距ぐ啶� -- 啶さ啶む, 啶掂た啶溹啶炧ぞ啶むぎ啷� 啷�
啶啶む啶啶班啶啶оぐ啶距啶膏啶� 啶膏啶ㄠた啶椸啶о 啶曕え啷嵿く啶距え啷佮啶距ぎ啶苦き啶苦 啷�
啶о啶粪啶熰ぎ啷佮い啷嵿じ啶距ぐ啷嵿く啶む
啶膏ぐ啷嵿さ啶膏啶むお啷嬥さ啶ㄠ啶む [ussaraha |
s奴tradh膩ra岣� -- bhavatu, vij帽膩tam |
bh峁泃yairmagadhar膩jasya snigdha岣� kany膩nug膩mibhi岣� |
诲丑峁涐梗峁璦尘耻迟蝉腻谤测补迟别
蝉补谤惫补蝉迟补辫辞惫补苍补驳补迟墨 ] 37: 11
There the
On account of the difference between the two, Dr.
L茅vi, Prof. Pisharoti and others regard our text with
suspicion as an adaptation. Dr. Raja finds in Sagaranandin
a support for the particular meaning he attaches to the
expression MM. Dr. G. Sastri, Dr. Thomas,
Dr. Sukthankar, Prof. Dhruva and others on the other
hand, explain the difference on the ground that
S膩garanandin was quoting from memory or giving in his
own words the contents of the prast膩van膩 or quoting from
a variant text.
The above assumptions, especially that of stating in
his own words, seem to be confirmed by the wording of
the quotation, e. g such words as 啶う啷嵿ぎ啶距さ啶む啶�, 啶ㄠ啶ぅ啷嵿く啷� 啶膏啶む啶班ぇ啶距ぐ啶�, 啶夃い啷嵿じ啶距ぐ啶｀ぞ啶�
啶多啶班啶栢ぞ [padm膩vat墨ya, nepathye s奴tradh膩ra岣�, uts膩ra峁嚹佱箖
艣谤耻办丑腻 ] in place of the usual 啶う啷嵿ぎ啶距さ啶む啶溹え, 啶ㄠ啶ぅ啷嵿く啷� 啶夃い啷嵿じ啶距ぐ啶｀ぞ啶� 啶多啶班啶む啶掂ぞ 啶膏啶む啶班ぇ啶距ぐ啶� [padm膩vat墨jana, nepathye uts膩ra峁嚹佱箖 艣rutv膩 s奴tradh膩ra岣� ] etc.
The extract from the Sakuntalavy膩khya which will be
considered next, also shows that S盲garanandin was
stating the contents of the sthapana in his own words.
The two extracts discovered by Dr. L茅vi show that our
Trivandrum play is a Southern recension of the drama of
Bhasa. Finally, we come to
1 L茅vi.
2 kalaksanaratnakosa, edited by M. Dillon,
11, 1923, p. 217.
has recently been published by the Oxford University Press (London, 1987). This
quotation occurs in that work on p. 51. 2. L茅vi, J4, 1928, pp. 179-217; Pisharoti,
IHQ, 1, p. 108; Devdhar, Plays etc, p. 60; Hirananda, MAST, 28, p. 11. 3 JOR.
1. p. 237.
4 G. Sastri, Critical Study, pp. 117-118; Thomas, JRAS, 1925, p. 103;
1928, p. 878; Sukthankar, JBRAS, 1925, p. 275; Dhruva, Svapna upar navo prak膩s,
5 pp. 5-6.
Sarup, Vision, Intr, pp. 29-35; Sukthankar, JBRAS, 1925, pp.
137-138. 274-276.
