LXXVI

(c) Bhaṭṭa Lollaṭa. Bhaṭṭa Lollaṭa has been referred to as many as eleven times.²⁰ From these he appears to be a commentator of the Nāṭyaśāstra. As the rasa theory of Śaṅkuka was known to have been levelled against Lollaṭa's view on the same, this latter writer flourished possibly in the middle of the 8th century.²¹

(d) Śrī Śaṅkuka. Abhinava referred to Śrī-Śaṅkuka or Śaṅkuka as many as fifteen times.²² About his time we seem to have some definite information. For he is probably identical with the author of the poem Bhuvanābhyudaya written during the Kashmīrian king Ajitāpīḍa whose date is about 813 or 816 A. C.²³

(e) Bhaṭṭa Nāyaka. Bhaṭṭa Nāyaka has been referred to as many as six times by Abhinava.²⁴ Besides explaining and elucidating the Nāṭyaśāstra, at least in part, he wrote on the Dhvani theory an independent work named the Hṛdayadarpaṇa. He has been placed between the end of the 9th and the beginning of the 10th century.²⁵

(f) Bhaṭṭa Yantra. From the single reference to him in Abhinava's commentary it appears that Bhaṭṭa Yantra²⁶ was a commentator of the Nāṭyaśāstra. About him nothing more can be said except that he preceded the celebrated commentator.

7. Bhatta Abhinavagupta

Among the commentators of the Nāṭyaśāstra, Abhinavagupta or Abhinava is the most wellknown. But his fame rests also on his commentary on the Dhvanyāloka as well as numerous learned treatises on the Kashmir Śaivism. From the concluding portion of some of his books we learn a few facts of his family history, and on the strength of these he has been placed between the end of the 10th and the begining of the 11th century.²⁷ From the Abhinavabhāratī we learn that his another name was Nṛsiṃhagupta.²⁸

Although like any other work of this class it professes to explain the text, Abhinava's commentary is not always an adequate help for understanding the several difficult passages of the Nāṭyaśāstra. This drawback might be due to its defective text tradition, but a careful study of it will convince any one that all its weak points cannot be explained away on this assumption alone. There are instances of Abhinava's not being sure about the explanation offered, for example, the word kutapa is once explained as

---

²⁰ Ag. I. pp. 208, 266, 279, 299 ; II. pp. 134. 196, 415, 423, 436, 452. De's Ms p. 386.
²¹ Skt. Poetics. Vol. I. pp 38-39.
²² Ag. I. pp. 74, 217, 274, 285, 293, 298, 318 ; II. pp. 411 ; 436. De's. Ms. pp 403, 413, 437, 441, 448, 469.
²³ See Skt. Poetics, I pp 38-39.
²⁴ Ag. I. pp. 4, 26, 278, II. p. 298, De's MS pp. 500, 508.
²⁵ Skt Poetics, I. pp. 39ff.
²⁶ Ag. I. p. 208.
²⁷ Skt. Poetics, I. pp. 117ff.
²⁸ See Ag. De's. Ms. pp. 428, 511.

LXXVII

'four kinds of musical instruments'²⁹ and next as 'a group of singers and players of musical instruments'³⁰ and then again as 'four of musical instruments',³¹ while explaining the mattavāraṇī he gives four different views³² and does not give special support to his own preference. Besides this, his explanation in some cases seem to be fanciful. For example, he explains khaṇḍana as (meaning) 'also fanning by means of a fan made of palmleaf'.³³ This evidently is wrong, for in the same context vyajanakam 'fanning' has been mentioned, and khaṇḍana may better be interpreted as 'drawing patterns or designs'.³⁴ But such instances are not many. That Abhinava had as the basis of his commentary a defective text of the Nāṭyaśāstra, is apparent from its published portion, and his text was in places to some extent different from any of the versions that have reached us. It is due to this latter fact that sometimes particular passages of the commentary cannot be connected with any portion of the text (given above the commentary) in the Baroda edition. For example, once Abhinava writes "here are four ca-kāras",³⁵ but in the text indicated by the pratīka two cā-kāras only are available. And curiously enough a part of this text quoted elsewhere³⁶ in the commentary corroborates the available reading of the text. In another place of Abhinava's commentary we have the word ālambhana explained, but we look in vain for it in the text.³⁷ The same is the case with avyatireka and āgama occuring in the commentary later on.⁴⁸ And some responsibility for its reduced usefulness must be ascribed to the fact that Abhinava had his commentary based on an imperfect text of the Nāṭyaśāstra.

There is still another reason due to which Abhinava's work does not prove to be quite adequate for our need. It is probably because he wrote the commentary with a view to help scholars of his time, whose knowledge on many things relating to the Indian drama, theatre and general literature he could easily assume, his commentary sometimes falls short of our needs.

But in spite of these limitations Abhinava's work has its value. Whenever he has to explain any theory or problem concerning the dramatic art or general aesthetics, he does it very exhaustively by quoting all possible views on the same and often cites examples from a vast number of dramatic and other works some of which have perished. Often he sums up the discussion in a masterly fashion. That he was a voluminous writer on the abstruse philosophical topics gave him some facility in handling such matters. But, for the purpose of reconstructing the theory and practice of the ancient Indian drama, such scholastic discussions are often not of much value, though students of Indian poetics and aesthetics will surely

²⁹ Ag. I. p. 73.	³⁰ Ag. I. p. 65.	³¹ Ag. I. p. 186.
³² Ag. I. pp. 64-65.	³³ Ag. I. p. 41.	³⁴ See note 2 on IX 61-64
³⁵ Ag. II. p. 34.	³⁶ Ag. I. p. 203.	³⁷ Ag. II. p 34.
³⁸ Ag. II. pp. 97, 225.

LXXVIII

be profited by their perusal. But it must be said of Abhinava's commentary that it gives considerable help in understanding some difficult passages of the very old obsolete text of the Nāṭyaśāstra, and for this we should be genuinely greatful to him.

VII. Data of India's Cultural History in the Natyasastra

Besides giving all sorts of information relating to the dramaturgy and histrionics as well as the allied arts of dance and music, the Nāṭyaśāstra includes considerable other materials for the cultural history of India. The most important among these will be discussed below under their several heads.

1. Language

The Nāṭyaśāstra gives some description of Pkt. (XVIII. 1-25) and examples of Dhruvā songs in Pkt. (XXXII). From these materials it seems that the Pkt. of the Nāṭyaśāstra lie mid-way between the Pkt. of the classical dramas and that of Aśvaghoṣa's plays. Besides this there occur in this work (XVIII. 44, 48) some references about the nature of languages used by the ancient tribes like the Barbaras, Kirātas, Āndhras, Dramiḍas, Śabaras and Caṇḍālas. There are besides other interesting matters relating to the language used by men of different professions and status in life.

2. Literature

In addition to Prakrit verses given as examples of Dhruvās, the Nāṭyaśāstra cites numerous poetical stanzas in Skt. as examples of the Benediction and of the different metres (V. 108-112, 130-131 : XVI). These are very early specimens of the ancient Indian literature. It is on the testimony of these which are free from the artificiality of the later classical poetry, that P. Regnaud placed the Nāṭyaśāstra about the beginning of the Christian era (Introduction to Grosset's ed. of the NŚ. p. VII-VIII). The Nāṭyaśāastra contains also the earliest available discussion on figures of speech (alaṃkāra), and the method of criticism based on the theory of Sentiments (rasa) which became very popular amongst Indian scholars during the medieval times.

3. Art

In the Viṣṇudharmottara (II. 2. 4) it has been said that the canons of painting are difficult to understand without an acquaintance with the canons of dancing. Now the Hindu drama as we have seen before depends a great deal on dance which is in fact its mainstay. The same work similarly connects the canons of painting with the canons of image-making. Thus the three arts being connected with one another, the Nāṭyaśāstra receives an aditional importance. This view is justified by the fact that the Nāṭyaśāstra describes various male postures (sthāna) such as Vaiṣṇava,

LXXIX

Samapāda, Vaiśākha, Maṇḍala, Ālīḍha and Pratyālīḍha (XI. 50-71), and female postures (sthāna) (XIII. 159-169) such as Āyata, Avahittha and Aśvakrānta. These and the various gestures described in the Nāṭyaśāstra may also be helpful in studying specimens of the ancient sculpture and painting. It should be noted in this connection that the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra a medieval encyclopoedic work while describing the rules of making images describes (ed. GOS. Vol. II. p. 301ff) the hand gestures etc. almost in the language of the Nāṭyaśāstra.

4. Metrics

Fiftyeight varieties of metre of sama, ardhasama and viṣama types have been described in the Nāṭyaśāstra (XVI). All these are perhaps anterior in time to the Chandaḥ-sūtras of Piṅgala. One important aspect of this description is that the name of the following metres are different in the NŚ. e. g. Drutavilambita = Hariṇapluta (NŚ), Bhujaṅgaprayāta = Aprameyā (NŚ), Sragviṇī = Padminī (NŚ), Mālinī = Nāndīmukhī (NŚ), Hariṇī = Vṛṣabha-ceṣṭita (NŚ), Mandākrāntā = Śrīdharā (NŚ), Pṛthvī = Vilambita-gati (NŚ), Kusumita-latā-vellitā = Citralekhā (NŚ).

5. Poetics

The Nāṭyaśāstra enumerates (XVII. 43-106) four poetic figures (alaṃkāra), ten Guṇas and ten faults (doṣa) of a composition. In brief these may be called the earliest writings on poetics. To the theory of Sentiment (rasa) and the States (bhāva) (VI-VII) also the same remark applies.

6. Costumes and Ornaments

Detailed descriptions of ornaments, and directions about costumes to be used by characters in a play according to their social status, profession, religious faith, and tribal origin etc. are given in the Nāṭyaśāstra (XXIII. 1-67, 110-127). These may throw interesting light on the social life of the Indian people in the remote past.

7. Mythology

The Nāṭyaśāstra mentions (I-V, XXXIII-XXXIV, XXXVI) numerous gods, goddesses, demigods etc. Classified according to the system adopted by Hopkin in his 'Epic Mythology' they are as follows :

(a) Lower Mythology : Serpent, Birds, Waters. (b) Spirits : Pitṛs, Bhūtas, Rākṣasas, Asuras, Daityas, Dānavas, Yakṣas, Guhyakas. (c) The eight great gods ; The Sun-God, the Moon-God, the Wind-God, the Fire-God, the God of death, Varuṇa and Ocean, Indra, the Dikpālas (World-protector). (d) The Host of Spirits : Gandharvas, Apsarasas, Kāma, Aśvins, Maruts, Rudras, Viśvedevas, Ādityas, (e) Divine Seers : Bṛhaspati, Nārada, Tumburu. (f) Earthly Ṛṣis and Personages :

LXXX

Bala (deva), Nahuṣa, Sanatkumāra. (g) The Three Supreme Deities : Brāhman, Viṣṇu, Śiva. (h) Lesser God : Kārtikeya. (i) Goddesses : Sarasvatī, Lakṣmī, Umā, Pārvatī, Caṇḍikā, Siddhi, Medhā, Smṛti, Mati, Niyati, Nirṛti. It is probably significant that Gaṇeśa and the Avatāras of Viṣṇu are absent from this list.

8. Geography.

In its chapters XIV, XVIII and XXIII the Nāṭyaśāstra mentions some geographical names such as Aṅga, Anta (Anti) rgiri, Andhra, Avanti, Arvuda, Āvarta, Ānarta, Uśīnara, Oḍra, Kaliṅga, Kāśmīra, Kośala, Khasa, Tāmralipta, Tosala, Tripura, Dākṣiṇātya, Dramiḍa, Nepāla, Pañcāla, Pulinda (bhūmi), Pauṇḍra, Prāgjyotiṣa, Prāṁśu-pravṛtti, Plavaṅga, Bahirgiri, Brahmottara (Suhmottara), Bhārgava, Magadha, Madraka, Malavartaka, Mahārāṣṭra, Mārgava, Mālava, Mahendra, Mosala, Vaṅga, Vatsa, Vanavāsa, Vārtika (Mārtika), Vāhlīka, Vidiśā, Videha, Śūrasena, Śālaka, Sindhu, Surāṣṭra, Sauvīra, Gaṅgā, Carmaṇvatī, Vetravatī, Mahendra, Malaya, Sahya, Mekala, Kālapañjara, Himālaya, Vindhya, Bhārata.

9. Ethnological Data.

The names of the following tribes occur in the Nāṭyaśāstra. Kāśi, Kosala, Barbara, Andhra, Dramiḍa, Ābhīra, Śabara, Caṇḍāla, Śaka, Pallava (Pahlava) and Yavana. From the costumes and colours to be assigned to their body it may be possible to trace them historically.

10. Ars Amatoria.

The Nāṭyaśāstra mentions Kāmitantra or Kāmatantra (XXV. 38, 53-567) and Kāmaśāstra (XXXV. 46). But as it divides women into twenty-four classes, and Vātsyāyana's Kāmasūtra into four classes these names do not seem to relate to the Kāmasūtra which probably comes later.

11. Arthasastra.

The Nāṭyaśāstra is of opinion that "The members of the court (sabhāstāra) should be appointed after consulting the views of Bṛhaspati who thinks that the following are the qualities required for this office. "They should be always ready for work, alert, free from indolence, undaunted by hard work, affectionate, forbearing, modest, impartial, skillful, trained in polity and good manners, deeply conversant with the art of argumentation and all other branches of knowledge, and not affected by sexual passion and the like" (XXXIV-87-90). The word sabhāstāra which has been translated here as a member of the court, occurs in the Smṛti of Vyāsa who holds that this officer should hold discussion about morals (dharmavākya) for the edification of those who are present (in court). In Mbh 4.1.24, however sabhāstāra appears only as a courtier (sabhya, Nīlakaṇṭha) who is particularly interested in gambling (Jolly, Hindu law and Custom, pp. 287-288).

LXXXI

The description of the king, the senāpati, the amātya and the prāḍvivāka as given in the Nāṭyaśāstra (XXXIV. 78-87) might well have been taken from the now lost work of Bṛhaspati recognised by Kauṭilya as one of his sources. The Nāṭyaśāstra gives besides one interesting information that the inmates of a royal palace included a snātaka (XXXIV. 64-69) and that there was besides a functionary named kumārādhikṛta (XXXIV. 76-77). As the definition has been lost, it is not possible to know what his duty was. Can he be identified with the kumārāmātya mentioned in Samudragupta's inscription ?

12. Psychology.

The Nāṭyaśāstra seems to be the first in recognizing the twofold importance of psychology in connexion with the production of a play. Its classification of Heroes and Heroines according to their typical mental and emotional states (XXIV. 210ff., XXXIV. 15ff). proves its admission of the importance of psychology on the creative side of the dramatic art ; for with the complete knowledge of all possible reactions of different objects and incidents upon such Heroes and Heroines, the playwright as well as actors and actresses could attain the greatest possible success in characterisation. On the critical side also the importance of psychology was discovered by the Hindu theorists almost simultaneously. It was realised early that no strictly objective standard of beauty ever existed, and the enjoyment of a theatrical production consisted of peculiar reactions which the art of the playwright as well as that of the actors could successfully evoke in spectators of different types. It is on this assumption that the theory of Sentiments and States (VI-VII) important alike for the criticism of the theatre and the belles lettres has been elaborated by the author of the Nāṭyaśāstra. Such a view does not allow any kind of dogmatism in the criticism of art and literature, and will make due allowance for the views of people who may widely differ in their tastes because of their varying cultural equipment.

VIII. The Date of the Natyasastra

More than sixteen years ago, a careful investigation of the linguistic, metrical, geographical and ethnographic data, of the evidence to be drawn from the history of poetics and music, of the Kāmaśāstra and the Arthaśāstra, and from inscriptions the present writer came to the conclusion that the available text of the Nāṭyaśāstra existed in the second century after Christ, while the tradition which it recorded may go back to a period as early as 100 B.C. (The Date of Bharata-Nāṭyaśāstra", in the JDL. Vol. XXV. 1934).¹ Since this conclusion was made, a more intensive

---

¹ For a bibliography on the Date of the NS. see this paper p. 1,

K

LXXXII

study of the text as well as accession of fresh data has confirmed the writer's belief in its soundness. These additional materials are being discussed below.

1. The Geographical Data

Geographical names occur in the Nāṭyaśāstra (XIV. 36ff.) mostly in connexion with pravṛttis or Local Usages which seem to be a later conception and not at all indipensable for understanding the theatrical art as explained in the Nāṭyaśāstra. In fact the authors of the Daśarūpa and the Nāṭakalakṣaṇa, who speak of the vṛttis are absolutely silent on pravṛttis which are connected with them. Considering the fact that these works depend a great deal on the Nāṭyaśāstra their omission of this item may be taken as very significant. Geographical names occuring in connexion with the pravṛttis are found in the Mbh. and some of the Purāṇas, some of these being almost in the same sequence (see D. C. Sircar, "Text of the Puranic Lists of Peoples" in IHQ. Vol. XXI., 1945, pp. 297-314). It seems that some interpolator put them into the text of the Nāṭyaśāstra, for associating it with all the different parts of India, though the original work was an exposition of the dramatic art as it was practised in the northern India especially in the midland only. Hence the geographical data should not be used in determining the date of our text.

2. The Natyasastra earlier than Kalidasa

The argument that a particular dramatist who disregards any rule laid down in the Nāṭyaśāstra, will be earlier than it in time, will reverse the accepted chronological relation between the Nāṭyaśāstra and Kālidāsa.

(a) Though the fact has been overlooked by earlier writers on the subject, Kālidāsa too violates the rules of the Nāṭyaśāstra on the following points :

(i) Though the prescribed rule (XIX. 33) is that the king's wives should be given names connected with the idea of victory, some of Kālidāsa's royal Heroines have been named as follows : Dhāriṇī, Irāvatī (Mālavi.) Haṁsapadikā, Vasumatī (Śak,).

(ii) It is also in disregard of the rule (XIX. 34) prescribing for the handmaids (preṣyā) the names of various flowers, that Kālidāsa has Nāgarikā, Madhukarikā, Samābhṛtikā, Nipuṇikā, Candrikā, Kaumudikā (Mālavi.), Parabhṛtikā, Caturikā (Śak.) as the names of handmaids in his play. Vakulāvalikā (Mālavi.) is possibly an exception.

(iii) Though the prescribed rule (XIX. 34) is that the names having an idea of auspiciousness, should be given to the menials, Kālidāsa has Raivataka and Sārasaka (Mālavi.) as the names of servants.

(iv) The term svāmin has been used by an army-chief (senāpati) in addressing the king (Śak. II) in violation of the prescribed rule that it should be used for the crown-prince (XIX. 12).

LXXXIII

(v) Besides these, Kālidāsa has written elaborate Prologues to his plays, though the Nāṭyaśāstra does not recognize anything of this kind as a part of the play proper. These as well as the departures from the rules in Bhāsa's play, may be taken as great dramatists' innovations which as creative geniuses they were fully entitled to.

(b) Besides these there seems to be other facts which probably go to show that Kālidāsa knew the present Nāṭyaśāstra. They are as follows :

(i) Kālidāsa uses the following technical terms of the Nāṭyaśāstra : aṅgahāra, vṛtti, sandhi, prayoga, (Kumāra, VII. 91), aṅga-sattva-vacanāśrayaṁ nṛttam (Raghu, XIX. 36), pātra, prāśnika, sauṣṭhava, apadeśa, upavahana, śākhā, vastu, māyurī mārjanā (Mālavi.)

(ii) Kālidāsa mentions the mythical Bharata as the director of the celestical theatre (Vikram, III).

(iii) According to Kāṭayavema, Kālidāsa in his Mālāvi. (I. 4.0 ; 21.0) refers to particular passages in the Nāṭyaśāstra (I. 16-19 ; NŚ (C.) XXX, 92ff.)

3. The Mythological Data

In the paper mentioned in the beginning of this chapter the present writer was mistaken in his interpretation of the word mahāgrāmaṇī which does not mean Gaṇapati as Abhinava the reputed commentator of the Nāṭyaśāstra opines (see notes on III.1-8.). The absence from the Nāṭyaśāstra of this deity who does not appear in literature before the fourth century speaks indeed for the great antiquity of this work.

4. The Ethnological Data

The Nāṭyaśāstra in one passage (XXIII. 99) names Kirātās, Barbaras and Pulindas together with Andhras, Dramilas, Kāśīs and Kosalas who were brown (asita, lit. not white), and in another passage (XVIII. 44) names Andhras and Dramilas together with Barbaras and Kirātas. Āpastamba the author of the Dharmaśūtra who lived at the latest in the 300 B.C. belonged to the Andhra land (Jolly, Hindu Law and Custom, p. 6 and also P.V. Kane, Hist. of the Dharmaśāstra. Vol. I. p, 45). Hence it may be assumed on the basis of these names that the Nāṭyaśāstra was in all likelihood composed at a time when a section at least of the Andhras and the Dramilas (forefathers of the modern Tamils) were still not looked upon as thoroughly civilized. Such a time may not have been much after the beginning of the Christian era.

5. The Epigraphical Data

Sylvain Lévi has discovered parallelism between the Nāṭyaśāstra and the inscriptions of the Indo-Scythian Ksatrapas like Chastana who are referred to therein as svāmi a term applicable, according to the Śāstra to

LXXXIV

the yuvarāja or crown-prince (I. Ant. Vol. XXXIII. pp. 163f). Though MM.P.V. Kane (Introduction to the SD. p. viii) has differed from him, Lévi's argument does not seem to be without its force. It may not be considered unusual for common persons who are intimate with him to show the future king an exaggerated honour by calling him svāmin a term to be formally applied to the reigning monarch only. Besides the argument put forward by Lévi, there may be collected from the inscriptions other facts too which may incline us to take 200-300 A.C. as the time of the compilation of the Nāṭyaśāstra. These are as follows :

(a) The word gāndharva probably in the sense in which the Nāṭyaśāstra uses it (XXXVI. 76) occurs in the Junagarh Rock inscription of Rudradaman, I (150 A.C.). This also mentions terms, like sauṣṭhava and niyuddha which we meet in the Nāṭyaśāstra probably in the same sense (Junagarh Inscription of Rudradaman I. See Select Inscriptions, pp. 172-173).

(b) The respect for 'Cows and Brahmins' (go-brāhmaṇa) which the author of the Nāṭyaśāstra shows at the end of his work (XXXVI. 77) has its parallel in the inscription referred to above. And respect for Brahmins also finds expression in more than one inscription belonging to the 3rd century A.C. (op. cit. pp. 159, 161, 165)

(c) The three tribal names Śaka, Yavana, and Pahlava appearing in the inscription of Vasisṭiputra Pulomayi (149 A.C.) occur in the same order in the Nāṭyaśāstra (op. cit., p. 197,) and NŚ.

The cumulative effect of all these data seems to be that they may enable us to place the Nāṭyaśāstra about 200 A.C., the time of these inscriptions.

6. The Natyasastra earlier than Bhasa

Lack of conformity to the dramaturgic rules of the Nāṭyaśāstra has sometimes been cited as an evidence of the antiquity of Bhāsa, the argument being that as he wrote before the rules were formulated, he could not observe them. This view however, seems to be mistaken. For the rules occurring in the Nāṭyaśāstra cannot, for obvious reasons, be the author's fabrication without relation to any pre-existent literature.¹ If the Nāṭyaśāstra was written after Bhāsa's plays, its rules had every chance of having been a generalisation from them as well as from numerous other dramatic works existing at the time, while the contrary being the case (i.e. Bhāsa being later than the Nāṭyaśāstra) some novelties are likely to be

---

¹ F. Hall in his Introduction (p. 12) to the Daśarūpa says : At all events, he (Bharata) would hardly have elaborated them (the rules) except as inductions, from actual compositions.

LXXXV

introduced by the dramatist in disregard of the existing rules. It is on this line of argument that the chronological relation between Bhāsa and the Nāṭyaśāstra, will be judged below.

(a) On no less than three points, Bhāsa seems to have disregarded the rules of the Nāṭyaśāstra. These are as follows :

(i) The sūtradhāra (Director) begins the plays, though according to the Nāṭyaśāstra the sthāpaka (Introducer) should perform this function (V. 167).

(ii) In contravention of the rule of the Nāṭyaśāstra (XX. 20) Bhāsa allows death in Act I of Abhiṣeka.

(iii) In the Madhyama-vyāyoga and the Dūtaghaṭotkaca, Bhāsa does not give the usual bharatavākya (final benediction) and what he gives in its stead, may be an innovation.

Hence it may be assumed that the Nāṭyaśāstra was completed before the advent of Bhāsa,.

(b) Besides this, there seems to be some good evidence in his works to show that the dramatist was acquainted with this ancient work on drama. For example, he mentions in a humorous context the Jester confounding the Nāṭyaśāstra (Avi. II 0. 38-39) with the Rāmāyaṇa. Bhāsa's mention of some technical terms as well as the acquaintance which he shows with some special rules of the Nāṭyaśāstra may also be said to strengthen the above assumption.

(i) First, about the technical terms. They are : sauṣṭhava, prastāvanā, sūtradhāra, prekṣaka, cārī, gati, bhadramukha, hāva, bhāva, māriṣa, nāṭakīyā, the root paṭha, raṅga.

(ii) The hetaera in the Cārudatta (I. 26, 38.) says within herself, "I am unworthy of being allowed entrance into the harem" (abhāiṇī ahaṁ abbhantara-pavesassa). This seems to refer to the NŚ. XX. 54. The expression, "by means of a Nāṭaka suiting the time" (kālasaṁvādiṇā nāḍaeṇa) in Pratimā. (I. 4. 7) probably points to NŚ. XXVII. 88ff.

(iii) The vocal skill of the hetaera referred to by the Śakāra (Parasite) in the Cārudatta may also be said to point to the elaborate rules regarding intonation (kāku) in the NŚ. XIX 37-8.

(iv) Besides these, expressions like "the two feet made facile in dance due to training" (nṛttopadeśa-viśada-caraṇau) and "she represents the words with all her limbs" (abhinayati vacāṁsi sarvagātraiḥ) in the Cārudatta (I.9.0, 16.0) probably relate to the elaborate discussion on dance and the use of gestures in the Nāṭyaśāstra.

On the basis of all these it may be assumed that Bhāsa was acquainted with the contents of the present text of the Nāṭyaśāstra. Hence

LXXXVI

it may be placed in the 2nd centuary A. C. i.e. one century before the time generally assigned to Bhāsa's works. (Jolly, Introduction to AŚ. p. 10, but according to Konow Bhāsa's date may be the 2nd century A. C. See ID. p. 51).

From the foregoing discussions it may be reasonable to assume the existence of the Nāṭyaśāstra in the 2nd centuary A.C., though it must not be supposed that the work remained uninterfered with by interpolators of later ages. Such an interpolation may exist more or less in all the ancient texts. For example, Aristotle's Poetics too, in its received text, has been suspected to have interpolated passages in it. There are indeed interpolated passages in the Nāṭyaśāstra and some of these have been pointed out¹ and a few more may by some chance be discovered afterwards. But this may not bring down the work as a whole to later times.

---

¹ See notes on XVIII. 6, 48; XX. 63. Besides these cases, the seventeen couplets after XV. 101 and the five couplets after XVI 169 are spurious. For these do not give any important information regarding the art of the theatre or dramaturgy and may be merely scholastic additions. The passage on pravṛttis XIV. 36-55 may also be spurious.

<!-- Blank or illustration plate: Page 84 -->

<!-- Blank or illustration plate: Page 85 -->

THE NĀṬYAŚĀSTRA

CHAPTER ONE

THE ORIGIN OF DRAMA

Salutation

1. With a bow to Pitāmaha¹ (Brahman) and Maheśvara² (Śiva) I shall explain the Canons of Drama³ (Nāṭyaśāstra) which were uttered by Brahman.

Sages question.

2-5. Once in the days of yore, high-souled sages such as, Ātreya¹ and others who had subdued their senses, approached the pious Bharata² the master of dramatic art during an intermission of studies (anadhyāya). He (Bharata) then just finished

---

1 (B. G. same). ¹ Pitāmaha (the Grand-father) is a Purāṇic epithet of the Vedic god Brahman. For, the Pitṛs (the Fathers) such as Aṅgiras, Bhṛgu, Dakṣa and Marīci and others, whose descendants peopled this earth, were their progeny. In the later literature and religion of India, Brahman gradually recedes in the background and practically vanishes. His place is taken by the extra-Vedic Śiva, and Viṣṇu in his fullfledged Purāṇic character.

² Maheśvara (the Great God) is another name of Śiva who is originally a pre-Vedic deity. Salutation to Śiva along with Brahman, is very rare in Indian literature.

³ By 'drama' in this connexion is to be understood any play in its theatrical and literary character. For on this point Ag. (I. p. 7) says that the NŚ. is meant for the producer (of a play) as well as the poet (=playwright). कविप्रयोक्तृरुपदेशपरं शास्त्रमिति.

2-5 (B.G. same). ¹ Ātreya—There are two Ātreyas. One is a disciple of Yājñavalkya (Mbh.) and another that of Vāmadeva (Brahma P.) See Vidyalankar, Jīvanī-koṣa, sub voce.

² Purāṇas except the Matsya (24. 28-30) are silent on this Bharata, the authority on the Canons of Drama.

2	THE NATYASASTRA	[ I. 5-

the muttering of prayers (japa) and was surrounded by his sons. The sages respectfully said to him, “O Brahman, how did originate the Nāṭyaveda³ similar to the Vedas, which you have properly composed? And for whom is it meant, how many limbs does it possess, what is its extent⁴ and how is it to be applied? Please speak to us in detail about it all⁵”.

Bharata answers.

6. Hearing these words of the sages, Bharata began in reply to speak thus about the Nāṭyaveda :

7-12. “Get yourselves cleansed, be attentive and hear about the origin of the Nāṭyaveda devised by Brahman¹. O Brahmins, in the days of yore when the Golden Age (Kṛtayuga)¹ᵃ passed with the reign of Svāyambhuva (Manu), and the Silver Age (Tretāyuga) commenced with the career of Vaivasvata Manu, and people became addicted to sensual

---

³ Nāṭyaveda—The ‘Nāṭyaveda’ according to Ag. is a synonym for the ‘Nāṭyaśāstra’, and is no Vedic work. He (I. p. 4) says : अत्र तु नाट्यस्य वेदः शास्त्रमिति समासः अन्यथा अध्यापनासम्भवात्.

⁴ pramāṇa=extent. Ag. takes the word in the sense of proof (pramāṇaṁ atra niścaya-janakatvam), but he cites another view as well, which takes the word to mean ‘number’ and is as follows : अन्ये तु नाट्यांगतानां रूपकादीनां पाठ्याभिनयरसगीतानां का संख्येति विभागविषयोऽयं प्रश्न इत्याचक्षते.

⁵ From the five questions put in here, it is not to be assumed that the treatment of subjects mentioned will follow the order of these.

6 (B.G. same).

7-12 (B.G. same). ¹ The reference here is to the Nāṭyaveda alleged to have been composed by Brahman in about 36000 ślokas. It is also believed that, later on a shorter work (in 12000 granthas) was based on this great work and it was in the form of a dialogue between Śiva and Pārvatī. This is considered by some to be the Ādibharata or Sadāśivabharata. The present NŚ. contains about 12000 granthas and it is supposed to include the views of the authors of the now extinct Nāṭyaveda (composed by Brahman) as well as of the Ādibharata. See Preface to NŚ. (B.) pp. 6-7. On this point Ag (I. p. 8) says: एतेन सदाशिवब्रह्मभरतमतत्रयविवेचनेन ब्रह्ममतसारताप्रतिपादनाय मतत्रयीसारविवेचनं तद्ग्रन्थसंक्षेपेण विहितमिदं शास्त्रं.

¹ᵃ A. K. Coomaraswamy has freely translated 8-17 (The Mirror of Gestures, New York, 1936, p. 16).

-I. 15 ] THE ORIGIN OF DRAMA 3

pleasures², were under the sway of desire and greed, became infatuated with jealousy and anger and [thus] found their happiness mixed with sorrow, and Jambudvīpa³ protected by the Lokapālas (guardians of the worlds) was full of gods, Dānavas, Gandharvas, Yakṣas, Rākṣasas and great Uragas (Nāgas), the gods, with Indra (Mahendra) as their head, (approached) Brahman and spoke to him, 'We want an object of diversion, which must be audible as well as visible⁴. As the Vedas are not to be listened to by those born as Śūdras, be pleased to create another Veda which will belong to all the Colour-groups⁵ (varṇa)'.

13. "Let it be so", said he in reply and then having dismissed the king of gods (Indra) he resorted to yoga (concentration of mind)¹ and recalled to mind the four Vedas.²

14-15. He then thought: "I shall make a fifth¹ Veda on the Nāṭya with the Semi-historical Tales (itihāsa),² which will conduce to duty (dharma)³, wealth (artha) as well as fame, will

---

² grāmyadharma—Ag. explains the word differently and as follows : ग्राम्योऽसभ्यताप्रार्थनाकीर्यदेयोचितो धर्मः स्वधर्माननुपालनलक्षणः.

³ According to ancient Indian geography the earth was divided into seven dvīpas (continents). Jambudvīpa is one of them. It included Bhārata-varṣa or Bharata-varṣa, known at present as 'India'. Viṣṇu P. (ch. 1-12). See Winternitz, Hist. of Indian Literature, Vol. I, p. 548.

⁴ On this point Ag. says : दृश्यमिति हृद्यं श्रव्यमिति व्युत्पत्तिप्रदमित्यर्थः.

⁵ This relates to the four classes such as Brāhmaṇa, Kṣatriya, Vaiśya and Śūdra.

13 (B.G. same). ¹ Yoga has been defined in Patañjali's work as cittavṛttinirodhaḥ. It however begins with the concentration of the mind.

² After 13, B. reads one additional couplet. But G. considers this passage to be spurious and puts it in the footnote.

14-15 (B.G. same). ¹ In the early Indian literature the itihāsa alone was considered as the fifth Veda. See Chāndogya Up. VII. 1f. and 7., and Suttanipāta, II.7 (sellasutta). Kauṭilya's Arthaśāstra too gives the same position to the itihāsas. See Winternitz, Vol. I. p. 313.

² On itihāsa see note below.

³ dharma also means virtue, law and custom etc.

4 THE NATYASASTRA [ I. 15-

contain good counsel and collection [of other materials for human well-being], will give guidance to people of the future as well in all their actions, will be enriched by the teaching of all scriptures (śāstra) and will give a review of all arts and crafts⁴ (śilpa)”.

16. With this resolve the Holy One (bhagavat) from his memory of all the Vedas shaped this Nātyaveda compiled from the four of them.

17-18. The recitative (pāṭhya) he took from the Ṛgveda, the song from the Sāman, Histrionic Representation (abhinaya) from the Yajus, and Sentiments (rasa) from the Atharvaveda, [and] thus was created the Nātyaveda connected with the Vedas principal and subsidiary (vedopaveda)¹, by the holy Brahman who knows [them] all.

19-20. After the creation of the Nātyaveda Brahman said to Indra (lit. the lord of the gods), “Semi-historical Tales (itihāsa)¹ have been composed by me, you are to get them [dramatized and] acted² by gods. Pass on this Nātyaveda to those of the gods who are skilful, learned, free from stage-fright and inured to hard work.”

---

⁴ The word śilpa is very often synonymous with kalā. As the 64 kalās enumerated in different works include different arts and crafts, these two words may be translated as ‘arts and crafts’. Śilpa, however, is sometimes to be distinguished from kalā; and then it may mean merely ‘a craft’.

16 (B.G. same).

17-18 (B.G. same). ¹ Vedopaveda—the Vedas and the Upavedas i.e. the Vedas principal as well as subsidiary. The Vedas are all well-known, and there are at least four Upavedas, one being attached to each of the Vedas. They are as follows: the Āyur-veda (the Science of Medicine) to the Ṛgveda, Dhanur-veda (the Science of Arms)—to the Yajurveda, Gandharva-veda (Musical Science) to the Sāmaveda, and Sthāpatya-śāstra (the Science of Architecture) to the Atharvaveda.

19-20 (B.G. same). ¹ Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra in its definition of itihāsa enumerates purāṇa and itivṛtta as belonging to its contents. An itivṛtta, according to Winternitz, can only mean an “historical event” and purāṇa probably means “mythological and legendary lore.” Vol. I. p. 518. Pargiter has, however, extracted solid historical facts from some of the

-1. 25 ] THE ORIGIN OF DRAMA 5

21-22. At these words of Brahman, Indra bowed to him with folded palms and said in reply, “O the best and holy one, gods are neither able to receive it and maintain it, nor are they fit to understand it and make use of it ; they are unfit to do anything with the drama¹.

23. The sages (muni)¹ who know the mystery of the Vedas and have fulfilled their vows, are capable of maintaining this (Nāṭyaveda) and putting it into practice.”

The Nāṭyaveda and Bharata’s one hundred sons

24. On these words of Śakra (Indra), Brahman said to me; “O the sinless one, you with your one hundred sons¹ will have to put it (the Nāṭyaveda) to use”.

25. Thus ordered, I learnt the Nāṭyaveda from Brahman

---

extant Purāṇas (See his Ancient Indian Historical Traditions, London, 1922). According to the native Indian tradition itihāsa is said to be an account of events that occurred in the past, carrying in it instructions about duty, wealth, enjoyment of pleasure, and salvation. The traditional śloka is—

धर्मार्थकाममोक्षाणामुपदेशसमन्वितम् । इतिवृत्तकथायुक्तमितिहासं प्रचक्षते ॥

The same tradition assigns the position of itihāsa to the Mahābhārata the great Indian epic. It is possibly this itihāsa that has been connected with the Nāṭyaveda by the author of the śāstra. Hence it appears that Oldenberg’s theory about the original connexion between epic and dramatic poetry, is worthy of serious consideration. Nāṭyākhyaṁ pañcamaṁ vedaṁ setihāsaṁ karomy aham (15) seems to be very significant. Ag. (I. p. 13) explains setihāsam as itihāsopadeśakarūpaṁ saprabhedam. See Winternitz, Vol. I. pp. 100 ff. 312 n. ² See note on 14-15 above.

21-22 (B.G. same). ¹ It may be tentatively suggested here that the gods represented the primitive Indo-Aryans who possibly had no drama. On this point see the author’s Prācīn Bhārater Nāṭya-kalā (in Bengali), Calcutta, 1945 p. 60 ff.

23 (B.G. same). ¹ The word muni is evidently to be derived from the Pkt. root muṇa ‘to know’ which is most probably not of Indo-European origin.

24 (B.G. same). ¹ The Purāṇas and similar other works totally ignore these one hundred sons of Bharata.

25 (B. G. same).

6 THE NATYASASTRA [ I. 25-

and made my able sons study it as also [ learn ] its proper application.

Names of Bharata's one hundred sons

26-39. ¹[Names of my sons are]: Śāṇḍilya, Vātsya, Kohala², Dattila³, Jaṭila, Ambaṣṭhaka, Taṇḍu, Agniśikha, Saindhava, Puloman, Śāḍvali, Vipula, Kapiñjali, Bādari, Yama, Dhūmrāyaṇa, Jambudhvaja, Kākajaṅgha, Svarṇaka, Tāpasa, Kedāra, Śālikarṇa⁴, Dīrghagātra, Śālika, Kautsa, Tāṇḍāyani, Piṅgala, Citraka, Bandhula, Bhaktaka, Muṣṭika Saindavāyana Taitila, Bhārgava, Śuci, Bahula Abudha, Budhasena, Pāṇḍukarṇa, Kerala, Ṛjuka, Maṇḍaka, Śambara, Vañjula, Māgadha, Sarala, Kartṛ, Ugra, Tuṣāra, Pārṣada, Gautama, Bādarāyaṇa⁵, Viśāla, Śabala, Sunābha, Meṣa, Kāliya, Bhramara, Pīṭhamukha Muni, Nakhakuṭṭa⁶, Aśmakuṭṭa⁷, Ṣaṭpada, Uttama, Pāduka, Upānat, Śruti, Cāṣasvara, Agnikuṇḍa, Ājyakuṇḍa, Vitāṇḍya, Tāṇḍya, Kartarākṣa, Hiraṇyākṣa, Kuśala, Duḥsaha,

---

26-39 (B. same; G. 26-38). ¹ B. and G. read some of these names differently. Some at least of the so-called sons of Bharata might in fact have been the authors who wrote on dramaturgy, histrionic art, dance and music etc. Śiṅgabhūpāla mention the first four. See below notes 2-7.

² Kohala has again been mentioned in NŚ. (C.) XXXVI. 65. Ag. has referred to his opinion several times and quoted from his work on nāṭya (Vol. I. pp. 140, 173, 182, 183, 285; Vol. II. pp. 26, 55, 130, 133, 142, 144, 146, 147, 151, 155, 407, 416, 421, 434, 452, 458, 459). Later writers like Dāmodaragupta, Hemacandra, Śārṅgadeva, Śāradātanaya and Śiṅgabhūpāla acknowledge him as an authority on drama and music. (See S. K. De, Skt. Poetics, p. 25. f.n.)

³ Ag. has quoted a passage from the work of one Dattilācārya (Vol. I. p. 205). He seems to be identical with this Dattila. See also note 1 above.

⁴ Śālikarṇa is probably identical with Śātakarṇa referred to and quoted in the commentary of the Anargharāghava (p. 7. see Lévi, II. pp. 27, 65) and the Nāṭakalakṣaṇa (p. 47, ed. M. Dillon). Cf. Sālivāhana = Sātavāhana.

⁵ The Nāṭakalakṣaṇa (pp. 46, 114) refers to and quotes from him.

⁶ The Nāṭakalakṣaṇa (pp. 114, 121) refers to and quotes from this authority. So does SD (295).

7. The Nāṭakalakṣaṇa (pp. 4, 19, 114, 115) refers to and quotes from this authority.

-I. 45 ] THE ORIGN OF DRAMA 7

Jāla, Bhyānaka, Bibhatsa, Vicakṣaṇa, Puṇḍrākṣa, Puṇḍranāsa, Asita, Sita, Vidyujjihva, Mahājihva, Śālaṅkāyana, Śyāmāyana, Māṭhara Lohitāṅga, Saṁvartaka, Pañcaśikha, Triśikha, Śikha, Śaṅkhavarṇamukha, Ṣaṇḍa, Śaṅkukarṇa, Śakranemi, Gabhasti, Aṁśumāli, Śaṭha, Vidyut, Śātajaṅgha, Raudra and Vīra.

39-40. [Thus] at the command of Brahman and for the benefit of the people I assigned to my sons different roles suitable to, them¹.

Performance begins with three Styles.

41. O Brahmins, I then prepared to give a performance (prayoga) in which was adopted dramatic Styles (vṛtti) such as the Verbal (bhāratī)¹, the Grand (sāttvatī), and the Energetic (ārabhaṭī).

Need of the Kaiśikī Style

42-43. ¹I [then went² to Brahman and] after bowing, informed him [of my work]. Now Brahman (lit. the guru of gods) told me to include the Graceful (kaiśikī) Style also [in my performance], and he asked me to name materials conducive to its introduction.

43-45. Thus addressed by the master I replied, "Give me materials necessary for putting the Graceful (kaiśikī) Style into practice. At the time of Nīlakaṇṭha's¹ (Śiva) dance I have seen his Graceful Style appropriate to the Erotic Sentiment, and this requires

---

39-40 (B. same ; G. 39). ¹ G. reads 39b differently.

41 (B. same ; G. 40). ¹ The four Styles probably related to four tribes such as Bharata, Sāttvata, Keśika and Ārabhaṭa. Among these Bharata and Sāttvata are wellknown. The remaining two names might have been lost.

42-43 (B. same ; G. 41). ¹ G om. 42a.

² pragṛhya (=embracing) has been taken to mean 'going to'.

43-45 (B. same ; G. 42-44a). ¹ Śiva is India's traditional god of dance. See M. Ghosh (ed.) Abhinayadarpaṇa, Calcutta, 1934, English Translation, p. 1.