विक्रमोर्वशीयम् (कल्पलताव्याख्यासमेतम्)/ INTRODUCTION
{{header
| title = विक्रमोर्वशीयम् (कल्पलताव्याख्यासमेतम्)
| ← सङ्क्षिप्तविवृतिः | विक्रमोर्वशीयम् (कल्पलताव्याख्यासमेतम्) INTRODUCTION कालिदासः |
प्रथमोऽङ्कः → |
English Introduction.
CONTENTS.
|
1 Sanskrit Drama. |
INTRODUCTION.
"The Sanskrit Drama"
At the outset, it is advisable to give a brief outline
of the general structure of the classical drama which would
enable an average reader to have a clear comprehension of the
particular style and technicalities of the Indian dramatic art.
"Poetry", as defined by Pandit Jagannath in his famous work entitled Rasgangadhara, "is a word or the combination of words which gives out a charming sense." The word 'charming' is further explained by him as 'a substratum of the quality' of evincing or rather creating an uncommon delight. According to another learned writer on Sanskrit poetics, sentiment is the vital self of Poetry.
Such poetry, irrespective of its intrinsic merit, is divided into two classes: (1 )दृश्य that which can be seen or exhibited and (2) श्रव्य that which can be heard. The drama, as it can be enacted on the stage, falls under the first class. Rupaka is a general term given to all dramatic compositions which have rasaor sentiment for their substratum. It is divided into ten classes which, according to, धनञ्जय,, are as follows: (1) नाटकम् (2) प्रकरणम् (3) भाण: (4) प्रहसनम् (5) डिम: (6) व्यायोग: (7) समवकार: (8) वीथी (9) अङ्क: and (10) ईहामृग:। It has a subordinate class, viz. of उपरूपकाः of which नाटिका like Ratnavali, सट्टक like Karpurmanjari and act त्रोटक like Vicramorvashiyam are prominent.
वस्तु or Res-business, नायक or the hero, and रस or sentiment are the three main features of every Rupaka or Uprupaka, and they, constituting the very self of every dramatic composition, are dealt with in detail:-
"वस्तु or the Res-business"
वस्तुor the plot of a play is of two kinds: आधिकारिक or the principal which relates to the chief characters and prevails right upto the end of the composition and प्रासङ्गिक or the accessory which is only meant to further the plot or the main topic of the play. It is further divided into two kinds, viz. पताका and प्रकरी। The first is an episode which evinces the progress of the plot and sometimes it is of such a considerable length as prevails throughout the whole play. The second is
वि. प्र.६ an episode of minor importance because in this no principal
characters take any part. In addition to the aforesaid,
there are three more elements which are essential to the
development of the plot, viz. बीज which is like a foundation
stone upon which the whole superstructure of the play is
gradually built, or it is the very seed of the plot bearing
diverse aspects and leading to multifarious results ;बिन्दु is
that which connects the broken plot, the link of which has
become disconnected on account of any subsidiary incident;
कार्य is the final aim of the plot, the achievement of which
closes the drama.
The plot of a drama may be of three types: one derived from history, the other entirely springing from the poet's fancy and the third, though historical in origin, considerably modified by the poet so as to suit his immediate purpose and sense of poetical justice in his composition.
Then again, there are five stages of the development of the dramatic plot: आरम्भ, i. e. beginning of the enterprise, यत्न, possible efforts for its attainment,"प्राप्त्याशा", expectation of its achievement, नियताप्ति, certainty of success by means of the removal of impediments cropping up over there, and finally फलागम the success. In the course of the gradual development of these five stages, there should be connecting links between the principal and the accessory incidents, which are known as Sandhis. These are also five: मुखसन्धि which combines the बीज and the आरम्भ, that is, during this, the seed is sown. प्रतिमुखसन्धि contains the efforts undertaken to sprout up the seed as exhibited in the first सन्धि । गर्भसन्धि consists in the partial attainment of the principal end. Here various obstacles creep in, and yet the plot attains its root. विमर्शसन्धि results in an exuberant growth of the plot, greater than that in the former, of course, the final attainment being beset by fresh difficulties. Lastly, the निर्वहणसन्धि which concludes in the harmonious combination of all the discordant elements in a drama closes finally with the air of success.
The plot of the play, be it historical, or fictitious is either सूच्यwhich means implied and requires suggestion or दृश्य श्रव्य which is capable of both representation and hearing and its character is highly sentimental and charming. In the case of the former which is more common, the sugge- stions can be amplified in five ways: (i) विष्कम्भ is that which connects the episode of the previous act with that of the following one, (ii) प्रवेशक when put up in between the two acts, suggests some past or future incident to connect the main topic of the play, through the lower characters alone. (iii)चूलिका the suggestion of some event from behind the curtain. (iv) अङ्कावतार hints the subject-matter of the following act, and forms the final scene of the previous act. (v) अङ्कमुख which suggests the substance of all the rest of the acts in one.
The subject-matter of the play presents itself in three ways : प्रकाशम्, that which is to be heard by all, स्वगतम्, that which is spoken to one's self and स्वागतम् that which is to be listened to, by particular persons only. The last is of two kinds, viz. जनान्तिक which is a talk between two persons only, and अपवारित which consists in giving out some secret in a way concealed from others. To add to these, there is one, known as आकाशभाषित or speech from the void or a place above or unknown.
“The Hero and the Heroine"
The qualifications of a hero are modesty, decorum and courtesy, munificence and civility, aristocracy and high birth, zeal and brilliance, bravery and learning, steadfastness of mind, skill and art, with speech, both eloquent and sweet.
A dramatic hero can be one of these four types:--He may be a धीरोदात, or a hero having sublimity of thought, magnanimity of nature, patience of mind, firmness of resolution, want of self-assertion, self-restraint and strict adherence to his engagements; धीरोद्धत्त is that type of a hero who is crafty and capricious, egoist and self-panegyric; धीरललित who is careless and meek, pleasure-seeking and happy ; धीरप्रशान्त who is lively and peaceful and endowed with practically all the best qualities as such.
Among erotic heroes, each of these may again be of four kinds: दक्षिण=showing equal devotion to many women, though principally attached to one: i. e. gallant; शठ= who remains attached to one, even at the cost of the displeasure of the other; i. e. sly; धृष्ट - professing his love to one, and even facing reproaches without being least ashamed; and अनुकूल having unflinching devotion to one lady. The hero the first kind has eight qualities, viz.शोभा, विलास, माधुर्य,गाम्भीर्य, धैर्य, तेजस्, लालित्य and औदार्य,which are explained in the comment wherever they occur. The hero of this play is a historical personage, the king Pururavas of the lunar race, the ruler ot Pratisthan and son of Budha and Ila. He is, by nature, of a gallant type of hero and by conduct sly in his dealings, as he keeps himself attached to Urvashi even at the cost of the displeasure of his queen Aushinari. As a gallant type of hero he is always found lacking in self-assertion (cf.ननु वज्रिण 1-19). He is unmindful of the failings of his people (cf. Vidushaka's breaking the news and loss of भूर्जपत्र later on). He is magnanimous throughout the play. He is full of valour (Cf...कस्मा परित्रातव्या etc.) and is always resolute in his undertakings.
Turning to the assistants of the hero, we find, पीठमर्द्द, the first, who is the hero of the पताका, a devout assistant to his master and smart in discourse. Next is विदूषक who is his constant companion, administrator in his love-affairs, a man of ready wit and plays a part which helps the general denouement of the play. There are others, like विट, नट, शकार and similar ones who are proficient in one art only. Besides this, the hero may be aided by his political or ecclesiastical ministers, ascetics and friends and eunuchs, mutes and others as well. At times there is a Rival Hero, or प्रतिनायक who is just the contrapositive to the main hero, being rapacious, bold and of evil conduct.
As the assistant of the hero of this play, there is only one, by name Maņavak, who plays the part of the clown in the drama. He is always jocund in his spirit and cracks jokes even at the expense of the hero. He is very shrewd (Obs. his replies when he lost the भूर्जपत्र), and he always takes delight in setting the two balls against each other (Ref : श्रान्तोऽस्मि प्रियवयस्यमस्या मृगतृष्णिकाया निवर्तयितुम्).
The heroine whose qualifications are more or less similar to those of a hero is classed under three types : स्वीया- the married wife of the hero; अन्या or परकीया, one belonging to some one else; सामान्या or a common woman. The first is of three kinds : मुग्धा, मध्या and प्रगल्भा; the second of two kinds: परोढा and कन्यका; and the last is of its own kind. They are again of various kinds: e. g. अभिसारिका, she who herself condescends to go to her lover or invites him to her residence,and कलहान्तरिता=-wrathful, and so on. For her assistants, she may have सखी, दासी, धात्रेयी (nurse-), प्रतिवेशिका (neighbourly woman), and the like, who have similar qualities to those of the friends of the hero. दूत and दूती that is male and female messengers are the common assistants and may be निसृष्टार्थ who act acoording to the sentiments of both, or मितार्थ= speaking little, or lastly सन्देशहारक, who run simply on errand.
The heroine of this play is Urvashi, a celestial damsel. She owes a fast attachment to her lover Pururavas (Ref.: she invites malediction by misquoting the name of her lover for Purushottam). As a heroine, she belongs to the Abhisarika type of the latter kind, viz. one who of her own accord moves towards her lover. But then, there is a rival to the heroine, the Pratinayika, Aushinari, the daughter of the king of Kashi and the crowned queen of the hero. She is jealous by nature, viz. Kalahantarita and in her behaviour, self-conscious and assertive. The assistant of the heroine is Chitralekha, a निसृष्टार्थ type of a दूती, very closely attached to her friend Urvashi. The assistant of the rival heroine is her maid-of-honour, Nipunika, who is very clever and reliable.
“Rasa or Sentiment"
"Rasa is that lasting impression or feeling produced to his overwhelming delight in a man of poetic sensibility by the proper action of the विभाव and अनुभाव, सात्त्विक and सञ्चारीभाव।"
भाव or feeling is a strong emotion which arises from the object under sight, creating such pleasure or pain as completely perverts the heart of every average human being. विभाव is that the perception of which leavens the main sentiment. It is of two kinds: आलम्बन that is the substratum of the main sentiment, be it a person or a thing with respect to which a sentiment arises; e. g. नायक is the आलम्बन for नायिका and vice versa, उद्दीपन is that which awakens or promotes the development of the sentiment.अनुभाव is a beaming manifestation of the sentiment by means of gesticulations. सञ्चारीभाव or the accessory emotions are those which occasionally appear and disappear and strengthen the main sentiment. Besides, there is the स्थायीभाव or the permanent sentiment upon which no sentiment whether foreign or akin to its nature has any bearing; it is permanent like salt diluted in water. It never changes with a temperory contrary sentiment but seems to say with Tennyson's Brook "Men may come and men may go, But I go on for ever." A sentiment would become subsidiary to the other if the आश्रय of the both happen to be the same. Even two different रसs one being अङ्गी or the principal and the other अङ्ग or auxiliary, may be inter-woven in one and the same play.
There are eight permanent sentiments that give birth to the principal eight रसाः । रति is the स्थायीभाव of the sentiment of श्रृङ्गार or the erotic;हास for the हास्य or the comic,शोक for the करुण or the pathetic, क्रोध for रौद्र or the furious;उत्साह for वीर or the heroic, भय for भयानक or the terrible, जुगुप्सा for the बीभत्स or loathsome and विस्मय for अद्भुत or the marvellous. According to the maxim "शान्तोऽपि नवमो रसः" the sentiment of शान्त the quietistic, having शम for its स्थायीभाव, is the ninth.
The sentiment of श्रृङ्गार is the foremost and commonest of all. It may be either विप्रलम्भ or love in separation and सम्मोग or love in union. विप्रलम्भ may be due to अयोग without the original contact which results in ten stages of Cupid, known as अभिलाषश्चिन्तास्मृतिगुणकथनोद्वेगसंप्रलापाश्च । उन्मादोऽथ व्याधिर्जडतामृतिरिति दशात्र कामदशाः। or due to विप्रयोग= the separation after once having enjoyed a hearty union. विप्रयोग may be caused by मान the jealousy arising from the violation of the duties by a lover, or प्रवास, , length of journey or शाप the malediction arising from the displeasure of a deity or a sage, which may be rectified later on.सम्भोग श्रृङ्गार is that in which the lover and the beloved enjoy the intimate contact with each other.
The ruling sentiment in this play is सम्भोग शृङ्गार the love in union. The substrata of the sentiment are inter alia Pururavas and Urvashi. The first contact between the two in the chariot while returning to the Hemkuta is the basis of the purva raga, which is of a माञ्जिष्ट or of bright, unflinching type. Then subsequent exchange of glances, coaxing speech and expression of smiles and bashfulness are the ensuant feelings. The lonely situation, cool and fragrant breeze and the pluvial charms are the excitants which awaken the erotic emotions. Eagerness, mental reverie, pensive mood and uneasiness of heart are occasional feelings that remain auxiliary to the emotion of love.
The subsidiary sentiment in this play is a rare comic and a predominating Vipralambha. The Vipralambha here is due to मान of the heroine who contracted jealousy at the
sight of the hero's appreciative glances towards Udayavati.“The Structure of a Drama"
Every dramatic composition of Sanskrit opens with a prologue or प्रस्तावना commencing with an Invocation which is technically known as नान्दी | Nandi invokes some deity and contains either benedictions or solicitations for favour. Inone way or the other, it suggests the general theme of the plotwhether in part or the whole. The Sutradhara or the Stage-manager, having finished with Nandi, continues to allude to the birth, race and time of the poet and his literary acomplishments and the occassion which has led him to undertake the enactment of the play. Thus ends the whole prelude containing sweet songs or the description of a season which excites the sentiment and the drama then begins, the introduction of which is generally made by the सूत्रधारeither by the suggestion of the बीज or an introduction of a character. The प्रस्तावना is of five kinds : उद्धातक, कथोद्धात, प्रयोगातिशया,प्रवर्तक and अवलगित.
The play under investigation opens with the usual नान्दी or invocation of the god Shiva forbenedictions, which is suggestive of the main incidents of the story. The prologue of the play is of प्रयोगातिशय type, where the entrance of the actors is exhibited through the first ' 'prayoga,viz, the introduction of the occasion of the enactment of the play by the chief actor.
The whole subject matter which is represented further on, is well classified and arranged into acts. A drama may consist of any number of acts between five and ten.The principal sentiment should be either शृङ्गारor वीर or even करूण and others may be subordinate to support the principal one.
Besides these, there certain conventions which are strictly followed: For example, nothing should creep in the play which denounces the character of the hero or is not harmonious with the prevailing sentiment. An act should neither be lengthy nor be wearisome. विष्कम्भ, and other interludes should be introduced wherever they are expedient and an act should end with the exit of all the characters. Any event like journeys, and wars should not be staged and the expiry of the hero should never be displayed. The conduct of the classical drama should be exemplary and dignified. There is a complete absence of tragedy or a calamitious conclusion. The unity of pleasure and interest should be carefully attended to. In Sanskrit dramas, the unity of action is generally observed and not neccessarily those of time and place. In accordance with the saying "मङ्गलादीनि मङ्गलान्तानि", the play, as it opens with a prayer or blessings, should also end with भरतवाक्य expressing the wishes of some magnanimous personality for universal prosperity and happiness. There is one more convention, though last but not the least: i. e. the hero and the higher characters speak in Sanskrit, while female and other lower characters use a language of different प्राकृत dialects, save those who are educated.
The Trotaka kind of Rupaka, as the play in hand is,may, in accordance with the definition given in the Introduction in Sanskrit, consist of 5, 7, 8 or 9 acts. The characters therein, should be celestial as well as human. Vidushaka must play a prominent part and be present almost in every act. It has no विष्कम्बक but the gap is bridged only by प्रवेशक. In other respects it does not differ from a नाटक ।
The Poet :
“His life, works and poetry"
Like the life of Shakespeare, the life of our poet, the brightest jewel of the mine of the Indian poets, remains unrevealed and blank. In his works, he has kept a dismal silence about himself. Unlike later Sanskrit poets who are often confident and self-puffers, Kalidasa expresses modestly and speaks little of himself. “The personal history" says a learned critic, "is thus involved in an impenetrable mist of obscurity." And this has made an ample room for a diversity of inferences which are open to a great controversy. The late Dr. Bhau Daji remarks that he was a Sarasvat Gauda Brahmin. It is further said that he and Matŗigupta, the king of Kashmir were identical. Some say that he was patronised by Pravarsena, the king of Kashmir. But a time-honoured tradition associates his name with the king Vikramaditya of Ujjain,the founder of Samvat Era. It is reported that Kalidas constituted one of the nine jewels of his Court, Thus runs a saying, that he was appointed the Governor of Kashinir by Vikramaditya. His description of Ujjaini and its surroundings, the Mahakala and the Kshipra firmly leads to the conclusion that he must have been the native of that part. If the king Vikramaditya be not taken as the poet's patron, various references to the name of the king in highly panegyric terms should be set aside without any plausible explanation. He seems, however, to have pleased both the Jains and Vaishnavas by favouring their tenets in his works. It is evident, that he was a staunch devotee of Shiva and Parvati, though by no means a sectarian. He appears to have been an admirer of field sports and outings, and describes their beneficial effects with a spirit of a true sportsman. He was a great observer and delineator of Nature. His exact description of the Himalayas, Alaka and other places proves the above statement and clearly shows that he had travelled far and wide. He is the only poet, who describes a living saffron flower which grows nowhere but in Kashmir. Kalidasa in his writings shows a thorough acquaintance with the court lifē. These circumstances coupled with the fact that there is no allussion in his works to the Goddess of Wealth having over frowned upon him, have led some critics to remark that he was in affluent circumstances and had not the misfortune ever to taste the bitter fruits of poverty. But from the devout prayer, at the end of Vikramorvashiyam for the union of the goddesses of wealth and learning it is sufficiently evident that he must have been subjected to the pangs of poverty and neglect. Though he was pleasure-seeking yet he cannot be said to be voluptuous. The critical study of his works, however, clearly tells us that he was very well acquainted with the Vedas, Upanishads, the Puranas, and several systems of Indian philosophy, geography astronomy and other fine arts.
As "he was the least of an egoist that it was possible to be", it has become doubtful, expressly to ascertain of which compositions he had been the author. But the following are the works which are generally attributed to him: ऋतुसंहार,कुमारसंभव, रघुवंश, मेघदूत, शाकुन्तल,विक्रमोर्वशीय, मालविकाग्निमित्र, श्रुतबोध, शृङ्गारतिलक, शृङ्गाररसाष्टक, सेतुकाव्य कर्पूरमञ्जरी, पुष्पबाणविलास, श्यामलादण्डक, प्रश्नोत्तरमाला and ज्योतिर्विदाभरण।-
It is, however, a disputed question, which oi these are really his and which are of the subsequent poets namesake to him. At any rate we do not hesitate in accepting the first nine and the thirteenth to be his. Although, the perceptible difference between रघुवंश and other kavyas in respect of their style and the poetical merits supplies a sufficient ground for doubt, still it can be removed, if a sufficient margin is allowed for the age of the poet and the corresponding development of his genius.
The style of Kalidas is pure and chaste. "It has not the laxity of Puranas. It is also characterised by brevity and perspicuity. His similes are charming, appropriate and natural. Delineation of characters, faithful to the minutest point and within the shortest compass imaginable, is the peculiar characterstic of his poetry." In his writings there is unaffected simplicity of expression. His language is simple and fluent and rich with similes and general truths. His choice of metres is consistent with the ruling sentiment. With no exaggeration he is praised for his happy selection of subjects and the amicable development and beautiful repre- sentation of the matter which delicately reveal the tenderness of feelings and poetical fancy of a very high order. To put in a nutshell, it can be safely stated that his poetical produc- tions which stand as an immortal monument of his unsurpassed poetic elegance have brought Sanskrit poetry to the highest refinement based on purity of style in spite of extravagant colouring.
None whosoever had the fortune to read and appreciate the poetry of this prince of the Indian poets, can resist to admire its mysteriously picturesque character which has evoked "spontaneous outpourings of praise" from foreign scholars who had access to it either directly or through English versions. Being spelled with the charms of his Muse and poetic genius, Goethe, who was the foremost rider on the wings of poesy in the land of Germany, has bestowed the highest meed of praise on Kalidasa. "Nature must be the life and essence of poetry" is the motto of our poet's poetry and in this respect he may be compared with the great poet Wordsworth. He is a very critical observer of Nature and every student of Kalidasa feels so when coming across the delightful description of the cliffs of the Himalayas decked with snowy diadems, the lofty peaks of Kailasa, the fragrant breezes blowing, the heavenly Ganges, the mountain lake and similar spectacles of Nature. "He shows an acquaintance with China pottery and silk and refers to the true causes of eclipse and the influence of the moon over tides." His queenly heroines write their love letters on the bark of the birch tree with mineral dyes or on lotus leaves with their nails. His works abound in pithy and pregnant generalisations which strike every reader with their vivid and impressive truths which are both touching and didactic.
What impresses us in Kalidasa's works is their free- dom from immaturity, but this freedom must have been the result of prolonged and diverse efforts extending over a stretch of time. In Kalidasa, we are introduced at once to something new which no one hit upon before, something perfect which no one achieved, something incomparably great and enduring for all times. His outstanding individual genius certainly accounts a great deal for this, but it appears in a sudden and towering glory without being buttressed in its origin by the intelligible gradation of lower eminence. It has however the effect of the tyrannical dominance of a great genius that it not only obscures but often wipes out by its vast and strong effulgence the lesser lights which surround it or herald its approach.
“The Date of the Poet."
Eleventh Century A. D.:
There is a set of ancient scholars who believed that Kalidasa must have lived in about the 11th Century A. D. on the following grounds: (i) In Kalidas's writings, the word यवन is found which means à Mohammedan who appeared in India after the 7th Century A. D. And naturally it follows, that Kalidas must have lived some time after the advent of the यवनाः! But as the meaning of the term is not fixed, as it may even denote the Greeks or the Ionians, the reasoning of this sort seems unsound. (ii) The tradition speaks that Kalidas was patronised by the king Bhoja of Dhara (11th cent. A. D.) But if Bhoja were his patron, Kalidasa must have extolled him to make his name immortal. Again, भामह who, by king Bhoja himself is said to be living in the early centuries of the Christian Era quotes कालिदासा. Moreover, a Kanerese translation of Vikromorvasiayam which was found in the 9th cent. A. D. shows that Kalidasa lived long before the 11th Century A. D.
Sixth Century A. D.:
Then there is a common belief that Kalidas lived in the 6th century A. D. The evidence which is laid down to prove this, though not conclusively, may be summed up thus:
(1) Jinasena the author of the पार्श्वाम्भुदय who has contrived to imitate Kalidasa's Meghaduta lived about 850. A. D. Mr. Pathak thinks, therefore, that Kalidas must have lived before him.
(2) The poet Pomna who lived about 945 A, D, asserts his superiority to Kalidasa. It shows that he was born before 945. A. D. (3) क्षीरस्वामी quotes कालिदासः in his commentary on Amarkosha. He lived about 750. A. D.
(4) In Gaudavoho which is said to be the work of the 8th cent. A. D., Kalidasa's name is alluded to as the great रघुकार।
(5) कुमारिलभट्टा living in about 720 A. D. refers to Kalidas's name in his तन्त्रवार्तिक ।
(6) Baņa who lived in about 650 A. D. mentions Kalidasa in his works.
(7) Kalidasa's name is found in the Aihole inscriptions of 631 A. D.
(8) दण्डिन् of 6th century A.D. mentions कालिदासः and his सेतुकाव्य।
(9) In an inscription 'कालिदासs' name is found along with वराहमिहिर who lived about 550 A. D.
(10) Mallināth while commenting on Méghduta hints that दिङ्गाग was कालिदासस्य् adversary whose teacherवसुबन्धु lived about 540 A. D.
(11) Kalidasa's thorough knowledge of astronomy which is said to contain terminology of the Greeks among whom the science developed about 2nd Cent. A. D. and hence Kalidasa lived after that.
(12) There is an interesting episude which proves Kalidasa to be the contemporary of Kumardasa, the king of Ceylon who ascended the throne in 575 A, D, It runs thus:
The king Kumardāsa was in love with a woman. he wrote these lines on the wall of her house “कमलात्कमलोत्पत्तिः श्रूयते न तु दृश्यते" and promised to reward the person who would complete the verse. The next evening, it so chanced that Kalidasa took his lodgings in her house. On seeing these lines he completed the verse by adding बाले तव मुखाम्भोजात् कथमिन्दीवरद्वयम्। The woman in expectation of the promised reward murdered Kalidasa with the view to assume its authorship. The king read the lines the next day and would not believe that the completion was composed by her, and on king's threatening, she confessed to the crime. And the king having found his great friend dead felt very sorry and burnt himself with Kalidasa's body.
(13) Mr. K. B. Pathak, the latest exponent and strong advocate of this theory brings forward the argument of the Huna kings. There were no Huns befors 530 A, D, and One day, as Kalidasa describės that his hero Raghu conquered them, gives & plenty of assurance to ascribe sixth century A. D. as Kalidasa's date:
First Century B. C.;
There are other scholars who believe that Kalidasa lived during (about) 1st Cent. B. C.
(1) Dr. Peterson says "Kalidasa stands near the beginning of the Christian era, if indeed he does not overtop it."
(2) Hippolyte thinks that Kalidasa was contemporary of अग्निवर्ण (described in 15th Canto of Raghu) and lived during( about) 8th century B. C.
(3) Sir William Jones places him in the I Cent. B. C.
(4) The tradition that Kalidasa was patronised by Epoch- making Vikramaditya, shows that he lived 56 years before Christ as the Samvat Era shows.
(5) Merutungacharya's Pathavali shows that Vikrama reigned 134 years before शाक Era.
(6) Rev. S. Beal says that a Chinese traveller carried to China in 67 B. C. copies of Buddha Charita of Ashwaghosh whose style resembles that of Kalidasa, and therefore clearly ascribes to Kalidasa,the period 40 B. C. as his date:
(7) ज्योतिर्विदाभरण describes Vikrama's victory over रूमदेशाधिपति. This book is attributed to Kalidasa and रूमदेशाधिपतिis Cæsar,(the king of Rome), belonging to 55 B. C.
(8) Kalidasa's style shows that he lived many centuries before Baņa Bhatta.
(9) Mr. Pandit observes that पुष्पमित्र founded the Maurya dynasty in 160 B. C. and his son अग्निमित्र, the hero of मालविकाग्निमित्रं, was Kalidas's contemporary. This view is rendered more conspicuous by dissensions by later authors.
(10) The astronomical data cannot prevent us from assigning I Century B. C, to Kalidasa.
(11) Mr. Apte, the ablest exponent of this theory, proves that Huna kings came to India in I Cent. B, C.,& minutely examines the history of Kalingas and arrives at decision that the Ist Century B.C. to be the date of Kalidasa. He further examines the law of inheritance, in the times of Kalidasa, according to which, the property of the deceased did not go to his wife, if he had no male issue but to the king (Shak.). He further deduces that Kalidasa having alluded to Parsikas as Parsis provides sufficient evidence to believe Kalidas's date somewhere in Ist century B.C.
वि.प्र. ७ Thus there are scholars who on the above arguments and such others, assign fisrt century B. C. to Kalidasa's period.
But as Kalidasa himself or some reliable contemporary of his, does not give any settled opinion, there is only an imaginary evidence on the point of period of the great poet, and therefore the question remains all the same much-vexed and open to disagreements and disputes.
In conclusion, the latest opinion on this point may be given in the words of Prof. S. K. De:-
“The limits of this time are broadly fixed between the 2nd and the 6th century A. D. . Since his works reveal the anthor as a man of culture and urbanity, leisured artist probably enjoying, as the legend says, royal patronage under Vikramāditya, it is not unnatural to associate him with Chan- dragupta II (cir 380-413 A. D. ), who had the style of Vikra- maditya, and whose times were those of prosperity and power,
The various arguments, literary and historical, by which this position is reached, are not invulnerble when they are taken in detail, but their cumulative effect cannot be ignored. We neither know, nor shall perhaps ever know if any of the brilliant conjectures is correct, but in the present state of our knowledge, it would not be altogether unjustifiable to place Kalidasa roughly at 400 A. D. It is not unimportant to know that Kalidasa shared glories and varied living and learning of a great time, but he might not have done this and yet be the foremost poet of Sanskrit literature; that he had a wide acquaintance with the life and scenes of many parts of India but had a partiality for Ujjaini, may be granted, but it would perhaps be hazardous, and even unnecessary, to connect him with any particular geographical setting or historical environment."
(Poussin Memorial Volume, Pt. I pp. 190–2.)
ESTIMATE OF THE PLAY.
Most of the early plays in Sanskrit literature owe their sources to the Vedic dialogues and the Pauranik stories adapted skilfully by the dramatist to the justice of his poetical sense and accepted conventions. A few of them weave some account in the life of a certain historical personage who is characterised as a man of exemplary conduct. ór a super-man. Two of Kalidasa's plays fall under the first category and the one probably the earliest of his dramatic works, viz. Mālavikāgnimitra belongs to the latter. In point of time, Vikrmorvashiam is said to follow this quasi-historical play of Malavikagninitra and to precede the world famous drama of Shākuntalam, which is supposed to be the specimen of the finest dramatic skill of our poet of poets.
Though the episode of the union of Vikrama and Urvashi is found in the Vājasanéya Aranyak and several other Puranas (Vide Introd. P. 29 et. seq.) the closest approach to the plot of this drama is the story narrated in the Padma Purana. The plot of Shakuntalam also is borrowed from the story of Dushyanta and Shakuntalä in the Padma Purana. It is, therefore, clear that Kalidasa has mainly relied on the Padmapurana for two of his important dramatic compositions.
It is a common feature with Kalidasa to open his dramas with the Invocation of blessings of god Shiva, and Vikramorvasham is no exception to it (Cf. Mal. एकैश्वर्ये स्थितोऽपि प्रणतबहुफलो यः. स्वयं कृत्तिवासाः Vikr. वेदान्तेषु यमाहुरेकपुरुषं व्याप्य स्थितं रोदसी Shak. या सृष्टिः स्रष्टुराद्या वहति विधिहुतं.......) Then next to that, Kalidas has his prologue to introduce the topic of his play, which is done by the Stage-manager, as usual, attended either by Marisha or the actress. (Cf. Mal. and Vikra. in respect of the attendence of Marisha and contrast Sutradhara being attended by actress in Shak.) The type of the prologue which he adopts, is either Avalagitā or Prayôgatişhaya out of fire principal kinds of prologues familiar to the Indian playwrights. Vikramorvashi has got the Prayôgātișhaya type of prologue unlike the prologue in Shak. or in Malavikāgnimitra, where it is of Avalagitā kind. The prologue in Vikramorvashiam introduces within itself the entrance of the shouting celestial damsels behind the screen which is tantamount to the introduction of the theme of the play in course of the prologue itself, whereas in Shakuntalam Mālavikāgnimitra the stage-manager himself in his concluding speech in the prologue introduces the name of some important character of the play and thus opens the main plot of the drama: (of. Mal. देव्या इव धारिण्याः सेवादक्षः परिजनोऽयं Shak. एष राजेव दुष्यन्तः सारङ्गेणातिरंहसा). However, according to the old school of dramaturgy it is believed that there is hardly any point capable of creating a distinction between these two types of prologues and so it is held that Kalidasa had uniformity in following only one type of prologue, namely, the Prayôgatishaya.
The Theme of the Play :-Vikramorvashi, quite similar to the other two dramas of Kalidasa, is an erotic play and has for its plot the love-story of the king Pururavas of Pratişthan and Urvashi a celestial damsel. In Shakuntala also, he seeks for his plot a love-episode in the account of Dushyanta's life with a daughter of a celestial damsel, Menakā, by name. In Malavikagnimitra too, there is an attempt to achieve Malavika, an aristocratic girl by the king Agnimitra of the Shunga dynasty.
Hero of the Play:It is the lunar race of the kings that provided Kalidasa with two heroes for his principal dramas, viz, one in Pururayas in Vikramorvashiam and the other Dushyanta of Shākuntalam (Vide pp. 37 & 39-Introdn.) His heroes come from a high family and are all kings of high reputation and prowess. Kalidasa has a fancy of selecting such heroes and portraying them as great warriors so much so that many of them are the Commanders of the divine army. The reader will find that all the descendents of Raghu's race among the Ikshwakoos had an access with their chariots to Indra's paradise (Cf. आनाकरथवर्त्मनाम्). Similarly the hero of the Vikramorvashiam is the best ally of Lord Indra. (Vide: Chitraratha's request to the hero to make Urvashi over personally to Indra -Act I and Indra's message in V Act भवांश्च सांयुगीनः सहायः P. 254 Vikr."). No less is his Dushyanta who goes to the Heavens with his chariots to defeat the demons at the desire of Indra, who honours him by occupying a common seat with him, (Ref. Act. VII. 2). His Agnimitra too is, no doubt, painted to be a great hero and an egoist, but his prowess is limited to terrestrial feats only. As men his heroes are very intelligent, generous and shrewd and godfearing as well. His Pururavas is a regular observer of religious rites (Ref. "सूर्योपस्थाननिवृत्तं पुरूरवसं P. 10) 18 brave and a true Kshatriya ever-ready to rescue the aggrieved. His Dushyanta and Agnimitra present no less a characteristic of his heroes, which will be discussed below in some detail. Their administration is very righteous and popular, and they are held in high esteem by their subjects. His kings attend regular Cabinet meetings and constitute the highest tribunal of Justice as well.
In their private life, they are very moral, though none is free from practising polygyny in actual life. In their pursuits of love, his heroes are very bold and not only they do not mind the displeasure of their senior consorts, but as their weakness for some one else invariably makes them too uxorious to withstand in any shape the curt admonitions they have to court their repeated reprimands or a casual vapulation or flogging as well. For example, his Agnimitra's subservience to his senior spouses Dharini and Irawati, one excelling the other in dominating over him, and a similar attitude of Pururaves towards Aushinary are a clear proof of the same. The poet, having felt later on the delicacy of this situation, sympathised better with his hero in Dushyanta whose sad plight on this account he has conveniently, with maturer experience, avoided in Shākuntalam in not bringing any one of his other consorts on the scene. In choice of their consorts, their taste is very chaste and seasoned and their affection to the heroine is both deep and substantial.
Technically, his Paruravas is a Dheerodatta or a gallant type of a hero, as much as his Dushyanta or Agnimitra is. Pururavas is a highly cultured type of gentleman and may be contrasted with Dushyanta, who, though seemingly august and dignified, betrays himself as a mean deserter when he denies having married Shakuntala fearing perhaps public scandal. Because as a picture of social influence then on the kings, the poets have well portrayed their thraldom to the sense of winning public encomium and to the charm of complacency in keeping their subjects pleased at any cost, the climax of which is seen in Bhavabhuti's Rama (Cf. "अथवा जानकीमपि आराधनाय लोकस्य त्यजतो नास्ति मे व्यथा") But Paruravas with all his gallantry is sly in his dealings, a shatha in his behaviour towards his mates other than his fiancee, though he is very respectful to the others (Vide Act II and Act V, P. 258).
अपराधी नामाहं प्रसीद रम्भोर विरम संरम्भात् ।
सेव्यो जनश्च कुपितः कथं नु दासो निरपराधः ॥ Page 94
heroine of the play is Urvashi, a celestial damsel. The birth from a celestial woman is owed by his another heroine, Shakuntalā as well. His Mālavikā though neither celestial nor quasi-celestial, is however born in the purple and is possessed of all qualities of sublime birth. His other two heroines are swakiyā or belonging to the hero alone as married wives, whereas Urvashi is a dancer and constitutes the powerful and light army of Indra in his bevy of chosen ladies (Ref. "सुकुमारं प्रहरणमिन्द्रस्य".) Urvashi is, however, addressed as common or Sadharani in a pure technical sense, for want of shackles of the marriage system in vogue in heavens (Obs. even Indrani is not married to a particular Indra but holds office of the queen of Heavens and consort of Indra ex-officio), otherwise she is very chaste to her fiance Paruravas and prepared herself to deteriorate in mortal society and limit her enjoyments to the modest paraphernalia of a human king. She is so much devoted to the king that she wholly loses herself and invites upon her the wrath of the Muni Bharat. Her sacrifice at the alter of Love is very supreme, though sufferings of Shakuntalā may be calculated perhaps no less; but Urvashi surpasses both of his heroines in respect of her poorva-rag, for she is not a mugdha type of a girl or a simpleton as was the case with Malavikā or Shakuntalā. Malavikā, a stranded young girl of high birth thrown into the state of serfdom under Dharini had no prospect of emancipation from that sad plight except in courting the advances of Agnimitra. Mālavikā's ready acceptance of the advances of the hero was more an emergency measure than a spirit of sacrifice for love. More miserable was the case of Shakuntalā, an unsophisticated (mugdha) girl brought up in an artless atmosphere of an hermitage, who fell a victim to the enamouring wiles of an over bearing king (a master in arts of handling simple girls to his free will. Obs. his deceit in not disclosing himself) who could succeed in overpowering the girl only in two visits to the extent of even the consummation of marriage and could afford conveniently to forget her for good—an action in apology of which the celebrated poet had to introduce the episode of malediction, which also served indirectly to bring about a separation and intensify the so-called feeling of love in the drama. It is to be noted by critics that the artifice of malediction introduced in Shākuntalam is an apology for a serious fault in the character of Dushyanta, whereas the malediction in the case of Urvashi is a self-invited Calamity owing to her engrossed thoughts for her lover, Then again, in the course of poorva-rag Urvashi, a developed damsel, could afford to become beside herself and pull her down to her forced existence in the middle world as a meed for her having sown wild oats on a casual visit to the earthly regions. This can as well plausibly be said of Shakuntala who was meditating over her centre of love and fell a prey to Durvasas' curse. True, but the circumstances differ a good deal in the sense that Shakuntalā was a married wife, who had entirely given herself to Dushyanta and fallen into the misery of curse on account of Dushyanta's breach of promise to send a man to fetch her whom he had left behind on account of his dastardly feelings that could not permit him to face Kanva for fear of his wrath in whose penanceful hermitage he had the audacity in venturing to commit adultery with a young unmarried girl who was being brought up under the patria potestas of the Rishi. On account of this serious fault committed by him especially after having pledged himself as the Saviour of the oppressed (Ref. “कः पौरवे वसुमती शासति शासतरि दुर्विनीतानाम्) he could not dare await Kanva's return for taking home Shakuntalā, nor could he do so in sending a man to fetch her in assertion of the consequences of his action upon Kanva who was, later on constrained to remind the delinquent Dushyanta in his speech "अस्मान् साधु विचिन्त्य संयमधनान्" ...Act IV. So it becomes an established fact that malediction in Shakuntalam is due to the artifice of the poet which he was obliged to introduce for draping in a proper colour the prince-like failings of the hero. But one would get feel that no such artifice was necessary if Kalidasa did not suffer from a false conception that the hero should be painted as far as possible like a flawless angel. On the other hand the introduction of this malediction has lessened the effect of the drama, because it leads the audience to feel that forgetfulness on the part of the hero was inevitable. The feeling that the Universe is sound at the core in spite of the wrongs and cruelties that exist in it, would come only when we know the forgetfulness and the later remorse of Dushyanta were genuine. But the artifice of Kalidasa has rendered both of them artificial and therefore meaningless. The artist should lead on his characters to their destined ends by what seems a very natural development of their foibles. In the case of Dushyanta he is not a "स्वतन्त्र कर्ता" neither free to forget or to remember his own doings. We cannot hold him responsible for the wrong he does to Shakuntalā nor can we give him any credit for the ultimate justice he is supposed to have done to her. From this point of view the original story as found in the Puranas seems to be more realistic than that of Kalidas but then it makes it difficult to explain what on earth made Dushyanta do, so foul an act, in the case of so fair a creature as Shakuntalā. As distinguished from this it is found that there is no commitment on the part of Urvashi which could have thrown her into self-forgetting reverie of Shakuntalā, except her geniune love and real spirit of sacrifice on her part. It can neither be said to be the artifice of poet in using malediction as a measure of bringing about separation; for this, malediction differs materially from the one in Shâkuntal; for in the former it brings about union and is a blessing in disguise rather than the separation as in the latter, where it is only a miserable apology for the levity of the hero's character and a device for bringing about separation according to the maxim,
"न विना विप्रलम्भेन सम्भोगः पुष्टिमश्नुते ।
कषायिते हि वस्त्रादौ भूयात्रागो विवर्धते ॥".
For seeking this end in the play in hand, Kalidas had another curse in his satchel thrown in IV Act where she subjects herself to a transformation into a creeper. That Urvashi who once tasted the immortal nectar and ambrosia of the heavens brought herself to limited pleasurses of this world with all her matured understanding and then remained with unflinching devotion to the hero is something which is a superior character in this heroine to the one in either an innocent girl of Mălavikā or an artless soul like Shakuntalā. She still goes a step further in her attempt to move first from the heaven for him before the curse, which makes her Abhisarika as well. To be Abhisarika cannot be a flaw in a heroine only because she stole herself with an opportunity to meet her lover. For if so, nothing short is done by Shakuntalā who cannot be technically called an Abhisarika, being a married consort approaching her disacknowledging husband, who rejects her, as a paragon of virtue seated in the throne of Justice, giving another specimen in his own conduct to verify the truth of his dogma of the infallibility of a righteous heart, viz. “सतां हि सन्देहपदेषु वस्तुषु प्रमाणमन्तकरणप्रवृत्तयः"- which is his personal measure in accepting and rejecting the girl at his own free will. Then again . Urvashi takes herself to another enterprise in offering sacrifice of her personal feelings in having imposed upon herself the segregation of her child for the sake of elongating the period of her union with the hero. Shakuntala's bringing up the child in Mareecha's Ashram was again an emergency affair, a result of the hero's folly, whereas Urvashi's attempt to rear her child in the ashram of Chyavan was a feat of her endurance and a specimen of her real love for Pururavas. That is why Urvashi is a heroine of a higher order in respect of her chaste love, though Shakuntalā can surpass her in her quick and hasty love. So far as quick love alone is concerned, Urvashi does not fall short there as she also falls in love at the first sight of Vikram, but has had no hasty love as found in Shakuntala, a character, on the other hand, portrayed by Kalidasa to offer didactic lesson to all advocates of free love in showing a series of serious calamities befalling a young girl in making an easy, hasty and indiscreet surrender of herself to one, who to all appearances glittered as gold, (Cf:रामादिवत् प्रवर्तितव्यं न तु रावणादिवत्).
The Sentiment in the Play :-The permanent emotion prevailing throughout this play is love between Pururavas and Urvashi, which is manifested by the ensuant actions of gentle talk and amorous glances and is excited by cool breeze, seasonal pleasures and also pluvial joys attended with auxiliary feelings of anxiety, purturbance and the like. The ruling sentiment in the drama is love and love in union, The sentiment is fostered by other subordinate sentiments as those of love in separation or a befitting and light comic here and there.
The scheme of the manifestation of sentiment in this play is in no way unlike to his other dramatic compositions. There is in Malavikagnimitra and also in Shakuntal the same sentiment of love in union or Sambhoga sringar interspersed with a light, casual comic and a regular separation. According to the popular convention "न विना विप्रलम्भेन संभोगः पुष्टिमश्रुते" the poet is very fond of introducing Vipralambha in the theme of his plays.
POORVARAG:Kalidasa has put in a stage where there is purva-rag, that is, love unaccomplished in all his plays; though the length of this suspense differs in each case. In Mālavikaānimitra, from the point of observing Malavika in a group photograph to the stage of Agnimitra's acquisition of Mālavikā in the Sea Mansion, there is Poorva- rag type of Vipralambha, '.which covers about two-thirds of his drama In Vikramorvashi, the purva-rag commences from the point of redemption of Urvashi from Keshi upto the middle of the third Act when she is sent to this world under the ban of Bharat, the length being that of about one half of the play. In Shakuntal, the purva-rag and the Sambhoga are so closely twined together that the former is shortened to its utmost. The commencement of the poorvarag in the king in Shākuntal is marked from the time that he has been slyly looking at the girls in Kanva's ashram behind the tree. Shakuntala Las fallen a prey to a similar feeling after having had a chat with him in the first Act, This prevails upto the second Act only. In the third Act the marriage being consummated, the poorva rag, if there be any, turns at once into Sambhoga, which in its turn is of the shortest period possible.
With a critical appreciation of the interspersing of the Sambhoga and Vipralambha in the plot of the play, the critics will find that there is a seasoned balance of the two in Vikramoryashi to a more tasteful manner than in the case of Shâkuntal, where rapidity of action and disproportionate prolongation of separation, form the marked feature of the sentimental development. In Vikramorvashi the hero meets the heroine and has an opportunity to observe well the lineaments of the heroine while riding a common chariot, and there he cherishes his feeling for the woman. Similarly in Shakuntal, the king conceals himself and scans the features of the girl and falls a victim to her beauty. Thus a deep observation on the part of the hero fascinates him and makes a move towards becoming familiar with the heroine. In the case of Urvashi she is also attracted there and then and the poorva rag commences. Then there is a separation on account of Chitraratha's arrival exactly as it is in the Shakuntal due to the appearance of Gautami. Then they meet again in the play in hand, the heroine moving towards her paramour. In Shakuntal the hero is again brought to the scene under the pretext of the safeguard of the hermitage and there the poorva rag. ends; whereas in Vikramorvashi this second union, though short, gives salad dressing to the poorva rag, which is disturbed by Urvashi's presence being required for the enactment of Laxmi Swayamvaram, an episode which is a pleasant outcome of the poet's fancy. After having enjoyed a short suspense then again there is a union of the two, approved for a length of time by the custodian of the heroine, where the poorva rag ends. Here it is not like a sly commitment by Shakuntala or Dushyanta in the absence of her guardian and hence the union in Vikramorvashi is more stationary and adequate. After the close of the poorva rag or the acquisition of the desired love in Shakuntal, there commences a long, long and disproportionate separation from the third Act to the seventh Act with a final union culminating in comedy. Whereas in Vikramorvashi, after the poorva-rag which is in itself blended happily with interim visits, there is a good deal of Sambhoga and the couple enjoy a pleasant excursion where the poet, to heighten his ruling sentiment, cleverly introduces the scene of Udayavati which gives birth to the womanly jealousy in the heart of Urvashi. The jealousy resulting in her love-bedaubed wrath makes her lose naturally the balance of temper and places her on the borders of the Kumari Grove and turns her into a standing creeper. Thus the poet once again throws the couple into separation, the effects whereof on the royal pair are more appreciable than in Shakuntal, for the Sambhoga in the former is better felt than in the latter. 'In the former, the separation is due to a natural womanly jealousy and the suffering of separation suits the natural justice better in this case, for the hero suffers here for the breach of love in peeping at Udayavati and the heroine out of her keen sense of wrathful jealousy: whereas in Shakuntal, the heroine is a victim of a brutal wrath of a visitor saint all her life and the hero is left to enjoy right royally the pleasures of his over-crowded seraglio to a greater length of separation, viz. till the revival of his memory of his past action so late as in the sixth Act. Unlike this, the hero and the heroine both fall into separation in Vikramoryashi; the heroine wholly becoming senseless on account of her transformation into a plant and the hero no less senseless in the stage of unmad. That is to say, the sentiment develops here upto the nine stages of cupid, whereas in Shākuntal heroine alone suffers. This union here is, again not the final beatitude as is in the case of Shakuntal; for the .couple once again unites and returns home with glee after a long excursion and enjoys ones again the pleasure of union for a certain length. This union, is again overshadowed with a gloomy prospect of separation at the sight of their son . Ayush because it means that the period of co-habitation had come to an end. There is a short vipralambha again.culminating: finally into a lifelòng union blessed with peace and happiness by God Indra, through Nārada. Moreover, the vipralambha in Vikramorvashi is also varied in the sense that it is due to ayoga for some time, then due to mān and shāp and then a prospect of pravās in the fifth Act, whereas in Shākuntal, it is a stupid malediction of Durvāsa which is all responsible for the misery which every reader of fine sense will feel as much too inferior to the one in the play under investigation. To add to the beauty of situation, the poet has made the best use of music and gaits and misgivings throughout the fourth Act--an element altogether absent in the Shakuntal. It will be evident, therefore, that the conduct of the drama in respect of the sentiment, the very soul of poetry is much more charming in Vikramorvashi than in any of his other dramatic compositions, unless the criterion of charm in Shakuntal be the hastiness of Othello in accepting and rejecting Desdemona in thirty-six hours. There too Othello kills his wife because a jealous villain shows him a handkerchief. Is there any such excuse for Kalidasa's Dashyanta to forget his own beloved? Well, what position now is deserved by this hero, so nobly painted as a lover, husband, father and ruler by the orthodox critics?
The plot of the play and the dramatic art of the Poet:- The plot of the play in hand deals with the episode of the meeting of Vikrama and Urvashi and each falling in love with the other at the first sight. Urvashi was held up on her way by the demon Késhi and so her attendents cried for help. The shrieks of her attendents were heard by the hero who appeased them and promised the rescue of Urvashi. He went to the direction in which Urvashi was taken away and brought her back. On her way she felt obliged to the hero for her redemption and was enamoured of him. Their association was disturbed by the appearance of Chitraratha, the commander of the Gandharya army, who was deputed by Indra to escort. Urvashi: safe to heavens. Urvashi on reaching Amaroti, felt miserably Wistful on account of her attachment towards the hero and decided to make a move to her lover in company with Chitralékhā. She found her lover sitting in a garden in his capital along with the clown musing upon the celestial damsel and her acquisition. There the heroine, anxious to know what her lover was pondering over, played an eavesdropper for a while. Later on, she was convinced of his feeling for her and therefore made her, appearance before him by casting her mask off. Their union was again disturbed as her presence was required in staging a drama at the court of Indra, where she faltered and misquoted a certain query. On account of this failing she was thrown to the mortal world and she was united with her lover. The poorva-rag turns here into a full-fledged union.
Once, thereafter, the couple feel inclined to have a short outing in the course of which the hero steals a glance at a Vidyadhar girl, Udayavati by name, which is another pivot of the dramatic res-business. Urvashi gets jealous at this breach and hastily walks ahead of the hero and steps within the forbidden area of the Kumarivan. There she is turned into a creeper. The hero is in quest of her and bewails at her disappearance and inquires of every living being in the forest about her and gives vent to his real feelings of a lover. The poet is at his height in his dramatic art here. The acquisition of a jewel brings about their union and they return home happily. That jewel is picked away by a vulture, whom Urvashi's son in the Chyavan's ashram above kills. This action was felt repugnant to the hermitage living and Urvashi's son was asked to be brought to the hero. The sight of the son was the limit of the period upto which Urvashi could have resided with Vikrama and so Urvashi was sorry to see Vikrama embracing their child. When asked she explained the reason of her despondency and the king was prepared to go to a forest for leading an ascetic life. Indrà had this intelligence of the king's resolve and deputed Nārada to dissuade the king from quitting the arms in view of an impending war between gods and demons and was pleased to extend the period of their union till Vikrama lived. The son, Ayush was nominated as heir-apparent and the couple passed a happy life thereafter. Thus closes the drama with a benedictory valediction by the stage-manager to the audience.
Looking at the plot it appears that the plan of this play is not dissimilar to, nor in any way the denoument is less charming than that of his other plays. As all his dramas are erotic, the substratum is very common and the outline of his plays does not differ in material points.
Theory of Obligation: Unlike any other dramatist, Kalidasa introduces his heroine to the hero in some difficulty or the other. The emancipation of the heroine from that trouble is manoeuvred at the hands of the hero and thus the
वि.प्र.८ hero and the heroine meet and get bewitched of one another. His heroines always feel, under the circumstances, indebted to the hero of which an advantage is generally taken by him. To illustrate, Agnimitra sees Malavikā as a slave to the queen Dhariņi and the loss of liberty is the utmost misery on a high-born girl, who is anxious to ameliorate her situation in any manner. Later on, when it is apprehended that the king feels in some may concerned with Malavikā, Dhariņi out of her supremacy and jealousy puts her into lock in the Sea Mansion and no body shall release her unless she is shown a particular ring bearing the image of a snake. Agnimitra gets that ring under pretext of curing the clown of a snake-bite and gets her released. And thus he throws the heroine into deep obligations. Here the rescue is from a formidable calamity as that of freeing the girl from behind the bars. In like manner, Urvashi also is thrown into indebtedness to the hero who has redeemed her from the clutches of the demon Késhi. When she recovers her sense, she feels and asks as to whether she is saved by Mahendra. The poet puts in the mouth of Chitralekha a sentence “न महेन्द्रेण; महेन्द्रसदृशानुभावेन राजर्षिणा पुरूरवसा. P. 20", which directly impresses upon the heroine the gratitude which she owes to him and which is meant to flatter the king as well in his face. In this case also, the heroine is under a great obligation, though apparently less great than in the case of Malavikā. With a matured experience, the poet has succeeded in arresting the mind of the heroine for his hero with an obligation more delicate in the case of Shakuntalā than in that of either Malaviká or Urvashi. In Shakuntal he places his heroine in a condition of being pestered only by a bee and a relief sought on that account is presumptively deemed by the poet enough for his purpose of obliging the heroine. But since the poet's usual art could not be satisfied, nor his taste be pampered with this too little a cause, he augments the scope of indebtedness by adding another unit of releasing her from the actionable claim or the mutual obligation which she owes to her other two friends in respect of watering two plants (Ref. शकुन्तले! मोचितासि अनुकम्पिना आर्येण" Act I). The hero purports to offer a valuable piece to Priyamvadā and Anusuyā who out of fear say that she shall be exempt from the obligation by the very word of the hero. Here also the obligation is brought to be borne on the mind of the heroine by her friend Priyamvadä just as it was done in the case of Urvashi by Chitralékhā. Thus there is a common artifice employed by the poet in the sense of enamouring his heroines for his heroes by means of some relief granted to them. It means, therefore, that this artifice restriots the application of the spirit of free love among the heroines, Anxious to prove his heroes to be chivalrous, our poet seems to create opportunities for them to oblige the respective heroines as though such chivalry is the only quality in a hero to be admired by the gentler sex. As a matter of fact this sense ought to be engendered by means of real admiration of the good parts of the hero, as is in the case of Bhavabhuti's Sitā, Shudraka's Vasantsénā, Baņa Bhatta's Pārvati and others. The artifice of throwing into obligation is, after the fashion of Kalidasa, also practised by Bharahhuri in the case of his Mālati, Dandina in the case of his Mallikā and Shreeharsha in the case of his Ratnávali.
After this first meeting Kalidasa has in his plan the bringing out an immediate separation, which lets the seed of love gain root in the heart of the heroine. Kalidasa has a fancy of attacking the heroine's heart and bringing about an expression from the tougher element first, which is, in turn, responded by the advances on the part of the king as well. For example, Malavikā sings "दुल्लहो पिओ मे तस्सिं भव हिआ णिरासं" Act II, which is later on responded by the advances on the part of the king as well. Similarly it is Urvashi, while separated at the instance of Chitraratha in Act I, expresses her submission to the sense of love by staying over, under the pretext of her necklace tucked to a branch of a tree. There the poet introduces a light comic ("आ दृढं खलु लग्ना सा, अशक्या मोचयितुम्" P. 34). Thereafter farther and farther she goes and the hero also expresses his mind "सुराङ्गना कर्षति खण्डिताग्रात्, सूत्रं मृणालादिव राजहंसी-Act I-20 P. 37", and the poet closes the Act. Exactly its parallel is followed by the poet in Shākuntal, where Shakuntala's meeting with Dushyant is disturbed by the free movement of an elephant and then the ladies all run up to the hermitage. While thus leaving the king, the heroine expresses her attachment just like Urvashi, by saying that her valkal (barch) is stuck to the branch of a kurabak or an amaranth and her foot affected with a thorn. For Urvashi who is a celestial damsel, the poet has a pearl necklace to be stuck to a branch, while in the case of Shakuntala there is her barch garment. This is very natural and popular pretext of womankind to remain behind for feasting their eyes on their lovers at the parting scene. Again the departure of the heroine leaving the hero to himself is common to both the plays. Even in Shâkuntal, the hero remains behind and says “गच्छति पुरःशरीरं धावति पश्चादसंस्थितं चेतः। चीनांशुकमिव केतोः प्रतिवातं नीयमानस्य । Shak. I, 36". Vikrama's mind is ex. tracted out of him as does a goose, a filament from the lotus stalk. Dushyanta's mind is, however, drawn like a China silk waved along with the wind.
Then till the comencement of the second Act, the clown does not know this love affair which is divulged by the hero to him both in Vikramorvashi and Shākuntal In both the plays the Vidushaka is anxious to know the sort of beauty that she is. The king then describes her charms in superlatives in both the cases. (Cf. आभरणस्याभरणं प्रसाधन विधेः प्रसाधनविशेषः-P. 51. Vikr. II, 3; "स्त्रीरत्नसृष्टिरपरा प्रतिभाति सा मे (II. 10) अनाघ्रातं पुष्पं किसलयमलूनं कररुहैः।" Shak. II. 11. No other pursuit then interests the hero in any of his plays (Cf. “विविक्तादृतेनान्यदुत्सुकस्य शरणमस्ति P.51. 4. बहुकुसुमितास्वपि..." Vikr. p. 57; "कण्वसुतामनुसृत्य निरुत्सुकं चेतः.........न न नमयितुमधिज्यमुत्सहिष्ये" Shak. II. 3). Then both the heroes feel subservient to the emotion of love and then call Love names (Cf. "अलब्धफलनीरसं मम विधाय तस्मिन् जने समागममनोरथं भवतु पञ्चवाणः कृती" Vikr. P. 70%; “तव कुसुमशरत्वं शीतरश्मित्वमिन्दोः द्वयमिदमयथार्थ दृश्यते मद्विधेषु" Shak. II, 4). Shortly after, there is a second meeting between the hero and the heroine. Prior to the actual meeting, one of the pair does always silently observe what the other is doing (Cf. In Shakuntal Dushyanta slyly does so “यावद्विटपान्तरेणावलोकयामि" and gauges the feelings of the heroine while she is with her friends; in Vikramorvashi the heroine slyly does so and gauges Vikram's feelings while he is sitting with his friend, Obs.तिरस्करिणीप्रतिच्छन्ना पार्श्ववर्तिनी भूत्वा श्रोष्ये वयस्येन सह विजने किं मंत्रयंस्तिष्ठतीति. P. 65) This is the poet's common artifice to permit each one to understand the feelings of the other. In spite of this divergence that in the case of one, the hero gauges the feelings and in the other the heroine does so of the other, the poet makes his heroine alone to write a billet-doux to her lover. ( (Vide Vikr. “सामिअ संभावित आ जह अहं तए अमुणिआ" Page 73 and Shak, "तुज्झ न जाणे हिअअं मम उण मअणो दिवा वि रत्तिं वि" Act IIT-19). Immediately after this, both of them meet and enjoy the company of each other. Here of course there is disunity of action in the two plays which affects the sentiment prevailing there, a point discussed above.
Thereafter in both the plays, the poet brings in his malediction of Bharat in Vikramoryashi and of Durvāsas in Shakuntal, but the consequences of the two materially differ. Now to follow the link, the critics have to go to the next stage of separation between Vikram and Urvashi of the IV Act, which is due to her change into the form of a creeper.
Then in both the plays, this disunion is ended by means of the sight of an ornament; in the case of Shakuntal, it is a ring which brings about the union, and it is the Sangam gem or the gem of union which brings the couple together in Vikramorvashi. After the acquisition of the signet ring, Dushyant also undergoes the pangs of separation, and Vikram has the prospect of separation on account of Ayus' visit terminating the period of stay of Urvashi with him.
Strangely enough, the poet is so close in his dramatic plan that the son of Vikram is as much reared in heavens by a sage viz. Chyavana as is the son of Dushyant brought up in the āshram of Mareecha. Both these children manifesf their Kshatria nature and the sages feel the necessity ot their being handed over to their parents. Both the heroes then nominate their sons of celestial birth as their heirsapparent and they lead the remainder of their life in close and happy union of their beloved heroines. Shall we say that all his plays are nothing but representations of Court intrigue or 'affaire-de-cœur' in the form of a poetic dialogue ?
The plan and inset of the plot in the two major Kalidasian plays thus are found agreeing closely much to the minor details, which will satisfy every curious critic in regard to the sterotyped uniformity of the style and dramatic art of the great poet Kalidasa and instigate the critics to further investigation.
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE PLAY:- Vikramoryashi has all the charms of a full-fledged dramatic composition with a special feature that it has maintained to the minutest extent the unity of action and interest throughout the play. The sense of proportion has never been neglected by the post in this drama which has resulted in full poetic justice to the denoument of the play. Apart from that the play richly abounds in beautiful portrayal of the character of the heroine who is least jealous-nay-eminently regardful of the status of the married consort of the king, & character noble in itself. Moreover she is respectful towards the feeling of her subjects as well (Obs. "कदाचिदसूयिष्यन्ति प्रकृतयः आवाभ्यां P. 222 Act IV). The next is the beautiful description of the mother Ganges, the King's capital and the landscape about it. The dignified demeanour of Urvashi even in self approach to the lover is very striking. Then this is the only drama which contains the Unmādānk in the Sanskrit literature, which so beautifully puts the king to ask of every animate or inanimate object in regard to the whereabouts of his beloved. It strikingly reminds of the poet and his hero of the Cloud Messenger with a step ahead in the sense that this demeanour of the Hero in this drama is attended with the spell of music and dance and impressive delusions. This art of the poet throws the reader in entire sympathy with the hero and is a device which makes the readers in unison with the hero, an element necessary to the perfect relish of the rasa (Vide " विगलितवेद्यान्तरो रसास्वाद" " etc), which is painfully absent in Shākuntal. Though the fourth act of this drama if admitted to be free from interpolation is at a couple of places incongruous as pointed out in the commentary, it only goes to establish that the poet did not feel interested in this play in observing closely the unities of time and place (Of. “पूर्वदिक्पवनाहतकल्लोलोद्गतबाहुः p. 202..अन्यथा कथं पुरूरवसमपहाय समुद्राभिसारिणी भवेत् p. 208 Act IV.) Even this incongruity has a charm in the case of a bewildered hero and every independent critic will feel the charms of this Act in no way less than that of the corresponding act of the poet's other dramas. The poor displays in this drama also the same concinnity of style, and his close acquaintance with the human feelings, his delineation of characters and picturesque description of natural phenomena appear as appreciable and bewitching as in the case of Shākuntal.
This is, however, a succinct survey into the merits of the play and it is felt that on the lines indicated above the reader will take pains to study this drama of Kalidasa and will feel its worth in its own way.