Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 62
Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications
________________
MAY, 1933 ]
RANDOM NOTES ON THE TRIVANDRUM PLAYS
95
RANDOM NOTES ON THE TRIVANDRUM PLAYS.
BY E. H. JOHNSTON, M.A.
I. The appearance of a complete translation of the thirteen plays, attributed to Bhasa by the lato MM. Ganapati Sastri, from the experienced hands of Professors Woolner and Sarup puts further research respecting these works on a secure basis. We are still hampered, it is true, by the lack of really critical editions of most of the plays, by our ignorance of the history of the manuscript tradition, and by insufficient information about the circumstances in which these and other plays continued to be acted till recent times. It would also be desirable to know what liberties this school of actors took with the text of other plays already known to us in standard recensions ; for this would give us some measure of the extent to which the originals may have been manipulated for these acting versions. Despite the deficiency of our knowledge on these points, I think it now possible to examine with profit some of the cruces which are still left unsolved by the translators, although it is hardly safe as yet to go very far with those places where the text seems to be corrupt. The following notes deal with certain passages which have a special interest for me. Inevitably I do not see eye to eye with the translators in them; for it would be waste of space to deal with the many difficulties in which I either would accept their solutions or am unable to improve on them. In the case of the majority of the plays there were no previous translations and the authors are to be congratulated on the general success of their enterprise ; difference of opinion on difficulties does not imply disparagement of their work.
My attitude to the dubious passages of the plays is necessarily determined to some extent by the conclusions I have come to on their authorship and date, and therefore I must deal briefly with these points. In my view the caso, as set out, for instance, by Professor F. W. Thomas in JRAS, 1928, 877 ff., makes it at least highly probable that the Svapnavdsavadatta is by Bhåsa, not preserved entirely indeed in the state in which it left his hands, but still essentially his work. But this is no proof that the remaining plays are by the same author. The arguments originally employed to sustain that assertion were based on the similarity of technique, the character of the Prakrit and the various verbal resemblances in the plays. The first two of these have been proved valueless by subsequent onquiry and the last seems to me equally inoonclusive. For the resemblances relate mainly to actors' gags and are to be found in plays undoubtedly not by Bhâsa; as an argument it suffers from the defect of ati-prasanga. We must investigate more fully the workmanship and language of the plays before asserting an identity of authorship which on the face of it seems hardly probable. The metrical usages of the plays have already been discussed with suggestive results in this journal (1931, 46 ff.) by R. V. Jahagirdar, and I prefer to make my approach by considering the handling of the dramatic problem, as exemplified in the SV.
All art consists in selection, and it is precisely in the nature of the facts which an author chooses for representation that his individuality becomes most apparent. When his attitude to his material has been determined correctly, it will be found that the same attitude persists in all his works, however varied the themes or stories of which he treats, subject of course to the development natural in an author whose working life is prolonged. This principle holds for Sanskrit literature as well as for any other, even though the canons of literary activity followed in India tend to the suppression, as far as possible, of the outward signs of a writer's individuality. But Nature is not to be denied and the signs are there, though we have to dig deeper to arrive at them.
I refer throughout to the texts printed in the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series, though in some cases later editions are preferable for use. It is much to be desired that new editions should number the sentences botween each vorse, so that references to one edition could be traced at once in any othee, I mention each play onco by its full name and thereafter by initials which will onsily be recognised.
