________________
846
SAHRDAYĀLOKA sattakam - atha sattakam. tacca nātikā-pratirūpakam, kaiśiki-bhāratipradhānam, raudra-vīra-bībhatsam, avamaría-samdhi-sūnyam. yathā - karpūramañjarī. antaryavanikántam. yathánke yavanikayā avacchedā bhavanti tathā’trā’pi. śauraseni-pracā-mahārāştri-yuktam. strīvad rajño’pi prāksta-pāthah kāryāt samskrtapāthah. tatra rūpakam eva idam karyam iti rājñā'pi prāksta-pāthaḥ kartavyah."
This means that sattaka is an art-form which is imitative of nātikā. The Kaisiki (as female characters abound in it, like nātikā), and bhārati are major vrttis. In it we have raudra, vīra, bhayānaka and bībhatsa rasas. But here we feel the reading seems to be currupt. We suggest that we should emend the text as "raudra-vīrabhayānaka-bībhatsa-[varjam]." This being a graceful art-form having female characters in majority and having kaisiki in predominance, it has to be like nātikā śrngara-prāyā and so, raudra"di have to be absent from this art-form, which again has graceful dancing in it. The Karpūra-mañjari as an illustration supports our emendation. This is supported by Saradātanaya's remark viz. hīna-raudrarasā"dikam. But in Sāradātanaya we have sarva-samdhi-vihīnam, which we had objected to earlier. So, there we can emend the text as "avamaría-samdhi-vihīnam” in view of Sāgaranandin, who also says that in a sattaka we have parts or divisions of theme presented through the device of “yavanikā”. NLRK as quoted above in prose, says that as in an act there are divisions by the device of yavanikā, so also here we have the same in sattaka. The NLRK is clear that the king-hero has to speak in prakrta but "kāryāt" i.e. due to special reason he may resort to samskrta al
Dr. Raghavan further observes that having once dealt with the sattaka amidst the rasā”śraya rūpaka varieties, close upon the nātikā, of which it is a prakrta counterpart, Sāradātanaya contradicts himself later, when he defines it as a bhāvā”śraya variety, a nrtyabheda, among upa-rūpakas. But perhaps we may assist Dr. Raghavan's effort here. As observed earlier by us this art-form viz. sattaka seems to be a special mixture of some drama and more dance and hence we should not find any contradiction in Sāradātanaya's presentation. Actually the B.P. IX. 4 (pp. 375, Edn. Agrawal, ibid) reads as :
“nātikāyās toțakasya satďakasya ca lakṣaṇam, amśatvān nāțakasyā’pi tathā prakaranasya ca. ānușangikam etešām lakṣaṇam tatra darśitam.”
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
