________________
950
SAHRDAYĀLOKA amśatvān nāțakasyā’pi tathā prakaraṇasya ca. ānuşangikam eteşām laksanam tatra darśitam. dombi śrīgaditam bhāņo, bhāni-prasthāna-rāsakāḥ, kāvyam ca sapta nộtyasya bhedāḥ syus te’pi bhāņavat
ityāhuḥ kecid anye tān sarvan nộtyā”tmakāh viduḥ.” Śāradātanya suggests that the definitions of nātikā, sattaka and totaka are discussed in Ch. VIII as they seem to be partially imbibing the characteristics of nāțaka and prakarana. Thus, for Sā., these three are singled out almost as rūpakas with abhinaya-prādhānaya. He gives the list of uparūpakas but adds that some ācāryās give different names to this or that art-form, but virtually their structure
ins the same. He also notes the opinion of some others - 'kecid anye', who feel that dombi, śrīgadita, bhāna, bhānī, prasthāna, rāsaka and kāvya are but varieties of nrtya, but are virtually similar to 'bhāna'. Still others hold that all these twenty types should be taken as 'nţtyā”tmaka', i.e. not nāryā”tmaka. They are more of dance-forms and not types of drama according to some. Śā. neither approves nor disapproves this opinion but seems to be closer to the view that takes these as uparūpakas, having an element of abhinaya' also. But they are 'padárthábhinayā”tmikāḥ', as suggested by Dhanañjaya and Bhoja. This means they are not drama proper, though involving an element, may be prominent at times, of ‘abhinaya' or acting also.
Dr. Rāghavan (pp. 570, ibid) observes : "At the beginning of the next (i.e. IXth) chapter whose first part deals with the upa-rūpakas, Sāradātanaya again mentions twenty uparūpakas. Here the sattaka is left out and in its place, we have a bhāna, a musculine companion to the faminine bhānī, added. Immediately are mentioned the nātikā, totaka, and sattaka, as derivatives from nātikā, and he says that they are already described under nataka. Totaka is defined along with nātaka, and sattaka along with nātikā, in Ch. VIII (pp. 238, 244) (pp. 359, edn. Agrawal). (The Vikramorvaśīyam is given as an illustration of a nātaka as well as toțaka. See. pp. 237-8). Sāradātanaya calls the nātikā, totaka and sattaka both as rūpaka and upa-rupaka. He contradicts himself when he says that these three are rasā"śraya like nāțaka on pp. 180-1, Ch. VII, and then counts them as the first three among the list of twenty upa-rupakas which are ntya-varieties and are bhāvā”śraya. On p. 181, he restricts the name nrtya and bhāvā”śraya to those beginning with dombī and similarly on p. 256 says that while some writers consider dombī and the rest only as upa-rūpakas and nětya,
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
