Hanuman Nataka (critical study)
by Nurima Yeasmin | 2015 | 41,386 words
This page relates ‘Various Rasas Delineated’ of the English study on the Hanuman-nataka written by Shri Damodara Mishra in the 11th century. The Hanumannataka is a Mahanataka—a fourteen-act Sanskrit drama dealing with the story of Rama and Hanumat (Hanuman) and presents the events in the lifes of Rama, Sita, Ravana and Hanuman (the son of Anjana and Vayu—the God of the Winds) based on the Ramayana story.
4. Various Rasas Delineated
The earlier Sanskrit critics are not found to treat Rasa (poetic sentiment) as an essential and separate canon for assessing a piece of poetry in general. Bhāmaha[1] and Daṇḍin[2] include the Rasa within the purview of the figure Rasavat, while, Vāmana[3] is found to recognize it as an element within the Arthaguṇa called Kānti. The word Rasa primarily means ‘taste’ or ‘flavour or ‘savour’ or relish, but metaphorically it means the emotional experience of beauty in literature. The KV describes how the figure Rasavat is dependent on the eight Rasas and it is further show that Daṇḍin was quite aware of the difference between sthāyibhāvas and Rasa. Bhāmaha and Daṇḍin, the two exponents of the Alaṃkāra school, are noticed to assign a subordinate status to the Rasa.
However, a distinct exposition of the Rasa along with its relation with the poetry in general, comes into light in the works of the comparatively later rhetoricians like Ānandavardhana and Viśvanātha. On the other hand, Viśvanātha defines Kāvya to be a sentence, provided, it contains Rasa.[4] However, it will not be justified to assume that the earlier writers were lacking in the idea of Rasa and that they failed to realize the aesthetic value in poetry or, that, their works were devoid of the Rasa. Bhāmaha[5] is found to maintain that a Mahākāvya should depict all the eight Rasas separately. Firstly Rudraṭa is found to treat Rasa in his work called Kāvyalaṃkāra (Kāvyālaṃkāra of Bhāmaha). The Nātyaśāstra says that nothing can be done in a drama without Rasa.[6] The Abhinavabhārati remarks that one Rasa runs like a thread in a dramatic representation.[7]
The cannons of Sanskrit dramaturgy mentions that a drama may contain more than one sentiment, but only one of them should be the principal one. It is also said that the principal sentiment should be either Śṛṅgāra (love) or Vīra (heroic).[8] There is also a rule that one sentiment should be principal and other should be subordinates to it. The view is found corroborated in by Ānandavardhana.[9]
Śrī Dāmodara Miśra in his Hanumannāṭaka, uses various kinds of the dramatic sentiment. The sentiments depicted in the Hanumannāṭaka are the Śṛṅgāra, Vīra, Raudra, Adbhuta, Karuṇa, Hāsya and Bhayānaka. Here is an attempt to make an assessment of various Rasas, incorporated in the Hanumannāṭaka
Śṛṅgāra (Erotic)
According to Bharata, wherein the permanent mood is Rati, that is called Śṛṅgāra.[10] Literally Śṛṅgāra means a ‘horn’ which sprouts from the head of a bull as a plant does from the earth. It comes to mean the budding of love as the word Śṛṅgāra is formed from the explanation. According to Viśvanātha, when a man of higher dignity has erotic dalliances, it becomes the case of Sṛṅgāra.[11] Mammaṭa says that it is of two varieties, viz. Sambhoga and Vipralambha.[12] Dhañanjaya opines that when a pair of young men feel mutual attraction due to favourable place, time, dress, sports etc., the feeling is called Rati (love/attachment) and Rati being fully experienced through various graceful actions, attain the status of the sentiment called śṛṅgāra.[13] On the other hand, he says that Śṛṅgāra is of three types, viz. the Ayoga, the Viprayoga and the Sambhoga.113 In Vipralambha[14] when the hero and heroine possesses love to each other but they cannot get united then that is called Viprayoga.[15] In the case of Ayoga, it is said, the lovers though attached deeply to each other in no way and due to being dependent upon others or due to some effects of bad luck be united.[16] When the hero and the heroine, being mutually attracted, enjoy the flavour of love through sight and touch etc., then this type of śṛṅgāra is called sambhoga.[17] Dhanañjaya gives the same opinion on this matter.[18] This sambhoga is styled as the Saṃyoga by Paṇḍitrāja Jagannātha. According to him Śṛṅgāra is of two types namely–the Saṃyoga and the Vipralambha.[19] According to Viśvanātha the natural phenomena like the rising of the sun and the moon, the sports in water and forest, the six seasons with their charm and gaiety, description of morning, black bees and the night etc. contribute much in the context of realization of the sentiment called Sambhoga.[20]
Śrī Dāmodara Miśra uses this Śṛṅgāra sentiment in various places. In the 2nd Act of the Hanumannāṭaka, there is found the description leading to Śṛṅgāra. In the verse gāḍāṃ gāḍāṃ[21] …, anyonyaṃ …. bāhubandhaḥ[22], mandaṃ mandaṃ[23] …, pṛthulaja ghānabhāraṃ[24] …, spṛhayati ca bibheti…. āviṣkaroti[25] and nidhuvanaghana[26] …….. śaṅkaṃ etc. there are some description suggesting sambhoga śṛṅgāra.
Vipralaṃbha Śṛṅgāra also finds its room in the Hanumannāṭaka In Vipralaṃbha[27] the hero and the heroine, though possessing love for each other, cannot get united.The love in separation i.e., Vipralaṃbha Śṛṅgāra exists in the presentation of the pangs of separation which Rāma feels when Rāvaṇa kidnaps Sītā with him. Hence, along with the Sambhoga type, the Vipralaṃbha type of Śṛṅgāra also, is found to be depicted in the Hanumannāṭaka The verses bahirapi na padānāṃ …….. sītāviyogam[28], madhyo’yaṃ haribhiḥ ……… bho maithili,[29] aliṅgitātra sarasīruha ……………. kva gatelyarodīt,[30] gāhaṃgāhaṃgahvara …… dīnamarodit[31], sa bhūrajorañjita …… bhūmiḥ[32], sīteti hā… paritaścacāra[33], ha jānaki pracalito ……. kva vilokayāmi[34], re vṛkṣāḥ parvatathā..… ko bhavānkena dṛṣṭā[35], he godāvari ….… maithilīṃ yācate[36], ke yūyaṃ vada[37] nāthanātha …… hā priye jānaki, saumitre dāvavahni …...… kānte’si sīte[38], śaṅkeśaśāṅke … priyāyāḥ[39] re re nirdaya … prayukto budhaiḥ[40], etc. also describes the pangs of separation of Rāma from Sītā when Sītā was caught by Rāvaṇa.It is already stated that the separation is the main cause of Vipralaṃbha Śṛṅgāra. This Vipralaṃbha Śṛṅgāra is also found in the case of Sītā. When she was in Laṅkā she thought about Rāma and worrying for him. In the verses mātarjānaki … gātreṣu romodgamaḥ[41], suvarṇasya suvarṇasya … aṅgulīyakam[42], mudre santi … ciraṃdattavān[43], atrāṅgulīyakamanau … mumuha[44], candro yatra … drutaṃ[45], the pangs of separation of Sītā from Rāma is described.All the verses referred to here can be treated as suggestives of the Rasa called Vipralmbha, which according to Bhoja[46] is essential for a better representation of Sambhoga.
Vīra (Heroic)
The Vīra rasa which belongs to the noblest men has utsāha (fortitude) as its permanent mood. The utsāha is the mood by virtue of which one is prompted to perform actions. The yellow colour is the symbol of Vīra rasa. Its presiding deity is Indra.[47] The person to be conquered are the Ālaṃbananavibhāvas and their heroic utterances, advances and appropriate situations are the Uddīpanavibhāvas, where taking up the arms etc.by the opponents is the anubhāva and patience, intelligence, pride, memory, mental deliberation and horripilation are regarded as the Vyabhicārībhāvas.[48] The author of the Hanumannāṭaka also employs the Vira. In the verse rājanmāgā viṣādaṃ[49] …, nāhaṃ[50] …, tam dṛstvā[51].. utkṣipya śūlamajayaṃ[52] …… etc. there is noticed the Vīra. In the verse dambholi kumbhakarṇa[53] … there is a description of the fight between Jambavān and Kumbhakarṇa. Here both the Jambavān and Kumbhakarṇa are Ālambanas and their efforts are Uddīpanas. Here the arms, hands and feet etc. are Ānubhāvas. There are many instances of Vīra rasa in the Hanumannāṭaka
Karuṇa (Pathetic Sentiment)
Śoka or grief caused by the death of a desired one is the permanent mood of the Karuṇarasa. By the learned it is mythologically spoken of as dove-coloured; while its presiding deity is the god of death. Sorrow is the permanent mood of the sentiment Karuṇa and here the object for which sorrow comes is Ālambana, the Uddīpana is such thing as when the dead body of the loved one is being burnt. Its Anubhāvas are the cursing one’s destiny, falling on the ground, waiting etc. changes of colour, size and sobs, stupefaction and raving. All worldly objects fainting, epilepsy, sickness debility, weariness, distress, insensibility, madness and anxiety etc,[54] areits vyabhicāribhāvas.
There is found representation of Karuṇa rasa in the Hanumannāṭaka The verses rāmaṃ jāyāgrajamiva…………..tatheti[55], hā tāta mātara[56] ………….…and sīteti hā janaka[57] ……, ha jānaki[58] …..etc. may be mentioned as examples of Karuṇa rasa.
Raudra (Wrath or Furiousness)
The permanent mood of the rasa called Raudra is anger.[59] Mythologists opine that it is red coloured and its presiding deity is Rudra. The enemy is supposed to be the Ālambana and the enemy’s activities are regarded as Uddīpanavibhāvas. Cutting of the enemy by means of various weapons like spear, sword etc. a pugilistic encounter, attack are regarded as Uddīpanas of this sentiment. Biting the leaps, contraction of the eye-brow, raising the hands, frightening, boosting etc. are regarded as Anubhāvas and fierceness, pride etc. are treated as Vyābhicārībhāvas.
The author of the Hanumannāṭaka also employs this Raudra rasa in his drama. In the verses re re niśācarapate[60] …, ekasmin[61] … there is found the presence of Raudra rasa.
Bhayānaka (Terror)
As mentioned in the Sāhityadarpaṇa[62], the permanent mood of the Bhayānaka is Bhīti or Bhaya. Its colour is black. Here the source of fear is the ālambana, the dreadful attempts etc. are Uddīpanas; the sweating, dissolution, paleness, convulsive speech, horripilation, trembling, looking round etc. are Anubhāvas, when the matter comes regarding to disgust, excitement, fascination, terror, fatigue, distress suspension, epilepsy, flurry or commotion and death etc. then these are called sañcāribhāvas. In the Hanumannāṭaka the verse re re niśācarapate[63] … paitāmahaṃ[64] … etc. there is found the employment of Bhayānaka rasa.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
rasavaddarśitaspaṣṭaśṛgārādirasam tathā/ Kāvyālaṃkāra of Bhāmaha,III.6
[2]:
rasavadrasapeśalaṃ Kāvyādarśa, II.275
[5]:
[6]:
na hā rasādṛte kaścidarthaḥ pravartate/ Nāṭyśāstra, Vol. I, p. 274
[7]:
eka eva tāvatparamārthato rasaḥ sūtrasthānīyatvana rūpake pratibhāti Abhinavabhāratī, Vol. I, p. 273
[8]:
[9]:
prasidhi’pi prabandhanāṃ nānārasaibandhane eko raśongīkartavyaste ṣāmektakras amicchatā Dhvanyāloka, III.21
[11]:
śṛṅgaṅg manmathodbhedastadāgamana hetukaḥ/
uttamaprakṛtiprāyo rasaḥ śṛṅgāra iṣyate// Sāhityadarpaṇa, III.183
[13]:
[15]:
viprayogastu viśleso ruḍhavisramabhayordvidhā ibid., IV.57
[16]:
tatrayogo’nurāge’pi navayorekacittayoḥ pāratantryeṇa daivādvā viprakarṣādasangamaḥ ibid., IV.50, 51
[17]:
darśanasparśanādīni niṣevete vilāsinau/
yatrānurktavanyonyaṃ sambhogo’yamudāhṛtaḥ// ibid., III. 210
[18]:
anukūlau niṣevete yatrānyonyam vilāsinau darśanasparśanādīni sa sambhogo mudānvitaḥ Daśarūpaka, IV. 69
[19]:
tatra śṛṅgāro dvinidhāḥ saṃyogo vipralambhaśca rateḥ saṃyogakālāvacchinnatve prathamaḥ viyogakālāvacchinnatve dvitiyah RG., p.41
[20]:
tatra syādṛtuṣatkaṃ candrādityau tathodayastamoyaḥ jalakelivanavihāraprabhātamadhupānayāminiprabhṛtiḥ anulepanabhūsādyā vācyam śucimedhyamamanyacca Sāhityadarpaṇa, III. 198
[21]:
[22]:
[23]:
[24]:
pṛthulajaghanabhāraṃ mandamandolayantī mṛducaladalakāgrā prasphuratkarṇapūrā/
prakaṭitabhujamūlā darśitastanyalīlā pramadayati patiṃ drāgjānakī vyājanidrā// ibid., II.17
[25]:
spṛhayati ca bibheti prematāṃ bālabhāvā-nmilati suratasaṅge’pyaṅgamākuñcayantī/
ahaha nahi nahīti vyājamapyālapantī smitamadhurakatākṣairbhāvamāviṣkaroti// ibid., II.20
[26]:
nidhuvanaghanakeliglānibhāvaṃ bhajantyā ramaṇarabhasaśaṅkātaṃkicetaḥ priyāyāḥ/
adharadaśanasarpatsītkṛtāyā dhṛtāyāḥ piba piba rasanāṃ me kāmato nirviśaṅkam// ibid., II. 21
[28]:
[29]:
[30]:
āliṅgitātra sarasīruhakorakākṣī/
pitādhareti madhure vidhumandalāsyā/
raṅgāvatāramakarandavimarditāni/
puṣpāṇyamūni dayite kva gatetyarodīt// ibid., V. 5
[31]:
[32]:
sa bhūrajorañjitasarvakāyo/
babhau vibhurmanyuvidīrṇacetāḥ//
yoṣidviyogānaladahyamānaṃ/
svakāntamāliṅgayatīva bhumiḥ// ibid., V. 7
[33]:
[34]:
[35]:
re vṛkṣāḥ parvatasthā girigahanalatā vāyunā vījyamānā rāmo’haṃ vyākulātmā daśarathatanayaḥ śokaśukeṇa dagdhaḥ/
bimboṣṭhī cārunetrī suvipulajaghanā badhanāgendrakāñcī hā sītā kena nītā mama hṛdayagatā ko bhavānkena dṛṣṭā// ibid., V.10
[36]:
he godāvari puṇyavāripuline sītā na dṛṣṭā tvayā sā hartuṃ kamalāni cāgatavatī yātā vinodāya vā/
ityevaṃ pratipādapaṃ pratinagaṃ pratyāpagaṃ pratyaṅgaṃ pratyeṇaṃ pratibarhiṇaṃ tata itastāṃ maithilīṃ yācate// ibid., V. 11
[37]:
[38]:
[39]:
śaṅke śasāṅke jaguraṅkameke paṅkaṃkuraṅgaṃ pratibimbitāṅgaṃ /
dhūmaṃ ca bhūmaṇḍalamuddhatāgneviyogajātasya mama priyāyāḥ// ibid., V. 21
[40]:
[41]:
mātarjānaki ko bhavāniha mṛgaḥ kenātra saṃpreṣita stvaddautyena raghūttamena kimidaṃ haste’sti tanmudrikā/
datā tena tavaiva tāṃ nijakarādālabhya cāliṅgya ca premṇāśrūṇi sasarja samyagudabhūd gātreṣu romodgamaḥ// ibid., VI.14
[42]:
suvarṇasya suvarṇasya suvarṇasya ca maithili/
preṣitaṃ rāmacandreṇa suvarṇasyāṅgulīyakam// ibid., VI. 15
[43]:
[44]:
atrāṅgulīyakamaṇau pratibimbamāsīd rāmasya sādaramatīva vilokayanti/
madrūpa eva kimabhūnmama vīkṣayeti mīmāṅsayā janakarājasutā mumoha// ibid., VI. 17
[45]:
[47]:
(a) uttamaprakṛtrivīra utsāhasthāyibhāvakaḥ mahendradaivato hemavarṇo’yaṃ samudāhṛtaḥ Sāhityadarpaṇa,III.232
(b) vīraḥ pratāpavinyādhyavasāyasttvā mohāviṣādanayaismayavikramādyaiḥ utsāhabhūḥ sa ca dayāraṇadānayogāt tredhā kilātra mātigarvadhṛtipraharṣāḥ Daśarūpaka,IV.72
[48]:
ālambananavibhāvāstu vijetavyā dayo mataḥ vijetavyādicestadyaṣṭasyoddīpanarūpiṇaḥ anubhāvāstu tatra syuḥ sahāyānveṣaṇādayaḥ sañcāriṇastu dhṛtimatigarvasmṛtitarkaromāñcāḥ sa ca dānadharmayuddhairdayayā ca samanvitaścaturdhā syāt Sāhityadarpaṇa, III.233, 234
[49]:
[50]:
nāhaṃ vālī subāhurna kharatriśirasau duṣanastāṭakāhaṃ nāhaṃ setuḥ samudro na ca dhanurapi yatyambakasya tvayāttam/
re re rāma pratāpānalakavalamahākālamṛttiḥ kilāhaṃ vīrāṇāṃ mauliśalyaḥ samarabhuvicaraḥ saṃsthitaḥ kumbhakarṇaḥ// ibid., XI.24
[51]:
taṃ dṛstvā jīvitāśaṃ girivarakuharaṃ trastacittāḥ kapīndrāḥ kecitpādāntavātapracalitapavanāndolitāḥ khe caranti/
keciddordaṇḍcaṇḍabhramaṇanipatitāḥ śonitānyudgiranti prāṇān kecit pravīrāḥ kathamapi dadhati spītaphutkārabhinnāḥ// ibid., XI. 27
[52]:
utkṣipya śūlamajayaṃ tripurāntakasya saṃhāraketumiva koṭitaḍitprabhābhiḥ/
ghoraṃ jvalantamurasi kṣipati sma rakṣastārāpatestadiṣuṇā raghuṇā nirastam// ibid., XI. 28
[53]:
dambholi kumbhakarṇaṃ girimiva tarasā pātayañjānubandhaṃ kaṇṭhaṃ gāḍaṃ viracya svabhujagurumadaṃ jāmbavānugraveṣaḥ nirmuktau tāvabhūtāmabhavadatha marutpuṣpavṛṣṭistadaṅge gulphāghātena roṣādrajanicaravarastannirasyopatasthau// ibid., XI.34
[54]:
iṣṭanāśādaniṣṭaapteḥ karuṇākhyo raso bhavet dhīraiḥ kapotavarno’yaṃ kathito yamadaivatah śoko’tra sthāyibhāvaḥ syācchocyamālamvanaṃ matam tasya dāhādikāvasthā bhāveddipanaṃ punaḥ anubhāvā daivanindābhūpātakanditādayaḥ vaivarṇyocchavāsaniḥśvāstambhapralapanānnica nirvedamohāpasmāravyādhiglaniśmṛtiśramāḥ viṣādajaḍatonmādacintādyā vyabhicariṇaḥ Sāhityadarpaṇa, III. 222-225
[55]:
[56]:
[57]:
sīteti hā janakavaṃśajavaijayanti hā madvilocanacakoranavendulekhe/
itthaṃ sphutaṃ bahu vilapya vilapya rāma stameva parṇavasatiṃ paritaścacāra// ibid., V.8
[58]:
hā jānaki pracalitotpalapadmanetre hā me manaḥkamalakānanarājahaṃsi/
eṣa priye tava viyogajavahnidagdho dīnaṃ prayāmi bhavatiṃ kva vilokayāmi// ibid., V.9
[59]:
raudraḥ krodhasthāyibhāvo rakto rudrādhidaivataḥ
ālaṃbanamaristatra tacceṣṭoddipanaṃ matam/
muṣṭiprahārapatanavikṛtacchedevadāranciścaiva
saṃgrāmasambhramādyairasyoddīptirbhavet prouḍā
bhrūvibhaṅgoṣṭhanirdaṃśobāhusphoṭannatarjanāḥ
ātmāvadānakathanamāyudhotkṣepaṇānica
anubhāvāstāthakṣepaḥ krūrasandarśanādayaḥ
ugratāvegaromāuncasvedavepathavo madah
mohāmarṣādayastatra bhāvāḥ syurvgabhicārinaḥ//—Sāhityadarpaṇa, III.227-231
[60]:
[61]:
[62]:
bhayānakau bhayasthāyibhāvo bhūtādhidaivataḥ/
strīnīcaprakṛtiḥ kṛṣṇo matastatvaviśāradaiḥ//
yasmādutpadyate bhītistadatrālambanaṃ matam/
cestā ghoratarāstasya bhaveduddīpanaṃ punaḥ/
anubhāvo’tra vaivarṇyagadgadasvarabhāṣaṇam/
pralayasvedaromāñcakampadikprekṣaṇādayaḥ//
jugupsāvegasaṃmohasaṃtrāsamlānidīnatāḥ/
saṅkāpasmārasambhrāntimṛtyvādyā vyābhicāriṇaḥ// Sāhityadarpaṇa,III.235-238
[63]:
re re niśācarapate tvaritaṃ gṛhāṇa bāṇāsanaṃ tridaśadarpaharaṃ śaraṃ ca/
nirvāpayāmi virahāgnimamuṃ priyāyā mandodarītaralanetrajalapravāhaiḥ// Hanumannāṭaka, XIV. 33
[64]:
paitāmahaṃ raghupatiḥ samare’tikopād bāṇaṃ mumoca hṛdaye daśakandharasya/
bhittvā sa tadhṛdayaśonitaśoṇagātraḥ prāṇānviveśa dharanītalamasya nītvā// ibid., XIV.42