3. Delineation of Rasa in the Mudrārākṣasa (Introduction)

Rasa is said to be the soul of any composition. No meaning can be gathered from a composition without rasa—

na hi rasādṛte kaścit arthaḥ pravartate.^[1]

Therefore, it is obvious to have some predominant sentiment in a particular composition, especially in a drama, that can exhibit the theme of the drama to the connoisseurs. In the former chapter we have discussed about the characteristics of Mudrārākṣasa as a nāṭaka. A nāṭaka should have Śṛṅgāra or Vīra as its predominant sentiment according to the ālaṃkārikas, and Mudrārākṣasa follows this criterion properly.

Mudrārākṣasa is a unique drama having some special characteristics. Unlike the majority of Sanskrit plays it is purely a political drama. The foremost specialty of the drama is the absence of the heroine as well as Śṛṅgārarasa . The drama is also devoid of Hāsyarasa and the character of vidūṣaka also cannot be found here. The drama conveys a manly stain and Vīrarasa is its predominant sentiment which is depicted without any bloodshed or any description of war or fighting. In many a places in this drama there are indications of a great war that had been fought against the Nandas by Cāṇakya and Candragupta as a result of which a new dynasty, i.e., Maurya dynasty had been established by Candragupta. But nowhere in the drama can a vivid description of that war be found. Still, regarding the principal sentiment of Mudrārākṣasa there is no controversy. Therefore, in the following, let us assess how Viśākhadatta is successful in delineating Vīrarasa as the principal sentiment of the present drama which is devoid of even a single scene of war or fight.

The Vīrarasa which has Utsāha as its sthāyibhāva^[2] and Dhṛti, Mati, Garva, Smṛti , Tarka and Romāñca as it’s sañcāribhāvas^[3] has got several varieties. According to Bharata, the author of Nāṭyaśāstra, Vīraasa has got three varieties—Dānavīra , Dharmavīra and Yuddhavīra.^[4] Dhanañjaya in his Daśarūpaka also accepted the above three divisions.^[5] But Viśvanātha, the author of Sāhityadarpaṇa added one more variety to this list of three, i.e., Dayāvīra.^[6] Paṇḍitarāja Jagannātha followed Viśvanātha in this regard but further he added four more varieties, viz., Pāṇḍityavīra , Satyavīra , Kṣamāvīra and Balavīra.^[7] He also has laid emphasis on the point that lots more varieties of Vīrarasa also can be created if necessary.

cf.

...vastutastu bahavo vīrarasasya śṛṅgārasyeva prakārā nirupayituṃ śakyante^[8]

Analyzing the most important character of the drama, i.e., Cāṇakya who is mostly present in the drama, it is found that the nature and the speeches of Cāṇakya do not come under any of the above said varieties of Vīrarasa. That means , Cāṇakya does not fit under the characteristic of Dānavīra or Dharmavīra or even Dayāvīra, because all these merits are found absent in the very character. Some may also profess about Yuddhavīra as the sentiment present herein the drama, but it cannot be supported because of the lack of any scene of war or fight in this drama. No doubt Cāṇakya has been presented in this drama as a very knowledgeable person but still he has not been depicted here as an erudite scholar. Therefore the chance of Pāṇḍityavīra is also less. On the other hand, Cāṇakya does not come under Satyavīra also as he is not much conscious in speaking the truth, or even Kṣamāvīra, as Cāṇakya never spare anybody for the offence done by the person. Moreover , Cāṇakya is an old Brāhmaṇa, therefore, the chance of the presence of Balavīra is also missing here.

The main thing based on which the drama runs smoothly is Cāṇakya’s political intrigues which is clearly shown in the title of the drama itself, i.e., ‘Mudrārākṣasa’ or ‘Rākṣasa won over by means of the signet ring’. It is Cāṇakya, the minister of Candragupta of Pāṭaliputra, who had destroyed the Nanda Dynasty and placed Candragupta on the throne as the first Maurya Emperor. Now to make Candragupta secure, Cāṇakya presses Rākṣasa, the former minister of the Nandas, into the service of their Maurya successor as a minister. But the reconciliation of Rākṣasa is not an easy task as he still professes loyalty to his former patron. But the task is accomplished by Cāṇakya’s political intrigues through a signet ring. Therefore, it is seen that the politics or rājanīti of Cāṇakya is playing the pivotal role here. Over and above, according to Dhanañjaya, Vīravasa arises from the vibhāvas called Pratāpa , Vinaya , Adhyāvasāya , Sattva(Bala), Moha , Aviṣāda , Naya(Nīti), Viṣmaya and Parākrama.^[9] Here, in this drama vibhāva called naya or nīti can be sensed everywhere. In this regard it should be mentioned that Dr. Satyavrata Singh has brought up a term ‘Nītivīra’ for this kind of situation.^[10] As Paṇḍitarāja Jagannātha is liberal in accepting more varieties of Vīrarasa, it is worth supporting the term that Nītivīra or better Rājanītivīra is the main sentiment of the drama. Because one can easily notice Utsāha or fortitude (i.e., the sthāyibhāva of Vīrarasa) of Cāṇakya for politics in the drama.

In this drama Cāṇakya has total faith on his wit only. He is an ardent supporter of karmavāda and doesn’t keep faith on fate. He says—

dvaivaṃ avidvaṃsaḥ pramāṇayanti

(The illiterate alone believes in fate).^[11]

To destroy the combined powers of Cāṇakya-Candragupta, Rākṣasa and Malayaketu tried a lot. So, Rākṣasa and Malayaketu are the Ālambanavibhāva of Vīrarasa herein. Rākṣasa’s affection towards his former master, i.e., Nanda, is the Uddīpanavibhāva for Cāṇakya, the counteraction of Cāṇakya against Rākṣasa’s intrigues is the anubhāva and Dhṛti , Mati , Garva , Tarka and Smṛti, i.e., the Sañcāribhāvas are also vividly described in the speeches of Cāṇakya against his opponents. These vibhāvas, anubhāvas and sañcāribhāvas of Vīrarasa strengthen the sthāyibhāva, i.e., Utsāha in Mudrārākṣasa. Therefore, the connoisseurs can easily assess that the Vīrarasa is the predominant sentiment of the present drama.

Now, let us cite some examples of different rasas used in Mudrārākṣasa—

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Nāṭyaśāstra, p.62

[2]:

uttamaprakṛtirvīra utsāhasthāyibhāvaka ḥ//Sāhityadarpaṇa,III. 232

[3]:

sañcārinastu dhṛtimatigarvasmṛtitarkaromañcāḥ/ sa ca dānadharmayuddhairdayayā ca samanvitaścaturdhā syāt// Ibid, III.234

[4]:

dānavīraṃ dharmavīraṃ yuddhavīraṃ tathaiva ca/ rasaṃ vīramapi prāha brahmā trividhameva hi// Nāṭyaśāstra. VI.79

[5]:

vīra pratāpavinayādhyavasāyasatvamohāviṣādanayavismayavikramādyaiḥ/ utsāhabhūḥ sa ca dayāraṇadānayogāt tredhā kilātramatigarvadhṛtiprahar ṣāḥ// Daśarūpaka, IV. 72

[6]:

. Sāhityadarpaṇa, III. 234

[7]:

Rasagaṅgādhara, prathama ānana, p.175-178

[8]:

Ibid., p.175

[9]:

Daśarūpakam, IV.72

[10]:

Mudrārākṣasa, Ed. Satyavrata Singh, p.31

[11]:

Mudrārākṣasa, Ed. Acharya Jagadish Chandra Mishra p.251