7.2. Summary of the Ubhayābhicārikā

The Ubhayābhicārikā is attributed to Vararuci. He is said to be a contemporary and co-pupil of Pāṇini. He belongs to the period to the last of the Nandas, the king of Magadha. He was born somewhere on the bank of the Godāvarī.

In the play Ubhayābhicārikā, the Viṭa named Vaiśikācala is appointed by his friend Kuveradatta to appease his beloved Nārāyaṇadattā. The Viṭa starts his journey through the street of Kusumapura. On his way, he meets a number of harlots, an old mother of one harlot, a wandering nun and so on. He speaks to each one. Finally, he reaches the house of Nārāyaṇadattā. But he finds that the spring season has done his work more quickly and both the lover re-unite with each other without his help.

In the play, the poet depicts a very small section of the contemporary society, the harlots and the people who enjoy them paying a huge amount of money.

The poet criticizes the harlots who are faithless, greedy and heartless creatures, who make false love with men, naked them to the skin and then no longer interested, leave him forever, as the soul depart from the body. cf.,

aho! aviśvasanīyāni khalu gaṇikājanasya hṛdayāni. kutaḥ-
snigdhaiḥ praśliṣṭaiḥ krīḍanairlālayitvā hṛtvā sarvasvaṃ
nirghṛṇāḥ kāmukānāṃ /
lubdhvā vaiśyāstānanyasaṃrañjanārthaṃ dehān vairāgyād
dehivat santyajanti //^[1]

In the play, Vilāsakauṇḍinī, the Buddhist parivrājikā is an object of satire. The poet satirizes the hypocrite parivrājikā of questionable morals, who quotes the scriptures like Vaiśeṣika and Sāṃkhya.

In the play, when the Viṭa, Vaiśikācala greets the parivrājikā, she replies that she has no use for a Vaiśikācala, the master rake, but she would like to meet a Vaiśeṣikācala, the master philosopher–

na vaiśikācala prayojanaṃ bhaved vaiśeṣikācalena.

She also replies the Viṭa that she is not allowed by her guru to talk with those who are totally ignorant of six categories of the Vaiśeṣika School–

ṣatpadārthavahiṣkṛtaiḥ saha saṃbhāṣaṇamasmākaṃ gurubhiḥ pratiṣiddhaṃ.

She also mentions about Sāmkhya philosophy and says that in Sāṃkhya philosophy Puruṣa, the Supreme Being is stainless, lack of quality and knows his fields of action. The poet satirizes such hypocrite wandering nun who speaks about philosophical topics but whose morality is doubtful.

The poet satirizes her as a knower of the Vaiśeṣika philosophy based on sexual love in the following words of Viṭa–

dṛṣṭiste'tiviśālacārurucirā naikatra santiṣṭhate
glānyā kāntataraṃ ratiśramayutaṃ śūnādharoṣṭhaṃ mukhaṃ/
ācaṣṭe suratotsavaprakaraṇaṃ khedālasā te gatiḥ
vyaktaṃ te kathitaṃ priyeṇa subhage ratyarthavaiśeṣikaṃ //^[2]

Satirical element is also observed when the Viṭa compares her body to Substance (dravya), her beauty with Quality (guṇa), her youth with Generality (sāmānya) with whom everyone wants to unite (samavāya).

Because she is special for all (viśeṣa)–

dravyaṃ te tanurāyatākṣi dayitā rūpādayaste guṇāḥ
sāmānyaṃ tava yauvanaṃ yuvajanaḥ saṃstauti karmāṇi te /
tvaṣyārye samavāyamicchati jano yasmād viśeṣo’sti te
yogaste taruṇairmano'bhilaṣitairmokṣo’pyaniṣṭājjanāt //^[3]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Ubhayābhicārikā , 21

[2]:

ibid., 16

[3]:

Ibid. 18