Kaur1

Sehajdeep Kaur

Roll No. – 2019Eng.1024

Indian Classical 12031101

Professor Ashwin Rajeev

19 October 2019

Question: Nowhere else in Sanskrit Drama do we find such variety, and such drawing of

characters, as in “The Little Clay Cart”. Discuss Sudraka's play as a chronicle of its milieu.

Sanskrit Drama derives its roots from the transcendental experience of oriental mind, shining

through the face of Indian philosophy, structured through myth and revealed in ancient texts. The

art in Indian thought is the height of experience, and that is perhaps why concept of ‘rasa’ (relishing

of an elemental human emotion) is so integral a component in Indian art forms. Bharata’s

Natyasastra, composed around 2nd century B.C.E is a most comprehensive text, survived on

dramaturgy. It forms the most important source of the knowledge we have today of Indian classical

drama. Natyasastra refers to drama, as an integrated art of music, action and poetry, capable of

rendering different forms of ‘rasa’ to the audience. This integrated approach entails highly

complex set of instructions and a rigid structure which has been thoroughly described by Bharata

and beautifully delineated through the works of oriental geniuses like Kalidasa, Bhavabhuti and

Bhasa.

One of the ancient masterpieces, Sudraka’s ‘Mrichchakatika’ (a prakarna rupaka), emerges as an

outstanding source, for the understanding of ancient Indian society. Albeit, there are Several
 Kaur2

controversies about the actual period of Sudraka, most of the scholars agree that he was an Aryaka

king in the mahajanapada (city) of Ujjayini, from third century C.E, that is during the reign of

Gupta dynasty1. Mrichchakatika is the only available manuscript of complete ‘prakarna’ (one of

the ten types of play mentioned in natyasastra) and is one of the very few prakarnas which

efficiently harnesses almost all major rasas. Now, what is remarkable about Sudraka is, that while

staying in the basic structure implied by Bharata and previous dramatists, he deviates, from most

of the norms stated in natyasastra. The characters which run his play, come from a vast array of

different layers of the society. His protagonists are not some high born rich leisure youths, but a

poor married brahmana and a courtesan. Every strand, of the then Indian milieu is woven with a

great care, through about thirty two characters in the intricate pattern of this play.

If we try to carefully comprehend the play, from the viewpoint of understanding the social milieu

it represents, we become aware of two major layers across which Sudraka’s society is designed.

First, the socio-political mantle and secondly, the religious one.

The characters accentuate their roles as members of a social system, through the choices they

make. Though Vasantasena’s decision to reject the offers of money and rather seek true love in

poor yet virtuous Charudatta, is quit against the nature of her profession as a courtesan, but it

elevates her status in the society2, and becomes a mean of aesthetic gratification, her job being

transformed into artistic experience. This theme of conflict between bounds of duty, and flame of

desire , plays itself again and again throughout the text. The mansion of Vasantasena as described

in act IV, gives an awe-striking reference to the majestic lifestyle of courtesans in Ujjayini.
 Kaur3

The ‘Bandhulas’ or the bastard pages, in Vasantasena’s mansion, display astonishing behaviour,

“We are indeed Bandhulas that sport like the cubs of elephants, being reared in other people's

houses, fed on others' food, begotten by other men upon stranger women, enjoying others' riches

and possessing no particular merits to speak off.” (Act IV, pg125)

What we know from didactic and authoritative texts like manusmriti, is that they were not

supposed to speak of themselves so disparagingly, but Sudraka provides us with completely

contrasting details about the class of Bandhulas in society, which couldn’t have been inferred

otherwise.

Charudatta is a dhiralalit hero (one of the several types of hero's character, marked by traits like

politeness, admiration of art and ideally very good nature). He is an ultimately considerate

personality, always reflecting generosity, influencing a certain sort of idealism, which attracts

those around him. His sensitivity towards art is constantly visible throughout the play, so much so

that even after being acknowledged of thievery in the house at midnight, he gets up to admire the

artistically cut hole in the wall rather than being concerned about the material degradation that

could have possibly happened,

“Ah! It is a fine looking hole!”

( Act III, pg108 )

What is worth noticing is that, albeit Charudatta belongs to the caste of brahmanas, he is

mentioned as a merchant who lost all his wealth to charity.

Similarly, Sarvilaka is not a common thieve either, he is a learnt brahmana turned into a thieve,

again representing an upheaval in the social order. He also seeks fulfilment through the passion
 Kaur4

for artistic subtleties. Rebhila also, who is actually a merchant by profession feels a natural

disposition towards singing .

This desire for fulfilment at individual and social level through the aesthetic sensitivity and its

colloquial harmony with their respective professions, to form a balance between desire and duty

is a structure with which the author wishes to replace the society of Ujjaini3 torn between duality

of their duty and desire.

Samvahaka , who had learnt the delicate art of shampooing, and drove pleasure from cultivating it

in house of Charudatta, turned to gambling when he had to use his art in pedestrian streets as a

mere means of livelihood.

"Vasantasena: It is a dainty art that you have learnt. Samvahaka: Lady, I learnt is as an art, but

it has now become my means of earning livelihood."

( Act II)

Bereft of any pleasure, he turns to gambling and having lost his will their and being saved by

Vasantasena, the realization of ephemeral nature of physical pleasures and strokes of dejection

leads him to go in a phase of complete rejection of the physical realm of pleasure and he turns into

a mendicant.

Despite the fact that we get to know about the strong cosmopolitan character of ancient Ujjayini

through different forms of employments (such as this rarely mentioned profession of shampooing)

and their role in the socio-political working of the state, we also come across the more

metaphysical realm of the play, where it reflects the ageless enigma of transformation of ART into
 Kaur5

a mere means of LIVLIHOOD and thus in this process, the losing of the shear essence of human

life- deprivation from harmony and higher pleasure, causing imbalance in life and society. It is a

ubiquitous problem which is manifested in roots of our society even today, tearing the barriers of

time, thus making Mrichchakatika a very relevant text in terms of our social predicament , no

wonder ancient Indians were so concerned about the concept of pleasure to write a whole treatise

on it - "Kamasutra" of "Vatsyayana", which naturally seems to have a great influence on

Mrichchakatika.

Similarly character, Vita brings out a course of transformation, his internal conflict between his

duty to accompany his master, Sakara, who acts as a protégé to the King Palaka who, otherwise

remains physically absent from the play. Sakara's acts of brutality represent the falling threads of

the kingdom’s rotting fabric.

Vita's character in a more broader sense, also reflects the nature of a common citizen of the society

who might have to accompany the powerful and rich to receive benefits and conformity, but is torn

between his desire to oppose the wrong being done or to stay and enjoy the shallow pleasures.

Moreover, Vita also acts as a jester to the comic character of villain Sakara, in a sense that he

provides a stern contrast to his insane acts, while indirectly commenting on their fallacy and

bringing into light a more foolish and comic persona of the villain.

“Be not afraid; be not afraid: All right I will deceive him. (approaching Sakara) Bastard, it is

true; there's actually a demoness in it” (ActVII)

His dilemma, is a dilemma of a common man and similarly his questions too reflect the mind-set

of the man of his contemporary society who has to live through the trenches of brutal caste

identities.
 Kaur6

“Why talk of one's family, since in such matters, it is a man's character that makes him what he

is? Even thorny trees grow exceedingly large on fertile field.” ( Act VIII )

Similar questions are raised in Act10, by Chandalas, who belong to one of the lowest group of the

Ujjayini’s social structure . The dialogue between Chandanaka and Viraka, two policemen who

are torn between the question of loyalty to the state or to the King, also becomes important in

understanding the socio-political turmoil which was filling the city of Ujjayini.

One of the fairly overlooked subjects in Mrichchakatika is, the complex employment of a character

from Buddhist dominion and its acclimatization in the obdurate social structure dominated by

Hindu pragmatic thought. India in 3rd century was under the reign of Gupta dynasty. After the fall

of Mauryans, which involved Hindu uprising, under the leadership of Pushyamittra Sunga 4

(General of Ashoka Maurya) against Buddhist spread, involved certain element of social

insurgency against Buddhist ideals 5 It was replaced by another brahmin dynasty in 75 B.C.E

known as Kanva dynasty, succeeded by the Guptas in 3rd century , in start of Christian era, the

period in which Mrichchakatika is assumed to be placed. This period was the period of tolerance

and budding back of Buddhism. Still the concepts of them being outsiders (“mlechchas”) and

other primordial archetypes against “Buddhist mendicants” and other deviators ( from

brahaminical canon) were embedded in collective consciousness of the society as we find in Act

VII of Mrichchakatika,

“Charudatta: ..So come, let us go. (walking about) How! Just before me I see a Buddhist

mendicant, a sight of evil omen! Let him come in by this path; while we shall depart by this other

path” (Act VII, pg.163)

Similarly, in Samvahaka's dialogue with Vasantasena and Charudatta in Act10, brings out various

possibilities about the complex cultural realities existing in Ujjayini in that period.

The political sub-plot very boldly incorporated the realism of streets and voices of 'subaltern' and

the marginalized6, with the revolutionary king to be, belonging from a herdsman clan group of

Ahirya class and his supporters coming from different classes of the society to get rid of the

problems they face as a part of the social structure. These social issues as reflected above, are

brilliantly woven through out the story which reach at a climax in Act X and with the revolution,

dethroning of the previous power takes place. And, must we remember that Mrichchakatika is a

prakarna, a play, whose true aesthetical beauty lies only in its enacting on the stage. The play also

contains wide variety of Prakrit dialects along with chaste Sanskrit. As Bill Rauch's observed

while the enactment of play on stage, “…costumes made it obvious that they represented several

castes. Colour, fabric texture, and jewellery, all created a visual hierarchy..7” So, when enacted on

stage, through skill and mastery of expressions, dance and songs, Mrichchakatika becomes a

powerful representation of a whole new society with different colours, dialects, socio-cultural and

political ideas.

Sudraka indeed created a revolutionary masterpiece whose greatness circumscribed the rim of

time's wheel and ideally chronicled a colourful milieu through the multiple seams of its intricate

fabric.

Notes :

1. Ruben Walter: Fighting Against Despots in Old Indian Literature, Bk.(Vol.1917- 67),

pg.114-118.
 Kaur8

2. Pendre G.S: The Influence of Kama-Sutra on Mrichchakatika, Miscellanea, pg. 24 (Art.)

3. Pati Madhusdan: Mrichchakatika-Thematic and Tonal Patterns, (pg.250 of The

Mrichchakatika of Sudraka, worldview edition, Vol.2015)

4. Sharma R.S: India's Ancient Past (Bk.) (pg.190)

5. Mookerji Radhakumud : The Gupta Empire, no.61 (pp133).

6. Sahitya Academy: Ancient Indian Literature, An Anthology (Volume II),

7. The Clay Cart By Sudraka: Bill Rauch, Review by- Judith A. Sebesta , Eleanor Owicki.

Theatre Journal, Vol. 61, No.1 (March 2009), pp 120-22.