The Sanskrit drama : $b in its origin, development, theory and practiceKeith, Arthur Berriedale
History
The Sanskrit drama : $b in its origin, development, theory and practice
Keith, Arthur Berriedale
Sanskrit drama -- History and criticism
Açvaghoṣa is an author whose fame, thanks to his error in being a
Buddhist long lost in India, has recently attained renewal by the
discovery and publication of his Buddhacarita, a court epic in
excellent style and spirit on the life of the Buddha. His Sūtrālaṁkāra
is also known through the medium of a Tibetan translation, and
illustrates his ability in turning the tale into an instrument for
propaganda in support of the Buddhist faith. If the tradition which
ascribes to him the Mahāyānaçraddhotpāda is correct, he was also the
founder or expounder of a subtle system of metaphysics akin to the
Vijñānavāda of the Mahāyāna school, and the Vajrasūcī seems to preserve
in some measure the record of his onslaught on the caste system, which
exalted the Brahmins at the expense of the Kṣatriyas, and condemned
Buddhism on the score that it was unfitting that a Kṣatriya like the
Buddha should give instructions to Brahmins. Certainly genuine is the
Saundarananda, in the epic manner, which like all his works is devoted
to the effective exposition of Buddhism in the language of polite
literature, and also of the Brahmin schools. We recognize in him one
who appreciated that it would never do to allow Buddhism to remain
buried in a form inferior to the best that Brahminism could produce,
and it is curious that fate should have preserved the work of the rival
of the Brahmins, while it has permitted his models to disappear. That
he had abundant precedent to guide him is clear from the classical form
already assumed by his dramas; the argument of Professor Konow [153] to
the contrary, on the ground that many of the standing formulae and
characters are derived from the popular drama, and show that the
artistic drama had not developed yet full independence, is
unintelligible, since these features persist throughout the history of
the Sanskrit drama. Nor does any weight attach to the argument that the
Nāṭyaçāstra, assumed to be of about the same period as Açvaghoṣa, shows
knowledge of only a limited variety of dramas. On the contrary it is
amazing how much literature must have preceded to permit of the setting
up of the main types of drama, some of which were evidently represented
by many specimens, though others doubtless rested on a small basis of
practice.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account