Mricchakatika- AN Overview PDF

Preview

Summary

'Mrichchhakatika,' or 'The Little Clay Cart,' is an ancient Sanskrit play written around the third century A.D. by King Shdraka (Ujjayini). It is one of the oldest Sanskrit plays that has been discovered in Indian literature. We are curiously ignorant about the author King Shdraka's life, death date...

Description

MRICCHAKATIKA: AN OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION

'Mrichchhakatika,' or 'The Little Clay Cart,' is an ancient Sanskrit play written around the third century A.D. by King Shdraka (Ujjayini). It is one of the oldest Sanskrit plays that has been discovered in Indian literature. We are curiously ignorant about the author King Shdraka's life, death date, and true identity. Other than the somewhat fanciful and exaggerated self-praising statements in the prologue of this play, no other work is attributed to him, and we have no direct information about him to date. There are many stories that revolve around the name of King Shdraka, but none of them so far have identified him as an author. A few years ago, the play's age and even authorship were unknown. The unexpected discovery of Bhasa's plays provided us with new information and shed light on the drama Charudatta, whose enlarged and completed version appears to be Mrichchhakatika. Shdraka was a Kshatriya king of some country (not mentioned) who was brave and handsome in appearance and knew the Rigveda, Samaveda, and mathematics, according to the prologue. He was an expert on courtesans and elephant training, as well as a devotee of Lord Siva who had performed the Asvamedha sacrifice. The great King lived to be a hundred years and ten days old when he died. The authorship of this play is still unknown due to a lack of information, facts, and evidence. There are numerous theories on the subject, but none of them can be considered reliable. Our lack of knowledge, on the other hand, may turn out to be a disguised blessing in disguise, because our lack of knowledge of external facts forces us to examine the text more closely in order to figure out who wrote the play. And King Shdraka's case is far from unique in India; we are forced to focus attention on the man as he reveals himself in his works in the case of every great Sanskrit writer—so sparse is Sanskrit literature of biography—we are forced to concentrate attention on the man as he reveals himself in his works in the case of every great Sanskrit writer. However, it might be worthwhile to compare Shdraka to two other great Indian dramatists, in order to see how he compares to them and, if possible, how he outperforms or is outperformed by them.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Klidsa, Shdraka, and Bhavabhti are without a doubt the greatest names in Indian drama history. These men are so dissimilar and so great that it is impossible to assign to any of them the same level of dominance that Shakespeare has in English drama. In spirit, Kalidasa – "the grace of poetry" – and Bhavabhuti – "the master of eloquence" – are far more closely linked than either of them is with Mrichchhakatika's author. The Shakuntala and the Latter Acts of Rama could have been written anywhere except in India; but Shdraka, alone among the long line of Indian dramatists, has a cosmopolitan character. Sansthanaka, Maitreya, and Madanika are world citizens, while Shakuntala is a Hindu maid and Madhava is a Hindu hero. Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti are far more true to their native land than Shdraka in terms of some of the more striking characteristics of Sanskrit literature, such as its fondness for system, elaboration of style, and love of epigram. We find few of those magnificent phrases in Shdraka in which, as the Chinese say, "it is only the words that stop, the sense continues" – phrases like Kalidasa's "there are doors of the inevitable everywhere," or Bhavabhuti's "there is no remedy for causeless love." The Little Clay Cart, like Macbeth and Hamlet, is linked to the Latter Acts of Rama in terms of the predominance of swillmoving action over the poetical expression of great truths. Shdraka's style is simple and direct, a rare quality in a Hindu; and while this style is exquisitely simple in passages of higher emotion, Shdraka cannot infuse into mere language the charm that we find in Kalidasa or the majesty that we find in Bhavabhuti.

Shdraka's limitations in terms of stylistic power, however, are not without compensation. Indian poets' originality and enterprise were slowly suffocated by their love of style, which eventually led to the demise of Sanskrit literature. Exactly at this point, where other Hindu writers falter, Shdraka emerges victorious. Nowhere else in the hundreds of Sanskrit dramas do we find such variety and character development as in The Little Clay Cart; and nowhere else, at least in the drama, is there such humour.

We only need to recall the names of the play's acts to get a sense of Shdraka's diversity. The Storm is followed by The Shampooer Who Gambled and The Hole in the Wall, and The Swapping of the Bullock-carts is followed by The Strangling of Vasantasen. The storey ranges from farce to tragedy, satire to pathos, with a true Shakespearian breadth. Here we have philosophy:

The lack of money is the root of all evil. (i. 14)

And pathos:

My body wet by tear-drops falling, falling; My limbs polluted by the clinging mud; Flowers from the graveyard torn, my wreath appalling; For ghastly sacrifice hoarse ravens calling, And for the fragrant incense of my blood. (x. 3) And nature description: But mistress, do not scold the lightning. She is your friend, This golden cord that trembles on the breast Of great Airāvata; upon the crest Of rocky hills this banner all ablaze; This lamp in Indra's palace; but most blest As telling where your most belovèd stays. (v. 33) And genuine bitterness: Pride and tricks and lies and fraud Are in your face; False playground of the lustful god, Such is your face; The wench's stock in trade, in fine, Epitome of joys divine, I mean your face For sale! the price is courtesy. I trust you'll find a man to buy

Your face. (v. 36)

But a spirit as powerful as King Shdraka's could not be contained within the strait jacket of the technical works' minute, and sometimes puerile, rules. He has broken the rule that the name of a drama of invention should be formed by combining the names of the heroine and hero in the title. Again, the books state that the hero must appear in each act; however, Chrudatta is absent from acts ii, iv, vi, and viii. Furthermore, because they do not strictly adhere to the technical definitions, various characters such as Vasantasen, Maitreya, the courtier, and others have benefited greatly.

Shdraka's wit is the third of his key distinguishing characteristics. Both the puns and the situations have an American flavour to them. The wordplay is difficult to replicate in translation, but the situations are unaffected by language.

It is still necessary to say something about the play's structure. It is, without a doubt, excessively long. Furthermore, the main action comes to a halt in acts ii to v, and during these episodic acts, we almost forget that the main plot is about Vasantasen and Chrudatta's love. The Little Clay Cart contains enough material for two plays. The majority of act i. forms a consistent and ingenious plot with acts vi. to x., while the remainder of act i. could be combined with acts iii. to v. to create a lighter-toned comedy. Even though the second act is clever, it has little to do with the main plot or the storey of the gems. Many other specimens of Sanskrit drama, which has set itself an ideal different from that of our own drama, show the same breadth of treatment as this play. The lack of dramatic unity and consistency is often compensated by lyrical beauty and style charms, but it raises the question of whether the Sanskrit plays should not be referred to as dramatic poems rather than dramas.

LET US SUM UP

We discussed the history of Indian theatre and an introduction to the author in this unit to get a better understanding of the society's cultural and social conditions at the time

the play was written. Even though exact dates are still being debated, this Unit has helped us understand the play's language and setting....