scholarly journals The Structure of a Sanskrit Drama

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 883-889
Keyword(s):  
Sanskrit Drama

Priyadarśikā, a Sanskrit Drama by Harsha

1926 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Walter E. Clark ◽  
G. K. Nariman ◽  
A. V. Williams Jackson ◽  
Charles J. Ogden ◽  
Harsha
Keyword(s):  
Sanskrit Drama

Knowing and Being

2019 ◽  
pp. 275-305
Author(s):  
Manu V. Devadevan
Keyword(s):  
South India ◽  
Early Period ◽  
Original Study ◽  
Historical Evidence ◽  
Sanskrit Drama ◽  
Art Form ◽  
Historical Phenomenon ◽  
Truth Value ◽  
Historical Moment ◽  
New Hypothesis

This essay, a highly original study of Kūṭiyāṭṭam as an historical phenomenon and developing art form, offers an ontology of performance in relation to a highly specific epistemology embedded in the Kūṭiyāṭṭam tradition. The author distinguishes Kūṭiyāṭṭam in general and Mantrāṅkam in particular from other performative traditions in South India on the basis of the distinctive truth-value that emerges on stage (in relation to other philosophical streams such as the Advaita). He also reviews the historical evidence on dating and proposes a new hypothesis about the historical moment when Kūṭiyāṭṭam as we know it took shape. He talks about the two manuals that were known from the early period, the Dhananjayadhvani and the Saṃvaraṇadhvani and outlines their impact on the performance of Sanskrit drama in Kerala.

Religious Syncretism and Literary Innovation

2018 ◽  
pp. 174-195
Author(s):  
Stefania Cavaliere
Keyword(s):  
Aesthetic Theory ◽  
Advaita Vedānta ◽  
Advaita Vedanta ◽  
Bhagavad Gita ◽  
Sanskrit Drama ◽  
Religious Syncretism ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Bhagavad Gītā ◽  
Literary Innovation

Stefania Cavaliere shows that the Vijñānagītā of Keshavdas is much more than a translation of an allegorical Sanskrit drama, the Prabodhacandrodaya of Krishnamishra. The allegorical battle between aspects of the mind in Krishnamishra’s text becomes in Keshavdas’s hands a platform for a much broader discussion of metaphysics, theology and religious aesthetics, incorporating such diverse influences as the Yogavāsiṣṭha, the Purāṇas, the Dharmaśāstras, and the Bhagavad Gītā. In this way the Vijñānagītā reads more like a scientific treatise (śāstra) than a work of allegorical poetry, and reflects Keshavdas’s erudition and innovation in weaving together strands of bhakti, Advaita Vedānta and rasa aesthetic theory.

Can Sanskrit Drama Tell Us Anything More?

1975 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 445
Author(s):  
Maria Christopher Byrski
Keyword(s):  
Sanskrit Drama

Sanskrit drama and the spectators

1962 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-44
Author(s):  
J. K. Balbir
Keyword(s):  
Sanskrit Drama

A Note on the Sanskrit Monologue-Play (Bhana), with special reference to the Caturbhani

1926 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-90
Author(s):  
S. K. De
Keyword(s):  
Special Reference ◽  
Considerable Importance ◽  
Sanskrit Drama

Popular and (as attested by theory) undoubtedly old as the bhāṇa must have been, the specimens of this form of composition which have been hitherto known to exist belong to comparatively recent times. Considerable importance, therefore, attaches to the discovery and publication (1922) of four bhāṇas. under the title Caturbhāṇī, by M. Ramakrishna Kavi and S. K. Ramanatha Sastri from Śivapurī, for which great antiquity is claimed by the editors and which, whatever might be their date, are certainly older than any of the late existing specimens. The Caturbhāṇī consists of Ubhayâbhisārikā (Ubh), Padma-prābhṛtaka (Pp), Dhūrtaviṭa-saṃvāda (Dvs) and Pāda-tāḍitaka (Pt), ascribed respectively, on the authority chiefly of a traditional verse, to Vararuci. Śūdraka, Īśvaradatta and Śyāmilaka. Professor Keith, in his recently published Sanskrit Drama (p. 185, fn. 3), throws doubt on the first two ascriptions, and declares rather dogmatically that “ none of these plays need be older than a.d. 1000”.

Aesthetic Codification of the ‘Unsavoury’ from Nāṭyaśāstra and the Poetics to Postdramatic Theatre

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-311
Author(s):  
Zornitsa Dimitrova
Keyword(s):  
English Literature ◽  
Greek Tragedy ◽  
Ritual Studies ◽  
Final Cause ◽  
Dramatic Theory ◽  
Sanskrit Drama ◽  
Doctoral Graduate

In examining the notion of entelechy – defined by Aristotle as the ‘final cause’ in drama – Zornitsa Dimitrova shows that depictions of ‘unsavoury’ content are only justified insofar as they are part of larger networks of aesthetic codification. The unsavoury cannot be an end in itself; neither can it function as an aesthetic category in its own right. Rather, it is a means related to pathos, or suffering, in Greek tragedy and bībhatsa, the ‘odious sentiment’ of the Sanskrit drama. Within such networks of codification, the purpose of the unsavoury is to carry forward the drama to an emotionally uplifting end: katharsis in the Poetics and ananda in Nāṭyaśāstra. This purposiveness – already visible in the entelechial nature of the dramatic plot – relates to a concept of mimesis implicitly understood as a term actional and interactionist in character. But only with the emergence of postdramatic theatre and the dissolution of plot does the unsavoury begin to function as an aesthetic category in its own right. Zornitsa Dimitrova is a doctoral graduate of Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster and holds degrees in Indology, Philosophy, and English Literature from the Universities of Sofia and Freiburg. Her research interests include performance and ritual studies, dramatic theory, and mimesis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document