Abhinavagupta's approach to Dharmi

 

Radhavallabh Tripathi

Kohala, an oft-quoted name in Natyasastra-tradition, has contributed to the concept of Indian Theatre by defining the ”natyasamgraha• or ”the digest of theatre comprising eleven fundamental elements•.  Bharata and his commentator par excellence, Abhinavagupta, have extensively dealt with the components of this ”natyasamgraha•.  They are: ”Rasa•, ”Bhava•, ”Abhinaya•, ”Dharmi•, ”Vrtti•, ”Pravrtti•, ”Siddhi•, ”Svara•, ”Atodya•, ”Gana• and ”Ranga•.1

Abhinavagupta has viewed the inter-relationship and interdependence of these elements from various points of view. From the point of view of the creator or the actor, ”Rasa• forms the core and leads him to the expression of ”Bhava•, followed by ”Abhinaya•.  This ”Abhinaya• corresponds to ”dharmi•, which is based on ”vrttis•.  These ”vrttis• are formed out of ”pravrttis•, and so on.  From the point of view of the spectator or connoisseur, ”Ranga• or theatre with all its paraphernalia comes first, then songs accompanied with the instruments and this chain of the basic elements of theatric universe finally leading the ”samajika• to the experience of Rasa.

”Dharmi• occupies almost a central position amongst the fundamentals of theatre.  It is the ”modus• ”operandi•, without which various concepts and aesthetic principles cannot be put into practice.  Abhinavagupta, therefore, rightly explains it as ”itikartavyata•.Ό2  The author of ”Samgitaratnakara• upholds his view.3  Dr. M. M. Ghosh translates ”dharmi• as "technical practice"; but ”dharmi• as explained by Bharata and his commentator is definitely something more than mere technical practice in dramatic art.  It embodies within its fold the philosophy or the aesthetics of art as well as channels through which they materialize.  Abhinavagupta calls it the very life of all art

activity.4

          Viewing the concept of ”dharmi• in a wider perspective,

Abhinavagupta goes to explain that there are two aspects of all

art and poetry— ”lokanusaritva• and ”vicitrayogitva•.Ό5  The first

follows the real practices prevailing in our day-to-day life,

while the latter is highlightened by the beauty of imagination.

That Bharata was conscious of these two aspects, so vital to art

and poetry is evident from his division of ”dharmi• in two types,

viz. ”lokadharmi• and ”natyadharmi•.  Of these, the first manifests

where the play projects natural behavior of characters, depicting

various professions and activities of the people as observed in

our world, and is enacted without playful flourish of the limbs-ͺ various conventional gaits and postures.

          On the contrary, if a play contains speech, activity, beings

and states of extra-ordinary kind, and requires acting with

playful flourish of limbs and possesses characteristics of dance,

requires conventional enunciation, and is dependent on

emotionally carried persons, it can be said to have been composed

and enacted by ”natyadharmi• or the conventional practice.  This

practice has an exaggeration in speech, actions and

gesticulations,6 framing the things and experiences of our dayάg[1]ά«to-day life in such a way that they acquire "a local habitation

and a name.”•"

          After explaining the basic tenets of ”natyadharmi•, Bharata

enumerates various theatrical acumen, forming its gamut.  The

asidessvagata•), speaking to the sky (”akasabhasita•), concealed

speechapavarita•) together with various motives like the

division of stage into imaginary zones (”kaksya-vibhaga•), the

appearance of objects such as hill, conveyance, aerial car,

shield, armor, weapons or banner staff in human form; assumption

of a different role by the actor in the same performance after

enacting one role; dance-steps and graceful movements in place of

natural walking; representation of human nature and various

sentiments through gestures; decorative movements— all these and

a number of properties on stage, arrangements and motives are

manifestations of ”natyadharmi•.  Bharata makes it clear that

”dharmi• is the ”desideratum• in a performance and it is impossible

to enact a play without applying the fundamental principle of

”dharmi•.

          As for the two divisions of ”dharmi•, both of these appear to

be standing poles apart and in nature alien to each other.  In

the realm of art, however, they are complimentary to each other.

Their mutual inter-dependence is necessary in any art-activity.

”Lokadharmi• constitutes the basic or raw material, while

”natyadharmi• brings out innovations, gives the play a perspective,

endowing it with beauty and puts it in the idiom or language of a

particular performing art.  Bharata very precisely points out theάd[1]ά
distinction as well as the inter-relationship between these two:

          ”Svabhavo• ”lokadharmi• ” tu• ”vibhavo• ”natyameva• ”hi•.  -NS XXI, 193.

          While ”lokadharmi• is the ”svabhava• or very nature of things to

be presented in art or in a dramatic performance, ”natyadharmi•

makes it ”vibhava•—endows it with artistic beauty.

          This brings us to the fundamentals of Indian Aesthetics.

The very phenomena of our own mundane world are taken up in art

but they are transformed.  Explaining the process of ”rasa•ͺrealization, Mammata rightly suggests that the very causes,

resultants, etc. that we find and experience in our day-to-day

life tend to become ”vibhavas•, ”anubhavas• and ”sancari• ”bhavas• in

poetry and drama.

          The concept of ”dharmi• also enshrines within its fold the

principles of realism and idealism.  ”Natyadharmi• means deviation

from realistic method, i.e., presenting things as they apparently

look.  Art reveals the extra-ordinariness of ordinary things and

enables us to see them in a way different from the common

practice.  Kalidasa has termed this process as ”anyathakarana•.

But ”anyathakarana• or making things look different does not really

mean distortion; rather, the deviation from portraying worldly

phenomena as they outwardly appear, is an outcome of the artist's

search for the inner truth.

          The concept of ”dharmi• also brings out the two successive

stages of creative process.  The artist does not create a world

away from his surroundings and environment, upon which he depends

for his creative activity.  He has to acquaint himself with theάd[1]ά
life around him and equip himself with an authentic knowledge of

his contemporary scene.  This has been called ”vyutpatti• by our

rhetoricians.  Mammata points out:

          ”lokasya sthavajangamatmakalokavrttasya•...”vimarsanad

vyutpattih•.

          But then comes the second and more important stage in the

creative process.  The artist moulds the crude material thus

derived by his ”vyutpatti• in a coherent shape and invests it with

his idealogy and his individual power of expression.  When

Kalidasa speaks of ”anyathakarana• and Bharata of ”natyadharmi• they

in fact are laying emphasis upon this sublimation of worldly

phenomena in a subtle creative world.  Abhinava falling in line

with these savants, says that by ”prakhya• and ”upakhya•, or the

capability of the artist to perceive and express, a world more

beautiful, more harmonious and absolved from the shortcomings of

God's creation is created.

          Abhinavagupta contributes to the concept of ”dharmi• in

considering its application in other forms of art.  Besides

Theatre, the principle of ”dharmi• with its twofold division is

equally applicable to various forms of ”belles lettres•.  All

offshoots of poetic imagination, transcending the historical or

phenomena realities, fall under the gamut of ”dharmi•.  With this

proposition, Abhinava cites various examples from poets and

dramatists to bring out the manifestations of ”dharmi•.

Accordingly, the demon disguised as Dasaratha at the time of

Rama's banishment in the drama ”Balaramayana• of Rajasekhara, is an example of ”natyadharmi•.  If a character is portrayed as doing

things that are not expected of him, then also it is the

”natyadharmi•-way.  The buffoon Vasantaka (probably from ”Ratnavali•

of sri Harsa), is an example.  King Udayana discovers the traits

of a minister in him and he is actually presented as playing the

minister for the king.  The creative imagination of the dramatist

leads him to various devises in the plot of his play also come

under ”natyadharmi•.  To establish the viability of the concept of

”dharmi• for each and every form of art and literature, Abhinava

quotes the following stanza from his teacher, Bhattatauta:

          ”Tadatra asti na tatra asya kaver varnanam arhati•.

          ”Yanna sambhavi yatra syat sambhavati atra tu dharmatah•.

          The poet and the artist, by his power of imagination, does

not only present the things which are possible in our world, he

can also represent”• things which are impossible in this world.

          To sum up, Abhinava says that ”natyadharmi• is the very life

of all performing or plastic arts and also that of literature:

          ”Yammat kavigata natyagata vagalankaracesta natyadharmirupa

          sarvapranavati•.

          ”Natyadharmi• is a deviation from common practice, from normal

behavior and ordinariness.  Yet it does not mean an escape from

the realities of our world.  ”Lokadharmi• or the worldly phenomena

always remain behind the most charming outbursts of creative

imagination.  Abhinava says that ”lokadharmi• is the ”upajiva•

(enlivening factor) of ”natyadharmi•.  Nothing can be conceived in

art by putting aside the ”laukika dharma•:άd[1]܌       ”Laukikadharmavyatirekena natye na kascit dharmo asti•.

          The creativity— the deviation from the norms— is

introduced to interpret the basic nature of outer realities and

to explore their inner view.  Rightly do the theorists form

Bharata to Abhinavagupta therefore emphasize on ”lokadharmi• as

”primafacie•— the background which is based on ”lokasvabhava•, or

the nature or behavior of the people.  Abhinava says that both

these ”dharmis• follow ”lokasvabhava•.  Again, he points out that the

very idea of ”dharmi• in art comes out from a study of mannerisms,

aspirations or the habits of the people; so that nothing can be

conceived or created in art in isolation from these.  For an

ideal artistic creation, there has to be a fusion of realistic

method and the idealistic creativity.  Thus the concept of ”dharmi•

indicates the subtle equilibrium which creative imagination tends

to achieve, depreciating too much emphasis on outer reality,

particularly when such an emphasis violates the very conditions

of art or would obliterate the inner view of things.  Mere

imitation produces only laughter— says Abhinava with reference

to Bharata.  Rabindranath Tagore reacts against the norms of

imitative naturalism established with the onslaught of European

and Parsi theatres in India.  He says:

          ...if there is too much imitative naturalism, the inner view

becomes clouded.  To express the inner turmoil of a character,

the actor very often takes to violent gestures and declamation.

The reason, I think is that he aims at imitating truth instead of

expressing it.  Scenic illusion, therefore is not a ”sine qua non• for the

stage.  There are directors like Adolphe Appia who would totally

discard adornment on the stage.  "The human body does not seek to

produce the illusion of reality, since it is in itself reality" ͺ- says Appia— "We must free stage of everything that is in

contradistinction with the actor's presence....Scenic illusion is

the living presence of the actor."

          Realism in fact does not mean imitation of realities.  The

concept of ”dharmi• in the ”Natyasastra•-tradition views the

principle of ”realism• in its right perspective.

          ”Lokadharmi• forms the basic structure, while ”natyadharmi•

leads to the creation or adoption of new idioms and stylizations

that later on become motifs and conventions.  But the very idea

of ”natyadharmi• is to free art from mere conventionalism.  In

”Natyasastra•-tradition, this is achieved by introducing a variety

of styles, divisions and sub-divisions in the treatment of the

fourfold ”abhinaya•. ”Abhinaya• is largely dependent on the idea of

”dharmi•.  Abhinava rightly says:

          ”Abhinayas ca laukikam tanmulama eva tadupajivinam samayikam

          natyiyam dharmam va anuvartante iti tad anantaram dharmi•.

          An example of the practice of the principle of ”dharmi• on

modern stage can be seen in the experiments of Bertolt Brecht.

Brecht called his theatre Epic Theatre, standing in sharp

contrast against the so called dramatic theatre of Greek

tradition.  His use of interpretative method, i.e., introduction

of songs and poetry and intrusion of a narrator or singer (like the ”sutradhara• or the ”bhagavata• in Sanskrit or traditional Indian

theatre) and elimination of scenic elaborations furnish examples

of the application of the principle of ”dharmi•.  In his drama ”Die

Mutter•, the old lady is shivering from cold in the snowy winds,

but there is no snow on the stage, the gesture of shivering is

sufficient to indicate it.  In ”Der Kaukasische Kreidekreis•, the

man is bathing and the lady is pouring water out of a bucket.

There is neither water nor bucket on the stage.

          Various conventions are applied on Brechtian theatre to

bring out the ”alienation effect•.  Such conventions are based on

the ideas of ”dharmi• on Bharata's theatre.  The conventions like

the intrusion of a ”sutradhara• or adopting songs in place of

dialogues tend to evolve alienation effect here also.

          The principle of ”dharmi• is vital and relevant for modern

theatre and aesthetics.  In 1908, Edward Gorden Craig was in

search for an actor who would allow his strings to be pulled like

a puppet, and yet should be something more than a puppet.  Craig

named this ideal actor as ”uber-marionette•.  Later on, he found an

answer to his quest of ”uber-marionette• in Bharata's Theatre,

encompassing ”Natyadharmi• methods of representation.

          The later theorists in the field of Sanskrit dramaturgy,

like Dhananjaya or Dhanika, Saradatanaya, Ramacandra-Gunacandra,

Sagaranandin, Visvanatha, Vidyanatha etc. have not dealt with the

theory of ”dharmi•.  Sarngadeva, Vema and Kumbha are exceptions

amongst them.  Considering this, Abhinava's exposition of ”Dharmi•

becomes significant.  After Bharata, he is the only great theorist to have dealt with this subject in depth and detail.  He

has also made his own contribution to the theory by viewing it in

a wider perspective, covering the vast range of poetry and

performing arts and establishing connection between ”dharmi• and

the creative process.

 

”REFERENCES•”:•

1.  Rasa Bhava abhinaya dharmi vrtti pravrttayah.

          Siddhih svaras tatha atodyam ganam rangas ca samgrahah.

                   Natyasastra VI.10

2.  Abhinavabharati, Vol. II, p.214.

3.  Sangitaratnakata, Vol. IV, p.9.

4.  Yasmat kavigata natyagata vag-alankaranistha natyadharmirupaͺ    sarvapranavati...- Abhinavabharati, Vol. II, p.218.

5.  Ibid, Vol. I, p.269 and Vol. II, p.214.

6.  Natyasastra XIII.69,72-82.