The original work of Bṛhatkathā is not available today. However, we can infer its structure and content based on the Kathā-saritsāgara. The main storyline relates to Udayana and his son Naravāhana-datta and comes with a large number of sub-stories. It seems like the story of Udayana was as popular as the stories of Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata, and Bhāgavata in the past. As it was popular in the country, the story has made its way into the Vinaya-piṭaka of the Bauddhas, Triṣaṣṭi-śalākā-puruṣa-carita – a Jain work authored by Hemacandra, as well as Bṛhat-kathā-mañjarī of Kṣemendra. In the Buddhist sources, the story of Udayana ends on an unhappy note – both Udayana and Vāsava-datta pass away towards the end. Bhāsa has certainly not borrowed the plots of his plays from this version of the story. Kathā-saritsāgara and other works are of the later period. Therefore, it is likely that he has based his play on the original Bṛhatkathā[1], which was probably available during his time.
Irrespective of its source, the stories of Svapna-vāsavadatta[2] and Pratijñā-yaugandharāyaṇa are based on the story of Udayana. It is said that Udayana was a historical king and a contemporary of Buddha.[3] However, it is hard to say which of the events of the plays are true to history. The plots of the plays are closely knit and their stories form a continuum. Thus, some scholars are of the view that the two plays together originally constituted a prakaraṇa, which was split into two by actors for ease of staging.
Though the Pratijñā-yaugandharāyaṇa is based on the story of Udayana, he does not play the main role there. Instead, his minister Yaugandharāyaṇa is the most important character. He displays immense intelligence, planning, courage, and devotion to arrange for the wedding of Udayana. He also makes his bold pledge – the pratijñā, and thus, the name of the play.
In the first act of the four-act play, Udayana’s mother gets to know that her son has been trapped by an artificial elephant designed by Mahāsena. His prime minister, Yaugandharāyaṇa pledges that he will rescue the king and get him back to the kingdom. The second act shows Udayana who is captured, being brought to Mahāsena. The joy and enthusiasm of Mahāsena upon hearing about Udayana’s capture is portrayed in the second act. He just cannot believe that Vatsa-rāja has actually been caught and asks various questions in order to confirm the fact. His minister Śālaṅkāyana brings Vatsa-rāja’s vīṇā before the king and Mahāsena decides that it should be given to his daughter Vāsava-dattā so that she learns the art of playing the instrument. He knows that his son Gopālaka was interested only in Artha-śāstra, i.e., the science of resource management and the other son Anupālaka had no interest in Gāndharva-vidyā, i.e., arts. Mahāsena enquires variously about the well-being of Udayana. He asks if his wounds have been dressed and treated well and also checks if he has been offered a comfortable place to sleep. He also checks if adequate hospitality is being provided to the abducted king. This is the most delightful act in the entire play. In the third act, we see Yaugandharāyaṇa coming to Ujjayinī in the disguise of a mad brāhmaṇa; he informs Udayana through the vidūṣaka Vasantaka, about the plan for his rescue. However, Udayana, who had fallen in love with Vāsava-dattā while teaching her vīṇā does not wish to escape alone from his imprisonment. Yaugandharāyaṇa gets a little worried about the king who has fallen in love paying little heed to time and circumstances. He then pledges that he will rescue Vāsava-dattā and Udayana together. In the fourth act, the hero and the heroine escape to Kauśāmbī on the back of an elephant. Mahāsena’s men chase after the couple but Yaugandharāyaṇa, who was in disguise fights them with his aides. During the combat, he gets caught. Back in Ujjayinī, Vāsava-dattā’s mother Aṅgāravatī, who is sad about her daughter eloping climbs onto the top of the palace and attempts to commit suicide by jumping off. Mahāsena consoles his wife by saying that Vāsava-dattā and Udayana had undergone gāndharva-vivāha and there was nothing to worry about their daughter. He suggests that they arrange a formal wedding for the portraits of the couple.
In the play, the characters of Yaugandharāyaṇa and Mahāsena are pictured very well. They are the primary characters and their nature is clear to the readers. Yaugandharāyaṇa tries hard to rescue Udayana, who is caught in the antaḥpura. Out of the four acts, Yaugandharāyaṇa completely occupies three, except the last. The first three acts delineate his thoughts, strategies, and personality. All servants and associates are depicted as being aware of Yaugandharāyaṇa’s intelligence and capability, while Udayana and his mother were the actual rulers. Mahāsena could not believe that they were able to catch Udayana even while Yaugandharāyaṇa was alive. Thus, when Yaugandharāyaṇa is caught towards the end of the play, Mahāsena says, ‘asi-doṣeṇa gṛhītaḥ, na puruṣa-doṣeṇa’ (He was caught not because of his mistake, but due to the faulty sword.) When he speaks, people around his exclaim, ‘Aho! Svara-gaṃbhīratā!’ In addition to such wisdom, courage, and skill at strategy, Yaugandharāyaṇa is shown to possess immense empathy and generosity. His sāttvic nature becomes evident along with his majestic personality. He is kind even to a servant. When he notices that a messenger is tired as he had swiftly brought the news, he asks him to relax a little and catch his breath before he continues to speak. The nature of the important characters gets established through such minor instances. The story is gripping and no part of the play is devoid of rasa. Events swiftly occur in succession and bring completion to the play.
Bhāmaha criticises the play saying that it is nyāya-viruddha, i.e., against logic, though he does not name its title. He questions how a person like Udayana could get caught because of an artificial elephant used as a decoy and asks if he really was so foolish; he also wonders why Mahāsena’s men did not kill him once they had caught him, as the rivalry between the two kings was well known. However, a literary work must not be subject to such critical scrutiny using the lens of reasoning and logic. The questions raised by Bhāmaha are not difficult to answer. Udayana had a craze for capturing wild elephants – it had almost become an addiction. He probably spotted the elephant when there was not enough daylight; he perhaps saw it hidden behind trees and vegetation. Rasa plays the most important role in a play and not nyāya.
The current series of articles is an enlarged adaption of Prof. A. R. Krishnasastri's Kannada treatise Saṃskṛta-nāṭaka. They are presented along with additional information and footnotes by Arjun Bharadwaj.
[1] We discussed the possibility of Bhāsa being a South Indian. He might have gone through the Tamil version of Bṛhatkathā called the Pèruṅgathai. It is said that the Pèruṅgathai was composed in the second or third Century CE.
[2] It is a curious fact that although there are many plays based on Udayana’s story authored by different poets in different periods of time, only one play – Tāpasa-vatsarāja bears his name in the tile. The rest of them such as Svapna-vāsavadatta, Ratnāvalī, and Priyadarśikā do not contain the name of the hero in their titles.
[3] Cam. History of India, I. p. 185
