Natyashastra is not merely a handbook or manual for the art of Theatre; it is a philosophy that speaks of Purushartha (the four aims of human life) within drama. Bharata Muni was courageous enough to directly contradict the Manusmriti through logic and debate. He educated the lower strata of society in a knowledge that was previously inaccessible to them and gave a distinguished place to the identity of the actor and artist in society. By discussing Theatre, Bharata was addressing the science and union of all arts and crafts in India.
“Natyashastra” encompasses every form of knowledge, art, skill, yoga, and action.
“Na taj jñānaṃ na tac chhilpaṃ na sā vidyā na sā kalā
Nāsau yogo na tac karma nāṭye’smin yan na dṛśyate.”
1.116
(Meaning: There is no knowledge, art, skill, yoga, or action that is not found in Theatre.)
Hence, Bharata himself referred to it as the fifth Veda intended for all classes of society.
In the previous episode, we learned about the three traditions of Theatre mentioned in the Amarakosha. We discussed the traditions of Shilali and Krishashva. In this episode, we will primarily focus on Bharata’s tradition of Theatre. Bhavabhuti, the 8th-century Sanskrit playwright, mentioned Bharata as the originator of the Tauryatrika. Tauryatrika refers to the combination of music, instrumental music, and dance. The Manusmriti described these as desires born from lust.
“mṛgayā’kṣo divāsvapnaḥ parivādaḥ striyo madaḥ |
tauryatrikaṃ vṛthāṭyā ca kāmajo daśako gaṇaḥ || 7.47 ||”
(Hunting, gambling, sleeping during the day,
Slander, women, and drinking,
Dance, music, and aimless wandering—
These are the ten vices born of lust.)
Bharata opposed this through the compilation of Natyashastra. His Natyashastra not only teaches dance and music but also establishes Theatre as the dharma of actors. No one has the right to judge another’s dharma. However, the Tauryatrika sutras composed by Bharata remain beyond our reach. It is also unclear whether the Bharata who compiled these sutras is the same as our current subject, Bharata. In Panini’s Ashtadhyayi, while we found references to Shilali’s Natsutra and Krishashva, there is no mention of Bharata’s Natsutra; nor is it mentioned in the Amarakosha. Nanyadeva, the author of Natyashastra Bartika (Bharatabhashya), also referred to Bharata as the originator of the sutras. We do not know whether our Shastrakara Bharata and Sutrakara Bharata are the same or different individuals. We can only rely on Abhinavabharati (mentioned in the previous episode).
There are mentions of five other Bharatas: Vriddhabharata, Nandibharata, Kohalabharata, Dattilabharata, and Matangabharata. According to Natyashastra, Brahma himself is the creator of Natyaveda. In another tradition, Nataraja Shiva imparted Natyaveda to Nandikeshvara. Bharata received traditional training from both these gurus. Besides the current Bharata and the five mentioned earlier, there is another Bharata, known as Adibharata. It is likely that Adibharata and Vriddhabharata are the same person. According to Sharadatanaya (author of Bhavaprakashana), this Vriddhabharata is the earliest sage of Natyaveda.
Sharadatanaya mentions that five sages learned Natyaveda from Brahma, and since Brahma referred to it as ‘Natyaveda Bharata,’ it became famous as Bharata’s Natyashastra. Currently, I do not wish to delve into mythological discussions, although these references will certainly help shape our discussions later. For now, maintaining the analytical perspective we have followed so far is advisable. The blog format does not provide the scope to discuss the entirety of Natyashastra. If an opportunity arises to write a book in the future, I would like to discuss this topic in detail.
For now, to complete our discussion of Bharata’s tradition, we need to mention a manuscript known as Panchabharata. According to Parasanath Dvivedi, the Panchabharata also references Adibharata, Nandibharata, and Matangabharata as mentioned by Sharadatanaya. However, the last two names in this manuscript do not match those mentioned by Sharadatanaya. The two additional names are Hanumatbharata and Arjunabharata. A manuscript of Arjunabharata still exists.
At this point, it is beneficial to look back briefly; otherwise, the complexity of information might lead to confusion. The main purpose of writing this blog is to become well-versed in Bharata’s Natyashastra. We have briefly discussed the various traditions of Theatre that existed in India before Bharata’s Natyashastra. We also learned about the acharyas Shilali and Krishashva, whose traditions were known respectively as Shailalin and Krishashvin. We can also infer that ancient Indian Theatre included various traditions and practices that evolved or merged over time. During Bharata Muni’s era, these arts and practices became consolidated, but many earlier traditions either vanished or integrated into a larger unified culture. As we discussed ‘Who is Bharata?’ we explored Bharata’s legacy and succession. References to Theatre in the Mahabharata and Ramayana further prove its antiquity. This antiquity and legacy suggest that Bharata’s opposition to Manusmriti and the attempt of Natyashastra to establish societal norms through social unity were deliberate.
