Clarifications on

Lokadharmi and Niifyadharmi

BIIARAT GUPT

he concept of dharmis-Jokadhanni and niilyadhanni-is

T peculiarly Indian and has no parallel in the dramaturgy of Aristotle .

. Dharmis are ways of manipulating dramatic production with respect
to acting and the handling of the story. As Aristotle has said little about
production modes, we do not know anything about the techniques which
may have been used in Greek classical theatre. However, even though the
dhannis are clearly defined in the Niityasastra and the commentary of
Abhinavagupta is sufficiently illuminating on them , still the dhstmis have
been subjected to the gravest misinterpretations by present-day exponents
of Indian theatre. It is not the kind of error that results in clouding some
marginally functional aspect of performance. The dharmis make up the
overall approach to mimesis as envisaged by Bharata.
The three words Joka, nalya and dharmihave to be viewed first as general
Sanskrit words and then as· definitive terms as given in the text. This shall
emerge soon from the analysis of verses that I shall undertake. But first to
the misunderstandings that prevail. There is first of all the modem Hindi
meaning of Joka which has caused a change of meaning by substituting the
original Sanskrit intent. In Hindi, and a good many other modem Indian
languages, Joka has come to denote folk. Loka-kaJa, Joka-sangeeta, etc.
have come to mean folk art and folk music. Lokadhanni is thus taken to
mea~ the folk mode (of theatre), and nafYadhanni is interpreted to den?te
classical theatre . To make matters worse , there is no dearth of Indian
theorists who have accepted certain European and Orientalist c1~ifi~a.
tions of Indian cultural and historical life into slots of binary opposites like
folk versus classical, popular versus elitist, Aryan versus Dravidian,
Brahmin versus unvedic, Great Tradition versus Low Tradition and so on,
to which the addition of Jokadharmi versus niityadharmi is made by drama
theorists. What is more, a set of medieval terns, marg! and desi. used in a
Very different context in manuals on music and dance, have been
interpreted to mean folk versus classical music, dance and culture' . In
truth, such a division of art forms or culture could not have existed before
the process of industrialization had come to create modem conditions . Was
&ng.., NIItRk No. 95: January-Marcb 191\?
36 BHARATGUPT

Greek tragedy a classical art form with its poetry in choicest metric forms,
or was it folk because a whole city watched it along with slaves? In ancient
India too, there seems to have been no difference between the acting styles
of the companies that performed in towns and those which played in the
villages. As all performance in tho se days was a caste job, there is little
possibility that there was one caste of rural actors and another of the urban.
Neither the caste rules nor the ancient economy could have allowed it.
Certainly the kusileves, bharatas , and naras must have had their schools
(sampradiiyas), but there could have been no classification along rural and
urban lines.
There is the vast. panorama of popular theatre in India which still retains
much of its traditional character. That it has acquired a few things from
cinema and westernized urban theatre can also be hardly denied. But still
forms like Bhavai, Yakshagana, Jatra, etc. have been able to retain an .
identity which can be safely called traditionally Indian. Nowadays, this kind
of theatre is being called folk, hence Jokadharmi, to distinguish it from
aSfapadi dances like Odissi, Bharatanatyam, and the more dramatic ones,
Kudiyattam and Kathakali, which were long ago christened classical. This
spurious distinction has led many to believe that Jatra, etc. are rustic art
forms different sui generis from Kudiyattam, etc. It is conveniently
forgotten that these were not rustic till the industrial revolution in India
made them so and till the urban middle class banished them from towns. In
terms of performance technique and methodology there seems to be little
difference between Jatra and Kudiyattam. The elements of niifya such as
Purana muthoi, abhinaya as codified gesture, stage conventions and
typified characters, all of which are to be found in rural forms today , are to
be found in aSfapadi dances as well as in the Niifyasiistra meant for ancient
dasarupakas. To call the rural forms of the present 'folk' and hence
Jokadharrni is not correct.
The other major misconception about Jokadharrni is to interpret it as
realistic histrionics. To the student of theatre history realistic acting is
known as a European phenomenon appearing for the first time in the 18th
century. Before that no theatre in the world had any place for it. The 20th
century Indian theatre, revived and nurtured under the shadow of the
Western stage and cinematic realism , has lost sight of its own non-realistic
methodology and taken realism for its own inheritance. It has not been able
to establish a link with the ancient Indian or the present-day traditional
theatre, and it can simply not envisage a production in which dialogue-
dominant verbosity does not throttle the inherited codes of iingikabhinaya
or body language. The recent efforts of some modem Indian playwrights to
include song and dance in plays have resulted in patchwork only. In their
 LOKADHARMiANDNATYADHARMi 37

productions, neither dance nor music reshapes or succeeds in modifying the

realistic mode of acting but instead remain a forced insertion. Realism
continues to dominate the vision of playwrights, audience and scholars '
alike. That is why even a profound scholar of the Na!yasastra, M.M.
Ghosh , translated Jokadharmi as realistic in his English translation of the
NlityaSastra. His translation, and the support of many others, has given a
sanctioned accommodation to realism in our ancient dramaturgy . Even
those who have recognized the non-realistic quality of ancient drama have
defined the concept of Jokadharmi as realism. In her ClassicalIndian Dance
in Literature And Arts, Kapila Vatsyayan says: "The basic approach of this
drama is 'idealistic': an elaborate stage convention (na!yadharm~, meticu-
lous to the last detail, dispenses with the need of realistic presentation
(lokadharm~ or portraiture" (p. 191). Whereas Vatsyayan has admitted
that ancient Indian production was far from realistic. lokadharmi is all the
same,for her, realistic rendering. Eugenio Barba has mistaken lokadhanni
for something not even of the stage but of the world. He is unable to
distinguish between lokadharma and lokadharmi: "We have two words,
Sanjukta Panigrahi says to me, to describe a man's behaviour: one,
lokadharmi. stands for the behaviour (dhanni) of man in daily life (Ioka);
the other , na!yadharmi, for his behaviour in dance (na!ya)" (pp. 5-32).
Thus Barba calls all offstage behaviour lokadharmi and all stage activity
~Ii!ya~harmi. But the NS has clearly laid down that both the dhanni~ exist
tn_ nalya. t!tat is, in performance. Barba's use of Iokudhetmi and
na!yadharmi is an obvious case of misinformation . Let me now tum to the
text for the definitions given:
That which shows normal and abnormal behaviour of people rendering their actions as
they [Link] been narrated in the popular stories, without enacting on the stage any
embellished movements of the body [is called lokadharmi]. That which seeks to render
through acting [abhinaya) the usual ways of various kinds of men and women,such a narra is
alavfu IokadharmI. Where speech, action, nature andexpression areall exaggerated. where
P ayfu lness, embellished body movements [angaMras] are employed. techniques of drama
I are used [thatis, n.i!)'adharmij . 'Where unusual characters are employed. embellished forms
l of svara {in song and speech] are used such a drama is called naryadharml. When people
[sitting or standing) close by cannot hear each other, but can hear words not spoken by
anybody, that is na",adhamJ. When mountains. vehicles, air vehicles, skins, armour and
~~~ are shown symbolic ally [as stage props] this is nii!yadharrnI'. Having acted one role,
n ~ actor takes up another role. either because no otheractor IS available, or If on~ has
the skill to do many rotes this [convention) is called niiiYadhanni. When a [SOCIally]
unCOhabitable woman is made into a cohabitable character or vice-versa, such a {dramatic
freedo~] is called na~yadharmI. When one walks dancingly , raising one's feet, em~loying
embeUishe~ ~y movements, this is nary3dharmi. That which is the natural beha.vlO1;1r of
people de?letmg their happy or sorrowful acts, and that which is expressed by mtncate
. gestures. IS natyadharmI.
.
 J8 BHARAT GUIT

Traditional stories [itihasa] and the meaning of Vedas which has bee n spoken by Bt..,
for the delight of men and gods is also natyadharmi. Na!y8 should always be produce!
natyadhanm-without body gestures lang§bhinaya} there is no delight. The spontaee
expression of all [living things] and all acting [abhinaya] to express meaning ~
embellished body movements is called nii!yadharmi. [NS 13: 7J{

First of all, it should be noted that there are only two verses aoo
lokadharmi. The text gives the impression that it is something obvious. V
the other hand , it is na!yadharmI which needs to be explained in de~
Broadly speaking, the representation on stage of lokadharma or the lI!l
behaviour of the world on stage is lokadharmi. The dharma of the na~.
the actor, which is specifically stage behaviour, is na!yadharmI. It mayl
asked, why make a classification, when all activity in drama is on the sl~.
and hence nii!yadharml? It seems that a distinction has to be made primai)
to show the difference between the simple and the embellished. It is liked
distinction between the raw and the cooked. The raw here is not r.
providing a realistic or naturalistic representation of worldly behaviour.&
it is the choice of keep ing to the well known story, behaviour, characters
tion and events as they have come down, without altering the roles throe
poetic imagination into udstt« or lalita nsysk», without embellishing d
story with fantastic events . The mode of acting even for lokadharmi canr
be realistic. It would use angikabhinaya and satvika and aharya as well. h
avoid the use of embellished movements that are expressive of int~
erot ic feelings. Thus it is clear that lokadharmi has a specific use aIll,
rather limited one in ancient drama. It is also to be noted that no producs
can be exclusively lokadharmlor na!yadharmi. Certain movements, soc:.
characters and some situations, very often the low and the comic ¢
would incline towards lokadharmi. But a good man y situations, parti~
in the na!aka and praksrsns, must follow na!yadharmI. Wherever ther.:
room for kaisiki vritti only the intense and fanciful world of na!yadh~~
would suffice. Again, it is clear from the text that all stage conventions!
make-believe and the dharma of na!ya . Even pictures or modeh t
mountains, air vehicles and the total paraphernalia of costume (3hiiJ)~I'
theatrical fiction. To represent, thus, animals, furniture and buildings n¢
out of the usual material of gum , wax, cloth, etc . available to the anee
producer was not a lokadharmI device, as some scholars have sugges:t'
but was a n3!yadharmI way. It is the belief of some specialists that anythil
placed on the stage is Ioksdberm] if inanimate and physical. For instanc/·;
model of whatever kind, realistic or symbolic, of a chariot is lokadh&'f>
but if a chariot is suggested through hand gestures and bod y movemen~
then the production would be called natyadharml. The text , however, a.<
not bear out this ·view. The verse quoted is explicit (78) . A cardbOt
 LOKADHARMI AND NA TYA DHA RMI 39

mountain or other models are netyedtuumi, Such a model is not realistic but
symbolic for Bharata. Stone is the dharma for a mountain and hence the
piling of stones on stage could be called /okadharmi, but a cardboard
mountain is nii!yadharmI. In the Indian theory of drama , the unreality of
the dramatic world is taken for granted. Here, there has been no need to
first make things look real , and then to indulge in a willing suspension of
disbelief. Nii!ya was meant to be a toy (kricjanlyakam), which could not but
be unreal. Hence, even /okadharmi cann ot claim to be real or realistic; it is
only a dramatic transmutat ion of worldly things and forces (Iokadharma)
into stage phenomenon . When put on stage only a fraction of the worldly
(lokadharma) survives, the rest gets converted into /okadharmi (if it retains
simplicity and similarity to the original) or into the dharma of nii!ya,
nii!yadharmi (if it is highly embellished and ornate). That is what Bharata
implies in verse 81 when he says that the happy and sorrowful actions of
men, when shown on stage through body movements of abhinaya, become
nii!yadharmL It is the basis, the /okadharma, on which the edifice of
embellishment is raised. Let us now turn to Abh inava for his analysis.

Although there is no dharma except that of the world (loka) , for the sake of
entertainmen t, when worldly actions are made to undergo exaggeration and embeUishment
by thepoet and the actor. then they are called niityadhamU. Dharmlhas been earlierdefined
as of two kinds. By 'earlier'. the place indicated i~ the chapter on rasa and bhii';a5. By saying
svabhavopagatam. it is meant that lokadhanna is primary. that it is like the wall on which
em bellishment is done like carvings. Some dnsrmis are of the loka kind, some are of the
mirya kind.
Whatever happens to be the svabhava [natural habit], it should be made to [Link] itself,
srhJyi and vyabhican bhavas included. what is the right way to include them?The right way
is to include them by showing normal actions. Lokavarta is the story that is well known.
Now, when the actions of the story are represented in their purity, without change, and acted
upon the stage thus, then it is called JokadharmJ. Here no distinction should be ma~
between nalya which is the dharma [of the stage] and dharmJ [that which fo'!ows ural
dh~a] . Embellished gestures should be avoided here. But even 10 loka~hanm, natura
aCh~".s like falling, striking and quarreling, etc. should be shown by gestures 1,lke pataka. For
remlnme roles women should do the acting and for masculine , men only (ID lokacJ!1~nml
Thus, where there is no acting [of the opposite sex] through gestures acquired by tr amm g t~
express the [Link] sex, but an expression of gestures natural to one's ownsex, that mode IS
called lokadharmi. -
All this means-if the poet only describes the story barely as it hascome down{as myth]
and the actor enacts it without embellishment according to his own imagination, then tha~
< part of rheplay, being depe ndent upon lok a, is lokadharmJ. [NSAb. 13: 851

The thrust of Abh inava' s argument is that the unembellished stands for
</okadharmi. The story, when left unaltered , acting when done by [Link] for
~a~uline .roles and by women for feminine roles, when th~ po~ttC an~
hIslnomc Imagination is given no scope or rein, the productlon IS calle
 40 BIIARATGUPT

JokadharmI. Moreover only that much of the play in which this occurs ij)
called. Also, acting in Jokadharrni cannot be done without the sernioticer
of nritta hastas like patiika, etc.
About nii{yadharrni there is less of a debate. The problem here is nc,
its definition but of its execution. It was easy for modem producers to~
JokadharrnI realism and follow the dictates of European practice, all t
while believing that this bad siistric sanction . But once it is realized II:
nii{yadharrni stands for all kinds of very intricate and embellished acting__
modem producer is faced with a nearly insoluble problem. Some of!I
conventions of the ancient stage like janiintika are easy to recreate, ncrj:
difficult to design ornate costume, but the total creation of a perfornm:
script in a non-realistic mode demands a knowledge of various body stanll i
(karanas), ways of walking, (ciiris and gatipraciira), hand gestures (mi:'
hastas), speech inflexion (kiiku), facial expressions (uttamiinga abhinaJl
and finally, the most difficult to surmount, the problem of recreating Ii
ancient system of music for the sake of dramatic songs (dhruvas) l!
instruments. The interrelatedness of all these elements in a performas
was once a matter of living practice. But now the deep structure of It
performance can only be theoretically reconstructed from the Nii!yaS§JtJJ
Some of the surving traditional modes can provide a few clues. From ~
a~!apadi dances we can take iingikiibhinaya of the various karalJas, nti:
hastas, ciiris and facial expressions . From theatres like Kudiyattarn 0:
Yakshagana, some clues may be gathered about stage space (tall
vidhiinii) . •
Now, whereas nii!yadharrni is artifact and improvization, stage conlt!.'
tion and exaggeration (atibhiivakam) of the given normal action !
Jokadharma , it is also true that this exaggeration comes most naturanyl
the moments of erotic passion. This engenders in the body movemenu:
peculiar change which has been called angaJiJii. The kaisikl vtitti is I
expression of this. Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to presume IJ!
nii{yadharmi is made up of ksisikl only. Exaggerated and imagioaD'
movements can also be in the service of sentiments other than sringara;t'rt:
can be employed for the heroic, the terrible or the wondrous. Let us oJ):
more. tum to Abhinavabharati for an elucidation of nii!yadharmi. CO!'
mentmg on the verse 72, it is said:

Now, n<ltyadharmJ is defined as ativakyakriyepetam that is provided with exagge¢ 'o

"-k
epr'sod es.... "
3 ya means the story that has come down-tous; when the storyis impro VlZ
, oW
th~, purpose of greater delight . this effort of changing is called kriyii . For instance. thef"
Ra)aSekhara has done the kriyfi of adding to the episode of Rama 's banishment a IW!"
who takes the form of DaSaratha. SalVa mea(J5 normal behaviour and bhava in this ,tIS
means normal feelings. These are here superimposed upon by the actions and feelin~'
 LOKADHARMIANDNATYADHARMI 4\

imagined by the poet [in nii!yadhamul For instance, the normall y fickle and shallow
character of tbe vidasek« has been turned into a serious and thoughtful counsellor. such as
Vasantaka, in the play Tapasavarsaraja and the no rmally Prakrit a-speaking queen is also
made to utter Sanskrit . [NS Ab, 13: 85)'

The inner wishes of characters are sometimes made to appear on the

stagein personified forms (as described in the verse 75). Abhinava gives the
. example of "then enters the Curse of Brahmin" from the play Miiyiipu~paka
(yathii miiyiipu~pake tatah praviseti brahmaSiipa iti). This is a curious
example of niityadhannl.
At another place in Abhinaviibharatl, the great commentator has pointed
out that both Jokadhannl and niityadharmi are of two kinds each. This
division has not been stated by Bharata. But while analyzing the nature of
abhinaya as representation of external objects and as expression of inner
feelings, he says: ~

A bhinaya is to be perfo rme d in two ways, JokadharmI and nii!Y"dhanni. The first is of two
kinds. internal and external. There (in lokadharml) the gestures expressiveof mental states
may be shown. For example, placing patAka hasta on the forehead shows inner pride. Or it
can be an abhinaya of purelyexternal nature, such as padmako~ hasta trying to denote an
object. So is niiIYadharmI of two kinds . It can be for the purpose of employing the kaiiikl
[Link], which is instrumental in producing out of the world beauty in na!ya. This is done by
usmg four kinds of karanas [dance stances] such as evestite, etc. The second kind of use of
naiYadbannl is by takin g'suppo rt of things which are to he found in the world. For example,
by unuaung the position of a hand engaged in painting. INS Ab, 9: 2J
Here, by pressing the point that even niityadharml is of two kinds,'
Abhinava reveals that the truth about the process of dramatic mimesis is ~ot
so easy to grasp. He has made a fine point about the transiti?n from [Link]
to art. Of the two kinds of niityadhannl, one is purely an artifact,.aJaukika,
out of the world, not based upon an attempt to indicate [Link] the
w?rld. It is angaJIJii or fantas y, purely sell-made. The o~er kind of
n~!ya~hanni is that which draws upon worldly things and achie~~s ornate
IDImeSlS. The latt er kind depends for its sustenance (ufajIVatI) . on
lokadharma. The process here is the same as we had nottced earher.
Niityadharmi transforms the dharma of the world (Ioka) into the illusion of
niitya. To summarize , the way of the world is Jokadharma; this is the
unembellished staie of normal behaviour normal action, and the prevalent
story form makes up the material that ' theatre draws upon. ~en it is
presented on stage as it is, the mode is caUed lokadhanm. But the
production is neither real istic nor folk. It is achieved through the chan?els
?f n?lya codes. As for niityadhannl, it is the furthest take-off into
ltItagmation and adornment, expressed through intricate gestures to create
for niitya a world of its own. 0
42 BHARATGUPT

NOTES

1. Margl and De sl: Sang"a Ratn akara of Samgadeva (circa 1265 A.D.) has been often
quoted in support of the high-low categorizati on.

miff ~ $ "" llI'l tl O"i<l l

-.ii lllfil<i\ f<1(31'{'III1: • ~: "" II
t<m~:~: 1
~ 1"'I""Si"''[Link]'~ II
ti\ ?;it "I'll'li
1fui 'I ~ 1'i <W;~;I \'Qfi""'l'1 " I
1'i "I ~ 'Iffij; <m.i ~ "IIH" II
KaUinatha comment s:
lItfif<'l'''l,t{t ~ "I ~("''l'lIMl\Ilf<N: '·"<'I4~fil{ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~{""f.q,", ~ I "lTfifu ~ 'lwf ~ ~\'Q""'l: ,d1 : -wr f.!llT'li ~ 1llI'l Wi n~
'lTdi: -wr ~I ~ ~ ~ lffi'lT ;;r-u "'~I ~ fii>44l on'l j ~
'I''I14''''41'dl mrr 1 (p. 14 - 15)

Marglhere is defined as music whicb has been set as an example (the way) by Bharan
Muni and othe rs. Afargi music is performed before Siva for spirit ua l elevation . Dd i is the
song. instru ment ation and dance which is pleasing and in accordance with th e taste of
people in various regions. Kallinatha adds th at music as envisaged by Bharata was tlx
result of a sea rch (anvcsana) and it was enshrined in the Natyasastra , the fifth Veda.
From the se defin itions one gathers that miirgIis meant to indicate a rather archaic form of
musical practice which was surviving in the 14th centu ry. as songs of old repertoire meant
for devotional practices . The dramatic employment of music as given in the Na!y aSastn
had become , along with the total theatre, a th ing of the past . Miirgl th en, is nothing
classical, nor elitist , nor something that widely e ntert ains, but it is the music of a ritual fM
earning unseen benefit (adrisra phala), as Was samagana in the age of Bharata-
5arogadev3 has made no attempt to categorize music as classical versu s folk, that IS,
exclusive to the upper classes, as different from the music of the lower strata, even thoug!:
he describes every kind of musical pra ctice that he could set his ears and eyes on. B}'
admitting music as of two kind s, he only indicates that one is arch aic and the other w1de~
contemporary.

2. The verses in the 13th Chapter are as follows:

t<Iif 'llT ~ ft "I'<f 'i'f ~: 4,

~ ~ 'I 'if'ilcf~ "'~ 11\>0
~1"'i1,oiIqlld ~ n~ O'lf 1
")""" dlf",'I)i'l d'ljj'<'il",f""[Link]'l,7II\>~
Ii 'q"d
Ji4tilq j~14I '11'1161il!1{lt1 j~ I
~ ~~nm~II\>,
 LOKADHA RMI AND NA TYADHA RMI 4J

'''IF"",,,,,fiI;Qjq o4F"",,,,If,,iM<ffl:' ,
<1k11~"$IUM1~ ~~'dO'l' II ,,~
''''U<:i§,1<B$di' ~Wl'l. '
~ ~ ~ ~ m"l'j<lT 1 IS6
'ffi; ~ "! 4~4;i)4$""il l
~ "i:l ~ ~ m "l'j<lT11 ,,~
31Imffii; "i:l 'lOO ;r ~ 'lffi'R'l.1
• ~ 'l"I ~ ~ m "l'flT'1I " <'
~<:i4i1~4i1'f.t ,,,1"4f$"'''''''': '
'lfcftre; JI'!"'fll ~ il m "l'j<lT II IS'>

"'I ~ 'lfiloii ~ !1I~""'*S'Rl'l." I

7~'"""~""liI ~ m "l'j<lT It ~
'W1"IT JI4GT 'I."'T 7J1'lT ~ '$'4il',
'!"IT 'l!'iq",,"l'' ' ~ !I' m "l'j<lT II"~
'<:ifi;ja<=ii"I'i "lI~"''')~; I
'ji'!il T1"i<\ "<mil ~ i! m "l'j<lT II t o
'>ii~ ~ ~ ~:<!lfil;4'<4"': I
~~~lIt~
"ll!lFc1$ll1il~''lr ~ ~;81
"f<;aq,,:!'l""ol'o ~ il'm "l'j<lT1J t'l
"'15 q;~~ 1i111'i!l1"'4IFeJRI:11 ,
~: f i ~ i! m 'lilQ.1I t~
"'<4 "'~n.'I'i ~ llGT ~ ~,
'I $l>1',F'l14,f«I;F",,,il' U'1;' ~ II ~
~ "f/Q'iit ~ \;lfll1'[Link]:' I
'lIq;

6t1i"1<:iii:1<il21 ~ ~ ~ II t"
J. <mfI ctifiw.,,<faqfclU,UI ~ 'I ;ifffil: 'll'iM<r. otlJf1I "f! 'l'I <il""'/d"fil;4,m<'l"'"lfll",,","""l'
llfi1~$M<i ,.,F<111:<41411: ~ ~ 1i<",, ~1"l'4d '
. ~ t!1ff"'IT ~, -silffil ~: , '{'ililfu 'WI 'll'lT' ~ (31 ~-~ 0)
~ l1lM 'F'I'l.""" """,,,,<f
~ <:11,.,,,4[11,, "'~ """,,41,,14'Id'
~ I "'iRldF, 4...i t!1ff, ""i%o""Fqq41 i <It "lR'l ~ 'lIq: "l'll<l: ~: i\:itila4 1
~qq!l1td""f<;<.M (~) I ~ 14fqof<;qil1 "'llfil~ <filf<l wt 'f«IT I ~
~ '1dl'd\d4' ~ 'f«IT "lJ:* ~ mili '!>T'f m ~
<llo;lIF"F,,: mqj "'IT WIT
~_ I ~ qJ;ilf~q;ljl qfi(f ~l ~:q~f1 4d~Slt;:H i;;!q ~
",(jq"i~l<'~" 4di",IFe;1i <It~14l<1:ilqd't' ~ "i:l ~: IWli "lf4PlI'IJ ~ JIllldiI ~ i!
44 BHARAT GUn

~ ~ ~ "llT ffitl'if d.,.<f...q~~IIil- 'If<:; "Il tl\1<lq«>l«l q;rozj lII"Ii ...m

i{.g~I'id' 'I'ff I
~ 'l'lfu----'1'<T ..;j~>fq''fd''!1q,' qufqfu 'lGU ~, 'I I! ",~,;;:<pd ,"i1,~f~~
d"'1"~ 1I<l",<l lIl'IT'l l! 'IilCZl'WI: [Link] ~Wl: "" 'I'ff I

4. 3l'l ~ ('IaJ'Ifu 3lfd..,qqfil;41qdfilfu, ~fd~,tl,fi;- ..,qqqfdili'" 'IT 3Fild,"l~fd'l:d";"''1,f<il",

fsI;tn I ~",:i\<!l1:u1 ~qf.l'1m'll «l(q~q~l(t\'1f".r"dd'<qq;"''1I, "dt1l ~ ~ ~1'1Fild1fuqf..
lIikI ~ <m,.;R>idFild'fdq"d«!d>fil",,f: , 'l'lT "'ij''1qq",f'''i",.;Fild'l'''fuiliq'il- 'l'lf~
qf.>ttl':l1'ld 'llajlqF"fl;«l41",4 "\'1"d";«l 1l'lT, "'ij'"ij,flldQfdili''' ~ q"'~"l:'(q,: ~"

s. ~ ~ ~fd..J"'ldI ffitl'if ~ '" I = ~---<"d'l"'q",*,I'i"I'1", 'l1lI

'~~ ~",,"IMfi0d" (9119) ~, ~ " 'l;J,*'''(iGi "Il, 'l'lT-qOO~1\4 q;Jifil
[Link]), '11{44",1N ~-;,,{41q41I''1.''''id<[Link]~\'1''l,<'iif''d,cffifil;q;'Iliq'~\l= 'l'lT~
Q\!fif4""U'''411 ,.;1',,4,1'1 <1l";!!>'i,,;jqf(i, 'l'lT~ AA "" ~ ~ ~I

WORKS CITED

Barba, Eugenio: 'Theatre Anthropology', The Drama Review 26.2 (Summer 1982), 5-32.

Bharata Muni: Njj!yatastram with AbhinavabbAratl, ed, Rama Krishna Kavi, 4 vols., OOS,
Oriental Institute, Baroda, 1934-64.

SMogadeva: Sangft3ratnjjkara, The Adyar Library, Madras, 1943-53.

Vatsyayan , Kapi!a: Classical Dance in Literature and the Arts, Sangeet Natak Akademi,
Delhi , 1968.