The Kalahantrita nayika and the Proshitabhartruka nayika have a lot of similarities. The only difference seems to be that one is a lover and the other is the husband. How to differentiate between the two when both are depicted refusing to communicate?
It is CRUCIAL to remember that Nayikas occur both in Literature and art. So, it is essential to not formulate a generalisation based on just the paintings or an assumption based only on literary depictions. Both need to be juxtaposed in a balanced way.
Can we link this concept of ashtnayika with bhakti poems? I saw in bharatnatyam that javali and padams built around ashtnayika show them with God as lover. In bhakti poetry too god is treated as lover sometimes? But is there a link between bhakti poems and ashtnayika?
@Gugan Esan asked: Speaking of Bharatha, the first mention of the name "Bharatha" is actually mentioned in Athiranachanda Cave Inscriptions of Mahabalipiram in Tamil Nadu dated to about 6th Cen. Taking this into consideration, when do you think is the 1st mention of Bharatha in Literature ? and would be good to know the title of the source.
Hello and thanks for the question. What you talk about is the epigraphic mention of Bharata. Textual sources actually place him in a broad dateline between the 200 BCE to 200 CE . As per the latest research on Bharata, therefore, juxtaposed with the subsequent commentaries on Natyashastra, some of which predate the Athiranachanda Cave Inscription, we place him far back in time. Also note that by the time of the cave, Bhatt Lolat, Bhatt Shankuk and Bhatt Nayak's revisions of Natyashastra were already in existence.
Taking up Gugan Esan's question: if at all you need to look at this archaeologically, don't look for the name "Bharata." Bharata Muni is a mythical sage as far as archaeologists are concerned. The theories of the Natyashastra however, as SA states, date back to roughly 200 BCE. Again, it is worth considering that many textual sources that maybe considered precursors to the Natyashastra we see today, go back to the Natyasutras and Panini's Ashtadhyayi. So, it's a classic case of tracing the theory versus tracing the alleged writer.
Well, there are definite similarities. And these can be corroborated beyond textual ambit with material culture such as similar jewellery (as shown in Gandhara sculptures for example).
Yes, but we only get textual and theoretical similarities, such as the emphasis on Role of Audience that both Aristotle and Bhatt Nayak emphasise on or concept of temporal unity. Archaeologically however, all Indian sites identified as parallels of Graeco-Roman Amphitheaters remain debatable.
It's as simple as an A intersection B set. Some Vasakka-sajja Nayikas hold mirrors but not all mirror holding ladies are Vasakka-sajja Nayikas. A Darpanadharini is a Surasundari or a Madhanika often found in temple architecture whilst a Vasakka-sajja is a woman dressing up for her Lord and decorating her bedchamber. It is this that primarily distinguishes the two: the related scenario in which a figure is.
Classically, from what we know to be Bharata Muni's Natyashastra. However, a significant broadening of the Nayika Bheda was done in 16th century text, Rasikapriya by Keshava Das.
One might usually get confused between some of depictions of the Kalahantarita Nayika and the Khandita Nayika as both are estranged and angry respectively. So how do we go about the identification of variations of each painting without mixing the nayikas?
The Kalahantrita Nayika is best described as the one refusing to communicate at all. She sits with her back to the Hero (Nayaka) or her face away from the Messenger and maids. The Khandita, however, is visibly having a confrontation with the hero and is shown yelling and making angry gestures.
Most of the time one gets easily confused while identifying which one's Ashta Nayika and which one's Ragini. What are the sole points one should keep in mind while identifying them?
Many Nayikas have a parallel Ragini but what is worth remembering that while four or five Raginis might pertain to a single Nayika, it isn't definite that every Ragini is a Nayika or vice-versa. A Ragini in Medieval Miniatures is usually identifed by: a. Accompaniment with a musical instrument. b. The Parent Raga written right on the top or below the painting. c. The mention of the name of the Ragini on the painting itself.
Not the Ashta Nayikas, no. These are essentially women in carnal love. That being said, there may be some depictions that show a particular woman in Divine Love portrayed as per the Ashta Nayika rules.
More often than not, the animals tend to either: 1. Depict the mood of the Nayika in that particular situation 2. Depict what the Nayika is anticipating next. But of course, there are exceptions to this and there are animals that have nothing to do with the Nayika at all.
In the present scenario? Yes. Right from movies by Satyajit Ray to Bhansali's Devdas and Bajirao Mastani, movies as well as the books they were originally based on adhered to the Nayika Bheda.
Again, a very good question! Remember only Miniature Paintings are late medieval. The first depictions technically come in ancient Indian Literature and dramas. Which is why, the Nayikas are ancient the paintings are not!
Hello everyone! The Chat window seems to have closed but I am happy to take questions here. So could you please post yours below?
Very nice and informative presentation . Thoroughly enjoyed it😊 congratulations
The Kalahantrita nayika and the Proshitabhartruka nayika have a lot of similarities. The only difference seems to be that one is a lover and the other is the husband. How to differentiate between the two when both are depicted refusing to communicate?
What is essential to identify an Ashta-Nayika archaeologically?
It is CRUCIAL to remember that Nayikas occur both in Literature and art. So, it is essential to not formulate a generalisation based on just the paintings or an assumption based only on literary depictions. Both need to be juxtaposed in a balanced way.
Can we link this concept of ashtnayika with bhakti poems?
I saw in bharatnatyam that javali and padams built around ashtnayika show them with God as lover. In bhakti poetry too god is treated as lover sometimes? But is there a link between bhakti poems and ashtnayika?
@Gugan Esan asked:
Speaking of Bharatha, the first mention of the name "Bharatha" is actually mentioned in Athiranachanda Cave Inscriptions of Mahabalipiram in Tamil Nadu dated to about 6th Cen.
Taking this into consideration, when do you think is the 1st mention of Bharatha in Literature ? and would be good to know the title of the source.
Hello and thanks for the question. What you talk about is the epigraphic mention of Bharata. Textual sources actually place him in a broad dateline between the 200 BCE to 200 CE
.
As per the latest research on Bharata, therefore, juxtaposed with the subsequent commentaries on Natyashastra, some of which predate the Athiranachanda Cave Inscription, we place him far back in time.
Also note that by the time of the cave, Bhatt Lolat, Bhatt Shankuk and Bhatt Nayak's revisions of Natyashastra were already in existence.
Taking up Gugan Esan's question: if at all you need to look at this archaeologically, don't look for the name "Bharata."
Bharata Muni is a mythical sage as far as archaeologists are concerned. The theories of the Natyashastra however, as SA states, date back to roughly 200 BCE.
Again, it is worth considering that many textual sources that maybe considered precursors to the Natyashastra we see today, go back to the Natyasutras and Panini's Ashtadhyayi.
So, it's a classic case of tracing the theory versus tracing the alleged writer.
Also, Would you say that there is definite mutual impact in classics Greek theatre and Indian theatre?
Well, there are definite similarities. And these can be corroborated beyond textual ambit with material culture such as similar jewellery (as shown in Gandhara sculptures for example).
Are there any similarities in Graeco-Roman poetics and Indian Natyashastra then, judging by the dateline?
Yes, but we only get textual and theoretical similarities, such as the emphasis on Role of Audience that both Aristotle and Bhatt Nayak emphasise on or concept of temporal unity.
Archaeologically however, all Indian sites identified as parallels of Graeco-Roman Amphitheaters remain debatable.
What is the difference between Darpandharini and Vaisakkasajjanayika?
It's as simple as an A intersection B set. Some Vasakka-sajja Nayikas hold mirrors but not all mirror holding ladies are Vasakka-sajja Nayikas. A Darpanadharini is a Surasundari or a Madhanika often found in temple architecture whilst a Vasakka-sajja is a woman dressing up for her Lord and decorating her bedchamber. It is this that primarily distinguishes the two: the related scenario in which a figure is.
For more details on this, Part II of the Women in Indian Art Lecture comes out next week. Stay tuned!
From where do we find the information regarding Nayikas in texts?
Classically, from what we know to be Bharata Muni's Natyashastra. However, a significant broadening of the Nayika Bheda was done in 16th century text, Rasikapriya by Keshava Das.
One might usually get confused between some of depictions of the Kalahantarita Nayika and the Khandita Nayika as both are estranged and angry respectively. So how do we go about the identification of variations of each painting without mixing the nayikas?
The Kalahantrita Nayika is best described as the one refusing to communicate at all. She sits with her back to the Hero (Nayaka) or her face away from the Messenger and maids. The Khandita, however, is visibly having a confrontation with the hero and is shown yelling and making angry gestures.
Most of the time one gets easily confused while identifying which one's Ashta Nayika and which one's Ragini. What are the sole points one should keep in mind while identifying them?
Many Nayikas have a parallel Ragini but what is worth remembering that while four or five Raginis might pertain to a single Nayika, it isn't definite that every Ragini is a Nayika or vice-versa.
A Ragini in Medieval Miniatures is usually identifed by:
a. Accompaniment with a musical instrument.
b. The Parent Raga written right on the top or below the painting.
c. The mention of the name of the Ragini on the painting itself.
@@thetometravellingbaba Okay. Thank you. Will keep this points in mind.
Do nayikas pertained with divine love ?
Not the Ashta Nayikas, no. These are essentially women in carnal love. That being said, there may be some depictions that show a particular woman in Divine Love portrayed as per the Ashta Nayika rules.
Do animals in the background have any specific significance in terms of the theme of these ashta nayikas?
More often than not, the animals tend to either:
1. Depict the mood of the Nayika in that particular situation
2. Depict what the Nayika is anticipating next.
But of course, there are exceptions to this and there are animals that have nothing to do with the Nayika at all.
Do we have nayikas in other Rasa?
Well, you have heroines if that's what you mean but they don't fall into the Ashta Nayika classification.
Do we find Nayikas in Indian Literature?
In the present scenario? Yes. Right from movies by Satyajit Ray to Bhansali's Devdas and Bajirao Mastani, movies as well as the books they were originally based on adhered to the Nayika Bheda.
Where can i access these paintings with their titles?
You may check out Speaking Archaeologically on Pinterest for complete provenance
Ashta Nayikas are seen represented in Early or late medieval period. Then why it's said they are Ancient?
Again, a very good question! Remember only Miniature Paintings are late medieval. The first depictions technically come in ancient Indian Literature and dramas. Which is why, the Nayikas are ancient the paintings are not!