BANGALORE: C K Venkata Ramayya's play, Ubhaya Bharati is inspired by historical events of the 8th century. It revolves around the protagonist Ubhaya Bharati, who is considered to be the incarnation of goddess Saraswati, and the debate between her husband Mandana Mishra and Adi Shankaracharya.
The play is divided into four acts and Ramayya shows great historical scholarship which often surfaces in dialogues between the protagonists, where while debating they refer to a particular scripture or the conduct of a particular king like Harsha Vardhana of Kanauj, to illustrate the point they are making.
The playwright, due to his erudition, skilfully brings in actual historical facts, during the dialogue in the debates. He brings to life the ideal woman Saraswati, the embodiment of wisdom and learning, in the incarnation of a homemaker, who takes a vow to use her debating prowess to propagate the Sanatan Dharma (eternal religion).
Adi Shankaracharya, the ideal ascetic, is evoked with a childlike innocence and having a Buddha-like wisdom. The play deals in the ideal: platonic forms of the scholar, woman, ascetic and king.
The characters are fleshed out well, by the playwright being mindful of their historical accuracy, but also taking the artistic license to make them suitable for drama. Their traits are exemplified by the use of anecdotes.
Ubhaya Bharati's concern for Kamalambe is shown through the empathy she feels when she learns of her friend's marital suffering and decides to use her wealth to meet the dowry demands at the root of the misery. Similarly, the childless Ubhaya Bharati's maternal instincts are highlighted when she comes across the infant Shankaracharya, while getting lost on the way to Kanyakumari, when she sings him a few verses. This is another clever use of the imagination by the playwright.
Words like rasa or apsara, and other such words are hard to express in a foreign language like English. What can one translate rasa as? Aesthetic juices? Or apsara- celestial nymph or celestial courtesan? The translator professor S Ramaswamy has been sensitive to such considerations and has ably rendered the play from the Kannada into English without allowing some important cultural nuances from being lost in translation. The work is suffused with a deep spirituality. Central to its theme is the strife between the world-views of Buddhism and the Vedic tradition.
At one end is the Buddhist jagadguru who is hell-bent on making India a Buddhist nation by using any means necessary and his antithesis is Ubhaya Bharati, who feels religious harmony is the need of the day, which according to her is sanctioned via Vedic precepts. On the other hand there is a debate between Mandana Mishra and Adi Shankaracharya on which is the correct way to interpret the Vedas. The former is an adherent of Maharishi Jamini's school of thought, which lays emphasis on ritual, while Adi Shankara is a proponent of a more experiential and objective dharma as expressed by the Advaita philosophy.
Shankara and Ubhaya Bharati are similar in that they are shown to be pragmatic, grounded, and their positions have a universal appeal much like Kant's ethics. For instance, in one part of the debate, Mishra says the Vedas are infallible. Shankara acknowledges the potency of Vedic knowledge but says even such exalted scripture should not countermand wisdom gained from what is-our experience or awareness.
Characters like the Buddhist jagadguru are creations of the playwright, but are etched in the backdrop of the authentic history of intellectual strife between Buddhism and the Vedic tradition.
Ubhaya Bharati tries to take advantage of the fact that Shankara is an ascetic and hence celibate, to defeat him in the debate. As the legend goes, Shankara's soul goes into the body of a king in order to gain sexual experiences, after which he continues the debate. This aspect of the story, which forms the crux of the account, is left out in the play. Instead, the play jumps directly to Shankara defeating Ubhaya Bharati and she and her husband becoming his disciples. The inclusion of this omitted portion would have enriched the play even more.
More good translations are needed of vernacular literature into English. Such writing has a vibrancy, depth and a rooted quality lacking in most of the Indian writing in English. This work will surely encourage the sincere reader to pick up books of translations from regional literature.