Loka Shakuntala
Dushyanta fell in love with Shakuntala, married her and then forgot her; but later, her memory brought him pain and suffering. What could be the logical reason behind this? Could it be his royal position that made him first forget her and then later remember her? This might be true where his forget fullness is concerned. But what is it that made him remember her? It is the human in him, one is likely to say. Or, could it be due to the institutionalised practices of the time concerning marriage, family, property rights, and state administration? Yes, possibly, to some extent. Menaka who lives in a world that is far from these practices has also been presented in the play very suggestively. But the memory - oblivion interplay does not seem to be part of her being where man-woman relationship is concerned. After seducing Vishwamitra and giving birth to Shakuntala she does not seem to be bothered by this relationship at all. Is it the concept of property, the desire to own and enjoy things, that traps the human beings of this society in the network of memory-and-oblivion?
Menaka, though not worried about her husband, gets worked up when her daughter is in danger. Moreover, she (Menaka) is made of heavenly elements and not human elements. One thing more; probably, the setup that created Kanwa and Gautami, and the one that created Doorwasa cannot be very much different from each other. But the setups they create in turn are so very different from each other.
Or, as Dushyanta doubts-bhaawasthiraani jananaantara subridaani- is it that the memory - oblivion interplay has nothing to do with the setup but is ingrained in the very mettle of man making him a tragic here?
One can analyse, but it is difficult to say anything with finality. Probably, one ought to recognise the unknown depths only by the 'Misfortune' that befalls in the name of the 'curse'. Probably, human knowledge cannot reach beyond this limit.
Shakuntaka was born as the child of heaven and earth (Swarga-Martya). Though she grew up among the taapasis of Kanwa's ashrama she could not become one with its culture. She could not come to terms with even the naagaraka set-up of Hasthinawathi. When the priest of the royal court looked upon her as his daughter, and invited her to his house with love and respect, she refused it. Finally, she went to the ashrama at Hemakoota and gave birth to her child. Rebelling against the barriers of different cultural setups, and moving with ease from one to another, and hitting at the deadwood of the man-made institutions, she becomes a metaphor for the woman that opens the floodgates for the natural flow of life-force. She is there all through the play and beyond it so much so that the play is named after her.
Now, look at the end of the play. By now, her son has already grown up to become Sarwadamana. Again, here is one more person to create and cultivate one more (set up of) Hasthinawatahi. Building up institutions, breaking them and again building them-moving in this way and understanding the entire process, is the human culture heading towards an ideal where one can live without being chained by any institution? Or is it just a drama of creation and destruction, absurd and purposeless, being enacted again and again?
|
