A History of Sanskrit Literature c3.37

c3.37

The ascription of these old plays specifically to Bhāsa rests primarily on the testimony of Rājaçekhara, doubtless the critic and dramatist of *c.* A.D. 900, who tells us that the *Svapnavāsavadatta* of Bhāsa survived exposure to the fire of criticism, when his dramas were exposed to that ordeal by experts. It would indeed be a curious coincidence if an unknown dramatist had written like Bhāsa a number of dramas, of which the *Svapnavāsavadattā* stands out in the judgement of many critics as unquestionably the finest, and in any case is so admirable that it may easily have won general acceptance in Rājaçekhara's circle as the finest of the works. Add to this the facts that Kālidāsa himself, who seems from internal evidence to have sought to vie with these dramas, recognizes ruefully the great difficulty a young poet must have in contending with Bhāsa, and that the author of these works is assuredly a greater dramatist than any other Sanskrit writer than Kālidāsa, and Rājaçekhara's testimony is strongly confirmed. Again, from the vast mass of confused conjecture on the mode of beginning dramas, the fact emerges that Bāṇa's reference to Bhāsa's dramas as introduced by the Sūtradhāra corresponds precisely with the manner of introducing these dramas, and, when all is said and done, is most simply and naturally explained by the obvious view that he is referring to them.