Kalidas Aur Vikram Par Ek Vichar

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, "Kalidas aur Vikram par Ek Vichar" by Suryanarayan Vyas:

The article begins by discussing the historical context of ancient Indian literature and drama, specifically touching upon the playwright Bhasa. Vyas notes that many scholars believe Bhasa belonged to the era of Chanakya and Chandragupta, acknowledging his significant contribution to dramatic arts. He observes that by the Shunga period in Vidisha, poetry and drama had developed considerably, with Sanskrit gaining popularity as a spoken language. While Panini's grammatical rules were not yet widely adopted, and dramatic art was not as standardized, Bhasa's plays had already achieved prominence, indicating a progressive period for this art form.

The author then addresses the theory, supported by scholars like Macdonell and Keith, that Indian theater was influenced by Greek drama due to India's interactions with Greece in the 3rd century BCE. Evidence cited includes the marriage of Seleucus's daughter to Chandragupta, Ptolemy's movements, and the exchange of ambassadors. The connection between Ujjain and Greece through the Narmada-Bhrugu-Kachh route during Alexander's reign, and the presence of the Greek ambassador Heliodorus in Vidisha (who even adopted the Bhagavata dharma, evidenced by the Heliodorus pillar), are highlighted. While acknowledging Greek interest in Indian literature, Vyas emphasizes that Indian dramatic texts are older, and Bhasa's plays seem to have influenced Greek theater rather than the other way around. He speculates that Bhasa's success might have inspired Kalidasa to refine his dramatic art, potentially leading Kalidasa to name Bhasa in his play "Malavikagnimitra" to announce his innovative entry into the theatrical world. Vyas points out similarities in characters like kings, heroines, supporting heroines, and jesters between Bhasa and Kalidasa, suggesting Kalidasa's art represents a more developed form. He estimates an age difference of about 100-125 years between Bhasa and Kalidasa, considering their similar eras. Kalidasa might have begun his literary career by building upon Bhasa's art and finding patronage with less prominent princes like Agnimitra, eventually achieving fame.

The article then transitions to the figure of Vikram, stating that, similar to Kalidasa, Vikram is also a subject of scholarly debate. Two main viewpoints exist regarding Vikram's identity: one places him in 57 BCE, while the other exclusively identifies him with Chandragupta II. Vyas laments that some modern scholars, overly reliant on figures like Smith, fail to acknowledge this historical dichotomy.

Vyas then presents evidence from ancient texts to support the existence of multiple Vikramas. He refers to Somadeva's "Kathasaritsagara," written in the 11th century, which he argues demonstrates awareness of two Vikramas. Somadeva's work, composed after the reign of the second Vikram, would have had no need to discuss a hypothetical first Vikram if only one existed. The "Kathasaritsagara" clearly identifies a renowned king Vikram in Ujjain and another Vikram in Pataliputra. Specific verses from the "Kathasaritsagara" are quoted, describing the Ujjain Vikram as the son of Mahendraditya, destined to conquer the earth and defeat foreign invaders, and a ruler who was respected by kings from various regions, including Gauda, Karnataka, Lata, Kashmir, Sindh, and even Persia. The text also explicitly mentions a "king Vikram in Pataliputra" without the epithet "Samrat."

Vyas argues that Somadeva, along with earlier authors like Kshemendra and Gunadhya, were aware of two distinct Vikramas. He emphasizes that these authors lived after Chandragupta II, and if Chandragupta II were the sole Vikram, there would be no need for them to discuss separate Vikramas of Ujjain and Pataliputra. He dismisses the idea that these accounts are mere fiction, stating that they are hundreds of years old and predate the theories of modern scholars like Smith and Harnell. Vyas concludes that the historical figure of Vikramaditya cannot be solely judged by Western scholars' criteria; a thorough examination of ancient Indian literature is essential for accurate historical understanding. He further asserts that numerous Jain literary works, exceeding 50 in number, also discuss the Ujjain-based Vikram independently, and texts like the "Kalak-katha" should not be dismissed as mere stories but considered as historically significant and factually based.