The Mahanataka Problem
Summary
This paper investigates the vexed question of what the so‑called ‘Mahanataka’ mentioned in classical Sanskrit treatises really was. References to a Mahanataka appear in works like the Bhavaprakashana, Sahityadarpana and the commentaries of Abhinavagupta, yet no manuscript of the play survives. Scholars have debated whether ‘Mahanataka’ referred to a lost Ramayana‑based drama or was simply a generic term for a grand dramatic performance. The author examines the textual evidence: some rhetoricians cite the Mahanataka as an exemplary drama, implying that it fulfilled the structural norms of Sanskrit theatre, while others identify it with the Hanumannataka or a southern version of the Ramayana story. By comparing descriptions, the paper suggests that the Mahanataka may have been a large‑scale drama in which the Ramayana narrative was enacted with added episodes and elaborate staging. The author also considers whether regional adaptations, such as those performed in Kerala temples, could be the missing Mahanataka. Despite these insights, the problem remains unresolved because no definitive textual evidence has surfaced. The article concludes that the term probably denoted a popular Ramayana‑based play which influenced later dramaturgy, but its exact identity remains a matter for further research.
AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.
Conclusion
Surveying classical references, the author shows that scholars have long puzzled over the identity of the Mahanataka. The available evidence points to a grand Ramayana‑themed drama that satisfied the norms of Sanskrit theatre, but without a surviving manuscript the issue cannot be definitively settled. The study highlights how gaps in the textual record force scholars to rely on indirect evidence and calls for continued philological exploration.