The Monstrous Feminine: Rkass and Other Others The Archaic Mother of Bhsas Madhyamavyyoga Sally J.

Sutherland Goldman University of California at Berkeley The author of the Trivandrum plays known as Bhsa is one of the more controversial playwrights of the Sanskrit tradition. The authenticity of his authorship has been critically examined by a number of well-known and influential scholars as, assuming he was the author of the Trivandrum plays, has his date. The controversy over his date has placed his work from a period prior to Pini (Gaapati str because of the number of non-pinian forms1) to as late as the seventh, eighth centuries of the common era,2 or even the eleventh century of the common era.3 In fact, it seems as if there are as many dates for Bhsa as there are scholars who have written on the subject. Scholarship generally falls into early (pre-Pnii), pre-Klidsa, or around the seventh to eighth centuries CE.4 A reasonable consensus is, however, that the playwright flourished
1

Gaapati str 1912 (TSS vol. XV) (Introduction to Svapnavsavadattam). According to Gaapati str, Bhsa, must necessarily be placed not later than the third or second century BC, Sukthankar (1920, p. 248). Bhide (1916, Introduction) places Bhsa between 475BCE417BCE. 2 Barnett places Bhsa in the 7th century CE, Devadhar, is less definite, generally agreeing with Barnett, but commenting, though the question of his time cannot be definitely settled for want of adequate data (1927, p. 62). 3 De 1941, p. 420. See Sukthankar 1922, p. 233 and Masson 1970, pp. 3-7. Cf. Pulsalkar 1968, pp. 6-23; Sukthankar 1921-1923; Masson 1970, p.13, note 2; Tieken 1993, p. 6, footnote 5. 4 For example of some early dates, see Kle (1929, p. xxxvi-xxxviii) 370 BCE; Bhide (1916, Introduction) 475-417 BCE; Gaapati str (1912, Introduction) 3rd-2nd century BCE; Sukthankar (1920) is more cautious, commenting only on the age of the Prkrit in the plays, which is much older than any we know from the dramas of the so-called classical period of Sanskrit literature (p. 259). A number of scholars date Bhsa much laterthe seventh century of the common era or later. See, for example, Barnett (1920, p.37) seventh century CE, Pisharoti (1923, p. 114) not earlier than the eighth century, Devadhar (1927, p. 62), follows Barnett, and understands seventh century CE, Tieken

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

between the time of Avaghoa and Klidsa.5 Perhaps S.K. De is the most insightful of Bhsas critics when he reminds us6 that we should not lose sight of the fact that these plays were a product of their environment. Like other Sanskrit plays, as they were handed down from one generation to the next, words, verses, and even sections of the plays were bound to have been lost, added, or revised. Thus issues of authorship and date will always be open to criticism, controversy, and revision. Despite the intense scholarly attention paid to the structural similarity of the Trivandrum plays, their authorship, and their authors date, little attention has been given over to serious analysis of the plays themselves. Scholars (see for example, Keith, De) have exercised themselves a great deal over whether or not the plays fit into the structure of the traditional naka and whether or not they follow exactly the plot of the original epic stories or other prototypes. Nevertheless, in all of this the plays themselves as literary and performative pieces seem largely to get bypassed.7 In aid of addressing this lack, the following paper will examine one of the lesser plays of Bhsa, the Madhymavyyoga,8 focusing less on the plays history, and more on

(1993, p. 36) The conclusions regarding its [the Pratijyaugandharyaas] date (not older than the Mattavilsa ) . . . and patronage (Pallavas, Narasihavarman II) have provisionally be extended to the other Trivandrum plays. 5 Sukthankar, understands the Prkrit to be of an age of that of Avaghoas; Winternitz 1940. p. 309), sometime before Klidsa; Keith (1924, p. 95) 300 CE. 6 De 1927, p. 421. The studies have now made it reasonable to assume that the Trivandrum plays, whether they are by Bhsa or by some other playwright, are of the nature of adaptations or abridgments made for the stage, and they have in fact been regularly used as stage-plays in the Kerala country. This very important fact should not be lost sight of in any discussion of the plays. It explains the traditional handing down of the plays without mention of the authors name, in closely resembling prologues, which are probably stage-additions, as well as the coincidence of formal technique and a large number of repetitions and parallels, which recur in these, as also in some other Sanskrit plays of Kerala. 7 There are of course exceptions. See Masson 1969, Goldman 1978, Gerow 1985, Farley Richmond and Yasmin Richmond 1985, Tieken most recently has offered a provocative and insightful analysis of a number of the plays with an eye to their ritual implications as well as a new, much later dating of the poems 1997. See too Tieken 1993. 8 The vyyoga, according to the Nyastra and other works on drama, is defined as follows: The hero should be a renowned person, the female characters should be few, and the males should be many, the action should cover only one day, it should only be one

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

its role as a work of literature and of performative dramatic art. The paper will concentrate on two interrelated issues: structure and meaning. Through the mechanism of the first the second will be analyzed with an eye toward understanding some of the psychological and sociological underpinnings of the world that informed Bhsas vygoga.9 The play is quite short, one act, and tells the story of a Brhman family, a father, a mother, and their three sons, travelling in a rkasa-haunted forest on their way to a sacrifice. It so happens that this is the very forest in which the Pavas are living out their exilealthough we are uncertain as to whether it is the first or the second exile as neither Kunt nor Draupad are mentioned, and it is also the home of the rkas Hiimb and her son Ghaotkaca. The story has as its background, the episode from the Mahbhrata in which Bhma meets and marries the rkas Hiimb, an episode, one assumes, that was well known to the audience of the play. The liaison results in the birth of a son, the half-human, half-demonic Ghaotkaca.10

act, there should be fighting and wrestling in it, the hero should not be a celestial, but should be royal. Later alakrastrins, added: that it should no have either the garbha or the vimara sandhis; the hero should be of the class styled dhroddhata [firm and haughty] wrestling and fighting should not be on account of a woman. Cf. Keith p. 347 and Nyastra 20 where the vyyoga is defined as: vyyogasya tu lakaam ata para sapravakymi // 89cd vyyogas tu vidhijai kartavya khytanthaksarra / alpastrjanayuktas tv ekhaktas tath caiva // 90 bahavas tatra ca puru vyyacchante yath samavakre / na ca tatpramayukta tad ekka savidhtavya ///91 na ca divyanyakakta kryo rjarinyakanibaddha / yuddhaniyuddhgharaasaghara cpi kartavya //92 evavidhas tu kryo vyyogo dptakvyarasayoni / 93ab See too Darpaka iii.54, Shityadarpaa 514. 9 The play, as is true in my opinion of all great works, can be read on many levels. And I have no intention of assuming that my reading of the story is the only one. Clearly it can, and does, have multiple interpretations. See, for example, Tieken 1997 who has read the story as a covert upanayana ritual. 10 The story is told in the diparvan of the Mahbhrata [1.139-143] and then again in a reprise in the Arayaparvan [130.85-97]. All references are the Critical Edition of the Mahbhrata, unless otherwise indicated.

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

After the opening verse, a verse in praise of Viu [Hari] in his Vmana avatra, the stradhra, or stage manager, hears a sound off stage, aye kin nu khalu . . . abda iva ryate, and assumes that it could be no other than the voice of a brhman. He again hears words coming from behind the curtain [nepathye], bhos tta ko nu khalv ea. This type of opening is common to Bhsas dramas. The stradhra is on stage to introduce the play and its characters. He hears a supposedly unexpected noise offstage, questions what it could be, and then realizes that it concerns the events of the play (as, e.g., in the driving away of the crowds in the Svpnavsavadattam). The audience is led to believe that the play, far from being performed here and now, is an ongoing story, in which we are being allowed momentarily to participate vicariously. The effect is not dissimilar from the modern day film technique of, the fade in. The transition functions to merge reality with fantasy, to draw the audience into the story. Visually, we see only the stradhra. But our ears are given the first clues as to the theme, tone, and subject matter of the play. A simple word, bho, is uttered. Apte [s.v.] understands the word only as a vocative particle used when addressing people, o, sir, oh, halloo, ah. But bho can and will also carry the intent of sorrow and/or interrogation. According to Gaapati str the word, bho, has already been uttered once by the eldest son. However this utterance has not been heard by the audience, but it has, apparently been, heard by the stradhra. The second time it is utteredthe first time the audience hears it, Gaapati str understands it to be uttered by the middle son, and the last time [the line following he verse] by the youngest son. The assumption of the first utterance is not unreasonable if we are to understand that the gradual descent of the audience into the story is marked largely by the use of this word, bho. The stradhra, hearing the question, understands the situation (bhavatu vijtam), and says: bho abdoccrad asya brhmo yam na saaya / trsyate nirviakena kenacit ppacetas //211

11

From his uttering of the word bho there is no doubt that he is a brahman. He is frightened by some wicked soul, who has no fear [scruples]. All citations are taken from

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

The word, bho, once again echoes in the audiences ears. In both Devadhars and Gaapati stris editions of the text, it is the very first word of the verse, and serves to tell the audience that the previous use of the word was by no means accidental. Bho' is thus a syllable pregnant with meaning. Just uttering this word tells our audience, at least according to the stradhra, that the person addressed or speaking is a brhman. This is reasonable, for according to the Manusmti, the word bho is peculiar to brhmans.12 The word carries the meaning of concern worry or anxiety here as well. This is made clear in the second line of the verse, where the stradhra lets the audience know that the brhman is being harassed by some evil creature. The exact nature of the evil creature will be revealed to us only upon the third and final use of the word bho, which follows the verse. The stradhra, hearing the final use of the word bho, here, presumably uttered by the youngest of the sons, now fully understands the situation. He, of course, as the stage manager plays an omniscient being, as it were, having special insights into the nature of the world as depicted in the drama. With his words, hanta ddha vijtam, again assuring the audience that he has understood what has happened, he then sets the scene, with the words: pavamadhyamasytmajo hiimbraisambhto rkasgnir aktavaira brhmaajana vitrsayati. 13 The sentence is fraught with meaning for the audience. We hear for the first time the words pava-, -madhyama-, -tmaja, and hiimb- all of which serve as indicators of the plot to come. We discover that the person just described as ppacetas is none other than the son of the middle Pava [Bhma] Bhsanakacakram (1937) edited by Devadhar, pp. 422-439. All translations are the authors unless otherwise indicated. 12 Manusmti 2.128: avcyo dkito nmn yavyn api yo bhavet / bho bhavatprvaka tv enam abhibheta dharmavit // A person who has been consecrated should not be addressed by name, even if he is younger, a man who knows the law, should speak after him saying, hello sir [bho]. 13 This is the son of the middle Pava, the fire of the rkasas, the one born of the kindling-stick Hiimb; it is he who harasses the brhman folks, who are without animosity towards him."

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

and Hiimb. The word pava- not only lets us know the family background of our harasser, but specifically brings to mind the middle one, here understood to be Bhmathe one between Yudhihira and Arjuna, that is the middle son of Kunt, who will figure prominently in the play. That the son is described in terms of the father, is not only important in the light of the later developments of the plot, but it immediately raises a doubt in the mind of the audience as to why the son of a Pava would be harassing brhmans. The word madhyama, again not only highlights Bhma, but also anticipates the character of the middle son of the old brhman who plays a vital role in the vyyoga. Finally we have the character of Hiimb introduced. Here like the patronymic reference to Bhma the matronymic is only used to provide a family lineage. Hiimb is, of course, a rkas. This, in part, explains the nature of her son. The sthpana is concluded with a verse describing the brhman family in what must be understood as culturally normative terms. bhrntai [rnta] sutai parivtas taruai sadro vddho dvijo niicarnucara sa ea / vyghrnusracarito vabha sadhenu santrastavatsaka ivkulm upaiti /314 The father is the bull, the mother the cow, the sons the calves. The association with bulls, cows and calves resonates strongly as some of the most powerfully cathected symbols of virility, motherhood, and devotion to ones children in traditional Indian society. The verse has placed the threatening figure of Ghaotkaca in conflict with the family and with other institutions and symbols that mark the patriarchy. Film theorist Robin Wood (1986 70-94) has used very similar terms to define the modern horror film. For him the horror film, consistently places the monster in conflict with the family, the couple and the institutions of patriarchal capitalism (Creed 61). As the story unfolds we have the halfhuman half-demonic figure of Ghaotkaca posing that very threat to the nuclear family and thus giving rise to the traditional rasa of the horror-drama, bhaynaka.15

14

This old brhman along with his wife and surrounded by his confused [exhausted] sons is followed by a night roamer is just like a bull, along with his cow and frightened calves, who is pursued by a tiger, becomes agitated. 15 Pulsalkar 1940, p. 208.

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

The transition is complete, the scene is set and the play commences. What is remarkable about this sthpana [and the others of Bhsa, I would argue] is the simplicity with which Bhsa uses language to provide a transition from the realm of the everyday world into the play. The play by its nature is a dyakvya, but it is by the use of words that Bhsa constructs the transition. Its simplicity, too, is deceiving, for the words are sparse, but the meaning conveyed is multivalent. The sthpana, has not only specifically set the scene of the play. In setting forth the boundaries of good and evil, rkasa verses human, it has introduced a paradox: the son whose mother is a rkas, and thus by definition, evil, and whose father is the son of the wind god and one of the greatest warriors on earth a person whose purpose on earth is to uphold dharma. That the feminine here is marked as evil is no accident.16 This is a point to which I will return shortly. Bhsa carefully introduces the character of Ghaotkaca, the son of Bhma and Hiimb, to represent a troubled and deeply conflicted young man. He is frightening, threatening, intimidating, potentially filled with evil. Yet, he is not without redeeming features, although they are largely obscured at the outset of the vyyoga. . The old brhman intuits that the young demon is not totally evil, for he hears some concern in his voice, and indicates this as he tells his terrified wife and sons, brhmai, na bhetavya na bhetavyam, putrak! na bhetavyam, savimar hy asya v.17 This, of course, proves to be the case as the young demon answers, bho kaam, and we discover the source of his conflict. Bhsa has once again employed the word bho. Here it is put in the mouth of Ghaotkaca, who despite his rkasa origins, speaks flawless Sanskrit. The word kaam as an avyaya carries the meaning of alas, alack, pity. According to Gaapati str (p. 34) these words and the verse that follows must be understood as svagatam, or an aside. He understands this because 1) the demon would not make his true feelings known to the brhman family, and 2) because the brhman, as suggested by his response, appears totally unaware of the words just spoken. Given this and the future
16 17

S. Goldman 1996, 2003,2004. Do not fear, brhman lady, do not fear! Do not fear, my sons! His voice is concerned. Here, I am reading -vimar as v.l. for vimar (MW s.v.)

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

developments in the play, Gaapatistr, is probably correct in this assumption. Bhsa, having introduced concern, quickly clarifies what it is, as he has the young demon say: jnmi sarvatra sad ca nma dvijottam pjatam pthivym / akryam etac ca maydya krya matur niyogd apantakam // 918 The conflict hinted at by the stradhara in the sthpana is now made explicit. Ghaotkaca knows what he ought to do, but cannot go against the word of his mother. Suddenly the entire nature and structure of the drama has changed. No longer is this just a young rkasa boy out harassing a brhman family, but a child whose loyalty, like his parentage, is divided. On the one side is the mother, the rkas, who must at all costs be obeyed, even though she is aligned with evil and wrongdoing. On the other side is the father representing the patriarchal world of traditional brhmaic India. That the action is played out in a forest and that the brhman family is on its way to a sacrifice only serves to intensify the conflict. Note how Bhsa projects the evil out from the child onto the mother.19 She has only been mentioned twice in the play [hiimbra . . . matu] and yet her evil presence already permeates the vyyoga. Note too that while the audience, who has in some sense taken over the omniscient nature of the stradhra, is aware of this evil feminine threat, the brhman family is yet unaware of her presence. Realizing that they are doomed, and that even the Pavas, who have taken up temporary residence in the forest can be of no helpsince they too have been called off to a sacrifice, here Dhaumyas 100 pot sacrifice, the old brhman petitions for their freedom, asty asmka moka. Ghaotkaca allows the possibility of release but on one condition [moko sti samayata]. He then tells of his mission: asti me tatrabhavat janan. tayham jpta: putra mamopavsanisargrtham asmin vanapradee kacin maua parimgynetavya iti.20 It is at this juncture that full nature of the threat is made apparent to the audience and the brhman family as well. The threat originates
18

I know that always and everywhere those best of the twice-borns are the most highly revered on earth. Today, however, disregarding all doubts, I must do this deed that ought not to be done, on account of my mothers command. 19 See Sutherland 1991. 20 I have a very respected mother. She has ordered me: Son! In order to break my fast, in the region of this forest, having sought out some male human, bring him to me.

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

from a rkas who wants to consume human [manuyam] male flesh. Ghaotkaca is only doing his mother's bidding. The rkas is a commonplace of the epic literature. The female counterpart of the rkasa, she is in some ways even more frightening. Like him, what is most pronounced about the rkas is sexual excess, but carefully set in juxtaposition to her libidinal drive is her need to devour.21 The consumption is not uncommonly expressed in a desire for humans or more specifically human blood. That consumption can be understood as an expression of sexuality, especially excessive libidinal urges, has been well established, and I need not elaborate here any further in any great detail.22 Like other rkas figures such as rpaakh, Suras, and Sihik, Hiimb, too desires to eat. Her voracious oral consumptive urges too can be seen as representative of her libidinal desires. This intersection between the libidinal and the gustatory urges are seen in the earliest extant story of Hiimb, that known from the Mahbhrata. The story is told first in the diparvan (1.139-143). Following the fire in the lacquer house, the Pava brothers are hiding in the forest with their mother, Kunt. As they sleep in the forest the rkasa Hiimba spies them. Both the rkasas hunger and his proclivity for human flesh are among the first things we learn about him. Among other things he is described as mnuamsda, piitepsu,23and kudhrta. Hiimba, smelling the odor of humans,24 orders25 his sister, his female counterpart as reflected in her name Hidimb, to fetch them.
21

See Goldman and Goldman 1996, pp. 65-68; See R. Goldman 2000, S. Goldman 1996, 2003, 2004. Note here the similarity of the vampire to the rkas. The female vampire is abject because she disrupts identity and order: driven by her lust for blood, she does not respect the dictates of the law, which set down the rules of proper sexual conduct. Like the male, the female vampire also represents abjection because she crosses the boundary between the living and the dead, the human and animal. [Creed 1993, p. 61] 22 S. Goldman 1996, 2004, R. Goldman 2000, Creed 1993, 23 The word piita, means flesh, but clearly refers to human flesh in such usages as pstana, piita, piitin, piitbhuj, which all refer to demons who are flesh eaters, or man-eaters. See Apte, s.v. 24 duo mnuamsdo mahkyo mahbala / ghrya mnua gandha bhaginm idam abravt // 25 upapanna cirasydya bhako mama manapriya / snehasravn prasravati jihv paryeti me mukham //

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

The self-description he provides in the passage is important in that it marks the rkasa as an eater of human flesh; it describes him as having: aau datr sutkgr cirasyptadusah.26 He describes the manner in which he will consume the humans: kramya mnua kaham cchidya damanm api/ ua nava prapsymi phenila rudhira bahu /27 The description is clearly reminiscent of the vampire of western myth, who with long pointed fangs sucks the blood from its victims. Hiimb rushes to do her brothers bidding, but when she sees Bhma, rather than eat him up she is consumed with lust.28 Upon seeing his unparalleled beauty, she falls in love with him [13]. Moreover she decides that he is the right husband for her [bhart aau datr sutkgr cirasyptadusah / deheu bhajayiymi snigdheu piiteu ca // kramya mnua kaham cchidya damanm api / ua nava prapsymi phenila rudhira bahu // gaccha jnhi ke tv ete erate vanam rit / mnuo balavn gandho ghram tarpayatva me // hatvaitn mnun sarvn nayasva mamntikam / asmad viayasuptebhyo naitebhyo bhayam asti te // e msni saskrtya mnu yatheata / bhakayiyva sahitau kuru tra vaco mama // 1.139.4-10 Today after such a long time, I have come across some food dear to my heart. My tongue salivates with the juice of delicate things and licks all around my face. The eight fangs with their so sharp points, are unbearable from the first attack, after such a long time; I will eat these bodies and their most [delicate] flesh.[6] Having seized the human's throat, I will severe its arteries and drink the abundant, fresh, warm, foamy blood! [7] Go, discover who these forest-resorting men who sleep are. The strong, powerful human odor as it were satisfies my nose [8]. Having killed all of these humans bring them back to me. Have no fear of them, that sleep in our realm.[9] Having prepared the flesh of the humans as we like it, together we will eat it. Quickly obey my words.[10] 26 MBh 1.39.5.His eight fangs, with their so sharp points, are unbearable from the first attack. 27 MBh 1.39.6. Having seized the humans throat, I will severe its arteries and drink the abundant, fresh, warm, foamy blood!

10

10

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

yukto bhaven mama], after rationalizing that ones love for ones husband is stronger than ones love for ones brother, [15] she says: muhrtam iva tpti ca bhaved bhrtur mamaiva ca / hatair etair ahatv tu modayiye vat sam //29 It is here that we see the two notions of gustatory and sexual satiation intersect. Hiimb cannot have both, in fact, does not need both, for the libidinal supplants the gustatory. This very intersection of the libidinal drive and the need to consume allows us to compare the figure of the rkasa to the western vampire figure. And I would argue, that the figures of the rkasa and the rkas in the traditional Sanskrit literary corpus depicts these creatures in a way not dissimilar from that of the depiction of the vampire, both male and female, in the western literary and cinematic tradition. Barbara Creed has noted this connection between the need to consume and libidinal drive, in reference to the western female vampire: The female vampire is abject because she disrupts identity and order; driven by her lust for blood, she does not respect the dictates of the law, which set down the rules of proper sexual conduct. Like the male, the female vampire also represents abjection because she crosses the boundary between the living and the dead, the human and animal . . . the vampires animalism is made explicit in her bloodlust and the growth of the two pointed fangs.30

28

The passage parallels the passion experienced by rpaakh upon seeing the two Rghavas, however, the resolution is far from the same. Rm 3.17.16. All references are to the critical edition, unless noted. 29 MBh 1.139.16With them slain, my brothers appetite and mine will be sated for only a while but not having killed them, I will be infatuated for ever after [for all eternity]. 30 Creed 1993, p. 61. In this connection, Creed has noted the lesbian nature of the female vampire in the western film, a point of departure I feel with the rkas in the brhmaic tradition. Certain lesbian overtones exist in a few stories, but the norm would be the female rkasa attacking a male victim, and thus maintaining a counter normative but nevertheless heterosexual relationship. One counter example to this, a clear example of same-sex craving, is found in the Sundaraka of the Vlmki Rmyaa,where the rkas express their strong desire to consume St (see 5.23.34-41 and notes).

11

11

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

Like the vampire, the rkasa as a creature, who in Kristevas terms disturbs identity, system, and order, is a figure that represents abjection.31 The intersection of libidinal and gustatory desire creates a tension that Bhsa draws upon in his drama to construct the figure of Hiimb. At the opening of his story the two traits that are most crucial in constructing the figure of Hiimb are: 1) the fact that she is a rkas, which for the audience immediately associates her with the negative libidinal and gustatory urges, and who, like the female vampire, is abject as she disrupts identity and order, and 2) the fact that she is a mother, also known from the epic story. This bivalence is reflected in Kristevas expanded construction of the Freudian Oedipal mother sometimes referred to as the archaic mother as the fecund mother and the phanasmatic mother who constitutes the abyss which is so crucial in the formation of subjectivity.32 It is this abyss that is, the cannibalizing black hole from which all life comes and to which all life returns and is represented as a source of deepest terror. Bhsa uses this construction of Hiimb as the bivalent archaic mother to generate horror in his audience. He does so not so much by a physical description of her but rather through a representation of her desires and the space that she occupies. Her haunt is the dark forest, impenetrable and dangerous. idam hi nya timirotkaraprabhair nagaprakrair avaruddhadikpatham/ khagair mgai cpi samkulntara vana nivsbhimata manasvnm //1033 Dadoun in his analysis of the film Dracula, understands the archaic mother as a nonpresence. 34 For him the signs of the archaic mother in the Dracula films are the space that Dracula inhabits, the small, enclosed village, the pathway through the forest that
31

Kristevas Powers of Horrors provides a hypothesis for the analysis of the representation of the woman as monstrous. She suggests a way of situating the monstrous-feminine in the horror film in relation to the maternal figure and what she [Kristeva] terms abjection, that which does not respect borders, positions, rules. that which disturbs identity, system, order (Kristeva 1982, p. 4). 32 Creed 1993, p. 25. 33 This desolate forest, with its paths [which lead] to the [outer] regions blocked by a variety of hills which appear like masses of darkness and with its interior regions dense with birds and beasts, is desired as a residence only by determined men. According to Gaapati str, the phrase, by determined men (manasvnm), refers to the Pnavas. 34 Dadoun 1987, p. 53

12

12

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

leads like an umbilical cord to the castle, the central place of enclosure with its winding stairways, spider webs, dark vaults, worm-eaten staircases, dust and damp earth.35 Similarly, Bhsa can be understood to depict the symbolism of the archaic mother in his womb-like description of the abode of the rkasa through which the brhman family is travelling: encircled by mountains, which appear like masses of darkness, with the only paths that lead to the outer world blocked, filled with terrifying creatures, dark and isolated. For Bhsa however, the non-present mother, is more than a symbolic representation of space, she is an omnipotent figure. Her physical presence is denied but her existence is very real. Dadoun suggests that the archaic mother exists as a nonpresence, which should be understood as a very archaic mode of presence. Bhsas use of the mother allows us to clearly imagine what this means, as Hiimb looms at the margins of the play, never visible, yet never out of our consciousness.36 Also one must keep in mind that at the same time Bhsa creates the non-present presence of the archaic mother, he absents the father, at least in the minds of the audience. The father, here Bhma, is supposed to be present, but in fact is removed from scene of the play altogether. Bhma, of course, in the Mahbhrata story, is left by Hiimb after the birth of their son Ghaotkaca.37 Here that absence is reinforced by the fact that the Pavas, although temporarily residing in the forest, have been called away from their retreat as noted above. Moreover, the absence of the patriarch marks the disintegration of the nuclear family, a situation set in marked contrast to the tightly integrated brhman family under threat. Bhma has been left to protect the rama But at this juncture, even he has gone temporarily: sa cpy asy vely vyymaparicayrtha viprakadeastha iti ryate (11.7)38 It is at this juncture, in the absence of the male, that the females libidinal and gustatory urges reassert themselves. Or, in more Freudian terms, it is in this absence that the phallic, sexualized, woman is
35 36

Creed 1993, p. 20. Creed 1993, p. 20, Dadoun 1987, pp. 53-54. Parallel to this is and, of course, the cause of it, is the absence of the father figure, here Bhma without whose phallic presence the mother has become all-powerful, phallic as it were. 37 Mahbhrata 1.143.36.

13

13

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

able to re-assert herself. That it is played out in the context of the family, where the father can no longer control the mother, whose ever-present gustatory/libidinal urges [re]surface, creates an even more terrifying and threatening scenario. Roger Dadouns Dracula acts on behalf of the mother.39 In the midst of the dark castle, Dracula emerges, with his black cape, pointed teeth, rigid bodycarried like an erect phalluspiercing eyes and penetrating look. For Dadoun, Dracula is the fetish form, a substitute for the mothers penis.40 Now consider the description that Bhsa provides of Ghaotkaca. He appears in the midst of dark, impenetrable forest, quite literally on his mothers errand. He is described as, having long, yellow eyes blazing from the cavity between the knitted eyebrows, a chest that is massive and broad, a complexion that is like that of a mass of darkness, fangs protruding and white arms which are [huge like] the trunks of the best elephants, and so forth.41 He, too, like Dracula, can be understood as the projection of a maternal phallus.
38

11.7 It is heard that at this time, he too has gone to [is located at] some distant place in order to engage in physical exercise. 39 Creed 1993, p. 21. 40 Dardoun 52-55, Creed 1993, p. 20. 41 taruavikaraprakrakeo bhrkuipuojjvalapigalyatka/ sataid iva ghana sakahastro yuganidhane pratimktir harasya // With hair scattered about like the [red] rays of the morning sun, with yellow and long eyes blazing from the cavity between the knitted eyebrows, with his [golden] necklace around his neck, like a cloud with lightning, the very image of Hara at the cosmic dissolution. grahayugalanibhka pnavistravak kanakakapilakea ptakaeyavs / timiranivahavara puroddhttadaro nava iva jalagarbho lyamnendulekha // 5 Whose eyes rare like a pair of planets, whose chest is massive and broad, whose hair is golden yellow [pta- v.l. pna-]; whose color is that of a mass of darkness, with fangs protruding and white, [he appears like] a new storm-cloud in which the digits of the moon are being clouded over. kalabhadaanadaro lagulkaransa karivarakarabhur nlajmtavara /

14

14

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

It is against this non-present presence of the archaic mother that the phallic son Ghaotkaca makes his demand, a demand that places him in a monstrous conflict with the nuclear family he has been denied: patny critraliny dviputro mokam icchasi / balbala parijya putram eka visarjaya //1242 The brhman first offers himself up in lieu of his sons, but he is rejected for he is too old. The mother then offers herself up, but she is rejected as she is a woman. Only a young brahman boy will do. The three sons in turn offer themselves up to save the family. But the father is too attached to the elder son, and cannot let him go. Similarly the mother is to attached to the younger and cannot bear to see him offered to the demon. Only the middle son is left and poignantly says: pitror ania kasyedn priya?[19.4]43 The theme of the unloved and unwanted middle child has antecedents in the unaepha story known in its earliest version to the Aitareya Brhmaa 7.15.14-18.44 Here the story tells of king named Haricandra, who desiring a son, begs for one from Varua. His boon is granted on the condition that the son be offered up as a human sacrifice to the god. A son named Rohita is born, but when he learns of the promise of his father, he runs away. Rohita eventually encounters an impoverished sage named Ajgarta, hutahutavahadpto ya sthito bhti bhmas tripurapuranihantu akarasyeva roa //6 Whose fangs are like the tusks of a young bull elephant, whose nose has the shape of a plow, whose arms are [huge like] the trunks of the best among elephants, whose color/complexion is that of a storm cloud, who, like the blazing fire into which an oblation has been offered stands there terrifying [bhma] like the anger of akara and the destroyer of the city of Tripura. vajrapto calendr yena sarvapatatrim / mgendro mgasaghn mtyu puruavigraha // He is the strike of the thunderbolt to the best among mountains, he is the hawk a among birds, he is a lion among the herds of deer, he is death in human form. 42 If you desire to be set free along with your virtuous wife and two of your sons, then considering the pros and cons [of the situation] give up one son. 43 Unwanted by my parents, who loves me now? Cf. unaephas words to Vivmitra at Rm 1.60.20.

15

15

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

who has three sons. Rohita offers the sage money in exchange for one his sons who could be offered in his place. Ajgarta agrees but will not give up his eldest son, and the mother refuses to give up the youngest. This leaves the middle son, named unaepha, who is exchanged for one hundred cows. No one can be found to actually carry out the sacrificial offering, and finally Ajgarta agrees, again for more money, to carry out the act. unaepha takes recourse in the gods who release him. Ajgarta demands his son back, but unaepha refuses to return and instead takes refuge with the sage Vivmitra.45 The similarity between the episodes is clear. However, Bhsas brhman father, unlike Ajgarta, is emotionally distraught at the decision to give up his son. While we can see the episode of unaepha as a possible source for Bhsas theme of the unloved middle child, this thematic of the unloved middle child as well as the story itself, can also be seen to have parallels elsewhere in the literature. The other most probable source of the Bhsas play, as noted by Devadhar, is the Mahbhratas story of the demon Baka. 46 Here, too, the theme of the unwanted middle child is hinted at also in connection with none other than our plays hero, Bhmasena. The story, like Bhsas, stresses the conflicted emotions of a brhman family making the horrific decision to give up one of its children to a demon to save the lives of the rest of the family. The story is placed immediately after that of the account of the slaying of Hiimba, by Bhma and the birth of Ghaotkaca discussed above.47
44

See R. Goldman 1978, pp. 348-349. The story is narrated in the Rmyaa as well (1.60-61) and Bhgavatapura 9.7. It is referred to at Mbh 13.3.6. 45 The story continues, and Vivmitra, adopting unasepha as his son, considers unasepha as his eldest son, thereby displacing the 50 elder boys. Vivmitra asks his sons to accept this arrangement, but they refuse and Vivmitra curses them to fall from their current high status.The Oedipal implications of the story have been thoroughly discussed. See Goldman 1978, pp. 348-349. 46 Pulsalkar (1940, p. 206) while he understands the plot to be from the imagination of the poet, sees the unasepha episode as the underlying source of theme. Devadhar (1927, p. 63) on the other hand understands the Baka episode of the Mahbhrata as the probable source of the play, although he to understands it to be largely a creation of the poet. 47 MBh 145-152. The Pavas and Kunt return to the Ekacakra forest, there they dwelt in a house of a brhman. Disguised as brhmans they begged for alms. At night Kunt would divide the food into two portions, one half for herself and the four brothers and one-half for Bhma. One day, when the boys had gone out, Bhma stayed behind with

16

16

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

Kunt. From inside the house a loud wailing arose. Kunt is filled with compassion, and wants to help the family. She goes to the inner apartments where she finds the familyhusband, wife, daughter, and son filled with grief seated. The brhman, wailing, claims that it is better that they all go, rather than sacrifice one of them. He, cannot, he says sacrifice his wife, the mother of his children, and ever faithful, nor can he sacrifice his young daughter. even though some fathers might love their sons more than their daughters, he does not. He would, gladly sacrifice himself, but then how would the family survive. The wife offers herself, because she is the most expendable, and is old, and has already had the pleasures of a husband and children. Moreover, without a husband she could not protect or sustain the children. And it is not against the law for a man to have many wives, but it is against the law for a woman to have more than one husband. The daughter, hearing this, begs to be allowed to sacrifice herself. She argues that she after all will be given away. It might as well be now as later. Finally the young boy, crawling to each of them in turn, tells his parents and sister not to worry that he would with a piece of straw kill the man-eating rkasa. At this juncture, Kunt asks what the trouble is. The brhman responds that in this region a man-eating rkasa named Baka [Baksura] haunts the forest and, if sated, protects the forest and surrounding villages and lands. But the rkasa demands as his price for this protection, a cartload of rice, two buffaloes, and the one human who takes the food to him. People provided him with his food in turn. And when after many years a mans turn comes, he cannot avoid it. If one tries to escape, the rkasa kills him, his wife, and children. He tells Kunt that he and his entire family will go to the rkasa. Kunt says, not to worry, she has five sons, and one of them will bring the rkasa his food. The brhman rejects her offer, they debate the subject, and finally the brhman gives in. Kunt asks Bhma to go and he agrees. The boys come back, Yudhihira intuits that something is going on. He asks his mother what she has done, why she has forsaken her son for another; he finally accuses her of having lost her senses. She reassures him that she has not lost her senses: they have been living off the generosity of the brhman family and she feels that some compensation is in order. She also knows Bhmas strength and capabilities. Yudhihira finally agrees with her course of action. In the meantime, during the next day, Bhma takes the food and went to where the man-eating rkasa was. Bhma calls out the rkasa and in a great rage Baka comes to where Bhma is standing. When he arrived he sees Bhma eating his food. The rkasa threatens to kill him, but Bhma only laughs. The rkasa lets loose a terrifying yell and rushes Bhma, who continues to eat. The rkasa then strikes Bhma on the back with both fists. Bhma feels the blow, but he does not look at the rkasa and continues to eat. The rkasa then uproots a tree and storms Bhma. Bhma finally finishes eating and makes ready to fight. He grabbs the tree that Baka has uprooted. The battle continues. Both contestants heave huge trees at one another. Eventually Bhma wins and breaks the rkasa in half, killing him. Thereupon Bhma deposited the corpse of the demon at the city gates and returned to the brhmans home unnoticed.

17

17

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

The story is quite different. In the story of Baksura, the brhman family has only two children, the elder, but still quite young, is a daughter while younger, is a very young boy, still crawling. But, nevertheless there are strong similarities. Here, as in Bhsas tale, the family must give up one of its children to sate the hunger of a rkasa. Bhma becomes, as it were, a surrogate third child, the middle son, who is given up, here by his mother. In fact, Bhma is Kunts middle son, and she is willing to offer her son up in order to save the brhman family. Note too, that as in Bhsas play, it is the mothers command that must be obeyed and her judgment, although questioned by Bhma, never really doubted. To Madhyamas pitiful words, kasyedn priya, Ghaotkaca replies, aha prto smi [19.4], Gaapat str, in my opinion correctly, glosses the phrase as, aham . . . prtimn . . . tvayi.48 That it is Ghaotkaca that answers and not the mother or father only further intensifies the plight of the young boy. Gaapat str in his commentary clearly connects the expression of love with the gustatory urges of the rkasas, specifically Hiimb. He explains the phrase: [tvayi] manmtbhakayatm tmano gktavati .49 Madhyama has only one wish before he is taken away, and that is that he be allowed a sip of water [22.7-8]. His wish is granted, but he is cautioned to be quick. Since he tarries a bit too long, Ghaotkaca begins to fret: atikrmati maur hrakla [24.12].50 He asks the brhman to call his son [24.2-3], but the old man refuses [ atirkasa khalu te vacanam24.4]. Ghaotkaca then asks for the name of the son, this too the old brhman refuses to provide [24.6]. But upon asking the elder son [not an accident], he is provided with the middle sons name, Madhyama (the middle one)[24.9]. Ghaotkaca then calls the young boy [24.10-11]. Bhma, also known as Madhyama, engaged in his exercises, hears the call and takes it to be for him [25]. Bhma enters. The character of Bhma as represented in the epic tradition underlies Bhsas construction of his play in a number of ways. We have already touched
48 49

I am filled with love for you. In reference to you [tvayi] who have allowed yourself to be food for my mother. 50 The time for my mothers meal is passing.

18

18

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

upon Bhma as the madhyama or middle son of Kunt, a role that is explicated and overdetermined in the story of Baka discussed above. In Bhsas play, Bhma is also a patriarchal figure, the husband of Hiimb and the father of Ghaotkaca. Bhma is, of course, associated with excessive consumption.51 He is called vkodara and his appetite is never sated, and this becomes his fatal flaw as the epic draws to a conclusion. For as Bhma, fallen to the ground, lies dying at the end of the epic, Yudhihira reminds him, atibhukta ca bhavat.52 Moreover, and not insignificantly for Bhsas play, is Bhmas history as the son of Vyu, the wind god. He is the most fierce and powerful of the Pavas, the great warrior, and slayer of rkasas (virtually all the rkasas encountered by the Pavas in the epic are slain by Bhma). Bhma is after all the one Pava brother who is most susceptible to his emotions, particularly, his anger. It is his rage at the insult carried out upon Draupad in the Sabhparvan [citation] that leads to his swearing to split the chest of Duryodhana and drink Dusanas blood.53 This association of Bhma with the consumption of blood cannot be ignored in light of his association with the rkas Hiimb, whose inherent nature is to consume human flesh and blood. Perhaps the raison d'etre for his curse can traced back to his relationship with Hiimb, a relationship that, much like the bite of the vampire, would infect him and cause him be associated with the vampire-like behavior of a rkasa.54 Bhmas emergence into the story, in the deep dark forest, with its symbolic associations to the archaic mother, now sets off an Oedipal struggle between father and son. Of course, as in the original Oedipal myth, the son is unaware that this personage who emerges onto the scene is his father. Bhma too at first is unaware that this is son, but he soon discovers the truth. The description of both characters, each of whom admires and respects the others prowess, resonates with phallic imagery. Thus in verse 26, Bhma, first seeing
51
52

Goldman 2005. You ate too much. MBh 17.2.2.25, see, too MBh 17.2.22-23. 53 MBh 2. 61.44-46. Bhsa was very familiar with this episode as one of his plays, the Urubhaga, Breaking of the thigh, has as its central action the battle between Duryodhana and Bhma In the play however, Bhma is taken away after the illegal blow, and does not drink the blood.
19

19

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

Ghaotkaca notes his leonine fangs, his thick neck, his hawk-like nose, his adamantine waist, his long and muscular arms, and compares his gait to that of a bull among elephants.55 In verse 27, Ghaotkaca, when first spying Bhma, notes his form which is like that of a lion, that it is strong and virile, his arms are long like plantain trees, and his sides are well-tapered.56 Ghaotkaca is seemingly unconsciously aware of a relationship as he ends this verse with the words: netre mamharati bandhur ivgato yam.57 The phrase bhandur iva, like, a relative, indicates subliminal recognition of or desire for such a relationship for Ghaokaca, while for the audience it reinforces the kinship. Bhma, declares himself as Madhyama (verses 28, 29), and upon being told the situation, demands that Ghaotkaca release the brhman family. Ghaotkaca refuses, citing once again his duty to his mother: the struggle now becomes one between a son and a father over control of the feminine , marked as the mother. Ghaotkaca says: na mucyate, mucyatm iti visrabdha bravti yadi me pit /
54 55

S. Goldman 2004. sihsya sihadaro madhunibhanayana snigdhagambhrakaho babhrubhr yenanso dviradapatihanur drghaviliakea / vyhor vajramadhyo gajavabhagatir lambapnsabhu suvyakta rkasjo vipulabalayuto lokavrasya putra // His face is that of a lion; he has the fangs of a lion as well; his eyes are like honey-wine; his neck smooth and thick; his eyebrows are tawny he has the nose of a hawk; his chin is like that of the lord of elephants; and his hair is long and scattered. His chest is broad, his waist is like adamantine, his gait is that of a bull among elephants, his arms are long with muscular shoulders. Clearly this one endowed with such great strength is the son of some worldly hero, yet born of a rkas,

56

sihkti kanakatlasamnabhur madhye tanur garuapakaviliptapaka / viur bhaved vikasitbujapatranetro netre mamharati bandhur ivgato yam

// He has the form of a lion his arms are like that of a golden palmyra tree, slender in waist, his sides are tapered like the wings of Garua. He might be Viu, with his eyes like full-blown lotus petals. He attracts my eyes to him as if he were a relative. 57 He attracts my eyes to him as if he were a relative.

20

20

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

na mucyate tath hy ea ghto mtur jay //3658 Bhmasena then responds: (tmagatam) katham maur jeti aho guruuru khalu aya tapasv [36.1-2]59 mt kila mansym daivatn ca daivatam / mtur j purasktya vayam etm da gat //[37]60 Bhmas words are explicitly intended to refer to Hiimb and her role as mother to Ghaokaca. But, their import in the construction of the larger Pava world, that is with reference to Kunt, is not lost on the audience, nor is the conflict arising from situating ones mother in a position of divinity and yet being required to do an action that is considered to transgress the boundaries of proper behavior.61 The identification of the mother as divinity in contrast to her role as demon allows expression of a counter-phobic reaction. For, as Winokur reminds us, the phantasmic mother resides in no other mother than our own. [Dadouns] argument remains a paradigmatic psychoanalytic account, in the sense that the source of anxiety remains with the mother, not the commodity or the racial other.62 The mother, although absent in the play, is real, as are the conflicted emotions that one has towards her. Bhma then demands to know who his mother is and, discovering that the boy is none other than his son by Hiimb, offers himself as victim in lieu of the brhmans son. But Bhma refuses to go until Ghaotkaca defeats him. Now ensues a battle between the father and the son for the affection of and/ or possession the mother. Bhma attempts to make himself known to Ghaotkaca, but Ghaotkaca does not or is not willing to understand that this is his father, and forces battle upon Bhma. The battle is played out in

58

I will not release him: Even if my father in confidence asked me to release him, I would not. For he has been captured by my mothers command. 59 [To himself:] How is this? [he says] At the command of my mother? The wretched fellow is obedient to his elders [mother]. 60 Indeed, among men the mother is deity among deities. Have given precedence to the mothers command, we have arrived at this condition. 61 It is a similar inability to transgress ones mothers dictum, that led to the marriage of Draupad to all five Pdava brothers in the Mahbhrata. MBh 1.182.2. It is also Kunt whose order must be obeyed in the Baka story, even at the risk of serious danger to oneself (see footnote 47 above). 62 Winokur 2004.
21

21

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

phallic imagery. Bhmas only weapon is his right arm, which like the right thigh, can be understood to represent the phallus [verse 42]. Ghaotkaca uproots huge trees to use as weapons, much in the manner of Baka in the Mahbhrata story,63 and finally uproots the peak of a mountain. But neither the trees or the mountains, despite their phallic strength, firmness, and size, faze Bhma for even a moment, so the battle comes down to hand-to-hand combat, a combat that still carries with it strong phallic associations. Bhma, much to his own astonishment, is actually bound by the strength of Ghaotkacas arms (vryam ullaghya bhvor) [verse 42]. He breaks free. Neither can defeat the other; Ghaotkaca resorts to a magical weapon, which he has acquired though his mothers favor, so it too can be understood as phallic projection of the archaic mother. The verse uttered here by Ghaotkaca is telling as it compares Bhma, bound by this magic pa, to a very phallic, yet impotent, akradhvaja flagstaff of akra mypena baddhas tva vivao na gamiyasi / rjase rajjubhir baddha akradhvaja ivotsave //[47]64 But Bhma possessed an anti-pa mantra (mypamoka mantra), which he has acquired from none other than iva whose defining symbol is the phallus, ligam, itself. Through this magical weapon which is more powerful than the maternal weapon of Ghaotkaca, he is finally able to break his bonds (patita pa), thus gaining victory over his son while symbolically castrating him. Much as Dadoun understands that Dracula has identified with the archaic mother and attributes to her a non-existent phallus, so we can understand that Ghaotkaca has identified with his mother, whose imagined phallus, the pa, here, is rendered impotent. Thus the destruction of the pa is the destruction of the imagined archaic mother. The resolution of the story is now obvious. Bhma, finally the victor, nevertheless agrees to accompany Ghaotkaca, who has reminded him of his earlier promise, on a visit to Hiimb. Thus at the very end of the vyyoga, Hiimb enters the play. With the destruction of the imagined archaic mother, she, the actual benign mother, can safely
63 64

See footnote 47 above. Captured up by my magic-noose, helpless, you cannot move, and you will appear resplendent, like the flagpole of akra held by ropes on the festival day.

22

22

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

appear. She is no longer a non-present presence as it were, and once in the company of her husband, she is no longer in need of a human victim to consume. Moreover, she is no longer functions as a manifestation of the imagined archaic phallic mother, but of the real and present mother, and as such she is no longer a threat. Her libidinal needs sated by the presence of her husband, her gustatorial drive disappears. As if to confirm this, Bhma says: jty rkas, na samudcrea.[49.3] 65 At this juncture, Bhsa reintroduces the word bho into his play. The word returns to haunt us, calling us, as it were, back into the real world. Following Bhmas comment about Hiimbs behavior, Hiimba identifies Bhma as Ghaotkacas father (ummatta! abhivdehi pidara[49.4]). This identification, as it were, signals the reintegration of the nuclear family, thereby marking the beginning of the end of the story. Ghaotkaca responds with, bhos tta [49.6], the very same phrase that begins our descent at the opening of the play, a phrase that marks Ghaokaca as being similar to the young brhman boys, that is situated within the nuclear family, at the opening of the play, Once reunited with his father, or to put it another way subordinated to the patriarchal power of the father, Ghaotkaca, too, is no longer a threat. He begs his fathers forgiveness, (putracpala kantum arhasi [50.1-2]), and is blessed by both his father and the old brhman [50.3-5; 50.10] The brhman praises Bhma, with the words, bho vkodara! rakitam asmatkula svakulam uddhta ca [50.12].66 The word bho! appears for the last time, perhaps a signal that the play is drawing to a conclusion. In addition Bhsas use here of the epithet vkodara, wolf-belly, is probably significant as it alludes to Bhmas rkasa-like voraciousness, which resonates in all likelihood humorously with the audience given the plot of the play. The reference to his saving his family can be understood as the reconstitution of the culturally normative, patriarchal nuclear family, which had been threatened by Bhmas absence. Bhsas vyyoga is more that a story of horror and valor, more than a mere entertaining interlude. Rather the play serves as a metaphor of the destructive nature of the uncontrolled phallic woman, whose power, even in her absence, is a source of horror. With the reintegration of the nuclear
65 66

She is a rkas by birth, but not by behavior. O wolf-belly, you have protected our family and saved your own!

23

23

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

family achieved the mothers demonic libidinal needs controlled, the sons oedipal drives overpowered, and the triumph of the patriarchy assuredthe play can come to a happy conclusion.

Bibliography of Works Cited Aitareya Brhmaa with Syaas Commentary. (1931). Ed. Knthastri ge. nandrama Sanskrit Series No. 32, Poona: nandrama Press. g-Veda Aitareya-Brhmaa. Titus On the basis of the edition by Th. Aufrecht, Das Aitareya Brhmaa. Mit Auszgen aus dem Commentare von Syacarya and anderen Beilagen. Bonn 897. http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etcs/ ind/aind/ved/rv/ab/ab.htm Apte, V. S. (1957-1959). The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary. 3 vols. Poona: Prasad Prakashan. Barnett, L.D. (1924). Abhasa-Bhasa BSOS vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 519-522 Barnett, L.D. (1920).The Matta Vilsa and Bhsa BSOS vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 35-38. Bhgavatapuram. (1983). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. With the commentary Bhvrthabodhin of Srdhara Svmin. Reprint 1988. Bhgavatapuram. (1965). Nadiyad: Ka akar str et al. With thirteen commentaries. Edited by Ka akar str. Bhsanakacakram: Plays Ascribed to Bhsa. (1937 Bhsanakacakram: Plays Ascribed to Bhsa. (1937). Edited by C. R. Devadhar. Reprint Poona: Oriental Book Agency, 1962. Bhide, H.B. (1916), The Svapna Vasavadatta of Bhasa edited with Introduction, Notes, [and] with Sanskrit Commentary. Bhavnagar. Creed, Barbara. (1993.) The Monstrous-Feminine: Film, Feminism, Psychoanalysis. London and New York: Routledge. The Daarpaka of Dhanajaya. (1897). Bombay: Nirayasgar Press. With the commentary of Dhanika. Edited by Knth Purang Parab.

24

24

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

Dadoun, Roger. (1987). Fetishism in the Horror Film. Fantasy Cinema. Ed. James Donald. London: British Film Institute, 1989. Ethnic Notions. Dir. and prod. Marlon Riggs. De, S.K. (1941). The Dramas Ascribed to Bhasa. Indian Historical Quarterly, vol. 15, pp. 415-429. Devadhar, C.R. (1927). Plays Ascribed to Bhasa: Their Authenticity and Merits. Gaapati str, T. (ed.) (1912). Works [of Bhsa]. Trivandrum Sanskrit series; no. 15-17, 20-22, 26, 39, 42. Trivandrum: Travancore Govt. Press. Gaapati str, T. (ed.) (1917). The Madhyamavyyoga of Bhsa with the commentary of Pait T. Gaapati str. Edited and published by the commentator. Trivandrum: Sridhara Printing House. Gerow, Edwin. (1985). Bhsas rubhaga and Indian Poetics JAOS 105/3, p. 405412. Goldman, Robert P., and Sally Sutherland Goldman. (1996). The Rmyaa of Vlmki: An Epic of Ancient India. Volume V, Sundaraka: Introduction, Translation, and Annotation. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Goldman, Robert P. (2000). Rvaas Kitchen: A Testimony of Desire and the Other in Questioning Rmyaas, Paula Richman, ed. Delhi: Oxford University Press and Berkeley. University of California Press, pp. 105-116; 374-376. Goldman, Robert P. (1986). The Serpent and the Rope on Stage: Popular Literary and Philosophical Representations of Reality in Traditional India. Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 14, pp. 349-69. Goldman, Robert P. (1978). Fathers, Sons, and Gurus: Oedipal Conflict in the Sanskrit Epics. Journal of Indian Philosophy. Vol.6, pp. 325-92. Goldman, Sally J. Sutherland (1991). The Bad Seed: Senior Wives and Elder Sons, in Bridging Worlds: Studies on Women in South Asia. Edited by S. J. Sutherland. Berkeley: Centers for South and Southeast Asia Studies, U. C. Berkeley, pp. 24-52. Goldman, Sally J. Sutherland (1996). Soul Food: Eating, Conception, and Gender in the Literature of Premodern India, A paper delivered at Annual Meeting of the Association of Asian Studies, Honolulu, Hawaii, April 1996 a revised version was presented at the Annual Conference on South Asia. Madison, Wisconsin, October 1996. Goldman, Sally J. Sutherland. (2003). Re-siting St: Gender and Narrative in Vlmki's Sundaraka. Pura XLV. No. 2, July 2003, pp. 115-135.

25

25

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

Goldman, Sally J. Sutherland. (2004). Whos For Dinner? : Cannibalistic Urges in the Mahbhrata. A Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Oriental Society, San Diego. March 2004. Kale, M.R. (1929). Introduction to Svapnavsavadattam. Bombay: Booksellers Pub. Co., pp. ix-xxxviii. Keith, A.B. (1924). The Sanskrit Drama. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Kristeva, Julia. (1982). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. Translated by Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia University Press. Mabhbhrata: Critical Edition. (1933-1970). 24 volumes. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. With Harivaa. Critically edited by V. S. Sukthankar et. al. Mahbhratam. (1933). With the Bharata Bhawadeepa by Nlakaha. Edited by Pandit Ramachandrashastri Kingawadekar. Poona: Shankar Narahar Joshi Chitrashala Press. Manusmti. (1946). 10th ed. Bombay Nirayasgar Press with the commentary Manavarthamuktval of Kullka. Edited by N. R. Archarya. Masson, J.M. (1969). A Note on the Sources of Bhsas (?) Avimraka. Journal of the Oriental Institute of the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, vol. XIX, pp. 60-74. Masson, J. L., and D. D. Kosambi. (1970). Avimraka (Loves Enchanted World). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Monier-Williams, Monier. (1899). A Sanskrit-English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reprint 1964. (MW) Natyasastra of Bharatamuni. (1971). Varanasi: Banaras Hindu University. With the commentary (Abhinavabharati) of Abhinava Guptacharya. Edited with introduction and commentaries Madhusudani and Balakreeda by Madhusudan Shastri. Pisharoti, A. Krishna and K. Rama Pisharoit. (1923). Bhsas WorksAre They Genuine? BSOS vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 107-117 Pollock, Sheldon I. (1991). The Rmyaa of Vlmki: An Epic of Ancient India. Volume III, Arayaka: The Forest. Introduction, Translation, and Annotation.. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Pulsalker, A.D. (1940). Bhasa, A Study. With a foreword by A. Berriedale Keith. Reprint. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal,1968.

26

26

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

Rmyaa of Vlmki. (1930). 4th rev. ed. Bombay: Nirayasgar Press. With the commentary (Tilaka) of Rma. Edited by Wsudeva Laxma str Pakar. Rmyan of Vlmki. (1914-1920). 7 vols. Bombay: Gujarati Printing Press. With three commentaries called Tilaka, Shiromani, and Bhooshana. Edited by Shastri Shrinivas Katti Mudholakar. Richmond , Farley and Yasmin Richmond. (1985) The Multiple Dimensions of Time and Space in Kiyam, the Sanskrit Theatre of Kerala. Asian Theatre Journal, 2, no. 1, pp. 50-60. Richmond, Farley. (1989). The Bhasa Festival, Trivandrum India Asian Theater Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1 (Spring 1989), pp. 68-76 Sahityadarpaam of Yogevaradatta arma Paraarah Vivanatha Kavirja. Vivti, Vijapriy, Kusumapratim, Lakm, Vivtipurtih, Locanam, Vimal, Rucir. Reprint: Dilli: Naga Pablisarsa, 1999. Sukthankar, V.S. (1920). Studies in Bhsa JAOS, Vol. 40, pp. 248-259. Sukthankar, V.S. (1921). Studies in Bhsa. II. On the Versification of the Metrical Portions of the Dramas. JAOS 41, pp. 107-130. Sukthankar, V.S. (1922). Studies in Bhsa. III. On the Relationship between the Cudatta and Mcchakaika. JAOS 42, pp. 59-74. Sukthankar, V.S. (1923a). Studies in Bhsa. IV. A Concordance of the Dramas. ABORI 4., pp. 167-187. Sukthankar, V.S. (1921-1923). Studies in Bhsa. V. A Bibliographical Note. JBBRAS 264, pp. 167-187. Sukthankar, V.S. (1925). The Bhsa Riddle: A Proposed Solution. JBBRAS N. B., pp. 126-143. Sutherland, Sally J. (see Goldman, Sally J. Sutherland). (1991) The Bad Seed: Senior Wives and Elder Sons, in Bridging Worlds: Studies on Women in South Asia. Edited by S. J. Sutherland. Berkeley: Centers for South and Southeast Asia Studies, U. C. Berkeley, pp. 24-52, 1991. Reprinted by Delhi: Svapnavsavadatta of Bhasa. (1929) Edited with an exhaustive introduction, a Sanskrit commentary, a literal English translation, critical and copious notes, and useful appendices, Edited by by M. R. Kale. Bombay: Booksellers Pub. Co.

27

27

Monstrous Feminine Sutherland Goldman

Tieken, H.J.H. (1993). The So-called Trivandrum Plays Attributed to Bhasa, Wiener Zeitschrift fr die Kunde Sdasiens Band 37, 5-44. Tieken, H.J.H. (1997). Three Men in a Row (Studies in the Trivandrum Plays II). Wiener Zeitschrift fr die Kunde Sdasiens, 41, pp. 17-52. Wetensch. Tieken, H.J.H. (2000). On the Use of Rasa in Studies of Sanskrit Drama. Indo Iranian Journal, 43, pp. 115-138. Wetensch. Tieken, H.J.H. (2001). The purvaranga, the prastavana, and the sthapaka. Wiener Zeitschrift fr die Kunde Sdasiens, XLV, pp. 91-124. Wetensch. Unni, N.P. (1978). Bhsa Afresh: New Problems in Bhsa Plays. Trivandrum : College Book House. Reprint: Delhi : Nag Publishers, 1999. The Vlmki Rmyaa: Critical Edition. (1960-1975). 7 vols. Baroda: Oriental Institute. General editors: G. H. Bhatt and U. P. Shah. Winokur, Mark. (2004). Technologies of Race: Special Effects, Fetish, Film, and the Fifteenth Century. Genders, Issue 40, 2004. http:// www.genders.org/g40/g40_winokur.html . Winternitz, M. (1940) Bhsa: What Do We Really Know of Him and his Work? M. Winternitz. In Woolner Commemoration Volume. Edited by Mohammad Shafi, Lahore: Mehar Chand Lachman Das, pp. 297-308.

28

28