Language and Gender in Recognition of Sakuntala and the Mahabharata

Kalidasa is considered one of the greatest writers if not the best writer India has ever produced. He was married to Vidyotma which is explained in the story  ‘Great Indian Poet: Marriage of Kalidasa and Vidyotma’ where he gained wisdom from a goddess after being insulted by his wife and began writing poetry in Sanskrit which is also the primary liturgical language of Hinduism. This is believed to be how he began his rise in writing and gained knowledge of how to speak in Sanskrit. His play ‘Recognition of Sakuntala’ is considered one of India’s greatest Hindu mythology of all time and he got his inspiration for this play from the original text called  ‘Sakuntala in the Mahabharata’. Both plays have some similarities but are quite different such as in plot format, language and gender role. Kalidasa’s play and the Mahabharata were written in separate times therefore depicting a significant difference in inequality when it comes to language and gender in each piece of work.

As mentioned previously Kalidasa got his inspiration for his play ‘The Recognition of Sakuntala’ most commonly referred to as ‘Sakuntala’ from the original text called ‘Sakuntala in the Mahabharata.’ One of the most obvious differences  is that in Kalidasa’s version he included an explanation for Dusyanta’s rejection by adding a curse and the ring which would be the recognition device that would bring forth his memory while in the Mahabharata it doesn’t include any of this, however the main difference is in gender role and language. In Sakuntala there is a difference in how the characters speak depending on class and gender. Sanskrit is spoken by high-caste, educated males such as the king Dusyanta and Sakuntala’s father, Kanva and this is because at the time Sanskrit was only spoken by people of high social status. Even the high-grade officials of the king, brahmins and male ascetics can speak Sanskrit and the other language that they speak is Pakrit which is then spoken by people of the lower classes. Despite his social status there was an instance where Vidusaka, the king’s best friend was speaking in Pakrit mostly for comic effect but never as his primary language. When it comes to females of this time period, they have to be well-educated such as ascetics and courtesans to speak in Sanskrit. An example of this is stated in Sakuntala page xxi  when Priyamvada quotes a Sanskrit verse to Anasuya and she understands it perfectly .

Another historical aspect of Kalidasa’s play is the significance when it comes to gender role. It is obvious that men speak more than women in this play and this is because it is believed that men were superior. So, the use of figures of speech such as simile, metaphors and hyperbole that were specifically meant to create an emotional effect were written from a male point of view while women were presented or seen as the objects of a man’s desire (Kalidasa, Recognition of Sakuntala,2008). This was one of the reasons why the women in this play didn’t speak as much as the men and when they did it was to provide emphasis to a prevailing emotion which will then be savored by a male character ( Kalidasa, Recognition of Sakuntala,2008). In Mahabharata, it is quite different  because Sakuntala dominated most of the dialogue but in Kalidasa’s version she didn’t speak no Sanskrit verse instead it was the king.

An example of language and gender in Kalidasa’s play is when king Dusyanta discovers his son and saw Sakuntala for the first time again and asking her for forgiveness. He said “Let the pain of my rejection pass from your heart. I was deluded, blocked by the dark from my own good fortune, blind as the man who tore at his neck, believing his garland a snake.” As you can see he is speaking in a very poetic way which was the norm for people of upper class and Sakuntala’s response was passive providing emphasis on the already set tone and mood, but in the Mahabharta , none of this was said because he already knew that the little boy was his son but even so no poetic verse was spoken by either of them. In the Mahabharata as mentioned previously, Sakuntala spoke the most especially when she was explaining how she became the daughter of Kanva and scolding him for disowning her and their child therefore the gender roles were switched a little compared to Kalidasa’s. She held a dominant positions meaning instead of just providing emphasis to what Dusyanta was saying she held her own opinion and thoughts. In Kalidasa’s  play, Sakuntala never scold him for not remembering who she is and for not claiming  their child, all she did was cry then disappeared hence you can see the difference in gender role.

In conclusion, language and gender were important aspects of this play because it identified someone’s class and it was specific to a particular gender. The fact that only certain people can speak a certain language showed that  classism was very prominent and present at the time and gender inequality was very much present as well. The men dominated most of the dialogues  especially king Dusyanta and was treated with high levels of respect but this wasn’t just because  he was king but simply because he is a man. The men held a higher position than women and women were to respect them and play their role. In the Mahabharata, Sakuntala states that “the role of women is to bear children to the man that enters her” and this was practiced in both plays but Sakuntala in the Mahabharta version was still more aggressive instead of passive. Both plays have different historical backgrounds and this goes to show that every author inputs their own lifestyle and beliefs into their own work.