The Recognition of Sakuntala

Dusyanta’s decision to send Madhavya to the city in his stead highlights the play’s central conflict, that between Duty (Dharma) Versus Love (Kama). Dusyanta sums up this conflict in his own words: “My mind divides between these two / Like a river when a rock displaces / Its seamless flow” (30).

The conflict between his love for Sakuntala and his filial duty is amplified in the conflict between Dusyanta’s private and public lives. As a king, Dusyanta’s public life must take precedence over his private desires; in briefly forgetting his people as Madhavya alleges, Dusyanta commits his second lapse. Since he has fallen short of dharma on two counts—as a son and as a king—the plot foreshadows Dusyanta will have to pay a price. The schema of dharma versus kama is repeated in Sakuntala’s desire for Dusyanta: While it is lawful for Sakuntala, who is of royal descent, to marry in secret without the consent of her guardians, it is still suggested that she breaches her filial duty in not seeking Kanva’s counsel. Thus, the plot sets up both Dusyanta and Sakuntala for a period of grief, during which they must make up for their violation of dharma.

Madhavya’s character introduces humor into the play, much in the manner of the Shakespearean fool. When Dusyanta tells Madhavya of Sakuntala’s bashfulness, the Vidusaka cheekily replies: “Perhaps you expected her to jump into your lap the moment she clapped eyes on you?” (26). While bringing in humor, Madhavya also serves to raise pertinent issues about kingship and rule. He advises Dusyanta against the hunt, which seems to be taking forever, as well as stalling the hunt to pursue his passion. He admonishes Dusyanta that Dusyanta’s neglect of his body (his people) has caused Madhavya to physically suffer. Madhavya’s speech here is another example of the rich wordplay in the text. The instance when Dusyanta dismisses his own confession as fantasy before Madhavya is an example of the play’s deft use of foreshadowing and plotting. Since Dusyanta’s denial of his love for Sakuntala is introduced as a plot point, it is sure to play an important role in later proceedings.

Act III constitutes the peak of the erotic and romantic moods in the play. Both Dusyanta and Sakuntala are shown suffering in (yet) unrequited love in their own ways. While Sakuntala has been struck by heatstroke, a metaphor for her burning up with the fever of love, Dusyanta is left to rave in solitude. The plot must reward the lovers for their penance and suffering with a consummation of love, and this act sets up the scene for the consummation. Sakuntala displays her agency when she begins to confess her love for Dusyanta, being as bold as to write him a letter and make the first move. Interestingly, just as Sakuntala is composing her love song (the only instance in the play she is given a song, instead of dialogue), Dusyanta bursts out of his hiding place, confessing his love for her. This illustrates that though Sakuntala has individual agency, Dusyanta, being a man and a king, must supersede her in action.

The conversation between Dusyanta and Sakuntala pits them as equals, as does Sakuntala’s despair when parting from Dusyanta. She says in an aside that she regrets her bashfulness when “what [she] most desired was within [her] grasp” (41). Sakuntala’s declaration foreshadows her secret marriage to Dusyanta, which occurs offstage in the time period between Acts III and IV. Although Dusyanta does woo Sakuntala with his words and declaration of love, it is implied that Sakuntala’s consent to the marriage is free and empowered. The tension between Sakuntala’s acts of agency and her subsequent poor treatment by Dusyanta and others shows a society in flux where its attitudes toward women were concerned.

Another key development which illustrates the structure of the play’s society is the question of Sakuntala’s parentage. While in contemporary portrayals of romance, love is often seen as disruptive, transgressing the boundaries of class, social status, and gender, in classical Sanskrit theatre one must balance the transgressive element of love with one’s dharmic duty. Thus, Sakuntala and Dusyanta are a right match because of Sakuntala’s biological parentage. The Recognition of Sakuntala, being a comedy with a happy resolution on all fronts, needs to preserve the status quo. This is analogous to Shakespearean drama, where happy couples are usually from similar social strata. In fact, couples who transgress the boundaries of social order, such as Romeo and Juliet, usually have a tragic ending. The importance given to Sakuntala’s parentage also indicates the central role of caste in late ancient Indian society.

Another important theme and juxtaposition that becomes clearer in Acts II and III is the juxtaposition between Nature’s Purity Versus Urban Corruption, reflected in the different lifestyles of the royals and the ascetics. The hermitage is presented as an uncorrupted sanctuary, with Shakuntala and her friends embodying the raw beauty of nature. Characters—especially Dusyanta—often remark on how the unadorned Sakuntala is far more attractive than the painted women of the city. The rituals of the ascetics too are described as beautiful and pure, their lifestyle extolled. When Madhavya suggests to Dusyanta that he enter the ashram on the pretext of seeking tax, Dusyanta chides him: “Fool! The tax these ascetics pay is of quite another kind, and much more valuable than mountains of pearls” (27, emphasis added). While the wild and the pastoral is exalted in place of the material and the urban, the plot acknowledges that one cannot escape worldly duties. Even Sakuntala, who is identified with nature, must step out into the larger world and fulfil her duty of being a queen, a wife, and a mother.