RĀGA, RASA AND PERSIAN MAQĀM IN SANSKRIT TEXTS : A MUSICOLOGICAL STUDY

RĀGA, RASA AND PERSIAN MAQĀM IN SANSKRIT TEXTS : A MUSICOLOGICALSTUDY

Bisakha Goswami,

Assistant Professor in Musicology,

Rabindra Bharati University, Kolkata.

Textual tradition of Indian musicology exhibits an elaborate tradition of intermingling particularly among Indian andcentral Asian music during 12th-16th century. Assimilating the melodic structures of Indian rāgas and Persianmaqāms were in frequent practice in medieval India. Few important Sanskrit texts composed in that period ofcultural assimilation exhibit the names of twelve particular maqāms in a very interesting way. Some Sanskrit textsalso provide descriptions of Persian maqāms along with their names. Among these texts, names of Rāgavibodha ofSomnātha, Rāgamanjarī of Pundarik Vitthala and Sangita-Sāra of Mādhava Vidyāranya are mentionable. Thecontent of Rāgavibodha, lucidly shows that the author Somnātha mentioned the names of eleven Persian musicalmodes while describing Indian rāgas, probably, following the earlirer musicologist Pundarika Vitthala’senumeration of fifteen Persian modes at the end of his text Rāgamanjarī. Seven out of eleven maqāmat mentionedby Somnatha are also available in the later works. These modes are namely – Irākha, Huseni, Musali, Vakhāreja,Hijeja, Puśka (= Muśaka) and Sarapardā. However, Sanskrit musicological texts of medieval India stand as avaluable documentation of a good number of evidences supporting the cultural blending between India and Persia.The present paper is a new attempt to highlight this finer history of acculturation by tracing out the existence ofPersian maqāms in Sanskrit texts in the domain of Indian musicology.

The traditions of music and allied arts are undoubtedly rich in Asian countries including India.Musical genres throughout the country are extremely diverse, reflecting the rich multi-culturedblend. This extensive diversity in cultural aspects is inevitably a result of assimilation ofheterogeneous human population. Among these various population groups, Muslim invadersfrom central Asian countries occupied a major part particularly in medieval history. Almostevery aspect of India’s existence including cultural, literary, political and religious past andpresent practices bear strong evidences of such amalgamation. Musical field is not an exceptionto this fact. Eventually, the trend of development of Indian music took its own unique shape.

Before entering into the evidences connecting to the textual records of music, a brief historicalobservation on the background responsible for the Indo-Persian cultural amalgamation isinevitable. Along with this a brief overview of Indian rāga melodies and its Persian counterparts(maqāmat) are also considered as a relevant area for overall understanding of the subject.

The origin of Indian rāga music was traced back to Gāndharva period (after the emergence ofChrist) in Indian. Ancient manuscripts dealt with music stands as evidences of the origin ofrāgas in India. Ancient treaties like Nātyaśāstra of Bharata, Bṛhaddeśī of Matanga,Saṃgītāratnākara of Sarangadeva, Saṃgītasamayasāra of Parśvadeva provide significant

information on the origin of rāga music side by side illustrating the aesthetic conceptionconnected to these rāgas. Later the rāgas were recognized by the association of aesthetic essenceor rasa theory and gradually various alamkāras applied to them. Later on dhyāna-rupas or visualimageries of rāga came into existence as an essential component of aesthetic representation ofrāgas.

Before the arrival of Christ there were two distinct traditions in the field of creative andperforming arts in India. The tradition of dance-drama and lyrical-drama was built by thefollowers of Bharata. On the other hand, the tradition of music and instrumental rendering wasbuilt by the followers of Nārada. Bharata’s followers used various jātis as melodies in theirdrama-songs. jāti was nothing but the staccato form of simple melodic structure based on theancient svara grāma-murchanā. Ancient gāndharva tālas and rhythmic systems (consisting offour regional varieties – Māgadhi, Ardha-Māgadhi, Sambhābitā and Pritthulā) had a major rolein the Performance of Jātis.1 The followers of Nārada tradition created grāma-rāga by classifyingthe regional melodies on the basis of svara-grāma-murchanās. These modified regional melodieswere called as deśī rāga or grāma rāga as they were practiced in ancient gāndharva svaragrāma or in ancient musical scales of India following the ten particular characteristic features ofgāndharva abhijāta music. The ten characteristic features of gāndharva abhijāta musicmentioned above are as follows – amśa, graha, nyāsa, tāra, mandra, alpatva, bahutva,apanyāsa, sadavatta and ouduvatta. These ten features were compulsorily followed duringperformance of gāndharva avijāta music, whether it is jāti gāna or rāga gitī. For this reason,we find these ten particular features in ancient musical texts prescribed for both the jāti gāna andrāga gitī. Scholars are in opinion that, later on Matanga, Śārangadeva and other followers ofBharata had a misconception that ‘rāga’ music was originated from ‘jāti’.2

Let’s see how the texts define the melodic structure ‘rāga’. Bṛhaddeśī of Matanga (5th-7th centuryA.D.) is providing a detailed discussion on rāga for the first time along with two specificdefinitions. Two specifically separate definitions are given here to illustrate two different groupsof rāgas.

The first definition means that, if the people of ‘satcitta’ class (trained in gāndharva music) aresatisfied by the specific application of svaras and varnas or the variation of sound production,then it is considered as rāga.3

Whereas, the second verse says, if certain specific melodies ornamented with svaras and varnasare able to entertain the general mass, then also the scholars call them ‘rāga’. Etymologically theword ‘rāga’ originated from ‘rang’ conjugation in Sanskrit, which means to amuse.4

While concentrating on two very significant words – ‘satcitta’ and ‘janacitta’ it is seen that,Matanga means ‘satcitta’ to a group of scholarly musicians who are highly knowledgeable in thefield of science of music as well as critical and experimental application of music. Hence therāga preferable to them should undoubtedly be the gāndharva or mārga rāga.

On the contrary, the rāgas that amuse the untrained common mass should obviously be the deśīrāgas originated from various regional tunes. This fact surely indicates that deśī rāgas began tooriginate long before the arrival of Matanga (5th-7th century A.D.).

Scholars think, due to the emergence of Buddhist religion, anti-Hindu, anti-Veda, anti-Brāhmanaas well as anti-Sanskrit atmospheres were dominated in India till the 3rd century A.D. Inconsequence, the gāndharva music, composed in Sanskrit language following the Vedictradition and transmitted by the Brāhmana class, rapidly started to extinct. Buddhist emperorshave given importance to various regional music and art forms as a substitute of gāndharvaculture. Eventually, desī or regional tunes (or dhuna), lyrics or padas, written in regionallanguages applying various regional rhythms or deśī tālas gradually started to emerge aselements of avijāta-deśī or mārga-deśī adopting the rigid systems of gāndharva musical textsshortly after the emergence of Christ. Although, these deśī rāgas adopted the set of technicalterminologies of gāndharva music theoretically, it was considerably different from gāndharvamusic in practice. gāndharva grāma rāgas were completely unchanged irrespective of time andplace as they were scientifically controlled by musical acoustics, science of language and scienceof rhythm.5 On the contrary the images of deśī rāgas were always changed with the change ofregion, singer’s tradition and period. Even, the intonation systems and nature of tunes werechanged with the change of region. For this reason, the music practiced in north and south Indiahas become prominently different. Pandita Somanātha, the author of the 13th century well-known musicological text ‘Rāgavibodha’ excellently defined the characters of deśī rāgas. Hesays, deśī rāgas follow certain periods, adopt various names and forms with the change of deśaor region. The treaties also prescribe certain specific systems and rules for practicing deśarāgas.6

About the laksanas or characteristics of rāga, Matanga says, the gītas or songs having tenspecific characteristic features are considered as rāgas.7 It indicates that, rāga can only becreated through vocal music but not through instrumental rendering, no matter whether oneapplies the proper melody, specific ornate perfectly with the help of musical instrument or not.This is because, in gāndharva music, one very crucial and complicated element ‘rasa’ isattached with the rāgas. This ‘rasa’ is an element of abhinaya or acting. abhinaya or acting ismanifested only with the help of ‘bhangi’ or gesture. This bhangi is expressed with the help ofsvaras or musical notes and lyrical words. gīta or song is nothing but the manifestation of mentalemotions with the help of melody, rhythm and lyrical language. The performers manifest theseemotions with the help of physical gestures where language is absent.

In the first evolutionary stage of rāga-rāginī classification the emergence of grāma rāga is seen.Then came the bhāsā rāga and these were followed by deśī rāga. While gāndharvaMusicologists were creating various bhāsā rāgas by applying ten specific laksanas on variousregional popular tunes then the bhāsā rāgas having the same name exhibited different natures.

The culture of beauty in art and music as well as the study of aesthetics started very early inIndian subcontinent. The Indian rhetoric’s, i.e. the alamkāra sastras are originated in ancienttimes. rasa theory or the theory of the nine states of human sentiments with their numerousvariations as introduced by Bharata Muni his text Nātyaśāstra . Eventually those eight particulardramatic sentiments (rasas) were also applicable to music. Those eight specific rasas were –sringāra (rhetoric), hāsya (comic), karuna (sympathetic), vira (heroic), raudra (luminous),bhayānaka(horrible), vibhatsa (ugly) and adbhuta (peculiar).8

These emotional sentiments were again said to be originated centering round eight types of stablemental states, like – rati, hāsa, soka, krodha, bhaya, jugupsā, utsāha and vismaya. LaterAbhinava Gupta recognized the existence of śanta rasa (calmness) along with the previous eightrasas in his commentary Abhinava Bhāratī. This sānta rasa is said to have derived out of bhaktior devotion. On the other hand, during 5th-7th century Matanga Muni mentioned the termranjakatva or the colourfulness for the aesthetics of the deliberation of rāga in his significantwork Brihaddeśī. We defined the rāga as ‘ranjayati iti rāga’, means, which entertains us that isrāga.’ Hence this ranjakatva is qualified, further ‘ranjakava’ created via medium of particularsvara. Composition which is created and decorated with the help of particular ‘svara varnas’ isrāga. Therefore, rāga is the supreme state (avastha) in Indian music. Pleasures are derived fromthese rāgas. When one listens to them one feels ānanda or enjoyment. And this ānanda means‘rasa-nispatti’ (creation of rasa or various emotional sentiments). But this rasa-nispatti in rāgais simply not connected with the rasa-bhava theory of Indian fine arts. According to this rasa-bhava theory, not all the eight rasas (prescribed by Bharata Muni for dramatic performance) arecoming out of musical sound.9 However, in the beginning of medieval period dramaticperformances and musical performances gradually started to be separated. With the emergenceof medieval court music in northern India the whole atmosphere of ancient musical activities haschanged making a new era in the field of performance. In this critical cultural juncture, theprocess of applying nine specific rasas in music took a modified shape.

One unique feature of culturing Indian rāga-rāginis, while appreciating this aesthetic value, is toimaging their visual images. During medieval times, scholars, musicians and artists tried toimagine various suitable images of almost each and every rāga-rāginī s on the basis of theiravailable tonal and melodic forms. In this gradual process the melodies acquiredunprecedentedly new existence which is called as – ‘rasasatta’ according to the aestheticterminology of India.10 These transformation of audible melodic forms into various imaginaryverses and later on into pictorial forms are not merely created by the sweet will of the artists but

the scholars as well as text writers prescribed certain specific way to make these images. Theypreviously made many meditating-verses (or dhyāna-sloka) developing the imaginary picture ofrāgas during meditation. In these pictures rāga-rāginī s are sometimes seen associated withvarious Indian Gods and Goddesses, sometimes they are representing the features of variousseasons and so on. This dhyāna-sloka system first introduced in the text ‘Rāgavibodha’ ofSomanatha (approx. 1609 A.D.), but, most probably this process of visualization of the featuresand images ofrRāga-rāginī s started long before compiling the Rāgavibodha. About these rāga-images or rupa of rāga-rāginī s the author Somnatha says –

Uktam rupamānekam tattat rāgasya nādamayamebam.

Atha devatāmayamiha kramatah kathāye tadaikaikam.

Susvara-varna-visesam rupam rāgasya bodhakam dvedha.

Nādatmam devamayam tat kramatohanekamekānca.11

But, long before the Somanatha, Matanga illustrated rāga-rāginī s in Bṛhaddeśī in such a waywhich draw the scholar’s attention as the initial form of dhyāna-sloka. The description ofBangali rāginī can be exhibited here as an interesting example. rāginī Bangali is combinedwith dhaivata as the starting and concluding notes, complete, delightful, having concert betweendhaivata-nisāda and sadja-gāndhāra, born of Bangala Deśa, Bangali has a divine form. Thisbhāsā rāga is full of rasa and is also dear to the deity. The remake ‘divyarupinī’ or divinegesture of the rāga indicates the initial stages of the development of aesthetic imagery of Indianrāgas. This rudimentary string of imagination later resulted in a distinct stream of aestheticconception, i.e. dhyāna sloka of rāga-rāginī s.12

‘Rupa’ (images) of the rāgas can be considered to something which is created specifically withthe help of melodic notes and it appears luster. These images are of two types – nādamaya(tonal) and devadehamaya (in the form of Gods and Goddess). The disposition of nādamayarupa of a particular rāga manifests the audible or tonal forms whereas, the devamaya rupaconstructs the visual images of certain specific Gods or Goddess who are suppose to be theauthority of those rāgas. The nādamaya rupa helps to imagine the proper images of specificauthority (Gods or Goddess) through tonal and melodic rendering.

The ancient scholars have established their own opinion regarding the meaningful applications ofvarious rasas in rendering rāgas. The example of Varati rāga can be exhibited in this respect.

In Saṃgītāratnākara , Sarangadeva says, Varati rāga is suited for applying sringāra rasa. It hasdhaivata as amśa svara, sadja as graha and nyāsa svara, sadja as mandra and dhaivata tāra.13

About Takka rāga the author said, it is dear to the lord Siva. It is originated fromsadjamadhyamādhaivati jāti and sung during rainy season, at the end of the day, applying vira,raudra, adbhuta and uddhavira rasa.14

About Hindola rāga the author said, it is dear to Madanadeva. It is originated from svara jāti andsuitable to sing in vira, raudra and adbhuta rasa.15

Sarangadeva has given a small description of deśī rāga by saying that, rāga Deśī is originatedfrom revagupta jāti and suitable for singing in karuna rasa.16

Whenever each rāga or rāginī is closely scrutinized in the light of sāhitya or literature (i.e.principles of rhetorical emotions) is found by its best effects only when it is made to express thefeeling for which it is intended. For instance, the rāginī Bhairavī is meant for the expression ofsentiments of general peace or devotion and piety. Feelings of love, grief and fear are repugnantto it. Pieces that indicate feelings of peace and devotion, ought therefore to be sung in it and notpieces that cover a lover’s plaint during separation from his sweet-heart or that pertain to feelingsof sensual passions, worldly enjoyment, anger or fear. The present system takes no account ofthis essentially important factor. Subjects fundamentally opposed to or incompatible with thespirit or tendencies of the rāgas or rāginī s trust upon them, praising their intrinsic beauty andoutraging their sacred dignity.

The 16th century text Samgita Dāmodara of Subhankara is also significant for the present studyas it has an elaborate account of rāga- dhyāna rupas. The description of Mallāra says that, therāga is sober and beautiful in his gesture.17

During this discussion, few inter-related aspects should also be considered simultaneously forproper understanding of the aesthetical conception of Indian rāgas. The age old systems of rāga-rāginī classification should also be taken into account for the rendering of rāga-rasa idealism. Inancient India, the melodies were categorized into two distinct forms namely rāgas and rāginī s.Scholars used to imagine melodic families exactly like the human families. The naming of maleand female rāgas was mainly based on the pattern of rāga-names. If the melody is carrying amale name then it should be considered as a male rāga and so on. This classification was againvaries with the changing time. Musicologists of different age and place varied in the opinion ofgiving name and counting numbers of rāga-rāginī s. King Somesvara (appox.11-12th centuryA.D.) established the name of six male rāgas. These are – Sri, Vasanta, Bhairava, Pancama,Megha and Nattanārāyana. This classification system is named as Siva mata or Somesvara matain the field of rāga classification. Later in 14th century, Nārada in his Samgita Makarandaclassified the rāga-rāginī s into two different rows. In the first row he took the name of eightmale rāgas, like – Bhupāla, Bhairava, srī, Patamanjarī, Nata, Bangāla, Vasanta and Mālava.And in the second row he placed the name of five rāgas like – Srī, Pancama, Megha,Natanarayana and Bhairava. Each of these rāgas again has six rāginī s as their wives. The name

of a different set of rāga-rāginī s was associated as their off springs. Later, Hanumana, thecomposer of Hanumat Samhita classified them into six male rāgas having five rāginī s each.Those six rāgas are – Bhairava, Malavakausika, Hindola, Dipaka, Srī rāga and Megha. Duringmedieval period in north India several eminent scholars in the field of music developed variousinteresting imaginary verses or rāga-dhyāna rupa mainly based on these rāga-rāginīclassifications. These verses are mainly describing the pictorial images of rāga-rāginī s.

The dhyāna rupa of Bhairavī rāginī exhibited in the text Pancamasārasamhitā of Nārada(written in 15th century) says that, the fair chaste lady worshiping the lord Siva in a temple isBhairavī.18

A lucid account of these imaginary verses or rāga- dhyāna rupa is available in 17th Century textRāgatārangini of Locana. Some appropriate examples of rāga-dhyāna slokas can be drawn fromthis medieval text to have a clear understanding of the aesthetic conceptualization of rāgasmainly in northern India. The tonal representation of six male rāgas like – Bhairava, Kausika,Hindola, Dipaka, Srī rāga and Megha are visualized through various Sanskrit verses describingthe aesthetic imagery of those rāgas.

In the text, rāga Bhairava is described as –

jatājutatatagangā vasanasita anga bhuangama,

varada karada krtadevavarada vahanacadhijangama.

asanagajavarakhala dhavalasasibhala virajai.

The scholars described rāga Bhairava as an image of lord Siva. In this picture the Siva is havinglong hair, carrying Gangā in his head, having the bull with him as usual and decorated with themoon in his forehead.

Rāga Kausika is described as –

pitavasana sitadamana hemasama rupa manohara,

virasiromaya malagabaigahi hota bhayankara.

karaTāla kalita karala kala karavala krtadara,

vira virakrtaseva virasayan karata yuddhavara.

Rāga Kausika is described as an handsome and brave hero or warrior wearing bright yellowcloths.

Rāga Hindola is described as –

rupagarvayuta kharvaparva himadhama samanana,

gāndharva dhika sarvakala vidyakulakanaka.

natabara kalitasuvesa vimala paravata-sundara,

kundala lalita kapola lola hindola purandara.

Rāga Hindola is described as a beautiful person skillful in fine arts.

Rāga Dipaka is described as –

kundadhavala abhirama-dhama parajanka-susobhana,

sutitamen nakatae hi agahi mauna mahadhana,

ramanihuti jehi thayara tahapalika men samagama,

ratipati atura catura carugati giti mahatama.

Dipaka rāga is described as a modest Yogi, fair and sober in nature and artful in nature.

Rāga Sri is described as –

turaekandhaparahakha sakhabrsabhadika surāgana.

ehiraarunatana tejaranga suratiringata rana.

darppamantaripudarppadamana kandarppadamana duti,

vasanasonadharadhira virapallava sohatasruti.

sirirāgarada bhupatiramana nrpatirupa jagavidita ati.

Sri rāga is described as a beautiful and artistic royal person decorated wonderfully.

Rāga Megha is described as –

nilākamaladala vimalanila nilima gunasagara,

hasa kusumaruci rucira caru narivaranagara.

pita vasana rana magana jivi jivana dhanadani.

nāri nāgara cahunaura kabahun kamini vanamani.

cātaka cahata concabhari nira jason kari kaku kata.

nāda nagara manamada ghana canda hrdaye hanumanta mata.19

That means, the body of nāyaka is as beautiful as blue lotus. He is smiling in yellow cloths andcharms the young ladies. He is associated with moon and took place in everyone’s heart. PanditLocana described this male rāga as a source or creator of Sring nāyaka rara rasa.

About hāsya rasa Locana said that, it is a kind of feelings with strong permanent sentiment.

This rasa is mainly originated during dramatic acting due to various odds and peculiarities indress and behavior.20

Pandit Locana has given the example of the dhyāna-rupa of Gunakari rāginī while illustratingthe karuna rasa .He says, the body of the nāyikā is fully covered with dust. Her hairs arecovering her face. Her eyes are closing due to pain. Her attractive body and face are bendingdownwards due to deep sense of affection. She is crying for long recalling the memory of hislover. It seems the wailing of Gunkari rāginī due to the separation from Kausika rāga.21

Locana described the rupa of Bhairava’s rāginī Sindhu while describing the raudra rasa. Thenāyikā is dressed in a virulent fashion and having red eyes due to anger. She is holding a trishulain her luminous hand, wearing a red dress and garlands. This rāginī of Bhairava is looking likeGoddess Kali.22

Locana described the rupa of rāga Kausika while mentioning about Vira rasa. The aestheticimaginary of the rāga shows that, the warrior heroes were ready for the battle in yellow clothsand in glamorous bodily gestures. 23

Bhayanaka rasa is derived out from the permanent mental state bhaya or fear. The Sanskrit textsare silent about the application or creation of this rasa in rāga music.

Pandita Locana described the rupa of rāginī Suddha Sarangi (it was prevalent in Mithila region)appropriate for explaining bibhatsa rasa. An ugly picture is depicted to describe the rupa of thisrāginī . A horrible scene of eating raw meat and drinking blood from the deceased bodies isexhibited here to give an idea of that particular rasa.24

However, the texts remain silent about the presence of adbhuta (peculiarity) and Santa(calmness) rasas in rāga rendering. Still they have given a vast account of the presence of otherimportant rasas in the rendering of rāgas.

The custom of applying various alamkāras or embellishments in manifesting rāga developedsimultaneously with the rasatattva and dhyāna rupa as an essential component of aestheticrepresentation of a rāga. Through the proper applications of alamkāras or embellishments

aesthetic beauty is created during performance of rāga. These alamkasas varied in names, stylesand numbers through the ages. Mida, gamaka, murchhana, tāna and the like are mentioned asvarious alamkāras in musicological texts. But whatever be the differences the alamkāras tookan important place in aesthetic representation of rāgas in India. Matanga has explained thesignificance of alamkāra while describing the aesthetic beauty in music –

…. alamkāras abdena Mandanamuccate.

yatha katakkeyuradinalankarena nari puruse ya

manditah sobhamavahet, tatha etairalankarai prasannadyadibhiralankrta vanasriya

gitirgatrsritrnam sukhavaha bhavatiti.

That means, ornament is being spoken of by the word alamkāra. Just as a man or womanadorned with a bracelet on the forearm, middle-arm and the like, bears beauty (becomebeautiful), similarly the singing that subsists in varnas (and is) adorned by these alamkāras(known as) prasannadi and the like, becomes delightful to the performers and listeners.

The study of the aesthetic ideas of Indian rāga-rāginī s reveals that, the concept of beauty inrāga was first defined through rasatattva with the association of alamkāras . This application ofrasas and alamkāras were creating various bhāvas or emotional sentiments in audience’s mind.And later on the rasatattva was assimilated with the imaginary verses and paintings describingthe abstract images of rāgas.

In 13th century, Śārangadeva, the author of Sangītāratnākara was the first to establish thesystem of rāga classification (rāga rāginī bheda) under ten highly technical subheads namely –grāma rāga, uparRāga, rāga, bhāsā, bibhāsā, antāra bhāsā, rāgānga, bhāsānga, kriyānga andupānga rāga. In the second chapter of his treaty (that means in Rāga Vivekādhyāya)Śārangadeva exhibited few new types of mixed rāgas constructed with Indian and Persianmelodies. Sārangadeva classified the deśī rāgas under four distinct sub-heads namely – rāgānga,bhāsānga, kriyānga and upānga. Under the upānga section two types of Todī rāgas were seen,like – Chāya Todī and Turuska Todī. Besides these, four kinds of Gouda rāgas were prevalent,like – Karnāta Gouda, Desabala Gouda, Touruska Gouda and Drāvida Gouda. Thisclassification indicates that, all kinds of mixed rāgas were included in the group of deśī rāgascurved out from regional tune. The name of Touruska rāga is also mentioned as a burningexample of Persian influence. The later musicological texts also exhibit the same system whileclassifying Indo-Persian musical elements. 25

Persian cultural elements have been absorbed into the culture of Indian subcontinent and inparticular, into north India since the invasion of Muslim rulers, especially with the Delhi

Sultanate from the 13th century and later in the 16th to 19th century Mughal Empire. Persianbecame the official language then in India, as well as the language of poetry and literature.

During the reign of Sultan Ala-ud-din Khilgi ( approx. 1296-1315 A.D.) the renowned poet andmusician Amir Khusrava introduced some new melodic structure in the field of Indian rāga-rāginī s by combining some Persian melodies with existing Indian melodies. These new type ofmelodic structures got their place under the category of Sankirna rāga in the broad system ofrāga-classification in India. Eminent scholars and musicians like Amir Khusrava as well as thefollowers of Sufi systems brought a new era in Indian music by fusion. They were said to haveattempted introducing various Persian elements in Indian music. It is indeed a well-known factthat, Amir Khusrava constructed numerous mixed rāgas by a cross between Indian rāgas andPersian melodies. He is also known to have introduced the maqām idea in Indian music. Whilediscussing the mixed rāgas we should mentioned the names of twelve specific rāgas created byAmir Khusrava by mixing few Persian and Indian melodies. The names of Yaman, Firdost,Bakharej, Zilaf and Sarparda rāgas are well-known creations of Amir Khusrava. Turuska-Todiis one among these mixed rāginī s incorporated into the stock of Indian rāga-rāginī s muchbefore the arrival of Amir Khusrava. Another foreign melody named Khāmāich rāginī (which iswell-known as Khāmbāj today) was also got incorporated during ancient time. Which issurprising here is that, those new foreign melodies were accepted by the musicians and scholarsand being well placed into the broad list of Indian rāga-rāginī s in all ages. A list of musicalmanuscripts stands as witness of this acceptance. For example, Locana Pandit has incorporatedPersian melody Firdost in his text rāga-Tārangini while describing the analytical features ofvarious Indian rāga-rāginī s prevalent in his time. Analyzing the structural features of Firdost,he commented that, this rāginī bears the melodic shadow of Purvī, Gourī and Syāma rāginī s.About another foreign rāginī Ādānā, he says, this rāginī has originated with the combination ofVarātī, Bangālī and other Vibhasa rāginī s.26

In 1609 A.D. Somanatha, wrote his well known treatise Rāgavibodha. In this text heincorporated a mixed rāga namely Turuska Todī under the sub-heads of deśī rāgas particularlywhile giving an account of janaka-janya rāgas. The following verse quoted from Rāgavibodhadescribing the dhyāna rupa of Turuska Todī is proving the existence of this rāga –

‘ayatanilanicola Karamalajapyamanapatinama.

birahāturoccagaudi turuskatodi mahāvenī.’ 27

On the other hand the existence of rāga Hijeja is exhibited in the following verse –

‘geyah purnastakkah sansanyāsapaho dinasyante.

mansapraha sanyāsohakhilo hijejastu sāyānhe.’28

Since 13th century specially, in southern part of India musicologists tends to classify all theexisting rāgas under two broad sub-heads – janaka rāga or the originator and janya rāga or thegroup of rāga originated from the janaka rāgas. The classification system is quite similar to the18th century north Indian thāta-rāga classification started by Pandit V.N. Bhatakhande. InRāgavibodha, Somanatha classified these two mixed rāgas under the class of janya rāga.

In the later musicological treatises rāga Hejjujī and Hijāja are found incorporated in the list ofjanaka mela rāgas. Thākur Jaideva Sing and few other modern day scholars say, the rāga Hejjujīis a mutilated version of the rāga Hijāja. In 1550 A.D. Pandit Rāmāmātya in his musical treatySvaramelakalānidhī mentioned the name of Hijjujī as a janaka mela rāga in the list of twentyjanaka mela rāgas. According to Rāmāmātya these twenty janaka mela rāgas are –

1. Mukhārī 2. Mālava-Goula 3. Sri 4. Sāranga Nāta 5. Hindola 6. Suddha Rāmakriya 7.Deśaksī 8. Kannada-Goula 9. Suddha Nata 10. Ahirī 11. Nada Ramakriyā 12. Suddha-Varalī 13. Rīti-Goula 14. Basanta Bhairavī 15. Kedāra Goula 16. Hejjujī 17. Sāma-Varāli 18. Reva Gupti 19. Sāmanta and 20. Kāmbhojī. 29

Mādhava-Vidyāranya was one more eminent medieval scholar who slightly dealt with Persianmaqām. As a great scholar in many branches of learning like – Veda, philosophy, poetry andmusic, Vidyāranya also wrote a text on contemporary Indian music. His book is known asSamgīta-Sāra which is unfortunately not available now. Later Raghunātha, the king of Tanjore,wrote his Samgīta-Sudhā in 1620 A.D., referring Samgīta-Sāra in his work. According toRaghunātha, Samgīta-Sāra is the first book that describes melas and tries to classify the thenknown rāgas of Karnātaka music under fifteen melas. One of the melas mentioned byVidyāranya was Hijjeju. It is thought by the scholars that, this Hijjeju is a corrupt form of thePersian maqām Hejāza. Whether Vidyāranya based his mela system on the Persian maqāmsystem or whether he had evolved the mela system independently and incorporated one of thePersian maqāms in his scheme is yet to be understood. 30

Amir Khusrava’s contemporary musicologist Mirzā Khān has incorporated these twelve rāgas inhis Persian text Tuhafāt- ul-Hind. These mixed rāgas are –

1. Mahira 2. Sājagirī 3. Yaman 4. Uśśāk 5. Muāffek 6. Ghanam 7. Zilaf 8. Farghānā 9.Sarpardā 10. Bākhric 11. Firdost 12. Sanam. 31

However, whether the origin of Indian mela system has any connection with Persian maqām isitself a part of an independent research.

Samgītaśiromanī and many other unpublished musicological texts of India deserve the scholarsattention in unfolding the mysteries of the existence of Persian melodies or maqāms in India.Pandita Somanātha in his Rāgavibodha incorporated the names of eleven Persian rāgas

(maqāms) in his own commentary named Viveka, specially, while mentioning the equal Indianrāgas having similar melodic patterns. Somanātha mentions that, people call these eleven Persianrāgas as ‘Pardā’. According to Somanātha, rāga Turuska Todī is a variation of Persian rāgaIrākh, Todī rāginī is similar with Persian rāga Husenī, Bhairava is similar with Persian rāgaZuluf, Rāmakriyā is similar with Musali, Asāvarī is similar with Ujjvala, Bihanga rāga is similarwith Persian Navaroz, Deśakāra is similar with Bakhrez, Saindhavī is similar with Hijej,Pancagraha rāga is similar with Kalyāna, Debakrayā is similar with Puska an Belābala issimilar with rāga Sarpardā.32

Eminent musicologist Pundarika Vitthala flourished in Akbar’s time has also given a list offifteen non-Indian melodies in his well known text Rāgamanjarī. In the beginning part ofRāgādhyāya Pundarik described rāga Hijejikā. This rāga seems to have originated from Persianmelodies. We may pick up the following lines from Pundarikas writings where The rāgaHijejikā is described –

adhunetyuktamelebhyah prasiddhā katicid bruve.

mukhārī somarāgaśca torī gourī varātikā.

kedārah śuddhanātaśca deśāksī deśikārakah.

sārangāDeśīkalyāna kāmodaśca hijejikah.33

Elsewhere Pundarika gave an account of Hijeja mela. According to him Hijeja mela is alwayscomplete ( pūrna). To quote from his own writings –

atha Hijejamelah.

ganī houkagatī yatra hijejākhyasya melakah.

melāhato Hijejaśca bhairavādyā hyanekasah.

hijejah sarvadā pūrno nitrih sāntārakākalī.

iti hijejah.34

Rāga Turuska Todi is also described under Karnāta mela. This rāga carries a Persian name. rāgaTuruska Todī is said to have all the seven notes of an octave (pūrna) and pancama note is a bitshaken. This rāga is sung during dawn time. To quote from the text –

turuskatodikā matrih pūrnā pancamakampitā.

manyāhatāpyusah kālo geyā samyak vicaksanaih.

iti turuskatodī.35

Pundarika Vitthala mentioned about twenty melas and about sixty five rāgas in his text.Towards the end of his text Pundarika mentioned fifteen Persian rāgas which he calledpārasikeyah rāgah paradānāmakah,that means, collected from Persian music. The Persian rāgasmentioned by Pundarika are –

1. Rehāyi or Rahāyi 2. Niśāvara 3. Māhura 4. Zangool or Jangoolā 5. Ahangaka 6. Bārā 7.Suha 8. Irāyaka 9. Huseni 10. Muslika or Buslika11. Yamana 12. Sarapardā 13. Bākharej14. Hijeja and 15. Muśak.

Pundarika also says that, there are a few more melodies which may be added to this list. Hetakes note of these few Persian rāgas which he perhaps found introduced into Hindustanī systemby the Muslim musicians of his time or before. Some of these were definitely the contributionsof Amir Khusrava. Pundarika also mentioned the similar Indian rāgas or melodies with thementioning of Persian rāgas. According to him the following Indian rāgas are similar to thementioned Persian melodies –

1. Devagāndhāra is similar with Rahāyi 2. Kānādā is similar with Niśābara 3. Sāranga issimilar with Māhura 4. Bangāla is similar with Zangula 5. Deśī is similar with Ahanga 6.Malhāra is similar with Bārā 7. Kedāra is similar with Suha 8. Dhanyāsī is similar withIrāyak 9. Jijāvantī is similar with Hosenī 10. Mālava is similar with Buslīk 11. Kayāna issimilar with Yaman 12. Sarpardā is similar with Vilāvala 13 Deśikāra is similar withBākharez 14. Asāvarī is similar with Hijeja 15. Devagiri is similar with Muśak.36

Pundarika undoubtedly did a great venture for the scholars of musicology by providing thesePersian melodies along with their Indian equivalents. Probably, termination of the Indian rāganame is intended to show that the Persian melody is not exactly the same as the Indian but thatthe two are founded on the same scale.37

Śrikantha was another noted musicologist of the 16th century. He was well versed in music andliterature. He was employed as court-poet by Jama king Śatruśalya who ruled over Navanagarnear Dvarka from 1559-16-8 A.D. In music, Śrikantha was greatly influenced by Rāmāmātya andPundarika Vitthala. Pundarika Vitthala seems to have been his teacher in music. In the 16 th

century, Śrikantha wrote an important treaty on music, viz., Rasa-Kaumudī. The copy of thisRasakaumudi in the possession of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute is dated 1596 A.D. SoŚrikantha must have written his text sometimes between 1569 A.D. and 1596 A.D. The text hasten distinct chapters. The first five chapters are devoted to music and the last five chapters toliterature. He has given three broad divisions of rāgas, viz., Suddha (pure, unmixed), Chāyālaga(having influenced by another rāga in practice) and Sankirna (formed by the mixture of morethan one rāga). He has also given pictorial representation of each rāga.38

Srikantha described the Persian maqām in the ninth chapter of his text. The maqāms, accordingto him, were something like rāgas and the Śubās were something like rāginis. Name of therāgas created by intermixing of Persian maqām and a Hindustani rāga are also mentioned byhim. 39

Finally, the Sankrit musical treaties of India exhibit a range of assimilation of Persian and Indianculture and the formation of Indo-Persian stream of musical genre. Hence, these texts also reflecta perfect synthesis of two great cultures, India and Persia through acculturation in various ways.

1 Ghosh Dr. Pradip Kumār, Bhāratiya Rāga Rāginir Kramavivartana, Ashis Publications, Kolkata, 2003, pp. 1

2 Ibid, pp. 2

3. Ibid, pp. 3

3Svaravarnaviśisthena dhvanivadana yā punah. Rajyate yena saccittāng sa rāgah sammatah satām.

4 Ibid, pp. 3

Yohasau dhvaniviśesastu svaravarnabibhusitah.

Ranjako janacittānang sa rāgah kathito budhai.

Ranjanājjayate Rāgo butpatti samudāhritā.

5 Ghosh Dr. Pradip Kumār, Sangitaśāstra Samiksā, Vol. I, State Music Academy, Kolkata, 2003, pp. 110-111

Daśalaksanalaksitam gītam rāgaśabdavidheyam

6Ibid.

Deśī rāga yadyapi tattddeśesu bhinyabhinyasvarupā vinyavinyanāmano vinyagānakālaśca santi tathāpi bahumatesuprasiddhāni laksananyānusṛtya…

7 Ghosh Dr. Pradip Kumār, Bharatiya Raga Raginira Kramavivartana, Ashis Publications, Kolkata, 2003, pp.8

Daśalaksanalaksitam gītam rāgaśabdavidheyam.

8 Ibid.

In Bharatas own words-

Sringara-hasya-karuna-raudra virabhayanakah

Vibhatsadbhuta sangau cetyastau natya rasah smritah.

9 Ray Sitansu, Studies in Musical Aesthetics, Krsna Brothers, Ajmer, 1989 (1st ed.), pp.7-8

10 Prajnanananda Swami, Raga O Rupa, Ramakrsna Vedanta Math, Kolkata, Vol. 1, 1996 (6 th edition), pp. 12-15

11 Rāgavibodha of Somanātha with his own commentary Viveka, Ed. by Ptd. S. Subramanya Sastri, Adyar Library,Madras, 1945, pp

12 Rāgavibodha of Somanātha with his own commentary Viveka, Ed. by Ptd. S. Subramanya Sastri, Adyar Library,Madras, 1945, pp

Uktam rupamanekam tattat ragasya nadamayamebam.

Atha devatamayamiha kramatah kathaye tadaikaikam.

Susvara-varna-visesam rupam ragasya bodhakam dvedha.

Nadatmam devamayam tat kramatohanekamekanca.

13 Saṃgītaratnākara of Śārangadeva, Ed. by Vinayak Ganes Apte, Anandasrama Mudranalaya, Maharastra, 1942, pp. 192

Iti Bhinnapancamah. / Varati syattadudbhava.

Dhansa sadjagrahanyasa samandra taradhaivata.

Sametarasvara geya srngare sanrngi sammata.

14 Saṃgītaratnākara of Śārangadeva, Ed. by Vinayak Ganes Apte, Anandasrama Mudranalaya, Maharastra, 1942, pp. 194

Sadjamadhyamaya srsto dhaivatya calpapancamah

Takkah sansagrahanyasah kakalyantararajitah.

Prasannantanvitascaru sancari cayyadyamurchanah

Mude rudrasya varsasu prahareyahnasca pascime

Viraraudradbhutarase yuddhavire niyujjate.

15 Saṃgītaratnākara of Śārangadeva, Ed. by Vinayak Ganes Apte, Anandasrama Mudranalaya, Maharastra, 1942, pp. 195-196

Dhaivatyarsabhikavarjyasvaranamakajatijah

Hindolako ridhatyaktah sadjanyasagrahansakah.

Arohini prasannadye suddhamadhyakhyamurchanah

Kakalikelino geyo vire raudreyadbhute rase.

16 Saṃgītaratnākara of Śārangadeva, Ed. by Vinayak Ganes Apte, Anandasrama Mudranalaya, Maharastra, 1942, pp. 201

Tajja desi rigrahansanyasa pancamavarjita.

Gandharamandra karune geya manisabhuyasi.

17 Samgita Damodara of Subhankara, Ed. By Gourinath Sastri & Govinda Gopal Mukhopadhyaya, sanskrit College, Calcutta,1960, pp. 66

Sankhavadatam palitam dadhanah.

Pralamvakarnah kumudenduvarnah.

Kaupinavasah sucisantamurti.

18 Pancamasara Samhita of Narada, ed. By Guru Bipin Singh & Dr. Bimal Ray, Manipuri Nartanalaya, Kolkata, 1985, pp. 30-31

Sarovaratha sphatikasya mandape /Saroruhaih sankaramarcayanti

Talaprayoga prativaddha giti / Gouritanu bhairavika satiyam.

19 Ragatarangini of Locana, ed. By Dr. Rina Sahay, Pilgrim Publishers, Varanasi, 2009 (1st ed.), pp. 70

20 Ragatarangini of Locana, ed. By Dr. Rina Sahay, Pilgrim Publishers, Varanasi, 2009 (1st ed.), pp. 71

Hasa sthayibhavatmakah.

21 Ibid, pp. 71

Dhulibhih parilipta-kama latikayykirna kacanan cayaih

khedat salasalocana varatanurnabhranang bibhrati.

Tanti snehasarovare nipatita kantasya murtihrdi

Dhyayanti kila kausikasya virahanmadhye cirang rodati.

22 Ragatarangini of Locana, ed. By Dr. Rina Sahay, Pilgrim Publishers, Varanasi, 2009 (1st ed.), pp. 72

Kopayyabaddhogravesa-bhrkuti sahacara raktanetrambujatat

Praptasrimaitkasa- prakharadinakarapraya-kaya pradiptih.

Haste yasyastrisulan-bhujaga-bhujagayyasakta raktamvarasri

Sindhurbandhukamala- kalit – kucarucibhairavasyaiva seyam.

23 Ibid.

Pita vasana, sitadasana hemasama rupa manohara

Vira-siromaya mala gare gahi hota bhayankara.

Karatala kalita karala kala karavana krtadara

Vira virakrtaseba, vira sanjo karata yuddhavara.

24 Ibid, pp. 73-74.

Canda-madhu-kaitabha vinasini munda-mahisasura- garasini

Dhumralocana khandi rana bhara mandi munda-vara.

Vikata kata-kata dasana bhisana raktavija-bhayankari rana

Nibhari khappara saghata ghata-ghata rudhira-pana-kara.

25 Ghosh Dr. Pradip Kumār, Sangitaśāstra Samiksā, Vol. I, State Music Academy, Kolkata, 2003, pp. 97-100

26 Prajnanananda Swami, Raga O Rupa, Ramakrsna Vedanta Math, Kolkata, Vol. 1, 1996 (6th edition), pp. 10

Firdostu Puravi-Gouri-Syamabhireva ca.

Baradi-Banga-Palabhyam bibhasavilanadapi.

Adanaragini prokta Firodastat dhanen ca.

27 Rāgavibodha of Somanātha with his own commentary Viveka, Ed. by Ptd. S. Subramanya Sāstri, Adyar Library,Madras, 1945, verse- 181, pp. 214

28 Ibid, verse – 13, pp. 109

29 Rāgavibodha of Somanātha with his own commentary Viveka, Ed. by Ptd. S. Subramanya Sastri, Adyar Library,Madras, 1945, pp. 78-190

30 Ghosh Dr. Pradip Kumar, Bhāratiya Rāga Rāginira Kramavivartana, Ashis Publications, Kolkata, 2003, pp. 24

31 Ghosh Dr. Pradip Kumār, Bhāratiya Rāga Rāginira Kramavivartana, Ashis Publications, Kolkata, 2003, pp. 25

32 Rāgavibodha of Somanātha with his own commentary Viveka, Ed. by Ptd. S. Subramanya Sāstri, Adyar Library,Madras, 1945, pp. 99

Few lines from Viveka, the commentary of Ragavibodha can also be quoted here to support the fact –

Iyam turuskatodī, irākhaparyayatayā karnātagaudasya samacchāyatvena ‘paradā’ iti loke. Tathā cakaiścittattadrāgasamacchāyāh paradākhyā dvādaśa rāgā ucyante. Todyāh samacchāyā husenī. Bhairavasya zulufah.Ramakriyāyā musali. Asāvaryā ujjvalah. Vihangadasya navarogah. Desakārasya bākharejah. Saindhavyā hijejah.Kalyānayamanasya pancagrahah. Devakrayāh pusskah. Belabalyāh sarapardah. Karnātasyerākhah. Anyaparāgānāmsugādumā iti.

33 Rāgamanjarī of Pundarika Vitthala, Published by Bhalchandra Sitaram Sukthankar, Malabar Hill, Bombay, 1917, pp. 9

34 Rāgamanjarī of Pundarika Vitthala, Published by Bhalchandra Sitaram Sukthankar, Malabar Hill, Bombay, 1917, pp. 16

35 Ibid. pp. 17.

36 Bhātkhande, V.N., Music Systems in India, S. Lal & co., Delhi, 1984, pp. 60

37 Rāgamanjarī of Pundarika Vitthala, Published by Bhalchandra Sitaram Sukthankar, Malabar Hill, Bombay, 1917, pp. 19

The whole description is available in the following verse quoted from Rāgamanjarī of Pundarika Vitthala –

Anyehapi pārasīkeyā rāgāh paradanāmakāh.

Sampūrna sanvagamakāh kākalpantaritā sadā.

Rahāyī devagāndhāre kānareca niśāvarah.

Sārange māhuro nāma zangulohtha bangālake.

Desyāmāhangako nāma vārā malhārarāgake.

Kedārehpi ca suvhātha ghanāsyān ca irāyika.

Jijābatyān ca housenī mālave musalīkakah

Kalyāne yamanam gāyet sarpardohatha vilāvale.

Deśikāre bākharejah āsāvaryā hijejakah.

Devagiryā muśakākhya ebamanyehapi yojayet.

38 Sing Thākur Jaideva, Indian Music, Sangeet Research Academy, Calcutta, 1995, pp. 221-222

39 Ibid.

References

Primary sources :

Aumapatam of Umapati, ed. by K. Vasudeva Śāstri, Madras, 1957, the work based on a manuscript from the Government Oriental Mss. Library at Madras and one from the BhandarkarOriental Research Institute at Poona.

Bandyopadhyaya Amiya Ranjan, Samgitera Saundarya Cinta, Progressive Publishers, Kolkata, 1995.

Bandyopadhyaya Krsnadhan, Gītasūtrasāra, The Oriental Printing Works, Calcutta, 1934,

Barthakur Dilip Ranjan, The Music and Musical Instruments of North Eastern India, Mittal Publications, N.Delhi, 2003

Bharatakośa, compiled by M. Rāmakṛsna Kavi, Sri Venkatesvara Oriental Series No. 30., ed. by Prof. P.V. Ramanujasvami, The T.T. Devasthanams Press, Tirupati, 1951.

Bharata Kośa, Vol. V, Bangiya Sāhitya Parisat, Calcutta, 1973

Bhatkhande, V.N., Music Systems in India, S. Lal & Co., Delhi, 1984

Bhattacarya Arun, Nandantattvera Sutra, Uttarasuri publications, Kolkata, 1981.

Bhattacarya Sadhan kumar, Sangite Sundara, De’s Publishing, Kolkata, 2002.

Bṛhaddeśī of Matanga Muṇi, Ed. by Dr. Pradip Kr. Ghosh, State Music Academy, Calcutta, 2003

Brhaddesi of Matanga Muni, Ed. By Dr. Premlata Sarma, Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts& MLBD, Delhi, Vol-II, 1994

Brhaspati, Acarya Kailascandradeva, Bharata Ka Samgita Siddhanta, Prakasan Sakha, Sucna Bibhag, Uttar Prades, 1959.

Brhaspati, Acarya Kailascandradeva, Dhruvapada Our Usakā Vikāśa, Bihar Rastrabhasa Parisad, Patna, 2000

Chakraborty Mriganka Sekhar, Indian Musicology, Melodic Structure, Firma KLM. Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata, 1992

Chatterjee Chhaya, Śāstriya saṃgita and Music Culture of Bengal Through The Ages, Sarada Publishing House, Delhi, 1996

Danielou, Alain, Northern Indian Music, Vol. II, London, 1954

Danielou, Alain, Sacred Music, Indica, Varanasi, 2003

Ghosh, Dr. Pradip Kr., Bhāratīya Rāga Rāginīra Kramavivartana, Ashish Publications, Kolkata, 2002

Ghosh, Dr. Pradip Kr., Dakhsin Bhārater Saṃgīta, Shibling, Calcutta, 1989

Ghosh, Dr. Pradip Kr., Saṃgīta Śāstra Samikhsā, Vol. I & II, State Music Academy, Calcutta, 2003

Goswami Kshetramohan, Kaṇṭhakoumudī, Kolkata, 1875 (1st ed.)

Jones William & Willard N. Augustus, Music of India, Susil Gupta (India) Private Ltd.,Kolkata, 1793 and 1834 (1st ed.), 1962 (2nd ed.)

Khan Sufi Enayet, Samgita, Samgita Karyalaya, Hatras, U.P., 1991

Mitra Rajyesvara, Mughal Bharater Samgita Cinta, Lekhak Samabay Samiti, Kolkata, 1964.

Nandi Dr. Sudhir Kumar, Nandanatattva, Pascimvanga Rajya Pustak Parsad, Kolkata, 1979.

Nātyaśātra of Bharata, Ed. by M. Rāmakṛsna Kavi and J.S. Pande in 4 volumes, Geakwad’s Oriental Series, Baroda 1926, 1934, 1954, 1964

Pancamasara Samhita of Narada, ed. by Guru Bipin Singh & Dr. Bimal Ray, Manipuri Nartanalaya, Kolkata, 1985.

Prajnānānada Swāmī, Rāg O Rūp, Rāmakṛshna Vedanta Math, Kolkata, Vol-I, 1951 (1st ed.)

Prajnānānada Swāmī , Rāg O Rūp, Ramakṛshna Vedanta Math, Kolkata, Vol-II, 1951 (1st ed.)

Rāgamanjarī of Pundarika Vitthala, Published by Bhalchandra Sitaram Sukthankar, Malabar Hill, Bombay, 1917

Ragatarangini of Locana, ed. By Dr. Rina Sahay, Pilgrim Publishers, Varanasi, 2009 (1st ed.)

Rāghavan V., An Outline Literary History of Indian Music, Journal of The Music Academy, Madras, Vol.-23, 1952

Raghavan V., Music in Ancient Literature, Journal of Music Academy, Madras, Conference Souvenir, 1950

Ray Sitansu, Studies in Musical Aesthetics, Krsna Brothers, Ajmer, 1989 (1st ed.),

Roy Dr. Bimal , Bharatiya Saṃgita Prasanga (Bengali), Jignasa, Kolkata, 1964 (1st ed.)

Sāmavidhāna Brāhmana with Vedārthaprakāśa of Sāyana and Padārthamātrāvivṛti of Bharatasvamin, critically edited by Dr. B.R.Sharma, KSV, Tirupati, 1964

Samgita Damodara of Subhankara,Ed. by. Gourinath Sastri &Govindagopal Mukhopadhyaya, Sanskrit College, Calcutta, 1960

Saṃgita Parijata of Ahovala Paṇdita, Ed. & Trans. By Geeta Som, Dipayan Publishers,Kolkata, 2001(1st ed.)

Saṃgītaratnākara of Śārangadeva, Ed. by Dr. Pradip Kumar Ghosh, State Music Academy, Calcutta, 1994

Saṃgītaratnākara of Śārangadeva, Ed. by Surescandra bandyopadhyaya, Rabindra Bharati University, Kolkata, 1973

Saṃgītaratnākara of Śārangadeva, Ed. by Vinayak Ganes Apte, Anandasrama Mudranalaya, Maharastra, 1942

Samgita Sara Samgraha of ghanasyama Das, Ed. by Tauduna Phongba, The Sarasvati Printing Works, Imphal, 1971

Satyanārāyana R. (ed.) The Kuḍumiyamālāi inscription on music, Sri Varalakshmi Academy Publication Series, Mysore 1957.

Sing Thākur Jaidev, Indian Music, ed. Dr. P. Sarma, Sangeet Research Academy, Kolkata,1995 (1st )

Tagore Rabīndranāth, Saṃgītacintā, Viśva-Bhārati, Kolkata, 1967 (1st ed.)

Secondary Sources :

Catalogus Catalogorum , An Alphabetical Register of Sanskrit Works and Authors, Theodor Aufrecht(ed.), 1962, Vol – I, Steiner Verlac GMBH Wiesbades, Germany.

New Catalogus Catalogorum , Vol.-I, Ed.by Raghavan Dr. V., University of Madras, 1949 (1 st

ed)

Śastri Dr. H.P., A Descriptive Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscripts, The Asiatic Society, Kolkata,Vol-XIV, 1955 (1st ed.)