Part V Questions of Metrics and Local Literatures
14. The Metrical Style of Tulsīdās
Tulsīdās (Tulasīdāsa, sixteenth to seventeenth century), the author of the Rāma-caritamānasa (Rāmcaritmānas), is a towering figure in the millennium-long history of Hindi literature of North India. His contributions are traditionally not limited to literature. Rather, they include the establishment of the devotion to Rāma as an incarnation of Viṣṇu and the popularization of the worship of Hanumān, two practices that continue to exist to this day. Given the vast range of academic study on Tulsīdās’s works, it is surprising that his literary style, especially his metre, has not drawn much attention.1 Even though metrical analysis involves technical matters, which may appear trivial to understanding Tulsīdās’s works, this paper claims that metrical diversity is in fact one of their characteristic features.
Metre in the works of Tulsīdās
Mātāprasāda Gupta, an authority on Tulsīdās in the twentieth century, admired his six major works as the jewels of Hindi literature: the Rāmacaritamānasa, Dohāvalī, Kavitāvalī, Gītāvalī, Kṛṣṇa Gītāvalī, and Vinaya Patrikā.2 Besides, there are six minor works including the Baravai Rāmāyaṇa, Pārvatī Maṅgala, Jānakī Maṅgala, Rāmalalā Nahachū, Rāmājñā Praśna, and Vairāgya Sandīpanī. Most scholars recognize these twelve works as authentic compositions of Tulsīdās.3 In addition to these authoritative compositions, a few works such as the popular Hanumān Cālīsā, used for daily recitation, are also generally attributed to Tulsīdās.4 It is difficult to determine the authenticity of Tulsīdās’s works, as is frequently the case in bhakti literature, but nevertheless it is not our main concern here. The metrical analysis presented in this chapter uses the Kāśīrāja edition of the Rāmacaritamānasa 5 and the Nāgarī Pracāriṇī Sabhā edition6 of the other eleven works. Tables 14.1 and 14.2 present the moraic forms used by Tulsīdās in his works.
TABLE 14.1 Metrical forms of major works | |||
(* = ‘syllabic metre’; †= ‘musical metre’; [no mark] = ‘moraic metre’; E. R. = ‘end rhyme’; m = ‘mora’ (mātrā)). | |||
Ramacaritamanasa | Regular stanza | 4 caupāī (16m. quatrain) + 1 dohā (13m. + 11m. couplet) | |
Specially used moraic forms | Chap. 1 | harigītikā (16 + 12 = 28m. quatrain. E. R. ◡–), tribhaṅgī (10 + 8 + 8 + 6 = 32m. quatrain. E. R. –), durmilā (10 + 8 + 14 = 32m. quatrain. E. R. ––), daṇḍakalā (10 + 8 + 14 = 32m. quatrain. E. R. ◡◡–), cavapaiyā (10 + 8 + 12 = 30m. quatrain. E. R. –) | |
Chap. 2 | harigītikā | ||
Chap. 3 | *pramāṇikā (◡–◡ –◡– ◡– quatrain), harigītikā tomara (12m. quatrain. E. R. –◡) | ||
Chap. 4 | harigītikā | ||
Chap. 5 | harigītikā | ||
Chap. 6 | harigītikā tomara *toṭaka (◡◡– ◡◡– ◡◡– ◡◡– quatrain) | ||
Chap. 7 | harigītikā *bhujaṅgaprayāta (◡–– ◡–– ◡–– ◡–– quatrain), *toṭaka | ||
Dohavali | 573 dohā (or soraṭhā) | ||
Kavitāvalī | 325 stanzas (*savaiyāª ((◡◡– or –◡◡) × ca. 8), *kabitta/ghanākṣarī (16 + 15 = 31 syllables. E. R. –), chappaya (rolā (11 + 13 = 24m. quatrain) + ullālā (26 or 28 m. couplet)), jhūlanā (10 + 10 + 10 + 7m. quatrain) | ||
Gītāvalī | 328 †padas | ||
Kṛṣṇa Gītāvalī | 61 †padas | ||
Vinaya Patrikā | 279 †padas | ||
ª There are some variations of the savaiyā and mattagayanda ((– ◡◡) + – –), especially noted in some printed texts. Savaiyā as well as kavitta are syllabic metre, but they are not traditional Sanskrit metrical forms. See details in Nagasaki (2012), p. 122. |
Source: Author.
TABLE 14.2 Metrical forms of minor works | |
Baravai Rāmāyaṇa | 69 baravai (11m. + 7m. couplet) |
Pārvatī Maṅgala | 16 stanzas (4–8 haṃsagati (12m. + 9m.) + 1 harigītikā) |
Jānakī Maṅgala | 24 stanzas (4 haṃsagati + 1 harigītikā) |
Rāmalalā Nahachū | 20 soharaª (8m. + 8m. + 6m. quatrain) |
Rāmājñā Praśna | 343 dohā (7 stanzas in 7 sarga: every stanza is called dohā, contains 7 dohā) |
Vairāgya Sandīpanī | 62 verses (dohā, soraṭhā, caupāī) |
ª The quatrain sohara is called rāsa by Hindi prosodist J. P. Bhānu in his Kāvya Prabhā-kara. |
Source: Author.
These tables indicate that Tulsīdās used many forms not only of mātrā chanda, which is a purely moraic metre with end rhymes, but also varṇa chanda, a rigid syllable-counting metre with a fixed order of feet, and tāla chanda, which is a musical metre.7 While other poets of bhakti literature tend to prefer certain metres, Tulsīdās is unique in his use of an unusually rich variety of metrical forms appropriate to the theme of the work.8
Accordingly, the following questions are posed: Why did he use so many metres? Which metre was most characteristic of his work? I will return to these questions later.
His works can be grouped into two categories based on the number of metrical forms; the first includes works composed in mixed metrical forms and the second in single metrical form. For example, while the Rāmacaritamānasa mostly consists of stanzas of four caupāīs plus one dohā, it also contains stanzas in various other metres and so belongs to the first category. On the other hand, the Dohāvalī and Rāmājñā Praśna are collections of dohās only, and belong to the second category.
Eight works belong to the first category: the Rāmacaritamānasa, Kavitāvalī, Gītāvalī, Kṛṣṇa Gītāvalī, Vinaya Patrikā, Pārvatī Maṅgala, Jānakī Maṅgala, and Vairāgya Sandīpanī. The Rāmacaritamānasa and Vairāgya Sandīpanī are in the caupāī–dohā style; Pārvatī Maṅgala and Jānakī Maṅgala are in the haṃsagati–harigītikā style; Gītāvalī, Kṛṣṇa Gītāvalī, and Vinaya Patrikā are collections of pada songs;9 and Kavitāvalī is a Rāmāyaṇa in kavitta (ghānakṣarī)–savaiyā and some other metres. The other four works fall under the second category: the Dohāvalī and Rāmājñā Praśna are collections of dohās; the Baravai Rāmāyaṇa consists of baravais; and the Rāmalalā Nahachū contains only soharas.
The Rāmacaritamānasa is the longest work by Tulsīdās and indicates remarkable variation in the number of metres, whereas his other works in mixed metrical forms are composed of a limited number of metres.
Metrical style of the Rāmacaritamānasa
The Rāmacaritamānasa, which is composed of about 1,073 stanzas,10 comprises seven chapters. The standard stanza is composed of four caupāīs plus one dohā or soraṭhā.11 Four-quatrain caupāī of sixteen moras each serve for the narrative while a dohā couplet of twenty-four moras each concludes the stanza. Each chapter begins with a Sanskrit śloka dedicated to the gods, and chapter seven, the last chapter, ends with verses in language and metre that are canonical Sanskrit. The word śloka is especially noted before the Sanskrit verses in some printed editions; it means Sanskrit metre in general, unlike Sanskrit śloka, which refers to a strophe of four pada ‘feet’ with eight syllables in each stanza. Individual metres that fall under the category of śloka are presented in Table 14.4.
TABLE 14.4 Metrical forms under the category of śloka in the Rāmac-aritamānasa (s = ‘syllable’). | ||
anuṣṭubh | 8s. × 4 | 8 syllables × 4 |
śārdūlavikrīḍita | 19s. × 4 | ––– ◡◡– ◡–◡ ◡◡– ––◡ ––◡ – |
vasaṃtatilakā | 14s. × 4 | ––◡ –◡◡ ◡–◡ ◡–◡ –– |
indravajrā | 11s. × 4 | ––◡ ––◡ ◡–◡ –– |
mālinī | 15s. × 4 | ◡◡◡ ◡◡◡ ––– ◡–– ◡–– |
sragdharā | 21s. × 4 | ––– –◡– –◡◡ ◡◡◡ ◡–– ◡–– ◡–– |
rathoddhatā | 11s. × 4 | –◡– ◡◡◡ –◡– ◡– |
pañcacāmara | 16s. × 4 | ◡–◡ –◡– ◡–◡ –◡– ◡–◡ – |
Source: Author.
These Sanskrit śloka are composed in syllabic metre. Syllabic metre, called varṇa chanda, derives from Sanskrit literature. On the other hand, moraic metre, or mātrā chanda, derives from Prakrit and Apabhraṃśa literature. These two are the major categories in Hindi poetics, but moraic metre is much more common in Hindi literature. This tendency is observed in the Rāmacaritamānasa as well. The effect of solemnity, one of the characteristics of syllabic metres, might be the main reason why Tulsīdās adopted the śloka at the beginning of each chapter of the Rāmacaritamānasa. He prayed for a successful start in those ślokas, along with the concluding śloka of chapter seven with which he declared the holiness of the Rāmacaritamānasa.12
Special metrical forms provide variation in the monotonous repetition of the caupāī–dohā rhythm (Table 14.1). Some editions give them the name chanda (metre), but this term covers verses other than caupāī, dohā, soraṭhā, and śloka. Among these special metrical forms, harigītikā, cavapaiyā, daṇḍakalā, and durmilā are defined as moraic metres. On the other hand, tomara, which is defined as a moraic metre in Hindi prosody, is explained as a syllabic metre in the Prākṛtapaiṅgalam.13 Of the chanda metres, three forms, toṭaka, pramāṇikā, and bhujaṅgaprayāta, are based on Sanskrit syllable counting.
The question is whether the caupāī–dohā style of Tulsīdās is original. Some scholars, such as Rāmacandra Śukla, have noted a similarity in style between the Rāmacaritamānasa and the Sufi romances, for example the Padmavāt by Malik Muhammad Jāysī.14 The remarkable resemblance between them may be due to the fact that Tulsīdās and Sufi poets lived in the same region, Avadh, and shared the language and literary form of the Avadhi epic.15 However, another possibility is worth noting. The stanza kaḍavaka of the Jain Rāmāyaṇa in Apabhraṃśa literature, which shows four verse forms (paddhaḍikā) with sixteen moras in each foot followed by a ghattā, gāthā, or ullālā, seems to be taken over by the four caupāī plus one dohā in the Rāmacaritamānasa.16 This possibility suggests that Tulsīdās borrowed the caupāī–dohā style directly from that of Jain Rāmāyaṇa of the eighth century. We cannot claim with certainty that Tulsīdās was familiar with the Sufi or Jain literature, but it is possible that the characteristic style of his magnum opus, the Rāmacaritamānasa, was borrowed from Jain or Sufi literature, despite the fact that Tulsīdās was skilled at using many other metrical styles.
In addition to the caupāī–dohā style, other works by Tulsīdās also show a remarkable similarity in metrical style with works by other bhakti poets. It is a view commonly held by Indian readers that ‘Tulsidas is a professional poet who shared a lot of cultural habitus with others in the same field including the Sufi poets,’17 and the legend about the interactions between Tulsīdās and his contemporary poets, which cannot be proven on historical grounds, might reflect that view. In this regard, we quote that the description in the Mūla Gosāīṃ Carita, the hagiography of Tulsīdās, emphasizes the communication and correspondences between the Krishnaite bhaktas and Tulsīdās. For example, Sūrdās (Sūradāsa) taught Tulsīdās the pada (dohā 29–30); Tulsīdās and Mīrābāī sent kavitta–savaiyā to each other (dohā 31–32); and Tulsīdās and Abdurrahīm ‘Khānkhānā’ (1556–1626), commonly known as Rahīm, sent baravai (dohā 93). Even though these legends lack credibility for contemporary historiography, they reflect the fact that the pada style of the Gītāvalī, Kṛṣṇa Gītāvalī, and Vinaya Patrikā, and the kavitta–savaiyā style of the Kavitāvalī, may be related to the Western tradition of Krishnaite poetry in Brajbhāṣā.18 Similarly, the baravai metre in the Baravai Rāmāyaṇa might be related to Brajbhāṣā literature patronized by the Mughal court. One exception to these shared styles is the haṃsagati–harigītikā style of the Pārvatī Maṅgala and Jānakī Maṅgala. The haṃsagati is an original Hindi moraic metre first mentioned in Chandohṛdaya Prakāśa, a seventeenth-century work of poetics by Bhūṣaṇa, and the harigītikā is referred to in the Prākrita-Paiṅgalam (fourteenth century); however, the stanza of haṃsagati-harigītikā is not common in Hindi bhakti literature. Thus it is possible that this is a special style of Tulsīdās’s or that other works in this metre have not survived.
If Tulsīdās borrowed metrical styles from the works of other poets, it raises a further question: what then is the characteristic of Tulsīdās’s own metre? To answer this question, we must analyze the metrical rhythms that Tulsīdās particularly preferred. Let us first look at the second category, namely works in single metrical form.
The favoured metrical form and rhythm of Tulsīdās
The popular Dohāvalī and Rāmājñā Praśna are collections of dohās, and the Baravai Rāmāyaṇa is a collection of baravais. Both dohās and baravais are couplets in moraic metre. Each features rhymes in the last two syllables but whereas each line of a dohā comprises 13 + 11 moras, each line of a baravai comprises 12 + 7 moras. The dohā is derived from Apabhraṃśa moraic metre and is popular among Hindi poets. On the other hand, the baravai, a moraic metre of presumably Hindi origin,19 has not been much used by Hindi poets except Rahīm and Tulsīdās.20 (The baravai metre used by the two poets is discussed below). The reason for the lack of popularity of the baravai may be its impracticality; that is, the baravai is a couplet with only thirty-eight moras, the smallest in Hindi metre, and thus it may be too short for poets to express their thoughts. The dohā is also short, but forty-eight moras is sufficient length for a complete, self-standing couplet. We could, with Schomer, call it an ideal metrical form; she stated, ‘the dohā is concise as well as easy to remember.’21 Despite the difference in the number of moras, the baravai is categorized as a variety of the dohā. While Tulsīdās used many types of metrical forms in his works, he composed three collections of poems, the Dohāvalī, Rāmājñā Praśna, and Baravai Rāmāyaṇa only in the dohā and its variety baravai. This suggests that the dohā may be Tulsīdās’s preferred favorite moraic metre.
But what are the unique characteristics of Tulsīdās’s dohā? The dohā is traditionally classified as a muktaka (independent verse), meaning it is in itself complete. Many Sant poets of bhakti literature preferred to use the dohā as a muktaka for their sermons. In contrast, the dohā of Tulsīdās has two functions, for example as muktaka and as the summarization of the stanza. The latter function is found in the dohās in the Dohāvalī, many of which are gathered from the Rāmacaritamānasa. The former function is closely associated with the sermons of the Sant poets, whereas the latter may be associated with the Jain Rāmāyaṇa of the Apabhraṃśa literature or the Sufi romance. The traditional moraic pattern of the dohā, as defined in the Prākṛta-Paiṅgalam, is 6 + 4 + 3, with 6 + 4 + 1 moras in each line. Many Hindi prosodists follow this definition. However, the syllabic arrangement of Tulsīdās’s dohās is unique, differing from the dohās in the traditional grouping of moras. The following is a dohā quoted from the Dohāvalī:
bādhaka saba saba ke bhae, sādhaka bhae na koi
–◡◡ ◡◡ ◡◡ – ◡– , –◡ ◡ ◡– ◡ –◡
tulasī rāma kṛpālu tẽ bhalo hoi so hoi
◡◡– – ◡ ◡ –◡ – ◡– –◡ – –◡
Rough paths of life are full of pits, support indeed is hard to find,
Tulsi, welfare one gets on earth when Gracious Rama is so inclined. (Dohāvalī 100, trans. Bahadur (1997), p. 13)
The following scansion indicates how the traditional mora grouping of the Prākṛta-Paiṅgalam (6 + 4 + 3, 6 + 4 + 1) applies to the first hemistich of the dohā but does not to the second because a long syllable stretches over the 6th and 7th mātrā ‘mora’ positions (Table 14.5).
TABLE 14.5 The dohā by Tulsīdās according to the traditional mora grouping. | |||||
Odd pada | Even pada | ||||
bādhaka saba | saba ke | bhae | sādhaka bhae na koi | ||
–◡◡ ◡◡ | ◡◡ – | ◡– | –◡ ◡ ◡– ◡ –◡ | ||
6 | 4 | 3 | 4 12 1 21 |
tulasī rā | ma kṛpā | lu tẽ | bhalo hoi | so ho | i |
◡◡– – | ◡◡– | ◡ – | ◡– –◡ | – – | ◡ |
6 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 1 |
To solve this problem, we need to assume a mora grouping such as the following:
bādhaka/ saba saba/ ke bha/ e,/ sādhaka/ bhae na/ koi
4 / 4 / 3 / 2, / 4 / 4 / 3
tulasī/ rāma kṛ/ pālu/ tẽ/ bhalo/ hoi/ so/ hoi
4 / 4 / 3 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 2 / 3
While the traditional mora grouping is 6/4/3, 6/4/1, I analyze this mora grouping as 3/3/2 or 4/4 plus 3 followed by two more moras in the odd pada. Here we should recall the 3/3/2 versus 4/4 theory of Kenneth Bryant. Bryant clearly indicated how this theory can be applied to the pada of Sūrdās.22 While, according to Bryant, this mora grouping can be applied even in the middle of lines of Sūrdās’s verses, it always occurs in the beginning of each pada in Tulsīdās’s dohās. However, surprisingly, the Hindi prosodist Jagannātha Prasāda ‘Bhānu’ already gave the 3/3/2 versus 4/4 mora interpretation in his definition of the dohā a century ago. In his definition, there are two mora groupings at the beginning of a pada, that is 3/3/2 and 4/4 (Table 14.6).
TABLE 14.6 The mora grouping of dohā by ‘Bhānu’. | ||
odd pada | 13m. = | 3(◡_ or _◡ or ◡◡◡) + 3 + 2 + 3 + 2 |
13m. = | 4(◡◡_ or _ _ or ◡◡◡◡) + 4 + 3 + 2 | |
even pada | 11m. = | 3 + 3 + 2 + 3(_◡) |
11m. = | 4 + 4 + 3(_◡) |
Source: Author.
Perhaps, the most interesting point is his emphasis on the principle that three moras should be followed by three moras, and four moras by four moras. In this manner, the mora grouping based on Bhānu’s definition or Bryant’s ‘4/4 vs. 3/3/2 theory’ both perfectly solves the problem of the second pada of the first line and agrees with the word boundary of the second line.
As is the case with the dohā, this mora grouping can be applied to the baravai composed by Tulsīdās. Bhānu did not describe any rule on the moraic makeup of the baravai, but we can find a regularity that is similar to that of the dohā. The following is a baravai composed by Tulsīdās.
kesa/ mukuta/ sakhi/ marakata/, manimaya/ hota.
– ◡/ ◡ ◡ ◡/ ◡ ◡/ ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡/, ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡/ – ◡
3 / 3 / 2 / 4 /, 4 / 3
hātha/ leta/ puni/ mukutā/, karata/ udota.
– ◡/ – ◡/ ◡ ◡/ ◡ ◡ –/, ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡/ – ◡
3 / 3 / 2 / 4 /, 4 / 3
The pearls in her hair, friend, are like emerald gems;
when she takes them in her hand they glow again. (Baravai Rāmāyaṇa 1, trans. Snell (1994), p. 398)
Remarkably, the repetition of 3/3 moras is found in the beginning of the lines in this example, as in the case of the dohā. If we assume that Bhānu’s principle of the dohā applies to the baravai as well, the moraic arrangement of the baravai would be 8 (3 + 3 + 2 or 4 + 4) + 4, 4 + 3. This hypothesis supports the theory mentioned above that the baravai is a variation of the dohā.
However, this mora grouping may not necessarily be applied to the baravai of Rahīm, the allegedly first Hindi poet to use the baravai in composition.23 Let us now look at a baravai by Rahīm:
aucaka āi jobanavāṃ, mohi dukha dīna
–◡◡ –◡ ◡◡◡–, ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡ – ◡
chuṭigo saṅga goiavāṃ nahi bhala kīna. (Nāyikā Bheda 10, Rahīma granthāvalī)
◡ ◡ – – ◡ ◡ ◡◡–, ◡◡ ◡◡ – ◡
A youth suddenly came and made me sad.
He interrupted my company with girlfriends; he did not do any good.
In this baravai, both lines start with four syllables, but there is no clear group of four syllables following them. Particularly in the second line, it is even less clear, because the go of chuṭigo ◡◡– is a long syllable while that of saṅga go –◡ ◡ is short. For Rahīm, a Persian poet, the phenomenon that o could be both scanned as short and long might be natural since Persian-Arabic prosody applied to Dakkhanī Urdu metre and Brajbhāṣā allows such scansion. In addition, according to the word boundary, the rhythmic pattern of this baravai of Rahīm is |–◡◡| –◡| ◡◡◡–| ◡ ◡ ◡ ◡| – ◡| (4 + 3 + 5, 4 + 3). However, if we do not consider word boundaries, the rhythmic unit of this baravai can also be considered to be based on the group of four moras, that is, the beginning of the first line (–◡◡| –◡◡|◡◡–) versus that of the second (◡◡–| –◡◡|◡◡–). In the baravai of Tulsīdās, the word boundary coincides with 4/4 vs. 3/3/2 syllables, whereas that of Rahīm does not. Even if Rahīm intentionally made the word boundary straddle the syllables, the baravais of Tulsīdās are simpler in rhythm and easier to recite.
Furthermore, a similar rhythm can be found in the sohara as well. I indicate the sohara used in Tulsīdās’s Rāmalalā Nahachū.24 This is the only work composed in a single metre, not dohā, but sohara. The sohara is widely known as the flexible metre of folk songs sung upon the birth of a son. The following is an example of sohara in the Rāmalalā Nahachū:
koṭĩha bājana bājahĩ dasaratha ke gṛha ho.
–◡◡ –◡◡/ – ◡◡ ◡◡◡◡ /– ◡◡–
4 4 / 4 4 / 6
devaloka saba dekhahĩ ānãda ati hiya ho.
–◡–◡ ◡◡/ –◡◡ –◡◡ / ◡◡ ◡◡–
3 3 2 / 4 4 / 6
nagara sŏhāvana lāgata barani na jātai ho.
◡◡◡ ◡ – ◡◡ / –◡◡ ◡◡◡ ◡ / – ◡◡–
3 3 2 / 4 4 / 6
kausalyā ke haraṣa na hṛdaya samātai ho. (Rāmalalā Nahachū 2)
– – – – / ◡◡◡ ◡ ◡◡◡ ◡/–◡◡ –
4 4 / 4 4 / 6
Millions of instrumentals are being played in the palace of king Daśaratha.
Having seen it, all gods are rejoiced in their hearts.
It cannot be described how delighted the town has become.
The delight of Queen Kausalyā cannot be held in her heart.
Moraic scansion indicates that this sohara contains twenty-two moras in each line. Many types of sohara gītas collected by Rāmanareśa Tripāṭhī in his Grāma Sāhitya 25 indicate a wide range of variations, but Tulsīdās composed the Rāmalalā Nahachū in a quite rigid sohara; that is, every sohara contains four lines, each line comprising 8 + 8 + 6 moras and rhyming ◡◡- at the end. Bhānu gives this type of sohara a special name, rāsa. Although the sohara has no relation to a dohā, we can find two ways of dividing an eight-mora passage even in this case, that is, into a 3/3/2 or a 4/4 grouping. Tripāṭhī says that the soharas of Tulsīdās are strict in terms of the number of moras as well as end rhyme, which is not required in soharas sung by ladies in local festivals.26 We can conclude that the 3/3/2 or the 4/4 mora grouping is the favourite rhythm of Tulsīdās.
Conclusion
Based on this evidence, we are now well placed to answer why Tulsīdās used so many metrical forms. Rāmacandra Śukla, the Hindi scholar of Tulsīdās, indicated that five types of metrical styles are found in Tulsīdās’s compositions: (1) Chappaya of the Rāsau literature, (2) Gīta of Vidyāpati and Sūrdās, (3) Kavitta–Savaiyā of Gaṅg (Gaṅga), (4) Dohā of Kabīr (Kabīra), and (5) Caupāī-dohā of Īśvardās (Īśvaradāsa).27 We may add to this list the Sanskrit verses in the Rāmacaritamānasa and folk song of the sohara already discussed. Among these, the chappaya of the Rāsau style is less used. But it is remarkable that almost all the metrical styles that existed in Tulsīdās’s day he used. Śukla extolled the versatility shown in his works and this recognition is shared by both the public and the academic community. The advantage of his works is their flexibility or the lack in them of unique metrical components. I cannot identify the specific features of the metrical style of Tulsīdās—yet his rhythmical sense is remarkable. Even though sometimes longer by one syllable than that found in the work of others, the two rhythms 4/4 and 3/3/2 at the beginning and the end rhyme, make his verses easy to recite and remember. Besides the ease of recitation, we can indicate another subtle characteristic; although many types of metrical irregularity exist, such as hypermetrical or hypometrical verses, they are limited in number. In other words, they break the monotony in the rhythm unexpectedly but pleasantly. Grace, neatness, and moderate flexibility could be named as characteristics of Tulsīdās’s metre and this view, reached by an analysis of his metre, does confirm the general perception of his works.
Future research must consider why he adopted so many metrical styles from other regions, dialects, and religious traditions. One possibility is that the diversity in metrical styles we attribute to him is not what he intended; these may have just represented rhythmic variations for him. We can also consider that this goes deeper: it may reflect his desire to be recognized among the Brahminical literary circle. He quickly gained popular fame through the Rāmacaritamānasa, but legends state that pandits in Banaras frowned upon his use of modern language, and Tulsīdās himself admits his language to be grāmya (uncultivated).28 However, he also composed Sanskrit hymns in the Rāmacaritamānasa and used many other metres of the varṇa chanda, mātrā chanda, and tāla chanda of Brajbhāṣā, Avadhi, and Sanskrit origins, thereby demonstrating his dexterity. We may interpret that he considered himself to be one of the most skilled poets, as he states in his Dohāvalī: ‘Even in Sanskrit, the language of god, or in bhākhā, that of the people, skilled poets can describe the fame of Śiva and Viṣṇu [equally well].’29
Part V Questions of Metrics and Local Literatures
14. The Metrical Style of Tulsīdās
Metre in the works of Tulsīdās
Metrical style of the Rāmacaritamānasa
The favoured metrical form and rhythm of Tulsīdās
Conclusion