Rāgabodha: A Śābdabodha-Based Framework for a Theory of Rāga

  • Lakshmi SreeramEmail author
  • Vidya Jayaraman


In Indian knowledge traditions, Vyākaraṇa describes the rules for the formation (prakṛti-pratyaya-vibhāga) and use of correct words (sādhuśabda). The Vākya (sentence) is postulated as the primary unit of communication. “śābdabodha” deals with the cognition of sentential meaning. Similarly, in Indian music, every rāga has a lexicon and grammar (rāga-lakṣaṇa): a rāga only allows some notes and not others, and it has rules for constructing phrases—notes to be highlighted, notes to end phrases on, ornamentation, etc. These phrases of the rāga are comparable to “vākya” which when presented with due regard to certain other considerations generate an apprehension of the rāga (rāgabodha). During presentation of a rāga, an artist aims to evoke the rāga-cchāyā or rāga-svarūpa and also an emotive state in the listener. There is a cognitive aspect to the informed listening of a rāga that is parallel to linguistic communication. We seek to understand how these parallels work between śābdabodha and rāgabodha. We postulate that the conditions of expectancy (ākāṅkśā), logical consistency (yogyatā) and proximity (sannidhi) in combination with the theory of sphoṭa provide a framework to explain how a rāga is expounded and cognised.


Rāga Language Sābdabodha Ākāṅkṣā Sphoṭa Indian music 



  1. AB—Nāṭyaśāstra of Bharatamuni with the commentary Abhinavabhāratī by Abhinavaguptācārya (1964), Ch 28, Oriental Institute Baroda.Google Scholar
  2. Gautam, M. R. (1989). Evolution of Rāga and Tāla in Indian Music. New Delhi: Munshriram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt Ltd.Google Scholar
  3. Kunjunni Raja, K. (1997). Indian theories of meaning. Chennai: Adyar Library and Research Center.Google Scholar
  4. Mahāmahopadhyaya Dr. R. Sathyanarayana. (1993). Meaning in music. Lecture delivered at the seminar, ‘What have the Arts in Common?’ Mysore.Google Scholar
  5. Mehr, S. A., & Singh, M. et al. (2018, January). Form and function in human song. Scholar
  6. PLM—Paramalaghumañjūṣā with the commentary jyotsnā by Pt.Kalikaprasad Shukla (1961), Baroda Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Baroda,Google Scholar
  7. Raja, D. S. (2016). The Rāga-ness of Rāgas: Rāgas beyond the grammar. New Delhi: DK Printworld.Google Scholar
  8. Ramanathan, N. (1998, December), Colloquium on “Improvisation” organised by the Brhaddhvani, Chennai.Google Scholar
  9. SBM—N.S.Rāmānuja Tātāchārya. (2005). śābdabodhamīmāṁsa—An inquiry into indian theories of verbal cognition, part I the sentence and its significance. Institut Francais De Pondichery, Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan.Google Scholar
  10. The authors wish to thank Dr. George Cardona and Mahamahopadhyaya Prof. Mani Dravid Sastri for their inputs in clarifying some concepts and Dr. N. Ramanathan for his feedback.Google Scholar
  11. TS—Tarkasaṅgraha of Annambhaṭṭa with his own gloss, styled the dīpikā and an English translation (1876), Nirṇayasāgar Press, Mumbai.Google Scholar
  12. TV—Tantravārttika of Kumārilabhaṭṭapāda (1929), ASS, Pune.Google Scholar
  13. Vijayakrishnan, K. G. (2007). The grammar of Carnatic Music. Berlin: DeGruyer Mouton, K.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. VP—Vākyapadīyam Part I (Brahmakāṇḍam) &) with the commentaries svopajñavṛtti by Harivṛṣabha and Ambākartrī by Pt. Raghunātha Sharmā (1988), Varanasi Vāraṇāseya Samskrta Viśvavidyālaya, Varanasi.Google Scholar
  15. VP—Vākyapadīyam Part II (Vākyakāṇḍam) with the commentary of Puṇyarāja & Ambākartrī by Pt. Raghunātha Sharmā (1980), Varanasi Vāraṇāseya Samskrta Viśvavidyālaya, Varanasi.Google Scholar
  16. Widdess, R. (2011). Dynamics of melodic discourse in Indian music: Budhaditya Mukherjee’s ālāp in rāg Pūriyā-Kalyān. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICPR 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations