The Lost Melodies wrote: ↑07 May 2021, 20:46
When you take the ragas taking suddha gandara and suddha rishaba, the phrases don't differ much (I am talking about melakartas and not ragangas. Second, I am considering only these two svaras). In such a case, every other raga must evoke the same rasa. Is that happening?
I find there are only two other kritis by SrI tyAgarAja, in this zone gAnamUrti and vanaspati:
http://thyagaraja-vaibhavam.blogspot.co ... -raga.html
This one has three negative references - which would fall under bayAnaka if not bibhatsa. Sage durvAsa could create bibhatsa if he curses as well as bayanaka before he does. Also SrI tyAgarAja is asking whether it is funny? A sort of negative reference. While rAvaNa is mentioned in many other kritis, his harsh word comes for a reference here as well.
That leaves gAnamurti kriti where I am not able to see anything specific apart from narakAntaka which is vIra rasa. Also the start is handled directly with Suddha gandhAra with a jAru and a svarakshara and a jAru again suddha rishabha. This is according to practice as I have heard it , not any notations.
Now your question is whether that evokes the bibhatsa rasa. Nothing evokes by itself unless it is held in culture as such. We are only considering how SrI tyAgarAja might have viewed it. When two versions are available for a given kriti, such questions arise naturally.
As regards Sindhu kannada there is a general aversion to vivadis among the Sishya parampara - as you know even vArALi was not taught directly. Do we know how this came about it? May be one Sishya was taught with kEsari and another with Sindhu kannada because the latter struggled?
The Lost Melodies wrote: ↑07 May 2021, 20:46
Can you prove Tyagaraja Svamigal has used jaru in Vagadisvari to approach the vivadhi svara shatsruti rishabha?
I will not take manuscripts as final evidence. It is only one of the evidences. So I am not into proving anything, as that is not how I approach this issue. Also this alleged morphing of Suddha daivata to catuSRuti is too prevalent across quite a few rAgAs across the two schools.
As regards whether our music has changed, I don't look at it from rAgA lakshana perspective at all as I don't accept that that is the only thing that defines the music. And the number of instances where changes are alleged are just too small, relatively.
After trinity there has not been any further movement on composition style simply because there was no patronage and a rich environment for things to develop. Only the performing styles evolved embellishing the structure of kritis. And all post trinity composers have followed SrI tyAgarAja, that too only cosmetically. Sri dikshitar has no followers even in structural terms as that is very special and difficult. SrI SyAma Sastri may be his son SrI SubbarAyA Sastri , else no one can compose in that style.
So our music has not changed!