Skip to main content

Full text of "ANNALS OF THE BHANDARKAR ORIENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE VOL XIII 1931-32"

See other formats


ol. XIII j [ Part I 

Annals of the 

Bhandarkar Oriental 

Research Institute, Poona 

Volume XIII 
1931-32 



EDITED BY 

D. R. BHANEARKAR, M. A., Ph. D., F. A. 8. B., 
Carmichael Professor of Ancient Indian History and Culture* 
~~" Calcutta University, Calcutta, 



A. B. GAJENDRAGAPKAR, M. A., 
Professor of Sanskrit, Elphinstone College, Bombay, 





Printed by Anant Vinayak Patwardhan-, B.A., at the AryaKbishan 
Press, Bhainburda Peth ? House No. 936|2, and Published by 
S. K. Belvalkar, M. A., ph. D. ? Secretary, at the ^ 
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute^ , 
POONA 



1931 



CONTENTS 

VOL. XIII, PART I 

(10-12-31) 

ARTICLES : 

1. Krsna Kutuhala Nataka, by Pralhad 0, 

Diwarrii, M. A,, LL. M. 

2. On the Text and Interpretation of some 

Passages In the Mahabhasya of 
Fatanjali, by Dr. K. B. Pathak, 
B. A, Ph. D. 

3. The Text of the Jainendra-Vyakarana 

and the Priority of Candra to 
Pujyapada, by Dr. K. B. Pathak, 
B. A., Ph. D, 

4. Subhacandra and his Praferit Grammar 

by A, N. Upadhye, M, A 

5. An Attack on Sri Madhvacarya in the 

Saura Purana by B, N. Krishna- 
murti Sarma, B. A. (Hons). 
6* Buddhist Logic ( An Introductory Survey) 
by Durgacharan Chatter]!, M. A. ... 

MISCELLANEA : 



Pagej 
1-lf 

17-24 

25-3( 

37-5E 

59~7( 

77-85 



7. An Old Prefatory Gloss on Istopadesa 

by A. N. Dpadhye, M. A, 86-8? 

8. Authorship of Svarupa-Sambodhana by 

A. K Upadhye, M. A 88-91 

9. The Bharata-Adibharata Problem and 

the Ms of Adibharata in the 
Government Oriental Library 

Mysore, by P. K. Gode, M. A 92-93 

10, Notes on Indian Chronology by P. K. Gode, M. A. 
(vi) A Note on Dates of Ratnacandr^!s 
Commentaries on the Raghuv&tn&a 
and the Naisadhlya. w 94-96 



Annals of the 

Bhandarkar Oriental 

Research Institute, Poona 



VolXlII] ctoberl931 [Parti 



KRSNA. KUTUH&LA. NS.TAKA 

* . (] 

BY 

PBALHAD'C, DIWANJI, M. A., LL, M. 



SOURCE 

This is one of the works mentioned along with Advaitasid- 
dhi, Advaitaratnaraksanam, Vedantakalpalatika, SiddhS-nta* 
bindu &c. under the head Madhusudana Sarasvatl in VoL I of 
the Catalogus Catalogorum of Theodor Aufrecht at page 427 
thereof. As it had not been published till I wrote my article on 
Madhusudana Sarasvati\ His Life and Works which was 
published in Vol. VIII Part II of these "Annals" at pp. 149-57, 
I had not been able to see a copy thereof and had not therefore 
expressed therein any definite opinion as to whether the author 
of this work and the other works above-mentioned were identical 
or different. Kecently I happened to know of the existence of a 
Ms copy thereof at the Sanskrit Library, Baroda and having 
taken it as a loan went through it with a view to decide that 
question, if possible, from internal evidence. I am glad to say 
that my effort has not been fruitless. 

DATE AND APPEARANCE OF THE MANUSCRIPT 

That Ms. seems to have been prepared by one Baladeva on 
Friday the 14th day of the bright half of the month of Asvin 
in the year Samvat 1846 corresponding with Sake 1711 ( A, D- 
1790 ) and consists of 78 folio pages containing 2,000 Hues- 
The size of each page is 9 " x 4| " and all except the first an^ 
the last are written on both sides, The Ms. 1 is complete 
for the facts that p. $ has been left partly BJ ank, pp. ^- 
are missing altogether and some of the pages Ijifter 



Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

destroyed by worms with the result that a few words at pp. -* ff ! 
and $ are missing. The context however gives a sufficient clue 
as to the substance of those parts of the text and therefore this 
Ms. does not fail to give an idea of the contents of the whole 
work. I give below the one which I have been able to form 
from it, after making some general remarks. 

OF THE WORK 



The Sastri who may have prepared its label seems to have 
noted on it that the work is a dramatic representation of the 
slaying of Kamsa by Sri Krsna but on a closer perusal I have 
found that such is not the case but that it aims in the first six 
acts at depicting the life of Sri Krsna in Vrndavana 
and in the seventh artfully gives a foretaste of what he 
was destined to do after 'he quitted that life and entered a 
new phase the scene of which was at Mathura. 
ITS AUTHORSHIP 

With regard to the authorship of the work the colophon 
reads : 




From this and from the facts that the celebrated author oJ 
the Advaitasiddhi, Siddhantabindu, Vedantakalpalatika anc 
other works was a devotee of Krsna and used to live at Benares 
for the greater part of his later life one is tempted to conclude 
that this must be the work of the same author. But on a close] 
examination of this work itself it appears that there are certair 
data therein which militate against such a conclusion. Thus th< 
Sutradhara says in the introductory passage : 

"ft *ft: T% cr 2 



*r T% ^ grcr: u ( p. ) 

It is quite clear from this that the author of this work was 1 
of Arundhati and ISTarayana of the SandilyaGotra.that he wa 
of Visnu fr6m his childhood and that he was a discipl 
Sarasvati. / Fnrfcher as to how the idea of composinj 
pcurred/ to him, he says ; > 




Kutuhala Nataka 



1! ( p. \ ) 

This shows that he was specially devoted to Yisnu in the 
particular form of Bindumadhava, a name which reminds one 
of the shrine of that name at Benares. Then speaking about his 
said Guru in the first act he says that he had composed several 
dramas namely, Gropracarana, Kamakutuhala, Danavinodana, 
Taranivihara and others. ( p. f ). In the same act he further 
says that his Paramaguru, Mukunda, was a great devotee of 
Yisnu and that he had been passing his time in devotion at 
Yrndavana. ( p f ). These autobiographical details ill-accord 
with the facts we know about the famous Madhusudana 
SarasvatI which are that he was one of the four sons of 
Purandaracarya Misra, a Kanoja Brahmana of the Kasyapa 
Gotra residing at the village Kotalipada in the Faridpur District 
of Eastern Bengal, that his mother's name was unknown, that 
he never mentioned his parents' names, or his place of nativity 
in any of his works in strict obedience to the rules of conduct 
applicable to the order of Samnyasis that none of them should 
maintain any connection with one's relations and place 
of birth after initiation in that order, that he could not 
have been a Yaisnava from childhood because his father 
is known to have been a devotee of Sri Daksinamurti 
Kalika, that he was a disciple of Yisvesvara SarasvatI since 
initiation and of Sri Rama and Madhava probably before that 
and that the name of his Paramguru is not known from any of 
the sources from which other information about him can be 
gathered. 1 It would therefore be right to conclude that this 
is not a work of the celebrated Madhusudana but of some other 
Sarhnyasl of the same name residing in Benares. That he is not 
also one of those other authors of the same name who are found 
mentioned in the Catalogus Catalogorum Yol. I at p. 427 is also 
clear from the fact that the above biographical details do not 
tally with those of the others which are given in that work 
and that is very natural since this work was by mistake put 
down in the said Catalogue under the name of the famous author 
of the same name. 

, ~^^ 

1 Vtde the article on Madhusudatta Sarasvati; His life and W^r\^ 
the A. B O.K.I. Vol VIII Paitll pj?< 149-57, 1G2, and Vol. IX & ' 
IV Miscellanea,'pp. 309-10. 



4 Annals of the JBhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

DATE OF THE AUTHOR 

As to when this author could have lived and composed this 
drama, I regret I cannot express any conclusive opinion because 
the work gives no clue to that fact except that he had composed 
this drama with a view to get it enacted before the idol of Bindu- 
madhava at Benares. I am not aware and have not yet been able 
to gather when that temple was erected. If that can be traced the 
earliest date that can be assigned to him can be fixed. The latest 
date is of course the date of the Ms. itself namely, A. D. 1790. 

MERITS OF THE WORK 

' Although this is not a work of the famous Madhusudana it 
has its own merits and 'deserves the attention of Sanskritists in 
my opinion. I therefore propose to give a short summary of the 
plot thereof with a few extracts in order to give the readers an 
idea as to its contents. 

THE PLOT- ACT 1 

The play begins in the orthodox fashion with a Nandl. 
'Then enter the Sutradhara and NatI who in the course of an 
introductory conversation give ideas as to the genes is of the work, 
the name, percentage and qualifications &c. of the author. This 
over, there enters Sadantaka, an employee of Kamsa, singing 
the praises of his master. While entering he hears the 
names of Krsna and Kamsa from the lips of the NatI 
in the course of a reference to the possible slaying of the 
latter by the former and therefore feels annoyed and gives vent 
to his wrath in hot words. While he is doing so there enters 
Nala-Kubara muttering the praises of Krsna. He asks him 
whether he owes allegiance to any other master than Kamsa and 
thereupon the latter tells him that 'he takes pride in obeying 
Krsna and after further questioning describes the exploits of 
that hero in the forests on the other side of the Yamuna. Sadan- 
taka is thereupon filled with a curiosity to know and see Krsna. 
Immediately after that enters Krsna with his friends Sridama, 
Sudama, Yasudama, Kinkimdama and others. On seeing him 
Sadantaka is convinced that he who does not see him has his life 
wasted. He gazes at him for some time and then departs. Then 
follows a beautiful description of the forest at the invitation of 
by the following verse . 



Krxria Kutuhala Nataka 



Thus for instance, Sujaya describes Vrndavana in these 
words : 



Pracanda referring to the southern breeze says : 



Further on he exclaims : 



ACT II 

Here ends the first act which is named SadanandanaL. ( ? ). 

Just as the first act introduces to the audience Krsna and 
his friends so the second introduces to it Badha and her friends. 
After some conversation takes place between them they move 
aside and there enters Krsna with his friends. The friends begin 
to prepare the audience for acquaintance between Krsna and 
Radha from a distance by describing the good parts of young 
and beautiful damsels in words like these: 



<T$<JT 

And also 



After a time this man's attention is drawn to the Gopls and 
asks his friends to make him acquainted with them, They one 
by one make known to him the several damsels who are seen 
there by describing each of them separately by references to 
name, features, the development of her limbs and the 
beauty of the surroundings. The verses containing 
tion are full of puns, alliterations and Bother 



s to h^"' 

w$r 

^ 



$ Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The names themselves are very suggestive. Some of them are : 
Oampakakalika, Kamalamala, Kamarhkura, Ambujalata, 
Srngarasarasi, Rasataranginl, Surataruvallarl and Kumkuma- 
mamjari. This over Krsna, Srldama and others move aside and 
Radha and her friends come to the forefront. She had seen 
Krsna from the place where they were resting and had already 
been smitten with love for him. She therefore gives expression 
to that sentiment by the following verse : 



n 

Thereafter Bhadramukha who acts as the Vidusaka goes 
to the place where they are sitting and returns after a time, 
crying. On Krsna asking him the reason for doing so he says 
that he had gone to pluck some flowers and was prevented by 
the ladies from doing so on the ground that it would be a theft 
if he did so. Krsna thereupon goes there and under the pretext 
of going to quarrel with the ladies begins bo talk with Radha and 
eventually first holds her hand and then her garment. At the 
same time some one calls out Radha and Candravali and 
thereupon all the ladies depart So Krsna says: 



\\ 

He broods over the situation for a time and then says that 
they had been out for a long time and should therefore return 
home. Then all depart. Here ends the second act named 
MugdhamadhusudanaJi. 

ACT III 

The third act begins with a prologue between one Ruclmati 
and a Sylvan deity wherein the latter asks the former whether 
Radha was alright. She replies : 



3T SRtrcrt ^ ^ ^fT ^ TsS ^j \ 

M 



by her the deity says about the state of 



KutuJiala Nataka 



u 

The description of the love-smitten condition of both the 
spouses contains many other beautiful verses but the above are 
given as specimens. That over, the sylvan deity departs and 
the maid goes to the locality in which there is the mansion of 
Nanda and strolling about says how pitiable the condition of 
Radha had become. Thereupon Yasoda comes out with two 
maids Sucarita and Subhasim. They talk about suitable and 
unsuitable matches and in the course of that conversation one 
of them says : 



U 

Then enters ISTanda with Krsna and his friends. JNanda asks 
Krisna to go to his mother. When he goes there she asks him. 
to go for a bath. He prefers to go to a lake and there sees a 
Harhsl who had been kept for sport by Radha and is attended by 
a female keeper. He enters into some conversation with her 
from which he gathers the nature and extent of her mistres's 
love for him. He then, enters the lake for bathing. While he 
is still doing so, there comes Radha wifch her friends. On seeing 
Krsna there she casts a glance at him and he admires her 
beauty thus: 



And also 




Then roaming about, Krsna meets the ladies near a 
and asks one of Radha's friends why they were 
often. She replies that she had gone there to ask him to 
& medicine for their friend Radha who was 



8 Annals of the Bkandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

disease of a long standing. Kysna replies that he would do that 
according to the view of Su^ruta and having said so draws near 
Radha, Her friends gauging the situation move aside. Availing 
himself of that opportunity Krsna makes overtures to her and 
at last they probably enter into a Gandharva form of marriage 
I say ' probably ' because the copyist has left a portion of p. 
- 3 T ~ blank and pp. %- and V-* ar ^ missing altogether. Here ends 
the third act named Susnigdhamadhavai.. 

ACT IV 

The fourth act begins with a prologue between Brahma 
and the gods as to the exploits of Krsna. That over, there enters 
Krsna with friends. This scene seems to have been laid in 
some far off forest in the valley of the Himalayas and the season 
is summer. So Krsna referring to the natural surroundings 
says ; 



The description of the forest through Krsna and his friends 
occupies many pages. Seeing palmyra palms his friends being 
desirous of eating their fruits ask for Krsna's permission to 
pluck them which he gives. In going to pluck them they become 
separated from him. While moving hither and thither some of 
them meet a demon and become terrified. Baladeva who is with 
them gives them consolation that he will kill him and proceeds 
to do so. They therefore go into the interior to eat fruits and 
Baladeva goes, kills the demon and joins them again. After a 
time they all depart. In the next scene Krsna appears with 
Candravali. The season then being the monsoon, they talk 
over the characteristics of that season for some time and then as 
it seems likely to rain. Krsna takes Candravali into a bower and 
there says : 



Krsna Kutuhala Naiaka 



Accidentally then they drift into a conversation about 
Radha and she to the surprise of Krsna suddenly appears. On 
seeing him with Candravall in that lonely place she rebukes 
him for his inconstancy and he tries to justify his conduct and 
persuades her not to forsake him by saying : 



She would not however forgive him and continues to repri- 
mand him but is ultimately convinced that Krsna there was 
Subala, a Gopa and Candravall, another Gopa, in. disguise and 
all her wrath melts away. There ends the fourth act called 
Samodadftmodarah, 

ACT V 

The fifth act begins with a dialogue between a Suka and a 
Suki ,who are Kimnaras. After a time the Vidusaka Bhadra- 
mukha comes in. He after some introductory remarks says to 
himself : 



i 
Therepon Krsna says to himself: 



Then seeing Radha from a distance he does not recognize 
her and exclaims : 



11 



U 

After a time he recognizes her and says : 




iO Annals of the Shandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Then gazing at the different parts of her body he admires 
them thus : 



^: \ 



Then he goes into the interior of the forest and there lures 
the Gopls by the melodious notes of his flute. They remain at 
a distance for a time and Krsna gets acquainted with them one 
by one through his Vidusaka and describes the peculiar charm 
of each. Thereafter they draw nearer to him and he cunningly 
asks them whether it was proper for such young damsels as they 
were to repair to a lonely forest at night-time and they reply : 

( f^ff^rT ) 



n 

So to test their intensity of their love he says 



i*sro 



And they come out successful by replying: 



And one of them exclaims : 
fTTrTT 



So Krsna yields and dances the Rasa dance with them in 
the moonlit night. While doing so he 'draws their attention to 
the reflections of the moon in the waters of the Yamuna in 
language containing a pun on the word Candravall and 
hinting that he loved her. Radha takes umbrage at 
it and therefore Krsna in. order to break her 



Krsna KutuJiala Nataka 11 

moves to a distance. The Gopls therefore roam about hither and 
thither in search of him, asking the trees, the creepers, 1 the wind, 
the river, the moon &c; whether they had seen the object of the irlove 
just as Pururava in Vikramorvaslya asks the inanimate objects 
whether they had seen Urvasi. 1 The verses which they utter 
are couched in a very melodious language. Thus to the river 
they say, 



fS' HT r^ ^[1% *TFflrr tpFR?r ^TT^: U 
On feeling a draught of the southern wind one of them says:- 



\\ 

It is while the Gopls are thus pining and struggling to find 
out Krisna that the fifth act named Rasavilasa ends, 

ACT VI 

The Sixth begins with a prologue in which Kalindl and the 
sylvan deity enter and talk over the separation of the Gopls from 
Krsna. "While this conversation is proceeding some one sings 
behind the curtain: 



The two thereupon move aside announcing the arrival of Krsna 
and the Gopls and suggesting thereby that they had met together 

*1. Of. also Srlmad BhSgvata Pumna X. .First half, chattel 30. 



12 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

again. On entering they express mutual joy at reunion. While 
they are doing so Krsna remarking that the night was over and 
the day was dawning, disappears. After his departure the Gopls 
having talked amongst themselves for some time, depart. Then 
again enter Krsria with G-opas preparing to go to graze catties. 
Then they repair to a forest for that purpose and while the cattle 
are grazing they are terrified on seeing a big forest bull and speak 
of it to Krsria. He encounters the animal and kills him. Then they 
go to the bank of the Yamuna and there the Sage Narada appears 
and asks Krsna why he had been leading this simple peasant- 
life and implores him to relieve the Rsis residing in that forest 
of the pest of a demon named Kesl. Krsna thereupon hunts 
out the demon and kills him and then Narada prepares him for 
another adventure by inviting him to witness the performance of 
a drama composed by him and he accepts the invitation. Here 
ends the sixth act named Kesi Yinasah. 

ACT VII 

The seventh act begins with a prologue in which Sudarsana 
enters in an aerial car accompanied by Katrlmati, They talk 
about events in the kingdom of Indra. After a time they look 
down and Katrlmati on seeing the Gopas and Gopls jubilant* 
asks her companion why it was so and he informs her that the 
play Kamsavidhvamsana composed by the Sage Narada is to be 
acted before Sri Krsna. Then enter Krsna and Baladeva and 
the Gopas and Gopls and the performance is commenced by the 
actors. In the prologue, it is said that this drama had been 
composed by the Sage Narada the author of other dramas named 
Madanavinodanain, and ZsTatavinodanam, The scene is laid 
in Mathura where Krsna slays Kamsa later on. It issaid 
that in this play the Sage Bharata acted was the Sutradhara, the 
Sage Vatsyayana as the Paraparsvika ( Assistant to the stage- 
manager ), the Sage Badarayana as Akrura, Asita and Devala 
as Rama and Krsna, Indra and others as cowherd-boys, the 
Apsaras as the wives of Gopas, Kasypa and Aditi as Nanda and 
Yasoda, Astavakra as the Vidusaka and the Gandharvas as the 
songsters and musicians. On seeing the Nata-Krsna of the 
subsidiary play enter the city somebody exclaims:- 



Krsna Kutuhala Nataka 13 

The city is described by verses like these : 



The objective for going to that city is stated by the Nata 
Krsna in the following verse : 



The author seems also to have taken occasions in this act to 
insert some verses on the Vedanta philosophy like the following:- 



There is one verse showing that he had also studied the 
Yogasutras of Patanjali, the words Klesa, Karma. Yipaka and 
Asaya occurring in one verse being technical terms used therein 
in peculiar senses. It is this : 



5?;: n 

The below-mentioned verses somewhat resemble the 7th 
verse of the Mahiinnastotra : 



\ 
n 

t \ 

? U 



After Kamsa is killed the courtiers ask Kata Rama and 
Nata-Krsna to think over who should be installed on the GadI 



14 Annals of the Bhandarfair Oriental Research Institute 

of Mathura and tlie said Krsna says that they should go for the 
time being and be prepared for the staging of another drama 
called Ugrasenabhiseka, He then asks them what boon they 
expected of him and they say : 



^ n 

The Nata-Krsna confers the boon and the actors depart 
Thereafter Narada appears before the Rama and Krisna of the 
main drama and askes them whether they had been pleased 
with the performance. They reply in the affirmative and eulogize 
the sage. The latter then prays to them to inspire several young 
poets to sing their praises and all depart. Here ends the seventh 
act named Kamsavidhvamsanam. 

COMPARISON WITH THE CONTENTS OF BHAGAVATA PURANA 

X 4 TO 40. 

When we compare this sfcory of Krsna's life in Yraja with 
that narrated in the chapters 4 to 40 of first the half of the tenth 
Skandha of the Bhagavata Purana we can at once see that the 
author has made some material additions and alterations in order 
to adapt it to the stage. One material alteration is that Krsna 
has been painted by him as being liable to be overpowered by the 
amorous instinct in man on seeing young girls whereas in the 
Purana, Badarayana has depicted him as a superhuman being, an 
embodiment of universal love and virtue and has also taken care 
to put in at the end of the description of the Rasakrlda" a word 
of caution thus : 



<**.. SB- 3 1. n 

Another such alteration is that whereas in this drama 
Krsna has been shown to have been specially attached to Radha 
and probably to have even entered into a Gandharva form of 
marriage with her, in the Bhagvata Purana Krsna has been 
depicted as the common centre of attraction of all the Gopa boys 
as well as of the GopTs and women in general wherever he went, 
Badarayana has also taken care to explain that the story of his 



Krsna Kutuhala Nataka 15 

dalliance with them has been inserted only in order to illustrate 
the truth that whoever constantly thinks of God and is willing 
to stake his or her all for His sake is sure to be one with him in 
course of time. Thus in XXIX. 15-16 Suka says : 

\ 

; U 

\ 
f| ^ \\ 

In fact as you read that beautiful poem from chapter to 
chapter the one idea that becomes confirmed in your mind is that 
Krsna was a very handsome and at the same time an extra-* 
ordinary personality and that blessed were those men and women 
who had tie good fortune to come in direct contact with him, 
whether they looked upon him as a child, as a playmate, as a 
friend, as the manifestation of Brahma or even as a foe. On 
reading this drama however the idea that is impressed on one's 
mind is that .the author's intention was to depict Krsna as a 
hero of the type of Dusyanta or Pururava. Even his descriptions 
of the seasons unlike those in Chapter XX of the same Skandha of 
the Purana are all filled with sentiments which are apt to promote 
love for the fair sex rather than for the pure self who is the fountain 
of universal love. There are no doubt references to the slaying 
of the oppressors of mankind such as Kuvalyaplda, KesI, Kaihsa 
and others in the prolog ue to the first act and in the last two acts 
but they pale into insignificance before the elaborate and interest- 
ing descriptions of Krsna's love-adventures. Perhaps he had 
the author of the Gitagovinda, or Abhijiaanasakuntala or 
Uttararamcarita rather than that of Bhagvata Purana before his 
mind's eye as an ideal and if that is true then it must be said 
that he has succeeded in achieving it to a great extent because 
his work has its own merits as a work of art as the illustrations 
and the summary of the plot above-given amply testify. 

CONCLUSION 

Such being my opinion I would be glad if it could be publi- 
shed. The Ms. above-mentioned though likely to be of great 
assistance in preparing and even to serve as a basis for a critical 
edition, is on account of the deficiencies above-noted by itself in- 
sufficient for that purpose, even if all the necessary corrections 
are made therein. It is therefore necessary to obtain other Mss. 



IS Art of Ik 5 tad Ar Oriental tori Wtete 




an 

tatftesearclitliiougliallof them except the fat has prowl 
fruitless, The first too only mentions 3 Mss, namely, O; 
El 18; and Lahore, 6, None of these is available tome, I must 
therefore rest content with writing this article on that work and 
ing it to some one haying better facilil 

w 

BO, 



ON THE TEXT AND INTERPRETATION OF SOME 
PASSAGES IN THE MAHABHASYA OF PATANJALI 

BY 
K B. Pathak, B. A., Ph. D. 



Dr, Kielhorn was the most competent scholar to undertake to 
edit the Yyakarana Mahabhasya of Patanjali. The German 
scholar enpyed special facilities for this purpose. He was 
famous for his industry and accuracy. Besides he had the 
advantage of sitting at the feet of Anantshastri Pendharkar who 
was unsurpassed in his knowledge of the science of grammar as 
taught by Panini, Katyayana and Patanjali. Kielhorn's edition 
of this literary monument of ancient India is regarded as most 
authoritative. I therefore make no apology for examining 
critically some passages in this edition. Dr. Kielhorn's 2nd 
edition Yol II, p. 90, has the following passage 

U ^ M \ 1\\ \\ 




Comparing this text with the same passage as it appears in 
the Benaras edition, we find the following addition : 
<J^J^T% <TK H^T: I%T% ^T^sftenpT q^j ^yg- \ 

It must be admitted here that Dr. Kielhorn in the appendix 
to his second volume, p. 453, says, 

^ E g B after ^^RTftfcT, spS^TCf 3?^l^:f^Rt -4R4iik IJ 1 ^^TT 
^m, See P. V. 3, 59; VI, 4. 154 

But Dr. Kielhorn has omitted this addition from his text. 

The question that aries here is whether this addition is a 
necessary or integral part of the passage. In order to answer 
this question we must try to understand the subject treated of. 
For this purpose I shall divide the passage as it is a dialogue 
between two persons. 
3 



18 Annals of the JBhandarkar Oriental 'Research Institute 
First person asks : - 



Second person replies : 

*TO*fc I f^cft^rT 3^T 

Firsfc person objects 



II 

Second person suggests 

f 
First person asks : 



Second person replies. 

ST^^f^n^T I <J ^rg^qJTm HTrRT ^Tcf^: RrTU Ncf^i 
First person denies this and says : 



II 

Second person says : 



First person asks : 



Second person replies: 

3??^ I ^rlT|?cj%^UTHcrTj ffcT ^^TTPT - 
First person interrupts: you have already said: 

qf^ ^ ^cf ^^r^ Tirrn ^Ticf^; fq"cr?r f^rc: sT^if 
Second person reminds him of his solution : 



completes his own sentence ending with 



and then 



Here the sentence ending with ^rfJf is incomplete; therefore 
I have used a dash after it. The subordinate clause that complet- 
es the sense is 3*^(1% 3?^^: f^rfcT ^fcH>^i ^^f\ ^H^. The previous 
sentence ending with sr^TR is the principal sentence with the 
subordinate clause g*?$-^f% & c dependent upon it. Between these 
two sentences there are parenthetical clauses which must be 
shown thus: 



i ^^^qi^crrr r% ^rm ( 



Some Passages in the Mahabkasya of Patanjati 19 



On the principle srfef: qrs^ris; cr^tqt^we must interpret the 
passage as above. ^[fF^|^r means r[ without the indicatory 
letters ^and ^, which denotes both ^and ^. In this sense <j 
is used by Panini in his two later sutras ^wffi V, 3, 59 and 
3K$7 ^:i VI. 4, 154. But in the sutra o=j^ only <p; is employed 
as it appears in rf and f^ft, with the udatta accent on the 
syallable <j. The position of the accent will not be affacted if 
<| in stead of 3^ is employed in Qcp^rr because as a jRq^f 5 will 
have the same accent ( III, I. 3 ). But if Panini had adopted 
this course, he would have laid himself open to the charge of 
inconsistency by attaching two different values to ^ in the 
three sutras under cousideration. grffF^ir means cl^ 1 ^^^ WTR 
With a view to preserve this ^RT^ sjfil adopted in 
and gR$^: , ^ with ^ is used in the sutra *f5fft which 
is thus explained in the Kasika : 

III, 1, 133. 



From the facts set out above the conclusion is inevitable 
that the passage as it is given in Dr. Kielhorn's edition is 
defective without the concluding clause 



Against the proposed use of ?j the objection is twice urged 



because the rule in srq; cp^ which teaches the lengthening of 
3T in rfct ^^T: does not apply to the Unadi words JTR| fiq which 
form TIT^I *TRR: ftcl& TO^: not fncfl^ &c though they end in tj only 
as the Kasika says. 



Panini VI, 2, 11. 
Kaiyaia on ucj^-J' saya, 

mTTI%cfT f T% 



Three reasons for attaching ^ to g^ in v$x$\ are given. The 
first reason consists in making <j spfem This is easily overruled 
by saying that as a IWT of one syllable only <j becomes ^Trf 
III, 1, 3 ). The second reason for attaching ^to ^ is 



20 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

found In distinguishing it from the Unadi termination <j appear- 
ing in 3Rjc| ft<j according to the Unadi Sutra 

This is also overruled by saying that Panini ( VI, 4 II ) 
mentions only ^g ?IH by way of restricbing the operation of his 
sutra to these two Unadi words and excluding therefrom other 
Unadi words ^TcJ and f^j. The third reason, which is the final 
decision, is that Panini has committed himself by using g as a 
substitute for both g^and g/^ in his later sutras g^-^KJi gR.^^: , 
If cj were now used for ^ only in this sutra ( III, 1, 133 ), his 
position would be illogical, and he would expose himself to 
ridicule. It is thus evident that the additional words are essen- 
tial to complete the sense intended ; and they must be restored 
at the end of the passage in Dr. Kielhorn' s edition. 

In the dialogue between two persons? as explained above, 
the agreement is unanimous that Panini is the author of the two 
Unadi sutras. Without this the whole passage would be entirely 
meaningless. In the words s^ the reference is made by Dr. 
Kielhorn to ST^cpc^. This is not only positively wrong but mis- 
leading. Here 3^3 means 3TT%!%3[ ^f in this very sutra, namely, 
ug^-jl', where ^ is added to g; in order to preserve its form 5 as a 
substitude for 3^ and ^ elsewhere. 

I shall now proceed to deal with a second passage. Dr. 
Kielhorn in his preface to his fLrsi; edition which is also repro- 
duced in his second edition, says, 

" Without the different commentaries on the Mahabhasya, 
the Yakyapadlya, the Kasiikavrlti, Siddhanfca Kaumudi etc., 
each of which has proved useful in turn, my labour would have 
been much greater than ifc has been, yet sometimes all have 
failed me when I should have most prized their assistance. On 
a passage like l^ft srett ^ \ ftt S3^T ^ I on p. 36,9, they say 
nothing." The whole passage referred bo runs thus : 




This passage appears in the Benaras edition as follows : 

i ^ CTT| ^ ^ 



Some Passages in the Makabhasya of Patanjali 21 



Here the word ^Rf appears after g^$r f 3. But it is omitted 
by Dr. Kielhorn as it is not found in the mss. examined by Mm. 
I wanted to inquire whether there is any manuscript of the 
Mahabhasya containing this reading. For this purpose I went 
to Mysore. And I am glad to say that a manuscript belonging 
to the family of Kashi-Sesha-Subrahmanya Shastri, contains 
the word ^f% after jj$r ^ The Shastri is an old man. He is a 
professor of grammar in the Sanskrit College in the city of 
Mysore. He has inherited this manuscript from his grand father 
who enjoyed the patronage of the last Peshwa Bajirao IL The 
ms. has deen in the possession of the family for 150 years. The 
passage under discussion which is found in this ms. reads : 



leaves 18 (b) and 19 (a) 

The Sanskrit word |fcf is here necessary. It stands at the 
end of a noun clause which is in apposition to the noun srferi^f. 
It may be noted that ^f-T is. a conjunction and resembles the 
English conjunction " that ", While the English word in- 
troduces a subordinate clause, the Sanskrit word stands at the 
end of such a clause. On the other hand sp^ exactly resembles the 
English word " that ", as it introduces the subordinate clause in 
^r^ftsiRg ^Fct &c. ^ is used in the next sentence in this very 
passage i 



The preceding sentence also must be similarly explained 
: ? What is the meaning of JRT^T ? ( irq- ^\$ : ] ' 

T 3W m fe^" g^T ^ ffi Here it may be remarked 
there are two subordiuate clauses- 



The word 3$r cfiSNir or 3% means a leather strap A^ r fe c 

jw* ' \ \ 

n B i u ^ % x 



Kslrasvami on Amarakos'a Oka's ed. p. 163. 



G-anaratnamahodadhi. 
Benares ed, p. 127. 

* means 52 TT^ gs^*- W?[T*TcT: 

Idem p, 28. 

a hollow cup made of leases. The word 3$r appears as 
and 3^ as ^^HT or g^T in Marathi. 



Annals of Ihe Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The third passage that alfcracbs our attention is the following 

\\ T%*mr 5R5TO \ ^r4i 
I cT^RcT SRr^ I ^Nfc4 RqfaRT rl^T 

^ n ^reT^R^i^? <^ptT?t i 
f fct n mT^^T^^cfff i 



Kielhorn's 2nd ed. Vol II, p 106. On referring io the 
Benares edition we find l%Fri% o^Tfl^T^rw: instead of T% SR^R^fcif 
: Which is the correct reading ? The Nyasakara Jinendra- 



buddhi says 



i 

Kaiyata says 

I f^Na'JW 

r i%qt 

Haradatfca says 



(VIII. 4-47.) f| 

^; 

The correct reading, which deserves to be adopted, is 



The fourth passage which I propose to discuss is the 
following 

II 



II ^ H 



;: u 
II ^ II 

^ \\ 

^T: II 3 II 



Some Passage? in the Mahabhasya of Patanjali 3 

ti ^WATS^T sTc-sret ^ 5? r; i 




, sflTTO^q- Rcq^t ^^^r T^ || 

Mahabhasya 
Kielhorn's 2nd ed. Vol II, p. 376, 377 

Up to the end of the explanation of the 2nd Vartika the text 
given above is identical or nearly so with that found in the 
Benares edition. From the beginning of the 3rd Vartika up to 
the end of the whole passage, there are variations. In order to 
ascertain the correct text we must try to understand what 
Kaiyata says 




In the 3rd Vartika the forms ^ &c. of the terminations 
&c. as they appear in living speech or spoken Sanskrit, are 
given by Katyayana, But the letter ^ indicating 3F^fc(lTl^ 
requires, never the less, to be affixed in the explanatory portion 
of the Bhasya. The reason for this is as follows. Under the 3rd 
Vartika forms like ^fnttS are explained as affixes ending in ^ 
and having the sp^TrF^ according to Pariini f^cT: ( VI. 1. 163 ). 
This method is, however, refuted under the 4th Varfcika by 
treating forms like 3TPTTS as compounds according to Panini's 
Sutra wn^T ( VI, 1, 223 ) which teaches that compounds have 
Whichever method is adopted, the result is the same 



namely, the position of fche sp^TcT^R remains unchanged. For 
this reason in the Bhasya under the 3rd Variika the three ex- 
pressions underlined 5TM^: ^Tl^l 3F^i and %^i^;^ should be 
corrected into %^T^qr: ^\^\\ 3I^T and %^ ^I^^r. But the ex- 
pressions ^IFEH ?$&%% and ^rrfef ^^ do not undergo this change 
for a reason which will be given later. 

Let us now turn to the Bhasya under the 4th Vartika. Here 
we have the M^l^m^f or refutation of the first method by regard- 



Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 



ing forms like nj% as compounds. Eefutation is indicated by 
inserting q 1 thus, ^FS^^^ ^f% should be corrected into ^ q 
TOS^T ^fcf, which then means, u In order that ^^ScW may 
nqt be adopted here "' we must take ^3 as a noun meaning nq|. 

I5f : 33'i So srf^RjS as a compound has the 
ifcf should be corrected into qs^r f 



should be changed into ^s^T^P^ 5RW f 3RRT ^fcf. And 
Rf should be altered thus 



Here ^f should be omitted because it is not wanted by 
what follows and because the omission is supported by the ms* 
K. Therefore we must read 




As regards the words ^1^2 and ^in%?r no change is to be 
made in them, as they are governed by Panini's Sutra 



: ( VI, 2. 134 ) according to which ^ir$2 and q$fa when they 
form the second members of a qgt ^?5^T compound, have the ^Trl 
^ on their first syllable. They thus exactly resemble affixes 
with s^ra ^K on the first syllable. 

We have therefore 




The use of the word irq here emphasises the fact that in the 
case of the preceding compounds we must expect SRq^t r ^rf^: 

The corrections suggested above are amply supported by the 
manuscript evidence recorded by Dr, Kielhorn as well as by the 
unanimous testimony of the commentaries. In the previous 
portion of this passage also there are variations. But they do 
not affect the meaning intended by Patanjali and they are 
pointed out in the Appendix. 



THE TEXT OF THE JAINENDRA-VYAKARANA 

AND 

THE PRIORITY OF CANDRA TO PUJYAPADA 

by 

Dr. K. B. PATHAK, B. A., Ph. D. 

It is a well-known fact that there are two redactions of the 
Jainendra sutras. One of these is preserved in Somadeva's com- 
mentary called Sabdarnavacandrika and the other is given by 
Abhayanandin in his Mahavrtti. Dr. Kielhorn maintained that 
Somadeva's recension of the sutras cannot be the original one. 
Among the Jaina community itself opinion is divided on this 
point. Under these circumstances it is most essential to settle 
this problem, as it is interesting both from a literary and histori- 
cal point of view, especially as its solution has an immediate 
bearing on the date of the Buddist grammarian Candragomin 
as will be seen later. 

The first; and earlier redaction of the Jainendra sutras is 
found in the Sabdarnavacandrika of Somadeva who composed 
Ms commentary Hi/Sakall^?. This commentary is always 
called lifT and not <a^ixl in the opening and concluding verses 
and in the prose passage at the end of the work, which gives the 
date. There are two manuscripts of the Sabdarnavacandrika 
in the Deccan Collage collection one written on palm-leaves and 
the other on paper. In both of these manuscripts, at the end of 
each pada of the five Adhyayas into which the work is divided 
we find the words ^f% ^^^1^1 *KiuT<H&bl4l f^t But in a 
recent edition of the Sabdarnavacandrika published at Benares, 
though at the end of the third pada of the fourth Adhyay a and at the 
end of all the padas of the fifth Adhyaya, the words ^i 



?f^t are given, still the expression f^t is replaced by ssgf^t at the 
end of all the padas of the other Adhyayas, However it is easy 
to see from the remarks made above in regard to the two manu- 
scripts belonging to the Deccan College collections, that the 
word fogtfci is an interpolation only suggested by the name of 
Abhayanandin's commentary called Mahavrtti. 

The second and later redaction of the Jainendra sutras 
appears in the Mahavrfcti of Abhayanandinruni, who says : 

4 



26 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 



(1 <* U 



n ^, \\ 

In the first half of the last verse Abhayanandin attacks 
Ms predecessor Somadeva and speaks of his own commentary as 
aj^'fel or the larger commentary because it is more extensive 
than the work of Somadeva, which is on that account called 
by some scholars. 



Somadeva mentions Gunanandideva, who preceded him in 
the work of explaining the Jainendra Sutras. The latter's work 
is called "3i*#l(^l which reproduces as many sutras as are 
practically helpful to beginners of Sanskrit. It is obvious that 
the Jainendra Prakriya is an abridgment of some complete 
commentary on these sutras either by Gunanandin himself or 
some other Jaina author. Gunanandin says: 



II 

Jainendraprakriya, Benares ed. p. 
We are told that his teacher was 6rutaklrti the lord of poets* 



Jainendra-prakriya, Benares ed. p. 300. 

Srutaklrti, the lord of poets may be identified with Sruta- 
klrti-traividya, who was living in Saka 1040, After this year 
the Jainendra-prakriya must have been composed. Gunanandin 
borrows his explanation of thesufcra f^T%%F5pJTT &c II, 3, 15 2 from 
the Amogha^rfctirV,4, 125, and seems to be indebted for his line. 



to the introduction ofj the Cintamani of Yaksavarman, 

who says, 



This must have been suggested by the following well-knowm 
verse in the Mahabharata. 



The Text of the Jainendra- Vyakarana 2? 



jpr 

Adiparva, Chap. 62, verse 26. 

It is needless to state that the Jainendra-prakriyS belongs to 
the earlier redaction of the Jainendrasutras as known to us from 
the Sabdarnava-candrika of Somdeva. 

As I have said above, the second and later redaction of 
the Jainendxa Sutras is found in the Mahavrtti of Abhayadeva- 
muni To this redaction also belongs the Paficavastuka, which 
derives its Sutras from bhe Mahavrtti There is a third recension 
of the Jainendra Sutras which is preserved by the Svetambara 
community, who believe that the Sutras emanated from the 
Tlrthamkara Mahavira himself, who taught them to his pupil 
Indra. Each pada begins thus: ^ ^l^l'IM^ sill- This Svetambara 
collection of sutras is called W^ipcfll^ff. If this Svetambara 
setting is removed, the sutras are found to be entirely identical 
with those in the Sabdarnavacandrika. Being independently 
preserved, these sutras are most valuable, as they afford a good 
criterion to judge of the genuineness or otherwise of the two 
redactions of the sutras mentioned above. 

There is another interesting fact which deserves to be men- 
tioned in this connection. Many of these sutras are borrowed by 
Sakatayana and Hemacandra, and are thus found in the 
Amoghavrtti, Cintamani and the Brhadvrtti, as has been 
already proved in my paper entitled Jain Sakatayana 
contemporary with Amoghavarsa I. Nor should we omit to 
mention Bhattakalanka who frequently cites Jainendra sutras, 
in his Karnataka Sabdanuasana written in Sake 1526. 

We have now ample material at our disposal, which will 
enable us to ascertain the genuine text of the Jainendravyaka- 
rana. Pujyapada defines the technical term^thus. 

swfrll^ 1, 2, 3. 

The accuracy of this sutra as given above is vouched for by 
the following nine authorities: 

! Jainendraprakriya, Benares ed. p. 2. 

2. Sabdarnavacandrika, p. 9. 

3. Svetambara recension. 

4. Amoghavrtti 1, 1, 5. 

5. Cintamani I, 1. 5. 

6. Hemacandra I, 1, 37. 



28 Annals of the JBhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

1. Rupasiddhi. 

8. Sakatayanaprakriya \ -< 

of Abhayacandra / p * 

9. Sabdanu&asana of Bhattakalanka p. 39. 

As ragards these authorities it is of importance to note that 
the Svetambara recension and Hemacandra are Northern 
while the remaining seven authorities belong to southern India 
of which Pujyapada was a native. It is thus abundantly evident 
that in the time of Hemacandra and even later both in Southern 
and Northern India the above form of the Sutra that we 
are discussing, was considered genuine; and, what is 
still more important, in Southern India, to which the Digambara 
Jainas of Delhi and Jaipur look up as the land where their great 
teachers flourished and as the repository of the literary 
monuments of their community, this form of the sutra and this 
alone was recognised as genuine up to Saka 1526 or A. D. 1604, 
the year which saw the composition, by Bhattakalanka, of his 
celebrated Sanskrit commentary on his own Sanskrit sutras 
dealing with the grammar of the Kannada language. If we turn 
to the Mahavrtti we see that this sutra is written as, 



and is thus copied into the Pancavastuka. From the 
evidence set fourth above it is obvious that Abhayanandin has 
interpolated the expression ^ERfsT into the text of the sutra. This 
expression he must have borrowed from the commentaries of 
Gunanandin and Somadeva, who Preceded him. 

Let us now proceed to examine the Jainendra sutra 

V*^ft V. 4, 55. 

and compare it with the forms it assumes at the hands of the 
writers belonging to the Panxnian school. 

Panini says : 



Katyayana remarks 
Patanjali explains : 
^FTRTfcT STTfjaq^ } f% W^T^ I 

The Kaika borrows these remarks and Haradatta explains : 

i 




ii 



Padamanjarl, Benares, ed 
Part II, p 1034 



The Text of the Jainendra* Vyafarawa 



29 



Jflanendrasarasvat! says 



Tattvabodhinl 
Nirnaya sagara edp. 28. 

In the face of these facts one would suppose that, like 
Candragomin, Pujyapada, who had before him the Mahabhasya 
of Patanjali to guide him, would have written ^p^ffi instead of 

is 



. That Pujyapada did really write 
amply proved by the following authorities. 

Candra VI, 4, 157 
Jainendraprakriya 
Sabdarnavacandrika 
Svetambararecension 
Amoghavrfti 

Cintamani 

Sakatayanaprakriya 

It is thus clear that Panini's sutra 
account for such expressions as 

fore remarks: 



and not 



Pujyapada's 
sutra V,4,65. 



sutra 
144. 



I, 1, 



is inadequate to 
. Haradatta there- 




Padamafijarl, Benares ed. part I, p. 7. 
On the other hand Abhayanandin borrows the inaccurate 
sutra ^F^ffe and tries to pass it off on the literary world thus : 



( ^5T ) ^T 
I cpf 
( 1 ) 



. ) 



D, C. ms, No. 590 of 1875-76 p. 75 a and b. 
D. C. ms. No. 1140 of 1884-87, p. 402 b. 

This sutra is borrowed by the Pancavastuka which adds, 

arfffcrt^; i ^if s&$w i 
Paficavastuka. D. 0. Ms. No. 589 of 1875-76 p. 14 (b) 

Sometimes Abhayanandin copies a spurious sutra with its 
vartika attributed by the Easika to Panini and Katyayana and 
tells us that these were composed by Pujypada himself. 



30 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 
Patafijali says : 



TV. 2, 43- 

\ 

\ 



The Ka6ika, on the other hand, says. 

IV, 2, 43 



Kaika, Benares ed, part I, p. 391. 

This well-known Sutra and its varfcika, as they appear in 
the Kasika, are reproduced by the Nyasakara Jinendrabuddhi 
while they are altogether omitted from the Benares edition of 
Haradatfca's Padamanjari. Bhattoji Dlksita remarks, 



And this view is endorsed by JnanendrasarasvatI in his 
Tattrvabodhim, JSTirnaya sagar ed. p. 235. 

Let us now turn to Abhayanandin. He says : 
*NMN-M ^r ( ^ ) f ^rfi^>^necr^ n 

HIM I l^*Mtci ^RT^" cT^T 

i ^TTTTTT \ 



This sutra and its varfcika in the form in which they appear 
in the Ka^ika, could not possibly have been composed by 
Piijyapada, who lived more than a century before the authors 
of the Kasikavrtti, as I have proved in my paper 
entitled Jaina ^akatayana, contemporary with Amoghavarsa I 
This fact affords the cl earest proof that Abhayanandimuni has 
tampered with the text of the Jainendravyakarana. The genuine 
form of the sutra which has just been discussed appears in the 
Sabdarnavacandrika and the Svetambara recension, and is sup- 
ported by many authorities, as will be seen from the following 
table. 



Candra III, 1, 59. 
i 

Pujyapada III, 4, 143. 
Sabdarnavacandrika and Svetambara recension. 



The Text of Ihe Jaintmdra-Vyakara'ya 31 



Saka-t&yana II, 4, 143. 
Amoghavrtti and Cintamanl. 

I 

Hemacandra VI, 2, 28. 

Sometimes Abhayanandimuni entirely omits a genuine 
Jainendra sutra the historical importance of which he fails to 
realise. I need only refer to the well-known sutra 
^^T^*TT^ g^ff^t III, 2, 5. 

which teaches the formation of such expressions as qfo %3cSTC, 
efii^rj cfif ., or HltnJcfc^<- There is not a shadow of a doubt as to the 
genuineness of this Sutra, which is amply corroborated by the 
testimony of the Jainendra-prakriya, the Sabdarnavacandrika, the 
Svetambara recension, the Amoghavrtti, the Cintamani and the 
Brhadvrtti of Hemacandra. I lay great stress on this sutra 
of fascinating interest, which has enabled me to solve most 
satisfactorily the problem of the epoch of the Gupta era 
over which there had raged a heated controversy for nearly a 
century, and to offer a spirited vindication of Alberuni against 
the attacks made on him by his numerous critics of the nineteenth 
century. 

It will be sufficient for my present purpose to notice some 
more Jainendra sutras. Panini says that the word sflfifcE is formed 
by adding the suffix sag. 

IV, 4, 41. 
\\ i \\ 



Mahabhasya, Kielhorn's ed. vol II p. 337. 



Katyayana here tells us that arrarffe is similarly formed. 
It is natural to expect all subsequent grammarians to condense 
the teaching of Panini and Katyayana into one single sutra. 
That is exactly what has actually occurred, as is seen at a glance 
from the following co nparison of the sutras: 
Candra III, 4, 39. 



Pujyapada III, 3, 193. 
Sabdarnavacandrika and Svetambara recension. 



3 2 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 



Sakatayana III, 2, 40. 
Amoghavrtti and Cintamaru 



Hemacandra VI; 4, 49, Brhadvrtti 
On the other hand Abhayanandin makes Pujyapada say : 



This is absurd. It is inconceivable that Pujyapada, who so 
frequently quotes the Mahabhasya in his Sarvarthasiddhi, 
could have copied Panini's incorrect sutras leaving it to later 
writers or Abhayanandin to correct them, as is evident from the 
following passages : 



Sarvarthasiddhi, UTitves ed p. 99. 
Mahabhasya 1, 1, 24. 



Sarvarthasiddhi pp. 5, 62, 124. 
Mahabhasya ( I, 1, 42 ) 



Sarvarthasiddhi p, 66. 
Mahabhasya VI, 2, 80 



Sarvarthasiddhi pp. 3, 64 
Mahabhasya Kirnay s. ed. vol II p. 473 



Sarvarthasiddhi p. 264. 
Mahabhasya Nirnay s. ed. vol II, p. 147 
f ^cfs^^ i 



Sarvarthasiddhi p. 74. 
Mahabhasya Nirnay s. ed vol. II. p. 149. 



Sarvarthasiddhi p. 112. 
Mahabhasya IV, 1, 3. 



The Text of the Jainendra- Vyakarana 33 

I shall now cite some passages from Bhattakalanka who wrote 
Saka 1526, and who was a profound grammarian in Dr. 
iel horn's opinion. 



( Jainendra I, 4, 65 ) 
Karnataka Sabdanusasana, 1st ed. p. 138, 



( Jainendra I, 2, 179. ) 
Idem. p. 230 



( Jainendra I, 3< 89 ) 

Idem p. 174 

These three Jainendra siitras as quoted above, are found in 
e Sabdarnavacandrika, Jainendra-prakriya^and the Svetambara 
cension. But in the MahS-vrtti, though the first two sutras 
>pear as cited above, the third sutra is thus transformed by 
bhayanandin. 



I, 3, 86. 
Fanini says : 

, 1, 40. 



It is proposed to correct 5?t^ into ^Tfrsrf^f^" so that it may 
>ply to all the words enumerated in the ^|u^if^: group. But Patam- 
li says this is unnecessary, 



But [this defence is unacceptable because Panini himself 
ore frequently uses forms like o4ifcllRft : (H 1,56.) and ^cTJilR.^- 
[1, 1. 70, ) Another sutra of Panini q^?ft ^R { II, 1, 37. ) is 
>t adequate to explain the words l^vftcf: ^ch+ftf^: and i^ft: There- 
re it needs correction. Accordingly, Somadeva gives Pujya- 
,da*s corresponding sutras thus : 

I. 3, 33- 
1 I> 3, 35. 

These certainly must be the genuine sutras. Les us turia to 
Dhayanandin 1 He makes Pujyapada say: 

Jainendraprakriya Benares ed. part I. p, 137, foot-notes. 
P 



34 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 
r: I, 3, 32. 



These must be considered spurious because ^1: was 
ambiguous even in the days of Patanjali, while *$${: not being 
used by Panini was invented by Abhayanandin himself in 
imitation of Panini's ambiguous style. 

The most convincing proof that Abhayanandin has tampered 
with the text of the Jainendra is found in his sutra 
which is a copy of the well-known sutra 



Panini VII, 1, 18. 

in which Panini teaches that feminine nouns ending in STT, 
such as ^dm, *TTS5T form their nominative and accusative duals 
in f as ^r^[ {T%. Panini affixes ^ to ^t in order that it may 
denote both 3?t and after. Here he appears to have forgotten 
that in so doing he has brought this sutra under the operation 
of the siitra ^ 3TN: VII, 3, 113, which applies to ft^ terminations. 
But the forms ^^i t *n^ do not take the augment 3TI?. This 
mistake is so palpable that all the later grammarians have 
tried to avoid it thus: 



sutra 211. 
sftcf: ^ft: Candra II, 1, 17. 

Sabdarnavacandrika. \ y 1 15 

Jainendra-prakriya. J ' ' 

*ft: Sakaiayana, Cinta- ^ 

rnam, V I, 2, 19, 

Sakatayana-prakriya. J 

Hemacandra 1, 4, 20. 

If we turn to Abhayanandin, we find that he presents this 
incorrect sutra STR 3^: as that of Piajyapada, without trying to 
understand the interesting discussion which it has elicited from 
Patanjali in the Mahabhasya. Having thus placed beyond 
controversy the genuineness of Somadeva's text of the Jain- 
endra Vyakarana, we shall proceed to prove the priority of 
Candra to Pujyapada. 

1st proof. 

Panini in the following sutra 

T: VII, 3, 34 



Idem, pp 56 and 57, foot-notes 



The Text of the Jainendra- Vyakarana 35 



tells us that the form %W alone is correct and not f 
The Kasika says ^f^rFn^T^^TTT^ sTzft^WMl-wjito *FF%. Bhat- 
toji Dlksita calls such forms srw^JT. Caudra, on the contrary, 
says 

T5 VI, 1, 42 



that f^THR alone is correct, but not f^sw. Pnjyapada, who 
had before him these conflicting statements of Panini and 
Candra, regards both forms, fitsR and f^rw as correct, and is 
followed by Sakatayana and Hemacandra : 



V, 2, 41. Sabdarnavacandrika. 

IV, 1, 233. Sakatayana, A.raoghavrtti. 
IV, 3, 56. Hemacandra 

2nd proof 

Panini sanctions the forms sng: and ^fg: 
: V, 4, 129. 



Candra? on the contrary, says that 5^: and ^fff: are correct. 
?l^i : IV, 4, 1^9. 



Pujyapada regards all the four forms as correct and is 
followed by Sakatayana and Hemacandra : 

l^str IV, 2, 164 Sabdarnavacandrika, and Svefcam- 

bara recension. 

11,1,222 Sakatay ana's A.moghavrtti. 
VII, 3, 155 Hemacandra. 



3rd proof. 

Panini does not sanction qRm ; OT^TW, The Kasika remarks 

Kasika ( V, 4, 75 ) 



Benares ed. Part II, p 120. 

Candra sanctions such words in the following Sutra 
^T$r: IV, 4, 104, 

Pujyapada improves upon it and is followed by", Sakatayana 
and Hemacandra thus. 

f Sabdarnavacandrika and Svetambara 



II, 1, 195. Sakatayana, Amoglivrfcfci and Cintamani 
VII, 3, 134. Hemacandra 
This sutra is thus explained. 



56 Annals of the j&handarkar Oriental Research Institute 



Cintamani. 
4th proof. 

Let us compare 

3T Pardni II, 1, 1. Candra II, 2, 11. 
Jainendra I, 3, 15. 
Sakatayana II, 1, 9. 

Hemacandra III, 1, 30. 



These four proofs will suffice to convince Sanskrit scholars 
that Candra lived before Pujyapada. I have proved that the 
author of the Jainendra Vyakarana belongs to the latter half of 
the (fifth century A. D. when the twelve-year cycle was 
simaltaneously used in Northern and Southern India, in the 
time of the Early Eadambas and their contemporaries, the early 
Guptas of the Imperial Dynasty. As Dr. Liebick has satis- 
factorily shown that the Candravrtti was composed by 
Oandragomin himself, the victory over the Hunas mentioned 
therein was the one gained by Skandagupta about A. D. 455. On 
these grounds we may conclude that Candragomin was ^contem- 
porary with Skandgupta and that Pujyapada lived a few years 
later but before the end of the fifth century A. D. 



SUBHACANDRA AND HIS PRAKRIT GRAMMAR 

BY 

A. K UPADHYE, M. A. 

. v> ______ 

CONTENTS 

Various Subhacandras and some facts about them. Subhacandra, the 
Prakrit grammarian distinguished from them. Spiritual genealogy of 
Subhacandra. Literary- activities etc of his predecessors. Information 
about Subhacandra, his scholarship etc His composition of 'ritualistic 
works. His works according to Pandava-purana prasasti His later 
works. Jnanabhusana and Subhacandra contemporaries When Subha- 
candra became a Bhattaraka 9 A digression on the possibility of existence 
of a Prakrit grammar written m Prakrit, various evidences. Sabdacinta- 
mani, a Prakrit grammar by Subhacandra Its extent Dr. Hoernle's 
incomplete Ms. Analysis of s'ubhacandra's grammar Subhacandra's 
sources. Grammars of Hemacandra and Tnvikrama compared. Those of 
Hemacandra and Subhacandra compared. Those of Tnvikrama and 
Subhacandra compared Originality of Subhacandra. Our expectations 
about Subhacandra's grammar and how they failed. His grammar looked 
at from another point of view The period when he composed his grammar. 
Cintamani of s'ubhacandra and the Audarya Cmtamani of Srutasagara. 
Mss. material. Concluding remarks Appendices. 

_... L 

It is not abnormal [in the lines of Jaina teachers that one 
and the same name 1 is borne by many authors belonging to 
different periods of time and as such, the students of Jaina Lite- 
rature will have to be cautious in ascribing a particular work 
to a particular author. There have been many Jaina saints 
bearing the name Subhacandra, and we have been able to list 
about eight Subhacandras iucluding the Prakrit grammarian 
with whom this paper is mainly concerned. We may note here 
the bare facts that we know about these various Subhacandras. 

(1) Subhacandra, the author of Jmanarnava. His work is 
very popular but very little is known about his spiritual genea- 
logy. There is a tradition, recorded in the Bhakfcamaracarita of 
Visvabhusana, that Subhacandra and Bhartrhari were brothers 

1 There hare been three or four SamantabhadraB and about twenty 
Prabhaoandras ( See Manikchanda GranthamalS . (.M. G. M. ) vol. 
XXIV, Introduction > 



38 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

and contemporaries of Bhoja and Munja. Leaving aside this 
tradition, inconsistent as it is in portions, we should try to settle 
the date of Subhacandra. In Jnanarnava he pays respect to 
Samantabhadra ( Circa second century A. O. ) Devanandi k ( alias 
Pujyapada, about 500. A. C. ) Bhattakalanka ( Circa 8th century ) 
and Jinasena ( 9th century A. O. ) Then Asadhara quotes 
some verses from Jnanarnava in his Sk. Commentary on 
Istopadesa of Pujyapada and this Commentary is composed 
before 1228. A. a So Subhacandra must; have lived somewhere 
between Jinasena and Asadhara. 

(2) Subhacandra 1 the Guru of Kulacandra. He was a con- 
temporary of King Uddyotakesari of Orissa. He is mentioned in 
a cave inscription at TJdayagirl It is inferred that he belonged 
to the 10th century A. C. Pt. Jugalakishor holds that this 
Subhacandra, in all probability is the same as author of 
JfLanarnava. 

(3) Subhacandra Saiddhantikaf the disciple of Ganda- 
vimukta-maladhari-deva. He died in Saka 1045 (1133. A. 0.) and a 
Nisadya in his memory was built by king Yisnuvardhana Poysala. 
Buciraja 5 also is his disciple who died in 1115 A. O. He is famous 
as the Gum of many male and female disciples whose Nisadya 
inscriptions are preserved at Sravana Belgola. His disciple 
Ganga-Camupati 4 , who was a commander of the army of the 
Poysala King Visnuvardhana, has built some Jaina temples and 
with f reverence he mentions the name of Subhacandra. Thus 
this Subhacandra appears to have been very popular claiming 
many disciples from royal families ; he caused many temples to 
be built and idols to be erected. 

(4) Subhacandra 5 the pupil of Devaklrti. He is mentioned 
in an inscription of 1163. A. C. 

_ (5) Subhacandra 6 the disciple of Ramacandradeva. He died 
m Saka 1235 ( 1313 A. C. ) Padmanandl and Madhavacandra 
were his disciples. He is known as Adhyatmika-Subhacandra. 

(6) Subhacandra 7 the disciple of Maghanandi VratI He 
had two pupils Caruklrti and Sagaranandi. 

1 See Archaeological S. I. Annual Report 1902-3 ^,~4(j 

2 Epigraphzca Cwnatica II. Inscription Nos. 117, 125 &c. 

3 HiC. II. 126- 

4 EC. II. 130, 74. and in many other inscriptions. 

5 EC. II. 34. 

6 EC. II. e 5, 384 &c. 

7 EC. II. 380 ; 471. 



Subhacandra and his Prakrit Grammar 39 

(7) Subhacandra the successor of Padmanandisuri. His 
successor was Jinacandrasuri the teacher of Ft. Medhavl who 
speaks of all these three in quite glorious terms in the Prasasti of 
his Dharma-Sarhgraha-Sravakacara 1 , which was completed in 
the year 1541 V. era ( 1484. A c. ). So this Subhacandra might 
have flourished at the beginning of the 15th century. 2 

We are unaware of the literary activities of most of these 
Subhacandras. There is a belief in some circles that the Prakrit 
grammarian is the same as the author of Jnanarnava-only to 
show how groundless this understanding is, we had to enumerate 
all the known Subhacandras. At the outset it may be said that 
the grammarian Subhacandra is altogether different from these 
and a quite recent author as proved below. 

Subhacandra, the Prakrit grammarian, at the end of most 
of his works has given his spiritual genealogy, sometimes in 
short and sometimes at a full length. He belonged to Nandi- 
sangha, a sub section of Mula-Sangha, and Balatkaragana. 
The genealogy begins from Kundakunda of venerable antiquity 
and runs as below : 

Kundakunda 

i 

Padmanandi 

1 
Sakalaklrti 

Bhuvanaklrti 

JSanabhusana 

1 

"Vijayakirti 

Subhacandra 

Some of the predecessors of Subhacandra were great 
writers. Traditionally Kundakunda is said to have composed 
eightyfour Pahudas but only about a dozen of his works 
have come down to us. Some of them like Pravacanasara and 

1 Published by Jaina-Siddhanta-Pracharaka-Mandali. Benares 1910. 
The translator gives 1561. V. era which is a mistake. The chronogram in 
the Prasasti runs thus: 

Verse No. 21. 



2 The Saudatti Inscription of S aka 902 mentions one more Subha- 
candra, disciple of Bahubali-thus he will "be the eighth. See Journal 
B.B. R. A. S. X, 3. 171 &o. 



,, jKesearcti Institute 

Samayasara are big works while others like different Pahudas 
are very short treatises. All his works are in Prakrit ( Jaina 
Sauraseni ), Kundakunda flourished about the beginning of the 
Christian era. We are not told how much time elapsed between 
Kundakunda and Padmanandi. Padmanandl was another name 
of Kundakunda but that is out of consideration here. There 
have been many Padmanandis 1 and the most popular one is the 
author of twentyfive small books of which Ekatva-Saptati is oft 
quoted. The problem of the date 2 of this author is very intricate; 
in all probability he flourished at the end of the twelfth century. 
It is possible that he is the same as our Padmanandl of the 
genealogy. Considering the gap between Padmanandi^and Kunda- 
kunda there is scope for conjecture that the line of Subhacandra 
began really from Padmanandi and only as a tradition they 
might have claimed descent from Kundakunda. Kundakunda was 
a Southerner while from Sakalakirti onwards all of them have 
been Bhattarakas at Sakavata (modern Sagavada) in Rajaputana. 
We think that Padmanandi perhaps was a Southerner and in all 
probability, he migrated into North and established the Patta 
at Sagavada. Then comes Sakalaklrti 3 who is a voluminous 
writer. Not less than twenty-eight works are ascribed to him. 
Some of which are: -Mulacara-pradlpaka, Srlpala-carifca, Ya6o- 
dhara-carifca, Tattvartha-Sara-dlpaka 4 etc. He is spoken as 
Purana-mukhyottama--sastrakart and Maha-kavitvadikalapra- 
vinah? Subhacandra speaks of him in his Pandava-purana, 



There are many works current in the name of Sakalakirti 
and all of them should not be indiscriminately put in the four- 
teenth century as there was one more Sakalakirti 6 who flourished 
in the 19th century. We do not know any literary activities of 

1 About six are mentioned in Sravana Belgola inscriptions E. C II. 

2 We propose to take it in our paper on Nimba-Sa"manta. 

3 We aie aware that there appears to be an unusually longer 
period of time between Padmanandr and Sakalakirti when we take into 
consideration that the latter is generally assigned to the end of the 
14th century. But our words OR the date and identification of Padma- 
nandi are only tentative. 

4 See. Bhandarkar's Report 1883-84; Peterson's Report. IV and 
Jaina Hitaishi vol. XII p 90. 

5 See J. H, Vol. XII p. 90. 

6 J. H. XII. p. 90 



Subhacandra and his Prakrit Grammar 41 

Bhuvanaklrti. Then Jnanabhusana was a far famed author, who 
according to a Pat^a-vall 1 is said to have travelled all over India. 
Though he was occupying the Bhattaraka chair at Sagavada, it 
appears from the Pattavall that he had many disciples in the 
south also. He is the author of Tattva-jnana-taranginl ( completed 
in 1503. A. C.), Pancastikayatlka, Nemi-nirvana-kavyatlka and 
some other ritualistic works. In 1503 A. C, he had already 
vacated the pontifical chair in favour of Vijayaklrfci 2 as pointed 
out by Pt. PremijI 3 . Then we pass on to Subhacandra the 
grammarian. 

We know very little about the personal history of Subha- 
candra. It is quite unusual with Jain monks to leave a record of 
facts of their household life. Thus naturally we come to lose the 
names of their fortunate parents and what we possess about Subha- 
candra is his spiritual genealogy which in short is given above. 
A Gurvavallis published in Jain a Siddhanta Bhaskara IV where 
a line of about 103 teachers is glorified beginning with Gupti- 
gupta and ending with Padmanandl. In that line Subhacandra 
is numbered as the 90th teacher and is glorified in brilliant terms. 
He was a Bhattaraka at Sakavata, the Bh attar akaship of which 
place was subsidiary to that of Idara. 4 Sakavata as noted above 
is the same as modern Sagavada where at present there is no 
Bhattaraka chair : there are some Jaina families and a pretty 
Pa-thassala. 

The huge number of books that have come down to us from 
Subhacandra's pen testifies to his scholarship and wide learning. 
Subhacandra is an all round literary enthusiast. He is said to 
have been well-versed in three lores-grammar, logic and 
metaphysics and a master of six languages. 5 The following 

1 Published ia Jaina Siddhff nta Bhsskara IV. 

2 iw^T^nwrfccft (%. f*f- *rr- IV. j. 54 ) speaks of f^ro^fcf in this 
manner. 



R 1 15) CfCl I H^T' Ct t> R ^ 



(?) 



:: n 

3 Introduction to M Q. M. Volume XXI. 

4 Shri Pannalal Saraawati Bhavana Repoit IV. p. 87. 

5 This title might have been given to him after he comjosed^ his 
Prakrit grammar. 

6 



Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

extract from the Patt avail tells us that he had mastered many 
works on Logic, Grammar, Metaphysics and Rhetorics. He 
wandered over various parts of the country, maintained a band of 
pupils, defeated in disputes many logicians and had an accurate 
knowledge of his religion as well as that of others. The 
passage, interesting as it is for the mention of many works 
studied by Subhacandra, runs thus: 



^m^^ 






T^; II " 

Even a glance at the range of subjects covered by his books 
brings home to our mind the width of his comprehension and 
spontaneity of his zeal as an author. Some of his compositions 
especially on ritual might not be appreciated m the 20th 

1-2 Of VidySnanda 

3 Perhaps lost tcTus. 

4 Of MSrjikyanandi 

5 Vsdinrja. 

6 Perhaps lost to us 

7 Of Prabhftcandra-a corn, on Laghlyaatrayain of Akalanka 

8 Of VadirSja-a commentary oa Ny^yavini^caya of Akalanka. 

9 OF Vidysnanda 

10 Of Akalanka 

11 Of Prabhacandra-a commentary on P ar Ik ^mukha above 

12 Of Samantabhadra 

13 Of VidyanaDda 

14 Of Netnicandia 

15 Of Yati Vr^abha 
16-17 Peihaps lost to ua 



$ul*hacandra and his Parkrit Grammar 43 

century. That only shows how Bhattarakas of the sixteenth 
century tried to keep intact the Jaina community, nofc so much 
by checking popular superstition and imitationary inclination of 
the mass but by accommodating them in a thorough Jaina colour. 
Certainly it was their weakness but the tide of time was too 
strong. Ritualistic festivities are always fascinating and it is 
no wonder if the general run of the mass attempts to find 
spiritual consolation even in rituals. Even the most orthodox 
Fandita will have to admit, he does so unawaringly when he says 
that the modern Jainas are not observing their ritualistic routine, 
that the Jaina rituals had grown to such an extent from 12th 
century onwards that even some of the best Jaina authors have 
composed treatises on rituals. Subhacandra is only a popular 
author like Sakalaklrfci; his works are more of an explanatory 
and popular character than profound and original contributions. 

In his Pandavapurana, Subhacandra has given a list of 
works composed by him before 1608 V. era. ( 1551A. C. ) the year 
in which he completed his PSndavapurana. 1 There he gives 
names of twentyseven works of which the following are 
Jaina puranas : -1 Candraprabha Carita, 2 Padmanabha Carifca, 

3 Pradyumna Carita, 4 Jlvamdhara Carita } 5 Candana Katha, 
6 Nandlsvarl Katha, 7 Pandavapurana. Then the works 
on rituals are as below: 1 Trimsat-catur-vimsati-puja 2 
2 Siddharcanam, 3 Sarasvatlpuja, 4 Cintamanlpuja, 5 Karma- 
dahana-Vidhana, 3 6 Ganadharavalaya-Vidhana, 4 7 Palyopama 
Yidhana, 8 Caritra-suddhi-vratodyapana, 9 Sarvatobhadra- 
vidhana. Then the following are _the commentaries: 1 
Parsvanatha-kavya-panjika-tlka, 2 Asadhara pujavrfctili, 3 
Svarupa-sambodhana-Vrttih, 4 Adhyatma-padya-vrfaih. Then 
there are some polemic and philosophical works: 1 Samsaya- 
vadana vidarana, 2 Apasabda khandana, 3 Tattva nirnaya, 

4 Sadvada. Then there is Angapannatti, a work in Prakrit giving 
a traditional survey of Jaina Literature; a Prakrit grammar 
called Cintamani and a collection of Stotras-we may put these 
three works under the misellaneous group, 

1 There is a Ms. of Pandavapuiana wirtten in 1623 V. eia. only 
15 years after its composition. See Sarasvati Bhavana Repoit. Vol. II. 
p. 79. 

2 There is another Tri. by BhStt^raka Vidyltbhu^ana. 

3 We have seen many Mas of Karrna; but nowhere the name of the 
author is given. 

4 There is another by As^dhara 



44 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

His literary activities did not; terminate with the completion 
of Pandavapurana as there are some works composed by him 
alter 1551 A. C. He wrote his Karakandu Carifca 1 in 1611, V. era. 
( 1554 A. C. ) and his Kartikeyanupreksatlka 2 in 1613, V. era, 
( 1556. A. O. ). It is imaginable that he might have written 
some books even after 1556 A. C. Here we give names of a few 
works traditionally ascribed to Subhacandra but which are 
not mentioned in his Prasastl of Pandavapurana. Of these 
Samavasaninapuija 3 , Sahasranama, and Vimana-Suddhl- 
Vidhan-i, come under ritualistic head; Samyaktva-KaumudI 
Subhasitarnava and Subhasita Batnavall under didactic while 
Tarka-^astra is a work on Logic. In only a few of his works 
Subhacandra has given dates of their composition. So far as 
our knowledge of the limit of dates of his works is concerned 
Adhyatrna-Taranginl-tika was composed in 1573, V. era. 
( 1516 A. G. ). and Kartikeyanupreksa-tika in 1613, V, era. 
( 1556 A. 0. ). Thus Subhacandra's literary activities extended 
over a period of more than forty years. 

In the opening verses of some of his works Subhacandra 
somehow manages to mention the name of Jmanabhusana, 
after whom, the pontifical chair was occupied by, Vi jay akirti 
whom our Subhacandra succeeded. The fact that Subhacandra 
prefers the name of Jnanabhusana to that of Vijay akirti, his 
immediate predecessor, points to one thing, that Subhacandra 
might have spent some days at the feet of Jnanabhusana and 
some of his lesions in Jaina scriptures he might have received 
from him. Pt. Premi 4 has proved with epigraphical evidences 
that Jnanabhusana was on the pontifical chair about the years 
1534-36, V. era ( 1477-79, A. C. ) and by the time of 1557-61. V. 
era ( 1500-4 A.. C. ) Vijayakirti came to occupy the chair One 
impoitant fact that is to be noted here is that Jnanabhusarza was- 
living even after he had given up the chair in favour of Vrjaya- 
kirti. Jnanabhusana completed his Tarangim 5 in 1503 A . G. 




n 
( a Ms. in ShoTapur Jaina Boarding House ) 



Jain Hitaishi XV, p. 336. 

3 Some Mas. of these Pojsa seen by us do not mention at all the 
name of the author. 

4 Introduction to M. G. M. vol. XXI. p. 13 

5 *r% ftoqTcfifrn ^rcFr^^jirr?^: 
*rfs-*Frc*nT ^idKdt*r HTOTI ^ 

Introduction to M. Gr. M. 



ubhacandra and his Pralcrit Grammar 45 

Further Pt. Jugalakisliore 7 has noted an evidence that a Ms. 
of Jfianarnava written in 1575 V. era ( 1518 A. C.) was given as 
a gift to this Jflanabhusana which goes to show that he lived as 
far as 1518 A. O. From these dates it is sufficiently clear that 
Jfianabhusana and Subhacandra must have been contemporaries 
for some time. 

When Subhacandra succeeded Vijayyaklrti is an important 
question but we have very litfcle material with us to work out 
the details. In his Prasasti of Adhyatmatarangini 4 Subhacandra 
speaks of himself only as a disciple of Vijayaklrti and not as a 
Bhattaraka, so upto 1516 A. c. he was not a Bhattaraka but at the 
end of his Panda vapuraiia he speaks of himself as having 
succeeded Vijayaklrti and in the colophon he gives his title of 
Bhattaraka. 3 So sometime between 1516-1551 A. C, he became 
Bhattaraka. 

Before taking up the study of Subhacandra's Prakrit grammar 
we would like to have a digression here as to whether there exists 
any Prakrit grammar written in Prakrit language. An important 
section of the Prakrit literature is covered by Prakrit grammars 
some of which belong to the early centuries of the Christian era 
and some of them are as late as 18th century. The most conspicu- 
ous feature of all Prakrit grammars is that they are unexcep- 
tionally written in Sanskrit. This phenomenon is a clear contrast 
against that of Pali graminars which are composed in Pali. There 
are many common features between Pali and Prakrit Literature. 
Then it is not much if we expect that there must have been some 
Prakrit grammars written in Prakrit like the Pali grammar 
of Katyayana. No such grammar is discovered as yet. But from 
the following quotations it appears that there might have been 
some such grammar. 

i Haribhadra, in his commentary on Dasavaikalika Sutra 
discussing about a case termination remarks Prakrta-ailya 
Caturthyarthe Sasthl and then quotes : 



ii Then Malayagiri in his Commentary on Avasyaka- 
sutra 4 quotes ; 

t 



TFTT 



1 See. J. H. vol. XII p. 89. 

2 Sanatana Jaina Granthamala Vol. XV. p. 236. 

3 SarasTati Bha^ana Keport Vol. II. p. 78. 

4 P. 26 of Agamodaya Samiti Edition. 



46 Annals of the JBhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The first line contains two rules corresponding to VIL 6 3-64 of 
Vararuoi and iii. 130-31 of Hemacandra and the second contains 
the illustrations. 

iii The same author in his Commentary on NancHsufcra 1 
remarks: 



In another context he quotes: 



This also is a metrical line. In all probability Haribhadra 
and Malayagiri are quoting from some Prakrit grammar 
composed in verses. Trivikrama's Suferas are metrical but they 
are in Sanskrit. It is essential that the Jaina libraries must be 
critically inspected and perhaps such a work would be discovered. 

Subhacandra's Prakrit grammar with his Commentary is 
known as Sabda-Cintamani and the phrase Prakrta-laksana 2 
in the opening verse will have to be taken in its usual sense. 
The title Cintamani is not unprecedented in grammatic literature 
and it appears to have been suggested from the Cintamani-tika 
of Yaksavarman on Sakatayana's Sabdanusasana. 

Subhacandra's grammar like that of Trivikrama is divided 
into three chapters each in turn containing four Padas. The total 
number of Sutras is 1224 as against 1085 of Trivikrama. 5 Of 
these, 998 Sutras are devoted to the treatment of Maharastrl 
including Dhatvadesas ; 26 to SaurasenI ; 18 to Magadhi ; 21 to 
Paisacl; 4 to Culika Pai^aci and 157 to Apabhramsa. Prakrit 
grammars are of little practical value unaccompanied by a 
commentary. So Subhacandra has his own Vrfcti. Sutras too are 
his compositions and not like Laksmldhara and others he has 
commented on the Sutras of others, 

Dr. Hoernle had published a query in Indian Antiquary 
( II. 29 ) to know whether there existed any other Mss. of Subha- 
candra's grammar beside the one he had come across. His Ms. 
contained only two chapters and the concluding colophon at the 
end of the second chapter led him to believe that the Ms. he had 
discovered was complete. He added a few general remarks and 

1 PageT43 Agamodaya Edition. 

2 See appendix, B. 

3 The number of Sutras i each pSda and adhysya can be 
below in the analysis. 



&iibhacandra and his Prakrit Grammar 47 

the opening Samjna Sutras, he considered to be an unique feature 
in this work 1 

We give below a general analysis of Subhacandra's work 
which would indicate the nature of contents and the method of 
treatment. 

I. i. Sutras 1-55. 

1-2 Introductory ; 3-14 Explanation of the terminology 
adopted in the work ; 15-16 Prakrit and its varieties ; 17-18 An 
adhikara Sutra and the interchange of vowels in compounds; 
19-23 Samdhi rules ; 24-39 changes of final consonants ; 40-47 
Rules about nasal insertion and elision; 48-53 Rules about 
Genders in Prakrit : 54-55 Change of Yisarga &c. 

I. ii. Sutras 1-127. 

1 An adhikara Sutra; 2-5 Loss of initial vowel; 6-20 various 
vowel changes of a; 21-39. various vowel changes of a; 2 40-53. 
of t; 54-61.-of I; 62-70.-of u\ 71-78 -of u. 79-97 -of r ( with 
exceptions etc. ); 98.-of lr\ 99-100.-of e\ 101-107.-of al\ 108-12.- 
of o; 113-15.- of aw; 116-17 a general rule about at and au 
with exceptions ; 118-27 some contraction and substitutes. 

I. iii Sutras 1-148. 

1-2, General rules as to the droppping of intervocalic con- 
sonants ; 3. Nasalisation of m ; 4. Exception about p ; 5. Ya&rufci; 
6-16. Changes of gutturals etc. ; 17-18. Changes of palatals ; 
19-27. Changes of cerebrals ; 28-50. Changes of dentals ; 51-64. 
Changes of labials; 65-82. Changes of y, r, I, and v\ 83-88 
General rule about sibilants with exception; 89-92 Loss of medial 
consonants; 93-148 Prakrit equivalents of some Skr. words. 

I. iv. Sutras 1-127 

Treatment of Conjuncts. 1 'Conjuncts that change to k, 2-7 
Conjuncts that change to kh; 8-11 to th,and th with exceptions; 
12.-to<? or ngr, 13-16~toc etc; 17-22. -to ch; 23-24-to^or nj\ 25-28- 
to jh; 29-30. Conjuncts that change to t\ 3 1-3 2. -to nt etc; 33-34 
to d #5. to nd\ 36-39, to dh; 39-40. to ^ 41-44. to th\ 45-47 
Conjuncts that change to p\ 48-50. to ph; 51-54. to bh etc.; 
55-57. to m. etc; 58-62. Conjuncts that change to r and the 
forms of ascarya: 63-fi4.-to /; 65. to ss- 66-69. to ft; 70. Some 

1 Sa/natana Jaina G-rantha-Mala of Calcutta once intended to 
publish this work, so also the M. Gr. M. of Bombay; the latter however 
has not given uj> the idea as yet. 

2 Some times the Sutras are not in order, and this is how 6ubha- 
candra ha& followed Tiivikiama without any discrimination. Want of 
order in some places m T's grammar is due to the metzical nature of 
his SGtras. 



4$ Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

individual cases; 71-75. Conjunct that change to Ih mh rih; 
76-78. Some special cases; 79-87. Loss of a particular member 
in a conjunct generalised and some exceptions given; 88-98. 
Doubling of consonants with exceptions; 99-114. Anaptyxis or 
simplification of conjuncts by Inserting some vowel between the 
two members of a conjunct ; 115-126. Cases of metathesis ; 127. 
Notable irregularities collected, 

II. i Sutras 1-79. 

1-31. Treatment of changes which the taddhita suffixes 
undergo in Prakrit; 32-79. Avyaya section. 

II ii Sutras 1-95. 

Declensions. 1-10. General rules giving terminations. 
11-20. Additional rules for nouns ending in a; 21-28* Additional 
rules for nouns ending in i and u\ 29-30. Nom. and Ace. of 
neuter nouns ending in a, i and u.; 3 1-42. Feminine nouns; 43-54. 
Nouns ending in r; 55-63. Nouns ending in consonants rajan 
and Atman ; 64-95. Pronouns. 

IT. iii, Sutras 1-51. 

1-14, Declension of yusmal; 15-29 of asmat; 30-34, Nu- 
merals; 35-45 substitution of cases; 46-51. A few general rules. 

II. iv. Sutras 1-128. 

Conjugation. 1-10, Present tense terminations; 11-13. 5as; 
14-19. Causal; 20-25. Some mkararta changes; 26-27. Passive 
28-30. Past; 31. Potential; 32-40. Future; 41-44 Imperative; 
45-46. Some special forms generalised; 47-50 Participles; 51-70. 
verbal changes before certain terminations; 71-78. General 
rules about vowel changes; 79-90 verbal changes; 91-128. 
Dhatvadeas. 

IILi. Sutras 1-175. 

1-175. DhatvadeSas continued 

III. ii. Sutras 1-39. 

1-12. Dhatvadesas continued; 13. A general rule about 
prepositions. SAUEASENI. 14-21. Phonetic changes; 22-24 
and 36. Declensions. 25. An exception. 26-27. Some verbal 
forms. 28-35. avyayas. 37-38 Conjugations. 39. A general rule 

III. iii. Sutras 1-43. 

MAGADHL 1-4. Declensions, 5-16, Phonetics; 17. A. 
general rule. PAISAOI. 18-27. Phonetic changes. 28. A special 
rule; 29-3_3. Declensions; 3437. Conjugation; 38-39. General 
rules. CULIKA PAJSACl 40-41. Phonetic changes; 42. An 
opinion of others; 43. A general rule. 

III. iv, Sutras 1-157. 



and his Prakrit Grammar 49 

APABHRAMSA. 1-7 [General phonetic changes; 8-17 
Equivalents of some Sk. words and other processes. 18-19 
Absolutive; 20-21. Infinitive; 22-85. Equivalents of ioa etc. and 
other adesas; 86. Gender, 87-112. Declensions; 113-140 Pro- 
nouns; 141-147. Conjugation; 148-54, Dhatvadesas 155-157 
General rules. 

Trivikrama tells that his giammar is based on that of 
Hemacandra and others 1 . Laksmldhara speaks of Hemacandra, 
Trivikrama and Bhamaha 2 as his authority. Subhacandra 
does not mention any of his sources by name but he suggests that 
he has consulted many Prakrit grammars in composing his 
Cintamani when he says,^ ' Laksanabdhim vi-gahya vai *. 

And it is necessary to see as to who might have been his 
main sources. Subhacandra's Prakrit grammar is closely related 
with those of Hemacandra and Trivikrama. Hernacandra's 
grammar has always proved a milch-cow for later Prakrit gram- 
marians and it is no wonder if Subhacandra too has freely 
drawn on that source. 

Though Trivikrama ( T ) closely follows Hemacandra ( H ) 
still his grammar is a decided improvement on that of H 4 
sometimes he changes the order of Sutras, to some extent to suit 
the metrical form of his Sutra-patha. He introduces a conveni- 
ent and concise terminology. In the commentary he gives more 
explanation and additional examples besides those given by H. 
and in all cases he supplies the Skr. renderings. Trivikrama has 
some independent Sutras no doubt sometimes the material for 
these Sutras is present there in the commentary of H. 5 T. gives 
a list of DesI words in his grammar 6 while this section forms 
an independent book of H. 



f crTT cTTFT MldH^sclTs S^ffor P- 3. Vizagapatam edition. 

2 Introductory verses Nos. 16 & 22 of Sadbhs^CandiikS (B S. S.) 

3 See appendix. B. Ho. 5 of Pia^asti. 

4 For a detailed comparison of the grammars of H and T, see, 
Dr. T. K. Laddu's ' Introduction to Tirvikrama's Prakut grammar' 
translated into English from Geiman, in the Annals B. O. B. I Vol. X. 
iiMv p. 206. 

5 For instance I. iii. 14, 77, I. iv. 83, 107 aad some other sQtras 
of T. are not traced in the SutrapStha of H. But however the material 
for these siatras is present in IPs commentary. See. H. I, 177 ; 254; I. 79 
and II. 113 respectively. 

6 I. iv 121. 

7 



BO Annats of the JBkandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Sutihacandra has many Sutras common with H. To Hema- 
candra's material Subhacandra makes very little substantial 
addition. 1 Subhacandra generally follows the style of H. In 
his commentary and in many places even the wording is the 
same. In many cases Subhacandra does not give the Skr. render- 
ing of Prakrit portions and here he is in close agreement with 
H. Full quotations are not given by Subhacandra as it is done by 
H 2 , but he gives only that much portion which serves the 
purpose of illustration of a particular Sutra-this is so even in 
Apabhramsa section. There are places where Subhacandra 
appears to make some additions to H s but all these additions 
are found in T. almost verbally. 

Subhacandra closely follows the order of T's sutrapatha, 4 the 
larger number of the Subhacandra's sutras can be explained 
away by pointing}to that fact that Subhacandra composes indepen- 
dent sutras 5 for matter which is included in the commentary by 
T. Following T. he came to have an independent terminology 
and it is this separate terminology 6 that gives a different 
colouring to his sutras. His pose of independence does net 
extend beyond the change of the order of words in a sutra. 
T. always gives the Skr. rendering while Subhacandra 
is very scarce in this function. * Subhacandra's Apabhramsa 
section is very poor as the quotations are not fully given. The 
exhaustive nature of JT's commentary has not been maintained by 
Subhacandra. 

1 See appendix A wheie a complete section of Subhacaodra'a 
grammai is given with the SutraplUtha of H. and T. in footnotes which 
will help the readers to compare the different Sutrapilthas. 

2 For instance Subhacandra has III iii. 40 thus. 

^l^PTq^T^T (t 3T- I 

Then follows the commentary ^Tc^Tq^TrT%% TOT eft SIT irerar, afTciHoFT, fft 
55JPTT- This might be compared with H. IV. 326 where he gives two full 
quotations fiom which . selects a few words where r is changed to Z. 

3 There are many such sutras which are not found in the Sutra- 
pStha of H. : but all these sutras have theii counter parts in T. some- 
times with slight changes, foi instance Subhacandra's *PTn%<sr. is not 
found in H's sutras ; with T. the sutra is sg^rrftri^ I. 1- 33-however the 
material for this sutia is found in H. under. II. 174. 

4 That is clear from appendix A. 

5 Aftei the sutra ^uri^r I. iii. 104. Subhacandra has 44 sutras 
which aie notJEound in the Sutrapatha of T. but the material of all these 
sutras is drawn from the commentary on artonirr. I- iii. 105. of Trivikrama. 
There are some such other places. 

6 See Appendix C. 



Subhacandra and his Prakrit Grammar Si 

From the above comparison it is quite clear that Subhacandra 
has mechanically followed H. and T. and as such he has made 
very little contribution to the advancement of Prakrifcic studies. 
The independence of Subhacandra's grammar if it can be called 
so consists mainly in changing the wordings of Sutras 1 , some- 
times in changing the order, combining two sutras into one 2 , and 
in composing sutras based on the matter that was included in 
the commentary by H .and T. Additional illustrations as such 
there are none. 

When we first took up Subhacandra's grammar for study we 
had high hopes that Subhacandra might give us some peculiar 
forms of what Dr. Pischel calls Jaina Sa-urasenl. Certainly our 
expectations were justified since Subhacandra, as a Digambara 
Bhattaraka, was expected to have studied all the works of 
Kundakunda, Devasena, Nemicandr* 3 and other Digambara 
Prakrit writers. He has himself written a Sk. commentary on 
Kartikeyanupreksa, a typical work in Jaina Saurasenl-however 
we are aware that he wrote this commentary after his completion 
of Oitnamam f grammar. But our expectations are hardly 
fulfilled. If Subhacandra desired to import something new, 
something original in his work there was every possible 
scope for him by way of adding fresh illustrations from 
Digambara Prakrit Literature which Was practically left 
untouched by H. 4 and only in portions utilized by T. 5 He him- 
self is the author of a Prakrit work called Angapannatti 6 as 
the text appears to be printed from a single Ms. one hesitates to 
pass any remarks on its dialect. As it stands it shares the 
characteristics of both Maharastrl and Sauraseni. According to 



1 T. has ^THKiRc-s; I. II. u ; in its place S. has ^ejrxRT^ this is no 
change at all since Vyajana and Svapna belong to one and the same class 
which contains some ten words that change their first a to . 

2 For instance in a-K^aH^isrg^t I- i- 25. Subhacandra combines 
two sutias of H. 3^c?rc3^r?^q- 1. II. and ^ ST^T. I. 12. 

3 We do find the woiks of Nernicandra mentioned In the list of 
books studied by Subhacandra. See ante. 

4 However in his treatment of Apabhiaru^a he has used the Para. 
mapja-jiaySsu of Joindu, See. Annals B. 0. R. I. Vol. XII. ii p. 159. 

5 affaTt^fa-KI -t I *i?f^r q^f^WRffl^ t 

serf CTTONTV^ ^nr^cr^fws^f^mK r3*frf?T ti 

In this verse he suggests that he has consulted and used the Prakrit 
works of Vrtasenft and Jinasena, whicn, so far as our knowledge of Jainrt 
Liteiatitre goes, might be none else thaovr^sr & uUjvHdi Prakrit comment- 
aries on Siddhsnta Sfitras. 

6 Published in M, G, M, Vol X&L 

* 




52 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

our conjecture this Angapannatti is composed later than the 
grammar only as an exercise to test his knowledge of Prakrit 
grammar. '. 

We can look at Subhacandra's workmanship from another 
point of view. In many cases his Sutras are more convenient 
and concise in form 'an improvement on H. and T. too-because 
of the special terminology invented by him. His Sutras will 
always find favour with students of Sastric method of learning 
who prefer short Sutras for memorising. 

We have settled the period when Subhacandra flourished and 
now it remains fco see when he composed his Cintaraani 
grammar. In the colophon of his Prakrit grammar he speaks of 
himself as *J3R^N^*1kM4M*^ 

indicating thereby, that he was occupying the Bhattaraka 
chair when he wrote the grammar. As to some limit of his 
Bhattaraka period we have remarked above that he was not on 
the chair in 1516 A. C. and he has composed this grammar before 
1551 A. C. when the Pandava-purana was composed and in 
whose Prasasti he mentions his grammar Cintamani. Thus his 
grammar was written somewhere between 1516 A.C. and 1551 A.O 
It is essential to settle the date more definitely, but, for want of 
material, we leave the point to better equipped scholars. 

There is another Prakrit grammar, Audarya Cintamani by 
name, composed by Srutasagara whose date is not quite definitely 
settled. 2 Dr. Bhandarkar 3 refers his literary activities to. 
about the year 1494 A C. Peterson 4 and following him Dr 
Vidyabhushana 5 have adopted the same view. Dr. Bhandarkar's 
date, though practically admissible requires further ratification in 
the light of isolated dates about the contemporaries of Srutasagara. 
Similarity in names of the grammars of Subhacandra and 
Srutasagara, one calling his grammar Cintamani and the 
other Audarya Cintamani, raises a question as to the mutual 
relation of these two works. It would not be reasonable to pass 
^any superficial remarks on the posteriority or priority of one or 
the other when we do not know the dates of their compositions 



H Aagapannatti 52. 

The title Uhaya-bhtfsa-parivet is fitting only after his composition of 
a Prakrit grammar. 

2 Introduction to M. G-. M. XVII 

3 Report on Seardh^foT 1 Skr. Mas. l$83-84 

1:4, IV* Be;port. 5' Ittdi&n'-Logic $/285 



Subhacandra and his Prakrit Grammax 53 

definitely We compared fche Sutrapatha 1 of SrutasSgara, with, 
that of Subhacandra but we do not find any striking similarities. 
Srutasagara's Sutrapatha is nearer to that of Hemacandra and 
there are a few traces of Trivikram a's influence. Some definite 
conclusion can be arrived at after comparing the commentary 
of Srutasagara with those of Hemacandra, Trivikrama and 
Subhacandra Unfortunately Srutasagara's commentary is not 
within our reach. Mss- of Audajya Cintamani appear to be very 
rare, 2 and there is one at BLaranja.^ (Sena Gana Jaina Mandira). 
S, P. Y. Ranganatha Svaml considered Srutasagara's work to be 
more extensive and explanatory than those of Hemacandra and 
Trivikrama. But Rao Bahadur K. P. Trivedi* questions the 
superiority of Srutasagara's Sutras. Srutasagara's grammar has 
six chapters and one peculiar point about his Sutras is that 
he has not used any special SarnjfLas like Trivikrama and 
Subhacandra. Srutasagara in his commentary on Satpahuda 5 
quotes his own Sutras. 

In preparing this paper we have used two Mss. of Subha- 
candra's grammar. One is complete, belonging to Pt. Appashastri 
Udagaonkar, beautifully copied by himself from some ( ? ) North 
Indian Ms. Excepting some Prakrit portions the Ms. is tolerably 
correct and Panditji has put some cross references in foot notes. 
This Ms. has been our main guide. The other is incomplete. It 
i? the press copy, prepared from Idar Ms. for publication in 
the Sanatana Jaina Granthamala. It contains many scribal 
mistakes. Portions of the first Adhyaya from this Ms. have been 
very beautifully recopied by Pt. Becharadas, the learned 
Prakritist of Gujarat Vidyapitha. The whole Ms. ( presscopy ) 
is finished with footnotes giving mainly the Skr. shade of 
Prakrit words. I got ii from my friend Pt. Nathuram Premi of 
Bombay. I am very grateful to both Pts. Appashastri and 
Premrji who sent their Mss. so readily for my study. 

I am very thankful to Pt. Jugalakishore but for whose 
kindly suggestions and references I could not have made this 
paper so exhaustive Lastly I wish to record my thanks to my 
pupil Mr. A. M. Ghatage who prepared for me the alphabetical 
index of Subhacandra's Sutras 



1 Of first thiee cnapteis only, printed in Vizagajattam 

2 See Jaina Hitaishi XV p, 154 

3 No. 7054 Catalogue of Skr. and Pki Mss. in the C P, & Berar. 

4 Sadbha^t-CandukS, Intioduction p. 7 footnote (B. S. S. LXXI) 

5 M, G-. M. Yol. XVII. 



APPENDIX A. 

Ill 1 , ii. 
] 4 



i 
15 

<|f 

H?R[=JT^, n^r n u 

16 



Tj ^ ; ?TN IM ^ II 

17 ^i 5 ^r: i 



. 
i ^wi^ = ^|T% 3^ i ^^ = ^ cpv i ar^r 1% ! 53fr, 

f% 1 *Tr*ri f^T, f^f II ^ II 
18 



r n ^ n 

19 ^t 7 -: i 



u i ^ u 

' 20 3^PcqT^m 8 HT nr: I 

u?r 



H 



1 Here we have given below for c 



pn a ro 
the giammais of Heraacandia ( H. ) and Tnvikrama ( T. ) 

2 n cfrtsjj-i. 260. 



III n. i. 
3 H. wr ^. IV. 261; T. ^lif^. ^^ HJ ii 2 



5 H qtF. IV. 267; I 1 sft T h* 4. 

6 H, s^tlw. 268; T. i^nf^. ii, 5 

7 H, ^ ^: 269, T. ^r ti ii. 6, 

8 H, frOTooft %%ft, 279 while T, has swir^tt n>r ii. 7, 



tfuhhacandra and his Prakrit Grammar 



55 



21 



^t 



\ 
; H ^v || 

25 5^i 5 1* 



26 



27 



U ^ II 



28 



U ^^ U 



29 



, rTT 3T3> i 



u ^H u 



U ^ II 



H ^A II 



1 H. ST srr ?if T. 266; T. ^f &;. li. 8. 

2 H 3TT 3Tr*P^ ^ ^ T* 263. T. 3TTfi 

3 H 3?t STT 264; T. *i n. 22. 

4 H. v^r^McTt , 265; T. a^crcTr*? ii> 23. 

5 H. g^iw , 270, T 

6 H. SRHT ^-fpfr, 271; T 

7 H ^-*mt SIST-* 272; T. 

8 H ^PT?^ ^rftff. 277; T. 

9 H. cf^TTPtn , 278; T. 



ii. 21. 



ii. 9- 
IT. 10. 

u. 11. 
f ii. 12. 
n. 13. 



56 Annals of the Bhandarlcar Oriental Research Institute 
30 uf 1 



35 

sjr^ 

86 

^fr^^t 

, ^^HT^T ii 3^. u 

37 



n 3 u 

81 f^^l 2 i 

^ II 3 



^T M 3 ^ u 

33 f^r^ 4 - T 4tffRM% \ 

fl f^r^t \ f^^, 
n^ ^r?T f* ^T i 

34 



: I n, ^TR, lHHt, rferg H 3 ^ U 

38 ^f%^tt 9 i 



1 H. or ^F^- 283; T. 

^ H 3T^ 5?, 284, T. 3?^t ^ ii. 15. 

3 H. fnft it^w^r, 285; T. frfi %^ ii. 16. 

4 H ft srpfc ^Fnr-f^ 282. T fr^afl f^fi^ 1 ii .17. 

5 H. tr^ ^ 280; T. cr^ ^ ( V. L. cr^ ) n 18 

6 H t^ ^resnfi%, 281. T. I-ST %3-^r^r^ n 19 

jfg" cjRd f^PT ZT^T ^FTT 

7 H. srcfr s%ri^Hffi^. 276, T. 37cfr ^%|^ii 20. 

8 H itftiant ^ : 275 ' T Mi^^ici ]%r ii 24. 

9 H. f3$**fc 273 5 T. a^Mfeii. 25. 



ubtiacandra and Ms Prakrit Grammar 

39 



i $55^=4 f^fr (Li. 18. ) 

( HI- iL 14 ) fRT ^f^T <5^T3*rfaT 3>T^ ^^T% II 3 ^ 

i ^ ssfr^l " ^ n ^ ft d T^TT 



APPENDIX. B. 
The opening verse of Subliacandra's grammar: 



u 
The Pra^asti and the colophon afc the end: 



u i u 



\ 



if ^JT^Ht 

t ^TH: U 3 II 



-H I ciff ^*-' 

1 u I M*J jnprpT^r^Tffr-- 

U * II 
U H U 



1. H ^ST srr^cT5rft.286. T. ^ sngcHlu 26. 



58 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 



TTC TTT% IFFR?^ II ^ U 






**** 
A verse at the close of III. iii 



^ II 

***** 

A Verse at tlie end of III. iv. 



ii ^ ii 



APPENDIX 0. 

Opening Sutras [of Subhacandra's grammar: Sutras giving 
terminology of abbreviations are included here. 

Ii. 
I ^ STIJ ^W^^R I 3 



: i M f ?: i ^ : I ^^nt T: I 

: t * f|fNt f|: M i ^p 
NTH ^rt: M V H^ wg^iRra^ I-H 



AN ATTACK ON SRl M ADHVACARYA IN THE 

SAURA PURANA 

BY 

B. N. KRISHNAMURTI SARMA B. A. ( Hons ). 



It is a well-known fact that the Samkhya, Saiva, Buddhi- 
stic and Advaita systems have been polemised upon to a greater 
)r a lesser extent in the Puranas. The early Samkhya dealt with 
in the Vedanta-Sutras was atheistic; the Saiva heretical; the 
Buddhistic system anti-Vedic. The Advaita was suspected of 
lidden sympathies with Buddhism, from very early times and 
;he close doctrinal correspondence between the two ought to 
nave been the subject of general discussion and comment after 
;he period of the Renaissance of Hinduism under the Guptas 
;he upshot of which was the visualisation of the Advaita as a 
iangerous cult by at least one section of the enlightened think- 
ers. A philosophical explanation of the early suspicion against 
che Advaita which later on developed into an open hostility, 
nay perhaps be sought in the intellectual aversion of the Brah- 
cnans to Buddhism which was too complete and unsparing to 
brook even the slightest hint or suspicion of its condonation 
at their own hands. That this note of disapprobation 
was sufficiently pronounced from very early days 1 is 
seen from the over-anxiety of Gaudapada himself to 
refute the allegation of doctrinal indentity between Buddhism 
and Advaita brought forward in his own days: ^Td&sH *fflTO 
( iv-99 ), on which Samkara comments : ^rfq ^TfTT^KI^^r fTR- 

3 



Anandagiri brings out the full significance of this remark: 
jjdl^k 3 ^tiljici fJ^t *HatiitoRi*r 3f=rftfcw i ts K^ RRi N 

That there existed a close doctrinal identity between the 
bwo systems is borne out by responsible writers on Indian Philo- 
sophy as well: 

" Gaudapada's liberal views enabled him to accept doctrines 
associated with Buddhism and adjust them to Advaita design. 2 



II 

^arakara Vijaya. 

cf . also ^t*Td*!^Nr%Htt* fi^i i?rffr. 
ti^t^ 1 fi^nH" ^TH i f^<?R^9,' STR^I^^TT \ 

Advaita Brahma Siddhi, Bibliotheca Indica p. 105 

2* Indian Ffyilotophy,) TO! ii^S. Badhakrlshnan, p. 453.. 



60 Annals of the Bhandarkdr Oriented Research Institute 

" The fourth chapter refers to Yogacara views and mentions 
the name of Buddha half a dozen times. 

" Indeed, the language and thought of the Karikas of Gauda, 
pada bear a striking resemblance to Madhyamaka writings 1 and 
contains many illustrations used in them. 2 

" He seems to have been conscious of the similarity of his 
system to some phases of Buddhistic thought. He therefore protest^ 
rather overmuch that his view is not Buddhism.* 

" That Gaudapada gives a vedantic adaptation of the 
Buddhistic Sunyavada is supported by many scholars such as 
Jocobi, Poussin, Sukthankar and Vidhusekhara Bhattacharya, 
Unfortunately, tfamkara explains away all obvious references fq 
Buddhism. "* ( Italics mine ). 

" His ( Samkara's ) Brahman was very much like the Sunya 
of ISTagarjuna. It is difficult indeed, to distinguish between 
pure being and pure non-being as a category. 5 There seem$ 
to be much truth in the accusation against Samkara, by "Vijnana 
JShiksu and others, that he was a hidden Buddhist himself. " 6 

The charge of crypto-Buddhism levelled against the A.dvaifca 
in the Padmapura^ta, 7 the Brahad- Brahma Samhita 8 etc., was no 
new one ; and the passages in these Puranas need on no account; 
be looked upon as interpolations, of interested parties. They 
are a record-and for aughfc we know the earliest record of 
emphatic public opinion against the Advaita doctrines, 
Ramanuja, 9 Madhva, Vallabha, 10 and Vijnana Bhiksu 11 have all 
expressed and echoed the charge of crypto-Buddhism in their 
works. And so far as I am aware, Madhva alone has given a reason- 1 

1. cf . 



( Madhvavijaya I, 50 ) 

2. RadhakrishJiail, p. 453, 

3. Hid-. 463. 

4. Hid p, 465. 
5. cf. 3H 



Madhva Yijayai. 51. 

6. Das Gupta * Indian Philosophy Vol. I pp 493-4 

7. Quoted by Vi]nana Bhiksu inhttf SamJchya-*Pravacdna Bhagya* 

8. Iv-8. 

9. VedartJia SamgraJia, Pandit pp86, 

10. Benares Sanskrit Series p577-a. 

11. Samkhya Pra^acana BJia^yq. 



An Attack on Sri Madhvacarya in the Saura Purana 61 

ed exposition of the charge by citing ancient Buddhistic texts 
and comparing them with Advaitic texts, in his Tattvoddyota. The 
complaint against the Advaita is thus historically sound and 
logically understandable. 

The Dvaita System of Madhva has not been the target of 
any Puranic criticism such as has been bestowed on the Advaita. 
But as ill-luck would have it, the existence of uncomplimentary 
criticism against the Advaita in the Padma Purana and the 
Brahma SamiMa seems to have actuated the perverse ingenuity 
of some disgruntled monistic Pandit into interpolating a certain 
number of verses into the Saura Purana criticising the System 
of Madhva, calumniating him and defaming his personality. 
These passages are sometimes jubilantly referred to by a set of 
people on certain occasions when sound reason and mother wit 
desert them in their controversial excursions. I propose there- 
fore to undertake in the course of this article, a searching 
examination of the two chapters in the Saura purana in which 
the criticisms against Madhva and his system are urged and 
expose their historical hollowness and metaphysical untenability. 

Prof. M. Winternitz, 1 who mentions that " three chapters 
( 38-40 ) are devoted to polemics against the system of Madhva" 
also draws attention to the fact that " chapters 38-40 do not 
occur in all the manuscripts 2 " and opines that " it is more 
probable that they have been interpolated. 3 " 

The Editors of the Anandasrama Series ( in which the Saura 
Purana is published ) confess in a foot-note that the three chap- 
ters in question are not found in the Mss. designated % ^, ^T, 
and ^T. Since in four out of the nine mss. collated by the Edi- 
tors the chapters in question are missing it is only reasonable 
to conclude that they have been interpolated in the others to 
judge from the obvious and avowed Advaitic bias 4 of the verses 
occurring there. The entire secret is betrayed by a clumsy 

1. History of Sanskrit Literature, Tr. by Mrs. Eetkar, Calcutta, 1927- 

p. 536. 

2. Sanskrit Edn. p. 125 note and Eggeling, India Office Cat., TI p. 

1188. 

3- C Jahn, 1 c, p. xiv ( Ibid ). 

cf . 4. *fm E n3'H<y^rer srf^sqYS ^^^" qlt 

p. 39 ) 



\\ ( chap, 40. ) 



62 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

statement; of the Editors that " in one among the four mss. which 
omit the three chapters is found a marginal note to the 
effect that three chapters following the 37th and dealing 
with the story of Madhva have been hushed up and deleted by 
Vaisnavas which are however to be found in other mss. 1 " This 
is entirely awkward. The owner of the mss. would most reason- 
ably have included the three missing chapters instead of indica- 
ting the deficiency to posterity by a mere marginal note ! A_t all 
events, his statement that particular chapters have been suppres- 
sed by Vaisnavas can have no historical value. Of the four 
mss. which omit the three chapters in question one is dated 1741 
Sarhvat, a date which is sufficiently early compared with the 
rest some of which belong to quite a late date. 

I shall now quote in extenso from the Saura Puarna to ena- 
ble the readers to follow the discussion closely: 

n 3 * n 
n 

: II 3 ^ II 



u 



U ^^ II 

^prt \\ **^ \\ 
n * 3 n 



: U 



rTTrT ^^i^T M VV9 II 

U Y <= [{ 
: II ^^ U 

^TT ^"^ II 



1 See footnote to Anandslrama Bdn. p. 125 



An Attack on ri Madhvacarya in the Saura Purana 6$ 
cr^rrcT^i^y-Hi-'I: Ri3%^ r i%^mr u MT u 

15 9 



: u M^ it 



u 



n ^^ u 

* 

( Chap. 39 ). 
3 ^ u 

* 

I 
II 3 3 II 



H <?!><*: ^ H 

U B"** H 



u BH H 



u s\ n 



n ^\ u 



II -*^ U 



n *-* u 



U "**< U 



IU Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 



3=c5T 



( Chap. 40 ) 

There Is some variation between the accounts contain- 
ed in chapters 39 and 40. The account in the former makes out 
that Madhu Sarma ( mark the name ), was born in the midst of 
the Andhra country, as the illegitimate son of a Brahman widow. 
He sought Padmapada as his preceptor in Advaita and read under 
him. Once, he was detected by the teacher while eating without 
having bathed or performed his ablutions. The teacher demanded 
a clear confession of his parentage etc., and the offender came 
out with a clear confession. Thereupon, the preceptor . cursed 
him saying that he would be good at purvapaksa only and leave 
his Siddhanta undeveloped. 

The second account ( chap. 40 ) repeats all the above details 
and adds that M adhu was the incarnation of Vasanta-a companion 
of Rati who agreed to help her to wreak vengeance on Siva for 
his cruel disposal of her husband, by. incarnating himself and 
promulgating a system of philosophy repudiating the supremacy 
of Siva and inculcating his hatred. 

The second account is a clumsy failure at an attempt to 
supply certain missing links-the motive of the incarnation of 
Madhu, and his identification with Vasanta. Another additional 
information which this chapter furnishes is in the shape of a 
Puranic prophecy that no followers of Madhu will be left in 
Aryavarta, Utkal, Bengal and the Godavari Delta-a prophecy 
which is as sweeping as it is false to facts. And curiously 
enough there is a glaring contradiction between the prophecy 
in chapter 39 and the one in chapter 40. In the former we read 
that " gradually the religion of Madhvawill spread to the banks 
of the Godavari and when the fulness of Kali age is reached, it 



An Attack on $rl Marthvacarya in the Baura Purftria 65 

fill spread in Aryavarfca." 1 In chapter 40 however we are told 
hat " no followers of Madhva will be found on the banks of 
UeGodavarl and in Aryavarta ! " What opinion one can have of 
he sanity of such a prophecy and its maker it is for the readers 
o judge. 

Such is the laborious " criticism " against Madhva and 
ns system, contained in the Saura Purani. Now, we shall 
the charges in some detail. 



To judge from the most outrageous of historical and biogra- 
phical blunders that the account bristles with one can 
unhesitatingly conclude that far from being an authentic 
Puranic version, the entire account is the interpolation of an 
ignorant and incorrigible Pandit. One wonders who the 
interpolator's informant was when one is told that Madhva was 
born in the " midst of the Andhra country I ** 2 There is, more- 
over, no proof at all that Madhva is polemised upon. Else, a 
nasty mistake must be admitted to have been committed by the 
interpolator in regard to the name of Madhva. He is 
designated in three different ways: Madhu, Madhu 
Sarma and Madhvacarya. It is clear that the account 
considers l Madhu ' as the proper name. Apart from 
the fact that * Madhva ' itself was not the name given to 
the Acarya either by his parents or by his preceptor at initiation 
it must be pointed out that there is no earthly connection what- 
soever between * Madhu * and * Madhva: ' and so no good ground 
to indentify the two as is done in chapter 40. Sri Madhva was 
named Anandatlrtha 4 by his preceptor at the time of initiation 
into holy order and ' Madhva ' is a synonym assumed by the 
Acarya. 5 He was named by his parents Vasudeva and one can 

l t Chap. 39, verses 55, 56, 

2. Chap. 40, veises 47-48, 

3. Of. ci^srT^n^cj ^rfg^TTc^t ^ft^r^ n Again ^UdTd^in^^f^ 4 . The fact, 
however, is lhat the real Maclh> acar> a was born neither in the Andhro. nor 
in the Kama talc a country but in the Tuiu country! ^ome ill-informed 
writers think that Madhva was a Canaiese Brahman., But this is simply a 
blunder, Madhva was a Tuln Biahman. 

4 . SCFT^rfiSflW <Tf 3^ff <f SPiF rP^c^^TOre^ I 

( Madhva-Vijaya T-2 ) 

5 qf^OT^ Sits : ^ ft rfmg^if ?f \ 

II 

( Oomm. on Chandogya Up.) 
a 



66 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

wonder till eternity how he could have addressed himself to his 
preceptor 1 by a name which he had not yet come to possess! In 
any case, there is not even the ghost of a suggestion in the 
Saura Parana that * Madhva ' is regarded as the substantive and 
proper name of the person polemised upon. The account deals 
with Madhu, Madhu-arma or at the worst Acarya Madhu and 
Sri Madhvacarya is quite beyond its jurisdiction. 

The attempt to ^legitimize Madhva is a sorry spectacle 
opposed alike to historical testimony and tradition. Sri Madhva'g 
father was a well-known personality 2 in the village of Pajaka* 
ksetra ( S. Canara district ) not in the " midst of Andhra 
country *' as the Puranic interpolator would have us believe-a 
statement which is as stupid and vague as it can be. He was 
held in high esteem by the villagers and was only spoken of as 
Madhyageha-bhatta-' resident of the midmost mansion' s -(]sradu- 
vantillayya in Tulu). Sri Madhva's parents would not easily permit 
his renunciation and he had to wait fcill fche birth of a second son 
to his parents. The biography of Madhva, written, by his 
younger contemporary, relates how the Acarya's brother too 
joined the holy order after the demise of his parents. The 
biography thus makes clear that the parents of Madhva were 
alive for more than thirty years after his renunciation. In the face 
of so much recorded evidence the statement that he was the son of 
a widow through illegitimate means is matched for absurdity of 
invention only by the other one of his pupillage under Padmapada ! 
( and perhaps also of his nativity in the "midst of Andhrade^a"! ), 

The Puranic prophecy further states that Madhva renounced 
the world at the age of five 4 ! Apart from the fact that he could 
not even have been initiated into vedic studentship ( ^IH^H ) at 
so tender an age, it is clear from the life-history of the Acarya 
that he must have been well-nigh 16 years old when he applied 

1. cf. f^jtf 



Madhva Vtjaya ii 14. 

3. rr Madhva was also known by the epithet Madhyamandira-which 
was originally applied to his father. This epithet also means resident of 
the middle house and the late Dr. R, G- Bhandarkar is sadly mistaken in 
introducing "a novel epithet Madhyarnandara which he lenders into 
"the wish-giving tree of the family of Madhya, 'Vatsnavism Straasburg, 
1913, p. 58. 



40-51. 



An Attack on &rt Madhvacarya in the Saura Purana &t 

>r permission to renounce. 1 He had to persuade his parents, 
rgue with them and ultimately force their consent. The 
carya's father was most naturally unwilling to lose his only 
m, since he had nobody else, he pleaded, to look after him and 
is wife in their old age 2 which implies that Madhva was in 
le fullness of youth just then and his father was even, 
resumably, planning for his marriage in the near future. All 
lis is a veritable impossibility in the case of a boy of five. 

The name of Sri Madhva's preceptor und r ' whom he studied 
^dvaitic works such as the Ista Siddhi j ^ s Acyutapreksa. 4 
'he Saura Puroma makes Padmapada, the pi ceptor of Madhva. 
Jut historically there seems to have elapsed something like 
iree centuries between Padmapada and Madhva and any tutorial 
onnection between the two is a human and a physical 
^possibility ! 

A few words about the alleged constructive incapacity of 
Madhva which is attributed to the curse of Padmapada. The 
pinion here expressed that Madhva is more a critic than a 
tiinker is not really different from a recent estimate of Madhva 
dumbrated by a certain soi disant authority that Madhva is a 
philosophical pugilist " and his system a " philosophical 
ugilism 1 " Both rest on an insufficient and scrappy understandi- 
ng of the system. As one who came after great intellectual 
;iants like Samkara, Padmapada, Vacaspati and Eamanuja 
Madhva had necessarily to devote his immediate and undivided 
Attention to a refutation of the views of his predecessors. $"or 
tad he merely to deal with Samkara and Kamanuja. Tradition 
tas it that he had tVenty one earlier commentaries on the 
Vedanta Sutras to deal with. 

1. C. N. Krishnasvami Ayer thinks that Madhva was twenty-fir eat his 
enunciation, which is objected to by C. M. Padmanabhaearya on very 
casonablc grounds. The latter author thinks that eleven or twelve was 
he age at which the AcSrya renounced. Personally, I think the Aca"rya 
night have been well-nigh sixteen, when he renounced the world. 

2. R^H ^ff mositf^ ^ c^frft ^FFn^s i^rssHX 1 

( Madhva Vijaya iv-22 ) 

fid 



iv-45). 
(Madftva Vtjaya iv 6 ), 



68 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research 1 nstitute 

Demolition precedes construction and Madhva demolished 
his" opponents before erecting a new citadel of his own in 
doing which he was merely acting up to the usual pro. 
cedure of Indian System builders: f 3W^T =3" ^R^^T^RTO^ 
Pklfe<u|l*3T ^TcT I 1 * The Advaita came up for a full measure of 
his criticism since it was the fashionable philosophy of the times, 
Out of the thirty-seven works of Madhva, only four deal directly 
and mainly with the Advaita. It is therefore quite untrue to 
say that Madhva was at all cynical in his attitude towards tie 
Advaita or was entirely preoccupied with criticising it- On the 
contrary, his activities were truly many-sided. He was not 
simply a destructive genius, a Vaitandnka or a philosophical 
pugilist. The following clear classification of Madhva's works 
would give an idea of his many-sided activities: 

1> Vedic literature : a commentary on the first forty hymns 
of the Bgveda. 

3* Upanisadic literature : Commentaries on the ten upa- 
nisads. 

3. Sutra literature : the Bhasya, Anu Bhasya, Ann 
Vyakhyana, and Nyaya-Vivarana. 

4 Glta-literature : two commentaries on the Gita. 

5. Ten Prakaranas : four dealing mainly with Advaita: 

Upadhi Khandana, Mayavada Khandana, Mithyatva- 
anumana Khandana, and Tattvoddyota; Pramana 
Laksana and Kathalaksana dealing with Logic and 
Dialectics; manuals devoted to a constructive exposition 
of Dvaita' Tattva Samkhyana, Tattva Viveka, and 
Visnu Tattva Nirnaya and also the Karma Nirnaya. 

6. Epic literature:-a metrical^ synopsis of the Mahabharata 
and a commentary on the Sri Bhagavata. 

7. Poems: a poem called Yamaka Bharata. 

8. Works of Worship-Tantra Sara, Krsnamrtamaharimva, 

9. Works on Conduct: Sadacara-Smrti. Yatipranava- 
kalpa. 

10. Devotional Hymns: Dvadasa Stotra, Nakhastotra. and 
JayantI nirnaya. 

Apart from the great commentaries on the Vedanta Sutras, 
andtheGita, Madhva gave a constructive exposition of Ms 
system in short manuals devoted to that purpose. Credit goes 



An Attack an &ri Madhvacarya ui the Qaura Pur ana 69 

to Madhva for having neglected no part of the valuable heritage 
of Hinduism. While Samkara would dismiss the entire Karma 
Kanda as barren and make invidious distinction between com- 
monplace srufis and mahavakyas, reject the Pancaratra and 
mystifyingly speak of the 'philosophy of the Upanisads ' par 
excellence Madhva accepts the entire body of Hindu religious 
literature as authoritative: 



The religious and devotional aspect of life was specially 
stressed by Madhva in separate works ( see class 9 and 10 ) 
thus laying firm and lasting foundation of religion, mora- 
lity, devotion and austerity. Seeing that only four out of his 
thirty-seven works deal directly with Advaita, while many of 
the rest are devoted to a constructive exposition of his system 
and others to miscellaneous matters, the charge of lack of 
constructive work and undue criticism of Advaita are entirely 
misplaced. 

The existence of the Dvaita as an independent system had 
( in days prior to Madhva ) long been threatened and a severe 
persecution of the Saints of the creed was set on foot by the 
Advaitins in ascendency; so much so that Dvaita teachers like 
Prajmatlrtha and his followers had literally to masquerade 3 in 
the guise of Advaitic hermits and appoint two successors one 
ostensibly following the Advaita teaching and the other entrust- 
ed with the ancient teaching of Dvaita which he was to 
propagate undetected by the Advaitins. An account of this 
persecution is preserved to us in the Manimanjari^, a poem by 
the biographer of Madhva. The advent of Madhva was there- 

1. Advita S^ddhi, p. 1. 

2. Quoted from the Skanda In Madbva's Sutra- Bha'-i'a. 

3. 




. Chap. 8. 



70 Annals of the J3Jiandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

fore of great relief to the faithful. Henceforth they could 
practise their religion in public and breathe freely. Heaven 
knows what a great boon it was deemed, in days when religion 
was a vital concern of life. 

Madhva had to define and illustrate the categories of logic 
eschewing what was unessential in the traditional system of the 
Logicians. He had also put new vigour into the religious and 
moral life of his followers, by erecting a new temple at Udipi 
and making it the meeting place of his followers from various 
parts thus fostering a sense of brotherhood among them and by 
introducing healthy reforms such as the abolition of bloody 
sacrifices and the substitution of flour ewes instead of live 
animals in sacrifices-a practice which is still followed by his 
religionists and the enforcement of fasts on EkadasI days. He 
had in short, evolved a new and compact community and saw 
it growing under his eyes, slowly and steadily. 

But he had to arm his followers in self-defence. Those 
were days of religious controversy and debates. The feeling 
of religion ran high in men's minds and they were prepared to 
stake everything for it. The veterans of Advaita were only too 
glad to meet the men of the new faith and if possible, to nip 
them in the bud. Logic and learning, wit and eloquence were 
at their command and they had a fair chance of success. Madhva 
had realised this himself for he too had had encounters with 
several rivals and old veterans more especially with the then 
head of the Srngerl Matha. The only hope lay in educating his 
followers in the arts of debate and discussion and enable them 
to hold their own against the onslaughts of Advaitins. It 
is no exaggeration to say that his hopes were more than fulfilled. 
We have only to cite the illustrious names of Jayatlrtha, 
Vyasaraja Svamin, and Vijayindra Tlrtha who rose to defend 
the citadel of their Master in troubled times. And where were 
their arms forged ? In the furnace of Sri Madhva's works. 

If Madhva had thus to devote, what may now seem to us, 
an undue attention to a criticism of rival schools and to the 
intricacies of Logic, it was more as a necessity of the times and 
in self-defence. Logic and criticism as such had no attraction for 
Madhva, and he warns 1 his followers against having too much 

1- *r ^73^1=^^ fH^dJ-TRTcrzf (I 

ff mrsift * 

n 



|J 

Madhra on Veddnta Sutra i, 1, 3, 



An Attack cm $rl Madftracania m the Baura Pura^a 71 

to do with either. Ignorance of the exact state of philosophical 
and polemical atmosphere during and before the times of Madhva 
as well as a failure to realise the magnitude of Madhva's mission 
are alone responsible for the wild criticism urged in certain 
quarters that Madhva was a friend of the Naiyayikas, or the 
other one urged by the Pandit-interpolator in the Saura Purana 
that he was a Sophist ( %^ Y and above all for the sapient 
comment emanating from a recent writer on Indian Philosophy 
that " Madhva makes a clever use of the "JSTyaya-Yaisesika 
doctrines.^" ( Italics mine ). 

The original motive of the supposed incarnation of Madhu 
is claimed to be to spread the hatred" of Siva ; and Madhva is 
falsely accused 4 of spreading tha hatred of Siva. But it needs 
no serious effort to establish that Madhva was not a bigot. True 
it is that he resolutely maintains the supremacy of Visnu and 
regards him as the creator. But in this respect he is not the 
only sinner ! The doctrine of the supremacy of Visnu is directly 
traceable to the brightest epoch of Tedic speculation, from 
whence it found its way into the epics and thence into the 
Puianas. And in advocating the supremacy of Visnu, Madhva 
is merely voicing forth the united testimony 5 of the entire 
religious literature of the Hindus. 



n^t HffwiFf n 

It is a well-known fact that the author of the Vedanfa Sutias has 
eleaily iepudiated the Nyaya-Vaise^ika tenets. Some Onental Scholars 
believe that the Nyaya iss not dealt with in the STttras. Madhva liowevei 
takes the Sutra 



as a conclusive repudiation of N^ICyo, system. lie writes. 

^TrT W. f-i 'm -y Cl 1 c3"T^T a-iM^I ^FPT^TF 
and quotes the famous lament of the jackal from the Bliarata 



- 

la the face of such an unequivocal icpudiation of Nya*ya the charge 
against Madhva that he was a sophist %^ la entirely ludicrous. 
2 Indian PhtlosojjTiy Vol n, p. 738. ( S. Kadhakiishnan) 

3. ^f^Tl^r 5R- ^SJ ^^U^R-^Fi I chap 40, 23. 

4. rr^^tlr 1 JTfTge: ft^ri%^f^% \ Ibid 61 
5. 



ti 

( ffarivamsa ) rjuofcedby Madhva. The same is quoted by Saihkaia 
also in his VIMIU SaJiasranaina BJiasya. 

cf also- srgrr ^^sjcp:!^ qr ^^fSi-T^rwsn^^t \ 



n 

R'dmayana v 



?2 Annals of the handarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Oriental scholars, pursuing the historical method, have also 
endorsed the supremacy of Visnu in their own way. Visnu ig 
pre-eminently an Aryan god. Siva, who is known to the Rg, 
veda only under the name of Rudra, has many repellent quali- 
ties which more probably than not, suggest his aboriginal origin, 
The opinion is held by many responsible orientalists that 
Rudra is a later accretion to the Vedic Pantheon. The associa* 
tion of phallic worship with Rudra is claimed to be another 
sign of his aboriginal Dravidian origin ; and the un-corapft 
mentary references to Rudra explained on the admission of the 
probability of the alien origin of that deity to whom the Aryans 
were at first averse. 

Without invoking the aid of comparative and historical 
religious research, every unbiassed student of Indian religious 
literature will see that Visnu is the supreme deity of the Hindu 
Pantheon. Earnest enquirers are some times discomfited by the 
testimony of the Puranas not being uniform. An historical 
explanation of this contradiction may be offered on the lines 
indicated by Max Miiller in regard to the early speculations of 
Vedic seers, by resorting to the henotheistic ^or Kathenotheistic 
standpoint. 

^ The difficulty was present also to the minds of indigenous 
writers and philosophers and the Puranas themselves suggest a 
way out of the difficulty from a purely religious point of view, 
It would-be presumptuous on our part to dismiss this explanation 
as^a Puranic fiction unworthy of credence. Even granting that 
it is so, one must nevertheless admit a fundamental postulate 
of Monotheism at its back. The Puranic explanation is that 
though Visnu is the Supreme God, other deities are sometimes 
held up to delude the demoniac and the ungodly and mislead 
them: 



*rt 

( Varaha) 



One may or may not agree with this explanation. But the fact 
remains that it has been accepted as a suitable solution by several 

1, Quoted by Madhva, in hi B- Oomm on Vedanta Svtra^ 1,1. 



An Aftack on Sn Martlivacarya in the Baura Pur ana 73 

indigenous philosophers 1 in India, iinciilding Madhva, who 
quotes the relevant passages from the Varaha Purana? 

Madhva is not the only apostle of the doctrine of the 
supremacy of Visrm. He is one among the many. The Alvars 
of S. India, Yamuna, Ramamija, Kuranarayana, 3 Vedanta 
Deika, Vallabha, Caitanya and Baladeva have all maintained 
the unchallengeable supremacy of Visnu. The Advaitins them- 
selves form no exception. Samkara 4 Suresvara 5 Sarvajnatma 6 , 
Madhusudana 7 , Srldhara, Brahmananda have all regarded Visnu 
as the Isvara of Advaita the lower Brahman. If those who have 
advocated the supremacy of Visnu are to be put down as the 
avatars of Madhu volunteering to wreak vengeance on Hudta , 
we should find more than a dozen avatar as of Vasanta ( Madhu ) ! I 
And it is not clear why Sri Madhva alone should be selected for 
the honor 1 Genuine Advaifrism has no quarter to give to either 
Siva or Visnu. Such being the case, it is quite ununderstandable 
how the three chapters in the 8 aura Pur ana whose Advaifcic 
bias and predilections are all but concealed, 8 , can reasonably 

1. RSmSnuja, VedartTia-SaihgraTiat Pandit Reprints, p. 181-6, cf also 
m>HllSHRf ^ I=H I l^S 



SadHnanda, Advaita Brahma Stddhi BiHiotheca Indica, 105-6 
3T?f 



Purugottama, Avatara Vadavali y Dev akin an dan Scary a G-rantha 
Series, 2 p 192. See also p. 225 ibid. 

2 The suggestion made in some quarters that Madhva has fabricat- 
ed these passages is to be spurned with the contempt that it deserves since 
the same passages have "been quoted by Vallabha, in his Anu'bfiasya 

3. Whose eyes were put out by a Cola King of the South, foi re- 
fusing to acknowledge 6iva as the Supreme Deity, 

4. 



Puru^ottama, Vaddvlai. 
l^^t ^?f : Ij 

i^rr;%5r n 

Naislcarmya Siddh^. 



6. 

SamJc^epa gariraJsa. 

7. JTtaf ^TTfT f^" ^"4 I^JT^ ft^" f^^J^TtrsfTcT' 

Adv^to, Siddfi'i. 

cf. also ^soTicq-^ rTf^T^f ^ ^^ \ ( Ibid ). 

8 cf . ch 39 Verses 56*7, and chap 40 verse 53. 

10 



74 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

take umbrage at Madhva's denial of the supremacy of Sha 
and invent a silly story of Batfs penance etc. This again 
amply proves that the Pandit interpolator was thoroughly 
ignorant of the fundamental position ol Advaita which \ 
nevertheless blindly adores. 

The statement that Madhva incited hatred of Siva 
is as stupid as unjust. Madhva was no bigot who forbade the 
worship of Siva. He has his own place in the hierarchy of 
gods according to Madhva, only Budra is nob at the head of it, 
In strict conformity with his rigorous Monotheism, Madhva 
believes in Yisnu alone as the Supreme Brahman 1 and creator 
( ^HI^KOT ); who has neither peer nor superior. 2 Tt is in this 
sense that he interprets the famous text Tr^qiftdt^t sffl \ Hatred 
of Siva has no place in the system of Madhva. Narayana 
Panditacarya, the biographer of Madhva has himself left us a 
poem in praise of Siva. 3 And Vyasatlrtha, the famous author of 
the Nyayamrta has also left one. 4 The practice of boycotting 
Siva temples obtains only among the followers of Bamanuja, 
A Tamil saying is current still among them that one i. e., a 
faithful Bamanujite must not take refuge in a Siva temple even 
if an elephant is after him and his life itself is in danger 1 
Madhva himself in his own days paid visits to the shrines of 
Benares and Barnes varam. To the last day of his life, he 
continued to hold his classes within the temple of Anantevara 
at Udipl 5 Vadiraja Svamin, who undertook a grand tour, has 
left us hymns in praise of the various Siva temples of India, 
"<While the followers of Bamanuja would on no account make 
p&grimages to Bamesvara or enter a Siva temple under the worst 
calamities even, the followers of Madhva have always main- 
tained a healthy attitude of religious toleration and catholicity. 
Even -jpday a special service is conducted at the Matha of Sri 
VySsar^a Svamin, on the night of Mahaivaratri. Thus, the 
indictm&it against Madhva that he incited hatred of Siva is 
entirely baseless. 




( JBharata ) 



( Glta, ) 

3. feua Stuti Belgaum, aka 1803. 

4. LagTiu &tva Stuti, Belgaum, 1803. 

5. An enclosure marks the place, today^at tbe temple of 
6 TirtTia Prabandha of 



An Attack on Sri Madhvacarya in the Saura Purana 75 

The story of the penance of Ratfs friends to wreak 
vengeance on Rudra, related and interpolated in the Saura 
Pur ana cannot really bear investigation, A.part from the 
novelty of the episode which is not found in any other Purana, 
it is an insult to the ideal womanliness of Rati to ever conceive 
of her as attempting to retaliate 1 against Rudra, leaguing herself 
with Madhu tor that purpose and accepting the latter's offer of 
help in the manner related. The character and personality of 
Bati disclosed to us in ihe Puranic legends and recorded hy the 
Prince of Indian Poets, Kalidasa, is", the beau ideal of a woman 
and wife, Bati, as everyone who has read the Kumara Sarribhava 
knows, piteously bemoans the loss of her husband. Her com- 
panions, notably Vasanta himself, console her. A.n ethereal voice 
predicts reunion at a later dale, * when Siva is delighled after 
his marriage with Parvatl. a ' "Rati retires with a pacified heart 3 
and patiently but eagerly awaits 1 the wedding of Parvati. She 
has no reason i,o bear ill-will or malice towards Rudra.- Suoto. a 
disposition is entirely unbecoming a lady of the type of Rati, 
And above all, the Pandit-interpolator in his eagerness to concoct 
a story with all his misplaced ingenuity, has most pathetically 
failed to realise or foresee that the slightest misdemeanour or 
attempt at open revolt or instigation of revolt against Rudra by 
Rati would have worsened her case and estranged her from Rudra 
on whose future good graces depended the prospect of her reunion 
with her husband. Woman as she was, Rati could not have been 
foolish enough to catch a Tartar in Rudra or attempt to 
double-cross him-the verdict of the Pandit-interpolator not 
withstanding ! The story of Rati's vengeance thus stands utterly 
disowned and discredited both by logic and commonsense. 



l. 



n 

(chap 40 Yerses 13-14) 

2. qr?ats^ qri^-'r ^r CTTOT ?r?q^%^f f^- < 

^Tff5TWGzff?T 1 1 
2umara Samlhava, iv, 42 ) 




76 Annals of the BhandarJcar Oriental Research Institute 

The character of Vasanta himself, such as we know hira 
from the legends and from Kalidasa, is not such as tt 
warrant his readiness to engage in any sort of unholy campaigi 
against Eudra, for the mere love of his friend. It is too mucl 
to exploit Vasanta's friendship for Kama, for purposes of invent- 
ing a silly story vilifying a great religious teacher and pMlo- 
sopher of India ! 

Thus the entire episode in the Saura Pur aria abounds in 
blunders of historical detail and artistic conception. The inter- 
polator is a fourth-rate Pandit ignorant alike of history, 
geography, tradition, art, proportion and philosophy ! Hie only 
qualification is His prejudice against Madhva, which is respon- 
sible for the miserable performance he has bequeathed to 
humanity. 

But for the spasmodic attempts in certain quarters to point 
fcxultingly to the episode in the Saura Pur aria when a more 
courageous course of polemics could not be faced and the rather 
at first-sight misleading statement in an accredited history of 
Sanskrit Literature that " in the Saura Parana three chapters are 
devoted to polemics against the system of Madhva, " the present 
writer would not have undertaken a serious examination of the 
two chapters in the said Puratja and exposed the hollowness of 
their criticisms and the puerility of their inventions. 

It is hoped that enough has been said to enable.scholars and 
critics to form a just and deserving estimate of the interpolated 
chapters in the Saura Puraya* 



BUDDHIST LOGIC 
INTRODUCTORY SURVEY ) 

BY 
DURGACHARAN OHATTEBJI, M. A. 

LECTURER IN SANSKRIT, GOVERNMENT COLLEGE 
KRISHNAGAR, BENGAL 



Logic in India is commonly associated with, the names of 
Gautama and Gangesa, followed by a host of commentators and 
sub-commentators. The Nyaya-Sufcra of Gautama with the 
Bhasya of Vatsyayana, the Varttika of Uddyotakara and fche 
Tatparyatlka of Vacaspati and some other sub-commentaries 
constitute what is generally designated as the old school of 
Indian Logic. The Tattvacintamani of Ganges^ with its 
innumerable commentaries and sub-commentaries is the basis 
of the modern school of Indian Logic ( Navya Nya^a ). A closer 
study of Indian Literature would show that not only these two 
but all the different schools of Indian Philosophy, both, orthodox 
and heterodox, have developed logics of their own in consonance 
with their distinctive metaphysics. Even some of the technical 
sciences, such as medicine ( ayurveda ) and politics (artha&astra) 
have discussed problems of logic. 1 In this connection it may 
be pointed out that a complete philosophical system must have 
a logic of its own, for unless we have a definite criterion of 
truth or an apparatus for testing our knowledge, we cannot have 
a fully reasoned and correct knowledge of the world and our 
relation with it, which may be regarded as the main problem of 
philosophy. Every Indian system has therefore thought it 
necessary to discuss the problem of pramana ( right cognition 
and its methods) as indispensable prolegomenon and the dictum, 
manadhlna meyasiddhik ( the objects of knowledge depend on the 
pramana or the method of right cognition ) has been accepted in 

1. See Vidyabhushana- A History of Indian Logic, Calcutta, 1921, 
p. 24 f. 



?8 Annals of the Bhandarltar Oriental Research Institute 
some form or other by all the schools. 1 

Buddhist Logic which took its rise and developed along 
with Buddhist Philosophy has a peculiar interest for us. It has 
enormously influenced Brahmanic and Jaina logic. All the 
schools of Brahmanic philosophers, ho wsoever at variance among 
themselves, are singularly at one in attacking the theories of 
Buddhist Logic, though each has its own way of attack. The 
Jaina logicians have also directed their attack against the 
Buddhist logicians. Consequently the problems of Buddhist 
logic afford an interesting study not only for their own sake 
but also for the sake of the light they throw on the history of 
Indian logic as a whole. We, therefore, cannofc neglect the Brah- 
manic and Jaina points of view in our study of Buddhist logic 
because the Brahmanic, Jain and Buddhisi logicians carried on 
an unremitting and tough intellectual fight for several centuries, 

Logic as an art or a method of argument had been resorted 
to by men long before any systematic speculation on logic began, 
The question is therefore not one of logic or no logic but one of 
developed logic or primitive logic. It was after the philosophical 
speculations were more or less crystallized that attention was 
directed towards logic as a separate science. Jayanta Bhatta 
if understood in this sense, is not far from truth when he 



1. a Prameyasiddhtlipramanaddlu. SSmkhyakanka, 4. 

5 Pramanenaprameyasyopal&ld'Fi'i'fy. Maitryupani^ad. 6.14. 

c Pramananay abb-yam tattvarthadhigamafy. Tattv&itha"- 

dhigama Sutra. 1. 1. 
d SamyagjnaxqpurviJca sarvapurusariliastddJwlj 

Ny&yabindu 1. 1. 

The utility and appropriateness of the discussion on the pramanas 
have been eloquently appieoiated by Prof. Max Mnller who in his pre- 
face to 'The Six Systems of Iruan Philosophy '(1912) observes as follows.- 

" Such an examination of the authorities of human knowledge 
( Pramanas ) ought, of course, to form the introduction to eveiy system 
of philosophy, and to have clearly seen this is, as it seems to me, a 
very high distinction of Indian Philosophy How much useless contro- 
versy would have been avoided, particularly among Jewish, Mohemedan 
and Christian philosophers,if a pioper place had been assigned in Umine 
to the question of what constitutes our legitimate 01 our only possible 
channels of knowledge, whether perception, inference, revelation or 
anything else." ( Preface, xiii ). 



Buddhist Logic 79 

remarks that logic is coeval with the creation and the Vedas. l 

As the Vedas present no set philosophy, the Upanisads 
likewise are diffuse and figurative in their expressions. It is 
for this reason that the Upanisads to which the germs of all 
later philosophical thoughts can be definitely traced have little 
to say about logical problems. * But the debates and the 
discussions found in the Upanisads in ay be regarded as the 
anticipations of the logical system that followed, 

Upanisads, though they encourage debates and discussions, 
declare that truths regarding Brahman are not obtainable by 
argumentation alone ( naisa tarkeria matir apaneya )? It is also 
to be noted in this connection that an approach to religion or 
metaphysics purely from the standpoint of reason, quite 
irrespective of the conclusion that may follow, is not much 
favoured in Brahmanic literature in general. 

A doctrine, unless ratified by Yedic authority, can claim no 
place in the domain of Brahmanic thought. The Mahabharata 
relates the story of a Brahmana who on account of his being 

1. Jayanta enters into a veiy interesting question as to the 
originator of the Nya"ya 6^stra which undertakes to prove the validity 
of the Vedas ( <cedapramanyamhcaya ). He argues as follows: 

If NySya is to prove the validity of the Vedas, how was the 
validity of the Vedas proved before Akapada, the accredited author of 
the Nya"ya~sutra ? This is a simple question. How was the meaning of 
the Vedas interpreted before Jaimini or tbe words derived befoie 
Psnini and the meties composed before Pingala ? Since the primal 
creation these arts ( vidya ) have begun like the Vedas. Aksapada, 
Jaimini, Pa"nim and Pingala are regarded as first teachers in 
NySya, Mlrna'msa*, Vyakarana and Chandas respectively on the gronnd 
of their elaborating and systematizing what was originally implicit 
and not reflectively foimulated. ( Itfanvak^apa'da't ptiivam kuto 
vedaprarna'nyams'caya Stslt atyalpam idam uccyate. Jaimineh puivam 
kena vedaTfcho vyftkhyafcah. Psnineh purvam kena pada"ni vyutp'adita'ni. 
Pingalat purvam kena chandSmsi racitni adisarga"t piabhrti vedavad 
imS vidyah piavxttsh. Samksepavistaravivakfaya" tu ta*msta"mstatra 
tatia kartrnftcak^ate. NySyamanjarl, Vizianagram Sanskrit Series, p. 5 ) 
Jayanta thus maintains that the Nyaya system is coexistent with the 
Vedas. 

2. For the roots of the Ny^ya-Vaise^ika doctrines in the 
Upanisads, f.ee Ranade's "A constructive survey of the Upanishadic 
Philosophy ", p. 190. Also compare Prof S. Raclhakrishna's remarks 
about JsTy^ya logic in his Indian Philosophy, VoL I ( 1923 ) p 263 

3. Kathopanigad, 129. 



80 Annals of the Eliandar'kar Oriental Research Institute 

addicted to logic-chopping all through hi$ life was bom a jackal 
in his next birth. * According to Vyasa, spiritual doctrines 
cannot be communicated to those made callous by dialectics 
( tarkaSastradagdhaya ). 2 Manu-Samhita, though recommend* 
ing Anvlksiki ( logic ) as a useful and necessary study for a 
king and insisting on a hefuka's and a tarJdn's being indispensa. 
ble members of a legal assembly, 3 enjoins excommunication 
upon those dvijas ( twice-born class ) who have become 
sceptics ( nastika ) owing to recourse to hefusastra and set at 
defiance Sruti and Smrti, the two recognised sources of 
religion. 4 Harm urges that dhar?na is to be analysed by 
means of argumentation in conformity with the Yedas s , 
Though there are several references to the necessity and 
usefulness of logic as well as debates and discussions, nowhere 
in Brahmanic literature is logic appraised at its full value. On 
the contrary, its importance has been emphasized, if at all, to 
prove things in concurrence with the beliefs and doctrines of the 
Yedas whose authority was commonly acknowledged to be one 
of the several means of right cognition (agamct or abda pramaria) 
in the Brahmanical schools of philosophy. 6 

The Buddhists on the other hand did not accept the 
unquestionable authority of the Vedas and so could rely upon 
individual experience and rationalism in matters of religion and 
philosophy untrammelled by any code of set beliefs. The 
Buddhist philosophers sometimes stigmatise the Brahmanic 
thinkers as traditionists or unscrupulous followers of the Agama 
1 aTiamasam panditako Jiaituko vedanindaTcal} 

anvzk '-siTcim tarJcavidjam anurakto nirartJiafcam. 

fietuvadan pravadita vakta samsatsu Jietumat 

aJsrosta cativaJcfa ca braTimavaJeyesu ca dvifan. 

naslikaJi. sarvakaiiki ca mur7shafy panditamanikaTj. 

tasyeyam plialamrvrtti srgalatvam mama dvija. 

MaTiabharata, &antijoarva t Adliyaya 180 &iohas 47-49, 

2. na tarkasastvadagdhaya tatJiaiva pzsunaya ca. 
ibid't Adhyaya 246, &lolca S c~d. 

3. traividyo hetulcastarkl nairuJjto dliarrttapcttha'kal^ 

trayakcasramino puroe jpansad sydd dasavara. 
ManuBamJiifa^ Adliyaya 12, SloTea 111. 

4. yo^ vamanyeta te mule fietusastrasray'ad dvijal 

sa sadhulhir "bafasJearyo riastiho vedanindalcafy. 
Manusamhita, AdJiyaya %, Stolcall. 
5 arsam dharmopadesam ca vedasastravirodhiria 

yastarJcenanusamdhatte sa dTiarmam veda netarafy. 
ManusamTiita^ Adfiyaya,^ 12, dloJca 106. 
6. See Vidyabtm^ana's History of Indian Logic pp 36-39 



Buddhist Logic 8t 

or the Vedas on account of the latter 's adherence to the authority 
of the Vedas without any regard for reason. 1 Buddha lays 
emphasis upon individual experience and not infrequently he 
declares in express terms that the path to be adopted is what one 
oneself recognises as true. " Then, monks, what you have 
just said is only what you yourselves have recognised, 
what you yourselves have comperhended, what you your- 
selves have understood, is it not so ? " "It is even so, Lord 2 ". 
Though in the Suttas there are a few passages apparently 
denouncing logic and free thought they are to be 
understood in the light of the general tenor of the texts which so 
eloquently favour rationalistic and argumentative procedure. 
The doctrine of Buddha is known as vibhajjavada, which 
according to competent authorities, is " Religion of Logic or 
Reason ". Buddha calls his teaching dharnma anitiha? not 
based on tradition (na+itiha^anittha), but self-confirmed. 
He is said to have admonished his followers on one occasion 
thus : " Do not accept, oh Bhiksus, my words out of any respect 
for me, but accept them for what they are worth after proper 
scrutiny, just as a piece of gold is accepted by an expert after it 
is put to fire, cut; or tested on the touchstone. 4 " No sentence," 
to quote Mrs. Rhys Davids, " occurs oftenerthan Tarn kissa hetu ? 
What is the reason of that ? " 5 in the Pali Tnpitaka. This 
tendency of Buddhism to appeal to reason and argument 
accelerated the development of logic in the hands of the Buddhist 



prUhur agamarn3:traklih, 
Tattvasamgiaha (Gaekwad's oriental Seiies ) KJCriks, 548. 
agamamStiam apetayuktikam e$Sm astitya'gamama'tiaksh 
ibid, Pan]ik!I. 

2 Majjhimanikaya, XXVIII. 

The rationalistic aspect of Buddha's doctrine finds a "brilliant 
exposition in George Grimm's ** The Doctiine of the Buddha or 
the Religion of Reason," Leipzing 1926. 

3 Sutta NipSta, 1053- JTiddesa II, 49, 151. 

4 tapdceJiedacca mlcasdt suvantam iva panditaify 

parlksya 'blii'k^avo graliyam madvaco na tu gaiiravat. 

Tattvasamgiaha, KarikTi, 3588. 

The following is the Tibetan version of the above sloka : 
l}sregs Ijcad brd&r liahi gscr bztn du 
mlcTias jpa rna i s Tcyis yons l/itags ?zas, 
Ijdag gsun l}lan liya dge slon dag 
gus paTii pfyyir ni ma yin no 

The Grammar of the Tibetan language by CSoma DeKoras, p 168. 
5. 0. A. F. Rhys Davids Logic ( Buddhist ),Hastirig'a Encyclopaedia 
of Eeligion and Ethics. Vol. 8, 132, 
11 



$2 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Tnstitnt$ 

philosophers who took it up with all earnestness for the purpose 
of challenging the antagonistic views and vindicating their own 

Buddhist literature generally falls into two divisions, Pali 
and Sanskrit. In Pali Buddhist literature there is not a single 
treatise devoted to Logic; nevertheless it gives very clear indica- 
tions of current logical doctrines. As he figures in the Pali 
literature, Buddha is " a reasoner whose interlocutors are not his 
match ; his weapons against them, beside his authority are ana- 
logy, simile, parable and an occasional trace of inductions by 
simple enumerations of cases." 1 We must also bear in mind in this 
connection that in the personality of Buddha the preacher and 
the philosopher blended together. "While Buddha gave a ration^ 
alistic philosophy in an age of Upanisadic dogmatism, he had to 
deal with * relatively immature minds', * the man in the street ' 
and " the average bhikkhu or sekha ( learner in fche order )." 
But any way the prevailing method of the Buddha in his 
replies to interlocutors is one of gentle c reasonableness *. 3 

The period of Pali Buddhism was rafcher one of criticism 
than of construction and it is not a matter of surprise that we 
do not find during this period any systematic study of logical 
principles. In the later period of Sanskrit Buddhism when the 
schism of the Buddhist Church resulted in the four principal 
schools of Madhyamika, Yogacara, Sautrantika and Vaibhasika, 
every school for the purpose of opposing rival doctrines as well 
as vindicating its own, found it necessary to evolve logical 
methods of arguments and thus gradually there grew up a vast 
literature on logic which to our great misfortune, is now a mere 
catalogue of names. Excepting only a few, almost all the 
treatises on Buddhist Logic are lost. But some have providenti- 
ally escaped utter destruction as they were translated into 
Tibetan or Chinese. The Japanese scholar Sadajiro Sugiura has 
given an account of the Buddhist logic in Chinese and Japanese 
in his work, " Hindu Logic as preserved in China and Japan " 
( 1900 ). Dr. Sat^s Chandra Vidyabhushana's monumental work- 
History of Indian Logic, ( 192L ), presents an elaborate account 
of the Buddhist Nyaya literature which was transported to Tibet 
and remains up till now, buried in its Tibetan translation. 

Dharmaklrti's Nyayabindu with the NyayabindutJka ( Bib 
Indica and Bib. Buddhica) is the only complete and comprehen- 

1. Keith Buddhist Philosophy, p. 303. 

2. A F.Rbys Davids -Logic (Buddhist) in Hastings' Encylo- 
paedia of Religion and Ethics, j. 132. 



Buddhist Logic S3 

sive work on Buddhist logic, that has survived in its'original 
Sanskrit form. The Six Buddhist Nyaya Tracts ( Bib. Indioa ) 
edited by Mahamahopadhyaya Dr. EL P. Sasfcri discusses some 
interesting problems of logic. The Tattvasamgraha of 
Santaraksita with Panjika of Kamalaslla ( Gaekwad Oriental 
Series ), an encyclopaedic Buddhist work, gives a comprehensive 
account of Buddhist logic. The Nyayapravesa, Part I ( Sanskrit 
Text ) and Part II (Tibetan Text) in the above series is an 
important manual of the Dinnaga's school of logic. 
The Pre-Dinnaga Buddhist Texts on Logic from Chinese 
sources by Professor Tucci in the same series has no doubt been 
a very valuable publication. His Nyayamukha ( translated into 
English from Chinese with critical notes ), published in Jahrbuch 
des Instituts fur Buddhismus-Ehmde vol. 1. edited by Prof. Wal- 
leser is to be welcomed by all interested in Indian logic. The 
publication of a few more works on Buddhist logic has, however f 
been announced in the Gaekwad Oriental Series. But what we 
possess of the Buddhist Nyaya literature is insignificant in 
comparison with what has perished of it. Twenty one volumes 
of the Tanjur (from Vol. Ce to Vol. Be i. e. 290 to 310, 
Cordier ), each about 400 leaves with 7 long lines on each side 
of a leaf, contain, with a few exceptions, 1 Tibetan translations 
of Buddhist logical treatises. The biblioraphy on Buddhistic 
logic in Chinese and Japanese as given by Dr. Sugiura in the 
appendix to his book already referred to is really of an enor- 
mous length. 

Owing to these circumstances it is not as yet possible to 
write upon Buddhist logic with any approach to adequacy 
though with regard to the main problems we may say that we 
have sufficient data at our disposal. In our account of Buddhist 
logic we should make use of some important Buddhist logical 
texts in Tibetan besides those that are available in Sanskrit. 
The Brahmanic and Jaina criticisms of, and references to, the 
Buddhist logical doctrines should also be utilised as far as 
possible. 

It is much to be regretted that Buddhist logic has in recent 
times scarcely received any attention of the orthodox Indian 
scholars of logic ( Kyaya ) who are occupied with^ the 
subtleties of the new school of Indian logic ( Navy a- Ny ay a ). 



I. See Indian Historical Quarterly, Vol. 3; Koto on Pustaba- 



84 Annals of the BJiandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

But it is worth noting that Buddhist logic has had greater 
enoe upon Navya-Nyaya than the ancient Brahmanic logic, 
While Gaatama introduces sixteen categories ( padartha \ 
rather topics of discussion in his logical system ( i. e. the 
Nyayasutra ) the Buddhist logicians were restricted to one topic 
only, viz. pramana. The 3STavya-E"aiyayikas also exclusively 
confined themselves to pramana "and discussions pertinent to it 
in their extensive and elaborate speculations in the field of 
logic. Gautama's ISTyayasutra has no reference to vyapti or the 
invariable concomitance between the probandum and the probans 
which is the pivot of inferential argument, though Vatsyayana's 
suggestive remarks in his commentary on the Nyayasutra 1.1.39 
are worth noting. All the subtle discussions on the invariable 
concomitance or vyapti that have found a prominent place in the 
Navya Nyaya have, it appears, been profoundly influenced by 
tjhe theories of inference as held by Dinnaga and Bharmaklrti, 

It is to be noted in this connection that the erudite 
Brahmanic scholars like Uddyotakara, Vacaspati, Udayana and 
Parthasarathi Misra appear to have possessed a profound know- 
ledge of Buddhist logic, which they exhibit in course of their 
criticism of the Buddhist doctrines. 

The Jaina philosophers also took interest in Buddhist logic, 
Not only did they refer to the Buddhist views in their own 
works by way of criticism but they also sometimes wrote 
commentaries on the Buddhist logical treatises, e. g, 
Haribhadra's ITyayapravesapamjika on the Nyayaprave^a 
and Mallavadin's Dharmottaratippanaka (Bib. Buddhica) on the 
Nyayabindutlka of Dharmottara. It deserves to be mentioned 
here that these commentaries along with the texts, Nyaya- 
pravesa, ISTyayabindutika ( with Nyayabindu ) and a few more 
texts of Buddhist logic that have survived in their original 
Sanskrit form, found refuge in Jain Bhandars, and but for the 
interest of the Jaina Philosophers in Buddhist logic they would 
have been lost and in that case would never have come 
down to us. 

The great importance of Buddhist thought is that it gave an 
impetus to the development of the Brahmanic philosophy in 
general and logic in particular. And as a result of this the 
3STyaya doctrines developed by alternate criticism and correction. 
The Nyayasutra of Aksapada and the Bhasya of Vatsyayana 
show the influence of Buddhist critics like Nagarjuna arid refute 
some of their charges. Dinnaga then sets himself to criticizing 



Buddhist Logic 85 

Brahmanic doctrines as those of Aksapada and Vatsyayana. To 
answer the objections of Dinnaga, urged against Aksapada and 
Vatsyayana, Uddyotakara made an attempt to interpret elabora- 
tely the 3STyayasutra of Aksapada and the Bhasya of Vatsyayana 
with all their implications. And again as Buddhist criticisms 
on Aksapada and Vatsyayana led Uddyotakara to write his 
Nyayavarttika, Brahmanic criticism on Dinnaga similarly 
induced Dharmakirti to write the Pramanavarttikakarika, a 
metrical commentary upon the Pramanasamuccaya effecting 
all possible improvements in their own defence. Dharmakirti 
was again answered by Vacaspati, the great Brahmanic 
philosopher and commentator. Dharmakirti was succeeded by 
a number of Buddhist logicians like Devendrabodhi, Vinltadeva, 
Jinendrabodhi, Santiraksita, Dharmottara, Arcata and Jetari, 
many of whom wrote commentaries and sub-commentaries on the 
treatises of Dinnaga and Dharmakirti and occasionally criticised 
Brahmanic writers like Kumarila and Vacaspatl. But they did 
not possess much originality of thinking like the two masters: 
Dinnaga and Dharmakirti. Owing to these mutual conflicts 
and opposition Indian logic had the opportunity of developing 
by a process of alternate criticism and construction/ 

The continuity of Buddhist logic came up to about 1000 A. D. 
when the decline and fall of Buddhism in India sounded its 
death-knell. During this time with the revival of Brahmanism 
Brahmanic logic being tinctured with Buddhistic influence 
came to be studied over again and thus was laid the foundation 
of the new school of Brahmanic logic ( Navya Nyaya ) which 
flourished later on so luxuriantly in Mithila and ISTadia. 

The History of Logic in India presents three stages : the 
first stage, when dogmatic philosophy and authority reigned 
supreme and logic was thrown into the back-ground; the second 
stage* characterised by a rampant revolt against authority when 
logic was raised to the rank of philosophy and was on a par 
with it; and the third stage, when logic got the upper hand over 
philosophy and in a sense smothered it, but at last lost itself in 
its own groove, Buddhist logic, it is to be noted, belongs to the 
second stage. 



MISCELLANEA 
AN OLD PREFATORY GLOSS ON ISTOPADESA 

BY 

A. N. UPADHYE, M. A. 



of tj^W^ is a work which needs no introduction to 
the students of Jaina Literature. It is a beautiful treatise of 
high elegance written in Skr. containing only 51 verses. 37T3PR 1 
the famous writer of the thirteenth century has written a lucid 
commentary in Sanskrit which is composed by him before 122J 
A, D. the year in which he completed his f^RiF^q 1 a huge work 
on Jaina ritual, in the SRffef of which he speaks of having already 
written a commentary on ^^N^3T. We do not know of any 
other Skr. commentary prior to that of ^Tf^rr^R. Asadhara's 
commentary is not without its merits : he has explained the text 
with all thoroughness and has given many quotations 2 from 
different works both in SCTf^T and Sk. to elucidate the contents of 
his text. This commentary with the text has been published in 
TIT. sr. W. Vol. XIII 

When one critically reads through the commentary of sfrsrw 
he is faced with a queer phenomenon ; there are some prose sen- 
tences already incorporated in the body of the commentary which 
have been recommended on by sji^n^. For instance a few may be 
noted here : 




1. Dr. Bhandarakars' Bepoits ( 1883-84 ) and Pt. Pretms' 

2. Except a dozen, all the quotations have becu traced to their 
sources; they aie drawn from following woiks 



Miscellanea 87 



p. 46. 

When we look to the statements completed by or ending 
with the word ^fcf in comparison with the following portion, it is 
quite clear that the ^f% -ending statemants have been explained 
by STIW 5 ^;. Those statements cannot be ascribed to him; had they 
been his own, there is no reason why he should again explain 
them in the very fashion in which he is explaining the text of 
^H^tf. Once he notes a various reading in such a statement 
and deals at length with its meaning. For instance j 




p. 

The admission of this various reading is a conclusive proof 
that these statements were there, before STT^ircfK, when he was 
writing his commentary. 

As to the nature of these statements, seen in their sum total 
they are introductory remarks generally at the opening of each 
verse to establish the connection between the forthcoming versa 
and the preceding one. ^ttq^r is a structure of continuous argu- 
ments and these remarks supply the interlinks. Considering 
their value 3TT31T3T has commented on these statements taking 
them to be a part of the text. 

One more evidence on the point is supplied by a Kanarese 
commentary 1 on ^fer. It appears to be sufficiently old and 
there are no traces in it that it is influenced by sn^TT^'s Sk. 
commentary. Though it cannot be definitely said that the 
Kanarese commentary is earlier than 3T[^rr<^[, it is plain that 
ST^TT^'s commentary has not reached the hands of the Kanarese 
commentator. In the EZanarese commentary also the introduc- 
tory remarks are there and they are verbally the same as those 
given by 3nw=R- In one or two places 3TT^rr=R has digested the 
originals and reproduced them in his own words. These intro- 
ductory remarks have been explained in the Kanarese commen- 
tary also. Thus both STT^TT^ and the K. commentary take these 
introductory remarks as an essential constituent of ^m^$T best* 
If so, who is the author of these remarks ? 

These remarks go to clear up the context of each verse and 
hence it is just imaginable that they too have been composed by 
himself along with the verses of 



1. From sn^rfsFRS-, Kolhapur. 



AUTHORSHIP OF SYARUPA-SAMBODHAISrA 

BY 
A, N. UPADHYe, M. A. 



is a short discourse on the Jaina concept of the 
soul and the path of Liberation, in conformity with the famous 
Jaina logic of seven-fold predication. As the title suggests and 
as the verse 22 runs thus, 



it is imaginable that ifc might have been composed as an- address 
to some elderly person. 

This small treatise has been published in mfDlcfrtfe 1 SWIRI 
Vol. I. probably from a single Ms. The P. T. ( Printed Text) 
contains twentyfive verses including the concluding verse 
which names the work as ^^q^tlH*i H'srf^rf^:. But we have come 
across a Ms. 1 with Kanarese commentary in which there are 
twenty-six verses. No doubt it is a wiQ^ifcf:. thafc does not mean 
there should not be twenty-six verses.] In calculating the number 
oftentimes the concluding verse is not included and there are 
many such instances. sr^rOTS^ 2 of errf^M has got nine verses 
together with the concluding one; similarly ^pjjfctaT 5 of 5T%RTTcf 
has thirty-three verses. I am not unaware of the evidences to the 
contrary. ^Ttejq^Rw 4 has only fifty verses including the last. It 
is to be remembered that the number twenty-six is not an 
improbable one in a work named q*rf%fcf: as the last verse is not 
included in the calculation. Moreover the additional verse of the 
Ms. fits in the context. It comes before number 21 of P. T. and 
runs thus : 



n 

Ft. Premi in his essay on SR^ S , and the head line of the 
P.T. ascribe this short work to 3&&g, the famous Jaina 
Logician. Of. course Pt. Premi must have had some Ms. evidence. 
Further %p3 the author of ^H^tcTOW*ft quotes the third verse of 
in this way ; 



1. Belonging to ffe^^FPR3- Kolhapur. 

2. Published in HF. 5. *r. XIII. 

3. Ibid. XIII. 

4. TTT. JT. m. XIII 

5. Introduction to JT[. y* m. Vol I. 



Miscellanea 89 



Thus there appears fco have been a tradition that 3iboij is the 
author of ^f. g\ But this tradition is strongly disputed and ^1*M 
is the author of ^. ^. The evidences are as below :- 

(1) A Kanarese commentary 2 of ^. ^"., in its opening 
lines says quite definitely that 3T^R, the disciple of JjsftR, com- 
posed ^3". <&.,* the passage runs thus: 



( 2 ) q^nw^^ll^ in his commentary (dl*H4W?V-) on 
quotes some verses in this way : 

( a ^ 4 3rp =q- ^uijT^fcr^^T^R^^^Tf^^ft^TT^^rfSI^Kfr^^ 



b 



n 



Both of these quotations are from ^ %. where their numbers 
are 12 and 4 respectively. In this way it appears that the 
Kanarese commentator and T^STH ascribe this small treatise to 
j^l^H 6 though still we are in dark as to how the tradition as- 
cribing this work to 3Tcf^|r came in vogue. 



1. Page 79 ^r. sr HT. edition. 

2. Belonging to sncS^RT^rw?. 

3. ;t sr. ^. edition. 

4. j 136. 

5. p. 140. 

6. I learn from Pt. Jugalaki shore that a s Ms. of ^r, ^-.is ascribed to 
in the Catalogue of qirot Bhandai at i^^. Thanks to Panditji 

for this important reference. 

12 



90 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

A careful study of ^r. tf. shows that the author is an able 
logic! 'in with a special command over sr^JT^f logic and its mode 
of application. Ifc is this fact that might have led some one to 
relegate the work to 3T3^f *s authorship as in recent times, 
qj^TRT 1 was ascribed to BTW^ on the ground that there is an 
oheisance to sr^p^ in its opening verses. We do not know much 
about H^i*M. No doubt he is a polemic logician as seen from 
and the introductory words ( 



> : ) used by q^fJl^i^r. The Kanarese commentary says 
that he is the disciple of ?|^R. ^ e know of one ^3RR 2 the 
author of ^nfef, w ^ had many honorific titles as %fN^3, %j^j- 
3$Fftai%, and who composed his work in 1112 A. C. If our iffRfa is 
the pupil of this i^^H then he must have lived next to him in 
the middle of the 12th century. This cannot be a conclusive 
identity as there was one more ?R$R even before the author of 
^jfrjcT of whom we have a mention in sr^fef. 3 - 4 It is just 
possible that ^r<M, 'the far famed logician' might have composed 
some works on Jaina ?%[q. I learn from Pt. Juglalakishore that 
in the catalogue of books in Padubasti Bhandara at Mudabidure 
there is a work named i|*||urtS)afr composed one by 



There were three other *riT%?rs beside the author of ^r. H. The 
of fer^r mentions qir^r who composed the 



( nor traced as yet ). He thus belonged to a period earlier than 
783 A. D. when ^r^[ was completed. Then there was another JT^RR, 
the disciple of 5TR%^ 6 ^m%u^, who according to Honvad Inscrip- 
tion 7 built many temples, was the adept of this Mahasena. The 
inscription being dated Saka 976 (1054, A.. D.) this *r^R flourished 



1. See Intioduotion to ^ram^rrr, ( nr. ar. fir ) XXVI 

2. See ^ifd^^R^R^ vol. 1 p. 117. 
3. 




r II ^rfecT I. 21. 

4. According to a statement of |feRF? there was one inoio ?r^?r who 
is said to have written a s^n^^RTmR (not tiaced any wheio.) He beloBgs 
to a period iatar than 13th centuiy. 

5. Tffre^T ^r^;r ^HciioJ^K^rRoff 

^r ^r ^ferr ^r ^i^r s^t^rr I 33. 
(There is a pun on the woid ^=^0 

6. The authoi of & tf. is the disciple of ?PTO^. See above. 

7. See I. A. XIX p. 268-75, 



Miscellanea 91 

in the middle of the llth century. 1 The third 3}fRfa is the author 
of gg^'^fef and the colophon of that work at the end of each 
chapter runs thus: '%$& 



Thus it was written at the instance of 



a high official of fi&g^rsr. In the light of the available material 
there is no definite evidence to identify the author of ^. ^. with 
any one of these three. 



1. See Repertoire D'epigraphie Jama Noa. 186 and 217. 

2. Published in TR. IT. HT Vol. VIII. 



THE BHARATA-ADIBHARATA PROBLEM AND THE 
" MS OF ADIBHARATA IN THE GOVERNMENT 
ORIENTAL LIBRARY, MYSORE. 



BY 
F, K. GODE, M. A, 



As various hypotheses have been offered for the solution 
of the Bharata-j&dibharata problem it Is desirable to record data 
bearing on the problem from all sources possible. The following 
data has been recorded so far : 

1. Dr. P. R. Bhandarkar in one of his articles in the Indian 
Antiquary^ observes: 

" Raghavabhatta mentions a work called Adibharata. A 
Ms with this name exists in the Mysore Oriental Library." 

2. Mr. Manmohan Ghoshe 2 has collected these quotations 
from Raghavabhatta's commentary on the Abhijnana-Sakuntala. 
According to him the quotations from the JLdibJiarata are 19 in 
number, while those from Wwrata are 9 only. Out of these 
quotations from Bharata, seven are traceable in the extant 
editions of the Natya-Sastra while two have their parallels in it- 

3. Mr. M. H. Kavi 5 possesses some fragments of a work 
called Sadaiivabharata which according to him may be the 
JLdibharata. 

4. Aufrecht mentions a work on alamkara called " adi- 
bharata-prastara " ( No. 4991 of Oppert's Catalogue ) 'the subject 
matter of which is stated to be Bharata&astra. 

Dr. S. K. De makes the following remarks 4 regarding the 
problem : 

" It appears that the term bharata in course of time came 
to mean the dramatic art generally as it also came to 
mean the actor ; and Raghavabhatta on Sakuntala express- 
ly refers to adibharata by whom he means our author in 
contradistinction to these later bharatas. " 
Mr. Manmohan Ghoshe observes in this connection: " If the 
Adibharata and Bharata prove to be two different works it will 
only strengthen the general belief that the extant Natyasiastra 
is not the work of a single author. " 

1. Vol. XLI, p.;i58. ' 

2. Indian Historical Quarterly, March 1930, pp 75-80 

3. Nstytestra ( GK 0, S. ) Vol. I., pp. 5f of the Preface. 

4. Sanskrit Poetics, Vol. I, p. 24, foot note 3, 



Miscellanea 93 

In view of the foregoing data leading to two different views 
regarding the identity of BJiarata and Adibharata or otherwise I 
wanted to verify the statement of Dr. P. B, Bhandarkar by actual 
examination of the Mysore Ms of the Adibharata referred to by 
him. This Ms is described in the Catalogue of the Mysore 
Oriental Library ( 1894 ), p. 108 as follows: 

"590. 
(472) 

With the kindness of the Curator of the Mysore Oriental 
Library I was able to get on loan the so-called Ms of the 
Adibharata tallying outwardly with the description of the 
Catalogue^given above. On actual examination, however, this 
work in Andhra characters turned out to be a regular Ms of the 
ISTatyasastra in an incomplete condition, only 15 chapters being 
extant in this copy with a folio of matter from the 16th Chapter 1 . 
The Ms begins with the following verse : 



The above verse appears as verse 18th in the Baroda Edition 
of the Natyasiastra ( 1928 ) and the Benares Edition ( 1929 ). 
The colophon of the 1st chapter is as under : 

" f TcT *TTT<TR^T^TO ^TraqfrrfrRPT WTtsssTTO l" 
The colophon of the 15th chapter reads 

" ffcf ^cff^req^w ^rf^TPT^r^ ^TRSTRT =TT*T q^^^ft^^FT: 

The present disclosure has removed the possibility of the 
existence of a Ms of the work of Adibharata as a work on Natya- 
sastra distinct and separate from the Na-tya^astra commonly 
ascribed to Bharata. It appears further to corroborate the view 
of Dr. De that the term Adibharata was used with reference to 
the author of the !N"a~tyasastra in contradistinction to the later 
Bharatas. __ 

1. After the present note was written I inquired of Mr. M. B. Kavi 
if lie has made use of this Ms (labelled as Adibhaiata "but actually 
BhaTa'Tya Natya^Ustra ) in Ids Qaikwar Oriental Series edition. He first 
wrote in reply that out of the two Mss used by Mm, one has 33 chapters, the 
othei has only 15 chapters. He fuither informed me that "in the Mysore 
Library 4472 is Natyas'a'stra consisticg of 15 chanters. The number may 
he a mistake foi 472. " I next inquired of the Curator of the Mysore 
Library if Mr. Kavi has made use of this Ms. I was inf oimed by the 
Curato^, cmiously enough, that no reference can be traced of Mr. 
M* B. Kavi having boriowed or used any of the Mss on Na"fcya^a~stra in 
hi a Library. This reply stopped my inquiiy any fuithej. 



ow 

BY 
P. K. GODE, M. A, 

VI 

DATES OF RATNACANDRA.'d COMMENTARIES ON TB 
RAGHUVAMSA AND THE NAISADH1YA 
BETWEEN A. D. 1612 AND 1627 

No complete Mss of Rafcnacandra's commentaries on tin 
Raghuvamsa and the Naisadhiya have yet been discovered 
Aufrecht records only one Ms. of each of the commentaries ani 
that too in a fragmentary condition. 

The Ms of the Raghuvamsatlka of Ratnaoandra mentioned 
by Anfrecht 1 is the same as No, 446 of 1887-91 of the Governmeu 
Mss Library at the B. O, R Institute, Poona, This Ms con- 
sists of 31 folios and is incomplete as it contains Ratnacandra's 
commentary on the first three cantos with two folios of com- 
mentary on the 4th canto. Ratnacandra was a pupil of Santi- 
candra. 2 The fact of^his having written a commentary on the 
Naisadhlyacarita of Srlharsa has been mentioned in his com- 
mentary on the RaghuvarhsJa, where the RaghuvaMsatlka is called 
a sister or ^younger sister ( ^fr^cr or ^pqfrr?ft ) of the Naisadhlya- i 
vivrfcti or Srlharsakavyavivrtti.'^ As in the case of the RaghiK 
vam^atlka Aufrecht 4 records only one fragmentary Ms of tie 
NaisadJuyavivrtti -viz, e * Rgb 369" which also is in the Government 
Mss. Library at the B. O. R. Institute as No, 369 of 1884-81; 

1 Catalogus Catalogorum Part III, p. 104 
2. Ms No. 446 of 1887-91, foho 7 




'. \\ ^ n 

See also folios 20 and 29 wheie the above two verses arc rocatei 
with slight vaUations. 

4. Catalogus Catalogoruin Part II, p 67. 



Miscellanea 95 

This Ms contains Ratnacandra's commentary on cantos XI, 
XX, XXI, and XXII of the Naisadhlyacarita. In this commen- 
tary also Ratnacandra repeats the stanza about his guru as under 
on folio 231 : 



The above stanza is repeated at the end of cantos XX, XXI 
and XXII. The present Ms is dated Samval 1668 ( =A.D. 1612). 
As the Raghuvavisatika mentions the Naisadhiyavwrtti, it mast 
have been written after the Naisadhiijavivrlti. The two Mss- 
under reference give no further clue to the date of Batnacandra 
and his works. 

The question now arises whether our Ratnacandra is identi- 
cal with the Ratnacandra to whom some works are assigned 
in the Jain Granthavali, 1 This identity is proved by internal 
evidence of the Ms of the ^qTc^^5$riI% ( "No. 360 of 1880-81 of 
the Government Mss Library ). This Ms is dated Sarhvat 1683, 
Ratnacandra's patent stanza about his guru is to be found in this 
commentary also. 2 There is a long prasasti at the end of the 
Ms which supplies much information about the works written 
by Ratnacandra previous to this commentary. We are told 
that this commentary was written in Samvat 1674 at Surat 
). It had the following brothers : (1) * afflrKfei (2) 

( 3 




and (4) ^fil^dl^l. It had also the following sisters : -Commen- 
taries on ( 1 ) ^*raT3TOcP=T, (2) %flh<^l u l'Hi^^cN, (3 ) '^fN^TSWt^f, ( 4 ) 
WR^^H, ( 5 ) ^fN^qmfea^, ( 6 ) sfl$MK*i4ln5T, ( 7 ) ^^W^^T^Eilgr and 
( 8 ) ^jgfewirensar. This list attached to the colophon of a work 



composed in Samvat 1674 and a Ms of which is dated Samvat 
1683 proves that all the works in the list were written prior to 
Samvat 1683. The following table will give a clear idea of the 
1. Jain GranthSvali ( 1909 ) 

p. 109 giEqTcFH-'gqji-Hti^ Composed in Samvat 1674. 

p. 159 ^J7crnfT%^rrs^5T - Composed in Samvat 1677. 



r ) 

p. 285 *MaiWs?H^Ri e *- 
2. Ms No. 361 of 1880-81, folio 61 



96 Annals of the Shandafkar Oriental Research Institute 



chronological order which can be deduced from the foregoing 
data 5 





Works 


Samvat 


A.D, 


Remarks 


1 

2 


%rftiT%i%* 

-T* ^JVuv,- , 


Before or 
in Sam vat 
1668* 

Between 
Samvat 
1668 and 
1683, 


1612 

Between 
1612 and 
1627. 


*Ms is dated 
Samvat 1668, 

^referred to in ST. $, 
?I^ Ms dated 
Samvat 1683. 


^P3IOT# 


3 


rs v N 

IWFR5I 


Composed 
in Samvat 
1677* 


Composed 
in 1621, 


^'according to Jam 
Granthavali p. 159, 


4 
5 


TOJR^fa* 


Before 
Samvat 
1683, 

Composed 
in 1674* 


Before 
1627. 

1618 


^'mentioned in a Ms 
of ^fT^s^q^ira 
dated Samvat 1683, 

*Ms is dated Samvat 
1683 (=A.D. 1627) 


^I^*?Wf- 
|fe 



It would thus be seen that Ratnacandra's literary activity 
falls between A. D. 1612 and 1627 or in ^.Q first quarter of the M 
cew/Mfyand that he wrote the two non-Jain, commentariei 
possibly at the beginning of his literary career. 



DL. XJtl j 



Annals of the 

Bhandarkar Oriental 

Research Institute, Poona 

Yolume XIII 
1931-32 



\ PART 11 



EDITED B7 

D. R, BHANDARKAR, M. A., Ph. r>., F. A, 8. B, 

)ftrmichael Professor of Ancient Indian History and Culturt, 

Calcutta University, Calcutta 

AND 

A. B. GAJEJtfDRAGADKAB, M. A., 
Professor of Sanskrit, Elpbinstoue College, Bombay 













Printed by V. G. Paranjpe, M. A., LL. B., D. Litt J at the 
Bhandarkar Institute Press, 198 (17) Sadashiv, 

Poona No. 2 ? and Published by 
S. K. Belvalkar^ M A., ph. D., Secretary, at the 
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 
POONA 



1932 



CONTENTS 



VOL. XI II, PART II 
( 16th May 1932 ) 



ARTICLES : 



1 Non-canonical Pali Literature, by 

Dr Bimala Churn Law, M. A., Ph. D,, B. L. ., 

2 Society and Culture in the Brahmana Period 

( Notes frcm the Aitareya Brahmana), by 
Ashutosh Biswas, M. A. 

3 Beginnings of Linga Cult in India, by 

Atul K. Sur, M. A., F. R. Econ. S. 

4 On the Unadi Sutras of Jaina SakatS-yana, by 

Dr. K. B. Pathak, B. A., Ph. D. 

5 



97-143 



144-148 



149-153 



154-156 



157-160 
161-170 

171-172 
173-179 



On the Date of Akalankadeva, by 
Dr. K. B. Pathak, B A., Ph. D. 

6 Dr. Pathak's View on Anantavlrya's Date, by 

A. N. Upadhye, M. A 

MISCELLANEA : 

7 A Note on Trivikrama's Date, by 

A. N. Upadhye, M. A, 

8 Adibharata by D. R, Mankad, M. A. 

9 Notes on Indian Chronology, by P. K, Gode, M. A. 

( vii ) A, Manuscript of SamgltarJgakalpadruma 
and its probable date, ( viii ) Rasavilaga of 
Bhudeva Sukla and its probable date about 
A. D. 1550. ( ix ) A Commentary on the Kumara- 
sambhava by Haricaranadasa, called Devasenft 
and its probable date between 1630 and 1680 
A. D. (x) Exact date on Nauka of Gang&rama 
Jadi 1742 A. D. ... 180-186 

REVIEWS : 

10 Mystery of the Mahabharata Vol I, by N. V. 

Thadani, reviewed by S. N. Tadpatrikar, M. A. 187-191 

11 The Mahabharata, critically edited by P. P, S, 

Sastri, Vol. I, Parts 1 and 2, reviewed by 

V. R. R, Dikshitar ... 192 

12 Pranayama ( Part I ) by Swami Kuvalayananda 

reviewed by M, S. Cheema, M. A, - 193-195 



Annals of the 
Bhandarkar Oriental 
Research Institute, Poona 



VOL. XIII ] JANUARY 1932 [ PART II 



NON-CANONICAL PALI LITERATURE 

BY 
DR. BIMALA CHURN LAW, M. A., Ph. B., B. L. 

The Pali canon includes the books of the three Pitakas. The 
works which are not Included in those Pitakas are known as 
non-canonical or extra-canonical. 

The title NettipaTcararia ] as explained by Dhammapala, means 

exposition of that which leads to the know- 
Nettipakarana ledge of the Good L&w The -^^ shows 

1 This work has been edited by Prof, E. Hardy for the P. T. S. London, 
and published by the said society in 1902. There is also a Burmese 
edition of this text. The text is not entirely free from inaccuracies 
but all such defects are pardonable when we remember that it is a 
pioneer work. The test edited by the P. T. S. is based on the following 
manuscripts ; 

( i ) Palm leaf manuscript of the India Office in Burmese character 
( see Catalogue of the Mandalay Mss. in ihe India Office Library 
by Prof. V. Fausboll, J. P. T. S., 1896 ) ; 

( ii ) Palm leaf manuscript of the India Office ( Phayre collection ^like- 
wise written in Burmese character ( see Catalogue of the Pali 
Mss. in the India Office Library by H Oldenberg ) , 
( iii ) Paper manuscript ( brought from W. Subhuti by Prof. Rhys Davids) 
in Sinhalese character ( Introduction, p. XXXV ). Prof. Hardy has 
relied on the palm leaf manuscript of the India Office in Burmese 
character in noting readings whenever they are found to contribute 
to a better understanding of the text. 

Mrs. Rhys Davids translates * Nettipakarana ' as the ' Book of 
Guidance ' ( S5kya or Buddhist Origins, p. 127 ). 



98 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

the methodical way of attaining textual knowledge. It contains 
much of the materials which are so grouped as to form a book by 
itself. The commentary on the Nettipakaraim says that without 
an able instructor it is Impossible for men to be guided in the 
right understanding of the doctrines. 

This treatise was translated into Burmese by Thera Mahasila- 
varhsa in the fifteenth eenfcury of the Christian era, and again 
two centuries latei, by a dweller in the Pubbararna-Vihara. It 
was composed at the request of Thera Dhammarakkhita and 
highly praised by Mahakaccana. The Mandalay manuscript 
ascribes its authorship to Mahakaccana as every section bears a 
clear testimony to the authorship of Mahakaccana who has been 
described here as Jambuvanavasin, i. e., dweller in the rose- 
apple grove. 

The Netti is essentially a Pali treatise on the textual and 
exegetical methodology, a Buddhist treatment upon the whole of 
the Tantra Yuktis discussed in the Kautiliya Arthasastra, the 
Susrutasamhita, the Carakasamhita and the Astanga-Hrdaya. It 
stands in the same relation to the Pali cannon as Yaska's 
iTirukta to the Vedas. The scheme of methodology has been 
worked out in a progressive order, the thesis being developed 01 
elaborated by gradual steps. To begin with we have the opening 
section, Sangahavara, or the conspectus of the whole book which 
is a feature also of the Milinda Panha. Then we have the 
Yibhagavara or the section presenting a systematic treatment in 
classified tables. This section comprises three tables or sub- 
sections : (l) Uddesavara, (2) Mddesavara and (3) Patiniddesa- 
vara. The Uddesavara merely presents a bare statement of the 
theses and as such it serves as a table of contents. It is followed 
by the Niddesavara which briefly specifies the import or defini- 
tions of the theses awaiting detailed treatment In the section 
immediately following, we mean the Patiniddesavara, which is 
but an elucidation and elaboration of the Niddesa scheme. The 
theses in the Uddesavara are introduced in three separate tables 
or categories -(1) that of sixteen haras (connected chains), (2) 
that of five nayas( modes of inspection), and (3) that of eighteen 
mulapadas ( main ethical topics ). The sixteen haras consist of 



Nan-Canonical Pali Literature 99 

desana (the method of instruction), vicaya (the method of 
enquiry ), yutti ( the method of establishing connection in groups ),- 
padatthana ( the method of teaching with reference to the funda- 
mentals ), lakkhana ( the method of determining implications by 
characteristic marks ), catuvyuha ( the method of four fold 
array ), avatta ( the cyclical method ), vibhatti ( the method of 
classification ), parivattana ( the method of transformation ), 
vevacana ( the method of synonyms ), paniiatti (the method of 
determining ( signification ), otarana ( the method of descending 
steps ), sodhana ( the method of rectification ), edhitthSna ( the 
method of determining positions), parikkhara (the method of 
discriminating causal relations ), and samaropana ( the method 
of attribution ). 

The five nay as consist of the following: modes of viewing 
things : (1) nandiyavatta, (2) tlpukkhala ( by the triple lotus ), 
(3) sihavikkllita ( the lion-like sport ), (4) disalocana ( broad 
vision ) and (5) ankusa ( focussing). 

The eighteen mulapadas comprise nine kusalas and nine 
akusalas The nine akusalas are tanha ( thirst ), avijja 
( ignorance ), lobha ( covetousness \ dosa ( hatred ), moha ( delu- 
sion ), subhasanna ( false idea of purity ), niccasanna ( false idea 
of permanence ), attasarma ( false idea of personal identity ), etc. 
The nine kusalas are samatha (tranquillity ), vipassana (insight), 
alobha ( absence of covetousness ), adcsa ( absence of hatred ), 
amoha ( absence of delusion ), asubhasamna ( idea of impurity ), 
dukkhasanna ( idea of discordance ), aniccasaiina ( idea of im~ 
permanence ) and anattasanfia ( idea of non-identity ). 

In the Niddesavara, the reader is to expect nothing more than 
a general specification of the meaning of the topics proposed in 
the Uddesavara for treatment. From the Niddesavara the reader 
is led on to the nexfc step, the Patiniddesavara which contains 
four broad divisions, namely, (1) Haravibhanga (explanations of 
the connected chains ), (2) Harasampata ( discussions of the hara 
projections ), (3) ISTayasamutthana ( exposition of the modes of 
inspection and (4) the Sasanapatthana ( the classification and 
interpretation of Buddha's instructions ). 



100 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The treatise deals in detail with sixteen haras in the specified 
order as follows : 

The Desanahara directs the reader to notice six distinctive 
features in the Buddha's method of instructions, namely, assadam 
( bright side ), adinavam ( dark side ), nissaranam ( means of 
escape ), phalam ( fruition ), upayarh ( means of success ) and 
anattim ( the moral upshot ). It also points out that Buddha's 
instructions are carefully adapted to four classes of hearers, 
namely (1) those of right intellect ( understanding things by 
mere hints), (2) those needing short explanations, (3) those 
to be slowly led by elaborate expositions and (4) those whose 
understanding does not go beneath the words. In the same con- 
nection it seeks to bring home the distinction between the three 
kinds of knowledge, sutamayl, cintamayi and bhavanamayl. 

In the Vicayahara the method of ruminating over the subjects 
of questions and thoughts and repetitions in thought is laid down, 
and this is elaborately illustrated with appropriate quotations 
from the canonical texts. 

In the Yuttihara we are introduced to the method of grouping 
together connected ideas and the right application of the method 
of reasoning or inference in interpreting the dharma. 

The Padatthanahara explains the doctrinal points by their 
fundamental characteristics and exemplifies them, This hara has 
an important bearing on the Milinda expositions. 

The Lakkhanahara points out that when one of a group of 
matters characterised by the same mark is mentioned, the others 
must be taken as implied. For instance, when the sense of sight 
is mentioned in a passage, the implication should be that other 
senses received the same treatment. 

The Catuvyuhahara unfolds the method of understanding the 
doctrines by noting the following points : 

^(1) the text, (2) the term, (3) the purport, (4) the introductory 
episode and (5) the sequence, illustrating each of them with quo- 
tatious from the canonical texts. 



Non-Cancnical Pali Literature 

The Avattahara aptly illustrates with authoritative quotations 
how in the teachings of the Buddha all things turn round to form 
cycles of some fundamental ideas such as tanha, avi^a, the four 
Aryan truths and the like* 

The Vibhattihara explains the method of classifying Buddha's 
discussions according to their character common or uncommon 
or according to their values, inferior, superior or mediocre. 

The Parivattanahara contains an exposition of the method by 
which the Buddha tried to transform a had thing into a good thing 
thing and transform also the life of a bad man. 

The Vevacanahara calls attention to the dictionary method of 
synonyms by which the Buddha tried to impress and clarify 
certain notions of the Dhamma. This section forms a landmark 
in the development of Indian lexicography, 

In the Pannattihara it is stated that though the Dhamma is 
one, the Lord has presented it in various forms. There are four 
noble truths beginning with dukkha. When these truths are 
realised then knowledge and wisdon come in and then the way to 
Bhavana is open to the knower. The elements may be compared 
but Nibbana cannot be compared. 

In the section on Otarana the Metti illustrates how in the 
schemata of Buddha's doctrines diverse notions spontaneously 
descend under the burden of certain leading topics such as, 
indriyas, paticcasamuppada, five khandhas and the like. 

The Sodhanahara illustrates the method by which the Buddha 
corrected the form of the questions in the replies offered by him. 

The Adhitfchanahara explains in detail the method of determin- 
ing the respective positions of different ideas according as they 
make for certain common notions. In the Adhitthanahara the 
basis of all truth is given. The four truths beginning with 
dukkham are described and side by side avijja is shown to be the 
cause working in opposite ways. There are also paths bringing 
about the extinction of dukkha, etc. The various kayas and 
dhatus are -also considered. Samadhi is the only meanp of 
removing evilk 



1 02 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

In the Parikkharahara the Netti explains and exemplifies how 
one can distinguish between fche catisal elements, broadly between 
hetu and other causal relations. This section has an important 
bearing on the Pctttkana q/ the Abhidhammapitaka. 

We come at last to the section called the Samaropanahara, 
This section explains and illustrates the Buddhas method of four- 
fold attribution, (1) by way of fundamental ideas, (2) by way of 
synonyms, (3) by way of contemplation and by way of getting 
rid of the immoral propensities. 

Kara Sampata is a division which is dependent on the hara as 
its purpose is to present the projections or main moral implica- 
tions of the haras or the connected chains previously dealt with, 

This division like the preceding one consists of sixteen parts 
exactly under the same headings. 

In the Hara Sampata the commentator Dhammapala has added 
and rearranged many new things. He cites thd passages from 
the text and then puts a lay dissertation on them by way of ques- 
tions and answers. This division stands almost as an independent 
treatise by itself. 

Desana hara Sampata In this division it is laid down that 
Mara invades only a mind which is quite unprotected (pamada- 
citta ), which is based on false beliefs, on idleness, &c. 

Vicaya hara Sampata In this section it is laid down that 
desire ( tanha ) is of two kinds- kusala and akusala. The one 
leads to nibbana and the other to birth and suffering ( sarhsara), 
Mind is both kusala and akusala in nature. The real nature of 
things can only be seen in the fourth Jhana stage. The various 
signs and nature of nibbana and samadhi are described. SamadM 
has five characteristics, namely, joy, happiness, consciousness, en- 
lightment and right perception. There are ten objects of meditation 
( kasinayatanani ) e. g., pathavi, apo, etc. They are then attached 
to three objects, anicca ( non-permanent ), dukkha (suffering) 
and anatta ( non-existence of soul ). 

A differentiation is brought about between an ordinary man 
and a man with knowledge. The former can do" any kind of 



Now- Canonical Pali Literature 103 

offence that may be possible. But the latter cannot lhe former 
can even kill his father or mother, can destroy the stupas but the 
latter camiDt ; when one practises the four Jhanas, and attains to 
Samadhi, his previous life and futurity are known to him. 

In the Yutti-hara-sampata it is stated that sloth, stuper and 
misery disappear from him who is well protected in mind, firm 
in resolution and adheres to right seeing 1 . 

In the Padatthana-hara and Lakkhana-hara-sampata, the 
padatthanas ( reasonings ) are described as belonging to one who 
is well restrained in mind, words and actions and who by the 
proper attainment of padatthanas realises the highest path. 

In the Catuvyuhahara-sarhpata, Avattahara-sampata, Vibhatti- 
hara-sampata, etc., great stress is laid on right perception, mind- 
fulness and kusala deeds which lead to the knowledge of paticca- 
samuppada. 

The third division called the !N~ayasamutthana contains a 
detailed treatment of the five specified modes of viewing things. 
Under the ISFandiyavatta mode, ife is pointed out that the earlier 
extremity of the world cannot be known owing to avijja 
( ignorance ) which has tanha ( desire ) at the root, Those who 
walk in the field of pleasure are bound down in heretical beliefs 
and are unable to realise the truth. There are four noble truths- 
Dukkham, dukkhasamudayam, dukkhanirodharh and dukkha- 
nirodhagaminipatipada. There is a middle path ( ma]jhima 
patipada ) which rejects the two extreme views and which is 
identified with the eightfold noble path ( ariya atthangiko 
maggo ). He who has avoided ditthi (false view ) escapes from 
kama ( lust ). Hence avoidance of desire ( tanha ) and ignorance 
( avijja ) leads to quieiitude or calmness. Kamma is recognised 
as the cause of the world of sufferings. But consciousness and 
all that concerns consciousness may be seen in fcheir increment 
in the ten vatthus. The ordinary enjoyment of food and touch, 
etc, is the cause of distress of a man with desire. 

The various asavas ( sins ) are next described. The sufferings 
of a man with attachments, faults and wrong views are also 
narrated. The four paths, the four foundations of recollections, 



104 Annals of the BhandarKar Cricniol Pesecrch Ir<stitvt e 

tlie four Jhanas, the four essentials ( fcammappadhanas ), the fe 
meditations, the four pleasure yielding states, etc., are also stated- 1 
each of these is described as an antidote for the man with attach 
ment, delusion and wrong views. 

Buddhas, Pacceka-Buddhas, the disciples, and all those who 
are devoid of attachment, hatred, delusion, etc., are like lions, 
Those who look to the right aspects, the senses, the counter forces 
of fehe views witli as strong reasons as Buddhas, Pacceka-Buddks 
etc., are said to have seen things just like a lion. Human types 
are four in number. Each of these has to undergo some sort of 
training. To each of them is offered an advice as to tanha 
( desire ), raga ( attachment ), kusala ( merit ), etc. This is tin 
way shown to be of the Tlpukkhalo and of the Ankusa described 
in the text. 

Now turning to the fourth division, the Sasanapatthana, w ! 
get a treatment of the proper method of classification and inter- 
pretation of the texts of the Dhamma. It is suggested that the 
discourses of the Buddha can be classified according to the 
themes into : (1) Sankilesabhagiya ( these dealing with sankilesa 
or impurity), (2) Vasanabhagiya (those dealing with desire), 
(3) Nibbedhabhagiya (those dealing with penetration ), (4) Asekha. 
bhagiya ( those dealing with the subject of a non-learner ), 
(5) Sankilesabhagiya and Vasanabhagiya, (6) Sankilesa and 
Nibbedhabhagiya, (7) Sankilesa and Asekhabhagiya, (8) Sankilesa 
and Nibbedha and Asekhabhagiya, (9) Sankilesa and Yasana and 
Nibbedhabhagiya, (10) Yasana and Nibbedhabhagiya, (11) Tanha- 
Sankilesabhagiya, (12) Ditthisankilesabhagiya, (13) Duccarita- 
sankilesabhagiya, (14) Tanhavodanabhagiya, (15) Ditthivodana- 
bhagiya, (16) Duccaritavodanabhagiya. Of these, sankilesas are 
of three kinds, tanha ( desire ), ditthi ( false view ), and duccaritas 
( wrong actions ). 

Various padas, slokas and texts are eited while explaining 
each of these textual classifications. 

eighteen main padas are those which are worldly 
" \ unworldly ( lokuttaram ), etc. In fact the chapter is 
ly interesting by its numerous quotations from familiar 



Non-Canonical Pah Literature 105 

texts and it does not enter deep into philosophical or logical 
arguments, But the classification and ^classifications are no 
doubt interesting as intellectual gymnastics. 

The Petakopadesa is another treatise on the textual and the 
exe/retical methodology ascribed to Maha- 
Petakopadesa kaooana and it is nothing but a different 

manipulation of che subject treated in the Netfcipakarana. Interest 
of this treatise, if it was at all a work of the same author, lies in 
the fact that it throws some new light here and there on the 
points somewhat obscure in the N"eU1. Its importance lies also 
in the fact that in places it has quoted the Pali canonical passages 
mentioning the sources by such names as Samyuttaka (=Samyutta 
Nikaya ) and Ekutlaraka ( = Ekutfcara or Anguttara Nikaya ). 
Its importance arises no less from the fact in it the four Ariyan 
truths are stated to be the central theme or essence of Buddhism, 
the point which gained much ground in the literature of the 
Sarvastivadin school. The importance of the last point will be 
realised all the more as we find how the discourses developed in 
the Netti in the course of formulating the textual and exegetical 
methodology centered r-uiind the four Ariyan truths. This work 
has not yet been edited. The P. T. S., London has undertaken an 
edition of it. A specimen by R, Fuchs Diss. Berlin, 1908 de- 
serves mention. 

The Milinda Panha or the questions of Milinda had originally 
been written in Northern India in Sanskrit 

M lntro a d^on or in some North Indian Prakrit by an author 

whose name has noc, unfortunately enough, 

come ^own to us, But, the original text is now lost in the land 
of its origin as elsewhere ; what now remains is the Pali transla- 
tion of the original which was made at a very early date in 
Ceylon. From Ceylon, it travelled to other countries, namely, 
Burma and Siam, which have derived their Buddhism from 
Ceylon, and where at a later date it was translated into respective 
local dialects. In China, too, there have been found two separate 
works entitled " The BcoL of the Bhikkbu Nagasena Sufcra ", but 
whether they are translations of the older recensions of the work 
than the one preserved in Pali or of the Pali recensions is difficult 
2 [ Annals, B. O. B. I. J 



106 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

to ascertain. However, in the home of Southern Buddhism ft 
book is accepted as a standard authority, second only to th 
Pali Pitakas, Prof, Rhys Davids rightly observes, " It ] s no t 
merely the only work composed among the Northern Buddhist 
which is regarded with reverence by the orthodox Buddhists of 
the Southern schools, it is the only one which has survived at all 
amongst them " ] . 

The book purports to discuss a good number of problems 

Character of the "^ disputed P lnts f BuddhlBm ; and this di, 

book cussion is treated in the form of conversations 

between King Milinda of Sagala and Thera 

Nagasena. Milinda raises the questions and puts the dilemmas 

and thus plays a subordinate part in comparison to that played by 

Nagasena who answers the questions and solves the puzzles in 

detail. Naturally, therefore, the didactic element predominates 

in the otherwise romantic account of the encounter between 

the two. 

Milinda who has been described as the King of the Yonas 

The two heroes * ith ^ apital at S * gala < Sakala = Sialkot), 

,, has lon S been identified with Menander, 

the Bactrian Greek King who had his sway in the Punjab He 
was born, as our author makes him say, at Kalasi in Alasanda, 
i. * ..Alexandria ; and if we are to believe our author, he, resolved 
of all doubts as a result of his long conversations with Nagasena, 
Zn? t0 , ^^ COnV ^ rted to Bu ^hism. Nagasena, however, cannot 
be identified with any amount of certainty. 

The name of the author, as we have already said, has not come 

Author down to us - A close analysis of the book 

nan.*. f 4. ,-L Sh WS that a conside rable number of place 

%?Z^ ^^*^*^ OM ^ d ^ ^wto 

lamed ,f '' *" ****' Bharukac ^^ etc. Most of the mers 



f the book *^ in the far no* 

o ^ of 

think, 



a 

mg the author of the Milinda Panho. She 



1 S. B. E n Vol. xxxv, Intro., p. 



zn. 



Non-Canonical Pali Literature 107 

that the recorded conversations of Milinda and Nagasena were 
edited in the new book form after Milinda's death, by special 
commission by a Brahmana of Buddhist Collegiate training, 
named Manava. There is, however, neither any positive or even 
negative evidence for such a theory. 

It is somewhat difficult to ascertain exactly the date of tho 
Book. Milinda or Menander is, however, 
Dafce ascribed to the last quarter of the 2nd 

century B. C. The book must, therefore, have been written after 
that date. On the other hand, it must have long been an im- 
portant book of authority when Buddhaghosa, the celebrated 
Buddhist commentator, flourished in the 5th century A. D. For, 
he quoted from the book often in his commentaries, and that in 
such a manner that it follows that he regarded the book as a work 
of great authority. From a close analysis of the books referred 
to as quoted by the author of the Milinda Panha, Prof. T. W. 
Rhys Davids, the learned editor and translator of Milinda Panha, 
came to the conclusion that " the book is lafcer than the canonical 
books of the Pali Pitakas (the author of the Milinda-panha 
quotes a large number of passages from the Pitaka texts ), and on 
the other hand, not only older than the great commentaries, but 
the only book outside the canon, regarded in them as an autho- 
rity which may be implicitly followed 1 /' 

The Milinda-panha has a marked style of its own. Its language 
is most elegant, and studied against the 

Style and language background of ancient Indian prose, it is 
simply a masterpiece of writing. The formal exactness of the 
early Pitakas as w ell as the studied ornamentation of later-day 
Pali or Sanskrit-Buddhist treatises are alike absent from its 
pages. The charm of the style is captivating and there 
are passages that are eloquent in their meaning and 
gesture. The prerorations with which the long discussions 
are often closed are supreme inventions by our author of 
the art of conversation as well as of writing. Its style and 
diction bear a close resemblance to and are somewhat maturer 



1 S. B. E., Vol. XXXV, Intro., p. xxxvni. 



108 Annah of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

than those of the famous Hasligumpha inscription of Kharavela 
which is assigned by Dr. B, M. B*rua to the second quarter of 
the 1st century A. D. 1 

At Sagala, a city of wealth and affluence, ruled King Milinda 
versed in arts and sciences and skilled 
Tejt in casuistry. He had hi& doubts and 

puzzles with regard to Buddha's doctrines and utterances and 
other knotty problems of Buddhism To resolve these doubts lie 
went to Nagasena, the famous f>.ralal ; aiid then began a wonder- 
ful conversational discourse between the two. But before the 
discourse really begins, we are introduced Ly our author to the 
previous birth history (Pubba-yo<,a) of fcl.e&e t%o personages and 
then to the contents of various sorts of p 1 



We are told that NSgasena in a previous birth of his was one 

of the members of the religious brotherhood 

( a ) Book I near |.| ie Q aTi g es> where Milinda, in his turn, 

in a previous-birth of his, was a novice. In accordance with his 
acts of merit in that birth and his aspirations, this novice after 
wandering from existence to existence came to be born at last as 
King of the city of Sagala, a very learned, eloquent and wise man, 
Now he had doubt's and problems in his mind, and in vain did he 
seek the venerable Kassapa and Makkhali Gosala to have them 
solved while all these were happening. The brother of the religi- 
ous brother-hood came to be born in a Brahman family as l^aga- 
sena. When he was seven yeais old he learnt the three Vedas 
and all else that could be learnt In a Brahmanical house. Then 
he left the house, meditated in solitude for sometime and he was 
afterwards admitted into the ardor as a novice by a venerable 
Buddhist priest, Rohana and was eventually converted into 
Buddhism. He was then sent to Pataliputra to the venerable 
Buddhist sage Dhamtnarakkhita where he became an arahat. 
Now while he was living there he was invited at the Guarded 
Slope in the Himalayas by an innumerable company of arabats 
who were being harassed by King Milinda who delighted in 
putting knotty questions and arguments this way and that. 
NSgasena readily accepted the challenge of Milinda and went to 



1 Barua Old Bramhi Inscriptions, p. 172. 



Non- Canonical Pali Literature 109 

- Sagala attended by a band of samanas. Just at that time Milinda 

had met Ayupala, an Arahafc of the Sankheyya monastery, whom 
too he confronted vilh Ms casuistry. Nagasena who was then 
living at the same hermitage came now to the rescue of the 
Order Milinda with five hundred Yonakas then repaired to 
Nagasena, and after mutual exchanges of courtesy and compli- 
ments the conversational discourse began. 

The first discourse turned on the distinguishing characteristics 
of moral qualities. Milinda enquired how 

(b) Book II Reverend Nagasena was known and what 

what was his name. Upon ifc Nagasena initiated a discussion on 
the relation between name and individuality, and explained it 
thoroughly with the help of ar instructive simile. The king 
then, obviously to test his knowledge, put to him a riddle and 
questioned him as to his seniority of years. JSTagasena -fully' 
vindicated himself, and the king then satisfied sought the 
permission of the Reverend Arab at to discuss with him. The 
irahat in his turn told that he was agreeable bo a discusston if 
he would only discuss as a scholar and not as a king. Then one 
by one Milinda put questions and Nagasena solved them with 
his wonderful power of argumentation, simile, and illustration. 
He contended that there was no soul in the breath ; he explained 
one by one the aim of Buddhist renunciation, the Buddhist idea 
of reincarnation, the distinction between wisdom and reasoning, 
and wisdom and intelligence He further contended that virtue 
was the basis oi the five moral powers requisite for the attainment 
of nirvana and that ofaher moral powers were faith, per&everence 
mindfulness and meditation which a recluse should develop in 
himself. The characteristic marks of each of these qualities 
were expounded in detail, and their power to put an end to evil 
dispositions. A very important metaphysical question is next 
discussed wherein Nagasena wants to establish] with the help 
mainly ot illuminating illustrations that when a man is born 
he remains neither the same nor the another ; like a child and a 
growing man through different stages of life. ' One comes into 
being ? another passes away j^and the rebirth is, as it were, 
simultaneous. In this connection it is discussed if a man who 
will not be reborn feel any painful sensation ; and then what is 



110 Annals of tfa Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

after all reborn. A discourse is next initiated as to what ij 
meant by ' time J , the root and the ultimate point of it. This 
leads to another discussion as to the origin and developments ot 
qualities, as to other existence or non-existence of anything as 
soul, which in its turn most naturally leads to a further discus, 
sion as regards thought-perception and sight-perception, and 
lastly to the distinguishing characteristics of contact or phassa, 
sensation or vedana, idea of sanna, purpose or cetana, perception 
or vinnana, reflection or vitakka, and investigation or vicara. In 
all these discourses and solutions, Milinda is fully convinced and 
is full of admiration for Nagasena. 

The second discourse turns on the question of removal of 

difficulties and dispelling of doubts in the 

(c) Book I way o a ^ a | n | n g a iif Q O f renunciation, 

The various questions as to these doubts are not always related 
to one another, but all of them are instructive and helpful to 
solve doubts in the mind of Milinda, the King. He wants to 
know why really there is so much distinction between man and 
man, how renunciation is brought about, what is the character 
of the influence of Karma, and what is after all nirvana and 
whether all men attain it or not. The interesting point raised 
next is whether rebirth and transmigration are one and the same 
thing, and if there is a soul or any being that transmigrates from 
this body to another. Among other doubts that conflicted 
Milinda were if the body were very dear to the Buddhist recluse, 
if the Buddha had really thirty two bodily marks of a great man, 
if the Buddha was pure in conduct, if ordination was a good 
thing. Milinda further enquired of Nagasena what had been the 
real distinction between one full of passion, and one without 
passion, and lastly what was meant by an arahat who recollected 
what was past and done long ago. Then there were also other 
difficulties of various kinds which were all solved by the 
venerable Nagasena. Milinda was satisfied that he had pro- 
pounded his questions rightly, and the replies had been made 
rightly. Nagasena thought that the questions had been well-put 
and right replies had been given. 



Non-Canonical Pali Literature m 

This book deals with solutions of puzzles arising out of con- 
tradictory-statements made by'the Buddha. 
(d) Book IV These puzzles were many and varied and 

were distributed in eighty-two dilemmas which were pufc by 
Milinda to ISTagasena, who, in his turn, gave satisfactory expla- 
nations to each of them. The 'contradictions in the Buddha's 
utterances were more apparent than real. About them strife was 
likely thereafter to arise, and it was difficult to find a teacher 
like Nagasena. So an early solution of these dilemmas was 
imperative for the guidance of intending disciples of the Order. 
These dilemmas are particularly interesting as well as instructive 
and it is profitable to be acquainted here with a few examples. 
Milinda was puzzled by a dilemma If the Buddha has really 
quite passed away, what is the good of pay is g honour to his 
relics ? Nagasena said to him, " Blessed One, O King, is entirely 
set free from life and he accepts no gifts. If gods or men put 
up a building to contain the jewel treasure of the relics of a 
Tathagata who does not accept their gift, still by that homage 
paid to the attainment of the supreme good under the form of 
the jewel treasure of his wisdom do they themselves attain to 
one or other of the three glorious states ( Tisso Sampattiyo ). 
There are other reasons too. For, gods and men by offering 
reverence to the relics, and the jewel treasure of the wisdom of 
a Tathagata, though he has died away, and accepts it not, can 
cause goodness to arise in them, and by that goodness can 
assuage and can allaj the fever and the torment of the three- 
fold fire. And even if the Buddha has passed away, the possibi- 
lity of receiving the three attainments is nofc removed. Beings, 
oppressed by the sorrow of becoming, can, when they desire the 
attainments, still receive them by means of the jewel treasure of 
his relics and of his doctrines, discipline, and teaching. Like 
the seeds which through ihe earth attain to higher developments 
are the gods and men who, through the jewel treasure of the 
relics and the wisdom of the Tathagata though he has passed 
away and consent not to it being firmly rooted by the roots of 
merit, become like unto trees casting a goodly shade by means of 
the trunk of contemplation, the sap of true doctrine, the branches 
of righteousness, the flowers of emancipation, and the fruition of 



*112 Annals of the Bfiandarfcar Oriental Research 

monkhood. It is for all these reasons that even when the Buddha 
has passed away, an act done to him notwithstanding his not 
consenting thereto, is still of value and hears fruit. 

A second dilemma that conflicted Milinda wa,s s how can the 
Buddha be omniscient, when it is said thac he reflects or thinks? 
To solve this dilemtr a, Nat asena, analysed the thinking powers 
of men from the lowest individual full of lust, ill-will and 
delusion to the highest Buddha having all knov 1^-d^e and bearing 
about in themselves the ten-fold power and \vfacne thinking 
powers are on every point brought qu'ckly into play, and act 
with ease. He then classified these different kinds of thinking 
powers into seven classes, The thinking power of the Supreme 
Buddhas Is of the last or seventh class, and its *tuff is very fine, 
the dart is highly tempered and its dir j chu\j;e is hirJYJy powerful. 
It altogether outclasses the other s*x and is clear and active in 
its high quality that is beyond an ordinary man's comprehension, 
It is because the mind of the Blessed One is so clear and active 
that the Blessed One has worked so many v^on rl ers and miracles. 
For his knowledge is dependent on reflectioi , ?nd it ^s on reflec- 
tion that he knows whatever he wishes to knoxv. It is m ore rapid 
than that, and more easy in action in the all embracing know- 
ledge of the Blessed One, more rapid than his reflection. His all- 
embracing knowledge is like the store-house of a nrrat king who 
has stores^of gold, silver and valuables, and ail ^orts of eatables; 
it is with the help of reflection thai fcbe Blessed One grasps 
easily and at once whatever he wants from the big store-house 
of his knowledge, 

A third dilemma was, why'did the Blessed One admit Deva- 
clatta to the Order, if he knew of his machinations ? In ' giving 
a solution out of this dilemma Nagaeeaa told Milirda that ''the 
Blessed^One was both full of mercy and wisdom. It was when 
he mhis mercy and wisdom considered the life history of Deva- 
datta that he perceived how having heaped up karma on karma, 
he would pass for an endless series of kalpas from torment to 
torment, and from perdition to perdition. And the Blessed One 
knew also that the infinite Karma of that man would, because he 
had entered the Order, become finite, and the sorrow caused bf 



N on- Canonical Pali Literature 113 

the previous karma would also therefore become limited. But if 
that foolish, person were not to enter the Order, then he would 
continue to heap up karma which would endure f or a kalpa. 
And it was becaube he knew that that, in his mercy, he admitted 
him to the Order. And by doing so, the Blessed One acted like 
a clever physician, and made light the heavy sorrow oi Deva- 
datta who would have to suffer many hundreds of thousands of 
kalpas. For having caused schism in the Order, he ( Devadatta ) 
would no doubt suffer pain and misery in the purgatories, but 
that was not the fault of the Blessed One, but was the effect of 
his own karma. The Blessed One did in his case act like a 
surgeon who with all kind intent and 'for man's good smears 
a wound with burning' ointment, cuts it with lancet, cauterises 
with caustic, and administers to il a salty wash. So did the 
Blessed One cause Devadatta to suffer such pain and misery that 
at the end he mighfc be relieved of all pains arid miseries. If he 
had not done so, Devadatta would have suffered torment in 
purgatory through a succession of existences, through hundreds 
of thousands of kalpas. 

Of other puzzles that arose in Milinda ? s mind, mention may- 
be made of three out of many. These were, for example, how 
was it that an Arahat could do no wrong ; why did not the 
Buddha promulgate all the rules of the Order at once and how 
could Vessantara's giving away of his children be approved. 
Speaking as to the faults of the Arahat, Nagasena told Milinda 
that the Arahats, like lay men, could be guilty of an offence, but 
their guilt was neither due to carelessness or thoughtlessness. 
Sins are of two kinds those which are a breach of the ordinary- 
moral law, and those which are a breach cf the Eules of the 
Order. Now, an Arahat, in the true sense of the term, cannot be 
guilty of a moral offenee ; but it is possible for him to be guilty 
of any breach of the Rules of the Order of which he might have 
been ignorant. Next, speaking as to the method of promulgating 
the Rules from time to time and not all al once, Nagasena quoted 
the authority of the Tathagata ; for the Tathagata thought thus, 
"If I were to lay down the whole of the hundred and fifty rules 
at once the people would be filled with fear, those of them who 
were willing to enter the Order would refrain from doing so, 
3 [Annals, B. O, B. I. ] 



t!4 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

they would not trust my words, and through their want of faith 
they would be liable to rebirth in states of woe. An occasion 
arises, therefore, illustrating it with a religious discourse, will I 
lay down, when the evil has become manifest, each Rule," As 
to the justification of King Yessantara's giving away his beloved 
sons in slavery to a Brahmana, and his dear wife to another man 
as wife. Nagasena fcold Mihnda that he who gave gifts in such 
a way as to bring even sorrow upon others, that giving of his 
brought forth frail in happiness and it would leadto rebirths in 
states of bliss. Even it that be an excessive gift it was not 
harmful, rather it was praised, applauded and approved by the 
wise in the world. 

The last four dilemmas of Milinda are concerned with the 
difficult problem of Nirvana. Is Nirvana all bliss or partly pain; 
the form, the figure, duration, etc., of Nirvana, the realisation of 
Nirvana, and the place of Nirvana, these are the puzzles that 
inflicted the mind of the King. Nagasena solved them all one 
by one to the satisfaction of Milinda. According to him Nirvana 
is bliss unalloyed, there is no pain in it. It is true that those 
who are in quest of Nirvana afflict their minds and bodies, 
restrain themselves in standing 1 , walking and sitting, lying, and 
in food, suppress their sleep, keep their senses in subjection, 
abandon their very body and their life. But it is after they have 
thus, in pain, sought after Nirvana, that they enjoy Nirvana 
which is all bliss. By 110 metaphor, or explanation, or reason, or 
argument can its form or figure, or duration, or measure be made 
clear, even if it be a condition that exists. But there is some- 
thing as to ibs qualities which can be explained. Nirvana IB 
untarnished by any evil dispositions. It allays the thirst of the 
craving after lusts, desire for future life, and the craving after 
worldly prosperity. It puts an end to grief, it is an ambrosia, 
Nirvana is free from the dead bodies of evil dispositions, it is 
mighty and boundless, it is the abode of great men, and Nirvana 
is all in blossom of purity, of knowledge and emancipation, 
Nirvana is the support of life, for it puts an end to old age and 
death ; it increases the power of Iddhi ( miracle ) of all beings, it 
is the source to all beings of the beauty of holiness, it puts a 
top fco suffering in all beings, to the suffering arising from evil 



Non- Canonical Pali Literature 115 

dispositions, and it overcomes in all beings the weakness which 
arises from hunger and all sorts of pain, Nirvana is not born, 
neither does it grow old, it dies not, it passes not away, it has no 
rebirth, it is unconquerable, thieves carry it not off, it is not 
attached to anything, it is the sphere in which Arahat move, 
nothing can obstruct it, and it is infinite. Nirvana satisfies all 
desires, it causes delight and it is ( full of lustre. It is hard to 
attain to, it is unequalled in the beauty of its perfume, it is 
praised by all the Noble Ones, Nirvana is beautiful in Kighte- 
ousness, it has a pleasant taste. It is very exalted, it is immova- 
ble, it is accessible to all evil dispositions, it is a place where no 
evil dispositions can grow, it is free from desire to please and 
from resentment. 

As to the time of Nirvana, it is not past, nor future, nor 
present, nor produced, nor not produced, nor producible. Peace- 
ful, blissful and delicate, Nirvana always exists. And it is that 
which he who orders his life aright, grasping the idea of all 
things according to the teaching of the conquerors realises by his 
wisdom. It is known by freedom from distress and danger, by 
confidence, by peace, by calm, by bliss, by happiness, by delicacy, 
by purity and by freshness. Lastly as to the place of Nirvana, 
there is no spot either in the East, or the South, or the West or 
the North, either above or below where Nirvana is. Yet it exists 
just as fire exists even if there Is no place where it is stored up. 
If a man rubs two sticks together, the fire comes out, so Nirvana 
exits for a man who orders his life well. But there is such a 
place on which a man may stand, and ordering his life aright, 
he can realise Nirvana, and such a place is virtue. 

This book deals with solutions of problems of inference. 
Milinda asked Nagasena how they could 

(e) BookV know that Buddha had ever lived. Naga- 

sena told him that as the existence of ancient kings was known 
by their royal insignia, their crown, their slippers anJ their fans, 
so was the existence of Buddha known by the royal insignia 
used by the Blessed One and by the thirty-five constituent quali- 
ties that make up Arahatship which formed the subject of dis- 
course delivered by Gotaina before his death to his disciples. 
By these can the whole world of gods and men know aud believe 



116 Annats of the 7iandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

that the Blessed One existed once. By this reason, by this argu, 
meat, through this inference, can it be known that the Blessed 
One lived. Just at the sight of a beautiful and well-planned city, 
one can know the ability of the architect, so can one, on examin- 
ing the Oity of Righteousness which the Buddha built up, come 
to know of his ability and existence. 

The sixth book opens with an interesting discussion. Can lay 

men attain Nirvana ? Nagasena told that 
(f) Boo VI 



women cou id S ee face to 
face the condition of peace, the supreme good, Nirvana. 'But, 
what purpose then do extra vows serve ? ' asked Milinda again, 
To this Nagasena replied that the keeping of vows implied a 
mode of livelihood without evil, it has blissful calm as its 
fruit, it avoided blame and k h^d such twenly-eight good qualities 
on account of which all the Buddhus alike longed for them and 
held them dear. And whosoever thoroughly carried out the vowg, 
they became completely endowed with eighteen good qualities 
without a previous keeping of the vows by those who became 
endowed with these good qualities, there was no realisation of 
Arahatship ; and there was no perception of the truth to those who 
were not purified by the virtues that depended on the keeping ol 
the vows, Nagasena next explained in detail with the help of a 
good number of similies the character that came as a result of 
keeping the vows for the good growth of the seed of renunciation 
and for the attainment of Nirvana. But those who being un- 
wcrthy take the vows incur a two-fold punishment and suffer 
the loss of the good that may be in him. He shall receive dis- 
grace and scorn and suffer torment in the purgatory. On the 
contrary, those who being worthy take the vows with the idea of 
upholding the truth deserve a two-fold honour. For he comes 
near and dear to gods and men, and the whole religion of the 
recluses becomes his very own Nagasena then gave Milinda 
the details of the thirteen extra vows by which a man should 
bathe in the mighty waters of Nirvana. Upasena the elder, 
practised all these purifying merits of the vows and Blessed One 
was delighted at his conduct. The thirty graces of the true 
recluse are detailed nett and whosoever is endowed with these 
graces is said to have abounded in the peace and bliss of Nirvana, 



Non- Canonical Pali Literature 117 

Sariputta, according: to Nagasena, was one like this who became 
in this life of such exalted virtue that he was the one who, after 
the Master, set rolling- the royal chariot-wheel of the Kingdom 
of Righteousness in the religion of Gotama, the Blessed One. 

The seventh or the last book is concerned with a detailed list 

<*} Book VII f the similesor Dualities of Arahatship; 

of these similes thirty-eight have been lost 

and sixty-seven are still preserved. Any member of the Order 
who wishes to realise Arahatship must be endowed with these 
one hundred and five qualities. Milinda silently and reverently 
heard detailed descriptions of these qualities ; and at the end he 
was full of admiration for the venerable Thera Nagasena for his 
wonderful solution of the three hundred and four puzzles. He 
was filled with joy of heart ; and all pride was suppressed within 
him. He ceased to have any more doubts and became aware of 
the virtue of the religion of the Buddhas. He then entreated 
ETagasena tc be accepted as a supporter of the Faith and as a 
true convert from that day onward as long as life should last, 
Milinda did homage to Nagasena and had a vihara built called 
the ' Milinda-Vihara * which he handed over to Nagasena. 

The Milinda-Panha like the Bhagavat Glta is the most in- 
teresting and instructive literary production of an age which is 
heroic. Its long narrative is composed of a long series of philo- 
sophical contest between two great heroes, King Milinda on the 
one hand and the Thera Nagasena on the other, A pubba-yoga 
or prelude is skilfully devised to arouse a curiosity in the reader 
to witness the contest and watch the final result with a great 
eagerness. Cn the whole, the Milinda successfully employs a 
novel literary device to put together the isolated and disconnected 
controversies in the Kathavatthu as representing different stages 
in the progress of the philosophical battle, and in doing so it has 
been in one place guilty of the literary plagiarism in respect of 
introducing King Milinda as a contemporary of the six: heretical 
teachers on the model of the Samafmaphala Sutta. 

Alasando ( dlpo ) the island town of Alexandria on the 
H m'tK Mito^iffi' Indus > fo ded b ^ Alexander. 



118 Annals of the Bkandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Yavana ( Baotria ) That province watered by the Oxus or 
the Amu Daria and the premier satrapy of the Achaemenian kings ; 
later on came to be conquered by Alexander and in 321 B. o. fell 
to the share of Seleukos Nikator. Hundred years later the Bactrian 
Greeks threw off their allegiance to their Seleukidan lord, asserted 
independence, and gradually moved towards India to establish 
there an independent principality. Milinda or Menander was 
one of the kings of this line of Bactrian Greeks who came to 
establish their power in India. 

Bharukaccha an ancient seaport equivalent to modern 
Broach in the Kaira district in Guzrat. Barygaza of the Greek 
geographers. 

Clna ( country ) China. 

Gandhara ( rattham ) an important ancient kingdom that had 
its capita] at Purusapura or Peshwar in the North- western Fron- 
tier Province. 

Kalinga an ancient kingdom on the Orissan coast, identical 
with the modern Ganjam region. All older works, such as the 
Jataka, Mahavastu and Dlgha Nikaya, mention a kingdom 
named Kalingajwith its capital Dantapura ages before Buddha's 
time. 

Kalasa ( gama ) a village situated in the Alasanda island on 
the Indus. The birth place of Milinda. 

Kajangala mentioned in very early Buddhist Pali texts as a 
locality somewhere near Eajmahal. 

Kasmlr ( rattham ) a famous kingdom in the North of India. 

Kosala an ancient province identical with South Bihar, 
capital Sravastl. 

Kolopattanam an ancient seaport probably on the Coro- 
mandel coast. 

Magadha ( rattham ) - an ancient kingdom identical with 
East Bihar ; capital Pataliputra. 

Madhura(nigamo)- an ancient city identical with modern 
Mathura. Coins of Menande? have been found here. 



Non- Canonical Pali Literature 119 

Nikumba ( rattharh') somewhere in the north-west of India. 

Sagala ( nagaram ) identical with Sakala, modern Sialkot, 
capital city of the King Milinda. 

Saketa identical with ancient Ayodhya country. 

Saka country the kingdom of the Sakas or Scythians in the 
time of Menander was confined to the Baotrian lands south of the 
Oseus and to Sogdiana to the north. 

Sovlra ancient Sauvlra, the country of the Sauvlra tribe 
adjacent to the Sindhu country. 

Surattho ( nigamo ) an ancient seaport identical with mo- 
dern Surat. 

BaranasI ' modern Benares. 

SuvannabhumI identical probably with Lower Burma and 
Malay Peninsula. 

Pataliputra ( nagaram) an ancient city, capital of Magadha 
. near modern Patna. 

Udicca a country in the north-west of India. 
Vanga identical with East Bengal 

Vilata an ancient kingdom somewhere in the north-west of 
India. 

Takkola an ancient seaport near Thaton in Lower Burma, 

Ujjenl identical with ancient Ujjayinl, capital of the ancient 
Malwa country. 

Greek ( country ) ancient Greece in Eastern Europe. 
1. Ganga The Ganges. 

Names of rivers in the 2, Aclravati an ancient river in Eastern 
Milinda-Panha ,_ . .. _ , 

India flowing through the Kosala country 

past Sravastl. 

3. Yamuna a tributary of the Ganges, the Isamos of the 
Greeks, 

4. Sarabhu identical with Sarayu, a tributary of the Ganges. 



1 20 Annals of the JBhandartcar Oi iental Research Institute 

5. Mali! a river south ot the Vindhyas flowing into the Baj 
of Bengal. These five rivers are often mentioned together in tht 
Pitakas. 

6. Sarassati an ancient tributary of the Indus. 

7. Vitamsa identical probably with Vifrasta, a tributary of 
the Indus, the Hydaspes of the Greeks. 

8. Candrabhaga identical with modern Chenab, a tributary 
of the Indus. 

A. Books silently referred to : 

Books referred to and 1. Digha Nikaya, 2. Kathavatlhu, 3. Angut- 
mentioned in the _ , i - K ^ n 

Milmda-Pafiho tara Nikaya, 4. Mahavagga, 5. Uullavagga, 

6. Vessantara Jataka, 7. Sivi Jataka, 8. Maj- 
jhima Nikaya, 9, Sutta Vibhanga, 10, Catuma Sutta, 11, Dhamma- 
<3akka- pa vattana_ Sutta, 12. Amba Jata&a, 13. Dummedha Jataka, 
14. Tittira Jataka, 15. Khantivada Jataka, 16, Cula-nandiya 
Jataka, 17. Taccha-Sukaia Jataka, 18. Cariya-pitaka, 19. Silava- 
naga Jataka, 20. Sabbadatha Jataka, 21. Apannaka Jataka, 22. 
Nlgrodha-miga Jataka, 23. Mahapaduma Jataka, 24, Ummagga 
Jataka, 25. Sutta Nipata, 26. Thera Gatha, 27. Samyuita Nikaya, 
28. Dhammapada and 29. Nigrodha Jataka. 

1. Vinaya, Sutta, Abhidhamma, 2. The Suttantas?, 3. Dhamma- 

Samganl, 4. "Vibhanga, 5. Dhatu-Katha, 6* 

Books or passages of -T-, , ^ .^ ... w ~r ., -v T ,,, -c r 

books mentioned Puggala Pannatfci, 7. Katha-Vatthu, 8, Ya- 

byname maka ^ 9> p a tthana, 10. The Abb idh am ma 

Pitaka, 11. The Vinaya Pitaka, T2. The 
Sutta Pitaka, 13. Maha-Samaya Suttanta - ( Digha Nikaya ), 
14. Maha-mangala Suttanta- ( Sutta Mpata ), 15. Sama-citta- 
pariyaya Suttanta - ( unknown ), 16. Rahulvada Suttanta ( Maj- 
jhirha), 17. Parabhava Suttanta -( Sutta Nipata ), 18. Sarhyutta 
Nikaya, 19, The Sutta Nipata, 20. Ratana Sutta - ( Sutta Nipata), 
2L Khandha Paritta - (not traced), 22. MoraParitta, 23. Dhajagga 
Paritta - ( Jataka Book ), 24, Atanatiya Paritta - ( Digha Nikaya ), 
25. Angulimali Paritta -( Maj jhima Nikaya), 26. The Patimo- 
kkha, 27. Dhamma-dayada Satta ( Majjhima Nikaya ), 28. 
khma Vibhanga of the Maxima Nikaya, 29. Cariya Pitaka, 



N on- Canonical Pali Literature 121 

tfavangarh Buddha Vacanarh, 31. Dlgha Nikaya, 32. Majjhima 
Nikaya, 33. Khuddaka Nikaya, 34 Maha Rahulovada ( Majjhirna 
Kikaya), 35 Fura-bheda fc'utfcanfo ( Sutta NipatrO, 36. Kalaha 
Yivada Suttants ( Sutta Nipata ), 37. Cula-Vyuha Suttanta ( Sutta 
Nipata), 38 Maha-Vyuha Suttanla ( Sutta Nipata ), 9 Tuvataka 
Sufctanta ( Sutta Nipata ), 40. Sariputta Suttanta ( Sutta JSTipata ), 
41, Mahasanaaya Suttanta ( Dlgha Nikaya ), 42. Sakkha-Panha 
Suttanta ( Dlgha Nikaya ), 43. Tirokndda Suttanta ( Khuddaka 
Patha), 44, Ekutfcara Nikaya { Anguttara Nikaya ), 45. Dhaniya 
Sutoa ( Sutta Isipata ), 46. Kummupama Suttanta ( Samyutta JSTi- 
kaya), 47. Sacca Samyulta ( Samyutfca Nikaya ), 48. Vidhura 
Punnaka Jataka, 49. Dhammapada, 50. SutasoniA Jataka, 51. 
Kanha Jafcaka, 52. Lomahamsana Pariyaya, 53. Cakkavaka 
Jataka, 54, Culla Narada Jataka, 55. Lakkhana Suttanta ( Dlgha 
Nikaya ), 56. Bhallatiya Jataka, 57 Parirdbbana Suttanta 
(Dlgha Nikaya). 

V. Trenckner has edited the book with a general index by C. 
J, Eylands and an index of gathas by Mr. Rhys Davids. It has 
been translated into English by T. W. Rhys Davids and included 
in the Sacred Books of the Eat Series as V'ols- XXXV-XXXVI. 
There is a Sinhalese translation of the Milinda Panho by Hinati 
Kumbure under the title " Milinda prashnaya," Colombo, 1900. 

The following books may be consulted 

1. Le Bonheur du Nirvana extrait du Milindapprashnaya ; ou 
Miroir des doctrines sacrees traduit du Pali par Lewis da Sylva 
Pandit. ( Revue de 1'histoire des religions, Paris, 1885 ). 

2. Deux Traductions chinoises du Milindapanho Par E. Specht 
arec introduction par S. Levi. 

3 Chinese translations of the Milindapanho by Takakusu, 
J. R. A, S. 1896. This paper contains a number of Chinese trans- 
lations in existence, the date of the two translations and the 
story of the discussions of King Milinda and Bhikkhu Nagasena 
found in the Buddhist sutra called Samyutta-Ratnapitaka. 

4. Historical basis for the questions of King Menander from 
the Tibetan by L. A. Waddel J. R. A. S., 1897. This paper point* 
out that the Milindapanha is known to the Tibetans, 
4 J Annals, B, O. B.I.j 



122 Annals of the Ehanaaikvt Oriental Research Institute 

5. Nagasena by Mrs. Rhys Davids, J. R. A.. S., i891. 

6. Milinda Questions by Mrs. Rhys Davids, 1930. 

7. Critical and philological notes to the first chapter of the 
Milindapaiiha by V. Trenckner revised and edited by Dr. Ander- 
son, J. P. T- S., 1908. 

8. Paul Pelliot - Les norns propres dans les iraduotions oM- 
noises du Miiindapanho. ( Journal Asiatic, Paris, 1914 ) 

9. There is a Bengali edition of this work published by the 
Bangiya Sahitya Parlshat, Calcutta, which can vie, if it can vie 
at all, in its uncritical method and blunders 

10. IT. Otto Schrader, Die Fragen des Koni<? Menandros 
( Berlin 1903 ). 

11. G, Cagnola, Dialoghi del Re Milinda ( Italian translation 
of the Milinda Pafiha ). 

The Abhidhammavatara was written by Buddhadatta; and it 

has been in continuous use amongst the 

Abhidhammavatara and , j , ,.,, -r-k-iT.., . , 1-1 

Buparupavibhaga students ot the Buddhibt scriptures. Bud- 

dhadaiia was held as a personage of excep- 
tionally high scholarly attainments by Buddhaghosa and others. 
It is interesting to note the incidents which led to the writing of 
this work. Buddhadatta was going from Ceylon to India when 
he was met by Buddhaghosa who was then proceeding to Ceylon 
for the purpose of rendering the Sinhalese commentaries into 
Pali. Knowing the mission of Buddhaghosi, Buddhadatfca was 
highly pleased and spoke thus ; " When you finish the commenta- 
ries, please send them up to me that I may summarise your 
labours/' Buddhaghosa consented to comply with his request 
and the Pali commentaries were accordingly placed in the hand 
of Buddhadatta who summed up the commentaries on the Abhi- 
dhamma in the Abhidhammavatara and that on the Yinaya in 
the Vinayavinicchaya'. He was the author of the Ruparupa- 
Tt T and f th6 G0m * e ^ry of the Buddhavamsa. The 
Abhidhammavatara is written partly in prose and partly in 
verse. It discussesjjhe^ points : 



Non*Canonical Pali Liferafure 123 

I citta, 2. nibbana, 3. cetasika (that which relates to the 
mind ), 4. arammana ( object ideation ), 5, vlpaka citta ( conse- 
quence of mindfulness), 6 rupa (form), 7. Pannatti (designa- 
tion ), etc. 

Ruparupavibhaga deals with rupa, arupa, citta, cetasika, etc. 
It is written in prose. Headers are referred to my work. ' The 
Life and Work of Buddhaghosa ' ( Oh. IV) for a further study of 
Buddhadatta and his works. 

A. P, Buddhadatfca a Bhikkhu of Ceylon, has edited Buddha- 
data's Manuals or summaries of Abhidhamma ( Abhidhammava- 
tara and Ruparupavibhaga } for the first time for the P T. S., 
London, 

The Saccasamkhepa is a religious work on truth written by 
Dhammapala Thera. Malalasekera points 
Saccasamkhepa uncertainty 



as to the authorship and date of the Saccasamkhepa. The Sad- 
dhammasamgaha assigns it to Ananda 1 . The Saccasamkhepa 
has been edited by Dharmnarama Bhikkhu. There are five 
chapters in it dealing with rupa (form), vedana (sensation), 
cittapavatti ( mind), and pakinnakasamgaha and Nibbana, It is 
known as the summary of the truth published by the P. T S. in 
J. P. T. S., 1917-1919. It consists ot 387 stanzas. 

The Abhidhammattha-Sangaha has served for probably eight 
centuries as n primer of psychology and 
philosophy in Burma and Cevlon, and a 
whole literature of exegesis has grown up 
around it, the latest additions to which are but of yesterday. The 
manual is ascribed to a teacher named Aimruddha ; but nothing 
is known about him except the fact that he ha,d corrpiled two 
other treatises on philosophy, and one of them was written while 
the author was at Kanclpur or Conjeeveratn Burmese tradition 
asserts that he was a Thera cf Cejlon and wrote the compendium 
at the Sinhalese vihaia founded by SomadevI, Queen of King 
Vttttagamanl, who flourished between 88-76 B. G t) a date fictitous- 



1 The Pah Literature of Ceylon, p 203, 



124 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

ly early for the book. In fact, Anuruddha is believed to have 
lived earlier than 12th but later than the 8th century A. D, 
Sariputta compiled a paraphrase to this book- The Abhidhamma- 
ttha-Sangaha has been edited and published in J. P. T. S., 1883 end 
translated with notes by Shwe Zan Aung and revised by Mrs, 
Rhys Davids under the name of the compendium of Philosophy 
included in the P. T. S. translation series. 

The Abhidhammattha-Sangaha is classed in Burmese biblio- 

Other contemporary phi- graphy Under a classified lisl of PMlosophi- 
losophical macmals cal manuals, nine in number. They are : 

1. Abhidhammattha Sangaha, by Anuruddha, -. Paramattha 
Vinicchaya, by Anurudha, 3. Abhidhammavatara, by Buddha- 
datta, 4, Euparupavibha^a, by BuddhacHtta, 5, Sacca Sankhepa, 
by Dhammapala, 6. MohaviochedanI, by Kessapa, 7. Kliema- 
pakarana, by Khema, 8. Namacara-dlpaka, by Saddhamma Jofei- 
pala, and 9. Namarupapariccheda, by Anuruddha. 

The 4bhidhammattha-Sangaha, because of its exclusively con- 
densed treatment, stimulated a large growth 

Exegetical literature , *,, , ,. , . , .-, ,-, 

on the book ^ ancillary works, of which the following 

have up-till-now been known. 

A. Four Tlkas or Commentaries : 1. Porana Tlka by Nava- 
vimala Buddhi of Ceylon, 2. Abhidhammattha Yibhavan! by 
Sumangala of Ceylon, 3. Sankhepa-Vannana by Saddhamma 
Jyotipala of Burma, and 4. Paramattha-dTpan! Tlka, by Ledi 
Sadaw of Burma. 

B. A 'Key' lo the Tika-gyaw, entitled Manisaramanju by 
Ariyavamsa of Saggaing, Burma. 

C. A commentary entitled Madhu-Sftrattha-dlpanl, by Maha- 
nanda of Hanthawaddy, Burma. 

D. A number of works, not in Pali, but in Burmese : 

1. Abhidhammattha-sangaha-madhu, a modern work by 
Mogaung Sadaw, 2. AbMdhanimattha^sangalm-gandhi, a modern 
work, by Payagi Sadaw, 3. Paramatta Sarupa-bhedanl, by 
Visuddharam* Sadaw, 4 Abhidhammattha-Sayupa-dlpaka, by 



Non- Canonical Pali Literature 125 

the late Myobyingyi, and 5. a number of analytical works 
entitled Akauk. 

The Abhidhammattha-sangaha covers very largely the same 

range of subject matter as that of the Visud- 

T1 cfatgahf ^ at *the <^imagga, though the amplitude of treatment 

Visuddhimagga. and the order and emphasis of treatment in 

each are different. But they are to some 

extent complimentary, and as such still hold the field as modern 
text books for students of Buddhism in Buddhist countries. 

The Abhidhammattha-Sangaha is so highly condensed that it 
consists, for the most part, of terse, jejure sentences, which are 
not easily intelligible to lay readers. It is, therefore, profitable to 
have a resume of the main topics and problems of the whole work 
as a Manual of Buddhist Psychology and Philosophy. 

Mind is ordinarily defined as that which is conscious of an 

object ; and the Buddhists have tried to 

m frame their definition with the help of 

fifty-two mental attributes or properties enumerated in Part II of 

the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha. But the definition of mind is 

also a division of mind, and our author's division into vedana", 

Sana, and sankhara corresponds to Bain's division of the mind 

into Feeling, Thought or intellect, and will or volition. 

Consciousness ( vifmana ) has, therefore, been defined as the 
relation between arammanika ( subject ) and arammana ( object). 
In this relation the object presented is termed paccaya ( the 
relating thing ) and the subject, pacc&yuppanna ( the thing 
related ). The two terms are thus relative. 

The object of Consciousness is either object of Sense or Object 
of thought. Object of sense sub-divides itself into five classes - 
sight, sound, smell, taste and touch, which are collectively 
termed pancarammana ( five-fold object X The object of thought 
also consists of five sub- clauses : citta ( mind ), cetasika ( mental 
properties), pasada, rupa and sukhumarupa (sensitive and 
subtle qualities of body ), pannati ( name, idea, notion, concept ), 
and nibbaria. These are collectively termed dhammarammana, 



126 Annal* of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The Pannatti object is of several sub-clauses. Panmatti is either 
(!) that which makes known ( pannapettfci ) . 
Pannatti Qr ^) that which is made known ( pannapi- 

yattti ), corresponding to our author's terminology -Saddapannatti 
and Atthapannatti which are undoubtedly relative terms. Sadda- 
pannatti is a name ( of a thing ) which, when expressed in words, 
or represented by a sign is called a * term ? . It is synonymous 
with nama-pannatti. Atthapannatti is the idea or notion of the 
attributes of a thing made known or represented by a name, In 
other words, it is equivalent to * concept 7 and is sub-divided into 
various classes. Pannatti has been distinguished from Para 
mattha in the sense that the former is Nominal and conceptual- 
whereas the latter is Real. 

The object comprehending as it does, the subject, is wider, 
more extensive than the latter. This is probably one reason why 
greater prominence is given to the object patthana. In Buddhism 
there is no actor aparfe from the action, no percipient apart from 
perception. In other words, there is no conscious subject behind 
consciousness. 

' Like the current of the river ' ( nadi soto viya ) is the Bud- 
dhist idea of existence For no two conse- 

Life and Ancient view , . . . . , ,. , , * .* j, 

cutive moments is the fabric of the body 

the same, and this theory of the ceaseless change or flux is called 
anicca-dhamma which is applied alike to the body and the mind, 
or the Being and thought respectively. The dividing line between 
th^se two is termed mano-dvara, the Threshold of Consciousness. 
Life, then, in the Buddhist view of things, is like an ever- 
changing river, having its source in birth, its goal in death, 
receiving from the tributary streams of sense constant accretions 
to its flood, and ever dispensing to the world around it the 
thought-stuff it has gathered by the way. 

Subliminal Consciousness is either kama, rupa or arupa. 

Primary classification Supraliminal consciousness is normal, 

of Consciousness supernormal, and transcendental. Normal 

consciousness is termed kamacitta, so called 

because desire or kama prevails on this plan of existence. Super- 
normal consciousness is termed Mahag-galacitta because it has 



Non-Canonical Pali LiUrature 127 

reached the sublime state, and is further distinguished as rupa, 
cr arupacitta. 

Consciousness in this four-fold classification is primarily 
composed of seven mental properties ( ceta- 
sikas )- namely, contact < phaesa ), feeling 
of consciousness ( vedana ), perception ( sanna ), will or 

volition ( cetana ), oneness of object ( ekag- 

gata ), psychic life ( jivitlndriya ) and attention ( manasikara ). 
These seven mental properties are termed sabba-citta-sadharana 
or universals, because they are common to every class and state 
of consciousness, or every separate act of mind or thought, There 
are forty-five different properties distinguishing one class from 
another. And those, in varying combinations, give rise to 
the eighty-nine classes of consciousness enumerated in 
Fart I of the Abhidhammattha-sangaha, or according to a broader 
classification, one hundred and twenty-one. The seven mental 
properties have been enumeratad above ; there are, besides these, 
six particular specific or accidental properties These are vitakka, 
vicara, adhimokkha, ririya, piti and ohanda. The four universal 
bad cetasikas or properties are moha, ahirika, anottappa and 
uddhacca Besides these, there are also two specific cetasikas or 
properties, lobha and ditthi. All these properties are discussed 
and explained in the body of the book. 

Of these and other classes of consciousness making up a total 

of eighty-nine, some function as causes or 

Classes and orders of -, -,, , . _i j 

Consciousness grouped karma, some as resultants or vipaka, and 

some are non-casual or kriya. Besides 

these three classes, there are two elements In every consciousness, 
the Constant and the Variable. The form of consciousness is the 
constant element, and is opposed to the matter of consciousness 
which constitutes the variable element. But in Buddhism, both 
subject and object are variable at every moment , and there are 
several forms of consciousness each of which may be designated 
a ' process of thought ' whenever it takes place as a fact To 
every separate state of consciousness which takes part in a 
process of thought as a functional state, either in the subjective 
form of the stream of being, or in the objective form of a consci- 
ous act of mind or thought, there are three phases - gene/si* 



12 8 Jrna/s cj tt e Phar.darKor C?ur<1a! Research Institute 

( uppada ), development ( thiti ), and dissolution ( bhanga) - each 
of which is explained and discussed by the author in his Manual 
in all their processes and stages. 

The possibility of the c internal " presentation of all the six 
classes of objects mentioned above is that 

In R\ r flec\^on U ploTer nd a sensation can be experienced, the Bud- 
( Suddha-manodvara- dhists believe, without the corresponding 
vlt objective stimulus. The possibility of 

Reflection proper is attributed to the relation termed ' proximate 
sufficient cause ' by virtue of which ( a ) a sense impression once 
experienced in a sense cognition by way of the five doors, or ( b ) 
a previous experience of all internal intuition or cognition by 
way of the mind-door or ( c ) the idea once formed in the 
sequels of either, can never be lost. There are different processes 
of reflection in connection with Things Seen ( dittha ). But when 
an object that has not been actually sensed is constructed out of, 
and connected with tbese seen objects, it is termed ' object asso- 
ciated with things seen ' ( ditthi-sambandha ). And the process 
of thought connected therewith is classed in the category of 
objects associated w*th things seen. The object constructed out 
of and connected with Things Heard ( suta object ) is termed 
' object associated with things heard ; ( suta-sarhbandha ). Any 
object constructed out of Things Cogitated ( vinnata) and con- 
nected therewith is termed 4 associated with things cogitated J 
( vifmata-sambandha ). AnY object in the category of Things 
Seen, Heard or Cogitated may either be past, present or future. 
When it is present, it is intuited as a vivid reality. The same 
forms hold good for all kinds of thought or reflection, 

How is memory possible, if the object be not the same for any 

two consecutive moments in life. The 

Memory and Changing ., 

Personality answer is given in detail by the author, 

Each mental state is related to the next in 

at least four different modes of relation ( paccaya ) :~ Proximity 
(anantara), Contiguity ( samanantara ), Absence (natthi), and 
Abeyance ( avigata ). This four-fold relation is understood to 
mean that each expired state renders service to the next. In 
other words, each, on passing away, gives up the whole of its 



Non-Canonical Pali Literature 129 

energy to its successor : and this is how the memory is helped 
and retained. 

The stage of apperception pertains to that active side of an 
existence ( kamma-bhava ), which deter- 
mines the passive side ( upapatti-bh^a ) 
of the next existence. The apperceptional 
act is thus a free, determining, casual act of thought, as dis- 
tinguished from the mental states, which are fixed, determined 
and resultant acts ( vipaka ) of kamma. Volition, under favourable 
circumstances, is transformed into kamma. But volition (cetana) 
in apperception on occasion of sense ( panca-dvarika-javana ) 
cannot possibly become kamma. Hence we must look to the 
volition involved in reflective or representative apperception 
( manodvarika-javana ) for kamma, which according to the 
different characters of volition is classed in different types or 
varieties with distinct characteristics. 

Interesting though is the phenomenon of dream, it is conspi- 
cuous in the Abhidhammattha-sangaha by- 
Dream Consciousness iis absence< Scattered references and some- 
times systematic explanations have here and there been made in 
Buddhist works regarding forms of dream- thought, dreams-classi- 
fied, theories of dreams, relation of dreams, relation of dream to 
sleep, etc. 

The first essential qualification of the process of thought 
transition from the normal to the super* 
normal is 'purity of virtue or morals'. 
The next is meditation and concentration 
of thought. There are four moments of apperception during the 
transitional stage from normal to super-normal consciousness. 
The first is termed ' preparation *, the second 'success', which is 
followed by the third called ' adaptation '. After the last moment 
of * adoption ? normal consciousness is cub off by the super-normal, 
and the transitional stage is superseded by the latter, known as 
the first Jhana, and for one thought-moment, the person- attaining 
it experiences ecstacy. Attainment in Jhana is thus a very 
important psychological moment, marking an epoch in his 
mental experience for the person who succeeds in commanding 

5 [ Annals, B. O. R. I. ] 



130 Annals of the ShandarJcar Oriental Research Institute 

it, Jhana is usually classified in five stages, and in the 
stage ecstatic concentration reaches its full development with the 
help of the continued voluntary exercise of the mind on an after- 
image to which it has been directed. 

To attain super-intellectual powers ( aW-iinnS ) for an adept in 
the Fifth Jhana, it will be necessary for 
d him to S though a course of mental 
training in fourteen processes. Super- 
normal powers of will or Iddhi-^idha may then be developed by 
means of the so-called four bases of Iddhi which involve respec- 
tively the development of Four dominant or predominant princi- 
ples of purpose, effort, knowledge and wisdom. There are ten 
classes of Iddhi known to Buddhism, the last three of which 
constitute the Iddhi-vidha, and are used as a basis for the 
willing process. 

With a slight difference in procedure in mental attitudes and 
mood of thought, the same forms of the 
transitional, inductive, or sustained and 
retrospective processes of Fifth-rupa Jhana obtain in the case of 
the Four Arupa Jhanas. When an adept in the Fifth Kupa- 
Jhana, who has repeatedly induced the same through any one of 
the ten circles, with the exception of space, erroneously believes 
that all physical pain and misery are due to the existence of the 
body, and reflects on the relative grossness of this jhana, he 
wishes to attain the first arupa-jhana, which he considers to be 
very calm and serene. 

A person who wishes to transcend the experience of this con- 

Wflv , . . dioned world must first of all cultivate 

Way to emancipation .. . 

purity of views ' or ditthi- visuddi. Next 

he must cultivate in succession, ' purity of transcending doubt' 
orKankha-vitarana-visuddhi, * Ten modes of Insight' or Vipa- 
ssana-napas or in other words the contemplative insight, enu- 
merated and explained in the Text All these ten kinds of 
insight are collectively termed purity of intellectual culture'. 
The matured insight of equanimity receives the special designa- 
tion of insight of discernment leading to uprising', because it 
invariably leads to the Path, conceived as a ' Rising out of '. It 



Non-Canonical Pali Literature 131 

is also styled as the ' mouth or gate of Emancipation ' ( Vimokkha- 
mukha). 

Emancipation has a triple designation, namely the * Signless ' 

or animitta, the ' Undesired ' or appanihita, 

Emancipation and the void 7 Qr suMata . Emancipation 

itself, whether of the Path, the Fruit, or Nibbana, also receives 
the same triad of names, according as it is preceded by the con- 
templation of things by * uprising discernment ' as either im- 
permanent, or evil, or substantial. 

The purity of insight which is the gateway of Emancipation 
is also called Path-insight. One who has 
Path Consciousness attained perfect purity of insight cuts off 
the heritage of the average man and evolves the lineage of the 
Transcendental. It is followed by a single moment of Path- 
Consciousness by which the first of the Four Noble Truths is 
clearly discerned. Error and doubt are got rid of, .Nibbana is 
intuited, and the eightfold Path-constituents are cultivated. 
These four simultaneous functions correspond to the Four Noble 
Truths, Just like the Four Noble Truths, there are four stages 
of the Path, which are called Four Paths. The attainer of the 
first is termed Sotapanna who will have as yet to undergo seven 
more rebirths in the Kamaloka 5 the attainer of the second is 
termed Sakadagami who will have one more such rebirth. But 
the complete destruction of these two does not permit of another 
rebirth in the case of the Anagami or Never returner of the Third 
Paih. The TO isdom of the Highest or Supreme Path is the same 
mental order of intelligence developed into the Perfected view of 
the highest order and is the last stage of * purity of insight *. 

Death is assigned to one of four causes : ( 1 ) the exhaustion 

of the force of the reproductive (janaka) 

Death kamma that has given rise to the existence 

in question, (2) the expiry of the maximum life-term possible 

for this particular generation, ( 3 ) the combination of bohh these 

causes, ( 4 ) the action of a stronger arresting Kamma that 

suddenly cuts off the reproductive kamma before the latter 's 

force is spent or before the expiry of the life-term, 



132 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The decease of the Arhant is according to Buddhist philosophy, 
the Final Death. If the Arhant be of the 
Final Death clagg k nown as ' dryvisioned ' ( sukkha- 

vipassaka ) who does not practise Jhana, his final death, which 
takes place on the kama plane, occurs after apperception or 
retention of impressions. If he be proficient in Jhana, final death 
may occur ( a) after sustained Jhana ; or ( b) after apperception 
in subsequent retrospect; or (c) after the moment of * snpei- 
intellectual ' knowledge ( abhinna ) ; or finally, ( d ) after retros- 
pection following the attainment of the Topmost Fruit. 

The Namarupapariccheda is another Abhidhamma manual 

written by Anuruddha Mahathera. It con- 

Namarupapariccheda gigtg Qf Ig85 stanzas dealing with name 

and form. 

The Namarupasamasa was written by 
hemacariya mosfcly in pr0se . n 

deals with citta and cetasikakatha. 
The Sutta Samgaha is a later manual or compendium of select 

suttas and is primarily intended for those 
Sutta Sarbgaha , , , . , , - . 1 

beginners who desire to have a knowledge 

of the Pali scriptural texts in a nutshell. 
The Paritta or Mahaparitta, a small collection of texts 
gathered from the Suttapitaka, is more 
widely known by the Burmese laity of all 

classes than any other Pali book. The PariUa, learned by heart 
and recited on appropriate occasions, is to conjure various evile, 
physical and moral. Some of the miscellaneous extracts that 
make up the collection are of purely religious and ethical 
character. The use of the Paritta is said to have had the 
Buddha's sanction. The victory of the holymen was accomplished 
by the Parifcta ( Mabel Bode. The Pali Literature of Burma, 
PP. 3-4 ). 

TheKanamavaca 1 ( words of the act ) is an important Pali 
text of whicil * wo manuscripts are avai- 
lable. The first manuscript is a very 
There is a collection of KammavaoSs made by Herbert Bfcynes ( vide 
J. R. A. S., 1892, Art. Ill ). Beers' attention is ^Iso inyite4 to 



- Canonical Pali Literature 133 

handsome copy of the Karamavaca in Burmese ritual or tamarind 
eed letters printed with a thick black resinous gum on sixteen 
leaves of royal discorded pasohs each leaf containing sir lines 
each side, It begins with upasampada ( ordination ). The 
second manuscript consists of fifty-eight Talipat leaves of five 
lines in character which are midway between Burmese and 
Eambodian. Like the first it begins with upasampada. Kamma- 
vacSs are the set forms of proceedings followed or to be followed 
by the members of the Buddhist Samgha convening a meeting or 
a synod, in moving resolutions, in making proposals or amend- 
ments or in accepting or rejecting them. 

The Slma-vivada-vinicchaya-katha which has been edited by 
J. P. Minayeff for the P. T. S., London, 

Sima-vivsda-vinioohaya- f TOm a Sinhalese manuscript, contains 
some facts in the modern history of the 

Buddhist Church which will be of interest to the students of 
Pali literature. The language is not very easy and elegant, 
There are prose and poetry portions in it. 

The Anagatavamsa has been edited by Minayeff. The edition 
is based on a Burmese manuscript, It 
Anagatavamsa contains an account of the previous exis- 

tence of Metteyyo with the three Buddlaas, Sumitta, Metteyyo 
and Mahutta. The poem is written in about 150 stanzas. 
According to the Gandhavamsa, the original Anagata-vamsa was 
the work of an elder named Kassapa. 

" A New Kammavaca " by T. W. Rhys Davids and G-. L- M. Clauson, 
and also to F. Speigel's Kammavakya, Palice et Latine ed. vgl^ferner 
Dickson, J. R. A. S., Vol. VH, New Series. Read Upas amp ada-Kam- 
mavSca, a Pali text with a translation and notes by J. F. Dickson, 
J. R. A. S., 1875. It is a Buddhist manual of the form and manner of 
ordering of priests and deacons. In Burmese Pali collections we 
find no less frequently than the Faritta of the laity, the; Kammav3c5 
of the mendicant order. These texts have a purely ecclesiastical use. 
The Kammavaoa can of course he called literature but it must lie 
noticed as a text representing the immovable tradition of old days in 
Burma. In the KammavScSs we find monotonous repetitions. The 
language is rigid. ( Mabel Bode, The Pali Literature of Burma, 
Pp. 6-7), 



Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The Jinacarita is a Pali Kavya consisting of 472 stanzas 
setting forth In delightful verse the life 
and career of the Conqueror or the Buddha 
composed by the Medhankara of Ceylon 

while residing in a monastery built by King Vijayabahu. There 
are at least four Medhankaras famous in the literary history of 
Ceylon ; and historical evidence tends to show that the youngest 
or the fourth in succession was the author of the Jinacarita. He 
was called Vanaratana Medhankara, and was also the author of 
another Pali book ' Payoyasiddhi ' and flourished under 
Bhuvaneka Bahu 1st ( 1277-1288 A. n. 1 ). The mention of 
Medhankara as the author of the Jinacarita is made in the 
' Saddhamma-sangaha ', and in the ' Gandha-vamsa '. 

The style of the poem is a queer admixture of the weak and 
prosy verses in some places, and of high 
Ud poetic effusions in others. But the charm 
of the poem lies in its higher style, in the 

author's choice of graceful, though sometimes forcible images, 
and finally in the art of his descriptions and delicacy of his 
expressions. The Jinacarila betrays at almost every page, the 
intimate acquaintance of the author with classical Sanskrit 
literature, so much so, that the principal interest with regard to 
its style, lies in its sanskritisation. 

The Jinacarita, however, throws no new light on the life of 

the Master ; and we can hardly expect 

Its importance , , . . , 

sucn a thing from a purely devotional 

work such as this. It is primarily based on the Nidanakatha, 
and it holds among the Buddhists of Ceylon, the same place that 
the Buddhacarita and the Lalitavistara hold among the Northern 
Buddhists. But what is strikingly surprising is that the Jina- 
caritais unknown both in Burma and Siam. 



Jour. P T. S. f 1904-5, p. IV, Note on Medhankara by T. W. 
Davids. But Mon Charles Duroiselle thinks that "the poem wa 3 
written m the monastery built by Vijayabahu II, who ascended the 
throne, m A.D. 1186 and was the immediate successor of the famous 
King Para-kramabahu, Jinacarita, p. m ( Edited and translated by 
C- Duroiselle, Rangoon, 1906 ). Bead also ' Jmacarita ", edited and 
translated by Dr. W. H. D. Rouse m the J. P. T. S., 1904-1905 



N on- Canonical Pali Literature 735 

In the beautiful city of Amara, there was a Brahman youth, 
wise and compassionate, handsome and 
The Poem pleasant, by name Sumedha. Hankering 

after wealth and treasures he had none, for this bodily 
frame he had no attachment. He, therefore, left his 
pleasant house, went to the Himalayas, and there dis- 
covered the eight implements necessary for an ascetic. He put 
on the ascetic garb and within a week obtained the five High 
Powers and the eight Attainments, enjoying the bliss of mystic 
meditation. One day he came down from the sky, and lay him- 
self down in a muddy portion of a road through which the 
Dlpankara Buddha with his disciples was to pass. He, the 
Dipankara Buddha, was delighted at it, and foretold that the 
ascetic Sumedha, in times to come, should become a fully 
enlightened Buddha, by name Grotama. Sumedha did him 
homage, and then seated in meditation, he investigated those 
conditions that go to make a Buddha. Sumedha, searching for 
Nirvana, endured many hardships while going through the 
continued succession oP existences, fulfilling the virtue of charity. 
He fulfilled, moreover, the Perfections of Morality, of Self- 
abnegation, of wisdom, and all others, and came to the existence 
of Vessantara. Passing away thence, he was reborn in the city 
of Tusita, and afterwards had another rebirth in the city of 
Eapila through the noble King Suddhodana, and his Queen Maya. 
He approached the bosom of Maya, and at the time of his con 
ception, various wonders took place all over the world. In her 
tenth month, while she was proceeding to the house of her 
relative, she brought forth the sage in the Lumbini garden while 
she kept standing under a Sala tree catching hold of a branch. 
The god Brahma approached and received the child in a golden 
net, the child that was born unsullied as a priceless gem. From 
the hands of Brahma and the angels, he stepped on to the ground, 
and gods and men approached and made offerings to him, 
Accompanied by a concourse of gods and men, he went to 
Kapilavastu and there a rejoicing of nature and men ensued for 
days and nights. In the Tavatimsa heaven the hosts of angels 
rejoiced and sported and predicted that he, the child would sit 
upon the Throne of Wisdom and become a Buddha. The ascetic 



136 Annals of the Shandarhar Oriental Research Institute 

Kaladeva, the spiritual adviser of King Suddhodana, went to 
the Tivatimsa heaven, heard the cause of their rejoicings, came 
dorm to Suddhodana's palace and wanted to see the child. The 
child was brought and instantly, the lotus- feet of the prince weie 
fired on the ascetic's head. Upon this, both Kaladeva and 
Suddhodana reverenced the soft lotus-feet. A second act 
reverence was done by Suddhodana and other men and women of 
the royal house during the sowing festival when the child, the 
Wise One, had performed a miracle. The prince then "began to 
grow day by day living as he did in three magnificent mansion? 
provided for him. One day as he came out on chariot on the 
royal road, he saw in succession the representation of an old 
man, of a diseased man and of a dead man. He then became free 
from attachment to the three forms of existence and on the fourth 
occasion, delighted in seeing pleasant representation of a monk, 
Ha then came back home and laid himself down on a costly 
couch, and nymph-like women surrounded him and performed 
various kinds of dances and songs. The sage, however, did not 
relish them; and while the dancers fell asleep he bent upon 
retirement into solitude and free from attachment to the five 
worldly pleasures, called his minister and friend Channa to 
harness his horse. He then went to his wife's apartment and 
saw the sleeping son and mother and silently took leave of them, 
Descending from the palace he mounted his horse and silently 
came out of the gate which was opened up by the gods inhabiting 
it. Mara then came to thwart him from going by saying that on 
the seventh day hence, the divine wheel of a universal monarch 
should appear unto him. But, he, the Wise of the World, did not 
desire any sovereignty, but wanted to become a Buddha. Upon 
this Mara disappeared, and he proceeded towards the bank of the 
river Anoma where he dismounted himself and asked Channa to 
go back home with the horse and his orname nts. He then cut off 
his knot of hair with a sword ; the hair rose up into the air and 
Sakra received it with bent head and placed it in a gold casket to 
worship it. Next he put up the eight requisites of a monk and 
having spent seven days in the Anupiya mango grove in the joy 
of having left the world, went to Rajagaha and made his round 
for alms iuit enough for his sustenance. Leaving the town he 



Non-Canonical Pali Literature 137 

went to the Pandava mountain and took the food. He was 
repeatedly approached by King Bimbisara and offered the king- 
dom, but he declined it; and retiring to a cloister practised un- 
matched hardships. All this was of no avail ; he, therefore, 
partook of material food and regaining bodily perfection, went 
to the foot of the Ajapala banyan tree where he sat facing the 
east. Sujata, a beautiful woman, mistook him for a sylvan deity 
and offered him a gold vessel of milk rice. The sage took it, and 
having gone to the bank of the Neranjara river he ate the food, 
took his rest, and then in the evening went to the Bo-tree which 
lie circumambulated keeping the tree to his right To his astonish- 
ment, a throne appeared, on which he took his seat facing the 
east, and promised that he would give up his efforts to attain 
Supreme Enlightenment even if his flesh, blood, bones, sinews 
and skin dried up. On his head the Maha-Brahma held an 
umbrella. Suyama, the king of gods, fanned a splendid yaVs 
tail, and god Pancasikha, the snake king Kala and thirty-two 
nymphs all kept standing and serving the Sage. Mara, then, 
creating unto himself a thousand dreadful arms, and surrounding 
himself by a manifold faced army, approached the Bo-tree. And 
at his approach the gods made good their escape. Mara created 
a terrific wind with a fierce roar, then the terrible torrent of large 
rocks, and brought on a most dreadful darkness, but each in 
succession was of little avail. All these turned to good account 
and the Blessed One did not even show any sign of consternation. 
The Evil One then threw his disc, hurled rocky peaks, yet the 
Unconquerable sat motionless as before. Baffled in his attempts 
he approached the All-Merciful and asked him to rise from his 
seat. The Blessed One enquired of the witness for his seat and 
Mara, showing his army, told that they were his witnesses and 
asked in his turn who had been the witness of Siddhartha. 
Siddhartha then stretched his hands towards the earth and called 
the earth goddess to witness. She gave forth thousands of roars 
and Mara caught by the fear fled with his army. Having dis- 
persed Mara's hosts, he remained seated still on the immoveable 
seat, and in his first watch of the night obtained the excellent 
knowledge of the past, and in the middle watch the Eye Divine. 
In the last watch, he gained thorough knowledge of the conoate- 
6 [ Annals, B. O. R. I.[ 



138 Annals if the JZhandarkar Oriental jResmrcfi Institute 

nation of causes and effects, and at dawn lie became perfectly 
Enlightened Buddha- Yet he did not rise up from his seat, but 
to remove the doubts of the gods remained seated there for seven 
days and performed a double miracle. Then after the investi- 
gation of the Pure Law, he at the foot of the goat-herd's banyan 
tree, caused to wither the face of Mara's daughter, and, at the 
foot of the Mucalinda tree, caused to blossom the mind of the 
snake-king. And, at last, at the foot of the Rajayatana tree, he 
enjoyed the bliss of meditation. Then the king of the Law, 
entreated by Brahma Sahampati, wanted to fill the world with 
the free gift of the nectar of the Good Law. With this object, 
he travelled to the splendid Deer Park where the sages and 
mendicants built him a saint, and came to acknowledge him as 
the Sanctified, the Perfectly Enlightened, the Tathagata. To the 
Elders of the Park, he delivered a discourse on tie establishment 
of the kingdom of Truth, and dispelled their ignorance. He thus 
set the "Wheel of the Law in motion for the good of the world by 
delivering the people from the mighty bond of transmigration, 
On his way next to Uruvela, he gave to some thirty Bhadda- 
vaggiya princes the immortal draught of the Three Paths; and 
conferred on them the gift of ordination. He then went to 
Latthivana Park and there presented King Bimbisara with the 
immortal draught of true doctrine Thence he proceeded to the 
Veluvana Park and dwelt there in a hermitage- Then King 
Suddhodana, having heard that his own son had attained to 
Supreme Knowledge, sent his minister Udayi to bring his son 
back to him. Udayi came with a thousand followers and hearing 
the Master preach renounced the world and entered upon the 
path to sainthood, He then made known to the Master the desire 
of Suddhodana to see him, and requested to preach the Law to his 
kith and kin. The Buddha agreed to it and went to Kapilavastu 
where lie was worshipped by Suddhodana and his relatives. But 
seeing that the young ones did not greet him, he performed a 
miracle at the sight of which Suddhodana was filled with joy. 
Then he went to the royal palace and preached the sweet 
doctrines to the king and hundreds of fair royal women. Next 
he extinguished the great grief in the heart of Bimba or Yaso- 
his *ifr ; and ordained prince Nanda even before the tfcre* 



jVcm- Canonical Pali Literature 139 

festivals, marriage, ceremonial sprinkling and entering on the 
house, had taken place. When his own son Rahula followed 
next for the sake of an inheritance, the Wise One ordained him 
too. 

After this he went to Sltavana at Rajagaha where he preached 
to a merchant o f SavatthI, named Sudatta, who attained the fruit 
of the First Path. Sudatta then went back to SavatthI, and there 
selected a park of Prince Jeta for the residence of the Blessed 
One. He ( better known as Anathapindika ) brought this for a 
crore of gold pieces for the Teacher's sake alone, and built there 
a chamber and a noble monastery for the abode of the Master 
and his followers. He also beautified it with tanks and gardens, 
etc,, and then inviting the Teacher to the spot dedicated to him 
the park and the monastery. The Buddha accepted the gift and 
thanked Sudatta for ifc, preaching to him the great benefit which 
lies in the giving of monasteries. 

Residing there, he spent his days going here and there and 
beating the great drum of the Law. In the first season, he dwelt 
in the Deer Park in the Benares city. In the second, third and 
fourth seasons he dwelt in the lovely Veluvana at Rajagaha. In 
the fifth season, he made his abode in the great wood near Vesall. 
In the sixth, he dwelt on the great mountain Mamkala, and in 
the seventh in the cool and spacious rocky seat of Indra. In the 
eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth seasons, he dwelt res- 
pectively in the delightful wood of Bhesakala, in the KosombI 
silk cotton wood, in goodly Paraleyya and in the Brahman villages 
of Kala and Verafi ja. In the thirteenth season he lived on the 
beautiful Caliya mountain, and in the fourteenth, in fair and 
lovely Jetavana. In the fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteen- 
th and nineteenth seasons, the Wise One made his abode respec- 
tively in the great Nigrodha monastery on a large hill at Kapila- 
vatthu in the city of Alavaka, in Rajagaha and twice on the 
great mount Caliya. In the twentieth season, he took up his 
abode in Rajagaha ; and for the rest twenty-five years of his life, 
he made his abode in SavatthI and Jetavana. Thus for forty- 
five years, the Blessed One preached his sweet doctrine, bringing 
happiness to men, and freeing all the world and the gods from 
the great bond of transmigration. 



140 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The book ends with, a prayer of the author in which he gives 
out his pious wishes to be born in the Tusita heaven, to be born 
contemporaneously with the Great Being, the future Buddha, to 
be able to give food, drink, alms and monasteries to bhe Wise 
One and so forth, and to become at last a Buddha himself. 

The Telakatahagatha is a small poem in 98 stanzas on the 
vanity of human life. It contains some of 

Telafcatahagstha the fundamental doctrines of Buddhism. 

The verses are written in chaste language. They represent the 
religious meditations and exhortations of a great thera named 
Kalyaniya who was condemned to be cast into a cauldron of 
boiling oil on suspicion of his having been accessory to an intri- 
gue with fche Queen-consort of King Kalani Tissa who reigned at 
Kelaniya in 306-207 B. C. 1 The author of this work is un- 
known. A careful study of the poem shows that the author was 
well acquainted with the texts and commentaries of the Buddhist 
scriptures. It is the only example of Sataka in Pali. 

The Pajjamadhu is a poem composed of 104 stanzas in praise 
of Buddha. Buddhappiya< a pupil of 

aojama u Ananda, is the author of this work He 

is also the author of fche Pali grammar known as the Rupasiddhi. 
He is silent about the date of its composition. The author has 
given us his name and pupilage in verse 103 of this poem. The 
language is sanskritised Pali and some of the verses are puzzling. 
There is a gloss in Sinhalese on the entire poem but it is verbose 
and rather diffuse in its explanations. The first 69 verses de- 
scribe the beauty of Buddha's person and the rest are in praise 
of his wisdom, concluded with a panegyric on the Order and 
Nirvana. 

The Rasavahinl is a collection of 103 tales written in easy Pali, 

RasavShinl ^ e nrst forty relating to the incidents 

which happened to Jambudlpa and the 

rest in Ceylon. A Sinhalese edition of this work has been brought 
out by M. S- Unnanse. The P. T. S, London, has undertaken to 
bring out an edition of this work in Roman character. Its date 

1 G. P. Malalasekera, The Pali Literature of Ceylon, p. 162, 



NonC-a*ionical Pali Literature 141 

is unknown but at the conclusion the "author gives us a clue 
which helps us in determining it to be in all probability in the 
first half of the 14th century A. i>. It is considered to be a revi 
sion of an old Pali translation made from an original compila- 
tion by Ratthapala Thera of the Mahavihara in Ceylon. Vedeha, 
the author of the RasavahinX gives us an account of the Vanavasi 
school to which he belonged ( Malalasekera, The Pali Literature 
of Ceylon, p. 210 ). The late H. Nevill suggests that the 
Sahassavatthu-ppakarana, still extant in Burma, formed the 
basis for the Pali Rasavahini ( Ibid, p. 129 ). This work 
throws much light on the manners, customs and social con- 
ditions of ancient India and Ceylon. It contains materials of 
historical importance and as such is widely read in Ceylon. 
This work has been edited and translated by P. E. Pavolini 
( Societe Asiatica Italiana, 1897 ). There is a glossary on the 
Rasavahini called the Rasavahinlganthl. 

Buddhist legends of Asoka and his times translated from the 
Pali of the Rasavahini by Laksamana Sastrl with a prefatory 
note by H. C. Norman ( J, R. A. S., L910) Zwei Erzahlungen 
aus der Rasavahini, Von. Sten Konow ( Deutsche morgenlandis- 
che Gesellschaft, Zeitschrift, Leipzig ), II settimo capitolo della 
Rasavahini by P. E. Pavolini ( Societe Asiatica Italiana, Giornale. 
Firanze, 1895 ), should be consulted. Die Zweite dekade der Rasa- 
vahini ( M & W Geiger ), Munchen 1918, with translation 
deserves mention, 

The Saddhammopayana has been edited by Richard Morris 

for the P. T. S. London. It is a piece of 
Saddhammopayana pQetry congisting of m stanzas and ft 

deals with the disadvantages of the ten akusalas ( demerits ), sins 
(papa), fruition of merit, advantages of charity, preceptc, medi- 
tation, approval, instructions, worship, refuges, exertions, etc. 
The language is easy and intelligible. 

The Pancagatidlpana has been edited by M. Leon Feer ( J, P. 

T. S., 1884, PP. 152-161 ). It is written in 
PancagatidTpana furnishes us 



an interesting piece of information regarding different hells. 
Saiijlva, Kalasutta, Sanghata, Roruva, Maharoruva, Tapa, 



US Anwtts of the Bhandarkar Oriental Resmrh Institute 

tapa and Avici are tte eight &feat hells. Those who kill and 
cause living beings to be killed out of avarice, delusion, fear and 
attget must go to the Sanjlva hell. For one thousand years they 
nuffer in this hell being subjected to continual torments without 
losing life and consciousness. Those who cause injury of dq 
harmful deeds to friends and patents, speak falsehood and back* 
bite others must go to the Kalasutta hell. In this hell thejr af 
cut to pieces with burning saws. Those who kill goats, sheep, 
jackals* hates, deer, pigs, etc,, are consigned to the Sanghata hell, 
where they ar3 huddldd up in one place and then beaten to death* 
Those who cause mental and bodily pain to others Or cheat others 
or again are misers have to go to the Eoruva hell, where they 
make terrible noise while being burnt in the terrific fire of hell, 
Those who steal things belonging to gods, Brahmans and pre- 
ceptors, those who misappropriate the property of others kept in 
trust with them and those who destroy things entrusted to their 
care are cast into the Maharoruva hell, where they make a more 
terrible noise while being consumed by a fire fiercer than that 
in the Roruva. Those who cause the death of living beings hy 
throwing them into the Davadaha fire, etc., have to go to the 
Tapa hell, where they have to suffer being burnt in a dreadful 
fire. Those who cause the death of beings by throwing them 
into greater Davadaha fire must go bo the Mahatapa hell, where 
they have to suffer still more by being burnt in a greater fire. 
Those who injure men of great virtue and those who kill parents, 
arahats, or preceptor must sink into the Avici hell, where they 
suffer being burnt in such a terrible fire that would consume 
even the hardest things. In this hell there is not a least wave of 
happiness, it is therefore called the Avici or waveless. Besides 
these hells, mention is made of a hell called the Pafcapana, where 
people suffer by being burnt in fires that are much more terrific 
than those of the Tapa and Mahatapa hells. Each hell has four 
Ussadanirayas, viz., Milhakupa, Kukkula, Asipattavana and 
Nadi. Those who are in the Mahaniraya have to proceed to 
Milhakupa when released. In this terrible hell they are beaten 
by a host of worms. Thence they go to Kukkula where they 
are fried like mustard seeds on a burning pan Coming out of 
Kukkula they find before them a beautiful tree of fruits and 
flowers where they shelter for relief from torments. As 



NcvrCanwcal Pali Uttrdun 143 

ftey reach the tree they are attacked by birds of prey such as 
rultures, owls, etc. They are killed by these animals which they 
make a repast on their fiesh. Those who are traitors must go to 
the Asipattavana where they are torn and eaten up by bitches, 
vultures, owls, etc. Those who steal money will also suffer in 
this hell by being compelled to swallow iron balls and molten 
brass. Those who kill cows and oxen suffer in this hell by being 
eaten up by dogs having large teeth. Those who kill acquatic 
animals will have to go to the fearful Vaitarani river where the 
water is as hot as a molten brass. Those who prostitute justice 
by accepting bribes will be out to pieces in an iron wheel. Those 
who destroy paddy have to suffer in the Kukkula hell. Those 
wto cherish anger in their heart are reborn as swans and pigeons. 
Those who are haughty and angry are reborn as snakes. Those 
who are jealous and miserly are reborn as monkeys. Those who 
are miserly, irritable and fond of backbiting are reborn as tigers, 
bears, cats, etc. Those who are charitable, but angry at the same 
time are reborn as big Garudas. Those who are deceitful and 
charitable are reborn as great Asuras. Those who neglect their 
friends on account of their pride are reborn as dogs and asses 
Those who are envious, cherish anger, or become happy at sight 
of sufferings of others are reborn in Yamaloka and the demon 
world. ( Of. the description of hells in the Markandeya Parana ) 



SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN THE BRAHMANA PERIOD 
NOTES FEOM THE AITAREYA BRlHMAKA 

4 

BY 
ASHUTOBH BISWAS, M. A,, Yedasastri, Kavyatlrtha 

The Brahmana Literature of the Vedas is a vast field of 
enquiry for the historian who attempts to reconstruct from 
original data, a Social History of India. 

In this article, an attempt is made to collect some very 
interesting passages in the Aitareya Brahmana of Rgveda, 
which throw a flood of life on prevalent manners and customs of 
the age. 

As regards eating and drinking one of the most important 
of human functions, we find many passages scattered all over fche 
entire Brahmana which will be dealt with hereafter. In III 4, the 
following passage occurs wherein the "AgnimanthaDa" Ceremony 
is prescribed as a part of the " Athithyesti," a sacrifice held in 
honour of Soma conceived as guest newly arrived. ASvalayana 
also prescribes the ceremony thus : " w 
The passage referred to is : ff^ *T$NrT?T 



\ Wow it is an indisputable fact that the Aryan indulged 
in meat diet meat even of the forbidden b'nd, This passage 
distinctly says that whenever a king or any other respectable 
personage arrived as a guest in any household it was the duty of 
every householder to entertain him with the meat of a bull or a 
cow that miscarries. This custom is quite in keeping with the 
tradition of the Samhitas, the Brahmanas and Sutras which 
distinctly refer to these with great approbation until we come to 
the modern Smrtis which expressly forbid them. Compare the 
following passage from a modern text often referred to in legal 
literature. " ^ qfifa. " ( Aditya Purana ) Sayana himself quite 
true to the tradition of his age cautions his reader and says 



Society and Culture in the Brahmana Period 145 

commenting on the passage : " 



The passage in VI. 8 describes under the garb of a legend the 
various sacrificial animals, including man, which were immolated 
in sacrifices. It is as follows : 



i ?r 
srrfirsnr i 



Now this passage points unmistakably to the fact that all the 
animals mentioned above were used in sacrifices, and as such 
their remnants were partaken of by the priests and the sacrifice! 
himself, for the Brahmana expressly lays down the dictum (after 
repudiating arguments to the contrary), viz , 



^r ( vi. 3 ). The story of Kavasa Ailusa as related in 
the Brahmana ( VIII. 1 ) is important in many respects. It is as 
follows . 3K^fr 3" ^^^t ^iRTOrr, ?r 



\ 



iT<T 

The same story is found also in the Kausitakl Brahmana with 
slight alteration described in connection with the origin of the 
^^^TTOrB' traditionally ascribed to Kavasa, son of Ilusa. The 
Rsis did not admit Kavasa into the sacrifice on the ground that 
he was the son of a slave and a non-Brahman They drove him 
away from the banks of Sarasvati infco a desert with the intention 
that thirst would kill him. Now Kavasa was a very learned 
man and he at once invoked the Sarasvati with the hymn 
beginning with the verse ?\\^ ( Rg X. 30. 1 ) etc. When the Rsis 
found that he was favoured by the Gods they realised their insigni- 
ficance approached him in a suplicant mood, gave him the desig- 
nation " Rsi " which he so eminently deserved but which in their 
arrogance they had withheld from him. " TO^? ^ *TT *t fftfn 
**!*: snmnr '' < Kau. Bra. XII 3 ). This story gives us a good 
insight into the caste-system of the time of the Brahmana. It 
shows the caste system still in a state of fluidity. The society 

7 [ Annals, B. O. K, 1. 1 



146 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

has not yet been divided into the rigid and mutually exclusive 
castes of the latter period. It shows that even a man of an 
inferior caste could qualify himself for admission into the higher 
castes provided he could prove his excellence. It was the same 
with Mahiclasa Aitareya, the tradional author of the Brahmana, 
who was also the son of an 'Itara' meaning low-born or other than 
the twice-horn. In this case also, Aitareya hecame a seer and 
the whole of the Brahmana together with the Aranyaka was 
revealed to him as he was favoured by the Gods on account of 
his superior piety and learning. The story is not found in any 
extant book but Sayana in his introduction to the Brahmana 
ascribes it to the 



In XII. 11, we find an interesting picture of the regard in 
which the father-in-law was held by the daughter-in-law. In 
course of describing how a rival army is routed and dispersed 
the following illustration is given viz, " cT5^ srsNrr^: *g<rr *^r- 

' \ ", The 



, 

daughter-in-law did not expose herself to the view of the father- 
in-law and as soon as he caught sight of her she used to hide her 
self from his gaze. It thus appears thab the present Hindu Society 
has in this respect remained almost stationary from the time of 
the Brahmana. Feminine modesty carried to gross exaggerations 
has marked the society in all periods. 

According to the rituals a saman is formed of three Rk verses, 
viz., " ** ^m 5% feft *?rfir^ ". The Brahmana says, one $k 
verse asked another saman to be united together in wedlock, 
On the latter refusing to comply with the request two Rks asked to 
be united with the saman but on the latter 's still refusing, three 
of them approached the saman to be united with it and so it now 
happens that a saman song is composed of three Rk verses 
because one or two Rks are unequal to one saman in strength. 
the Aitareya in XII. 12, " 
u >' Comp. XV. 3, 



One man can have many wives but no woman can 
** i. ,T/ n ne husband - Th is is the first authoritative 
statement of Polygamy, which was common enough during the 
Vdio period. TMs p aB8 age is very freely quoted by later Smrtis 



Society and Culture in the Brahmana Period 14? 



in favour of Polygamy or 9f 1^13. The king it appears had three 
kinds of wives with their distinctive appelations. The best kind 
was designated as *rft<fr, the second in rank and honour was 
called Vavata ( smiTm ) the third in rank was called Parivrkti 
(<rft3%)- Polyandry as will appear from the passage was un- 
thinkable and unknown amongst the civilised and enlightened 
Aryans of India. Polygamy although sanctioned by the law was 
only prevalent amongst the kings and the wealthier classes. 

That the standard of morality was sufficiently high during the 
period is evidenced by the story of Pra;jpati,in XIII.9 which relates 
the ravishment of his daughter by himself. He was punished by 
the Gods for this delinquency which was unknown before, " sr^Tcf 
SrsnTFTfS'* ^^nTfl" \ ". It can be safely presumed that Incest was 
unknown amongst civilized Aryans at all times. 

An interesting picture of the comparative position of the wife 
and the sister in the household is to be found Jn XIII. 13. The 
text says, **TOTra; ^TOR,^ *^ r ^t^qr^ ^^^ 3T*5Jjfe4l 
snVra \ ". " Therefore it is that a sister born of the same mother 
becomes a dependent or hanger-on on a wife born of a different 
mother ". This shows that the widowed sister occupied a subordi- 
nate position to the wife and that she lived upon the charity and 
sufferance of the wife who was the sole mistress of the house, 
This is undoubtedly a very interesting revelation found in the 
Brahmana and this custom has descended down to the present 
day, unaltered and unchanged from that remote period. 

The Brahmana contains here and there in vague words and 
phrases statements of scientific theories which have been satis- 
factorily demonstrated only at a much later day by Western 
Scientists. The most important and startling theory is perhaps 
that of the sun - its rising and setting. Herein we find a scientific 
explanation of the appearance and disappearance of the great 
luminary - popularly represented as the rising and setting 
respectively. 10 XIV. 8 it is very distinctly laid down as a pro 
position that the sun never rises or sets'. " *r 3T tnsr ^ ^^remra 
T i ". " 3TOWW " is explained by Sayana as <eaneHTO&r: and 



as a*n%. How are we then to account for the appearance and 
disappearance for the time being ? The answer is given in the 



148 Annals of the Bhandarfcar Oriental Research Institute 

following words : " 



The sun revolving in its orbit is said to be rising in that part 
of the hemisphere from which it is to be seen by the people. It i s 
said to be setting in that part of the earth, where it disappears 
from the gaze of the people. In other words it reveals light or 
day in front and leaves darkness or night behind. 

Frequent references to the sea and navigation by sea-going 
vessels is to be found in the Aitareya. The sea is often requisi- 
tioned for a simile in connection with the sacrifice. The 
HST such as *TrTH*R is often represented as a sea. 



Sea-going vessels are distinctly referred to in XVII. 7. 



Again in XVIL 8, the sea is mentioned viz, : m I" 



BEGINNINGS OF LINGA CULT IN INDIA 

BY 
ATUL K. SUE, M A,, p. R. Econ. s. 

It would be platitudinous at the present stage of our knowledge 
of the history of Indian cultures to lay stress on the debt which 
Hinduism owes to Pre- Aryan and Un- Aryan cultures of India. 
So overwhelming is the burden of such debt that it would require 
the pages of some half-a-dozen tomes to do proper justice to the 
study of the extraneous traits in detail, In this short paper, I 
merely desire to touch upon the fringe of one such trait in 
Hinduism, namely, the origin and antiquity of the Linga Cult 
in India. 

Until quite recently it was fondly believed that the Linga 
Cult in India is of quite recent origin. Indeed, at one time with 
the aid of all available data, its date could not be pushed back 
beyond the Imperial Gupta period. Thus, in 1903-04 1 the official 
archaeologist while describing a clay seal from Basarh, on which 
appeared the symbol of Linga and Yoni, loudly proclaimed it as 
the oldest representation of the phallic emblem that has yet been 
found in India. Then, in the Archaeological Report of the years 
1907-08 8 there appeared the description of a miniature Linga and 
Yoni recovered from the areas north of the Dhamek Stupa at 
Sarnath, and apparently of the same date as the Basarh specimen. 
For two or three years thereafter these two specimens constituted 
the archaeological history of the Linga Cult in India. Then our 
knowledge of it was further advanced in the years 1909-10 lV > by 
the publication in the Eeport of the same years by B. D. Banerji 
of the description of a Sivalinga, which had been rescued from 
Bhita and was at that time preserved in the Lucfcnow Museum. 
Ideologically, this image could be divided into two halves. The 
upper half is modelled in the shape of human bust a male 
figure holding a rose in his left hand and raising the other hand 

1 Page 110 

2 Page 61. 

3 Page 148. 



150 Annals 6fthe Bhcwdarkar Oriental R^99ar^h Institute 

in the well-known Ahfiayimuirfi pose. Below the bust are four 
human heads, being: indicated by deep drawings. There is an 
inscription on it which offers us the most valuable clue to its 
date which has been fixed as the first century before Christ. 

Not very many years later, T. G. Rao } announced the dis- 
covery of a phallus symbol discovered at Gudimallam, a village 
situated at a distance of 6 miles to the north-east of Benigunta, 
a railway junction station on the Madras and Southern Marhatta 
Railway System. It is one of the most important and valuable 
archaeological specimen of the Linga yet discovered in India 
as it represents the Phallus in a most stark and realistic manner, 
It has been shaped like a human phallus with an admirable 
degree of exactitude even the longitudinal facets on the erect 
organ appear on this specimen in the most life-like manner. It is 
sheltered in an ancient temple with several inscriptions on it 
It has been known from very ancient times as "Parasuramesvara" 
and is still being worshipped by the local people. Though of very 
ancient date, yet it is in a very perfect state of preservation. 
The image proper is about five feet in height. It rises from a 
pedestal on the floor of the central shrine. It bears on its front 
a very beautiful figure of Siva. This figure of Siva has a very 
close resemblance with the figure of a Yaksa, in the Sanci Stupa, 
and on the ground of stylistic resemblance between the two, 
T. G. Bao has assigned it to the second century before Christ. 

The understanding of the proper significance of the epithet 
" tiisnadeva " in the Rgveda pushed back the antiquity of the 
cult of Linga to a millenium and a half earlier. This epithet 
occurs in two passages of the Rgveda. They are quoted below i 
" The terrible god Indra, skilled in all heroic deeds, has 
with his weapons mastered these demons. Indra, exalting, 
has shattered their cities ; armed with the thunderbolt 
he has smitten them asunder by his might. Neither 
demons impel us, Indra, nor, O puissant deity of a truth, 
any evil spirits, The glorious Indra defies the hostile 
being : let not those whose god is the SISNA approach 
our sacred ceremony." RV. vii. 21, 4-5. 
1 Vol. JI, p. 63ff. Rao-Hindu Iconograph^T 



Beginnings of Linga cult in India 15 1 

" Proceeding to the conflict, and desiring to acquire them 

he has gone to, and in hostile army besieged inaccessible 

places, at the same time, when irresistible, slaying those 

whose god is the SISISTA, he by his craft conquered the 

riches of the city with a hundred gates ". RV. x. 99, 3. 

It is evident from the above passages that there were in Bgvedic 

times many rich and prosperous cities in the Indus Valley which 

were inhabited by the ISTon- Aryan Phallic worshippers. Some of 

these cities were very big in size one had even a hundred 

gates, 

The antiquity of the cult of Linga can be pushed still further 
back, if we only care to carry our researches into the domain of 
pre-historlc archaeology. Such researches show conclusively that 
phallus played a considerable part in the religious and magical 
ideology of the Pre-Aryan and Non-Aryan peoples of India. There 
is a very fine specimen of phallus dating from the neolithic times 
in the Foote Collection of the Madras Museum. 1 It was found 
on the Shevaroy hills in the Salem district of the Madras Presi- 
dency. It is made of pale gneiss stone. Though the specimen 
has been much ravaged in fche process of time, it still retains 
its original highly realistic shape. It was no doubt used as an 
object of worship or as a charm against sterility. 

Shevaroy hills in the Salem district is not the only place in 
India which has yielded a phallic symbol of neolithic times. 
Earthenware phallic symbol dating from neolithic times have 
also been obtained from various places in the Baroda State in 
Qujrat. 2 

In this connection the data furnished by Linguistic Palaeonto- 
logy is very illuminating. Przyluski in his paper on, " ISTon- 
Aryan Loans in Indo Aryan " h&s shown that both the words 
" langala " ( plough) and " linga ?1 ( penis ) are of Austro- Asiatic 
origin and in their etymology they mean one and the same thing, 
He says that " linga Jj in the sense of <e penis 77 has equivalents 
in fche Non-Aryan languages of the East whereas it has no equi- 

1 Pago 61 Foote Collection of Indian Prehistoric and protohistonc 

Antiquities by Bobert Bruce Foote. 

2 Ditto, p. 139. 



152 Annals of ifie Pnovdarlor Oriental Research Institute 

valents in the Indo-European languages of the West. In 
accordance with the original etymological meaning of the word, 
" langalam ? ' when introduced in the Sanskrit vocabulary came 
to mean both the plough and the penis?. On the other hand, 
specially in the Sutras and the Mahabharata a form " lagula" is 
found to mean both the penis and the tail ( of an animal ). Jf the 
equivalence " langala-ianguia " is authorised then the semantic 
evolution of the word would be easily understood. From "penis" 
one can pass without difficulty to the sense of {1 plough" and 
" tail ". There are evident analogies between the copulation and 
the act of ploughing by which one digs up the earth for depositing 
the seed. The problem becomes more complicated from the fact 
that, almost inevitably, the word a ling:*, " which strongly resem- 
bles the other words and h^s the meaning: of penis comes in 
Some Austro- Asiatic peoples use even tod^y not a plough to furrow, 
but a simple pointed stick for digging holes in which they place 
the seeds. There the analogy between the " penis " and ihe 
farming instrument is as clear as possible. Profs, Hubert and 
Maus point out that in Melanesia and Polynesia the farming 
stick has often the form of a " penis 7? . In some Polynesian 
languages the same word designates the penis and the digging 
stick. It is possible that the aborigines of India at first knew 
the use of the stick and that the name of the instrument for 
digging the soil has not changed after the introduction of the 
plough. 

In the face of the evidence quoted above it becomes perfectly 
clear that the Aryans of India have borrowed from the aborigines 
not only the cult of Linga but also the name of the symbol, That 
it was of Un-Aryan origin is shown by the opprobrious terms 
applied to the Phallic worshippers in the Rgveda. The paucity 
of Phallic worship in the case of other Indo-European peoples 
strengthens the argument for borrowing. 

Before 1 come to a close I desire to indicate the time when the 
cult of Linga was introduced into the Aryan religion. We have 
already seen that in the Rgveda it is being mentioned as a Non- 
Aryan cult. The whole of the later Vedic and the Sutra litera- 
tures do not contain any reference to the Linga cult. It 



Beginnings of Linga cult in India 153 

appears for the first time in the epics and there it appears as an 
Aryan cult. Thus, the Ramayana mentions that wherever Havana 
went he carried with him a Siva-Linga of gold. In the Maha- 
bharata, too, Sivalinga is mentioned in several passages ( Anusa- 
gana, v. 822ff ; vv. 7510, 7516 ; cf. also Dronaparva 9616ff; 9625 and 
9631 ). 

To sum up. Phallus worship in India is of Non- Aryan origin 
and dates from the USTeolithic times. Ifc was a nourishing cult in 
the Indus valley in the period of the Rgveda. It became fused 
with the cult of Siva in the epic period. The earliest archaeolo- 
gical specimens date from about the Christian era. Tiie early 
specimens show definitely that Siva-linga in ifcs origin is of 
phallic origin. 



S [ Aim*U, B. O. B. t. ] 



THE UNADI SUTRAS OF JAINA SAKATAYAK1 
BY 

DR. K. B, PATHAK, B. A., Ph. D. 

There is a belief current among the Jaina community thtt 
their Sakatayana was identical with the elder Sakatayana, the 
predecessor of Yaska and Panini, and composed the Unadi Sfttras 
which are given in the Krdanta portion of the KaumudI by 
Bhattoji Dlksita. 

In the introduction to the Sakatayana-prakriya-sarhgralia of 
Abhayaeandra-suri printed at the Jainendra Press at Kolhapur 
we are told 



Thair this is altogether a mistake will be obvious from the 
rtracts which I give below from the Amogha Vrtti : 

IY, 2, 279 



: \ 



Amoghavrtti IV, 3, 279. 

Panini's Unadi Sutras begin thus ' 



On ;he Uitfidi Sutras of Jain Sakatayana 155 



Candra'a Unadi Sutras begin thus : 



The opening Unadi Sutras of Hemecandra are as follows :~- 



It may ba stated here that Panini divides his Unadi Sutras 
into five pstdas ; hence their name Pancapadl. Candra's Unadi 
Sufcras are divided into three Padas. On the other hand Jaina 
Sakatayana and Hemacandra do not divide their Sutras into 
Padas. On comparing the above Sutras, we find that Panini and 
Oandra have two terminations 3"<n^ and ^r^ while Jaina Sakata- 
yana and Hemacandra have only one termination >?trt. The 
reason for this lies in the fact that Panini and Candra taach the 
accents of words. STR? and a" are accented OD the last syllable 
while 3[HT and ^ST have the 3^nr accent on the first syllable. But 
in the period of Sanskrit literature to which Jaina Sakatayana 
and Hemacandra belong, Sanskrit words had lost their accents 
and- so there was no need to mark them by using- indicatory 
letters such as sr , q; , =^&c. In confirmation of this view, I may 
cite a few more instances. Panini has 

111,126. 



Candra has 



Jaina Sakatayana has : 

r: Ms. p. 2099, 



156 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Intitule 
Hemaoandra has ; 



Again Panini has s 

Ill, 373. 



Candra has * 

II, 50. 






Jaina Sakatayana has : 

( ft i^ w^i^ft-itr^r: Ms, p, 2096, 



Hemacandra has : 

f : 200. 



The tezt of Unadi Sutras in the manuscript of the Atnogha- 
vrtti before me is full of mistakes. But it can be corrected with 
the help of the commentary called Sakatayana Nyasa. An in- 
complete copy of this Nyasa has lately been discovered and is 
now deposited in the Oriental Library in Mysore, but it is 
wanting in the portion dealing with this subject. At the end of 
this Unadipatha there occur the following verses : 



7 JTT: 

25?? wr 57 ftrr ^ 1 1 



Arnoghavrtti IV. 3, 279, 

I have Droved elsewhere that the Amoghavrtti was composed 
by Jaina Sakatayana in the time of Amoghavarsa L 



ON THE DATE OF AKALANKADEVA 

BY 

DR. K. B. PATHAK, B. A , Ph. D. 

In a paper contributed to this Journal, Mr. S. Srikanfcha Sastri, 
M. A,, says that he has assigned Samkara to the last quarter of the 
sixth and the formei half of the seventh century and Akalanka to 
c, 645. It is very easy to show that these dates are impossible. 
Prabhacandra lived in the time of Amoghavarsa I and says that he 
was enabled to write his second work by approaching the feet of 
Akalanka. Let us consider the following succession of Jaina 
authors with their works ' 



Akalanka 
Mamkyanandi 
Vidyanandapatrakesari 
Prabhacandra 



Jinasena and GunaKhadra 

Jinasena and his pupil Gunabhadra were the joint authors of 
the Adipurana. Gunabhadra, while still a young man, wrote his 
Atmanusasana, to instruct Krsnaraja II, who was then Yuvaraja. 
35lh verse of Almanusasana is quoted ] by Prabhacandra in Ms 
second and later work Nyayalmmudaoandrodaya. The last named 
work with iis author Prabhacsndra is mentioned in the Adipurana. 
These facts prove beyond a shadow of doubt that Prabhacandra 
was a senior contemporary of Jinasena and Gunabhadra. We also 
know thai the Nyayakumudacandrodaya is a commentary on 
Alalanka's Laghlyastraya Prabhacandra assures us that be was 
enabled to explain Akalanka's words in Laghlyastraya, because 
he enjoyed the rare chance of approaching the feet of Akalanka. 



1 Nyasakara and Jama SSkatayana. Ind. Ant. ( 1916 ). 



158 Annals of tkt Bhandarhar Oriental Research Institute 



t^cH^NW 4nsn*icl 



Here we have STTT + W<*><?3^ <r. 3to<s^T f? ^rr^r^. The ter- 
mination applied here is STOT^. snw + ^P^rg 5 also gives us STT^I. 
^T^. But the former method of separating the words is necessi- 
tated because we have to explain cTcT^ as cTW <T^, erw referring to 
Akalanka involved in the ?TF^rr form ^rr^sr^. A comparision 
is drawn "between Gautama Ganadhara and Mahavlra on one 
hand and Prabhacandra and Akalanka on the other. Just as 
Gautama Ganadhara approached the feet of Mahavlra and was 

enabled to explain the Tlrthamkara's words, so Prabhacandra, 
by approaching the feet of Akalanka, was able to write a com- 

mentary on the Laghly astray & of Akalanka. Prabhacandra also 

assures us that he wrote his firtt commentary on the qft^TTlPS of 

Manikyanandi , 



Between Manikyanandi and Prabhacandra we musfc place Vidya- 
nandapatrakesari, because Vidyananda quotes the ^ft^TTE^. 

^'- \ 
III, 14 ; 3T2^WTT p. 197. 



Vidyananda's 1st verse in his T^w^rr is cited by Prabhacandra 
in his Prameyakamalamartanda, chap. VI. Therefore Manikya- 
nandi and Vidyananda must be placsd between Akalanka and 
Prabhacandra. The chronological order of these Jaina authors and 
their works is as follows * 



Akalanka 3fl3^T<ft and 
Manikyanandi qrf^m 
Vidyanandapatrakesari 
Prabhacandra 



Jinasena and Gunabhadra 



IV, 3, 



On the date of Akalankadew 15$ 

We must not lose sight of the fact that Prabhacandra was a 
senior contemporary of Jinasenn, and Gunabhadra, Since between 
Akalanka and Prabhacandra there intervene Manikyanandi and 
Vjdyanandapatrakesari it is manifest that Prabhacandra must 
have been a boy, when he approached the feet of Akalanka. The 
latest date assigned to the Adipurana is Saka 760 or 838 A. D. 
The difference between this date and the date proposed for 
Akalanka, c. 645, by Nllakantha Sastri is 193. It is thus obvious 
that Prabhacandra, a senior contemporary of Jinasena could 
never have approached the feet of Akalanka, if the latter had 
lived 193 years before. The relative positions of these authors 
can be seen at a glance from the following synoptical table : 

Akalanka 



i i 

Kumarila M&nikyanandi 



Sarhkara & Sure&vara 



Vidyananda-pStrakesari 



Santaraksita & Kamala&Ila 



I 

Prabhacandra , _ AmO ghaYawa I, 
Jinasena & Gunabhadra -> A - D ' 813 ' 

I have thus established a point of contact between Brahmani- 
oal literature, Buddhistic literatu re, Jaina literature and con- 
temporary Kastrakuta inscriptions. The dates that I have dis- 
covered In the pra^astis of Jaina authors are confirmed by the 
dates found in the inscriptions of contemporary RSstrakuta 
kings. The date of Akalanka is so firmly fixed that it is im~ 
possible ~io assign his critic Kumarila to the first or second half 
of the seventh century, in order to make him embrace Buddhism 
with his 500 followers or to make him the teacher of Bhavabhuti. 
The story that Kumarila embraced Buddhism is contradicted by the 
Buddhist, Jaina and Brahmanical authors, who unanimously call 



160 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental BetearcJi Institute 

Mm Mlmamsaka. And Prabhacandra, who himself was a con- 
temporary of Amoghavarsa I and who had studied ' the writings 
of Bhavabhuti, must be understood to contradict, in anticipation, 
the statement of Kumarila being the teacher of Bhavabhuti (fi rs t 
quarter of the 8th century ), if the usually accepted date 
of Bhavabhuti is to be relied upon. When the author of 
the Prameyakamalamartanda assures us that his senior 
contemporary Akalanka is assailed by Kumarila. After this it is 
needless to state that Santaraksita and Kamalaslla, who criticises 
Kumarila and Vidyanandapatrakesari, belong to the ninth 
century. It is thus clear that Kumarila and Sarhkaracarya 
were distinguished authors of the earlier part of the Bastrakuta 
period. 



DR. PATHAK'S VIEW ON ANAETAVlRYA'S DATE 

BY 

A N. UPADHYE, M. A, 

In his recent paper on Dharmaklrti and Bhamaha ] Dr. K. B. 
Pathak refers to Anantavlrya as a commentator ol Pariksamukha 
of Manikyanandi and also an the author of a commentary on the 
Nyaya-viniscaya oi Akalankadeva Finally he concludes that 
this A.nt*ntavirya belonged to the cloi.e of the tenth century A. C 
from the facts, that he is referred to by Vadiraja who wrote in 
Saka 947 ( 1025 A. C } 9 by Malliseiia in hi^j Mahapurana written 
in Saka 969 ( 1047 AC,) and also by Nagara Inscription of Saka 
999 ( 1077 A. ). With due deference to the learned scholar one 
has to say that there has been a gross misrepresentation and 
puzzle of facts in his remarks and his conclusion about the date is 
an illustration of loose logic. 

His first remark to be considered is that Anantavlrya has 
written a commentary on Nyayaviniscaya of Akalanka and that 
he belonged to the close of the tenth century. So far as my know- 
ledge of Jain Literature goes I do not know of any commentary 
on that work by Anantavlrya. Vadiraja has written a commen- 
tary on JSIyayaviniscaya 2 and a few Mss of it are available. If 
Dr. Pathak possesses any commentary on Nyayaviniscaya by 
Anantavlrya, students of Jain Literature would be very much 
obliged to learn from him the whereabouts of it. 

Anantavlrya has written commentaries on Siddhiviniscaya 
and Pramanasamgraha of Akalanka. The Ms. of the commentary 
on Siddhiviniscaya d , recently discovered, is at the GrU]arat 

1 Annals, B. O. B. i. XII, iv, p. 373. 

2 The Arrah Ms. of Nyayavimscayavivara^a does not give the full text 

of Nyayaviniscaya. It is quite recently, within the last three or four 
months, that the original text has been completely restored by Ft. 
Jinadas from another Ms. in the Jama Boarding House, Sholapur. 
This original text of Akalanka's -work is to be published soon. 

3 The history of the discovery is very interesting and instructive. See, 

Anekanta Vol. I, pp. 134 0tc. 
9 I Annals, B. O. B. I. ] 



162 Annals of tht Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Vidyapitha, Ahraedabad, while the Praamna-samgraha-bliasya 
is still merely a name to us. But unfortunately this Ms. does not 
preserve all the karikas of Akalanka In full 1 , the commentary 
which is written in a running ^tyle noting only the opening words 
of each kanka. The opening verses of Siddhiviniscayatlka run 
as below 




The name of Akalanka's work is Siddhiviniscaya and the adje 
ctive akalanka to Jina is quite significant indirectly mentioning 
the name of Akalanka, Further the words of Akalanka are looked 
upon as scarce. The commentator expresses frankly, in an ingeni- 
ous manner, his inability to explain fully Akalanka 's words, 
though he is cmantavtrya (of infinite power). The literary 
output of Akalanka is compared to an ocean and he is simply 
picking pebbles on the shore thereof. Finally he questions how 
Dharmaklrti who upholds the doctrine of Nairatmya can reach 
the status of Akalanka. 3 Anantavlrya is the disciple of Ravi 
bhadra as we learn from his colophons :~~ 

1 With great effort Pt. Jugalakishore has reconstructed the MangalS- 
cara^a-kSrika which runs thus 



4 , AnekSnta, Vol. L p. 137. 

2 See Anekanta, Vol. I, p. 201. 

3 Some implications appear to be guaranteed from these verses and the 

moat striking one is that even In the days of Anantavlrya the works 
of Akalanka were considered to be difficult. AnantavTrya, from the 
y m -Krhioh he expresses this, it appears, is not a contemporary of 
Akalanka. 



Dr. Pathatis View on Anantavirya' s Date 163 

f^n%rti%s9RTHftpra 



: ITW STEr^r-' " Or " flrf 



Anantavirya, so far as we know, is the first comraeDtator on 
the works of Akalanka Almost all later commentators have 
mentioned the name of Anantavirya in full reverence, 
Prabhacandra, in his ISFyayakumudacandrodaya which is a com- 
mentary on the Laghlyastrayam of Akalanka, speaks of Ananta- 
virya thus : 



And in the mahgaiacarana of the same work he does not laave 
the name of Anantavirya unmentioned : 



n 

Then Vadiraja ( first half of the eleventh century ), who refers 
to and quotes Siddhiviniscaya of Akalanka, in his Nyaya- 
vimscayavivaraiia, compliments Anantavirya that his words 
have guid<?d him at every step like a torch light in finding out the 
sense saturated in the word^ of Akalanka The verse runs thus :~ 

\ 
H ^ u 

Then Abliayacaiidr^ who htm written a Tatparyavrtti on Laghl- 
yaBtrayam" 5 speaks of Anantavirya thus : 



u ^ u 



1 The us^ of sarani'h in Masculine deserves notice. 

2 This verse occurs at the opening of the fifth, chapter of that work. 

See f* nekanta, Vol. I, p. 132. 

3 Published in MSnikacandra GranthamSlS ( MGM ), Vol. I, 



16-4 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

That Anantavlrya has written a commentary on Akalanka's 
works is corroborated by the Humach inscription 1 of 1077 A, a 
The 'Akalankasutra' of the Inscription might indicate the Karikas 
of Siddhiviniscaya, if not, the Framana-Samgraha-Sutras* of 
Akalanka, on which too, as we learn from some remarks in his 
Siddhiviniscaya-tika, Anaatavlrya has written a bhasya, 

Now coming to the date of Anantavlrya the above references 
will help MB to settle, to some extent, the later limit of his period, 
Prahhacandra, the author of Nyayakumudacandrodaya and Pra~ 
meyalcamalamartanda, flourished before the composition of 
&dipurana d of Jinasena who might have begun it somewhere 
about 838 A. C. Now Prabhacandra plainly tells us 4 that, for 
him the explanations of Anantavlrya were the only guide to 
understand the works of Akalanka, indicating thereby perhaps 
that he was not a contemporary of even Anaritsvlrya, then 
what to say of his being a contemporary of Akalanka whose 
words were looked upon as scarce by Anantavlrya himself ! 
Though the exact date of Anantavlrya is still a desideratum this 
much is certain that he flourished some time after Akalanka 5 

1 EC. VIII, Nagara No. 35. 

2 See Anekanta, Vol. I, p. 256. 



; \\ Adipurana I. 47. 

4 See the Terse quoted above. 

5 Dr Pathak relegates Akalanka to the middle of the 8th century 

(Annals XT, ii, p. 155 ), but this view is not in any way cogent. 
AkalankaS dispute with Buddhists, might be accepted as a historical 
fact but that h<a visited bhe 6oiut of Sahabatunga should not be given 
the value of contemporary evidence since the inforiiition in which 
Akalanka is made to address Sahasatunga belongs to 1128 A. ( EC 
11.67) Further, the identification of SShasatnnga with Dantidurga 
( Saka 675 = 753 A ) is merely conjectural In no contemporary 
record Dantidurga is called Sahasatunga ( Early History of Deocan, 
Section XI }, We most see whether there is any other evidence 
useful to settle the limits of Akalanka's period The Dhavnla com- 
mentary of Virasena is finished in the reign of Jagattunga t the 
available dates range from 794 to 808 ) The prasasti gives the date 
but the versest are hopelessly corrupt in th Sholapur Ms. More than 
once Virasena quotes m hi? commentary long extracts from RSja- 



Dr. Pathak's View on Anantavlrya' s Late 165 

( circa last quarter of the seventh century at the latest ) and a 
pre tt;y long time before Prabhacandra, the author of Nyaya- 
kumudacandrodaya- Thus it is impossible that Anantavlrya, the 
commentator of Akalanka's woiks can be assigned to the close of 
the tenth century. If V'adiraia mentions Anantavlrya, that means, 
at the most, the later limit might be settled. Bat the problem how 
much earlier he was than Vadiraja is not even attempted by 
Dr. Fathak and he simply jumps to the conclusion by throwing 
him only one generation back. 

The next point to be considered is that Dr. Pathak ascribes the 
commentary on Parlksamukha and the commentary on Akalanka's 
\vorktooneandthe same Anantavlrya. It appears that he is 
misled by the common name of both these authors who are not 
afc all identical and not even contemporaries. It is already seen 
above fchat Anantavlrya, the commentator of Akalanka's works, 
lived pretty long before the time of Prabhacandra, the author of 
Prameyakamalcimartanda and Nyayakumudacandrodaya, while 
Anantavlrya? the commentator of Parlksamukha 1 , is a com- 
laratively late author, sufficiently later than Prabhacandra, since 
in his commentary he plainly tells us - and it is also -proved by 

v5rtika of Akalanka. This means in Virasena's time Rajavartika had 
already superseded Sarvarthasiddhi of Plljyapada and become popular. 
Further, the relations between Akalanka, Anantavlrya and Prabha- 
candra, outlined above on substantial grounds, militate against 
Dr Pathak's view. The'.lower limit for Akalanka's period is that 
he js later than Dharmakirti Then Siddhasena Divakara, who is said 
to hftve been acquainted with Dharmakirti '& definition of. prat yaks a ^ is 
quoted in two places by Akalanka m his Rajdvartika ( pp 275 and 
295). In view ui these intricate facts, I think, we should put 
Akalanka in the last quarter of tre seventh century at the latest. 
Further there is the verse of Akalanka carita ( Anekanta p 78 ) which 
rurs thus ; 

\ 



This verse gives 643 A P as the dale whf*n Akalanka s dispute \vith 
Buddhists took place r ihe evidence of the verso deserves .->ome 
weght as it agrees with oth^r circumstances S, Sr'kantha Sastri put^ 
c 645 as Akalanka's date, but be has uot given any evidence? (Annals 
XII, in, p 255 ). 
1 It is popularly known as PrameyaratnamSla or Pdrlks5inukhapafi;ik5 



166 Annals nf the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

the contents - that hin Vrtti is merely a summary of Prameya- 
kamalamSrtanda 1 . Further, considering the manner in which he 
refers to Prabhacandra J s work, there is no scope to infer that 
Prabhacandra and Junior Anantavirya were contemporaries. This 
Junior Anantavirya wrote his commentary for S&ntisena at the 
request of Hirapa, the son of Vijaya and Nanamba. So the iw 
authors should not he identified. 

I am aware of a way of escape from my conclusion. It might 
be said that Anantavirya and Prabhacandra were contemporaries 
and there is no wonder if they ha v mutually used their works, 
Such a conjecture is out of court as it lacks all historical 
judgement and moreover it is not backed by any evidence, first, 
we are dealing with authors and their works of the seventh 
century or so, therefore we can not leave out of consideration the 
transit-conditions etc. of those days. Kor can we imagine that all 
these authors lived in one and the same place. If a particular author 
quotes or refers to a previous author, generally we will have to 
admit a gap of at least one generation if the evidences to the 
contrary are not sufficiently conclusive. Secondly, Aanantavlrya's 
commentaries have been a guide to Prabhacandra, a fact plainly 
admitted by Prabhacandra himself and then can we imagine the 
same Aanantavlrya saying, 



: H ? 

So I would put it as an established fact that Anantavirya, tl>e 
commentator of Akalanka's works, is quite different from the 
later Anantavlrya, the author of Pariksamukhapanjika, Many 
scholars have been mHed by identical names and more so in the 
study of Jaina chronology, since the same name is borne by Jaina 
authors more than one We know at least three Samantabhadras, 
at least three Jinasenas, about nine Subhacandras and about 



s w? 5 1* TTT^TRfftHr: it ^ a 



II V || 
- 3e Bombay and Benaras Editions, 



Dr. Pathak'a View on Anantavirya?* Date 167 

twenty Prabhacandras \ So one has bo be cautious in establishing 
identity of two authors because of similarity in name. Further, 
in settling the relative chronology of Jaina authors quotations in 
the body of the work are often deceptive because of the multipli- 
city of Mss. and they should not be accepted as grounds of 
inference until one is satisfied that a particular quotation is 
genuine in that context ( different families of Mss. will have to be 
consulted ) and that the verse quoted does not belong to any 
previous author. 

There have been some four Anantavlryas : for easy reference 
we would enumerate them by giving a few notable facts. 

( i ) Anantavlrya, the commentator of Siddhivinicaya and 
Pramanasamgraha of Akalanka ( last quarter of the seventh 
century at the latest ) He was a pupil of Ravibhadra and 
flourished, soon after Akalanka, in the first quarter ( circa ) of the 
eighth century. The Humach inscription 2 of 1077 A. C. mentions 
him as an author of a Vrtti on Akalanka -sutras. 

( ii ) Anantavirya, a teacher at Sravana Belgola. He was the 
pupil of Gunasena, the disciple ot Vlrasena. The Peggur inscrip- 
tion^ records a granfc to him by Rakkas in Saka 899 ( circa 977 

A. C. ). 

( iii ) Anantavirya, the pupil of Prabhacandra (II). He had a 
colleague named Municandradeva. This teacher Prabhacandra 
will have to be distinguished from the author of Prameyakamala- 
martanda since the same inscription mentions another Prabha- 
candra previous to that. This Anantavirya is referred to in 
some three inscriptions ' Nidigi inscription 4 ot c. 111? A. a, 
Kallurgudda inscription 5 of c. 11 SI A. a and Purale inscription 1 



1 See MGM. Vols, XXIV, XXXI etc. Introduction and Annals XIII. i, 

pp. 37 etc, 

2 EC. VIII, Nagar No. 35. 

3 EC I, Coorg Ins, No. 4 , and also IA. VI, p 102 where Kittel holds a 

different date and puts Saka 780 with a question mark. 

4 EC VII, Shimoga, No. 57 

5 EC. VII, Shimoga, No. 4 

6 EC. VII, Shimoga, No, 64, 



168 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

of o. 1132 A. So this Anantavlrya might have flourished at the 
close of llth century, 

( iv ) Anantavlrya 1 , the author of Parlksamukhapanjika which 
was composed for one Santisena Pt. Jugalakishore opines that 
he might have flourished in the llth century, so it is likely that 
he is the same an No iii. 

Moreover, the Chamarajanagar Inscription'^ of 1117 and Humach 
Inscription d of 3147 A. G. mention fche name of Anantavlrja 
along with Srlpala and others. These two along with NagamangMa 
Inscription 4 No. 19 refer to the first Anantavlrya. Then there is 
a dateless epigraph on a Jain image at Kogali ( Bellary District) 
which mentions one Anantavlryadeva by whose pupil Obeyama- 
setti the image was made 5 . 

Like Dr. Pathak, Dr, Vidyabhushan 6 too has identified Ananta 
vlrya Nos. i and iv ( above ). The error in this view has been 
already discussed. Dr. Vidyabhushan, however, adopts a different 
line of argument to settle the date of Anantavlrya ( No. iv ). It 
is already noted that Parlksamukhapanjika was composed for 
Santis^ena. Dr, Yidyabhushan supposed Santisena to be identical 
with Santisuri who died in 1039 A C But this supposed identity 
cannot be accepted for various reasons. First, the names Santisen: 
iind Santisuri are not identical. Secoudly, Santisuri, who died in 
1039 A. C. is a Svetambara saint belonging to Tharapadra-gaccha 7 
His name before the initiation was Bhlma, his native place v\cs 



1 Dr. Vidyabhushan says that this Anantavlrya is referred to in thi 

Sarvadarsanasatngraha of MSdhavacSrya but I have not been able t> 
trace the verses ascribed to Anantavlrya there, in the Prameyaratna 
mala ( See pp. 83-84 of Sarvadarsanasa&graha BORE edition ). 

2 EC. Chamarajanagar, No. 83. 
1 EC. Nagar, No- 37. 

i EC. IV. 

5 South Indian Jainiam, part II, pp 56-57. 

6 History of Indian Logic, p. 198. 

7 Bhandarkar, Eeport of Sanskrit MSI. 1883-84. p. U. 



Dr. Pathak's View on Anantavirya's Date 169 

gnnatayu ( modern Una ) near Anahilla Patana 1 . It is after 
initiation that he came to be known as Santisuri. He is the 
ittthor of a long commentary on Uttaradhyayanasutra and of a 
fippanl on Tilakamanjarl of Dhanapala. Jlvaviyara and Chaitya- 
rapdana-Mahabhasya too are ascribed to him. Santisena might 
lavebeen only a novice when the commentary was written for him 
drile Santisuri ( the name given to Mm at the time of initiation ) 
s a learned monk as seen from, his commentary on Uttaradhya- 
^ana which is a masterpiece of doctrinal exposition. Thirdly 
Lnantavlrya and Santisena lived in the South as shown below 
riule Santisuri was born and spent his life in Gujarat. Lastly 
here have been many Santisuris 9 - and there is no reason why 
his very Santisuri should be selected for identity. 

It should be considered now whether the name of Santisena 

applies any data to settle Anantavlrya 's ( No. IV ) date. There 

re some Jaina epigraphical records where the name Santisena 

ccurs. But one thing must be borne in mind that the epigra- 

hical records are not the Census reports nor is it an inviolable 

ile that names of all authors, teachers and pupils should neces- 

inly find place in inscriptions. However, there is an excuse. 

is just probable, in view of the large number of Jaina inscrip- 

ons and on the unguaranteed supposition that Santisena might 

ive become a pretty famous monk in later life to attract public 

tention to the extent of his name being recorded in a grant or 

, that we might be tempted to search his name in Jaina inscrip- 

>ns, The name Santisena enumerated along with other teacher 

Sravana Belgola 3 and Ghalya inscription 4 has nothing to do 

ith our Santisena as the inscriptions are of very early date. 

ien there is the Debkunda inscription * of 1088 A. C. which 

mtions one Sanfcisena, the pupil of Durlabhasena. There is * 

1 For full details of this antisu*ri, see PrabbSvaka Cant a XVI. eipe- 
cially the historical summary thereof written in Gujarat! by Muui 
alyanavijaya;ji published as an introduction to the Gujarati trans- 
lation of PrabhSvaka Carita ( Atmananda Sabha, Bhavanagar 1931 ), 

J See Peterson Report IV", pp. cxvin eto. 

^ EC, II, No. 31. 

I EC.V Channarayapatana, iSTo. H9. 

1 El. II, No. xvin, 

10 [ Annals, B. O. R. I. ] 



170 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Besearch Institute 

temptation to identify this Santisena with the one for whom 
Parlksamukhaparijika was written. Anantavirya is a South- 
Indian author as indicated by the proper names mentioned by 
him. He wrote the commentary at the request of Hlrapa ( possi- 
bly Hirappa adapted to the Sanskrit sound ), who was a son of 
Vaijeya ( a palm-leaf Ms. in Laxmisena Matha Kolhapur, reads 
Vaijayya Vaineya of the printed edition is a mistake, ) and 
Nanamba, Then Hirappa, Vaijayya and Nanamba ~ these names 
have decidedly a South-Indian phonetic colour, while Debkunda 
is in Northern India So it is least possible that Anantavirya 
might write a manual for the benefit of Santisena living in 
Northern India, The data of Santisena 's name are of no help, 
As a probable conjecture we have identified this Anantavirya 
with No, iii above. 

To conclude, Anantavirya, the commentator of Akalanka's 
two works, is quite different from Anantavirya, the author of 
Parlksamukhapanjika. The first flourished, say in the first 
quarter of the eighth century, some time after Akalanka while 
the second Anantavirya is sufficiently later than Prabhacandra 
whose Pr am eyakamalamartanda he summarises in his commen- 
tary and probably he flourished at the close of the eleventh 
century. Dr. Vidyabhushan's identity of Santisuri and Santi- 
is not acceptable, 



^ I am highly obliged to Ft Jugalakishore, perhaps the highest 
living authority on Jaina chronological problems, whose notes on 
the present topic published in Anekanta have been utilised by 
me and who, at my request, sent so readily and kindly some 
references. 



MISCELLANEA 

A NOTE ON TKIVIKRAMA'S DATE 

BY 
A. N. UPADHYE, M, A. 

The date of Trivikrama, the Prakrit grammarian, has been 
only a matter of conjecture 1 . The earlier limit of his date is 
quite definite as he himself says that he has reflected in his work 
the Prakrit forms of earlier authors including Hemacandra 2 . 
Hemacandra ( 1088-1172 A. C.) finished his Prakrit grammar 
before 1142 A. C., when Kumarapala came to the throne*. As to the 
later limit Pischel points out that Kumarsvami, the son of Kolacal 
Mallinatha, quotes Trivikrama both by name and anonymously 
in his commentary on Prataparudriya of Vidyanatha who was a 
contemporary of Prataparudra II ( 1295-1323 A. C. ). Aufrecht 
assumed that Mallinatha lived not earlier than 14th century. 
Hultzsch however refers Mallinatha to the end of the 15th century, 
So Kumarasvami's reference to Trivikrama shows that Trivi- 
krama lived earlier than 15th century. Dr. Laddu has shown 
that Simharaja who utilizes Trivikrama's sutras probably lived 
in the beginning of 14th century and ultimately he accepts the 
conjecture of Pischel that Trivikrama belonged to the 13th 
century. Keith takes exception to Simharaja's reference to the 
fourteenth century as being conjectural and adds further, * it is 
possible that he is really later than Bhattoji Dlksita '. Dr. Gune 
would like to relegate Trivikrama to the fourteenth century 
at the latest. 

I wish to add here a fresh line of evidence which helps, to 
some extent, to put a later limit to Trivikrama's date. The evi- 
dence comes from lialebida inscription published in the latest 

1 For previous discussions on his date see, Pischel Pkr- Gr, 38 , Laddu 

Annals of B. O. R. I. X, pp. 201-205 ; Gune BhavisayattakahS in G. 
0. S. p. 67 of the Introduction ; Keith A History of Skr, Literature 
p. 435. 

2 Introductory verse No. 11. 

3 See Introduction fco MoharajaparSjaya m G, 0. S- p. XIV et seq. 



172 Annals Gfthe Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Annual Report of Archaeological Survey of Mysore 1 . The inscrm. 
tion records the death of Sakalacandra in 1236 A. C, He wag 
student of Arhanandi-Traividyadeva and was given dlha W 
Bahubali-Siddhantideva who was a junior co-disciple of Vlranandi- 
Siddhanta-cakravarti. This Ylranandi finished his Kaname 
commentary on his own Acarasara in 1154 A, C. 2 Considering 
the above relation between Sakalacandra, Bahubali and Vlranandi 
we can take these two dates 1154-1236 as tentatively circumscrib- 
ing the life of Sakalacandra. This indicates that Arhanandi-Trai- 
vidyadeva who was the tirutaguru of Sakalacandra flourished some 
where about the middle of the 12th century. Now Triyikraraa 
tells us that Arhanandi-Traividya-Muni was his &ruta-bharta l 
( i. e. teacher in Jain Scriptures ). And if Trivikrama's student 
life is to be put in the middle of the 12th century at the feet of 
Arhanandi-Traividyadeva he must have composed his Prakrit 
grammar, at the latest, early in the beginning of the 13th century, 
A period of fifty years is not in any way small for the Prakrit 
Grammar of Hemacandra to travel from Pattana to South India, 
considering the literary activities of itinerant Jain ascetics of the 
middle ages. Moreover, the philosophical controversy between 
Devasuri and Kumudacandra 4 at the court of Siddharaja, after 
giving all concession to sectarian bias with reference to florid 
colours of situations, characters and events as depicted in the 
play Mudrita-Kumudaeandraprakarana 5 of Yasascandra, will have 
to be accepted as a historical event. The controversy, at which 
even Hemacandra might have been present, took place in 
Pattana in 1124 A. C. and it indicates pretty well the literary 
relations between the South and Gujarat. 

1 Of the year 1929, published m 1931. Inscription No 14, pp. 74-75 etc. 

2 See Karnataka-kavicanta, Vol. I, p. 168. 

3 Introductory verse No. 2. 

4 We are not, at present, with what little material we have, in a position 

to identify this Kumudacandra with any of the two Kumudaoandras 
from South India One is the teacher of MSghanandi, the author of 
SSstrasarasamuccaya ; while the other is a pupil of one Maghanandi 
as he tells us in the colophon of his Jmasamhita. On these two 
Eumudacandras see, Karnatakakavioarita Vol I pp 388-90 and 
, MGM Vol XXI, p. 24 of the Introduction. 

Vol. VIIL 



ADIBHA.RA.TA 
BY 

D. R. MANKAD, M. A. 

The Govt. Manuscripts Library at the Bhandarkar Oriental Re- 
search Institute, Poona, possesses a Ms. (No. 41 of 1916-18 ) which 
is entered there under the title Natyasarvasvadlpika. It has 
61 folios, each folio containing 10 to 11 lines. It is a paper Ms., 
appearing recent. 

I have carefully gone through this Ms., and I have found that 
it does not contain one single work, but fragments of different 
works. I shall show this by analysing the contents of the Ms. 

Folios 1-33 are orderly and coherent as far as the work they 
contain goes. 

Folios 34-47 do not seem to be a continuation of the work con- 
tained in folios 1-33. They ( 34-47 ) describe talas etc., which are 
enumerated in the contents ( prefixed to this Ms. in fol. 1-5 ) 
under the heading saptamadhaye talavidhana. But on further 
investigation of these folios it seems that; they do not contain the 
text indexed here ( i. e in folios 1-5 ), for though they show the 
portions noted in the contents, there are remarkable discrepancies 
between the text as preserved in these folios and the contents. 
These folios discuss Mandala, sthana (both these are not found 
in the contents ) talapranas, kalalaksana, margalaksana ( which 
has 16 divisions here while the contents note 16 divisions under 
margapurana bhedah ). Then these folios sub-divide kriya etc. 
in the details of which there are striking differences. 

these folios contents 

kriya ... 8 16 

anga -5 6 - 

graha . 4 6 

jati ... 4 5 

lay a ... 3 4 

yati .. 3 6 

prastara 4 4 



Then there are named 
at the end of 



I, therefore, believe that folios 34^47 do 
work as contained in folios l- 33 . 



preser ^ the 



l. 



the 



to hi, jw. 58 

^j 

Moreover, fol i- 

- : 

of different 



though 



* hat this Ma contains fragments 



> asya granthasya 
n te> here ' that " 



"mark, 
nama 

cording to the contents 

<^ided in several 

Prakarnas, to t a l number rf 

Prakaranas being 221. And ft S" belng 33 &nd th 

adhyaya almost intact and ttoL/ S 6 ~ 33 C ntain the 
Eem. o ^wo f the se 

r^ "' 

^^ f * he first 

m ^^-bham. 
enumerates i n ver ,, form 



. 
adhy ^ a ^ several 

&nd that of 



Portion in the begi nni 



Jldibharata 17$ 

contents of the work, substantially agreeing with the contents 
noted in folios 1-5, occupies folios 6-11. This first adhyfcya 
shows a mixture of prose and verses. 

In spite of the clear mention at the end of the contents asya 
granthasya nama natyasarvasvadlpika I doubt that folios 11-13 
contain the first chapter of Adibbarata itself. My reasons 
are stated below. But before I attempt at giving these reasons, I 
shall note the colophons to different adhyayas contained in these 
folios. 

iti srl adibharatasastre samavayaskandhe natyasarvasvadlpi- 
kayam sabhoddharaperanyantastaprakaranam nama dvitlyo'dhyS- 



Colophon to the third adhyaya also has the same ... adibharat 
samavayaskandhe natyasarvasvadlpikayam ... 

Fourth adhyaya is missing in these folios, and the fifth has 
the following colophon 

ittham racito'fcra bharate mahapancamastvandhravacordhva- 
vihito budhenatha athaya ( ? ) varonvedapadassatlko (?) hi raja 
narayanasiddhasivayoginathena samamanvayapadena ramyam 
hi(?) iti pancamassargai.. 

Sixth adhyaya ends with this colophon ' 
narayanali siddha^ivasrlranianandayogirajena 

racito bharatosastho'dhyayasca svayapadarthapattlks ( ? ) 
narayanasiddhasivaramanandayogirajaviracite adibharate natya- 
natyanga samagryadihastadidevatam saptaprakarananirupanam 
nama sastho'dhayah. 

Here ends the samavayaskandha and begins the sikfift- 
skandha, colophons to the first and the second adhyayas of which 
arc, mutatis mutandis the same as seen at the end of the first and 
second adhyayas of the samavayaskandha. 

Apparent conclusion, from the abore colophons and the 
introductory remark - vyakartumadibharatam sphutamarabhami- 
would be that the present folios must contain N&tyasarvasva- 



176 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

dlpika of Ramananda Yogiraja, which in its turn should be a 
commentary on Adibharata. But the title Natyasarvasvadlpika 
suggest* the existence of a work named Natyasarvasva on which 
it may have commented. This is supported by the fact that 
these folios have a double copy of folios 12-14, of which one 
continues the present work, while the other one bears a marginal 
caption Natyasarvasvam. I, therefore, take these two, out-of- 
place folios to contain a fragment of Natyasarvasvam, the com- 
mentary on which was probably designated as NatyasarvaBva- 
dipika. 

UTow the text preserved in folios 1-33 shows peculiar chara- 
cteristics for a commentary 1 . It runs in Anustup metre, varied 
very rarely, by other metres. It does not quote any other author. 
It does not give tlka or anvayapada. A commentary is usually 
expected to show all these characteristics. In fact, apart from 
the colophons and the contents which mention N&tyasarvasva- 
dlpika, there is no internal indication to show that these folios 
contain Natyasarvasvadlpika. On a careful consideration of the 
text, I doubt that these folios contain Adibharata. My reasons 
are : 

( 1 ) Colophon to the sixth adhyaya of the Samavayaskandha, 
clearly takes this work to be Adibharata, though I am not pre- 
pared to stress this point too much, for the obvious reason that 
this and the colophon to the fifth adhyaya are in direct conflict 
with the remaining colophons. 

( 2 ) The portion in these folios exhibit a running style, much 
similar to our printed Bharatanatya^astra, and a confident treat- 
ment of the subjects, which may be seen in an authoritative work. 

(3) Mr. Manamohan Ghose has during the course of an 
article, 2 drawn our attention to the quotations from Adibharata 
found in Raghavabhatta's commentary to Sakuntala, He has 
given passages quoted under the name of Adibharata by Raghava- 

1 Following inforation is found in the Ms. : 

n 

( foL 8, L 1-3 ). 



2 8 Indian Historical Quarterly, March 1930, p. 7J&. 



JLdtbharata 17? 

under three heads : ( 1 ; those that are found in the 
present Bharatanatyasastra, ( 2 ) those that have parallels in it 
and ( 3 ) those that are not seen there. Under ( 2 ) is quoted the 
following passage : 



\ 
Sakuntala, ISTir. S. p. 9. 

Following is the parallel passage found in the present 

I : t 



- \ 



NS. KM. XXVII, 47-50. 

Now compare the following almost identical passage found in 
the text contained in these folios ( fol. 13 a line 2-6 ) : 



I have not been able to trace any other quotation given by 
Mr. M. Ghose ; and though the text as preserved here runs only 
upto the middle of the second skandha ("out of the five skandhas ), 
I am not prepared to say that all these references noted by Mr, 

II [ Annali, B. O. R. I. ] 



178 Annals of the jBkcmdarkar Crtentai JKe^earch 

M, Ghose under ( 1 ), ( 2 ) and ( 3 ), would be found in tie 
remaining portions of the text : for, the references recorded by Mr, 
M. Ghose show that the work Adibharata as understood by 
Raghavabhatta treated among other things of avasthas, samdhis 
etc., wiile Adibharata as noted in these folios cannot possibly 
treat of any such topic, as, it remarks ( fol. 10 a, 1. 6*10 ) : 



ff i 



This quotation apparently believes that Natakas and other 
varieties of rupaka have no place in this text, which should have 
treated of nrtta, and nrtya but not natya, ( as understood by Dasa- 
riipakam ). This is completely borne out by the contents noted 
in folios 1-5, where no rupakaprakara or no other matter usually 
found in our natyasastra works, occurs, and which expressly states 
- etatparyantam adibharatasastram. Evidently, this contradic- 
tory nature - that one passage quoted under Adibharata and not 
found in our printed NS., should be seen here and that other 
passages quoted under Adibharata have no apparent place in this 
work - may stop us from taking this fragment to represent Adi- 
bharata, But I cannot be positive. My whole object is to 
collect data and to leave the question about the identity of the 
work open. 

( 4 ) That these folios do not contain JSTa tyasarvasvadlpika is 
borne out by another line of argument. I have already noted 
that as far as the general style of the work contained herein is 
concerned, it represents a flowing epic style, free from any prose 
or poefcic explanations. And though it is difficult to determine 
the connection between Adibharata and Natyasarvasvadlpika, 
I put the following before the readers : folios 12-14 are found 
twice in this Ms., and those that are out of place, show that they 



JLdibharata 179 

treat of fcalas. Also folios 34-47 contain a treatment of talas as 
noted above 5 but both these portions are not the same as detailed 
in the contents. Now both these portions - the additional folios 
12-14 and folios 37-47 ~ begin with the following benedictory 
stanza 

Visnum lokagurnm pranamya sirasa eanmargasarhdarsakam 
klrtipritikaram janasya laghuna kalena kamapradam 
sevyam sadyatibhih dhrtaplutapadam nyasottalokatrayam 
talanarh kathayami laksanamaham purvoktasastrakramSt 

In spite of this identical benedictory stanza, the matter seen 
at both these places, though treating of talas, is different, one pro- 
bably representing Natyasarvasva and the other, the dlpika there- 
on. My reason for so saying is that the additional folios 12-14, 
which contain the stanza as well as the talalaksana, bear a 
marginal caption - Natyasarvasvam - , which, therefore, may 
represent that work. Folios 34-47 bear a marginal caption - 
hastadhyaya - which is obviously wrong as they treat of talas 
only. From the style of these folios ( 34-37 ) one can say that 
they may represent the dlpika, for there are found prose explana- 
tions, quotations from other works on the same subject etc., which 
are the usual indications of a commentary. 

It is on these grounds that I doubt folios 1-33 to contain a 
portion of Adibharata, or, at least, to show a new light on the 
question of Adibharata. 



NOTES ON INDIAN CHRONOLOGY 

BY 

P. K. GODE, M. A. 



VII 

A MANUSCRIPT OF SAMaiTARAGAKALPADRUMA 
AND ITS PEOBABLE DATE 

Aufrecht mentions in the Catalogus Catalogorum only one 
Ms. of a work on music under the title ^nrfRT^T^^^TT. This is 
" Bd. 980 ", which is the same as No. 980 of 1887-91 of the Govt 
MBS. Library ab the B. O. R. Institute, The Ms. consists of 31 
folios and is incomplete. Folios 1 to 9 which comprise one 
chapter of the manuscript may possibly have been a later inter- 
polation based on the 3rd chapter of the SamgUaratnakara. This 
chapter commences with the following statement indicating that 
the material has been borrowed from, the Samgltaratnakara : 



On folio 9 we 



get the following colophon of this Chapter - 



After this some-what extraneous matter the real beginning of 
the Samgltakalpadruma is indicated by the following lines : 



\ 



appears to be an honorific title of 
borneout by the line 



^ 

snw". Thece does not seem to be any necessity to suppose that the 
expression " Tm^ITRt^r^firfTiiT^^q-^ >* is to be taken entirely in the 
metaphorical sense, for we have such combinations as 



to justify the conclusion that TI TOm ls an honorific title affixed to th* 



Miscellanea -ig-i 

In the above quotations the scribe appears to have confounded 
the epithet %^rnr with s^ro^. The correct epithet appears to 
have been %^W as is clear from the following verses which tell 
us that the author's name was ^TOTR^. He was fche son of CK^I^ 
(or ffcnfcr) and grandson of SOTtWSf. The family name appears 
to have been W^^qro 

Folio 10 " 




II " 

On folio 18, another chapter appears to commence with the 
same aNfrr and tf^r^ar as on folio 9. Subsequent matter of 
this new chapter appears to have been interspersed with verses 
which already appear in the previous chapter. However, the 
new chapter does not look like being a mere duplicate of the old 
one. Another colophon appears on fol. 27 : 

" *ft tfr 



n " 



After this colophon begins m^fOTR which is introduced with 



. ............. and 

\ ". The available portion of 
this incomplete rrr55TSTT*r is covered up by folios 27 to 31. 

The Ms. mentions among other references the following 
authors and works ' 

(1) 3Tf5mq- (fol. 12, 20,28 ); (2) ^ynrnir (fol. 28); (3) ?TT^- 
tfifar ( fol. 22 ) ; ( 4 ) rrTT^frfar ( fol. 10, 20.) ; ( 5 ) Hmqun^ficr ( fol. 
10 ) ; ( 6 ) a;??^mn:?frr^ ( fol 22 ) ; ( 7 ) ^r^ftar ( fol. 10) ; ( 8 ) 

^rTOT(fol. 22); (9) srf^frr ( fol. 28 ) ; (10) wn?x (fol. 28); 
( 11 ) fcuRScrc ( fol. 10, 27 ) ; ft*!JS*T<Jr ( fol. 10, 19 ); ( 12 ) ft N Miff 
(fol. 10) ; ( 13 ) i%crffef??: ( fol. 28 ) ; (14) %^rftrerCTreT ( fol 10 ) ; 
( 15 ) *fTcnTTT ( foL 10, 19 ); ( 16 ) ^WrcRTn^TT ( fol. 10) ; ( 17 ) 



1 Journ, Andhra His. Res. Society Vol. Ill, 2, 3, 4. 

p, 205 " ^frfrff^TrTRTOT a work of the 18th century by NSrSyana of 

the Ganga family " 
p. 206 " About A. D, 1750 NarSyariadeva issued ^VfirT^RHT in fiv ? 

Chapters etc. " 



18'7 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 



( fol. 10, 22 ); ( 18 ) ^frcT^sfhTRFTtrr ( fol. 10 ) ( 19 

20) *GMhrofi*nr (fol. 19, 20); (21) * 
( fol. 21) ; ( n ) #fowrc (fol. 22), which may be the work by 
quoted in ^fm?(RPTtJT of the Narayana of the *TI|p family 5 ( 23 ) 
' ( fol- 22 ) mentioned in ^WtcTOTr of Eaghunatha of Tan- 



jore about 1620 A. D. ( JAHBS. Ill, 2, 3, 4 p. 204 ) ; ( 24 ) 

( fol. 22 ); ( 25 ) ^farerirmrr ( fol. 22 ) 5 ( 26 ) *Mfernfer ( fol. 27 } ; 

( 27 ) *wn*n?Rr ( fol. 10 ); ( 28 ) farmer ( fol. 22 ). 

In the above list of references, the references to 



and ^J?idMlK<Hid prove that the present work is a late compilation 
from many works on Sarhgita referred to by the author. The 
chronology of many of these works is uncertain We can, how- 
ever, fix the probable time of this compilation from the mention 
of ^flflmKgrra 1 on fol. 22. The approximate time of the work as 
fixed by Dr. P. E. Bhandarkar ] is the latter half of the 17th 
century (A, D.I 650 to 1700 A D.). As Samgltaparijata has not 
been much made use of in the present compilation ifc must have 
been a somewhat fresh work at the time. Perhaps it attained 
importance later and was translated into -Persian in A. D. 1724. 
The reference to the ^JfRFTlTRnrr on fol. 10, if it has reference to 
a work of that name by sTKnrtfrapr in five chapters issued about 
A, D. 1750 2 , still takes the date of composition of the Samgiiaraga- 
Jcdlpadruma to a period immediately following A. D. 1750. If the 
dates of the ^TTrT^TTR^TRT and the ^ITtT'TlTRnn 1 as fixed above are 
regarded as correct we can assign fche ^^TTrT^^T^TT of ^ 
to a period between 1*750 A. D. and 1800 A. D. 



1. Vide his article on " Anoient HiBdu Music ", I A. XLI ( 1912 ), p. 160 

" Ahobala's Samglta-panjata This work was translated into 

Persian m the year 1137 A. H. or A, D. 1724 this work 

represents a later stage in the development of Music than the last 
treatise, and I have assigned it, therefore, to the latter half of the 
17th centurv approximately." 

2. JAHBS III, 2, 3, 4 p. 206. 



vm 

RASAV1L&SA OF BHUDEVA SUKLA AND ITS 
PROBABLE DATE ABOUT A. D, 1550 

Dr. S. K. De mentions liasa-vilfisa 1 of Bhudeva Sukla among 
minor works on alamkara literature and remarks that he " belongs 
to the 16th century. ?r The following evidence not only cor- 
roborates Dr. De's remarks but enables us to fix the probable 
date of Rasarwlasa. On an examination of the two Mss. 2 
of the work in the G-ovt. Mss, Library in the B. O. R. Institute, 
I find that Bhudeva Sukla quotes 3 from Srivatsalanchana, who is 
evidently the commentator of Mammata. As regards the date of 
tirimtsalanchana Dr. De observes 4 that he " cannot be earlier than 
the 14th century " but " is earlier than the 17th century, being 
quoted by Kamalakara ( 1612 A, D. ) and Jagannatha ". These 
remarks, however, are not sufficient to enable us to fix the 
probable date of Rasavdata. Mr. P. V. Kane refers 5 in his 
History of Alamkara Literature, to a Ms. of the Kavya- 
parlksa of Srivatsalanchana which is dated 1550 A. D. This 
date proves that Srivatsalanchana must have written his 
Rainjapariksa before 1550 A. B. The Kavyaparlksa is an " inde- 
pendent work by Srivatsalanchana which deals with the general 
characteristics of poetry and follows in the main the teachings of 
Mammata ". The facts that ( i ) Rasavilasa quotes from Srivatsa- 
lanchana's work 6 and that (ii) there is a Ms. of one of Srivatsa's 
works dated 1550 A. D. lead us to infer that Rasawlasa is a 
work written about A. D. 1550. We may, therefore, fix A. D. 1550 
as the probable date of Rasa-vttasa of Bhudeva Sukla. 

1. Sanskrit Poetics, Volj I, p. 305. 

3. No. 594 of 1887-91 and No. 337 of 1884-86. 

3, Ms. No. 337 of 1884-86, folio 3- 




also 

4, Sanskrit Poetics, YoL I, p. 178. 

5, Sahityadarpana, 2nd edition, 1923, Introduction, ( Index of Works ), 
p. GLXV 3STo. 187. 

6, The verse quoted above may be eithor from K%vyaparlk$a or from his 
commentary on Mammata's Kavyaprakaba. I have not identified it. 



A COMMENTARY ON THE KUMABA-SAMBHAVA, BY 

HARICARANADiSA, CALLED DEVASENA AND ITS 

PROBABLE DATE BETWEEN 1630 AND 1680 A. D, 

Aufrecht T records only one Ms. of a commentary by Hari- 
caranadasa called Devasena, viz. " Peters 1. 114 7! . This Ms, is 
the same as No- 37 of A, 1882-83 in the Govt. Mss. Library at the 
B. O. R. Institute, Poona. The commentary is for cantos I and I[ 
only. In the colophon of Canto I on folio 14, as also in the 
colophon for Canto II on the last folio 24 we are told that the 
commentary ?[3%?n" was composed by ff^RtfRW who is also styled 
in the 1st colophon as * Tr^^oT 3 ^ 1 ^^^^^"^ ' - an epithet which is 
only a paraphrase of the author's name ff^Tfll^RT, That the'author 
was a devotee of Hari is clear from the following stanzas at 
the beginning of the Ms. : 



^ || " 

Among authors and works referred to in the commentary the 
following are to be noted : 3THT: ( fols. 1, 2, 3 ) ; t*r ( Ms- 1, 2, 6, 
11, 12, 16, 18, 21, 24 ) ; ^w^irrsrn? ( fol. 1 ) ; ^rm^cT ( qr^srw* ) 
( fol. 2 ) ; Ir^tfrfV ( fol. 4 ) ; ft^: ( fols. 5, 6, 10 ) ; wrf%ffr ( fol. 7 ), 



These references clearly show that it is not a very old com- 
mentary. In particular the following reference to 



enables us to fix: us one terminus for the date of the commentary : 



*TJ ^cT: *' etc. 



The above comment has reference to the commentary 2 of 
Bhanu DIksita alias Ramasrama on the following line of verse 21 
in the Amarakosa v First Kanda ) : 



?rm rTK^r^^ ^r T^nrr^: i 



1. Catalogus Catalogorum, i, 110 b, 

2. Amarakosa with commentary VsOtyasadha or Ramasram! of Bhftuuji 
DIksita, son of Bhattoji DIksita ( Nirnayasagar Press, Bombay, 1915), 
p. 37. 



Miscellanea 135 

This identification proves that the present commentary was 
composed after the commentary of Bhanu Diksita on the Amara- 
kota. Bhanu Diksita or Ramasrama was the son of Bhattoji 
Diksita, whose date is about A. D. 1630, T Satvaraja, a disciple of 
Rama&rama wrote in 1641 A. D. 2 We may, therefore, conclude 
from these facts that Bhanu Diksita flourished between A. D. 1630 
and 1641 and as Haricaranadasa refers to Bhanuji Diksita's com- 
mentary on the Amarakosa in his present commentary DevasenS 
we must suppose that the latter was composed after 1641 A. D. 

Another limit to the above date may be furnished by the 
following facts, if the underlying identity of authorship presumed 
by us is correct : Haraprasada Shastri describes a work called SJH 1 - 
ST^T^ST in his Notices of Sanskrit Mss.' d It is ascribed to one 



and is in Bengali characters. Its subject is mentioned as 
The Ms is dated Saka 1602 ( = A. D. 1680). The 
name SHSKUKHH appears to have a Bengali tinge about it and if 
he is identical with the iHT^rW who composed the H^^RfniW as 
I presume him to be, we may be justified in the inference that 
the commentary Devasena of Haricarariadasa was composed between 
A, D. 1641 and 1680 or towards the middle of the llth century, 



1. Systems of Sanskrit Grammar by S. E. Belvalka*, Poona, 1915, p. 47. 

2. Ibid, p. 48 Genealogical table. 

3. Second Series, Vol. I f 1900, p. 90 Ms No. 95. 

12 [ Annals, B. O. B. I. ] 



EXACT DATE OF NAUKA OF GANGSRiMA. JADt 
( COM. ON THE RASATABANGINI OF BHANUDATTA ) 
1742 A. D. 

Dr. S. K. De states 1 that the commentary JSTauka by GangSrama 
JadI on the RasataranginI of Bhanudatta is " dated in 1732 A.B. " 
In another place 2 he remarks that Gangarama JadI "belongsto 
the second quarter of the 18th century ". I am not aware of the 
evidence on which Dr. De bases these statements. Presumably, 
however, it refers to the chronogram given by the author of the 
commentary at the end of the work. In a Ms. 8 of this commentary 
in the Govt. Mss Library at the B. O, R. Institute the relevant 
verses containing the chronogram run as under 



n 
\ 
n u n " 

the chronogram ( 3"f, ^tsp, fTt, ftfr ) is equal to the figures 
9,9,7,1, which when read in the inverse order give us Samvatl799 
as the date of compilation of the work, In fact the figures 1799 
are actually to be found in the Ms. as shown in the above verse- 
The date of Nauka as based on the above chronogram is A, D. 
1742 and not 1732 as stated by Dr. De, I am not sure if " 1732" 
is a misprint for " 1742 " in Dr. De's book under reference. In 
the Errata at the end of Dr. De's book this date is not corrected, 
in case it is a misprint. 



1. Sanskrit Poetics, Vol. I, p. 253. 

2. Ibid, p. 291. 

3. No. 113 of 1919-24. 



REVIEWS 

MYSTERY OF THE MAHABHARATA, VOL. I, BY N. V. 
THADANI, Published by BHARAT PUBLISHING HOUSE, 

KARACHI 

It is one thing to conceive an idea, and quite another to work 
it out thoroughly- Even in the ordinary routine of daily life, 
scores of ideas crowd an imaginative head, but almost all if not 
ALL as readily disappear to give place to different new-comers* 
A few, perchance, do cling to their place of birth, with a hope of 
growth and their final appearance, in full concrete form in the 
outer world of existence. Of these lingering few, one or two 
sufficiently force themselves, and compel the person to work. 
But even these, after a little of actual labour, tire the person, and 
he throws away the task half-done, growing despondent of the 
drudgery attaching thereto. So, to work out an idea completely, 
is, in itself, a matter of no small credit to the worker. The 
world may or may not appreciate and accept his work, but 
he is there all the while silently drudging on at his self- 
imposed task. 

Prof. Thadani's is a labour of this type. One can easily con- 
ceive the illimitable patience that the learned author had to 
practi&e, in systematically working out his problem and bringing 
it out in the form of a book, the first volume of which, has only 
recently been presented to the public, and the second, as the 
author promises, is to follow shortly. The real explanation of the 
mystery of the Mahabharata, is, we learn from the preface, to 
appear in the forth-coming second volume ; and the Introduction 
only supplies us an outline of what it is to be. The first volume 
of the work, as it were, is meant to prepare us for the reading of 
the second, and explains the thesis of the author, as far as the 
Vedas are concerned or, more properly, in author's own words 
in the preface, " the first volume ends with the Gods of the 
Ve<}as " ; and yet, this alon<-> covers no less than 500 pages ! I 



188 Annals of the Bkandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The origin of the work, as stated by the author, in the begin- 
ning of the Introduction, lay in " the idea of the MBh. as a great 
picture of a great Philosophy of life," occurring to him "al- 
most like a dream ". But the dream . was not allowed to pass 
unnoticed. He " pursued it for nearly eight years," and we have 
as the result, the work under review. 

So, Pr of. Thadani has worked his interpretations, apparently, 
from the Great Epic back to the Vedas, though the actual pre- 
sentation of the theme, as we gather from the volume in hand, ig 
to he quite the reverse. Howsoever that be, the new idea has 
been placed before the reader in all the details, and to follow 
them in the proper spirit, he is, to start with, asked by the author 
, to forget what we have, so long learnt to think of our sacred 
literature, especially about the MBh., that it is a history 
'itihasa'-- giving the story of the great fight on the Kuruksetra, 
To put it in the author's own words " the Sacred books ... deal 
with the one problem of all problems the truth of the life con- 
ceived in various ways. ... And all this can be demonstrated by 
means of the ancient method of interpretation, based on the 
analysis of words and names. ... " The author, in the present 
work, has, according to this ancient method, dealt with only the 
Vedas and the MBh.", but, believing that " no student of the 
original work of the Hindus can lightly dismiss this interpreta- 
tion,* Prof. Thadani has asked others to volunteer their assistance 
in this huge work initiated by him, as, " the principal Sanskrit 
works will all require a new intepretation ; not only in mass, bufe 
in data." 

Modern Oriental scholarship of the Europeans, followed by 
Indians, has, for more than the last half century, put all the 
ancient Hindu literature, to a minute scrutiny, and gleaned 
historical facts pertaining to the Indian people. Thus, apart from 
the philosophy contained therein, we have before us a connected 
real story of the Vedic people, how they actually lived and fared, 
where they came from, who the Dasyus were whom they had to 
fight with, and so on. The MBh. being understood to be an 
itihasa history first, is naturally read in that light, and we 
weep at the lamentations of the grieved there, jump with the fir? 



"Reviews 189 

in Bblma, look with awe upon Bhlsma and Drona in short, we 
treat the Panda vas, the Kauravas, nay, even Sri Krsna, as real 
human beings, who like us, had their span'of life in the mortal 
world, shared the joys and sorrows as we do even now, and so 
our hearts respond in sympathy towards whatever they say or 
do, and now we are asked to turn to the ancient method of 
interpretation and treat the Epic story as an allegory depicting 
the contest between the different systems of thought, such as 
Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, etc. 

This, of course, with regard to what an ordinary reader would 
say ; but the fact is, there are really very few people, who would 
readily pick up and follow any thing beyond the beaten path. 
And still, Prof. Thadani's work has an interest and importance 
In the light referred to above. 

It would be interesting to note here, that there have been 
a few scholars although only a few who have been 
in the field that Prof. Thadani has entered, putting 
forth the hypothesis that the whole, or a part of the Great 
Epic is an allegory, and Prof. Winternitz, in reviewing Mr. 
Dahlmann's Mahabharata, has conveniently summed up all. 
Eeferring to Mr. Dahlmann's hypothesis that " the marriage of 
the five Pandavas with Draupadi, the embodiment of the goddess 
Sri, is nothing but a symbolical representation of the joint posses- 
sion of the common property belonging to the undivided family 7 *, 
the great MBh. Scholar goes on " What Th. Goldstucker objects 
against Lassen's allegorical explanation of the polyandric 
marriage of Draupadi, holds good against all similar expla- 
nations, such as M. Bergaigne's mythical, and Mr. Dahl- 
mann's symbolical explanation." " Either polyandry existed 
as an institution when this allegory was made in that 
case there is no ground for considering a polyandric mar- 
riage as an improbable event in the history of the Pandavas 
themselves or it as little existed in their time as in the 
later history of India. In that case however, it would have offended 
the national sentiment, and no allegory of this kind could have entered 

a poet's mind, or obtained currency," " epic tradition in the 

mouth of the people was too strong to allow this essential and 



190 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Imtitute 

curious feature in the life of its heroes, to be changed, " and 
lastly, "... from every point of view the story of Draupadl 
and the five Pandavas has to be regarded as an ancient 
tradition illustrating an actual state of society, and in that sense 
as a " red piece of history ", and certainly not ( as Mr. Dahlmann 
thinks ) an invention of some teacher of law, who wantedto 
illustrate his legal theories by a fanciful symbolical marriage 
of five men ... Everybody ... will agree ... that the MBh. could 
never have become the national epic of India, if it had been 
merely an illustration of Dharmasastra with all its legal anti- 
quities/' 

To return to the volume in hand, a glance at the contents 
would give us a fair idea of what the work aims at 5 but before 
proceeding in that line it would be better to peep into the Intro- 
duction, where the author starts with '* As it is in the cell, so it 
is in the Brahmanda ", as the sole basis for his interpretation : 
" According to this idea, the Sanskrit language itself is conceived 
as a picture of the Brahmanda, reproducing by means of its vowels 
and consonants, general structure, samdhi rules and grammatical 
forms, the idea of the nucleus, cytoplasm, centrosomes and chro- 
mosomes of the cell, and the form, action and interaction of its 
constituent parts ; so that each expression, word or letter might 
be the mirror of a great science, a great philosophy, and a 
great religion all united together in one Truth." This has been 
explained at great length in the major portion of this volume, 
the cell ( ch. Ill ), the Golden Egg, or the Brahmanda ( oh. IV), 
physical science as found in our literature, ( ch. V ), the origin 
and character of Sanskrit ( ch. VI ) ; and it is in ch. VII that we 
come across the method of interpretation, as put forth by the 
author, and with authority too, to back him. 

Without going into details, which form the lot of the student 
and reader, and not of the reviewer, a few interesting interpreta- 
tions may be given : ELala, analysed according to the ecliptic 
method, denotes the cycle of Buddhi or the Sun completed in 
Prakritic Ether ; similarly Gaja denotes tbe relation of Purusic 
frakritic Ether, 



W 

Earn, of the Mahabharata which latter, is " great treatise on 
the subject matter of Breath or Prana ... " represents all seed, the 
essence of vegetable kingdom or the vegetable kingdom itself; 
while Eunti, analysed into Kum and ti, gives the meaning Earth 
for the former, and iti, meaning, 'that is to say' for the latter part 
of the word. So that we have Kunti standing for the Earth, a 
meaning further strengthened by her other name Prtha, identical 
with Prthivl, the Earth. According to the author, the Pandavas 
of whom, Arjuna, like Indra, stands for Heart-energy, likewise, 
represent the animal kingdom ; " and as our planet consists of all 
the five elements and is characterised by the energy of the Sun 
and the moon, both the kingdoms of life are conceived as born 
of her." 

^ I purposely desist from making any reference to the author's 
different interpretations regarding the characters and their 
activities in the Mahabharata, given with some detail in his 
Introduction, as, according to the promise of the author himself, 
Ms second volume mainly deals with the Great Epic, and it 
would be but right to look into the real mystery of the .Maha- 
bharata when we have that promised volume in hand. 

S. N. TADPATRIKAE 



THE MAH&BHARATA, critically edited by P. . S, 
Vol. I, Parts 1 & 2, published by V. RAMA8WAMI SASTUULIJ 
& SONS, MADRAS 

Among India's glorious literary heritage the Mahabharata, the 
great Epic of India, as Professor 1C. W. Hopkins styled it, occupies 
a foremost place as a finished piece of literary composition, a 
superb didactic work and as the accredited source of ancient 
historical tradition. The materials which it contains being 
invaluable to the students of history and philosophy, not to speak 
of literature, have compelled the International School of Oriental 
Scholars to focus their attention on the get up of a really critical 
edition based on almost all available manuscripts so as to make it 
a complete whole. Such an edition of rare value has been 
undestaken by the well known Oriental Institute of India, the 
Bhandarkar Oriental Besearch Institute of Poona, 

Coming nearer home the Kumbhakonam edition of the 
Mahabharata, which we hear is out of print, supplied the longfelt 
need for a book of that kind in the south of India. There is still 
the need for handy volumes of the Mahabharata which will be 
easily portable and can be handled with ease for ready reference. 
This is now satisfied by the enterprising publishing firm of 
Madras, Messrs* V. Ramaswamy Sastrulu & Sons, 292, Esplanade, 
Madras, It has been decided to publish the full work in a series 
of volumes, of which two parts are already out. They are 
edited by Professor P. P. S. Sastri of the Presidency College, Madras. 
There is clear evidence of the great care bestowed by Porf. Sastri 
in editing this work. This seems to be an endeavour to bring out 
a south Indian recension of the Mahabharata and to this extent the 
learned editor has utilised five important manuscripts. From 
what one can gather from the two parts before us, there is no 
doubt that the work will be accorded a popular welcome and will 
be an invaluable and useful addition to the editions already in the 
market. The value of the work is very much enhanced by a table 
of contents giving a running summary of important incident 
and an index indispensable to research scholars. 

V. R. ft. DIK8HITAB 



, FBANAYAMA ( PART I ) BY SWAMI KTJVALAYANANDA, 
Published by Kaivalyadhama Lonaola, priced at Es. 2-8, 
Pp. 156. 

In ancient India our ancestors built up a civilisation peculiar 
to this country. Their main efforts were concentrated on the 
attainment of the highest perfection and " liberation " of the 
human soul. By itself it was the most laudable aim. The 
individual soul is a parfc of the universal soul. This realisation 
of unity or oneness of the Jlvatman with Paramatrnan had to be 
realised. For this purpose they evolved a highly elaborate system 
of Yoga, consisting of physical and psychical processes which 
would help the individual to discover his inner essence and thus 
get absorbed in the Supreme. Life was not so complicated then, 
BO the individual could spend the greater part of it in the reali- 
sation of this aim. Detailed treatises were compiled for the 
guidance of the seekers after this Truth. But the political 
upheavals, that history records, put this wonderful education and 
training in the background. During the Muslim rule even the 
study of Sanskrit became a clandestine affair. Most of the 
Sanskrit literature became extinct. In modern times the in- 
dividual has become so much absorbed in political and economic 
struggle that he has almost forgotten that he has a soul. Even 
the body, the vehicle of the soul is neglected. This is due to the 
all-pervading influence of western civilisation. Darwin, the 
greatest scientist of the age, gave us the theory of the evolution 
of the species. Herbert Spencer developed the idea. But no one 
has paid the slightest attention to the evolution of the mind and 
the soul, which are the real powers behind the body. But now a 
reaction is setting in. Indians, specially, are now realising that 
the time has come for them to pay attention to their souls the 
only thing that belongs to them and which no one can take away 
from them. We might reasonably and proudly call it the renais- 
sance of the Indian thought Kamakrishna and Vivekananda 
set in ball rolling, Now the task has been seriously taken up tyr 
Mr. G-une, better known as Swami Kuvalayananda. 
13 [ Annals, B. O. R-IJ. 



194 Annals of ths Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

For reviving what is best in the Indian civilisation he is the 
most suited person, with his high ficln cation, love of truth, honesty 
of purpose, respect for learning, devotion to humanity and an 
\itfer disregard of materialism. The only reward that he possibly 
expects for his efforts and labour is the satisfaction that he has 
been of some service to his fellow human beings. He is trying to 
spread this Y "j^ 1 ^dge among as many people as he possibly can. 
With this end in view he has started a quarterly Journal under 
the name of Yoga-Mlmamsa, in which are embodied the results of 
his research work in this subject. 1 he book under review is one 
of the popular series intended for laymen, who want to start 
physical exercises which would have the way for spiritual 
advancement. It might come to that or might not. By itself the 
course of physical culture given herein is a great boon to 
humanity. 

The most prevalent human ailmentn, which are the curses 
of the modern civilisation are ( 1 ) cuberculosis, ( 2 ) digestive 
disorders and ( 3 ) nervous troubles. Other diseases take their 
source from them. 

Tuberculosis is the result of living in crowded towns. In 
modern times an open air life has become almost inaposssible, 
Even outdoor exercise has become a luxury. The lungs do 
not get enough of Oxygen and hence are weakened. This leads 
to the deadly disease, from which the mortality is very high in 
India and in the west. The respiratory organs require a great 
deal of Oxygen taken from fresh air to ward off these dangers 
to health. Pranayama supplies the requisite amount of Oxygen 
to the lungs, which keeps them in perfect condition. Proper 
respiration can be admirably secured by the exercises that go 
under the names of IPjjayi Kapalbhati and Bhastriks, so well 
described in this book. 

The disorders of the digestive organs are caused by sedentary 
work, lack of proper exercise and unwholesome food. This leads 
to the commonest trouble of constipation. In its turn it gives 
birth to various grave ailments. Perhaps it would be true to say 
that more than half of the troubles that human body suffers from, 
arise from the disorder of the stomach. Certain exercises des- 
cribed herehin, specially Kapalbhati and Bhastrika, give the 



Reviews -j^g 

much needed exercise to the abdominal muscles. The Colon gets 
the necessary pressure to evacuate itself. The bowels are thus 
made to move freely. This tends to keep the digestive system in 
perfect condition. 

Owing to the worry and strain of modern life, nervous 
troubles are very common, Every day we read of innumerable 
medicines and drugs advertised in the European papers for 
curing the jaded nerves. The author rightly claims that the 
Pranayama exercises would ward off nervous disorders. The 
blood is first enriched in Oxygen and then freely circulated 
throughout the human body. The glands get their necessary 
food and the nerves are toned up by this blood supply and some 
exercise. 

Apart from its value as physical culture, Pranayama is the 
basis of all spiritual development. By cleansing the Nadls it 
paves the way for " meditation ". The author has done well in 
not dwelling at length on this aspect of Pranayama. It must be 
followed under the personal supervision of an expert or else it is 
likely to have disastrous effects on human body end brain. 
Secondly, it is such a vast subject that brevity in its descrip- 
tion is apt to be dangerous. We hope that some day the author 
will give us a full and detailed description of that course. 

Prevention is always better than cure. So everyone who 
wants to be out of the clutches of these deadly disorders and 
diseases, is well advised to take up these exercises of Pranayama 
which take only about twenty minutes a day. The author has 
done his duty by placing at service of the humanity a detailed 
ascription of this course, 

The real value of this book lies in the fact that the author, 
a Sanskrit scholar of repute, has made a thorough study of the 
ancient and original literature on the subject. These ideas were 
then put to scientific tests in his laboratory and then interpreted 
in his usual simple but convincing style. Thus he has taken the 
help of science to give us, what for centuries had been considered 
a closed book of mystery. This book is bound to be received well 
by the public. We very anxiously look forward to the issue 
of more hand-books of this kind. 

M. S. CHE 




IP VETS ui- 

JLnnals of the 

Blianda,rka,r Oriental 

Research Institute, Poona 

ITolume XIII 
1931-32 



EDITED BT 

P B BHANDAKKAR MA Ph I> F A. S B , 
Carmichael Professor of Ancient Indian History and Culture 
Calcutta University Calcutta 

AND 

A B QAJENDRAGADKAB T A 
Professor of Sanskrit Elphmstone College Bombay 




Printed by V G Paianjpe MA LL B , r> Litt , at 
Bhandarkar Institute Piess 198 (17) Sadashiv > 

Poona No 2 and Published by 
S K BeKalkar M \ pb D Stcr*_tirv at the 
Bhand-irkar Oiiental Researcl Institute, 
POONA 

1932 



BHHNDHRKHR RIENTHL 
INSTITUTE, 



MANAGEMENT FOR 1930-33 



P.O., G.O.I.B,, G.B.B~i"o B' a**^*^*^ ' 
Governor of Bombay. ' '' " ' ' S ' * t} ** 

Vice-Presidents:- 

> Balasaheb Pant Pratiaidhi, B. A the Ruler of A TKT 

N jdrB?!! b pl sa J eb ^7 ad; ' th80hiefofr ^^ 

4 Br.,K. B. Pathak, B.A./ph. D. " ' ' ^ E ' 

5 K. S. Jathar, Bsq., c. I. E. 

Regulating Council for 19SO-SS : - 



Joint Trustees 



- B - 



B ' < Vice.0hair man 



- - " - -. ar-at 
Satdar O. N. Mujumdar, M. L. o. 



8+ 
9 









- A - ph - D - 

MW 

, M. A. 



M. A., D. Litt. 



> slli 

3 S S t 



. ... 






annually. 



t Wn . - , - 

T Dominated by Government, 



VOL. XIII] PARTS III- iv 

Annals of the 

Bhandarkar Oriental 

Research Institute, Poona 

Yolume XIII 

1931-32 

EDITED BY 

D. B. B HAND ARK AR, M. A , Ph. D., F, A, s. B. ? 
Carmichael Professor of Ancient Indian History and Cultuie, 
Calcutta University, Calcutta 

AND 

A. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, M. A., 
Professor of Sanskrit, Elphinstone College, Bombay 




Printed by V. G. Paranjpe, M. A., LL B., D Litt , at the 
Bhandarkar Institute Press, 198 (17) Sadashiv, 

Poona No. 2 3 and Published by 
S. K. Belvalkar, M. A. 5 ph. D., Secretary, at the 
Bhandarkai Oriental Research Institute, 
POONA 



1932 



CONTENTS 
VOL. XIII, PARTS III - iv 

( SlstiJuly 1932 ) 
ARTICLES : p ageg 

1 Gleanings from the Udayasundari-Katha by 

Jogesh Chandra Ghosh ... 197-205 

2 Kularrtava Tantra its extents and contents by 

Chintaharan Chakravarti, M. A. . . 206-211 

3 Some Notes on the Chronology of the Sena Kings 

of Bengal by Charu Chandra Dasa Gupta, M.A. 2 12-217 

4 The Malavas by Adrish Chandra Baner^i, M. A.... 218-229 

5 On the Date of Srikantha and the Brhat-Samhita by 

B. N. Krishnamurti Sarma, B. A. ( Hons. ) ... 230-249 

6 Pali Chronicles by 

Bimala Churn Law, Ph. D,, M. A., B, L. ... 250-299 

7 The Date of Harsa-Pulakesin War by 

Dr. A. S. Altekar, M. A., LL. B., D. Litt. ... 300-306 

8 The Age of Janaka and others by 

Vanamali Vedantatirtha, M. A. ... 307-325 

9 Arthasastra Re-examined by 

V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar, M. A. ... 326-330 

MISCELLANEA 

10 Philosophical Aspect of Ahimsa ( substance of the 

lecture delivered ) by Prof. Dr. Betty Heimann 331-334 

11 A Note on Siddhiviniscaya and Srstipariksa by 

H. R. Kapadia M. A, ... 335-336 

12 Notes on Indian Chronology by P. K. Gode, M. A. 

(xi) Date of Ragamala of Pundarlka - Vitthala 
(xii) Date of Sumalivi]aya ? s commentary on 
the Raghuvamsa (xiii) A Manuscript of a 
Commentary on the Raghuvamsa called Praka- 
ika and its probable date (xiv) A Manuscript 
of Mallinatha's Commentary dated Samvat 
1837 ... 337-345 



Annals of the 
Bhandarkar Oriental 
Research Institute, Poona 

VOL. XIII ] APRIL - JULY 1932 [ PARTS HI-IV 



GLEANINGS FROM THE UDAYASUNDARI-KATHA 

BY 

JOGENDRA CHANDRA GHOSH, Puratattw-vicaksana ; CALCUTTA 

Udayasundarl-katha is a Campu-kavya, i. e. a work composed 
in prose interspersed with verses. It was written by a poet named 
Soddhala in the llth century A. D. He was born in Lata-desa 
( South Gujarat ) and was the court-poet of the three successive 
royal brothers of Konkana, named Cchittara/ja, Nagarjuna and 
Mummuniraja, whose capital was at Sthanaka, the modern 
Thana. The ascertained date of Cchittaraja is 1026 A. D., and 
that of Mummuniraja is 1060 A. D. 1 For sometime he graced the 
court of Vatsaraja of Lata also He has given an account of his 
family in the first Ucchvasaka or chapter of his book, which con- 
tains some very interesting historical information. As far as we 
know, this information has not hitherto been utilized by any 
scholar. 

Soddhala writes that in the past there was a king named 
Siladitya, whose capital was at ValabhL His only younger 
brother was named Kaladitya. 2 In the family of this Kala- 
ditya was born Candapati, whose son was Sollapeya, Sollapeya's 

1 Bom. Gazetr. Vol. I, Pt. II, p. 542ff. 

2 Pp. 3-4. 



1&8 Annals of ths Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

son was Sura, from whom, by his wife PampavatI was born 
our poet Soddhala, 1 Siladitya had a long struggle with DharmR. 
pala of the Mandhatr-vamsa, king of Northern India ( Uttara. 
paths). Through the tact and prowess of Kaladitya, Dharma- 
pala^was besieged in a fort and had to submit to the authority 
of Siladitya but was restored to his kingdom. 2 Siladitya, 
now well established in his vast kingdom, thought of appointing 
an able administrator for his extensive territory. One night 
before going to L sleep he was thinking as to whom to appoint 
to this responsible post, But as he could not come to a decision, 
he resigned himself to the providence of that deity through 
whose grace he acquired his dominion, and fell asleep. In the 
third part of the night his Eaja-laksm! (royal prosperity) appeared 
before him and he was roused from his sleep. She told him that 
she had come to advise him about the question of the appointment 
of his chief minister, over which he was troubling himself. She 
gave him a seal of gold and directed him to entrust Kaladitya 
with this seal and also with the general superintendence ( sarvddhi- 
karasvamin ) of his kingdom She also told him that this Kaladitya 
was an attendant (gana) of Siva who went by the name of 
Kayastha. He was so named because he was in such close proxi- 
mity that he was considered to be iu the body of the god, ( sa ch- 
astamurtera bhtigavato jaiamaylm mwrtim adhisthitasy = asanna-sa- 
Mcaratvena kaye sthitatvat kaijastha iti ). This attendant of Siva 
named Kayastha, under the orders of this god incarnated himself 
as Kaladitya, his brother, to protect his Baja-laksml This 
Kayastha-Kaladitya, the ornament of the Ksstriyas ( ksatnya- 
vibhusana) was then entrusted with the protection of the 
kingdom. 3 

Kaladitya' s descendants then multiplied and were divided into 
many branches. They spread themselves to metropolitan towns 
for the triumph of the Ksatriyas and as supporters of the creeper 
of royal prosperity. They came to be known as Valabha 
Kayasthas as they hailed from ValabhI. 4 

1 Pp. 11-12. 

2 Pp. 4-7. 
5 Pp. 9-11. 
4 P. 11. 



Gleanings from the Udayasundari-Katha 199 

Soddbala's father died while he was a child. He was brought 
up by his maternal uncle Gangadhara, who was a friend of Yogi- 
raja, the king of Lata. Soddhala Hmself was a class-mate of 
prince Sirhharaja, son of king Klrtiraja, king of Lata. Their 
preceptor was one Oandra. Klrtiraja was the father of king 
Vatsaraja who was the patron of Soddhala. Soddhala's forefathers 
for generations held the post of Dhruva Prabhus ( dhruva- 
vrtteh prabhuh ) of the districts of Sikkaraharlya seventy-two, 
Vahirihara seven hundred, Annapalllya seven hundred and 
of other districts, of the Lata country. 1 Dhruva denotes 
" a fixed or permanent hereditary officer in charge of records 
and accounts of a village, " the Talati and Kulkarni of 
modern times. One of the chief duties of the Dhruvas was 
to see that revenue farmers did not take more than the royal 
share. The name is still in vogue in Cutch where the village 
accountants are called Dhru and Dhmva. Dhru is also a common 
surname among the Nagar Brahmanas and Modh and other 
Vanias in Cutch, Gujarat and Kathia vara. 2 

Now, who could these Dharmapala and Siladitya be ? Both 
are historical names and there is no difficulty in identifying them, 
There are more than one Dharmapala, but this Dharmapala king 
of Ufciarapatha, could be 110 other than the king of the same name 
of the Pa la, dynasty of Bengal. That Dharmapala was the emperor 
of the Utlarapatha finds support from his own charter L e. the 
Khalimpur copper-plate grant.* From lines 27 and 28 of this 
plate we find that many kings of the Jambu-dvlpa ( In.lia ) 
assembled at Pataliputra to do homage to him. These expressions 
are also found in the charters of his successors. 

Soddhala described Dharmapala to be of the ' Mandhatr vamsa. ' 
There has been much speculation about the caste of the Pala 
dynasty of Bengal. But here is a positive and disinterested piece 
of evidence, which sets all doubts at rest. Besides, this evidence 
is contemporary, for in Soddhala's time, in the eleventh century, 

1 Pp. 151-2. 

2 Bom. Gazetr. Vol. I, Pt, I, pp. 81-82. 

3 Ep. Ind. Vol. IV, p. 243. 



200 Annals of the BhandarJcar Oriental Research Institute 

the Pala dynasty was still reigning. All other accounts except 
that of Haribhadra about the caste of the Palas are later than 
Soddhala's, This is not all. The fact finds corroboration from tie 
same Khalimpur charter. In verse 11 it has been described that 
Mahendra having suddenly found the advancing army of 
Mandhata in close quarters and being unable to form an opinion 
of their number, owing to the volume of dust raised by them, 
which whitened the ten quarters, became alarmed and dis- 
tracted. Mr. A 4 K. Maitra in the Gaudalekhamala has right- 
ly held that here Maheudra refers to Indrayudha, king of 
Kananj and has an allusion to his defeat at the hands 
of Dharmapala He did not s however, explain why Dharma- 
pala f s army had been compared to the army of Mandhata, 
Mandhata is said to be a friend of Indra, but no explanation has 
been given by anybody why he has been introduced in this verse 
as an adversary. There must be some [justification for the poet 
for going against the mythological tradition. The reason for 
this extraordinary action on the part of the poet, seems to us to be 
to indicate that Dharmapala was a descendant of Mandhata. 
This allusion to Mandhata was quite intelligible in Dharmapala's 
time though it now requires elucidation. From this we are not, 
however, to conclude that the Palas were really the descendants 
of Mandhata. But this much we can say with certainty that 
they passed for as such, otherwise Soddhala, a poet of a distant 
province like Gujarat of the eleventh century, had no reason or 
interest to describe Dharmapala as of the Mandhatr-vamia. 

Now Siladitya mentioned by Soddhala can be no other than a 
Siladitya of the Valabhl dynasty, for his capital was at ValabhI. 
This Siladits a was a contemporary of Dharmapala, who flourished 
in the eighth century. Now of the seven Siladityas of the Valabhl 
dynasty, the last three reigned in the eighth century. Of these Sila- 
ditya VII might be the person who came into conflict with Dharma- 
pala. The ascertained dates of the last three Siladityas are - Si- 
laditya V. - 722 A. D. ; Siladitya VI, - 760 A. D. and Siladitya VII. 
- 766 A, D/i We have no information of Dharmapala's having 
met with any reverse at the hands of any king of the Valabhl 

1 Ep. Ind. Vol. V, Pp. 69-70, 



Gleanings frcm the Udayasundart-Katha 201 

dynasty. But we have evidence to show from the Khalimpur 
charter that he granted villages for the maintenance of the 
Brahmanas of the Lata country. Besides from verse 5 of the 
Monghyr grant of his son Devapala, 1 it appears that he ( Dharma- 
pala) carried his conquering expedition as far as Kedara-fclrfcha 
in the north, Ganga-sagara in the south and to Gokarna-tlrtia, 
probably in the west. There is a celebrated place of pilgrimage 
named Gokarna even now, resorted to by large number of 
pilgrims, in Korakana in the Bombay Presidency. 

Soddhala calls himself a Kayastha and at the same time claims 
to be a Ksatriya. There can be no doubt as to his claim to the 
Ksatriyahood, as his book containing the assertion was read 
before two well-known Rajput princes, viz. the Calukya Vatsa- 
raja of Lata and the Silara Mummuniraja of Konkana. If his 
mythical story of the origin of the word Kayastha and of 
the Kayastha caste, is given credence to, we should admit that 
the Kayastha caste originated in the eighth century with 
Kaladitya. And this Kaladitya was a scion of the Valabhl 
dynasty which was admittedly of the Ksatriya caste. But this is 
more than what we are prepared to believe. As far as we have 
been able to trace, the word Kayastha as the name of a post can 
be found in epigraphy in the fifth century, in the Damodarpur 
copper-plate grants. 2 It is distinctly stated in the Brahma- 
purana that Kayastha was an officer, as in * Media dutasca 
kayastha ye c~anye karmakarinah' ( Chap. XL IV, V. 37). The 
word also occurs in Mrcchakatikam, Yajfiavalkya-samhita, Yisnu- 
samhita &c., in the same sense. That in the Mrcchakatikam 
Kayastha Dhanadatta was a Brahmana is apparent from the 
following address of Carudatta to SresthI and Kayastha : 

' Bhoh, adhikrtebhyah svasti hamho niyuktah, apt kusalam bhavatam ' 

( Act IX ). 

Here by the word * niyuktah ' ( appointed ) the SresthI and the 
Kayastha were meant. Now according to Manu, chap, II, verse 
127 'kusalam 9 (happiness) should be asked of Brahmanas only. 

1 Ind. Ant.Vol. XXL Pp. 254-257. 
3 Ep. Ind. Vol. XV, P. 130. 



02 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

It may be argued, how can a SresthI (merchant) be aBrahmana? 
There appears to be no bar. Carudatta, although a Brabmana 
was a Sarthavaha ( merchant ) for three generations and lived in 
sresthi-catvara. 

The earliest mention of Kayastha as a caste-name that we 

have hitherto been able to find, is ip the Sanjan copper-plate 

grant of the Rastrakuta king Amoghavarsa I, dated 871 A. D, 1 

It was written by Dharmadhikarana-senabhogika Gunadhavala 

of the Valabha-Kayastha-vamsa, i. e. the very Kayastha family 

to which our poet belonged. It does not appear from the state- 

ment of Soddhala that there were any other sections of Kayasthas 

than his own in existence in his time in his part of the country, 

But the distinctive adjective Valabha, signifying the locality of 

its origin, clearly shows that there were Kayasthas other than 

the Valabha, even in the ninth century. Although the word 

Kayastha originally meant the name of a post, people following 

the occupation for generations came to be known as a distinct 

caste. This will be clear, if we look to the caste-names of India, 

which are mostly occupational names. It is not unlikely that 

Kayastha as a caste commenced formation from the 8th 

century. It is difficult to say when the mythical stories about 

the origin of the different sections of the Kayasthas came into 

existence. The story of the origin of the Valabha-Kayaethas is 

not of later date than the eleventh century. The Citragupta- 

origin of the Kayasthas is, perhaps, sllll later. The earliest men- 

tion of Citragupta as one of the ten names of Yama is found in 

the Baudhayana Dharma-sutra. He has not become a writer of 

Yama even then, The earliest epigraphic mention of Citragupta 

having any connection with the Kayasthas is found in a charter 

of Govindacandradeva of Kanauj, dated 1115 A. r>. 2 This plate was 

written by a Vastavya-Kayastha Thakkura named Jalhana, who 

hasheen described as ' Karamk-odgato wdyanis= Citragupt-cpamo 

gtmaih ' i. e. born of a Karanika family, resembling Citragupta in 

qualities ( as a writer I This was only a prelude. From this 

' ihe ide " of descent from him was 



. Ind. Vol. XVIII, Pp 235ft 



Q-leanings from the Udayzeundari-Katha 203 

conceived. Poet Srlharsa of Naisadhlya-carita was a contempo- 
rary of king Jayacandra, grandson of king Govindacandradeva, 
king of Kanauj, mentioned above. He described Citragupta as 
' Kayastha ' and makes him present at the Svayanivara-sabha of 
DamayantI, along with Agni, Indra, Yama & c . Jayacandra 
flourished towards the latter part of the 12th century. It may, 
therefore, be surmised that the legend of the Citragupta descent 
of some sections of the Kayasthas dates from the 12tL century. 
It is very curious that although there are ample references to 
Kayasthas in epigraphy, there is no mention of their Citragupta- 
descent, not even in their own family prasastts. 

We have seen that the Valabha Kayasthas are mentioned in 
epigraphy and in Sanskrit literature, but they are not heard of 
now-a-days. Where are they gone ? Are they all extinct? It is 
hard to believe that such an influential section of the Kayasthas 
died out altogether. Let us see if any clue can be found of their 
present whereabouts. There is a sect of Brahmanas called Balam 
Brahmanas, who resided in Vala or ValabhI. They were the 
family priests of the Kayasthas residing there. These Brahmanas 
quarrelled with the Kayasthas, their Yajarnanas and left the 
place for Dhundhuka. 1 Now this sect name of the Brahmanas 
no doubt, was derived from Vala or Vala-grama. We may, 
therefore, expect that the Kayasthas of Vala came similarly to be 
called Balam. In fact we find mention of a Valamya Kayastha 
donor in a pillar inscription of Bhinmal, dated 1206 A. D, 2 We 
have seen that the forefathers of Soddhala held for generations 
the post of Dliruva-Prabttu ( dhruva-vrtteli prabhuh ). We have 
already shown that the Dhruvas were village accountants 
and their posts were hereditary. The Dhruva-Prabhus were 
district accountants, having under them village accountants. 
By holding the po^t for generations, they perhaps came to be 
known as Dhruva-Prabhus, We Gnd in the Bhinmal inscriptions 
that in some cases the writers of them were Dhruvas, which is 
the legitimate duCy of the Kayasthas. So these Dhruvas were 
most probably of the Kayastha caste. There is a section of 



1 Bom. G-azetr. Kafchiawar Population, p. 673. 
I Bom. Gazetr. Vol. I, Pt. I, p. 474, 



$04 Anwls of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Instthifa 

writers in the Bombay Presidency, who are called Dhruva- 
Prabhus. They say that they are descended from Dhruva, the 
son of king Uttanapada. We believe they are the Valabha 
Kayasthas, and have completely forgotten their old tradition. 
As they are called Dhruva-Prabhu, they are connecting them- 
selves with Dhruva, the epic hero. 

These Dhruva-Prabhus claim to be of the same stock as fclie 
Pattana-Prabhus, another writer caste of the Bombay Presidency, 
This is admitted by the Pattana-Prabhus also. Their epithet of 
Patfcana is derived from their residence in Pattana or Patan, 
They are also called Patare or Patharlya. In the Sahyadn-khanda 
of the 8kanda-Putana their descent has been traced from a king 
named Asvapati of the solar race of Ksatriyas. Under a curse 
from Bhrgu Rsi his descendants have been degraded from the 
kingly office to that of a writer. ( Ch. 27 and 28 ). Details of 
these Prabhus will be found in the Bom. Gaztr. Vol. XVIII, Ft, I, 
pp. 185-2b5. 

A stone inscription of the time of king Hammlr of Rantham- 
bhar, ( 1288 A. D. ), found in the Kotah State in Rajpufcana, con- 
tains an eulogistic description of the minister of Fammira. The 
family belonged to the Katariya Kayastha varhsa, who went there 
from Mafchurapura. This Katariya, apparently, is a scriptic 
mistake for Patharlya. We have not heard of any section of 
Kayasthas going by the name of Katariya. 

Svam! Vidyananda in his Comprehensive History of the 
Kayasthas has identified the Valabha Kayasthas with the Valmika 
Kayasthas, but he has not given his reasons for thinkiDg so, The 
Valmika Kayasthas trace their descent from Citragupta, v;hereas 
the Valabha Kayasthas, we have seen, are descended from Kala- 
ditya. Besides ifc is doubtful whether Valmika can be derived 
from Valabha, Not only this, he has in his concluding sentence 
asserted that ' the kings of Valabhi were Kayasthas of a Sree 
Citragupta descent' Because a scion of the family and his des- 
cendants by pursuing the Kayastha profession became Kayasthas, 
therefore, the whole dynasty was Kayastha. A fine argument 
indeed I 



Gleanings from th& Udayasundarl- Katha 205 

Pandit Gangasamkara Pan coll, a Nagar Brahmana, on the 
other hand thinks that the Valabhi kings were Sipahl Nagars\ 
. e, the Nagar Brahmanas, who took to fighticg to defend their 
country. 2 He also says that a section of the Nagar Brahmaiias 
was called Citragupta. Another section again was called Bhatta"' 
It is very strange that Bhatia Nagar is a well known division of 
the Kayasthas. 



1 Nri'/aiotpatti, p. 62n. 

2 Ibid, pp 61-62. 

3 Ib.d, r 59 

2 [ Annals, B, Q. R I]. 



KULARNAVA TANTRA ITS EXTENT AND CONTENTS 



BY 

CHINTAHARAN CHAKRAVARTI, M. A. 

According to the colophons of the published editions of the 
Kularnava Tantra the entire work consists of 125000 verses and 
the published portion ( which covers only about 2000 verses ) is 
stated to form only the fifth part of the whole thing. This is 
styled Urddhvamnaya Tantra. The entire work of which the 
extent is referred to here is not known to have been found any- 
where. Some manuscripts containing only a number of verses 
more than the published 2000 are however sometimes reported 
to exist. But we know of verses and topics stated to have 
been taken from the Kularnava which are nofc met with here, 
It is necessary, therefore, to take stock of all materials attri- 
buted to the Kularnava though some of the attributions may 
evidently be later and open to doubt. 

The Kularnava, as it has been published by Arthur Avalon 
and others, consists of seventeen chapters or ullasas. The Banglya 
Sahitya Parisat of Calcutta, however, has two manuscripts 
which contain an eighteenth chapter as well. 1 

Topics not included in the published version of the Kularnava 
are found in several manuscripts 2 to have been ascribed to it, 
Of these mention may be made of Kahkasahasranoman ( one 
thousand names of the Goddess Kali), Gartopatipaficanga (five 
essentials of the worship of Gane6a ), JDurga-dakaradi-sahasra* 
namastctra (one thousand names of Durga the initial letter of 
each of which is d \ JDevz-svarupostuti (the hymn of the exact 
nature of the Goddess ), tiaktakrama ( the order of worship of the 
Saktas \ tiyamakavaca ( the talisman of Syama or Kali ) etc. etc. 

Some of the verses attributed to the Kularnava in works like 
the Kaulavall of Jnanananda Paramahamsa and Tantrasara of 

1. 0. Chafcravarti Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Bangiya Sahitya Pariqat 
( Snhitya Parisat Patrika Vol. XXXVIII, p. 243 ), 

2, Cf. Catalogus Catalogorum of Aufrecht under Kularnava Tantra. 



Kularnava Tantra Its Extent and Contents 207 

Krsnananda Agamavaglsa could not be traced either in the pub- 
lished editions of the work or in the Sanskrit Sahitya Parisat 
Manuscript of it, which we are going to describe below. Of these 
verses reference may be made to the long extract in the Kaulatali 
(IX, 31ff ) which appears to have been ascribed to the Kularnava 
as also the verses in the Tantra sara pertaining to the determina- 
tion of the Pak&a for initiation and the denunciation of the un- 
initiated. 

A purely Vaisnava work the Isftna&ariiMta 1 dealing with 
the greatness of the well-known Vaisnava reformer Caitanya 
is also represented as forming part of the Kularnava. 

It cannot be stated if all these detached materials formed part 
of the Kularnava Tantra, for such attributions are not infrequent- 
ly imaginary and unreliable and they are occasionally different 
in different manuscripts. 2 But the fact thai; the Kularnava con- 
sisted of more materials than what are found in the published 
version may be correct in view of the definite statement that it 
is only the fifth part of the whole work. Thus these detached 
materials or at least some of them might not unlikely have 
formed part of the big work or belonged to different versions 
of the work if not to entirely separate works bearing same or 
similar names. That the existence of more than one version of 
the work or the denomination of different works by its name, was 
recognised seems to be evident from the introductory portion of 
the Kaulavali. This refers to the Kularnava twice ( not unlikely 
on account of the existence of two different versions' 5 of the work ) 
in the course of enumerating the works on which it is bassd. 

1. A manuscript of this work is in the collection of the Vahgnja Sahitya 

Parisat. One manuscript of the work has been described by Rajendra- 
lala Mitra in his Notices af Sanskrit Manuscripts I 824 

2. Chakravarti op cit. p. 246f. 

3. Similar is the case not only with several other Tantra works but also 
with more than one Smrti and Purana works ss well. Sometimes the 
same name is found to have been used in connection with similar or 
different works with qualifications like laghu (small) and brhat 
( big ). Thus to mention only a few, we have Haritasmrti and Laghu- 
Haritasmrti, Manu and Brhan-Manu, Markandeya Purana and Bihan- 
Markandeya Purana, miatantra and Brhan-nilatantra, Nintina, 
Brhan nirvana and Mahamrvana Tantra. In this connection see, 
gchrader *- Pancaratra and Ahirbudhnya 8amhtta p 13, 



208 Annals of the Bhandarkar Osiental Research Institute 

Besides there are several manuscripts of a work called gatlha- 
kulatnava in the Madras Oriental Library. The name of the book 
as given in the DtsciipUve Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscripts i-i tie 
Oriental Libtary, Mad; as 1 is ga?bka-kulurnava ; but a colophon of the 
twenty-fourth Patala ( as quoted in the catalogue ) gives the name 
as garbha-\aulagama. 

Several manuscripts of an entirely different work bearing the 
same name, garbha-kaulagama, ars also in the said Library. Two 
works of the name of Kalt-kula? nava and Laksrm-kularnava have 
been lef erred to by Raghunafcha in the bibliographical list given 
by him in the beginning of his extensive compilation Agama* 
tatttavilaea 8 

We have actually a complete work which styles itself as the 
Kalarnava but has very little agreement with the published edi- 
t.ona of the work. It is a unique thing in respect of contents which 
agree more with those of the Y^ni 'lardra than with what we have 
in the published Kularnava. A manuscript of the work is in the 
Library of the Sanskrit Fahitya Parisat of Calcutta/ The work in 
the manuscript is complete in twelve chapters, while the published 
editions have, as has already been pointed out, seventeen chapters. 
But owing to its smaller extent it cannot be stated to have 
preserved a shorter version, as there exists marked difference 
between it and the published text. The latter work calls itself 
MafiU aha^ja ( the great secret ) and ^arvagamottamottaira (the 
Irsfc of the best of agamas ) while the work in manuscript styles 
itself KidUcara-rahasya ( secret of kula rites ), 

The subjects treated of in the work are as follows ' - 
Chapter I The excellence of Kula practices. 

CT anler II The utility of the five objects of worship e. g. 
wins, meat, fish, meal ( inurtra ) and sexual union, 

1. Vol XII, flos 5599 3C05. 

2. I? L. Mitra Notices of Sanskrit Manusci ipts Vol IS. 

8 A short description of the Ms by tha present writer has appeared m 
the Sanskrit orgaa of the Parisat Sanskrit Sahitya Parisat ( Vol. 
XIV, p. 269 ff). 



Kularnava Tantra Its Extent and Contents 209 

Chapter III The details of the Kula form of worship and the 
sancfcification of the materials for the worship. 
For further details of the subject reference has 
been made to the Anandapatala ( foL 15b ). 

Chapter IV Worship of cakra or mystic circle. 

Chapter V Description of different cakras which are enume- 
rated to be five in number e. g,, Rajacakra, Deva- 
eakra, Kulacakra, Rasacakra and Srlcakra. 

Chapter VI Importance of the worship of the female organ of 
generation which is stated to be the abode of 
various deities. It is definitely asserted that the 
male organ is the symbol of the Supreme God 
Siva and the female organ that of M ah am ay a 
the Supreme Goddess. 1 

Chapter VII Statement of the mantra for the worship ( man- 
troddhara ). 

Chapter VIII - Worship of Yonipitha. 

Chapter IX Secret worship. Every act in sexual enjoyment 
is here conceived of as a material for worship. 
Kissing is the sandal-paste, beating the breast 
the flower and so on. 2 

Chapter X Utility of worship on particular days. The 
tenth chapter of the published Kularnava is also 
devoted to the same topic. But except for a few 
preliminary verses there is scarcely any agree- 
ment between the tenth chapters of the two works. 
The tenth chapter in our manuscript after re- 



M 

I ( fo1 ' 26b > 



fo1 - 35b > 



210 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

ferring to the importance of worship on parti- 
cularly auspicious days goes on to describe the 
origin of wine. It is stated that the goddess 
Sura ( wine ) appeared at the time of the churning 
of the ocean in the guise of a beautiful maiden, 
When she was eagerly sought after by gods like 
Visnu she assumed a liquid form, portions of 
which were taken by the gods each of whom was 
thus satisfied 

Chapter XI Preparation of wine and description of the five 
objects of worship ( wine etc, ). 

Chapter XII Hymn and talisman of the female organ of 
generation ( tftfotrfcr and qtf^rg- ). 



Some verses especially dealing with kula rites are found to 
be common to more than one Tantra. Some of the verses of the 
Parisat Manuscript under description also belong to this class 
Of these :-- 



fol. I6a 
is a well known couplet. 



u ( fol. 39a ) 
\ 
RT: \\ 

u ( fol. 40a ) 

These two extracts are also found in Kall-Tantrd> as IV, 5-6 
and IV. 18-19. 

Now a word about the position to be assigned to the work in 
the domain of Kaula literature. Among the followers of the Kula 
form of worship two graduated types are recognised e. g. the 
Purvakaulas and the Uttarakaulas. According to Laksmldhara, 
who commented on the Saundaryalahari of Samkaracarya, the 
Piirvakaulas took recourse to a symbolical form of worship 

1. Sanskrit SShitya Parisat edition, 



Tantra- Its 



whereas the Utfcarakaulas offered their worship to the actual 
organ of a maiden. 1 ouai 

From a comparison of the nature of contents of the published 
edition and the Sanskrit S^a Parisat copy of J 



*- ~ .. *v Nsc*.u.u, l y a jrarisat copy of the > 

would appear that the published edition belongs to the 

a symbolic interpretation 2 of the five tnit<n<t n* ^ -, . 

/. 7 j. ^ TT- , tuiioas or ODjects of worship 

so essential to the Kaulas. 

The Sanskrit Sahitya Parisat copy of the work, however 
seems to be a work belonging to the Uttarakaulas who are re-' 
presented as being engaged in the crudest form of Sex-worship 



\ 

f- Laksmldhara's Commentary on Saun- 
daryalahari ( Mysore Government Oriental Library Series ) p. 130, 
under verse 41. 

V. 107112. 



SOME NOTES ON THE CHRONOLOGY Off THE 
SENA KINGS OF BENGAL 

BY 
CHARU CHANDRA DASA GUPTA, M. A. 

A storm of debate and discussion has centred round the 
problem of the chronology of the Sena kings of Bengal since the 
beginning of the early part of the nineteenth century. Writing 
about the date of Laksmanasena's accession, Smith observes, 
Ballal Sena was succeeded in A. D. 1119 by his son Laksmana- 
sena," ( EHI, P. 419 ). He based his observation on the assump- 
tion that the first year of the Laksinana-samvat or La-Sam * as 
the first year oflLaksmapasena's reign, and ?vhich Dr. Kielhora 
calculated' to be October 7, A, D. 1119, ( IA. Vol. XDT.p.lff). 
The late Dr. Kielhorn based his arguments on a statement in 
Abul Fazl's Akbarnama which TUBS thus : " In the country of 
Banga ( Bengal) dates are calculated from the beginning of the 
reign of Laksmapa Sena, and that from that period till now there 
have been 465 years. " It is further stated therein that at the 
time to which the writer refers, there had elapsed 1506 years of 
the Salibahana or Saka era and 1641 years of the era of Vikrama- 
ditya. ( Ibid ). A calculation of this date enabled Dr. Zielhorn 
to ascertain a date which he took at 1119 A. D. ( Ibid ). But there 
are difficulties in the ascertainment of the Laksmara Senrvat, 
The copper-plate grant of Siva Singha which bears the date 
4 La-Sam 293 Sravana vadi 7 Gurau, Saka Ib21, Sfirhvatl455' 
leads us to conclude that the Laksnaana-fiamvat began in A. D, 
1107, and not in 1119 A. D, as Dr. Kielhorn seems to have esta- 
blished. The question is thus not yet settled and the validity of 
Kielhorn's conclusion has also been questioned on astronomical 
grounds ( JA8B. 1926 t p. 365-89 ). Moreover, it is very striking 
that the Sena kings of Bengal never use the era which they ate 
said to have established, The Barrackpur copper-plate of Vijaya- 
sena is dated in 62nd regnal year, the Naihati copperplate of 
Vallalasena in llth regnal year, the Anulia, the Govindapur, the 
Tarpanadlghi copper plates and the Dacca Image inscription of 



Some Notes en the Chrcnology cf Hie Sena Kings of Bengal 213 

Laksmanasena are dated in 3rd, 2nd, 2nd and 3rd regnal years 
respectively, the Edilpur copper-plate of Kesavasena in 3rd regnal 
year, the Madanpada and the Calcutta Sahitya Parisat copper- 
plates of Visivarupasena in 14th regnal year. ( Inscriptions of 
Bengal, By N. G. Mujumdar, Vol. Ill, pp. 57-149 ). This is a 
very remarkable fact which conclusively proves that the Senas 
never used the Laksmana samvat. Even the records of Kesava- 
sena and Visvarupasena, the two sons of Laksmanasena, form no 
exception to this rule. But it is all the more strange to see that 
the era was used in Behar and there eame to be associated with 
a line of Sena kings who are described as lords of Plthi. The 
Janibigha Inscription of king Jayasena of Plthi is dated in the 
year 83 of the Laksmana Era and the two Bodh Gaya epigraphs 
of Buddhasena, the father of Jayasena bears the dates 51 and 
74 of the Laksamanasena Era. Thus the Laksmanasena Era 
which was never used by the Sena kings of Bengal was frequent- 
ly used by the lords of Plthi. It is therefore natural to conclude 
that the Senas of Bengal had scarcely to do anything with the 
Laksmana samvat. ( Sir A.eutosh Silver Jubilee Volume, Orienta- 
lia, pt. 2, p. 5 ). 

The problem, therefore, stands where it had originally been. 
Let us therefore try to see if anything can be made out from a 
study of bhe inscriptions, the Danasagara and the Adbhutasagara. 
Writing in JBAS, January 1930, Mr. P. C. Barat, B. A. has re- 
adjusted the chronology of the following Sena rulers basing his 
arguments mainly on the evidence furnished by the Danasagara 
and the Adbhutasagara : 

Name Date of birth Date of accession Date of retirement 

or death 

Vijayasena A. D, 1069 A. D. 1095 A. D. 1158 

Ballalasena A. D. 1094 A. D. 1158 A. D. 1168 

Laksmanasena A. D. 1119 A. D. 1168 A. D. 1182 

( JBAS. January 1930 ) 

The Danasagara and the Adbhutasagara are two Sanskrit 
works attributed to Ballalasena. We know of 4 mss. of the- 
Danasagara viz. those belonging to the India Office Library, the 

3 [ Annals, B. O. R. I.[ 



214 Annals of the Bhandartcar Oriental Research Institute 

Asiatic Society of Bengal, Raja Vinaya Krsna Deb Bahadur and 
Praeya-vidyamaharnava Nagendra ISFath Vasu. In the mss. in 
possession of the India Office Library and Mr, Nagendra Hath 
Yasu we have the following verse : 

4 Nikhila-bhupa-cakra-tilaka-iSrlmad-Ballalasena-devena I 
Purne Sasi-nava-dasamita-sakavarse Danasagaro racitah n ' 

The former ms. gives the date in the numerical figures also 
and the latter contains two more verses by way of elucidating 
the date. The passage may lead us to assume that Ballalasena 
was alive in S. 1091 = 1169 A. D. This assumption is confirmed 
by certain passages of the Adbhutasagara which contain dates to 
show that he was alive in S. 1090 = 1168 A. D. This book was 
examined by many scholars including the late Sir E. G, Bhandar- 
kar and the late Mm. H. P. Sastrl. In 1905 Mm. Muralldhar Jha 
collected 7 mss. from different places and edited the book. The book 
contains ' Atha Mithila-mahl-mahendra-nihsankara-sankara 
Srlmad Vallalasenadeva-sampadito'yarh Adbhutasagarali l ' at the 
beginning and *iti Sri Maharajadhiraja-nihsankara-sankara- 
Srlmad Vallalasenadeva-viracito'dbhutasagare ? at the end of 
every chapter. In the extracts of Sir R. G Bhandarkar there is 
the following verse : 

* Sake kha-nava-khendva=bde arebhe=dbhutasagarali I 
Gaudendra-kunjavalanstam bhavahur=mahlpatili M } 

( Collected Works II. 346 ) 

This passage is found in all the mss. of the Adbhutasagara. 
This fact most probably shows that this work is genuine. Now 
we have more passages in this work which shows that S. 1090 is 
the date when the Adbhutasagara was begun. They are * 

1. In the chapter on Rahor = adbhutavartah, 

k Kha-nava-daso-1090-na sakabda dvigunah karya=rava- 
rudggole ' 

2. In the chapter on Vrhaspatya=dbhutavartah, 

* Atha=dbhutasagara=rambha-6akabdat sastya=bda-yuga- 

ganananV 

1 Kh-nv*-da&o-1090-na fokabdat' 



Notes on the Chrond6gy of the Sena Kings of Bengal 215 

3. In the chapter on Ravya=di-varsa=dbhutavartah, 

' Atas = tan = matenaikad-grantha = rambha-sakabda-varsa 
=dhipa-gananarh ' 

'Kha-nava-dasa-1090-SiSa-sake ' . . . 

4, In the chapter on Samvatsara=dbhutavartali 
' Kha-nava-viya=dindu-1090-hina ? . . . 

All these passages go to show that Ballalasena was most pro* 
bably alive in S. 1090=1168 A. D. 

But when did Ballalasena die ? The Adbhutasagara helps us 
little to ascertain this point ; but there is the passage : 

" G-ranthe'sminnasamapta eva tanaye sanirajya-laksm!mmuda 
Diksaparvani daksine nijakrter=nispattima=sthapayat I 
Nana-dana-tilam = vusamvalanabham suryatmajasarhgamam 
G-angayam viracayya nirjarapuram bharyanuyato gatah n 
Srimad Laksmanasena-bhupatiii ratistaghyo yadudyo gato j 
Nispanno'dbhutasagarah krtirasau Vallalabhumibhujali \\ " 

We may on the strength of this passage accept the year S. 1090 
as the date of his abdication. The Naihati copper-plate grant of 
Vallalasena which is the only record uptill now found is dated in 
bhe llth regnal year in the 16th day of Vaisakha. Mr. Barat 
writes down " Only one copper-plate grant of Ballalasena Deva 
has been known till now, and it is dated in the eleventh year of 
Ms reign. Taking 1090 as the date when Ballalasena handed 
over the reins of kingship to his son, his accession to the throne 
falls in S. 1080 = A, D. 1158. " ( JBAS. Jan. 1930 ). But there is 
one internal evidence in the NaihatI copper-plate of Ballalasena 
which has not been noticed by Barat or any other scholar but 
which makes our position regarding the date of Ballalasena more 
certain than ever. It is well-known that this grant was made by 
Ballalasena on behalf of his mother VilasadevI on the occasion of 
a solar eclipse. The passage in question, runs thus : 

" Sri Yardhamana-bhuktya=ntalipatInyuttaro=Eadha- 

mandale Svalpa-daksina-vlthyam ... Yallahittha-gramo ... 

acarya-srluvasu-devasarmmane -asmanmatri Sri Vilasadevl- 
nh sura-sariti suryo=parage datta-hema=sva-mahadana- 



216 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

sya daksinatveno = tsrstah ... tamra-sasanikrtya pradatto'as 

mabhih Sam 11 Vai6akha-dine ,16 Sri ni mahasam 

karana ni " ( Inscriptions of Bengal, Vol. Ill, p. 74 ). 

i. e. The village of Vallahittha ... situated within fche Svalpa- 
Daksina-vlthi belonging to the Uttara-Radha-mandala of the 
noted Vardhamana-bhukti ... is given by me, by a copper-plate, ... 
as a fee to the preceptor, the illustrious Ovasudevasarmman... for 
the performance of the Great-Gift in which a golden horse is 
given away, by our mother the illustrious VilasadevI on the 
occasion of a solar eclipse. ... The year 11, the 16th day of 
Vaisakha, Endorsed by the illustrious ( king ). Endorsed by' 
the Mahasan( dhi-vigrahika ), the Karana. 

Thus it is quite clear that a grant was made by Vallalasena 
in the year 11 i. e., llth regnal year and 16th day of Vaisakha on 
account of a solar eclipse. The Adbhutasagara has given S. 1091 
= 1169 A. D. as the date of Laksmanasena ? s accession. Now 
when did the solar eclipse take place in the month of Vaisakha 
immediately before 1169 A. D. ? According to Dewan Bahadur 
L. D. Swamikannu Pillai one solar eclipse took place in 1167 A.D, 
( S. 1089 ) on Saturday 21st April, obviously referring to the 
month of Vaisakha. ( Indian Chronology, p. 88 ). There was no 
solar eclipse in the month of Vaisakha for 19 years before that 
date. ( Ibid, p. 86 ). Thus 1167 A. D. or S. 1089 must be the llth 
regnal year of Ballalasena. Thus the date of his accession must 
be referred fco 1157 A. D. or S. 1079, a date which has a remarkable 
support in the passage of the Adbhutasagara quoted above, viz., 
* Bhuja-vasu-dasa-mite Sake Ballalasena-rajyadau ' i. e.,' in 1082 
S. ( 1160 A. D. ) at the beginning of Ballalasena 's reign 7 . Ballala- 
sena' s reign may, therefore, be said to extend from S. 1079 = 1157 
A. D. - S. 1091 = 1169 A. D. 

Vallalasena's date being fixed, it is easy to find out the date of 
his father "Vijayasena. We know as yet two inscriptions of 
Vijayasena viz., the Deopara Inscription and the Barrackpur 
copper-plate dated in 62nd regnal year 7th Vaisakha. There is an 
important passage in the latter inscription that throws a great 
deal of light on the point. The passage, in question, runs thus ? 



Some Notes on the Chronology of the Sena Kings of Bengal 217 

" Sri Paundravardhana-bhuktya=ntalipatI-KhadI-visaye 

G-hasasambhoga -bhattabada-grame Samatatlya-nalena 

pataka-catustaya Srl-Udayakaradevasarmmane 

ssomagrahe asman - maha- mahadevl- Srlmad- Vilasa- de- 
vya datta-kanaka-tula-purusa-mahadane homa-karmma- 

daksina tamrasasanlkrtya pradatta'smabhih . . ... Sam 

63 Vaisakha-dina 7 Sri ni ( ma )ha ni." 

( Inscriptions of Bengal, Vol. Ill, pp, 63-64). 

i, e,, 4 patakas of land by the Ma of Samatata in the village of 
feasambhogabhattabada belonging to the Khadi-yisaya of the 
noted Paundravarddhana-bhukti is given by me, by means of a 
copper-plate, to the illustrious Udayakaradevasarmman as fee for 
conducting Homa in the Great Gift of my Great Great Queen, the 
illustrious Vilasadevl, in which the Golden Tulapurusa was 
given away on the occasion of Lunar Eclipse, The year 62, the 
7th day of Vaisakha. ( Endorsed by) the illustrious (king). 
( Endorsed by ) the ( Mahasamdhivigrahika or Mahamatra ). 

Thus it is deducible from the passage quoted above that a 
grant was made by Vijayasena on behalf of his chief queen 
Vilasadevl on the occasion of a lunar eclipse, In 1157 A. D. 
itself there was a lunar eclipse in the month of Vaisakha i. e., 
OB Thursday llth April ( Indian Chronology, p. 88 ). If 1157 A,D. 
is accepted as the date of Vallalasena's accession, then Vijayasena 
must have vacated the throne by that date- Taking the 62nd 
regnal year as the last year of Vijayasena's reign, we can easily 
have. 1095 A, D. as the first year of his reign. He, therefore, may 
be said to have ruled from c. 1095 A, D. to 1157 A, D. 

In conclusion I desire to thank Prof. D, R. Bhandarkar for 
suggesting this problem to me and taking a great deal of interest 
in preparation of this note. 



THE M&LAVAS 

BY 
ADRISH CHANDRA BANJCRJI, M. A. 

The earliest mention of the Malavas whose history it is our 
intention to discuss here is in the writings of Alexander's histo- 
rians where they are mentioned as the Mallois. In the first 
stage of Indological research scholars had failed to identify 
them with any Indian tribe. It was in 1872 that the late Sir E, G, 
Bhandarkar was able to identify the two tribes Malloi and 
Oxydrakoi with the Malavas and Ksudrakas of Sanskrit litera- 
ture. 1 

Neither the Malavas nor the Ksiidrakas have been mentioned 
by Panini. Nevertheless, there is a Sutra in Panini ( V. 3. 114) 
which speaks of certain tribes living by the profession of arms 
( ayudhajivi samgha ) and included among the Vahikas. The 
Kastika says that- amongst these Samglias were the Malavas and 
Ksudrakas. According to Sylvain Levi the Vahikas were in the 
Punjab, 2 for which he relies on the Mahabharata. Mr. JL P. 
Jayaswal, on the other hand, is inclined to extend the boundaries 
of the Vahika country, and would make it co-extensive with the 
modern Punjab and Sindh minus the hill districts/ Though the 
Malavas are tacitly understood in Panini's Astadhyayt, there 
can be no doubt that they are actually mentioned as such by 
Patanjali ( IV. 1. 68 ). 

It was first pointed out, in my opinion, by Prof. D. R. 
Bhandarkar that there are three stages in their history. The first 
was in the Punjab, the second was in the Nagar-chal area of the 
Jaipur State, and finally in the north-west part of Central India. 4 
Let us now take the first stage of their history. In the time [of 
Alexander they were settled in the Punjab. The Sanskrit name 
Ksudraka-Malava has been transliterated in Greek in various 

1 Indian Antiquary , Vol. I, p. 23, 

2 Ibid, 1906,: p, 18. 

3 Jayaswal Hindu Polity, Pt. I, p. 38. 

4 33h$ndarkar Carmichael Lectures 1921, pp. 12-13, 



The Mniava* 219 

wa ys. Thus Arrian calls them Mallai and Oxydrakai ; Curtius, 
Sudraoae and Mall ai ; Diodorus, Syrakusoi and Malli ; Strabo, 
Hydrakai and Malli ; and the Roman writer Pliny, Sydracae and 
Malli. As to the exact; tribal territory opinion differs. The late 
V. A, Smith was of opinion that the Malloi occupied the country 
below the confluence of the Hydaspes ( Jhelum ) and Akesines 
( Chenab ), that is, the country comprising the Jhang district and 
the whole or greater portion of modern Montogomery district. 1 
But McCrindle thinks that the territory of the Malavas was of 
great exten,t comprehending a part of the modern doab formed by 
the Akesines and the Hydraotes and extending according to 
Arrian to the confluence of the Akesines and the Indus. That is 
the modern Multan district with portions of Montogomery dis- 
trict. 2 It was during his retreat from the banks of the Hyphasis 
( Ravi ) that Alexander came into conflict with the Mallois. They 
were on the Hydaspes ( Jhelum after its unity with Chenab ). 
The scattered passages in the Greek works are our only source of 
information regarding the life, political and social, of these tribes 
at this time. The two tribes Malavas and Ksudrakas of Sanskrit 
literature, and Malloi and Oxydrakoi of Greek writers seem to 
have formed a league at this time. "But whether they were able 
to oppose Alexander unitedly, it is very difficult to determine, 
Curtius informs us that their combined army was led by a brave 
Ksudraka warrior. But Diodorus informs us that the Syrakusoi 
and Malloi could not agree as to the choice of the leader and 
ceased in consequence to keep the field together. 5 Arrian, too, 
definitely tells us that Malloi had certainly agreed to combine 
with the Oxydrakoi and give battle to the common enemy, but 
Alexander had thwarted this design by his sudden and rapid 
march whereby these tribes were prevented from giving each 
other mutual help. 4 We are further told that most of their cities 
were on the Chenab but their capital which was the last to be 
captured by Alexander WAS on the Eavi. Diodorus and Curtius 

1 J. R. A, S. 1903, p. 631. 

2 McCrindle Invasion of India, App. Note, PP. 351. 

3 Ibid. p. 236, fn. 1. 

4 Ibtd. p. 150. 



220 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research fnstitufe 

wrongly assign this city to Oxydrakoi, but Arrian makes it quite 
clear that the city belonged to the Malloi. General Cunningham 
identifies the city with Multan, but St. Martin takes Harappa to 
be the * Mallian capital '. 

While sailing along the Hydaspes Alexander received the 
news that the Mallois and Oxydrokois " had conveyed their 
children and wives for safety into their strongest cities, and they 
meant to give him hostile reception." He, therefore, accelerated 
his voyage and reached the confluence of Akesines and Hydaspes, 
and then by forced marches through waterless tract brought his 
troops to the territory of the Mallois. As the Mallois never 
imagined that Alexander would attack them so soon by crossing 
so difficult a tract of country, they were taken by surprise being 
engaged in their fields. In a skirmish some were killed and the 
rest took shelter in a nearby stronghold. But tLte defeat suffered 
by the tribe was neither final nor decisive. The surprised tribe in 
sullen anger took shelter in fortified cities determined to resist 
till the end. As he had no infantry with him, Alexander besieged 
the city with the help of the Cavalry. This city has been identi- 
fied with the ruins of Eot-Kamalia, a small but ancient town on 
a mound on the northern bank of the Ravi. 1 When the infantry 
arrived, Alexander sent Predikkas to attack another Malloi city, 
while he himself led assault on the besieged city. The place was 
soon captured, the majority of the defenders being put to the 
sword. In the meantime, Predikkas, who was sent to attack 
another city, found it deserted and easily captured it. The 
Malavas had decided to oppose the Greeks at a more strongly 
fortified place, identified by Cunningham with Tulumba, but that 
city was also easily captured by a detachment under Predikkas. 2 
Alexander then attacked a city of a tribe called the Brachmans, 
and then giving one day's rest to his worn out troops renewed his 
attack on the Malavas. But this time he found most of their 
cities deserted, the men having preferred to make the desert and 
the jungle as their home, but not to submit to an alien yoke. 

1 Cunningham Ancient Geography of India, Ed. by S. N. Mazumdar 
Sastri, Pp. 238-241. 

I Ibid. Pp. 259-60, 



The Malavas 221- 

Alexandar tlieii sent Peithon and Demetrius against the largest 
city of the Mallois ; to which, he was informed, many men from 
other cities had fled for safety. For reasons unknown to us this 
city too was abandoned and the Mallois are said to have crossed 
the Ravi and arrayed themselves against the Greeks on its other 
bank. Alexander decided to reach the place with cavalry by 
forced marches, asking the infantry to follow. On seeing him 
crossing the river, the Mallois, at first attempted to retreat in 
good order but on noticing the email number of enemy, wheeled 
round to give battle. After some time perceiving that their, heavy 
armed troops were in danger of being surrounded by the mobile 
Greek cavalry, they retired to a nearby city which was their 
capital where they made a last desperate effort to resist the 
foreign invader. On being forced off the city walls they took 
shelter in the citadel, but they could not hold it long, the bravery 
and leadership of Alexander overawed their every effort, and the 
citadel was captured, though he (Alexander) was seriously 
wounded in leading the attack. All the inhabitants including 
the men, women, and children were put to the sword. According 
to McCrindle, Diodorus and Curtius wrongly assign the city to 
the Oxydrakoi. 1 As a matter of fact if Arrian and Plutarch are to 
be believed the city belonged to Malloi and not to Oxydrakoi. 

One who has gone through the works of Greek writers gene* 
rally carries the impression that Alexander's conquest of the 
Malavas and other small states of the Punjab was an easy affair. 
But quite contrary was the case. The resistance offered by this 
small tribe to the conqueror of nearly half of the ancient world, 
is truly amazing. This much must be conceded that the Mac- 
donian soldiers, trained as they were under two foremost generals 
of ancient Greece, were no proper match for one or two small 
tribal states which played no important part in the political arena 
of India at any time. 

The unguarded statements of the Greek writers confirm the 
above supposition. Curtius' statement as to the strength of the 
combined army of the Mallois and the Oxydrakois, has to be 
accepted with a grain of salt, because according to Arrian there 

1 McCrindle ^Invasion of India by Alexander. App. Note, ,Q. P. 351< 
4 [ Anuala, B. O. R. I. ] 



2S2 Annatt of the Bfamdarfair Oriental Re&arch Insiitute 

was no combination at all. The opposition of the small Punjab 
states seems to have disheartened the Gr eekf soldiers very much, 
Because we are told by one authority that " When the Macedo- 
nioas found that they had still on hand a fresh war in which the 
most warlike nations of India were yet to take part, they began 
to chide the king in language of sedition ". 1 The fear of the 
Macedonians was well justified. After the palpable resistance 
given by Darius III and meek submission of Ambhi, the Greeks 
thought that their conquest of India would be easy. After the 
battle of Hydaspes that dream of theirs was shaken. Henceforth 
every inch of the ground had to be fought for, every fortified 
place taken. It was this guerrila warfare that had demoralised 
the Greek soldiers. No more they had to meet shaky armies of 
degenerated empire, ready to leave the field of battle at th 
first clash of arms. But they had now to meet men of different 
calibre, armed men who whould stick to their post till hewn to 
death. Thus when they were first surprised while they were 
engaged in fields, the Malavas did not tamely submit, but todk 
shelter in a nearby stronghold. Then from city to city the carnage 
of war continued. On the fortified heights of Tulumba, and at 
Kot-Kamalia, they resisted the invader. They went so far as 
even to make the desert and jungle their homes rather than be 
slaves to fehe foreign conqueror, and it was when Alexander had 
exposed himself to gravest danger that the last Malloi city fell. 
The Greek writers in order to magnify Alexander convey the 
impression that Malava tribe was practically annihilated, but 
that was far from the case. Both the Malavas and Ksudrakas 
are mentioned in Patanjali as we have seen above. Arrian too 
definitely tells us that the leading men from the Mallois and 
Oxydrakois came to conclude a treaty with Alexander, and a 
treaty was concluded. If there was practical annihilation, why 
then was there a treaty ? Did Alexander conclude treaties with 
the people of Messaga, Aornos, Darius III, and others ? A treaty- 
is possible with a partially defeated people ; it does not imply 
annihilation. What were the exact terms of the treaty we do 
not know, but these were probably some of the terms, namely, 

J Bid p. *34 



The McUavas 2t3 

ontribution of chariots and horses or cavalry, and an annual 

tribute. 1 

When they were attacked by Alexander, the Malavas seem to 
have been in a fairly high state of civilization. They were 
mainly an agricultural community. Thus when Alexander 
made a surprise attack on them, they were engaged in their fields, 
They impressed the Greeks with their appearance, being men of 
tall stature and dignified bearing. " Their robes were of linen 
wrought with purple and gold." They also seem to have deve- 
loped a currency of their own. Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar draws 
our attention to a statement of Quintus Curtius referred to by 
General Cunningham : " that near the junction of the five rivers 
Alexander received from the Malli and Sudracae a present of 100 
talents of white iron (ferri candidi). This white iron can be 
either nickel or tin. But tin was soft metal, therefore unsuitable 
for coinage ; besides it was well known to the Greeks who would 
not have, therefore, called it white iron. Nickel, on the other 
hand, thinks Cunningham, is hard and magnetic, as well as 
white, and as it was not known to the Greeks they could call it 
white iron. Thus in his ( Cunningham's ) opinion Nickel was 
used for purpose of currency by the Indian tribes, Malavas and 
Ksudrakas, in the time of Alexander.'* 2 

With this ends the first stage of their history. We have no 
further information about their continuing to remain in this 
reign. Neither Kautilya nor Megasthenes mentions them. They 
seem to have migrated southwards and settled somewhere in 
Rajputana. Hai Bahadur Gaurishankar Hirachand Ojha, in his 
Hindi History of Rajputana, has devoted but one page to an 
account of them which, unfortunately is very scrappy and un- 
critical.* We will, therefore, try to reconstruct their history so 
far as it relates to their settlement in Eajputana, Just sixty- 
one years ago Carllyle found no less than 600 coins belonging to 
the Malavas at Nagar, also called Karkkotaka-Nagar, lying in 

1 Ibid. Pp. 154 and 249. 

2 Bhandarkar Carmichael Lectures, 1921, P, 144. 
9 Ojjha Rfyputanaki Itifrasa, Vol. I, p. 96. 



224 Annals d/ the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

the territory of Raja of Uni^ra a feudatory of Jaipur. 1 Carllyle 
traced the names of forty kings, but Smith found only twenty, 
A. large portion of this hoard appears to have been lost. These 
Malava coins are remarkable for their small size, and one of them 
which is No. 106 in Smith's Catalogue is regarded by him as the 
smallest in the world. 2 He rerharks : " It is difficult to under- 
stand how such a coinage could have been used, as it was used 
for centuries/' The size of the coins, however, can suggest only 
one thing the low economic condition of the tribe. 

In 1923 Mr. R. O. Douglas wrote a paper called " On some 
MSlava Coins " which was published in J. P. A. S. B., Vol. XIX, 
( 1ST. S. ) P, 42 ff. That paper is important in some respect. His 
reading Malaya instead of Malava on some coins is noteworthy, 
but even he has not been able to throw light on the name of 
supposed kings of the tribe, which, as noted above, are about 
forty according to Carllyle, and twenty according to Smith, 
But are they really names of any kings at all ? Some of them 
are Magaja, Magojaya, Majupa, Mayojapa, Mapaya, and so 
forth. It will be seen that most of them begin with "Ma 91 
and consist of permutations and combinations of five letters 
^0. 0a> ja 9 sa } ya. The probability is that these letters 
constitute not names so much, as abbreviations. In fact it was 
suggested to me long ago by Prof. D. R Bhandarkar, that the 
three letters Magaja which occur for instance, on coins 82-84 
of Smith's Catalogue and which had been taken to be the name of 
a king looked like an abbreviation of the legend : Malava- 
gayasya jay ah which occurs for fnstance on coins Nos. 58-61. 
As stated above it is worthy of note that the Malava coins are 
very small in size. To engrave the whole legend, therefore, on 
any one of its surfaces must have caused considerable difficulty. 
This seems to be the reason why the legend was abbreviated into 
these three letters. Similarly it is a habit with the coin manu- 
facturers not to engrave each letter fully and entirely. Thus 
what looks like the letter pa in Mapaya may be la,- and 
Mapaya might thus stand for Malaya equal to Malava. 

1 Cunningham A. 8. JR. vol. VI, 1871-3, pp. 72ff. 

% V. A. Smith Catalogue of Coins in the Indian Museum, Vol. I ? p. 178, 



The Malavaa $35 

m 

Mr. Douglas has already shown that the tribal name is 
sometimes written Malaya instead of Malava. Simi- 
larly Mapaja may be explained as equivalent to Mala- 
jayah equal to Malava jayah. Again Magajasa may be 
equivalent to Malava-ganasya yasah. It is thus not at all im- 
probable to take these letters as the abbreviated forms of the 
legend. Otherwise we are compelled to weave the most fantastic 
names out of them. 

I have already stated that the Malavas were in south-western 
part of the Punjab before they migrated to the Nagar-Chal province 
of Jaipur State. If any proof is needed, it is furnished by the 
fact that the legend on some of the coins has to be read from 
right to left as in KharosthI which is almost an unprecedented 
thing in Brahml ; this is certainly due to their northern origin, 
where KharosthI was the prevalent script since the Achaemenid 
conquest of North-west India. KharosthI died a natural death 
in the 4th century A. D. It is thus evident that the Malavas 
must have been settled in Jaipur area much earlier than this 
period. This is in keeping with the fact that the legend on the 
earliest coins as noted by Mr. Douglas are in Prakrit and not in 
Sanskrit. The Malava occupation of this region is further con- 
firmed by the ISTasik Cave Inscription of Usavadata, a Saka, son- 
in-law of Ksatrapa ISTahapana.* It is inexplicable how Eai 
Bahadur G. H. Ojha has lost sight of such an important fact in 
his History of Rajputana. The Nasik Inscription informs us that 
Usavadata had gone at the command of his lord, who can be no 
other than Nahapana, to relieve the Chief of Uttamabhadras whc 
had been besieged by the Malayas, who fled away at the mere 
sound of his approach, and were made the prisoners of the 
Uttamabhadras. Usavadata is represented as afterwards having 
gone to Puskaras seven miles west of Ajmere. It is thus clear 
that the Malayas were then settled in South-eastern part of 
Jaipur State. That the Malayas were the same as Malavas can 
not be doubted after the reading vouched for by Mr. Douglas on 
the coins examined by him. Thus we see that both on the first 
and second occasions the real cause of their migration was defeat 
at the hands of superior powers. 

I Ep. Ind, Vol. VIII, p. 44. 



226 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental ^Research 

a 

It has been noted above that on most of their coins the term 
Gaya is associated with Malava. It further deserves to be 
noticed that the inscriptions also speak of the Malava gaya, 
The question that arises now is * what does Gana signify? 
Bai Bahadur Ojha blindly following in the foot-steps of Monier- 
Williams and Fleet has taken the word to mean * jati '. In his 
Sanskrit-English Dictionary Monier- Williams translated the 
word by ' tribe '. This meaning was adopted by Fleet in his trans- 
lation of the phrase Malaxa-ganasthiti occurring in the two 
Mandasor Inscriptions. 1 Following them the Rai Bahadur has 
translated the English word by the Hindi term jati, which 
means not only a tribe, but also a casfce. It was Mr. K. P. 
Jayaswal who first pointed out that gana signified a republic, 2 
and Prof. Bhandarkar afterwards pointed out that it denoted 
a tribal oligarchy, a federation of clans. 3 The latter view 
is now generally accepted, but it was Mr. Jayaswal who 
placed the scholars on the right track, and Dr. Thomas challenged 
the late Dr. Fleet fifteen years ago in regard to the correctness 
of his rendering of the word gana by tribe. 4 Bai Bahadur 
Ojha's book was published but six years ago, and it is, indeed, a 
a matter of regret that he has failed to take note of the exact 
significance of the term gawz. It will be thus seen that the 
Malavas were a gana a tribal oligachy,- at any rate from circa, 
150 B. 0. to oiroa. 550 A. B. 

It is well known that the celebrated Allahabad Pillar Inscrip- 
tion of Samudragupta speaks of the Malavas. In fact, they head 
the list of the tribes which were tributaries of the Gupta 
Emperor. The question arises * where are the Malavas to be 
located in the Gupta period ? It does not seem very difficult to 
find an answer. The scholars are fully aware that the years of the 
Vikrama Era were designated Krfca in the Gupta epoch and earlier, 

1 Corpus Imcriptionum Indicarum, Vol III, pp. 72ff & 79ff, 

2 Jayaswal Hindu Polity, Pt. I, p. 29. 

3 Bhandarkar - Carmichael Lectures, 1918, p. 165, and Some Aspects 

of Ancient Hindu Polity, p. 110. 

4 /. R. A. S. 1914, pp. 413 and 1010 ; 1916 p. 163, 



The Malavas gg? 

^nd that the Malavas were somehow associated with them. The 
typical verse is found in the Mandasor Inscription of Narvarmam 
wMon runs ^thus : " &rt(r) -m Malava-gavamnate prasaxte Icrta- 
samjftite > \ " The second expression Krta-sarhjnite which 
qualifies the phrase expressing the date shows that " Krta " was 
the original name of the Vikrama Era. But what does the first 
expression, Malava- gaqamnate, signify? It must mean "tradi- 
tionally handed down by the Malava Gaiia", and Indicates that 
the Malavas had their own peculiar system of computing the 
Krta years. This point has already been dwelt upon by Prof. D. 
B. Bhandarkar and it is not, therefore, necessary to deal with it 
further. 1 Suffice it to say that the Malavas were conrected with 
the Krta Bra so far as their system of reckoning went. Wherever 
the Krta years are specified in the inscriptions of the Gupta 
period, the name of the Malavas occurs in most cases. We have, 
therefore, to see where these inscriptions have been found which 
associate the Malavas with the Krta years. They are Mandasor 
in the Gwalior State, Zansuvaih in the Kotah State, Nagarl in 
Udaipur State, and so forth. These inscriptions are found 
within an area marked by longitude N. 23-26 and latitude E. 
74-77. It will be thus seen that the Malavas in the Gupta period 
were no longer confined to the Nagar-chal province of the Jaipur 
State, but had moved southwards and settled in a province com- 
prising south-eastern part of Bajputana and north-west part of 
Central India. Shortly after Gupta period the Malavas seem to 
have migrated still further southwards. In the Qurvavali- Sutra 
of Dharmasagaragani, Sri Devendrasuri is represented to have 
gpne from UjjayinI in Malavaka to Gurjaratra ( Gujarat ). z It 
seems that Malavaka touched Gujarat. Curiously enough this 
agrees with what the Chinese pilgrim Yuan-Chawang has stated, 2 
He makes Po-lu-ka-che-po ( Bharoach ) and Mo-la-po ( Malava ) 
as two conterminous states about the middle of the 7th century 
A. D. He also tells us that Malava was situated on the south- 
eastern side of the Mo-ho ( v. t. Mo-hi=Mahi ) river. This is also 

1 Sir R. Cr. Bhandarkar Commemoration Volume, pp. 187-94. 

2 Webor Die 8k. und Pr. Handschriften der Berliner Bibliothek, II, 

990. 
I Waiters Yuan Chawang t Vol. II. p. 241, 



2$8 Annals &f the JBhandartear Oriental ^search 

confirmed by the copper-plate grants of the Valabhi king DTmiva- 
sena II, dated Gr. E. 320-21. 1 The first inscription records ftat 
the king made a grant on the eastern boundary of $ avagramaka 
in the bhukti of Malavaka, whereas the second refers to his grant 
of land on the southern boundary of Candraputraka in the bhukii 
of Malavaka, It is known that both these charters were found in 
the Rutlam State, and as a matter of fact Navagramaka mentioned 
in the copper-plate grant has been identified with ISTogawa in the 
same state. What is further noteworthy is that the Rutlam 
State is situated on the south-eastern side of the Mahl river 
at its source. This concurrent testimony points to the conclu- 
sion that in the post-Gupta period the Malavas had occu- 
pied a province including the modern Rutlam State. 

It must not however be supposed that the Malavas migrated 
southward only. In the post-Gupta period they seem to have 
gone eastward also. All the copper-plates of Pala kings except- 
ing that of Dharmapala refer to the Kulikas or cultivators as 
consisting not only of the Khasas and Hunas but also of the 
Malavas. The above account of the Malavas refers to the pre- 
Muhammadan times Before, however, we conclude this paper, 
it would be well to notice whether they survive in the modern 
period. It is well known that there is a province called Malwa 
in Central India. " It consists solely of the plateau lying between 
23 30' and 24 20' N and 74 30' and 78 10' E. which is termi- 
nated on the south by the great Vindhyan range, on the east by 
the arm of the same range which strikes north from Bhopal to 
Chanderi ( the Kulacala paryata of the Puranas'), on the west 
by the branch which reaches from Amjheri to Chitor ( in 
Bajputana ), and en the north by the Mukundwara range which 
is from Chitor to Chanderi 2 ." 

1 Ep.lnd. Vol. VIII, p. 188 ff. 

2 Imperial Gazetteer, Vol. XVII, pp. 95-100. 



The Malavas 229 

It is also worthy of note that the name Malaya has survived 
not only in that of a province as just noted, but also in those of 
two Brahmana castes. They are called the ' Malavls ' or ' Mala- 
vikas ? > They are the proper Brahmanas of Malava and the 
adjoining country. They are not only found in their special 
habitat, but also in Gujarat on one hand, and Central Provinces 
and United Provinces on the other. Perhaps the most noteworthy 
example of this caste is Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviyaji. These 
' Malavl ' Brahmanas, however, are isolated from their main acock 
in Malwa. 1 



1 Wilson Indian Castes, Vol. II, pp. 114 and 189. Jayaswal Hindu 
Polity, Ft. I, P, 153. 

5 [ Annals, B. O. B. I. [ 



ON iHE DATE OF SRIKANl^HA AISfD THE 
BRHAT-SAMH1TA 

BY 

B. N". KEISHNAMURTI SABMA, B. A. ( Hons. ) 

Writing in the maiden number of the Jcurnal of Oriental 
Research, Madras, on the knotty problem of <fi the date of Srlkantha 
and his Brahrna-Mimarn&a ; V Mr. T. R. Cliintamani permits him- 
self an unhappy digression in a foot-note wherein he bitterly 
complains against Sri Madhvacarya having quoted the verse * 



from " an anonymous but contemporary work known as JBrJiul- 
Samhiia " ; and concludes with pretentious familiarity that ''per- 
haps the source referred to by Sri Madhvacarya in this connection 
is on a par with the Katharayana Matharayana sources from 
which he is in the habit of citing certain Sruti tests ! " 

The writer's anxiety to create for himself many opportunities 
and lose none to criticise Madhva though obvious is yet highly 
regrettable. For, I perceive no earthly connection, from the 
writer's treatment of the problem at any rate, between the 
problem of Srlkantha 's date and Madhva 's citing a verse ( albeit 
also cited by the former ) from the Brliat-Sainhila. That the 
writer himself was only too plainly conscious of the blessed irre- 
levance of Madhva 's quotation to his subject is betrayed by the 
fact that he himself has to resort to the luxury of a foot-note to 
censure Madhva. 

Having come to the happy conclusion that " Srlkantha should 
have flourished about the middle of the j 3th century " (p. 67), Mr. 
Chintamani proceeds to give some corroborative evidence and it 
is here that he introduces the verse c ^sEtffTOSrft ' etc. Says he 



The date of Srlkantha and his Brahmamlmamsa, by T. B, Ohintamam, 
M. A , Research Student, University of Madras. The Journal of Oriental 
Research, Madras, Vol i, part 1 , January 1927. 



On the Dale of Srikantha and the Brhat-Satiihtta 231 

"The date we have thus arrived at is confirmed by the following 
reference. Srikaniha quotes the verse : 

i 



"My revered preceptor, Professor S< Kuppus'/ami Sastrigal, has 
been able to identify 1 this verse as Akhandananda 's. Akhandanandj, 
in his Taltvadipana refers to this verse with the following remaiks ; 



Edition of Tatt?adlpana in the 

Benares Sanskrit Series, p. 687. 

"It is a well-known fact that Samgraha-slokas are the ctmpj- 
siiions of authors who refer to them as such* " (Italics mine ). 

I am sure., Mahamahopadhyaya Prof. Kuppusvami Sastri 
would certainly disclaim any conspicuous or extra-ordinary 
ability in tracing the terse In question in a glided prose work 
such as the Taitvadtpana ; and I have no manner of doubt that he 
would be the last man to identify himself, sympathise with or 
lend his weighty support to the attacks and insinuations of Ms 
precocious pupil, Mr. Chinfcamani, against Madhva. 

Ifc would appear from the foregoing quotations that Mr. Chinta- 
mani would regard Srikaniha as later than Akhandananda for the 
very sirapla reason that the former quotes the verse ' S'JaPlt ..... * 
in his commentary on the VedUnta Sutras, which has been in 
the writer r s opinion shown to have been composed by Akhanda"- 
nanda. Since Srikantha *' belongs " to the middle of the 13th 
century, " Akhandananda belongs to the beginning of the 13th 
century. ' ' 

In spile of assiduous attempts, Mr. Chintamani has not 
successfully demonstrated a clear case of borrowing on the part 
of Srlkantha from Akhandananda. On the contrary, the occur- 
rence of the verse in Srlkantha as well as in the other, would at 



1 The opening verso of the leading article in this number of the Journal of 
Oriental Research, could similarly be identified as an unacknowledged 
adaptation with a change of the last quarter, of a well-known Yrse in 
the Nllakanlha Vijaya of Nilakagtha Di^sita ; Madras 1924, 

% Op. cit., p, 68, 



232 Annals of the Ehandarlar Ctitntal Ee&arzh Institute 

best only indicate that both have it from a common source. Nor 
is the verse indubitably Akhandananda 's own though quoted as a 
Saihgraha slofca. Mr. Chmtamani himself admits that "Akhanda- 
nanda is indebted to his teacher Prakasatman for this verse" and 
that " with slight modifications, Akhandananda adopted the verse 
and gave it as a Samgraha stoka 1 " whatever one may think 
of the intellectual honesty involved in such a procedure. Any- 
how it is amusing to note that Mr Chintamani ? s dictum that " it 
is a well-known fact that Bamgraha ilokas are the compositions of 
authors who refer to them as such " ( p. 68 ) is miserably contra- 
dicted by himself at the very next page. 

Nor does it appear very necessary that Srlkantha quotes the 
verse in question from Akhandananda. There is nothing to 
support such a very original notion in Srlkarrtha's work. In the 
first place, Mr, Chintamani does not express the entire truth when 
he baldly observes, ''Srlkantha quotes the verse ' 
Indeed, Srlkantha quotes it with a significant remark : 
which shows that the verse so quoted is of hoary antiquity 
being, in fact, the stock-in-trade of all Vedantins. Srlkantha is 
not likely to have borrowed it from Akhandananda. There is no 
valid reason to support such a conjecture other than the flimsy 
one of Samgraha slokas being: the compositions of authors who 
refer to them as such which is so pathetically negatived in the 
same breath by the writer himself. E"or is ' cf^rr 131% ' the usual 
or legitimate manner of acknowledging- such a debt ! 

Lastly, Srlkantha 's priority to Madhva eeems to be established 
by the repudiation of the pro-Saiva interpretations of srutis in the 
former's commentary on the Vedanta Sutras by Madhva in his 
Anu-Viakht/ana The strong Vaisuavite tenor of Madhva 's com- 
mentary on the Vedanta Sutras and the strong plea which he puts 
iorth on behalf of the supremacy of Visnu throughout his com- 
mentary and notably in the commentary on the very first Sutra* 
appear to be directed pointedly towards the repudiation of an 



1 LOG. cit, p. 69. 

, ^ ^ft^; , ^ - 



On the Dale of tfrikawtka and the Efhat-Sathhita 



233 



equally vehement and passionate Saivite interpretation 1 of the 
Sutras. The plausibility of Srlkantha's work having been the 
one which Madhva ought to have had in view, is established 
beyond doubt by an actual and elaborate refutation of the Saivite 
interpretation of the Upanisadic text : 



sponsored by Srlkantha, in Madhva f s Anu-iyakhyana 



In the 3TT5=r^H5rif^^DT Srlkantha proclaims Siva as the ananda- 

maya 

rfr^r q;w ?r q^H^^i ? m sror ^m 



^cT: 3T^TT^rTc!: s and Madhva naturally, is eager to 
refute this view as can be seen from his inclusion of the conten- 
tion that anandamaya is ^ ( qncft 5 ^ of Srlkantha) in the purva- 
paksa and from his siddhanta that anandamaya is Visnu : 
1 ? \ ^^T^TT<^U ^i T^ftrrfR* i 



These two instances would suffice to establish that Madhva is 
endeavouring to refute the Saivite interpretation already current 
and established in his days. The probable identity of the Saivite 
commentator responsible for those views with Srlkantha deserves 
careful consideration especially when the views criticised by 
Madhva are directly traceable to Srlkantha's Bhasya. 

It is also significant to note JayatirtLa echoing the term s 
used by Srlkantha : cT^TT irf^^ET ^f^cT (p. 50) : ?r 



i 3^. iiq- ^ ^R ^^r i 

Srlkantha . Brahma Mimamsa, Mysore Oriental Library Series, p. 25, 
2 Nyaya Sudha of Jayatirtba, p, 128. 
B Srlkantha, Op. cit., p. 31. 

4 Madhva ; Commentary on Vedanta Sutra i, 1, 12. 

5 Nyaya Sudha, p. 112. 



234 Annals Qfthe Bhandarkar Oriental Research Insfitute 

Literary tradition among the commentators of the Dvaita 
school also endorses the view that Madhva implied a criticism 
of Srlkantha also. The author of the Candnkuprakasa 1 in com- 
menting on Vyasatlrtha's Candnka indicates the Saiva-Visteta 
dvaita tenets refuted 2 by Madhva. Vadira.ia Svamin roundly 
assercs that Madhva 's work was the last word on the Vedanta : 

$y^f f%M^g T%^T?cfr ETvsRq-msr q^ ft' 5 i 

an assertion which could not have been made If the Srikantha 
Bhasya had come later than Madhva Vadiraja Svamin is not 
usually an ill-informed person in such matters. 

It would thus appear that Srikantha must have been a prede- 
cessor of Madhva, who falls entirely within the 13th century 
( 1199-1272 A. D. ). Srikantha must therefore have flourished 
at least a century earlier and may therefore be placed in tre 
32th century. Srlkantha's emphatic Saivite interpretation could 
thus be shown to have been directed against Bamanu-ja and it 
will then be clear how Madhva had a double task of reclaiming 
and reaffirming the Supremacy of Visnu as well as of refuting the 
Saivite interpretations of Srikantha. 4 

Mr. Chintamaru places Akhandananda in the beginning of the 
13th century. It is therefore quite impossible that Srikantha 
ever borrowed from or was otherwise indebted to Akhandananda 
who was later than himself ; nor even from Prakasatman who 
must have been, at the worst, a contemporary of his. Madhva, 
too, was a contemporary of Akhandananda and to begin his 
philosophical career by misappropriating a verse from Akhanda- 
nanda musb have sounded hideous to him Mr. Chintamam's 
verdict notwithstanding:, especially when he could have had 
access to it in the earlier works of Srikantha and Sudarsana Suri. 



Tatparya Candnka of VyasatTrtha with Comm , Pra/caua, by Ragha- 
vendra Tirtha, Government Oriental Library Series s "Mysore. 
Op cit., YoL i, p 72. 
Yukti-malhka of Vadiraja Svamin, 
Of. - 



Candnka Piakasa, p. 72. 



On the Date of Srikantha and the Brhat-Satiihita 235 

Mr. Chintamani seems to have been blissfully innocent of the 
fact that Sudarsana Suri, the illustrious commentalor on the 
fabhasija of Kamanuja shows clear traces of his acquaintance 
with the verse /OTcFsfr...' of which he quotes more or less the 
first half : 



Sudarsana, apart from the probability of Ms having been 
slightly earlier than Akhandananda, is not likely to have borrow- 
ed the verse from him. Mr. Chintamani, had he known 
Sudarsana 's familiarity with the verse, would certainly have 
convicted him also of misappropriation. Sudarsana, then, has 
entirely escaped scot-free, thanks to the writer's ignorance. 
Anyhow, there is no doubt that the verse goes back to some 
source far earlier than Sudarsana. 

We are therefore constrained to observe that Mr. Chintamani 
has come out rather very badly in the first part of his self- 
imposed task of settling the date of Srikantha. He seems some- 
how to have missed the royal road to successful research which 
lies in a patient collection of all available and unimpeachable 
references in the works of Srikantha 2 , Madhva and Akhandananda 
( if the last has any thing at all to do with the vexed question of 
Srikantha 's date ) to the views of their predecessors and contem- 
poraries and then proceed to examine how far any one of them 
presupposes, quotes or criticises the other Mr, Chintamani 
however seems to have set; about it in the wrong way by 



&ri BKa&ya with the Comm of Sudarsana, p 328, Medical Hall Press, 
Benares, 1889. 

The phrase pfhntf: 3^ftt at the outset of Srikantha's Bhasya is taken 
by some to pre-suppos a reference to Madhva also and thus is relied 
upon to establish Srikantha's posteriority to all the three famous 
Bhasyakara's of S. Ind'a But firstly too rigid a, numerical significance 
need not be attached to the casual use of the plural which could be 
explained otherwise, secondly, the required number of three Bhasya- 
karas can still be made up without including Madhva among predeces- 
sors of Srikantha ; and thirdly because of tho surmise of Madhva*s pro- 
bable inclusion in the phfase being negatived by traces of his having 
used Srikantha, 



$36 Annals of Hie Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

attempting to make the whole problem turn on a stray quotation 
by Madhva of a certain verse *' from an anonymous but con- 
temporary work," 

II 
THE BRHAT SAM HITS 

Worse is the fate that hath overtaken him in the other pert 
of his self-imposed task of proving Madhva to have misappro- 
priated the verse ' OT^Hr^ from the Tattvadipana. 

Mr. Chintamani remarks rather patronisingly, " This verse, in 
the form in which it is found in the Taiftadlpana, seems to haie 
become familiar to Sri Madhvacarya through an anonymous but 
contemporary work t known as Brliat Sa?hhiia'\ ( Italics mire), 
To be sure, Madhva quotes the verse l ^q^HT ' in his commentary 
on the Vedanta Sutra i, 1, 4, from the Brhat Sarnfata ; but there is 
nothing in this to occasion such a huge surprise. However, lie 
manages to overcome his surprise and proffers a critical piece 
of advice to his readers that " this Brhat Bamhita ought to be 
differentiated from the astronomical work of the same name." 
The advice is quite unwarranted since not even a tyro of 
Madhva' s works would confound for a moment, the two Brliat 
Samhitas. Perhaps, it is but the recrudescence of a subjective 
experience of the writer himself ! Mr. Chintamani, however, 
finally declares for the supreme enlightenment of his readers 
" A Brhat Samhita has been published as No. 68 of the 
Anandasrama Series, I have carefulhj examined the work and 
the verse in question does not occur anywhere in that work. 

Perhaps the source referred to by Sri Madhvacarya 

"( Italics mine X All the trouble and credit 

of this amazing process o f research is grievously annulled when 
it is revealed that 3STo. 68 of the Anandaferama Series is 
Brhat Samhiia merely but a Brhad Brahma Samfnta \ 1 * R 
ffirasrif5l?t' must certainly have escaped the notice of Mr. 
Chintamani 1 No wonder, therefore, that despite strenuous efforts 
Mr. Chintamani could not trace the verse quoted by Madhva 
from the Brhat Sa?hhita in the Brhad Brahma Samhita. One 
cannot, therefore, but heartily pity him for having wasted his 
critical acumen in the wrong place 1 



On the Late of rika$tha and the Brhat- Salhhiia 23? 

Granting that the verse quoted by Madhva could not be 
found in the misleading No. 68 of the Anandasrama Series, it 
does not prove that the same must necessarily have been mis- 
appropriated from AkhandananoVs work or for the matter cf 
that, even from Prakasatman's Sabd^nirnaya} The whole serio- 
comic is badly exposed when it is brought to light that Madhva 
has quoted not only the unfortunate verse '^q^TTT 7 from the 
Brhat Samhtta ( whatever it is ), but also not less than twenty- 
five others in various places in his commentary on the Veaania 
Sutras. Nor is this all. In his commentary on the n Bhagaiata 
Madhva again quotes as many as eleven lines from the Brhat 
Bamhta. I may take this opportunity of recording all the verses 
quoted from the B^liat Samhita for obvious reasons. 




I hope, Mr. Chintamam would not have us believe that Madbva'a re- 
ferences to and citations from a Babdamrnaya are really from PrakS- 
satman's Sabdanirnaya published m the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series ' 

Madhva on Vedairta 8tra i> 1, 1. 3 Ibid,, i, 1, 4, 4 Ibid., i, 1. 15. 

Ibid i, 2. 26. 6 Ibid,, i, 3, 11. 7 Ibid,, ii,,l, 18. 

6 [ Annals, B. O. It. I. ] 



238 Annats of the handarkar Oriental Research 



: TT<rr: 



%>Rr 






1 Ibid., ii, 3, 7. 2 Ibid., ii. 1, 26, 

4 Ibid., h, 4, 23. 5 Ibid., lii, 4, 42. 

7 Phagaiata Tatparya of Madhva, II, 7. 34, 



3 Ibid., ii, 4, 18. 
6 Ibid, hi, 4, 50. 



On the Date of rikwtfha and th Brhat-Sqwhita 239 




I have also " carefully examined " No. (8 of *the Snandfi- 
4rama Series and not one of the verses quoted by Madhva from 
the Brhat Samhitd " occur in that work anywhere " which proves 
that apart from the obvious difference In their respective titles, 
the Brhdt Samfata should rot be ' confounded ' with the Prlad 
Brahma Samhita as is most regrettably done by Mr Chintamani, 
It will be news to him that Madhva himself makes a distinction 
between Brhat Samhita and a Brahma Samhita and actually quotes 
from the latter. The identity of the latter, however, with No. 68 
of the Anandasrama Series is tho' probable yet unproven. 

A patient and sympathetic attention to the large number of 
verses quoted by Madhva from the Brhat Samhita in his works, 
would show that they are on a variety of topics. A close scrutiny 
of their order and arrangement would also reveal many interest- 
ing facts. For instance, two or more verses are sometimes quoted 
consecutively dealing with a single topic. At other times, a half 
of a preceding or following verse is found together with a given 
complete verse. The interesting variety of topics with which 
they deal theology, psychism, devotion, the physical constitu- 
tion of bodies, etymology, and rules of interpretation go a long 
way to indicate that they are genuine quotations from a work 
now lost to us. 



It is also significant to note that besides 'sqsfc*n ? there are 
four other verses quoted in different contexts but all dealing with 
the proper method of interpretation and reconciliation of texts 
which proves that the verse ' ^TcfTHr ......... ' lias a legitimate place 

in the Brhat Bamluia and was not ( and in fact could not have 
been) falsely ascribed to an imaginary Brhat BamMa. 

1 Op. cit., u, 2, 7. 
% Op- cit., ii, 9, 24 T 



40 Annals of the Bhhndarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Another important fact to be noticed in this connection is that 
one of the verses concerning the canons of interpretation cited 
by Madhva from the Brhat Sarnhda and later on quoted by 
Vyasaraja Syamin in his Nyayfimrta is seen to be quoted and 
passed over in silence by Madhusudana Sarasvati in the Advaita 
Siddhi} Now, from whafr we know of Madhusudana, we can 
safely say thart he would certainly have denied the genuineness 
of the text from the Brhat Samhita rather than taken the trouble 
of quoting it and passing it over- Instances are not wanting 2 
wherein Madhusudana refuses to subscribe to the genuineness of 
texts cited by Madhva. Hence we may safely conclude that 
Madhusudana had no difficulty in admitting the text 



I" ffw ' as a genuine citation from a genuine work 
known as Brhat Saihhita. 

The foregoing observations would establish the genuineness 
of the Brhat Samjiita once extant but no longer available. In- 
stances are not rare of ' Samhitas ' such as the present one which 
are known to have existed once through quotations in later works ; 
but which to-day, have passed into the limbo of the forgotten 
and the irrecoverable. Ramanuja and Madhva both quote from 
a Parama Samluta ; Sudarsana quotes from a tirikalcttara and 
Madhva again quotes from a Prakasa Famhita all of which are 
now completely lost. The present writer, however, has great 
pleasure in announcing to such as are interested that a small 
fragment of the Prakasa Samhita is extant and that a transcrip- 
tion from an old manuscript copy of it ( also extant ) is still in 
his possession. There is no inherent impossibility in the Brhat 
Saihhim having been extant in the times of Madhva nor is there 
any reason to discredit the Acarya's Statement so far as we know. 

Anent '' the K^thaiayana-Matharayana sources from which 
he ( Madhva ) is in the habit of citing certain 6ruti texts," time 

1 ^^=irM<11^T^ 3T13TRT ^5T% fiqvj; \ 

rre^T^Kor ^mM^T U quoted in the Piirvapaksa, Advaita JSiddhi 
P. 105, Sri Vidya: Bress, Kumbhakonam, 1893. The same text would be 
found quotecl by Madhva under n, 1,18 ( Vedanta iSutra) and ex- 
tracted on p. 237 ante. 

I Op. cit.. p. 286, 



On the Date of Srikaritha and t\e Brhat-Samhita 241 

and patient research alone would bring to light most of the un- 
traceable Brutis and Smrlis quoted by Madhva in his works ; but 
the attitude of mind which posits in the name of Madhva tfrutis 
even he has not cared to ' fabricate 1 ? will neither farther research 
in that direction by one single step nor reflect credit on the 
maker of such wild accusations. 

Now for the question whether Akhandairanda is to be regarded 
as the de facto author of the verse 6 swjfto ; ; which, " in the form 
in which it is found in the Tattvadipana, seems to Jiavs become 
familiar to Sri Madhvacarya." ( Italics mine ). The insinuation 
embodied in the italicised phrase needs no comment. On Mr. 
Chintamani's own showing, the verse goes back to an earlier 
source. I am really surprised at Mr. Chintamani's serious mis- 
representation and deliberate misquotation from Akhandananda. 
Says he " Akhandananda refers to this verse with the following 
remarks : 



Edition of the Tattvadipana in 

the Benares Sanskrit Series, p. 687." 

But the real and undistorted fact is tbat Akhandananda refers 
to the verse with the remark * 



Mr. Chintamarii substitutes 3^ for ?fm=^ in the original and 
altogether omits ' ?t?T 2 ' of Akhandananda and offers an emended 

1 The fact is that Madhva has cited only Easaya^a and Mathara Srutis 

m bis works besides others but nowhere has he cited anything like 
Katharaya^a and Matharayana drutis. Perhaps the &rutt& foisted on 
Madhva by Mr. Chmtamani are the result of his original researches 
into the works of Madhva ! A learned critic of Madhva is said to 
have confounded the Tura Sruti of Madhva with Catura Sruti. 
Evidently Mr. Chintamani has tried to improve upon this prototype. 

2 The presence of this ff^T coupled with cTqTC... would seem to indicate 

that Akhandanauda himself was quoting it faithfully from 
earlier source- 



242 Annals of the BhandarJcar Oriental Research Institute 

version. But this is playing tricks with evidence which cannot 
go undetected. I can only add how painful it is for me to expose 
the frantic attempts of Mr. Chintaraani to foist the verse on 
Akhandananda by such artificial means of questionable probity, 

Far from emanating for the first time either from Akhapda- 
nanda or his preceptor, the Tatparya Lingas ( enumerated in the 
verse ) have been the stock-in-trade of all Vedantins from time 
immemorial. The six Tatparya Lingas or principles of interpre- 
tation are as old as the Vedanta Sutras. In fact, these enjoyed 
among the Vedantins the same recognition and importance which 
the Mimarhsakas gave to another set of six canons of interpreta- 
tion g 



the order of authority here being in the ascending order from the 
last : 



There is a remarkable parallelism^ between the two sets of 
canons and it i*s not altogether rare to find even the Mlmamsakas 
making use of the canons of their compeers, the Vedantins. 
References Jo ^<j^aT, ^^ and 3T^rr2r are common enough in 
Mimamsa literature : 



1 Mimamsa tiutra iii, 3, 14. 

2 &a$tradipika, p. 249, Bombay, 1915, 

3 Of. ^r^Ri^To^^r ^Slpqt ^TtrJ^ \ 

Srri?: ^^ 5 5rfFT%ltRaf^r^ \\ 

4 tiastracfipika p. 91. 

5 Op. cifc., p. 83, 



On th6 Date cf Srikantha and the Srhat-SaihMA 243 

The speculative age of the Upanisads which had already 
given currency to a number of new technical terms in logic 1 
could not possibly have failed to evolve canons of interpretation 
corresponding to ' ^Tci^ffo'. Badarayana himself makes striking 
use of some of them : swrw, ^ and OTTT%. In the Samanvaya 
gMrfmcf^Wff^'wra;, he tacitly admits the application of all the 
Tatparya Lingas in arriving: at a satisfactory interpretation of the 
divergent testimony of the Upanisads in regard to the nature of 
Brahman. He himself makes significant use of abhyasa* SJT^;- 
rifrswrai^; upapatti : ^rre^qq^: ariw^ftg ?r 3TTC1T-* and of <K^. 
Samkara notes Audulomi's resort to arthavada in his commentary.* 

Prakasatman himself in his tiabdanit naya declares that the 
identity of the individual with the Supreme is established by the 
proper application of the Lingas 3"*T5F$T etc., in the interpretation 
of texts. His own statement, 



^t n 

does not give the impression that the ' Lingas ' herein brought 
together originate for the first time from him. On the 
contrary, Prakasatman is visibly anxious to find support for his 
thesis in the hoary interpretational traditions of the Yedanta as 
embodied in the verse ' ^T^Ht 7 . This is quite clear from his 
own commentary on the verse * 



whereupon he cites the relevant 
texts embodying these Lingas and concludes - 13" ^c 

*T2rr*?!*t 



Cf. " In the Aitareya JBrahmana, Kathopamsad etc , tkere occur such 
terms as tarka ( debate ), yukti ( continuous argument ), jalpa ( wrang- 
ling ), vitanda ( cavil ), chala ( quibble ), mrnaya (ascertainment ), 
pr ayoj an a ( purpose ), pramana ( proof ), prameya (object of know- 
ledge )" etc. Histonj of Indian Logic, Vidyabhushan, p, 23, Calcutta 
1921. 



tfamkara Bhasya on iv, 4, 



244 Annals of the Phandarftcur Oriental e$earch 



l^ sfta: 1 U Attention n;ust be dravMi to his use of th 
terms emTWt' etc. without any explanation and to his rtfeierce 
even to the exact number of them as six inspite of the fact that 
actually seven Lingas are embodied in the vere given ly him 
The point is that 3<re*T andSTOfrc came to be treated as one Linga 
and the assumption of this attitude by Prakasatman ( see comm 
ante} without any explanation also shows that even by the tiire 
of Prakasatman and necessarily long before him, the Vedantins 
had effected the amalgamation which continued to pass muster 
This again, presupposes the popularity of the seven Lifigcts from 
very early days and Prakasatman could not certainly have 
invented 2 them. Neither was he the fir^t person to codify them 
for reasons already detailed. On the contrary, Pnakasatman seems 
to have simply adopted the well-known verse mutatis mutandis in 
his tfabdanirnaya, 

The author of the Pancapadika has clearly anticipated the 
Tatparya Lingas though he does not make out a l n elaborate inven- 
tory of them which is done by Prakasatman in his Paficapadika- 
vwarana. Padmapada's several references, 



1 &abdanirnaya pp 4 69-70. The most significant and ' tell-tale * lacuna 

here being the absence of the finite verh which betrays the verse in 
its true colors as an excerpt mutatis mutandis,, it is easy to see that 
the verse is not a self-sufficing composition of Frakasatman. 

2 Nor is Samkara the inventor, much less the codifier of the tatparya 

Uhgas for the first time as is fondly believed by some. In fact 
Samkara has nowhere referred to all the sis tatparya lingas in a 
connected manner tn one place, nor given the verse embodying them 
in his Bhasya beyond noting in one place . aqr^qtf !lfln^^?Tl^ttUI 
(111,3,36), 

3 Pancapadika of Badmapada, p. 84, Vizianagaram Sanskrit Series, 

4 Op. cit., p. 91. 

5 Op. cit., p, 98, 



On the Date of Srikantha and the JBthat-Samfiifa JJ45 

prove that he was fully aware of the six Tafparya Lu'tgas and the 
use that Samkara desires fco be made of them. 

The prevalence of these Tafparya Linger long before Prakasat- 
man is established by Padmapada's references to qrs>, sraVp? etc, 
and by Vacaspati Misra's references to some of them : 



Eeference has already been made to Sudaisana Suri's fami- 
liarity with, the verse. 

Prakasatman brings out clearly all the six Tatparya Lingas 
anticipated by Padmapada * 



\ and indicates at length 
the relevant Upanisadic texts embodying them. 

It will be seen from the foregoing passage of the Vivarana that 
its author has indicated at length the application of the six 
Tatparya Lingas embodied in the well-known verse ' ^M^HJ c * 
without himself quoting it in the Vivarana but which he gives 
mutatis mutandis in his Sabdanirnaija where the last quarter qrSir 
3TTTOWJ <R: seems to have been specially introduced in place of 
the regular one * V&i? cTfcT'Jf^rfr'Sr I. 

1 Bhamatl of Vacaspati Misra, p. 8, (with Kalpataru and Panmala ) 

Nirnayasagar Press, 1917. 

2 Op.cit,, p 103. 

3 Mark the reference to 3^351} and ;3TOifR; as one hnga here also without 

any attempt to explain the same. 

4 Pancapadika Vivarana of Prakasatman, p 235, Vizianagaram Sanskrit 

Series, 1892. 

5 Ibid. 

7 [ Annals, B. O. R- I.]. 



246 Annals of the &hvn*iarkar Oriental fitisearch Institute 

Now, Akhandananda, after making the necessary comments 
on the Vivarana passage quoted above, cites the full verse too, 
which sums up the Llhgas not with the remark 3? ^3^31$: 
which would mean that the Sloka is from his own pen but with 
the significant remark crai^T tfsrss^P: * OTcfiW ...... ' ^t%^ which 

implies that he is eager to bring the various texts quoted and 
correlated with their particular Lviga* by Prakasafcman himself 
into line with the well-known verse giving the Tafparya Lingas. 



- -such will be the most legitimate and reasonable 
conclusion we have to draw from the manner of Akhandananda's 
introducing the verse. I am afraid, Mr. Chintamani has no right 
to evade this natural interpretation of Akhandananda after having 
purposely distorted his statement and given a curiously perverted 
misquotation. 

We have already demonstrated Srlkantha's priority to 
Akhandananda. Even if our reasonings may riot convince 
everybody, it is admitted by Mr. Chintamani himself that Sri* 
kantha was not removed from Akhandananda by more than a 
couple of decades. In any case, it is clearly demonstrable that 
the verse goes back for earlier than both Srlkantha and Akhanda- 
nanda. Srlkantha cites the verse with the remark " 



fir b " which is coolly and completely omitted by Mr. Chintamani. 
The phrase cfSTTOri^rr attests the hoary antiquity of the verse in 
question. Srlkantha, as a predecessor of both Madhva and Akhanda- 
nanda, could not have borrowed the verse from Akhandananda 
unless Mr. Chintamani now revises the dates he has assigned 
to both Akhandananda and Srlkantha. Secondly, if Srlkantha 
had been in any manner indebted to Akhandananda for the verse, 
he would have made the fact clearer by some such acknowledg- 

1 Tattva&pana of Akhandananda, p. 687 , Benares Sanskrit Series. 

fc Srikaritha Brahma Mimamta Bhaya, p. 21, Mysore Oriental Library 
Series. 

a Attention hss already been drawn to the significance of the term. 
See ante p. 241. 



On the Dale Of rtkavtha and the Brkat-SamUta 247 



ment as fpJW cit^^T^r. The phrase TOT <TdPcT seems to smack 
more of indebtedness to some Puranic source. 1 

This is happily confirmed by another quotation from some 
Saiva Sgama work which Srikantha gives in which the latparya 
Lingas are clearly presupposed : 

\ 



fr 

<tf el q I 



rnRT: II ?ftr U 

This JLgama work must have been at least a century earlier 
than Srikantha and if the Lingas <c TT^T etc., " are to "be found 
presupposed in it, it readily stands to reason that they were far 
earlier than Akhandananda - whatever his date. 

Eamanuja, who was certainly earlier than Akhandananda in 
one place remarks : 



The probability of the verse *yT#'*fr... y going back to some 
Paranio source ( as supposed by Madhva ), is endorsed by some 
quotations in Vidyaranya's ~Vivarana Prameya Safngraha ? 



: U 



u 

6arhkara Bhasya i, 4, 1, 

2 &rlkantha Bhusya p, 21, Mysore Oriental Library Series. 

3 RSmanuJa's Vedartha Samgraha, Pandit Reprints, p. 47* 

4 Fzvarana Prameya tiamgraha, Bengali E4nv Baguipati Sahitya Man<Jir 

pp, 7-8. 



248 Annals of the JBhandarfcar Oriental Research Imtitnte 

The exact identity of the Purana is not however clear. Theie 
seems, however, to be some distant parallelism in tone to these 
verses in some of the Brhat SarnMta verses cited by Madhva * 



'The reference to snr&r, x*^ and cHTgrOTPEffi 1 in both the sets of 
verses cannot simply be accidental. ISTor is it without signifi- 
cance that " the Lingas such as 3"<*5fW etc., " should have been 
referred to in both the works the one cited by Vidyaranya and 
the other by Madhva, Our quest for the parentage of the verse 
' ^l^nrf... ? leads us to unexpected quarters. Amalananda in his 
Sastradarpana } seems to discern some of the latparya Lifigas in 
some ruti texts ! Granted that the verse c OTaFsW ' is a genuine 
Puranic text, it can readily be traced to some ruti text in con- 
formity with a well-known Mlmamsaka dictum. It may not be 
entirely idle to point out for the serious consideration of scholars 
that Narayana 2 in his commentary on Madhusudana Sarasvati's 
Siddhanta Bindu actually quotes the verse ' ^q'^rit } 4t in the form 
in which it is found in the Tattvadlpana ' 7 as a Sniti text which 
whatever we may think of it, is much more startling and mon- 
strous than Madhva's mere ascription of it to "an anonymous 
but contemporary work known as Brhat Samhita ! " 

However that may be, the suggestion may not after all be out 
of place here that the * Purana ' cited by Vidyaranya may be 
identical with the source referred to by Madhva as Brhat Samhita, 
Not infrequently, the texts and sources referred to by Madhva 
are found to be corroborated by earlier and later Advaitins. I 
shall bring my article to a close by referring to only one such 
instance of the citation of the verse : 



II Bengali Edn,, p. 656, Lotus Library, s'aka 1839. 
U 



\ 

Siddhanta Bindu with Comm. of Narayana, p. 238. Benares Sanskrit 
Series 65, 1928, 



On the Date of tirlkantha and the Brhat-Samhita 249 



^: u 

quoted by Madhva from the Skanda in his commentary on the 
Vedanta Sutras among a number of other verses from the same 
source which is corroborated by Padmapada in his Pancapadika 1 : 



The verse ' 3T?Tr^w4i%rcf ? is as popular and authoritative 
among the Vedanfcins as ' 'OT^T^Rirr^Kt 7 etc. Madhva 's ascription 
of it to the Skanda is fully confirmed by Sudarsana Suri's classi- 
cal commentary on the &ri J3hasya 2 while its Puranic genuine- 
ness is admitted by Padmapada. 

It is not improbable that in the absence of such an earlier 
admission of and cross reference to the Puranic authenticity of this 
verse, Madhva's ascription of it to the Skanda would certainly 
have been questioned by born sceptics and Madhva - phobes like 
Mr. Chintamani. Providence alone has to be thanked for yet 
preserving sometimes prominently and at other times com- 
pletely hidden from the searching eyes of enthusiastic researchers 
some traces of the numerous texts cited by Madhva ; and in the 
interests of historical and critical scholarship let us hope 
that many more texts and sources referred to by Madhva will in 
the near future be brought to light. 



1 Pancapadika p 82, 

2 tiruta Prakasa of Sudarsana, pp. 11-12, Medical Hall Press, Benares, 



PALI CHEONIOLESS 

J3Y 

BIMALA CHURN LAW, Ph. D , M, A., B, L. 

The Dipavamsa or the Chronicle of the Island of Lanka is the 
earliest known work of its kind. It puts 
Dipavarhsa together certain well-known traditions 

handed down among the Buddhists of Ceylon, sometimes in a 
clumsy manner. Its diction is in places unintelligible, and its 
narrative is dull and interrupted by repetitions- Its authorship 
is unknown. The canonical model of this work is to be traced 
in a number of verses in the Parivarapatha of the Vinayapitaka, 
The Dipavamsa is an authoritative work well-known in Ceylon 
at the time of Buddhaghosa, and as a matter of fact the great 
Pali commentator has copiously quoted from it in the intro- 
ductory portion of his commentary on the Kathavatthu. Dr. 
Oldenberg has cited and translated the book into English. He 
says that the Dipavamsa and the Mahavarbsa are in the main 
nothing but two versions of the same substance both being based 
on the historical introduction to the great commentary of 1he 
Mahavihara. The Dipavamsa follows step by step and almost 
word for word the traces of the original. According to 
Oldenberg the Tipavamsa cannot have been written before 
302 A. D. because its narrative extends till that year. If we 
compare the language and the style in which the Dipavamsa and 
the Mahavamsa are written, it leaves no doubt as to the priority 
of the former. The Dipavamsa was so popular in Ceylon that 
King Dhatusena ordered it to be recited in public at an annual 
festival held in honour of an image of Mahinda in the 5th 
century A. D. ( Vide the Dipavamsa edited by Oldenberg, Intro- 
duction, pp. 8-9 ) Dr. Geiger has published a valuable treatise 
known as the Dipavamsa and Mahavamsa ( 1904 )J An idea of 
its contents can be gsthered from the summary given below. 

1 Dipavamsa und MahSvariua und die geschichthche uberheferung in 
Ceylon, Leipzig, 1903. Translated into English by E. M 
swaniy, Dipavamsa and Mahavamsa, Colombo, 1908. 



Pali Chronicles 51 

The first chapter gives an account of Buddha's first visit to 
the island of Lanka. Gotama obtained perfect enlightenment at 
the foot of the Bodhi-tree. He surveyed the whole world and 
perceived the island of Lanka, a dwelling place fit for saints 
He foresaw that Mahinda, the son of the Indian King Asoka, 
would go to the island and propogate the Buddhist faith there. 
Accordingly he placed a divine guard over the island. He visited 
Lanka and drove the Yakkhas ; inhabitants of the place, out of 
the island. 

Buddha visited the island for the second time when the island 
was on the verge of being destroyed by a terrific war which 
ensued between the mountain-serpents and the sea-serpents, The 
Lord exhorted them to live in peace and all the serpents took 
their refuge in him. 

His third visit to the island was in connection with an invita- 
tion he got from the Naga King Maniakkhika of Kalyanl. 

The DJpavamsa then traces Buddha's descent from the Prince 
Mahasammata, the first inaugurated king of the earth. Gotama 
Buddha was the son of Suddhodana, chief of Kapilavatthu and 
Rahulabhadda was the son of Gotama. Mention is also made of 
many other kings who reigned before Suddhodana and after 
Mahasammata. 

A brief account of the first two Buddhist Councils and the 
different Buddhist schools that arose after the second council is 
also given. The first council was held under the presidency of 
Mahakassapa and under the patronage of Ajatasattu. Ihe first 
collection of Dhamma and Vinaya was made with the assistance 
of Upali and Ananda. The second council was held during the 
reign of Kalasoka. The Vajjiputtas proclaimed the ten indul- 
gences which had been forbidden by the Tathagata. The Vajji- 
puttas seceded from the orthodox party and we^e called the Maha- 
samghikas. They were the first schismatics. In imitation of 
them many heretics arose, e. g., the Gokulikas, the Ekabbohari- 
kas, tie Bahussutiyas, etc. In all there were eighteen sects 
seventeen heretical and one orthodox. Besides these there were 
other minbr schools. 



262 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

The Dlpavamsa further deals with the reign of the great 
Indian King Asoka, the grandson of Candagutta and son of 
Bimbisara, and the notable events that took place in his time. It 
was during his reign that Mahinda went to Ceylon and spread 
Buddhism there with the help of the Ceylonese King Devanampiya- 
tissa who was a contemporary of Asoka the Great. It is said 
that this great king built 84,000 viharas all over the Jambudvlpa, 
The third Buddhist Council was held under the presidency of 
Thera Moggaliputta Tissa and under the patronage of Asoka. 
After the council was over the Thera sent Buddhist missionaries 
to different countries ( Gandhara, Mahisa, Aparantaka, Maha- 
rattha, Yona, Himavata, Suvannabhumi, and Lanka) for the 
propagation of Buddha's religion. 

The Dlpavamsa gives a brief account of the colonization of 
Ceylon by Vijaya, son of the King of Vanga, and also a systema- 
tic account of kings of Ceylon who ruled after Vijaya and their 
activities in promoting the cause of Buddhism. Slhabahu, King 
of Vanga, enraged at the bad conduct of Vijaya, his eldest son, 
banished him from his kingdom. Vijaya with a number of 
followers went on board a ship and sailed away on the sea. They 
in course of their journey through the waters visited the sea-port 
towns of Supparaka and Bharukaccha and later on came to Lanka- 
dipa. Vijaya and his followers set on colonising this country 
and built many cities. Vijaya became the first crowned king of 
the island. After Vijaya we find a long list of kings among 
whom Devanampiyatissa stands out pre-eminent. 

It was during the reign of Devanampiyatissa that Buddhism 
was first introduced into Lanka through Mahinda who at the 
instance of Thera Moggaliputta Tissa, the President of the Third 
Council, went to Ceylon for the propagation of the Buddhist 
faith there. It may be noted here that the great Indian King 
Asoka was a contemporary of Devanampiyatissa and that they 
were in friendly terms. Asoka sent a branch of the Bodhi-tree 
of the Tathagata to Lanka which was planted with great honour 
at Anuradhapura. 

After the death of Devanampiyatissa Buddhism Was not in a 
flourishing condition- The immediate successors of the king 



Poll Chronicles 253 

were weak. The Damilas carre over io Lan^a frcm Southern 
India and occupied the country. The people were tired of the 
foreign yoke. They found in Dutthagamanl, a prince of the 
royal family, who could liberate the country from the foreign 
domination. Dutthagamanl at the head of a huge aimy drove 
the Damilas out of the country. He was the greatest of the 
Sinhalese kings. Whether as a warrior or a ruler, Dutthagamaul 
appears equally great. He espoused the cause ot Buodhibm ELIK! 
built the Lohapasada, nine storeys in Leight, the Mahathupa, and 
many other viharas* Indeed Buddhism was in its most flourish- 
ing condition during the reign of this great king. 



Dutthagamanl was followed by a number of kings, 
them Vattagamani was the greatest His reign is highly impor- 
tant for the history of Buddhist literature. It was during his 
reign that the bhikkhus recorded in written books the text of the 
three Pitakas and also the Atthakatha, Vattagamani was also 
succeeded by a number of important kings. The account of the 
kings of Ceylon is brought down to the reign of king Mahasena 
who reigned for 27 years from circa 325 to 352 A. D. 

At the close of the 4th century A. D. there existed in Ceylon, 
an older work, a sort of chronicle of the 
ltS history of the island from very early times. 
The work was a part of the Atthakatha which 
was composed in old Sinhalese prose mingled with Pali verses. 
The work existed in the different monasteries of Ceylon and on 
it, the Mahavamsa is based. The chronicle must have originally 
come down to the arrival of Mahinda in Ceylon ; but it was later 
carried down to the reign of Mahasena ( 4th century A. f>. ) with 
whose reign the Mahavamsa comes to an end. Of this work, 
the Dipavamsa presents the first clumsy redaction in Pali verses. 
The Mahavamsa is thus a conscious and intentional rearrange- 
ment of the Dlpavamsa as a sort of commentary on the latter. 

Author The author of the Mahavanua is known as Mahanaman, 

A ^ell-known passage of the Cnlavamsa alludes to the fact 
that King Dhatusena bestowed a thousand 
Bate pieces of gold and gave orders to write a 

8 [ Annals, B. O. R> I. J 



254 Annals of the Shandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

dipika on the Dipavamsa. This dtpika has been identified "by 
Fleet with the Mahavarhsa ; and if this identification be correct 
then the date of its origin is more precisely fixed. Dhatusena 
reigned at the beginning of the 6th century A. D., and about this 
bime the Mahavarhsa was composed. 

The historicity of the work is established by the following 
Historicity of the work facts : ~~ 

( a ) As to the list of kings before Asoka, namely the nine 
Nandas, Candagutta and Bimbisara, the statements concerning 
Bimbisara and Ajatasattu as contemporaries of the Buddla 
agrees with canonical writings, and in respect of the names, with 
those of the Brahmanic tradition. In the number of years of 
Candagutta's reign, the Ceylonese tradition agrees with the 
Indian. Candagutta 7 ^ councillor Canaka (Canakya) is also 
known. 

( b ) The conversion of Ceylon, according to the Chronicles, 
was the work of Mahinda, son of Asoka, and this is confirmed to a 
considerable extent by the fact that Asoka twice in his inscrip- 
tions ( Rock Edicts XIII & II ) mentions Ceylon to be one of the 
countries where he sent his religious missionaries, and provided 
for distribution of medicines. It receives further support from 
Hiuen Tsang who mentions Mahendra, a brother of Asoka, 
expressly as the man by whom the true doctrine was preached in 
Sinhala. Even before Mahinda, relations existed between India 
and Ceylon, for the chronicles relate that Asoka sent to Devanam- 
piyafcissa presents for his sacred consecration as the king of 
Ceylon. 

( c) An inscription from a relic-casket from Tope No. 2 of the 
Sa&ci group gives us the came of Sapurisasa Mogaliputasa who, 
according to the tradition, presided over the third Council under 
Asoka's rule. There is no doubt that he is identical with 
Moggalliputta Tissa of the Ceylonese Chronicles. 

( d ) The narrative of the transplanting of a branch of the 
sacred Bodhi-tree from Uruvela to Ceylon finds interesting con- 
firmation in a representation of the story on the reliefs of the 
lower and middle architrave of the East gate of the Safici stupa. 



Pali Chronicles 255 

( e ) The contemporaneity of Devanarhpiyatissa with Asoka 
is established on the internal evidence of the Dlpavamsa 
and the Mahavarhsa, as well as by archaeological evidence, 
Another contemporaneity of King Mahavarman reigning from 
G. 352-379 A. D. with Samudragupta is established by the Chinese 
account; of Wang Hientse. 

( f ) There is a general historical reminiscence underlying the 
stories of three Buddhist Councils recorded in the Chronicles. 

But the historical statements are not always infallible; 
and the longer the interval between the time of the events 
and the time when they are related, the greater the possi- 
bility of an error, and the more will be the influence of 
legend noticeable. As regards the period from Vijaya to 
Devanampiyatissa, there is a considerable distrust of 
tradition and traditional chronology. Also during the period 
from Devanampiyatissa to Dutfchagamam there is matter for 
doubt. But in the later periods we encounter no such difficulties 
and impossibilities, The chronology is credible, the numbers 
appear less artificial, and the accounts more trustworthy. 

In the ninth month after Buddhahood, when the Lord Buddha 
was dwelling at Uruvela, he one day per- 
f sonally went to Lanka and converted a large 
assembly o r Yakkhas as well as a large 
number of other living beings. After this, he came back to Uru- 
vela but, again in the fifth year of his Buddhahood when he was 
residing in the Jetavana, he, in an early morning out of com- 
passion for the ISTagas went to the Kagadrpa (apparently the 
north-western part of Ceylon ) where he preached the five moral 
precepts and established the three refuges and converted many 
Nagas. The Lord then came back to Jetavana, but, again, in the 
eighth year of his Buddhahood the Teacher, while dwelling in the 
Jetavana, went to Kalyanl and preached the Dhamma, and then 
came back to Jetavana. 

The Chapter II gives a long list of kings beginning with 

Mahasammata from whose race sprang the 

The Race of Maha- Q rea t Sage, the Tathagata. Descendants of 



256 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Eesearh Institute 

gaha and Mittxila, and they reigned in groups in their due order, 
One group whose chief was Okkaka ruled at Kapilavatfclm and 
was known as the Sakyas. In this line was born Yasodhara, a 
daughter of king Jayasena, and she was married to Sakka Anjana, 
They had two daughters, Maya and Pajapatl, who were both 
married to Suddhodana, a grandson ot Jayasena and son cf 
Slhahanu. The son of Suddhodana and Maya was the Lord 
Buddha whose consort was Bhaddakaccana, son was Eahula, 
great friend was Bimbisara, and another contemporary was 
Bimbisara's son, Ajatasattu. 

The first Buddhist Council 1 was convened three months after 
the parinirvana of the Buddha ( at Kuslnara ) 
in the Sattapanni Cave at Rajagaha where 
his nearest disciples followed by seven 
hundred thousand Bhikkhus and a large number of lay men 
assembled to establish the most important rules of the Order as, 
according to their recollection, the Master himself had laid 
down. The work of the compilation was entrusted to Thera 
Ananda and Thera Upali. Thera Upali spoke for the Vinaya, 
and Thera Ananda for the rest of the dhamma ; and Thera Maha- 
kassapa seated on the Thera 's chair asked questions touching 
the Vinaya, Both of them expounded them in detail and the 
Theras repeated what they had said. The work of the First 
Council took seven months to be completed, and the Council rose 
after it had finished compilation of the Dhamm a, and the canon 
came to be known as Thera Tradition. 

A century after the parinibbana of the Buddha when Kalasoka 

was the reigning king, there were ab Vaisall many Bhikkhus of 

the Va]]i clan who used to preach the ten points of Buddhism. 

But the Theras of Pava and Avantl with their leader, the great 

Thera Eevata, declared that these ten points were unlawful, and 

wanted to bring the dispute to a peaceful end. All of them 

followed by a large number of Bhikkhus then went to Vaisall 

and there met the Bhikkhus of the Vajji clan. Kalasoka too 

1 Prof. Przyluski's Le Concile de Bajagrha, pt. I, pp. 8, 30, 66 and 116 
should be consulted. Read also Buddhjst Councils by Dr. P. C 
Majumdar published in the Buddhistic Studies, Edited by Dr. B. Law, 



Pali Chronicles ^57 

went there, and, hearing both sides, decided in favour of the true 
faith, held out by the Theras of Pava and Avantl, The brother- 
hood then came together finally to decide, and Revata resolved to 
settle the matter by an Ubbahika wherein four from each of the 
two parties were represented. Thera Revata, in order to hold a 
council, chose also seven hundred out of all that troop of 
Bhikkhus, and all of them met in the Valikarama and compiled 
the Dhamma in eight months. The heretical Bhikkhus who 
taught the wrong doctrine founded another school which came to 
bear the name Mahasaraghika. 

The Third Council was held under better circumstances during 
the reign of King Asoka at the Asokarama in Pataliputta under 
the guidance and presidentship of Thera Moggalliputta Tissa. 
Within hundred years from the compilation of the doctrine in 
the Second Conncil, there arose eighteen different sects in the 
Buddhist Order with their respective schools and systems, and 
another schism in the Church was threatened. At this time, 218 
years from the parinibbana of the Buddha, Asoka came to the 
throne, and after a reign of four years, he consecrated himself as 
king Pataliputta. And, not long after, Samanera Nigrodha 
preached the doctrine to the king, and confirmed Kim with many 
of his followers in the refuges and precepts of duty. Thereupon 
the King became bountiful to the Bhikkhus and eventually 
entered the doctrines. From that time the revenue of the brother- 
hood was on the increase but the heretics became envious, and 
they too, taking the yellow robe and dwelling along with the 
Bhikkhus, began to proclaim their own doctrines as the doctrine 
of the Buddha, and carry out their own practices even as they 
wished. They became so unruly that King Asoka was obliged 
to arrange an assembly of the community of Bhikkhus in its full 
numbers at the splendid Asokarama under the presidency of Thera 
Moggalliputta Tissa. Then did the king question one by one on 
the teachings of the Buddha. Ihe heretical Bhikkhus expounded 
their wrong doctrine, upon which the king caused to be expelled 
from the Order all such Bhikkhus and their followers. Only tlie 
rightly believing Bhikkhus answered that the Lord taught the 
Vibhajja-doctrine, and This was supported ani confirmed by Thera 
Moggalliputfca Tissa. Three thousand learned Bhikkhus were then 



258 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

selected to make a compilation of the true doctrine under the 
guidance of the great Thera, and they completed their work at 
the Asokarama in nine months. 

Vijaya of evil conducL was the son and prince regent of King 
Sihabahu, ruler of the kingdom of Lala-, but 
T S "vwa he was ^nished from the kingdom by Ms 
and others father for his many intolerable deeds of 

violence. Boarded on a ship with his large 
number of followers with their wives and children, Vijaya first 
landed at Supparaka, but afterwards, embarking again landed 
in Lanka in the region called Tambapanni, where he eventually- 
married and consecrated himself as king and built cities. After 
his death, he was succeeded by his brother's son Panduvasudeva 
who married Subhaddakaccana and consecrated himself as king. 
He was in his turn succeeded by his son Abhaya who was 
followed by Pandukabhaya. Between Pandnkabhaya and Abhaya, 
there was no king for 17 years. 

Pandukabhaya's son Mutasiva followed his father and was 

Devanaihpiyatissa succeeded by his second son Devanarhpiya- 

tissa whose friend was Dhammasoka whom 

he had never seen, but to whom he was pleased to send a prince- 
less treasure as a gift. Dhammasoka appreciated the gift, and 
sent as a return-gift another treasure to Devanampiyatissa who 
was now consecrated as King of Lanka, 

After the termination of the Third Council, Moggalliputtatissa 
Thera, in order to establish the religion in adjacent countries, 
sent out learned and renowned missionaries to Kasmlr, Gandhara, 
Mahisatnandala, Vanavasa, Aparantaka, Maharattha, Suvaima- 
bhumi (Burma), and to the Yona country. To the lovely island 
of Lanka, he sent there Maliinda, the Theras Itthiya, Uttiya, 
Sambala, and Bhaddasala to preach the religion. 

Mahinda, then a monk, came out to Lanka with four Theras 

Sanghamifcfca's son Sumana, the gifted Saraa- 

., 
Dera. Even on their landing many devas, 

nagas and supannas were converted to the 
doctrine, and he with his followers entered the capital city 
where people Pronged to see him, and he preached the true 



Pali Chronicles 359 

to them. The wise king Devanampiyatissa heard him explain 
some of the miracles and teachings and episodes of the life of the 
Buddha, and became one of his most devoted patrons. The king 
(hen built for the great Thera the Mahavihara, henceforth known 
osthe Mahameghavanarama which the Thera accepted. Next 
the king built for him and his followers, another vihara on the 
Cetiyapabbata, henceforth known as the Cetiya pabbata-vihar?* 
which too the Thera accepted. The wise king then became eager 
to enshrine one of the relics of the Great Lord the Buddha in a 
stupa, so that he and the followers of the faith might behold the 
Conqueror in his relics and worship him. Upon his request 
Mahinda sent Sumana to King Dhammasoka with the instruction 
to bring from him the relics of the Sage and the alms-bowl of th& 
Master, and then to go to Sakka in the fair city of the gods to 
bring the collar-bone of the Master from him. Sumana faithfully 
carried out the instruction, and when he landed down on the 
Missaka mountain with the relics, the king and the people were 
all filled with joy, and thirty thousand of them received the 
Fabba^a of the Conqueror's doctrine. Later on the king sent his 
nephew and minister Arittha again to Dhammasoka to bring 
the Bodhi-Tree, which at Dhammasoka' s approach, severed of 
itself and transplanted itself in the vase provided for the purpose. 
Arittha then came back on board a ship across the ocean to the 
capital with the holy tree and a gay rejoicing began. With the 
Bodhi-tree came also Therl Sanghamitta with eleven followers. 
The Tree and its Saplings were planted with due ceremony at 
different places, and royal consecration was bestowed on them. 
Under the direction of the Thera Mahinda who converted the 
island, Devanampiyatissa continued to build viharas and thupas 
one after another, and thus ruled for 40 years, after which he died. 
He was succeeded on the throne by his son, prince Uttiya ; but 
in the eighth year of his reign, the great Thera Mahinda,^ who 
had brought light to the island of Lanka died at the age of sixty ; 
and the whole island was struck with sorrow at his death, and the 
funeral rites were observed with great ceremony. 

After a reign of ten years Uttiya died, and was followed by 
Mahaslva, Suratissa, two Damilas, Sena and Gufctaka, Asela and 



260 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research 

Elara, a Damila from the Cola country, in succession. Elaia ^as 
killed by Dutthagamam who succeeded the former cs King. 

Gamani, for such was his original narn e, was born of prince 
Kakavannatissa, overlord of Mahagama, and Viharadevi, daughter 
of the King of Kalyam. Gamani was thus descended through the 
the dynasty of Mahanaga, second brother of Devanampiyatlesa, 
Kakavannatissa had another son by Viharadevi named Tissa, and 
both Gamani and Tissa grew up tog-ether. Now when they were 
ten and twelve years old, Kakavannatissa who was a believing 
Buddhist, wanted his sons to make three promises ; first, they 
would never turn away from the Bhikkhus, secondly, the two 
brothers would ever be friendly towards each other, and, thirdly, 
never would they fight the Damilas. The two brothers made the 
first two promises but turned back to make the third, upon which 
their father became sorry. Gamani gradually grew up to sixteen 
years, vigorous, renowned, intelligent, majestic and mighty. He 
gathered round him mighty and great warriors from far and near 
villages, as well as from the royal and noble families. Gamani 
developed a strong hatred towards the Damilas who had more 
than once usurped the throne of Lanfea, and became determined 
to quell them down. Now he had gathered a strong army of 
brave and sturdy warriors round him, he approached his father 
for permission to make war on the Damilas. But the king, 
though repeatedly requested, declined to give any such permission. 
As a pious Buddhist devoted to the cult of ahimsa, he could not 
give permission for war that would result in bloodshed and 
cruelty. He also dissuaded the warriors to fight for his sons. 
Gamani, thereupon, became disgusted with his father, and went 
to Malaya ; and because of his anger and disgust towards his 
father, he was named as Dutthagamani. In the meantime King 
Kakavannatissa died, and there arose a deadly scramble for the 
throne between the two brothers, Dutthagamani and Tissa. Two 
battles were fought with considerable loss of life, and Duttha- 
gamani eventually became victorious. Peace was then concluded 
and the two brothers began to live together again. He took some 
time to provide for his people who had suffered during the last 
wars and then went out to fight against the Damilas. He over- 
powered Damila Chatba, conquered Damila Titthamba and many 



Pali Cnromcles 261 

other mighty Damila princes and kings. Deadly were the wars 
that he fought with, them, but eventually lie came oufc victorious 
and united the whole of Lanka into one kingdom. Gamani was then 
consecrated with great pomp, and not long after he himself conse- 
crated Maricavatti vihara which he had built up. Next took 
place the consecration of the Lohapasada , but the building up 
of the Great Thupa was now to be taken up He look some time 
to the obtaining of the wherewithal, i. e., the materials of the 
thupa from different quarters, and then began the work in which 
masons and workmen from far and near did take part and at the 
beginning of which a great assemblage of Theras from different 
countries took place. When the work of the building had con- 
siderably advanced, the king ordered the making of the Relic- 
chamber in which the relics were afterwards enshrined with due 
eclat, pomp, and ceremony. But ere yet the making of the chatta 
and the plaster work of the monument was finished, the king fell 
ill which later on proved fatal. He sent his younger brother 
Tissa, and asked him to complete the thupa, which Tissa did. 
The ill king passed round the Cetiya on a palanquin and did 
homage to it, and left with Tissa the charge of doing all the work 
that still remained to be done towards it. He then enumerated 
some of the pious works he had done in his life to the Theras and 
Bhikkhus assembled round his bed, and one of the Theras spoke 
to Mm on the unconquerable foe of death. Then the king became 
silent, and he saw a golden chariot cams down from the Tusita 
heaven. Then he breathed his last, and was immediately seen 
reborn and standing in celestial form in a car that had come down 
from the Tusita heaven. 

Dutthagamanl was succeeded by his brother Saddha" Tissa 
who ruled for 18 years, and built many 

A LoDg Line of Kings cetiyas and viharas. He was followed by 

Ten kings Thulathana, Lanjatissa, Ehallatanaga and 

Vattagamam. The last named was a 

famous king during: whose reign the Damilas became powerful 
and again usurped the throne. Vattagamani was thus followed 
by Damila Pulahattha, Damila Bahiy a, Damila Panayamaraka, 
Damila Pilayamaraka and Damila Dathika. But the Damilas 
9 [ Annals, B* CX R. I* 3 



$62 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

were dispossessed of their power not long after by VattagSmanI, 
who now ruled for a few more years. 

After his death, his adopted son Mahacull Mahatissa reigned 

for 14 years with piety and Justice. He was 

Eleven kings & 

followed by Coranaga, Tissa, Siva, Damila 

Vatuka, Brahman Niliya, Queen Anula, Kutakanna Tissa, Bhati- 
kabhaya, and Mahadathika Mahanaga \ All of them had short 
reigns and were builders of viharas and cetiyas. Anula was a 
notorious queen and to her love intrigues at least four kings, 
Siva, Tissa, Damila Vatuka and Brahman Niliya, lost their lives. 
Except Tissa, they weie all upstarts and they rightly deserved 
the fate that had been theirs 

After Mahadathika's death, Amandagamani Abhaya, his son, 
Tw ive km s followed him on the throne. He was follow- 
ed by Kanirajanutissa, Culabhaya, Queen 
SI v all, Ilanaga, Candamukhasiva, Yasalalakatissa, Subharaja, 
Vankanasikatissaka, Gajabahukagamani and Mahallaka Naga in 
succession. Most of these kings were worthless, and their merit 
]ay only in the building or extension of viharas and other reli- 
gious establishments and in court-intrigues Two of them, 
Ilanags and Subharaja were however comparatively more noted 
for their acts of bravery and valour exhibited mostly in local 
wars. 

After the death of Mahallanaga, his son Bhatikatissaka reigned 

rp, . , for 24 years. He was followed in succession 

J nirteen kings 

by Kanitthatissaka, Kujjanaga, Kuiicanaga, 
S'rinaga Tissa ( I) , Abhayanaga, Sirinaga II, Vijayakumaraka 
Sarfaghatissa, Sirisarhghabodhi, Gothabhaya and Jetthatissa who 
are grouped together in a chapter entitled " Thirteen Kings " in 
the Mahavamsa. Scarcely there is anything important enough 
to be recorded about these kings, besides the fact that most of 
them ruled as pious Buddhists always trying to further the 
cause of the religion by the foundation and extension of religious 

1 In the list of ancient kings cf Ceylon the name of Darubhatikctissa 
appears after Damila Vatuka ( Vide Geiger, Mahavamsp, Introduction, 
p, XXXVII ). 



Pah Chronicles 263 

establishments, and that they carried out the affairs of the king- 
dom through wars, intrigues, rebellions and local feuds. 

The Jetthatissa was succeeded by his younger brother, Maha- 

King Mahssena sena, who ru]ed for 27 years and during 

whose reign, most probably, the Maha- 

vamsa was given its present form. Originally it ended with 
the death of King DutthagamanI, but now it was probably 
brought up-to date. 

On his accession to the throne, he forbade the people to give 
food to any Bhikkhu dwelling in the Matavihara on penalty of a 
fine of hundred pieces of money. The Bhikkhus thus fell in want, 
and they left the vihara which remained empty for nine years. 
It was then destroyed by the ill-advisers of the king and its 
riches were removed to enrich the Abhayagiri-vihara. The king 
wrought many a deed of wrong upon which his minister Megha- 
varmabhaya became angry and became a rebel. A battle was 
imminent, but the two former friends met, and the king, repen- 
tant of his misdeeds, promised to make good all the harm done to 
the religious establishments of Lanka. The king rebuilt the 
Mahavihara, and founded amongst others two new viharas, the 
Jetavana vihara and the Manihlra vihara. He was also the 
builder of the famous Thuparama vihara, as well as of two other 
nunneries. He also excavated many tanks and did many other 
works of merit. 

Dr. Kern says in his Manual of Indian Buddhism that the 
Mahavamsa deserves a special notice on account of its being so 
highly important for the religious history of Ceylon. Dr. Geiger 
who has made a thorough study of the Pali chronicles, has edited 
the text of the Mahavamsa for the P. T. S. London and has ably 
translated it into English for the same society, with t^e assis- 
tance of the late Dr. M. H. Bode. G. Tumour's edition and 
translation of this text are now out of date. Prof. Geiger has 
translated it into German. Mrs. Bode has retranslated it into 
English and Dr. Geiger himself has revised the English transla- 
tion. There is a commentary on the Mahavamsa known as the 
Mahavamsatika ( WamsatthapakasinI revised and edited by 
gatuwantudawe and Nanissara, Colombo, 1895 ) written by 



264 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

nama of Anuradhapura. This commentary is helpful in reading 
the text It contains many additional data not found in the text 
Readers are referred to the Mahawanse, ed. by Tumour, Ceylon, 
1837, Mahavamsa revised and edited by H. Sumangala Batu* 
wantudawe, Colombo, 1883, and Cambodjan Mahavamsa by E. 
Hardy, J. R. A. S. 1902. There is a Simhalese translation by 
Wijesinha, Colombo, 1889 ( chapter & verse ). 

It has long been ascertained that both the DIpavamsa and the 
Mahavamsa owe their origin to a common 
source - the Atthakatha-Mahavamsa of the 
Mahavihara monastery, which, evidently was 
a sort of chronicle of the history of the island from very early 
times, and must have formed an introductory part of the old 
theological commentary ( Atthakatha ) on the canonical writings 
of the Buddhists. Both Oldenberg and Geiger, the celebrated edi- 
tors of the DTpavamsa and the Mahavamsa respectively, are of opi- 
nion that this Atthakatha-Mahavamsa was composed In Simhalese 
prose, interspersed, no doubt with verse in the Pali language. 
This book ( Mahavarhsa- Atthakatha ) existed in various recen- 
sions in the different monasteries of the island, and the author 
of hobh the Dipavamsa and the Mahavamsa borrowed the materials 
of their works from one or other of the various recensions of that 
Atthakatha. This borrowing presumably was independent, and 
quite in their own way ; but even then, in the main, they are 
nothing but two different versions of the same thing. Bat as the 
Dipavamsa had been composed at least one century and a half 
earlier than the Mahavamsa, it shows perhaps more faithfulness 
to the original, i. e , to the Atthakatha, for, as Oldenberg points 
out, that the '' author of the Dipavamsa borrowed not only the 
materials of his own work, but also the mode of expression, and 
even whole lines, word for word, from the Atthakatha. In fact, 
a great part of the Dipavamsa has the appearance not of an 
independent, continual work, but of a composition of such 
single stanzas extracted from a work or works like the 
Atthakatha 1 '. 1 But the author of the Mahavamsa is not so 
fettered in his style or execution. Coming as he did at least one 

1 Dipavamsa ( Oldeuberg ), Introduction, p. 6. 



Pali Chronicles 265 

century and a half later ( i. e., the beginning of the 6th century 
A, D.) than the author of the Dipavamsa when the islanders had 
attained much more freedom in their learning and writing of the 
Pali language, he evidently showed greater ease and skill in his 
use of the language, as well as in hissiyle and composition, and 
finally, a more free and liberal use of the material of his original 

It is well-known that Mahanama was the author of the Maha- 
vamsa, whereas we are completely in the dark as to the author- 
ship of the Dipavamsa. A further proof of the fact that both the 
authors were indebted to a common source is provided by a very 
striking coincidence of the two narratives, namely, that both the 
chronicles finish their accounts with the death of King Mahasena 
who flourished about the beginning of the 4th century A. D. It 
was not much later that the Dipavamsa was composed, but as the 
Mahavamsa was composed still later, we might as well expect the 
bringing down of the narrative to a later date. But this was not 
the case, apparently for the fact that their common source, the 
A/fcthakatha - Mahavamsa of the Mahavihara monastery, as shown 
by Oldenberg, was very intimately connected with King Malia- 
sena with whose reign the glorious destinies of the monastery 
came practically to an end, and there the Atthakatha could onl> 
logically stop its account 1 . 

But the historical writers of the Mahavihara fraternity did 
not at once bring down their account to the reign of Mahasena. 
The Atthakatha Mahavamsa seems to have originally brought 
down its account only to the arrival of Mahinda in Ceylon ; but 
it was later on continued and brought down to the reign of 
Mahasena, where both the Dipavamsa and the Mahavamsa as 
already noticed came to an end. 

That the Dipavamsa was well-known to the author of the 
Mahavamsa is evident from the very arrangement of the chapters 
and events of the nairative, so much so that the Mahavamsa seems 
to be more an explanatory commentary on the earlier chronicle. 
The account in the Dipavamsa is condensed, and the sequence of 
events and characters presents the form more of a list and cata- 

1 Dipavamsa ( Old<-n v erg ), Introduction, p. 8. 



266 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

logue than of any connected account. The Mahavarhsa, on the 
other hand, is elaborate, more embellished, and seerrs rather to 
explain the catalogue of events and characters of the earlier 
chronicle so as to give it the form of a connected narrative. 
Geiger rightly thinks in this connection that " the quotation of 
the Mahavarhsa refers precisely- to the Dipavamsa." ] The well- 
known passage of the Culavamsa ( 38 59 ), ' Datva sahassam dipe- 
tum Dipavamsarh gamadisi ? which Fleet translates as ' he ( King 
Dhatusena ) bestowed a thousand ( pieces of gold ) and gave 
orders to write a dlpika on the Dipavarhsa ', also lends support to 
this view 2 , for this dlpika, Fleet says, is identical with MahS- 
vamsa. 

It is interesting to compare the more important chapters of 
the two chronicles to see how their subject matters agree or differ. 
We have already indicated that their contents are almost identi- 
cal ; in the Dlpavamsa they are condensed, and in the Mahavarhsa 
elaborate After an identical account of the race of Mahasamrnata, 
both the earlier and later chronicles proceed to give a more or less 
detailed account of the three Buddhist Councils. The account of 
the First Council is almost the same. Five hundred chosen 
Bhikkhus assembled under the leadership of Mahakassapa in the 
Sattapanna cave at Rajagaha and composed the collection of the 
Dhamma and the Vinaya. The Dlpavamsa mentions tie fourth 
month after the Master's death as the time at which the first 
council was held. This was the second Vassa-month, i e,, 
Savana. This date is substantially confirmed by that provided by 
the Mahavamsa which mentions the bright half of .Asada, the 
fourth month of the year as the beginning ol the Council. But as 
the first month was spent in preparations, the actual proceedings 
did not begin till the month of Savana. The account of the 
Second Council too is substantially the same. It was brought 
about by the dasa-vatthunl of the Vajjians of VesalT, a relaxation 
of monastic discipline ; and 700 Bhikkhus took part in fche dis- 
cussion of the Council. It was held in the llth year of the reign 
of Kalasoka ; there is, however, a slight discrepancy about the 

1 MahSvamaa, ( Geiger ), Intro, p. xi. 

2 MahSvariisa, ( Geiger ), Intro, p. XI where Geiger quotes Fleet, 



Pali Chronid^ 267 

locality where the Council was held. The Mahavamsa mentions 
Valikarama, whereas the Dlpavamsa mentions the Kutagarasala 
of the Mahavana monastery as the place of the Council. The 
tradition of the schism in the second Council is also identical in 
the two chronicles. The Dlpavamsa states that the heretical 
monks held a separate Council called the Mahasarhglti, and pre- 
pared a different redaction of the Scriptures. The tradition is 
also noticed in the Mahavamsa where it is related that they 
formed a separate sect under the name Mahasamghika, The 
account of the Third Council is identical. It was held at Patali- 
putta under the presidency of Tissa Moggaliputta and lasted for 
nine months. 

The list of Indian Kings before Asoka and pieces of historical 
account connected with them, the traditional date of the Buddha's 
parinirvana, and the duration of reigns of individual Indian kings 
are always almost identical in both the chronicles. The story of 
the conversion of Ceylon, that the coming of "Vrjaya and his 
consecration, the lisi and account of Ceylonese Kings up to 
Devanampiyatissa and that of the latter's contemporaneity wifch 
king Dhammasoka are for all practical purposes the same. But 
before the two chronicles take up the account of Mahinda's 
coming to Ceylon, the Mahavamsa inserts a somewhat elaborate 
account of the conversion of different countries under the efficient 
missionary organisation of Moggaliputta Thera. The Mahavamsa 
thus rightly stresses the fact that it was a part of the religious 
policy of the great Thera that Mahinda came to Ceylon. Here 
again the accounts of the Dlpavamsa and the Mahavamsa are 
identical ; then follow the identical accounts of Mahinda's entry 
into the capital, his acceptance of the Mahavihara and that of the 
Cetiyapabbata-vihara, the arrival of the relics, the receiving and 
coming of the Bodhi Tree, and the Nibbana of the Thera Mahinda. 
From Vijaya to Devanampiyatissa the tradition and traditional 
chronology are almost identical ; there is only a discrepancy 
about the date of Devanampiyatissa himself. The earlier chro- 
nicle states that king Devanampiyatissa was consecrated king 
in the 237th year after the Buddha's death, whereas the Maha- 
vamsa places it on the first day of the bright half of toe ninth 



268 Annals of the BJicndarkar Oriental Research Institute 

month, Maggasira ( Oct. -Nov. ), showing a discrepancy involved 
probably in the chronological arrangement itself. 1 

The account of the kings from the death of Devanampiya, 
tissa to DutthagamanI is also identical in the two chronicles. 
But the Mahavamsa is much more detailed and elaborate in itq 
account of King DutthagamanI giving as ifc does in separate 
chapters the topics of the birth of prince Gamani, the levying of 
the warriors for the war of the two brothers Gamani and Tissa, 
the victory of DutthagamanI, the consecrating of the Maricavatti 
vihara, the consecrating of the Lohapasada, the obtaining of the 
wherewithal to build the Mahatlrupa, the beginning of the Maha- 
thupa, the making of the relic-chamber for Mahathupa, the en- 
shrining of the relics and finally his death - whereas the Dipa- 
vamsa touches and that also in brief, the two accounts only in 
their main outline. 

The list and account of the later Kings from Dutthagamani to 
Mahasena in the Dlpavamsa are very brief. In the Mahavamba, 
however, though the essential points and topics are the same, the 
accounts differ considerably in their detail which may be due to 
the more liberal use by the author of the original as well as of 
other historical and traditional sources than the Atthakatha- 
Mahavamsa. He might have also used those indigenous historical 
literature and tradition that might have grown up after the 
author of the Dlpavamsa had laid aside his pen. This is apparent 
from a comparison of the respective accounts of any individual 
king, say, the last King Mahasena. Thus the Dlpavamsa relates 
that while he was in search of really good and modest Bhikkhus, 
he met some wicked Bhikkhus ; and knowing them not he asked 
them the sense of Buddhism and the true doctrine. Those 
Bhikkhus, for their own advantage, taught him that the true 
doctrine was a false doctrine. In consequence of his intercourse 
with those wicked persons, he performed evil as well as good 
deeds, and then died. The Mahavamsa account is otherwise. It 
gives the story of his consecration by Sanghamicfca, the account 
of the vicissitudes of the Maha vihara, how it was left desolate for 
nine years, how a hostile party succeeded in obtaining the king's 



1 See Mahavamsa, ( Geiger ), Intro, pp xxxi foil. 



Pali Chronicles 359 

sanction for destroying the monastery, why for this fault of the 
king the minister became a rebel, how the Mahavihara was re- 
co instructed and came to be again inhabited by Bhikkhus, how an 
offence of the gravest kind was made against Thera Tissa and 
how he was expelled, how the King built the MamhJra-vihara 
destroying the temples of some Brahmamcal gods, and Low he 
built many other aramas and viharas, and a number of tanks and 
canals for the good of his subjects. 

One such instance as just noticed is sufficient to explain the 
nature of the difference in the accounts of individual kings sn 
given in the two chronicles. The duration of ruling years an 
given to individual kings is in most cases identical ; there are 
only a few discrepancies, e. g., with regard to the reigns of Sena 
and Gutta, Lajjitissa (the Mahavamsa gives the name as Lafga- 
tissa ), Niliya, Tissa Yasalala, Abhaya and Tissa. In the case of 
Sena and Gutta, the Dipavamsa gives the duration of rule as 
12 years, whereas the Mahavainsa gives it as 22 years. The Dlpa- 
vamsa gives 9 years 6 months to Lajjitissa, whereas the later 
chronicle gives 9 years 8 months. Niliya is given 3 months in 
the earlier chronicle, but in later chronicle he is given 6 months. 
Tissa Yssalala is given 8 years 7 months and 7 years 8 months 
respectively 5 and the order of the rule of Abhaya and Tissa of the 
Dipavamsa is transposed in the MaJaaYamsa as Tissa and Abhaya, 
and Abhaya is given only 8 years in place of 22 as given by the 
Dipavamsa. 

In the early days of the study of the Ceylonese Chronicles, 
scholars were sceptical about their value as 

oSi e onw U Ohr f onicle8 "" of authentic historical tradition and 
information. But now after lapse of years 

when the study of Indian and Ceylonese history has far advanced, 
it is now comparatively easy for us to estimate their real value. 

Like all chronicles, the Dipavamsa and the Mahavarhsa con- 
tain germs of historical truth buried deep under a mesh of absurd 
fables and marvellous tales. But if they do contain mainly myths 
and marvels and read more like fantasies, they are like other 
chronicles of their time. This, however, should not be used as 
any argument for completely rejecting the chronicles as positively 
10 [ Annals, B. O. B. L ] 



$70 Aunals of the Bhandafkar Oriental Research Iwstitnte 

false and untrustworthy. It is, however, important that one 
should read them with a critical eye as all records of popular and 
ecclesiastical tradition deserve to be read. Buried in the illumi- 
nation of myths, miracles and legends there are indeed germs 
which go to make up facts of history, but they can only be 
gleaned by a very careful elimination of all mythical and un- 
essential details which the pious sentiment of the believer gather- 
ed round the nucleus. " If we pause, " Geiger rightly says, " first 
at internal evidence then the Ceylonese chronicles will assurdely 
at once win approval in that they at least wished to write the 
truth. Certainly the writers could not go beyond the ideas deter- 
mined by their age and their social position, and beheld the events 
of a past time in the mirror of a one-sided tradition. But they 
certainly did not intend to deceive hearers or readers. 7 ' T 

The very fact that both the DIpavamsa and the Mahavamsa are 
based on the earlier Attha-katha-Mahavarnsa, a sort of a chronicle 
which itself was based upon still earlier chronicles, ensures us in 
our belief that they contain real historical facts, for, with the 
Atthakatha, the tradition goes back several centuries, and becomes 
almost contemporary with the historical incidents narrated in the 
chronicle. 

Even in the very introductory chapters, there are statements 

Which agree with other canonical writings, and find confirmation 

in our already known facts of history. Such are the statements 

that Bimbisara, was a great friend of Buddha, and both Bimbieara 

and Ajatasattu were contemporaries of the Master. There does 

not seem to be any ground for rejecting the tradition of the 

chronicles that G-otama was five years older than Bimbisara, though 

the duration of the rule ascribed to each of them disagrees with 

that ascribed by the Puranas. But whatever that might be, there 

can hsrdly be any doubt as to the authenticity of the list of 

Indian kings from Bimbisara to Asoka provided by the chronicles. 

The Jain tradition has, no doubt, other names ; " this " as pointed 

out by Geiger, " does not affect the actual agreement. There can 

be no doubt that the nine ISTandas as well as the two forerunners 

1 MahSvatiisa ( Geiger ), Intro,, p, xv 4 



Pali Chronicles 271 

of Asoka, Candagutta and Bindusara, were altogether historical 
personages." But more than this is the complete agreement of 
the Ceylonese and Pauranic tradition in the duration of reign, 
nimely 24, ascribed to Candagutta. The discrepancy of the two 
traditions in respect of regnal duration of Bindusara and A&oka, 
namely 3 years and 1 year respectively, is almost negligible. 
Still more interesting is the name Canakka ( Canakya ) the Brah- 
man Minister of Candagutta, who was known to the authors of 
the Dlpavamsa and Mahavamsa. 

So much with regard to the historical value of the Ceylonese 
chronicles in respect of Indian history. But more valuable are 
the chronicles with regard to the history of Ceylon. As regards 
the oldest period from Vijaygt to Devanampiyatisss the chronicles 
are certainly untrustworthy to the extent that the duration of 
years ascribed to each reign seems increditable in view of the 
fact that they appear to be calculated according to a set scheme, 
and present certain insuperable difficulties of chronology with 
regard to one or two reigns, e, g., of King Pandukabhaya and 
Mutasiva. Moreover, the day of Vijaya's arrival in Ceylon has 
been made to synchronise with the date of Buddha's death, which 
itself is liable to create a distrust in our mind. But even in the 
first and the earliest period of Ceylonese history, there are certain 
elements of truth which can hardly be questioned. Thus there is 
no ground for doubting the authenticity of the list of kings from 
Yijaya to Devanampiyatissa ; nor is there any reason for reject- 
ing the account of Pandukabhaya's campaigns, as well as the 
detailed account of the reign of Devanampiyatissa, which seem 
decidedly to be historical. We have also sufficient reason to 
believe the contemporaneity and friendship of Tissa and Asoka 
who exchanged greetings of gifts between themselves. 

As for the period from Devanampiyatissa to Mahasena, the 
chronicles may safely but intelligently be utilised as of value. 
There are no doubt* gaps in the traditional chronology which 
have been carelessly filled in, notably in the period from 
Devanampiyatissa to DutthagamanI but after Dutthagamarjl 
there is no such careless and fictitious filling in of gaps, nor any 
set up system of chronology, and on the whole the list of kings 



272 Annals of the B bandar kar Oriental Research 7? Mi, ie 

and their duration of reigns are creditable. But even where the 
chronology is doubtful, there is no ground whatsoever for doubt- 
ing the kernel of historical truth that lies mixed up with mythi 
cal tales in respect of the account of each individual reign, say, 
for example, of the reign of Dutthagama.nl. It may, therefore 
be safely asserted that the Ceylonese chronicles can be utilised, 
if not as an independent historic;:! source, at least as a repository 
of historical tradition in which we can find important confirma- 
tory evidence of our information with regard to early Indian and 
contemporary Ceylonese history. 

But the Chronicles must be considered to be of more value for 
the ecclesiastical history not only of Ceylon but of India as well, 
With regard to this there are certain notices in th e Chronicles 
that have helped us to start with clmost definite chronological 
points which are equally important in respect of the political 
history of the continent and its island. One such fixed point is 
provided by the Chronicles where it has been stated that 218 years 
after the Sambuddha had passed into Nirvana when Asoka wrs 
consecrated. This corner stone has helped us to ascertain one of 
the most knotty and at the same time most useful starling point 
of Indian history, namely, the year cf the Buddha's parinirvara 
and his birth, which, according to the calculation based on the 
date just cited are 483 B. C. and 563 B. C. respectively. 1 

Next in point of importance with regard to the history of 
Buddhism is the conversion of the island by Mahinda, who is 
represented in the Chronicles as a son of Asoka. Historians have 
doubted the tradition in view of the fact that there is no mention 
of it in the numerous edicts and inscriptions of Asoka. Geiger 
has very ably shown that this argument is at least an argumenium 
e silenho and can hardly be conclusive. The tradition of the 
Chronicles is unanimously supported by the tradition of the 
country itself, and finds further confirmation in the account of 
Yuan Chwang who expressly states that the conversion of Ceylon 
was the work of Mahendra or Mahinda, who is, however, repre- 
sented as a brother of Asoka. But it must not be understood that 
Ceylon was converted all on a sudden by Mahendra or Mahinda. 

1 See Maha-yamsa ( Geiger ); Sees. 5 aE<^6. Introduction 



Pali Chronicle 273 

Similar mission must have been sent earlier; "a hint that 
Mahinda's mission was preceded by similar missions to Ceylon is 
to be found even in Dipavamsa and Mahavarhsa, when they 
relate that .Asoka, sending to Devanampiyatissa, with presents 
for his second consecration as king, exhorted him to adhere to the 
doctrine of the Buddha." ! 

Geiger has also been able to find very striking confirmation 
of the history of the religious missions as related in the Chroni- 
cles in the relic inscriptions of the Sanci stupa 3STo, 2, 2 He has 
thus pointed out that MaJ3hima who is named in the Mahavamsa 
3s the teacher who converted the Himalaya region and Kassapa- 
gotta who appears as his companion in the Dipavamsa are also 
mentioned in one of the inscriptions just referred to as ' pious 
Majjhima ' and ' pious Kassapagotta, the teacher of the Himalaya/ 
In another inscription also Kassapagotta is mentioned as the 
teacher of the Himalaya. Dundubhissara who is also mentioned 
in the Chronicles as one of the Theras who won the Himalaya 
countries to Buddhism, is mentioned in another inscription as 
Dadabhisara along with Gotiputta ( i. e., Kotiputta Kassapagotta ). 
The Thera, i. e., Moggaliputta Tissa who f is described in the 
Chronicles as having presided over the Third Buddhist Council 
is also mentioned in another inscription at Moggaliputta. These 
facts are guarantee enough for carefully utilising the Chronicles 
as an important source of information for the early history of 
Buddhism. 

This would be far more evident when we would consider the 
accounts of the three Buddhist Councils as related in the two 
Chronicles. The authenticity of the accounts of these Councils 
had during the early days of the study of the two Chronicles 
often been doubted. But it is simply impossible to doubt that 
there must lie a kernel of historical truth at the bottom of these 
accounts. As to the First Council, both the northern and 
southern traditions agree as to the place and occasion and the 
President of the Council. As to the second Council,both traditions 
agree as to the occasion and cause of the first schism in the 



1 Mahavamsa, ( tr, ) p. XIX. 
% Ibid, pp. XIX - XX, 



274 Annate of the BJtandarkar Orieiiial Reseat ch tmtitute 

Church, namely, the relaxation of monastic discipline brought 
about by the Vajjian monks. As to the place of the Council, the 
northern tradition is uncertain, but the southern tradition is 
definite inasmuch as it states that it was held in Vesall under 
King Kalasoka in 383/2 B. C. and led to the separation of the 
Mahasarhghikas from Theravada. The Ceylonese tradition speaks 
of a Third Council at Pataliputra in the year 247 B. c. under 
King Dharmasoka which led to the expulsion of certain dis- 
integrating elements from the community. The Northern tradition 
has, however, no record of a Third Council, but that is no reason 
why we should doubt its authenticity. Geiger has successfully 
shown that the " distinction between two separate Councils is in 
fact correct. The Northern Buddhists have mistakenly fused the 
two into one as they confounded the Kings, Kalasoka and Dham- 
masoka, one with another. But traces of the right tradition axe 
still preserved in the wavering uncertain statements as to the time 
and place of the Council. v 1 

The succession of teachers from Upali to Mahinda as provided 
by the Chronicles is also interesting from the view point of the 
history of early Buddhism. The succession list which includes 
Upali, the great authority on Vinaya at the time of the Buddha, 
Dasak.% Sonaka, Siggava, Moggaliputta Tissa and Mahinda, may 
not represent the whole truth, they even might not all be Vinaya- 
pamokkha, i. e,, authorities on Vinaya ; but the list presents at least 
an aspect of truth, and is interesting, presenting as it does, ' a con- 
tinuous synchrological connexion between the history of Ceylon 
and India/ The list can thus be utilised for ascertaining the chro- 
nological arrangement of early Indian history as well as of the 
teachers of early Buddhism. 

The Chronicles can still more profitably be utilised as a very 
faithful record of the origin and growth of the numerous religious 
establishments of Ceylon. They are so very elaborately described 
and the catalogue seems to be so complete that a careful study 
may enable us to frame out a history of the various kinds of 
religious monastic establishments, e. g., stupas, viharas, cetiyas, 
etc, of Ceylon. Thus the history of the Mahavihara, the Abhaya- 

l Mahavamsa. ( Geiger's Tr, ) pp, LIX - LX and ff- 



Pali Chronicles ^75 

giri vihara, the Thuparama, Mahameghayanaraiua, and of ihe test 
of others is recorded in elaborate detail. Incidentally they refer 
to the social and religious life led by the monks of the Order as 
well as by the lay people. It is easy to gather from the chronicles 
that the great architectural activity of the island began as early as 
as the reign of Devanampiyatissa and continued unabated during 
each succeeding reign till the death of Mahasena. The numerous 
edifices, tanks and canals whose ruins now cover the old capitals 
of the island were built during that period, and their history is 
unmistakably recorded in the Chronicles. Religious ceremonies 
and processions are often vividly described, and they give us 
glimpses of the life and conditions of the time. Not less interesting 
is the fact, often times related as a part of the account of these 
religious edifices, of very close intercourse with more or less 
important religious centres of India, namely Rajagaha, KosamM, 
Vesall. UjjenI, Pupphapura, Pallava, Alasanda ( Alexandria ) and 
other countries. Every important function was attended by 
brother monks and teachers from the main land to which the 
Ceylonese Kings and people turned for inspiration whenever any 
question of bringing and enshrining a relic arose. There are also 
incidental and stray references which are no less valuable. The 
Mahavamsa informs us that King Mablsena built the Manihlra- 
vihara and founded three other viharas, destroying temples of the 
( Brahmanical ) gods. It shows that Brahmanical temples existed 
side by side, and religious toleration was not always the practice. 

As for the internal political history and foreign political rek* 
tions with India, especially with the Damilas, the Chronicles seem 
to preserve very faithful records. ISTo less faithful is the geogra- 
phical information of India and Ceylon as supported by them. 
But most of all, as we have hinted above, is the information con- 
tained in them, in respect of the history of Buddhism and Buddhir t 
establishments of the island. There is hardly any reason to doul t 
the historicity of such information. 

The Culavamsa 1 is not an uniform and homogeneous work. It 

1 Edited by Dr. W. Geiger in two volumes for the P. T. S M London, 
translated into English by Geiger and Mrs. R. Bickmers, 19*9 
and 1930. The translation with copious notes and a learned intro- 
duction is very useful. 



276 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental fteseart h Institute 

is a series of additions to, and continuations 
u_avamsa ^ ^ Mahavamsa. The Mahavamsa is the 

work of one man - Malianama, who compiled the work during the 
reign of Dhatusena in the 6th A- D, But the single parts of the 
Culavamsa are of different character, written by different 
authors at different times. The first who continued the chronicle 
was according to Simhalese tradition the Thera Dhammakitti. He 
came from Burma to Ceylon during the reign of King Parakkama- 
bahu II in the 13th century A. D. 

Between chapters 37 and 79 no trace is found of the commence- 
ment of a new section. This part of the chronicle seems to be tie 
work of the same author. So it is clear, if the Simhalese tradition is 
authentic, then about three quarters of what we call the Culavam&a 
( Pages 443 out of 532 pages of Geiger's edition of the Culavamsa) 
were composed by Dhammakitti. 

The second section of the Culavamsa begins with the reign, of 
Vijayabahu IT, the successor of Parakkamabahu I, and ends with 
that of Parakkamabahu IV. Hence it follows, the second part 
of the Culavamsa consists of the Chapters from 80 to 90 both 
inclusive. 

The third portion begins with the chapter 91 and ends with the 
chapter 100. 

The Mahavamsa gives us a list of kings from Vijaya, the first 
crowned king of Ceylon to Mahasena. Mahanama simply follow- 
ed here his chief source, the Dlpavamsa, which also ends with 
King Mahasena. The Culavamsa, however, begins with the reign 
of King Sirimeghavarma, son of King Mahasena and ends with 
Sirivikkamarajasiha. 

The first section of the Culavamsa begins with Sirimeghavanna 
and ends with Parakkamabahu I. Evidently this portion gives 
a chronological account of 78 kings of Ceylon. Altogether 
eighteen paricchedas are devoted to the glorification of the great 
national hero of the Sinhalese people, Parakkamabahu I. Revd. 



Pali Chronicles 277 

B. S. Copleston has called this portion of the Culavarnsa tl^e 'epic 
of Parakkaina '. This king was noted for liis charity. He not 
only made gifts of alms to the needy, but also to the Bhikkhus. 
As a warrior this king also stands out pre-eminent The Colas 
and Damilas came to Lanka from Southern India and occupied 
Anuradhapura. Par akkam a fought many battles with them and 
drove them out of the country and .became king of the united 
Lanka. He then espoused the cause of the Buddhist Sangha. He 
built many great viharas and thupas. He also constructed many 
vapis and uyyanas. 

The second portion of the Culavarhsa begins with Vijayabahu II 
and ends with Parakkamabahu IV. Thus it refers to 23 kings 
of Ceylon. 

The third section begins with Bhuvanekabahu III, and ends 
with Kittisirirajaslha. Thus it refers to 24 kings. 

The last chapter gives a brief account of tha last two kings, 
e. g., Sirirajadhirajaslha and Sirivikkamarajasiha. 

There are in both the Chronicles, the, DIpavaihsa and Maha- 
vamsa, interesting references to Pali texts 

Li the CeyloLJsrcht^ affording very useful material for the history 
nicies. of Pali literature as well- as of early Bud- 

dhism in Ceylon. 

In the DIpavamsa references are not only made to Yinaya 
tefcts, the five collections of Sutfca Pitaka, the three' Pitakas, the 
five Nikayas ( they are not separately meirtiototJd ), and the nine- 
fold doctrine of the Teacher comprising the Suite/ G*yya, Yeyya- 
karana, Gatha, Udana, Itivuttaka, Jataka, Abbhuta and Yedalla 
but also to the seven sections of the Abhidhamma, the ^tisam- 
bhida, the Niddesa, the Pitaka of the Agamas and the different 
sections namely, Yaggas, Pannasakas, Samyufct^and Kipatas into 
which the DIgha, Maxima, Samyutta and Aiguttara Nikayas are 
respectively divided. Mention is also made separately of the 
two Yibhangas of Yinaya, namely, Parivara and Khandhaka the 
Cariya-Pitaka, the Yinaya Pitaka, the Patimokkha and the Attha- 
katha. We find further mention of the Kathavakthu of the 
11 [ Annals, B. O. R. I. ] 



278 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Abhidhamma, the Petavatthu and the Saocasamyutta of the 
Vimanavatthu. Of Suttas and Suttantas separate mention is 
made of the Devaduta Sutfca, Balapandita Suttanta, Aggikhanda 
Suttanta, Asivisa Suttanta, Asivisupama Suttanta, Anamataggiya 
Sutta, Gomayapindaovada Suttanta, Dhammacakkapavattana Sut- 
tanta and the Mahasamaya Suttanta. 

INDEX OF PALI TEXTS IN THE DIPAVAMSA 

Abhidhamma, 5, 37 ; ?, 5& 
Abbhuta, 4, 15. 

Aggikkhandha Sufctanta, 14, 12. 
Anamataggiya Suttanta, 14, 45. 
Atthakatha, 20, 20. 
igamas, 4, 12 ; 4, 16 
JLsiviBa Suttanta, 14, 18. 
AsiYisupama Suttanta, 14, 45. 
Itivuttaka, 4, 15. 
TJdana, 4, 15. 

Kathavatthu, 7, 41 ; 7, 56. 
Khandhaka, 7, 43. 
Geyya, 4, 15. 
Gatha, 4, 15. 

Gomayapindaovada Suttanta, 14, 46. 

Cariya Pitaka, 14, 45. 

Jataka, 4, 15 ; 5, 37. 

Dhutanga, ( precepts ), 4, 3. 

Bhamma, 4, 4 ; 4, 6. 

Dhatuvada precepts, 5, 7, 

Dhammacakkapavattana Suttanta, 14, 46* 

Devadiita Sutta, 13, 7. 

Mpatas. 4, 16. 

Isfiddesa, 5, 37. 

Kikayas,7,43. 

Pitakas, 4, 32 ; 5, 71 5 7, 30 ; 20, 20. 
a* 5, 37 ; 7, 43. 
s, 4, 16. 



- Pali Chronicles 279 

Petavatthu, 12, 34. 

Patiinokkha, 13, 55, 

Patisambhida, 5, 37. 

Vinaya, 4, 3 ; 4, 4 & 6 ; 7, 43. 

Veyyakarana, 4, 15. 

Vedalla, 4, 15. 

Vaggas, 4, 16, 

VimSnavatthu, 12, 85. 

Balapandita Sutfcanta, 13, 13. 

Vinaya Pitaka. 18, 19 ; 18, 33 ; 18, 37. 

Vibhaiigas, 7, 43. 

Mahasamaya Sutfcanta, 14, 53. 

Sutta, 4, 15 ; 4, 16. 

Sutta Pitaka ( pancanikSya ) 18, 19 ; 18, 33. 

Samyuttas, 4 , 16, 

In the Mahavamsa too we find numerous mentions of Pali 
texts. But, curiously enough, references to independent texts are 
much less comprehensive than that of the earlier chronicle ; 
though mention of Suttas and Suttantas mainly of the three 
Nikayas, the Anguttara, the Majjhima and the Samyutta, as well 
as of the Sutta Nipata and the Vinaya Pitaka are much more 
numerous. There are also several references to Jatakas. The 
three Pitakas are often mentioned as important texts, but only the 
Abhidhamma and the Vinaya are mentioned by name, and that 
too only once or twice in each case. 

INDEX OF PALI TEXTS IN THE MAHAVAMSA 

Abhidhamma Pitaka, 5, 150. 
Asivisupama: ( Anguttara NikSya ), 12, 26. 
Aiiamatagga Samyutta ( Samyufcta Nikaya ), 12, 3L 
Aggikkhandopama Sutta ( Anguttara ), 12, 34. 
Kapi Jataka, 35, 31. 
KalakSrama Suttanta, 12, 39. 
Khajjaniya Suttanta ( Samyutta K. ) 15, 195. 
Khandhakas ( Sections of the MahSvagga and 
Oullavagga of the Vinaya Pitaka ),-36, 68. 



2SO Annals of the fihandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Gomayapindisutta ( Samyutta N. ), 15, 197. 
Culahatthipadupama Suttanta, ( Majjhirua M". ), 14, 2. 

Cittayamaka ( Ref. Yamakappakarana of fche ALhidhamma) 

5, 146. 

Jataka ( tales ), 27, 34 ; 30, 88. 

Tlpitaka, 4, 62 ; 5, 84 ; 5, 112 ; 5, 118 & 119- ; 5, 2lO 5-37, 44, 
Tittira Jataka, 5, 264. 
Devaduta Suttanta ( Majjhima N. ), 12, 29. 

Dhammacakkapavafctaua Suttanta ( MahSvagga of the V. p.) 
12, 41; 15, 199. '' 

Balapandita Suttanta ( Samyutta.JST. ), 15, 4, 
Brahmajala Suttanta, 12, 51. 
Vessantara Jataka, 30, 88. 
Vinaya, 5, 151, 

Maha-Narada-Kassapa Jataka, 12, 37. 
Mahappamada Suttanta ( Samyutta 1ST. ), 16, 3. 
Mangala Sutta ( Sutta ISTipata ), 32, 43. 
^ Mahamangala Sutta ( Sutta K ), 30, 83. 
Mahasamaya Suttanta ( DIgha ISTikaya ), 30, 83. 
Samacitta.Soitta ( Samacittavagga In the Duka Nipata of the 

Angutfcara Nikaya ), 14, 39, 
Sufcta Pitaka, 5,150. 

The Buddhaghosuppatti deals" with the life and career, of 

Buddhaghosuppatt! Bl !f dhag h sa ' the famous Commentator, less 
autnentic than the account contained in the 
Culavamsa. It gives us an account of Bud- 
dhagosa's boyhood, his admission -to the priesthood, his father's 
conversion, voyage to Ceylon^Buddhaghosa as a witness^ permis- 
sion to translate scriptures, iis objects attained, return to India 
and his passing.away. The. book is written in an easy language. 
It is more or less a historical romance. As to the historical value 
of this work readers are referred to my work, 'The Life and Work 
of Buddhaghosa '- ( Ch. II, m 43-44 ). . The Buddhaghosuppatti 
has been edited by James Grey and published by Messrs. Luzac & 
Co., London. Grey has also translated the took into English, 



Pali Chronicles 2j_ 

The stories in the Milindapanha, the Mahavamsa and the 
Buddhaghosuppatti are so similar that one doubts it very much 
that the author of this work borrowed the incidents from the 
Milindapanha and the Mahavamsa and grafted them on to his 
own. 

A critical- study of 'the Buddhaghosuppatti does not help us 
much in elucidating the history of Buddhaghosa, The author had 
little authentic knowledge of the great commentator. He only 
collected the legends which centred round the remarkable man 
by the time when his work was written. Those legends are 
mostly valuable from the strict historical point of view. Grey 
truly says in his introcuction to the Buddhaghosuppatti that the 
work reads like an " Arthurian Romance ". The accounts given 
by the Buddhaghosuppatti about the birth, early life, conversion 
etc., of Buddhaghosa bear a great similarity to those of Milinda 
and Moggaliputta Tissa. In the interview which took place 
between Buddhaghosa and Buddhadatta, the latter is said to have 
told Buddhaghosa thus, " I went before you to compile Buddha's 
word. I am old, have not long to live and shall not therefore be 
able to accomplish my purpose. You carry out the work satis- 
factorily." 

In Buddhadatta's Vinayavinicchaya we read that Buddhadatta 
requested Buddhaghosa to send him the commentaries when 
finished that he might summarise them. This request was com- 
plied with by Buddhaghosa. Buddhadatta summarised - the com- 
mentary on the Abhidhamma in the Abhidhammavatara and the 
commentary on the Vinay^t in the Vinayavinicchaya. Tke above 
statement in the Vinayavinicchaya which is more authoritative 
than the Buddhaghosuppatti is in- direct contradiction to the 
statement in the latter book. The author has made a mistake in 
the 6th chapter of the Buddhaghosuppatti in which it is stated 
that Buddhaghosa rendered the Buddhist scriptures into MagadhL 
In the" seventh chapter of the same book we read that after the 
lapse of three months when lie completed his task, the works of 
Mahinda were piled up and burnt. Buddhaghosa translated 
Simhalese commentaries into MagadhI and not the texts them- 
selves. Had it been so there would not have been' any occasion 
for burning, the w^Qrkjs of Mahinda, On the other hand they - 



282 Annals $f the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

have been carefully preserved as the only reliable and authentic 
interpretation of the sacred texts. It has been distinctly stated 
in the Mahavarhsa that the texts only existed in the Jambudlpa 
and Buddhaghosa was sent to Ceylon to translate the Sinhalese 
commentaries into Maghadhl. If the tradition recorded in the 
Mahavamsa is to be believed, then only we can get an explanation 
for the destruction of Mahinda's works. 

The Saddhammasarhgaha is a collection of good sayings and 

teachings of the Master. There are prose and 

Saddhammasaiiigaha poetry portioils in It ^ consists of nine 

chapters. It was written by Dhammakityfi- 
bhidhanathera. It has been edited by Nedimale Saddhananda for the 
P. T. S. London. The Dlgha, Majjhima, Samyutta, Anguttara and 
Khuddaka Nikayas are mentioned in it. The books of the Abhi- 
dhammapitaka are referred to in this work. There are references in 
it to fche Vajjiputtakas of Vesall and Yasa/s stay in the Kutagara- 
sala in the Mahavana. It is mentioned in this book that Moggali- 
putta Tissa recited the Kathavatthu in order t6 refute the doctrines 
of others. This treatise contains an account of the missionaries 
sent to various places to establish fche Buddha's religion* Thera 
Majjhantika was sent to Kashmir and Gandhara, MahSdeva 
Thera to Mahisamandala, Rakkhita Thera to VanavasI, Yonaka- 
Dhammarakkhita Thera to Aparantaka, Mahadhammarakkhita 
Thera to Maharattha, Maharakkhita Thera to the Yonaka region, 
MajjMma Thera to the Himalayan region, Sonaka and Uttara to 
the Suvannabhumi and Mahinda Thera to Lanka with four other 
Theras, Itthiya, Uttiya, Sambala, and Bhaddasala, Besides 
there is a reference to the Buddha preaching his dhamma to 
the inhabitants of the city of Campaka (Campakanagaravasinam), 

The Sandesa Katha has been edited by Minayeff in J. P. T. S. 

1885. It is written mostly in prose. It 
Sandesa Katha ,.., . . . ,, , . , ,, , , 

dilates on many points, e. g.. Mahinda, Mana- 

vijaya, Kittisirirajaslha, etc. 

The Mahabodhivamsa has been edited by Mr. Strong for the 

P. T. S. London. The Simhalese edition by 
Mahabodhivariisa TTI.. i .-,, in/-tii. 

u patissa and revised by Sarandada, Colombo, 

deserves mention, Th^relis ^ Simhalese translation of 



Pali Chronicles 283 

r/ork in twelve chapters. Prof. Geiger says that the date of the 
composition of the Mahabodhivamsa is the 10th century A. D. 
( Dipavamsa and Mahavamsa, p. 79 ). 

The Thupavamsa contains an account of the thupas or dagobas 
built over the relics of the Buddha. Headers' 
Thspavamsa attention is invited to a paper on this book 

by Don Martino de Zilva Wickremasinghe ( J. K. A, S. 1898 ). 
This work has not yet been edited by the P. T. S. London. A 
Simhalese edition of this work is available (Ed, by Dhamnaaratana, 
Paeliyagoda, 1896 ). 

The Hatthavanagalla-vihara-vamsa or the history of the 
temple of Attanagalla consists of eleven 
chapters written in simple Pali. Eight 
chapters deal with an account of King Siri- 

Sanghabodhi and the last three chapters deal with the erection of 
various monumental and religious edifices on the spot where the 
king spent his last days. It reads like a historical novel. J. 
D'Alwis's English translation with notes and annotations de- 
serves mention. Dr. G. P. Malalasekera has undertaken an 
edition and English translation of this work in the Indian Histo- 
rical Quarterly. There is an edition of this work published in 
Colombo 1909 under the title, " Attanagalu-vihara-vamsa ". 

The Dathavamsa or the Dantadhatuvarhsa means an account 
of the tooth relic of fche Buddha Gautama. 
Dsthavamsa Vamsa means chronicle, history, tradition, 

etc. Literary it means lineage, dynasty, etc. The Dathavamsa is 
a quasi-religious historical record written with the intention of 
edifying and at the same time giving an interesting story of the 
past. This work is noteworthy because it shows us Pali as a 
medium of epic poetry. 

The work was written by Mahathera Dhammakitti of the city 
of Pulatti. He was a disciple of Sariputta, 

The Author fche aut bor of the Saratthadlpanl tlka, Sarat- 

thamanjusa" tlka^, Ratanapancika tlka on the Candravyakarana 
and the Vinayasamgraha. He was well-versed in Sanskrit, 
Magadhibhasa, Tarka^astra (logic), Vyakarana (grammar) 



#84 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Kavya ( poetry ), Sgama ( religious literature ), etc. Ee was for. 
tunate enough to secure tlie post of a Rajaguru. Two Vamsas f 
the Pali Buddhist literature, the Sasanavarhsa and the Gandia- 
vamsa, tell us that it was he who composed the Dathavamsa (P 
T. S. Ed. p. 34 and J. P. T. S. 1886, p. 62 X We know from the 
Dathayamsa that originally it was written by the poets in the 
Simhalese language and later on rendered into Magadhibhasa bv 
Dhammakitti for the benefit of the people of the other countries 
at the request of Parakammo, the Commander-in-chief of Ceylon 
who placed LllavatI on the vacant throne of Ceylon. This Llla- 
vatl, later on, became the queen of Parakramavahu, the king of 
.Ceylon ( verses 4-10 ). 

The Dathavamsa was written in the Buddha era 845 during 

Date of Oomporitum * " ****** Kfa * J ittisiri ^^ava,na of 
Ceylon. Kern says that it is also known as 

Daladavamsa composed about 310 A. D. It was translated into 
Pali in A. p. 1200 under the name of the Dathavamsa ( Manual of 
Indian Buddhism, p. 89 X 

The Dathavamsa is an important contribution to the history 

t ^ of Pali Buddhist literature. It is an histori- 

importance * f 

cal record of the incidents connected with 

tooth-relic of the Buddha. It is as important as the Mahavamsa 
and the Dlpavamsa. The history of Ceylon would be incomplete 
without it. 

The Dathavamsa is a specimen of fine poetry. It contains 



g and some debased Simhalese ' wprds. 

7 6 Its vocabulary is rich. Kern rightly re- 

marks that it belongs to the class of compendiums s,nd contains 
repetitions of passages from more ancient works with more or less 
apocryphal additions. ( Manual of Indian Buddhism, p, 9 ), In 
the Erst chapter, stanzas are wrttten in Jagati chanda. Sixty 
stanzas are written in Yamsastha vrtta and the last two in Srag- 
dharavrtta; in the secor.d chapter, stanzas are written in Anustupa- 
, chanda in Pathyavaktra vrtta and in Mandakracta vrtta ; in the 
third chapter, the stanzas are written in tristhupa chanda in Upa- 
jata, Indravajra, Upendravajra and Sikharam vrttas ; in the fourth 
chapter, stanzas are written in Atisakvarlchanda, in Jtfalinl, Sa4- 



Pali Chronicles 285 

dulavikridita vrttas ; and in -the last chapter, s'-anzas are \ r.tten 
in Sakvarlohanda in Vasantatilaka and Sragdhara vrttas. 

The Dathavamsa gives an account of the tooth-relic of the 

Buddha which is said to have been brought 

Subject-matter to Ceylon by Dantakumara, Prince of 

Kalinga from Dantapura, the capital of Kalinga. It consists of 

five chapters, a brief summary of which is given below. 

Chapter I. While the Buddha Dipamkara was coming to the 
city of Rammavat! at the invitation of the people of the city, a 
hermit named Sumedha showed his devotion by laying himself 
down on the muddy road which the Buddha was to cross. The 
Buddha walked over Ms body with his disciples. Sumedha 
prayed to the Buddha Dipamkara that he might be a Buddha him- 
self in future. Dipamkara granted him the boon whereupon he 
set himself in all earnestness, to fulfil the ten paramitas ( per- 
fections ). The hermit was in heaven prior to his last birth, At 
the instance of the gods, he was reborn in Kapilavastu in the 
family of Suddhodana and in the womb of Mahamaya. As soon 
as he was reborn, he stood up and looked round and was wor- 
Bhipped by men and gods. He went seven steps northwards. He 
was named Siddhattakumara Three palaces suitable for the three 
seasons of the year, were built for him. While going to the 
garden, he saw an old man, a diseased man, a dead man and a 
hermit. He then made up his mind to renounce the worldly 
life. With the help of the gods he left the palace and reached the 
river Anoma and on the banks of the river, he cut off his hair and 
threw it upwards to the sky. Indra got the hair and bmlt a 
caitya over it which is still known as Culamani Cartya A potter 
brought a yellow robe, a beggar's bowl, etc. for Lim. He put on 
the yellow robe and left the Rajagaha. Thence he went to 
Uruvela and made strenuous efforts for six years to acqmre bodh 
(enlightenment). In the evening of the full-moon ^ day o 
Vaisakha, he went to the foot of the Bodhx-tree and sat on a seat 
made of straw and defeated Mara's army. In th e last ^ watch o 
the night he acquired supreme knowledge. After .the ** 
of Bodhi, he spent a week, seated on the same seat a the foot or 
the Bo-tree, enjoying the bliss of emancipation. He spent another 
12 [ Annals, B. O. B. 1. 1 



286 Annals cf the Mandarkar Oriental Research institute 

week, looking at the Bodhi tree, with steadfast eyes. Another 
week was spent by him at a place called Ratanaghara near the 
BodM tree, meditating upon paticcasamuppada ( dependent origi- 
nation ) He then went to the foot of the A;japalanigrodha tree 
where he spent a week in meditation. He went to Mucalinda- 
nagabhavana where he was saved by the naga from hailstorm. 
He then visited tha Raj ay at ana. Thence he started for Isipatana- 
migadava to preach his first sermon known as Dhammacakka- 
pavattana but on the way two merchants, Tapussa and Bhallika, 
offered him madhupindika ( a kind of food prepared with honey 
and molasses ). The Buddha placed them in two refuges. He 
then reached Isipatana on the full-moon day of the month of 
Asadha. He preached the Dhammacakkapavatbana Sutta to the 
first band of five disciples headed by Annakondanna, 

Chapter II. The Buddha was thinking of doing good to the 
world. Nine months after his attainment of Bodhi, the Buddha 
made an gerial voyage to Lanka to fulfil his mission and 
descended on the garden named Mahanagavana. Then he went 
to the meeting of the Yakkhas and terrified them by creating 
storm, darkness and heavy rains. The Yakkhas having been 
greatly troubled by these, came to the Buddha and asked for 
protection. In the midst of the meeting he sat down on a seat of 
leather but by his miraculous power he made the seat very hot 
and owing to the excessive heat radiating from the seat, the 
Yakkhas became very much distressed and the leather expanded so 
as to cover the whole of the island Lanka and the Yakkhas gathered 
together on the coast, unable to bear the excessive heat. The 
Giridlpa which was full of shady trees, was brought close to the 
island of Lanka by the Buddha and the Yakkhas, to save them- 
selves from the extreme heat, went to the Giridlpa which was 
again set on its former site and thus the island of Lanka was rid 
of the Yakkhas. As soon as the Yakkhas left the island of LankS, 
he stopped his miracle and many gods came to the island and 
surrounded him. Tie Buddha preached to the Devas dhamma 
and gave one of his hairs to God Sumana who built a Caityaover 
it on the top of the Sumanaku-fca Hill and worshipped it. Then 
the Buddha returned to Jetavana. Again he went to Lanka five 
years after his enlightenment and pacified the contest between 



Pali Chronicles 287 

Culodara and Mahodara for a jewelled throne. Again he came 
to the island of Lanka eight years after his enlightenment being 
invited by a Naga named Maniakkhika. The Buddha with five 
hundred disciples went to the house of Maniakkhika in KalyanL 
A caitya built over the seat offered by Maniakkhika and used and 
left by the Buddha, was worshipped by the Nagas there. This 
caitya was named Kalyani Caitya. The Buddha then visited the 
Sumanakuta Hill and left his footprints there. Thence lie went 
to Dighavapl where he sat in meditation for some time. Thence 
he visited the site of the Bodhi-tree at Anuradhapura where also he 
sat in meditation for sometime. Thence he visited theThuparama 
and finished his work in Ceylon. He preached dhamma for forty- 
five years and obtained parinibbana on the full-moon day of the 
month of Vaisakha in the garden named Upavattana of the Malla 
Kings near Kusinara. In the first watch of the night of his pari- 
nibbana, lie preached dhamma to the Mallas, in the middle wr.tch, 
he made Subhadda an arahat and in the last watch he instructed 
the Bhikkhus to be ardent and strenuous. Early in the morning 
he rose up from meditation and passed away. Many miracles 
were seen after his parinibbana, e. g., the earth quaked from end 
to end, celestial music was played, all trees became adorned with 
flowers, though it was not the time for flowers to bloom. The 
body of the Buddha was wrapped up in new clothes and cotton, 
five hundred times. It was put into a golden pot, full of oil. A 
funeral pyre was prepared with scented wood such as sandal, 
twenty cubits in height and the Mall chiefs put the oil-pot in the 
pyre. As Mahakassapa did not arrive, fire could not be kindled be- 
cause it was desired by the gods that the Buddha's body must not be 
burnt before Mahakassapa had worshipped it. As soon as Maha- 
kassapa came and worshipped the dead body of the Buddha, fire 
was kindled. The dead body was so completely burnt as to leave 
no ashes or charcoal. Only the bones of the Buddha of the colour 
of pearl and gold remained. On account of the Buddha's desire 
the bones became separated excepting the four bones of the head, 
two collar bones and teeth. Sarabhu, a disciple of Sariputta, 
went to Mahiangana in Ceylon taking with him one of the collar- 
bones of the Buddha and built a caitya. An arahat named Khema 
took a left tooth relic of the Buddha and over the remaining bone 
relics,, kings of the eight countries began to quarrel. 



2g8 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

settled the dispute and divided the bones equally among the 
countries. The kings after having received the relic, took them 
to their respective kingdoms, built caityas over them and wor- 
shipped them. One tooth-relic taken by Khema was given to 
Brahmadatta, king of Kaling-a who built a caitya ov6r it and 
worshipped it. Brahmadatta 's son, Kasiraja, succeeded his 
father and worshipped, like his dead father, the caitya built ever 
the tooth relic of the Buddha. Kasiraja's son, Sunanda, succeeded 
him and did the same. Sunanda's son Guhaslva, succeeded him 
to the throne and did the same, Guhasiva's minister who was a 
false believer, asked the king whether there was anything super- 
natural in the tooth relic of the Buddha which the king wor- 
shipped and for which valuable offerings were given by him, 
The king then narrated the various qualities of the tooth relic 
which showed miracles when prayed for. The minister gave up 
his false belief and became a follower of the Buddha. The heretics 
seeing this became very much dissatisfied. Guhaslva ordered 
all the Niganthas to be driven out of the kingdom. The 
ftiganthas went to King Pandu of Pataliputta, who was then a 
very powerful king of Jambudlpa. They complained to Pandu 
that King Guhaslva being a king subordinate to him ( Pandu ) 
worshipped the bone of a dead person ( that is, Buddha's relic ) 
without worshipping Brahma, Siva and others whom he ( Pandu ) 
worshipped and they further complained that Guhaslva ridiculed 
the deities worshipped by him ( Pandu ). Hearing this King 
Pandu grew angry and sent one of his subordinate kings called 
Cittayana with a fourfold army to arrest and bring Guhaslva 
with the tooth relic. Citfcayana informed Guhaslva of his mission 
and Guhaslva welcomed him cordially, showed him the tooth 
relic of the Buddha and narrated to him the virtues possessed by 
it Cittayana became very much pleased with him and became a 
follower of the Buddha. 

Chapter III. Cittayana then informed Guhaslva of the order 
of King Pandu. Guhaslva with the tooth relic on his head, 
followed by a large number of followers with valuable presents 
for King Pandu, went to Pataliputta. The Niganthas requested 
King Pandu not to offer any seat to Guhasiva and they ajsp 



Pali Chronicles ggg 

requested him to set fire to the tooth relic. A big pit of burning 
charcoal was dug by the king's command and the heretics after 
taking away the tooth relic, threw it into the fire. As soon as ifc 
came in contact with fire, fire became as cool as the winter breeza 
and a lotus blossomed in the fire and in the midst of the lotus, 
the tooth relic was placed. Seeing this wonder, many heretics 
gave up false beliefs but the king himself being a false believer 
for a long time, could not give up false belief and ordered the 
tooth relic to be destroyed by stone, which found its place in the 
sky. The ISTiganthas asked the king not to attach great impor- 
tance to the miracles as they were not unprecedented. The tooth- 
relic was put in a casket and the Nighanthas were asked to take 
it out and throw it away but none could do so. The king declared 
that he who would be able to take out the tooth relic, would be 
rewarded. Anathapindika's great grandson recollecting the 
virtues of the Buddha and the deeds done by his great grand- 
father for the Buddha, was very much pleased to know of the 
declaration and went to take the tooth relic out of the casket. He 
praised the tooth relic much and then the tooth relic rose up to the 
sky and then came down to rest on the head of the great grandson 
of Anathapindika. The Mganthas told King Pandu that due to 
the influence of Anathapindika's great grandson the tooth relic 
could rise up to the sky and come down to rest on the head of the 
great grandson. The iNTiganthas denied the influence of the relic 
which displayed various miracles according to the desire of 
Anathapindika's great grandson. The tooth relic was thrown 
into a moat. Cittayana advised the king that he should follow 
dhamma of the Buddha because by worshipping the tooth-relic, 
Bimbisara and other kings attained nirvana. Thus advised he 
gave up false belief and brought the toofch relic with great pomp. 
King Guhasiva was cordially received by King Pandu and both 
of them did many meritorious deeds. 

Chapter IV. A King named Khiradhara came to fight with 
King Pandu who became victorious. Pandu after re-establishing 
peace in his kingdom, sent back Guhasiva with Buddha's tooth 
relic to Kalinga. Dantakumara, son of the king of Ujjain, came 
to Kalinga to worship the tooth relic. Guhasiva cordially 



290 J Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

corned him and became pleased to hear the qualities of -D&nta- 
kumara and afterwards gave his daughter in marriage -to Danta^ 
kumara. After the defeat of Dantakurnara his son and nephews- 
came to Malayavana, a town near Banfcapura, to take away the 
tooth relic by force. Fully realising the danger, Guhaslva asked 
his son-in-law and daughter to go to Ceylon with the tooth relic, 
As the king of Ceylon and his subjects were faithful to the Buddha, 
he thought Ceylon would he the best and safest place for the relic, 
At this time Mahasena, a friend of Guhaslva, was the king of 
Ceylon. The son-in-law and the daughter with the relic sailed by 
a merchant ship from the port of Tamralipti. The ship reached 
Ceylon safely with the relic. 

Chapter V* Dantakumara and his wife with the relic went to 
a village near the eastern gate of Anuradhapura in the ninth year 
of the reign of Kitfcisirimegha, son of Mahadisena. Dantakumara 
met an .Arahat and informed him of the tooth relic which he 
brought to Ceylon for its safety. The Arahat after hearing this 
went to the king and informed him of the matter. Mahadisena, 
the preceding king of Ceylon was a friend of Guhasiva, king of 
Kalinga who did not know thab Mahadisena had died and his son 
Kittisirimegha was on the throne of Ceylon. Dantakumara and 
his wife became very much grieved to know that Mahadisena 
was no more and his son Kittisirimegha had succeeded him on 
the throne. The king of Ceylon after learning from the Arahat 
that the tooth relic was brought to Ceylon for its safety by Danta- 
kumara and his wife, became very much pleased. The king and 
the queen of Ceylon went barefooted to Meghagirivihara, residence 
of the Arahat, to receive the relic. They brought the relic to the 
palace and placed it on the throne with great devotion. The 
citizens of Ceylon, the Bhikkhus well- versed in the Tripitakas 
and the Ajrahats came to worship it. The king knew that the 
colour of the relic was as white as the morning star. But finding 
it not to be so when it was taken out of the casket, suspicion 
arose in the mind of the king, but his suspicion was soon removed 
when the relic displayed several miracles. The king built a 
special temple and kept it there. All the Simhalese monks and 
Householders assembled at Anuratfhapura to worship the tootji 



Pali Chronicled gg^ 

relic. At this time a question arose as to the section of the monks 
to whom the tooth relic would be entrusted for its safety and 
management. The king decided that the tooth relic would select 
its own abode. The tooth relic placed on a fully decorated ele- 
phant was taken round the city and was brought to the place 
where the Thera Mahinda preached his first sermon after reaching 
Ceylon. The King of Ceylon ruled that the relic would be taken 
round the city once in a year in spring. The temple where it 
was kept, was extended at the cost of nine lacs. After the death 
of Kitfcisirimegha, his successors such as Buddhadasa worshipped 
it with devotion and protected it. 1 

The Cha-kesa-dhatu-vamsa has been edited by Minayeff of 

. , JT St- Petersburg in the Journal of the P. T. 

Cha-kesa-dhatu-rarhsa Q 1QQ - _ . 

s b. 1885. It is a work by a modern 

Burmese author of unknown date. It is a mixture of pross and 
poetry. It contains an account of hair relics of the Buddha. 

The Gandhavamsa has been edited by Minayeff in J. P. T. S., 

1886. His edition is based on Burmese 
Gandhavamsa . , T , . .... ... 

manuscripts. It is a small and interesting 

outline of the history of Pali books, It is written mostly in prose. 
Besides the books of the canon, there is contained in it a sketch 
of the history of more modern Pali works far more detailed than 
that in the Sasanavamsa. A list of authors and their works as 
stated in the Gandhavamsa is given below : 

1 The Dathavacasa has been edited in Devanagarl character and trans- 
lated into English by Dr. B. C. Law and published by Messrs. Motilal 
Banarsidas, Proprietors of the Punjab Sanskrit Book Depot, Lahore* 
Besides, there are two Sinhalese editions ( by Terunnanse and SIIS- 
lankars), and a P. T. S ( London ) edition published in 1884 in J. P. 
T. S. Th*re is another English translation of this -work by Mutu 
Coomaraswami published by Messrs, Trubner & Co., London in 1874. 
A French version of this work appeared in Paris in 1884 under the 
" Le Dathavamaa, ou, Histoire de la dent relique du Buddha Gotama ; 
poeme epique Pali de Dhammakitti . " There is a commentary on the 
Dathavamsa known as the DathSdha'tuvamsatika mentioned in an 
inscription of the 15th century A. D. Vide also G. Tumour Account 
trf the Tooth Behc of Ceylon ( J. A- S. B. vi ). 



Annals Of the JShandartcar Critntal Eesearch Institute 

Mahakaccayana * Kaccayanagandbo, Mahaniruttigandho, 
Cullanirutfcigandbo,. Nettlgandbo, Petakopadesagandbo, Vanna- 
rutigandbo. 

Buddhagbosa : Visuddhimaggo, SumangalavilasinI,Papanca- 
Sudani, SarafcfcbapakSsinl, ManorathapuranI, Samantapasadika, 
Paramatthakatha, Kankhavitarani, Dhammapadatthakatha, Jata- 
katthaVatha, Khuddakapathatthakatlia, Apadanatthakatha. 

Buddhadatta : Vinayavinicchayo, Uttaravinicchayo, Abhi- 
dhammavataro, Madhuratthavilasinl. 

Ananda ' Mulatikam, 

Dhammapala : Nettipakaranatthakatba, Itivuttaka-attha- 
katha, Udanatthakatha, Cariyapitaka-atthakatlia, Theragaihattha- 
katha, Vimanavattlmssa Vimalavilasinlnaraft atthakatha, Peta- 
vatthussa Vimalavilasini nama atthakafcha, Paramattbamarijusa, 
Dlghanikayatthakathadlnam Catunnam atthakathanam Llnattha- 
pakasinl nama tiki,, Jatakatfchakathaya Llnatthapakasinl nama 
tlka, Paramatfchadipani, Llnatfchavannana. 

Mahavajirabuddhi : Vinayagandbi. 
Vimalabuddbi : MukbamattadlpanL 
Cullavajiro : Atbbabyakkbyanam, 

Dlpamkaro : Rupasiddbipakarapam, Bupasiddbitikam Sum- 
mapancasuttam. 

Culladbammapalo : Saccasamkbepam. 

Kassapo : Mohavicchedani, VimatiochedanI, Buddbavamso, 
Anagatavamsa. 

Mabanama: Saddbammapakasanl, Mabavamsa, Cullavamsam. 

Upasena s Saddbamma^tbitlkarh. 

Moggallana J Moggallanabyakaranam. 

Samgbarakkhita i Subodbalamkararh. 

Vuttodayakafa J Vuttodaya, Sambandbacinta, Navatlkath* 



Pali Chrcnides 293 

Dbammasirl : Kbuddasikkham, 
Anuruddha : Khuddasikkham. 

Anuruddha * Paramafctbaviniccbayam, Namarupapariccbe- 

dam, Abhidhammatthasamgahapakaranam. 
Kbema - Kbemam. 

Sariputta: Saratfchadipam, Vinayasamgahapakaranam, Sarafc- 
thamanjiasam, Paiicakam. 

Buddhanaga : Vinayatthamanjusam, 
Havo Moggallana * Abhidbanappadlpikam. 

Vaoissaro : Sambandhacintatika, Moggallanabyakaranassa- 
tlka, Namarupapariccbedatika, Padarupavibba- 
vanam, Khemapakaranassatika, Mulasikkbaya- 
t!ka, Yuttodayavivaranam Stimangalopasadanl, 
Balavataro, Yogaviniccbay o, Simalamkara, Rupa- 
rupavibbaga, Paccayasarhgabo. 

Sumangala : * Abbidbammaitbavikasani, Abbidbaramattba- 
Vibbavanl. 

Dbammakitti : Dantadbatupakaranam. 
Medbamkaro * Jinacaritam, 
Saddhamasiri : - Saddatfcbabbedacinta, 
Devo * Sumanakutavannana. 

Cullabuddhaglioso : Jatattaglnidanam, Sotattaginidanaiii. 
Hatthapala ' MadburasavabiBi. 
Aggavamsa : Saddanltipakaranaln. 
Vimalabuddbi :~ Mabatlkam, 

Uttama : Balavataratlkam, LingattbaYivaranatlkaih. 
Kyaovaranno : Saddabindu, Paramattbabindupakaranam, 
Saddhammaguru : Saddavuttipakasanarh. 

Aggapandita : Lokuppatti, 
13 [ Annals, B. O. R, .1 ] 



294 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Saddhammajotfpala : Slmalaihkarassatlka, Matikatthadlpani, 

VinayasamutthanadlpanI, Gandhasaro, 
Patthanaganananay o , Samkhepavaii- 
nana, Suttaniddeso, Patimokkhavigo- 
dhanl. 

Nava Vimalabuddhi : Abhidhammapannarasatthanam. 

Vepullabuddhi Saddasaratthajaliniyatika, Vuttodayatika, 
Paramatthamanjusa, Dasagandhivannana, 
Magadhabhutavidaggam, Vidadhimukkha- 
mandanatlka. 

Ariyavamso ' Manisajramanjusarn, Manidlparh, Gandabhara- 
nam, Mahanissaram, Jatakavisodhanam. 

Clvaro : Janghadasassa tlkam. 
Nava medhamkaro : Lokadipakasaram. 
Sariputto -* Saddavuttipakasakassatlkam. 
Saddhammaguru : Saddavuttipakasanam. 

Bhammasenapati Karikam. Etimasamidlpakam, and Mano- 
haram. 

NanasS-garo * Lingatthavivarnapakasanam. 
Abhaya * Saddatthabhedacintaya mahatikam- 
Gunasagaro : Mukhamattasaram tat-tlkam. 
Subhutaoandana Lingatthavivaranapakaranam. 
Udumbaranamaoariya : Petakopadesassa tlkam. 
Upatissacariya : Atiagatavamsassa atthakatha. 
Bu ddhapiya : Saratfchasamgahanamagandho. 
Dhammanandacariya : Kaccayanasaro, Kaccayanabhedam, 

and Kaccayanasarassatlka, 
Gandhacariyo : Kurundigandho. 
Nagltacariya : Saddhasaratfchajalini. 

Works of unknown authors mentioned in the Gandhavariasa 
are stated below * 



Pali Chronicles 295 

Mahapaccariyam, Puranatika, Mulasikkhaiika, Llnatthapaka- 
sinl, Nisandeho, DhammanusaranI, Neyyasandati, Neyyasanda- 
tiya tlka, Sumahavataro, Lokopannafctipakaranam, Tathagata- 
pattipakaranam, Nalatadhitavannana, Slhalavittha, Dhammapa- 
dapako, Patipattisarhgaho, Visuddhimaggagandhi, AbMdhamma- 
gandhi, Nettipakaranagandhi, Visuddhimaggacullatlka, Sotappa- 
malinl, PasadanI, OttasalokasudanI, Subodhalankarassa Navatika, 
Gulhatthatlkam, Balappabodhanam, Saddattbabhedacintaya maj- 
jbimatlkam, Karikayatlkam, Etimasamidlpikayatlkam, Dlpavamsa, 
Thupavamsa and Bodhivamsa. 

The author of the Sasanavamsa gives an outline of Buddha's 

life and briefly deals with the three Bud- 
Sasanavarhsa -,, , .,,,.. 

dhist Councils held during the reigns of 

the three Indian kings, Ajatasattu, Kalasoka and Asoka, After 
the third Council was over, Moggaliputta Tissa Thera sent 
Buddhist missionaries to different countries for the propagation 
of the Buddhist faith. Pafmasami, the author of the Sasana- 
vamsa, speaks of the nine regions visited by the missionaries. 
But of these nine, five are placed in Indo-China. Dr. Mobel Bode 
is of opinion that the author's horizon seems to be limited, first 
by an orthodox desire to claim most of the early teachers for tie 
countries of the South ( and hence to prove the purest possible 
sources for the Southern doctrines), and secondly by a certain 
feeling of national pride. According to this account, Mafca- 
Moggaliputta Tissa sent two separate missionaries to the neigh- 
bouring regions in the valley of the Irawaddy besides three 
others, who visited Laos and Pegu. 

The Thera Mahinda went to Ceylon for the propagation of the 
faith during the reign of the Sinhalese King Devanarhpiyatissa 
who was a contemporary of the Indian King Asoka. 



Sona and Uttara visited Suvannabhumi ( 
is, Thaton at the mouth of Sittaung River). 
that even before the sending out of the 
bhumi by Moggaliputta Tissa 
Buddhist Council, Buddha 
of Bhikkhus to preach%tr^e 10I f jjj-.g beainsoosi &d3 



296 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Maharakkhita Thera spread Buddhism in Yona country ( the 
country of the Shan tribes about Zimme ). 

Yonarakkhita Thera visited the country of Vanavasi (the 
region round Prome ) and propagated Buddhism there. 

Majjhantika visited Kasmlra and Gandhara ( the Gandhara 
country) which lay on the right bank of the Indus, south of Kabul 
and the whole country became a strong Buddhist hold. 

It was through Maha-Kevata Thera that Buddhism found its 
way into Mahimsakamandala ( Andhra country ). 

Maha-Dhammarakkhita Thera went to Maharattha ( Maha- 
nagara-rattha or Siam ) and spread Buddhism there. 

Majjhima Thera spread the Buddhist faith in Clnarattha (the 
Himavantapadesa of the Ceylon books ). 

Now we shall deal with the history of the spread of Buddhism 
in Aparantarattha which ( placed by European scholars west of 
the Punjab ) is no other than the Sunaparanta of the Burmese, 
i. e. } the region lying west of the upper Irawaddy. 

The Sasanavamsa brings before us a picture of the relations 
of State and Samgha in Burma from the time of Anuruddha, with 
his constant adviser, Arahanta, to the time of Meng-Dun-Meng, 
with his Council of Mahatheras, Those relations were one of 
mutual dependence. The Order, though enriched by the gifts of 
pious laymen, yet depends, in the last resort, upon the king. The 
peaceful and easy life dear to the Burmese Bhikkhu, the necessary 
calm for study or the writing of books, the land or water to be 
set apart for ecclesiastical ceremonies, all these are only secured 
by the king's favour and protection. This accounts for the 
general loyalty of the Samgha to the head of the State. The king's 
despotism is also held in check. " At the lowest, the royal gifts 
of viharas and the buildings of cetiyas are either the price paid 
down for desired prosperity and victory, or the atonement for 
bloodshed and plunder ; and the despot dares not risk the terrors, 
the degradation,that later births, in coming time, may hold in store 
for him, if he injures or neglects the Samgha." As a rule, the king 
was the .recognised authority in ecclesiastical affairs. This ip 



Pali Chronicles $97 

evident from Anuruddha's vigorous reforms. The Samgharaja is 
not the elected Head of the Order. He is appointed by the king 
whose favourite and tutor he usually is, It appears from the 
Parupana Ekamsika controversy that the king's power to settle 
a religious question by royal decree is fully recognised by the 
Samgha. But we also see the king himself under his acariya's 
influence, so far as to ensure his favouring the orthodox or un- 
orthodox school, according to the views of the Samgharaja. 

The History of Religion in Mramma is nothing more than the 
history of the Buddhist Order in Sunaparanta and Tambadlpa. 
The history of the Burmese as a nation centres in a group of 
cities Pug&n, Sagain, Ava, Panya, Amarapura, Mandalay 
each, in its turn, the seat of kings. 

The early Buddhist stronghold in Burma was at Sudhamrna- 
pura, the capital of Manohari, King of Pegu. Anuruddha, King 
of Pugan, at the instance of Arahanta, a great Thera who came 
from Sudhammapura to Pugan, made war with Manohari and 
brought the sacred relics and books to Pug&n. All the members 
of the Samgha in Thaton ( Sudhammapura ) were also transferred 
to Pugan. Anuruddha further sent for copies from Ceylon, which 
Arahanta compared with those of Pegu, to settle the readings. 

During the reign of Narapatisisa the celebrated teacher Uttara- 
]Iva came from Sudhammapura to Arimaddana and established 
religion there. His pupil Chapada who spent ten years studying 
in Ceylon, returned with four] colleagues to the capital After the 
death of Chapada separate schools came into existence, having 
their origin in certain differences that arose between the three 
surviving teachers Sivali, Tamalinda and Ananda. The 
schools are together known as Pacchagapa to distinguish them 
from the earlier school in Arimaddana ( Purimagana ) founded 
by Arahanta. 

The reign of Kyocva is highly important for the history of 
Buddhism. He was himself the author of two manuals Para- 
matthabindu and Saddabindu, for the use of his wives, and one 
of his daughters wrote the Vibhatyattha, We are told of the 
science and zeal of the women of Arimaddana, and anecdotes are 
told of their skill in grammar and the keenness of their wit. 



298 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Pesearch Institute 

In the reign of Bureng Naung religion thrived most. It i s 
recorded of him that he even forced Buddhism on the Shans and 
Muslims in the north of his kingdom. 

In the reign of Siri Mahaslhasurasudhammaraja begins a Dew 
chapter in the history of Burmese Buddhism the Parupana 
Ekamsika controversy. The rise and many phases of the dispute 
are set forth at length by the author of the Sasanavamsa. Two 
sects arose the Ekamsika sect ( it was so named for going about 
in the village with one shoulder uncovered by the upper garment, 
and the Parupana sect ( this school strictly observed the wearing 
of the upper garment on both shoulders, during the village 
rounds). During the reign of Bodoah Pra the question was 
settled for good. A royal decree established the Paiupana 
practices for the whole of the kingdom. 

During the reign of Meng-dun-Meng we come to the last con- 
troversy, perhaps recorded because it points to the influence of 
the Burmese Samgha in Ceylon. An ancient Slma in the island 
( Ceylon ) was the subject of dispute. The matter was brought 
for judgment to the Samgharaja at Mandalay, by deputations 
from both sides. The Samgharaja gave judgment after consulting 
various sacred texts. The members of both sides received presents 
from the king. 

Thus the history of religion in Aparanta closes. 

The edition of the Sasanavamsa 1 is based on two palm-leaf 
Mss. in the British Museum, It is a non-canonical book and is 
text of Burmese authorship, It is a very interesting historical 
work. The author Pafmaswami who dates his book 1223 of the 
Burmese Common Era 1861 A. D., was the tutor of the then 
reigning king of Burma and himself a pupil of the head of the 
Order at Mandalay. The table of contents promises a general 
history of Buddhism drawn from a few well-known Pali works, 
e. g., Atthakatha, Vinaya Pitaka, Mahavamsa and Dipavamsa, 
Events are brought up to the time of the third Council in the 

1 Read Sasanavamaadipa edited by Jnanatilaka Nayaka Punnanse and 
Sa"sauavamsSdipaya by Vimalasara Unnanse Read also " The author 
9f the SSsauavamsa " by M. Bode, J E, A, S., 1899. 



Pali Chronicles 299 

time of Asoka and the sending forth of missionaries by the Thera 
Mahamoggaliputfca Tissa. The later history of religion consists 
of nine chapters, which falls into two parts, The first part con- 
sists of a few legends strung together with quotations from Bud- 
dhaghosa and DIpavamsa. The accounts of Ceylon and Burma 
seem to be more careful and complete than those of the other 
matters of this group. The second part covers three-fifths of the 
book and treats solely of the -history of Buddhism in Burma 
proper. In part one, the section dealing with the missions strikes 
the key-note of the Slsanavamsa, A few geographical notes 
eiplained the nine regions visited by the first missionaries. A 
careful study of this work shows the author's intimate acquain- 
tance with the commentaries, The style imitates that of Buddha* 
ghosaandhis successors., There are no points of philological 
interest. The book gives us an interesting record of the part 
played by the Buddha's religion in the social and intellectual 
life, Pannaswami's history is a purely ecclesiastical piece of 
work. This work has been edited by Mobel Bode, Ph. D. for the 
P, T.S.London. 



THE DATE OF HARSA -PULAKESIN WAE 

BY 

DR. A. S. ALTBKAJR, M. A. T LL. B., D. Litt. 
Benares Hindu University 

It is well-known that the efforts of mighty Harsa to reduce 
Pulakesin II to submission did not come to fruition and that he 
had to return home discomfited from the Vindhya passes. But 
neither the foreign admirer of Harsa, who admits the defeat of his 
imperial host, nor the courtly poet of Pulakesin, who grows elo- 
quent over this signal achievement of his patron, throws any 
light on the time of this war or the causes that led to it. We of 
course know that the war took place sometime before 634 A, D, 
the date of the Aihole inscription, but how many years prior to 
that date it was fought, is not jet definitely ascertained. As a 
consequence,we find divergent views held on this subject. The 
late Dr. Fleet had advanced the opinion that the war between 
Pulakesin and Harsa must have taken place before 612 A. D. 1 
This view has been recently accepted by Dr. R K. Mookerji in 
his book on Harsa in the Rulers of India Series 2 . Vincent Smith*, 
and following him, Mr. 0. V. Vaidya 4 are, on the other hand, dis- 
posed to hold that the contest has to be placed in c. 620 A. D. It 
will be shown in this paper on the strength of new epigraphioal 
evidence that the war between the two aspirants for imperial 
power almost certainly took place sometime between 630 A, D. 
and 634 A. D, 

The arguments in favour of the view that the battle took place 
before 612 A D. are by no means very strong. * It is no doubt true 
that later records of the successors of Pulakein II mention that 

1 Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts, p. 351. 

2 Pp. 31 ft 

3 Early History of India, 4th. edition, p. 353. 

4 History of Mediaeval Hindu India, Vol. I, p. 13* 



The Date of Harsa- Pulakesin War 301 

Pulakesin won the title of Paramesvara as a result of the over- 
throw of Harsa, the Imperial Sovereign of Northern India, and 
fchafc the Hyderabad Plates of Pulakesin II, dated 612 A. D. 1 , assign 
him that title. It will be, however, not safe to conclude from 
this circumstance that Pulakesin had defeated Harsa even earlier 
than 612 A. D. If such were the case, the glorious achievement 
being quite a recent one, the plates would have gone eloquent 
over its description. As it is, they do not even refer to the over- 
throw of Harsa. The title Paramesvara is no doubt given to Pula- 
kesin, but every student of ancient Indian copper-plates knows that 
their writers were not usually accustomed to weigh their words very 
carefully when they were eulogising their patrons. Thai the title 
Faramesvara had no vital connection with the overthrow of 
Harsa, as later day copper-plate-composers claim, will be further 
evident from 'the fact that Ravikirti, the author of the Aihole 
prasasti, does not give it to his patron in his famous composition, 
although he therein describes the defeat of Harsa in picturesque 
language. 

Nor does the testimony of Yuan Chwang prove that the two 
sovereigns had measured swords with each other before 612 A. D. 
The Chinese pilgrim no doubt remarks that after conquering the 
' five Indias ' within six years after his accession, Harsa 
' reigned in peace for thirty years without raising a weapon. 2 * 
But as Walters has pointed out 5 , the word ch'ut here employed 
simply means * to don the imperial robe ', i. e. to reign justly 
and happily. That any literal interpretation of the expression, 
which would of course exclude the possibility of the offensive 
against Pulakesin after 612 A. D., is out of question will be clear 
from the fact that Harsa was actually engaged in a war with the 
people of Garrjam at the time of his meeting with Yuan Chwang, 

Fleet seems to be under the impression that all the exploits 
of Pulakesin mentioned in the Aihole inscription in verses 17 to 
24 were accomplished prior to his formal coronation in 610 A. D., 



1 i. A, VI, p. 73. 

2 Waiters, On Yuan Chwang, I, p. 343. 

3 Ibid* P. 346. 

14 [ Annals, B, O. B. 1. 1 



302 Annals of the ghandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

which is being described in v. 25. If such were the case, the 
defect of Harsa will have to be placed prior to 610 A. D. The 
verse 25, however, does not at all refer to the coronation of Pula- 
kesin II. After describing how Pulakesin foiled the efforts of his 
uncle to deprive him of his throne, how he broke up the con- 
federacy of Govinda and Appayika, defeated the rulers of Vana- 
vasi and Konkana, overthrow Gacgas, Alupas and Mauryas and 
reduced Lata, Malava and Gurjara rulers, Raviklrti points out 
that as a consequence of these exploits, Pulakesin became the 
Lord Paramount of the three Maharastras. The verse describes 
Pulakesin's attainment of the imperial position in the south and 
has nothing to do with his accession in 610 A. D. 7 

A survey of the political situation at the commencement of 
the careers of both the sovereigns will show that they could not 
have fought with each other prior to 612 A. D. Each had to spend 
his first few years in consolidating his position and overcoming 
local and hereditary foes, who were neither few nor insignificant. 
If we read between the lines of Yuan Chwang, we shall find that 
Harsa could have thought of challenging the position of Pula- 
kesin only after 612 A. D. Says the Pilgrim " Proceeding east- 
wards, he ( i. e. Harsa ) invaded the states that had refused alle- 
giance and waged incessant warfare until in six years he had 
fought the five Indias ". The exact meaning of the expression 
1 Five Indias ' is unfortunately uncertain, but the expression 
'proceeding eastwards ' makes it quite clear, that these six years 
were spent by Harsa in fighting with his opponents exclusively 
in Eastern India. The pilgrim goes on to observe, " then having 
enlarged his territory, he increased his army, bringing his 
elephant corps upto 60,000, and the cavalry to 1,00,000." It 
must have been only after his resources were thus increased and 
army strengthened in 612 A. D. that Harsa could have thought of 
atiacking his neighbours in the west or in the south 

1 Of. 



The Date of Harsa- Pulakesin War 



303 



Nor was Pulakesin powerful enough to accept the challenge of 
Harsa before 612 A. D. The .Hyderabad plates make it clear that 
lie had ascended the throne in 610 A. D Pious history, as manu* 
factured by later chroniclers, no doubt asserts 1 that Mangallsa 
voluntarily surrendered the crown to his nephew Pulakesin II, 
when the latter came of age ; ' for is it ever conceivable that a 
scion of Calukya family would ever depart from the path of 
virtue ? ' Contemporary documents, however, tell a different tale, 
and we know that instead of handing over the kingdom to his 
nephew, Mangallsa fought with him to the bitter end in order to 
secure the succession of his own son and perished in the effort. 2 
The fratricidal war encouraged the feudatories to be rebellious, 
and Pulakesin was threatened in the very heart of his kingdom 
by a confederacy of Govinda and Appayika, who advanced to 
fight with him on the banks of the Bhima. Pulakesin could save 
the situation only by buying off one of his opponents in order to 
defeat the other. 5 Then immediately to the south of his capital, 
he had to fight with the Gangas and Alupas, Nor had he easy 
time in Konkana, where he had to reduce to subjection the 
Mauryas. It will be thus seen that the first few years of Pula- 
kesin must have been spent in reconquering the home-provinces 
of his hereditary kingdom. Within three years of his accession, 
lie could, therefore, hardly have been in a position to defeat Harsa. 

The cause of the war between Harsa and Pulakesin seems to 
be the conflict of their imperial plans in Gujarat and Malva. 
Students of Ancient Indian History know full well how these 
provinces used to profess allegiance sometimes to a northern and 
sometimes to a southern power. Both Harsa and Pulakesdn, there- 
fore, thought that these provinces ought to fall within their own 
spheres of influence. There is nothing to show that Eaviklrti 
follows any chronological order in narrating the events in the 
Aihole inscription ; the mention, however, of the acceptance of 
Pulakesin 's sovereignty by Lata, Malava and Gurjara rulers in 
v. 22, immediately before the description of the war with Harsa, 

1 e. g, Yevoor tablets, I. A, t vol. VIII, P. 13, 

2 A ihole Inscription, v. 15. 

3 Ibid, v. 17. 



304 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

may very probably show that the one was the cause of the other, It 
is well-known that several records of the Gurjars of Bharoach 
claim that Dadda II, a ruler of that line, had protected a king of 
Valabhi against Harsa. 1 It would appear very probable that 
before attacking Valabhi, Harsa must have compelled the ruler 
of Malva to recognise his suzereinty. This must have exasperated 
Pulakesin, for that ruler was his own feudatory erstwhile. He 
seems to have planned retaliation by helping the Gnrjara ruler 
Dadda II in affording protection to the Valabhi chief against 
Harsa. ISTay, it is quite probable that the credit claimed for 
Dadda II may have really belonged to Pulakesin, whose feudatory 
he probably was. Cases are by no means few in Ancient Indian 
historical documents where feudatories entirely ignore their 
suzereins and take the full credit of the latters' achievements to 
themselves. Thus the defeat of Gurjara-Pratihara ruler Mahipala 
is claimed entirely for Calukya feudatory ISTarasimha by his court 
poet Pampa, who completely ignores Indra III, his patron's 
feudal lord. 2 The Bharoach Gurjara kingdom was a petty princi- 
pality, hardly equal to two or three modern districts : and it is 
very improbable, if not impossible, that Dadda II could have 
single-handed afforded protection to the Valabhi ruler against 
the Lord Paramount of Northern India. It is almost certain that 
he was either supported by Pulakesin 7 s battalions, or that he was 
merely fight'ng in the latter 's army. The latter hypothesis seems 
to be more probable, for the Aihole inscriptions claims in v. 22 
that the Gurjara ruler was a feudatory of Pulakesin. 

It would appear that Harsa eventually succeeded in winning 
over the Valabhi rtiler by offering him his own daughter in 
marriage. Such a move was essential, for it was very useful in 
consolidating Harsa's position in Central India by removing an 
enemy in the flank. The assumption sometimes made that Harsa 
may have marched against Valabhi after the efforts to defeat 
Pulakesin proved of no avail is very improbable. Northern 
powers are usually seen consolidating their position in the north, 
right up to Kathiawar before launching an attack on trans- 
it e. g- Naosati plates I. A. XIII, p. 77. 
2 Karnatakq-bhasa-bhusana, Introduction, p. XI y. 



The Date of Harsa- Pulakesin War 305 

Vindhyan regions. The Mauryas had conquered Kathiawar 
before attacking the Deccan- The Muslims attacked Devagiri 
only after they had conquered Gujarat and Kathiawar. It would 
therefore seem almost certain that Harsa' s conquest or winning 
over of the Valabhi ruler must have preceded his offensive 
against Pulake^in. 

If such were the case, the latter event must be placed some- 
time about 630 A. D. We have already seen how later Gurjara 
grants claim that Dadda II had afforded protection to the Valabhi 
king against Harsa. The known dates of Dadda II range from 

629 to 640 A D. It is nofc very probable that his accession took 
place much earlier than 629 A. D. We may therefore place the 
Gurjara-Calukya alliance sometime about 628 or 629 A. D. This 
alliance did not last long, for Dhruvabhata the Valabhi king, 
was won over by HarSa. Strengthened and encouraged by this 
defection, Harsa must have planned his offensive against Pula- 
kesin sometime between 630 and 634 A. D. 

634 A. D,, the upper limit for the war is determined by the 
Aihole inscription. That the lower limit cannot go back beyond 

630 A, D., as shown above by a discussion of the general political 
situation, is further rendered almost certain by the recently 
published Lohanera copper-plates of Palakesin II. 1 The wording 
of the date of this document is unfortunately slightly corrupt, 
it reads as ' dvipancasadadhike sakabdapancake y . If we take the 
expression literally, it would mean ' in the Saka year 52 '. But 
in Saka 52, neither Pulakesin nor the Calukyas were in existence. 
It is quite obvious that the expression sakabdapancake is a mis- 
take for satabdapancake. The date of this record of Pulakesin II 
is therefore 552 in Saka Era i. e. 630 A. D., a year falling with* 
in the known reign of that ruler. 

The Lohanera plates of Pulakesin II issued in 630 A. D. des- 
cribe his valour and exploits, but are altogether silent about the 
defeat of Harsa. They describe Pulakesin as Vijayl sahasaikaratih, 
anekacaturdantasamgramajanitaprana ... taya ... svdbJiujabalaldbdha- 
vikramakhyah, ... purvaparambunathah, ... prasabhabJumrstanyaraja~ 

1 |hare , Sources of Mediaeval History of the Deccan, Vol. I, pp. 1-8. 



306 Annals of the Bhcwdarkar Oriental Research Institute 

srifr, but are quite silent about the most notable achievement of 
Pulakesin, Negative evidence is no doubt generally to be accepted 
with caution, but the composer was out to describe the valour of 
the donor ; and if the most significant achievement of the latter 
known to us did not occur to him, the almost certain reason seems 
to be that it was not yet an accomplished fact. We have seen al- 
ready how the known facts of the Gurjara-Maitraka history sup- 
port the view that the offensive against Pulakesin could not have 
been launched before o. 630 A. D. The negative evidence of the 
Lohanera plates supports the same conclusion. It would be thus 
seen that we can locate the war between Harsa and Pulakesin 
within the narrow limit of four years, 630-634 A. D. 



THE AGE OF JANAEA AND OTHERS 

BY 

VANAMALI VEDANTATIRTHA, M. A. 

Two remarkable books were sometime ago published on 
Ancient Indian History by the Calcutta University. These 
deserve the special study and attention of all oriental scholars. 
The first of these IB Dr. S. N. Pradhan's " Chronology of Ancient 
India " which deals with the political history of ancient India 
from the time of the Rgvedic King Divodasa down to the 
extinction of the "Nandas, while the second, Dr. H. C. Roy 
Choudhury's " Political History of Ancient India " deals with the 
period from the birth of Pariksit to the extinction of the imperial 
Guptas. Thus the period ranging from the time of Pariksit to 
the end of the Nandas has been dealt with by both Dr. Pradhan 
and Dr, Roy Choudhury. 

It is interesting to note that the results obtained by them 
diverge widely. Dr. Pradhan has worked on the well-known 
principle laid down in the Vayu Purana ( I, 200-1 ) and the 
Mahabharata (I. 2, 382 ; 1, 1, 267-8 ) that the knowledge of the 
Veda should be reinforced with the knowledge of the Itihasa and 
Purana, for ' Veda is afraid that the man ignorant of the Purana 
and Itihasa will do violence to Him' (i.e. Veda). There is 
some truth in this principle, for Vedic India can never be properly 
understood, unless one knows the Purana ( = ancient history ) of 
India. Working on this principle Dr. Pradhan has checked and 
corrected Puranic genealogies and traditions with the informa- 
tion and evidence derived from Vedic literature in general, as 
W ell as from genuine Puranic synchronisms, and found that in 
the Puranas ' sometimes one dyna B ty is merged or interwoven 
into or tacked on to another dynasty, owing to the corrupt readings 
that have crept in ', and this has resulted in 'a preposterously 
long line of kings ' ( Chronology of Ancient India, Preface, p. zi J. 
Collateral successions have sometimes been described in the 
Puranas as lineal ; sometimes orders of succession reversed, syn- 
chronisms misplaced, dynasties lengthened owing to corrupt 



308 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

readings ( 0. A. L, Preface, p. xi ). For this reason Dr. Pradhan 
has thought it necessary to accept all Puranic accounts with 
caution, to compare and check them amongst themselves and 'to 
correct them in the light of Vedic, Buddhistic, Jain and other 
external evidences ' ( C. A. /., Preface, p. xi ). For according to 
him evidence derived from the Veda is very strong and generally 
carries more authority than the Puranas, for ' many of them are 
either directly contemporary records or are traditions founded on 
contemporary records 7 ( C. A. L, Preface, p. xi ). Dr. Boy Chou- 
dhury's point of view, though somewhat similar, leans more 
towards Buddhistic literature, and looks on the Puranas with 
greater suspicion. It may be noted in this connection that 
Pargiter's view has been to place ' little trust in the Yedic litera- 
ture regarding matters containing Brahmanical pretensions ' 
(Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, p. 10 ), and to ascribe to the 
Veda * a Brahmanical lack of historical sense ' (A. I. H. T,, 
pp. 63-75 ), and generally to place c implicit trust in the Puranas ' 
and * little trust in the Vedas '. We mean to compare here a few 
of the results obtained by Dr. Pradhan and Dr. Roy Choudhury. 

Dr. Eoy Choudhury thinks that Janakas from Siradhvaja 
Janaka to Krti Janaka, as described in the Puranas ( i. e. the 
^Vayu and Visnu etc. ) were the later Videhas of Mithila, and 
began to rule the kingdom of Videha 6 generations or 180 years 
after the time of Janamejay a Pariksifca. He admits that he has 
failed to bring any of the^Janakas into synchronistic connection 
with the members of other royal dynasties and identify any of 
the Puranic Janakas, with the Janakas mentioned in the Bud- 
dhistic Jatakas ( Political History of Ancient Inaia, 2nd ed,,p. 31). 
He thinks that the great Janaka of the Vedic texts was Siradhvaja 
Janaka, father of Sit a, of the Puranic list, because Asvapati, kicg 
of the Kekayas, is represented in the Ramayana as the maternal 
grandfather of Bharata, and because Janaka of the Vedic texts, 
was contemporary with the Kekaya king named Asvapati ( Poli- 
tical History of Ancient India, 1st ed., p. 21 ). This is the view 
held by Dr. Eoy Choudhury in the 1st edition of his book. In 
the 2nd edition of it, we find he has almost withdrawn his 
opinion, as we find him adding " as the name Asvapati is also 
given to Bharata 's maternal uncle ( Ramayana VII, 113, 4), it 



The age of Janaka and others 309 

was possibly not a personal name but a family designation like 
'Janaka *. In that case it is impossible to say how far the identi- 
fication of the Vedic Janaka with the father of Slta is correct " 
( P. H. A. J., 2nd ed., p. 31 ). Although * the precise determination 
of the exact chronological relation between Janameiaya and 
Janaka is \ according to Dr. Roy Choudhury, ' impossible ' 
( P. H. A. I. 9 2nd ed., p. 26 ), yet Dr Roy Choudhury thinks, the 
fact that ' the great Janaka was later than the Pariksitas ? ( i. e. 
Janamejaya, Srutasena, Ugresena and Bhlmasena ) * admits of no 
doubt ' ( P. H. A. I., 2nd ed., p. 25 ). Although the epic tradition 
that Uddalaka and his son Svetaketu attended the Sarpa-satra ol 
Janamejaya ( Mahabharata, Beng. recension, I, 53, 7 ; IV, 21, 2 ) 
and the Puranic tradition^ Visnu Pur aria IV, 21, 2 ) that Janame- 
jaya 's son and successor Satanlka learnt the Vedas from Yajfia- 
valkya, go towards proving the contemporaneity of Janarnejaya 
and Janaka, they are held by Dr. Roy Choudhury as unreliable (P. 
H. A. L 9 2nd ed., p. 26 ) because he thinks that they are incompa- 
tible with the evidence derived from Vedic literature ( P. H. A. I. 
2nd ed, p. 26 ). The first line of Vedic evidence is, according to 
Dr. Roy Choudhury, derived from the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad 
( III, 3. 1 ), where Bhujyu Lahyayani tests Yajnavalkya with 
the question " whither have the Pariksitas gone ? ", the true 
answer to which had already been obtained by Bhujyu from a 
G-andharva who had possessed the daughter of Patancala Kapya 
in the Madra country before. Yajnavalkya answered " Thither 
where Asvamedha sacrificers go". Dr. Roy Choudhury concludes 
from this that * the Pariksitas ( sons of Pariksit ) ' i. e. Janamejaya 
and his brothers ' must at that time have passed away, though 
their life and end must have been still fresh in the memory of the 
people ' ( P. H. A. L, 2nd ed., pp. 25-6 ). 

A second line of evidence adduced by Dr. Roy Choudhury in 
support of his contention is as follows ( P. H. A. J., 2nd ed., 
P, 26 ) : 

Indrota Daivapa Saunaka was a contemporary of Janamejaya 

( Satapxtha-Brahmaria XIII, 5, 4, 1 ). Indrota 's pupil was his son 

Drti Aindrota ( Jaim. Up. Bra. Ill, 40, 2 ; Vamsa Bra. 2 ). Drti's 

pupil was Pulusa Pracmayogya (Jaim. Up, Bra, III, 40, 2). 

15 [ Annals, B. G. R, I.]. 



310 Annals of the J&handarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Pulusa's pupil was Satyayajna Paulusi ( Jaim. Up. Bra. Ill, 40, 
2 ). Satyayajnya Paulusi was a contemporary of Budila 
rasvi and of Uddalaka irurii ( Chandogya Up. V, 11, 1-2) 
prominent figures of Janaka's court ( Brhadaramyaka Up. V, 
III, 7, 1 ). Satyayajna Paulusi therefore was a contemporary 
of Janata Vaideha. He was an elder contemporary because his 
pupil Soma^usma Satyayajni Praclnayogya met Janaka ( atapa- 
tha Brahmana XI, 6, 2, 1-3 ). As Satyayajna flourished long after 
Indrofca Daivapa, his contemporary Janaka was considerable 
later than Janamejaya, the contemporary of Indrota ( P. H A. L 
2nd'ed., p. 26 ). 

Turning to the view of Dr. Pradhan we find that the same 
evidence from Vedic literature and consequently the same line of 
argument has been used by him to show that Janamejaya Pari- 
ksita was a contemporary of Hiranyanabha Kausalya and there- 
fore was an older contemporary of Janaka and Yajnavalkya ( C. 
A. Z, 1st ed., p. 134 ). The small synchronistic tables furnished 
by him ( C. A. /., p. 160 ; p. 134 ), illustrate the chronological 
relation amongst the persons mentioned : 

Indrota Daivapa 

I 
Drti Aindrota Pariksit Aruna 

tlpamanyu, Pulusa PrScinayogya, Hiranyanabha, Janamejaya Uddalaka, Veda 

1 , I ! 

Pfacmasala t Satyayajfia Paulusi, Krti Janaka, gatanika, Yajfiavalkya, 

Thus it will be found that the Vedic evidence used by Dr. Roy 
Choudhury in the hope of proving * clearly ' that ' Janaka was 
separated by six generations from Janamejaya's time ( P. H. A. /., 
2nd ed,, p. 27 ) or by about ' 180 years ' (P. H. A. / 2nd ed,, 
pp. 27-8 ) and thus to reject the Puranic and epic synchronisms 
considering them as ' unreliable ' is exactly the very evidence 
which has already been employed by Dr. Pradhan to show that 
they furnish corroboration of the epic and Puranic synchronism?. 

The third argument advanced by Dr. Eoy Choudury to prove 
that Janaka was six generations below Janamejaya is based upon 
the lists of teachers in the Satapatha Brahmana and the Brhada- 



The ag& of Janaka and others 311 

ranyaka Upanisad ( P. H. A. ! 1st ed., p. 17 ; 2nd ed,, p. 2? \ He 
says that because Tura Kavaseya, the priest of Janamejaya, 
stands at the 10th step above Sanjivlputra, and because Yajfia- 
valkya, the friend of Janaka, stands at the 4fch step above the 
same Sanjlvlputra, as in the list below : 

Tura Kavaseya Janamejaya 

Yajnavacas Rajastambayana 
Kusri 
Sandilya 
Vatsya 

Vamakaksayana 

Mahitthi Yajnavalkya, Janaka 

Kautsa Asuri 

Mandavya Asurayana 

Mandukayam Prasniputra 

Sajajlvlputja Safijlvlputra 

therefore Janamejaya stands at the 6th step above Janaka. 

Dr. Pradhan we find ( C. A. I. p, 159 ) has used a slightly 
different list from the same book Safcapatha Brahmana ( 7, 6, 5, 9 ; 
XIV, 3, 2, 32 ), but arriving at the same conclusion, namely that 
Tuia Kavaseya stands at the 6th step above Yajnavalkya in the 
following series of Vedic teachers * 

Tura Kavaseya 
Yajnavacas Rajastambayana 
Kusri Vaja^ravasa 

TJpavesi 

I 
Aruna Aupavesi Pariksita 

i* ' / 

Uddalaka iruni Janamejaya 

! , I 

Yajnavalkya, . Janaka Satanlka 

Thus although Tura Kavaseya stands at the 6th step in the 
series of teachers above Yajnavalkya and Janaka, Dr. Pradhan 



312 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

has placed Janamejaya only a step above Janaka ( O. A. /,, l e fc e i 
p. 159 ) in conformity with the several epic, Puranic and Vedic 
synchronisms which will be mentioned in this paper presently, 
and has made the justifiable hypothesis that Tura Kavaseya lived 
to a great age to officiate* as the priest of Janamejaya, just as 
"Vyasa Parasarya lived to a great age to attend Janamejaya's 
court (C A. I, p. 160) when the latter instituted his Naga- 
satra ( Seng. MBh. I, 53, 7 ; I, 60, 7 ). Besides in a succession of 
teachers, the average age-difference is generally much less than 
that in a lineal descendance, unless the pupils are sons of their 
preceptors. The preceptors were in some cases younger than 
their pupils, just as Samkaracarya was much younger than his 
pupil Suresvaracarya, The subject of contemporaneity will be 
best understood when it is borne in mind that a man may gene- 
rally be contemporary with five successive generations. In my 
childhood I was a contemporary of the grand-father of a friend of 
mine ; I *am now a contemporary of his old father and of him ; 
I am a contemporary of his son, who is now a youth and has just 
married ; If I am spared a few years more, I shall be a contempo- 
rary of my friend's grand-child. If a man lives exceptionally 
long, he may be a contemporary of no less than six successive 
generations of men, younger or older. There is no reason to be 
surprised at the information that Tura Kavaseya officiated as the 
priest of Janamejay a, although the latter was contemporary with 
TJddalaka Aruni who was the fifth in the series of teachers from 
Tura Kavaseya. All doubts about this will be dispelled when 
one remembers the case of the Turkish bi-centenarian Zaro Aga 
who was 9 years old in 1784 at the time of the treaty of the 
American War of Independence. 

It is interesting to note how Dr. Pradhan and Dr. Roy Chou- 
dhury have differed as regards the time about which the famous 
king Hiranyanabha Kausalya flourished. 

Dr. Roy Choudhury thinks that Hiranyanabha Kausalya 
was a contemporary of Gautama Buddha, and of Prasena]it, king 
of Kosala, and of Bimbisara of Magadha ( P. H. A. L, 1st ed. p. 51 
and p. 81 ; 2nd ed. p. 65 and p. 99 ), He has arrived at this result 
by the following steps ; - - 



The age of Janaka and others 313 

( 1 ) ' Uddalaka 7 Aruni ' was separated by 6 generations from 
Janamejaya ? . 

(2) Gunakhya Sankhayana was separated by 2 generations 
from Uddalaka, ( as in the Sankhayana Aranyaka ). 

( 3 ) ' Therefore Gunakhya Sankhayana flourished 7 or 8 
generations from ' ( i. e. below ) ' Janamejaya '. 

( 4 ) Kausalya Asvalayana, Kabandhin Katyayana, Pippalada 
and Prince Hiranyanabha Kausalya were contemporaries as 
given in the Prasna Upanisad (VI, 1). Asvalayana here was an 
inhabitant of Kosala. 

( 5 ) The author of the Sankhayana Grhya Sutra was contem- 
porary with the author of the Asvalayana Grhya Sutra, ' as they 
mention each other in their respective works '. 

( 6 ) Assalayana of Savatthi ' is ' mentioned in the Majjhima 
Nikaya ( II, 147 et seq) as a famous Vedic scholar and a contem- 
porary of Gotama Buddha and Kukuda or Pakudha Kaccayana '. 

' These facts ' have enabled Dr. Roy Choudhury ' to identify 
1 Kausalya Asvalayana ' of the Prasna Upanisad * with Assalayana 
of Savatthi * of ' the Majjhima Nikaya ', and to conclude that he 
' must have lived in the 6th century B. a ' ( P. H. A. L, 2nd ed., 
pp. 16-17 ), and secondly to conclude that Gunakhya Sankhayana 
' too must have* lived in the 6th century B. C- ? , if Gunakhya San- 
khayana was identical with the author of the Sankhayana Grhya 
Sutra <, P. H. A. /., 2nd ed., pp. 16-17 ), and thirdly to conclude 
that the king: Hiranyanabha Kausalya was contemporary with 
Prasenajit,king of Kosala, and of Gautama Buddha, and of Bimbi- 
sara of Magadha. 

On analysing the steps adopted here by Dr, Eoy Choudhury it 
will be found that the 1st step is wrong, as we have already seen 
that his Yedic evidences rather tend to prove the contemporaneity 
of Janamejaya and Uddalaka Aruni. 

Combining the 4th and 6th steps together, Dr. Roy Choudhury 
concludes that Kausalya Asvalayana of the Prasna Upanisad was 
identical with Assalayana of Savatthi of the Majjhima Nika^. 
Because Asvalayana was an inhabitant of Kosala, therefore he 



314 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

was identical with Assalayana of Savatthi this seems to be the 
reasoning adopted by Dr. Roy Choudhury. It is an assumption 
pure and simple. It is no proof. 

In the 1st edition of his work ( p. 10 ) Dr. Roy Choudhury 
stated " It is however possible that Gunakya Sankhayana was 
not identical with the Grhya Sutrakara and referred us to B jg 
XXIX, pp. 4-5. In the second edition ( pp. 16-17 ), he states " If 
Gunakhya Sankhayana was the same as the Grhya Sutrakara, he 
too must have lived in the 6th century B. c." It appears that he 
entertains less doubt about Gunakhya Sankhayana having been 
the Grhya Sutrakara, for he accepts the contemporaneity of Guna- 
khya, Asvalayana and Gautama Buddha, and places Janaka in 
the 7th century B. C. ( P. H. A. J., 2nd ed., pp. 27-28 ). But we 
have got to say a few words about Gunakhya. 

From the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad ( VI, 3, 7 ; 5, 3 ) we learn 
that Yajnavalkya was the pupil of Uddalaka Aruni. Kahoda 
being the pupil of the same Uddalaka, was contemporary with 
YajSavalkya. Gunakhya who was the pupil of Kahoda, therefore 
ranks only a step below Yajnavalkya. Now Yajnavalkya was 
the author of many Yajuses in, and the compiler of the 'White 
Yajurveda. Gunakhya who ranks only a step below Yajnavalkya 
therefore belonged to the very beginning of the Yajurvedic Period. 
Hence he could not evidently have been the Grhya Sutrakara, for 
the Grhya Sutras, as a class of literature, are of later date. 

Another point need be noticed in this connection. The conse- 
quences of treating Gunakhya as contemporary with Assalayana 
Savatthi and Gautama Buddha, and therefore with Prasenajit and 
Bimbisara would be to bring down Kahoda, and Yajnavalkya 
the author of the White Yajurveda to only a step above Gautama 
Buddha, that is to suppose that Gautama Buddha, Frasenajit 
and Bimbisara, etc. might have seen Yajnavalkya in their youth. 
This is absurd on the very face of it, for the White Yajurveda 
cannot belong to the time of Gautama Buddha. Gunakhya 
was far earlier than Gautama Buddha. 

Again, consequent on Dr. Roy Choudhury 's assumption of the 
identity of Assalayana of Savatthi with Kausalya Asvalayana*gf 



The age of Janaka and others 



315 



the Pra&na Upanisad, Dr. Roy Choudhury has been compelled to 
make another wrong assumption, namely, of the identity of 
Kabandhin Katyayana of the Prasna Upanisad with Pakudha 
Kacchayana of the Majjhima Nikaya ( P. H A. L, 2nd ed., 
pp. 16-17 ). In order to prove the identity of Eabandhin Katya- 
yana with Pakudha Kaccayana, he says that the word ' Kavan- 
dhin ' means the same thing as the word * Kakuda 7 giving us the 
equation c Kavandhin = Kakuda' ( P. H, A. /., 2nd ed , p. 17 
foot-note ) and has asked us to refer to the Atharvaveda IX, 4, 3. 
We consult the Atharvaveda and find that W. D. Whitney has 
translated the word ' Kavandha * by * trunk *. ( Translation cf 
Atharvaveda> p. 529 ). We consult the Vacaspatya Abhtdhana, 
Mocier- William's Dictionary, Sanskrit Worterbuch, R. C. Childers 7 
Dictionary of the Pali Language etc., and nowhere do we find 
any way of helping Dr. Roy Choudhury to obtain the equation 
" Kavandba = Kakuda ". We give here all the meanings of 
these two words * 

" Kav(b)andha" = (1) A barrel, cask, trunk, belly 

(2) A large-bellied vessel 

(3) A comet 

(4) Name of Rahu 

(5) Name of the Raksasa Danu, son of Sri 

(6) Name of certain Ketus 96 in number 

(7) Clouds which obscure the Sun at sun-set 

and sun-rise. 

"Kakuda " = (1) Chief 

(2) Any projecting corner 

(3) The hump of the shoulder of the Indian 

bullock 

(4) Name of a metre 

(5) An ensign of royalty 

(6) Name of a daughter of Daksa and wife 

of Dharma. 

Chiiders names ' the tree Terminalia Ar;juna ? as a synonym 
for, Kakuda in addition to the 3rd and 5th in the above list. 



316 Annals of the Shandarkar tiriental Research Institute 

t{ Kav(b)andhin " means (1) a sage mentioned in tke Prasna 

Upanisad 
(2) laden T yith water. 

Thus it will be realized that we have been misled with a wrong 
equation. But even admitting for the sake of argument that the 
word * Kavandha 7 means the same as ' Kakuda ', we cannot 
accept that Kabandhin Katyayana of the Prasna Upanisad was 
identical with Pakudha Kaccayana of the Majjhima JSTikaya, for 
it would then only mean that in the Katya"yana gotra ffr family 
one was named Eabandhin and another Pakudha. Other very 
strong evidences must be brought forward to prove the identity of 
two persons having different names of the same meaning. But 
the question does not arise at all, because the equation itself 
Kavandhin = Kakuda, cannot stand. The fact is that Katyayana, 
Sankhayana, Asvalayana, Bharadvaja etc. were gotra or family 
titles in those days, just as Mukherjee, Banerjee, Pradhan and 
Eoy Choudhury are family-titles now-a-days. 

From the conversations described in the Prasna Upanisad ( III, 
1-12 ) between the Atharvavedic Professor Pippalada and Kausalya 
Asvalayana, it is clear that the latter was eager to know about 
fche nature of Life and its relation to the Self, while from the con- 
versations between Assalayana of Savatthi and Gautama 
Buddha it is clear that this Assalayana belonged to a degenerate 
age, puffed up with the vanity of caste, always anxious to preach 
the purijtf and superiority of Brahmans. How different is] the 
mentality of Asvalayana of the Prasna Upanisad. 

Similarly, it is evident from the Majjhima Nikaya ( I, p. 198 ; 
I, P 250 ; II, p. 2 ) that Pakudha Kaccayana was a degenerate 
mediocrity or even worse in intellect, while the Prasna Upanisad 
( I, 3-15 ) informs us that Kavandhin Katyayana really belonged 
to the true Brahmanic type of the Vedic age, anxious to know 
about the Most Glorious, the Most Effulgent, the One Origin of 
this Universe, Manifested in this Universe. It is now easy to 
understand why Dr. Roy Choudhury has been led to assign Hiranya- 
nabha Kausalya to the time of Gautama Buddha, Prasenajit and 
Bimbisara. Kausalya Asvalayana and Kavandhin Katyayana 
were, according to the Prasna Upanisad, contemporary with the 



The age 6f Janaka and others 317 

King Hiranyanabha. Assalayana of Savatthi and Pakudha 
Kaccayana were, according to the Majjhima Nikaya, contem- 
porary with Gautama Buddha, Prasenajit and Bimbisara. Now 
if Kausalya Asvalayana and Kavandhin Katyayana are identified 
with Assalayana of Savatthi and Pakudha Kaccayana respective- 
ly, as they have been by Dr. Roy Choudhury, then the king 
Hiranyanabha Kausalya could nofc but be regarded by him as 
belonging to the time of Gautama Buddha. 

We have already seen that Dr. Roy Choudhury f e identifica- 
tions represented by the equations : 

Kausalya Asvalayana = Assalayana of Savatthi and Kavan- 
dhin Katyayana = Pakudha Kaccayana, are wrong-, so that one 
may infer that his assigning Hiranyanabha Kausalya to the time 
of Gautama Buddha and Prasenajit is erroneous. Moreover we 
shall have to imagine that the Kosala King HiranyanSbha and 
the Kosala King Prasenajit ruled simultaneously if we believe 
in the above identifications. Had they ruled or existed simulta- 
neously in Kosala, the eloquent Buddhist literature would have 
mentioned that. 

According to Dr. Pradhan, the assignment of Hiranyanabha Kau- 
salya to the time of Gautama Buddha is absolutely untenable, for 
the King Para, son of Atnara and grandson of Hiranyanabha, as he 
has shown ( C. A. I., p. 135 ) is mentioned not only in a Brahmana- 
like passage in the Sankhayana Srauta S~;tra ( XVI, 9, 11-13 ), 
the Talavakara Upanisad Brahmana ( II, 6, 31 ), the Panes vimsa 
Brahmana ( XXV, 16, 3 ), and the Satapatha Brahmana ( XIII, 5, 
4, 4), but also in the Taittirlya Samhita (V, 6, 5, 3) and the 
MaitrayanI Samhita. No one should dare to bring the Taittirlya 
Samhita, the MaitrayanI Samhita, Satapatha Brahmana, Tandya 
Brahmana, Talavakara Upanisad Brahmana etc. down >to times 
of Prasenajit, Ajatafcatru and Gautama Buddha. 

Dr. Pradhan has collected various other pieces of evidence for 
accepting that Janamejaya Pariksita was a contemporary of 
Hiranyanabha Kausalya and an older contemporaiy of Janaka 
Vaideha and Yajnavalkya Vajaeaueya -* 
16 [ Annals, B. O* R, J ] 



318 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research fnstitute 

( 1 ) The position of Yajmavalkya, and therefore of Janaka 
Vaideha, is absolutely fixed on the genealogical table because 
Satanlka, son of Janamejaya, read the three Vedas with Ysjia- 
valkya(C. A. I, : p. 124 ). 

( 2 ) The position of Yajnavalkya and therefore of his friend 
Janaka Vaideha, is unalterably fixed on fche genealogical table, 
because Yajnavalkya was the nephew (=sister's son=Bhagineya) 
and disciple of Vaisampayana who related the story of Maha- 
bhaiata at the courfe of Janamejaya Pariksita ( C. A. /., p. 124 ). 

( 3 ) This Vaisampayana's personal name was Caraka 
( Kasika on Panini ), so that his full name was Caraka Vaisam- 
payana, so called bacause he was a descendant or son of Visampa 
( C. A. I., p. 124 ). As a result of a quarrel between Vaisampa- 
yana and his nephew Yajnavalkya Vajasaneya, the latter, the 
friend of Janaka, gave up learning and teaching the Black 
Yajurveda, and composed and compiled the White Yajurveda 
( O. A. I, p. 124 ). 

This quarrel between the uncle and the nephew is attested not 
only by the Vayu, Brahmanda, Visnu and Bhagavata but also by the 
Mahabharata ( both the Bengal and Madras recensions } ( C. A. I. 
p. 124 ) and the Satapatha Brahmana ( M. &at. Br. Ill, 8, fc, 24), 
where it is mentioned that Yajnavalkya was cursed by Caraka 
Adhvaryu. This fact of fche quarrel between Vaisampayana 
and his pupil and nephew Yajnavalkya Vajasaneya fixes the posi- 
tion of Yajnalkya and therefore of Janaka Vaideha, just a step 
below that of Janamejaya whose court-historian Vaisampayana 
was. 

(4) Uddalaka Aruni who, according to the Brhadaranyaka Upa- 
nisad attended the court of Janaka Vaideha, and joined that 
famous debate, had two other class-friends, namely, Upamanyu 
and Baida ( or Veda ); and these three were the pupils of Apoda 
Bhaumya as is evident from the Bengal and Madras recensions of 
the Mahabharata ( C, A. L, p, 132 ). Now of these three pupils, 
the third, i. e, Veda or Baida was approached by Janamejaya 
Pariksita to become Ms priest ( C. A. J.,132). This also makes 
Uddalaka Aruni and consequently his pupil Yajnavalkya con- 
temporary with Janamejaya. 



The age of Janaka and others 319 

( 5 ) Uddalaka Aruni himself with his son Svetaketu attended 
the Sarpa-satra of Janamejaya ( MBh. I, 53, 7 ). This also makes 
Uddalaka Aruni and Janamejaya contemporaries. 

( 6 ) Yajnavalkya Vajasaneya, as appears from the Brhadara- 
Byaka Upanisad ( VI, 5, 3 ), was the pupil of Uddalaka Arum 
0. A.L, p. 132). He was the pupil also of Hiranyanabha 
Kausalya, a descendant of Rama Dasarathi. This King Hiranya- 
nabha Kausalya was, according to the unanimous testimony of 
the Vayu, BrahiBanda. Visnu, and Bhagavata Purana, was the 
pupil of Sukarman, the great grandson of Jaimini, the disciple of 
Vyasa Parasarya ( G A. I., pp. 125-12? ). Jt i s related in detail 
in all these works that Sumantu was the son and pupil of his 
father Jaimini the pupil of Vyasa Parasarya Sumanfe's son 
and pupil was Sutvan ; Sutvan's son and pupil was Sukarman ; 
Sukarman got two very intelligent disciples, one, the Brahmana 
Pausyanji, and the other, the King Hiranyanabha Kausftly?. 
Now Jaimini, having been the pupil of Vyasa, was contempoiary 
with Pandu; Jaimini 's son Sumantu was contemporary with 
Panda's son Arjuna ; Sumantu f s son Sutvan was contemporary 
wifch Arjuna's son Abhimanyu ; Sutvan's son Sukarman was 
contemporary with Abhimanyu 's son Pariksit. Hence Sukarman ? s 
pupil Hiranyanabha Kausalya could not but be contemporary 
with Janamejaya, the son of Pariksit. The relation is best ex- 
pressed in the following table 

Vyasa Para^ara 



I 

Jaimini 
1 
Sumantu 

i 

Sutvan 

i 

Sukarman 


Upavesa 
Aruna 


1 

Pandu 
1 
Arjuna 

i 

Abhimanyu 
1 

Pariksit, 



Vahulasva 



! ! i 

Vaisam- Hiranyanabha } Uddalaka Janamejaya 



payana, 

Yajnavalkya 



Svetaketu Satanlka Zrti Janaka 



320 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Instittm 

This establishes the contemporaneity between Janamejaya and 
Hiranyanabha Kausalya. According to all the authoritative 
Puranas,as Dr.Pradhan has shown, Yajnav&lkya learnt the science 
of ' Yoga ' from Hiranyanabha Kausalya ( C. A. I. pp. 123-4 ). 
Dr, Pradhan has also shown that Hiranyanabha's pupil Krti was 
no other than Krti, the son of Vahulasva of the Janaka dynasty 
( C. A. L pp. 131-132 ) . Krti Janaka and Yajnavalkya therefore 
belonged to the same time and the same step on the genealogical 
table, as both of them were the pupils of Hiranyanabha. Yajna- 
valkya thus was the friend and contemporary, not of Slradhvaja 
Janaka, the father of Sita, as Dr. Roy Choudhury has supposed, 
but of Krti Janaka, a descendant of Slradhvaja in the 18th degree, 
Thus will be realized what a tremendous confusion has been 
made by Dr. Eoy Choudhury by supposing that the Yidehas 
in the Puranas from Slradhvaja Janaka downwards, were the later 
Videhas of Mithila, who began to flourish six genarations after 
Janamejaya Pariksita, and by assuming necessarily that the 
events of the Ramayana were long posterior to those of the 
Mahabharata. This absurd supposition, which goes against the 
entire body of Indian tradition, could not have been thought of 
even if there were no uncritical scholars in support of it in 
the days of the infancy of Oriental research in Europe. 

The above table makes it absolutely clear that the Pariksitas 
could be dead when Janaka Vaideha ( = Krti Janaka ) held his 
Vahudaksisa Sacrifice in his advanced years and thus Bhujyu 
Lahyayani could very well test Yajnavalkya with the question 
"Whither have the Pariksitas gone ? " , after the passing away 
of the Pariksitas. 

(7) It seems that]jDr. Roy Choudhury has not paid proper 
attention to the use of * Lan ' in the verb ' bhu ' in the sentence 
"Kva PSriksita abhavan." More than two thousand and one 
hundred years ago, Patanjali illustrated the use of * Lan ' in the 
sentences " Arunad Yavanai. Saketam, arunad Yavano 
Madhyamikan, " as pointed out by Goldstucker and R. G. 
Bhandarkar- Patanjali, the speaker who illustrated the use of 
' Lan * could have seen the Yavana King and his siege of Saketa 
and Madhyamikas, had he so liked and had he taken the trouble 



The age of Janaka and ethers 321 

of going to Saketa etc. . Yajmavalkya and Bhujyu similarly might 
have seen the death of the Pariksitas had they heen present in 
Hastinapura at that time. It is clear from the use of * Lan * that 
the death of Janamejaya and his brothers happened during the 
life-time of Yajnavalkya, Bhujyu etc. In fact the use of * Lan 
is another evidence for the contempraneity of Janamejaya and 
Yajfiavalkya. The real fact is that Yajnavalkya was a younger 
contemporary of Janamejaya as we have already found. 

( 8 ) From the Vayu ( 61-49-52 ) Brahmanda ( II, 65, 51-4 ) 
Visnu and Bhagavata we learn that Jaimini's son Sumantu to 
whom. Vyasa entrusted the teaching of Atharvaveda, had two 
pupils, one <5f whom was Kavandha 5 Kavandha again taught 
the Atharvaveda to two of his pupils, namely Pathya and 
Vedasparsa ; Pathya 's three pupils were Jarjali, Kumudadi and 
Saunaka, while Vedasparsa had four pupils, namely Moda, 
Pippalada, Sanskayani and Tapana. The relations are best 
expressed in the following tree which has already been published 
in Dr. Pradhan's table genealogies of Vedic Kings and series of 
Vedic teachers, facing page 176 of ' Chronology of Ancient India,* 

Jaimini 

i 

Sumantu 

i 

Kavandha 



Pathya Vedasparsa 



I I , I i I . i I 

Jajali Kumudadi Saunaka Moda Pippalada Sanskayani Tapana 

The reader can see it at a glance that here is Pippalada who 
has been mentioned in the Prasna Upanisad. 

Now Sumantu, son of Jaimini, was contemporary with 
Pandu's son Arjuna, for Pandu and Jaimini, as we. have already 
seen, were contemporaries ; Kavandha, pupil of Sumantu, was 
therefore contemporary with Abhimanyu, son of Arjuna; 
Vedaspars^ was contemporary with Pariksit, and Pippalada, pupil 



322 Annals of the JBhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

of Vedasparsa, was therefore contemporary with Janamejaya 
Pariksita, as illustrated below : 

Vyasa 



Jaimini Pandu 

i i" 

Sumantu Arjuna 

i .1 

Kavandha Abhimanyu 
Vedasparsa Pariksit 
Hiranyanabha, Pippalada Janamejaya, Vaiampayana 

Kausalya Asvalayana, Sukesan Bharadvaja, Kavandhin 
Katyayana, Pippalada, the Atharvavedic professor, must there- 
fore have been contemporary with Janamejaya, as is clear from 
the table above. Now from the Prasna Upanisad we have already 
learnt that Hiranyanabha and Pippalada were contemporaries. 
Hence Hiranyanabha must have been contemporary with 
Janamejaya. 

It should be noticed in this connection that Pathya's pupil 
Jajali ( lit. son of Jajala ) seems to have been the same Jajali who 
learnt from the famous Tuladhara ( = shopkeeper ) of VaranasI, 
as related in the Mahabharata, while Saunaka, the other pupil 
of Pathya, seems to have been the author of the present recension 
of the A-tharvaveda which we now possess, and to have taught 
Satanlka, son of Janame3aya the science archery and rituals. 
The Prasna Upanisad now appears to be the Upanisad or supple- 
ment to the Pippalada recension of the Atharvaveda, as it extols 
and praises the Professor Pippalada. The Pippalada recension of 
the Atharvaveda has also been obtained in Kasimlra. 

( 9 ) The contemporaneity between Hiranyanabha and 
Janamejaya is also deducible from a comparison of the list of 
Samavedic teachers drawn up by Dr. Pradhan ( C. A. I. p. 131 ) 
with the list of Atharvavedic teachers and the pedigree of 
Janamejaya as already shown on the table of genealogies facing 
page 176 of h;s Chronology of Ancient 



fhe age of Janaka and others 323 

Sainavedic teachers Atharvavedic teachers Pedigree of 

Janamejaya 

Jai 7 ini Pandu 

I j 

Sumantu Sumantu Arjuna 

Sutvan Kavandha Abhimanyu 



Sukarman Vedasparsa, Pathya Pariksit 



Pausyanjali Hiranya, Pippalada, Saunaka, Janamejaya 
nabha, j 



I 



Krti Janaka Yajnavalkya Satanlka 

Krti is expliciiy stated to have been the pupil of Hiranya- 
nabha in the matter of spreading the knowledge of the SSmaveda, 
and to have been a king ( C. A. I. pp, 131-2 ; pp. 141-3. ). 
Yajnavalkya also learnt Yoga from Hiranyanabha. Thus Krti 
Janaka was the Janaka Vaideha of the Vedie texts for whom 
Dr. Roy Choudhury is very anxious. 

( 10 ) That Janamejaya Pariksita was, to a certain extent, 
contemporary with Janaka 7aideha of the Vedic texts, is further 
proved from the following: Vedic evidences * 

In the Talavakara Upanisad Brahmana (III, 40, 2) Hrtsvasaya 
Allakeya, king of the Mahavssas, is mentioned as a pupil of Soma- 
6usma Satyayajfii Praclnayogya who, in his turn, was the fourth 
in the descending series of teachers from Indrota Daivapa 
Saunaka as 'illustrated in the following table : 

Inrdota Daivata Saunaka 

Drti Aindrota Saunaka 

I 
Pulusa Praclnayogya 

i 
Satyayajna Pauluai 

I 
Hrtsvasaya Allakeya, SomaSusma SatyayajSi 



324 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

In the Satapatha Brahmana ( XI, 6, 2, 1-3 ) it is stated that 
Somasusma Satyayajmi Praclnayogya saw Janaka Vaideha. From 
the Gopatha Brahmana ( I, 2, 5 ) we learn that a Vedic teacher 
named ' Danfcabala Dhaumra ' was courteously received by the 
King Janamejaya Pariksita. The reading "Dantabala Dhaumra" 
in Dr. Kajendralal Mitra's edition of the Gopatha Brahmana is 
clearly the corrupt form of the correct; name "Dantala Dhaumya" 
of the famous Vedic teacher. Now the Jaiminlya Brafomana 
( II, 55-56 ) informs us that Brtsvasaya Ailakeya, the king of the 
Mahavrsas, was the pupil of Dantala Dhaumya and Somasustna 
Satyayajni Pracmayogya, It follows then that Janamejaya 
Pariksita who courteously received Dantala Dhaumya, must have 
been contemporary with Somasusma Satyayajni and therefore 
with Janaka Vaideha, This Janaka, Vaideha who was no other 
than Krti Janaka, appears to have held, his Vahudaksina sacri- 
fice when he was quite advanced in years when Janamejaya was 
dead, The relation is illustrated in the following table : 

Indrota Daivapa Saunaka 

I , 
Drti Aindrota Saunaka Apoda Dhaumya 

I 
Pulusa Praclnayogya, Janamejaya Dantala Dhaumya 

Satyayajna Paulusi Janaka Vaideha 

Somasusma Satyayaj&i Hrtsvasaya Ailakeya 

Thus from evidences exclusively Vedic, we arrive at the con- 
clusion that Janaka Vaideha of the Vedic texts was a younger 
contemporary of Janamejaya. 

(11) There is yet another ground for holding that Janaka 
and Yajnavalkya were younger contemporaries of Janamejaya 
Pariksita. The Vayu Parana clearly relates that the 
Vajasaneyins i. e. Yajnavalkya Vajasaneya and his followers 
and pupils were held in high esteem and established in honour 
by Janamejaya Pariksita who circulated his royal proclamation 
for honouring the Vajasaneyins amongst his subjects. Vaisam- 
payana, the leader of the opposite school, i. e. the Taittirlyas, 
became really sorry for this and once said angrily to Janame- 



The age of Janaka and ethers 3 $5 

jaya : " You, ill-advised king, your proclamation will not be res- 
pected as long as I continue to live " 

Inspite of this, Janamejaya worshipped the Vedic deifcy PrajS- 
pafei on a full moon day with the offering of oblation of ghee and 
performed two Asvamedha sacrifices according to the rules and 
formulas or mantras of Vajasaneya ( = Yajnavalkya ) and thus 
after establishing the Vajasaneyin Yeda ( = Brahman), i. e. the 
White Yajurveda in practice, Janamejaya became dwarfed in 
three limbs. ( Perhaps Janamejaya became attacked with gout 
or paralysis which crippled him ). This detailed information 
given by the Vayu Pur ana is extremely interesting and absolutely 
creditable. It removes all doubt about Janamejaya and Yajfia- 
valkya. It is certain that these two Asvamedha sacrifices per- 
formed according to rules and mantras given by Yajnavalkya, 
were the very Asvamedha sacrifices to which Yajnavalkya, 
referred, during the debate held in Janaka 's court. The story of 
Patancala Kapya's daughter having been possessed by a 
Gandharva, has been introduced by the later Yajasaneyins, i. o. 
the writers of the Brhadaranyaka, to give an appearance of 
difficulty to the question put to Yajnavalkya by Bhujyu Lahya- 
yani, at the court of Janaka. 

Thus it will ba found that Dr. Boy Choudhury's error about 
the chronological relation betwesn Janamejaya and Jaaaka^has 
plainly been due to his wrong assumption of the identity of Assa- 
layana of Savatthi with Kausalya Asvalayana ; of Kabandhin 
Ratyayana with Pakudha Kaccayana. Consequent on these 
wrong assumptions, Dr. Roy Ohoudhury has made the more 
grievous assertion that Hiranyanabha Kausalya was contempo- 
rary with Gautama Buddha. 



I 5 ? [ Annals, B.O.B.LJ 



ARTHASASTRA RE-EXAMINED 
OB 

THE CULTURE AND DATE OF THE ARTHAS'STKA 

BY 
V. R. RAMACHAND&A DIKSHITAR, M. A. 

11 Kautalya's Arthasastra advocates ideals and culture which 
are non-Indian. This may be due to the fact that the Malwa 
empire for a long time remained under the influence of the 
Greeks, Sakas and Hunas ". In this strain a recent writer on the 
subject writes in the Indian Antiquary* and seems to propound 
three theories. First the Arthasastra was written somewhere 
between 480 and 510 A, D. Secondly it was a product of the 
Malwa Empire under the foreign domination of the Greeks, Sakas 
and Hunas- Thirdly ideals and culture advocated in the Artha- 
sastra are non-Indian. 

This is then a re-examination of the whole Arthasastta problem. 
Though there has been a view that the date of the compilation of 
fche Kautaliya Arthasastra may be brought down to the beginnings 
of the Christian era 2 still opinion was not divided as to the culture 
advocated by that treatise on ancient Indian Polity. The late 
V. A. Smith took the correct and sound view that the Arthasastra 
was an actual picture of the Mauryan Empire under its first 
emperor*. This finds corroboration from a more reliable quarter 
viz. * Asokan inscriptions. Notwithstanding volumes of inter- 
pretation on these mute records on the rocks and pillars still the 
last word has not been said. A comparative study of the inscrip- 
tions and the Arthasastra texts has revealed to us the wonderful 
concordance between the two. The Inference is irresistible that 

1 See Fran Nath's article on the date of the compilation of Kautalycfs 
Arthasastra 484-510 A. D., June, 1931, pp. 109-113, July, 1931, pp, 121-3. 

2 See . B. Keith in the Sir Asutosh Memorial Volume, Fatna, pp, 8-22* 

3 See Early History of India, p. 144* 



Arthasastra re-examined 327 

Asoka was an ardent student of the Arftatnatra 1 . Suffice it to say 
here that this coincidence is remarkable since it demonstrates 
beyond doubt the powerful hold which the Arthasastra had on the 
great Mauryan empire. 

An interesting circumstance in this connection is that the 
ideals and culture advocated by the Arthasastra were known to 
the distinguished author of the sacred Kural whose compilation is 
assigned to the second century B. c. on various grounds. 2 If the 
Arthasastra be known in the Tamil land in the Second Century 
B. C. surely at least a century must have elapsed since the com- 
pilation to get authoritative recognition from the learned public. 
Further there is no trace of the ideas and ideals peculiar to the 
Greeks, Sakas and Hunas adumberated. The institutions and the 
political theories inculcated are quite in consonance with the 
accepted standards of Ancient Hindu culture. Mere statement 
of a theory would not help us much unless substantiated by quota- 
tions from the Arthasastra. No case has been made out to prove 
that the author of the Arthasastra has imported alien ideas and 
culture into his memorable treatise. 

Equally weak, unconvincing and inconclusive is the attempt 
to show that it was a product of the Malwa Empire. The follow- 
ing are some of the points raised in this connection. They may 
be categorically stated with summary answers. 

1. Kautalya has selected a small territory called Janapada and 
that situated near a sea- coast approaching in area nearly to a 
modern tasil. This is quite contradictory with the other remark 
made in the very next page that the Kautiliya Zing possessed 
landed property in Aparanta, Asmaka, Avanti, Jangala, and Anupa 
Desas. Certainly each of these countries must have been bigger 
than a modern tasil and these countries put together must be big 
enough for an empire even granting that the Kautillyan King 
possessed landed property only in the above mentioned Desas. 
Thus at the outset it seems that the case made out rests on no 
substantial basis. 

1 I have discussed this question in my Maurya Polity, ( Madras Uni- 

versity ), 1932. 

2 See Author's Studies in Tamil Literature & History, the chapter of 

Tiruvallhvar. 



328 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

2. Much is made of the defence by the local wild tribes. Re- 
ference here is only to the outlying portions of the empire, speci- 
ally those forest-belts which always separated the Capital from 
the country parts. In such places a statesman like Kautalya 
would have felt that it would be the right policy to get such for- 
saken places guarded by wild tribes who were real masters of the 
situation. The mention of Vahurika and Pulinda may refer to 
Gujarat, Avanti and Central India. But Sabaras, Candalas and 
Atavikas were not the monopoly of the Malwa Empire alone. 
These and similar tribes were scattered throughout the length and 
breadth of the Indian continent. The same condition is depicted 
in the ancient Tamil works. The Maravar or the Eyinar who 
were foresters were pressed into service by the Tamil kings for 
defence purposes. In the opening chapters of Janapadasamuddeia 
Kautalya simply lays down means and methods for a conquering 
monarch with regard to colonisation of new lands, their distribu- 
tion and protection. In the beginning of the Mauryan epoch 
there was a tendency on the parfr of the first two kings to enlarge 
their kingdoms as far as possible. This being the ruling passion 
of the monarch Kautalya lays down a prescription how to en- 
croaoh on a new territory with a view to eventually occupy the 
same. 

3. The theory that the Kautillya Janapdda was situated near a 
sea coast is inconclusive. For ihe empire under Candragupta 
Maurya, and his successors Bindusara and Asoka, was bounded 
by the sea at least on two sides, and there is therefore every justi- 
fication for Kautalya to refer to seaports and sailing vessels, 
either commercial or piratic. There need be no elaborate depart- 
ment of Navadhyaksa or Superintendent of boats and navy for a 
Janapada of a modern tasiL An interesting circumstance in this 
connection is that among articles of import find mention oysfcer 
shells, conch shells, pearls etc., which are found in sea-shore 1 . If 
the kingdom is really situated on a sea-coast, then, would it not 
be legitimate to expect that kingdom to export such articles and 
import inland articles which can not be obtained near a sea-coast ? 
But the fact that the sea-growing articles were imported is proof 

1 Arthasastra, Book II, Ch, XI. 



ArtlaiSstra re-examined 329 

positive that the Capital was situated away from the sea and this 
necessitated importing of such articles of merchandise- Again if 
the kingdom is situated on a sea-coast then there would be no 
room for Kautalya to enunciate in such an elaborate manner the 
interstate or international policy hy means of a mandala theory 
known as * the circle of states '. In fact if one takes it as Pran 
N"ath does, there would be no place for a circle of states '. 

In this connection a passage from the section entitled 6iffi- 
dhyaksa is quoted and the passage is as follows : 
Bodasadronam Jangalanam varsapra 
manamadhyardhamanupanam desa 
vapanam ardhatrayodasasmakanam, 
tray o vim satir a vantinam , amitamapa- 
rantanam haimanyanam ca kulyavapanam'ca kalatah I 
ArthasSstra, Bk. II, Ch. 24. 

Shama Sastri translates it thus " The quantity of rain that 
falls in the country of Jangala is 16 dronas half as much more in 
the moifit countries ( aniipanam ) ; as to the countries which are 
fit for agriculture ( de^avapSnSm ) IS 1 /^ dronas in the country of 
A6makas ; 23 dronas in Avanti and an immense quantity in 
western countries ( aparantanam ) the borders of the Himalayas 
and the countries where water channels are made use of in agri- 
culture ( Kulayavapanam ) ! . Fran Nath interprets thus : " The 
annual measure ( of produce to be taken as the King's due ) is 
16 dronas in the country of Jangala ; 34 dronas in moist ( marshy 
or low ) countries fit for agriculture -, 13 ] /2 dronas in Jancpadas 
of Asmaka ; 23 dronas in Avanti ; the quantity in AparSnta is 
not measured ; the crop grown in winter and irrigated ( by well, 
pond, tank, lake etc. ) should be ascertained according to the 
time " 2 . Both these translations are faulty in the sense that 
while one term is interpreted as the name of a kingdom, another 
is interpreted in its literal sense. For example, Shama Sastri 
translates anupa moist country and Pran IsTath Haimariya winter, 
In the interpretation of any passage the prescription is * 
arthat-prakaranat-lmgat-au(tiyat-arthani&cayah \ 

1 Trans. P. 139, II Ed. 

2 Ind. Ant, 1931, ^ 1U- 



330 Annals of the Bhcmdarkar Oriental Research Institute 

This means that the interpretation suggested must follow the 
prakaraya. Either all the terms occurring in the passage are 
names of territories or connote different classification of soil. The 
latter cannot be. For Asmaka and Avanti cannot come under 
any classification of soil. So the other possible alternative is 
that every term refers to a different kingdom. Further it is 
ingenious to interpret Varsapr&mariam as annual measure of 
produce. Its ordinary meaning, c the quantity of rainfall,' will 
quite fit in with the context. 

If Kautalya had meant " actual measure of produce" he should 
have stated the quantity of the Apar^nta and Hairaanya. The 
expression amitam proves that^the author means only the quantity 
of rainfall. 

The suggested translation is as follows : 

" Amongst the countries fit for agriculture the quantity of 
rainfall in the kingdom of Jangala ( possibly Kurujangala ) is 16 
dronas, in that of Anupa 1 24 dronas, in that of Asmaka ( Aratta ) 
13 V2 dronas and in that of Avanti ( Malwa ) 23 dronas the quantity 
of rainfall in the Aparanta and the Himalayan regions cannot be 
measured ; and these are cultivated by irrigation channels in 
certain seasons ". 

The idea of the last two sentences is that such regions being 
mountaineous tracts and rainfall dependent on monsoons, some- 
times there will be very heavy showers and sometimes monsoon 
failing there will be no shower with the consequence that they 
had to resort to irrigation. A geographical study of the territo- 
ries mentioned shows that; the empire contemplated by the Arfha- 
sastra is not Malwa empire of the 5th Century A. D. but is much 
bigger than that. Western India, Himalayas, Kurujangala, 
Bengal, Malwa and the Dekhan constitute the empire and hence 
practically the whole of Hindustan with a portion of the Dekhan. 
In other words these were the territorial limits covered by the 
Maiiryan empire under its first ruler Candragupta, Can it still 
be maintained that the Arthasastra was not the work of the 
Minister of Candragupta Maurya ? We hope not. 

1 The country inhabited by the Anupa tribe and may be looked for in tfce 
Yindhya Hills. 



MISCELLANEA 

SUBSTANCE OF THE LECTURE ON THE 
PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECT OF AHIMSA 

delivered at the 

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona 
( 25th February 1932 ) 

BY 

PROFESSOR DR. BETTY HEIMANN 
of the University of Halle 

Etymologically ahimsa connotes an absence of a desire to 
injure another in thought, word, or deed. In form it; is negative, 
and is often interpreted in a specific narrow sense ; but really it 
is wider and a very ancient conception. It can in fact be traced 
back to the Rgvedic conception of the " Rta " or the eternal cos- 
mic Law or Order which governs all the facts and happenings in 
Nature. Rta compels every animate and inanimate being to 
follow the laws of its own existence so as not to thwart or obstruct 
all others from following the laws of their own individual exis- 
tences. It may accordingly be said to be a sort of a " social con- 
tract " interpreted from the cosmic point of view. It is worth 
noting in this connection that Varuna, the champion of the 
Rgvedic ftta, is associated with Mitra, the god of friendship or 
social contract, from whom the Buddhistic conception of " Metta " 
is lineally descended. This conception is meant to inculcate the 
doctrine of " Samata " or equality of all things in the sense 
of the well-known Brhadaranyaka passage I. iii. 22 which equates 
the Prana Atman simultaneously with the gnat, the fly, the eleph- 
ant, or the universe, who are all ignoring their differing evalua- 
tion from the human point of view - alike the equal partners of 
the cosmic social order that is based upon non-violence or 
Ahimsa. It follows that this doctrine, while in one of its work- 
ings-out it led the Jainas to object to even the cultivation of the 
soil lest it might involve the destruction of insect-life, in its 



332 Annats of the Bhandartcar Oriental Research Institute 

another and equally logical interpretation it enjoined upon th - 
King of the oountry the duty to uproot all the "Kantakas"' 
thorns or mischief -mongers, that may harm his subjects and so 
disturb the social balance. This means that the "social contract" 
presupposes the acknowledgment of all existing orders and 
existing groups of beings as essential functional values in an 
estimation of the universe as a whole, no single component of 
which is permitted to follow the " Atimarga M and transgresf the 
bounds of its own existence and purpose. This in fact is the 
true "Dharma" the eternal rule that teaches different "Dhaimas" 
to tolerate each other. 

Ahirhsa in Ancient India was conceived as a duty and a privi- 
lege that regulated the relations not between man and man alone, 
but between man and the whole Nature. Thus man is enjoined 
to remember in his daily religious offerings the shares of all his 
fellow-creatures. As objects of religious veneration he chooses 
caves, causeways or confluences which seem to have been sancti- 
fied by Nature itself. He may not impair the holiness of Nature 
by his own man-built forms of religion. And even in those 
glorious fcemples ( e. g. Mamalapuram and Ellora ) where the art 
of man appears to have triumphed over N ature, his innate humi- 
lity has led him to create animal-sculptures and place them as if 
freely walking about in the complex of the temple. 

It is this doctrine of Ahimsa taken in its widest philosophical 
sense that has made the Ancient Indian Ethics a cosmic ethics and 
not a personal ethics. Man and the animate and inanimate crea- 
tion in the midst of which he is placed constituted but one whole, 
the component parts of which had their own fixed and inalienable 
places and boundaries. Hence the system of the castes and their 
traditional code of conduct, wherein each individual is merely a 
representative of his order and becomes liable for ancestral or 
communal delinquencies. The individual has accordingly to 
preserve the balance of his order and be ready, by self-immolation 
if need be, to restore the balance if disturbed, and render 
objective satisfaction : Compare the story of Odipus in Greek 
Mythology. Hence the responsibility of the king for all the un- 
detected sins amongst his subjects as illustrated in the glorious 
life-history of B&ma. The king no less than the commoner wag 



333 

thus regarded not as a private individual but as the " function- 
holder " of the community. The conduct between men and men 
is iri short governed by laws derived from cosmic facts. Ahimsa 
thus became tantamount to unviolated social contract, 

In tfoe domain of Dharmasastra or Civil and religious law the 
doctrine of Ahirhsa has made itself felt in the recognition of the 
sanctity of possession, the appointed time for appropriation being- 
purposely postponed as long as possible. Similarly the head of 
the family was not allowed to make a will cutting the property 
especially landed and house-property into pieces. The house- 
holder's duty to maintain the holy fire and the daily Karman or 
to contmue the " praja-tantu " may in this way be regarded as an 
injunction for Ahimsa in respect of things and persons that are to 
come. Man in fact is not an isolated individual : every creature 
is a fellow-creature. Hence the exemplary cultivation of hospi- 
tality in Ancient India. Hence too the three 'ethical duties 
enjoined by Prajapati by the voice of thunder : Damaijata, Datta, 
Daijata ( Brhad. V. ii. 1 ). Belief in the dogma of transmigration 
or re-incarnation, by projecting or continuing the relations 
between man and his fellow-creation beyond the limits of just 
one span of life, must no doubt have eased the difficulties 
in the way of the acceptance of the ethical doctrine of 
Ahimsa as a social contract, and ifc must also have heartened 
many an Indian Yogin, Sadhu, or Tapasvin io cultivate self- 
denial and indifference to bodily suffering. Ahimsa in fact wean- 
ed men from, self-conceipt, wantonness or passion ( vppig) which 
has played such an important role with the Greek Dramatists. 

In religious and political expressions Ahimsa, sows the seed of 
tolerance, one effect of which is the facility with which symbols got 
multiplied and at times even contradictory symbols were brought 
together in India in the sphere of one and the same religion. 
Symbols are not the reality * they merely represent it. And as 
the Real according to the " Ahimsa " philosophy is an all-compre- 
hending unity, a variety of symbols to represent the divine 
variety of nature became a foregone conclusion. 

The famous theory of the Syadvada, which teaches us to look 
to all possibilities in thinking, may be regarded as the logical 
18 [ Annals, B. O. B- LJ. 



334 /innate of the Bhandarhr Oriental Research Institute 

aspect of the doctrine of Ahimsa, And not only the Syadvada, 
but all Indian Logic endeavours to see things not subordinated 
but co-ordinated : not cut off from each other by dichotomic defi- 
nitions, but brought together in a kind of summarizing, synthetic 
definitions, In politics Ahimsa has given us the idea of " Satya- 
graha ", which etymologically connotes " seizing the truth as it 
exists " always conceding the right of all forms of existence as 
such to exist, including of course your own existence. This 
should infuse not only courage of convictions and a fearlessness 
of consequences but also the ever necessary readiness to compare, 
to measure and to discuss one 'sown point of view and that of 
the opponent, in order to realize and establish the balance between 
the opposing forces and ideas, 

We can thus never do full justice to the high dignity of the 
doctrine of Ahimsa if we narrow it down to one single practical 
act. 



A NOTE ON SIDDHIVINISCAYA AND SRSTIPAElKSA 

t r 

BY 

H. R KAPADIA, M. A. 

Out of the several important and unpublished works quoted 
oy Siddhasena Qard in his monumental commentary! to Umasvffli 
Vacaka's TattvUrthadhigamasutra and its bJiasya, I may mention 
BiddUviniicaya and Srstipariksa. 

As is well-known Jainism does not consider anybody as a 
Creator of the Universe, much less does it attribute the act of 
creation to Paramatman, the soul in its perfectly liberated con- 
dition. Since the learned commentator does not intend to dilate 
upen this open secret, he naturally refers the readers to standard 
works where their curiosity in this connection is likely to be 
easily gratified. He has selected for this purpose SiddhiviniscaycP 
and Srstipariksa?) the latter signifying the examination of creation. 
In my humble opinion, both these works are of Jaina authorship 
and most probably of the tfvetambara School. If one is tempted to 
identify this Siddhiwmscaya with one composed by A kalankadeva 
and commented upon by Anantamrya, pupil of Eainbhadra, will 
it not be a very difficult problem for him to solve as to why this 
Siddhasena does not seem to have criticized or refuted any of the 
views of Akalanka expressed by him in his splendid work 
Tattvartharajavartika, even when this tivetambara commentator 
has not spared his own brethren, and, if rightly judged, Siddhasena 
Lwakara too, the well-known logician, in his zeal to be quite 
iaithful to the Agamas ? 

It may be mentioned en passant that the exact date of Siddha- 
sena Gani is a desideratum. He has referred to Dharmakirh* and 

1 This commentary together with the original text and the bhSsya is 
published in two parts, in the "Sheth Devacband Lalhhai Jain 
Pustakoddhar Fund Series " f along with my introductions in Sanskrit 
and English. 

2-3 Ibid. pt. I, p. 37. 

4 Ibid. p. 397, 



336 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

Jinabhadra Gani ksamaframaria, in his commentary. This practically 
settles his earlier limit. Pandit Sukhlal identifies him with 
G-andhahastin mentioned by titlanka Sun in his commentary to 
Acaranga. This fact, if admitted., helps us in fixing the other 
limit. 

Since not a single line is quoted in the commentary from 
Siddhiviniscaya, it remains to be verified, if there is any scholarly 
discussion as regards the theory of Creation in Siddhzmniscaya of 
Akilanka, whose date is still a subject open to discussion amongst 
various scholars. 

Srstiparlksa so far as I know, has not been mentioned in any 
of the catalogues of Mss. published. So will any scholar be 
inclined to furrow this virgin soil by attempting to find out, 
if there is any Ms, available, and if not, to see whether this is 
quoted in any work of not later than the 9th century ? 



NOTES ON INDIAN CHRONOLOGY 

BY 
P. K. GODE, M. A. 

~ " XI 

DATE OF EAGAMALA OF PUN DARIRA-VITTHALA 
( SAKA 1498 = A. D. 1576 ) and identification of his patron 
MADHAVASIMHAKAJA with MADHAVASIMHA, 

patron of DlLAPATIRAYA 

The Eagamala is a dissertation on the different ragas, their 
forms, attributes and notes composed by Pundarlkavitthala, a 
Karnataka ( Karnataka-jatlya ). The only two Mss. of the work 
now extant and available are the following : - 

( 1 ) Bikaner Ho. 1100, ' 

( 2 ) Mo. 1026 of 1884-87 of fche Govt. Mss. Library at the 
B. O, B. Institute, Poona. 

The description of the Bikaner Ms. as given in the Catalogue 
does not refer to the date of composition of the work which is 
given only in the B. 0. R. I. Ms. No. 1026 of 1884-87 and is 
contained in the following verse * 



"9 I I 



^T C HMIIMI 2 ) V H tS.5i l^^ ^ 11 a < 9!i 



The chronogram f ^^^S4r^T y comes to Saka 1498 i. e. A. D. 1578. 
The age of the Ms. as recorded in the copy is Samvat 1671 1 6. 

1. Catalogue of Sanskrit Mss. in the Library of the Maharaja of Bikaner, 

1880- p. 515. 

2. Th^s is the read ing of Bikaner Ms. 



338 Annals cfthe BhandarJcar Oriental Research Institute 

A, D. 1615. This means that the present oopy was prepared 39 
years after the date of composition of the work. 

Aufrecht has the following information regarding the works of 
Pundarlkavitftiala in his Catalogue 1 : 



from Karnataka, son of irnr^fltaim lived under 
Bit 513, ?jira9pft Bit 516, otontfoft- 



" 1578, ^ ^TT^T^sT?^ Bik, 529. 



The parentage of Pundarlkavrfcthala as given in the verse 
from the TT*WUT quoted above appears to be different from that 
mentioned by Aufretcht. The ^ruwicsr verse tells us that he was the 
son of ' Nag&mba and Dharma ' (TPTT*rnaWRl3jO while Aufrecht says 
presumably on the authority of the catalogue description of the 
Mss. of the works ffiSHRtftr and others that he was the son of 
and lived under Akbar ( 1556-1605 ). 



Aufrecht's remarks aboub the parentage of Punfyarika Vitthala 
appear, however, to be incorrect. The Bikaner Durbar has fur- 
nished me with a oopy of a Ms. of Bagamanjarl mentioned by 
Aufreoht as " Bik. 516 ". The following verses in the beginning 
and end of the work show clearly the relation of Pundarikdvitthala 
with Madhavasimharaja * 

Folios 1 & 2 " ^rTTc^^cjq^i^M^iHsRrsTTf^T^T 5 ^^" I 

^S^ * 5^1 *f^ \ Hd Ts ft in I TT^* T^TcTf TT^frt* II 



: II 



1, Catalogus Catalogorum, Part I, p. 339 a. 

2. Mr. Fox-Strangways in his Music of Hindostan, p. 105, adds ^^$1 and 

to this list of works ascribed to Pui^darika Vitthala and 
that he belonged to the 2n$ half of the 16th century. 



Miscellanea 



ii " etc. 
Last Folio 



II ^ U " 

It is clear from the foregoing extracts that Madhavasimharaja 
was the patron of Pundarlka Vitthala. The two brothers Madhava- 
simharaja and Manasimha were great favourites of Emperor 
Akhar. They were sons of ' Bhagavantadasa ' of the * Kaohapa T 
family. Madhavasimharaja was a Vaisnava and was apparently 
fond of Music. Pundarlka Vitthala was inspired to write all his 
works on Music by the direct encouragement of Prince Madhava- 
siihha. 

The present Madhavasimharaja appears to have been the 
patron of another writer called 3>4qfcKKT who wrote M^M^lRd or 
There are two Mss. of this work in the Govt. 



MSB. Library at the B. O. E. Institute : ( 1 ) No. 409 of 1882-83 
and No. 517 of 1891-95. Dalapatiraya makes the following re- 
marks about himself in this work 



d Jj ffr fir 






This passage is found in both the Mss. Ms. No. 517 is in- 
complete, while No. 409 has the following colophon : 



40 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 



Sir R. G, Bhandarkar 1 remarks on the basis of the last line 
of the above colophon that Madhavasimha, the Sarvabhauina, 
appears to have been Savai Maclhavsrao or Madhavarao II of 
Peshawa dynasty of Poona. 

I am inclined to take a different view of the above colophon. 
In the first instance the Ms. No. 409 has been acquired from 
Gujarat. 2 Secondly the "^ni 1 JTrw% " has a Gujarati tinge 
about it and presumably refers to a Prince in Rajputana. Thirdly 
the word ' m^T% ' is generally used by copyists in the sense that 
the 4 * copy was made " or the " work was copied ". I am, there- 
fore, inclined to take the last line as one added to by the scribe 
and the ' *nrr? HTO3TO5 ' as some other Rajput Prince different 
from the *rmr%S ^rrinlm, the patron of Dalapatiraya. It is 
possible that the present copy .of the 4^si^lRfT might have been 
made by a scribe under the instructions of a Rajput Prince called 
4 ^n *TTST3rf%fr J . During the time of the Peshawa Madhavrao II, 
the Mogul rule was not so prominent as in the days of Akbar. 
Dalapatiraya in his remarks about himself and his father ( vide 
extract quoted above ) refers to circumstances such as ' siSrnT&ST- 

all 



of which fit in more with the times of Emperor Akbar than those 
of Madhavarao II of the Peshawa dynasty. I am, therefore, of 
opinion that the ^iVqilis ^ErRsrfar or rrnft*^, the patron of <5<$Hm<i*r 
is identical with the Ki^rraf the patron of Pundarlka Vitthala. 
The epithet * ^NrfrH * need not mislead us because it is laudatory. 
It is similar to the epithet " 9fr^pfi*lTr " applied to the two 
brothers Ui^u'tiQ and TTRWl 1 the tributary princes in the extract 
from Ragamafijarl quoted above. 



1. Eeport on the Search for Sanskrit Mss. for 1882-83, p. 41, 

2. Ibid, p. 2 " The Gujarat Section comprises Nbs. 1-486 " 



XII 



DATB OF SUMATIVIJAYA'S COMMENTARY ON THE 
EAGHUVAMSA LATTER HALF OF THE 17TH 



Mr. S. P. Pandit in his edition of the Kaghuvarha makes the 
following remarks about the commentary of Sumativijaya on 
the 



41 We have now to notice the last Jain commentary that we 
have secured. The author's name is Pandita Sumativijaya of 
Vikramapura ( Bikaner ? ) and that of his work Sugamartha~ 
prabodhika ^hich he composed sometime between A. D. 1635 
and 1643." 

The date given by Mr. Pandit in these remarks is based on the 
chronogram in the colophon of his Ms. viz. "fHftre*ifW5Ti%^fac^". 
About ^ and $rrfr there is no difficulty of interpretation as their 
values viz. 6 and 1 are clear. There is difficulty as regards the 
value of the expression " i%fTOT ". Mr. Pandit observes in this 
connection * " whatever the figure of unit may be ttat is meant 
to be indicated by the letters preceding ir it is certain that 
mean one thousand six hundred and ninety, obviously of 



the Sarhvat as that is the era used in Bajputana where the com- 
mentary was composed and whence it has been obtained." 

Another scholar to deal with this date is Mr. Nandargikar* 
who describes a Ms. of the work viz. No. 46 of 1873-74 of the 
Govt. Mss. Library at the Bhandarkar Institute. His remarks 
about the date are as under : 

" Date 1609 of the Samvat year corresponding with A, D. 1552, 
This Ms. of Sugamanvaya is bought for the Bombay Govt. by 
Dr. Biihler at Bikaner in Rajputana." Mr. Nandargikar, like 
Mr. Pandit, alto bases his date A. D. 1552 on the chronogram 



1. RaghuvamSa, edited by S. P. Pandit, 1872, Preface pp 

2. Raghuvarhita, 1897, Critical Notice, pp. 24-25, 
J.9 [ Ajmali, B. O. B. I. } 



342 Annah of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 

This divergence of interpretation of the chronogram by two 
different scholars results in the difference of more than 100 years 
(1643 and 1552) in fixing the dale of composition as recorded in 
the work itself. 

Instead of multiplying these interpretations it would prove a 
sort of corrective if we try to infer the prohable date of the work 
on the basis of internal evidence. A cursory perusal of this 
commentary ( Ms. No. 46 of 1873-74 referred to. above) gives us 
the following list of authorities mentioned by Sumativijaya : 
:, OTanPPnSP ( fol. 240 ) ; T%^: or ftsgTRR^T: ( 4, 56 etc. ) ; 
fr ( fol. 5, 1 2 etc. ) ; W^' ( fol. 7 ) ; STH^m; ( fol. 9, 32 etc, ) ; 
( fol. 14, 16, 19, 22, 31, 32 etc. ) ; 3TT%^f%?rn?foT: ( fol. 
14, 16, 18 etc. ) ; ^TOT^W ( fol. 23 ) ; ^TT^eT: ( fol. 33, 70 ) ; sn*m: 
( fol. 36 ) ; f%TTrrT^^SF2t ( fol. 49 ) ; ^re: ( fol. 82, 140, 152 ) ; 
T: ( fol. 97 ) ^ ^t^^m ( foL 114 ) 5 f^r^wsr ( fol, 139 ) ; ^frsr- 
r ( fol. 142 ) ; SSJTST- ( fol. 142, 175, 217 ) ; ^saprgr: ( fol. 192 ) ; 
: ( fol. 192 ) ; ft*55*Tnr ( fol. 219 ) ; <TT^ ( fol. 51, 78, 79, 
198). 



In the above list the reference to the sj^sFTsrfira 1 ^ proves that 
the commentary was wriiben after A. D. 1374 1 which is the date 
of this lexicon. More important than this reference is the re- 
ference to srrsrsqreRiJr on folio 142 which appears as under : 



Now as regards Bhojavyakarana Dr. Belvalkar 3 observes that 
it was " written for bhe benefit of a King Bhoja, son of Bhara- 
malla." Mr. Harishankar Shastri in his edition 4 of this work 

1. Zacharie , Die Indischen Worterbucher, p, 35, 

2. Bhojavyakarana ( K. S. Press 1919 ) Pothi edition folios 25-26 see 
verses 88, 89, 90, 2nd line of verse 90 < = 



3. Systems of Sanskrit G-i ammar ( 1915 ), pp. 115-116. 

4. Edition of Bhojavyakaranq ( in Pothi form ), 1919, ( Published by 

NirnayasSgar Press, Bombay ), Introduction p. 2. 



Miscellanea 



343 



states " *t 



I wonder on what evidence Mr. Harishankar Shastri has 
based the above remarks for they are different from tho following 
statement of the work itself as recorded on folios 29, 67 and 76 of 
tha printed edition under reference J 



It appears, therefore, that the work was written, as stated 
thrice in the work itself, under the orders of the King Bho:"a, the 
son of Bharamalla. Bharamalla of the verse is none other then 
Bharamalla I, Rao of Kacch who reigned from 1585-1631 A. D, 1 
As the work was written under the orders of Bhoja, son of Bhra~ 
malla and during his reign it must have been written some years 
after 1631 A, D., say about A. D. 1640 or so. As Sumativijaya 
belongs to Vikramapura i.e. Bikaner as stated in the .colo- 
phon of his commentary and as he quotes ^ffacsn^ttfT as autho- 
rity he must have had a copy of the work before him. We shall, 
therefore, be not far wrong if we suppose that Sumativijaya 
wrote his commentary between 1640 and 1675 A, D. or in the latter 
half of the 17th century. This conclusion harmonizes with the 
dates of some ol the Mss. of the commentaries of Sumativijaya in 
the Govt. Mss. Library at the B. 0, E. Institute which are as 
under : 



Ms. 


Number 


Dated 
Samvat 


A. D. 


Kern arks 




No. 450 of 1887-91 


1838 


178'i 




T^^^T^T^T 


Do 


No. 373 of 1892-95 


1817 


1761 




r. 


No. 315 of A 1882-83 


1804 


1748 




H^P-TOT 



Bopibay Gazetteer, Vol. I2T, part ii ? p. 41- 



xin 

A MANUSCRIPT OF A COMMENTARY ON THE 
EAGHUVAMSA CALLED PRAKASIKA AND 
ITS PROBABLE DATE MIDDLE OF 
THE 15TH CENTURY 

There is a Ms. of a commentary on the Raghuvarhsa called 
Kaghukavyaprakasika in the Govt. Mss. Library at the B. O. R. 
Institute. This is No. 471 of 1895-1902 and consists of 69 folios. 
The commentary is only for seven cantos of the text. The name 
of the author is not mentioned in any of the colophons of the 
seven cantos which appear on folios 19, 25, 35, 44, 54, 66 and 72. 
Among works and authors referred to in the commentary the 
following may be noted : ^map^*- ( fol. 5 ) ; %3TOcfT ( fol. 5, 48, 65 ) ; 
**: ( fol. 6, 14, 18 ) ; *TT^: ( fol. 8 ) ; **: ( fol. 8 ) ; ft**: ( f ol. 9, 11, 
15, 19, 52 ) ; $ *rar3F: ( fol. 11 ) ; 3TOT: ( fol. 13, 19, 37, 64 ) ; 
( fol. 15 ) ; tiTOf**: ( fol. 18, 29, 31, 39, 40 ) 5 <m3TT- ( fol. 17 ) ; 

( fol. 26. 27 ) 5 arm*' ( fol. 28, 37 ) ; 3^TOT%^ ( M. 29 ) ; 
( foL 30, 49 ) ; STITCH ( fol. 32, 64 ) ; f%^Tm^fiqr ( fol. 46 ). 

As the list of the Mss. of the collection 1895-1902 was pub- 
lished by the B. O. K. Institute in 1925 this Ms. of the com- 
mentary Prakasika could not be recorded in Aufrecht's Catalogus 
Catalogorum. 

From the list of references given above it will be clear that 
the commentary is not very old. The quotation from s 



on folio 29 gives us one terminus to the probable date of the 
commentary. This quotation appears as under : 



Presumably this is a quotation from the work of Mahlpa called 
3*%^nSfitec|s, which is a chapter of the larger work *n3^?Tra^. It 
deals with homonyms and bears the date 1374 A. D. 1 As the pre- 
sent commentary refers to a lexicon of 1374 A. D. it must have 
been composed many years after this date. Secondly, in the list 
of references given above the commentary mentions works which 
are all of them of earlier date. This would justify our conclusion 
that the present commentary Prakasika was written in the middle 
of the 15th century, say between 1425 and 1475 A. D. 

J, Zacharie ; Die Indischen Worterbucher, 1897, p. 36, 



XIV 

A MANUSCRIPT OF MALLINATHA'S COMMENTARY 

DATED SAMVAT 1837 ( 1781 A. D. ) AND IDENTIFxCATION 

OF GAJASIMHA IN WHOSE REIGN IT WAS WRITTEN 

There is a Ms. ( No. 332 of 1884-86 ) of Mallinafcha's com- 
mentary on the Raghuvamsa dated Samvat 1837 (rnr, 3Tf3r, 3U, ^ ? 
which corresponds to A, D. 1781. The scribe states that the Ms. 
was copied in the above year in the reign of Qajasimha of 
V ikramapaltama The name of scribe is STRnr^rsr of rfr^H" or ^W3 
family. 

It appears that the Gajasimha mentioned in the colophon of 

this Ms. is identical with Gajasimha of Bikaner Raj 1 who ruled 

from A. . 1746 to 1787. The date of the Ms. viz. A. p. 1781 

harmonizes with the above period of Gajasirnha's reign and 

Vikramapattana of the Ms. is identical with Bikaner. 




The Chronology of India by Duff, p. 377. 



I p ^UOATICtf3 OF THE INSTITUTE ^ ^ $ 

( ) Bombay Sanskrit and Prakrit Series 
Mammata's Kavvanrfll-Tsi .?*.v, -n >, ., 

^^^^2it^?l : S 1 ' 



No . 38, 



6 SS^^^rt p?J'|f r ^. Banhaui, JlTrl^'i. 
I Vyavaharamaynkfaa. No 80, by P V. Kale " A I,""' Patha . fc ' Price Rs -3- 

9 Jhalkikar's Nyayakosa, No. 49 $rd E 1 f ^ ' ^" "^"' * r * c Ks. 5-8. 

M, M. Vasudeva Shastri Abbyanfcsr Price R<? fj !set * aD< ^ enlarged by 



12 

,., -,. ^ ^ . . ^ 



^ n ) Government Oriental Series 

^ ^d 1 - w i th 
* aby Mahamah - 



. 

P 6 r 7ce Ss.1: !aSS B> N0 ' 5 ' by the late Dr - V - S- Ghat,, . A, D . Litt , 



3 Budbabhuspna, Out of Sena* 'hT T "Pi* n f rr -rk 

4 Vy5kara 9 a-Mah5bha{ya! wSr^Index Vo? T n* " ' 

5B s ^sfsi 
1 M - 



. 

the Deocan, and Iuwnption,. PriceRs 4-8 Vol 'iV^ 6lL B N 

^-^^ ^ a ^ o 






N ' 6 ' fc y P'^-P- V.Kane, 



( m ) O^/igr Works 

I Mahabharata, Fascicule I, pp. 60 , Price Rs, 2-4 ; Fascicule H, 
pp. 61-136 , Price Rs 2-8 , Fascicule III, pp. 137-232 Price Rs S 
Fascicule IV pp. 233-400 , Price Rs. 5-4; Fasc.cule V.' pp 401 640 ' 
Price Rs. 7, Fascicule VI, pp. 6U-880, Price Rs. 7 ; parts not sold smatj 
L Prospectus to a New and Critical Edition of the MahabbSrata, Price As S 
i \ f pa ?It D ?> f *^ e Mahabharata, edited by N.B Utgifcar,M.A.' Price Rs.ul 
4 Annals of the B. O. R. Institute, Price Rs. 10 per Volume, Volumes I- VII 
K -u^ parts of eacl1 ; Volur ne>s VIII-XIII parts four each, 
& tfbandarkar Commemoration Volume, on sale at the Oriental Book 
Supplying Agency, Poona. -w* 

6 Summaries of Papers read at the First Oriental Conference, price Rs 2 

7 Proceedings of the First Oriental Conference Vol. I Price Rs. 5, 
J? I)o I>0 D O Vol. II Price Rs. 8. 

-X g Second Do Price Rs. 10. 

1? P Third Do Price Rs, 10. 

11 L)0 Fourth Do Vol. 1 Price Rs. 5, 

1J i! I>o Do Vol. II Price Rs. 8. 

JJ Do Fifth Do Vol. I Price Rs. 8, 

14 Do Do Do Vol. II Price Rs. 7. 



15 Descriptive Catalogue of M>s. in the Government Ms<3. Library at the 

Institute, Vol I, Part I, Samhitas and Brahn.anas, Price Rs. 4. 

16 History of the Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Bombay Presidency 

from 1868 to 1900, Price As. 8. 

17 A list of New Mss, added to the Library ( 1895-1915 ), Price Be 1-8. 

II WORKS I* T PRESS 
( i } Old B. S. S. Pledges 

1 SySdvadszoafijari edited by Principal A. B. Dhruva, M. A., LL. B. 

2 JLpastambadharmasutra, by Prof. M. G. Shastn, M. A. ( Reprint froai 

B. S S. Nos.44& 50). 

( n } Reprints and Revisions 

3 Desinainamala, 2nd edition, edited by P. V. Raraanujaswami, M. A. 

4 Kavyaprakas'a with Jhalkikar*B commentary, Ullasas I-X, Reprint oy 

Prof. R. D. Karmarkar, M. A, 

(in) Government Oriental Series 

5 R. G Bhandarkar's Collected Works, Vol. I, by N. B, Utgikar, M. A, and 

Dr. V. G. Paranjpe, M. A., D. Litt. 

6 Taittu-iya-Samhita, Word-Index to, Part II, by Pandit Parashuram Shastri. 

7 VySkarana-Mahabhasya, Word-Index to, Part II, by Pandit Shndhar 

Shastn Pathak and Siddheshwar Shastri Chitrao. 

8 Nighantu and Nirukta by Prof. V. K. Rajvade, M. A, 

9 K. B Pathak Commemoration Volume. 

(iv) Other Works 

10 Annals, Vol. XIV, Parts I-II. 

11 Mahabharata, Fascicule VII, containing Appendices, Introduction etc to 

the Adi Parva. 

12 R. G. B. Library Catalogue. 

Ill WORKS UNDERTAKEN 
( i ) B. S. S. Old Pledges 

1 Tarkaparibhasa, edited by Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar, and Pandit Kedarnath. 

2 Hirukta, part II, with Durga's commentary, edited by Prof. R. G. 

Bhadkamkar, M. A. 

3 Mrcchakatika, part, II edited by Sardar K. 0. Mehendale, B. A. 

( n ) Reprints and Revisions 

4 RSjatarangini, 2nd Edition ( B. S. S. Nos. 45, 51, and 54), by Professor 

A. B. Gajendragadkar, M. A. 

5 Handbook to the Study of Rgveda, part I, ( B, S. S. No. 41 ) 2nd Edition by 

Dr. R. Zimmermann, Ph D. 

6 KSvySdarsa, Seeond and Revised Edition, by Dr. S. K. Belvalkar and 

Pandit Rangacharya Raddi Shastri. 

( in ) Government Oriental Series 

7 Vykara*ia-MahSbhSsya, English Translation, by Prof. K. V. Abhyankar, 

M. A , and M. M. Vasudeva Shastri Abhyankar. 

8 p&devl -with a new Commentary by M. M. Vasudeva Shastri Abhyankar, 

9 Garbe, Die S&mkhya Philosophic, English Translation byR. D. Vadekar,M.A. 

10 Catalogus CaUlogoruni for Jain Literature, edited by H.D. Velankar, M. A. 

11 Dhv&ayaloka with Locana by Dr. S. K. De. 

12 VSkyapadiya by Prof. Charudev Shastri. 



N. B. The Institute is prepared to buy old, rare and otherwise valuable 
Mss. of Sanskrit, Prakrit, Avesta, Persian and Arabic works.