Skip to main content

Full text of "s.v.u.oriental journal vol-20,part1,2"

See other formats 


SRI 
VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY 

ORIENTAL JOURNAL 

TIRUPATI 




EDITOR 

Prof. S. SANKARANARAYANAN, M.A., Ph.D. 

Dîrector, S.V.V. Oriental Research Institut e 

ASSOCIATE EDITORS 
Dr. D. SRIDHARABABU 

and 
Dr. K.S. RAMAMURTI 



V«l. XX JANUARY-DECEMBER, 1977 PARTS 1&2 



CONTENTS 



Page 

ENGLISH Nos. 

1. SrîvatsalâSchana : The Source of Inspiration to 
Jagannâtha Pandita 

—Dr. K.S, Ramamurthî ... 1 

2. The Krsnagîti of Sonnaoâtha Misra - A Study 

— Dr. Banamalî Rat h ... 9 

3. The Contribution of Souîh India to Sanskrit 
Lîterature with Spécial référence to Karnataka 

—Dr, K: Krishnamoorthy .•. 13 

4. A Noteon Vedàrthasamgraha 

---Miss Gîta Jonwar .,. 35 

5. Thoughts on Srïnîvasa Dïksita's Srïvisistâdvaita- 
bhâsya on the Brahmasûtras 

—Dr. D. Sridhara Babu ... 41 

6. Rimarâya on 'tat tvana asi' 

—Dr. K.S.R. Daîtû ... 47 

7. The AI vars' Concept of Salvation 

—Dr. N. Subbu Reddiar .., 53 

8. Sun-Worship in Andhra Pradesh 

—Dr. SJ, Mangakm ... 61 

9. Hindu Rituals in Madurai Country of Médiéval 
Age 

—Dr. S. Selvin Kumar ... 69 

10- A Brâhmi Inscription from Alltiru 

-—Dr. S. SankaranarayanaM .é^ 7S 



ïl 

i 1 . Siddhcsvara Tempie at Terâla 

— Sri C.A. Padmanabha Sastrî 

12. SomeTeluguPlace-NamesofHistorical Importance 

--^Dr. S. S. Ramachandra Murûiy 

13. Science in Vedas-O 

^Dr. S.,C. Goya! ... I 

14. Terminological Studics of Seiected PlaiU nariies 
of the Krsiparasara 

.— /)r. Gyiila Wqfîiila ... I' 

REVIEWS 

1. Water Quality in Bhavamisra's Bhivaprakisa 

' — Dr, S. Sankaranarûvanan ... ■ lî 

2. Visnusahasranimastotra 

—Dr. S»B, Raghunmhûiéaryulu .•» 12 

3. Dhvanyaloka 

— Dr, K.S. Ramamurthi ***, 1,2 

4. Essays in Sanskrit Criticism 

-— jDf* KS. Ramamurthi ,., 12, 

5. Kriyâkairacacandrikâ 

--Dr. V, Varadacharï ,,, 121 

6. Sistradîpikâ of Pàrthasârathimisra with Prabhfi 
of Tatsatvaidyanatha 

—Dr. K. Varadacharï ,„ 128 

7. Paribhasendusekhara of Nigeéabhatta with 
Durga— a Sanskrit commentary and Hindi commen- 
tary 

— jDr. N.S. Ramanujaiatacharya ... 134 

S^Tillapâka Arfnamâcharyulu -^ A Historîcal Novel 

— Srf A,V. Srinivasacharytilu ... 136 



iii 

SANSKRIT 

Dr. N,S. Ramanujataîacharya *.. 1 

Dr. S.B* Raghunathacharya ... 33 

TELUGU 

Sr/ jS:./. Krishna Moorîhy ... 1 

Srî M. Prabhakara Mo ... 17 

OBITUARY 

1. Dr. V. Raghavan 

2. Sri N. Subrahmanya Sastry 

3. Dr. Viswanatha Satyanarayana 

S. V.U.O.RX LECTURE SERIES - No. 1 

The Kuroksetra War (Lecture I) 

—Dn D:C. Sir car 

Râjavamsa-Varnana of the Purânas (Lecture II) 

—Dr.D.C. Sircar 



LS. RAMAMURTHI 

SRIVÂTSALANCHANA ': THE SOURCE OF 
INSPIRATION TO JAGÂNNATHA PANDITA^ 



It is a well kîîowii fact that Panditarâja Jagaiioâtha won the 
appréciation of scholars in the world of Sanskrit for his original works, 
specially for his magnum opus the Rasagahgadhûramûfiî a treatise on 
poetics. Though the work is incomplclej the available portion itself 
being a land-mark in the field enabîes as to cooccive the entire plan of 
the work wîth the help of the lustre of the diamond of his genins. 
When the diamond of Rasagangadhara i.e. the Rasagangadharmani is 
placed before m, I am sure, that we are able to perceive and understand 
his maiiy sided geaius shîning in the shape of his other works like the 
BhminmlasayPancakkrïs etc., set in ail the angles of this diamond. 
It is no exaggeration hère if wesay that the diamond created by him 
under the patronage of Mnghal emperors in the middle of the seventeenth 
century excels the famous natural diamond of Kohinoor. Thanks to the 
aesthetic efforts of Shahajahan who placed in our hands the two unsnr- 
passed créations (l) The Tajmahal and (2) The RasagûngadharamQnî, 

Dnring the Miighal period, Shahjâhan's reign was unqnestionably 
regarded as the âge of golden âge of arts. The impérial court congre- 
gated Persiaiij Hindi and Sanskrit scholars. This impetus for this 
encouragement emanated from Akbarj whose reign witnessed the rise of 
men of genius. How fortunate is Jagannatha to hâve been born in this 
period and reckoned the lord of wits in and out the impérial court. The 
spirit of the âge exerted its influence on him. The image of Srîvatsalan- 
chana his predecessor seems to hâve influenced him to bring forth his 
Rasagatlgadhara. The inspiration of Srivatsa in this regard could be 
clearly seen in bis thought and content, specially in the définition of 
kavya, the explanation of the rasa, the sub-divisions in yîra and in 
refuting other s, 

SrIvatsalaSchana flourished during the middle of the sixteenth 
century (a,d. 1568). Though we do not know much about his personal 

680 -E.l 



2 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL > 

life, we know only that much that he is proiScient in ail the six syste 
of philosophy and grammar. He calls himself a kavî or poet: Tl 
poetic talent was probably imbifaed from fais father Visnudharacaryî 
great scholar and a poet. Srîvatsa's works are (1) The Kayyaparih 
(2) Kâvyâmrtar (3) Sërabodhîni - a commentary on the KâvyapràkZ 
of Mamraata. He also seems to bave written a drama called Ramoday 
The Kâvyapariksa and KëvyUmrta are treatises on rhetoric. The Kâv) 
pariksë is a gênerai treatise whereas the Kâvyamrta is originally intend 
lo criticise the Kâvyaprakâsa. Of course his criticism is only in t 
beginning on tha topics like the définition of kù'vya etc. In his kâv} 
mrtam y though ihQ ksrikas mq drawn from the Kavyaptakasa, Srivats 
originality is exhibited in either dispensing away with some items 
merging them with others as in case of gunas diiià aîahkaras, 

Srivatsa opens his kâvyapariksa with the définition o! km 
stating. 

He then proceeds to explaia the views of the ancients, who advocal 
îMî sabda itself is kavya ànè that kâvyatva is embeded both in sal 
and artha. He also quotes 

Hère we notice that according to Srivatsa, vakrokîî is a WïïT'^^fR a 
lot a f^5tWF5rfR. He also says ^^^i W^'^^^ and this vakrokti 
defined by him as =¥î?^^l^f^:. From this we understand that t 
vakmktî or the modified uîterance raust be capable of creating ^^ïî^c^R 
the listener or the reader i.e. ^T^^F?^ becomcs an élément in the ce 
stituents of poetry. As such most probably he seems to hâve accepi 
the définition ^M^^g: 75^?^: ^[ôqq;. Hère the word «T^c 
means befitting place for words i.e. (words contextuaily fitting,) a ri^ 
Word in a right place. The epîthet ^I^^I^^ên^: means life-givi 
elixir, that helps persons to appreciate rasa. When the whole iscc 
strued it means that the words in their proper places act like amedici 
for restoring life and becomes palatable. This verbally expressed wc 
^ (which means ^ôS[ hère) along with the term ^^F^^Wri: indica 

1. Edited by Dr. P. Sarma and published by the Mîthiîa Institute, Darbhanfa. 

2. Ed. by Dr. K.S. Ramamurti and Publ. by S.V.U.O.R. Institute, Tirupati. 

3. Aufrecht ce. pt I p526 (1962). 



977 Parts î & 2] SRÎVATSALAÈCHANA : THE SOURCE... 5 

charming seiise' (life) i.e. it becomes tasty revealiog its sensé as the 
r<Ç is not separated from ils sensé. From this we note what he means is 
hat the 'use of befitting words in theîr appropn'ate places which give 
ise to a charming sensé constitute poetry. From this it is clear ihat he 

iccepts the hormonious blending of ^^ and ^5^ for good poetry. A 
ilose examination at this stage reveals that Srîvatsalâîïchana accepts 
Handîdâsa of a.d. 1285, who wrote a commentary called Diplka^ on the 
Kavyaprakasa of Mammata, thongh he did not mention hini anywhere. 

^andïdâsa says ^^rR^fè 1 ^M3[5ftqTg: 75[^4^: ^^1 Probably it 
s only to indicate that he has borrowed this from his predecessor, 
Irîvatsa uses the word 3"^^ in his first Icarikâ as ^fJPWMK^I^I^: 
{?Çf3^4 ^^^cF and scholars are of the opinion that this définition is 
icceptable to Srîvatsa.^ 

Having thus noticed the inclination of Srîvatsa to accept and adopt 
the définition of Candîdàsa let us focus our attention on the définition 

Df këvya proclaimed by Jagannatha. He defines kâvyas as ^ipfl^^- 
^ra"?!^^: 51®^: ^Î^Q^. Explaining this in good length, he says at the 
end ^fl%Mîîq5Çr[^=oè^^^5îfgq[[5[q^T^^ ^^^^R^^R^T^ ^iï m^^- 
m^^ ^fèiÇl^l Hère we note that Jagannatha used the words ^^pfN, 
^^5 ^ram?^ and ?r®^ only to perfect his own définition by warding 
off ^^5î|[f^ and ^53|[fç[, Thepiirport of his explanatîon of the jîirra 
(wMch ail know) is that a sensé when thought over again and again 
produces an uncommon bliss ^5ïïî^^F^3[ which isalso said as super- 
natural bliss ^^xRJ«îî?^. This uncommon bliss is also known as 

poetical eharm ^^^RR. This is a subjective expérience. This delight 
is nothing but the expérience of the knowledge of the uncommon bîîss» 
We do not get this type of bliss in the common parlance when we hear 
the sentences like ^you are blessed with a child* or 'I will give you 

money', The pleasure experînced hère is only ÇfTÎ^^ or xisual, but not 
unusuaL Therefore this cannotbe called poetry. As such we note that 
the Word which is capable of giving rise to a charming sensé or a sensé 
that produces uncommon bliss becomes poetry. This in simple words 
is explained by Maîjûnathasâstry^ in his laghu tika called 5ara/a as 
^^r^?f^f^^^^^^^ i.e. the quality of char m itself is poetry. 

4, KSvyaparîk su --înttoûuction p. 12» 

5, ibid. 

6, iîasa^aHgffi/mrj --Ed. Manjnnathasastry p. 6» 



4 S.V, UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURWAL [Vol 

ManjûQâtliasIstri further states qr?^^®??^^^^ (^©^cffq^M) 

^^È W^^^W^Wxi ^M^^% f i.e. the orcier of tbe wor< 

which uBCommon bliss wliich is otherwise knov/n as ^ÏÏ^^R is gêner. 
when coûtemplated upon agian and again, that set iip constitutes po 
Atthis stage witliout botheriîîg oiirselves wilh the sâstraic jargon j 
examine it we note that words which are capable of giviug rlse to ch 
ing seûse constituîe poetry, Si'ch being the case how can Ihi 

différent from the définition ^M?#^3: ^^m^: adopted by 
vatsa as ST[^fÇ and ^^^^ëfî]^ are identical and they présuppose cii^ 
ing seiïse and the process of 5«î: g^J^^I"^- From this we onders 
that Jagannâtha has improved upoii Srivatsalânchana with a vie 
give a clearer expression. While SrîvatsalâSchana does not elabc 
■more and more, Jagannâtha indaiges in eîaboraling with sâstraic jai 
in the inteiest of perfection, 

Nexî speaking of the rj.ya-realization Srîvatsa inlrodaces 

upanisadic quotation ^è 1^: | l^ mi ^ôHfRr^l ^^^^ \ n 
above is rasa and having attained this rasa one gets delighte 
Probably he is thefir&t rhetorician to introducc this upanisadic dici 
into the field of poetics, He says — 

ftqïïi g«ïï =^ m^i^^ l^^¥ïFF?îtr ïriïîmw^^îF >nïR^q! 

"#l Çf: 1 # m ÇlSSWFRt vr#" ifcT. {Kâvyapanksâ p. 
Tais simply means- In a kàvya the sthàyî (which lies dorment in 1 
mind of a sahrdaya) is manifested by vibimva, anubhâva etc. T 
Âtman which. is of the rature of consciousness and bliss shines in tl 
modification of the mind (manifested by vibhsvas in the form of sthây 
For, according to the Vedlnta theory the Àtman is invariably présent 
every knowledge or expérience. Hère also the casual aggregate consi: 
ing of the contact of Àtman and manas is prcjent. Pratyaksa aj 

7. ibid. 



t977 Parts ! & 2] SRÏVATSALÀÎÎCHANA : THE SOURCE... 5 

other instruments of knowledge are pramanas in that they are able to 
make known what hacl remained unknown prevïoiisly. Such beiiig the 
case by the said manifestation brought into being on witnessiiig or listen- 
ipg to a composition, the veîl that covers the ananda aspect of the 
Atman is removed. Then the consciousness which is delimited by the 
manifested rati etc. shiniog in the form of ânanda by virtu® of the 
removal of the veil of the ânanda aspect of the Atman is said to be rasa. 
The same thing is said by the Sruti in the Taltdnya Sàkhâ as ?:^ "1 ?î: | 
^ i^H^ etc. 

With this observation if we turn to Jagannitha we note that his 
position is not far removed from this. He explains the rasasvarûpa as 

{Rasagangïïdhara p. 87) 

Thîs in simple words, means that the characters (hero and heroin), the 
moonlight, the tears and their agony enter the minds of spectators (the 
sahrday as) v^ho witness or listen to a well set composition of a poet. 
They i.e. the spectators or listeners synipathetîcally react to those situa- 
tions with the help of the culture that lie irabedded in them, when the 
relationship of hero and heroin (i.e Sakuntaiâand Dusyanta) disappears 
from their minds, by itself only; At this stage the characters (hero and 
heroin) having been rid of their usual status become îhQ cause of 
generatîng uncommonness in the minds or spectators or listeners, when 
contemplated upon, with the help of the concomitants such as âlambana, 
uddipana vibhâvas etc. Hère the spectator, in a technical sensé is called 
Pramata, Because of the comtempîatîon (or carvana) of the PramâtS 
the veil that covered the bliss aspect of Âtman in him îs removed, when 
he sheds ail his tisual nature. Then he is abîe to enjoy this bliss along 
with the raii which is aîready in him in the form of vasana^ which zt that 
stage is known as rasa:: This means, that the^m^a is nothing bot the rati 
visualised together with the bliss -aspect of Âtman. 

Afterdeflning/a^û in thèse terms Jagannitha explains the philo- 
sophical concept that underlies this. In the course of his expianaî ion to 
show that there k hbdapramaita fot M concept he quotes ûi^Talttiriya 
stating; iî^^rfft -^# f 



6 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

Hère we note that ail this type of philosophical explanation is 
emanated from Abhinavagupta, wliich bas been made use of by other 
writers on the subject - Srîvatsa and Jagannâtha being no exceptions. 
The onîy thing whîch attracts our attention is the support taken from 
the suîri by Srîvatsa and Jagannâtha. From this we feel thaï Jagannâtha 
had his inspiration fioni Srîvatsa, who happened to be the first rhetori- 
cian to call oo the Upanisadic line to give more and more support to the 
argument. 

Next 'n enumerating the kinds of virarasa, Visvanàtha in his 
Sâhityadarpana gives four Viras namely, dânavïra, dharinavira, 
yuddhûxira and dayâvira. The rhetoriciaiis after Visvanàtha do not seem 
to hâve taken congnizance of thèse divisions until Srîvasta states ^1^;^ 

^îïîSrîT?3îfg^^îlgîif?i} : 1 He simply went on giving exampîes in 

order. Jagannâtha also gives thèse four divisions of vira. He says 

^^gëfl j ?M^2îfg:g;^îr: etc. Jagannâtha's geBeraî nature is to 
split things into their nciinute parts wherever camatkara exists. Though 
Jagannâtha in this instance emuîated Visvanàtha, it is clear that Srî- 
vatsa was in the upper most of his mind; for he says at this stage — 

^[^S^ I This verse (said to hâve been quoted by Srîvatsa by Jagannâtha) 
is found in Srîvatsa's Sârabodhînî (a commentary) on the KUvyâprakasa. 
This suggests that Jagannâtha was thorough with Srîvatsa's works and is 
acting under a considérable inspiration ofSîîvatsa. 

It is also interesting to note hère that Jagannâtha vi^as in touch 
with the first work Kâvyaparlksa of Srîvatsalâichana onîy and not with 
his second work Kâvyâmpa, Srîvatsa rejects the four varietîes of vira 
which were enumarated by bim in Kàvyapariksïï, in his Këvyëmrta, 
Jagannâtha does not seem to hâve noticed this. But in refuting the 
définitions of Kavya of others we note that Jagannâtha follows the 
Kavyamrta, 

We shall now pass on to another interesting item. We aii know 
that there is a lot of différence in the interprétation of the verse 
n^W^cT^-^Ç^ vvith regard to the process of dhvanî. The main 
feature of the conclusion of Appayya Dîksita is that the suggested 
meaning of ^^^ïï is by means of laksana, whereas Jagannâtha 
argues that it is onîy by means of abhidhâ-ihrongh the peculiar intona- 
tion of the speaker-as the laksana expressed by Appayya Dîksita is only 
a mistaken notion, He argues vehemently exposing the defccîs in the 
arguments of Appayya Dîksita. Actually the supposed Ckhrarnîmâfk- 
sakhandana of Jagannâtha which is well known in the scholardom starts 
with this verse only. Buta glance at the Kavyapariksd of Srîvatsa 



m Parts 1 ^ 2] SRIVATSALÂRCHANA : THE SOURCE... 7 

tows that the arguments advanced by Jagannàtha are not uiiknown to 
•îvatsa. Srivatsa çommeoting on the verse T'ï7%f^g^^?«f says ^^ 

^'^^^ r-t ïï^t ^'^^Fk^ ^m^ ^^^ I m %f%ci^ - m 

îSrr^RM^^r ^m^^^ï^c^ïri: - {Kavyapanksa, p. 50) 

Ail thîs is in no way différent from the arguments of Appayya 
îksita. But we are sure that Srîvatsa is not referring to the arguments 
'Appayya as the latter is removed down from the former by about a 
iutury. The word kecît used by Srîvatsa refers to some of his pre- 
ïcessors or contemporaries. Thus iterating the arguments current in 
s time and refuting them he offers his own explanation as 5W I ^cf: 

wi^mm ^^[T^^^m^^Wl w. ^^ ^^^'^ i ^«ïï '^^ ^ssrpïï 

^T^ïï^ I {Kâvyaparîksa, p. 1 1 ) 

•om the above we note that there is no différence betvveen Srivatsa and 
gannâtha. Further it also becomes clear that Srivatsa became the 
urce of inspiration to Jagannatha Pandita in producing his Rasagahga- 
ara, a work which affords him a beautiful ground to produce his own 
eaningfui ccmmentary on his own verses. In the case o f nUsesacyuta- 
ndanam the explanation offered by Jagannatha and the conclusions 
rived at by him are in no way différent from that of Srivatsa. A glance 



s S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

at thèse two reveals the fact that the différence lies only i„ the phraseo- 
lo^of explanation. When Srivatsa simply says ^iM^ STïfr^jfeïï 
cî^SrWÇf'=îTf rg; etc., Jagannîtha says ^T^IÏÏ^^Î^^^crTO^^. 
mmmmm^mm^ - and in the case of adkaro.i,aSrî- 
vatsalârchana says ^Wï^^ ^m^T^m^ for which Jagannâtha 

expiains m^ ^^^^ '^'mm^H^^-m^mf^m^m- 

^mmm l So from this we observe that Jagannâtha is endowed with 
thequahty of giving a better charming look for the object he handies 
a^d n appears new and fresh. Being a genius he could give finer to ■ches' 
to eyery .dea of Sriva.sa and make it his own. The fmbedded fo et 
h.s language, the analytical spirit, the clarity of exprÏÏ on the pe, 
pecuuy m style, the scrumptioBS scholarship and the acïua'liza ioh of 
argument in Jagannâtha keep us sail with him always '''"''^''*'"'^ "^ 



* sr^ïïs^^^^ 



ÂNAMALI RATH 

HE KRSNAGITI OF SOMANATHA MISRA-A STUDT 



Jayadeva^ the famous lyric poet of Orissa^ has given socîi a char- 
ing picture to the amorous dalliances cf Radhâ-Krsna in his Giîagovinda, 
,at it has become the perennîal source ofinspîrationj elatîon aiidjoy 
the thinkers, literateurs, devotees and heretîcs of the world-all aliki, 
rthe last few centuries. The sweetness in diction^ the musical beaitty 
'lyrics, the softness of word-pictureSj above ail theartistic exprès- 
an of the universal human feelings of the Gitûgovinda hâve a captivat- 
geffect on its readers, The popularity of this work has never been 
feoted by the bulk ofliteratnre in Sanskrit as well as in regionallangu- 
;es which has sobseqiientiy appeared in thefield/ Âhost of writers 
ghly inspired by its artistic beamy and the nnîversal appeal, hâve 
terapted at différent times to compose poems in imitation of that 
aster-piece. Scholars from al! parts of India in gênerai afldf oets of 
dssa in particalar, brought np in that glorions tradition^ of Sanskfîtic 

î , The Historiés of Sanskrit Literatiire hâve described Jayadeva belongiiig to Bea- 
gal. But the receot researches seem to establlsh that the poet belonged to 
Orissa. 

VWeinthisconûection 

(1) TheSommr on Érî Jayadeva edited by Br. RK. Sahu. The Jayadeva 
SânskrtikaParisada: Orissa, Bhubaneswar, 1968. 

(ii) A Descriptive Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscrîpts of Orîssa. Vol. Il Pré- 
face pp- XXXV -LVI éd. by K.N. Mahapatra. Orissa Sahitya Âkademi, 
Bhubaneswar. 

(iii) ''New Light on poet Jayadeva, the aiithor of the GUagcvinda'' by Sri 

K.N. Mahapatra in the O.H.R J. Bhubaneswar, Vcl VII Oct. 1958 and 

January 1959 parts 3 & 4 PP; 191-2-8. 
(iv) Bzmmûi'RQ^t'h: Orissa JheHomelandof Jayadeva. The papei is contre 

buted to the procedings of the International Sanskrit Conférence, New 

Delhi, 1972. 

L Vide BanamaliRath: A family of poeî-cum-rketoricians in Orissa. Jhdkar, 
February 1958, Vol IX Na 12 pp. 10§4-90. 



!0' S.V. UNiVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

cultBre, hâve composed in Sanskrit more ihan one hundred and îhirty 
poems in imitation of tlic Gtîagovinda in order to give vent to their 
poetic ingennîty and erotico-devotional ecstasy. 

Apart from a few works of this type available in print a bulk of 
such imitative works, at présent, are discovered in manuscripts and a 
nnmber of them almost hâve been lost in course of time. But many 
interesting stray verses and fragmentary songs and, in some cases, only 
the naraes of such gîtakëvyas hâve been preserved in the Jater commenta- 
taries and anthologies and in works on rhetorics and nrusicology as wcIL 
I propose to deaiwith such quotations separately. In the présent con- 
text my observations are restricted to the Krsnagiîî of Somanatha Misra, 

A manuscript of this work is preserved in the library of Gujarat 
Vidyâsabhâ, Ahmedabad. ït bas been edited by Dr. Priyabâla Shah asid 
publishedby the Rajasthan Orienta] Research Institute, Jaipor in 1956. 

No reliable information about the poet is available eîther from the 
internai or the externai sources. However the author refers to himself 
as Somanatha Misra^ and il indicates that be belonged to a brihman 
family (rfF//^ Somanatha). Most probably he was a poet of Brajabhtimi 
and flourished during the sixteenih century a,d, 

Unlikeother works imitative of the Gtîagovinda^ it is not divided 
into dij9ferent canlos. Thus it is not a kâvya of the orthodox type; 
but a work which contai ns twen ty astapadîs. In every case they are prece- 
ded by a few stanzas io syllabic mètres. The songs hâve been composed 
after the ténor and manner of ihe Gitagovinda. They are to be sung in 
some spécifie râgas^ mentioned on the top of each astapadî, The îhought 
which is described ia nutshell in the preceding verses, finds its full play 
in the succeeding narrative songs. There are twenty astapadîs and 48 
verses in ail. 

Somanatha begins his Krsnagîti with a salutation to Krsna^ and 
déclares that he had written this work simply to gratify his own mind.*^ 

Krsmgîîî, p. 24, 
4. The ràgas like — ^^^ géâ", %^^, ^\i\^ \m^t^, =ÇïïM, ^f çfr, ^^T^, 

^[m, m'm^i\, ^^^m, ^^w, ^^^r^^r, q-^?cr and |^^. 

çr-^ ;^^ ïïéi^^fïrfiâ ?%sarntf?r; f^tl (last verse) 



1977 Parts I & 2] THE KR§NAGÏTL.. îi 

Furtber, accordiog to him, the recitation of îhe asiapadis is a panacea to 
end thesins and sufferings of the cycle of birth and death.'^ The poet 
unequivocally déclares the extra- ordinary merits of his poetry.^ Yet he 
is very conscious of his own limitations and thiis records that though his 
coral composition cannot vie with the siiperb songs of Jayadeva, yet it 
wii! be sung by the devotees who are interested in singing the praise of 
the Vrajanâtha (i.e. Srî-Krsna).^ 

The thème of the poem begins with the famous love épisode 
ofRidhâ and Krsna, Râdhâ in her dream feels that her lover Krsna 
is movîng with another beîoved and she gets up with mortification 
and evinced her resentmenr with jeaîousy and anger, k Krmadûn itits. 
to assnage her ruËFled feelings towards Krsna and appeals to her in an 
arbor on the bank oftheYamuna that Krsna is not at fault andhe is 
eagerly awaitlng her in another new arbor. A sakhi of Radha aiso equally 
entreats her to be kind to Krsna who is unnecessarily tornieoted for no 
fanlt of his own. Râdhâ toc réalises her folly. But, without showing 
it she is waiting for an excuse. The friend of Râdhâ goes to Krsna des- 
cribes the love-îorn plight of her sakhi, Tbereafter she returns to Radha 
and through her good offices Râdhâ and Krsni are reunited. Thus the 
poet descrioes the amorous sports of the couple exhaustively and the 
poem cornes to an end with similar requests to each otlier for décoration 
with ornamcnts and cosmetics when the dalliances were over. 

Thus it appears that the main trait of the work is to describe the 
mysiic^^ vlpralambha and sambhoga-srngaras. Hère the poet's urge of 
singing the excellences of Harî is also discernible. 



7. ^îRwg^R ^^% i^^'ïï^rcfiîr^^ 1 

s. , ♦^^"^^■atcf iîr^îT^cr^^î^'iïiïq. — Verse no 4 uoder astapadl* 

cf. foot note No, 6, also. 

10. Krsmgïtî F, 24. verseNo.2. 

The dalliances of Râdlîâ-Krsna ârç^ îQtmQé hcve Satkâmakell. Kà ma in 
itself is baneful, but when it is directed towards Krsna it becomes subh'mated 
or satkâma whîch is according to scriptures one of the finest ways that leads the 
devotee towards salvation. 



12 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

As a gîîakïïvya, ïht présent Krmaglîi successfuHy attaches more 
importance to the musical astapadis than the narrative verses. The 
language of thc worJc is smooth, ineîodioiis and charming as the natural 
overflow of emotional iiiflection. It avoids the wearisome détails of the 
épisode and it shuns the eiideavours for the ostensible pictorial artisties 
of the pedantic schoJasticism. Thoagh the work is considered to be 
artisfîc, esoteric and devotiocaî yet it is remarkably sensuoiis in spirit 
and treatment which suggests the poet's iinfeigned prediliction for the 
eroticinterest. As this work appertains to MaX-fi calt of later Krsnaite 
Vaisnavism it uses more or less \\\q same apparatiis and inventory of 
poetic refÎHemeots to set off the beauiy of the highly erotic thème which 
has beeii held in high esteera m the estabîished elevated tradition of ero- 
tico-relîgious devotionalism. Moreover in this work, we come across 
the harmony of soands and the musical melody, a remarkable feature of 
the work, that has been effectively maintained in the verses and songs 
alike. Two instances alone may be quoted hère : 

(i) ^rîTfisT^tefèît ÇîMîf^W^îrfe^^ 
S^^^rgsjM w^ ^mmTw\\ ii 

Verse No. l, under astapadî No. 2 
(il) A portion of the astapadî No. 16 : 

^Qî^ cfçf% 5r^t ^Cïïf ^^r^f^ ^^^^ 
^"m f# i#5 ^îïfef#5nw II 

This is definitely a standard imitation of Jayadeva's GUagovmda, But 
itagÎQWing descriptions of ubiquitous and interminable erotic acts, feel- 
ings, gestures and reparlees thoiigh declared to be spiritual and esote- 
ric, yet theysuggest nothing but exoteric erotic interest and apparent 
sensuousness. 



L KRISHNAMOORTHY 

THE CONTRIBUTION OF SOUTH ÎNDIÂ TO SANSKRIT 

LÎTERATURE WITH A SPECIAL REFERENCE TO 

KARNATAKÂ 

{A GENERAL SURVEY) " 



Thanks to the researches of scliolars in aocient Indian history aiid 
archaeology, weare now in a position to state that the datable history 
of Karnataka goes as far back as the Christian era, and the acbievements 
of the Karnataka ruiers form one of the mes t glorioos chapters in Indian 
history. Not onJy the famous kings among the Sâtavâhanas, Gangis/ 
Rastrakùtas, Cikkyas, Yâdavas, Hoyasalas and the Vijayanagara ruiers, 
but éveil feudatories like the Nayaks of Ikkeri, were great promoters of 
learning and very often great contributors to literature themselves. What- 
ever the religions persuasion of the rolers, the orîhodox Vedic religion, 
Jâiïîism and Saivisra, ail received equal encouragement attheir handsand 
asone might naturally expect, Karnataka did throw up great writers in 
Sanskrit, Prakrt and Kannada in the long period of its recorded history, 

The Western poineers in Sanskrit studies like Prof/ Max Millier 
felt so keenly the absence, after the epic âge in India, of any significant 
worksinSanskrit till the sixth centuary A.D., that they postulated the 
theory of a renaissance or ravivai of Sanskrit îearning. Even early 
archaeoîogîsts and epigraphists like B{ihler^ ^w 
of the above surmise on the évidence of dated inscriptions, are seen 
underrating the contribution of South Indiato Sanskrit poetry. Biihler 
observes : 'Itis, however, very questionable whether the poetic art had 
reached in Southern India that degree of development which it had 
reached at the spécial centres of intellectuai tife in Northern India." 
But, as ably pointed ont by Dr. D,G. Sircar, récent finds show that 
Biihier's doubts are imjustified, That the Iffvj'^i style wascultivated in 
South India is fully established by a numbcr of inscriptions in Karnatak a. 
Kubjâ, the author of the Tllagun# 



U S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

Sâûtivaramaîi (5th ceotury a.d.) was a master of varied mètres and strik- 
iiîg figures of speech; Ravikîrtî tfae famous poet of Piilikesin II, could 
deservedly lay cîaim to the famé of Kâlidâsa and Bhâravi on account of 
liis composition in the famous Aihoîe inscription (a.d. 637). 

Such exaraples of rare postic finish do indicate that Sanskrit 
poetiy was being rcgularly cultivated in this région in the period under 
siirvey. Some of the ancieat raanuscripts in drama and poetry, dis- 
covered in the présent century, go to confirm this conclusion, îhough 
many a great work, mentioned in epigraphical records, is irrecoverably 
lost. Thus the Datîakûsûîravrtîî a trestise on the FdM'^ chapter of 
erotics writt^m by the Ganga king Madhava lî (c 5th ceraury a.d,) and 
the Gaùga king Durvinîta^s (c. 6th century a.d.) Sanskrit version of the 
renowned Brhatkaîhâ (inPaisacî Prâkrt) of Gunâdhya, and the corament- 
ary on îhe difficult fifteenth canto of Bhâravi's ornate poem^ Kmtàrjmiya 
and Ganga king Sripurusa's (c 8th century a.d.) Gajasâsîra (a treatise 
on the training of éléphants) are nothing more than mère names tous, 
Even if some of tiie copper plates that mention thèse détails be regarded 
as later forgeries^ the facts recorded may be taken to represent genuine 
tradition. 

Ihù txhimctoî s. Tmil Ferungadai, (Brhatkaîhâ) (c 8ih century 
A û.) whicli speaks of itself as being based on a Sanskrit version, goes to 
make ît plausible that Durvinîta was the author of that Sanskrit version, 
particularly in the absence of Sanskrit versions of that work up to the 
lOthor 11 th century A.D. 

It is interestiug in this connection, to note that the original 
Bfnaîkatha d\%o hailcd from Kuntaladesa (an ancient name for parts of 
Karnâtaka) in the reign of a Sâtavâhana king by about the first century 
A.D. Later legcnds make it appear that he was a rival of Sarvavarman, 
îhe famous author of the Katantra Vyakarana in the court ofa Sâta- 
vahana king. Indeed, this gramraar is not only handy and simple, but 
alsopractical and popular. Its great popuîarity in distant landslike 
Tibet, Kashmir and Bengal in the centuries that followed, as against the 
more elaborate and more intricate grammarof Pânini indicates its uti- 
îiîy, To revert to the Brhatkathà, it Isa rare and signal monument to 
thegenius ofthe South in the matter of romantic and didactic taies, 
wîth flashes of buoyant and sunny humour. No wonder it served as a 
source book to the master-poeîs ofthe North like Subandhu and Bâna as 
weli as ofthe South, like Dandin, who vvrote on secuiar thèmes. It desêrves 
to be mentioned hère that, again, it was in the ^atavâhana court that the 
firstanthologyofsevenhundred lyric gems in Prâkrt, namely, GâtM- 
saptQSQîl {oT Safîasm) was compiled. Thèse love-songs are extremely 
tender and beautiful The calm and unsophisticated life ofthelndian 
people, especially in the villages amidst nature, is artfuily dcpicted. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] CONTRIBUTION OF KARNATAKA 15 

Sometimes we hear the man's voice, but more often the woman's, The 
women old and young, speak to the youtb, to îhe lovîng wonien, to their 
own hearts; yet their one thème is love. Thèse lively verses hâve influ- 
enced ali the later lyric writers, notooly in Sanskrit, but in otherîndiaii 
languages lîke Hindi. Bana iii his Harsacarîta, pays a glorioiis tribiite 
to îtas an 'imperishable and refined repertory of good sayings', Some 
scholars, however, think that this collection may belong to îhe fouith or 
fifth century a.d. 

The Avaniisundan'kaûtâ. discovered and edited recently, records a 
tradition that its iliustrious author, Dandin wasthe greaî grandson ofone 
Dâmodara. an immigrant to the Palîava court of h'arasimhavarman 
from Gujarat or so, that this Dâmodara, was agréât friend of Bhiravi 
and was honoured in the courts of the G-unga king Durvinîta, the Eastern 
Câlukya king Visnuvardhana and îhePallava Simhavisnu before he fînally 
settled in KaSc!. This information that ail the three rulers were con- 
temporaries, however, cannot be fulîy reconciled with inscriptional 
évidences. Yet it is enoiigh to establish that Bhâravi and Dandin wcre 
writers from the South and that they were honoured in the courts of 
Karnitaka rulers. 

Bharavi's Kirâmrjuniya is one of the most ceiebrated Mahakâvyôs 
(great epic poems) in Sanskrit. ît marks a new epoch in Sanskrit ornate 
poetry by giving greater importance to meaning rather iban to style 
{Bhâraver ar^ha-gauravam) , and to poctic description of natural settings 
and phenomeoa rather than îhe narration of incidents. Itis aîsothe 
first work in which verbal acrostics like ekâksari (verses made up of 
vvords containing the différent forms of a single letter) and gatapralyE" 
gâta (verses reading alike both forwards and backwards) bave been dis- 
playcd (especially in canto XV). Thèse aparî, Bhâravi stands oui as a 
poet of power and singular energy in introducing spirited dialogues, and 
we find cbarming images in almost every verse of his. though some of the 
conceits might appear far-fetched to modem taste, Hc provcd to be a 
"poets' poet" m the history of Sanskrit mahàkâvya î^nd set the standard 
once for ail for others to follow. 

In an inscription (c. 1129 a'd.) at Srâvanabeiagola,i mention is 
made of a Jaina poet Srivardhadeva, author of the glorious poem 
'CîîdâmanI*, eulogised by Dandin himseîf in the folîowing words - 

"If Lord Siva bore Ganga on the top of his matted hair, 
hère îs Srlvardhadeva who bears Sarasvatî at the tip 
of his tongue." 

1. Epigraphîa Carnatîca, II, No, 67 



16 S.V, UNiVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

^^: ^Pm mm ^m ^^^^: i 

Unfortunately, îhe work is not extant. 

That in créative literature, the Jainas took remarkable interest 
follows as a corollary from the patronage they received from Karnltaka 
kings who, in that period, were themselves of Jaina persuasion to a large 
extent. It is said in several Kannada inscriptions that one ascetic 
Sirplianandin was responsible for establisbing the Gafiga sovereignty. 

Différent from this sage is Jatisirnhanandî whose mahakavya u\ 
31 cantos, namely, Varâhgacarîîa has been recently edited by 
Dr A.N. Upadhye. Dr. Upadhye has pointed eut how this author might 
hâve lived at the elose of the seventh centnry a.d, and how a mémorial 
to him in stone is preserved up to this day at Koppal. The poem gives 
us echoes from Asvaghosa's Biiddhacarîîa and Saundaramnda^ and is 
racy and readable, v^ith occasional instructions of didactic master, It 
canbetakento represent Purmakavya (old epic style) since it includes 
dogmatic détails and polemical discussions. Nonstheless, its poetic 
merit is of a high order and the verses are melodious. 

Several snch early Jaina aiUbors of purëmkàvyas like Kmî Para- 
meswara (or Kavl-Paramesihl) are mcntioned by later poets like Jinasena 
(nineih century), author oî tho Âdîpurâm^ Câvundarâya (tenth centnry) 
and Vidirâja (elevanth century). But their works are ail unfortunately 
lost. 

The Jainas were also poineers in the composition of useful secular 
Works on Grammar. Prosody, Medicine, etc. Thus we hâve inscriptional 
références to Piîjyapàda allas Devanandin (fifth century or sixth century 
A.0.) as an author of a Nyasa on Pâninian grammar known as Sabdma- 
mra (though sometimes king Durvinîta himself is given the epithet 
Èabdavaîarakara), He was certainly the founder of a new System of 
grammar known as Jainendra Vyàkarana, whîch has recently been pub - 
lished (Benaras). From a perusal of the work, it appears that Deva- 
nandin was surpassing Panini himself in the matter of brevity, niaking 
ail the sûtras much more laconic by avoiding ail lengthy expressions. It 
provided a nucleus for further elaborate studies in the centuries that fol- 
lowed. It is in the nature of an abridgment of Pànini for ail practical 
purposes, 

Dandin deserves our considération now asamasterof Sanskrit 
prose and an early authority on Sanskrit poetics. Référence has already 
been made to bis newiy disoovered Avanîmndur%''kaîhà while discussing 



977 Parts 1 & 2 ] CONTRIBUTION OF ... ... KÂRNATAKA 17 

haravPs life and tiroes. Récent studies in the field indicate that this 
vanîîsundarîkaîhâ is itself possîbly the lost introduction to Dandin's 
ell known Dasakumâracariîa. Dandin was honoured in the Paîlava 
>urt of Narasimhavaniian (c. 630-668 a d.) and his famé had spread ail 
7Qt Karçâtaka, as is indicated by a subhïïsUa (pithy saying) of Vi jjika 
5. Vijayâ (c, 650 ad.), a poetess and queen of Candrâditya, the eldest 
tn of the mighty Cilukyan Emperor, Pulakesin II : 

m^mw^ Il 

"It is because Dandîn had no occasion to see me, of shîning dark 
mplexion that he raade the mistake of descrîbing Sarasvatî as ail 
lite.'* 

The allusion h to the benedictory verse of Dandin's celebrated 
rk on poetics, the Kïïvyudarsa. This work also served as the basis for 
; Kannda Kavirëjamarga ascribed to kîog Nrpatunga or Amogha varia 
h century a.d,) 

TliQ Kavyâdarsa which hassome verbal réminiscences ofBana, is 
three chapters. In the first, Dandin discusses the nced fora scîenti- 
study of litcrature, classifies the literary forms, and deals at length 
h the nature of literary styles, vaidarabhï bxlû gaudî. In the second, 
gîves a very élégant and graceful account of some thîrty and odd 
tâlattkuras or figures of speech. In the last chapter he treats of various 
es of È abdalankâras (figures of Word and sound) like yamaka and 
^prâsa. 

Dandinas popular prose work is the Dakakumïïracarita, The 
•les of the ten princes are truer to life than those of Bâna and their 
e less involved. The diction of Dandin bas been a by-word for grâce 

ease : Dandinah padalalityam; and his sprightly humour and vein 
atire will win the admiration of even modem readers. An întroductory 
le of the Dasakumaracarita is copied in the Pallava inscription of the 

th century at AmarâvatL^ Similarly, we find a poet Acala who com- 



Souih Indîon Inscriptions /, 26; Kîelhorn's lîst No, 1903. 

[In fact, the Amarâvati Paîlava inscription in question has heen assigned to 
about A.D. 1100 (not to the eîghth century) on paîaeographîcal grounds; and 
Prof. Kie]horn has pointed eut that the invocatory verse of this epigraph 'is an 
imitation cf the second of the intioductory verses of B^na's Kadamban\ but 
notoil^Siiïàm's DaéakuTnàracarîta. See EpigrapMa Indica^ VoLX.pp, 43-44-— 
Ed ] 



18 S.V, UNiVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

posed tvYo verses îe praise of natyàcârya Bharata and got them inscribed 
on a stone pillar at Pattadakal in the seventh century.-^ 

According to îhe findiîigs of Dr. A. Vetikatasubbaiah, the glorious 
Ganga court ofBûtuga and Rakkasaganga in the last part of the tenîh 
eentory gave patronage to a number of eminent writers in Sanskrit among 
the Jainas. Hemasena alias VidyâdhanaSjaya aîîas Dhanaîïjaya was tbe 
author of the iîrst tour-de force in Sanskrit mahakâvyas, namely, the 
Râghavapândavîya. This poem narrâtes îhè story ôf bdîh the epics, the 
Ràmâyam md îhQ Mababharata, simultaneousiy by raeans of puns. His 
student was Vâdibhasimha alias Odeyadeva ^/lûf^ Srivijaya who is we!l- 
inown as the author oftwo prose works after the mannerof Bâna, name- 
ly the Gadyacmîâmanl and Ksîracudâmanî. Thèse hâve Jain didactic 
storiesfor their thèmes. Hère, agaiii, it deseïves to be mentioned that 
Vîranandin, îhe author of the far-famed Candraprabhâpmam and Asaga 
who wrote the Vardhamanapurâna in Sanskrit becanie also so famous as 
to be alluded to by Kavicakrayartî Ponna. 

Turaing to early sacred and philosophicaî literature in Sanskrit, it 
îs very difficult in the présent state of scholarship to décide which of the 
aothors were front the Karnâtaka région, though we know in gênerai 
that Apastamba and Hiranyakesin, among renowned suîrakaras, (cora- 
posers ofaphorisms) and Samantabhadra among Jain authorities, were 
ail from the South. Epigraphical évidence, however, shows clearly that 
in Karnâtaka from the earliest times, the study of the Vedâs, 
Vedangas, Sàstras B.nd PurBnas in Smskrït was widely prévalent. 

It woiild not be wrong to sutmise that Srâgerî was a great centre 
for the philosophicaî activityof the great éankaracârya and some of his 
pBplls like Padmapada and Suresvara-Viivarïïpa. 

Though a large number of works hâve been los! by the ravages of 
time, even the few surviving works noticed above serve to show that the 
contribution of Karnâtaka to Indian culture through the médium of 
Sanskrit in the period (4th to lOth century a.d., under Sâtavâhanas, 
Kadambas, Pallr.vas and Gangâs, etc.), is neither mean nor negligible. 

The glorious reign of the Râstrakiïtas saw at once the flowering of 
literary activity both in Sanskrit and Kannada. The curriculum of 
advanced studies in this period was so wide as to include Veda, Vyâkarana 
Jyoiîsa, Sahffya, Mimâm^â, Puranas, Nyaya and Smrîîs. 

One of the epigraphs of this period mentions Kaumàra or the 
Kàtantra System of grammar in which speciaîists were available. The 
famous Gommentary {vrtti} on the Katantrasutras was written by Durga- 
simha belongîng tô this period. It not only explains but aïnplifies the 
te:?{:t. Dufgaslm hi bas aîso Written a gloss on his own vriîi, 

3, Kîelh&rrCs List No. 1042. " 



977 Parts 1 & 2 ] CONTRIBUTION OF KARNATAKA 19 

Like the Jainendra System, Karnâtaka founded another System of 
anskrit grammar renowned as the Saktâyana School. While compres- 
'mg PSnini and Jainendra in a convenient form, this Jaina Sâkatâyanas 
protège of the Ristraktita King Amoghavarf a I, anticipâtes already in 
is arrangement the example later followed by the Kaumudi texts. The 
Utras are arranged topic-wise for easy compréhension. Besides being 
ic author oF the sUîras known as èabdânukasana, Sâkatayana himself 
as aiso added hîs own commentary on them known as Amoghavriti, in 
onour of his patron. 

The history of the Râstrakiîtas was almost a forgotten chapter in 
le history of India till the end of the last century. The discovery in 
lis centiiry of numerous inscriptions and copper plates, nioslly in 
inskritj bas corne in handy to write a depeodable history of this great 
iling dynasty. Each one of the Sanskrit records is, indeed, a poem by 
self. Each of thèse Sanskrit plates is replète with the grâces and 
nanties of language met with in cîassicaî writers like Bâna and Bhâravi. 
ne of them, the Bagumra plate of Indra III dated ad. 9155 deserves to 
î noticed hère in particular. Its author is Trivikrania, the same as the 
ithor of the jBrst and only datable campû-kâvya in Sanskrit literalure 
z.; Nala-Campû; This establishes the fact that Karnâtaka had its own 
gnal contributions to make in îhe field of pore literary forms also. 

The origin of the ^'otà campU itself is obscure; but Prof R,S. 
ugali thinks that the word is of Kannada origin. 

Trivîkrama*s composition in prose and verse, both highly Iiierar> 
id embellished/runs to seven long chapters. He pays compliments to 
ba and Subandhu in the beginning. He does not slavishly folîow the 
iginal Mahabharata in hîs treatment of the Naîa story. He has made 
glily romantic and ingénions innovations of his own. Nala's minister 
utailiîa îs assigned an important roîe hère in bringing about the union 
Nala and DamayantL There are conventîonal descriptions of nature 
d the story ends with DamayantPs rejection of the îove-suit of the 

Apother ornate work from the pen of this author is Madalasa- 
mpû. Amoghavarsa I or Nrpatunga (a.D- 814-878} was himself a poet 
a v<?ry bigh order. A short and sweet philosophical lyric in Sanskrit, 
asnottararatnamallka is his composition, thoughit is sometimes wroogly 
iributed to Vimala or Sankarâcârya. The verses, in Âryà mètre, are 
: in the form of questions and answers, a figurative device known as 
asnottara Hîs Kavîrâjamarga in Kannada is modelled on the ceîebrated 
ivyUdarsa of Dandin. 

A noteworthy work on Indian mathematics written under the 
tronage of this renowned ruler is M^îhivîrâcarya's Ganita-sâra- 



20 S.V. UNÏVERSÏTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

sangraha, It is simpler than the work of Brahmagiipta and deals with 
geometrîcal progression. 

The Smfîi writers Kâtyâyana, Ângîrasa, Yama and Visnu are ail 
usually assignée to this period; one is net certain whether any of thèse 
hailed from Karnâtaka. 

Halayudha is a writer of a famous lexicon known after his name, 
htsiàts Kavirahasya and Mricsanjivani, The former is really a dhàtupuiha 
or list of verbs with meanings, written in verse. It explains the conjuga- 
tional peculiarities of roots having the same form, and îts préface 
raentions expressîy the patronage given to hira by Krsna 111, the last 
Râstrakiïta king. The îatter is a cotnmentary on the basic text of 
"pïo^ùày, VmgdiWs Chandas-sûtra, 

This was the golden âge which saw the rise of the great Âdvaîta 
philosopher Sankaracârya. He was given encouragement to estabîish his 
matha ai Srngeri. 

The numerous bhâsyaSy or learned coramentaries, written by him 
on the major Upanîsads, the Brahmasûtras and the Bhagavad Gitâ, taken 
together with his moving devotional hymns (stotras) and manuals of 
Philosophy, started a new âge in philosophical thinking and living. 
Some of his greatest disciples, like Padmapâda, the author of the 
Pancapâdika, Suresvara, the author of ihç^ Brhadaranyakasloka-'vartîka, 
Tmttiriya-slokavarttîka and Nahkarmyasîddhiy^tït aiso settled in Karnâ- 
taka. The great tradition of Advûîta ^as ihus born and nourished in 
this land. 

ït is a moot question among scbolars whether Mandana Misra was 
himself Suresvara and whether Visvarûpa was not his other name. The 
fact is further complicated by the suggested identities of Suresvara, 
Umveka and Bhavabhiîti in addition. 

The celebrated commentary called the BaJakridà on Yâjnavalkya- 
smrii is by Visvarûpa, who is generally identified with Suresvara. In 
the words of Mm. P.V. Kane : '*The style of Visvarûpa is simple and 
forcible and resenibles that of the great Sankara. He quotes profusely 
from Vedic Works, mentions the Carakas, the Kathakas and Vâjasaneyins 
and very often supports his position by quotations from the Rg-Veda, 
the Brahmanas and the Upanisads, though saturated with the lore of the 
Fûrvamtwamsà.^' 

Sarvajnâtman, the great systématiser of Sankara's thought, in his 
Samksepasariraka, was a pnpiî of Suresvara and is, therefore, to be 
assigned to this period. 



1977 Parts I & 2 ] CONTRIBUTION ÔF KARNATAliA 21 

Anoîlier very great writer wfao flourished iinder îhe Caiukyas of 
Leraulavada (or Vemulavada), feudatcries of the Râstrakûtas, was Ihe 
JaÎDa Somadevasuri. He continued îhe campU tradition started by 
Trivîkrama and took it to sublime heighîs. He wrote his Yasasnlaka \n 
Â.D. 959 while his patron was camping with his overlord Krsna lïl at 
Melpâdi in the Chittoor district. The work 'represents a lively picture 
of India at a time when the Buddhist, Jaina and Brihmanical religions 
werestill engaged in a coniest that drew towards it the attention, and 
well-iiîgh absorbed, the inteliectual énergies of ail thinking men', The 
storyisof the hero Yasodhara 's différent binhs and sufferings, popular 
among Jainas. But in the treatment of the same, Somadeva has shown an 
encyclopaedic genius that a schoiar today couîd reconstruct ail shades of 
Vedic, Agamic, Tintric and popuiar thought and wisdom curr@n£ in the 
tioîe by dint of patient rcsearch on this work. There is noîhijig secular 
or religions, social or political, that escapes îhe farflung net of the great 
author. It can be regarded as a unique work in Sanskrit literature. 

Somadevasuri was also a very proli fie writer and another work 
which deserves some considération hère i<î his treatise on Politics, (he 
mtmkyamrîa. ït is modelied on Kautiiya's ArîhasâsîrQ and has been 
recently translatée into Italian. Such is ils unique significance as one 
of the very few books dealing exclusively with Politics and state-craft, 
It has thirty-two chapters dealing, among other things, with the value 
of life, the sciences, the minister, preceptor, gênerai, envoy, spy, the 
saptmgas (the seven lirabs) of a State, judiciary, diploniacy. war and 
peace. 

The other works of this author, not extant today are: Sminavati-- 
Prakaram, Mukii-Cinîàmani and Mahendra- Mmali-sanja^^^ 

în the theological field too, the Jainas of this period produced 
monuraental works. Some of the most exhaustive and authoritative 
commentaries on the Jain Cannon koown as Sakkhandàgama were con> 
pleted under Râstrakûta patronage. Yîrasena and Jinasena were teacher 
and disciple who jointly completed the gigantic commentaries known as 
Dhavala and Jayadhavalâ together running to some 100,000 solkûs. 

^ Jinasena was also a master-poet who wrote the magnificent Adî^ 
purana deling with the epic story of Bharata and Bâhubali; It is a Kavya 

ZLIZTA\ '"'• ^^' 1 """^l '^'""^ '''^ voluminous remained 
mcomplete till it was completed by Jinasena's gifted pupil Gunabhadra 
whose supplementary work is knowa as the Umra^Furana. The import. 

S;Û:X P.„,°/a.''"°''^' -«..--pae.r, for a perW „f cc„.„,ic,, 



22 S.V, UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

Aaotlier literary work of Jioasena, equally significant, is the 
Fârsvabhyudayâ, which gives the life-sîory of Pârsvanatha, and at the 
same time, by a very ingénions device of samasyapûranâ, (a part of 
a stanza beingadded to another fo complète the sensé) incorporated 
the entire tQXi of KaiidSsa's Meghaàuta. For every single Une of 
Kâlidâsa, Jînasena adds three more of his own and açhieves the intended 
nieaning relating to Fârsvaîiâtha. This work bas proved most usefui 
in dec^ding Kâiidisa's text and readings. 

Asaga's Vardhamana-pumna m Sanskrit is also a work written 
la this period. Asaga was equally great as a poet in Kannada îiterature. 
Thîs work is refarred to in Jayakîrti's ChaHdontisasana, which is also 
a vcryinteresting work on prosody written by a Kamiadiga in the tenth 
century. Besides giving a succinct account of Sanskrit aiietres, this 
work dévotes a very valuable and significant section to Kannada 
prosody. 

Finally, this survey would be incomplète if the progress achieved 
by Jaina logic is not indicated. Just as Suresvara is the greatest name 
in the Hindu thought of this period, Vidyânanda is his equal in Jaina 
thought. Hs wrote his brilliant coramentary the Asjasâhasrt on 
Samantabhadra's Âptamlmâms^, Àptapariksây (an independent work) 
and other advanced polemical works. Vidyânanda, like Akalanka 
b^fore him, çriticises the doctrines of the Hindu and Buddhîst schoois of 
Philosophy. Manikyanandrs PaHfr^a-wwA:/ia-5w/ra Prabbâcandra's 

Ptameya-kamala-martân4a are celebrated texts of Jaina philosophy 
and are assigned to this period. 

The patronage extended to Sanskrit writers by the Western 
Câlakya kings of Kalyâna was almost unprecedented in thehistoryof 
Karnâtaka. There seems to bave arisen a heaithy compétition between 
rulers of the North like Bhoja and rulers of the South like Vikraniâ- 
ditya VI to secure the best poets and philosophers for their courts by 
ofîering them fabulons rewards. Hence weiind luminaries of all-ïndia 
famé like Vâdirâja, Bilhana and Vijnanesvara adorning the Càlukyan 
Court and making solid contributions to varions branches of Sanskrit 
learning. 

The Jaina Vâdirâja, in the court of Jayasimha II (Jagadekamalla), 
whose reign extended frora a.d. 1015 to '42 was indeed a star of the 
first magnitude in the galaxy of Jaîn writers in Sanskrit, deserving 
a place in the company of Samantabhadra and Akalaùka. His genius 
bas been deservediy eulogised not only in dozens of inscriptions ail over 
Karnâtaka,'* but also in Kannada literary works like Nâgavarma's 



4. E.C. VIII, 35-40, etc. 



W Parts 1 and 2] CONTRIBUTION OF KARNATAKA 23 

îvyâkksùffa ma ilnûnàlh^'s SiikimâracarV Below are given (in 
inslation) two of themany verses in MoIIfsenapras^sf! ai SravaHabela- 
la (twelfth centiiry a.d.) glorifyiïig Vâdirâja as a scholar aiid ever 
otorious debator : 

'*A speech which illumined the three worlds has îssued only 
from two persons on this earth; one (was) the kîng of Jinas; the 
other Vâdirâja." 

''In the victorious capital of the glorious CâJukya emperor 
(Cakresvara) (which i^) the bir^h-pîace of the Goddcss aPSpeech, 
the sharp-SGunding dmm of the victoriens Vidirij i suddenly 
roamsaboui. (The drum sounds) \Iahi% i c. 'sîrike' as thoogh 
its pride in disputationvvere /isîng; (it sounds 'JahîhV i.e., 'give 
up' as thoiigh it boasted of clear, soft, sweet and pleasant 
poetry.-'5 

Of the many works of Vàdiiâja, only the Yasodharacarïta, a short 

crative poem in four cantos ia about 300 verses, was pufaHshed in 1912 

om Tanjore), and io 1960 by the Karnâtaka Uiûversity. His longer 

îrary epic, Farsvanaiha carita. In iwelve cantos, was published in Î916 

Dmbay). But they hâve not received any wide attention outside the 

rrow circîe of Jaina scholars. His magnum opus, the Nrâyavinî- 

ya-fikâ, an exhaustive commentary on the philosophical and poîemical 

ssic of Akalanka called th^ Nyayavîn'àcaya afteer the manner of the 

ddhist Dharmakïrti's well known Prama^avlnrscaya, has been pub- 

led in two volumes only very recently. (by the Bharatiya Jnanapitha, 

si). Even a cursory glanée through thèse volumes will reveal how 

jirâja eminently deserved the titles saf-turka'Sanmukhûy syadvada- 

mpatr B:nû Jagadekamallavadî conferred on him by fhe Cilukyan 

peror Jagadekamalla. Vâdirâja is seen hère as an abie thinker 

iog elaborate critiques of ail the sixsjstemsof Indiin Philosophy and 

Liting in détail the arguments of siich eminent tbinkers of rival schools 

the Buddhist Dharniakîrti, as interpreted by Archata and Dharmot- 

a, tho Mimamsaka Kumarikibhatta and Vedântins like Sarikara and 

Manamisra. Hundreds of works and authors are referred to, and after 

lorough examination ofall, the Jaina theory of 5yâ^vâ<i^is established 

:he most impeccable metaphysical tfuth. This monuirieriUil work 

ch yet awaits critical stady by scholars bids fair to prove a gold mine 

)bilosophical ideas, but has been littîe known hitherto. Another work 

logic by Vâdirâja is the Pramananîrnaya (Bombay, 1917). It is a 

id compendium or haadbook on the various pramanas or instruments 

^alîd knowledge. 

Even as a poet, Vâdirâja deserves a high place. Though his 
svanâthacarita is an ornate epic on tht life of a religîous saint (based 

Translation by Holtzxh, E.I. ÏIIp. IB. 



24 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

on îhe story of Ganabhadra's Utîarapurâni) and fiill of conventioîia! coîi- 
ceits and iengthy descriptions. His Yasodharacarita is a spirited narrative, 
in meKîfluous verse of the ever fresh thème of woraan's frailty leading to 
wickedness, and of the wages of sin. Unlike the common run of Sanskrit 
love-poems whose thème is romantic love ending happily, we hâve hère 
a fresh VeaHstic taie based on a domcstic tragedy' where kappiness is 
disturbed by the vagaries ofa woman's heart, plunging one and ail în 
misery in birth aftcr birth, till religious wisdom dawns on chose that 
are given to reflection. There is a vein of satire whîch ridicules the wor- 
shipby masses involving violence on the one hand, and the animal 
sacrifices of the priestly class, on the other. The Tamil Yasodharakâvyam 
of unknown aiithorship (c. eleventh centnry a,d,) and the Kannada 
Yasodhara carîîa oï Janna (twelfth century), are seen to be heavily 
indebted to Vâdirâja's Sanskrit original. 

Pârsvanâthacarita giyts the date of its composition as a.d. 1026 
and mentions the 'Kaitaga^tira' or the bank of the river Ghataprabhâ, as 
theplace where it was written. This, coupled withVâdi raja 's spécifie 
mention of a number of earlier writers like Anantakirti and Vîranandîn^ 

proves very valuable to the liteniiy historianof Sanskrit. 

Alsofrom the pen of Vidiraja is the Eklbhâvastotra, one of the 
most popular hyrans among Jainas up to this day. It contains just 
twenty-five beamifiil and devotional quatrains and closes wiih a eulogy 
of the author. 

However, it is interesting to note, in this connection that in an in- 
scription of ad, 1036^ one Kâlâmukha îSaiva teacher, Lakulîsa Pandita 
^/irt^ Vadirudraganaof Balligâma (in the province of Banavâsi 1200) îs 
glorifiedin hyperbolic terms as defeating the formidable debaterVâdirâja 
himself: cf Vàdirâjamukhamardanam). This would serve to indicate 
how Jagadekamalla was tolérant of ail religious persuations in his vast 
realm, thoiigh he had a spécial prédilection in faveur of Jainism. 

We know that one Nâgavarman, a reputed Kannada author, was a 
Katakopadhyâya or Fanâlta in the court of Jagadekamalla (cf. *Jananathai 

Jagadekamalli '). Quite afew quotations from a lexical work in 

Sanskrit (the nanie of the work is not given,) now lost of Nâgavarman are 
fonnd in ihe commentary on the Yasodharacarita by Laksmana (of Ksema- 
puraor Gerusoppe) and the lexical work may possibly belong to thîs 
period. 

Dayapala, who was a pupil of Matisâgara and a fellow student of 
Vâdirâja; prepared a very uscful revised raanual ofthe topies of the 

6. B.C. Vol. I, No. 126, 



1977 Parts 1 & 2 ] CONTRIBUTION OF •.. ... KARNATAKA 25 

tëkatâyana-Vyâkarana known z^ tht Rupasiddhi. This work bas been 
/ery mucli praised ia several Kaûnada inscriptions.^ To quole ooly one 

/erse : 

^m %T ^ ^^\% ^^îF^Tefr "^mi il 

The work Rûpûsfddhi written by Dayâpâla, the kiîig of ascetîcs, 
shines brighter than the Sabdanusâsana. 

The Caltîkyaîi emperor Vikramâdîtya VI was a patron of the great 
Lashmirian poeî: Bilhana who immortaîised him in an ornate epic, the 
^ikramânkadevacanta. What Bâna dîd for King Harsa in ornate prose, 
iilhana did for Vîkramâditya VI, in verse. In Sanskrit literature, cons- 
dcuoiisly déficient in historical Works, the Vikramankadevacarîta in IS 
antos is one of the noteworthy works which has a historical personage 
s the hero; and despite its flair for the mythological and the hyperbo- 
ical, it holds the attention of a historian and a literary critic alike even 
3day, The work is aiso of interest as giving a very detailed autobio- 
raphy of Bilhana, the aiithor, and helps us to get a vivîd picture of the 
ifeofa travelling pandit in mediaeval India from court to court of 
rinces, proud of his art and sure of his honour. 

Bilhana's nostalgie meniories ofhis sweet Kashmirian home are 

adeed lovely : 

"What shall ï stng ofthat spot, the ancient home ofwonderful 
legends, the sportive embellishment of the bosoni of Mount 
Himalaya? One part bears the safîron in its native loveliness, 
the other the grape-pale like a eut of juicy sugarcane on tbe 
Saraytî's banks', 

Bilhana drank deep at the fountains of poetic and scholarly lore 
1 that homeland of learning (Saradâdesa), and travelled widely 
îroughoutthe length and breadth of India, visiting cities like Kanya- 
ubja and Kâsî, Prayâga and Ayodhyâ in tbe Nojth, Somanâthain 
le West and Gokarna in the South^ The city of Dhârâ mourncd> to 
se the poet's own words, that she missed the privilège of weîcoming 
le great poet, sînce the munificent Bhoja had just then expired. 

The poet further States : 

*' In villages, in 'provincial and royal cities, îâ Ibrests and 
groves, in ail lands sacred to Sarasvati, the wîse and the fools, 



7. E-€, Vol, VUh Nos. 35, 36, 37 etc. 

8. B.C. Vol. VU; I, 39. 



26 S.V. UNlVERSiTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

the old and the young, men and women, everywhere, each and 
ail, recite his verses with treaiorsofjoy." (caïUo XVIIIj 89). 

Itwas, however, only in Vikramaditya, theKarnâtaka empcror, 
îhat Bilhana found a patron of his dreams, a patron moregenerous 
than eveîî Bhoja 

The Poet says : 

''The chief of wise men (Bilhana) turning his face from common 
prioces, roamed, fiill of curiosity leisurely, over the Southern 
land. ........ There the lucky poet received from the Calukya 

king, the terror of the Colas, the dignity of ' Vidyipati' (îhe 
Chief Pandit), distinguished by the grant of a blue parasol and 
an éléphant in rut.'' 

la sheer gratitude, Bilhana proceeds to compose the biography 
of his patron, in sweet and melodious style, making him a véritable epic 
hero, an equal of Ràma and BhL^na, a hero of many battles, a Madana 
of many queens, and a favoarite of Lord Siva Himseîf. 

The Vikramankadexacariia is a mahâkâvya, par excellence, replète 
with classical imagery, and brimming wiîh poetic fancies. And Bil- 
hâna's style approacheg the perfection of Kâlidâsa himself in grâce and 
ease, élégance of thought and aptness of imagery, range of sentiments 
and wealth of suggestion [dhvmî), ïn the mahàknvya manner, we hâve 
descriptions of the seasons and royal sports^ and a svayamvara scène of 
the Karahâta princess who chooscs the hero as her husband in an opcn 
assembly of princes. 

We might note hère a few items of historical interest which can be 
gleaned from the Vikramâhkadevacarita, The work starts with a 
legendary account of theorigin of theCâlukya race and speaks highly 
of Tailapa who wrest-d the kingdom from the powerful hands of Râstra- 
kûta emperors, Jayasimha lî and others sre just mentioned and 
Ahavamalîa (â.d. 1040-1069), the hero's father, is described at some 
length, We are told that he conquered the Colas, and stormed Dhirâ 
from which Bhoja (the Paramâra ruler) had to flee (canto L 91-96). 
He destroyed the power of Karna, king of Dâhala (canto I, 102) and 
erected a piilar of victory in the Southern océan, (canto 1, 3) after 
storming Kânchî, and built the city of Kalyâna. 

The chief victories of King Vikramâditya, described in thecpîc 
are those over the king of the CoUs. Rajiga, the king of Veiigî, and 
the rulers of Kerala and Cakrakota. 



1977 Parts t & 2 ] CONTRIBUTION OF ... ,. KARNÂTAKA 27 

A very popular work in Sanskrit, aiso frora the pen of Bilharia, 
îs tlie Caurapancâsikâ ov Bilhmakavya, a lovely lyric anthology of fifty 
erotic verses. In sensuous strains are poiired forth hère a îovcr's 
recollections of the pîeasures he bad in the company of his beloved. 
Almost every verse has the refrain. 

' Eveil now, I remeinber ' 

li vividly pictures the one or the other feature of his beloved's charms. 
Pre-fixed to it, perhaps by a later hand, wefind a romantic taie 
explaining its origiîi. Bilhana is portrayed as the tutor of a princcss 
Candralekhâ or Sasikalà, the daughter of Vairlsimha, a king of Gujarat. 
It is made out that there was aloveaffair between the teacher and 
the prêt ty pupil; and that the poet was condemoed to death by the 
furious father. On the vvay to the place of execiition, the poet, lost 
in love, appears to hâve uttered thèse verses; and the king who heard 
them, relented and seems to hâve spared the life of the poet, giving 
his daughter also in marriage to him. It is diSicult to vouch for the 
historicity of this story. 

Ah other work which came to be written under the patronage of 
this mighty Câîukyan emperor, and whose authority has shaped tbe 
livcs of générations of Indiaiis up to the présent time, is the renowned 
MUâksarn of Vijîiâneévara. It is no doubt a commentary of the ancient 
S/wff/ of YàjSavalkya, but it is raach more than a commentary: it 
appears to be a compendium of ail ancient Smrtîs, Dr. P.V. Kane 
rightiy observes : "The Mîîâksara of VijEânesvara occnpies a unique 
place in Dharmasastra literature. Its position is analogous to that of 
the Mahâbhasaya of PataSjali in Grammar, to thdit of tht Kavyaprakësa 
of Mamraata in poetics. It represents the essence of Dharmasastra 
spéculation that prcccded it for about two thousandyears, and it 
became the fountain-head from which Sowed fresh streams of exegcsis 
and developraents. In the décisions of the courts in British India, the 
Mimksarâh of paramount authority in severaî matters of Hindu Law, 
such as adoption, inheritances, partition etc.^ 

Consideriûg the systematic approach of the author on légal points 
in a style both compact and cohérent and revealing his vast érudition 
in légal lore as well as a sharp logical acumen, one need not be surprised 
at the authority wii h which this work came to be invested in the sub- 
séquent centuries* 

We now pass on to the reignof Vikramadîtya'sson SomesvaralII 
(a.d, 1127-1138) who bore the significant, îhough somewhat 
ambitions title of 'sarvajna. "the omniscient one"). Hecould assume 



9. Mist&rfcffPhamas^^^^ Vol I (1930) p. m. 



28 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

thîs title only because he undertookj for the first time m Sanskrit literary 
history^ a project of something like a universal encyclopaedia of ail the 
arts and sciences kûown in his time. The wonder is that he successMly 
côBûpleted his gigantic undertaking and gave us the work koown as the 
AbhUasîtârtka cînmmam, (literally, Hhe Philosopher's Stone that yields 
whatever one wants') or MmasoIIasa (literally, ^Mind-refresber'). ît 
speaks of itself as a book of wisdom that benefits one and ail {sàstram 
nsvopakarakam) and as a 'universal edacator' {jagadacâryapustaka) . The 
scope of the book is so exîensive that it can rightiy claimthese tities. It 
présents the cream of Hindu Culture at its besî in ail its diverse branches, 
before it was rudely shakan by forcign invasions. As Dr. Shama Sastry 
points ont, *thîs is the first book in Sanskrit literature which does full 
justice îo the Dravidian élément in fndian culture in important fields like 
architecture and sculpture, iconography and fine arts like rousic and 
paints, augury and social customs. sports and entertainments, including 
topics like cookery and rattle-drum {budnbnàïke in Kannada), cock-fight 
and snake-charms'. 

We may now try to form a geoeralidea ofthis universal encyclo- 
paedia, the ManasoUasa, which is both luminoos and voluminous. ït 
comprises ôffive scores of chapters, dealing with exactly a hundred 
topics, ment for the édification of the people in gênerai and the princes 
in particular. The hundred chapters are divided equally under Five 
Books of twenty chapters each. 

la connection with thèse subjects of chiefly secular interest, 
practically every branch of Sanskrit iearning is intelligently summed up; 
and the Mànasoîlâsa remains to this day ihe only exhaustive volume 
which tieats succinctly of such varied subjects as Polity, Astronomy, 
Astroiogy, Diaiectics, Rhetoric, Poetry, Music, Dance,Painting, Archi- 
tecture, Medicine, the training of horses and éléphants, and dogs. 
There is, in fact, no other single book which gives us an account of the 
Indian ideas regarding Arithmetic and décimal notation, préparation of 
calendars, omens, auguries, paîmistry. Horticulture, treatraent of ani- 
mal diseases, Mining, Alchemy, gems and precious stones, marriage 
and child-rearing, cookery, liquors, beverages, conveyances, scents and 
cosmetics. 

Thoroughly practical and secuîar in outlook as the work is, there 
are îittle or no digressions into accounts ofVedic gods and sacrifices, 
rituals and cérémonies, or even of Vedânta and other Systems of Indian 
Phiîosophy. We get also a very graphie picture in this work of a typical 
royal &riar, with places assigned to ladies, ministers, feudatories, offi- 
cers ranks, poets, singers, debaters, dancers etc: 

Thc^ Mànasoîlâsa is thus a unique'encyclopaedic work, of great 
gênerai interest. ït is written mostly in the popular amspbhmQiî&, with 



1977 Parts 1 & 2 ] CONTRIBUTION OF KARNAÏAKA 29 

occasional prose passages. ïts style is easy and lucid, and yet, inore 
often than not, poetic. The miscellaneous nature of the topics treated, 
in thfc voluminous work migbt possibly indicate that it might hâve been 
the work ofband of experts in the court ofSoraesvara, rather ihan the 
Personal composition of the royal author. 

Another protège of Somesvara was possibly the Jaina composer 
?àrsYSidcva7^ho ^TotQ the Sangicasamayasâro, în the field of music we 
bave again another authoritative vvork, the Sangitacûdamûnî from tbe 
pen of the next Caîukyan emperor, Jagadekamalîa îï (ad, 1138-50). 

Two other works, perhaps of the tenth century or se, which 
)ossïbly belong to the p^riod of thèse later Câiakyas under Taila are 
3hanaiïjaya's Namamalâ, a Sanskrit lexicon, and Jayakïrd's Chandonusâ- 
wîa, a work on prosody (éd. by Prof H.D* Veiankar, Bombayj. The 
atter gives some interesting observations on Kannada raetres also. 

Many eminent Advaita writers flourished during this period, The 
^yayamakaranda, Nyïïyadîpdvalîmià Pramanamâ^à are three gréa t works 
if Ânandabodhà Bhattâcârya. The Brahmaprakasika referred to by Cit- 
nkha and Jîîânottama Misra's commentary on Suresvara's Varîika are 
he Works even anterior to Ânandabodhà. Anubhtïtisvariîpa, the teacher 
f ÂnandajSâna, has comraented on ail the three works of Anandabodhà. 
'itsukha and Sukhaprakâsa hâve also commented upon the Nyayamakam 
inda of Anandabodhà; The Frakotârîha or Prakotârthavivarana is a com- 
ïentary on the BrahmasUtra^bhàsya; ïi is referred to in the Sîddhântalesa" 
mgraha. The Vedàntakaiimudi, referred to in the Siddhantaksa^ also 
ppears to be a work of this period. The PùncQpadîkàvivarûna by 
rakâsâtman and Tattvoddîpana by Akhandananda are the works on the 
ne of the Fjrar^wa Schoolof teachers. 

The disappearance of the Câlnkya power was followed by the rîse of 
te Yâdavas of Devagiri and the Hoyasalas of Dvirasamudra. Undcr the 
âdavas we find reputed writers likeHemâdri who wrote iS'mm' digests 
i^ih^ Caturvargacintamani. The Mahâvîdyandambana of Vâdîndra 
oked much interest in later writers. Vâdîndra wasa religous eounsellor 
the Yadava King Singhana of Devagiri, Bhuvanasundara Suri wroté a 
mmentary, cdiWtà th^ Vyakhyânadipika on the MahSvidy&vfdambana^ 
ïQ Êukîimukrâvafiof 3d,\hmà, which is an anthology of siibhaskas. and 
t Sangitaratndkara whïch is an authoritative work on musie by Sârfiga- 
va were inspired by the Yadavas. 

Tradition has it that the great Srivaisnava teacher^ Ramanuja, 
is given asylum by Hoysa la Visnuvardhana and that his great pliilo- 
phical Works were written in the Hoysala State. Confirmatory 



30 S.V, UNIVERSÎTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

évidence, however, for the tradition is not yet availabîe. Agréât 
Sanskrit poet who adorned the Hoysala court (Thirteenth century) of 
king Virabaîliîa was Vidyacakravartin. He held siich titles as samskria- 
sarvahhauma and sahajasarvajna. His works are : Tbe Sanjïvm 
a commentary on the ÂimïkBrasarvasva^ Sampraduyaprakailni - acom- 
mentary on ihe Kavyaprakasa, Vimpakmpancasika - a poem, and 
Rukmînîkafyam — a play. His son, sakalavidyacakravarîîn, wrotc 
Gadyakarnamrta, a prose panegyric of his patron. Asarapleofthe 
Sanskrit poetry cultivated by the Hoysala court, in Dr. J.D. Derrett*s 
English rendering, is given below : 

A forest-dweiling maiden shy 

Roams in the city of thy foe- 

Ballâlaj who art lord of ali :~ 

A nobie city left to die. 

Her eye is caught by flashing fire 

From gems dropped heediess on the ground- 

She fancies charcoal embers spread, 

And quickly, lest they first expire, 

BIows on themtinysandal, chips, 

Her eyes half-ciosed against the ash : 

No incense rises, but a swarra 

Of bées seeks fragrance from her lips. 

They hover close : she think them smoke. 

(Strange errors thy jast wars provoke :) 

Among Vîrasaiva writers too there was great literary activity 
during the twelfth century, and in case some late author has not 
fathered the work on Sripatipandita, his Srikarabliasya wili rank as 
theeariiest contribution of the Vîrasaivas to Sanskrit pbilosophical 
litcrature. But the genuineness of the authorship has often been 
impugned by modem scholars. We find Kaviràja, a poet from Bana- 
vasi (cA.D, 1200) popularising the tradition of dvîsandhamkâvya, or 
poetry which can yield two stories in one work, by writîng the Rsghava- 
pandaviya. 

If Karnataka provided an asylum for the Vedantîc teachers, 
Sankara and Râraânujaj it was the very birth-place and home of 
activity of the celebrated champion of Dvaita> Madhvâclrya, whose 
date has becn worked out to be between a.d. 1239 and 1317 by Dr. Saie- 
torej^ Some 37 Works are ascribed to Madhvàcârya, thechief aniong 
them being the Guâhlmsya, Olîatâîparya, Sûîrabhasya, Anubhâsja^ 
Mahabhàraîatâîparya-nîrnaya, Pramàmlaksma^ Taîtvasahkhyàna^ Mâyâ" 
vïïdakhanàana , Tatîvoddyoîa, Vismtatîmvinfmaya, the others forraing 
giosses on the Upanisads mostly* 

10. Ancknî Karnataka, y oh l, ^. Ail. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] CONTRIBUTION OF . ... KARNATAKA 3! 

But it was with the establishment ofthc Vijayanagara empire in 
A'D. 1336 that tlie heyday of Karnataka history reaclied every dcpartment 
of life and culture. Naturalîy, the Karnataka contribution to Sanskrit 
reached its zénith under ihe unstinted patronage of thèse rulers upto 
the end of the sîxteenth century, 

The most notable literary figures in this golden âge of revival of 
old learning were the brothers Mâdhava and Sayana, Both held 
mînîstcrial posts in the reign of Bukka, and under tfaeir guidance 
available knowledge in ail branches of Sanskrit study, secular and 
sacred, was systematised and wriîten down in the form of manuais and 
text books. The following standard Works are from the pen of Madhava 
on Brâhmanic religion : the Parâsarasmrîhyakhyâ, Kâiamâdhmiya and 
Jaimirdyaftyâyamalâvîsîara, 

He is traditionally identifîed with Vidyaranya, the great Advaîta 
philosopher-statesman, while sonie scholars are chary of accepîing the 
identification as genuine. If the tradition be true, then theclassical 
Works of xhù Advaita sy%tQm^ namely, the Vivaranaprameyasangraha, 
Jîvanmukîîvîveka B.né Fancadasi will ail be from Madhava's pen afier 
ht s.ssumtà sannyâsa and took îhenameof Vidyâranya. The popuîar 
biography of Saàkara called Sahkaravîjaya is aiso ascribed îo Madhava; 
but internai évidence shows it lo be the work of a much latcr author 
known as Abhinavakàlidlsa in the Vijayanagara court. 

The work of Siyani is raore thanamazi ng. For the first time 
in the history of îndia. ail the Vedic scriptures - the truly extensive 
Samhitâs and the md.]OT Brâhmanas oî tht four Vedas-werç fully explained 
and annotated word by word in Classical Sanskrit. For Vedîc exegesis, 
Sâyana's Bhasya is an invaluahîe key embodyîng ancient tradition, and 
even modem scholars who differ from him in détails of interprétation 
hâve recognised the indispensable help of ihe Sâyanabhasya. This in 
itself is more than a life work; but we hâve aîso from Sâyana's pen the 
following standard Works, each a compendium of merit and realiy 
astounding in size; the Subhïïsitasudha nidhi {a,n anthoiogy), Karmanpaka 
(smrii) Yajnatanîrasudhamdhi (ritual), Alankarasudhânidhi (poetîcs), 
Pumsarikasudhïïmdhi {purana) , and Mâdha viya Dhâtuvpii {on roots) . 
Some scholars hâve suggested that Sâyana most hâve utilized the services 
of a nurnberof Pandits who wrote Works in his name. 

I hâve proved elsewhere that the author of the celebrated^arM- 
darsanasangraha is Sâyana's son MÂdlim'à alias Mâyana and not 
the original Mâdhava -Vidyaraijya.'^ I hâve since obtained évidence to 



* Introduction to Sayana *s Subhâsltasudhmtdhî, Karnataka Uni ver si ty;Dharwar , 

:' ■;i968. ::■••■■•■■■.•■■: .••y'^' '■.■■■■■;■■■■■ ■■ ^ ■'■■;• '•/■*■.■•■:■ 



32 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

show that the author of BoJhâyinmûîrahhâsya, so long attributed to 

Sâyana, is reilly Sâyani's grandson aiid a soa of Singtiana. The initia! 
verse itself in thc work, so far iinpublished, reads as follows : 

t?^m ^w% Rî^m^î; I! 

This is îhe reading in a Ms. at Gokarna as well as in another hU. 
at Madras commaoicated to me by Dr. K. Kunjunni Raja. 

I hâve also shown that the Vedabhasyakïïra Sâyana, though a réci- 
pient of land grants in Nellore district of AndhiaPradesh, was from 
Karnàtaka on the linguistic évidence of his name and thatof his sons.** 

At the same time we hâve another Mâdhava (mantrin), a disciple 
of the Saiva teacher Krij/âsakti, who wrote a comnientary on the Sma- 
samhità, The Nanârtbaraînamâlâ, a lexicon, was written by Irugapa 
minister of Harihara IL 

We find a woman writer too in this period, Gangadevî. She was 
the queen of Kampana, sonofBukka, who conquered the Cola territory 
for Vijayanagar, and in her charming poem, the Madhuravîjayay she 
eulogiezes the conquest of Madhurâ by her hiisband. Its poetie merîts 
are of a very high order. 

Bhoganàtha, a brother of Sâyana, is also known to bethe author 
of many works. He was a couasellor of Sangama IL He was a poetof 
a hîgh order, and Sâyana had a good opinion of his brother's literary 
abilities. On the basis of the quotations in Sâyana's AkhMrasudhà- 
nîdhi, we can gather the names of about six works, otherwise lost ta us. 

L The Udâharammàlâ. This is a collection ofstanzascomposed, 
as examples for the rules laid down in the Alankarasasira 
(Rhetoric); a spécial feature about the stanzas is that ail of them 
are in praise of Sayana. 

2. The Ramollïïsa is a poem relating to tht Ramayam story. 

3. The Tripura-Vijaya has for its thème the story of Siva's victory 
over Tripura, 



** Journal ofthe Kannada Sahitya Pansât, Bangalore, 1972. 



1977 Parts I & 2] CONTRIBUTION OF KARNATAKA 33 

4. The Srhgâramanjari is full of verses dealing with the sentiment 
of love. 

5. The Mahâganapatistava and The Gaurînâthasataka which are 
two stotras in praise of Ganapati and Siva respectively. Bhoga- 
nâtha's verses hâve a limpid fiow and ihey are pregnant with 
tbought. 

Praudhadevarâya ÏI (a.d. 1426-48) wrote the Ratîratnapradipika 
a fext-book on erotics. Under Devarâya, we find the court-poet 
Dindima writingtheornateepics the Ssiuvâbhyudaya and Rmâbhyudaya 
and in the reign of Achyutarâya was composed the Acyutarâyâbhyudaya 
AH thèse are semi-historica! poems. A poetess, Tirumalambâ, wrote 
the Varadàmbikàparinayacampû in praise of her patron Acyutaraya. 
Krsnadevarâya himself was reputed to hâve been the author of poems likc 
the Madâlasacariia and plays iike the Jâmbavatîkalyâna. His court-poet 
Lolla Laksmidhara wrote the DaivajnavÙâsa, which is an encyclopaedic 
work, besides a commentary on Sankara's Saundaryalaharî . 

^OfVîrasaiva works, mention may be made of Pâlkuriki éotna- 
naiha s Somanatha Bhàsya (Basavarsjiya) written in the court of Vïra 
PralapaRudra II. He also wrote the Rudra Bhàsya, Astaka, Pancaka, 
Nmaskarajadya^ Aksarànka-gadya, Panca-pràrthana-gadya, Basavo- 

5™/«ra. by Snpati Pandita was another monumental work of the 
penod expounding 5flA:a- VisfsfàdvaUa. 

n»'-^^^f* "'"''' '° *^° ^'^^°'^ °f Sanskrit literature Hke Vedanta 
aiid Vadiraja (Dvaitm) were ail patronised by the Viiayanaear Cour/ 

Te wrt;?'^ ""' t ^'°'-^- ^ -«"'- -f coLentarfeJlXhoS 
werewntendunng this period by the adhérents of différent relie oTs 
ects wh,ch cannot be mentioned hère. We may note in m^ngtl âuhe 
ageofereative writingwasoverand had given place to an a^eTf nan afs 
tracts and compendiums in every branch of study. manuals, 

courts InJtf ^"^*^'^*'°" °f Sanskrit learning continued even in the 
^B^^XZ:':u^7^!^:''^' °^ encyclopaedicworï: 

consists of'S^,t e" nd i ?he essen^^^^^^^^ I'' ^''' 

coming within the p.rview o? the v2l\L u r""' °^ Knowledge 

materialofinteresttohistoriansaL «tf/ '^^'""'"- ^'^"« '^ 

Phy ofBasavesvaraandtSrdinrôfTh T'' accounts of the biogra- 

Phy of india, Town-planning Str tt^^^^^^^^ ^^°S^«- 

manoeuvres, Théâtres PainHno n ' \conography, Music, army 

neatres, Pamting, Dancng, Astrology, the training of 



680 — E. 5 



34 S.V. UNIVERSITE ORIENTAL JOURNAL ; [Vol XX, 

horses, cows, éléphants etc., besides matters of religions interest ciifled 
from varions Saiva Âgamas atid Puranas. The book deserves a critical 
édition, Another work of the same author is the Siéhadîasuradruma, an 
antliology of poetic genis. The well-known Kannada poet Sadaksaradeva 
wrote the poem Kavlkarnarasâyana^ which is published but in part. 

In the eighîeenth century too we fînd Sarvadhikari Kalale Naîîja- 
ràja of aMysore under Krsnarâja 11 (1734-60) patronising poets likc 
Nrsimhakavi who wrote the Nanjarajayasoblwsana (poetics) after the 
manner of Vidyanatha's Prataparudrayasoblmsûm, NaSjaraja himself is 
the author of a highly praised work on music, the Sangîtagangadhara. 

The post Vijayanagar period was mainly an âge of commentaries 
and tracts iiî literature as wel! as philosophy. In the varions courts of 
Mysore rulers as we!l as Marâtha chiefs in Karnataka, in the holy 
mathas of the différent ÂcâryaSj including Jainas, in the modem 
period too there hâve been hundreds of Sanskrit scholars conver- 
sant in traditional as well as modem Sanskrit scholarship. It is impos- 
sible in the brief span of a paper to cite thèse by name, 

Even îhis rapid survey is enough to indicate the nature and extent 
of the contribution ofKarnâtaka to Sanskrit literature. The contribu- 
tion has been in al! fields and has extended uniformly over the centuries, 
It has been solid and conspicuous in the case of religion and philosophy, 
and signal and unique in certain forms of literature like the campumd 
encyclopaedic works. It has been remarkable mihc Mdofdharmamstra, 
historical poems and music. It has been of no mean order in the matter 
of the oîher sciences and the arts. In point of commentaries too, 
Karnitaka may well be proud of its contribution. 



Miss GEETA JONWAR 

A NOTE ON VEDÂRTHASÂMGRAHA 



The Vedmhamm^Yaha of Sri Ramâmija occupies a unique plaee in 
Indian Philosophicaî literature in gênerai and in Vedaiîîic lîteraturein 
particular. It embodies ail the tenets of Visistadvaîta-Vedanta in a 
concise form and hence ils study is indispensable to a student of that 
System of philosophy. In the words of Sri M. Hiriyanna, Tedartha- 
sciipgraha is an independent treatise explaining in a masterly way bis 
(Rimanuja's) philosophie position and pointing ont the feasîs for it In 
the Upamsads'} 

Before making any comments it wouîd not be undesirabîe to survey 
the contents of the Vedânhasamgraha. Tbe author opens with saluta- 
tions to Lord Visnu, his htadevata and the sage Yamuna and proceeds to 
the immédiate subjeet of discussion. The study of the Upanîsads alone 
leads to the true understanding of the relationship between the individual 
self and the Suprême. The essence of Âdvaita philosophy, that the 
undifferentiated consciousness alone is Brahman, the identity 
of whora with the Âtman is proclaimed through sayings such as 
Uat tvam asV; Bhâskara's bhedahheda view, namely that the sinless 
Brahman is associated with sin due to the présence of upadhis; and 
Yâdavaprakaàa's bhedahheda viewpoint, namely Brahman is capable of 
becoming sentient and non-sentient things even without upadhis; ail 
thçscthree views hâve been examined bythe author in the light of 
scriptural sayings and logic and hâve been systematîcally refuted. 
Ràminuja thcn puts forth his constructivestandpoint that consistsof- 

1. The correct knowledge of the relation of cause and effect 
between Brahman and the universe leads to the further knowledge 
that the effect is an attribute of the cause. 

2, The causal state of Brahman consists of the existence of indivi» 
dual selves and physical nature in a subtle and undifferentiated 

m ill.i . ~. . i n iii . .. » i .111... „„ i,i» iii, „ i..i^^.i.., w i|i,.,...»— 1.^— .1— .w,*-i I. — ..I M » Il i..i - ii I M — .i- w .ii.. ».»«.■ ...i. >. .1. I ■ -i . Il ■■■ - ■ ■■"■■ 

1 » M. Hiriy anna : The Essentials of Indian Philosophy, p. 176. 



36 S.V, UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

form iiî Him whereas the effectuai state of Brahman is when îhey 
abide îe Hîm in a gross and manifesîed condition. 

3. Ail terms indicative of jîva, prakpi, ttc,^ dénote Brahman 
alone. 

4. The quintessence (that forms the heart of the wiiole) of scrip- 
tures is enumerated along with the interprétation and reconci- 
liation of mutually opposed scriptural passages, 

5. The Lord being propiîiated through actions in conformity with 
His will confers upon the devotee a holy disposition and thereby 
enkindles in him a désire to tread the path of piety and right- 

eonsness. 

6. Having collected a substantial amonnt oî punya (merit) throngh 
total self-surrender at the lotus îike feet of the Almighty, with 
the feeling of bhakti (aronsed in him), does a devotee become 

worthy of divine grâce. 

7. The author through the systematic discussion of various passages 
form scriptures lays down with emphasis that Narayana alone 
is the highest being. 

Further the contentions of Prâbhâkaras, namely (i) karyârthovûda, 
î«e. the sensé of words conveys some meaningat first only from sentences 
enjoining action; (ii) vyutpatti-abhâ?avëda/i.Q. the sentences defining 
Brahman B.S satyam, jnânam, a^anmm etc., do uotconveyany meaning 
due to the absence of any enjoining ofany action and many others hâve 
been refûted. The nature and characteristics of Lord Visnu and Srî- 
the mother of the Universe, hâve been well delineated. The impersonal 
character of the Vedas along with the various nietaphysical principles 
hâve been dealt with. Much stress has been laid on the service of the 
Lord and saying such as 'service is a dog's life' hâve been explained as 
service ofone who is unworthy of the same is dog's life, Parnbkaktiy 
Le. knowledge that has matured into suprême dévotion is the only path 
that leads one to the salvation in the form of unioE with the Suprême. 
The author concludes with a wish that this work Vedârihasamgraha 
which is intended for those wise andopen-ffiindedpersons whoaregifted 
with discriminative insight into the essential and non-essential, will find 
worthy readers. 

A quick perusal will reveal the author's ardent quaiity of esta- 
blislîîng his own view only after proper scrutiny and systematic réfu- 
tation of rival view poinls on the subject in question. This tendency can 
be viewed in the réfutation of bhedabheda doctrines, Prabhakara^s view 
point and many others which incidentally give the reader a probe into the 
author's deep insight and analytical bent of mind* 



1977 Parts I& 2] A NOTE ON VEDARTHASAîilGRAHA 37 

Eternal querries like, 'Who am I ?', 'What is the nature of the 
Suprême?'. 'How are tlie two related ?', etc., hâve been put forward 
and an earnest attempt to solve the samehasbeen made. According to 
Râmânuja, Nàrâyana is the highest being and ail terras whether indi- 
cative of Âtman on prakrti signify the Suprême alone, as seen from the 
foUowîng : 

BrahiBan himself lias been described as the effect baviiig for his 
mode configuration consisting of prakrîî, pumsa^ mahat, ahankâra, tic, , 
and it is the knowledge of Brahoian in the casoal state that ieads to the 
knowledge of alL^ 

Though the individual selves are essentiaJly of the nature of pure 
mowiedge devoîd of restriction and limitation they get covered up by 
mdya in the form of karma that régulâtes their births. For their release 
Tom the world, i.e. the unending circle of transmigration there is no 
vay of émancipation other than surrender to the Almighty."^ 

Râmânuja's stress on bhaktî as the only means to saîviition has 
ïarned for him a foremost place among writers on bhakri, According to 
ilmdhyarta that has culminated irto bhaktî h vidyâ. Whiie discussing 
hka 1 1 from the îààvasyopanîsad he says : vîdyâsabdena bbakii-rUpâpanna- 
UtyanamucyateJ Hq aîso elucîdats: bhaktîsabdas ca pritîvîsese vartate, 
rîtssca jnànavisesa eva.^ 

His firm belief is that seîf-surrender at the feet of Nàrâyana alone 
an lead to jBnal béatitude in the form of Union with the Suprême, 

2. Vedarthasaingraha (WS), p. 25, 11. 17, 25-26, Sri Bhagavad Râmânuja Grantha- 
mâlâ, Kâncïpuram, 1956. 

5[^^RTl«r ^1 T%Icf ïT^cTW W ibid. p. 17. IL 3-4. 

4. iT^r ^çrR^^# H^qcîTTfrf ^^^ ^q'WcT ?fcr lï ibld. p. 19, 11. 3-4. 

5. ibîd, p.23, 1. 16. 
6; ibjd.p. 44, 11.3-4. 



38 S.V. UNIVERSITV ORŒNTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

Aloog with this îhe assistance rcndered by a holy teacher (guru) towards 
the achievement of qaalities like, sama, dama and la tQV moksa is slÏso 
necessary. The philosopher says : 

An attitude of servility towards the Lord is soleîy praiseworthy and the 
passages like sevà svûvrttir akhyaîâ or sarvam paravasam duhkham hâve 
beeii explâiiied as that the service of oae who is uaworthy of the same 
is derogatory. This has offered Rimâiinja the opportunity to describe 
the excellences of Lord VisnUa his Usjadevafa\ and he has done so at 
Icngth. The Lord is described as - 

mimf^mml^'^m mmm f^fl^R^ e4?ïi^?i^ ^^ 

The discussion about the impersonai character and eternality of 
the Feia^ brings home to the reader Rârainuja's thorongh grasp ofthe 
subject and his ability to commimicate the same in an intelligible 
manner.^ 

Regarding language the priraary observation ofthe casual reader 
is that Ramâauja has chosen to express his ideas in gadya i.e; prose. 
Moreover, one cannot help being impressed by his apt use of vi^ords that 
admirably suit their respective contexts, Thus in the concluding verse : 



JO 



The use of attributes such as vimatsarUh, pramanaîanirah speak of this 
quality. 

Râmânuja's style is characterised by long compounds that consti- 
tute long sentences thus making the work slightly dIfHciilt to understand. 
Though this throws ample light on the rich vocabnlary of the author one 

7. ibid. p. 23, 11.6-8. 

8. ibid, p. 21, 11. 12-14, 

9. ibid. p. 42, IL 8-29. 
10. ibid. p,45, IL 30-3L 



1977 Parts I & 2] A NOTE ON VEDARTHASAMGRAHA 39 

hasto admit that the attention of the gênerai reader becomes divided 
between the substantiative and its innumerable adjectives weaning him 
away from tfae thought content. Thus for example, the longwinded 
sentence coiipîed wiih compounds rnakes the foUowing passage difficult 
of compréhension : 

q^ff3Ç7=^{iïïR%â[5T^Fri5r^çig?rfïrg'i2îçr ^?T=gT€'î^3fïTf %- 
l^j^c^Rftfè^^ïïÎTOf %^ft^<T%?^9î q^ç^=g^wfl^^ïï5r- 

It must however be said in ail fairness that the author at times 
does Write short sentences that hâve a refreshing quality. For exampie : 

Sach passages not only further the argument but also add a touch of 
élégance. 

The System of putting forth a question and answering the samc 
miikts ths Vedarthasamgraha interesting as in : 

^s^R H^^, ^^-mm^ mi ?m ^^i^ t%^ " 

11. ibid. p. 22. 11. 5-12. 

12. ibid. p. 44, n. 3-5. 

13. ibid. p. 11. 1. 31; p. 12, 1.4. 



40 S.V UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

Out of the sùbdalank&ras only anuprasa, which is a resulî of 
long compounds exists, whereas the others like êhsa and yamaka are 
absent. 

Regarding the use of arthâlankaras, upamâ is met with frequeEtly 
and rUpaka occasionally. A mahpamïï, containiDg a double upamana 
can be seen in 

^wM II'' 

(Hère the sâdharana-dharma is repeated aod there is disagreement in 
geader and number also). It is needless to add ihat common expressions 
camftSrmînda^ candramukha, etc., containing similes frequently appear 
in the Vedâriksamgraha. A rûpaka as well as mpreksa exists in karma- 
mpmdyëvesfifah jiv'aîrmnGhP Others like parîmma^nâ aîîsayokîî, are 
not expected in a work of this type, 

Thus it can be inferred that philosophical doctrine of Rimâniija 
giving suprême importance to Nârâyana or Visnii is one that can appeal 
to the common man who is prone to be a devotee, Nevertheless the 
terscness of his language has been instrumental in alieaatinghimfrom 
his Works. This accounts for the paucity of followers as well as readers. 
It would not be an exaggeration, therefore, to say th^itramâmjasya vacah 
nârîkelaphalasammîtam is standing in necd of an honest effort on the part 
of the generally equipped reader who wants to drink deep at the roots of 
Visistâdvaita view. It must be admitted that Râmânuja has trîed to 
secure more oftraditional support for the Visistâdvaita school through 
the Vedmhasamgraha by actually showing ho'w mantras in Vedasultm^L- 
tely help a person to corne to this conclusion, i.e, Visistâdvaita vicw. 



14. ibid. p,42, IL 9-lL 

15. ibîd. p. 18, 1.32, 



D.SRIDHARA BABU 

THOUGHTS ON SRINIVASA DIKSITA'S 

SRIVISISTADVAITABHASYA ON THE 

BRAHMASUTRÂS* 

The purpose of this paper îs to bring ont some thooghts regardiûg 
the cofflmentary cûkd ÊrmmtMvaitabha^^^ Lakmn-ViÈimdvaita-' 
bhasja on the Brakmasutras, Its author is Srînivasa Dîksita of Tirupati, 
jelongingto c. I3th century a.d. Ascholar-poet Sundararàja Bhatti- 
^arya of the 19th century composed a sub-commenîary on it namely 
^igamamdadarpam. Sriiiivàsa Dîksîta's commentary on the 5^/'iraA:a- 
nimSmsa together with SundBiarâja Bhattacârya's sub-commentary was 
irstpublîshed in Telugu characters in Madras in 1896. This work bas 
)eeiî edited by Srîiiivâsa Tâtacàrya and Vâsudeva Bhattàcarya. 

Srtvîsïstadvaitabhasya is mainly based on Vaîkhanasa System which 
iclongs to the tradition of Vaidika Vaisnavism. An élément of expla- 
lation of Vaikhànasa System is necessary hère. Vaikhânasas belong 
one of the ancient Vedicschools and hâve theirown Kalpasutras in 
/hich the Srauta^ Grhya and Dharma Sûtrasmt included, Without losing 
heir connection with theVediclore they hâve developed an àgamic 
radition in which the image worship of the Lord Visnu or Nârâyana is 
mphasiscd, and the methods of image making, the construction of the 
smples, cérémonies regarding the installation of the images in the 
5raple and the daily worship and festivals are discussed therein. 

We hâve very scanty information regarding the biographical 
etails of Srînivasa Dîksita. We corne to know from différent sources 
lat he belonged to Tirupati. He was wcll versed in différent branches 
f learning and had also a title 'kavîkulaîilaka\ It is said that he 
as also a great devotee of Lord Srînivasa or Venkatesa at Tirupati. 
hère are évidence to prove that our commentator, Srînivasa Dîksita 
as différent from bis names-sake: (I) The author of thecommentary 

*This paper was présentée! at the 52nd Indian Philosophical Congress, held at 
Gauhati, Assara from 29 October to Ist Noveraber 77. 



42 S.V. UNÎVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

on KiliàSLSïï'& Abhfjfîana Sâkuntala and (2) Srînivasa Dîksita or Srî- 
Bivisâcàrya mentioned by oiir commeiitaîor Srînivasa Dîksita in his 
Vaîkhânasasûtraîâtparyacimâmani. 

Srînivisa Dîksita has aiso two other philosophica! works in 
addition to his Èrmsîkâdvaiîabhâsya to his crédit namely, (1) a corn- 
mcntary on the Pàramatmîkopanîsad and (2) a compendiiim known as 
Uîîamabrahmavidyâ. The second work is not published but exists in the 
forra of raanuscripts. This work contains similar ideas that are dealt 
with in his comraentary on the Sârirakamimâmsâ. The exisîingpalm 
leaf manuscripts of this work are full of scribal mistakes. Sundararâja 
Bhattâclrya who had aiready been meiîîioned as a composer of a sub- 
conimentary on Srîaivâsa Dïksita's SnmhtâdvaUabhâsya, without 
trying to correct and edit the manuscripts of the Uuamabrahmavîdyâ 
wiote an independent work called iht Vtîamabrahmavidyâsâra to mirror 
the ideas uf Srînivàsa Dîksita incorporaied in his Uuamabrahmavîdyâ, 
The Uttamabrahmavidyâsâra contains five divisions called Adkîkaras, 
(This is published io the SrLVaikhânasa Granîhamalâj MadraSj 1916.) 
The essence of the contents of this work is d,i follows. Following the 
teachings of Vikhanas it is established that the worship of the Lcrd is 
the means to obtain the highest goal of libération. The importance of 
the worship of the Lord through the images is aIso stressed. The theory 
that the worship of idols is intended only for the persons of lower 
intellect is vehemently critisised by the author. The primary importance 
attachée to the image -worship of the Lord for the Brahman-realisers, 
and the spécial power of Lord Nirâyana to offer libération to the 
individuals are dealt with. The aiîtfaor alsoemphasîses that the image 
worship is important and désirable even îot n ptt^oii oï turiyàsrama. 
The Vaidika nature of VaikhâDasa school is established on the basis of 
that it uses the vedic mantras^ not Uddhria also known as Tânnika- 
maninis \n the process of worship, The complète seif-sarrender to 
the Lord is the main qualification of a seeker. Becanse the essence of 
the Upanlsads is incorporated in the Vaikhànasa texts, the Vaikhà- 
nasUgama is said to be basically Upanisadic. It is emphaticaîîy stated 
that on the Upanisadic principles the school was first founded by a seer 
Vikhanas, the best among Vedântins. Sri Sûkta is inierpreted hère 
in terms of îhe suprême statc of Lord Narâyana» The pasiages from 
Paramâtmlkopajusad are often quoted to support the purport of this 
work. Those passages quoted are discussed in the iight of the passages 
from other Vpaimads, In the concluding division of thi*i work ihe 
worship of Nârayana is deaît with basing oa a dialogue between Punda^ 
fîka and Nârada, as recorded in the Ânusasamkaparvan of the Mahâ^ 
hharata, 

The essence of the whole book of Srlnivâsa Diksita can be 
summarised in the following manner. The ultimatc reallty or Brahman 



1977 Parts 1 éc 2] THOUGHTS ON SRÎNIVAS.4 DÎKSITA... 43 

îs Lord Nârâyana. For attaining libération one should follow the 
path of worship {arcana). Forthis, the image rQaking and installation 
and consécration of the image are important. The worshipped image 
is îîothing hvLî the Lord Himsclf. It is stressed that the worship of the 
Lord ijQ the image form is essential for ail ïn différent stages of life 
even in the stage of reiiunciation. Similar ideas of Srinivâsa Diksita 
sought vivid expression in his coramentary on the Brahmasûîras too. 

In the Jijnasâdhîkarana the commentator Srinivâsa Diksita says 
that the Word Brahman dénotes Nârâyana Himself.^ He also quotes 
hère the passages from the Vaikhânasa Grhyasûtra : 

' Nârayonaparayano nirdvandva munlh ' 

and aiso Maricî's words from the Jnânopadeéapatala of the 
Vîmdnarcanakalpa — 

%^^\^^ ^^Wi ^m wm^: ^m^ ^wmm w^i ^xm^\ 

Lord Nârâyana has two aspects namely niskaîa and sakala. In nî^kala 
aspect, hc has no form, no body; He is all-pervasive, unseen by the 
sensc organs, eternal, visualiscd only by the yogins, pure, unthinkabie, 
bcyond the régions of speech and mînd. devoid of thrce qualities of 
prakrtï, and without beginning or end. He is the being without différ- 
ences, beyond the dualities of the world, existent for the wise and 
non-existcnt for the unwise. The sakala aspect of the Lord is defined 
as bcing with form. Hère the foilowing example îs given : aithongh 
the fire pervades the entire wood in the forest, it does not exhibitits 
form. it exists potentially thcre as formiess. It takes form only 
becausc of friction of two pièces of wood and manifcsts itselL Thus 
the Paramâtman^ although He is niskaîa, becomes sakala at His own 
Will. The concepts sakala and niskaîa hâve some relationship with 
the spirit of this commentary where ihe point of reaching Brahman 
without qualities (nirgima) through the worship of Brahman with quali- 
ties (saguna)^ a process that which is based on the sûîra of Vikhaîaas 
himself. 

Vikhanas says : sagune brahmani buddhim nivesya pascân nirgunam 
asritya mokse nîtyam yatnant ku yât, It is not the practice of some of 
the schools of the Visistâdvaitins, who aîtach much importance to the 
Lord with anantakalyanagunas, to focus on the idea of nirguna or nîskala 
""orm of Brahman. But hère in this commentary, we find a happy 
larmonious blend of both thèse aspects which appear in différent 
mssages of Upanisads, The commentator interprets sagima form as 
he form of the God that ismanifested în images or idols. Dévotion 
1- Brahma^abdaéca Narayanavâcakah . 



44 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

and self-surrender îo tliis form are oecessary. One should îhiiik that îhis 
for m in images is the Brahman itself. Then only he can proceed further 

to réalise Brahman as nirguna, nîravayava, avyakta^ réalisable tliroiigh 
the eoîicentratîon on the holy syîlable om and can sîart to meditate 
on lois aspect. Until he gets libération he should try to foHow this 
path. For that type of yogin, libération cornes in this life time. 

Another point aiso niakes this commentary distinct. It is the 
emphasis on the worship of Lord Nâriyaiia along with his consort 
LaksmL Before that worship according to the commentary^ one should 
surrender himself to Goddess LaksmL He says ; Jaganmaîur Laksmyâh 
prapaltih prathamam karyà. To eniphasise the glory of Laksmî^ the com- 
mentalor quotes from the Jnânakanda of Marîci's work Vima^'àrcana- 
kaîpa as : 

If one accepts the all-pervasiveness of Lord Nârayana or Visnu, 
how is it possible to establish Laksmî also as ail pervasive? Hère the 
commentator takes refuge to support his view in the passage of Fwj^w- 
purana, tvayedaffi vîsmrm ca amba Jagadvjâ Thus the ail- 

pervasiveness of Lord Nirâyana and Laksmî is established. In îhe same 
conîexr the concept of prakrtî and purusaas eiernal entities are brought 
"' in and the> 'hâve alsO' no beginning and no end* The snpporting passage 
for this conception is as fûllows: 

'■'■'■■•'•' Maya' prakrtîh\mâyt vîsffiêt prakrtîpurusau eîau anadi. 

.Goddess Laksmî : is' interpreted as mûïaprakrtï and Lord Nârayana " as 

/ paramapurusa.^^iO is always, associated with her. Among the two main 

,;'sects of .Vaisnavism nao^^ely, Tengalai and Vadagalai, the foîlowers of 

the fariner stresetjs the importance of Laksmî as a mediator to help 

jivaiman.. to ' reach paramatman, whereas' the latter emphasises '"the 

iraportance of , Xnksmî -'a.s a permanent associate qî paramatman 

having an independent status to bestow grâce on jivaimas. The 

stand-point ofthe Vadagalai sect is weii brought eut in Vedântadeéika's 

Rahasyarayasâra, Sîddhopayasodhhanadhikarana^ In îhis respect very 

often wc find the glorification of the Goddess Laksniî in the îexts of 

Vadagaîai sect. The commentator of Èrïvisîstadvaitabhâsya conceives 

both Lord Nârayana and Goddess Laksmï as inséparable co-eternal 

entities. Forhim, Nârayana îs always Laksraîvisista. We hâve com- 

mentaries on the Brahmasûîras like the Srikarabhasya of Srîpati Pandita 

(14th centiiry a.d.) where Brahman is defined as Paramasîva, If we 

compare such définitions with the definions of Brahraao as the Lord 

Nârayana as exponnded by Visistâdvaitins particuiarly by Sri Rimânnja, 



Î977 Parts 1 & 2] THOUGHTS ON SRINIVÂSA DïKvSITA... 45 

the teiîdency of this Srixïsîsiâdvaîtabhasya or Laksmîvfsisiadvaîtabhcisya 

QÏ Srinivâsa Diksita to associate Laksmî aiid Nârâyana in the fashioB 
of saktî and sakta^ prakrti and purusa is comparable to Saktfvisisfâdvalta 

of Saivites, popularly îaught in Mysore. 

To conciudej the conimentaries on the Brahmasïltras from diiTer- 

mt stand-points vary according to their structure and their fimctional 

/aiue. îfatext is supposée to be authoritative. ifthattext is coai- 

nenîed according to one's own stand-point, then one's own doctrine of 

>hilosophy or a System of faith is snpposed to hâve an authoritative 

anction from tradition. Thus the ideas that are contained in the 

Utras themselves can also be developed by the coramentator by means 

\f reasoning, with the support of relevant passages to soit his own point 

>fview from différent texts of the vast Vedic and Piirânic tradition, 

Jecause the commentary now under review is written by a Vaikhânasa, 

aving Vedic background with the agamic tradition of idol worship 

efining Brahman as Lord Narayana, the identification of the Lord with 

he image that is to be worshipped is brought into the limelight in the 

ommentary. Occassionally we get fiashes of thoiights of harmonising 

ifîerent passages of the Upanîsads and other texts in which the ulîiniate 

ature of Brahman, withouî forai and with form is described. Because 

le texts îike the Brahmasiïtras or the Bhagavadgïtâ or the Upanîsads 

re not mère the products of fancy of inîellectiial and philosophical 

naginatioOj they do not keep quiet with mère activity of pore philo- 

)phy. They need religion. The Hindu religion with iis vast number 

F sects furnishes différent lines of practice without losing faith in one 

[timate principle and scriptural sanction as authoritative basis. 

The spirit oï Srîvmstâdvaitabhasya reflects the agamic tradition 
' image worship in temples, Instead of oifering a vague philosophical 
•y postulate defining some iinknown ultîmate reality, a concrète prac- 
caî course of worship is suggested. And at the samc time hère a path 
om the known to the unknown, from the simple to the complex, from 
e saguna lo the nlrguna, from the sakala to the niskala, from an idol 
the absolute is chalked out 



L (XXIII Çhapter ^seeàiûkasn5to41(^ 



ISl.DATTÀ 

RAMARAYA ON TÂT TVAM ASr 



The philosophy of Advaita whicli is rootcd in the Upanmâs 
revolves round the mahavskya : tat mm asi,^ *Tbat thon art'; Accord- 
îng to the Advaitins^^ tattvamasî stands forabsoluteideotitybetweeii 
the Brahman and the individual soûl, which is nothing but pure 
consciousness. But the word tat rdm to the Brahman and 
tvamtotht /iv^ or pure consciousness who is found, owing to mâvg in 
issociation with psycho-physical organ callcd antahkûTam. So both of 
themcannotbeabsolutely îdentical Therefore, the above préposition 
expresses absolute unity betwcen them by taking tQQOuntto phadajahal- 
aksQnS [partml rétention of the meaning of a word), apposition (s3m3- 
mdhîkaranya) between the Brahman and the individual soûl, since both 
)f them are pure conscioosness, Thus the proposition stands for absolute 
inity and non^-difference between the jiva and the Brahman.^ 

Though Sankara has net explaincd the meaning of tat tvamûsi 
nth the aid of laksana in his Masj^a; hc bas done so in his Ymkacuda- 
tant He categorically déclares* therein that to achieve identity, the 
îcondary meaning of tatmàivamisto be taken as the words mutually 
pposed to each other in their characteristics like the lîre-fly and the 
un, the king and the servant, the well and the océan and the atom and 



L Chândogyopanisadi 6. 8. 7. 

2 Vedâniaparibhâsâ (The Adyar Library, Madras, 1942), pp. 73-76; 147-151. 
3. Anima Sen Gupta : A Critkal study ofthe philosophy ofRâmânûJa (Chowkamba 
Sanskrit Séries Office, Varanasî-1, l ed, 1967) pp, 220-226, 



48 S,V. UNÎVERSÎTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL' [VoL XX 

tht Meni moiintain. He adds^ tliat jahadajahaUaksana is to be resorted 

to for achievîiig îhe knowledge of identity between the two expressed 
by îaî and îvam. 

Now let us examine if there is need for resorting to the laksanâ m 
interpreîing the meaningof /^/ îvam asî, Visvanâtha paScanana déclares^ 
thaï the necessity for a laksana arîses whenever there is an improbability 
of purport (î.e., the intended meaning). In the statement /^^ îvam asî the 
Word tai, dénotes the Suprême Brahman, with omniscience (sarvajnatva) 
and the word îvam, the individuai soûl, with little knowledge (kfncf- 
jnatva), Sureiy thèse caiinot be identical with each other. Thus there 
is îàtparymnupapattî. This difEcuIt situation can be got over by taking 
recourse to the laksana wherein the essential nature, i.e., consciousness 
of the meanings îat and tvam is taken into considération and not their 
attributes as sarvajnatva and kîncfjjnatva, 

There is a charge that since the third variety of laksana^ i,e,y 
jahdajahaliaksanâ, apart from jahallaksanà and ajahallaksanU^ has not 
been stated or recognised by any Naiyayikas'^ and hence it is not 
authentic as it is onîy a prodact of the imagination of the Advaitins for 
coûvenience. But it may be replied that the statements of the Naiyâyikas 
in regard to the variety of /(^/cs^n^ are not absoîute or statutory. As 
aîready stated^ it is onîy the /^;/?^rjà/2w^aj7^/// (improbability of purport), 
that décides the necessity of laksanà and this improbability of purport 
is resolved only by taking recourse to laksanà. According to Madhusiî- 
dana Sarasvatî, taking recourse to laksana is not faulty when the purport 
of identity is grasped. The tatparya (purport) is not to be abandoned 
because the use of a vrai like the abhidha is to be determined by the 
tatparya and not vice-versa. When the true purport îs arrived at by the 
jahadajahaUaksana, it is improper to resort to the primary meaning.^ 

7. The great Naiyâyika-.cum-Advaitin Annarabhatta, in his Tarkasakgrahadîpîkâ 
gîvesthis third variety of laksana ^né qixoïQs îaî tvam asî as its example; but 
the commentary NUakantJiaprakSsikâ remarks that this example setting fortb 
the tdentîty of the Jlva and Brahman is the view of the Advaitins only. This is 
not acceptabie to the Naiyâyikas. Tarkasahgraha (Chowkamba éd. 1969) 
pp. 326-327. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] RAMARAYA... 49 

Thus taking recourse to the jahadajahallaksana is jusîified.^ 

This Advaitic interprcîaition of tût tvam asî is not acceptable to 
Râmaniija. He holds^^ that tat tvam asi does not convey, as the Advai- 
iins hold, the essential oneness of the Brahman aod the individual soûl, 
[t is unthiakable that an individual souî which lives in God and 
^hich dérives its siistenance froni God can be indeoîical with God 
n every respect. It is meaningless to assert identity between Xv^o 
îxactly sîmilar entities. Proposition or apposition {samansdhikaraffya) 
Qcans a unity of différent objects. Râmanuja argues that the passage 
at ivam asi ïmi^W^^ the personaî identity of God uoder différent condi- 
ions; Brahmao as the cause of the world and as the possessor of infinité 
uspiciûus qualîties is identical with Brahman îhat résides in the indi- 
idaal souî in inséparable association with the material body as such a 
3UÎ constitutes the body of God in which He résides as the inner con- 
"oller. The Word tat signifies God as the cause of the Universe and 
'am signifies God as the inner controlier ol the individuaisooi and 
oth refer to the some substance. ^^ Thus Râmanuja eonsiders Sankara's 
iterpretation of tat tvam asi to be fanciful and not based on the Upanî- 

Now it may be good to refer to Bellamkonda Râroa Raya Kavi,î3 
le author of 143 works in Sanskrit, the ablest exponent of the Advaita 
sdânta in récent tiraes. His works in this field answer the criticism 
velled against the Advaita by its opponents, 

One of his moauinental works, the Sankarusankarabhasya- 
narsah is an eîaborate réfutation of Ramânuja's interprétation of 
iâ to brahma-'jijnasïï m Msbhasya, Hère Râma Raya also meets 
darsanasûri*s criticism of Sankara's interprétation of the sutra. 
iring this process, he quotes (additional proofs and évidences from) a 
mber of Smttis to support Sankara's interprétation of tat tvam asi. 
ï goes to thQ Smrîis as Ramaauja contends^^ that in deciding the 
ïaning of the F^iâr^y one should tafce the help of the Smpîs and PurU- 
S". 

Rama Raya argues at iength that Râmânuja's inierprelation of 
tvam asi is wrong. He emphatically déclares that the revered sage 

. However, Dharmarâjâdhvarin opines that there is no need to resort to laksanâ 

in interpreting tat tvam asi, See the VedânîaparibhâsS, pp. 14-16. 
. Vedârthasangraha (éd. by J, A. B. Van Buitenen, Poona» 1956), pp. 68-88; 

122-124, 
. Srîbhâsya, IJ.l. 

Vedârthasangraha, Tirupati, 1953 pp. 41-42. 
, He was an Andhra Niyogibrahmin (1875-1914) of Pamidipàdu; Narasaraopet 

Tq. Guntur district. 

Srïbhasya ï.1.1. 



680 — F- 7 



50 S.V. UNIVERSÎTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

Bâdarâyana, visualised with his divine sighî'-' that some persons wouid 
unhesitatingly and mischievously interpret the mahâvâkya, and 
hence he himseL'' (BâdarâyEnal gave the rneaining of lat tvam asi in 
the Skànda-pimm. He cites"= the foliowing verses" from the 70th 
chapter of the Skânda-purSna (Kasimâhâtinya} to prove that the sage 
has upheld the use of bhâgalksanâ (partial abandoningofmeaning) in 
interpreting the meaning of lat tavam asi. 

%SïR[ It^îrî? WT^Rf Târ%% ïfFR: Il 

Headds that eventhe Sî7?flM«^/'â'* in the foUowing verses'^ attests to 
SâÉkara's interprétation. 

^ ïï^ô^m ïfra ^Tg^rW^îl^ m il 
^^^%mt êr^fT^ mm tu 

Éahkatâêahkarabhasyavimûrsûht lsi\ïdiS2iïeioptt 1953. p. 370. 

16. ibid. 

17. Some of thèse verses are not traceabîe in the texî priiited by the Sri Venkates- 
wara Steam Press, Bombay. 

18. Anandasram Sanskrit Séries, No. 25, 1945. 

19. Bhahmargîîâ, 4.5. 76-82. 



1977 Parts î & 2] RAMARÂYA... 51 

prs?î?§îr % cTFOTW ^F^P^f ^ ^^r^T: 1! 

^ Again he remarks that îhe Adhyatmaramayana'-^ too bears évidence 
o Sankara's interprétation in the fo]lo«.ing verses. 

^R^r ^w?tîFrff2Trsg% ¥|%^ (1 

5^ 5t^?5:%#^^: Il 

Thus the above authorities, quoted by Rânaa Riya in favour of 
nkara's (Advaitic) interprétation ofra/n-amasf, strengthen tte posi- 
n of the Âdvaitins with référence to the mahâvâkya. This is the 
ique contribution of Râma Raya to Advaita Vedânta. 



UttarakSnda, V. 25-27. Gorakhpur. Samvat 2008. 



N. SUBBU REDDIAR 

THE ALVARS' CONCEPT OF SALVÂTION 



It ïs we!! known that, according to the Hindu philosophical 
thoiight based on the Upanisadic doctrine, muktî is the reaiization 
of the meaBÎng of the relation between the self and the nniversal Self 
enshrined in the Upanisadic text** Thou art that"^. According to the 
Vïsistâdvaita System it is of much value to abolish the ahahkara of the 
jiva by self-effacement and surrender of the self to the truc Self. Kain* 
karyarasa brings ont the joy of seifless service. In attuninghis naughted 
will to îhat of the 5m, the mukîa kch that he jslikea luteon which 
the Suprême Singer plays. Love is fulfilled in surrender and service; its 
cosmic value lies in attuning itself to the Infinité, Bot it is the expérience 
of the bliss of Brahman that expresses the suprême value oî mukfi in the 
Visistâdvai tic sensé of the ecstasy of the unitïve consciousness.2 The^^^ 

the mî/te is iramersed in the suprême and unsurpassablc bliss of 
Brahmiïnubhava without losing hîs self-bcing. It is a state of ^iz/ya in 
which the unitive expérience of bliss is présent without the îoss of self- 
experience.3 

Nammalvâr conceivcs moksa as the God's abode and also a place 
of the freed soûls who are the real imraortals. The Àlvâr refers to this 
place in his works as Vîdu,^ Tuyar llla vidu,^ Vin nadu,^ Vaikuniham^ 
Vaikunihû van nadu,^ Vaikunfha manager,^ and Pomulagu.^^ The référence 

1 . Chândogya Upanîsad, 6. 8. 7. 

2. VedmtaSûna 4.4. 2L 

3. ibid; Rahasyatrayasâra (RTS) chap. 21 

4. Tîruvîrutîam (TVR) 95; Tîruvâêirîyam (TVS) 2; Periya Tirmruttam {PTV) 48; 
TmmymoU (TVM) L 1 : 10; 2. 8: 1 etc. 

5. TVM 2J:2 

6. TyR23, 

7. ibid. 66, 68; PTV 51; TVM 2. 1:11; 2.5:11 etc. 

8. PrF68. 

9. rFM4,ÎO:ll 
10. ibid. 6. 8:11 



54 S.V. UNÎVERSÎTY ORÎENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

to Vaikunihûnadan'^ or the Lord of Vaikunthani signifies thaï God is tlie 
ruler of ihe city Vaikuntliam. Vîâu is deliverence, i.e. deliverance froni 
the worldly life or samsara. The conception of vîâu is not giveo by 
Tiriival}uvar in détail but the oearest approach to the Âlvar's cooccpt 
can be seen in TirukkuralP^ But the Tamil saint refers îo this place ia 
ooe instance as Tamaraik-kaman ukgiâ^ (the world of letos-eyed God), 
Tamaraîkkaman of course signifying Visnu, The same concept is clearly 
expressed by Nammalvâr ^s Anadu parrenïl urradu vîâu-uyîr^'^ ~ îhQ jiva 
(soui), onceitgives ep its attachment to the worldly things, attains 
moksa. The words vimâdu, vân nndu suggest ihat the so-caîled place of 
moksa is situated far above the world in the endiess space. The place is 
free from misery - Tuyar iîlâ vldu. The Alvâr, while stating the spécifie 
resuit flowing from a recitation of his hyraiis, déclares tfaat it wooid lead 
to moksa, Gencrally the idéal is always described in a positive way such 
as "those who recite the ten verses wiil reach Vaikuntham"^5-*'the 
décade on His sacred feet will lead us to His feet*'^^ etc. Other Âîvârs 
too hâve the same conception rcgardîng moksa, They too refer îo mokm 
more or less in the same words and phrases. Other words and phrases 
employed by them arc peru nîlam Greaî land^^' peruvisumbu^^ ''Great 
spsLCc^\umbar ulag0^ **world of Devas*', vimaganfi^ "celestialabode** 
ete. The description of moksa by the AI vârs coïncides more or Icss with 
îh^mtyanbhûîî as described in the Vaisnavite Agamas and other Vaisna- 
vite texts/ 

The paih to mukii or moksa is refcrred to as selgadi,-^ and màk- 
kadî?- éelgadi is the good path which a j%va bas to choose and mâk-kadi 
is moksa. Thèse two concepts in combination may be interpreted to 
mean the straight and shining path of arcîrctdi gaîî as mentioned in the 
Chandogya Upanîsad,-^ Tirumaâgaiyâlvâr mentions this in his Sirla- 
îirumadal'* and élaborâtes it in his Penya-Timmadal P The soûl travels 
through the solar rays, reaches the sun, enters through a minute hole 
in the sun and then attains the place called moksa where^ it is said. 



IL 


ibid. 7 9:4 


12 


Kural, ch, 35-37 


13. 


ibid. 1103 


14. 


rFiWl. 2:5 


15 


ibid. 2.5;!}; 4. 8:11. 


16. 


ibid. 4. 9:11. 


17. 


Peria TirumolJ PUd U 1:9. 


18. 


ioid. 5. 6:5. 


19. 


ibid. 11.4:10. 


20. 


Mudal Tiruvantâdi [MTV) 68, 


21. 


PTM 1.1:5,8. 


22, 


Mil rv, 95. 


23. 


le. 4 15:5. 


24. 


Kami, 7,8. 


25. 


ibid.* 16, 17. 



1977 Paris l à 2] ALVARS... -5 

iî ecjoys the bliss of the Lord. The achievemenf of a single mukta is a 
cosmic eveot, as it were, and even tlie celestials bail îlie eiitry of the fiiiite 
self inîo iflfiîîity and sing /î^/Mt/>/25 in their ov/ii celestial way. The 
gïûrious ascent of the soûl îo its original home has been vividly descri- 
bed by Nammâîvâr.^^ It is aiso beautifully portrayed by Vedanta 
Desika in liis Paramapadasopsnam where the author indicates iiine steps 
in the path, to perfection. The first five, naraely viveka, nlrveda, vîrakti, 
hhitî-Mma and upaya constitute the means and awaken thereligious 
:onscîousîîess and induce the /wz/wz/Zq^i to practise dévotion and self»- 
îurrender. The remaining four steps comimr\% oï utkramana, arciradi, 
iivya-dem-prabhava and prapîî relate to the summum bonum spiritual 
indeavour. They describe vividly the ascent of the redeemed soûl 
ils home in the absoiute.^^ j\xo author, it is presumed, follows the 
^aikimihagadyam of Râmânuja and the Kausiîakl Upanîsad in his des« 
^ription. . . ■ ■ 

According to Vaisnavism, îsvara is the object of the knowledge 
;bich is the meaos, upâya^ and also the object of the knowledge vvhich 
\ attainment, He is the means as being the gîver of the desired fruit and 
le besîowerof grâce, and lilcewisc, He is upeya because he Himself is 
le object that is to bereached.Hejs the ever-attained mt2.m{sîddkopaya). 
i aoxiliar} tothis means there are two othernieans, naniely, bhakti and 
^apattï. The former is mainly bascd upon the teaching of the Upanimds 
id the latter is to be traced mainly to the Vaifnavite Agamas. 

The course of bhakti involves a training in three stages known as 
ima-yoga, inSna-yoga znà bhakti-yoga in the progressive realizatîon 
^moksa. Thèse three stages constitute the to-be-attaincd means 
Miyopâya). The path oï karma means the performance of certain 
ma or rites and duties^^ as prescribed in the iciuras. One should 
rform one's duties for the fulfilment of God's purpose; the perron 
o'dld do them whole-heartedly subordinating his désire conipletely to 
5 divine vvilL By thus working for the Lord, one not only rcnounces 
î fruits associated wîth them, but also purifies one's hcart. This 
ma-yoga has severaî sub-divisions,29 which include such items as 
î adoration ofgods, the performance ofausterities fr^pa^j, pilgrimagc 
sacred places, giving in charity and sacrifices. Someof thèse rites and 

* rFAfîO;9, 

• Desika Prabandham - Verses Ï34 to 1 50. 

. The rites and duties consist of (i) nîtya^karma or regolar duties to bc performed 
compu son ly (îikc the daily sandhyâvandana) (ii) naîmimka-karma or rites to be 
compuisoiily performed on specified occassîoBS (lîke bathing at the timc of 
éclipses of the Sun and the Moon), and (îii) the kâmya^karma or rîtes that are 
opLional and to be chosen according to one's ability. 

■ The BhQgamd-gïta 4.25 etc. 
TVM, 4.7:8. 



56 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

duties are referred to by tlie ÂJvârs. Nammâlvir says : "Enjoyiog the 
sight of Thy présence with my eyes, and offering flowers, culled from ail 
directions to my hands' content at Thy feeî and dancing and singing soBg 
of Thy praises";3o -withoiit séparation from the Lord, offeriiig Him 
holy water, and after that, incense and flowers";^^ "are not the days 
near when I circumambulate and worship with folded palms îhe deity 
at Tinivâranvîîai," ^^ etc. lo this process the self-regarding sentiments 
like self-love and self-possession are siibdued. Animal instincts and 
inclinations are transmoted into an organic craving for God, as the 
impure gold are transmnted into pure gold in the furnace, The whole 
process is one of self-realization by seif-reouaciation. The earth-boxind 
self then becomes spiriîualised. 

The path of knowledge (jnsnayoga) is a stage of constant and 
Bninterriipted contemplation; il is to be pracîised by one who has 
conqaered his mind by karmayoga and could thinlc of hîs essential nature 
ortheself as being distinct from matter (the body, the sensés and the 
lilce)-his svampa which is the mode of îsvara by virtiie ofits relation to 
Him as His body. Inanayoga is a path of contemplation, ofself- 
iilomiBation and of self-renuncîation leading to its positive sequalof 
self-realization. Contemplation is the process of turning the out-going 
mind within, with the help of yogic auxiliaries like yama (self-restraint), 
niyama (observation of rites) and prânayâma (the control of the breath} 
and seeing the inner quiet etc. In this state ail activity is swallowed up. 
The yogin can arrest the out-going tendency by contemplaiing on tiiou- 
ght itself, or on the nature of the Âtman. Nammâlvir says : ''G 
Father, iend me Thy heiping hand of jnâna so that I may reach Thy 
inaccesible feet".33 When the purified self reflects on it se if, ail other 
thought^ go away; the contractions caused by karma and the confusions 
due to avidyà are then destroyed by the fire of jnâna. The Âtman at 
this stage returns to itself and shines by itself and enjoys îhe quiet of 
kaîvalya. ît is no longer bound by the prakrîi and its three guiias, but 
attains caimness and serenîty. This self cognitîon itself is an orienta- 
tion towards God-cognitîon. In a higher stage he has a glimpse of 
Paramâiman, the Suprême Self as the pervading identity in ail Jivas, and 
sees Him in ail beings and ali beings in Him. Tirumalisaiyâlvâr says : 
"by compleicly shuUmg the gaies of the sensés, hy opening the gâte of 
God-knowledge, by kindling the blaze oï jnâna, by making the body and 
the heart that pine av;ay for God, and by such a fully iiature dévotion 
one can realise the Lord with tne discus".34 i^ n^^ ^g^t higher stage, 
this spiritual expérience is further enriched. Peyâlvâr says: 'The 
Jfianîs are those, who by means of knowledge, can penetrate tbe Lord 

3L ibid. ï.6:î. 

32. ibid. 7.10:1. 

33. ibid. 2.9: 2; 1.7:1. 

34. Tiriiccanda Viruttam {TCV), 76. 



î977Parfs ! & 2] ALVARS 57 

Who is tlie inner niear.iiig of thc four Vedas and who is ininianeQt in 
tlieir hearts".35 The spiritual insight of atmajnânî h completely 
acquired in llie fourth stage. Hère the j«5«/ exhîbiî liOlversal sym- 
piiîhy, réalises kinship lor ail jîvas and regards îhe joys and sorrows of 
oîhers as hîs own. Nammâlvâr says : ''May wc ali (endre mankind) 
Bever niOre vv?>Jiow in îhis wi^eful state of false knowîedge, evil conduct 
and fililîy body,'*^^ 

If a seeker escapes the snare , of wordly pleasure and begiiis tu be 
atîracted by the pleasure of eBJoyiiig ihe said spiritual insight that 
créâtes a distaste forai! sensepleasures, then he begins iht practice of 
bhakti-yoga, the direct raeans for îhe aîtainimect of the soprerae goal 
of enjoying the Lord. Whiie practising bhakn-yoga, the aspirant 
contemplâtes on Xh^ Bhagavan ii^iht Inner Se]f of his own self 
which is His body. The vision that he has aiready acquired of his 
own pure seîf is then iisefuî. Forit is only through this that he 
reaches the Inner Self, jnst as thecloth wiihin whïch a gem is 
tied op is filrst lo be seen before the gem itself cao be seen. In îhis way 
the vision of one's self serves as a qualification or as a stepping stone 
for the practice oî bhakîi-yogtK The chaniers of a hymn of the Tiruvây- 
molj, according to NanimâXvâr, wili be biesied with thh jnâna.^'^ 

Bhakti-yoga is the spécial path which is of the nature of unsur- 
passed love and which has, for its object, the essentiai nature and form 
and qualiiies of the Bhygavân Who is not dépendent on is not subject 
to the authority of, and does not exist for iinyone else. li is a prccess 
in which the seeker sheds his egoism and egocentric outlook, attunes 
himself to the wili of God and yearns for the eternal communion with 
Him. This yoga is the direct path îo perfection as it leads to the very 
heart of reiigious consciousness which co«sias in shiftirg the centre of 
référence from the Atman îo the Paramàtn-.an. This stage effects a 
révolution in oiir life, which is for greater importance ihan the coperni- 
can révolution. While the asîronomer réalises the littleness of îhe earth 
and the greatness of îhe sun that draws it to itself, the religions man or 
devotee realises the emptiness of îhe earth-bound self and the saving 
raight of God Who is the source and centre ot aii iiving beings. The 
knowledge of the finite self has its reiigious fuliilment in the intégral 
expérience of the infinité which is its ground and goal. The self is 
merged in the Suprême Self iike the sponge in the sea. Nammâîvar 
says : *To the Lord, ihe sandal paste for smearing is niy heart; the 
garland is the garland of verses cooiposed by me; the silken garment too 
consists of thèse; the bright ornaments are the folding of arms in 

35. Mu rv, 84. 

36. TVR, 1. 

37 TVM, L 10:11. 



58 S.V. UNfVERSÎTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

worship".3s To tbis saintj the charming Kaanaji (Krsna) is everythiog; 
He is the food that he eaîs, the water he driiiks, and the bétel lie chews.^^ 
Agaia îhe ÂJvâr says : "Eveii if ït is not giveo to me to worship Thce 
wîlh cool'flowers at the appropriate hours, I give over my very life as au. 
ornameot to Thy fair iiead, welî decoraied wifh flowers"/^ Periyâlvâr*s 
sentimeni of bhakn runs like this : •'Enshrining tfae deity of Madhava 
iiîtiieheartand offering theflower of dévotion at the point ofdeath will 
enabie oue to escape the horrors of the world of death".^^ Speaking 
fiirtherhe stresses that the thoughts of the Lord at the point ofdeath 
wii! ensure saivatioîi. His foster-daiighter says : 'To worship the Lord 
with fresh i^lowers in a staïe of purity, to iitter His glory wiih one's 
tongue î:nd to cherish it in one's heart woiiid bornoff the demerits of 
the past and future as the fire does ihe heap of dust".^^ Similar 
sentiments are found expressed in the verses of other Âlvirs also. 
Among the four kinds of devotees referred to in the Gita^'^ and the 
Mahàbharata^^ the one who worships Bhagavân with exclusive dévotion 
is the best and he aîtains moksa, 

Bhûkîi-yoga has also been called parabhakîl Love of the Lord 
which results from întimacy with sâtîvikas (and the scripturcs) and which 
produces porâ bhakîi is also called bhakîi because it générâtes an inten- 
sive désire io know Isvara clearly. This parabhaktî develops icto thirst 
or intensive désire and détermination to see the Lord. By this keen 
désire alone, îhe devotee wins the grâce of Lord who rewards him with 
a perfect visual perception of Himself for the time being« This visua^ 
perception is parajnana. From this perfect vision of the svarûpa of the 
Lord is born an excessive and unsurpassed love for Hira and unquenchable 
spiritual thirst similar îo that feit by a ntan suffering from great thirst at 
the sight of a tank. This excessive and unsurpassed love for the Lord is 
called paramabhakti which produces an eager désire and détermination 
to enjoy the Lord without any lîmitation.^^ At this stage the devotee, as 
describcd by Nammalvâr,46 feeîs that it is impossible to live any longer 
without this expérience of eternal bliss. The Âlvir cries out that he 
wouid not in future allow the Lord to leave Him (inî nân pogal ctten) and 
that he must become one with the Lord and déclare ail this with an 
oath*7 that cannot be ignored by the Lord, This paramabhakti also 

38. ibid 4.3:2 

39. ibid. 6. 7 : l 

40. ibid. 4. 3 ; 4 

4L Periyâhâr Tirumoli (Periyâ]) 4,5.3. 

42. Tîruppûvai 

43. 7:16. 

44. émtU 350:33-35. 

45. RTS, ch.9. 

46. JKM, 10.10:1. 

47. ibid, 10.10:2. 



1977 Parts I 8c 2] ALVÂRS... 59 

générâtes a désire m the Lord to give moksa to the bhakîa icimediately 
and alîows him to aîtain iî. Theyare iinaîly united in the realm of 
miikîî. The soûl is a giow with Divine Pire but is not idenîical with it. 
As the life of our îife, God feeds the seul and diviiîfzes iî. Likewise lie 
sou! feeds on God. în the bliss of unitive coosciousness. the soul-huBger 
Df God and the God-himger of the soûl are both finally satisfied. The 
temporal pieasures of earth, the seductive joy of svarga and the joy of 
kaîvaîya are nothing when compared to the bliss of the intégral expérience 
5f Brahman. Hère at îhis stage the soiilis not passive, but energises 
îothiisiastîcaily and shares its joy with others, 

The other means to moksa is known as prapattî or unqualified and 
Lbsoliîte self-^surrender. it is aiso caîled àaramgatî. ît is the highest 
îage of God-love. Frapaiti stands in the place of paràbhakîî to the 
oan who adopts it as the direct and independent means. This way 
>reserves the essentials of bhaktî, dispenses with its non-ersentials like 
he need for ceaseless practice. The question of caste distinctions does 
tôt arise hère. Since it will be the raeans of securing ail the desired 
►bjects, it has been prescribed in the place of parâbhakti for those who 
:bow their limitations. The spiritual expérience of the Tamil Âîvârs is 
pitomised in the saranagati of Nammâlvâr who is extolied as thefore- 
[îost of prapannas in VaîsBavism. The Âivâr says : "Henceforward 
l is imposible for me to possess myself in misery without the darsana of 
'hyfeet".'*^ He extends the hospitality of his divine expérience to the 
?hoIe worid of the jivss, with a view to establish a spiritual community 
fthe bhaktas. The saint records his expérience in performing the act 
f self-siîrrender at the feet of the deity at Tirumogiîr : •'Thereisno 
ilvation without surrender to kalamegham, the presiding deity at 
'iramogiîr^'j'*^ and *The lotus feet of the deity is the only salvation^.sQ 
*he peak of his action is seen performed in the présence of Lord of 
irupati Hills. Almost ail the Âlvars speak of their self-surrender to 
îe Lord. 

The paths of dévotion and self- surrender hâve more relevance to 
le position of God in Vaisnavism than those of karma and jnëna as 
ich. To faliin line with the Upanisadic concept that knowing Him is 
te means of obtaining final release,^^ the great exponent Ramânuja 
?'olved a very convincing exposition according to which bhakîî, jnana 
làprapiîîaU represent certain stages of jfima itself. Al! the same, 
ress is laid by him more on the bhakîi, and prapattî aspects oï jnëna. It 
in the iight of this stress that the three esoterîc doctrines hâve corne to 

:8. ibîd 5* 8:7. 

-9. ibid* 10. 1:1. 

fO. ibid. 10. 1 :6/ 

i. Plîlan on TFM, 10. 9:L 



60 S.Y. UNIVERSiTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX, 

bs furmoiated as tlie basis of thc Vâismivite religion. Thèse three secrets 
coniain the esseatials of the Vedaata in lerms of iaitva, hiia v.nà purusa- 
Fiha. The Lord Himself has ixpounded the technique of self- surreiider. 
The three secrets are kîiovvn as muiamaniram, dvayam aud carama-slokam 
of which ihs iirst states ït in a cutshelL Uie second makes the meaning 
more exphcit and the third élaborâtes it siiii further. Thèse three niysie- 
ries which form epitoiiies of the imths that ought to be knowîi and of 
the.meaas ofattaiûiQgsaivation, which are the distinciive, unique and 
exclusive doctrines of this sys;tem of religion and philosophy are invalu- 
able aiid are therefore to be preferred like aaibrosia in the océan. 

The staîe of ih2 emancipafed bOiil hasto be understood hère. The 
released sdif realises the iinitive consciousoess. The' "infinité" of 
spaco-time, whichstaggersîhe scientific imagination, paies into infi- 
îiitesimiîl littlcness in ihe iigbt of the really infinité and the eternal glory 
of Paramapada which transcends the limiî of thought. The self enjoys 
ail the peifectioii of Vaikuntha like lEiokyaoï identiiy of abode, sumîpya 
or proxiiTïity, sârûpya or similarity of form and sàyujya or intiraate 
union; he is ever immersed h\ îhe eternal bliss of the Brahman. Sâhkya 
(co-exisience) leads to sâmipya (fellowship) and 55m7;)'a (transformation 
a id déification) and is consummated in sâyujya (îhQ bliss of communion). 
The form, flavoiifj and fragrance of Brahnmnubhava are not physical or 
psychicaL but -ire siiper-sensuoas. 



SJ.MâNGALAM 

SUN^WORSHfP'ïN ANDHRÂ PRADESH 



ïitïodiictiûïi 

Of ail the deities of the Hindu pantheoB no other deity receives as 
niiich Mîversal bornage and aijoysas much popuîarity as Sûrya, the 
Sun-god* He is worshipped by the hâves and have-nots, the castes and 
casteless and the Vaisnavites and the Saivites, the îwo main Hindu 
dénominations. Of course, he does not, unlike Visnii and Siva, receive 
primary worship except from the Sauras, a sectarian Siirya-warshippers 
whoexalt him as the Suprême Soûl and Creator of the universe. In 
mcieot times he had a wider popuîarity far beyond the frontiers of this 
:ountry and the remnants ofhis s}mbo]îsmând vénération by the pri- 
mitive people are extanî to the présent day in Egypt, Iran, the Middle 
East, ihe Far East,Aostralia, Mexico and North-East America.^ Hence 
the natural worship of the Son was prcvaîent also in the pre-Aryan and 
Dravidian India, According to V.G. Srivastava, the solar worship în 
mcient lîîdia was a mixture of three différent traditions: first, the 
)rthodox tradition of the Vedas^ Upanmds, Puranas, Smrtis etc,^ second 
SheMâgi tradition of Iran; and the third the indegenous tradition of 
Lidia such as found among the non-Àryan and wild tribes of Indîa.^ 

Siiiï Temples in India 

According to the Magî tradition and the Bhavhya Purana, the Sun 
Temple at Multan (Mulasthanapura), now in Pakistan on thebanksof 
he river Chenab. was built bySàmba, son of SrîKrsna. Hiuen-Tsang 
md the Arab traveliers mention Sun-worship in Multan. In the Gupta 
)eriod, according toinscriptional évidence, there were Sun temples^ at 
ndrapura (now Indore, Bulandshahar district, Uttar Pradesh) and 

L M, Gupta Sakîi : Sûryy, the Sm-God, pp* 1 fF., Somaiya Publtcation, Bom- 
bay, 1977. 

2. AÎOC, XXIII, Seniinar Papers, p. 130. 

3, a/III, pp.68ff;79ff. 



62 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL , [Vol. XX 

Dasapura (Mandasor). Again inscriptions^ refer to Sun temples in the- 
PDst-Gupta perîoci ofGopàdri (Gwalior hills) and at Deo Baranark ia 
Sliahâbad district, Bihar. The îndraditya temple at GliotarsiJ.! k.m, 
froni Pratapgarîi, was built in A.o. 942. There are ruins of Sun temples 
aï Raiipiir, Bamneva (both in Jodhpor région), Vasa (in Sirohi région) 
Satvas (in Bharatpur) and Kuich. The most renowncd Sun temples io 
lodia today are at : Osia in Rajasthan, Modiiera in West Gujarat, 
jMartâQda in Kashmir. Bhumara in Madliya Pradesli, Konârka in Crissa 
aiidTiruvidaiaiarudnr (Sûryanârkoil) in Taniilnad, Of îiiem architec- 
turally and .sculpturaily the .most gigantic and ornate is the one at 
Konârka. 

Siiîi-worship m Andhra Pradesh 

Geographicaliy Andhra Pradesh is situated in between Orissa and 
Tâoiilnad, the two States having the proud claim of Konarka Temple and 
the Sûryanârkoil respeciively. The Sûryanârkoil (or Sûryanârayana- 
koil) at Tiruvidainiarudiïr on the river Kàverî, between Mâyavaram and 
Kumbhakonam, was built in the eleventh century a.d. by the Cola 
Emperor Kulottunga Cola L The temple was called Kulottuâga Coja 
Mârtandâlaya. The Konârka temple is believed to hâve been constructed 
in the middle of the thirtcenth century by the Eastern Ganga klng 
Narasimha L Since Andhra Pradesh is lying in between thèse two States 
having Sun temples, an attempt is made hère to investigate thewhere- 
abouts of temples, shrines and images of the Sun in this Telugu speaking 
State as weil as to understand the position this god held in the religions 
and cultural life of the ancient people therein. The study is based on 
îhe earl> inscriptions of Andhra Pradesh upto c. a.d. 12.00. 

The earliest known référence to Sûrya, the Suu-god, is fouad in 
îhe inscriptions^ of the Sâlankâyana kings who ruled for about a century 
upto c. A.D. 430. Thèse kings were meditators on the feet of Citraratha- 
svâmin and they styled themselves as Ehagavac-Citrarathasvàmipada' 
nudhyâîa. Citraratha^ according to Sanskrit lexicon, is an epithetof no 
othergod butSùrya. Citrarathasvâmin beingtheir tutelary deity, the 
Sâlafikâyanas must hâve definitely enshrined this deity in a temple dedi- 
cated to him. But so far not even ruins of such a monument hâve been 
traced. L.P. Paadey is of the opinion that the small mound at Pedavegi. 
jiear Eluru, is the site of the ancient temple of Citrarathasvâmin,^ 

în the Visnukundi period no reforence to Sûrya either as a name 
of god or as a personal name has been noticed in the inscriptions. But 

4. ibid.pp. 161ff;213ff. 

5. Eh IX, p. 58; XXV, 44; XXÏ, pp. î ff. 

6 L.P. Pandey, 1971, Sun Worship în Ancient India, p. 264, Motilal Banarasidass, 

Delhi. 



64 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. X: 

given oioney and laod by a certaio Nàgiyagavurida of the Jammikunt 
village. Obviousîy ihere was a shriiie of ttiis deity at Jammikuntc 
No trace of it is fbund iiow, Probably .tlie présent Siva temple wa 
erecîed on tbe ruins of the original Âditya temple. Inscriptions at îh 
lime of Vikramaditya VI refer to ÂdityadevaJ- An iasciiption froi 
Gangapuram, Maothani taiiîk, Karimiiagar district, refers to Siresvara 
deva^no whom some gifis were givea by Gondarâja, a subordinateo 
the kiog Bhûlokamaliâ- 

The piace-names after Sûrya mentioiied in the Kalyâna Câiuky 
inscriptions are Adîtyapalli and Sïiralura^'* (boih are net identified] 
The Personal names after Siîrya noticed in their inscriptions are: Âditya 
Âdityabliatta, Aditya bhattopâdhyâyaj Bhânudeva, Bhâskarabhatta, Siir 
(two persons) and Suresvarapandita. 

DevendravarraaQ III^ an Eastern Ganga raonarch who flourishe^ 
at the dose of the ninth and in the first quarter of the tenth century ad, 
is believed to hâve constructed the prestnt Sun temple at Arasavalli, nea 
Srîkakulam. This temple is very famous and is exciusively dedicated t< 
Sûrya. An inscription dated S. 1068^^ ^^ ^^ 1146) foimd in this templ 
is a glaring évidence of its antiquity. N. Ramesan writes that th 
original temple seems to bave fallen into disuse, and the présent temp! 
was reconstructed by one Yelamanchili Pullaji Pantulu in the yea 
A.D. 1778, The Lord (Surya hère) is knov/n as Kalivarada, "a grante 
of the boons in the Kaliyuga".^^ 

Surâlaka^"7 (now Siiryamanipuram, Tekkali talok, Srîkâkufan 
district), a place-name after Sûrya, is stated to hâve been situatec 
in the Andhra région of the Eastern Ganga dominion. The persona 
names noticed in^the Eastern Ganga records of îhis région are ; Aditya 
(two persons), Âdityamai5ci, Adityarâja (prince), Âdityavarman (tw 
persons), Bhânucandra, Mitravarnian (king), Ravicaodra, Ravisarman, 
Sûrama (six individuals)andSûrapotu. 

It is important to note that the most famous Sun temple aï 
Konârka, Orissa State, was constructed by one of the Eastern Ganga 
kings, nameîy, Narasiinha I who ruled from a.d. 1238-1264. ^ 



12. CllD, m Khammam no. 13; ARE, Hyd. 1966, no. Î60. 

13. X/)/, no. 23, 

14 WDL no. 1X\ Slh IX-1, no. ÎÎ9. 

15. ARE, 1896 no 387. 

16. N. Raraesan; Temples and Legends of Andhra Fradesh, p. 147 Bliâratîya Vidyli 
Bhavan, Bombay, 1962. | 

17. JAHRS, XVIIÎ, p. 118. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] SUN~WORSHIP... 65 

In tlie Câlukya-Cola period, an inscription dated a.d, îlîl from 
Ceimakesvara temple al Macherîa (Palnad talok, Guntiïr district) refers 
to Adîtyesvara and his îempie.^^ The Raraesvaram temple at Âchanta 
(Narasapuram taluk, West Godavari district) has an inscription dated 
A,D. 1112, referring to a donation of a tope to the temple of Sûresvara.'^ 
Another temple of Siîresvara^Q was built at Karampudi (Palnâd taluk, 
Gugtur district) in the year a.d. 1154 by ïsanapreggada, a minister of the 
Velanântî chief Kuiottunga Coda Gonkarâja who was the most faithful 
and trusted feudatory of the Câlukya-Coias. 

The Personal names after Surya found in the Câlukya-Cola records 
are: Âditya Jtwo persons), Âdityabhatta, Âdîiyadevabhatta, Àdïtya- 
devasahasra, Adityarya, Adityasadangavid, Bhâskarabhatta, Divâkara- 
bhatta, Siîrama, Sîïramlmbâ (two queens), Sûrapa (two persons), 
Siîraparâja, Siîrayya (six persons), Sûr isetti, Sïïryadevabhatta (two per- 
sons) and Sïïryadevasahasra. 

The Kâkatlya chief Rudra ï, in the year A.D. 1162 instaîled the 
deity Siîryadeva as well as the gods Rudresvara and Visndeva. This îs 
reveaîed in an inscription-^'^ from Hanumakonda. Warangal taluk. Th© 
king thus paid due respect to Surya, Siva, and Visnu. 

From the above survey it is obvions îhat the Sun-worship in 
Andhra Pradcsh was in practice sioce the fonrth century a.d. There îs no 
doobt that this practice was in vogue long before the Sliankayana 
period. The inscriptions containing personai names and place-names 
afterSiîrya as weil as the temples and shrines dedicated to him are glow- 
ing évidences to prove the prevalanee of the wide-spread practice of the 
Sun-worship in diieferent parts of Andhra Pradesh, governed by severa! 
dynasties. The différent names of Stîryagiven to mcmbers of the royal 
families and to common raen of ail walks of iife ciearly showhowdeep 
the cuit of Sûrya had entered into the socîo-religious set-op of the people. 

Besîdes the above mentioned facts indicatlng Sun-worship, gathe- 
red from the inscriptions upto c.a.d. 1200, there are also large number 
of Personal names after Sïïrya. as weîl as images, shrines and temples 
mentioned in the Kâkatîya, and Vijayanagara records, Some of the 
temples constructed diiring the reigns of thèse iater dynasties also had 
shrines set apart for Sûrya. unfortunately a good number of the ancient 
Sun shrines and temples are not extant. Probably they were converted to 
or repiaced by those of Visnu. Because, in Iater times, as N. Ramesan 

18. su, X, no. 66. 

19. ibid. no. 69, 

20. ibid no, 3 34. 

21. WDJ, no. 36. 

680 — E. 9 



66 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

stateSj **this worsliip was merged with îlie worshîp of Visnu and most of 
the images of Siîrya are practicalîy identical with those of Visnu exccpt 
for some sîight variation in symbolism. In fact Lord Visnii is aîso wor- 
shipped with the epithetofSûryaEarayana which is very sigoificant'*.-- The 
precîdîng deity of Konarka Sub temple as well as that of Tiruvidaiina- 
riidûr Sea temple îs SOryaSârâyana. In the Vedic limes Visnu was an 
aspect ofSîIrya. Visait is one of the twelve Âdityas. The Sun is '«on- 
sîdered as tweive-souled, of whom Visiiu is eteniaL Hence the présent 
day identification of Sûrya with Visnu is fuîly in accordance with the 
time-hoiioured Vedic traditions. 

Today the only Sïîrya temple, exclusively dedicated to the deity, 
so far reported from Andhra Fradesh, is theoneaî Arasavallî(Srîkâkulam 
taîiik & district) as we hâve already seeii. There are, however shrines 
of Siîrya in the^ temples at Alamptïr and Hanmakonda. ■ The Alampiïr 
STurya image/^ accord ing îo M. Gupta Sakti belongs to theeighth century 
A,D: The same authoi reports the existence of a Siîrya pilîar at Nagâr- 
joBakoada.^^ There is an image of Sïîrya in the Parasuramesvara temple 
at Gudimallam. At Tippalûru (Kamalâpuram taluk, Coddapah district) 
an image of Sûrya with seven steeds has been found among the ruins of a 
Siva temple.-^ ,This image is intact, 

The foregoing facts îndeed go counter to the suppositions made 
by some scholars that there was no Son temple in Andhra Pradesh. 
V.C. Srîvastava in his Stm-worshîp in Anciem îndîa makes no mention 
about Sun-worship \n Andhra Pradesh. M. Gupta Sakti does not refer 
to the Arasavalli temple. According to O.S. Ghurye, in the Southern 
India no temple of Sun appears îo hâve been reported from Kar- 
iiâtaka, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh, -^ On the contrary, it is confîrmed 
hercby that, in Andhra Pradesh^ besides a number of shrines and images 
în various parts, there stands a very far-famed Sûrya temple at Arasa- 
vaiiî. 

Thus, in so far as the Sun-worship is concerned, we find Andhra 
Pradesh as a religious and cuitural link between the two States, Orissa 
and Tamîlnad, the former having the fanious Siîryaiarâyana temiple at 
Konârka and the latter having the Sûryanlyarkoil at Tiruvidaimarudûr. 
An investigation on the carrent practice of Sun-worship and its past 
reranants in the adjoining States is yet to be done 



22 N. Ramesan: op. cit, p. Î42. 

23 M. Gupta éakti : op. cit. Plates. 

24 ibid. Plates 

25 El XXX, p. 12 

26 Ghurye GS-i Gais and Me n, p. 7. Bombay 1962 



Î977 Parts î & 2] 



SUN-WORSHIP... 



67 



Abbrevïatïons : 
AÎOC 
ARE, Hyd, 

en 

CITD 

El 

JAHRS 

KDI 

SU 

WDI 



Ali India Oriental Conférence 

Annuaî Report on Epîgraphy, Hyderabad. 

Corpus Inscripiionum Indicariim 

Corpus of the Inscriptions in iheTelangana Districts 
of îhe HE H the Nizam's Dominions. 

Epîgraphia îndica 

Journal ofthe Andhra Historié al Research Society. 

Karimnagar District Inscriptions (Inscriptions of 
Andhra Pradesh, karimnagar District) 

South Indian Inscriptions , 

Warangal District Inscriptions (ïascripîions of 
Andhra Pradesh, Warangaî district.) 



s. SELVIN KUMAR 

HINDU RÏTUALS IN MADURAI COUNTRY 
OF MEDIEVAL AGE 



The Madiirai région of South lodia experienced the early impact 
of Islam, lîi médiéval times the Arab traders entered into cominercial 
relations with Ma'bar, a name that they gave to the southern régions of 
the Coramandel CoastJ Âbulfeda who visited the Madurai country 
c 1330reniarked that itwas the third partof Indiaand that to reaeh 
this région a three or four days eastward journey from Quilon was 
neccssary. This territory began from *Cape Kumàri* better knowi) as 
Kanyàkuniâri.- Amir Khusru observed that Madurai was so distant 
frora Delhi that an expédition would take tweWe months to reach that 
région. The Madurai country included the territory extendîng from 
Kanjâkumi i and stretching along the Coramandel Coast.^ This région 
generally corresponded with the Pândyan kingdom with its capital at 
Madurai which was in the âge in question, one among the four impor- 
tant Hindu States cf South India, The other powers, the Yadava 
kingdom of Devagiri (ruied by Râmacandra) Kâkatîya kingdom of 
Warangal (ruled by Pratâparudra II) and the Hoysala kingdom of 
Dvàrasamudra (ruled by Vira Ballâla 111) lay further north/ As 
Aampions of Hinduism, the Pàndya kings of Madurai devoted a part of 
their wealth to the promotion of religion and the maintenance of 
religious institutions. So devoted were they to their religion, they evcn 
callcd themselves as 'Paica Pàndyas' and ruled the country from fivc 
capitâls so as to correspond the pattern of the fivc heroes^ of the 
MahabhSrata. The five capitâls were Madurai, Ramanâthapuram, 

1. Henry Yule: Hcordier : Cathay and the Way Thither., Vol II p. I4l and Henry 

Yule : The Pook ofSer Marco Polo Vol, II, pp. 322*23. 
2 HôbsonJobson: pp. 526-27* 

3. ibid. 

4. Ishwar i Prasad : History of Médiéval India, pp, 231-3i 

5 . Smith Y, A. : Early History of Jndia, p. 468, 



70 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

Tîriiflelveli iinà Podukkottai etc., and on îhe eve of the MusHm 
conquest Ihe rulers were Vira Pindya, ¥ikrama Pindya, Parakrama 
Pândya, Su,îidara Pândva and Kulasekhara Pandya.'^ The people of the 
kiiigdom too foilowed the path of their riilers in matîers of religion. 

During the year a.d. 1311, Malik Naib Kafiir marched to M.a'bar. 
The accounî of Zîauddin Barni says tbat he (Malik Kafur) destroyed 
the golden idol temple of Ma'bar and the golden idols wliich for âges 
had been worshipped by the Hindus. The fragments of the golden 
temples and the broken idols of gold and gilt became the spoilsofthe 
army. The triumphant army returned to Delhi with six hundredand 
twelve éléphants, ninety-six niam of golê, several boxes of jewels and 
pearls, and iwenty thousand horses.^ This acconnt SBggests the extent 
of accumula tedwealth in îhe temples of Ma'bar. The Hindus of Ma'bar 
revered the images greatîy and appeared ready to sacrifice their lives 
to protect them from destruction,^ It is mentioned that adamsel, without 
considération for her life saved an image oy jumping from a tower 
of a temple with a Musahuan; who went up to destroy it. This is 
vividly portrayed in a Teîugu work, the Acarya Siïktimukmvali "^ 

Foreign îravellers make références to ihereligious rituaîs followed 
by the people of Ma'bar. Marco Polo who visited Ma'bar in about 
A.D. 1293 records that the people of Ma'bar committed self-immolatioa 
in the names of gods. The person who came forward to sacrifice his. 
life for an ido! used to assemble his kinsfolk who provided him with a 
cart and set him on it. They gave him twelve knives and took him on a 
procession, proclaiming ioudly." ""The valient man is going to slay 
himsclf for the life of an idoP. Then he was killed with threc of the 
knives and his body was cremated.^^ After Marco Polo, John of Monle 
Corvino a Franciscan Friar and after him Friar Odoric of Pordenone 
visited Southern India. The latter who considered the région as the 
land of St. Thomas says that hère in the past the Hindus venerated the 
oxen, abstaining from eating their fiesh/'^i though they took cows' miik 
and put their cattle to labour as they dîd about othcr animais. î- 



6. Venkataramanayya; N.. Early Muslïm Expansion in Souîk India^ p. 45. 

7. Ziauddin Barni: Tarikh^î-Firoz Shahi îrans. and éd., Eiîiot and Dowson 
VoL ill p. 204. 

8. The Érïrangam Koyll Ohtgii deais with the traasfereace of the idol, 'Aîagiya- 
raanavâk Peramâi* and the Hindus' efforts to save it from the Sultans of 
Delhi. 

9. Krishnaswamy ÂiyaDgar S : Sources ofVijayanagar Hisîory, p. 40- 
10. Nilakanta Sastrî K A.; Foreign Notices of South îndia, p. 134. 

IL Uppcr class Hindus believed that Gods use some favourite animais as vâhana^ 
and since the cow and ox are ixiclusive among them they treated thèse animais 
wiih due respect and avoided eating their Hesh. 

12, Niiakaata Sastri^ K.Â*; op. cit. p. 1^%. 



1977 Paris I & 21 HINDU RITUALS... 71 

He also observes tbat the custom of the people was to make great 
idols, in gold, and to hâve some sort of festivities for their idols. He 
■was surprised to see the great throne, used îo carry the idcis macîe of 
gold aBd the idol having a collai of geros of immense value. He further 
observed that the temple where il was located was a!so of gold. Because 
of tîie colour of the vîmana be would hâve foroied siïch an impression. 
A popular biît crue! cusîom amcng Hîodus was that they used to visit 
the temples with a knife struck in the arm. Usiially they did not rsœove 
them until they arrived before the idoL As well there was a pool ipside 
the temple. FilgriDis visited ,îhe idol and cast goîd. siiver and precious 
stones into ihe water, where it accuniulated. Whenever the temple 
needed repairs,- the accu m ul a ted armaments that hadbeers cast ioto the 
pool by the pilgrims were collectedJ^^ With the surplus amcuîit they 
made some jewellery and adorned the idols.^-^ 

Friar Jordaous who reached India before Odoric has left some 
valuable and interestîng information about the Hindu rituals in Ma'bar 
wiiich were widely observed during the lîrst half of the fourteenth 
ceutury. 'A popular custom prévalent among Hindus was that when-they 
were involved in great misery they would swear a vow to the ido! in ordcr 
to gain relief . When the vow was fulfiUed they woold fatien themselves 
3y eating weîl, After one or two years, during the festival days, they 
^oold cover their bodies wiih flowcrs and perfumes; they would sing and 
îance before the ido! as it was taken in procession, When the proces- 
îion was in progress the devotees who hâve taken a vow of sacrîficing 
:hemselve> to the idoi would carry swords with two handles, îhey would 
>ut the swords on their necks' pulîing strongîy with a vigorous cxertion 
)f bothhands,und-so eut off their heads before the idols. ^'^ So great 
vas their -regard fox' their ■ religion that they gave ■ least, regard to their 
:ives. 

Hindus chanted the word pacuta, pacmiîa, pacauîa mort thd.n-B, 
lundred ti mes a day, which was a corruption of the word Bhagavaîita.î^ 
Msothey.believed thaï their, souîs dwelled in a narrow prison of their 
jodyand after their death they attaio, their, libération and grow îo a 
Sreater.degree, of h'rppiness.. This belief led theni to throw themselves 
nto the fire-and- lo^s^.crifïce their, livesJ^ Soroe pe-opie used to' pour 
)utter and oïî on the idoIs,a.nd:those who, did .so regularly were honoured 



13.' 'ibid:. pp. -195-96. : 

14..' .ÂmîrKhusru.: ■ -Ashika TraiîS--aiid éd. EUiot and .Bowsod, Vol. lîI.App, p. 550. 

15-/Nilakant.aSastri:,..op.Cît:p,.^209.' \.: ' ' 

-16. :..ibid.. ■;''--:■■' 

17., Muhammad . 'Huiayn NaiQar z^^'iArûb Oêûgmphers' Mmwleâgeof , Sûuth^Endia, 

; "■ -p. 155.'" ■.„■-'■'",■'■ 



72 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

as îraditîunal Hindus by the socîety.îs C'-rtain people used to obstain 
from îheir food and drinks on some days of religious importance and 
theywere called anshanayya [anasana)^^ Thèse instances indicate the 
révérence given by society to the ardent foilowers of Hindu faiîh. 

Aaother practice was lo coosecrate the. young girls to the deities. 
When this was done the fathers and moihers sent their girls to the idols 
on spécial occasions sang and danced in front of the idols in great festi-- 
vity, prepared food and, sitting in front of the idols, ate it with great 
rejoice.^^ 

As it was in the past, some girls were kept in the temples for ever. 
They were termed devadâsis. In Ma'bar there were many of them. They 
were regarded as public wonaen and often called 'women of the idoP. If 
ehiidren were born to them, they were to be consecrated to Gods' service. 
They would aiso wait for the peopîe in the market place and would sell 
themselves for a fixed siro to those who considered that debauchery is not 
a sin. After collecting money, they used to deliver it for tlie iipkeep of 
the temple.^* Edgar Thurston mentions seven classes of snch women, 
Dana, Vîkrîîâ, Bhrtyâ, Bhalm, Hrm, Aknkârâ and Rudragamkâ or 
GopikU}^ He says that they are paid by temples and their dutics were 
mainly singing and dancing there, 

Among the Hindu religious practices of Ma'bar the car festival 
stimulated greatest interest as in modem times. It was held annually 
and in those days they used to carry the idol on a decorated chariot, 
when the king, queen, pilgrims and the whele body of people joined to-- 
gether. The devotees drew it from the temple with songs and music. 
Maidens used to go in front and devoied pilgrims often cast themselves 
under the chariot, so that its wheels might run over them. They were 
actually saying that they desired to die. for their God, and the car wouîd 
-pass over them crushing them. 



18. ibid. 

19. ibid. 

20. Henry "Yuie : The Book ofSsr Marco Polo Va]. îï, P 3 16. 

21. Miihammad Husayn Nainar : op. clt p. 188. 

22. Amoag them Datts was one who gave herseif as a gift to a tempie ; Vîkrïtâ was 
one who sold herseif for the saine purpose ; Bhrtyâ was one who offered herseif 
as a temple servant for the prosperity of h^r family ; Bhaktâ was one who joined 
the tempie ont of dévotion ; Hrîâ^ was one who was enticed away and présentée 
herseif to a tempie; Alankârâ was one who was welî îrained in her profession and 
profusely decked and presented to a temple by klngs and noble men and Rud* 
ragamikâ or Gopikâ wa-, one who received regular wages from a temple and were 
employed to sing and dance îhere. Edgar Thurston ; Castes and Tribes of South* 
ern IndiaVo\Aî,p, 125. 



Î977 Parts i & 2] HINDU RITUALS... 73 

Tàe inhabitants of médiéval Madurai experienced repeated ordeals. 
Foreign forces invaded the country frequenîly and contribuîed to violent 
changes. Ibn batuta and Gangàdevi had remarked that during the 
period of iVîuslim ascendancy. the natives were forbidden from worship- 
ping their Gods in the temples. -3 Confronted by this formidable chal- 
lenge, the Hindus responded not by the abandonmeni of their formsof 
worship but by a rededication to their religion . The self immolation com- 
mitted by the devotees and the consécration of young giris to the idoîs 
indicated this trend. The devadasis cultivated the arts of singing and 
dancing and helped in the maintenance of theptaces of worship. 

My duethanksare to my superviser Dr. K.Rajayyan for helping 
me in writing this paper. 

[Almost ail the statemenls of the learned anthor of this intere- 
sting paper is based mainly on the observations of foreign travellers. 
And the inaccuracies of différent types in the observations of the foreig- 
ners vïsiting ïndia, since the days of Mega:ithenese due to several factors 
are aiso weli known :~ S. Sankaranaravananl 



■ 23. ; :Tîruvenfcatacharir'G'aôgidevî*s''Ma£ffc/r5vi7«j'aOT Nîlkantlm Sastri», op„, cit. 



s. SANKARANARAYANAN . 

■ ' A'BRAHMI ÎNSGRIPTION FROM ÂLLURU" ' 

Alluri! is. ■'a village in tlie:'NaGdigama' takk, ■XrishGadistrk^^^^ 
Acdhrâ'Pradcsh. : Â stOïiebeariDg.the subjoined. inscription, was^ dis*- 
co?ercd i.n 'tbis': village as earlyas 1924/ , Tlie: inscription ■was briefly 
noîiced in Ûit ' Animal Report on S, MïanEpigraphy for 1923-'24, along 
with an ■ excellent facsimile.^ Itwas subsequently edited, aîso witli a 
good facsimile but with a very faulty transcript aod interprétation by 
Dr. R. ShamSastry in his paper uoder the heading "An Important 
Politico-Relîgious -Inscription" in one of the issues of the Calcutta 
Reviewr In. 1939 Dr. D.C. Sircar, in hîs l\v: Successors of the Sma- 
vahanas,^ wrote a short note on this record soggestiog some corrections 
and improvements over tbe views expressed in theabove two publica- 
tions. In 1941 5 K. Gopalachari, in his Early Hisiory of Ânâbra Country^ 
gave his own reading aid interprétation of the text of the record, 
Besides, scholars like Shri C.R. Krishnamacharki and Shri KM. Dikshit 
aîso seem to'have attempted to edit the epigraph.^ But their papers 
■somehow couldnct unfortunately seethelight oftheday,. Thiis the 
record, important as it is in many respects as we shall see presently, 
still remajns to be edited properîy. Hence, when my colleague 
Dr. D. Sridhar Babu, Reader, S.V. University Oriental Research Institute, 
Tirupati, visited Vijayawada recently I requestedhim îo arrange to take 
some photographs of the record now preserved in the Muséum tbere, 

1. No. 331 of Ammal Report on S, kdian Epigraphy. for 1923-24, p. 97 and plate 
facinç. It has also been casoally referred to in ArcL Snrv. oflndïa, Anmal 
iîei?^rf/l925-26, pp. 139-140 aad plate LXV, fîg. a, showing thepillar; îbid. 
1926-27, pp. 151-51 

2. Third séries, Vol. XVI (1925), pp. 48-53. 

3. Pages 328 ff. 

4. Pages 88 ff, 

5. Dr. Sircar, op^cit., 330» f.n., K. Gopalachari, op.cît., p. 89* In fact the lattcr 
writes that he had actnally consulted CRX Charln^s manuscrîpt of the arîiele 
on the record awaîting publication in the Epigraphia Indka (El)* , 



76 S.V. UNIVERSÎTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

He arniged for the same. I thank Dr. D. Sridhar Babu and the 
authorities of the said Muséum for this favour. Now basing on the 
photograph and the facsimile given in the Anmml Report on S. Indîan 
Epigraphy, 1923-24, the inscription is edited hereunder in detaîL 

The stone, bearing the epigraph constitutes a part of a stone pillaî^ 
which originaliy must hâve belonged to a railing, the naortices on it 
being vsry clear,^ We iiod, below the inscription the lower half of a 
lotus, fuli-blown and facing front, eut in relief, as in the case of the 
Guntupalle inscription of the Cedi king Siri-Sada of the earlier period.^ 
The upper part of the stone just touching the first line is broken 
off and iost. Yet there are reasons to présume that most probably 
no line we hâve losî at the beginning. For, as we shall see presentiy 
the first line introduces the king of the record just as the first 
line of the Velpûru inscription of Aira king Mânasada does.* On ihe 
oîher hand. the record consisting of 17 lines indicate that we hâve lest 
at least one line at the end.^ Further it is to be noted that while 
the lines 10-17 of the record arc fully preserved, a few letters are Iost 
at the end of each of the first nine lines, the number of letters Iost 
varyiiig from 1, in line 9, to about 4 or 5, in line 1. The left corner 
on the top and the upper portion of the first line hâve also suffered 
damages. Cjnscquently the first letter hère is totally Iost. May be 
what we hâve Iost hère w:'s only an auspicious symboî îike svastika or a 
siddbam symbol Further, the second letter of the line is only partîy 
preserved. Thus the record is unfortunately fragmcntary. 

The characters of the record are Brlhmî and are comporable wiih 
those of îhe above meniioned inscription of the Aira king Mânasada 
which bas been discovered in Velpûru (Saiîenapalle taluk, Guntur dis- 
trict, Andhra Pradcsh), not far removed from Alliïru and has been 
assigned, on grounds of paiaeography, to the lirst half of the second 
century a.dJ^ Hower it may be observed that the letters p and v of our 
record wiîh thcir roundi-h bottom scem to be ei.îlicr than those, with 
the angular bases, of the Veipûru epigraph Sîmilarlv the form of h of 
the Aîliîru record also perhaps points to an earlier period for the 
epigraph Of ihc initial vowels a occurs in the Alliiru inscription four 

6. ^rrÂ. Surw îndia, Anmml Report, 1925-26, p. 140 and pi. LXV, fig» a, 

7. Above, Vol. XIX, pp. 53-60. 

8. £i. VoKXXXil, pp, 82ff and piate. This record introduces the kiflg simply 
as Aira Mânasada, a Gâlaveya. 

9. Infact an cxamination of the tbove plate and the phoîograph of îhe piilar 
shows îhatthe iascription must hâve originally continued a îittle further either 
en the îotîis itscif fotind beîow or on some other side of the plllar» But I am 
unablt to trace lî mw* 

ÎO. ibid. p. 83. 



Î977 Parts 1 & 2] BRÂHMÎ INSCRIPTION... 77 

îimes (lines 12, 13, 15 and 17), a once (lineîS),^^ e twice (Unes 14 and 16) 
and most probably aiso ai^- twice (lines i and 7). Of the consonants, 
A'/i is written in two différent vvavs : îhe one with its longer right hand 
rounded off at the bottom (cf. kheta, Une 4) and the oîher with its right 
hand having, at the bottom, a smaîl stroke to the right (cf akhaya, îine 
13). The form of the Dravidian l is met with twice (lines 3 and 12), 

The language of the record is Prakrt. Of the phoiietic changes found 
in the text of our inscription, the following may be worth mentioning. 
The occassional shortening of the Sanskrit a is fonnd in pase (Pâli passe, 
Skt. parsve) in Iine 15. Likewise, the lengthening of a Is met with in câ 
{Ski ca) ïn Vine 5 . Change of Sanskrit g into k is noticQd in parîcëka 
{Skt,-parkyaga) and paka (Skt. bhâgay^ respectively in Iine 14 and î2. 
Tand/ arc occasionally changed into l as noticed in taîaka^^ (Skt. 
taiâka) and kula (Skt. kula) respectively in lines 12 and 3. Paîatali- 
sation of îy\ îsy, and sth h m^^t with in paricaka {^kt. -pontyëga),^^ maca 
(Skt. matsya) and pica^^' {Skt. pr sth i) in fines 14, 5 and Î2 respectively, 
Bh is changed into/? m paka (Skt. bhâga)^^ m Une 12 

Of the vîbhakiîs or declensions only three Cases, vîz.. Nominative, 
Genitive (both in sîngular and plural) and Locative (in singular only)— 
ail the three in ail the three genders— occur in the présent record. A 
préférence for the Genitive singular to the Genitive plural is noticed in 
-dâsasa {for-dâsâna, Iine 9) and - kaâahasa (for --kadahana^ Iine 10). The 
final m or amsmraoï the vîbhaktis, viz., the Genitive plural and the 
Locative singular, is invariably dropped as in gavirta {Unt S) aviruna 
Puvaseliyâna (Iine 17) and simaya (lines 6-7). The Pronoun Genitive 

W, Le. in tttara* The reading datara by K. Gopaîachari is of course not correct. 

12. ït IS too much to iînd a comparison btween the form of aï of the Alluru record 
and that of the Vatteluttu characters. Cf. K. Gopaîachari, op.cit. p. 89. 

13. Cf. bhska (Skt »hha^a) in a Kanheri inscription. See Ardu Surw of W^ Ind 
VoL V. p. 80, Vol. 16. lines \\-\2. 

14. Thîs Pâli form /rt/5/:«i3f is also met with in a Nâgârjunakonda inscription. See 
EL, VoU XX, p. 22, Inscription F. Iine 3. 

15. Paricaka is nothing but the Pâli pariccâga (Skt. parityâga) *giving% or *Hbera- 
lity'. in an Aniarâvati inscription {Arch, Surv, of S. Ind*, Vol. I., p,48: Luders, 
List of Br3hmi Inscriptions, No. 1254) we hâve passage reading deyadhamapa-^ 
ricakâ he sitcîya dânâ* Takîng paricaka in the sensé of "circular panels (Skt, 
paricakray' the above passage has been rendered as "the meritorious gift of 
ivvo cross-bars with circular panels" (ibid). From the présent inscription, it is 
clear that in the Amarâvati insription also the intended reading is paricaka 
only and the above passage is to be taken in the sensé of deyadharma-parityâga- 
rïipe dve sftci datte* 

16. Cf. the Hindi plcha *hind part% 

17. Cf. patîpoga (Skt* pratibhoga) of the Lauriya Arârâj Edict of Asoka. This kïnd 
of change is probaly due to assimilation. Cf. Dr. Huitzsch. Corpus Inscripticn 
nu m Indîcarum. VoI# 1, p. 144, f.n. 



78 S*V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

siQgîiiar se (Prâikrt se^^ Skt. iasya or asya) and the forms of Indéclin- 
ables câ (Skt. ca) and ata^^ (Prakrt, Pâli and Skt. atra) are also found 
hère. A grammatical irregularity may be fouod in îhe construction 
Kâhapanana ca purana-sahasmn (Une 13), wliere the adjective kâhiïpa- 
nma qualifies, by a relation of non-différence (abhedamaya), thefirst 
part of the foliowing compound, vzz., purana of purmasahasam. But 
this kind of irregular compound is at limes found in eariy înscriptions.^o 
The words g^v/-^ (Skt.^a^) used in the sensé of *cow' (Une 8); kuthi- 
kaââha (Skt. kurnbln-kataha) probably denoting, as we sliall see later, a 
boiler-Iikebigvessel used for storing grains (liée iO); abhlkara (lise il) 
used as a synonym oî akûra- 'shape' or *form' ma daii {%\i. datîi) 
*gift' , (iine 5), used in Neiiter Gender may be of lexical interest. 

The âvailabie part of tlîe record consists ofsome short and long 
sentences eight in nuniber. aiî recording several gifts by différent indi- 
viduals. The partly preserved first sentence (Unes 1-2), which perhaps 
originally preceded by an auspicious symboî or words, now lost, records 
the gifî of a monastery (vihâra) togcther with a garden (saramo)^ The 
donorof thisgift is described in three words. Of them, the first word bas 
siîffered damage in its first letter while the third word is preserved only in 
its first two letters of which also only the lower parts are available. Yet, 
a close examination of the facsimile and ihe photograph would show 
that niost probably the fir^t word is [Aijlasa as suggested by th-: noted 



i8. For s substituting s in Buddhist Sanskrit, see F. Edgerton Buddhisî Hybrid 
Skt. Grammarand Dict* Vol L p. 19, para» 2, f.n. In the Bhattiprolu (Gunîur 
district) Buddhist casket inscription (3rd or 2nd Century B.a), we hâve Samuda 
(Skt, Samiidra) and Samanadasa (Skî, Sramanadâm)* See £/., Vol. ïî, p. 327, 
No«lïi; p« 328» No. VIIL According w the ruie tûdo hasà se va sîriySm opî 
{thQ Prakrtaprakaia, V, 57), se is the Genêt ive Singuhir of the îadmidetad 
sterrvs m ail the three genders. For the use of se in îhe sensc of asya see e.g, 
tl\Q A^mnasâkunmlam (M,Wiliiams' éd. Î961, pp» 44, 115: etc.). Again se 
is used more than once in the sensé of iasya or asyQ in the îksvâku inscriptions 
(see, E/, vol, XX, p. 22, inscription F). According toPieschel, ^^ isfroni^is- 
stem and it is on analogy of te and me {Grammatk der Pràkrî, para. 423). 

19. For the Prâkrt c5 (Skt, ci2} see ihe Asokan Edicts, for instance the Erragudi 
(Kurnool district, Ândhra Pradesn. Miner Rock Edict £/, Vol. XXXIÏ,' p. 7, 
text iine 16» Simiîarly it is aiso not imlikeiy that ata herc is a synonym of the 
Pâli ato, Skt. atah Turther'. 

20. Cf. e.g. mahâksatrapasya svâmi-Rudradâma-puîrasya râpio ksatrapasya svâmi- 
Rudrasïhasya in the Gunda inscription of Rudrasimha î, year 108 (£/, VoL 
XVÏ, p 235, text lincs 2-3;, wïiere mahZksatrapasya is to be construedby 
abhedânvayamth. a vrtîyekadesa, v/j., the word Rudradâman. Cf. note 57 
beiow. 

21. Gôvî îs also found in the Nânâghât inscription (See Arch. Surv, ofiV. M., VoL 
V, p. 60, No. II). ïnhisAM5Mû5j.'û{NSP.£d., VoLI, 1938, p.31), Patanjali 

(^ I inondes gSvi in the list of corrupt forms of ^aiih, 

22f. Cf. e,g. aMï7mrfljfj and ^toa^i both meaning ^fetches, brings'. 



i977 Parts i & 2] BRAHMÎ INSCRIPTION... 79 

€pigraphistSj C.R. Krishnamacharîu and K.N. Dikshit to K. Gopaia- 
cbari vvho accepted that reading.-^ Hence tiiis word as read now skouU 
siiggest that the présent donor belonged to ihc famiiy called Alla. This 
narae Aiia is evidently another form of Aîra, tiie iiame of the famiiy îo 
whîch belonged the Ccdi kings Mahâmeghavahana Khâravela of the 
Hâihigiimpha înscriptioiî,-'* Mahâmeghavahana Vakadepasiri of the 
Maiichapurigumpha inscription, ^saod Mânasada of the Velpûru inscrip- 
tion referred to earlier, The partly preserved two leiters ofthethird 
word may be read as Ce[ti]r^ We know aiready froni the said Hâthî- 
gumpha inscription that Ceîi ( = Skt. Cedi) is another nameof the Aira 
famiiy. Thus from wfaat we hâve seen so far, wc may conclude that the 
présent donor was most probably a king belonging to the Aila, otherwise 
known as Cedi Mahâmeghavahana famiiy. The second word which is 
Fully preserved rcads Af<7ii3M5'a corresponding to the Sanskrit Mâftda- 
^yasya, The v^oxà Mandavya may bc b. gotra name of the Cedi king who 
vas the donor 27 However, it is difBcult to be sure whether the muti- 
ated portion of the lîrst sentence originally contained a personal name 
)f the donor other than Mândavya. Hence wc may not be wrong if we 
ake provisionally Mândavya itself as a personai name of the royal donor 
n question. ^^ 

The partly preserved second sentence in our inscription (lines 3- 
\) records the gift of some cultivable land (kheta) containing in it cius- 
ers of bamboo,^^ by certain individual named Sara. The names ofthis 
:heta is almost lost. It was situatcd on the homàâ.Ty (simayap^ oî & 
ocality, the name ofwhich is not fuliy available. The thkd sentence 
lines 4-5) and probably the ncxi one also (lîncs 5-6), both not avaiiable 
afull, record some royal giîts (rëjadaii) of lands. The gift-land of 
he former sentence was situated on the outskirts of the place called 



23. Op. cit.* pp. Xii and 89. The reading Aîksa may get some strcngth also from 
the third word Cffïi, another name of the Aila (or Aira) famiiy. 

24. £1, Vol. XX, pp.79fî., particularlyp.79, text îinel, 

25. LOders, op. cit., No. 1347. 

26. This restoration may be supported by the reading Aiîa of the fïrst word. (See 
above f.n. 23)» The thlrd word raight hâve been Cetîsa or Ceîirâjasa in the 
ofiginal. 

27. The Gotrapravara-nibandha-kadamba mentions Mândavya under the Bhrgus. 
ît may be observed that the Aira king Mânasada of the Veîpûru record, refcrred 
to earlier, daims Gâlaveyagotra for himseîf. 

28. K. Gopaîachari does not appear to be correct (op. cit. p. 89) when he says that 
the king of the record, out of modesty, had omittedhis name. 

V. Le, veiara-kula Skt. veîrakuîa. Cl mîtara, Skt. mUra in the Karadh Cave ins- 
cription {Arch^ Surv. W. înd^. Vol. IV, p. 89, No. 6, îîne 2). Of this change there 
are many paraîîels in the Prâkrt records» 

50, Cf. nagara-sîme râjakam khetam etc., in the Nâsik inscription of Gautamî- 
putra Sàtakarni, year 24 (£/, Vol. VIII, p. 73, text Ifne 4). 



80 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

Pâpikala and its extent was measured in nivarîtanas. But îîie Word 
glving the numtier of that land-measure is lost. The gift land of îhe 
fourtil sentence measured thîrty-two nivantanas and it wa:> ^^'tuaîed 
somewhere on the boundary of a place i\e., a village, îhe name of which, 
nQt fully preserved, ended in -pada. This village was incliided m the 
district (r/j^/ia = Skt. râsîra) naraed Mâcha (Skt Matsya), The ftfih 
sentence (lines 7-8) registers a gift of twenty-foiir nivarîtanas of land 
somewhere on the outskirts of the locaiiîy called Airapura. The name 
of the donor of this gift, onîy partiy prescrved, reads ... dala, 

The sixth sentence (lines 8-14), îhe longest in îhe record, enunie- 
rates the gifts made by an officiai, disignated as mahmalavara. But bis 
Personal name is not given. The list of his gifts includes five hundred 
cows; sixty-four builock-carts; female and maîe raenial servants, nuni- 
bering four; kubhi-kadâhas again four in number; two boilers of copper 
(lohiya);^^ four vessels of brass or bell-metal; sonae (number not speci- 
fied) cups fasliioned like the silurus or sheath-fish (varfà/aMifMraj and 
some (again nurober not specified) yonaka-dmkm ot the lamps of the 
Greeks or the Romans. 3- The list of the ^ifts naade by the above m^/îâ- 
talavara further includes a tank/ excavated somewhere in the hind part 
(pka-paka) of the hili Ataragiri (Skt. Aniaragirî); and a permanent 
endowment ofonethousand coins called karsâpana-purmas. The four 
servants of the above list of gifts are described in the passage /?e5a- 
rupënî dasi-ddsasa camii, It may be noted that hoîh pesa (Skt. presya) 
and rf^s'âr can be taken as synonyms meaning *meniai servants'. But 
hère in order to avoid an unnecessary and clumsy répétition, the expres» 
sion n/^-yz-rfas^ may better be understood in the equally well-known 
sensé of* female and maie slaves'. Thus the passage in question may 
suggest that some four slaves ofboth the sexes were gifted as meniais. 
The expression kubhi-kadâha may bej like dâsi-dâsa, a Dvandva com- 
pound and may hence mean 'smalî pots and boilers'.^^ However. as in 
the case ofother vessels in the list of gifts one may normally expect 

31. la/ifl me ans *metai* in gênerai and 'copper' in particuîar, However, as the 
author of the record seems to be anxious îo specify the materiaJs eut of which 
the gift vessels were raade, the latter sensé may be preferred. Dr. D.C Sircar 
(op. cit. p. 330) is inciined to take the word in the sensé of 'iron'. But the word 
seems to hâve been uscd în that case îd the later period, both in Sanskrit and 
in Pâli. See Baddhîstic Studies (Ed. B.C. Law), p. 436, fn.; and M. W^illiams, 
Skt. Efig. Oict. (2nd Ed.), s,v, 

32 K,N. Dikshit seems to hâve cxpîained to Dr. Sircar the passage under question 
as *lampsof theshapeof the niouth of a vadSla-Mi, manufactured by the 
Yavanas* (D.C. Sircar. op. cit„ p. 330, f.n.)- The other expia nation offer'ed in 
this connection is 'somc hand-iamps of vadâia fish-shape and Yonaka iamps. 
(K. Gopalaehari, op. cit. p. 89).. See below, for another possible explanation 
of the passage in question, 

33. Cf* gkatj-kaîâha of the Vinayapîtaka (PTS Ed. VoL ÎI, p. 115). 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] BRAHMI INSCRIPTION... 81 

hère too a mention of îhe materiaî ont of which thèse vessels were made. 
Hence it Is iikely that kubhi-kadàha is used hère as a Karmadharaya in 
the sensé of '*potters' product" or ''(vessel) made of eanh''.^"^ But why 
should the gift of ordinary earthern wares, oîily four in iiumber, are to 
be included in the iist of gifts of much higber value ? Our above two 
cxplanations maynot provide an answer to îhis pertinent question, 
Hence kîibhi may be equated with the Skt. kumbhï which Pataiijalî has 
employed in the sensé of a big jar of that name used for storing grains ^^ 
This storîng jar was calied /cî/mMj perhaps because it couid hold one 
kumbha (a capacity measore) of grains which is equal to twenty dronas, 
as sîated in the Kautilîya Arthasâsira.^^ As some cultivable lands had been 
gifted, it is natural thaï the donor donated four kubhî-kadàhas (aiso 
included tbis important gift in îhe Iist), by wayoTmaking necessary 
arrangement for the storage of grains produced in thèse lands. Basing 
on the Word kubhî, we may believe, as we hâve already pointed ont. that 
thèse jarS' were made of clay .^'^ 

The sevenih sentence (fines i5--16) records' the gift of tweniy-live 
nîvartîanas of land by the sanie v/sr.. îhe mahàiaJavara, mentioned in 
the previous sentence. But hère in rnaking this gift he was associated 
with his wife, children and grandchiidren. The situation of this gift- 
land is indicated by the expression ata se îiiara-pase (Skt. atra [eva i e. 
Antaragirau] asya [i e. îatakasya] uîtara-pârsve) meaning 'here (on the 
Anîaragiri itself) on thenorthern side of this (tank i e , the one men- 
tioned in the previous sentence)'. The eighth or thQ last sentence is 
onlypartly preserved (fine 17), it refers to the schooî (nigâya) of îhe 
vénérable monks of the Pûrvasailïya sect. Obviously it is in favour of 
this s'chool of monks that the above donations, mentioned in the previous 
seven sentemces, were made. ^ 

The above analysis of the contents of îhe record, would sbov.J:hat 
the présent inscription contains no référence either îo Jayadharfma-' 
parîchâ interpreted as.*'desire for conquest by means of .preaching the 
dhamma of the Buddhîsts'% or to the Câradhmina ■ takûn to mean "dutres' 
ofspies", Therefore.thereis.no \justilication for' ihe view, "'that îhe 
object of the inscription is the establishment of the institution of the 
ascetic spies as a means to conquest by law of piety and to theascertain- 



34. Ctkumbhûpama of the Dhamma pada (PJS 'Ed.,. verse 40) of which the word 
kumbha hw^s been explained by the comment a tors as kuiâla-bk^j'ana *vessel made 
by poîîer, i.e. earthern vessel'. 
'•35, -Cl* kiimbhï'dhcijiyali sroJriyûk-oiih^ : Mahâbkâsya on the vârttika 5 under.îhe 
rule C///W of Pinini, I, iii, 7- 

36. Shama Sastri*s Ed. (1909), p. 105. Now ■■ kiiblii-kaifâha .again a Km'madàâra}'a, 

■ may /.mean *big vesselkn.ow,.îî..as ktimbhï ikmnhhy-stmakah katâhak) or *bîgvessei 
,, with a capacity equaî to a %/m^/ir\(i.€.;A-«/rtèimj. 

37. I Even now the grains are'stored in. big e.arihern jars m .Ind.iaû. villages. , 

i80— "E.ii " 



t 



82 S.V. UNiVERSITV ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Voî. XX 

ment of rcliable information about the coodiict of tbe good andthe 
wicked". Sîmlîariy there is no référence in the record to a donor named- 
Sana, alleged îo be a king of the Âyis.^^ 

The importance of the record is maaifold. We hâve gotonJya 
îimited number of epigraphs from the Eastern Deccnn assignable to the 
first and second centuries of the Christian era, and their ttxU are also 
not as lengthy as thaï of the présent inscription. Again, our record is one 
of a very sniall number of epigraphs of the Cedi Mahâmeghavâhana 
dynasty. So the Allilru record is of considérable interest from the point 
of study of the language and hisfory of thearea and of the âge. 

The importance of the record for the study of the history of South 
lïîdian Buddhism bas already been referred to by scholars. It is almost 
the earliest of the known inscriptions that refcr to the school of tbe 
Pîïrvasailiya irionks.39 a school which is referred to in the Pâli chroni- 
cles/^ With somc amount of réservation Dr. Vogeî snggested that the 
BuddhisE sects known as Pûrvasailïyas and Aparasaîlîyas probably ''ori- 
ginated from the two Buddhist convents of thePubbaselaand Aparasela, 
whichj according to Hiuen-Tsiang, existedon the hiUs to the east and 
the west of the capital DhaSnakataka".^^ Further, that the institution 
ofslavery was in vogue in thearea doring the âge in question and that 
thegiftof slaves was made to a Buddhist monastcry ofthe period 
provide also interesting information given by the Aiîiîru inscription, 

The référence to the lamps of the Yonakas (Skt. Yavmakas) 
and to the cups shaped like sheaîh-ish is also quite interesting. It is 
usually belicved that a^^lateas the early centuries of the Christian era, 
the Word Yavana meant, îo an îndian, the Greeks only, though in 
subséquent âges it was used as a synonym of mleccba and indicated any 
foreigncî"/- However Shri. M. N. Deshpande, the présent Director 
General Archaeological Survy of India, has drawn ourattention to some 
lamps of Roman imitation found at Ter, Osmanabad district, Maha- 
rashtra "^^ On my request the above scholar was good enough to send me 
an extract of his paper published elsewhere,*** îogtiher wiib photographs 
of some îerracoita lampi^^^ unearthed at Ter, ona among them being 

38. Cf ShamaSastri: op. cit., pp. 49-50; Dr, D,C Sircar : op cit., pp. 329-30, 

39. An /?ep.^- W, £>.. op. cit.. p. 97; Dr, D a Sircur: op. cit. p. 330. 

40. £/„VoLXX,p. 10-11. 

41. ibid. 

42. M Williams: op cit., sak; The Age of împeriâVnUy (Ed. R.C. Majimidar 
etc., Bombay, 1951), p 101. 

43. lui// Wj, No. îO(Oct.î961X p. 56. 

44. i e. in Le Rayonnement Des Cmiisaîkns Grecque Et Momam Sur Les Cultures 
Périphériques, ?dTis(Eà.E.âQBoccMàs),l9€5. 

45. For this help I am beholden to this scholar. 



J^fUMI^-'Wflf^^-*-: 




BUDDHA^S MARBLE STATUE FROM ALLfJin 



By Courte sy of îhe Municipal Muséum 
Vijayawada 




TERRALOTTA LAMP FASHIONED AFTER FiSH (FROM TER; 

By Cmrtesy of Archoeologicûl 
Survey of Indla 



Î977 Parts î & 2] BRAHMÎ INSCRIPTION... 83 

fasîiioned after the human head and the otiier afier a fish. Thèse lainps, 
accordîîig to Sliri Desiiparjde rcfl,ect Roman influence. A Roman lanip 
of the second eenîury a d. lias been imearîhed in Arikameda (near Pondi- 

cherry) aiso.*^^ In AllGru itself an image of the standing Buddha dressed 
after the Roman fashion (î,e. in toga) bas been found.'^'' Heiice. il 
wouid appear that even in the early centuries of the Christian era îhere 
was a sîrong Roman influence in the Easteni Deccao, ' Hence the wcrd 
Yonaka of the AHûru îBscrîptîoD' may sigiiify the Romans as welL At 
âoy rate, ours is almost the earliest record ,of the Easîern Decean îo 
speak of the Graeco-Roman influence, thoogb we . hâve , maiiy early 
records froiB, the caves of the western Decean referring îo the Yavanas,"^^ 
and.though the visit of the Yonarâjis {Ski, Ymana-ràjîs) or rews of' the 
Yavaiia (soldiers) of , Samjayapiîr! to the, , NagârjuBakonda area 
(Gunlur district,' Aîidhra Pradesh) lîi subséquent âge seems to hâve 
b^en menîioîîed.'Jn ,the inscripîioïi of the, Âbhîra Icing Vas/oscna**^ frorn 
that locality. ; Seholars; aiso tisce the Graeco- Ronian irifl,oence in toc 
sculptures from Ainarâvâî'r^^, and Nagârjunakcnda.:^,^ Fiirther in view 
of îhe above facts aiio in view of the Graeco-Rooiaii lainpt' ht Ter^ shaped 
h'ke a iish, one may also suggest that the conceriied passnge of the 
Aliuru inscription actua-îly.iBtends' to convey . the nieaning 'soiiie Yûmika 
Jamps wiih cups (i.e., oil-conlainer) shaped like sheath-fish' {vÉdâl- 
iïbhikâra-karodîyo Yonaka- dmkayG.ix, Skî. vadâiàkàra-karotayofYëvmiaka- 
dîpîkdh), 

Oiir record is silent about ihe niaterial v^ith uhich the l^nips were 
made. However, it may be surniised that iusî like ihe lanipû frora Ter, 
nientioned above, the lamps under quesMon bad aîso been nsede of 
terracotta onîy. The name Yonaka-dîrîka may signify that the lamps 
were either maaufactured in, and imporied froni tlvc Yavana country 
or from a Yavana settlement like SamjayapurI in ïndia itself 5- or made 
iocally on the raodei of the Yavana îamps. 

46. Ancienî Indîa, No. 2 (Juîy 1946), p. ÎÔÎ. 

47. This Buddha image is preserved in the Nfunicipai Muséum in Vijciyawacta. 

48. Luders: op. cit. nos. 965, 1093, 1123. 1140, 1154, 1Î56, U82, etc. 

49. £/, Vol, XXXIV, p. 202, text line 2. In another inscription from Nâgârjuna- 
konda" assignable to the third eenîury a.d. the Buddliist teachers of the Thera- 
vâda school are described to hâve converted to Buddhism the people ot many 
countrics including that of the Yavanas. Sce EL Voi, XXXÏH, pp. 247 ff 

50. K. Gopaiachari : op. cit, p. 96. 

51. A Comprehensive Hist. oflndia, Vol. II (Ed. K.A.N. Sastri. Orient Longmans, 
1957) p* 755. 

52* See above f,n. 49. The list of articles thu had been transported from the 
Western countries to the Eastern coastal région of îndia, incîuded lamps also, 
See Anciens India, op.cît,, p. 18. 



U S.V UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

The référence ta tlie colas known as Karsâpana-puranas in the 
présent epigrapfa is also a striking point for the students of ancient ïndiaa 
niuîiismatics. The name of the coin reniinds us of the Pâli expression 
poranasa Nitakahapanasa''^^ in the Samanta-pasëdikâ of Buddhaghosa, 
a conieniporary of Kuniâragupta I (a.d. 413-35). In that passage the 
adjective pof^a (Skt. purâna îiteraily 'ancient') has been app^îed to 
the nilakahâpana (Skt. mlakârsapana) coirî peihaps to distingiiisb it 
from the Rudradaniaka coin evidently of the later days. No doubt 
Buddhaghosa's commentators, like Sâripiitta etc., of the subséquent 
period explain iht \yotà porâfta a^ poratta-sattanumpa-^Iûkhana-'Sampanrjâ 
uppadîîa^^ (Skt, purànû' sasîrâmirUpa'ïaksana-sampanmà uîpadîtah) meaning 
'manufactured wiîh îhe spécial characteristic marks following the 
ancient treatise (on numismatîcs)'. However, the modem researchers 
are of the opinion that purâna 'ànà mlakârsapana are but two différent 
namesof one and the same class of îhe punch-marked silver coins. -''•'^ 
It is interesîing fo note that hy uûrigkahapana toqu'àllfy pman^ by 
abhedânvaya, the Alluru inscription seems to îestify the correctness of 
the contention of the modem scholars. 

The adjective nîla applied by Buddhaghosa to the purâna-kârsâ^ 
pana is absent in our record. it is again interesting to observe that 
the punch-marked silver coins are called sîmply as kahapana m the 
PItakas and that at a later period cnly the epithet ?2j/a came to be 
applied to thèse coins wheo they had accnmolated vçrdigris deposit on 
them ihrough oxidization on acconnt of long passage oftime.^^ 

Forther, tht ttxm purâna 'o\à' is used in connection with the 
kahapana in our record evidently to differentiate it from the new kahâ- 
pana^.-'^ Therefore it niay snggest that both the old and the new kaha^ 
panas wcvQ in circulation in the area and during the period to which 

the AHûrii record belongs. There is yet another probability. The Nanà- 
ghât inscription of Nâganika.-^^ the Nasik inscription of Usavadata,59 
and îhe inscriptions of the subséquent period from the Western Deccan,^o 

53. For complète quotation of the passage uiider question mQ Buddimtic Stttdies 
(op.cit.) p. 384. 

54. For moreaiîd fuller quoîatîom see ibid* pp. 385 ff. 

55. îbid p. 447; Dr. D.C. Sircar: Siudies in Indian Coins (1968), p* 99, 

56 Jûimu U P, ffist, Socîeiy, VoL VI (Î933)p, 167; Dr. I>,C. Sircar: StMies etc., 

, ^ p/99. , ■ 

57. It isaîso probable that the iotended meaning of the passage in question is *one 
tliousand of the Purânas' or *tîie ancient (ones) ^monglhc kâr sa panas' {kârsâpa- 
mnâmmadhyeye purSmh, îesmn sahasram). ïn this sensé there is no'need 
for us to assume an abhedânvaya of kahapana with purâna in our record, 

'■5^, ' ■opxit.'/' 

.:;59. ^LVoivin, p.7Sfr. • 

: 60. ibid.'pp.SS, 90, etc. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] BRAHMI INSCRIPTION... , ^5 

speak of kârsâpanas but do not apply to them the terni purâna, At the 
saaie time it is known that there had been two varieties of karsâpanûs, 
oîie made of silver and the other made of copper, and that the former 
had the narae purana also, while the latter did not.^î Hence by using 
the ter m purana does the Alliïru epigraph intend the silver kârsâpanas 
as distinguished from the copper ones, probabîy mentioned in the 
inscriptions from the Western Deccan referred to above? Any way 
our inseription is very probabîy the earliest among the known epigraph s 
to speak of the Kârsâpana-puranas. 

The Alliïru record is important aiso for the study of political his- 
tory of the Andhra country. We know aiready that the Airas otherwise 
koown as Cedis wcre occupying the région comprisiug the West Godavari 
districtj eastern part of the Krishna district and the Guntur district du- 
ring the early centuries of the Christian era.^^ The présent A llûru record 
îhows that the western part of the Krishna district was aîso under the 
Cedi or Aila ruie. In facî the Aiia pénétration into further west seems 
Êo besuggested by the name Eksvaram of a village near the western boun- 
dary of the Nalgonda district whîch is on the western neighbourhood of 
the Krishna district. For, that name is to be traced from the Sanskrit 
Aile svar a é^noimg a form of Sîva i,c. most probabîy a /M^a setupby onc 
\ila,^^ who, on thebasis of what we havestudied above, may hâve to bc 
ndencified with one or the other ruler oftheAila or Cedi dynasty. Fur- 
ther the palaeography of ail the known Aila inscriptions from the Bas- 
;ern Andhra points to a period earlier than that of the Sâtavâhana 
'ecords from the sarae région. Hence one may conclude that the 
îitavâhanas succeeded the Allas in the région some time in the niiddle 
)f the second century a.d. 

Another interesting item to be notcd in our record is the use of 
he form Àîla in préférence to Aira which is found in the Hâthigurnpha 
îiscriptions etc., referred to above. Some scholars hold that dirais an 
jquivalent of another Prakrtic tîtle Ayîra (Skî. Arya) meaning *nobîe'.^^ 
I!onsequently it is conchided that this titîe of the Cedi kings signifies the 

61. Repson: Catalogue ûflndianCûius» pch xxvnL 

62. For a detaîled discussion on this point see S. Sankaranarayanan : Chedî Ride in 
Andhra in The Karanatak Historical RevîQw» Vol, HT, (1977), pp. 34 ff. 

63. A.P. Govt. Arch Séries No. XIV {A Monograph onYeleswaram Excavation) 
pp. 2-3. In fact in some of the Purina manuscripts the Prakrtic form Elu is 
found in the place of Its Skt. équivalent Aila. See Pargiter : Puranîc Text of 
the Dynasties of Kali Age, p. 2. In this connection it is interesting to note that 
M. Williams (op. cit* s> v. Manâavya) refers to a Unga called Manda vyesvara, 
which, as the name indicates, mnst ha?e been Instalîedby one who was a 
namcsake of the Aila kîng of the présent record, y/z, Manda vya» 

64. Luders: op. cit.. Nos. 1345, 1347, 



86 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

Âryaû origin of their family, establishcd in the land of the îion-Âryans/^ 
m., the KaiiBgi country. As againsî this, anoîher set of scholars 
suggest that the form Aira stands for the Sanskrit, Alla which is used io 
the Purânas to dénote a branch of the Pauravas of ihe iunar race.^^ NO'W 
our présent inscription clearlydistiîigiîishes Aila (line I) from Ayira (Skt. 
Ârya) (line 13) and îhus iî seems to support the second view. ït may 
also beofsome interest 'to note ihatwhiîe îheAilas and the Iksvakus 
find mention in the Purinas side by side/^' the epigraphs show that the '• 
kings whostyled themselves as Aiias and Iksvakus, he!d sway over the 
Krishna-Guntur région of Andhra 003 after the other, of course with a 
break by the Sâtavâhana raie in betwsen, Most probabiythe said royal 
families known from the epigraphs ciaimed their,-origin from their respec- 
tive Purânic namessake. 

■ Amoog the,nameof thegeographical iinits occiiring in.the présent 
record oniy those of the localities Pâpikala, Airapura,, and Macha-ratha 
and of the hill Antaragiri ::ire fuîîy preserved. Of thèse, Papikala has 
been identijSed with the modem village Pâkarela or Pakarela in the 
Gudivada taluk. Krishna dis,trict^''^ K,.Go.pa,îacharî .'opined:^^,, that 
Pâpikaia may be identicai with Pâpila meetloBed in an Iksvaku inscrip- 
tion frora Nâgârjunakoada.'^^ The name Airapura seeiBs to snggesî that 
it was a city most probably foimded by kingof the Aira family to which 
theking Mandavya too belonged. Thîs place may be identified either' 
with Ailuru in Gudivada taiiik, Krishna district or with Alliîru, the find 
spot of the inscription under study. The name Macharatha or Mâcha 
district remiûds us of the niodern aame Masûlipatnam, more popularîy 
known as Machilipatnam OB the coasta! side of the Krishna district. It 
may be noted that the Machiiipatnam région had been under îhe sway of 
the Cedi king Khâraveia and it had beeo referred to as 'a land of Mai- 
soli' by Ptolemy.'* The name Ataragiri [Skt. Antaragm) 'Middie 
Hiir, if viewed along wiîfa the liâmes Puvasela 'Eastern Hill' and Avara- 
selâ 'Western Hiir inay suggest that the first onealso, just Hke îhe other 
two, had something to do with DhEÎSakada,72 

The text of the record togcther with ils Sanskrit ftej^F and an 
English translation is given below. 

65. The Age of Impérial Unîîy, op. clt, p:2l2. 

66. Pargiter: op. cit., p. 2.; E/., Vol XX, p, 80; AComprehensive Eist. of India., 
op. cit., pp. 111-12. 

67. Pargiter: op.cit., ibià 

68. An. Rep. on 5. înd. Epigraphy, op, clt, p. 97. 

69. Op. cit., p. 142 f.n, 

70. £■/-, Vol XX, p. 22, Inscription F, Une 3, 

71. S. Sankaranarayanan : op. cit., ibid. 

72. Seeabove. 



ëJhî 



"^&: 



8 ' 



10 



12 



14 



16 



'^ôhim. 






•yf.. 



WmWé 



awi 









mmsmi 









^^'»r 



^i-itfa^SfejlKi^^ill 



10 



12 



14 



^f^ 



BRAHMI INSCRIPTION FROM ÂLLURU 



1977 Farts I & 2] BRAHMI INSCRIPTION... 87 

TEXTES 

i [t^ej îî?^?î %[raF.... 

8. ^$re[t] ïïrîlîT q=? ?î?rrfïî %ïîî^ sffç^^ 

73* From photographs and tlie facsimiie facing p. 97 in tho An* Report on S, Ind- 
Epigraphyïoi 1923 -24. 

74. Only the lower part of ta is visible. After tîiis three or foor îetters seem to 
hâve been lost* Most probably the original expression was Ceîîsa or Ceîirâjasa, 
Cf. the Hâtbigurnpha inscription, line !♦ 

75. Dr» Shama Sastry split sa râmo, corrected the second word into ramâ, and 
interpreted it as **magnifîcent", Hereinafter only a few (not ail) important 
faiilty readings of Dr. Sastri are noted by us. 

76. After this, four Ietters seem to hâve been lost of which the fîrst is'obviously ko» 
Cf. line 14. But Dr. Sastry read hère jayadhama-parîcd, took it for the Sans- 
krit j'ayadharma-pancchë in the sensé of * 'désire for conquest by nicans of 
preaching the dharma of the Buddists", 

77. î.e. Sa-^veîara-kiiîo. Of course it is not unîikeîy that gift recorded hère in this 
sentence consîsted of a cluster of bamboos and a kseîra. But the absence of ca 
after kheta seems to suggest that the expression vetara-kula h an adjective» 

78. The four or five Ietters that might hâve been lost hère, probably containcd the 
name of kheta or îand donated. 

79. The expression deya-dhama-parkâko of the previous sentence is obviously 
supposed to folîow hère. Dr. Sastry however read hère sarasa and took it in 
the sensé of * 'fertile**. 

30. The Ietters that are lost hère must hâve given the nuraber of the mvarttanas 
donated in the village. 

U. The Ietters that are lost heie are difficults to restore. But there can hardly bc 
any doubt that they formed part of the name of the pada (Skt. psta) or village 
In whîch 32 mvarttanas of îand were donated. Dr. Sastry read hère râja-Jaiini 
and câradhama and took them respectively in the sensé of * 'most fertile" and 
**the duty of spies'*. 

;2. The Ietters that are lost hère may be restored as rajadaîinî Cf. in line 
5 above. 

3. It is possible to read this name as Cerapura meaning a ciry of the Cera (kings). 
But that is highly improbable in the présent record found in Andhra i.e. far 
away from the îand the Ceras v/z., the Kerala country. 

4. The ietters that are lost hère are difficult to resîore. But it is obvious that they 
formed the first part of a personaî name ending in daîa, 

5. Evidently the original had baîivadâna hère. 



88 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

17. srfW^ ^fe^R f^ïïR^^^ 

TEXT SANSKRITISED 

1. ^5r^ PfF^s^î^ ^^[gj^Flçq] 

2, ffRF^ifRT ^HTjkf^fîT: 1.... 
S. ^îTÇfÇfîîîPïi ?î%^# ïî.... 

S6. Hère Dr. Sasîry reâû pasarûpântjasa jâsa, took the expression for the Sanskrit 

spasa-rûpâiii yësya yasyas^nd mtçiprttté it as ''disgiîises of spîeswhosc". 
87. The single letter; îbatis lost iiere is no doiîbt caofwliich the îower partis 

■visible. • • • 

88.' Dr. Sastry read lakiya and took it for the Sanskrit laghtya *'*sraaller'*- ' 
'S9/ Prob'âbîy - «Mi^'âra-^aro^^/jf? is intended. 'See above. 

90. Dr. Sastry interpreted ilie iines 11-12 as *'For the pnrposeof coîlecting,' taxes and ; 
■; :■ oîherincome (karëdâya) intbe îorm of diamond fv.£Zjû Sk t. va/m j.fro.m' the -mines ' ' 
iSkam) 'a'nd aîso for the sobsistence ijmkâya) of the workmen (raka i.e. karaka?] \ 
etc. are granted the mine calied Fîcapâka" etc, ; ' '..•■■• 

■•9lV ; Br;.Sastry someliow read.here to Tapetatampasa and took Tapetatarapa for a^' 
Personal name of Sana snpposed îo hâve been .mentioned in the record. See 
' below. Onthe oîherhandK.Gopalacliarî read ata Pedatarapasemd Mth 
iinexpîained. 

92. Dr. Sastry read hère Smmsa kaia Âyîrana and interpreted it as ''made by Sana. 
tiiekingof Ayis''. According to him Ayîrana Isan équivalent of the Skt[: 

Ayirâjmya, 

m. Rest of the record is not traceable. ■ An expression likc ' parîgahe savam àatam:^ ' - 
Cf. 'Âparmnakâviimseîiyâmm parîgahe savaniyutam yatiihâpîiam in a'l>lSg^rj}^ 
. nakonda inscription (£1, Vol. XX, p. 21, inscription £, !ine,2) ' : ■ , ■' ' '^ 



1977 Paris I & 2] BRAHMl INSCRIPTION.., 89 

10. fF^rmif^ =g^îR (i.e mim "^wm) sfrit^ (çttiïï^)' 

14. ï^^ (i e. i^^)^^ FflFcT^RW 5:^gïïqtt2ïrïï: I 

15. ^ (or ^cT:) ^Ç!T (or cTW) 3iTf^ %q^nrl%^^f^ 

16. W^ ^^R^ ^P^^ ^qc^^f^ I 

17. ^îurt ^lt#^^ T^wm [^fèrl ^ ar^rq; i] 

TRANSLATION 

The monastery with a garden (is) thegift^^ of Mandavya, {îhe king) 
)f tire Cedi famiîy (and) of the Alla clan. A field (named) na ... ti with 
îlusters of bamboos f/oc^/fijj on the outskirts cf.. nigala (is the gîfîjoî 
iàra ,,,fUYar{tanas (ofafield) located on the boundary of Pâpikala arc 
oyal gifts. Also twenty-two nivarttanas on the outskirts of..,pàtz 
mcluded) in the district of Matsya (7^ îhe ^ifi] of îhe king. Twenty-four 
îvartîanas oiî\ Wiii boundary of Airapura is (//?€ gift) of...ndaia. Five 
undred cows; sixty-four bullock-carts: four fcmale and maie slaves (as) 
îenials; four kubhi-kadàhas; two copper boijers: four vessels of beii- 
letal: Fâvûrn^ïAa-lamps with (o//) réceptacles of the shape of the vadâla 
fîsh): a tank on the hind part of the Antaragiri and a permanent endow- 
lent of one thousand karasâpana-purânas; (ail) are the gifts of the 
îûhâîalavara. Fifty-tv^^o nlvantanas (ofland) there f/z^^/fjon itsnorthern 
ide (is the gift) of the same associated with (hisi wife, children and 
rand-chiîdren. (Ail thèse are gifted] for the enjoymenc of the vénérable 
lonks of the Pûrvasailiya (school) 



H. In Buddhist Sanskrit the Nominative Singuiar esa seenis at times, îo be used as 
Noniinative Plural also, See Edgerton : op. cit., VoL ï, p- liS. 

^5, Deya-dhama-paricâka literaîiy 'theact of sacrifice imade) accordîng to the 
sacred princîples of gifts*. 



680 ~E. 12 



CJ. PADMANÀBHA SASTRY 

SIDDHESVARA TEMPLE AT TERALA 

Accordîng to thc Aparajitaprcché ma SamarShgam Sûtradhara, 
:hc terni PhamsanS dénotes a temple form, The stcpped pyraoïid super- 
itructure form according to the tcxt on Indian architecture is kîiown as 
^hmmna. In the archacological litcraturc it is referrcd as £^ia«fk- 
la^ara^ The temple belonging to thîs style is foiind àt Terala, Pal* 
ladu taluk; Andhra Pradesh. One can approach this temple across thc 
[uarrîes from the Machcrla Raîlway Station. 

At présent this temple is burried opfo the levelof comice. Thc 
ragments of the door-way and other architectural éléments arefoood 
:;attered in front of thc temple. 

On plan (/5/acd0/îiaj, thc temple consists of a gnihamaniapa 
n antamla mé a garbhagrha.^ The npper part of tkt jmghi of the 
arbhagrha is only visiblev The wall is devoid of niches; Just belaw 
le KapoîapàU, on the uppcr part of the wall, flying gmdharvas are 
ixvtà. Thc KapoiapSli U sHpQû into straigbt edged unlike the kapola 
f the other temples. The Ca^^raiato are carved at the régulât inter- 
^h ovQî thc KapotapûlL 

The sikhara rises over a tall kanthamauli and consii^ts of nîne 
humis. It is of a stcpped pyramidal type and shows a slight curvatore 
tthe edges, Tiie intercsting feature of the sikhara is the employment 
' madhyolata, in the middle portion on aîl sides. The sikhara otherwise 
net rclieved into reccss and offsets as wc fmd in the other nagara 
kharas. Thc madhyalatâ has a string of udgamas which is composed of 

K Bhanudcva : Aparaptaprccha, Baroda Oriental Insîitute, 1950, sûtra 178. 
2* K.V. Soundara Rajan : Early Temple Architecture in Kamataka and its Ramifi- 

cationSi p. U,p.64 
3* Since the temple is corapletely burried upto thc level of cornice, we cannot 

gîvô the plan in détail, and it is only a tentative plan. 



92 S.V, UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

candrasâlas. The décoration of the bhûmis is also noteworthy. Each 
bhûmi in its klianda part is decorated wîth floral scrolls and shouldered 
arches separated fay pilasters, The ornamenîation, in the east face of 
the sikhara and its bhûmis shows three petalied la the triarguiar pattern. 
Another type of tiie ornamentation is the mâla décoration. Thèse two 
types are alternatively employed in the Mmw/^. Variation in the mâlïï 
décoration is observed throughout the sikhara in ail the faces They 
are simple garland motifs and Gherubus carrying the garlands The 
candrasâlas form the main eiemciitof the décoration in the madhyalata. 
The candrasâlas and the udgamas hâve human heads in their sockets. 
In the south face of the s/A'/?^r<^, gandharvas are shown in îhc udgamas. 
The west face of the sikhara also shuws the similar décoration. 

The sfA^Aarû is capped by the projecting pîdhânaphalaka and fol- 
lowed by a short gala and a large ânialaka ail carved. Tlie kalasa as 
the top eîennent is completely missing. 

The antareîa part of the temple is butted. The fragments of the 
door-way oî tht gûdhamandapa are scattered on the ground. The door- 
way of this ;;2^7«^tf/?û! carries the stambha^ laîa anà paira-sakhâs. The 
stambha iakhâ has an elongated bracket topped by Laiina mode! showing 
only madhyalaià élément. Laiâsâkhâ is fluently rendered in its sweep of 
the carve. Its fo liage shows a shaiiow carving. The lintel portion of 
the door-way carries Ganesa, Umamahekvara^ Siva and Siva as Yogisvara 
and Visnu. 

The plan of the temple in its élément may be compared to the 
Râmalingesvara temple at SaLYâvoîu'^ and Siva temple at Banda îândra- 
pàdu, The jattgha oî the temple carries the décoration of tht gandharvas 
in the xipper portion of the wall recalls ths sarae as in the nâgara style 
of the temples at Mahâkuta,^ Pattadakal^ and Àlampiïr.'^ The carving 
of the gandharvas in the upper part of the wall aloog with ghantanmlâ is 
a characteristic fcature of the nâgara temples of ail over the northern 
ïndîa and the Deccan [t is best seen in the temples at Âlampnr also. 
The feature of the phâm^ana- sikh ara reveals ihe resemblances of the 
samc type oî sikharas found at Aihole and Bsndatandrapadu, The pré- 
sence of the madhyalaîs élément in this temple and at BandatSndrapâdu 
shows the changes in the evoiution of îhe phâmsanà sikharas: An examî- 
nation of the;yAâmsa/îâ superstructural décorative features at Aiboie.^ 

4. M. RamaRao: Earïy Çhalukyan Temples of Andhradesa, Hyderabad, Î965. 

5. Stella Kramrisch : The Art ofindia, pL 57. 

6. Zimmer. H: The Art aflndian Asf a, Î96B, pi 304. 
7- M. Rama Rao : op. cit., pL 50. 

8. Stella Krararisch : op. cit,, pL 58- 



1977 Parts ! & 2] SIDDHESVARA TEMPLE... 93 

Mahâkiita^ and otfaer places reveal the practice of shooldered arch 
design and in the floral scrolls in the peiiod. The extra décorative fea- 
tures which are noticed in the subjoined temple is probably a îocal pheno- 
menon Such a tendency m ihe matters of décoration of the super- 
structure is seen at Satyavolu in the Râmalingesvara tempie. The déco- 
ration of the sikhara on its bhïlmîs shows several motifs such as gan' 
i/î^rv£?5and seated lions. AI! the features show that the Siddhesvara 
temple at Terâla beings to the late seventh or early eighth century a.d. 

Ail the inscriptions^^ that are available on the slabs lying near the 
temple refer to this temple as Siddhesvara temple. Oftheni, the 
eariiest one dated a.d, 679 refers to the reign of Sarvalokasraya Visnu- 
vardhana Maharaja i.e. Visnuvardhana II of the Eastern Câlukya family. 
On this basis, we can surely fix the date of this temple to the period of 
Visnuvardhana IL The origin of a sikhara cappcd by an amalaka bas 
already been traced to the early CalukyasJi 

There is a beautiful Mahisâsuramardanî sculpture lying on the 
south face of the wall of iht garbhagrha. It may be the one of the sculp- 
tures of the temple. The description of the image is as foilows: 

It is of a four-handed variety. The upper right arm holds a éûla 
md lower right arm holds a k/iadga, The left upper arm possess a khetaka 
tnd left îower arm liolds on the head of Mahisa. The ornamentation is 
.1 foUov^s . Jatâmakvta, Sarpakmdaîas and small rope like necklace. The 
ajnopavita runs aloog the breast on to the rightofthe abdomen. The 
arving below the waist is mutilated. 



ibid. pi. 57. 

M. Somasekhara Sarma : Corpus oî Teîangana Inscriptions ^ Vol» IV, 1973, pp. 1-2» 

K.V. SoundaraRajan ; îndian Temple Styles (New Delhi; p, 41 ♦ 



s s. RAMâCHANDRA murthy 

SOME TELUGU PLAGE-NAMES OF HISTORÏCÂL 
IMPORTANCE 

The place-naracs of any country or région deserve a detailcd criti* 
cal study as they reveal rnany aspects of human life of even remote past. 
Many a tirae place-aames préserve facts of historical intcrest, which arc 
not known through any other source. It is proposed in this paperto 
discuss sorae place-naraes of historical sigaificance occurring in the ins- 
criptions of Andhra Pradesh from the earliest to the thirtcenth century, 

Theplace-namesofthisgroupmaybroadiybedividedasfollows : 
;i) Places named after a dynasty, (2) Places riamed after a ruling king 
)r his queen, or prince, (3) Places naraed after the epithets of the kings, 
4) Places named after the subordinate chiefs, officiais, relatives etc. of 
:he kings and (5) Places named after officiai désignation. 

We iînd three place-names whichowe their origin to the royal 
lynasties. They are Vânavrôlu (identical with modem Vânavôluin 
^nantapur district), Vaidumbavrëlu (unidentified) and Âdavàni (modem 
^doni, Kurnool district). Of thèse namcs, the firstone, which occurs 
n the inî'criptions of the tcnth century, owes its name to the Bina dyna- 
ty, the chiefs of which ruled over the région around Anantapur as 
ubordinates of the Câlukyas of Bâdâmi during the eighth century. The 
îcond one, Vaidurabavrôlu, also finds mention in the inscriptions of the 
;nth century and was obviously named after the Vaiduraba dynasty, 
le chiefs of which ruled over the présent Chittoor and Cuddapah régions 
uring the ninth and tenth centuries. The place-name Âdavâni, referred 
) in the inscriptions of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, probably owes 
s origin to the Yâdava dynasty which flourished during tbat period. 

The earliest occurrence of naming a town after a king or a chief in 
le Ândhra country can be dated back to about the third century b.c. 
he place-name Dhanadapura (modem Candavôlu, Guntur district), 
ferredto in the inscriptions of the twelfth century; appears to hâve 



96 S.V. UNiVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

been îiamed after a chief called Dhaaada. The Gaaapavaram iBscriptiorij 
daîed a,d. I23L staîes that Dvîpa was populated by Dhanada in ancient 
timesJ A king named Kubïraka is known from a Brâhmî inscripîioû 
dîscovered at Bbattiprôlu.- Dhanada being a synonym of Kubera it niay 
be presiimed îhat it was Kuberaka who gave his name to Dhanadapura. 
Chroîîologically nexî place-name which owes ils orgin to a king is Vijaya- 
puri, the famous Buddhist site and modem Nagarjunakonda. It appcars 
to hâve been named after the Satavahana king Vijaya-âatakarni (3rd 
côntury a.d.) who might hâve founded îhis city.^ Anotncr such instance 
occurs during the period of îhc chiefs of Ânanda-gotra. The Mattepado 
plates'* of Damodaravarman (4ih century a.d.) state that the king resided 
aï Kâodirapura which was obviousïy naraed after the king Kandâra, the 
founder of the Ananda-gotra line ofkings. 

Subséquent to the chiefs of the ÂBanda-gotra family it is the 
Eastern Calukyan kings who contributed their names or epithets to the 
places. The village Sarvasiddhî (modem Sarvasiddhi, Vîsakhapatnam 
district) referred to in an inscription, dated a.d. M 35, seems to hâve 
been named after the tiîle Sarvasîdéln QÎ the Eastern Câ}iikya king either 
Jayasimha I or 11^. The village Niravadyapura or Niravadyaprôlïi 
(modem Nidadavôlo, West Godavari district) seems to hâve been named 
after the epithet Nirmadya of Jayasimha IL The Celliîru plates^ of 
the Co}a prince Vîracôda, dated a,d. ÎI43, refer to a village Kokkili- 
pondi. Though îhere is no direct évidence it may be presnmed that 
thispiace. might hâve been named after the Eastern Ciiokya king KokkiH 
(a.d^ 719). The village éîla^ (East Godavari district) owes its name 
to ,Sîlâ. the queen of Visnuvardhana V. Lîkewise the Bhïœaprôlu 
(modéra Bbimavaram.near Simarlakôta,. East Godavari district), also 
referred îô as Cilukya-Bhîmapuxi in inscriptions,^ owes its name to 
Calukya Bhîma L II is interesting, to note that the sanie village is 
also referred to as Rijaniriyana Bhîmavaramii and Râjanârâyanapuram.u 
in the inscriptions, ^ Râjanamyana is one of the epithets of ,„ Râjarâja- 
narendra and perhaps the place was given. a new snrname after his title. 
The place-name , Miimmadi . Bhîmavaramu (modem Mummidivaram, 
East Godavari district) referred to in the tweifth century inscrîptions^*^\ 
owes its name to the epithet M^w/Hisf^f Mim^ of Vimaliditya. The 



î. ' Epigmpàia Mdkûf {El) :Voi. lil. pp:82'ff., ,, 

: '2. iMf.. Vol. lî, p. 325. 

3. ,iàM., Vol XXXVI, pp. 273 ff. ' 

4. . lèiil., ■ Vol. XVlï. pp. 327fr. 

5. N, Venkataramanayya : The Eastern Çâîukyas of Vefigï, pp. 64 and 70. 

6. Indlan Àntiqmrf (lA/,. Vol. XïV. pp. 56 :£, £/, VoL VII pp. 9-ÎO. ■ 
7., SmthJndiûMlnscripiimS'(SII), VoL IV, No. 1214. 

■■8. lèiU,, VoL V, Nos. 6g aodS2. 

9. léM., Nos. ,62 aïîd66respectively. 
10.^ Jbid. 'Vol IV, No. I139; ibid,, VoL Vî, Ho. 1139/ 



1977 Parts I & 2] SOME TELUGU PLACE-NAMES... 97 

place-name Râjamahêiidrapattana (modem Rajahmundry, East Goda- 
van district) occurring iîi the inscriptions of the tweifth and thirteentii 
centuries^^ owes its origin to the epithet Râjamahendra of Rijaraja- 
narendra. 

A few inscriptions of the twelfth century a.d. refer to tlie village 
Tuinbaîam (modem Pedda or Chinna Tumbalam, Kurnool district) as 
KiftinârayanapiiraJ^ We learii from inscriptioDS*^ that the Râftrakuta 
king Govinda îlï had the title Kirîmarâyam. As the kingdoin of this 
ruler is known to hâve extended over the Kurnool région,^* it can be 
presumed thaï the second name Kîrtiûârâyanapura of Tumbalam owes 
ils origin to this king's title. 

As many as 21 place-names appear to hâve been named after the 
impérial Cola kings. Modem Neliiîru is referred to in the inscriptions 
of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries with a second name Vikrama- 
simhapiira.15 Vikramasimha appears to be one of the titles of Parlntaka 
(â.d. 907-55)^^ probably after which the second name Vîkramasimha- 
pura was given to Neilûru, Jananithapuramu mentioned in the 
inscriptions of the twelfth century and identical with modem Dràksa- 
rama (East Godavari district) *' seems to hâve been named after the 
title Janmmha of the Cola king Rijarija L The Meipâdi (Chittoor 
iistrict) inscription^^ of the same king dated a,d. 999, informs us that 
le cancelled the name Viranarayanapuram, borne by the village Meipâdi 
md named it after his own epithet JRâjâimja as Râjisrayapuram. 
>ince it is known Ïh2it Viranàrayana was one of the titles of the king 
*arâotaka I it is obvions that Meipâdi was given anothername Vif a- 
lârâyanapuram after this king which was subseqoently cancelkd by 
lajarâja. Some other titles of Rajarâja were also given as second 
lames to some villages. Kalahasti (Chittoor district) is referred to 
,s Tirukkalâtti éias Mummudisolapiiram in the inscriptions^^ and the 
lame Mummudisolapuram owes its origin to the title Mnmmodisola. 
'wo other villages Tummiiru and Snpmpëta (Neilore district) are 
sferred to as Tumbaiytir a/m? Jayangondasola-caturvedîmangalam and 



1 L EL, Vol, V , pp. 31 fif. Annual Report on Indian Epigraphy (ARE), 1957. No. 
B 10; Journal êfAndhraHîsîoricûl Research Society, (JAHRS) Vol. II, pp. 156 ïï, 

12. SIL, Vol IX-1, Nos. 294 and 295. 

13. M., Vol XII, p. 218; Yazdani (Ed.), The Early Bistoryofthe Deccan, p, 265, 

14. Yazdani (Ed.), op. cit. 

15. Neilore District Inscriptions {NDI}, Vol. Il, pp. 833, 836, 838, 852, etc. 

16. Annual Report on South India Epigraphy (ARSIE), 1911, Nos. 228, 278 and 279 
îbid*r 1912, pt. 2, para 16. 

17. Slh, Vol. V, No. 51; ibid., VoL IV; No. 1091 ARE., J957, No. 139 £/.,Voî. 
VL, pp. 334 ff.. îbid., Vol X, p. 71. 

.8. ÀRSIK, 1920 No. 101; ibid.y 1921, Pt. 2, para, 31. 
.9. ibid., 1909, pt 2. para 42. 

SO — E. 13 



98 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

Siïratnr alias Singalânîapura respecîively in the inscriptions.^^ The 
second names of thèse îwo villages can be îraced to the epithets Jayaii- 
gondasola and Singalântaka. Four villages are found to hâve beei 
named after diiïereot epiihets of Ihe Cola king Râjendra 1. They are 
Kalidindi which is referred to as Madhiiràntakanallxir,^! Cërâm ^2/^.? 
MadhnrântakacatiîTvediinangalaii}, Madamangalam cUas Gangaikonda- 
sol^ana!ltLr-2 and Mahîpâlakuiakâlapura.^s Regarding îhe last one, 
\t is possible that îhe Cola king might hâve rcceived the epithet Mahi- 
pâlakulakala to commemorate his victory over îhe Pala king Mahipâîa 
and diat the village in question came to be named after this epithet. 
Thîs village is idenlical with modem Nagari in Chittoor, district. A few 
inscriptions of the twe'lfîh century refer to îhe village Ghantasâla alias 
Colapâiidyapuram (modem Ghantasala, Krishna district).-'^ The term 
Colapandya seems to owe ils origin to the title Colapândya of the prince 
Jatâvarmaii Sundarapândya who was appointed by his father Rajendra I 
as îhe viceroy of the newly annexed Pandyan territory, Valavanirâyana- 
Caturvedimangalam which was mentioned ,^ as, the' second name of the 
village Kiingantir in îhe epigraphs^^ (modem Punganiîni, Chittoor 
district) owes its origin to ,the epithet Valavanamonya of Kulottunga L 
Modem Nandalûru (Cuddapah district) is referred to in some' inscrip- 
tions-^ as Nirandanûra/i<:7.y Kulottungacoja-caturvediniafigalam obviou-- 
sly so named after the same king^ Kulottnnga L Srîkantfeanirayaria- 
purara. (modem Gand::ivaram5 Nellore district) is yet another village 
to be given the second naine KnlottimgasolapuraîB as evidenced by an 
inscription^'^dated in the41st year of the king. . Modem Visâkhapatnam 
is also referred, to^ as Kiilottungacodapattanamn, inthe inscriptions^^ of 
theeJeventh and tweîfth centuries. , Tamil inscription-^ from Vijaya- 
,vâda (Krishna district) refers to that place as Rijendrasolapurani. 
This was so named after RâjeEdiacoIa, another name of Kulottnnga I. 
The village Cindadam (unidentified)- was also named as Râjendracoda» 
caturvedimangalam.5*^. The Pithâporam plates of Vîracoda (a.d. 1093)3^ 
furnish us witlî interestïog information that the village Milavelli with 
iîstweîve hamlets and Ponnaiorra and Âlami were uniled and renamed 
as Viracodacaturvedimaigalam,., after the name of the prince. \ A Taniil 



20. .iVDi., Vu LUI, pp. 1,315 ff.. 

21. £/.„ .VoLXXIX, pp. 57ff., . . 
22: -^i^SJE, .1,906, No. 553. 

23.. ibîd.. 19^7. No. B 28. 

24. SÎL, Vol. X, Nos- US aad 1,40. 

25* .4iîS/E., 1906 Nos. 540-4L 

26. ibid., 1907, No. 578; îbïd., 1908, pt. 2, paras 63 and 7S. 

,27. NDL, YoL.IÏ, pp. 779,, ff. ' ' ' 

28. 51/., ¥ol..X-, No.651 ,(Âpp-2j ■ 

•29., ibid^. Vol. IV, No. 779. 

.30. iMd,;^o, 1281. 

31. EL, VoL-V.,,pp.7a ■ ' 



1977 Parts I & 2] SOME TELUGU PLACE-NAMES... 99 

inscription from Nandalûni belonging to Kuloîtunga III, dated iû his 

26th régnai year-^^ refers to the_Vîllage Andapnr alias Tyâgasamiîdra- 
caturvedimangalam (modem Adupûru, Cuddapah district). This 
village is obviously named afier the epithet Tyagasamudra of Kulot- 
tunga ÎIL 

Two Tami! inscriptions^s from Âdiipùru and îsukapaili, both 
iaîed AD. 1284, refer to the village Kâmaccola-nallûr. Probably it 
mt% its îiame to the Telugu-coda chief Pottapi kimadevacoda-mahâraju, 
i feudatory of the Cola king Kulottunga I. Anotlier Tamil inscription^^ 
from Natidaliîru (Cuddapah district), dated iri the 26th year of Knlott- 
uâga ÏII refers to the Village Mantram aîias Bhujabalasiddhi-caturvedî- 
mangalam which seems to hâve becB named after the Teîugu-coda chicf 
Bhujabalavïra-Nâllasiddharasa.35 Anotlier Village probably named 
after the same chief is Nag apudôl (modem Nâgovôlu, Nellore district) 
which is referred to wiîh a second name Râjamalla-caturvedimangalam 
in two inscriptions of Rajarija Iïï.36 An inscription of Rijendra liF'^ 
oieotions the village Kôyarriîr a/M^Uttamacojapuram (modem Laddigam, 
Cbîttoor district) probably named so after the epithet Uitamacolagangan 
allas Vif aganganVetium Amurâbharanan, a Western Ganga subordinate 
of the Cola king. 

According to the epigraphical évidence only one place seems to 
lave been named after the kings of the Eastern Ganga family. However, 
;hough there isno direct epigraphical évidence, it can be presmned that 
;he place-names like Anantavaram in the Visakliapatnam-Srikakukm 
•egion owe their origin to the Eastern Ganga ruiers like Ânantavaraman- 
îôdaganga. The Bhoglpuram (Visakhapatnam district) inscription^» of 
/\niyanka Bhîma II dated a.d. IITS, refers to the village Bhogipnram 
ilias Vikramaganga-Vîrapêntta, It is suggested elsewhere^^ that 
^ikramaganga might be identicai with Anantavarman-coiaganga. Tf 
this suggestion isaccepicdit may be conciudedthat Bhogâpnram was 
?iven a second name after this king. 

Tàe major dynasty that followed the Cilukya--Calas in the Andhra 
jountry was the Kakatîyas. The nilersof this dynasty are known to hâve 
;learedoff the forests for constructing new villages. Soit is not impos- 

32. ARSÎE, .1907, No. 578, ibid., Î908. pt. 2, paras 63 and 78. 

33. ibid., 1913, No. 239,; v^^E. 1961, No. B 4. 

34. /iie.S^, I90S,pt. 2. paras 63 and 73. 

35. K.A. Niikantha Sastri : TheCoiasi2ndQd.%p. 390. 

36. iVD/., Vol.îlï.pp. 1402ff, 

37. ARSIK. 1906, No: 551; i^M., 1907 pt. 2, para 68. 

38. SU, Vo!.XNo.71Û, 

39. K. ¥. Subrahinanya Aiyar: Msimical Sketckes ûf :Amiml Bekkaa^ ¥oî. H, 

^^ p., 164. • //■. 



100 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

sible that many villages named Ganapavaram, Rudravaram etc., owe 
tiieir orgin to the Kâkatîya nilers. An inscription**^ from Peddacheni- 
kiru refers to the village Têmadta alias Gariapavaramu whichisobviously 

named after Kâkatiya Gaaapatï. Another village Gangavaram (Nellore 
district) is rcferred to in tlie iiiscriptions^î as Calamartigandâpurani 

which is apparently named after the epithet Calamarîiganda of the same 

king. 

. An inscription'^^ from Mahâdevamangalam (Chittoor district), 

datée in the 16th régnai year of Rajarija I, refers to the village Mavali- 

maBgalam(î.e« Mahabali»), This place seems to hâve derived its name 

from themythical ancestor Mahâbali of the Bànas whoserved under the 

kiiigs of différent impérial dynasties sucb as theGolas, Pandyas tlcS'^ An 

undated inscription'*'^ from Puliîpattûru (Caddapah' district) refers to 

; the village Pnlipattiîr aîim Pottapiccola-Âkômalla-arasiIr Jidentical with 

the findspot.). The chief Râjàdhirâja-Pottappiecola-Akomallarasar, 

after wliom the village is named maybe identified with the chief caîled 

Bhiijabalaviran Akomallarasaîi .serving nnder^ Rajâdhirâja ,11.^^ An 

inscription^^ from Tripurântakam (Kurnool district), dated a D. 1259 

refers to the village Ânuàgurajupallî^ (modem Alogurijiipalîi, Guïîtur 

district). This village seems to hâve been named after the Haihaya 

chief Ânuguraju (a.d. 1135-46). Betapuri (modem Betapudi, Guntur 

district) is yet another village to bave been named after another Haihaya 

chîef Beta I or 11.^7 Two inscriptions^^ of the Kôta chief Keta II give 

a long iist of villages named by this chief after his borther and parents. 

The village Ammaiapîliidi (modem Pedda Ambatîpndi, Guntur district) 

was given a second name Codavaramu after his brothercodariju; Kôgallu 

(modern Kôgaritipalem, Gontur district) was given another name Sab- 

bâmbikâpuram after SabbimbikS, the mother of the chief; three villages 

Tidivâya, Giijipâdii and Callagara (modem Tâduvlya, GiSjupalle and 

Callagarige respactively, al! in Guntur district) were given another name 

Bhîmàvaramu afier Bhîma H. fathcr of Keta IL A Tamil inscription'^^ 

from Rayacûti (Cuddapah district), dated a,d. 1233, records' that the 

Kalakada cliief Riyîdeva- maharaja granted the. village Rayanarlyana- 

piitteri (miidentiied)s which was named after himself/.to the temple of 

Janardanapenioiaî. 

40. 5/i.» Vol Vî, No. 204. • . .. 

4L AW., Vol. L pp. 323 ff. 

42. ARSîE,, 1932, No. 167 

43. ilif,, VoL XXIX, p, 154. 
44* ARSÏE^. Î930.NO.Î06. 

A5, T. S. Pandarattar: Hisîory ûfthe Lûier Colas (Tamil), VoL 2, p. 143. 

46. SIL, VoL X, No. 370. 

47. J^iîi?5., VoL XÏX, pp. 29-30. 
4S jEL, VoL VI, pp, 146. ff. 

49. ^i?iSJ£.,î911,No.446. 



,1977 Parts 1 & 2] SOME TELUGU PLACE~NÂMES.„ 101 

Of the subordinate chiefs of tlie Kakatîyas, the Malyila chiefs, 
the Viryâla chiefs and the Recherla chiefs were among those who con- 
tributed either theîr names or the names of their oearest relatives îo tlie 
vi liages. The Kondiparti (Warangal district) inscription^^ of Kâkatiya 
Gaiiapati, dated a.d. î203, mentions the village Caundapura (uoidenti- 
fied) apparently aamed after Caundapa, son of Malyâla Kâtaya. The 
Attirâla (Cuddapah district) inscription^^ of Kâyastha Anibadeva, dated 
Â.D. 1287 States that he constructed the village Ambavnramu (modem 
Ambavaram, Cuddapah district), obviovsly named afier himself. The 
Kandavaram (Warangal district) inscnption,^^ belonging to the région 
of Kâkatiya Ganapati and dated A.D. 1219, records that Kundamambi, 
Ihe sistsr of Kakalîya Ganapali and ihe wife of Natavadi Rudra granted 
the village Vemulatonta after renaming it as Kiindavararo, obvionsly 
after himself. The gift-village is identical with the findspot of the ins- 
cription. The Pâkkâl (Warangal district) inscription^^ of Kâkaîîya 
Ganapati states that Jagadâla Mumœadi built the village Ganapapura in 
honour of his elder brother Nalla Ganapa, who was a minister of the 
Kâkatiya king. 

There appears to be only two place-names^ which can be specîfi- 
cally grouped under the places named after the officiai désignations and 
they are Bhandâripalli (modem Bandârnpallis Guntur district) (Baftdëru 
("'treasurer') ane Pregadapâlli (modem PregadapalM, Adilabad district) 
{Pregaia 'Ministef). 

The foregoing study helps us arriving at the following conclusions. 
The earliest occurence of naming a town after a king or chief in the 
Ândhra country can be dated back to the third century B.C. This prac- 
tice became more common dnring the lime of the Co|as, maoy of whom 
contributed their names or epithetsto a nnmber of places in a major 
part of South India. It îs intercsfing to note that in many instances the 
second names of the places given by the kings etc., had fallen ont of use 
and the original names continued to exist. But when a village was 
Qcwly established and given the name of a kîng or chief it natnrally 
continues to be in existence. Instances arc not wasting where the 
iecond name of a village, given by an earlier king, is cancelled by the 
ater king who gave his own name or epithet as a second name to that 
âllage. 



50. Warangal District Inss., No. 4S. 

51. 5'//.> Vol. X, No. 448. 

52. 'Warangal District Inss., No. 58. 

53. ibîd.,No.67. 



S,C. GOYAL 

SCIENCE IN VEDÂS II* 

Our Universe: 

Swedish astronoraer V.Cfaarlier bas suggested iiis hypothesisof 
unlimited complexity, "that just as a multitude of stars surrounding our 
Sun bclong to a single cloud as our galaxy, galaxies themselves form a 
much large cloud, only a sraall part of which falîs within the range of 
our télescope. This implies that if we go farther and farther inîo space, 
we wouid finally encounter a space beyond galaxies. However, this 
super giant, galaxy of galaxies isnot the only one in the Universe and 
much farther in space, othcr similar Systems can befound in their turn; 
thèse galaxies of galaxies cluster in still larger units and infinitum. In- 
triguing as it is, this picture of an ever increasing aggregation of matter 
is unfortunately outside the possibility of observation study". 

According to Vedic calculations there are 1,08,00,000 stars in our 
galaxy. The Vedic sage bas also commented : # #î I? ^îfê ^ ^ \ 
t is He alone who can know ail this. Man with his meagre intellect can- 
lot comprehend this. 

Àpraketam saîilamis kmvin tohe the earliest cosmic mass in the 
^edic terminology- 

^^m^ W^ Il (Rgreda X, 129, 3) 

* This is the second of a séries of three Extension Lectures delivered by Prof* 
S.C. Goyal; Vice-Chancellor, University of Jodhpur in the S.V» University 
Senate Hall on the 13th and 14th of April, 1977 under the auspices of Sri Venka- 
teswara University Oriental Research Institute. The first lecture was publîshed 
in our S.V.U, Oriental Journal, Vol, XIX. pp. 101-107, 



104 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

It may be noted hère îhat the word saliîam does not mean water, 
rather it has a teclinical meaniog in Vedic terminology, quite analogous 
to the primeval neclcus of modem science. According to Belgian astro- 
nomer George Lcmaitre - this aprakeîam salilam is a highly compressed, 
extremely rarîfied and completely homogeneom state from which the 
Uîliverse sîarted ils evoluîioîiary process. 

Tliere are two views prévalent in the scientists regarding stellar 
evolation. According to îhe first - there is a continuons evolutionary 
process which has resulted in the présent state of the Universe, while 
according to the second there is a steady - state universe, the same-state 
existing since eternity. The vedic view agrées with the first scientific 
View. The Universe started with a pre-atomic state of squeez which 
expanded and will continue to do so for about two billion years, then 
the contraction process will commence with Brahmi's night. 

Professor Kanga has qooted the Dutch astronomer De Sitter^ in 
this context "our Universe sphère having started with a comparatively 
small radins has gradnally expanded and this expansion will continue 
some thonsands of millions of years still and then an opposite process ^ 
will iûtcfvenc and the Universe will begin to contract and go on con^ 
tracting and this altcrnation or succession of expansion and contraction 
will continue for immeasurable âges." 

Age ûf'ihe Universe : ' 

, ., The vâtîous scientiic views rcgarding the âge of the Universe are 
snmmarised belowïr ', 

';■. ;l, , Astronomical évidence ckarly indicates that the multitude of 
stars iacluding our own Sun among them were probably 
formed earlier than Sun two billion years ago from thehot 
■ -primordial gas that prcviously fiîled ail the Universe.^ 

' 2. According to the radioactive dock method uranite, the 
.oldest minerai dates back two billion years at least. 

, "3. Itis found on the basis of the relation betwecn stellar masses 
, : and stellar life spans that most of the stars forming the milky 
, : -^ way System were born about three billion years ago. 

Indlanvkw &fag€ôf the Universe: 

According. to. Hindu sages our création consistsof 14Manus., 
■Each .Manu comprises, of 72 cmuryugas, ■ There are four .âges as givea 

, belowin each caiîiryii^a : 



L Whem Tàeûsaphyamd" Science àfmî» ¥oL î, p, 46. 
Z, ■: ' Ftio.fessor Gamow ; Bi&graphy 0ftke Earik^ p, 2. : 



1977 Parts 1 k 2] SCIENCE IN VEDAS... 105 

Golden-age 17,28,000 years 

Silver-age 12,96,000 years 

Copper-age 8,64,000 years 

îron-age 4,32,000 years 

Total: "43^,000 years 

I Manu=43,20,000x71 = 30367,20,000 years. 

Présent is the 28th cycle of tlie 7tb Mann and in this cycle about 5000 
years of Iron-age bave elapsedby lîow. 

Age of the Uaiverse can be calculated as given below : 

SixMaaus 30,67,20,000x6 = 1,84,03,20,000 years 

43,20,000x27 = 11,66,40,000 

f Goiden-age 17,28,000 

i Silver-age 12,96,000 

28th cycle -j Copper-age 8,64,000 

! Outof Iron-age 5,000 

12,05,33,000 12,05,33,000 



1,96,08,53,000 years 



Comîîc rays in inîer s^eUar space : 

The cosmic rays found in the space hâve been classified in three 
groups in Vedas : 

1 . The Vâyu group of cosmic rays. 

2. The Marîci group of cosmic rays. 

3. The Pasu (animal) group of cosmic rays. 

i. The Vayu group of Cosmic rays : 

Vâyu bas been mentioned in the Vedas as a chief clément pervad- 
ing space. It possesses îusîre and the solar system as well as the galaxies 
of the stars move, as if in a string, woven by this Vâyu. Following 
références may be quoted in this context : 

^Il^^^f^l '^^ - (Jaiminîya Brahmana, 1, 192) This Vayu bas 
â lustre. 

^g# ^m'^\ {Yajurveda, 1, 24} confirms this, namely; Thou 
art Vâyu having penetrating lustre, 

YâjSavaîkya bas described this Vâyu to be born of Agni and it 
possesses lustre because of its bîrth - 

680 — E. 14 



106 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

[Saîapatha Brâhmona^ X, 6, 2, 11) 

The solar System and the galaxies are woven by this Vâyu and go on 
moving like this - 

çf^^îfl^ m\ iim\ # mn^ ^\ m^ ^^^ ^ ^rg: ^: 

(Satapaîha Brâhmana, VIII, 7, 3, 20) 

Heat waves in thespace hâve been referredto in Vedas as the 
intcrstellar birds or vayàmsf 

1 . Iq 1% Hfî Wfîïf : (Taininya SaàhM V, 7, 6) , m' 
certainly means Agni. 

2. ^^ ^^ ^^m^^m^^^MmèiRëv^^^ 140, i) 

Agni has becîi described as possessing the wealth of beams srûvoh and 
vayah the fires of Agoi blaze mighfily. A similarrefeTencehasbeenmade 
in the F^jwn'£^a,xii, 106. 

Agni is rcgarded as immortal because of thèse beat waves - 
^mà ^^% ^W: (Rgveda, X, 45, 8) 

The State ofniortalifywhich has been described in the Satùpatha 
SraAw^fa corresponds tothestateof instability of plauets. The siin 
becâme effulgeiit As soôû as thèse heat waves affected the space at the 
time of expansion ofUniverse, afîerwards %hen the mcon alsostarted 
emltîing light there was motion in stabilify, This ancient lawis known in 
the Modem Scienees as the !aw ofmuiual stabilky due to heat waves. In the 
.cosmic expansion from ^1^4 to ÀgmmVâyih, wyàmi the' heat waves" 
émit light and îhat is why the eartli sliines af night- 

■'■/^ 5W%î #ftr ^* .îfîïW 11 '■■■•:■■ 

(Tmnfriya SomhM, V, 6, 4,) 
2. The Marie! group of Cosmk rays: 

Marïcavah Mt cotpusckî ÎTom thesun which are cansed by the 
cyclic motion of the Maruts, Thèse Maricaychârt known collectively^ 
in the modem science as an aurora. Professer Cari Kiepenhener has i 
described them in thèse words, '^they take so many fcrm - beams of light 
or gbwing arches, stable or changingpaîterns, long drapes or narrow 
strips of pulsacing light, or coloured flames or whiîe sheeîs.3 Marîcayé 
émit heat and light as they are a!so born out ofheat- 



3 TheSun^pAS^ 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] SCIENCE IN VEDÀS .. 107 

^tï^ MfffQTfT: (Jaimimya Brahmana, U 45). 

Maricayah being most uniform and shining in their movement are 
regarded as very important outof the 49 cosmic rays rotatiog in différent 
fields and giving rise to différent shapes. Lord Krsna has also poînted 
ont their importance^ 

3T^tf%^cîI'3; ^^ Bhagavadgitâ (X, 21 . ) 

Sant Tulsidas lias also xnentioned 49 types of Maruts in Sundarkând of 
Ramcarit mânas— 

^gfw ^f^ flw spfq sfîl çriïï ^m^ 

Thèse rays move in electric iîelds. Pointing out this electricity in 
thèse Maruts, the sage addresses them in the Rgveda as— 

3. The Pasu (ammai)group of Cosmic rays : 

Some beat and electric current in space hâve the confignratian of 
i quadrupcd - ^F^^^ ^WS^ ^^^:.... (Jaimimya Brâhmana, II, 231). 

fhe Rgveda describes them as the dust and storm type - ^*ijè*it^ 7T§^ 
Rgveda, 1, 12, 17). 

Thèse cosmic rays contain heat - 

5r5rrq-tg[#5 ^^^\ ^'^^\ wm^ çi^t I «iît^: 

{Satapaîha Brâhmana, VI, 2, 1, 4) 
^PÏÏ^: TO«f: (Taîttiriya Brâhmana, 1,1,4,3) 

(Satapaîha Bràhmana, Vl, 1,4, 12) 

There are eight animal shapes moving in space. Out of thèse the 
>rse form and the bull form are conspicuous and can be seen moving in 
e sagittarius and taurus signs of the zodiac— 

Î^HT mi^H,, {Rgveda lï, 33.6) 

^m iFr^ra feft% (ibid 8) 

^iv^does notmean *ahorse' hère, rather it refers to the cosmic 
^s having an electric field of the shape of a horse* 



108 S,V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

Cosmic rays are fouad to be groiiped in the Vedas in the following 
additional groups also : 

The Maruî group of cosmic rays : 

Thèse rays hâve their fields shiniog like goid — MR^ ^%M: 

(Rgveda, l, 31, 1) which meansf shining rays. ç«fW^?!: [Rgveda.lh 

24,2). 

The electro-magnetism présent in the space is due to the Maruts. 
This magîietîc povver of the Maruts is referred to as ^^^5; in the 
Rgveda, I, 88, 5. 

The direction of the eîectro magiietic field generated by the Maruts 
bas been defîned in the Rgveda Isanah i.e. Borth-east (Çgr^^^ îj 87,4.) 
and also {Rgveda 1^64^ 5). This is conGimtâ in Jaimmiya BrShmana 

m, 381. 

They hâve a silvery white colour ?t^ f^^^^ {Jaimimya Brali- 
mana.UI, 382), 

The Rbhava group afCosmïc rays ? 

; ■ Rbhmas are solar rays - ^^: ^MW. {Rgveda, l, 110, 4). The 
entir® ^«itm of the Rgveda. Mandata fîrst relates to Rbbavah SLnd their 
évolution. 

Âpsûra group of Cosmic rays: 

The sua is 'the GaBdharva aod his rays are the Apsaras— , 

:^^ ,;■,,, #¥î:.,S^ Il 

(Saiapaiha Brahmana, IX, 4, 1 , 8 j 



.'EggeUcg translates the word Apsarasdiim *sun-motes'. 

Cosmic Dusl: 

.. The space betweea stars m far more-empty thati the best.vaccuuiii 
that CEE be produced in a laboratory, bot it is not uîterly voîd. It is 
pervaded by'aB excessively tenuons distribotioE ôf ioterste]lar:matter, 

partly-in,1he iorm of gas and partîy dust, --^. 

. \4^. .Me Fkysïcsof the Smimd Stars, p» ^,^ 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] SCIENCE IN VEDAS... 109 

The vedic équivalent ofcosmic dust îs % ^fr^'f^f ^mï f^^\^: 
(Rg^edâ, X, 121, 5). It is a cosîbîc wirid, a coBSîant stream of protons 
and électrons. This cosiiiic dus! is'iio:; the same as ihe dusi on îlie 
terrestria! sphère, which is called Parthîva Rajah 

I%îïïH mïïl%: (Yûjurveda^XXXîV, 32)^ 

The coiour of the cosmic dost has been described as dark ^^^^F '(^W 
(R^veda,!, 35, 4), but the phrase f^il^ W^J (Rgvedû, h 35, 9} 
bas been intcrpreted b> Macdonell as 'dark spaces'. 

Modem science points ont, '*the space iiBmediateiy nearihcsuii' 
is free of dir^t, since hère the.diist of the son évaporâtes aîl solid parti- 
cles."^ This view is aîso fouod fo be irue in conîext of tlie Marut 
type of coscoic ray - ^^% ïfÇcî: (Rgveda, L 168,4). But in thù Para- 
sara Samhiiâ (which is a îater work), the coiour of the cosmic diist is 
mcQîioïied as red, bliie, white etc. Obvioosly îhis is qiiitc confusing 
and probably this situation arose because of the limited intellect of 
thosc who wrongly intcrpreted the original sûkias of the Rgveda, 

l do not know Sanskrit so well and hâve not read the Vedas, but 
beiog a technologist aod an eogineer^ I hâve a firni belief that it shoiild 
be possible for us to trace back the source of scientific and technical 
knowledge in the Vedas, It is possible only when we are in a position to 
hâve tin correct understanding of the meaniiig conimunicaîed by the 
Sukîas oftliQ Vedas. 

The Word ^: bas 47 dijBTerent meaniiigs ascribed to it. It may 
mean sun's rays in a particular context while it, may mean îhQ cow in ■ 
sorae other contextV 

"/'• . "."^ ; z"^', , , (Rgveda, X, 85, 13) ' 

One interpréter has sanctioned the kiliing of cows in vedic niarriage 

cérémonies absolutely.ignoring ail 'other prohibitions and références 

whereio she has:beeîî m^entioned. :^^2{f,„ However,, ., a |correct, . approacb,;; 

canheîp us in understanding the' correct;, meaning, as "cooling down of ;; 
thesun's rays in.' the ,wiEter^'$eason:|.,of marriages''. ît aeed not be. ; 

■;::5.'' 'Karl Kiepenhatier:,: '^^Tke.Sm, '(p.;38)*/' ■■:■■';::•;:"■: 



ilÔ S.V. UNIVÈRSITY ORIËNrAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

eiîiphasised that tlie diversity and complexity of vedic interprétation 
arise largeîy on account of the lack of knowledge on the part of inter- 
préter. If the studenîsof science gruup who hâve got a scientific oiitlook 
and rational thinking are taogbt Sanskrit, probably they will be able to 
dig ont the correct meaning and interprétation of the sûkîas ofthe 
Vedas. This would put an end to the unfortunate practice of putting 
forth distorted meanings which came into vogue due to vested interests. 



GYULA WOJTILLA 

TERMINOLOGICAL STUDIES OF SELECTED PLANT 
NAMES OF THE KRSIPARÂSARA 



In spite of the long discussioiis on the development of the ancient 
Indian Society we hâve a considerably insufficient knowledge ofthe 
origin and developmeiît of agricnltiire, the most important part 
of the productive forces in India. This circûmstance sets np the claim 
to make a comprehensive study of that subject, This study can be car- 
ried out al most only by meaiis. of the material that has corne down to lis 
in various literary sources sînce the archaeological data are sporadical 
and are still not évalua ted,^ 

Hère in the présent paper we are going to examine a selected gronp 
of plant names a ttested in the Irs/p^rsiarû', an nnparalleled handbook 
ofagricalture assignable to the eieventh ceninryA,D.^aswellast^ 
preliminary âîîSwer to two questions : L The historial development of 
the cultivation of the plants concarned 2. A short etymological investi- 
gation in ordertoascertam the provenance of thèse words and fo identîfy 



The présent paper îs the part of my comprehensive study in préparation abom 
the ancient Indian agricultural terrainology, 

Krsi-Parïïhra Ed. and translated by G.R Majumdar and S. Ch. Benerjî, 
Calcutta 1960; L. Gopal, The Date of Kni-PûrUara, Journal of Indian 
History, Golden Jubilee Vol , 1973, pp. 152-168; GyulaWoitilla:"irw>ffr2itfm", 
Berlin, March 1975, publîshed in Wissenschafîliche ZeitschirftderHumboldî- 
Universitat zu Berlin-ges-Sprachw. R XXV (1976) 3 pp 377-3)8; *'Whîch Class, 
of people was the Kmparïïhra Addressed toT' Moscow, January 1976; *Tndian 
Village Commnnity'Àccording to the Krsîparâiara ma some Other Contempc 
rary Literary Sources^', Warsaw, Mai, 1976, (ail in the press);^"Parâsara" paper 
read at the session of the '^Magyar Okorttidomanyi Tarsasag** (Hongarian 
Society for Ancient Stitdies), Budapest, September 1976;* The ploughasdes- 
cribed* intht Krsipârâkta/m Altorientalisch^ Forschungen V. Berlin 1977 
pp. 245-252, 



112 S,V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

the linguistical data wiîh the cultiiral data of the ethnical groups iising 

the languages to the vocabulary of which thèse words beloBg.^ 

i. IMRA m.n. **The mango tree (Mangifera indiea) and its 
fruit". 

A tropical tree of the cashew-ni.it famiîy with a fleshy 
juîcy fruit. 

Sat. Br. XIV, 7, 4, 1; P. VflT, 4, 5; Mahâbhâ L 7584; Râma 
II, 33, 14; 

SusruS 1/141,13; IL 479, 21; BrSamLIV, 11; AmaK H, 4, 
33; MêghaDii 18; Sâk 78, 16; Kiittani 733; KSrmaP. H, 
20,38; GaruPI, 169,26; 170,27; 170,33; 171,42 etc. Abhi- 
dhâCi 1133; KrsiPa 240, 
mambam idein D L 46; 53; 235; J. IL 105; 160; Miln 46. 

Pk amba m. n. *'amra-.PhaP' He 1 , 84. 

Tt is represented in the aricient Buddhistic sculptures (BIRD« 
WOOD, 90). 

NIA : TURNER 1268 and KrsiK I, 24. 



ïn the case of languages, Iiandbooks, dlctîoiiaries, periodicals, we folio w the 
System of abbreviations fouud in, R. L Turner, A Comparative Dîcîîonaty of 
îhe îndo-ÀryanLansuages, London, 1962-66; and M Mayrhofer: Eîymologîs- 
cheswûrterbucIufesAliindischen.lÎQidGlhQTg 3953» 

The abbreviations ofthe Sanskrit sources hâve been taken from the 
''Dîctîonary of Sanskrit on mstêricai Principles {^pecimm Fascicule) Ed. by 
A.M. GhatageandM A. Mahendale, (Poona 1973), and that ofthe Pâîi sour- 
ces are in accord ance with The Pâli Text Society's PâihEnglish Dicfionary. 
Ed. by T. W. Rhys Davîds and W. Stede. (London, 1965). Prâkrt sources ara 
standing as in the Pâia-Sadda-Mahannavo\ A Comprehensive Praknt^Hîndi 
Dictionary with Sanskrit Eqm'mlenîs etc. hy Pandit Hargovind Das, T. Sheth 
(Vàranâsi 1963). Other abbreviations used are as follows: 
Birdwood : G. Birdw- jod: The Industriai Arts of India, London 1880, 
ChauJu-Kua, His work on the Chinese and Arab tradeinthe i2îhand13th. 
centuries, entitîed Cku-fm-chi. Transi, by F. Hirth and W. W. Rockhill, 
St. Petersburg, 191U 
E. K. : Personally communicated by Dr. Eva Korenchy. 
Ferrand, Texts : G. Ferrand : Voyage du Mardi and Arabt Sulayman en Inde 

et en Chine 'Paris' Î922. 
HuaM-al-Alami Ed. V. Minorsky, London, 1937. 

/ B. : Inscriptions of Bengal.^Vol ilL Ed. by N. G. Majumdar, Rajshahi. 1929 
Krsik : Krsikosa, l-li Sampâdak/V.svanâth prasâd, Patna, 1959-1966. 
Hiyogi: P. Niyogi : Contributions tu the Economie History of Northern India 

front the tmth to the îweïfîh Century A.D. Calcutta, 1962. 
Peripl.Erythr: The Peripîus of the Erythrean Sea, Ed. by W. H- Schoff./ 
London, 1912. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES.., 113 

From phonetîcal point of view the Word may be connected 
with amia ''sour-sweet" and so the name cornes from this 
physical oature of the fruit. In this case thé word can be 
regarded as a part of the I.E. vocabiilary inherited from Indo« 
Âryan peoples. (EWA I. 46 and 77) 

ii. KADALl î. ''Bansina(Musasapientumy\ 

A gigantic Iree-like herbaceous plant with a nutritious fruit- 
ïts leaves are lîsed for différent purposes (Plate etc.). 
Mahâbhallî, 10581; li!20; XIi;637; Rama IIÎ, 17, 9; V, 56, 
70; KumâraSa ï, 36; SasruSI, 74,15; BsSamLÏV,4; BhagP 
ÏV, 6, 21; 9, 54; AmaK ïï, 4, 113; Kiittani*î02; SES; 1021; 
AbhidhâCi ! 136; Triklse 2, 426; Manaso vol. ÏII. P. Î75. 

- dalanirmùah; Krsipa 223.-daIa ^^banana leaf used as plate". 
flKadaïtï idem. Vin Î88; Mile Î66. ït is represented in 
the ancientBuddhistic sculptures (BIRDWOOD, 91). 
Pk kayaîi f. idem. He 1, 220. 

. NIA . TURNER 2712 and KrsiK I, 78. 

It is probabîy a Word belonging to the Austro-Asiatic group 

oflanguages. Savara /<ï>2rfin-372^*Banane"/EWA ï, 150/? 

iii. KARPÂSA m. (îts another form oîkârpasa) '"Cotton (Gossy" 
piwn herha ceum)" 

A fibrous plant, the seeds of which are covered with long haîrs 
called cotton. 

GobhiGS II, 10, 8, 12; ArthaSâ II, 4î; ManuSmlï, AmaK 
H. 5, 35; BrSain V, 75; XV, 9; XXIX, 5; AbhidhâCi 1139. 
It is often mentioned in the inscriptions of the Chandela 
dynasty (NIYOGÎ, 28); KrsiPa 90. 

Pâ Kappàsa m. idem. DU, 141; A ÏÎI, 295; J. I, 350; VI, 4h 
Pk Kappâsa m. idem. Nicu 3. 

NIA : TURNER 2877. 

It is probabjy of Austro-Asiatic origin -> Javan. kapas. 

Pers Kirpâs "feines Gewebe**, Arm. kerpas^ Ar. kirbàSp 
Hebr karpas, Gk. ic^Qroc6os. Lat* carbasus, derived from 
the Sanskrit word. 

iv. KARFÛRAm, '' CamphoT tiec {Cinnamomum camphoraL.) or 
camphor'*. 

A species of cinnamon tree, its bark has an aromatic taste 
and smell. 

680 _E. 15 



114 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

It is employed as medicine and spice for meals, 

PaîcT V, 15; AmaK II, 6, 130; SusruS 1, 215, 5; AbhidbaCi 
643; Trikâse 2, 6, 39; CaurPan 9; KathâSaSâg IX, 7, 31: 
dvîpam karpiïrûsamjmiam '"the karpura island*', probably Bor- 
néo or Sumatra; KrsiPa226. 

Pâ kûpûra m.n. idem. J.VI. 537. 

Pk kappura n. idem, Panaha 2,5; Sura 2,6; Supâ 293. 

NIA î TURNER 2880. 

Foreign accoonts:^ Chau Ju-kua (p 88 f,) writesthatcamphor 
{chùng-nmi) is an imported spice from south-east Asia. 

Çudôd-al-Âlam (p. 86) and Ibn Khordadbhah (Ferrand Texts, 

81) speak of îhe export of Indîan camphor to west. 

It is brobably of Aiistro-Asiatic origin. Klmer kiïpôr, Cam 
kûpu, Mon. khapuiw (EWA, i, 75). The European languages 
borowed îhe Middle Indian form, (S,Pâ and Pk). 

Lit. : W,H. Schoff : Camphor, JAOS 42 (1922) pp. 355-370. 

V. KUNKUMA m. "The Indian saffron [Cumma longay. 

A species of crocus, iîs dricd stigoias used as a dye and ' 
Savoîiring. 

It has a spécial orange-yellow colour. ft has to the présent 
daytemained a famous product of KâsffiÎT. Ils cultivation 
has apparently from an early lime specially flourished about 
Padmapiîra, the présent Pampar. iSiein Râjat Transi. //, 428). 

, ..; SnsriîS I, ,103, 16; 139/ 1,0; 223, 20; 2, 35,, 4; 286, 6; 327, 

,,16; 515, 3: Kuttaoî 698 {kunkumâ); RâjTa/Ka/ I, 13, 16; 

IL8, 12; ni, 14,15,20; SamaMa II, 8; AbhidhâCi 645; 

Trikise 2..6, .35; Mânaso vol. III. p. 182, 183; . KrsiPa 100. ; 

Pi kunkuma o. idem. Miln 382; Vism 24! . 

• Pk kumkuma m. idem. Srâ 18, 

'■ NIA: TUNER 3214. 

Tfac Word beîoîigs to îhecomraon vocabulary of thehuman 

ci\iIiz3îî0n|Kolîurwôrter/->Akkad, Jcî/r/c^/î^ Hebr. karkdm, 
htm, imrkëm-a, AtAurkm GkvicQôXos dérive from an 

onknown source. Tlie Sanskrit kmkuma was replaced by a 

Middle lodian fbrm (EWA, L 2î9); 



•4. 



IhtMmms to fofei,giï gcmmts are occasional, the giving.'Of complète îist 0! 

s«ch iiala is O'Uî of îhe scope of oor présent work, 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES,.. 115 

vi. TâMBÛLA n. 'Tiper beiel" 

The piper bétel plant the leaf ofwhich is chewed in Indîa 
and other countrîes of the east. Inscriptions of Bengal show 
that large plantations of betel-kaves existed during the Sena- 
period augmenting the wealth of her people. Bengal and 
Malabar were the most important betel-leaf growing régions 
in India. (i0th-12th century a d.) (NIYOGI, 33) 

BrSam XII, 10; LXXVÏ, 41; RâjTa/Ka/V, 364; BhigP VIII, 
16, 41; VetàPaS (Si) 2, 6; KrsiPa 226. 

Pa tambula n idem. J I, 266, 291; ÎI, 320; Vism 314; Dha III, 
219. 

Pk iambola m. **the piper bétel plant" He I, 124, 

NIA: TURNER5776. 

It is surely of Austro-Asiatic origin (EWA I, 495). 

Lit,: N.M. Penzer: Romance of Bétel- Chewing, in: The 
Océan ofStory^ Vol. VIÏL Appendix II (Delhi-Varanasi-Patna, 
1968); P.K. Gode : Références to tambula in Inâîan Inscriptions 
between A D. 473-1800, in : Sarûpa-bharatî or the homage of 
lodology being Dr. Lakshman Sarûp mémorial volume. Ed. by 
J. Agrawal and Bhider Shastri (Calcutta 1954), pp. 208-215. 

vii. TXLA m. "The palm tree (Borassus flabelliformisY' 

A tree of the large tropical and subtropical family of mono- 
cotylédons with a crown of fan-shaped leaves. 

P IV, 3, 152; MahâBhâ 1, 7585; III, 935; ÏII, 11574; - Vanai 
''co forest" VI, 5441; HariVam. 3715; ManuSm VIII, 246: 
Lalivi 273, 22; AbhidhâCi 1136; Trikâse 3,3,393; The plate 
from Kelga (E.î. XXVIII, 327-328); KrsiPa 200. 

Pâ tala m. idem. M I, 187; J.I, 202, 273; VvA 162; PvA 100. 

It is represented in the ancient Buddhîstic sculptures (BIRD- 

WOOD,91). 

Pk tala m. idem. Panaha 1,4; Gaud 284, 351, 366, ÎIOO. 

NIA : TURNER 5750 and Krsik II, 62. 

It is a borrowing from the Dravidian languages. 

Kan îâr, Tel tadu, (EWA I, 498 and DED 2599). 

^îii. TILA m. ''Sesamumîndicum'\ 

A plant of the Pedalîaceae yielding gingili-oil. 



116 S.V. UNIVERSlTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

AV II, 8,3; VI, 140, 2; XVIII, 3, 69; 4, 32; TaiS VII, 2,10,2; 
Mais IV, 3,2; VâjaS XVIIÏ, 12; SatBr IX, 1,1,3; BrÂraU Vl, 
3, 22; ChândoU/, 10, 6; ÂpaGS I, 9,6; 17,2; 11,5,15; 
PâraGS I, 15, 4; SâhkhâGS IV, 1,3; 3,4; 4,9; GobhiGS 11,9,6. 
ArthaSâlI, 41; AmaK IL 4, 56;BrSam V, 75; XV, 14; XVI, 36; 
XXV, 2; XXIX, 4; DasKuCa 118, 162, 173; AvantiKa 18; 83; 
KùrmaP 11, 18, 56; 26, 43 etc; PancT 11,3; AbhidhâCi 
1179; RàjTa/Ka/I, 38; KathSSaSig X, 5,8; tilapîàanayantra 
"mill" is mentioned in some Inscriptions : Inscriptions E.I I. 
97; KrsiPa 167. 

Pâ tilaxa. idem. Vin 1,212; AIV, 108; JI, 392; 11,352; 
Vism 489; PvA 47; 

Pk tik m. idem. Gâ 695; Nâyà 1,1; Prâsiï 64; 108; 

NIA: TURNER 5827 and Krsik II, 94. 

Foreign account : PeripI Erythr 41 : export to West. 

Theorigin of the word is not satisfactorily cleared iip (EWA, 
I, 504) . The most important views are: Munda origin (Kuiper), 
Dravidian origin (Burrow) : cit. from EWA L 504. 

Lit : K.L. Mehra : History of Sésame in India and its Cultural 
Significance. in: Yï}5.!l%7Ipj). 9^-107. 

ix. DHÂNYAn.jm.l "grain generally, esp. paddy (Orvza Sativa 

RVVI,13,4;>Vm,24,2;V,29,7;Vi,50, î;KausiBrXL8; 
SadviBrV, 5; SânkhâGS I, 28, 24; III, 4, 9; GobhiGS III. 2, 58; 

ManuSm VIII, 320; AmaK II, 9, 28; BrSam XV, 6; XVI, 7- 
XIX, 6; XXIX, 4; XL, 2.3.5; XLV, 33; oàsKuCa 157; Abhi- 
dhlGi 471; AbhidhàRaMâ II, 425; Sama Ma VIIÎ, 88; 
RâjTa/Ka/1, 246; RamC V, 176 mentions paddy plants 
ofvarious kinds in Varendri, (BcngaJ); çaddy cultivation 
during the Sena period: I.B.p. 129; SukSa 32; KrsiPa 
III; 154; 167 etc: In the mediaeval period Bengal and Assam 
were very important riceprodiicing areas. /NIYOGI, 26/ 
f&dhamîan. "grain" Vin IV, 264; DA I, 78; M I, 57 etc. 
Pk JAannfl m. idem. Sura 1, 49; 
NIA : TURNER 677S; and KrsiK II, 1 18. 

It can be listed to the Indo-European group of words in Sans- 
krit. Opers.rfâHcA'a "Achtelsekel"; Khot. danaf. 
"Getreide, Korn"; Sogd. Sn "Getreidekorn"; MiPers. rfffHaJt; 
^&TS. dâna"Kom"; Liih.dâona, "Brot"; Toch B/âno "Korn" 
"Samenkorn". /EWA II, 98/. 



1977 î»arts 1 & 2] TÊCHNOLOGlCAL STUDIES... t\1 

Lit: H.M Johnson : Grains of Mediaeval India, in : JAOS 
61. /1941/pp. 167-171. 

X. MARlCA m. "The pepper shrub and its seeds {piper iieg/um)." 

Ap]a.ntof the gtnus piper negnim having berries ofpungent, 
aromatic taste. It is tbe most popular spice in the worJd. 

ArthaSâ II, 41; HariVa 5367; SuéruS I, 139, 3; 142, il; 145,5; 
161, 10; 217, 3; 231, II; II, 338, 17; KâmSû VII, 1, 24; AmaK 
II, 9, 36; RaghuVam 4, 46; BrSam LT, 15; KûrmaP 11.10. 47; 
AbbidhâCi 419; AbhidbâRareâ 2,461; KathâSaSâg 11,5, 124: 
™ ksodanirbharam "full of pepper dust"; KrsiPa 223. 

Pâ marîca n. idem. Vin 1, 201 ; Miln, 63. 

Vk mariy an. Kcâi. Il, 1,^.^16%. 

NIA: TURNER 9875 and KrsiK IL 273. 

Itismost probably an Austro-Asiatic loanword which was 
earlier borrowed by the Dravidian languages too. 

T 3. milagu iàtm. /EWA, II, 588/ 

xi. MÂSAm."^ç.&niPhaseolusradiatusJ\ 

Akindof leguminous plants. Its fruit is one of the most 
important nourishment in India. 

AV VI, 140. 2; XII, 2, 53; TaiS V. !, 8. I; KathS XII, 7; 
XXXir, 7; MaiSIV, 3, 2: VàjaS XVIII, 13; SatBr 1,1,1,10; 
BrAraU VI,3.22: ChândoU V,10,6: ApaGS 1,13,2; 17 2; Gobhi 
GS II, 2, 10; 6, 6; 9, 6; SâàkhâGs I, 28, 6; F V, 1, 7; V, 2, 4: 
ArthaSâ II, 41; KâmSiî VIL 1, 43; MaVastuAva IL 432, 16.19; 
co vflma "the colour of be.<în": SusruS f, 70,5; BrSam XV, 
14; XVI, 36; XXV, 2; ÂbhidhâCi 1171; Trikâse 2,"9, 5; 3,3, 
439; KrsiPa 191. Nîlan,P 422; 

Pâ. masa m. "Phaseolus Indica" . - khetta" a field of beans". 

Vv808; VvA308. 

Pk. MSsa m. idem. De I, 98. 

NIA: TURNER 10097. 

The Word belongs to ihe common vocabulary of the human 
civilization {Kulturworter)-Turkmen burcak "Bohne", {EWA 
II, 630. 

xii. YAVA m. "Grain, corn, especially barley" 

"Grain": RV 1,23, 15; 66,3; 117,21 etc; "Barley"; AV II, 
8,3; VI, 30, 1; 50, 1.2; 91, 1; TaiS VI; 2, 10, 3; 4, 10,5; VII. 



il8 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol, XX 

% 10,2; KâthS XXV, 10; XXVÏ, 5; MaiS IV, 3,2; VajaS V, 
26;XVIII12;XXni,30; SatBrî. 1,4,20; ÏI,5,2, 1;III, 6,1 
9.10 etc;P VI, 1,49; ArthaSâ II, 41; Zse/m-'^Barley-field'* 
PaScT IV, 5; AniaK II, 9, 15; BrSam, VIII 30; XV, 6;XVI, 7; 
XIX, 6; XXIX, 4; XL, 2 3; LXIX,2, DarpDa VI, 39;KrsiPa 
167, KurmaP 11. 20,37; NîtaraP 696-97; 719; 

Pâ yava m. ^"Corn, bark]/" Vin IV. 264; S IV, 220; A IV. 
169; 

Pk javam. idem Naya î, 1; Paeh 1,4; Gaud 258; 5?7; 588; 
589. 

NIA: TURNER 10431 and KrsiK II, 53, 

Foreign acconût : I-tsing Records 43-44/is grown in Western 
India Its correspondent vvords can be found in the cognate lE 
languages hNyavam. "Getreide", MPers jmv/o *'Gerste"; 
OssetiroB, j^ez/ "Hirse" etc. (EWA 111,9). If we regard 
the Finno-Ugric *juva'*<^jeva as loans from lE we iîiay hold it 
tobeaword belonging to the coramon vocabBlaryofthe 
human cîvilization (KulturwÔrter). At the same time the data 
ofthe Samoyedic languages, ifthey are not taken from the 
Finno-Ugric, bear the withness to the very early cultural 
contacts between the lE andUralian languages (E.K,) 

xiii. SARSAPA m. **The mustard seed (Sînapîs dichoîomaf' 

A plant belonging to the species of the Sinapis section ofthe 
genns Brassica. 

ChandoUIII,14,3; SadviBrV, 2;SânkhâSS IV, 15,8; PiraGS 
1,16,23; SànkhâGS lï, 1, 3; ArthaSâ 11,41; SusruS 1, 139, 4; 
182, 16; AmaK II, 9, 17: BrSam XXfX, 5, XI, 5; DasKuCa 118; 
AbhidhâCi 1180; AvanîisuKa 18; AbhidaRaMa IL 426; 
TrikBse 2,9,3; RâjTa ;Ka/ III, 338; ksodakuia ''Th^Mmmtt 
pounding mustard seeds'* : SubhâRaK 318 : Jayanaga*s grant 
of Vappaghosavâta (6th ceniuay a,d,) ; E J. XVIIL P. 60 ff. 
KrsiPa217. 

Pâ sâsapam. ''mustard seed''. S II, 137; V. 464: A V. 170; J 
VI, 174 etc. 

Pk sasava m. idem. Âci 2, 1, 8, 3; and sarisamm. idem. 
Ogha 406; Sam 44; Kanima 4, 74; 75; 77; Nâya 1,8. 

NIA: TURNER 13281; and KrsîK II, 323. 

Its origin is uncertain. There are varions explanations 
Ancient ^'Kulturwort" borrowed by lE languages {Henning; 
It cornes from the Austro-Asiatic languages (Przyluski- 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES... 119 

Regamey). It is an ancieot lE word (Wûst, Thieme) etc 
(EWA III, 447), 

xiv. SASYA n. '^Grain especially Wheat". 

AV VII, 11, 1; Vni, 10,24; TaiS IJI, 4,3,3î V,l,7,3; VIII, 
5,20,;; Mais IV, 2, 2; éatBr XI,2,7, 32; SànkhàBr 19,3; 
AsvaSS 2, 9, 2; AsvaGs L 55, KâthU 1, 6; MaiîuSm IX, 49; 
MahâBhâ B,6623; KuniaSam 11,44; RaghuVam 1,26; 62; X, 49; 
XV, 58, BrSam XXIX, 9;-Vipatti 'Hhe destruction of grain- 
BrSam XIX, 10; DasKuCa 196; HarsaC42;;KisiPa 179, 184, 19,6 
Pâ. sassan. ^'corn, crop" M 1, 116; J I, 86; 143; 152; II, 135; 
Miln 2; DhA L 97; SnA 48; sassasamaya ''crop tinie'*: J. I, 
143. 

Pk sassam n. idem. Gâ 689; Supâ 32. 
NIA : TURNER 13295. 

Ihe Word fairly can be listed to the lE vocabulary of Sans- 
krit, kv hahya''ÏT\xmtnidiXms''\hashus 'Yructus'' (grain nach 
BaileyAION 1,143) Kymr, haidd ^'herdeum", Cdll asîam- 
*yajm/w? etc (EWA m, 449) 

The conclusions to be drawn from the material examined are 
as foilows - 

T. The names of varions cereals, dhanya^ yava can bc attes- 
ted in the earliest strata ofthe Sanskrit texts/before 800 
B C The names âmrâ, tîla. masa sasya^ sarsapa appeared 
in the upper Vedic period (ca 800-540 B.C.), the names 
kadalî, kârpasûy tâla can be traced back to the Pre-Maii- 
ryan times (540-325 B C.) and finally the literary éviden- 
ces ofthe Mauryan âge (325-185 BX.) speak of karpûra, 
ktmkuma, tâmbula and marîca, This enrichment of Sans- 
krit vocabulary covers the period ofthe historical expan- 
sion of the Indo-Aryan speaking peopîes and later on 
the great empires of North India. During this period the 
traditionaî agriculture also came to be more developed 
and the list of agriculturaî products grew larger. 

II. From etymological point of view the names âmra, dhânyu 
yava, sasya belong to the lE, tâla to the Dravidian, 
tambUla, marica, kadali (?), kàrpïïsa (?) karpura (?) to 
the Austro-Asiatic vocabulary of the Sanskrit Janguage. 
The origin ofthe words tof*iww^7, tîla, masa ând sarsapa 
cannot be preciseîy located. This brief review fairly 
illustrâtes the highly probîematic culturai interchange 
among différent peopîes of India in the ancient times. 



REVIEWS 

WATER QUALÎTY IN BHâVAMISRA'S BHJVAPRàKâSA: Dr E.A.V. 
PRASAD, nepartmmtofGeoksy, SV, Univem'iy, Tirupati: MASSLIT 
Séries, No. 2 ; NJ. Pub!icatioQS,1979 - Pages x+ !07 ; Price : Rs. 50-00 

Bhâvamisra, a great Ayurvedic specialist of the medieaval India, 
is said to hâve headed a raedica! institute. with a strength M about 400 
Ayarveda students in Vâranâsi, sometiinein the léth century ad (pv4). 
He bas written a book by name Bkâvaprakâsmighcntu. ïts first part, 
consistingof about 2,100 verses, written in simple and beautiful Sans- 
krit, is divided iuto six (according îo Dr. Prasad 'seven') broad divisions 
(prakaranas) ânâfnnhet divided into 24 sub-seetions^ (mrgas). The 
entire work describes the medicioal properties and utilities, mainly of 
the products of the kingdoms of the plants (Audbhidal of the animais 
(Prànija) and of the minerais (Dkâtuja), In this work Bbâvanaisra bas 
not "only recorded the views of ail his predecessors in this field, like 
Caraka, Susruta, Vâgbhata, Hârita etc.. but al so bas incorporated in it 
the views of his contemporariesand the results of fais own researchcs. 
Thus, the work seeins to be an important one from the point of view of 
thesîudents not only of the Àyurvcda but also of thehisîory of Iiidian 
medicine. 

In the 13th sub-section of this work. called 'Water Section' (Vâri- 
var^a) consisting of 86 verses (Chowkharaba édition, 1969 ; but 82 verses 
according to Dr, Prasad) Bhâvamisra describes in détail the différent 
types of water and their respective properties. Dr. Prasad, v, ho is an 
authority in Geology and has already donc much work in the hydro- 
science, enshirined in ancient Sanskrit literature, has undertaken to 
Write a séries of raonographs on the subjcct (he has namcd the séries as 
MASSLÏTmeaning.Monograpbs in Ancient Scieniific Sanskrit Litera- 
tare). ïn the présent work under review Dr. Prasad has taken the aboyé 
mentioned Vârivarga for his study. After introducing the subject in 
gênerai (pp. 1-2) and Bhâvamisra's BhâvaprokSsa m particular (pp. 3 
and 4) theauthorgives the text of the verses in Roman with English 

680 - 16 



122 S,V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

translation (pp. 7-31). Tlic rcsi of the work is devotcd îo examine and 
scieouficahy evaluate what Bbâvamisra has staied. Dr, Prasad'.s ana- 
lysîs falls info différent headings Jike, Unique Properties of Watcr; 
Hydrologie Cycle; Classification of Watcr, Atmosphcric Précipitation; 
Ecology; etc., etc. Hère, vve arc happy to read ihe observations of 
Dr. Prasad, ïhe scientist. such as ''the Hydrologie Cycle is a continuous 
global process involving thermal encrgy and gravitation as its motive 
forces ... it provides the ground work upon which the Hydroscience is 
constructed .. It is stnkingîy évident that while dealing with the 
water quality. this important concept of Hydrologie cycle has been 
faithfully adopted in Bhâvamisra's Bkavaprakaéa' (p. 36)**. *'The water 
types dcscribed in Bhavamisra' work (Bhâvaprakasa) is esscntially 
jlieteoric** (p. 18). •*-.....ihe study of natiiral walcr composition învolves 
Cîoncept of Ecologyj bccausc a large nnmbcr of factors and processes are 
îHtcrrelated in bringing aboot the compositions of water. This is ont of 
the important concepts of the modem Hydroscience which is again 
faitlîfully rejBected in this ancienl Sanskrit litcratnre" (p. 47), While 
concluding Dr. Prasad obseï ves with satisfaction that he has found 
*'Biany aspects of science of water as stated in Bhivamïsra's Steva- 
prakâsa to be in complète accord wiih the findings and conclusions of 
modem science*"; aod hcnce the anthor picads **for a critical stndy and 
expérimentation of the ancicia lore" (p. 85). Dr. Prasad deservcs our 
congratulations on his performance of ihe woik which he has under- 
takcn with sincerity and dévotion. The value of the book is enhanced 
by différent Tables, as many as H in numbcr, one Drawing, and a 
lengthy Glossory (pp. 89-100) and a long list of références (pp. 101-107). 

Howevcr, the value of this good monograph would hâve been 
higher, had the author bascd his studies on the text as found in some 
standard publications of the work (in fact Dr. Prasad does not indicate 
the édition which hc consultcd) : had he avoided the wrong-splitting, 
and wrong iransiiteration of the Sanskrit text tbroughout; and had he 
consulted a good Saaskritîst for proper expîanation of some of the 
Sanskrit passages- At limes one feels pained to see parts of verses 
being oraittcd (verse 2) unconnecîed words addcd (verse 71); and so on 
and so on. Fn fact therc cannot be any denying in that a work of this 
nature would be fruitfui to the maximum provided it is undertaken by 
the scientîsts woïking in collaboration wiih Sanskritisrs, One h opes 
that Dr. Prasad wîli give a serions thought to thèse points while making 
the second édition of his book. 



S, SâNKARANARAYANAN 



1977 Parts !& 2] REVIEWS 123 

VISNUSAHASRANAMASTOTRA Translaîed and ametated bvC S/VA-- 
RAMAMURTI, Publication (No. 6) of the Vishnasahasranania Sâtsaa- 
gham, 469, Sector IX, Râmakrisnl-puram, New Delhi, 1978. pp xh-^lOS. 

Aparî from jnana and bhakti the Nsmajapa or régulât chantiog of 
the name of the Alniighty is prescribed as a means of moksa especially 
ÎQ the présent âge Kaliyuga. The famous adage Kaîau nëmaiva kevalam 
stresses opon the chantiîig and recitation of the naîBes of Lord Vism. 
As obvioiisfy mentioned ïn the préface, the great polymatb of îhis coun- 
try Sri Saùkarâcarya stressed two things m his Bhaja Goviiida stotra 
^geyam Giîanamasahasram\ From his comoientary on the Vimusahasra- 
mmastoîm (VSS) along with that on tht Brahmasuiras and the Bhagavad 
gi7a, we can easily undersîand the importance given b> Sri âaèkara for iî. 
Of course there are many commentai ies on VSS wrilîen by Parisara- 
bhatta, Vidyâdhirâja, Raghimâthinandafiriha and oîhers. But 
Sankara's commentary is the firsî among them. 

The. présent work contains VSS in original foîm pr in fed in De va-, 
nagarî script with a literal translation , in Engîi^h and an elaboiate anno- 
tation for each aod every name mentioned in VSS. Tfie translator bas 
taken ■utmost care in renderioginto English, even the difficoli ones soch 
as Fumsah etc AI! the thousandnanies of Visnuare annotated in the îight 
of the famons cofomentary of Sankaracârya^ in a ,very good manner. 
Many approprfate Upanisadic and Pniâçic sonrces are given in Roman 
characters. Besides, the présent édition of VSS contains six illustra- 
tions:', 

1. Sankara with Vyasa fianking Daksinamûiti, {8th centisry a d.) 

2. Krsna with Rukminl and Satyabhima, 

3. Visnii on'Garnda (Sthcentury A.D.),, 

4. Sesa'siyi.,Visnu (5th eentory A.D.), 

5. Trîvikrama (9th - lOih ceiimry a d.) and 

6. Visvartïpa (9th - lOth century A.D.). 

The dates given to each of thèse figures aloog with iht namesof places • 
where these-are^avaîlablethrow Iight on the ant-îquity of thèse forros of 
"Visnu-, which-.were in' worship even in tho-sc •perîodsand în the varioo^ 
parts of thecouatry. . In this respect, it can be said îhat the présent edi- , 
tîoo of VSS is the best amoog , the; éditions so, far pubîished io, the 
country. ;■ ■ ■ 

Devotees of Lord Vismi wonid heartily welcome this handy édition 
of VSS and make use of the text. translation and annotation fer thek 
recitation and better understanding. We rre deeply indebted to Sri 
G. Sivaramamurti for this valuabie contribution. The Vîsnusahasra" 
namasaîsangham, is to be apprécia ted for its laudabîe service to devotees. 

S.B. RAGHUNADHACHARYULU 



124 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol: XX 

BHVANYALOKA : A critical édition mth introduction; English trans^ 
htion md Notes by K. KRISHNA MOORTHY: Pablished by the Régis- 
trar, Karnataka Univcrbity, Dharwar, Pages 406+41 Priée: Rs. 25/- 
or S 8 or Sh, 60. 

It can not an exaggeration if ît is said that thc présent édition of 
the Dhvanyâloka brought out by Prof. Krishna Moorthy satisfics a long- 
feltnecdfora critica! and correct édition of thc text in the ficld of 
pbctîcs, The pains takcn by Prof. Krishna Moorthy to go through many 
vaîuabiô manuscripts available to fix thc correctreadiogs of the tcxt with 
a critical eyc are commendable. His doctoral thesis The Dhvanyâloka 
and ils Crincs bears testimony to the hîtcrest developcd by Prof. Krishna 
Moorthy for thc tcxt Dhvanyâloka. The improvcd rcadings in thîs 
édition shown in the Introduction arc not without justifications. 

The text is really a treat for both the scholars of Sanskrit and 
Enghsh. His Engh'sh translation spcaks of his mastery ovcr English. 
Every reader can easily notice theperspccuity in his style of expression. 
The English rendcring in no circiîmstances gocs beyond the Sanskrit 
thought. In addition to this, another striking featnre lies in his render- 
ing the Sanskril verse-cxamplcs given by Ânandavardhana into English 
verse. This is really more fitting in the context in view of the fact that 
the text deaîs withpoctry. 

In his enthusiasm Prof. Krishna Moorthy seems to hâve left some 
minor points nnnoticed in connection with translation, specially whlle 
quotîng some others. For cxamplc in the verse Éyamasvangam - (p. 70) 
the editor gives the translation of Rooke. Herc when the Sanskrit verse 
rcads ...... Mim ...... the translation given is 'oh jeaîous one% ...the word 

bhiru does not mean jealons, it shonîd havc hccn Cûndi as noted in the 
footnote. Bot thèse can safely be overJooked as they do not hamper 
tbe uîiderstanding. 

On the wholc we fecl that the Sanskrit worîd rcmains indebted to 
Prof Krishna Moorthy wào descrves thc congratulationsof oneand ail. 



K.S, RAMAMURWI 



1977 Parts 1 è: 2] REVIEWS Î25 

ESSAYS IN SANSKRIT CRinCïSM : By Dr. K. KRISHNA MOORTHY, 
Professor of Sanskrit, Karnatak Universîty. Dharwar, Second Edition, 
1974. Rs, 12/- pages 319. 

This work ootains 26 essays pubîîshed by Prof. K. Krishna Moor* 
thy iîî différent journals. Out of thèse 26, only 20 exclusively dcal with 
literary criticism in Sanskrit. Prof. Krishna Moorthy i s more îhan justi- 
fied to publish them in one volume as they deal with difFerent topics of 
onc and the same subjcct. He cîearîy brings out thc vicws of thc ancients 
as well as the modcrners in the field. The work itself in brief can be 
treated as a compcndiura in thc Sanskrit Poctics. 

Throughout thèse essays the author exhibits his vast érudition 

and logical acunien in his présentation. Starting from alamkâra (essay 

No. 2) he gradually traces thc devclopmcnt of the science of rhetoric 

upto Ruyyaka (essay 19) dealîng thoroughiy the theory of rasa of Bha- 

rata and the vicws expresscd on it îatcr by Bhatta Tauta and others. In 

the essay 'Concept of Suggestion in Sanskrit Poctics' he dcals with the 

€/Amiîi theory of Anandavardhana who postolaîcd this long before the 

réalisation of this clément in thc poetry by the wesî. His essays 'indian 

Définitions of Poetry' and 'Essence of Poetry' give a cîear eut and 

coraprchchsivc View of thc Indian rhetoricians regarding îhe soûl of 

poetry. His essay 'Indian Poetics and T.S. Eliot's threc voices of 

Poetry' cxhibit his mastery ovcr English aesthetics. Besidcsthis, wc 

note that thc author quotcs profusely the European Criticism whcncver 

needed in thc course of his writings only io show that the îndian writers 

exercised their minds in this field far earlier than any other class of 

writers in the world. 

On the whoie Prof. Krishna Moorthy's language is sonorousand 
befits the context. His analyticai mind and expression in English 
always go hand in hand. Thc printing and gct up of the faook are cxcelf 
lent. 



KS. RAMAMVRTHI 



126 S,V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

KRIYIKAIRAVACANDRIKI OF VARIHAGURU : CrUkally edited by 
Sri S.B. RâGïïUNA DHACHARYA wfth hfs commemary Râkâ, Published 
by H.H, Srimaimarayana Ramanuja Jeeyar Swamy, Srimadabhaya- 
vedantacbarya Peeîhaîn, Sri Vasiidasasrainam, Nadigaddapaîcm, 
Gunter dî , A.P., India, 1976. Price : Rs. 16/- pages XXVII+389* 

TIic Kriyâkairmacandrika îs a Hiaeual on the kriyâ and îhe caryi 
aspects of thô Placarttra Âgama, Oui of the 37 chapters which this 
work contains, the first twenîy five treaî the kriya aspect and îhe re- 
raaiîîing the carya aspect. The treaîmcnl is bascd on the Pâdmasanihim 
and the Vismîflakû. The importance of this work lies in the présentation 
of the essential acts wiîh pointed références to the items in each and avoid- 
ing digressions. Th^ kriyâ portion begins with the sélection of the site 
for the building of the temple and desis with the nyâsa and praiisthë 
of varions kinds of the images to be in stalled in the temple constructcd 
on that site. And it ends with the method ofinbtalling the image of the 
deity in thô hoase. The raethod of initiation of thepnpils for conducî- 
ing worshipof God, îhe mâfm^^ and the Saliva methods of worshfp, 
ablution of several kinds, conduct of the festivals, rénovation and 
Pantraropam are dealt \v^ith in the caryà section. 

That the principiesof architecture were followed by thebuiiders 
of temples is évident from the detailed description io chapters 5îo7, 
Mention of Vâsudeva, Acyuta, Satya, Puriisa and Ananta as the deities 
to be invoked during installation indicées that the Pâncarâtîa System 
inherited the Vaikhânasa tradition which admits the above menîioncd 
deities. Référence could be made. in support of this, to the Jayâkhya- 
smnhiîâ 4J to 7; Mahâbhârata, Sànti. Ch. 358; FïïramesmrasamhiB L35a- 
81. The charge, that îhe Pàîïcaratra system is non-vedic, rather anti* 
vediCj is disproved by the profuse citations of the Vedic mamras which 
are r^^quired to be recited in the rituals connected with both the kdyi 
ma ihe caryâ. Spécial attention roay be drawn to i^p, 160-162 and 2C0- 
201. The aiîîhor Varâhagurn, who mmt hâve been an ordest foUower 
of tlie Fâncarâtra tradition, follcws Apastamba Èmmsûtra for the procé- 
dure conductiog the rite ^orfo/za?îfl' (Ch. 15). 

în ihe opening introdiictcry verse. Varihagnm pays his obeisance 
te hh father Per|ararya. who was his preceptcr and was a descendent of 
Anantadesika of Kausikagotra. The name Pexîararya is taken by many 
scholars as Patrâcarya ïr is hard to agrée with this view since the titîe 
Pitràcârya is assnmed by the Vaisnava famiîy of Sathamarsanagoîra 
living at Kumbakonam, while îhe author belonged to Kausikagoîra. A 
siîoggestion could be made hère for taking this name as équivalent to 
Âmmàlicarya which was the titlc of Vâtsya Varadacirya well-knowa as 
Nadâdûr Ammal Permr means in Tamil one who has given birîh to a 



1977 Parts! & 2] REVIEWS 127 

chïld. This suggestion îs aiso fauity since pen:3r can mcao failier not 
mothcî (ammâlj, Besîdes, the title Ammàl is hcldbythe Vaisnavasof 
irîvatsagoira- Those of Kausikâgotra do not appear to hâve had tliis 
tîîie» Tais suggestion, if admitted, may point to the naDac Varadadcsiica 
for îheaotbor. There is thus no mcans of finding eut whaî this nanie 
Fexfir raeans, Thcrc is also no évidence avaiîable to fix the date of the 
anthor. 

The cditor Sri S B. Raghonadhacarya bas contributed a worthy 
commcntary or gloss called Raka for this worlc. He justifies convînciiîgly 
(p. 244} îhe inclusion of the caryïï materiaîs in a work which should dcal 
only with the krfyâ portion as its title suggests. With rare and abundant 
scholarsticskii], he questions (p: 272) the gcnuine nature of a passage 
in the Pâdmasûmhim. On the treatmcnt of JV; ^j"^ (pp 2(7, 268) and 
latmdhvarcanaipp. 280-281); the author displays his skill in bîending 
hormoniously the traditionaî scholarshjp with modem research. Con- 
viocing dérivations and cxplanations arc offcrcd to words snch as vûlûja 
{p. 250), garbha (p. 253], manâapa {p. 275), nisâcurna (p. 295), galanîikâ 
(p. 286), îripaduka (p. 286), and others. Technical expressions get ade- 
quateiy cxplaincd, c.g., sampâîa (p. 269) gokmna, vitasti and prâdesa 
(p,279) and others. The word utsava (p. 294) is expîained according to 
the Pâflmasambiia. It is worth noting that two other ?/ays of expîain- 
tng this Word are also availablc in tbe ènpramasamhiîâ (30,8) and Atri's 
Samûrtarcanàdhikarana (54,3). Of interest is the editoi's discussion on 
:he readings of the text (pp. 269 and 270). 

The worth of this édition is cnhanced by the Appendices which 
'ontain the rnics for Vâsudeva Punyâhavacana, and the texts of the Furu- 
QsUkîa, Srisûkta, Nïïrâyanànuvâka, Nârayanopanîsaî, Visni/stlkta, Bhûsii- 
:ta, Nîîâsukta, Varmasûkta, Pavam'ânasûkta, Ghrtasûkta, Trîsuparnasukta^ 
lâkunasûkfa, Râksoghnasûkta and Sàntipancaka, The Index of the 
'^edmnantrav, occurring in the text numbering î82, gives références to 
he sources of thèse manîras which arc also quoted in full. One hun- 
red and sixty five Agamamanîras arc alphabeticaliy arrangcd mention- 
ig their sources which are mostîy in the PadmasmiihUà and Visnutîlaka. 
ivdras^ which the i^xt mentions, are thirty-seven în numbcr. Thcv are 
idexed giving the définitions for them. It is also stated that there are 
îl mudras not cnumerated in this text. The sources from which this 
st is prepared are also mcntioned. The svaras, eight in number, eleven 
las, fourteen rUtgas and sixtcen nrîtas are indexed citing their défini- 
ons. An index of half-vcrses for 281 slokas is prepared mentîoning 
icir sources . Of value are the index of technical terms 1 1 5 in number 
\é a bibliography. 

This édition bas a bénédiction (mùhgaîasasana) from H, H, Tridandi 
îïîîanniriyana Jîyar Swioii, a préface from Prof. E.R. Sreelcdshna 



128 S.V, UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

Sarma, a foreword from Prof M. D. Balasubrahmaoyam, an intrcductioîi 
by Dr, N.S* Ramaoojatatacharya and Im&da by Agamaclrya S.B. Lak- 
shminarasirohacharya, ao Eîiglish Introdîiclioa by Dr. M. Narasiinhadja- 
rya, Prastâvma (in Tekgu) by îhc editor, îisî of abbreviations anë a 
table of contents. 

Thîs îîianoal is îoo well-known aniong thc folîowers of îhc Pânca- 
râtra systcm. This édition is in many ways bettcr than the Granîha and 
Devanigari éditions which arc not now available. For thc undei stand- 
ing of thc subjeci mattcr prcsenîed in îliis work, therc is no need for any 
one to take the aid of othcr référence books. The work is self conîâiG'- 
ed in ail aspects and satisfies al! thc requirements of a modem édition. 

A suggestion is offered to the editor for bringing ont this work 

Wîlh his conimentary in thc Devanigari script so as to make it reach the 
scholars who do not know îhe Telugn script. The ediîor can also take 
up, wiîh ccnfidence, the édition oftwo other PSicaiatra texts Xû/^w/ûffa- 
saïnhità and Vkffutikka, of courte in the Devanâgari script with his valu- 

able gioss. , 

F. VARAMCHARL 



'&ÂST'RADlPIKI OF PÂRmASIRâTHIMISRA WITH PRABHI OF 
TATSAT VâIDYANITHA : A Fart f, Edited by Acharya P,N. PATTA- 

BH!RAM:A SASTRI: Sri Lalbahadur Kendriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha..,. 

New Delhi, 1978; fages 2+ÎI + 8+504, • Price : Rs. 50/-. 

The Vedas and the SrantasStras deal maînly with the performance 
ùî iùcnïïcts for mhkh manims, formulas and procédures are laid down 
by ihsm. The sacrifices are, however, of varions kinds. Some among 
lliem are principal rcquiring ths performance of certain rites which are 
onîy subsidiary to them. The relative natore of thèse sacrifices regard- 
ing thetr rôles as principal and secondary is not dealt with in the Vsdas 
or Ihe Srautasûtras. It is the Mîraâmsa system that offers the rules for 
inirrpreting the muniras and the formulas and contains directions for 
deiermining îhe procédures for the performance of thèse rites. 

Many sages framed ruks for this interprétation and itis thcPUrva-^ 
mimamsS sëirm of Jairaîni thaï finaîly emerged as the authentic work to 
serve this purposc. Sabara^vâmin wrote a bhïïsya on them. This 
bhÔÊja wu commented later by Kumârila Bhafta and Prabhikara. Thèse 
two wriîers held dîvergenî views on many topics and their foUowers, ■: 
maîntaioing their tradition came to be knownas Bhittaand Prlbbâkara; '■ 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] REVIEWS 129 

As ycars rolled by, there arose mutual récriminations between the 
two schools. Besides, the sûtras of Jaiminij on wfaich the bMsya of 
Sabarasvaîiîin and commentaries upoa it were based, are 2744 groaped 
in îwelve chapters. Each chapter conîains a number of sections called 
/Iff/ii/i^mi^îa which is dejBned as : 

vfsayo visayascaiva pUrvapaksas îathoîtar&m / 
prayojanam ca pancâhgam msiredhîkaranam matam // 

The adhikaranas are 881 in number. The very elaborate and voînmi- 
BOUS System required a concise treatment, in the sensé that the contents 
of the sections could be presented a clear eut treatment. It was Pârtha- 
sirathimisra who undertook this responsible taik and prodnced the 
Éâsttadipika. He flourished about â.d. Î 100 and was the son of Yajii- 
tman. Hîs oîher Works are: î. Nyâyaratnakara^ a commentary on the 
Slokavarîîika of Kumârila Bhatta; 2. Tantraratm^ again a commentary 
QnthtTuptlkû of Kuraârîla Bhatta; and 3. Nyâyarainamëla, an inde^- 
pendent work in which the author discusses the nature of certain impor-» 
tant topics, bringing ont the différences in the views held by the Bhâttas 
and Prâbhâkaras and showing the weakness in the latter schooL 

The Sàsîradipikâ is written in an easy and simple prose inter- 
spersed with the author's verses in the appropriate contexts emphasizing 
his views on the particular topic îaken up in the section. Pârthasâra- 
thimisra was the earliest writer in the field of the Castra to write a book 
of this kind. He states prima fade view in each section and after offering 
a detailed discussion upon it^ gives his sîddhànîa. Another aspect is 
that the inner connection (samgaîi) between the quarters (pâda) and 
chapters are explained at the beginning of each quarter and each chapter. 

The édition of the Éastradîpîkâ under review contains the text 

and coînmentary for the Mimâmsdsûtras from the pàda II of Ch. I to the 

snd of Ch. V. The second and third pddas of Ch. I are devoted to the 

reatment of validity of the arthavâdas, Smrtîs and acara, The îast pâda 

\î the chapter détermines the ways in which certain names of sacrifices are 

scertained from the Vedic passages. For instance, Citrâ is the name of 

sacrifice. This name is derived from a varîety (cftrâ) of materials used 

1 the performance of it and the féminine genderof the name istobe 

istified as it refers to an isti, The second chapter détermines the basis 

)r distinguishing one karma from another. The principal and subsidiary 

laracter of the sacrifices is explained in Ch. lïL Sruti, Lihga, Vïïkya, 

rakarana, Sîhana and Samakhyâ are shown to be the six pramanas for 

îcidingthis^ Ch.IV contains a discussion on the subject matter of 

îdic injunctions andhow the results are to be obtained. Howshould 

c rites of varions kinds, like the principal and subsidiary, should be 

rformed in particular séquences is treated in Ch. V. Sruti, Artha, 



Î30 S.V. UNÎVERSÎTY' ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

Pâthû, Pravrttî, Stâna and Mukhya are the pramânas to be employed 

to determioe this séquence. 

There are some interesting points in tàe Sâstradîpika which, frcsi' 
the point of explanation offered, are valuable for understaiidiag tlier 
natiire of the contribution made by tlie autlior. On the arthavadas^ tlie- 
author remarks that everyfaody is fîttracted to the worldly objects which 
are enchaotîng by their nature. The meaBs to get at them is indeeé 
hard. Man is therefore reloctant to take to those means. Inorderta 
create a likiog for obtaining those objects the objects are glorified as 
having exquîsite virtues. Driven then by a désire to hâve then\ 
roan may BOt miod the hardships he bas to undergo to get them. Like- 
wisCj the resuîts to be obtained are aiso, extolled so as toattracî man 
(pp., 10,, 1 i) The arîhavadas are stated to. be of threekinds : ■ 1) Some of, 
them' coîidemn the, undertaking of certain deeds as forbiddea, as they 
would' lead ,to undesirablc co.ri séquences*, ,2) Sonie, glorify the Vedic 
îBJunctioBs. . 3) Some descrifae vivîdly ,the reasoBs ^for iindertaking 
certain rites, (p. 21). 

■■ Bhavana hc\z^m%,tà into .two 'Mads : 'those whîch ha^ve^sacrifict 
as their object' and those having the sacrifice as the efficient ïiîst,ruB:ient 
for; obtaining the cherished goal (p. 96). 

;..:,,■,. Whiîe, disciissÎBg ,the rôle of the arîhavadas, the aiithoî notes a' 
.caser yajamana'h'prastarûh. Ho'w C2,n y a jaj aman a he z prasiara (seaî) 
Of prûstara be yajamana ? în the con,£ext Ihe seat is praised as usefiîl îo^ 
yajdmïïna, , Then the word yajamïïna will hâve metaphorical import.. 
The author discusses the basis for siich imports and states that si mila- 
, rity 'aod BOt superimposition is the basis for usage (pp. 108-109). 

;,-':; Elaborate discussion is u.BdertakeB whiie makin,g cîear what the 
toïms hm. and., sesm m^^n. In this context,' the , view of BSdari is citei 
,and'Te.fuied^aBd: Jairniîii's Vîe,w is stated lo be ihat the concept of sesa 
lies.- in ,beio,g of service' to „another and not doing help to another,. 
(pp. 220-222). 

Whiie dealing with séquence, the author states that it is known in 
the casa of the mantras vAen they are recited, and in the case of injunc- 
tîons when they are known (p. 470). 

în the sacrifices like Jyotïstoma and Pamidarika, cows and horses 
are offered as gifts. A question is raised as to who among the donor and 
recepient should perform those rites, Âfter discussing the issues per- 
taining to both, the author décides that the sacrifice should be per- 
formed oniy by the donor, Then he remarks that according to a bhasya*^ 
kata^ earlier to Sabarasvamin, the receiver shall perform it. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] ' REVIEWS 13! 

Clarification sare ofl'ered as to the possibiliîv of îhe pramanas 
becoming niiitually opposed f p. 44) and as to what a word stands for 
(pp. 74, 75). 

The aiîthor offers dérivations and explanations to some technical 
ternis like astâkapâla (P. 105, Î06), kalpa (p. 59), karana (p. 130), nîgada 
(pp. 144-145), hîs fp. 189), nivida (pp. 238-239, 245) and prasasm 

(p. 451). 

The author mentions the names of some early wrîters for fais 
statements. Some of them are Gautama (p. 57). Àsvaîayana (p. 60) 
Vâjasaneya (p. 67) and BIdari (p. 222). Some writers are mentioned as 
kecît, ekadesinen, It is curious to note that the author does oot mention 
Prabhâkara or Sâlikanàtha by name. Prabhâkara's reasoning is 
ridiculed as the fooPs prattle (p. 275). 

Even the lucid exposition of Pârtbasârathimisra was feit as hard 
for understanding with the resull that commentarics were reqnired to be 
written aboot A.0. 1600. The authors of them were ail near contempora* 
ries. Except the commeBtary of Somanatha, ali others hâve remained 
onîy in maiiuscripts. The next commentary to appear in print is the 
PraM^ published in the bock imder review. 

The author of the FrflMâis Tatsat Vaidyanitha, son of Râma- 
candra Tutsat. In the colophons at the end of îhe pëdas In his corn" 
mentarvj he refersto his father by the names such as Râmabhatta, 
Râmabhad ra , Ramacandrasîlr i , and Rimabudha . His father was wcll- 
versed in pada, vâkya and pramïïma,WB.s respected by schoîars (vîdvan- 
manya) and had the title la/^^/v Ta/ and S^r are the titles by whiçh 
Vedic schoîars ritualists, sacrificers and donors were honoured. {The 
Bhagayadgita.Xmi, 25-26, 27). It is évident that Vaidyanatha and bis 
father belonged to the family steeped in Vedic learning and devoîed to 
the performance of Vedic rittials. 

Vaidyanâtha is known to havc written fîve works 1. Agnîhom» 
rthacandrika\ 2. A commentary on the Kâlamadhavakârïka; 3. Udaha- 
^anacandrika, a commentary on the Kavyaprakasa; 4. Alamkàracandrîka^ 
% commentary on the Kuvalayananda; and 5. Prabhà, a commentary 
511 the Sastradipikâ. The référence to himself as a kaxï, in the second 
otroductory sloka in the praèAà, gç^is justified by his commentarics oo 
^îamkâra works cited above. The Udaharanacandrika was written in 
L683 and so Vaidyanâtha may be taken to hâve flourished at the end of 
he nth. century. 

Tbc Frabhâ is lucid, easy and brief and not exhaustive like the 
îommentary of Somanâtha. Thongh brief, hère the knotty points get 



132 S,V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

adéquate explanation. It is valuable for information \t contains os 
matters mainJy related to the sacred rites. 

The ioner Tela.tion(sa7ngati)k said to be of four kinds. bîg, sâsîra, 
adhyaya, prakrta (context), and ranamara. (p. I). Four kinds of 
fallacies are to be avoided while seekïBg to know Dharma (p. 2), 

On the question of wearing yajnopavua the commentator remarks 
that it is ordalned in the Darkapûrnamâsa while the Kâtlmka enjoins it 
for alî sacrifices. Yajnopanta, meiitioned hère is not the one that is 
made up of threads but it means the wearing, the cloth worn as 
yajnopmvîîa ^ So, the iûjunctioo is of the Ihread - yajnopavita woiiîd be 
iiot of the Srauta kind (pp. 44-45). . Soniaîiâtha held the opposite view, 
tlmt yajnapavita made of tfareads is meant hère. (p. 30). 

While discussing whether one caii marry one's materBal uncle's 
daughter, the commentator refers tothispractice as prevailiog in the 
Andhradesa (p. 50). The writers of , North Tndia refer to this practice 

as prevailiBg among South lodiaiis. Somanâtha offers some comments 
on 'this practice. Prohibition :is only when the, motber'S (ofthe girl) 

gotra is to be.taken' into account. There cannot be any objectioîiv' if the 
gîrlis given, in adoption to some one else wheîi the gofr^? of the parents 
do not coma for considération (p. 34). 

^ht- Rïïjasuyû shail be perfornied by a Ksarriya, that is one who 
, is:not oaly a bornKsatriya but aiso a .crowned king. The comimentator 
ilotes that eveiî those, who^ do not get rolership, are called Raja in the 
Dravida coîintry. (p. 194-5), Kîimarilabhatta observes that Sabrasvimîti 
identificd such.pcrsons who. gct the name jRâja as Ândhras and that this 
miist be taken to refer to the pcopie of South India without référence to 
any particiilar région {Tantravaritika P. 591), 

Whîlô Km-iri sacrifice is perfarmed, the followers of the Taîiiirîya 
,XQC&nsion aï thQ Krsnavajurveda are enjoined to dine on the ground 
(p. 215). 

The woîth of this commentary is high in one more respect : That 
is, many words of rïtualistic nature are fully explained. Some of them 
2Lit àjyabhâga (p. 470), ukhâ (pp. 390,486), prsadâjya (p. 483), 
Maitravaruna (p. 423), svaru (p. 418), hauîra (p. 39Î). havirdhana (p. 373), 
sparsana (p. 370), samsthâ (p. 364), sadas (p. 355), ghrtam, mastu, 
nispakvam (p. 312), Urdhvapatra (p. 234), aratni (p. 233), sphya (p. 225), 
samya (p. 224) and others. 



There are words which are ancient in tfaeir usage and convey 
meaaings which are not current outside the sâstraic sphère^ especialjy 



1977 Parts ! & 2] REVIEWS 133 

Mîmânisa. To thoss, not acquaioted witb sâstras, the meaniiigs wliich 
the aotlior fgives for them may appear to be strange and^ incorrect 
too. Some of them are:- ufapa (p. 247), nîskarsa (p. 259), samparâyîka 
(p. 260), sundhana (p. 295), prâkâsa (p. 303), avagurana (p. 316), 
upararnana (p. 333), abhisava (pp. 168, 334), anupahuia (p. 341), 
parîvasya (p. 420], nidevanam (p. 448) , ^r^w^a/a (p. 451)^ anîarita (p. 451) 
vyaîîreka (p. 456), /^m/jâ^ar/z (p. 465), pratibala (p. 476), avaroddhum 
(p. 504), and others. 

■ Another noteworthy featiire is that tbe commeotator cites passa- 
ges from certain recensions of tfae Vedas sucli as the Kausîtakî (p. 304), 
Maitrayaiiïya (p. 322), and Tindya (pp. 80, 84). Mention is made 
of writers on Kalpasîïtras, Dharmaéâstras, such as Kiîîya (pp. 40), 

Âpastaraba (p 45), YijSavalkya (p. 45). Référence is made to earlier 
writers like Bâdari (p- 220), Varttikakara (p. 244) who must be 
Kumârilabhatta, Mandanamisra (pp. 13, ■ 130), Sâlikanâtha (p. 19), 
BhavaDltha (p. 121), and Misra fp. 134), the author of the text. Rca- 
dîBgs are aîso taken note of along with a discussion on them. (Vide :- 
pp. 128, 308, 383). 

In his Préface, the editot lias given a valuable but brief acconnt 
of the development of theMîmImsa tradition. He has vehementiy and 
lustifiabîy conderaned the approach taken by modem Indian schoîars 
towards the understanding of the contribution made by the ancient 
writers of ïndia and fixing the periods of their activities. Yet, it is 
doubtful whetberhis arguments for fixing the period of Samkara are 
infallible and acceptable. 

Useful information is given regarding Pârthasârathimisia's 
::ontrîbution to the Mîmamsâ system, and the family of the Mîmimsâ 
traditionalïsts in MithîIS. 

The edi tor's foot notes are useful for clarifications on the use of 
îïxpressions like vajî (p. 179) râjâ (p. 195), veda according to the 
=*rlbhâkaras (p. 275) and others. Référence couid be made aiso to the 
lotes on pp, 164, 175: 216, 219, 276-277, 2S0-281 and 287-288, 



Curiously enough, the editor bas not furnished information on 
he Mss. materials he has uscd in editing this work, though he has used 
fae letters îike A^a, ga and others while referring to the readings, c. g. 
jp. 122, 128, 187, 188 and others. 

This édition is really an asset to the students of the Sâstras and 
choîars. Printing and get up arc good. It is hoped that the Tarkapada 



134 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

of the Prabhâ and on the remaining portion of the Sâstradipiks will be 
brought out in the near future by the learned éditer who is equipped 
with critical acumen and érudition acquired from his talented Guru. 



V. VARADACHARI 

ïïi'#F^q?FfÇi^?n'fî3q, îî|î%gt, ??.^^. fÇJFi; v3ii ;^fR 



'^m w{w0m BvmJ nm^ %m sfrlg; i mwïiï^ ^mmf^ 

^^m^M^n m wTïh^^^m m ï^m^ m ^§^ %wiw?i 
wi mi m\ mi ^mm_] ^^W4 ^J^(^ m^ ^ ^ ^^, | s^l^^^ 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] REVIEWS 135 

?. Si? - 

# ?r^H??îrèî wè I 3nw Trfwf^ffF ^w^j^-. ^îiï?wM 
" '«T^: ?î'W' f?îçî mmi ^m+m- pif?: '3#r 

ïlm^^^ I wi^^\: ^m^^: mm^: w^ ^ mf^^> 'i^ î| 

ftF 5'TO%Fïï' ff^'ïîF^F^I 

^mmi: ^mij^'. ^w^'mi w>^f^m^: ^m^^^^k^ 



^. wi- m^i^pm: 



!36 S.V UNiVERSIIY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

tra:i'ô ;iSA|ss^ &o^^s5 ?6o^^ ™, eB. ê. 6^S,lëd^Ck., ^lO^Tù Î7. 






è>S:^B tt^i^^t^ (^SRÎ VENKATESWARA ORIENTAL SERIES NO' 
^^l^^ SOb\??i«^ ^^ïî^cc ioFT-Slwo'l tt\ "âsredào^ fc^'GH'SÏN ê 

ët^ z^^l^^cz:. êTjëù :':&:iëp èo3?l' eb I2i i:i;a^^' ^î:^o3d6^ra 
i^bi^ £c;j5 ^^cza. Il &o^ îo'o^'^ è^Ô^ûi^cëc. Ho)^^ 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] REVIEWS !37 



m[ 









^^'^% |^23^So â^^éo ^ ^oi:àï!i: &3dà^Êb e?:^^d5br^ e^s^l^ mT^ipae^ 
^à i§oô B"5'£^Glgtr d'ôfèT S)5b^;â ^2?*^-^ 

'■^'i^oî^b -■ 53*^ sè^^S^o) ■:ç^'^^n*^Q, iScs^i^'ctfài' ■•^:w^^'*:i'd6jî\' «:fA 



138 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

(c) il) (è) ^à^o^^z^ 0^ ii^t è^^dJb'Sc ^Œx)^^ ^o^^-gjEsdà^ 

K?cpdàe3 M.A. P.lid. rpii *iè5?:;'.wL* 

(d) û:i^îlQ^ ts.w. ^^e:r 29^ ^è^a^ "^e? ss^^^^si^ "^^ ^^^ 



A. V. SRINIVASACHARYULU 



% % ^^{^mvmi 



m m fi mfw^^: I mm m^ , mm mmJk' \ 
^•qtmf^ ^Mi m # mm w ^5[f ?^ ^J^ ^^]^^^ li ^^- 



^^m\ I 3RÎ: 



*f C-. 



^ mwwi^- 



3î. i »n. îjiîRîî. s. 131 



S.V. UNiVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 



,c;.; 



^rî K"^ H«ft^rî rîfl ETjîTpjTfjïf ^=jT^j->. fîfsrîforfcî; %i f [^ ïprrorq; 3rs(*TTof 



2 cr. g. ïB. =«îr. 107 (ffen:) 
3- %^^îïï. ï. 36 



1977, Parts I and2j aWI^îRI^^ fôTînÇTraf'Sîr f¥m: \ 

:\^m\^^w^ ^r^ qqfr w\^mï ^r H^t% cilf ffîîww ^pïmm m^m- 



V S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

mm mm^^^ 

'îF^^îffîW^ cî^fTtWîraWiîMF^' (^. ^. 2-1-68) # #^ 

m m^mm, m tIsît q^^ ^m ^m^^^^^s^ ww^fm- 



1977, Parts 1 and 2] SfRM^I^ g5nn3l^?:Wî miK: 'i 

mmwwjwii m ^ îppr wa 5^M*K*5iH^HaRwi mm- 1 

^rfïli ^: \ 2# îppf SRÎsîï^R îIPTfl^ïï^, 'fî'ïï^tR#f 
5. 3î. ^. ?. 29 



c s V. UNIVERSITE ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

fw^ Hffeqî f^HTi^i cT^^ftg^ r-'^m^w^ ^mm•. 

Tm^j-^m'^^m^i mhwm %f^ i ^% 'm wi mHm^m 
?Rr#^, ^^^?H^HTOt5[eiJi?iiiïnHfèf ^flRff^ w^i %-^mk I 

6. cT. ÏT. i. 2ï6 



1977, Parts i and 2] HWrDîiqT^^ g5RTcira€S2^T îk'^K: ^ 



^«î^è^Pïï: f^^HHmj: STïTRlïï^f^ TtcïïT ^i^^îîIftT^: liïïf^ffiTgîîR 1?^- 



wîTr^TffèléT: R^^TfHissa: m^^iWFWïmj i 

7. ÏÏ. 1- ^. 'et, 103 (ffe^) 



c S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

mX^^ I ^^ irsr Wï ar^qjïï^ q^1-fc2i q^ïï^ erfeiq; i «ra ^^ 
'w'^^^^iwm^ ^îîFïïôîîïiraRFfFïï^' (?îir.^. 2-1-68) # ^"^ 

gjoiT^iîf mfr - '3s[=^ïïKFïïW srmpKPî;' (t. ?i;. 1-1-3) 

' ffeîfîT ^jRwf^ï?: ' (I. ^. 6-1-1) 

8. î^. ^T. (î^. ?ï. 2-Ï--68) 



1977, Parts 1 and 2] siïîTIoJï^ISiÇT g^î^RîT^l^H*)! R^R: '■ 

'^m\ m^'^ f^Mf^' (I. ^, 6-1-2) 

fc2Tïrî^cf 1 

siî%i:^ctâ; ïf^RTort sî:[^ïr>iï 3^qflîR% i sfFHFq^fq ^îïï^^^fra; ^^m- 
M^Hiidi^ ff^jorrfè^Fï: 1 ^wra; stfîf'^ #^f^ ^Rî ^r^î%?ïï^siîfï]ggor- 

9. a.ïTT. a. 23 . 

10. :^. 53;. s. 39 

11. '^. ^. S- 219 

680 — S. 2 



<io S.V. UNIVERS! TY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

T%^Fiï OT^cî; srgqf^IH qi^^rzfTJng: | ^pi^ '^^'HWJim:] 



^_. - ,, 



gïSRrsî-Wf rSigsTi^T^Ï^ Ti^5î^q7ï7ï^ ^fTÏÏTOïTsftî -T^fSîIcîrïé^ 



12. Fî. R. Tï. 323 

13. cT. Fn. !à. 141 



1977, Parts 1 and 2] 5iïtns3M^^ i^RTcJT^SÇ^sjF H^T; T^ 

^ Wi^sfq 3Tf?fr^ffî f^^WM îi^m |?î'ï^ I 3ÎRcïî?Fïï?Wmf^5çf 

\^^^^'^^ ^^à^fïmmm ^^ ^sr m % i ^F^rçT ^"^^r^îTïrrqFî,, 

14. a".m. q. 338 

15. ktm. <?. 145 10 14^- 



-i'^ S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

^m ?!%% Tçr^ïTïTîlTFRîn I 3Tqïïï?^Rr m^'K^^f^ rmïT^m^._ i ^*-ïï=w 
m#7 ^t^pî;' i fît 

^n =g ^w fra#f^'7#3ïîî!î3:^îq^qHi%sF^^?^=fî^ w ^pm^ ï^^'^, 
gît 3î|îî?w^^5fp|twrïiT^ trsf ^^\ qjf^^n^ \ ^^^ imm^^ ^^^w■^- 

16. rî.ï%. q. 353 

17. cT.î^.a. q. 535 

18. >T.cn. T. 168. 



1 977, Parts 1 and 2 ] ^m^m^ gsprîcîî^'^m M^t '^ \ 

*îmTfif5omftr TRicî vi# 1 
sF^r '^grfffci: ïrirr^TT ^r%% sïïHfi^ f^^r^^ ïfîprcfrfe i ?îW; - 

». cT.m. s. 17a- 



r^ s. V. UNïVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

?fFîF5TF2îf^ f^DTTF ^fF/l'V? ?mïf3ïïFf ! 

21. r^.V-Â. SÎIîTRt;. q. l8l. 

22. çT.Î%. H. 33S . * 



1977, Parts I and 2] îlWMq:!^^ ^^m'^m^r^m ft^^îR: 'iy. 

vm: T^ ^w^m rat ^ï^^^m: mmimwWi^R^,w^f^j^]<i^ 
3TrWï?î qtef^, sfïïl¥^ ^r#^-îf^i^r?iïî%3 tï^^fîm imfm 

im ^çf w^^ f Rcî # '^4 ^rq^ ^rmo^ ?# f m ïjn ^w4 



?r-T=^. ï. 374 



^ S.V, UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

^m^ ^'- ^ ^Rt m^ ira ^f.Rra; i ^^ml^ i ^îr^rM 

24. ^.3t. ï- 29-30. 

25. »n.^. ?. 40. 



1977, Parts 1 and 2 j summi^.m W^^mmJ ^l: 'i ^ 

H ^mm ^\kmn mm tstr; m^^m^ ®r W i ^^ ^ ^^r?^"^ 
m^ # m^ I 

^fMîT^ra; î ^ f| =îÎ5r?î%?ffeîqîFcit ^m%i ^mi^^^ 
w^W'^mm^^ I î5M3îrr^ fppni^^ ffîïîriïïFq ^ i 
rgïïfm^qt^ w^^ m^ 'rif ciw»iR[q[ i m m^ ^# "=R5t 

tT ^^w^ ïT Hf«fcrf^ I ^mm ^wm lira |?% t^: 5^2:, f^?^ 

=^.T. 2. 155. 
680— 3 



%i S.V. UNI.VERSITY ORtENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

w^k^m, t m =^ srw^ qxè wm ^ fèB#t i 
'îîf^fc^g; , 3tïpinïrc|^> ^^m^ ^ïm^^ ^m m\m^ i mm- 

^mw^^^'^m, ^^ 5 1? f fîf w îî^fe ^^ »T^ I ^.^ 

^sf? ^ ^ <ïiÉ I iT«ir| îfiëi^fFïïf^ïiï ^^m mm ^m I 
^ ^ swFit îWM fi^sR «lîfJTi^^rsFîiwï^j?? MwfFPif^ 
s^és^ I^PPïïoî Mfg. ?f5i% îi%ï#t. ^ - ^ I % ïRT^fïf- 

28. îïlt.f . ij. 78 (%fiïf ?3^) 



i-977, Parts 1 and 2 j WlM^î^ 3^lcïra?g!Jl mK: n 

^ m-- 1% I 



r29 



Ira ^?i: |Ç7 i#i ^lî^iMWîè 1 m^i wï^ ^sf^ ^5r% 

9. fr. 5t. Z. 2J8-22I. 

0. en. 5f. ï. 29. 

t. riï. 5t. T. 2. 99-100. 



\o S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

X 

'rni^ ^^ ^m ar^r^iï^^^Rr W¥^?^i^' i^fèRiliTR- 

^ t '^?liïî%f|[ qf^^ï t^'îîîfT^:' I^^Çl^I %îf^ltq5J3; 

32. çr. i%. "j. 294 

33. 5n. ^. T. 1. 100 



1977, Parts I and 2] ^mwn^.^ g^TTrOTlSS^ÏÏ l¥nK: ^i 

m^h Trf^cRr ^7r%%: ^if^l^ m^^^ crt^of ^rrsfq^îïïiïï 
^^]m^^^^ri ^^^ïï^^r^i i^rot^ïï 5?TmR¥{^^f^|?ïi: ^ g 

îrw<^q^i?îr f w ?t ^^ q- ^3f2ï^ I iwm çf^Hq^f.^!^ 

r5# q^RmïTFfiiiHr; I 3îg1rs^5r q^ q;l|^ r^^^ ^i ^ - cf^fq 
[i 3^?sF^^ ïrf^î{%^ 51^-71^- flïft^ ïfrfir^ ^rwr^r sir^â, rm"??- 

i- ^T. §. f. 248. 



\^ s. V. UNIVERSITY-GsRIENTÂL JOURNAL [Vol. H 

"^^m^mm ^g; # 4m ^\ m-, mm ^^-^m 
î. înripqçf m m. w{^ms.Èm^F{ mwmrn ^ m^\ 

3îcf; îfrfïM W ^^ Ml P 11%: ffîNdH»ixb| I M^ 



36. =^. ^. 'j. 156. 

37. cT. R. 5_. 

38. çr. 1%. 1- 



1-977, Parts 1 and 2] vm^mi^ ^wm^^'^m fi^R: '<\ 

i^^ ?#: pm^ ?îi|iîîRi3rac arîFTfpi^ f^îPî q^^ nmn^^ i 



39. ïï. i%." ï. 



î,v S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol XX 

l^giy- «l^ri^: w^B^m w>^m^m^^ qz^fê ^z^^w^mm 
«HôTiRP^^^îîfTïRïï^f Mira îïï^f#P3;i sî^î^î?]^ ^[^^'Jm\- 

40. m. st. s. 29. 

41. sïï. T. 2. 158-159- 



1977, Parts 1 and 2] în^m^T^ 55Pïïcïï^?^în ^^K: \y, 

mm m>^^ I 



*> ç 



# Çt^n" 5îr^ ^€5:fî?l' 3^^ H1^: cî^IM sftrPî RFfM^î^wi- ïfq%^ 
42. ï2fr. ^. 5. 218. 



-<S S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

^WJDïî^: T^^^fm"^ iIr^RF 3T^W ^%# ^v^m^ ^ 

^mi^ g^Ri^# jj^cf ira 5'îR^.^F5 1 ^ ^'-^^m WM'^i^^-^^-^^ 
43. ^^. f . a. 81-83 (îiHt^?3w^) 



19/7, Parts I and 2J ^fïPm\^ ^m\^^^^m iW^îT?: v^ 



mn ^é^ ? 






\c S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

^m^' lit aïïT^lîWi^fHïïN Rîïï m^ 1 cîHîlfq ^f^f-q-Sjfq - ?:5lÇî^^q- 

sr^H-îpnf^j^^î; i ara: cigrar cf^sm^^s^sf^ îiM'TqfîTra ^wm, i i^ 

^ïî ^^ ïrn% I f5[fefrar ff 3?TfTfîRîsf:, ^ g ^ciff# 1 j?^ 5 
ira ':r?5f ^^rrraqîRmrf 5fïïra 1 



45. cT. ra. 



1977, Parts I and 2] ïffiTIoJM^^ 55r^Çïî^3SS«ir m^r^: ^^ 

T^ "^^cT^ f§r ^^^Eff^t ^ ^^W;W.^w^ wi-.mwi^^, ^^^^^^m 

46. a. ^. în. q. 149 
47- ^. T. ^. 33^-339 



^« S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. 

^'ïï^^^î' i f^ ^ t^g^r^ swF^fÇî ^ïiïïrfsr i^^r r^i^t^: ^s^î: i 

4^. =^r. S- 'J. 248 

49. ^. 3. ^. ''^^ 103 (ffè:^^) 

50. cT. g. ^. ^. Î08 (gfe^^) 



1977, Parts i and 2] aWT^^I^ g^nïïcîTfgSsîr fl=fR: 5'î 

m: ^^ ^^ ^mï% I mi^ 5riïïRgq%ïïK3; i ^î^ f| f^ta 
i^cî-i Rî^r^^ m f^mïïm ^fe^ftra ct^îra^pw^ mwm-. i 

^ïir; R=^i'Tfeîm'3ïï: ^^rf^^rm^: '?ife' ^rm^t Tft^ Is:^)- 



Dr. %^. ^TOJ 



#îftTOÏ#ïï^!? 















,^v S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

sîfe ^m m: M ^•. m f^3 ^^r^^^ 1 ^ ^ ^^ %^mmm 



Cr^ 



sr3 fR # I îî^^R: ^P^#^ ^m^^ ^m\^^^ i^ ct^ =^5^- 

5rïïî5^^ mm^ ^M^^: ^W^ W^^ ^=^^ 3fô3îTqîc2ïïf|3[^: 1^ 

^RTi^'ïïf^Rïn^r ^«mi ^^^'iHWuirît ||^ sj^rpi; srai^: #^: i 

ïïîï îl %^^ Hîî^: 3TS"^^ sqcî^fqé feg i%5^ïïT5[«r t^: 1 TJ^^f^îM: 

ïï^# tqr^: cî?ns^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^ ômmTq^^ i [itk îOO] 






1977, Parts 1 and 2] 3î[q Wïm^ mt^^'J^^ïf^■. ^'* 

R5r^trî5[ - 5t^^«ïïf?fïr: ^13^^% m §| H'^m^ [t- ^. ^. R °R- 
m %fRF?fH'^^3iFî#^TïïrsrRc^, T%^^l%^r^ 

fmf^ - 

' ' mf^m. - ^%f^' ' W- H ^i ^ ] # 1 

6. With ihc BudJhiscs and dit- Jains it is mcdiumsized (madhyama 
Parimana) !TK lOi 

=Erïî5î ^ Hîî: # %Rfi%^i fr<(?wcîfl;i ïRrf^g, ÇTîrfïit^sïfcqîci^aRi^^^^îr- 



-.c S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

^^ f^5# ^m ^mmm M w^^^^^ [^^i f . { 5?=^] ffg i 



^5ïï ffïfîî: ^ R^# ^iï%ïïf^ sïK^^^ïf cff^sfïïi^ g^rf^'îft^ftër^- 
^.''S^or? RcïîqTfç I mï - 



1977, Parts 1 and 2] sfîq ^frmi fl^sTH^fii?: ^v> 

ïï^îl#ïïî(iï^ ^irg:tîTk»TRïf ^fîT^^^ïï^i 5ÏÏ- 
T^i^F3^#«f ^^i[^à ^m^ [ïït, f^. {%] 

?rs I 

•i. m^t - 

3T^ïï^ïï 1 ^d p;t[^ ^^ ^^fcf jra^- 3ÎN îfrfïï^^fiï #Wiïf^ ? ff^ i 
5îf^ 4^imï ïï j^lïT^ïFif^îïÇîff ciï'^a[îR'î^iî^ ïïf5ï#?Tîîi| 

3Ti;TTrRr^R'ïïï<iÙè^ fi^^^To^rt ^^R^^ia;. .. Mh g n^ê ^nitSR ^^s^^if 
^ïï ^i^'û^ cT^î ïTïïèsRfi: 3î[^;fîifr%j%^^ lïï^|ci,^iïfr% \ à^\ ^r. ^>^\, 



*, 



16 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIEiNTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

^^K'^^^î^ ^m=^: cî5;îFcit Wi^m Rëft^iï: 1 ^m ^Z^ 3THW 

^?¥T: ^PF§ï%: iî%|3T^î^ ^qg^vr 'ï'jprTOîT I tT«iïc^ ïïrkf^ if«ïc3; 
çf^rf^fïT: ÇI325i^qï^5 îI%|q-W?: ïTIfF^M 5#f% i ^^: 

^^^^^^JWi%\^ f^;% b^ q^qj^l Jiïq^rrfqor: m-, ii 



ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 

g.i.^. ^F5rra^cif?îR^"i qf rfirïïH^Tî^^T fq. 2?îï.. ^^ i^,?/^ 



1971, Parts 1 and 2] aifq ^\m^ ;#t*|^%: ^^ 



SRI K.J. KRISHMAMOORTHY 



■c^£S3&, ç^a^êd:^ âr»C;?5^^sâpô^ "à^ê^^eri^^lià • (^1,^. 1468-1553). 

^dàri 6>.v'>s5p-?Ciûgf^ ô^lc^DS'l'Ki"5aS ^luePODdâos^Sj . aD^oC?^. 

SPos^o^sS r^^w^^' ët^o^it,. (lj5of{o^oé5^ âsîg^ro& '^Sôjo^ô ^dij» 



2 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

e^îD§, ^CS^^OD x^^SiTT ^oT"^ S^^ï^^^^i ^sSl)^ ec3â;î ;iSî*îàç?:5^Si 

^ A 

^CâeSoS.. .............. .,../•' 

i^ih ëu^o^àè lip^h^ èn^ih èp>q^^^^ëz ^6oîT^dh:s iD^aôbs^od^g 

Ô.Ô. ^sS|^s5 lô^c^ra (1949). sâ^e» 65. 85. 88. 

r'oe^oacP'Oagâa. xlr* : çsoiqJg-S î3_2^â, Z^h 259. 

8. ^sbo^er- Siôcaôà^Sbo. R. No. 520 (Paper), ^h 7, S.V.U.O.R. Instî- 
tute Library, Tirupati. 

4. -^: '-w-^d-g-^oi^^co*. No. 6609 (Paper), ^h 17, S.V.U.O.R. 
Institute Library, Tirupati. 



1977 Parts I & 2] ir-^^è' "^'^êeûSl:)er^^a^Cooe) ù^d^^ë't^ ■• 3 

9) "âDO^roo^J» ô^;S<5 10) e^q?g€r^âol^25s&co 11) ^^on*£^î5ol d'îSo&t» 
12) 45î^s5â^ BcdSï ïîifîSSb 13) ^ol^îSoâeasrg^g 14) ô^sS^Î â*ô:îo^;5b. 



i ïSon» siO(5D ^asÎN é^o siô : 
2) ^«îSïco QoâPo^ï?^. KîàâbS^ "él^ïîr^S D%à^&. àB^oeeTi^^O) "S Ô 



5. '^Q^66^cè;Sx>, III-49. 

6. esâ^jg-àdS&ïSbo, IV-28L 

a ^, ^S5î5-^ ^S5t3âe^t» (1940) 



'4 S.V. UNIVERSitY ORIENTAL JOURNAL .[VoL-XX 

— s 

c^ê^N^o ç.5t7- or:^ £:<^3l'1oï''0 '^ù^^è'ïoo^.'u 'Ï\::r?l5cfi 1 ôoii' 
oé^S)§ é-è's£> o&^oT?' -^ ^\B X^^o5, ^c^è'sT ):Sêèr>^Q Os5ô co^â 

■ ii) e:^g^- 

<So\ï ^^x^ u S5 ' :.. V' r* i u ^' ?.5 Ci' ^ ^j -N 1 ^^ o ^^TT' p xr^ S:o vr^ ■ 



mi Parts i &,21 o : >: ic-ô-.^;^---: n, kt^^ ^ ^ ^r 












îyêPc/y 












oOCjoOu^S^ àz^zB"^ ^o^:ù 1 c :^:i^c3cr7 l'izii^tolJ^ 






A 

t;lo^M«S-ex > EJiied bv P^Ti^Iît V. Vija}ir.igluiva£h:irya, ^.ô, \t^^ 



6 S,V. DNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL {Voi. XX 

a-. ro w* 

0*fôf)ê_26. 27, 28, 29. 46,48.55,61.81, 84; Ses^e»^?, 8.34, 
44, 80; à^;^a!ao-a>-.32; bê;So;S^^eû-12, 14/ S7, {^8. 43, 5T; ^^;S, 
^«^^;5ûoa)-15. 45; S'oKê-Sâ; ^ ^Sic3pA_42; î5a«)S5ûûo, ^^o ç5>ÎO^g^_45, 
54,71; àPoe5b1)d;^<5rîS)3»e6„9, 20; ô^a^BîS ?î)5b^-92; î5ÛN;i^&.93; 

■^ Ce'3'û a'es'Èouô'H^èîSDS îS ^éêë^ o^^&o^ ç?5ré^«i>. çrsi«S^&, 

Q :<V> 



DS)4^ SD^ &^ SîS^ "3 srD> ?;5o aoi^a-DS ô'é^oûcâ o^S'\a d2yâ*eS'i»o. 
î3»dbgcl6 ^^^o 'èmtù'â "So^ôcâ ^2ySr»CfEsrcû 'Bo^'Boefo. «sS) â^cD>^Ô§ 



€5c|_^^Sr.^gs5ôslê^^^©s'. c^o55)(baûa V (1917), ;3o^^e3o«4, 6 and 7 

(s5r-e^^';io. i^r^j^e^^TP'^^oiSoaa^Sboeo). S^i^^^ 145^1^2* 281—290. 

*^^^s' ^^o o^^^^^^ Edited by Pandit V. Vijayaraghava- 
charya (1936). %éjco 21-54. 



1977 Parts I & 2] -êr>r^r "àe^tosiDsnxPdDr© irô^^^iët^ 7 

^^c^m [\Im. 1190.1280) D-S^s^î^S^^rao. u-^^e \ê^<poë&ù (ij.^. 

î^^ftosî', s?Si)î5, (Ijcpsà, aocPSSr^gsiiF^f ;$0»^^à*oo "S^iî^^ciD s^^^î^on* 

—0 

Sx«ô5. 'So^éj»t^QSsJ«Ô§, ras ^oSëos:ùî?S. 



tto^.J^Spè'gXiÔSlè^^jQjg', ^oîâ^ïSûo V (1911). ?33-£)S'~!0, 11^ 12 
(;!$«^-^s3ioJSr»;l)î^€Or^;Soo«o), s^^eo 406-410. 

Tirumala Sri Venkateswara Journal (^ôâaaa J.^goS't)^^^' sSâlsT), 
Vol I, No. 7 (February 1933), %bo^ 588-êTO» 

'b-^^S' rsâ© OqSjor^&ca* (19Si], ;5)à}eo §f~8S. 

iv) -^^^ :sx6^cèi 

;â<b€o 10î).l22. 

V) ©aî^ :Sûo^55Q: 
e0^ (laeS), î5)ècc 119-127. 



8 S.V. UNIVERSÎTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

^ u — a 

à^cpœKf^o»/ e.rx-.S'^d'i^ca^ d'i^uiê rSoeDoôoui^ a,§^;_.^^ D"l asso- 



^ -jî ^ eu. e _£ *" ' 

3jDri3 riieSgo.r ao2c'^':5_^» ^'^^'^ i^vzi^ lia^^.e^ t^çS^Z'c^o 
ô,;iSD f^ô^fS ^^-*t-s:£:'© éî^^^ocû-. ^5:i^ao c3;3SpS sSu?^5^ â^^^SD'â'^'Ko 



t>ro 



£:ép:5'^Sï5?7O00. 



SS^^^t^ô'û-ffesr* o:^^^j5:ô"^iîSp» ^ftj.-/^ ^rô^-:» Kvr>m u^çx^ti: 
a-ir» ? w>S^îfï)d3k:>;5j', lV-^9-2. 299. 



1977 Parts I & 2] j^^^^ l)iîSo-i&e7--îj'eûgo ù-sa^siiiS 9 

a 

V — o 






>î;ï&^ôS fiîojrs-s^ zfhHq ^^o& isôà'è!. sîsls^^oSdj^^, aifgr^on'jf 

^0(^^ ^'ô«^^?S '^^^ c£:j|S>'rsà^oBÔ' D â*Do^. aoo'^ ao^' 

?Sa ■ ;;3-aô5'& ë^Z)M êoèèr^^; tPSàs^f'oS^ ^îaj»ô ào^^îà îSoôoû 3*o30^ 

î3»dS , ;j»^sb^:Stor? ^à^&. ^sà^to î^oas' c3*d:f)&©^ .;S2^S^0»;î 

n^CsSêDo"^ s';6pô^ ^;<^;SojârÎ3. à^^tj: ^?f^ ISd^^'3 ;|s% ;:)/6ô' 

.4.1) ^S> ;i3oe55ra: 

e3û^3c^2j^^'o sjôsi^^^^r, ^os5)éj:Sxi III ,i91ô\ ^::o.sr-iO. 11, 12 

xi) SS>D;à>ùj|Ji'c»: 

^•^«r ^rs';5)o ©^h^r^^tL.* ;i9SS\ $,4,:©o 69«83. 

5. ti?;3^S'î}cK3:Saj, II-188- 



10 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

I^SÈîSo'âtfo [ôS'h ;Soa3d»(Sb. ëu'^ë ^cxxié ^^É^o. è^^S'î^o^^o 



î5D^'âr*ÛB*S ?5 ^2?CPe?oS'a»o^ z.^j^^^^^ €^Q7V>tiSoàgo, 



e^ûo;S©dîS sSp€>h'A3^ I)D. is l ^^?;^ô:àè^"2oî6 ibe^acosSodSb^ ^j^^e^csSp&^oâ 

co, , ■ , ,«''■ , .ro eu- '. 

^èsgoiïï I ^c5^ ^cç^co ^yB^^ s5>ftoco j5d5j*çî»à»o?foaoa> 1 ^ ^i^^^ 

C Q V^ 

îv^ '^^gà'^&ozù^ î^oB^^àïSDèD -^î^o^a? h't^^<^ooù ë^'â^!^:s^ 
^ êôo ,^ô;Se^o<5^ l^;S;S_j?rs70D sSôsàf^îS^ ^ ^eîîSsîrO^co, 



16, -;Sj-: 'w-f^^^ ^^o o;3oor^^€x>' (î986)r^éo©o 87^93. 



1977 Parts î & 2] -w-f^û--^' l^^ê^^^^^j^' ^ô'cjgiifjss II 

;$o*; a)î3-^ao. cToiâdà?^ S3î6^sic&g ^ùoù^ toë'h^^tS^ëïï' ^^^^doù l^iS 

s-c&s'^^o q^oc:^^ "Sïëb^ê^a ^5o^©&oâ, ^o^sd ^èrl ë^E^û ^â "^^î 
êCôSier&g?) S^Mtî^'Sy' a^Sj^oô.^^ 

IcD^ooe^ÔD ^&o^ lop^ «502DÎ5 *âo^"t3^^6^Si *^^;S53*«^"âsS* e^^ "itf -ë* 

ô6's>^ ô'tfcSrr sr^&oô. «o3)'i siô ^lîfe i^îTd'oa^^^^ «(êj'âo^t^ifsîs' 

17. i) jSS«ifsS> ;Sûoja^£3: 

::: ô* ^. "âs5ïô^;5 j£S^c<€» (i945) 

8/ .Sx»: ^-w^^-in^^^^o o^^^^m^ (1935), ^àbex» 119 -ISC 



12 S.V. UNÎVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL fVol XX 

id^Ô'îSà àS)^oû, :âDOj-,D. Ï7Ô15 ^ôbgs*^éj'SâÂis*eo |^:Dî;Sôo;Slià'^^. §^t6 
41J*^^o& C3*1^ «ir^oA, ^7Ô^)^c5 aliè^co tj^S'ôà'^; Ss»^??. SSx)î&0 à^S^oà 






îfcl^î6|^ 483. îT^oT?^ ;Sol^îS5^ 544 sSJ'^ë'êc o^o>:?o3d. Q:Sîb^ ç?^o^^, 

19. "Sèij'ô ^9^§'<^T'^^7r>5a ^ ÔjsSdîs-^â^ sSô^^Ôj^, "âog't)^^£) ;5^;^ 
^In: «^'Sog'tiï'^îr sS^^&:>co' (1949), ^i:-€)û 81 — 86. 

l^^^^a (1974) 

iî) '^^OTT^^^o^^r^^* ^-"Jb^^^^i T3^. ^. é3. ^Hi^r^^-XT'^, ^.ê ^SSi^;^ 
^SS^tio (197Ô] * 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] -s-^è-g- l)adJb&enîr'a|o ^tfSg^-Ss 13 

o 

'©^èll'f'^ ^os-c'Cê çs-à-goà) îjàSi'O'^6, ô'&jj'SS'o'S^ «•^SjjCbOîSorf 

^^^^à ^^àl):x *^5ê&ào B^sb.&. 

■^ 3*0^,0 Sl;i^ îàpoor? -^iSoô t»or^ .aS):^S4oÔ : 
iv) e.;à;?e^a^ Sjj^ot^ô'iJsST? ria^S^dfcasê^ 'hm^^œt:?^^& 







„. , a5ïî^?;S(>^&» là«)t)dèû *A3».;ii^a'D ©à^Ôo^^To^ ê^Sio 



^1 



>»S, .*Je£uc„>^§*' ■ç9'â^,. ,^0(î5ip^mïS ;5%5^^o?T« ■^-''a^-^Sooâ.,,, lier»©' 



14 S.V. UNIVERSÏTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

^^, as^^d^ÔbgD Ç5^sr6'2)j;?:^o ^S5r5''^"Sooô; €5ègoa'3SiS3ûo:ûOÔ. 

:ôÔ^(;:f7r«»©ô3o s3w»;S s?éS:5i* (:ir»8^. 1978) s ^Ô^iSjooooÔ. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] -sf^'^r -aiî«iû:l->er.xr»3Joe ^i^SQ«t)S5 15 

ià-CS^^o c%e*^, ^-^e^^ «ô^ècJà'a. ïo5r»5'SiDJi|^S^âSo;b^'2o. 
e'on»o& •3043S3 ^irSjtfoS* KSsSbïSjoooû «ïSb&o^S^îs^â acSàîS. lïîoo e.^ 

&©2>c»o^ l^ïâsrcrefi, ia»oe*3*e^g, ^Sb*ô^^1?$ô, rtfs'Kë'sî,Lfô;So,fi3tf-w 



24,'See:T.:T. D, lBS€nptioîis> Vo'L l¥, jiîscX'Flx-a^No. 144, Fage 265. 



fUBÏÏAKAUMO 



n**. Jfoj:ï^i(à3S^ -hT^^^t la^oûoû à'aoûn'&. «àsrsSji iib\^ 

•.«—«.«.ii-.^ ..^ A. _ -4Ï 



^TPà-Cîo^i^, 1o^^ ^tl^ë^ ^■^'Sh, ^-'n^ , 1977^ 



18 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

DiB^DSô irë^Ù JD^KeTSio. -^ Ù^QèrC^^ foB^t^ m^^^ &^^^ë èn»^ 

à:ùe* (214 :ï. - 2ie ;S.) ^S) S'a^oO?:) aûH'^^ î6^^"âriào?à ^^^^ào^ 

ê, ibid, s3. 62 

©Soc 8) if ^ *5r>/^^©^c90::^ ;ix> 

"sr^CacjSbSb ^^«î^^j.^ ;5oé3o-5/' — g'o;^2S\^^ir'e^ ^ S5, ^9 

7, 2^«5-un.i!n2Sb-:3^'èS^o^o -ç5o^s5ô 2', 29-10-1969 -cSb-»!! S^^'^^ir^^f 

9. îbîd, 140 S3. ^ ^g^^ A^J,^ sbôosjo -csj-:^iâi ibid. 182 lg9, 
207, 211 ^rsr-ty^ 



1977 Parts î & 2] S-^^-^^ xy^i'r'^^-^àë^&u 19 

w sfr>&œ affl,-î â^ ^êâSàoS ijo^/îra âJ«^^:$j>& crôS^ "—^^ûj 

à'ÇT &ûa b^a â)s3s s^s^^ ^^âi"!"" «d ^esssi'Sîiû. "^o rjî& 

•• «■■ . 
■•',.■•■■ "^âlB(m "to &oâ)ai. 

iii KPm ë^^ 3c3&ë" 

0, ibid ÎB^ s3. 

1, ibid. 187 ss. 

2, ibîd,188s. 

B.' ibid. 189, 191 S,. 

L ibid. 197 S). 

>, ibid; 202 î5. 

r. ■ ■ îbîd. ' f^.. 4. ^:e?^;h'<^;5a) "- e^Ro - ''^'^'^.g, „- i S'?S^» ;'■ 



5Ô IV. UNÎVERSÎTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 






ii)T^S^ m^oX^^S^^^ 2'^t^^^s>i esD^sigS'^o^Ô e^(5^5'g^;$ aîôA^S 



19, 
20. 



^osfi^^:Sx> -. ftse^ C30 - e^^^g^ - 204, 205 sS. 
(lià>iir»Slj^aQoc3&o -esc'cso - ^Seï", 10, r*. S. 

22. ^SSo[jr»s5cn'o3oc3^-«clc3o -;3ô', 10^ f^. 18. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] ^^^ijr,^^ TP>;6^è'-(r^^g-^^^i^ ^^ 

*V&§a) iiSràcoà 6êS^i^& ëië 

r^S^' ,, a^^^ .,;S25ro.^ r*^^S^of* &%S.«^ n»,SS) ^^^s-^ '3o& ^6i^&>o^ 



a) co . 'Oj 

■ ST^:/' ra^'sS^al&o-eî^rag-iï^SSg^ -210.211 i). • ■' 



11 s V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

S)'D^î6ô ? eD |^;S€j^oS3SSi:è^î6D. s^&^^S^^^îSp, ^o^JS5^^â^^^ ^tTesgi^â^Six» 

•â)ô'^C'tD"c3'2â:.^o S)cp&^ g?;3^âoî& crSâo S^cso 0d5'ôb «3(^oiD§^^ tào^t:?^.^'^ 
S^cè^t ^^e§^&, S)oo8»eS^;SD tsî^^e^sio^a) ^î5^;S"â^2& â^::r&a 



2}YqK75) -^ â)éç>S^263 ^D^osubéaSb SSdj'OSSûûcT^ e^cj'^'â^'SoîS dlûîS^D* ? 

fo^ ^ar S^^ddbûîâ^Ô/'^ e ë"^ àa' CP^iDÎDa^ (^;S;5oAotî) 5;$)éo5i)o"â cJÊD^^Ô. 
XJS'^îy^, fcè^ ^aê ^ a ^^^ot^éD^ e^^^^*^ S|^i5'£§'"2û^ «^èè^c:P25^^^^J5"âD 

^S&gS^. Sàôcsào "â^ic^'Ô'ÊS <^>jà^g ^Dô'.^^C^ SC^^^ ^JuxtapositïonN âjot. 
CP25b4i) ïTîSd S^DS'dSb. <S^éd;^(^S:) ^-SSpo^îS^^ S^^ àè'' ;3^<^;Sû ;Scp î5 ^ 

(logical seqî3eiîce\ ^hi^^TSoC^ 'écS:>. 5*^*6 ^ô eS£)j'o^ ^îO^'â^ v)^è'e^'&. 
go. r©^^5\^îSbo - Ç3ÔCQ0 - (^^^g^ - 26s3. 

82. ifeid. Î9^;s. 

B4. g'o^5S^^:Sx^ - Bfe^g ~ 6^^^ ^ 194 - 196^5. 



1977 Parts I & 2] S)'^^«r»$ -o-^r^p^^lg-^ô^^^ 



23 



i;$oS& %"â^S& ^D^où^oë ^i^^^ i^^pes^^Éâi. a^^D 
«^Ti^ hë^^SiùM i^ts*^:^ taooi^ti aiP $i)^S^(5l sSÔ^^J coooé'ââr* 

tfïO^àSîSû. ^ô ?yf ^ ^^î|S> d&D ^ Sïb^ Z7PjÙ Sr î5 ^olS <ÏÔoô IxùiSi;) 

;■■■.■■ Cr *'_-^, 

O eu. «f—a 

hë 03)0»' srôoi^feff* eoe-5e5io ^^iF^ëdb. e'So êF& i!d& ^s'^S 

crî&D ^^tl)Ss,^M hë l}è5â ;oSS. , e 'sr^îS^S* o'aàû-^â) 2^t3^ m'^ê^ 

© « O ■' ■ ■ fi 

cpSbD ëë;^oièp>h^ î;S:^o,èl'à3;;&o'^oâ .g'^'^^tJSSïo.iD^ô. '. -tP^essDS.'^Spd^^Sb?? ; / 



24 S.V. UNÎVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

"S^^îà, ;àeS d^P'So 'S&ë' àCD(^ u^&iO 

îi^î^i. d&'C'^gSS^îS:) çrSo^ -SD! è^b «ô ë'^Sb. 2^^S5cc:6^ a^oë^^^ ;5ôâf«6^ 

\^^&^^ tâi. ei)to>7?^. Siï ^^îV ^à S£2f î6D^'â^ JDeDc^àD, rSo^^T? 

r©^ï6^^;Sùo - es-^j-^^g .. S3î^^ - 461. 462 S5. 
86. ibid ec»o-5^o(:^, ;66 , 11 f^ 1 



1917 Parts I & 2] s^icp^ vr-^^ip>^^^dëg^) ,25 

^^ë^ ^<^^ éî^^â: ■ ,^.ë'^s^ "âr^i^asJS? i^côr^sâ^^e^^eTs^b??' 
^^^^$é. rm-,oà, "S^«û4l5' i6i^pî5o^*' a3.?S £r??3»^ ^^^c^cpc^ea 

ë>^^FS §o_;)5^^ ^iç^^^lî. ^^S=r^|^2^-j ^^^;i'^ ë^o^^^i^-M. tl:'^ 1^^' 

'^ **• oc ^£i _^ 

o~ A — ^ c ,.,_. .«w oc ■ £*• 5,., 

^ep;^^?^ Sii'ADâr^oD S^oi^cSPK^5 àfî}&. 'ip^ëpt^ èç^&^:â ë^j i^SêC: ^o d os;S 
S^;^^ <S^5'jp ^q^^f ^o^îS^ fe ^'Q^i^'cx^:^?? e^' ^'s^'^^ 

■ 38. ibid, Véd,^/ 

m, ibid, 191 S3. 

•40. 'ibid'/ 124. s5. ' ■, 
.• 41. ■; îbid, ■12'M.y:' ■■■ 



26 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

^c<?5ôoT^«S* ^^^oi^-)t^ **sy|ifgr5â* ^'t^^^:Sêî r^l"» ^ot^do&sB^"" 



â^'âS) 'ë é^% ^5'^"^55^S^ê %-aî6 8sqSj^ 



b à^ë^ 'dpâù^ .^hz^u-'i^^^Tf^ :53^D. ^ ê S3^^5s5t^ fct^5^;5b ^f^sS^o, 
c52^t::)SSv)^ Dcot^îS^ fcè'î6Dd>w cp^^âe^î^D^^^^. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] ^^^^^ TP>^}^ww^ss.^àë^^' 
ùQ^ rS:ioë Sc^eS) SossS i5*& 



27 



"'nàs^SroÛiÛ} xy^&, ^^^€^ ^C^I, i^^o^ l::^^roé)oéir.^^ 



D£r^§oÛ'c;)ô.':,^àl'S'''''Oiïoa^,^& ,"So& ^5r«GÛ:^Ô. .ei;^»^, S|;îea5^, 

■■■.■•■■ os* -_J î»* .-»-• Ow 

w«ww wwg-- :-»M.A- ;-.t«vw-». v- ww«u - w ^^ w ^^ .,fi*.j i»*^* 






4S.',\îbîd, 189 â. 
44'*' ' ibid- •154 53., ■ 






28 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [Vol. XX 

£3 — a— "^ oJ f^ -^ • 



■^4 ^^^ î^oli^ ^3^o 3 "igo^e^tS" ^;S^c3&u^'2o 

€^oM î o'S^D m^^^ B^^7!f^ o^DoeàSû c6^^û?6 fcè' '^■:i^àd^^ ^câ^^ 
t^S^ë^^lt'^ïi ù--^^^ cp':^ck. ^.€)t^ ^igs5^0L5b?:-ô t^^. S'D i Ô 



47. ibid, ô3co^ ^ 4à3.^^.s^c^c3 - ll^j ;3. 
43. -ëS 55cp»:5^è^^o^. ^i^g. XL Ç^. -0 

49. ibid.r*. 4 

"en 

50. ibid, 63-çp>o. V, r^. 14. 

(Pp. 451-55) 

52. i%j ^::S^r:ojèë ^ ç£Tro^ 1-). §:;^ 18. 



1977 Parts 1 & 2] S^-^tj^^ ■a-S:,i'i?^-^S.g-s-Që^s^ 29 

"ê^*. ^a:i)j ûj^è'îf dào^S'S^ (line^â î^ôo;^litDtàî6^ô, ùi^ë^é^tis> 
\èr>sB^ë'^^':5t \èr^i^r^^ ûj^r^so^ôb aoAèôoûâS. gs'j-^^'^ 

ÙA^ ^:}ù^f:S:* e 05S &âà ? ^^5'"ë«s, S:t£Sw%, i;3rsè.'i$. ^oâd à ë 
ô^ ^ô^e^j-û" 1^0^ ù^à è^6âù i^aPo^S^. M&cr^âo ^&5'&o^ iSpià 

SSb^T'ô e"a)& '^^^^\ rù)^0^^' e^DSîSoô d&ï7n^. c?àoD ^&a; 

ï5^ "éâ^aï^ep^j^ ^«F^^f dàoS'^ ïTSisS», *oâgir^^iSj;|^£S€F' ©D 
55., o§)ts^l^^I'' ■,^siDS,-.'yorTr»^&ge», ¥aûi ,Vî!as'fre,ss, Snrâîigam'' 



30 S.V. UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL fVoL XX 

;5\SxS ^xpo lisâsâs. "5^^ î6^^iî^' ^^^ 5:h^ô à^êi^'é^ig i;ï5^^o c^is^ài"*' 
■J',^^ ê^^^Sdî)^ d^'^e^ ^ 6à^to^ S)[KSS^ S)o^"^*^ S'^^JSr? '*^à:ft 



àiS^'ê, "5s5 ùù^^ëc^ ^cp^K^-^i 4S^si§"i'* aD sè^§î5o2S'C?6^o 






^&^^ "é^S ^^ôo;< ^cSiûfc) ùiëër^ K$oî^s5c«d3b2&. 5b" é'î63^ 

iTo^^efg'é^. £ê^5Paà*(5 "âD. hë^ •tP23»&D* d&ï3-^<^ sd^^?^*^ as: 
^èo. ^a :5oo::o|^t." oâ^j^sso^ê^ *^^^^- cp^<î^ 'bv%^ -s^ow^^^' e^è3. àe' 
'tPc^Sàb î;îà^Sô'' data, (2-277) ^ô "B_^Êd3£pô'eagS's3co ^odà (10-11) 

58. s5ast« ^■»£i'^§â* Ed. B.O.R.I» Poona, t)-xp>hz56^j. ç0-qp>o. 12^ f'^^S 
App. I (P. 309} 

59, a>Do-7?^d;Sd). 10-129. 4. 



1977 Parts ! & 2] ^■?^^^•l? ■cp&5'-qr=^ûp^:â-:^ 



^ëjS:D^ /^irip^liS: K^ëàs©. • •ë■^&^^' , c*Ad&% S^5.Sp:3|^ 

vàS^a. "£-:<5 aâi" ôàc> «p^'S «î^T?... ..."«' ^S 1«'^^&3e& 

^s,i;sS» ^œ^. c?5 C?î!^ fea^œ ?:«;£. r&^ ^a^- ao^S Û^î 

"^à^lj^.^^ ^^f.. S-Sb^ïi c&r.!r ê'è-'-Js. ^ Sdî^^çâ -^l. S'S 

^S) cxo^ '^^g ëéë^âxiâ} rl2-S'.5cS*r^ crée? ïe^.;: sf.îs»^. ^ 
S^^ssSiû î;7(StëoD îî2c/^w^. K7cSà^3^::i? ^c^^i^io^^i:. 4i ■i^Bè:^ 
fpèè-è^î ■êS)§'S'to;Sj S5^^û ?S^-:?îiSr^. ^"i'r^ll^^' w;:;^a >rr^i:. 

r'^ea^.^r ■ '^s*^'S^^'»' «^-^S*^, ç?;:^^'^^^ ^^e:-.^x; r;^^^^^ 

m\ a303 7^^^:5ai-L -164 - 1. si' 

64, Vision in Long Darkness ^ Dr. V. S. Agrawala. Varana^i. 1963. 



32 S. V. UNI VERSITY ORIENTAL JOURNAL [VoL XX 

(è).^^^il&b lPo^^^gS5b& hë ëiS^6^ ^•^n^ ^^^rv ^cSgàoC<^&>. 
"êd^S-.S^ 02>a^^ «g^SSd. I^Kë* S'SSç'^'îS ç^DS3*25§5È». ^2^^£^ cCrdàSûDS^ 

^^^a». t6^êêj hë ^^ èD 5odB*5S5iû. 

oc ^ ^ 

■^ S'D SiD§^0 K^^ô. '^^SpAou)26 ;S'^;3cûo2û ^"é^oôî^ dàç'^&^S ■ 
é'tf^^:s55'Sé^ ^o ^ôâr*^^(?^î3%^. "oD^ ë^o tSc^ rb^iS^ ^^os:> t:D\ë 

S^^;?^' ^oè'efJS&îà So^sî^âSoD^ ç;S)oMî6siûn« ;âc3&taa^ (_^;$o*S^"âs'^ôd&. 



;vr»;5j>SS^ ^o; 60,21, Sâ8 



1:977 Parts 1 & 2] t¥^Tj^^ v^^^^ip^w^^^^m 88 

acPo^&û<5^ ©^à^^€»î5^S). eo(^ ÛS5Ô "So^ 'roë^^\ VotSTgé^g'^co^i' 

Jjè^SpKsSpdà^^ 5^?^-g^. id^ea^ §. e3.aiàD, ià^saiSè «^c«>?5 i^^à^^^v^S^^ 

^dà. iSo^&t^, e5oû)^^(âj e5{7As^3 cpS^D *'Dë'gS5rdlr»^cp^ ^ôSp 



70. fil e)®-^ îSs^i^ktSSj ^sxoSi -(«JîSa) ù'o/^Ô ;^6g7pv^'<sS^sf¥6^ 

78. ibid.-Ky^c^eSâ-sr*^, «f. B7 

7g. , ,^e)^;<^iJlto',-.î30Q^^^^^^^ 



34 S.V. UNÏVERSITY^- #RIENTAIi:-iOURHÀt ^ fVol^XX 

^SXjgë^r? ^o^;5^Ss3ca SS)j^n*S)^ ft?c7^5^^S& ^sSpcJSPS'cP'gî&à^ê' d&S) îS^ii^ 

•'î) ^/^e^o^ /r;S;)Sy"âaX3 î ^o|^^^^o"è ^$goo^. ifSr-^c^ 8DDdoii:5 
SSblsS^o&îS:? /roè^1)t>ô^ (5i)P5'ëoo£^.&. â^ S5p|^SSdû S)&^'SôS foi^ 

""Ciœ^àùë ^sigSPôSB dir*^^ >2^''^ èr^si^:^, ' ^crS^i5o|^^D ^sSpcSSy» 

§'£)^S5jjâsSx> àB^OfSJûDO gr^o^^^^g&D cèo§^îiô?7 S5ÔOÛî5ô, ^ô 
srôaDë'jp g?Sr8g^goe^2^ ^^d'i^ê^S êS) à^ÎDoCSb £^î6^a. "Sd ^tS'^efS& 

77. îbîd. î3ûoiîJcf-s3ô'Tr»Pî^^o<:^o-»221 s3. 
79. ibid. dix>e5 -.i&;5,^oi^crc9-115 s. 



If 77 Parts 1 & 2] ^¥^w^i( tp>;s^^irv^g'^^^s^ 



gl 






y^i 






roêBsj^âb.-s» 



*«^Ôo SSSariSSbi rïo^ ^^^ff gSj^S^m ^'ôIp© oîeSPo 
« ^ tf* Qg ^ 

iS6 îSs5&»:S ^^ ^oi^ ^oî7 S€^o 3^oéŒJ>J'^^ 






e.v 



'S^(^ 



tpSj^cCuCs^ - y»e-B^o«î^ — f^. Wê 



87».' ibid.,''':^°^^-'^^"^i5-'^^^ ^« 
Bi. îbid., îSi<»2^^ -sjtft^ 



S.V.U.O.R.I. Lecture Séries - No. 1 

General Editor : Dr. S. SANKARANARAYANAN 

THE KURUKSETRA WAR 

AND 

RÂ JA VAMSA- VARNANA OF 

m m 

THE PURÂNAS 



by 

Dr. B.C. SiRCAR 

Government Epigraphîst for India (Rtd.) 

Carmîchael Professer of Ancient Indicoi Hisîory and Culture (Rtd.) 

University of Calcutta 




Published by 

SRI VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY 

ORIENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE 

TIRXJPATI 

1980 



CONTENTS 



Pâ«es 



General Editor's Préface — >- ^ 

AithofsPrfface ■ . ■ -, , - ^" 

Kimksftra War :(Lectiire î) : - •- ^ 

Rajavamsa-ïamaca of the Puraaas (Lecture II) -« , .» 25 

lidcx . ... .-^ 3t 



GENER4L EDITOE'S PREFACE 

'The two greaî epics of anciect InâiB-Ramayûna ma thc 

Mahubhara'a ..,,.. I do not know any bocks anywherc 

whîch hâve exereised such a coBtiniîoiîS and pervasive îBflu- 

eacc on the.mass-miQii as thèse îwov Daiing back to a 
remoie antiqoityj they are still a hving force in theîifeof 
,the Indian peopIe....,.,*,.Tfaey represent tbe typicaî Indiaii 

■ mathod of cateriug al! Wgcther for various degrecs of cul- 

■ lural, deveiopmeiif , from the highest intellectïial dowB to 
'■/the simple îioread and' uoîaiigM villager. ... ..Deiibe- 

rately they îried to b0ild op a ijîî:îty of outlook amoog the 
people. which was îo survive andovcr-shadow aîl diversity." 

Thos wriîes absorbingiy Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru about the 
Ramàyam and îhe Mahâbhâraia (Mbh.)' îb his, ioimiîable Discovery of 
India (1956, pp, 88-S9). ît is indeed difficilî to imagine what could 
Tave been, but for thèse two epfcs. thc history of Indian people, of 
heir polîticalthoeght,,re}îgious. social, légal and administrative insîitu- 
:ionsj , arts, music, dance, literature tic. Thus thèse, epics coBSîiiote 
lot a rûere intégral part, but a basîcfactor of îhe àîstoiy of 'Indias 
3eople. It should oot ba forgottca that the épies iike Mbh. looktheîr 
ihape tK^t m a year or two,, oot eves m a décade or two» bot in .course ' 
)f sevcral centuries. .During thîs long period, gifted reciters .hâve added 
ilotto Vyâsâ's originai greai niass of .materiaL; 'Ail. the floatlnglite-. 
rature, that was thought to be worth preserviag, historicaî, geographical, 
iegendary, .politicaî, theologictl and phïlosophieaî,5 of nearly thîrty 
::enfiiries, found a place ïn it. la those days wheo Ihere was eo printing, 
interpolation îu a recognîsed classicseeued to correspond toincIusioB 
in the national library. Dîvested of thèse accretions, the Mbh.is a' 
n^ble poem.5 possessing in a suprême degree., the charactedstics of a 
true epic' . .../ (C. Rajagopalachari. in his préface to his Mûhëbhirais, 
Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, II Ed.), 

Now it will be of much înterest to sec how some of thegreat 
thinkers of ancient ïndîa vîewcd our epics and thc Puriças. In the 
Brahmasuîta of BSdarayana there are about twelve références to certain 
smnis [l, % 6; iii, 23; IL i, 1; H, iii, 45,47; IIL L Î4. 19; iv, 30, 37: IV, i, 
ÎO;ii, 14; iii, 11)» and thèse références, ascxplainedby theearliest known 
commentator Saàktra, in majority of the cases, are to the Mbh. of Vyasa 
or, inafew instances, to thePuranasof the sanic Vytsa. Kuœirilabhatta 
the cetebrated Mimamsi teacher cîetrîy says that îhe UMsûb (epics) ard 
the purMfas are to be trcatcd as mrtis; that they contain a good amount 



H 



of fiction, evenîhough the îtihâsas and the puranas of thc Vedas may ht 
otherwise (tbe Mimamsa-vsntika, î, iii, 2 ând 7), Saùkara, the reputed 
àcârya of Advaita too rates the Mbh. as a smrti or a scripture of law on 
par with the ManusmrîL Âpastamhaâharmasmra etc. (Brahmasûtra- 
Bhasja, II, i, I; etc.) Ànandavardhana, the most famous literar^ 
critic of aBçient îndia too upholds the Mbh. as a scripîurc only, but 
coniainiiig ceriaiîî fealiires oï potiry {Mahâbhârûte ûpî sâstrampe 
kâvyaic^aymvayitn etc. — See the Dhvanyuloka, under ÏV, 5). Thus it 
is certain thaï accordiiig îo some of the repiited ancicnt îndian thinkers 
Mbh. was a book of law like the MaraismrtL 

Now il should bc clearly understood that the purpcsc and impor- 
tance of a smr!î lies not io iîs r^îcoTding any historicaî cvents, but only m 
it5 showiîig or prt scrîbing a way of life and rules and régulations, by 
sincerely followiog which the reader can attain a purusartha or r goal 
oflife. Furthcr. according to ?Bcient îndian thought, a scripture is 
purposeful, prcvîded ît prescribes certain action, which a person can 
act iipori; and even that part of the Vedas too, recording certain events 
etc , becomes uscless if one cannot act opon what has been narrated 
there (See âmnàyasya krïyàrîhmvad anar^hakyam aîadarthânam, Jaimini's 
Mimâmsâsritra, I, il, 1). îndeed a reader gets nothing to act iipon by 
rcading n graphie correct description of Aîexandcr's compaigns, or 
Asoka's conquest of Kalinga, or bv accurateiy nnderstanding Samudra- 
gupta's Aîlahabad prasasîi beautifully describing that emperor's Dakslnâ- 
pmha expédition. îf, from this point of ancient Indian thought ihe 
Mbh. isadjudged, tben it raustbe créditée with fulî success in achieving, 
to a remarkâble extent, its purpose as smrîî throughout th« âges, as 
stated by Pandit Nehru we saw above. Therefore, if Mbh. is found'not 
recording events upto the satisfaction of the historians, it in no way 
lessens its importance. For, its professed aim and purpose arc altogether 
différent Surely, the fact that the ear does not see the colour affects i» 
no way its importance as an ergan of hearing (See sva-^sva-visaya-kûranî 

pramânàni, kroîrâdivat .Sankara under Brhadaranyakopanîsad,, Tï, 

i, 20). Probâbiy Swami Vivekananda echocd the aboVe idea when, in 
one of bis remarkâble interviews, he said : 

'The sublimity of ihe law propounded by Rsmâyana or 
Bharafa doQS oot dépend upon the truth of any personality 
iike Rama or KrsnH; and one can even hold that snch persons 
never lived and at the same time take thèse writings as bigh 
auîhorities in respect of tbe grand ideas which they place be- 
foremankind. Our philosopby does not dépend an any perso- 
nality for its truth ItistobenotedthatChristianity 

canoot stand without Christ, Mohammedanism without 
Mohammed and Buddhism without Buddhâ; butHinduism 
standUndependent of any person; and for tbe purpose of 
estimating the phiiosophicaf tratfa cont^lned in any Purina, 



111 

we need not consider fm question whether the persons (and 

events) treated of thereio werc real or werc iîctitious 

Tlîc object of tlie Porlins was îo educ2te iht mankind*. 

{The Complète Works of Swami Vmkananda, Advaitasrair^a, Vlîl 

Ed., Vol V, ..pp. 2û7~0i). v 

Now.arise somc peiCiQf'nt qoe^stions : ■ fs itniî îme that Mbh. 
îia^ been considercd m liMsa m ■India^down the iiges ? Does ml.iîMsë 
<ienoie a narration of what look place long ago ? Does it.not sbow that 

ihe anciem. ïodiao tbinkers .beiievcd' ûiu rr^^h. cootains àislorical 
truih? •, Lef us sfydy làeproblcîii'iQ this.W'a^ : 'The words ïtîhësa and 
PurmaoQmr^ïohMyfotihtfitstimt m m aranyaka parts oftfie 
Vedas, {Sce.;cg. ihe Tammyalrmyaka H, 9) mdthty are iisuaily taken 
to décote respectiveiy (|) those parts of the' YÉdasiliatconîain.î'îories 
•^ike:;il}e gods and the deoiocs fought eacii oîhcr': and , (2; those Vedic 
parts tiiâî dîscribe tlie piccess of ilic world"Crca!îO,îi.' (See Saysoa oq 
theabove), Boih thèse porn,oîis of the Yecas foroi parts of whai.ihe • 
Mîmiqisakas label as £4T//îm'g<5fa or the stafemerît, indicatiiig îhe iiapor» 
tance and supenority of a'thîiigenjoiTjed or tfce baseness • cf a thiîig 
prohibîtted. Kiiffîârilabhâtta. who^ as we sawaiready. rates.Mbfi. etc. 
as smrtis, tdk m m clear terms ss follows : ' Vvasa anà Vainiîki wcre 
■.mastersof Vedic litôratureâïid heîice they hatc fashioned .îiieir works 
after îhe Vedas; their Works contain a go^od amouoî of (iràavaias, in 
tht.îormof upakhyâmsisommmcs slicrt • aod ■ sometimes very lopg: 
tiiese sbouîd not be.taken litcrallj lo arrive at tbe trutb: they are meant 
'to indicate, .on the whole, îhe greatiiess'of wbat is being eBJoÎEedor tîie' . 
baseness;, of whaî js ..being tabooedr 'aï limes thèse aatbors bave taken ' 
apon themselves tht mil of poet s aod m^d their imagioations, of coiitsc 
;niaînly.' wîth a'''^view lo catch the attentïO'fl. of as many.as possîMc- 
(sarvesâm cUîûm gmhitavjmn iiyevmn âtambhûk. See tkt Mmëmsi'- 
v&rttika, l,u, 7). , ' 

; Sankarâ too thioks îhat iiilmsâ ma pumm îhu stand oitside the 
, VedlC' iore'.are the exteotion, of, aod are. iîioii!ded 'on îhe mode! of 
the .Vedic arthavâdas {ox at îimes thC'Yedichyu.Q&): aod that they are ■ 
.therefore tobe treated iiî the same fashioE as the Vedic anhavûdm are 
tre.atedbyiheMîmâmsakas. ItmeaBsthis: Whee a.stateiBeîitisâny of 
them.is corroborated.by.any oîher mcans of liiowiedgc then, ,it fs îo be | 
, vi.ewed as anuvëda or explanatory repefitioB; when a .staîmeBt în ih^m is • ' f 
-contradi'cted -by any. other proof then il is to be classed as gumvëda or ■ 
..a figurative statcraeBt that is iitendcd to iodicate the greatness or basc- 
.oess.of what is beiag/enjoiacd' or, tabooed h a gîvea conlext; ai)d. wlien 
■a-.stateoaent 'isaeithercorroboiatcd nor coiitradicted'by aey other proof' ■ 
then oiily it . may be dcemed' to be, a. bkûiârthmSda or a statemeni of fact, ■ 
. (See'.Sa'àkara.aBd hiS'COfflmeBtators mâtt the Brahmasûlm.,.!, iii,;33).. 
-Therefore, if -sone'Of the statemtQts,:Ja Mbh. or Puraps arc fbuad cob- 



IV 

tradicîed by proofs siich as archaeclogy aod se on, whicb hâve fui! 
authorlty in tîieir respective iieldsof kîîowledge — like the eyc in ils field 
of seeing colours—îheQ those statements mây jbave to be classed as 
gunavada as stated abave aad there is nothing wrocg in it. The word 
îîîhàsa is in fact derived from the word îîîha from which aiîihya is also 
derived and which means only *îraditïonal instruction'; and there is no 
spécial guarantee th-^.t the instruction îhiis imparted contains cent per 
cent historical trutb. 

ït wiii be of much use now to know how the Vedic akhyayikà and 
also the iîihnsa hâve been theniselves rated by great thinkers likc Smkara. 
According to îhat masier of Advaîta, the Vedic âkhyàyikas ot storles in 
the scriptures serve simpîy as a means of easîly understanding a parti- 

cular phiîosophica] truth {sukhavabodhârtha akhyayîkâ See Aïtare- 

yopanisad, pïQd,mh\t to ch. lî. See also on Chândogyopanhad, VIII, 
Vî, 2). Fnrther. he gives only an alkgorical value to the Vedic itihâsa of 
the gods-and-dcffions-fight. He maintains that in this lîîkïïsa the expres- 
sion gods àtno\t%, not acîual gods, but only the sense-faculties îliumi- 
nated by, or regniated by, the scriptiire; démons stands, not for the 
actual démons, but only for the base sense-facnltiss, that are coioured 
with selfishness and are rebelling against scripture; and their jî^/iMs 
nothing but the perpétuai mutual confrontation between thèse two sorts 
of facalties in every human being in order to put down one another (See 
Saàkara on the Chandogyopanisad, I, ii, 1; Brhadaranyakôpanîsad. I, 
îii, 1). Perhaps foliowing this lead, Abhinavagupta, one of the greatesî 
literary critics^of ancient India and the foremost among the teachers of 
the Kashmir Saivism, appîies the same principle of alîegory to Mbh. 
He takes [\) pâtfdava, [2) kaurava^nù (3) their icMni/cs^/m-ivar respecti- 
vely îo dénote (l) the human intention born of wisdom; (2) the humaa 
intentions born of selfishness, and (3) their mutual perenniaî confrenta- 
tion in the human borîv, a fleld of dutîes. {See Abhinavagupta's Gita- 
nhasahgraha on the Gitâ,, ï, 1). 

Ail thèse do go to show that there were thinkers in ancient India 
who attachcd to itihasas and puranas only a figurative or allegorical 
value and not historical value in fuîl measure. Then does it mean that 
our ancestors hâve caused us to get ourseives totaliy drowned in an 
océan of make-belief ? No. Some historical truth does constitute the 
nucleus of every Purâna and epic (See Swaoîi Vivekananda, op. cit., 
ibid.), though in course of tirae much unhistorical stuff got ifself 
gathered around the historical truth. In this connection it may be 
suggested that a reader may profitably consult some of the récent books 
like Mahahhàrata-Myth and Reality, Differîng viem (Forward by Prof. 
Niharranjan Ray; Ed. S.P. Gupta and K.S. Ramachandran, Dcîhî, 
1976), Age of Mahâhharata (Ed. G.C. Agarwaîa, Delhi, 1979) etc., 
where, upholding that the nucleus of the Mbh. may be historical, varions 



coBiîCtiiig théories regardiog the date of the Kurulsetrâ . war liave bee,ii 
propoonded by sclioJars from, différent aogles, Swami Vivekariaiida àas 
showm îhat a good amonat of materia! m Mbii, may be unhistoricaL He 
lias gOQe tô the extent of raisiîig'doabtsregardîfîgtfaehisîoricity of tbô 
very Kuruksetra war, of' Yuâhkthïrà'S' Àimmedha, and of some oiîier 
îtras includiog Arjiina eveo. A' reader may be benifitted by goiog tbrougli 
Swamijî's views.' (See op. di, Vol. IV, pp. îOf-105). However, Swamiji 
emphasizôs thaï eveii if thejiîsîoricity of the wboie thiiig is proved îo be 
absolutely false to-day^ it wii! „îio| îQihe.least be any loss îo lis. Thei, 
what is the osô:of,so mudvof historicalreseaTcli îoiichiBg Mbh. one 
mayaskv /ït'has,,îts.;:iise/beeause we bave îo get at the tmth: itwîlî 
noî do for us îo remain boMod by.a wmu§, idea born g f ignorance, ' la 
this couiîtry, peopleîhink very littîe of îhe ïmportaîîce of. siich loquiries' 
(ibid). : 

! am happy that Dr. D.C. Sircar, one of thi foremost îîidian 
historians and ooe aoiongst a very k^, re^earcliers in the lîeld of îiido- 
logy pioducing a Niagara of serious writing^. accepîcd oui îîivitaîîon to 
our S.V. Uoiversiîy and in March 197S deîî\ v^red, under lîie auspices of 
our Oriental Research Institute, two lectures, piiiiing out, in a force- 
fu! language, the difficalties a serioos hisîorian fiîîds îd viewiog Mbh. 
and Puraiias as full-fiedged historicaî documenîSj as îhey are being 
coosiderediîi some quarters m récent îimes. For this î express my 
heartfeîî thanks to him. I aiso express my deep gratitude to ProL K. 
Satchidananda Murthy: the former honoarable Vice-Chanceîîorof the 
S.V, University for generously gianting necessary funds for arrangiiig '■ 
thèse lectures of Dr. D.C. Sircar; and to Prof M. Santappa, oor rcvered 
présent Vîce-Chancellor for kindly graeîing fnndâ for getting thèse 
lectures printed and piibîished. I also thank the Direcîor,aiidth& 
Manager of the S,V» University Press for printing thèse Icoteres. 



TIRUPATî , S. SANIAIANARÂYÂNAN 

■28th May, 1980 miECTOR 

S.V.U. Oriental Research Instîtetc 



PKEFACE 

Frofessor S. Sankaraîiirayanaiî, now Director of the Oriental 
Research Iiistitute, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati, was years 
:igo a valuôd Assistaiît of mine wtoen^ I was a Government Epigraphist 
for iedia at Ootacamuiid.,. As he learnî that i was expecîed îo âttmé 

tfie Madras Session of the Epigraphical Society of India in Jasuary this 
yeartoreceivetheSociety's/^m-^û/fî^^^ he iiivited roc tovisithis 
lîistituîe on my way back from Madras, and deîiver a few lectures, 
HGwevcîj I was then a Visitîng Frofessor at ilieUiiivôrsity of Bhagaîpor 
and fouadît difficalî tobe absent from there for a longer period. On 
leamiEg this time îhat I wouid delîvcr the Laie Sri MalIaiBpalli Sonia- 
■sekhara Sarma Lectures ai Hyderabad in March, he agaÎQ iavited me 
for the same piirpose and î tbaiîkfyliy accepted it. Althoogh I am 
still a Visiting Professer at the Usiversity of Aîîahabad, there î bave to 
deliver some lectures in lieu of teaching work. 

Thetopics of the lectures seîected by me for delivering at this 
institiite invoive certain coBtroversies that I raised sonietime ago, This 
îs because vade vade jàyaie iativa-bodhak One of the topics relates to 
the Mahâbbârata aod the other to the Purams. The Mémbkâmia, ofteû 
câlied the Great Epie of India. is a woik of such a ûature aod magîii- 
tiide that there is no aspect of lodiaolife aod cuîtore îhat has no refiec- 
tïoû in it — 

Yad^ ih s= Ssiiiad ~ anyatra van - n ^ eh = asii m mi kvaciu 

Iq India and in, the countries oiitside wherever Indianism had an oppor- 
tenity to getafoothold, for hiindreds of years, people of al! ' classes 
hâve enjoyed the récitation and représentation of its épisodes emphasis- 

ing the victory of rfkimia — , 

Yaîodhurmas mtaîùlayaii 

The Purânic literature, on ihe whole, has aiso served a similar purpose. ■ 
Of course, the problems of my discessiocS' hère are furely from the 
aistoîîan's point ofview.' 

I am glad to hâve the opportimity to visît this cefebrated and 
wonderfulpilgrimspotofoiircoiiBtry, which. is associated wiîh the 
peat name of Lord Venkateswara. 

Priyatam Blwiavën ■ 



Marchli, 1978. ,, , DX. SIRCAR 



THE KURUKSETRA WAR 



ïnSepteraber, 1975, I was interviewed by somejoumaîistsat the 
GuestHouseoftheUniversityofPcona. In thc course oftbat interview, 
î gave them my opinion on the Kuruksetra War on the lines of what 
I first wrote in a paper read at an Inter-University Seminar on the War 
held in 1965 at the Centre of Advanced Study in Ancient Indian History 
and Culture, University of Calcutta, which had not only been publishcd 
in its proceedings entitled The Bhàrata War and Purànic Généalogies, 
Calcutta University, 1969, pp. 18-27, but was also later'incorporated in 
my Smdiesmthe Yugapitrôna andOther Texts, Delhi, 1974, pp. 35-40. 

Besides various other points, îtried to empbasise the fact tbat 
the composition of the présent Mahâbhârata îext is ascribed by compé- 
tent authorities to the period from the fourth century B.C. to the fourth 
century Â.D. while ail the early Indian traditions would assign the 
legendary Kuruksetra War to dates many centuries or even millennia 
earlier. In this connection, I particularîy pointed ouï that it was 
obviously impossible to dcscribe, without any written accounî and 
merely from hearsay, a historicai event after a long period of time with 
any accuracy, so that much of the description of the so-called great war 
in the Mahsbhsrata must be regardcd as imaginary. Another point 
emphasised by me was the significant fact that Kuruksetra ismentioned 
many times in the Yxt-Mahàhhârata literaturc of India, but never as the 
venue of the great War, and thatthesaid literaturedoesnotknowanyfaero 
of the War as such. This was coupled by me with the great diversity of 
the dates to which the War was assigncd even as carly as the âge of the 
Impérial Guptas, since thèse point to thcir being fabricated at a late date. 

It may be argued that there arc many conflicting dates of the 
Buddha'sParinirvina prévalent in the Budhist countrics of the world 
and that they are not generaily regardcd as proving the Buddha to be a 
myth. The two cases are, howevcr, not similar bccause the Buddha 

680—1 



2 D,a SIRCAR 

died iii 486 B.C. (according îo îh^' reliabîe Cantonese dotted record) 
aîid the eariiest definite mention of the Boddba and his Dharnia and 

Sangha asivel! as of Lumbioigràma ns his birtli place and Sambodhi 
(Mahahadhi) apparently as tbe spot where he obtained bodki or suprême 
knowledge is foiind in Asoka's records of the middieof the third cenîiiry 
B.C. Thîs is a différence of a liitle over two ceatories hère whereas the 
différence betwsen the date of the Kuruksetra War and that of îhe 
Mahabharata is by far and immeasurably larger. Moreover^ the carly 
Buddhist tr^ditioDS reprisent the Baddha as a contemporary of langs 
Bimbisâra aod Ajatasatru ofMagadha, king Prasenajit of Kosaia, king 
Udayana of Kausambî and king Pradyota of Âvanlî, and thèse monarchs 
arc aiso known from other sources such as the Ptirmas. 

Il ssems ihat very few people in our country had any opportiinity 
to read niy wrîtings referred to above; but as soon as îity views that the 
Kuruksetra War as dsscribed in the Mahabhurata must be regarded as a 
myth appeared in the newspapers, many people came forward to défend 
the historicity of the epic tradition, and îheir views appeared in the 
newspapers. Amor.g the correspondents, the celebrated Archaeologist, 
Dr. H.D. Sankaiia of Poona, was prob^bly the only one who essentially 
agreed with me. The people championing the cause of the historicity 
of the Mahâbhârata War called a conférence about the close of October, 
1975, al Bijnor in U.P., where they are reported îo hâve decided among 
îhemselves that the War is a historical fact. Since then some other 
sirailar conférences may also hâve been beid at other places under îhe 
auspices of varions institutions, 

Of course, our people are generally credulous, and critical acumen 
îs rather rare. Even our great historian Kalhsna. who wrote his 
Rajatarangini about A. D. 1150, failed to disabuse himself of creduîous- 
ness and to exercise a strong common sensé in certain cases. Thus 
after recoonting an absurd taie about king Meghavahana of Kashinir, 
which he iBUst hâve found in some Purana-type work, Kalhana says, 
''We feel embarrassed indeed in îhus recording this and other acts of 
tbiskingof récent fîmes (i.e,, not of epico-Puranic aniiquity). '^hkh 
cannotbe believed by the common people. Howeverj authors who 
follow the path of the ancient sages are, of course, not doniinated by 
subserviencc to the hearers' (i,e., the readers') notions on their compo- 
sitions." ^ Stilî, however, the attempt to décide the historicity or unhis- 
toricity of a legend by means of votes in an assembly of the supporters 
ofaparticuîarview isreally funay. Such incidents remind us of îhe 
story of stifling the views of Galiîeo (15644642). ït is well known that 
Galileo became convinced early in life in the truth of the theory of 



î, Mâjatarangfnî, ÎIÏ, 94-95. 



THE KURUKSETRA WAR 3 

Coperniciis that it was the earth that movcs round tbe sun and not the 

siiiî tfaat raoves romid the earîh as was then the popolar notion sup- 

ported by Christian scriptures; but he was deferred from avowiog the 
opinion for fearof ridicule, Afterdevising an improved type of téle- 
scope, hc tried to défend tbe Coperincan îheory but was discouraged by 
tlîe Cfiorch. Although his 'Dialogue of the Two Cliief World Systems 
(i.e. tlie Ptolemaîc and the Copernican)*'"was wrifteiiin a very élever 
and non-commif tai way, the Church auihorities ultimaîely decided to 
proseciite Galîiôo forlieresy, andhe was compelled îojourneyto Rome 
iespite illness and old âge, He was natiirally found giîilty and liad to 
îavôhlaiselfby reciîîog a formirla' in which he; 'abjnred, cnrsed {»nd 
Iete$ted''hïs errofs (!)■ and was ■'under Jioiise arrest for îhe restofliis 

That the eanh on wbich we h've is xou-ndish in shape is aiso nota 
îommon ancient belief because people a!I over the world generally 
^upposed îhat the syrface of the carth was a sort of big field.. Another 
nstance of the same kind is'îhe belief of the Christiaos in the story of 
he création of the world and what we see.on it as it has been described 
n the Christian scriptures.', It was calcolated on îhis basis îhat îhe 
vorld wascreated by God în.the 7!0th yeârof îhe Julian period l'.e.'m 
^004 B.c», and that the création of human beings îook place shortîy 
f ter ward s. because the e?uire woik of crestion was compleîed in six days 
.nd the Creator took resî on the seventh. Thanks, however, to îhe 
>rogress. of studies in açtronomy, geologVj faîology, ',' anthropology, 
rchaeology and other ailied sciences, it is'Well. known now thaï îhe ■ 
rorld as aIso its part known as the earth existed niany millions ofyears 
fo and that the human beings of onr type, i.e the biological species 
alled Homo Sapiens, reached the présent stage of development throiigh 
, proccssof évolution in millions ofyearsmainli by way of what is calîed 
,aîiiral sélection. 

■■ Oor attention is often drawn to the facî thaï ' the' Mahabhàrûw is 
alled Siin lîihësa,^ and that this word is ysiially taken îo mean *history*., 

2. In this connectîoîî, we are also remiîîdedof Ravindranatii Tagore'ssarcasîic 
reniarks on research work in a note eiîtitled fraimtatîva "m which he puîs i\p 
as' ' imaginary : coîîtroversy bctwes» two schoîars, îîanied'Kunjavîliârî" acd. 
MadhosûdaG izstn, oîî the availablllty of gai vaiîîzing: batteries in ancicRî îndia 
as weii as the Sanskrit oarne for the gas culled Oxygen. ■ Ravmdra Macatmaiîy 

', Visva-Bhâratî, ¥oL VU,, pp. 506 ff. 

3. cf, Jaya-'mm^eiihâso-'vûm (in Nîîakantha's commentary oo thepassage taio 
■ ■Jayam==udmyeê) ioîerprctcd by HX. Raychaudhurl not p^obabîyq^it:e■■c■ôrr€c- 
■ tly,as'*songofvîcîory' ('^^^^■/«^•, •^to., 195S, p,.279). ■ïiiany;case/NIIakantha" 

, aîsO; says Jaya-samjmm . Bkami''Gkhyam „ MhSsmn rô*. ■ 'The; fôllûwirîg .staczas 
QHOted by Nliakantha from îhe Bkavisya. Purmm as&igRS the mmQjaya'mt only 
to th& MahëbMrata bût also to the Rmmmm, îhe eighteeii Purâms aiïd other 
■ ■'■"'workson the VaisBavâ'and saiva creeds -1-- ■ 



4 D.C. SIRCAR 

However, the word îtihësa is used in the Mahâbharaîa itself not in the 
sensé of 'history' but to signify any Icgend even incliiding a mytholo- 
gical taie. Thiis the following stanza occiirs in the Santi-parvan, 84.1 : 

Ath»apy^udïïharantmmtmam=îtîhâsam purâtanam f 
Bfhaspates- ca sammdam éakrasya ca Yudhhfhîra // 

Hère a dialogue between Brhaspati, the preceptor of the gods, and 
Sakra, i.e. Indra who was their kiog, is called an 'old' îtîhdsa. Both 
the preceptor and the king of the gods being personages belonging to the 
domain of mythology, there can hardly be any question of taking the 
Word îtihàsa hère in the sensé of history. It can at best œean a 
îegend. Sometimes a folktale is also called an îtihas. 



B 

The Mahabkiïraia [i.e, the great poem concerning the Bharatas or 
descendants of Bharata) is regarded as a whole literature rather than a 
unified work and as offering a heterogenous mass, parts of which are in 
some cases incompatible and often date from différent centuries. It is 
believed to contain the remains of the ancient ïndian heroic songs which 
hâve undergone much retouchment, extension and disfigurement. 
Winternitz points out the impossibility of the reconstruction of Its 
central thème in ils original shape, although its kernel was the battle 
between the Kauravas and the Pandavas. The composition of the epic is 
placed by him to the period between the fourth century BX. and the 
fourth Century a.d.'* 

The centrai story of the Mahâbharata may be sumniarised as 
follows- King Santanu, a descendant of Kuru and Bharata (for which 
he could be called both Kaarava and Bharata), ruîed at Hastinâpura (on 
the Ganges, not far from Meerut in U.P.) and had, from his wife, who 
was the goddess Gangà, a son named Bhîsma. Later he married a fisher 
girl named Saîyavatï on condition that her son would gain his throne. 
This was possible because Bhisma gracefully renounced his claim. 
Satyavatî, who now gave birth to Citrângada and Vicitravïrya had 
previousiy given birth to the sage Vyasa begotten by the sage 
Parâsara on her. Soon Santanu and Citrângada died, and Bhîsma raised 
young Vicitravïrya to the throne. The youthful king having died 
without issue, Satyavatî advised Bhîsma to produce chiidren on his 

4. Hist, Ind. Liu, Eng. trans., VoU I. pp. 326 ff., 474-75, 



THE KURUKÇETRA WAR 5 

widows, Ambiki and Ambâliki, according io the old system of levirate. 
Bbîsma having decîmed, she iiivited her eldest son Vyasa, bom before 
her marriage with Santanu, and Vyâsa begot Dbrtaristra on Ambika, 
Pându on Ambalikâ and Vidura on a slave girl. Dhrtarâstra having been 
born blind, Pandu was placed on the throne. Dhrtarastra married 
Gândhârî (daughter of the king of Gandhâra in the Peshawar or Rawal- 
pindi-Peshawar région) and had a hundred sons, the eîdesî of whom was 
Duryodhana. Pandu married Kuntî or Prthâ. daughîer of the Yidava 
prince Stlra and sister of Krsna's, falher Vasiidevaj ^aod aiso Midrî 
(daughter^ of'the Madra king) who'was the sister ofSaiya, theMadra 
iîng of.SikaJa (Sialkoî). / Kuntî gave, birth to three sons, , namely 
,Yudhisthiraî''''Bhî.ma (who was of ihe same âge .as Dhrtarâstra's son 
.■Duryodhana) and Arjuna, ;and Mâdrî lolhetwias, Nakula and Saha- 
4eva'. Kuntî had given birth to Karna before her marrige with^Pându 
and discarded the new-born baby whom a charioîeer-woman brought np 
■as her sod. Oo the death of Pindu. Mâdrî committed ^ari, and.Knnti 
and the five Pâiidavas (sons of Pându) were living al Hasîinapura under 
the care of Dhrtarastra who was bow the king. The Brâhmaiias Drona 
andKrpawere engaged in teaching the artof fightingto the Kaurava 
and Pândava princes (i.e. the sons' of Diirîarâstra and Pându), Karna 
•and Drona's''''son Asvatthâman aiso becoroiog theîr feilow students. 
Arjuna was the^favourite disciple of Drona and excelled ail other 
■stiidents, and, this cansed jealousy in the heart of Duryodhana and his' 
brothers'headed by Duhsasana. Once in a tournaiiaenf, Karnashowed 
âlmost eqnal skillas Arjii.fîa aad was a! once befriended by Duryodhana 
and made the king of Aèga (Easc Bihar]. 

Yadhisthira was made the heir to Ihe Kaurava throne; bot a plot 
was hatched against the Pândavas to burn ihem.wîth Knntî in a house of 
îac at Viranlvâta; but Yudhisthira learnt about the plot from Vidiira/ 
■and the Pândavas escapcd death aod ied together .with their .mother 
into the forest. though the Kauravas thought that they had ail died. 
During the period when the Pândavas were thns in ahiding, they heard. 
•of the svayamvara of Krsnâ, daughter of • king Drnpada of Paicâîa.\(really ,. 
South Pancala with.Kimpilya in the Farrnkhabad district, U P,. as the, 
■capital, since Drupada had to sorrender Norih PaScâla with Abicchatra 
itt' the.' Bareily disirictj U.P,, as its.. capital to Drona).. The Pândavas 
^wentto the^ svayamara in the guise of Brâhmaças,. There was a contest 
in arcbery.in which Arjuna. alone came ont sucçessfnî and.thus. won ,the ' ■ 
Mnd of:the princess; but she wasnia.rried to the five Pândavas., ,.,'.Now 
that tbe' Pândavas were found'to be^ alive andallied witb.the PaScilaSj ■ 
;BMsfna>.. Drona and Vidura-advised Dhrtarastra to ■•seek^^' .réconciliation .. 
mth.thep, andthelatter.offered the.w:esterS"part of..the,Kurii.,kingdoïn' 
tO:,-Yudhist,hirâ. who thus became. Ihe Mng, of, Khindavaprastha^'with 
Ind..rapr.as,tha.;(fflodern Delhi) .as hïs-capital ;.. 



6 DX. SIRCAR 

Bhîma, Arjuaa, Nakuîa and Sahadeva subdoed the ruiers respec- 
tively of the east, nortfa, vvesî and south, and Yudhisthira's Mjasuya 
sacrifice was performed in great pomp. Daryodhaiia, who had been 
iovîted to the ceremony along with onoieroiis other guests from différent 
parts ofindia, left the célébrations with feeliogs of envy and hatred. 
A plot was then hatched to. invite Yodhisthira to play dice with the 
skîlîed player Sakiioî, Diîryodhana's materna! uncle, so tbat the formeras 
kingdom may be won by the latter as a resuît of victory in the game. 
Yûdhîsthira accepted the invication to play dice aod after losing to 
Sakani such stakes as his treasiires, state chariot, slaves, éléphants, 
chariots and horses, finally lost bis kingdom as weîl as hîs own self, his 
four brothers and their common wife. However, after nndergoîng con- 
sidérable hnmilîatîOQ aod insnlîs, the Pandavas were allowed to go back 
to Indraprasîha; but soon afteiwards, in another game of dice, 
Yudhistbira was defeated and had to go into banishment with his 
brothers and Dranpadî for a period of thirteen years, the thirteenthof 
which the Pandavas wonîd hâve to live incugeito. A considerabie part 
of the tv^?elve years was passed by them in îhe Kâmyaka forcsî, acd the 
thirteenth year they passed incognito at the city of Virâtanagara (in the 
Jaipur district, Rajasthan), capital of the Matsya king Virâta. Yudhi- 
sthira became Virâta's corapanion and counsellor. Bhïnia his cook^ 
Arjuna the dancing mas ter of his daughter Uttari, NakuJa his borse- 
tamer, Sahadeva the overseer of his cattle, and Draiipadî his queen*s 
chamberraaid. AboiU the end of the year, the Kaiiravas made an 
attempt to take away Virâta's cattle; but ArjunEa who had been taken 
by Virâta*s son Ut tara as the driver of his chariot, succeeded in repnîs- 
îng the Kanravas and rescuing the cattle. Soon the Pandavas disclosed 
their identity, and the gratefnt Virâta gave hîs daughter Uttarâ in 
mardage to Arjnna's son Abhimanyiï. 

The Pandavas nowdemanded their half of the Koru kingdom: but 
Duryodhana refused to part with aoy portion of it. In the eighteen days* 
fight that foUov^ed, the chief fighters on the Kaurava side including 
Duryodhana were ail killed, and Yudhisthira became king of the Kuru 
land. 

As regards the eighteen day's battle, Bhîsma led the Kaurava 
forces for the first ten days* He was often confronted by Arjuna though 
Dhrstadyumna was the gênerai of the Pândava forces. The Pandavas 
succeeded in mortally woundicg Bhîsma on the tenth day of the war by 
a fraudulcnt stratagem. They knew that Bhîsma would not fight 
Sikbandin, brother of Dhrstadyumna, bccause he had been born as a 
gîrl; so Arjuna was shooting his arrows at Bhîsma from behind Sikhandin 
and soon the Pindava forces made an ail out attack on the Kuru com- 
mander. Bhîsma's body was eovcred by înnumerable arrows stickîng to 



THE KURUKÇETRA WAR 7 

ît so thaï, when-he fell, his body rested above tlie ground. on the bed of 
irrows so to say. Droria, who was 85 years old, qow became Ihe com- 

.nander of the Kaamva forces. On' tbe tliirteenth dayof the battle, 

Arjuna's son Abhimariyo was separated' from his proîectcrs' by Jaya- 
Iratha, tîie king of Sindhu-Saiivira (Sind) and the busbarid of 
Jaryodliana's sister,„aBd was.killed whiîe figh'|jîig„.with,several eiiemy 
^•^ârriors.. .Ar.iuoa.took revenge by.kiiîmg Jayadraiba îhe next day. .On 
his day,,.Karna kiîled Gbatotkaca,' • Bhïma's , soti .from the Raksasî 
^idimbà. On the.ifteeîîthday, 'Drona killed Driipada and Virita. 
■^hen Drona and Arjooa fooght .fierceJy/ and the îatter kiiJed the former 
J another fraodukot. trîck* Bhîma had kilîed an, éléphant Bamed. 
^svatthiman, and.ihis.was rcpresented to Drona as the slaogfcter of'his 
3n;,of the same name. Drona, became overcome with sorrow for a 
^hïle, aod Dbrstadyumîia eut off his head at tbat lime. Then on the 
:.xteenth day Karna became the leader of the Kaurava forces. On the 
sventeenth day, Bhima kiîied DuhsasaQa,, and Arjuna kilîed Karna 
gaiost the rules of waj when the latter was trying to poli ont a sinking 
'heel ofhîs chariot. Salya became Duryodhaiia's cciîiiTîaiîder-in-chîef 
a theeighteeiith' aod !ast day of the battle; but Yudhisthîra kilîed him 
t midday. Sakuni was kilîed by Sahadeva îhe sanie day. Having lost 
!I hope,j .Duryodhana fied îo a iake whcre he was foimd ont by the 
'indaves and was cha,llei3ged to a due! by Bhîma. There was a severe 
iub figfat between îhe two, and Bhîma, smash ed Duryodhana's left thigh 
^en thoHgh striking the opponeat beîow the oavel was against the luîes 
f club fighting. 



■/Aévatthâman, Krpa and Krtavarmaîi, theonîy siirvivIîigJSghters oa 
ie Kaurava side, came to the dyiag Duryodhana, and the latter madc 
.svatthâman the Commander of his army which was now reaîly uon- 
dsîent.. Asvatthaman then resoîved to Mil the Pandavas and their 
artisans whîle they were asieep în their camps* He succeeded jn killing 
^hrstadyumna, the five.sons of Draupadî, Sikhandin and many clhers. 
/hen DhrstadyiîQina's charioteer gave this news to the Pândavas. Bbînia 
ersued Asvatthâman and tried Io punisli bini: huî Asvatthaman could 
otbe kilîed. 



Dhrtarâstra followed by the Kannn^a ladîes were/ proceediig to 
le battle field when the Pândavas came and joîned this procession of 
bie, mouraers. Gândhirî began to lament when she saw the.dead bodies 
f her himdred sons (ail of them kilîed by Bîiîma) 'and other relatîyes 
nd friends- She rebnked Krsna for not prevestîng the aBrithilatioii of 
le Kaiiravas and the min of the Pandavas* YEdhisthimiheâ'ordered 
le performance of the fîineral cérémonies' far al! the deceaséd persons ^ 
nd became king. 



8 D.C.SIRCAR 

Somc additions were made to this main story, Yudhisthira pe 
formcd an Akvamedha sacrifice for which Arjuna had becn selectcd ' 
protcct the horse. Old Dhrtaristra, wlio was living at Yudhisthira 
court and was hcld in respect, went to live in thc forcst with Gândhâi 
Kunti and Vidura and alî of them died there in a forcst fire. Tl 
Yâdavas fought among themselves and wcrc destroî/cd. Krsna w 
killed through mistake by a hunter whea the former was in meditatio 
Yudhisthira then annointed Parîksit, son of Abhimanyu and Uttai 
and repaircd to the Himaiayan forests with his brothers and Draupac 
There Yudhisthira's folîowers died one by one, and hc hîmscîf hi 
peculiar expériences. 



Scholars hâve noticed that the Kurus were 'by far the most impc 
tant people in the Biâhmana literature' and thaï 'it was in the count 
of the Kurus, or the allied Kuru--Panc3laSj that the great Brahman 
were composed'.^ The name of the Kuru people is usually mentioni 
not alone but as coupled with that of the FaEcâlas with whom they mi 
hâve been very ciosely connected. Thus the Jaimîniya Upanisad Br 
hmana,^ Kausitaki Upamsad,^ Gopatha Brahmona^^ Kâthaka Sanihiîa^ a- 
Vâjasaneyi Samhiiâ^^ mention the Kuru-Pancâlas as a united peop: 
yNhXlt IhQ Aîtareya Brâhmam^^ speaks of the Kuru-PaScalas, it h 
been suggested, on the strength of the Vâjasaneyi Samhita passage cit 
above, that sometimes 'the Kuru-PaScâias had actually one king' 
Accoîàing to th& Saiapaiha Brahmana, 'speech' had its particular hoi 
in the Kuru-PaEcâla country^^ while the mode of sacrilBce there uas t 
best.*"^ Kings of thc Kuru-PaEcala people used to perform the Rajasu 
sacrifice, açcording to the same work,*^ and their princes often raid 
the neiglibouring régions in the dewy season and returned in sumn 
according to the Taiîtîriya BrâhmanaJ^ Likewise, the Jaîmîniya Bra 
mMfta,'^'^ Jaîmîniya Upanisad Brahmane^ and Brhadïïranyaka Upanisai 
speak of thtc famous Brâhmanas of the Knru-Paicila country. 



5, 


VedîcIndex,VoLh P* 165. 


6* 


HT. 7.6, 8-7; ÏV. 7,2, 


7. 


ÏV. 1. 


8, 


I. 2.9. 


9. 


X.6. 


10. 


Kânva Recension, XI, 33. 


11. 


I1I.'2,3.15, 


12. 


Vlïl. 14. 


13- 


Vedic Index, VoL I, p. 166» 


14. 


î. 7.2-^ 


15» 


V. 5.2.3.5. 


16. 


L 8.4.Î.2. 


17. 


IL 78» 


18. 


m. 30,6; ÏV. 6.2. 


19, 


III. 1.1, 9,20. 



THE KURUKSETRA WAR 9 

The Èaîapatha Bruhmani mentions a purohita îiamed Oevabhaga 

Srautarsa in îhe service of both îhe Korys and îhe Srijayas^o who were 
probabîy a braoch of îhe Paîcala peopie.^^ 

lîi conoectioB with tîie locality called Koroksetra, le., *îhe land 
of the Kurus' wliicb they occiipied, the Koru peop!e are, however, 
raentîOEfd chiefly aloîîe.22 

The Chaîîdogya Upamsad speaks of the Kîiius as saved by an mvâ 
or marées and of soine disaster that they suffered owiîig îo a sçvere 
hailstorm.-"^ 1ht SUnkhayana Smuta Sutra, which meotioQS a Vïïjapeya 
ceremony celebrated by the Kurus/- refers to a ciirse oo ihe Kuriis, 
which led to the peoplc beiog driven out of Kuriiksetra-^ îû any case, il 
is a significsnt fact tbat in the numercus referecces to the Kurus and to 
Kuriiksetra cited above from later Vedic texts, ariv allusion to the 
Kuraksetra War, so faraoïis in the story of the Malmbkàrata aod so 
popular among Indiens and peopfes infliinced by ïndianism îiî other 
parts of Asia, is conspicuous by its absence. !t isii^t improbable that a 
single great calaniity that befeî.l the Korus bas been aIJuded to in the 
Chandogya Vpamsadànâ ihe Sankhayana Érauia Suira; but it cannot be 
associated in any way with the great Bharata War.' Thus référence ta 
the Kurii War is untraceable in îhe Vedic literatiire, i.e. lo îhe earliest 
Works of Indîan îiterature, even thoogh îhe Kuriis and Kiirui^eîra^are 
both so often mentioned therein. The importance of this évidence is 
aot geoerally realised by the stedents of îhe snbject. It has, however, 
bQQU rightiy suggested that the Vedic référence to thc'calâiiîity befaîliog 
:he Kuru people 'passibly adombrates the''m.isforiiïnes of the'Kauravas . 
n the epic tradition'.^? 

Another eqiially important évidence is the fact ihat» even in 
mcient india, people were not soreas îo when exactiy the legendary 
iCuruksetra War raight hâve occurred if it was at ail a historicaî event, 

2a IL 4.4.5. 

2î» For the intimate association of tîje Srojayas with îhe Pancâlas, seé Moaler- 
WilUams, Sans*-'En§rî>îcî., s.v.; H.C. RaychaBdhuri, P0I. Hist, Ane» Ind., 
1972, p* 66. T)ït Mahâbhâraîa (VIÏL 11.31 and -75.9) represents Uttamaojas as ' 
both a Pàocâîya and a Srajaya. 

22. Vedic Index, Vol. î. p. l^^. 

23* IV. 17.9. 

24, L 10. l. 

25» XV. 3.15., 

24 XV. 16, il. 

27. J^^ Iff^^, VoL I, p. 167. 



10 D.C.SIRCAR 

The MahuMmraîa^ regards^ Kiiruksetra, *the land or field of the 
Kurus', as good as the beaven on earth; hiiitht ManusmrtP^ calls the 
same land Brahmavarta created by the gods, and good customs préva- 
lent thereiîî beiog the idcal for al! people cîsewhere, while Kuriîk§etra, 
î.e. outskîrtsof Brahniâvarta and tiie neïghbouring région includlng the 
Kuru couDtry, togeîher with îhc Matsya, Païïcila and SilraseBa countries 
formed Brahmarsi-desa which was ncxt to Brahmavarca in sanctity. The 
îatc Taiairïyalranyaka^^giyos the boundaries of Kuniksetra as Khaçdava 
onthesouth, îhe TSrgbîia on tlic north, and the Parinah on the west, 
and is siipposed to îndicate modem Sirhind in the Eastern PuQJab and 
Haryana. In the same context, the maru (désert) in the plural is nien- 
tioaed as the î^lAwa of Kuruksctra, the word «i^jrâf meaning^ 'the 
ïiîoiînd of earth thrown up' frooi the excavation of m altar* This bas 
been taken îo mean that the déserts were so caîied becaiise, with réfé- 
rence to Kiirulîsetra, ihey stood in the same reiation as the waste earth 
of the î^r/v^f a to the sacfificial altar. 



!t seems that, when the popularity of the story of the MahIbhSrata 
War deveioped considcrably, an eagerncss was exhibitcd by some people 
to assigQ a date to this so-cal!ed great cvent, and this led to the growîh 
of a diversity of traditions which may bc cnumeratcd as folîows. 



28. lîL 83.204-05 — 

% wRî f^ i TORT ftfft^ n 

W^m «Wiî«î ^W^: ^â^?W: \ 

The Kurus had thcir capitals at [ndraprastha (Delhi) and Hastinàpura (Mcernt 
district), the Matsyas at Virâtanagara (Jaipur district), the Fâncâlas at 
Ahicchatra (Bareily district) and Kâmpiîya {Farrukhabad district)- and îéûrasenas 
at Mathura* ; ^ ^ ■ ":-; 

30. Y.UU / , ; 



THE KURUKSETRA WAR U 

L Accordingto Âryabhataof Kiisumapeia(Pâtalipiitra}, whowas 
born iîi a.d. 476 and composed his ceiebrated astronomicaî îreaîise îo 
A.D. 499, the Ka!iyuga started in 3102 b.c."^ The sanie view was support- 

ed bytheaiîthorof îhe Aîboîe mscriptioïi (a.d, 634-35), wlio sîates tîiat 
3735 years elapsed since îhc Mahabiiâraîa War in thc cxpmâ Èaka year 

556.^2 ' Numeroiis îaterwTîîers hâve followed this tradition, sotbatfhc 
beginning of the Kaîiyugaera in 3102 B.c. came îo be more or less geoe- 
îaîly acccptedultimately. , Bot îhe division oftinie ioto four yugas (viz. 
Krta,Tretâ;:Dvipara asd'Kali) is BOt .met with in very ear}y lodian 

literature, and' J.F. Fleet' addoccd rcasoB^.to beîîeYeîhat' che îcckmmg 
was unkïîowe inVedic tiiBes and îhat fî wasîni^eoted by the astrononiers 

and .chronologists îSOOyears.after ihc initia! point assigned to il, i.e. 
about-tfîe''':cammeiicemeîif oîtM fiftîi' century k,Bp In addition 'to- ■■ 
Fleet*s'SiiggcstiO'ii, v/iiîcîi''îîas beeiî ■acceptcd' by most writers o^q early 
[ndiaQ^history and ehroîioîogy, 'we 'fiavctried lo provc fbat the use of an 
îfa îît the dâtingof records was inirodiiccd a'Bd popularised in jndiaby 
:he foreign rulers not very much earlier û^m f!ie'bcgîfiïiini,g of Ihe Cbris- 
tian cra,^^ Wc bave showB thaï ail the carly docyRieiiis of liidiao' rolcrs, 
.vho flourîshed before the adventof the Scytfiiûiis in tlic 'fïTst' ce.ii1iiry 
5.C. as we!l as of many later rulers of icdîgenoos origin arc dated in the 
•egnalreckoningofîhe reigoîpg moîiarchs and noî in any-rra. 

2. A. second school' of aslronomers a,îîd chronofcgisî?, îtpresenled 
)y Vrddba Garga, Varihamihira (sixfh centory a.d.) and Kaibaçi 
twelftb cenliiry a.d.) placed tle Kuru and Pacdava hcrocs ©f tbe Bhirata 
¥ar 653 years. after 'the begiimiog' of Ihe Kallyoga m 3IC2 b.c. and 2526 
'ears before the commeDcemerit of the ÈaM era in a.d. 7g, i e., ^ m mf 
i.c..'^:' 'It iS'Of course impossibk t# ' reconcile thîs traditïofî with liîe one 
lîscussedabove. ' But it is based on Ihe Porinic beîief, îo bc nieatioBecî 
iôlow, îhc!t"the Greal Bear, was in Ihe Maghâ coBstellaiioii wîien, Pariksif 
7Z% riiîing and that it crosses the 27 nakmîrës'm Tl ceoîorîes. 

■ 3. Theie are two Purlnic traditions beariiig oq the problem iinder 
rudy.'.thefiîslof the.oîfoondinlbe 'râjn, Maisya, Brahmane^, Bfmga'^ 
aia and Vîmu Purâms quoting îhe length of the îcteTveîiî.iig period '.fro.m 
le birthof Pariksît to îhe coroîialion of Mahipadma Naiida.^'^ Since 
ariksit''Was borîi, according to'the Môhëbhâraia, sborily'âfier the^'^ 



tî. Sans* LU- fp* 52L 

SZ £/, VoL Vî, p. îff. 

\3. JRAS, 19U^ PP* '^79£, 675ff . ; ci Vedic index, Vol ï, p. 4. 

\4. Sircar, ïnd. Ep., PP- 235fr. 

l5i- îbid., PP.3Î8-Î9- 

6. Pargiter, The Furâna Text ofîhe Dymsiies ofike Kali Àm P- 3^. 



Ï2 D.C. SIRCAR 

Bhiraîa War, and the Nanda dynasty founded by Mahipadma rukd for a 
century, âocorémg io îhQ Purâ^as, before it was extirpated by Candra- 
gupta Maarya short ly after Alexander's departure from îndia in 324 b c , 
it ï$ as good as the two traditions discussed abovc. Unfortunately, thc 
passage giving the duration of the period is ofien variously read in 
the différent Purânas and in the différent manuscripts of the same 
Purâna as iOl5, tOSO and Î500 years.37 Thîs divergence may hâve 
been due to the fact that the îengths of the reign periods of indivi- 
dual rulers flourishing between Pariksit and Mahapadma were calculated 
or read in their sources diiFerently by the Purânic chroniclers; but that 
the copyists sometirnes added the différent reign periods in the dynastie 
lists and corrected the totals seems to be clear from the similar case of 
the duration of Andhra (Sâtavàhana) rule variously given often in the 
différent Pi/r^ftai" and différent manuscripts of the same Purâitas. ît is 
well known that this period is quoted as 300, 41Î, 4î2, 418, 456 and 460 
years,3S exactly as in the other case. The value that can be attached to 
such divergent traditions is not as to which of the différent readings is 
correct, because it is apparently impossible to settle that question with 
the materiaî at our disposai. The onîy point is that the Puranic chroni- 
clers and copyists regarded the duration of the period intervening between 
Pariksit *s bîrth and Mahâpadnia Nanda 's coronation to hâve been somc- 
thing between Î0Î5 and î 500 years so that this tradition would assign the 
Mâhâbhârata War, immediately preceding the birth of Pariksit, to a 
date roughly between 1400 and 1950 b.c. Needless to say that this 
cannot be reconciled with the other traditions ascribing the Bharata War 
to 3102 or 2449 B.C. The value of this tradition dépends on the import- 
ance vi^e attach to the Purlnic généalogies which are, by their very 
nature, certainly of iittle help in determining the exact date of any event 
of the past, although they appear to place Pariksit centuries later than 
3 102 and 2449 B.c. 

The PurSftas aiso quote variously the duration of the reigns of thc 
22 Barhâdrathass 5 Pradyotas and 10 Saisunigas flourishing in Magadha, 
accordin to them, between the Bh ara ta War and the riseof the Nandas 
as fbllows ;— 



37. Cf» evam varsa-sahasram tu jneyam panmsad-utîaram» The word jneyam is 
read in the Bhâgavata Purdna as àaiam (with pancadaS'Otîaram\ and pahcamà- 
uttaram is sometirnes read as panca^àat-ottaram and pancadas-ottûram. 

38. The Pr/r5//a r^.vf, etc., pp. 43, 46. Cf.— 

m^m^ ^«fc^R ^^^, ^mw '^m^ TO^I, lî^îiïîfew;.... ïîï?fïrgE< 
2fRïï% ^^ft^nft ^mm ^ , ^iïïïTR ^^ik w ^ 'm, '^:^m^mm ^smi^sm-- 



THE KURUK^ETRA WAR B 

1 (a) Birhadrathâs 940years 

(b) Pradyotas Î38years 

(c) SaisuBigas 330ycârs. 

HOSyears 

II (a) Bârhadraîhas lOGOyears 

■ (b) , Pradyotas / 138years 

. ■■ (c) 'Saisii.jDàgâS' ■■■ •, 3éOyeârs' 

■' 1498 yaars, ■ 

■III"' '(a); Bârhadrathas 723ycars' 

■■,(b) fra,dyotas. ., 52years , 

; , ."(c)'" Saisiinigâs 163 years • 



, 938yearsS9. 

Tlausthe total reign period of thc three dynasties would' fall 
between 938 and 1498 years, i.e., rougîiîy betwecn 500 and I5G0 years. 
Tlîis is similar îo the period bcîween the birth of Paiiksit and îhe rîse 
of Mahâpadaia given as failiog between I0I5 and 1500 vears since îhe 
basis of botîi is thc same. 

The unreliability of siich PurSnk statemcnts, \\bich shouM better 
BOt be regarded as tradiîians. is iilastrated by anoîler statement foiind 
in the same context. accordiog to whicb the intervcoicg period between 
Mahâpadroa Nanda and Puloman, who was îhe hst of the Andhra 
(SatavâhaDa) kiags accordirig to the Purams, was 836 \ears (826 years 
accordiog to a few maouscripts).'^^ We know, howcver, that Maha- 
padma asccnded the throne roughly aboiit 400 bx. and the last king of 
the latvâhana dynasfy niled iû thc firsthalfof îhe third ceotiuy a.î>., 
so that the ititcrval between the two mmt hâve been !css thao 650 years. 

4. Anothcr Paranic tradition states that the Greaî Bear was m îhe 
Pusya constellation whtn Praiipa (father of §antanu aïid great-grandfa- 
therof Pariksifsgreal-graQdfather) was ruiiog, that il took a ceotury 
in Crossing one mksatra zné that it was in the Magha when Pariksit was 
on tbe throQe; itis fîirther sEÎd, Iîî îhe same contcxt, that, aftcr the end 
of the Arîdhrk(Sitavahaiia) ibIc, the Grcat Bear begaa its cycle agaiiî 
aftcr the period of 2700 years {i.c. was in the PiBya) and aîso that it was 
în thc 24th «onstellatidn froiB Magha after the eod of the Aodhras 
(éatavihanas),'** If Pwtîpa fioiirished in the first ;Pusya) of the 
37 ctuturies and Pariksit ia tU third (Maghâ) and if the dowafall of tbe 



i9. SeePargiter, AnekïïîMiarî Bsmml TtëdMmh P- I^T. 
40, Ibid,, p. 58* 
^41, ïbid., p/îS; 



14 D.C, SÎRCAR 

Aûdliras (Sâtavâhanas) feli in or shortîy before the 25th or 24th ceotury 
after Fariksif, tlie înterval betweeiî Pariksiî and Puloman would be 
about 23 or 22 centuries. Since Puloman flourished in the firsî half of 
the îfîird century A.0.. Pariksiî and the Bhirata War appear to be 
referred herc to about the 20th or Î9th century b.c., even thoagh the 
intention was probably to assiga Panksit to about 2449 b.c., i.e.. in the 
25th-24îh century B.c., when the Great Bear was staying in the Maghl 
accordiîig îo Varaharaihim and others. If Pariksit is said to hâve 
flourished about 2449 b.c., and the fait of the Aîidhras isplaced before 
the 25th century îhereafter, ie., before i". A.D. 51, this tradition also 
goes âgaiost the kiîown fâcts of hîsîory.'*'^ , 

5. Therc are ceartaiiî palpahly absurd traditioîss like those in the 
KathasarîtsSgam {llth. cmiîmy A.D.) and the Eastcro Câfukya inscrip- 
tions, according to which lldayanaj king of Kausimbî and a contem- 
porary of the Buddha who dicd about 486 b.c.> was the fifth or sixth in 
the iineai succession from Pariksit, so that the latter couîd not bave 
ffoorishcd iBiich eariier thao. 700 B.c.^,^ 

6. The Jain tradition makes the heroes of the Bhârata War con- 
temporaries of the Tirthankara Aristanemi who, howaver^ belongs to 
the domain of mythology. The chronoiogical traditions of the Jains, 
which are la te, conflicting and worthless for historical purposes in many 
cases for the eatly period, scarccly hclp ns in determining the date of 
the Bhârata War. Ail that can be said on this basis is that the War may 
hâve been fought sometime before the days of Mahavîra, i.e., about the 
beginning of the 6th century b.c. or eariier, 

The divergent traditions, discussed above, would show thaï the 
people had originaily little knowledge about the Bhârata War, but that 
they entertained varions ideas about its date only after its story had 
attained considérable popularity with the évolution of the Mahâbhârata 
as an epic. îf. therefore, the story deveîoped on the basis of a genuine 
historical event, the latter niust hâve been originaîly a peity family or 
tribal fend which forrned the thème of a battle-song that was gradualîy 

42. The recently pubîishcd Hisse-Borala inscription f£7, Voh XXXVIÏ, p. 6) gives 
the date Saka 3S0 (a d. 458) as when tbe Great Bear was in the Uttara-Phalgunï 
wa^^orra and 30 20 ycarsof the Saptarsi cycle elapsed, in the style of Varâha- 
mihira and others, who speak of the Great Bear staying in MaghS 2526 years 
before the beginning ofthe éakattz^ i.e,, in 2449 b.c. If the Great Bear had 
beeB in Maghâ in 2449 b*c* it was in Uttara-Phalgunî in a.d. 458; but the 
Hisse-Boraîa tradition puts the commencement of the cycle at 2562 b.c. This 
has been misianderstood by some scholars who hâve wrîtten on the Hisse-Borala 
inscription. See Joum* Ane. Inâ. HîsU, Vol» I, 1867-68, pp. 94if. 

43. Raychaudhuri, Politicai History of Âncîent India, Î950, p.,32; Sitcan Thê 
Guhiîas ofKîskindhâip^l3* * ■ ■' 



THE KURUKÇETRA WAR 15 

embelîislied and magnified tliroyghoat ihc centuries by différent poets 
and miûstreîs, uitîmately devcloping into the grcat ,war-poem of the 
MahâbhëTQtQ, siipposed to hâve bées completed duriag the îongperiod 
betweeQ the 4îb cestury b.c. aad the 4lh ceBtiiry a.d. 



■'■ 'E 

,, Aîîothcr. question requîrmg an answer is whelhcr the' occiîtrence 
of lie Blîirata War in the 4th, 3rd or 2ôd milleBniuîii, B.c. h rccoocîla- 

^le withtbc usiially accepted fiews rciardÎBg.tbe proto-Iiisfofic Harappa 
>r Indus Valiey civilizatioii and the advent ,of tkt Aryams in Inàm about 
'.be mîddlc of the.and lîiilleîiîîîaiB b.c. We liave probably îo aaswer the 
lucstioîi îH/the HCgative.',' 

■ '. ' A.B. Keith rightly wonders at the iiaivc crcdiiiiiy of thosewho 
^eîicve m the hisîoricity of the .Bharata Warjo, spite of the abseoce of 
lîiy mention of it in the Vedic literatiire, aithough H.C. Raychaudhiiri 
l_id Eot share his opinloo,'** . It appears to us, howevcr. thaï thcre 
Q,ust bave been.rcfereoce to îhe Bhtrata War ïh îndian litcrary works 
niuch earlier than the fourth centiiry b.c.; if it was reaily a lemarkable 
istorical event of the hoary pas!* 

Raychaudhiiri draws oiir atteniionto îhe meiîtioCj in the later 

'cdic lïtcrature, of such figures' associa ted with the Bharata War story 

s Pratîpa's son Bihiika, Viciîravîrya's son Dhifarastra, Devakî's son 

'.rsna and ■ YajHasena's son Sikhandin as well as îo the allusion to.thc 

nfriendly feclings betweco, the Kuru prince Biilika and the Srijayas 

Qd to the Kums rcproaching theDilbhyas associatcd wîth ;fae PaicSlas, 

le Bhirata War beiog sometimes representcd in the Great Epie, it is 

lid, as a trial of strength between' the Korus and, the SrSjayas or 

aîcâlas, Hc farthcr siiggests that the batllc-songs describiiig the 

xuggle of the Kurns and. the Srijayas. aad Iheir associâtes most bave 

îcn current in the fiflh ■ ccnliiry b.c.^ becausc a Vaiiampâyana was 

cîown to Pânini whilc îhe Mûhëbhâmi-aeâryû .Vâisainpiyana is 

.entioned in Âsvaltyana's Gfhymtiim. Unfortiinatcly, thèse argumc- 

ts, are palpably too inadéquate to provc ihat the Bharata. W*r was 

ïgarded by the pcople as an eveat of ..greaî ïB^aicitude -iniich.carlîer 

lan'foorth' xentury bx, It is not possible to détermine whether the 

•iginal batlle-song, whîch was the nncleiis on which Ihe story of the 

[ahâbhârata' War finally dcveloped. was one of the itihïïsm (legends) 

luded to in the Vedic iîteratiîre. 



44. .Op. .cit., pS ItJs a sipificanî fact, as wc baye already, hïmtà at, Ihar 

:* Kuruksctra'aûd' the Kums .•■are,, very. ofleB ..îïîcstîoïîcé îîï . the • laîer VèdtC' 

., iiterature whîch is, homtvti, totilîy sileat |bo,ottheFàBfa¥âs.aa.cl„tlîe,liattIc 
.of'Kuruksetraf.., ■ '■ ;:* .=."-..'. ^ ^ '■ ;."; ^' ;:■' ■ 



16 D.CSIRCAR 

If the so~caîkd Mababharata War was original ly a sffiâllfamily 
feudortnbal stmggîe gradually magnified by poets and minstrelsover 
the centunes, it is obviously not possible to détermine its date. The 
sttempts of Pargiter who asslgns the event toc. 950 BX., of Raychau- 
dhiiri ascribing it to the ninîh century B.c., and of varions other 
writers who hâve suggested this or thaï date appear to be ail uncon- 
vincing. 

It is often believcd that Pargiter's theory is based on Parinic 
évidence. Actually, however, he not only rejects siich Purânic 
statements as the one regarding the period întervening between Pariksit's 
birth and Mahâpadma's accession, but even the conflicting statements 
regarding the length of individuaî reigns as given in the Purs^as and 
snggests an arbitrary period covenng the reigns on the basis of an 
imagîoary averagc of 18 years per reign.^^ We do not understand how 
only a part of the Purlnic évidence can be accepted when it militâtes 
against speciic statements in the Puranas themselves. 

We cannot also overlook the shaky nature of the évidence of 
averages as is very clearîy demonsîrated by A.S. Altekar's attempt to 
prove in 1939 that the Bhirata War occurred in 1400 b.c., but in 1959 
that the event took place in 950 B.c., as suggested by Pargiter. In bofh 
the cases, he dépends on the genealogy of the Eastern Câlukyas of 
Vengî, though in 1939 he spoke of 40 kings ruling for 656 years (I6| years 
in average), but twenty years îater, only of 32 kings reigning for 461 
years (14| years per ruler). ^6 

Raychaudhuri dépends on the list of Brâhmanical teachers as 
found in the Vedic literature and rejects a number of Puranic statements 
which are opposéd to the Vedic évidence. He says thatKavasa's son 
Tura,who wasapriest of Pariksît's son Janamejaya, was separated % 
5 or 6 générations of teachers froin Aruna's son Uddâlaka whose 
disciple was Kusîtaka's son Kahola (Kahoda). It is further pointed 
out that Asvaiâyana, author of the Ajvâlïïyana Grhyasûîr a, or hi^ 
pupiî, honours a Kahola and that this Asvalàyana rîiay be identified 
with Assalâyana of the Majjhîmanîkàya, who wàs a contemporary of 
the Buddha whose death occured in 486 b.c., as we know. Thus it is 
found that Janamejaya's contemporary Tura was 8 or 9 prîèstly generaT 
tions above a contemporary of the Buddha, and, taking the duraticn of 
a priestly génération to cover about 30 years as suggested by Jacobi and 
Rhys Davids, Raychaudhnri assîgns Parîksit to a date more thân 240 or 
270 years earlier, i.e. in the nînth century b.c.^^ It seems that he couîd 
fiave better saîd eighth century b.c. 

45, Aident M<Mm Histaricsl Tpûditim, pp; ISlff, 
4^ Ff^c, me, 1939, pMi 1959, p.2é. 
47. Op» cit.. pp. 33ff», 50ff. 



THE KURUKSETRA WAR 17 

Unfortunately, Raychaiidlîurï''s theory invoîves a number of îdcn- 
îïficaîîoiîs SHch as that of Kusîtaka's son Kahoîa (Kahoda) wiîh Kahola 
of îhe Âsmlayana Grbyasulra anà of AsvaJiyaaa^ auîhor of the Grhya- 
sûira^ with Assalâyana, contemporary of îhe Boddha. and thèse may not 
be regarded as satîsfactory by alî investigators^ especialîy because his 
chrooology is opposed to certain spécifie staîenients of the Ptiranas, 
Accordîîîg îQ the Porinic lists/Udayana, a conteraporary of the Buddha, 
was the twenfyfiffh in dmc^nt from Pariksit.'*^ If we do not totally 
discard this list, we hâve to face the unconvîncîïîg position îhat 10 gène- 
rations of priests covered the same period as 25 générations of kings. 
^gain, ifthegreat Mahâbhirafa War w£s fought in the ninth or tenth 
:entury b.c., it h not only impossible to explain fhe absence of 
iny référence to if in the Vedic îiterature, but a îso to onderstand why 
he writers of the GnpU âge (vîz., Àryabbata, Varahmihira and the com^ 
>iiers of the historical sections of the Purânas) assigned to it such remotc 
!ates as falling in the foorth. îhird and second inilîennia b c. Furîhcr, 
ven if Pariksit is believed to hâve flourished in the ninth century b c, 
l hardly proves, it seems to as, anything defioite about the date, nature 
nd magnitude of the so-ca!led Mahâbhârata War which/ in its présent 
3rm, îs no better than a myth witfaout any historical value at alî. The 
nal form of the story represents the War as fought primarily between 
le Kurus or Kauravas and the Pândavas îhough it îs often supposed 
lat it was really a struggle between the Kurus and the Srnjayas or 
aicalâs. If îhe îatter was the case, then no reiiance can apparently be 
lacedonthe tradition associating the War with the birth of Parîksit, 
hich would appear to hâve been inîrodueed into the story long aftcr 
ït evenî; . . . 



Again, m connection with the magnitude of the War as described 
the Mahàbharata, we faave to consider whetherthe connection of the 
fers of the easteni and southern borders of India as active participants 
the Kura-Pandava Wâr fought in the Eastern Punjab can be much 
rlier than ihe fourth century b.c. As for instance, in îhe last Ghapter 
tlîc first Section of Ihe Udyoga^parvan and elsewhere, kingBhagadatta 
Pragjyoîïsa or Assam is mentioned as an ally of Duryodhana and he 
an important figure in the story of the War, althoogh this kingdom 
d Its rulers are conspicuous by their absence in the Vedic literature 
ith Pamnr's ^#S^Ajàyi exhibiting no knowledge of thepeople of the 
5t and southîn the 5th century B.c., it is impossible to believe that the 
îa orne kmg of Assam being a friend of the Kuru king and fightine 
the War on the latttr's side was conceived earlier thaa the rîse of the 



Fargïter, The FurSna Text, etc., ppv 65-66. 
680 — 3 



î8 D.C-SIRCAR 

ûnî hîstorical empire of India, nameiy that of thc Nandas, îb thc fourth 
iîentury b.c. Indeed, alf stories of carlitr dig-vijaya ma empire-building 
described in the cpics aod the Furanas bave io be regardcd as bcloïîging 
îo thc dooiaÎQ of mythoîogy and folklore and Bot of bistory .^^ 

Like Bhagadatta of Pragjyoîisa, anolher ally of Duryodbana, who 
foaght OQ ihc Kaurava side was tbe Kambaja king Sudaksina whose army 
îs stated to hâve conta incd some Yavana (Grcck) and sâka (Scytlnan) 
contingents. This obviousiy refers to an âge wbcn not only the Grecks 
but cven thc Scythians were well known in India. This âge docs not 
appcar to bc much carîier than thc bcginnieg of the Christian era. 

An important ally of Yadhis|hira fighting on ihc side of the Pânda- 
vas was the Plindya king whosc army consisted of thc peopîe of the sea 
shorc, i.e., thc shorc of the Indian Océan. It is wcîl-known that thc 
kingdoms of the Far South of India were practically unknoivn to North 
Indians at the time of Pânini, but bccarae fairly known in the north by 
timç thc Vârtîikas of Katyâyana were writtcn m the fourth ccntury 
B.c. Thc extension in the North Indians' knowledge in South ïndian 
topography was due apparentîy to the expansion of the Magadha empire 
undcr the Nandas and Mauryas in the fourth century b.c , as we hâve 
suggestcd. 

Then again, a close fight on a single battie-field betwccn 7 and 11 
aksauhiftis of soldiers was an impossibility not only in the ancient woild, 
but evcD today, an aksauhîni bcing cornposed of 21,870 chariots, as 
many éléphants, 65, 610 horsemen and 109, 305 foot-soIdiers,.and invol- 
ving about 40 iakhs of mcn, ït must be rcgarded as a flight of fancy. 
Moreover, thc description of the War shows that it was in alî cases more 
or less a fight betweea individuais so that there was no necessity of 
gathering a hugc mass of men. Thus the cxccedingly large nuniber of 
fighters shonUi hiive to be rcgarded as a hiter fabrication to impart an 
exaggerated importance to it. 

Lastly, we may refer to the argument that the Mahabhârata War 
shouîd be rcgarded as a historicai tvtnt becausc the Indians gcncrally 
acccpt it as such. It is, howevcr, no argument at ail. A few centuries 
ago, as we hâve sccn already, thc whole world bclieved that thc sun 
movcs around the «arth; but this bas becn provcd to bc a wrong belief. 
Lîkewise, the Jain and Buddhist belief in thc higtorical existence of the 
carlier Jinas and Buddhas bas been regardcd as an absurdity. As for 

49. Theîdeaof thc empire of kiag Jarâsandha of Magadha looks î ike an ccho of 
thc Magadha empire whîch rcached its zénith in the days of the Nandas aM.^ 
Mauryas. Cf. Sircar, Cosmography and Geography în Earîy IndiauJUmatu h 
pp. 19-20, notes 71 and 79, 



THE KURUK§ET8A WAR 19 

iostaûce. the first Jain Tirtiiankara Aditiâtha or Rsafahanaiba is widely 

i^encrated by the Jains, and wc hâve works on his life and career; but he 
jas beco rcgarded as no more a hisîorical persosage tfaan indra or 



Wc hâve Teferred aboYC fo the ccntribation made b.v H.D . Sanka- 

a,^^ the^ wcll.}cfi0Wîi'''fndiarî: archaeoîogisî, to the controversy oii"!lie 
istoricàî value' of ihc Mahablmrûia tradition. In' the' présent section 
'e arc !nc!ïBed:tô''cîiiote'!iis .v'îews whîch are as foîîO'WS. 

':-'Ttough;tbe^iîiîeresC in historya'OioBg îîie présent génération of 
îîdèQtS''seemS"'to be'Jaggîîig, still it appcars that tbc prcss and peopie 
:1arge' are deepl}' iîiterestcd in',' knowing wlieilier tbc Mahëbhëraia is a 
yth'Ora leaîiîy. Tbis'''js an âge ,.old pfobîem;'biitthe présent ■contro- 
:rsy was touched off wheo D,C. Sircar of Calcutta sa^d in aiV interview 
at the Mahâbhârata Wâî,' as described iîî t'be''ep!'c, Wâs''a'îiiyth a,îid 
at its reai'date waS' iirîkoowîi, so thaî'later writters/assigBec -varioûs 
tes to the event, and iarge armies cO'Ufd never hmz îaken pan in it. 

*;Siich uîipalatobis views, aboiit an event ■which every îadmii, 
ïorant or cducatcd, is mclined to regard as'.a fact. were soon^ chal- 
iged by V.N. Daita and M. A. Pliadfce of the Kiirii.ksheîra 'Universily. 
too had expressed; my' viôws in ao artiele,. extracis froœ whicàwere 
calated'by the UNI. ' Thèse as.well as the earlier '^îtatenieBîs ,of D.C 
'car wera''questîonedby V.V.'Mîîâshiof NâgpUT. ..The présent article 
examines' ail the views, eiîicidaîiîig my owa and selsetisg a smaî! sec- 
îi'oflhe.MaMMsriïia fox a crîtîcâlappraisal 

•,-:., "MirashfS''Vîe.ws''Oîi alî thèse ■questfoîi.s are fo!! ■■■of co-atradiclioBS, 
âdoiîtsthat'the-ifaMé/i^wJ^âJîas'^ severa! îDiatioiis.. : The 

ïSîionsïtheîiE';aTeriîow.aBd wheH:?,;Âs'p0iBted,.OBthereaGdîa.ffi 
VatËMmëyami archaeology provides the coaeliisive evideB^ee. ■•ThBf^ • 
:he Sabha-parvao of the Mahabhimta.^ aîîî.0î3g ■fhe .peûples^ and cob^q- 
;s.'.fmm whoîB'the Paçda¥as'exacted::trîb^ûîe,iîî-t{ie co'arse oîxWn.iîg- 
ya (world-conqiiesl);, ■■Rome is. ■^■.meniiO'îîed , as^ Româ, aîong .with 
:iocbuS'. of^'^Syria^ '■(Antakhi) ■, aad ïhe .Greeks ' ( Ya-?aoa's}. ■• ■■Now,' ■ iMs 

K The said Tîrthaôkara is sa.id to havç beeo 500 bowshots m statare mi to hâve 
iivcd for maiiy hundreds of thousaods of year?. Cf. S, Stcvemon . Hie Eeart 
0f Jaînism, p, 5U 
» Adaptôd hère from his note entîtled The Mahâbkdraîa: À Myth? whîch 
* appeared in The Times of îndia, Bombay. October 19, 1915. This is «xpccted to 
give an idea about the controversy in the newspapers and refers not onîy to 
mafty of the participants, but also sometimei to their vlews as weîl as Sankalia's 
évaluation ôf the htter particalarly from the archaeoîogical point of view* 



20 D.CSIRCAR 

référence cannot be to pre-Iniperial Rome, but must be to the Rome of 
the emperors, particukriy after Augtistus (a.o. 14) as aow provcd by 
archaeology. Agaiîi, this Parvan depicts the poiîticai geography of 
India, as known in the 2nd^3rd century â.d. If so, wouîd It be wrong to 
say tbat even the criticai édition of the Mahâbhûraîa is of the 4th century 

A.D.? 

**Regardîng the Rgveda, îhere is no onanimity aboiit its date, ft 
îs varîousîy dated between 2500 b.c. and ÎOOOb.c. (B.K, Ghosh in Ihe 
Vedîc Age, éd. Majumdar, p. 229). If it really mentions iron {kfm-ayas}, 
tîien it, or the section whicfa mentions it, could be reaîly as late as 
900 B.c. The pity is that Mirashi, though he is one of our greatest 
eptgraphistSj is not at ail conversant with Indian and West Asiatic pre- 
hîstoric archaeology. So he loves to stick to his 50-year o!d views. 
Thcre is nothing strange în this. This has happeced bcfore, whcn wcll-- 
knowc schoîars and even the geoîogists of the Î9th century refused to 
regard the world as oîderthan SjOQOycars; Mirashi is therefore iinablc 
to appreciate what the implications of îhe discoverîes inade in îndia 
during the last 25 years are. He therefore harps on the genuineness and 
great antiquity of the Bhirata War. The very source - earîy Vedic 
îiterature - on vi^hicb he relies is not so oîd. This literatnre nowhere 
refers to the War, as claimed by hîm. So, instead of challengingour 
views, he should proditce incontrovertible évidence. 

'*V.N. Datta and H.A. Phadke assert that the tradition is authtn- 
tîc and the great battle took place after the composition of the Rgvedûy 
butbefore the composition of the èankhâyana ÉraiHasûtra {c. 60Q'B,C,). 
It îS because of ihis long, deep-rooted and persistent tradition that the 
whole land of Haryana still echoes to the din and fury of the battle. 
They (as well as Mirashi) scem now to agrée with D.c. Sircar in disregard- 
ing the oft-repeated astronomical évidence. I bave aiso pointed ont iu 
détail, in the earlier article, how nnrcîiablc this évidence is. The other 
two points which thèse schoiars stress can be easily acconnted for. The 
Rgveda was not composed earlier than 1000 B.c. and ihe War could hav« 
been fought between this date and 600 b.c. în fact, this is our vicwas 
well, which is further elucidated by a crîtîcal study of the Mahâbharaîa^ 
and a fuller appréciation of the récent archaeological évidence. Thus wc 
are able to projcct a fairly accurate picturc of the Mahâbhuraîa era, the 
nature of the battle and its probable date. 

''Archaeological discoveries in India since 1947 hâve clcarly and 
indubitably proved that the whole country was in a chalcolithic stage 
of civilîzation from c. 3000 b.c. until 1000 b.c. This last date niight 
Èave to be lowered if we accept the consensus of the C-I4 dates, which 
fall between 800 and 400 bx. Actuaîly, the knowledgc and regular use 
ofîron werc unknown bcfore this period. Further, thcre werc small, 



THE KURUKÇETRA WAR 21 

îegîOQalaod sub-regionai cultures outside the large arca ofthe Indus 
Cîvilîsalioîî, each haviag a distiactive pottcry, but dépendent on 
agriculture, stock-brceding ma huntiîig. Alîover Icdia becf, miîfton 
aîidvenîson, besid es grains such as wheat, barley^ and rice formed 
the staple food of the iobâbitams. The ox-drawn cirt, witfa a solid 
wheel, was the main vehicle of traasport. The use of the horse was 
ooî yet coîîîffion or widely docuffleBted. Probably ït was yoked to 
chariots, but noî rîddcn. 

*'The pictîire chaiîies îq aboul l(M bx. or slîghtiy !atcr, when 
ail over Noribcra lodia, froffi Pesiawar !0 Ujjaiïîj and from Jodbpur îo 
Jaîiakpur on thcs Nepâi-Bihar border, we fiiid a dîstîiictîve pottery, 

knowîî aS'the..Paî.ilcd Gxey Ware '(besîdes.a Black-.aad-Ied-Waje]. 
ThiS'isjBfariably associatcd with iroB, and, G,G. .MajuiBdar's' sforîy at 
the Deccan Collège bas proved beyoad the shadow ofadoubt that ît 
could not ha¥e bceo produccd without'iroB technoîogy. We înif ht aiso 
conjecture' that such a revoiuiioBary' change -froiîî copper /bronze to , 
iroB-could hâve been, rcgardcd thenorsooQ affer as' the eod ofthe 
D?ipara-yuga.aôd the oiiset ofthe Kali-yiiga. 

"This more or Icss oîîiform maîeria! culture in NortherB Iiidia 
wasmainly dépendent on airiculturc and stock-breeding, sorouch so 

that the cow had becoineaunit of exchange andwcalih, andaruler's 
weaith was calculated on the basis of the sumber of cows bc possessed. 
Naturally^ wars were ofien waged for large hcrds, as for instance 
beîween king Virita of Viratapura (Bairat) niling îhe Matsya country 
(coniprising parts of Jaipur district in Rajasthan) and, the Kauravas, 
whcn the Pindavas were in exile., E?idencc, from the Hastinâpur 
excavation shows that the horse was now kcown and cven liscdas food. 
It was probably regularîy yoked to chariots. However, we badly:accd 
this évidence from other Painted-Grey-Ware sites. 

'it is this culîura! uoily that is probably reicctcd io îhe alliances 
we iSîid so oftcn mcatioaed in the MêlMb'!mmi&, belweec distant 
Gandhara (NWFP), SiM, Sindhu-Saovîra (Sindfa),, Magadha (Bihar) 
and Yidarbha (Berar) wîth the ruîers of Kîiru-Paîcaîa (în the land 
including the présent district of Delhi) So, whena.family feiïdbroke 
ont between the members of the Kuru faœilyj other rulcrs, were Bâturally 
drawn in. Still we laust not forget the true/characterof tfaebatllcof 
Kuruksetra. Right, from îhe beginnîngî i.e. the blowîng of conch-shelîs 
as tranapeis,, to the very end, î.e.^lhe killîngof Dur^'odhana byBhiœa 
and,, Ihe battic of Braàmittras between .Arjina aad Asvâtlhimaii, ît was 
1 Gontcst ,belwcea two individuals .whose personal ,bra¥ery and skîli 
m .handling a macej i>r,4ischar|iag''' arrows, or even managiig a chariot,. 
■i?,â.s evei;;ything. ■■.Tais -was /Iriily a hefoic ,agc^„ ,Jike' ihc ose dcscribed 
by Honaer in Greecc. Large , amies, caiîed, Aksaukms, conslsilng^ of 



22 D.C.SIRCAR 

iîîfantry, cavalry aBd clcphants had do place in thèse conflicts, Not 
a sîBgïe instance of a cavalry charge or a pitched infântry battle is 
known or describcd. As pointed eut by me elsewhere, it wasAlexacder 
\;vhoshowed thcladiansliow efficient cavairy was agamst sîow-movmg 
éléphants. 

"Howcver, siîch a realistic picture becomes confusing when the 
comîTîeiitators of thc Mahâbharata dcscribe the effects of îhe varions 
^5'/ras' ~ missiles discharged witb the heip oï mamras - qî when in the 
Sabhâ-parvan, the four Pàndava broîhers - Arjuna, Bhîma, Nakula 
and Sahadeva - start on a world - conquest {dig-vijaya) wiîh large 
armiesin four différent dlrectioBS, but defeat siBgle-banded and exact 
triboîc from the Syrians, Romans aad Greeks, the kîngs of Karhâd, 
the Co|as, the Pândyas and the Keralas in the sooth, or the Hfmas and 
others iïî Ibc west. 

"Oûc may say the same thingabouî the subséquent rejoinder of 
Pandey {Free Press Journal), whcm ho âmm oui attention to the lists 
oî janapadas meiitioiied in the Bhîsma-parvaD (Chap. 6) of the MaM- 
hhurata, and the unreliability of the C-i4 dates. If aoyone caresto 
examine the lists of rivers, mouBtains ^nd janapadas a iittle critically, 
oncwilî hâve tocoacludethat thèse lists must bave bcen added to the 
MQhïïbknrata and other Purmas, after the 5th aiîd even the 7th 
Cv^ntury a.d. 

=*Aïïî0î5g the janapadas we find mention of the Pârasikas aod 
Hûnas, besides the Âbhîras, Fahlavas and many others. Now itis 
weli-known that the Hûnas dîdBot enter îndia before the 5th century 
A.D. In facî^ the very compîeteBess of thèse lists should make us think 
about their refii âge. Frankîy,here is an excellent opportiinity for our 
historîans to measure the growth in our ktiOwledge of the geograpby of 
lodia from âge to âge, instead of regardîng ail this knowledge as 
beionging to oiie period. As far as the C-i4 dates arc coBcerned, they 
are quite consistent, and excepî one date, ali the rest-including those 
from Hastinâpur. where the sample was carefuily collcctcd for this very 
purpose of dating accurately the Painted-Grey -Ware deposits — fall 
between 800 b,c. and 400 b.c. 

"When our Sanskritists and historians ask us to swallow a great 
deal of nonsense and insist oa regarding the présent Mahabharata bs 
true history, one can only marvel at their lack of a critical faculty. 
Vcrily the Mahâbhâraîa in îts présent form — even much of the critical 
édition — is a myth; it does contain a kernel of truth which archaeology 
aione can reveal. Hence, the only way to understand this problem is to 
coûduct a large scale excavation at Hastînipnr. because so far, ail the 
otier sites of the Pain ted-Grcy- Ware havc becn found to be small and 
shâîlow * 



THE KURUKSETRA WAR 23 

H 

It wïll be seen from the above that Sankalia essentiaîîy agrées 
wïth us in regardiog thc part pîayed by imagination in tbt dcvclopmcot 
oî the story of tbc Kuroksefra War in ûe Malmbbaraia. However, tfiere 
are a fcw points oiï which thc readcrf of thc writings of both of us may 
find some cases of différence of opinion. Although a detailcd cxamina- 
tion of a!! soch cases may bc UDdesirâblc îîcrej it wiîl fac hclpfui to the 
readcrs in avoiding confusion if tbcir attention is drawn at least to a fcw 
ofthem. Thus, at one place^ Sankalia secnis to agrée witb thoscwbo 
assign thc Kurulcseirâ War lo a date between IGOO and 600 B,c. Hc also 
spcaks of the end of the Dvipara and thebcginniîig of thc Kali âge aboiit 
1000. BX, or slîghily' later. What, howcvcr. we lia?e said above wîH show 
that wc.do not agrcc witliany such ?iews. Thc fact is tbat thc said 
pcriod îs thc âge wheo thc Vcdic Hterature was prodoced. and the 
authors of this literaturc very well knew thc Kuruksetra région where ■ 
the great faatlle is statcd in the Malmblmaîa to havebeen fougiit. In 
case a rcally 'grcai' batile or war was fought at the place in the pcriod 
m question; we fce! that thtre mnst havc been at least Ihe^slightest écho 
ofïtintheliteraiureoffhcage, 

Moreoverj the Yu^a division, was fabricatcd by the asironomers 
about the agc of Impérial Gupîis noî for expîaining any change in our 
cultural history but for certain astroiiomical spéculations. 

Again Sankalia thinks that thc lists of jampadas and rîvers inthe 
Bhîsma-parvan and the himnmiîtït compiled after'the 5th,or cven the 
?th ccntury a.d.j bccause the Htinas are mentioned in îhem/'iBOiir . 
opinion, îhe lists in the Mahâbkiratû and the earlier' Purims are not 
much later than the fouith century a.d. The Hilnas and Pârasikas are 
ïîîtntioncd in thc Ragkmma of Kaiidasa who appears to havc beeB a 
contcmporary of Candrigupta II (a.d, 376-413) and to bave composed 
his work îong'btfore î ht H uni invasioe of ïndia was repnlsed by Skandi- 
gupla (A.D. 45547). It shoold be mué that îadia of thc aoibors of tbô 
geograpbical lists in thc Méibkirata and thc Furams inclndcd practî- 
cally ibe whoic of modcrn Afghanistan in 'm Udîcya or Uttartpatha 
division. Thui thc mention of th« HOmsof îheOxnsvalicy ina work 
of Indian îitcrature àom aot really prove that it isiatcr ihan thc ifth 
scntnryA.D* ' ' 



■RAJAVAMSA-VARNANA OF THE PURÂNAS 



. A 

There is a good deal of discrepaiicy in the Purânic accounts of 
well-knowîi royal famiîies of the historica! period. A lypical illustra- 
tiofl Js offered by îhe Puranicgenealogy -and climnology of the Satavâba-. 
nas,'î' .cailed Andlira in mostof tfae Puranas, biif Aodhrablirtya (servaBts 
of the Andhras; in a few cases. 

The Vuyu^ Brahmànda, Vimu aed Bhâgavaîa Puranas m^ that tliere 
were 30 Andhra kiîigs. but never quote so maoy names. , The fëyu men- 
tions only 17, 18, 19 or 25 names and the Visnii oely 22, 23 or 24, uiiile 
ihû Bmlimânda and Bhâgavaîa give respectiveiy 17 and 23 oaraes. Oa 
the other hand, the Maîsya Furam says that there were. 19 Asdhra kiogs, 
but quotas the liâmes of 30 rulers.^ 

.There is aiso discrepancy in the.leagth of ,thc iîidividoal relgQs 
qnoîQd in îhQ Purâms , Takiiig the longer or loflgesf period where¥er 
there is any différence, we get 471| years/:for ail the Andhra kings. 
While the Vàyu and Brahmanda hâve two passages, one, givirg the dora- 
tion of Andhra raie as 300 years aod the other a little above 400 years, 
Dne Mar^ja maniiscript quotes 4Î2 years, though îbos! masuscripts of 
ihis .PiMfeé? quota 460 years as the duration. The fîmu ^Jià Bhëgmam 
Purams and one maGOscript of the Bruhmmâa give 4S6. years mstead.^ ' 

: Again, accordiagto the praclically uoanimoys testimosy of the 
PuranaSy Simiika (whose name is wroDgly spelt in ail the PeriGÎc 

U Éâtaviïhana and Sâ^fltor»! are also written Sâtavakana and Sëiakamù But 
the names appear esseBtiaîly to he patroaymics meaiiiag * the son of Éatûvëhma 
(one having hundred vehicies) ' and " the son of Éaiûkûrm (one ha^lng huodred 

ears, î.e»' capable of recel vÎBg severaî reporters' al a tiiBc) ' respect! veîy. 

2. Rapson: Catalogue of Coins, ppA%n-hYîî; Vmgk^^ fhePamm Texi etc., 
pp., 38-43. •■ ' 

3. Pargiter, op.cit., pp. 43, 46. 

Ô80 — 4 



26 D.C. SiRCAR 

maouscripts) establishcd Andhra suzeraintyj aftcr having overthrown 
the last Kâiiva^king Susarman, 294 ycars (I37yearsof Maurya riilc -r 
ÎÎ2 ycars of Sunga ruîe -f 45 years of Kânva rule) after Candragupta 
Maurya liad cxtripated the Nanda dynasty shortly after Alexanders 
departure from ïndia in 324 B.c. as can be gathered from the writings of 
early European authors, that is to say, in or shortly after 324-294=30b.c. 
Another important fact is that even the earliest Satavâhana kings, 
Sâtavâhana and Sitakarni, issucd coins bearing tlieir names, a fashion 
borrowed by the Indian kings from the Indo-Greeks and popular after 
the Kânvas. We also know that the Andhras (Satavâhanas) could not 
havcruled as an impérial power after the foiindation of the Iksvâku 
and Vàkâtaka kingdoms, respecîively in the northern and southern areas 
of îhe Sâtavâhana empire, in the third century a.d. The length of 
Andhra rule iisiîaily quoted as more than 400 years is thus palpably 
wrong. 

Ail this dïscrepançy clearly suggests that the geneaîcgicaî and 
chronological traditions of the Purëms are unreliablc. Moreovcr, 
numismatic évidence Jias ofFered us the names of certain Andhra or 
Sâtavâhana kings (e.g.^ Knmbha Sitakarni, Rudra Satakarni, and 
Krsna Sitakarni)^ not known from any of the FurMas. 

Two other unsatisfactory features of the Purânic traditions may 
also be noticed hère. In the first place, we n">ay refer to the incredibîy 
long reign period assîgned to rulers like Mahâpadma Nanda (88 years) 
and the Vàkâtaka king Vindhyasakti î (96 years). ^ ît is sometimes 
suggested. on the basis of the reading astâvimsatj (for astasiti) in some 
manuscripts only of ihc Vuyu Fursna, that Mahâpadma roJed for 28 
ycars and that the duration of his life time was 88 years. But this 
is certainJy unwarranted, bccause another tradition common to the 
Matsya, Vàyit and Brahmânâa Purànas states that the nine Nandas 
ruled for 100 years, i.e., Mahâpadma for 88 ycars and his 8 sons for 
12 years. ^ 

Secondly, some of the Purânic traditions are clcarîy anachronical 
Thus Bâhu and Sagara, vi^ho werc distant ancestors of Dasaraîha of the 
Iksvâku dynasty of Ayodhyâ, are statcd in a story, found in the 
Harivamsa and a large number of the Furânas, to bave fought with the 
Yavanas, Sakas, Pahlavas, etc., who,as we know, came to India more 

4. Kumbha's coins hâve been discovered in theTarhaia hoard (JNSl» VoLH, 
pp.S3ff.)» Rudra ^âtakarni and Krsna ââtakarni (whose name has been 
read as iCarMû i5/ij^flrni on some Tarhala coins) areknown from the coins 
described in Rapson^s Catalogue of Indian Coms in thi Brîtish Muséum* 

5. Pargiter: op.cit., p. 25. 

6. Ibid., p. 26. 



RAJAVAMSA-VARNANA OF THE PURÂNAS 27 

than a millennium aftcr the supposed daté of thc said monarchs of 

ladiaîî mvtlîology.'^ 

le aiiy case, îf îhe above is the uûsatisfactory position in respect 
of îhe Andàras (Sitavahanàsj who flourisbed oiïly a cenlury before the 
compilation of the historical section of tht Purâms îb îlie jfirstlîaîf of 
îlie fourth century a.d., a similar or worse coofosion must be expected 

îo the case ofthe dynasties whose periods are ascribed to the hoariest 

aoîiquity. 

As regards the sofar lioe of Kosala, the discrepaocy betweeii the 
évidence of the Mmiyana ma thaï of the Purmas n well known, and 
îîie îwo cmmt be recoûcikd. Thus.the Ramâjmna gives only 35 îiaiîies 
of Iksvaku rulers downtoRàma, whereis the Fwânas enomeraîe 63 
Bames for îtie same period, ao'd, Jikewise, the former 'makes Raghu the 
faîher of Kalmâsapada and places Aja ,12 generaîioîîs .below Ragho, 
altlioygh.tlîe latîer makcs Aja the son of Raghu.^ It is, ' îherefore, 
impossible to compile a reliabie geoealo^y of îhe' ■îksvikuS'Oîi. the basis 
of ■such.conflictsn.g sources, and il isiio wonder that similar 'discrepancy 
is îioîiced ï,n the works of modem' writers.on' the' genealogy of 'îhe -solar 
liae. TJius we find 96 names froni Manu to Brhadbala in îhe geneaîogy 
quo ted by Pargiter,î> ' ^viiilc V.Pathak quotes Oïily Ibmmts^^^ After 
Brfiadbala, tiie Purams meîition 30 aamcs tipto Soniitra so [«s !o make 
% 4- 30 = m mm.ts.}'^ ihough in Pathak's list-Suniîîfa"'ii îs the 102Bd 
came. Now, îa this pari of îhe Iksviku dynasty, the Puranas include 
tht folîowîîig names in succession ^ Saïïjaya, his soq SSkya, his soccessof 
Soddhodaoa, his son Siddhirths, his son Râhuîa, his successor Prasenajit, 
hissuccessor Ksudraka, his soccessor Kiilaka, his suecessor Suratha 
aDd his son Surnitr^. the !ast king of Ayodhyâ. That thê mention of 
Sàkya, Suddhodaîia, Siddhirtha (i.e. Gautama, the Buddha) and 
Rahiilaaskings is due to e^nfusi^n is ciear from Buddhist évidence 
which î-akes king Prasenajit of Kosala a contempcrary of the Buddha 
and assigns the latter^s padnînana to the firsî quarter of the fifth 
century b.cJ^ Il shou!d also be coted that Buddhist'iiterature memi^ns 
AhhlkosaSa and Vimdhava respectively as the father (predecessor) and 
son (successor) of Prasenajit and that thèse names are not found ïq 
the Purasic genealogy. 



7, Journal of îhe Asiatic Society, 4th Séries, Vol. IV, No 2, !%"> po 49 ff 
Sircar, Sîud. Soc. Adnu Ane. Med* M., Voî. ï, ChapJ ÎÎI. " * ^' . ' 

%% fàxgittï^, AncientînàianHistorkaî Tradition, pp. 91*92. 

9, Ibid., pp. Î44ff ~ . 

■Vi, Hismyùf Kosala, pp.Uiï, 

Î1. Pargiter: r/îffP«r5^£ïfe.^/, etc*, pp.66-67. 

Î2. ^^^l^zhà\xi\mï:Fomicalïïisioryofâncî€ntîndîQ,\9m, pp. 102-03, 214i 



28 D.C. SIRCAR 

Accordiog to a Paranic tradition, the current manavantara is thaï 
of Vaivasvata xMano, ofwhich the Krfa or Saîya (1,728,000 y ears), Treti 
(1,296,000 years) aiîd Dvapara (846,000 years) yugas as weîl as a portion 
of the Kali-yuga hâve already elapsed. If, therefore, Vaivasvata Manu 
flourished 3,888,000 years before the begioning of the Kali âge, he 
canaot possibly be regarded as about one liundred générations in ascent 
from Prasenajit (c. 500 b.c*}. Thuseitherthechronological or the genca- 
logîcal traditîoQ hm to be regarded as wrong. Since no human civili- 
zation had deveioped aiîywherc on the earth about a lakh of years ago, 
the tradition assigning Vaivasvata Manu to the 3,889th millennium b.c. 
is of course an absurdity. 

B 

The Porânîc traditions may be compared with the untrustworthy 
legends of Greek and Jewish origins, which are regarded as fuli of 
^isinterpretations and mistakes'^^ as well as with the généalogies 
found in the earlierbooks of Kalh&m's RSjatarangifti, in chronicles likc 
the Oriya Madala Pmji and the Bengali Jî5jawa/â, in the prasasîis 
noticed in the earîy médiéval epigraphic records of India, tic., etc. 

As regards the first few books of the Rdjatarangini, Stein observes, 
*'ït seems probable that those portions of Kalhana's chronicle whichare 
Oîost open to critical objection owc their want of historicaî value largely 
to the unsatisfactory character of the earîier Works. Kaihana'saccountof 
the period preceding the sixth century of our era furnishes us on the whole 
only with bare dynastie lists and with traditions often of a very legendary 

nature concerning certain individuaî kings. But thèse scanty records 

of doubtful value were ail that hc found in his sources It is only 

too évident that eachnarrator omitted more and more of authentic butto 
him uninterestîng data, whilc legendary incidents and popular anecdotes 
on the other hand rcceived an increasingly large share of attention." ^^^ 
But the évidence of the temple chronicles shows that the earliest section 
of the accounts was based on imagination infiuencing oral tradition of 
no value at ail. Indeed, it requires greater credulity than those, who 
are inclined to distinguish legeod and mythology from history, possess 
to accept as historicaî what the FurSnas say about Manu (the founder of 
the Iksvâku and other houses) and his successors or what the Kashmir 
chronicle narrâtes about the earîier rulers of the land, one of whora is 
represented as a contemporary of the Pândava king Yudhisthira (assigncd 
to 2449 B.c.) and another credited with an absurd reign period of 

13. Haîl : Ane. Hist. N. East, 7th éd., pp. 2-3. For the close resemblance of Purâ- 
nie généalogies with ïrish annals, cf. Journ. Ane, Ind. HîsU, Vol. V, p. 361; $ce 
StudîaHibtrnkayVo\,m{\%l), pp. 113-27, See also facîow. ;; 

14, MMam's Rdjatanéginl^ VoK I, pp» 2S-29, 



RSJÂVAMSA^VARNANA OF THE PURANAS 



29 



300 vears.t5 The Oriya MïïdaM Fanj% wMcb is of the nature ofthe 
temple chroBicles of South India^^^ mmt bave depended oa îcgeBds 
coircnt abolit the sixteeuth centiiry a.b. araoDg the priests of the Jagan- 
niihateoipleat Purî, siipplcmentcd largely fay their own imagination, 
regardint three royal families that rukd over the Pmî région in the near, 
distant aodreoiotepast, namely. (1) theSûryavamsî Gajapatis(c/rcaA.D, 
1435^1541}, (2) the Gangas (i.e. the later Eastern Gangas, arca ^'^r^j\^ 
1435), and (3) îhe Kesarim (i e. the later Somavaipsîs, cw^ ad. 1025- 
1110)^ Coiîsequentlv. the tradition abont thèse three dynasties is 
partiallyreliablc fn the first case, mostîyunreliable in the second and 
absoiiitely worîhless in the thirdJ^ of the 46 rnlers of the Kesann 
dyîiasfyassigacd îo the period between the sixth and the twelfth century 
A.ix, thenaffleof the dynasty and the diiraîion of its rule bemgboth 
tolaliywroiîg, the naœes of oaly three may be somehow traced in the 
Liter Sosiavarosî geneaiogy. The absence of any référence to the rulers 
of the Bhaoma-Kara and other earîy dynasties (e.g., Gupta, Vigraha, 
Mina, Gauda and Sailodbhava) shows that the compilers ofthe Madalâ 
Pënjiwerc absoliitely ignorant about the gennine events of the hîsîory 
of Ofîssa beforc the tenlh ccntory A.0. Faced with thèse circumstances, 
who can say ikt the case ofthe earlier liâmes in the Purânic généalogies 
is Bot like îhat of the îmaginary Kesarin kings of the MSdala Panji? It 
mayalsobe noticed that ihe carliest aiîd most dubions names in the 
Râjatmanglnl (i,e. Gonanda î and hïs success.ors) were accepted by 
Kalharîa oîî the auîhorily of a Purum caîled Nilamata, Who can be sure 
that our Puranas are betîer in respect of the earîiest names in the généa- 
logies îhaiî Ihe Nîiamma Purâm ascribed îo a sage named Nîlamuni ? 

Weha?ea similar lis! of the aboriginal Tripiira Mngs in their 
chronicies fabricated in the eighteenth century. ^^ The kings are repre- 
seoted as tbe descendants of Druhyu, sonofYayati (a distant ancestor 
of the Piiidavas) and sixih in descent from the Moon-god. Vïravikrama- 
kîsoraaiânikya (1723-47) being represented as the 184th descendant of 
the said god, îherc are 11% names from Druhyn to Vîravikrama, of 



15. Ibiâ,, L56ff., III. 470. As we àavc seen, Kaîhaoa's attitude to such absurditîes 
is cicar from ÏÏI. 94*95, said in support of his description of the miracuîous 
activitjes of king Meghavâhana. Isdeed, he was cmbarrassed in recording 
strangc acts of the king of tlie tiistoricaî period which couîd not be belicved by 
the common peopk. However, Kalhana consoled himself by the thonght that 
hc was foîîowlEg thepath of the ancient sages, and coald therefore Ignore the 
readers' reactions to his description* . ■ 

lé. Cf K.À.NIÎakaiîtaSastrl: A Bisîûry ûfSomh India, 1966, p. 21. 

Î7. §ee beîow; dho lûum, lad, ffist.. Vol. XXXÎ, 1953, pp, 233 ff., Joum, As. Soc,, 

''"" op.cit,, Ko,î* :P3.'" ^^ 

1$, Jmm,AmJmi.Mis%,YM.Y,;m''^M'.,.^ 



30 'CC. SIRGAR "■ ■^•■'■•" -■:• ■ 

whoîH nearly 150 are imaginary.^^ The iiilers of Manipur likewii 
claimed descent from Arîuna*s son Babhruvihaîîa,2o king of Manipai 
whîch was, howeverj near Kalinga on îbe Orissa-Aîidhra Pradesh coai 
accordîîig îo the Mahëbhâraîa. Affiong their chronîcîeSj the most impo 
tant is the Caîîharoï Kimbsba^^ whkh does not give any îist of 11: 
descendants of Bablirovahana till tlie beginning of Pakhangba'srule j 
theKali year3l35 or A.D. 33. There are 72 names beginning wiîh Û 
said ruier aod ending wîth Kulacandra (a.d. WQ-9iy^ This îî'st reminc 
îisofthe Oriya Mëdala Pânjî discossed above. It oifers us the nami 
often with their dates in Saka era even îfaough the use of the said et 
became popular in the Bengal - Âssam région of Eastern India not mue 
earlier than the Iwelfth-thirtcenth century. Among the irst fiflee 
roiers, six are allotted abnorBially high reign periods, e.g,, No. 
Pâkhangfaà - 120 years, No. 2 Tompok-liO years, No. 3. Taothingbâ 
100 years, No. 8, Naopbangbi - 90 years. No. ÎO. UrSkontbangbà 
90years3 No. Il; Nâuthingfahong - 100 years, and No 15. Ayàngbâ'' 
89 years. 

Emuîating tbc Manipur kings, the aboriginal rulers of Cacha 
claimed to hâve been the descendants of Bhîma's son Gha|otkaca,-bors 
of the Râksasî Hidimbâ, even though the Mahâbhâraîa places Hidioibi' 
land in the neighbourhood of the Delhi région. We are supplied with i 
Iist of 103 names beginning with Ghatotfcaca and ending with Govinda 
candra who ascended the throne in a.d. 1813. Oniy the last eight of thi 
names are historical23 

A Tan trie Sanskrit work entîtied Haragaurîsamvada'^ was corn 
posed after Saka Î734 (a.d. 1812); but its ambition is to give an accoum 
of Indian history from the days of Yudhisthira, as well as of the earlj 
hlstory of a few other places including Assam not excloding the rulers ol 
the Indra-vamsa (i.e, the Ahom kings). It offers another instance ol 
how généalogies, chronologies and accounts can be entîreiy fabricated 
As regards the history of India, we are to!d that Yudhisthira, thefirsl 

19. K.F.Sen: SrURajamâîS, Vol ï, pp. Ixi-ixvii; cf. Vol. Il, pp. xxiii ff., Vol. IIJ, 
pp, iii tr. Another work of the same type is Mrtyunjaya Vidyâlankira's Râjâvah 
published in 1S08. See an analysis of its pseudo-historical tradition in Proceed- 
ings of the Sîxteenth Session of the Indian Hisîorical Records Commission, Î939, 
pp. 59 ff. 

20. R K. Jhalajit Singh, A Short History of Manipur, pp. 6-7. 

21. Ed. L.Ï. Singh and N.K. Singfa, 1967, pp. 1 ff. 

22 îbid., pp, 692 ff. Cf. 67 names from Pâkhangbâ to Kulacandra given by R.K. 
Jhalajit Singh, op.cit., pp. 315 ff. 

23. W.W.Hnnter, A Statistical Account of Assam, VoUïT, Î975, pp. 403-04. Fot 
the date of Govindacandra, see Jg>. înd,. Vol. XXXV, p. 104. 

24, Ed. P.C.Bagchi, M,iï/if.e«ar/,, VoLXVIIL pp.23i:.60. 



RÂJAVAMSA-VARNANA OF THE PURÂNAS 31 

Mog of fhe Kali agc, mlcd for 14I2years asd was folio wed fay thc 
Nâïïdas (500years)j the Gautamas (400years), îhe MayBras (132years), 
ihe Paicasama (105 years), îhe Saka kiogs (iSOyears) beginning witîî 
Sakaditya who began to mie in thc Kali year 3179 (i.e. a*d. 78), Vifcra- 
midîtya who hegan to riiîe in âaka 111 {ku-vîm-bhUmi ^A.n. 189), tic, 
The afasurdity of this aeed not be discussed in détail. As regards 
Assam, it is said thaï Bhagadatta was foJlowed by 24 or 25 kings of 
Naraka's line, such as Ja, Sa, Ni^ etc., alfhoiigh elsewhere we are told 
that Naraka's desceodants rufed for J9 générations, the latest beiog 
Sufaahu and his son Soparna, Soblhu (accession îjq a.d, 78) was an aîly 
of SakSdilya , who was lillcdand whose throne was occupied hy his 
brother Vikramaditya. He captiired Vîkraîîiidiljâ's sacrificial horse and 
was defeatedby.ihe îattcr in the Saka year êiksa-pmî'Vîéhu. {i22=A.0. 
200); ■ A Ksatriya;boy.,nanicd Tîclriîi.haîlîiîg frooi the Dravida country 
becamc.king.of Kâmartipa in Saka 431 (a.d. 519) and roled for 62 ycars. 
Other riilers-of the coantryare raentioo,cd as the Western Ksatriyas ol 
Gauda (lOSyears}: the son of îhe river Brahmapiitra; Indra'S son (born 
in ;Â.D,. 1ÎÎ9 and anointed ling io .a.d. 1149] ,was' the founder of the ■ 
[odravamsa; one of his descendants becarae kiiig of .Kimarîîpa in 
KM. 1362: ■etc. The fabiicatcd accoant ofîhe iniagioary ruiersgocson 
ike the above., What is of great îîiiport:înce is that not a single of the 
?enuinc rulers of ancieot Assam siich^as those bclonging to thc dynasties 
^f Pnsyavarman, Sâlastambha and Brahmapala is mentioned in the above 
iccount. Moreover the Ka'îî-ynga znâ .èaka years , me nientioned in 
;onneciîon with the mlers from the very faegiaoing even though the 
>opularîty of the use of îhe said eras in the Bengal-Assam région i*s not 
aoch earlier than the twelfth-tbirleenth centurv a.d. as we hâve said. 



Instances of fabricated genealogy are aiso found in numeroES 
pigraphic records. It ÏS' well known that Ihe cpigraphs of the Cilukyas 
f Badâmi represent Vikramâditya I (a.d. 655-81) as thc. son of Piilakeâîn 
I (a.d. 610-42). although their genealogy qooted'-less than threc 
enturies afterwards by the Later Ciliilyas tells os îfaal Piilakesin II .was 
acceeded regularlyby his son Nedamarîj grandson Âdityavarman and 
reat-grandson Vikramiditya.L25' în the records of the Eastcrn Ganga 
îona.rch Vajrahasta III (a.d. 1038-70), his predecessors are m'entioncd 
s: (1) Gunamaharnava (i.e. Gunlrnava), (2) fais son ¥ajrahasta I 
i4 years), (3) . his son Gandama (3 years), (4) his brother Kiraarnava 

55years), ,(5) his brother Vinayiditya '{3 ye.ars}: .(6) Kiraârnava's 

)n'"Vajrahasta, II Amyankafahîma-^ (35 years), (7) his son Kamirnava 
^year), (8) his brother Gnndama (3 years}, (9) Ms ■ sîep-brotber 



Î5::r 'SirçBt,:Me'Mm^^^k^m ' #: :Maiômdar, Pr :242, 



32 D.C. SIRCAR 

Madlîiîkamarnava (19 3'ears), and (10) Kâinlrnava's son Vajrahasta III 
(A.D. 1038-70).^^ The same genealogy is quoted eveo in the earlier 
records of Anantavarman Codagaâga (a.î>. Î078-I147).2'7 But, ïîi the 
later epîgraphs of Codagaùga, we find the genealogy as follows: from 
Ananta (Visnu), îhrough the Moon, to Gângeya; from Gingeya ta 
Kolâhala, founder of Kolahalapura in Gangavidi; his son Vîrocana; 
then after 81 kings of Kolahalapura, Vîrasimha; hîs five sons Kâœârnava 
T, Dânarnava ï, GuçSrnava I, Màrasimha and Vajrahasta I; of thèse 
(1) Kâmirnava defeated Bâladitya, cooqucred Kalinga and ruled at 
Janîâvurâ for 36 years; (2) his brother Dânarnava (40years), (3) hîs 
son Kimârnava II (reigned at Nagara for 50 years); (4) his son Ranir- 
nava {5 years); (5) his son Vajrahasta lï (15 years); (6) his brother 
KSmârnava III (19 years); (7) his son Gnnirnava II (27 years); (8) his 
son Jitanknsa (15 years); (9) hîs brother's son Kaligaiaùknsa (12 years); 
(10) his nnde Gimdama I (7 years); (11) his brother Kâmârnava IV 
(25 years); (12) his brother Vinayiditya (3 years); (13) Vajrahasta IV 
(35 years), son of Kâmirnava IV; (Î4) his son Kâmârnava V (| year); 
(15) his brother Gundama lï (3 years); (16) his step-broîher Madhu- 
kSmarnava (19 years); and (Î7) his son Vajrahasta V (â.d. 1038-70) .^s 
Leaving aside the mythical figures, we ûnà that a host of apparently 
imaginary personages (snch as Kolâhala of Karnataka and his descen- 
dants, some of whom migrated to Orissa, hâve been introduced in the 
modiied genealogy between Tnrvasu and Gnnirnava II (No. 7) who is 
the progenitor of the family in the earlier acconnt, but is represented 
hère as Gunârnava II. It will be seen that the two accounts talîy with 
cach other from Vajrahasta II (called Vajrahasta ÎV in the later account)^ 
grandfatherof the great Vajrahasta II (â.d. 1038-70) called Vajrahasta 
V in the later accoimt, It is not possible to believe that Vajrahasta IIÏ 
made mistakes in recounting the names of his immédiate prodecessors 
and that his grandson Codaganga had more reliable information abont 
them. We hâve to notice that even tbe nanie of the father of Vajrahasta 
III bas been wrongly quoted in the later records of his grandson. There 
can therefore be no doubt that whatever is new in the later genealogy 
and is in conflict with the earlier account is imaginary and unreîiable. 
It seems that Vajrahasta II Aniyankabhima {a'rca a.d. 982-1016) was the 
founder of the faraily^s greatness and that there was little anthentic 
information about his predecessors npto Gunârnava, progenitor of th« 
famîly, at the disposai of the court poets of Anantavarman Codaganga. 
The genealogy from the god Visnu to this Gunârnava seems to be entirely 
fabricated, the fabrication depending on several factors529 theforemost . 

26. Bhandarkar's List of Inscriptions, No. Î09i. 

27. ïbid., No, î 100. 

28. Ibid., No. 1103. Nagara is probabîy the same as Kaîiôganagara. 

29. We hâve discussed the question in fiiîi^ deta:ii in Eh.Voh XXVIÎÏi î>î). 239^î« 



RAJAVAMSA-VARNANA GF'THE PURANAS 33 

amoîigsî tiiem beiiig îbc eagerness of the médiéval ruïmg families to 
trace their descenî from a respectable source like the solar, îunâr, 
Yâdavâ, or Niga lineage, The paJpably iiîireliabJe mime of tfae mytfîi- 
cal genealogy of the CSlakyas of ¥engi md Kaîyâna is qiiiie well Icqowiî 
ta the stodent ofindian history,3« 

le an altempt to détermine îhe date of the Bharala War, Pargiter. 
sxiggests aiî average of ISyears for a génération of îbe Purliiic kiogs. 
But it is Eof possible' to'be sure about sucli av^'rages/ Thus the 17 kings 

of the Imperfal Eastern Gaèga dynastyfrom Yajrabasîa 01 (who ascea- 
ded tlironein a...,d. i'038} toBbafiiiiV fwho'was' ousted by Kapileadra' is 
A.D..1435) 'ruled^foi' 397 years, i.e.'a liftîe' over 23 years ia avcrage.^'^ 
wbile; Oî3' the-other hand, Cbapters V-VIII of 'fhe Rëjaiarmgim, which 
arexegarded by scbolars. as quite satisfactory as a hïstorieal acecost, 
would give 34 rulers (from the accession of Avant i va rniaii in a i>, 855, t0 
the end of Jayasïniiia's rule m a d. 1155)^- reîgniiigfor a total cf 300 
years, i.e , an average of a liiile less ffiao 9 years. And, if llie tmo^ 
groups are amalgaîriated, 17-i- 34 = 51 rulers would be found lo bave ruied 
■for 397+300 = 697 years, i.e. an average of about, I3| years. Tlie difficulty 
is tliat wbeîî more thaû a hundred générations are iavolved, even the 
différence of one year would create a discrepancy of more Ihaii a cenfury. 
But suppose we accept Fargiter's average of 18 years, then more 
than hundred générations of the Iksvakus before Prasenjit (c. 500 b.c.] 
wouid cover a period above ISCO years, so ihat Manu must hâve iouri- 
shcd eariier îhan 2300 b.c. Even on an average of 10 years, the fouoder 
of the îksvaku house bas to be placed eariier îhan 1500 BX:. The ques- 
tion now is how to reconcile this chronoîogy with the widely accepted views 
regarding the existence of the proto-bistorîc Harappa or Indus Valley 
civilizatîon in the third and second niillennia b.g. aed ihe advent of the 
Aryans in India about the middîe of îbe second lîîilIeQniuiîi B.C. Are 
•Manu and his descendants to be regarded as Aryaiis or as Pre-Aryans? 
As the Furanm appear to.represent them .as Aryans, we hâve probably 
to regard .them as mythical igures'if we accept thetheciy of'Aryaa 
advent about the middle of îhe second millenDiEiii b.c. 



30. SeeSircar in The Ciasskai Age, éd. Majanidar, pp. 229-31. In the mythical 
part of the geneaiogy' of the Eastera Cilokyas of Veàgï, Parîksît is reprcsenied 
as sixth in ascent from Udayaiia. (coBtemporaiy of the Buddlm, 566-486 bxJ, 
so th'àt he was supposée to hâve iourislied after 7CC b.c. Cf, Sircar, The, GuM- 
las of Kiskindlm P- Î3- This, chronoîogy seeras Iq be absiird, aaother absur- 
ditybeiiîg the représentation of Uilayana and other members of hîs family as 
kings oîAyodhyâ.' . 

31. The n kiBgs of.. theEasterO'Ganga' dynasty represented .14 générations so ihat 
the average per ■gênera tio'îiîsnearly ■27 .years. ■ 

32,. The date of iayasimha's û^dXh is really .îeariîi 'from a kter chroaide. Kaihana^s 
'■■ wo^rk was compietcd'iive years earlierv about a.d, 1150. ■ 

■680 — 5- 



34 D.C. SÎRCAR 

Il niay be noticed thaï tlie noB-Aryan association of some of the 
clans is qaile pronounced: Thus the story of Yayàti of the îiinar race 
suggests Ihat liis favourite son Puru, the progenitor of the Pauravas, was 
boni of a non-Âryan priiicess, while his other sons, (Yadu, Tuîvasu, 
Druhyii and Aau). whom he had cursed, became the progenitcrs of the 
despised Yâdavas, Yavaiias, Bhojas and Miecchas respectiveîy, the 
foiifth category being sometimes possibîy caîled Ânava Ksatriya. In 
this connection, we should aiso note the dark complexion.of the Yâdava 
hero Krsîîi and the well-knowii fact that Krsna hiniself and some 
members of his family married non-Aryan girls. Wbat is more impor- 
tant secms to be that PurUs Yadu, Tiirvasu, Druhyu aod Anu are 
roentioned in the early ¥edic literatiire as separate clans which are thns 
ixtadekinsmen of one aaotherin the Yayati story exactiy as the progeai- 
tors of the AngaSj :¥angas, Kalingas, Pundras.and Suhmas are made 
sons of the same father in thePuranic story of Dlrghatamas* ' 

D , 

The above views of mine .on the genealogical traditions of the 
FîirSf 05* first appeared in a paper that was read at an Inter-University 
Semsnar on Piirânic Généalogies heîd in 1965 at the Centre of Advanced 
Study AncientHistory and Culture, University of Calcutta, and appe- 
ared first in :the Proceedings of the 'said Seminar in a volumeentitled 
The Bharata War and Purïïnîc Généalogies, Calcutta University, 1969, 
pp. 105-14, and iater also In my Studies in the Yugapurdna and Other 
Texts, Delhi, 1974, pp. 41-46. !n the year 1971, an American scholar, 
Dr. David P. Henige of the University of Wisconsin, Madison^ U.S.A., 
wroie to me a letter in which he expressed his opinion on some ofmy 
viôvi^s on epico-Purânic tradition appearing in the Proceedings of the 
Seminar referred to above, 

The following parts of Dr. Henige's letter were read by me ai one 
of the Monthiy Seminars at the Centre because h appeared to me to be 
of some importance îo the students of epic and Purânic traditions — 
"î hâve recentiy been reading with great interest The BhârataWar and 
Puranlc Généalogies which }'ou edited. My own field is African history, 
although I faave long had an interest in pre-British Indian history as 
welL In factj the study of pre-colonial African history is notsofar 
removed from eariy ïndian history, at least in terms of the nature of the 
évidence aviiable, as one might suspect. That is, the oral traditions, 
our primary source, bear distinct similarities to the chronicles of eariy 
îndia, and since ray own field of particular interest is an analysis of the 
chronoligical context of oral traditions, I hâve found itvery usefulto 
look closely at India for comparative purposes —I enjoyed the 'Proceed- 
ings of the Seminar' portions of this book for the varietyof views con^ 
cerning the vaiidity and accuracy of the Purânic généalogies. Your 



RÂiAVAMSA--¥ARNANA OF THE.PURANAS , 35 

scepticism iiîifortonafeJy does riof seem îo.be sliared by niany of your 
colleagiies. l! seenis to me that the Purânic généalogies most cfoseîy 
reseîiible the ïrish annals, and I commandto yoor attention an article ky 
John V, Kslieher, entilled *EarIy îrisli History and Pseudo-History', iii 
Siudia Hihemica, lîl (I963),rpp.' iî3-I27,.m which he disciissed how and 
why thèse Yast généalogies. 'were n^bricated at a much later date for 
partisan purposes. • Perh.ips'it h iinf'àir îo soggesî tîiat ■'the. fiiiimc 
gefiaiogies are esseiitialîy faMca fions;, but Icm see'siniilarities betweea 
the twO'Cases '' . 

Tiîejiorfflal îndîaîi.apî-iroach to smh \kw$ was illustraied by the 
fact that, wheii îhc letter was read ont one of the Senior Research 
Fe!lows'at:tIie Centre/ observed that Dr, Henige is probably not km'ûm 
.wiîh tiic tpîc^and ■Poraîiîc tradirions; In îhc Research Fellow's opinion^ 

■ Jf;Was. 'liQWïse to compare the' accounts ^of the Purams with those of 
Ireland, Wiiaf was sîriking m îliis was that îhe observation was made 
withoiit any knowledgc of the frisfi tradîtîOîis'and was qiiiîe lïîifortunâfc 
becaosc il extiibitcd die indian tendency of failingto appreciate com- 
menls oe anything that-is held. in esleem.' ■ Thus ihe great service.'Dr. : • 
Heaige reodered by drawing our atterîtion to the tradition of anoiher 
country. wfiich appeared to liim îo show siniîlârily wiîb our Purânic 
lôgcnds, was nul ail realised. The «ubject should noi imvt been viewed 
wiîh a partisan and uncritica! eye and wiîh thaï of îhe proverbial kupa- 
mûfîdïika haviîig îimiled ideas and saîisfied. with Ihe knowledge of his 
own surroiinding.'^-^ 

The paper on ïrisii pseudo-history by Joko. V. Keîieher of the 
Uoiversîty of Harvard was onginally read at the inaugural meetiagof ' 
the American Committee for Irish Studies at îhe Convention of.the 
Modem Langiiage Associatioci of America hsîd at CMcagO' on the27t}i 
December, 1961. The author cf the paper first points out how the 

■ Aagîo-Nornian conquest of Ireland was not &o décisive in ifs cffccts as 
the Norman conquest of E,ngiand. In îhe case of ïreland^ this foreigi, 
coQqiiest 'had a century of bouoding sy'ccess^ less Oian a century of 
suney prime', aiid then il collapsed; and we hâve 'the eative recovery 
in ïrelaîid in îhe laie foyneeoth mû fifteenth centurîes\34, Kelleber 
observes ''The culture that reasserted itself io îhe fo or feenth century 
•and contîîîiied viable, tto.ogh niaiined ,and aîl loo. often chaotic, dowû, ■ 
to îhe carly sevenîceïith.centory, was but the iateststagesof the cuîtorc " 
that. had' existed coatiouously and strongly siîice pre-historic timcs. Il 
was so ïBStiBct in the aative population . ..... wc can.be sorc that miicà 

does survive if only.below îhe level of coBSciousnesi.'' ^^ • 



33.. .Sce Joum, Ànclnd, Misî,, ¥o,L V, pp, 36C)-6I; a.Iso Sircan' S&me Fr&Mems'^&f ■ 
îndian'HIstûryandQilîiire,. 'Ahmtd-àhûé, 1974, .pp. S-!Ov 

■35, .îoc.-citf ,, .. ,■■■■■■■■ 



36 D.G. SIRCAR 

For the lîistory of post-Norman îreland i.e. rooghly from about 
A.D. 1170 to. Î600j tliere is an amoïint of good modem writiog, 
abolît eighîy per cent of whicli is based on Normao and Engiish sources, 
ït has beeo shown îhat *'îhe native history for that period is almost as 
poorly attended to as in pre-Norroan history. "36 n jg farther said tliats 
doriiig.the early historical period, this culture SvaSj îf essentially 
barbarie and certainly archaic, yet vigoroiis,' unimpairedj and extra- 
ordinarîly indîgenous.-....also proudly self-ccnscious/^^ 

Wlien ïreland was Christianized, the Church îiad to deal with aa 
unbroken forefgn culture and had to compromise. Howaver^ in tht 
final compromise, the society, which was rigidly stratified and familial, 
became modified to a considérable extenr. Under the influence of the 
Church, anybody could become a mook or priest or imn, and any monk 
or nuû an abbot or abbess or the founder of a new church whiîe every 
one liad a chance to becorae learned since learning was no longer a cîass 
prérogative. This resulted in a révolution - a sudden release of tht 
long-thwarted energy of tfae masses, and Iiish missionaries and scholars 
poiired abroad during the seventh and eighth centuries. After a century 
or more^ the révolution was over and the people were agaio thinldogof 
the right order of things and of the sacred order which should not be 
broken, Kelleher refers in this context to a corpus of saints* généalo- 
gies, which is now preserved in severai texts and the real purpose of 
which was to conceal the fact that some of the important ^early clerics 
had been unpalatably plcbian*.3s 

At the sanae tinie, the îrish were not isolated during this period. 
They knew what was going on in the continent. They appear to hâve 
received the ïegends that developed around the great nameof Charle- 
magne and his court after his death in a.d. 814. Keileher says, ''By the 
beginning of the tenth century. there is strong évidence that the idea of 
imitating Charlemagne had occurred to severai kings in ïreland as it was 
indced occurring to kings evejywhere in the Western World/'^^ înhis 
opinion, the so-called High Kingship of ïreland, which did not exisî 
before the mîddle of the ninth ceatury, should be understood chiefly in 
the light of that imitation. 

Kelleher gives the summary of the Irish tradition about the High 
Kingship in the foliowing words : '-'Tlie High King, or Kingof Tara, 
was at once overlord of the provincial kings, the ultimate enforcer of 
order withîn the realm, and the highest appeal judge in law. Early in 

36. loc. cit. 

37. ibid., p. 117. 

38. ibid., p, 119, 

39. îoc. cit. 



RÂJAVAJtiâA-VARNANA OF THE PURÂÎs'AS 37 

his reign (and incidentaily, we are never given any clear account of how 
he was chosen), he secured the submission of the provincial kjngs when 
he made a sun-wise circuit of the country and took the hostages of each 
province. ïf he failed to take the hostages of any provincc,^ he was 
deined fuii title and was called ard-rî co fressabra, 'Higb King wifh 
opposition'. But since ihis term does not appear before the mid-eieventh 
cent ury, that is, URtii after the usurpation of the oJRce by Brian Boroimhe, 

kiflg of Munster, it wouid seem plain that the circuit and the taking of 

hostages wereâlways successfully pcrforraed. This over-kingship of 

Ireland was an oiSceof the grcatest antiquity; and al! but a few scattered 

sources mainîain that fromthe time of Eochaid Mugmedon, a fourth- 

century ancestor of the Ui Neiil and the Coonachta it had beionged excîu- 

Eivelyîohisposterity. The Connachta indeed were shut outafterjhe 

death of AiliH Moltln 482. Thereafter, till Brian^s usurpation in 1003, it 

was the sole monopoly of the Ui NeiiL the descendants of Niaîlofthe 

Nine Hostages who supposedly died in 405 or thereabout. At iirst six Ui 

Neill kindreds contsnded fer the title: but fros 734, its possession was 

restricted to two lines, Cenel Eogain, the most powerfui of the Northern 

Ui Ngill, and Clann Colmain Môir, the dominant line among the 

5outhern Ui Neill. Thèse two regurarly - acd we are apparently to 

issume. for the most part, peacefully - iaterchanged the High Kingship 

ilternately fiom 734 to 1002. Their hold on it was broken onlyonce 

iuring that period by the i.itrudcd reign of Conghalach mac Maeie 

^ithigh, king of Breaâ. who was also of the Southern Ui Neill and wha 

■eigned as High King from 944 to 956, after which the alternation was 

mmediately resumed."*' 

This tradition has coma dcwn throuah various works, most of 
/hich were formerly believed to be old even by notable historians, 
hough they hâve now been proved to be médiéval works. Thus 'the 
ïook of Riahts' once regarded as the ^constitution' of pre-Korman 
reland is now believed to be raucb îaîer while the famous poem on the 
ircuitof Ireland by Muirchertach is said to be 'composed perhapstwo 
undredyears after the supposed event it célébrâtes and !s indeed but 
ne more twelfth-century forgery of an ail too familiar type'.« The 
radition as we hâve it and much of the évidence for it are beiievedto 
raw upon the legends of Brian Boroimhe who was the first Insh 
'.harlemagne. 

It has been said, "It can beshown that everything intheannals 
pto about 590 and a large number of entrics from thence to 733 {the 
itry on Bede's death) were cither freshly composed or whoily revised 

40. ibid., pp. 120-21. 

41. ibid., p. 121. 



38 D.C. SIRCAR 

aol earlier than tbs latter half of îhe riiotii century. Nor does tli 
wriîiîig stop at 735......mosî of the information, aï least from theearl 

sevenîh century on, is reliable, beoause tt h aboiiî matters with which îh 
revisîonists were not coocerned. ......If will^ lioweveîj be a long whil 

bôfore wô shaJl be able to say with confidence what is reliable and wha 

bas been tampered with or falsified the tradition was not manufac 

tured ont of whole cloth. There was a Kingship of Tara. ... The plac 
had been deserted from sonietinie in the sixth cei3tury.....the titie *KiJî 

of Tara' used in Christian limes at once antiqiiariaB revivaland th 

claim to the possession of the national prestige îhat had surrounded th 
pagan priest-kingship."^- 

When we waot to compare the Irish legends cited above with th 
Puranic taies, we find that the Irish^ îegend-makers were writing aboi] 
events oûly a few centuries old' whereas the Puranic authors or th 
revîsers of the Puriniciegends speak of events many centuries or evc] 
milliennia old. This will be abondantîy clear from a comparison of th 
iegeeds discussed above with the accoonts of the first few books o 
Kalhana's Rajaiarangim, parts of which were composed on the basis o 
Pnrâna-type Works like the Nîlamaîa by Nîla-mnni. The exceptionall; 
long iîitervening period that séparâtes îndian anthors of the epico^ 
Purânic legends from the aje to which the heroes of the latter ar 
assigned make the ïndîan tradition generally much more unreîiable. ïi 
the long period covered by the Indian legends, the earlier an event an< 
apersonage the lesser their daim to anthenticity. The origin anddeve 
lopment of îhe legends in India appear to hâve been more on mytholo 
gical than on historical lines. 



'■42v;;ibid4:'Pp.,'l32-53*^' 



INDEX 



/Ibhimanyu 
Âbliïras 
Adinâtha 
AdityavariilaB 
Afghanistan 
Africaiî history '' 
Âliîcchatra 
Abo,îïîKîngs ; •;■ 
Ailîole ioscrlptioB ' ■ 

AîlillMoIct •■•■ 

Aiiareyû . Brûhmmm ■ 
"Aja;. ■:„; ; 

Ajâtasatm ." 

AksauMnJ 

Alexander 

■Aliekar, A*S. 

Ambâîikâ; ',' 

Anibîka 

An an ta (Visiiu) 

Aiiactavarman Codagaiîga 

Anava Ksatriya 

Aiîdka (Sâtavâhana/ 12- 

Andiirabhrtya 

Aoga 

Anglo-Norniao conquest 

Anîyankabhînia 

Antakhi (Aoticchus of Syris) 

Aîîii 

Ard-ri co fressabrë 

ÂfïstaDemi 



&4' 
■ 22' 

■ B 
. '31 

■. ■ ■. 23 • 
■^' ,34 
5J0 
30' 

;„ii ■■ 

' 31 
37 

■ 3 
', 27, 

22,20 ; 
m 

5 
5 

32 
32 
34 

5.34 
35 

"2 
i9 



>8.2I,2: 



Arjona 

Arum . 

Aryablii'ia 

Aryans 

Asia 

Asoka ■ 

Assaiïi ■ r 

Âstâdhyâyi 

Astâvimhti wroîig for asîMîti 

mtra . 

uhû 

âsmiûyam' Grhyûsûira ,. 

4hamedh& 

âsvatthaman 

Augustus 

AvaDtivarmaïi' 
^yaiîgba 
^yodbyâ „,.. 



14 
2. 30 

15 
il 17 

9 

2 

30. 31 

17 

26 



5-7, 2î 

■■ 20 

2 

' ■' 30 
26,21,33.,: 



Bâiîlîka 
' BIlîii 

Bairat 

Bâiâditya 

Bareily 

BârhâdrBthas 

Btàe 

Bengnî-Assam région 

Bengali 

Bcrar 

Bhagadatta 

Bhûgûrata P^trâna 

Blîlnu !V 

Bîiaraîa 

Bhiratïîs 

Bliârata \^ar 



30 
15. 
26 
2î 
32 
5 

12 J3 
37 

30. 3Î 
28 
21 



Bhaiîn:a-Ka:a 

BrMvi^ya P^ifûna 

Bhîma 5-7. 

Bhljn.a 

E':~.^^mi:Fiir an 

Bhojàs 

B'l:r 

Bî;:icr 

3;..jk-ari-Ied '^a.re 

BrahmS^tra 

BfShmBnJa PurUna 

Brafimanica! -.eaciiers 

Brahmapâla 

Brahmapuira 

Bralimarsldesa 

Brahmavarîiu 

Brega 

Brhidârmiyaka Upûmsûd 

Brhadfcala 

Brhaspatl 

Brian Boromhe 

Buddîia % 1 14. 

Buddliïst ! 

Cacbar rakrs 
Caîimrâ! Kum-m-ë 
Calokyas of BIdàmi 
Ciukyas of Kalyaoa 
Caliîkyas, Laier 
Câlukyas oî Veàf i 



rjS,3î 
Î].îi25 
33 
4 
4 
,I,9J1J2J4-I6, 
20, 13, 34 
29 
3 
5-7. 2î, 22,, 30 
4-6 

'? :4 

21 

,, 2 

2 

■ 2î 



2 

21/ 
11,25,26' 
16 
31 
31 
10 
iO 
37 
, S 
27 
11 

Î6-"„II„ 33 
2, 18 27 

30 

.30 

' ■' 31 

33, 

■ , 3.Î •., 



40 



INDEX 



Caodragupta Maurya 


12,26 


Gândhârî, 


5,7,S 


Candragupta lï 


23 


Gaôgâ, Gaoges 


4 


Cantonese dotted record 


-7 


Gangavâdi 


32 


Ceoei Eogain 


37 


Gaôgas, EasterB 


29.31 


Chïïndogya Upanîsad 


9 


Gâiigeya 


32 


Charlemagne 


36, 37 


Gauda 


29- 


Christian era 


îî,18 


Gautama Buddha 


27,3! 


Chrîstiaîiizaîion of ïreland 


36, 38 


Ghatotkaca 


7,30 


Christians 


3 


Ghosh, B.K. 


30' 


Church in ïreland 


36 


Gonanda, L 


29 


CitrâDgada 


4 


Gopaîha Brâhmana 


S 


Cîann ColmaîB Mor 


37 


Govindacandra 


30 


Codaganga 


32 


GreatBear 


11,13,14 


Cofas 


22 


Greece 


21 


Congliâiach mac Maele Mitliigli 37 


Greek contingents, 


18, 19 


Coûûacbta' 


37 ., 


Greek legend 


■■ '2^ 


Coperincan.theory 


3 


Greeks 


■. . ,22: 






Guhilasof Kiskindhâ' 


:/.î4„33 


Dâibîiyas 


15 


Gonârnava, 


.'31,32 


DânârnaYa L 


32 


Gundama 


31,32 


Dasaratha 


26 


Gupta 1 


, 17, 23, 29 


Datta, V.N, 


19,20 






Davids, Rbys 


16 


Haragam Isam vida 


30- 


Delhi région 


30 


Harappa 


r%1 

3Ù> 


Devabhaga Srauî a rs a 


9 


Harappan civilization 


15 


Devakî 


35 


Harîvmiûa Parmi a 


26 


Dharma, Buddliist 


2 


Haryana 


10,20 


Dhisjadyumiîa 


6,7 


Hastinâpura 4, : 


5, lO; 21,22 


Dhîtarâstra 


■.5; 8, 15 


Henîge David, P. 


34, 35 


Big-vîma 


18,19,22 


Hidimba Ri\sasï, 


7,30 


Dîrghatamas 


' ' ■ 34 


Himalayan forcsts 


, S. 


Draupadl 


6-8 


Hisse.Borala inscriptîoB 


Î4 


Dravida couQtry 


31 


Homer 


21 


Dion a 


5,7 


Homo Sapiens 


3 


Drsadvati 


10 


Hûrtas ■ 


22,23 


Druhyu • 


29, 34 






Dropada ■ 


5,7 


ïksviku dynasty 


26, 28, 33 


Duhsâsaîia 


5,7 


India 15,17 


,18,26,28 


DuxyodhaBa ■ ' 5,7, 


17, Î8, 21 


ïodiaû îîisîory, pre-British 


3,4 


Bvâparayuga H» 


21,23,28 


ïndian mythology 


27 






Indian océan 


is- 


,. Eastera Câjukya Inscriptioas 


14 


ïndian tradition 


3S 


,', Eastera Câl'lsyas of Vengi ■ 


16 


Ïndo-Grecks 


26 


■ Engia.nd : 


35 


Indra" 


4, 19, 31 


■ Eochaid .M,iîgmedoD 


. 37 


ïndraprastha 


5,6,10 


epic and Piirânic traditions 


34,35 


ïndravamsa 


30, 31 


epico-Purânic antiqoity 


2 


Indus valîey cisniization 


15,21,33 


epico-Forânic legends 


3S 


ïreland, 


35, 36, 37 






Irish annais 


28, 35 


Farrukhabad disirlci 


5 


Irish history 


35 


Fieet. J.F. 


U 


ïrish legends 


■3.8\ 






Irish missionaries 


v' 36 


Gaîiieo 


2,3 


Irish traditions 


36,36 


Gaudhâra Couctry 


5,21 


îtUma 


36, 4, 15 



INDEX 



41 



Jacobi 


16 


Kesann 


29 


Jagannâtha temple 


29 


Khândava 


ÎO 


Jûimitûya Brahnmm 


S 


Khàndavaprastlîa 


5 


JaiBs 


î 4/18. 19 


■ .Kolâhala, 


32 


Jain Tîrtbaôkara 


Î9 


Kolahalapura 


32 


Jaipur district 


6, ÎO, 21 


Kosâla 


2,27 


Janakpur 


'^ 2i 


Krpa 


5,7' 


Janaîîiejaya 


Î6 


Krmsi . 


34 


Janapadas 


22,23 


Krsni (Draiipridï} 


■ 5. 7, S, 'tS 


Jantàvura 


32 


Krsna Sfîakarûl ' 


26 


Jarâsandiia 


■m 


Krsii-âym 


20. 


Jfaya (Mahâbhâram) 


• 3,4 


Kflavaroiaiî 


■ 7 


Jayadratha 


. ■? 


Krtayiîgii, 


11,28 


Jayasimha 


33 


Ksatriya 


' 31 


Jewish "legend 


' 28 


Ksodraka 


27 


Jitâàkii&a 


■ 32 


Kulacaîidra 


3Ci 


Jodlipur 


2Î 


Kulaka 


27 


Jiiîian Pcriod 


3 


KiîiîîbliaSatakarRi 


26 






KuhjtiYïMn 


'■ 3 


KalîolaKalîoda) 


16 ■ 


Kuntî 


5,8 


Kaîbaiia ' 2 Al. 


2S, 29, 38 


kûpammidûk€i 


35 


KlHdasa 


n^ 


Kum " 4,6,8-ÎL15,l7.2î 


Kailcra 


30,31 


KBriiksetra 1,2,9,10,15,2! ,23 


Kaligalaôkusa 


31 


Kurii-Pandiva war 


17 


Kaîinga 


30.32 


Kora-Paocilas 


8,2! 


Kalingaîiagara 


32 


KEsïtaka 


16.Î7 


Kaliâgas 


34 


Kusumapura (Pltaîiputra; 


) ii 


Kâiiyuga 11,12, 


23,28,3r 


^i/-iiiFa-M«OTi (Saka î!l| 


31 


Kalmisapâda 


27 






Kâîïîàrnava 


31 , 32 


Literatufeofîndiâ 


î 


Kâmarûpa 


3i 


Limibinîgrânia 


2 


Kamboja 


ÎS 


Liiiiar iineage 


3334 


Kampiiya 


5,10 






Kâmyaka 


6 


Mâdaië Pmji 


2S-3Ô 


KâBva 


26 


Mad!î.tîkIoiirJiava 


32 


Kâïiva ReceBstoii of Vâjmmtfa 


M.adliiisiîdaii-, iistrî 


3 


Samhm 


,g 


Madra 


5 


Kapiîeiidra 


33 


MSdri 


5 


Karhâd 


22 


Magadha 


2,12,18,2! 


KarBa 


5,7 


Magtia coosteilatioîî 


11,13,14 


Karna Sâtakaroî 


■ ■ 26 


Mûhmiiàram 1-4.9-1 1.14,1 5,Ï7.Î 9-23,30 


Karnâtaka 


' 32 


Muhâbhâra t-^Bcârya 


i5 . 


KSrsnyam veâûm 


4 


MaMbbârata traditioîi 


ï§ 


Kashîïiir 


2.2S' 


.Maliibfairata war : 


240-I2.15.Î9 


Kàthaka SamkUâ 


■ 'S 


Maîiâbodbi (Sambodàî) 


■2 


Kaîhasaritsûgam 


14 


Mahàkosala 


27 


Kltyâyana 


Î8 


' Mahipadraa Naiida. 


11-13.16,26 


Kauravas 4*7, 10, 


, 17, Î8» 2i 


Mafeivira 


14 


Kaesâmbi 


2,14 


MajjkmamkiyG 


îg 


Kausltaki Upammé 


■S 


Majiimdar, G. G 


• ■ 21 


Kavasa 


■ 16 


Mina' 


■ , 29" 


Keith, A.B, 


15 


Maoipur 


. m ■ ■• 


Kelîeher, JohaV 


35, 36 ■■ 


mamims 


• ;.• 'U ^' 


Keralas 


22''- 


'M^xm 


■ 27,28,31 ■ •" 



680-6 



42 



INDEX 



Manusmrîi 

manvanîara 

Mârasimha 

marii 

Mathurâ 

Matsya 

M'a f s y a Purâna 

Maurya 

Meerut 

Meghavâhana, 

MirashiV^V. 

MIecchas 

Moon (God) 

Mrtyiinjaya Vidyâlanfcâra 

Miiirchertach 

Munster 

Nâga lineage 

Nagara, s a. Kaiinganagara 

naksatras 

N aïeul a 

Nanda dynasty 

NâophaTigbâ 

Nâraka lîne 

Nâuthingbhong 

Ncdamari 

Kepal-Bihar border 

Niall 

Nilakanta Sâstrl 

'NUamaîa Purâna 

Nîlamuni 

Norman Pre-history 

Northern îndia 

NWFP (Gandhâra) 



Orissa 

Orissa-Andhra Pradesh Coast 

Oriya 

Oxus valley 



10 

28 

32 

10 

10 

5510,11,21 

25,26 

18,26,31 

4 

2,29 

19,20 

34 

2932 

30 

37 

37 

33 

S2 

11,13 

5,6,22 

12,18,26,31 

3U 



31 

30 

3Î 

21 

37 

3 

29,38 

29,38 

36 

21 

21 

29,32 
30 

28 

23 



Parinirvâna oî die Biiddb,a 
Pâtalipiitra 
Pathak, V» 
Paiiravas 
Pesbawar 
Phadke, H.A. 
Post-Norman îreîand 
Pradyota 
Pradyotas 
Prâgjyotisa 
Prasenajit 
..Pratïpa 
Pre-AryariS 
Pre-historic time 
Pre~historic archaeology. West 

Asiatic 
Pre-Norman ïreland 
Proto-historic civilization 
Prthâ 

Ptolemaic worid System 
Pulakesin II 
Puîoman 
Pundras 
Punjab, Eastern 
Punnia t"4Ji-l3J6- 
Pitrohiîa 
Pûri 
Pu ru 

Pu5ya constellation 
Pusyavarman 



Pablavas 

Paînted Grey ware 

Pakhangbâ 

Pancâla 

Pancasama 

Pândavas 

Pându 

PËDdyas 

Pânini 

Parâsara 

Pârasïkas 

Pargiter 

Parîksit 

Parînat 



22,26 

21,22 

. 30 

5,8-10,15,17 

31 

4-7,11.15,17-19,21,22,28,29 
5 



8,1 i 



22 

15,17,18 

4 

22,23 

16,27,33 

-14,16,17,33 

ÎO 



1,27 
II 
27 
34 

5,21 

19,20 

36 



17.18 

2,27,28.33 

13J5 

33 

35 

20 
37 

15 

5 

3 

31 

13,14 

34 

10,17 

22,23,25-29,35.38 

■9 

29 

34 

■ 13 

■31 



Raghu 

Raghuvamsa 

Râbuîa 

Râjamâlâ 

Rajasthan 

PJij'asTiya 

Eâfiitarangini 

RâjSvaii 

Râma 

Râmacarira 

Râmïïyana 

Ranârnava 

Ravindranath Tagore 

RawalpïTîdi 

Raycbaudhuri, H.C« 

Rgveda 

Roma, Rome 

Romans 

Rsabhanâiha 

Riïdra ââtakarnl 

Sabhâ Parvan 
Sagara 



2.21 



27 ' 

23 

27 

28,30 

6,21 

8,29,33,38 

30 

27 

4 

3J9,27 

32 

3 

^ 5 

3,9,15-17 ■ 

. 20 

19,20 

, ,22 

. 19, 

26 ; 

,",19,22 



INDEX 



43 



Sahadeva 
éailodbhava 
Sais'uîiâgas 
^aka 
Sakâditya. 
Saka^era 
Sàkala 
Sakra 
Sakoni 
SSkya 

.Sâlastambha ' ' 
Salya 
Samhodki 

Saôgha.'BiiddMst"' 
Sanjaya 
Saîikaiia, H.p, 
■■ ÉânkMyma Srautmûîra 
^aBtanii 
Sânti Parvan 
Saptars'i cycle 
Sarasvatî 
' éatakarna' 
Sâtakami 

Salapatha Bmhmam 
éaîavahana 
San 

Satyavaîl 
Satya Yuga 
Scyihians 
Sialkot 
Sibi 

SiddiiSrtha Gaiîtama 
•Sikhandia , 

éîmuka 

Sindiiu Sauvîra 

Sirhicd 

Si va' 

'éivadharma 

Skandagapta 

Solar lincage 

Somavamsi 

Srnjayas 

Steiîi 

Subahu 

Sudaksina 

éuddhodaiia 

Suhîsas 

Samitta 

îâunga 

Suparna 

^ïîra 

,éîîras«îîa,SïiraS€îiaka 

Suratîia 
SoryavamsïOaJapaîïs 



,'5.6,22 


Susarman 


2b 


29 


Svayami'ûra 


5 


12,Î3 


Syria 


19,22 


11,1. §,26,3! 






3Î, 


Tûitîilnya Âmnyûka 


10 


14,30,31 


Tmîtinya Bmhmam 


8 


5 


TantfîC Sanskrit work 


30 


, .4 


Tara 


■ 36,m 


' 6 


Tarhala 


26 


27 


TâtitliingM 


■30' 


■31 


Tlcirm 


J ; 


5 7 


Tompok 


30 


' '2 '■ 


Tretâ Yiiga 


H, 2? 


■"* 


Tripora kings 


29 


11 


Tiira 


16 


2,19.23 


Tïïrghr»a 


!Ô 


'9.20 


Tuivasiî 


52,34 


A.^ 15 








HL'à^'àvJ^* 


2,14,17,33. 


14 


L'ddâiiîk? 


16 


10 


L'dicya 


. 23 


25 


Vdyoga Pûrvan 


f - 


25,26 


VI Neili 


j? i 


'é-9 


Ujjû:ii 


7: 


12-14,25-2:' 


Uiâkonthar.gbi 


J-' 


N 


L'îkara 


w. 


4 


U Étant 


6,s 


28 


Uuara-PiiJgiicï 


\4 


IIJS 


Uîtarapaîlia division 


23 


■^ 


UîïaniaLjiiô 


9 


•«7 


A^iLsampâ}a!îa 


15 


6,7,î: 


Vai\asvata \Unix 


28 


^ î 


Vâjapeya 


9 


7,21 


l 'ùp^^aei i SamhitB 


8 


S 


Vujrahas::: 


■ 31-33 


19 


Vâkâuka 


2é 


4 


Van l'as 


34 


23 


Varihin-ihira 


! 1,14,17 


ÙJ 


Vâraoâvaia 


5 


29 


P^ârttika 


is 


9,L\I7 


Vasudtn a 


5 


2'=? 


l âj^u Famm 


î 1,25,26 


31 


Vcélclittïâiutt 


9,15-17,20,34 


IS 


VcSic timcs 


...Il 


'*"" 


Viciîra\îrya 


4;i.5 


}^ 


Vidarbha 


21 




Vidura 


5,8 


26 


V igraha 


29 


3Î 


Vikraniûditya 


31 


5 


Vioayidîtya 


31.32 


10 


Vindlîyasakii ■ 


2ê 


27 


Vîrasimha 


. .32 


29 


Virita' 


47.21 



11 



liEX 




î,!l tel' 

21 
I 



35 



^lOjJ, 



Si 



!S1 



113 ïa!m 
!1 ïajâti 
l,j Mistfe H18.2U» 



OBITUARY 

Dr. F. RÂGHAVAN (1908 --79)' 

We feel exlremely paiîied to record îhe . sudden démise of 
Dr- V. Raghavaû on the 5th Âpriî 1979. 

Born in Aiigiîsî 1908 ai Tiruvaror, Tanîore District, Tamil Nadu, 
Souîh india, Dr. Ragbavan had the lîoiqoe privilège to stody Sacsirit 
uader the great scholar MahëmafwpSMyâya' Prof. S.' Kuppuswamy ,. 
Sastd, He took his M.A. degree in Sanskrit laïig'uage and literature ib 
1930 and Ph.D. in 1935. He starîed his carrier as a Superinîendent of 
Saraswati MahalLibrary, Tlianjavur and siibsequently joined Sanskrit 
Oepartment, Madras Uoiversity and slowly rose iipto the Professorsfiip 
of the Department in 1955, a position whicb he was holding wîth a!l 
aistinctioB till his fetiremenl. 

Dr. Raghavan was the General Président of Ail India Orientai 
Conférence in 1964, He was awarded tiiîe Kcvikokila for liis poetic 

geniiis and Sakalakalûkalâpa for his versatality, by His Hoh'ocss Sri 
Sankarâcàrya of Kaficî-Kâmakoti P'fifîni. He was aiso awarded the 
title Padmabhman in 1962 by the Président of India. He has published 
abolit 80 bôoks and more îhan 700 papers on varions subjecîs connected 
Wîth Indian Culture and Literature. Becanse of his scholarship and 
versataîity, Dr. Raghavan wa> Soved and respected by scholars aîl over 
India and abroad. It ma\ not fae ai exaggeraîion if we say tbat 
Dr. Raghavan throughont hh »:':r:der:.'c carrier served as a Connecting 
link belween Ihe East and the West. 

Dr. Raghavan's magnum opusMows Smgarapmkasa^ fais doctoral 
thesis, first published in Î966 has seen the tîiird and revised édition In 
1978, He has also bronght cm first Sve volumes' of the New Câtaîogiis 
Catalogornm. He was a iTiemberofSariskrit Commission appointed by 
:ihe Governmenl of, India in 1956. In hoaour of Ms great îtacher M.M. 
Knppaswaniy Sastri, Dr, Raghavan foiinded the Kiippiiswainy Sastri 
Research Institute in Madras, which he was organising till his lait day 
în fact he deîivered bis îast lecfiire in the above Iiistitiite on the 
Raimyana on the Srî Râmanavanil day, îhe 5th April 1979 and wilhin 
a few hours he breathed his las! with îhe same oiemory. 

Tfaere is no country and no lodoîogicaî or Oriental Research 
Institute in any part of the globe which Dr. Raghavan bad not visited 
■ and had not enriched that Institute in oce way or other, He had'been 
oneof the advisersfor the development of the Sri Ysnkateswara Uni- 
.versîty Orientai Research Institnte since ils inception in 1939. 

His démise îs a great loss for the scholars in Indological fi.cîd,. 

 WM'- lR?f h€î il 
May His Souî Rest in Peace ! ' 



w i mmim mm 

. We regrel to mû k Mnpii émise of Sri H. %kkuf. 
Sâstri in Baogalore in tbc inoBtlofDeceier Wl SriSastri, ate 
o'otainiiii ils Postfadiiate dejree W in Philôsoplf aod Saiislîit froio 
tk Ufli^eîsitiof Calcutta in \M joiocd tîic M of Sactiictaii 
uader Gnriidc? Miàmiï îagoîe. After serving varions Institutiôiis, 
as itim iîî Karaclii and ôtkr places lie joiiied m Orieota! lesearcli 
lûÉute as Ciirator io !S44. He mU tlis Library till his fctiremeiit 
iiî Bl He wasa ma sclioiariûNfafa, MtaaiiîsiaiidPliiiosoplîî 
M k Ma oû traÉioBal liiies ader lis fatkr-iE-law lÉ* 
Ëàféf^fd Aîianîabislîiâ Sastri. He coiHribiited iïiaiiy articles on 
différent topics to irions Molofica! JoiirMls. His deatli lil! k 
alwys ftlt by sileiit pricrs iii fie il 

Ma? His W te in Feace ! 



Dr. VISWANATEA SÂTYANARAYANA (1.895--I976) 

We are extremely sorry tO: BOte îhe' deniise of om proîific aiid 
reRowîied Telugu poet and critic Sri Viswaoallia Saiyanarayaiia, on 
t8"10-l976 inGoiimr, 

Sri Sâtyaîiarayaiia popularly kncwn as Tis^uinafha in TeiugB 
"ilerar> field, wos boni in a village Nandamui Oifi !0-9-!895 of tbe 
■)rthodox parents Sri Soblianidri and Parvaîaiiiiiia. He waseducaîed 
in Masulipatâiii. After oblaining tk M. A. degree he woiked as a 
îectiirerinTeluguin îheJaîîya KaJasala, Emdu ccllege ai Masols md 
Aîidîira Christian Collège, Goniur. Duriaghis stay at Masula he stiidîed 
Vedanta under abis teacher^ l^kc Kiippt Lrlsrilvadhâni and ofhers, 
Afferwards he eiitrred SR.R. ?M CV.R Collège. Vijayawada as 
the Hcâd of the Department of Telugu in ÏW and relired in Î957. 
In 1959 he w:is calted upon to take up îhe Principalship of Karimnagar 
Collège whîch pesthekid :!lî 1961. 

Viswaîiuihii wrût.^ raore ihm oce hundred works in TeSiigii. Therc 
îsnobranchoflileraturc in Tclugu liî«t be did nol toiich and adors. 
AH his Works are fui! of modem .^cc:al ccniscieiisness, progressive 
cEîkiok -iiîd deeper îianiioRv of mmf> iifc. The strtani of Visv.anaîha's 
créative iiterature ;s essenciaiiv hchn Like Aiiuûda Coofliarâswaîpy 
who iiuirpreted lùùhr. îiâdiiicfi and ci:':iiîe îhrc'U^h îhe riedium of an 
and arciiitcctiire. WiwuMilvà vvilliiiis\ersatiie§eî.iii£;ogiCû:ï} evaluatcd 
iBdian tradition tlirough îhe \a::ous literar} forrs. 

His magnum opus vîz. tke RSmûjma Kûlparrksa staiiû> as the pilki 
of. his glorj as îhe Râmukaiiia Bhâsyalam. Eh ceîebraied lioveî 
Veyi Pmfagak (The Thousand Hooas. îs a m^deni clds^^îc iind a social 
novel. Of lilihis historical nmelsthc Ekaiira is considercd euîstandisg 
and his Khmerasâni Pàîalu are very popuîar ûjougnom Andhra. He 
aiso wrote three Sanskrit pîâi'S viz , Gupîa Pasupahm, Aair.u Smnisikam 
:ind Asam NirSsam, 

As an outstâiîdioglîterary critic he îs always rcmembered for his 
critieal essays pubîished on varions topics. 

Tiie bonoiirs and awards he won diiricg his sixty years of iiierary 
career are ïiomeroiis. Oiitofwhich ûie'nût Kêvisamrëî becaroe a part 
of his îiame. la 1963 he received the Sahilys Academy award, ïn 197Û ■ 
jie received the Padmabimmn from the Government of India aiid Iïî 1971 
the much coveted Jiâîiapceth awaid, He was aîso awarded îhe 
Kalaprapoorm by the Aiidhra Uaivcrsity, Waiiair and the Hoeorary 
Docîoratc ■ by • ^he S.V. Uaiversity, Tirepati. He^was madc'.poel 
lauréate by the GO'Verîïïîî.cet ef Andhra Pradcsh m Octobcr, 197L ■ 

Itis.no •exa.ggeiâliôiîîfwe say that io the dcath oî Kôrisammi 
VîswaBilha, we {#sf a manysidcd .gcnios in, îhe îîterary ieM of Teiiigii; 



OUR CONTRIBUTORS 



/• Dr. Bammalî Rath 



2 Dr. K.S:R. Dam 



3. Miss Gîta Jonwar 

4. Dr, S, a Goyal 



5. GyuIaWojîilk 



6. Dr. K. Krishnamurîhy 



Departmeof of Oriya Laiiguage and 
Liîerature, Visva-Bîîaratî P.O. Santi- 
îiiketaii;' (WB;). He obtaîoed his 
Ph; D. Degree for his, thesii 'A Study 
on the Sri Krsçalîiamrtam of Nîtya- 
n'anda* from ihe Uîiiversity of Ber- 
hempur (Orissa). He is an auiiior of 
the work 'A Stiidy ' on tbe Oriya 
Semmtks\ and bas pubHsiicd a îhihi- 
ber of articles. 

Pfîîicîpal, S V. Oriental Collège, 
Tirupatî. He obtained his Ph.D, 
dfgree for his thesis "'A Critical Stiidy 
of tbe' Siddhânlasindhii of Bellam- 
kondi.RImariya KaYi' from îhe S,V. 
Uaiversity, Ttmpm; ma bas pob- 
lished articles ifl thefield of'Y^daoïa. 



Vice-Chancellor^ Uoiversify of Jo4îi- 
pur, Jodhpiïr. By profession he is an 
eîigincer but works aiso oa interpre- 
tatîoo of the Vedas from îhe poiot of 
iBodern sciences - 

Adviser for the Dep^irlBieiit of ludo- 
logy at the Library of the Hiingariaiî 
AcademyofScienceSs Budapest, Him- 
gary, He obtained his Ph.D.dagree 
for bis thesis 'The Dasa.kuîîiara0arita 
of Dâçdio as a Historical Source' 
froai the EVOT¥OS Lovand-Uoiver- 
sily, Budapest; and bas piblîshed 
m^m articles os différent siibjects 
coonected wilh îiidology. 

Professor aad Head of tbs Depart- 
înent of Sanskrit, Kar,ii.atâ:k .Univer- 
,sity,„;. Dharwar.: He ;obtaiaed bis 
Ph 'D* dvgree for his Ihesîs ^Dbvanya- 
.loka and Its Critics' from Ihe Uaii^'er- , 



7. SnKX Kmhmmmrîhy 



8, Dr. SJ, Mangalam 



9. Sri CA, Padmmabha 



Sasîri 



ÎO, Sri M. Prabhûkara Rao, 



sity of Bombay; translated înto Eîig- 
lish the D/zM/îjûMa and the Vakwktî- 
jivîta of KuBrîaka; published Essays 
on Sanskrit Lîterary Criîîcîsm, Some 
îhoughts on Indlan Âesthetks. KiïUdâsa 
etc. He also wrete* many works m 
Kannada. He is at présent engaged 
in the study of Vidyâcakravartîn's 
Gadyakarnamrîa, 

; tecturer in Telugu, S.V.U.OR. In« 
stitnte, Tiropati, He is a Telugu B. 
Vidwan asd M A. in Telngiï He has 

published maoy research papers iîi 
différent joornals; is an associate 

éditer of the Telngo ComBienîary.of 
Pedda Tinimalâcirya on ÊrîmadBha- 
gavadgîîa, S V.U.O.R. Institute, 
Tirupati; has edited many TelngB 
Works; and is working now for his 
fh.ï), degree. 

Department of Archaeology, Deccan 
Collège, Poona., He obtained his 
Ph.D. degree for his thesis 'Studies in 
the Historical and Ciîltural Geogra- 
phy and Ethnography of Andhra Pra- 
desb (npîo 1200 a d.) froni the Uni- 
versity of Poona; published papers 
îike Vengt and some Rare Brahmin Go- 
îras of Andhra Pradesh etc. At pré- 
sent he is working on the HÎ5,torîca{ 
Gecgraphy of Andhra Pradesh 

Epigraphîcal Assistant, OiHce of the 
Chîef Epigraphist, Archaelogical Sur- 
vey of lodia. OldUelversity Build- 
ings, Mysore. He has studied Tem- 
ple Architecture and has published 
some papers on that subject; and is ai 
présent working on Telngu Ins- 
criptions. 

S.VU.O.RV lostitute, Tirupati. He 
îs a Cc~Author of the Btâhmimayi- 
mûrîi in Telugn - A work depicting 



îli 



IL Dr. S.B.Rêshmathacharya. 



12. Dr. SS, ■ Mmachmdm 
MunhxK 



13, Dr. K.S, Rmnamurihi 



14. Dr, N,S> RamanujaiatU" 
char y a 



tJie biograpiiy and greaîness of' îate 
KavisûmrâiVisvânitlmSaiyiimïayam 
of Aîîdhra; and has poblisbed mariV 
articles, 

,• Leciiirer in Sanskrit; S.V. Uoiversity, 
; Tjrupati, He ohmimd îhe âtgrcc 
■ ^VidyavSridhî;'(Pli.D.) for his rhesis 
'Tîie Applicabîliîy of the Logical. 
' Means of.VaJid CogniiioB in Exege- 
tics' frooi îhe Sampurnananda San- 
skrit University, Varasasi: edited 
Works like Kriyâkaîrmûcandrikë . Ka- 
éûmbîn! (Teîugu) etc; published â 
gloss in simple Telogu for 40 SQfctas 
ofthe Rgï'edûwilh Aîianda Tlnfîâ's 
commeiîtary: aod had writien niany 
papers in Sanskrit. 

Deputy Slip erinîecderif iru Epîgra- 
phist îo the clïice of îhe Chief Ep'îgra- 
pîiiâi, ArclîaeoJogicaiSurveyof Icdia., 
Mysore. He obtaiîied his Pîi.D. 
degree for his thtns 'Study of Telugii 
Place-Names Ba^^ed oo. Inscriptions* 
froni the Aodhra University. Walîair* 
He is the AssL Editor of tbe Siudies 
in Epigraphy mû has published 
maiîv papsrs on cpigraplis. 

Lecîorer in Saoskril, S.V.U. O.R,. 
Ifîsîitute, Tirupati. Hs obtaiîîed 
lîis Pli.D* degrec for his ihesis 'A 
■Comparative Stody of the îiiter- 
pTetarioB of the Sîiiras of PâîiiBî by 
Bhaltojï Dîksîta aed , Nâmyaçâ 
Bhatta* from the S.V, UnîversHy, 
Tirupati; edited about eigiiî: Sanskrit 
Mss. like Krmaiilasakmyû, Bâk'- 
MîMmta, 

Professer, Kendriya Samskrita Vidyi^ 
pïîha, Tirupati. Hc is a ..fradî- 
tiOîiaî schoM/m' Nyaya, Mimëmsâ,, 
Fyëkaram : und' Viihiëdvmm, Me 
obiaiBed his 'Vidyâviridîîî (Ph.D.|' 
from tke St»piriîaEaîîda Sanskrit 



1? 



15. Br. S, Sankaranamyanan 



16. 5. Sehfn Kumar 



17. Dr. û. Srldhara Bêbu 



18. Dr. N. Subbu Reddmr 



¥isva Vîdyalaya, Varaiiasi, fer ïn$ 
critical édition of Taîtxadniàma^ii 
edited a number of books like 
Jnâpakûsangraha of Nagesabliatta, 
Tmtvacîntamanï etc., and published 
a nombcr of papers ïq Sanskrit. 

Director, S. V. U. 0. R. lostitiïte, 
Tirupati. Formerly he was a Dy. 
SHptiiîg. Epigraphïst, Archaeolo- 
gical Survey of India, Mysore. He 
is a student of tfae Krsmyajurveda, 
Nyaya and Vedanta • He obtained 
liis Ph.D. degxee for his thesis The 
Yimukmdîs 'and' Theif: Times' (an' 
Epigrapbical ■ studyj: "edited Tarka" 
sangraha, Bhojamrlîra etciû Sanskrit; 
âcd at présent is engaged iiî publï- 
shiîig tht Bhagavadgim witîi the 
commentary of Abliioavagopta, with 
EngHsh iraaslatîon. 

Lectureriîi Mediaeva]HisîOî-y,Schooî 
of Historical Studies, Madîirai Uni- 
versïty, He lias published papers 
îike Mawsohum of Maduraî, Hîstory 
of Tamîî Nadu etc. 

Reader in Phîîosophy aad Com- 
parative Religion, S.V.U.O.R. Insti* 
tîitc, Tirupati. He obtainedhis Pb.D. 
degree from the Uîiiversiîy of 
Gottingen. West Gerniany for hîs 
thesis 'Kiîîgship, State and Religion ' 
in Souîh India'; widely travelled 
abroad; wrote Maxmuîkr m Telugn; 
and publislied many articles. At 
présent he is preparing a monograph ':: 
on Hayagrivû, 

Retd. Prof, of Tamil, S.V.Univer- 
sity, Tiropatî. Aathor of many 
seienîinc Works inTamil, and has 
published niany articles ' in varions 
joornals; obîaised liis Ph.D. degree 
for his thesis 'Religion and Philo* 
sophy of Niiâyira Divya Prabandham 



whh Spécial Référence îo Nam- 
mElvâr', froni the S.V. Uaiversity; 
aad is at présent, Cfalef Editer of 
73.mil Encyclopaedia, Madras Uni- 
versiîy, Madras. 



PUBLICATIONS OF 
S.V. UNÏVERSITY ORIENTAL RESEARCH INSTÏTUTE 

TIRUPATI 

The followingis the lis! of publications available for saie at priées 
mentioned against them. S.V. University Orieuiaî Journal is a niuiti- 
I.ngual and mainly eontains articles in Epglish, Sanskrit and Telugu. 
Occasionaliy articles in Tarai! or Hindi aiso are publishcd. 



;.No. 








1. S.V. 


University Orien 


tal Joi 


2. 




-ào- 




3. 




-do- 




4. 




-do- 




5. : 




-do- 




6. 




-do- 




7. 




-do- 




8. 




-do- 




9. 




-^do- 




0. 




-do- 




1. 




-do- 




2. 




-do- 




3. 




-do- 





Titles_ Pfj'^_^ 

al Vol. ÏPar(sl& 2:1958} 10-00 

VIII Parts! & 2(1965;, 10-00 

IX Parts 1 &2(l966j 10-00 

X Parts! & 2:1967) 10-00 

XI Parts 1 & 2(1968; 10-00 

Xll Parts I&2,:i969) 10-00 

Xni Parts 1 k 2(1970, 10-00 

XIV Parts l&2(I97îj 15-00 

XV Parts 1 & 2(1972} 15-00 

XVI Parts! & ?n973' 15-00 

XVn Parts î & 2(1974} 15-00 

XVm Parts î &. 2:1975) 15-00 

XÎX Parts 1 & 2(1976; 15-00 

4. Gajagrahanaprakâra of Nârâyana Dîksita 

Ediîed with Introduction by q-o - '^ù 

Prof E R. Sreekrisbna Sarma, m a,, ph d. 1968 .-su 

5. Apittiniyaprâmâayasâdhaiiam of Nitâyana 

Bhattapâda 

Edited with Introduction, English 

Translation and Notes by ., ^^ 

Prof. B. R. Sreekrisbna Sarma ma., Ph.D. i9bb ---^ 

f. Kâvyâœrtam of SrivatsaîâSchana 

Edited with Introduction by _ 

Dr. K.S. Ramamurti, M.A., Ph.D. ^y.l ^ -' 

', Kamalâvilâsabhaça of Nirayanakavi 

Edited with Introduction by ^ù1] i 5Q 

Dr.K.S. Ramamurti, M.A., Ph.D. '^'^ '- 

Vijayavikramavyayoga of Âryasfma 

Edited with Introduction by _ 

Dr. K.S. Ramamurti, M.A., Ph.D. ii'^^ --jy 



11 

19, Vedâîitasâracinîlmani of Siiâramasâsîn 

Edited with lEtroductioE by ... 

Dr. M. S. Narayanamurti, m. a., pîi.d. î973 6-00' 

20. Padukâpattabhisekam of ■Nârayana.kavi 

Edited with îotrodocîion by 

Dr. K.S Ramanmrti;' M.A.j ph*D. 1974 7-5Ô' 

2L Pradyumnacaritramu (Teiiigii) of Miippirâla 
Subbarâ>akavi; ■ ■ 

: Edited with ïntro'dactîon and Notes by 
"..Prof. J. Cheîifia'Reddy, M.A,, Pli.D, ■ 1975 18-75 

•22. Ersnaviiisa '(a'.kavya.in- Il cantos)'0'f ■ ■ 

, Puayakoti:witlî VylkhyiBa 
Edited, wità, Introd'uctiôn by ■ 
■■Dr,'K.S. Eamanmrtij M.A.,Ph.D/ 1916' 'SS-OO' 

23. Srï'Bhagavad Gîtâwiîh tlie 

Teliigii Prose rendering by 

Tallapaka Peda TiroHialacliaryiilu 

Edited with ÏBîroducîion by 

Prof. G.N. Reddy, M.A.,Ph.D. 

Assisted by Sri KJ. Krislianaœoorîliy 2ad 

Sri A,V. Srinivasacharyiilu, 197S 40-00 

24. Gurusisyasambaîîdhilu'Pûrvâdarsaiu, 

■ Prast'Utaparisthitiilii (TelugE' 
Lectures by^ 

Sri SaàkarâchSryaE of Smgeri Matli; , ■' 197S 3-00,,. 

25. Gajasiksâ of.Niradaoïimi'wIth' tàe"" '. 

commcBtary Vfaktitippaaî'Of Umâpatyacarya 
, Edited with lîitiodiîctîoiiby 

■ Dr. E.R. Sreekrîshîia Sarma, M.A., ph.D* ,1978 ,10~00' 

.26. .An Alphabelicalîîîdex of Sanskrit, Telogii 

and Tamîl Maiiiiscripts' (Palm-îeaf and Paper) 

in the Sri VeHkateswara Usiversiîy 

O'rieQtai Research Ins.tiîiî.te Librarv 

Tirtipatk. • :' ..1956. ,15-00 

Récent Pub! katloîîs : 

27, '"Rgvedam!!" -The irst Monolheistic laterpreîatioîî 
io Telugii by 
Dr. S,B. Raghunadhacharyuia. 1979 54-00 

2S* Amaîanidipiriîi Hyniii by 
Sri Tiruppiaâi vir 

with commcntary of Vedâata Dcéika ' '"^ 

Telegu TraûslatîOîi by 
Srï A.V. Sriaîvasadîaryiiîïi. ' 1979 16-00 



li tfîe Press : 

h Bllabhâratam.ôf Agasfya Pagdïta 
Edited by 
Dr. K.S. Râfflamiirti. . 

2. TheBhâgavâdGîti with comnieiîtary 

Gitârthasaàgraiia of Abhinavagwptâ' 
Ediîedwith EpglrshTraflsIation aîici.nctei.by ,, , 

, ■Dr. S. Sankâranarayamin ' 

3. 3.V.UO/JourDai¥oL';XXr&XXÏf, ': 

,, SvV; Universily^Siîver JiibOee ■ .; 
■Specjar'Nîioiber'/ 

':■'''' ■'ThetatesôftheS.V. Uiiîversîly Oriennil JoiirsalÊie as follows : 
■;■ ; LJnlaûd ' ,.. RsJ5:"-eacii VoiamefFosifree) 

2. Foreign* .» / 1 and 15 shillings or4 S' ,;, 

^OTE.,:-:Ail,the above pablicatioiis are,cow siipplied oiiiy on pre-pay- 
^■■' ■■:•/' ■meni.'ofïCôst'/aiîd postâge eilher by Bioaey' order"or deiBaiid 

draft, payable to fhe legïstran)f S.V. Vnivmiîy. ,25%of dis- 

couat is a!lowed oa âll oui piibîicâlîons. 

*Ttie Jonroa! is sent posi fr^e bv .surface œail b'iit if the party 
gquires il to be despaiched by air mail, IhzMî mm cbâiges have'to bc 
ome by ihe parl^ 

r.B.:- The Foreign rates ^: vohine^ ! !o XIII art 20 shillings or 2 
dollars âûd 50 cenis each. 



Statemeiît or Owîîershîp aEd Other Partîciikrs àbomt 
Sri Yeikateswara UEÎYersîty Oriental Journal 

FOMM IV , ■ 
(See Mille No- 8) 



î. , Place of Pubiicatioa 



Sri Veokaîeswara Universiîy 
Oriental Research Institiite, Tiriîpaîi, 
Andhra Pradesh. 



2.,,' Periodicïty 0f ils 
Piîbîîcalioîi , 



Ha!f Yearlv 



3' Priîîîer's aame 
Natîoiiaîity 
Address 

4. Pubiîsher's oams 
NatîoBalîty 
■,■ Address 



... Sri K. Penciialaîaîîj a.p.a.s.^ 

... IndiaB 

.,. Registrafj S.V. UniversJty^ Tirupatî, 

•„ Prof. Dr. S. SankaranarayaBao^ m*a., pîi, 

... Indiaa 

,.. , Direcior, 

/ S.V.U.O.R^iQSîitutejTîriipati.v , 



5. Editons Ha me 
■ Naîioïîalîty' 
Address 



6, Namc aad address of , 
individuals whoown 
thc pcriodical 



Prof. Dr. S. Saokaranarayanan, m.a;,fIî. 

ladian , , 

Director, 

S.V.U. O.R. Imtituîe, TirupatL 

Sri Veokaîeswara Universîty, 
Tîrepati. 



I, Prof. S. Sankaranarayanan àcreby déclare tfaat the partîcula 

mm abovc arc true to the best of ©y kEowicdge and belief. 



S. sankaranarayana: 

FUBLISHER 



Sri Venkateswara UMiTersîty Orîeatal Journal, Timpatî 



- L TMs Jouroal is thù officiai orgaa^of tbe Sri Veakateswara 
University. 

2. Bach volume of Ihe Joaraal appears ia 2 parts - Part 1 ia 
June and Part 2 iiî December^ 

: .\.;;;3. :CoîitnbiitioEs oa Indologicaî, sabjects- aad Ofieeta! ciiîtïire 
:'are;accepted'from tàc reputed scholars rnsLiuly îb three laBgaages- 
English, Sanskrit acd Teliîgiî. 

,,..,; 4. Eacb contribution mîistbeîegîblyaBdcIearlywrittCB or typcd. 
.ononîy 0He,side,of ,the, paper, juade compleleiy press ready and seat 
to the Edîtor. 

-5. Tàe, Edîtor réserves' to hîmseîf the right of acceptmg, rejecting 
or mojifyïîîg any contribolioa ...reccived for publicatioB. Contribufors 
are advîsed to keep copies of their articles as the Editordoes not- 
uoderîake ihe respoosibllity to returo the rejected articles. 

6. Evcry author will receive free of charge 25 offpriflls of bis or 
her article, besides a copy of tbe issue of the loEraal eonlaiiiiag tbat 
particular article. 

7,, , .Books Oîî ladology îo English,, Sanskrit, DravidiaB languages 
and Hindi are reviewed in the loiirûaL Two copies ol the books 
intended for review are to be sent to the Editor. 

8. AU enquiries and commonications regardieg the editiog and 
publishiûg of the Journal should bc addressed Io : 



, THE E0ÎTOR 

S.V. UNiVERSiTY ORIENTAL JOURNAL 
TîRUPATî-517 502 

(AN0HRÀ FRADES.H)j SOUTH ÎKDîA , 



*rinied by i The Registrar,,, S.V. Universitf at the S*V, Ueîversity Press, Tirupall. 
2î-7-'1980, 300 Copies 

•f^ô/Mei èj» • The Director, S.V* Univershy Oriental Research îosti tute, Tirupatl»