Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c14.s3: The Yādavas—The Sātvatas

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c14.s3

Language: English

The Yādavas—The Sātvatas

c14.s3.2

Bhajin- Devāvṛdha Andhaka Vṛṣṇi Bhajamāna | Mahā-Bhoja (see next table)

c14.s3.4

lineage not The Bhojas of Kukura Bhajamāna given Mārttikāvata (from whom (from whom were the were the Kukuras) Andhakas)

c14.s3.12

Devaka Ugrasena Kṛtavarman Devārha other

c14.s3.14

Kaṃsa and Kambalabarhiṣa other sons | Asamaujas]

Moreover the Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Padma misread his name as Kroṣṭu or Kroṣṭṛ, and appear to confuse him with his ancestor, Yadu’s son Kroṣṭu or Kroṣṭṛ, and that this is a mistake is shown by their reading Vṛṣṇi correctly in the first line about the family of the Śainyas.¹ There were three lines of descent of the Vṛṣṇis from Vṛṣṇi’s three sons Anamitra, Yudhājit and Devamīḍhuṣa;² and Anamitra there means the eldest son (by Gāndhārī), who was also called Sumitra. But there was also a fourth line from his youngest son Anamitra (by Mādrī) as will appear, whose descendants were called Śainyas. Vṛṣṇi’s lineage, so far as it can be made out from a collation of the important texts, is shown in the next table, and a comparison of its length with that of the Kukuras and Andhakas shows that it must omit several generations.

c14.s3.16

¹ See sixth note infra.

c14.s3.17

² Br 14, 2, 35. Hv 35, 1907, 1945.

c14.s3.18

Vṛṣṇi’s offspring begin with that of the eldest son (by Gāndhārī) Sumitra, called Anamitra by the Brahma and Harivaṃśa, down to Satrājit,¹ and Satrājit's children are mentioned separately.² Yudhājit's descendants divided into two families, those of Śvaphalka and Citraka.³ Devamīḍhuṣa's line is given extremely briefly, and some of the authorities wrongly invert him and his son Śūra.⁴ This was the family in which Kṛṣṇa was born.⁵ Vṛṣṇi's youngest son Anamitra had a son Śini, and their descendants were called the Śainyas.⁶ All these are shown in the table opposite.

c14.s3.19

¹ Bd iii, 71, 18b–21. Vā 96, 17b–20. Br 16, 9–11. Hv 39, 2040–2. Mat 45, 1–3. Pad v, 13, 72b–75a. Lg i, 69, 10–12. Also Br 14, 1–2 and Hv 35, 1906–7, which give only the first two lines. Kūr i, 24, 38b–39 is different. Cf. Viṣ iv, 13, 7–8; Ag 274, 38b–40; Gar i, 139, 39; Bhāg ix, 24, 12–13a.

c14.s3.20

² Bd iii, 71, 54–7. Vā 96, 53–5. Br 16, 45b–49a. Hv 39, 2076b–80a. Mat 45, 19–21. Pad v, 13, 93b–6. Lg and Kūr nil.

c14.s3.21

³ Bd iii, 71, 102–115. Vā 96, 101–114. Br 14, 3–13 (inaccurate); 16, 49b–59. Hv 35, 1908–21 (inaccurate); 39, 2080b–89. Mat 45, 25–33 and Pad v, 13, 98–105a (without Citraka's line). Lg i, 69, 18–31. Kūr i, 24, 42–46a partially agrees. There are considerable variations in the verses, especially in Mat and Pad where some lines are obviously corrupt. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 2; Ag 274, 46–7a; Gar i, 139, 41–3a; Bhāg ix, 24, 14b–18.

c14.s3.22

⁴ Bd iii, 71, 145–60a. Vā 96, 143–59a. Br 14, 14–24a, 25b f. Hv 35, 1922–34a, 1935b f. Mat 46, 1–10, 23–4. Pad v, 13, 108b–117. These collated show that Devamīḍhuṣa was the father (or ancestor) and Śūra the son (or descendant). So MBh says Śūra was son of Devamīḍha (vii, 144, 6030–1) and father of Vasudeva (ibid.: also i, 67, 2764; 111, 4382). MBh xiii, 147, 6834–5 says Śūra was son (descendant) of Citraratha, referring to his distant ancestor. Kūr i, 24, 67–70 confusedly joins this line on to Hṛdika in the Andhaka line. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 8–12; Ag 274, 47b–8; Gar i, 139, 50b–55; Bhāg ix, 24, 27b–44.

c14.s3.23

⁵ Vasudeva's and Kṛṣṇa's families, Bd iii, 71, 160b f. : Vā 96, 159b f. : Br 14, 36 f. : Hv 36: Mat 46, 11–22: Pad v, 13, 123b f. : Lg i, 69, 43 f. : Kūr i, 24, 68 f. Cf. Viṣ iv, 15, 11 f.; Ag 274, 49 f.; Gar i, 139, 56 f.; Bhāg ix, 24, 45 f.

c14.s3.24

⁶ Bd iii, 71, 100–1. Vā 96, 99–100. Mat 45, 22–4. Pad v, 13, 97. Hv 35, 1934b–5a (condensed). Lg i, 69, 15b–17. Kūr i, 24, 40–1. Br 14, 24b–5a. Cf. Viṣ iv, 14, 1; Ag 274, 45b–46a; Gar i, 139, 38b, 39b, 40; Bhāg ix, 24, 13b–14.

c14.s3.25

*Turvasu's lineage.*

c14.s3.26

Turvasu's line is given by nine Puranas,⁷ and all are in general agreement, except that there is great variation in some of the names, the Agni wrongly includes in it the Gāndhāras who were The *Yādavas* (*Sātvatas*) continued—The *Vṛṣṇis*.

c14.s3.27

⁷ Bd iii, 74, 1–6. Vā 99, 1–6. Br 13, 141–8. Hv 32, 1829–36. Mat 48, 1–5. Viṣ iv, 16. Ag 276, 1–3. Gar i, 139, 63–4. Bhāg ix, 23, 16–18. Turvasu is called Turvaśa in Vedic literature.

c14.s3.28

| | | Gāndhārī = Vṛṣṇi = Mādrī | | |
| | | \| | | |
| Sumitra or Anamitra I | Yudhājit | Devamīḍhuṣa | Anamitra II | Sini? |
| \| | \| | \| | \| |
| Nighna | Pṛśni | Śūra | Śini (whose descendants were Śainyas) | |
| \| | \| | \| | \| |
| Prasena | Satrājit | Śvaphalka | Citraka | Satyaka |
| \| | \| | \| | \| |
| Bhaṅgakāra | Akrūra | Pṛthu &c. | Yuyudhāna | |
| \| | \| | | \| |
| Sabhākṣa | Devavant and Upadeva | | | Asaṅga |
| | | | | \| |
| | | | | Yugandhara |
| | | Vasudeva | other sons | |
| | | \| | \| |
| | | Balarāma | Kṛṣṇa | |

c14.s3.29

Druhyus, and the Viṣṇu, Garuḍa and Bhāgavata omit the last part. Marutta the great king of this dynasty (whom the Matsya incorrectly calls Bharata) had no son and adopted Duṣyanta the Paurava, and thus this line is said to have merged into the Paurava line, as the Brahmāṇḍa, Vāyu, Brahma and Harivaṃśa declare. Yet it is added that from this line or from Duṣyanta there was a branch which founded the kingdoms of Pāṇḍya, Cola, Kerala, &c. in the south.¹ The line stands thus, greatly abbreviated—Turvasu, Vahni, Garbha, Gobhānu, Trisānu, Karandhama, Marutta, Duṣyanta, Śarūtha (or Varūtha), Aṇḍira; and Pāṇḍya, Kerala, Cola and Kulya (or Kola).

c14.s3.30

¹ Cf. Pad vi, 250, 1-2. This is not improbable. Turvasu princes may have carved out such kingdoms.

c14.s3.31

*Druhyu’s lineage.*

c14.s3.32

Druhyu’s line is given by nine Puranas,² and all are in general agreement, except that the Brahma and Harivaṃśa wrongly divide it into two, assigning to him the successors down to Gāndhāra, and Dharma and the remainder to Anu. This mistake of theirs is the cause or result of their erroneously making the Ānavas a branch growing out of the Paurava line, as will be explained in noticing the Ānava genealogy. The line stands thus—Druhyu with two sons Babhru and Setu, then Setu’s descendants, Aṅgāra-setu,³ Gāndhāra, Dharma, Dhṛta,³ Durdama,³ Pracetas, to whom the Brahma and Harivaṃśa add Sucetas. Four Puranas add that Pracetas’ offspring spread out into the mleccha countries to the north beyond India and founded kingdoms there.⁴

c14.s3.33

² Bḍ iii, 74, 7-12. Vā 99, 7-12. Br 13, 148-53. Hv 32, 1837-41. Mat 48, 6-9. Viṣ iv, 17. Gar i, 139, 64-5. Ag 276, 4-5a. Bhāg ix, 23, 14-16.

c14.s3.34

³ These names have variations. The name Aṅgāra is supported by MBh xii, 29, 981; cf. also id. iii, 126, 10465.

c14.s3.35

⁴ Bḍ, Vā, and Mat (loc. cit.) thus:—

c14.s3.36

*The Ānavas.*

c14.s3.37

The genealogy of Anu’s descendants, the Ānavas, is given by nine Puranas.⁵ All agree substantially, except that the Brahma and Harivaṃśa wrongly make Anu’s lineage descend from Kakṣeyu,

c14.s3.38

⁵ Bḍ iii, 74, 12 f. Vā 99, 12 f. Br 13, 14 f. Hv 31, 1669 f. Mat 48, 10 f. Viṣ iv, 18, 1. Ag 276, 5 f. Gar i, 139, 65 f. Bhāg ix, 23, 1 f

c14.s3.39

Pracetasaḥ putra-śataṃ rājānaḥ sarva eva te
mleccha-rāṣṭrādhipāḥ sarve hy udīcīṃ diśam āśritāḥ.

c14.s3.40

Viṣ more fully. Bhāg briefly. See JRAS, 1919, p. 361.

c14.s3.41

one of the sons of Raudrāśva of the Paurava line, and wrongly assign to Anu part of Druhyu’s progeny,¹ as mentioned above. The seventh king after Anu, Mahāmanas, had two sons, Uśīnara and Titikṣu, and under them the Ānavas divided into two great branches; Uśīnara and his descendants occupied the Panjab, and Titikṣu founded a new kingdom in the east, viz., in East Behar.

c14.s3.42

¹ Br 13, 152–3. Hv 32, 1840–1.

c14.s3.43

Uśīnara’s posterity is given by the same nine Puranas,² the fullest account being in the Brahmāṇḍa, Vāyu, Brahma and Harivaṃśa. It stands thus, with the kingdoms that his descendants founded:—

c14.s3.44

² Passages in continuation of those in second note above.

c14.s3.46

c14.s3.47

³ Probably referred to in MBh ix, 55, 3029–31.

c14.s3.48

⁴ Miscalled Bṛhadgarbha, MBh iii, 197, 13321. See xiii, 93, 4420, 4424.

c14.s3.49

Titikṣu’s lineage is given by the same nine Puranas.⁵ All agree substantially, except that the Brahmāṇḍa has lost all after Dharmaratha in a great lacuna, the Vāyu omits from Satyaratha to Campa, the Viṣṇu, Garuḍa and Bhāgavata omit Jayadratha’s descendants, and the Brahma and Agni omit Vijaya and his line. The best accounts are in the Matsya and Harivaṃśa. This ‘Kingdom in the East’ was divided among Bali’s five sons into five kingdoms, Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Puṇḍra and Suhma. He was quite distinct from Bali son of Virocana, the Daitya (p. 64). This genealogy with the Aṅga line is given in the Table in chapter XII.

c14.s3.50

⁵ Bḍ iii, 74, 24–103. Vā 99, 24–119. Br 13, 27–49. Hv 31, 1681–1710. Mat 48, 21–108. Viṣ iv, 18, 1–7. Ag 276, 10–16. Gar i, 139, 68–74. Bhāg ix, 23, 4–14. Cf. MBh xiii, 42, 2351 (Citraratha).

c14.s3.51

*The Pauravas.*

c14.s3.52

The genealogy of Pūru’s descendants, the Pauravas, is found in eight Puranas and also twice in the Mahābhārata, and may be conveniently considered in three portions, only the more important features and differences being noticed; the first, from Pūru to Ajamīḍha, the second from Ajamīḍha to Kuru, and the third from Kuru to the Pāṇḍavas. The Brahmāṇḍa has lost all the Pauravas in a large lacuna.

c14.s3.53

In the first portion all the Puranas¹ agree more or less down to Matināra; but the two Mahābhārata accounts² differ, the first having many names as in the Puranas but being manifestly confused;³ and the second omitting Raudrāśva and Ṛceyu, but inserting a group of ten kings Sārvabhauma, Jayatsena, Avācīna, Ariha, Mahābhauma, Ayutanāyin, Akrodhana, Devātithi, Ariha and Ṛkṣa between Ahaṃyāti and Matināra. None of the other authorities know of this group in this position, and all the Puranas place it as a group of eight kings in the third portion between Vidūratha and Bhīmasena, except the Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Agni which omit all these kings except Ṛkṣa (who is Ṛkṣa II). The Mahābhārata has certainly misplaced this group, and for several reasons. Its own first account agrees with the Puranas in knowing nothing of this group here. The account says that two of these kings married princesses of Aṅga, one a princess of Kaliṅga, and two married princesses of Vidarbha, but those kingdoms were not founded till long after Matināra’s time, as will appear from the synchronisms in chapter XIII and Table of genealogies in chapter XII. That table and the synchronisms also show that it is impossible these ten kings could find room at this stage; and further that, if they could be inserted here, there would be an unaccountable gap in the third portion. The group must therefore be removed from here and put where the Puranas place it, in the third portion, and where it is thoroughly in position.

c14.s3.54

¹ Vā 99, 119–166. Br 13, 2–8, 50–63, 80–1. Hv 31, 1653–68; 32, 1714–32, 1754–5; with 20, 1053–5. Mat 49, 1–43. Viṣ iv, 19, 1–10. Ag 277, 1–9, 15. Gar i, 140, 1–8. Bhāg ix, 20, 1–39; 21, 1, 20–1.

c14.s3.55

² MBh (first) i, 94, 3695–3720; (second) i, 95, 3764–89.

c14.s3.56

³ It says Pūru’s son Pravīra married a Śaurasena princess (3696), and his son Manasyu married a Sauvīra princess (3697), but Śūrasena and Suvīra did not come into existence till later; see chap. XIV and Anavas ante.

c14.s3.57

From Tamsu to Duṣyanta there is great uncertainty. The chief texts, the Vāyu, Matsya, Brahma and Harivaṃśa, have a certain seeming agreement, yet really supply no intelligible pedigree, as will appear if we try to construct one from their statements. All that seems clear is that there was a remarkable woman Ilinā and that her grandson was Duṣyanta.¹ The Mahābhārata accounts turn her into a king Ilina. Queens were sometimes turned into kings mistakenly,² but I am not aware of any instance of the reverse; so that these accounts appear to be incorrect, and the genealogical verse quoted is not found in these Puranas. The other Puranas which are later have connected up a pedigree, but differ incompatibly and omit Ilinā altogether. The truth is, there is a serious gap in the genealogy here, as will appear from the discussion of the synchronisms in chapter XIII.

c14.s3.58

¹ Cf. also Vā 68, 23, 24; Bḍ iii, 6, 23, 25.

c14.s3.59

² As Mat 12, 37, Pad v, 8, 142 and Ag 272, 26 do with Satyavrata Triśaṅku's queen Satyarathā; as Gar i, 138, 22 does with Māndhātṛ's queen Bindumatī; and as Mat 50, 6 does with Vadhryaśva's mother Indrasenā.

c14.s3.60

From Duṣyanta to Hastin (or Bṛhat³), who founded or named Hastināpura, the lists fairly agree. Hastin had two sons Ajamīḍha and Dvimīḍha. Ajamīḍha continued the main Paurava line at Hastināpura, and Dvimīḍha founded a separate dynasty, which is not specially named and may be called the Dvimīḍha line, and which will be noticed infra. This portion is shown in the following table.

c14.s3.61

³ So Br, Ag, and Hv; but Hv 20, 1053-4 names Hastin.

c14.s3.62

The second portion from Ajamīḍha to Kuru is given by the same eight Puranas⁴ and the two Mahābhārata accounts.⁵ Ajamīḍha had three sons, and they originated separate dynasties. The eldest line from Ṛkṣa I continued the main line at Hastināpura, and here the lists agree down to Kuru, inserting only Saṃvaraṇa between them; but it will appear from the synchronisms and the Table of genealogies in chapters XIV and XII that there must have been more generations, and that not a few names have been lost here, probably both before and after Ṛkṣa. The two other sons, Nīla and Bṛhadvasu,¹ founded the dynasties of North and South Pañcāla respectively, which will be noticed separately. The Mahābhārata does not say anything about the origin of these two dynasties, except that its first account baldly declares that Ajamīḍha had two sons Duṣyanta and Parameṣṭhin, and from them came all the Pañcālas, which except in the names agrees with the Puranas. South Pañcāla was approximately the portion of Pañcāla south of the Ganges as far as the R. Carmanvatī (Chambal), and its capitals were Kāmpilya² and Mākandī. North Pañcāla was the portion north of the Ganges, with its capital at Ahicchatrā,³ whence it was called the Ahicchatra country.⁴

c14.s3.63

⁴ Vā 99, 211-17. Br 13, 102-7. Hv 32, 1795-1800. Mat 50, 17-21. Viṣ iv, 19, 18. Ag 277, 25-6. Gar i, 140, 24-5. Bhāg ix, 22, 3-4.

c14.s3.64

⁵ MBh (first) i, 94, 3721-2, 3724-39; (second) i, 95, 3790-1.

c14.s3.65

¹ So Vā. Mat Bṛhadanu. Hv, Viṣ, Gar, and Bhāg Bṛhadiṣu.

c14.s3.66

² MBh v, 193, 7500 : xii, 139, 5137.

c14.s3.67

³ Called also Chattravatī, MBh i, 166, 6348.

c14.s3.68

⁴ MBh i, 138, 5507–16.

c14.s3.69

Bharata’s descendants were called the Bharatas or Bhāratas;⁵ so all these dynasties, the main line at Hastināpura⁶ and those of the Dvimīḍhas and of North⁷ and South Pañcāla, were Bhāratas.

c14.s3.70

⁵ MBh i, 2, 371; 62, 2320–1; 74, 3123 : iv, 28, 912 : xiii, 76, 3690. Vā 99, 134. Mat 24, 71; 49, 11. Br 13, 57. Hv 32, 1723, &c. So also Śatapatha Brāhm (p. 65).

c14.s3.71

⁶ So habitually in the MBh. Sörensen (p. 123) treats Bhārata in iii, 106, 8847 as applying to Sagara, but it really refers to Janamejaya, to whom the MBh professes to have been recited.

c14.s3.72

⁷ Thus Dhṛṣṭadyumna, who belonged to this line, is called Bharatar-sabha, MBh vi, 50, 2066.

c14.s3.73

The third portion from Kuru to the Pāṇḍavas is given by the same authorities.⁸ There are some discrepancies among Kuru’s immediate descendants, but the text suggested by collating the chief accounts⁹ clears them up. It shows that Kuru had three

c14.s3.74

⁸ Vā 99, 217–18, 229–49. Br 13, 108–23. Hv 32, 1801–2, 1813–28. Mat 50, 23, 34–56. Viṣ iv, 19, 19; 20. Ag 277, 27, 31–40. Gar i, 140, 25, 30–40. Bhāg ix, 22, 4, 9–33. MBh (first) i, 94, 3740–51; (second) i, 95, 3792–3835. His ancestor Yayāti is called, by anticipation or through lack of the historical sense, ‘augmentor of the Kuru race,’ MBh i, 86, 3541–2; and so also Saṃvaraṇa, MBh i, 171, 6527; 172, 6562; 173, 6611.

c14.s3.75

⁹ > Kuros tu dayitāḥ putrāḥ Sudhanvā Jahnur eva ca

c14.s3.76

Parikṣito mahātejāḥ pravaraś cârimardanaḥ
* * *
Parikṣitasya dāyādo babhūva Janamejayaḥ
Janamejayasya putrās tu traya eva mahārathāḥ
ŚrutasenÔgrasenau ca Bhīmasenaś ca nāmataḥ
Jahnus tv ajanayat putram Suratham nāma bhūmipam
Surathasya tu dāyādo vīro rājā Vidūrathaḥ–&c.

c14.s3.77

sons, Parikṣit I¹ the eldest, Jahnu and Sudhanvan. The account deals first with Sudhanvan’s descendants, an offshoot, in which was Vasu who conquered and founded anew the kingdoms of Cedi and Magadha: its genealogy is noticed separately infra. The account then returns to the main line, to Parikṣit I’s lineage. His son was Janamejaya II, and his sons were Śrutasena, Ugrasena and Bhīmasena. Then the account drops them, passes to Jahnu, and gives his descendants who became the main Paurava line.² Śrutasena, Ugrasena and Bhīmasena are not described as kings, and the fact that their line stops and the account passes to Jahnu’s son Suratha as king shows that Janamejaya’s branch lost the sovereignty, which then vested in Suratha. The cause of this is explained by a story told earlier in the genealogy. Janamejaya II injured the rishi Gārgya’s son and was cursed by Gārgya; he was abandoned by his people, and was in great affliction; he sought help from the rishi Indrota Daivāpa Śaunaka, who purified him with a horse-sacrifice.³ He did not however recover the sovereignty, and so his three sons passed into oblivion.⁴

c14.s3.78

¹ Written indifferently as Parikṣit and Parikṣita.

c14.s3.79

² Viṣ, Gar and Ag agree with this *résumé*, except that Viṣ and Gar (unless its reading be amended) make Janamejaya’s three sons his brothers. Bhāg says Parikṣit I had no offspring. Ag follows Hv with one or two more mistakes. MBh i, 3, 661-2 and Bhāg ix, 22, 35 confuse this Janamejaya II with the later Parikṣit’s son Janamejaya III, who reigned after the Bhārata battle; and then make the same mistake as Viṣ and Gar. Var 193, 1-5 also confuses them. The Parikṣit who got Vāmadeva’s horses was a different person, a king of Ayodhyā (MBh iii, 192, 13145, 13179 f.), and probably the same as Pāripātra of that line.

c14.s3.80

³ Vā 93, 21-6. Bd iii, 68, 20-6. Hv 30, 1608-13. Br 12, 9-15. Lg i, 66, 71-7, Also MBh xii, 150 to 152, which amplifies and brahmanizes it.

c14.s3.81

⁴ This explains the allusions in the Śatapatha Brāhm (xiii, 5, 4, 1) and Śāṅkhāyana Śr Sūtra (xvi, 9, 7) to Janamejaya Pārikṣita and his three sons (not brothers), the Pārikṣitiyas, and also the question in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (iii, 3), ‘Whither have the Pārikṣitas gone?’ if their extinction be implied: but the answer ‘Thither where aśvamedha sacrificers go’ suggests the opposite, because such sacrifices procured great blessings, as is declared in this story in MBh xii, 152, 5674. See Weber Hist. of Indian Lit., pp. 125-6, 135-6, 186: and Vedic Index, i, p. 520

c14.s3.82

The Mahābhārata’s two genealogies of the main line are different and mutually inconsistent, though if the group of kings, Sārvabhauma to Ṛkṣa II, be brought from the first portion into its proper place here, the second genealogy approximates to the Purana account. The Brahma, Harivaṃśa and Agni omit them all except Ṛkṣa II.

Linked texts (16)

Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Viṣṇupurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Brahmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Garuḍapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Agnipurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Matsyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Bhāgavatapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Padmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Liṅgapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Kūrmapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Śāṅkhāyanaśrautasūtra — Śāṅkhāyana, Sanskrit
Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣad — Sanskrit
Śatapathabrāhmaṇa — Yājñavalkya & Śāṇḍilya (Vedic teacher), Sanskrit
Vāyupurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Harivaṃśa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit