Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c21.s3: Section 3. Orthodoxy

Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c21.s3

Language
English

Contents

Section 3. Orthodoxy

A. Among the Monarchs

v2.c21.s3.t1.1

The desire of the people of Vijayanagara to give undue prominence to the minutest details of public or private conduct is to be traced to their inherent orthodox nature. What appears to foreigners as pagan formalities were really indispensable ceremonials to the Hindus, who were under the abiding influence of their classical doctrines. Nuniz relates to us that "The King of Bisnaga is a Brahman; every day he hears the preaching of a learned Brahman, who never married nor ever touched a woman".⁴ Although Nuniz is wrong in stating that the Emperor of Vijayanagara, Achyuta Rāya, was a Brahman, yet he suggests in his words an important feature of the everyday life of the Hindu kings. This was the company of learned men among whom they passed a part of their time. Mr. Venkoba Rao has identified the learned Brahman mentioned by Nuniz with Vyāsarāya, the great Vaishṇava teacher.⁵ Sōmanātha in his *Vyāsayōgicharitam* tells us that Narasa Nāyaka, Vira Narasimha and Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya were daily being instructed in Dharma by that celebrated Vaiṣṇava leader. About Narasa Nāyaka Sōmanātha says :

v2.c21.s3.t1.2

⁴ Sewell, For. Emp., p. 390.

v2.c21.s3.t1.3

⁵ Venkoba Rao, Vyāsayōgicharitam, Intr., p. lxvii.

v2.c21.s3.t1.4

एवमेव भक्त्या संभावयन्तं रहस्येनं धर्मपदोपदेशेन प्रत्यहमनिगृहन्¹

v2.c21.s3.t1.5

¹ *Vyāsayōgicharitam*, p. 59.

v2.c21.s3.t1.6

Vira Narasimha was likewise devoted to the same *rāja-guru*:

v2.c21.s3.t1.7

पुण्यकीर्तनेन वसुधाधिपेन हंसेनेव कमलाकरः प्रत्यहम् उपसेव्य(मानः)²

v2.c21.s3.t1.8

² Ibid., p. 64.

v2.c21.s3.t1.9

Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya's noble example of devotion to Vyāsarāya was unique:

v2.c21.s3.t1.10

तेन कृष्णमहीपालेन त्रिसन्ध्यं कुलदेवतायामिब मकुटतटमालतीकुसुम-शेखरीक्रियमाणखमयूखजाते महानुभावे...व्यासयोगिनि....³

v2.c21.s3.t1.11

³ Ibid., pp. 67-8.

B. In Public and Private Charters

v2.c21.s3.t2.1

Only the strictest conformity to the *śāstras* could be expected of rulers who were thus under the spiritual guidance of renowned *rāja-gurus*. The innumerable grants recording gifts of land to persons and institutions enable us to assert that the monarchs of Vijayanagara made it a point to include in them details of the *gōtras*, *śākhās*, and *sūtras* of the donees, the minutest particulars contained in the *pañchāṅga* or calendar, and benedictory and imprecatory verses taken from the *purāṇas* and *itihāsas*. Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya on the application of the excellent minister Tippasōma, son of *kandāchāra* Brahman the minister Mādappa, in A.D. 1513, granted to Viśvēśvara, who was a highly esteemed teacher, versed in the *srauta* and *smārta*, ever performing the six rites, and who was the son of Mādhavārādhya of the Haritānvaya Āpastamba-*sūtra* and Yajus-*śākhā*, the village named Bhaṇḍāripaḷḷi in the country between the Tuṅga and the Bhadrā called Yeḍatore, in the Honnur-sime of the Śrīraṅga kingdom, situated east of Siriyūr, south-west of Benkīpura, north of Jannāpura, giving to it another name of Kṛṣṇarāyapura.¹

v2.c21.s3.t2.2

¹ E.C., VII., Sh. 1, p. 2. On Yedatore, see Barnett, Ep. Ind., XII., p. 296, and Fleet's note on the same, ibid., p. 296, n. (4). The instances where the gōtra, śākhā, etc. are mentioned are too many to be cited here. A few specimens may be given here. E.C., V., P. I., Cn. 167, p. 198; E.C., IV., Hs. 24, p. 86, Yd. 59, p. 62.

v2.c21.s3.t2.3

In the reign of the same great monarch the head-jewel of that king's court (tad-rājānasthāna-śirōmaṇi) the great minister Hisūr Mallarasayya, who was in charge of the Narasiyapura-sime of the Hoysala-nāḍ, granted to Mallayyadēva, son of Mogūr Sōmayya-dēvoḍeyar, of the sōmēśvarācārya-sampradāya of Ōraṅgal, the village of Hāchraraguppe belonging to Kereyārapurasthala, giving it the name of Mallayyadēvapura. This stone inscription is interesting because it contains several titles which are not in the form usually given to Vijayanagara kings. Its date is given thus: Śrīmat Sālivāhana-śaka-varsha 1438 sanda varttamāna-Dhātu-samvatsarada Pushya-śuddha 7 lu Maṅgaḷa-vāradalu ghaḷige 29 mahā-nakshatra Uttarā...sanda ghaḷige 24½ nitya-nakshatra Rēvati-ghaḷige 47½ Sīvayōga 14½ Vaṇijakaraṇa yint ī pañchāṅga-siddhāyada-tithiyalu...²

v2.c21.s3.t2.4

² E. C., V., P, I, HN. 19, p. 243, n. (2), 244; P. II, pp. 724-5. The date corresponds to A. D. 1516, Dec., Tuesday 30th (Rice gives it as A. D. 1517). But I am unable to verify further details, According to Swamikannu, Ind. Eph., (V., p. 235) the nakshatra Uttara-Bhādrapada falls on Monday the 29th=Paushya-Su. 6. See, for another example, 402 of 1912.

v2.c21.s3.t2.5

It is not surprising, therefore, that a people who were thus uncommonly careful in the matter of including the details of the pañchāṅga, should have copiously copied verses from the purāṇas and smṛitis in the grants. The imprecatory verses beginning with sva-dattām and ending with achyutam-padam which we have just referred to in this chapter, are similar to those found in the smṛitis.³ A copper-plate grant dated A. D. 1403 recording the gift of the village of Sibur in Chetur-nāḍ, to certain Brahmans (named) by Harihara Rāya, contains the following evidently from the composer of the śāsana:

v2.c21.s3.t2.6

³ Eggeling, Cat. of the Skt. MSS. in the Ind. Office, II, pp. 387-8.

v2.c21.s3.t2.7

Śrī-Rāma-vākyaṁ:—
bahubhir vasudhā dattā rājabhis Sāga- rādibhiḥ|
Yasya-yasya yadā bhūmis tasya tasya tadā phalam||
Āditya:—
svalpāṁ api mahīṁ yas tu dadāti śraddhayānvitaḥ|
sa yāti Brahma-sadanaṁ yasmān nāvarttate punaḥ||
Bṛhaspatiḥ:—
Prāsādā yatra sauvarṇā vasu-dhārāś cha kāmaśaḥ|
gandharvāpsarasō yatra tatra gachchati bhūmidaḥ||
ājñā śulkaṁ cha daṇḍaś cha mudrā-karaṇaṁ eva cha|
sīmā-nirṇaya-kartṛtvaṁ prajābhyō bhaya rakṣaṇam||
yathēṣṭaṁ cha karādānaṁ kāru-saṁsthāpanaṁ tathā|
mandiraṁ dvi-vidhaṁ kṣētraṁ gōṣṭaṁ cha vanaṁ eva cha||
khilībhūtaṁ cha yat kṣētraṁ mṛga-vāsas tathaiva cha|
nadī-parvala bhōgāś chō aṣṭa-bhōgāḥ prakīrtitāḥ||
ēlair aṣṭābhir aiśvaryair aṣṭa-bhōgāis samanvitān|
yō dadāti sura-śrēṣṭa grāmaṁ satkṛtya bhaktitaḥ||
guru-daivata-viprēbhyaḥ puṇya-kālēshu buddhimān|
sa yāti Brahma-sadanaṁ ēka-viṁśa kūlānvitaḥ||
anēka-kālaṁ tatraiva bhōgān iṣṭān manōramān|
anubhūya punar bhūmau rājā bhavati dhārmikāḥ||¹

v2.c21.s3.t2.8

¹ E. C., XII, Si. 95, p. 101, text pp. 299-300, The verses may be thus translated: Rāma—"The earth has been enjoyed by Sāgara and other kings; according to their (gifts of) land so was the reward". Aditya: "Though he grant but a small portion of the earth, he will go to Brahma's abode and not return." Brihaspati: "To where there are golden pavilions, where is the cow of plenty and he will obtain all he desires, where the gandharvas and apsaras are, there goes the donor of the land. The power to issue commands, to levy customs dues and fines,

v2.c21.s3.t2.9

An inscription dated A. D. 1421 ends with the usual verses among which we have the following: "The quail and the boar, the she-buffalo and the elephant, the teacher and the donor, these six went to svarga." Rice commented thus: "It is said to be taken from the Māśa-mahātmya of the Vāyu or other purāṇa, and refers to the merit arising from making a tank. A quail once scraped a hole in the ground; a boar came and made it larger; a buffalo and elephant each in turn enlarged it still more; a holy man then pointed out that it could be made into a tank or pond; and the king to whom he gave the advice carried out the idea and made a grant of it. For their respectivs shares, in this work of merit all six went to svarga or paradise."¹

v2.c21.s3.t2.10

¹ E. C., XI., Hr. 52, p. 110. n. (1). This verse also appears in the grant by the benevolent Muhammadan officer Shaikh Mallik in A. D. 1653, E. C., VII, Ci. 43, pp, 185, n. (1), 186. For an extraordinary and unusual verse in a grant dated A. D. 1516 recording the victory of Krishna Dēva Rāya in the Gajapati kingdom, see E. C., V., P. I., Hn. 13, p. 7. For Rice's remarks on the same, ibid., Intr., pp. xxx-xxxi.

C. How Gifts were made

v2.c21.s3.t3.1

Some details about the nature of the gifts and the manner in which they were given are also available. An inscription dated A. D. 1463 of the times of Immaḍi Prauḍha Dēvēndra (i. e., Mallikārjuna Rāya) informs us how he got himself ready for an occasion of granting gifts: "He, being moved to make grants, having bathed in water from the sacred tīrthas, attired in purified flaxen garments, united with Brahmans who had performed the religious baths, the great king (with titles) named Immaḍi Prauḍha Dēvēndra (on the date specified), on his birthday (or under his natal star), in the pure Bhāskara-Kshētra, at the foot of the Hēmakūṭa hill, on the bank of the Tuṅgabhadrā, in the presence of the god Virūpāksha,—in a holy place, at an auspicious time in the presence of the god Chandramauli in the Bārakūru-vēnthe of the Bārkūru kingdom, gave the villages belonging to Chaturmandi...for the offerings

v2.c21.s3.t3.2

to use a seal, to fix boundaries, to protect the subjects without fear, to impose taxes at his will, to establish work-people,—moreover, houses both kinds of land, cattle folds, woods, waste ground, lands filled with game, rivers and hills—which are the eight means of enjoyment,—along with these eight sources of wealth and eight means of enjcyment will he, O greatest of the gods, who gives villages to a guru, to the gods or the Brahmans, at meritorious times, that wise man, go to Brahma's abode, with twenty-one generations of his family. After there enjoying for many ages all the pleasures his heart desires, he will be born again as a righteous king." E. C., XII., p. 101.

v2.c21.s3.t3.3

to that god Rāmchandra."¹ In a copper-plate grant dated A. D. 1426 we are told "that king Prauḍha Rāya, (on the date specified), being in the dāna-maṇṭapa in the presence of the god Virūpāksha on the bank of the Tuṅgabhadrā, for the purpose of making the kalpa-latā gift, ascertained on enquiry from the learned men that according to the śāstras it was equal in merit to the tulā-purusha."²

v2.c21.s3.t3.4

¹ E. C., VIII., Nr. 79, pp. 158-9. The inscription evidently is to be interpreted in the sense that the king gave the villages which were in the Tuḷuva-rājya, according to the usual custom, in the temple of Virūpāksha. B. A. S. ² E. C., XII, Tm. 11, p. 5. ³ E. C., IX, Supplement, Ht. 34 p. 172 "This (the date) is given as the Saka year denoted by the letters raṅgalōka (=1332), the year Vikriti. But this does not fall within Harihara's reign." Rice, p. 171, n. (1). ⁴ Gopinatha Rao—Amrita Rao, Ep. Ind., XVIII, p. 165.

v2.c21.s3.t3.5

There is one more detail about the manner in which grants were made, which may be noted here. Another copper-plate grant assigned to the year A. D. 1410 relates that Harihara Rāya II, "seated on his hereditary throne in the city named Vijaya...examined the dāna-śāsana made by Dharmarāja in the Dvāpara-yuga...granted of his own accord, with pouring of water and presentation of gold coins, flowers and akshate," the village named Dharmēśvarapura on the bank of the Kshīranadī in the Gajakōṇapuri (Āneguṇḍi) kingdom for the worship of the god Dharmēśvara." Although the copper-plate śāsana looks suspicious because of its wrong date³ and the statement that the dāna-śāsana was made by "Dharmarāja in the Dvāpara-yuga," nevertheless it contains one point about which all inscriptions agree. This refers to the ceremony of pouring water and the presentation of a gold coin. Kṛishṇa Dēva Rāya in Śaka 1436 (A. D. 1514-5), at the time of making a gift, was surrounded by his purōhitās and a number of Brahmans well versed in the śrauta learning; and he also gave many gifts with pouring of water together with a gold coin.⁴ The references to this detail of the ceremony are found in almost every record of the times. It may be observed here that even on occasions of remission of customs and other dues, the provincial rulers observed the same formality. Mallinātha Oḍeyar, who was in charge of Bemmattanakallu, raised an upper storey of stone for the god Siddhanātha of that locality, constructed other works of merit, and in order that this work of merit might continue for ever, presented Chikkapura in Bemmattanakallu, with pouring of water for the decorations, illuminations, and offerings of the local deity.¹

v2.c21.s3.t3.6

¹ *E. C.*, XI., Cd. 2, p. 2.

D. Enumeration of Gifts

v2.c21.s3.t4.1

As regards the articles that were given away as gifts during these occasions, we have also some interesting details. Vira Mārappa Oḍeyar, according to an inscription dated A. D. 1347, "bathing in the water of the ocean at the time of the *parva*, pouring a libation to the *manes*, the highly generous Mārappa made gifts to Brahmans of lands, cows, virgins, and gold in quantities", while on a visit to the temple of Śiva at Gōkarṇa.² Viṭhṭhala Oḍeyar, the learned governor of Āraga Eighteen Kampaṇa, in A. D. 1403, as we have already seen, is described thus: "The *hēmadri* gift did Viṭhṭhala mantri but once make, and forthwith there was a *hēmadri* gift from house to house of all the Brahmans."³ The gifts which Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya the Great made in A. D. 1513 are thus enumerated :—

v2.c21.s3.t4.2

² *E. C.*, VIII., Sb., 375, p. 66.

v2.c21.s3.t4.3

³ *E. C.*, VI., Kp. 53, pp. 6-7, op. cit.

v2.c21.s3.t4.4

*brahmāṇḍaṃ viśva-chakraṃ ghaṭam udita-mahā-bhūlakaṃ ratna-dhēnum|*
*saptāmbhōdhīmś cha kalpa-kshitiruha-latikē kāñcha-nīṃ kāmadhēnum||*
*svarṇa-kshmāṃ yō hiraṇyāśva-rathaṃ api tulā-pūrusham gō-sahasram|*
*hēmāśvaṃ hēmagarbhaṃ kanaka-kari-rathaṃ pañ-chalāṅgali atānīt||*⁴

v2.c21.s3.t4.5

⁴ *E. C.*, VII., Sh. 1, p. 2, text, p. 2. These gifts were the following: "The golden egg, the golden wheel, the golden pot, the golden cow, the seven golden seas, the wishing tree, the golden cow of plenty, golden earth, golden horse-chariot, a man's weight in gold, a thousand cows, a golden horse, the golden-wombed (Brahma), gold elephant-chariot, and the five

v2.c21.s3.t4.6

Achyuta Rāya's liberality was equally remarkable.¹ After his victorious campaigns in the south, i.e., in the cyclic year Nandana, on the 12th day of the bright half of the month of Karkāṭaka he visited the temple of Varadarāja at Kāñchi, weighed himself against pearls in the presence of the god, bestowed the gifts called *mahābhūtaghaṭa* and *sahasragōdāna* and made presents of rich jewels set with rubies, diamonds, emeralds, topaz, and lapis lazuli, together with villages, to worthy recipients.² It is obvious that Achyuta Dēva Rāya followed the example of his illustrious predecessor, who, according to the epigraph dated A. D. 1515 already cited, "did he again and again bestow the great gifts described in the śāstras, together with the grants associated with them."³

v2.c21.s3.t4.7

¹ Achyuta Rāya made in A. D. 1531 the *sapta-sāgara-dāna*. E. C., IV., Kr. 11, p. 101.

v2.c21.s3.t4.8

² *A. S. R.* for 1908-1909, pp. 187-8.

v2.c21.s3.t4.9

³ E. C., VII., Sh. 1, p. 2, op. cit.

E. Witnesses

v2.c21.s3.t5.1

The names of the witnesses, whose signatures were appended to the grants, also bespeak the orthodox nature of the people. In most of the records we have divine as well as human witnesses. Thus an epigraph dated A.D. 1583 contains the following:

v2.c21.s3.t5.2

*āditya-chandrāv anilo' nalaś cha dyaur bhūmir āpō hṛidayaṁ Yamaś cha|*
*ahaś cha rātriś cha ubhē cha sandhyē dharmasya jānāti narasya vṛittam||*

v2.c21.s3.t5.3

Then we have human witnesses who are called in the epigraph *nara-sākshigaḷu*. These are thus described: *Tirthahaḷ (!)* iya *Amarēndra-puri Śrī-Pādaṅgaḷu Bukkarāya-purada Mahā-janaṅgaḷu karttugaḷa oppita Hariyappana sva-hastada oppila*

v2.c21.s3.t5.4

ploughs." E. C., V., P. I. Hn. 13, p. 4. The *hiraṇya-garbha* and *tulā-purusha* are also mentioned among other great gifts, in connection with the Hoysala kings Vishnuvardhana in A. D. 1117 (Rice, *My. Ins.*, p. 215,) and Sōmēśvara Dēva in A.D. 1255. E. C., V., P. I, Ak. 108, p. 157. On the *tulāpurushadāna*, see *A. S. R.* for 1912-13, pp. 142-5; *The Sources*, p. 117; Acharya, *Dicty. of Hindu Arch.* p. 246; *Ep. Ind.*, XIII., p. 295, and n. (1); *My. Arch. Report*, 1920, p. 37. Here we have Vīra Nārasimha weighing himself against gold.

v2.c21.s3.t5.5

tad-binnaha-sākshigaḷa oppita.¹ Superstition was to some extent responsible for the inclusion of the following witnesses by Tippe Setti of the Vijayanagara treasury, when, as related above, in A. D. 1423, he dedicated to the god Tirumala (of the Chikka-Honnuru-grāma, Huṇsūr tāluka ?) the tank which he had constructed, in order that merit might accrue to his parents, on the east side of Chikka-Honnūru. The record contains "the witness of the Fish, Tortoise and Boar, and the eight regents of the points of the compass, of the chief holy meritorious Brahmans, of the priests, nambis, and body servants of that god Tirumale, of Viraṇa-ayya of Kariyamaranahaḷḷi, the ? snake-charmers (hāvvarum), the ? tellers of omens by lizards (balli-munnibarum), of all these sacred persons..."²

v2.c21.s3.t5.6

¹ E. C., VIII., Tl. 172, p. 199, text, p. 656. These witnesses are the following: "Sun and moon, wind and fire, sky, earth and water, conscience and Yama, day and night, morning and evening,—these know the acts of a righteous man." Cf. E. C., V, P. I., Hn. 36, p. 11.

v2.c21.s3.t5.7

² E. C., IV, Hs. 27, p. 86, text, p. 236.

F. Fasts and Feasts

v2.c21.s3.t6.1

In the observance of fasts and feasts, too, we have evidence of the devoutness with which monarchs as well as people clung to classical precepts. To foreigners this was familiar. Thus Paes relates: "You should know that among these heathen there are days when they celebrate their feasts as with us; and they have their days of fasting, where all day they eat nothing and eat only at midnight."³ We can gather more details from epigraphical records on this subject. The Vijayanagara monarchs certainly did not introduce any innovation in this matter. In earlier times as well it was not uncommon for high officials to be strictly orthodox in their daily avocations. Thus, according to an epigraph dated A.D. 1218, in the times of the Hoysala king Ballāḷa II, "the Sāvāsi official, great master of the robes, (with praise) bathing and sacrificing at dawn and observing both ēkādaśis, worshipper of the feet of Brahmans and gurus, worshipper of the divine lotus-plant of the god Jaitanātha,—Jaya-Bhaṭṭayya Nāyaka having set up the god Jaita-Nārāyaṇa", received from the Hoysala king Ballāḷa Dēva a grant of forty gadyāṇa.¹

v2.c21.s3.t6.2

³ Sewell, For. Emp., p. 262.

v2.c21.s3.t6.3

¹ E. C., V, P. I., Hn. 61, p. 18.

v2.c21.s3.t6.4

In Vijayanagara times princes as well as people celebrated the vratas and sacrifices enjoined in the Hindu scriptures. An inscription dated A. D. 1356 relates that sometime after the illustrious minister Sōmapa had built the temple of Srī-Sōmanātha, "in observance of the Monday-vow (sōmavāra-vrata), the king (Bukka's son Kumāra Kampaṇa) paid a visit to " the most blessed god Sōmanātha ", and made grant of a large village for the god. Kumāra Kampaṇa, according to the same record, was a " unique treasure of music, a tree of paradise to the learned ", and was " intent on establishing dharma."²

v2.c21.s3.t6.5

² E. C., X, Kl. 222, p. 64.

v2.c21.s3.t6.6

Bukka I's famous minister was Mādhava, who was " renowned in the world for his good qualities ". This great man, who was " invested with authority for punishing the evil ", " with Brahman purity and Kashtra victorious power for protecting the earth from fear ", is highly praised in an epigraph dated A. D. 1368. He was " an astonishing expert in policy, like Bṛihaspati in exceeding wisdom ", " always composing poetry which gives new pleasure to the minds of all "; and because he " cleared and made plain the ruined path of the upanishads, which was overgrown and dangerous from the serpents the proud advocates of evil doctrines ", " was praised by the wise as the guru who established the path of the upanishads ". Although he had " accepted the government as far as the Western ocean ", yet " in order to have an oversight of that kingdom without trouble, on the advice of the Śiva guru Kāsivilāsa Kriyāśakti, he worshipped in the manner of the Saivāmnāya the god of gods embodied in his own favourite linga, Triyambakanātha, by means of daily special ceremonies and by a number of rites and practices. Then at a certain time (specified) in order to fulfil the great Śaiva vow which he had commenced with special rites a year before as directed in the Śiva sandhyā, desiring to make the donations required to complete that great vow", he secured permission from his lord Bukka Rāja, and bought the village of Muchchuṇḍi, in his own Eighteen-maṇḍala country "with the knowlege of the authorities of the maṇḍala". He gave it as well as two other hamlets situated in Nāgarakhaṇḍa, to learned Brahmans, renaming it "Vidyēśvarapura, after the eight Vidyēśvaras who were the objects of adoration of his vow."

v2.c21.s3.t6.7

We may here also observe the qualifications of the donees. They were "like incarnations of Vidyēśvara, pre-eminent by their virtues and the country of their birth, travellers to the farthest point of the Chārāyaṇīya-aticharaṇāmnāya, daily observers of all the rites appointed in the pure Śivāmnāya, ever devoted to the worship of the Aṣṭa-mūrti, Kāśmīr-Brahmans".¹

v2.c21.s3.t6.8

¹ E. C., VII Sk. 281, pp. 146-7. op. cit. These Kashmere Brahmans may have been of the same stock as the Sārasvata Brahmans. If the relationship between these Kashmere Brahmans, their antecedents, and the events that led to the migration of earlier chieftains from Kashmere—like Jaya Bhaṭṭaya Nāyaka who, in the epigraph already cited, is called "a rājā by right of the Kāśmīra country"—could be traced, then it is not improbable that the community which has been known as the Sārasvatas may have come to Karṇāṭaka along the western coast at the beginning of the thirteenth century A. D. In this connection I may add that the Mādhava of this inscription has been identified with Mādhava Vidyāraṇya. See M. Srinivasa Rao—Krishnaswamy Aiyar, *Panchadaśī* of Vidyāraṇya (with Eng. Trans. notes etc.) Intro., p. xl. The editors of this work do not believe that Mādhava was ever a *sanyasin*. "In all extant inscriptions Mādhava is known as Mādhava Amātya, Mantri or Sachiva and never Achārya or Vidyāraṇya." Ibid. p. xiii.

v2.c21.s3.t6.9

Another instance of a devout Hindu may be mentioned. Śravakratu Sōmanātha Dikshita, son of Dēvaru Sōmayāji, of the Kāśyapa-gōtra and Ṛik-śākhā, is described in A. D. 1418 as "the performer of the yājapēya, sarvatōmukha and pratiasanta sacrifices".²

v2.c21.s3.t6.10

² E. C., X, Bg. 17, 18, p. 233.

G. Piety among High Officials

v2.c21.s3.t7.1

As regards the orthodoxy of high officials, who were not of the priestly class, we may cite the evidence from an inscription dated A. D. 1629 which speaks of Immaḍi Tammaya Gauḍa. He was the grandson of Sugaṭur Tammaya Gauḍa "of the fourth *gōtra*". He, his wife, and certain Gauḍas (named) had the *agniṣṭōma* (sacrifice) performed by Kṛṣṇa Sōmayāji (descent stated).¹ But a more interesting example of puritanism is that of Bāchappa, son of Kirti Dēva. We have had an occasion of mentioning this *Bhāṭa* in the previous pages. According to an epigraph dated A. D. 1358 he performed various works of merit, *e. g.*, tanks, channels, areca-gardens, constructing golden palanquins, *chāmaras*, and umbrellas for gods; and in addition to these he made sluices to the tanks he had constructed, planted lines of trees on the four sides, and performed the ceremony of *upanayanam* to the *pipal* trees planted at the four corners.²

v2.c21.s3.t7.2

¹ E. C. X., Mb. 62, p. 94.

v2.c21.s3.t7.3

² E. C., III, Ml. 22, p. 58.

H. Saṃskāras

v2.c21.s3.t8.1

Without entering into the details of the various *saṃskāras* or rites which orthodox Hindus perform,³ we may note briefly that the fact of their having been celebrated by monarchs as well as subjects, reveals to us the inborn conservatism of the people. Rājanātha tells us the following in his *Achyutarāyābhyudayam*:

v2.c21.s3.t8.2

³ For a minute account of these, see *Grihya Sūtras* (Śankhāyana), P. I, 1, Adhyāya, khanda 19-28, pp. 45-57; *Manu*, II, 29-30, pp. 34-5; 34, 36, 37, p. 36; 65, p. 42; Barnett, *Hinduism*, pp. 51-2.

v2.c21.s3.t8.3

अथ पुंसवनादिकं यथावद्विहितं कर्म विशामधीश्वरेण ।
तनयस्य तदीय गर्भभाजो विभवस्येव नयो विवृद्धयेऽभूत् ॥⁴

v2.c21.s3.t8.4

⁴ *Achyutarāyābhyudayam*, Canto II, v. 16, p. 36. (Srirangam, 1907.) "Then Pumsavana and other purificatory ceremonies performed according to the śāstras by the king, were for the growth of the child existing in the foetus even as righteous conduct is for the increase of prosperity." S. N. Sastri, *Achyutarāyābhyudayam*, p. 12.

v2.c21.s3.t8.5

That the rulers also observed the *nāmakaraṇa* rite is proved by an epigraph dated Śaka 1386 (A. D. 1464-5) which relates that Mallikārjuna Rāya "having bathed and prepared himself to make a grant", "at the festival of giving a name to his son Dēva Rāya, in the pure Bhāskara-kṣētra at the foot of the Hēmakūṭa hill, in the presence of the god Virūpākṣa" at Hampe, made a grant of the village of Saraballige, now rechristened Gajabēṭe-Dēvarāyapura, situated in the Āraga kingdom, to Srigirinātha's eldest son Dēvappa Daṇḍādhipa, the protector of the great Āraga kingdom.¹

v2.c21.s3.t8.6

¹ E. C., VIII, Tl. 206, p. 209; Gopinatha Rao, *Ep. Ind.*, XV, p. 17.

v2.c21.s3.t8.7

We may also here add that kings were named after their grandfathers. This is specially noticeable in the names of the rulers of the Saṅgama dynasty. Harihara Oḍeyar's youger brother was Kampa or Kampaṇa, and the son of the latter was called Saṅgama, obviously after his grandfather Saṅgama. Bukka Rāya II was the grandson of Bukka Rāya I. Harihara Mahārāya II's son was Dēva Rāya I whose son was also called Harihara. Dēva Rāya's grandson was named Dēva Rāya II. In the Āraviḍu dynasty too we have similar instances of rulers who were named after their grandfathers. Rāma Rāya, the famous Regent, was the son of Śrīraṅga and Rāma Rāya's son was also called Śrīraṅga; and the latter's grandson was also known by the same name.²

v2.c21.s3.t8.8

² Rice, *My. & Coorg*, pp. 112, 120. See also *A. S. R.* for 1907-8, pp. 246, 253; *A. S. R.* for 1908-9, p. 195.

v2.c21.s3.t8.9

From the genealogical table of the engravers of Vijayanagara given in the Chapter on Administration, the reader must have realized that among them too there prevailed the custom of naming persons after their grandfathers.

I. Obsequial Ceremonies

v2.c21.s3.t9.1

It is obvious that the Hindus and Jainas of Vijayanagara paid equal attention to the death ceremonies.³ The observations of Nuniz about the ceremonies among the Brahmans may be recalled in this connection. We have some more notices in inscriptions which are interesting. Saṅgama II made a grant of the village called Biṭruguṇṭa or Biṭṭarakuṇṭa to twenty-eight Brahmans on the anniversary of his father's death.⁴ One of the most prominent names among the royal *bhāṭs* is, as we have just remarked, that of Bācheyappa. "When that Bācheyappa, obtained supreme bliss (*i. e.*, died) his elder son Bukkaṇṇa, performing penance in (the presence of the god) Virūpāksha, sent his bones to Vāraṇāsi"¹. On Harihara Mahārāya II obtaining *nirvāṇa* "in the year Tāraṇa, in the rainy season, in the month Nabhasya (Bhādrapada), the tenth *tithi*, on Sunday (=31st August 1404) under the constellation Pitṛi (Magha)", his learned Minister Viṭhṭhaṇṇa Oḍeyar, who was governing the Āraga kingdom, granted the village called Muktahariharapura to certain Brahmans to commemorate the death of the king.²

v2.c21.s3.t9.2

³ For a detailed account, *Grihya Sūtras*, (*Śaṅkhāyana*) P.I, 4, Adhāya khaṇḍa 1, p. 106 seq; Barnett, *Hinduism*, pp. 52-3; Wilkins *Mod. Hind.* p. 439 seq.; Hemingway, *Tanjore Gaz.*, pp. 76-7.

v2.c21.s3.t9.3

⁴ *Ep. Ind.*, III, pp, 22-3, 27.

v2.c21.s3.t9.4

¹ E. C., III, Ml. 21, p. 58, op. cit.

v2.c21.s3.t9.5

² E. C., VIII, Tl. 129, pp. 188-9.

v2.c21.s3.t9.6

We are to suppose that funeral obsequies were conducted in the orthodox manner on this occasion. From the following undated epigraph assigned to about the year A.D. 1500, it seems that women through their priests made offerings of a similar nature. Suguṭūr Chikka Tammaya Gauḍa's elder sister Halasa Rātama, "through her purōhita Kṛishṇa-bhaṭṭa Tirumala Sōmayāji, offered at the feet of the goddess in this southern Gayā *tilōdaka*, and *piṇḍa*, securing the reward of making the offering in Kāśi, Gayā and Prayāga, as declared by Vālmīki."³

v2.c21.s3.t9.7

³ E. C., X., Mb. 76, p. 97.

v2.c21.s3.t9.8

The *Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara* Gava Rājaya, according to an epigraph dated A. D. 1571, performed the funeral rites for his father Veṅkaṭādri Rājaya, and granted "the village of Saulaṅga to Vijēndra Voḍeyar's Maṭha of the Ānegoṇḍi Maṭha", in order that merit might accrue to his father.⁴ Granting lands for charitable purposes in order to commemorate the death of parents or of the ruler was, therefore, a feature of Vijayanagara times. And as regards performing funeral rites, we may mention that on the death of Rāma Rāya on the battle-field of Rākshasa-Taṅgaḍi, his adopted son Ali ‘Ādil Shāh, according to the author of *Rāma Rāyana Bhaikhair*, sent the bones of the great Hindu ruler to Benares.⁵

v2.c21.s3.t9.9

⁴ E. C., VII, Hl. 60, p. 172.

v2.c21.s3.t9.10

⁵ Mack. Coll.

v2.c21.s3.t9.11

Foreign travellers describe the funeral ceremonies of a class of people but with some inconsistency in their accounts. Barbosa, as we remarked in connection with the castes in Vijayanagara, gives a detailed account of the people who were "very like unto the Bramenes, who wear round their necks certain cords of twisted silk, from which hangs a cloth bag containing a stone" which they call Tambarane. These, as Dames rightly suggests, could only have been Lingāyats. Barbosa gives further an account of their funeral rites. "'Many of them are merchants and trade as well.' They marry only one wife, and when one of them dies the wife buries herself alive. They dig a great hole deep enough to come up to her neck, and place her in it alive, standing on her feet, and begin to shovel in the earth around her, trampling it down with their feet until she is covered up to the neck with well-trodden earth. Then they place a great stone over her, and there she stays alive and walled up in clay, and they carry out other ceremonies for her, (which would take too long to describe : a miserable and pitiful thing, making us consider what strength ambition and reputation have in this world, when they can induce these women to submit of their own will to such a horrible end, for nothing else than for honour and to be held in good repute, failing which they would be regarded as no longer alive)."'1 According to Barbosa, therefore, this was a custom among those people who wore the Tambarane round their necks—that is to say, the Jangamas or Lingāyats.

v2.c21.s3.t9.12

Now to turn to Nuniz. This chronicler says the following in connection with sati : "This is the custom throughout all the country of the heathen, except with that caste of people called Telugus, amongst whom the wives are buried alive with their husbands when they die. These go with much pleasure to the pit, inside of which are made two seats of earth, one for him and one for her, and they place each one on his own seat and cover them in little by little till they are covered up ;

v2.c21.s3.t9.13

¹ Barbosa, Dames, I, pp. 218-20; Stanley, pp. 94-5.

v2.c21.s3.t9.14

and so the wife dies with her husband."¹ That Nuniz is positive about the name Telugu is clear from his earlier statement relating to them. "There is another class of men called Telumgalle; when these die their wives are buried alive with them."² There can be no doubt, therefore, that according to Nuniz the Telugus were addicted to this rite.

v2.c21.s3.t9.15

¹ Sewell, For. Emp., p. 393.

v2.c21.s3.t9.16

² Ibid., p. 390. Mr. Thompson accepts this blunder of Nuniz as a fact. According to him sati took the shape described by the Portuguese chronicler in the Telugu country. Suttee, p. 39.

v2.c21.s3.t9.17

Caesar Frederick also observed this custom, but unlike Barbosa and Nuniz, this shrewd observer gives us one of the most gruesome accounts we have of the rite, without telling us anything about the name of the people among whom it was common. Caesar Frederick says: "Also in this Kingdome I have seene amongst the base sort of people this use and order, that the man being dead, hee is carried to the place where they will make his sepulcher, and setting him as it were upright, then commeth his wife before him on her knees, casting her armes about his necke, with embracing and clasping him, untill such time as the Masons have made a wall round about them, and when the wall is as high as their neckes, there commeth a man behind the woman and strangleth her: then when she is dead, the workmen finish the wall over their heads, and so they lie buried together." With Caesar Frederick it was "the base sort of people" among whom "this use and order" was found."³

v2.c21.s3.t9.18

³ Caesar Frederick, Purchas, Pilgrims, X, p. 96.

v2.c21.s3.t9.19

There is one more traveller who also witnessed this unfortunate custom. It was Gasparo Balbi who writes about the events of A. D. 1582 thus: "Without the Citie of Saint Thomas is another Citie environed with walls, made of earth, and inhabited with Gentiles Souldiers, whose Chieftaine is called Adicario (adhikāri ?), who hath power to execute justice. They observe the custome to burne their Dead in this Citie, as at Negapaton; but neere to this is a Citie called La Casta de gli Orefici, Goldsmith rowe; they have a custome when the Husband is dead, to make a pit in the earth, and there to place the dead corpse crosse-legged; and on the other side his living Wife in the same manner, and their kindred cast earth upon her pressing her downe, that shee may die also....”¹ Here we have the same practice current among the goldsmiths on the east coast.

v2.c21.s3.t9.20

¹ Gasparo Balbi, *Purchas, Pilgrims*, p. 148.

v2.c21.s3.t9.21

We may remark here that Metthwold, in his *Relations of Golconda*, speaks of it as having been common among the weaver caste in the kingdom.²

v2.c21.s3.t9.22

² Metthwold, *Relations of Golconda*, p. 28, and p. 28, n. (3).

v2.c21.s3.t9.23

We have to decide as to the people who thought it worthy to die in this manner. The travellers who noted the custom were certainly correct in their assertion that there was such a rite in the Vijayanagara Empire. But it cannot be maintained with Barbosa that it was prevalent among the Liṅgāyats, nor with Nuniz, among the Telugus. The evidence of inscriptions is more conclusive on this subject. The people who died in the manner related above were the Jainas, most of whom, as is well known, were merchants and traders like the Liṅgāyats. The popularity of this kind of death was due to the precedent set by famous Jaina teachers and influential Jaina nobles. We shall first give one or two examples of the death by *samādhi*, as they called it, among the humbler classes of the Jainas. These again were called Gauḍas. A record dated A. D. 1458 relates that Siriya Gauḍa of Kuppe died, and his wife Tangaṇṇa Gauḍi fell into the tomb along with him (*ātana kūḍe samādhiyana (n) u kūḍidaḷu*).³ Then again in A.D. 1465 Kavaḍi Bela Gauḍa's wife Lākhayi Herggaḍi entered into the linga (*surag oḍadu liṅgada oḷagādaḷu*).⁴ In about A.D. 1509 when Haraūr Chāuṇḍa Gauḍa's son Bomma Gauḍa went to *svarga*, his wife Bommi Gauḍi, sitting in the tomb (*samādhi kuḷitu*) also went to *svarga*.⁵

v2.c21.s3.t9.24

³ *E. C.*, VIII., Sb. 496, p. 83.

v2.c21.s3.t9.25

⁴ *Ibid.*, Sb. 524, p. 86.

v2.c21.s3.t9.26

⁵ *Ibid.*, Sb. 165, p. 23.

v2.c21.s3.t9.27

A rapid review of this rite will make it clear that it was an ancient custom in the Karṇāṭaka. The following account of entombment in the thirteenth century and after proves that Jaina ascetics as well as Jaina aristocrats had given prominence to the cruel custom. The epigraph describing it is dated A.D. 1274. Bāḷanchandra-paṇḍita-dēva, the beloved disciple of Māghnaṇḍi-bhaṭṭāraka-dēva, of the Śrī-Mūla-saṅgha, Dēśiya-gaṇa, Pustaka-gachchha, Koṇḍakuṇḍānvaya, Ingalēśvarabaḷi, Śrī-Samudāya, and "famous in the world for his teachings on penance, announced to the four castes saying 'at noon (on the date specified) I shall enter into the tomb', and commanding them saying, 'You should all obtain dharma: you must forgive me (or, I ask your forgiveness)'. Having performed all the rites of *sannyasana*, seated on the *palyankāsana* (or couch) praising the forms of the *pañcha-paramēṣṭi*,¹—in a manner that gained approval from his own and from other sects he suffered perfect entombment. All the Bhavyas (the blessed ones, that is, the Jains) of the royal city of Dōrasamudra, performing all the ceremonies suitable for the occasion, as a memorial for his departure (or death), made images of their guru and of the *pañcha-paramēṣṭi*, and set them up, extending his merit and fame.² This was the recognized mode of death among the Jaina gurus. Māgha Chandra Dēva, who is mentioned along with the renowned gurus Pārśva Dēva and Bāhubalivṛati, and whose death is recorded in an epigraph dated A.D. 1371, must have "obtained *mukti*" in a similar manner.³ Our assumption is proved by an epigraph of A.D. 1372 which informs us that Srutimunīśvara's disciple, Māgh-anaṇḍi Siddhānti Dēva, Srutakīrti Dēva, Munichandra Dēva, Bāhubali Dēva, Pārśva Dēva, Jinachandra Dēva, and one or two others whose names are effaced, "renouncing all, entered the tomb, and attained to the (exalted) state."⁴

v2.c21.s3.t9.28

¹ *Pañcha-paramēṣṭi* or the five chiefly desired ones—the Arhantas, Siddhas, Achāryas, Upādhyāyas and Sādhus". Rice, E. C., V., P. I, p. 87, n. (2).

v2.c21.s3.t9.29

² E. C., V., P. I., Bl. 131, p. 87.

v2.c21.s3.t9.30

³ E. C., III, Nj. 43, p. 99.

v2.c21.s3.t9.31

⁴ Ibid., Nj. 64, p. 101.

v2.c21.s3.t9.32

The dismal details given by Caesar Frederick and Gasparo Balbi about the manner they "made a wall round about in a pit in the earth", may be contrasted with the following accounts of the death of a few Jainas in the latter half of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth centuries. A stone inscription, dated A.D. 1372, refers us to the reign of Vīra Bukka Rāya, when the rāja-guru, head of the Balatkāra-gaṇa, Simhanandi Āchārya's lay-disciple, Soraba Vīra Gauḍa's daughter, wife of the Āḷva-mahā-prabhu Tavanidhi Brahma, Lakshmī Bommakkā, with the rites of samādhi expired and went to svarga.¹ An effaced inscription assigned to about the year A.D. 1400 relates the following: "On a certain day Aruhat Paramesvara (? made known to) Munibhadra (vondānondu-dinam Aruhat-Paramēśvaraṁ Munibhadra ......Siriyanna......chintaneyaṁ māḷpa) that he would grant the happy state to Śiriyaṇṇa, who was a perfect lay-disciple. At the favourable time, when the rain of flowers was falling, and with a noise like thunder the sounds of great drums were rolling, (ghana-rava-bhēri-dundubhi mahā-murajaṁ bahu-vādya-ghōṣadiṁ) singing songs to himself, the sādhu Śiriyaṇṇa swiftly clung to the feet of Jina, never to leave him, —how fortunate was he."²

v2.c21.s3.t9.33

¹ E. C., VIII., Sb. 199, pp. 31-2.

v2.c21.s3.t9.34

² Ibid., Sb. 153, p. 22, P. II., pp. 65-6.

v2.c21.s3.t9.35

Munibhadra Dēva, disciple of Chandrasēna Sūri of the line of Jinasēna and Virasēna of the Uddhura-vaṁśa, had the Hisugal basadi made, and the Mulugund Jinēndra temple extended. This is related in an inscription dated A.D. 1388. The epigraph continues to give the following information about him : "After the performance of penance, elucidating his chosen āgama, having driven away sin, Munibhadra Dēva was for long without anxiety. At length, having added to his virtue, Munibhadra Dēva becoming aware that his end was approaching, as the leaf of the lotus in the water casts off the drops, so having severed himself from all outward things, the great Munibhadra Dēva, practising the prescribed rites, prepared for the higher state, and quitting this life (on the date specified) with all the rites of *sannyasana*, through the tomb entered upon the enjoyment of eternal happiness."¹

v2.c21.s3.t9.36

¹ E. C., VIII., Sb. 146, p. 21. ² Ibid., Sb. 261, p. 41. ³ Pimenta, Purchas, *Pilgrims*, X., p. 217.

v2.c21.s3.t9.37

Another example of a lay Jaina dying in the orthodox manner is given in an epigraph dated A.D. 1408. This record tells us that Gōpa Mahāprabhu was the ruler of the town of Kuppaṭūr in Nāgarakhaṇḍa. He "shone as purified by Jina-dharma, his blameless career like steps to paradise". His son was called Śiriyaṇṇa. "Śiriyaṇṇa's son, the Male-nāḍ, *mahā-prabhu* Gōpaṇṇa, having enjoyed the society of his wives for many days, abandoned family pleasures, and (on the date specified) making gifts to Brahmans of gold, grain, land, cows and all the other gifts,—discarding all pleasures of the mind or the palate, repeating the praises and prayers of the Jina-dharma, taking the hand of the Mōksha-Lakshmi, he with great joy went to heaven, amid the plaudits of all the good. Seeing that, Gōpa's wives, making all gifts to Brahmans, with pure minds doing reverence to the lotus feet of Siddhānta-yōgindra, thinking on the feet of the great Vitarāga, went to heaven.—Gōpāyi and Padmāyi."²

J. Purificatory Ceremonies

v2.c21.s3.t10.1

That foreign travellers not conversant with the customs and manners of the Hindus could be superficial in their observation is evident from the remarks of Pimenta, who, writing about the Nāyaka of Gingee, in A.D. 1599, thus describes the orthodox surroundings of that ruler. "The Naicus shewed us his golden stuffe, amongst which were two great Pots carried on their shoulders full of water for the King to drinke. The Jogues which had returned by land from Bengala, brought in such vessels water from Ganges for the Courtiers, they were encompassed with filthie base clothes, which they kissed as holy vessels notwithstanding."³

v2.c21.s3.t10.2

How far Nicholas Pimenta could be trusted in connection with this detail can be seen by examining a few epigraphs which deal with this kind of water. An inscription, dated Śaka 1428 (A.D. 1516-17) of the times of Vira Narasimha Bhujabala Mahārāya, informs us that a gift of gold for a lamp was made for bringing a pot of water from the Kāvēri for the sacred bath of the god Ratnāchalēśvara at Ratnagiri, Trichinopoly district, and for offerings in the mornings.¹ There is reason to believe that there was an official who was in charge of the "holy water" from the Ganges, from the following inscription dated A.D. 1524. This record deals with the grant of Marayanahaḷḷi, rechristened Daṇāyakapura, for the chief evening offering of the god Varadarāja of Kalu-ūr, by Kōnapa Nāyaka, who was the "bearer of Ganges water to Kṛiṣhṇa Dēva Mahārāya."²

v2.c21.s3.t10.3

¹ 147 of 1914.

v2.c21.s3.t10.4

² E. C., IX., Ma. 82, p. 61.

v2.c21.s3.t10.5

The anxiety which the people felt for performing purificatory ceremonies of temples is illustrated in an epigraph dated A.D. 1432. In the reign of Dēva Rāya II, when the champion over three kings, Hiriyakaṭṭige Amareya Nāyaka's sons Guṇḍappa Nāyaka and Amareya Nāyaka were ruling Vijaya-Sōmanāthapura which is Nuggiyahaḷḷi, the manager of his (Hiriyakaṭṭige Amareya Nāyaka's ?) house, the Eḷanhaṅkanāḍ-prabhu (with epithets) Jāla Bhīma Śeṭṭi's son Chikka-Bhīmaṇṇa, assembling the Brahmans of Nuggiyahaḷḷi, caused the samprōkshaṇa of the god Sadāśiva to be performed.³

v2.c21.s3.t10.6

³ E. C., V., P. I.. Cn. 241, p. 226.

v2.c21.s3.t10.7

The instance of minister Mallarasayya, as is related in an epigraph stated about A. D. 1500 which we have already seen, of the times of the Mahānāyakāchārya Yallappa Odeyar, coming to Beṇṇagere, stopping the daily allowance at the Nārāyaṇa temple, having proper prōkshaṇa (or purification) performed for the god, and granting a śāsana regulating the worship and ceremonies,⁴ only proves the care which the people and the State took to maintain the precints of a temple holy. We cannot determine for want of evidence the nature of the incident which led to the stopping of the daily allowance at the temple, the purification ceremony which it entailed, and the consequent regulation of worship and ceremonies.¹

v2.c21.s3.t10.8

⁴ E. C., VIII., Sb. 323, p. 55, op. cit. Supra, Volume I, pp. 182, 376.

v2.c21.s3.t10.9

¹ For some more notices in connection with orthodoxy, e.g., *grihapravēśa*, read Taylor, *O. H. M. SS.* II., p. 153, where it is said that Tirumalai Nāyaka built a palace called after own name, and that in "the *Sittari* month of the *Bava* year the ceremony of entering to reside in the new edifice, as is related in an inscription, dated A. D. 1670, see *E. C.*, XII., Pg. 46, p. 122. Subramiah Pantalu relates some incidents relating to the blind beliefs of Tātāchārya, *I. A.*, XXVII, p. 324.

v2.c21.s3.t10.10

We cannot think of ending our observations on the orthodox surroundings in and outside the great capital without having the pious personality of Annamarādhya *alias* Kompalli before us once again. In a record dated A. D. 1429-30 we have the following about this devout personage :

v2.c21.s3.t10.11

"...the descendant of the Kauṇḍinya-*gōtra*, the follower of the excellent Āpastamba-*sūtra*,

"who is glorious, the student of the Yajuś-*śākhā*, who is brilliant in virtue,

"who is the son of the Brahman Mallikārjuna, who is of unlimited spiritual power,

"who is intent on the performance of the deeds prescribed by the *Srautas* and the *Smārtas*, who is intelligent,

"who is a fit person for receiving gifts of land, who is the foremost of Brahmans,

"who is modest, distinguished, famous and high-souled,

"who has studied the four Vēdas and understood them by the Śaiva scriptures; he is the lord of the northern gate at Śrīśaila, and is renowned on earth,

"He placed the *mantra* consisting of five letters (*Nama-Śivāya*) and a Rudrākhsha having one face on one scale (and he himself sat on the other). Oh wonder ! he went up!"²

v2.c21.s3.t10.12

² Butterworth-Chetty, *Nellore Ins.*, I., p. 16.

Linked texts (8)