History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s47.35

v1.c6.s47.35

As Viśvarūpa quotes Kumārila's Ślokavārtika and is mentioned by the Mit. as an authoritative commentator it follows that he flourished between 750 A. D. and 1000 A. D. A greater approximation as to the date of Viśvarūpa can be made, if the identity of Viśvarūpa with Sureśvara be held established. Sureśvara, as he himself tells us in the Naiṣkarmyasiddhi, the Taittirīyopaniṣadbhāṣya-vārtika and other works, was a pupil of the great Śaṅkarācārya whose generally accepted period is 788-820 A. D. Mādhavācārya in several works of his quotes as Viśvarūpa's passages from the well-known works of Sureśvara. For example, the Parāśara-Mādhavīya (vol. I, part I, p. 57) quotes a kārikā of Sureśvara as that of Viśvarūpācārya.⁵⁴³ In the Vivaraṇaprameyasaṁgraha (Vizianagaram series p. 92) also Mādhava quotes a verse from the Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣad-bhāṣya-vārtika as Viśvarūpa's.⁵⁴⁴ In the Puruṣārthaprabodha⁵⁴⁵ of Brahmānanda-bhāratī (ms. in Bhau Daji collection, Bombay) composed in 1476 (probably of the Śaka era) the author speaks of the Naiṣkarmyasiddhi as a work of Viśvarūpa. In the Saṁkṣepa-Śaṅkara-jaya Viśvarūpa is said to be the author of the two vārtikas on Śaṅkara's bhāṣya.⁵⁴⁶ According to tradition embodied in the various lives of Śaṅkara, the latter had four pupils, Sureśvara, Padma-pāda, Toṭaka and Hastāmalaka. Several works mention Viśvarūpa as one of the four pupils and omit the name Sureśvara. For example, in the Dvādaśa-vākya-vivaraṇa of Gopāla (Aufrecht's Oxf. cat. No. 557, p. 227 b) the four pupils of Śaṅkara are named as Viśvarūpa, Padmanābha, Toṭaka and Hastāmalaka. In the Māna-sollāsa-vṛttānta-vilāsa of Rāmatīrtha we are expressly told that Sureśvara is another name of Viśvarūpa, a pupil of Śaṅkara (vide Mitra's Notices vol. V, No. 1763, p. 82). In the Saptasūtra-saṁnyāsapaddhati (Mitra's Notices, vol. VI, p. 296) the four pupils are said to eb Svarūpācārya, Padmācārya, Toṭaka and Pṛthvīdhara. The Guru-vaṁśakāvya (Vanivilas ed.) identifies Sureśvara and Viśvarūpa (II. 59) and makes him a pupil of Kumārila and Śaṅkara. It may therefore be held as fairly established that Viśvarūpa and Sureśvara are identical. Some corroboration is afforded by the fact that Viśvarūpa quotes Gauḍapāda the 'paramaguru' of Śaṅkara and holds the same philo-sophical views as those of Śaṅkara. Just as Viśvarūpa quotes Kumārila's Ślokavārtika, Sureśvara also in his Taittirīyopaniṣad-bhāṣya-vārtika quotes a *kārikā* of Kumārila and styles the latter Mīmāṁsakaṁ-manya.⁵⁴⁷ This shows that Sureśvara treated Kumārila with scant respect, which seems unlikely if he was at any time Kumārila's pupil. Viśvarūpa in his introduction⁵⁴⁸ performs an obeisance to the Sun, the great serpent (Śeṣa), Tilaksvāmin and Vināyaka. The Bhāmatī of Vācaspati-miśra has a similar salutation. Vācaspati-miśra wrote his Nyāyasūci-nibandha in 841-42 A. D. i. e. he was almost a contemporary of Śaṅkara and his pupils. The learned editor of Viś. tells us that in a commentary on Viś. called Vacanamālā Sureśvara is bracketed with Manu and Yogīśvara (Yājñavalkya) as an expounder of Śāstra (i. e. dharmaśāstra).⁵⁴⁹ Therefore that commentator looked upon Viś. and Sureśvara as identical. From all these several considerations it follows that Viśvarūpa flourished about 800-825 A. D. But this problem presents further difficulties. The mutual relations of Sureśvara, Bhavabhūti, Umbeka and Maṇḍana are a great puzzle. I have dealt with this question in JBBRAS for 1928, pp. 289-293. The conclusions arrived at there are that Maṇḍana's literary activity lies between 690-710, that of Umbeka between 700-730 and Sureśvara's between 810-840 A. D. and that Umbeka and Bhavabhūti are identical, but that Maṇḍana and Sureśvara are separated by about 100 years.