Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar c14.s2: Section VI. The Religion of the Kings and the spread of Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism

Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar c14.s2

Language
English

Section VI. The Religion of the Kings and the spread of Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism

c14.s2.2

The history of the religion of the Vijayanagar house is an epitome of the history of the religious movements in the empire. The early Vijayanagar kings were Śaivas of an orthodox type, but the later sovereigns became staunch Vaiṣṇavas with a predilection for God Veṅkaṭēśa of Tirupati in preference to Śrī Virūpākṣa of Vijayanagar. This change of faith of the ruling princes had its indirect effects on the faith of the people in the empire, and in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism spread in South India with amazing rapidity.

c14.s2.3

The members of the early Saṅgama dynasty, as said earlier, were Śaivas, following the Kāśmīr school of Śaivism and were known by the name of the Pāśupatas. Kriyāśakti Paṇḍita was their guru, and Śrī Virūpākṣa of Hampi was their tutelary deity, while Śrī Virūpākṣa was their sign manual.⁶⁵ The rulers maintained very cordial relations with the Śṛṅgēri maṭha; and Vidyātīrtha and Vidyāraṇya, who were its heads, and contributed much for the foundation of the Vijayanagar empire, were held in great veneration and high esteem by the early rulers of the line. In A.D. 1346 the five Saṅgama brothers jointly made a grant to the maṭha.⁶⁶ In A.D. 1380 Cennappa Uḍaiyār, a nephew of Harihara II, made the grant of an agrahāra to one Vidyābhūṣaṇa Dīkṣita, a sound scholar and a disciple of Vidyāraṇya, and re-named the village after Vidyāraṇya himself.⁶⁷ In the course of the fifteenth century a gradual change came over the faith of the Vijayanagar house and the rulers came to have a partiality for Vaiṣṇavism.⁶⁸ The Sāḷuvas were Vaiṣṇavas equally devoted to Nṛsiṃha of Ahōbalam and Veṅkaṭēśa of Tirupati. But their patronage was given to Śaivism also. They made their mahādānas both to the Śiva and Viṣṇu temples. But the Vaiṣṇava temples received more attention; grants and gifts to them were made on a larger scale. However Śrī Virūpākṣa of Vijayanagar continued to be the tutelary deity of the Sāḷuvas.

c14.s2.4

⁶⁵ E.C., V, Cp. 256.

c14.s2.5

⁶⁶ E.C., VI, Sr. 1.

c14.s2.6

⁶⁷ E.C., IX, Kn. 43; see also E.C., IV, Cn. 64; E.I., III, p. 118 and M.A.R., 1907, para 54 for a mention of the cordial relationship between the Vijayanagar kings and the Śṛṅgēri maṭha.

c14.s2.7

⁶⁸ According to the Prapannāmṛtam, a celebrated Śrī-Vaiṣṇava work, during the time of Virūpākṣa of Vijayanagar, "who secured the throne by the valour of his own sword", a change came over the faith of the Vijayanagar sovereigns. It is said that the relations whom Virūpākṣa had killed to gain the throne were born as ghosts, and haunted the palace in which Virūpākṣa lived, and hence he left it and lived in another palace. Two Vaiṣṇava Brahmans came to the old palace, saw the ghosts holding court and mistaking them to be living persons, read the Rāmāyaṇa to them to which they listened with great interest. After the course had been finished, they told the Brahmans that they were the ghosts of the relatives of Virūpākṣa who had been killed by him, and that by hearing the Rāmāyaṇa they had been rid of their piśāca life, and after presenting them with a large number of gold coins, they went to Heaven. Virūpākṣa who came to know of the whole story, began to entertain great reverence for the Rāmāyaṇa. He was also admitted to the Vaiṣṇava faith. And out of gratitude for relieving him from the trouble of the ghosts he changed the sign manual of Śrī Virūpākṣa for that of Śrī Rāma. (S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, pp. 6 and 71-73; also, Text I. 90).

c14.s2.8

Under the Tuḷuva rulers, Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya, Acyuta Rāya and Sadāśiva Rāya, Vaiṣṇavism gained a larger number of adherents. Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya, though a staunch Vaiṣṇava, showed equal patronage to the Śaivas and made grants to the Śiva temples. In 1517-18 he made a substantial remission of certain items of revenue amounting to 10,000 poṇ in favour of the Śiva and Viṣṇu temples in the Cōḷamaṇḍalam. In 1517 he built the northern gōpura in the temple of the God Poṇṇambalanātha whom he worshipped at Cidambaram⁶⁸ᵃ on his southern tour after his successful campaigns

c14.s2.9

The evidence of this Śrī Vaiṣṇava work indicates that the faith of the king Virūpākṣa had begun to change. S. K. Aiyangar thinks that the Virūpākṣa referred to in the work is the successor of Mallikārjuna, who according to the Śrīśailam plates won the throne ‘by the valour of his own sword.’ But T. A. Gopinatha Rao is inclined to think that the Virūpākṣa referred to in that work was Virūpākṣa II who won in the triangular fight for the throne on the death of Harihara II in A.D. 1404, and ruled for a short time. He bases his conclusion on the evidence of the sign manual Śrī Virūpākṣa used in the Śrīśailam plates of Virūpākṣa, and argues that the statement of the Prapannāmṛtam is contradicted by the sign manual used in the later inscriptions of the king. (E. I., XV, p. 25). But there is no other evidence to show that Virūpākṣa II changed his sign manual for Śrī Rāma. Hence the argument of Gopinatha Rao appears to lack support. But since the successors of Virūpākṣa II were staunch Śaivas, though tolerant towards the Vaiṣṇavas, and the successors of Virūpākṣa III came to have greater predilection for Vaiṣṇavism, it is reasonable to take the view that the Virūpākṣa referred to in the Prapannāmṛtam was the successor of Mallikārjuna, though there is no inscriptional evidence to show that he changed the sign manual; nor did the Sāḷuvas, the Tuḷuvas and the early rulers of the Aravīḍu line change the sign manual.

c14.s2.10

68a Though Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya takes credit for having built the northern gōpuram at Cidambaram it appears that he built only its superstructure for the basement of the tower up to the first of the seven tiers has all the features of a Cōḷa structure like the eastern and western gōpurams of the temple. The construction of the superstructure of the gōpura begun by Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya was completed by Acyutadēva Rāya. (See J.O.R., Vol. XII. p. 172 where a Cidambaram inscription of Acyutadēva Rāya is edited by S. R. Balasubrahmanya Ayyar.)

c14.s2.11

in the north. He made substantial additions to the main buildings in the Śiva temples at Kāḷahasti and Tiruvaṇṇāmalai. He also made substantial grants to the Gaṇapati temple at the capital itself.⁶⁹ He built a raṅga maṇṭapa (assembly hall) in front of the inner shrine of the Virūpākṣa temple at the capital and a gōpura before it. He also repaired a great gōpura in front of it. He made a gift to God Virūpākṣa of a golden lotus set with the nine kinds of gems and a snake ornament.⁷⁰

c14.s2.12

⁶⁹ 398 of 1896.

c14.s2.13

⁷⁰ E.I., I, pp. 366 and 370; A.S.R., 1908-09, p. 175.

c14.s2.14

But Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya’s grants to the Vaiṣṇava shrines were more numerous and richer. When he recovered the fort of Udayagiri, he found in it an image of God Kṛṣṇa which he carried to his capital with great veneration, and had enshrined in a temple specially erected for the purpose.⁷¹ He also built portions of the Viṭṭhalasvāmi temple at the capital.⁷² When he went to Tirupati in A.D. 1514 to pay his respects to God Veṅkaṭēśa, he bathed the God there in gold with 30,000 gold pieces, and presented a three-stringed necklace and a pair of gold bangles of very high value set with pearls, diamonds, rubies and topaz.⁷³ Allasāni Peddana in the prologue to his Manucaritamu says that Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya, his patron, was a great devotee of Veṅkaṭēśa.⁷⁴ This is also shown by the copper images of this king and his wives which are still found in the temple of Śrī Veṅkaṭēśa at Tirumalai.⁷⁵ In the next year he presented to God Ahōbala Narasimha at Ahōbalam a necklace, a pendant set with diamonds and an emerald, wristlets set with diamonds, a golden plate and 1,000 varāhas.⁷⁶ He also made substantial improvements to the Varadarājasvāmi temple at Conjeevaram.⁷⁷

c14.s2.15

⁷¹ 25 and 26 of 1889; 498 of 1907.

c14.s2.16

⁷² 711, 712 and 713 of 1922.

c14.s2.17

⁷³ 53, 54 and 55 of 1889.

c14.s2.18

⁷⁴ Canto I, v. 47.

c14.s2.19

⁷⁵ See M.E.R., 1904, para 9; M.A.R., 1920, para 87.

c14.s2.20

⁷⁶ 64 of 1915.

c14.s2.21

⁷⁷ 478, 513, 569 and 664 of 1919.

c14.s2.22

Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya was an ardent worshipper of Viṭhōba. The Viṭhōba cult was a phase of Vaiṣṇavism that prevailed in the Mahārāṣṭra country. Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya consecrated a temple at his capital for this God of his heart. “If the scale and highly artistic nature of a shrine could alone determine the strength of the devotion of the builder to the enshrined, we might say that Viṭhōba had the highest place in Kṛṣṇadēva’s heart.”⁷⁸

c14.s2.23

⁷⁸ *Ind. Ant.*, XLIV, p. 222.

c14.s2.24

Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya’s leanings towards Vaiṣṇavism are also seen in the encouragement he gave to Vaiṣṇava literary celebrities. Veṅkaṭa Tātārya, an eminent Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teacher, was greatly honoured by the king, and he was also made the head of all the Śrī-Vaiṣṇavas in the empire. In 1523 A.D. the king ordered that he was to be shown the first honours in every public assembly, and gave him a charter to that effect. The Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teacher was also given the power to punish delinquents in regard to religious and social matters.⁷⁹ Another teacher of eminence who received great patronage at the royal court of Vijayanagar was Vyāsa Tīrtha Yatīndra, a great scholar and an ardent exponent of the Dvaita philosophy. He was the recipient of many grants of villages.⁸⁰

c14.s2.25

⁷⁹ *M.A.R.*, 1918, para 110.

c14.s2.26

⁸⁰ E.C., VII, Sh. 85; 13 of 1905; *Catupadyamanimañjari*, pp. 161-2.
81. 544, 547 and 584 of 1919.
82. 511, 543 and 546 of 1919; *Rep.*, 1920, para 47.

c14.s2.27

Acyuta Rāya was an ardent Śrī-Vaiṣṇava. But he was tolerant towards all other religions and sects. We see from his numerous munificent gifts to temples and institutions that while in the first half of his reign he showed equal patronage to both Śaivism and Vaiṣṇavism, in the second half, his leanings were more towards Vaiṣṇavism. Thus in A.D. 1534 he made a grant of a few villages to be distributed in equal proportion between the temples of God Varadarāja and Ēkāmbaranātha at Conjeevaram and communicated the order to his subordinate officer in that locality, who, however, being a staunch Vaiṣṇava, failed to do as he was instructed by the king, and granted a larger portion to the Varadarāja temple and a smaller share to the Ēkāmbaranātha shrine. Acyuta Rāya who came to know of this unequal distribution redistributed the lands in equal proportions between the two temples by lots.81 But his large grants to the Varadarājasvāmi temple show that he was a staunch Vaiṣṇava. He performed the *tulābhāra* of pearls at Kāñcī and made substantial grants to the temple of Varadarājasvāmi.82 He gave many gifts to the Viṭṭhala temple at Vijayanagar among which the *Svarṇakṣmā* or earth of gold was one.⁸³ In 1534 he made a gift of land with a house in the presence of Viṭṭhalēśvara to each of the two Śrī-Vaiṣṇava Brahmans who recited a purāṇam in the temple.⁸⁴ He made a grant in A.D. 1539 of what was called the “ Ānanda Nidhi ” by which he claims to have delighted Viṣṇu and to have made Kubēras of Brahmans.⁸⁵ He set up the image of the God Tillai Gōvindarāja at Cidambaram in May 1539 according to the ritual of Vaikhānasa Sūtra and granted 500 poṉ for the daily worship in the temple.⁸⁶ Finally, that Acyuta was an ardent Vaiṣṇava is shown by such phrases as “ joined the feet of Viṣṇu ” used to mention his death.⁸⁷

c14.s2.28

⁸³ E.I., I, p. 364; E.I., XVII, p. 171; E.C., VII, Sh. 1; E.C., X Hn. 13.

c14.s2.29

⁸⁴ 240 of 1910.

c14.s2.30

⁸⁵ M. E. R., 1904 para 24; Rice, Mysore and Coorg from the Inscriptions, p. 119; M.A.R., 1920, para 89; A.S.R., 1908-09, p. 119 fn. 1; M.E.R., 1923, para 81. The exact significance of this grant is not known. The record registering this grant speaks of it as “a very new thing” and as being greater than the “nine treasures of Kubēra.” R. Narasimhachar thinks that the gift consisted of a “potful of money as explained by Hemādri in his Dānakhaṇḍa” (M.A.R., 1920, para 89).

c14.s2.31

⁸⁶ 272 of 1913. The Tillai Gōvindarājasvāmi temple at Cidambaram has a chequered history. The Gōvindarāja idol which is housed in the temple of Naṭarāja was, according to the Prapannāmṛtam, removed from the temple, by the Cōḷa king Krimikantha. (S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, pp. 202-3). According to the Kulōttuṅga Cōḷaṉ Ulā and Rājarājaṉ Ulā, king Kulōttuṅga II caused the Gōvindarāja idol to be thrown into the sea (his original abode). (See Journal of the Bombay Hist. Soc., IV, p. 40). It appears that Rāmānuja who lived then brought back the discarded idol or made a one with the help of his disciples and consecrated it in a temple he constructed at Tirupati. (See R. Raghava Aiyangar, Ceṉṉi Kulōttuṅga Aṉapāyaṉ, Śen Tamil, VIII, pp. 301-02; Wilson, The Mackenzie Collection, p. 299; see also S. K. Aiyangar, Anc. India, p. 320). According to the Guruparamparā, Vēdāntācārya repaired and consecrated the Gōvindarāja shrine at Cidambaram with the help of Gōpanna, though there was great opposition from the Śaivas (see J.B.B.R.A.S., XXIV, p. 309). But the idol appears to have been again removed by the Śaivas. Since then till its reconsecration by emperor Acyuta Rāya of Vijayanagar in A.D. 1539, there appears to have been no Gōvindarāja shrine at Cidambaram. In A.D. 1510 Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya made a gift of three villages with an income of 1,400 rēkai (gadyāṇa) for the mahāpūja of Aḷagiya Tiruccirrambalam Uḍaiya Tambirāṉār (323 of 1913). When he visited the place in 1517-18, he is said to have worshipped the Lord Poṇṇambala (Naṭarāja) and constructed the northern gōpuram (174 of 1892, 371 and 374 of 1913). If there had been the Gōvindarāja shrine at Cidambaram at the time of his visit, he could not have failed to worship him as a staunch Vaiṣṇava and make grants or improvements to the temple. If it had existed he would have included it in the list of temples that were benefited by his remission of 10,000 varahas made in favour of the Śiva and Viṣṇu temples in the Cōḷamaṇḍalam. In March 1530 Acyuta Rāya made a grant of eighty-two villages for the celebration of the annual car festival of Naṭarāja and the construction of the northern gōpuram of the temple (J.O.R., 1938, pp. 169-178). From this it is evident that there was no Gōvindarāja shrine in the temple

c14.s2.32

⁸⁷ E.C., IX, Cp. 186 ; E.C. V, Hn. 7.

c14.s2.33

Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism gained a stronger hold in the empire during the time of Sadāśiva. It was a happy combination then that both the de jure sovereign Sadāśiva and the de facto ruler, Rāma Rāja, were ardent followers of Vaiṣṇavism in the empire. During this period grants to Vaiṣṇava temples are more frequent and costly, and Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teachers are shown greater favour. The Viṣṇu temples of Śrīperumbudūr (Chingleput district) and Śrī muṣṇam (South Arcot district) not to speak of Tirupati and Tirumalai (Chittore), are the objects of special grants. The Tāḷḷapākkam family of Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teachers were greatly honoured by Rāma Rāja. A few among them were Annamācārya, Tirumalācārya⁸⁸ and Tāḷḷapākam Tiruveṅgaḷanātha, the author of the work called Paramayogivilāsamu and the establisher of two schools of Vedānta.⁸⁹ Gōvinda Dēśika, the royal preceptor of Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya, was displaced by Tātācārya, a famous Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teacher.⁹⁰ According to the Prapannāmṛtam it was during this period that Doḍḍayācārya defeated all the Śaiva scholars of Citrakūṭa (Cidambaram) including Appayya Dikṣita in a religious controversy, and succeeded in establishing the worship of Gōvindarāja at the place with the help of Tātācārya and Rāma Rāja.⁹¹ Tātācārya

c14.s2.34

⁸⁸ M.E.R., 1916, para 72.

c14.s2.35

⁸⁹ Ibid.

c14.s2.36

⁹⁰ M.A.R., 1906-07, para 53.

c14.s2.37

⁹¹ S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, pp. 202-203; though it is true that Appayya Dikṣita spent his last years at Cidambaram, yet his defeat at the hands of Doḍḍayācārya is mentioned only in this Śrī-Vaiṣṇava work, which, as a

c14.s2.38

on that date. It was reconsecrated only in A.D. 1539. An inscription of that year definitely states that Acyuta Rāya ordered that the image of Tillai Gōvindarāja Perumāḷ might be set up at Cidambaram according to the ritual of Vaikhānasa Sūtra, and made a grant of 500 poṇ towards the daily worship (272 of 1913 and 1 of 1915). The shrine was set up in the terraced maṇṭapa around the first prākāra of the Naṭarāja temple. No foundation of a permanent character seems to have been laid for the new shrine for the steps, floral designs and friezes even now seen all round the prākāra walls and maṇṭapas were also to be seen when the shrine of Gōvindarāja was demolished recently for carrying out certain repairs and improvements in the Vaiṣṇava shrine. The inscription of Acyuta Rāya falsifies the statement in the Prapannāmṛtam that Rāma Rāja restored the Vaiṣṇava shrine at Cidambaram after the defeat of the Śaiva scholars of Citrakūṭa (Cidambaram) by one Mahācārya, a Vaiṣṇava scholar who lived at Ghaṭikācala(Sholingar). (S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, p. 202; Ancient India, p. 320).

c14.s2.39

wrote his well-known work Pañcamatabhañjanam. Doḍḍayācārya also wrote his Caṇḍamārutam in refutation of the Dīkṣita’s work Advaita Dīpika.⁹² At the instance of Kandāḷa Śrīraṅgācārya, another Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teacher of the time, a grant of thirty-one villages was made to the Rāmānujakūṭam at Śrīperumbudūr (Chingleput district).⁹³

c14.s2.40

⁹² E. I., XII, pp. 346-47.

c14.s2.41

⁹³ E.I., IV, pp. 1-22, British Museum Plates of Sadāśiva.

c14.s2.42

With the coming to power of the Aravīḍu kings, Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism received still greater support from the rulers. Tirumala I himself was a “repository of nectar-like devotion to Hari (Viṣṇu).”⁹⁴ He made the tulāpuruṣa and other gifts, at Kāñcī, Śrīraṅga, Śeṣācala (Tirupati), Kanakasabhā (Cidambaram) and Ahōbalādri.⁹⁵ Though he was a staunch Vaiṣṇava, the old formula was followed in the matter of invocatory verses and colophons of the grants. Gaṇādhipati was saluted first, the invocatory verses were addressed to Śiva and Līlāvarāha (Viṣṇu) and the colophon Śrī Virūpākṣa written in Kanarese was retained.

c14.s2.43

⁹⁴ E.I., XVI, p. 245.

c14.s2.44

⁹⁵ E.C., XII, Tm. 1; Ck. 39.

c14.s2.45

Śrī Raṅga also was a staunch Vaiṣṇava. In the Ariviḷimaṅgalam plates he is called “the worshipper of Viṣṇu.”⁹⁶ One of the important services rendered by Śrī Raṅga for the cause of Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism was the restoration of worship in the Ahōbalam temple. The place had been occupied by Ibrāhim Quṭb Shāh and Malakappa, the chief of Haṇḍe Anantāpuram. Śrī Raṅga defeated them and restored the temple to the Jiyyaṅgāru who was in charge of it.⁹⁷ The Vaiṣṇava shrines at Melkōṭe, Śrīperumbudūr, Śrīmuṣṇam and Triplicane were the objects of numerous grants during this time. Śrī-Vaiṣṇava scholars like Eṭṭūr Kumāra Tirumala Tātācārya received great patronage at the royal court. Śrī Raṅga carried out additions and improvements to the Viṣṇu temple at Kāñcī for which he had as his agent one Tiruppaṇi Śiṅgāraieṅgār.⁹⁸ Śrī

c14.s2.46

⁹⁶ E.I., XII, p. 357, v. 20.

c14.s2.47

⁹⁷ S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, pp. 233-34 : M.E.R., 1915, paras 17 and 53.

c14.s2.48

⁹⁸ 10 of 1921; for the influence of Tātācārya during this period see M.E.R., 1921, para 53.

c14.s2.49

partisan work, naturally made prominent mention of the great Advaita teacher’s defeat. But one thing is clear from the work; the Gōvindarāja shrine at Cidambaram received special royal support without which it is doubtful if the idol could have been restored within the precincts of the Naṭarāja temple.

c14.s2.50

Rāmānuja appears to have been deified and worshipped during this period. According to a record of 1575 Śrī Raṅga, Tātācārya, his guru, and a few others provided for the recitation of the Yatirāja Saptati, a poem by Vēdānta Dēśika in praise of Śrī Rāmanuja in the temple of Melkōṭe.⁹⁹ But he like his predecessors had no antipathy to Śiva. He continued the formula of making obeisance to Śiva, Viṣṇu and Gaṇeśa at the beginning of his grants.¹⁰⁰

c14.s2.51

⁹⁹ M.A.R., 1906-07, para 50.

c14.s2.52

¹⁰⁰ E.I., IX, p. 327; E.I., XII, p. 356.

c14.s2.53

Until the days of Tirumala and Śrī Raṅga “the Vijayanagara throne was still believed to be under the blessed guardianship of the wings of Virūpākṣa.”¹⁰¹ With the accession of Veṅkaṭa II there appears a change in the imperial policy. Under him, Śrī Veṅkaṭēśa of Tirupati takes the place of Śrī Virūpākṣa of Vijayanagar. His grants bear the signature of Śrī Veṅkaṭēśa. The initial invocation is also addressed to him, or to Rāma, or Viṣvaksena or Viṣṇu.¹⁰² The moon comes to be called the brother of Lakṣmī in preference to the earlier practice of being called “the great darkness dispelling light.”¹⁰³ Further, the grants of Veṅkaṭa are generally made in the presence of God Veṅkaṭēśa of Tirupati. Thus “the Vijayanagariyas drifted southwards from Vidyānagara to Penugoṇḍa first and thence later to Candragiri—from the feet of Virūpākṣa to the feet of Veṅkaṭēśa, and from Śaivism to Vaiṣṇavism.”¹⁰⁴ Tātācārya, the guru of Veṅkaṭa and a great Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teacher, commanded great influence at his court. Tirumala Śrīnivāsācārya, Kaṇḍāla Appalācārya and Tāḷḷapāka Tirumalācārya were a few other Śrī-Vaiṣṇava teachers that flourished during the time of Veṅkaṭa. Places like Tirupati and Ahōbalam were the more important Vaiṣṇava centres. The coins of Veṅkaṭa also show that he was a staunch Vaiṣṇava. His gold coin known as Veṅkaṭa pagoda has on the obverse Viṣṇu standing on an arch, while the reverse bears the nāgari legend, Śrī Veṅkaṭēśvarāya namaḥ (adoration to blessed Veṅkaṭēśa).¹⁰⁵

c14.s2.54

¹⁰¹ I.A., XLIV, p. 221.

c14.s2.55

¹⁰² Ibid.

c14.s2.56

¹⁰³ Ibid., p. 225.

c14.s2.57

¹⁰⁴ Ibid. The change of faith of the Vijayanagar house has been supposed to have caused the anger of Virūpākṣa who punished the kings with their defeat at Rakṣas Taṅgḍi. In fact a work called Jaṅgama Kalai-jñāna gives an account of the defeat and death of Rāma Rāja in a prophetic strain by one Sarvajña, a Jaṅgama priest, and his son Virūpaṇṇa, both staunch devotees of Śiva (Wilson, The Mack. Coll., p. 272).

c14.s2.58

¹⁰⁵ Hultzsch, The Coins of the Kings of Vijayanagara, Ind. Ant., XX, p. 308.

c14.s2.59

The later rulers of the Aravīḍu line like Rāmadēva II, Veṅkaṭa III and Śrī Raṅga III were also staunch Vaiṣṇavas. But as in the earlier days toleration was shown to all religious sects. Rāma II himself though an ardent Vaiṣṇava made grants to Śiva temples. Thus in A.D. 1615 he repaired the Virūpākṣa temple at Mupinapura and granted eleven villages to the temple for the offerings, perpetual lamp, dancing girls, decorations and musicians of the God. But the temple once again fell under repair, and worship ceased. Therefore Rāmadēva repaired it and set up the God again in it.¹⁰⁶

c14.s2.60

¹⁰⁶ E.C., VI, An. 103.

c14.s2.61

Śrī Raṅga encouraged the spread of Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism with the help of the Samayācāryas. He made a grant in 1641 in favour of one Nallāṇ Cakravarti Veṅkaṭācārya one of the Svayamācārya puruṣas.¹⁰⁷ He made certain improvements to the Gōvindarāja shrine at Cidambaram and made a grant of five villages rent-free to the temple. He is also said to have fixed the routes which the processions were to take at the place and thus he appears to have ended the disputes between the authorities of the Śiva and Viṣṇu temples at Cidambaram though only temporarily.¹⁰⁸ A record of 1644 states how one Pemmasāni Timmaya Nāyuḍu appointed one Bukkapāṭṇam Tātācārya as the Samayācāram of Ghaṇḍikōṭaśīma; and it was also provided that he was to receive Guruseva, to be present at Hariseva and to punish people who swerved from the right path.¹⁰⁹

c14.s2.62

¹⁰⁷ E.C., X, Kl. 86.

c14.s2.63

¹⁰⁸ 271 of 1913.

c14.s2.64

¹⁰⁹ V. R., I.M.P., II, p. 607, No. 394.

c14.s2.65

Thus the spread of Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism in the empire was in no small measure due to the encouragement which the state gave it, the kings adopting it as their faith. But this rapid spread of the faith, and the construction of new Vaiṣṇava temples or the restoration or reconsecration of old ones, were not accomplished without opposition. At every stage the Śaivas opposed the spread of Vaiṣṇavism. This at times took such a serious turn that loss of life was sustained by the parties Fr. N. Pimenta who passed through Cidambaram in 1597 was an eye-witness to certain incidents that took place there when Kṛṣṇappa Nāyaka of Jiñji made certain improvements to the Gōvindarāja shrine there. He says that a great controversy arose as to “ whether it was lawful to place the Signe of Perimal (which is nothing but a Mast or Pole gilded, with an Ape at the foot) in the temple at Chidambaram. Some refused, others by their Legats importunately urged, and the Naichus of Gingi Decreed to erect it in the temple.” But when Kṛṣṇappa carried out the reconstruction and repair of the temple in spite of the opposition, the priests of the Śiva temple climbed the towers “ and cast themselves down ” while he was in the temple and thus twenty of them died. Kṛṣṇappa got angry and ordered the rest to be shot which order was obeyed and two were so done away with. “ A woman also was so hote in this zealous quarrel that she cut her own throat.” But finally Kṛṣṇappa was able to accomplish his purpose.¹¹⁰

c14.s2.66

¹¹⁰ Purchas, His Pilgrims, X, pp. 208-09.

c14.s2.67

Another feature of the religious movements of the period was the holding of controversies between eminent religious teachers. In the latter half of the sixteenth century there were two such notable scholars belonging to rival faiths. Appayya Dīkṣita was a staunch Advaitin with a partiality for Śiva while Tātācārya was a devout Vaiṣṇava. In one of such religious controversies, it is said, Appayya Dīkṣita defeated his opponent for which the royal guru cultivated a deep hatred for the Dīkṣita, and according to tradition, even plotted to put an end to his life.¹¹¹ A similar controversy was held at Kumbakōṇam between Vijayīndra Tīrtha, a great Madhva celebrity, and the guru of the Vīra Śaiva maṭha at that place. According to the condition they had entered into before the controversy, Vijayīndra Tīrtha was to join the Śaiva maṭha if he was defeated in the controversy, but if he succeeded, the Śaiva guru was to make over his maṭha and its property to Vijayīndra. At the end of eleven days of controversy, the Vīra Śaiva guru admitted his defeat. As a result of this, Vijayīndra Tīrtha took possession of the maṭha at Kumbakōṇam.¹¹² Likewise controversies were held between Vijayīndra Tīrtha and Appayya Dīkṣita. Both of them wrote works each condemning the philosophy of the other.113

c14.s2.68

¹¹¹ Ind. Ant., XXVIII, p. 326.

c14.s2.69

¹¹² E.I., XII, p. 346.

c14.s2.70

In spite of these bitter controversies and the strong feeling of the members of one faith against those of the other, there was no persecution in the empire. The religious conferences and discussions held were in the nature of the deliberations of a Parliament of Religions. The emperors themselves took lively and intelligent interest in such deliberations. William Forster praises the toleration under the Mughals in the following terms: "There is no trace of intolerance or persecution of any man on account of his religion--a statement which could scarcely be made of any European country at the same period."¹¹⁴ This unreserved praise of Forster can more properly be applied to the Hindu sovereigns of Vijayanagar. They pursued the policy of universal religious toleration in a period of religious bigotry and fanaticism when the rulers of Europe resorted to organised and systematic persecution, all in the sacred name of religion. The Vijayanagar rulers were far-sighted and imaginative enough to rise above the limits of their age. It must be noted however that though there was the least sign of intolerance or persecution in the empire, the rulers were always in favour of Śrī-Vaiṣṇavism and hence its rapid and successful spread in the empire.

c14.s2.71

¹¹⁴ The English Factories in India, 1618-21, Intro.. p. xliv.

Cites (13)