Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Materials for the Study of the Early History of the Vaishnava Sect c11: Lecture IV. Bhagavatism in the Scythian, Gupta and Post-Gupta Periods

Materials for the Study of the Early History of the Vaishnava Sect c11

Language
English

Lecture IV. Bhagavatism in the Scythian, Gupta and Post-Gupta Periods

c11.2

The history of the *Bhāgavata* religion from the first to the third century A.D. is, at present, in a state of utmost confusion and darkness. There are some Buddhist works of the period, *e.g.*, the *Buddha-charita*, and the *Mahāyāna Śraddhotpāda* (Awakening of Faith) attributed to Aśvaghosha, which, in our opinion, show some acquaintance with Bhāgavatism, but they do not to any great extent illumine the darkness. The difficulty of finding any Brāhmaṇical works, which may with certainty be referred to this period, excludes them from the domain of the historian.

c11.3

Kṛṣṇa appears to be mentioned in four famous inscriptions of the period, namely, the Mora stone slab inscription of the time of the Mahākshatrapa Rājuvula,¹ the Mathurā Inscription of the time of his son, the Mahākshatrapa Soḍāsa, edited by Mr. R. P. Chanda,² the Nāsik Buddhist Cave Inscription of the time of Rājan Vāsiṭhiputa Siri-Pulumāyi³ and the China Stone Inscription of the time of Rājan Gotamiputa Siri-Yaña Sātakaṇi.¹ The Mora record seems to contain a reference to images of the *Bhagavat* Vṛishṇi and the five Viras (heroes), *i.e.*, of Kṛishṇa and the five Pāṇḍava brothers. The Mathurā Inscription, edited by Mr. Ramāprasād Chanda, records the erection of a *toraṇa* (gateway), *vedikā* (terrace) and *chatuḥśāla* (quadrangle) at the *mahāsthāna* (great place) of Bhagavat Vāsudeva, in the reign of the Mahākshatrapa Soḍāsa. In the Nāsik inscription the namè of Kṛishṇa (Keśava) occurs in the following passage : *Ekadhanudhārasa ekasurasa ekaBamhaṇasa Rāma-Keśav-Arjuna-Bhīmasenatulaparakamasa*, “the unique archer, the unique hero, the unique Brāhmaṇa, in prowess equal to Rāma, Keśava, Arjuna and Bhīmasena.”² This inscription comes from the same province of India to which the Nānāghāṭ record belongs. But it is worthy of note that the characteristic *Bhāgavata* names Saṅkarshaṇa and Vāsudeva are not mentioned, and are substituted by Rāma and Keśava ; and the two are not called *Bhagavat*, but only men of prowess. This is exactly what we might expect from a record in a Buddhist cave. It will be remembered that in the Buddhist *Ghata Jātaka* also Vāsudeva and Baladeva figure only as princes and warriors. The China Inscription was published by Bühler as early as 1889.¹ Mr. N. G. Majumdar is the first to point out that it opens with an invocation of *Bhagavat* Vāsudeva.

c11.4

¹ J.R.A.S., 1911, 151.

c11.5

² *Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India*, No. 5.

c11.6

³ Lüders, *Inscription* No. 1123.

c11.7

¹ Lüders, Inscription No. 1340.

c11.8

² *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. VIII, p. 60.

c11.9

¹ Ep. Ind., Vol. I, p. 95 f.

c11.10

Sir John Marshall found at Tumain in Central India an original Vaishṇava temple now dedicated to the goddess Vindhyavāsinī, a form of Durgā. The original building was adorned with vigorous and beautiful carvings representing incidents in the life of Kṛishṇa. Another notable monument was recognised to be a figure of Balarāma assignable to the second or third century A.D.²

c11.11

² Annual Report of the Director General of Archæology in India, 1918-19, p. 21.

c11.12

Mathurā, the birth-place of Bhāgavatism, where the religion was found flourishing by Megasthenes, had ceased to be the stronghold of the faith during the Saka-Kushāṇ Period. Only two *Bhāgavata* Inscriptions have yet been discovered at the place, or in its immediate neighbourhood, which can be referred with certainty to the period of Scythian rule. The evidence of epigraphy points to the predominance of the Jaina faith, although Buddhism and Serpent worship also appear to have flourished. No less than eighty-seven inscriptions belong to the Jaina faith. The number of Buddhist inscriptions is about fifty-six. The following epigraphs belong to Serpent worship:—

c11.13

(1) Lüders, Inscription No. 63 which records the dedication of a pillar by Devila, the servant or priest at the temple of Dadhikarṇa.

c11.14

(2) Lüders, Inscription No. 85 which records the dedication of a stone slab in the temple of the divine lord of serpents (*bhagavat nāgendra*) Dadhikarṇa by the sons of the actors of Mathurā, who are praised as the Chāndaka brothers, chief among whom was Nandibala.

c11.15

(3) Lüders, Inscription No. 52a—The Mathurā Nāga Statuette Inscription.

c11.16

The evidence of serpent worship in Mathurā is important in view of the close association of Kṛṣṇa-Viṣṇu, called Anantasvāmin in a Gupta record, with Ananta the lord of snakes, the identification of his elder brother, Balarāma, with the serpent king, and the story of Kālīya nāga and his suppression by Kṛṣṇa recorded in the Purāṇas compiled during the Gupta Period.

c11.17

The paucity of *Bhāgavata* inscriptions at Mathurā probably indicates that Bhāgavatism did not find much favour at the royal court. The Śaka and Kuṣān sovereigns who reigned from the first century B.C. to the third century A.D. were usually Śiva worshippers or Buddhists and were, with a few exceptions, probably not well disposed towards the religion of Vāsudeva. The word *Rudra* figures more frequently in royal nomenclature than the name *Vāsudeva*. And the epic bards devoted to *Pītavāsa Janārdana*, the yellow-robed Kṛṣṇa, speak with horror of the depredations of Śakas and allied barbarians in the evil age "to come."' This anti-Bhāgavata attitude was probably one of the causes which brought the foreign kings into conflict with Vaiṣṇava monarchs like Chandra of the Meharaulī Inscription and the Chandra Guptas of the Gupta dynasty.

c11.18

No inscription has yet been discovered which throws much light on the state of Bhāgavatism in Northern India during the period which elapsed from the time of Soḍāsa to the Age of the Guptas. When the veil of darkness is lifted again in the Gupta Period we find the religion flourishing in the Pañjāb, Rājputāna, Central and Western India and Magadha.

c11.19

The Tuśām Rock Inscription, discovered in the Hissar District of the Pañjāb, which may be assigned to the fourth century A.D. on palæographical grounds, contains an adoration of Viṣṇu, "the mighty bee on the water-lily which is the face of Jāmbavatī," and mentions two reservoirs intended for the use of the Bhagavat, which are the work of Somatrāta, the great-grandson of Āryya-Sātvata-Yogāchāryya-Bhagavadbhakta Yaśastrāta. The nomenclature of this family of Sātvata devotees reminds us of Sarvata(1)āta of the Ghosūṇḍī record and the epithets applied to Yaśastāta prove the Aryan origin of the Sātvata religion.

c11.20

¹ Mbh., III, 188.

c11.21

and point to the close connection between Yoga and Bhakti dedicated to the *Bhagavat* of the Sātvatas, which is one of the most noticeable features of the *Gītā*.

c11.22

In the Susuniā Inscription of Chandravarman that monarch is described as the lord (*adhipati*) of Pushkaraṇa and as a servant (*dāsa*) of Chakra-svāmin (wielder of the discus, *i.e.*, Kṛishṇa-Vishṇu). Mahāmahopādhyāya Haraprasād Sāstrī believes, perhaps wrongly, that this king (*Mahārāja*) is identical with the supreme sovereign (*bhūmipati prāpta aikādhirājya*) Chandra of the Meharauli Iron Pillar Inscription “who in battle in the *Vaṅga* countries turned back with his breast the enemies who uniting together came against him, and by whom having crossed in warfare the seven mouths of the Indus the *Vāhlikas* were conquered.” King Chandra set up a lofty standard (*dhvaja*) of *Bhagavat* Vishṇu on the hill called Vishṇupada which is probably identical with that part of the Delhi Ridge on which the column stands.

c11.23

An inscription of the time of Naravarman, regarded by some scholars, without adequate reason, as the younger brother of Chandravarman, has been discovered at Mandasor.¹ The record opens with an invocation to the “Purusha with thousand heads (*sahasraśiras*) and immeasurable soul (*amitātman*) who sleeps on the waters of the four oceans as on a couch (*chatussamudra-paryaṅka-toya-nidrālu*).” It is dated in the (Mālava) year 461 (404 A.D.), “the festival of Śakra (Indra) having commenced, then allowed by Kṛṣṇa (*Kṛṣṇasyānumata*),” and extols a person named Satya “whose wealth and life were dedicated to gods and Brāhmaṇas” and who finding this world (*Jīvaloka*) to be transitory like the water of the mirage (*mṛgatṛṣṇā*), like a dream, like lightning and the flame of a lamp, took refuge (*śaraṇaṃ gataḥ*) in Vāsudeva, the grantor of protection (*śaraṇya*), the abode of the world (*jagadvāsa*), the immeasurable (*aprameya*), the unborn (*aja*) and all-pervading (*vibhu*); who is further compared to a tree that gives heaven (*tridaśa*) as its noble fruit, whose charming young shoots are the celestial damsels, whose many branches are the heavenly cars (*vimāna*), and which drops honey in the shape of rains from the clouds. The Gaṅdhāra Inscription of the time of Viśvavarman, the son of Naravarman, records “the erection, “when there is the time of the awakening from sleep of Madhusūdana,” of a temple of Viṣṇu by Mayūra-kshaka, one of the king’s ministers, who displayed the most extreme devotion (*Parā bhakti*) to Chakragadādhara, wielder of the discus and club, i.e., Viṣṇu. The coins of the Traikūṭaka King Dahrasena, the son of Indradatta, describe him as *Paramavaiṣṇava*. From a copper-plate found at Pardi, south of Surat, we learn that Dahrasena flourished about A.D. 456.¹

c11.24

¹ Indian Antiquary, 1913, ‘Epigraphic notes and Questions’ by Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar; H. P. Sāstrī, Ep. Ind., XII, pp. 315 ff.

c11.25

¹ J.R.A.S. 1905, pp. 801-804.

c11.26

Some of the great Gupta sovereigns of Magadha describe themselves as “*paramabhāgavata*,” and were unquestionably great champions of the religion of Vāsudeva. With the rise of their power Bhāgavatism, which was now synonymous with Vaishnavism, naturally came to the forefront and spread to the remotest corners of India. The general prevalence of the religion throughout the Gupta Empire is attested by numerous inscriptions and sculptures. The Udayagiri Cave Inscription of the year 82 of the Gupta Era records the dedication of two images, one of Vishnu, the other of a twelve-armed goddess who must be some form of Lakshmī, by a mahārāja of the Sanakānika family; the last component—‘*dhala*’ of his name alone is legible, but he is described as the son of Mahārāja Vishṇudāsa, and the grandson of the Mahārāja Chhagalaga; he refers to himself as *Śrī Chandraguptapādānudhyāta*, so that he must have been a feudatory of Chandra Gupta II Vikramāditya. The name of the father of—‘*dhala*,’ Vishṇudāsa, “Slave of Vishnu,” possibly indicates that he, too, was a *Bhāgavata* or *Vaishnava*. The Bhitarī Pillar Inscription of Skanda Gupta records the installation of an image of *Śārṅgin*, the wielder of the bow called Śārṅga, *i.e.*, Viṣṇu, and the allotment to it of a village by the emperor in memory of his father Kumāra Gupta I, and to increase his merit. The inscription mentions Skanda Gupta’s struggles with the Pushyamitras. Kumāra Gupta seems to have died before the success of his son’s arms had been assured and the ruined fortunes of the family re-established; it was therefore to his mother that the victorious prince returned to announce his victory, “just as Kṛṣṇa, when he had slain his enemies, betook himself to (his mother) Devakī.” The Junāgaḍh Inscription of the same reign contains an adoration of Viṣṇu “the perpetual abode of Lakshmī, whose dwelling is the water-lily; the conqueror of distress; the completely victorious one, who, for the sake of the happiness of the lord of gods, seized back from Bali the goddess of wealth and splendour, who is admitted to be worthy of enjoyment and who had been kept away from him for a long time.” The inscription records the erection of a temple of *Chakrabhṛit* (the wielder of the discus, *i.e.*, Kṛṣṇa) by Chakrapālita who was the son of a governor of Skanda Gupta, and was a devoted worshipper of Govinda. Another inscription of the time of Skanda Gupta, *viz.*, the Gadhwā Inscription of 467-68 A.D., records the installation of an image of *Anantasvāmin* (Viṣṇu) and a grant of some land at a village belonging to the same god under the name of *Chitrakūṭasvāmin*. The Eraṇ Stone Pillar Inscription of the time of Budha Gupta contains an invocation of the all-pervading (vibhu), four-armed (deity) Janārdana, i.e., Vishṇu, whose couch is the broad waters of the four oceans; who is the cause of the continuance, the production, and the destruction, etc., of the universe; (and) whose ensign (ketu) is Garuḍa. The epigraph records the erection of a dhvajastambha or flagstaff of the deity by the Mahārāja Mātrivishṇu who is described as atyanta-bhagavad-bhakta "excessively devoted to the Blessed One." Another Eraṇ inscription executed in the reign of the Hun King Toramāṇa contains an adoration of the Boar Incarnation and records the erection of a stone temple of "Nārāyaṇa who has the form of a boar," by Dhanya-vishṇu, the younger brother of Mātrivishṇu. A Dāmodarpur Copper-plate Inscription of the time of Budha Gupta is concerned with the construction of a temple for the god Svetavarāhasvāmin and another Gupta epigraph of A.D. 543-44 refers to provision for its repair.

c11.27

After the disintegration of the empire of the Guptas the Bhāgavata or Vaishṇava religion flourished in the dominions of many of their former feudatories, especially in Central India. The Barabar Hill Cave Inscription of Anantavarman records the installation in the cave of an image of Kṛishṇa. The Khoh Copper-plate Inscription of the Parivrājaka Mahārāja Saṃkshoba (209 G. S. = 529 A.D.) contains an invocation of Vāsudeva, and records the gift of a village for the purpose of observing the bali, charu and sattra at the temple which the king had caused to be built for the goddess Pishtapurī, probably a form of Lakshmī. The Khoh Copper-plate Inscription of Jayanātha records the gift of a village for the purpose of a temple of Vishnu. Two inscriptions of the same place but executed in the reign of Sarvanātha record the gift of several villages for the purpose of the worship of the goddess Pishtapurikā.

c11.28

We learn from the Māliyā Copper-plate Inscription of Dharasena II that Dhruvasena I, King of Valabhī, was a Bhāgavata or Vaishnava. The Alinā Copper-plate Inscription of Silāditya VII of the same dynasty refers to the man-lion (Narasimha) Incarnation. The Sārnāth Stone Inscription of Prakaṭāditya records the building of a temple to Muradvish (Vishnu-Krishna). A temple of Deogarh, in the Lalitpur Subdivision of the Jhānsi district in the United Provinces, is adorned with sculptures which, according to V. Smith, may date from the first half of the sixth century A.D. The subject of one of these is Vishnu as the Eternal, reclining on the serpent Ananta with the other gods watching from above. A composition nearly life-size, at Pathārī in the Bhopāl Agency, believed to represent the new-born Krishna lying by the side of his mother, who is watched by five attendants, is considered by some to be the finest and largest piece of Indian sculpture.¹ The style, says Smith, is much the same as that of the Deogarh panels, and the group must be of nearly the same age.

c11.29

¹ See V. Smith's *History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon*, p. 164.

c11.30

We shall now try to find out the most salient features of "Guptan Vaishnavism." The records of the Gupta Age refer to the close association of Bhāgavatism with *Yoga* philosophy and solar worship, which is also noticed in the *Gītā* and the *Nārāyaṇīya*.² It is clear from the Tuśām Inscription that the Sātvatas or the Bhāgavatas had now definitely accepted the identification of their Kṛiṣhṇa with Viṣhṇu. Viṣhṇu's epithet "The mighty bee on the water-lily which is the face of Jāmbavatī" certainly refers to Kṛiṣhṇa who is, in the Purāṇas and the *Mahā-Ummagga Jātaka*,³ the husband of Jāmbavatī or Jambāvatī.⁴ But though Kṛiṣhṇa and Viṣhṇu were regarded as identical, the latter name was now the more usual designation of the Supreme God of the Sātvatas or the Bhāgavatas. Viṣhṇu, Puruṣha, Nārāyaṇa, Janārdana, was now the Supreme Deity. Kṛiṣhṇa was merely his most perfect Incarnation. In other words, Bhāgavatism had now lost itself in Vishṇuism. The earth is Vaishṇavī, belonging to Vishṇu. It is Vishṇu who, for the sake of Indra, seized back from Bali the goddess Śrī. It is Puruṣa who, according to the Allahabad Praśasti of Samudra Gupta, caused Udaya (creation) and Pralaya (destruction) and, according to a Mandasor inscription, slept on the waters of the four oceans as on a couch. It is the Bhagavat Nārāyaṇa who, according to an Eraṇ Inscription, became incarnate as a Boar "to lift up the earth and to serve as the pillar for the support of the great house which is the three worlds." It is Janārdana who, according to another Eraṇ epigraph, lay on the broad waters of the four oceans and is the cause of the continuance, the production and the destruction of the universe. In the concluding portion of the Mandasor record of Naravarman, however, the Supreme deity receives the name Vāsudeva and is described in terms which remind us of the Bhagavad Gītā. He is Śaraṇya (refuge of beings), Jagadvāsa (home of the universe), Aprameya (the immeasurable), Aja (unborn), and Vibhu (all-pervading). People leaving the world and its fleeting joys take shelter in him (Śaraṇāgata). But the heaven (tridaśa) of the Mandasor record is too earthly to bear comparison with the param sthānam of the Lord's Song.

c11.31

² Fleet, *Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum*, Vol. III, pp. 127, 270 (*Bhagavat-pādānām Āditya-bhaṭṭāraka-pādānām chu; Sātvata-yogācharyya bhagavadbhakta*).

c11.32

³ No. 546. The *Jātaka*, edited by Cowell; Vol. VI, pp. 216-17.

c11.33

⁴ In the *Jātaka* Jāmbavatī is represented as a Chaṇḍāla maiden The Gupta epigraphs make no mention of Rādhā who is referred to in Hāla's *Sapta-Satakam* (Ind. Ant., 1874.. 25 n.) and later works. Fo references to Kṛiṣhṇa as *Rādhāvirahātura* and *Rādhādhara* see *op. cit.* 1877, p. 51; 1893, p. 82.

c11.34

Along with Kṛiṣhṇa there appear other beings who are also regarded as incarnations of Vishṇu- Nārāyaṇa. The worship of the incarnations is a notable feature of the Vaishnavism of the Gupta period. The Boar Incarnation is expressly referred to in the Eraṇ Inscription of the time of Toramāṇa and some of the Dāmodarpur plates. The Dwarf Incarnation is clearly implied in the statement of the Junāgaḍh Inscription :—" who, for the sake of the happiness of the lord of the gods, seized back from Bali the goddess of wealth and splendour." The man-lion incarnation is mentioned in the Alīnā plate. The Rāma Avatāra is not referred to in any of the Gupta inscriptions, but is mentioned by Kālidāsa¹ (*Rāmābhidhāno Hari*) who probably belonged to the Gupta age. The Rāma cult however was still in its infancy. A *Rāmatīrtha* (place of pilgrimage) is mentioned in a Nasik cave inscription of the second century A.D. But it is difficult to say whether it was named after the Rāghava prince, as the son of Jamadagni and the elder brother of Vāsudeva bore the same name. Rāma worship was certainly favoured by some of the early Tamil saints, notably Kulaśekhara, and Varāhamihira in his *Bṛhat-Saṃhitā*² refers to images of Rāma, son of Daśaratha. But there is no clear evidence of the existence of a Ramaite sect before the age of Rāmānanda. The germs of the Dwarf, the Boar, the Fish and the Tortoise *Avatāras* are to be found in the *Śatapatha* and a few other *Brāhmaṇas* but not as yet connected with Viṣṇu (the Dwarf alone excepted). Nṛsiṃha appears in the *Taittirīya Āraṇyaka*. In a notable passage of the *Nārāyaṇīya*,¹ only the Boar, the Dwarf, the Man-Lion and Man (Vāsudeva?) appear as *avatāras*. In a second list² two more, Rāma Bhārgava and Rāma Dāśarathi, are added. In a third list³ Haṃsa, Kūrma, Matsya, and Kalkī are added, while in the *Matsya Purāṇa*⁴ and the *Bhāgavata Purāṇa*⁵ Buddha appears in the list of the *Avatāras*. The last mentioned work raises the number of *Avatāras* to twenty-three and includes even Ṛiṣabha, probably the first Tīrthaṅkara of the Jainas. The *Ahirbudhnya Saṃhitā* speaks of thirty-nine *Vyūhas* or manifestations of the Supreme Being and includes in the list not only some of the well-known *Avatāras* but also Kapila and Nara. The *Viṣvaksena Saṃhitā* refers to secondary *Avatāras* and cites as instances Buddha, Arjuna and others. The doctrine of the *Avatāras* thus underwent several stages of development.

c11.35

¹ Raghuvamśa, xiii, 1.

c11.36

² LVIII, 29-30.

c11.37

¹ Mbh., xii, 349, 37.

c11.38

² Op. cit., 339, 77-90.

c11.39

³ Op. cit., 339, 104.

c11.40

⁴ 47, 247.

c11.41

⁵ 1, 3, 24.

c11.42

With the worship of the *Avatāras* may be contrasted the almost total absence of any reference to the *Vyūhas* Saṅkarṣaṇa, Pradyumna and Aniruddha in the inscriptions of the Gupta Age. The Vyūhas as well as the ten Avatāras are met with in the Nārāyaṇīya. The Mahābhāshya of Patañjali and the Ghosuṇḍī and Nānāghāt Inscriptions show that the cult of the Vyūhas in some shape must have prevailed in the second and first centuries B.C. The disappearance of the independent worship of the Vyūhas excepting Vāsudeva was perhaps one of the first fruits of the growing popularity of the Avatāras. The ousting of the Vyūhas by the Avatāras was one of the characteristic signs of the transformation of Bhāgavatism into Vishnuism.¹

c11.43

¹ The adoration of Saṅkarshaṇa and Vāsudeva seems to survive in a modified form in the worship of "Bala, Krishna and Subhadrā" mentioned in a Bhubaneśwara inscription (Ep. Ind., XIII, 153). Varāhamihira (LVIII, 36 37) refers to images of Baladeva and Krishna standing on either side of Ekānaṁśā (Subhadrā ?) who is identified with Pārvatī by the Trikāṇḍaśesha and the Śabda Kalpadruma.

c11.44

Another important feature of the Vaishnavism of the Gupta period was the worship of Lakshmī. Under the name of Sirimā Devatā Lakshmī appears to have been worshipped by the Brāhmaṇical Hindus and Buddhists alike before the Christian era. We have representations, of a very early date, of this goddess on the Bhārhut Tope, and on certain silver coins of the Mahākshatrapa Rājuvula of Mathurā.² She had only a minor place in the early Vishnuite pantheon.³ But, as Sister Niveditā has pointed out,¹ "a great formative movement took place in the history of Vaishṇavism when India was united under the Guptas." The "enthronement of Lakshmī beside Nārāyaṇa as the centre of Vaishṇava worship"² is not an isolated fact. It is paralleled by the prominent position held by the *Devis* or royal consorts in the inscriptions and on the coins of the Gupta Emperors. There is reason to believe that there was "a strong movement for the assertion of the rights of woman"³ in the Gupta period. The influence of the *Sāṅkhya* doctrine of *Purusha* and *Prakriti* on the neo-Vaishṇavism may also be detected in the Lakshmī-Nārāyaṇa cult. The numismatic evidence seems to point to the fact that the worship of Pallas and other Greek goddesses had something to do with the wide diffusion of the cult of Srī. On Rājuvula's coin mentioned above Lakshmī sometimes takes the place of Pallas on the reverse.

c11.45

² Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, pp. 216-219, and Cunningham, Coins of Ancient India, p. 86.

c11.46

³ Cf. Bodhāyana Dharmasūtra, ii, 5. 24.

c11.47

¹ *Footfalls of Indian History*, p. 213.

c11.48

² *Op. cit.*, p. 206.

c11.49

³ *Op. cit.*, p. 206.

c11.50

Side by side with Lakshmī appears another goddess, Bhūdevī, or the Earth, who is called Vaishṇavī, consort of Vishnu, in several records of east central India.⁴

c11.51

⁴ Fleet, *Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum*, Vol. III, pp. 194, 198, 296.

c11.52

In a previous lecture I have adduced grounds for believing that the principal *Purāṇas* were composed or compiled during the Gupta Age. But it is not safe to depend on them in writing the history of ancient Vaishnavism. The Purāṇas have been added to from time to time and the texts have undergone such corruption that no one can be positively certain that a particular chapter was not interpolated in comparatively recent times. E.g., the Vāyu Purāṇa known to the Mahābhārata¹ was different from our present text. The passages from the Purāṇa quoted in the epic do not agree with the corresponding passages of the extant work. What is true of the Vāyu is also true of the Matsya, Viṣṇu, Bhāgavata and Brahma-Vaivartta Purāṇas. The great Bengali writer, Bankimchandra, shows in his Kṛiṣṇa-Charitra that the contents of the extant Brahma-Vaivartta Purāṇa do not agree with the contents of the work given in the Matsya. As the extant Purāṇa texts are unreliable I have generally abstained from using them in the present historic sketch and have depended mainly on the sure guidance of epigraphy.

c11.53

¹ iii, 191, 16, Vāyuproktamanusmṛitya Purāṇam Ṛishi-saṃstutam.

c11.54

With the fall of the Guptas Bhāgavatism lost its pre-eminence in Northern India. The most powerful sovereigns of the next period, e.g., Mihiragula, Yaśodharman and Harsha, were adherents of non-Bhāgavata creeds. But there is reason to believe that though hurled from its eminent position, it was far from being extinct in Northern India. The *Brihat Samhitā* of Varāhamihira refers to *Bhaktas* of Vāsudeva¹ and defines *Bhāgavata* as one devoted to the worship of Vishnu.² In the *Harsha-charita* of Bāṇabhaṭṭa (seventh century A.D.) King Harsha is represented as meeting not only Buddhists and Jainas but also *Bhāgavatas*. Bāṇa mentions not only the *Bhāgavatas* but also the *Pañcharātras*. The word *Pañcharātra* was sometimes used as a synonym of *Bhāgavata*; more often it designated an important branch of the *Bhāgavata* sect.³ Schrader believes that some of the *Pañcharātra Samhitās* were composed in Kaśmīra between the fourth and eighth centuries A.D. Magnificent temples in honour of Vaishṇava deitics were constructed in Kaśmīra in the reign of Avantivarman.⁴

c11.55

¹ LXIX, 32.

c11.56

² LX, 19.

c11.57

³ Ind. Ant., 1908, p. 258.

c11.58

⁴ Rājatarangiṇī, V, 28-30.

c11.59

The *Bhāgavatas* were an influential sect in the early part of the ninth century A.D. Śaṅkarāchārya in a well-known passage of his commentary on the *Brahmasūtras*⁵ combats the *Bhāgavata* doctrine (which he calls *Pañcharātra*) and asserts its incompleteness and unorthodoxy. The passage seems to intimate that the promulgator of the *Pañcharātra* system was Sāṇḍilya, who was dissatisfied with the Vedas, not finding in them prompt and sufficient way of supreme excellence (*Para-śreyas*) and final beatitude; and therefore he had recourse to this *Śāstra*. Śāṇḍilya was probably one of the first among those who systematised the doctrines of the Vāsudevakas. If we regard him as identical with Udara Śāṇḍilya of the Vedic texts, he is tenth in the apostolic succession from Indrota,¹ the priest of Janamejaya, the great-grandson of Kṛṣṇa’s sister Subhadrā.

c11.60

⁵ II, ii, 42-45.

c11.61

¹ *Vaṃśa Brāhmaṇa*, 2.

c11.62

Though the *Bhāgavata* religion still flourished in the north, its stronghold was now not the valley of the Ganges or Central India, but the Tamil country. There the faith flourished under the strong impetus given by the Ālvārs “who by their Tamil songs inculcated *Bhakti* and Kṛṣṇa-worship mainly.” Bhāgavatism had penetrated into the Deccan at least as early as the first century B.C.² The China inscription of the time of Yajña Sātakarṇi shows that the faith flourished in the Kṛṣṇā District in the second century A.D. In the sixth century A.D. the Chalukya king Maṅgaleśa is described as a *parama bhāgavata* or most devout worshipper of the Blessed One and bas reliefs at Badami belonging to this period depict many scenes connected with Kṛṣṇa and other deities of the Vishṇuite pantheon. The significant name "Vishṇu gopa" of Kāñchī found in the Allahabad Praśasti of Samudra Gupta probably indicates that the Kṛishṇa cult had found its way to the extreme south before the middle of the fourth century A.D. Nay, we have a more direct evidence of the existence of Kṛishṇa-Baladeva worship in the Tamil country in the early centuries of the Christian era. The Chilappathikaram (Śilappadikāram) and the other ancient Tamil poems refer to temples dedicated to Kṛishṇa and his brother at Madurā, Kāviripaddinam and other cities.¹ The poet Kari-kannam of Kāviripaddinam described the two kings Karikal and Velli-ampala-thu-Thunjia-Peru-Valuthi as "majestic like the two gods one of whom fair in complexion, bears the flag of the palmyra (Baladeva) and the other of dark hue, whose weapon is a wheel.² The wide prevalence of Bhāgavatism in the Far South is also testified to by the Bhāgavata Purāṇa which says³ that in the Kali Age devoted worshippers of Nārāyaṇa, though rare in some places, are to be found in large numbers in the Draviḍa country watered by the rivers Tāmraparṇī, Kṛitamālā, the sacred Kāverī and the great stream (Periyār ?) flowing to the west. Pure souls who drink the water of these streams are usually devoted to the Blessed Vāsudeva (Prāyo bhaktā Bhagavāti Vāsudeve 'malāśayāḥ).

c11.63

² *Cf.* the Nānāghāṭ Inscription.

c11.64

¹ Kanakasabhai's "The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago," pp. 13, 26.

c11.65

² Kanakasabhai's "The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago," pp. 68-69.

c11.66

³ xi, 5, 38 ff.

c11.67

The Vaishnava tradition of Southern India mentions twelve Ālvārs,¹ namely:—

c11.68

¹ For the Ālvārs see S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar, *Sri Rāmānujāchārya*, pp. 4 ff. ; T. Rājagopālāchāriar, *The Vaishnavite Reformers of India*, pp. 2, 138 ff. ; Sir R. G. Bhandarkar, *Vaishnavism, etc.*, pp. 48 ff. ; Dikshitar, *Studies in Tamil Literature and History*, pp. 103 ff. ; J. S. M. Hooper, *Hymns of the Ālvārs*; Farquhar, *An Outline of the Religious Literature of India*, pp. 187 f. ; K. G. Sesha Aiyar, I.H.Q. 1931, pp. 724 ff. Pandit M. Raghava Aiyungar, *The Contemporaneity of Saints Tirumangaiyar and Gnanasambandha* (Dr. S. K. Aiyangar Commemoration Volume, 201 ff.), etc.

c11.69

1. Poygai or Poykai Ālvār.
2. Bhūtattār (Ālvār).
3. Pey Ālvār.
4. Tirumalisai Ālvār.
5. Namm-Ālvār or saint Saṭakopa.
6. Mathura Kavi or Madhurakavi Ālvār.
7. Kulaśekhara Ālvār.
8. Periy-Ālvār or Vishṇuchitta.
9. Āṇḍāl.
10. Toṇḍaraḍippoḍi Ālvār.
11. Tiruppāṇ Ālvār.
12. Tirumaṅgai Ālvār.

c11.70

The word Ālvār literally means "those who are immersed (in devotion to or love of god)." These saints came from both sexes and from many castes including the lowest. They composed the Divya Prabandham or Nālāyira Prabandham, i.e., the collection of four thousand lyrics of divine praise. The songs were gathered together by Nāthamuni, the famous Āchārya, who probably lived in the eleventh century A.D. The three earliest Ālvārs were mythical in their origin and are said to have been born at Kāñchī, Mahābalipuram and Mylapore respectively. They are represented as having met at the modern Tirukkoilur, where they had a vision of God and poured forth their joy at the sight in Tamil verses of a hundred each. These saints speak of Nārāyaṇa as the Supreme Divinity, refer frequently to the early Avatāras or descents of Viṣṇu, especially the Trivikrama, and are eloquent in their praise of the Kṛṣṇa Avatāra. They show acquaintance with the principal Purāṇas and worship images of the more ancient temples of the Tamil country, like those at Śrīraṅgam, Tirupati, and Alagarkoil. They speak with reverence of the Vedic canon but teach the adoration of the Deity by recitation of His names, services at the shrines and meditation on His personal forms. Tirumaḷiśai Ālvār was the next in the traditional list. He was born in the hamlet of Tirumaḷiśai, near Poonamallee and lived for some time at Kāñchī. “Those who will not worship Viṣṇu,” says he in his hymns, “are low indeed.” The fifth Ālvār Saint Saṭagopa, Saṭakopa or Namm-Ālvār stands first among the Ālvārs in order of importance. He wrote the Tiruviruttam, the Tiruvāśiriam, the Periya Tiru vandādi and another work that has the distinctive appellation Tiruvāymoḷi, “the word of the mouth.” He was the son of a Pāṇḍya chieftain and his native city was Kurukai or Kurukūr near modern Tinnevelly on the Tāmraparṇī. He composed over a thousand stanzas in classical Tamil. He preached ecstatic love to the Lord conceived of as Nāyaka or lover with the devotee as his beloved. Mathurakavi or Madhurakavi was a Brāhmaṇa of Tirukkovilūr. He was a worshipper of his Guru exclusively. Kulaśekhar Āḷvār was a ruler of ancient Kerala on the Malabar coast. He composed songs in praise of Mahāviṣṇu and his favourite avatāra was Śrī Rāmachandra. The section of the Prabandham consisting of his songs is called Perumāḷ-Tirumoḷi. Periy-Āḷvār or Viṣṇuchitta, was born at Śrī Villiputtūr. He was a composer of extensive songs. Among these the most famous is the Tiruppallāṇḍu. The Āḷvār also wrote the Tirumoḷi which is concerned with the exploits of Kṛiṣhṇa. Āṇḍāl Koḍāi or Nāchchiyār was a lady, the reputed daughter of Viṣṇuchitta, who may rightly be called the “Mīrā Bāi” of the South. She was probably born about A.D. 716. She expresses passionate longing for Kṛiṣhṇa whom she regards as her lover. The chief works attributed to her are the Tiruppāvai muppatu and the Nāchchiyār Tirumoḷi (The sacred speech of the queen) Toṇḍaraḍippoḍi (“the Dust of the Feet of the Slaves of God”), the next Āḷvār, known originally as Vipra Nārāyaṇa, was a native of Maṇḍanguḍi. His favourite deity was Ranganātha at Śrīrangam. He wrote the sacred poems known as the Tirumālai (the sacred garland) and the Tiruppai Yeuchill (the Rousing of the Lord).

c11.71

Tiruppāṇ, the eleventh Ālvār, was the adopted child of a lute-player at Uraiyur near Trichinopoly. He composed the Amalan-ādipirān in ten stanzas.

c11.72

The last of the Ālvārs is Tirumaṅgai who is the author of the largest number (1,361) of the four thousand verses of the Tamil Vaishṇava Prabandham. Tirumaṅgai belonged to the Kallar caste and was born at Tiruvāli Tirunagari or Kurugur in the Tanjore district. He served under the Chola king and afterwards lived in Śrīrangam and rebuilt some parts of the great shrine, the funds for which he had to find by robbing the great Buddhist establishment at Negapatam of its golden image of the Sākya sage. He provided for the recital of Namm-Ālvār’s Tiruvāymoli annually at Śrīrangam. The date of this Ālvār is a subject on which opinion is divided. Bishop Caldwell held that he was a disciple of Rāmānuja, while Gopīnāth Rāo is willing to believe that he was a contemporary, if not actually a disciple, of Yāmunāchārya Ālavandār, Rāmānuja’s great-grandfather and predecessor in the apostolic succession of Vaishṇavism, who lived in the eleventh century A.D.¹

c11.73

¹ Farquhar, Rel. Lit., 379; Ind. Ant., 1906, p. 230.

c11.74

It is however clear from the centum known as the *Rāmānujanūrrandhādhi*, a work composed during the lifetime of Rāmānujāchārya by Amudan, a convert and pupil of one of the great Āchārya's own disciples, that Rāmānuja lived long after Tirumaṅgai, and had read and derived much wisdom from the works of that Āḷvār.¹ That the last Āḷvār was not a disciple, or contemporary, of Yāmunāchārya is proved by a stanza in praise of his work by Tirukkoṭṭiyūr Nambi, a teacher of Rāmānuja and, therefore, a contemporary of Yāmuna. The eulogium goes to show that Tirumaṅgai's works had been regularly studied and handed down from preceptor to disciple for some time at least. A decad of Tirumaṅgai in praise of the Parameśvara Vinnagara at Kāñchī gives in great detail the achievements of a Pallava ruler whom Dr. Hultzsch considers to be identical with Parameśvara Varman II, from the name of the shrine. This, says Krishṇaswāmī Aiyaṅgar² is not a necessary inference, as any other Pallava paramount sovereign might have had the title Pallava Parameśvara. The details given in the decad do not find support from what is known of Parameśvara Varman II. There is a story that Tirumaṅgai held a successful disputation with the Saiva saint Tiruñāna Sambandar, supposed to be a contemporary of the celebrated Pallava ruler Narasimha Varman I of Kāñchī who reigned about A.D. 642. The date of the Saiva saint has then to be allotted to the middle of the seventh century A.D. The date of his Vaishṇava contemporary must in that case fall either in the middle of the seventh century, or, if he was a younger contemporary, in the latter part of the same century and the beginning of the eighth. Mr. V. R. Ramchandra Dikshitar, following the late Gopīnātha Rao, however, points out that Tirumangai refers to Pallavamalla and Vayiramega who are identified with Nandi Varman Pallavamalla and his Rāshṭrakūṭa contemporary Dantidurga who flourished about the middle of the eighth century A.D. The Ālvār, according to this view, could not have flourished before c. 750 A.D.

c11.75

¹ S. Krishṇaswāmī Aiyaṅgar, Ancient India, p. 407.

c11.76

² Ind. Ant., 1906, p 281.

c11.77

The dates (4203-2706 B.C.) assigned by the "hagiologists" to the earlier Ālvārs do not bear scrutiny. Since the Ālvār mentioned last in the traditional list lived in or about the eighth century A.D., it is surmised that the earliest saints must have lived long before this period, possibly in the opening years of the Christian era. But the matter is not free from doubt. In the opinion of the late Gopīnātha Rao, Bhūtattālvār, the second saint, who makes reference to Māmallai or Mahābalipuram, a city named after Narasimha-Varman I, surnamed Mahāmalla, could not have lived earlier than the seventh century A.D. The same remark applies to his traditional contemporaries, the first, third and fourth Ālvārs. Mr. V. R. Ramchandra Dikshitar suggests ¹ that Nammālvār, too, may be placed in the seventh century, though many other scholars including Gopīnātha Rao are inclined to assign to him a much later date. Kulaśekhara is placed by Sir Ramkrishna Bhandarkar in the twelfth century A.D., while Mr K. G. Sesha Aiyar assigns to him a date in the sixth century on reasons that are not very convincing.² Epigraphic evidence suggests that the Ālvār flourished some time before Rājendra Chola I.³ The commendatory verses in regard to some of his lyrics are written by Maṇakkāl Nambi who is said to have been born in the ninth century A.D.⁴

c11.78

¹ Studies in Tamil Literature and History, pp. 105-106.

c11.79

² The Indian Historical Quarterly, 1931, p. 784.

c11.80

³ Op. cit., p. 728.

c11.81

⁴ Op. cit., pp. 732-33.

c11.82

The Ālvārs were followed by another group of teachers called Āchāryas ⁵ who represented the intellectual side of Tamilian Vaishṇavism as the Ālvārs did the emotional side. The first of the Āchāryas was Nāthamuni or Raṅganāthāchārya. He was a native of Vīranārāyaṇapura, the modern Mannargudi, and was probably a descendant of the early Vaishṇava immigrants from the North who carried the Bhāgavata cult to the Tamil country. He lived in the town of Śrīraṅgam near Trichinopoly probably during the eleventh century A.D. The traditional date of his death is 920 A.D. But if the story regarding his synchronism with a Chola king whose capital was Gaṅgaikoṇḍa Cholapuram be correct¹ he could not have died earlier than the reign of Rājendra Chola I Gaṅgaikoṇḍa (eleventh century A.D.).

c11.83

⁵ For the Āchāryas see T. Rājagopālāchāriar, The Vaishṇavite Reformers of India, pp. 1 ff., 140 ff., Śrībhāshya of Rāmānujāchārya, trans. by M. Raṅgāchārya and M. B. Varadarāja Aiyangar, Vol. I, pp. 89 ff., 158.

c11.84

¹ T. Rājagopālāchāriar, The Vaishṇavite Reformers of India, p. 7.

c11.85

Nāthamuni was a passionate lover of the songs of the Ālvārs, especially of Śaṭakopa. He is said to have recovered the whole of Śaṭakopa’s works and to have arranged them and the extant works of the other Ālvārs into four collections of almost a thousand stanzas each. He also composed a Sanskrit work, the Nyāyatattva, extracts from which are given in the Nyāyasiddhāñjana of Śrī Vedānta Deśika, a famous Vaishṇava writer of the fourteenth century A.D. The Nyāyatattva, in the opinion of T. Rājagopālāchāriar, was an elaborate treatise covering the whole field of philosophy from the point of view of the Viśiṣṭādvaita school. The doctrine peculiar to the school of which Nāthamuni was the founder, and Rāmānuja the great exponent, is that of Prapatti or surrender to God in absolute renunciation and faith. The doctrine is founded on the Bhagavad Gītā and the older Pañcharātra Tantras, and is a cardinal doctrine of the Vaishṇava. In the Gītā ¹ we are told that it is only those who surrender themselves to (Prapadyante) the Blessed Vāsudeva that receive divine grace and pass beyond the bounds of māyā. Such persons are called Prapanna.² Prapatti is also dealt with in the Bhāradvāja Saṃhitā.³ It is said to have been accepted and brought into practice by Nammāḷvār, and by Nāthamuni after him. It was elaborated by Rāmānuja's successors. In his later days Nāthamuni made a pilgrimage to the most sacred spots in the Vaishṇava Holy Land, including Mathurā, the Bethlehem of Bhāgavatism. It was in commemoration of this visit, with his son and daughter-in-law, to the banks of the Yamunā, that his grandson is said to have been named Yāmuna.

c11.86

¹ IV, 11; VII, 14.

c11.87

² Op. cit., II, 7.

c11.88

³ Schrader, Introduction to the Pañcharātra, p. 23.

c11.89

Nāthamuni infused fresh energy into the heart of Vaishṇavism, and the sect of Śrīvaishṇavas established by him was destined to have a chequered career in the annals of India.

c11.90

The second Āchārya was Puṇḍarīkāksha who is said to have been born at Tiruvallari, north of Śrīraṅgam. He received from his guru Nāthamuni, the name of Uyyakkondar or Saviour of the New Dispensation.

c11.91

Rāmamiśra was the next in the apostolic succession after Puṇḍarīkāksha. He does not appear to have been a man of strong personality like Nāthamuni, but he had the enthusiasm of his predecessors and holds an honourable place among the Vaishṇava apostles as the spiritual instructor of the great Yāmunāchārya Āḷavandār.

c11.92

“Yāmunāchārya,” says T. Rājagopālāchāriar, “really laid the foundation for all the doctrines that go under Rāmānuja’s name.” Yāmuna was born in the city of Vīranārāyaṇapura (the modern Mannargudi in the South Arcot District) in the palmy days of Chola imperialism. He was the son of Īśvara Bhaṭṭa, and the grandson of Nāthamuni.

c11.93

Yāmuna first distinguished himself by vanquishing one Akki Alwan, the Court Pundit of the reigning Chola king, in a Śāstric disputation, and was hailed by the Chola queen as Āḷavandār or the Victor. He was granted some lands by the king and lived a life of pleasure and luxury. The story goes that one day Rāmamiśra managed to gain an interview with him and persuaded him to visit the shrine of Śrīraṅgam to receive a valuable treasure which Nāthamuni had left for his grandson. When he reached the temple Yāmuna was told that the treasure was the Deity Himself. His eyes were now opened. He took up his residence at Śrīraṅgam and devoted himself to the task of expounding the doctrines of the Viśishṭādvaita school which is "a somewhat modified and more methodical form of the ancient *Bhāgavata*, *Pañcharātra*, or *Sātvata* religion."

c11.94

The most important work of Yāmunāchārya is the *Siddhitraya*. It contains three sections called the *Ātma-Siddhi*, the *Īśvara Siddhi* and the *Saṃvit Siddhi*, and is said to have for its object the demonstration of the real existence of the individual and Supreme souls, and the refutation of the doctrine of *Avidyā*. The *Siddhitraya* is quoted frequently by Rāmānuja.

c11.95

Another important work of Yāmunāchārya is the *Āgamaprāmāṇya* which maintains the orthodoxy of the *Bhāgavata* or *Pañcharātra* school against the attack of Śaṅkarāchārya.

c11.96

Yāmunāchārya is also the author of the *Gītārthasaṃgraha* which contains a summary of the teachings of the *Bhagavad gītā*. Following antecedent oral teaching he analysed the Divine Song as a consistent exposition of the doctrine of *Bhakti* supplemented by a description of the *Karma* and *Jñāna* Yogas as subordinate to the main theme.

c11.97

Among other works of Yāmunāchārya may be mentioned the *Mahāpuruṣanirṇaya* and the *Stotraratna*. The *Stotraratna* has been commented upon by the great Vaiṣṇava writer Śrī Vedānta Deśika. "Its spirit of earnest piety," says Dr. Macnicol, "may be taken as indicative of the real religious value of this Vaiṣṇavism of the South."

c11.98

Yāmunāchārya’s is thus one of the greatest names in the whole history of the Vaishṇavite development. It is said by some historians that, had there been no Philip, there would have been no Alexander; it may perhaps be said with greater precision that had there been no Yāmunāchārya there would have been Rāmānuja. The great prophet of mediæval Vaishṇavism has had to follow in the lines laid down by the great apostle who wrote the *Siddhitraya* and the *Āgamaprāmāṇya*.

c11.99

Yāmunāchārya is said to have died in the eleventh century A.D., having expressed a wish to see Rāmānuja established at Śrīraṅgam as his spiritual successor. The wish was duly carried out, and the school founded by Nāthamuni and raised to eminence by Yāmunāchārya was strengthened by the advent of the man who may be looked upon as the second founder of Vaishṇavism, who “accomplished for Indian Theism, a work similar to that which the Greek Fathers did for Christianity in its Hellenic environment.”

c11.100

Having given a brief account of the lives of the Tamil Āchāryas to whom Rāmānuja owed so much, I proceed to note the special features of the religion which they professed and preached.

c11.101

In the first place the new school, called the Śrī Vaishṇava or Viśishṭādvaita school, tacitly discarded the Karma-mārga of the Mīmāṁsā philosophers according to which salvation may be attained by the sole means of the faithful performance of *Karma* or the periodical ceremonial rites enjoined by the *Vedas* and the *Smritis*. *Śrī Vaishṇavism*, like the school of *Śaṅkara*, was in one respect the expression of a natural reaction from the sacrifice-ridden *Pūrva Mīmāṃsā* schools of Prabhākara, Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, Maṇḍana Miśra and others, which were in their turn the outcome of the disgust at the development of atheistic Buddhism.¹ The Vaishṇavas, while abstaining from an open denunciation of the *Karma Kāṇḍa*, disapproved of all *Karma* which is done for worldly or transient results and considered that the best antidote to its evil effects is the renunciation of all attachment to the fruits thereof.

c11.102

¹ T. Rājagopālāchāriar, *The Vaishnavite Reformers of India*, pp. 18 ff.

c11.103

*Śrī Vaishṇavism* was also a protest against the system of *Śaṅkara*. The great *Advaita* philosopher laid unusual stress on *Jñāna*. Even among the most learned in *Śaṅkara*'s school a tendency was seen to make religion ‘‘more an affair of the head than of the heart.’’ In a system of Absolute Monism there is hardly any room for *Bhakti*, in the popular sense, as a feeling of reverence for a Being conceived as higher than the soul of the devotee. The *Śrī Vaishṇavas* attacked this system and explained the ancient scriptures in a far more human spirit than *Śaṅkara* did. In refuting the absolute identity doctrine derived by *Śaṅkara* from the Upanishad text ‘*Ekamevādvitīyam*,’ Yāmunā-chārya says :—

c11.104

*Yathā Chola nṛipaḥ samrāḍadvitīyo’sti bhūtale*
*Iti tatlulyanṛipati-nivāraṇaparaṁ vachaḥ*
*Na tu tatputra-tadbhritya-kalatrādinivāraṇam*

c11.105

“To say that the Chola king, now reigning in this country, is all supreme and without a second, can only exclude the existence of another monarch equal (in power) to him ; it cannot imply the denial of the existence of a wife, sons or servants of such a monarch.”¹

c11.106

¹ T. Rājagopālāchāriar, *The Vaishṇavite Reformers of India*, p. 36.

c11.107

The protest against Śaṅkara’s system was carried further by Madhva, a Vaishṇava apostle of the thirteenth century A.D.

c11.108

Śrī Vaishṇavism loosened the hold of its followers on the various minor gods who were propitiated with a view to the attainment of various worldly objects. Devotion to one Deity was the teaching of this school. The ordinary Indian is eclectic. The Śrī Vaishṇavite alone had something of the Hebrew spirit of exclusiveness. To the follower of Śaṅkara one Personal God was as good as another and both were simply of ‘phenomenal importance.’ But the Śrī Vaishṇavite like the Hebrew refused to recognise as objects of worship deities other than their own favourite.

c11.109

Another remarkable characteristic of Vaishṇavism was its solicitude for the lower classes. Unlike the more orthodox forms of Hinduism, it did not keep the Śūdras and the untouchables at a distance, but brought them into its fold and extended to them the privilege of knowing God and of attaining liberation. The agencies employed in effecting this were:—(1) the doctrine of *prapatti* or surrender to God, which was conceived as demanding no caste status or educational qualification, (2) the adoption for religious purposes of the works of the Ālvārs and making them the common property of all classes, Brāhmaṇas and non-Brāhmaṇas alike.

c11.110

But although liberal in this respect the Śrī Vaishṇava Āchāryas firmly supported caste, eschewed all heresy, and upheld the Śāstras. The conservatism of the southern Vaishṇavas in social matters was productive of important consequences in later times. Rāmānanda, one of the apostolic successors of Rāmānuja, insulted by his brethren for his social inferiority,¹ returned to the north, the land of his birth,² and established the famous sect which can boast of a Kavīra and a Tulasī Dās.

c11.111

¹ T. Rājagopālāchāriar, *The Vaishnavite Reformers of India*, p. 145.

c11.112

² Sir George Grierson points out that he was born at Prayāga (Allahabad) and was educated at Benares. *J.R.A.S.*, Oct., 1920, pp. 591 ff.

Linked texts (44)