Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Materials for the Study of the Early History of the Vaishnava Sect c8: Lecture I. Vaishṇavism and Vāsudeva

Materials for the Study of the Early History of the Vaishnava Sect c8

Language
English

Lecture I. Vaishṇavism and Vāsudeva

c8.2

Vaishṇavism is the name given to the Bhakti ¹ religion which recognises Vishṇu, also called Bhagavat (the Blessed One), Purushottama (the Supreme Person), Nārāyaṇa, Hari as the sole God. He is defined as the Unborn (Aja), and the Eternal (Śāśvata). He is the Creator (Dhātā), the embodiment of Immortality (Amṛitam), the Father and the Mother and the Eternal Preceptor of the universe :—

c8.3

¹ The Śāṇḍilyasūtram, 1, 1, 2 defines Bhakti as Parānurakti-rīśvare, intense devotion to the Lord, i.e., to God " conceived of as personal, a Saviour worthy of trust and ready to be gracious " (cf. Hill, The Bhagavad Gītā, p. 50; Mrinal Dasgupta, IHQ, 1930, pp. 315, 322 ff.).

c8.4

Pitā mātā cha sarvasya
Jagataḥ śāśvato guruḥ.²

c8.5

² Mbh. edited by P. Tarkaratna, xii, 334, 27.

c8.6

As occasion demands from time to time in His infinite grace (prasāda, anugraha) He Himself becomes incarnate to relieve the world from sin, or His followers from trouble. The most perfect incarnations (avatāras) are those of Rāma Dāśarathi and Kṛishṇa Vāsudeva.

c8.7

Vishṇu worship is as old as the Rig Veda. Vishṇu is, as is well known, one of the manifestations of the sun. He envelops the earth on every side with rays of light (mayukhaiḥ).¹ He is often mentioned along with the Ādityas and is later reckoned as one of them.² He represents the sun in its daily and yearly course.³ His fame rests on the three strides with which he crosses heaven:—

c8.8

¹ Rig Veda, vii, 99, 3.

c8.9

² See Rig Veda, i, 90, 9; vii, 39, 5; x, 65, 1; 141-3; A. V. xi, 6, 2; Sat. Br. xiv, 1. 1, 10; Wilson's introduction to the Rig Veda Saṃhitā, Vol. I, p. xxviii and Bhagavad Gītā, x, 21.

c8.10

³ Haug's translation of the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, p. 1. n..

c8.11

Idaṃ Vishṇur vichakrame tredhā nidadhe padam
samūlham asya pāṃsure
Tṛṇipadā vichakrame Vishṇurgopā adābhyaḥ
ato dharmāṇi dhārayan.⁴

c8.12

⁴ Rig Veda, i, 22, 17-18.

c8.13

“Vishṇu strode over this (universe); in three places he planted his step: (the world, or his step was) enveloped in his dust. Vishṇu the unconquerable preserver, strode three steps, thereby maintaining fixed ordinances.”⁵

c8.14

⁵ Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, 2nd ed., ch. 2.

c8.15

“Three steps he made, the herdsman sure, Vishṇu, and stepped across (the world).”⁶

c8.16

⁶ Hopkins, The Religions of India, p. 57.

c8.17

“There can be little doubt,” says Wilson, “that the three steps, here referred to, are the three periods of the sun's course—his rise, culmination and setting." It is expressly so stated by Aurṇavābha as explained by Durgāchārya in his commentary on the Nirukta.¹ Mr. Jayaswāl, however, thinks² that Aurṇavābha takes the verse "idam Vishṇur vichakrame tredhā nidadhe padam" in the sense that Vishṇu literally and physically in the past stepped over the earth, horizon and sky and "in ascending (he stepped) at the Vishṇupada on the Gayā peak." In the philosophy of the Taittirīya Saṃhitā the three places of Vishṇu are not the two points of the horizon and the zenith, but the earth, air and the sky.³

c8.18

¹ Wilson's Introduction to the Rig Veda Saṃhitā, Vol. I, p. xxxiv; also p. 53. Cf. also Haug's Ait. Br., p. 4, n. Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, vii.

c8.19

² Ind. Ant., 1918, March, p. 84.

c8.20

³ Hopkins, The Religions of India, p. 460.

c8.21

An ancient commentator, Śākapuni, understood the "three paces" to refer to the threefold manifestation of light as fire on earth, as lightning in the atmosphere and as the sun in the sky. Muir says that the explanation of Aruṇavābha (as quoted and elucidated by Durgāchārya) seems to satisfy best the idea of movement expressed in the description. On the other hand Keith points out that this interpretation is in flat contradiction with the references of the Vedas to the nature of the highest place of Vishṇu.⁴

c8.22

⁴ Keith, Religion and Philosophy of the Veda, p. 108.

c8.23

Colebrooke thought with Sāyaṇa that the taking of three steps might have formed the groundwork of the Paurāṇik legend of the Dwarf Avatāra. Wilson, however, remarked that it might have been suggestive of the fiction; but no allusion to the notion of Avatāras occurred in the Veda. As pointed out by Barnett ¹ the old mythical feature of the three imperishable ² steps of Viṣṇu acquires a new spiritual meaning in later times and the ‘three immortal steps’ that lead to heaven are interpreted in a Besnagar inscription of the second century B. C. as denoting dama, tyāga and apramāda, self-control, renunciation and vigilance.

c8.24

¹ Hindu Gods and Heroes, p. 89. 2 Ṛig Veda, i, 154, 4 3 i. 156, 3. 4 vi. 69; vii, 99. 5 vii, 100, 6.

c8.25

In one Ṛigvedic passage Viṣṇu is called the germ of ‘Ṛita,’ Ṛitasya garbham ; ³ where ‘Ṛita’ may mean moral order or sacrifice. The idea is developed in later times. Viṣṇu also figures in the Veda as a leader in battle. He is specially praised with Indra, the two being looked upon as masters of the world.⁴ His greatness is inconceivable, and he is revered under the title Śipiviṣṭa⁵ meaning ‘clothed with rays of light’ or ‘bald.’ He has three spaces, two called earthly, and one, the highest known only to himself and visible only to Sūris, apparently a class of specially favoured beings, “ like an eye fixed in the sky.”¹ Vishnu’s highest place (*parama pada*) which is a realm (*pāthas, vāstu*) beyond ordinary mortal ken,² which ‘ man apprehends not, nor can the soaring winged birds pursue,’³ ‘ in which god-seeking men delight’ and to which poets pray that people may go to enjoy felicity, may be plausibly described as a realm of departed spirits.⁴ The later popularity of the deity, according to Hopkins, lies in the importance of his “ highest place ” being the home of departed spirits, where he himself dwells, inscrutable. The blessed abode (*paramam padam anāmayam*) of Vishnu becomes the goal of spiritual endeavour in later ages.⁵

c8.26

¹ i, 155, 5; vii, 99 ; i, 22, 20.

c8.27

² vii, 99, 1.

c8.28

³ Rig Veda, i, 155, 5.

c8.29

⁴ i, 154, 5-6.

c8.30

⁵ Kaṭhopanishad, i, 3, 9; Mbh. xi, 7. 25; Gītā, ii, 51.

c8.31

It is clear that Vishnu was a great god even in the earliest Vedic times. But he was not regarded by anybody as the Sole God, or even as the greatest God. His inferiority to Indra appears even in the hymns devoted to his own glorification, and nothing better is said of him, in Rig Veda, i, 22, 19, than that “he is the worthy friend of Indra—Indrasya yujyaḥ sakhā.” He is also ordered about by Indra⁶ :—

c8.32

⁶ iv, 18, 11; viii, 89, 12.

c8.33

“His mother inquired of the mighty Indra, ‘have these deities deserted thee, my son?’ Then Indra said, ‘Viṣṇu, my friend, (if thou) purpose slaying Vṛitra, exert thy greatest prowess.’”¹ Viṣṇu strode his three steps by the energy of Indra.²

c8.34

¹ M. N. Dutt Śāstrī’s translation of the Ṛig Veda Saṃhitā, p. 759.

c8.35

² Ṛig Veda, viii, 12, 27.

c8.36

In the later Vedic literature the position of Viṣṇu becomes more prominent. The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa relates with great fullness of detail the legend regarding the ‘three strides.’ It further represents Viṣṇu as the personification of sacrifice. We have already seen that as early as the Rigvedic age he was called the ‘germ of the sacrifice.’ “Viṣṇu truly is the sacrifice, by striding (vi-kram) he obtained for the gods that all pervading power (vikrānti) which now belongs to them. By his first step he gained this same (earth), by the second this aerial expanse, and by his last (step) the sky. And this same pervading power Viṣṇu, as the sacrifice, obtains by his strides for him (the sacrificer). For this reason he strides the Viṣṇu-strides.”³

c8.37

³ Śat. Br., Part I, 9, 3, 9; Eggeling’s translation of the Śat. Br.. Part I, p. 268.

c8.38

The fourteenth Kāṇḍa of this Brāhmaṇa, at the beginning of its first part contains a legend of a contention among the gods, in which Viṣṇu came off victorious, whence it became customary to say, "Vishnu is the most excellent of the gods." The gods sent forth ants to gnaw the bowstring of Vishnu, who stood, resting his head on the end of the bow; the string snapping and springing upwards severed his head from his body. The head fell with (the sound) 'ghrin;' and on falling it became yonder sun (Aditya).¹

c8.39

¹ Eggeling's translation of the Sat. Br., Part V, pp. 441-42; Weber's History of Indian Literature, pp. 126-27; Muir, Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, 123 ff.

c8.40

The same legend with some variation recurs in a passage of the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka² and also in the Pañchaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa.³

c8.41

² v, 1.

c8.42

³ vii, 5, 6.

c8.43

We find the name Nārāyaṇa for the first time in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, but it is not in any way connected with Vishnu. It is in the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka that it is brought into direct relation to Vishnu.

c8.44

The prominent position held by Vishnu in the Brāhmaṇic period is also manifest in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa where he is said to occupy the highest place among the gods (Agnirvaidevānāmavamo Viṣṇuḥ paramaḥ).⁴ He is one of the 'Dīkṣāpālau'—the two guardians of the 'dīkṣā' or initiation.⁵ He protects the defects in the sacrifice (from producing any evil consequences), while Varuṇa protects the fruits arising from its successful performance.⁶ Vishnu also figures in this work as a helper of Indra against the Asuras. "The Asuras after having been turned out, entered the Śastra of the Achchhāvāka (Priest). Indra said, "Who will join me, that we both turn out the Asuras from here?" Vishnu answered, "I (will join you)." Indra and Vishnu then turned the Asuras out.¹

c8.45

⁴ Ait. Br., 1, 1.

c8.46

⁵ i, 4.

c8.47

⁶ iii, 38, Haug's translation, pp. 227-28.

c8.48

¹ iii. 50; Haug's translation, p. 254.

c8.49

Although Vishnu came to be looked upon by some as "the most excellent of the gods," he was, even now, far from being regarded by any section of the Aryan people as the One God. His pre-eminence among the gods is not always apparent and in a passage of the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa he is called Devānām dvārapaḥ,² the door-keeper of the gods, not a very complimentary epithet for the 'highest' among the gods.

c8.50

² i. 30.

c8.51

Again, we have no evidence of the existence of a Vaishṇava sect in these early times. The sectarian name Vaishṇava is met with only in the latest portion of the Mahābhārata :³

c8.52

³ xviii. 6. 97

c8.53

Aṣṭādaśa purāṇānām śravaṇād yat phalam bhavet
Tat phalam samavāpnoti Vaishṇavonātra saṁśayaḥ.

c8.54

"(By listening to the Bhārata) a Vaishṇava acquires that merit which is gained by listening to the eighteen Puraṇas. There is no doubt about that."

c8.55

The exact date of this portion of the Great Epic is, no doubt, uncertain. But from numismatic evidence it seems probable that the epithet " *Parama Vaishṇava* " came into general use only from about the fifth century A.D.¹ We should also note another important fact, namely, that there is very little inner connection between Vedic and Brāhmaṇic Viṣṇu-worship and the Bhakti religion we call Vaishṇavism. The idea of a God of Grace, the doctrine of Bhakti—these are the fundamental tenets of the religion termed Vaishṇavism. But they are not very conspicuous in Vedic and Brāhmaṇic Viṣṇu-worship. Viṣṇu in the Brāhmaṇic texts is more intimately connected with ' *yajña* ' (sacrifice) than with Bhakti or *Prasāda*. It is in the hymns addressed to Varuṇa, and not in those addressed to Viṣṇu, that we find a feeling which bears some resemblance to the Vaishṇava Bhakti.²

c8.56

¹ *Cf.* the " Traikuṭaka " coins mentioning " *Parama-Vaishṇava* Śrī-Mahārāja Dahrasena " and " *Parama-Vaishṇava* Śrī-Mahārāja Vyāghra (Sena)," Rapson, *Catalogue of the Coins of the Andhra Dynasty*, etc., pp. 198, 202.

c8.57

² Ind. Ant., 1908, p. 259; J.R.A.S., 1915, p. 834; Macnicol's *Indian Theism* p. 10; Hill, the *Bhagavadgītā*, p. 50.

c8.58

Dr. Macnicol, indeed, sees some hints in the *Brāhmaṇa* literature of the progress which Viṣṇu was making behind the screen of Brāhmaṇic ritual, to the position he has held so long as the Supreme God of those in India whose hearts are filled with Bhakti.¹ But these hints are extremely dubious. Dr. Keith rightly observes² "That the Brāhmaṇas treat Viṣṇu as identical with the sacrifice and ask him to make good its defects do not show that he was 'on his way to his place as the God of the worship of men's hearts,' or 'was recognised in his aspect of grace as a saviour.'" If the Vedic or Brāhmaṇic accounts of Viṣṇu-worship do not furnish any clue to the origin of Vaishṇavism as we know it, what is its source?

c8.59

¹ Indian Theism, p. 30.

c8.60

² J.R.A.S., 1915, p. 839.

c8.61

In the opinion of several scholars this Bhakti Religion was of foreign origin, and was preached in India for the first time by Rāmānuja. "There has been considerable mis-impression," says S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar³ "that the Vaishṇava movement originated in Rāmānuja....On the basis of this mis-impression, theories have been built up time and again that the characteristic features of the special teachings of Rāmānuja have been borrowed from Christianity." Dr. Keith observes:⁴ "The first great theistic movement of India is that of Rāmānuja...........But precisely at this point we are met with the fact that Christian religious influences are possible and even probable."

c8.62

³ Sri Rāmānujāchārya, p. 2.

c8.63

⁴ J.R.A.S., 1915, pp. 836-37.

c8.64

Mr. Aiyangar rightly considers the hypothesis of a plagiarism from Christianity to be an error which arises from not giving due weight to the indebtedness of Rāmānuja to those Tamil Saints that had gone before him ere he came into the world. The Tamil Saints to whom Mr. Aiyangar refers are the Āchāryas Nāthamuni and Ālvandār (Yāmunāchārya) and their precursors the Ālvārs.¹

c8.65

¹ *Śrī-Rāmānujāchārya*, p. 4.

c8.66

Rāmānuja begins his *Vedārtha Saṃgraha* as well as his commentary on the *Bhagavadgītā* by paying his tribute of respect to Yāmunāchārya. A work of the latter, the *Siddhitraya*, is frequently quoted in Rāmānuja's works, and Rāmānuja generally follows the same lines of argument as we find in Yāmuna's work.² Yāmunāchārya in his turn was the spiritual successor of his grandfather Nāthamuni, the author of the *Nyāya Tattva* "an elaborate treatise covering the whole field of philosophy from the point of view of the Rāmānuja school."³ Nāthamuni again got his inspiration from the songs of the Ālvārs, especially from those of Saint Saṭakopa.⁴ The Ālvārs were saints or Bhaktas of various castes, who by their Tamil songs inculcated Bhakti and Kṛiṣhṇa-worship mainly.⁵ The *Bhagavadgītā* was well known to them and the *Bhāgavata* in some form also: "It . seems reasonable to conclude," says Mr. T. Rājagopāla Chariar, "that these Āḷvārs or the earlier of them were offshoots of the northern Bhāgavatas." Colebrooke gives an account of the Bhāgavatas in his *Miscellaneous Essays*.¹ The synonymy of the *Bhāgavata* sect is thus given in the *Pādma Tantra*, one of the 108 Tantras or *Saṃhitās* which constitute the sacred canon of an important section of Vaishṇavas :—

c8.67

² V. A. Sukhtankar's "Teachings of Vedānta according to Rāmānuja," *The Vienna Oriental Journal*, Vol. 22, 1908, pp. 121-22.

c8.68

³ T. Rājagopāla Chariar's "The Vaishṇavite Reformers of India," p. 4.

c8.69

⁴ *Op. cit.*, pp. 2-3.

c8.70

⁵ *Op. cit.*, p. 138.

c8.71

¹ Vol. I, pp. 437-43.

c8.72

Sūris Suḥrid Bhāgavatas Sātvataḥ Pañchakāla-vit
Ekāntikas Tanmayaś cha Pañcharātrika ityapi.²

c8.73

² J.R.A.S., 1911, p. 935.

c8.74

The Bhāgavata, Sātvata, Ekāntika or Pañcharātra religion is referred to in the *Nārāyaṇīya* section of the *Śāntiparva* and the *Viśvopākhyāna* of the *Bhīshma-parva* of the *Mahābhārata* :—

c8.75

" *Yadā Bhāgavato* ' tyarthamāsīdrājā mahān Vasuḥ."³
" *Sātvatam vidhimāsthāya prāksūryamukha-niḥsritam.*"⁴
" *Nūnam Ekāntadharmo'yam śreshṭho Nārāyaṇapriyaḥ.*"⁵
" *Pañcharātra vidomukhyāstasya gehemahātmanaḥ*⁶
*Dvāparasya yugasyānte ādau Kaliyugasyacha Sātvatam Vidhimāsthāya gītaḥ Saṅkarshaṇenavai.*⁷

c8.76

³ Mbh., xii, 887, 1.

c8.77

⁴ Mbh., xii, 835, 19.

c8.78

⁵ Mbh., xii, 348, 4.

c8.79

⁶ Mbh., xii, 235, 25.

c8.80

⁷ Mbh., vi, 66, 40.

c8.81

According to the *Mahābhārata*¹ this religion was obtained by Nārada from Nārāyaṇa Himself. "It has once before been concisely told in the *Harigītā* (that is, the *Bhagavadgītā*)." In another passage, in reply to Janamejaya’s question "who taught it first?" Vaiśampāyana says "it was told by the Adorable Himself to Arjuna" (i.e., in the *Bhagavadgītā*).²

c8.82

¹ xii, 346, 10-11.

c8.83

² Mbh., xii, 319, 6-8.

c8.84

The date of the *Bhagavadgītā*, of the *Viśvopākhyāna* or of the *Nārāyaṇīya* is uncertain, but we have epigraphic evidence of the existence of the *Bhāgavata* or *Bhakti* school long before the beginning of the Christian era.³

c8.85

³ See *The Indian Antiquary*, 1912, p. 13; R. P. Chanda, *Archæology and Vaishṇava Tradition*, *Memoirs of the Archæological Survey of India*, No. 5.

c8.86

A Besnagar inscription⁴ of the second century B.C. mentions the erection of a flagstaff with an image of Garuḍa at the top in honour of Vāsudeva by Heliodora, an ambassador of the Greek king Antialkidas, who was a *Bhāgavata*. Another epigraph of a slightly later date, evidently from Besnagar, records the erection of a Garuḍa column "of the excellent temple (*Prāsādottama*) of the *Bhagavat*" by Gautamîputra.........a *Bhāgavata*, in the twelfth year after the installation of the Great King Bhāgavata. A third monument of about the same date has been discovered in the same locality in which Mr. Chanda recognises the remnant of a *Makaradhvaja* or a “crocodile column” which is the emblem of Pradyumna, the son of Vāsudeva. The Ghosūṇḍī Inscription,¹ probably engraved a little earlier, speaks of a *pūjā* stone wall for the worship of Bhagavat Saṅkarshaṇa and Vāsudeva. Another inscription probably of the first century B.C. existing at Nānāghāṭ² contains an adoration of Saṅkarshaṇa and Vāsudeva.³

c8.87

⁴ Lüders, Ins. No. 669 (*Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. X, Appendix), Vogel, *ASI*, 1908-9, 126-29. Besnagar, ancient Vidiśā, is in Eastern Malwa.

c8.88

¹ Lüders, Ins. No. 6; *Ind. Ant.*, 1932, 203 ff.; Ghosūṇḍī is about 4 miles from Nagari in the Udayapura State, Rājputāna.

c8.89

² Lüders, Ins. No. 1112; Nānāghāṭ is in the Deccan.

c8.90

³ In connection with the antiquity of the cult of Kṛishṇa (Vāsudeva) mention may be made of a story recorded by Zenob, a Syrian who flourished about 304 A.D., regarding the erection of a temple to Giṣane (Kṛishṇa?) by the sons of certain Indian chiefs who had fled westward with their clan and found shelter in Armenia (149-127 B.C.)—See Kennedy, *The Indians in Armenia*, JRAS, 1904, 309 ff.

c8.91

These epigraphic records show clearly that the Bhāgavatas were the *Bhaktas* of Vāsudeva. This fact enables us to trace back the existence of the sect to the age of Pāṇini for we must recognise in the *Vāsudevakas* of that grammarian the forerunners of the *Bhāgavatas* of the second century B.C.

c8.92

In the *sūtra*, iv, 3, 95, Pāṇini says that an affix comes after a word in the first case in construction in the sense of “this is his object of *Bhakti*.” Then in a succeeding *sūtra*, iv, 3, 98, he says that the affix ‘*Vun*’ comes in the sense of “this is his object of *Bhakti*” after the words Vāsudeva and Arjuna. Thus Vāsudevaka = a person the object of whose *Bhakti* is Vāsudeva. To this word we may compare the word Gotamaka = a follower of Gotama.¹

c8.93

¹ Rhys Davids, *Dialogues of the Buddha*, I, pp. 220-222; *Buddhist Ind.*, p. 145.

c8.94

It is agreed on all hands that Pāṇini flourished before Patañjali² who wrote the great commentary (*Mahābhāshya*) on his sūtras apparently in the second century B.C.

c8.95

² For references see V. A. Smith’s E.H.I., 3rd Edition, p. 214.

c8.96

But the exact date of this prince of grammarians is uncertain. According to Hopkins³ “no evidence has yet been brought forward to show conclusively that Pāṇini lived before the third century B.C.” Böhtlingk places him in the fourth century B.C. and his view is accepted by Macdonell,⁴ Keith and many other western scholars; while Sir R. G. Bhandarkar says that “Pāṇini must have flourished in the beginning of the seventh century B.C. if not earlier still.”⁵

c8.97

³ *The Great Epic of India*, p. 391.

c8.98

⁴ *Sanskrit Literature*, p. 17.

c8.99

⁵ E. H. D., p. 8.

c8.100

As the question of Pāṇini’s date is important for determining the antiquity of the Bhāgavata religion it will not be quite out of place to state our own views on the subject.

c8.101

Pāṇini lived not only before Patañjali, but also before Kātyāyana who wrote the Vārttikas (explanatory and supplementary rules) on his grammar, and who was himself a predecessor of Patañjali. This fact forbids the acceptance of the theory of Hopkins that Pāṇini lived in the third century B.C.; for that would leave an interval of considerably less than a century between Kātyāyana and Patañjali. The actual interval between these two grammarians cannot be so short because Sir R. G. Bhandarkar points out that Patañjali notices variant readings of Kātyāyana’s Vārttikas as found in the texts used by the schools of the Bhāradvājiyas, Saunāgas and others.

c8.102

Böhtlingk’s theory rests upon a story in the Kathāsaritsāgara, a collection of popular tales belonging to the eleventh century A.D., where Pāṇini is said to have been the disciple of one Varsha, who lived at Pāṭaliputra in the reign of King Nanda. But as Weber points out¹ the authority of such a work is extremely questionable in reference to a period fifteen centuries earlier. Moreover, the work makes Kātyāyana a contemporary of Pāṇini.² But as Goldstücker points out the two grammarians really belonged to two different periods of Hindu antiquity.³ The assertion is also contradicted by a statement of Kātyāyana himself. A rule of Pāṇini, iv, 3, 105, teaches us that the names of *Brāhmaṇas* and *Kalpas* are formed by adding the affix " *ṇini* " to the proper names of the personage who proclaims them, provided that such a personage is an old authority. As the *Brāhmaṇas* proclaimed by Yājñavalkya are not formed by the affix " *ṇini* " it is clear that Pāṇini did not include Yājñavalkya among the old authorities.¹

c8.103

¹ Ind. Lit., p. 217.

c8.104

² See Goldstücker’s Pāṇini, His place in Sanskrit Literature, p. 61.

c8.105

³ Op. cit., p. 93.

c8.106

¹ Goldstücker, *Pāṇini*, p. 101.

c8.107

To Pāṇini's rule Kātyāyana adds a *Vārttika* " among the *Brāhmaṇas* and *Kalpas* which are proclaimed by an old one there is an exception in reference to Yājñavalkya and so on, on account of the contemporaneousness namely, of these latter *Brāhmaṇas*, with the old *Brāhmaṇas* spoken of by Pāṇini."²

c8.108

² Op. cit., p. 105.

c8.109

Thus works (*e.g.*, the *Brāhmaṇas* proclaimed by Yājñavalkya) which Pāṇini did not include among the "*purāṇaprokta*" *Brāhmaṇas* came to be considered by Kātyāyana to be as old as those which were old to Pāṇini. The two grammarians, therefore, could not have been contemporaries.

c8.110

Kātyāyana's date, fourth century B.C., may now be relied upon. This date does not solely depend on 'the ghost story' of the *Kathā-saritsāgara*³ but follows from the ascertained date of Patañjali.¹ The interval of two centuries between Kātyāyana and Patañjali will not appear too long when we remember that the grammarians of the schools of the Bhāradvājīyas and Saunāgas, Kuṇararāḍara, Saurya Bhāgavat and Kuṇi lived before Patañjali and after Kātyāyana since all their Vārttikas or remarks, recorded by Patañjali, are criticisms on, and emendations of, the Vārttikas of Kātyāyana.²

c8.111

³ As Dr R. L. Mitra says in his Introduction to the *Aitareya Āraṇyaka*.

c8.112

¹ E.H.D., p. 7; E.H.I., 3rd edition, p. 451, n.

c8.113

² Goldstücker, Pāṇini, 1914, p. 68.

c8.114

Pāṇini, therefore, lived before the fourth century B.C. But it is difficult to accept the statement of Sir R. G. Bhandarkar that he cannot be placed later than the seventh century B.C. A tradition recorded in the Kāvya-Mīmāṃsā, dated about the ninth century A.D., says that the great grammarian won fame in the great centre of learning at Pāṭaliputra, a city founded after the death of the Buddha. Pāṇini knows not merely "the three saṃhitās of the Ṛik, Sāman and Black Yajus," as contended by Goldstücker,³ but also Brāhmaṇas and Kalpas⁴ and refers to Sūtrakāras.⁵ He also mentions the Mahābhārata⁶ which is not recognised in any Sanskrit literary work till after the end of the Brāhmaṇa period, and only in the Grihya Sūtras. Pāṇini's date must, therefore, fall in the age of the latest sūtras.

c8.115

³ Pāṇini, p. 108.

c8.116

⁴ iv, 3, 105.

c8.117

⁵ iii, 2, 23.

c8.118

⁶ vi, 2, 38.

c8.119

The most important chronological datum is furnished by the mention of *Yavana*.¹ *Yavana*, or Yona was a term used in ancient India to denote the Greeks. In Aśoka's Rock Edict XIII Antiochos is called a *Yonarāja*. In the Besnagar Pillar Inscription Heliodoros, the ambassador of Antialkidas, is called a *Yonadūta*. We know from the cuneiform inscriptions of the Achaemenian Kings of Persia that they had no other name for the Greeks but *Ya-u-na*.² This Persian form of the name *Yavana* was not unknown to the Hindus :—

c8.120

¹ iv, 1, 49.

c8.121

² *Ind. Ant.*, 1875, p. 215.

c8.122

Uttarāpathajanmānaḥ kīrtayishyāmi tānapi
Yauna Kāmboja Gāndhārāḥ Kirātā Barbaraiḥ
saha.³

c8.123

³ Mbh., xii, 207, 43.

c8.124

It is a desperate resort to imagine that this well-known ethnic term really means non-Greeks.⁴ Pāṇini in his *Sūtra* iv, 1, 49, explains the formation of the word *Yavanānī*—to which, according to the *Vārttika*, the word ‘lipi,’ writing, must be supplied, and which therefore signifies “the writing of the Yavanas or Greeks,” and not “the writing of the Persians,'' or ``the cuneiform writing.¹ The employment by the Indians of a special term and affix to denote the Greek writing could only have arisen after long acquaintance with the Yavanas and their alphabet. Such a prolonged intercourse between the Indians and the Greeks was not in my opinion possible in the seventh century B.C. when the empires of Assyria and Media intervened between India and Hellas, but was possible, and even probable after the Achaemenian conquest of Gandhāra, the native land of Pāṇini, for the Persian empire formed a link which connected India with Greece, and Greek mercenaries and Greek officials were largely employed by the Persian Kings and Satraps.²

c8.125

⁴ The theory that “the term Yavana does not indicate Greek nationality” has recently been revived by some scholars (*Indian Culture*, Vol. I, No. 3, 1935, p. 356) and attention is invited to “the apparent Iranian nationality” of the Yavana Tuṣāspha of the Junāgaḍh Inscription of Rudradāman. It is forgotten that the Yavanas are sharply distinguished from the Kambojas by Aśoka, from the Pallavas by Queen

c8.126

¹ Goldstücker, Pāṇini, 1914, p. 12.

c8.127

² Rapson, Ancient India, p. 87.

c8.128

Pāṇini therefore, in all probability, lived after the Persian conquest of Gandhāra in the latter half of the sixth century B.C., but before the

c8.129

Gotamī Balasirī and the Great Satrap Rudradāman and from the Pārasīkas by the poets of the Mahābhārata and by Visākha-datta, the author of the Mudrā-rākshasa (Act 2,—Astitāvachchhaka-Yavana-Kirāta Kāmboja-Pārasīka-Vālhika-prabhṛitibhiḥ . . . . . samantāduparuddhaṁ Kusumapuram). If Tushāspha was an Iranian, it may with equal reason be argued that Vāsudeva, the successor of Huvishka, and Suviśākha, the Parthian Governor of Rudradāman, were native Hindus of India. Kālidāsa (Raghuvamśa, IV, 60 ff.) has been relied-on by some to establish the equation Yavana=Pārasīka. But the Yavanas of Raghu, IV, 61 have been mentioned in connection with the land-route (Sthala-vartma leading to the "western" realm which was the country of the Persians. Raghu's army, avoiding the sea-route, had suddenly overspread the Yavana country (apparently in the Kābul valley) like a mass of clouds and thence proceeded to the land of the śmaśrula westerners, i.e., the Persians.

c8.130

fourth century B.C. With a date in the fifth century B.C. all the evidence accommodates itself. With such a date accords the fact that Pāṇini knows the Persians as a warlike people¹ but, unlike later grammarians, never alludes to the Yavanas or Śakas as fighting races. The interval of a century between Pāṇini and Kātyāyana is not too short in view of the fact that "the oldest author on record who wrote on Pāṇini was Kātyāyana."²

c8.131

¹ v 3, 117.

c8.132

² Goldstücker, Pāṇini, 1914, p. 90.

c8.133

Since Pāṇini probably flourished in the fifth century B.C. the *Bhāgavata* (*Vāsudevaka*) sect must have arisen before that time. We learn from the *Sūtras*, iv, 3, 95 and iv, 3, 98, that the new faith was even in the fifth century B.C. a religion of *Bhakti*. It has recently been suggested by Mr. Umeshchandra Bhaṭṭāchārya³ that *Bhakti* in rules iv, 3, 95 ff., can hardly mean religious adoration as it is used in reference to even cakes (*apūpa*). He asks "is not fondness (*anurakti*) a possible meaning in the rules we are considering?" But *anurakti* for one who, as we shall see further on, is identified with Viṣṇu-Nārāyaṇa as early as the *Taittirīya Āraṇyaka* and receives the epithets *Bhagavat* and *Devadeva* in records of the second century B.C., is hardly distinguishable from *Bhakti* in the religious sense as defined by Śāṇḍilya. Another writer suggests that *Bhakti* in the rules of Pāṇini is political *Bhakti* because there is no evidence that Arjuna, whose name is coupled with that of Vāsudeva in rule iv, 3, 98, was deified. It is, however, well-known that already in the great epic Arjuna is regarded as an incarnation of Nara and is called *Bhaktānukampī* like unto Mahendra and Varuna.¹ In the Vishvaksena *Saṃhitā* Arjuna is classed with Brahman, Śiva and a few others among the secondary *Avatāras* of Viṣṇu.²

c8.134

³ IHQ, 1925, 483-9.

c8.135

¹ Mbh., iii, 45, 12; 47, 10-14.

c8.136

² Schrader, Introduction to the Pāñcarātra, p. 48.

c8.137

We have seen that the religion preached by Rāmānuja and professed by the Ālvārs existed before the Christian era, and that its votaries were called *Bhāgavatas* or *Vāsudevakas*, i.e., the *Bhaktas* or followers of Vāsudeva. Vāsudeva is thus the fountain-head of Vaishṇavism. No doubt under the comprehensive designation of Vaishṇavism are included a number of sectaries who recognise other personages than Vāsudeva as their Saviour. The most important of these are the followers of Rāmānanda and Kavira. But the vast majority of the Vaishṇavas are still Vāsudevites and even those who pay exclusive devotion to Rāma cannot trace the origin of their doctrine to any other source than Rāmānuja who, as we have seen, owes his tenets to the earlier *Āchāryas* and *Ālvārs*, who in their turn were offshoots from the *Bhāgavatas* or *Vāsudevakas* of Northern India mentioned in the inscriptions discovered at Besnagar and Ghosūṇḍī and also in the *Aṣṭādhyāyī* of that prince of grammarians, Pāṇini.

c8.138

We have little authentic information regarding Vāsudeva, round whom the *Bhāgavata* movement centred. The name Vāsudeva occurs once in the Vedic literature, *viz.*, in a passage of the tenth Prapāṭhaka of the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka—Nārāyaṇāya vidmahe Vāsudevāya dhīmahi tanno Viṣṇuḥ prachodayāt. Here Vāsudeva is a name of Viṣṇu. But the last book of the Taittirīya Āraṇyaka is a comparatively late work.¹ It is described as *khilarūpa* or supplementary. Viṣṇu does not receive the name ‘Vāsudeva’ in any of the *Saṃhitās*, *Brāhmaṇas* or classical *Upanishads*.

c8.139

¹ Dr. R. L. Mitra's Introduction to the T. A., p. 8.

c8.140

In the *Bhagavadgītā* “which contains probably the oldest dogmatic exposition we possess of Viṣṇuism”² and which is recognised as an *Upanishad* by the Hindus, Vāsudeva is said to have been a scion of the Vṛṣṇi family:—

c8.141

² Barth, *The Religions of India*, p. 191; *cf.* also Mbh., xii; 348,6-8.

c8.142

*Vṛṣṇināṃ Vāsudevo’smi Pāṇḍavānām*
*Dhanañjayaḥ.*

c8.143

The Vṛṣṇi origin of Vāsudeva is apparently hinted at in a Mora stone slab inscription of the time of the Great Satrap Rājuvula (first century A.D.).¹ The Vṛishṇis are mentioned in the Ashṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini² and in the Arthaśāstra attributed to Kauṭilya.³ Scions of the family are apparently mentioned in the Taittirīya Saṁhitā,⁴ the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa,⁵ the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa⁶ and the Jaiminīya Upanishad Brāhmaṇa.⁷

c8.144

¹ Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India, No. 5, 166.

c8.145

² iv, 1, 114.

c8.146

³ R. Shama Sastry's translation, p. 13.

c8.147

⁴ iii, 11, 9, 3.

c8.148

⁵ iii, 10, 9, 15.

c8.149

⁶ iii, 1, 1, 4.

c8.150

⁷ i, 6, 1.

c8.151

The Ghata Jātaka⁸ gives the Buddhist version of the story of Vāsudeva just as the Daśaratha Jātaka gives the Buddhist version of the legend of Rāma. It describes Vāsudeva as a scion of the royal family of “Upper Madhurā”.⁹ but does not give the name of the family. But it is not difficult to find out that the Vṛishṇi family is meant. The Jātaka says that the family of Vāsudeva perished for their irreverent conduct towards Kaṇhadīpāyana.¹⁰ The Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra refers to this incident but substitutes “the corporation of the Vṛishṇis” for the family of Vāsudeva :—

c8.152

⁸ The Jātakas, Cowell's edition, Vol. IV, p. 50.

c8.153

⁹ Pp. 50-51.

c8.154

¹⁰ Pp. 55-56.

c8.155

“Whoever has not his organs of sense under his control, will soon perish........Vātāpi in his attempt under the influence of overjoy to attack Agastya, as well as the corporation of the Vṛishṇis in their attempt against Dvaipāyana.”¹¹

c8.156

¹¹ R. Shama Sastry's translation of Kauṭilya's Arthaśāstra, pp. 12-13.

c8.157

The Jaina Uttarādhyayana Sūtra, Lecture XXII, confirms the statement of the Gītā and the Jātaka that Vāsudeva was a Kshatriya Prince.

c8.158

The Mahābhārata, the great storehouse of Hindu tradition, usually takes Vāsudeva to mean "the son of Vasudeva."¹ But in certain passages a different etymology is given.

c8.159

¹ Cf. Mbh., iii, 14, 8.

c8.160

Vasanāt sarvabhūtānām vasutvāddevayonitaḥ
Vāsudevastato redyo bṛhattvād Viṣṇuruchyate.²

c8.161

² Mbh., v, 70, 8.

c8.162

"He is called Vāsudeva in consequence of his enveloping all creatures with the screen of illusion, or of his glorious splendour, or of his being the support and resting place of the gods."

c8.163

Chhādayāmi jagad viśvam bhūtvā sūrya ivāṁśubhiḥ
Sarvabhūtādhirāsaścha Vāsudevastatohyaham.³

c8.164

³ Mbh., xii, 341, 41.

c8.165

"Assuming the form of the Sun I cover the universe with my rays. And because I am the home of all creatures, therefore, am I called by the name of Vāsudeva."

c8.166

The Mahābhārata knows a false Vāsudeva as well as the true Vāsudeva. The false Vāsudeva was a king of the Pauṇḍras.⁴ The true Vāsudeva was Kṛiṣhṇa, the famous prince of the Yādava, Vṛiṣhṇi or Sātvata family of Mathurā. It is written in the Śāntiparva⁵ that the Sātvata or Bhāgavata Dharma was first taught by Kṛiṣṇa Vāsudeva to Arjuna :—

c8.167

⁴ Mbh., i, 186, 12; ii, 14, 20; etc.

c8.168

⁵ Mbh., xii, 348, 6-8.

c8.169

Samupodheshvanīkeshu Kuru Pāṇḍavayormṛidhe
Arjune vimanaske cha gītā Bhagavatā svyam.¹

c8.170

¹ Mbh., xii, 348, 8.

c8.171

“It was sung by the Blessed One Himself when armies were drawn up for battle in the Kuru-Pāṇḍava war and Arjuna became dispirited.”

c8.172

This fact forbids the acceptance of the theory of Mr. A. Govindāchārya Svāmin that the Bhāgavata Śāstra was “not originated by Vāsudeva—the son of Vasudeva—i.e., Kṛiṣṇa,”² because forsooth, the word Vāsudeva also means “He who permeates all” and the Pādmatantra distinguishes between the two Vāsudevas. The name Sātvata Dharma applied to the Bhāgavata religion also shows that it originated in the Sātvata prince Vāsudeva. The association of Vāsudeva with Saṅkarṣaṇa in the Bhāgavata inscriptions of the first and second centuries B.C. also proves that Kṛiṣṇa, the brother of Saṅkarṣaṇa (Saṅkar-shanānuja),³ was the real Vāsudeva worshipped by the early Bhāgavatas.

c8.173

² J. R. A. S., 1911, p. 936.

c8.174

³ Mbh., ii, 79, 23.

c8.175

According to Sir R. G. Bhandarkar, Vāsudeva and Kṛiṣṇa were originally names of distinct individuals. In the opinion of that great scholar Vāsudeva was a Kṣhatriya belonging to the Yādava, Vṛiṣhṇi or Sātvata race who founded a theistic system. Later on "he was identified with Kṛiṣhṇa whose name had been handed down as that of a holy seer."¹

c8.176

¹ *Ind. Ant.*, 1912, p. 13.

c8.177

Nobody will deny the existence of several "holy seers" bearing the name of Kṛiṣhṇa who were quite distinct from Vāsudeva of the Vṛiṣhṇi race. Such were Kṛiṣhṇa, the father of Viśvakāya,² Kṛiṣhṇa Āṅgirasa,³ Kṛiṣhṇa Hārita⁴ and Kaṇha, the mighty seer mentioned in the *Ambaṭṭha sutta*.⁵ But it is impossible to accept the statement that Kṛiṣhṇa whom epic tradition identifies with Vāsudeva was originally an altogether different individual. On the contrary all available evidence, Hindu, Buddhist and Greek, points to the correctness of the identity; and we agree with Keith when he says that "the separation of Vāsudeva and Kṛṣṇa as two entities it is impossible to justify."⁶

c8.178

² *Ṛig Veda*, i, 116, 23; i, 117, 7. The identification of Kṛiṣhṇa who lived on the banks of the Aṁsumatī (*Ṛig Veda*, VIII, 96, 13f) with his epic and Purāṇic namesake (P. T. Śrīnivāsa Iyengar, *Life in Ancient India*, pp. 131ff; Radhakrishnan, *The Heart of Hindusthan*, p. 51; *Indian Philosophy*, Vol. I, p. 493) is implausible. The Aṁsumatī is not the Jumna as stated by Iyengar but a river in the Kuru country (Macdonell, *The Bṛihad-devatā*, part II, p. 238).

c8.179

³ *Kaush. Br.*, xxx, 9.

c8.180

⁴ *Ait. Āraṇyaka*. iii, 2. 6.

c8.181

⁵ Rhys Davids, *Dialogues of the Buddha*, I, p. 118.

c8.182

⁶ J. R. A. S., 1915, p. 840.

c8.183

We learn from Patañjali that the event of the death of Kaṁsa at the hands of Kṛiṣhṇa was in his age believed to have occurred in the remote past. He says “*chirahate Kaṃse*” which means that Kaṃsa’s death occurred at a very remote time. That Kṛṣṇa was the name of the slayer is evident from the following statements found in the *Mahābhāshya*:—

c8.184

“*Prahārādṛśyante Kaṃsasyacha Kṛṣṇasyacha.*”
“*Asādhur mātule Kṛṣṇaḥ.*”

c8.185

But in another place it is said that “in the days of yore Vāsudeva killed Kaṃsa”—*Jaghāna Kaṃsam kila Vāsudevaḥ*. It is thus clear that from the remotest times, from the period when the feud between Kaṃsa and his nephew was believed to have taken place, an age which was considered to be an ancient one even by Patañjali, Kṛṣṇa and Vāsudeva were considered to be names of one and the same individual—the slayer of Kaṃsa. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar points out¹ that in Kielhorn’s edition of the *Mahābhāshya* the name ‘Vāsudeva’ takes the place of Kṛṣṇa in one passage; but then, from no manuscript is the name Kṛṣṇa entirely absent. The frequency of the name ‘Vāsudeva’ may be due to the fact which he has himself proved that it was the proper name, while ‘Kṛṣṇa’ was the Gotra name.²

c8.186

¹ *Vaiṣṇavism*, etc., p. 10.

c8.187

² Pp. 10, 12.

c8.188

In the *Ghata-Jātaka* Vāsudeva receives the epithet "Kaṇha" that is, Kṛiṣhṇa:—

c8.189

"Just then a courtier named Rohiṇeyya, went into the presence of King Vāsudeva, and opened a conversation with him by reciting the first stanza:

c8.190

"Black Kaṇha, rise! why close the eyes to sleep? why lying there?
Thine own brother—see the winds away his wit do bear,
Away his wisdom! *Ghata* raves, thou of the long black hair!"¹

c8.191

¹ Cowell's *Jātaka*, Vol. IV, p. 54.

c8.192

The Greek writers, Megasthenes and Arrian, mention Herakles as one held in special honour by the Sourasenoi, an Indian tribe who possessed two large cities Methora and Kleisobora.² Bhandarkar identifies the Sourasenoi with the Sātvatas and Herakles with Vāsudeva. According to Lassen, McCrindle and Hopkins, Methora and Kleisobora are Mathurā and Kṛiṣhṇapura.³ Now, Megasthenes lived full two centuries before Patañjali. The name of the second city (Kṛiṣhṇapura) mentioned by him is a certain indication of the early and inseparable connection of Kṛiṣhṇa with the Sourasenoi (Sūrasenas) or Sātvatas.

c8.193

² McCrindle, *Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian*, p. 201.

c8.194

³ McCrindle's *Megasthenes and Arrian*, p. 140, n.; *Ind. Ant.*, 1876, p. 334; Hopkins, *The Religions of India*, p. 459.

c8.195

In the *Chhāndogya Upanishad*¹ Kṛiṣhṇa learns the same doctrines—*tapodānamārjjavam ahiṁsā satyavachanam*—which Vāsudeva teaches in the *Gītā*.²

c8.196

¹ iii, 17, 4.

c8.197

² xvi, 1-2.

c8.198

The rank growth of legend which has clustered round the name of Kṛiṣhṇa Vāsudeva reminds us of the extravagant tales which obscure the genuine history of Kapila, of Buddha, and of Aśoka. The Kṛiṣhṇa stories may not all be either fiction or myth; but they are no better suited to serve as the foundation of sober history than the tales of the *Bhāgavata Purāṇa*, of the *Saddharma-puṇḍarīka*, or of the *Aśokavadāna* are adapted to form the basis of chronicles of the doings of the Sāṁkhya sage, the Sākya reformer or the Maurya monarch. In his *Early History of India* V. A. Smith complains that most writers upon Aśoka’s reign have begun at the wrong end with the late legends, instead of at the right end with the contemporary inscriptions. Similarly most writers upon the life of Kṛiṣhṇa have begun at the wrong end with the late epic and *Purāṇic* legends instead of at the right end with the early *Brāhmaṇas* and *Upanishads*.

c8.199

On the strength of the late legends several scholars have come to the conclusion that Kṛiṣhṇa Vāsudeva was not a human being, but a popular deity whose cult being foisted upon a dummy Viṣṇu gave rise to sectarian Vaishṇavism. For example, Barth says in his *Religions of India*¹ that Kṛishṇa is “beyond all doubt, a popular divinity” and that “there is a connection between the attainment of supremacy by Viṣṇu and his identification with Kṛishṇa.” “The supremacy of the Brāhmaṇic god was the result of his fusion with the popular god.”

c8.200

Barth considers Kṛishṇa to be a solar deity. “Like those of many solar deities his first appearances were beset with perils and obstructions of every kind. On the very night of his birth his parents had to remove him to a distance beyond the reach of his uncle king Kaṃsa who sought his life. In the Veda the sun in the form of Mārtāṇḍa is the eighth son born of Aditi, and his mother casts him off just as Devakī who is at times represented as an incarnation of Aditi removes Kṛishṇa. Conveyed to the opposite shore of the Yamunā and put under the care of the shepherd Nanda and his wife Yaṣodā he was brought up as their son in the woods of Brindāban with his brother Balarāma. Arrived at adolescence the two brothers put to death Kaṃsa, and Kṛishṇa became king of the Yādavas. He took a determined side in the great struggle of the sons of Pāṇḍu against those of Dhṛitarāshṭra which forms the subject of the *Mahābhārata*. In the interval he had transferred the seat of his dominions to the fabulous city of Dwārakā, the city of gates, the gates of the West. It was here that he was overtaken himself and his race by the final catastrophe.''

c8.201

According to Hopkins¹ “The Vishṇu worship which grew about Kṛishṇa was probably at first an attempt to foist upon Vedic believers a sectarian god, by identifying the latter with a Vedic divinity.” “The epic describes the overthrow of an old Brāhmaṇic Aryan race at the hands of the Pāṇḍavas, an unknown folk, whose King’s polyandrous marriage is an historical trait, connecting the tribe closely with the polyandrous wild tribes located north of the Ganges. This tribe attacked the stronghold of Brāhmaṇism in the holy land about the present Delhi; and their patron god is the Gangetic Kṛishṇa.”² “The simple original view of Kṛishṇa is that he is a god, the son of Devakī.”³

First 200 of 314 passages. Read on

Linked texts (37)