Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

[admin]

Raghunandana [Raghunandan Bhattacharyya] [Raghunandana Bhaṭṭācāryya ]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/5/21

Raghunandana
Born: c. 16th century CE, Nabadwip
Other names: Raghunandan Bhattacharyya, Raghunandana Bhaṭṭācāryya
Occupation Sanskrit writer

Raghunandana (c. 16th century CE) was an Indian Sanskrit scholar from the Bengal region. His writings include 28 Smriti digests on Hindu law and a commentary on Dayabhaga.[1]

Life

Raghunandana was born at Nabadwip, to Harihara Bhattacharya. He was a pupil of Srinatha Acharya Chudamani.[1] His writings mention Rayamukuta (1431 CE), and are mentioned by Viramitrodaya of Mitramisra (early 17th century). Thus, it can be inferred that Raghunandana lived around 16th century CE.[2]

The various estimates of his lifespan include:[3]

• Rajendra Chandra Hazra: 1520-1570
• Monmohan Chakravarti: born 1490 or 1500, literary activity during 1520-1575
• Pandurang Vaman Kane: 1510-1580

Bani Chakravarti wrote a book on him, titled Samaj-samskarak Raghunandan (1964), in Bengali language.[1]

Works

Astavimsati-tattva

Raghunandana authored 28 Smriti digests on civil law and rituals, collectively known as Astavimsati-tattva.[4] The English scholars compared Raghunandana's digests to the Comyns' Digest, and called him the "Comyns of India".[3]

The titles of these digests end in the word tattva (literally "essence"). 27 of these works are mentioned at the beginning of Malamasa-tattva.[2]

The 28 digests include:[4][2]

1. Ahnika-tattva
2. Chandoga-vrsotsarga-tattva
3. Daya-tattva
4. Deva-pratishtha-tattva
5. Diksha-tattva
6. Divya-tattva
7. Durgotsava-tattva
8. Ekadashi-tattva
9. Janmashtami-tattva
10. Jyotisha-tattva
11. Krtya-tattva
12. Malamasa-tattva (or Malimluca-tattva)
13. Matha-pratishtha-tattva
14. Prayashchitta-tattva
15. Purushottama-kshetra-tattva
16. Rg-vrsotsarga-tattva
17. Sama-shraddha-tattva
18. Samskara-tattva
19. Shuddhi-tattva
20. Sudra-krtya-tattva
21. Taddga-bhavanotsarga-tattva
22. Tithi-tattva
23. Vastuydga-tattva
24. Vivaha-tattva (or Udvaha-tattva)
25. Vrata-tattva
26. Vyavahara-tattva
27. Yajuh-shraddha-tattva
28. Yajur-vrsotsarga-tattva

Chandoga-vrsotsarga-tattva, Rgvrsotsarga-tattva and Yajur-vrsotsarga-tattva are collectively known as Vrsotsarga-tattva. Deva-pratishtha-tattva and Matha-pratishtha-tattva are collectively known as Pratishtha-tattva.[2]

Commentary on Dayabhaga

Raghunandana's Dayabhaga-tika, also known as Dayabhaga-vyakhya[na], is a commentary on Jimutavahana's Hindu law treatise Dayabhaga. During the British Raj, when Hindu law was used in the courts, the Calcutta High Court termed Raghunandana's Dayabhaga-tika as the best commentary on Dayabhaga.[4] William Jones, a puisne judge at the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William, mentioned that the local Hindu scholars often referred to Jimutavahana's treatise, but it was Raghunandana's work that was "more generally approved" in Bengal.[3]

The commentary quotes several other scholars and writings, including Medhatithi, Kulluka Bhatta, Mitakshara, Vivada-Ratnakara of Chandeshvara Thakura, Shulapani and Vivada-Chintamani of Vachaspati Mishra (often critically).[3]

There have been some doubts about the authorship of this commentary. Both Henry Thomas Colebrooke (1810) and Julius Eggeling (1891) suspected that it was not authored by the writer of Divya-tattva (that is, Raghunandana). However, Monmohan Chakravarti (1915) and Rajendra Chandra Hazra (1950) both attribute the work to Raghunandana. Pandurang Vaman Kane also ascribes the commentary to him, but not without hesitation.[3]

Equally revealing for the existence of different texts with identical titles are certain statements in the dharmanibandhas. Besides the puranas with these names which he did consult (pp. 2-3) Ballalasena refers in the Danasagara to "another" (apara) Brahmaº, Agniº, Visnuº, and Lingaº which he did not use (p. 7). Inasmuch as the contents of these "other" puranas, as indicated in the Danasagara, do not correspond to those of the extant puranas, the conclusion was drawn that in addition to the latter -- which are spurious by definition (see 1.3) -- there was for each of them at least one other spurious text.15 [15 E. g., HAZRA 1940: 95 n. 40 (Lingaº), 151 n. 168 (Brahmaº).] Similarly, Narasimha Vajapeyin's Nityacarapradipa distinguishes between two different Brahmaºs, one of which is quoted in Laksmidhara's Krtyakalpataru, the other in the works of Hemadri; the text labels the latter an upapurana.16 [16 BI work 160, 1903-28, 1.19.] Ballalasena (p. 7) also refers to a few puranas which were useless for his purpose, since they do not contain rules on gifts (danavidhisunya); one of these is the Brahmandaº. Not only does the extant Brahmandaº contain such rules; Hemadri's Caturvargacintamani, attributes to it many other verses on the subject which do not appear in our editions. This shows "that the text of the 'Brahmanda', used by Hemadri, was in many ways different from that of our present edition as well as from that of the Brahmanda known to Ballalasena."17 [17 HAZRA 1940: 19.]

The Kalikaº is a title which has created problems for several scholars. Raghavan was the first one to suggest the existence of at least three versions: the one represented by most manuscripts and editions, comprising from 90 to 93 chapters; L. 370 of Aufrecht's Catalogus Catalogorum, which Rajendralala Mitra himself calls Candiº; and the India Office manuscript, a later and different text.18 [18 RAGHAVAN Kalikaº 1938: 331.] The editor of Laksmidhara's Krtyakalpataru, K. V. Rangaswami Aiyangar, came to the conclusion that "it has been ... difficult to find any of the quotations from Kalikapurana in any of the printed editions of it. The existence of Kalikapurana in more than one recension, and the radical differences between rival versions of it, might justify the suspicion that we do not now possess it in the form in which it existed in the 11th and 12th centuries."19 [19 RANGASWAMI AIYANGAR Nandiº 1941-42.: 159.] On the basis of the India Office catalogue19a [19a EGGELING 1899: 1193-1198, no. 3344.] Hazra accepts the existence of another Kalikaº, also called Kaliº and Satiº, which is quite different from "the present" Kalikaº.20 [20 HAZRA 1963: 259.] Elsewhere Hazra mentions that Raghunandana's Durgapujatattva (pp. 8-9) quotes ten verses which are introduced as dusprapakalikapuranantare 'pi. It shows "that Raghunandana knew another Kalika-p. which was different from the present one profusely drawn upon by him in his Tattvas."21 [21 HAZRA 1963: 236.] Notice also that Nilakantha's [Mimamasakabhatta's] Vyavaharamayukha, after quoting three stanzas from the Kalikaº, says that they do not deserve absolute confidence, "for they are absent from two or three manuscripts of the text."22 [22 Ed. P. V. KANE, Bombay: NSP, 1926, p. 114.]

-- The Puranas, by Ludo Rocher

Foreword

Dharmasastra has been a discipline comprising the vast range of subjects related to regulations on ethics, social and moral behavior, administration, laws of inheritance and various other issues related to diplomacy and polity. The tradition of Dharmasastra developed through the hundreds of texts like Dharmasutras and Smrtis. Yajnavalkya in his Smrti has noted ten major authors of Smrtis, but Vtramitramisra, the author of Vtramitrodaya has enlarged the list by citing many other Smrtis. Apart from the authors of Dharmasutras and smrtis, commentators like Visvarupa, Medhatithi, Vijfianesvara, Kulu kabhatta and a host of other also have made original contributions to Dharmasastra.

Vyavaharamayukha is a part of Bhagavantabhaskara, one of the most voluminous encyclopedic works on Dharmasastra. Nilakantha Bhatta, its author was great Mimamsaka. He was protege of Bhagavantadeva, a ruler of Bhareha (presently in Etawa Dist. of U.P.). Mahamahopadhyaya Purushottam Vaman Kane has placed him around 1610-45 AD. Nilakantha Bhatta compiled this voluminous text at his instance.

Mimamsaka (Skt. Mīmāṃsaka) — an eternalist tradition of ancient India. The Mimamsaka, or Analysts, are followers of Jaimini. Their school is based on an explanation of the Vedas. They say that only the Vedas are valid, and they practise sacrifice as taught in the Vedas.

There were two distinct systems of this name, both basing themselves on the interpretation of the Vedic texts, the Purva Mimamsaka, the 'Investigation of the Primary' (Skt. Pūrva-Mīmāṃsaka), who are just referred to as Mimamsaka, and the Uttara Mimamsaka, the 'Investigation of the Latter' (Skt. Uttara-Mīmāṃsaka). The latter is better known as the Vedanta school. The Vedas are sometimes said to cover two topics: action (relating to Vedic ritual) and knowledge. The Mimamsaka are said to deal with action and the Vedanta with knowledge. The Mimamsakas deal mainly with the beginning parts of the Vedas, and their foundational text is Jaimini's Purva Mimamsa Sutra (Skt. Purvā Mīmāṃsā Sūtra), dated around the 2nd century BCE.[1] [See Hillary Rodrigues, Introducing Hinduism (New York: Routledge, 2006), 209.]

-- Mimamsaka, by Rigpa Wiki

Bhagavantadeva (भगवन्तदेव) as mentioned in Aufrecht’s Catalogus Catalogorum:—king of Bhareha, son of Sāhideva, son of Rājāsiṃha, son of Cakrasena, son of Tārācandra, son of Yaśodeva, son of Rāmacandra, son of Karmasena, son of Rolicandra, son of Śivagaṇa, son of Candrapāla, son of Manyudeva, son of Narabrahmadeva, son of Vīḍharāja, son of Vairāṭarāja, son of Raya, son of Astaśatru, son of Viśoka, son of Karṇa. They were of the Seṅgara, or in Saṃskṛt, Śṛṅgivara [śṛṅgivara, vara m. N. of a man ib. -- Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary] tribe. Bhagavantadeva was the patron of Nīlakaṇṭha, the author of the following work.

-- Bhagavantadeva: 4 definitions, by Wisdom Library

Some of the Mayukhas such as the printed editions of the S'anti, Prayas'citta, S'raddha and Acara Mayukhas contain the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva. The genealogy is more or less mythical, but there are no weighty reasons to suppose that the verses are spurious and not from the pen of Nilakantha himself1 [The verses are: -- [x]. Vide also Aufrecht's Bod. Cat., p. 280. No. 656 and I.O. Cat. part III, p. 429, No. 1444 and Mandlik's Introduction LXXVII.]. The genealogy is: from Brahma was born Kas'yapa, whose son was Vibhandaka, whose son was Rsyas'rnga. In the family of the latter was born S'rngivara, after whom the family came to be known as Sengara. King Karna was born in that family. Then follows a line of eighteen kings, the last being Bhagavantadeva.

-- The Vyavaharamayukha of Bhatta Nilakantha, With an Introduction, Notes and Appendices, by P.V. Kane

Karna (Sanskrit: कर्ण, IAST: Karṇa), also known as Vasusena, Anga-raja, and Radheya, is one of the major characters of the Hindu epic Mahābhārata. He is the spiritual son of the Vedic deity- Surya ("sun god") and princess Kunti (mother of the Pandavas), and thus a demigod of royal birth. Kunti was granted the boon to bear a child with desired divine qualities from the gods and without much knowledge, Kunti invoked the sun god to confirm it if it was true indeed. Karna was secretly born to an unmarried Kunti in her teenage, fearing outrage and backlash from society over her premarital pregnancy, Kunti had no choice but to abandon the newly born Karna adrift in a basket on the Ganges, in the hope that he finds foster parents. The basket discovered and Karna is adopted and raised by foster Suta parents named Radha and Adhiratha Nandana of the charioteer and poet profession working for king Dhritarashtra.

Karna grows up to be an accomplished warrior of extraordinary abilities, a gifted speaker and becomes a loyal friend of Duryodhana. He was appointed the king of Anga (Bihar-Bengal) by Duryodhana. Karna joined the Duryodhana's side in the Kurukshetra war. He was a key warrior who aimed to kill 3rd Pandava Arjuna but dies in a battle with him during the war.

He is a tragic hero in the Mahabharata, in a manner similar to Aristotle's literary category of "flawed good man". He meets his biological mother late in the epic, and then discovers that he is the older half-brother of those he is fighting against. Karna is a symbol of someone who is rejected by those who should love him but do not given the circumstances, yet becomes a man of exceptional abilities willing to give his love and life as a loyal friend. His character is developed in the epic to raise and discuss major emotional and dharma (duty, ethics, moral) dilemmas. His story has inspired many secondary works, poetry and dramatic plays in the Hindu arts tradition, both in India and in southeast Asia.

A regional tradition believes that Karna founded the city of Karnal, in contemporary Haryana.

-- Karna, by Wikipedia

There are twelve Mayukhas (chapters) in Bhagavanta-bhaskara, They deal with various topics related to Dharmasastra viz. - the Samskaras, Acara, Samaya (calendar), Sraddha, Niti (Polity and administration), Dana, Utsarga (Public welfare activeities), devapratistha, Prayascitta, Suddhi and Santi. Out of these twelve Mayukhas in Bhagavantabhaskara, the Vyavaharamayukha is the sixth one. It is a valuable treatise on legal issues, covering important facets of Ancient Indian Economy, administration and rules for inheritance. Nilakantha Bhatta is not only an authority on Dharmasastra, he has culled the essence from hundreds of ancient Smrti texts, to make his work a valuable compendium. It is thus not only an essential reading for the students of Sanskrit -- particularly that of Dharmasastra, it is also very useful for legal practitioners, sociologists and researchers in Ancient Indian History and Culture. Also, Nilkantha Bhatta is not just a compiler. He has given his original views and interpretations on a number of debatable issues.

The text has been printed a number of times, but it has not been published with English translation. Mahamahopadhyaya Purushottam Vaman Kane recognized the importance of this work for the first time and he translated it into English. His translation published in 1993 is not easily available now. We are happy to bring out the text and translation together for the first time.

It is his translation of Vyavaharamayukha that led Mahamahopadhyaya Purushottam Vaman Kane to take up one of the most promising and gigantic project in Indological studies, i.e., writing the ‘History of Dharmashastra.’ sub-titled as ‘Ancient and Medieval Religions and Civil Law in India,’ Kane intended to give a survey of Dharmasastra literature in the preface of Vyavaharamayukha, which developed into his magnum opus to be completed in more than three decades. In about 7000 pages. Kane could provide first hand knowledge because of his command on Sanskrit. Professor R.S. Sharma, one of the most eminent historians of the country, writes about his achievements in the following words -- “Pandurang Vaman Kane, a great Sanskritist wedded to social reform, continued earlier tradition of scholarship. His monumental work entitled the ‘History of Dharmashatra,’ published in five volumes in the twentieth century, is an encyclopedia of ancient social laws and customs. This enables us to study the social processes in ancient India.”

We hope that this new edition of Vyavaharamayukha will be useful for [the] academic world.

Preface

The Vyavaharamayukha of Nilakantha is a work of paramount authority on Hindu Law in Gujerat, the town and island of Bombay and in northern Konkan. Even where, as in the Maratha country and in the District of Ratnagiri, the Mitaksara is the paramount authority, it occupies a very important, though a subordinate place. The first English translation of the Vyavaharamayukha was published in 1827 by Borradarle. Considering the state of Sanskrit scholarship among Westerners more than a hundred years ago, the translation was a creditable performance. But, as has been judicially noticed, Borradaile’s translation is in many places infelicitous, obscure -- or positively wrong. Besides, Borradaile’s method of dividing the translation into chapters, sections, and placita, though convenient to judges and lawyers for purposes of reference, conveyed to those unacquainted with the Sanksrit language or the original work the wrong impression that the original was similarly divided. About fifty years ago the late Rao Saheb V. N. Mandlik brought out a scholarly translation of the Vyavaharamayukha, that was a great improvement on Borradaile’s work, both in the accuracy of the translation and the method of its presentation. That work is not now available in the market. It omitted the section on ordeals, it did not refer to decided cases, and was also inaccurate in some places, as a reference to the pages indicated in the Index to this translation will show. In 1924 Mr. J.R. Gharpure of Bombay, the indefatigable editor of the ‘Collection of Hindu Law Texts,’ brought out a translation of the Vyavaharamayukha. In this translation he generally follows the late Rao Saheb Y.N. Mandlik, though here and there improvements are made; but he does not translate the section of the work on ordeals, nor does he cite even a considerable body of decisions of the High Courts that have a direct bearing on the text of the Vyavaharamayukha.

In the translation here presented, the whole of the Vyavaharamayukha has been rendered into English. The text chosen for translation is that contained in the edition of the Vyavaharamyukha published by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute at Poona in 1926. The pages of the text have been indicated at the bottom of the pages of the translation. In this translation, explanatory notes have been added in order to elucidate the meaning of the author. References to the pages of the notes in the Poona edition where the Vyavaharamayukha has been exhaustively annotated, have also been given in appropriate places for those who want to make a deeper study of the original and the translation. The Vyavaharamayukha is written in continuous prose, except where quotations in verse (which are numerous) are cited from ancient works and sages. In the present translation, quotations in verse have been clearly indicated by the method of beginning them in a separate line, and by lessening the size of the lines of the translation of verses by a few letter spaces, as compared with the rest of the work. Another feature of this translation is that exhaustive citations of decided cases have been made, wherein the Mayukha has either been quoted, explained. criticised, referred to, or which have an important bearing on the law as laid down in the Vyavaharamayukha. The decisions of courts have in a few places been also criticized. It has however to be borne in mind that this work does not profess to be a treatise on Hindu Law and that, therefore, no one should expect that all possible cases on Hindu Law would be found digested herein.

As judges and the legal profession have been accustomed for decades to use the translations by Borradaile and Mandlik, and as decided cases cite quotations from and give references to these translations, in the corner of each page of this translation corresponding portions of Borradaile’s translation contained in Stokes collection of Hindu Law-books and Mandlik’s translation have been indicated with the letters S and M respectively.

The Introduction to the edition of the text of the Vyavaharamayukha deals exhaustively with the family and personal history of Nilakantha, the works of Nilakantha, the period of his literary activity, the contents of his twelve Mayukhas which together constitute his digest called Bhagavantabhaskara, his position in Dharmasastra Literature, and the position of the Vyavaharamayukha in modern Hindu Law. Those who want to make a detailed study of these matters must refer to that Introduction. But for the benefit of those who do not know Sanskrit, a brief treatment of the matters detailed above is given here.

An exhaustive synopsis of contents, an index of cases and Law Reports, and a general index which also contains in italics important Sanskrit words will, it is hoped, add to the usefulness of this edition of the translation of the Vyvaharamayukha.

-- Vyavaharamayukha of Nilakantha, Translated into English, With Explanatory Notes and References to Decided Cases, by P.V. Kane, Introduced by Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan [Central Sanskrit University

The introductory verses in the mss. of all the Mayukhas present a perplexing problem. Hardly any two mss. of the same Mayukha contain the same introductory verses. For example, one of the three mss. of the Samayamayukha in the Bhau Daji collection of the Bombay Royal Asiatic Society has only one introductory verse2 [[x].]; while in the other two that verse does not occur at all. In one of these two latter there are four introductory verses and in the other there are five, the Benares edition agreeing with the last. The Benares edition of the S'antimayukha (of 1879) contains fourteen introductory verses, nine of which (from the second) give the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva; while one ms. of the S'antimayukha in the Bhau Daji collection has only one introductory verse which is not found in the Benares edition; and another ms. of the same in the same collection has three verses, only one of which is found in the Benares edition. In the same way the printed editions of the Prayas'cittamayukha and the Acaramayukha (Benares, 1879) contain fourteen introductory verses each; while mss. of these two Mayukhas in the Gattulalji collection in Bombay have only two and three verses respectively. This perplexing variance in the number of introductory verses cannot be satisfactorily explained by supposing that in all cases of such differences the scribes of the mss. and others introduced unauthorised interpolations. The hypothesis which, after a careful consideration of all the introductions, seems most probable is that Nilakantha himself (or probably his son) from time to time revised his works, recast the introductory verses, added to them and also made slight alterations and additions in the body of the works.

Some of the Mayukhas such as the printed editions of the S'anti, Prayas'citta, S'raddha and Acara Mayukhas contain the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva. The genealogy is more or less mythical, but there are no weighty reasons to suppose that the verses are spurious and not from the pen of Nilakantha himself1 [The verses are: -- [x]. Vide also Aufrecht's Bod. Cat., p. 280. No. 656 and I.O. Cat. part III, p. 429, No. 1444 and Mandlik's Introduction LXXVII.]. The genealogy is: from Brahma was born Kas'yapa, whose son was Vibhandaka, whose son was Rsyas'rnga. In the family of the latter was born S'rngivara, after whom the family came to be known as Sengara. King Karna was born in that family. Then follows a line of eighteen kings, the last being Bhagavantadeva.

-- The Vyavaharamayukha or Bhatta Nilakantha, With an Introduction, Notes and Appendices, by P.V. Kane

Other works

His other works include:[2]

• Gaya-shraddha paddhati
• Graha-yaga-tattva (or Graha-pramana-tattva)
• Tirtha-yatra-tattva (or Tirtha-tattva)
• Tripuskara-santi-tattva
• Dvadasa-yatra-tattva (or Yatra-tattva)
• Rasa-yatra tattva (or Rasa-yatra paddhati)

References

1. Sures Chandra Banerji (1989). A Companion to Sanskrit Literature. Motilal Banarsidass. pp. 76–77. ISBN 978-81-208-0063-2.
2. Sures Chandra Banerji (1999). A Brief History of Dharmaśāstra. Abhinav Publications. p. 45. ISBN 978-81-7017-370-0.
3. Ludo Rocher (2002). Jimutavahana's Dayabhaga: The Hindu Law of Inheritance in Bengal: The Hindu Law of Inheritance in Bengal. Oxford University Press. p. 16. ISBN 978-0-19-803160-4.
4. Ganga Ram Garg, ed. (1992). Encyclopaedia of the Hindu World. Concept Publishing Company. p. 739. ISBN 978-81-7022-376-4.

[admin]

Part 1 of 2

Nilankantha [Bhatta Nilakantha]
Excerpt from The Vyavaharamayukha of Bhatta Nilakantha, With an Introduction, Notes and Appendices
by P.V. Kane

Foreword

Dharmasastra has been a discipline comprising the vast range of subjects related to regulations on ethics, social and moral behavior, administration, laws of inheritance and various other issues related to diplomacy and polity. The tradition of Dharmasastra developed through the hundreds of texts like Dharmasutras and Smrtis. Yajnavalkya in his Smrti has noted ten major authors of Smrtis, but Vtramitramisra, the author of Vtramitrodaya has enlarged the list by citing many other Smrtis. Apart from the authors of Dharmasutras and smrtis, commentators like Visvarupa, Medhatithi, Vijfianesvara, Kulu kabhatta and a host of other also have made original contributions to Dharmasastra.

Vyavaharamayukha is a part of Bhagavantabhaskara, one of the most voluminous encyclopedic works on Dharmasastra. Nilakantha Bhatta, its author was great Mimamsaka. He was protege of Bhagavantadeva, a ruler of Bhareha (presently in Etawa Dist. of U.P.). Mahamahopadhyaya Purushottam Vaman Kane has placed him around 1610-45 AD. Nilakantha Bhatta compiled this voluminous text at his instance.

Mimamsaka (Skt. Mīmāṃsaka) — an eternalist tradition of ancient India. The Mimamsaka, or Analysts, are followers of Jaimini. Their school is based on an explanation of the Vedas. They say that only the Vedas are valid, and they practise sacrifice as taught in the Vedas.

There were two distinct systems of this name, both basing themselves on the interpretation of the Vedic texts, the Purva Mimamsaka, the 'Investigation of the Primary' (Skt. Pūrva-Mīmāṃsaka), who are just referred to as Mimamsaka, and the Uttara Mimamsaka, the 'Investigation of the Latter' (Skt. Uttara-Mīmāṃsaka). The latter is better known as the Vedanta school. The Vedas are sometimes said to cover two topics: action (relating to Vedic ritual) and knowledge. The Mimamsaka are said to deal with action and the Vedanta with knowledge. The Mimamsakas deal mainly with the beginning parts of the Vedas, and their foundational text is Jaimini's Purva Mimamsa Sutra (Skt. Purvā Mīmāṃsā Sūtra), dated around the 2nd century BCE.[1] [See Hillary Rodrigues, Introducing Hinduism (New York: Routledge, 2006), 209.]

-- Mimamsaka, by Rigpa Wiki

Bhagavantadeva (भगवन्तदेव) as mentioned in Aufrecht’s Catalogus Catalogorum:—king of Bhareha, son of Sāhideva, son of Rājāsiṃha, son of Cakrasena, son of Tārācandra, son of Yaśodeva, son of Rāmacandra, son of Karmasena, son of Rolicandra, son of Śivagaṇa, son of Candrapāla, son of Manyudeva, son of Narabrahmadeva, son of Vīḍharāja, son of Vairāṭarāja, son of Raya, son of Astaśatru, son of Viśoka, son of Karṇa. They were of the Seṅgara, or in Saṃskṛt, Śṛṅgivara [śṛṅgivara, vara m. N. of a man ib. -- Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary] tribe. Bhagavantadeva was the patron of Nīlakaṇṭha, the author of the following work.

-- Bhagavantadeva: 4 definitions, by Wisdom Library

Karna (Sanskrit: कर्ण, IAST: Karṇa), also known as Vasusena, Anga-raja, and Radheya, is one of the major characters of the Hindu epic Mahābhārata. He is the spiritual son of the Vedic deity- Surya ("sun god") and princess Kunti (mother of the Pandavas), and thus a demigod of royal birth. Kunti was granted the boon to bear a child with desired divine qualities from the gods and without much knowledge, Kunti invoked the sun god to confirm it if it was true indeed. Karna was secretly born to an unmarried Kunti in her teenage, fearing outrage and backlash from society over her premarital pregnancy, Kunti had no choice but to abandon the newly born Karna adrift in a basket on the Ganges, in the hope that he finds foster parents. The basket discovered and Karna is adopted and raised by foster Suta parents named Radha and Adhiratha Nandana of the charioteer and poet profession working for king Dhritarashtra.

Karna grows up to be an accomplished warrior of extraordinary abilities, a gifted speaker and becomes a loyal friend of Duryodhana. He was appointed the king of Anga (Bihar-Bengal) by Duryodhana. Karna joined the Duryodhana's side in the Kurukshetra war. He was a key warrior who aimed to kill 3rd Pandava Arjuna but dies in a battle with him during the war.

He is a tragic hero in the Mahabharata, in a manner similar to Aristotle's literary category of "flawed good man". He meets his biological mother late in the epic, and then discovers that he is the older half-brother of those he is fighting against. Karna is a symbol of someone who is rejected by those who should love him but do not given the circumstances, yet becomes a man of exceptional abilities willing to give his love and life as a loyal friend. His character is developed in the epic to raise and discuss major emotional and dharma (duty, ethics, moral) dilemmas. His story has inspired many secondary works, poetry and dramatic plays in the Hindu arts tradition, both in India and in southeast Asia.

A regional tradition believes that Karna founded the city of Karnal, in contemporary Haryana.

-- Karna, by Wikipedia

There are twelve Mayukhas (chapters) in Bhagavanta-bhaskara, They deal with various topics related to Dharmasastra viz. - the Samskaras, Acara, Samaya (calendar), Sraddha, Niti (Polity and administration), Dana, Utsarga (Public welfare activeities), devapratistha, Prayascitta, Suddhi and Santi. Out of these twelve Mayukhas in Bhagavantabhaskara, the Vyavaharamayukha is the sixth one. It is a valuable treatise on legal issues, covering important facets of Ancient Indian Economy, administration and rules for inheritance. Nilakantha Bhatta is not only an authority on Dharmasastra, he has culled the essence from hundreds of ancient Smrti texts, to make his work a valuable compendium. It is thus not only an essential reading for the students of Sanskrit -- particularly that of Dharmasastra, it is also very useful for legal practitioners, sociologists and researchers in Ancient Indian History and Culture. Also, Nilkantha Bhatta is not just a compiler. He has given his original views and interpretations on a number of debatable issues.

The text has been printed a number of times, but it has not been published with English translation. Mahamahopadhyaya Purushottam Vaman Kane recognized the importance of this work for the first time and he translated it into English. His translation published in 1993 is not easily available now. We are happy to bring out the text and translation together for the first time.

It is his translation of Vyavaharamayukha that led Mahamahopadhyaya Purushottam Vaman Kane to take up one of the most promising and gigantic project in Indological studies, i.e., writing the ‘History of Dharmashastra.’ sub-titled as ‘Ancient and Medieval Religions and Civil Law in India,’ Kane intended to give a survey of Dharmasastra literature in the preface of Vyavaharamayukha, which developed into his magnum opus to be completed in more than three decades. In about 7000 pages. Kane could provide first hand knowledge because of his command on Sanskrit. Professor R.S. Sharma, one of the most eminent historians of the country, writes about his achievements in the following words -- “Pandurang Vaman Kane, a great Sanskritist wedded to social reform, continued earlier tradition of scholarship. His monumental work entitled the ‘History of Dharmashatra,’ published in five volumes in the twentieth century, is an encyclopedia of ancient social laws and customs. This enables us to study the social processes in ancient India.”

We hope that this new edition of Vyavaharamayukha will be useful for [the] academic world.

Preface

The Vyavaharamayukha of Nilakantha is a work of paramount authority on Hindu Law in Gujerat, the town and island of Bombay and in northern Konkan. Even where, as in the Maratha country and in the District of Ratnagiri, the Mitaksara is the paramount authority, it occupies a very important, though a subordinate place. The first English translation of the Vyavaharamayukha was published in 1827 by Borradarle. Considering the state of Sanskrit scholarship among Westerners more than a hundred years ago, the translation was a creditable performance. But, as has been judicially noticed, Borradaile’s translation is in many places infelicitous, obscure -- or positively wrong. Besides, Borradaile’s method of dividing the translation into chapters, sections, and placita, though convenient to judges and lawyers for purposes of reference, conveyed to those unacquainted with the Sanksrit language or the original work the wrong impression that the original was similarly divided. About fifty years ago the late Rao Saheb V. N. Mandlik brought out a scholarly translation of the Vyavaharamayukha, that was a great improvement on Borradaile’s work, both in the accuracy of the translation and the method of its presentation. That work is not now available in the market. It omitted the section on ordeals, it did not refer to decided cases, and was also inaccurate in some places, as a reference to the pages indicated in the Index to this translation will show. In 1924 Mr. J.R. Gharpure of Bombay, the indefatigable editor of the ‘Collection of Hindu Law Texts,’ brought out a translation of the Vyavaharamayukha. In this translation he generally follows the late Rao Saheb Y.N. Mandlik, though here and there improvements are made; but he does not translate the section of the work on ordeals, nor does he cite even a considerable body of decisions of the High Courts that have a direct bearing on the text of the Vyavaharamayukha.

In the translation here presented, the whole of the Vyavaharamayukha has been rendered into English. The text chosen for translation is that contained in the edition of the Vyavaharamyukha published by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute at Poona in 1926. The pages of the text have been indicated at the bottom of the pages of the translation. In this translation, explanatory notes have been added in order to elucidate the meaning of the author. References to the pages of the notes in the Poona edition where the Vyavaharamayukha has been exhaustively annotated, have also been given in appropriate places for those who want to make a deeper study of the original and the translation. The Vyavaharamayukha is written in continuous prose, except where quotations in verse (which are numerous) are cited from ancient works and sages. In the present translation, quotations in verse have been clearly indicated by the method of beginning them in a separate line, and by lessening the size of the lines of the translation of verses by a few letter spaces, as compared with the rest of the work. Another feature of this translation is that exhaustive citations of decided cases have been made, wherein the Mayukha has either been quoted, explained. criticised, referred to, or which have an important bearing on the law as laid down in the Vyavaharamayukha. The decisions of courts have in a few places been also criticized. It has however to be borne in mind that this work does not profess to be a treatise on Hindu Law and that, therefore, no one should expect that all possible cases on Hindu Law would be found digested herein.

As judges and the legal profession have been accustomed for decades to use the translations by Borradaile and Mandlik, and as decided cases cite quotations from and give references to these translations, in the corner of each page of this translation corresponding portions of Borradaile’s translation contained in Stokes collection of Hindu Law-books and Mandlik’s translation have been indicated with the letters S and M respectively.

The Introduction to the edition of the text of the Vyavaharamayukha deals exhaustively with the family and personal history of Nilakantha, the works of Nilakantha, the period of his literary activity, the contents of his twelve Mayukhas which together constitute his digest called Bhagavantabhaskara, his position in Dharmasastra Literature, and the position of the Vyavaharamayukha in modern Hindu Law. Those who want to make a detailed study of these matters must refer to that Introduction. But for the benefit of those who do not know Sanskrit, a brief treatment of the matters detailed above is given here.

An exhaustive synopsis of contents, an index of cases and Law Reports, and a general index which also contains in italics important Sanskrit words will, it is hoped, add to the usefulness of this edition of the translation of the Vyvaharamayukha.

-- Vyavaharamayukha of Nilakantha, Translated into English, With Explanatory Notes and References to Decided Cases, by P.V. Kane, Introduced by Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan [Central Sanskrit University

The introductory verses in the mss. of all the Mayukhas present a perplexing problem. Hardly any two mss. of the same Mayukha contain the same introductory verses. For example, one of the three mss. of the Samayamayukha in the Bhau Daji collection of the Bombay Royal Asiatic Society has only one introductory verse2 [[x].]; while in the other two that verse does not occur at all. In one of these two latter there are four introductory verses and in the other there are five, the Benares edition agreeing with the last. The Benares edition of the S'antimayukha (of 1879) contains fourteen introductory verses, nine of which (from the second) give the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva; while one ms. of the S'antimayukha in the Bhau Daji collection has only one introductory verse which is not found in the Benares edition; and another ms. of the same in the same collection has three verses, only one of which is found in the Benares edition. In the same way the printed editions of the Prayas'cittamayukha and the Acaramayukha (Benares, 1879) contain fourteen introductory verses each; while mss. of these two Mayukhas in the Gattulalji collection in Bombay have only two and three verses respectively. This perplexing variance in the number of introductory verses cannot be satisfactorily explained by supposing that in all cases of such differences the scribes of the mss. and others introduced unauthorised interpolations. The hypothesis which, after a careful consideration of all the introductions, seems most probable is that Nilakantha himself (or probably his son) from time to time revised his works, recast the introductory verses, added to them and also made slight alterations and additions in the body of the works.

Some of the Mayukhas such as the printed editions of the S'anti, Prayas'citta, S'raddha and Acara Mayukhas contain the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva. The genealogy is more or less mythical, but there are no weighty reasons to suppose that the verses are spurious and not from the pen of Nilakantha himself1 [The verses are: -- [x]. Vide also Aufrecht's Bod. Cat., p. 280. No. 656 and I.O. Cat. part III, p. 429, No. 1444 and Mandlik's Introduction LXXVII.]. The genealogy is: from Brahma was born Kas'yapa, whose son was Vibhandaka, whose son was Rsyas'rnga. In the family of the latter was born S'rngivara, after whom the family came to be known as Sengara. King Karna was born in that family. Then follows a line of eighteen kings, the last being Bhagavantadeva.

-- The Vyavaharamayukha or Bhatta Nilakantha, With an Introduction, Notes and Appendices, by P.V. Kane

INTRODUCTION

I. Critical Apparatus

The present edition of the Vyavaharamayukha of Nilakantha is based on the following editions and manuscripts: —

(A.) The oblong lithographed edition of 1826 published at Bombay by ‘Shreeorustna Jagannathjee’ under the patronage of the Government of Bombay and printed at the Courier Press. This edition is, for the time when it was published, a very accurate one. There are a few misprints and mistakes. It does not say what mss. were consulted and no various readings are given. It gives references to editions of the Manusmrti and Yajnavalkyasmrti that were published before it. At the end there is a table of contents and a list of errata is given at the beginning. This edition contains 244 pages with eight lines on each page.

(B.) This is a paper ms. belonging to the Deccan College Collection, No. 67 of 1879-80, written on 73 folios, having 16 lines on each page up to folio 32 and 12-15 thereafter. There is no date at the beginning or at the end. It looks to be about 100 years old. The handwriting is not good. Red vertical double lines are used to indicate quotations.

(C.) This ms. is No. 120 of the Vis'rambag collection (i) written on 85 folios. There are generally eleven lines on each page. It is written very carelessly, though in a good hand. There is no date at the beginning or at the end. The ms. appears to be a hundred years old. There are many omissions of words and lines through oversight.

(D.) This ms. is No. 121 of the Vis'rambag collection (i). There are 100 leaves with 10 or 11 lines on each page. It is written in a clear, bold hand, but rather carelessly. The copyist was probably altogether ignorant of Sanskrit and wrote to dictation. The colophon at the end shows that it was copied in samvat 1820 i.e. 1764 A. D.

(E.) This ms. is No 296 of the Vis'rambag collection (ii). It is incomplete and contains 98 folios, out of which 1, 5-34, 48 and 85-94 are wanting. The writer was an illiterate and careless scribe, though he wrote a good hand. This ms. omits very frequently words and sentences through oversight.

(F.) This is a ms. belonging to the Bhau Daji collection of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic society. It contains 91 folios with 9 or 10 lines on each page. It is well written and is tolerably correct, but frequently omits words and even lines. Corrections are made in a smaller and more beautiful hand, probably by another scribe. The original readings of F agree remarkably with B and D, but the corrections make it differ from them. In a few cases whole pages are omitted, though the ms. itself presents consecutively numbered pages.

(G.) A ms. from the Library of the Calcutta Sanskrit College, containing 95 folios with 12 lines (sometimes only 8 or 10) On each page. It is written in a bold and beautiful hand. Corrections are made in another ink but probably by the same hand. Two folios, 44-45, are missing, though on the first page it is described as complete. From folio 80 there is confusion. Probably the leaves of the original were carried off by the wind when the scribe was copying. He collected the leaves together but changed their order and copied down the leaves so shuffled up. The ms. looks modern and must not be more than 100 years old.

(H.) A ms. from the Library of the Calcutta Sanskrit College in Bengali characters containing 78 folios with 8 or 9 lines on each page. Though described as complete on the title page, it stops at the title called [x]. This ms. is very incorrect and full of lacuna, very often due to the fact that the scribe's eye ran from one word to the same word occurring a few lines later. The ms is modern, about 50 years old.

(K.) This is the Benares lithographed edition of 1879 printed at the Kas'i-Sanskrta Yantralaya. This edition often confounds the letters [x] and [x], [x] and [x], [x] and [x]. There are numerous mistakes arising from the inability to read correctly the original from which this edition was printed. This edition does not give various readings and was probably based upon a single ms. This edition agrees remarkably with A, C and G, particularly with C even in the matter of omissions.

(M.) This is the edition of the late Raosaheb V. N. Mandlik published in 1879 containing the text, translation and critical notes. This is a scholarly edition. It is based on six mss. and two printed editions. This edition is not now available in the market. It gives in the footnotes various readings and also references to some of the works quoted or referred to in the text.

(N.) This is a ms. belonging to the library of Srimant Raje Lakshmanrao Saheb Bhonsle of Nagpur (junior). It is well written and is tolerably correct. It has 136 folios with fourteen lines on each page. It is about a hundred years old. It is full of omissions. From the section on [x], a great confusion is visible. Probably the leaves of the original were blown away by the wind when the scribe was copying. The leaves were collected without any attempt at arranging them in consecutive order.

It will be seen from the above that mss. belonging to different parts of India have been utilised in preparing this edition. Among the mss. B, D, E, and F agree very closely, even in their mistakes and are probably copies of the same codex archetypus. C sometimes agrees with B D F and sometimes with G. C G and K show a remarkable agreement even in omissions. H is akin to G. M very often follows A. N seems to be an independent ms., though it generally presents the same readings as C and K and sometimes agrees with A and M. In the footnotes all important readings have been collected, only very palpable mistakes of copyists being generally omitted. Even such mistakes will sometimes be found in the footnotes purposely given for the sake of comparison.

The Vyavaharamayukha quotes very largely from the Manusmrti, the Yajnavalkya-smrti, the Narada-smrti and other smrti works. In the footnotes important variations from the printed editions of these works have been pointed out.

II. The family and personal history of Nilakantha

For several generations the family of which Nilakantha was a worthy scion held the first place among learned men in that ancient and far-famed seat of Sanskrit learning, the city of Benares. The Purvamimansa system and religions and ceremonial lore were the special forte of this family. Although biographies of learned men are very rare in India, as regards this family the case is somewhat different. Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Sastri has brought to light a biography of this family written by a distinguished member of the family, Samkarabhtta, son of Narayanabhatta and father of Nilakantha (vide Indian Antiquary for 1912 vol. 41. pp 7-13).

Unfortunately the copy supplied to the Mahamahopadhyaya does not contain the first folio and the work, which is full of inaccuracies and omissions, comes abruptly to an end. The last chapter shows that Samkarabhatta, who was a very old man then, was weighed down with grief for the loss of a promising nephew. The work is styled Gadhivams'anucarita from the fact that the gotra of the family was Vis'vamitra.

The family migrated to Benares from the Deccan. According to tradition the home of the family was in the ancient and famous town of Paithan. The first member of the family, of whom some notices are preserved in works that were beyond doubt composed by the members of the family, was Govinda1. [[x]. Introduction to [x] of [x] But it has to be noted that in the commentary on the [x] composed by [x], two more ancestors are mentioned. [x] I.O. Cat. part II p. 303. I take [x] as the name and not [x] as some do. [x] was a famous name in Maharastra.] As the first folio of the Gadhivams'anucarita is not available, information about the founder of the family and its early fortunes is not forthcoming from that work. In the Tristhalisetu of Narayanabhatta, the author refers to his ancestor Govinda and informs us that the gotra of the family was Vis'vamitra1. [[x] (mss. Deccan College No. 104 of 1892-95 and Vis'rambag i. No. 149).] Rames'vava was the son of Govinda. The copy of the Gadhivams'anucarita opens (on its second page) with a panegyric of Rames'varabhatta. He is said to have been very strong in Mimansa, grammar, logic and in philosophy. He wrote a poem styled Ramakutuhala in order to eclipse the fame of the Naisadhiya of S'riharsa. Numerous pupils flocked to him at Paithan on the Godavari. He is said to have cured of leprosy the son of an influential Mahomedan officer of the Ahmednagar state. He went to Kolhapur and thence to Vijayanagar, which was then ruled over by the famous Krsnaraya. He then started on a pilgrimage to Dvaraka. On his way to Dvaraka a son was born to him in s'ake 1435 caitra i.e. March 1513 A. D. This son later on became famous as Narayanabhatta. Rames'vara, after staying for four years at Dvaraka, came back to Paithan. After spending four more years at Paithan, Rames'varabhatta left for Benares2 [The Introduction to the [x] bears this out, [x].]. A second son named S'ridhara was born on the way and a third named Madhava at Kas'i3 [[x] vide I.O. Cat p. 531, Nos 1667-68 [x], son of [x]]. Rames'vara was advanced in age when his first son Narayana-bhatta was born. So he must have been quite an old man when he came to Benares. For some of his famous pupils, vide Indian Antiquary for 1912, p 9. Students from all parts of India came in crowds to Benares to learn at his feet and spread his fame throughout the length and breadth of India. Rames'vara died at a very advanced age and his wife became a sati.

Narayanabhatta learnt all the s'astras at the feet of his father1 [ ]. He is said to have engaged in constant disputations with the pandits of Eastern India, He vanquished Maithila and Gauda pandits at the house of Todarmal. It was he who raised Daksinatya pandits to that position of high eminence which they hold even now at Benares. He was the most illustrious member of his family and shod lustre on it by his giant intellect, his holiness and his ceaseless efforts in the cause of Sanskrit literature. Pandits all over India looked upon him as their patron and he spared neither money nor pains to help them. He was very fond of collecting and copying manuscripts. It is related that, when the Mussalmans razed the temple of Vis'ves'vara at Benares to the ground from religious bigotry and hatred, there was severe drought for a long time and that the Mahomedan ruler implored Narayanabhatta to propitiate Vis'ves'vara. Narayanabhatta propitiated Vis'ves'vara and copious rain fell in a day. Thereupon Nararyanabhatta induced the Mahomedan ruler to allow him to rebuild the temple of Vis'ves'vara. For his piety and learning Narayanabhatta was given the title of ‘Jagadguru’ and his family was given the first place of honour in the assembly of learned Brahmanas and at the recitations of the Vedas (mantrajagaras). The latter distinction continues in the family, it is said, even now. That Narayanabhatta was concerned with the rebuilding of the temple of Vis'ves'vara is vouched for by Divakarabhatta, a daughter’s son of Nilakantha, who was the grand-son of Narayanabhatta1 [[x] Introductory verse 4 to the [x]. Vide I.O. Cat. part III p. 547, No. 1708.]. But it is rather strange that the Gadhivams'anucarita is silent on this point (I. A. vol. 41 at p. 10). In the colophons to the several works of his descendants, Narayanabhatta is frequently styled ‘Jagadguru’.2 [e.g. [x] &c. Aufrecht's cat. of Sanskrit mss. in the Bodleian Library p. 277, No. 654.] Narayanabhatta wrote the Prayogaratna, the Tristhalisetu, the Antyestipaddhati, Rudrapaddhati, Divyanusthanapaddhati,3 [It is probably to this work that [x] in his [x] refers in the words [x] p. 457.] and numerous other works. He wrote a commentary on the Vrttaratnakara in the year 1602 of Vikramarka i.e. 1546 A. D.4 [[x] I.O. Cat. part II p. 304.] His works are even now used all over India and regulate the performance of religious ceremonial in modern times. His descendants speak of him as almost an avatara5 [[x] Introductory 3rd verse to the [x] of [x] (Nirn. ed).] of the Deity and as a profound Mimansaka.6 [[x] Intro. 4th verse to the [x] of [x] (No. 109 of the Deccan College collection of 1895-1902).] He appears to have composed a commentary on the S'astradipika of Parthasarathimis'ra, as his son S'amkarabhatta informs us.1 [My friend, Pandit Bakres'astri of Bombay, has a copy of the comment of [x] on the [x]. While commenting on the first [x], says [x]. At the end of the 6th [x] we have these words [x]. This shows that [x] commented on the first pada of the first [x] and the first two padas of the sixth [x] (of the [x]).] As he was born in 1513 and wrote a work in 1546 A. D, the literary activity of Narayanabhatta must be ascribed to the period between 1540 A. D. and 1680 A.D.

Narayanbhatta had three sons, Ramakrsnabhatta, S'amkarabhatta and Govindabhatta, the first being the eldest2 [In the [x] (Nirn. ed.) we read in one place [x].]. Ramakrsna also was a very learned man. He is spoken of as a helmsman in the deep ocean of the philosophy of the Bhatta (Kumarilabhatta) school and as unravelling the knotty points in other s'astras also and as having made his opponents look like glow-worms in the brilliance of his lore.3 [[x] Introductory verse to the [x].] He wrote a commentary on the Tantravartika, the Jivatpitrka-kartavya-nirnaya, the Jyotistomanaddhati, the Masikas'raddhanirnaya and other works. The Gadhivams'anucarita says that he died at the age of 52.

S'amkarabhatta, the second son of Narayanabhatta, was a profound Mimansaka. He wrote a commentary on the S'astradipika, to which frequent reference is made in his own work called the Dvaitanirnaya and in the Samskaramayukha, where it is styled S'astradipikaprakas'a. For an account of his Dvaitanirpaya, the Annals of the Bhandarkar Institute (vol. Ill, part 2, pp. 67-72) may be consulted. In this latter work, he distinctly states that he will conform to the views of southern writers.1 [[x] 8th intro. verse in the ms. of the [x] (No. 109 of 1895-1902 of the Deccan College Collection).] He wrote a work called Mimansabalaprakas'a (printed at Benares), in which he summarises the conclusions established in the twelve chapters of the Purvamimansasutra. Another work of his is the Dharmaprakas'a or Sarvadharmaprakas'a, in which his mother’s name is given as Parvati2 [[x] I.O. Cat part III, p. 482 No. 1564.] and in which he refers to his S'astradipikaprakas'a. Some of his other works are Vidhirasayanadusana, in which he refutes the Vidhirasayana of Appayyadiksita, the Nirnayacandrika, Vratamayukha. Bhattoji Diksita, author of the Siddhanta-kaumudi, was the most famous of his pupils.

The third son of Narayanabhatta was Govinda who died at the age of 48, leaving four sons (vide I. A. vol. 41 at p. 11).

Ramakrsna, the son of Narayana, had three sons, Dinakara alias Divakara, Kamalakara and Laksmana. The eldest of these was Dinakara3 [[x] 6th intro. verse to the [x]. 6th intro. verse to the [x] of [x].] and Laksmana was the youngest.4 [[x] 7th intro. verse, [x].] Their mother’s name was Uma and she seems to have immolated herself on the funeral pyre of her husband. The sons offer most touching reverence to their mother in their works.1 [[x] 5th intro. verse to the [x]. Intro. to the [x] and [x].] Dinakara alias Divakara wrote the Bhattadinakari or Bhattadinakaramimansa which is a commentary on the S'astradipika, the S'antisara, the Dinakaroddyota. This latter was a comprehensive digest, commenced by Dinakara and completed by his son Vis'ves'vara or Gagabhatta.2 [[x] vide Dr. Mitra's Bikaner cat. pp. 386-387; vide also I.O. Cat. part III, p. 505.] Kamalakarabhatta wrote no less than twenty-two works. Next to Narayanabhatta, Kamalakara and his cousin Nilakantha stand out as the most prominent and far-famed scions of this family of Bhattas. In some of Kamalakara’s works such as the S'antikamalakara and the commentary on the Kavyaprakas'a verses occur highly eulogising his proficience in all the s'astras.3 [[x] No. 433 of 1895-1902 of the Deccan College Collection and a ms. of the S'antiratna in the Bau Daji collection of the B.B.R.A.S.] He tells us that he composed his commentary on the Kavyaprakas'a for the diversion of his son Ananta. He composed his Nirnayasindhu in the year 1668 of the Vikrama era. i.e. in 1612 A. D.4 [[x] 6th verse at the end.] We learn from another source that this was his first work. Therefore his literary activity must have fallen between 1610 A. D. and 1640 A. D. Some of his important works are the Nirnayasindhu, the S'udrakamalakara, the Vivadatandava, the S'antikamalakara, the Vratakamalakara, the Purtakamalakara and the commentary on the Kavyaprakas'a. For a complete list vide the foot-note.1 [In the [x] he says at the end (I.O. Cat part III, p. 455 No. 1502) [x]; at the end of the [x] (also called [x] after the verse [x]: there is a list of 22 works [x].] The youngest of the three brothers, Laksmana, studied under Kamalakara and wrote the Acararatna, the Gotrapravararatna and a few other works.

S'amkarabhatta had four sons, Ranganatha, Damodara, Nrsimha and Nilakantha. Mandlik is not right in saying that S'amkarabhatta had two sons. In the Vyavaharatattva (vide appendix A) the colophon makes it clear that Nilakantha was the younger brother of the first three mentioned above. Similarly in the colophon to the Nitimayukha (Benares edition of 1880) Nilakantha is described as the younger brother of the first three mentioned above. The Dvaitanirnaya of S'amkarabhatta says that the author’s son Damodara wrote a supplement to the Dvaitanirnaya2 [[x]. Vide Annals of the Bhandarkar Institute, vol. III, part 2, p. 72.]. In the Vyavaharatattva Nilakantha refers to the work on matters forbidden in the Kali age composed by his eldest brother Damodara1 [[x]. p. 465.]. In the Acaramayukha Nilakantha refers to the Kalivarjyanirnaya of his elder brother (bhratrcaranah) and in the Prayas'cittamayukha to his eldest brother, without naming him. In the other Mayukhas also (such as those on S'raddha and Samaya) references occur to an elder brother. It is difficult to reconcile the fact that Damodara is spoken of as the eldest brother in the Vyavaharatattva with the fact that Rahganatha’s name occurs before that of Damodara in the colophon to the same work. An explanation may be hazarded that Ranganatha probably died early so that Damodara became the eldest or that Ranganatha might have been given away in adoption. It is also possible that the colophon is not exact as to the seniority among the brothers. It is significant that the Gadhivams'anucarita speaks of only Damodara, Nrsimha and Nilakantha. So it looks very probable that when S'amkarabhatta wrote the work in his old age, Ranganatha had passed away. The works of Nilakantha will be dealt with separately later on.

Dinakara alias Divakara had a son Vis'ves'vara better known as Gagabhatta. He officiated at the coronation of S'ivaji, the founder of the Maratha empire. Besides completing his father’s digest, the Uddyota, he wrote the Bhattacintamani, the Mimansakusumanjali2 [In the [x] ([x] p. 88 Chowkhamba series) he says [x].], the Kayasthadharmadipa and other works. His S'ivarkodaya is modelled on the lines of the S'lokavartika of Kumarila. In the Kayasthadharmadipa reference is made to Aurangzeb, to Rajagiri (Raigad fort) as the capital of S'iva (S'ivaji), to S'ahaji and Jija (the mother of S'ivaji) and to Balaji Kayastha, a minister of S'ivaji at whose instance the work was composed by Gagabhatta1 [I.O. Cat. vol. III, pp. 525-527, No. 1653.]. Kamalakarabhatta had three sons one of whom Ananta wrote a digest styled Ramakalpadruma on acara, samaya, s'raddha, utsarga, prayas'citta and similar matters.

Damodarabhatta had a son Siddhes'vara, who wrote a work called Samskaramayukha in samvat 1736 (i. e. 1679-80 A. D.). Nilakantha had two sons, S'amkara and Bhanu and a daughter. His wife’s name was Ganga2 [[x]. Intro. 2nd verse to the [x] of [x] (I.O. Cat. part III p. 433 No. 1464); [x] I.O. Cat. part III, p. 488 No. 1575.]. Nilakantha’s son S'amkarabhatta had a hand in editing the Samskaramayukha, as will be seen later on. He wrote the Kundoddyotadars'ana (or Kundabhaskara) in 1671 A. D.3 [I.O. Cat. part III p. 427 (foot-note). Peterson in his cat. of Ulwar mss. says that the Kundarka was printed in the [x] (p. 2), that that work was commented upon by [x], son of [x] and that [x] wrote one of his works, the [x], in 1636 (??).] Besides these he wrote the Vratarka, the Kundarka, the Karmavipaka. Bhanubhatta, another son of Nilakantha, wrote the Dvaitanirnayasiddh ntasamgraha, which is an epitome of the Dvaitanirnya, the Ekavastrasnanavidhi, and the Homanirpaya. The name of Nilakantha’s daughter was Ganga (probably in her husband’s family). She was married to Bhatta Mahadeva, of the Bharadvaja gotra, surnamed Kala (Kale in Marathi). Her son Divakarabhatta was a very learned man and compiled an extensive digest called Dharmas'astrasudhanidhi. Parts of that work are Acararka, the Danacandrika, the Ahnikacandrika, the Danahiravaliprakas'a &c. He composed his Acararka in the (Vikrama) year 1743 (i.e. 1686-87 A D.)1 [Vide I.O. Cat. part III, p. 509-510, No. 1616. The verses at the end are [x].] In that work he speaks of his maternal grandfather as the foremost among Mimansakas. In the Danahiravaliprakas'a he speaks of Nilakantha as possessed of the unclouded wisdom of Brhaspati and S'ukra2 [I.O. Cat. part III, p. 547, No. 1708, intro. verses 4-5 [x] (p. VIII, note 1) [x].]. From the introductory verses to the Danasamksepacandrika we find that his mother’s name was Ganga and father’s name Mahadeva3 [[x] I.O. Cat. part III, p. 548, No. 1709.]. In that work he distinctly says that he follows the Danoddyota, Danaratna and Danamayukha4 [Vide Cat. of the Bod. Library by Winternitz and Keith vol. II, p. 280 No. 1494 [x].]. The last is one of the twelve mayukhas of Nilakantha.

It is not necessary to pursue the pedigree of the family beyond the immediate descendants of Nilakantha.

Therefore the pedigree of the family is

Nagapas'a
Cangadeva
Govinda
Rames'vara'
Narayana / S'ridhara / Madhava
Uma = Ramakrsna / S'amkara / Govinda
Dinakara alias Divakara / Kamalakara / Laksmana / (four sons): Ranganatha / Damodara / Nrsima / Nilakantha
Vis'ves'vara alias Gagabhatta / Siddhes'vara
Ananta / Prabhakara / S'yama /S'amkara / Bhanu / Daughter Divakara surnamed Kala

For a more detailed pedigree Mandlik’s edition may be consulted. It is however to be remembered that the pedigree of the family given by Mandlik on information supplied by modern s'astris is not quite accurate. Dr. Ganganatha Jha was not able to find recently any living descendant of Nilakantha in Benares. In Mandlik’s edition Gagabhatta is shown to have had no descendants, while Dr. Gaganatha Jha says that a descendant of Gagabhatta by name Ramabhatta lives at Benares near 'Ratanphatak’.

III. The works of Nilakantha

Nllakantha composed an encyclopeedia embracing various topics connected with ancient and medieval Hindu civil and religious law, ceremonial, politics and cognate matters. That envyclopsedia is generally styled Bhagavanta-bhaskara in honour of the author’s patron, Bhagavantadeva, a Bundella chieftain of the Sengara (S'rngivara) clan that ruled at Bhareha near the confluence of the Jumna and the Chambal (carmanvati). Some variation in the name of the encyclopaedia is perceptible in the various colophons to the different parts of it. That the patron’s name was Bhagavanta (-deva or -varman) is quite clear.1 [ Vide the concluding verse of the Vyavaharamayukha and the 12th verse to the [x] (Benares ed.) [x].] It is therefore natural to expect that the work should be styled Bhagavanta-bhaskara.2 [e.g. in the [x] the 14th introductory verse (in the Benares ed. of 1879) is [x].] But in the colophons to some of the Mayukhas the work is called Bhagavantabhaskara3 [Vide Mandlik's edition of the [x].] or simply Bhaskara.4 [Vide the [x] (Benares ed. of 1879), the [x] (Benares ed. of 1880).] In some other colophons it is called Vidvadbhaskara.5 [Vide the [x] (Benares ed. of samvat 1937).] As the whole work was styled Bhaskara (the Sun) it was divided into twelve parts, just as there were twelve Adityas and each part came to be called a Mayukha (a ray) by a continuation of the metaphor. Nilakantha distinctly says in most of the Mayukhas that he composed the work at the command of Bhagavantadeva or that he was urged or inspired by his patron to do so.1 [Note the word [x] in the colophon to the [x] and the [x] (Bombay edition of 1891 printed at the [x] press), the word [x] in the introduction to the [x] (p. XVII. note 1 above), the word [x] in teh 11th intro. verse to the [x] (Benares ed. of 1879).]

The introductory verses in the mss. of all the Mayukhas present a perplexing problem. Hardly any two mss. of the same Mayukha contain the same introductory verses. For example, one of the three mss. of the Samayamayukha in the Bhau Daji collection of the Bombay Royal Asiatic Society has only one introductory verse2 [[x].]; while in the other two that verse does not occur at all. In one of these two latter there are four introductory verses and in the other there are five, the Benares edition agreeing with the last. The Benares edition of the S'antimayukha (of 1879) contains fourteen introductory verses, nine of which (from the second) give the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva; while one ms. of the S'antimayukha in the Bhau Daji collection has only one introductory verse which is not found in the Benares edition; and another ms. of the same in the same collection has three verses, only one of which is found in the Benares edition. In the same way the printed editions of the Prayas'cittamayukha and the Acaramayukha (Benares, 1879) contain fourteen introductory verses each; while mss. of these two Mayukhas in the Gattulalji collection in Bombay have only two and three verses respectively. This perplexing variance in the number of introductory verses cannot be satisfactorily explained by supposing that in all cases of such differences the scribes of the mss. and others introduced unauthorised interpolations. The hypothesis which, after a careful consideration of all the introductions, seems most probable is that Nilakantha himself (or probably his son) from time to time revised his works, recast the introductory verses, added to them and also made slight alterations and additions in the body of the works.

Some of the Mayukhas such as the printed editions of the S'anti, Prayas'citta, S'raddha and Acara Mayukhas contain the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva. The genealogy is more or less mythical, but there are no weighty reasons to suppose that the verses are spurious and not from the pen of Nilakantha himself1 [The verses are: -- [x]. Vide also Aufrecht's Bod. Cat., p. 280. No. 656 and I.O. Cat. part III, p. 429, No. 1444 and Mandlik's Introduction LXXVII.]. The genealogy is: from Brahma was born Kas'yapa, whose son was Vibhandaka, whose son was Rsyas'rnga. In the family of the latter was born S'rngivara, after whom the family came to be known as Sengara. King Karna was born in that family. Then follows a line of eighteen kings, the last being Bhagavantadeva.

The order in which the twelve Mayukhas were composed is an interesting question. In the introductory verses to the Benares editions of the Acaramayukha, the Prayas'cittamayukha and the S'antimayukha, the order is given as follows1 [[x].]: — (1) Samskara; (2) Acara; (3) Samaya; (4) S'raddha; (5) Niti; (6) Vyavahara; (7) Dana; (8) Utsarga; (9) Pratistha; (10) Prayas'citta; (11) S'uddhi; (12) S'anti. The same order occurs in another verse in the introduction to the Samayamayukha2 [[x] (Benares ed. of samvat 1937). Vide I.O. Cat. part III, p. 428, No. 1441.] In the colophon at the end of the Acaramayukha it is described as the second; while the S'antimayukha is described as the twelfth. But it is worthy of note that in the colophon to the edition of the Pratisthamayukha published in Bombay in 1891, it is described as the eighth while it is the ninth according to the order set forth above. The introductory verses to many of the Mayukhas and the internal evidence contained in them is sufficient to establish the order in which almost all the Mayukhas were written3 [[x]. Intro. to the [x]. This shows that the [x] was composed after the [x] that speaks of tithis. [x]. The first verse of the [x] shows that it was written after the [x].]. Nilakantha very frequently says that a particular subject has been already treated of by him in another Mayukha or that he will dilate on it in a subsequent Mayukha. From the cross references contained in the several Mayukhas it appears that the order set forth above is tolerably correct.1 [e.g. the [x] (Benares ed.) says [x] (p. 46); in the [x] (Benares ed.) we find [x] (p. 69); [x] ([x] p. 48); [x] (p. 87 of [x]); [x].] Considerations of space and utility require that the cross references should not be set out here in detail.

The next question is whether Nilakantha composed other works than the twelve Mayukhas. In appendix A there is a work called Vyavaharatattva. Four different reasons lead irresistibly to the conclusion that that work was composed by Nilakantha. In the first place the colophon at the end of that work describes it as the composition of Nilakantha, the son of the Mimansaka S'ankarabhatta. In the second place, in the section on dattapradanika, the author of the Vyavaharatattva speaks of the Dvaitanirnaya as composed by his father. Besides, at the beginning of the section on Dayavibhaga, the author of the Vyavaharatattva says that the proposition that the sources of ownership are those well known from worldly dealings has been established by him in the discussion on ownership. This is obviously a reference to the Vyavaharamayukha wherein there is an elaborate discourse on 'svatva’. Besides there is a very close correspondence in language and doctrines between the Vyavaharatattva and the Vyavaharamayukha, Therefore there can be no room for doubt that both works are by the same author.2 [For a discussion about the [x] vide 21 Bom. L. R. p. 1-4 (Journal portion).]

The criticism of it is uncharitable because it is mainly born of prejudice, and it has extended beyond finding fault with the text, to the question of its authorship itself. The critics somehow want to disprove that this work is, as traditionally accepted, a writing of the great Madhava-Vidyaranya, the author of the Panchadasi, and a great name in the field of Indian philosophical and theological literature….Besides the support of tradition, the colophon at the end of every chapter of the book mentions its author’s name as Madhava, that being the pre-monastic name of Vidyaranya….

The identity of Madhava, the author of Sankara-dig-vijaya, with this Madhava-Vidyaranya is further established by the first verse of the text, wherein he pays obeisance to his teacher Vidyatirtha…The identity is further established by the poet Madhava’s reference to his life in the royal court in the following touching introductory verses of his work: “By indulging in insincere praise of the goodness and magnanimity of kings, which are really non-existent like the son of a barren woman or the horns of a hare, my poesy has become extremely impure. Now I shall render it pure and fragrant by applying to it the cool and fragrant sandal paste fallen from the body of the danseuse [a female ballet dancer] of the Acharya’s holy fame and greatness, as she performs her dance on the great stage of the world.”

Besides, the text is a masterpiece of literature and philosophy, which none but a great mind could have produced. But there are detractors of this great text who try to minimise its obvious literary worth by imputing plagiarism and literary piracy to its author.

-- Sankara-Dig-vijaya: The Traditional Life of Sri Sankaracharya, by Madhava-Vidyaranya, Translated by Swami Tapasyananda

The Nirnayasindhu of Kamalakara several times quotes a Vyavaharatattva, which, however, is certainly a different work altogether as the quotations show that that work dwelt upon ceremonial matters and religious rites. The only important points in which the Vyavaharatattva differs from the Vyavaharamayukha are two, viz. the former work places the mother before the father in the matter of succession, while the latter reverses the order and the former makes no reference to the sister as an heir, while the latter assigns her a high place among gotraja [kinsmen] heirs. The reason probably lies in the fact that the Vyavaharatattva was a mere epitome and the author rather followed in both matters the orthodox school of Vijnanes'vara, who was a southern writer like Nilakantha himself; while in the Vyavaharamayukha he propounded the views prevalent or favoured in the territories of his patron or at his court. About the position of the father, he distinctly states that the eastern writers preferred him to the mother. It is noteworthy that neither Mandlik in his learned introduction nor the learned authors of the Digest of West and Buhler refer to the Vyavaharatattva of Nilakantha. That work is for the first time placed in print before Sanskrit scholars. It is not possible to say that the Vyavaharatattva is an abridgment of the Mitaksara. A comparison of the contents of the former with the latter shows that the topics dealt with are arranged in different ways in the two works.  

Nilakantha seems to have also composed a work on adoption styled Dattakanirnaya. In the Vyavaharatattva the author refers to a Dattakanirnaya written by himself. The Dharmsindhu also says that the Dattakanirnaya of Nilakantha prescribes that on the death of an adopted son his natural and adoptive fathers had both to observe mourning for three nights and the sapindas [cousins] for one night, while on the death of an adoptive son whose thread-ceremony had been performed (in the family of adoption) the adoptive father and his sapindas would have had to observe mourning for ten days.1 [[x] ([x] III. [x]).] The quotation from the Dharmasindhu shows that what is referred to is not the section on adoption in the Vyavaharamayukha, but an independent work, since in the Vyavaharamayukha there is nothing corresponding to the quotation. Nilakantha is said to have written (according to Aufrecht) two works styled Dharmaprakas'a and S'raddhaprakas'a. The former is referred to in the Samskaramayukha.2 [p. 37 of the edition issued by the Gujarati Press in 1913 ([x]).] It is extremely doubtful whether the Dharmaprakas'a is a work of Nilakantha. We saw above that S'amkarabhatta wrote a work called Dharmaprakas'a. It is probable that there is some confusion owing to the defective text of the Samskaramayukha, wherein editorial additions were made by the son of Nilakantha.

The edition of the Samskaramayukha published by the Gujarati Press in Bombay presents a curious problem. The introductory verses make it clear that the work was composed by S'amkara, the son of Nilakantha and not by Nilakantha himself. The colophon at the end also makes this clear. In the body of the work the other Mayukhas are in several places referred to as 'composed by my father'. For example, on pp. 7 and 10 of the printed edition we have [x]. In other places such expressions as the following are met with: — [x] (pp. 14 and 23); [x] (p. 70); [x] (p. 82); [x] (p. 129). In most of these places, there are different readings in some mss., as the foot-notes point out, to some such effect as [x]. On p. 120 we read [x] and on p. 130 [x]. In these cases there are no different readings pointed out in the foot-notes. In this state of the printed text, several mss. of the Samskaramayukha were consulted. It was found that they all contained the introductory verses and the colophon ascribing the work to Nilakantha’s son. In the present state of our knowledge all that can be said is that the Samskaramayukha of Nilakantha was edited by his son S'amkara with additions of his own, but that what we now have is substantially the work of Nilakantha. If ever a ms. of the Samskaramayukha comes to light containing the text as it left the hand of Nilakantha, it will afford an interesting comparison with the printed text.

[admin]

Part 2 of 2

IV. The period of Nilakantha’s literary activity.

The period of the literary activity of Nilakaiatha can be determined with tolerable precision. Nilakantha frequently quotes his father’s Dvaitanirnaya in the Mayukhas on Vyavahara, Prayas'citta, Samaya, S'raddha, and S'anti. The Dvaitanirnaya quotes the Todarananda, an encyclopaedia of religious and civil law, astronomy and medicine, compiled by Todarmal, the famous finance minister of Akbar. The Jyotisasaukhya, a portion of the Todarananda, was composed in 1572 A.D. and a ms, of the Vyavaharasaukhya was copied in 1581 A.D. Therefore it is reasonable to suppose that the Dvaitanirnaya could not have been composed much earlier than 1600 A.D. Kamalakara, who was the first cousin (paternal uncle’s son) of Nilakantha composed the Nirnayasindhu, which was one of the earliest of his numerous works, in 1612 A.D. Nilakantha, who was the youngest of the four sons of S'amkarabhatta, could not have begun his literary career earlier than Kamalakara who was only the second son of his father Ramakrsna, the latter again being older than S'amkarabhatta. Therefore it is highly probable that Nilakantha’s literary activities began later than 1610 A.D. One ms. of the Vyavaharatattva bears the date samvat 1700 (i.e. 1644 A.D.). This may be the date when the ms. was copied or it may be the date when the work was composed. At all events the Vyavaharatattva is not later than 1644 A.D. The Vyavaharatattva presupposes the Vyavaharamayukha and refers to the author’s Dattakanirnaya. Hence Nilakantha must be deemed to have written a good deal before 1644 A.D. A ms. of the S'antimayukha in the Bhau Daji collection (in the Bombay Royal A. Society) seems to bear the date samvat 1706, i.e. 1650 A.D.1 [The colophon is [x]. It will be noticed that one letter after [x] is wanting.] Whether this is the date of the composition of the work or only the date of its being copied does not make much difference to the argument. The S'antimayukha is the last of the twelve Mayukhas that Nilakantha composed. Hence the above quotation makes it clear that the last of the Mayukhas was composed not later than 1650 A.D. Therefore the literary activity of Nilakantha must be placed between 1610 and 1650 A.D. Since the Vyavaharatattva was either composed or copied in 1644 A.D. and presupposes the Vyavaharamayukha, the latter could not have been composed later than 1640 A.D. This conclusion about the period of the literary activity of Nilakantha and the date of the Vyavaharamayukha is corroborated by several circumstances. Gagabhatta, who was the son of Dinakara, the first cousin of Nilakantha, was a famous man in 1674 when he officiated at the coronation of S'ivaji. Nilakantha, being of the same generation as Gagabhatta’s father, must have attained eminence about 1650 at the latest. S'amkara, the son of Nilakantha, wrote the Kundabhaskara in 1671 A.D. Divakarabhatta, the son of Nilakantha’s daughter, wrote his Acararka in 1686 A.D. Therefore Nilakantha must have been a man of mature years in 1650. In the same direction points the fact that Siddhes'vara, the son of Damodara and nephew of Nilakantha, wrote his Samskaramayukha in 1680 A.D. It is significant to note that Purusottamaji, perhaps the most illustrious descendant of Vallabhacarya, who was born in samvat 1724 (i.e. 1668 A.D.) and who wrote at Surat, refers to the S'uddhimayukha in his work styled Dravyas'uddhi.  

V. The contents of the twelve Mayukhas.

It will not be out of place to give a brief outline of the contents of the twelve Mayukhas.

(1) The Samskarmayukha: The worship of Gapen'a and Svastivacana (which are necessary in all samskaras); the enumeration of samskaras; the procedure and details about Garbhadhana, Pumsavana, Jatakarma, Namakarana, Cudakarana, Upanayana, Samavartana (return of the student from the teacher’s house), and marriage; the duties of Brahmacarins; holidays; gotras [lineage/descendants] and pravaras [clan]; sapinda [cousin] relationship; different forms of marriage, viz. Brahma, Asura &c; the time of marriage; the duties of married women and of widows; the duties of the four castes and of the orders of householder, of the forest hermit, and of the ascetic.

(2) The Acaramayukha: the use of the right hand in all ritual; the time of rising from bed; meditation on various deities, immortal persons &c; directions as to the time and the place of answering calls of nature and as to the manner of purification thereafter; sipping water by way of purification (acamana); rinsing the mouth; daily bath and baths on special occasions; applying tilakas [vertical markings on forehead] and ashes; the performance of the daily samdhya; offering water to the Sun; muttering of prayers (japa); offering of oblations to fire (homa); division of the day into eight parts with the actions and engagements appropriate to each; the five great daily yajnas; offering water to sages, heroes and ancestors; worship of deities such as Hara, Hari, S'alagrama; the flowers and leaves appropriate to the worship of each deity; the offering called Vais'vadeva; mid-day meal and accessory matters; engagements after dinner; sleep; dreams, good and evil.

(3) The Samayamayukha: division of tithis [Vedic timekeeping: 16-26 hrs.] into purna and khanda; the s'astrartha as to each tithi from the pratipad to the amavasya; important festivals like Krsnajanmastami, Ramanavami, Navaratra, Mahas'ivaratra, and the rites to be performed on each of these; the utsarjana and upakharma rites on the full moon of S'ravana; the time for performing an isti; offering of pinda (rice-ball) to the Manes on the amavasya; eclipses and the rites to be performed when they occur; the fortnight (bright or dark) appropriate to different rites; three kinds of months, candra, savana, and saura differring in their duration; the rites appropriate to each month from caitra; the intercalary month, the rites appropriate to it and the actions to be eschewed in it; the determination of the seasons; the sixty years’ cycle; rites to be performed on the birthday of a person; proper and improper times for shaving; things prohibited in the Kali age.

(4) The S'radddhamayukha: the definition of S'raddha; two varieties of it, parvana and ekoddista; the proper time and place for S'raddha; persons competent to perform S'raddha; cases in which women were competent to perform S'raddha; such S'raddhas as mahalaya; materials to be used in S'raddha; use of flesh prohibited in S'raddha though allowed in former ages; discourse on kus'a and sesame; brahmanas unfit to be invited at S'raddhas; the way in which the sacred thread was to be worn at the time of performing S'raddhas and other rites; the places where pindas were to be offered and the size of pindas; gifts to brahmanas; places where pindas are ultimately to be cast; the prayoga (procedure) of S'raddhas; how S'raddha is to be performed by him who is unable to go through the whole ritual of it; the letting loose of a bull; the sixteen S'raddhas that led to sapindana; S'raddhas on auspicious occasions; daily S'raddha as one of the Mahayajnas.

(5) The Nitimayukhha: definition of king (rajan); the proper time for coronation; characteristics of a throne; the king’s crown; the seven constituent elements of a state, viz. the king, the ministers, allies, people, forts, treasury and army; the principal vices of kings and their effects; evils of gambling and drinking; the qualities of a good king; the duties of kings; the five great yajnas in the case of kings, viz punishing the wicked, honouring the good, increase of wealth by lawful means, impartiality and protection of the state; messengers and envoys (dutas), their qualities and three classes; fate and human effort; eulogy of the brave that sacrifice their lives in battle; varieties of elephants; the game of chess.

(6) The Vyavaharamayukha: definition of vyavahara; eighteen titles of vyavahara; the courts of justice; judge and assessor; other tribunals than the king’s courts; conflict between dharmas'astra and arthas'astra and between different rules of dharmas'astra; force of local or family usage; the plaintiff or complainant; the defendant or opponent; the plaint, its contents and defects; the defence and its four varieties; sureties for the litigants; the pramanas, viz, documents, possession and witnesses; description of various kinds of documents; characteristics of false witnesses; ordeals in the absence of other means of proof; principal ordeals, viz. of fire, water, poison and balance; persons fit to undergo ordeals and the proper times and places for ordeals; other ordeals such as holy water, rice, heated golden masa &c.; ownership; meaning of daya; two kinds of heritage, sapratibandha and apratibandha; partition of heritage; time for partition; shares on partition; the rights of the father, mother, and eldest son on partition; partition after father’s death; twelve kinds of sons; adopted son; who should adopt, when one should adopt; persons competent to give, in adoption; who should be adopted; the ceremonial of adoption; two kinds of dattaka; dvyamusyayana defined; how far sapinda relationship of the adopted son extends in the family of adoption and in the family of birth; property not liable to partition; evidence of separation; order of succession to sapratibandha heritage; the compact series of heirs from the wife to the brother’s son; gotrajas as heirs; sister’s right to succeed; samanodakas and bandhus; strangers as heirs; re-union; definition of stridhana; its varieties; succession to stridhana; persons excluded from inheritance; debts, recovery of debts and rates of interest; mortgages and pledges; suretyship; three or four kinds of sureties; deposit; sale by one not an owner; partnership; resumption of gifts; non-payment of wages; rescission of sales; disputes as to boundaries; assault and abuse; theft; adultery; violent offences; gambling and other miscellaneous matters.  

(7) The Danarmayukha: definition of dana; eulogy of dana; persons competent to make gifts and receive them; things proper to be given as gifts; ista and purta; proper times and places for making gifts; measures of corn and distance; postures of idols of various deities such as Ganes'a, Narayana, Kama; the mandapa described; settling the four principal directions; the ceremonial of the worship of the planets; the sixteen mahadanas such as weighing against gold &c; gifts of lands, houses, elephants, horses; prohibition against the resumption of gifts; description of a prapa (where water was distributed gratis) for travellers.

(8) The Utsargamayukha: eulogy of the dedication of a reservoir of water to the public; proper time for making such a dedication; the ritual of such a gift; wells and tanks; pandal to be erected near the reservoir at the time of dedication; twenty-four priests required in the dedication and their duties; the deities invoked at such a dedication; purification of wells and tanks polluted by dogs, cats, asses, pigs or corpses; the planting of trees and rites appropriate thereto.

(9) The Pratisthamayukha: the time for consecrating temples; the preparations for consecration, such as collecting firesticks, saffron, musk &c; worship of the mandapa (pavilion or pandal); bathing the image; consecrating the image in two ways, cala and acala; the procedure of repairing old temple buildings and re-establishing idols pulled down or carried away by a river or defaced by accident &c.

(10) The Prayas'cittamayukha: — definition of prayas'citta; no necessity for prayas'citta in certain cases such as killing an atatayin; the description of various hells in order to induce sinners to repent; the different births to which sinners are condemned; the constitution of an assembly that is to prescribe a prayas'citta; the preliminaries to undergoing a prayas'citta, such as shaving, applying cowdung and mud to the body; the rites common to all prayas'cittas; the various kinds of Krcchras as prayas'cittas; description of Brahmakurca, Baraka, Santapana, Candrayana; visits to various tirthas prescribed in the case of various classes of sinners; various causes of sinfulness and pollution, such as murder, drinking, theft, adultery, eating forbidden things, giving up vedic study, contact with certain persons; prayas'cittas for killing a Brahmana and members of other castes, for killing various male and female relatives, for relatives of persons committing suicide and for those that attempt suicide, for killing a cow and other animals, for drinking liquors and eating flesh, onions, garlic and other prohibited articles; prayas'cittas for taking food in certain S'raddhas from men of other castes or from S'udras; prayas'cittas for thefts of various articles and for adultery; prayas'citta for contact of nine kinds; no sin arises from contact at tirthas, in marriage processions, fairs, battles, national calamities, burning of a village; prayas'cittas for lesser transgressions of various kinds such as selling oil, honey or salt by Brahmanas, for receiving forbidden gifts, for being an actor &c.

(11) The S'uddhimayukha: purification of vessels of gold, silver, copper, iron, lead &c,; purification of vessels scratched by birds or beasts, or plates licked by S'udras or cows, or soiled by contact with wine &c.; purification of cloth of various kinds when soiled; rules as to purification left to local usage by Marici; periods of impurity on account of mis-carriage or still-birth or ordinary birth; periods of impurity on death before the first year, before the thread ceremony or marriage in the case of women; instantaneous purification in the case of persons killed in battle or killed by a stroke of lightning &c.; how the sick are to be purified in case of impurity due to birth or death; priyas'citta for death on a cot, death due to snake bite; the death of a brahmacarin specially ominous; the merit of helping to carry the corpse of an unknown or poor person; no impurity on the death of a samnyasin; when the ashes are to be collected after cremation of a body; the merit of casting the ashes in the Ganges at Benares or at Prayaga; the nine S'raddhas to be performed on death; the letting loose of a bull on the 11th day after death; procedure about S'raddha if the day or month of death not known; practice of sati; women that were unfit to perform sahagamana; procedure, if before one impurity ceases, another occurs; periods of impurity on hearing of the death of a sapinda abroad after the lapse of three months, six months &c.; the period of impurity on the death of samanodakas and on the death of one’s teacher; purification on the death of a married sister and other relatives.

(12) The S'antimayukha: definition of S'anti; even S'udras authorised to perform the propitiatory rites for averting evil; Vinayakas'anti; characteristics of the nine grahas (the sun, the moon, Mars and the rest, Rahu and Ketu); propitiatory rites on the conjunctions of certain planets; how heroes like Saudasa, Nala, Rama, the Pandavas suffered from the evil aspects of planets; rites on the birth of an infant with teeth or for the birth of a child on the 14th day of the dark half of a month or when the moon is in the constellation of Mula, or when a child is born on certain Yogas like Vaidhrti and Vyatipata; rites on the birth of a son after three daughters or vice versa, and on the birth of twins; rites for birth on particular tithis or days of the week or particular lunar mansions; rites on certain extraordinary events (such as weeping or laughing of trees); solemn propitiatory rites at the time of coronation &c.

VI. The position of Nilakantha in Dharmas'astra Literature.

The development of religious and civil law in India falls into four well-marked but somewhat overlapping periods. The first period starts in the midst of antiquity and culminates in the ancient Grhya and Dharma sutras. Most of the Grhya and Dharma sutras even in their extant form are several centuries earlier than the Christian era. The present writer is not one of those who hold that metrical smrtis in continuous s'loka metre are in a body later than the sutra works (at least the older ones among those extant). It seems very probable that metrical smrtis were composed even before the sutra style attained its full vigour. It may be readily admitted that most of the extant metrical smrtis are much later than some of the extant Dharmasutras (such as those of Gautama, Baudhayana, Apastamba). But the same cannot be said of the smrti material contained in the Mahabharata and of the Manusmrti. Therefore it must be said that while several attempts were being made to compose sutra works on ritual and law, metrical works also were being composed for the same purpose. The second period is that of the metrical smrtis like those of Yajnavalkya, Narada, Brhaspati, Katyayana and a host of other writers. This period extends from the centuries immediately preceding the Christian era to about 600 A.D. The third period is that of eminent commentators and it extends from the 7th century to the 12th. Among its earlier representatives are Asahaya, Vis'varupa and Medhatithi. To this period belong several well-known names such as those of Bharuci, S'rikara, Govindaraja and Dhares'vara. But the best exponents of this period are Vijnanes'vara and Apararka, who respectively flourished in the latter half of the 11th and the first half of the 12th century. From the 13th century to the 18th is the period of the Nibandhakaras, the writers of digests and encyclopaedias. One finds that many writers in this period compose treatises in which they review all the work done by their predecessors from the earliest times, introduce order and system in the heterogeneous and scattered mass of material that had accumulated during the lapse of centuries, examine the views of different authors, express their adherence to some one view and discard or refute the rest. Nilakantha is one of the foremost representatives of this period. His position is analogous to that of Bhattoji Diksita in Grammar or of Jagannatha in Poetics. Nilakantha makes a difference in dealing with the conflicting views of writers believed to be inspired sages like Atri, Angiras, Devala, Manu and of later writers like Medhatithi, Hemadri, Madhava and others. As regards the former class of writers, he hardly, if ever, says that they are wrong, but tries to reconcile the differences amongst them as best as he can and, where the conflict is utterly irreconcilable, has recourse to the theory that their views had reference to a different yuga. As regards writers of the second class his method is different. He has the highest admiration and reverence for authors like Vijnanes'vara, Madhava and Hemadri. But his veneration for these authorities does not make him slavishly follow their dicta and bow to their authority in everything. He very often expresses frank dissent from their views. But his criticisms of these writers are always impartial and most courteous as befits a scholar whose passion is the search of truth as it presents it to himself. He boldly criticizes the opinions of every one, not sparing even his own father who was a profound mimansaka1 [For example, vid [x] (p. 25 Benares ed.) [x] (p. 25 Benares ed.) [x].]. He is profuse in acknowledging the debt he owes to others. Wherever he did not personally verify a quotation from an ancient work but took it over from one of his predecessors, he distinctly says so2 [For example, vide the words [x] &c.]. In the vastness of the material drawn upon, in the ease and flow of style, in the conciseness and perspicuity of his remarks, in sobriety of judgment, in acuteness of vision, in the orderly presentation of various topics for discussion, Nilakantha is hardly rivalled, much less surpassed, by any writer of this period. When this is said, it is not meant that all the twelve Mayukhas are equal in execution and workmanship. The best are the Mayukhas on Vyavahara, S'raddha, Prayas'citta, Acara and Samaya. The weakest of the whole lot are the Mayukhas on Niti and Utsarga. From appendix C it will be seen that Nilakantha quotes no less than about a hundred smrtis and several hundred other works on Dharmas'astra.

Nilakantha, being bred and brought up in an atmosphere redolent with the Purvamimansa system, very frequently discusses the doctrines of that system and makes very acute use of them in all the Mayukhas. In the Vyavaharamayukha alone he draws upon the Purvamimansa in dozens of places. In Appendix F are brought together most of the passages from the Vyavaharamayukha in which the Purvamimansa system is relied upon or appealed to by Nilakantha.

VII. Nilakantha and other writers on Vyavahara

The Vyavaharamayukha stands in a special relation to the Mitaksara of Vijnanes'vara and the Madanaratna. When Nilakantha wrote it appears that Vijnanes'vara had come to be looked upon as the most authoritative writer on Dharmas'astra. In the Dvaitanirnaya his father speaks of Vijnanes'vara as the foremost among writers of 'nibandhas’.1 [The words are [x].] Nilakantha himself looked upon Vijnanes'vara as the first among ‘sampradayikas’ (those who are repositories of traditional lore).2 [Mark the words [x] (text p. 171, II. 6-7).] Of all the Mayukhas it is in the Vyavaharamayukha that Nilakantha most frequently quotes and also criticises the Mitaksara. In appendix D are collected together all those passages from the Vyavaharamayukha wherein the Mitaksara is either quoted or criticised. It will be seen that the most important points on which the Vyavaharamayukha differs from the Mitaksara are the preference of the father over the mother, the high place assigned to the sister as an heir, the postponement of the half brother and his son to the paternal grand-mother and sister, the various kinds of stridhana and the different rules of succession as to each. It seems that Nilakantha highly esteemed the Madanaratna. He quotes that work as frequently as he does the Mitaksara and in most places follows its views in preference to those of others. In appendix E all those passages where the Madanaratna is quoted or referred to have been brought together. Unfortunately it was not possible to secure a copy of the Madanaratna (Vyavaharoddyota) even after a good deal of inquiry and search. A comparison of the original text of the Madanaratna with the Vyavaharamayukha would have cleared up many difficult points. The Viramitrodaya, however, has been of great help in pointing certain views as those of the Madanaratna.

In the division of his encyclopaedic work into twelve parts and in the general method of treatment Nilakantha had several predecessors. Hemadri, minister of the Devagiri Yadava kings Mahadeva (1260-1271 A.D.) and Ramacandra (1271-1309 A.D.), composed a vast encyclopaedia styled Caturvargacintamani on Vrata, Dana, Tirtha, Moksa, Kala &c. Candes'vara, minister of the king of Mithila, wrote a voluminous work divided into seven parts called ratnakaras (oceans, as in Hindu mythology there are seven oceans) on Dana, Vyavahara, S'uddhi, Puja, Vivada &c. He weighed himself against gold in s'ake 1276 i.e. 1314 A.D. His Vivadaratnakara is a work of paramount authority in Mithila and is quoted in the Vyavaharamayukha. King Madanasimha composed a large work called Madanaratna in seven Uddyotas on Samaya, Acara, Vyavahara, Prayas'citta, Dana, S'uddhi and S'anti. The Madanaratna and Hemadri are quoted at every step by Nilakantha. The Nrsimhaprasada is a work of enormous extent, being nearly half as much in bulk as the Mahabharata. It was composed by Dalapati (is it a proper name?), who was the chief minister of king Nizamshah,1 [Vide I. O. Cat. part III. pp. 434-435 No. 1467, Mitra’s Bik. Cat. pp. 429-430, Benares ‘Pandit’, New Series, vol. V. p. 377 for an account of the work.] probably the founder of the Nizamshahi dynasty of Ahmednagar (1489—1508). A ms. of that work was written in samvat 1568 i.e. 1512 A.D. This work is divided into twelve parts called savas on Samskara, Ahnika, S'raddha, Kalanirnaya, Vyavahara, Prayas'citta, Karmavipaka, Vrata, Dana, S'anti, Tirtha and Pratistha. It is remarkable how closely the parts of this work agree in number and nomenclature with those of the Bhagavantabhaskara. The Nrsimhaprasada is quoted in the Samayamayukha and the Dvaitanirnaya. Raghunandana, who is later than 1450 and earlier than 1600 A.D. and who wrote a commentary on the Dayabhaga, is the author of a comprehensive work called Smrtitattva, divided into twenty-eight parts styled tattvas on Daya, Divya, Samskara, S'uddhi, Prayas'citta, Tirtha, Vyavahara, Pratistha &c. His Divyatattva is quoted in the Vyavaharamayukha and the other tattvas also are frequently referred to in the other Mayukhas. He is designated Smartabhattacarya and Gaudamimansaka by Nilakantha. Todaramalla, the famous finance minister of Akbar, compiled an encyclopaedia of religious and civil law, medicine and astronomy styled Todarananda. The various sections of this work are called saukhyas and deal with Acara, Dana, Vyavahara, Prayas'citta, Samaya, S'uddhi, Vrata &c. We saw above that his Jyotistattva was composed in 1572 A.D. and a ms. of his Vyavaharasaukhya was copied in 1581 A.D. The Todarananda is quoted in the Vyavaharamayukha and other Mayukhas.

VI. The position of the Vyavaharamayukha in modern Hindu Law.

It has been repeatedly laid down by the Bombay High Court and by the Privy Council, the highest judicial tribunal for India, that the three books of chief authority in western India are Manu, the Mitaksara and the Mayukha.1 [Vide Murarji v. arvatibai I.L.R. 1 Bom. 177 at p. 187; Savitribai v. Luxmibai I.L.R. 2. Bom. 573 at p. 606; Lallubia v. Cossibai I.L.R. 5 Bom. 110 at p. 117 (P.C.); Pranjivandas v. Devkuvarabai 1 Bom. H.C.R. (O.C.J.) 130 at p. 131.] In the Maratha country and in the Ratnagiri district the Mitaksara is of paramount authority and a subordinate place, though still a very important one, is assigned to the Vyavaharamayukha.2 [Krishnaji v. Pandurang 12 Bom. H.C.R. (A.C.J.) at p. 169 and Jankibai v. Sundra I.L.R. 14 Bom. 612, 616 (Ratnagiri District).] The Vyavaharamayukha is of paramount authority in Guzerat, the town and island of Bombay and in northern Konkan.3 [Lallubhai v. Mankuvarbai I.L.R. 2 Bom. 388 at p. 418; I.L.R. 6 Bom. 541, 546; Jankibai v. Sundra I.L.R. 14 Bom. 612, at pp. 623-24; Vyas Chimaanlal v. Vyas Ramchandra I.L.R. 24 Bom. 367 (F.B.) at p. 373.] Though the pre-eminence of the Mitaksara in the Maratha country is admitted, yet its doctrines have in several instances been set aside in favour of those put forward in the Vyavaharamayukha.4 [Bhagirthibai v. Kahnujirao I.L.R. 11 Bom. 285 (F.B.), at p. 293.] For example, though the Mitaksara nowhere recognises the sister as a gotraja sapinda, the courts, following the Mayukha, have assigned her a high place as heir even in the Maratha country. It is interesting to see how the Vyavaharamayukha came to be recognised as an authoritative work in Guzerat. We saw above that the family of Nilakantha came from the Deccan. Naturally all the members of that family preferred the usages of the Deccan and S'amkarabhatta expressly says in his Dvaitanirnaya that he will conform to the views of Deccan writers. Therefore the works of these Bhattas of Benares were highly esteemed by the learned men of the Maratha country. When the Marathas extended their sway over Guzerat in the 18th century, the works of Kamalakara (particularly the Nirnayasindhu) and of Nilakantha (particularly the Vyavaharamayukha) were relied upon by the S'astris at the court of the Maratha rulers of Guzerat. Thus the Vyavaharamayukha had come to be looked upon as a work of high authority in Guzerat before the advent of the British in the beginning of the 19th century.1 [Vide Lallubhai v. Mankuvarbai I.L.R. 2 Bom. 388, 418-19 and Bhagirthibai v. Kahnujirao I.L.R. Bom 285 (F.B.), 294-95 for the reasons of the ascendancy of the Vyavaharamayukha in Guzerat.] The result was that so early as 1827 Borradaile translated the Vyavaharamayukha in English. That the Mayukhas of Nilakantha were eagerly sought for even as far to the south as the Belgaum district in the times of the Peshwas is established by a letter of Naro Vinayak, Mamlatdar of Athni in the present Belgaum District, dated 28th June 1797. In that letter reference is made to the copying of the six Mayukhas on Samskara, Acara, Samaya, S'raddha, Niti and Vyavahara and a request is made that the other six Mayukhas may be sent for a copy being made.1 [Vide [x] Vol. X. p. 5172 letter No. 4006 (edited by Mr. Vasudevs'astri Khare, 1920). As the letter is interesting the whole of it is reproduced below. [x].] It appears that even in Northern India the Vyavaharamayukha was referred to by the British courts as early as 1813 A. D.2 [Bhagwan Singh v. Bhagwan I.L.R. 17 All 294, at p. 314.]

The general principle on which the courts of Western India act in construing the rules laid down by the Mitaksara and the Vyavaharamayukha is that they are to be harmonised with one another, wherever and so far as that is reasonably possible.3 [Gojabai v. Shrimant Shahajirao I.L.R. 17 Bom. 114, 118 quoted with approval in Kesserbai v. Hunsraj I.L.R. 30 Bom. 431, 442 (P.C.).]

It was said above that the Vyavaharamayukha is of paramount authority in Northern Konkan. As there is divergence between the views of the Mitaksara and the Mayukha in matters of succession, it becomes of great practical importance to settle with precision the exact limits in Northern Konkan up to which the Mayukha must be regarded as a work of paramount authority. It has been judicially decided that Karanja, which is an island opposite the Bombay harbour, is governed by the principles of the Mayukha,1 [Sakharam Sadashiva Adhikari v. Sitabai I.L.R. 3 Bom. 353.] that Mahad, the southernmost Taluka of the Kolaba District, is not so governed and that the predominance of the Mayukha cannot either on principle or authority be taken further south than Chaul and Nagothna2 [Vide Narhar v. Bhau I.L.R. 40 Bom. 621 (where the authorities are collected).] (in the northern part of the Kolaba District).

Though the authority of the Vyavaharamayukha is supreme in Guzerat, the island of Bombay and northern Konkan and high in the Maratha country, it is not to be supposed that the whole of it has been either adopted by the people or accepted by the courts. There are several matters, such as the twelve kinds of sons and the fifteen kinds of slaves and the marriage of a person with girls belonging to lower castes than his own, on which Nilakantha expatiates with as much learning, patience and zest as any ancient writer, although those usages had become obsolete centuries before his time.3 [Vide the remarks in Rahi v. Govind I.L.R. 1 Bom. 97 at p. 112 and Lallubhai v. Mankuvarbai I.L.R. 2 Bom. 388 at pp. 420 and 447.] Nilakantha says that the paternal great-grand-father, the paternal uncle and the half-brother’s son succeed together. But the courts have never recognised this rule, nor has it ever been made the foundation of a claim in a court of law. On the other hand, the views of Nilakantha that the sister is a gotraja sapinda and that even a married man may be taken in adoption have been followed by the courts, although hardly any eminent writer before him propounded these views. Kamalakara, a first cousin of Nilakantha, criticises those who would include sisters in the term brothers (vide Sarvadhikari’s Tagore Law Lectures p. 664, ed. of 1882). Among the other Mayukhas, the Samskaramayukha is frequently cited in the law reports.1 [Vide I.L.R. 2 Bom. 388 at p. 425, 3 Bom. 353 at p. 361, 4 Bom. 219 at p. 221, 32 Bom. 81 at pp. 88, 96.] In a case reported in 22 Bom. L.R. (p. 334) both sides seem to have relied upon the Pratisthamayukha.  

IX: The present edition

In section I above the material on which the text of the present edition is based has been indicated. No efforts have been spared to arrive at a correct text of the Vyavaharamayukha. Great labour was spent in trying to trace the quotations to their sources. Some of the quotations had to be found out from mss. Only those who have ever done the work of identifying quotations can form an adequate idea of the labour involved in this task. In spite of this there are still several quotations that have defied all efforts to trace them. Often times there is great divergence between the printed texts of the authors quoted by Nilakantha and the readings of the mss. In most of such cases, the readings of the mss. have been given in the text and in the footnotes the readings of the printed editions are indicated. As regards various readings only the important ones have been pointed out. The footnotes would have been encumbered with unnecessary details if every variation and every omission contained in the mss. had been indicated.

The annotations have been purposely made copious. The Vyavaharamayukha is full of difficultis. An attempt has been made to fully explain every possible difficulty. The numerous references to the doctrines and technical terms of the Purvamimansa have been explained at length. Parallel passages from other works have been added at every step. References to modern developments of the Hindu law have been frequently given.

In order to enhance the utility of the work several appendices have been added. Appendix A contains the text of the Vyavaharatattva which is based on two mss. Appendix B contains the names of all the authors and works quoted in the Vyavaharamayukha with brief notes in the case of some. Appendix C contains a consolidated list of all the authors and works occurring in the twelve Mayukhas. Appendix D collects together all those passages in which the Mitaksara and Vijnanes'vara are quoted or criticized. In Appendix E are gathered together the passages where the Madanaratna is quoted, criticised or referred to. Appendix E contains the passages where the doctrines of the Purvamimansa have been appealed to or relied upon in the Vyavaharamayukha. Appendix G gives an index of the pratikas of the verses occurring in the work.

As regards the system of transliteration, the one adopted by the Bhandarkar Institute has been followed in the Introduction. Unfortunately in the notes this system was not consistently followed with regard to four letters, viz. [x], [x], [x] and [x].  

[admin]

Rajendra Chandra Hazra [R. C. Hazra]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/8/21

Rajendra Chandra Hazra (1905–10 May 1982) was a scholar and Sanskritist known for his studies of Puranic literature (the Puranas and the Upapuranas). During an academic career spanning over four decades he wrote about 10 books and over 200 research articles on subjects ranging from his central interest in Smriti literature to "the Vedas, Vyākaraṇas [grammar/linguistics], Kāvya, anthology, archaeology, world-history, paleography, and the Nyāya [justice/rules/method/judgment] and Vaiśeṣika [perception/inference] systems of philosophy."[1][2]

Biography

Hazra was born in 1905 in the village of Dogachi in what was then the Dacca District in Bengal and is now in Bangladesh. After being a star-pupil during his schooling years, he obtained a B.A. and M.A. in Sanskrit from Dacca University in 1929 and 1931, respectively; standing first class first at both stages.

University of Dhaka (also known as Dhaka University or DU) is the oldest university in Bangladesh. Nawab Bahadur Sir Khwaja Salimullah, who played a pioneering role in establishing the university in Dhaka, donated 600 acres of land from his estate for this purpose. On the first day of July 1921 the University of Dhaka opened its doors to students with Sir P.J. Hartog as the first Vice-Chancellor of the University in British Raj, it has made significant contributions to the modern history of Bangladesh. After the Partition of India, it became the focal point of progressive and democratic movements in Pakistan. Its students and teachers played a central role in the rise of Bengali nationalism and the independence of Bangladesh in 1971.

-- University of Dhaka, by Wikipedia

He earned a PhD in 1936 under the guidance of S. K. [Sushil Kumar De] De, while working as a lecturer in Sanskrit and Bengali at the Jagannath Intermediate College.

Sushil Kumar De (29 January 1890 – 31 January 1968) was a Bengali polymath from the early decades of the 20th century. Trained as a lawyer, with degrees in English and Sanskrit Poetics, he wrote extensively on Sanskrit Literature, Philosophy, Poetics, History of Bengali Literature, besides editing critical editions for a large number of Sanskrit and Bengali texts from manuscripts.

He was professor of English literature at Calcutta University, and of Sanskrit and Bengali at Dhaka University. While at the latter post, he accumulated a large collection of palmleaf manuscripts.

Sushil De was born in Calcutta in 1890. His father Satish Chandra De was a state surgeon, posted at Cuttack, Orissa, where he did his schooling at the Ravenshaw Collegiate School. Subsequently, he did his Intermediate and B.A. from Presidency College and M.A. in English from Calcutta University, and became a Premchand-Roychand scholar. In 1912, he completed his law degree from the University Law College, but instead of practicing, he joined as a lecturer in English at Presidency College and later at Calcutta University. In 1921, he did his D.Litt. from the University of London (School of Oriental Studies) with a thesis on rhetoric (alaMkAra) in Sanskrit poetry. He also studied linguistics at the University of Bonn.

Upon return to India, he joined Dhaka University, initially in English, and then in the Sanskrit and Bengali departments. Subsequent to his retirement from Dhaka University in 1947, he also headed Jadavpur's Bengali department.

In 1951 he was a visiting professor at the University of London.

His work on the history of the Vaishnava movement in Bengal, along with critical manuscript analyses of several original texts, are very well respected.

He also published a brief note on erotics in Sanskrit literature.

He was well known in Oriental study circles, and was elected General President of the All-India Oriental Conference, 1949. A fellow of the Royal Astatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland(1954), he edited the Udyoga Parva [5th of 18 books of Mahabharata] (1940) and Drona Parva [7th of 18 books of Mahabharata] (1958) volumes in the Critical Edition of the Mahabharata from the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

At the same time, he was also active in Bangla literature, publishing a volume of Bangla sonnets Dipali, focusing on physical love (1928), and praktani (1934) on characters from classical Sanskrit literature. He was president of the Bangiya Sahitya Parishad (1950, 1956),

Bangiya Sahitya Parishad is a literary society in Maniktala of Kolkata, West Bengal, India. Established during the time of the British Raj, its goal is to promote Bengali literature, both by translating works in other languages to Bengali and promoting the production of original Bengali literature.

The organisation was founded by L. Leotard and Kshetrapal Chakraborty in 1893. Then it was known as The Bengal Academy of Literature. On 29 April 1894, the name of the society itself was changed to Bangiya Sahitya Parishad. 1894 saw the first officers, with Romesh Chunder Dutt as the first president and Rabindranath Tagore and Navinchandra Sen as vice presidents.

-- Bangiya Sahitya Parishad, by Wikipedia

and also wrote several popular translations of Sanskrit tales.

-- Sushil Kumar De, by Wikipedia

His thesis, Studies in the Purāṇic Records on Hindu Rites and Custom was published as a book in 1940 by Dacca University. Hazra obtained a D. Litt in 1940 with his Studies in the Upapuranas, which was incompletely published as a series of books by Munshiram Manoharlal with the permission of the then Principal of the Calcutta Sanskrit College and is considered by some to be his magnum opus.[2][1]

From 1939 to 1951, Hazra worked at Dacca University, where he rose to be the head of the Department of Sanskrit. During this period he, along with fellow faculty-member, R. C. Majumdar, aided revolutionaries fighting for Indian independence from British rule by giving them shelter in the university's Dacca Hall, where Hazra was the provost. Earlier, Hazra had qualified for the Indian Police Service but was refused appointment due to his connection with the revolutionaries.[1]

Ramesh Chandra Majumdar (known as R. C. Majumdar; 4 December 1888 – 11 February 1980) was a historian and professor of Indian history. He was a former Sheriff of Kolkata.

Early life and education

Coming from a Vaidya family, Majumdar was born in Khandarpara, Gopalganj, Bengal Presidency, British India (now in Bangladesh) on 4 December 1884, to Haladhara Majumdar and Bidhumukhi.In 1905, he passed his Entrance Examination from Ravenshaw College, Cuttack. In 1907, he passed F.A. with first class scholarship from Surendranath College and joined Presidency College, Calcutta. Graduating in B.A.(Honours) and M.A. from Calcutta University in 1909 and 1911 respectively, he won the Premchand Roychand scholarship from the University of Calcutta for his research work in 1913.

Career

Majumdar started his teaching career as a lecturer at Dacca Government Training College. Since 1914, he spent seven years as a professor of history at the University of Calcutta. He got his doctorate for his thesis "Corporate Life in Ancient India". In 1921 he became professor of history in newly established University of Dacca. He also served, until he became its Vice Chancellor, as the head of the Department of History as well as the dean of the Faculty of Arts. Between 1924 and 1936 he was Provost of Jagannath Hall. Then he became the Vice Chancellor of that University, for five years from 1937 to 1942. From 1950, he was Principal of the College of Indology, Benares Hindu University. He was elected the general president of the Indian History Congress and also became the vice president of the International Commission set up by the UNESCO for the history of mankind.

Works

Majumdar started his research on ancient India. After extensive travels to Southeast Asia and research, he wrote detailed histories of Champa (1927), Suvarnadvipa (1938) and Kambuja Desa (1944). On the initiative of Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan [an Indian educational trust founded on 7 November 1938 by Dr. K. M. Munshi, with the support of Mahatma Gandhi.], he took up the mantle of editing a multi-volume tome on Indian history. Starting in 1951, he toiled for twenty-six long years to describe the history of the Indian people from the Vedic Period until the Independence of India in eleven volumes. In 1955, Majumdar established the College of Indology of Nagpur University and joined as Principal. In 1958–59, he taught Indian history in the University of Chicago and University of Pennsylvania. He was also the president of the Asiatic Society (1966–68) and the Bangiya Sahitya Parishad (1968–69), and also the Sheriff of Calcutta (1967–68).

When the final volume of "The History and Culture of the Indian People" was published in 1977, he had turned eighty-eight. He also edited the three-volume history of Bengal published by Dacca University. His last book was "Jivaner Smritidvipe".

-- Ramesh Chandra Majumdar, by Wikipedia

Hazra migrated to India in 1951 and joined the Department of Post-Graduate Studies at Sanskrit College, Calcutta. There he served as the professor of Smriti and Puranas till his retirement in 1972. Hazra worked closely with the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Calcutta's Asiatic Society, Ganganath Jha Research Institute, Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture and the Sahitya Akademi, and collaborated with Sanskritists and historians S. K. De, R. C. Majumdar, P. V. Kane, U. N. Ghoshal, A. D. Pulaskar, V. Raghavan, Suniti Kumar Chatterji, among others. He was elected a fellow of The Asiatic Society in 1964 and later awarded its S. C. Chakravorty Medal for "outstanding contribution in Ancient Indian Language with special reference to Smriti and Purana" and its Naresh Ch. Sengupta Medal.[2][1]

Bibliography

Books

• Studies in the Purāṇic Records on Hindu Rites and Custom, Motilal Banarsidass, 1940.
• Studies in the Upapurāṇas, Vol I (Saura and Vaiṣṇava Upapurāṇas), Munshiram Manoharlal, 1958.
• Studies in the Upapurāṇas, Vol II (Śākta and Non-sectarian Upapurāṇas), Munshiram Manoharlal, 1963.
• Studies in the Upapurāṇas, Vol III (Ṣaiva and Gāṇapatya Upapurāṇas), unpublished, manuscript available.
• Studies in the Upapurāṇas, Vol IV, unpublished, manuscript available.
• Studies in the Upapurāṇas, Vol V, unpublished, manuscript available.
• Edited: Śava-sūtakāśauca-prakaraṇa of Bhaṭṭa Bhavadeva, Sanskrit College Research Series, 1959.
• Edited with S. K. De: Sāhitya-ratna-kośa, Part II Purāṇetihāsa-saṃgraha (An anthology of the Epics and Puranas), Sahitya Akedemi, 1959.
• Edited with S. K. De, U. N. Ghoshal, A. D. Pulaskar: The cultural heritage of India, Volume II, Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture, 1962.
• Edited: Kṛtya-Tattvārṇava, Part 1, Asiatic Society, Calcutta, 1975.
• Kṛtya-Tattvārṇava, Part 2, unpublished.
• Rise of Epic and Purāṇic Rudra-Śiva Or Śiva Maheśvara
• Studies in Smr̥ti Śāstra
• Rudra in the R̥g-Veda
• The Problems relating to the Śiva-purāṇa
Collected research articles
• Dr. R. C. Hazra Commemoration Volume, Part I (Puranic and Vedic Studies), All-India Kshiraj Trust, 1985; incomplete.
• Dr. R. C. Hazra Commemoration Volume, Part II (Dharmaśāstra, Sanskrit literature, Vyākaraṇa), unpublished.

References

1. Kanjilal, Dileep Kumar (192). "Professor Rajendra Chandra Hazra (1905-192)". Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. 63 (1/4): 384–385. JSTOR 41693033.
2. Bhattacharya, Ram Shankar, ed. (1985). Dr. R. C. Hazra Commemoration Volume, Part 1. Varanasi: All-India Kashiraj Trust. pp. iii–viii.

[admin]

Part 1 of 3

Frederick Eden Pargiter
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/7/21

Frederick Eden Pargiter: Excerpt from The Puranas, by Ludo Rocher

The most important names in this period, from a methodological point of view, are Frederick Eden Pargiter -- whose historical evaluation of puranas has been admired and criticized, but never ignored -- and Willibald Kirfel -- whose strictly philological approach created a true school of purana scholars, especially in Germany.21 [21 Cf. Hermann BERGER (rev. of Losch's Rajadharma, ZDMG 113, 1963, 390): "Seit die in der Indologie etwas stiefmutterlich behandelten Puranas durch W. Kirfels bahnbrechende Arbeiten erstmals eine systematische Behandlung erfahren haben, beginnen immer mehr Indologen diesen fur die indische Geistesgeschichte so grundlegenden Texten ihr Interesse zuzuwenden." [Google translate: Since the Puranas, treated somewhat stepmotherly in Indology, were groundbreaking by W. Kirfels, Work for the first time have received systematic treatment more and more. Indologists wrote these texts, which are so fundamental to Indian intellectual history to turn their interest.] Their contributions, as well as the reactions they provoked, will be analyzed elsewhere in this volume....

1.4.1 The "Ur-Purana"

On the basis of the indices which Wilson prepared from various puranas, he could not fail being struck by the fact that individual puranas have numerous topics in common. When comparing the parallel passages in the Brahmaº and the Visnuº, he proposed, cautiously: "they appear to have been taken from some older work or works, from which the present Puranas are, probably, in part at least derived."1 [1 JRAS 5, 1839, 66.] One year later, the Preface to the translation of the Visnuº, subsequent to the discussion of the sectarian character of the puranas, states more boldly:

"The identity of the legends in many of them, and still more the identity of the words -- for in several of them long passages are literally the same -- is a sufficient proof that in all such cases they must be copied either from some other similar work, or from a common and prior original."2 [2 WILSON 1840 = 1961: IV.]

Lassen, as always, echoed Wilson, but he referred unequivocally to the fact that, as far as the corresponding passages in individual puranas are concerned, the texts "have made use of a common prior source."3 [3 LASSEN 1847: 480.] In 1905 4 [4 In 1897, LUDERS applied a similar method to the legend of Rsyasrnga; see references sub Padmaº Patalakhanda.] A. A. Macdonell stressed the same idea more specifically with regard to what is supposed to be the main topic of the puranas, pancalaksana: "In that part of their contents which is peculiar to them, the Puranas agree so closely, being often verbally identical for pages, that they must be derived from some older collection as a common source."5 [5 1900: 299.]

Pañcalakṣaṇa, occurring in the Amarakośa and in various Purāṇas, enumerates creation (sarga), recreation (pratisarga), genealogy (vaṃśa), cosmic cycles (manvantara) and accounts of royal dynasties (vaṃśānucarita) as five characteristics of a Purāṇa, but many of the extant Mahā-purāṇas and almost all the Upapurāṇas do not follow this definition. They have rather become “Codes of Hindu rites and customs by including chapters on varṇāśramadharma, ācāra, śrāddha, prāyaścita, dāna, pūjā, vrata, tīrtha, pratiṣṭhā, dīkṣā, utsarga etc.”

-- The Nilamata Purana: A cultural and Literary study of a Kasmiri Purana, by Dr. Ved Kumari

By that time the idea of a common origin of all puranas had obviously fully taken root, for in the same year A. M. T. Jackson6 [6 1905: 67-77.] wrote an article "to enquire whether we can fix approximately the scope and date of composition of this original." He came to the conclusion that "the original purana may be regarded with some probability as a work of the 4th century B.C." He even decided that it was a Saiva work, and continued:

"It is quite possible that the genealogies and the lists of rivers and tribes were originally drawn up in prose. At some date, which is at present unknown, the original purana was re-written in verse, while the original chronology gave place to the system of Kalpas, and the history subsequent to the great war was thrown into prophetic form. This second version was the common source of the extant puranas."

Three years later Blau applied the comparative method to the legend of Saranyu -- and spoke, for the first time, explicitly of an "Ur-Purana" as the common source of the extant puranas "in ihren echtesten Partien." [Google translate: in their most genuine parts]7 [7 August BLAU: Puranische Streifen. I. Der Itihasa von Saranyu in seiner Fortbildung durch die Purana [Google translate: Puranic Stripes. I. The Itihasa of Saranyu in his further training through the Purana], ZDMG 62, 1908, 337-357 at 337. Blau also saw another reason why it is important to determine the oldest parts of the puranas: "Denn so wenig die Massenhaftigkeit der puranischen Produktion und der z. T. hochst unerfreuliche Inhalt dieser Literatur zu naherer Beschaftigung mit ihr einladen mogen, so ist es gerade darum um so wunschenswerter, dass das Ursprungliche und Alte in den einzelnen Purana herausgehoben und miteinander verglichen werde." [Google translate: Because so little the masses of puranic production and the content of this literature is partly extremely unpleasant invite you to take a closer look at it, it is precisely for that reason that it is all the more desirable that the original and the old are emphasized in the individual Purana and compared to each other.]

The first application of the principle on a large scale came from Frederick Eden Pargiter. In an article, in 1913, on "Visvamitra and Vasistha," he defined his methodology as follows: "The texts for each story are cited. They are all obviously based on a common original metrical tradition, and by collating them a revised text may be framed. This I have done, and I give the collated version here with such variant readings only as are material."8 [8 JRAS 1913, 885-904 at 885.] Far more important was the publication, in the same year, of The Purana Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age. In it Pargiter reconstructed the original puranic account of the dynasties that reigned in India during the Kali era, based on editions and manuscripts of the Matsyaº, Vayuº, Brahmandaº, Visnuº, Bhagavataº, Garudaº, and Bhavisyaº. A more general volume on Indian history, based on the same principles, appeared in 1922: Ancient Indian Historical Tradition. Once again Pargiter clearly stated his methodology:

"In examining the genealogies it is of little profit and is likely to be misleading to deal with the accounts of the several Puranas separately. The only trustworthy course is first to collate the texts that generally agree and ascertain as far as possible what original text they indicate, and then construct the genealogy therefrom. By this method individual corruptions and errors can be corrected, losses and omissions remedied, and interpolations and alterations detected with reasonable confidence; and thus a text may be framed which approaches as nearly as is possible to the common original on which all those texts were based."9 [9 PARGITER 1922: 82.]

The merits of Pargiter's methodology in reconstructing the early history of India on the basis of the puranas will be examined later in this volume (see 2.2.4). At this point I merely want to stress the emergence of the concept of reducing parallel accounts in various puranas to one single original. In Pargiter's case this concept was so successful that, from then onward, many historians of India were to base their research and their writings directly on Pargiter's reconstructed text rather than on the more cumbersome editions of individual puranas.10 [10 E.g., K.G. SANKAR (Some Problems of Indian Chronology, ABORI 12, 1931, 301-361) uses PARGITER 1913 "throughout this article." According to Ferdinand BOCK (Die puranas als Geschichtsquelle [Google translate: The puranas as a source of history], WZKM 29, 1931,97-133), "Die neue PARGITERSCHE Ausgabe der Puranas [emphasis added], die ich allen Zitaten zugrunde lege, zeigt dem Philologen auf den erst en Blick so viel Auffallendes, dass eine genaue Prufung des Ganzen unerlasslich erscheint" [Google translate: The new PARGITER edition of the Puranas [emphasis added] on which I base all quotations shows the philologist so much striking at first glance that a thorough examination of the whole seems indispensable.] (p. 98). Occasionally, the puranic lists of dynasties have been emended, starting from Pargiter's text. E.g., V. V. MlRASHI (The puranas on the Successors of the Satavahanas in Vidarbha; Pur 18, 1976, 88-92) proposes to correct the unknown Maunah (at PARGITER 1913: 46) into Maundah.]...

2.1.3 Different Recensions of Puranas

The existing editions of individual puranas exhibit a wide range of discrepancies, from minor variant readings to the inclusion or exclusion of entire chapters or sections. The latter situation applies, for instance, in the case of the Padmaº: "The present Padma, which is the result of several recasts, has come down to us in two distinct recensions -- North Indian (Bengal) and South Indian."1 [1 HAZRA 1940: 107. In the case of the Padmaº this distinction was already made by Luders (Sage von Rsyasrnga, 1897, ref. sub Padmaº), including the statement that the Bengali version is the older one (p. 94 n. 1). Cf. WINTERNITZ 1907: 452.] This statement by Hazra reflects the traditional interpretation of the major discrepancies, especially those between the Vangavasi editions1a [1a Even though, in the particular case of the Padmaº (see there) the Vangavasi ed. too, reproduces the "Western" Padmaº.] on the one hand and the Venkatesvara and/or Anandasrama editions on the other. Haraprasad Shastri formulated the general principle as follows:

"They represent the different provincial recensions and that means collation of different classes of manuscripts ... By a cursory view of the two sets, one can at once come to know ... that some khandas of the Puranas are popular in one province and unknown in another and so forth."2 [2 HARAPRASAD SHASTRI: 1928b: 327-328.]

Elsewhere the editions are much closer to one another, as in the case of the Brahmaº: "The AnSS ed. is chapter by chapter the same as the Vanga ed. There are occasional variations in readings and number of verses in the corresponding chapters, but these variations are not many and important."3 [3 HAZRA 1940: 145 n. 163.] We might be tempted to conclude from statements such as this that there are also puranas without major, regional differences, were it not that we know that the Vangavasi editions and the Venkatesvara and/or Anandasrama editions are not always as independent of one another as the geographic distance between Calcutta and Bombay or Pune might make us believe. Thus, in the preface to the Vanga edition of the Skandaº the editor explains that he took the Venkatesvara edition as his basis, and merely added to it chapters and verses he found in the Bengal manuscripts.4 [4 Pp. 10-11, quoted at HAZRA 1940: 157 n. 176.] And with regard to the Vamanaº editions Hazra surmised with good reasons: "The Vanga ed. is the same as the Venk. ed. Both consist of 95 chapters. The variations in readings in these two editions are so small in number that one seems to be a reprint of the other."5 [5 HAZRA 1940: 76 n. 1. Cf. PADOUX (Agniº 1978: 58) on the Agniº: "each new edition seems to make it a point to reproduce faithfully even the most obvious errors of the previous ones."]

A good example to show that corresponding chapters in different regional editions of a particular purana do not warrant any conclusion as to the original organization of the text, is provided by the Agniº. Hazra adds the usual note: "The Vanga. ed. is chapter by chapter the same as the AnSS ed. There are, of course, occasional variations in readings and number of verses in the corresponding chapters."6 [6 HAZRA 1940: 134 n. 122.] Gyani agrees, and further specifies: "These editions do not much differ from one another. All the editions contain 382 chapters but the Venkatesvar edition has got one chapter in excess. The Chapter 135 entitled Atha Sangrama Vijaya Vidya cannot be traced in other editions."7 [7 GYANI Agniº 1964: 3 n. 1.] Not only has the additional chapter unostentatiously been inserted in more recent Anandasrama editions, but, more importantly, the apparently uniform division of the Agniº in 382 is, in reality, not a very ancient one. It was the work of its first editor, Rajendralala Mitra [16 February 1822 – 26 July 1891], who used eleven manuscripts, and described their relationship and arrangement as follows: "Of these, eight codices correspond very closely, and give the same number of chapters; two Nos. I and VII are incomplete, wanting several chapters at the end; and one, No. III, has several chapters at the end, and 4 chapters on pilgrimage in the middle the counterparts of which are not to be met with elsewhere. The chapters are not regularly numbered in any of the MSS., and in several no number is to be met with. For the sake of convenience of reference the serial number has been introduced by me, and the total I arrived at from the eight MSS. which correspond is 382".8 [8 Agniº ed., 1873-79, pp. xxxvii-xxxviii.]

What I would like to suggest is that, even when different editions of a particular purana correspond in their general arrangement, this does not mean that we are in the fortunate position of possessing the text of that purana. On the contrary, there are reasons to believe that, irrespective of whether or not the printed editions exhibit major differences, all titles of puranas have been -- and are -- used to cover a variety of materials which do not appear in our editions. Some of these materials may still be available in -- numerous -- manuscripts which have never been consulted by purana editors; others may have existed in manuscripts which are now lost; others again may have been included in the recitations of individual sutas without ever having been committed to writing.

As early as 1890 Buhler showed that al-Biruni's quotations from "the Visnudharma" are, in fact, from two different versions of the Visnudharmottaraº. One of his conclusions was that "it is evident that in the beginning of the eleventh century two works with the title Vishnudharmottara or Vishnu-Dharma existed, and that both were considered to be canonical by Biruni's Pandits who, one and all, were Vaisnavas."9 [9 Book-notice on Sachau's Alberuni, IA 19, 1890, 381-410 at 407.]

On numerous occasions scholars have taken notice of the existence of manuscripts the contents of which did not correspond to those of any of the published versions. According to Burnell, "eighteen Puranas are mentioned everywhere; but they are often by no means the same works, though under one name."10 [10 1880: 187. Cf. p. 189, on Brahmaº, etc.] In Haraprasad's catalogue of the purana manuscripts at the Asiatic Society in Calcutta one comes across several statements, similar to the one on a Bhavisyaº manuscript: "it does not agree with any of the recensions of the purana known."11 [11 HARAPRASAD SHASTRI 1928a: 424. Cf. p. (Varahaº), p. 647 (Vamanaº), p. 784 (Nilamataº), etc.] R. N. Mehta came to the conclusion that "under the title of Nagarakhanda several works exist."12 [12 Nagarakhanda -- A Study, JUBar 17, 1968, 106.] Bonazzoli refers to the existence of five different Bhavisyaºs.13 [13 BONAZZOLI Bhavisyaº 1979: 26-27.] Even for a purana for which most editions correspond, such as the Devibhagavataº, Lalye saw a manuscript which is totally different.14 [14 LALYE Devibhagavataº 1973: viii.]

Equally revealing for the existence of different texts with identical titles are certain statements in the dharmanibandhas. Besides the puranas with these names which he did consult (pp. 2-3) Ballalasena refers in the Danasagara to "another" (apara) Brahmaº, Agniº, Visnuº, and Lingaº which he did not use (p. 7). Inasmuch as the contents of these "other" puranas, as indicated in the Danasagara, do not correspond to those of the extant puranas, the conclusion was drawn that in addition to the latter -- which are spurious by definition (see 1.3) -- there was for each of them at least one other spurious text.15 [15 E. g., HAZRA 1940: 95 n. 40 (Lingaº), 151 n. 168 (Brahmaº).] Similarly, Narasimha Vajapeyin's Nityacarapradipa distinguishes between two different Brahmaºs, one of which is quoted in Laksmidhara's Krtyakalpataru, the other in the works of Hemadri; the text labels the latter an upapurana.16 [16 BI work 160, 1903-28, 1.19.] Ballalasena (p. 7) also refers to a few puranas which were useless for his purpose, since they do not contain rules on gifts (danavidhisunya); one of these is the Brahmandaº. Not only does the extant Brahmandaº contain such rules; Hemadri's Caturvargacintamani, attributes to it many other verses on the subject which do not appear in our editions. This shows "that the text of the 'Brahmanda', used by Hemadri, was in many ways different from that of our present edition as well as from that of the Brahmanda known to Ballalasena."17 [17 HAZRA 1940: 19.]

The Kalikaº is a title which has created problems for several scholars. Raghavan was the first one to suggest the existence of at least three versions: the one represented by most manuscripts and editions, comprising from 90 to 93 chapters; L. 370 of Aufrecht's Catalogus Catalogorum, which Rajendralala Mitra himself calls Candiº; and the India Office manuscript, a later and different text.18 [18 RAGHAVAN Kalikaº 1938: 331.] The editor of Laksmidhara's Krtyakalpataru, K. V. Rangaswami Aiyangar, came to the conclusion that "it has been ... difficult to find any of the quotations from Kalikapurana in any of the printed editions of it. The existence of Kalikapurana in more than one recension, and the radical differences between rival versions of it, might justify the suspicion that we do not now possess it in the form in which it existed in the 11th and 12th centuries."19 [19 RANGASWAMI AIYANGAR Nandiº 1941-42.: 159.] On the basis of the India Office catalogue19a [19a EGGELING 1899: 1193-1198, no. 3344.] Hazra accepts the existence of another Kalikaº, also called Kaliº and Satiº, which is quite different from "the present" Kalikaº.20 [20 HAZRA 1963: 259.] Elsewhere Hazra mentions that Raghunandana's Durgapujatattva (pp. 8-9) quotes ten verses which are introduced as dusprapakalikapuranantare 'pi. It shows "that Raghunandana knew another Kalika-p. which was different from the present one profusely drawn upon by him in his Tattvas."21 [21 HAZRA 1963: 236.]

Raghunandana was born at Nabadwip, to Harihara Bhattacharya. He was a pupil of Srinatha Acharya Chudamani. His writings mention Rayamukuta (1431 CE), and are mentioned by Viramitrodaya of Mitramisra (early 17th century). Thus, it can be inferred that Raghunandana lived around 16th century CE.

-- Raghunandana [Raghunandan Bhattacharyya] [Raghunandana Bhaṭṭācāryya], by Wikipedia

Notice also that Nilakantha's [Mimamasakabhatta's] Vyavaharamayukha, after quoting three stanzas from the Kalikaº, says that they do not deserve absolute confidence, "for they are absent from two or three manuscripts of the text."22 [22 Ed. P. V. KANE, Bombay: NSP, 1926, p. 114.]

The introductory verses in the mss. of all the Mayukhas present a perplexing problem. Hardly any two mss. of the same Mayukha contain the same introductory verses. For example, one of the three mss. of the Samayamayukha in the Bhau Daji collection of the Bombay Royal Asiatic Society has only one introductory verse2 [[x].]; while in the other two that verse does not occur at all. In one of these two latter there are four introductory verses and in the other there are five, the Benares edition agreeing with the last. The Benares edition of the S'antimayukha (of 1879) contains fourteen introductory verses, nine of which (from the second) give the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva; while one ms. of the S'antimayukha in the Bhau Daji collection has only one introductory verse which is not found in the Benares edition; and another ms. of the same in the same collection has three verses, only one of which is found in the Benares edition. In the same way the printed editions of the Prayas'cittamayukha and the Acaramayukha (Benares, 1879) contain fourteen introductory verses each; while mss. of these two Mayukhas in the Gattulalji collection in Bombay have only two and three verses respectively. This perplexing variance in the number of introductory verses cannot be satisfactorily explained by supposing that in all cases of such differences the scribes of the mss. and others introduced unauthorised interpolations. The hypothesis which, after a careful consideration of all the introductions, seems most probable is that Nilakantha himself (or probably his son) from time to time revised his works, recast the introductory verses, added to them and also made slight alterations and additions in the body of the works.

Some of the Mayukhas such as the printed editions of the S'anti, Prayas'citta, S'raddha and Acara Mayukhas contain the genealogy of the family of Bhagavantadeva. The genealogy is more or less mythical, but there are no weighty reasons to suppose that the verses are spurious and not from the pen of Nilakantha himself1 [The verses are: -- [x]. Vide also Aufrecht's Bod. Cat., p. 280. No. 656 and I.O. Cat. part III, p. 429, No. 1444 and Mandlik's Introduction LXXVII.]. The genealogy is: from Brahma was born Kas'yapa, whose son was Vibhandaka, whose son was Rsyas'rnga. In the family of the latter was born S'rngivara, after whom the family came to be known as Sengara. King Karna was born in that family. Then follows a line of eighteen kings, the last being Bhagavantadeva.

-- The Vyavaharamayukha or Bhatta Nilakantha, With an Introduction, Notes and Appendices, by P.V. Kane

A most interesting case is presented by the Agniº. Gyani23 [23 GYANI Agniº 1964: 1 n. l.] lists five editions which "do not much differ from one another," and he therefore restricts himself to using one edition: Venkatesvara. Yet, ever since the publication of the catalogue of Sanskrit manuscripts of the India Office Library23a [23a EGGELING 1899: 1294-1298, no. 3582.] the existence of a Vahniº -- "different from the work usually designated by that title" -- was known.24 [24 Cf. WINTERNITZ 1907: 473 n. 2; at 1963: 496 n. 2 it is called an upapurana. In fact, Buhler's Report for 1872-73 to the Director of Public Instruction mentions: "Among the puranas the Vahnipurana is new to me. It is not identical with the Agnipurana" (extract at IA 2, 1873, 304). Cf. WILSON 1840 = 1961: xxxviii.] Only at the end of his treatment of the Agniº Hazra25 [25 HAZRA 1940: 139-140.] briefly refers to this manuscript: "Besides the extant Agni-p., Mss. have been found of another work called 'Vahni-purana.'" A little over ten years later Hazra had an opportunity to study the manuscripts of the Vahniº; he concluded: "With the spread of Tantricism this spurious work [= the present AgniP] attained great popularity, and the genuine Agneya-purana [= the earlier Agni-p.] had to save itself from extinction by assuming a different title, viz., 'Vahni-purana.'"26 [26 Discovery of the Genuine Agneya-purana, JOIB 5, 1956, 411-416 at 411; also, Studies in the Genuine Agneya-purana alias Vahni-purana, OH 1, 1953, 209-245 [contents at 218-224]; 2, 1954, 77-110.] He rightly points out that what makes a mahapurana is its being well known; that what is less well known becomes an upapurana. "As modern scholars did not know the real nature of this 'Vahni-purana' occurring in Manuscripts, they took it to be an Upapurana of minor importance." Although Hazra twice uses the expression that it is the Vahniº rather than the Agniº that "is identical with" the genuine Agneyaº, the absence in it of the Isanakalpa -- here too, even as in the extant Agniº! -- and various other arguments make him admit that, once again, this Vahniº has lost many chapters of the original Agneyaº; they have been replaced by passages drawn from other sources, and the whole assumed a "Vaisnava form." In short, this is a unique case in which one "extant" purana has actually been replaced with another, at least by one scholar. Yet, in 1964 Gyani continued to analyze the Venkatesvara edition; his sole reference to Hazra's article appears in six lines of the conclusions.

Vaishnavism is one of the major Hindu denominations along with Shaivism, Shaktism, and Smartism. According to a 2010 estimate by Johnson and Grim, the Vaishnava tradition is the largest group within Hinduism constituting about 641 million or 67.6% of Hindus. It is also called Vishnuism since it considers Vishnu as the Supreme Being. Its followers are called Vaishnavas or Vaishnavites (derived from IAST: Vaiṣṇava), and it also includes some other sub-traditions like Krishnaism and Ramaism, which consider Krishna and Rama as the Supreme Being respectively...

Key texts in Vaishnavism include the Vedas, the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, the Pancaratra (Agama) texts, Naalayira Divya Prabhandham and the Bhagavata Purana.

-- Vaishnavism, by Wikipedia

Modern scholarship noticed all these facts. It recognized "that the extent of the genuine Agneya-purana was not the same at all times and in all places and that it varied with the difference in time and locality."27 [27 HAZRA, JOIB 5, 1956, 414-415.] It realized that of the hundreds of verses attributed to the Deviº, which are not traceable in our text, some were quoted by certain nibandhakaras, some by others. "This shows that the text of the Devi-p. was not the same everywhere but differed considerably in different provinces."28 [28 HAZRA 1963: 193-194.] Yet, one failed to draw the logical conclusion: besides the version or versions of puranas that appear in our manuscripts, and fewer still in our editions, there have been numerous other versions, under the same titles, but which either have remained unnoticed or have been irreparably lost.

The danger I want to point out here is that those readings and arrangements of a particular purana which happen to have been included in the printed edition or editions, have automatically been considered as representing "the" purana -- be it only the less valuable extant one --, whereas all variant readings and arrangements exhibited in manuscripts which were not used by the editors, have been generally overlooked or neglected. These latter materials never -- or very rarely -- come to the notice of those doing research on the puranas; and if they do, they are invariably treated as less valuable or negligible deviations from the standard text.

One scholarly publication in which, besides editions of puranas, manuscripts have been used quite extensively, is Pargiter's Purana Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age. The author made a conscious search for as many manuscripts as he could possibly find (see his account, pp. xxix-xxxiv), and the variant readings found in them are carefully noted in the critical apparatus. Occasionally, however, even Pargiter cannot help giving more weight to the printed editions than to handwritten materials. For instance, in the Bhavisyaº the text on the dynasties of the Kali age occurs in the Venkatesvara edition, whereas "I have examined the following MSS, but none of them contain anything about these dynasties" (p. xxx); these manuscripts are ten in number, and Pargiter therefore concludes that the passage in the edition is "not genuine." A similar situation presents itself in the Brahmandaº: none of the five manuscripts which Pargiter consulted contains the passage as it occurs in the Venkatesvara edition which "professes to be based on several MSS, yet gives variant readings only rarely, and leaves on my mind the impression that it has been silently emended at times" (p. xxx). Yet, in this case Pargiter failed to draw the same conclusion he drew in connection with the Bhavisyaº.

No one has probably consulted as many purana manuscripts as R.C. [Rajendra Chandra] Hazra; no one was more acutely aware of the problems they raise than he was. Yet, although he points to the existence of a manuscript of the Vamanaº which "seems to differ much from our printed editions," he too, cannot help basing his discussion of the nature and contents of "the extant Purana" on the printed editions only.

Other scholars did not use manuscripts to the extent Pargiter or Hazra did.29 [29 HAZRA 1940: 76-77.] The manuscripts were, in most cases, inaccessible to them, or too voluminous to handle. In fact, most scholars who wrote on puranas did not even have access to all existing editions.30 [30 The editions in Telugu script are, in many cases, the earliest ones; yet they have remained practically unknown and unused. The editions in Bengali script, especially those of the Vangavasi Press, have been used more often, but in general only by Bengalis. Most purana studies, by Indians all over the subcontinent and by non-Indians, are based on the devanagari editions, especially the Venkatesvara and Anandasrama editions, the latter being even more widely available than the former. E. g., "Reference is made here only to the texts that have appeared in Devanagari" (PUSALKAR 1968: 692); "Unless otherwise indicated, the texts are those of the Anandasrama Series" (W. JAHN: Uber die kosmogonischen Grundanschauungen im Manava-Dharma-Sastram [Google translate: About the cosmogonic Basic views in the Manava-Dharma-Sastram], Leipzig: Drugulin, 1904, p. 20).] Their conclusions are based on those editions which happened to be available to them; in many cases this just meant one single edition. Kirfel's Purana Pancalaksana, for example, uses a single manuscript of the Brahmandaº, in addition to its Venkatesvara edition; for the Visnuº it uses one edition from Calcutta and one from Bombay; for the Padmaº it uses two editions from -- at that time -- Bombay Presidency; and for all other puranas it relies on single editions. Kirfel was aware of the problem; he confessed facing the alternative of making purana studies progress with incomplete materials, or postponing publication of his research indefinitely, and he decided in favor of the former.31 [ 31 "Wenn im Vorwort zum Puranalaksana gesagt wurde, dass zur Aufhellung mancher textlicher Verderbnis oder Abweichungen noch eineAnzahl alter und guter Handschriften hatte herangezogen werden mussen, so gilt dieses auch fur den vorliegenden Band. Es besteht aber auf absehbare Zeit nicht die geringste Aussicht, an jene heranzukommen. Aber selbst wenn dies der Fall ware, wurden sich doch nicht alle Textverderbnisse berichtigen lassen, wie die in Poona erscheinende kritische Ausgabe des Mahabharata beweist. Zudem wurde es sich bei den vielen hier in Betracht kommenden Purana's um eine so grosse Anzahl von Handschriften handeln, dass die Drucklegung des durch so umfangreiche Kollationierungsarbeiten ubermassig angeschwollenen kritischen Apparates schon aus praktischen Grunden scheitern wurde. Dies hiesse zugleich, die mit der riesigen purana Literatur verknupften Probleme auf unabsehbare Zeit zuruckzustellen; dies ware ein Verfahren, das mit den Prinzipien von Forschung und Wissenschaft nicht mehr recht vereinbar ist" [Google translate: If in the foreword to the Puranalaksana it was said that for enlightening some textual corruption or discrepancies still a number of old and good manuscripts had to be used, this also applies to the present volume. But there is no prospect of getting hold of them in the foreseeable future. But even if that were the case, not all text corruptions would be corrected as the critical edition of the Mahabharata published in Poona shows. In addition, it became one of the many Puranas under consideration here. Large number of manuscripts act that the printing of the by so extensive Collation work on excessively swollen critical apparatus already done practical reasons would fail. This would also mean the one with the huge purana literature postpone linked problems for an indefinite period of time; this would be a procedure that is no longer quite compatible with the principles of research and science." ] (KIRFEL 1954: XI-XII).] Abegg's Pretakalpa is based solely on Jibananda's edition of the Garuda -- the editions of which are very different indeed.32 [32 "Neben dieser in der Einleitung S. 2 allein angefuhrten Ausgabe ist noch eine von Pancanana Tarkaratna, Calcutta 1891 erschienen, sowie eine in Bombay; beide waren mir nicht zuganglich" (Pretakalpa des Garuda-Purana, 1921, p. VIII n. 1). [Google translate: In addition to this edition, which is only cited in the introduction on p. 2, there is also one of Pancanana Tarkaratna, Calcutta 1891, and one in Bombay; both were not accessible.] A study such as Hohenberger's "Das Vamanapurana"33 [33 HOHENBERGER Vamanaº 1963.] which uses the Venkatesvara edition of the text only, cannot claim to be more than a study of that particular version of the Vamanaº; it is not an analysis of the Vamanaº as a whole. Surabhi H. Trivedi34 [34 TRIVEDI Brahmaº 1968-69.] lists four editions of the Brahmaº (p. 75), but uses nothing else than the Anandasrama edition. V. S. Agrawala based his study of the Markandeyaº, in Hindi, on Jibananda's edition and Pargiter's English translation.35 [35 AGRAWALA Markandeyaº 1961.]

In short, the existing editions, useful as they may have been in making the puranas available in print, have done a definite disservice to scholarly research, in that they have accidentally raised one or two versions of each purana to the rank of the purana. By doing so they have obliterated all other versions which might be equally or, eventually, more important than the published ones.36 [36 E. g., Sylvain LEVI (1905: 210) noted the existence of not less than five versions of the Svayambhuº: Svayambhumahaº (12 chapters), Svayambhu-utpattikatha or Madhyamasvayambhuº (10 ch.), Brhatsvayambhuº (printed in the BI, 3000 lines in ms.), Mahatsvayambhuº (2000 lines), and Svayambhucaityabhattarakoddesa (250 lines). He considered the first one to be the best; as opposed to the printed one with its "style barbare et metrique abominable." "Il est regrettable que la Bibliotheca Indica ait imprime de preference cette derniere recension, et que l'editeur du texte ait cru devoir farcir a plaisir de barbarismes et de solecismes le sanscrit macaronique de son auteur; il n'est pas conforme au 'fair play" meme entre brahmanes et bouddhistes, de choisir, comme de parti pris, les lecons les plus incorrectes et d'eliminer les autres" [Google translate: "barbarian style and abominable metric." "It is unfortunate that the Bibliotheca Indica has preferably printed this last review, and that the editor of the text thought it his duty to stuff barbarisms and solecisms the macaronic Sanskrit of its author; he does not comply to 'fair play' even between Brahmans and Buddhists, to choose, as if by bias, the most incorrect lessons and eliminate the others."] (p. 212 n. 1).] As a result they have made purana research based on them one-sided and, therefore, inaccurate.37 [37 Cf. Albert B. LORD (The Singer of Tales, Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1960, pp. 124-125): even though one or more versions of oral poetry become eventually fixed, this does not in any way affect the singer or his audience. The singer "continued, as did his confreres, to compose and sing as he always had and they always had"; the audience "thought in his terms, in the terms of multiplicity."]

These facts have been recognized. Kane discusses the unfortunate situation that most editions of puranas are based on one manuscript or on a few manuscripts selected at random. "Many conclusions, therefore, drawn from the current printed editions of the Puranas or from mss. of the Puranas, must be regarded. as merely tentative and as likely to turn out to be wrong."38 [38 KANE 1962: 838.] Haraprasad Shastri used a presidential address at the All-India Oriental Conference to stress the fact that "in the matter of the Puranas every manuscript has a peculiar feature, and so, all manuscripts are important from the point of view of a collector and a scholar."39 [39 AIOC 5 (1928), 80. Cf. DAS (1924: 119): "One might almost say that no two manuscripts of any Purana are exactly the same."].

Yet, scholars continue to quote and draw conclusions from the Visnuº, the Matsyaº, etc. Sten Konow,40 [40 Note on the Andhra King Candasata, ZDMG 62, 1908, 591-592.] for example, while discussing the name of the last but one Andhra king, relies heavily on the puranas to defend the form Canda rather than Vincent Smith's Candra.

"The forms of the name given in the puranas are not at all in favour of this supposition. Candra, it is true, occurs in THE Visnu and Bhagavata Purana, but THE Matsya has Canda and THE Vayu Danda, and this last form cannot well be explained as a corruption of Candra. I therefore think that Canda is the correct form of the word."41 [41 Ibid., p. 591 (emphasis added). Konow's argument is even less convincing, since he draws these forms, second hand, from R. G. Bhandarkar's Early History of the Dekkan (2nd ed., 1895, p. 164), where the sources used for the puranas are not even specified.]

In connection with the different versions of puranas reference should also be made to titles of puranas to which adjectives such as Brhad-, Laghu-, Vrddha-, etc., have been prefixed. They have laid to confusion and misinterpretation.42 [42 The confusion existed already in the Sanskrit texts. For instance, the Ekamraº distinguishes between a principal Narasimhaº and an upapurana called Brhannarasimhaº. Gopalabhatta's Haribhaktivilasa also quotes verses separately from Narashimhaº (ca. 100) and Brhannarasimhaº (63). The Caturvargacintamani, on the other hand, ascribes the latter to Narasimhaº. HAZRA (1958: 356) concludes that either Hemadri considered the two works to be identical, or the verses occurred in both. They do not, however, appear in our printed Nrsimhaº.] Winternitz,43 [43 WINTERNITZ 1907: 466-467.] for example, confused the Naradaº and Brhannaradaº in the original, German Geschichte; the confusion has only been partly eliminated in its English translation.44 [44 WINTERNITZ 1963: 489-490.] Both in the German and English editions the Brhannaradaº is called "the great Purana of Narada," whereas the much longer Naradaº, the edition of which is not even mentioned, is called an upapurana. Similarly, when Winternitz45 [45 Ibid., p. 478; cf. HAZRA 1958: 353-356.] assigns an early date to the Visnuº because few mahatmyas [Māhātmya can be translated as “glory” or “greatness”, and is also a term for a text genre.] claim to be part of it, he adds the following note: "Nevertheless it is noteworthy that Matsya- and Bhagavata-Purana give the number of slokas of the Visnu-purana as 23,000, while in reality it has not quite 7,000 verses, and that also a 'Great Visnu-Purana' (Brhadvisnupurana, Aufrecht CC I, 591) is quoted." He thus seems to equate the larger version of 23,000 verses with the Brhadvisnuº. In reality, here as elsewhere in Sanskrit literature46 [46 Compare the many smrtis to which the same adjectives have been prefixed. On the status of such texts, see J.D.M. DERRETI: Dharmasastra and Juridical Literature, [part of vol. IV in this series,] Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1973, p. 40.] we should expect Brhad-, Laghu-, Vrddha-, etc., to refer to compositions which are secondary as compared to the corresponding titles to which these adjectives have not been prefixed....

[admin]

Part 2 of 3

Frederick Eden Pargiter: Cont'd from The Puranas, by Ludo Rocher

2.2.2 Dating the Puranas

It should come as no surprise that, as soon as Westerners came in contact with the puranas, they raised the question of the dates of these texts. The initial reaction was to assign late dates to the puranas generally. Bentley, for example, held that "many of the Purans" are more recent than Varahamihira,1 [1 John BENTLEY: On the Antiquity of the Surya Siddhanta, and the Formation of the Astronomical Cycles therein Contained, As. Res. 7, 1799, 537-588 at 574.] and, more specifically, that the Visnudharmottaraº borrowed from Brahmagupta.2 [2 A Historical View of the Hindu Astronomy, from the Earliest Dawn of the Science in India, down to the Present Time, Calcutta: Baptist Mission Press, 1823, p. 86.]

Brahmagupta (c. 598 – c. 668 CE) was an Indian mathematician and astronomer. He is the author of two early works on mathematics and astronomy: the Brāhmasphuṭasiddhānta (BSS, "correctly established doctrine of Brahma", dated 628), a theoretical treatise, and the Khaṇḍakhādyaka ("edible bite", dated 665), a more practical text.

Brahmagupta was the first to give rules to compute with zero. The texts composed by Brahmagupta were in elliptic verse in Sanskrit, as was common practice in Indian mathematics. As no proofs are given, it is not known how Brahmagupta's results were derived.

-- Brahmagupta, by Wikipedia

Far more influential, of course, was [Horace Hayman] Wilson's opinion. I have already referred to the place which he assigns the puranas in the general development of the Hindu religion (see 1.3.1). He felt that none of the present manifestations of popular Hinduism can be older than Sankara, "the great Saiva reformer," and, on the Vaisnava side, than Ramanuja, Madhva, and Vallabha.

Every date in ancient Indian history, except that of the invasion of Alexander (326 B.C.), is controversial, and Sankara’s date is no exception. Max Muller and other orientalists have somehow fixed it as 788 to 820 A.D., and Das Gupta and Radhakrishnan, the well-known writers on the history of Indian Philosophy, have accepted and repeated it in their books. To do so is not in itself wrong, but to do it in such a way as to make the layman believe it to be conclusive is, to say the least, an injustice to him. It is held by the critics of this date that the Sankara of 788-820 A.D. is not the Adi-Sankara (the original Sankara), but Abhinava Sankara (modern Sankara), another famous Sannyasin of later times (788-839), who was born at Chidambaram and was the head of the Sankara Math at Kanchipuram between 801 and 839. He was reputed for his holiness and learning and is said to have gone on tours of controversy (Dig-vijaya) like the original Sankara.

It is found that not only modern scholars, but even the authors of several Sankara-vijayas have superimposed these two personalities mutually and mixed up several details of their lives. The author of the concept of adhyasa himself seems to have become a victim of it! The cause of much of this confusion has been the custom of all the incumbents of the headship of Sankara Maths being called Sankaracharyas. To distinguish the real Sankara, he is therefore referred to as ‘Adi-Sankara' an expression that is quite meaningless. For, Sankaracharya was the name of an individual and not a title, and if the heads of the Maths of that illustrious personage were known only by their individual names like the heads of religious institutions founded by other teachers, probably much of this confusion could have been avoided….

Ullur S. Parameswara Iyer has pointed out in his great work that the sole support for the modern scholars’ view on Sankara’s date as 788 A.D. is the following incomplete verses of unknown authorship: "Nidhi nagebha vahnyabde vibhave sankarodayah; Kalyabde candranetranka vahnyabde pravisad guham; Vaisakhe purnimayam tu sankarah sivatamagat." Here the words of the first verse are the code words for the year 3889 of the Kali era, which is equivalent to 788 A.D. (It is derived as follows: nidhi: 9; naga: 8; ibha: 8; vahni: 3. Since the numbers are to be taken in the reverse order, it gives 3889 of the Kali era as the date of Sankara’s birth, its conversion into Christian era being 788 A.D. Kali era began 3102 years before the Christian era….

Traditional Indian dates are suspect because of the multiplicity of eras, of which about forty-seven have been enumerated by T. S. Narayana Sastri in his book, The Age of Sankara. So unless the era is specifically mentioned, it is difficult to fix a date in any understandable way. Two of these eras are famous—the Kali era, which started in 3102 B.C., and Yudhishthira Saka era which started 37 years after, i.e., in 3065 B.C. The calculation according to the latter era is, however, complicated further by the fact that, according to the Jains and the Buddhists, the latter era started 468 years after the Kali era, that is, in 2634 B.C.

Sri T. S. Narayana Sastri, in his book, The Age of Sankara, argues the case for the traditional date, on the basis of the list of succession kept in Kamakoti Math and Sringeri Math, and what he has been able to gather from ‘mutilated copies’ of Brihat-Sankara-vijaya, Prachtna-Sankara-vijaya and Vyasachallya-Sankara-vijaya. Until authentic copies of these works are available, the information they are supposed to give is not acceptable…

44 B.C., the supposed date of the birth of Sankara according to Sringeri Math, might have been the result of the confusion of eras and calculations based on them. 2625 of the Kali era, the date of his death, must have been taken as referring to Buddhist-Jain era and then converted into Kali era by adding 468 to it, thus arriving at 3093 of Kali era (9 or 10 B.C.) as the date of Sankara’s death….

as stated in T. S. Narayana Sastri’s work, in the Kamakoti list Sankara occupied that Gaddi for three years (from 480 B.C. to 477 B.C.) and was followed by Sureswara for 70 years (477 B.C. to 407 B.C.), the Sringeri list maintains that Sankara occupied that Gaddi for six years (from 18 B.C. to 12 B.C.), and was followed by Sureswara for 785 years (from 12 B.C. to 773 A.D.)… The record of the Sringeri Math says that Sankara was born in the 14th year of the reign of Vikramaditya. Compilers wrongly referred this to the era of Vikramaditya of Ujjain, which was originally called Malava Samvat and later in the eighth century A.D. called the Vikrama Samvat. This took Sankara to the first century B.C. and necessitated the assignment of around 800 years to Sureswaracharya to agree with the later dates. Mr L. Rice points out that the reference is not to the Vikramaditya of Ujjain but to the Chalukya king Vikramaditya who ruled in Badami near Sringeri. Historians opine that Chalukya Vikramaditya ascended the throne during the period 655 to 670 A.D….

Such unbelievable inconsistencies have made modern historians totally reject the evidence provided by the chronological lists of the Maths. So Sri Ullur Parameswara Iyer, himself a pious Brahmana, maintains in his History of Kerala Sahitya (Vol. 1 p. 111) that it is easy to prove that most of these Math lists have been formulated so late as the 16th century A.D.

But a still greater difficulty posed for such an early date as 509 to 476 B.C. for Sankara is the proximity of this to the generally accepted date of the Buddha (567-487 B.C.). Sankara has criticised Buddhism in its developed form with its four branches of philosophy. A few centuries at least should certainly be allowed to elapse for accommodating this undeniable fact. Sri T. S. Narayana Sastri is, however, remarkably ingenious, and his reply to this objection is that the Buddha’s date was certainly much earlier. Vaguely quoting Prof. Wheeler, Weber and Chinese records, he contends that the Buddha must have flourished at any time between the 20th and the 14th century B.C. He challenges the fixing of the date of Buddha on the basis of the dates of Kanishka or of Megasthenes.3a [Kanishka’s date is variously stated as 1st century B.C., 1st century A.D., 2nd century A.D. and 3rd century A.D. The relevancy of his date to the Buddha’s date is that Hsuan Tsang, the Chinese traveller, states that the Buddha lived four hundred years before Kanishka. Some historians try to fix the date of the Buddha on the basis of this information as 5th century B.C. This view is not currently accepted, and the Buddha’s date is settled on other grounds as 567-487 B.C. It is fixed so on the basis of Asoka’s coronation in 269 B.C., four years after his accession. According to the Ceylon Chronicles, 218 years separate this event of Asoka’s coronation from the date of the Buddha’s demise. Thus we get 487 as the date of the Buddha’s demise, and as he is supposed to have lived 80 years, the date of his birth is 567. According to R. Sathianatha Ayyar, the date of 487 B.C. is supported by “the dotted record” of Canton (China); The traditional date according to the Buddhist canonical literature, however, is 623-543 B.C. Megasthenes comes into the picture, because he was the Greek Ambassador of Selukos Nickator at the court of Chandra Gupta Maurya (325 B.C.), who is described by him as Shandracotus. Now Sri T. S. Narayana Sastri, with a view to push back the Buddha’s date, challenges this identification, and opines that this reference could as well be to Chandra Gupta or even to Samudra Gupta of the Gupta dynasty (300-600 A.D.), in which case the Mauryan age (325 to 188 B.C.) will have to be pushed further back into the 7th to 5th century B.C. and the Buddha (567-487 B.C.) too, into the 9th century B.C. at least. But Sri Sastri forgets that these contentions cannot stand, as the date of Megasthenes and of Chandra Gupta Maurya have necessarily to be related to the firm and unquestionable date of Alexander’s invasion of India (326 B.C.) Megasthenes was the ambassador at the Pataliputra court sent by Selukos Nickator (305 B.C.), the Satrap who succeeded to the Indian region of Alexander’s empire, which he had to give up to Chandra Gupta by a treaty. T. S. Narayana Sastri’s attempt to shift the Gupta period of India history, to the time of Alexander’s invasion (326 B.C.) by equating Shandracotus with Samudra Gupta of the Gupta period, is a mere chronological guess-work without any supporting evidence, as against several historical synchronisms which compel the acceptance of the currently recognised chronology. For example, the Chinese Buddhist pilgrim Fahien was in India in the Gupta age, from 399-414 A.D., and his description of India can tally only with that period and not with the Mauryan period. Besides, the Hun invasion of India was in the reign of Skanda Gupta, about 458 A.D., and this event cannot be put on any ground into the B.C.’s when Mauryans flourished, even with an out-stretched poetical imagination. So we have got to maintain that the Shandracotus who visited Alexander’s camp (326 B.C.) and who later received about 326 B.C. Megasthenes as the ambassador of Selukos Nickator, the successor to Alexander’s Indian province, can be none other than Chandra Gupta of the Mauryan dynasty (325 B.C. to 188 B.C.) Further, historical synchronisms, the sheet-anchor of the chronology of Indian history give strong support to the accepted date of Asoka (273-232 B.C.), the greatest of the Mauryan Emperors. His Rock Edict XIII mentions, as stated by Sathianatha Ayyar, the following contemporary personalities: Antiochus Teos of Syria (261-246 B.C.); Ptolemy Philadelphos of Egypt (285-247 B.C.); Antigonos Gonates of Macedonia (278-239 B.C.); Magas of Cyrene (285-258 B.C.), and Alexander of Epirus (272-258 B.C.). They are referred to as alive at the time of that Rock Edict. In the face of such historical synchronisms all attempts to push back the time of the Buddha by several centuries in order to substantiate the theory of 509 B.C. being Sankara’s date, is only chronological jugglery. So the Buddha’s date has to remain more or less as it is fixed today (568-487 B.C.). Sankara came definitely long after the Buddha.] The reference to Megasthenes, the Greek ambassador, who refers to the ruler to whom he was accredited as Shandracotus, need not necessarily be to Chandragupta Maurya but to the king of the Gupta dynasty (300-600 A.D.) with the same name, or even to Samudra Gupta. If this line of argument is accepted, the present dates of Indian history will have to be worked back to about three to four hundred years, which will land us in very great difficulties, as shown in the foot note….

there is another opinion that assigns Sankara to the 1st century B.C. This view is held by Sri N. Ramesam in his book Sri Sankaracharya (1971). His argument is as follows: Sankara is accepted in all Sankara-vijayas as a contemporary of Kumarila. Kumarila must have lived after Kalidasa, the poet, because Kumarila quotes Kalidasa’s famous line; Satam hi sandeha padesu vastusu pramanam antahkaranasya vrittayah. Now Kalidasa’s date has not been firmly fixed (first half of the 5th century A.D. according to some), but it is contended that it cannot be earlier than 150 B.C., as Agni Mitra, one of the heroes in a famous drama of Kalidasa, is ascribed to that date. So also, it cannot be later than the Mandasor Inscription of 450 A.D. So on the basis that Sankara and Kumarila were contemporaries and that Kumarila came after Kalidasa, we have to search for Sankara’s date between 150 B.C. and 450 A.D. Now to narrow down the gap still further, the list of spiritual preceptors that preceded Sankara is taken into consideration. Patanjali, Gaudapada, Govindapada and Sankara— form the accepted line of discipleship. Patanjali, Sri Ramesam contends, lived in the 2nd century B.C., a conclusion which, if accepted finally (?), gives much credence to his theory. Now, not less than a hundred years can be easily taken as the distance in time between Sankara and Patanjali in this line of succession, and thus we derive the time of Sankara as the 1st century B.C., which has the merit of being in agreement with the Kumarila-Sankara contemporaneity and the Kumarila-Kalidasa relationship. The 1st century hypothesis has also got the advantage of tallying with the Sringeri Math’s teacher-disciple list, according to which, as already stated, 12 B.C. is the date of Sankara’s demise. Sri Ramesam finds further confirmation for his theory in the existence of a temple on a Sankaracharya Hill in Kashmir attributed to Jaluka, a son of Asoka who became the ruler of Kashmir after Asoka’s demise, according to Rajaiarangini. Asoka passed away In 180 B.C. and it is very credible that Jaluka could have been in Kashmir when Sankara visited that region, provided Sankara’s life is fixed in the 1st century B.C. Further, Cunningham and General Cole are stated to assign the temple architecturally to the times of Jaluka…

Sri Ramesam also refutes the modern scholars’ view of Sankara’s date being 788-820 A.D. on the ground that this has arisen due to confusion between Adi-Sankara and Abhinava-Sankara (788-840 A.D.)… its credibility depends largely on the theory of 200 B.C. being the time of Patanjali and the acceptance of the Kumarila-Kalidasa relationship. If these are questioned, the whole theory falls. This is the case with most dates in Indian history, where the rule is to fix the date of one person or event on the basis of the date of another person or event, which itself is open to question….

Dr. A. G. Krishna Warrier, Professor of Sanskrit (Rtd) in the Kerala University, in his learned Introduction to his translation of Sankara’s Brahma-sutra-bhashya into Malayalam… states that the Buddhist author Kamalasila has pointed out that Sankara has quoted in his Brahma-sutra-bhashya (B. S. II. 2-28) the following passage from the Alambanapariksha by Dingnaga, the celebrated Buddhist savant: 'Yadantarjneyarupam tat bahiryadavabhasate’. Dingnaga’s date, which Dr. Warrier links with those of Vasubandhu (450 A.D.) and Bhartrhari, is fixed by him as about 450 A.D. But that is not all. The following verse of Dingnaga’s commentator Dharmakirti is quoted by Sankara in his work Upadesa-sahasri: Abhinnopi hi buddhydtma viparyasitadarsanaih grahyagrahaka-samvitti bhedavaniva laksyate (ch. 18, v. 142). This reference is from Dharmakirti’s Pramana-virtischhaya. Dr. Warrier points out that Dharmakirti is described as a ‘great Buddhist logician’ by the Chinese pilgrim-traveller, It-sing, who was in India in 690 A.D. The implication is that Dharmakirti must have lived in the first half of the 7th century or earlier, and that Sankara came after him. It means that Sankara’s date cannot be pushed back beyond the 5th century A.D., or even beyond the 7th century A.D., if the Upadesasahasri is accepted as a genuine work of Sankara. As in the case of most dates in Indian history, the credibility of the view, too, depends on the acceptance of the dates of Dingnaga and Dharmakirti as 5th century and 7th century respectively, and that Upadesasahasri is really a work of Sankara, as traditionally accepted. Fixing dates on the basis of other dates, which are themselves open to question, can yield only possibilities and not certainties.

Probable dates suggested by other scholars are also the 6th century and the 7th century A.D. Sankara refers in his writings to a king named Pumavarman who, according to Hsuan Tsang, ruled in 590 A.D. It is, therefore, contended that Sankara must have lived about that time or after. Next Telang points out how Sankara speaks of Pataliputra in his Sutra-bhashya (IV. ii. 5) and that this will warrant Sankara having lived about a century before 750 A.D., by which time Pataliputra had been eroded by the river and was non-existent. Such references to names of persons, cities, rivers, etc. in philosophical writings can also be explained as stock examples, as we use Aristotle or Achilles in logic, and need not necessarily have any historical significance. Dr. T. R. Chintamani maintains that Kumarila lived towards the latter half of the 7th century A.D. (itself a Controversial point) and Sankara, being a contemporary of his, must have lived about that time (655-684 A.D.). It is also pointed out by him that Vidyananda, the teacher of Jainasena, who was also the author of Jaina-harivamsa (783 A.D.), quotes a verse4 ["Atmapi sadidam brahma mohat parosyadu sitam; Brahmapi sa tathaivatma sadvitiyatayesate."] from the Brihadaranyaka-vartika of Sureswara, disciple of Sankara. This is impossible to conceive without granting that Sankara and Sureswara lived, about a hundred years earlier to Jainasena who lived about the second half of the 8th century A.D.

Thus vastly varied are the views about Sankara’s date, ranging from 509 B.C. to 788 A.D., i.e., more than a millennium and a half…

Under the circumstances, all these complicated discussions of Sankara’s date culminate only in a learned ignorance. We have to admit that we have no certain knowledge, and it is, therefore, wise not to be dogmatic but keep an open mind….

-- Sankara-Dig-vijaya: The Traditional Life of Sri Sankaracharya, by Madhava-Vidyaranya, Translated by Swami Tapasyananda

"The Puranas seem to have accompanied or followed their innovations, being obviously intended to advocate the doctrines they taught. This is to assign to some of them a very modern date, it is true; but I cannot think that a higher can with justice be ascribed to them."3 [3 WILSON 1840 = 1961: ix-x.]

Notwithstanding Kennedy's claim that "the eighteen Purans must have been committed to writing in times considerably remoter than the era of Vicramaditya, or 56 A C.",4 [4 Asiatic Journal 1837, 246. Yet, since India has no real historiography, "it must be obvious that there are no means available, by which the date or probable period when each of the Purans was composed can be determined" (ibid., p. 243).] Wilson's late dating was followed by Burnouf,5 [5 Bhagavataº 1, p. CI, especially the Bhagavataº, on account of Vopadeva's authorship.] Lassen,6 [6 LASSEN (1861: 599): between the middle of the 8th cent. (Markandeyaº) and the 13th cent. (Bhagavataº).] Macdonell,7 [7 India's Past, 1927, p. 90: "Deriving their subject matter from the epics, the earliest of them cannot be older than the sixth century A.D."] etc.

Bentley was aware though, in 1799, that his late dating contradicted the traditional belief about puranas, "which through the artifices of the Brahminical tribe, have been hitherto deemed the most ancient [books] in existence."8 [8 As. Res. 7, 1799, 574.] Leaving aside isolated voices claiming that the puranas were in existence in the prehistoric period,9 [9 B. N. REU: Hindu Puranas, their age and value, NIA 2, 1939-40, 302-306 at 303.] or that they came into existence more than five thousand years ago,10 [10 NARAYANA SWAMI AIYAR 1914: 22] there are indeed those who believe that the puranas go back as far as the Vedic period. The concept of a Puranaveda, and arguments in favor of the existence of puranas as a literary genre, from the time of the Atharvaveda onward, have been discussed earlier in this volume (see 1.2.1). There seems to be a widespread agreement that the original puranas existed, "long before the beginning of the Christian era."11 [11 HAZRA 1962: 240; MEHENDALE 1970: 297.]

To be sure, nearly everyone agrees that the composite nature of the puranas implies that "there is a good deal in the puranas that ... must be admitted to be very ancient; while undoubtedly also there is a great deal in them that is very modern."12 [12 K. T. TELANG: Bhagavadgita, 1875, p. 14. Cf. HAMILTON and LANGLES' (Catalogue des manuscrits samskrits de la Bibliotheque Imperiale, Paris: Imprimerie bibliographique, 1807, p. 6) objections to Bentley's theory that the puranas cannot be older than the Muslim period, since they include the names of Muslim princes.] Most of the secondary literature starts from the idea that there was first "the old purana" (see 1.3) which, from a certain time in history onward, began to be re-modeled.13 [13 For more complex developments, in four stages, see Sita Nath PRADHAN: Chronology of Ancient India. From the Times of the Rigvedic King Divodasa to Chandragupta Maurya, With Glimpses into the Political History of the Period, Calcutta University, 1927, pp. xii-xiii. Also S.D. GYANI: Date of the Puranas, NIA 5, 1942-43, 131-135, and The Date of the Puranas, Pur 1, 1959-60, 213-219; 2, 1960, 68-75.] On the time when the re-modeling began, and on the question whether the re-modeling went on indefinitely or came to an end at a certain moment, opinions vary. For instance, the transition from the puranas as pure chronicles to the puranas as veritable encyclopedias began about 500 B.C. , for Apastamba could quote them as sources for acara.14 [14 B. K. GHOSH: Review of Meyer's Gesetzbuch und Purana [Google translate: Law Book and Purana], IHQ 5, 1929, 367-375 at 368-369.] Or, the re-modeled puranas are described as "part of the machinery devised by orthodox Brahminism in [its] onslaught against Buddhism",15 [15 V. VENKATACHALLA IYER: The Puranas, QJMS 13, 1922-23, 702-713 at 703.] or, more broadly, as a reaction against both religious -- Buddhism, Jainism, etc. -- and political -- the invasions of the Sakas, Hunas, etc. -- dangers, implying thereby that some of the extant puranas were composed in the first centuries A.D.16 [16 KANE 1968: 411; also Paurana-dharma, Gode vol. (1960), 3.70-82 at 71.] According to others, for some of the puranas at least, the recasting period came to a close -- they "received their final form" as part of the textbooks of Smarta Hinduism -- during the Gupta period.17 [17 ELIOT (1921: l.xxxviii; 2.187) mentions explicitly the Matsyaº, Markandeyaº, and Visnuº. KANE (The Tantravartika and the Dharmasastra Literature, JBBRAS n. s. 1,1925, 9 -102 at 102) concludes that some of the extant puranas were composed several centuries before Kumarila. Cf. also W. CROOKE: Hinduism, ERE 6, 1914, 695.] On the other hand, even though Bhandarkar assigns a specific terminus a quo -- the time of Wema Kadphises, ca. A.D. 250 -- to the recasting process, he adds that the process went on uninterruptedly ever since.18 [18 R. G. BHANDARKAR: A Peep into the Early History of India from the Foundation of the Maurya Dynasty to the Fall of the Imperial Gupta Dynasty (B.C. 322 -- circa 500 A.D.), JBBRAS 20, 1900, 356-408 at 404.]

The idea of recasting, which in the minds of most means gradual deterioration (see 1.3.6), often goes hand in hand with the assumption that the texts were subject to continuous inflation and that they became more and more unwieldy in the course of the centuries. This assumption, in turn, has been used as a criterion to establish at least a relative chronology for the puranas. The principle is this: "The more boundless the exaggeration is, the more modern the Purana is; this can be taken as a general rule."19 [19 CHAUDHURI Agniº 1928-29: 133 n. 9. The quotation is nearly identical with WINTERNITZ 1963: 465.] The author who made this statement applied it to the Agniº: the Agniº "boundlessly exaggerates the description of Heaven and Hell;" hence "there can be no doubt that the Purana is modern, absolutely modern."20 [20 Ibid., p. 133.] As an extreme application of this expansion hypothesis I may refer to the decision that the Vamanaº is more recent than the Matsyaº, based on the fact that the period during which Aditi practised asceticism is a thousand years in the latter, whereas the former "expands" this period to a myriad of years.21 [21 HOHENBERGER Vamanaº 1963: 6.]

Even though the expansion hypothesis appears quite often in purana studies, it has occasionally also been reversed, and replaced by the belief that the opposite is rather true. Not only is Agniº 236.24-66 -- on warfare -- a later, abbreviated version of Visnudharmottaraº 2. ch.177 (quoted in Hemadri's Caturvargacintamani) but, more generally, "puranas at the time of Hemadri and earlier, rather than being shorter than today, were in most cases longer.22 [22 J.J. MEYER: Textchronologie aus Schreibfehlern in Indien [Google translate: Text chronology from spelling mistakes in India ], ZII 10, 1935-36, 257-276 at 273.]  

Rather than proclaiming expansion or retraction of the puranas the sole possibility to the exclusion of the other, I agree with the more cautious and open-minded approach, that "when a series from simple to complex is considered providing the chronological framework, a counter argument that with the passage of time, the same complex situation would get simplified also requires to be carefully considered."23 [23 R.N. MEHTA: Puranic Archaeology, JUBar 20-21, 1971-72, 5-15 at 6.]

Faced with the endless speculations on the dates of individual puranas a number of scholars realized that there are serious limitations to our ability to date puranas in their entirety; S. G. Kantawala went as far as to say that "one will have to assign separate dates to sections, chapters or even stanzas of the Puranas."24 [24 The Puranas and Epics as Sources of Religious, Social and Cultural History of India, JUBar 19, 1970, 46-58 at 50, quoting more or less literally WINTERNITZ 1963: 469, on the Mahabharata. Cf. DIMMITT and VAN BUITENEN 1978: 5; BIRWE: JAOS 96, 1976, 396; R. C. MAJUMDAR, in a postscript to MEHENDALE 1970: 298.] Yet, as I said at the beginning of this section, nothing was more natural than that Western scholars wanted to give the puranas generally and each purana in particular a definite place in history; it was equally natural that, once the process had started, Indian scholars joined in. The result is that even those who do realize that dating a particular purana is highly speculative if not impossible, nevertheless propose more or less specific dates, as the following few examples will illustrate.

Hazra studies the smrti chapters in the puranas and assigns dates to them, but from these dates more often than not he also derives dates for individual puranas as a whole.25 [25 Dates proposed by Hazra for individual puranas will be mentioned at the appropriate places in Part II.] Kane not only quotes approvingly a statement on the Mahabharata by Winternitz -- comparable to Kantawala's above --; he also adds that it "applies with equal (or perhaps greater) force to the Puranas."26 [26 KANE 1962: 838.] Yet, in the same chapter he assigns dates to most individual puranas. According to Wendy O'Flaherty,27 [27 O'FLAHERTY 1975: 17-18.] "the dating of the Puranas is ... an art -- it can hardly be called a science -- unto itself;" nevertheless broad dates such as "Bhavisya: 500-1200" or "Brahmavaivarta: 750-1550", alternate with very precise ones: "Agni: 850", "Bhagavata: 950", "Brhaddharma: 1250", etc. More specifically, the Visnudharmottaraº enumerates nine rasas, and is therefore dependent on the santi section of the Natyasastra "not before Anandavardhana;" since the third book of the Visnudharmottaraº is not older than Anandavardhana, the Visnudharmottaraº belongs to the tenth of the first half of the eleventh century.28 [28 SHIMIZU Visnudharmottaraº 1969.] The Agniº is difficult to date for "no particular and pointed date can be applied;" its alamkara section seems to belong to the period between A.D. 750 and 850; "this may be regarded as an approximate date of the Purana."29 [29 CHAUDHURI Agniº 1928-29.] The Devimahatmya is earlier than the seventh century. It must have been inserted in the Markandeyaº before that time. Hence the Markandeyaº is even older than that.30 [30 WINTERNITZ 1907: 472 n. 3.] The dynastic lists of the Vayuº date from the first half of the fourth century; therefore the Vayuº in its present form came into being in the first half of the fourth century.31 [31 V. A. SMITH: The Early History of India, 41924, p. 32 n. 1.] On the basis of seven -- rather six -- verses on landgrants which appear in the Padmaº, Brahmaº, and Bhavisyaº, Pargiter decided that these three puranas existed long before A.D. 500; and, since they are not early puranas, he concluded that "the Puranas cannot be later than the earliest centuries of the Christian era."32 [32 Note on the Age of the Puranas, JRAS 1912,254-255. Against Pargiter, on the basis of astronomical passages which cannot be earlier than A.D. 600, J.F. FLEET (A Note on the Puranas, JRAS 1912, 1046-1053), with an emendation for the Padmaº (The Puranic Order of Planets, JRAS 1913, 384-385), and one for the Visnuº (The Vishnu-purana and the Planets, JRAS 1913, 1066).]

In view of what has been said earlier in this volume, both on the transmission of puranic materials and on the role of the "mini-puranas," I submit that it is not possible to set a specific date for any purana as a whole. Dates proposed by others will be reported in Part Two. It will become clear, at that point, that even for the better established and more coherent puranas -- Bhagavataº Visnuº etc. -- opinions, inevitably, continue to vary widely and endlessly....

2.2.4 The puranas as Historical Documents

"The most systematic record of Indian historical tradition is that preserved in the dynastic lists of the Puranas. Five out of the eighteen works of this class, namely, the Vayu, Matsya, Vishnu, Brahmanda, and Bhagavata contain such lists. The Brahmanda and the Vayu, as well as the Matsya, which has large later additions, appear to be the earliest and most authoritative ... Modern European writers have been inclined to disparage unduly the authority of the Puranic lists, but closer study finds in them much genuine and valuable historical tradition."1 [1 Vincent A. SMITH: The Early History of India, from 600 B.C. to the Muhammadan Conquest, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 4 1924, pp. 11-12.]

Given the paucity of materials with which to reconstruct ancient Indian history, it was inevitable that scholars attempted to make use of the puranic king lists -- vansanucarita,2 [2 TANDON 1952: 8.] one of the pancalaksanas -- exhibited in the puranas.3 [3 E.g., Ernst WALDSCHMIDT (Geschichte des indischen Altertums, in: Geschichte Asiens, Munich: Bruckmann, 1950, p. 19) speaks of "die fur uns wichtige 'Geschichte der Konigsgeschlechter.'" [Google translate: (History of Indian Antiquity, in: History Asia, Munich: Bruckmann, 1950, p. 19) speaks of "the history of the Royal families.'"]

The puranas derive all dynasties from the mythical Manu Vaivasvata. One of his sons was Iksvaku who became the ancestor of the Aiksvaka dynasty of Ayodhya, also known as the Solar Race. Another son, Ila, turned into a woman, Ila, and became the mother of Pururavas, the progenitor of the Aila race of Pratisthana, also known as the Lunar Race. The various dynasties which derive from these two races are described up to the time of the Great Battle between the Pandavas and the Kauravas.4 [4 On the problems connected with the Bharata war, see the proceedings of a seminar held at the University of Calcutta, and edited by D. C. SIRCAR: The Bharata War and Puranic Genealogies (Calcutta University, 1969). The volume contains contributions by Sircar ("there was no 'great war' and it is impossible to determine its date," p. 5); by R. C. MAJUMDAR ("in spite of the defective nature of the Purana accounts, scholars should not reject or ignore them in a hurry," p. 8); and others.] The period after the Bharata battle, corresponding to the evil Kali age, is then related in the form of a prophecy.5 [5 The idea of describing history in the form of a prophecy also appears in Buddhist literature; cf. the Manjusrimulakalpa, ed. T. Ganapati Sastri, TSS 70, 74, 76 (1920-25). See 2.1.5.] It is generally accepted that the recording of dynastic history in the puranas came to an end with the early Guptas.6 [6 PARGITER 1913: xii-xiii. Cf. HAZRA 1962: 252. The view that the puranas do not describe any important king or dynasty of the late Gupta era or the post-Gupta period has been challenged by A. B. L. AWASTHI: History from the Puranas, Lucknow: Kailash Prakashan, 1975.]

As pointed out by Vincent Smith quoted above, opinions on the trustworthiness and usefulness of these lists vary. Initially Westerners7 [7 Cf. Al-Biruni: "Unfortunately the Hindus do not pay much attention to the historical order of things; they are very careless in relating the chronological succession of their kings, and when they are pressed for information and are at a loss, not knowing what to say, they invariably take to tale-tellings" (SACHAU 1888: 2.10-11).] expressed skepticism about the puranas as historical sources; in the words of an anonymous contributor to the Edinburgh Review:

"The Puranas appear to be extravagant romances, which, however amusing as poetical compositions, can furnish no addition to authentic history, whatever portion of it they may be supposed incidentally to contain. When we find gods and heroes mingling in doubtful fight; events natural and supernatural succeeding each other indifferently; a fact probably historical, followed by another evidently allegorical, -- the only rational conclusion is to consider the whole of these poems as works of imagination, and to appreciate their merits by the rules applicable to similar compositions amongst other nations."8 [8 Ed. Rev. 15:29, 1809, 176. The author is Alexander Hamilton, both according to the Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals, and Rosane ROCHER: Alexander Hamilton, New Haven Conn., 1968, pp. 98-99.]

Similar skepticism reveals itself in statements by William Ward;9 [9 "No doubt, there is much real history in the pooranus; and, if it were possible to obtain any sober historical work among the numerous Hindu writings, the real facts might be separated from the many fictions with which the pooranus are filled. Till some such clue, however, can be obtained, I am surprised and sorry, that any person should attempt to illustrate authentic history, and even the divine writings, from these works, which, in their present state, deserve no better name than entertaining romances" (WARD 1811: 2.37-38).] he even generalizes: "As writers of history, the Hindoos deserve the severest censure for mixing their accounts with so much fable."10 [10 WARD 1811: 1.193. Yet, in a later edition (1820: 3.vi-vii) Ward expresses "his earnest wish that some Sungskritu scholar would devote his leisure to a work on [Hindoo history], drawn entirely from Hindoo sources; persuaded as he is, that the pooranus, if thoroughly and judiciously examined, would afford ample materials for a succinct history of India, or supply numerous fragments of the most interesting and important nature."] Vans Kennedy, in whose opinion the puranas are, and always were, purely religious books, of course refused to detect the slightest historical element in them.11 [11 "... neither the Vedas, the Upanishads, nor the Purans, profess to be historical compositions; and the ascribing this character to the latter, in particular, is a most erroneous opinion, for, with the exception of the genealogies of the princes of the solar and lunar races, the Purans contain nothing which has the slightest semblance of history ... It is true that each Puran contains a description of the division of time according to the Hindu system; but the chronology of no event is fixed more precisely than by referring it generally to such a Kalpa, or Manvantara, or Yug, as the particular year is never mentioned. The attempting, therefore, to extract either chronology or history from such data, must be an operation attended with equal success as the extraction of sunbeams from cucumbers by the sages of Laputa" (KENNEDY 1831: 130).]

In the meantime James Tod obtained puranas from the library of the Rana of Udaipur, in view of his Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan (1829). He came to the conclusion that the various accounts were "borrowing from some common original source;"12 [12 2Madras: Higginbotham, 1873, 1.18 (orig. 1829).] even though that source may have been important, he had serious doubts about the present state of the accounts.

"Doubtless the original Poorans contained much valuable historical matter; but, at present, it is difficult to separate a little pure metal from the base alloy of ignorant expounders and interpolators. I have but skimmed the surface: research, to be capable, may yet be rewarded by many isolated facts and important transactions, now hid under the veil of ignorance and allegory."13 [13 Ibid., p. 23.]

Vincent Smith was one of the first, in 1902, to show, in the specific case of the Andhra dynasty, that the list of kings and the duration of their reigns, as preserved in the Matsyaº, are basically correct. Admitting that "the historical passages in Puranas were liable to receive additions," be nevertheless concluded:

"The near approach to accuracy attained by the Matsya Purana (Radcliffe ms.) in the list of the later Andhra kings shows that the compiler had access to good authorities for the history of his dynasty, and raises a presumption in favour of his information about the earlier kings, although it cannot be controlled by the evidence of coins or inscriptions except to a slight extent."14 [14 Vincent A. SMITH: Andhra History and Coinage, ZDMG 56, 1902, 649-675; 57, 1903, 605-627 at 654. Approved by RAPSON 1922: 267.]

The real champion for the puranas as texts worthy of the attention of historians of ancient India was, of course, Frederick Eden Pargiter. He explained -- and defended against criticism -- his opinions in a number of articles; his two books15 [15 See PARGITER 1913 and 1922.] on the subject have become classics in the history of Indian scholarship.

According to Pargiter it is not possible that the memory of important kings of ancient times would have been totally lost; therefore "the presumption is that ancient tradition about kings is prima facie deserving of attention;" It is possible that good things of the past have been magnified, or unpleasant things suppressed; it is also possible that the king lists as we have them contain mistakes and corruptions. However, "false genealogies presuppose and imitate genuine genealogies;" besides, "there appears to have been a sufficiently strong body of traditional knowledge in North India to prevent false particulars from being successfully introduced to any serious extent." Therefore, acknowledging their limitations "is not the same thing as to declare that these traditional genealogies are unworthy of any trust whatever."16 [16 Quotes are from Ancient Indian Genealogies -- are they trustworthy?, R. G. Bhandarkar vol. (1917), 107-113.]

Pargiter's work undoubtedly raised the status of the puranas as historical documents, and even the status of the puranas generally.17 [17 For a good survey of reactions to Pargiter, see U. N. GHOSHAL: Studies in Indian History and Culture, Bombay: Orient Longmans, 1965 ed., pp. 37-48: The Historical Traditions in the Puranas.] Again and again one comes across statements to the effect that the puranas, as sources of history and otherwise, have been neglected and underestimated so far, but all that has changed now, thanks to Pargiter.18 [18 S. BHlMASANKARAO: Historical Importance of the Puranas, QJAHRS 2,1927-28, 81-90, who pleads for a renewed study of the puranas to arrive at a reliable history of Andhra.] In fact, "with the publication of Mr. Pargiter's [Purana Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age] a new development in Pauranic studies may be said to have been started."19 [19 N.K. SIDHANTA: The Heroic Age of India. A Comparative Study, London: Kegan Paul, 1929, p. 31. "Though the imagination of an age devoid of the proper historical sense may have confused fact and fiction, it is nevertheless possible to disentangle the two threads and build up a history of the past on the basis of the Puranas" (ibid.). Cf. Nripendra Kumar DUTT: The Aryanisation of India, Calcutta: Mukhopadhyay, 2 1970, pp. 131-146: Pargiter's Theory.] From now onward "the Puranas represent an authentic historical chronicle."20 [20 V. R. RAMACHANDRA DIKSHITAR: The Puranas: their historical value, PO 2, 1937-38, 77-83 at 77.] They give us "a complete picture" and "a trustworthy and. accurate account" of the various periods in ancient Indian history.21 [21 K.P. JAYASWAL: History of India 150 A.D. to 350 A.D., Lahore: Motilal Banarsi Dass, 1934, pp. 122, 154.] Even in the deteriorated, extant puranas "there are various indications which show definitely that particular care was taken in early times to study and preserve correctly the dynastic lists and accounts, which later came to be recorded more or less systematically in the Puranas."22 [22 HAZRA 1962: 264.] Also, "whatever those ancient authors did or wrote, they did it with sincerety and accuracy;" as a result "the Puranic lists of dynasties of kings and kingdoms furnish details of dates to an extent that even in days of historical records may be surprising."23 [23 KRISHNAMACHARIAR 1937: xliii.] Special mention may be made here again of Vincent A. Smith, who used the puranic king lists repeatedly in his authoritative Early History of India.24 [24 E. g., 4 pp. 31-32 (Magadha 6th cent. B.C.), 41-43 (Nandas), 51 (Saisunagas and Nandas), 230 (Andhras); he regrets that the puranas pay little attention to South India (p. 467).] The most recent follower25 [25 And also his defender against criticism: "The only valuable work on [the purana], by Pargiter, was treated with an unwarranted rudeness, especially by Keith, under the influence of the XIX century principle that because an oral tradition has been handed down, it was probably wrong. If the trend of recent work on our own dark ages, or on the Greek and Roman, has been to rehabilitate tradition, it is quite wrong to refuse that benefit to the Indian: that Indians should have been inaccurate is not impossible, but to say that they told nothing but lies is to make high demands on credulity ... We therefore believe that the a priori case for belief for Pargiter and the Purana has far more rational support than that for scepticism" (JAOS 77, 1957, 116).] of Pargiter is R. Morton Smith. In three articles and one book26 [26 On the Ancient Chronology of India, JAOS 77, 1957, 116-129, 266-280; 78, 1958, 174-192; -- Dates and Dynasties in Earliest India, Translation and Justification of a Critical Text of the Purana Dynasties, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1973.] he not only applied Pargiter's methods, but further expanded them, and applied them to a longer period of history.27 [27 "The advocates of Traditional History cannot claim to be heard with respect till [a critical text of the relevant passages of the purana] has been made; once it has been, it will be seen that the purana makes good historical sense, consistent with the data of archaeology" (1973, p. v).] He established the chronology of all kings, both prehistoric and historic, from about 1800 B.C. until A.D. 249 (the death of king Pulomavi III of Andhra).28 [28 For a description and critique of Smith's book, see P.H.L. EGGERMONT, IIJ 18, 1976, 284-287. Eggermont notes that some inconsistencies in Smith's chronological system result from "the author's confidence in the existence of a single universal chronology of a supposed original Purana, which he shares with Pargiter and his school. In my opinion it is, on the contrary, evident that there must have existed a great many Puranic chronological systems belonging to various periods of India's history, and supplying a great variety of data and dates which have coalesced into the attractive collections we have at our disposal at present."]

This is not to say that the puranas have been universally accepted by historians as documents that could be fully relied on.29 [29 See WINTERNITZ' review of PARGITER 1913, WZKM 28, 1914, 302-307. According to V.S. SUKTHANKAR (On the Home of the So-called Andhra Kings, ABORI 1, 1918-20, 21-42 at 28), "a glance at the formidable list of variae lectiones published with the text of extracts collected by Pargiter ... will convince anyone of the futility of trying to get a reliable and in every way satisfactory text." Cf. N. SUBRAHMANIAN (Historiography: India and the West, Bulletin of the Institute of Traditional Culture, Madras, 1962, Part II, 253-308): The Pauranika, like the historical novelist, allows fiction to dominate facts. So they lack credentials from the point of view of the historian" (p. 259); " ... it is not [the Pauranika's] fault that he confounds the historian; for he never professed to serve the purposes which a modern scientific historian keeps in view; but it is the historian's misfortune that he has to depend on the Pauranika" (p. 260).] Pargiter immediately met with criticism from A.B. Keith.30 [30 For the controversy between Pargiter and Keith, see below. Some Indian scholars, even though they had their own doubts about the puranas, felt it necessary to defend them against Keith. E. g., Hemchandra RAYCHAUDHURI: Political History of Ancient India, Calcutta University, 41938, p. 6; Vidya Dhar MAHAJAN: Ancient India, Delhi: S. Chand, 4 1968, pp. 12-13.] A.L. Basham expressed skepticism about using the puranas for the reconstruction of ancient Indian history: the king lists do provide information on some historical kings, but, in general, they "are corrupt and, as far as we can see, unreliable."31 [31 A. L. BASHAM: The Puranas and Indian History, Prachya Pratibha 1,1973, 18-31 at 25.] It also comes as no surprise to see D. D. Kosambi refer to "the endless insipid drivel of medieval Sanskrit Puranas."32 [32 D. D. KOSAMBI: Ancient India: A History of Its Culture and Civilization, New York-Cleveland: The World Publishing Co., 1969, p. 174. Besides, "brahmin indifference to past and present reality not only erased Indian history but a great deal of real Indian culture as well." Cf. also Kosambi's The Study of Ancient Indian Tradition, in Indica (Bombay: St. Xavier's College, 1953), pp. 196-214 (pp. 199-203: Pargiter's Theory).]

In any case, scholars have used puranas to reconstruct Indian history, more or less cautiously and critically, with greater33 [33 PUSALKAR (1968: 708-709), writing about himself, says that "in the Vedic Age, Pusalker has attempted to give a connected history of ancient India from earliest time to the period of the Buddha."] or lesser34 [34 D. R. BHANDARKAR (Lectures on the Ancient History of India, on the Period from 650 to 325 B.C., Calcutta University, 1919), in the chapter on "Political History," quotes puranas repeatedly, obviously without enthusiasm. For the period of the Buddha, "The only chronicle that is relied on for this period is the Puranas, but it is a hopeless task to reduce the chaos of Puranic accounts to any order. Some attempts no doubt have recently been made to deduce a consistent political history from these materials, but without any success as far as I can see" (p. 58). The attempts referred to are S.V. VENKATESWARA AYYAR: The Ancient History of Magadha, IA 45, 1916, 8-16, 28-31, and K.P. JAYASWAL: Saisunaka and Maurya, JBORS 1, 1915, 67-116 (see there, pp. 67-68, for a number of specific rules on how to use the puranic lists.)] enthusiasm, being aware that "the Puranas are often surprisingly right in their statements; but not seldom they are equally mistaken."35 [35 L. D. BARNETT: Political History of India, CR 3rd ser., vol. 10, Jan.-March 1924, 249 (review of H. C. Raychaudhuri: Political History of Ancient India, 11923). Similarly, WINTERNITZ (1963: 1.464): "The puranas are valuable to the historian and the antiquarian as sources of political history by reason of their genealogies, even though they can only be used with great caution and careful discrimination," with a footnote: "As historical sources they surely do not deserve such confidence as is placed in them by F. E. Pargiter." Cf. also GYANI Agniº 1964: 2-3; P. C. JOSHI et al.: Ancient Indian History, Civilization and Culture, Delhi: S. Chand, 1968, pp. 16-17.] One characteristic feature of recent historical research is the search for extraneous evidence which corroborates the data contained in the puranas, and, as a result, is considered to lift the suspicion which these data might otherwise be regarded with.36 [36 PARGITER himself (1913: xxii) indicates that he corrected puranic names "by reference to other books or to inscriptions." According to A. A. MACDONELL (India's Past, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1927, p. 246) the statements of the puranas "cannot ... be treated as historical without a good deal more corroborative evidence than has yet been forthcoming." Cf. R. C. MAJUMDAR (in Sircar: Bharata War, p. 8): "If any Puranic account gets support from any other source, then that account may be regarded as historical;" Romila THAPAR (A History of India. Volume One, Pelican Books,1966, p. 28): "Had this literary source [i.e., the puranas] been the only one available the basis for discussion of the beginning of Indian history would have been limited."] This extraneous evidence can take multiple forms. One of them, Vedic literature, will be discussed separately. Other means of checking puranic data include epigraphy and archeology, 37 [37 H.C. RAYCHAUDHURl (Notes on Certain Post-Mauryan Dynasties, AIOC 10, 1941, 390-395 at 390) objects that the puranas fail to mention many ruling families known from archaeological evidence, and suspects a number of puranic royal lineages which are not confirmed by inscriptions.] popular sources,37a [37a Ruprecht GEIB (Indradyumna-Legende. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Jagannatha Kultes, [Freiburger Beitrage zur Indologie 7,] Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1975) uses, among other things, popular Oriya sources to check the data of the Vaisnava puranas on the Jagannatha cult and the Indradyumna legend. The popular -- and pre-Vaisnava Saiva -- sources have the advantage that they originated from parties whose interests were diametrically opposed those who produced the Vaisnava sources.] Buddhist and Jaina literatures generally,38 [38 R. C. MAJUMDAR (Sources of Indian History, HCIP I, 1951, ch. II, pp. 47-65 at 49): they are "a valuable supplement and corrective," after the 6th cent. B.C.] and the Sinhalese chronicle Mahavamsa39 [39 According to D. R. BHANDARKAR (Lectures, pp. 67-68), the Mahavamsa is more reliable, though neglected, for the rulers of Magadha than the puranas. W. GEIGER (Mahavamsa tr., PTS 1912, pp. xlii-xliv) did not hesitate to give preference "wholly and unreservedly" to the Sinhalese chronicles over the puranas. Against Geiger, and in defense of the puranas, see Narendra Nath LAW: Presidential Address 19th Indian History Congress 1956, IHQ 32, 1956, suppl. p. 10.] and the Jaina puranas in particular.40 [40 Prahlad C. DIVANJI (Historical Value of Pauranic Works, JGRS I, 1939, 102-105 at 108): by comparing the Vaisnava and the Jaina puranas "the religious colouring given by any of them or both can be eliminated."]

The puranic king lists have become the object of many -- often highly imaginative - calculations in connection with early Indian chronology. E.g., K.P. JAYASWAL: Chronological Totals in Puranic Chronicles and the Kaliyuga Era, JBORS 3, 1917, 246-262. D. R. MANKAD'S chronological system, which is closely related to his ideas on yugas and manvantaras, will be referred to in that context. Some scholars were indeed convinced that the puranic data for the earliest -- "pre-Bharata war" -- period were as reliable as those for later periods. Cf. A. S. ALTEKAR: Can we re-construct pre-Bharata-war History?, JBHU 4, 1941, 183-229; also R.M. SMITH: Dates and Dynasties in Earliest India, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1973, p. 1. According to some "the first great landmark in the Puranic history is the Great Flood" (Jwala Prasad SINGHAL: Some Lights on Ancient World History from the Puranas, IHQ 3, 1927, 24-27). One author divided the earliest Indian history -- 132 reigns from Manu Vaivasvata to Mahapadma Nanda -- into five periods starting in 7350 B.C. (Gulshan RAI: Five Periods of Traditional History in the Vedic Age, IHC 4, 1940, 101-116). Expectations were also raised that the early genealogies might solve the problem of the origin and identification of the Indus Valley civilization (K. P. JAYASWAL: Presidential Address, AIOC 7, 1933, lix-lxxxvii at lxii; approvingly, A.D. PUSALKER: Presidential Address, IHC 13, 1950, 19-29 at 26); these efforts were countered by the argument that archeology "consigns the early part of the traditional account firmly to the realms of mythology" (Romila THAPAR: A History of India. Vol. 1, Pelican Books 1966, p. 29).

Examples of studies using puranic data for the reconstruction of India's earliest history are: A.D. PUSALKER: Genealogy of the Solar Dynasty in the Puranas and the Ramayana. A Critical Study, Pur 4, 1962, 23-33; Ronald M. HUNTINGTON: The Legend of Prthu. A Study in the Process of Individuation, Pur 2, 1960,188-210; Rai KRISHNADASA: Ikshvaku Genealogy in the Puranas, Pur.2, 1960, 128-150; M. RAJA RAO: The Puranic Date of the Mahabharata, JGJRI2, 1944-45, 125-143; D.S. TRIVEDA: The Intervening Age Between Pariksit and Nanda, JIH 19, 1940, 1-16; D.R. MANKAD: Chronological Distance Between Rama and Kr~I)a, JOIB 14, 1964-65, 1-13.

Other scholars, who do believe in the trustworthiness of the puranic genealogies, prefer to rely on data for the historic period only. Cf. R. C. MAJUMDAR: Sources of Indian History, in The Vedic Age, Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1965 ed., pp. 47-65 at 48; also Oxford History of India, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958, p, 61.

For the early historical dynasties, up to the Mauryas: P. L. BHARGAVA: Mauryan and Pre-Mauryan Chronology according to the Puranas, JlH 27,1949, 171-178; id.: Pre-Mauryan History according to the Puranas, IHQ 28, 1952, 232-:-239; H. G. SHASTRI: The Puranic Chronology of the Mauryan Dynasty, JOIB 9, 1959-60,387-392; S.N. Roy: Textual and Historical Analysis of the Purana-Commentary Relating to the Maurya Dynasty, Pur 14, 1972, 94-106.

For the post-Maurya dynasties: S.N. Roy: Historical Analysis of a Puranic Verse Relating to the Sunga Dynasty, pur. 11, 1969, 67-72; K.P. JAYASWAL: The Yaunas of the Puranas and the Last Kushana Emperor in India, JBORS 18, 1933, 201-206; S.A. JOGLEKAR: Satavahana and Satakarni, ABORT 27, 1946, 237-287; P.L. BHARGAVA: The Satavahana Dynasty of Daksinapatha, IHQ 26, 1950, 325-329; Sidhakar CHATTOPADHYAYA: Home of the Satavahanas, JIH 41, 1963, 749-755; id.: The Puranic Account of the Satavahanas, JIH 44, 1966,359-365; id.: A Note on the Satavahanas, ABORI 48-49, 1968, 375-381.

For the Guptas: D. R. PATIL: Gupta Inscriptions and the Puranic Tradition, BDCRI 2, 1940-41, 148-165 + Appendix (59 pp.); B. BHATTACHARYA: New Light on the History of the Imperial Gupta Dynasty, JBRS 30, 1944, 1-46; R. C. MAJUMDAR: A Forged Purana Text on the Imperial Guptas, IHQ 20, 1944, 345-350; D. C. GANGULY: The puranas on the Imperial Guptas, IHQ 21, 1945, 141-143; Dasaratha SHARMA: The puranas on the Imperial Guptas, IHQ 30, 1954, 374-378; S.N. Roy; Some Notes and Observations on the Puranic Account of the Imperial Guptas, Pur 12, 1970, 265-285; D.R. MANKAD: Samudragupta in the Puranas, AIOC 13 (1946) 1951, 2.417-422; A.D. PUSALKER: Vikramaditya in the puranas, BhV 8, 1947, 129-134; S.N. Roy: On the Identification of the Puranic King Pramati, VIJ 7, 1969, 109-118 [Pramati= Candragupta II Vikramaditya].

[admin]

Part 3 of 3

Frederick Eden Pargiter: Cont'd from The Puranas, by Ludo Rocher

One last point in connection with the puranic king lists ought to be mentioned here. Arrian's Indike (9.9), quoting Megasthenes, states that "from Dionysus to Sandracottus the Indians counted a hundred and fifty-three kings, over six thousand and forty-three years."41 [41 Loeb, tr., E. Iliff Robson, p. 333.] Similarly, in Pliny's Natural History (6.59): "From the time of Father Liber to Alexander the Great 153 kings are counted in a period of 6451 years and three months."42 [42 Loeb, tr. H. Rackem, p. 383.] Classical scholars have wondered about these figures, not to mention the intriguing discrepancy.43 [43 E.g., Pierre CHANTRAINE: Arrien. L'Inde, Paris: Belles Lettres, 21952, p. 35. For a different type of speculation, identifying Sandracottus with Candragupta I Gupta -- rather than Maurya -- who would have been enthroned in 325 or 324 B.C., and on the Indian identity of Father Bacchus, the kind of chronology handed Megasthenes; etc., see K.D. SETHNA: Megasthenes and the Indian Chronology as Based on the puranas, Pur 8, 1966, 9-37, 276-294; 9, 1967, 121-129; 10, 1968, 35-53, 124-147.] More important is the fact that, at least from Megasthenes' time onward, Indians had puranic lists of kings, some of which came to the notice of the foreign visitor.44 [44 Cf. L. ROCHER: The Greek and Latin Data about India. Some Fundamental Considerations, Zakir Husain vol. (1968), 34. Also KANE 1962: 849.]

It seems impossible to doubt that Prithu Vainya at the commencement and Chandragupta I of the Imperial Guptas at the termination are what the Indian informants of Megasthenes intended when they spoke of a king-series from Dionysus to Sandrocottus. Through Megasthenes the Puranic chronology of the rise of the Imperial Guptas in c. 325 or 324 B.C. appears to be completely vindicated.

-- Megasthenes and the Indian Chronology As Based on the Puranas, by K.D. Sethna, Purana VIII, Bulletin of the Purana Department, Ministry of Education, Government of India, 1966

4. Vide K.D. Sethna -- "Megasthenes and the Indian Chronology as based on the Puranas" in Purana VIII.1 pp. 9-37 and in the same journal VIII.2. pp. 276-294. Sethna concludes that Candragupta I of the Gupta dynasty was crowned in 325 or 324 BC. He follows up his theory and shows that Xandrames of Greek writers is Candramsa of Naga dynasty (Purana IX.I. pp. 121-139). Also vide, R.D. Karamarkar -- "The First Greek conqueror of India" ABORI [Annals of the Bhandrakar Oriental Research Institute] XXXI-i-iv pp. 238-249.

-- Vayu Purana, from Ancient Indian Tradition & Mythology, translated by A Board of Scholars, edited by Dr. G.P. Bhatt

Ferdinand Bork45 [45 Die Puranas als Geschichtsquelle, WZKM 29, 1915, 97-133 at 125.] drew attention to an important concept for a correct evaluation of the puranas as sources of Indian history: one should, above all, not overlook the goal of the puranas. According to Bork the composers of the puranas were, in no way, motivated by the need to preserve things historical, but solely by the desire to comprehend, from a religious point of view, the great world creation and destruction. In the puranas, as elsewhere in Indian "historical" writings, "ist es ... weniger ein historisches, als vielmehr ein zyklisches Denken, das hier die Grundlage bildet." [Google translate: It is ... less a historical than a cyclical thinking that forms the basis here.] 46 [46 Ulrich SCHNEIDER: Indisches Denken und sein Verhaltnis zur Geschichte [Google translate: Indian Thought and Its Relation to History], Saeculum 9, 1958, 156-162 at 160. Cf. LEVI (1905: 199), on the Nepal Vamsavali, which "n'est qu'un rameau de la litterature des puranas;" [Google translate: is just one branch of purana literature] also Henry R. ZIMMER: The Hindu View of World History according to the puranas, The Review of Religion 6, 1941-42, 249-269. Although not specifically dealing with puranas, see Hermann GOETZ: Die Stellung der indischen Chroniken im Rahmen der indischen Geschichte, Ztschr. f. Buddhismus [Google translate: The position of the Indian Chronicles in the context of Indian history, Ztschr. F. Buddhism] 6, 1924-25, 139-159 at 159. The importance of motives and intentions in "historical" documents has been stressed, in connection with the Javanese chronicles, by C. C. BERG: Javanese Historiography. A Synopsis of its Evolution, in D. G. E. HALL: Historians of South Asia, London: OUP, 1961, pp. 13-23 at 18, and The Javanese Picture of the Past, in SOEJATMOKO: An Introduction to Indonesian Historiography, Cornell UP, 1965, pp. 87-117 at 90.] The puranas are, indeed, one of the principal sources for the Indian system of cyclical time. According to Kirfel47 [47 1959: 9.] many puranas, after removal of later insertions and additions, still clearly show that they begin with the creation myth and end with the destruction of the world. The Indian system of cyclical time has been described so often48 [48 E.g., John MUIR: Original Sanskrit Texts, London: Trubner, 1890, 31, pp. 43-49: Account of the System of Yugas, Manvantaras, and Kalpas, according to the Vishnu Purana, and other authorities; HOPKINS 1896: 418-422; H. JACOBI: Ages of the World (Indian), in ERE 1, 1910, 200-202; P. E. DUMONT: Primitivism in Indian Literature, in A. O. LOVEJOY: A Documentary History of Primitivism and Related Ideas, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1935, pp. 433~443 (= 2 1965); W.N. BROWN: Man in the Universe. Some Continuities in Indian Thought, Berkeley-Los Angeles 1966, pp. 79-80; A. S. GUPTA: The Puranic Theory of Yugas and Kalpas. A Study, Pur 11, 1969, 304-323; Cornelia D. CHURCH: The Puranic Myth of the Four Yugas, Pur 13, 1970-71, 151-159 [p. 152 n. 2: a list of puranic passages]; Adalbert GAIL: Zur Entwicklung des Manvantara Abschnitts im Rahmen der alter en Puranas [Google translate: To develop the Manvantara section as part of the alter en Puranas ], Deutscher Orientalistentag 18 (1972) 1974, ZDMG Suppl. II, 321-330. D.R. MANKAD used the yugas and manvantaras to work out his own system of chronological computations. His publications on this subject include: The Yugas, PO 6, 1941-42, 206-216; Manvantara, IHQ 18,1942, 208-230; Manvantara Caturyuga Method (as employed in Puranas for chronological computations), ABORI23, 1942, 271-290; Chronology of the Kali Dynasties, PO 8; 1943-44, 87-99, 177-187; Some Traditional Chronological Considerations. Puranic, Buddhist, Jain, BhV 10, 1949, 19-34; Puranic Chronology, Anand: Gangajala Prakashan, 1951; Solar Genealogy Reconsidered, JOIB 15, 1965-66, 350-373.] that a few general remarks can suffice here.

The basic idea of the Indian system of cyclical time is that four periods (yugas) succeed one another within a caturyuga or mahayuga. The names of the yugas are identical with those of the throws of dice, from best to worst: krta (or satya), treta, dvapara, and kali. The puranas provide long descriptions of the perfect state of things during the krtayuga and even longer descriptions of the terrible evils of the kaliyuga, in which we now live.49 [49. See KIRFEL 1959.] It is said that, in the krtayuga, dharma -- often represented as a bull -- had four legs: tapas, sauca, daya, and satya. In each subsequent yuga one leg was lost. In these days only satya is left, and even that Kali is trying to destroy.50 [50 E.g., Bhagavataº 1.17.24-25.]

One feature that sets the yugas apart from similar systems in other civilizations is that, in India, the world ages have been assigned specific durations. The four yugas extend over periods of 4000, 3000, 2000, and 1000 years. Each of these is preceded by a dawn (samdhya) and followed by a twilight (samdhyamsa) equal to one tenth of the duration of the yuga proper. The figures for the yugas which appear most often in the puranas are, therefore, 4800, 3600, 2400, and 1200, the caturyuga being equal to 12,000 years. More often than not these years are said to be divine years. To convert them into human years they have to be multiplied by 360, i. e. 1,728,000 + 1,296,000 + 864,000 + 432,000 = 4,320,000.

Although some texts refer to a world destruction at the end of the caturyuga, in a majority of sources one thousand caturyugas follow each other without interruption. They make up one kalpa or day of Brahma, and end in a total destruction introducing a night of Brahma, of equal duration. The night of Brahma comes to an end at the time of a new creation. The entire system of days and night of Brahma is repeated again and again, for the entire duration of Brahma's life: one hundred years. If we add to this that the present Brahma was preceded by and will be followed by numerous other Brahmas, the Indian system of yugas and kalpas is without beginning and without end.

Alongside the yugas and kalpas runs another system which plays a prominent role in the puranas. Each kalpa is divided into fourteen manvantaras "Manu intervals," each of which is presided over by a different Manu. It is obvious, for arithmetical reasons, that manvantaras and yugas cannot originally have been together within the same system. The puranas normally fix the duration of a manvantara at seventy-one yugas, but this leaves six yugas unaccounted for within a kalpa of one thousand. As will be seen in the description of some puranas later in this volume, the present Manu, Vaivasvata, is the seventh in the ongoing Varahakalpa.

The system -- or systems -- of cyclical time play an important role in puranic cosmogonic myths. In fact, "any cosmogonical story is invariably accompanied by an enumeration of the time units ... Time is cyclical, rather it is without a beginning or an end; its structure is one of a series of cycles."51 [51 Madeleine BIARDEAU: Etude de mythologie hindoue. Cosmogonies puraniques, [Google translate: Study of Hindu mythology. Puranic cosmogonies.] BEFEO 54, 1968, 19-45 at 21; 55, 1969, 59-60. See also A.D. PUSALKER: Puranic Cosmogony, BhV 2, 1940-41, 177~191; A.P. KARMARKAR: Puranic Cosmogony (Its Proto- Indian Origin and Development), Radha Kumud Mookerji vol. (1945), 1.323-332; Catarina CONIO: Mito e filosofia nella tradizione indiana. Le cosmogonie nei Mahapurana, [Google translate: Myth and philosophy in the Indian tradition. The cosmogonies in the Mahapuranas.] Milan: Mursia, 1975 [rev. Bonazzoli, Pur 18, 1976, 103 -107]; id.: Relationship Between Symbols and Myths in the Cosmogonies of Mahapurana, Pur 19, 1977, 257-282.] One important aspect of puranic cosmogonic myths is the role played in them by Samkhya concepts, to such an extent that one has been able to speak of a "puranic Samkhya."52 [52 Wilhelm JAHN: Uber die kosmogonischen Grundanschauungen im Manava-Dharma-Sastram, [Google translate: About the cosmogonic basic views in the Manava-Dharma-Sastram.] Leipzig: Drugulin, 1904. [Provides a useful survey of earlier scholarship on "puranic Samkhya," pp. 3-11, and compares Manu 1.5-20, 27 with twenty puranas.] Hacker53 [53 The Sankhyization of the Emanation Doctrine shown in a Critical Analysis of Texts, WZKSO 5, 1961,75--112, reprinted: Pur 4, 1962,298-338. Cf. also his Two Accounts of Cosmogony, Nobel vol. (1963), 77-91.] proposes some very specific dates for the "samkhyization" of puranic cosmogony. The earliest text is in the Markandeyaº, around A.D. 300. It was followed by the Vayuº-Brahmanaº (shortly after A.D. 335), the Padmaº, the Visnuº (ca. A.D. 500), and the Kurmaº (7th or 8th century). About the account in the Lingaº one can only say that it is later than that of the Vayuº-Brahmandaº.

In connection with the puranas as sources of Indian history, and Pargiter's role in establishing them as such, a few words must be said about a basic concept which became even more controversial than the results derived from it. From an early article onward54 [54 Ancient Indian Genealogies and Chronology, JRAS 1910, 1-56.] Pargiter assigned the puranas to the class of "ancient ksatriya literature."55 [55 The idea that ksatriyas had achievements of their own in Indian literature and civilization was not new. In an article first published in Nord und Sud (1893) and reproduced, with additions in response to criticism, in Beitrage zur indischen Kulturgeschichte, Berlin 1903 (pp. 1-36: Die Weisheit des Brahmanen oder des Kriegers?), Richard GARBE stated: "So viel steht doch fest, dass die grossten geistigen Taten oder vielmehr fast alle Taten von menschlicher Bedeutung in Indien von Mannern der Kriegerkaste vollbracht worden sind" [Google translate: So much is certain that the greatest spiritual deeds, or rather almost all deeds of of human importance in India, were by men of the warrior caste.] (p. 30). He listed the following as being of ksatriya origin: the atman-brahman theory, Buddhism, Jainism, and Bhagavatism. For bibliography on the controversy, see HORSCH 1966: 427.] This literature, originating from court bards and court priests, "grew up in virtual independence of brahmanical literature," which was the concern of the rsis; only at a much later stage "was it taken over by the brahmans as a not unworthy branch of knowledge. It was then that it was arranged and augmented with stories and discourses fashioned after brahmanical ideas."56 [56 Ancient Indian Genealogies and Chronology, p. 4.] Not only does this ksatriya literature provide better historical data about ancient India than the brahmanical literature; it is the only historical literature worth considering. "The reproach that there was no historical faculty in ancient India is true only as regards the brahmans. The ksatriyas did display almost as much of that faculty as could be expected in such ages in the appreciation bestowed on the dynastical genealogies and ballads of royal exploits."57 [57 Ibid., p. 5.]

The existence of a ksatriya literature -- the puranas -- independent of and different from the brahmanical literature -- the Vedas -- has found acceptance with several scholars.58 [58 E.g., RAPSON 1922: 265; S. BHlMASANKAMRAO: Historical Importance of the Puranas, QJAHRS 2, 1927-28, 81-90 at 82-83; N.K. SIDHANTA: The Heroic Age of India, p. 30; WINTERNITZ 1963: 457 (with restrictions; Winternitz, WZKM 28, 1914, 306, also does not agree with Pargiter that the puranas originally contained lists of kings only). WALDSCHMIDT (Geschichte des indischen Altertums, p. 18) casually speaks of "eine weltlich- hofische Oberlieferung, die in den Kreisen des Kriegeradels zuhause ist." [Google translate: a worldly Court tradition that is at home in the circles of the warrior nobility.]] But it has been opposed far more often than it has been agreed to. It immediately got Pargiter involved in a prolonged controversy with A.B. Keith, leading to a series of articles in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.59 [59 In addition to Pargiter's 1910 article, mentioned earlier, there. are the following: PARGITER: Visvamitra and Vasistha, 1913, 885-904; KEITH: The Brahmanic and Kshatriya Tradition, 1914, 118-126; PARGITER: Earliest Indian Traditional 'History,' 1914, 267-296; PARGITER: Brahmanic and Kshatriya Tradition, 1914, 411-412; KEITH: The Earliest Indian Traditional History, 1914, 734-741; PARGITER: Earliest IndianTraditional 'History,' 1914, 741-745; KEITH: The Age of the Puranas, 1914, 1021-1031; PARGITER: Irregularities in the Puranic Account of the Dynasties of the Kali Age, 1915, 141-147; KEITH: The Dynasties of the Kali Age, 1915, 328-335; PARGITER: Irregularities in the Puranic Account of the Dynasties of the Kali Age, 1915, 516-521; KEITH: The Dynasties of the Kali Age, 1915, 799-800; PARGITER: Visvamitra, Vasistha, Hariscandra, and Sunahsepa, 1917, 37-67.] Also, many of those who agreed with Pargiter, against Keith, on the subject of the historical value of the puranas, sided with Keith, against Pargiter, on the concept of a separate ksatriya literature.60 [60 V. R. RAMACHANDRA DIKSHITAR: The Puranas, Their Historical Value, PO 2, 1937-38, 77-83 at 78-79; according to the same author (1951-55: 1.xii), "the Puranas are the fifth Veda, and those who follow it are followers of the Vedic school." Also PUSALKER: Were the Puranas Originally in Prakrit?, Acharya Dhruva vol. 3 (1946), 101-104; HAZRA 1962: 242-244.] According to them, "there have never been in India two such water-tight compartments as the Brahmana and the Ksatriya tradition ... Both are Brahmanical traditions, though produced under different environments and with different aims and objectives."61 [61 PUSALKER: Historical Traditions, HCIP I, 1951, pp. 269-333 at 309; also The Brahmana Tradition and the Ksatriya Tradition, Hiriyanna vol. (1952), 151-155 at 153. Cf. U. N. GHOSHAL: The Beginnings of Indian Historiography and Other Essays, Calcutta: Ramesh Gopal, 1944, p; 51 n. 13.] It is also not true, they argue, that historical sense was a monopoly of the ksatriyas,62 [62 PUSALKER: HCIP I, p. 310. Cf. KEITH: JRAS 1914, 118-126.] and, consequently, that the puranas are the sole trustworthy sources for Indian history. In fact, the Vedic data have definite advantages over those of the puranas. Besides having been transmitted far more faithfully, they are older and, therefore, much closer in time to many of the events of which the puranas had only "faint and inaccurate memories."63 [63 PUSALKER: HCIP I, p. 312 ("The details of the Dasarajna as given in the Rgveda no doubt are a first-hand contemporary account"). Cf. RAYCHAUDHURI: Political History, 4 1938, p. 7.] The puranas represent "centuries of manipulation, of corruption, of reconstruction, and to evolve a ksatriya tradition from this mass of priestly lore and to claim for it superiority to the incidental notices of the Vedic text is surely a tour de force."64 [64 KEITH: JRAS 1914: 741. Cf. K.M. MUNSHI: The Early Aryans in Gujarata, Bombay University, 1941, pp. 6-7, 16-17.] The ideal solution consists in harmonizing the data from the Vedas and the puranas.65 [65 G. S. GHURYE: Some Problems of Indian Ethnic History, AIOC 9 (1937) 1940, 911-954 at 954.] Whereas some doubted whether that is at all possible,66 [66 RAPSON 1922: 273.] P.L. Bhargava's India in the Vedic Age tried to show that "in reality the Vedic and Puranic traditions are in agreement and ... the joints which connect the historical matter of the Puranas with mythology are too loose to hinder the attempt of gleaning history from these works."67 [67 2 1971, p. 5. Cf. PUSALKAR COB 12, 1964, 45): "The proper procedure for the writing of traditional history is to base the account on the joint testimony of the Vedic texts and the Puranas wherever available, to bring harmony into the conflicting texts as far as possible, and to give a very careful consideration to the evidence of the Puranas before rejecting it." See also PUSALKAR 1955: lxiv-lxv, lxvi-Ixvii. V.G. RAHURKAR'S article Devapi and Santanu in the Rgveda, Gode vol. (1960), 3.175-180, is an effort "to show how the Vedic, the Sautic and the Puranic sources can be correlated." Cf. id.: The Role of Agastya in the Vedic and Post-Vedic Literature, PO 22, 1-2, 1957, 40-50, and GONDA'S (1975: 28) criticism.]

Another problem connected with the puranas, even if it has little to do with history, is so closely linked to Pargiter's name -- and to the discussions surrounding the brahman/ksatriya literatures -- 68 [68 Several articles listed in note 59 above also deal with this problem.] that it better be treated here. The question whether the epics were originally written in Prakrit was not a new one;69 [69 H. JACOBI'S chapter on "Die epische Sprache" [Google translate: The epic language.] (Das Ramayana, Bonn: Friedrich Cohen, 1893, pp. 112-119) was discussed in reviews by A. BARTH (Revue de l'histoire des religions 27, 1893, 287-290 = (Euvres 2, 1914, 151-154) and G. A. GRIERSON (Indian Epic Poetry, IA 23, 1894, 52-56); they both were favorably inclined toward a Prakrit original. Barth even made the general statement: "tout ce qui a ete populaire dans l'Inde, en dehors, bien entendu, de la litterature sacree et scolastique des brahmanes, a commence par le pracrit et a fini par Ie sanscrit." [Google translate: all that has been popular in India, outside, of course, the sacred and scholastic literature of the Brahmans, began by pracrit and ended up in Sanskrit.] Their thesis was rejected by JACOBI (War das Epos und die profane Literatur Indiens ursprunglichin Prakrt abgefasst?, [Google translate: Was that Epic and the profane literature of India originally written in Prakrt?] ZDMG 48, 1894,407-417), with the caveat: "es moge dahingestellt bleiben, wieweit davon auch die Puranen beruhrt werden." [Google translate: it remains to be seen to what extent they too Puranas are touched.] WINTERNITZ (1963: 1.449) rejects the idea that the epics were first composed in popular dialects, and only later translated into Sanskrit.] Pargiter also made the question bear on the puranas, and defended in great detail their Prakrit originals.70 [70 PARGITER 1913: xvii-xviii, 77-83; 1922: 5-14.]

Pargiter's thesis has found some following. Some fully agree with it.71 [71 V. VENKATACHALLA IYER: The Puranas, QJMS 13, 1922-23, 702-713; N.K. SIDHANTA: The Heroic Age, p. 31; V. V. MIRASHI: The Puranas on the Successors of the Satavahanas in Vidarbha, Pur 18, 1976, 88-92 at 92.] Others restrict its applicability to a limited number of puranas only,72 [72 S. BHIMASANKARARAO (Historical Importance of the Puranas, QJAHRS 2, 1927-28, 84): "There are clear indications that some of the puranas, Matsya, Vayu, and the Brahmanda were originally composed in Prakrit but were subsequently sanskritised. The Vishnu, Bhagavata and Garuda were composed directly in Sanskrit."] or they refuse to accept Pargiter's idea that the Prakrit puranas were originally written in Kharosthi script.73 [73 WINTERNITZ (WZKM 28, 1914, 305, review of PARGITER 1913): " ... vertritt Pargiter mit guten Grunden die Hypothese, dass diese ein Prakrit war. Weniger gut begrundet scheint mir seine zweite Hypothese, wonach die Schrift, in der dieser Bericht ursprunglich geschrieben war, Kharosthi gewesen sei." [Google translate: "... represents Pargiter hypothesized that this was a prakrit with good reason. Less well founded seems to me his second hypothesis, according to which the writing in which this report was originally was written that was Kharosthi."]] On this point again Pargiter's main critic was Keith. He reasoned that, "if a man could write good Sanskrit, it is absurd to suppose that he would be so helpless as to write bad Sanskrit or bad metre merely because he had a Prakrit original text to render." According to Keith,

"What we have in fact to recognize is that epic Sanskrit, and still more Puranic Sanskrit, are not good Sanskrit in the grammatical sense; that Sanskrit is essentially more popular and more tinged with vernacular than the Brahmanical Sanskrit proper, but to accept the obvious fact that the vernacular influence existed is one thing, to believe that the epic or dynastic account is a translation is quite another."74 [74 KEITH: JRAS 1915, 332, 333. Cf. Sten KONOW'S review of PARGITER 1913, IA 13, 1914, 195-196.]

Among those who reject Prakrit as the original language of the puranas, some suggest that the so-called prakritisms in the texts have been introduced there at a later stage only, under the influence of popular speech,75 [75 PUSALKAR: Dhruva vol. (1946), 3.101-104.] or they assume that there existed some parallel genealogies in Prakrit, elements of which became incorporated in the Sanskrit accounts.76 [76 A. S. GUPTA: Puraanesv apaniniyaprayogah, Pur 4, 1962, 277-299, rejected by HAZRA 1963: 187 n. 362a.] Hazra, on the other hand, comes closer to Keith, except that he posits the existence of a "synthetic Sanskrit," influenced by Prakrit and Apabhramsa, as a medium of expression in religious and social matters in quite early days. Both the epics and the puranas, "aiming at religious synthesis as well as mass enlightenment," absorbed many of the characteristics of this language. Many of these have been expurgated by copyists and editors, but a number of them have been preserved.77 [77 HAZRA 1963: 186-187. These remarks were made in connection with the language of the Deviº. Hazra also maintained that it was as a reaction against the spread of "synthetic Sanskrit" that Panini and others wrote their grammatical treatises.] Suniti Kumar Chatterji speaks of a "Vernacular Sanskrit," a form of Prakrit "within the same linguistic orbit" as the language of the two epics and of Buddhist Sanskrit.78 [78 Foreword to SATYA VRAT: The Ramayana, A Linguistic Study, Delhi: Munshi Ram Manohar Lal, 1964, pp. xv-xvi. Elsewhere CHATTERJI (Purana Legends and the Prakrit Tradition in New Indo-Aryan, BSOAS 8, 1935-37, 457-466) pleads for a comparative study of the sanskritized place names in the puranas and their surviving forms in the vernaculars. This might teach us much about the earlier existence of puranic legends, their regional origin, etc. On the language of the puranas, see also V.S. AGRAWALA: Important Words from the Puranas, Pur 2, 1960, 307-312; -- Adam HOHENBERGER: Metren der Kunstdichtung in den Puranen, [Google translate: Meters of the Art poetry in the Puranas.] WZKSOA 9, 1965, 48-97; tr., Metres of Classical Poetry in the Puranas, Pur 11, 1969, 20-66; -- R.A. PATHAK: Some Linguistic Peculiarities in the Puranas, Pur 11, 1969, 119-126; -- Vinapani PATNI: The Elements of Poetry in the puranas, Pur 15, 1973, 178-200.]

An interesting, but less often mentioned, offshoot of Pargiter's belief in the puranas as true historical records, is his theory about the aryanization of India. According to Pargiter the original home of the Aryans -- i. e., the puranic Ailas or Lunar Race -- was the mid-Himalayan region. They entered India, from the North, about 2050, settled in Madhyadesa and conquered most of North India, and, from about 1600 B.C., started to spread outside India toward the northwest. This move "may have led to the Genesis of the Iranians," and accounts for the appearance of Aryan gods in the treaty between the Hittites and the Mitanni (ca. 1400 B.C.).79 [79 PARGITER 1922: ch. 25, pp. 287-302.] Even one century after comparative philology had established that the Aryan Indians populated the subcontinent from the northwest, Pargiter's theory gained considerable success. India as the homeland of the Aryans was a theme that appealed to many Indian scholars.80 [80 Narayana TRIPATHI; Puranic Traditions (about earlier homes and migrations. of the Indian Aryas), IHQ 9, 1933,461-469, 880-885; 10, 1934, 121-124; -- Raj Bali PANDEY: The Puranas on the Original Home of the Indo-Aryans, IHC 10 (1947), 128-137 = The Puranic Data on the Original Home of the Indo-Aryans, IHO 24, 1948, 94-103; -- PUSALKER: Aryan Origins According to the Puranas, Siddheswar Varma vol. (1950), 2.269-272; Literary and Archaeological Evidence on the Aryan Expansion in India, Pur 6, 1964, 307-332; Pre-Harappan, Harappan and Post-Harappan Culture and the Aryan Problem, Quart. Rev. Of Historical Studies 7, 1967-68, 233-244; Rgveda and Harappa Culture, Renou vol. (1968), 581-594; Jaya Chamaraja WADYAR: Puranas as the Vehicle of India's Philosophy and History, Pur 5, 1963, 6-10.] Those who reacted against it based their arguments on Vedic data,81 [81 Gordon CHILDE (The Aryans. A Study of Indo-European Origins, London: Kegan Paul, 1926, p. 32): the Veda "carries conviction precisely because the historical and geographical references in the hymns are introduced only incidentally and in a thoroughly ingenious manner."] or on ethnological82 [82 J. KENNEDY: The Puranic Histories of the Early Aryans, JRAS 1915, 507-516 at 509-510.] or archeological83 [83 H. D. SANKALIA: Traditional Indian Chronology and C-14 Dates of Excavated Sites, JIH 42, 1964, 635-650 at 650. Sankalia (Puranas and Prehistory in Bihar, JIH 48, 1970, 461-468) believes that the various dynasties mentioned in the puranas and later Vedic hymns might refer to peoples who have been shown by archeology to have lived in Bihar, U.P., and W. Bengal, from the time of the stone age.] evidence.

Closely related to the puranas as historical and cosmogonic documents is their role as source materials for early ideas on cosmography and geography. A few words on this subject may be added here as an addendum.

The puranas generally conceive the universe84 [84 On Indian cosmography generally, see Willibald KIRFEL: Die Kosmographie der Inder, nach den Quellen dargestellt, [Google translate: The cosmography of India, according to the sources.] Bonn-Leipzig: Schroeder, 1920 [reprint Hildesheim: Olms, 1967]. Also, by the same: Das Purana vom Weltgebaude (Bhuvanavinyasa). Die kosmographischen Traktate der Puranas. Versuch einer Textgeschichte, [Bonner Orientalistische Studien, N.B. I,] Bonn: Selbstverlag des Orientalistischen Seminars. [Google translate: The Purana of the World Building (Bhuvanavinyasa). The cosmographic treatises of the Puranas. An attempt at a text history, Studies, N.B. I, Bonn: Self-published by the Orientalist seminar. ] 1954.] as having the shape of an egg (anda), with a horizontal diameter of 500,000,000 yojanas. Vertically the cosmos is subdivided by a number of parallel planes. Below the earth (bhurloka) are the seven patalas (under worlds) and -- also usually seven -- narakas (hells), the residence of the demons and the place of punishment for the wicked, respectively. Upward from the earth are six tokas: bhuvar-, svar-, mahar-, janar-, tapo-, and satya- or brahma-. The earth85 [85 V. VENKATACHELLAM IYER: The Seven Dwipas of the Puranas, QJMS 15, 1924-25, 62-75, 119-127, 238-245; 16, 1925-26, 116-124, 268-283; 17, 1926-27, 30-45, 94-105; Ramji PANDEY: The Concept of Earth in the Puranas, Pur 12, 1970, 252-264.] itself is represented as consisting, first, of a central circular mass of land, Jambudvlpa, with a diameter of 100,000 yojanas. Jambudvlpa is surrounded by a concentric ring of water, Lavanoda. This is again surrounded by a ring of land (dvipa) and a ring of water, and so on, up to a total of seven continents86 [86 A number of texts represent the earth in the form of a lotus, with mount Meru in the center as the pericarp of the lotus and just four continents around it as its petals. Cf. K. NILAKANTA SASTRI: Caturmahadvipas, JIH 20, 1941, 61-64; Rai KRISHNADASA: Puranic Geography. Chatur-dvipa and Sapta-dvlpa, Pur 1, 1959-60, 202-205; D. C. SIRCAR: Catur-Dvipa and Sapta-Dvipa Vasumati, JIH 46, 1968, 19-26.] and seven oceans, the width of each succeeding pair being double that of the preceding one. The whole is finally surrounded by yet another continent, Suvarnabhumi, said to be the playground of the gods, and a mountain range, Lokaloka, which separates the world from the non-world.

Jambudvipa is divided into seven parts (varsa) by six parallel mountain ranges running from west to east. From north to south the mountains are called Srngavat (or Srngin), Sveta, Nila, Nisadha, Hemakuta, and Himavat (or Himalaya). The names of the seven varsas are: (Uttara)kuru, Hiranmaya, Ramyaka, Ilavfra, Harivarsa, Kimpurusa, and Bharata. Only the central varsa, Ilavrta, with mount Meru in its center, is again subdivided, by two north-south mountain ranges (Gandhamadana and Malyavat), into three sections: besides Ilavrta in the center, Ketumala in the west and Bhadrasva in the east.

Bharatavarsa,87 [87 W. KIRFEL: Bharatavarsa (Indien). Textgeschichtliche Darstellung zweier geographischen Purana-Texte nebst Ubersetzung, [Beitrage zur indischen Sprachwissenschaft und Religionsgeschichte 6,] Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1931. Bharatavarsa is, again, most often subdivided into nine sections, called khanda, bheda, but also dvipa. Cf. Sashibhushan CHAUDHURI: The Nine Dvipas of Bharatavarsa, IA 59, 1930, 204, 224-226. There is a tendency among certain scholars to identify these dvipas of Bharatavarsa, not with parts of India but of Greater India. E. g. , Surendranath MAJUMDAR: Notes on Puranic Nine Divisions of Ancient India, JBORS 8, 1922, 41-45 [reprinted in his edition of Cunningham's Ancient Geography of India, Calcutta: Chuckervertty, Chatterjee & Co., 1924, pp. 749-754]. Cf. also Ordhendra Coomar GANGOLY: Discovery of Indian Images in Borneo, Rupam 7, 1926, 114; id.: On Some Hindu Relics in Borneo, Journal of the Greater India Society 3, 1936, 97-103; Buddha PRAKASH: The South East Asian Horizons of the Geographers of the Puranas, BhV 20-21, 1960-61, 242-273; Om PRAKASH: An Inquiry after South-Eastern Asia in the puranas, JBRS 52, 1966, 96-107 = Pur 7, 1965, 306-319. -- Sometimes Bharatavarsa is represented as a tortoise -- rather the back of a tortoise -- resting on water: Markandeyaº ch. 57 is called karmavibhaga (even as Varahamihira's Brhatsamhita, ch. 14). Cf. C.A. LEWIS: The Shorter Kurma-vibhaga Texts of the Puranas, Pur 9, 1967, 84-97. ] i.e. India, is different from all other sections of the bhurloka, in that it, and it alone, is karmabhumi.88 [88 E. g., Visnuº 2.3.2: karmabhumir iyam svargam apavargam ca gacchatam.] It is also different for another reason: mountains and rivers which the texts locate in other varsas and even dvipas are imaginary, whereas the numerous peoples, rivers, mountains, and cities of Bharatavarsa, even if they cannot always be identified, may be assumed to reflect some degree of positive information or recollection. As early as 1885 Burgess89 [89 J. BURGESS: On the Identification of Places in the Sanskrit Geography of India, IA 14, 1885, 319-322 at 319.] called on scholars to pay attention to the geographic lists of the puranas. Ever since the puranas have been -- and still are -- one of the most important sources for our knowledge of the pre-modern geography of India.90 [90 Most studies on Indian geography make use of the puranas. The following are a few examples directly related to puranic data: D. C. SIRCAR: Text of the Puranic List of Peoples, IHQ 21, 1945, 297-314; id.: Text of the Puranic List of Rivers, IHQ 27, 1951, 215-238 [both articles are included in Studies in the Geography of Ancient and Medieval India, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1960,21971]; Shashi Bhusan CHAUDHURI: Ethnic Settlements in Ancient India (A Study of the Puranic Lists of the Peoples of Bharatavarsa). Part I Northern India, Calcutta: General Printers & Publishers, 1955; C.A. LEWIS: The Geographical Text of the puranas. A Further Critical Study, Pur 4, 1962, 112-145, 245-276 [compares and improves on the texts established by Kirfel and Sircar]; V. S. AGRAWALA: Bhuvanakosa Janapadas of Bharatavarsa, Pur 5, 1963, 160-181 [comments on Lewis' readings and identifications); D. C. SIRCAR: Cosmography and Geography in Early Indian Literature, ISPP 7, 1965-66, 231-234 (+ 7 plates), appendices 353-407; M. R. SINGH: The Relative Chronology of the Janapada Lists of the Puranas, Pur 9, 1967, 262-276; id.: Geographical Data in the Early puranas, Calcutta: Punthi Pustak, 1972.].

Frederick Eden Pargiter
Born: 1852
Died: 18 February 1927 (age 75), Oxford, United Kingdom
Occupation: civil servant, judge, antiquarian

Frederick Eden Pargiter (1852 - 18 February 1927) was a British civil servant and Orientalist.

Born in 1852, Pargiter was the second son of Rev. Robert Pargiter. He studied at Taunton Grammar School and Exeter College, Oxford where he passed in 1873 with a first-class in mathematics. Pargiter passed the Indian Civil Service examinations and embarked for India in 1875.

Pargiter served in India from 1875 to 1906 becoming Under-Secretary to the Government of Bengal in 1885, District and Sessions Court judge in 1887 and a judge of the Calcutta High Court in 1904. Pargiter voluntarily retired in 1906 following the death of his wife and returned to the United Kingdom.

Pargiter died at Oxford on 18 February 1927 in his seventy-fifth year.

In his Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, taking the accession of Chandragupta Maurya in 321 BC as his reference point, Pargiter dated the Battle of Kurukshetra to 950 BC assigning an average of 14.48 years for each king mentioned in the Puranic lists.[1]

Works

• Pargiter, F. E. (1904). The Markandeya-Puranam Sanskrit Text English Translation with Notes and Index of Verses. The Asiatic Society (57, Park Street).
• Pargiter, F. E. (1920). A Revenue History of the Sundarbans from 1870 to 1920. Calcutta: Bengal Board of Revenue.
• Pargiter, F. E. (1922). Ancient Indian Historical Tradition. London: Oxford University Press.

Notes

1. "F. E. Pargiter".

References

• F. W. T (April 1927). "Mr. F. E. Pargiter". Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (2): 409–411. JSTOR 25221169.
• "F. E. Pargiter". British Museum.

[admin]

Part 1 of 2

Chanakya
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/9/21


Chanakya
Chanakya, artistic depiction
Born 375 BCE, Chanaka village in Golla region (Jain legends);[1]
or in Takshashila (Buddhist legends)[2]
Died 283 BCE, Pataliputra, Maurya Empire
Occupation Teacher, Philosopher, Economist, Jurist, advisor of Chandragupta Maurya
Known for Prominent role in the foundation of the Maurya Empire & Arthashastra, Chanakyaniti

Chanakya (IAST: Cāṇakya, About this soundpronunciation (help·info)) was an ancient Indian teacher, philosopher, economist, jurist and royal advisor. He is traditionally identified as Kauṭilya or Vishnugupta, who authored the ancient Indian political treatise, the Arthashastra,[3] a text dated to roughly between the 4th century BCE and the 3rd century CE.[4] As such, he is considered the pioneer of the field of political science and economics in India, and his work is thought of as an important precursor to classical economics.[5][6][7][8] His works were lost near the end of the Gupta Empire in the 6th century CE and not rediscovered until the early 20th century.[6]

Chanakya assisted the first Mauryan emperor Chandragupta in his rise to power. He is widely credited for having played an important role in the establishment of the Maurya Empire. Chanakya served as the chief advisor to both emperors Chandragupta and his son Bindusara.

Background

Sources of information

There is little documented historical information about Chanakya: most of what is known about him comes from semi-legendary accounts. Thomas Trautmann identifies four distinct accounts of the ancient Chanakya-Chandragupta katha (legend):[9]

Version of the legend / Example texts

Buddhist version / Mahavamsa and its commentary Vamsatthappakasini (Pali language)
Jain version / Parishishtaparvan by Hemachandra
Kashmiri version / Kathasaritsagara by Somadeva, Brihat-Katha-Manjari by Ksemendra
Vishakhadatta's version / Mudrarakshasa, a Sanskrit play by Vishakhadatta

The Mahavamsa first came to the attention of Western readers around 1809 CE, when Sir Alexander Johnston, Chief Justice of the British colony in Ceylon, sent manuscripts of it and other Sri Lankan chronicles to Europe for publication. Eugène Burnouf produced a Romanized transliteration and translation into Latin in 1826... Working from Johnston's manuscripts, Edward Upham published an English translation in 1833, but it was marked by a number of errors in translation and interpretation, among them suggesting that the Buddha was born in Sri Lanka and built a monastery atop Adam's Peak. The first printed edition and widely read English translation was published in 1837 by George Turnour, an historian and officer of the Ceylon Civil Service…

Historiographical sources are rare in much of South Asia…

The Mahavamsa has, especially in modern Sri Lanka, acquired a significance as a document with a political message. The Sinhalese majority often use Manavamsa as a proof of their claim that Sri Lanka is a Buddhist nation from historical time…

Early Western scholars like Otto Franke dismissed the possibility that the Mahavamsa contained reliable historical content…

Wilhelm Geiger was one of the first Western scholars to suggest that it was possible to separate useful historical information from the mythic and poetic elaborations of the chronicle…. Geiger hypothesized that the Mahavamsa had been based on earlier Sinhala sources that originated on the island of Ceylon. While Geiger did not believe that the details provided with every story and name were reliable, he broke from earlier scholars in believing that the Mahavamsa faithfully reflected an earlier tradition that had preserved the names and deeds of various royal and religious leaders, rather than being a pure work of heroic literary fiction. He regarded the early chapters of the Culavamsa as the most accurate, with the early chapters of the Mahavamsa being too remote historically and the later sections of the Culavamsa marked by excessive elaboration.

Geiger's Sinhala student G. C. Mendis was more openly skeptical about certain portions of the text, specifically citing the story of the Sinhala ancestor Vijaya as being too remote historically from its source and too similar to an epic poem or other literary creation to be seriously regarded as history. The date of Vijaya's arrival is thought to have been artificially fixed to coincide with the date for the death of Gautama Buddha around 543 BCE. The Chinese pilgrims Fa Hsien and Hsuan Tsang both recorded myths of the origins of the Sinhala people in their travels that varied significantly from the versions recorded in the Mahavamsa…

The story of the Buddha's three visits to Sri Lanka are not recorded in any source outside of the Mahavamsa tradition. Moreover, the genealogy of the Buddha recorded in the Mahavamsa describes him as being the product of four cross cousin marriages. Cross-cousin marriage is associated historically with the Dravidian people of southern India -- both Sri Lankan Tamils and Sinhala practiced cross-cousin marriage historically -- but exogamous marriage was the norm in the regions of northern India associated with the life of the Buddha. No mention of cross-cousin marriage is found in earlier Buddhist sources…

The historical accuracy of Mahinda converting the Sri Lankan king to Buddhism is also debated. Hermann Oldenberg, a German scholar of Indology who has published studies on the Buddha and translated many Pali texts, considers this story a "pure invention". V. A. Smith (Author of Ashoka and Early history of India) also refers to this story as "a tissue of absurdities". V. A. Smith and Professor Hermann came to this conclusion due to Ashoka not mentioning the handing over of his son, Mahinda, to the temple to become a Buddhist missionary and Mahinda's role in converting the Sri Lankan king to Buddhism, in his 13th year Rock Edicts, particularly Rock-Edict XIII. Sources outside of Sri Lanka and the Mahavamsa tradition do not mention Mahinda as Ashoka's son….

The Mahavamsa is believed to have originated from an earlier chronicle known as the Dipavamsa... The Dipavamsa is much simpler and contains less information than the Mahavamsa and probably served as the nucleus of an oral tradition that was eventually incorporated into the written Mahavamsa. The Dipavamsa is believed to have been the first Pali text composed entirely in Ceylon.

-- Mahavamsa, by Wikipedia

His [Hemachandra's] date of birth differs according to sources but 1088 is generally accepted...

Probably around 1125, he was introduced to the Jayasimha Siddharaja (fl. 1092–1141) and soon rose to prominence in the Chaulukya royal court. According to the Prabhavakacarita of Prabhācandra, the earliest biography of Hemachandra,...

Prabhācandra (c. 11th century CE) was a Digambara monk,grammarian,philosopher and author of several philosophical books on Jainism.

Prabhachandra was a Digambara monk who flourished in 11th century CE. He denied the possibility of any genuine intensity of action, whether good or bad, on the part of women.

According to him, Kumarapala converted to Jainism and started worshipping Ajitanatha after conquering Ajmer.

-- Prabhācandra, by Wikipedia

Multiple legendary biographies by medieval Jain chroniclers present him [Kumarapala] as the last great royal patron of Jainism.

Sources of information

Kumarapala was well known for his patronage of Jainism, and several medieval Jain scholars wrote chronicles about him. These scholars include Hemachandra (Dvyashraya and Mahaviracharita), Prabhachandra, Somaprabha (Kumarapala-Pratibodha), Merutunga (Prabandha-Chintamani), Jayasimha Suri, Rajashekhara and Jina-Mandana Suri, among others. Of all the Indian kings, the largest number of chronicles have been written about Kumarapala. However, these chronicles differ substantially in important details about his life...

According to Merutugna, Kumarapala was a descendant of Bhima I through Haripala and Tribhuvanapala. Haripala was a son of Bhima and a concubine named Bakuladevi. Merutunga's genealogy seems to be historically inaccurate, as the fragmentary Chittorgarh inscription corroborates Hemachandra's genealogy. However, historian A. K. Majumdar notes that the voluntary rejections of thrones are very rare, and therefore, Hemachandra's claim of Kshemaraja having voluntary give up his throne is doubtful. Hemachandra, who was a royal courtier, probably invented a fictional narrative to avoid mentioning the illegitimate son Haripala. This also explains why Karna's son Jayasimha Siddharaja hated Kumarapala....

Kumarapala's contemporary chronicler Hemachandra does not mention anything about the king's life before his ascension to the throne. This is unusual, because Hemachandra's narratives about other kings of the dynasty describe their early lives. Historian Ashoke Majumdar theorizes that this might be because Hemachandra played a significant role in Kumarapala's early life, as mentioned by later chroniclers. Yashahpala, another contemporary writer, provides a hint about the king's early life in his drama Maharaja-Parajaya. In this play, a character states that Kumarapala "wandered alone through the whole world", suggesting that the king spent his early life wandering away from the royal court.

Prabhachandra provides the following account of Kumarapala's early life: One day, Jayasimha Siddharaja learned through divination that Kumarapala would be his successor. This made Jayasimha very angry, because he hated Kumarapala. Fearing for his life, Kumarapala fled the kingdom in form of a mendicant. Sometime later, Jayasimha's spies told him that Kumarapala had returned to the capital disguised as an ascetic. Jayasimha then invited 300 ascetics to a feast, and washed their feet in order to identify Kumarapala (who had royal marks on his feet). Kumarapala was recognized, but fled to Hemachandra's house before he could be arrested. Jayasimha's men followed him, but Hemachandra hid him under palm leaves. After leaving Hemachandra's house, Kumarapala was similarly saved by a farmer named Āli. He then went to Khambhat, accompanied by a Brahmin named Bosari. There, he sought shelter with a rich man named Udayana, who turned him away to avoid enmity with the king Jayasimha. Fortunately for Kumarapala, Hemachandra had also arrived at a Jain monastery in Khambhat. Hemachandra gave him food and shelter, and predicted that he would become the king after 7 years. The Jain scholar also took 3,200 drammas (gold coins) from a Jain layman, and gave them to Kumarapala. Subsequently, Kumarapala spent years traveling as a Kapalika ascetic, before being joined by his wife Bhopaladevi and their children. When Jayasimha died, Kumarapala returned to the capital and met Hemachandra. The next day, he arrived at the royal palace, accompanied by his brother-in-law Krishna-deva, who commanded 10,000 horses. There, he was proclaimed as the new king after two other claimants were rejected.

Merutunga mentions a similar legend...

The historicity of these legendary narratives is debatable...the greater part of the legendary narratives appears to be fanciful...

The Jain chroniclers provide highly exaggerated accounts of the territorial extent of Kumarapala's kingdom. For example, Udayaprabha claims that Kumarapala's empire included Andhra, Anga, Chauda, Gauda, Kalinga, Karnata, Kuru, Lata, Medapata, Maru, and Vanga. Such claims are of little historical value....

Kumarapala waged war against a ruler of Saurashtra. Later chroniclers such as Merutunga, Jayasimha Suri and Jina-Mandana state that Kumarapala's army was led by Udayana, who was mortally wounded during this campaign. However, this claim appears to be incorrect, as the earlier writer Prabachandra states that Udayana died fighting Navaghana of Saurashtra during the reign of Jayasimha Siddharaja.

The later writers seem to have confused Jayasimha's Saurashtra campaign with that of Kumarapala. Kumarapala's Saurashtra campaign was probably against the Abhiras....

The historicity of these legends is doubtful, as they claim that Hemachandra had the supernatural power to...

However, these accounts do not appear to be historically accurate. Ajayapala was a follower of Brahmanism, because of which the later Jain chroniclers portrayed him in a negative light....

While several legendary chronicles state that he met the Jain scholar Hemachandra early in his life, the historical accuracy of this claim is doubtful...

The later legendary accounts of Kumarapala's conversion to Jainism are too fanciful to be true. For example, Merutunga claims that Hemachandra made the god Shiva appear before Kumarapala at the Somanatha temple. Shiva told Kumarapala that Hemachandra was an incarnation of all the gods....

The Jain chronicles state that Kumarapala banned animal slaughter, alcohol, gambling and adultery after his conversion to Jainism. However, no extant inscriptions issued by the king announce any such ban....

Although Jain accounts unanimously state that Kumarapala converted to Jainism, none of the king's extant inscriptions invoke Jain deities....

-- Kumarapala (Chaulukya dynasty), by Wikipedia

Jayasimha spotted Hemachandra while passing through the streets of his capital. The king was impressed with an impromptu verse uttered by the young monk.

In 1135, when the Siddharaja conquered Malwa, he brought the works of Bhoja from Dhar along with other things. One day Siddhraja came across the manuscript of Sarasvati-Kanthabharana (also known as the Lakshana Prakash), a treatise on Sanskrit grammar. He was so impressed by it that he told the scholars in his court to produce a grammar that was as easy and lucid. Hemachandra requested Siddharaja to find the eight best grammatical treatises from Kashmir. He studied them and produced a new grammar work in the style of Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī. He named his work Siddha-Hema-Śabdanuśāśana after himself and the king. Siddharaja was so pleased with the work that he ordered it to be placed on the back of an elephant and paraded through the streets of Anhilwad Patan. Hemachandra also composed the Dvyashraya Kavya, an epic on the history of the Chaulukya dynasty, to illustrate his grammar.

-- Hemachandra, by Wikipedia

Somadeva was an 11th century CE writer from Kashmir. He was the author of a famous compendium of Indian legends, fairy tales and folk tales - the Kathasaritsagara.

Not much is known about him except that his father's name was Rama and he composed his work (probably during the years 1063-81 CE) for the entertainment of the queen Suryamati, a princess of Jalandhara and wife of King Ananta of Kashmir.

Ananta or King Ananta, also known as Anantadeva, was a king of Kashmir who reigned for 40 years from 1028 to 1068 CE. He belonged to the Lohara dynasty.

At a young age, Ananta succeeded his close relative — who possibly ruled the region for less than a month — on the throne of Kashmir. According to the Kashmiri historian Kalhana...

-- Ananta (king), by Wikipedia

Kalhana (sometimes spelled Kalhan or Kalhan'a) (c. 12th century), a Kashmiri, was the author of Rajatarangini (River of Kings), an account of the history of Kashmir. He wrote the work in Sanskrit between 1148 and 1149. All information regarding his life has to be deduced from his own writing, a major scholar of which is Mark Aurel Stein. Robin Donkin has argued that with the exception of Kalhana, "there are no [native Indian] literary works with a developed sense of chronology, or indeed much sense of place, before the thirteenth century".

Kalhana was born to a Kashmiri minister, Chanpaka, who probably served king Harsa of the Lohara dynasty. It is possible that his birthplace was Parihaspore and his birth would have been very early in the 12th century. It is extremely likely that he was of the Hindu Brahmin caste, suggested in particular by his knowledge of Sanskrit. The introductory verses to each of the eight Books in his Rajatarangini are prefaced with prayers to Shiva, a Hindu deity. In common with many Hindus in Kashmir at that time, he was also sympathetic to Buddhism, and Buddhists tended to reciprocate this feeling towards Hindus. Even in relatively modern times, Buddha's birthday has been a notable event for Kashmiri Brahmins and well before Kalhana's time Buddha had been accepted by Hindus as an avatar of Vishnu.

Kalhana was familiar with earlier epics such as the Vikramankadevacharita of Bilhana, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, to all of which he alludes in his own writings. However, his own writings did not employ what Stein has described as "the very redundant praise and flattery which by custom and literary tradition Indian authors feel obliged to bestow on their patrons". From this comes Stein's deduction that Kalhana was not a part of the circle surrounding Jayasimha, the ruling monarch at the time when he was writing the Rajatarangini.

-- Kalhana, by Wikipedia

Rajatarangini (Rājataraṃgiṇī, "The River of Kings") is a metrical legendary and historical chronicle of the north-western Indian subcontinent, particularly the kings of Kashmir. It was written in Sanskrit by Kashmiri historian Kalhana in the 12th century CE....

Although inaccurate in its chronology, the book still provides...

Kalhana's work is also full of legends and inconsistencies...

Historical reliability

Despite the value that historians have placed on Kalhana's work, there is little evidence of authenticity in the earlier books of Rajatarangini. For example, Ranaditya is given a reign of 300 years. Toramana is clearly the Huna king of that name, but his father Mihirakula is given a date 700 years earlier. Even where the kings mentioned in the first three books are historically attested, Kalhana's account suffers from chronological errors.

-- Rajatarangini, by Wikipedia

The queen was quite distraught as it was a time when the political situation in Kashmir was 'one of discontent, intrigue, bloodshed and despair'.

-- Somadeva, by Wikipedia

The Kathāsaritsāgara ("Ocean of the Streams of Stories") is a famous 11th-century collection of Indian legends, fairy tales and folk tales as retold in Sanskrit by the Shaivite Somadeva.

Kathāsaritsāgara contains multiple layers of story within a story and is said to have been adopted from Guṇāḍhya's Bṛhatkathā, which was written in a poorly-understood language known as Paiśācī. The work is no longer extant but several later adaptations still exist — the Kathāsaritsāgara, Bṛhatkathamanjari and Bṛhatkathāślokasaṃgraha. However, none of these recensions necessarily derives directly from Gunadhya, and each may have intermediate versions.

-- Kathasaritsagara, by Wikipedia

The Mudrarakshasa, The Signet of the Minister) is a Sanskrit-language play by Vishakhadatta that narrates the ascent of the king Chandragupta Maurya (r. c. 324 – c. 297 BCE) to power in India. The play is an example of creative writing, but not entirely fictional. It is dated variously from the late 4th century to the 8th century CE.

-- Mudrarakshasa, by Wikipedia

Vishakhadatta (Sanskrit: विशाखदत्त) was an Indian Sanskrit poet and playwright. Although Vishakhadatta furnishes the names of his father and grandfather as Maharaja Bhaskaradatta and Maharaja Vateshvaradatta in his political drama Mudrārākṣasa, we know little else about him. Only two of his plays, the Mudrārākṣasa and the Devichandraguptam are known to us. His period is not certain but he probably flourished in or after the 6th century CE. Some scholars such as A. S. Altekar, K. P. Jayaswal and Sten Konow theorized that Vishakhadatta was a contemporary of Chandragupta II, and lived in late 4th century to early 5th century. But this view has been challenged by other scholars, including Moriz Winternitz and R. C. Majumdar....

Alternative theories

The name Vishakhadatta is also given as Vishakhadeva from which Ranajit Pal concludes that his name may have been Devadatta which, according to him, was a name of both Ashoka and Chandragupta.

-- Vishakhadatta, by Wikipedia

In all the four versions, Chanakya feels insulted by the Nanda king, and vows to destroy him. After dethroning the Nanda, he installs Chandragupta as the new king.

Buddhist version

The legend of Chanakya and Chandragupta is detailed in the Pali-language Buddhist chronicles of Sri Lanka. It is not mentioned in Dipavamsa, the oldest of these chronicles.[10] The earliest Buddhist source to mention the
legend is Mahavamsa, which is generally dated between 5th and 6th centuries CE. Vamsatthappakasini (also known as Mahavamsa Tika), a commentary on Mahavamsa, provides some more details about the legend. Its author is unknown, and it is dated variously from 6th century CE to 13th century CE.[11] Some other texts provide additional details about the legend; for example, the Maha-Bodhi-Vamsa and the Atthakatha give the names of the nine Nanda kings said to have preceded Chandragupta.[10][12]

Jain version

The Chandragupta-Chanakya legend is mentioned in several commentaries of the Shvetambara canon. The most well-known version of the Jain legend is contained in the Sthaviravali-Charita or Parishishta-Parvan, written by the 12th-century writer Hemachandra.[1] Hemachandra's account is based on the Prakrit kathanaka literature (legends and anecdotes) composed between the late 1st century CE and mid-8th century CE. These legends are contained in the commentaries (churnis and tikas) on canonical texts such as Uttaradhyayana and Avashyaka Niryukti.[13]

Thomas Trautmann believes that the Jain version is older and more consistent than the Buddhist version of the legend.[13]

Kashmiri version

Brihatkatha-Manjari by Kshemendra and Kathasaritsagara by Somadeva are two 11th-century Kashmiri Sanskrit collections of legends. Both are based on a now-lost Prakrit-language Brihatkatha-Sarit-Sagara. It was based on the now-lost Paishachi-language Brihatkatha by Gunadhya. The Chanakya-Chandragupta legend in these collections features another character, named Shakatala (IAST: Śakaṭāla).[14]

Mudrarakshasa version

Mudrarakshasa ("The signet ring of Rakshasa") is a Sanskrit play by Vishakhadatta. Its date is uncertain, but it mentions the Huna, who invaded northern India during the Gupta period. Therefore, it could not have been composed before the Gupta era.[15] It is dated variously from the late 4th century[16] to the 8th century.[17] The Mudrarakshasa legend contains narratives not found in other versions of the Chanakya-Chandragupta legend. Because of this difference, Trautmann suggests that most of it is fictional or legendary, without any historical basis.[18]

Identification with Kauṭilya or Vishnugupta

See also: Arthashastra § Authorship

The ancient Arthashastra has been traditionally attributed to Chanakya by a number of scholars. The Arthashastra identifies its author as Kauṭilya, a gotra or clan name, except for one verse that refers to him by the personal name of Vishnugupta.[19] Kauṭilya is presumably the name of the author's gotra (clan).[20]

One of the earliest Sanskrit literatures to identify Chanakya with Vishnugupta explicitly was the Panchatantra.[21]

The Panchatantra is an ancient Indian collection of interrelated animal fables in Sanskrit verse and prose, arranged within a frame story. The surviving work is dated to roughly 200 BCE – 300 CE, based on older oral tradition. The text's author has been attributed to Vishnu Sharma [Vishnugupta Sharma] in some recensions and Vasubhaga in others, both of which may be pen names. It is classical literature in a Hindu text, and based on older oral traditions with "animal fables that are as old as we are able to imagine".

It is "certainly the most frequently translated literary product of India", and these stories are among the most widely known in the world. It goes by many names in many cultures. There is a version of Panchatantra in nearly every major language of India, and in addition there are 200 versions of the text in more than 50 languages around the world. One version reached Europe in the 11th century. To quote Edgerton (1924):

...before 1600 it existed in Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian, German, English, Old Slavonic, Czech, and perhaps other Slavonic languages. Its range has extended from Java to Iceland... [In India,] it has been worked over and over again, expanded, abstracted, turned into verse, retold in prose, translated into medieval and modern vernaculars, and retranslated into Sanskrit. And most of the stories contained in it have "gone down" into the folklore of the story-loving Hindus, whence they reappear in the collections of oral tales gathered by modern students of folk-stories.

The earliest known translation into a non-Indian language is in Middle Persian (Pahlavi, 550 CE) by Burzoe. This became the basis for a Syriac translation as Kalilag and Damnag and a translation into Arabic in 750 CE by Persian scholar Abdullah Ibn al-Muqaffa as Kalīlah wa Dimnah. A New Persian version by Rudaki, from the 3rd century Hijri, became known as Kalīleh o Demneh. Rendered in prose by Abu'l-Ma'ali Nasrallah Monshi in 1143 CE, this was the basis of Kashefi's 15th-century Anvār-i Suhaylī (The Lights of Canopus), which in turn was translated into Humayun-namah in Turkish. The book is also known as The Fables of Bidpai (or Pilpai in various European languages, Vidyapati in Sanskrit) or The Morall Philosophie of Doni (English, 1570). Most European versions of the text are derivative works of the 12th-century Hebrew version of Panchatantra by Rabbi Joel. In Germany, its translation in 1480 by Anton von Pforr has been widely read. Several versions of the text are also found in Indonesia, where it is titled as Tantri Kamandaka, Tantravakya or Candapingala and consists of 360 fables. In Laos, a version is called Nandaka-prakarana, while in Thailand it has been referred to as Nang Tantrai.

Author and chronology

The prelude section of the Panchatantra identifies an octogenarian Brahmin named Vishnusharma (IAST: Viṣṇuśarman) as its author. He is stated to be teaching the principles of good government to three princes of Amarasakti. It is unclear, states Patrick Olivelle, a professor of Sanskrit and Indian religions, if Vishnusharma was a real person or himself a literary invention. Some South Indian recensions of the text, as well as Southeast Asian versions of Panchatantra attribute the text to Vasubhaga, states Olivelle. Based on the content and mention of the same name in other texts dated to ancient and medieval era centuries, most scholars agree that Vishnusharma is a fictitious name. Olivelle and other scholars state that regardless of who the author was, it is likely "the author was a Hindu, and not a Buddhist, nor Jain", but it is unlikely that the author was a devotee of Hindu god Vishnu because the text neither expresses any sentiments against other Hindu deities such as Shiva, Indra and others, nor does it avoid invoking them with reverence.

Various locations where the text was composed have been proposed but this has been controversial. Some of the proposed locations include Kashmir, Southwestern or South India. The text's original language was likely Sanskrit. Though the text is now known as Panchatantra, the title found in old manuscript versions varies regionally, and includes names such as Tantrakhyayika, Panchakhyanaka, Panchakhyana and Tantropakhyana. The suffix akhyayika and akhyanaka mean "little story" or "little story book" in Sanskrit.

The text was translated into Pahlavi in 550 CE, which forms the latest limit of the text's existence. The earliest limit is uncertain. It quotes identical verses from Arthasastra, which is broadly accepted to have been completed by the early centuries of the common era...

Content

The Panchatantra is a series of inter-woven fables, many of which deploy metaphors of anthropomorphized animals with human virtues and vices. Its narrative illustrates, for the benefit of three ignorant princes, the central Hindu principles of nīti. While nīti is hard to translate, it roughly means prudent worldly conduct, or "the wise conduct of life"...

Modern era

It was the Panchatantra that served as the basis for the studies of Theodor Benfey, the pioneer in the field of comparative literature. His efforts began to clear up some confusion surrounding the history of the Panchatantra, culminating in the work of Hertel (Hertel 1908, Hertel 1912a, Hertel 1912b, Hertel 1915) and Edgerton (1924). Hertel discovered several recensions in India, in particular the oldest available Sanskrit recension, the Tantrakhyayika in Kashmir, and the so-called North Western Family Sanskrit text by the Jain monk Purnabhadra [???] in 1199 CE that blends and rearranges at least three earlier versions. Edgerton undertook a minute study of all texts which seemed "to provide useful evidence on the lost Sanskrit text to which, it must be assumed, they all go back", and believed he had reconstructed the original Sanskrit Panchatantra; this version is known as the Southern Family text.

-- Panchatantra, by Wikipedia

K. C. Ojha proposes that the traditional identification of Vishnugupta with Kauṭilya was caused by a confusion of the text's editor and its originator. He suggests that Vishnugupta was a redactor of the original work of Kauṭilya.[3] Thomas Burrow suggests that Chanakya and Kauṭilya may have been two different people.[22]

Identity

He is generally called Chanakya, but in his capacity as author of the Arthaśhāstra, is generally referred to as Kautilya. The Arthaśhāstra identifies its author by the name Kautilya, except for one verse which refers to him by the name Vishnugupta. One of the earliest Sanskrit literary texts to explicitly identify Chanakya with Vishnugupta was Vishnu Sarma's Panchatantra in the third century B.C.E.

A prior time-limit for the Tantrakhyayika may be determined by a reference which it makes to Chanakya. Its author, at stanza 2, pays homage to six authors of hand-books for princes, among them to "Chanakya, the great," whose Artha-sastra, very recently found and published, was known to the author of our text and used by him. Chanakya, otherwise known as Kautilya or Vishnugupta, was the prime-minister of the first king of the Mauryan dynasty, king Chandragupta or [x] of Pataliputra or [x] 821-297 B.C., at whose court Megasthenes lived as ambassador of Seleukos Nikator. The earliest time-limit for the Tantrakhyayika would accordingly be about 800 b.c.

-- The Panchatantra: A Collection of Ancient Hindu Tales In Its Oldest Recension, The Kashmirian, Entitled Tantrakhyayika, by Dr. Johannes Hertel, 1915

"0" references to "Chanakya", "Chana", "Artha," or "Kautilya.

-- The Panchatantra of Vishnu Sharma, English Translation, by Arthur W. Ryder, 1925

Not every historian accepts that Kautilya, Chanakya, and Vishnugupta are the same person. K.C. Ojha suggests that Viṣṇugupta was a redactor of the original work of Kauṭilya, and that the traditional identification of Viṣṇugupta with Kauṭilya was caused by a confusion of the editor with the original author. Thomas Burrow suggests that Cāṇakya and Kauṭilya may have been two different people. The date of origin of the Arthahastra remains problematic, with suggested dates ranging from the fourth century B.C.E. to the third century C.E. [700 years] Most authorities agree that the essence of the book was originally written during the early Mauryan Period (321–296 B.C.E.), but that much of the existing text is post-Mauryan.

-- Kautilya, by New World Encyclopedia

[admin]

Part 2 of 2

Legends


Dhana Nanda's empire, circa 323 BCE

Buddhist version

According to the Buddhist legend, the Nanda kings who preceded Chandragupta were robbers-turned-rulers.[10] Chanakya (IAST: Cāṇakka in Mahavamsa) was a Brahmin from Takkāsila (Takshashila). He was well-versed in three Vedas and politics. He had canine teeth, which were believed to be a mark of royalty. His mother feared that he would neglect her after becoming a king.[2] To pacify her, Chanakya broke his teeth.[23]

Chanakya was said to be ugly, accentuated by his broken teeth and crooked feet. One day, the king Dhana Nanda organized an alms-giving ceremony for Brahmins. Chanakya went to Pupphapura (Pushpapura) to attend this ceremony. Disgusted by his appearance, the king ordered him to be thrown out of the assembly. Chanakya broke his sacred thread in anger, and cursed the king. The king ordered his arrest, but Chanakya escaped in the disguise of an Ājīvika. He befriended Dhananada's son Pabbata, and instigated him to seize the throne. With help of a signet ring given by the prince, Chanakya fled the palace through a secret door.[23]

Chanakya escaped to the Vinjha forest. There, he made 800 million gold coins (kahapanas), using a secret technique that allowed him to turn 1 coin into 8 coins. After hiding this money, he started searching for a person worthy of replacing Dhana Nanda.[23] One day, he saw a group of children playing: the young Chandragupta (called Chandagutta in Mahavamsa) played the role of a king, while other boys pretended to be vassals, ministers, or robbers. The "robbers" were brought before Chandragupta, who ordered their limbs to be cut off, but then miraculously re-attached them. Chandragupta had been born in a royal family, but was brought up by a hunter after his father was killed by an usurper, and the devatas [deities] caused his mother to abandon him. Astonished by the boy's miraculous powers, Chanakya paid 1000 gold coins to his foster-father, and took Chandragupta away, promising to teach him a trade.[24]

Chanakya had two potential successors to Dhana Nanda: Pabbata and Chandragupta. He gave each of them an amulet to be worn around the neck with a woolen thread. One day, he decided to test them. While Chandragupta was asleep, he asked Pabbata to remove Chandragupta's woolen thread without breaking it and without waking up Chandragupta. Pabbata failed to accomplish this task. Some time later, when Pabbata was sleeping, Chanakya challenged Chandragupta to complete the same task. Chandragupta retrieved the woolen thread by cutting off Pabbata's head. For the next seven years, Chanakya trained Chandragupta for royal duties. When Chandragupta became an adult, Chanakya dug up his hidden treasure of gold coins, and assembled an army.[24]

The army of Chanadragupta and Chanakya invaded Dhana Nanda's kingdom, but disbanded after facing a severe defeat. While wandering in disguise, the two men once listened to the conversation between a woman and her son. The child had eaten the middle of a cake, and thrown away the edges. The woman scolded him, saying that he was eating food like Chandragupta, who attacked the central part of the kingdom instead of conquering the border villages first. Chanakya and Chandragupta realized their mistake. They assembled a new army, and started conquering the border villages. Gradually, they advanced to the kingdom's capital Pataliputra (Pāṭaliputta in Mahavamsa), where they killed the king Dhana Nanda. Chanakya ordered a fisherman to find the place where Dhana Nanda had hidden his treasure. As soon as the fishermen informed Chanakya about its location, Chanakya had him killed. Chanakya anointed Chandragupta as the new king, and tasked a man named Paṇiyatappa with eliminating rebels and robbers from the kingdom.[25]

Chanakya started mixing small doses of poison in the new king's food to make him immune to poisoning attempts by the enemies. Chandragupta, who was not aware of this, once shared the food with his pregnant queen, who was seven days away from delivery. Chanakya arrived just as the queen ate the poisoned morsel. Realizing that she was going to die, Chanakya decided to save the unborn child. He cut off the queen's head and cut open her belly with a sword to take out the foetus. Over the next seven days, he placed the foetus in the belly of a goat freshly killed each day. After seven days, Chandragupta's son was "born". He was named Bindusara, because his body was spotted with drops (bindu) of goat's blood.[25]

The earliest Buddhist legends do not mention Chanakya in their description of the Mauryan dynasty after this point.[24] Dhammapala's commentary on Theragatha, however, mentions a legend about Chanakya and a Brahmin named Subandhu. According to this account, Chanakya was afraid that the wise Subandhu would surpass him at Chandragupta's court. So, he got Chandragupta to imprison Subandhu, whose son Tekicchakani escaped and became a Buddhist monk.[26] The 16th-century Tibetan Buddhist author Taranatha mentions Chanakya as one of Bindusara's "great lords". According to him, Chanakya destroyed the nobles and kings of 16 towns and made Bindusara the master of all the territory between the eastern and the western seas (Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal).[27]

The German translation of Lama Taranatha's first book on India called The Mine of Previous Stones (Edelsteinmine) was made by Prof. Gruenwedel the reputed Orientalist and Archaeologist on Buddhist culture in Berlin. The translation came out in 1914 A.D. from Petrograd (Leningrad).

The German translator confessed his difficulty in translating the Tibetan words on matters relating to witchcraft and sorcery. So he has used the European terms from the literature of witchcraft and magic of the middle ages viz. 'Frozen' and 'Seven miles boots.'

He said that history in the modern sense could not be expected from Taranatha. The important matter with him was the reference to the traditional endorsement of certain teaching staff. Under the spiritual protection of his teacher Buddhaguptanatha, he wrote enthusiastically the biography of the predecessor of the same with all their extravagances, as well as the madness of the old Siddhas.

The book contains a rigmarole of miracles and magic….

"He acquired all Siddhis: the globule Siddhi, the eye-ointment, the sword-Siddhi, further all power to destroy and again to revive to life, and got complete power over all superhuman Yaksas and Nagas and especially received a Vajra-body which was created for him by the elixir of life. He became a giant on magic power and supernatural knowledge….

The king received the elixir of age and the Yaksas as his servants. He built five hundred temple-cloisters as the resting-place of the preachers. Later, he (acarya) dwelt on the Sriparvata for two hundred years long, surrounded by the Yaksis and remained there practising the Tantras till his subsequent beheading by the grandson of the king Udayana called Susukti or the mighty prince...

He was shown a mirror in which he saw himself roasting in hell-fire…

Then he asked a ferryman on the shore of the Ganges to take him to the other side; but it happened so that, he having no fare for the ferry, showed his pointing finger to the Ganga and the Ganga stood up straight. Thus he came to the other side. Then in Odica, he demanded brandy from a wine-selling woman and as this one said he must pay the bill, he began to chase the shadows of a sun-dial from the fields but which did not go away from there, so he pointed his finger towards the sun and held it as with a nail and drunk brandy. As he did not want to set it free, the clocks and the guards made mistake. The king who knowing that the Yogi wanted to show his power, gave the price for the brandy and prayed to him to let the sun loose…

As now the self-erected stone image of the Chandika slightly shaking began to move, there with a blow on the head, he went with head on her breast to the womb. People say that he is still there, kneeling in straight position, but his pair of ears are only to be seen…

This Yogi could not be destroyed in water, fire, by weapons and by poison…

Once seeing him in the company of a common woman of the temple, the king ordered them to be burned. But out of the ashes, he reappeared as Heruka with gakti in a halo of brilliant rays.…

The boy and the girl changed themselves into Vajra and Ghanta, he took hold of them and flew to heaven…

There was a certain Mantravati experienced in the Mantras of Sahajasiddhi and magic-powers, she was a Hexe (witch). She wanted to destroy the acarya and his followers and attempted to seize him; but could find nothing but a piece of woollen-cloth (Kambala) on the spot where the acarya sat. The witch saw that this was a magic work of the acarya that he had transformed his own body into a woollen-cloth! ‘That must be torn off and everybody must eat a piece of it.' With these words she tore off the cloth and everybody (of her following) ate off a piece. Thereupon the acarya made himself again visible and cursed them all, and five hundred witches with Mantravati became five hundred sheep-headed Matrkas."…

But the Tirthikas scolded the king, who ordered his men to cut off his head. But they could not do damage to the acarya inspite of their all sorts of weapons. Then, as the acarya clapped both of his hands, the palace broke into pieces, and he with his exorcising look made the people of the king benumbed and stiff…

One morning his mother saw the acarya in the king's fruit-garden. He was sitting at the foot of the trees and uttered the words: ‘Narikela Bhiksavo' and the fruits of the tree came by themselves to him. After having drunk the cocoanut water, he spoke: ‘Narikela Uparajahi’ and the fruits went up as before…

The king dug a groove in the earth and filled it with thorn-bushes, elephant and horse dung and threw the acarya there and covered him up. So the acarya showed a double function of his body: in Jalandhara he was wandering to work for the salvation of beings, and at the same time taught in Bengal…

Once during swimming he was eaten up by a fish, but having meditated the Mandala of Heruka he came out without any harm…

A Tirthika Yogi let two meteors fall from heaven. Both were black, and in the shapes of houses but with human heads. Acarya knowing these to be eye-illusions muttered Dharanis to annul them and both of them transformed themselves in little pieces of coals; then some of the Tirthikas showed a piece of art — as flames from the fire coming out of the body. But he put water on it and extinguished the fire. Thus all the attacks were parried each time and juggling works were defeated by the juggling works. In the end, the four leading teachers of the Tirthikas, by the magic-power of the acarya, were transformed into cats. Now the Buddhists increased very much in this country….

He lived two hundred years…

With the words: 'Go to Udayana' went up magically the acarya in heaven…

He disappeared again through the door of benediction of acarya Nandapala and emerged up in two and a half hundred years in the south…

Then the Castellan smote him with a batan. The acarya blew a horn, thereby the stone statues of the temple of Jagannatha lost their extremities and organs and their former wonder powers…

There appeared the acarya magically doubling his body four times and consecrating simultaneously in all four temples.…

He needed CandaIa girl ([x]) for the support of his magic, and got one by giving her parents gold procured miraculously as high as her stature. He reached the highest state of Mahamudra-siddhi. After he had written many text-books, bodily he flew up to the heaven like a Garuda-prince to the Ksetra of the Buddha-Aksobhya…

He was threatened by a Tirthika king who wanted to break his head. His head was cut off, but he put on a buffalo-head on his shoulders. He went to Harikela to preach. There exorcised a cat, hence he was called Bhiradi or Birali…

'He lived with Vajrayogini who looked like a she-dog before the world. Hence he was called Kukuri. This acarya took as a Yogi of Srivajrabhairava, the pose of a destroyer, and there was a history that a king of the Tajiks (Persian) with his elephants were reduced to dust…

In dream AvaIokitesvara said as he had broken the order of his Guru, he would die within three years of an infectious disease and would go to hell, he got very much frightened, cut himself off from his family and took vows. But the prophesy was fulfilled, after three years he got the contagion and died. There his acarya saw in his mind, how he was taken away by the beadles of the Yama, but five gods and Hayagriva with Aryavalokitesvara at their head struck the hell-beadles and Aryavalokitesvara shed tears and ran towards him to bring his body back. And while he was brought back visibly to the Parivara of the Arya, he came back to life again.…

Nagarjuna holding himself on the Dharanis of the 'air-wanderers' (Dakinis), brought two shoes from the tree-leaves which enabled him to go through the air. The one he concealed, he put on the other and flew to Vyali through the air. As he now demanded that the acarya must give him the gold-essence, Vyali answered thereupon: 'Give me thy shoe, that will be the worth of the gold-essence that I give to you!' Then many Upadesas for Quicksilver-essence, many hundred thousands, aye many millions of methods of Elixir and beyond it, the power of exorcism to make gold, he gave to Nagarjuna, and he gave him for it a shoe. Then he put on the hidden shoe and went to India through the air and furthered there very much the Upadesas of Life-elixir. In the country of Gandhara in the north was a mountain called Dhinkota in the district called Munindra. He wanted to change it into gold and silver, but Aryatara who knew that would bring the future generations to fight amongst themselves, prevented it and by her blessing changed it to salt. And today it is known by the Gandhara country Lati.1 [Perhaps the salt-range of western Punjab is meant here.] …

As the fisher was in deep contemplation, he had thrown out his angle and drew it, but the fish drew him in its interior and swallowed him. As he was meditating deeply over the power of Karma, he did not die. As the river Rohita that today in Tibetan called gTsan-po, had reached Kamarupa, there lay a small hill called Umagiri, while there Devesvara zealously gave the Upadesas to the penitent Uma, and the fish swam in that water. The fisher, lying in the belly of the fish, heard that, meditated over that Upadesa and had great benefit. As a fisher again caught that fish and killed it, a man was there. Earlier he died there as a king; thirteen years had just past that formerly a son was born to him. In the belly of the fish he had spent the rest twelve years….

At one time the acarya ordered that he had got appetite for flesh and spirituous things. As the disciple went to the town to buy flesh and brandy, a woman had exhibited six pieces of pork and six flasks of brandy. She said: 'As price I demand your right eye, I will not be drawn into any other bargain.' Then the disciple in order to bring the offering to his acarya, took out the right eye and gave it to her. Thereupon he brought the flesh and the brandy to his acarya. On query he narrated the matter to the acarya. The acarya then demanded the left eye which was given. Thereupon the acarya blessed him and in three years he got back his eyes like before. And in the same period he became a Mahasiddha….

As regards the Siddha Nago, he was called the naked because he did not have a thread as cloth on his body. When he stayed in the south, he came in the social-circle of the first wife of the king and gave her the Upadesas. The king was angry, cut off the five limbs of the acarya, and threw them off towards the sky. But these limbs came back again and were fitted in the body. As this happened seven times, the acarya in the end gave out a curse and the king's five limbs fell off by themselves, and then he died. But after a prayer for it he came back to life. Thus he showed his power. Then he disappeared towards the mountain Bhindapala and there he is still living without throwing off his mortal body…

By making a vow on Mahabodhi, they received the answer that the time was proper to act, in order to accomplish the tasks of terror. This was met by the acarya and his four companions at Jarikhanda. They revolved the wheel of Yamantaka; then within six months the Pathans and the Mogols were innerly shaken and in the east all the followers of the religion of the Turuskas were slain in battle. The Hindu king Manasing was taken prisoner…

In the interior of the palace there was a Linga terrible to look at, and it was established from the time of Arjuna. He treaded and danced on it and so his foot-prints were stamped on it. At this the king out of anger let six elephants be excited. In spite of the number of the elephants being six, who seized him with their trunks, he was not to be moved. As he threateningly raised his finger the stone image of the Chandika, which once was of great miraculous power, melt away just like a lump of butter in the heat of the sun. Still now this figure remains there without becoming a mass. Then the king recognised, that he had acquired the Siddhi, and threw himself on the ground….

His body was changed into rainbow colours and his Jnanakaya clasped the heaven….

But this great Acarya brought in fourfold forms his tasks to end magically: Only through the word what he said took place, through the four glances of exorcism, in the midst of little refined congregations astonishment, and wonder-signs appeared on their faces and that he (in the Ganacakra) by the power of magic created thither flesh-balls, liquids, brandy and blood and the fruits of the woods…

Man appointed time which was the fruit of the previous birth, lotus flowers and wheels (Cakras) came out in her hands and feet and thus as she was furnished with Laksanas, a prophesy came about her that when she could dwell, she would acquire Mahatmya. She heard that in a city of Marahata near Cavala dwelt the Mahacarya Santigupta. As soon as she heard his name, she felt a need for Samadhi and as soon as she saw his face, plunged into the complete Samadhi….By the Yoga, her power over the air became unparalleled. She could ascend up the sky for miles….

Here is written only on the basis of that which anywhere to be perceived from the histories prepared in India, and at that which is given in Tibet by the believing people, that was present from old times."

-- Mystic Tales of Lama Taranatha: A Religio-Sociological History of Mahayana Buddhism, by Lama Taranatha, Translated into English by Bhupendranath Datta, A.M., Dr. Phil.

Jain version

According to the Jain account, Chanakya was born to two lay Jains (shravaka) named Chanin and Chaneshvari. His birthplace was the Chanaka village in Golla vishaya (region).[1] The identity of "Golla" is not certain, but Hemachandra states that Chanakya was a Dramila, implying that he was a native of South India.[28]

Chanakya was born with a full set of teeth. According to the monks, this was a sign that he would become a king in the future. Chanin did not want his son to become haughty, so he broke Chanakya's teeth. The monks prophesied that the baby would go on to become a power behind the throne.[1] Chanakya grew up to be a learned shravaka, and married a Brahmin woman. Her relatives mocked her for being married to a poor man. This motivated Chanakya to visit Pataliputra, and seek donations from the king Nanda, who was famous for his generosity towards Brahmins. While waiting for the king at the royal court, Chanakya sat on the king's throne. A dasi (servant girl) courteously offered Chanakya the next seat, but Chanakya kept his kamandal (water pot) on it, while remaining seated on the throne. The servant offered him a choice of four more seats, but each time, he kept his various items on the seats, refusing to budge from the throne. Finally, the annoyed servant kicked him off the throne. Enraged, Chanakya vowed to uproot Nanda and his entire establishment, like "a great wind uproots a tree".[29]

Chanakya knew that he was prophesied to become a power behind the throne. So, he started searching for a person worthy of being a king. While wandering, he did a favour for the pregnant daughter of a village chief, on the condition that her child would belong to him. Chandragupta was born to this lady. When Chandragupta grew up, Chanakya came to his village and saw him playing "king" among a group of boys. To test him, Chanakya asked him for a donation. The boy told Chanakya to take the cows nearby, declaring that nobody would disobey his order. This display of power convinced Chanakya that Chandragupta was the one worthy of being a king.[1]

Chanakya took Chandragupta to conquer Pataliputra, the capital of Nanda. He assembled an army using the wealth he had acquired through alchemy (dhatuvada-visaradan). The army suffered a severe defeat, forcing Chanakya and Chandragupta to flee the battlefield. They reached a lake while being pursued by an enemy officer. Chanakya asked Chandragupta to jump into the lake, and disguised himself as a meditating ascetic. When the enemy soldier reached the lake, he asked the 'ascetic' if he had seen Chandragupta. Chanakya pointed at the lake. As the soldier removed his armour to jump into the lake, Chanakya took his sword and killed him. When Chandragupta came out of the water, Chanakya asked him, "What went through your mind, when I disclosed your location to the enemy?" Chandragupta replied that he trusted his master to make the best decision. This convinced Chanakya that Chandragupta would remain under his influence even after becoming the king. On another occasion, Chanakya similarly escaped the enemy by chasing away a washerman, and disguising himself as one. Once, he cut open the belly of a Brahmin who had just eaten food, and took out the food to feed a hungry Chandragupta.[30]

One day, Chanakya and Chandragupta overheard a woman scolding her son. The child had burnt his finger by putting it in the middle of a bowl of hot gruel. The woman told her son that by not starting from the cooler edges, he was being foolish like Chanakya, who attacked the capital before conquering the bordering regions. Chanakya realized his mistake, and made a new plan to defeat Nanda. He formed an alliance with Parvataka, the king of a mountain kingdom called Himavatkuta, offering him half of Nanda's kingdom.[30]

After securing Parvataka's help, Chanakya and Chandragupta started besieging the towns other than Pataliputra. One particular town offered a strong resistance. Chanakya entered this town disguised as a Shaivite mendicant, and declared that the siege would end if the idols of the seven mothers were removed from the town's temple. As soon as the superstitious defenders removed the idols from the temple, Chanakya ordered his army to end the siege. When the defenders started celebrating their victory, Chanakya's army launched a surprise attack and captured the town.[30]

Gradually, Chanakya and Chandragupta subdued all the regions outside the capital. Finally, they captured Pataliputra and Chandragupta became the king. They allowed the king Nanda to go into exile, with all the goods he could take on a cart. As Nanda and his family were leaving the city on a cart, his daughter saw Chandragupta, and fell in love with the new king. She chose him as her husband by svayamvara tradition. As she was getting off the cart, 9 spokes of the cart's wheel broke. Interpreting this as an omen, Chanakya declared that Chandragupta's dynasty would last for 9 generations.[30]

Meanwhile, Parvataka fell in love with one of Nanda's visha kanyas (poison girl). Chanakya approved the marriage, and Parvataka collapsed when he touched the girl during the wedding. Chanakya asked Chandragupta not to call a physician. Thus, Parvataka died and Chandragupta became the sole ruler of Nanda's territories.[31]

Chanakya then started consolidating the power by eliminating Nanda's loyalists, who had been harassing people in various parts of the kingdom. Chanakya learned about a weaver who would burn any part of his house infested with cockroaches. Chanakya assigned the responsibility of crushing the rebels to this weaver. Soon, the kingdom was free of insurgents. Chanakya also burned a village that had refused him food in the past. He filled the royal treasury by inviting rich merchants to his home, getting them drunk and gambling with a loaded dice.[31]

Once, the kingdom suffered a 12-year long famine. Two young Jain monks started eating from the king's plate, after making themselves invisible with a magic ointment. Chanakya sensed their presence by covering the palace floor with a powder, and tracing their footprints. At the next meal, he caught them by filling the dining room with thick smoke, which caused the monks' eyes to water, washing off the ointment. Chanakya complained about the young monks behavior to the head monk Acharya Susthita. The Acharya blamed people for not being charitable towards monks, so Chanakya started giving generous alms to the monks.[31]

Meanwhile, Chandragupta had been patronizing the non-Jain monks. Chanakya decided to prove to him that these men were not worthy of his patronage. He covered the floor of the palace area near the women's rooms with a powder, and left the non-Jain monks there. Their footprints showed that they had sneaked up to the windows of the women's rooms to peep inside. The Jain monks, who were assessed using the same method, stayed away from the women's rooms. After seeing this, Chandragupta appointed the Jain monks as his spiritual counsellors.[32]

Chanakya used to mix small doses of poison in Chandragupta's food to make him immune to poisoning attempts. The king, unaware of this, once shared his food with Queen Durdhara. Chanakya entered the room at the instant she died. He cut open the dead queen's belly and took out the baby. The baby, who had been touched by a drop ("bindu") of the poison, was named Bindusara.[32]

After Chandragupta abdicated the throne to become a Jain monk, Chanakya anointed Bindusara as the new king.[32] Chanakya asked Bindusara to appoint a man named Subandhu as one of his ministers. However, Subandhu wanted to become a higher minister and grew jealous of Chanakya. So, he told Bindusara that Chanakya was responsible for the death of his mother. Bindusara confirmed the allegations with the nurses, who told him that Chanakya had cut open the belly of his mother. And enraged Bindusara started hating Chanakya. As a result, Chanakya, who had grown very old by this time, retired and decided to starve himself to death. Meanwhile, Bindusara came to know about the detailed circumstances of his birth, and implored Chanakya to resume his ministerial duties. After failing to pacify Chanakya, the emperor ordered Subandhu to convince Chanakya to give up his suicide plan. Subandhu, while pretending to appease Chanakya, burned him to death. Subandhu then took possession of Chanakya's home. Chanakya had anticipated this, and before retiring, he had set up a cursed trap for Subandhu. He had left behind a chest with a hundred locks. Subandhu broke the locks, hoping to find precious jewels. He found a sweet-smelling perfume and immediately inhaled it. But then his eyes fell on a birch bark note with a curse written on it. The note declared that anybody who smelled this perfume will have to either become a monk or face death. Subandhu tested the perfume on another man, and then fed him luxurious food (something that the monks abstain from). The man died, and then Subandhu was forced to become a monk to avoid death.[33][34]

According to another Jain text – the Rajavali-Katha – Chanakya accompanied Chandragupta to forest for retirement, once Bindusara became the king.[35]

Kashmiri version

The Kashmiri version of the legend goes like this: Vararuchi (identified with Katyayana), Indradatta and Vyadi were three disciples of the sage Varsha. Once, on behalf of their guru Varsha, they traveled to Ayodhya to seek a gurudakshina (guru's fee) from king Nanda. As they arrived to meet Nanda, the king died. Using his yogic powers, Indradatta entered Nanda's body, and granted Vararuchi's request for 10 million dinars (gold coins). The royal minister Shakatala realized what was happening, and had Indradatta's body burnt. But before he could take any action against the fake king (Indradatta in Nanda's body, also called Yogananda), the king had him arrested. Shakatala and his 100 sons were imprisoned, and were given food sufficient only for one person. Shakatala's 100 sons starved to death, so that their father could live to take revenge.[36]

Meanwhile, the fake king appointed Vararuchi as his minister. As the king's character kept deteriorating, a disgusted Vararuchi retired to a forest as an ascetic. Shakatala was then restored as the minister, but kept planning his revenge. One day, Shakatala came across Chanakya, a Brahmin who was uprooting all the grass in his path, because one blade of the grass had pricked his foot. Shakatala realized that he could use a man so vengeful to destroy the fake king. He invited Chanakya to the king's assembly, promising him 100,000 gold coins for presiding over a ritual ceremony.[36]

Shakatala hosted Chanakya in his own house, and treated him with great respect. But the day Chanakya arrived at the king's court, Shakatala got another Brahmin named Subandhu to preside over the ceremony. Chanakya felt insulted, but Shakatala blamed the king for this dishonour. Chanakya then untied his topknot (sikha), and vowed not to re-tie it until the king was destroyed. The king ordered his arrest, but he escaped to Shakatala's house. There, using materials supplied by Shakatala, he performed a magic ritual which made the king sick. The king died of fever after 7 days.[37]

Shakatala then executed Hiranyagupta, the son of the fake king. He anointed Chandragupta, the son of the real king Nanda, as the new king (in Kshemendra's version, it is Chanakya who installs Chandragupta as the new king). Shakatala also appointed Chanakya as the royal priest (purohita). Having achieved his revenge, he then retired to the forest as an ascetic.[37]

Mudrarakshasa version

According to the Mudrarakshasa version, the king Nanda once removed Chanakya from the "first seat of the kingdom" (this possibly refers to Chanakya's expulsion from the king's assembly). For this reason, Chanakya vowed not to tie his top knot (shikha) until the complete destruction of Nanda. Chanakya made a plan to dethrone Nanda, and replace him with Chandragupta, his son by a lesser queen. Chanakya engineered Chandragupta's alliance with another powerful king Parvateshvara (or Parvata), and the two rulers agreed to divide Nanda's territory after subjugating him. Their allied army included Bahlika, Kirata, Parasika, Kamboja, Shaka, and Yavana soldiers. The army invaded Pataliputra (Kusumapura) and defeated the Nandas.[38] Parvata is identified with King Porus by some scholars.[39]

Nanda's prime minister Rakshasa escaped Pataliputra, and continued resisting the invaders. He sent a vishakanya (poison girl) to assassinate Chandragupta. Chanakya had this girl assassinate Parvata instead, with the blame going to Rakshasa. However, Parvata's son Malayaketu learned the truth about his father's death, and defected to Rakshasa's camp. Chanakya's spy Bhagurayana accompanied Malayaketu, pretending to be his friend.[40]

Rakshasa continued to plot Chandragupta's death, but all his plans were foiled by Chanakya. For example, once Rakshasa arranged for assassins to be transported to Chandragupta's bedroom via a tunnel. Chanakya became aware of them by noticing a trail of ants carrying the leftovers of their food. He then arranged for the assassins to be burned to death.[41]

Meanwhile, Parvata's brother Vairodhaka became the ruler of his kingdom. Chanakya convinced him that Rakshasa was responsible for killing his brother, and agreed to share half of Nanda's kingdom with him. Secretly, however, Chanakya hatched a plan to get Vairodhaka killed. He knew that the chief architect of Pataliputra was a Rakshasa loyalist. He asked this architect to build a triumphal arch for Chandragupta's procession to the royal palace. He arranged the procession to be held at midnight citing astrological reasons, but actually to ensure poor visibility. He then invited Vairodhaka to lead the procession on Chandragupta's elephant, and accompanied by Chandragupta's bodyguards. As expected, Rakshasa's loyalists arranged for the arch to fall on who they thought was Chandragupta. Vairodhaka was killed, and once again, the assassination was blamed on Rakshasa.[40]

Malayaketu and Rakshasa then formed an alliance with five kings: Chiravarman of Kauluta (Kulu), Meghaksha of Parasika, Narasimha of Malaya, Pushkaraksha of Kashmira, and Sindhusena of Saindhava. This allied army also included soldiers from Chedi, Gandhara, Hunas, Khasa, Magadha, Shaka, and Yavana territories.[41]

In Pataliputra, Chanakya's agent informed him that three Rakshasa loyalists remained in the capital: the Jain monk Jiva-siddhi, the scribe Shakata-dasa and the jewelers' guild chief Chandana-dasa. Of these, Jiva-siddhi was actually a spy of Chanakya, unknown to his other spies. Chandana-dasa sheltered Rakshasa's wife, who once unknowingly dropped her husband's signet-ring (mudra). Chanakya's agent got hold of this signet-ring, and brought it to Chanakya. Using this signet ring, Chanakya sent a letter to Malayaketu warning him that his allies were treacherous. Chanakya also asked some of Chandragupta's princes to fake defection to Malayaketu's camp. In addition, Chanakya ordered Shakata-dasa's murder, but had him 'rescued' by Siddharthaka, a spy pretending to be an agent of Chandana-dasa. Chanakya's spy then took Shakata-dasa to Rakshasa.[41]

When Shakata-dasa and his 'rescuer' Siddharthaka reached Rakshasa, Siddharthaka presented him the signet-ring, claiming to have found it at Chandana-dasa's home. As a reward, Rakshasa gave him some jewels that Malayaketu had gifted him. Sometime after this, another of Chanakya's agents, disguised as a jeweler, sold Parvata's jewels to Rakshasa.[42]

Sometime later, Rakshasa sent his spies disguised as musicians to Chandragupta's court. But Chanakya knew all about Rakshasa's plans thanks to his spies. In front of Rakshasa's spies, Chanakya and Chandragupta feigned an angry argument. Chandragupta pretended to dismiss Chanakya, and declared that Rakshasa would make a better minister. Meanwhile, Malayaketu had a conversation with Chanakya's spy Bhagurayana while approaching Rakshasa's house. Bhagurayana made Malayaketu distrustful of Rakshasa, by saying that Rakshasa hated only Chanakya, and would be willing to serve Nanda's son Chandragupta. Shortly after this, a messenger came to Rakshasa's house, and informed him that Chandragupta had dismissed Chanakya while praising him. This convinced Malayaketu that Rakashasa could not be trusted.[42]

Malayaketu then decided to invade Pataliputra without Rakshasa by his side. He consulted the Jain monk Jiva-siddhi to decide an auspicious time for beginning the march. Jiva-siddhi, a spy of Chanakya, told him that he could start immediately.[42] Jiva-siddhi also convinced him that Rakshasa was responsible for his father's death, but Bhagurayana persuaded him not to harm Rakshasa. Shortly after, Chanakya's spy Siddharthaka pretended to get caught with a fake letter addressed to Chandragupta by Rakshasa. Wearing the jewels given by Rakshasa, he pretended to be an agent of Rakshasa. The letter, sealed with Rakshasa's signet-ring, informed Chandragupta that Rakshasa only wished to replace Chanakya as the prime minister. It also stated that five of Malayaketu's allies were willing to defect to Chandragupta in return for land and wealth. An angry Malayaketu summoned Rakshasa, who arrived wearing Parvata's jewels that Chanakya's agent had sold him. When Malayaketu saw Rakshasa wearing his father's jewels, he was convinced that there was indeed a treacherous plan against him. He executed his five allies in a brutal manner.[43]

The rest of Malayaketu's allies deserted him, disgusted at his treatment of the five slayed allies. Rakshasa managed to escape, tracked by Chanakya's spies. One of Chanakya's spies, disguised as a friend of Chandana-dasa, got in touch with him. He told Rakshasa that Chandana-dasa was about to be executed for refusing to divulge the location of Rakshasa's family. On hearing this, Rakshasa rushed to Pataliputra to surrender and save the life of his loyal friend Chandana-dasa. When he reached Pataliputra, Chanakya, pleased with his loyalty to Chandana-dasa, offered him clemency. Rakshasa pledged allegiance to Chandragupta and agreed to be his prime minister, in return for release of Chandana-dasa and a pardon for Malayaketu. Chanakya then bound his top knot, having achieved his objective, and retired.[43]

Literary works

Two books are attributed to Chanakya: Arthashastra,[44] and Chanakya Niti, also known as Chanakya Neeti-shastra.[45] The Arthashastra was discovered in 1905 by librarian Rudrapatna Shamasastry in an uncatalogued group of ancient palm-leaf manuscripts donated by an unknown pandit to the Oriental Research Institute Mysore.[46]

Formerly known as the Oriental Library, the Oriental Research Institute (ORI) at Mysore, India, is a research institute which collects, exhibits, edits, and publishes rare manuscripts written in various scripts like Devanagari (Sanskrit), Brahmic (Kannada), Nandinagari (Sanskrit), Grantha, Malayalam, Tigalari, etc.

The Oriental Library was started in 1891 under the patronage of Maharaja Chamarajendra Wadiyar X... It was a part of the Department of Education until 1916, in which year it became part of the newly established University of Mysore. The Oriental Library was renamed as the Oriental Research Institute in 1943.

From the year 1893 to date the ORI has published nearly two hundred titles. The library features rare collections such as the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics by James Hastings, A Vedic Concordance by Maurice Bloomfield, and critical editions of the Ramayana and Mahabharata. It was the first public library in Mysore city for research and editing of manuscripts. The prime focus was on Indology. The institute publishes an annual journal called Mysore Orientalist. Its most famous publications include Kautilya's Arthashastra, written in the 4th century BC, edited by Dr. R. Shamashastri, which brought international fame to the institute when published in 1909.

One day a man from Tanjore handed over a manuscript of Arthashastra written on dried palm leaves to Dr Rudrapatnam Shamashastry, the librarian of Mysore Government Oriental Library now ORI. Shamashastry's job was to look after the library's ancient manuscripts. He had never seen anything like these palm leaves before. Here was a book that would revolutionise the knowledge of India's great past. This palm leaf manuscript is preserved in the library, now named Oriental Research Institute. The pages of the book are filled with 1500-year-old Grantha script. It looks like as if they have been printed but the words have been inscribed by hand. Other copies of Arthashastra were later discovered later in other parts of India.[1]

In this context, my mind remembering a day which was the His Excellency Krishnaraja Wodeyar went to Germany at the time of Dr. R. Shamashastry were working as a curator of Oriental Library, Mysore, The King sat in a meeting held in Germany and introduced himself as the King of Mysore State. Immediately a man stood up and asked, "Are you from our Dr. R. Shamashastry's Mysore?" Because the Arthashastra edited by him took a fame worldwide. The King wondered and came back to Mysore immediately to see Dr. R. Shamashastry, and also Dr. R. Shamashastry appointed as Asthana Vidwan. Sritattvanidhi, is a compilation of slokas by Krishnaraja Wodeyar III. Three edited manuscripts Navaratnamani-mahatmyam (a work on gemology), Tantrasara-sangraha (a work on sculptures and architecture), and Vaidashastra-dipika (an ayurvedic text), Rasa-kaumudi (on mercurial medicine) all of them with English and Kannada translation, are already in advanced stages of printing.

Oriental Research Institute

The ORI houses over 45,000 Palm leaf manuscript bundles and the 75,000 works on those leaves. The manuscripts are palm leaves cut to a standard size of 150 by 35 mm (5.9 by 1.4 in). Brittle palm leaves are sometimes softened by scrubbing a paste made of ragi and then used by the ancients for writing, similar to the use of papyrus in ancient Egypt. Manuscripts are organic materials that run the risk of decay and are prone to be destroyed by silverfish. To preserve them the ORI applies lemon grass oil on the manuscripts which acts like a pesticide. The lemon grass oil also injects natural fluidity into the brittle palm leaves and the hydrophobic nature of the oil keeps the manuscripts dry so that the text is not lost to decay due to humidity.

The conventional method followed at the ORI was to preserve manuscripts by capturing them in microfilm, which then necessitated the use of a microfilm reader for viewing or studying. Once the ORI has digitized the manuscripts, the text can be viewed and manipulated by a computer. Software is then used to put together disjointed pieces of manuscripts and to correct or fill in any missing text. In this manner, the manuscripts are restored and enhanced. The original palm leaf manuscripts are also on reference at the ORI for those interested.

-- Oriental Research Institute Mysore, by Wikipedia

• The Arthashastra, which discusses monetary and fiscal policies, welfare, international relations, and war strategies in detail. The text also outlines the duties of a ruler.[47][unreliable source?] Some scholars believe that Arthashastra is actually a compilation of a number of earlier texts written by various authors, and Chanakya might have been one of these authors (see above).[9]
• Chanakya Niti, which is a collection of aphorisms, said to be selected by Chanakya from the various shastras.[45]

Legacy

Arthashastra is serious manual on statecraft, on how to run a state, informed by a higher purpose, clear and precise in its prescriptions, the result of practical experience of running a state. It is not just a normative text but a realist description of the art of running a state.

- Shiv Shankar Menon, National Security Advisor[48]

Chanakya is regarded as a great thinker and diplomat in India. Many Indian nationalists regard him as one of the earliest people who envisioned a united India spanning the entire subcontinent. India's former National Security Advisor Shiv Shankar Menon praised Chanakya's Arthashastra for its precise and timeless descriptions of power. Furthermore, he recommended reading of the book for broadening the vision on strategic issues.[48]

The diplomatic enclave in New Delhi is named Chanakyapuri in honour of Chanakya. Institutes named after him include Training Ship Chanakya, Chanakya National Law University and Chanakya Institute of Public Leadership. Chanakya circle in Mysore has been named after him.[49]

In Popular Culture

Plays

Several modern adaptations of the legend of Chanakya narrate his story in a semi-fictional form, extending these legends. In Chandragupta (1911), a play by Dwijendralal Ray, the Nanda king exiles his half-brother Chandragupta, who joins the army of Alexander the Great. Later, with help from Chanakya and Katyayan (the former Prime Minister of Magadha), Chandragupta defeats Nanda, who is put to death by Chanakya.[50]

Film and television

• The story of Chanakya and Chandragupta was portrayed in the 1977 Telugu film entitled Chanakya Chandragupta. Akkineni Nageswara Rao played the role of Chanakya, while N. T. Rama Rao portrayed as Chandragupta.[51]
• The 1991 TV series Chanakya is an archetypal account of the life and times of Chanakya, based on the Mudrarakshasa. The titular role of the same name was portrayed by Chandraprakash Dwivedi
• Chandragupta Maurya, a 2011 TV series on NDTV Imagine is a biographical series on the life of Chandragupta Maurya and Chanakya, and is produced by Sagar Arts. Manish Wadhwa portrays the character of Chanakya in this series.
• The 2015 Colors TV drama, Chakravartin Ashoka Samrat, features Chanakya during the reign of Chandragupta's son, Bindusara.
• Chanakya was played by Chetan Pandit and Tarun Khanna, in the historical-drama television series Porus in 2017–2018.
• Chanakya was played by Tarun Khanna, in the historical drama TV series Chandragupta Maurya in 2018–2019.

Books and academia

• An English-language book titled Chanakya on Management contains 216 sutras on raja-neeti, each of which has been translated and commented upon.
• A book written by Ratan Lal Basu and Rajkumar Sen deals with the economic concepts mentioned in Arthashastra and their relevance for the modern world.[52]
• Chanakya (2001) by B. K. Chaturvedi[53]
• In 2009, many eminent experts discussed the various aspects of Kauṭilya's thought in an International Conference held at the Oriental Research Institute in Mysore (India) to celebrate the centenary of discovery of the manuscript of the Arthashastra by R. Shamasastry. Most of the papers presented in the Conference have been compiled in an edited volume by Raj Kumar Sen and Ratan Lal Basu.[54][55]
• Chanakya's Chant by Ashwin Sanghi is a fictional account of Chanakya's life as a political strategist in ancient India. The novel relates two parallel stories, the first of Chanakya and his machinations to bring Chandragupta Maurya to the throne of Magadha; the second, that of a modern-day character called Gangasagar Mishra who makes it his ambition to position a slum child as Prime Minister of India.
• The Emperor's Riddles by Satyarth Nayak features popular episodes from Chanakya's life.
• Kauṭilya's role in the formation of the Maurya Empire is the essence of a historical/spiritual novel Courtesan and the Sadhu by Mysore N. Prakash.[56]
• Chanakya's contribution to the cultural heritage of Bharat (in Kannada) by Shatavadhani Ganesh with the title Bharatada Samskrutige Chanakyana Kodugegalu.[57]
• Pavan Choudary (2 February 2009). Chanakya's Political Wisdom. Wisdom Village Publications Division. ISBN 978-81-906555-0-7., a political commentary on Chanakya
• Sihag, Balbir Singh (2014), Kautilya: The True Founder of Economics, Vitasta Publishing Pvt.Ltd, ISBN 978-81-925354-9-4
• Radhakrishnan Pillai has written a number of books related to Chanakya — "Chanakya in the Classroom: Life Lessons for Students",[58] "Chanakya Neeti: Strategies for Success", "Chanakya in You", "Chanakya and the Art of War", "Corporate Chanakya",[59] "Corporate Chanakya on Management" and "Corporate Chanakya on Leadership".[60]

See also

• Rajamandala

References

1. Trautmann 1971, p. 21.
2. Trautmann 1971, p. 12.
3. Mabbett, I. W. (1964). "The Date of the Arthaśāstra". Journal of the American Oriental Society. American Oriental Society. 84 (2): 162–169. doi:10.2307/597102. ISSN 0003-0279. JSTOR 597102.
4. Transaction and Hierarchy. Routledge. 9 August 2017. p. 56. ISBN 978-1351393966.
5. L. K. Jha, K. N. Jha (1998). "Chanakya: the pioneer economist of the world", International Journal of Social Economics 25 (2–4), p. 267–282.
6. Waldauer, C., Zahka, W.J. and Pal, S. 1996. Kauṭilya's Arthashastra: A neglected precursor to classical economics. Indian Economic Review, Vol. XXXI, No. 1, pp. 101–108.
7. Tisdell, C. 2003. A Western perspective of Kauṭilya's Arthashastra: does it provide a basis for economic science? Economic Theory, Applications and Issues Working Paper No. 18. Brisbane: School of Economics, The University of Queensland.
8. Sihag, B.S. 2007. Kauṭilya on institutions, governance, knowledge, ethics and prosperity. Humanomics 23 (1): 5–28.
9. Namita Sanjay Sugandhi (2008). Between the Patterns of History: Rethinking Mauryan Imperial Interaction in the Southern Deccan. pp. 88–89. ISBN 978-0-549-74441-2. Retrieved 6 June 2012.
10. Trautmann 1971, p. 11.
11. Trautmann 1971, p. 16.
12. Trautmann 1971, pp. 18.
13. Trautmann 1971, p. 29.
14. Trautmann 1971, p. 31–33.
15. Trautmann 1971, pp. 41–43.
16. Varadpande 2005, p. 223.
17. Upinder Singh 2016, p. 30.
18. Trautmann 1971, p. 43.
19. Trautmann 1971, p. 5:"the very last verse of the work... is the unique instance of the personal name Vishnugupta rather than the gotra name Kautilya in the Arthashastra."
20. Trautmann 1971, p. 10:"while in his character as author of an Arthashastra he is generally referred to by his gotra name, Kautilya."
21. Mabbett 1964: "References to the work in other Sanskrit literature attribute it variously to Vishnugupta, Chanakya and Kautilya. The same individual is meant in each case. The Panchatantra explicitly identifies Chanakya with Vishnugupta."
22. Trautmann 1971, p. 67:"T. Burrow ("Cāṇakya and Kauṭalya", Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 48–49, 1968, p. 17 ff.) has now shown that Cāṇakya is also a gotra name, which in conjunction with other evidence makes it clear that we are dealing with two distinct persons, the minister Cāṇakya of legend and Kauṭilya the compiler of the Arthashastra. Furthermore, this throws the balance of evidence in favor of the view that the second name was originally spelt Kauṭalya, and that after the compiler of the Arth came to be identified with the Mauryan minister, it was altered to Kauṭilya (as it appears in Āryaśūra, Viśākhadatta and Bāna) for the sake of the pun. We must then assume that the later spelling subsequently replaced the earlier in the gotra lists and elsewhere.'"
23. Trautmann 1971, p. 13.
24. rautmann 1971, p. 14.
25. Trautmann 1971, p. 15.
26. Trautmann 1971, p. 28.
27. Upinder Singh 2016, p. 331.
28. Kallidaikurichi Aiyah Nilakanta Sastri (1988). Age of the Nandas and Mauryas. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 148. ISBN 978-81-208-0466-1.
29. Trautmann 1971, p. 22.
30. Trautmann 1971, p. 23.
31. Trautmann 1971, p. 24.
32. Trautmann 1971, p. 25.
33. Motilal Banarsidass (1993). "The Minister Cāṇakya, from the Pariśiṣtaparvan of Hemacandra". In Phyllis Granoff (ed.). The Clever Adulteress and Other Stories: A Treasury of Jaina Literature. Translated by Rosalind Lefeber. pp. 204–206. ISBN 9788120811508.
34. Hemachandra (1891). Sthavir̂aval̂i charita, or, Pariśishtaparvan. Translated by Hermann Jacobi. Calcutta: Asiatic Society. pp. 67–68.
35. Rice 1889, p. 9.
36. Trautmann 1971, p. 31.
37. Trautmann 1971, p. 32.
38. Trautmann 1971, pp. 36–37.
39. Varadpande 2005, pp. 227–230.
40. Trautmann 1971, p. 37.
41. Trautmann 1971, p. 38.
42. Trautmann 1971, p. 39.
43. Trautmann 1971, p. 40.
44. Kautilya's Arthashastra (PDF). Translated by Shamasastry, R. 1905. Retrieved 23 August2020.
45. Sri Chanakya Niti-shastra; the Political Ethics of Chanakya Pandit Hardcover. Translated by Miles Davis and V. Badarayana Murthy. Ram Kumar Press. 1981. Archived from the original on 16 July 2014. Retrieved 15 August 2014.
46. Srinivasaraju, Sugata (27 July 2009). "Year of the Guru". Outlook India. Retrieved 17 March2018.
47. Paul Halsall. Indian History Sourcebook: Kautilya: from the Arthashastra c. 250 BC Retrieved 19 June 2012
48. "India needs to develop its own doctrine for strategic autonomy: NSA". The Economic Times. NEW DELHI. Press Trust of India. 18 October 2012. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
49. Yelegaonkar, Dr Shrikant. Chanakya's Views on Administration. Lulu.com. p. 8. ISBN 9781329082809.
50. Ray, Dwijendralal (1969). "Bhumika: Aitihasikata" [Preface: Historic References]. In Bandyopadhyay, Sukumar (ed.). Dwijendralaler Chandragupta [Chandragupta by Dwindralal] (in Bengali) (4th ed.). Kolkata: Modern Book Agency. pp. Preface–10–14.
51. Chanakya Chandragupta (1977), 25 August 1977, retrieved 24 May 2017
52. Ratan Lal Basu & Rajkumar Sen: Ancient Indian Economic Thought, Relevance for Today, ISBN 81-316-0125-0, Rawat Publications, New Delhi, 2008
53. B. K. Chaturvedi (2001). Chanakya. Diamond Pocket Books. ISBN 978-81-7182-143-3. Retrieved 6 June 2012.
54. Raj Kumar Sen & Ratan Lal Basu (eds): Economics in Arthashastra, ISBN 81-7629-819-0, Deep& Deep Publications Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 2006
55. Srinivasaraju, Sugata (27 July 2009). "Year of the Guru". Outlook India. Archived from the original on 12 October 2012. Retrieved 8 March 2012.
56. The Courtesan and the Sadhu, A Novel about Maya, Dharma, and God, October 2008, Dharma Vision, ISBN 978-0-9818237-0-6, Library of Congress Control Number: 2008934274
57. "Bharatiya Samskrutige Chanakyana Kodugegalu Part 1 – Shatavadhani Dr.R.Ganesh — Spiritual Bangalore". spiritualbangalore.com. Archived from the original on 2 March 2014.
58. "Chanakya in the Classroom: Life Lessons for Students". Rupa Publications. Retrieved 6 February 2021.
59. Sethi, Vinay (December 2015). "Corporate Citizen". corporatecitizen.in. Retrieved 6 February2021.
60. "Books - Radhakrishnan Pillai". http://www.crossword.in. Retrieved 6 February 2021.

Bibliography

• Mookerji, Radha Kumud (1988) [first published in 1966], Chandragupta Maurya and his times (4th ed.), Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 81-208-0433-3
• Rice, B. Lewis (1889), Epigraphia Carnatica, II: Inscriptions and Sravana Belgola, Bangalore: Mysore Government Central Press
• Singh, Upinder (2016), A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century, Pearson Education, ISBN 978-93-325-6996-6
• Trautmann, Thomas R. (1971), Kauṭilya and the Arthaśāstra: a statistical investigation of the authorship and evolution of the text, Brill
• Varadpande, Manohar Laxman (2005), History of Indian Theatre, Abhinav, ISBN 978-81-7017-430-1

External links

• Kautilya Arthashastra English translation by R. Shamasastry 1956 (revised edition with IAST diacritics and interwoven glossary)
• Chanakya Nitishastra: English translation by Miles Davis.

[admin]

Part 1 of 4

Mystic Tales of Lama Taranatha: A Religio-Sociological History of Mahayana Buddhism
by Lama Taranatha
Translated into English by Bhupendranath Datta, A.M., Dr. Phil.
1944
Ramakrishna Vedanta Math

Highlights:

The German translation of Lama Taranatha's first book on India called The Mine of Previous Stones (Edelsteinmine) was made by Prof. Gruenwedel the reputed Orientalist and Archaeologist on Buddhist culture in Berlin. The translation came out in 1914 A.D. from Petrograd (Leningrad).

The German translator confessed his difficulty in translating the Tibetan words on matters relating to witchcraft and sorcery. So he has used the European terms from the literature of witchcraft and magic of the middle ages viz. 'Frozen' and 'Seven miles boots.'

He said that history in the modern sense could not be expected from Taranatha. The important matter with him was the reference to the traditional endorsement of certain teaching staff. Under the spiritual protection of his teacher Buddhaguptanatha, he wrote enthusiastically the biography of the predecessor of the same with all their extravagances, as well as the madness of the old Siddhas.

The book contains a rigmarole of miracles and magic….

"He acquired all Siddhis: the globule Siddhi, the eye-ointment, the sword-Siddhi, further all power to destroy and again to revive to life, and got complete power over all superhuman Yaksas and Nagas and especially received a Vajra-body which was created for him by the elixir of life. He became a giant on magic power and supernatural knowledge….

The king received the elixir of age and the Yaksas as his servants. He built five hundred temple-cloisters as the resting-place of the preachers. Later, he (acarya) dwelt on the Sriparvata for two hundred years long, surrounded by the Yaksis and remained there practising the Tantras till his subsequent beheading by the grandson of the king Udayana called Susukti or the mighty prince. As it is related, it took place, in his seventy years of age, when the 71st year was not complete as it was only half-year. The mother of the prince asked his son to beg of the head of the acarya as his father and acarya possessed magic by which his age would be as long as the acarya, and as the acarya had a Vajra-body he would not die. The mother wanted it for the good of the son. The prince went to Srlparvata and begged of the acarya for it. The head was cut off by a Kusa-stalk. A word was heard: 'I go from here towards Sukhavati, but will come back again and will rejoin the body.' Thereupon there were earthquake and famine for twelve years…

He was shown a mirror in which he saw himself roasting in hell-fire…

Then he asked a ferryman on the shore of the Ganges to take him to the other side; but it happened so that, he having no fare for the ferry, showed his pointing finger to the Ganga and the Ganga stood up straight. Thus he came to the other side. Then in Odica, he demanded brandy from a wine-selling woman and as this one said he must pay the bill, he began to chase the shadows of a sun-dial from the fields but which did not go away from there, so he pointed his finger towards the sun and held it as with a nail and drunk brandy. As he did not want to set it free, the clocks and the guards made mistake. The king who knowing that the Yogi wanted to show his power, gave the price for the brandy and prayed to him to let the sun loose…

As now the self-erected stone image of the Chandika slightly shaking began to move, there with a blow on the head, he went with head on her breast to the womb. People say that he is still there, kneeling in straight position, but his pair of ears are only to be seen…

This Yogi could not be destroyed in water, fire, by weapons and by poison…

He gave Siddhi to all men, and from animals to worms and disappeared in the Rainbow-body…

Once seeing him in the company of a common woman of the temple, the king ordered them to be burned. But out of the ashes, he reappeared as Heruka with gakti in a halo of brilliant rays. Thus, the people were surprised and became converts to Vajrayana…

He meditated and attained deep Samadhi on the bright Ray, built a hut near a door of a city in Udayana and worked jugglery with the king. He disappeared in celestial region by magic…

The boy and the girl changed themselves into Vajra and Ghanta, he took hold of them and flew to heaven…

There was a certain Mantravati experienced in the Mantras of Sahajasiddhi and magic-powers, she was a Hexe (witch). She wanted to destroy the acarya and his followers and attempted to seize him; but could find nothing but a piece of woollen-cloth (Kambala) on the spot where the acarya sat. The witch saw that this was a magic work of the acarya that he had transformed his own body into a woollen-cloth! ‘That must be torn off and everybody must eat a piece of it.' With these words she tore off the cloth and everybody (of her following) ate off a piece. Thereupon the acarya made himself again visible and cursed them all, and five hundred witches with Mantravati became five hundred sheep-headed Matrkas."…

As he showed his index-finger to the Linga, its head fell down to the foot, and as he looked at it, the body broke up in many pieces. Then, the whole world recognized that he had acquired Siddhi; and they trampled the idol on foot…

But the Tirthikas scolded the king, who ordered his men to cut off his head. But they could not do damage to the acarya inspite of their all sorts of weapons. Then, as the acarya clapped both of his hands, the palace broke into pieces, and he with his exorcising look made the people of the king benumbed and stiff…

Later he with five hundred peoples went to heaven…

One morning his mother saw the acarya in the king's fruit-garden. He was sitting at the foot of the trees and uttered the words: ‘Narikela Bhiksavo' and the fruits of the tree came by themselves to him. After having drunk the cocoanut water, he spoke: ‘Narikela Uparajahi’ and the fruits went up as before…

The king dug a groove in the earth and filled it with thorn-bushes, elephant and horse dung and threw the acarya there and covered him up. So the acarya showed a double function of his body: in Jalandhara he was wandering to work for the salvation of beings, and at the same time taught in Bengal…

In midnight appeared the man-eating Dakinis and Raksasas, everyone bound the body of a man and taking him away, put him before the shrine of the Matrkas, and made themselves ready to devour them. But as the monastery steward uttered the word: ‘Phat’ ([x]) and made dancing movements, the Dakinis and Raksasas became senseless and fell to the ground. The shrine of the Matrkas fell down into three pieces….

After religious discourses Jalandhari gave him a skullcup full of light…Finally he told them: 'Keep everything in the secrecy of your memory for three years, after it bring all the Tantra powers in function and you according to your wish will have holy life! And all will acquire the Siddhis.' Saying this he became invisible…The six Yogis received the Siddhi of immortality. …

All men were in doubt when once in a city of Bengal assembled hundred thousand men to see him, the acarya appeared with the Sakti pounding Sesame in the air above the ground about a man’s height. And as people asked him different questions, he gave answers in a song of his experience. It is narrated that the assembled people understood the sense and acquired the Siddhi. Thus he became famous as Siddha Tilli. After working for the salvation of all creatures for a long time, he went bodily to heaven….

Once during swimming he was eaten up by a fish, but having meditated the Mandala of Heruka he came out without any harm…

A Tirthika Yogi let two meteors fall from heaven. Both were black, and in the shapes of houses but with human heads. Acarya knowing these to be eye-illusions muttered Dharanis to annul them and both of them transformed themselves in little pieces of coals; then some of the Tirthikas showed a piece of art — as flames from the fire coming out of the body. But he put water on it and extinguished the fire. Thus all the attacks were parried each time and juggling works were defeated by the juggling works. In the end, the four leading teachers of the Tirthikas, by the magic-power of the acarya, were transformed into cats. Now the Buddhists increased very much in this country….

He mastered Tantras and collections over Sambara, Hevajra, Bhairava and four thrones. He lived two hundred years…

With the words: 'Go to Udayana' went up magically the acarya in heaven…

He disappeared again through the door of benediction of acarya Nandapala and emerged up in two and a half hundred years in the south. There he met acarya Asitaghana. This one was on the border of his second hundredth years when he met the acarya. Thereupon began the acarya to work with activity…

Then the Castellan smote him with a batan. The acarya blew a horn, thereby the stone statues of the temple of Jagannatha lost their extremities and organs and their former wonder powers…

There appeared the acarya magically doubling his body four times and consecrating simultaneously in all four temples. The Tirthikas came to confuse them (inmates of the convents), but they were defeated by greater exorcism…

He needed CandaIa girl ([x]) for the support of his magic, and got one by giving her parents gold procured miraculously as high as her stature. He reached the highest state of Mahamudra-siddhi. After he had written many text-books, bodily he flew up to the heaven like a Garuda-prince to the Ksetra of the Buddha-Aksobhya…

He was threatened by a Tirthika king who wanted to break his head. His head was cut off, but he put on a buffalo-head on his shoulders. He went to Harikela to preach. There exorcised a cat, hence he was called Bhiradi or Birali…

'He lived with Vajrayogini who looked like a she-dog before the world. Hence he was called Kukuri. This acarya took as a Yogi of Srivajrabhairava, the pose of a destroyer, and there was a history that a king of the Tajiks (Persian) with his elephants were reduced to dust…

On his way back to Jambudvipa the sea became stormy and thieves came there. Muttering the Dharanis [incantations] he threw down a handful of sand offering, brought the robbers and thieves in his power and the sea became calm…

Vikrtideva was a well-informed Bengali-Pandita. He went to Nalanda and busied himself much about Dharma and all the Upadesas. Though, when he left his motherland, he promised his original Guru to be a monk, he did it later, as he had desire of the flesh, took a wife and had three children: One boy and two girls. But in dream AvaIokitesvara said as he had broken the order of his Guru, he would die within three years of an infectious disease and would go to hell, he got very much frightened, cut himself off from his family and took vows. But the prophesy was fulfilled, after three years he got the contagion and died. There his acarya saw in his mind, how he was taken away by the beadles of the Yama, but five gods and Hayagriva with Aryavalokitesvara at their head struck the hell-beadles and Aryavalokitesvara shed tears and ran towards him to bring his body back. And while he was brought back visibly to the Parivara of the Arya, he came back to life again. As he had seen the face of Avalokitesvara, he had greater power, gained success in his spiritual dignity and the Siddhi…

Nagarjuna holding himself on the Dharanis of the 'air-wanderers' (Dakinis), brought two shoes from the tree-leaves which enabled him to go through the air. The one he concealed, he put on the other and flew to Vyali through the air. As he now demanded that the acarya must give him the gold-essence, Vyali answered thereupon: 'Give me thy shoe, that will be the worth of the gold-essence that I give to you!' Then many Upadesas for Quicksilver-essence, many hundred thousands, aye many millions of methods of Elixir and beyond it, the power of exorcism to make gold, he gave to Nagarjuna, and he gave him for it a shoe. Then he put on the hidden shoe and went to India through the air and furthered there very much the Upadesas of Life-elixir. In the country of Gandhara in the north was a mountain called Dhinkota in the district called Munindra. He wanted to change it into gold and silver, but Aryatara who knew that would bring the future generations to fight amongst themselves, prevented it and by her blessing changed it to salt. And today it is known by the Gandhara country Lati.1 [Perhaps the salt-range of western Punjab is meant here.] …

When the others had gone, the acarya came there to beg of his food. She brought all food to him and the acarya said: 'When thy relatives do not get irritated then give me much food till tomorrow morning, so that you can remain; but if you are angry, then tarry now while I put fire in the surrounding woods, then fly and come to me!' She took her little child and flew. As she arrived at the place of the acarya, he gave her the Elixir of life. Thereby she received a Vidyadhari-body and doubled motherhood. Thus she received in quick succession a large number of children. The acarya gave the Elixir to them also, and there arose three hundred descendants with Vidyadhara-bodies…

As the fisher was in deep contemplation, he had thrown out his angle and drew it, but the fish drew him in its interior and swallowed him. As he was meditating deeply over the power of Karma, he did not die. As the river Rohita1 [Is it the same as the river Lauhitya which now-a-days is called Brahmaputra?] that today in Tibetan called gTsan-po, had reached Kamarupa, there lay a small hill called Umagiri, while there Devesvara zealously gave the Upadesas to the penitent Uma, and the fish swam in that water. The fisher, lying in the belly of the fish, heard that, meditated over that Upadesa and had great benefit. As a fisher again caught that fish and killed it, a man was there. Earlier he died there as a king; thirteen years had just past that formerly a son was born to him. In the belly of the fish he had spent the rest twelve years….

As concerns the Siddha Karnari, he had been the king in the country of Mewar. Some years had passed that he took a beautiful wife with the name of Pingali. She was very dear to the heart of the king. In order to examine her, once he went alone to a wood and let the false news to be spread, that he had been eaten up by a tiger and thus had met his death. The queen Pingali died from grief, and her dead body was brought to the burning-place. The king did not go back to the city, but standing by the side of the dead queen he constantly wept: 'Alas, alas Pingala!' Thus eight years, thus twelve years had passed. Then came there Siddha Goraksa. Inadvertently he let an earthen vessel (Dipi) fall down from his hand and he broke it. Then he began to lament and remained standing with the complaint: ‘Alas, alas Dipi.' Then spoke the king: 'What for this foolish Yogi makes such a lament when his water-vessel is broken?' Then to make it clear that it deals about a stroke that contains an allusion upon the other, spoke the acarya: ‘There thou art a fool, as regards my broken pot, it remains to me indeed as my property. Stop your lament over Pingala who is no longer present as she is reduced to dust.' Then he recognized him as the acarya Goraksa and prayed to make him his disciple. He spoke to him: 'Throw away the kingship from you!' As he put away his kingship, he followed him as a disciple. At one time the acarya ordered that he had got appetite for flesh and spirituous things. As the disciple went to the town to buy flesh and brandy, a woman had exhibited six pieces of pork and six flasks of brandy. She said: 'As price I demand your right eye, I will not be drawn into any other bargain.' Then the disciple in order to bring the offering to his acarya, took out the right eye and gave it to her. Thereupon he brought the flesh and the brandy to his acarya. On query he narrated the matter to the acarya. The acarya then demanded the left eye which was given. Thereupon the acarya blessed him and in three years he got back his eyes like before. And in the same period he became a Mahasiddha….

As regards the Siddha Nago, he was called the naked because he did not have a thread as cloth on his body. When he stayed in the south, he came in the social-circle of the first wife of the king and gave her the Upadesas. The king was angry, cut off the five limbs of the acarya, and threw them off towards the sky. But these limbs came back again and were fitted in the body. As this happened seven times, the acarya in the end gave out a curse and the king's five limbs fell off by themselves, and then he died. But after a prayer for it he came back to life. Thus he showed his power. Then he disappeared towards the mountain Bhindapala and there he is still living without throwing off his mortal body…

Later on, during the occasion of his stay in the south there lying the mountain Khagendra, the king named Ramacanda of the country of Bhirva came out for a hunt. He saw a Gazelle staying on the corner of the mountain. He followed its tracks and when he had arrived at it, the Gazelle changed itself into a tiger. As he was startled a little, the animal emitting forth sparks ran away to a hut of leaves. As the king went there to search about it, there was a bright splendour of a shining Bhiksu. On the question: 'Who art thou?' and being asked twice, the acarya did not give any reply. In answer to the third time he said: 'Thou king of bad character, what sayest thou? I am a Yogi.’ Now he overcame him with three magical-looks. The king became an extraordinary believer and fell to his feet. Then the king’s companions came and they also fell to the feet of the acarya. He made them glad by preaching Dharma, and after he had allowed a young Brahmana to have a look in his heart, who produced many songs and dances and then became invisible… The disciple meditated and within a short time won the Siddhi of 'seven miles-boot.'..

By making a vow on Mahabodhi, they received the answer that the time was proper to act, in order to accomplish the tasks of terror. This was met by the acarya and his four companions at Jarikhanda. They revolved the wheel of Yamantaka; then within six months the Pathans and the Mogols were innerly shaken and in the east all the followers of the religion of the Turuskas were slain in battle. The Hindu king Manasing was taken prisoner…

In the interior of the palace there was a Linga terrible to look at, and it was established from the time of Arjuna. He treaded and danced on it and so his foot-prints were stamped on it. At this the king out of anger let six elephants be excited. In spite of the number of the elephants being six, who seized him with their trunks, he was not to be moved. As he threateningly raised his finger the stone image of the Chandika, which once was of great miraculous power, melt away just like a lump of butter in the heat of the sun. Still now this figure remains there without becoming a mass. Then the king recognised, that he had acquired the Siddhi, and threw himself on the ground….

Further was the Turuska king from the country of Canka. He went on the street near the place where the acarya sat. As he used many abusive language to the acarya and this was heard by one of his disciples, he gave out the curse: ‘You all be dumb.' And the king and his people became dumb on the very spot. Then they were frightfully afraid and prayingly applied themselves to the acarya. Then he said: ‘To testify the power of the Bauddhas, all without exception you can speak again.' And thus it happened…

his body was changed into rainbow colours and his Jnanakaya clasped the heaven….

But this great Acarya brought in fourfold forms his tasks to end magically: Only through the word what he said took place, through the four glances of exorcism, in the midst of little refined congregations astonishment, and wonder-signs appeared on their faces and that he (in the Ganacakra) by the power of magic created thither flesh-balls, liquids, brandy and blood and the fruits of the woods…

At first he saw the face of Avalokitesvara and of that Hayagriva, then that of Manjusrl and Yamantaka, thereafter of Hevajra and of Kurukulli. He made Mahakali completely his servant, and he received everything what he ordered from the Six great Yoginis….

Man appointed time which was the fruit of the previous birth, lotus flowers and wheels (Cakras) came out in her hands and feet and thus as she was furnished with Laksanas, a prophesy came about her that when she could dwell, she would acquire Mahatmya. She heard that in a city of Marahata near Cavala dwelt the Mahacarya Santigupta. As soon as she heard his name, she felt a need for Samadhi and as soon as she saw his face, plunged into the complete Samadhi….By the Yoga, her power over the air became unparalleled. She could ascend up the sky for miles. She also acquired the four magical looks….

Here is written only on the basis of that which anywhere to be perceived from the histories prepared in India, and at that which is given in Tibet by the believing people, that was present from old times."

-- Mystic Tales of Lama Taranatha: A Religio-Sociological History of Mahayana Buddhism, by Lama Taranatha, Translated into English by Bhupendranath Datta, A.M., Dr. Phil.

Lama Taranatha:

Tarantha, son of Namgyal P'un-ts'ogs. was born in Tsang on the 8th day of the pig-male-tree year, corresponding to 1573 A.D. and was called Kun-dgah SNyinpo, or "The essence of happiness". He studied in the Jonang monastery, north of Sakya under the religious name Taranath, an din his forty-first year built himself a monastery in the neighbourhood, which he named rTag-brten, and filled it with many images, books, and caityas. He laterly proceeded to Mongolia at the invitation of the people of that country, and founded there several monasteries under the auspices of the Chinese Emperor. He died in Mongolia, and was canonized under the title of "The Reverence Holiness," Je-tsun-dam-pa." -- From L. Austine Waddell: The Buddhism of Tibet or Lamaism (1899), p. 70

Contents:

• SUBSTANCE OF INTRODUCTION
• PREFACE BY THE ENGLISH TRANSLATOR
• FOREWORD
• PUBLISHERS NOTE
• INSPIRATION I
• INSPIRATION II
• INSPIRATION III
• INSPIRATION IV
• INSPIRATION V
• HISTORY OF THE CONSECRATION OF VIKRAMASILA
• HISTORY OF CONVERSION IN NALANDA
• INSPIRATION VI
• INSPIRATION VII
• APPENDIX I
• INDEX

SUBSTANCE OF INTRODUCTION
by Gruenwedel

The German translation of Lama Taranatha's first book on India called The Mine of Previous Stones (Edelsteinmine) was made by Prof. Gruenwedel the reputed Orientalist and Archaeologist on Buddhist culture in Berlin. The translation came out in 1914 A.D. from Petrograd (Leningrad).

The German translator confessed his difficulty in translating the Tibetan words on matters relating to witchcraft and sorcery. So he has used the European terms from the literature of witchcraft and magic of the middle ages viz. 'Frozen' and 'Seven miles boots.'

He said that history in the modern sense could not be expected from Taranatha. The important matter with him was the reference to the traditional endorsement of certain teaching staff. Under the spiritual protection of his teacher Buddhaguptanatha, he wrote enthusiastically the biography of the predecessor of the same with all their extravagances, as well as the madness of the old Siddhas.

Prof. Gruenwedel said that the folklore exploited for this work is not small; it is especially noticeable in the text of the occasional news about the old ruins, temples and religion, about the destruction wrought by the followers of Islam, further the occasional informations about the relations between the Brahmanical gods and the Buddhist Bodhisattvas and divinities. Also, there are some informative mentioning about Further-India and the manifestation of Virupas in China. Perhaps here lies before us the ioonographic agreement of the Indian Siddhas with the Sen-nin representations.

As sources of Taranatha, he mentioned the Magadha-Panditas Indrabhadra, Indradatta and Bhataghadri instead of Bhataghati, the last two he mentioned at the end of History of Buddhism where Indrabhadra corresponds with his Ksemendrabhadra.

It seems Taranatha was much dependent on the Tibetan recipients regarding language, it is especially noticeable in connection with the proper names.

The English Translator

***

PREFACE BY THE ENGLISH TRANSLATOR

The book of Gruenwedel contains 212 pages of which 146 pages only cover the text. The English translation is an abstract of the text with the informative notes taken from the German translator. None of the names of the Siddhas mentioned in the text has been left out. The book contains a rigmarole of miracles and magic. Hence the important parts of the stories about the Siddhas have only been selected, else there is a repetition of the same nature. The English translator has tried to be literal, only in a few places where abstract and free translations have been made he has marked it within brackets as —('Translator)'.

The book is translated into English in an abstract form as in these days of reawakening of Indian culture, the Indian historian and the sociologist may find information in Taranatha's books regarding Buddhist India. By perusing the Tibetan books translated into English and German it seems to the translator that all the Tibetan writers on India have used common source for their informations regarding Indian history. And in some of these books, the authority of the Indian book Aryamanjusrl-Mulakalpa (translated by K. P. Jayaswal as An Imperial History of India) is quoted viz. the age of Panini is given as contemporaneous with Mahapadmananda of Magadha.

FOREWORD

In going through Taranatha's books it becomes evident that he never came to India. His knowledge of Indian geography was not clear, he made mistakes about the names of persons, geographical positions of different places etc. Further, it is clear from his writings that much of what he called Siddhis were knowledge of alchemy, witchcraft and Blackmagic.

Again in perusing this book one will find out the process by which Mahayana Buddhism has gradually amalgamated itself with the Brahmanism of later days which will account for the disappearance of the former from India. Indeed the Siddhis, the Sadhanas and the beliefs mentioned in his writings are still extant amongst the Hindus of present day.

The abstract translation is presented to the public sp that the research student may gather some informations which may throw some further light on the history and sociology of India of that time. Again, the book containing some Indian words expressed by the Siddhas may help the philologist in his investigation regarding the languages of the period. As regards the sociological and other information culled out from this book the following are pointed out:

(1) That India had connection with the outside world at the period dealt by Taranatha.

(2) The sorcery practised in India and Europe had common forms.

(3) The nature of the story of seeing in magic-mirror was common in both the places.

(4) Pa is the Tibetan contraction of the Sanskrit word Pad or Pada.

(5) Karmaru is the Tibetan contraction of the Indian name Kamarupa.

(6) Odivisa is Orissa, Otantapuri is Odantapuri. Udyana or Udayana is Udyana (today's Cabul and Swat valley).

(7) Some of the Buddhist Siddhas carried Jata (long matted hair) on their heads.

(8) Taranatha spoke of the existence of Citizens'—‘Gild’ of that period.

(9) The use of sun-dial existed in that period.

(10) Women used to sell brandy in those days.

(11) The book contains instances of inter-caste marriages.

(12) The wretched condition of the field-worker (peasant) in India was notorious even in those days and known to the outside world.

(13) The word 'Dinar' the Indian form of the Roman coin 'Dinarius', which was used in Sanskrit literature, still persisted in the time when Taranatha wrote this book.

(14) The book mentions a Ksatriya-Pandita as a purohita (priest) of a king. This reminds us of the practice of the Vedic age. It lends further strength to the proof that the priesthood has not always been the sole monopoly of the Brahmanas.1 [(1) The investigators say that in some parts of India non-Brahmanas still act as priest (vide N. N. Vasu: The Ethnology of the Kayasthas)]

(15) The book mentions the employment of Tajik (Persian) soldiers in the service of a Raja of Maru (Rajputana).

(16) From the list of the names of the Siddhas it will be found out that some of them were of so-called low castes.

BHUPENDRANATH DATTA
3, Gour Mohan Mukherjee Street,
Calcutta, April 1944

THE PUBLISHER'S NOTE

For the first time this book is now translated into and published in English from German. Originally this book was written in Tibetan by Lama Taranatha and translated into German by the great scholar Prof. A. Gruenwedel. Dr. Bhupendranath Datta, the eminent research scholar in the fields of the Comparative History and Anthropology, has spared no pains to present to the reading public an English rendering from its German version. Besides being wonderfully proficient in the World History and Anthropology, his intimate knowledge in German, French and some other languages of the Continent is well-known to the learned section in India and abroad. We have no hesitation to believe that this faithful English translation from the gifted pen of Dr. Datta will be appreciated by all readers. This book opens a sealed chapter on the religio-sociological history of Buddhist India. We offer our sincere thanks to Dr. Datta for giving us kind permission to publish this important volume.

We would express our gratitude to Swami Sadananda Giri for allowing us to print the pictures of Bodhisattva, Bhairava, Ganesa and Prajnaparamita in this book. These were published in his valuable book: Javadwipa. We are also greatly indebted to Sj. Ajita Ghose for lending us two other blocks of Vajra-Sarasvati and Atisa Dipankara. The pictures are arranged in the first page in this order” (1) Vajra-Sarasvati (A Tibetan painting) and (2) Atisa Dipankara, and in the second page (1) Boddhisattva, (2) Bhairava, (3) Ganesa (Tantric), and (4) Prajnaparamita.

15-8-44
Ramakrishna Vedanta Math
19B, Raja Rajkrishna Street,
Calcutta

MYSTIC TALES OF LAMA TARANATHA: INSPIRATION I

"Here follows a narration, which is equal to a precious jewel as it is rich in wonders, and which is endowed with seven holy inspirations, while the Jatakas contains the list of former teachers.

I bow to the feet of my holy teachers. After testifying my reverence to the bands of the Gurus who following one after another exercised the life-bringing path of Vajradhara to all living beings, it was my task to glorify their lives-career as far as possible in a Sutra. For although itself a perfect one, the tongue of which had the power to work wonders, it would be impossible to execute the fame of these men in hundred ages, yet at the command of my Guru this book is written.

As I through the presence of our teacher, the holy one, who carried the name of Buddhaguptanatha, and in remembering the Bauddhas of three ages, was entrusted with the task to unite properly all words from prose and verse in the sea of theme-building; while I tried to keep myself everywhere within the jurisdiction of his power, where it was only possible on the power of his holy words, and there also preceded the presence of my great Siddha Guru himself, who through his holiness is a root-Guru, thus the people will be properly informed of the power, also of incorporeal power of commission of even of this man who himself has the fame to be graced with the seven inspirations of beatitudes. (P. 9).

What concerns the first inspiration was the Mahanmudra-Revelation. Its adept was Mahacarya Brahmana-Rahulabhadra born in the country of Odivisa. By caste he was a Bhahmana and from childhood was confided with the Vedas and with Vedangas. Going to Madhyadesa, he professed the doctrine of Buddha and gradually became a great Tripitaka-knowing Bhiksu. The teacher of this acarya was Sthavirakala, whose teacher was named the honoured Asvaghosa. Though the Gurus say that the teacher of the last had been Upagupta, yet it is difficult to make a judgment over the correctness of the ancient teacher-generations. But it is extolled in the context of Tibetan lists that he was the corporal student of the son (of Gautama) of Rahulabhadra. So it is sufficient to note here without further examination. Later, he became an abbot in Nalanda. Lastly he went to the south. Thus, in the country of Mahratta he saw the Yogini of the sphere of his work in the form of the daughter of an arrowsmith, who could extinguish the essence of his ego-existence. He knew Dharma thoroughly, gave at once the Mudra to the daughter of the arrow-smith and prosecuted the work of arrow-making while wandering in many countries. When his wisdom began to grow more, he received the name of Saroha, i.e., who is met with the arrow. Thus, came innumerable men with the king at the head, to see him, and they derided him. There in the posture of a Brahmana, the acarya sang 'ah hurra, indeed I am a Brahmana, I live with the daughter of an arrowsmith—caste or no caste, there I do not see any difference; I have taken the sworn vow of a Bhiksu, I go a-begging together with a woman—sin or no sin, I do not see any distinction.' 'Here is an impurity', thus doubted men amongst themselves, but could not recognize that the man is poisonous as a serpent. But after he had sung the Doha-Vajra songs the five times hundred thousand men with the king acknowledged excellently the aim of his action. As he now acquired a Vidyadhara-body, magically he went to heaven and finally became invisible." (pp. 10-12).

Here, the author states that this Brahmana Kahula and Sthavira Rahula are two different persons.—(Translator).

"His pupil was the acarya Nagarjuna. He was born in the south in Vidharbha, by caste he was a Brahmana. Finally he came to Nalanda. As his teacher Rahulabhadra advised him to mutter incessantly the Dharanis of the Amitayus so it was possible for him to live in peace. He became a monk there. There was nothing for him to learn, as neither Mahayana nor Hinayana-pitakas remained strange to him. Therefore, he exercised the Mahamayuri, the Kurukulli, the nine Yaksinis and the Mahakalas; he acquired all Siddhis: the globule Siddhi, the eye-ointment, the sword-Siddhi, further all power to destroy and again to revive to life, and got complete power over all superhuman Yaksas and Nagas and especially received a Vajra-body which was created for him by the elixir of life. He became a giant on magic power and supernatural knowledge. In various places he performed Siddhis of the sword and quicksilver-Siddhis. For the Sangha he created food materials as well, when the abbot Rahulabhadra was busying himself with the exorcism of Aryatara, Nagarjuna came to the abbey at that time. During this period there was a famine in Magadha for twelve years. Acarya performed a gold-tincture (Siddhi), and as far as this gold-tincture reached, the cornfields changed and there was no famine, hence the Sangha was not without bread.

Then he worked on many heretical handbooks viz. those which belonged to Veda-class; and fought with all enemies of Mahayana viz. Samkara, with the Bhiksus etc. refuted them, and as well as many dialectical polemical literature written by the Saindhava Sravakas. He collected all the copies and buried them under the ground. Later, once he fought with five hundred Tirthikas in the city of Jatasamjaya, lying in the south, he defeated them and won them over to the religion. Thus he made the Mahayana as brilliant as the sun. Then he wished to change the Ghantasaila and many mountains lying on the north viz. Dhinkota etc. into gold. Aryatara dissuaded him from it as it would bring quarrel over it in future. But it is said that many gold-mines are present there, and at least the stones show the colour of gold. Later, while journeying northward he seeing many boys playing, prophesied that a boy would be a king. Twelve years later, coming back to Jambudvipa from Uttarakuru he saw one of the boys as a king named Udayana who made reverences to him. As a consequence the king received the elixir of age and the Yaksas as his servants. He built five hundred temple-cloisters as the resting-place of the preachers. Later, he (acarya) dwelt on the Sriparvata for two hundred years long, surrounded by the Yaksis and remained there practising the Tantras till his subsequent beheading by the grandson of the king Udayana called Susukti or the mighty prince. As it is related, it took place, in his seventy years of age, when the 71st year was not complete as it was only half-year. The mother of the prince asked his son to beg of the head of the acarya as his father and acarya possessed magic by which his age would be as long as the acarya, and as the acarya had a Vajra-body he would not die. The mother wanted it for the good of the son. The prince went to Srlparvata and begged of the acarya for it. The head was cut off by a Kusa-stalk. A word was heard: 'I go from here towards Sukhavati, but will come back again and will rejoin the body.' Thereupon there were earthquake and famine for twelve years. As the prince was afraid of the rejoining of the body he threw the head many miles distant from the place of beheading. A Yaksi took up the head, and the Yaksi Ksitipati built a temple over the head and body. My Lama has seen and narrated the following: This temple whose walls are formless and seem to be like rocks is a wonderwork. The outside of it is steep and there is no way to it. (pp. 14-19).

His disciple was Mahasiddha Savaii. When Nagarjuna was staying in Bengal, a dancing-master brought there children (brother and sisters) from the east. He called them and showed the figure of Bodhisattva Maharatnamati. As the dancing-master wanted to see also, he was shown a mirror in which he saw himself roasting in hell-fire. He wanted to be saved and was asked to meditate on Sambara. After his meditation, he recognized the original cause of his soul and recognized the face the Bodhisattva Maharatnamuni. Then Nagarjuna told him that as he now got power he should go to the south (Sriparvata), live the life of a hunter and create the good of the creatures. The both sisters Logi and Guni got their Mudra names as Dakini Padmavati and Jnanavati. He lived with them outwardly a sinner. He got the grace of Vidyadhara and became famous as Savarl.

This acarya is also called the younger Saroha. The disciple of this acarya was Lui-pa (Luipada) whose disciple was Dombi, whose was Tilly, his Naro, his younger Dombi, his Kusalibhadra (pp. 19-20). There were series of schools, Luipa, Darika and Antara built also another series which began with Tilo.

Luipa was a writer of the king of Udayana in the west named Samanta Subha. Once he met Mahasiddha Savari who together with him sang a song, and received Abhiseka and Tantras from the latter. Once he went to a cremation place (lit. field of corpses), sat himself in the rows of the Dakinis and made himself master of the inn (lit. a publican) and therefrom he distributed the flesh of seven corpses. As he had now received Vajravarahi in exorcism-Mandala of Abhiseka, he said: 'Kicking with outstretched foot I destroy the slavery of Samshara, Vajrasattva is a greater king, more and more again one should set himself to business.' Later, he perceived that it would be necessary to meditate without disturbance. On that account, he went to the east, to Bengal, and when he saw on the bank of the Ganges, a hill made of heaps of fish-entrails, he meditated there for twelve years, ate the fish-entrails and acquired the Mahamudrasiddhi.

He also converted miraculously the king and minister of Orissa. Thereupon, the king got the name of Darika or Dari, the servant of Hetaera, the minister, the name of Denki (rice-husking mill). He worked on the Denki of a brandy-selling woman, (pp. 19-23).

Another disciple of Savari was Maitri or Maitrigupta. He was a Tirthika-Pandita and a Brahinana. Later he met Naro and himself joined with the Bauddhas, received Abhiseka and Upadesa and became a monk of Nalanda. Getting instructions from many great and learned Gurus like Ratnakarasanti, he became a great Pandita and dwelt in the monastery of Vikramasila. Though he carried on the profession of a Pandita and practised no exorcism, he beheld Vajrayogini personally. Once as he did not properly recognize his own nature he got a prophesy. Consequently he went to Siparvata to see Savari. In his journey towards the south he met the prince Sagara. Both went, towards Sriparvata and asked everybody where was the old Siddha Savari. They travelled for a half-year in this way. But as the head hair (Jata) of Savari was lousy and possessed by nits, both the Saktis were busying in removing these things. Maitri for a moment was staggered, but the prince fell down at his feet. As the words resounded: 'Aya Jara Valahu,’ Maitri became at once free, received a rainbow body and faith arose in his heart. But as again he saw that both the women were killing swines, roes and peacocks, he again became a little unbeliever; but with the snapping of the fingers everything disappeared. Now he was given Abhiseka, all the Upadesas and commenting advices being bestowed, the wisdom of knowing the region of his work dawned to him. He became the master of a number of Suras and Dakinis, won the eight Siddhis, the sword-Siddhi etc. But as Savari again demonstrated to him some jugglery, he cried out; 'why must you make these jugglery, rather explain to me the basis of the region of my work' and went at once back to Madhyadesa.

People say that he came to Tibet. It is clear that the Tibetans are not oriented over the mainpoints of his life."

Here follows discussion over the Tibetan tradition—(Translator).

"In his seventieth year of age he left his body after receiving the Mahamudra in the meantime. In the time when acarya Naro had left the body, he had appeared as the leader of the healer of the souls. People owe him still greater advancement than equalling him with the greatest. As in Aryadesa at that time there was no aim which the people could follow, he worked in the northern countries of Nepal and Tibet with greater success. He had four great disciples: Sahajavajra or Natekana, Sunyatasamadhi or Devakara Candra, Ramapala, and Vajrapani known also as 'Indian Pani'. The first two and the fourth received corporeal Vidyadharis. Ramapala of the school of Nandapala who made commentaries on the books on Abhisekas was born in Karnata as a Brahmana. He knew the Vedas. Maitri taught him for twelve years. He had in his possession a goddess or a Yoginl who possessed the power of a Sakti. To him prayed acarya Kusalibhadra the younger and Asitaghna for Mahamudra instructions.

Here closes from the history which is equal to a mine of precious stone the first chapter over the occasion of Mahamudra-Tradition." (pp. 23-28).

INSPIRATION II

"Now comes the second inspiration which comes from the goddess Chandika, but as there was no Upadesakas of Chandika, the inspiration worked magicaliy.

One of the Siddhas was Virupa. There is no proof to show that he had a Guru by a separate person. He applied himself one day personally to Vajrayogini when this acarya Panditabhisu was in Nalanda. He allowed himself the pleasure of drinking brandy, cohabited with a woman and was driven out of the monastery by the Sangha. Then he asked a ferryman on the shore of the Ganges to take him to the other side; but it happened so that, he having no fare for the ferry, showed his pointing finger to the Ganga and the Ganga stood up straight. Thus he came to the other side. Then in Odica, he demanded brandy from a wine-selling woman and as this one said he must pay the bill, he began to chase the shadows of a sun-dial from the fields but which did not go away from there, so he pointed his finger towards the sun and held it as with a nail and drunk brandy. As he did not want to set it free, the clocks and the guards made mistake. The king who knowing that the Yogi wanted to show his power, gave the price for the brandy and prayed to him to let the sun loose. Three days after he went away in the morning.

After that, as the sacrifice festival of a king of Trilinga was being made, he consumed the first offerings of the Tirthikas, but he made no reverence thereby. As the king and his people protested to him, he bowed but all the statues of the gods of the Tirthikas broke into pieces. There the prince of the gods was a Linga form, a limb consisting of four faces called Visvanatha, established by the people of the citizen-gild, and this one was also broken into four pieces. After that, he went to Dakinipatha in the house of the Tirthika-Ganas. Though lots of persons were there, the Trisula was held by him as the main-article for slaughter and the witches already built Ganas to the flesh (offering?) of Siva, there the acarya clapped his hands and the Trisula broke. As now the self-erected stone image of the Chandika slightly shaking began to move, there with a blow on the head, he went with head on her breast to the womb. People say that he is still there, kneeling in straight position, but his pair of ears are only to be seen. He ordered her, not to bring any living being to destruction.

Now it is onesided opinion of the Tibetans, that this Dakinipatha lay in the south, but it seems that, it was in eastern India. Further it is also said that the converter of the goddess had been Goraksa.

"As after that he went to Sorasta, there was a self-erected (Sayambhu?) stone image of Mahesvara called Somanatha, very strong in miracles. As he thereby did not wish to break it, he with his pointing finger proved that the figure of Avalokitesvara had appeared on the statue. Some say that it has been the figure of Marichi." Then followed further miracles.—(Translator).

"Sometime later as he lived in the time of king Ramapala and carried the name of Siro, he rendered all possible help to the living creatures in Madhyadesa. As he washed his own feet, Vanvadala, the elephant of king Ramapala drank the water, then went to the battle and was victorious over a hundred Mleccha-princes."

Later, once in the country of Gaur stood a Yogi over the pillows of a Tajik prince, when he awoke. This Yogi could not be destroyed in water, fire, by weapons and by poison. Then the king recognized that he had acquired the Siddhi and asked him: 'Who art thou?" He answered: 'I am Virupa'. Then he gave instructions to some who acquired lower Siddhis. In Bengal he stayed for four months enjoying all Siddhis; but where he went afterwards no body knows. There is an especial instance when he appeared magically in China. People say that Virupa appeared thrice in the human world. This acarya was named by the people, as Sri-dharmapala. but he was not identical with Sthavira Dharmapala who was an abbot of Nalanda. (pp. 28-31).

His disciple was the man who appeared in Odiyana as Kalavirupa. He was scarcely born in the Brahmana caste, when the Brahmana astrologers told his parents that he would commit four mortal sins. Later, he committed four sins: murder of a Brahmana, killing a cow, sleeping with mother, drink which degrades a Brahmana. Then he wandered in all Brahmana and Buddhist temples and cloisters, but could not be absolved of sin. Then he met Jalandhari, and getting precept from Vajravarahi was absolved of his sin. (pp. 31-33).

With Virupa the younger was Vyadhali. He was originally of the bird catching family (Vyadhali). He received Mudrasiddhi in twelve years, (pp. 33-34).

He taught Kusalibhadra, he was Chandrika Tantrika, Further Virupa gave instructions to Dombi-Heruka. It is known in Tibet that he is identical with the acarya of this name. But, it seems he was a king in the eastern laying country of Tripura (p. 34). The acarya went and gave Abhiseka and Upadesa to the king who meditated on his Tattva and got the second grade of knowledge. He recognized that he could make exorcism and as a proof worked on a Mudrika who was of the Hetaera class. She become his Padmini. This became known to the public who said the king's family was disgraced. He was driven out of his kingdom by the minister and subjects. As he practised Vidya-asceticism, wandered in woods and fields and therefore got the name of Dornbi. Thus, Dombi is one who goes with a Hetaera. Later, there was famine in the kingdom, and the virtuous king with her Sakti riding as a tigress standing on a She-Yak and himself sewed with poisonous snakes came there. The people recognized that he had become a Siddha. They became his disciples. They became Tantrikas and acquired Siddhis (pp. 34-35).

Further, in a country called Radha commonly called Rada, there lived a king who did lots of injury to the religion of Buddha, but was very much afraid of tigers and serpents. The acarya worked wonders and told him: 'If you do not yourself accept the religion of Buddha, then I will bring to you these poisonous snakes.' And all accepted the religion of Buddha. Thus he made an end of the continuation of the Tirthika-religion in the country of Rara.[ Lastly, he went to sleep in his corporal form in heaven. (pp. 36-37).

His disciples were the Yoginis of the Dombi-system. Acarya Alalavajra, Hemalavajra and Ratavajra were from Madhyadesa. There were also others: Krsnacari, acarya Garvari, Jayasri, and Durjayacandra. (pp. 37-38).

Rahubhadra and others touched the feet of this acarya and acquired subtleties of Siddhi. Thus Mahasiddha Dombi taught a Hetaera, and this one to Ratavajra, and he to Krsnacari, and this is a Tantra school. (pp. 38).

Rahulavajra was a Ksatriya and Vikramabhiksu Pandita. He meditated on the Guhya (esoteric) Tantras. (p. 39).

Here closes from the history which is equal to a mine of precious stone, the second chapter: the occasion of Inspiration series of Candika." (p. 40).

INSPIRATION III

'Here follows the third Inspiration, the Karma-Mudra. The great king Indrabhuti was master in Guhya-Tantra.1 [1. Mahapandita Rahula Saukrtyana who is a great scholar of Buddhism tells the translator that there had been only one king Indrabhuti who was of Orissa (Odivisa). In that case Taranatha must have made a mistake in calling him the king of Udayana.] He was the king of Udayana who saw the materialized face of Buddha. He saw the Rsis, who formed the surroundings of the master, going and coming but forming no halting places. In answer from his minister he heard that they were the Sravakas of the great Rsi Buddha the Tathagata. The king wishing to realize Buddha, gave up the enjoyment of his five senses with his wives. Miraculously before him appeared an endless Mandala and the king received the Abhiseka. Tathagata gave him all the Tantras. He taught all population of Udayana and wrote the Tantras in book forms. He left the company of his wife and his own over-sensuous body and travelled from one Buddhaksetra to another. He gave Siddhi to all men, and from animals to worms and disappeared in the Rainbow-body, (pp. 40-42).

There was a dancing-girl from Srimat Sukha, who later became a Dakini, saw her (materialized) face again. She was called the Sahajasiddhi dancing-girl. (This Sahajasiddhi dancing-girl is identical with Sukhilalita in Taranatha's History of Buddhism pp. 210, 17). According to the commentary of Sahajasiddhi, she was the daughter of a king of a part of Udayana. When she grew up, once she went with a group of five hundred girls to a garden. There appeared Bodhisattva Vajrapani in a magic form of a Rsi. As he was seen by the girls, they raised a cry and ran away, taking him to be a demon on account of his Rsi's hair-dress (matted hair). But the dancing-girl said: 'Don't you fear' and she having a look at him went into Samadhi. Then she and her five hundred maidens bowed to his feet and he blessed them by putting his hand on their vertex. Then he preached to them with the words: 'May you all be Yoginis.' They, according to their Tattvas, attained the ten Sarvadarsana-dharmas. (pp. 42-43).

After she preached to Mahapadmavajra, this one to Anangavajra, and to the swine-keeping woman, this one to the Padmavajra Saroruha the junior, this one to Indrabhuti the junior, this one to Krsncari, this one to Kalyananatha, this one to Amitavajra, this one to Kusalibhadra. (p. 43).

Mahapadmavajra was born in a Brahmana caste in the western country of Maru. After knowing the Tripitakas and all the teaching books he went to Udayana, and saw the (materialized) personal face of Vajrasattva. In order to get Abhiseka he went to the divine dancing-girl. There he wrote many Tantras for the mystery of Guhya collections and informations on four Mudras. He also wrote a manual called Guhyasiddhi. (pp. 43-44).

Now follows Anangavajra. He belonged to a caste of a low occupational order. He meditated for twelve years on the Kotamba mountain according to the advice of his teacher Padmavajra. The advice he got from his Guru was: Put yourself in touch with the swinekeeping woman by keeping swine and then step by step you will be a Vajrasattva.' He began to keep swine in a city of north Udayana, healed many persons and became famous as the holy swine-keeper. (p. 44).

His disciple was the acarya Saroruha belonging to the Kstriya caste. As he was a great Pandita and knew the sciences and many Guhya-Tantras, he became the sacrificing priest (Purohita) of the king. Once seeing him in the company of a common woman of the temple, the king ordered them to be burned. But out of the ashes, he reappeared as Heruka with gakti in a halo of brilliant rays. Thus, the people were surprised and became converts to Vajrayana (cult). The king also with five hundred people acquired the Siddhi. Later the acarya went in the neighbourhood of Maru. Seeing the miraculous power of the acarya, the king professing the Tirthika religion accepted the religion of Buddha. A temple of Heruka was built, and it was solemnly predicted of him that if he gave up his vows and wanted to see the veiled figure, he would die by spitting blood. But when later, he wanted to destroy it with his Tajik (Iranian) soldiers, twelve Tajik cavalrymen fell down at the same time and he became insane. But the acarya brought immense blessing to all creatures and acquired the Siddhi of Hevajra. (pp. 45-49).

His disciple was king Indrabhuti the junior. But as he himself ordered to narrate the burning of the acarya, his life-history was not completely described. It was written as an occasional comment on the margin of the history of Kambala."

Here closes from the history which is equal to a mine of precious stone, the third chapter on the occasion of information of hundred Karma-series." (p. 49).