1. Shankaravijaya of Anatanadagiri (Article) Antarkar W.R

Journal OF THE

University of Bombay

|ARTS NUMBER 36}

VOL. XXX Series SEPTEMBER 1961 PART. 2

CONTENTS ARTICLES PAGE DEVAS IN THE VEDIC LATERATURE N. J. SInNUE ... 1

ASVAMEDHA : TUN KING OF SACRIMICES B. II. KAPADIΑ ...

CASTE SYSTEM IN THE MAMARHARATA ... S. N. GAJENDRAGADSAR 23

MATSYA PORANA AND KUMARASAMHHAVA. R. N. BETAI 39

CONSTRUCTIONAL P'ECULIARITIES IN THR SIMILES N. D. PARADKAR 49

ŠANKARA VIJAYA OF ANANTANANDAGIRI W. R. ANTARKAR 73

. SOME GLIMPSES OF SOCIETY AND CULTURE AS REFLECTED IN THE PAUMACARIYA ... P. M. UPADHYE

OLD LITERATURE IN VARIOUS DIALECTS ON MARATHI ... A. K. PRIOLKAR ... 106

SBT MAHAVIRA STAVANA PHAGUBANDHA OF JAYA SURDAKA SURI ... K. B. VYAS 118

BOOK REVIEW

STUDIES IN INDOLOGY 185

72 JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BOMBAY

väcaka. The lopa of one of the Upamanas which constitute a multiple Upamana is common. Dharmaluptă occurs frequently as the common property is left to the understanding of the diseerning reader. Väkyo- SANKARA-VIJAYA OF ANANTANANDAGIRI pamas as well as Upamas based on Vaidharmya are, by no mean;, uncommon. Free expression of Sankaracarya has given rise to many irregularities. Thus at times the Upameya-vākya as well as the DR. W. R. ANTARKAR

Upamana-vākya are put in a suecinet form. On some occasions, however, both namely, the Upameya-vākya as well as Upamana- AFTER diseussing the works of Citsukha and Anandagiri, I wish to deal with the third of the ten works referred to in my previous väkya are very loosely constructed and have to be recast for the purposes article.1 I intend to diseuss only two such works as they have given of understanding the simile. This is only natural as the Acarya was not rise to some controversy. The present work is one of the two and is primarily interested in ornamentation. taken up first because that, in my humble opinion, is comparatively the older one.

This work was pnblished in the Bibliotheca Indica Series in 1881 A.D. by Jivānanda Vidyāsāgara. It is also available in ms,-form at many places.2 All these copies generally contain 74 chapters though the Kaśi and Sankeśvara mss. have only 78 chapters. The Sankeśvara mutt ms. gives the name of the work as mata-nibarhana (refutation of theories) whereas the colophons to the first three chupt rs of the work in the printed edition give its name as Acarya-Vijaya.3

There are two controversial issues with regard to this work, viz. (1) Identity of the author and (2) authenticity of the work itself. I shall deal with them separately.

Identity of the author The colophons at the end of the first 32 chapters of the printed edition of this work give the author's name as Anantănandagiri whereas the remaining 42 chapters give it as Anandagiri. This creates the impression that one and the same person bears these two names. This impression seems to be current among many scholars even today, who believe t at this work is written by Anandagiri, the famous commenta- tor of Sri Sankaracārya's Bhasyas. In my humble opinion, however, Anantänandagiri and Anandagiri are two distinet individuals, out of whom the first and not the second is the author of the work in question. My reasons are as follows : (1) The Änandaśrama Mas. Library, Poona, contains two mss. of this work. Thave also a copy of the same procured from the Sankes- 1. Vide JUB Vol. XXIX-Part 2-Sept. 60. 2. (i) Anandaśrama Mss. Library, Poona, (ii) Oriental Research Institute, Mysore, (iti) Shrirama Taraka Mutt, Kasi, (iv) Sarasvati Mabal, Tanjore ete. 8. The stanzas quoted by Susama as from Acarya-Vijaya are found in this S. V. The work Acarya-Vijaya, therefore, is not an anonymous work as maintained by Mr. R. K. Aiyar in his booklet, ' Kumbakonam Mutt elaims ' at p. 23.

74 JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BOMBAY SANKARA-VLJAYA OF ANANTANANDAGIRI 75

vara mutt. All these three mss. give in all the colophons the name of the author as Anantanandagiri. (b) Anantā.'s work contains more prose and less poetry and much more annotative matter than is to be found in the (2) At the very commencement of the work itself, the author quoted stanzas. refers to himself as Anantanandagiri.4 At the beginning of Ch. IV, (c) The bulk of the stanzas quoted cannot at all be traced to however, of the same, he refers to Anandagiri independently and that Ananta.'s work. also by the side of Suddhananda.5 All these facts, I believe, are sufficient to show that Anantānanda- (3) Ānandagiri, the commentator of Sri Sankara's Bhāșyas, giri, the author of our present work is distinet from the celebrated invariably refers to himself as the disciple of Suddhananda Yati whereas Anandagiri though the question who followed whom remains undecided. we do not get a single such reference in any of the colophons either in the I am supported in my belief by Prof. B. Upädhyaya who also holds printed copy or in the mss, Our author has referred to Sankara as his suggesting his the same view in tihs matter.º The misconception about the identity Paramaguru and called himself his अप्रतिहतशिष्य of the two has led the late Mr. M. R. Bodas to remark that the contemporaneity with his Guru. Curiously enough, he refers to himself stanza "कल्यद्वंश्च शरेक्षणाध्वनयन:" ete. quoted as from Anandagiri's in the third person but in the same capacity of a direet disciple, in a work is not found in the printed work (i.e. S.V. of Ananta.)10 The later chapter .? stanza properly belongs to Pr. S.V. of Anandagiri. To deeide the (4) I have already referred in my previous article, to 800 and question of priority and the true meaning of the expression arafagafers odd stanzas quoted by Dhanapatisurin in his commentary Dindima we must try to settle the date of Ananta. The late Mr. Telang has on ch. XV of Mädhava's S. S. Jaya and also shown that not even one advanced mainly two arguments for the purpose.11 They are : of these ean be traced to the S. V. of Anata., at present under considera- (1) Ananta. cites in ch. XIX of his work the stanza " amirat tion and that they must have belonged to an older work which can be लोहितशुक्लकृष्णाम्" ete. as a Sruti text. According to Mr. Telang, this identified as Pr. S.V. of Anandagiri, the disciple of Suddhānanda.8 stanza is not a śruti text but is one of the introductory stanzas in These stanzas describe in details the various stages of Sankara's trium- Väcaspati's Sankhyatattvakaumudi. Vācaspati is generally assigned phant tour. The S.V. of Ananta. in question is mostly oceupied to the 9th cent. A.D. S.V. of Ananta., therefore, has to be placed later. with a similar description. On a comparison of the two descriptions it was found that they agreed with each other almost completely with This, however, does not seem to be convineing for the stanza in regard to (1) the order of the various stages of the tour, (2) the names question is not only found in Svetasvatara Up. (4:5) but has also been of the opponents and also of the places where they were encountered, quoted as a śruti text by Sri Sankarāeārya in bis commentary on the (8) the descriptions of the two, (4) arguments and citations on either Br. Sutras. (Vide comm. on Br. Su. 1:4:8), side, (5) the period of Sankara's stay at every place ete. In spite of (2) S.V. quotes in ch. XI and XL three stanzas as from this agreement, however, it is clear that the two descriptions are from Adhikaraņaratnamālā or Vyāsādhikarapamala,12 traditionally aseribed two different pens, for, to Mādhavācārya a/s Vidyāranya or Bhāratitīrtha, his preceptor. (a) The order of stages in Ananta.'s work is different at two Both persons are generally held to belong to the latter half of the 14th or three places from the one as found in the quoted eent. A.D. at the latest. Ananta. therefore, cannot be placed earlier

stanzas. than the 14th eent. A.D, 9. Vide श्रीशङ्कराचार्य-जीवनचरित तथा उपदेश-P. 11, 4. Read the opening words अनन्तानन्दगिरिरहम् 10. Vide श्रीशङकराचार्य व त्यांचा सम्प्रदाय-P.18, 5. Read : गिरिप्रमखैः शिष्यवरः सेव्यमान :. ... श्रीराङ्करभगवत्पादाचार्यः । 11. Vide Indian Antiquary-Vol. V -- p. 287, 12. The stanzas are : 6. Read: अनन्तानन्दगिरिरहमप्रतिहतशिष्यः मम परमगुरोरवतारकथां ..... करोमि। अविचार्य विचार्य वा ब्रह्माध्यासनिरपणात। असन्देहफलत्वाभ्यां न विचारं तदहति॥

and also his salutation, just prior to this sentence- अध्यासोऽहं ब्रह्मशद्ः साङगब्रह्मश्रुतीरितम्। सन्देहान्मुक्तिभावाच्च विचार्य ब्रह्म वै नमामि शङ्कराचार्यगुरुपादसरोरुहम्। यस्य प्रसादान्मूढोऽपि सर्वज्ञोऽहं सदास्म्यलम् ।। ad: H on Br. Su. 1:1:1: 7. Read-कदाचिच्छिष्या: अनन्तानन्दगिरिप्रमुखाः परमगुरुं नत्वेदमूचु: 1 ch. 66 and पारिप्लवार्थमास्यानं कि वा विद्यास्तुतिस्तुतेः। ज्यायोऽनुष्ठानशेषत्वं तेन 8. Vide JUB-Vol .- XXIX, Part 2, Sept. 60. पारिप्लवार्थक:॥। on Br. Su. 8 : 4:28

76 JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BOMBAY SANKARA-VIJAYA OF ANANTANANDAGIRI 77

If this is correct, Ananta. cannot be admitted to be Sankara's raised against it.14 The Srngeri Mutt and its adherents, however, direet diseiple, even if we accept for the latter the latest date, viz. 8th negative the claim with equal vehemence, saying thatit is more or less a cent. A.D. The expression अप्रतिहतशिष्य may, therelore, mean that fabrication for the express purpose of boosting up the claim of the Ananta. came in the direet line of Sankara and nothing more. Kanci Mutt, 15 whiel has also published an "embellished" (f<taa) edition of the same and hence it is valueless for purposes of history. Now, according to the line of succession of the Kanci mutt (which The reasons given for this view may be stated as follows : the Srgerl people call into question), Suddhänanda and Anandagiri (1) Both the original and the 'embellished' editions "even in are the 6th and 7th acaryas from the first acarya. If this is true and if its language and in its contents bear such evident traces of recent following the method adopted by modern scholars for computing time, fabrication by unskilled hands that the reliance placed upon it is being we ascribe an average of 25/30 years to every acārya, Anandagiri relaxed for some time past ;"16 and that "it is full of diserepancies cannot be placed much later than 200 years after Sankara. and mistakes."1 (2) It contains references to Ramānuja and Madhva, 1ª Even if we choose to distrust the Kanci succession list, we can Among the moderns, Prof. Wilson alone holds that " the work is prove Anandagiri's priority to 1100 A.D, in another way. According sufficiently historical since it bears internal and indisputable evidence to Venkața Dīxit and Jayatirtha, the commentators of Rāmānujacārya of being the composition of a period not far removed from that at which and Madhvacarya, the latter criticise Sankara's interpretation of the Bhg. he (i.e. Sankara) may be supposed to have flourished ... "19 Mr. Telang at many places. Now, Anandagiri has also commented upon Sankara's however has controverted this view with regard to the work. Mr. Collins GBh. Ifhehad known the criticisms of Rama, and Madhva, he would Mackenzie describes this work as "a legendary life of Sankara "20 certainly have tried to defend Sankara against them but he does not do while the editor of the catalogue of Mss. in Saraswati Mahal Library, so anywhere. This is pessible only on the hypothesis that he preceded Tanjore, says that " A perusal of the work will convinee anybody that both and, therefore, also preceded 12th cent. A.D. This automatically the work is very unreliable. It is full of diserepancies and mistakes."21 proves his priority to Ananta. who, as already shown, cannot be placed (8) It contains particulars, subversive of all known versions, of earlier than the 14th cent. A.D. Sankara's parentage, birth place and the place of his final disappear- The conclusion, therefore, seems irresistible that Anandagiri ance.22 Thus, Sankara's grand-parents are mentioned as Vidvan is the earlier of the two writers and that Ananta. must have drawn Mahendra (विद्वन्महेद्र) and Kamaksi (कामाक्षी), parents as Sarvajit upon his Pr. S.V. while writing his own S.V.13 In the absence of the (सर्वजित्) and Visista (विशिष्टा), birth-place as Cidambaram and the former, it is not possible to say anything about its authenticity and the place of final departure as Kanei. Further, he is stated to have met same granted also, it is not possible to say how far the Anantã has kept and received initiation into Sannayasa from Govindamuni at Cidambaram to the original or where and how much, if at all, he has deviated from only, from which place again, he started on his triumphant tour. His the same. It is, therefore, unsafe to draw any inferenees as to the encounter with Vyasa is very queerly narrated. Perhaps, these are the authenticity of Ananta's work. For that, we must look to other sources diserepaneies and mistakes referred to in (1) above. We may also add

beginning. and that brings me to the second of the two issues referred to at the that the work does very scant justice to Sankara-Mandana discussion and omits all reference to important events like the passing away of Sankara's mother, acquisition of disciples like Sadananda etc: Authenticity of the work 14. Vide श्रीशाङ्करपीठतत्वदर्शनम्-pp. 14 to 16. 15. Vide pamphlets " Sri Smgeri Sarada Mutt " and "Kamakoți Pradeepam" Opinion is sharply divided on this point both among the traditionists by Shri S. Sunderamiah and " Kumbakonam Mutt claims " by Shri R. Krishna- and the modern scholars. The Kanci mutt people look upon this work swamy Aiyar. 16. Vide ' Kumbakonam Mutt claims '-p. 12. as very authoritative and have taken great pains to answer objections 17. Catalogue of Sanskrit Mss., Saraswati Mahal, Tanjore, p. 3281. 18 Vide ' Kumbakonam Mutt claims.p. 12. 18. It is for this reason also that I cannot accept the contention of the Kanci people that the Pr. S. Jaya referred to by Madhvacarya at 1 :1 of his S. S. Jaya is Mutt " -- p. 26. 19. Shri Venkataraman quoted by Shri Sunderamiah in Sri Srngeri Sāradā the same as the S. V. of Ananta. Vide श्रीशङ्करपीठतत्वदर्शनम्-pp. 16 to 20, That 20. Quoted by K. T. Telang -- vide I.A .- Vol. V-p. 287. 21. Vide Oxford Catalogue of Sanskrit Mss .-- p. 618. otherwise also, this contention cannot be maintained is sufficiently clear from my 22. Vide Catalogue of Sanskrit Mss., Sarasvati Mahal-p. 8281. previous article (JUB-Vol. XXIX-Part 2, Sept. 1960). The correspondences referred to by them (i.e. Kanei people) only point to a common source for both.

78 JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BOMBAY SANKARA-VIJAYA OF ANANTANANDAGIRI 79

It must be admitted that in this maze of conflicting opinions, it is The objection with regard to the particulars of Sankara's parentage very diffieult to come to a decisive verdict either way. I may, however, will, if true, have to be immediately conceded. I have, however, state my findings as follows: consulted a number of mss.24 for this particular purpose and found

I have yet to see the ' embellished' edition of the work. I was, that they fall into two groups, one giving Kalati as the birth-place of

however, told by a Sastrin (Sri Pollaham Ramasastrin) at Mylapore, Sankara etc. and the other giving Cidambaram as the birth-place ete. Madras, that no such edition had been published by the Kanci Mutt Both these groups contain very old Tada-patra mss., thus obviating the so far. He has written a small booklet on this partieular S.V. in some possibility of one of the two being a later thought or fabrication. In mss. of which, available in Government Oriental Mss. Library, Madras, the present state of our knowledge, no completely satisfaetory explana- the additional paragraphs, pointed out by Sri R. K. Aiyar in ' Kumba- tion ean be given for this contradiction in the mss. The following two konam Mutt claims' as from the embellished edition, were to be found. considerations may, however, be noted with profit. The Sastrin told me that this was being described as the ' embellished' edition of the S.V. He himself expressed the opinion that a critical (i) Acyutārāya Modak (1820 A,D.) in his commentary on Mädha- edition of the work, putting together all the available mss. of this work va's S.S. Jaya says: "अनन्तानन्दगिर्युक्तशङ्करविजये तु" कालटयाख्ये ग्रामवर्य in different places was a great necessity and in the circumstances this केरलालङ्कृती द्विजः । "इत्युक्तम् ॥"25 appears to be the maximum fair criticism of the additional passages. Comm. on S. S .. , Jaya-II: 1 This shows that the copy of Anant's. Mr. Collins' remark, however, that the work is " a legendary life" S. V. before A. Modak also must have contained the same parti- need not be taken literally for it will be appreciated that to the average culars as in the other biographies of Sankara. western mind, everything and every happening that does not conform to the every-day experience of the common man is a legend. This was (ii) While introducing the story of Sankara's life, G.V.K. particularly so at the beginning of Oriental Studies. After the reeent (Guruvamsa-Kävya), which describes the birth of Sankara at Kalati advances in the different fields of science like telepathy and clairvoy- in Kerala Pradesha, states at I; 6 that the same story has already been ance, extra-sensory perception and para-psychology ete .; it is no longer described by 'grcat poets' (*alrå: 1). The commentator who is also neeessary to believe that no such thing as what can be ealled ' a miracle' the author of the Kavya, states very clearly that the great poets are can be a fact of life. Dr. Burnell gives no reasons for the statement Anandagiri-yati and c. (आनन्दगिरियतीन्द्रादिभिः) ।. This Kavya is re: the modernity of the work. Arguments from style and language are undoubtedly a Srngeri mutt work and I leave it to scholars to draw subjeetive and hence not conclusive. their own conclusions in the matter.

(it) Mr. Venkataraman's statement regarding the reference to With regard to the omissions, it has been found that almost no Ramanuja and Madhva in Ananta's work cannot be understood. I biography of Sankara gives any reliable account of Sankara-Mandana was unable to find any such reference in the printed edition of the work controversy. These other works do not also necessarily recount all the and neither Mr. Venkataramana nor the two critics, Mr. S. Sunderamiah ineidents in Sankara's life, It is again the other works, particularly and Mr. R. K. Aiyar state where these references are to be found. that of Madhava and those that follow him (works of Sadānanda and It is, indeed, interesting to know that Prof. Wilson thought of plaeing Nilakantha) that are guilty of the most glaring anachronisms. No such the work prior to the 11th cent. A.D. just because it made no reference either to Rama. or Madhva.23 anachronism is to be found in Ananta.'s work. 24. Mas, from (t) Anandaśrama Mss. Library, Poona-2 mss. ; (ii) Sarasvati (iii) The main objection seems to be with regard to the particulars Mahal Library, Tanjore-1 ms. of Sankara's parentage ete. I hope to show in a later article that from 25. The stanzas in question are : the evidence in hand, it seems more likely that the place of Sankara's कालटद्ाख्ये ग्रामवर्ये केरलालङ्कृती द्विजः। विद्याधिराजतनयः प्राज्ञः शिवगुरुर्बभी।। passing away is Kanci rather than Kailāsa. I shall, therefore, discuss ततः सदाशिव: शम्भुलोकानुग्रहतत्परः। तपोमहिन्ना तत्पल्या प्रविवेश स्वतेजसा ॥ the other aspeets of this last objection. सा दधार सती गर्भमादित्यसमतेजसम्। व्यजायत शुभे काले पञ्चोच्चग्रह्संयुते। 23. Quoted by K. T. Telang-vide I.A.Vol. V-p. 287. आनन्दन् बान्धवाः सव पुष्पवर्ष दिवशच्युतैः। शम्भोर्वरमनुसृत्य पिता शिवगुरुः किल॥

80 JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BOMBAY

All this does not mean that I regard this S.V. as absolutely authori- tative. My only point is that the arguments and objections put forward against it eannot prove either the forged nature or the unreliability of SOME GLIMPSES OF THE SOCIETY the work. Palm-leaf mss. of this work are to be found throughout India, from Kaśt to Kanci and Ujjain to Mysore. The charge, AND CULTURE AS REFLECTED

therefore, that the work in question is forged by the Kānci mutt to serve IN THE PAUMACARIYA

their ends is as much justified as is the charge that Madhavacarya's S. S. Jaya was got up by the Srngeri mutt to support its elaim in its BY DR. P. M. UPADHYE, M.A., Ph.D.

case against the Kanci mutt. Its authenticity, however, does not follow as a logieal sequel. As a matter of fact, not one of the 16/17 THE Paumacariya of Vimalasuri is one of the earliest Prakrit epies of the Svetambara sect of Jainas and it depicts the Life of Rama biographies of Sankara I have worked upon inspires confidence in its according to Jain traditions. The work is quite extensive and it authenticity to the expected degree. We have to put together all these contains about 9000 gathas in 118 chapters. Though the date of the biographies and after they are made mutually corroborative, we are P.C. is a disputable question, it is more or less certain that the work able to get only an outline sketch of the great man's life. must have been composed after the Christian era.

ABBREVIATIONS The aim of this article is to present before the readers some glimpses of the society and culture as reflected in this earliest Prakrit epic, viz. (i) Ananta-Anantānandagiri the Paumacariya of Vimalasüri. The data given in this article should (ii) Rāmā-Rāmānuja (iti) S.V .- Sańkara Vijaya not be looked upon as anything more than a sampling of the vast material

(iv) Pr. Ś.V .- Prācina Šańkara Vijaya contained in the whole of the P.C., it can be the subject of thorough and

(vi) Br. Sü .- Brahma Sūtras (Đ) S. S. Jaya -- Sankşepa Sankara Jaya systematie study on its merit. But this being not one of the direet objectives of this article, an attempt has been made to illustrate this

(vii) GBh .-- Gità Bhășya aspeet by taking out some samples of the relevant data from various (vit) . JUB-Journal of the University of Bombay portions of the text. Hence this study should be considered more or (ix) I.A.Indian Antiquary less representative and not exhaustive.

The information collected deals with the following aspects :

(A) Social Life (a) Society in general ) Women (b) Houses (h) Education (c) Conveyance (i) Manners and Customs (d) Food and drink (j) Amusements and Pastimes (e) Dress (k) Morals (f) Ornaments

(B) Flora and Fauna (C) Religion (D) Political Life (a) The King and kingship (c) Law and Justice (b) Administration (d) Army-Weapons