the traditional age of sri sankaracharya and the mathas

7/23/2019 The Traditional Age of Sri Sankaracharya and the Mathas

1/54

~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ 1

THE

TR ADITIONAL

AGE I

I OF f

I SRI SANKARACHARYA I

W AND

THE MATHAS

I

I A NATA JA

AIYER

ND

I

ifl

S

LAKSHMINARASIMHA SASJRI

M A L T

I

I

I

/


2/54

THE

TRADITIONAL AGE

of

SRI

SANKARACHARYA

and

THE MATHAS

y

A Nataraja Aiyer

and

S

Lakshminarasimha Sastri M.A.

L.T.

SRI KANCHI KAMAKOTI MUTT

K NCHEEPUR M


3/54

I

0

PO LISHERS

First

Published

1962

Reprinted 1988

Revised

Edition

1992

Price Rs.

rinted r

M/s. Rajan Co.

l rlntrrs,

I Goomes Slrcct Madras . 100 001.

other

who

through

practice and

: precept have fostered the .. ..

. h o a r

y

A d v a

i i

c.

tradition thatwas bequeathed ....

to

posterity

by

the great hagavatpada

as a priceless legacy this

~ : t

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

{


4/54

reface

This Book

is

an attempt to determine the

age of Sri Sankaracharya according to the ancient

Historic traditions preserved in the Mathas, which

are indeed as old as the Acharya. The facts we

have herein presented would

be

found to differ

considerably from the d tes assigned y

Historians. But if Historians have their own

reasons to believe that Sankara flourished in

788 to 820 A.D., we have equally

v l i d ~

or more

valid reasons to believe that Adi Sankara lived

during the period 509 to 477 B.

C.

We do not claim to be original inadvo

cating this date. Pioneers like the late lamented

T.

S.

Narayana Sastri Age of Sankara), and

Sri Kata Venkatachellam, and a host of other

scholars, h ~ v already proved that the date of

Sankara

is

509 to

477 B.C.

We are merely con

tent to follow their foot-steps.

The histories of the various Mathas have

been sketched, with the scanty ineterials that have

been made available to

us.

\Ve have primarily based our work on the

historic traditions as embodied in the Gururatna

Malika Sadasiva Brahmendra, and in the Susama

of Atma Bodha.


5/54

1J1 i11 J

l

lulincss Sri Yog swar 11

-

l

I

111 11,

L

111karn

frnrya

f the

a

vardhana

Matha of

the Vimala Pitha of Jagannatha, for the

Acbarya Parampara of

the

Govardhana

Matha

that he

o graciou

Jy

favoured us with.

We are

also gratefu] to Sri E.

Rama Rao

of Bangalore who ha traced the recent rustory

of

Kudali (Appendix F .

f

this work should

arouse

a genuine

interest with

regru-d to

the hi

tory

of Sankara

and

the Mathas in

the minds of the inte Jigentsia

it

would, we believe have amply ju 'tified it

exi tence.

THE AUTHORS

ONTENTS

CHAPTER

Prelude

I The Bb.agavatpada

II. ...

ri Sankaracharya and the Mathas

T

he Bhagavatpada and the Kanchi Kama

II.

koti Pitha

V

Sureswaracharya and the Mathas

V

The Mathamnaya and the Kamakoti

Pitha

T

he Kamakoti Pitha through the Ages

I.

VII. Epilogue

APPENDIX A

The Traditional age of Sri Sankaracharya

,and the Math.as

APPENDIX

B

Southern Tours of the Acharyas of Amani

' and

Sringeri

APPENDJX C

The Vidyaranya Tangle

PAGE

46

5

73

100

113

141

147

155

161


6/54

APPENDIX D

The

Acharya Parampara of Sringeri

The Acharya

Parampara of

KudaJi

The Acharya Parampara of Dwaraka

The Acharya

Parampara

of Govardhana

Matha of

Jagannatha

APPENDIX E

Places all over India, where the Acharyas

of the Kanchi Kamakoti Pitha attained

Brahmibhava

APPENDIX

F

The Vidyaghana - Abhinava Sankara

Tangle

APPENDIX G

A Succint Survey of the Sri Kudali

Sringcri

Mutt

PAGB

166

169

172

177

181

187

190

n

if;J: f

~ ' ~ ~ + . 1 1 ) i i ~

illlt

i f r ~ ~ l i

I

THE DATE OF SRI SANKARACHARYA AND

THE

CHRONICLE

OF THE MATHAS

A TRADITIONAL APPROACH

Prelude

~ i l ~ < w f f f i r 1 ; I T T i f f ~ ~ :

?Trfi ~ ' l i r . ( W i ? \ ~ l a T ~

R i t .

t

tlf t


7/54

2

l

ul1'

111

uf'

l\nli Mllllkiu1 forP. r:rnw j;

1

t

11

0111 m1ds1

;i,,

1lH' gTPa1- 81mlrnrarh;11')'iL

llis

life

of

hut

thi1' .v-

iw.o

''1.

1

m.

11

ert-

.nsc of

the

term.

An

oft-qnotrd

verse sums up

hi> UI

>' < . F1 r, immediatel

r thereafter

Sank , -

f>tva1a.ka

,

founds

th

D

ak

a

ara

goes

to

oad 'n'k war a tha, then

r ~

to

D

n nBJ'ama and

fo els h ' >.

h

un

t e ,Jyotll' Matha, then reacllu;

t etl ast coast, :founds the

Go>ardhana

Matha then

turns

sou l-west

found

Sri '

3 d ' s ngen, finally arrives

at

Kanehi

h ~ u ~ f s the_ K1Uuakoti Pitha, stays there till the end

of

e,

nnd attains Videha Mukti

Tt

. .ld

th

th t tl fi \\Ou us appear

ar

a le

nal b hE> t of Oovinda Bhagavatpada was tl t

w.athd e e t 1 ~

d - - -

motlel

of th

o

Buddhist order and

cf. or er of

Hincl11::'

'"


10/54

,.

l IIl'l't js the ,.-erdict

of

historians

o 'I'ho Cambodia Inscription of the Greatel' Indiu

n ontloru one Sivasom


11/54

10

trr1111ItI1011

)

11

.

It to It

It U ' j flt I

/

U ' A C' ( ;jf,c Of S _ . . L . ~ - s b 1

11

' ' ' '

I nt1 ..

lN

flculh, fl20 A ..s

"

' ' " D. The clrronogimn

~ i v r f l {

i r . J r ~ ~

si

1

Jffi :rr:;Fb-

...

'

'

6-.

' ' ~ \ 1 \ ? I

{ l l. 'f

~ < J ; : r 1 ' i f l

..,

'

~ q ~ f i i Q f i :

I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ :

I

~ J f g =

'88

3 which d,

y

f ..L '

i eve

l'S

e yields 3889

r s .

o

LUC

K

a

i or

3889

- 3

10

2=

7

, i e

.,

3889

anothe ,._

77-78 A.D.

' r cwonogra1n J h

4'...-' h wuc reads .

Lu L

IJJ es the d t IA ~ l i f i i f ~ -

A. D. a e

of

Sankara's


12/54

12

sUlli,as;. 'l'his is

palpah

ly

uhstu

d. TbNi{' stotras

can

~ v e 1 be

r,ttributed to

n k ~ u a

ru1 (loctrines

pre-existed long before their

f:imr Hrmw, i i h;

thl

irnc.ien t cfoct1inC's that are

refuted

and not hr

.A i aD$?'n

or J)inu aga or

Nagarjum1

brand

of tut\, doc1l'ines.

Trum.:

i.

11lso

the otlier a.

p(>(t

or

111

1' r1t1ar;tion C' im

Wt>

be

qtri1c sme thnf the


13/54

14

~ ~ ~ f i t ~ ~ ffi?r

~ m i i - f . i f

f < t o r ~ r f . r l f

~

t ' l r ~ 1 f i f a : t 1 M 8 f s t a c t i i E - . b r l l - g ' f ~ ~ ~ o r : 1

Now every

activity of_ this

Abhin11\-;1

~ a u k a n b o i ( ~

such

clOSc

and

striking rcsemblanC c to th well

kn

own life

19Jfill of

Adi Sankara may lie

1 (\tainecl. Abhi

nava

Sankara

is tl1e refore madr

to

i lir

twenty

yPai'IJ

15

~ a r l i e r .

Thus

a branch

of Sringeri

tradition

fi:ires

the


14/54

16

uid

d by u

1

1

1

.

ti d IV 111011 w h ~ n it

ts about

. .

th

1

10

11

ut plunf't,s l .

L

i

< l e s e r i b m ~

we

tme o Sankara.. bU'th

~ m u ~ a t

~ i t :

~ ~ S l i l ~ f ; ~

~ f i r w r ~ ~ r

:q'

~ i t u

. (.Matll1a1 iya. Sankara Vijaya 72J

Arya.mba gav1 birth . .

whe

th S.

Io

a.

sou

rn

an

arn;pieious

Lagn

. g

o any on .

of

the Indi '

mdee


15/54

18

1

fir 1t,1,,yed

centurie

ago.

Can

it

be argued . t ~ t ,

w

we a1lu lt to these cities, we must bnve b e . ~ n .livmg

,before

their

destruction 1 This " P a t a l i p u ~ r a " ev1dene_e

is least convincing, :>ince

Sankara's

allu ton to ~ a ~ 1

iputra could neither prove his

anteriority

nor postenor1ty.

n

wonld be

1

too hazardous

to

ba8e

any

theory on such

;:u11depcnd.ible assumptions.

III. There is again a passage in

the

same

Bhasya

.-011 fh

R1alnllnsur.rru which runs thus

.; ~ ~ i l ' {TGTT ~ S l t ' l i ' i f < P l o l t s ~ < I : . ( { 4 ~ ~ ~

J J ~ ~ r ' l ~ c p c < n ~ ' 1 l u ~ r ~ l l < r ~ f u < f q ~ l f ; : i 1

(U

: lt

18).

'rhe topic under discussion is the i m p o i : ; ~ i b i l i t y of. any

1-

...

ex

1

stent and

a

non-existent. To

illus-

assoe1ation

u e ~ w e e n an

. .

tnt t

the

point,

the Bhagavatpada

dra.ws attent10n

tothe

, ahstndity

of a

statement such

as

" P u r n ~ v a 1 1 m m succeed

.ed a barren woman's son." The tnntlon of a barren

\';ross

two Purnavarmans.

.ous ynas ies

" l ' h - ~ r o

is

a.

Purnn.va.rman

mentioned il" a.

Ja'l[a

copper

plate inscription. This Purnava.rman c ~ u 1 ~ n o ~ hr.ve

had

anything

to do

with

Sankara , since. he hve-a m. iar

off Jav:':t.

Another Purnavarman

is mentioned by H1eung

"l'sang

as having

ruled over

Western M a ~ a d h a .

And

:Sirice Sankara wrote 'his Bhasyas

in

Varanasi (Benares),


16/54


17/54

22

-

489

B.C.

This

IIala was

a contemporary of

Nara, of

the Kashmir Gonanda dynasty, whom the Raja

'l'ata

ngini'

mentions. Hence, Purnava.rman could not have been the

~ o n t e m p o i a r y of

Sankara,

Pumarnrman is

just

an

imaginary

figure;

just

like 'rom,

nick or

H a r r ~ '

Ent tll.' Jiina. la

(V-0l.

1-3)

would have

it Lha.t Purn.11 ...

varman

was a real historic personage

and

identical

with

liala,

who was the 74th

ruler

of Magadha.

t

is

Sfii(l:

that Hala

was also kno,n1

by

the surname Puma from

the Yayu Purana

verse :

~ m : l t i f ~ ~ t l _oTT ~ r e t ~

l l ~ f f i

I

where iflf is the surname of HaJa.

I f ,

therefore,

Purna or

Pm1iayarman and

lfah l1C'

identical, that would be a further confirmation of the

traditional

date of

Sankara.

IV.

The l\Iadhaviya

$ankaravjjaya

makes Sn nlrnra

a contempo rary of Bana,

Mayura and

Dandi

in v the:

slo1rn

:

. 'fi'.nflil::rtf;;cr J

~ f u ; a 1 f ; q 3 1 . T r ; : i : _ ' l ' J U T ~ < . _ ( e f l J G ' l ~ ~

1 f u ~ m )

~ ~ i l 1 f ~ ~ 1 ; r w ~ ~ M ~ i f l l l T ~ ' l i t ~ < f i T {

I

(Sa

rgu

15

. 141.

)'

Professms \Veber, Buhler and Max Muller have fixed

the

date of

Dandi at

the

end of

the _6th

century A.

D.

Bana and

l\'Iaynra are also known

to

have li

"Cd

in

the

beginning of

the 7th

century. Hence

Sankara

must have

lived towards the end

of

the 6th and the beginning of

the 7th century.

This piece of independent evidences is

said

to

confirm

the date of

P n r n a y a

The biggest flaw

in

the

argument

is,

e-0uld the

highly

spurious

:i'.fadhavi.va Sankara

Vijaya

be relied upon when

it makes Bana, 1\fayura and Dandi tlie cont< mvoraries

of Sankara t

makes Srikantliacharya

(of the llth;

23

century) and

Abhinava

gn

pta

(of the 10th century)

also

contemporaries of S a ~ k a r a .

Can

this be soberly accepted

The Madhaviya Sankaravija.ya makes

everJ

one,

from

Adam

to fjisenhower,

a

contemporary

of

Sankara.

t

is

highly risky to base one's

arguments

on this highly

anachr onistic work. This work itse lf is a

. h u g ( ~

:rnar.hro

nism, since

the author (or

authors)

of it,

who lived

in

the . e:arly years this century have fathered

the

work'

on

Vidyaranya of the

14th century

This

pseudo-biography, passing

under the

impressive

title

l\fadhaviya

Sankaravijaya,

is

neither

MaclliaYiy:i _nor

Sankaravijaya

Though foisted

on the

.

devotecl. head of

l'lfodhavacharya,

or

Vidya,ranya, it is

really

a much

later

work (later than the

14th 'century). t

cannot l1t1

more

than

two centuries old, because

it has

two com

men.taries, Dindima

and

Advaita. Lakshmi,

the

Litter

of

which belongs to the first quarter of

the

19th crntury.

t appears

to have been

written by

one

Nava

Kalidasa,

and, freely emended

by an adherent of the

Sringeri

l\1atha. It has been revised and altered beyond recog

nition

by

Bhattasri Na.rayau a. Sastrigal, with the aid of

Kokkonda Venkatara.tnamgaru, and

Siddhantam

Suhrah

manya Sastri of Bangalore. In fact, on more

than

one

0 ~ " 1 1

ion, the fate

Bhatfas

r i ar a:nwn Sa, tci ponsttd

of

ba

vin

cr b


18/54

24

two well-known commentaries on the \vork), s h'td any

reference to

the

A c h a r y a ~ connection with Kanchi.

In

sh?1't, the aim

of

Sri

Sastri

was

to

erase

all

traces

o .

the Bhaga,'atpada's connection with. Kanch..

As

for its claim

to be

a biography of

the

great

Bhagavatpada, \Ve

will

have to borrow Bentley's words

when he summed up his views on Alexander Pope's

trnnslation of Homer- t is all

very

good, Mr. Pope,

b u ~ you must l\Ot call it Homer. So too must we say

of the l\fadhaviya

I t

:Is good

poetry

and all that, but

don't call it Sankaravijaya-not one

shred

which is

genuine biogl apliy. As we have elsewhere pointed out,

it is a

st

ring of anachronisms and a veritable comedy of

conll.i Pa itlcuiitiPs.

But

all that were par


19/54

26

But the q u c s ~

l

k

.k,

lS,

i.ic SanY-..ara converted

Tri-

Vf rama? Wu it the

fi.nit

or the A..:i1 S

f

J.:_

. u anrmra or anr

ILllS

iUwttrious

s u c c ~ o r s 1 Adi

Sanlta

em

rnent1

. k

w. .

rn was

pre-

k Y a V i sopke

7

,

w1th

no

sectarian

b i a ~ .

Ji

'l'ri-

rarna was made a Saiva, it should

haV'e

h en bv a

l

a

e ~ 8 a n k ~ u ' f l . c b a r y a

with

$0mewWit

pronomtct>d

S ~ h - a

eanutg-&---pr


20/54

28

cularly whrn

there

is

such

remarkable agreement among

with regard to details.

l i01 6

positive

information is forthcoming. There

is

the

famo1s 'ra.mrapatranusasarui (copper

plate

inscrip

tio111 of king

Sn

ignorant

of the

existence

of

such records. The

only


21/54

30

possible

explanation

is

that, in the

eyes

of

the historians,

all these records

arc

fakes

of

a

later date

concocted bv

the various

Mathas

to

cnrry their history

far

back

i n t ~

a

hoary

w1tiqui.ty. Should

such

indeed be

the attitude

of

the

historians, that would scarcely be

fair,

since,

such

an

allegation would

imply

that

the

Acharyas

of

the

various :Mathas

Wl l C

paities to

the

perpetration

of

this

,pionP.

fr;,ucl. Or,

i11

view of

th'-l

remarkable

similarities

found

in the

rccor


22/54

32

Now follows the chronogram of the birth of Kumarila-

Bhatta

~ < f T ~ ~ < t O f i f < ~ ~ l q l + i i \ ~ f l ~ I

~ < ~ ~ l \ i : l T i l i :

' f i t ' < f i t < - J r ~ < ~ H : :

~ R l l ~ + m : ' J i l l < i i J 0 6 i l i t f l ~ :

I

~ ~ : m ~ ~ O f ~ M W l q:'f m f i l ~ ~ ~ f c f i I

(Quoted by T. S. Narayana Sastri

in

his ' Age of

Sankara 1917, pp. 139).

Before we decode this verse to

obtain

the

date

of:

t>irih of Kumarila Bhatta, we must be familiar with

certain

era1 in ancient Indian chronology

: -

( 1) Yudhisthira era of the Hindus, corresponding

to the coronation of Yudhisthira-36 years before

Kall

or 3138 B.C.

2) Kali era begins in 36

Yudhisthira era

or

3102 B.C.

3) The Yudhisthira era of the Jains corresponds

to 468 Kali or 2634 B. C.

Now, decoding the foregoing chronogram, :;iW: = 7-,.

cm::

= 7,

=0

i f & : i f ~ T

=

2, i.e. 7702, which,

when

reversed, gives 2077 of the

Yudhisthira

er

of

tho

Jains

i.e. 2634-2077

=

557 B. C. This is the

date uf

hirt:h

of Kumarila Bhatta.

J\ext, Chitsukhachrya in his

Brhat

Sankara Vijnya

says that, Kumarila was older than Sankara hy t orty

eight years. Hence, Sankara must have been hmn 48

years after Kumarila, that is

in

557-48 = 509 fL C.

1'he

date

of Sankara 's meeting with Kumarila

i:-i

irn1i

catcd in the verse :--

ffi O_

q ~ ~

qr{

~ ~ ~ i r a ~ R f

~ f f i l ) ~ ~ {*9t fii.'ltfl


23/54

-dynastic history, from 2615

Kali

to 2554 Kal i. Thfo

fa

further

confirmation

of the date of Sankara

rn.

''fhe common allegatiou

against

th

t Mn

thas

that

they

have taJllpercd

with their dates

to gain

antiquity

fo1

their institutions

is

hnrdly

fair.

Had

they been

prompted

l>y

mich ignoble rnotinos,

1.hey couhl

have

pushed

hack

the

date

of Sankara as far

hack as 1st century Knli or

30th ceni ury B. C. For,

Gaudapada

is said to

have h < ' t ~ n

a S i s y ~ of Suka, who

lived

in

the

let. cen.t.ury l{:tli,

f

that. were so,

Gaudapada's Sisya

Govinda)ladil,

;111d

his Sis>a

Sankara

BLagavatpada, con1c1 easily hn.

1

ie l H ~ 1 : n

made to l i /e

in

the 1st century Kali or

30th cen

t111y B. C.

But

t h e ~ ; r .

Matha

histories rwver

make snch

f:111tf1';ti;i

daims. StH .h

moderation should be ample

proof

of

1.li( i1

authenticit:v.

f 9th century A.D.

js too late a


24/54

36

Vais:tlcha, on the Krsnapaksa chaturdasi tithi.. f now

we remove one

full

cycle of 60 years,

then

112 -60== 52.

i.e. the 52nd year will also be Nala, with the same

month, vaksa

and

tithi. Hence, without materially alter

ing

the

year, month,

paksa and

tithi, the dates oJ Sar

vajnatman

and

others may be u pruned

to

" reasonahlc

limits

" so

that

we

might

bring

Sankara's

date forward

by at least three centuries, to the satisfaction o( aH

parties concerned. ,

But the

very

idea behind such pruning would be

:

(l)

that

the early records have been deliberately f a l s i f o ~ d by

an addition of

60

years to the reign

oi

each Acl11rrya ;

nnd (2) thnt we believe that no

man

could live for over

hundred years. To presum e so would be tantamount

to

questioning the honesty of the chroniclers. They were

too

~ r e a t

to be capable of such

shady

transaction >.

Somc

of

these chroniclers are, even

to this

day,

e o m r n a n d i n ~

the veneration of millions. One. at least among tl1em,

the

great Sadasiva Brahmendra, the

author

of t

lw I

lm1-

ratnamalika, is

held

in high reverence

by

all :tlik('. irres

pective

of. their

affiliations.

In

fact, the grcnt. 8atchi

dananda Sivabhinava Nrsimha Bharati Swami of Hl'ingcri

himself ha8 celebrated the gTeatness

1

of S a < l m ~ i v n Brnh

rnendra in immortal verse. Such being 1.lw < :Is( , no111

conld dare

to question

the

honesty

o:f Sa


25/54

38

Sii Kota Venkatachelam has taken

considerable

pa:ins:

to fix the date of every important event in Sankara's;

life. (pp. lJ 1

to

116, Chr-0nicle of Nepal

History)

.

Further con:firmatio of thl date is forthcoming

1'rorn

the Brhat Sanka

ra

Vi

jaya of Sri Chitsukhaclmr>a, who

appears

to have been

the

most sober

and

fait.hfUl hlo

grapher of Sankara,

having been the companion

of

San

kara, practically from his birth. In the 32nd Pralmrana,

(4)

The

real history

of

India. is said to comm from

the d ~ a t h of Buddha,

which is now lixed

by da ti ng back

from the Ume

or

Ale.xander's in v

asio

n

of

India during 326-

32

B.

C. Tile reigning mona1cb at

th

e time

or

Ale:xander's

Jnvaalon is aa.id to have been Chandragupta

Maurya.

Wilh

this starting-point in

history, viz.

the

invasion of

India

hy

Alexander, the

date

of

Gautama

Buddha's NJrva.na. is .1\xed ns

being 486 C l lu t this date of B u d , d ~ a ' s death, MCOl'dJng t

F1ri Venka,tac

hellam, is

w

rong, Fo1

-, AleJW.nder's

con tem.pora1-y

ea

n.ol Chandragupta. Ma11rya

but ChandJ.ars

(2) Pradyo

ta

., S ,.

J

38

(3) Slsu

na

ga JO 360

(4) Nanda 2 ,. 100

(S) Ma

urya ,.

12

316 ,.

(6) S u n ~

10

300

(7)

Kaawa

4 8

(8) Andbra

32 S06

with a total

regnaI period of

2811 years. The

Maurya.

dynast.y

tharcfore came

into

power in 1604, years of

the

Kali

era 9 :r

39

of Chit.sukha's work, we have complete details with

regard

to the

date:

of

Sankara :

~ a :

m

~ i Rr 1 J r ~ ~ ~ e y 0 1 '

1

r r w ~

~ c f f ~ i r ~ f o f a { - ~ ~

II

Cl

~ ~ B r o s e y

fc{ ~ I - 1 ; . i ; : < ~ ~ I

~ J W ro ({ f ~ ~ ~ rnfu

i h l ~

II

~ ~ ~

q

q ~ p : < i t

RMT

~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 e f t

I

J t r o l ~ m t < t > < i i 2 ~

II

+ M l ~

~ s f ~ ~ ~ ~ ) + ~ I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ < I T II

~ ~

i ' l f ~ ~ i i i ,fqtirr ~ ~ i j ' I

5 1 H l ~ ~ r ~ < t f ~ ~ i i i ~ r - I O l l II

(12 to 16)-

'fhen iu

the tenth

month of her

pregnancy

which

was

fraught with

all auspicious

igns, in the year

2631

of the Yudhisthira Saka, in t

h.

e auspicions year a n d a n ~ ,

on SundaY the 5th day oi the .bright half of the auspi

cious m;nth Vaisakha, when the sun was

in

Aries

(Mesa), when the moon

hnd

advanced into tl:c c o n s t e ~ a - ,

tion of

Pnnarvasu,

in

the

Ijag11a

Kataka, JUSt

at m1


26/54

40

~ l a y in the Muhurta

known as Abhijit,

with the

Lagna

. a ~ p e c t e d . by a u s p i c i o u ~

planets, when

Guru,

Sani,

Kuja

a

nd Ravi were both rn

Kendra and in

exaltation, when

Snkra _

w as

ascendent,

and

when

the

auspicious

Budha

was with the sun,

the

chaste Aryamba gave

birth to

a

son even as Parvati gave

birth

to the glorious Shanmukha.

2631

Yudhisthira Saka corresponds to

2593 Kali

or

509

B

C. The horoseope { f the

Bhagavatpada

recon

structed

from these

data

would be

as

follows

Sukra

Kuja

Surya

Budha

Born in the

Constellation

Punarvasu

~ a n i

I

Chandra

um

Lagna

NOTE

: --The

positions

of Rahu and

Ketu

are not

indicated since we have no data.

Ve

have n ~ w ~ c c a s i o n

to l Cfer to

the

horoscope

of

Sankara

as

.mamtamed by

the

Sringeri

Matha.

t

would

he .found tnat the planeta r,v positions in the foregoing

; . ~ o s e o p e

reconstructed from Chitsukha s Brhat

Sankara

I ~ a y a are

the same as those reconstructed from

th


27/54

42

(b) Vle

have - alre:idy shown

that

Kumarila W M

born in 557 B.

C.

Bhartrhal'i or Bharti:p1'apancha as he

At the t.in le rt Bhisma's Niryana, the relative .

positions

:

of

the

sun

and the

mocn :md otber details are dei;m, bed in

fnH in

the

49th

chapter

of

Santi P:uva of

the

Mahabharnta.

'file details ure as follow :

'lche

Month was

Muglm, Suklu Paksa, .Ast.ami tithi, an


28/54

44

{ t SankarH, and son 14 of Govinda Bhagavatpade. (the

Guru of Sankara) before his Sanyasa.

Further,

accord

ing to Kota Venkatachellam's scheme, more

than

13 cen

turiS

pass from Buddha to

Sankara,

a period long

whioh

means that from the birth of Pariksit

to

the

coronation

or

Nanda (Maha Padma

Nanda),

1500

years had

t>:tssed.

Pa11iksit

must have been born in

3138

B.

C.,

since Ab timanyu

died

in 3139 B.

C.

(Pariksit a

posthumous

child). Hence,

the

coronation

of Nanda must

have

come off in

3 1 3 S ~ 1 5

=

1638

B.C.

f now we accept the tradition that the

two

genera.tions

the Nanda dynasty

ruled for

100

years,

then the date of

accession or Chandragupta. Maury a shou ld be 1638---100

=

J538 B.C., which

confirms

Sri Yenkatachellam's

da.te

as also

the date obtained on astronomical

evidence.

Now,

even

historians

admit

that Bimbisara

of

the

Sais\1-

naga dynasty was a contemporary of Gautama

Buddha.

Now,

the ollowing

table

gives

the

regnia.l

years

of

the

r u l 1 ~ r > from

:

Btmbisara to Chandragupta, according

to

the

Matsyrc

Purana:

Bimbisara 28 years

Ajatasatru

27 years

Darsaka 24 years

Udasin 33 years

Nahdivarrlhana . 0 years

\lahanandin . 3

years

Mahapadma

Nanda and other

Nandas

100

y e a r ~

Total

295 years

Buddha was alive in

1538

+

295

=

8 . l . ~ B.

4 l i

B

C., is quite reliable

and

calls for no revision. Or,

at

any

rate,

sank a

was born and li11ed in the pre-

Christw.n e

a and

certainly not in the 9th century A D.

Bom in Kalati

in

509 B. C., the

Acharya

founded

many

Mathas,

in particular, the

Kamakoti Pitha, over

which he himself presided as the first Acharya,

and

entered

the Guha or Bila (the fissure) of Kamaksi in

Kanchi

and merged himself in Brahman.

14.

Vide-"

Age

of

Sankara",

by

T. S.

Narayana Saatri,

pp. 90 to 103.


29/54

CaAPTEn

SRi

SA:NKARACHARYA AND

THE MATHAS

The Ministry of Sanlmra

mr. 1y be viewed from

three

have founded I

k n o ~ \ t l

Ma.thas

E

Si

like th.e

umcrn

an


30/54

:wmdendiragiri (or simply Anandagiri) and Totaka ~

be identical.

_

Visnugupta, who

is

said

to

have belonged

to the same village as that of the Bhagavatpada, was

later orda.ined as Sanyasi under the name of Chitsukh

aehwya. It. was this disciple of

Sankara

who w r ~ t e the

Brhat Sankara Vijaya, which, unfortunately, 18 not

extant but

which

Anandagiri

claims

to

follow

c l o s e l y ~

Prthirldharnbharati, again, is not mentioned. Probably

he

is not different

from Hastamalaka, though some think

he is different from Rastamalaka.

\Ve have,

at

present, accounts of only four :\Iatbas,

enumerated in the popular Mathamnaya stotras (said to

haye been written by the great Sankara himself). Bach

of these Mathas was placed under the care

of"

one of

the

more distinguished Sisyas of

the

Acharya. We

will Just

trace the history of these Mathas as found

in

the

.M:athamnaya stotras

or

from a

particular

work e n t ~ t l e < l

the Mathetivrttam

( ~ l f f l l )

which is mater1ally

the same as the others.

At the very outset, it should be remembered that

each l\ fatha hns.its own version of Matharnnaya, and th.at,

consequently,

there

are

striking

differences even with.

r-egard to some fundaim:ntal details. For the. benefit.of

the reader who may be curious to be acquainted

w1.th

the contents of the Mathamnaya texts, we summarise

here

the

details of the

Mathctivrttam

which

i


31/54

50

Sarvajnatman

al'c clnimed to be

the

first Aehm-yas not

merely

by

th11 I>waraJm Pitha but by

the

Sringeri Matha

as well. f>adrnapadacharya is also ment ioned as having

IH'C'll lh1 1I. Acharya of Dwaraka, In short, the eru:ly

i

iHLory ol th.is

Pitha

is very canfusing. The reason may

h


32/54

52

~ r . t "f;r ( Prnjn:umm Brahm.a} is the ruliu.g motto

of

this

,l\1111.ha

Ii

'J.'lic (fovardhana Mat.ha still exists. Besides this Matha

J'nri has

a few

other Mathas, viz. the SanlrnranandiA

: Uatha, the Siva Tirtha

Matlia

and the G o p < ~ Tirtha

lHatha.

The latter are

:probably off-shoots of

the

original

(i-ovardhana

Matha.

The Govardhana Matha

has

had

a phenomenally

long

line of

Acharyus,

there having

been as

many

as

14

incumbents up to the present

time.

Its traditions,

how

ever; confirm the date of the Bhagavatpada as being in

the

5th c


33/54

54

ul 111nrt.i11l

looki111{ ini aniry,

with

the

multitude of gay

f c w l o o w ~ ,

1lihnt.1nH,

cliamaras and Vyajanas--that were

inl11t1cl n Hig-ht. for gods to see, a sight that simply over

wlwhnH th 3 host of Sisyas

with

a sense of incomparable

dignity and

awe. Again, lik:e the Pope who commands

the allegiance of all Christendom-the Catholic world at,

l ~ a s ~ t h e

Acharyas

of

Sringcri

dominate

the

Hindu:,

worJd. Their disciples

are

legion,

in all parts

of

India.

This

Matha constitutes the Daksina

( s o u t h ~ r n ) Amnayn.

lts

Sampradaya

is

Bhurivara

(eschewing wealth).

The

Aeharyas

of this

Matha

assume the titles

of Saraswati,

Bharati and Puri. Its

Ksetra

is Rameswara, its presid--

ing deity Adi Varaha, the

Sakti

being Kamaksi, (or

Sarada according to

another

version).

Its

first Acharya.1

was Prithividhara (who is said to be the same as Sures-

waracharya).

The

Tirtha

is

Tungabhadra. The

ponti:ffsc

befong

tu the

order

of Chaitanya Brahmacharis. The:

l\Iatha stands for Yajurveda

(

Krsna

Y

ajus)

,

the

Maha

vakya

;risnflii

7

(A

ham Brahmasmi) being its ruling

motto.

7) : q g ~ e f ~ m ~ : ~ ~ h : 1 f u -

+t if r ~ C I . II

~ f t : < t ~ ' S f ~ u = ~ ~ ~ : ~ + r ; : r : I

~ r c r r f r r

~ H : ~ a l m:al au

~ i i T U i l : ~ ' l ' f f i I

'ifilil'lllit ~ l l f < \ . . ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ T

II

~ r ~

~ ~ = ; ~ ~ f o - c t t ~

1

B r ~ " f i { t

lffQ ~ r :

~ ~ w r ~ ; q

w r c i t ~ ' ' ~ n : 1

~ ~ i ~ : s i f ' f t ~ < t i t 4 q r : II

8.. Chronicle of

Nepal

History,

pp. 116.


34/54

56

B f t U " i { " ~ ' I ' : l ~ { ~ l ~ 5 i ~ ~ : I

i z n ; i j - ~ < r r ~ ~ ~ c n < f i ~ r r < J f ~ r n r : u

~ ' - 6 f ~ i f { i f i l ; : 4 1 f ; ; T C f f ~ l l ? J ~ f c t ~ F T Q : I (

o ~ r f i m > < r o r ~ ~ l { ~ ~ ~ i l f l . : 4 C i f :

)

(Ma hetivrttam, 1\-20) .

I

Not

bi;ing content

with

defining

the

juris J ~ m i

fii\f T.f f

l (25)

~ 1 ~ ; : ~ ~ ; : 1 ~ :

a f

by

Tripura Kumara, Ganapatya by Girirajakumara, and

Kapalika by

Va.

tuka-natha. I t

is

extremely doubtful

if

Kapalilrn, which

stands

self-condemned, ever received

the

Bhagavatpada

s approvl}l as a :eeligion.

to

be

foHowccl

by (JTJe

seeking

,Tnana.

The sixth

religion

is probably

Kaumarm

the worship of Subr.ahmanya.

lrn,vhow,

these Sisyas,

entrusted with

these

different

missions,

must have had

buses of ope-rations,

an.cl

these,.

probably, were some

of the minor

1\fathas, not

taken

cognisance

o1 by the

Matha.mna.ya.

All

these

minor

o r g a n i s a t i o n ~ may

have

had a brief

existence,

and might

liave

faded into

oblivion

through the

ages,

for want .-,;f

1ellergetic

and

zealous workers.


35/54

53

CHAPTER

III

THE

BH G V TP D

ND THE K NCHI

K M KOTI PITH

Any one who

has studied the

second chapter would

lia.ve

been

intrigued'

by the

fact that the

Kamakoti

Pitha

is

mentioned

nowhere

in

the (extant)

Mathamnyas,

and

that

no

jurisdiction is assigned to it.

It

is nevcrthelesir

a Matha oi

very great antiquity, having had an unbroken

hi


36/54

60

estnblishmeut. of'

the

six-fold paths worship c ~ ~

l w v i n ~ ; t:.iken

place at

Kanchi

f . \ ~ J q J J f l ? . l + J t T i t ~ er m r i r ~ < r t ~ ~ ~ ~ {'q'%nrr

i i i . ~ f;:nrfil '-7 ~ i r e ~ ~ ~ i r

t

etc.

(Anand.

Sank.

Vij.

GG I> ::iknrn.na).

l'he

mo,..t

valtmb1r picc

o

in:f

rmai.ton t l i a ~ nanda

g ~ i fur11Lhes us \V-ith

i.

thal the H l i a ~ mt.paaa attained

V1deha M11kti ai KanclU

~ t ; f . : r f ; : J T ~ : C f i l ~ ) ; r l f { t l ~ ~ l ~ ~ l f i r ~ ~ l i < l . . ~ m : l t

~ ~ " i l s ; n ~ r ~ t r ~ q r ~ r ~ ~


37/54

62

-\l:1t.l ns in ~ ~ b l a b a r , testifies to the

fact

that,

after

tour-

111g 1ou11d

lrnlia,

Sankara

finally reached

Kanchi

C' Cl:


38/54

~ ~ ~ s t ~ ~ ' < l i i T 1 1 o ~ ~ : II

~ ~

::ll ig ~ f 9 ~ < J

~ i ~ ) i :

II

~ ~ ~ ~ l l ~ ~ C l ~ ~ t < l ~ I

a f 1 0 % ~ f f c r U < r t t

a . T ~ t

II

U

l tCJ ~ f q ) { l ~ l m ~ : q ~ f ' m : l ~ ~ C I T < J : . l

'

a i ~ f i f 11.a-

~ c : r ~ i l l ' l

Rrnfu

d) l he Vyasachaliya

Sankaravijaya,

written

by

one of the later Acharyas of the

Kamakoti

Pitha sum

marises Sri Sankara s activities at

Kanchi

~ f . r & ~ " { q ' r j ~ f t i ' E f i < f ~ ~ ~ i : f t 6 I l ' ~ f . ~ + " ~ l : C J ~ t : = a " I illSIT

Pluqfct ~ ~ T ' l r < T a ~ = < r m ~ ~ ~ i : ~ r f i t a - :


39/54

. at Kanchi the Sarnda Matha

Sri

Sank-ara establt.shed

d from the

snow-clad

P tha

renowne .

or

the Kamakoti

1

'

f the

administration

Himalayas

to the

southern s ; h a a s peculiar

to

the

tne enforcement of

all

nJ

fom castes

~ . . . >

. ;fl ~ llH

' o

3

SO ri_.

Sanka.rt.

67

a)

There is, first and

fo

remost, the life-size image

of

~ a n k a r a in

.the Kamaksi temple, installd

over his

Surnadhi.

(

b)

Among

t lw

ornamental s

culptures of the

pillars

at Kamakili and Ekamrcsw

ara.

temp s, ther e arc

images

of t11e

Dltagavatpadu witl1 regal

in

Jgnia

beside

hi

m.

bi

the Varadarajaswami temple, too, there is a stone carv

ing- r c p r e ~ 1 e n t i 1 1 g Sri Sankara

as

paying

homage

to

Bliagavan

Vy

asa.

( c) n the unei nt dilapida ted . temple (recently reno

vated)

at Sivasthanam, in Teuambakkam on

the eouthern

bank

of the river Vcgayati, ther

e is a

plaque behind tl::.e

I,inga in ihe sanctum which repr

ut

Sri Sankara

a.s

o . t r ~ r i n g obeisance to Siva and Parvati.

(d) In Tiruvottiyur, six miles north

oJ.' Ma

dras,

there is

un

image of Sankara installed in the

temple

of

Tripuraslllldari, whose Ugrakala (fierceness) the great

B11fl 'avatpall.a is said to have mollified. So, too, in

Mangadu, fifteen miles west of Madras,

there

is a Meru

P1asthn

-of

Sri Yantra, said to have been installed

by

tl1( gr at

Sankara

himself. An image of

Sankara

is also

found installed

in

the temple.

(

e) Most interest ing feal ure of

all

is

this-

-that there

is nu

iiahotsava

celebrftted in the Kamaksi temple at

Kancheepuram when the

Murti

of

the

Acharya

is not

accorded equal worship. At the end

of the

Chaturmasya

e C J .v

year

the

image of the Acharya is taken

in

proces

:.

ion,

by

w

ay

of

Vfavarnpa

Yatra, to the Upanishaf

Bralunendra Matha

at the

western outskirts of Kanchi.

S 1ch

intimate local association with

the

personality

of

Sankara

\ annot be ascribed to mere accident. The


40/54

68

poplJlax iru..igmation througliout the- ages abould have been

Jlowerfully imp ressed

by

the

dominant

pel'&onality of the

gi-eat

Bhagavatpada who cast off his mortal oil

in

this

city.

Viie

cannot

but refer

here to some

disputed

issues.

They

a r e : -

1)

D[d

Sankara occupy the Sarvajna Pitha at

Kanchi or at a s h m i r ~

and

2)

Did

he die

at Kanchi or at Kedara?

After

all thff evidence we have

mars

halled, it w o u l ~

be

~ e s s to

reopen

these qu.estic

>n

s. Still, the .Madha

viya $8.nka.'r'a. Vijaya

d-esci-ibes

Sanka

r a's accession t o the

arv

aj

na Pith.a

t

Kashnrir,

and

his ascension to Kailasa

from K-edara. How

far a.re

they

admissible

There is

evidence

to t he effect

that

the

great

B

ha

gavat

pa

da

visited

Kaabmir-and pr o

bah1y

O< euried.

the

Sar

va jna Pith.a aa well. There is even

today

in Srin:a-ga:r

a temple

e d i c a t ~

to Sri Sankaraeharya. The

fo

llow

ing

excerpt

would explain

"

Sankaracharya-This shrine

is

situated in the city

of

Srinagar

. SanJmracharya

is

an ancient temple crown

ing the Takti-Sula;iman bill and standing 1000 ft . a b ~ e

th

1

valley.

The temple and

he bill on which

it

stan

take t h ~ i : r name .froll).

Sankaracharya-the

great Sou

Indian

Teacher of

Monism,

wno

cam.e

to

Kashmir

from

Travance1e. This temple was built by .King Gopaditya,

wllo reigned in Kashmir from 36 to 308 B .C. I t was

repaited

lat.er

by the liberal-minded l1ns1U:n king, Zuin

ulAbdin." (' Tl;te Rinclu ", dated 17-7-]949, yage 15.

crJumn

2).

Hence, after establishing his supremacy

at Kashmir

by

69

e


41/54

70

(2) Muka Sankara

(the

eighteenth pontiff),

was

served by

Vikramaditya

the

Great,

better known

as

Sakari. (375-413 A.D.)

3)

Sa,t-chit-Sukha

(the twe

nty-.first

Acharya),

is

said to

have

converted the

astror

wmer Ary ate

mscnption

No.

X.

ll1Rcr1p1Jon JS th


42/54

72

(17)

In all the foregoing inscriptions, the Swamis

of the Kaernkoti Pitha

are

the donees. Here follows a

copper plate inscription (No. X , in which the S w a r n ~ is

the

donor. The date of the

grant

is

Saka

1608,

t. c.

1686.

The then Acharya of the Kamnkoti Pitha, Sri Maha

devendra Saraswati makes a

gift

of land to one

Rama Sastri. In this inscription, there is a reference to

the land in question as haYing belonged to the

Jagir

Sime

(31rr :rt

flmw) granted sometime earlieL' by

Akkanna and Madanna, ministers of Golkonda.

Mackenzie ' mentions that the Kamakoti Pitha had as

many

as

one hundred and twenty-five copper plate inscrip

tions in its possession. But unfortunately all of them

were destroyed at the beginning of this century, except

these ten. The destruction of these copper plates is a

terrible

loss

to

history.

(18) T rn

Chingleput District Clazrteer oi' the Y{'ar

1879

contains the following account

Shankarachari . . . . . . paid particular atLcntion to Con-

jeevaram where he worked many miraeles

and

founded

a

}iatham

or l\fonastry. (pp.

86

and

87)

'Vith all

this

volume of evidence in

favour

of

the

antiquity

of

the

Kanchi Kamakoti Pitha,

it ~ o u l d

be

impossible to call

it

a bogus institution pa rtLsan pro-

paganda

has been asserting time

and

agam. .

-w

c ca1inot do better than crown

our

arguments with

. , d" t f

11

,,- h mahopadhva a ~ f a d h a v a

the conswcred ver 1c o ~ n a a .

S

. ' r B1iandari of the Punj;ih

Oriental

Umvers11-.y, who

. i . t i . , pth

writes: Such being the case, the Khnchi Kamakoti 1 a

~ ~ 6 t : ~ ~

i ~ 6 4 ~ o l ~ ~ ~ ~ l t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ : ~ ~ : a ~ t ~ ~ r ; ~ ? i t o r v ~ ~ -

c ~ :


43/54

74

Sisya

Pith11s. Nevertheless, cons idering Sureswara's emi

nence, cq

ua}

io his own,

and

considering his

great

yogic

powers, the

Bhagavatpada entrusted him with the

con

trol

of ll

Pithas, Thus

Sureswara,

in

his capacity of

Controller-General, stayed for some time

in

each of

the

Pitlrns-(and

p r o h a b l ~ ,

paid

pe1-iodic

visits)-stabilising

those inst;itntiom:.

l l e r n ~ e it

is

that

ll

M:athas in.dude

Snreswara in their

line

of

succession

after Sankara

'>

-' rngei1

I

ia

commences

378

years

after

his df'ath (

406 B C .

m

: . 1

accordmg to the Kanch1 calendar. This

huge

mterrugnum

is

really

bewildering.

. Ntir

i

this

tJw only i s r I ' < ' p a n c ~ ' -

Aftrr

Sut'f'SWlll ll

pass-

11lt .

l\:1.1Y i n 7 7 2 ~ . D . , h e i s ~ a i c l tolrn chceu

s11cceccledbv

om J:

1 t y a b ~ d h u g J l . ' 1 J . l l l who

is frll>ntified

with

8 : u 1 ~ 1 . . j n : l ;

rnan' t ie . ust

pu1

hrnl st c " s . ~ r

aft


44/54

76

nnd Sarvajnatman,

belonging

to the Kamakoti

Pi tha-

the

Pitha

of

the great Acharya himself-must

han been

a c ~ o r d e d high honours by

the

firnt Aclrnryas

of

all the

other lHilthas ; so

that,

between

the Bhagavatpada and

themselves

they

filled

in

the revered nnmes of

the

elderly

Bureswara

and the young

Sarvajna in

their

spil'itual

geneology. Thmi,

the

first Achar:va of

Sringeri, nominated

by Sankara himself, was Prithvidhar a (or Prithvidhav a)

1

[Sri

N. Venkatrama.n, however, seems

to

regard Pri1.hi

vidhara

as being identical

with

Sureswarn.

(Sankar

acharya and

his successors

in

Kanchi,

page

10). But

Atmabodha

thinks

otherwise.] But Prithvidharacl1arya,

_though

realty the

first

Acharya

of

that

line

afte1'

Sankara,

waives off

that honour and prefers

to considP.r himself

as successor

in the

line

after

Snreswara and Sarvajnat

man (or Nityabodhaghana,

as

Sringeri chronides

call

him).

The Kudali-Sringeri

records,

(Hultzsch Mss),

contain a

very

suggestive verse

~ . r r ; ; q ~ l fciT I

~ f ~ ( q f 1;>1 y .he

Jeit

fxiliinn been fUl

unlHoke;i in '

[

Acltarya.s on th K.udali-Srincreri

Un '

bl 5

p1

oo a

Y about

a

do7,en Acharya

whose names

ar enu

-

te l

in tJ

e Hult7.sch

Mss.

But

immcthing

happened

JU:.L then. rheJ;e was

no successor

to the pontifirate

for

what

reason, we

cannot

say.

There

p rhaps

some

trut.h in. tho

tradition

that the

t h e 1 ~

.Acharya of

Kudali

::U:in.geri

l1ad gone on a .

tour to

Kedara

and

.had not.

r turned. It was

at

thi

t i m ~

that the future Acharya of

ihc

Iv.unaJmti

Pitha,

Sri Krpa

Sankru:11,

undc1;

orders

i1orn lris l.ITU and

predecessor KaivaJyanandir,

m


45/54

78

identifa.1 with Snreswara, and

the

tradition gained

grournl

that

Sureswara,

a/ins

Viswarupa

occupied th0 pontifical ,

throne of S1ingcri, and the history of the Sringcri. Matha

it'iell' was tra.ccd from his times (circa 28

B.C.),

and

Sankam

himself

-vvas made to live

just

prior to 28 B.

C.

(J4 to 12 B. C.), so as to make Viswarupa's succession

immediate

after

Sankara. This Viswarupa

was

then

.,

mcc{;edcd by Nityabodhagana (v.Tongl:v identi.ficd with

Sn-v ajnatman),

,T

nanaghana, J nanottarna. Siva,

,T

nana

~ i . r i Simhagiri, Iswara Tirtha and finally the

famous

Vidya Sankara Tirtha. 'l'his last Acharya who lived for

105 years, is generally assigned

the date

(1229-1333) in

the Sringerj calendar, su

that Bharat

Krsna 'rirtha, the

brother of Vidyaranya,

might

succeed

him

without any

break in the line. But

according

to the 'l'hcosophist

(Vol. XVI,

pp.

292-96), Vidyasankara appears

to

have

died in

5G9

A.D. at

Nirmala

on

the Bombay

coast,

on

Kmtika Sukla

Trayodasi.

After him, until

Bharati

Krsna

Tirtha

occupies t h ~ throne of the restored Sringeri

Matha, i.e.

from 569

A.D. to

1333

A.D., there

was

an

interrugnum of 764 years during

which

the Matha had

no

history at

all.

Though this appears

to

have

been

the real

state

of affairs, the Sringeri

cafondar

a d j u . ~ t s the

period 28 B.

C.

to

1333

A. D., thus : ::

(a) Viswarup a (confounded with Sureswara)

28 B.C.

to

about

772

A.

D.

(

b

The other

Acharyas,

from

Nitya

bodhaghana to

Viclyasankarn, from about 772

A.D.

to 1333

A.

D. Thus,

an unbroken

line

of suceession is sought to be established

by

endowing Viswarupa with an

incredibly

long

life of

800

years.

But

what

appears t

h

o

ave actually happened is

follows w.>

(a)

Prithhridhru:a to

y

28

B

c T' iswa.rnpa, circa

477

B.

C

t

t f names

of

the

A h

vidhara

and Viswaru h . b c ar::as between

Prithi-

'

pa .,p;e

ecn

irretrievably

lost

(b)

From Viswar t ' l d

569

A.D.

.

pa

o

i

yasankara,

28 B.C.

fo

(c) From 569

A.D.

d

to

J:338

A D.,

the JJ atha wa

un

-

.er a trtal eclipse.

"

Atmab dha.

refers to

this

11u.g:c

gup

< r

800 ""


46/54

80

Sringeri.

(Vide

supra). Later on

in

1333

A.D., it

sent

Bharati Krsna Tirtha to

revive

the

Sringeri Matha

as

also

to found eight

more Mathas. Why was it

1

then,

that the Kamakoti Pitha

allowed

an interrugnum

of 800

years to pass without nominating anyone

during

that

period

Atmabodha,

in

this connection, gives

but

a

glimpse of

the

chaotic

nature

of

the

times.

We

have

to

l'eronstruc:;

the history

of

the Karnataka

from

other

so11rces.

First, the Kamakoti Pitha itself was passing through

difficult times

from

5th century A.D. onwards. Bauddhas,

,Jainas, Kapalikas and Saktas

had

regained

their

supre

macy in

Kancheepuram,

rendering

peaceful existence

impossible

for

the

Kamakoti

Acharyas.

:B u,:rther, Kanchi

was

in

a

state oi panic due

to

the

periodic incursions

of

the

Kaiabhras,

of

whom

very little is

known.

The

unsettled

conditions of

the

times

may

be gleaned

to

so:rnc extent from the Matta

Vilasa, a

play

of the

late

7th centur,Y A. D. in which

the

excesses of

Bauddhas,

~ f a i n a s

and Kapalikas arc caricatured.

Hence,

the

Kamakoti Pitha itself

was

constantly

on

the

move,

far

away from

Kancheepuram,

as

can

be seen

from

the

fact

that most of the Acharyas died far aw.ay fronL

Kanchi,

and their

successors belonged to the same places

where

the prr.decessors

had

died. Thus the Kanchi

Matha

waA

its elf havinl: a

precarious

existence

amidst the

pplitica1

and

religious turmoil of

the

times.

Passing on to a considerati on of

what

happened to

Sringeri

, we must peep through the dense haze of time

to

get

a

bluned picture

of

what

was happening then.

This

is

the

religious

and

political

background

:---

81

Karnata'ka

h ~ s ,

from very early times, been a strong

hold of extrfm1st

types

of Saivism, apart from its having

been

in the

grip of

Jainism

as

vvell. The entire

countrv

,vas

studded with the

.

Mathas

of Kalamukhas.

S r i s a i l a ~

was

the

centre of

Kapalika and

Kalai:nukha activities.

There was, again,

Vira

Saivism,

the

fore-runner of the

Basaya cult,

and

hence

much

older

than

the Basava

enlt.

The

Vira

Saivas claim

that theirs

is

the

oldest

religion in

the

world.

They

claim that

Revana

Siddha

or Renukaeharya,

one of the first five

great Acharyas

of their

cult,

presented the

'Adi

Bhagavatpada

with

a

SpJiatika

Linga ~ q f a C f . T ~ w - t h e present Chandra

mauliswara worshipped by the Sringeri Pitha 2, They

go so far as to

say

that the Ifrhat

Sankara Vijaya

has

l chapter entitled the

Siddha Sankara

Samvada where

in the

con

~ r s a t i o n

of the two Acharyas

is -

said to

have

been dfScrihed

in

detail,

and

more,

that Sankara

him

sell

was

persuaded

to believe

that Lingaradhana was

snpc;rior

to any other form

of worship.

Whatever

such

claims

may

mean,

there

is some more information-and

very valuable

information at t h a t ~ f o r t h c o m i n g with

regard

to Sringeri

and Vira

Saivas. There is a p s ~

in the Guravamsa

Kavya,

published under the authorlty

of the Sringeri Matha which contains tw-0 tell-tale slokas :

~ i : : i J ~ l c l U ~ ~ ~

: < i i ~ 1 " ' 4 1 4 ~ h ' l l i t ' 1 f l i f t ; = z y : r

i t i f \ N ~ I

~ 1 ~ 1 J r t ~ q i f m r f c i ~ Q l l

~ ~ J ' t i ' I U l < i l f 4 @ r ~ ~

l

c f t ~ 1 " l + R 1 1 " ' 4 ~

c r - = ~ s ~

l i t ~ ~

2

(Nanjanacharya- Vedanbi.sara Vira Saiva

Chintamanl),

s

6


47/54

82

l i f i t ~ ~ w ~ ~

~ c < i T ~ 1 r { r ~ R { i f ' t ~ a u

Wl eT\Rrr ; i J { ~ ~

c


48/54

84

From the foregoing citations the following fact.a

emerge:-

(1) The

Sringeri tradition

itself admits that the

Lino-a of Chandramauliswara was got from Renukacharya.

c

\Ve need

not

give

any

serious credence

to the

claim

that

Renukacharya presented Chandrarnauliswara

to the

Bhagavatpada. \Ye know

from other

sources

that

he

fetched the Pancha Lingas from Kailasa, of which the

Chandramauliswara of

Sringeri

is one

and

the Chandra

mauliswara of Kanchi is another. But the insistence

that the Virasaivas place on the fact

that

Renukacharya

presented the C h a ~ d r a m a u l i s w a r a Linga, and the open

aeknowledgment of that fact

by

the Sringeri chronicles

point

to

the

'One inesca,pable conclusion that during those

800 years

of Sringeri's

eclipse, the

Matha had

either passed

entirely imo

the domination of .Virasaivas

or

(which is

11early the s ~ m e ) , the successors of Vidya Sankara

(after

569 A. D. ) , succumbed to the influence of Virasa iva

religion

and

became converts thereto, forswearing

their

allegience to

the

Advaitic tenets of Sankara, and, per:

haps, the uriginal Chandramauliswara having been

l ~ s t

in

the course of all this turmoil, a new Chandramauhs

wara Linga, worshipped through generations by the

Virasaivas, was substituted

in

the place of the original

Chandramanliswara . 'Vhate ver might have boen the real

state

of affairs, this much is

certain-Sringeri

as

an

Atlvaitic institution, ceased to exist. The Chandramaul

iswara installed there by

the

Bhagavatpada fell into the

hands

of the Virasaivas or, having been lost for ever,

was substituted

by

another Linga, worshipped by the

Virasaivas.

85

(2) Nor was this all. In the course of the 12th

and

13th

centuries, the followers of Ramanuja,

and

) adhava were

aJso

aggressively

propagating their

doctrines in the Karnataka. From

Goa

came the mis

sionary

activities of the Roman Catholics (Cf.

~ ~ T < I f

i i t l t ' T ~ l c r ~ f Q ; : r l I , etc.

and Q ' ~ m < i 5 1 f u f

: j ~ ~ : firoRr

5 1 " 2 " ( J i 5 1 ~ { J w r r : IDl'::QCI :

bUJfaJwt f ~ ~ ~ ' q i ~ ~ < i l ~ m : i 1 H ~ U J : } H :

etc.-Susama). In

short, among the f anatical

d u ~ l i s t s

who overran Karnataka in those days, it was

impossible for a monistic institution like Sringeri to sur

v i v ~ .

The inevitable happened.

t

ceased to exist.

But even the Virasaiva domination of eight centurie l'

was

not

tG

last

long. 'l'he armies of Malik Kafur, the

victorious General of Alla-ud-din Khilji, were

marching

through K:1rnataka, submerging the old order like a.

tidal

wave.

After

Malik Ka.fur's Campaign

in

the

Kar

nataka, the Virasaiva dominatio J- at Sringe ri was pro

bably thoroughly shaken. The institutipn i,vas in its

thl'oes of death.

3)

t t h i ~

time (early 14th century), the pontiff

at .Kanchi was Vidya

Tirtha.

He was

the Guru of

S a ~ a n a

l\Iadhava (later, Vidyaranya, head of the

Virnpaksi Matha) and of Bhamti Krsna Tirtha, the

younger

brothrr

of Vidy


49/54

Evangelism. The eight Sisyas chosen by Vidya Tirtha

and Sankarananda for this

onerous task

wen

Satchl

dauanda, Adwaitananda, Sevadhi Mahadeva, Si

vadwaita

and

Sukhananda Brahmananda, Sandrananda,

and

Sukhananda.

3

Vidyaranya, therefore, with

the blessings

of Vidya

Tirtha and Sankarananda, strained every nerve to res

tore

the old

order in Sringeri, and to

found

the other

l\fathas to serve as bastions against the advance of the

other Sctarian cults. This fact--viz. the Vidyaranya

was the restorer of the

Ancient

Regime is reflected

by

the

fact

that all these Mathas, jncluding Sringeri, con

tain, in their Srimukh.as,

the

seal

Vidyasankara

or Vidya

r:myu.

Sri

N.

Venkatraman

thinks

that ViJyasankara

and

Vidyar::mya mean the same,

but

different

from

the

lXth

head

of

the Sringeri

Matha, who died

in

Nir

mala

in

491

S.E.,

i .e. 569 '.A.D.

(pp.

95,

Sankar

acharya

and his successors).

Such,

however, does not

appear

to

be

the case.

Of

course, the

term Vidya

Sankara

does not

at all refer to

Vidyasankara,

the 9th

Acharya (reckoned

after

Sankara) , of

Sringeri

who

died

in 5 )6

A.D.,

though the Sringeri chronicles would

ha;;e it so. The term Vid ya-Sankara is a onogrmn cu

it 'llJere, rt fusi.on

of

Vidya Tirtha a.nd Sankamnanda

the two 1lcharyas

of

the Kanwkoti Pitha who were

r.espor .'iib?c for the restoration of, Sringeri

with

the aid

of

Vidyaranya. t was Vidyaranya

who,

in

his gratitudA

c::

.::...s:

3.

e

:q

i j 1 ~ f i M { , B f [ ~ i i f ~ ~ ' ' ~ f i r S : i H ~ : ,

:a:fiF'Ho/G.'

'(1q11:T

+ r i j T ~ ' i

fuq,

: a : r ~ o ~ i g r < i ; : z y : - o l T : ~ ~ E f i l i _ . . F i f i T l f r ~ ~ o 5 1 f u f m T :

~ m ' r . ? $ i i r n r < t ' 1 1 T : i l l ~ i { W ~ ~ f a o i t ~ l l .

-Sui;a.ma.

87

n

devotion to his

Gurus

composed the monognm

Vidya Sankara 4.

(4) W11cn Vidyaranya attempted the rcstomtion of

Sringeri, evidently the first thing to be restored was

the worship

of

Chandramauliswara r ~ i n g a .

But

from what

we are able

to

see, the fonga had passed into the ha:nds

of

the

Virasaivas.

Vidyaranya had perhaps

to

coax

the

then

Virastiiva owner of the Chandramauliswara Linga,

a11d he got it returned on condition

that

it was to

be

1,lO lsidered

a present from Virasaivas. Probably he

had

f..lso to agTee to the importation of some Virasaiva

rituals in the Sringeri Sampradaya. That appears

to

be

the

drift of the Guruvamsa Kavya.

Hence, the

Sringeri Matha

was 1X'storcd to

its

original

.status

through

the labours-

of Vidyaranya. Bharati

Krsna Tirtha

was the first

Acharya after the

restoration:

Evidently, the Sringeri chronicles commit

an

error when

they

make

Vidyaranya als;o

an

Acharya of

Sringeri.

This

-cannot be,

for both Bharati Krsna Tirtha

( 1328.80), and

Vidyaranya (13:31-86) ,

are

assigned

the

same periods.

Both could not have been pontiffs simultaneously. Fur-

1her, Vidyaranya is definitely known td have founded

:and preside] over the Virnpaksi

Matha

-

f i ~ ' l f a . ' f ~

~ m

i r ~

t l ' ~ f l l ~ etc.

t

Susama).

rhe latest chronicles of Sringcri would, however,

draw

a veil over

this

eight-hundred-year-eclipse

of Sringeri,

and rewrite the

entire

history of the Matha thus

-

-

4.

mi:4' ~ ; q f ' i f . l e y r ( f l ~ ~ < R 1 l ; : q < T f

: rrm

f c t ~ r { O < T

r . r ~ m r ' f i {

~ F ~ ~ T ~ ( 7 , f f ~ ~ ~ f J < 3 f f i ~ ~ f l T : p m f ; : r " " Q''"fT


50/54

88

(1)

Sankara Bhagavatpada, 788-820 A.D.

( 2)

Sri Sureswaracharya

3) Nityabodhaghana

(4) Jnanaihana

(

5)

J nanottamasiya:

(

6)

,J

ri

anagiri

(7) Simhagiri

( 8 ) Iswa,i:a

l irtha

( 9)

N

rsimha

Tirtha:

(10) Vidyasankara

From

820 to 1333

A.

D

. Bharati Krsna

Tirt:&a to Abhinava Vidya'.

'1'irtha, 1333 to the present day,

so

that,

from the times of the Bha.gu,::itp"ada to

the

present day an unbroken line Of Aclu.rrya is made tO

rule c>ver Sringerj. Not

merely is

this attt>mpi,

ca lcu

lat d to vitin1c histol'y, but i l Dlksita

of Mysore slves a

l f f ~ r e n t

ac.count of

lhls

caSt>. (

irfr prd-

face to Brahma. Sutra. .Bllruna-Venl


51/54

90

Soon

afLer,

the

e

lder

Nrsimha

Bharati (1547--1609),

returned

from Kcdara, and

resumed

his pontificate.

Nrsimha llharati Junior, the

successor,

was

however,

sent over to Nco-Sringeri

where

a vacancy

had

a,risen.

The new _Acharya of NBo-Sringeri

was,

however, given

to

understand that

he should

stay

at

Neo-

Sringeri

and

mr1st

not go out on

Digvijaya.

This

agreement was

ratified

in

1580

by Krsnappa

K

ayalm of

Keladi

( 1520

to

1609), who passed 01ders

that

the Acharyas of

Neo-Sringeri should

not

go

out

on

Digvijaya.

During the

reign

of

the 52nd Acharya

of

Kudali

( ci:rca 1723

, the Acharyas of

Kuda.li, Sankheswa:ra

and

Neo-Sringeri l\fathas, met

at

Satara,

during

the

reign

of

Sahu,

the

successor

of

Sivaji.

The

question

as to

which

Acharya

\Vas to be accorded

Agra

Puja was vehe

ml)ntly discussed.

Pinally, the

issue was se

ttled

by

deciding

thnt

the Acharya of Kudali aJone was

entitled

to

Agra Puja.

(

Vide--History

of Sankheswar,

Matha).

his

absence, Sankara

Bhara.ti, after his return,

was obliged

to

stay at

Kudali.

But

on

a

reference

to the Guruparampara ot Sringeri,

we

fi nd tbers is

no

Sankara Bharati at all, particu laily be

tween

1500-1600 A.D.

We

are

afraid,

there

is sorae m l i r t a l l ; ~

here.

We have therefore preferred to

follow

the version of

the

lndiun Patriot since

the writer

of those articles

in the Indian

l 'atriot was an Antevasi

; a ~ i j t

of

the last

Acha:-ya

of Kudali and

at

one time a successor presumptilre

to

the

pontificate of Kudali. The gentlema n

is

still alive,

and

we

had oral information from

him

in addition to

what

we gathered

from his

articles.

His

version

of the whole case ap pears

to

he

more

aut;1entic, and we have

preferred to

adopt his

ver

sion

rather than

the

version

of Venkatachala Dilrnita which is

somewhat confusing.

During the pontificate o1 Nrsimha, Bb.arati,

the

531d

.Acharya ot Ku lali ( 1

727-51)

Cheladi .Basavappa

N a y a . k ~

om

again passed ordPrs re. trarning the

Ai:iharyas of o S r i r l g c r i from going out on Dig

1

;ijaya.

_Again

in

1806, dlll'ing

th pontifi ate of

aukara

Bltarati,

the

56th

.Aclulrya

o f

Knuali,

Ptll'nayya, the famous

mi,1ister

of Hyder Ali and 'rippu Sultan, restrained

the

Achal'yas of Neo"Sringeri

from

Digvijaya.

n

1811,

Krishnarajendra III

of Mysore allowed Nara

simha Bharati

(180'7-20

)

of

the Kudali Matha

to

go

-0n

D i g v i j a ~ a having

recognised his titles

to his being

the

Jagadgurn.

n

the year 1820, during the

reign of

Sankara Bharati

J 820--56),

the

58th Acharya of Kudali, the

.Acharya

-0f Neo-Sringeri was

again restrained from

going out

oi S r i n ~ r i

ln

1836, the 58th

Acha :ya of

Kudali

set

out on a

Digvijaya,

when

the Acharya

of Neo-Sringeri

took

..exception

to

that,

and filed

a

suit

in the Hu:mr

Sudder

A


52/54

92

l he

Ka11ntaka

was

divided

into

a

number of

diocese

for

purposes of spiritual

as also fiscal administration of

the Matha

benefices.

vVest

Karnataka

was

under

the

jurisdiction

of

Kudali,

and

East Karnatalrn, under

the

sway nf Puspagiri, South

Karnataka,

comprising

modern

Kolar m ~ d e r the

jurisdiction

of the

Anrni:i

Sringcri, and

North Karnataka under

Sankheswara Matha. About

1792,

when

Tippu

Sultan had

annexed

Coimbatorn

and Salem

districts,

the

Acharya of Amani toured these districts

and

recruited Sisyas. But when he attempted to recruit disciples

i Tnnj0re and

Trichinopoly

districts,

he

was firmly told

tliat, that was not his

jurisdiction,

and that, if at all he

wanted to tour the

districts,

it

should

be

on

the distinct

u n c l e r t . a k i n ~ ~

that

he would

not

attempt recruiting Sisyas.

He

gave

the

undertaking that

he would thereafter desist

from

recruiting

disciples.

This

W JS

the first occasion

when

an

Acharya of

a

Matha

belonging

to the Karnataka

attempted to

tour

the South.

South India.

including Chola,

Pandya,

Chera

countries

and Toncfaimandalmn

has always been

under

the

juris

diction of ihe Karnakoti Pitha. In t w ~

middle of

the last

C1 ntury, Babu R.ao,

the

a ~ m t

of

Mackenzie

of Tfmjore

was informed

by the then

Achary.a

of the

Kamakorti

Pitha that

hii,; jurisdiction

extended over

the

districts

enumerated

above.

Hence it was

that

the attempts

of

the

Ac

harya

of Am:mi

Sringeri to

enlist Sisyas

were

firmly

rc sisted.

But in the

middle

of the year 1854, Hi"

Highness

f: ri Krishnaraja Udayar

Bahadur,

had olrt.airny}

initiation

in

Sri Vidya from His Holiness

r ~ i m h a Bhn,.wti

VTII of

Neo-Sring-eri and had composed

two

works, the Sringeti

93

ltfatha

Guruparampara,

and

Astottara

Sata

Namavali on

r s i m h ~

Dharati Swami. This enlightened ruler of 2\iysore

was so

devoted

to the

Acharya

of

Sringeri, that, for

the

first time in

the

anuals of Neo-Sringeri. the Acharya waa

penr,itted to

go

on Digvijaya.

And

when

the

Acharya

sent a

Srimukha intimating-

bis proposed visit

to the

citizens of

Madras

in 1860, he was

assured

by

the

President

of

the

Association of the Citizens

of

Madras

that, His Holiness was most

welcome,

prnviclr.d that 1is

rno,emcnts

and

activities

during the tom wet\:

such a'1

wonld not

offend

the dignity of

the

Karnakoti

Pitha

\Yh;se

spiritnal jurisdiction comprised l\Iadras

and

South

India.

The Aclrnrya

of (Neo.) Sringer then gave :m assur

:.ance in 1v1iting,

that

he and his followers would never

J.e)lort then:selves

in any manner derogatory to the

dig

_nity of the Kamakoti Pitlm.

(

Vidc--Appendix B).

l_i'rom

all

that we

have

so far cited,

it should

be

clear

that

Neo-Sringeri

has

no

jurisdiction whatever

beyond

the limita of Sringeri.

And

whatever

jnriscliction

S.ringeri

now

elaim:01

W JS acquired through

sufferance an


53/54

94

V

irn

paksa .Matha, he

stabli sh

ed S:cing

eri

as l r>

Puspa-

g i r ~

.Amani, Sankhes

wru;a

and

oth

er 1\

1at

has. Particularly,.

af ler 15.99, Neo

-S

ringru s ems to have sbrunk into a

litt1 tow

ns

hip

,

wi th

no

jurisdictions.

There

i, pe r

haps

eon:riderab1 11 truth in t

ho

ve rdict

.returned y

lfuhuya

vedanta:pravartaka

Sri

edan

ta

Raman

uja

I

J

augaro

in

the year Srimukha .::ici-g/ ..as

l

: S - s ~ s ; S t : \ ' o : S / . , . ~ s

1f;:pXf\IJ'::r

. : S X : S a - . J ~ e i ~ ' ~ o X M t r : : J l l i < S o ~ ; $ ~ i : l i ) : , 1 5 o Z l : l ; $ ~

; $ ~

:.Siba>cl'Nm

: S . j g _ ~ x

c D d f u t ; > ~

l \:lC:o ~ o s ' t i r ~ 5 1 l l l l " ~

3 ~ ~

: . S s ; ; S ~ : : i l l . ) O l ' ~ o

OSo:Odfu

" . , ~ l M o ' i : : a ~ ~ i ' l ' i i 3 ; $ J X o O J > o ' ~ etc.

~ P a g e 16

of the Nirnaya Patra, issued by

Sri

Vedantaramanuja Swami).

t

is clear that the decision:

arrived at by

Gurram

Venkanna Sastrulu that the

present

Sringeri Acharyas, who reaJ.ly beloug to

tlie

Parampara

of

Vidylll'anya,

are not

the

rightful

masters of

the

Vid

yapi

tha

established

at

Sringeri by

the

Bh


54/54

96

from

the Paudya country,

on

the

banks of Tampra.parni.

A

real

prodigy

even

in

his seventh year, he e\rolrnd the

admiration of the great Bhagavatpada himself, who was

hi:::nself a prodigy

of

the

first order.

Ordained in

Sanvasa

by the gr.eat Sankara himself, he was

nominated s u ~ c e s c

sor

to

ihe 1\amakoti

Pitha--a worthy

snecessor to

a

worthy

Guru.

Sarvajnatman

seems

to

have been eonside

rablv indebted

to 8uresw

the traditional age of sri sankaracharya and the mathas

Documents