Vedanta Deshika's arrangement.

 

Vedanta Deshika the great scholar, teacher, and controversalist, who lived through almost the first three quarters of the 14th century and who in a Tamil Prabandham of his own has a chapter on those that are entitled to “communion with God”, makes, in the first stanza of this section, a recital of the names of these Alvars omitting those of Andal and Madhurakavi. The first four are mentioned in the usual order, then comes in Satakopa and then follows Vishnuchitta; immediately following him is Kulashekhara, then follows Yogivaha, then follow Bhaktanghrirenu and Tirumangai Alvar. Madhurakavi is mentioned in the next following stanza as the man who first taught that God's communion is attainable only by means of a "preceptor" (guru), and his work included in the Prabandham is one of 11 stanzas which state that he had made his choice of a guru in Satakopa, and that therefore his salvation was certain to him. In regard to the order here again, the exigencies of writing in verse is to be considered because all the names are brought in in one stanza of the poem, whereas the first work above referred to names each one in a separate stanza. The following stanza of the work of Vedantacharya we discuss, contains “the order of preceptors" referred to in the previous paragraph and this stanza is recited by the Vaishnavas of the Vadakalai section at the commencement of every serious holy act of theirs. The order is given beginning with one's own preceptor, and then passes on to the succession of preceptors advancing backwards from the nearest. Passing over the succession of gurus on this side of Ramanuja, it begins with Ramanuja, then comes in his principal preceptor Periya Nambi, then his preceptor Alavandar, then his preceptor Manakkal Nambi then his master Uyyakkondar, then Nathamuni, then Satakopa, then Vishvaksena (Senainathan), then Mahalakshmi and then Vishnu Himself. In this it will be noticed, as soon as the first Acharya is reached he passes on to only one of the Alvars, Satakopa and then passes out of the earth into heaven itself. This arrangement is what exactly detaches Nam Alvar from the group of the Alvars in the arrangement of Amudan of Shrirangam. That ought not to be interpreted as it has been at any rate in some quarters done, as arguing the posteriority of Nam Alvar to the other Alvars. In a consideration of the question whether there was any recognised order of precedence in chronology, the valid source of information is the one first quoted above, namely the order indicated in the poem Ramanuja Nurrandadi of Amudan of Shrirangam. We shall return to it later.

 

LECTURE II.

SPECIFIC QUESTION OF ALVAR KULASHEKHARA

KULASHEKHARA'S LIFE ACCORDING

TO THE GURUPARAMPARA.

 

According to the ordinarily prevalent accounts in the Vaishnava guruparampara Kulashekhara is regarded as the incarnation of Kaustubha (the jewel in the breast of Vishnu), and was born in the year Parabhava, the month Masi in Tamil, (Sans. Magha) Friday the 12th of the bright fort-night and Nakshatra Punarvasu. He was born according to this authority in the "city of Kolli (Quilon), otherwise Tiruvanjikulam". He is said to have been the son of a king by name Dridhavrata. After the usual education he was installed as ruler. Early in his career he became attached to the Vaishnava school of bhakti (devotion) and was particularly interested in having the Ramayana read out to him. In the course of this reading he became absorbed in it so much that on a particular occasion when they read out the portion where Rama marched forth single-handed against the great army of Khara and his two brothers he called out in his abstraction and ordered the whole of his army being put in motion to the assistance of Rama. The reader understanding his position went through the rest of the story rapidly and brought it to its termination bringing Rama victorious back to the hermitage where Sita was, and then Kulashekhara is said to have felt relieved. On another occasion it would appear his ministers wanted to wean him of this extraordinary devotion to Vishnu and brought about the loss of some jewels and valuables left in the sanctum of his palace, access to which was denied to everybody else excepting to himself and to the few Vaishnava priests engaged m service in it. When the responsible officials charged the Vaishnavas with the theft he is said to have affirmed "no Vaishnava will ever commit such an enormity", and, in token of his faith in them, to have thrust his right hand into a pot into which was put a malignantly poisonous cobra. When the cobra did him no harm and his court felt satisfied that he was right they ceased to interfere with him. His devotion to Vishnu grew stronger day by day till at last he gave up royal life, went forward to Shrirangam to be "perpetually" in the divine presence. It is there that he is said to have composed his Mukundamala his Sanskrit work, and the larger portion of the “Perumal Tirumoli “ in the Tamil Prabandham. At the instance of Ranganatha himself he moved forward to Tirupati taking Kanchipuram on the way. He has one ten relating to Tirupati. He returned from Tirupati and travelled on to various Vaishnava places till he came to Mannanarkovil (in all probability, Kattumannarkovil in the South Arcot district) where, while in his devotion to god he is believed to have given up mortal life. His whole life is said to have been not more than 25 years. This account makes it clear that the hagiologists knew almost nothing about his life except perhaps his place of birth. Even in regard to that, there is apparently an error. The guruparampara makes Kolli and Vanjikulam two names of the same place. We have already pointed out that Vedanta Deshika in the Prabandhasaram Stanza 8, mentions his place of birth as Vanjikulam while Kulashekhara himself states that he was ruler of Kolli. The guruparampara seems merely to attempt at a solution of the inconsistency in these two statements by the simple expedient of equating the one name with the other. Unless, as was ported out above, Vedanta Deshika had the specific knowledge that Kulashekhara was born in Vanjikulam though he was king of Kolli, we ought to accept Kulashekhara 's statement that he was a native of Kolli; while the other is certainly very probable, as the Bhagavata account specifies Periyar among the rivers hallowed by the birth of Bhaktas. The astrological details that are given are apparently the work of the hagiologists and are of no value historically as they must have made a backward calculation, if they at all did so, to suit their own particular dating. Of the real details of his life this biography gives nothing.

 

THE AGE OF KULASHEKHARA.

 

Preceding now to an examination of the age of Kulashekhara the extract quoted above makes it clear that it is the opinion of the venerable scholar, Sir R. G. Bhandarkar "that the Alvar Kulashekhara lived in the first half of the 12th century.” It will also be remembered that this conclusion is arrived at specifically on the consideration of two inscriptions which mention a Kulashekharanka, and which refer themselves to the Chalukya emperor Jagadekamalla, A. D. 1138 — 50. More generally, however, he has been led to this position by fixing the latest limit for Kulashekhara in the Madhvacharya, Ananda Tirtha who flourished about A. D. 1199 to 1278. The downward limit is fixed as the date of composition of the Bhagavatapurana which this Acharya regarded as sacred and quoted as authority. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar therefore would place it two centuries earlier than Ananda Thirtha on the ground that “it cannot be very much older, for its style often looks modern and in copying from the older puranas it falls into mistakes, such as the one pointed out by me in another place.” Kulashekhara 's posteriority to the Bhagavata is also sought to be established from a citation which the learned doctor found of the shloka of the Purana, XI, 2, 36. That Kulasekhara was later than the Bhagavata may be provable; but this citation from the Bhagavatapurana I do not see in the southern editions of the Mukundamala accessible to me, A Kannada edition, a Grantha edition and a new edition which was published sometime back in Devanagari, none of them show this shloka. There is besides the fact that this particular shloka is recited in apology for any shortcomings in the performance of religious acts commonly, at the end of almost every religious ceremony so far as I know. It will be admitted therefore that some editions of the Mukhundamala might bring it in at the end; but even so it is not found in the southern versions known to me. The citation referred to therefore loses its decisive character. That apart this chronological position can easily be demonstrated impossible. The period A. D. 1100-1150 is exactly the period in which the Prabandham, 4000 must have been cast into the present form by Ramanuja, at any rate with his sanction, and the Ramanuja Nurrandadi incorporated into it gives an honourable place to Kulashekhara as an Alvar. Most of these separate Prabandhas and their authors are given commendatory verses which are generally recited before beginning the recital of the particular Prabandha concerned. The part of the Prabandha of Kulashekhara Alvar is introduced by verses in praise by the early Acharya Manakkal Nambi who is the disciple's disciple of Nadamuni, and the preceptor of Alavandar, the great grandfather of Ramanuja. Ramanuja was just seen as a young man, according to tradition, by Alavandar who had attained to venerable old age then. His preceptor Manakkal Nambi must have been older. There is no reason to doubt the age of Ramanuja, though the actual dates may not, it is just possible, be equally certain. The latter half of the tenth century and the first of the next, at the lowest computation must be the age of Manakkal Nambi. If in his age Kulashekhara's part of the Prabandha came in for commendatory verses from him, Kulashekhara must have been somewhat anterior.