The Right Honourable Sir Freeman Thomas

Baron WILLINGDON of Raton,

G.C.S.I., G.C.I.E., C.B.E,

Chancellor, University of Madras

as a token of the author's great esteem

For

His Excellency s "kindly interest and enlightened sympathy

 

 

PREFACE

 

 

THE following lectures, presented to the public as the fourth course of Madras University Special Lectures in the Department of Indian History and Archaeology, formed the subject on which I intended to send a paper to the International Congress of Orientalists, which was to have been held at Oxford but for the outbreak of the War. It was suggested as worth doing as the result of a discussion on the subject which I had with Sir George Grierson, who at the time was interesting himself in the subject. He wanted more of Vaishnava literature should be made known to the European public and suggested the translation of Yatindramatadipika, a manual of Vaishnavism, and the Arthapanchaka of Pillai Lokacharya. The translation work has been done since, by my friend Mr. A. Govindacharya of Mysore; and the historical part of the subject was awaiting study for various reasons, among which other occupation was the principal contributary. The timely appearance of Sir R. G. Bhandarkar's treatise on “Vaishnavism, Shaivism, and Minor Religions” made the taking up of the subject more urgently necessary. In a review of the work in the Journal of the Mythic Society, Bangalore, I indicated that I would work up the subject so as to bring to bear upon the question all the light that may be got from sources recently made available. I took advantage of the occasion offered by the First Oriental Conference at Poona, over which Sir R. G. Bhandarkar himself was to have presided but was unfortunately prevented from doing so by illness at the time. The objection was made in certain friendly quarters that it was highly improper that I should have taken up a controversial subject like this and presented a paper to a Conference held in honour of Sir R. G. Bhandarkar himself, "criticizing his views.'' The word criticism conyeys a little too often unfortunately, the sense of finding fault which is far from the accepted significance of the term. Criticism is of the essence of historical research and no one is justified in proceeding on research work without making sure that the footing gained already by previous work is actually beyond cavil. That can be. done only by a thorough re-examination of the work already done, not with a view to find fault or exhibit shortcomings only, but to take stock of what has been satisfactorily established and what cannot equally satisfactorily be so regarded. Without such an examination it would be assuming too much to proceed further in research work. It is in that view that the work was undertaken, and I had not the slightest doubt, nor do I cherish the least touch of it now, that Sir R. G. Bhandarkar himself would welcome such a re-examination. It is not want of respect for him that prompted the work; but much rather the wish to complete the work that he has done in a subject in which such work as he had done had to be done by him at a great disadvantage. I have no doubt whatsoever that this investigation will be received in the spirit in which it is offered, as a critical study of an interesting question, by Sir R. G. Bhandarkar himself. I would appeal to other friends who may chance to read the book to consider any criticism in the book in the spirit of the most friendly investigation of the position of other scholars with no further object than the evaluation of actual achievement. I cannot conclude this prefatory note better than by making an extract from one of the most eminent recent authorities on the subject of History, Lord Acton: —

“For our purpose the main thing is not the art of accumulating material, but the sublimer art of investigating it, of discerning truth from falsehood and certainty from doubt. It is by solidity of criticism more than by the plenitude of erudition that the study of history strengthens, straightens and extends the mind.”

To avoid clumsiness in print transliteration in the body of the book has been given up. The necessary and the correct pronounciation is given in the index which the reader is requested to consult in cases of doubt or difficulty.

I am grateful to His Excellency Lord Willingdon for kindly according permission to my inscribing this course of University Lectures, the first to be published by me since His Excellency's assumption of office as Chancellor of the University of Madras, to him as a slight token of my esteem for his sympathy for oriental research.

I am obliged to Mr. B. R, Shrinivasan the Proprietor of the Tata Printing Works, for the neatness and expeditation with which he put the work through the Press.

 

 

Madras University.

25th January 1920.

S. KRISHNASWAMI AIYANGAR.

 

University of Madras