CHAPTER XXIX

VISHNUISM IN SOUTH INDIA

1

Though Sivaism can boast of an imposing array of temples, teachers and scriptures in the north as well as in the south, yet Vishnuism was equally strong and after 1000 A.D. perhaps stronger. Thus Alberuni writing about north-western India in 1030 A.D. mentions Siva and Durgâ several times incidentally but devotes separate chapters to Nârâyana and Vâsudeva; he quotes copiously from Vishnuite works[564] but not from sectarian Sivaite books. He mentions that the worshippers of Vishnu are called Bhâgavatas and he frequently refers to Râma. It is clear that in giving an account of Vishnuism he considered that he had for all practical purposes described the religion of the parts of India which he knew.

In their main outlines the histories of Vishnuism and Sivaism are the same. Both faiths first assumed a definite form in northern India, but both flourished exceedingly when transplanted to the south and produced first a school of emotional hymn writers and then in a maturer stage a goodly array of theologians and philosophers as well as offshoots in the form of eccentric sects which broke loose from Brahmanism altogether. But Vishnuism having first spread from the north to the south returned from the south to the north in great force, whereas the history of Sivaism shows no such reflux.[565] Sivaism remained comparatively homogeneous, but Vishnuism gave birth from the eleventh century onwards to a series of sects or Churches still extant and forming exclusive though not mutually hostile associations. The chief Churches or Sampradâyas bear the names of Sanakâdi, Srî, Brahmâ and Rudra. The first three were founded by Nimbâditya, Râmânuja and Madhva respectively. The Rudra-sampradâya was rendered celebrated by Vallabha, though he was not its founder.

The belief and practice of all Vishnuite sects alike is a modified monotheism, the worship of the Supreme Being under some such name as Râma or Vâsudeva. But the monotheism is not perfect. On the one hand it passes into pantheism: on the other it is not completely disengaged from mythology and in all sects the consort and attendants of the deity receive great respect, even if this respect is theoretically distinguished from adoration. Nearly all sects reject sacrifice _in toto_ and make the basis of salvation emotional--namely devotion to the deity, and as a counterpart to this the chief characteristic of the deity is loving condescension or grace. The theological philosophy of each sect is nearly always, whatever name it may bear, a variety of the system known as Visishtâdvaita, or qualified monism, which is not unlike the Sânkhya-Yoga.[566] For Vishnuites as for Sivaites there exist God, the soul and matter, but most sects shrink from regarding them as entirely separate and bridge over the differences with various theories of emanations and successive manifestations of the deity. But for practical religion the soul is entangled in matter and, with the help of God, struggles towards union with him. The precise nature and intimacy of this union has given rise to as many subtle theories and phrases as the sacraments in Europe. Vishnuite sects in all parts of India show a tendency to recognize vernacular works as their scriptures, but they also attach great importance to the Upanishads, the Bhagavad-gîtâ, the Nârâyanîya and the Vedânta Sûtras. Each has a special interpretation of these last which becomes to some extent its motto.

But these books belong to the relatively older literature. Many Vishnuite, or rather Krishnaite, works composed from the eighth century onwards differ from them in tone and give prominence to the god's amorous adventures with the Gopis and (still later) to the personality of Râdhâ. This ecstatic and sentimental theology, though found in all parts of India, is more prevalent in the north than in the south. Its great text-book is the Bhâgavata Purâna. The same spirit is found in Jayadeva's Gîtâ-govinda, apparently composed in Bengal about 1170 A.D. and reproducing in a polished form the religious dramas or Yâtras in which the life of Krishna is still represented.

2

The sect[567] founded by Nimbârka or Nimbâditya has some connection with this poem. Its chief doctrine is known as dvaitâdvaitamata, or dualistic non-duality, which is explained as meaning that, though the soul and matter are distinct from God, they are yet as intimately connected with him as waves with water or the coils of a rope with the rope itself. This doctrine is referred to in the religious drama called Prabodhacandrodaya, probably composed at the end of the eleventh century. The Nimâvats, as the adherents of the sect are called, are found near Muttra and in Bengal. It is noticeable that this sect, which had its origin in northern India, is said to have been persecuted by the Jains[568] and to have been subsequently revived by a teacher called Nivâsa. This may explain why in the twelfth century Vishnuism flourished in the south rather than in the north.[569] Less is known of the Nimbârkas than of the other sects. They worship Krishna and Râdhâ and faith in Krishna is said to be the only way to salvation. Krishna was the deity of the earliest bhakti-sects. Then in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries there was a reaction in favour of Râma as a more spiritual deity, but subsequently Vallabha and Caitanya again made the worship of Krishna popular. Nimbârka expressed his views in a short commentary on the Vedânta Sûtras and also in ten verses containing a compendium of doctrine.[570]

3

As among the Sivaites, so among the Vishnuites of the south, history begins with poet-saints. They are called the twelve Ârvârs.[571] For the three earliest no historical basis has been found, but the later ones seem to be real personalities. The most revered of them is Namm'ârvâr also called Sathagopa, whose images and pictures may be seen everywhere in south India and receive the same reverence as figures of the gods.[572] He may have lived in the seventh or eighth century A.D.[573]

The chronology of the Ârvârs is exceedingly vague but if the praises of Siva were sung by poet-saints in the seventh century, it is probable that the Vishnu worshippers were not behindhand. Two circumstances argue a fairly early date. First Nâthamuni is said to have arranged the hymns of the Ârvârs and he probably lived about 1000 A.D. Therefore the Ârvârs must have become classics by this date. Secondly the Bhâgavata Purâna[574] says that in the Kali age the worshippers of Nârâyana will be numerous in the Dravidian country, though in other parts found only here and there, and that those who drink the water of the Kaveri and other southern rivers will mostly be devotees of Vâsudeva. This passage must have been written after a Vishnuite movement had begun in the Dravidian country.[575]

The hymns attributed to the Ârvârs are commonly known by the name of Prabandham or Nâlâyiram and are accepted by the Tengalai Vishnuites as their canonical scriptures. The whole collection contains 4000 verses arranged in four parts[576] and an extract consisting of 602 verses selected for use in daily worship is in part accessible.[577] This poetry shows the same ecstatic devotion and love of nature as the Tiruvaçagam. It contemplates the worship of images and a temple ritual consisting in awakening the god at morning and attending on him during the day. It quotes the Upanishads and Bhagavad-gîtâ, assumes as a metaphysical basis a vedantized form of the Sânkhya philosophy, and also accepts the legends of the pastoral Krishna but without giving much detail. Jains, Buddhists and Saivas are blamed and the repetition of the name Govinda is enjoined. Though the hymns are not anti-brahmanic they decidedly do not contemplate a life spent in orthodox observances and their reputed authors include several Sûdras, a king and a woman.

After the poet-saints came the doctors and theologians. Accounts of them, which seem historical in the main though full of miraculous details, are found in the Tamil biographies[578] illustrating the apostolic succession of teachers. It appears fairly certain that Râmânuja, the fourth in succession, was alive in 1118: the first, known as Nâthamuni, may therefore have lived 100-150 years earlier. None of his works are extant but he is said to have arranged the poems of the Ârvârs for recitation in temple services. He went on a pilgrimage to northern India and according to tradition was an adept in Yoga, being one of the last to practise it in the south. Third in succession was his grandson Yamunârcârya (known as Âlavandâr or victor), who spent the first part of his life as a wealthy layman but was converted and resided at Srîrangam. Here he composed several important works in Sanskrit including one written to establish the orthodoxy of the Pâncarâtra and its ritual.[579]

4

He was succeeded by Râmânuja, a great name in Indian theology both as the organizer of a most important sect and, if not the founder,[580] at least the accepted exponent of the Visishtâdvaita philosophy. Râmânuja was born at Srîperum-budur[581] near Madras, where he is still commemorated by a celebrated shrine. As a youth he studied Sivaite philosophy at Conjeevaram but abandoned it for Vishnuism. He appears to have been a good administrator. He made the definitive collection of the hymns of the Ârvârs and is said to have founded 700 maths and 89 hereditary abbotships, for he allowed the members of his order to marry. He visited northern India, including Kashmir if tradition may be believed, but his chief residence was Srîrangam. Towards the end of the eleventh century however, the hostility of the Chola King Kulottunga, who was an intolerant Sivaite, forced him to retire to Mysore. Here he was protected by King Vittala Deva whom he converted from Jainism and on the death of Kulottunga in 1118 he returned to Srîrangam where he ended his days. In the temple there his tomb and a shrine where his image receives divine honours may still be seen. His best known work[582] is the Srî Bhâshya or commentary on the Vedânta sûtras.

The sect which he founded is known as the Srî Sampradâya and its members as the Srî Vaishnavas. As among the Sivaites revelation is often supposed to be made by Siva through Sakti, so here the Lord is said to have revealed the truth to his consort Srî or Lakshmî, she to a demigod called Visvaksena, and he to Namm'ârvâr, from whom Râmânuja was eighth in spiritual descent. Though the members of the sect are sometimes called Ramaites the personality of Râma plays a small part in their faith, especially as expounded by Râmânuja. As names for the deity he uses Nârâyana and Vâsudeva and he quotes freely from the Bhagavad-gîtâ and the Vishnu Purâna. Compared with the emotional deism of Caitanya this faith seems somewhat philosophic and reticent.

Râmânuja clearly indicates its principal points in the first words of his Srî Bhâshya. "May my mind be filled with devotion towards the highest Brahman, the abode of Lakshmî; who is luminously revealed in the Upanishads: who in sport produces, sustains and reabsorbs the entire universe: whose only aim is to foster the manifold classes of beings that humbly worship him."[583] He goes on to say that his teaching is that of the Upanishads, "which was obscured by the mutual conflict of manifold opinions," and that he follows the commentary of Bodhâyana and other teachers who have abridged it.

That is to say, the form of Vishnuism which Râmânuja made one of the principal religions of India claims to be the teaching of the Upanishads, although he also affiliates himself to the Bhâgavatas. He interprets the part of the Vedânta Sûtras which treats of this sect[584] as meaning that the author states and ultimately disallows the objections raised to their teaching and he definitely approves it. "As it is thus settled that the highest Brahman or Nârâyana himself is the promulgator of the entire Pâncarâtra and that this system teaches the nature of Nârâyana and the proper way of worshipping him, none can disestablish the view that in the Pâncarâtra all the other doctrines are comprised."[585]

The true tradition of the Upanishads he contends has been distorted by "manifold opinions," among which the doctrine of Sankara was no doubt the chief. That doctrine was naturally distasteful to devotional poets, and from the time of Nâthamuni onwards a philosophic reaction against it grew up in Srîrangam. Râmânuja preaches the worship of a loving God, though when we read that God produces and reabsorbs the universe in sport, we find that we are farther from Christianity than we at first supposed. There is a touch of mythology in the mention of Lakshmî[586] but it is clear that Râmânuja himself had little liking for mythology. He barely mentions Râma and Krishna in the Sri Bhâshya nor does he pay much attention to the consort of the deity. On the other hand he shows no sign of rejecting the ritual and regulations of the Brahmans. He apparently wished to prove that the doctrine of salvation by devotion to a personal god is compatible with a system as strictly orthodox as Sankara's own.

I shall treat elsewhere of his philosophy, known as the Visishtâdvaita or non-duality, which yet recognizes a distinction between God and individual souls. The line of thought is old and at all periods is clearly a compromise, unwilling to deny that God is everything and yet dissatisfied with the idea that a personal deity and our individual transmigrating souls are all merely illusion. Devotional theism was growing in Râmânuja's time. He could not break with the Upanishads and Vedantic tradition but he adapted them to the needs of his day. He taught firstly that the material world and human souls are not illusion but so to speak the body of God who comprises and pervades them: secondly this God is omniscient, omnipresent, almighty and all-merciful, and salvation (that is mukti or deliverance from transmigration) is obtained by those souls who, assisted by his grace, meditate on him and know him; thirdly this salvation consists not in absorption into God but in blissful existence near him and in

## participation of his glorious qualities. He further held[587] that God

exists in five modes, namely: (_a_) Para, the entire supreme spirit, (_b_) the fourfold manifestation as Vâsudeva, Sankarshana, Pradyumna and Aniruddha, (_c_) incarnations such as Râma and Krishna, (_d_) the internal controller or Antaryâmin according to the text[588] "who abiding in the soul rules the soul within," (_e_) duly consecrated images.

The followers of Râmânuja are at present divided into two schools known as Tengalais and Vadagalais, or southern and northern.[589] The double residence of the founder is one reason for the division, since both Mysore and Trichinopoly could claim to have personal knowledge of his teaching. The really important difference seems to be that the Tengalai or southern school is inclined to break away from Sanskrit tradition, to ignore the Vedas in practice and to regard the Tamil Nâlâyiram as an all-sufficient scripture, whereas the Vadagalais, though not rejecting the Nâlâyiram, insist on the authority of the Vedas. But both divisions are scrupulous about caste observances and the ceremonial purity of their food. They are separated by nice questions of doctrine, especially as to the nature of prapatti, resignation or self-surrender to the deity, a sentiment slightly different from bhakti which is active faith or devotion. The northerners hold that the soul lays hold of the Lord, as the young monkey hangs on to its mother, whereas the southerners say that the Lord picks up the helpless and passive soul as a cat picks up a kitten.[590] According to the northerners, the consort of Vishnu is, like him, uncreated and equally to be worshipped as a bestower of grace: according to the southerners she is created and, though divine, merely a mediator or channel of the Lord's grace. Even more important in popular esteem is the fact that the Vadagalai sectarian mark ends between the eyebrows whereas the Tengalais prolong it to the tip of the nose. _Odium theologicum_ is often bitterest between the sects which are most nearly related and accordingly we find that the Tengalais and Vadagalais frequently quarrel. They use the same temples but in many places both claim the exclusive right to recite the hymns of the Ârvârs. The chief difference in their recitation lies in the opening verse in which each party celebrates the names of its special teachers, and disputes as to the legality of a particular verse in a

## particular shrine sometimes give rise to free fights and subsequent

lawsuits.

The two schools reckon the apostolic succession differently and appear to have separated in the thirteenth century, in which they were represented by Pillai Lokâcârya and Vedânta Desika[591] respectively. The Tengalai, of which the first-named teacher was the practical founder, must be regarded as innovators, for in their use of Tamil as the language of religion they do not follow the example of Râmânuja. Lokâcârya teaches that the grace of God is irresistible and should be met not merely by active faith, but by self-surrender,[592] and entire submission to the guidance of the spiritual teacher. He was the author of eighteen works called Rahasyas or secrets[593] but though he appears to have been the first to formulate the Tengalai doctrines, Manavala Mahâmuni (1370-1443 A.D.) is regarded by the sect as its chief saint. His images and pictures are frequent in south India and he wrote numerous commentaries and poems. Vedânta Desika, the founder of the Vadagalai, was a native of Conjeevaram but spent much of his life at Srîrangam. He was a voluminous author and composed _inter alia_ an allegorical play in ten acts, portraying the liberation of the soul under the auspices of King Viveka (discrimination) and Queen Sumati (Wisdom).

At the present day the two sects recognize as their respective heads two Âcâryas who are married, whereas all Smârta Âcâryas are celibates.[594] The Tengalai Âcârya resides near Tinnevelly, the Vadagalai in the district of Kurnool. They both make periodical visitations in their districts and have considerable ecclesiastical power. In the south Srîrangam near Trichinopoly is their principal shrine: in the north Melucote in the Seringapatam district is esteemed very sacred.

5

It was only natural that Râmânuja's advocacy of qualified non-duality should lead some more uncompromising spirit to affirm the doctrine of Dvaita or duality. This step was taken by Madhva Âcârya, a Kanarese Brahman who was probably born in 1199 A.D.[595] In the previous year the great temple of Jagannatha at Puri had been completed and the Vishnuite movement was at its height. Madhva though educated as a Saiva became a Vaishnava. He denied absolutely the identity of the Supreme Being with the individual soul and held that the world is not a modification of the Lord but that he is like a father who begets a son. Yet in practice, rigid monotheism is not more prevalent among Madhva's followers than in other sects. They are said to tolerate the worship of Sivaite deities and of the lingam in their temples[596] and their ascetics dress like Saivas.

Madhva travelled in both northern and southern India and had a somewhat troubled life, for his doctrine, being the flat contradiction of the Advaita, involved him in continual conflicts with the followers of Sankara who are said to have even stolen his library. At any rate they anathematized his teaching with a violence unusual in Indian theology.[597] In spite of such lively controversy he found time to write thirty-seven works, including commentaries on the Upanishads, Bhagavad-gîtâ and Vedânta Sûtras. The obvious meaning of these texts is not that required by his system, but they are recognized by all Vaishnavas as the three Prasthânas or starting-points of philosophy and he had to show that they supported his views. Hence his interpretation often seems forced and perverse. The most extraordinary instance of this is his explanation of the celebrated phrase in the Chândogya Upanishad Sa âtmâ tat tvam asi. He reads Sa âtmâ atat tvam asi and considers that it means "You are not that God. Why be so conceited as to suppose that you are?"[598] Monotheistic texts have often received a mystical and pantheistic interpretation. The Old Testament and the Koran have been so treated by Kabbalists and Sufis. But in Madhva's commentaries we see the opposite and probably rarer method. Pantheistic texts are twisted until they are made to express uncompromising monotheism.

The sect is often called Brahma-sampradâya, because it claims that its doctrine was revealed by Brahmâ from whom Madhva was the sixth teacher in spiritual descent. Its members are known as Mâdhvas but prefer to call themselves Sad-Vaishnavas. Its teaching seems more rigid and less emotional than that of other Vishnuites and is based on the Pancabheda or five eternal distinctions between (_a_) God and the soul, (_b_) God and matter, (_c_) the soul and matter, (_d_) individual souls, (_e_) individual atoms of matter. God is generally called Vishnu or Nârâyana rather than Vâsudeva. Krishna is adored but not in his pastoral aspect. Vishnu and his spouse Lakshmî are real though superhuman personalities and their sons are Brahmâ the creator and Vâyu.[599] Peculiar to this sect is the doctrine that except through Vâyu, the son of Vishnu, salvation is impossible. Vâyu has been three times incarnate as Hanumat, the helper of Râma, as Bhîma and as Madhva himself.[600] Souls are separate, innumerable and related to God as subjects to a king. They are of three classes: those who are destined to eternal bliss in the presence of God: those who revolve eternally in the maze of transmigration: and those who tending ever downwards are doomed to eternal suffering.

This last doctrine, as well as the doctrine of salvation through Vâyu, the wind or spirit, has led many to suspect that Madhva was influenced by Christian ideas, but it is more probable that he owed something to Islam. Such influence would no doubt be distant and indirect, for a Brahman would not come into contact with Moslim doctors, though it is said that Madhva could speak Persian.[601] But some Moslim ideas such as the absolute separation of God from the world and the predestination of souls to eternal happiness and misery may have entered Brahman minds. Still, nearly all Madhva's views (with the possible exception of eternal punishment) have Indian analogies. The Yoga teaches that there are innumerable souls distinct from one another and from God and though salvation through the spirit sounds Christian, yet the Upanishads constantly celebrate Vâyu (wind) and Prâna (breath) as the pervading principle of the world and the home of the self. "By the wind (Vâyu) as thread, O Gautama, this world and the other world and all creatures are bound together."[602] Thus the idea that the wind is the universal mediator is old and it does not seem that Madhva regarded Vâyu as a redeemer or expiation for sin like Christ.

The Mâdhvas are still an energetic and important sect. Their headquarters are at Udipi in South Kanara and they also hold an annual conference at Tirupati at which examinations in theology are held and prizes given. At Udipi are eight maths and a very sacred temple, dedicated by Madhva himself to Krishna. The head of each math is charged in turn with the supervision of this temple during two years and the change of office is celebrated by a great biennial festival in January. The worship is more puritanical than in the temples of other sects, dancing girls for instance not being allowed, but great importance is attached to the practice of branding the body with the emblems of Vishnu. The sect, like the Srî Vaishnavas, is divided into two parties, the Vyasakutas who are conservative and use Sanskrit scriptures,[603] and the Dasakutas who have more popular tendencies and use sacred books written in Kanarese. Neither the Srî Vaishnavas nor the Mâdhvas are numerous in northern India.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 564: Such as the Vishnu Purâna, Vishnu Dharma, said to be a section of the Garuda Purâna and the Bhagavad-gîtâ.]

[Footnote 565: The Hindus are well aware that the doctrine of Bhakti spread from the south to the north. See the allegory quoted in _J.R.A.S._ 1911, p. 800.]

[Footnote 566: Thus Râmânuja says (Sri Bhâshya, II. 2. 43) that the Vedânta Sûtras do not refute the Sânkhya and Yoga but merely certain erroneous views as to Brahman not being the self.]

[Footnote 567: It has been described as the earliest of the Vishnuite Churches and it would be so if we could be sure that the existence of the doctrine called Dvaitâdvaita was equivalent to the existence of the sect. But Bhandarkar has shown some reason for thinking that Nimbâditya lived after Râmânuja. It must be admitted that the worship of Râdhâ and the doctrine of self-surrender or prapatti, both found in the Dasasloki, are probably late.]

[Footnote 568: See Grierson in _E.R.E._ vol. II. p. 457.]

[Footnote 569: The Church of the Nimavats is also called Sanakâdi-sampradâya because it professes to derive its doctrine from Sanaka and his brethren who taught Nârada, who taught Nimbârka. At least one sub-sect founded by Harivamsa (born 1559) adopts a doctrine analogous to Saktism and worships Râdhâ as the manifestation of Krishna's energy.]

[Footnote 570: Called the Dasasloki. It is translated in Bhandarkar's _Vaishn and Saivism_, pp. 63-5.]

[Footnote 571: Also spelt Alvar and Azhvar. The Tamil pronunciation of this difficult letter varies in different districts. The word apparently means one who is drowned or immersed in the divine love. Cf. _Azhi_, the deep sea; _Azhal_, being deep or being immersed.]

[Footnote 572: An educated Vaishnava told me at Srîrangam that devas and saints receive the same homage.]

[Footnote 573: It is possible that the poems attributed to Namm'ârvâr and other saints are really later compositions. See _Epig. Ind_. vol. VIII. p. 294.]

[Footnote 574: XI. 5. 38-40.]

[Footnote 575: Bhandarkar (_Vaishn. and Saivism_, p. 50) thinks it probable that Kulasekhara, one of the middle Ârvârs, lived about 1130. But the argument is not conclusive and it seems to me improbable that he lived after Nâthamuni.]

[Footnote 576: The first called Mudal-Âyiram consists of nine hymns ascribed to various saints such as Periyârvar and Andal. The second and third each consist of a single work the Periya-tiru-mori and the Tiru-vay-mori ascribed to Tiru-mangai and Namm'ârvâr respectively. The fourth part or Iyar-pa is like the first a miscellany containing further compositions by these two as well as by others.]

[Footnote 577: Nityânusandhânam series: edited with Telugu paraphrase and English translation by M.B. Srinivasa Aiyangar, Madras, 1898.]

[Footnote 578: The best known is the Guru-paramparâ-prabhâvam of Brahmatantra-svatantra-swâmi. For an English account of these doctors see T. Râjagopala Chariar, _The Vaishnavite Reformers of India_, Madras, 1909.]

[Footnote 579: Âgamaprâmânya. He also wrote a well-known hymn called Âlavandâr-Stotram and a philosophical treatise called Siddhi-traya.]

[Footnote 580: He states himself that he followed Boddhâyana, a commentator on the Sûtras of unknown date but anterior to Sankara. He quotes several other commentators particularly Dramida, so that his school must have had a long line of teachers.]

[Footnote 581: See _Gazetteer of India_, vol. XXIII. s.v. There is a Kanarese account of his life called Dibya-caritra. For his life and teaching see also Bhandarkar in _Berichte VIIth Int. Orient. Congress_, 1886, pp. 101 ff. Lives in English have been published at Madras by Alkondaville Govindâcârya (1906) and Krishnaswami Aiyangar (? 1909).]

[Footnote 582: He also wrote the Vedârtha Sangraha, Vedârtha Pradîpa, Vedânta Sâra and a commentary on the Bhagavad-gîtâ.]

[Footnote 583: _S.B.E._ XLVIII. p. 3.]

[Footnote 584: II. 2. 36-39.]

[Footnote 585: II. 2. 43 _ad fin._]

[Footnote 586: Râmânuja's introduction to the Bhagavad-gîtâ is more ornate but does not go much further in doctrine than the passage here quoted.]

[Footnote 587: This fivefold manifestation of the deity is a characteristic Pâncarâtra doctrine. See Schrader, _Int._ pp. 25, 51 and _Srî Bhâshya_, II. 242.]

[Footnote 588: See Br. Ar. Up III. 7. The Srî Vaishnavas attach great importance to this chapter.]

[Footnote 589: Only relatively northern and southern. Neither flourish in what we call northern India.]

[Footnote 590: Hence the two doctrines are called markata-nyâya and marjâra-nyâya, monkey theory and cat theory. The latter gave rise to the dangerous doctrine of Doshabhogya, that God enjoys sin, since it gives a larger scope for the display of His grace. Cf. Oscar Wilde in _De Profundis_, "Christ, through some divine instinct in him, seems to have always loved the sinner as being the nearest possible approach to perfection in man.... In a manner not yet understood of the world, he regarded sin and suffering as being in themselves beautiful holy things and modes of perfection.... Christ, had he been asked, would have said--I feel quite certain about it--that the moment the prodigal son fell on his knees and wept, he made his having wasted his substance with harlots, his swine herding and hungering for the husks they ate beautiful and holy moments in his life."]

[Footnote 591: Also called Venkatanâtha. For some rather elaborate studies in the history of the Srî-Vaishnavas see V. Rangacharis' articles in _J. Bombay R.A.S._ 1915 and 1916 and _J. Mythic Society_, 1917, Nos. 2 ff.]

[Footnote 592: Prapatti and âcâryabhimâna.--The word _prapatti_ seems not to occur in the Srî Bhâshya and it is clear that Râmânuja's temperament was inclined to active and intelligent devotion. But _prapatti_ is said to have been taught by Nathamuni and Sathagopa (Râjagopala Chariar, _Vaishnavite Reformers_, p. 6). The word means literally _approaching._]

[Footnote 593: The Artha-pañcaka and Tattva-traya are the best known. See text and translation of the first in _J.R.A.S._ 1910, pp. 565-607.]

[Footnote 594: Râmânuja set less store than Sankara on asceticism and renunciation of the world. He held the doctrine called _samucchaya_ (or combination) namely that good works as well as knowledge are efficacious for salvation.]

[Footnote 595: Also called Ânandatîrtha and Pûrnaprajña. According to others he was born in 1238 A.D. See for his doctrines Grierson's article Madhvas in _E.R.E._ and his own commentaries on the Chândogya and Brihad Ar. Upanishads published in _Sacred Books of the Hindus_, vols. III. and XIV. For his date Bhandarkar, _Vaishn. and Saivism_, pp. 58-59 and _I.A._. 1914, pp. 233 ff. and 262 ff. Accounts of his life and teaching have been written by Padmanabha Char. and Krishna Svami Aiyer (Madras, 1909). His followers maintain that he is not dead but still alive at Badarî in the Himalayas.]

[Footnote 596: See Padmanabha Char. _l.c._ page 12. Madhva condemned the worship of inanimate objects (_e.g._ com. Chând. Up. VII. 14. 2) but not the worship of Brahman _in_ inanimate objects.]

[Footnote 597: In a work called the _Pâshanda capetikâ_ or _A Slap for Heretics_, all the adherents of Madhva are consigned to hell and the Saurapurâna, chaps. XXXVIII.-XL. contains a violent polemic against them. See Jahn's _Analysis_, pp. 90-106 and Barth in _Mélanges Harlez_, pp. 12-25. It is curious that the Madhvas should have been selected for attack, for in many ways they are less opposed to Sivaites than are other Vishnuite sects but the author was clearly badly informed about the doctrines which he attacks and he was probably an old-fashioned Sivaite of the north who regarded Madhvism as a new-fangled version of objectionable doctrines.

The Madhvas are equally violent in denouncing Sankara and his followers. They miswrite the name Samkara, giving it the sense of mongrel or dirt and hold that he was an incarnation of a demon called Manimat sent by evil spirits to corrupt the world.]

[Footnote 598: See his comment on Chând. Up. VI. 8. 7. Compare Bhag.-g. XV. 7. The text appears to say that the soul (Jîva) is a part (amsa) of the Lord. Madhva says it is so-called because it bears some reduced similitude to the Lord, though quite distinct from him. Madhva's exegesis is supported by a system of tantric or cabalistic interpretation in which every letter has a special meaning. Thus in the passage of the Chând. Up. mentioned above the simple words _sa ya eshah_ are explained as equivalent to Sâra essence, yama the controller, and ishta the desired one. The reading atat tvam asi is said not to have originated with Madhva but to be found in a Bhâgavata work called the Sâmasamhitâ.]

[Footnote 599: In his commentary on the opening of the Chând. Up. Madhva seems to imply a Trinity consisting of Vishnu, Ramâ (=Lakshmî) and Vâyu.]

[Footnote 600: This is expressly stated at the end of the commentary on the Brih. Ar. Upan.]

[Footnote 601: _Life and teachings of Srî-Madhvacharyar_ by Padmanabha Char. 1909, p. 159. Some have suspected a connection between Madhva's teaching and Manicheism, because he attached much importance to an obscure demon called Manimat (see Mahâbh. III. 11, 661) whom he considered incarnate in Sankara. It is conceivable that in his Persian studies he may have heard of Mani as an arch-heretic and have identified him with this demon but this does not imply any connection between his own system (or Sankara's either) and Manicheism.]

[Footnote 602: Brih. Ar. Upan. III. 7. 2.]

[Footnote 603: Among them are the Manimanjarî, the Madhvavijaya and the Vâyustuti, all attributed to a disciple of Madhva and his son.]

##