Part 6 - The date of Sripati Panditacharya

As regards the period of time to which Sripati, the Commentator, should be assigned, it has been pointed out

above that judging from certain lithic records and literary references he should have belonged to circa 1400 A.D. From the internal evidence afforded by his Bhashya itself, it is clear that he is posterior to Ramanuja, to whose doctrines he specifically refers by name and which he refutes in detail, especially his regard for Tantric Agamas, including idol worship, which Sripati throughout denounces. Paribhashapradhana Ramanuja Sastram Vedamulatva bhavat avaidikam iti ghantaghoshaha (Adhyaya II, Pada II, Sutra 42, line 18, page 247). There is a reference also to the practices prevailing among the followers of Ramanuja in regard to the branding of the Sankha and the Chakra and the worship of the Saligrama in a passage occurring in Adhyaya I, Pada I, Sutra 12. The relevant passages are as follows: tantrika sarvakarmani visnumuddisya karayet || vaidikassarvakarmani sivamuddisya karayet || tathapi sivopasanameva sadyo muktih || Tantrikas sarva karmani Vishnumuddisya karayet || Vaidikas sarva karmani Sivamuddisya karaye! || Tathapi Sivopasanameva Sadyo-muktihi || Again, samkhacakramudradharananirasah ; tatha ca saligrama silapujadi avasyam varjayet || Sankha chakra mudra dharana nirasah; tathacha Saligrama sila pujadi avasyam varjayet || He is as much against the Tantric doctrines of Pasupatas as of Ramanuja. In Adhyaya I, Pada II, Sutra 1, he has the following pancaratradivatpasupatyagamanam nirastatvat || Pancharatradivat Pasupatyagamanam nirastatvat || Sripati is also posterior in date to Ekorama and the five Acharyas of the Virasaiva religion, who, though they are by some modern writers classed (see E. P. Rice's Kanarese Literature, 54-55) as contemporaries of Basava, the great reformer, who himself belonged to the third quarter of the 12 th century, are undoubtedly considerably more ancient than Basava. Basava's work presumes the

previous existence of Acharyas who had prepared the ground for him. Basava's vigorous propaganda resulted in the development of the Virasaiva religion. This is entirely in accordance with the view of Sir R. G. Bhandarkar as developed in his Vaishnavism, Saivism, etc., 132. Though Basava is not referred to by name by Sripati, it is inferable that Sripati belongs to the post-Basava period. This could not well be otherwise, as Basava came long after Ramanuja. Not only Sripati refers to and refutes the doctrines of Sankara and Ramanuja, but also criticizes in more than one place the distinctively dualistic philosophy of Madhvacharya. Sripati's date has, therefore, to be fixed as posterior to Madhvacharya, say between 1300 and 1400 A.D. This date may be taken as approximately correct, though it is not quite in agreement with what Mr. P. Gopinath Kaviraj has suggested (1200 A.D.) in the Hindustan Review for January 1923. Seeing that Ramanuja lived in the first half of the 12 th century, during the reign of the Hoysala King Vishnuvardhana (1111 to 1141 A.D.) and that Sripati is posterior in date to Basava, who lived about 1167 A.D., and that Madhvacharya lived from and after 1238 A.D., this date being fixed with reference to the Sri Kurmam inscriptions of Narahari Tirtha and Mutt traditions combined, it seems safe to assume the date mentioned above." This date will allow a certain period of time for the promulgation of the doctrines of Ramanuja and Madhvacharya for them to assume a predominance, which required refutation at the hands of a Virasaiva teacher of eminence like Sripati Panditacharya. Light from Inscriptions. A few lithic inscriptions lend additional weight to this deduction. The most important of these is one 5 According to lithic inscriptions dated in 1281 and 1293 A.D., Naraharitirtha, the Madhva saint-third in succession to Sri Madhve charya-who is mentioned in them should have lived about that time. (See Madras Epigraphy Report 1896 and 1900.) He is believed to have lived up to 1333 A.D.

which comes from a ruined mantap at Kondavidu, the celebrated hill capital of the Reddis, who ruled from 1328 to 1427 A.D. This is a Telugu record and is dated in Saka 1327, cyclic year Parthiva and registers that the stone beam in the gopura of the Visvesvara temple there was presented by one Damalapati Chennamanenimgaru for the merit of his spiritual teacher Srigiriayyamgaru, who was the grandson (?) of Panditaradhyadeva (Madras Epigraphy Report , 1910, 539 of 1909). There is little doubt that the Pandit- aradhyadeva referred to in this record is the same as Sripati Panditaradhya, he having been, from what has been stated before, known more commonly as Panditaradhya (see above quotation from Pattabhiramavilasamu). This identification being conceded, we have the date Saka 1327, Parthiva, for his grandson Srigiri. Saka 1327, Parthiva, corresponds to A.D. 1405. Taking it for granted that Sripati had had a grown-up grandson in the 40 th year of his age-a by no means impossible suggestion his date would fall in or about 1365 A.D., and if he had been alive even a few years before the date of this grant in favour of his grandson-who himself is spoken of as a spiritual teacher in this record -he would have to be set down to circa 1400 A.D., a date which is in agreement with our deductions from independent sources as to his time. On a pillar of the same mantap on which the above-mentioned record is found, there is another one-a mutilated one-of Reddi King Peda-Komati-Vema dated in Saka 1330, corresponding to 1408 A.D. (Madras Epigraphy Report , 1910, No. 538 of 1909). This record is dated only three years later than the one recording the gift in favour of Srigiri, grandson of Sripati Panditaradhyadeva. Peda-Komati-Vema, as we know, was the author of Sringaradipika, a commentary on the Amara Sataka. Evidently, Sripati Pandita was a contemporary of Peda-Komati-Vema. The Reddi chief, Damalapati Chennamanenimgaru, who presented the stone beam for the merit of Sripati's grandson, was evidently the descendant of a Tamil chief who had long held sway in the

Kondavidu country, as his title Dramilapati, or Dravida lord) shows. " 33 Damalapati (i.e., The next record comes from Panem, Kurnool district, but is unfortunately not dated. On a pillar in the Mukha-mantapa of the Panikesvara Svamin temple at this place is a record which registers the fact that one Vibhuti Gauraya visited the temple. It is mentioned that he was born at Machirajupalli, near Warrangal, and that he had settled on the top of Srigiri and was the servant of Panditaradhya, who may be identified with Sripati Pandita. There are three other records of this Vibhuti Gauraya, who was evidently a person of some importance as the details given about the place of his birth and his settling down at Sri-sailam indicate. The statement that he was the "servant of Sripati Panditaradhya signifies possibly his retirement from temporal affairs and becoming a disciple of the great teacher Sripati Panditaradhya, probably the greatest Virasaiva teacher of the time. (Madras Epigraphy Report , 1914, No. 169 of 1913; also 168 of 1913; for the Reddi kings of Kondavidu, see Epigraphia Indica , XI, 313 et seq.; and Venkayya, Ancient History of Nellore, 23-24.) " Posterior to Nilakantha, Author of Bhashya on Suta Samhita. Sripati quotes from Nilakantha's Bhashya on SutaSamhita (on Dhyana Yogakhanda) in Adhyaya II, Pada II, Sutra 42, page 244, line 7; also in Adhyaya I, Pada I, Sutra 21, page 74, line 29, where he refers to Purvacharya Nilakantha Bhagavadpadacharya's Bhashya on Chchandogya Upanishad. I have been unable to trace these works in any of the Catalogues accessible to me. But there is hardly any doubt that this is the Nilakantha, who is popularly but mistakenly described as an independent Saiva commentator on the Vedanta Sutras, whose alleged work is called the Saiva Bhashya. Sripati nowhere quotes the alleged latter work; if it had been in existence, he would have referred to it. He should not be confounded with the Nilakantha, the best known Commentator 3 F

of the Mahabharata, who lived and wrote his Bharatabhavadipa at Kurpara, to the west of the Godavari, in Maharashtra, and who, according to Burnell, belongs to the 16 th century (Madras D.C. of Sanskrit MSS. IV, i, No. 1958; Macdonell, Sanskrit Literature, 282, 290). Another Nilakantha, alias Ayya Dikshita, who flourished. in the 1 st half of the 17 th century, was the author of the Sivalilarnava. He was the grandson of Acca Dikshita, grandson of Appayya Dikshita, one of the finest exponents of Saiva Siddhanta. Nilakanthasivacharya's alleged Bhashya goes by the name of Nilakantha Bhashya, which, on closer investigation is found to be only another name for Srikantha's Bhashya, known as Brahma Mimamsa Bhashya. A commentary on the latter is Appayya Dikshita's Sivadityamanidipika, in the colophon to which work Appayya Dikshita plainly states that it is a commentary only on Srikantha's Bhashya and not on that of Nilakantha's also, as has been suggested in some quarters. It is more than doubtful if there was really a Nilakantha or Nilakantha-Sivacharya who was also a commentator on the Brahma Sutras. Mr. S. S. Suryanarayana Sastri, the author of Sivadvaita of Srikantha, has, since the above was written, arrived at the same conclusion, arguing from a different point of view (see Sivadvaita of Srikantha, 18, f.n. 23). The doctrines of Saivadvaita religion are propounded in Sivadvaitanirnaya by Appayya Dikshita. The Nilakantha-Sivacharya above named should not, further, be confounded with a third person of the same name, who is well known to Virasaiva literature. This is Nilakantha Sivacharya, whose Sanskrit work, entitled Kriyasara, is often popularly, but erroneously, described as a commentary on the Brahma Sutras. He is one of the more familiar Virasaiva teachers of the Kannada country. As he has been referred to in Mallannarya's Virasaivamrita-purana, a work which belongs to 1530, he must have been anterior to Mallannarya. How much exactly anterior to him, it is not known. But he has been assigned to the 14 th century, though

this seems a little too early for him. He cannot have lived earlier than Sripati. In some MS. copies of his work, he is called Nilakanthadikshita or simply Nilakantha. His work is also alternatively known as Nigamagama Sarasangraha. It is not a Bhashya on the Badarayana Sutras. It is a work which, as the author himself states, treats of the quintessence of action as derivable from the Vedas and Sastras (Nigamagama Sarabhuta Kriyasara) in the spirit of the teachings of the Vyasa Sutras (Upodghata, verses 11 and 12; Prathamopadesa, verse 1). He styles his work a Prabandha or treatise. It is divided into 32 Upadesas and treats of a variety of topics, including the fundamental tenets of the Virasaiva faith. It is, in fact, a hand-book of interpretation of Virasaiva doctrines and beliefs. Even the 18 Puranas (including the Ramayana, the Bhagavata, etc.) are interpreted in this work from the Virasaiva point of view. The point to note in regard to it is that it is undoubtedly a work much later than that of Sripati. Its style is modern and somewhat artificial in character. The author's knowledge, though undoubtedly great, nowhere approaches the profundity of Sripati. Sripati shines as a learned scholar, an acute thinker and a great dialectician of a rare type, who had drunk deep at the fountain-head. Nilakantha, who describes himself as the knower of the secret of the Ekoththara Sathasthala, shows himself as a redactor and popularizer intent on interpreting everything known from the Virasaiva point of view. Nilakantha refers to another work of his at the end of the nineteenth Upadesa of his Kriyasara, but its name is not mentioned. His philosophical standpoint is also bheda-bheda (see 3 rd Upadesa, verse 3) which is in keeping with Sripati's teaching. Sripati uses the phrase Ubhaya Vedanta Nigamagama repeatedly in his work and the fact that Nilakantha gives this name to his work and suggests that his doctrine is also bheda-bheda, shows that he was not unaware of Sripati's work, to which he does not, however, so far as can be seen, directly refer by name. It is strange,

however, that in the colophons appearing in the Kriyasara in the MS. copies of this work as found in the Madras Oriental MSS. Library (see D.C. of Sanskrit MSS. in the Madras Oriental MSS. Library, XI, Nos. 5438 and 5549) and as printed in the Telugu script edition published by Mr. Virasangappa, at the Mysore Sarada Press, in the year Tarana, the work is described as that of the teacher Nilakantha, who possessed the secret of the doctrine of Ekoththara Sathasthala of the Visishtadvaita philosophy. A possible explanation is that the reference here is to Saivavisishtadvaita and not to Vaishnava or Ramanuja's Visishtadvaita, for the Ekoththara Sathasthala doctrine is not part of the latter's Visishtadvaita philosophy. The Virasaiva standpoint, though described by Nilakantha in his colophons as Visishtadvaita, evidently following Srikantha, who called his system Siva Visishtadvaita, is also plainly called by him Bhedabheda, which is in keeping with the Virasaiva standpoint as propounded by Sripati in his Bhashya. Posterior to Srikantha, Author of Brahma Mimamsa Bhashya. Srikantha-Sivacharya, whose Bhashya on the Brahma Sutras is also well known, though not a professed Virasaiva, approaches the Virasaiva point of view (see Bhandarkar's Vaishnavism, Saivism, etc., 137; Madras D.C. of Sanskrit MSS. X, p. 3874). Srikantha-Sivacharya is referred to by name by Sripati in Adhyaya II, Pada I, Sutra 22, page 200, line 8, as Saivagraganya Srikantha Sivaradhya and he quotes from Srikantha's work Brahma Mimamsa Bhashya. He again refers to bim in Adhyaya III, Pada II, Sutra 8, page 320, line 33. Here he refers to Srikantha as Sivacharya and cites him in connection with the discussion of Bhava and Abhava, the leading topic of Sutra 8. The change from Srikantha Sivaradhya to Srikantha Sivacharya should be noted. The former designation would seem to indicate his being claimed as a Virasaiva by Sripati.

Srikantha Sivacharya was the author of a Saiva commentary on the Brahma Sutras. The work is commonly called Brahmasutrabhashyam, though in the colophon the author styles it more formally Brahma Mimamsa Bhashya, the name by which it is actually cited by Sripati. The most famous commentary on it is the work entitled Brahmasutra Bhashya Vyakhyaya: Sivadityamanidipika by Appayya Dikshita. Srikantha Sivacharya is sometimes briefly referred to as Srikanthacharya, while he appears simply as "Srikantha in the colophons contained in his Bhashya. Appayya Dikshita wrote his Nakshatravadavali (also called Vadanakshatra Malika) to support the views of Srikantha. (See Madras D. C. of Sanskrit MSS. X, Nos. 5079 and 5092, pages 3857 and 3874.) " Date of Srikantha from Literary Data. The date of Srikantha is not yet definitely settled. It has been suggested, on the basis of verbal and doctrinal resemblances, that he probably flourished close to the period of Ramanuja, who, as we know, lived about the beginning of the 11 th century A.D. But it has been stated that it is difficult to decide the question of priority and that there is also the possibility of explaining the resemblances referred to on the basis of a common original. The suggestion has been made that Srikantha's treatment of Sutras III, 3, 27-30, where he criticizes views which are said to be those of Ramanuja and Nimbarka, who, chronologically speaking, came some time after Ramanuja, is fairly conclusive in the matter. Mr. S. S. Suryanarayana Sastri, who puts forward this view (vide his Sivadvaita of Srikantha, 45 et seq.), holds that Srikantha's criticism is effective and is not attempted to be met in any other commentary. Briefly put, this criticism bases itself on the position that until the attainment of Brahman, bondage continues (even after death) and that bondage without Karma is inconceivable. This position, it is remarked, has not been controverted elsewhere. Mr. Suryanarayana Sastri also states that there

" is an inversion in the order of Sutras 29 and 30, as read by other commentators and the inversion is not noticed by others. On these grounds, he suggests that it is "likely that Srikantha came after all these, probably some time in the 13 th century, when the Saiva Siddhanta was taking shape in the hands of the Santana Acharyas.' There is, however, little in this reasoning, to support the question of date. Nor is there anything in the criticism of Ramanuja that is novel; and as regards the inversion. in the order of the Sutras, such inversions occur in Sripati's commentary also. This by itself cannot, therefore. be accepted as settling the question of the priority of Ramanuja to Srikantha. A writer in the Jijnasa, suggests the opposite view that Srikantha preceded Ramanuja (see Jijnasa, Part II, article on Srikantha). In commencing his work Srikantha states that he has corrected the errors (kalusha) of the commentators who preceded him and that Aryas and pious Saivas would find his commentary a great treasure (mahandhi) (see Madras D. C. of Sanskrit MSS. X, p. 3874 et seq., at page 3875; also Madras Epigraphy Report , No. 188 of 1905). The words are:Purvacharya kalushitam Srikanthena prasudhate w Sarvavedantasarasya saurabhasvadamodinam Aryanam Sivanishthanam Bhashyametanmahanidhihi || Who were these commentators whom Srikantha corrected? This statement would seem to indicate that several commentators had preceded him. Until we have definitely fixed his date, the reference to previous commentators cannot be correctly explained. Epigraphic records appear to throw some light on his date and to this we may now tu.n our attention. Srikantha's Date as determined from Inscriptions. Numerous inscriptions mention or refer to persons bearing the name of Srikantha and as the references occur at different intervals of time, it is of some interest to see which of these relates to Srikantha, the author of the Bhashya. First in order of date, perhaps, should have

been the Srikantha after whom the Srikantha-Chaturvedimangalam, a village in the Musuri taluk, Trichinopoly district, is named. This place is referred to in as many as fifteen lithic records dated from the 30 th year of the reign of the Chola King Parantaka I to the 3 rd year of Rajaraja III. It would seem to follow from these inscriptions that the Srikantha after whom it was named should have flourished anterior to the rule of Parantaka I (907- 948 A.D.). Who he was, it is not possible to determine. A person bearing the name of Tiruvaiyan Srikantha, i.e., Srikantha, the son of Tiruvaiyan, is mentioned in an inscription, dated in 965 A.D., found at Gramam in the present South Arcot district (Madras Epigraphy Report , No. 74 of 1905). He figures in it as a Vaidumba feudatory of the Rashtrakuta King Krishna III (Madras Epigraphy Report , 1901, page 42). Whether he could be identified with the name-father of Srikantha-Chaturvedimangalam is difficult to say in the present state of our knowledge of the history of Vaidumbas. The following is a list of the records in which SrikanthaChaturvedimangalam is mentioned :- (1) 600 of 1908 at Tirupattur, Musuri taluk, Trichinopoly district. Reign of Rajaraja III (18 th year). Grant by a native of the place, a brahmadaya of Uratturnadu. (2) 511 of 1912 dated in 13 th year of Vikrama-Chola (1118-35). Sale of land in this village, also called Nambikurichchi. (3) 512 of 1912 dated in Vikrama-Chola's reign. Land sale in the same village. (4) 97 of 1914 dated 25 th year of Rajaraja I. Grant of gold to the temple at the place. (5) 100 of 1914 dated 3 rd year of Rajendra-Chola I. Gifts to the temple at the place by one of the members of the village assembly. (6) 102 of 1914 dated 7 th year of Rajakesarivarman. Land granted for digging a channel from the tank at the village for irrigating the lands. (7) 105 of 1914 dated 7 th year of Rajakesarivarman. Sale of right to a private party to levy a definite quantity of paddy on the lands of the village. for digging a channel.

(8) 111 of 1914 dated 30 th year of Parantaka I. Grant of land to the temple. (9) 114 of 1914 dated 4 th year of Rajakesarivarman, Rajaraja I. Grant of gold for lamp, etc., to the temple. (10) 117 of 1914 dated 5 th year of Rajakesarivarman. Gift of a lamp to the temple. (11) 119 of 1914 dated 18 th year of Rajakesarivarman. Gift of a lamp to the temple. (12) 120 of 1914 dated 7 th year of Rajendra-Chola (1050-62). Remission of taxes to the temple at the place. (13) 123 of 1914 dated 3 rd year of Rajakesarivarman. Sale of land. (14) 133 of 1914 dated 5 th year of Rajakesarivarman. No taxes should be levied on the temple belongings. (15) 136 of 1914 dated 3 rd year of Rajarajadeva III. (=13 th February 1219 A.D.) Gift of land. Village called also Malari, As will be seen, these inscriptions range in their dates from the reign of Parantaka I to Rajaraja III. A Telugu-Sanskrit record dated in Saka 1193 (corresponding to 1271 A.D.) cyclic year Prajapati. which comes from Tripurantakam in the Markapur taluk, Kurnool district, mentions a Brahmana resident of Madhurantaka (perhaps the village of that name in the present Chingleput district) who bore the title of Chodamandala-pratisthacharya, and a certain Srikantha-siva, probably a Saiva ascetic. In another record at the same place, wholly in Telugu, dated in Saka 1192, cyclic year Pramoduta, corresponding to 1270 A.D., in the reign of the Kakatiya queen Rudrayyadeva Maharaja (Rudramma), we have mention made again of a Srikantha-siva (Madras Epigraphy Report , No. 246 o' 1905). Another record comes from Tiruvidamarudur in the modern Tanjore district, dated in the fourth year of the Chola King Vikrama-Chola, who reigned from 1118-1135 A.D. (Madras Epigraphy Report , No. 301 of 1907). It records a gift of land to the image of Kulottunga-CholisvaramudaiyaMahadeva (named after Kulottunga-Chola I) set up by Svamidevar Srikantha-siva, who has been identified (wrongly as will be shown below) with Srikantha, the

commentator. (Ins. in Madras, II, p. 1276, No. 328.) Mr. V. Venkayya has identified this Svamidevar Srikantha with Srikantha-Sambhu, the father of Somesvara or IsvaraSiva, the guru of Kulottunga III. (Madras Epigraphy Report 1908, p. 64.) As Srikantha's son, Somesvara or Isvara-Siva, who wrote the Siddhanta Ratnakara, was the guru of Kulottunga III (1178-1216 A.D).) and consecrated the temple built by Kulottunga III at Tribhuvanam, in the Tanjore district, it has to be presumed that his father Svamidevar Srikanthasiva himself had passed away by then. Vikrama-Chola, in whose reign the grant was made, ruled between 1118-1135 A.D., while Kulottunga-Chola I, in whose name the image was set up, ruled between 1070-1120 A.D., and preceded him. Somesvara or Isvara-Siva, the son of Svamidevar Srikantha-siva, who set up the image, was the guru of Kulottunga III, who ruled between 1178-1216 A.D. Thus nearly a century separated Kulottunga-Chola I from Kulottunga-Chola III. Taking it for granted that the image was consecrated in the year in which the grant was made to it, i.e., in the fourth year of VikramaChola's reign, corresponding to 1122 A.D., Svamidevar Srikantha should have been living in that year, while his son Somesvara or Isvara-Siva belonged to the period 1178-1216 A.D. Svamidevar Srikantha cannot, therefore, be identified with the Srikantha of the two Tripurantakam records, dated in 1270 and 1271 A.D., though this (Svamidevar) Srikantha was evidently a great Saiva teacher. His son Somesvara is, indeed, described as well versed in the Saiva-Darsana and the eighteen Vidyas and as having expounded the greatness of Siva as taught in the Upanishads. As remarked above, Somesvara was also the author of Siddhanta-Ratnakara. Somesvara was also known as IsvaraSiva, a name which the late Mr. Venkayya was inclined to identify with Isana-siva, which was borne by a Saiva teacher who wrote the Siddhantasara. In the same line of teachers there was also a Srikantha. Both Isanasiva and Srikantha are mentioned by the Saiva teacher,

Vedajnana, in his Atmarthapuja-paddhati. " This Isanasiva has, however, to be distinguished from the person of the same name who belonged to the Amardakamatha and wrote a work called Krinakramadyotika (see Hultzsch, Report on Sanskrit MSS., II, xvii; also Madras Epigraphy Report 1908, para 64). There is a Srikantha mentioned in a record, dated in the 21 st year of the Pandya King Maravarman alias Tribhuvanachakravartin Sundara-Pandya I (1216-35 A.D.), who was pleased to distribute the Chola country". This records a sale of land to Srikantha-siva, one of the Acharyas residing in the Tirugnanasambanda matha at Tirupattur (the place of that name in the present Ramnad district) by a local chief. From the point of view of dates, the Srikantha of this record-whose date works out to 1236 A.D.-may be the same as the Srikantha of the Tripurantakam records, which belong to 1270 and 1271 A.D. If the Srikantha of these records is Srikantha, the commentator, then he should be assigned to about 1270 A.D. In this case, he should be held to come long after Ramanuja and Nimbarka and not before them. There remain three others of the name of Srikantha to consider. One of these is Srikantha, the Tantric writer, who belonged to the Kashmir School and composed the Ratnatraya Pariksha prior to the 10 th century. He has to be distinguished not only from the Srikantha, who lived from about the first quarter to the third quarter of the 13 th century A.D., but also from Svamidevar Srikantha, father of Somesvara, the guru of Kulottunga-Chola III above named (see Madras D.C. of Sanskrit MSS., X, 5092, pp. 3874-7; also Hultzsch, Search for Sanskrit MSS., No. II, p. xvi, for Srikantha, the Kashmirian author). Another is the Srikantha, identified with the Srikanthanatha mentioned in the undated records in the ArulalaPerumal temple at Conjeevaram as the preceptor of the Vedic scholar Sayana, whose " master was Sangama II, the son of Kampa and grandson of Sangama I. (Madras Epigraphy Report 1893, p. 5, para. 13; Inscription No. 50 of 1893; Epigraphia Indica , III, 118-19.) This Srikanthanatha has been identified with the "

person of the same name mentioned as the preceptor of Sangama II, son of Kampa I and grandson of Sangama I, in the Bitragunta grant of Sangama II, dated in Saka 1278, Durmukhi, corresponding to 1356 A.D. (Nellore Ins. I, C. P. Grant No. 20; Epigraphia Indica , III, 21-25.) This grant records the gift of the village of Bitragunta to twenty-eight Brahmans at the request of the king's (Sangama II's) preceptor Srikanthanatha, on the anniversary day of the king's death. In consequence, the village came to be known as Srikanthapura. At the request of the same guru, Sangama II granted another village, called Sinhesari, identified with Sankesari, near Pushpagiri, in the Nellore district. The question arises whether the Srikanthanatha mentioned in the Arulala-Perumal temple and Bitragunta records, both doubtless referring to the same person, can be identified with the Srikantha-siva of the Tripurantakam and Tirupattur records mentioned above. The Bitragunta record is dated in 1356 A.D., while the Tripurantakam records belong to 1270 and 1271 A.D. and the Tirupattur one to 1236 A.D. As the hiatus of time that separates the Bitragunta and Tirupattur records is about 120 years, it seems doubtful if they can be identified. It is possible that the Tripurantakam and Tirupattur records refer to Srikantha, the commentator, while the Bitragunta one refers to a later successor of his who lived about the first half of the 14 th century A.D. Finally, there is a Srikanthadeva mentioned in an undated record on the north wall of the Ilamisvara temple at Taramangalam, Omalur taluk, Salem district. It mentions a certain Srikanthadeva, who bore the title of Gaudachudamani and Vidyasamudra and records a gift of land made to his father as gurudakshina by the six Vellalas of the place, of whom Nalla Udaiyappar was one. (Madras Epigraphy Report 31 of 1900.) It is rather difficult to identify this Srikanthadeva, though it is quite possible, judging from his high sounding titles and the Vellala disciples he possessed, that he might have been the same as the Srikantha-siva mentioned by Aghora Sivacharya in his Mahotsavavidhi. He

belonged to the Amardakamatha above named. His predecessors in order were :-Paramesvara; Hridaya Sankara; Dhyana Siva; and Srikantha-Siva-Desika, who, it is said, was an immigrant from the Gaudadesa (modern Bengal). This Srikantha, it is added, moved south to offer worship to the god at Chidambaram, and became thereafter the guru of Vikrama-Chola, son and successor of Kulottunga-Chola I. Vikrama-Chola ruled from 1118-1135 A.D. and was a devout Saiva, though not intolerant of Vaishnavism. (See Mysore Gazetteer, Ed. 1930, II, ii, 1133-1134.) The fact that this Srikantha was from the Gaudadesa, which is noted by Aghora Sivacharya, enables us to identify him with the Srikantha mentioned in the Taramangalam record, who, it is mentioned in it, bore the title of Gaudachudamani. Whether this Srikantha, who is alleged by Aghora Sivacharya to have been the teacher of Vikrama-Chola, can be identified with the Srikantha-siva, who set up the image in the name of Kulottunga-Chola I, in the fourth year of the reign of his son Vikrama-Chola, is a moot point. If Aghora Sivacharya is correct in his statement, the two Srikanthas would have to be identified. If this be so, the Taramangalam record would have to be referred to about 1135 A.D. The above identification of Srikantha, the commentator, with the Srikantha-siva of the Tripurantaka and Tirupattur records would fix him up to about the third quarter of 13 th century A.D., which would allow a sufficiency of time for his being honoured as a great authority by Sripati, about a century later. If this be so, Sripati, who quotes Srikantha, with evident feelings of regard, should have come long after him. This brings us again to about the middle of the 14 th century A.D. (1350-1400 A.D.). The date of Bhatta Bhaskara, from whose writings Srikantha has undoubtedly borrowed (see Bhatta Bhaskara, Mys. Ed., pp. 34, 81, 82 and 138 and Srikantha's Br. Mimamsa, IV. 4. 19; I. 3. 12), may be fixed from an epigraph found on the base of a mantapa in front of the central shrine in the Saumyanathaswami temple at Nandalur in the Pullampet

taluk of the present Cuddapah district (see Madras Epigraphy Report 1908, App. B., No. 577 of 1907). It is a Grantha and Tamil record recording a gift by Bhujabala Vira-Narayana Ahavamalladeva Maharaja and mentions Bhaskarabhattopadhyaya. The king mentioned is undoubtedly the Kalachurya king Ahavamalla, who possessed the title of Vira Narayana or Raya Narayana, as a record in the Shimoga district mentions it (Epigraphia Carnatika VII, Shikarpur 245), and was also known as Kalachurya Bhujabala Chakravarti, etc. (see Mysore Gazetteer, Ed. 1930, II, ii, 896-97). We know he succeeded his brother Sankama in or about 1181 A.D. and reigned up to 1183 A.D. Though this inscription is undated, it has to be referred to one of the four years ranging from 1181-1183 A.D. Accordingly, the Bhaskarabhattopadhyaya referred to in it would have to be set down to about the same period. The name as given in the inscription. may be interpreted as "the teacher Bhaskarabhatta,' which in later times came to be "Bhatta Bhaskara", evidently to distinguish him from many other persons of the name of "Bhaskara". If Bhatta Bhaskara is the person referred to in this record, as it seems probable, then he should be taken to have lived at about 1183 A.D. and was the recipient of a gift at the hands of the Kalachurya king Ahavamalla. This king is referred to in another record found at Chintalapatturu, in the Cuddapah taluk, in which he is termed a Mahamandalesvara (Madras Epigraphy Report 320 of 1905). This record may have to be referred to 1179 A.D. or even before that year, when he was associated with his brother Sankama, a division of the kingdom having been effected about that year (Mysore Gazetteer, Ed. 1930, II, ii, 896). " This Bhaskarabhattopadhyaya should not be confused with the Bhaskarabhatta, who was the author of a work called the Vaikhanasasutra Vyakhyanam, otherwise known as Bhaskara Bhattiyam. In the colophons to his work, this writer styles himself Bhaskaracharya or Bhaskarasurin and describes himself as the son of Nrisimhacharya of Gautamagotra (Madras T.C. of Sanskrit MSS., IV, i, B.

No. 3463 (6) at pp. 5173-74). The scribe who copied this MS. calls its author Bhaskara Bhattacharya. Tenali Gopanarya in his Vaikhanasa Sutranukramanika refers to this work and states that this was written by Bhaskarabhatta (Madras T.C. of Sanskrit MSS., IV, i, B. No. 3473 (a), pp. 5185-86). There is hardly any doubt that he is not the Bhaskarabhattopadhyaya referred to in the Nandalur epigraph and that the latter has to be identified with the famous Bhatta Bhaskara, the commentator on the Taittiriya Aranyaka. Ahavamalla as also the rest of his dynasty were, it is true, Jains, but there is nothing to show that they were not generally tolerant towards Saivism, which, in fact, was revived under the influence of the great Basava and his followers in the Kalachurya period (Mysore Gazetter, Ed. 1930, II. ii, 898-99). The gift in favour of Bhatta Bhaskara, the eminent teacher of the Upanishads, by Ahavamalla may be taken to be an act of recognition on his part of Bhatta Bhaskara's known popularity, piety and talents as a scholar. Bhatta Bhaskara may be taken to be the first philosophical fruit of the Saiva cult of the 12 th century in which Siva is described as the transcendental Brahman. If this be so, then Bhatta Bhaskara should be assigned to about 1183 A.D., or the last quarter of the 12 th century A.D. Accordingly Burnell's suggestion, based on tradition, that he belonged to the latter half of the 12 th century has to be given up. He may have been an Andhra in the sense that he lived in or about the modern Cuddapah district, where the grant in his favour has been found. As enough time will have to be allowed for him to become a well-known authority, at least to be adopted be adopted without citation as a leading authority on the Upanishads by Srikantha, we will have a period of about a century between the two, if we take the Srikantha of the Tripurantakam and Tirupattur records as Srikantha, the author of Brahma Mimamsa, and the Bhaskarabhattopadhyaya of the Nandalur epigraph as Bhatta Bhaskara, the author of the commentary on Taittiriya Aranyaka. This identification will also possess

the merit of allowing sufficient time for Sripati in his turn quoting Srikantha as an eminent authority on the Brahma Sutras. Srikantha and Meykandar. While Srikantha has been identified by some with Meykandar (Meykandadevar), the author of the Tamil translation of the famous Sanskrit work, the Sivagnanabodham, his guru has been identified by others with Mrigendra, the author quoted by Madhava in his Sarvadarsana Sangraha. (See Cowell and Gough, translation of Sarvadarsana Sangraha 116, f.n. 3.) Both these identifications seem unsatisfactory. It may be pointed out that while Meykanda belonged to Tiruvennanallur, on the south bank of the Malattar, about 14 miles south-east of Tirukkoyilur, in the South Arcot district, Srikantha, according to inscriptions, was connected with Madhurantakam in the Chingleput district. There is at Tiruvennanallur a shrine in honour of Meykanda, not far away from the new Chuttram in existence there, while there is a temple in honour of Srikantha at Vada-Tirumullaivayil in the Chingleput district. On the north wall of the Arunachalesvara temple at Tiruvennanallur, there is an inscription dated in the 16 th year of the Chola King Rajaraja III (1216-48 A.D.) corresponding to Saturday, 22 nd May 1232 A.D., which records a gift of land to an image set up by Meykandadevar of Tiruvennanallur (Madras Epigraphy Report , No. 485 of 1902; see Epigraphia Indica , VIII, 268). This record fixes definitely the date of Meykandadevar, who declares himself the disciple of Paranjoti Muni, to about the middle of the 13 th century. How long before 1232 A.D. did Meykandar set up the image for which the grant of land was made in that year? This may be fixed up with the aid of a lithic record which comes from Chidambaram. Meykandar, it is said, was the son of one Achyuta Kalappalan of Pennagadam, who, it has been suggested, may be the Achyuta Kalappalan of Chidambaram, mentioned in a work called the Tamil Navalar Saridai as the person

who had taken captive the kings of Chera, Chola and Pandya countries. Whether this is so or not, there seems to be some ground for identifying this Kalappalan with the Kalappalarayar who, in the eighth year of the reign of the Pandya King Jatavarman alias Tribhuvana Chakravartin Sundara-Pandyadeva-probably Jatavarman SundaraPandya I, 1251-1264 A.D.-made a grant of land for conducting festivals and providing offerings in the temple of Makali (at Chidambaram) which, the record states, was founded on the south side of the road by which the god was taken in procession for the sea-bath (Madras Epigraphy Report , 297 of 1913). The eighth year of Jatavarman SundaraPandya I would be 1259 A.D. If the grant of Kalappalarayar was accordingly made in that year, Achyuta Kalappalan, the father of Meykanda, should be assigned to about the middle of the 13 th century A.D. He was evidently already an important person at the time-he is styled Rayar-and may have been old enough to have had a fairly aged son. The difference in time between 1259 A.D., the date of the Chidambaram record of Kallappalarayar, and 1232 A.D., the date of the Tiruvennanallur record registering a grant to the image set up by Meykanda, is about 27 years. The Tiruvennanallur record is thus 27 years earlier in date than the Chidambaram one, which would confirm the suggestion that at the time of the latter record Meykandar was already a well-known personage. Evidently Meykandar had, in the lifetime of his father, already become famous by his philosophical studies and religious zeal, as we see a grant being made for an image set up by him. any case, there can be hardly any question, with these two epigraphic records before us, to doubt any longer that Meykandar actually lived about 1235 A.D., if not indeed a little earlier than that date. As we have seen above, we have independent inscriptional records which agree in fixing Srikantha, the commentator, to about 1270-71 A.D. It is possible that Meykanda and Srikantha were contemporaries, and this contemporaneity In

ought to suffice to clear up the confusion as to the identity of Srikantha's guru with Meykanda. Men of nearly the same age and celebrity, referred to in contemporaneous inscriptional records, in which they are spoken of as religious preceptors, cannot have been guru and sishya. There are, besides, as pointed by Mr. Suryanarayana Sastri, doctrinal differences between these two religious teachers which appear too fundamental to enable us to identify them. Srikantha's system, as he points out, considers the world as due to the transformation of the Lord through His Chitsakti; it makes no independent provision for the creation of the material world; it does not specifically recognize anava mala; it is extremely doubtful if it recognizes jivanmukti; and while Meykandar seeks to establish his system on reasoning, Srikantha appears to fight shy of it and so takes refuge in Sruti. It is hardly likely that a system with so many variations from the Saiva Siddhanta, could have owed much to the protagonist of the Siddhanta (Sivadvaita of Srikantha, 22). As a matter of fact, Srikantha's guru was one Svetacharya, a name which prima facie has no relationship with that of Meykanda-Deva. (See Srikantha's Brahmamimamsa Bhashya, stanza following the colophon.) The identification suggested by the writer in the Journal of Oriental Research has been answered at length by a contributor in the Jijnasa, I. ii, to which further reference may be made by the interested reader. Sripati anterior to Sivalinga-Bhupati. Among the writers quoted by Sripati is Haradattacharya, a famous Saiva sage. His date can be fixed with some degree of certainty. As Sripati quotes him and speaks of him with reverential awe, it might be presumed that he had, by Sripati's time, receded into the dim past. How far he was actually removed from Haradatta may be ascertained both from the story of his life as given in the Bhavishyottara Purana and from the writings of his commentator Sivalinga-bhupati. From the Bhavishyottara 4 F

50 50 INTRODUCTION Purana, which gives the story of Haradatta who is considered an incarnation of God Siva, we learn that he ascended to Heaven in a vimana when the Kaliyuga was past 4000 years minus 21, i.e., 3979 years, which corresponds to 879 A.D.-in the year Vilambi, Pushya month, Panchami, first half of the lunar month, Thursday, on the banks of the Cauvery at Kamsagrama. Though in the Sivarahasya, Kaliyuga 3000 is given as a rough approximation as the date of Haradatta, the former has been accepted by Professor M. Seshagiri Sastri as the more correct one." He also identifies this Haradatta as the 8 It has been suggested by Mr. Suryanarayana Sastri that as the date given in the Bhavishyottara Purana is not exactly correct in as much as, if the details given are reliable, the day should fall in the dark half of the month and not the bright half of the month mentioned in it, we would have to take the cyclic year alone into consideration and identify it with 1119 A.D. in which year there was a Friday which was the fifth day of the bright half of the month of Pushya. Though it is usual to stress the cyclic year in cases of this nature, still the date given in Bhavishyottara Purana correctly works out to Friday, 16 th January 879, though the Friday falls in the dark half of the month of Pushya. This is a detail in which a mistake might have been made. As regards the story of the ordeal that Haradatta had to undergo to prove the superiority of Siva, it is a familiar embellishment intended to glorify his greatness and no more. Moreover, we are still to know the exact conditions prevailing in South India at the close of the 9 th century A.D., when the Imperial Cholas under Vijayalaya and Aditya I began their sway over Southern India. Finally, there is no reliable evidence tending to confirm that there was religious intolerance in or about the reigns of Vikrama-Chola and KulottungaChola II, in whose reign Ramanuja appears to have lived. (See M, sore Gazetteer, 1930 Edn., II, ii, 1141-1143.) In these circumstances the shifting of the date of death of Haradatta from 879 A.D. to 1119 A.D., on the grounds mentioned by Mr. Suryanarayana Sastri, cannot prove acceptable. The doctrinal similarities he points to as existing between Haradatta and Srikantha, from which he draws the inference that either Haradatta came after Srikantha or at least was an younger contemporary of his, are capable of being as satisfactorily explained by supposing that Srikantha as often. elaborated the arguments of Haradatta as he barely adopted them on other occasions or simply set down the points raised by his

author of the Harihara-taratamya, and the Chaturvedatat parya-sangraha and with the Haradattacharya who is quoted in Madhava's Sarvadarsana-sangraha in the chapter dealing with the Nakulisa-Pasupata system (see Report on Sanskrit and Tamil MSS., No. 2, 13-17). He also sets out the story of the birth of one Sudarsana, son of Vasudeva, a devout Vaishnava at Kamsapura (now Kanjanur) in the Tanjore district and how he became a Saiva through the will of Siva and assumed the name of Haradatta and how he converted his parents, the king and the people of his native town (Ibid., 14-15). This Haradatta has been distinguished from two other Haradattas, also eminent authors: (1) Haradatta, the commentator on the Apastamba Sutra, whom Buhler has assigned to some time between 1300 and 1450 A.D.; and (2) Haradatta, the author of the Padamanjari, a commentary on the Kasikavritti of Jayaditya Vamana, who wrote the vritti on the Sutras of Panini. The second of these was the son of Rudrakumara and younger brother of Agnikumara and was evidently a resident of the Telugu country (Ibid., 13, 16 and 17). Haradatta, the Saiva teacher, who wrote the Harihara-taratamya and the Chaturveda-tat parya-sangraha, and who is quoted in the Sarvadarsana-sangraha (see Cowell and Gough, Sarvadarsanasangraha, 104) is undoubtedly the Haradattacharya referred to by Sripati. Though he is referred to by Sripati, there is no mention made by him of Sivalinga-bhupati, the commentator of Chaturveda-tat parya-sangraha. This would seem to show that Sivalinga-bhupati wrote his commentary on Haradatta's work after Sripati's time. In the colophon to his commentary, Sivalinga-bhupati describes Haradattacharya as Sarvajna Siromani predecessor. It is, however, hardly necessary to elaborate on the danger of arguing on the basis of doctrinal similarities, for its inherent weakness is frankly admitted by Mr. Suryanarayana Sastri when he concedes that "it goes, however, without saying, that it is extremely unsafe to rely on a conjecture based on information, which is itself at least partially incorrect" (Sivadvaita of Srikantha, Chap. I. 40-44 and Appendix II).

Paramasiva Yogi (see Madras D.C. of Sanskrit MSS., X, p. 3854, No. 5077). The commentary is called in one colophon as Sruti-sukti-vilasa (ibid.) and in another as Girisa Sruti-sukti-mala (ibid., p. 3855, where the blank space left should be filled in, with the aid of Hultzsch's Reports on Sanskrit MSS. in Southern India, II, MS. No. 28, page 94, by the words fhda za yai). This commentary (Girisa Sruti-sukti-mala) was composed by the Reddi prince Sivalinga-bhupati. From the details given of his parentage, there can be little doubt that he belonged to a collateral branch of the Reddi dynasty, of which Komati-Prola or Pola, son of Vemaya, was the founder. Sivalinga-bhupati traces his descent from Komati; his fifth son Malla; latter's only son Pina-Komati; latter's third son Macha; latter's first son Komati; his second son, himself (Sivalinga). (See Hultzsch's Report on Sanskrit MSS. in Southern India, I, page xii and 91-95.) This genealogy agrees with that which has been reconstructed with the aid of copper-plate and other records, except that in the latter, the collateral branch to which Sivalinga-bhupati belonged is not set out (see Nellore Inscriptions, III, 1462; Madras Epigraphy Report 1899-1900). This lacuna is filled in by the commentary above named. Sivalingabhupati states that he ruled our Skandapuri, a town to the south-east of Sri-saila. (This town is now represented by the village of the same name at the foot of Sri-saila, where pilgrims halt for the night during the Kartika jatra time and proceed to mount up the Hill at dawn. The place is notoriously deficient in water.) He was a devotee of Somesvara, the presiding god of Skandapuri. He was a peral donor of gifts, having exhausted the gifts mentioned. in Hemadri's Danakhanda. He was a great supporter of Bharata-mata, i.e., the arts of dancing and music. His guru Kondayogi belonged to the Gangadhara vamsa, noted for its learning. Kondayogi was the grandson of Tripurantaka and son of guru Srigiri, brother of Bhimesasvami and Tripurantaka Desikamuni. Kondaya was the guru of the country around Sri-saila. Through this guru's grace,

Sivalingabhupa says, he wrote his fine commentary called Girisa-sruti-sukti-mala on the "great work" of Haradattasuri (i.e., Haradattacharya). From these details given us by Sivalinga himself, we can fix his date. His father Macha was a brother of Srisa Srigiri, for whom we have the dates 1397-98 and 1400-1. Another brother of his was Racha-Vema, for whom we have the date 1397-98 (or 1398-99). For Srisa Sivagiri's first son, Komati, we have the dates 1409, 1415 and 1430-31, while for his second son Mallaya or Srigiri Malla, we have 1406-1407 and 1408-1409. Macha's son Sivalinga, a cousin of Komati and Srigiri Malla, cannot have been far removed from them in date. We may, therefore, set him down from about 1408-09 A.D. to 1430-31, or about the first quarter of the 15 th century. (See Nellore Ins., III, App. I, Reddi Dynasty, 1462-64; Madras Epigraphy Report 162 of 1899 and 543 of 1909; see also V. Venkayya, History of Nellore, 24.) From this it would seem to follow that he lived and wrote about 1430 A.D., from about a quarter to half a century later than Sripati. That is, perhaps, the reason why we do not find mention of Sivalinga but only of Haradattacharya in Sripati's Bhashya. Sivalinga quotes-without acknowledgment-from Srikantha's Bhashya, which accordingly should be presumed to have been known to him. Since Sivalinga came after Sripati, Sripati is the earliest author now known who quotes Srikantha by name-barring, of course, the specific reference to Srikantha in the Pauskara Bhashya attributed to Umapati Sivacharya, the author of Samkalpa Nirakaranam. It is, however, more than doubtful if this Umapati was really the author of the Pauskara Bhashya. (See Suryanarayana Sastri, Sivadvaita of Srikantha, 24, f.n. 31; 32-33; and Note A to Chapter I.) Sripati posterior to Revanarya, Author of 'Siddhanta Sikhamani'. Another authority quoted by Sripati is Revanarya's Siddhanta Sikhamani, a work held in the highest esteem. by Virasaiva teachers, ancient and modern. This is a

Sanskrit work available in print. Its popularity is betokened by its translation in the 17 th century into Tamil by Turaimangalam Sivaprakasaswami, of the Bommaiyapalaiyam Periya-matham, near Pondicherry. (Ed. S. C. Nagichetti and published by Messrs. Gooroo Basava & Co., at the Kalaratnakaram Press, Madras.) Revanarya in his work says that the doctrines enunciated by him were first learnt from Rishi Agastya by Renuka, who made known to the world the Virasaiva-Samaya (i.e., Siddhanta). According to him Sivadvaita-Siddhanta-evidently that is his philosophical standpoint-sets down the akara of Siva and bestows the ananda of Shatsthala. In the introductory verses he states he bows down to Santa Mallesvara, who is the Lord Siva at Sri-saila, whom he describes as VedagamaShatsthalarupam. As regards himself, he gives his name as Revanarya, son of Revanasiddha and grandson of Viranaradhya. He claims to have been descended from the kula of Renuka himself. He thus sets down his descent Visvanatha, then Sarvesa Desika, then Viranaradhya, then Revanasiddha, and finally Revanarya, the author of Siddhanta Sikhamani. Probable Date of Revanarya. One Bhoga Mallesa wrote a commentary on the Siddhanta Sikhamani, of which a copy is available in the Madras Oriental MSS. Library (see Madras D.C. of Sanskrit MSS., X, No. 5119). He praises the Siddhanta Sikhamani thus:-"It is pre-eminently the best among Saiva Sastras and revels in the name of Siddhanta Sikhamani in this world; it incorporates the gist of all the (Saiva) Sastras; it is the essence of all Saiva tantras; it brings to light Sivabodha and gives a man a firm knowledge in Saiva Sastra." As to the date of this work, there is no clue available in it. But as he says he belonged to the family of Renukacharya, the great Virasaiva teacher, and was about five generations removed from him, the period of time that should have elapsed between him and the great teacher, may be set down as approximating about 100 years. Since

the original Renukacharya (also called Revanasiddha) is said to have been a contemporary of Rajendra-Chola I, the great Chola king (1013-1045 A.D.), whose daughter he is said to have married, he would have to be set down to circa 1000 A.D. Whether he married that great king's daughter or not, it might be allowed that tradition assigns Renuka to Rajendra-Chola's period of rule. If so, Revanarya, his descendant and author of Siddhanta Sikhamani, should have lived about circa 1200 A.D. But Revanarya, the author, is not exactly correct when he suggests that he was only five generations removed from Renuka, his ancestor, as we have independent evidence that he has omitted some steps in his account. As a matter of fact, we know from other sources, that Renuka had a son named Rudramuni, whose name is not mentioned by Revanarya. Making allowance for such omissions, we may take that Revanarya, the author, flourished approximately about 1250 A.D. This would allow him about 100 to 150 years to become a renowned authority to be quoted from by Sripati with respect in his Bhashya. (As to Renukacharya, see Narasimhachar's Karnataka-Kavi-charite, I. 162; also Revanasiddhesvra Purana, ibid., II. 139.) Revanarya (or Revanaradhya), the author of SiddhantaSikhamani, wrote four other works, each of which is a commentary on the work of his grandfather Sosali-Viranaradhya. These are:-(1) Pancharatnavyakhya (or Tantrasaraprakasika), which is a commentary on the Tantrasarapancharatna of Sosali-Viranaradhya; (2) Tarakapancharatnavyakhya (or Tarakapradipika), which is a commentary on the Tarakapancharatna by the same author; (3) Pancharatna-vyakhya (or Sivatattvaprakasika), which is a commentary on the Sivaratnapancharatna by the same author; (4) Pancharatnavyakhya (Srutyarthapradipika), which is a commentary on the Srutipancharatna by the same author. This work is also called Srutyarthaprakasika. In it, Revanaradhya mentions both his father's and grandfather's names, Revanasiddhesvara and Sosali-Viranaradhya, which appear in the Siddhanta Sikhamani as

Revanasiddha and Viranaradhya, and his own name as Revanarya. This establishes the identity of the author of the above works with the author of Siddhanta Sikhamani beyond all doubt. (MSS. of these works are in the Madras Government Oriental MSS. Library. See Madras D.C. X, Nos. 5087-5090.) Sivaprakasaswamigal of Turaimangalam, the Tamil translator of this work, is also the author of a Tamil rendering of the Vedanta parichcheda, which forms part of the Vivekachintamani, a work in Kannada by Nijagunasivayogi. It explains the differentiations between the perceiver and the thing perceived, the nature of bliss arising from understanding the Mahavakyas and the nature of the identity of the individual soul with Paramatman as stated in the Uttaramimamsa. Sivaprakasaswami's work is known as Vedantachintamani (see Madras D.C. Tamil, III, No. 1604). Sivaprakasaswami is held in the highest respect as a Saiva Siddhanta writer. His writings are not only inspiring to a degree, but also full of refined feeling. In the Abidekamalai, a Virasaiva poem, we have his praise sung for us in a manner which shows the great hold he has on the Virasaivas of Southern India (see Madras D.C. Tamil, I, No. 333).