24. Date of Vasudeva’s Commentary on the Vasavadatta

24. Date of Vasudeva’s Commentary on the Vasavadatta of Subandhu - Between A. D. 1500 and 1700* commenIn 1940 I published a paper' on the Dates of Narayana Diksita and Other Commentators of the Vasavadatta of Subandhu. In this paper I have montioned about 20 commentaries on the Vasavadatta and tried to fix their probable chronology on the strength of data then available to me. In 1948 my friend Rao Saheb G. V. Panse, B. E. of Poona showed to me an incomplete MS² of a tary on the Vasavadatta containing about 270 folios (11.7 by 4. 4 inches in size). This MS excited my curiosity as I had not examined this commentary in my previous paper referred to above. I, therefore, asked Rao Saheb Panse to prepare a critical analysis of this MS and submit it to the session of the All-India Oriental Conference. Rao Saheb Panse accordingly prepared such an analysis for the Darbhanga Session held in October 1948 and gave me a copy of it with a request that I should try to fix up the chronology of this commentary by Vasudeva represented by the Baroda MS. At the time when Rao Saheb Panse requested me to fix up the chronology of Vasudeva's commentary under reference I was engaged in writing a paper on the date of Rasakamadhenu by Cudamani Misra. This work on alchemy appears to have been composed later than A. D. 1500 according to the evidence recorded by me in my paper. A comparative study of the historical and biographical data available in the Rasakamadhenu and Vasudeva's commentary on the Vasavadatta called Bhuvana-Candrika or Bhuvanartha Candrika disclosed quite accidentally that Devanatha, the father of Vasudeva was possibly identical with Devanatha-Misra, the guru of Cudamani Misra. If this identity could be proved we can definitely say that Vasudeva and Cudamani Misra were contem- * Journal of Oriental Studies (1950), Vol. II, No. 2, p. 1-7. 1. Vide Annals (B. O. R. Institute) Vol. XXI, pp. 128-144. 2. This MS belongs to the Manuscripts Library of the Central Institute, Baroda, as I am informed by Rao Saheb Panse. (182)

poraries. But before I proceed to prove this identity it is necessary to record the extracts from Vasudeva's commentary on the strength of which we are in a position to fix up the suggested identity. The MS begins as follows:- 66 Folio 1 - " sriganesaya namah | srivasudevaya namah || - galagaralamilitabhabhirjayati harah krsnamanukurvan | phanipumgava phutakrta bhrtasukhira kapalalivenuravah || 1 || sakadvipidvijakulakamalavana vikasanaika dinanathah | avanagunaratnapatho natho'bhutmadhavo vibudhah || 2 || tasmatsamastapanditamastakamaniratmajo jatah jitabhanuratuladhamna srinarayano dhiman || 3 || parapaksagirividaranakulisacam sarvasastrajnah | ajani janardananama srimannarayanena sutah || 4 || caturavikasastisammitakala | kalapasya vasagrham | matyativratatinam dhareva sita kutharasya || 5 || dhiranmahodadheriva sitadyutirapara iva tanayah | tasmajjato devaprakhyah sridevanathakhyah || 6 || niravadyagadyapadyavaliracanacatura maulimanih | smrtitatvadattadrstirnikhilopanisannisannamanah || 7 || laksanavisaye daksinabhavah sastre parisramah srutya | sahitya samhatamatasta karkasyamapi yasya || 8 || ayurvedavibodhavisuddhadhirbhirnirupita itiha | dhanvamtarirayamaparo na paro yasmadbhisakkopi || 9 || tasmatsambhavo bhuvikhyato vasudevakhyah | durgatanayastanute vyakhya makhyayikayastu || 10 || samtah samti mahatyo vasyobahvarthasarthakah tikah | kim tu madiya tika pativa jadyam patiyasi hamtum || 11 || arthavartetyarthabhramti bhramato'va dharaniya me | gudhasayamudhamateh pare kavyarnavam yatuh || 12 || vikhyatakhyayikavyakhyamakhyaturmama ko gunah | nadhikarthapravesasvennasadarthasya ca ksayah || 13 || "

Further portion is not legible in the manuscript due to the folio being damaged by rain, etc. The colophon of Ucchavasa I reads:- 66 sakadvipikulapradipadharani girvanavargagrani- | nanapamditamaulimamdanamanih sridevanathah krti || yam durga ca sati sutam prasupuve srivasudevahvayam | tadvayakhyamrtasiktaadima ihochvasogatah purnatam || 1 || iti sridevanathatmajasrivasudevaviracitayam bhuvanacamdrikayam prathamochvasah | " The colophon of Ucchvasa II on folio 110 reads :- " sakadvipikulapradipadharani girvanavargagrani - | rnanapamdita maulimamdanamanih sridevanathah krti || yam durga ca sati sutam prasusuve srivasudevahvayam | tadvyakhyavisayikrtontamadhunochvaso dvitiyo gatah " The genealogy of Vassudeva as given in the foregoing extracts is as follows :- madhava (of a sakadvipi dvija family ) Son narayana I Son janardana 1 Son devanatha (an eminent physician ) ( married durga ) Son vasudeva (author of bhuvanacamdrika commentary on the vasavadatta ) The commentary of Vasudeva is very rich in citations from previous works and authors. Rao Saheb Panse has noted some of them as follows :- agnipurana, abhidhanacintamani, uttaratamtra, katyayana, kukkokah, chandomanjari, tarapala, damodara, dhatuparayana, namanidhana, pimgala, bhujabalabhimanibamdha, magha, yajnavalkya, ramtideva, ravanastava, vacaspatih, visnunamastava, vrksayurveda, vyadih, sesakhyamala, sarasvatistava, smrti, hemamala, amgaraja, amarakosa, utpalini, kavya-

prakasa, gadasimha, jayadeva, trikamdasesa, desikosa, dhanika, nighamtu, ( dhanvamtariya ), bhagavadgita, malanaga, malatimadhava, raghuvamsa, rabhasah, rucaka, vamana, visnupurana, vrtta- ratnakara, sabdarnava, srmgaratilaka, sahityadarpana, hariharastotra, ajaya, amaramala, kavikalpalata, kavyalamkara, gamdhasastra, jayamta, dasarupaka, dvirupakosa, nalacampu, naisadha, bharata, mahanighamtu, mudraraksasa, ratnakosa, ramayana, rudra, vayupurana, visvaprakasa, vopalita, sabdabheda, samsaravarta, susruta, halayudha, anekartha, amarasimha, kamamdakiya, kasikhanda, govardhana, jyotihsastra, damdi, dharanih, nalopakhyana, nyayavartika, bhagurih, mahabharata medini, ratnavali, rayamukutavyakhyana, lohasastra, vimdhyavasini, viracarita, vyaktiviveka, sasvata, sarasvatikamthabharana, suvarnaloka, haravali . From the above list the reference to rayamukutavyakhyana, evidently on the Amarakosa, gives us one terminus to the date of Vasudeva. Rayamukuta composed this commentary in A. D. 1431. We can, therefore, safely conclude that Vasudeva, the author of the Bhuvana-Candrika commentary on the Vasavadatta is later than A. D. 1450. Other datable references in the above list, are medini ( c. A. D. 1200-1275) and sahityadarpana of Visvanatha) composed between A. D. 1300 and 1350.' These dates are in harmony with the date of Rayamukuta's commentary viz. A. D. 1431. On folio 211 of the Baroda MS of Vasudeva's commentary on the Vasavadatta of Subandhu Vasudeva comments on the following line in the Vasavadatta :- " kamburiva gagana maharnavasya, paradapinda iva kaladhatuvadinah Vasudeva comments :- " " kambuh samkhah ... muktim datva param samsaram dadatiti paradah harajo raso mukumdah paradasutau rasemdranamanityasmatpitrcaranaviracitarasamuktavalyam ' " It is clear from this reference that Devanatha, the father of Vasudeva, composed a work called the Rasamuktavali² on alchemy. 1. Vide p. 236 of Sanskrit Poetics by S. K. De, Vol. I. 2. The only Mss of Rasamuktavali recorded by Aufrecht In his Cata. Catalogorum are as follows :C C I, 495 - "rasamuktavali med. B. 4. 236 " ( Dated Samvat 1728 = A. D. 1672. ) C C II, 116 - "rasamuktavali med. I O 1875 (dated Saka 1731 = A. D. 1809 ). 14" C C III, 106 - " rasamuktavali med. Ashburn 14 " ( Continued on the next page )

This statement is in harmony with Vasudeva's description of his father's proficiency in Ayurveda as recorded in the following verse 9 at the beginning of the commentary :- " ayurvedavibodhavisuddhadhibhirnirupita itiha dhanvantarirayamaparo na paro yasma- dbhisak ko'pi || 9 || " Verily Devanatha was as it were Dhanvantari, the physician of the gods. There was no other physician superior to him. We have now to identify the following line in Devanatha's Rasamuktavali quoted by Vasudeva :- " harajo raso mukumdah paradasutau rasendranamani " This line is not found in the Anandasrama MS of the Rasamuktavali, which is anonymous. The three MSS of the Rasamuktavali mentioned by Aufrecht are not accessible to me and consequently I cannot say if the above line can be traced in any of these three MSS. In this connection I have to point out that Cudamani Misra in his work on alchemy called the Rasakamadhenu (ed. by Jadavaji Trikamji Acharya, Bombay, 1925) quotes from a work on alchemy by his guru Devanatha Misra some verses as follows:Page 379 - " - " tatha ca madgurusridevanathamisra - nutana ghatatkapalam dugdhayuktakam vibhavya vijnani | vadyo mukhe'sya vastram suddham badhva bhrsam rajjva || 31 || " ( verses 32, 33 and 34 which follow as part of the extract are in the same metre-arya Page 327 - 88 prahurmadgurusridevanathamisrah - sutam palasatamathava tadardhamathava tadardhamatha tulyam | athava dasapalamathava tadardhamathavaikamadaya || 38 || " (Continued from the previous page) Rao Saheb Panse showed me a copy of MS No. 2540 in the anandasrma, Poona. This is a MS of rasamuktavali . It begins: - " sriganesayanamah | girijatanujam pranamya purvam girijesam kila vedhasam ca bhaktya | kama ...samaha karomi ramyam rasasuktavalikam paropakrtyai || 1|| " The MS ends - " iti rasamuktavali samaptah "

The line from Dovananatha's Rasamuktavali quoted by Vasudeva very probably belongs to the treatise on rasavidya composed by Devanathamisra, the guru of Cudamani Misra. If this surmise is correct we can easily deduce the following conclusions:-- (1) Devanatha, the father of Vasudeva is identical with Devanathamisra, the guru of Cudamanimisra. (2) Devanatha, Vasudeva and Cudamanimisra were all contemporaries and consequently the relative chronology of their works would be as follows:- (i) rasamuktavali is earlier than the bhuvanadrika of vasudeva . (ii) rasamuktavali is also earlier than the rasakamadhenu of cudamanimisra . (iii) As the rasakamadhenu of cudamanimisra is later than A. D. 1500 the dates of the rasamuktavali and the bhuvanacandrika also get shifted to a period, which is later than A. D. 1500. The MS of Rasamuktavali mentioned by Aufrecht as "B. 4. 236" is dated Samvat 1728 = A. D. 1672. If this Rasamuktavali is identical with the Rasamuktavali of Devanatha we can infer that these three authors viz (1) Devanatha, (2) his pupil Cudamanimisra and (3) Vasudeva (Devanatha's son) flourished between A. D. 1500 and 1672. We have seen above that Vasudeva belonged to a Sakadvipi Brahmin family. His father's pupil Cudamani Misra also belonged to a Sakadvipi Brahmin family as stated by him in the following verses found in the Rasakamadhenu :Page 128 (at the end of Pada I)- 66 sakadvipajavipramukhyasubhisak samkhyavadakhyati manmisra sribalabhadrasunuharirama- syatmasambhutina | sricudamanina krte sukrtina sutopacaryakhyako granthe'smin rasakamadhenukathite pado'yamadyo matah || 329 || " Page 548 (at the end of Pada III ) - " sakadvipajavipramukhyasubhisak samkhyavadakhyatimanmisra sribalabhadrasunuharirama- syatmasambhutina | sri cudamanina krte sukrtina sutakriyasamjnito granthe'smin rasakamadhenukathite padastrtiyo maya || 329 || "

In my paper on the Rasakamadhenu I have pointed out some Mantras in Hindi quoted by its author on pp. 48, 409 etc. This fact would warrant an inference that Cudamani Misra and his Sakadvipi Brahmin family belonged to Northern India. The commentator Vasudeva and his Sakadvipi Brahmin family may also be taken to be a North Indian family, very probably belonging to the United Provinces. A work called the Rasaratnapradipa is mentioned in the Rasakamadhenu (pp. 177, 370 etc.) If this Rasaratnapradipa (on alchemy) is identical with the Rasaratnapradipa' of Ramaraja (c. A. D. 1475) we get additional corroboration for our earlier limit for the date of the Rasakamadhenu² viz. A. D. 1500. 1. Vide New Iudian Antiquary Vol. VII, pp. 176-180- My paper on "Some new Evidence from Rasaratnapradipa of Ramaraja on the Genealogy of the Taka Kings of Kastha." 2. Vide Annals (B. O. R. Institute) Vol. XXXII, pp. 61-68.