chap23
chapter22.html
chapter23.html
chapter24.html
Art and Culture of Tamilnadu
R. Nagaswamy
23. THE DATE OF DVYASURICHARITAM
A HISTORICAL WORK ON VAIṢṆAVA SAINTS
Śaṅkara and Rāmanuja are the two great revolutionaries of south India; by revolution we mean not necessarily violent, overthrow of the existing systems, but imperceptibly and suitably ushering in new thoughts in social and religious concepts which, judging from the results, have influenced the life of the people for well over thousand years. While Śaṅkara symbolises intellectual supremacy, Rāmanuja stands out as the embodiment of love and compassion. A discerning researcher of Rāmanuja movement would be struck by the catholicity of outlook and the genuine love of the followers towards the religious uplift of all sections of the society, particularly the down trodden. It mattered little whether one was a born Vaiṣṇava or a follower of other religion, but conscious efforts were made to bring people of all castes into the fold of this religion of abundant love and devotion. It is a surprise to historians that such a great movement got split up on petty matters, lost track of its main path and drifted into a narrow sectarian path isolating themselves from the rest of the people and often exhibiting animosities among themselves. How a true follower of Rāmanuja can entertain hatred in his mind is beyond comprehension. If any proof is required to know the history of the great movement initiated by Rāmanjua, the Vaiṣṇavites have themselves left abundant histrorical in material their literature.
They have carefully preserved both in writing and tradition the historic personages and the events through the centuries, that contributed to the prevelant state of Vaiṣṇavism. The Divyasuricharita and Guruparampara prabhava, exemplify their anxiety to leave as far as possible an authentic history of their religious movement. In fact the historical material left by the Vaiṣṇvavites are unparallelled and there is an urgent need to evaluate these works in the light of recent advancements in epigraphical and archaeological studies. There are many minor persons about whom we know nothing, except from Guruparampara. They are found mentioned in epigraphical records of the temple and I am convinced that there is much more history in these writings than we have hitherto understood.
But at the sametime it must be understood that certain amount of myths and legends are interwoven in these works, either to infuse sanctity or owing to the beliefs in miracles which the historian will be within his bounds to reject as unhistoric. For example a story is told about how Rāmanuja took over the administration of Śrīrangam temple, which is patently repugnant to modern taste and one cannot believe that the great saint who had nothing but love to give could act as told in the story. Similarly a story is told of a Cöḻa contemporary of Rāmanuja and his persecution. It has been shown that Śrīrangam received the maximum royal patronage under this Cöḻa ruler.
The earliest historical work of some authority, seems to be the Divyasuricharita by one Garuḍavāhana Paṇḍita. From the colophon of the Divyasuricharita it is learnt, that he belonged to Kaśyapagotra and was the chief of Śrīranga āroghyaśāla at Śrīrangam. He was also called a Kavi and Vaidya Purandara. His teacher was one Varada of Vātulagotra. His father is mentioned as Kṣemeśa Lakṣmi Sakha and mother Lokeśa.
The ārogyaśāla mentioned was a hospital curing the illness of the devotees following the traditional Dhanvantri medical texts. Such hospitals existed in all the major temples which is befitting their philosophy of love. But in modern times, while there are persons to spend several lakhs to erect useless new structures, none considers its terms of establishing an up-to-date hospital as an adjunct to the temple.
A slab set up in the temple of Dhanvantri shrine in the fourth prākāra is a record of the Hoysala ruler Vīra Rāmanātha in the year A.D. 1257. Singanna Daṇḍanāyaka, a commander of Vīra Rāmanātha, constructed an ārogyaśāla on the west side of the gopura, enshrined the image of Dhanvantri, called Eṭuttakai Aḻakiya Nāyanār and endowed lands for its upkeep. The Śālai was entrusted to the care of one Garuḍavāhana Paṇḍita who was a rakṣaka of the donor. Obviously the Garuḍavāhana Paṇḍita, should have cured the commander of some illness. So it is evident that the temple of Dhanyantri and the Śāla came into existence for the first time in A.D. 1257.
About 250 years later in 1493, the ārogyaśāla was destroyed in fire. A certain Śrīnivasa also known as Śrīraṅga Garuḍavāhana Bhatta son of Aḻakiyamaṇavāḷa Maṅgaladīraya, rebuilt the ārogyaśālai, reconsecrated the deity Dhanvantri emperumāṉ and made provision for medicinal decoction to be offered daily to the God.
According to Koiloḻugu, Lord Ranganātha was afflicited with indigestion which Rāmanjua cured with a medicinal decoction and ever since entrusted the offering of decoction to one Garuḍavāhana Paṇḍita and it is this Garuḍavāhana Paṇḍita who is credited with the authorship of Divyasuricharitam. So it is held the Divyasuricharitam was written in the time of Rāmanuja. It is likely that the Koiloḻugu makes up the story with a view to give a sanctity by ascribing it to Rāmanuja. The ārogyaśāla itself came into existence only in 1257, 125 years later than Rāmanuja. The author of the Divyasuricharita, specifically says that he was the chief of the Ārogyśāla Śrī Raṅgādhipa Ārogyaśāla Vallabha. It is, therefore, unlikely that Divyasuricharita was written in the time of Rāmanuja. We have seen that the Śāla was burnt down by fire in 1493, rebuilt and reconsecrated by Śrīnivasa alias Garuḍavāhana. It is he who also instituted the offering of medicinal decoction. The editor of Divyasuricharita rightly points out that the author of the Divisasuricarita was one Śrīnivāsa alias Garuḍavāhana Paṇḍita. In the epigraph of A.D. 1493 the Garuḍavāhana was also called Śrīnivāsa. It is in all probability this Śrīnivāsa alias Garuḍavāhana was the author of Divyasuricharita, the earliest authentic account on the life of Vaiṣṇava Āchāryas.
It brings up to another important point of historical enquiry. The most authentic and exhaustive Tamil work on the history of Vaiṣṇava Āchāryas is Guruparampara prabhava by Pinbalagiya Perumāḷ Jīyar. After giving a summary of the history of Āḻvārs this author deals exhaustively with the life of Ramanjua. This author is assigned to 13th century by scholars. But he quotes extensively from Divyasuricharita, and is defenitely later than that work. Secondly it has been shown by M. Arunachalam that many of the dates given in this work are historically untrustworthy. The discrepancies should have arisen due to the fact that the text was written after a long time gap which tried to make the best of what was available. It is not without justice that S. Krishnaswamy Aiyangar, the editor of Guruparamapara suggests that this work should have been written by one of the disciples of the Jīyar.
In a recent publication of Divyasuricharita Dr K.K.A. Venkatachari, the editor, has the following remarks to make, "The date of Divyasuricharita is not certainly fixed. Traditionally it has been - thought that the author was a contemporary of Rāmanuja because the work contains a reference to Rāmanuja which suggests he is still alive. Prof. B.V. Rāmanujam, however, dates the work in the late 15th or early 16th Century. He bases this date on the 19th Sarga which he considers original contrary to the traditional view".