CHAPTER - 1

Madhusudana S a r a sv a ti; L ife-D ate-W ork s.

I n tr o d u c t io n s

Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i , an e x q u is i t e th inker# a g r e a t

organ izer# a f a i t h f u l commentator# and an in d ep en d en t w r ite r

o f th e a d v a ita School k e p t th e f i r e o f th e Sankara School\

bu rn ing i n s p i t e o f th e d u st thrown on i t by th e o th e r

s c h o o ls o f Vedanta*

\

T h is man o f g e n iu s 'was so unassum ing th a t h e h a s n o t

l e f t any o f M s b io d a ta reg a rd in g h i s p la c e o f b ir th # name

o f p a ren ts# ed u ca tio n and vh ere h e l i v e d h i s g lo r io u s l i f e .

T h is v e r y f a c t shou ld be enough, to le a d u s to agree w ith

M a c d o n e ll's q u o ta tio n : “H is to r y i s th e weak p o in t o f

I n d ia " . And th e o n ly so u rces which h e lp u s to know som ething

abou t h i s l i f e are th e in tr o d u c to r y v e r s e s and th e co lop h on s

o f h i s w orks.

V ariou s Madhusudanas :

A u frech t Theodar m en tion s in h i s 'The C atalogu e

Catalogarum V o l .I - I I I # th a t# th e r e are s e v e r a l a u th ors in

S a n sk r it l i t e r a t u r e , who bare th e name o f Madhusudana. They

a re a s under s

- 2

( i ) Madhusudana V a ca sp a ti.

( i i ) Madhusudana, who was a Grammari a«

■Qu _(i i i ) Madhu dana o f P arth sp ura.

( iv ) M adhu sudan a o f Tirtha*

( v ) . Madhusudana o f M ^iithila*

(v i) Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i .

The books which bare th e name o f Madhusudana are/

p ro b a b ly tw enty f i v e in number* Out o f th e s e Madhusudanas,

some b ore th e h o n o r if ic t i t l e o f S a r a sv a t i snd o th e r s

T ir th a * G e n e ra lly in S a n sk r it l i t e r a t u r e , a p erson w e ll

/ _le a r n e d in D arsana, S a s tr a o r S a h ity a i s h on orab ly r e s p e c t ­

ed a s T ir th a , S a r a s v a t i , B h a tta , Upadhyaya, Acarya e t c . in

some p la c e s* th e A p p e lla t io n S a r a sv a ti d oes n o t in d ic a t e

t h a t he i s an in c a r n a tio n o f th e G oddess o f L earn ing, b u t

i t r e p r e s e n ts th e t h ir d Asrama. Among th e a u th o rs, b ea r in g

th e name Madhusudana, th e r e was one named Thakkara# who wasa f

le a r n e d in N yiya and Vedanta, f lo u r is h e d in Vang&esa, and- r s -

w rote com m entaries on works o f Gangesopadhyaya. A nother

Madhusudana reg a rd s h im se lf as K rsnadvaipayanaputra? he was

th o ro u g h ly read in th e Vedas* S t i l l a n o th er Madhusudana has

w r it te n sh o r t t r e a t i s d o n Purvamimimsa. The r e s t o f th e

— §Madhusudanas w rote com m entaries on v a r io u s s u b j e c t s . The^re

3

com m entaries b e in g c a l l e d Pataka# Darpana, MaiSjari etc#

Mahahmhopadhyaya Vasudeva S a s tr i Abhyankara S ta te s

t h a t o u t o f tw en ty f i v e Madhusudanas, th e r e are f i v e , who" 1

b a re th e a f f i x *S a r a s v a t i1 a p p lie d t o t h e i r name# Out o f

t h e s e f i v e , th e f i r s t i s *&rl S a r s v a t i - S i f y a ' , who was th e

_ a 4 — _ - —au th or o f 1 Anandf-mandakini1, 'K rsn ak u tu h a la ', ‘H a r i l i l a ' ,

* • «»

1 V ed a stu tiv y a k h y a ' e tc # The second i s our au th or, nam ely

Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i , vho was th e author o f 'S id d h an tab in d u 1,

*A d v a ita s id d h i* e t c . ; The t h ir d one i s known as th e author

o f *A d vaitabrahm asidd hi*. The fo u rth i s sa id to be th e author

fo­o t 'K u su m a -v a ca y a li^ i1 • The f i f t h was th e d i s c i p l e o f

V isv e sv a r a S a r a sv a t i, nam ely Purusottam a S a r a s v a t i , whose

i n t e l l e c t ren dered v a lu a b le s e r v ic e in th e f i e l d o f Nyaya,

V ed in ta a*113 Mimarxisa.

1. ^TtWTFIdT

| '«. ** Siddhantabindu - e d ite d

w ith an o r ig in a l commentary By MahamahopSdhyaya -^s^^dev

S h a s tr i Abhyankar, Second e d i t io n . P u b lic a t io n * Govern­

ment O r ien ta l S e r ie s C la ss A,Mos 2 : Bhsndarkar O r ien ta l

R esearch I n s t i t u t e , Poona, 1962, p . 27 .

- 4 -

E x tern a l E v id en ces And L if e S to ry :

As Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i , th e author o f th e * Siddhanta**

b in d u ' h a s n ev er m entioned h i s b ir th -p la c e t in any o f h i s

w orks, we have t o lo o k f o r e x t e m a l e v id e n c e s f o r c o l l e c t i n g

in fo rm a tio n which would throw l i g h t on h i s l i f e s to r y .

Mr. D iv e n ji s t a t e s t h a t h e had life hectrd from an U dasin ,

who i s no more on t h i s e a r th , and who had l i v e d a t Vrndaveha,

|^ v |x jLahore, H aradvira , ^ ? /k e s a f o r a number o f y e a r s , th a t

Madhusudana had l i v e d in th a t p a r t o f I n d ia a s a South In d ian

Brahman^by b ir th vfcio had m ig ra ted to Vrndavana in th e l a t e r

p a r t o f h i s l i f e .

A ccording to th e m an u scrip t, named 'V aid ik avad a Mimamsa*

(A work o f P t . H arid asa V id y a v ig isa , based on olrder a v a i la b le

C h r o n ic le s ) , Madhusudana was one o f th e fo u r sons o f one

Purandaracarya, a d ir e c t dependent o f th e s ix t h d eg ree , o f

a-, iu k l’a yagurved i Brahman, named Rana M i£rC vho was th e

o r ig in a l in h a b ita n t o f K anoj, a t o w about f i f t e e n m ile s

n o r th o f K inpur in U .P . T h is Rama M ^srli w ith s e v e r a l o th e r

1 . Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i * H is l i f e and works, by P .C .

D iv a n j i . A nnals o f th e Bhandar O r ie n ta l R esearch

I n s t i t u t e , Poona. V o l. V III . P a r t I I Septem ber 1926,

p p . 1 4 9 -1 5 8 .

Brahmans l e f t t h i s p la c e b ecau se o f r e l i g io u s p e r s e c u t io n s

by Shahbuddin Ghori and s e t t l e d a t Navadvipa# th e modem1

N adia in th e Burdwan d i s t r i c t . T h is Hindu k in g o f th e

Gaudas r u le d th e r e . T h is R ina MisraThad a son named Gopal

M isr ^ who l a t e r on become w e ll known a s Madhava M lsra . He

had a son named Sanataha M fsra. T h is Sanatana M isra had a

son named GuparnavaCarya# vho once went to Yalohara# t o a

to% n on th e Madhumati r iv er# to m eet h i s fa th e r - in - la w # and

s e t t l e d th e r e . He had a son named Purandara* He was once

i n v i t e d by Msadhava Pasa# a Hindu k in g o f Vang t o h i s

C a p ita l* On h i s way back# he sajir a b e a u t i fu l Suburb o f 2

K ota lip ad a# and d e c id e d to s e t t l e a t i t s h am let named

/ 3U s a s iy a . He b u i l t a h ou se , named P u ran daravatika and a

tem p le o f S r i D ak sin am u rtlica lik a . P eo p le say th a t s t i l l i t

e x i s t s . T h is Purj/andara had fo u r sons# namely# Srinatha#

m A cifrr»fr?r: . IPmx: 11- V ed'Shta-K alpalatika o f Madhusudana

Sarasvatx# E d ite d by_ Ramajna Pahdeya, Government S a n sk r it

l ib e r a r y N o .3# Benares# 1920# p i 7 .

2 . I t was d e sc r ib e d as a. suburb o f th e o f Pari<%>ur on

- 5 -

th e s tr e n g h t o f i t s d e s c r ip t io n in th e H a r i l i l a - as

- 6 -

co n td .• fo o t-n o teMfcclO in th e VedShtakalpa-

la tik a# i t i s found described as - ClT y<*-iu6d t*-d4cf

? T z r tw fT =fTwt yw: i A rtic le s 'MadhusudePa Sarasvati -

H is l i f e and works'-by P .C .D ivan ji. Annals o f the Bhandar-

kar O riental Research In stitu te ,P o o n a .P s313-323„Vol.IX.

* 27-'28

— Recent d isco v er ies have proved i t to be a very o ld s i t e

containing th e ruins o f the Gupta Period* Annals Report

o f th e A rchaeological Survey o f Ind ia , Eastern C ir c le .

Page*31. Yean 1920-21.

— "K otalipSda'is the correct Bengali form, th e Bengali

pronunciation o f 'kotw al1 being ‘KotaL‘ . But Kotil<s»pada

i s the form adopted by the lo c a l P o s t -o f f ic e . K otilipada

i s s t i l l a Paragana with a P o lice Station and a sub-

r e g is tr a r 's o f f ic e and though, a t p resen t, included In

1 the d i s t r ic t o f Faridpur l i e s on the'border o f the two

adjacent d i s t r ic t town o f Faridpur to be c a lle d i t s

Suburb. I t was o r ig in a lly included w ithin candra&vipa

and even f i f t y years back formed p art o f the d i s t r ic t

o f Bari sa l -" A rtic le : MadhudSdana Sarasvati : H is

l i f e and works - a Rejoinder by Chintaharana Chakravarti.

Annals o f th e Bhandarkar O riental Research I n s t itu te ,

_ _ ' , 1 Yadavsnanda, Kama! aj an ay ana, and Vagisa. Among th ese , the

youngest o f a l l died a t a very early age. The remaining three

co n td .. fo o t-n o te page 5 &. 6

Poona, p*-1192-193 v o l. XI Part-11, Jan. 1930.

2. "Usasmya i s obviously m isprint fo r Unaisiya'• Madhusudana

S arasvati. His l i f e and works* A Reply to C ritic ism s,

P .6 .D iv a n ji, Annala o f the Bhandarkar O riental Research

in s t i t u t e , Poona, V ol.IX .Par t - I I & IV, Ju ly , 1929,p .318.

-" P .S .- I learn from Pandit Kalikanath Gautsna, Kavyatirtha,

cousin o f Pandit Chintaharana chakravarti, th a t Madhusu-

dancfs n a tiv e v i l la g e was Unasiya ( & *f 1VVT ) i n the

K otalipara Pargana o f Faridpurv"- Madhusudana Sarasvatij

H is l i f e and works - A Rejoinder by K. Chattopadhyaya,

Annals o f the Bhandarkar O riental Research I n s t itu te ,

Poona, -VVol.lX, Part II to IV, 1927-' 28, p . 328.

1. Mr. Nagendra Hath Vasu in h is 'Vanger J a tiy a I tih a sa '

(Vaidika kanda)h as noted th a t, a work in MS.form ca lled

1 Vaidika-vada Mimamsa'is in the p ossession o f Pt.Haridasa

Siddhahta v ag isa - a member o f the sane fam ily, had a

work named - 'Bhavabhumivarta', a h is to r y of K otalipada,

composed by Raghavendra Kavisekhar a in A. D.fJ‘667, s ta te s

th a t Madhusudana was the yonger brother of Purandar a

- 7 -

and not h is son con td .. .

became famous l a t e r on as S r in a th a Gudimani, Yadavlhanda» *

N yayacarya and Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i .

There are;som e le g e n d s reg a rd in g th e l i f e o f Madhusudana

S a r s a v a t i , one o f them r e la t e s th a t , Purandara once b e in g1

i n v i t e d by th e k in g o f Candcadvipa , r e s id in g a t Madhava

P a s i , went to th e c o u r t w ith h i s two so n s , nam ely, Yadavanan-

da and Madhusudana. T h is k in g wa© stru ck by Madhusudana* s

b r i l l i a n t a b i l i t y . Purandara in ten d e d to have a g ra n t f o r

a p ie c e 'of la n d . The k in g d id n o t f u l f i l i t . As a r e s u l t

o f t h a t , Madhusudana f i r s t became ex a sp er a te d , b u t l a t e r on

was f i l l e d w ith a se n se o f rem orse and begged p erm iss io n o f

h i s f a t h e r t o beccPfe a r e c lu s e , which was g ra n ted . He

became a Dqndin Sam nyasin. He g o t h im se lf fo r m a lly i n i t i a t e d

- 8 -

c o n t d . . f o o t n o te No. 1 page N o .7

3 R I T : f T W r s

i-prgfr T*. :

1 . The v e ry name Chandradvipa s u g g e s ts i t s co n n ectio n w ith

Chandra- d yn asty . I t s t i l l e x i s t s in th e d i s t r i c t o f

B ari s a l .- E n cy clo p a ed ia I n d ia , XII No. 18

9 -

i n t o th e Brahmavidya by V i& vesvara S a ra sv a ti? and r e s id e d

— Q Wi€ya t G opala Nfetha on C a tu ssa s th i Ghata in B anaras. H is fos^me

sp rea d s p e e d ily on accou n t o f h i s obperfvance o f thorough

p en an ce and p r a c t ic e in Yoga, and he a t once became r esp e c ­

te d in th e le a r n e d c i r c l e o f t h a t p eriod * H is o th e r two

/ - _ _ 2 Gurus were i§rirama and Madhava S a r a s v a t i . Akhahdinanda i s

a ls o c o n s id e r e d ,to be h i s Guru

1 . He i s s a i^ t o bd th e au th or o f ( i )

( i i ) d i i ) ( iv ) z r R r t s w i

(v) I l” .ftu frech t's C ata logu s

Catalogorum V. I i P . 587.

2 . " sfra

gtrppfZfV» S3

thsrf ^Tcrr^wf^fkmtfa k*v. i w^frfqrr i

3 . •' ^ T S ^ -F F ^ T f^ T .JFT' l

’ § $rmi 11

The Colophon o f th e 1 "pyfT 1 (a m a n u scr ip t).

(Quoted by S r i S.N.Ta<%>atrika£ain h i s a r t i c l e j " TTfit

* & work on A r th -S a str§ (? ) "* By Madhusudana

S a r a s v a t i .* in $ n n ^ a ls o f th e Bhandarkar O r ien ta l

R esearch I n s t i t u t e , Poona.V o l .V I I I .P a r t I I I , p . 3 3 1 -3 4 .

10

Another story about the l i f e of Madhusudana runs thus*

Once he cane neat the overflooded river Yasohara. On i t s

bank, he prayed to God Varuna to give him a passage^

' — ' i f

through the river, and due to the mercy of God, he (Jossed

tXthe river on foot without any obstante. The people therefore,

named the river a fte r him.

I t i s said that Poet Tulasidasa was his contemporary,

and also lived at Banaras. When they came to know each other,

Tulasidasa sent his Rian a- c ari t a-min a s a to Madhusudana.

Having' been highly impressed by i t , Madhusudana sen<t i t back

with th is eulogistic verse;

" ¥ m f dcrKfr 11

qwrfr i ■

Madhusudana was once invited by the Emperor Akbar a t

1. " 'pFWFFT is not a place near Banaras but i s Banaras

i t s e l f . I t i s one of the names given to Banaras on accoun-

t fe of i t s religious associations. When performing any

religious ceremonies a t Banaras. We say in the Samkalpa-

vgkya"............SfFF^T^ , 3 T t »............«

Madhusudana Sarasvati - His l i f e and works: by K.Cha^to- •

padhyaya? Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Renerch

Institute,Poona.Vol.IX,Part-II to IV,July, 1927,pp.324-328.

- 11 -

his court, aid the P audits, having befun struck by his wide X.

and profound tearing, praised him for his scholarly persona-clity and paid him the following high enyomium s

mi i

: TIT 11»

Pandit I sv arc an dr a# who claims to belong to the sane

family as that of Madhusudana, states that there exists a

villa in Ko^SLipS^ai near Paricfour, known as Purandaravatika,

and there is a temple of the Goddess D'aksinamurtakalika.

Prof. J. N. Parquhar is of the opinion that, Madhusu­

dana and Vallabha knev each other and perhaps exchanged their 2

views also. This inference is based on a tradition in the

literature of the religious sect of Vallabha, and it is

further supported by the fact that Madhusudana is the first

Ac ary a of the school of Sankara Vedanta^ who used the word

v Suddhadvaita‘forv May av ad a 'oriKeval advaita/ the well-known

3terir by which Sahkara1 s Siddhanta is generally known.■ > ' t

x / ',V 1. 'Vedaniakalpalatika1 - ed. R. D. Karmarkar. p.XII.

' Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute,No. 3,Poona. 19 62. 2. ‘The organisation of the Sainnyasis of the Vedanta' -

Prof. Parquhar,' The Journal of the Bombay Branch of

Royal Asiatic Society, July, 1925, p. 483.

— 12

'Kulpanjika* referred to by Rlsnajiia PShdeya Vyakarano-

padhyaya in feass ' Vedahtakalpalatika'# throws l ig h t on some

inform ative sources o f MadhusCdana' s l i f e story . According

to that# the ancestor o f Madhusudana was Rana Misra# a

Brahraana l iv in g in Varfgadesa. His generation l iv e d in

'K otalipada1» a suburb o f Faridpur. Madhusudana's fo re -

- fa th e r Praraodsna Purandaracarya was a famous person. He

had four sons. Srinithacudamani# yadavihanda Nyayacirya#

Kamalajanayana# and Vagi sa Goswami. Among these# th e second

one become a respected person among the co u rtiers o f the k ing

Pratapaditya. Having been h igh ly impressed by h is i n t e l l e ­

ctual b r il l ia n c e , the said monarch o ffered him the t i t l e o f

'Avilamba S a ra sv a ti'. He la t e r on became well-known as

'M adhava-Sarasvati.' The th ird son o f Purandaracarya,namely#

K anal a j an ay an a went to Navadvipa# and stu d ied ' Nyayasastra'

there; and having known th e v a r ie ty o f the world, became aI

monk. Tradition says th a t h is vidyaguru was Madhava Saras­

v a t i . This Madhava Sarasvati was th e d is c ip le o f Rameivara 1

Bhatta, who was the d is c ip le o f h is father# N'arayana Bhatta.

1 . Rama i s mentioned as th e Guru o f Madhava Sarasvati by

Aufrecht in h is 'Catalogous Catalogorum*# Vol. I ,p .5 0 5 .

13

- f?Rame^vara B h atta once went to Dwa£5|k a . He had a son m

21514 A. D. March. He became famous a s Narayana B h atta .

He cane t o Dwiijjka and s tu d ie d Mahgbhasya, S u resvara v a r t ik a

f o r fo u r y e a r s and went to P r a t is th a n a p u r i. There he o b t a i ­

n ed fame f o r h i s w ide know ledge and in o rd er t o ga in em anci-

„ j _p a t io n , went t o VarSnasi w ith h i s two sons# nam ely, S rid h ara

and S& grh?ta- R im e^ v a ra B h a tta was q u ite o ld in age , when

Narayana B h atta was b o m . He had th r e e d i s i c i p l e s .

( i ) Ananta B h a tta ( i i ) Damodara S a r a sv a ti ( i i i ) MCdhava

S aras v a ti. Amongst them, Madhava SarasvatiT was th e teach er

o f Madh'usudsna S a r a s v a t i . I t i s a ls o p o in te d o u t Rgnajtfa"3

Pahdeya, t h a t th e sane o f Balabhadra m entioned in th e

' S iddhintab indu* by Madhusudaha, and Purusottam a S a r a s v a t i ,

th e com m entator o f 1 S id d h in ta b in d u 1 in d ic a t e s th a t B a la -

bha^dra B h attacarya was a fa v o u r it e p u p il o f

1 . In d ian A ntiquary, 1912* 9 .

2 . Narayana B h atta w rote in VSS. 1602(1545«• * « O __ »A* )

. sifwrTOT ^ I

< p t d f ? r n : » »

- P*Ff v e r s e - 4 a t th e end.

3

M adhusudana efid t h a t t h e S u m sn e B h a t ta c a r y a b e in g a

B e n g a li surnam e, and h e b e in g th e f a v o u r i t e p u p i l o f

M adhusudana, M adhusudana a l s o m ust h ave been a B e n g a li-

B ut t h i s i s n o t c o n v in c in g - A gain , t h i s a c c o u n t co n ta in ^ :s

a n o th e r d is c r e p a n c y - YSdav ah anda, MadhusGdana* s own b r o th e r ,

who l a t e r on came t o be known a s M adhava S a r a s v a t r c a n n o t be

h i s ' G uru.

We h ave seen t h a t R a n a jn a P ahdeya, i n h i s p r e f a c e t o

t h e V e d a n ta k a lp a la t ik a , h a s a s s o c i a t e d t h e t i t l e 1 A vilam ba-

- S a r a s v a t l * w ith Y ad av ip an d a who h a d th e t i t l e o f 'N ySya-

c a r y a ' • And th e r e a l s o h e h a s n o t b een c l e a r and h a s m ade2

a c o n fu s in g co m b in a tio n o f Y adavim anda and M adhava. I t i s

l - h| t r t 3 : w f ^ : -

- P u ru so ttam a* s com m entary on ' S id d h a n ts -

b indu* v e r s e No. 4 a t th e end .

2. ; g c u t r r f ^ c ^ j i t . w i ^ T ’Tftrrai i

%rf g r t TTfr d ' fq<aw 'fWFrn=TT ^ fp r i ^V3

gg-ftrfsritfrg r -

- V e d a n ta k a lp a la t ik a , - R a n a jn a P an d ey a , S a r a s v a t i

B h a ran a T e x ts . N o .3 . B a n a ra s , 1920, p . 6 .

- 14 -

1

- 15

in c o n c e iv a b le how th e sane man cane t o be known b o th as

Yadava and Madhava.

On th e o th e r hand, Madhavananda Avilamba S a r a sv a ti i s

th e f u l l name o f th e son o f Yadavananda N yayacarya g iv en

i n the* Vanger J a t iy a f t lh S s a ' ’ (H isto ry o f th e C a stes and

CMeeds o f B en gal) by Mr. N agendranath Vasu.

Mr. Chintaharan C hakravarti sa y s t h a t - ” th e d escen ­

d a n ts o f Yadavananda N yayacarya have th r e e w ell-know n sub-

- d iv i s io n s t r a c in g t h e i r l in e a g e from th r e e so n s o f ’'jtadava^1

nan da v i s . Madhava Avilamba# V isvan ath a and Raghunatha".

T h is sta tem en t c le a r ly g o e s a g a in s t th e in d e n t i f i c a t io n o f

Avilam ba w ith Yadavananda.

Mr. P . C. D ivan ji# in h i s in tr o d u c t io n to 1 Siddhahta~

bindu* h a s g iv en a b r i e f o u t l in e o f M adhusudana's a n c e s to r s

b a sed on th e record o f 'Mr. C hintaharaha Chakravati# i<ho,

s t a t e s th a t, h e b e lo n g s t o th e same fa m ily as was honoured2

b y th e b ir th o f Madhusudana.

otwf"MadhusQdana S a r a sv a ti : H is l i f e and works s A

R a jo in d e r ', Chin t ah a ran Chakravarti# f i n a l s o f th e

Bhandarkar O r ien ta l R esearch In s t itu te ,P o o n a # V .X I ,

P a r t-I I# 19 30, p . 193.

2 . S iddhahtab indu , Ed. P .C .D iv a n ji# Gaekwad1 s O r ie n ta lS e r ie s No.LXIV# Baroda O r ie n ta l I n s t i t u t e # 1933 ,pagesXVI

16

^ r i Rama M isra"««

M adhava\

S o p a laf8

Gsnap a t i

j h

SanatcPatI

K p sn ag im irn ava8fI

J i t a m i t r a A c a ry a se k h a ra P u ra n a d a ra8I

Tr |L ''.r - 111 r- - i r t ...." " "i "■t i i i . i

S r in a th a Y adavananda K am a l a j an ay an a V a g isa Name Unknown Sudam ani N y ay acary a ( a l s o known a s Goswami

i MadhusiljsdanaJ S a r a s v a t i )

G a u r id a s a Vi swan a th a R ag h u n a th a M adhava A vilam baT a r k h a n can an a ~ ' s a r a s v a t i

I

V anin a th aI, R udraram a

GhanasyamaI

R am apati»t

G a u r ip ra s a d aIt

M adan amok an atI

Jnlan adakan th ai • *8

C in t sh a ra n a &

- 17 -

Various Views Regarding the Date of Madhusudana Sarasvati s

Thus# this heterogeneous matter concerning the life of

Madhusudana Sarasvati# gives no definite pointer towards the

removal of our difficulty for fixing the exact date of the

author. It still remains an open questions# for# the great

task of understanding and interpreting lives purely on the

basis of legends, which# of course# is not impossible# but

difficult because of the variety and magnitude of the legends.yViX!A well-known fact is that# Madhusudana flourished a

con-si-de-rahl-e period after Sankaracarya# for Sankara is

highly commended in the Sundry passages of his commentary

on the Gita# and our author almost seems to be content to

waive his right to be called an independent commentator#

accepting somewhat inferior position as an interpreter •

In the preface to his edition of Schegel' s Bhagavatgita#

Prof. Lassen refers to an opinion of Bumouf idortifying

our author with Madhusudana# who is mentioned by M'adhava-1

carya in his Dh atuvrtti. Bumouf himself is not clear in

1. Bumouf* s words t * Colebrooke speaks of a Madhusudana whom he'gives as one of the commentators of the

V 5

contd..

- 18 -

id e n t ify in g th e se two* 3nd P rof. Lassen S tated th a t he i s

not. q u ite prepared to accept th e v iew . He p r o v is io n a lly #

as su g g ested by Bum ouf, a s s ig n s our author to th e m iddle

o f th e 14th century A. D. p la c in g Madhavacarya a t the c lo se

o f th a t Century.

Mr. K asinatha Trimbak^ Tel ang jfays that# “Madhusudana

must have flou rish ed # n o t before# but sometime a f t e r Madha- 1

vacarya. In order to em phasise h i s view , he g iv e s in te r n a l

e v id e n c es from G ita-G udharthadipika. Commenting on Gita#VI

36# Madhusudana ej<plains some o f th e p a ssa g es from th e

YogavaM ftha# and adds some observations# and fo u rth er s t a t e s -

'* 11 - " The r e s t may be

seen a t le n g th in Jivanm uktiviveka'*. Now# Dr« F. E. H all

r e fe r s to J iv a n sn u k tiv iv ek a as a work a scr ib ed to Vidyaranya

c o n td .. fo o t n o te p a g e -17

o f # and whom Say ana c i t e s in h i s D hatu vrttis " —

-B u t th e q u estion remains# whether he i s th e same Madhu-

sudhana as the one to whom Colebrooka has o ttr ib u te d

sev era l works on Vedgnta P h ilosophy.

1 . * A n o te on th e age o f Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i’# K. Telang.

The Journal o f th e Bombay Branch o f the Royal A s ia t ic

Society# V ol.X# 3sft94~?4#Bee. 1 2 th -1974. pp. 368-377.

- 19 -

1o r Madhavacary a i' A ccep tin g Madhavacarya to be th e author

o f ' J iv m m u k tiv iv e k a ', Mr. T e la n g / argu es th a t Madhusudana

m ust have f lo u r is h e d a f t e r Madhavar®carya. F u rth er he

q u o te s a v e r s e o f th e G udharthadipika, s t a t in g th a t “ T h is

e a s i l y i n t e l l i g i b l e commentary , which h a s been composed by

me a f t e r o b ta in in g th e fa v o u r o f th e p r e c e p to r s , § r i RSfta,* •* 2

V lsv esv a r a and M^dhava, i s o f f e r e d to t h e i r l o t u s - l i k e £ebt'J

He i d e n t i f i e s Madhava w ith th e au th or o f 1 J iv a n m u k tiv ivek a '

and s t a t e s th a t Madhusudana p rob ab ly f lo u r is h e d about th e

end o f th e 15th o r th e b eg in n in g o f th e 16th Century A.D.

Dr. W in te m itz su p p o rtin g th e o p in io n o f Mr. T elang

s a y s t h a t Madhusudana must have f lo u r id ie d du rin g about

1495-1585 o r 1490-1602 A.D.

1 . In th e B ib lio g ra p h y o f ‘In d ian P h ilo s c p h ic a l system s'

p . 133. H a ll -.rrefers to P r o f . W eber's B e r lin C atalogu e

c o n ta in in g an accou n t o f th e J iv a n a m u k tiv iv ek a . p .2 0 5 .

2. •#rrTIit^^wicrrq^Hf gm rW re wr jc fn g iJ x\

11 - ^T^dwr-Q uoted by Mr. T elang in h i s a r t i c l e : { /hrno te

on th e age o f Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i . The Jou rn a l o f th e

Bombay, Branch o f th e Royal A s ia t ic S o c ie t y . V o l. X.

1 8 71-74 . p . 392.

p r o f . Lassen fu r th e r adds t h a t , w h ile commenting on

^riraad B hagavadglta , Madhusudana h a s s a id s "

5fr^Tt " VI 27 . A ccording to him*- ^ r id h ara l i v e d

and w rote a t th e b e g in n in g o f th e 14th Century A.D. o r h a l f

a cen tu ry b e fo r e Madhusudana. So, th e d a te o f Madhusudana

sh ou ld be l a t t e r h a l f o f th e .014th cen tu ry o r th e b eg in n in g

o f th e 15th cen tu ry A.D.

Shree Ranajria Papdeya f i x e s th e d a te o f Madhusudana

S ar l^ v a t l in h i s S a n s k iit in tr o d u c t io n to 1 V ed a h ta k a lp a la tik a 1

qncf ^-and p u ts him in th e p e r io d betw een 1540-1623 A. IV

Mahlmahopadhyaya V asudeva Sast r i Abhyankara sa y s th a t

an i n t e l l e c t u a l atm osphere was c r e a te d in th e 17th cen tu ry

by th e le a r n e d o n e s . Anong thdm, th e f i r s t was Jagannatha,

th e au th or o f "Rasagangadhara'p who l i v e d in T elangade^ a.

The second was 'Khandadeva'MiTsrJ^ th e au th or o f * B h a tta -

d ip ik a 1, a w e ll-k n o w work o f Purvamimarasa* The t h ir d was

G adidhara B h atta who formed a t r a d it io n o f N avadvip any ay a .

1 . V edan td fea lp a latik a , Ed. Ramajng Pahdeya, Govt. S a n sk r it

L ib ra ry , No. 3, B anaras, 1920, p . 11#

- 21 -

fThe fo u rth was N agesa B h atta , who l i v e d in K asi a id w rote

v a lu a b le books on Vyak arana. Yoga, Dh a nr. a, Alankara e t c .

The f i f t h i s Madhusudana S a r a sv a t i, th e author o f

S id d h an tab in d fy .A d va itasid d h i, e t c . They- were a l l

co n tem p o ra r ies, and th e y f lo u r is h e d in tn e same cen tu ry ,

so a cco rd in g t o Mtn. Abhyankara,Madhusudana f lo u r is h e d in

P a n d it B a la sa r a s v a t i sa y s t h a t th e d a te o f

Aopaya D ik s i t a i s 1587—1660 A*D. And Madhu.su.cB3f an a

S a r a s v a ti f lo u r is h e d a f t e r %>psya D ik s i t a .

Mr. C hintaharana C hakravarti w r ite s th a t M adhava-

M a d h u s u d c J ia 's nephew, b e in g th e son o f h i s b r o th er

Yadavahanda N yayicarya who was a con tem perary o f P r a ta -

p a d ity a , f lo u r is h e d in th e l a t e r p a r t o f th e 16th and

b e g in n in g o f th e 17th C ent. T h is may p o in t t o th e m id d le

o f th e 16th C ent, a s t h e d a te o f Madhusudana.

A llo w in g 30 y e a r s rou gh ly f o r one g e n e r a t io n ,

t h i s g iv e s 1538 A.D. c ir c a as th e p ro b a b le tim e when

— *v,Madhusudana can be supposed to have f lo u r is h e d .

-^fcf l----- sfcWbonValpfholM - ed 'fc^ H-S-flv-l i r S \ n h* i ^ i t n — > - -

I th e 17th c e n tu r y .

22 t

Goswami Dimodar S a s tr i in h i s in tr o d u c t io n to

^ B hak tirasayaga , w ith a commentary a s s ig n s Madhusudana

S a r a sv a ti t o th e 16th C entury.

P r o f . D inesh Bhai;tacarya h as p o in te d o u t th a t

a l i s t o f t a le n t e d p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f Akbar*s tim e o ccu rs

in A in-I~A kbari (A in .30 book I I ) . The l i s t i s c l a s s i f i e d

in t o th e f a c u l t i e s in which th ey show e x c e l le n c e s . Among

th e s e , th e f i r s t group, d e sc r ib e d by Abul F a z l, c o n s i s t s

o f th e names o f p h ilo so p h e r s and a s c e t i c s . There we f in d

a name 1Madhu S a r a s t i ' . And P r o f . E h attacarya shows th a tf , '*

th e name a s s p e l t in th e o r ig in a l P e r s ia n t e x t c le a r ly

s u g g e s ts Madhava S a ra sw a ti. The name which im m ed iate ly

f o l lo w s i s th a t o f Madhusudana t O ther r e le v a n t names

a ls o found in t h a t group are krsna P a n d ita . They a l l

f lo u r is h e d in t h e 16th c e n t . So, Madhusudana m ust have

f l o u r i s h e d in th e 16th C ent. M oreover, , Abul Fazl w rote A in -I-

A kbari in 1597 A .D .. So th e S h h olars l i s t e d in i t m ust have

S ee p a g e -2Is 'X. 'Madhusudana S a v a sv a ti j K is l i f e and vjorks'

Mr. C hintahaiana C hakravarti; A nnals o f th e Bhandarkar

O r ie n ta l I n s t i t u t e , Poona, V o l.IX , P a r t - I I t o IV, 1927-28,

P . 3 0 9 -3 1 2 .

(conh/

23

f lo u r is h e d e a r l i e r . And so i t can be c o n je c tu r ed t h a t by

th e t im e o f A in -I-A k b a r i, Madhusudana t o o ■was an o ld

s c h o la r . Prom t h i s e v id e n c e , one may come t o th e c o n c lu s io n

t h a t Madhusudana f lo u r is h e d a t l e a s t in th e m id d le o f th e

116th C entury.

Mr. D iv a n ji h a s s t a t e d th a t Madhusudana f lo u r is h e d

oin 16th cen tu ry i . e . betw een 1540 t o 1647.

Mr. P.M. Modi s t a t e s in th e in tr o d u c t io n t o

' S id dh an tab in d u ' t h a t Madhusudana l i v e d rou gh ly betw een

31495-1585 A.D. o r 1490 - 16023.

H arihara s a s t r i , in h i s S a n sk r it p r e fa c e t o th e

• Advai t an ah j a r i S er ie s* and P a n d it H aridasa in th e in tr o d u c t io n

t o h i s e d i t io n o f th e H a r i l i la , m en tion s a commentary o f -

Madhusudana on Appaya D ik s i t a s * . * Siddhantaledta SarRgraha*

and state^f th a t Appaya D ik s i ta was p r io r t o Madhusudana*

Appaya D ik s ita f lo u r is h e d in t h e l a t e r h a l f o f th e 16th

C entury. So, Madhusudana^iave l i v e d in th e b eg in n in g o f th e

1 . In d ia n H is t o r ic a l q u a r te r ly . V o l.X E II. 1C37 P .3 1 .

2 . Madhusddana S a r a sv a t i - H is l i f e and w orks.by P .C .

D iv a n ji - A nnals o f th e Bhandarkar O r ie n ta l R esearch

I n s t i t u t e , Poona, VOL.VIII, P .1 4 9 -1 5 8 , V o l.IX P .3 1 3 -3 2 3 .

Siddantabindu - T r a n s la t io n by P.M,. M odi.

SamaldSs C o lle g e , Bhavnagar 2 5 -6 -1 9 2 9 , Page 27 .

3 .

it 2 4 5 !

17th Century. Bret t h is statem ent remains only as a guess,

because, there i s no such commentary a v a ila b le whi ch was

writ t e n by Madhusudana on Appaya D lk sita s * Siddhantale^a -

Sang rah a*.

The R e lia b il i ty o f th e view s mentioned and th e date o f th e 0

author s

Mr. Tel an g op ines th a t V idyira^la, who i s id e n t ic a l

with Madhava has w r itten ' Jivanamuktiviveka. This p a r tic u la r

person has been mentioned as a m in ister o f king Bukka o f

Vijayanagar, by Macdonell in th e H istory o f Sanskrit l i t e r a tu r e .

(P. 257). According to Macdonell, the book must have been com~

posed by him in the l a s t quarter o f th e 14th Century. However,

th ere i s no recorded tr a d it io n suggesting Vidyara^ya1s d ir e c t

contact with th e sch olars o f Benares, and th at too with

Madhusudana©

Madhusudanas id e n t if ic a t io n with Madhava Avilaraba

Sarasvati as a lso Madhava Avilamba S a ra sv a ti's id e n t if ic a t io n

b^u’le. accepting Mr^. Chakravarti • s view* we are on the sa fe ground,

fo r , Madhava was patron ised by k ing Prafapaditya o f Bengal,

who fought with Akbar, and seems to have flou rish ed in the

.^ith'ladavahanda, i s i l l o g i c a l , f@c,.i -H t -HT:is

B4dI

'i s 25 st

l a t e r p a r t o f t h e 1 6 th and t h e b e g in n in g o f t h e 1 7 th

c e n t u r y .1

M adhusudana i s r e f e r r e d t o by S esa G ovinda. i n h i s

1S a rv a s id d h a h ta R ahasya v iv a r a n a . T h e re in we a r e t o l d t h a t

K rsna G ovinda, t h e f a t h e r o f s e s a G ovinda, was th e p r e c e p to r

o f B h a t to j i D ik s i t a , S esa g o v in d a r e f e r s t o M adhusudan a s* Ji 2 ' • * * * * fh i s G uru . B h a t to j i D ik s i t a and s e s a G ovinda w ere con tem -

• rp o r a r ^ g s . a s th e y w ere co n tem p o -^ trie s# so w ere K rsna G ovinda

an <3 M adhusudana S a r a s v a t i .

1© M adhusudana S a r a s v a t i . H is l i f e and w orks by M r.C h in ta h a ra n a

C h a k r a v a r t i . A n n a ls o f t h e B aroda O v ie n ta l R esea rch I n s t i ­

t u t e . Vol®XI. P . 192 -793 .

w&wmnx a* 11 rfcim f w r : mrm: i ^ ttt

CfHiqTCT% | %Os, f t

- Ved£n t a k a l p a l a t i k a . Ed. by Rarnajrfa P ah d ey a . The p r in c e s

o f w a le s S a r a s v a t i Bhavan T e x ts . N o .3. B enares* 1920.

P . 1 0 .

F t. Hard.das Vidyayagis, P rof. R*D. Karmarkar, and

Abhyankarji, th e e d ito rs o f H a r ilila , Vedahtakalpalatika,

and the ' Siddhantabindu* r e sp e c tiv e ly s ta t e th a t T ulsidasa,

t^io composed Ramacaritamanasa in Avadhi language, Gadsdhara

Bhatt^carya*well-known thinker o f nyaya^astra, B hattoji

D ik s ita ,- a well-known fig u r e in alahkarasastra, and

Madhusudana Sarasvati f lo u r ish ed in th e reign o f Akbar.

The con du s i on, which has been thus arrived a t , doesI

n o t f i t with the Kijawarta o f th e Vallabha Sect, considered

by P rof. Modi. I f Vallabha were Madhusudana* s eontemparary.

Then there would have been a t l e a s t a few referen ces in

th e w ritin gs o f Madhusudana. But no such referen ce i s

seen in th e works o f Madhusudana. Tradition says th a t

when Madhusudana met Vallabha in^ayaga# he was a t l e a s t

50 years o ld in age i . e . in 1516 A.D., and having l iv e d

a t Devarsi for 15 years he died in 1531 A.D. This does

n o t appeal to u s as cogr/ent. i f t h is i s supposed to be ■

tru e , then he would have been 90 years o ld even a t th e

tim e o f th e accession o f Akbar, and considering the fa c tV \.

th a t an in terv iew referred to by Farqubar must have taken

- 27

p la c e on ly when th e emperor was w e l l - s e t t l e d t h a t in te rv ie w

would have become im p o ss ib le because then Madhusudana

would, acco rd ing to th e c a lc u la t io n , be over 100 y ea rs

o ld , and so cou ld n o t have t r a v e l l e d from Benares to D elh i,

i n th o se days when th e r e were n o t com fortab le conveyances

a s we have th e fe days*

And a s to ry , t h a t fo r a review , Madhusudana and

Tul s id a sa exchanged t h e i r works namely A dv a itasid d h i

and Rgnacaritam anasa seems to be im possible* Because, th e

d a te o f a Ms, \h ic h o ccu rs in th e l ib r a r y o f th e Q ueen's

c o lle g e a t Benares, s t a t e s i t to be w r it te n in 1584 A.D* "

3tf we a llow 107 y e a rs to our th en on ly th e s to ry

becomes true*

I t i s s a id t h a t Nrsimha S a ra sv a ti o r Nr sirnha drama,

and NSdhava S a ra sv a ti were th e Gurus o f Madhusudana

S a ra sv a ti who overpowered N aray an ab h a tta 'in d eb a te* T h is

N arayanabhatta , i s a commentator o f Sadananda’ s ' V edan tasara’

who,, in h i s commentary *Subodhini 1 w r i te s t h a t he had

composed i t in S 'aka 1510, t h a t i s 1588 A.D. I f we accep t

28 -

1490 A.D., as the birth year of Madhusudana, even, then

he would be 98 years old at the time of the composition

of his work 'Subodhini' of Nrsimhsrs rama* But there also#

naturally, his Guru Madhava would be s till older by about- - “ - - » P *

20 years. That age is not quite comfortable, for participa­

tion in a heated Rebate. So, the episode narrated in the

Nijavarta, referred to by Mr. p.M. Modi also reveals jj

nothing except the date of Madhusudana vis. 1540 A.D® j

That Appaya Diksita was prior to Madhusudana

Sarasavati is an accepted fact. Appaya Diksita flourished ip

the later half of the 16th Century* Tradition says that

in the later part of his life, he went to Benares, and

there he came into contact with Jagannatha# the welt-known

author of Rasagangadhara® I t seems quite strange that

there is not a single reference to his meeting with

Madhusudana who was living in the same period in Benares.

I t lead s^ to think, that Madhusudana must have left

Benares for Haradwar at the time whm Appaya Diksita came

to Benares, According to the tradition, Appaya Diksita and

jagannatha came to kno^ each other in the court of

Emperor Shah Jahan. This very Bnperor ruled India frcsn 1626

to 1658. His son inprisoned him. Having come to knov® th is

story, Madhusudana must have le f t y Benares for Haradwar,

and due to th is reason, h is contact with Appaya Diksita

could not; have become possib le.

Considering the events noted above, Madhusudana' * i

approximates to 1540-1647 A.D., the period in which he

must have gained a revered position in the f ie ld of the

Vedanta doctrine o f Absolute monism preached by Sriraad.

Sahkaracarya.

Works s

The l i s t of various works generally attributed under

the heading of Madhusudana Sarasvatd in Aufrecht1 s ,

’catalogorus Catalogorum' (Part I , Page : 427) runs as

follows:

( i) AdVaitabfahmhMdiihi. <ii) Advaitaratnaraks§ana

( i i i ) Atmabodhtika (iv) AnandamandSkini (v) Rgvedajatady--

§ stav ik rti-v i var ana (vi) Kr snakutuhal ana taka (v ii) Prastha-

nabheda. (v i i i ) Efoaktisamanyanirtbana. (ix) Bhagavadgita”

gudharthadipika". (x) Bhagavadbhak t i r asayana.

30

( x i ) Bh ig a v a ta p u ra n a -p ra th am a s i ok a -v y akhy a . ( x i i ) B'nagavada

p u ra n a d y a s lo k a tra y a -v y a k h y a . ( x i i i ) Mahimn a s t o t r a t i k a •

( x iv ) R a j n amp r a t i b o a h a . (xv) V e d a s t u t i t i k a . (x v i) V ed an ta -

k a lo a la tr U c i . ( x v i i ) Sandi 1 v a s u t r a t i k a . ( x v i i i ) S a s t r a -at *

s i ddhantalesa t i k a . (x ix ) Samk^epasarijjrakasarasamgraha.

(x x ) S a rv a v id y a s id d h a h ta -v a y n a n a* (x>d) H a lillfe -v y a k h y a*

(x x i i ) Si d d h a n ta b in d u .

Mr. D iv a n ji ad d s one m ore name - A s t a v ik r t i v iv r a n a

o r V i v r t i . The e d i t o r o f H a r i l l la v y a k h y a a l s o seem s to

r e f e r t o t h i s work in h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n . May b e t h i s i s

ri d e n t i c a l w ith Rjgveda j a t a d y a s t v i k r t i v i v a n a .

— CM ahamahopadhyaya G a n a p a ti S S s t r i h a s n o te d one m ore

t i t l e a s a work o f M adhusudana, v i z . I d v a r a p r a t i p a t t i p r a k a s a .

T r ie n n ia l c a ta lo g u e o f m a n u s c r ip ts , M adras, V o l. I I

(p a g e : 2178} S a n s k r i t C o l le c t io n o f 1913 to 1 9 1 5 -1 6 .m e n tio n s

* T a t tv a d n a ta m a n y a lo k a k a n la k o d d h a ra 1 a s a work o f M adhusudana."* *• x

D r. D asgup ta , i n t h e ‘H is to r y o f I n d ia n P h i lo s o p h y 1

V o l . I I (page 225) m e n tio n s one m ore ifc it le a s a work o f

M adhusudana, v i z . A d v a i ta - m a n ja r i .

S h re e P . M. Modi i n h i s in t r o d u c t io n to * S id d h ah tab in d u *

- 31 »

m en tion s th e fo l lo w in g works under th e name o f Madhusudana,

s t a t in g th a t th e s e are m en tion ed o n ly by Auf r e c h t , b u t we

do n o t f in d th a n .

( i ) GLtrarupavada o r CitrafsupaviCara# ( i i ) T ark asiltra-

~bhasya:tika ( i i i ) A nyapadesa^taka. ( iv ) B h a g a v a d a g ititg t-

p aryak arik a (v) A commentary on Mahanataka ( v i ) Anyatha-

k h yatik an ta -k od d h gra .

I t i s d i f f i c u l t to a s c r ib e th e s e works, w ith any f a i r

c e r t a in t y , to a s in g le p en .

v* _We m o stly come a c r o s s th e ab rid ged t i t l e *B h ak ti^ asa-

<s=*ya n a ' in s te a d o f th e f u l l t i t l e * B haktiyasayananlrupana'

m en tion ed by Auf r e c h t in h i s ca ta logu es cata logorum . N ext,

s Bhlgavatapurana Pratham aslokavyakhya' and ' a tg g a v a ta -

purana dy a £ l ok a t r a yavyakhya1 a re s e p a r a te ly m entioned by

Auf recht® I t seems th a t th e form er i s n o t d i f f e r e n t from

th e l a t t e r bu t in c lu d e d in i t . The e d i t o r o f 'H a r i l i l a -

-v y ik h y a ' sa y s th a t th e 1 Bhagavatapuran'adya&Lokatrsya-jS-

-vyakhysr* was p u b lis h e d in Bengal* To be on t h e s a fe

ground, we sh ou ld a c ce p t Mr® D iv a n j i’ s vew s th a t , *A ufrecht

was perhaps m is le d by th e o m iss io n o f th e word 1Traya1 from

- 32 -

- th e t i t l e o f that commentary in any o f th e MSS. that may

have come in to h is own hand o r by a wrong d e scr ip tio n given

in any o f th e C atalogue on which he r e l ie d , and as fo r th e

th ir d , he h im se lf has exp ressed a doubt whether i t i s n ot

id e n t ic a l with Prasthanobeda and th e doubt i s probably 1

w e ll-fo u n d e d ."

Regarding ' Sarvavidyfsiddhahtavarnana, * A ufrecht p u ts

a qu estion mark in to th e bracket, and w r ite s 'Prasthanabheda.'

In Dr. R. L. M itra' s 'N o tic e s o f S an sk rit M anuscrip ts',

th e r e i s a n o te o f a Ms® o f 1Atm abodha-tika1 by Madhusudana,

wherein th e work 'Atmabodharthaprakarana' i s d escr ib ed as

' Sarvavedantasiddhantasam graha'. Dr. Modi says th a t i t i s

n o t an a d d itio n a l work o f Madhusffdana, but another name o f

' Atmabodha/ a work o f 6ra iankaracarya. A commentary w ritten

on 1Siddhantale^asangraha' o f Appaya D ik s ita by Madhusudana

i s , a s I th in k , a lam entable m istake made by A ufrecht; fo r ,

i t i s hardly p o s s ib le to b e l ie v e t h i s , fo r they both

f lo u r ish e d n o t o n ly in th e same century, but alm ost a t th e

1. Madhusudana Sarasvati s H is l i f e and vorks -p .C .D iv a n ji, Annals o f th e Baroda O rien ta l Research I n s t i t u t e , Poona. Vbl. I I I . p a r t II® Sept. 26. page $ 156

33 -

same tim e. And there i s n o t a s in g le reference o f Madhu-

sudhana's commentary on h is con temp erory Appaya D ik s ita 's

work. Aufrecht has made another m istake. He has mentioned

the t i t l e .‘Advai tabrahma s i ddhi1. But i t i s a work o f

Sadananda Y ati. The e d ito r o f th e ’H arililavyakhya* c a l l s

th e same work as * Advai t a s i ddhi * and Mr. Divan j i c a l l s i t -

a s 'Advaitabrahmasiddhi * . The statem ents o f both o f than

m isleads us; because, Madhusudana Sargsvati h im self has

used the word ' Advai ta<ii ddhi ’ in s tea d o f ' Advai tabrahma­

s i ddhi' or 1A dvaitasiddha*,. in the in troduction o f the 1 -

sa id work.

Published Works Of the Author s

Advaitasiddhi :

I t was f i r s t published by S. S. Ayyar as n o . s i o f th e

1 AdvaitamaSjari s e r ie s in 1893 with a commentary o f Brahtna-

nanda S arasvatl. The author has made an obeisance to h is

Gurus in th e second and the th ird introductory v erses o f

a&rfirffc: apwg $ i i y n ohm

- 35 -

c a lle d Atmanirupana' the n a tiv e o f the'Atman i s d ea lt with.

The th ird chapter d escrib es th e means o f Absolution and

r a is e s and answers the question whether isjjptavana or Jnana

can be th e o b jec t o f v idh i or n o t and whether sabda can

lea d to d ir e c t kn^Ledge or n o t. The fourth chapter expounds

th e nature o f Mukti.

Advai taratnayak sana s

I t was prin ted by th e Nim ayasagar P ress, Bombay in

1917 A.D. I t i s considered to be the work o f Madhusudana

Sarasvati, because he frequently r e fer s to 'Advaitasd^3hf '1 -

a s h is own work* The author a lso r e fe r s to 1 Vedantakapa-

la tlk a * as h is own work. At th e end, the author has paid

i e.cfi! sicrf^t ftmv. i rm aid-Rnt fmv. i v**?«srr«i a&rf^iT i

* w T f Tffr i ✓ Xl^ ^

36 -

1homage to h i s Guru VISveSvara, and th e colophon i s S l ig h t ly

2d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f A d v a ita s ila h i.

V ed a h ta k a lp a la tik a :

T h is work was p r in te d in th e P r in c e ss o f W ales S a ra sv a ti

Bhavan t e x t ser ies® The au th or h a s m entioned th e name o f

3Vi sve^vara in th e in tr o d u c to r y v e r s e s . The colophon a t

t h e o id o f t h i s work m en tion s th e name o f th e author a s

' 4w e ll a s h i s Guru. I t o m its th e number o f th e ' Stabaka*.

T h is work h a s been r e fe r r e d to in 1 A d v a ita s i/3 h i' s i x tim es ,**w-GP

i n 'A dvaitaratnardk sana* on ce , in * Siddhfntabindu* and inil v

ajteR^jr : is wrfrm: 11

i k\w . "Pprprh»<Tm 3-SP^T 'f wpft TfcFPTfalT rnPl *PTF I

g rrxTf*?! ^ trf^T 11

u4I

- 37

*M ahim nastot ratT k a' tw ic e , and in ' Bhakti?*asayanam' o n ce .

trea tm en t o f p a r t ic u la r t o p ic s in d e t a i l l a t e r on, but

none h a s been f u l f i l l e d in th e subsequent p a r t . T h is le a d s

u s t o t h in k . , t h a t , i t i s th e f i r s t p o r t io n o f th e *Stabaka'

and th e r e s t o f th e p o r t io n h a s been d e s tr o y ed . The colophon

d oes n o t m ention th e name o f h i s guru V isv e iv a r a , b u t he

h a s m entioned h i s name in th e in tr o d u c to r y verse® I t shows

t h a t i t sh o u ld be th e e a r l i e r work o f th e au th or . Mr.

Ramajha Pandeya, in h i s in tr o d u c t io n to t h e ’VedaTntakal-

p a la t f k a ' shows t h i s w ith a p a r t ic u la r r e fe r e n c e . He sa y s

t h a t 'A d v a ita s id d h i' c o n ta in s a r e fe r e n c e to his^ G ita -

nibandhana? G ita-nibandhana and th e Srimad B h agavatatik a ,

In ' V ed a n ta k a lp a la tik a * , th e r e a re p ro m ises o f th e1

3,

w wrm: | f , ?0

cfgqRTsrt^n rr*?: i 3 ® ^

38 -

b o th th e s e works o f Madhusudana co n ta in r e fe r e n c e s t o h i s

B h ak tirasayan a, and t h i s Bhak t i r a say ana r e f e r s to th e

• V e d a h ta k a lp la t ik a *, T h is shows t h a t th e ‘V ed an tak a lp a la tiK S ’

i s an e a r l i e r work o f Madhusudana S arasva ti*

R egarding th e s u b je c t m a tter o f t h i s work, i t e j ^ la in s

t h e n a tu re o f em ancipation and i t s means# r e f u t e s th e

v ie w s o f o th e r s r eg a rd in g em ancipation and shows how tfee

c e s s a t io n o f ig n o r a n c e ta k e s place®

V ed a h ta k a lp a la tik a h a s been r e fe r r e d t o tw ic e in th e

commentary o f th e M ahimnastotra# and f i v e t im es in th e

A d v a ita s id d h i. We f in d r e f e r e n c e s t o V ed a h ta k a lp a la tik a ”

i n "Siddhantabindu* and v i c e versa* Some o f th e p a ssa g e s

o f t h i s work throw s l i g h t on th e Bhaktimarga fo llo w e d by 1

Madhusudana®

fr2?TWT% 11

- 39 -

Sam ksepasSr/rake - .

I t i s a commentary on th e Samk sep a sa r ir a k a o f

Sarvajxiatma Muni# I t h a s been p u b lish e d in th e Anandasrama

S a n sk r it s e r i e s , w ith th e com m entaries o f A g n ic it Purusottam a

Masra ana K r sn a tir th a . The author h a s made an o b e $ isa n c ei

in th e in tr o d u c to r y v e r s e o f t h e t e x t . In th e co lophon ,

a t th e a d o f th e f i r s t ch a p ter th e word ‘tpsjcff'if 1 i sO k

usedpi but in th e rem ain in g th r e e ch a p ter s , th e word

i s u se d . The name o f h i s guru i s ’ Sri Vi svesvaranan da r e fe r r e d

t o in th e colophon o f th e f i r s t ch ap ter , b u t th e rem ain ing

th r e e ch a p ters have 4 r lv is v e s v a r a S a r a sv a ti in t h e ir

colophon®. Of c o u rse , i t d oes n o t make any d if f e r e n c e fo r

a c c e p t in g Madhusudana’ s au th o rsh ip o f t h i s work. The f i r s t

frrrTf^wwrwprifijo-rag trr^ -t^ q c rq q -fp j

•f rrSfq ii

40 -

l i n e o f th e in tr o d u c to r y v e r s e o f th e .'A dvaitasiJdhi ’ i s

o n e and th e same. MadhusQdanas o th e r works n e i t h e r m ention

t h i s work, nor does t h i s work m ention any o th e r work o f

h i s , y e t th e in t e r n a l e v id e n c e s in th e work le a d u s to

b e l i e v e th a t t h i s work h a s been composed by h i s e x c e l le n t

p e n . We have th e same ty p e o f d is c u s s io n in s id d h ih ta b in d u 8

and 1 Samksepa SabLraka’ concerned w ith th e t o p ic 'ThatI

th oux a r t* .

In t h i s work o f Madhusudana, we f in d th e names o f

V isvaved a and P ratyag Visnu a s th e te a c h e r o f h i s own 1

te a c h e r se

Gu dhar th ad ip ik a s

I t i s a ru n n in g commentary on th e g r e a t work

Srimad BhS'gavadgita. I t was p u b lish e d by th e N a tiv e o p in io n

P r e s s Bombay in Saka 1802, and th e same to g e th e r w ith

S’ . f ^ T T f S ^ W ? l

■aqmtf sranSfrfii erf f? g* u

41

th e • su b o d h in l' , th e comm a n t airy on th e same work by Sridhara,

by N irn ayasagar p r e s s , Bombay in 1905 a . d . The wording o f

t h e co lop h on s o f th e ch a p ters o f th e G udharthadfpika

co rre^ son d s to th o s e o f th e co lophon s o f t h e ch a p ters I I ,

I I I & IV o f th e San ksa>asarirakasangr a h a tik a , and a s in

t h e co lop h on s o f both th e s e works V isv esv a ra S a ra v a ti i s

m entioned a s th e guru ^ jm s f - to —say—t h a t ^ o f Madhusudana

s a r a s v a t i , i t i s e s t a b l is h e d beyond d o u b t^ v isvesvara

s a r a s v a t i was th e guru o f Madhusudana. N ext, th a t th e f i r s t

l i n e o f th e l a s t o f th e v e r s e s p u t a t th e end o f th e work

i s th e same, a s th e l i n e o f in tr o d u c to r y v e r s e N o .2 in th e

' A d v a ita s id d h i1. The author m en tion s th e work* Bhaktirasayana*1

which in d ic a t e s h i s a u th o r sh ip . T h is work shows him

1. I went through ® m an u scr ip t o f ‘ Gudharthadipika- ' which

I had from L .D .I n s t i t u t e o f In d o lo g y . I t $ i s upto XII

Adhyaya o n ly , w r itte n in 1793 Vikrama Samvat.

* <f twFrprP?S^TTfT. 'S'f^FT Tfa I " VII*16

n o t a s a Staunch b e l ie v e r o f A d va ita monism, b u t a s an

a rd en t d e v o te e who f ir m ly fo l lo w s th e p a th o f B hakti, and

t h i s le a d s him to occupy a u n iq u e p o s i t io n in th e f i e l d o f

In d ian p h ilo so p h y

Bha gavadbhak t i ra sayajx,a s h

I t i s an oth er work on r e l i g i o u s p h ilo sop h y ,. The p a th

o f d ev o tio n i s expounded in t h i s work. I t h a s been p u b lish e d

by Goswarai Damodara i a s t r l in t h e Achyuta Granthamala s e r i e s .

The colophon o f t h i s work d e c la r e s Madhusudana a s a

p e r ip a t e t i c te a c h e r who p reach ed th e g o s p e ls g iv en by 1

I>aramahanrisas» I t d oes n o t co n ta in th e name o f h i s

paramaguru i . e» V isv esv a ra , which h as been m entioned in

many o f h i s o th e r works, The k a r ik a no . 19 o f th e f i r s t

ul'i£asa, c o n ta in s a r e fe r e n c e to ' V ed ah tak alp alatik a* and

t h e K arika Mo. 23 o f th e same u l l a s a c o n ta in s a r e f e r s i c e

to ‘S id dh antab indu1. T h is p ro v es Madhusudana1s a u th orsh ip o f

- 42 -

'rfti

I

the sane work. Moreover on the other hand, the <3udhartha-

dipika States that the topic on hand is further developed by1

the author in his ‘Bhaktirasayag^*• This definitely proves

it to be a work of Madhusudana.

Bhagavata Prathama^loka vyakhya s

It is a theological work of Madhusudana. It was

published by Nitya Swarupa Brahma cari of Vrndavana in Saka

1955, with ten commentaries. The author seems to have

intended to write a commentary on the whole work or on the

major portion of the Bhagavatapurana# for, the colophon

which occurs at the aid of each of his works is absorb from

this particular work. The last line indicates the name of

Bhaktirasayana saying that "all the varieties of experience

of the soitiment of Bhakti have been stated by us in the

- 43 -

% 3PF*rrf*U iffcRFT W f^ T I •vjj - 16,

4 4 -

jij 4

B h ak tirasayan a . F eu i^ ill b e d e scr ib e d h e r e ." The su b seq u m t

p o r t io n , o f th e work, d oes n o t even r e f e r to th a n .

Madhusudana' s au th o rsh ip o f t h i s work i s beyond doubt.

T h is t lk a h a s been d iv id e d in t o th r e e p a r t s by

Madhusudana. In th e f i r s t p a r t , th e aupantsada in t e r p r e ta t io n

i s g iven ; and th e second and th e th ir d p a r t s r e s p e c t iv e ly

c o n ta in s pauran ika and k ev a la b h a k ti e x p la n a tio n .

The f i r s t p a r t o f t h e t lk a e x p la in s th e term s ‘T at'

and *tvam*. Summarising t h e Brahm asutras o f Badai^yana,

Madhusudana g iv e ^ th e e x p la n a tio n o f f i r s t fo u r s u tr a s , which

seem s to be somewhat s im ila r to Vallafcha1 s in t e r p r e t a t io n .

I n th e second p a r t , th e term s - Vasudeva, Sarikarsana, Aniruddha

and Pradyumna h a v e been o m itte d and in s t e a d o f th a t ,

Madhusudana h as u sed Vi r a t , H iranyagarbha, Atfyakrta and

S a k sin . A l l o f them a r e one and th e same, th e d if f e r e n c e th a t

ap p ears to u s , i s b eca u se o f U padhi. The f i r s t th r e e stan d

f o r th e l im it e d c o n sc io u sn e s s and th e l a s t one fo r th e Pure

SRTTtq I I

45

C onsciousness. In the th ir d in terp re ta tio n o f the Kevala

Bhakti, Madhusudana exp la in s the theory o f Devotion in

b ri e f .

Mahimna stotratika" :

The o r ig in a l sto tra has been composed by Puspadanta-

cafya# and Madhusudana wrote a commentary on i t . I t was

published by Nim ayasagara Press# Bombay# in 1S00. In the

beginning o f the commentary, Madhusudana pays homage to

h i s preceptor Visvefevara and the colophon a t th e end o f the

t e x t mentions h im se lf as a bee s i t t in g on th e lo tu s f e e t1

o f th e i l lu s t r io u s Visvesvara Sarasvati Moreover^ th ere

i s a d is t in c t reference to' V edantakalpalatika/ in th e2

commentary on th e verses n o .26 and 27 . These evidences

confirm th a t t h i s work can be included amongst th e works

ascrib ed under th e name o f Madhusudana.

TO w f 11

” Comm, on verse No. 26.m i W f ^ c ! 1

« # * 0 # 'O

Comm, on verse No. 27

- 46 -

In th e commentary, Madhusudana p r a is e d b o th s iv a and

v isn u # He f i r s t r e f e r s t o 'a n c ie n t a ca ry a s b u t d oes n o t, »

1m ention them . As h e was a d e sb te e o f Visnu h e h o ld s th a t

Puspadanta h im s e lf p r a is e d both s iv a and Visnu in t h e same

Qs t o t r a to show t h a t th ey a r e n o n - d i f f e r e n t . He h a s given

a b r i e f l i s t o f works on v a r io u s b ran ch es o f Sanskrit

l i t e r a t u r e o f h i s days* He does n o t comment on v e r s e s 3 2 -3 6 .

I t i s a commentary on Sankara1 s Da sa s i o k / . I t was

f i r s t p u b lish e d a t Benares by Babu Govinddasa Gupta in

V.Sam 1944. I t h a s l a t e r e d i t io n s a l s o . In t h i s work, th e

au th or h a s made o b e isa n c e in t h e f i r s t b e n e d ic to r y v e r s e3

a t th e b eg in n in g o f th e commentary. The colophon o f t h i s

work resem bles-a lm o st e x a c t ly w ith th a t o f th e 'A d v a ita ra tn a -4 5 6

akaana . The V ed a n ta k a lp a la tik a and A d v a its id d h i r e f e r t o

S i ddkntabindu

i .

K

TOT - Comm- or) Vea.se no:<?

aftsHR f t W f t 11

rR fi i

S -^d W TTfH : f g i P = d f ^ t I v .K .p .8 7 .

I a . B . P . 4 9 0 .

- 47 -

Siddhantabindu, and Siddhantabindu refers to ! Vedghtskalpala-

_1tikar This proves that he is the reputed author of this

work.

Prasthanabheda s

I t was published with a Hindi translation by Pt.

SarayuPrasada Misra of Bankipura Patana in 1897 A.D. and

by the Vanivi^asa Press, Sri ran gam in 1912. This work does

not have a colophon, so, one cannot firmly regard

Madhusudana as i t s author® Mr. p.C®Divanji i s of the

opinion that 'Prasthanabheda' is an independent work, and

not a part of the comm aatary on the 7th verse of the

'Mahimnastotrai He assumes that having been inspired by the

2idea, contained in the 7th verse of the Mahimnastotra fee

I if

t / 1 \

■PrafT^J i - p- 133

^ lift,

^ fr ^fbr: qjirRmW T t q x r ' f t w : q^^TfTfcf ? |

jfan f w p ifT ^c^F T f^ gtRrrqtrfq- f =r 11

Mo:

48

Madhusudana may have w r it te n i t a s an independen t work. I t

may a ls o be p o s s ib le , t h a t some c o p y is t may have in c o rp o ra te d

th e 'whole o f i t , w ith s l i g h t v a ria tio n s* in th e commentary,

th in k in g t h a t one and th e same id e a i d e n t i c a l l y runs through

bo th th e works. On th e o therhand , th e au th o r, may have taken

o u t th e r e le v a n t p o r t io n from th e commentary on v e rs e 7 o f

th e s to t r a , and have w r it te n th e f i r s t one o r two l i n e s a s

an in tro d u c tio n , g iv in g th e name 'P rasthanabheda *.

Mr. Chattqpadhyaya h o ld s th e view t h a t *p ra s th a n a th e d a 1 i s

a p a r t o f th e ‘M ahim nasto tra tika ‘ on v e rs e no . V II. He says

t h a t words o f th e v e rs e n o .7 * cannot

be understood i f th e tp ras th S n ab h ed a’ be tak en a s an2

independen t work, we have an account o f

3, Madhusudana S a ra sv a ti : H is l i f e and works - A

R ejo ineder by Mr. C h a k tra v a r ti . A nnals o f th e Bhandarkar

O rie n ta l R esearch I n s t i t u t e . Poena v i l . I X Ju ly 1927.

PS 324 - 328

- 49 -

RiHci T and cjwrqfsj d is c u s se d in th e same

\o rd er a s th e y w ere in th e v e r s e . And th e conclusion :

i s a ls o th e same a s i s found in th e v e r s e . N ext, t h e t e x t

b e g in s w ith th e se n te n c e 's " m ^rr^TUTT rp| =%qr cfTcq^

qpqnRT ^fcl W T^r fr*Tf 'a n d th e

m angalst& nza which o c c u r s in v a r ia b ly in a l^ m ost each and

ev ery work o f h i s , i s a b sen t in t h i s work o n ly . Had

Madhusudana w r it te n i t a s a sep a ra te work, h e would have

s ta r te d th e work w ith man g a l stanza* I t p r o v e s t h a t i t i s

n o t an in d ep en d en t work o f Madhusudana b u t a commentary on

v e r s e 7 o f th e M ahim nastotra.

H a r i l i l a vyakhya :

I t i s a commentary on th e ’H a r i l i l a 1 o f Vopadeva - a

s y n o p s is o f th e Bhagavatapurana. I t was p u b lish e d w ith a

p r e f a c e in S a n sk r it by P t . Isw arachandra S a s tr i and p t .

H aridasa V idyavagi^a in th e C a lc u tta o r ie n t a l s e r i e s n o*3

in 1920 A*D® I t i s d iv id e d in t o tw e lv e c h a p te r s , each

50 -

1c o n ta in in g th e same co lop h on . The l a s t v e r s e o f t h i s

work g iv e s th e name o f th e au th o r , w ith o u t any in fo rm a tio n about

him . The p r e c e p to r o f th e author i s nowhere m entioned .

Nor i s th e r e r e fe r e n c e t o any o th e r work o f Madhusudana.

T here i s n e i t h e r any e x te r n a l nor any in t e r n a l ev id en ce to

p r o v e th a t t h i s work i s composed by Madhusudana, t h e

au th or o f t h e S iddhantab indu . I t e v in c e s n e i t h e r th e depth

o f th e m eta p h y sia l th ou gh t nor w ide know ledge and

e x p e r ie n c e s , which c h a r a c t e r isef 'the works o f Madhusudana

t h e [Sidhhantabindu. The e d ito r o f t h i s book and Prof,M odi

h a v e regard ed t h i s work a s one w r itte n by Madhusudana,2

t h e author o f S iddhantabindu. ^ ^ § 1 ’ Abhayankara S g s tr i

s t a t e s th a t th e r e w ere f i v e Madhusudana S a r a s v a t is , and th e

one, who was a d i s c i p l e o f Sridh ara S a r a s v a t i , was th e

1® rfcj

> * # • * * # #

« « « • tf

/

2 . S iddhantabindu - P.M- M odi. The Sujna G oku lji

Zala Vedanta P r iz e 1921. Page : 37

- 51 -

author o f t h i s work, h e b e in g a d i f f e r e n t p erson from th e1

a u th o r o f th e *Si ddhantabindu' . But h e d o es n o t throw

any more l i g h t on t h i s p a r t ic u la r m a tter , and, so , th e

au th orsh ip o f H ar ilila -V y a k h y a ' rem ains an open q u e s t io n .

Anandamandakini s

I t h a s been tw ic e p u b lish e d in th e P a n d it o f Benares

New S e r ie s . V o l .I . and in th e Kavyamala o f Bombay Gucchaka

I I . I t i s a f i n e s to tra # c o n ta in in g 102 S tan zas, in th e

r ~S a r d u la v ik r id ita m etre in a b e a u t i f u l d ic t io n and lu c id

s t ^ le , g iv in g a b r i e f d e s c r ip t io n o f Lord Krsna, and h i s

v a r io u s h e r o ic d e ed s . The l a s t S tanza o f t h i s work g iv e s

t h e name o f th e au th or, and th e colophon c o n ta in s some

in fo rm a tio n about Madhusudana, th a t h e was a d e v o te e o f th e

son^ o f Nanda. As th e author does n o t m ention th e name o f

h i s p r e c e p to r , which was a custom ary p r a c t ic e among th e

a u th o rs , Mr. P.M. Modi comes to t h e c o n c lu s io n th a t

An an doman daki n i was an e a r l i e r p ro d u ctio n o f th e au th or.

1» Siddhan-tsfoandu - p*.~M'.-~-M©d&'»—ghfe-'Sujna- Sokuij-i Zaia

Vedanta- Pri-ze—1934'. P-age t 33 .

| - StUVranfeWnclu - comm. oi- ft-h h a H a n to flQ S a s h i . O n ie n te ? ) S e n Y e o . fo o v iq .

* * 1 *•» : <-> 0 ___________ V O r \ ...V <0 \ s ~ \ /-• O ........................... <-.................. .......................................................................... - ... ...................

- 52 -

MiJfee. Afchayarikara Sastri says that the ■&nandamandakin:T,$ u - _ _Kr$iakutjjahala, H arllila - Vyakhya and Vedastutl are the

works o f one Madhusudana Sarasvati, who -was a d iscip le of1

Sridhara Sarasvati But i f i t were so, the author would

have given the name o f h is preceptor, and we could have an

idea of the other Madhusudana* But not a single reference

i s found in th is connection which would lead us to think

o f another Madhusudana. And Mires. Abhyankarji a lso cannot

throng any lig h t on th is matter* So, the problsn of the

authorship o f th is work i s s t i l l undecided.

Unpublished Works s

Rajnam^ratibodhah :

Mr. S.N.Tadpatrikara has given a short survey o f the2

contents as found in the manuscript. The work has been

divided in to three parts *

l*v Siddhantabindu - commented by H±-ss. Vasudeva Sastri

Abhayankara*Govt. Oriental Series Class A No.2, page 27

2* Maddhsudana Sarasvati : His l i f e and works s- S.N.

jevlkara. Annals o f the Bhandarkara Oriental

Research In stitu te poona. Vol. VIII Part III

P. 331 - 334

- 53

11* I - ^ o S jW T T fa ^ T JPfWq

11* 1*1 strrr^

i im i m jfcisfh# wft?The colophon o f the f i r s t p a rt s ta te s th a t Madhusudana

was th e d is c ip le o f Akhandananda and not o f Visve&vara__ i '

Sarasvati. The colophon a t th e end o f the second part2

om its the name o f h is Guru, and the colophon o f the th ird3

p art has the name o f th e work. The author o f t h i s work i s

Madhusudana Sarasvati. Prom th is fa c t on ly , Mr. Aurfrecht

and Mr. Tadpatrikara have a ttr ib u ted th is work to Madhusudana

1.

2.

d n i ?i 18t cmV9<S, VO '

T r ^ jffW

qh-T O T T f^tf^''^trfq'TO | ib id<%. 'i 1d

ib id

1

^■pijwrrf’i ^ f g n xud.

- 54 -

S a r a s v a t i . I t i s tr u e , th a t th e colophon o f th e f i r s t p a r t

h a s th e name o f th e au th o r , b u t, in s t e a d o f s t a t in g

Madhusudana* s r e s id e n t ia l p la c e a t B enares, i t m en tion s

him a s a r e s id e n t o f R atnadri cave on th e Ratnagahga. T h is

ty p e o f r e f e r e n c e i s n o t found in th e works o f Madhusudana

S a r a s v a ti , th e author o f AS. T h is means th a t Madhusudana

S a r a s v a t i , th e author o f t h i s work, i s n o t id e n t ic a l w ith

t h e author o f ' s i ddhantabindu1 and • v e d a h tsk ^ lp a la tik a * .

A s ta v ik r it i-V iv a r a n a o r V iv r i t i :t a u> ^

I t h a s been n o ted in Mr. D iv a n j i’ s in tr o d u c t io n to

• Siddhantabindu* t h a t ’T h is work was p u b lish e d w ith a

commentary, a t C a lcu tta in Saka 18n by s .S . B h a tta c a r y a .1,1

Mr® K shetreshachandra Chattopadhyaya d oes n o t c o n s id er t h i s2

work to be a work o f Madhusudana. The rea so n s >hidn h e

g iv e s fo r h i s b e l i e f a r e ( i ) th e name m entioned in th a t

1® Siddhantabindu - Ed. by Mr. P .C . D iv a n j i . Gaekwad*s

O r ie n ta l S e r ie s . Baroda. No. LXLV 1933. p.%.

2 . Madhusudana S a r a sv a ti - H is l i f e and works : by K.

C hattcpadhyaya. A nn als o f th e Bhandarkara O r ien ta l

Research I n s t i t u t e , Poona. V o l.V II I . P a r t IV

P. 425 t o 427

work i s Madhusudana Maskarin and not Madhusudana Sarasvati.a

( i i ) th e author mentions Nffsirfiha as h i s Guru * h ile

MadhusHdana h im self has mentioned Vi^vesvara# Sririma and

Madhava as h i s Guru in h i s other works, ( i i i ) Madhusudana2

Maskarin# m aitions h im se lf as a son o f JOrsgadvaipayana

w hile we have seen before, that# Madhusudana was a son o f* *

Puvandar icSry a*

I could not get any inform ation about the above work

o f Madhusudana Sarasvati.

K rsnakut|hala N a taka :

Mr. Divarigi has given a b r ie f account o f t h i s work,3

which he gathered from a manuscript. According to th a t.

- 55 -

1. /* *r

2 . The comm. exp la in s -

?fli *rra i C3 . Madhusudana Sarasvati t P.C. D ivanji. Annals o f the

Bhandarkar O riental Research I n s t i tu t e . Poona. V o l.x iJ I .

P .I 1931. Oct. Page s 1-16

56 -

th e colophon o f th e work has the name o f Madhusudana 1

S arasvati. The introductory p ortion o f the work s ta te s

th a t he was a son o f ArundhateL and Ngrayana o f th e sandilya

Gotra, and was a devotee o f Visnu from h is childhood, and2

was a d is c ip le o f Krsna SarasvatT. He says th at the idea

o f composing the p lay occurred to him when he saw Lord3

Visnu in a dream. He then g iv es th e l i s t o f dramatical

1.

2.

3 .

sppT srrs? 11 it** v

■fWrf P- 2,-

p r n i f : # <p $cFcrft tfTifd: g HrPrf iT praV’-^T^rr-

f^psq: %SDT=f:

w *rr*fr irjrt il sr •# *r u xwd *>■TTTrtrr^wf*^gfr ^ i R p p ^ T tpT dT

11 p : Z .

57

p la y s which were composed by h is Guru - Gopvaca^Bna,

Kamakutuhala, Danavinodana, Tayanivihaya. e tc . In the same

a c t, he says th a t h is paramaguru, Mukunda was a great devotee

o f Vi^iu. A ll th ese d e t a i ls «hich occur in th e manuscript,

go aga in st Madhusudana, th e son o f Pu^andaraca^a, and

th e d is c ip le o f V iivesvara Sarasvati, being th e author o f

th e work. I t may have been w ritten by some other person,

named Madhusudana.

I ^varapratipattiprakasa :

This work was brought to l ig h t by Mr* Ganapati S astr i

o f T riven dr arct in 1921. He, in h is p reface S ta tes th a t

th e work has been composed by Madhusudana, th e author o f

Siddhantabindu. ‘ P rof. Modi and Mr. D ivanji agree with him.

As I could n ot see t h i s work, I am not in a p o s itio n to

esqpress my opin ion .

Atmabodhati ka s

Dr. R.L. M itra’ s N otices o f Sans. Mss. a t No. 1677,

n o tes t h i s work under the name o f Madhusudana Sarasvati.

The colophon o f t h is manuscript S ta tes th a t i t has been

composed by Madhusudana. Abhyahkara Sastri holds th a t

58 -

th e r e i s no doubt reg a rd in g t h i s work, having been composed

by Madhusudana S a ra sv a ti , th e au th o r o f ’Si ddhantab!n du'•

I have n o t been a b le to see t h i s m anuscrip t, and so cannot

express any op in ion re g a rd in g i t s a u th o rsh ip .

I have n o t b e e i a b le to g e t any m anuscrip t, no r could

I g e t any fu r th e r in fo rm atio n about 1 V e d a s tu t i t ik a ',

’S a n d i ly a s u tra t ik a 1, 1 S a s tra s id d h a n ta l e sa tik a * , *Ja t 'id y -

a rs ta k r ti ' , ' T a ttv a c i ntam apyalokakantakoddhara ‘ , and

A dvaitam anjara*, except th e names a s n o ted by some sc h o la rs

under th e name o f Madhusudana SX'arasvatT.

However, n o t a l l , b u t. some o f th e works, which a r e

a sc r ib e d to Madhusudana S a ra s v a ti , y ie ld some in te rn a l

ev idence b earin g upon th e conclusion th a t th ey a re th e

outcome o f th e same pen -

S i ) ( i ) S iddhantabindu - a commentary on S a n k a ra 's D aeasloki

( i i ) A d v a ita s id d h i. ( i i i ) Advai t a r a tn a r ak jsan a (iv )

Vedantakalp a la t ik a (v) Samk sepa s a r i raka s i r a sn g rah a tik a

(v i) G udhardhadipika. - a commentary on G ita .

(v i i) EShagavadbhaktirasayana ( v i i i ) Bhagavata-pratham -

sioka-Vyakhya. (ix ) M ahim nasto tra tika ( in c lu d in g

P rasthanabh eda) •

— 59

( I I ) The works which, though, th e y bear t h e names o f

'Madhusudana a s t h e i r au th or , cannot w ith c o n fid e n c e be

a t t r ib u t e d t o him a r e - ( i ) B a r i l i l a Vyakhya

( i i ) jmandamandSkini ( i i i ) Atmabodha^ika.

( I I I ) The works which even when th ey b e a t th e name o f

Madhusudana S a r a s v a t i , can n ot be c o n s id e r e d a s h i s own

works a r e - ( i ) Rajnampratibhodhah ( i i ) K rsn akut% iiah-

N ataka. ( i i i ) A sta v ik r tiv iv a r a n a ..

(IV ) And th e works abou t which n o t a s in g le p i e c e o f

in fo rm a tio n h a s been a v a i la b le and h en ce which cannot

be d ir e c t ly o r in d i r e c t l y c o n s id e r e d to b e h i s works

a r e - ( i ) V e d a s tu t it ik a . ( i i ) SahdilyasttFtra-ti’K f i i i )

S a s tr a s id d h a n ta le s a t ik a . ( iv ) T attvacin tam an yalok ak an ta-\ _

koddhara. (v) J a ta d y a 's ta v ik r t i . ( v i ) Advaitam anj a r l .

C on clu sion :

A f te r a d e t a i l e d d is c u s s io n about th e a u th orsh ip o f

works a t t r ib u t e d t o Madhusudana, t r u ly or f a ls e ly # we can say

t h a t h e m ust h ave a ch iev ed an e s t a b l is h e d s t a t u s and p o p u la r i ly

ow ing to h i s power o f e x p r ess io n s t i f l e and judgem ent a s

ev id en ced in h i s works,

- 60

A r ic h d eve lop ed , im p a r t ia l p h ilo s o p h ic a l a t t i t u d e

i s found in th e works o f Madhusudana S a r a sv a ti£ „ H is works

r e v e a l him, n o t o n ly a s a staun ch fo l lo w e r o f th e d o c tr in e

propounded by j&rlmad- ^arikarercarya, b u t a ls o d i f f e r s from

Sankara on se v e r a l i s s u e s and b o ld ly g iv e s h i s own o p in io n .

isOf co u rse , h i s courage in t h i s regard^notew orthy, f o r th e

orth od ox atm osphere in which he l iv e d , was n o t q u ite

fa v o u ra b le f o r th e show o f such co u ra g e . B ecause the

h y p n o tic g r ip o f S an k ara's id e a s on th e i n t e l l e c t u a l s o f

h i s age was trem endous.

H is works r e v e a l h i s m ost s u c c e s s fu l a ttem p t to

s y n th e s is th e r e l i g io u s and p h ilo s o p h ic th o u g h ts . 5he

d o c tr in e s o f Vedahta have bean s y s te m a t ic a l ly d ev e lo p ed

by U p n isa d ic Q u o ta tio n s . So a ls o th e d o c tr in e o f b h ak ti

h a s been propounded and e s t a b l i s h e d ’w ith th e h e lp o f

Q u o ta tio n s tak en from S n r t is . ( r h e developm ent o f both -

th e A d vaita p h ilo so p h y and b h ak ti h a s reached i t s c lim ax

in h i s s c h o la s t ly works.~j

As a commentator, Madhusudana1 s power o f in t e r p r e t in g

th e t e x t and r e v e a lin g t h e h id den m eaning i s rem arkable.

61 -

And as an author, h is l i t e r a r y as w ell as in te l le c tu a l

e x ce llen ces are o f a high order. His contribution to

Indian philosophy outstanding. ^We fin d in him a rate

combination o f a Vedahti c philosopher and an ardent

preacher o f devotion .)

-x-x-x-x-x~x*-