Veṅkaṭācala Itihāsamālā

The following work was available only in a Telugu edition, copies of which have become rare. Manuscripts of the work do not seem to be available in Madras. An elaborate search may fetch a copy, possibly in Mysore. But even that seems doubtful so far. It has had therefore to be published from the Telugu edition, which, it is said, had the benefit of the learning of MM. Srirangacharya, the widely respected scholar of Tirupati.

The work is of considerable importance incorporating reliable tradition in regard to certain features of the temple organisation at Tirupati. The traditional information seems to have been collected from reliable sources, although we cannot as yet be certain as to the actual person who compiled the work, though the work states it, it was an Anantarya who did it. Notwithstanding this defect, the work deserves publication. Having had to look through the work for the purposes of a history of the holy shrine at Tirupati, which I have been commissioned to write for the Devastanam Committee, I found the matter too valuable to be lost, and recommended its publication by the Devastanam Committee.

I have great pleasure in acknowledging the courtesy of Mr. A. Ranganatha Mudaliar, B.A.,B.L., Commissioner, Tirumalai-Tirupati Devastanam, in agreeing to its publication among the Devastanam Series. I also acknowledge with pleasure here the assistance rendered by Sahitya Siromani S. Rajagopalacharyar, who has been working with me throughout.

S. KRISHNASWAMI AIYANGAR.

Venkata (Tirupati)

This is a work which professes to be a historical account of the various arrangements that were made from time to time for the conduct of worship in the temple on the hill at Vengaḍam. It is not a regular history of the temple in the sense that it gives an account of the temple from its origin down to the time of writing of this account, but is more or less a record of certain important incidents in its history. The whole account consists of seven chapters dealing with the topics connected with the contesting claims of Saivas and Vaishnavas to the temple, the settlement arrived at as a result of the discussion between the contesting claimants, the arrangements ordered in consequence thereof by the Vaishnava teacher Rāmānuja through the local ruler Yadava Raja. This is followed by the further arrangements that were called for and made subsequent to this, but all of them more or less during the life and under the commands of Rāmānuja. It may therefore be taken to be an account of what was done to the temple by Rāmānuja and does not purport to give the history of the shrine either in the period previous to Rāmānuja regarding which some allusions could be found here and there, and naturally nothing for the subsequent period. The work therefore deals as it were with one particular period of its history, which is comprised perhaps in the century after Christ, 1050 to 1150.

They said that the God who manifested himself in the temple on the south bank of the tank of Svami Pushkariņi was no other than the worshipful Skanda. They gave as a reason for this that the name Svāmi is peculiarly applicable to him as forming part of Kumārasvami which is the acknowledged name of Subrahmanya. The holy tank near the temple goes also by his name as belonging to him. There is nothing strange about it, they urged, as other names are similarly attributed in use, such as Bhimasēna being generally called Bhima and Satyabhama being generally called Bhāma.

They quoted for authority the Vamana Purāṇa which contains a section illustrative of the holiness of Vēnkaṭāchalā. Skanda is said to have consulted his father in regard to a place peculiarly holy to Vishnu, for performing a penance and getting rid of the sin of killing the Asura Taraka. The father, Siva, advised the son to go to Vēnkaṭāchala as the holiest of the holy places of Vishnu. Skanda went to Venkaṭāchala and performed his penance on the bank of a tank, according to Vāmana Purāņa, part ii. He there found Vayu (god of the air) also similarly performing penance, and, having paid his respects to him, he also set up there to do likewise. Therefore they urged that the God there ought to be regarded as God Kumārasvāmi. Being in the position of one performing a penance, they said, the God is there exhibited without his extra hands and characteristic weapons. For these and for many other good reasons they urged the place is really a holy place of Skanda, not Vishṇu.

They pointed out further that for some time past some Vaishnavas took possession of the place and having there set up some of the Vaishnava images which did not exist in the temple before, took possession of the temple and conducted worship there as though it were a Vaishnava shrine, thus making people believe that it was a Vishṇu temple; but the place, without a doubt, owing to the merits of the penance that Skanda had performed there, was in actual truth a Saiva holy place.

Therefore they urged that in this temple everything would have to be conducted according to the prescription for worship laid down in the Saiva Agamas.

Having heard this, the Yadavarāja began to ponder seriously over the matter, and, having known that for some considerable period of time the place was regarded as a Vaishnava holy place and that worship was being conducted by the Vaishnavas according to the Vaikhānasa Āgama, he thought he should not commit himself to any course of action without proper investigation, notwithstanding what the Saivas urged.

The Vaishnavas that were left in Tirupati feeling themselves not competent to discuss with the Saivas on equal terms gave a detailed report of what took place to Rāmānuja then in residence in Srirangam.

On receipt of this information Rāmānuja set forward immediately from Śrirangam. Having reached Tirupati, he intimated the Yadavarāja of his arrival and offered to explain satisfactorily all the objections that the Saivas put forward against Tirupati being regarded a Vaishnava shrine, and prove to the satisfaction of the Yādavarāja, on the authority of the Sastras, that Vēnkaṭāchala was the hill of Vishṇu, and remove his doubt in regard to the matter. He informed the Raja he undertook the journey from Srirangam specially with a view to this.

Having been thus assured, the Yadavarāja brought together a great assembly of learned men both from among the Saivas and from the Vaishnavas, and having brought them together proposed the subject for their discussion in the proper form.

The Saivas stated that Kumārasvāmi obtained his father Śiva’s permission and arrived at Venkatagiri (Tirupati), and set up to perform his penance on the bank of a holy tank, according to Vamana Purāṇa. There standing, with his feet touching the ground, on the south bank of the Svāmi Pushkariņi wearing a coiffure of matted locks and keeping aside the warlike weapons as unsuitable to an ascetic, Skanda shows himself in the form of an image to enable people to offer him worship and thus fulfil their cherished wishes. Therefore they stated that the place where Skanda performed penance in the hill Vẽngaḍam must be regarded as a Saiva holy place.

They further asserted that this image of God cannot be said to be Vishnu. The weapons characteristic of Vishnu, such as the conch and the discus were not seen in the image; while the matted locks and nāga (serpent) ornaments characteristic of other Gods are seen on the image. Therefore the image cannot be regarded as that of Vishnu.

Rāmānuja’s Answer: Before God Śrīnivāsa appeared on this hill, Brahma, Rudra and the other gods besides several Rishis are stated to have already begun performing penance there. If so, would it not be madness to state that one of those performing penance should be singled out as being exclusively associated with this hill and as giving it sanctity? Further than this, in the self-same Vāmana Purāņa, in chapter 14, Vēnkaṭāchalam is held up as a very holy place dedicated to Vishṇu, whose temple was on the south bank of the Svāmi Pushkarņi. In the same Vamana Purāņa, in several other contexts, the place is described as the residence of Vishṇu in the form of Varaha, and in the form of Śrīnivāsa. It is further stated to be a place fit for the residence of those devoted to Vishnu. Therefore it is clear that it was regarded as a place holy to Vishṇu and not to any other.

In the same manner, the Varaha Purāņa states that Venkatachalam was the temple of Varaha-Vasudeva in the colloquy between Dharani (the earth) and Varaha in the first chapter of the Venkatachala Mahātmya section. There is an equally clear statement to this effect in the Padma Purana in chapter 24.1, and in the Garuda Purāņa in the colloquy between Arundati and Vasishța, in chapter 63. Similarly this hill is stated to be a Vishṇu-kshētra in the Brahmandapurāņa in the colloquy between Bhrigu and Nārada. So also other Purāņas make similar statements.

In addition to these clear statements, all the Purāņas state that this hill was the Krida-parvata, (sporting hill) in Vaikuntha wherefrom it was brought down by Garuda. In consequence, this hill is called the Vaikunthagiri, Garuḍāchalam and by other similar names. These would make it clear that the hill was sacred to Vishṇu: More than this Vaidika Brahmans on occasions of the performance of ceremonies prescribed in the Śrutis and Smritis indicate this place as Varāha Kshētra. There is not much use in repeating the statement again and again. Even the Veda which is acknowledged to have no beginning, speaks of this `hill as a hill holy to Vishṇu in the Rig-Veda (Eighth Ashṭaka, eighth chapter and section 13).

On this clear exposition by Rāmānuja that the hill Venkatachala was a hill dedicated to Vishnu, the Yadava Rāja became quite clear in his mind that there was no reason for regarding the Saiva contention as deserving of any serious consideration.

Rāmānuja : “The Saivas assert that the name Svāmi Pushkarini indicates clear association with Kumārasvāmi.” This name was given to it because Kumārasvāmi performed his penance on the bank of this tank. The statement that, for this reason, the tank belongs to Skanda is not worthy of acceptance.

The meaning of the term Svami Pushkarini is that this tank is the lord of all similar tanks in the world. It is a term indicative of leadership or excellence. It is so explained in the Purāņas, and the Sanskrit compound is so explained. Therefore the term Svāmi cannot be held to apply to Kumārasvāmi as an abbreviation.

Moreover the term Svāmi can convey Śrīman Nārāyaṇa as he is the creator, protector and destroyer of all the worlds. Association with such an unparallelled leader’s name might as well be connoted by the term, if we make the first part of the compound a word in the genitive case which would not offend against Sanskrit grammar.

On the bank of that tank there are several beings engaged in the performance of penance. Kumārasvāmi is just one of them. The tank therefore cannot be the holy tank of Kumāra. Among the authorities quoted by my rivals in support of

their contention, the following explain the name Svāmi Tirtha as the king among the holy waters or Tirthas. The authorities referred to are Vamana Puraṇa, chapter 40/25, Varāha Purāņa, First part, chapter 38, and chapter 50/18. So also the Venkatesa Sahasranāmāvali. Similarly, Varāha Purāṇa, part II, chapter i; Padma Purana, chapter 32. Further-in chapter 3 of the Mārkandēya Purāņa this tank is described as the king of similar holy tanks.

In the 2nd chapter of the Brahma Purāṇa, it is said that Sarasvati wished to be considered the holiest among the Tirthas, and obtained the boon from Brahma to the effect. She flowed as the river Sarasvati in consequence. Owing, however, to the curse of Pulastya, who found the flowing river inconvenient to him, she came down to Venkaṭāchalam as Svami Pushkariņi an unflowing tank. This implies that Svāmi Pushkariņi is the holiest of all holy tanks. Therefore in the Skanda Purāņa, part 11, chapter 1, and in part II of the same Purāṇa, the name Svāmi Pushkariņi for this tank is explained as being due to the presence on its banks of the two lords of the world Śrī Varāha and Śrīnivāsa. The name of the tank is explained as being due to their presence in such close proximity. This tank is described in the Varaha Purāṇa, part I, chapter 35, as the sporting tank of Vishṇu in Vaikuntha, and brought down to the earth along with Venkatachala.

On the basis of these authorities, it is clear that this tank is called Svämi Pushkarini for the following two reasons; First, a bath in it is capable of giving Sāyujya (union) with the deity, the lord (of the world) Nārāyaṇa; secondly it is called Svāmi Tīrtha because of its proximity to the Lord God of the world, Nārāyaṇa.

The holy Tirtha associated with Kumārasvāmi, however, is the one called Kumāra Dhāra. Even that is a Tīrtha holy to Vishnu because the whole of the hill Vēngaḍam has been described as the sporting ground of Vishnu. It is also regarded as the hill belonging to Vishṇu-Varāha. Kumārasvāmi however having found it necessary to perform a penance to Vishnu came to Vishnu’s hill and placed himself on the bank of the Vishnu Tīrtha in order that he might purify himsel

by a bath in that Tirtha, and perform his penance in the holy place. Since he chose that spot and that holy water, the stream there goes by the name Kumāra Dhāra. So Kumārasvāmi has to be located not on the bank of the Svămi Pushkariņi, but near the Kumāra Dhāra or Kumāra Dhārikā.

When the Yadavarāja heard these arguments from Rāmānuja, he showed the greatest respect to Ramanuja and accepted his conclusion as the only acceptable conclusion.

Seeing that the Yadava Rāja was feeling convinced by the arguments of Rāmānuja the Saivas grew jealous and addressed him as follows.

“O, King. In whatever manner the name Varāha Kshētra is appropriate to Vengaḍam by the fact of association with the deity Varaha, in the same manner the name could be derived from that of Kumāra Svāmi by association. Although it may be true that the Tīrtha Svāmi Pushkariņi may be the Tirtha par excellence, this fact does not debar the name being derived from association with Kumāra Svāmi. Therefore as the form of any other God than Vishnu cannot be got out of the image which adorns the southern bank, so the God represented by the image on the holy tank nearby could not be got rid of association with other. Gods than Vishnu.”

“Further we do not assert that the hill has no kind of a connection with Vishnu. We take it upon ourselves to state that the image of God on the southern bank of the Svāmi Pushkariņi. is Skanda. We say further, by this fact, that this tank is associated with Skanda. The features of other Gods which are found in this image cannot possibly be hidden by anybody.”

Having heard this, the Yadava Rāja said to the Saivas that what they stated did not appear to him appropriate. “It is stated in the Puranas “, he said, “that this hill Venkaṭāchala was the place sacred to Vishṇu, and as such Kumāra Svāmi came there to make penance and get rid of the sin of having slain Därakasura. Further than this, since it is stated that the divine sporting-hill of God Vishnu was brought down by

Garuda from Vaikuntha, it follows that the tank of divine holiness was also the same God’s sporting tank. If so, it cannot follow that the name Svāmi Pushkariņi was given to the tank because of Skanda performing his penance on the bank of this tank. “Therefore it is clear”, he said, “that you are in no position to give an effective reply to the arguments adduced by Rāmānuja Muni to establish that there was no manner of a connection between this tank and any other God, and therefore what Rāmānuja Muni had actually proved seemed quite adequate to establish his contention. What remains to be done therefore is only whether the God represented by the image on the south bank of the tank is Vishṇu or Skanda. Even in regard to that, I shall ask Rāmānuja Muni to state what he may have to adduce as satisfactory reason.” So saying he addressed Rāmānuja with much attention and respect.

Yadava Rāja: Addressing sage Rāmānuja, the Yadava Rāja said:“It was clearly demonstrated, by what the sage had already urged as evidence, that the shrine on the south bank of the Svāmi Pushkariņi was a Vaishnava holy place, and that the tank itself was a Vaishnava holy tank. He said that he was prepared to accept that position; but wanted that Ramanuja should put it beyond a doubt by evidence that the deity on the south bank was Mahāvishņu, and no other god.” Thus addressed by the Rāja, Rāmānuja put forward his arguments as follows.

Rāmānuja: Bespeaking the Raja’s attention, Rāmānuja said It was well recognised by all that the deity on the south bank of the tank was Vishṇu and no other, and there was little in it that required to be proved by him. That the lord on the hill Vēnkața was only Madhusudana without an equal, and there is not the slightest reason to suspect that the deity there is any other god. To say that he is Skanda is to assert that the light emitted by the fire-fly is sunlight. Proceeding to evidence, the Purāņas which are accepted and read as authoritative holy books, all of them declare without a doubt that the deity on the south bank is no other than Nārāyaṇa, the lord of Śri (goddess Lakshmi). In the first chapter of the second part of the Varaha Purāņa God Varāha himself is made to say that Śrīnivāsa appeared on the south

bank of the tank to grant the boon prayed for by Vāyu (god of the air) who was in penance for the purpose. He also stated that Śrīnivāsa was going to remain there to the end of the kalpa (one of the greater periods of time) and was going to be worshipped by Kumārasvāmi (Skanda or Subrahmanya). In the face of the statement, it cannot be argued that the Śrīnivāsa is Skanda. Further it is stated that Skanda performed a penance in the presence of Śrīnivāsa with a view to get rid of the evil attaching to him by his killing the Asura Tāraka. How then can Skanda the worshipper be transformed into Skanda the object of worship. It is not only in this Purāņa, but in several of the Purāņas describing the great merits of Venkaṭāchala, it is clearly stated that Śrīnivāsa and Varaha, both of them forms of Vishnu, were respectively on the south and west banks of the holy tank under reference. More than this the Bhavishyottarapurāṇa recounts a colloquy which took place between Śrīnivāsa and Varäha. When Śrīnivāsa married Padmavati, the daughter of Akāśa Rāja, it is stated in the Puranas that both Varaha and his consort Bhumi (the goddess of earth) were invited. Thus there are many stories in the Purāņas which state that both Srînivāsa and Varāha were separately enshrined on the south and west banks of the tank. Much more than this, as we stated already in the first stabaka, the term sirimbiḍasya used in the Rig Veda, Eighth Ashtaka, eighth chapter, 13th Varga (section) is explained as referring to Śrīnivāsa. The deity in this shrine has a single face and four arms, while it is stated that Skanda at birth had only one head and two hands; and that when it came to a question of being nursed by the Pleides (Krittika) he is said to have acquired six faces and twelve hands. Further than this when Skanda resolved to go to Vēnkatachala for performing penance, he is said, by the Šaivas, to have given up all his weapons. This is obviously an error, as others who went on a similar purpose, such as Raghava (Vishṇu as Rama) and the Pāṇḍavas when they went to perform penance carried their weapons with them. The Vamana Purāņa in chapters 22 and 23 states clearly that when Skanda went to perform penance he carried all his weapons with him. It is not stated elsewhere in the work that he laid

down the weapons. The deity that is present here, however, is shown with two hands in the posture of holding weapons, and the other two in the pose of granting people boons and giving them refuge. The right hand is in the posture of giving boons and the left hand is placed on the thigh just above the knee as if to indicate that that is the limit of suffering to all seeking salvation. It is clear therefore that the image here is intended to represent God Nārāyaṇa. For Skanda in Venkaṭāchalam to which he had gone to perform penance, the image representing him ought to be that of a penitent devotee, not an image to be worshipped. It is hardly necessary to say anything further. This image has on its right chest the Srivatsa, the seat of Lakshmi, which is inappropriate to any other God. Therefore this is conclusive proof that the image is a representation of Vishnu. Further, according to the Vamana Purāṇa, chapter 40/21, there is an account of Brahma and other gods having obtained a view of the deity in the divine Vimāna (sanctum) of this temple. On that occasion Vishnu is said to have appeared to human beings as the image of Śrīnivāsa in the sanctum built by man. It is clear from this account that. the deity enshrined in the temple was intended to be Śrīnivāsa and no other. In chapter 24/5 of the same work, it is stated clearly that Skanda who was in residence near the Kumāra Dhārikā came down daily, bathed in the Svāmi Pushkariņi and worshipped Śrīnivāsa. This is narrated to Parvati by God Paramasiva. From this account, it is clear that the deity on the south bank of the Svämi Pushkariņi was not regarded as Skanda, but Srinivasa daily worshipped there by Skanda. Further than this in the Varaha Purana, chapters 50/18, it is set down that Mahādēva, the father of Skanda made a request of God Vishṇu that he himself might also have a place of residence allotted to him on the hill, and that he was directed in reply to have his residence at the foot of the hill. Therefore it becomes clear that God Mahādēva himself had no kind of residence on this hill. In chapter III of the Brahmapurāņa, it is stated that Šankarāja built the temple and set up the image of Srinivasa in it as a result of Śrīnivāsa’s coming into his view. Again the Dravida saint Nammālvār refers to the god at Tirupati in his Tiruväymoli which is regarded as the Veda itself in Tamil. In that work the image in this holy place is clearly stated to be Vishṇu and no other. This is confirmed by statements made by the other Alvārs in regard to this particular holy place.

The fact that the image of this god here is not in possession of the conch and the discus is explained as follows. He had a great devotee in a ruler of the locality generally known as Tonḍaman Chakravarti. At one time when he had to carry on war against his enemies who had the better of him, Vishṇu lent him his pair of weapons to secure him victory, as is generally well known. He had remained since then without these weapons for a considerable length of time at the Tondaman’s request. This is stated in the 7th chapter of the Brahmapurāṇa, and is confirmed by the account found in the 11th chapter of the Brahmānḍa Purāņa as well.

There is no allusion anywhere to Skanda having lent his weapons to anybody, or of having laid them aside for purposes of penance. It is therefore clear that the deity here is not Skanda.

In regard to the other points brought out prominently by the Śaivas, namely, that on occasions, the pūja is performed with bilva in this temple, bilva (marmelos) which is a peculiar article with which to worship Śiva; the absence of weapons characteristic of Vishnu to support the conclusion that the image is that of Vishnu; the possession of features peculiar to other gods, such as the coiffure of matted locks of hair, the wearing of jewels of the pattern of cobras (nāgas); these could be satisfactorily met by the following arguments. The argument of the absence of weapons has already been met above. In regard to the character of Śrīnivāsa as a manifestation of Vishnu, many Purāņas in several places state clearly that the Śrīnivāsa in Venkaṭāchalam is but an avatar of Vishnu in Vaikuntha. In offering proofs, it must be recognised that the authority of sacred texts is superior to that of inference. The texts referring to this deity, it was already pointed out, are quite clear in respect of its Vishnu character. The bilva is quite as acceptable to Devi (Lakshmi) as Tulasi (basil) is. Whatever is acceptable to his consort Lakshmi is equally

acceptable to god Śrīnivāsa. Even in the Śāstras, bilva (marmelos) is included among the articles with which pūja (worship) is to be performed on an equal footing with tulasi (basil). That bilva is acceptable to Lakshmi is stated clearly in the Śrīsūkta (prayer addressed to Lakshmi). The Hārītasmrti mentions bilva as one of the principal objects of use for worship. Coming down to evidence, the Varāha Purāņa, in part i, chapter 45/13, describes the appearance of Śrīnivāsa on Venkatachalam to Dasaratha, and it is stated there that the rishis who were living on the south bank of the Svāmi Pushkariņi performing penance worshipped him on occasions with bilva. In the second part of the same Puräṇa, chapter 9, it is stated that Mahalakshmi generally resides in gardens where bilva is cultivated. Thus it is clear from the statements in the Śruti, Smrti, Itihasa and Purāņa that worship with bilva is appropriate to Vishnu.

Vishnu is stated to have allowed his hair to grow into matted locks in several of his avatars. The existence of the matted locks therefore need not be held to detract from the Vaishnava character of the image. In the Śrī Bhāgavata, book ii, chapter 5, in the colloquy between emperor Nimi and the sage Navayōgīśvara, it is laid down clearly that on special occasions worship may be offered to Vishnu wearing a coiffure of matted locks. Similarly in the 12th chapter of the Pancharātra, the Sātvata Samhita, one is advised to contemplate Vishnu as having a coiffure of matted locks and a beard, carrying in his one hand the danda (a stick of palāśa or aśvaka carried by Sanyāsis and Brahmacharis) and kamandala in another and as wearing a garland of lotus seeds. Similarly Vishnu is described to have worn matted locks in several avataras. It cannot therefore be held that the wearing of matted locks is the characteristic of other gods only. More than this the Skanda Purāņa in part I, chapter 10, states that Śrīnivāsa wore the matted locks when he appeared in Vēnkaṭāchala. A similar statement is made in Vāmana Purāņa, chapter 34/15.

It is stated in Skanda, Vämana, Varaha, Pādma and other Puranas that, at the request of Brahma and of other Gods,

Vishnu suppressed his fearsome form and assumed a more pleasant looking shape. In the Padma Purāṇa, chapter 26/3, Vishnu is said to have been dressed up in cloth carrying figures of nāga. In chapter 27/4 of the same work he is said to be wearing matted locks. In chapter 33/10 a fearsome form and a pleasant form are both described as forms alike of Vishnu. In the Bhavishyottara Purāṇa, chapter 11, it is stated that Ākāśa Rāja presented jewels made in the form of cobras to Śrīnivāsa on the occasion of his marriage with the Raja’s daughter Padmavati. In the esoteric sections of the Bhavishyottara Purāṇa, Śrīnivāsa is said to have worn jewels in the form of Nagas, where Paramēśvara expounds Śrīnivāsa to Parvati. The Brahmanda Purāņa, chapter 2, states that the great Nāga Adiśēsha serves as all kinds of dress and decorative ornaments. In Pädma Purana, chapter 34/11, Śrīnivāsa is said to reside along with Lakshmi on the hill which was an incarnation of Adiśēsha. In the Brahmanḍa Purāṇa, in the chapter containing Vēnkaṭēśa Sahasranama, Vishnu is stated to have matted locks, the conch and the weapon sakti (a javelin or short double sword used as a throw weapon), and jewels in the form of cobras. It is further stated that God there appeared in both the forms. It is therefore clear that jewels in the shape of Nāga were always worn by Śrīnivāsa. It cannot therefore be said that that form of jewel is peculiar only to other gods. Further, since we have now offered proof, it is wrong to regard these features, the use of bilva, the absence of the conch and discus and the wearing of the matted locks and nāga jewels as necessarily peculiar to other gods. It would be equally clear that, if these are peculiar to Śiva as our opponents say, they could hardly be appropriate to Skanda. These contentions are therefore clearly baseless.

The image of god that appears before us has the mark of Śrīvatsa, and carries Lakshmi on his chest. These make it clear that He is God Nārāyaṇa and nobody else. Nārāyaṇa is stated to be the only primeval being. Brahma and Šiva and other gods sprang from him. Nārāyaṇa is again stated to be the creator of the universe, its protector and ultimate destroyer. That it is from this primeval Supreme that Brahma, Siva and others arose is stated clearly in the Upanishads. If

Nārāyaṇa is the cause of creation, protection and destruction, and, as the cause can contain features that appear in the consequence, the wearing of the matted locks and the nāga jewel is but an indication that Brahma and Śiva emanated from him. This form of Vishnu is described with the same features in the Satvata Samhita. In the Padma Purāṇa, chapters 27/3, these powers are ascribed to Vishnu, and he is also stated to be surrounded by the various powers to carry out these functions. It therefore becomes clear that the features pointed out by our opponents as peculiar to other gods become as much features of Vishnu.

The next point for consideration is what the quotation from the Padma Purāņa above conveys, namely, that Näräyana is the primary cause of all that exists. Vamana Purāņa, chapter 24 (end of the chapter) states that the form of Srinivasa is the primal form of Nārāyaṇa himself. It is in conformity with this, that Pey Alvar describes him as exhibiting the two forms, namely, that of Vishnu and Śiva. In chapter 21/2 of the same work, it is stated that Vayu made an incantation of the saving mantra Rama, and that Skanda did so also, having obtained the mantra from his father Śiva. The Brahmanda Purana, chapter 2, and Brahma Purāņa chapter 2 alike, state that it was Adisesha that became the sporting hill of God and thus gained the enjoyment of God’s perpetual presence on him. Both Varaha Purāņa, part II, chapter 3, and Padma Purana, chapter 32/10 state clearly that Śrīnivāsa came down to the earth at the commencement of Kritayuga. Therefore the god whose image is on the southern bank of the Svami Pushkariņi with all the features, such as the wearing of the matted locks, the cobra ornaments, worship with bilva, etc., is no other than Śrīnivāsa, the consort of Lakshmi, the lord of Vaikuntha, who came to reside in Venkatachalam, worshipped by Skanda, Mahādēva and others. It is thus clear that He is Sriman Nārāyaṇa and no other like Skanda or Śiva.

When Rämänuja thus concluded his arguments, the Yādava Räja told the Śaivas that he felt convinced that their arguments were all satisfactorily met by Ramanuja, and that,

if they had anything further to urge, they might do so the next day, and requested Rāmānuja that further arguments will continue on the following day. When again they assembled, the Saivas urged that the deity on the south bank of Svami Pushkariņi is either Skanda or Mahādēva, and if not, it must be Harihara; but it never could be Vishnu. They urged in support that the emblems of Vishnu were not incompatible with the deity being Skanda, as the Vamana Purāņa, chapter 21/2 where the origin of Skanda is recounted by Brhaspati, it is stated clearly that Skanda had a part of Vishnu in him. Since Skanda is said to have one head and two arms, or six heads and twelve arms, it may not be inappropriate if sometimes he had one head and four arms. If, however, this is objected to, we claim the image to be that of Mahādēva on the same argument as the Vaishnavas who claim these peculiar features as not unsuitable to Vishnu, the primal cause of the universe, as we claim Mahādēva to be the primal cause. Even otherwise since the Vaishnavas claim that the god is Vishnu, because of some of the Vaishņava Agamas, so we call him Šiva because of the Saiva signs in the image. Again if it is inappropriate to regard him as Mahādēva, he is certainly Harihara, since the signs of both Vishnu and Śiva are found in the image, and even Vaishnava saints have so described them. Therefore in Skanda Purāna chapter 8, Śrīnivāsa is described as Mahādēva, as also in several other places, where the two terms are used together. Therefore we may be certain that it is Harihara and nobody else. Similarly in the Padma Purāņa, chapter 27/4 des: cribing the coming down of the God, he is said to have worn face mark resting upon a base resembling that of the eighth day moon. This part moon is a characteristic of Śiva, and is generally associated with him. Therefore the image must be regarded as that of Harihara. Any other contention beyond the three seems to us unacceptable.

The Yadava Rāja replied that he could not agree with the Saivas in respect of the image being regarded as either Skanda or Mahādēva, but whether it could be Harihara, he would ascertain from Rämänuja himself. Rāmānuja replied that all that was urged by the Saivas was wrong. In chapter

10 of the Bhagavat Gita, Krishna says everything that exists has a part of Vishṇu in it, and therefore even Skanda and Mahādēva must necessarily contain a part of Vishnu. It does not require much further argument. In the Vamana Purāṇa, chapter 21/2, it is stated that Skanda is said to have had his three baths daily and worshipped Nārāyaṇa in the presence of Vayu who was also there performing his penance. Since he is said to be contemplating upon Nārāyaṇa to get rid of the sin of killing Tārakāsura, and since, in chapter 24/5 of the same work, Vāyu is said to be performing penance long since to God Śrīniväsa in the same place, and since Skanda is said to have been worshipping Srinivasa ever since, it would be absurd to say that the worshipping Skanda and the worshipped Śrīnivāsa are one and the same.

Further, another question arises. It is admitted that on the south bank of the tank, there is an image of a god enshrined in a temple. It is stated equally clearly in the same Purāņas that Skanda came there to perform penance to Vishnu to get rid of the sin of his having killed Tārakāsura in battle. These Purāņas again say that in the same place God Śrīnivāsa appeared for the benefit of Brahma and the other Devas, the Brahmarishis and Rajarishis and others who were performing penance there with the same object. The question therefore arises whether the God referred to as being on the south bank of the tank is, in the circumstances, Skanda or Srinivasa. It can hardly be Subrahmanya because he is said to have come there to get rid of his sin by penance, attracted towards the place for gaining the grace of Vishnu, and therefore one among the many like Brahma and others who were similarly engaged. How can Skanda then be regarded as the object of worship to the others? More than this, the same Purāņas assert that Skanda came daily from the Kumāra Dhärikā to offer worship to Śrīnivāsa, and therefore it cannot be said, on their authority, that Skanda’s habitual residence was on the south bank of the Svāmi Pushkariņi. Nor is this fact of the establishment of Skanda in a shrine stated in any of our authorities. Moreover the same Purănas state that Šankarāja and Tondaman Chakravarti built a shrine to Vishnu who appeared in response to the penance of

Rāmānuja had successfully met all the arguments urged by the Saivas in their support, the Yadava Rāja inquired whether the Saivas had anything else to urge in support of their contention. They said in reply that they had become dumbfounded by the power of incantation of Rāmānuja, and further if, as the ruler of the locality, he carried out the wishes of Ramanuja by force, they were in no position to do anything against him. We would be satisfied however completely if Rāmānuja could show us that his contention is acceptable to the god himself. The Yadava Rāja said in reply that, having once diverted his mind from the truth by false arguments, they were still attempting to persist, and warned them that if they so persisted; he would

be compelled to punish them, and, turning to Rāmānuja, asked him to demonstrate to the Saivas that his contention has the approval of, the god himself.

Rāmānuja resolved within himself to put the question beyond doubt by making the god wear the conch and the discus, as he is described in chapter 11 of the Brahmänḍa Purāņa. Then addressing the king, he said that, if the king would be pleased to make a conch and a discus, the special symbols of Vishnu, and the rope, the goad and other weapons characteristic of other gods, and place them in the sanctum of the temple, the weapons that the god assumes would put it beyond a doubt whether he is Vishnu or any other god.

This was agreed to, and each party got the weapons characteristic of Vishnu and other gods made, and proceeding with the king to Venkaṭāchala placed these in front of the god, and locking the door kept watch all round. Rāmānuja on his part approaching the God by means of his Yoga practices prayed that he might assume his own weapons as before, and put the question beyond a doubt. After daybreak the Yadava Rāja took both the parties along with him and got the door opened, when to his surprise, he saw the image of Śrīnivāsa wearing the conch and the discus. Thereafter he became a devotee of Ramanuja and punished those who set up this mischievous contest. He became thenceforward Rāmānuja’s disciple, accepting from him the Vaishnava initiation of the holy branding and other ceremonies, and continued to be his devoted disciple. Thereafter Rāmānuja satisfied with what had been done, got the king’s judgment published and restored the old form of pūja according to the practice of Vaikhanasa Agama, having duly performed the great ablution as an initial purificatory ceremony to the god and the temple. Further he took steps to restore the damaged Vimāna Anandanilaya in accordance with the prescription of the Vaikhanasa Agama, and put round the neck of the Bhagavan a garland of gold containing an ima māvati, and re-established the deity as before. got rid of the danger from the Saivas to the and, making Yādava Rāja who was his discipl u temple, everything

required to conduct the regular worship in the temple, Rāmānuja retired to Lower Tirupati (Govindarajapaṭṭana) and remained there for sometime.

Rāmānuja while himself residing in Tirupati (Lower Tirupati) saw that the Friday ablution (abhisheka) was performed every week as prescribed in the Ananda Samhita of the Vaikhānasa Agama. He also arranged that that for Śrīnivāsa the upright face mark should be of pacchaikkarpuram (preparation of camphor) as prescribed in the 27/41st chapter of the Padmapurāṇa, and Bhavishyōttara Purāṇa 7/11. It was laid down by him that thenceforward this ought to be the upright face mark for three days beginning Friday, and for the following three days beginning Monday, this mark should be of white earth, He also prescribed the application of collyrium to the eye over and above this. On Thursdays the jewellery worn by the God should be removed completely, and the image should be dressed all over in flowers as prescribed by him. This flower dress should be removed on the following Friday, and the upright face mark should be made on the forehead of the image with the sacred earth (tiruman). The image should also be made to wear the under cloth and the upper cloth. Then the morning worship ought to be performed. Afterwards the image should be given ablution, and then decorated with all the jewels with the upright face mark of camphor as before. He further prescribed that on Fridays the Nācchiyār Tirumoli of the Prabandham sung by Godā, an incarnation of Bhudēvi should be sung, as in the removal of the jewels worn by the image, the golden representation of Padmavati would also be removed to the regret of the god. He further arranged for the celebration of the festivals to the god. As there were no streets laid down for taking out the and he made arrangements for the laying out of the the purpose. He also arranged for the continunce of the orship in the temple by making it the duty of those descent from one Bimbādhara who was peculiarly attacked god, was an expert in the Vaikhanasa Agama,

and who received the Vaishnava initiation of Panchasamskāra from himself. Having got all these arrangements made through the Yādavarāja who had become his disciple, Rāmānuja set about, and arranged for the installation of the images of the Alvärs in the Gōvindarāja temple at Tirupati at the foot of the hill. This he did, as they themselves in their works thought it polluting the hill to go up even for worship, and therefore worshipped God on the hill from a distance, because it is stated in the Vamana Purana, chapter 21/2, that great rishis like Suka, Bhṛgu, and devotees like Prahlada, and kings like Ambarisha, all regarded the hill Venkaṭāchala as an abode of Vishnu, and therefore too sacred to be trodden upon.

Sometime before this, it happened that a Chola ruler by name Krmikantha destroyed several Vishnu temples and carried his destructive work even into the holy place of Govinda Rāja at Chitrakūṭa (Chidambaram). Some of the Vaishnavas of the locality carried the Utsava image (moveable festival image) from there, and removed themselves for safety to Tirupati at the foot of the hill, the larger image of the sanctum having been thrown into the sea by order of the Chola. Having heard of this calamity with great sorrow, Rāmānuja set up another image in the sanctum, and with the utsava image brought by the Vaishnavas instituted a regular system of worship in the temple of Gōvinda Rāja in Lower Tirupati. All this Rāmānuja did through the Yadava Rāja, resident at Nārāyaṇapura, who fixed a spot on the bank of a tank to the south of the town of Tirupati, and there installed the images of Govinda Rāja. He then built the temple and a town round it by name Rāmānujapura, and instituted a course of worship as in Tirupati on the hill. Having carried all these out through the Yadava Rāja by exhibiting to him the great devotion that he himself felt for Srinivāṣa, Ramanuja returned to Srirangam. He made three or four visits afterwards, on occasions and instituted various services in the temple as occasion demanded. The Yadava Rāja carried out everything as arranged by Ramānuja. “On one of these occasions Rāmānuja instituted in the temple of Govinda Raja the shrine for the goddess Gōda, who as a24

vyuha (manifest form) of Lakshmi, was found in his garden of basil and brought up by Bhaṭṭanatha. Thereafter the Yādava Rāja arranged for the conduct of the worship of Gōvinda Rāja in the month of Āni (August-September) as also the bathing festival in the month of Margali (DecemberJanuary). The Yadava Rāja then constructed houses in the four streets of Ramanujapura, and granted them as a free gift to devotees of Vishnu like Tirumalai Nambi, Ananta Alvan, and others. He also built the bazaar streets to the north-west of the temple and a granery for paddy to the east of the town.

Relating to the story of the step well and the golden well.

As has been related in the 2nd part of the Varāha Purāņa, chapter 10, Tondaman Chakravarti was ruling the locality at the beginning of the Kali age. He used to visit the temple of Srinivasa by the underground passage called the Nrisimha cavern. On one occasion this Chakravarti having been driven out by enemies went through the secret passage to the temple at dead of night. In consequence of this intrusion, it is said that Sri Devi hid herself in the chest of Śrīnivāsa, while Bhudēvi sheltered herself in the well dug by Ranga Dāsa for watering the flower garden. Hearing these stories from the old people in the locality, Rāmānuja arranged to set up images of Śrīnivāsa with Bhūdēvi on the bank of the step well constructed by Ranga Dāsa, and arranged for their daily worship. He also asked that flowers, basil, etc., used in worship of Śrīnivāsa may be dropped into that well for the sake of Bhūdēvi. On one occasion when Alavandăr undertook a visit to Tirupati, he found that Tirumalai Nambi, who used to bring water from the Pāpanāśa tank and bathe the images in it, on that particular day, was not able to do so owing to illness. Alavandar took the occasion to address a prayer to God Śrīnivāsa that he might accept the water from the well formerly constructed by Ranga Dasa, as the equivalent of water from Pāpanāśa, and ordained that thereafter the water from that well should be regarded as of equal holiness with

that of either Pāpanāśa or Akāśa Ganga. It has therefore become the habit in consequence that the water of that well was being used for all holy purposes in the temple. Having heard of this, Rāmānuja ordained that the water of Pāpanāśa, Akāśa Ganga, and this well called Sundarasvāmi well were all of equal holiness, and the water of any of these should be used for all purposes in the temple. The two wells referred to above, the step well of Ranga Dasa, and the Sundarasvāmi well were stated to have been originally constructed for the kitchen convenience of Śri Devi and Bhūdēvi. Having fallen into neglect for sometime, it is stated that the gardener Ranga Dāsa repaired them and made them fit for use. This is stated in the 9th chapter of the Varāha Purāṇa, part ii.

In the Bhavishyottara Purāṇa, chapter 13, it is stated that this was done by Tonḍaman Chakravarti in his previous birth. Chapter 7 of the Brahma Purāṇa, however, contains a statement that the well was actually constructed by Bhūdēvi, and that the flower garden was made by the Sudra (probably Ranga Dāsa). In the Bhavishyottara Purāṇa, it is stated that the devotee Ranga Dāsa met the Vaikhānasa temple priest Gopinatha on the way, and discovered the god at the foot of the tamarind tree. Therefore, in constructing the temple, he took care that the tree was not affected by the structure. In chapter 9 of the Varaha Purana in the section bearing on Ranga Dasa, Ranga Dāsa is said to have constructed the teme. In the story of Tonḍaman Chakravarti in chapter 10, it is stated that God commanded the Chakravarti to construct the shrine, which he attempted to do between the tamarind tree and the champaka tree without hurting either, and when the Chakravarti was actually exercised as to how to bring in a temple of the size within the narrow limits, it is also stated that the trees of themselves moved out of their place to make room for the temple. On the basis of these stories Rāmānuja recognised that these trees were fit for being worshipped and ordained daily worship of these as well.

The explanation for the Naga jewels on the image.

On a previous occasion, a Gajapati king by name Vira Narasimha was on a pilgrimage to Rāmēśvaram (Sētu) He

came to Venkatachala in the course of his journey, and having had his bath at the Svámi Pushkariņi offered worship at the temple of Śrīnivāsa. Having done so, he ordered the construction of a tower for the temple to complete the structure. Having gone forward on his pilgrimage taking Śrirangam and other holy places on the way, he returned to Venkaṭāchalam after his visit to Rāmēśvaram and remained there to complete the structure of the tower. During his stay he dreamt one night that a serpant came to him and addressed him as follows: “O Gajapati. I am this Venkatachala. Your constructing this big tower on the hill gives me great pain. I had therefore to proceed to the God and twine myself round his arm in carrying my appeal to him.” Having heard this, the king consulted elderly folk in the place. They told him in reply that it was a fact on the authority of the Purāņas, that the hill undoubtedly was the great serpant, Śēsha, or Ananta, and that the construction of a great tower for the temple was likely to be painful to the serpant Ananta. They advised him therefore to desist. Having heard this, the Gajapati completed the tower without carrying through the whole of his project, and, as an expitiation for the pain that he gave to Ananta; he made a golden jewel in the shape of Ananta and asked it to be put on the god as a jewel. The orthodox folk round about objected to this as the jewel was characteristic of other gods, but he was assured by the god himself, assuring them through one possessed of his spirit, that the jewel was acceptable to the God. It was thus made clear to Rāmānuja that, from the days of Vira Narasimha, this Näga jewel was worn on one of the arms of the god. On further enquiry, Rāmānuja found, from the accounts in the Bhavishyottara Purāṇa and in chapter 2 of the Brahma Purāņa, that the God was presented with this Nāga jewel for both the hands by Akāśa Raja on the occasion of the marriage of Padmavati to the God. Having ascertained this he ordained that the Nāga jewel ought to be placed on both the hands of the image.

Next follows the story of Nṛisimha : In the Skanda Purana, in the section dealing with the river Svarṇamukhari, it is stated that God Sankara performed a penance for sometime on the west bank of the Svāmi Pushkarini in contemplation of God Nrisimha, and that, in this place, Nrisimha appeared before the penitent Siva. It is also stated in the 61/29th chapter of the first part of the Varaha Purāṇa, in the Ashtottara Sata Nāmāvaļi (a string of 108 names) some of the Saivas who lived about that time wanted to build a temple on the west bank of the tank for both Sankara and Nrisimha who appeared in response to his penance. The Vaishnavas opposing it pointed out that according to the Purāņas Šiva who wished to reside there with Vishnu was asked by the latter to reside below the hill in the south-eastern direction. They also pointed out that the hill Vēnkaṭāchalam is a divine hill sacred to Vishnu, and therefore any representation of Śiva should not be installed therein. So saying they succeeded in stopping the building of the temple. Afterwards when Rāmānuja was there, seeing that God Nrisimha was of a very austere form, and since a separate shrine for this God would lead to trouble with the Saivas, ‘found authority in the Varāha Purāṇa, first part, chapter 61/29, to regard God Śrīnivāsa himself as Nrisimha in form, and therefore set up a separate shrine in the temple of Srinivasa with the tower called Ananda-Nilayam in front of Srinivāsa himself and ordained the conduct of the worship of this form of Vishnu there.

The image of Nrisimha half way up the hill.

The Märkandeya Purāṇa, chapter 2, states that a disciple of Agastya by name Suddha along with the Rishi Märkandeya once went up the hill of Venkatachalam. On the way, near the cavern sacred to Nrisimha, it is stated that Mārkanḍēya had a vision of Nrisimha. On the basis of this Rāmānuja set up a Nrisimha image on the spot where God Nrisimha appeared before Märkanḍēya, and arranged for the worship of this deity also.

Application of the camphor preparation on the chin of Śrīnivāsa

and the hanging of the shovel on the temple tower.

Rāmānuja had directed one of his disciples Anantārya, a great devotee of Vishnu, to maintain the flower garden for the service of Srinivāsa. Anantärya took great interest in this work and was doing all the work of the garden himself without seeking assistance of others, and when

ever earth had to be dug and removed, he drew upon the assistance of his pregnant wife to carry the earth for him. On this, God Śrīnivāsa was moved to pity for the woman, and, assuming the form of a young bachelor (vatu), took the basket of earth from the lady and was carrying it himself. Anantārya was wild with the young bachelor for doing what he regarded as an impertinent act. All this warning fell on deaf ears. Getting angry once, he struck the bachelor with his shovel, which struck him at the chin and left a depression there. When he went to worship Śrīnivāsa that day, he found blood dripping from the God’s chin. Guessing that it was no other than Śrīnivāsa himself that appeared as the offending bachelor, he collected the pollen from the flowers of Vishamacchada and pressed it on the wound to stop the blood, and begged the God to excuse him for the offence of hurting him. Pleased with his devotion Śrīnivāsa thought it but right that the wound should remain as it was, and asked him to place the shovel with which he hit him at a prominent place in the temple, so that it may be seen by all. This was carried out and ever since that time, on the occasion of the daily worship, Śrīniväsa is anointed with the camphor mixture on the mark of the wound at the chin.

The Puraṭṭāsi (September-October) Festival.

As directed by Rāmānuja, Anantārya (Ananta Aļvār) had set himself up in Venkatachalam, having made a big flower garden, and a large tank to irrigate it. He was engaged in the daily service of supplying flowers to the temple from this garden. God Srinivāsa demonstrated this devotion of Antārya to the public by a miracle. He assumed the form of a prince and made Padmavati take the form of a princess. They both of them engaged themselves in the pleasant occupation of collecting flowers every night in Anantārya’s flower garden. Having found that somebody was depriving the garden of its best flowers so sedulously cultivated for God’s service, Anantārya kept watch for eight days, and at dead of night on the eighth day discovered the pair moving about in the garden. He tried to capture both of them, but God Śrīnivāsa managed to dodge him and enter the temple. But Padmavati, in the form of the

princess, could not run as fast, and was actually caught and tied up to the champaka tree in the garden. Padmavati with great deference prayed to Anantarya that he might capture the husband, but might let her off, treating her as his own daughter. In the course of this colloquy day dawned, when the temple establishment entered the temple and opened the sanctum. God Srinivasa let them know, through one of them, that what took place in the garden was his own doing and commanded that Anantarya might be brought down together with Padmavati. On hearing this Anantarya was transported with joy. He came over with his basket of flowers, carrying Padmavati on his head, and set her down at the feet of Śrīnivāsa. Having heard of this occurrence, Rāmānuja directed that, in memory of this miracle, the God may be taken in procession, on the seventh day of the Puraṭṭāsi festival, round the town, and on the eighth, the day of the car festival, Anantārya may be presented with a garland of flowers and other gifts from the God himself.

The story of the God at the foot of the Tamarind Tree.

Tirumalai Nambi (the maternal uncle of Rāmānuja and a grandson of Āļavandār) was commanded by Alavandār to go and settle down at Tirupati and perform regularly the duty of bringing water for the ablution of the image in the temple there. He had settled down at Tirupati for this purpose, and, when Alavandar had passed away, Rāmānuja went over to him to have the Ramayana expounded to him. Well pleased with this, Tirumalai Nambi expounded to Rāmānuja the Ramayana with all its esoteric explanation. Rāmānuja arranged to live in the town of Tirupati at the foot of the hill as he thought it would be desecration that he resided on the hill. Tirumalai Nambi on the contrary, engaged in the temple service, had necessarily to live there and the two had arranged to meet half way up the hill. They fixed upon a tamarind tree far down the hill as their meeting place where the Ramayana was being expounded regularly. Having gone through this course of instruction for a year, Tirumalai Nambi one evening felt some contrition that because of this Ramayana work, he had to forego the midday worship of Śrīnivāsa. Having expressed30

ŠRIVENKATACHALA ITIHASAMALA

this feeling before God Śrīnivāsa that evening, he went to bed as usual. God appeared before Tirumalai Nambi in a dream and promised to show himself to him at midday thereafter. Tirumalai Nambi went about his work as usual with the recollection of this dream. One midday, Nambi felt the smell of civet, musk, the camphor mixture, etc., associated with the worship of God as when the temple worship was going on, and suddenly he saw before him a pair of foot impressions of the God with the leaves of basil offered in worship. Surprised at this sudden appearance both Nambi and Rāmānuja built up a shrine for the foot-mark at the foot of the tamarind tree, and consecrating it, properly arranged for its daily worship. As several Purāṇas have stated that in the age of Kali, God Venkaṭanatha was the God complete, Nambi and Rāmānuja arranged that all people without distinction of caste, including the Chandalas, might come and worship there at the foot of the tamarind tree. They were to take their bath at a tank called Chandala Tīrtha near about, and then come and circumambulate and offer worship at the foot marks of the god under the tamarind tree. As prescribed in chapter 62 of part i of Varāha Purāṇa, every one that wished to, worship Śrīnivāsa had to come to the spot, and, crying out the name of Govinda should offer worship at the foot and then proceed higher the hill to the temple.

The story of the image of Śrī Rāma in the temple of

Śrīnivāsa.

Once upon a time, as it is stated in the Vasishța Rămăyana, there lived on the banks of the Kritamālā (Vaigai) to the south-west of Madura of the south, there was a Rishi by name Viśvambara in the town of Kalavingam (sparrow). Having recollected the offer of protection by Răma to Vibhishana, he set himself up in penance to realise this particular act of grace on the part of Rāma. Śrī Rāma was gracious enough to give him a view of his offer of protection to Vibhishana. That Rishi made an image of what he saw and set it up there in a shrine and worshipped it daily. Some time after, there was a great disturbance in the town, and the image of Ramachandra there directed the Vaishnavas there, through one of them, who be

came possessed of him, to be taken over to Venkaṭāchala. They therefore removed the image from there, and, carrying it to Tirupati, set it down in front of Tirumalai Nambi at the foot of the tamarind tree, as he was expounding to Rāmānuja Vibhishana seeking refuge of Rama. Being quite surprised at the coincidence, both Nambi and Rāmānuja took the image of Rama from there with Janaki his consort and other attendants, and set these up according to the Vaikhānasa Āgama, and ordained the daily worship of these along with the worship of Śrīnivāsa as has been stated in the Tiruchanda Viruttam of Tirumaliśai Alvär (87).

The Story of Varäha.

Rāmānuja also ordained that the God Varaha on the west bank of the Svāmi Pushkariņi should be worshipped first by those going to worship Śrīnivāsa. This was laid down in several Purāņas describing the merits of Venkatachala such as the Padmapurāṇa, as they state it clearly that Varāha was there even before Śrīnivāsa; that he should be worshipped before Śrīnvāsa is laid down in the 8th chapter of the Brahma Purāṇa, and in the 5th chapter of the Bhavishyottara Purāṇa.

When Rāmānuja had set up the image of Govinda Raja in his shrine in Lower Tirupati and ordained that worship should be conducted as if Vēnkatachalam and Tirupati were jone place of worship, he arranged it that when the final evening ceremony of sending God to sleep was performed, these people engaged in temple service should be presented with garland in the shrine of Viṣvakṣēna (an attendant god answering to the controller of the household), before locking up the temple for the night.

Sixth Stabaka

The account of Tirumalai Nambi’s Association with Tirupati. Tirumalai Nambi (who, by the way, was according to the Guru Paramparas a grandson of Alavandăr) was one among he younger men in Srirangam, who was in the habit of attending at Alavandar’s exposition of Vaishnavaism. Aļavändar whose name was Yamunächārya was among the

teachers (Acharyas) of Vaishnavism coming really two generations after, but almost as the next important successor of the first Acharya Näthamuni. One of the main functions of these teachers is to expound the cardinal texts of Vaishnavism. On one occasion he was expounding the Tiruväymoli, the principal work of Nammālvär regarded as an exposition in Tamil of the essence of the Veda. In the course of exposition of the third ten of the third Tiruvaymoli, he expatiated upon the great religious merit of the holy place Tiruvēngaḍam and pointed out that, in such a holy place, it would be very desirable indeed for one to render service to the God by providing water for his ablution and flower for worship and decoration. He wound up by expressing his great regret that at his age, he could not undertake the important and meritorious service. Young Tirumalai Nambi immediately got up from the audience and volunteered to go to Tirupati and render this service to the God by residing there. To demonstrate the great devotion of Tirumalai Nambi, the God at Vengadam assumed the form of a hunter as Tirumalai Nambi carrying the water pot on his head was going towards the temple from the holy water of Pāpanāśa. The hunter begged of him for a little of the water that he was carrying, as he was very thirsty. Naturally Tirumalai Nambi declined to desecrate the water for the holy service by using a part of it for the purpose of drink, and so walked along quietly. The hunter kept following him as he thought. As the Nambi was repeating the Prabandha verses of Kaliyan (Tirumangai Āļvār) and moving on, the hunter made a small hole in the pot by the arrow that he was carrying in his hand and gradually drank off the whole water. Having gone some considerable distance absorbed in his recital of the Prabandha, Tirumalai Nambi felt that the burden on his head had become very light, and discovered what had happened, as the hunter was still drinking the water. To his angry question whether it was proper for him to have done what he did with the water that he was taking to the temple for God’s service, the hunter coolly answered “O, Grandfather, do not be distressed about the water. Here a little way down is a holy pool of water from which you can take water for the temple service instead”. He led the Nambi

some little way and pointed to the holy water of Akāśa Ganga, and said that “This is the holy Ganges water itself, and you might bring this daily for our service”. Having said his to indicate that he was no other than God himself, he disappeared. Struck with wonder at this exhibition of grace by God to his devotees, he became the more devoted, and was serving God with water taken from the Akāśa Ganga instead of from the distant Pāpanāśa. Since the God himself addressed him Tāta (grandfather), he was thenceforward known Śrīśaila Natha Tātāchārya or in Tamil, Tirumalai Tätāchärya). Tirumalai Nambi had a son by name Rämänuja. When he died early, he had adopted a son, who was known as Kumāra Tirumalai Nambi. Tirumalai Nambi often used to call him Tāta, and he came to be known thenceforward as Tātāchārya. Since he was friendly to everybody in the locality, he became popular and was designated Tolappa Tātāchārya or Tātārya, the friend. Having spent some time longer in this service, Tirumalai Nambi ultimately passed away. Rāmānuja arranged in memory of Tirumalai Nambi the annual celebration of a festival in which the God is given an ablution on the day following the Adhyayana Utsava (festival of the recital of Prabandhas). The image of the God is to be seated in the hall Mangalagiri. A number of Śri Vaishnava Brahmans used to go to the Akāśa Ganga and bring water from there chanting all the way the Prabandha of Tirumangai Ālvār, and carrying the water in procession through the four streets running round the temple, bring it into the temple and with the water perform the ablution of the image and saṭagõpa (sin-destroyer ; this is of the shape of the head gear made of metal covered with gold, carrying on the top of it a pair of sandals symbolical of the feet of God).

The Account of Anantarya.

Anantārya belonged to the West country and was born at Lughunütanapura on the banks of the Kaveri (Sirupudupaṭṭanam or Siruputtur). His father was a Kēśavācharya of the Bharadvaja gotra. The date of his birth is given as Kali 4154 or Śaka 975 expired, the year Vijaya, the month of Chaitra and nakshatra Chittra.. Having received his early

education and attained to much competency, he went down to Śrirangam, along with a number of others including Yegñēśa, to Rāmānuja, who then was teaching in Śrirangam. Rāmānuja welcomed them among his pupils and was giving them instruction in the Vēdānta. One day Rāmānuja enquired who among the number of his disciples was willing to volunteer service at Venkatachala to supply flowers, etc., to God Venkatanatha there. Most of them shrank from it as the place was cold and otherwise uncomfortable for a permanent residence, while Anantārya bravely got up and offered his services. Rāmānuja applauded his courage and sent him there. It is this that gave him the later name Ananta-purushārya, purusha being the equivalent of a manly man. He went to Venkatachalam and laid out a big garden and even constructed a tank for the purpose of watering it. He took the flowers from this garden and offered them for the daily service in the temple. Having heard that at one time Yāmunächārya had a little cottage put up near the temple and from there was doing the flower service, he built up a Manṭapa on the same spot, and set up an image of Yāmunāchārya and arranged for conducting the worship of Yāmunāchārya in that pavilion. He generally strung the flowers together into garlands in that pavilion and took them over for service to the temple at the time of worship, carrying them on his head. Anantārya went on doing this service with his son who was called Ramanuja.

The account of Tirumalai Nambi's Association with Tirupati. Tirumalai Nambi (who, by the way, was according to the Guru Pararnparas a grandson of Alavandar\ was one among the younger men in Srirangam, who was in the habit of attending at Alavandar's exposition of Vaishnavaism, Alav&ndar whose name was Yamunacharya was among the 30 SR1VENKATACHALA ITIHASAMALA this feeling before God Srmivasa that evening, he went to bed as usual. God appeared before Tirumalai Nambi in a clream and promised to show himself to him at midday thereafter.

Tirumalai Nambi went about his work as usual with the recollection of this dream. One midday, Nambi felt the smell of civet, musk, the camphor mixture, etc., associated with the worship of God as when the temple worship was going on, and suddenly he saw before him a pair of foot impressions of the God with the leaves of basil offered in worship. Surprised at this sudden appearance both Nambi and Ramanuja built up a shrine for the foot-mark at the foot of the tamarind tree, and, consecrating it, properly arranged for its daily worship. As several Puranas have stated that in the age of Kali, God Venkatanatha was the God complete, Nambi and Ramanuja arranged that all people without distinction of caste, including the CfaanddlaSy might come and -worship there at the foot of the tamarind tree. They were to take their bath at a tank called Chandala Tirtha near about, and then come and circumambulate and offer worship at the foot marks of the god under the tamarind tree. As prescribed in chapter 62 of part i of Varaha Purana, every one that wished to worship Srmivasa had to come to the spot, and, crying out the name of Govinda, should offer worship at the foot and then proceed higher up the hill to the temple, The story of the image of Sri Rama in the temple of Srinivdsa.

Once upon a time, as it is stated in the Vasishta Ramayana, there lived on the banks of the Kritamala (Vaigai) to the south-west of Madura of the south, there was a Rishi by name Visvambara in the town of Kalavingam (sparrow) , Having recollected the offer of protection by Rama to VibhLshana, he set himself up in penance to realise this particular act of grace on the part of Rama. Sri Rama was gracious enough to give him a view of his offer of protection to Vibhishana. That Rishi made an image ef what he saw and set it up there in a shrine and worshipped it daily. Some time after, there was a great disturbance .in the town, and the image of Ramachandra there directed the Vedshnavas there, through one of them, who be32 SRIVENKAT ACHALA ITIHASAMALA teachers (Acharyas) of Vaishnavism coming really two generations after, but almost as the next important successor of the first Acharya NathamunL One of the main functions of these teachers is to expound the cardinal texts of Vaishnavism.

On one occasion he was expounding the Tiruvaymoli, the principal work of Narnmalvar regarded as an exposition in Tamil of the essence of the Veda. In the course of exposition of the third ten of the third Tiruvaymoli, he expatiated upon the great religious merit of the holy place Tiruvengadam and pointed out that, in such a holy place, it would be very desirable indeed for one to render service to the God by providing water for his ablution and flower for worship and decoration.

He wound up by expressing his great regret that at his age, he could not undertake the important and meritorious service.

Young Tirumalai Nambi immediately got up from the audience and volunteered to go to Tirupati and render this service to the God by residing there, To demonstrate the great devotion of Tirumalai Nambi, the God at Vengadam assumed the form of a hunter as Tirumalai Nambi carrying the water pot on his head was going towards the temple from the holy water of Papanasa. The hunter begged of him for a little of the water that he was carrying, as he was very thirsty. Naturally Tirumalai Nambi declined to desecrate the water for the holy service by using a part of it for the purpose of drink, and so walked along quietly. The hunter kept following him as he thought. As the Nambi was repeating the Prabandha verses of Kaliyan (Tirumangai Alvar) and moving on, the hunter made a small hole in the pot by the arrow that he was carrying in his hand and gradually drank off the whole water. Having gone some considerable distance absorbed in his recital of the Prabandha, Tirumalai Nambi felt that the burden on his head had become very light, and discovered what had happened, as the hunter was still drinking the water.

To his angry question whether it was proper for him to have done what he did with the water that he was taking to the temple for God's service, the hunter coolly answered " O, Grandfather,* do "not be distressed about the water. Here a little way down is a holy pool of water from which you can take water for the temple service instead ". He led the Nambi INTRODUCTION 33 some little way and pointed to the holy water of Akasa Ganga, and said that " This is the holy Ganges water itself, and you might bring this daily for our service ". Having said this to indicate that he was no other than God himself, he disappeared. Struck with wonder at this exhibition of grace by God to his devotees, he became the more devoted, and was serving God with water taken from the Akasa Ganga instead of from the distant Papanasa. Since the God himself addressed him Tata (grandfather), he was thenceforward known Srfsaila Natha Tatacharya or in Tamil, Tirumalai Tatacharya) . Tirumalai Nambi had a son by name Ramanuja. When he died early, he had adopted a son, who was known as Kumara Tirumalai Nambi. Tirumalai Nambi often used to call him Tata, and he came to be known thenceforward as Tatacharya. Since he was friendly to everybody in the locality, he became popular and was designated Tolappa Tatacharya or Tatarya, the friend. Having spent some time longer in this service, Tirumalai Nambi ultimately passed away. Ramanuja arranged in memory of Tirumalai Nambi the annual celebration of a festival in which the God is given an ablution on the day following the Adhyayana Utsava (festival of the recital of Prabandhas) . The image of the God is to be seated in the hall Mangalagiri. A number of Sri Vaishnava Brahmans used to go to the Akasa Ganga and bring water from there chanting all the way the Prabandha of Tirumangai Alvar, and carrying the water in procession through the four streets running round the temple, bring it into the temple and with the water perform the ablution of the image and satagdpa (sin-destroyer ; this is of the shape of the head gear made of metal covered with gold, carrying on the top of it a pair of sandals symbolical of the feet of God) . The Account of Anantdrya. Anantarya belonged to the West country and was born at Lughunutanapura on the banks of the Kaveri (girupudupattanam or jSiruputtur) . His father was t Kesavacharya of the Bharadvaja gotra. The date of his birth is given as Kali 4154 or Saka 975 expired, the year Vijaya, the month of Chaitra and nakshatra Chittra.. Having received his early education and attained to much competency, he went down to Srirangam, along with a number of others including Yegnesa, to Ramanuja, who then was teaching in Srirangam. Ramanuja welcomed them among his pupils and was giving them instruction in the Vedanta. One day Ramanuja enquired who among the number of his disciples was willing to volunteer service at Venkatachala to supply flowers, etc., to God Venkatanatha there. Most of them shrank from it as the place was cold and otherwise uncomfortable for a permanent residence, while Anantarya bravely got up and offered his services. Ramanuja applauded his courage and sent him there, It is this that gave him the later name Ananta-purusharya, purusha being the equivalent of a manly man. He went to Venkatachalam and laid out a big garden and even constructed a tank for the purpose of watering it. He took the flowers from this garden and offered them for the daily service in the temple. Having heard that at one time Yamuna chary a had a little cottage put up near the temple and from there was doing the flower service, he built up a Mantapa on the same spot, and set up an image of Yamunacharya and arranged for conducting the worship of Yamunacharya in that pavilion. He generally strung the flowers together into garlands in that pavilion and took them over for service to the temple at the time of worship, carrying them on his head. Anantarya went on doing this service with his son who was called Ramanuja.

The organising of some other festivals as a result of a careful investigation of Venkatachala Māhātmyam.

The first point discovered was that the hill Venkatachala was Vishṇu himself. This is stated in the following Purāņas; –Mārkanḍēya Purāņa, Part ii, Varaha Purāṇa, part i, chapter 34/2, Vamana Purāṇa, chapter 21/2, which state clearly that sages like Šuka, great devotees like Prahlada and royal saints like Ambarisha all regarded the hill itself as a form of Vishnu, and therefore always remained at the foot of the hill not to desecrate it by walking up the hill. Having known this, Rāmānuja himself followed the example by remaining

in Tirupati and only going occasionally up the hill praying for God’s grace for the desecration that he had necessarily thus to commit. It is from Tirupati at the foot of the hill that he went up a part of the way daily to read Ramayana with Tirumalai Nambi. In the course of this kind of life, he felt it necessary that those engaged in temple service should be free from any liability for desecration, and made certain arrangements in consultation with his teacher Tirumalai Nambi, and his disciple Anantārya. The following are the regulations made :-

On the authority of Varaha Purāņa, part i, chapter 52/21, it is only those who are required for immediate service of God that should reside on the hill. Everybody else should live only at the foot, going there for worship on the necessary occasions.

Those that live in Venkatachalam and pilgrims that come there, should cook in the temple itself and with articles of food used in the temple service, and it is only in this way that they should conduct their festivals and ceremonies, as laid down in the Skanda Purana, Svarṇamukhi Māhātmya.

Those living in Tirupati should not cultivate flower plants for purposes of their household worship. They must use only flowers intended for the worship of Śrīnivāsa, but only after the requirements of his worship had been met. This is laid down in the 7th chapter of the Brahmōttara Purāņa.

Those living on the hill should get down when they they feel the approach of death.

Animals and birds on the hill being God’s creatures should not be hunted and killed even by the hunter folk living on the hill. This is laid down in Varaha Purāṇa, part i, chapter 44/12;

Those who go on pilgrimage to the hill of Tirupati should not take with them vehicles or sandals or other protection for the feet. This is laid down in Varāha Purāņa, Part 1, chapter 51/19, and Vamana Purāṇa, chapter 34/25. The limits for the holy place in Vēnkaṭāchalam are laid down in Varaha Purāņa, part i, chapter 49/17. It details Mahādeva’s request to live in proximity to the God with a view to

worship him daily which was not granted, and the fact that he was asked to make his abode at the foot of the hill to the south-west of it on the bank of the Kapila Tirtha. Therefore all the distance between Svāmi Pushkariņi and Kapila Tīrtha is marked out as holy for Vishnu. Therefore through a radius of one yojana (7 to 8 miles) round the Svāmi Pushkariņi is regarded holy because of the presence of God; and all that is laid down above, will apply to that whole area. Within this area no temple to any other god should or could be erected. Whatever people do in accordance with these regulations does not make them liable for any desecration. Tirumalai Nambi and Anantārya laid down these regulations of Rāmānuja before the God in the sanctum and prayed for his approval, which was expressed through one of the worshipping priests becoming possessed and giving divine assent. This was accepted by all those associated with the temple and in residence on the hill.

The appointment of a bachelor (Ēkāngi) for taking care of whatever belongs to Śrīnivāsa.

Rāmānuja wanted someone to see that these regulations were carried out and that the worship itself was conducted according to regulations after the death of Tirumalai Nambi and Anantārya. Someone was also required to see that there was no quarrel about these matters. He was to be a man of learning, capable of instructing the local ruler, and of sufficient renunciation to have any desire for himself. So Rāmānuja arranged it that an unmarried man (Brahmachāri), such as is prescribed in the Paramēśvara Samhita be chosen and given the coloured robes of a sanyasin, and that he carry on the administration of the temple under the orders of Tirumalai Nambi and Anantārya. He also entrusted him with the image of Chakravarti Kumāra (Rama) and a seal with the mark of Hanuman for him to seal up the treasury, and a key with which to lock up the temple for the night.

The Installation of a Sanyäsin (Yati) called Venkaṭanātha Saṭagōpa Yati by Rāmānuja.

Rāmānuja during his first visit to Tirupati arranged to secure the gift of a village called Balamandyam irrigated by

a canal from the river by one Vittala Děva Raya, his disciple. He then asked a few families of Śrī Vaishnavas to go and settle down in Tirupati. It was also at this time that he learnt the Rāmāyaṇa from Tirumalai Nambi. When after a year’s stay he wanted to return to Srirangam, he gave to Anantārya, who was disconsolate at parting, an image of his own likeness. He then left for Srirangam taking with him his cousin Govinda Nambi.

On the second occasion of his visit to Tirupati, he had to settle the question whether the God there was Vishnu or any other. He established successfully and to the satisfaction of the Yadava Rāja that it was Vishnu and, through the good offices of the Rāja, he got the Vimana tower, pavilion and such other structures for the temples built. It was also on this occasion that he took up the image of Govinda Rāja from Chitrakūta cast out by the Chola Krimikantha and got him established in a temple along with Gōdā Dēvi. He also got constructed through Tirumalai Nambi and Anantārya a shrine to Hanuman, and set up there the image of Chakravarti Kumāra (Rama) given to him by Tirumalai Nambi. He ordained the bachelor who was a disciple of Anantarya and installed him there as described in the Parameśvara Samhita, giving him the red robes and appointing him guardian of the shrine, Senapati. He also gave him the seal bearing the mark of Hanuman, a seal-ring, a pennon with the mark of the bell on it, and the key of the temple. He got the Yādava Rāja to pass an order that all those residing in Vēnkaṭāchalam should act according to his commands. He then left for Srirangam. When again he visited Tirupati at the ripe old age of 102 in the year Kali 4220, Sälivähana Saka 1041, he entrusted, in view to his own great age, the whole management to Anantārya who was then 66 years old to superintend the management of the temple. Since the whole management could not be conducted by the one bachelor sanyāsin, he also ordered he might be made a full sanyāsin, and given two or three assistants by appointing brahmachāris (bachelors) to these offices as in his own case. Seeing that a special kind of service should be instituted in the temple as described in the Tiruväymoli of

Nammälvär, the third ten, third section, he appointed a special devotee for this purpose under the name Saṭagōpa Yati. He entrusted him with the worship of the image of Rāma. Then he chose from among the disciples of Anantārya four and made them bachelor sanyasins to assist him. He then told Yadava Rāja to conduct the management of the temple with the assistance of Anantārya, on account of his old age, owing to which it was not possible for him to be visiting Tirupati often. Under the direction of Anantārya, Saṭagopa Yati and the four Brahmachārins should actually carry on the services to the temple. These four bachelors took over the work of the one bachelor before, and put themselves under the direction of Saṭagopa Yati. He commended Anantärya as the most capable among his students, and bespoke the Yādava Rāja’s consideration for him. He also informed the Yadava Rāja that similar arrangements were required in all the Vaishnava shrines and that he had instituted 74 simhasanas (throne) for his disciples, and enthroned them on the acharyapitha and made them Achāryas. What down

these acharyapurushottamas should be is laid in the Padmōttara, Chapter I. These Achäryapurushas as a body were to keep an eye upon the proper conduct of worship in all the temples dedicated to Vishnu. When a number of these came together, they must be treated with respect and rewarded as prescribed in the Sandilya Śruti. Having made these arrangements Rāmānuja pointed out to the Yādava Rāja that Anantārya was the seniormost among those present at the time, and that he might do everything with his advice. This person Anantārya, with some of your descendants, Šaṭagopa Yati representing him, and a certain number representing Tirumalai Nambi should be appointed for the future as such are not at the moment here present, and asked him to carry this out. He further instructed that one belonging to the Satamarshana gōtra should be appointed for this service as Nathamuni, Kurukai Kāvalappan, Yamuna-muni and other great teachers belonged to this gotra. Having made these regulations, he got down the hill, for Govindarajapattinam wherefrom he left for Srirangam, after instructing the Yadava Rāja to see to it that the trouble created

by the Ŝaivas was not repeated either in the one place or in the other.

The setting up of the image of Rāmānuja in Vēnkaṭāchalam,

Sometime after, Anantārya having heard of Rāmānuja’s nirvāņa (giving up of his body) prayed to God Śrinivāsa, with great sorrow, and put forward a request that, in recognition of the great services of Rāmānuja to humanity generally, he might condescend permit of the recital of the centum Rāmānuja Nūṛrandadi composed in praise of Rāmānuja by one of his disciples, Amudan of Śrirangam, during the Adhyayana Utsava, and that he might permit of the setting up of an image of Rāmānuja within the precincts of the temple and the arranging for the conduct of daily worship to that image with a view to the promotion of his teaching and the perpetuation of the arrangements that he had made. The God expressed his assent through one of those present.

On another occasion a certain Sāṭagōpa who was appointed to carry out the wishes of Śrīrangarāja (Śrī Rangarāja Vigñapti Kārya) who instructed Rāmānuja himself in the Prabandhas of the Alvārs took the opportunity, during the festival in the month of Karttika to appeal to Ranganatha for permission to go to Tirupati. Having worshipped the God Ranganatha, he proceeded to the Rāmānuja mantapa (pavilion) in Śrīrangam and obtained the approval of Rāmānuja for his proceeding to Tirupati with a view to singing the Prabandhas in the Devagana on the hill. Having received Rāmānuja’s approval, he started on his journey. Having broken his journey at Conjivaram to worship Varadarāja, he proceeded onward to Lower Tirupati at the foot of the hill. Having offered his worship at the Govinda Rāja shrine, he walked up to the foot of the hill, and, worshipping again the foot-marks under the tamarind tree, and the Nrisimha image enshrined in the forest near about, he went up the hill to Where Tirumalai Nambi and Anantärya were. Having exEhanged courtesies with them, he took his bath at the Svāmi Pushkariņi, and, having completed his daily services, went and offered worship at the Varaha shrine as instructed in the

Tiruvōymoli of Parānkusa, and then proceeded to the temple of Venkatanatha (Śrīnivāsa). There he offered his worship to the God in prescribed form, and having accepted his tīrthe (holy water) from the kaṭāha (the vessel in which the water used in ablution of the image is preserved), he also offerec worship at the shrine of Viṣvaksēna, Nrisimha at Venkaṭāchala, Garuda and other attendant deities in the temple. Then having, got round the temple rightwise, he went into the precincts of the God, and, as directed in the Periya Tirumoļi, he sang the Tirumoli of the Alvār. Then, praying for the intercession of Lakshmi, he made his self-surrender to the God and had a complete view from head to foot of the image there. He was then commanded by God in the usual fashion to sing a few verses from the Prabandha of the first Alvārs. He did as he was commanded and pleased God immensely. Having been rewarded by God with the gift of the holy water and other things usual, in reward for his services, he went up to Tirumalai Nambi and Anantārya. Having been requested by them to begin the Adhyayana Utsava daily by chanting the first ten of Periya Alvar’s Tirumoli. He rendered it musically first, and then the rest of the Prabandhas during the festival. He took leave and left for Srirangam and reported all that had taken place to Ramanuja.

Well pleased with what had been done, Rāmānuja ordained that the Prabandha of the first Alvārs may be sung first, and then the other Prabandhas, all of them being alike set to music and musically chanted. In order that this may be done regularly he appointed one from among the descendants of Näthamuni for this particular task and gave him the designation Śrīsaila Vigñaptikārya, and sent him to Tirupati with a letter to Anantārya. Having reached Tirupati with the letter, this Śrīsaila Vigñaptikārya handed the letter over to Anantārya and went to the sanctum of Śrinivasa along with Anantārya. Anantārya intimated to Śrīnivāsa the wish of Rāmānuja in regard to Śrīśaila Vigñaptikārya, and, having received God’s approval, asked him to reside in Tirupati and keep conducting his services as directed by Rāmānuja.

The above resume of the work Śrī Vēnkaṭāchala Itihāsa Mālā gives more or less a clear idea of the contents of the

work. A critical evaluation of the material contained in it would be necessary before it can well be used for purposes of reconstructing a history of Tirupati so far as that important epoch is concerned. The epoch is of particular importance as practically the whole organisation of worship in the temple seems based upon the arrangements that Rāmānuja is believed to have made there.

The work claims to have been compiled by Anantarya. If he was the disciple of Rāmānuja deputed to carry out Rāmānuja’s directions and see to it that the affairs of the temple were managed satisfactorily thereafter is doubtful. From the details given in the work itself, he was Rāmānuja’s junior by about 36 years, and had been contemporary not only with Rämänuja but even with his uncle Tirumalai Nambi, so that Tirumalai Nambi, Rāmānuja and Anantärya between them would perhaps have covered about a century of time. The precise date given for the birth of Rāmānuja is Saka 939, equivalent to A.D. 1917, and, by all accounts, he is said to have lived for a period of 120 years, which would take him to A.D. 1137 for his last year. He must have passed away either that year or the year following. In the course of the narrative contained in this work, he is made to say to the Yādava Rāja that he was too old to be able to make other visits to Tirupati as he was 102 years at the time. That would mean he had just about 18 years of life left, and that again would mean the actual date under reference is A.D. 1118 or 1119 when Anantārya is said to have been 66 years. That is the date for Rāmānuja so far as the Guruparampara accounts and the account of the Itihāsa Māla are concerned. We have no means of checking this by any other direct sources of information, as we have none. But then this can be checked in a way by the traditional account of the life of Rāmānuja which brings him into contact with rulers who lived at the time and rendered him assistance in various ways, such as for instance the Yadava Rāja who figures so largely in this narrative. There are three rulers that come into view in the account of his life, a Krimikanṭha Chola, a Chola sovereign who died from an abcess in the neck which was so bad and severe an attack that worms appeared in the

abcess. Hence the name. Of course if the Vaishnava accounts are to be believed in their entirety, he is supposed to have suffered from this fell disease because of the dessecration purposefully carried out in regard to the Vishṇu temple of Govinda Rāja in Chidambaram. In regard to this particular matter we come upon what seems to be a very serious discrepancy. Assuming for the moment that the date as given for Rāmānuja in these works is correct, Rāmānuja’s life would be covered by the whole of the 11th century practically and the first 38 years of the 12th. If for our purposes we neglect the first 25 years or even 30 years of Ramanuja’s life as uneventful and anterior to his having become anything prominent, it would bring us to the second half of the 11th century for his active life, and almost the following 40 years of the next century. During the former period, and a very considerable part of the latter, the Chola ruler happened to be the great Chola, Kulottunga Chola I, A.D. 1070 to 1118; his last year may have been a few years later.

He was followed by a professed Vaishnava Vikrama Chola who ruled from A.D. 1118 to 1136. He was in turn succeeded by Kulottunga Chola II, a comparatively young man and a devout Saiva. The unsettling of the arrangements in Chidambaram, and the throwing out of the main image of Govinda Rāja into the sea were acts of desecration said to have been brought about under the orders of this ruler, and the circumstances are described to us in literature, contemporary literature, that has come down to us. The Cholas were in the habit of confirming their accession to the throne by having themselves anointed in the coronation hall on the east bank of the tank in the temple at Chidambaram. The story is that when the anointing was over and the procession was formed to start from the hall to go round the town, the elephants, the horse and the foot soldiers of the court that had been drawn up, along with the contingents brought by the subordinate rulers, found too little room to move about, and finding that there was such a crush in front of the Naṭarāja shrine on account of this, the prince enquired what buildings they were that obstructed the front yard of the court so badly. Being told that it was the shrine of Govinda Raja lying there, he replied smartly that the place for the lying of Vishnu was not the [[43]] front yard of the temple of Naṭarāja, his favourite deity, but the sea, and ordered therefore that the Vishnu image might be cast into the sea. The order was probably carried out literally. This could have been only somewhere about A.D. 1135 or 1136, the year of accession of Kulottunga II.

Kulottunga I was not fanatical enough to do that for one thing; and he made actual grants and even detailed arrangements regulating worship in respect of Srirangam about the year A.D. 1084, even providing for the recital of the Prabandhas of Kulaśēkara Āļvār and Tirumangai Alvār. It would be difficult to imagine that he was responsible for this desecration; the more particularly in the face of the definite statement in the works of Oṭṭa Kuttan, the poet who was the tutor to Kulottunga Chola II as prince.

This is one difficulty which it seems almost impossible to get over. From certain incidents related in the Itihāsa Mālā, it seems to be clear that Rāmānuja had already returned from the Mysore country where he had to reside for over a quarter of a century because of the offence that his principal disciple Kūrattu Alvān gave to the Chola ruler, and of Rāmānuja having to go into exile as a result thereof to save himself from being molested by the Chola ruler for the time being.

It is a well known fact, borne out by dated inscriptions, that he was responsible for the adoption of Vaishnavism by the Hoysala ruler Biṭṭi Dēva, who ever afterwards adopted the style Vishnu Vardhana, although the Kannada word Bițți is an actual Kannaḍa form of the Sanskrit Vishnu. But this Vishnu Vardhana did not come to the throne till almost the end of the first decade of the 12th century. The third ruler under reference is a Yādava Rāja whose invitation it was that brought Rāmānuja to Tirupati for the second time and who afterwards rendered so much service by assisting Rāmānuja in carrying out his instructions with respect to the temple at Tirupati as a local ruler responsible for the ordering of the worship in the temple. There is so far no inscriptional evidence for the existence of a Yādava Rāja o early, the earliest Yadava Rāja figuring in inscriptions coming almost about the end of the 12th century. But that is not a very great bar and cannot constitute a vital objection as there might have been Yadava Rājas ruling in the locality[[44]] who might not have done anything which would ordinarily be recorded in the inscriptions. The local rulers were known Yadava Rājas as a family name, and we know of Yādava Rājas who played important parts later. They must have had their ancestors as local rulers without having achieved any distinction to come down to us in inscriptions. It may be that the traditional date for Ramanuja is pitched a little too early, and a readjustment of the dates may be necessary. But that is a question that cannot be definitely settled here and now.

Rāmānuja’s connection with Tirupati, however, need not be rejected on that account. The territory dependent upon Tirupati, as an important centre, had been brought under Chola rule when the second Chola Aditya of the new dynasty conquered the Tonḍamandalam and annexed it to the Chola empire. Later inscriptions record that that Chola died at a place called Tondaman Aṛṛür, a place now in ruins on the banks of the Svarṇamukhi not far from Kalahasti, called now Tonḍaman Naḍu. There are inscriptions which name this place Tonḍamän Pērür or Tondamān Pērāṛṛūr even. Therefore the Chola power must have extended in reality to this region pretty early on the establishment of the dynasty. This Chola Aditya’s dates would be the end of the 9th and the initial years of the 10th century, as his successor Parantaka came to the throne in A.D. 906. Aditya is said to have built 300 temples to Śiva on the banks of the Kaveri, clearly indicating his enthusiasm for Śiva worship and his personal devotion to the promotion of Saivism. It would not be very difficult to imagine that since then there had been a certain amount of religious ferment, and if the Saivas made an effort to gain the upper hand to set up Saivism as perhaps the dominant religion, it would be nothing strange or even unnatural. The period of the great Chola rulers culminating in that of Rājarāja the Great, the builder of the temple at Tanjore, must have been a period of Śaiva propaganda, that is the whole of the 10th century with perhaps a decade or more of the previous century being included in it. It is not unlikely that at some period, it must be in the latter half of the tenth century, there was a squabble over the character of the temple at Vẽnkaṭāchalam, and a dispute between the Saivas and the

AT