The Tantra -$Uddha of Bhattaraka-Sri-Vedottama a Translation and Commentary
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE TANTRA -$UDDHA OF BHATTARAKA-SRI-VEDOTTAMA A TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY By David John Fern B.A., The University of Calgary, 1977 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Asian Studies We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA April 1989 © David John Fern, 1989 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. 1 further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of f-JSlftf^ QTooieJ The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date A^<<- ^ ^9 DE-6 (2/88) Tantra-tfuddha Abstract This thesis is a translation of and commentary on the Tantra-iuddha (Purity of the System), a 14th century (circa) Sanskrit philosophical monograph defending the religious validity of the Pancaratra school. The work is attributed to a Sri Bhattaraka-sn-vedottama. Set in the framework of a debate between two Mimamsaka disputants the text follows the "objection- response" (purva-paksa - uttara-paksa) format so characteristic of the genre. I have divided the work into three more or less cohesive sections. In the first the author is faced with the problem of justifying the validity of his school and its smrti in the absence of confirmation by a §ruti. He does so by hypothesizing a supporting iruti which existed in the past but has since been lost. In Section 2 the opponent plays the devil's advocate and suggests that the author: 1. Claim universal validity for all smrtis, (independent of iruti support), 2. reject the traditional requirement that smrtis be free from any taint of an ulterior motive, and 3. claim the status for the smrti of being an equally valid alternative to iruti in instances where the two appear to conflict. Fully cognizant that to accept any of these would be to undermine his position the author rejects all three proposals. In the third section the author clarifies the distinctions between his own school and four Saivite ones. He then responds to a number of objections and citations that declare the Pancaratra system to be non-Vedic, both in its beliefs and in its ritual practices. This he does by reinterpreting the intentions of alleged opponents such as Sankara and Rumania or by simply declaring Tantra-fuddha iii deprecatory passages as inaccurate. The text draws heavily upon an earlier work by Yamuna, the Agama- pramanya, which also sought to defend the Pancaratrikas. Arguments and conclusions correlate highly throughout, with one significant difference. Whereas Yamuna speaks from the perspective of Vislstadvaita Vedanta, Bhattaraka Vedottama infuses the Pancaratra school with a much more monist tinge. This is perhaps the sole reason for studying the text ; it reminds us that religious schools are rarely stagnant. Considerable variation occurred within movements bearing the same name and we would be foolish to cling to our generalizations too seriously. Tantra-fuddha iv TABLE OF CONTENTS HEADING PAGE Abstract ii Acknowledgements v Part I: Introduction Placing the text 1 Purpose and form of the text 3 Topical structure 7 Section 1 7 Section 2 8 Section 3 11 The author's sympathy with the Kevaladvaitins 15 The author's debt to Yamuna 16 Comments on text presentation 18 Part II: Translation 1. Pramanas and the Pancaratra smrti 20 2. Sruti-smrti relationship 42 3. Non-Vedic nature of the Pancaratra system 71 Bibliography 118 Tantra-iuddha v Acknowledgements The completion of this thesis is overwhelmingly due to the patience and commitment of two people. The first is my wife Gail, who supported me financially throughout my studies and, more importantly, who never stopped encouraging me. The second is my adviser Dr. Ashok Aklujkar, whose dedication to his professional field and to his students have inspired me since I've known him. Tantra-Suddha: Introduction 1 INTRODUCTION Placing the text This thesis is a translation of and commentary on the Sanskrit monograph (prakarana) Tantra-Suddha,^- — "Purity of the (Pancaratra)2 system" ~ attributed to Bhattaraka-§ri-vedottama. The Sanskrit text was edited by T. Ganapati Sastri and published in 1915 in Vol. XLIV of the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series. To my knowledge it is the only published edition of the work. In his brief preface the editor states that it is based on a single palmleaf manuscript written in the Malayalam script. Little is known about the author, but he is estimated by the editor to have lived in the 14th or 15th century. His name, Bhattaraka-srl-vedottama, is probably not his birth name but rather the combination of a pair of honourific titles or epithets, a practice not uncommon in South India. This title would suggest he was an influential figure in or leader of a matha (religious ashram or school) and was likely familiar with Vedic ritual and lore. Further evidence for a southern origin for the text is attested by the fact that, to our knowledge, no other manuscript has been found outside Kerala. A final point, which will be discussed below, is the author's heavy reliance upon another southern text, the Agama-pramanya of Yamuna, who lived in the late 10th and early 11th centuries. 1 Dr. Ashok Aklujkar has suggested that the original tide was Tantra-Suddhi rather than Tantra- Suddha. This seems likely given the nominal character of Suddhi as opposed to the adjective Suddha. It is also easy to imagine a change from Suddhyakhyarh to Suddhakhyam. 2 In the literature the school has been called both "Pancaratra" and "Pancaratra" while the followers have been variously termed, "Pancaratras," "Pancaratras," "Pancaratrins," "Pancaratrins," and "Pancaratrikas." In this thesis the word "Pancaratra" will be used to refer to the school itself while its adherents will be called "Pancaratrikas," which is the author's name for them. Tantra-guddha: Introduction 2 Against this geographical placing must be weighed some internal evidence. In Section 3 the author expends much effort distinguishing his school from various Saivite^ sects. The most prominent of these in his eyes appears to be the Pasupatas, a group placed in western India in what is now Gujarat by Gonda (MRLS p. 165) and Dasgupta (Vol. 5, p. 18). The Vlrasaivas, on the other hand, who trace their roots to south-western India in what is now Karnataka are not mentioned at all by the author, although they had been active for one or two centuries before the time assigned to Bhattaraka-sri- vedottama by the editor.4 Nor are the Saiva-Siddhantas discussed, albeit they represented the most prominent southern Saivite school at the time.5 Although it is difficult to specify exactly where the Pancaratrikas first thrived Schrader (p. 16) argues they spread from the North to the South, with the majority of the samhitas (works within their tradition) being composed in the North. D.L. De (p. 643) links the Pancaratrikas with the Yadava tribe of Krsna. Mahabharata 12.336.30 describes the home of the Pancaratrikas as Sveta-dvipa, (lit. the "white island") but does not elaborate further. The movement itself is a very old one, as indicated by their inclusion in the Narayaniya section of the Mahabharata. The Pancaratra samhitas are estimated by Schrader (p. 19) to be no older than the eighth century. They were certainly known in the South by the 11th century insofar as both 3 In this thesis the term "Saivite" will be used as a generic noun or adjective pertaining to all worshippers of Siva. "Saiva," on the other hand, will be taken to mean only that specific Saivite sect discussed by the author in Section 3. 4 The VlraSaivas are normally dated from the time of the poet Basavanna in the late 12th or early 13th century. Gonda (MRLS p. 156) suggests the Vlrasaivas were a branch of the older Kalamukha tradition, which the author does discuss. An alternative explanation for this non-mention would be that the author predates the 13th or 14th century. 5 Pereira (p. 167) dates them back to at least the eighth century and Dasgupta (Vol. 5, p. 16) believes the bulk of their Saivagama was completed by the ninth century. Tantra-Suddha: Introduction 3 Yamuna (in the Agama-pramanya) and Ramanuja (in his commentary on Brahma-sutras 2.2.42-45) defend the movement. Purpose and form of the text The stimulus for the Tantra-Suddha, as its name implies, was to defend the legitimacy of the Pancaratra system and its agama (collected body of works considered authoritative) against orthodox Vedic critics who maligned its claim to be based on the Veda. The Pancaratrikas were worshippers of Visnu in his supreme form (known as Vasudeva or Narayana) as well as in his various manifestations, particularly those of Krsna and the four vyiihas (emanations of Visnu).6 They were among the numerous bhakti schools prevalent in India from the first millenium onwards which stressed devotion to a personal deity rather than ritual practice and discriminative wisdom (vijnana) as the path to spiritual achievement and ultimate liberation. Yet they claimed to remain within the general Brahmanical tradition in that, unlike the Buddhists and Jains, they did not reject the authority of the VedasJ Proponents of the more traditional schools however, particularly Mlmamsa and Advaita Vedanta,^ generally refused them such a standing and questioned 6 For a more detailed explanation of the vyuhas see Section 3, para.