Mīmāṃsā, Vedānta, and the Bhakti Movement Anand Venkatkrishnan Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2015 ©2015 Anand Venkatkrishnan All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Mīmāṃsā, Vedānta, and the Bhakti Movement Anand Venkatkrishnan This dissertation concerns the reception history of the Bhāgavata Purāṇa (BhP), an influential Hindu scripture, among Sanskrit intellectuals who lived between the 13th and 18th centuries CE. The BhP is most widely recognized for its celebration of bhakti, or religious devotion to an embodied god, through its narrative, didactic, and philosophical treatment of the god Kṛṣṇa. Composed in Sanskrit, the BhP was also closely connected to popular traditions of vernacular poetry and song, collectively known as the “bhakti movement.” I study the rise to prominence of this text-tradition by examining its impact on two important systems of Sanskrit scriptural interpretation: Mīmāṃsā and Advaita Vedānta. I situate the shifting discursive registers of these hermeneutical traditions in particular social contexts, paying special attention to the lives and careers of scholars in the academic center of Banaras in early modern north India. I also investigate how Sanskrit discourse about the BhP reveals intersections between popular religious movements and elite scholarly pedagogy. The thesis contributes to a number of scholarly fields, each wider than the previous. First, it provides a fuller picture of how particular Sanskrit systems of knowledge experienced change in precolonial India. Second, it attempts to understand the challenges that bhakti, qua the public expression of personal devotion, posed to Sanskrit intellectuals. Third, it revisits certain binaries and narratives in the historiography of Indian religion and philosophy. Fourth, it incorporates the insights of intellectual and social history into the study of the premodern non-West. Finally, it helps make a space for intellectual history within religious studies, and for religion among intellectual historians. Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction 1 A Quick Refresher 1 The Bhāgavata Purāṇa 2 Mīmāṃsā 3 Vedānta 5 Early Modernity 8 Intellectual History 13 The End-Game 19 Chapter Outline 26 Chapter 2: The Darkness At Dusk 30 The BhP in Transit: Śaivas, Vaiṣṇavas, Advaita Vedāntins 30 Chapter 3: Mīmāṃsā in the Moonlight 68 The Bhagavannāmakaumudī in Context 68 A Tale of Two Smṛtis 76 The BNK in the World of Vedānta 100 The Sacred Name in the South 118 Conclusion 124 Chapter 4: Vedānta in the Moonlight 127 Jñāna and Bhakti 134 Bhakti and Karma 151 Jñāna and Karma 161 A Social History of Intellectual Change? 177 Chapter 5: Bhakti in the Moonlight 189 Theists, Non-Theists, and Intellectual Historians 189 Madhusūdana Sarasvatī and the BhP 195 Śāṇḍilya's Bhakti Sūtras 204 Nārāyaṇa Tīrtha and the Moonlight of Bhakti 209 Bhakti, Yoga, and the Beautiful Goddess 221 Conclusion 231 Chapter 6: Conclusion 235 Bibliography 242 i Acknowledgments Throughout my graduate career, I used to tell people that the acknowledgments section was the part of my dissertation I most looked forward to writing. In part, this was because I had no idea what the rest of the dissertation was supposed to look like. But mostly it was due to the profound grace I had received from a range of teachers, colleagues, friends, relatives, and community members, without whom I would not have reached this point. Gratitude is a passionate feeling in secular and religious cultures alike. The three traditional Hindu figures to whom obeisance is first owed are Gaṇeśa, remover of obstacles, the Guru, who shows the way, and Sarasvatī, bestower of knowledge. I can think of no better exemplification of all three than my advisor, John Stratton Hawley. He has opened for me countless doors within academia, guided and commented on every piece I have written, and shared freely of his wisdom. The ability to instruct without didacticism; to insist on facts without pedantry; to encourage without flattery; to critique without denigration; to be generous without expectation; and above all, to be sincerely and enthusiastically kind—these are not just pedagogical but fundamentally human qualities, and in Jack they are present in abundance. I feel fortunate to have had his winds of learning at my back over the past few years, and to discover the many more ways in which my gratitude will grow. I owe an indescribable debt to Sheldon Pollock, who has also supervised and encouraged my work from the moment I entered graduate school. When I was a senior in college, an “insurgent classicist” chafing under the strictures of Greek and Latin antiquity, I encountered two magnificent tomes: Literary Cultures in History: Reconstructions from South Asia, and The ii Language of the Gods in the World of Men. That I would have the chance to study with the editor/author of these groundbreaking volumes never crossed my mind; the breadth and depth of learning was too dazzling to belong to a single person. That I was not only able to do so, but was also welcomed into his intellectual circles, is a testament to his generosity and commitment to his students' advancement. I have benefited immeasurably from his guidance and support, and from the example of his scholarly dedication to and respect for the thought-worlds of premodern India. The other members of my committee have also been consistently supportive and attentive in the course of my graduate studies: Rachel McDermott, Lawrence McCrea, and Wayne Proudfoot. From Rachel I have learned what a gracious, meticulous, and encouraging teacher looks like—one of the warmest human beings I have come to know. From Larry, a veritable sarvatantrasvatantra, I have learned what devotion to Sanskrit learning looks like. I was lucky to study Mīmāṃsā and Vedānta with him many summers ago, imbibing vicariously his own training with stalwarts of the disciplines who have now passed on. From Wayne I have received insight into how to define terms clearly both for a non-specialist audience, and for my own understanding. All of them have shaped my pedagogy and research. I am grateful to Christopher Minkowski and Rosalind O'Hanlon at Oxford University for inviting me to participate in the last iteration of the “Early Modern South Asia” workshop, and providing me the opportunity to publish my first peer-reviewed article in the journal South Asian History and Culture. Conversations with them have led to an edited volume, Scholar Intellectuals in Early Modern India (Routledge, 2015), and to new avenues of research into the intersection of social and intellectual history in premodern India. I look forward to more such discussions during my postdoctoral term as a Junior Research Fellow of Balliol College. I owe iii further thanks to Jim Benson and Alexis Sanderson at Oxford for their interest in my work, and, at the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies, Rembert LutJeharms, Jessica Frazier, and Gavin Flood. I am also grateful to Gillian Evison at the Oriental Institute Library for assistance with Sanskrit manuscripts at the Bodleian Library. I cannot stress enough the importance of my colleagues and friends across departments at Columbia University to the success of my graduate career. Research and writing is often done in silent aloneness, but the very ability to engage in them is impossible without a cadre of warm, supportive, gifted, insightful, and courageous fellow-travelers. In no particular order, I am grateful to the following: Daniel del Nido (admittedly primus inter pares), Laura McTighe, Kali Handelman, Cara Rock-Singer, Jay Ramesh, Mark Balmforth, Simran Jeet Singh, Drew Thomases, Hamsa Stainton, SaJida Jalalzai, Todd Berzon, Liane Carlson, Yogi Trivedi, Udi Halperin, Patton Burchett, Jon Keune, Joel Bordeaux, Joel Lee, James Hare, Andrew Ollett, Tyler Williams, Dalpat RaJpurohit, Manpreet Kaur, Christine Marrewa Karwoski, Shiv Subramaniam, Amanda Culp, Arthur Dudney, Anand Vivek TaneJa, Divya Cherian, Guy Leavitt, Audrey Truschke, Elaine Fisher, Owen Cornwall, Pasha Mohamad Khan, Krista Dalton, Rex Barnes, Andrew Jungclaus, Liz Dolfi, Elizabeth Tinsley, Yonatan Brafman, Joe Blankholm, and Zachary Ugolnik. I would also like to express solidarity with the Graduate Workers of Columbia University (GWC-UAW Local 2110), which as of writing seeks to gain the right for graduate student employees of the university to unionize. Organizing for the GWC has taught me the precarious, sometimes shockingly insufficient conditions under which intellectual labor is conducted, and that achieving a democratic society is as much a task for those within the university as those beyond its walls. iv Outside of Columbia, I have profited from conversations, studies, and collaborations with both senior and junior scholars. I am grateful to Yigal Bronner, AJay Rao, Parimal Patil, Gary Tubb, David Shulman, V. Narayana Rao, Christian Novetzke, Somadeva Vasudeva, Valerie Stoker, Madhav Deshpande, Andrew Nicholson, Elisa Freschi, Jonardon Ganeri, Ravi Gupta, Prashant Keshavmurthy, Archana Venkatesan, Vasudha Narayanan, Chakravarthi Ram-Prasad, Edwin Bryant, Afsar Mohammad, Chad Bauman, Reid Locklin, Davesh SoneJi, Jim Mallinson, Francis X. Clooney, Kiyokazu Okita, Carla Bellamy, Teena Purohit, John Thatamanil, Sthaneshwar Timalsina, Robert Yelle, Michael Allen, Shankar Nair, Jason Schwartz, Eric Steinschneider, Arun Brahmbhatt, Patrick Cummins, Charles Preston, and Sonam Kachru. I also take this space to thank my various students