88. Hemādri

Volume I: Part II pp. 749–755

88. Hemādri

88. Hemādri systemṣ He refers to the Maitrāyaņa Śruti, Talavakāra brāhmaṇa, Kātyāyana grhya, Bhagvadgītā, the purāṇas as supplementing the Vedas ( vedopabṛṁhaka ), the Sāṁkhya and Yoga.

88. Hemādri Hemādri and Mādhava are the Castor and Pollux in the galaxy of dākṣiṇātya writers on Dharmaśāstra. Hemādri is a very voluminous writer. He is the author of the Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi, an encyclopædia of ancient religious rites and observanceṣ From ancient times in India the goals of human life ( puruṣārthas ) were said to be four viz. Dharma, Artha, Kāma and Mokṣa (and were spoken of as ‘Caturvarga’). Mokṣa could be attained only by a few men but as to the other three (spoken of as Trivarga ) all could secure them, according to their abilities and activities (vide Manu II. 224). This subject of Puruṣārthas has been dealt with at some length in H. of Dh. Vol. II. pp. 2–11, Vol. III. pp. 8–10 and 241–43 and Vol. V. pp. 1626–1632. According to the statements contained in the work itself the author intended to treat Dharmaśāstra in five sections, called vrata, dāna, tīrtha, mokṣa and parīśeṣa.¹ The Parīśeṣa-khanda was divided into four parts, viz., Devatā, Kālanirṇaya, Karmavipāka, Lakṣaṇasamuccaya.² The Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi has been published in the Bibliotheca Indica Serieṣ Four volumes containing 6 parts and covering about 6000 pages have been so far printeḍ The second and third volumes have two parts each. The fourth volume which deals with prāyaścitta does not appear to be the work of Hemādri.³ The work so far published is concerned with vrata, dāna, śrāddha and kāla (latter two being parts of the Parīśeṣa-khaṇḍa ). That portion of the Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi which was intended to treat of tīrtha and mokṣa has not yet come to light. It is extremely doubtful whether the author was able to carry out his gigantic scheme. Msṣ of portions of the great work are described in the catalogues under various names, e. g. I. O. Cat. No. 1379, p. 407 on śāntikāpaustikāni is the same subject that is treated in vratakhaṇḍa pp. 1003ff., though there are considerable variations between the Mṣ and the printed text.

Hemādri's is a standard work on the subjects with which he dealṣ He quotes most profusely from smṛtis and purāṇas and names a host of writerṣ He appears to have been a profound student of the Pūrvamīmāṃsā. The discussions in his work, parti- cularly on śrāddha and kāla, cannot be well understood without thorough acquaintance with the numerous nyāyas of the mīmāṁsā which he employs at every step. To illustrate this a few instances may be cited at randoṃ On pp. 137, 143, 156, 159 of his Kāla- nirṇaya (vol. III part 2) he makes use of four different nyāyas of the mīmāṁsā.⁴ The eminent commentators and nibandhakāras on dharmaśāstra and other works named by him are given below.⁵ It is somewhat remarkable that though he quotes Aparārka and the Smṛti-candrikā scores of times he hardly ever mentions by name the Mitākṣarā of Vijñāneśvara. Though he does not promise a treatment of vyavahāra, here and there he makes sallies into the domain of vyavahāra. For example, he quotes the well-known sūtra of Gautama (10. 39) on the sources of ownership and holds a lengthy discussion thereoṇ¹¹⁰⁸ In ano- ther place he digresses into the question of the various kinds of strīdhana and their devolution (vol. III, part 1, pp. 530-531 ). He was of opinion that everyone, to whatever śākhā he may belong, should perform śrāddha in accordance with the directions thereon in all śākhās, kalpa and gṛhya sūtras, smṛtis, purāṇas and usageṣ¹¹⁰⁹ He makes the important statement¹¹¹⁰ that a person following any particular Vedic śākhā may enter into alliance by marriage with any other person of the same country following another Vedic śākhā.

Hemādri gives some account of himself in his work. The Msṣ present great variations from the printed text. He belonged to the Vatsagotra.¹¹¹¹ He was the grandson of Vasudeva and the son of Kâmadeva. The introductions to the khaṇḍas contain fulsome praise of Hemādri. One verse says that by showering wealth on poor people the lines that Brahmâ had drawn on their forehead at the time of their birth (foredooming them to eternal poverty) and that Brahmâ acquiesces in such conduct of Hemādri.¹¹¹² Another verse says that none existed, exists or will exist surpassing Hemādri.¹¹¹³ He describes himself as in charge of the imperial records of Mahādeva, the Yādava king of Devagiri (modern Daulatabad).⁷ In the colophons and the body of the work also he is described as the karaṇādhiśvara of Mahādeva, as highly honoured by the king and as a minister (mantrin) of the king.⁸ He gives in the introduction to the Vratakhaṇḍa a detailed pedigree of the Yādavas of Devagiri. In the section on kāla (vol. III, part 2) he starts with Sanghaṇa (i. e. Singhana of the inscriptions), then speaks of his son Jaitrapāla (i. e. Jaitugi), his son Kṛṣṇa (or Kanhara) and lastly of Mahādeva, son of the younger brother of Kṛṣṇa. This is not the place to go into the genealogy of the Yādavaṣ There are some discrepancies between the genealogy as presented by Hemādri and as gathered from the inscriptions and numerous copperplate grants of the Yādavaṣ Vide Bombay Gazetteer, vol. I, part 2, pp. 248-249 for Hemādri and pp. 268-275 for extracts from the Vratakhaṇḍa, pp. 252 and 519 for two pedigrees of the Devagiri Yādavas and pp. 511-534 for history. The following may be consulted for the principal grants of the Yādavas :- Inḍ Ant. vol. 17, p. 117 (Kalasbudruk plate of Bhillama dated śake 948 or 1025 A. D.), E. I. vol. III p. 110 (Bahal inscription of Singhana dated śake 1144), E. I. vol. III pp. 217-18 (Gadag inscription of Bhillama dated śake 1113 i. e. 1191 A. D.), Inḍ Ant. vol. 14, p. 68 (grant of Kṛṣṇa or Kanhara dated 1249-50 A. D.), Inḍ Ant. vol. 14, p. 314 (Paithan plate of Rămacandra dated śake 1193), E. I. vol. XIII, p. 198 (Thana plate of Rămacandra dated śake 1194 i. e. 1272 A. D.), E. I. vol. XIX, p. 20 (Mamdapur inscription of Kanhara dated śake 1172 i. e. 1250 A. D. wherein his younger brother Mahādeva is described as yuvarāja). Mahādeva reigned from 1260 to 1271 and Rămacandra, the son of Kṛṣṇa, from 1271 to 1309 A. D. Since in the Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi Hemādri is said to be the keeper of the state-records of Mahādeva, that work must have been 88. Hemādri composed at some time between 1260 and 1270 A. D. There are contemporary records available showing that Hemādri was in high favour not only with Mahādeva but also with his successor Rāmacandra. The Thana plate of Rāmacandra (dated śake 1194, i. e. 1272 A. D.) records the grant of a village called Vaul in Sāsaṭi (modern Sāsṭī in the Thana District) to thirty-two brāhmaṇas by Acyuta Nāyaka of the Gautama gotra and descendant of Jalhaṇa, who was the governor of Konkan, and describes⁹ Hemādri as one who had attained a preeminent position in the government through the favour of Rāmacandra and as one who was in charge of all (state) records and was the foremost minister.

Hemādri is frequently cited by Raghunandana in his Smṛtitattva and rarely criticized ; vide (vol. I). Tithi pp. 1, 11, 16, 18, 120; Śrāddha pp. 285, 286; Jyotiṣtattva 678, Mala° 755, 836; Saṁskāra 891; (vol. II) Ekādaśī 37, 44, 90 (cr.), Udvāha 145, Śuddhi 273, 339 (mentions Pariseṣakhaṇḍa) 356.

Vide a paper in J. O. R. (Madras) vol. XII pp. 46–60 by Dr. P. Śrinivasachar on the Yādavas of Devagiri, that shows that the last dated Inscription of Kṛṣṇa is dated 12th April 1259, that Mahādeva succeeded him and that some time elapsed between the death of Mahādeva and the accession of Rāmacandra, and that Hemādri was in great favour with both Mahādeva and Rāmacandra. The pedigree (relevant to this writer) is Bhillama— Jaitugi—Sīṅghaṇa (and also Simha, Simhana, Simhala )—Jaitugi II— Kṛṣṇa (also written in Inscriptions as Kanhāra, Kanharadeva, Kandharadeva, dates ranging from śake 1169 to 1175) and Mahādeva who succeeded Kṛṣṇa; (Kṛṣṇa’s son Rāmacandra or Rāmarāya, one date is śake 1199)—Śaṅkaradeva succeeded in śake 1232 (1310–11 A. D.) and was killed by Malik Kafar two years later. Vide JBBras vol. XII pp. 1–50 (by Dr. Fibet). It is probable that Mahādeva, brother of Kṛṣṇa, succeeded because Kṛṣṇa’s son Rāmacandra was very young.

Hemādri is credited with a commentary on Śaunaka’s Pranavakalpa.¹⁰ He appears to have written a śrāddha-kalpa according to the rules of Kātyāyana which is distinct from his Śrāddha- khaṇḍa (vide Calcutta Sanskrit College msṣ cat., vol. II, p. 163, No. 217 and Stein's cat, p. 105). Hemādri also wrote a commentary¹¹ called Kaivalyadīpikā on the Muktāphala of Vopadeva, the famous author of the Mugdhabodha grammar. The Muktāphala embodies the philosophy of the Bhāgavata purāṇa in 19 adhyāyas and 784 verses (and a few lines in prose in 5th and 6th chapters). Vopadeva was a friend and protege of Hemādri, who wrote several works at the encouragement of the latter. He says that he wrote the Harilīlā (published in the Calcutta Oriental Series No. 3), an index of the Bhāgavata for pleasing the minister Hemādri.¹² Verse 54 in the Upasamhāra- dhyāya in the edition of the Muktāphala expressly states that Hemādri induced Vopadeva, son of the physician Keśava and pupil of the scholar Dhaneśa, to compose the Muktāphala. Verse 53 also is interesting :—दे एष चित्रं रामस्य सिन्धुर्वैदः पुराशुना । हेमाद्रिः स्वमुपा- नीत: सूर्यावर्तप्रदक्षिणः ॥. Rāma means Daśarathi Rāma and Rāma- candra (Yādava king). Hemādri means mountain Meru and also the author Hemādri.¹³

There is a learned commentary on the Raghuvamsa by a Hemādri. Mr. P. K. Gode (in ABORI vol. XIV pp. 126–128) adduces arguments for establishing that the commentator is different from the author of the Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi. There is a commentary on this work called Viveka with which both 88. Hemādri

Hemādri and Madhusūdana-Sarasvatī had something to do¹⁴ Hemādri also wrote a commentary called Āyurvedarasāyana on the Astāṅgahṛdaya of Vāgbhata.

Altogether Hemādri was a towering personality. His name is associated throughout the Maratha Country with the construc- tion of numerous temples having a peculiar style of architecture. He is also credited with having invented the Modi script. Within a few decades his Caturvarga-cintāmani, particularly its dāna and vrata sections, came to be looked upon as the standard work in the whole of the Deccan and southern India. Mādhava in his Kalanirnaya (p. 67) expressly mentions the Vratakhaṇḍa of Hemādri as an authority. This work was composed about 1340 A. D. In an inscription of Bhāskara alias Bhavadūra, son of Bukka I, dated śake 1291 (i. e. 1369 A. D.) the king is described as making various gifts following the composition of Hemādri.¹⁵ This is obviously a reference to his dānakhaṇḍa and establishes that long before 1369 A. D. Hemādri had become a standard author in the Telugu country. The Vanapalli plate of Anna-Vema dated śake 1300 (about 1380 A. D.) describes Vema as giving the various gifts in Hemādri and his son as one who observed the vratas and dānas¹⁶ described by Hemādri. Pedda-Komaṭi-Vema is described in a grant of śake 1344 as eager in bestowing gifts described in the rules of Hemādri.¹⁷ Hemādri is quoted in the Madanapārijāta,¹⁸ the Dvaitanirṇaya of Śaṅkarabhatta, the Nirṇayasindhu and other workṣ