94. Madanapāla and Vishveshvarabhatta

Volume I: Part II pp. 792–804

94. Madanapāla and Vishveshvarabhatta

by Lakṣmīdevī, wife of Vaidyanātha Pāyaguṇḍa. There is a Vivaraṇa of the Kālanirṇayadīpikā, by Nṛsiṁha, son of Rāmacandrācārya (vide D. C. Mṣ No. 99 of 1871–72 ).

94 Madanapāla and Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa The Madanapārijāta compiled under the patronage of king Madanapāla by Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa is a famous work. Like Bhoja, Madanapāla seems to have been a great patron of learning and several works are attributed to hiṃ At least four works on dharmaśāstra are ascribed to him (i. e. were written under his patronage) viz. the Madanapārijāta, Smṛtimahārṇava or Madanamahārṇava, Tithinirṇayasāra and Smṛtikaumudī. Four more works are ascribed to Madanapāla that deal with subjects other than those of Dharmaśāstra viz. Madanavimodanighanṭu, Sūrya-siddhāntaviveka, Siddhāntagarbha and Yantraprakāśa.

The Madanapārijāta is an extensive work in 995 pages pub- lished in the B. I. Series (in 1893). There are 23 introductory verses, the first 13 of which give the genealogy of Madanapāla. In the printed edition these 13 verses are stated to have been added by Purohita Śrī-Rāmadeva. The last of the introductory verses states that the work was composed after a careful study of Hemādri, Kalpavṛkṣa (i. e. Kalpataru ), Aparārka, Smṛticandrikā, Smṛtyarthasāra and Mitākṣarā.¹ That Madanapāla was only the patron and not the real author of the work is made clear in several placeṣ In the introductory verse 20 it is stated that the work was compiled through (lit. by the mouth of) learned meṇ² In several places in the body of the work³ it is said that the author has explained the matter under discussion in his work called Subodhinī, a commentary on the Mitākṣarā. Therefore the Madanapārijāta was really composed by Viśveśvara- bhaṭṭa, the author of the Subodhinī. The Madanapārijāta con- tains nine stabakas (bunches i. e. chapters) on brahmacarya, the dharmas of householders, the daily duties (āhnika-kṛtya), the Saṁskāras from garbhādhāna onwards; impurity on birth and death, the purification of various substances (dravyaśuddhi), śrāddha, dāyabhāga (partition and inheritance) and prāyaścitta. The longest section is the 9th on ‘Prāyaścittas and Karmaphala’ (pp. 304), then comes the 7th section on ‘śrāddha’ (pp. 172), the 3rd section on ‘Āhnika’ covers pp. 142 and first on ‘brahmacarya’ is dealt with in 128 pageṣ The shortest is the 5th on ‘āśauca’ (in 28 pages); the 4th on Saṁskāras also is a short one (only 33 pages). In the portion on the dāyabhāga it very closely follows the Mitākṣarā.

The Madanapārijāta (after quoting a verse of Viṣṇu) on p. 654 propounds the somewhat startling proposition that even the Kānīna and other secondary sons (mentioned by Yāj. II. 128–132) succeed as heirs to a man’s property (vide note below)⁴ and relies on Yāj. (II. 128–132), who enumerates twelve kinds of sons from aurasa to apaviddha and remarks that each of these succeeds to the father’s property in the absence of any of the sons enumerated before him in the text. Kānīna is a son born to a man from an unmarried girl. Hence a Kānīna son would have succeeded before the paunarbhava and other sons named by Yāj. after hiṃ The Manusmṛti (IX. 172) also refers to the kānīna soṇ Vijñāneśvara (in Mit. on Yāj. II. 132) contains the very words quoted in the passage as his opinioṇ

Vide also pp. 385, 603, 774 of the Madanapārijāta for references to Subodhinī. It may, however, be noted that the Subodhinī on the Vyavahāra section (p. 61 of Ghārpure’s eḍ) states that all this about Kānīna and similar sons refers to other ages (yugas) and that in the Kali age only two kinds of sons (viz. aurasa and dattaka) are recogniseḍ The style of the Madanapārijāta is simple. Its style is simple and luciḍ Besides the authors and works mentioned above, it cites those noted below.¹¹⁹⁶

There is a work called Mahārṇava ascribed to Māndhātā, a son of Madanapāla. In several msṣ of this work deposited in the Deccan¹¹⁹⁷ College there are introductory verses giving the genealogy of Madanapāla that agree almost word for word with the introductory verses of the Madanapārijāta. Moreover two verses that speak of Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa occur here also as well as in the Madanapārijāta and Subodhinī. The Madanamahārṇava was edited by Pandit Embara Krishṇāmacarya and Mr. M. R. Nambiyar and was published in 1953 in the Gaekwad Oriental Serieṣ It is a large work in 468 printed pages with an intro-duction (pp. 11–26) and a Sanskrit Index (pp. 27–40) of the contents of the 40 chapterṣ One Mṣ directly claims the work as Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa’s while the others say that the work was com- piled by Mādhatā, a son of king Madanapāla, through learned meṇ It begins by quoting in the second chapter thirty verses of the Śātātapiya-Karmavipāka contained in Jīvānanda’s Dharmaśāstra-saṅgraha (latter part pp. 435–455, in all about 187 verses in six chapters). The Ānandāśrama collec- tion of Smṛtis has a Śātātapa-smṛti in six chapters but it contains about one hundred verses more than in Jīvānanda’s text, as it adds in each chapter several verseṣ Karmavipāka means (literally) the fruition of one’s evil actionṣ The central theory of Śātātapa is that those guilty of greater or lesser sins who do not undergo the appropriate prāyaścittas (penances) fall into hell for a time, are born again with certain signs (or defects) on their bodies, and that if they repent and undergo the prescribed penances, then those tell-tale signs disappear and that sins of former lives affect men by diseases, which disappear by japa (repetition of sacred text inaudibly) or by worship of deities or homas (offerings in fire) and by appropriate giftṣ Thirteen diseases and physical affections such as leprosy, consumption, loss of sight are caused by what are called mahāpātakas; dropsy and other diseases are the outcome of upapātakaṣ Appropriate penances (prāyaścittas) remove the effects; so also do gifts of a cow (with calf) or a bull or gifts of ten nivartanas of land, dinners to brāhmaṇas, japa of mantras to Rudra &c. Śātātapa explains the well-known terms Rudra, Mahārudra and Atirudra and his words are followed by the Madanamahārṇava (vide note below).¹¹⁹⁸

In several other places also the Mahārṇava quotes passages from Śātātapa-saṃhitā. For example, on p. 436 it quotes two verses of Śātātapasamhitā⁶ ( II. 43–44 ) for a penance in the case of one who kills an elephant.

The word Karmavipāka occurs in Yāj. III. 133 and in Anuśāsana-parva ( 144. 43 Ch. eḍ ) and Yogaśūtra II. 17 ( sati mūle tadvipāko jātyāyurbhogaḥ ) i. e. sinners are born as different animals or worms etc. ( Manu XII. 55–60 and Yāj. III. 207–216 ), they have a long or short life and fierce sufferings in hells ( Manu IV. 88–90 and XII. 75, Yāj. III. 206 ). Vide for this doctrine H. of Dh. vol. IV. pp. 172–176. Vaṣ 20. 44 and Śaṅkha quoted in Mit. on Yāj. III. 216 hold that the murderer of a brāhmaṇa is afflicted with leprosy ( brahmahā-kuṣṭhi ). Long before the Mahārṇava several extensive works on Karmavipāka must have been com- posed, since the Mahārṇava cites the work Karmavipākasaṅgraha 51 times, the Karmavipākasamuccaya 48 times, and the Karma- vipākasāra 21 timeṣ Vide Smṛtitattva, vol. I, Malamāsa p. 835 for a long quotation from Śātātapiya-karmavipāka.

Dharma⁷ had a fivefold aspect viz. varṇa-dharma, āśrama- dharma, varṇāśrama-dharma ( e. g. a brāhmaṇa-brahmacārin has to observe the rules peculiar to his varṇa as well as rules applicable to the stage of studenthood ), guṇadharma ( a king has certain duties peculiar to his position, viz. protection of subjects, dis- pensing justice &c. ) and Naimittikadharma ( prāyaścittas i. e. penances ). This work also is said to have been compiled by 94. Madanapāla and Viśveśvarabhatta

Māndhātā through the learneḍ⁸ It is said to have been based on a study of the śruti, the smṛtis and the purāṇaṣ The work is divided into 40 taraṅgas (waves). The principal subject⁹ of the work is to describe how the various diseases which human bodies are heir to the result of evil deeds done in past lives (this subject being called Karmavipāka in dharmaśāstra works) and to prescribe various rites and penances for the eradication of the evil results of evil deedṣ Among the various rites and penances that are set forth in great detail may be mentioned the Kūṣmāṇḍa-homa, Rudraikādaśinī, Mahārudrābhiṣeka, Vināyaka-śānti, the Navagrahayajña &c. The Mahārṇava mentions the Karmavipāka of Sātātapa, the Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi (folio 234 a of D. C. Mṣ No. 259 of 1886–1892), the Mitākṣarā, the Karmavipakasamuccaya &c. It is worthy of note that in the Smṛti-kaumudi the authorship of the Mahārṇava is claimed by the author himself and is not ascribed to Madanapāla’s soṇ¹⁰

The Tithinirṇayasāra is another work compiled under Madanapāla. Stein in his cat. of msṣ at Jammu (p. 306) gives extracts from this work. The first fourteen verses are the same as those in the Madanapārijāta. It appears to have been composed by Viśvanātha, which is most probably a paraphrase of the name Viśveśvara¹¹. The Smṛtikaumudī¹² contains an introduction of 17 verses, 13 of which set forth the genealogy of Madanapāla. The four-teenth verse tells us that Madanapāla composed works called Yantraprakāśa, Mahārṇava, Pārijāta, Siddhāntagarbha and Tithi-nirṇayasāra.¹³ The 15th verse says that he composes the Smṛti-kaumudī through the learneḍ¹⁴ The 17th verse says that his predecessors have generally dilated upon the dharmas of the three higher varṇas and the dharmas of the śūdra have not been dealt with by them as a principal topic, therefore he would clearly expound the dharmas of the last varṇa. At the end of the mṣ in the I. O. Cat. it is described as the younger sister of the Mada-napārijāta and of the Mahārṇava.¹⁵ This is not found in the D. C. mṣ which was copied in saṁvat 1615. This work is divided into four kalollāsas, each kalollāsa being subdivided into kiraṇas (rays). The first kalollāsa has two kiraṇas, the second has four, the third and fourth five kiraṇas each. The subjects dealt with are : I. two kinds of śūdras, viz. : the kevalaśūdra (simple śūdra) and one who is of mixed descent, being born of a śūdra woman from a man of the higher castes; the mixed castes; II. general discourses on the śūdra's adhikāra for engaging in various acts and performing various rites, such as the study of the vedas and smṛtis, the performance of garbhādhāna and other saṁskāras and the consecration of sacred fires; saṁdhyāvandana; the śūdra's capacity for attaining the knowledge of brahman; III. marriage; different forms of marriage, prohibited degrees of blood relation-ship (sāpiṇḍya), the various rites of marriage such as kanyā-dāna; such saṁskāras as nāma-karaṇa (naming the child), the duties of śūdras in ordinary and difficult times; āśauca for śūdras; the various śrāddhas for them; the letting loose of a bull in honour of the dead; IV. śūdra's daily duties such as śauca, brushing the teeth, baths in the morning and at other times, brahmayajña, tarpaṇa, vaiśvadeva, daily śrāddha, dinner, &c. 94. Madanapāla and Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa

The Smṛtikaumudī mentions among others Aparārka, Kṛtyakalpataru, Mitākṣarā, Medhātithi, Yajñapārśva and Smṛtimañjarī. It also quotes from the Vedānta-kalpataru¹⁶ and the author claims the Madanapārijāta as his own work.

It has been seen how all the four works set out above were composed under the patronage of Madanapāla and how they were probably from the pen of Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa. There is one more work on Dharmaśāstra which Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa composed in his own name without the shelter of a patron's name. It is the Subodhinī, a commentary on the Mitākṣarā of Vijñāneśvara. The vyavahāra portion of it has been published in Bombay by Mr. S. Setlur and also by Mr. J. R. Gharpure. Mr. Govind Das has seen portions of the Subodhinī on the prāyaścitta section also. The Subodhinī does not comment on each word of the Mitākṣarā but explains only important passageṣ It is a learned work. This was the earliest composition of Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa, since it is mentioned even in the Madanapārijāta. The first verse of the Subodhinī is also the opening verse of the Mahārṇava and of the Smṛtikaumudī.¹⁷

From the verses¹⁸ 21 and 22 in the introduction to the Madanapārijāta it appears that Viśveśvara was the son of Pedibhaṭṭa and Ambikā, that he was of the Kauśikagotra and was the pupil of Vyāsāraṇya-muni. In the Subodhinī also the verse ‘mātā &c.’ occurs at the end with slight suitable variations and the verse ‘matiryeṣām’ in the beginning. The second introductory verse in Mr. Gharpure’s edition makes Viśveśvara the son of Appabhatta,¹⁹ while Mr. Setlur reads ‘Peṭṭibhaṭṭa’ which is probably a misreading for Pedibhaṭṭa. From his father’s name it appears that Viśveśvara was a native of the Drāviḍa country²⁰ and migrated to Northern India in search of patronage after he wrote the Subodhinī. Viśveśvara is regarded as one of the leading authorities of the Benares School of modern Hindu Law.²¹ Madanapāla belonged to the family of Ṭāka kings that ruled in Kāṣṭhā ( modern Kath ) on the Jumnā to the north of Delhi.²² The printed Madanapārijāta makes the family name to be ‘Kāṣṭhā,’ but this is most probably a wrong reading, as in the Mahārṇava and the other works of Madanapāla the family name is distinctly stated to be Ṭāka. The pedigree of the family as gathered from the Madanapārijāta and the other works is given below. Some works such as the Mahārṇava omit mention of Sahajapāla. About Sādhāraṇa it is said that he brought about the remission of all taxes at the three tīrthas ( Prayāga, Kāśī and Gayā)²³ Vide N. I. A. vol. VII pp. 176–180 where Dr. P. K. Gode produces evidence from the Rasaratnapradipa of Rāma-rāja on the Ṭāka kings of Kāṣṭhā (1200–1500 A. D.) and suggests the probable dates of the several kings that are set out in the note 1215, with reference to verses in the Madanapārijāta and other workṣ

In the Sūryasiddhāntaviveka of Madanapāla the father of Madanapāla is said to be Sahāraṇa²⁴ which is a Prakrit equivalent of Sādhaāraṇa. Madanapāla appears to have been a very great patron of learned men and is said to have emulated the fame of Bhoja.²⁵ Besides the four works described above he compiled several other works, the most famous of which is his dictionary of drugs called Madanavinodanighaṇṭu. That work is very extensive, contains about 2250 verses and is divided into fourteen vargas, the last of which contains a praśasti of his family.²⁶ This work contains the names of medical drugs, the qualities of drugs and of dishes and of the flesh of various animalṣ Some of the words given as synonyms for Sanskrit words occur in the modern Marathi.²⁷ We saw above that his Smṛtikaumudi refers to Yantra-prakāśa and Siddhantagarbha as two of his workṣ These two were works on astronomy.

Another work of his is the Sūrya-siddhāntaviveka or Vāsanārṇava, which is a commentary on the Sūryasiddhānta. There is a mṣ of this work in the Bhau Daji Collection of the Bombay Asiatic Society.²⁸ Therein after giving his pedigree he says that by his works on Smṛtiśāstra, on astronomy and mathematics and on medicine he came to be known as abhinava Bhoja.²⁹ In this treatise he refers to his own works already composed called Siddhāntagarbha³⁰ and Yantraprakāśa. He also refers to a Rājamṛgāṅka of Bhoja and to Bhāskara's workṣ The mṣ was copied in samvat 1459, i. e. 1402-3 A. D. In the colophon of this work his birudas (titles) are Paṇḍitapārijāta and Abhinava-Bhoja, and he is also styled Mahārājādhirāja.³¹ In the Madanapārijāta and the Mahārṇava the birudas are Paṇḍitapārijāta and Kaṭāramalla or Kaṭṭāramalla. A work called Ānandasañjīvana on singing, dancing, musical instruments and rāgas is ascribed to Madanapāla.³² The king Madana, son of Sahāraṇa, who is connected with the restoration of Medhātithi's bhāṣya, must be this Madana.

A great deal has been written concerning the date of Madanapāla. The introductory verses giving the genealogy of Madanapāla must be held to be genuine, as they occur in the ancient mṣ (D. C. Mṣ No. 131 of A 1882-83) of Mahārṇava copied in samvat 1645 (1588-89 A. D.) and in the still older mṣ (dated samvat 1459) of the Sūrya-siddhānta-viveka. As the Madanapārijāta mentions the Smṛticandrikā and Hemādri's Caturvarga-cintāmaṇi not only in the introductory verses of the Madanapārijāta but in the body of the Madanapārijāta and the Mahārṇava, Madanapāla must be certainly later than 1300 A. D. As the Smṛtikaumudī mentions the Vedāntakalpataru that was composed in the time of the Yādava princes Kṛṣṇa and Mahādeva, 94. Madanapāla and Viśeśvrabhaṭṭa it follows that the work was composed after the third quarter of the 13th century. The Madanapārijāta is quoted in the Nṛsimhaprasāda, the Antyeṣṭipaddhati of Nārāyaṇabhaṭṭa, the Āhnikatattva vol. I. Tithi 17, Āhnika Tattva pp. 326, 336, 384, 419, Jyotiṣṭattva 656, Malamāsa 804, ( Madanapārijāte-Mādhavacāryadhṛta-Śātāpavacanāt ), 814; vol. II. Udvāha 140, Daya 175, Śuddhi 235. It may be noted that in the Madras Law Journal, vol. IX for 1899 in pp. 7–15, 54–70, 91–114 there are English translations of certain parts of the 8th stabaka of the Madanapārijāta of Raghunandana, the Śrāddhakriyākaumudī (pp. 327, 489) of Govindānanda. Therefore it is certainly earlier than 1500 A. D. And if we rely on the date when the mṣ of the Sūryasiddhāntaviveka was copied (viz. 1402–3 A. D.), it follows that Madanapāla flourished before 1400 A. D. The Madanavinodanighanṭu³³ gives the date of its composition as ‘Brahma-jagad-yugendu’ of the Vikrama era, māgha 6 of the bright half and Monday (i. e. 8–1–1375 A. D.). This was interpreted by Sarvadhikari (Tagoer Law Lectures pp. 297–298, eḍ of 1922) as equal to 1231 of the Vikrama era (i. e. 1175 A. D.). He held that ‘yuga’ meant two. But herein he was entirely wrong. Besides, the date proposed by him is impossible, since it would lead us to hold that Madanapāla wrote in 1175 A. D. and since, as we saw above, he could not have flourished before 1300 A. D. It has been already shown (pp. 309, 369) that the view of Sarvadhikari and others that the Pārijāta mentioned by Cāṇḍeśvara is the same as Madanapārijāta is quite wrong. Astronomical usage as found in Bhāskara and other writers always interprets yuga³⁴ as meaning four (and not two) and hence the date of the composition of the Madanavinodanighanṭu is 1431 of the Vikrama era (i. e. 1375 A. D.). Vide Jolly’s Tagore Law Lectures pp. 14–15, Dr. Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883-84 pp. 47 and 347 and S. B. E. vol. 25, p. cxxv ṇ 2. A mṣ of the Suryasiddhāntaviveka, which is one of the last ( if not the last ) works of Madanapāla is dated in 1402-3 A. D. Hence the literary activity of Madanapāla and of his protege, Viśveśvarabhaṭṭa, must be placed between 1360– 1390 A. D.