Vidyaranya and Desikar

[Guest guest]

> The Muttadipathis of Sringeri Sankara Math during that period were:

> Vidyathirtha: 1228-1333

> Bharatikrishna Tirtha: 1333-1380

> Vidyranya: 1380-1386

>

> Based on this, Vidyaranya did not take Sanyashrama during Deshikar

> life time. In fact, according to the source mentioned above, in

> Vidyranya's 40th year, he became associated iwth the Vijayanagara

> empire and served as chief minister to three succesive kings.

 

 

Not true. The dates above represent the dates when the succeeding maThAdhipati

took over from the previous one. They do not represent dates of sannyAsa. For

example, the current Sankaracharya of Sringeri became a sannyAsi in 1972, but

became the maThAdhipati only in 1989. Sringeri accounts will show Sri

Bharati Tirtha as holding the post only from 1989, not from 1972.

 

In an inscription dated 1346, Harihara I of Vijaynagar pays respects to the

sannyAsi named Vidyaranya. So as of 1346, Vidyaranya was already a sannyasi.

Of course, the traditional story is that Vidyaranya was already a sannyasi

when Harihara first met him. As such, it is inconceivable that he would be the

"minister" of the first three kings of Vijaynagar.

 

The confusion in this regard arises because of Vidyaranya's pUrvASrama name,

which is supposed to be mAdhava. Now, Vijayanagar sources talk of at least

three mAdhavas who were closely connected with the kingdom in various

capacities. It should be noted however that the confusion arises because people

have

been neglecting the gotra information that is available for the three mAdhavas.

Since the gotra is one strong piece of information that can be trusted for

purposes of history, I think this should be taken into account very seriously.

If this is done, the identification of Vidyaranya with mAdhava can be resolved

properly, I suppose. Obviously, the minister of three kings was a mAdhava. I

don't think it is possible that *this* mAdhava was the same as vidyAraNya.

> Historical accuracy is important in the classroom, but is of

> questionable use in a religious discourse. My grandmother would be far more

 

 

Of course. There is no doubt that Vidyaranya and Vedanta Desika were

contemporaries. Whether the story about Vidyaranya asking Vedanta Desika

to go to the Vijaynagar court is true or not, I don't know. The Sringeri

math does not have any traditions that would provide more information on this.

Whether they were friends or not is also questionable, I suppose. The sarva-

darSana samgraha does not treat viSishTAdvaita very favorably. Nor does

Vedanta Desika spare advaita in the SatadUshanI.

 

Regards,

 

S. Vidyasankar

[Guest guest]

Mani writes:

*** I too once thought this, but upon further research,

*** it appears that Vidyaranya was not a court official of

*** the Vijayanagara kingdom, as he was a virakta and a

*** sannyasi who was the presiding acharya of the Sringeri

*** Sankara Matha. While it may have been the case that

*** he suggested that Desikar go to the court for some financial

*** assistance, Vidyaranya by no means resided in the court

*** or was an ``official'' in any sense of the word. [Part

*** of the confusion lies in the fact that the chief minister

*** of the Vijayanagara kingdom at the time was known as

*** Madhavacharya, which was the name of Vidyaranya before

*** he took sannyasa.]

 

Given that I had heard the same story associated with Desikar

(i.e. refusing Vidyaranya's suggestion), that I thought I would check

it out with some references. I find that Mani's dates don't add up.

 

First, let's consider the "accepted" dates for Desikar.

 

Life of Desikar: 1268-1369(71) (1369 appears the consensus, but have

seen references to 1371)

 

Now, regarding Madhava-Vidyaranya. Now what follows is from

Introduction to the Sankara Digvijaya printed by the RK Mutt. But here

are the dates as quoted from them.

 

Madhava (as Mani notes) was Sri Vidyaranya's pre-monastic name.

 

Dates: 1295-1380 (birth - Sanyashrama)

1380-1386 (head of the Sringeri Math - parama pada)

 

The Muttadipathis of Sringeri Sankara Math during that period were:

Vidyathirtha: 1228-1333

Bharatikrishna Tirtha: 1333-1380

Vidyranya: 1380-1386

 

Based on this, Vidyaranya did not take Sanyashrama during Deshikar

life time. In fact, according to the source mentioned above, in

Vidyranya's 40th year, he became associated iwth the Vijayanagara

empire and served as chief minister to three succesive kings.

 

It is therefore, highly conceivable that the story as narrated by Sri

Anbil Ramaswamy has some grains of truth. I am not sure if they were

"childhood" friends in that Desikar was elder to Sri Vidyaranya by

25 years. However, it is possible that they knew each other.

 

In S. Das Guptas "History of Indian Philosophy," it is mentioned

(vol 3., page 120), that Vidyaranya quotes Desikar's

Tattva-mukta-kalapa in Sarva-darshana-sangraha. Thus, to say the

least, Vidyaranya was aware of Desikar's works.

 

Perhaps there are other more recent datings that are more accurate

and differs substantially from the numbers above. Nevertheless, it

does not appear so outlandish (atleast to me) that the traditional

biographies related to this even may be true.

 

However, I would say that these discussions of dates, etc are totally

silly and meaningless. Does it really matter wheteher or not

Vidyaranaya was Desikar's friend? or if the stories are "really"

true? After all, of what benefit is it to a bhakta when Mahabharata

and Ramayana really took place and who were its "true" authors?

Perhaps Max Muller and his fellow Indologists might, but I hazarad a

guess that many of the indologists had very little spiritual need for

the dates.

 

Historical accuracy is important in the classroom, but is of

questionable use in a religious discourse. My grandmother would be far more

concerned and impressed at the fact that Ramanuja and his contempories

were persecuted by local kings, than by the knowledge that it was

Kuttolanga I, II, III ... or whatever.

 

sk