Sunteți pe pagina 1din 22

ROQUE MESQUITA

¯

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V AYU IN THE

PHILOSOPHY OF MADHVA

The Dvaitavada¯ is the only Vedanta¯ system in which the God Vayu¯ – known by the names Anila, Gandhavaha, Marut, Matari¯ svan,´ Mukhya

Satataga and Vata¯

– holds a unique position in the philosophic and theological concept of the

School. His person is intrinsically connected with the avatara¯ -doctrine,

the son of Vis n . u. This

. topic has hardly received the scholarly attention it deserves. 1 The present

paper attempts to provide a survey of some of the important quotations Madhva attributes to different known and unknown sources which under-

specifically with Madhva as an incarnation of Vayu,¯

Pran¯ a, Parjanya, Pavan, Prabhañjana, Pravaha, Sadagata,¯

.

I am indebted to Anne MacDonald for useful remarks and improvements to the English expression of this paper.

1 Cf. for instance, the studies on Madhva by K. Narain (An Outline of Madhva Philo-

´

sophy. Allahabad 1986), B.N.K. Sharma (Philosophy of Sr¯ı Madhvac¯ arya.¯

Delhi 1976), I. Puthiadam (Vis . n u the ever free. A

Study of the Madhva¯

and his Cardinal Doctrines. Dharwad 1990) completely ignored this topic, whereas H. von Glasenapp (Madhva’s Philosophy of the Vis . n u Faith, Transl. by S.B. Shrothri. Bangalore 1992: 22f.) was of the opinion that the followers of Madhva considered him as an Avatara¯ of Vayu.¯ Glasenapp remarks on this point: “It can’t be said of sure, whether Madhva considered himself as the human form of the Wind-god, or whether his worshippers have made him one, because the passages in Madhva’s works in which he himself appears to be referring to his divine origin, could have been later insertions. At the same time: Why

should he have not considered himself as an Avatara¯ of Vayu”?¯ Mme. S. Siauve, who for the first time discussed this problem at some length (cf. Les hierarchies´ spirituelles selon l’Anuvyakhy¯ ana¯ de Madhva. Pondichery´ 1971: 9–18), missed the point while evaluating the unknown sources adduced by Madhva in support of his doctrine of the preeminence of Vayu¯ which clearly enhance Madhva’s claim of being an avat¯ara of Vayu.¯ According to her, Madhva is following an old tradition as transmitted in the passages quoted by him. As a matter of fact, the passages in question were composed by Madhva himself. Madhva is

is under direct inspiration of Vis n . u,

sincerely convinced that he, as an incarnation of Vayu,¯

. as I have shown extensively in Mesquita 2000: 47ff. [= 1997: 38ff.] and p. 24 n. 26 [= 1997:

21 n. 19]; p. 98 n. 176 [= 1997: 78 n. 165]; p. 100 n. 178 [= 1997: 80 n. 167]. Therefore,

the views put forward by Madhva on the superiority of Vayu¯ are original creations of his for the sake of strengthening the avat¯ara-claim and can in no way be considered as later insertions by the followers of Madhva (see Mesquita 2000: 47ff.; 55 n. 93 [= 1997: 38ff.;

44 n. 83]); also below n. 57.

T.P. Ramachandran (Dvaita Vedanta.¯

Concept of God. Madras 1985) and D.N. Shanbhag ( Sr¯ı Madhvac¯ arya¯

Delhi 1986),

.

´

.

D.N. Shanbhag ( Sr¯ı Madhvac¯ arya¯ Delhi 1986), . ´ . Indo-Iranian Journal 46: 97–117, 2003.

Indo-Iranian Journal 46: 97–117, 2003. © 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

98

ROQUE MESQUITA

score the priority of Vayu¯ among gods and confer upon him the highest

position of prathama¯nga˙ or pradhan¯ a¯nga˙

of Vis . n . u – from which the three

am s´avat¯

.

ar¯ ah¯ , namely Hanumat, Bh¯ıma and Madhva arise. 2

.

is a mighty god closely associated with Indra,

Vayu¯ is said to have

sprung from the breath of Purus a (X 90,13). In R gveda X 168,4 he is the

In Vedic literature Vayu¯

who is his charioteer. In the hymn of Purus asukta¯

.

.

.

¯

¯

Atman of the gods, while in X 16,3 the human Atman enters at death into Vayu.¯ He is the first among gods to drink the Soma juice after winning the race for the first draught of Soma. 3 Vayu¯ is the generator and nourisher of

plants and living creatures. In the Epic literature Vayu¯ is the reputed father of Bh¯ıma and of Hanumat 4 and the proclaimer of Puran¯ as such as VayuP¯

and Brahman¯ d . aP. 5 Madhva develops his concept of Vayu¯ in the light of this religious back- ground, allotting to him a very unusual priority amongst gods and beings.

Before I start to elaborate on this concept in detail, a preliminary remark ought to be added. While discussing the hierarchical order (taratamya¯ ) among gods Madhva makes several contradictory statements regarding

and Brahma¯ and puts forward in their support

many untraceable and sometimes anonymous (iti ca) quotations. 6 In this

the position of Sr¯ı, Vayu¯

.

.

´

´

connection, Sr¯ı is referred to in some hierarchical lists before all other gods

and immediately after Vis . n . u:

etebhyo ’bhyadhik¯a sris´

tatsamo n¯asti paramo harir eva na c¯aparah . /

sam hit¯ay¯am . br haty¯am . tu svayam . bhagavatoditam / 7

tu sad¯a mukt¯a vi´ses atah /

.

.

.

.

2 Cf. Mesquita 2000: 49 n. 75f. [= 1997: 40 n. 67f.]; see below p. 13ff.

3 Cf. Thomas Oberlies, Die Religion des R gveda. Erster Teil – Das religiöse System

.

des R gveda. Vienna 1998: 435; 217–219; also Paul Deussen, Allgemeine Geschichte der

.

Philosophie mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Religionen. Leipzig 1894, I,1 p. 294–

305; I,2 p. 93–101.

4 See below n. 12.

5 MBh III 189,14; KurmaP¯

I 1.15; Harivam sa´

.

VII 11; 21.

6 This seems to be an inherent feature of Madhva’s unknown sources which differ in their content even though they refer to one and the same doctrine; they give the impression that not a single author but many authors were at work in composing them; see Mesquita 2000: 23 n. 21; p. 116 [= 1997: 19 n. 14; p. 93].

7 Anuv (p. 166,24+167,25); see also Mesquita 2000: 85 [= 1997: 67]; Siauve 1971:

satsiddh¯anta iti

42f.; Anuv (p. 153, 26f.): nirdos atvam ram¯ay¯a´s ca tadanantar¯a tath¯a

.

.

jñeyo nirn ¯ıto harin a¯ svayam; also Mesquita 2000: 82 n. 146 [= 1997: 65 n.135]; Siauve

.

1971: 9; 34f. Vayu¯

.

is not mentioned at all in this list!

While discussing the threefold infinity (anantyam¯

. trividdham) of Vis . n . u, namely in space

´

(de´satah . ), in time (k¯alatah . ) and in essence (vastutah . ), Madhva remarks that Sr¯ı follows

¯

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V AYU

99

Similarly, some of Madhva’s sources state that Vayu¯ in age and rank:

comes after Brahma¯

vis n or br¯ahman aj¯atih . san brahm¯a jajñe caturmukhah /

.

.

.

.

ito ’gre jagatas tasm¯at ks atraj¯atir aj¯ayata /

v¯ayuh iti v¯amane. 8

.

Vis . n . u, since she is infinite in space and in time; Vayu¯ v¯ayuh . ); cf. BhagTN¯ (p. 186,10–182,2):

de´satah k¯alata´s caiva vastutas tu tridh¯a hareh /

.

.

yath¯anantyam . na c¯anyasya prakr . ter de´sak¯alatah /

tath¯a sabdasya´

k¯ala´sabd¯atmik¯a saiva tath¯api tu hareh sad¯a /

.

k¯alasya de´s¯anantyam . ca k¯alatah /

.

.

n¯asy¯ah . s¯amarthyale´so ’pi jñ¯an¯anandagun . es v api /

.

jñeyas tadavaro v¯ayuh . sesav¯´

ındrahar¯as tatah /

.

avar¯as tata indr¯ady¯a gun . aih sarvair na sam sayah´

iti brahmavaivarte

.

.

.

/

´

comes after Sr¯ı (jñeyas tadavaro

ibid. (p. 198,8–199,2:

iti vis n ukr te tattvaviveke); see Mesquita 2000 : 417ff.; 493f.

.

.

.

´

Sr¯ı is mentioned after Vis . n . u in the hierarchical ladder because of her infinite (an¯adinitya)

knowledge, cf. PL (p. 65,3–10); Mesquita 2000 : 240f.; 494f.; VTN (p. 18,5f.); Mesquita o.c. p. 98 n.140; see also Tattvasankhy˙ ana¯ (p. 69,5–6); GiT [ad VII 7] ChUBh (p. 454,28):

avyaktar¯up¯a

laks m¯ı´s ca var¯ato ’to harih svayam / na tatsamo ’dhiko v¯a

iti ca. All gods and souls

are reflections of the supreme Atman, but Sr¯ı is His first and immediate reflection, other

souls such as Brahma¯ etc. follow her (Anuv p. 136,8): abh¯¯

param¯atmanah . / c¯ay¯a vis . n o ram¯a tasy¯a´s ch¯ay¯a dh¯at¯a

asa evam purus . a¯ mukt¯a´s ca

. alone is in possession of full consciousness during the Pralaya, whereas other gods remain

in the state of sleep (AiUBh p. 209,20+213,16):

(see Mesquita 2000 : 495ff.). Sr¯ı

alp¯api hy amr t¯a dev¯ı sr¯´ ıh p¯urn . atipriyatvatah¯

.

.

.

.

¯ ´

. / iti ca; G¯ıBh (p. 49,11–14):

.

´

supt¯as tatra yato j¯ıv¯ah . sarve brahma´siv¯adik¯ah /

.

asupt¯a sr¯´ ı´s ca mukt¯a´s ca svatantronmes avarjan¯at /

.

¯

ity¯adyaitareyasam . hit¯ay¯am (untraceable); see also B AUBh (p. 344,15–16):

anyes . am¯

.

amr tatvam tu bhaved vis n oh pras¯adatah . /

.

.

.

.

nity¯amr . tah sa bhagav¯an sr¯´ ı´s ca n¯anyah . katham cana /

.

.

iti n¯arad¯ıye.

´

There are some other quotations ranking Vayu¯

19:

above Sr¯ı, for instance AiUBh (p. 181,13–

ity¯adi brahm¯an . d . e); BhagTN¯

(p. 583,11–15):

svatantro n¯aparah . ka´scid vis n . oh pr¯an . apateh . prabhoh . /

.

.

yath¯a pr¯an . at¯ paro n¯asti svatantro jagati kvacit /

tath¯a pr¯an . o ram¯a caiva na vis . n . oh pr . thag ¯ı´svarau /

.

yady ucyante pr¯an . atantr¯a bahavah purus . a¯ iti /

.

satyam eva hy asa˙nkhy¯at¯a na niyamyanis . edhik¯ah /

ek¯advit¯ıya´srutayah . kim tv ¯ı´s¯antarav¯arak¯ah /

.

tath¯a svagatabhedasya tadatantranis edhak¯ah /

iti brahm¯an . d . e; see also below n. 9.

.

.

.

.

8 B AUBh (p. 274,12f.).

¯

100

ROQUE MESQUITA

According to some other sources, Vayu¯

same time Brahma¯ is said to be superior (pradh¯

is identical with Brahma¯ and at the

any¯

at¯ ) to him:

v¯ayur eva brahm¯a bhavat¯ıti dar´sayitum . v¯ayoh . sr t

v¯ayur eva yato brahmapadam . niyamato vrajet / sahaiva janane ’py asm¯at p¯urvam . v¯ayor janim . vadet /

kvacit tu brahman ah p¯urvam . pr¯adh¯any¯at tatpadasya ca /

iti brahmatarke

.

s ih prathamam ukt¯a –

.

.

.

“Vayu¯ becomes indeed Brahma.¯ 9 In order to show that the creation of Vayu¯ is referred to first, [the following] is stated in Brahmatarka: ‘Since even Vayu¯ achieves as a rule the status of Brahma¯ [and] although He is born together with Him, Vayu¯ is referred to as being born prior to Him. In

9 B AUBh (p. 283,19f.):

¯

uttamah sarvadeves u pr¯an . a eva harer anu /

.

.

caturmukhasya pr¯an . asya na vi´ses o ’sti ka´scana /

.

iti n¯ar¯ayan . a´srutau.

BhagTN¯

(p. 198,8–199,2):

niyam¯ad v¯ayur evaiko brahmatvam y¯ati n¯aparah . /

.

iti vis n ukr te tattvaviveke

.

.

.

ibid. (p. 687,6ff.): sa eva v¯ayur uddis . . o v¯ayur hi brahmat¯am ag¯at ibid. (p. 98,3–4):

t

sarvaj¯ıvanik¯ayes . u brahmav¯ay¯u harer vidau /

na c¯anyas t¯adr so´

vett¯a y¯avad vetti harih svayam /

.

.

t¯avat t¯av api no vis n . um j¯an¯ıto lokavanditau /

.

.

iti brahm¯an . d . e

see also MBhTN II 34:

brahm¯atmako yato v¯ayuh . padam . br¯ahmam ag¯at pur¯a / v¯ayor anyasya na br¯ahmam padam . tasm¯at sa eva sah /

.

.

ity¯adi brahm¯an d . e

.

iti tantrabh¯agavate;

142ab: v¯ayur hi brahmat¯am eti tasm¯ad brahmaiva sa smr tah /

 

.

.

III

10cd: v¯ayur ya ev¯atha viriñcan¯am¯a bhavis ya adyo¯

.

na paras tato hi /

see

also ChUBh (p. 401,22f.):

v¯ayor hiran yagarbhatv¯at padadvayam ud¯ahr tam /

.

.

.

iti ca

and BhagTN¯

dar´sayitum aha¯ cf. Siauve 1971: 10f.; Mesquita 2000: 47f. [= 1997: 38f.].

(p. 686,5ff.): sarvagun . aih sarvottamas tu v¯ayur eva sa eva hiran yagarbha iti

.

.

 

¯

101

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

some places [the birth] of Brahma¯ is reported as prior [to Vayu],¯ 10 because He is higher in rank [than Vayu]’¯ ”. 11 Despite these disparate statements just referred to, Madhva draws throughout his works a clear and a consistent outline defining the specific features of Vayu¯ based on traditional material which he has worked over. One of these special characteristics is that Vayu¯ appears as an avatara¯ on earth in different ages. However, while depicting Vayu¯ as such Madhva makes a very significant change to the traditional idea, handed down in the Ram¯ ayan¯ . a and Mahabh¯ arata,¯ that Vayu¯ is the father of the heroes Hanumat and Bh¯ıma. 12 The specification of Brahma,¯ on the contrary, remains strictly within the line of the tradition. He is chiefly the creator and maintainer of the world as well as the universal guru. 13 But there are no incarnations of Brahma¯ on earth. In accord with a selected number of Madhva’s numerous quotations (all of them are untraceable!) one could describe the priority of Vayu¯ under the following headings:

1) Vayu¯

as the origin and sustainer of the world:

A) sy¯utam . jagad idam yasmin s¯utram v¯ayur asau smr tah /

.

.

.

.

tam c¯api yamayed yasm¯ad antary¯am¯ı harih smr tah /

.

.

.

.

pr . thivy¯ady¯a devat¯as tu dehavad yadva´satvatah . /

ıram iti cocyante yasya vis . n . or mah¯atmanah /

sar¯´

.

10 Cf. B AUBh (p. 275,12f.):

¯

pr¯an . in¯am dhairyar¯upam . ca v¯ayo r¯up¯antaram . punah . /

.

sasarja matim¯an brahm¯a vis . n . or ajñ¯¯

apurah . sarah /

.

iti n¯arad¯ıye.

11 B

12

¯

AUBh (p. 248,15–18); see also BhagTN¯

Ram¯

ayan¯

. a VII 35,20ff.; Mahabh¯

arata¯

(p. 160,4–5:

iti brahm¯an . d . e).

I 114, 9; Mesquita 2000: 47 [= 1997: 38]; see

above n. 4 and below p. 13ff.

13

BhagTN¯

(p. 530,1):

vis . n . uh pradh¯anatah . sras a¯ gun . asras . . a¯ caturmukhah /

.

iti n¯arad¯ıye

¯

t

t

.

cf. B AUBh (p. 248,18–20):

atm¯¯

a viriñcah suman¯ah sudhauta´s ceti kathyate /

.

.

brahm¯a caturmukha´s ceti p¯urvajo yah . praj¯apatih . /

iti sabdanirn´

aye

.

cf. BhagTN¯ (p. 102,6–9):

iti sk¯ande; ibid. (p. 145,6–7):

iti br¯ahme); BSuBh¯

(p. 35,20–21:

iti br¯ahme); MBhTN I 122ab: tasm¯ad brahm¯a gurus mukhyah . sarves am¯

.

eva sarvad¯a

ity etat pañcaratroktam . pur¯an . es v anumoditam; see also Mesquita 2000 :

.

382 n. 395; Siauve 1971: 12.

102

ROQUE MESQUITA

iti brahmatarke

“God Vayu¯ is called ‘Thread’, since this world is woven together in him. 14 And Vis . n . u is also called internal ruler because he

Earth etc. [mentioned in this section]

are [presiding] deities. They are called the body of the supreme

soul Vis . n . u, as they are controlled by Him, in the same way as

[a man] controls [his own] body Brahmatarka. 15

” This is mentioned in the

controls him (= Vayu).¯

B) tasm¯ad v¯ayoh . paro n¯asti r te vis n um san¯atanam /

.

.

.

.

. ad¯¯ ın¯am ks atriy¯an . am¯

ses´

.

.

.

v¯ayur ev¯adhipah . smr tah /

.

.

dh¯aran ad¯

.

dharma ity¯ahur v¯ayur dh¯arayati praj¯ah . /

abalo ’pi tato v¯ayor vis n ubhakty¯adir¯upin . ah /

.

pr¯aptum icchati yuktah . san vis . n . um subalavattaram /

.

.

.

yathaiva yuvar¯ajena mah¯ar¯ajam abh¯ıpsati /

pr¯aptum . dharmabhim¯an¯ı sa v¯ayuh . saty¯abhim¯anav¯an /

tasm¯ad ahur¯

satyajñam atha dharmajñam . v¯ayur devo yatas tayoh . /

dharmavidam satyavetteti vedinah /

.

.

iti n¯arad¯ıye

14 Cf. ChUBh (p. 400,23f. = s¯utr¯atman

s¯utram sa v¯ayuh . ; cf. also BSuBh¯

.

(p. 111,9–10):

iti brahm¯an . d . apur¯an . a); MBhTN III 11a:

bh¯ut¯ani ces . . a¯ mantr¯a´s ca mukhyapr¯an . ad¯

mukhyapr¯an . ah parasm¯ac ca na parah . k¯aran anvitah¯

t

.

idam jagat /

/

.

.

.

iti ca v¯ayuprokte

also ibid. (p. 111, 12–15):

pr¯an . ad¯

idam avir¯¯

as¯ıt pr¯an . o dhatte pr¯an . e layam abhyupaiti na pr¯an . ah kim cid¯a´sritah /

.

.

.

ity¯agnive´sya´srutau /

(cf. below n¯ar¯ayan . sruti, n. 18; 20) yad¯a´sray¯ad asya ces . a¯ so ’nyam . katham up¯a´srayet /

t

. yath¯a pr¯an . as tath¯a r¯aj¯a sarvasyaik¯a´srayo bhavet /

iti ca yuktir bh¯arate

pr¯an . asyaitad va´se sarvam pr¯an . ah parava´se sthitah /

.

.

.

na parah . kim cid a´¯sritya vartate paramo yatah . /

.

iti ca pai˙ngi´srutih .

also ibid. (p. 112,7ff.; p. 209,1–2): v¯ayor v¯ava rudra udeti v¯ayau vil¯ıyate tasm¯ad ahur¯

v¯ayur dev¯an¯am sres´ .

t

.

ha it¯ıti ca kaun . d . in ya´srutih . (untraceable); BhagTN¯

.

(p. 90,7–8):

.

sarvaces . ayitr . tv¯at tu pr¯an . o ’bhibhava´saktitah /

.

t

.

ojas tv anabhibh¯avyatv¯at saha´s ca svecchay¯a kr teh /

.

balam vidh¯arakatv¯ac ca vidhr tir v¯ayur ucyate /

.

.

.

iti ca bh¯arate; cf. ibid. (p. 618,5–8; 619,5–10:

iti harivam ses´

.

.

u [all untraceable]).

15 B

¯

AUBh (p. 308,23f.); see also Man¯ UBh (p. 515,21+516,10:

.

KathUBh (p. 485,20f

iti mah¯akaurme).

iti harivam ses´

.

.

u);

 

¯

103

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

“ Therefore, there is none who is superior to Vayu¯ except the

alone is called the Lord of Ks atriyas, such

as

‘Dharma’, because he protects [them]. One who is weaker than

having the nature of devotion towards Vis . n . u, [and] who

wishes to attain Vis n u is fit to attain the extremely powerful [Vis . n u

. with his help], just like one who wishes to reach the emperor with the help of a prince. This Vayu¯ is the presiding deity of Dharma [and] of Satya. Therefore, the people versed [in these matters] say that the knower of Satya is the knower of Dharma. Now, one who is the knower of Dharma is [also] the knower of Satya, because Vayu¯ is the presiding Deity of them both”. This is taught in the Narad¯ ¯ıyaP. 16

this Vayu,¯

upholds mankind they call him

eternal Vis . n . u. Vayu¯

.

´

Ses a and so on. Since Vayu¯

.

.

.

2) Vayu¯

is higher than the R . . is and Devas:

s

r . s ibhyas t¯uttam¯a dev¯a devebhyo v¯ayur uttamah /

.

.

v¯ayo´s ca bhagav¯an vis . n . ur na tasm¯ad uttamo guruh . /

ity¯ac¯aryasam . hit¯ay¯am

“Among the Rs is the gods are the highest in rank. Among gods Vayu¯

is the divine Vis . n . u. There is no

is the highest and higher than Vayu¯

Guru higher than He”. This has been said in the Acaryasam¯

.

¯

. hita.¯ 17

3) All gods and their activities are derived from Vayu:¯

A) vis n or v¯ayuh . samutpanno v¯ayoh . sarv¯a´s ca devat¯ah /

. pr¯an . ady¯¯

.

as t¯an nayan pr¯an . a ajñ¯¯

apayati r¯ajavat /

.

16 B

¯

AUBh (p. 274,28+275,18); BSuBh¯

(p. 112,21–25):

yatah . sarvam jagad vy¯apya tis hati pr¯an . a eva tu /

.

t

ato dhr tam jagat sarvam anyath¯a kena dh¯aryate /

.

iti yuktir v¯ayuprokte

.

an unaitat sr jyate ’n unaitad dh¯aryate ’n au layam abhyupaiti pr¯an . o v¯a an uh pr¯an . e hy etad

.

.

.

.

.

.

bhavat¯ıti ca srautr¯´

ayan . srutih ; see also BhagTN¯

.

(p. 251,1–3):

pr¯apnoti v¯ayuh . sarvam tu svata eva hares tath¯a /

.

atah pr¯aptir iti pr¯ahur v¯ayum . bh¯utapatim . prabhum /

.

pradh¯anav¯ayur anyes . u nity¯avis . o yatas tatah /

tadgun . as¯

iti brahmavaivarte; see also ibid. (p. 583,11–15, above n. 7).

t

.

.

tes u cocyante n¯ıcat¯a n¯asya tatkr t¯a /

.

.

17 ChUBh (p. 417,24–26); MBhTN II 149:

balam indrasya giri´so giri´sasya balam marut /

.

na harer balam anyatah . /

(iti bh¯arate [untraceable]); ibid. III 24; 65; see also KathUBh (p. 484,21–23:

bhavis yatparvani); cf. below n. 19.

balam tasya harih s¯aks an¯

.

.

.

.

iti

104

ROQUE MESQUITA

svayam . ca pañcar¯upah . san dady¯an moks adikam¯

iti prabhañjane

. prabhuh . /

.

all [other] gods

. like pran¯ . a, apana¯ etc. Vayu/Mukhya¯

them like a king [command his officers]. Himself being five-fold,

the Lord grants salvation [to mankind]”. This is stated in the Prabhañjana. 18

“From Vis n . u Vayu¯

Pran¯ a rules and commands

is born and from Vayu¯

.

B) acetanam cetanebhyo daivatebhya´s ca cetan¯ah /

.

.

dev¯ah pr¯an . ac¯

.

ca sa pr¯an . o vis . n . or sadaiva tu /

svabh¯avam ca pravr . ttim ca vik¯aram ca sam¯apnuyuh . /

.

.

.

iti brahmatarke

“An insentient being receives [his] natural state, activity and modi- fications from the sentient beings and from gods. And gods receive

while Pran¯ a gets [them] always from

[them] from Pran¯ a (= Vayu),¯

.

.

Vis . n . u”. This is stated in the Brahmatarka. 19

C) uttamah sarvadeves u pr¯an . a eva harer anu /

.

.

caturmukhasya pr¯an . asya na vi´ses o ’sti ka´scana /

.

18 PrasUBh´

(p. 504,22–23); ibid. (p. 507,15–20):

vis n oh pr¯an . as tatah sraddh¯´

.

.

.

.

a tasy¯a rudro mano ’bhidhah /

.

tasm¯ad indras tv indriy¯atm¯a tasya somo ’nnadevat¯a /

tata´s ca varun ah sr t

.

.

.

.

s as tasm¯ad agnis tato ’varah /

.

.

ak¯¯ a´sadevat¯a vighnas tato v¯ayoh . suto marut /

tasm¯ad agnih . p¯avak¯akhyah . prathamo ’gneh . sutas tatah /

tatah parjanya udbh¯utah sv¯ah¯ato mantradevat¯a /

.

.

.

udak¯atmako budhas tasy¯a us a¯ n¯am¯atmak¯a tatah /

.

.

tatah sanih´

.

. pr . thivy¯atm¯a karm¯atm¯a pus . karas tatah /

.

kram¯at pratyavar¯a ete mukt¯ah sarvagun . air api /

.

nityamuktas tath¯a vis n uh pr¯an . ad¯

iti ca

.

.

.

apy uttamottamah /

.

MuUBh (p. 498,23–25):

pratibim . bo hareh pr¯an . as tasya c¯any¯ah . kal¯ah kram¯at /

.

.

kal¯an¯am devat¯a any¯a devat¯an¯am nar¯a api /

.

.

tasm¯at sarve ’pi muktes u nares v api niy¯amak¯ah . /

.

.

tis anti n¯atra sandehah param¯atmani c¯akhil¯ah /

iti muktaviveke

t

.

.

see also BhagTN¯ (p. 79,3–80,1:

harivam ses´

.

¯

iti brahmatarke); ibid. (p. 619,5–10:

iti

iti n¯arayana´srutau); cf. above n. 9

. u) [untraceable !]; B AUBh (p. 283,19f

and below n. 20.

19 ChUBh (p. 452,13–19); see also MBhTN II 148–149:

a´svamedhah kratu´sres ho jyotih . sres´

t

t ho div¯akarah /

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

br¯ahman o dvipad¯am . sres´

.

.

t

.

ho deva´sres as tu m¯arutah /

t

.

.

.

balam indrasya giri´so giri´sasya balam marut /

balam tasya harih s¯aks an¯

.

na harer balam anyatah . /

.

.

.

(iti bh¯arate [second stanza is untraceable]).

 

¯

105

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

tam jñ¯atv¯a tena c¯avis . . as¯

.

t

tadbhr tyatvam up¯agat¯ah . /

.

tasm¯at pr¯an . a´¯s ca maruta ity es am¯

.

.

n¯ama sam sthitam /

.

v¯ayor dev¯a hi j¯ayante layam es yanti tatra ca /

.

iti n¯ar¯ayan . a´srutau

is higher in rank than all gods. There

. is no difference at all between the four-faced god and Vayu¯

After knowing Him [as superior to them] they were possessed by Him [and] were devoted to him. For this reason they received the

and

disappear in Him”. This is stated in the Nar¯ ayana¯

is not originated. His sole origin is the

“After Vis n . u, god Vayu¯

names Pran¯ a and Marut. Hence the gods are born from Vayu¯

.

sruti.´

20

4) Unlike all other gods Vayu¯ supreme Self.

nais a pr¯an . a udeti n¯astamety ekala eva madhye sth¯at¯athainam ahur¯

.

it¯ıti mukhyapr¯an . asy¯anutpattih . sruyate´ /

yatpr¯aptir yatparity¯aga utpattir maran am tath¯a /

.

.

tasyotpattir mr ti´s caiva katham pr¯an . asya yujyate /

.

.

iti ca yuktir v¯ayuprokte / atmata¯

eva pr¯an . o j¯ayata iti ca / (= PrasU´

III 3).

madhyama

“This Pran¯ a is not produced, nor does he perish; [rather he] stands

.

as a solitary in the middle. Hence [wise people] call him the Middle.

Therefore, the absence of the origin of Mukhya Pran¯ a is taught in the

.

Scriptures. And the reason [for it] is given in the following statement

of Vayupur¯

everywhere [and] to desert, as well as who is the origin and death

[of others], be himself originated and dissolved’? And another text declares: ‘This Pran¯ a springs from the Supreme Self’. 21

an¯ a: ‘How can the Pran¯ a who has the power to penetrate

.

.

.

5) Vayu¯

is superior in qualities to all other gods and liberated souls:

muktebhyo ’pi manus ebhyo dev¯a eva gun . adhik¯¯

.

tebhyo v¯ayus tato vis . n . uh parip¯urn . agun . ah sad¯a /

ah /

.

.

.

ye tv etad anyath¯a vidyus te hi y¯anty adharam tamah /

.

.

ye tv etad evam j¯ananti te y¯anti paramam . harim /

iti ca

.

In MBhTN III 23–24 the superiority of Vayu¯

the quarrel of the life-forces regarding their rank (B AU VI 1,7–14; ChU V 1,6–15; Kaus ¯ıtU

is defended with the allusion to the legend of

¯

.

II 14).

20

B

¯

AUBh (p. 283,19+284,27).

yatpr¯aptir

yatparity¯aga utpattir maran am tath¯a / tasyotpattir mr ti´s caiva katham pr¯an . asya yujyata

21 BSuBh¯

(p.

110,22–24);

.

.

see

also

NyaV¯

(p.

.

111,27–30):

.

na

ca

ity¯adim¯ah¯atmyavacan¯an mukhyapr¯an . asya notpattir iti v¯acyam / mahattv¯an mahat¯am

 

.

vis . n . uh kart¯a pran . asya¯

.

caikar¯at / kim n¯ama na sr jed es a yena saktyedam´

.

.

.

.

avr¯

.

tam iti srutes´

tato ’pi m¯ah¯atmy¯ad vis n oh .

.

.

.

106

ROQUE MESQUITA

“The gods have qualities superior to even the liberated souls, while Vayu¯ has [higher qualities] than these [gods], [higher] than Vayu¯ is

Vis . n . u, who is always endowed with the fullness of [infinite] qualities. Those, however, who perceive it otherwise go to lower darkness, but those who know it as it is, attain the supreme Hari”. And this has been handed down [in the tradition]. 22

6) Vayu¯

is the only mediator between men and Vis . n . u:

n¯anyair devair harim pa´syej jñ¯anar¯upen . a v¯ayun¯a /

.

brahman a¯ paramajñ¯anar¯upen . a harin a¯ tath¯a /

.

.

prasannenaiva tam pa´syed anye ’nujñ¯aprad¯ayinah . /

.

iti ca

“Hari cannot be seen with the help of other gods except through Vayu¯ in the embodiment of knowledge. In the same way, he is ought to be seen through the gracious Hari [himself] as Brahman in the embodi- ment of the highest knowledge. Other gods give [their] assent [to it]”. And this has been handed down [in the tradition]. 23 7) God Vayu¯ leads the soul to the ultimate salvation, namely to Brahman:

A) sa v¯ayum agacchat¯¯ ıti prathamam ucyate utkr¯anto vidv¯an param abhigacchan

vidyutam ev¯antata upagacchati dyaur v¯ava vidyut tatpatim . tenaiva brahma gacchat¯ıty ante ’pi v¯ayugamana´sruteh

It is stated that he reaches Vayu¯ first, because the following is

taught in the Vayugamana¯ sruti:´ “A sage departing [from the gross body and] on [his] path to the highest Brahman, attains finally

After attaining Vayu,¯ who is

his [‘namely Dyaus’] Lord, [the departing sage] reaches Brahman in the end only through Him [= Vayu]”.¯ 24

Vidyut only. Vidyut is indeed Dyauh

v¯ayum upagamya

B) ¯ıyus tr¯ın karman a¯ lok¯an jñ¯anenaiva taduttar¯an /

.

tatra mukhy¯ah . harim y¯anti tadanye v¯ayum eva tu /

.

apakv¯a ye na te y¯anti v¯ayum . v¯a harim eva v¯a / sth¯anam¯atr¯a´srit¯as te tu punar janivivarjit¯ah . /

iti brahmatarke

22 MuUBh (p. 500,6–8).

23 MuUBh (p. 497,15–16).

24 BSuBh¯

(216,17–19f.); ibid. (p. 217,2–4): vidyutpatin¯a v¯ayunaiva sa en¯an brahma

gamayat¯ıti brahmagamana´sruteh .

vidyutpatir v¯ayur eva nayed brahma na c¯aparah . /

kuto ’nyasya bhavec chaktis tam r te pr¯an . an¯ayakam /

iti ca br hattantre

.

.

´

cf. also S SS v. 25:

arcir¯adipath¯a v¯ayum . pr¯apya tena jan¯ardanam / yanti uttam¯a narocc¯ady¯a brahmalok¯at sah¯amun¯a /

 

¯

107

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

“Through [the performance] of Vedic rites [such as Agnis . oma

t

.

etc.] they would go to the three [lower] worlds. Through know- ledge alone they will go [to the worlds] which are higher than these. The best [among them] reach Hari. However, the others [‘namely inferior to these’] reach only Vayu.¯ Those whose [know- ledge and devotion] is unripe, attain neither Vayu¯ nor Hari. Moreover, those resting in the state of perfect tranquility are free from birth”. This is stated in the Brahmatarka. 25

C)

vis n ur hi d¯at¯a moks asya v¯ayu´s ca tadanujñay¯a /

.

.

.

iti bhavis yatparvavacanam

.

[as well but

only] with his consent”. This is declared in the Bhavis yatparvan 26

“Vis . n . u grants namely liberation and the god Vayu¯

.

8) Vis . n . u is denoted by the word Vayu¯ mark:

since pran¯ . a is His distinguishing

uktam ca br hatsam hit¯ay¯am

.

.

.

mukhyatah . sarvan¯am¯a tu vis n . ur eko na c¯aparah . /

.

tasm¯at pr¯an . adi´¯

anyavyapeks . ay¯a v¯ayau mukhyavr . ttir vidh¯ıyate /

v¯ayu´s ca s¯uryasam . sthah sam stapaty etaj jagattrayam /

ajñayaiva¯ pr¯an . ad¯

mukhyato vis . n . au vartam¯ano ’pi v¯ay¯av api vartate /

atah sarvaved¯adyabhidheyatvam . v¯ayor apy asti /

sabd¯a´s ca vis n av¯

.

.

.

.

eva hi mukhyatah . /

harer v¯ayoh . sakty¯´

a s¯uryas tapaty ayam /

v¯a es a udeti pr¯an . e ’stamet¯ıti ca sruti´

.

¯

(B AU I 5,23) pr¯an . a´sabda´s ca

.

pr¯an . asya pr¯an . a iti sruter´

(KeU I 2) ubhayor api pr¯an . a´sabdah

siddha eva / ayam .

 

.

 

¯

v¯ava si´´ sur yo ’yam . madhyamah . pr¯an . ah

.

iti (B AU II 2,1) v¯ayor vi´ses an ad¯

.

.

uttamah

.

pr¯an . o vis . n . ur iti ca siddham.

And the following is said in the Br hatsam hita¯ –

.

.

“ All the names in [their] primary meaning [denote] Vis . n . u alone

and none other. And consequently, the words such as Pran¯ a etc. refer

.

truly in [their] primary meaning to Vis . n u only. The primary usage is allotted to Vayu¯ through its application to another [higher Being,

namely Vis n . u]. Besides, Vayu¯

being in the sun shines upon the three

. worlds. The sun shines upon them only on command of Hari through

the power of Vayu¯

And the Sruti says: ‘Or it arises out of Pran¯ a

.

´

.

[and] sets in the Pran¯ a’. And [therefore] the word Pran¯ a denotes

[primarily] also Vayu¯

as it denotes primarly Vis . n . u. Hence, all the

.

.

25

BhagTN¯

(p. 74,4–6).

26 MBhTN I 78–99; see Mesquita 2000: 169ff. [= 1997: 139ff.].

108

ROQUE MESQUITA

´

On account of the Sruti-

statement: pran¯ . asya pran¯ . ah it is surely established that the word Pran¯ a

Vedas and other scriptures speak also of Vayu.¯

.

.

denotes [primarily] both of them. It is [equally] established that Vis . n . u

is the highest Pran¯ a because Pran¯ a is the distinguishing attribute of

Vayu,¯

middle pran¯ . a’ ”. 27

as taught in the B AU (II 2,1): ‘This young animal is indeed the

.

.

¯

9) God Vayu¯

is the son of Vis . n . u:

yam indram ahur¯

yo dev¯an¯am devatamo janitram . v¯ayos tasmai somam ebhyo juhomi /

varun am yam ahur¯

.

.

yam . mitram ahur¯

yamu satyam ahuh¯

/

.

.

evam v¯ayoh . pitaram . vis n um eva yajanti devaih saha ye kr te jan¯ah . /

.

.

.

.

.

evam tret¯ay¯am . kecid anye pr . thak t¯an is v¯a vis n av¯

.

.

t

.

.

.

iti ca brahm¯an d e

.

.

arpayante na c¯anye /

“Him whom they call Indra, whom they call Varun a, whom they call

.

Mitra, whom they call Satya, whom they call father of Vayu,¯ who is the highest among gods, to Him I offer together with these [gods

this] Soma. Thus in the Kr tayuga the people together with the gods

[only]

worshipped only Vis n . u, the father of Vayu.¯

.

28 In the Tretayuga¯

.

some worshipped Vis n . u in this way. Others surrendered [ultimately] to

.

27 AiUBh (p. 180,28+181,19):

dv¯au atm¯¯

anau hi vedes u dvau pr¯an . au dvau ca cetanau /

.

ajñ¯an¯abhibhav¯aspr . s au v¯ayur n¯ar¯ayan . a´s ca tau /

.

t

.

tadanye cetan¯ah sarve pr¯an . a´¯s c¯atm¯ana eva ca /

.

ajñ¯an¯abhibhavaspr . s as¯

.

t

.

tasm¯at te hy adham¯ah srut¯´

.

ah /

.

madhyamo v¯ayur evaika uttamah kevalo harih /

.

.

sarva´sabdoditau tasm¯ad etau dv¯av eva n¯aparah . /

anye caiva mitaih sabdair´

ucyante n¯amitaih kvacit /

.

.

sr¯´ ır apy akhila´sabdokt¯a vis . n . uvan na tu mukhyatah . /

tasm¯ad amitan¯am¯an¯av api tau mitan¯amavat /

sr¯´ ı´s ca v¯ayu´s ca vis n us tu mukhyokter amit¯abhidhah /

.

.

.

anantan¯amakatv¯ac ca so ’nantagun . a ¯ıritah /

pr . than n¯am¯ani yasm¯at tadgun . an¯

.

eva pracaks . ate /

.

ity¯adi brahm¯an . d . e.

28 Cf. ChUBh (p. 409,10+410,22):

dharmajñ¯an¯adir¯upen . a vis n or b¯ahucatus ay¯at /

t

. j¯atam . v¯ayum . viditvaiva putro bh¯utv¯a na rodati /

.

.

.

na j¯ayate na mr iyate mukto bh¯utv¯a sukh¯ı bhavet /

.

v¯ayum . hareh sutam jñ¯atv¯a n¯aham putratay¯arudam /

.

.

.

hareh pras¯adas¯amarthy¯ad ajar¯a c¯amar¯a hy aham /

.

iti ca.

 

¯

109

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

Vis . n . u after they had worshipped [other gods like Indra etc.] as different [from Him], while others neglected it”. And this has been taught in the Brahman¯ d apuran¯ . a. 29

.

.

This brief sketch shows how Madhva’s description substantially differs from the traditional specification of the personality of the god Vayu.¯ Not only is the god Vayu¯ without origination, being himself origin of the world and of all gods, he plays a unique role as a mediator between

men and Vis . n u and as a giver of final liberation, which Madhva in numerous other places views as an exclusive right of Vis . n . u. 30 Furthermore,

an¯ a and with

Vis n . u is also in intimate relation with the name Vayu/Pr¯

.

.

.

the personality of Vayu¯ as his father. According to an unknown source of Madhva, (iti ca) the knowledge of the fact that Vayu¯ is the son of

Vis n u is an essential prerequisite for final liberation. 31 This enhance-

.

.

ment of God Vayu¯ expressed in several of Madhva’s untraceable sources

cannot be coincidental and must be rather positively intended by Madhva since he uses them as the basis for substantiating his claim of being a

partial incarnation (am . s´avat¯

. agency of god Vayu.¯ Madhva develops this doctrine in a number of

steps. The first outstanding statement in this connection which Madhva

attributes to the Brahman¯ . d . apuran¯ . a (untraceable) is that Vayu¯

), of Vis n . u, which

cipal inherent member (pradhan¯ a¯nga˙ /prathama¯nga˙

. necessarily implies that Vayu,¯ unlike other gods, has no origin:

ara¯

) of Vis n . u. This implies an intermediate

is a prin-

bh¯ubh¯arah¯arin o vis . n . oh pradh¯an¯a˙ngam . hi m¯arutih /

.

.

.

ity¯adi kathitam sarvam brahm¯an . d . e harin a¯ svayam / 32

.

.

.

“Maruti¯

the burden of the earth

the Brahman¯ d . apuran¯ . a”. In his second important remark in this regard, ascribed to an unknown

is the

source, namely the Bhavis yatparvan, 33 Madhva declares that Vayu¯

is indeed the principal inherent member of Vis . n . u who removes

All this has been proclaimed by Hari himself in

.

.

origin of three avataras¯ :

tasy¯a˙ngam . prathamam . v¯ayuh . pr¯adurbh¯avatray¯anvitah . / prathamo hanum¯an n¯ama dvit¯ıyo bh¯ıma eva ca /

29 MuUBh (p. 493,21–23).

30 See Mesquita 2000: 171 n. 348 [= 1997: 139 n. 335]; Mesquita 2000 : 489f.

31 See above n. 28.

32 MBhTN II 15f. [9–49ab].

33 Ibid. II 112–123.

110

ROQUE MESQUITA

p¯urn . aprajñas tr t¯ıyas tu bhagavatk¯aryas¯adhakah . /

tret¯adyes . u yuges . v es a sam bh¯utah ke´sav¯ajñay¯a /

.

.

.

.

ekaika´sas tris u pr . thak

.

essential parts. The first one is called Hanumat and the second is indeed

as

Vayu¯

as His (= Vis . n . u’s) first inherent member has three avataras¯

Bh¯ıma. The third is Purn¯

. aprajña (= Madhva). He took [these incarnations]

in the three Yugas separately one by one, beginning with Treta¯ on the

command of Vis . n . u, [and each of them] carries out the deeds of the divine

Vis . n . u

. use of the traditional idea handed down in the Ram¯ ayan¯ . a and Mahabh¯ arata,¯

of Vis n . u, Madhva makes

”.

34

While developing this doctrine of am s´avat¯

.

ara¯

as I mentioned above, that Vayu¯ is the father of Hanumat and Bh¯ıma, which explains why they are known in the tradition as Marutsutas. In

order to adapt this notion to his concept of am s´avat¯

Madhva modi-

ara¯

.

fies it decisively. According to Madhva, Hanumat and Bh¯ıma are not simply Marutsutas but they are identified as pradurbh¯ ava¯ s/avatara¯ s of

Vayu.¯ And the inclusion of Madhva alongside these two avatara¯ s neces- sarily implies that Madhva himself is responsible for this set-up of three avataras¯ of Vayu.¯ Thus the conclusion seems inevitable that the source-

quotations attributed to the Brahman¯ . d . apuran¯ . a and Bhavis yatparvan which

are supportive of the said structure of avatara¯

s are to be traced back to

Madhva as their author. The elaboration of this thought pattern does not take place in an iso-

lated and independent way but in close relationship with full avatara¯ s of

Vis n . u, namely Rama¯

.

and Kr . . n . a. This is also attested in the same quotation

s

.

ascribed to the Brahman¯ d apuran¯ . a:

.

.

tasm¯ad balapravr . ttasya

antara˙ngam . han¯um¯am s´ ca bh¯ımas tatk¯aryas¯adhakau /

r¯amakr . . n . atmano¯

s

hareh /

.

.

“Therefore, Hanumat and Bh¯ıma being essential parts of Hari – who is

and Kr . n . a [and] engaged in [the task] of physical

. force [namely in the removal of the burden of the earth] – carry out the

deeds of Hari [in the treta¯ and dvapara¯ age respectively]”. 35

identical with Rama¯

s

34 Ibid. II 118–119; ibid. II 33:

tasm¯ad balapravr . ttasya r¯amakr . . n . atmano¯

antara˙ngam . han¯um¯am s

s

hareh /

.

ca bh¯ımas tatk¯aryas¯adhakau /

.

ity¯adi kathitam sarvam brahm¯an . d . e harin a¯ svayam.

.

.

.

For a detailed examination of this doctrine, see Mesquita 2000: 47ff.; 43 n. 56 [= 1997:

38ff.; 35 n. 48].

MBhTN II 33; II 23ab: kr . . n . ar¯am¯adir¯upes . u balak¯aryo jan¯ardanah sarvam brahm¯an d e harin a¯ svayam.

ity¯adi kathitam

35

s

.

.

.

.

.

 

¯

111

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

To these two Madhva adds a third full avatara¯ , namely Vyasa,¯ 36 whose

and Kr . n . a’s, is on the intellectual level and consists

. in imparting knowledge to mankind (vyas¯ adir¯ upes¯ . u jñanak¯ aryas¯ tatha¯

prabhuh . ) in the kali age. 37 In this arrangement there are also some discrepancies. For instance,

according to the tradition Vyasa¯ is assigned to the dvapara¯ age [not to the kali age] and he is taken as a secondary avatara¯ . 38 It is noteworthy that in this arrangement of avatara¯ s of Vayu¯ Madhva also, exactly like Hanumat and Bh¯ıma, is carrying out the deeds of Vis . n . u

) but his task consists, as

in case of the full avatara¯ Vyasa,¯ in imparting knowledge (jñanak¯ arya¯ )

Kr n a

and not in balakarya¯ as in case of full avatara¯ s such as Rama,¯

(purn¯ . aprajñas tr t¯ıyas tu bhagavatkaryas¯

duty, unlike Rama’s¯

s

adhakah¯

.

.

.

s

.

. and of the secondary avatara¯ s such as Hanumat and Bh¯ıma. 39 According

to Madhva’s understanding, the point of difference among these tasks is based in Vayu’s¯ nature itself which consists of knowledge and physical

force (vayur¯

s of

are consigned to the same tasks and

in the same succession as the three full avatara¯

tion of Madhva to Vyasa,¯

dvapara¯ (kali?) age, also makes it possible for Madhva himself to appear as

the author of the texts in the kali age. 41 The difference between the primary and secondary avatara¯ s is that the former are absolutely identical with

s of Vis n . u. The subordina-

Vis n . u, through the mediation of Vayu,¯

. the teacher and author of all canonical texts in the

balasam vidatm¯

.

). 40 That means that the three am s´avat¯

.

ara¯

.

s have only a temporary conscious-

ness of identity with Vis . n . u. Madhva expresses this distinction of rank in

Vis n . u, 42 whereas the secondary avatara¯

.

36 See Mesquita 2000: 42ff. [= 1997: 35ff.].

37 MBhTN II 23cd.

38 See Mesquita 2000: 48ff. [= 1997: 39ff.].

39 It cannot be coincidental that Madhva praises in MBhTN (II 151–152; 162–168) the excellent qualities of the soldier Bh¯ıma fulfilling his task (balak¯arya).

sv¯abh¯avik¯ı

40 MBhTN III 74ab; G¯ıT (p. 61,16): par¯asya saktir´

vividhaiva sruyate´

jñ¯anabalakriy¯a ca; see Mesquita 2000: 49 n. 75 (= 1997: 40 n. 67).

41 See Mesquita 2000: 44–48; 63ff. (= 1997: 36–39; 51ff.); also MBhTN II 7cd–8ab:

yath¯a sa bhagav¯an vy¯asah . s¯aks an¯

.

n¯ar¯ayan . ah prabhuh . /

.

jag¯ada bh¯arat¯adyes . u tath¯a vaks ye tad¯ıks ay¯a /

.

.

cf. Mesquita 2000: 76f. [= 1997: 60f.].

42 MBhTN II 27:

ity¯ady¯ah . kevalo vis n . ur nais am¯

.

.

.

bhedah katañcana /

.

na vi´ses o gun . aih sarvair balajñ¯an¯adibhih . kvacit /

.

.

ity¯adi

brahm¯an . d . e

see Mesquita 2000: 52f. n. 82 [= 1997: 41f. n. 73].

112

ROQUE MESQUITA

a very conspicious way when he states that Vis . n . u appears in the shape

), and never asserts that Vis n . u appears in the shape

of Madhva (madhvarupin¯

that Madhva is the third earthly form of Vayu¯ (anandat¯ ¯ırthavaranamavat¯ ¯ı

)! The expressions used in this connection are

of Vyasa¯ (vyasar¯ upin¯

.

tr . t¯ıya¯ bhaum¯ı tanur marutas) 43 or that he has a divine appearance (divyam .

ya

. asyaiva padam . sis eve). 45

rupam¯

). 44 Additionally, Madhva is called the disciple (tasyaiva sis´

.

.

jagadekabhartuh . ) and devotee of Vis n . u (nar¯ ayan¯

.

Furthermore, the secondary avatara¯ s are subjected to human weaknesses

and other infirmities. 46 These particulars do not apply to Vyasa.¯

, being an

earthly incarnation of Vayu¯ (bhaum¯ı tanur marutas), can possess a

is at the

. bottom of Madhva’s explanation. Appealing to an anonymous and untrace-

, i.e., Madhva

temporary consciousness of identity with Vis n . u. Again Vayu¯

In a further step, Madhva articulates how an am s´avat¯

.

ara¯

able source (iti ca), Madhva declares that an am s´avat¯

.

ara¯

himself, spiritually appropriates Vis n . u through the mediation of Vayu,¯

.

who is the best abode of Vis n . u. The immediate consequence of this appro- priation is that Vis . n . u enters the pran¯ . a of the meditating Madhva and takes

possession of him (ave´¯ sa). Madhva compares this prodigious phenomenon with demonical possession. The source reference in question runs:

.

pradh¯anam . dh¯ama vis n . os tu pr¯an . a eva prak¯ırtitah . /

.

up¯ayair yo vij¯an¯ıyat pr¯an . astham parame´svaram /

.

tasya pr¯an . e harir nityam avis¯

. nityam . pr¯an . asthitasyaiva vis . n . or ave´¯

pr¯an . adv¯aren a yajjñ¯anad¯ıpanam . jñ¯aninah . sad¯a /

t o bhavati dhruvam /

.

sa eva hi /

.

sannidh¯anam yath¯a pr¯apt¯ah . pi´s¯ac¯ah . purus . es v api /

.

.

tatra sthitv¯api bhuñjanta avi´¯ seyuh . puna´s ca te /

mantr¯adibhis tath¯a vis n uh sad¯a pr¯an . asthito ’pi san /

.

.

.

jñ¯anad¯ıpty¯adikam . kury¯aj jñ¯aninah . punar eva tu /

iti ca

“The pran¯ . a alone is called the best abode of Vis n . u. One who can know

.

a, manana etc.) that the almighty

God is dwelling in the pran¯ . a, his pran¯ . a Hari enters by constantly [and]

firmly taking possession of him, since it is a possession by Vis . n u, who always dwells in this very pran¯ . a. Through the mediation of pran¯ . a the illumination of the wise men based on his [= Vis . n . u] knowledge takes place without interruption. Just as demons enter human beings, who also

with the help of right means (like sravan´

.

.

43 MBhTN III 8cd; XXXII 162; AiUBh (p. 242,29f.):

madhv ity ananda¯ madhva anandat¯¯

uddis o veti (va+iti) t¯ırtham ud¯ahr tam /

.

t

.

.

ırthah sy¯at tr tiy¯a m¯ar¯ut¯ı tanuh / [iti ca].

.

.

.

44 Ibid. (p. 242,22–25).

45 MBhTN XXXII 157; IX 116.

46 See Mesquita 2000: 52f. [= 1997: 42f.].

 

¯

113

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

dwelling in them enjoy and take [total] possession of them with the help

of mantras, in this very manner, Vis . n u also dwelling permanently in the pran¯ . a can repeatedly produce the illumination, etc. of wise men based on the knowledge [of Vis . n . u]”. And this has been handed down [in the tradition]. 47 Accordingly, we can attest that Madhva twice underlines the special

role of Vayu:¯

ara¯

.

first, in his earthly appearance as the third am s´avat¯

.

and secondly, in his confirmation as the authorized proclaimer of all canonical texts due to his illumination through the mediation of Vayu.¯ In

the framework of am´savat¯ ara¯ , as the third incarnation of Vayu,¯ Madhva was allotted the task of imparting the knowledge (jñanak¯ arya¯ ) and the

illumination based on the knowledge of Vis n . u (yajjñanad¯

¯ıpana) autho-

rizes him to fulfill that task in the name of Vis n . u (bhagavatkaryas¯

.

.

adhaka¯

).

His name purn¯ . aprajña and supurn¯ . aprajña 48 is possibly meant to allude to

sa) of Madhva by Vis . n . u

implies that Vis . n . u is personally present in Madhva: anyave´¯

balam anyatmakam¯

. In this sense, Madhva appears as a self-confident literary author with

divine warrant not only of his own original and other commented works 50 but also of all other literary texts which in the tradition are known as

works of Vis . n . u or of Vyasa.¯

. ah

51 His model of truthfulness and realization

sanimittam ced

this authorization. The possession or seizure (ave´¯

.

hi tat. 49

of his divine task is Vyasa¯

(yatha¯ sa bhagavan¯

vyasah¯ .

saks¯

.

an¯

nar¯ ayan¯

.

prabhuh . / jagada¯

in this fact the difference between himself and Vyasa.¯

identical with Vyasa,¯

(jñanad¯

. With the help of this double-track which allows for the setting of Vis . n . u’s

sa) by Vis n u.

Whereas Vis n . u is

Madhva underscores

. he is only present in Madhva due to the illumination

bharat¯

adyes¯

. u tatha¯ vaks ye

.

).

¯ıpana), i.e. due to Madhva’s being possessed (ave´¯

.

47 MuUBh (p. 497,20–24); see Mesquita 2000: 72ff. (= 1997: 57ff.).

48 Cf. MBhTN XXXII 157ab; see also my forthcoming paper: Die Idee der Erlösung bei Lebzeiten im System Madhvas (W. Halbfass Commemoration Volume, Vienna).

49 MBhTN II 17cd. In this connection Madhva differentiates (ibid. II 32) between two

ity¯adi kathitam

sarvam brahm¯an . d . e harin a¯ svayam; cf. also B AUBh (p. 262,11; 263,1): avis¯ .

sarve te vis . n . un¯avis . . a¯ vis . n . or bhinn¯ah sadaiva tu [= p. 261,11–

264,5:

t o vis n ur etes u

na vis . n . us tatsvar¯upakah

forms of possession vi´ses avi´¯

.

.

.

.

ity¯adi pai˙ngi´srutih . ).

ses ino hareh

and kim cid¯ave´sino hareh /

.

¯

t

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

50 Cf. MBhTN I 22: artho ’yam

nirn ¯ıyate sahr dayam . harin a¯ sadaiva; ibid. I 136f.:

.

.

.

vis . n . v¯ajñ¯ayaiva vidus a¯ tatpras¯adabalonnateh . /

.

anandat¯¯

ırthamunin¯a p¯urn . aprajñ¯abhidh¯ayuj¯a /

t¯atparyam . s¯´astr¯an am¯

.

.

sarves am¯

.

uttamam may¯a proktam /

.

ibid. IX 116f.: vis . n . or eva pras¯adatah

tu tr t¯ıyam etad amun¯a granthah kr tah ke´save.

mayeyam . satkathodit¯a.; VTN (p. 44,4): madhvo

.

.

.

51 See Mesquita 2000: 63ff. (= 1997: 51ff.).

114

ROQUE MESQUITA

side by side, Madhva

. can show in an emphatic way that in both cases Vis . n . u alone is ultimately

the proclaimer of all canonical texts. This line of argument is pursued further when Madhva offers a literary

reference to prove his claim. It is very striking that Madhva quotes from

sources to establish the identity of Vyasa¯

with Vis . n . u, 52 but in order to substantiate his own claim of being an avatara¯

of Vayu¯

and partial incarnation of Vis n . u he can put forward only unknown

. sources, anonymous and unidentifiable references. For instance, a refer-

(R . gveda I 141,1–3)

ence based on a prophecy in/of the Bal itthas¯ ukta¯

heralding the arrival of Madhva:

presence in Madhva and Vis n . u’s identity with Vyasa¯

the verifiable Puran¯ a and Itihasa¯

.

.

yasya tr¯ın y udit¯ani vedavacane r¯up¯an . i divy¯any alam

.

.

bat taddar´satam ittham eva nihitam devasya bhargo mahat /

.

.

v¯ayo r¯amavaconayam . prathamakam . pr . ks o dvit¯ıyam . vapur

.

madhvo yat tu tr t¯ıyakam . kr tam idam bh¯as yam . hi tena prabhau /

.

.

.

.

“In the verses of the Veda, there are described three divine forms [incar- nations] of Vayu¯ [see Rigveda I 141,1–5]. The third of those forms has composed this Commentary, explaining it as describing Hari. The

archetypal form of Vayu,¯ of which these are the various avatara¯ s, consists of power and wisdom. By the command of God, these qualities appear fully in the avatara¯ -forms of Vayu,¯ the mighty, the supporter and mover of the universe. His first form of avatara¯ is as Hanumat, who carried the message of Rama¯ [to S¯ıta],¯ or who ever obeys the words of Rama.¯ The second form is that of the warrior Bh¯ıma, who destroyed the army of the Kurus. His third is that of Anandat¯ırtha, called also Madhva, who composed this

Commentary

Madhva mentions this prophecy not only at the end of his works but also in several places within one single work of his, namely MBhTN. Most conspicious is the fact that he appeals directly to the said prophecy as

”.

53

52 Cf. MBhTN II 7cd; II 51:

v¯ayuprokte ’pi tat proktam . bh¯aratasya pra´sam . sanam /

kr . . n . advaip¯ayanam . vy¯asam . viddhi n¯ar¯ayan . am prabhum /

ko hy anyah . pun . d ar¯ık¯aks an¯

s

.

mah¯abh¯aratakr d bhavet /

.

.

.

This is actually a verse from PadmaP (I 143cd–44ab) with slight deviations. It also occurs in Vis . n . uP (III 4,5) and in MBh (XII 334,9), see Mesquita 2000: 42ff. (= 1997: 35ff.).

53 A literal translation of this passage by a person staying outside of the tradition of Madhva school cannot do justice to the context implied here. In order to read and interpret this passage in the context of Madhva school I have given above a rendering through a madhvite scholar, which is, however, by no means a literal translation but rather an inter- pretation, cf. Chandravasu [Chandogya Upanis . ad. With commentary of Madhvach¯ arya.¯ Allahabad 1910]. For full quotation see Mesquita 2000: 55f. [= 1997: 44f.].

 

¯

115

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD V

AYU

evidence (tatpramanam¯ ) for his avatara¯ -claim, while he reports his birth year. 54 That means we have here a clear case of a vaticinium ex eventu, a prophecy after its fulfillment. Thus the conclusion is unavoidable that all quotations articulating this prophecy are in fact statements made by Madhva himself, as I have shown extensively elsewhere. 55 The same eva- luation holds for the untraceable quotations in support of the privileged position in rank and function allotted to Vayu,¯ as they are in perfect

of Vis n u. The

harmony with Madhva as avatara¯ of Vayu¯

. question of credibility implied here is to be solved within the framework of

am s´avat¯

and am´savat¯

ara¯

.

. From Madhva’s own statements it is clear that he is sincerely

convinced of his mission to proclaim all canonical works in the name

of Vis n . u in the kali-age by virtue of divine charisma (vis . n uprasad¯ at¯ ).

ara¯

.

.

.

And this implies that God Vis . n . u is co-cause and co-author and hence

co-founder of Madhva’s Vedantic¯

antah¯

. and ascribes to Vis . n . u even the logical argumentation in defence of his

This claim

enables Madhva, on the one hand, to justify that the unknown sources and the untraceable quotations supportive of his peculiar doctrine are not fabricated by him but inspired by Vis . n u himself, and on the other hand, to explain why Vis . n u is ultimately the author of the literary compositions of Madhva without Madhva ceasing to be their author. 56 This position is very similar to the Christian concept of scriptural inspiration in which the possibility of a deceit is excluded, since inspiration as a divine revelation implies a divine authorship. 57 Although the sacred books are of human

teachings: yuktayo nirn ayasyaiva svayam bhagavatoditah¯

system. Consequently, Madhva puts

forward his own teachings as co-authored by Vis n . u: bhagavadradh¯

.

.

.

.

54 MBhTN XXXII 120–124.

55 The outer form of this reference also points very clearly to the authorship of Madhva.

As a matter of fact, this reference consists of three segments consisting of verses. Although

´

the first part, in Sard¯

to be taken as a self-statement of Madhva, the second and third parts, in Sloka-metre, are

ascribed to an unknown source, namely to “Sadbhava”.¯ Nevertheless, all three segments

together, despite their different metrical structure, are closely connected, since the explana-

(R . gveda I 141,1–3) is shared by all three parts,

tion of the prophecy in the Bal itthas¯ ukta¯

¯ıd ita-metre, is not identified as a quotation and therefore has

ulavikr¯

.

´

.

as in the fictitious quotation attributed to the Bhavis yatparvan (cf. MBhTN II 112–123).

.

This implies that the quoted portions should be attributed to Madhva himself exactly as the

self-statement at the beginning; see also Mesquita 2000: 60ff. [= 1997: 47ff.).

56 Cf. Mesquita 2000: 78ff. [=1997: 62ff.]; see also my forthcoming rejoinder to the review of my monograph on Madhva’s unknown Sources by B.N.K. Sharma (Asiatische Studien, Lausanne).

57 Curiously, the first Indian Scholar who pointed out to this similarity was a Madhvite

Chandra Vasu, at the end of his introduction to the translation of

himself, namely Sr¯ısa´

the Chandogya Upanis . ad. (With the Commentary of Madhvach¯ arya¯ [Sacred Books of the

Hindus, ed. by B.D. Basu, Vol. II, Part III], Allahabad 1910: XV): “Before closing this

´

116

ROQUE MESQUITA

origin, God is their author through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This fact lays down the lines of the theological speculation how God is active as a principal cause in all the essential operations of the composition of a book by an inspired author. 58 A special feature of Madhva’s school is the originality of its teachings which, not depending on a guruparam . para¯, goes back to the otherwordly authority of Madhva. The doctrine or the message of Madhva thus appears as a revealed religion. And Madhva is the very first Indian author to introduce the concept of charisma of inspiration, however, not under the influence of Christian thoughts but by adopting and working out original Indian concepts. 59

ABBREVIATED TITLES

AiUBh

Madhva,

Aitareyopanis . adbh¯as ya, see Anuv

.

 

Anuv

Madhva,

Anuvy¯akhy¯ana

[Works of Sri Madhwacharya], in:

Sarvamulagranth¯

ah¯

– Prasthanatray¯

¯ı, sam put . a 1, B. Govindacharya, ed.

.

.

Udipi 1969

 

¯

B AUBh

Madhva, Br had¯aran yakopanis . adbh¯as ya, see

.

.

.

Anuv

BhagTN¯

Madhva, Bh¯agavatat¯atparyanirn . aya [Works of Sri Madhwacharya], in:

 

ah¯

– Puran¯ aprasthana,¯

sam put . a 3, B. Govindacharya,

BSuBh¯

Sarvamulagranth¯ ed. Udipi 1980

Madhva, Brahmas¯utrabh¯as ya, see Anuv

.

.

.

.

ChUBh

Madhva, Ch¯andogyopanis . adbh¯as ya, see Anuv

.

 

G¯ıBh

Madhva, Bhagavadg¯ıt¯abh¯as . ya, see Anuv

 

G¯ıT

Madhva, Bhagavadg¯ıt¯at¯atparya, see Anuv

KathUBh

Madhva, Kathopanis . adbh¯as ya, see

.

Anuv

introduction, I may mention a point on which perhaps Madhva is unique, namely, his claim

that he is an incarnation of Vayu.¯ The Vayu,¯

God. He is called ‘the beloved son of God’, the ‘servant of God’, the ‘mediator between

correspond

very closely to the Christ principle of the Christian theology. I have, therefore, not hesitated

is not

the same as the Christian idea of Christ. No one can expect exact similarities in such cases,

but the approach is still remarkable. But more remarkable than this, is the claim of Madhva that he is an incarnation of Vayu.¯ Other authors have been more modest, and left it to their disciples to deify them, but Madhva, like Jesus, boldly lays claim to be the incarnation of Vayu,¯ the son of God”. This important remark escaped notice of latter Madhvites, since none of them tried to explore the peculiar rank and funktion of Vayu¯ in the Philosophy of Madhva (see above n. 1).

in translating Vayu¯

God and man’ the ‘saviour’. The functions assigned by Sr¯ı Madhva to Vayu¯

called also Pran¯ a, is the highest being next to

´

.

and Pran¯ a by Christ. Some may think that Madhva’s idea of Vayu¯

.

58 Cf. K. Rahner/H. Vorgrimler, Concise Theological Dictionary transl. by R. Strachan. London 1983: 231, s.v. inspiration; see also Mesquita 2000: 15; 75 n. 130 (= 1997: 12; 60 n. 119).

59 Cf. Mesquita 2000: 15 n. 7 [=1997: 12 ].