Note - From the notes of Shri H. L. Kamath
Summary of an article written by "Venkateśa Vishnu Vaidya" published in the weekly newspaper 'Prabhāt', dated Sunday, 19-2-1939 (Volume 5, Issue 4), which was printed at the Mangalore Press, with M. Baburaya Prabhu as publisher and K. V. Shenoy as editor:
Part 1: The Misconception of Ancient Traditions
The article begins with the heading "The Ancient Tradition Title of the Saraswats" and discusses the claim that when the Goud Saraswats settled in Goa, they were Lingaradhakas (lingam worshippers), meaning Shaivites or Smārtas, and that some of them became Vaishnavites later following Madhvacharya. (It is not specified who wrote this article, when, or where).
The author of that article bases his premise on the argument that the family deities (kuladevatas) of the Saraswats of Goa include deities with lingas such as:
Sri Mangesh
Sri Ramanath
Sri Nagesh
Sri Damodar
He argues that based on this evidence alone, it cannot be concluded that they were exclusively Smārtas. This is because family deities also include Shakti deities such as:
Sri Mahalaksa (Mahalasa)
Shantadurga
Sri Navadurga
Sri Vijayadurga
Sri Kamakshi
Thus, based on these Shākta deities, they could equally be considered Shāktas. Similarly, based on family deities like Sri Laxminarayan, Sri Narasimhas, Sri Bindumadhav, and Sri Devakikrishna, there is equal room to consider them Vaishnavites. Furthermore, deities like Vetal and Ravalnath are the family deities of some, which suggests they could be classified accordingly. The author points out that this entire line of reasoning is deluded.
Part 2: Migration and Origin Theories
"To claim that the Saraswat Brahmins brought all these family deities directly from their homeland of Gauda Desha into the Gomantaka province lacks clear proof."
The name Sri Mangirish is compared with Managiri or Munger in the Bihar province.
However, there is a divergence of opinion regarding whether the Saraswats originally came to Gomantaka in ancient times from the Gauda region of Bengal, from the hill regions of Punjab, or from Munger in Bihar due to Vidyaranya's influence.
Legends claim that family deities like Sri Mahalasa and Narasimha were established several centuries after the Saraswats arrived in Gomantaka.
Part 3: Antiquity of Vaishnavism
An article titled "Gomantaka Monthly of 1935" claimed that in earlier times all Brahmins followed the Smārta tradition, and the Vaishnava tradition emerged as a separate system only in the last 4 to 5 centuries. However, the author argues:
If the deity Rudra was not even common in the Vedic period, how could the worshippers have followed a Smārta tradition then?
The Smārta tradition was formed during the revival of religion, alongside Vaishnava, Shākta, Gānapatya, and Saura traditions.
There is no adequate basis to claim that the Smārta tradition existed before all other traditions. Examples contradicting this can be found in the histories written by philosophers like Prof. Radhakrishnan and Prof. Max Müller.
The claim that another sect of the Vaishnava tradition arose only in the past four to five centuries is laughable.
During the period of the Mahabharata, the Vishnu-worshipping Vaishnava tradition existed.
It is known from the accounts written by the Greek traveler Megasthenes, who toured India before the Common Era, that he made references to Vishnu temples.
There are accounts in Chachnama of Vishnu temples being destroyed.
Jataka tales of the Buddha contain accounts of Vaishnavas accepting Buddhism.
There is historical evidence that Ajatashatru, the king of Magadha, had a Vishnu temple in his capital.
Puranas record that Udayana, the king of the country of Kausambi, went to a Vishnu temple to meet Vasavadatta and waited for her path.
Puranas mention that the Vaishnava lineage was passed down through sages like Narada, Sanaka, Sanandana, and others.
Srimad Bhagavatam extensively describes the greatness of the Vaishnava tradition.
Therefore, it is incorrect to assert that the Vaishnava tradition was formed as a distinct sect only 4–5 centuries ago. Even among the Dashagotra Brahmins brought by Parashurama from Trihotrapura to Gomantaka, some were undoubtedly Vaishnavites.
Part 4: Shankaracharya and Sectarian History
Since Parashurama was an incarnation of Vishnu, how did the expansion of his devotees and followers unfold? Commentators of the Bhagavata such as Vijayadhvaja and Shridhara have mentioned the Saraswats in their commentaries, stating that Vishnu-worshipping Brahmins lived on the banks of the Saraswati River during the Bhagavata period.
Most people seem to hold the mistaken belief that the Vaishnava tradition was established solely by Madhvacharya:
Shankaracharya propagated the Smārta tradition in the 9th century AD.
The second [tradition/teacher] propagated the Vaishnava religion, but they were not the creators of the traditions themselves. Vaishnavism is purely Vaishnava.
Traditions such as Sri Vaishnava, Bhagavata, Smārta, Shaiva, and Vīrahaiva, along with philosophical schools like Suddhadvaita, Dwaitadvaita, Advaita, and Vishishtadvaita, existed from ancient times. They were merely propagated by the Acharyas.
Since Shankaracharya's biography records that he defeated Vaishnavas in debate, it implies that a Vaishnava tradition existed prior to that.
If so, what is the basis for claiming that such Vaishnavas did not exist among the Goud Saraswats?
Part 5: The Mathas of Goa and Historical Realities
There is a legend that there was a religious seat (dharma pīṭha) of the Saraswat Smārta tradition in Kushasthali and Madgaon of Gomantaka, and that it was destroyed by the Portuguese.
Some writers have linked this to the Kavalapur Goudapadacharya Matha.
However, the historian of the Kavalapur Matha could not specify whether that matha was originally in Kushasthali or Madgaon.
Even if one argues that a matha existed in Madgaon based on the name Mathagrama, since people have resided there continuously since the Vaishnava period, it is likely that a matha of the Vaishnava tradition existed there.
The history of the Portuguese records the destruction of small shrines, but there is no mention of the destruction of any large matha. If a matha had been destroyed, it would have been recorded.
The establishment of the Goudapadacharya Matha of Kavalapur must have taken place in more recent times.
Part 6: Establishment of the Kavalapur Matha
When the Smārta Saraswats of Gomantaka began accepting the Vaishnava tradition, a large assembly of Smārta adherents gathered at the Sri Mangesh Temple.
To halt the decline of their tradition, a decision was made to establish a new religious seat.
Accordingly, in the holy city of Kashi (Varanasi), a brahmachari belonging to their tradition was given sannyasa initiation, and a matha was established in Kavalapur.
He was Sri Bhavananda Saraswati, the 1st Goudapadacharya.
It is surmised that, unable to endure the religious persecution of the Portuguese, the Goudapadacharya went and settled in Kashi, and after several generations, their original seat in Gomantaka fell into oblivion.
Evidence for this is found within the history of the Kavalapur Matha itself:
Scholars in the holy city of Kashi rendered a decision that fish-eating Brahmins possess the eligibility to take up sannyasa.
The record that Sri Bhavananda Saraswati received sannyasa initiation based on this decision is found in that very history.
If a religious seat and sannyasins of the Smārta tradition had already existed in Gomantaka previously, what was the necessity of obtaining permission once again from the scholars of Kashi?
This proves that it had become necessary at that time to establish a new religious seat and lineage for the Smārta tradition.
Part 7: The Resolution at Mangesh Temple
The perspective behind the decision made by the Smārta adherents assembled at the Sri Mangesh Temple was as follows:
"Currently, some householders within the Smārta tradition are betraying their own tradition and family deities by accepting the Vaishnava tradition. If this trend continues unchecked, the society itself will be destroyed in the future. Therefore, a religious seat is necessary for the preservation of society."
This resolution bears the signatures of members such as Suryarao Sardesai, Prakashrao Sardesai, Sabnis, and others.
No comments:
Post a Comment