अणुभाष्य (महाप्रभु वल्लभाचार्य - शुद्धाद्वैत वेदान्त ब्रह्मसूत्र महाभाष्य प्रकाश टीका सहित)

श्रीकृष्णाय नमः श्रीमद्ब्रह्मसूत्राणुभाष्यम् शुद्धाद्वैतब्रह्मवादनिर्गुणभक्तिमार्गप्रवर्तकाचार्यचक्रचूडामणि- श्रीमद्वल्लभाचार्यचरणप्रणीतम् दशदिगन्तविजयिश्रीमद्गोस्वामिश्रीपुरुषोत्तमचरणप्रणीत- भाष्यप्रकाशेन सम्पूर्णवेत्तृश्रीमद्गोस्वामिश्रीगोपेश्वरजिचरणप्रणीत- भाष्यप्रकाशरश्मिना च परिबृंहितम् मूलचन्द्रतुलसीदासतेलीवाला इत्यनेन संशोधितम् काशीस्थ-श्रीमुकुन्दरायजी-श्रीगोपाललालजीमन्दिराधिष्ठित- षष्ठपीठाधीश्वर-गोस्वामिश्रीश्याममनोहरपाद- विरचितया नवीनभूमिकया समुल्लसितम् तृतीयो भागः तृतीयोऽध्यायः देहलीस्थ- अक्षयप्रकाशननेन प्रकाशितम्

The provided image is completely blank/white and contains no visible text. Please upload a clear image of the page you would like transcribed.

श्रीकृष्णाय नमः । श्रीमद्ब्रह्मसूत्राणुभाष्यम् । शुद्धाद्वैतब्रह्मवादनिर्गुणभक्तिमार्गप्रवर्तकाचार्यचक्रचूडामणि- श्रीमद्वल्लभाचार्यचरणप्रणीतम् । विशददिगन्तविजयिश्रीमद्गोस्वामिश्रीपुरुषोत्तमचरणप्रणीत- भाष्यप्रकाशसंपूर्णवेत्तुश्रीमद्गोस्वामिश्रीगोपेश्वरजी- चरणप्रणीतभाष्यप्रकाशरश्मिपरिवृंहितम् । तृतीयाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । 'भगवद्धर्मपरायण सद्व्रत श्रेष्ठि गोवर्धनदास सुन्दरदास' इत्यस्य पुष्टिमार्गीयसंस्कृतसाहित्यसमुद्धारार्थं निर्दिष्टद्रव्यसंग्रहतो 'भृगुपुरस्थ मूलचन्द्र तुलसीदास तेलीवाला, बी. ए., एल्एल्. बी., वकील, हाइ कोर्ट' इत्यनेन संशोध्य 'निर्णयसागर' मुद्रणालये मुद्रयित्वा प्रकटीकृतम् । श्रीवल्लभाब्दाः ४४७. संवत् १९८२. मूल्यमेकमुद्रिका ।

The provided image is completely blank (contains no visible text or content). Please provide an image that contains the text/page you would like transcribed.

PREFACE. In the presence of S'rīmad Goswāmi S'rī Gokulanāthaji Mahārāja of Baḍā Mandir, Bombay, an arrangement was arrived at between S'eth Lālji Nāraṇji and ourselves in May 1925 by which the Trustees of the late S'eth Gordhandās Sundardās agreed to defray the whole cost of the publication of Aṇu Bhāshya-Bhāshya Prakāsha-Ras'mi. This volume is published in pursuance of the same. For this happy result we express our obligations to S'rīmad Goswāmī S'rī Gokulanāthaji Mahārāja and the said Trustees. In bringing out this edition we have got hearty co-operation from Goswamis and their learned s'āstris. H. H. Tilakayita S'rīmad Goswami S'rī Govardhanalalji and his son S'rī Damodaralalji have been kind enough to lend us two very good Mss. of the Aṇu Bhashya. Through the kindness of S'rīmad Goswami S'rī Vraja Ratnaji a fragment of the original Ras'mi became available to us for the first time in 1917. S'rīmad Goswami S'rī Vallabhalalji S'rī Muralidharaji, S'rī Gokulanathaji, S'rī Ranchhodlalji, and S'rī Magnalalji have lent us Mss. of the Aṇu Bhashya from their collections. Last but not the least we must acknowledge our deep obligations to the late Pandit Gattulālji's Library. Mr. Jamnadas Kanji B. A., has helped in preparing the press-copy of the Introduction. Messrs Dhirajlal Sankalia, Govardhandas Pragji, Hiralal Mulji, and Purushottam Kanji B. A., have also helped while reading the proofs. Thanks are due to them also. Bombay, \ } 5-2-1926. / M. T. Telivala.

An accurate, line-by-line transcription of the page:

(1) प्रकृतिपर एवाधि. p. 2. L. 1. र. It would be better to read this as प्रकृतिपरमात्माधि. This would yield very good sense. The only difficulty in this way of reading is that we have to add मा after पर which is not found in the original. The omission of मा seems to be due to the slip of pen. (2) शोधयति. p. 2. L. 1. र. The original reads शोधति. This also is correct. धातूनां भ्वादित्वादनेककार्यत्वान्निखलत्वात् शोधतिप्रयोगोपि साधुः । (3) वा अन्तरे. p. 14. L. 1. भा. One old Mss. reads अवान्तरे. (4) अपेक्ष्यते. p. 14. L. 3. भा. अपेक्षते seems to be the reading. अपेक्षन्ते seems to be a change suggested by भूतानि. (5) गौणत्वम्. p. 15. L. 8. प्र. Can it be न गौणत्वम् ?. One न seems to be missing here. (

INTRODUCTION. S'rī Vallabhacharya And His Aṇu-Bhāshya. S'rīmad Vallabhacharya, the author of the 'Aṇu Bhashya', was born on the 11th day of the dark half of Chaitra, 1535 Samvat, (1479. A. D.), in the forest of Champa near Raipur. His father was Lakshmaṇa Bhatta, and Yallammagaru was his mother. He was a Telagu Brahmin studying the Taitirīya S'ākhā of the Black Yajur-Veda. Vallabha's birth is shrouded in the mysteries of the devotional beliefs of his followers, but one thing is certain that his followers believed that he was commissioned by God to inaugurate a great religious revival in India. From the writings of Vallabha which are available now, we can say that this belief was shared by himself also. It is not an uncommon phenomenon in India. Ramanuja, Madhva, Nimbarka, Chaitanya, and several other great teachers did believe in their special messages to the world. Vallabha's ancestors were Deekshitas, and were devoted to Krishna in the form of Gopāla. The Swarūpa of Madana-Mohanji in the Seventh Pītha is the one which came to him from his Sixth ancestor Yajna Narayana Bhatta. It is possible that Vallabha's father Lakshmaṇa Bhatta and his ancestors were the Upāsakas of Gopāla according to the cult of Vishṇuswami. The early years of Vallabha were passed by him with his father at Benares, where he is said to have mastered all the Vedas, Six Dars'anas, and all schools of Āstika and Nāstika thinkers. He studied the S'aiva and Vaishṇava Āgamas. When Vallabha was comparatively young, his father died. Vallabha wanted to study the Vaishṇava systems of Madhva, Ramanuja, Nimbarka and others, and seeing that they were not prevalent there, in order to have direct knowledge, he is said to have proceeded to the South. Vallabha's desire to go to the south of India was very natural. During that time there was the powerful Hindu kingdom of Vijaya-Nagar or Vidya-Nagar, over which ruled the mighty monarch Krishṇadeva-Raya, himself a great Vaishṇava. During his time, it seems a convention was held of the representatives of all the existing Sampra- dāyas. The session seems to have been going on when Vallabha visited Vijaya- Nagar. The main dispute seems to have been between Vyāsa Tīrtha, the Mādhva, and some representative of Mayavadins. It seems also clear that the Dwaita philosophy of the Mādhvas could not hold its own against the attacks of S'ānkaras. At this juncture Vallabha seems to have baffled all by his great learning and powerful arguments. We see no reason to doubt this fact. The author of a recently discovered work Vyāsa-Yoga-Charitam, from Vyāsa Raya Matha, does chronicle the fact that Vallabhacharya was honoured by the king Krishṇadeva Raya, under the presidentship of the then famous Mādhva Swami Vyasa Tīrtha. Vallabha's position was peculiar. He accepted Adwaita pure and simple without the interference of the Māyāvāda of S'ankara; hence all the attacks advanced by Mādhvas and others against Advaita lost their force as against him. His acceptance of 'शुद्धाद्वैत' disarmed the opposi- tion of both Vaishṇavas and S'ānkaras. The position taken up by Vallabha

( 4 ) was not altogether singular. We believe that Narayana Bhatta, the author of the famous drama Veṇisanhara, was the follower of a system of philosophy which combined in itself the Pure Adwaita of the Upanishads and the Bhakti- Mārga. Whatever that may be, it is certain that Vallabha made a very great impression on king Krishṇadeva, Vyasa-Tīrtha and others who were present there. In consequence of this session, the king performed a ‘Kanakābhisheka’ with Hundred Maunds of Gold. It is said that Vallabha did not accept this gold and resumed his travels. This abstinence on the part of Vallabha added to the admiration of all those present there. Vyāsa-Tīrtha, the Mādhva, actually requested him to be the head-priest of his Maṭha after him. Vyāsa-Tīrtha with king Krishṇadeva again approached Vallabha and presented him with a good many valuables. From these presents Vallabha is said to have prepared a gold Mekhala set with diamonds, rubies etc., and presented the same to S'rī Vitthala in the Vitthala Swami Temple at Vijaya- Nagara. Ultimately, it appears, Vallabha could not conscientiously accept the offer of Vyāsa-Tīrtha, but from this time Vallabha came to be regarded as a great Acharya. During his visit to Vraja, Vallabha set up the Shrine of S'rī Nathaji on the holy hill Govardhana in a temple built for that purpose by one Purṇa Malla Kshatriya. There Vallabhacharya used to pass his Chātur-Māsa i. e. Āshādha S'ukla eleventh to Kārtika S'ukla eleventh every year. Here he developed the asthetic side of Vaishṇavism by refining and perfecting the mode of worship Sevā-Mārga. During his stay in Vraja, on the midnight of 11th day of the bright half of S'rāvaṇa, he says he had holy communion with Lord Krishṇa, who commanded him to initiate Jīvas in His Service. This initiation consists of two parts: one is the formula to be repeated by the aspirant before the deity by holding Tulsi-leaves in hand and afterwards placing the same at the feet of the deity through Acharya, and the other part is the effect of the same, on the devotee, by which he becomes the Adhikari in the Sevā- Marga of Lord S'rī Krishna. He married one Mahalakshmi. He had two sons by her viz. S'rī Gopinatha and S'rī Vitthalanatha under whom the Sampradaya flourished considerably. While he was staying in the north of India, Vallabhāchārya came into contact with Kes'ava Kas'mirin, the famous Nimbarka scholar, and Chaitanya, the Bengal Saint. They were both Krishṇopasakas, and it seems from Sampra- dayika Gathas that their relations were very cordial. Kes'ava presented his pupil Madhava Bhatta Kas'mirin to Vallabha in Dakshiṇa of भागवतकथाश्रवण. He became his devout disciple, and during his whole life acted as the amanuensis of S'rī Vallabha. It seems that during Madhava Bhatta's stay with him at Adel, Vallabha composed his numerous works. During that interval Vallabha wrote Purva Mīmānsā-Bhashya, Brahma-Sūtra Bhashya, Tattvadīpa-Nibandha with his own commentary, Sūkshma tīkā and Subodhini on S'rīmad Bhāgavata, and the sixteen Prakaraṇa Granthas giving in brief the essence of his views. It is really unfortunate that only a fragment of his Pūrva Mīmānsā Bhashya is available now. Aṇu Bhashya, as we have it now, is not wholly written by him. 1524

( 5 ) The last Adhyāya and a half of the Bhashya is finished by his son Vitthale- s'wara. Sūkshma tīkā is almost lost. Even Pushti-Pravaha-Maryada-Bheda one of the minor Prakaraņas, is not available as a whole. The Bhagavata- Subodhini is available only on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 10th and a portion of 11th Skandhas. It is probable that Vallabha wrote on all the Skandhas. During his stay at Adel, after the completion of his Bhashya on पूर्वोत्तर- मीमांसाs, he seems to have met with great opposition from the Mayavadi Pandits of Benares. In order to silence them for ever, Vallabha wrote out a pamphlet in mixed verse and prose, and affixed the same to the doors of Kās'ī Vis'vanātha, with a challenge to Benares Pandits to refute the same, if they could. One Upendra was the leader of the opposition. It seems this discussion ended into threats of personal violence, as a consequence of which, Vallabha left Benares. This work seems to have created a great stir in the world of scholars then living. One Ayyanna Dikshita actually mentions it by name in his Vyasa- Tatparya-Nirnaya. Ayyanna's seems to be a veiled attempt to belittle the achievement of Vallabhacharya by propounding a principle though novel, far from convincing, for finding out the true view of Vyasa. It would be rather hazardous to say that the true view of Vyasa can be deter- mined from the statements of the opponents. Assuming however that it is so, the opponents mention both Parinama and Vivarta as the view of Vyasa. Hence from the statements of opponent Sankhyas and Naiyayikas, it is impossible to come to the conclusion that Vyasa teaches Vivarta alone in his Brahma Sūtras. The last portion of his life was passed at Adel. Here he finished his works which were begun by him during his travels, and served Lord Krishna with the love and devotion of Gopees, and founded his system on it. At the age of 52 he burnt his Parņas'āla, joined the Sannyasa Ās'rama, and came to Benares. For a month he observed fast, and for the last eight days he observed मौनव्रत, and on the 2nd day of the bright half of Āshadha Samvat 1587, he left this world mid-day. S'rī Vallabhacharya gave permanent form to his views, which were pro- pounded by him in the convention of king Krishnadeva of Vijayanagar, in his commentaries on the Pūrva and Uttara Mīmānsas. From internal evidence available from his writings which are extant, we have reason to believe that he completed his Bhashya both on Pūrva and Uttara Mīmānsas. His mention of ‘चकारात् मीमांसाद्वयभाष्यम्’ in his Prakās'a on the opening verses of his Tattvadīpa Nibandha would rather suggest an accomplished fact. In numerous places in the Subodhini (his commentary on Bhagavata) he refers to both the Bhashyas as siddha-vastu-facts accomplished. ‘भावनापक्षश्च पूर्वमीमांसाभाष्य एव निराकृतः’ भा. सु. २. १. ५. Similarly in ‘Veda Stuti Subodhini’ he refers to his Bhashya on the Brahma- Sūtras ‘भाष्ये विस्तरेणोक्तत्वात्’. We do not find this alleged विस्तर in the Aņu Bhashya as written by Vallabhacharya. In the Subodhini on 3. 4. 7. Vallabhacharya writes ‘एतान्येव गुणोपसंहारे षोडशाधिकरण्या प्रतिपादितानि’. गुणोपसंहार is the 3rd Pada of the 3rd 1525

( 6 )

Adhyaya of the Brahama-Sutras. The mention by Vallabhacharya of 16 Adhika- raṇas as referring to 16 adjectives leads us to the inference that he must have written his commentary on the गुणोपसंहारपाद before he came to write his सुबोधिनी on the 3rd स्कंध. In the Aṇu Bhashya we do not find any reference to these 16 विशेषणs. Nor was the Prakas'akara aware of this, when he first wrote his commentary on this Pada-Bhashya. In the revision which he seems to have made after he finished his तृतीयसुबोधिनीप्रकाश, he added this in his Prakās'a at the end of each of sixteen Adhikaraṇas, as we find in the original. On a perusal of the Aṇu Bhashya itself, we find that it is an abridgment of a bigger work on Brahma-Sutras of Vallabhacharya. In the ईक्षत्यधिकरण there is no reference to the refutation of सांख्यs, though in the beginning of the fourth Pada of the 1st Adhyaya mention is made that सांख्य's theory is refuted in the ईक्षत्यधिकरण. In one place it is mentioned that आविर्भावतिरोभाववाद will be explained in details in the तदनन्यत्वाधिकरण, but there beyond the bare mention of the words आविर्भाव and तिरोभाव, we do not find anything else. This is possible only in a work of the nature of an analysis. Besides in सुबोधिनी we meet with references to Sūtras of 3rd and 4th Adhyayas, and in some places we find the interpretation as given in Subodhini different from the one found in अणुभाष्य. Of course there is no विरोध or violence to the general views of Vallabhacharya, but difference there is. As an instance we cite ‘जगद्व्यापारवर्जम्’ ४. ४. १७. ब्र. सू. The interpretation of this Sūtra as given in Subodhini is to the effect that the ऐश्वर्य of the मुक्त Soul is unlimited in all respects, except the power of creation etc. of the Universe. In Aṇu Bhāshya on the same Sūtra, the question is discussed, whether there is any जगद्व्यापार or सांसारिकता in लीलासृष्टि, and the same is denied. These facts lead us to the inference that Vallabhacharya must have written an exhaustive commentary on the Brahma Sūtras, and the Aṇu Bhashya which is available at present, is an analysis or a smaller edition of that big work. The name ‘अणुभाष्य’ also supports our inference. Almost all the works of Vallabhacharya have double editions, e. g., the सूक्ष्मटीका and सुबोधिनी on S'ri Bhagavata, the निबन्ध and its प्रकाश. Hence it appears that Vallabhacharya first completed his commentaries on पूर्व and उत्तर मीमांसाs. The mention of this fact in his प्रकाश on निबन्ध can be explained on this hypothesis alone. After the completion of these पूर्व and उत्तर मीमांसाभाष्यs they became prevalent among the Pandits of Benares following the Bhātta school of Mimansa and मायावाद of S'ankara. On account of this opposition Vallabhacharya had to come down from Adel to Benares, and proclaim again his views on पूर्व and उत्तर मीमांसाs through his पत्रावलंबन as mentioned above. Vallabhacharya, during his stay of fifteen to twenty years at Adel, wrote out all his works during the interval of अनवसर from Sevā. When he passed away, his first son श्रीगोपीनाथ was about twenty, while the second son S'ri Vitthalanatha was about fifteen. S'ri Gopinatha was in a position to get the benefit of his father's teachings, but through unfortunate circumstances, the संप्रदाय could not get the bene- fit of the knowledge of the Acharya's teachings, through him. S'ri Gopinatha and S'ri Vitthalanatha were on extremely cordial terms, as found from the letters passed between them. About Samvat 1620 or so S'ri Gopinatha left this world at Juggannath Puri, and soon after, his only son S'ri Purushottama followed him. 1526

( 7 ) This unfortunate event embittered the feelings of the widow of S'rī Gopīnātha, and as a result the original works of श्रीमद्वल्लभाचार्य were taken away by her. Under these circumstances, श्रीविट्ठलनाथ tried his atmost to collect the writings of his father, but it appears that he succeeded only in securing the fragment of Anu Bhashya, but could not get the copy of the bigger or complete Bhashya. He had to satisfy himself with the portion of अणुभाष्य which could be secured by him. In Samvat 1622 S'rī Vitthalanath left Adel for good, and migrated to S'rī Gokula, and adopted it as his permanent residence. During his stay at श्रीगोकुल from 1622-1642 Samvat, he came in contact with Emperor Akbar, Birbal, Todarmal, Rai Purshottama and others. Emperor Akbar made a gift of Gokula and Jatipura villages to Vitthaleswar. Akbar in another of his Sanad gave him permission to graze his cows on all lands including the royal ones also. It appears from this time Vitthalanath, who was up to this time known as Vipra or Dīkshita, came to be styled Goswami, a name by which all his agnate descendants are known to this day. How much he loved S'rī Gokula and Govardhana can be learnt from the description of the same in the Aṇu-Bhashya on 4. 2. 15. B. S., where it is placed above the Vyapi Vaikuntha, on the authority of a Rik. Here he got perfect peace, and it was here that he completed the remaining portion of the अणुभाष्य. Though we have not got Vallabhacharya's Bhashya on the last Adhyaya and a half, the portion of the Bhashya as written by S'rī Vitthalanath has admirably succeeded in bringing out the interpretation of his father on these Sūtras. Thus the संप्रदाय has to depend on this Aṇu Bhashya as the final authority on Brahma-Sūtras. The आचार्यत्व of the संप्रदाय, for this reason, has been attributed by some to the father and son combined. Whatever that may be, the Aṇu- Bhashya has been since then the chief authority of पुष्टिमार्गीय Vaishṇavas. Vitthaleshwara passed away in Samvat 1642. After him Purushottamaji is the first commentator on the Aṇu Bhashya. S'rī Purushottamaji the author of Bhashya-Prakās'a was born on the 11th day of the bright half of Bhadrapada 1724 Samvat at Gokula. He is Seventh in descent from S'rī Vallabhacharya. In his childhood he seems to have come under the influence of two Scholars S'rī Krishna-Chandraji Maharaja and Chacha S'rī Gopes'aji. The former was his grand uncle and also his Guru (ब्रह्मसंबन्धदाता). Chacha Gopes'aji stood in a similar relation to him. Before Purushottamaji, his guru S'rī Krishnachandraji had begun to critically study the Aṇu Bhashya. His labours resulted in a rough draft of the Bhava-Prakasikā and a fragment of the commentary of Guṇopasanhāra Pada of Aṇu Bhashya. The latter has been completely incorporated by S'rī Purushottamaji in his Bhashya-Prakās'a on that portion. The rough draft of Bhava-Prakas'ika seems to have been utilised in the work current under that name in the Sam- pradaya. The copy of the same in the hand of S'rī Purushottamaji seems to be a revised version of the original. It summarises what is contained in the Aṇu Bhashya and Bhashya-Prakāsa combined. Chacha Gopes'aji's influence on Purushottamaji seems to be apparent on a comparison of the Ṭīkas of both on the Subodhini of the Bhagavata first स्कन्ध. Almost the whole of Chacha Gopes'aji's Tippani seems to be incorporated in his Prathama-Skandha-Prakās'a. 1527

( 8 ) Purushottamaji seems to have migrated from Gokula to Surat in Gujarat with his uncle S'rī Vraja-Rajaji soon after 1737 Saṁvat. After this date S'rī Vraja-Rajaji settled at Surat, where he raised the Haveli for S'rī Bala- Krishnaji. Vraja-Rajaji was childless. He was a great scholar of the Prameya School of the Sampradaya. From him S'rī Purushottamji got in inheritance the Swarupa of S'rī Bala-Krishnaji with the Mandira. Purushottamaji ac- knowledges this obligation in the opening verses of his Bhashya-Prakāsa. Though Purushottamaji seems to entertain the greatest respect for S'rī Vraja- Rajaji, the Prameya mode of thought of his uncle, does not seem to have appealed to him. Purushottamaji's writings can be equally appreciated by both scholars Sampradayikas and others. Purushottamaji's literary activities continued at Surat and Dumas for forty years and over. It seems that he did not live long after 1781 Samvat second Ashadha Sudi 10th Thursday, on which day by a writing he bequeathed all his property including the Swarūpas of S'rī Balakrishnaji and S'rī Vrajes'aji with temples and everything to his namesake cousin. Between the period of S'rī Vitthaleswara and S'rī Purushottamaji, Aṇu- Bhashya does not seem to have received requisite attention. Some of the des- cendants of S'rī Vitthaleshwara might have read the Aṇu-Bhashya here and there, but the absence of any commentary during almost a century, would rather suggest that sufficient attention was not bestowed on the study of the Aṇu- Bhashya. S'rī Hari Rayaji the illustrious descendent of Vitthaleswara did copy out Aṇu-Bhashya in his own hand, but being extremely emotional, he has not chosen to write anything like a commentary, on the Aṇu-Bhashya. When Purushottamaji approached Aṇu-Bhashya for his studies, in the absence of any tradition, he felt himself baffled, as can be seen from the concluding verse of the Bhashya-Prakas'a 'संप्रदाये निवृत्ते'. It was a question to him as to how he should find out a mode by which he can thoroughly master Aṇu-Bhashya. Fortunately for him, there was his Guru S'rī Krishṇa Chandraji, another descendant of Vallabhacharya. It is possible that the seed of comparative study was sown in Purushottamaji by S'rī Krishṇa-Chandraji. Through his inspiration S'rī Purushottamaji, it would seem, thought of undertaking the herculean task of studing all the Brahma-Sūtra-Bhāshyas that were available in his times. Being a Goswami himself, there was no dearth of riches, and in a city like Surat where he lived, materials were ample. With the help of these riches, it seems, he secured not only authentic texts of all the Bhashyas, but he seems to have collected round him a band of scholars of those vari- ous schools, so that he could be in a position to understand those Bhashyas in their true perspective. With this equipment S'rī Purushottamaji approached the Aṇu- Bhashya, and his masterly review of the systems of शंकर, रामानुज, भास्कर, मध्व, निम्बु, and शैव is unparalleled in the history of Vedanta literature. Great scholars like सुदर्शन, जयतीर्थ, वाचस्पतिमिश्र, had written commentaries on the Bhashyas of their respective Acharyas, but nowhere do we find the critical and comparative method such as adopted by S'rī Purushottamaji in the exposition of the Aṇu-Bhashya. 1528

( 9 ) From the time of S'rī Purushottamaji Sampradayika scholars began to devote their attention to the study of the Aṇu-Bhāshya. Different scholars began to study the Aṇu-Bhāshya, and expound the same in their commentaries from diverse standpoints. S'rī Mathuranāthaji and S'rī Muralīdharaji both descendants of S'rī Vallabhacharya belonged to the house of S'rī Gopīnātha Dīkshita. Both of them were great Mīmāṁsakas. They have written commentaries on the Aṇu- Bhāshya independantly of S'rī Purushottamaji. In their commentaries they display their great hold over the Mīmāṁsā school of philosophy. The com- mentary written by S'rī Mathuranāthji is called प्रकाश, while that written by S'rī Muralīdharaji is named सिद्धान्तप्रदीप. S'rī Mathuranāthaji's commentary has not been in print at all upto this day, while S'rī Muralīdharji's commentary on the first three Sūtras has been published by S'astri Ramanātha in

( 10 )

the seat for nearly fifty years, and when she found herself unable to carry on the Sevā, in Samvat 1841, she adopted S'rī Gokulotsavaji. This incident was a very beneficial one in the cause of the literary activity of the Sampradaya. Through S'rī Gokulotsavaji his son Yogi Gopes'waraji got the rich treasures of authentic collection of manuscripts of S'rī Purushottamaji. Thus it would not be wrong to say that S'rī Gopes'varaji acquired the literary inheritance of S'rī Purushottamaji. Miraculous powers are attributed to him by Sampradayika Gathas, but we are not concerned with the same at present. On account of his extreme devotion to the नाम and स्वरूप of God, and his aversion to anything worldly, he was fitly called by his contemporaries as योगी. He was an all-round scholar. We have seen his draft of the commentery on the पूर्वमीमांसासूत्रs. His नवार्थी, a commentary on the तैत्तिरीयोपनिषद्, awaits publication. He felt himself conscious of his knowledge of the world beyond. This explains why he styles himself संपूर्णवेत्तृ from the 3rd or 4th Pada of First Adhyāya of रश्मि. At the end of रश्मि he writes about himself thus-'प्रज्ञावान् कृतकृत्यश्च हरीश्वरज्ञः एव च, प्रमाणज्ञः कृतज्ञश्च', and we think that a perusal of the रश्मि and the नवार्थी, would lead us to completly agree with what he himself has expressed. He seems to have passed away not long after the completion of रश्मि i. e. Samvat. 1897. The author of रश्मि thoroughly explains not only the भाष्यप्रकाश of S'rī Purushottamaji, but even supplies the want, which was felt by the readers of प्रकाश. प्रकाशकार took for granted, that readers of Aṇu Bhashya, understood the literal sense of the Aṇu Bhashya, and hence we rarely find him explaining the literal text of the Aṇu Bhashya. For this reason, the author of रश्मि, in all places where he finds, that S'rī Purushottamji has not explained Aṇu Bhashya, tries to give the literal meaning of all the passages of the Aṇu Bhashya. श्रीगोपेश्वरजी was a great master, and after him one of his pupils S'rī Giridharjī of Benares, also a descendant of S'rī Vallabhacharya, wrote a commentary on the Aṇu Bhashya. This commentary is purely based on the प्रकाश of S'rī Puru- shottamaji, and explains the Aṇubhashya literally. S'rī Giridharaji was a grammarian, and so we find him in this commentary displaying his mastery over grammar. Another merit of this commentary lies in the fact, that in the beginning of each अधिकरण, it gives the complete विषयवाक्य. So that it clears the reading of the Upanishats, according to S'rī Vallabhacharya. He has divided Aṇu Bhashya into paragraphs, but the chief merit of his commentary lies in its discussion of the various readings of the Aṇu Bhashya throughout. This commentary is complete, but it has remained upto this day in Manuscripts. S'āstri Haris'ankara Aunkarji has recently undertaken to bring out the edition of Aṇu Bhashya with this commentary under the patronage of S'rī Muralidharaji Maharaja of Benares, the grandson of S'rī Giridharaji. Itchharam Bhattaji a S'rimali Brahmin of Gujarat was also a contem- porary of योगी श्रीगोपेश्वरजी. He was a devotee of S'rī Ranchhodaray of Dakore, and he lived on the banks of Gomati, in a cell, where he wrote his commentary called प्रदीप on the Aṇu Bhashya. This is a complete commentary. There is no attempt as such, for a display of scholasticism. He explains the literal text

1530

( 11 )

of the Aṇu Bhashya in such a way, as would enable even a biginner to follow it with little difficulty. The whole Manuscript of this work, in the author's own hand, was seen by us in the collection of the Bade S'rī Mathu- res'ajis temple at Kotah. It is really unfortunate that Prof. Magnalal Sāstri who has been publishing the Aṇu Bhashya with this commentary, does not try to get the use of this original Manuscript. Two other commentaries one by S'rī Giris'adharaji, and another of one Ramanarayana are also said to exist. In addition to these, two वृत्तिs explain the न्यायसूत्रs of Badarayana on the basis of Aṇu Bhashya. One is the भावप्रकाशिकावृत्ति of S'rī Krishṇachandraji, mentioned above. This वृत्ति is bigger than अणुभाष्य. It seems to be the summary of अणुभाष्य and भाष्यप्रकाश combined. The last three अध्यायs of this वृत्ति are with us, written in the hand of S'rī Purushottamaji, and from the mode in which this Manuscript is written, and from the remark on the last page 'इयं वृत्तिः गोस्वामिपुरुषोत्तमैः स्वसुतन्नाम्ना कृता इति श्रुतम्', we are tempted to attribute the authorship of this work to S'rī Purushottamaji himself. At least the final form to this वृत्ति, was undoubtedly given by S'rī Purushottamaji. Two अध्यायs of this वृत्ति have been published by us, and the remaining two are in the press. Another वृत्ति is written by one Bhatta Vrajanatha, a descendant from the female side of S'rī Vallabhacharya, at the intance of king Jayasinha of Jaipur. It is a small one explaining the सूत्रs in the light of Aṇu Bhashya, but in some places the author seems to be influenced by the चैतन्य school, and to that extent its authencity is lessened. It is named मरीचिका. In addition to these, there is one nameless Vṛitti also. Besides these, there are two small works, what are known as अधिकरणमालाs. After S'rī Purushottamaji completed his भाष्यप्रकाश, he found from experience, that it was a difficult thing for ordinary people to follow. Hence in order to benefit them, he wrote out this न्यायमाला, wherein he has suscintly explained all the अधिकरणs and सूत्रs of Badarayana. The other work was written by one निर्भररामभट्ट a Nagar Brahmin and a pupil of बल्लभभट्ट. He was the मुख्यप्रचारक in the temple of S'rī Dwarakanathaji at Kankroli, during the time of S'rī Vrijabhushaṇaji, in Samvat 1835. He has summarised the purport of all the अधिकरणs according to Aṇu Bhashya in a simple manner. Both the treatises are already published. In addition to this there is one Aṇu Bhashya Tattva in S'rī Mathureshaj i's library at Kotah. This work has somehow remained unknown in the Sampra- daya. One वल्लभदेव has written वेदान्तकौमुदी to explain sutras of Badarayana according to Aṇu Bhashya. One S'rī Vrajanathaji son of S'rī Raghunathaji and pupil of वल्लभजी belonging to चन्द्रमाजी's house has written the meaning of अधिकरणs in Karikas. Some Karikas on Aṇu Bhāshya were composed by S'rī Devakinandanaji, the grandson of विट्ठलनाथदीक्षित. Thus the descendants of the seven sons of S'rī Vitthalanatha Dikshita have devoted their attention to the Aṇu Bhashya. S'rī Mathuranatha and S'rī Muralidharaji were the descendants of S'rī Giridharaji, the first son of S'rī Vitthales'a. In the second son Govindaraya's line, we have S'rī Harirayaji and S'rī Gopes'waraji, the author of Ras'mi. In the 3rd son S'rī Balakrishṇaji's line 1531

( 12 )

we have S'ri Krishnachandraji, and his worthy disciple S'ri Purushottamaji, the author of the भाष्यप्रकाश. The fourth son S'ri Gokulanathaji's line became extinct soon after him, and we have not got materials to learn how Aṇu Bhashya was understood by him. In the fifth son S'ri Raghunathaji's line, we have S'ri Devakinandanaji तत्त्वदीपिकाकार S'ri Vallabhaji, while S'ri Giridharaji of Benares was a representative of the sixth son S'ri Yadunathaji. The seventh son S'ri Ghanshyamaji had one representative Chacha S'ri Gopes'aji. He has not written on Aṇu Bhashya, so far as we know, but we can learn his views from his commentaries on the 1st and 2nd स्कंध of the Subodhini. Thus from the time of S'ri Purushottamaji down to the time of Pandit Gattoolalaji, who also made an attempt to expound Aṇu Bhashya, and S'ri Jivanaji of Bada Mandira at Bombay, who is said to have written a वृत्ति on Aṇu Bhashya, the सांप्रदायिकs have devoted their attention to the Aṇu Bhashya.

In conclusion we ought not to omit reference to one work which passes in the name of श्रीमद्भाष्य of S'ri Vallabhacharya. Some pages of the जिज्ञासाधिकरण and first Pada of the third Adhyaya and 11 Sūtras of the second Pada have been seen by us. The portion from the third Adhyaya has been published by us in the monthly Pushti-Bhakti-Sudha. From the style, this seems to be a clumsy attempt of a writer of recent times. All copies seen by us are new. The style is such as leaves little doubt in our minds, as to the spurious nature of this production.

Having thus surveyed the manuscript-literature on the Aṇu Bhashya, we shall see how Aṇu Bhashya was attended to, after printing was introduced into India. The credit of having published अणुभाष्य for the first time, is due to the Asiatic Society of Bengal, who got Pandit Hemchandra Vidyaratna to edit the same in Bibliotheca Indica Series. This text was based on there manuscripts. As a first attempt it was welcome, but its text is unreliable in good many places. Pandit Hemchandra's describing the अणुभाष्य as द्वैताद्वैतपरं व्याख्यानं has done great injustice to S'ri Vallabhacharya. The systeem of S'ri Vallabhacharya was and is always known as the शुद्धाद्वैत. It is difficult for us to understand how this fact escaped the notice of the learned editor. However with all its short-comings, we must acknowledge our obligations to the learned editor, because it was through his efforts that Aṇu Bhashya of S'ri Vallabhacharya became available in print to the public, for the first time as early as 1897 A. D.

After this Pandit रत्नगोपालभट्ट edited Aṇu Bhashya with भाष्यप्रकाश of S'ri Purushottamaji for the Benares Sanskrit Series. The Benares edition was a creditable attempt of the late Pandit Ratna Gopala. It was this edition which paved the way for people like ourselves, for the study of the Aṇu Bhashya. But the Benares printing left much to be desired. It did not do justice either to Aṇu Bhashya or Bhashyaprakas'a. One always found it difficult to follow the Bhashya-Prakasha without proper paragraphs and punctuation. There were also many typographical mistakes.

S'āstri Ramanatha then published the first विवृत्ती of the Aṇu Bhashya with five commentaries under the patronage of S'rimad Goswami S'ri Gokula- nathji Maharaja of Bombay. 1532

( 13 ) Mr. Magnalal S'astri M. A. of the Deccan College at Poona has published recently the भावार्थ's portion of Aṇu Bhashya with the commentary प्रदीप of Itchharama Bhattaji. The प्रदीप is a great help in understanding the literal text of the Aṇu Bhashya. In the Bombay Sanskrit Series is published Aṇu Bhashya under the editorship of S'āstri S'rīdhar Pathak of Poona 1921 A. D. This edition claims to be a critical one, but a comparison of its text with that of the Benares edition would show that the claim cannot be maintained. In good many places the text is incorrect and unreliable. Even instances are there where सूत्रs are not correctly printed. Generally we should have expected the Bombay Sanskrit Series to maintain a high standard, and we are disappointed to see that it is not maintained in this edition, in spite of the materials available to the learned S'āstri. The present attempt to publish the Aṇu Bhashya with Bhashya-Prakash together with the rare commentary रश्मि is undertaken under the following circumstances. In spite of four or five editions of Aṇu Bhashya, we felt that the text of Aṇu Bhashya had not been done justice, which was due to it. We have been fortunate to secure the original copy of the भाष्यप्रकाश of S'ri Purushottamaji in his own hand, and comparing the same with the Benares edition, we felt that the literary acumen displayed in the original, was lost in the printed text. S'rī Purushottamaji was a great master. His critical faculty was unparalleled. His love of accuracy was so great, that the quotations made by him, from the works of other writers, when compared with the printed texts of those works, were invariably found by us, to be at an advantage in point of accuracy. From his manuscript we find him putting a point, where we use a coma, for a full stop he makes one stroke, and for a complete idea he puts two perpendicular strokes. When he wants to begin a fresh paragraph he puts two perpendicular strokes, and leaving a space of half an inch, he puts another two strokes, and then begins a fresh paragraph. Important words are coloured with red senna. S'rī Purushottamaji has revised this manuscript at least three to four times. Where he thought that an addition was necessary, he would affix a fine slip and rewrite over it. Where the angle mark was above the line, we had to look for the addition on the top of the page on the margin, counting the number of lines mentioned at the end of the addition. Where the angle was below the line, we had similarly to look for the addition at the bottom of the page. S'rī Purushottamaji was a great authority in the Sampradaya, and the copies of the भाष्यप्रकाश became current at once in the Sampradaya. The result was that some of the copies which were made before the revison by S'rī Purushottamaji, did not contain the same. Even our original copy misses the latest revision, because after it was copied fair, it seems the learned author once more revised the same. Yogi Gopeswarji had before him the original referred to above. It would seem, he had not before him the copy of Bhashya Prakās'a containing the last revision, because we have invariably found the latest addition not commented upon in रश्मि, even in those places where an explanation would seem extremely necessary. Such a copy of the भाष्यप्रकाश has also been fortunately available to us. S'rī Purusho- ttamaji has studied all the then existing systems of Vedanta in a critical method. His criticism against other systems are very fair, and a student of Aṇu Bhashya 1533

who wanted to study the Aṇu Bhashya in a comparative method, this was the only commentary that was available in the संप्रदाय. But S'ri Purushottamaji's style is rather difficult. The literal text of the Aṇu Bhashya in good many places was not cleared up so as to help the beginners. This want has been amply fulfilled by Yogi S'rī Gopes'waraji in his रश्मि. रश्मि explains both the Prakas'a and the Aṇu Bhashya. The Prakas'a is referred to by him in his commentary by the words 'प्रकृते', while Aṇu Bhashya is referred to by the word 'भाष्ये'. This रश्मि was completed by S'rī Gopes'waraji in Samvat 1897. We had heard of it a dozen years back, but upto 1917 we had not been fortunate to see the copy of the same. Though we visited and searched the libraries of Kotah, Kankroli, Natha- dwar, and other places, we were unable to trace a complete copy of this com- mentary. It seems except the original which is in our possession, there is no complete copy of this manuscript available anywhere. Through a lucky coincidence the first instalment of this manuscript, came to our hands in 1917. Since then through a series of incidents, almost the whole manuscript of रश्मि in the author's own hand, has been available to us. But there was one difficulty in this manuscript. In many places it is most illegible, and the deciphering of the manuscript has taxed our patience to the utmost. With all the care that has been bestowed on it, it is possible that something may have escaped our vigilence. Whatever that may be, we believe that Aṇu Bhashya as explained and enlarged in the भाष्यप्रकाश and रश्मि would be the best guide to the right understanding of the Aṇu Bhashya of S'ri Vallabhacharya. We would have liked to commence the printing from the very beginning, but we could not do so as in the original manuscript of रश्मि pages 3 to 21 are missing. We have got another copy of the same, but it is hopelessly incorrect. For this purpose we went to Nathadwar, and H. H. the Tilakayita S'ri Govardhana- lalji was kind enough to lend us the manuscript copy of जिज्ञासाधिकरण of रश्मि. But on comparison of this copy with the one in our possession, it appears to be a first draft of रश्मि. Goswami S'ri Gopes'waraji Maharaja, the present occupant of the seat of S'ri Vitthles'aji's Mandira, did not come to Nathadwar, as usualy he used to do, during the last Annakoota festival. If he had come, it was possible to take search, if there was a manuscript of his portion of रश्मि in his temple collection, because it was in this temple that Yogi Gopes'waraji carried on his labours about a hundred years ago. In these circumstances in order to avoid delay, we decided to commence the printing from the third Adhyaya. The first Pada of the third Adhyaya elaborates the process of the five आहुतिs of श्रद्धा, सोम, वर्ष, अन्न and रेतः through which Devas secure a body which is fit for the attainment of the knowledge of Brahman in case of a निष्काम अधिकारी. All the Achāryas have attributed वैराग्य as the chief object of this Pada, but S'rī Vallabhacharya differs from them all, and shows that वैराग्य may be a subsidiary object, but the main purport of Badarayana in these Sūtras is to show the process of five आहुतिs offered in five fires viz द्युलोक, पर्जन्य, पृथ्वी, पुरुष and योषा through which the body fit for the attainment of ब्रह्मज्ञान is developed by the presiding deities in case of a निष्काम अधिकारी. 1534

( 15 ) We have refrained from entering into further details of the अधिकरणs and सूत्रs, for they have been very beautifully summarised by S'rî Purushottamaji himself in his वेदान्ताधिकरणमाला published by. us some time ago, and whatever remains to be said, we propose to say, when the whole work is completed, in an exhaustive introduction. The text of Aṇu Bhashya is based on the following manuscripts. (a) Manuscript belonging to S'rî Damodaraji grandson of S'rî Vitthales'wara. This manuscript is a very reliable one and at the same time it is well written and well preserved. (b) Another manuscript equally old and accurate. Both these Manuscripts were kindly lent to us by H. H. the Tilakayita Maharaja of S'rî Nathadwar. S'âstri Nandakis'ora took them out for us. (c) A manuscript very old and accurate, but in some places, mutilated. (d) A manuscript old and fairly accurate. (e) A manuscript well written old and fairly accurate. These three manuscripts C. D. E. were received from the collection of Pandit Gattoolalaji in Bombay. (f) (g) (h) Three manuscripts about 100 years old and fairly accurate. These three were received from H. H. Goswami S'rî Gokulanathaji Maharaja of Bombay. (j) A manuscript received from the collection of S'rî Gokuladhis'aji's temple of Bombay through the kindness of H. H. Goswami S'rî Maganlalji Maharaja. This manuscript was taken out for us by S'astri Chimanlal. (k) A manuscript received from H. H. Goswami S'rî Ranchodlalji Maharaja of Porbander. This mss. was brought to us by S'âstri Harikrishna. (l) A mss. received from the collection of H. H. Goswami S'rî VallabhalaIji Maharaja of Kamwan. This mss. is dated 1787 Samvat and though not very accurate belongs to a rather different recension. (m) A mss. received from H. H. Goswami S'rî Muralidharaji Maharaja of Benares from the Gopala Mandira collection. This was brought to us by S'âstri Haris'ankar Aunkarji. (n) The edition printed in Bib. Ind. Series. Calcutta. (o) The edition of the Benares Sanskrit Series edited by Pandit Ratna Gopala Bhatta. (p) The edition of Prof. Maganlal S'âstri M. A. published in Vaishnava Parishad Series. (q) The edition published in the Bombay Sanskrit Series. In additin to these, in cases of doubt, we have consulted S'rî Krishna- chandraji's भावप्रकाशिकावृत्ति and वेदान्ताधिकरणमाला, the former written in the hand of S'rî Purushottamaji himself. 1535

( 16 ) The text of the Bhashya Prakas'a is based on the original copy written by the author in his own hand. For the portions which are added by the author subsequently to this copy in his fair draft, and which are not incorporated in this manuscript, we have based the text of those additions on three copies. At one time we thought of bracketing this last addition, but on a further consideration, we thought that as the author himself wanted to incorporate the same, it would not be fit to mark out the same. (a) A mss. dated 1787 Samvat received from his H. H. Goswami S'ri Vallabhalalji Maharaja of Kamwan. (b) A mss. received from H. H. Goswami S'ri Ranchhodlalji Maharaja of Porbander. (c) (d) Two mss. received from Pundit Gattoolalaji's collection of Bombay. (e) The edition in the Benares Sanskrit Series. The text of the रश्मि is based on the original copy in our possession as stated above. श्रीकृष्णार्पणमस्तु । 1536 Bombay, } 5-2-26. } M. T. Telivala.