Sanskrit sources of kerala history part 23 KR IRS contd 18 8 24 19 8 24 4. The Lilatilakam
Chapter 6 - Miscellaneous Sanskrit works bearing on Kerala history The Lilatilakam is treated as “the only extant treatise on the grammar and rhetoric of the Manipravala style” in Malayalam literature. Though, it deals with an aspect of Malayalam grammer and rhetoric, its language is Sanskrit. The work uniformly consists of Sutras and Vrttis in Sanskrit and examples in Manipravala, and that has been identified as bhasa samskrtayoga in the very same treatise. The historical worth of the Lilatilaka is neccessarily founded on two vital factors namely the historical associations of the author and the date of the composition of the treatise. Nothing definite is known about the life of the author. According to R. Narayana Panicker, he was a dependent of Sangramadhira Ravi Varma, the Venad king who ruled from Kollam in the beginning of the 14th C. AD. Vadakkumkur agrees with this. Ullur makes him one of the dependents of the Venad royalty. It is difficult to say which particular ruler of Venad was his patron. N. Raghavan Nambiar recorded then the author of the Lilatilaka was one Bhattatiri of the Mampula home. It seems ceratin that the Lilatilaka was written by a person who was intimately associated not only with the Travancore royal house but also with the social life extant in the extreme south of Kerala. The examples chosen by him to illustrate his points are chiefly concerned with the social and political life of Venad. The rulers praised or mentioned by the illustration are either the sovereigns of Venad or the Pandyas who are attached to them. Kota Martandavarma, a ruler of Venad has been praised two verses, and Viramartanda Varma in another too. In the eighth ‘Silpa of Lilatilaka while explaining the Sutra Utsahasya Virah. The author gives an illustrative verse which alludes to the defeat and capitulation of the Pandya king by Ravi Varma, the ruler of Venad. Similarly another aphorism bhayasya Bhayanakam is explained by citing a verse in which a pandya prince is said to have made the Turuskas free from the battle field on their horse. In another verse randra in illustrated by citing a verse on the terrific fight of Vikrama pandya. A few temples located north of Tiruvalla have been mentioned. They are Trissivaperur, Trikkariyur and Mahodayapuram centres of supreme fame in the Kerala coast on account of their historical and religious association. Lilatilaka highlights three important points of interest to the political history of Travancore. 1. The Tulukkanpata or battle with the Muslims; 2. The reign of Kota Martanda Varma; 3. Ravi Varma’s battle with Vikrama Pandya; Tulukkanpata While illustrating the sentiment of Bhayanaka the author of the Lilathilaka cites a verse in which a pandya prince is said to have routed out the Tulukkas in battle. It has to be noted that the name of the Pandya prince is not given in it. Instead, the author merely says Pandya Yuva. Elamkulam identifies the prince with Vikrama Pandya whose exploits has been alluded to in the next verse that illustrates roudra [raudra]. Lilatilaka verse which speaks of the flight of the Tulukkas was “turagārūḍhastvarayā” (Turuturemandi Turukkarellam) The known references to the Tulukkanpada show only that the Venad ruler, and also a Pandya prince (not specified as Vikrama Pandya) routed the Tulukkas. This battle or this series of battles, could have been fought either as a united military effort against a more powerful Muslim ruler, or as a border skirmish between the Venad ruler and the Mohamodans who established themselves at Madurai. Kota Martanda Varma While dealing with the dussandhi caused by Visarjaniya, the auother quotes the following verses : Ennikkolvanariya gunavanenmar samanterennum tarasreninaduvil maruvillata taramanalaha marrarennum kulumiya patanganalobhutpuresmin kolambhamboruhadinamanihi kotamartanda Pandu Likewise, in the context of discouraging on Udatta the author illustrates asayamahatva by citing mentioning kota Martanda. tasmin kale bhuvi Yadusisorjanmamakinramadhvim Pitva matto dvijaparisadamarthinam cetaresam Kainovolam kathamapi dhanam kontu tarppiccu kamam korikkol kenrutanarulinan kotamartanda Virah. Kota Martanda, mentioned in these verse was sovereign of Venad who ruled from Kollam. The expression kolambamboruhadinamani indicates this fact. It is corroborated by the mention of yadusisu in the second verse. Scholars have identified this Kota Martanda with Padmanabha Martanda Varma of the Varkkala inscription dated 427 M.E. The identification seems sound, even though the earlier scholars have not cited any reason. We can find in these verses some useful clues in support of this identification. Both the verses bear mention of one and the same king, because the name Kota Marthanda is common to both of them and rare said to have ruled sometime back as indicated by the usage tasmin kāle and Pandu. There are only two Martanda Varmas with whom the namesakes figuring in the Lilatilaka could be identified. In the verse cited second Kota Martanda is compared with a drunkard who goes amuck giving away all his riches to others and in a state of extreme loss of self control cries out to others to carry away as they like, whatever there remain. The king is said to have drunk the Madhvi that was metaphorically the birth of the Yadhisisuh and there become matta. This would make one suspect that the child birth happened at a time when there was a severe shortage of heirs in the royal house. The child-birth must have given a new hope of continuance for the royal house, without making an adoption. This sole event cannot have any relation to the reign of Udaya Martanda Varma, because, we know from other sources that Udaya Martanda Varma was the fourth. So of Kota Varma, and that patriarchy was the accepted system of inheritance in Travancore at that time. Based mainly on this identification we may say that the Lilatilaka brings to light an unknown event that took place in his time. This is of course, its result of a new interpretation, of the verse from Lilatilaka cited first. Sooranad P.N. Kunhan Pilla and Prof. Elamkulam, the chief commentators of the work, have interpreted the verse in one and the same way. Sangramadhira and Vikrama Pandya The Lilatilaka, contains a verse referring to Ravi Varma, the ruler of Venad. The verse runs as follows — dronaya drupadam dhananjaya iva ksmapalabalobali Venadinnudayoru ravivarmakhyo yadunam patih pandyam vikramapurvakam patayil vaccattippiticcannane pandyesaya kotuttu tasya tanayam padmananamagrahit In this verse, Ravivarma, the ruler of Venad is said to have defeated Vikrama Pandya in battle handed over him to the Pandya sovereign and obtained Vikrama Pandya’s daughter in marriage. Scholars like Attor Krshna Pisharati, Kumaran Unnithan, T.K. Velu Pillai, R. Narayanan Panicker, Sooranad Kunhan Pilla, Ullu, and P.K.S. Raja have taken this identification as valid. According to Prof. Elamkulam this Ravi Varma was a different king, one who is famous as the hero of the Karuvelankulam battle. Neither the attribute Yadunampatih applied to this Ravivarma nor the fact that he is mentioned to have wedded a Pandya princess, Prof. Elamkulam says, is quite a dependable factor indeciding the identity of this king. Thus the Lilatilaka, if Elamkulam’s view is accepted does not serve as a source of information in respect of the history of Sangramadhira. The question of the identity of the Ravivarma of the Lilatilaka with Sangramadhira emerges as a possible factor. The verse under reference cites that Ravi Varma defeated in battle the Pandya ruler Vikrama Pandya and delivered him upto the Pandya sovereign and thus obtained the daughter of Vikrama Pandya in marriage. The expression ksmapalabala clearly shows that this was an early feat of Ravi Varma when he was quite young. The comparison of this incident with the episode of Dhananjaya’s obtaining Draupadi after the defeat of Dranpada suggests that the Pandya princess whom Ravi Varma obtained was not the daughter of the Pandya sovereign to whom he delivered up Vikrama Pandya but of Vikrama Pandya himself. In the Srirangam and other eulogies of Ravi Varma Kulasekhara he is said to have made a Pandya Princess his queen. Some scholars including Elamkulam are of opinion that Sangaramadhira married the daughter of the Pandya king Maravarman Kulasekhara I. But the eulogies are silent on this point; they merely say that he married a Pandya princess. Anyhow, that he married a pandya princess is beyond all doubts. During the period of Sangramadhira, there was a Vikrama Pandya one of the brothers of Mara Varman Kulasekhara. It is likely, as pointed out by the earlier scholars that Vikrama Pandya, who was co-regent with Maravarman Kulasekhara might have, for some unknown reasons, gone against the latter, and Ravi Varma Kulasekhara, on account of obligations by virtue of alliance or Vassalage, chartised the impudent Vikrama and produced him before the Pandya sovereign. [4]:The quotations in the Lilatilaka mention 3 names of the rulers of Venad. They are Ravivarma, Kotamartandavarma and Viramartandavarma. Even if the identity of the last two is accepted, two Venad rulers are mentioned in it. We can only say that authors of the relevent quotations might be contemporaries of those kings. Since the span of time between the composition of the illustrative verses and the sutra and vritti is not known, it is unscientific to treat the author of the Lilatilaka as a contemporary of either of the said kings. [12]:This Vikramapandya seems to be different from the Vikramapandya a prince said to have been capitulated by Ravivarma and delivered upon the Pandya sovereign. ----------------------------------------------------- 16. Yamaka poems of Vasudeva Chapter 6 - Miscellaneous Sanskrit works bearing on Kerala history Vasudeva the son of Ravi has composed several Yamaka poems famous for their diction and elegance. According to the popular tradition in Kerala Vasudeva was a Bhattatiri of the Pattattu family of Nambutiri Brahmin in the village of Perumanam, a few miles to the South of Trichur. The development of his illiterative genius is attributed to the divine blessing of the deity of the Sasta Temple at Tiruvellakkavu in Perumanam. Vasudeva was the student of a rich and generous scholar Paramesvara who, being a great expounder of the Mahabharata and the Puranas, was well known as Bharataguru and who was a Brahmin contemporary of king Kulasekhara. Among his works Yudhistiravijaya, Tripuradamana, Sourikathodaya, and Nalodaya are composed in Yamaka style. Vasudeva’s all these works contain verses eulogising the royal patron of the poet. Yudhistiravijaya mentions a king Kulasekhara. It gives the following information about the royal patron of the poet. “At the time, when there reigned a king named Kulasekhara of elephant gait, in whose kingdom decrepitude and misery were unknown, whose terrific battle fields were glorified by poets as hovered over by wheeling fights of Vultures, the fat soil of whose dominions yielded coveted harvests, while the trees provided the complete shade cowing to their luxuriance, whose subjects were graceful mannered and whose land was a fitting receptacle of fame, there lived a preceptor called Bharataguru, who was well versed in the vedas. Trpuradahana refers a king Rama as follows: “There ruled a king who was bowed to by poets, the fight of whose army scattered his enemy kings, who was as steady in punishing the wicked as ready in succouring the righteous, whose conduct was above calumny, who was extolled as the foremost of kings (rajasekhara = siva in being wealthy (bhutidhara = a smearer of ashes) in having proboscis like arms (vyale-pati-Sphurat-Karam-serpentent wined arms) and in bestowing wealth upon the suppliants at his feet, who was considered as an incarnation of Rama himself in the sameness of his name, with the hero of the Ramayana and in (the identity of purpose) raksopayam (protection of his subjects: danger to Raksasas). In the reign of this king who was pleasing the eyes of his subjects, the Tripuradahana was composed by Ravibhu (son of Ravi) in the yamka style. In Saurikathodaya also Vasudeva has eulogised a king named Rama, who appears to be identical with the Rama mentioned in the earlier work Tripuradahana. Nalodaya is another Yamaka poem composed by Vasudeva. But some assign its authorship to Rav, the father of Vasudeva. Even according to this view the work was written by a contemporary of king Kulasekhara. Hence the reference to the king contained in the work is important in this connection. “The name of the king of his time was Rama, who was an adopt in the science of polity, whose powerful army clore its way, like a good ship through the river like armies of his enemies, whose kingdom produced stones, whose forests abounded in elephant hards, who as an overlord collected tribute from his vessels, who though being christened Rajaditya (at the same of his coronation) resembled the heaven resplendent with the sun and moon, who had conquered all his enemies etc. The question naturally arises whether the two royal names mentioned by Vasudeva, namely, Kulasekhara and Rama represent one and the same king or two different successive rulers. But three commentaries on Yudhistriravijaya are seen to identify Kulasekhara with Rama. Padarthacintana of Raghava while explaining the words Kale Kulasekharasya gives the following information: kulaśekharasya kulaśekharanāmnaḥ, kulālaṅkāro'yaṃ bhavati iti vicārya gurubhiḥ tathā kṛtanāmadheyasya paṭṭabandha ityarthāt bhavati prāg rāmavarmanāmatvāt || Vijayadarsika of Acyuta explain the word Kulasekhara as follows: kulaśekhara iti abhiṣekakṛtaṃ nāma, pitrādikṛtaṃ tu rāmavarmeti | The word vasudhāmavataḥ ise xplained to mean— vasūni dhanāni dhāma mahodayākhyaṃ puraṃ ceti dvandvaḥ | Ratnapradipika of Sivadasa explain these words as follows:— kulaśekharasya kulaśekhara iti nāmavataḥ etad abhiṣekakṛtaṃ nāma pitrādikṛtaṃ tu rāmavarmeti | vasudhāmavataḥ vasu dhanaṃ dhāma mahodayākhyaṃ puram || >From these references one may safely conclude that the term Ramavarman was the personal name of the king who received the title Kulasekhara on the occasion of his inauguration. According to Visnu, a commentator of Nalodaya, the king Rama of Mahodayapuram also possessed the title Rajaditya. Vasudeva has praised Kulasekhara in each of his four Yamaka compositions, this giving the posterily useful account of his patron. Scholars have expressed different views regarding the identity of Vasudeva’s patron. Zachariae tries to identify his patron with Ravi Varman Kulasekhara of Quilon the author of Pradyumnabhyudaya. This view is untenable since the patron of Vasudeva was Ramavarman Kulasekhara who had his capital at Mahodayapuram. According to another view Kulasekhara Alvar is credited with the patronage of Vasudeva. A third view is that Ramadeva of Ramavarman mentioned in the Laghubhaskariya of Sankaranarayana in the patron of the yamaka poet. Keralavarma who has been referred by the poet must be the ruler with the title of Kolatiri (Kolabhupa in Sanskrit) during the period 1423 -1446 AD. In his commentary on Vasudeva’s Yudhishtiravijayam with the title of Padarthachintanam the commentator Raghava has mentioned that he was undertaking the task that the behest of his royal patron with the name of Keralavarma. śrīkeralavarmanṛpaḥ paribhūtārātibhūtibhūritamadaḥ āsthanamalaṅkurvannā rathāyogāt kadācidaśiṣanmām racaya yudhiṣṭiravijayavyākhyāṃ prakhyāpitorutātparyām locanacaturāṃ rāghavalāghavavijitātmajitām || Poet also says that he had been directed by his patron, evidently the same ruler with the name of Keralavarma to make a śravyakāvya, not a play coming under the category of dṛśyakāvya koleśvarastaṃ muditaḥ kadācidā sthanavarti nṛpacakravartī niṣṇātadhīḥ kṛṣṇakathānubandhaṃ kāvyaṃ kuru śrāvyamiti nyagādīt | Both of them, the preceptor as well as the desciple must have been held in great esteem by the scholarly ruler of the Kola kingdom. -------------------------------------------------------- Conclusion The study of Sanskrit sources of Kerala history leads us to the inevitable conclusion that however the old Indian literature may be said to the deficient in the scientifically written histories, it does not totally lack in historical information which can well be pieced together to give us a connected picture of the contemporary times. This information can be gathered not only such original and authentic sources as the inscription, coins or archaeological remains but also from the literature. A noteworthy feature of almost every work that has survived is the legendary or mythical origin of dynasties. The authors of these historical Kavyas, claim, merit, not for historicity, but for poetry because to them, the historical narrative is only the occasion, the elaborate poetry woven round it is alone essential. Therefore, as observed earlier, these works cannot be considered as proper history. However, it is a fact that they contain valuable historical information. But in purport and treatment they differ altogether from genuine works of history. For, instead giving a systematic and matter of fact account of the life and times of their patrons, the authors of historical poems put in their works a good deal of literary fancies mingled with facts. Thus we can see that Kerala has its own historiographical tradition, preserved in the form of Historical Kavyas and inscriptions. The court poets of Kerala composed fanciful legendary biographies of their patrons, carrying little for historical facts. This resulted in the virtual absences of authoritative historiography. In order to please their patrons every court poet traced the origin of each dynasty to devine deities. They being attracted by romantic hero worship took their heroes to the acme of glory and did not care to depict the life of the people. A close examination of these works again shows a clear distinction in dealing with historical facts. Yet as indicated above, in Sanskrit literature, we get some valuable historical works. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata, the Itihasas, also contain some historical references. Though the Puranas are full of legendary tales, their value as source for early Indian history is not meagre. We can distinguish from these works, that the vast number of texts of Sanskrit literary works that contribute to our knowledge of historiography -local chronicles and historical biographies. In the later class we get the more important historical Mahakavyas inwhich we get a number of such literature like Musakavamsa of Atula, Visakavijaya of Keralavarma Valiya Koyil Tampuran, Keralodaya of K.N. Ezhuthaccan, Ramavarmakavya of Paccu Mutatu, Ramavarma vijaya kavya of Kunnan Variyar etc. These works seeks to describe the life of the well known personalities of powerful dynasties. In these works we meet the life histories of famous princes like Srimulam Tirunal Maharaja, Visakham Tirunal Maharaja, Martandavarma, Ramavarma Pariksit Tampuran, Devanarayana, Ayilyam Tirunal Maharaja etc.... and also deal with the dynastic histories of Zamorin, Cochin and Tiruvitamkur. ------------------------------------------------ K Rajaram IRS to be contd 18824 19824 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoofZCnaqYGN82vBgKFRveFDLuF7-zdAtgkST%2BHU_95PYw%40mail.gmail.com.
