I am glad to announce the release of
the Vrajaisvarya-kadambini, “A Bank of Rain Clouds Pouring Vraja’s Opulence,”
yet another publication of the Baladeva Vidyabhusana Project.
In this remarkably sweet and simple
work, composed at the request of Sri Krsnadeva Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya, Sri
Vidyabhusana presents an epitome of the tenth canto of the Srimad-Bhagavatam,
which is here recounted in the author’s words with many vivid descriptions not
found there. It includes accounts based on other Puranas, tantras,
and Gaudiya texts.
The text is further enriched by an
extensive and thus far unpublished commentary by Vrndavana Tarkalankara
Bhattacarya, one of Sarvabhauma’s leading disciples. Named Sudha-sara,
“The Essence of the Nectar,” the commentary is true to its name, bringing out
many aspects of each verse that would be often overlooked by the average
reader, and the explanations are backed up by quotes from the sruti, smrti,
lexica, treatises on philosophy, poetics, music, and so on.
This edition includes the original
Sanskrit text critically edited based on multiple manuscripts, its Roman
transliteration, the original Sanskrit commentary, a Sanskrit gloss, an English
translation of all of these, and ample footnotes clarifying technical
terminology.
Introduction
From its very
inception, Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism has given bountiful and lofty contributions in
the field of devotional poetry. Many of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s followers
were not only highly accomplished poets, but they also left behind volumes of
works that occupy a distinct place in the history of Sanskrit literature. Rūpa
Gosvāmī, Sanātana Gosvāmī, Jīva Gosvāmī, Raghunātha Dāsa Gosvāmī, Prabodhānanda
Sarasvatī, and Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja were some of the luminaries in the literary
circle of Vṛndāvana in the 16th century, at the height of what was
known as the bhakti-kāla, the devotional period.[1] In the same
phase, those who remained in Bengal and Odisha, such as Kavi Karṇapūra and
Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, also became renowned for their Sanskrit poetry. There
were many other Gauḍīyas who engaged in writing in vernacular, prominently in
Bengali, Odia, and Vraj-bhāṣā. Their works were not at all meant to flaunt
mundane erudition, although they lack none of it. Rather, these compositions
were internally a deep and intense mode of meditation on the pastimes,
qualities, and names of Śrī Rādhā and Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and externally an open
glorification to be sung and heard, as emphasised by Caitanya Mahāprabhu
Himself as the utmost process of spiritual realisation based on the following
words of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.14.3):
jñāne prayāsam udapāsya namanta eva
jīvanti san-mukharitāṁ
bhavadīya-vārtām |
sthāne sthitāḥ śruti-gatāṁ tanu-vāṅ-manobhir
ye prāyaśo’jita jito’py asi tais
tri-lokyām ||
“Even though You are
usually unconquerable anywhere within the three worlds, You come under the
control of those who, without endeavouring for mere knowledge, remain living
amongst devotees while honouring— through body, words, and mind— topics
narrated by them, either related to You or related to Your devotees.”[2]
Besides being a prime offering unto Their Lordships, those treatises are
also an everlasting legacy to future Vaiṣṇava generations, who can thus closely
associate with the authors through their words, in which they share so much of
their realisations and ample scriptural knowledge. Indeed, Lord Kṛṣṇa is known
as Uttama-śloka, “He Who is praised by choice poetry.” Not to speak of hearing
and repeating the words of the scriptures and of the previous ācāryas,
Viśvanātha Cakravartī directly endorses the composition of poetry as a process
of devotional service: atha varṇayet kīrtayet, sva-kavitayā kāvya-rūpatvena
nibadhnīteti vā,[3]
“One should also narrate (Lord Kṛṣṇa’s pastimes). Or else, one should write
(about His pastimes) in the form of poetry according to one’s poetical skills.”
Thus, it is nothing but appalling that some individuals who fancy themselves as
Gauḍīyas have been running a campaign to avert others from reading anything
written by the previous ācāryas. Such derision is an affront to all of
them, particularly to Jīva Gosvāmī, Śyāmānanda Prabhu, Śrīnivāsācārya, and
Narottama Dāsa Ṭhākura, who so painstakingly strove to distribute the Gauḍīya
works far and wide. Their intentions could not have been clearer.
In Gauḍīya texts, readers conversant with Sanskrit will derive a surplus
stratum of intricacies and subtleties that are peculiar to the finest poetry,
in this case, in the form of bhakti-rasa, a distinct characteristic of
the works of Rūpa Gosvāmī and Jīva Gosvāmī, who put their best efforts to
establish bhakti as one of the rasas in Sanskrit dramaturgy, which
until then were generally considered only eight according to Bharata Muni’s
tradition:
śṛṅgāra-hāsya-karuṇā
raudra-vīra-bhayānakāḥ |
bībhatsādbhūta-saṁjnau cety aṣṭau nāṭye
rasāḥ smṛtāḥ||
“Conjugal
love, humour, sorrow, anger, heroism, terror, disgust, and wonder— these are
said to be the eight rasas in dramaturgy.” (Nāṭya-śāstra, 6.15)
Remarkably, such refinement makes Gauḍīya poetry enticing even to scholars
who may not be particularly inclined to the devotional genre.
The Text
Aiśvarya-kādambinī, or Vrajaiśvarya-kādambinī,
is the only known work of Gauḍīya Vedāntācārya Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa
(c.1700-1793 AD) that is primarily poetical in nature, although he used
versification in other of his original compositions, such as the Siddhānta-darpaṇa
and the Prameya-ratnāvalī. While he is best known for his commentaries
on philosophical works such as the Brahma-sūtra and the Bhagavad-gītā,
it is conspicuous that he was thoroughly learned in poetics, as observed in the
Sāhitya-kaumudī and Kāvya-kaustubha. Thus, it is quite natural
that he would bring forth his own poetry. His command of prosody is also
noticeable by the great variety of metres he used here, as seen below. The
whole text is an epitome of the tenth canto of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,
which is here recounted in the author’s words with many vivid descriptions not
found there. It includes accounts based on other Purāṇas, tantras,
and Gauḍīya texts. In some instances, the author may also have been inspired by
the Vraja folklore, which is extremely rich and extensive, comprising countless
anecdotes and songs whose motifs are centred around the pastimes of Śrī Rādhā,
Śrī Kṛṣṇa, and the inhabitants of Vraja.
The word aiśvarya
is a derivative noun from the word īśvara, God, the Supreme Lord, and it
refers to attributes that exclusively pertain to Him, such as omnipotence and
supreme opulence. Here, the focus is His madhuraiśvarya, His sweet
omnipotence. In various religious traditions, God is usually portrayed as
omnipotent, but this is often illustrated by His ability to create and destroy
the universe, to punish the sinful, etc. Although such qualities are certainly
encompassed within Kṛṣṇa, while in Vraja, they are mostly withdrawn to give way
to an even higher dimension of His omnipotence: His beauty, His sweetness, His
attractiveness, His love, His ability to give unlimited happiness to His
associates, and so on. All these constitute His sweet omnipotence, which is
fully manifest only in His interactions with the inhabitants of Vraja. The word
kādambinī means “a bank of rainy clouds.” Through a poetical simile
given at the end of the text (7.15), the author explains that the lotus-like hearts
of the devotees are drying up due to the feeling of separation from Kṛṣṇa, a
distress compared to the scorching heat of the summer sun, which is aggravated
by the paucity of narrations about Him. Each chapter of this book is thus
compared to a shower (vṛṣṭi) of topics about Kṛṣṇa in the hope that those
afflicted devotees will recover their bodily lustre, just like lotus flowers
during the monsoon.
This is one of
Vidyābhūṣaṇa’s shortest works, and he concludes the text specifying its
extension in the following words:
aiśvarya-pūrveyam apūrva-parvā
kādambinī nanda-sutāvalambā|
bhūyād viyat-sindhu-śaśāṅka-saṁkhyā
satāṁ priyā tac-caraṇāśritānām||
“This Aiśvarya-kādambinī,
whose number of verses is 140, has for its basis Kṛṣṇa, the son of Nanda
Mahārāja, and it brings about an unprecedented festival. May it be pleasing to
the devotees who have taken shelter at His feet.”[4]
Curiously, the verses in all the manuscripts are numbered, and their
aggregate amounts to 137 verses, which is also consistent with the way the
commentator analysed, interpreted the text, and numbered his comments. There
are two possible solutions for this puzzle: The first guess is that the author
used the round number 140 just to give an approximate idea of the extension of
the text rather than a precise number. The second possibility is that Vidyābhūṣaṇa
deliberately left a riddle to be deciphered by scholarly readers. The problem
with the first theory is that it sounds somewhat superfluous to use a round
number for a denomination relatively so small, and it would not be an arduous
task to find a vocabulary to express the intended exact number and at the same
time fit the metre of the verse. The problem with this second theory is that
the commentator simply corroborates the number 140 and leaves it there, while
it is more than expected that he would have given at least a hint to a possible
brainteaser, unless he is with the author in testing the readers. In any case,
this puzzle can indeed be solved by dividing the verses in a different way
according to the rules of prosody. The following varieties of metres have been
used throughout the book:
Even Metres (sama-vṛtta)
Jatu (5 syllables) 7.2, 7.3
Saṁhatikā (10 syllables) 6.3, 6.42, 6.43, 6.44
Bhujagahāriṇī (11 syllables) 4.11
Īhāmṛgī (11 syllables) 2.7, 3.8
Indravajrā (11 syllables) 3.10, 7.5
Kanakamañjarī (11 syllables) 4.5
Rathoddhatā (11 syllables) 4.2, 4.8, 6.50, 7.1
Śālinī (11 syllables) 1.4, 2.3, 2.5, 3.1, 3.6, 3.9, 5.1, 5.6, 5.9, 5.10,
5.17, 5.18, 6.2, 6.5, 6.11, 6.12, 6.16, 6.19, 6.47, 6.48, 6.53, 7.13
Saṁśrayaśrī (11 syllables) 5.2, 6.45
Sīdhu (11 syllables) 6.25
Svāgatā (11 syllables) 3.7, 4.12, 4.13, 6.8, 6.15, 6.18, 6.26, 6.46
Upendravajrā (11 syllables) 4.1, 4.14, 5.22
Vātormī (11 syllables) 1.5, 1.9, 2.8, 3.2, 3.3, 5.3, 5.5
Badhirā (12 syllables) 1.10, 6.33
Bhujāṅgaprayāta (12 syllables) 6.13, 6.22, 6.35, 6.36, 6.38, 6.39, 6.40,
6.41
Drutavilambita (12 syllables) 5.15
Pramitākṣarā (12 syllables) 7.9
Mañjubhāṣiṇī (13 syllables) 6.32
Praharṣiṇī (13 syllables) 6.20, 6.21
Rucirā (13 syllables) 5.7, 6.24
Vasantatilaka (14 syllables) 1.8, 2.1, 4.6, 6.1, 6.14
Pañcacāmara (16 syllables) 5.4
Kokilaka (17 syllables) 6.7, 6.9, 6.29
Śārdūlavikrīḍita (19 syllables) 6.23, 6.49, 7.15
Sarasī (21 syllables) 6.31, 6.51, 6.52
Sragdharā (21 syllables) 3.5
Half Even Metres (ardha-sama-vṛtta)
Ākhyānikī 3.11, 4.3, 4.10, 5.19, 5.23, 7.8
Puṣpitāgrā 5.11, 5.12, 5.13, 5.14, 5.16, 6.54, 6.55
Śiśirā 3.4
Viyoginī 6.30, 7.4, 7.10, 7.11, 7.12
Uneven Metres (viṣama-vṛtta)
Bālā 1.1, 5.20, 5.21, 7.16
Jāyā 7.7
Ṛddhi 2.4, 4.7
Śālā 2.2, 5.8, 7.6
Varāsikā 1.2
Moraic Metres (mātrā-chandaḥ)
Āryā 7.14
Aupacchandasika 4.9, 6.27, 6.28, 6.34, 6.37
Gīti 1.3, 1.6, 6.10
Pathyā 1.6
Moraic Even Metres (mātrā-samaka)
Pādākula 6.17
In addition to these, verse 1.7 has a half even metre in which the first
and third quarters conform to Vātormī, and the second and fourth conform to
Śālinī; verse 4.4 has a half even metre in which the first and second quarters
conform to Vāsantikā, and the third and fourth conform to Upendravajrā; and
verses 6.4 and 6.6 have an unidentified variety of the Triṣṭup metre.[5]
After analysing the metre in all these verses, it can be observed that each
half of verse 5.4 can be a single verse in the Pramāṇikā metre, as both halves
are grammatically independent and make different individual statements. The
same applies to verses 6.40-41, which can be similarly divided into four verses
in the Somarājī metre. In this way, there are three extra verses, and the total
amounts to 140.
Background
There are scores of
important books that are widely read but whose background history is totally
unknown. It is therefore a matter of joy that both the author and the
commentator of the Aiśvarya-kādambinī have shed light on what motivated
its composition. Verse 7.15 states:
teṣāṁ tāpa-vimardanāya vimadā
śrī-sārvabhauma-prabhoḥ
kāruṇyād uditeyam āśu bhavatād
aiśvarya-kādambinī
“By the kindness of
Śrī Sārvabhauma Prabhu, this bank of rain clouds (kādambinī) has now appeared,
pouring forth topics of Kṛṣṇa’s omnipotence (aiśvarya) and crushing the pride
of opponent philosophers. May it quickly eradicate the grief of those
devotees.”
The commentary further elucidates: “This book was brought into
existence by the kindness of Śrī Sārvabhauma. Thus, he is its
cause. This also indicates that this book is furnished with evidence that was
revealed by his kindness. His designations as ‘Sārvabhauma’ and ‘Prabhu’ are
due to his being known and influential (prabhu) in all (sarva) places (bhūmi)
by dint of his outstanding proficiency in all scriptures and his being an
exalted devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. This is what should be understood here: Vāsudeva
Sārvabhauma, the best amongst logicians, who was very eloquent and was revered
by Gajapati Pratāparudra, and whom Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu persuaded to accept
devotional service, once again appeared in the holy abode of Navadvīpa,
desiring to propagate devotion and to smash all misleading philosophies. Being
known as Kṛṣṇadeva Tarkālaṅkāra, he defeated all logicians, retired, and went
to Vṛndāvana, where he became submissive at the feet of Viśvanātha Cakravartī.
At the palace of King Sawai Jai Singh II, he defeated hundreds of dissident
scholars and made the king become exclusively devoted to Govinda. In his
assembly hall full of many kings and hosts of scholars, King Jai Singh named
him ‘Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya’ and presented him with two pieces of cloth to
honour him. This magnificent soul and foremost learned scholar taught the
esoteric meanings of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to Vidyābhūṣaṇa and requested
him to narrate Lord Hari’s sweet omnipotence. Being thus requested by him,
Vidyābhūṣaṇa in due time described the topic in detail.”
In other words, it
appears that Kṛṣṇadeva Sārvabhauma was morose because of the scarcity of fresh
literature centred around the pastimes of Lord Kṛṣṇa in those days, and thus he
requested Vidyābhūṣaṇa to fill this gap, knowing well how capable he was. Kṛṣṇadeva
Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya was a prominent śikṣā disciple of Viśvanātha
Cakravartī and a descendant of Jagannātha Cakravartī (Māmu Ṭhākura).
Documentary evidence suggests that Bhaṭṭācārya had been initiated in the
Advaita-parivāra.[6]
According to Gopāla Kavi’s (19th century AD) Vṛndāvana-dhāmānurāgāvalī
(chap.62), Sārvabhauma had vowed to take dīkṣā only from someone who
could defeat him in a debate, which happened when he met Viśvanātha.
Sārvabhauma’s name is mentioned amongst five of Cakravartī’s disciples in a
document dated Saṁvat 1769 (1712 AD) in connection with the Gokulānandajī Kuñja
at Rādhā-kuṇḍa.[7]
Soon after, he settled in Amber (present Jaipur) and was the mahanta of
the Rādhā-Vinodī Lāl Temple for over three decades.[8] A document
dated Saṁvat 1773 (1716 AD) records a grant he received from King Sawai Jai
Singh II (1688-1743 AD) to be used in the service of the deity.[9]
He also played an important role in the Jaipur debates, and ample documentation
corroborates his relationship with the King, who commissioned him to compose
several treatises, such as Bhakti-vivṛti, Karma-vivṛti, Jñāna-vivaraṇa,
Bhakti-phala-viveka, and Siddhāntaikya-prakāśikā, all of which are
part of the Khasmohor Collection, preserved at the Mahārāja Sawai Mān Singh II
Museum in the City Palace in Jaipur. Most of these works seem to have been
written between 1719 and 1723 AD. His best known book is the Padāṅka-dūtam,
whose earliest known manuscript is dated Śakābda 1645 (1723 AD).[10]
Commentaries on various works of Viśvanātha Cakravartī, such as Alaṅkāra-kaustubha,
Kṛṣṇa-bhāvanāmṛta, and Saṅkalpa-kalpa-druma also have the name “Kṛṣṇadeva
Sārvabhauma” at the end.[11]
Bhaṭṭācārya was a householder, and by 1735 AD, his son Rāmanātha Deva Śarmā was
already sharing some of his duties. Kṛṣṇadeva Bhaṭṭācārya passed away either in
the mid or late 1740s, as a document[12] dated Saṁvat
1802 (1749 AD) describes that after his demise, his grandson, Vṛndāvana Bhaṭṭācārya,
claimed the same grant that had been previously given to his grandfather.
Based on the above
dates, as well as the available manuscripts, the Aiśvarya-kādambinī may
have been written in the 1740s. There is no indication that the text was
completed in Kṛṣṇadeva’s lifetime, despite his acknowledgement. If it was, it
should have been in the early 1740s. Yet in this case, it is very likely that
Sawai Jai Singh II would have been given a copy. A manuscript of the text
without a commentary is found in the collection of the City Palace Library in
Jaipur, but it does not belong to the Khasmohor Collection, Jai Singh’s
personal library. This is a hint that the text might have been written after
his demise in 1743. Kṛṣṇadeva too passed away shortly, so there is a
possibility that the book was a posthumous tribute.
It is worth noting how over a century
later, in the Navadvīpa-māhātmya (1.4.63-64), Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura would
directly corroborate the previous identity of Vidyābhūṣaṇa, and indirectly,
that of Kṛṣṇadeva too: “Being related to Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya,
Gopīnāthācārya heard Mahāprabhu’s explanation of the Brahma-sūtra along
with him. By the Lord’ will, in due course of time, he will take birth as
Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa and will then be victorious in Jaipur.”
The Commentator
Vidyābhūṣaṇa commissioned commentaries on several of his works, and this
one is yet another instance. This is substantiated by the fact that Dayānidhi,
his personal scribe, wrote notes on manuscript ‘jha’ listed below. At the
colophon, the commentator identifies himself as Vṛndāvana Tarkālaṅkāra Bhaṭṭācārya.
He ends his commentary by acknowledging Kṛṣṇadeva Sārvabhauma as his guru, and
Rādhā-Vinodī Lāl as his worshipable Deities:
śrī-sārvabhauma-caraṇāśrayaṇopalabdha-
rādhā-vinoda-pada-paṅkaja-sevana-śrīḥ|
kādambinīṁ vyavṛṇuta prathitaiśya-vṛṣṭiṁ
vṛndāvanaḥ sakala-sajjana-sammadāya||
“For the delight of
all devotees, Vṛndāvana Tarkālaṅkāra, who has the fortune of serving the lotus
feet of Rādhā-Vinoda and of having attained shelter at the feet of Kṛṣṇadeva
Sārvabhauma, has commented on this cloud-like book that pours out the
omnipotence displayed by Kṛṣṇa.”
These Deities belonged to Lokanātha Gosvāmī, and to evade Aurangzeb’s
onslaught, They were taken from Vṛndāvana to Rajasthan, where They eventually
reached Amber in early 18th century. While Sārvabhauma served as the
mahanta of the Rādhā-Vinodī Lāl Temple, he engaged several of his disciples
in the service of the Deities, among whom was Tarkālaṅkāra.
If the same Vṛndāvana Tarkālaṅkāra
Bhaṭṭācārya was also known as Vṛndāvanacandra and Vṛndāvana Cakravartī, then he
is credited with the authorship of several works. A commentary on Kavi Karṇapūra’s
Alaṅkāra-kaustubha, named Dīdhiti-prakāśikā and dated Śāka 1662
(1740 AD),[13]
is signed by Vṛndāvanacandra Tarkālaṅkāra, who identifies himself as the son of
Rādhācaraṇa Cakravartī. A commentary on Kavi Karṇapūra’s Ānanda-vṛndāvana-campū,
named Sukha-vartinī and dated Śāka 1709, is also attributed to him, and
so is a Sanskrit commentary on Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja’s Caitanya-caritāmṛta,
dated Śāka 1667.[14]
Under his name, there is also a commentary on Rūpa Gosvāmī’s Stava-mālā
and Laghu-bhāgavatāmṛta, as well as a commentary on Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja’s
Govinda-līlāmṛta, named Sadānanda-vidhāyinī. A cross-examination
of these commentaries may be required to definitely ascertain whether all of
them were factually written by the same person, but in principle, there are indications
that this might be the case. As by the end of the Sudhā-sāra (7.13)
there is a reference to the Siddhānta-ratnam, which was not composed
earlier than mid or late 1750s, it is inferred that this commentary was written
after the demise of Kṛṣṇadeva Sārvabhauma, and possibly years after the Vrajaiśvarya-kādambinī
was written.
Needless to say, Vṛndāvana Tarkālaṅkāra
was a learned scholar proficient in multiple disciplines, something that is
evident from his commentary on the Aiśvarya-kādambinī, named Sudhā-sāra,
“The Essence of the Nectar.” True to its name, it brings out many aspects of
each verse that would be often overlooked by the average reader, and the
explanations are backed up by quotes from the śruti, smṛti,
lexica, treatises on philosophy, poetics, music, and so on. It is not clear
whether the author intended this to be the full name of the book or it was so
named by the commentator, but at the end of the commentary, we find the name Vrajaiśvarya-kādambinī,
which was therefore adopted in this edition.
An important highlight in the
commentary is yet another corroboration of the link between the Gauḍīya-paramparā
and the Mādhva-sampradāya. While glossing the second verse of the author’s
invocation, Tarkālaṅkāra says: ānandaḥ śrī-madhvācāryaḥ. sa evātigāmbhīryāt
siddhānta-ratna-pūrṇatvāc ca sindhus taṁ paritaḥ pravardhayan. tad-anvaye svayaṁ
dīkṣāṁ gṛhītvā gauḍādi-deśeṣu taṁ pracārayann iti bhāvaḥ, “The word ‘ānanda’
refers to Śrī Madhvācārya, who is himself and ocean on account of his great
profoundness and his being replete with jewel-like philosophical conclusions.
Lord Caitanya spread such an ocean in all directions, which means that after
accepting initiation (dīkṣā) in the disciplic line of Madhvācārya, Lord
Caitanya propagated the ocean of knowledge of Madhvācārya in many lands
starting with Gauḍadeśa.”
[1] Usually
considered to have transpired from 1350 to 1650 AD, but some propound earlier
and later dates.
[2] The translation
here follows the interpretation of Viśvanātha Cakravartī.
[3] Sārārtha-darśinī
on the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.33.39).
[4] For reasons
better known to them, the editors of previous editions changed the reading of
this verse and interpreted it in a way that is not even remotely close to what
the original says.
[5] As the author
used these metres, they must have been featured in some treatise on prosody
with their specific names. There are multiple works on the topic, and they
substantially differ from one another in the number of metres and their
definitions. The author himself used several metres here that are not found in
the Chandaḥ-kaustubha, on which he wrote a commentary.
[6] Vide Prof.
Monika Horstmann’s Der Zusammenhalt der Welt, 3.3.3.
[7] Vrindavan
Research Institute, microfilm T1:25.
[8] Nusukha Puṇya,
vol. 19 (Tālukā Havelī) p. 249, Rajasthan State Archives.
[9] Nusukha Puṇya,
vol. 17, pg. 811, Rajasthan State Archives.
[10] Dhaka
University, call number 200(A).
[11] In the
introduction of my edition of the Prameya-ratnāvalī, I have debunked the
idea that he was also known as Vedāntavāgīśa, the author of the Kānti-mālā
commentary.
[12] Nusukha Puṇya,
vol. 19 (Tālukā Havelī) p. 248, and vol.17 p. 813-814, Rajasthan State
Archives.
[13] University of
Tübingen, accession number Ma I 240.
[14] Sanskrit College
of Calcutta, Catalogue of Descriptive Manuscripts, X, 41.
