^{page 935 note 1} See par. 7 infra, where the term Pañca-kāla-parāyana occurs. For explanation, see par. 9 infra. The confusion of this with Pāñcarātra must be avoided, as in footnote 53, p. 16, Dr. G. A. Grierson's Nārāyaṇīya (Ind. Antiq., 1909, Reprint).

^{page 936 note 1} From such Upaniṣad passages as “na khalu Bhāyavatā Yamaviṣayamṁ gacchanti”, oft quoted by the ancient Ācāryas, it is further evidence of the eternality of the Bhāgavata Religion.

^{page 937 note 1} Ekāyana appears to have been one of the Upaniṣads, or the crown of all Upaniṣads, of which the whole Pāñcarātra literature appears to be a vast commentary. So do we learn from the Śrī-praśsna Saṁhitā, ii, 38, 39—

“Vedam ekāyanam nāma Vedānām śirasi sthitam

Tad arthakam Pāñcaratram mokṣadam tat-kriyāvatām,

Yasmin eko mokṣa-mārgo Vede proktas sanātanaḥ,

Mad-ārādhana-rūpeṇa tasmād ekāyanam bhavet.”

^{page 937 note 2} Śrī Kṛṣṇa's reference here is to the primeval Vāsudeva Dharma, not to Himself as the son of Vasudeva, to which latter He Himself alludes in the Bhagavad-Gītā, v, x, 37, viz. “Vṛṣṇīnām Vāsudevo 'ham”. Also see my note on Vāsudeva, in the Indian Antiquary, p. 319, 11, 1910Google Scholar.

^{page 938 note 1} Similarly Rāja-vidyā of Bhagavad-Gītā, ix, 2 does not mean “the Science of the Kings (i.e. Kṣatriyas)”, but means “Royal Science or Princely Knowledge”.

^{page 939 note 1} The whole literature of the Bhāgavata Religion is called the Sāttvata Śāstra in a generic sense. In a specific sense Sāttvata is also the name of one of the 108 and odd Pāñcarātra-Saṃhitas or Treatises comprising the Āgamic Science. The Sāttvata-Śāstra is again divided into two branches, the bigger of which is called the Pāñcarātra, and the smaller the Vaihānasa, probably the fifty-third in the list of the Saṃhitas given infra, par. 13. Read Īśvara-Sa-ṃhitā, i, 62: “Tat syāt dvedhā Pāñcaratra- Vaihānasa vibhedataḥ.” It is not borne out by orthodoxy, to consider Sāttvatasand Bhāgavatas as of two different schools, for Sāttvata = Bhāgavata. The term Sāttvata is thus derived: “Sat Brahma, sattvam vā; tadvantas Sātvantaḥ Brahma-vidaḥ, sātvikā vā; teṣām idam karma, śāstram vā, sātvatam; tat-kurvāṇāḥ tad-ācakṣāṇāṣ ca vā; sātayati sukhayaty āśritān iti sāt Paramātma; sa eteṣām astî'ti vā sātvataḥ; sātvanto vā mahā-bhāgavatāḥh” [Viṣṇu-Sahasra-nāma-bhāṣya by Parāśara-Bhaṭṭārya].

^{page 939 note 2} See par. 7 infra. We wish to invite the attention of Dr. G. A. Grierson (and other Oriental scholars as well) with reference to his opinion, reiterated again in JRAS. for April, 1910, p. 284, note, viz., “It is an historical fact that the Bhāgavata religion took its rise, not amongst the Brāhmaṇas, but amongst the Kṣatriya caste” (italics ours. See n. 3, p. 942).

^{page 940 note 1} We would also recommend our readers to a perusal of the subjectmatter, viz. Pāñcarātras noticed in chapters 20–49 of the Agni-Purāṇa (Pūna Ānandaśrama Series).

^{page 940 note 2} Read Mahābhārata, Śānti-Parvan, Mokṣa-Dharma, 340, 111—

“ Sātvatam vidhim āsthāya gītas Saṇkarṣaṇena yaḥ

Idam Mahopaniṣadam sarva-Veda samanvitam.”

^{page 942 note 1} Thus the descent of the Bhāgavata Religion is, in the Kṛta Age, from Nara-Nārāyaṇa to Nārada; at the end of the Dvāpara Age, from Saṃkarṣaṇa to Sāṇḍilya; in the Kali Age, from Viṣvaksena to Śaṭhakopa, as will further appear.

^{page 942 note 2} Cf. the term Pañca-kāla-vit in par. l supra.

^{page 942 note 3} From this it is evident that a succession of Brāhmanṇa teachers precede the Kṣatriyas as the promulgators of the Bhāgavata doctrine. Nor need the monopoly be solely accredited to the Kṣatriyas (see note 2, p. 939 supra) or even to the Brāhmaṇas. For among the exponents of the doctrine figure archangels (Viṣvaksena, etc.), angels (Sanatkumāra, etc.), Ṛṣis (Śāṇḍilya, etc.), Rākṣasas (Prahlāda, etc.), men of all castes (Śaṭhakopa, etc.), and even monkey-gods (Sugrīva, Hanumān, etc.).

^{page 943 note 1} Cf. Rāmāyaṇa, vi, 131, 121—

Adi-devo mahā bāhuḥ Harir Nārāyaṇo vibhuḥ|

Sākṣād Rāmo Raghu-śreṣṭhaś Śēṣso Lakṣmaṇa ucyate|| i.e. Nārāyaṇa Himself becomes Rāma and Śeṣa becomes Lakṣmaṣa.

^{page 943 note 2} Cf. the verse cited in our Bhagavad-Gītā, Introd., p. xiv—

Anantaḥ pṁrathamaṁ rūparṁ Lakṣmaṇaś ca tataḥ param|

Balabhadras tṛtīyas tu kalau Kaścit (Rāmānuja) bhaviṣyati||

^{page 944 note 2} Curiousty enough, theosophists [for example read C. Jinarajādāsa's “Lives of the Initiates” in the April (1910) number of the Theosophic Messenger, p. 386] affirm that he who was Apollonius Tyana and subsequently Jesus the Christ became Rāmānuja thereafter in India. The following extract is made therefrom to incite inquiry: “In India, next to Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who proclaimed the Path of Devotion, Śrī Rāmānuja holds a unique position among his brother philosophers. When we realize that the gentle Jesus of Palestine, after a life as Apollonius of Tyana, later took birth in South India about the twelfth century as Rāmānuja, we can account for the intensely devotional trend of his philosophy. Indeed, as we study his life and work, we can see that he took birth there for the special purpose of reviving the idea of Bhakti that was being lost to Indian thought.”

^{page 944 note 2} Read—

“Śrī-Viuṣṇu-loke Bhagavān Viṣṇur Nārāyaṇas svayam

Proktavān mantra-rāj-âdīn Lakṛmyai tāp-âdi-pūrvakam.”

(Cited in Comm. on Vākya-Guru-paramparā.)

^{page 945 note 1} Read—

“ Sv-opadiṛṭan ati-prītyā tāpaḥ-punḍr-âdi-pūrvakam

Viṣṇu-loke (a)vatīrṇāya priyāya satatam Hareḥ

Seneśāya Priyā Viṣṇoḥ mūla-mantra-dvāyādikam.”

(Op. cit.)

^{page 945 note 2} Read—

“Seneśas svayam āgatya prītyā Śrī-nagarīm śubhām

Śaṭhagopāya munaye tintriṇī-mūla-vāsine

Tāp-âdi-pūrvakam mantra-dvaya-śloka-varān kramāt

Viṣṇu-patnyā, Mahālakṣmyā niyogād upadiṣṭavān

Punaś ca Nāthamunaye pañca-saṁskāra-pūrvakam

Bhaṭṭa-nātha-prabhṛtibhiḥ nirmitair divya-yogibhiḥ

Divyair viṁśati-saṅkhyakaiḥ prabandhais saha deśikaḥ

Svokta-Drāmiḍa-Vedānām caturṇām upadeśa-kṛt.”

(Op. cit.)

^{page 945 note 3} Read p. 270 with footnote, JRAS. for April, 1910, by Dr. G. A. Grierson.

Read—

“Ādāv upadiśed Veda-Khila-Rg-Veda-saṃjñikam

Asmad-gurubhya ity ādi vākya-trayam Arindama!”

(Op. cit.)

^{page 946 note 1} These are called the Pañca-Saṁskāras, or the Five Vaiṣṇava Sacraments, the esoterics of which ic is not the purpose of this paper to deal with. These several symbols represent cosmic truths. See the chapter on “Symbology” in our Lives of Saints. Freemasons or simply Masons know that symbols have each their meanings. With reference to Vaiṣṇavic masonry and the Holy Symbols employed by it, the best English article that has yet been written is the one by DrGrierson, G. A., viz. “The Auspicious Marks on the Feet of the Incarnate Deity” (JRAS., 01, 1910, pp. 87 ff.)Google Scholar, to which particular attention is invited, especially of the Masonic world. This is what a certain writer says: “These symbols were not picked up, discovered or invented by men in ancient monasteries or temples. They were given to men directly from on High by the ministers of God. Their deeper meaning is so recondite that it could never have been discovered by man without such aid” (A Primer of Theosophy, Masonry, 1909, p. 60, Rajput Press, Chicago, U.S.A.)Google Scholar.

Also, like the ritualism of Masonry, these Five Sacraments are of great value to those who know and practise them.

^{page 947 note 1} Vide enumeration of these above.

^{page 947 note 2} Also see Parāśara-Saṁhitā, ch. iv, and Tapta-calcrāṅkana- Vijaya.

^{page 948 note 1} Same as St. Namm-āzhvār, whose life read in our Lives of Āzhvārs or Drāvidā Saints.

^{page 949 note 1} How among the main Drāvidḍ;a languages, Tamil, Telugu, and Kannaḍa (Kanarese), Tamil alone comes to be sanctified and has been chosen as the medium of spiritual instruction, and is ranked on a par with Sanskrit (hence the dual or Ubhaya-Vedānta, of the Śrī-Vaiṣṇnavas), may be learnt from a Sanskrit work called Śambhu-Rahasya, and from the Ācāra - Hṛdaya by Azhagiya Maṇavaḷa-p-perumaḷ Nāyānar, the younger brother of Lokācārya, the author of Artha-Pañcaka (vide JRAS. for July, 1910). He is numbered 48 in the Succession List (see our Life of Rāmānuja).

^{page 950 note 1} In this connexion the article “Notes on Tul'si Dās”, by DrGrierson, G. A., in the Indian Antiquary, vol. xxii, p. 266, 1893Google Scholar, narrating the list of succession, beginning from Śrīman-Nārāyaṇa, streaming down to Tul'si Dās, through Lakṣmi (Śrī), Senapāti, Kāri-sūnu ( = Śaṭhagopa), Nāthamuni, Yāmunâcārya, Rāmānuja, Lokâcārya, etc., Rāmānanda, etc., is very interesting, as proving the solidarity of the Bhāgavata Religion throughout Bharata-khanḍa (India). JRAS. for April, 1910, p. 270, has already been referred to.

^{page 950 note 2} A neat and faithful translation of this has been recently made by DrGrierson, G. A. (vide Indian Antiquary, vol. xxxvii, 09, 1908)Google Scholar.

^{page 950 note 3} Also in Ānandagiri's Śaṅkara- Vijaya references occur; and it is chronicled therein that two of Śaṅkara's disciples were specially ordained to teach Vaiṣṇavism.

^{page 950 note 4} In another work written by Yāmunâcārya, viz. the Siddhi-Traya, he mentions Śaṅkara as a Brahma-Sūtra-Bhāṣyakāra. The year of Yāmunācārya's birth is a.c. 916 (see Hierarchic Table in our Lives of Saints). Hence, from this internal evidence, Śaṅkara must go to the ninth or eighth century at least. In the work Agama-Prāmāṇya, Yāmunâcārya refers to a Kāśmīr-Āgama.

^{page 951 note 1} 1 A special paper is intended in due course to be presented on this part of the subject to the Royal Asiatic Society. The following short extract from Śaṅkara-Bhā;ṣya, however, will suffice now, as illuminating our contention here: “Tatra yat tāvad ucyate yo 'sau Nārāyaṇaḥ Paro 'vyaktāt prasiddhaḥ Paramātmā Sarvātmā, sa ātmanā - (ā)tmānam anekadhā vyūhya vyavatiṣṭhata iti, tan na nirākriyate” (ii, 2, 42). Also in ii, 2, 45, “vipratiṣedhāc-ca,” Śaṅkara writes: “Veḍa-vipratisedhaś ca bhavati, caturṣu Vedeṣu evaṁ śreyo (a)labdhvā Śāṇḍilya idaṃ Śāstram (Pāñcarātram) adhītavān ity ādi.” See reference to Sāndṇṭilya in par. 7.

^{page 954 note 1} Read Rationale of Image- Worship by Yogi Pārthasārathi.

^{page 954 note 2} This is perhaps not to be confounded with what goes by the name of Nārada-Pāñcarātra, until they can be proved to be the same. Also, there are two editions called by this name, one published by Banerji in 1865 (Bibliotheca Indica), and another by Bhuvanacandra Vasāka in 1887, in the Jñānaratnākara Press, Nimtala, Calcutta.

^{page 954 note 3} Vaihānasa (?).

^{page 954 note 4} Parama-puruṃa(?).

^{page 955 note 1} See No. 50.

^{page 955 note 2} Also called Bharata (?).

^{page 955 note 3} See Introduction to Mantra-Śāstra by Gopālāchārlu, S. E., pp. 33–5Google Scholar.

^{page 956 note 1} This is probably the Mahā-Lakṃsmī-Tantra of the list given in the first chapter of the Kapiñjala-Saṁhitā.

^{page 956 note 2} Dr. Schrader, Ph.D., Adyar, Madras, has taken up a Devanāgari edition of this Saṁhitā, and is collecting rare MSS.

^{page 956 note 3} It is doubtful whether this is the same as No. 8, Nāradīya-Sahitā, of the list given above.

^{page 956 note 4} This name is not found amongst the 108 of the Pādma enumeration. This may, after examination, happen to be No. 49, or 74, or 98, as the Sṁamhitā is also known by the name Kṛṣn-âtreyi. The Bṛhad-Brahma is also popularly known in the Gujarat country as the Nārada Pāñcarātra.

^{page 958 note 1} The Hindu, Madras, May 30, 1910.

^{page 959 note 1} That is in the Śrī-Bhāṭ ya (A. G.).

^{page 959 note 2} Sankarṣaṇa (A. G.).

^{page 960 note 1} Sankarṣaṇa(A. G.).

^{page 961 note 1} Also see Garbe's, R.Philosophy of Ancient India, pp. 83Google Scholar, 84, quoted in my Vade Mecum of Vedānta, pp. 21 ff. See also Colebrooke, Barth, and Hopkins. Also read anent the antiquity of the Bhāgavata Religion, and conversion of Greeks to it, as revealed by the Besnagar Inscription, the revised translation of the latter as given on p. 817, JRAS. for July, 1910, runs thus:—“This Garuḍadhvaja of Vāsudēva, the god of gods, has been caused to be made here by Hēliodōros, a votary of Bhagavat, a son of Diya (Diōn), a man of Takshasilā, a Yōna ambassador, who has come from the great king Antalkidas to king Kāśīputra-Bhāgabhadra, the saviour, who is prospering in the fourteenth year of (his) reign.” Also refer to Indian Antiquary, p. 13, 1911, re this inscription.