03 biography of cāmarājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri

By

Cāmar ājanagara Veṇkaṭaramaṇa śāstri

Printed in our own Bhuvanēśvarī Press

1917

Price 8 ¯

Aṇe]

[Postage extra

Plate 10: DharmadhikāriCāmarājanagara Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri (1833–1917). Photograph by Varadācārya, 1917 C.E. Frontispiece from original biography.

1. Birth and Childhood

jātasya hi dhruvō mr̥tyur’dhruvaṁ janma mr̥tasya ca |

tasmād’aparihāryē_’rthē na tvaṁ śōcitum’arhasi237 ∥

Wewitnessdailyinthisworld,asitismanifesttous,thatbirthand

death are the experience of all creatures. Many are the luminaries who have lived here, and then passed on. Truly have the wise observed in the saying *“naraḥpatitakāyōpi yaśaḥkāyēna jīvati”*that man lives on in the body of his fame, even when his earthly body has ceased to be.238 When a man, whose human form has obtained from good deeds over many incarna-tions, departs this world having chosen to merely indulge himself in selfiish and sensual pleasures, engaging in no works yielding merit in this world or the next, we would be right to consider him no better than a beast. But we would be right to think the scholar exalted who, having grasped the purpose of this human life, engages himself in reflections on matters of Truth and spirituality, and devotes himself to the service of others. The darśana of such a luminary, honouring him, conversing with him, contemplating his life, and chronicling his life, are all acts that surely bring one merit.

Our intent in undertaking this effort is to acquaint our readers with our protagonist as having been among this very group of illustrious individuals.

This is not a full biography of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri. It is, rather, a broad account of his life, but which includes many specifiics. It should suffiice to acquaint the reader with the life of our protagonist, and fulfiil this writer’s purpose.

This venerable individual was born on the tenth *śuddha tithi (Vijayadaśamī)*of the month of Āśvayuja in the Vijaya saṁvatsaraof Śāḻīvāhana

Śaka1756 (October 15, 1833 C.E.),239 in the Katvāḍipura Agrahāra of Nañjanag ūḍu *tāl ūk,*which lies halfway between Maisūru and Nañjanagūḍu. At 237 *Bhagavadgītā *(2:27), Kr̥ṣṇa to Arjuna: “Certain indeed is the death of one who is born, *and the rebirth of one who dies. Therefore, it is unbefitting of you to lament the inevitable.” *

238This is the second hemistich from Ballāladeva’s *Bhojaprabandha:*53 (16th century):

“dēhē pātini kā rakṣā yaśō rakṣyamapātavat | naraḥpatitakāyōpi yaśaḥkāyēna jīvati ∥”, meaning “to no purpose is care for this fleeting body; esteem endures, it alone is worth our care, for Man lives on in the body of his fame even when his mortal body has ceased to be”.

239The tithigiven corresponds to Wednesday, October 23, 1833 C.E., not October 15. For the record, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was of the Bhāradvāja gōtra, and the Āśvalāyanaschool of the *R.gvēda *[Śāstri 1925b, p. 9].

75

76

sons of sarasvatī

the time, Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, the grandfather of our present king, had established an agrahārain Katvāḍipura, and bestowed the homes therein upon many excellent scholarly and śrōtriyabrāhmaṇas along with vr̥ttisfor their sustenance.240 Among those to have received homes in this manner was Rāmaśēṣa Śāstri,241 who gifted away both his home and his vr̥tti 1831

to a selfless and noble individual called Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, who had moved to Mais ūru from Sindhughaṭṭa.242 As a mark of special regard, the king had also arranged for a monthly stipend of twelve Haṇas for him. This same Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri was Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s father.243

240Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV (1894–1940 C.E.) was king of Maisūru when this biography was written in 1917 C.E. His grandfather Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III bestowed the name Cāmarājanagara upon the village of Arikuṭhāra in 1818 C.E., upon learning that it was the birthplace of Cāmarāja Voḍeyar, his own father [Rice 1877b, p. 227]. Row [1922, p. 153] records that Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III established an agrahārawith 74 homes and vr̥ttisat a village called Kattavāḍipura on the banks of the river Kapilā in Nañjanagūḍu district on Sunday, August 1, 1819 C.E., and named it the Kr̥ṣṇarājēndrapura Agrahāra, and that subsequently, in response to complaints from residents of this agrahāraabout thieves, the king gave them homes in a new agrahārahe constructed to the southwest of the palace in Mais ūru. Rice [1897a, p.

316] indicates that the original agrahārawas near the Arkēśvara temple. Such appear to be the origins of the Katvāḍipura Agrahāra in Maisūru. Inscriptions 1–3 in Rice [1894, p. 1] describe the 1821 dedication, in the names of three queens, of three agrahārasadjacent to each other, to the west of the Mais ūru fort. These becoming known as the New Agrahāra, the

“Old” or Katvāḍipura Agrahāra must have been completed between 1819–1821. Incidentally, these inscriptions set the value of a vr̥ttifor agrahararesidents at 36 Varāhas.

241Lakshminarasimhaiya *et al., *[1970] identify him with Kāśī Śēṣa Śāstri. See footnote 479. Śēṣa Śāstri moved to Maisūru in June 1818 C.E. and grew very close to Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III.

242According to Śāstri [1925b, p. 34], Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s move to Maisūru occurred in 1831 C.E. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri had studied at Śr̥ṇgēri, and had been a fellow-student of Śrī Vr̥ddhaNr̥siṁha Bhāratī (1798–1879 C.E.), the pontiff of the Śr̥ṇgēri Maṭha [Śāstri 1925b].

He was an accomplished scholar in the *Vēdas,*literature, logic, astrology, and ritual, and came to Mais ūru in 1831 C.E. with his younger brother Lakṣmīpati Śāstri. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri lodged with Rāmaśēṣa Śāstri (see page 176), and Lakṣmīpati Śāstri found patronage under the Daḷavāiof Maisūru, who, at this time, seems to have been a Dēvarājayya [Arasu 1993, p. 151]. Recognizing Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s profound scholarship, Rāmaśeṣa Śāstri presented him at the court of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, who granted him a monthly salary of twelve *Haṇas.*Rāmaśeṣa Śāstri also gifted away to Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri his own house in the Katvāḍipura Agrahāra, as well as the associated *vr̥tti.*We note in passing that the British rescinded Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III’s executive authority as of October 19, 1831 C.E., after intervening militarily to quell an insurrection (September 1830–June 1831 C.E.) in the Nagara province near present-day Śivamogga. This would have been a diffiicult time for the ruler.

243Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s great-grandfather Gaṇgādhara Vāraṇāsiwas originally from Bādāmi, acquiring his sobriquet after having made several trips to Vārāṇasi. Around

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 77

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s mother was a lady by the name of Bhāgīrathamma. Such being his origins, our protagonist had remained at Katvāḍipura during his early years.

When His Highness sent for Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, intending to appoint him a scholar at court, he replied: “Your Majesty, city life is unsuitable for a vaidikalike myself. If it pleases you to arrange for me to reside in some village akin to a hermitage, conducive to an ascetic life and the performance of rituals such as Aupāsanaand Vaiśvadēva, I would be content to spend my days praying for your prosperity, sustained by the patronage of others.”244

Bhāgavata Subbarāya, who was Mukhtasarof the *Zenāna Bāgilu,*conveyed this message to His Highness.245 Bhāgavata Subbarāya had the very 1730 C.E., rising political unrest in the region of Bādāmi caused him to move to Honnavaḷḷi (13.34 ◦ N 76.39 ◦ E), a village close to Tipṭūru in Tumakūru district [Śāstri 1925b]. Bādāmi, historically a Cālukya stronghold, had passed into the control of Bijāpur even during the time of Vijayanagara, and subsequently into Mughal hands after 1687 C.E. The loosening of Mughal control in the 1690s C.E. resulted in a great deal of unrest in the region, as the Marāṭhas under Pēśva Bāji Rao I, as well as various local chiefs began to assert themselves.

Gaṇgādhara Vāraṇāsi’sstay at Honnavaḷḷi turned out to be short, however [Śāstri 1925b].

Suffering much due to the depredations of the local Muslim chief (perhaps Dilāvar Ḳhān, then Navābof Sīra), he moved within two years to Sindhughaṭṭa in the Aṣṭagrāma region and remained there, the local *pāḷeyagāra,*a Vīraṇṇa Nāyaka, having welcomed him and supported him with a vr̥tti. Gaṇgādhara Vāraṇāsihad two sons, Kr̥ṣṇabhaṭṭa being the elder, and Narasiṁhabhaṭṭa being the younger [Śāstri 1925b]. After his sons came of age, Gaṇgādhara Vāraṇāsiretired to Kāśī, where he passed away a *saṁnyāsi.*Kr̥ṣṇabhaṭṭa had a son who had been named Gaṇgādhara after his grandfather, and Narasiṁhabhaṭṭa had a son named Kr̥ṣṇa. A genealogy appears on page 152. Narasiṁhabhaṭṭa’s descendants remained in Sindhughaṭṭa, which is at 12.695 ◦ N, 76.550 ◦ E.

244The Aupāsanais a twice-daily ritual offering of curds and rice performed by a householder using the Aupāsanafiire established at the time of his marriage. This fiire is maintained throughout marriage, and used in all domestic rituals, and even to light the funeral pyre upon death. The Vaiśvadēvaconsists of the pañca mahāyajñasor fiive great *yajñas *[Pande 1994], namely the *dēva yajña, bh ūta yajña, pitr̥yajña, manuṣya yajña,*and brahma yajña, whose objects are the gods, all animals, the ancestors, people, and the *Vēdas,*respectively.

These rituals are mandatory for all brāhmaṇas, and represent the obligations of a brāhmaṇa to each of the above.

245See Plate 21. Bhāgavata Subbarāya was a distinguished public servant and close confiidant of the king, but but surprisingly little seems to be known known about his life. A biography appears in Sāstri [2002]. Zenānaliterally means “women’s quarters”, but at the time, it was one of the two sections ( Khāsand Zenāna) of the Sammukhada ¯

Uḷigedepartment,

responsible for the palace indoor employees. The Zenāna Sammukhahad three departments, called *Ambā Vilāsa,*the *Zenāna Bāgilu,*and the *Oḷa Bāgilu.*Bhāgavata Subbarāya appears to have retired in 1868 C.E., after Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III died, with the honorary title of Second Baḳhśiof the Treasury [Elliot 1878]. See pages 87 and 199.

78

sons of sarasvatī

highest regard and reverence for Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri. Not taking even the slightest offense at this response, His Highness once again bade Bhāgavata Subbarāya determine Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s wishes, so that he might be accommodated wherever he desired.

Upon receiving this message through Bhāgavata Subbarāya, Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri responded: “Good Sir, His Highness has recently made great improvements to the village of Arikuṭhāra, renamed it Cāmarājanagara in honour of his father, built a divine temple and established in it an Īśvara liṇgadonated by the Śr̥ṇgēri pontiff, giving it the name Cāmarājeśvara.246

His Highness has provided support for many brāhmaṇas through 1834

employment at that temple.247 Were I to obtain some appointment there, I would devote myself to my daily observances and to teaching my students.” Bhāgavata Subbarāya submitted this response to His Highness. Inquiries revealed a vacancy at the temple for someone to fulfiil the function of dharmādhyayana,248 the incumbent Candraśēkhara Śāstri of Diḍḍepura having passed away, and none of his children being competent to serve as instructors. His Highness selected Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, who had deep scholarship in literature, the *Vēdas,*ritual, and astrology, for the post, and sent him a letter of appointment. The Śāstri moved to Cāmarājanagara with his wife and son.249

246Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III’s father KhāsaCāmarāja Voḍeyar was born in Arikuṭhāra. The liṇgabears his name, so that he is implicitly deifiied. See footnote 274. According to Row

[1922, p. 136], this temple was completed on the third day of the waxing fortnight of Jyēṣṭha of the Vyaya saṁvatsaracorresponding to the Śakayear 1749. This corresponds to June 8, 1826 C.E. Inscription Ch 86, located at the entrance to the Cāmarājeśvara temple gives the date as Monday, the second tithiof the waxing fortnight of the *nija *Āṣāḍha of the Sar-

vadhārin saṁvatsaracorresponding to the Śakayear 1750, which would be July 14, 1828 C.E.

[Rice 1898]. However, Rice [1877b] incorrectly dates this event to 1825 C.E.

247Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III was noted for his munifiicience to scholars, temples, and charitable institutions. Royal grants nearly doubled from about 7% of total revenue in 1799 C.E.

to 13.5% in 1823 C.E. (P ūrṇayya was Dīvān1799–1811 C.E.) The British saw this increase as an example of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III’s maladministration, and used such arguments to justify their administrative takeover in 1831 C.E. [Stein 1989, p. 269]. There may be merit in that position, but a strong argument is presented by Ikegame [2007] that the king was merely discharging his traditional duty under the Indian doctrine of rājadharmaas protector of his subjects, the concepts underlying which would have been alien to the British.

248The term may mean study of the dharmas ūtrasand dharmaśāstras, all part of the huge smr̥ticorpus, including the Āpastamba, Gautama, Baudhāyana, and Vāsiṣṭha sūtras, the Manu, Yājñavalkya, Nārada, and Viṣṇu smr̥tisand related commentaries. Mr Naresh Keerthi suggests that dharmādhyayanamay just refer to pro bonoinstruction at the temple.

249We can date this move as being after the birth of his fiirst son ŚrīkaṇṭhaŚāstriinOctober

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 79

At this time, Gaṇgādhararāya, a worthy laukikabrāhmaṇa, made available a portion of his house for the Śāstri’s residence.250 Some time later, Jīvaṇḍarāya, an acquaintance of Gaṇgādhararāya, gifted away a home of his to the Śāstri.251,252 As the Śāstri pursued this dignifiied life at Nagara,253 three sons, Narasiṁha, Kr̥ṣṇa, and Rāma, and two daughters, Nañjamma and Śaṇkaramma, were born to him following Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri.

Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri was especially attached to Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, both because he was his eldest son and because he had an exceptionally sharp intellect. This child was capable of clear and articulate speech by the age of 1833 C.E., but before the end of 1834 C.E., when Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri began work on his *Nañjarājacampū *(see footnote 299). We know for certain that he had already moved to Cāmarājanagara by then [Śāstri 1925b].

250 See footnote 75 for an explanation of laukika. The honorifiic “Rāya”, a corruption of rājanin Saṁskr̥ta, becomes “Rāv” in Marāṭhi. This Gaṇgādhararāya was surely Gaṇgādhara Rāv (see page 201), son of the highly respected public servant BacceRāv, whose real name was Bhujaṇga Rāv, the sobriquet Bacceobtaining from T.ippu’s fatherly affection for him. BacceRāv had been Huzūr Gumāstahunder Pūrṇayya during T.ippu’s time, and Head Śeristedārof Kaḍappa after T.ippu’s defeat of 1799, at the extraordinary salary of *Rs.*700 per month [Gribble 1875, p. 132]. Upon retirement in 1837, he was granted two villages free of tax, with annual revenues of *Rs.*5,600. His son and grandson were also entitled to these revenues, but required to pay half as tax. BacceRāv’s son Gaṇgādhara Rāv was himself a signifiicant fiigure, participating prominently in the politics of the time, holding the title of Musāhibof the Tośakhāna, and held in good regard by Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, but held in very low esteem by the British, as were many of the king’s other advisers [Gopal 1993, p. 394]. Gaṇgādhara Rāv’s son appears to have also been called Bhujaṇga Rāv, and modestly employed in 1874 as 3rd Clerk in the offiice of the Sub-Collector in the district of Kaḍappa

[Revenue Board 1875, p. 25]. He would of course, have had access to his inherited revenues.

251This name may have been Jīvandhara Rāya (a Jaina name), or more likely Jīvan Rāya, transformed into Jīvaṇḍarāya when articulated. We observe a “Jivan Rao Tank” to the northwest in the map of Mais ūru (Plate 12), suggesting that Jīvan Rāv was an important fiigure at the time. A memorandum dated 30th May 1826 from Sir Thomas Munro [in Arbuthnot 1881, p. 336], takes the Collector of Tinnevelly to task for improperly suspending *Head Śeristedār *“Jivan Ráv” on flimsy evidence, and ordering that the extraordinary fiine of *Rs.*4000 levied on him be returned with interest. Munro also notes that while it would be desirable to restore this Jivan Ráv to his former offiice, it would be unlikely that the Collector and he could work together cordially. There is a strong possibility that this same person was subsequently transferred to Mais ūru, which was also within Madras Presidency at the time.

252Such remarkable kindness from the king and important offiicials such as Gaṇgādhara Rāv and Jīvan Rāv, as well as such distinguished scholars as Rāmaśeṣa Śāstri suggests that Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri was held in extraordinary esteem indeed.

253“Nagara” means “city”, but is used here as a contraction of Cāmarājanagara.

80

sons of sarasvatī

three.254 The Śāstri would seat the child near himself each morning and evening, and teach him stōtrassuch as the Navaratnamālikā Stōtraand the *Pañcāyudha Stotra *.255 The child was capable of concentrating on its lessons for as long as two hours, showing no signs of boredom.

1841

This child underwent the sacrament of tonsure at the age of three, and that of upanayanaat the age of eight.256 By this time, he had learned all three kāṇḍasof the Amara Kōśa, the grammatical formulæ of the *Aṣṭādhyāyī,*the list of Saṁskr̥taverbal roots and samāsaforms, numerous prayer *stotras,*the *Raghuvaṁśa,*the work of Māgha, and the Naiṣadha, all by heart, and with an understanding of their meaning.257

The Śāstri decided to teach his son his own Vēdic śākhain its entirety, and began teaching him the R.gveda. Awakening him at four each morning, he would teach him a new chapter to be committed to memory, and would make him recite it repeatedly between seven and ten or eleven that evening.258 Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s task in the afternoons was to study poetry, and to review his previous lessons.

254This is a subtle point. Clear and accurate pronunciation is highly esteemed by learned brāhmaṇas, fastidious practitioners of the ancient tradition of orally transmitting the vast Vēdiccorpus. Their insistence on fiidelity of pronunciation has allowed the preservation of the subtleties of the Vēdiclanguage and intonation over the millenia. That Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was capable of such clarity of articulation so early is to be taken as a mark of distinction.

255Several compositions are called Navaratnamālikā Stōtra. The one referred to here is most likely one attributed to ¯

AdiŚaṇkarācārya that begins *“hāra n ūpura kirīṭa kuṇḍala. . . ” *.

The Pañcāyudha Stotrampraises the fiive weapons of Viṣṇu, namely the sudarśanadiscus, the pāñcajanyaconch, the kaumōdakīmace, the nandakasword, and the śārṇgabow.

256The sixteen traditional *saṁskāras *(sacraments) are *garbhādhāna *(conception), *puṁsavana *(male quickening), *sīmantonnayana *(parting of mother’s hair), *jātakarma *(birth), *nāmakaraṇa *(naming), *niṣkramaṇa *(fiirst outing), *annaprāśana *(weaning), cūḍākaraṇa (tonsure), *karṇavedha *(ear piercing ), *upanayana *(initiation), *vedārambha *(start of Vēdic instruction), *keśānta *(shaving), *snāna *(ritual bath marking end of study), *vivāha *(marriage), and the *antyeṣṭi *(funeral).

257It is impressive that an eight-year-old would have learned this corpus. The Amara Kōśa is a Saṁskr̥tathesaurus, traditionally learned by heart. Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyīis a monumental work on Saṁskr̥tagrammar, noted especially for its terse formulæ that comprehensively represent Saṁskr̥tasyntax and semantics in several thousand context-sensitive production rules. The Raghuvaṁśais an epic poem about Rāma from Kālidāsa’s mature period. Māgha is a highly respected poet (see footnote 130). The Naiṣadhacaritais an epic by Śrīharṣa that deals with the story of Nala from the *Mahābhārata.*Also see footnote 236.

258The Vēdaswere always fully committed to memory, preserving the tonal accents of the original Vēdiclanguage. Errors were not tolerated. To guard against inadvertent changes, each verse had to be recited in seven different permutations of its words, with the proper changes in tonal accents for each. See footnote 460 for some details of such recitation.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 81

By the age of fiifteen, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri had learned all eight aṣṭakasof the *R.gveda,*and was accomplished in literature and drama. Impressed by the brilliance of this promising youth, Subbādīkṣita, a R.gvediresident in Cāmarājanagara, made a proposal of marriage for his nine-year-old daughter Subbamma. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri accepted it. The marriage was conducted in conformance with all formally prescribed rituals (1843 C.E.).259

Within six months of his marriage, he began studying the ancillary Vēdic disciplines, such as the ¯

*Aśvalāyana P ūrvaprayōga *( Nr̥siṁha Pārijāta),260

Saṁskr̥taphonetics, grammar, prosody, etymology, astrology, and formal practice of ritual.

As he made systematic progress in these studies, he developed a strong interest in undertaking a formal study of the Pāṇinian Siddhānta Kaumudi, and expressed this interest to his father.261 His father advised him: “Dear child! I have already taught you everything I know. You may proceed with a study of grammar, in accordance with your wishes. There is no one here capable of instructing you systematically in grammar. The city of Mahis ūru is fiilled with scholars deeply learned in various disciplines. Go there to study grammar, as is your wish. Remember that you will be an alien there, and treat everyone with courtesy. Avoid bad company. Sustain yourself either as a teacher in a household, or by vārānna.262 Review again and again what you have learned. Never be apathetic in your study. You have my permission to proceed on this journey.”

259This is a typographical error in the original. Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri would have turned fiifteen only in 1848 C.E.

260A treatise on ritual practices pertaining to the living, for brāhmaṇas maintaining the R.gvēdictradition. Āśvalāyana is an ancient *r̥ṣi *(c. 400 B.C.?), to whom are attributed the eponymous gr̥hyaand *kalpa sūtras,*covering household and formal rituals, respectively. The Pārijātais a work by Nr̥siṁha (1360–1435 C.E.) based on these works. It remains a standard.

261This refers to the Vaiyākaraṇa Siddhānta Kaumudi, a work not by Pāṇini, but by the 17th-century grammarian Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita, who had studied Vedāntaunder the astonishingly prolifiic Appayya Dīkṣita (see footnote 213). This landmark work simplifiies the arcane and highly formal Aṣṭhādhyāyīgrammar of Pāṇini, making it more generally accessible, and restoring the Pāṇinian tradition to its former preeminence over competing grammatical traditions.

262Literally “weekly board”. It was common for charitable households to sponsor students by giving them free board once a week. The students would sustain themselves by rotation among several such households.

2. Formal Study

TheŚāstriarrivedinMaisūruattheageofsixteentostudygrammar,

and began his studies in grammar and logic under Kāśī Śēṣa Śāstri and Kavi Varadācārya,263 who had distinguished themselves in grammar.

Among his fellow-students were Cakravartyayyaṇgār and Śrī Kr̥ṣṇa Brahmatantra, the previous pontiff of the Parakāla Maṭha.264 They were all most methodical in pursuing their studies, but of the three, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s were the most impressive study habits and intellect. His gurus and fellow-students were most astonished by how he would commit the formulæ and the commentaries to memory, and study them day and night. Within just three years, he had completed a study of grammar and logic in their entirety.

We will now describe his method of study.

Awaking at three o’clock, in the latter half of the night, he would review his previous lesson until it was fully committed to memory. He would next review all his prior lessons. It would be around seven in the morning by this time. He would then complete his bath and morning rituals,

1849

and proceed to receive instruction from his gurus. These lessons would last till about eleven in the morning. His fellow-students would fiind it a little tiresome to remain focussed for this length of time.

After his lunch, the Śāstri would once again review all his lessons, till the evening.

He would sometimes feel drowsy.

At such times, he

would splash cold water on his eyes and walk around for a bit. If anyone came by for a chat, he would send them on their way quickly, remove himself to some more isolated place, such as the Trinayanēśvara temple, and continue his study.265 Such unrelenting application to his study allowed the Śāstri to achieve complete mastery of grammar within 263See the list of scholars on page 23 and Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri’s students on page 204.

264CakravartiAyyaṇgārwasadistinguishedcitizen, whoheldthehonourarytitleof *Dharmādhikāri.*He ran the Vidyātaraṇgiṇī press out of his home in the Kempunañjāmbā Agrahāra of Mais ūru. Srī Kr̥ṣṇa Brahmatantra Svatantra Parakāla Mahadeśikan was pontiff of the Parakāla Maṭha 1885–1915 C.E. He was born in 1839 C.E. in Amidala, some 40 km west of Anantapur in present-day Āndhra Pradēsh, and was known as Kr̥ṣṇamācārya prior to

his becoming a *saṁnyāsi.*As the author of a large number of campūand poetical works, he acquired the sobriquet kavisārvabhauma.

265The Trinayanēśvara temple is a landmark within the Maisūru fort.

82

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 83

three years. It took his fellow-students several more years to attain his level of accomplishment.266

At this point, the Śāstri had to return

to Nagara, having received a letter saying that his wife was expecting.

The Śāstri became a family man after his return to Nagara. In his 1853

twentieth year, he celebrated the birth of his son, whom he named Narasiṁha. After this son were born, in order, two sons named Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa and Subrahmaṇya, respectively, and a daughter named Laks.-

mīdēvī.267

There were excessive demands at the time on the Śāstri’s household in Cāmarājanagara, which consisted of Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, his wife, fiive sons, daughter-in-law, as well as grandchildren. His eldest daughter Nañjamma was also now married, and he himself had become her husband’s teacher.268 Because this young man did not pursue his studies seriously and would often take himself away, and because the children in the household had to be looked after despite its limited income, the household experienced frequent discord, and Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri began to feel an aversion to the ways of this world. Bearing all this with fortitude, he stayed true to his path as a householder. Witnessing this situation, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri began to think to himself: “My household makes substantial demands despite its small income. I should be careful not to cause our yajamānadistress.269 It would be best to move my household elsewhere.”

266It will soon become clear that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was in fact an extraordinary all-round scholar. We can, however, begin to understand the intensity of his dedication to the study of Saṁskr̥tagrammar in the context of his view that a human lifetime barely suffiiced for mastering more than a single subject. In the preface to the Dhātur ūpaprakāśikā, his magnum opus, he is quite explicit: *“purā khalu dharmādi puruṣārthādhigamahētuṣu ṣaḍdarśanyādi-tantrēṣvēkaikamapyambudhir bāhubhyāmiva sudustaramiti matvā prāñcaḥpaṇḍitāḥēk-asmin janmanyekaikam śāstram paṭhitavyamiti dhr̥ḍhīkr̥taniṣcayāḥpr̥thakpr̥thagvibhajyā-janmanaḥācāvadhērēkaikam śāstramēva parigr̥hya tatrātirāgēṇa śrāmyanta uttējitānasīn-iva nijanijaśāstrāṇi bhibharāmbabhūva” *. We may paraphrase this as: “Scholars of old, seeing that means for attaining dharma and puruṣārtha, such as the six darśanas, were as vast oceans that human strength did not suffice to cross, determined to commit themselves in each life to a single field of study, divided learning accordingly, and studied their branch with the deepest *devotion and effort, becoming accoutred with their learning, as if with well-honed swords.” *

267Narasiṁha was born in 1852 C.E. (see page 97). Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa, being forty-eight in late 1900, was likely born in 1853 C.E. (see page 112). Lakṣmīdēvī appears to have been a year older than Subrahmaṇya, being eight when he was seven, *c.*1868 (see page 100). They were likely born in 1860 and 1861 C.E., respectively.

268The reference here is to Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, not to his son Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri.

269Literally, yajamānameans “performer of yajñās”, but is commonly a respectful way of referring to the head of the household, who conducts all rituals on behalf of the family.

84

sons of sarasvatī

The Mahārāja once visited Cāmarājanagara with his retinue.270 Śrīkan.-

ṭha Śāstri was then temporarily offiiciating in the role responsible for delivering the rājāśīrvāda.271 The king happened to visit the temple for darśana one evening at the time of dīpārādhane.272 The ambience November 1858

during worship that evening was suggestive of Śiva him-

self holding court, both because a large number of people

were present at the ceremony, and because the gloriously resplendent Cāmarājeśvara was pleased to accept their devotions. After services had been rendered to the deity based on the four *Vēdas,*the *Itihāsas,*the Purāṇas, the Sthaḷa Mahima, and various devotions to Śiva,273 the person in charge of announcing the avadhārayaproclaimed: “śrī kempunañjāmbikāsamēta *śrī cāmarājēśvarasvāmin! rājāśīrvādamavadhāraya!”*274 At this point, our 270This visit is diffiicult to date precisely, but the circumstances match the report by Row

[1922, p. 138] that Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III visited Cāmarājanagara during the month of Kārtika of the Kāḷayukti saṁvatsaraof Śakayear 1781, which corresponds to November 1858 C.E., bringing gifts of gold and jewellery for the deities at the temple.

271Literally “conferring blessings on the king”. See footnotes 274 and 276

272Literally “worship with light”, an important activity towards the end of the worship ritual. A plate or a candelabra with burning camphor (or oil lamps) is waved in circles before the deity, and mantraschanted. The effect is spectacular, especially in subdued light. Also see footnote 543.

273A traditional worship ritual renders to the deity the respectful attentions due to a distinguished person or guest, to the accompaniment of the appropriate mantras from the Vēdas, and passages from the Itihāsasand *Purāṇas *(“histories” containing traditional accounts of cosmology, lives and genealogies of heroes, and geography). The Sthala Mahima or Sthala Purāṇais an account of the traditions and the history of the specifiic temple or locale.

274“O śrīmānCāmarājēśvara, accompanied by śrīmatīKempunañjāmbikā, now hear the *rājāśīrvāda”.*See footnote 276. The āśīrvādais a blessing or benediction bestowed upon the *yajamāna *(the nominal or actual performer of the ritual) by the brāhmaṇas in attendance.

This suggests that the worshipper here is KhāsaCāmarāja Voḍeyar (accompanied by his wife Kempunañjāmbikā, as required by the śāstras), in whose memory the temple was built by his son Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III. The tradition of conducting all temple rituals in the name of the king has precedent, and is followed to this day in the Jagannātha temple in P ūri, Orissa

[Tripathi 2004]. The long-standing tradition at P ūri is that the true ruler of the kingdom is the deity, the king merely being his sevakaor servant who discharges his obligation through worship. *Rājōpacāras *(acts of deference due to a king) are offered to the deity, consolidating its status as king. The rājāśīrvādais offered to the incumbent ruler, in whose name the ritual was conducted. Also see Appadurai and Breckenridge [1976]. Applying this logic here gives rise to a paradox, however, since Śiva is worshipped in this particular temple in the form of the Cāmarājēśvara *liṇga,*with statues of Kempunañjāmbikā and Cāmuṇḍēśvarī on either side. That is, Śiva and Pārvatī are being worshipped in the form of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III’s

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 85

protagonist, the Śabda-Brahmanincarnate,275 composing numerous verses spontaneously, delivered an articulate and majestic āśīrvādathat held the audience spellbound for a full half-hour.276 This performance both en-thralled the king, as well as fiilled him with joy. Similar proceedings took place at the Svāmi Temple, the Cāmuṇḍēśvarī Temple, and the Ammanavara Temple. After the dīpārādhane, everyone returned to their homes, and the king’s retinue too, returned to the palace. As he was about to retire after dinner, the king asked Bhāgavata Subbarāya: “Who was that boy who delivered the rājāśīrvādain the temple?” Subbarāya intimated that the boy was Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s son, and that he was very profiicient in the Vēdas, literature, ritual, and grammar. The king commanded: “Excellent! Please have the boy see me tomorrow.”

The following morning, the king’s messenger arrived at Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s home and announced: “Sir, His Highness has commanded me to conduct your son to his presence.” The Śāstri, a strict vaidikabrāhmaṇa, parents “Khāsa” Cāmarāja Voḍeyar and Kempunañjāmbikā, his fiirst wife. They appear to be at once both the worshippers and the worshipped. We fiind an interesting explanation for this actual deifiication of this king and his consort in Row [1922, p. 135], where it is suggested that owing to the king’s deep devotion to Śiva, the term śivaikya, meaning “oneness with Śiva”, generally used to connote the demise of a member of the Liṇgāyatacommunity, which the king belonged to, be taken to have literally occurred in this case, so that the king is indistinguishable from Śiva. A similar case is made for his wife. A fundamental problem remains, however, since Cāmarāja Voḍeyar and Kempunañjāmbikā appear both as worshippers and the worshipped. (The āśīrvādais for the benefiit of the king as worshipper. The deity is in no need of blessing.)

275Literally “word- Brahman”, often taken to mean the Oṁkārasound, but more broadly to comprehend the *Brahman,*or Universal Reality. Here, the term is intended to convey that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was Speech (that is, Knowledge) incarnate. In the Advaitictradition, Śabda-Brahmanconnotes the saguṇa Brahman, or the Brahmanwith attributes, representing the “lower” knowledge, rather than the nirguṇa Brahman, or the pure Brahmanrepresenting the “higher” knowledge. In the philosophical traditions of the Indian grammarians, Śabda-Brahmanrepresents the “higher” knowledge.

276The āśīrvādaor benediction occurs at the end of the ritual, and serves several purposes.

First, it formally reassures the yajamānaof the success of the ritual, and of the fulfiilment of its intended purpose. Since the domain of the ritual is largely inaccessible to the attendees, the āśīrvādaalso communicates the signifiicance of the ritual to all present. The āśīrvāda is an elaborate performance, incorporating verses from the śrutisand smr̥tis, and links the domain of formal ritual to the everyday world. See Prasad [2007] for an exploration of

āśīrvādawith reference to its practice in the local traditions at the town of Śr̥ṇgēri, home to the influential Śaṇkara Maṭha. A royal *āśīrvāda,*such as this one, would be especially demanding. Vēdicrituals culminate not with an aśīrvāda, but in the āśis, which is part benediction and part an expression of the the ritual’s desired outcome [Gonda 1989].

86

sons of sarasvatī

was alarmed, and wondering why the king had sent for his son, asked him what transgression might have led to such a circumstance. When his son replied that the king had visited the temple the previous evening, and that he was unaware of any lapse on his part, the Śāstri, obliged to obey a royal command, sent his son along.

Upon seeing Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, the king exclaimed: “So you are the son of our Śāstri, young man! Indeed, what else could the offspring of a lion be but a lion? I am pleased at your brilliance! Be that as it may, you delivered a magnifiicent āśīrvādalast night, in stately language. Who did you learn this from?” Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri responded with humility: “Your Highness, this is simply the result of your munifiicence. My achievements owe entirely to your benevolence. Compared to those of the many great scholars at Your Highness’s court, my accomplishments are trifling.” Pleased with this response, His Highness said: “Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri! You appear well qualifiied to be a scholar at our court. Come see us in Mais ūru eight days hence. We will arrange for your employment at the palace.”

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri conveyed this command of His Highness to his *yajamāna.*Pleased, he sent Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri to Maisūru.

3. The King’s Regard

Dearreader, theseareeventsfromsixtyyearsago. Noamenitiesex-

isted then for travel between towns, such as exist today. Bullock-drawn carts were the only transport available. Our protagonist always travelled between Mais ūru and Cāmarājanagara on foot. On such occasions, he would arise at dawn, bathe and fiinish his daily rituals, and walk all the way while reciting the Vēdasand grammatical formulæ, his books and clothing in a cloth bag upon his shoulder. He would arrive in Mais ūru by noon.

He would not feel fatigued in the least, having walked while engaged in such recitation. Mais ūru and Cāmarājanagara are thirty six miles apart. For him, walking this distance was much as an evening walk is for our citizens of today. He travelled between Mais ūru and Cāmarājanagara frequently.

Indeed, he was quite used to it.

The Śāstri lodged as a guest in Bhāgavata Subbarāya’s home after arriving in Mais ūru. Bhāgavata Subbarāya was then a person of eminence and renown. He had enormous regard for Vēdiclearning, as well as for vaidikas who had achieved erudition in these fiields. He himself lived the life 1859

of a śrōtrīyabrāhmaṇa, observant of the practices that the Vēdasenjoin. Hundreds of brāhmaṇas were honoured guests each day at the home of this prosperous individual. A constant stream of guests arrived between ten in the morning and fiive in the evening each day. His home truly functioned as a chatraat the time.277 A large number of students from elsewhere lived there. Scholars and travellers from elsewhere frequently lodged there as well.

Upon arriving at Subbarāya’s home, the Śāstri acquainted him with the purpose of his trip. Subbarāya promised to bring the matter up with the king at an opportune moment, and asked him to remain his guest at home until such time. Accordingly, the Śāstri waited there for some days, busying himself with his studies. After returning to Mais ūru, the king had forgotten the conversation he’d had with Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri in Cāmarājanagara, it being only natural that a ruler would be occupied with many matters. When 277 Chatrais the Kannaḍa form of sattra, which in Saṁskr̥tameans a facility providing free board and lodging to the public. This is not to be confused with chattra, an umbrella or parasol.

87

88

sons of sarasvatī

Subbarāya brought up the matter, the king merely responded: “Ah, yes! I remember. You mean the matter about Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri? Very well!”

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri remained as he was for many days, unable to secure an audience with the king. Bhāgavata Subbarāya himself being an important offiicial, the Śāstri was hesitant to speak with him. Instead, he occupied himself in enhancing his own knowledge, engaging scholars at the palace in discussions of scholarly matters, as time permitted. Despite his deep scholarship, the Śāstri was child-like in his simplicity and innocence. There was not a trace of pride in him. Other scholars took great delight in his erudition and simplicity.

One Śāmaṇṇa, who was the father of the present pontiff of the Śivagaṇge maṭhabefore he accepted *saṁnyāsa,*278 expressed his desire to study poetry with the Śāstri. Veṇkaṭanārayaṇa Śāstri, the brother of Śāmaṇṇa’s mother, was among the foremost scholars at the court. He arranged for his nephew’s studies with the Śāstri.

Having high regard for the Śāstri, Veṇkaṭanārayaṇa Śāstri asked Subbarāya to appoint the Śāstri to the position of raconteur of stories to the king at night.279 Arrangements were made accordingly. But who, indeed, can divine the king’s thoughts! After a few days had passed in this fashion, the king happened to ask Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri one day: “Ah, there you are, Śāstri! Anything new?” When the Śāstri responded: “Your Highness, all is the result of your munifiicence. Our household in Cāmarājanagara is large. Our income is insuffiicient. Yet, my present situation will not permit me to bring my family here. Your command in Nagara of a position for me in the palace remains unfulfiilled. I face many diffiiculties,” the king recalled his words in Nagara and the Śāstri’s uncommon eloquence, called Subbarāya right away, and appointed the Śāstri as a scholar at the palace at a salary of three Varāhas (nine R ūpīs).

278This appears to have been Śri Subrahmaṇya Śivābhinava Saccidānanda Bhāratī *Svāmi. *

A *saṁnyāsi,*having renounced the world, retains no attachments, and has no family. He is ritually dead to the world. Hence, any reference to the Svāmi’sfather must be in the context of his p ūrvāśramalife, prior to having accepted *saṁnyāsa. *

279Given Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s background, these would have been stories from the Purāṇas, Itihāsas, or literary or poetic sources.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 89

The Śāstri moved his family to Mais ūru very shortly after this appointment. At this time, a wealthy individual by the name of Liṇgōpant accommodated the Śāstri and his family in his own home, where he had made arrangements for him to present discourses on works such as the *Purāṇas.*280

By this time, his eldest son Narasiṁha had undergone his upanayana.281 In him was reflected his father’s nature. He pursued his studies with the same vigour that his father had, and had become a dear son to his father.

280We can speculate that Liṇgōpant may have been a descendant of Biṣṭopant, the Bakṣi of the Savāri Ilāqa, who commanded the Mais ūru forces fiighting in support of the British in their war against the Maraṭhās in 1802–1804 C.E. Biṣṭopant’s grandfather Rāmarāv appears to have been a commander with NavābAṇkuś Ḳhān, a Bijāpur army general who fought alongside Randullāh Ḳhān in the Bijapur campaigns in Maisūru in 1648 C.E. Ramarāv’s son Liṇgōpant was in service with Nānā Faḍnavīs, a leading statesman and minister with the Pēśvas of Mahārāṣtra. Biṣṭopant was the second son of this Liṇgōpant. The Liṇgōpant who hosted Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was no doubt a descendant and namesake. Despite their martial traditions, the family were Deśastha Smārtabrāhmaṇas, explaining the willingness of the strictly observant Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri to live with them. See Row [1922] for details.

281A ritual marking the formal transition from the stage of childhood to that of a student.

See footnote 256 for a list of *samskāras. *

4. This Anguished World

Noonecouldpossiblyremainunmovedbythetragediesthatnowtran-

spired at Cāmarājanagara.

We have seen that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was followed by three siblings, called Narasiṁha, Kr̥ṣṇa, and Rāma.282 Narasiṁha, too, had studied poetics and drama with passionate intensity. His upanayanahad been completed by the age of eight. He was two years younger than Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri.

1845

His intellectual abilities truly surpassed those of his elder brother.

This child, which had shown so much promise, passed away within two years of his upanayana. The loss of his son shook the spirit of Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, whose life so far had been entirely free of misfortune.

Kr̥ṣṇa was two years younger than Narasiṁha. His intellect was in no way inferior to that of his elder brothers. He too had undergone sacraments such as tonsure and upanayanain timely fashion. At fourteen, he 1854

was married to Veṇkaṭalakṣamma, the elder sister of Mūgūru Kub-

ērayya. Due to daivayōgaor to the Śāstri’s own prārabdha, however, this Kr̥ṣṇa died an untimely death within three years of marriage.283

Owing to such sorrows, the Śāstri did not pressure Rāma on matters of education. Rāma’s intellect was sharper than that of his brothers. He was not diligent in pursuing his studies, however. Getting him to learn Vēdic recitation was a special challenge. As are many other students, he was diligent only in studying the *Amara Kōṣa,*declensions, nominal compounds, poetry, and *campu.*He truly liked to enjoy himself. Studying the Vēdas, however, would give him a headache. He was married in his fiifteenth year to Nañjamma, the daughter of Kuccamma and Rāmappayya from Ālūru in Cāmarājanagara district.284 He was especially skilled in literature and poetics. His failure to learn the *Vēdas,*however, remained a source of concern for the Śāstri.285

282Rāma was born on Wednesday, Āṣāḍha bahuḷa aṣṭamīof the Śōbhakr̥tu saṁvatsara corresponding to Śāḻīvāhana Śaka1765 [Śāstri 1925b]. His birth particulars are given as Rēvati *nakṣatra,*Mīna *lagna,*Mīna *navāṁṣa.*This corresponds to July 29, 1842 C.E.

283 Daivayōgais a coincidence of providentially determined circumstances. Prārabdhais the operation of prior karmain this life. Also see footnote 389.

284Śāstri [1925b, p. 54], however, records that Rāma was married at sixteen.

285This Rāma became MahāvidvānCāmarājanagara Rāmaśāstri, a renowned scholar and poet. See pages 53ff. for some of his poetical interactions with Garaḷapurī Śāstri.

90

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 91

The Śāstri’s eldest daughter was Nañjamma. She was two years older than Rāma.286 She was married to a Raṇgaṇṇa, the son of Kāḷanañjuṇdayya of Nañjanag ūḍu. Raṇgaṇṇa’s mind was fiickle. As we have already seen, he was under the tutelage of his own father-in-law. The extent of his learning did not approach even that of his own wife. As she had listened to her brothers study, Nañjamma too had mastered the *Amara Kōśa,*declensions, nominal compounds, verbs and conjugations, poems such as the Raghuvaṁśa, and in the end, even Vēdicrecitation.287 She would correct her husband if he made an error during his study. This caused great embarrassment to Raṇgaṇṇa. Due to his fiickle nature, he was often found to have absconded entirely. In the end, that is exactly how his fate turned out. He failed even to remain long a householder. He had a daughter, but that child died. In his very youth, he forsook his family, and moved away somewhere.

Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri had enormous affection for his eldest daughter.

He was deeply anguished that she should have suffered such troubles so early in her youth. He continued to shelter and protect her in his own house. Her word was never challenged at home.

Śaṇkaramma was some two or three years younger than Rāma.288 She was married to Kr̥ṣṇaśāstri, the son of Bhāskarayya of Cāmarājanagara. This young man had mastered literature as a student of his own father-in-law. As a result of the marriage having occurred between families in the same town, indescribable distress ensued in household affairs. In the end, this Kr̥ṣṇaśāstri moved away to Rāmanāthapura with his family.289

The loss of his children and domestic strife now convinced the Śāstri’s mind of the trifling nature of this world. Even though a householder, this deeply learned and insightful man began to meditate upon Truth, remaining radiant as a water droplet upon a lotus leaf.290 Be this as it may!

286That would make 1841 C.E. the year of her birth.

287See page 300 for another similar account. Traditionally, learning was acquired not by reading, but orally, through repetition.

288Śaṇkaramma would have been born around 1845 C.E.

289Rāmanāthapura is at 12 ◦ 37 N, 76 ◦ 5 E, and some 120 km from Cāmarājanagara.

290The wording here is a purposeful allusion to the fourth verse of the Bhajagovindam by ¯

AdiŚaṇkarācārya. It urges one to recognize the world as transitory, and seek refuge in Govinda. The verse is: “naḷiṉī·daḷa·gata·jalam’ati·taralaṁ tadvaj’jīvitam’atiśaya·capalam |

*viddhi vyādhy’abhimāna·grastaṁ lōkaṁ śōka·hataṁ ca samastam ∥”*meaning: “even as a drop of water on a lotus petal has a fleeting existence, so is life transitory. Know indeed that

92

sons of sarasvatī

Let us now recall that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri and his family were resident in Liṇgōpant’s home in Mais ūru. On the eleventh tithiof the waxing fortnight of the month of Caitra of the Kāḷayukti saṁvatsaraof Śāḻīvāhana Śaka 1783 (1860 C.E.),291 his wife Sau∥ Subbamma passed away. The Śāstri was stunned. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s brother Lakṣmīpati Śāstri was then 1861

in Mais ūru under the Daḷavāyi’spatronage. Upon learning of the demise of his elder brother’s daughter-in-law, he immediately stepped in and provided a great deal of assistance. When this news reached Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri in Cāmarājanagara, he exclaimed, “Ah, Fate! How strange are your workings! What perversity! *Kṣate kṣārāvasēcanam *(akin to rubbing salt in one’s wounds)”, and remained engrossed in his thoughts for a long time. But what indeed, is in the power of man to call to a halt?

He himself carried out the fiinal rites for his daughter-in-law, on behalf of his grandchildren.

How could Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri have now cared for his orphaned children?

Deeply anguished by his wife’s demise, he sent his children back to Nagara, and feeling that living with Liṇgōpant would only increase his distress by evoking memories of his wife, he took up boarding and lodging in the home of VīṇeSāmbayya,292 and became his son’s teacher. The Śāstri was now twenty-eight years of age.293 His scholarship, like the waxing moon, grew ever brighter each day.

all the world is tormented by disease, conceit, and sorrow.” More apt for this context perhaps, is that the metaphor of water on a lotus leaf is also used to suggest the detachment of the enlightened mind, and how it is unsullied by the temporal world. See, for example, Mahābhārata ( ¯

Araṇyakaparva2.32 ): “jñānviteṣu mukhyeṣu śāstrajñeṣu kr̥tātmasu | na teṣu *sajjate snehaḥpadmapatreṣvivodakam ∥” *, meaning: “they who are enlightened, the illustrious, who have mastered the śāstrasand disciplined their very souls, attachment does not cling to them, even as water does not to a lotus leaf.”

291The given Śakayear and saṁvatsaraname are inconsistent. Śaka1783 matches the Durmati saṁvatsaraif reckoned as elapsed and Dundubhi if taken as current. The Kāḷayukti saṁvatsaramatches Śaka1780, or 1858 C.E. The tithigiven matches Thursday, March 25, 1858 C.E. in the Kāḷayukti saṁvatsara, Sunday, April 21, 1861 C.E. in the Durmati saṁvatsara, and Thursday, April 10, 1862 C.E. in the Dundubhi saṁvatsara. Given the traditional practice of referring to dates by saṁvatsaranames, we would have favored the year 1858 C.E.

That would be inconsistent, however, with the information in the following paragraph.

292See Plate 18c. He was a senior and influential vīṇā vidvānin the court of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, and was descended from vaiṇikasfrom Tañjāvūr [Vedavalli 1992, p. 56]. See Vasudevacārya [1994, p. 129], for an amusing story involving him and VīṇePadmanābhayya.

293That allows us to date this to 1861 C.E.

5. Śaṇkar ānanda Sarasvatī

VeṇkaṭaramaṇaŚāstri’smind,whichhadabidedsorrowandhappi-

ness equally, now attained full detachment from this world. He was being transformed profoundly. The distress within his household continued to grow unabated. He had endured it all with great patience. His days as a householder were nearing an end! Knowledge of the divine began to take root in his mind. The ability to discriminate between Self and non-Self blossomed in him.294 The cloak of Illusion slipped away from within his heart.295 What now remained? When the ariṣaḍvargahave all fled from the Self in fear,296 when attachment to the world has removed itself and vanished, when certainty has dawned that the Self alone is the Truth, what then remains? Dear reader! Have you an answer to this question? If renouncing the world and embracing supreme asceticism appear right for you, then surely that is the right course for you to adopt.297

It is now the Siddhārthi saṁvatsaracorresponding to the Śāḻīvāhana Śakayear 1784.298 The month of Śrāvaṇa, the fiirst part of the season of *Varṣa,*is lending splendour to all nature. Today is the seventh tithi 1861

of the śuddhafortnight of that Śrāvaṇa. As the Śāstri was seated at dawn that day, a divine radiance stood before him said: “No longer remain in this world of impermanence. Follow me this very afternoon. Distance yourself from your life as a householder,” and disappeared.299

294The original uses the expression ātmānātma vivēka, also the title of a famous work by

¯

AdiŚaṇkarācārya expounding the principles of his philosophy of Advaita, non-dualism.

The expression means “discrimination between Self and non-Self”.

295This is an allusion to Śaṇkarācārya’s concept of Māya, the cloak of ignorance that prevents one from perceiving the identity of the Self and the Brahman. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri was a follower of the Advaitictradition.

296The ariṣḍvargaor “six internal foes” are *kāma *(lust), *krōdha *(anger), *mada *(pride), *lōbha *(avarice), *mōha *(attachment), and *mātsarya *(jealousy).

297The expression used is paramahaṁsa parivrājaka, a term applied to the most accomplished of ascetics, whose characteristics are described in the Paramahaṁsa Parivrājaka Upaniṣad.

298Unfortunately, we have an inconsistency again. Siddhārthin saṁvatsaraactually corresponds to Śaka1781 (expired). If we read the text as referring to Śaka1784 (current), however, we get the Durmati saṁvatsara, corresponding to 1861 C.E. This matches the year quoted in [Śāstri 1925b, p. 55]. The date referred to is August 12, 1861 C.E.

299Another vision, dated earlier, is described by Śāstri [1925b]: Lord Veṇkaṭēśvara visited 93

94

sons of sarasvatī

The Śāstri arose immediately, completed his morning observances, his bath, and rituals such as the Aupāsanaand Vaiśvadēva, and regarding himself henceforth freed of his debts to the dēva s, r̥ṣi s, and *pitr.*s,300 left home without declaring his resolve, and determining to proceed to a deserted site, this omniscient luminary arrived at the Br̥hadrājavīdhītaṭāka (Doḍḍarāyapēṭe lake) some three miles distant from Cāmarājanagara,301 bathed there, and leaving all his clothes at the spot, ritually discarded his sacred thread and top-knot, donned a loincloth, thrice recited the mantra “saṁnyastōhaṁ, *saṁnyastōhaṁ, saṁnyastōhaṁ” *(I am a saṁnyāsiwho has forsaken all his worldly attachments),302 meditated on the Oṁkāra, which brings salvation, incorporating within itself the *a-, u-,*and *m-*syllables as well as the World, Life, and the Self, proceeded towards the village of Āl ūru, and accepting

alms from a householder there, remained contented and blissful.303

Over here, as the family sat anxiously, all its meals delayed in anticipation of the long-absent Śāstri’s return, news arrived that the Śāstri had accepted *saṁnyāsa,*and quickly spread all over town. His wife and children, Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri in a dream, declared him to have been born of the sage Vyāsa, and charged him with continuing Vyāsa’s account of him in the *Skānda Purāṇa.*He also foretold the birth of a great poet within his family, presumably his youngest son, Rāma. In fulfiilment of this charge, Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri wrote the Nañjarājacampūbetween 1834–1838 C.E.

This date is earlier than the one given in footnote 298.

300Tradition has it that Man is born with three r̥ṇa s or debts: to the devas, r̥ṣis, and the pitr̥s. These debts are discharged, respectively, by performing yajña s and yāga s, observance of braḥmacarya, and the begetting of children. A person may not enter saṁnyāsauntil these obligations have been met. The *Manusmr̥ti *(6.35) is explicit: “r̥ṇāni trīṇyapākr̥tya mano *mokṣe niveśayet” *.

301This lake is directly north of Cāmarājanagara, and just northwest of the town of Doḍḍarāyapēṭe.

302The Nāradaparivrājakōpaniṣadspecifiies the mantra “Auṁ bhūḥsaṁnyastaṁ mayā |

*Auṁ bhuvaḥsaṁnyastaṁ mayā | Auṁ svaḥsaṁnyastaṁ mayā |” *

303In principle, saṁnyāsais only permissible after one’s r̥ṇashave all been discharged (footnote 300) and one’s wife has granted permission. In his vārttikaon the dialogue between Yājñavalkya and Maitreyī in the Br̥hadāraṇyakōpaniṣad, for example, Surēśvara says: *“bhāryādanujñyāp ūrvo hi saṁnyāso vihitaḥśrutau | ato’nujñārthamēvā’ha maitrēyī-mr̥ṣirātmanah. ∥” *, which translates as [Hino 1991]: “Indeed, in the Śruti, renunciation is prescribed only when it is allowed by a wife, etc., therefore, the sage addressed (his wife) Maitreyī for (securing) her consent.” An accompanying footnote indicates that in Yājñavalkya’s case, the śrutirefers to *kramasaṁnyāsa *(footnote 309). In practice, however, this mandated permission is not always sought. Āl ūru is some 7 km northeast of Cāmarāja-

nagara.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 95

who remained in the clutches of this world, lamented greatly. It is impossible to describe here the sorrow of Bhāgīrathamma, who was a model wife, and of serene temperament.

Puṭṭayya, who was then *Amaldār,*304 wrote to the king with the news of the Śāstri’s having accepted *saṁnyāsa.*Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III had the ultimate regard for Cāmarājanagara and the brāhmaṇas who lived there. The Subedārhad strict orders to communicate any unusual news in writing.

The news of the Śāstri’s having accepted saṁnyāsareached the king even before it reached Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri. When the king, grieving greatly for the diffiiculties that had confronted Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, condoled with him when he came to the palace, saying: “Dear Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri! Your father appears to have accepted *saṁnyāsa,*and departed. Do not grieve on this account!”, the Śāstri, suffering even greater grief than he did upon his wife’s death, burst into tears, and begged of the king: “Your Majesty! We are now orphans!305

As protector of those bereft of help, you now stand in place of our parents.

You must protect us, in fulfiillment of the saying rājā pratyakṣadēvatā.”306

The king consoled the Śāstri, and sent him home. He also appointed him to the role of reciting the Mantrapuṣpaat the Nañjarājēśvara temple in Cāmarājanagara.307 Rāma continued in Nagara, fulfiilling both this duty as well as that of dharmādhyaya.308 The Śāstri continued living in Mais ūru.

Six years went by in this manner. The *Svāmi *(Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s father) had lived on the banks of the Kāvērī at Yeḍatore during this time.

1867

At this place also lived a person by the name of “ Ātmānanda”, who

had accepted krama saṁnyāsa,309 being formerly known as Subrahmaṇya Śāstri of Homma. Our Svāmitoo was initiated into krama saṁnyāsa 304Chief administrative offiicer for a tāl ūkor district. This offiicer is known variously as *Amaldār, Tehsīldār, Māmlatdār,*or *Subedār.*We should note in passing that the person referred to here is a Puṭṭayya, not to be confused with ṀṢPuṭṭaṇṇa, the author of the biography of Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri, the third of the biographies in this volume. He too had served as Amaldārof Cāmarājanagara, but this date is too early for him. He fiinished his B.A. in 1885 C.E., and served in various locales as Amaldārbetween 1897–1908 C.E.

305A nosisim use of “we”, connoting either the fiirst person singular, or the larger family.

306This means “the king is a divinity our eyes are able to behold”.

307The Mantrapuṣpais an extract from the Aruṇapraśṇaof the Taittirīya Āraṇyakaof the Kr̥ṣṇa Yajurveda. It is traditionally recited as a benediction at the end of a pūjaceremony.

308Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri had been in this role in the Cāmarājeśvara temple (footnote 248).

309 Kramasaṁnyāsais the acceptance of saṁnyāsain the normal course of a life’s un-folding, that is, at the fourth āśramaor stage of life. The Nāradaparivrājakōpaniṣaddescribes the vidvat, jñāna, vividiṣā, and karmacategories of *saṁnyāsa.*The fourth of these,

96

sons of sarasvatī

by him. Soon after our Svāmihad accepted *saṁnyāsa,*our benevolent king had invited him to Mais ūru, arranged for an honorarium through the palace, and hosted him where the Uttarāji Maṭha is located.310 After remaining here for some time, the Svāmireturned to Yeḍatore, considering the city life unsuitable. The Svāmilived there happily in the company of *Svāmi *Ātmānanda. Our Svāmiwas known as “Śaṇkarānanda Sarasvatī”.

karma saṁnyāsa, is divided into the *nimitta *(causal) and *animitta *(non-causal) kinds. ¯

Atura

saṁnyāsa, taken on account of impending death, is of the nimittatype. Krama saṁnyāsa, which is entered into in the normal course of life, is of the animittacategory.

310This should read Uttarādi Maṭha, which is a maṭhabelonging to the Mādhvasect. The Uttarādi Maṭha in Maisūru is now located adjacent to the Śaṇkara Maṭha, whose location marks the precise spot where Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri’s house once stood.

6. A Mingling of Happiness and Sorrow

TheAkṣaya saṁvatsara wasunderway. VeṇkaṭaramaṇaŚāstri, r̥tvik at the palace, proposed marriage between the seven-year-old Veṇkaṭalakṣamma, who was the daughter of his son Rāmāśāstri, and Narasiṁha, the eldest son of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri. This news becoming known to the king, he personally arranged for this marriage, feeling that this would be an excellent match. Though Narasiṁha was then only fourteen, it would have been wrong to reject the match on account of his youth. The bride was from an excellent family! Besides, there was the matter of the king’s command!

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri therefore agreed to the marriage.

Narasiṁha took Veṇkaṭalakṣmī’s hand on the third śuddha tithiof the month of Jyēṣṭha of the Akṣaya *saṁvatsara.*311 The king supervised the ceremony personally. But who can stand to challenge divine will? Who indeed can fiight Death! This world is subject to Īśvara. Man is unen-1866

lightened. On the fourth day of his marriage ( Haribhauma),312 the bridegroom Narasiṁha was racked by violent vomiting and purging, and died the same night. This pen of ours is incapable of writing of the anguish of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, his in-laws, and of the king. To the same corpse were dedicated auspicious sacraments such as the Nāgavallias well as the funerary sacraments such as cremation.313 We have set our heart to stone, being forced to write of such anguish. We could not continue our account otherwise. We will simply write of what occurred.

When Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri went to the king’s presence a month after the above events transpired, and mentioned his troubles, the king, mentally anguished, said: “Dear Śāstri! Can anyone oppose divine will? I can not bring your dead son back to life. But you are still young. I will fiind you a bride from a good family. I will increase Śaṇkarānanda Svāmi’sstipend, and send him to Yeḍatore. Your family has suffiicient income in Nagara to support 311Unfortunately, an adhikaJyēṣṭha month occurs in this Kṣaya saṁvatsara. This date corresponds to either Thursday, May 17, 1866 C.E., or Friday, June 15, 1866, according to whether the Jyēṣṭha is taken to be adhikaor nija.

312The couple’s fiirst meal together. Marriages were complex social affairs, and lasted up to a week.

313The Nāgavalliconstitute the concluding marriage rituals.

97

98

sons of sarasvatī

itself. Do not let what transpired in the past bother you.” After consol-ing Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri in this fashion, he directed: “Send for Veṇkaṭanārayaṇa Śāstri,314 and let us have a bride found for Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri”. Inquiries now being made among Hoysaḷa Karṇāṭakafamilies all over, it was learned that Gōpāla Bhaṭṭa from Mēlukōṭe in Hirōḍe tāllūkhad a marriageable daughter, that the match was excellent in all respects, and that the girl was also becoming and graceful. The king arranged this match for Śrīkan.-

1867

ṭha Śāstri, and in the Prabhava saṁvatsara, had the marriage conducted with grandeur, had the bride and bridegroom carried in an howdahatop an elephant, had them brought from Mēlukōṭe to Maisūru, lodging them en route in the Dariyā Daulat at Śrīraṇgapaṭṭaṇa, holding a grand santarpaṇafor brāhmaṇas, and arranging for ceremonies such as

ārati-akṣatefor the couple.315

After he came to Mais ūru, the king appointed Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s father-in-law Gōpālabhaṭṭa to a position in the palace at a salary of thirty *Haṇas. *

The workings of this world are strange indeed! Does anything ever endure in this impermanent world? All is momentary! In the Vibhava saṁvatsara, Death had ŚrīmanmahārājaKr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III con-1868

ducted to its presence with great grandeur. When the king left this world, the world itself became consumed by the flames of anguish.

The world lost its radiance with the passing of this king, who had always been a patron to scholars, shown great empathy towards the sufferings of others, and treated the poor, the destitute, and the helpless with such respect. Scholars, in their great anguish, recited the following ślōka:316

ratna·garbhā nirādhārā nirālambā sarasvatī |

paṇḍitāḥkhaṇḍitās’sarvē kr̥ṣṇa·rājē divaṇgatē ∥

314See page 88.

315This is a celebration on a grand scale, made possible only by the direct orders of the king.

Carriage atop an elephant is a singular honour, typically reserved for royalty. The Dariyā Daulat was T.ippu Sultān’s summer palace, and later became the king’s personal resort in Śrīraṇgapaṭṭaṇa. A sojourn here would be a very special favor from the king. The ārati-akṣateis a post-marriage ceremony of benediction and celebration in which elders and well wishers participate. This event may feature entertainment, typically classical music. ¯

Arati, a

common ritual intended to remove evil influences, consists of fiilling a plate with a reddish-brown combination of water, turmeric, and lime, and moving it in circles before the couple.

See footnote 543 for āratiand footnote 378 for *akṣate *( mantrākṣate).

316See Ballāladeva’s Bhojaprabandha294: “adya dhārā nirādhārā nirālambā sarasvatī |

*paṇḍitāḥkhaṇḍitāḥsarve bhojarāje divaṇgate ∥”*Dhāra was King Bhoja’s capital city.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 99

Meaning: With Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III having ascended to heaven, this land of Karnāṭaka has lost its benefactor. Sarasvatī, the goddess of learning, is now bereft of support. Scholars are all now destitute.317

Our protagonist was plunged into an ocean of grief at the demise of this crest-jewel of scholarly patronage. The honorarium that Śaṇkarānanda Svāmihad received also ceased with the passing of the king into the other world. This *Svāmi,*who had renounced all attachments, paid not the slightest heed, sustaining himself on the alms of householders. Although he received word both of the indescribable distress in the household of his prior

āśramaand of the demise of the king, he maintained the dignity of his present āśrama, and remained engrossed in seeking the Self.

Cāmarāja Voḍeyar was now king. Raṇgācārya was Dīvān.318 Upon hearing a full account of the svāmi’smerits from other scholars, Raṇgācārya applied to the king, and restored the svāmi’shonorarium (four Varāhas), thus becoming the object of our protagonist’s gratitude.319 At this 1869

time, our protagonist was engaged in having the Royal genealogy and the history of Mais ūru compiled.320 Our protagonist was now thirty-fiive years of age. When he turned thirty-six, he moved to Nagara with his second wife, to ensure the welfare and education of his children, who 317Major C. Elliot, with the assistance of Raṇgācārulu, whobecamePalaceControllerafter the king’s demise, reduced the number of scholars in the palace’s employ from 464 to 125, of whom 22 were acknowledged as leading men in different branches of learning. The rest were terminated, with some level of gratuity. The total number of palace employees dropped from 9,687 to 3,196 [Stanhope 1878, p. 57].

318This is inaccurate. In 1868 C.E., the year Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III died, Cāmarāja Voḍeyar was just over 5 years old. Raṇgācārlu was still Palace Controller, and did not become Dīvān until the Rendition of 1881 C.E., which formally restored the rule of the Voḍeyars.

319No intercession would have been required of the fiive-year old king for the restoration of the honorarium. Also see Vāsudevācārya [1962] for an account of how he was left without support when his father Kānkānhaḷḷi Subrahmaṇyācārya (see page 25) died, and his pension was terminated during Raṇgācārlu’s restructuring of the palace affairs. The pension was restored following the persistent appeals of Vāsudēvācārya’s grandfather to Raṇgācārlu.

320Footnote in the original: “This same book has now been published by the controller of the palace.” The work being referred to is the so-called Annals of the Mysore Royal Family, that is, the *Śrīmanmahārajaravara Vaṁśāvaḷi,*edited by B. Rāmakr̥ṣṇa Row, the Palace Controller. Volume 1 of this work was published in 1916 C.E., the year before this biography was published.

100

sons of sarasvatī

were growing up without their mother, as well as to take charge of the lead-erless household. He would travel to and from Mais ūru occasionally. Living in Cāmarājanagara at the time were his household, that of his younger brother Rāmaśastri, his two sisters, and his mother. A school was started in the temple there, and Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri appointed as instructor. The Śāstri lived there, teaching his students and continuing his own studies.

The Śāstri’s daughter Lakṣmīdēvamma was now eight years of age and running her ninth year.321 The śāstrasdecree that a girl be married at eight.322

In accordance with this injunction, the Śāstri married his daughter to Ayyā Śāstri,323 the son of the Royal scholar and distinguished poet Garaḷapurī Śāstri. He had achieved distinction in poetry and drama. The Śāstri re-joiced, thinking: “How fortunate to have such a learned son-in-law!” By this time, he had completed the upanayanaceremony for his second son Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa. He also took great care in the education of his youngest son Subrahmaṇya, who was only seven.

When the Śāstri was forty, he had a daughter by his second wife.324 The Śāstri was especially attached to her both because she was the daughter of his junior wife and because this child possessed great intellectual acuity as well as charm. This girl learned the *Amara,*grammar, and poetry with her brothers. Her name was Bhāgīrathī. Joy and sorrow must yet

1879–1883

exist together in this world! Before one could say that the Śāstri’s life had reached a certain equilibrium, that is, in the Śāstri’s forty-sixth year, died in succession his youngest son Subrahmaṇya, yet unwed, his dearest daughter Bhāgīrathī a year later, and two years thence, his second wife, who had stood as his greatest worldly treasure.

In the interim, that is, a year or two after Lakṣmīdēvamma was married, SvāmiŚaṇkarānanda left Yeḍatore and travelled to Kāśī.325 At this same time, an ascetic brahmacārifrom Rāmanāthapura was initiated into krama 321See footnote 187. This marriage must have taken place in 1868 or 1869 C.E., making 1860 the year of Lakṣmīdēvamma’s birth.

322For example, *Yājñavalkyasmr̥ti *( *Ācārādhyāyah. *: 64) declares that the father of an unmarried maiden incurs the sin of fœticide at every menstrual period. There was urgency to ensure marriage before puberty, but there was more leeway regarding how soon brides had to join their new households after puberty. The high infant and maternal mortality rates of the time likely had much to do with such early-marriage practices.

323Footnote in original: “He is the Royal Scholar ‘Kavitilaka’ Ayyāśastri.”

324This child was born in 1873 C.E.

325Śaṇkarānanda Sarasvatī’s move to Kāśī can thus be dated to 1869–1871 C.E.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 101

saṁnyāsaby our *Svāmi.*This younger svāmiaccompanied our Svāmion his trip to Kāśī. This *mahātma,*a treasure-house of Truth, lived in a small cottage on the banks of the Gaṇgā, engaged in contemplating the Self. His honorarium from the king of Mais ūru was collected each month and sent to Kāśī by sōsale Garaḷapurī Śāstri.

It was during these times that Rāmaśāstri had also suffered the loss of his fiirst wife.326

326Rāmaśāstri had been married at fiifteen or sixteen, that is, in 1857–58 C.E. to Nañjamma (see page 90). He had taught at the Saṁskr̥taPāṭhaśāla at Yeḍatore between 1873–76 C.E., but returned to Cāmarājanagara since this income had been insuffiicient [Śāstri 1925b]. He had lost his fiirst wife Nañjamma during this time, and as the text to follow indicates, married Lakṣmīdevamma, affectionately called Ammaṇṇa. By her, he had a son (C.R̥Narasiṁha Śāstri, Professor of Saṁskr̥ta, University of Maisūru), and a daughter, Bhāgīrathī.

7. Flowering of Scholarship and Authorship

of Book

Dearreader! I leave it to you to consider what emotional composure any human who had undertaken to engage himself in matters of this world might be left with after suffering a series of calamities such as described above! Paramātmaalone of transcendental awareness might fathom the depths of grief in Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s heart; the likes of us could not even venture to guess at it. Even confronted with such sorrow, the Śāstri faced it all with courage, and became ever more virtuous. What, indeed, are happiness and sorrow to those possessed of knowledge? Isn’t this the sign of the true mahātma?

The Śāstri now no longer wished to remain in Cāmarājanagara. In keeping with custom, he had arranged for the timely marriage of his younger brother Rāma with Lakṣmīdēvamma,327 daughter of Nāgappa from Sāgare in Heggaḍadēvanakōṭe *tāllūk.*He had also arranged for the marriage of his only surviving son Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa with Kr̥ṣṇamma, the second daughter of Śaṇkarabhaṭṭa of Candakavāḍi (Diṇḍēpura) in Cāmarājanagara *tāllūk. *

When the Śāstri suffered his series of misfortunes, his son and brother had both lived in Cāmarājanagara. Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa had a daughter, as well.

Deciding that he did not want the responsibilites of a household any longer, and considering it best for everyone to take charge of their own households, he returned to Mais ūru when he was fiifty-one years old (1884), leaving their respective household responsibilities to each. It is fair to say that his scholarship had thus far remained hidden, like the moon 1884

obscured by clouds, or embers cloaked in ash. Now there was opportunity for the brilliance of his scholarship to show itself. His brother too, following his example, moved to Mais ūru, and set up his own household. Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s son Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa had no equal in the practice of ritual, Vēdicrecitation, and literature. His æsthetic sensibilities were 327Footnote in original: “This is the well-known Royal Scholar Cāmarājanagara Rāmaśāstri. We plan to publish his biography in the future.” This biography appeared in Śāstri

[1925b], but is loosely structured, containing a great deal of ancillary material, including extracts from the Nañjarājacampūby Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, the father of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri.

This was Rāma’s second marriage (see page 90 and footnote 326).

102

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 103

simply unmatched. His discourses on the Purāṇaswere marked by extraordinary fluency. He continued in the role of dharmādhyayanaat the Cāmarājēśvara temple, and lived in Cāmarājanagara, maintaining his dignity, never transgressing his father’s word.

After returtning to Mais ūru, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri sought patronage from Darbār Baḳśi Ma∥ Ambil Narasiṁha Ayyaṇgār and Ma∥ ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya, acquainting them with his story, from beginning to end.328 Impressed with his scholarship, Ma∥ Ambil Narasiṁha Ayyaṇgār appointed him instructor for Saṁskr̥tain Mahārāṇī’s College.329

The monthly magazine Hitabōdhiṉībegan publication in Mais ūru in 1883.330 There were no monthly publications in Kannaḍa before this time.

Hitabōdhiṉīwas followed by other publications such as ¯

*Anandamandira, *

*Nibandhamālike,*and *Sudarśana,*all of which rendered great service to the cause of the language. The magazine Sudarśanabegan in Uḍupi in 1886, and published articles in the Maṇgaḷūru dialect of Kannaḍa.

Hitabōdhiniwas started by Ma∥ ṀṢPuṭṭaṇṇa, B.A., Ma∥ ṀB. Śrīnivāsayyaṇgār, and Ma∥ ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya. Among the scholars who 328Ambil Narasiṁha Ayyaṇgār (1845–?) was a highly respected public offiicial, on whom was conferred the title of Rāi Bahād ūron February 16, 1887. He is especially remembered for his work on education, and with ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya on the emancipation of women.

Narasiṁha Ayyaṇgār founded the Mahārāni’s High-Caste School on January 21, 1881, with a class of 28 girls. This school enrolled several hundred girls in a short time. An excellent account of the school appears in Knowles [1889]. ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya (1844-1933 C.E.), a journalist of distinction, was equally committed to the cause of education, and served as the principal of the Marimallappa School from its very inception. He writes [in Śāstri 1934, p. 23] that he had known Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri since the time they had both lodged at Bhāgavata Subbarāya’s house, as new arrivals in Mais ūru. Ma∥is an abbreviation for mahārājaśrī, a respectful form of address.

329Mahārāṇī’s College grew out of Mahārāṇī’s High-Caste School (see footnote 328), which had been founded three years earlier. It seems certain that this was still called a

“school”, rather than a “college” in 1884 C.E. However, since it acquired the status of a college in 1902 C.E., well before this biography was written, the author’s reference to a “college”

is understandable.

330Although some sources, such as Narasimhacharya [1934, p. 155], indicate that the Hita-bodhiṉīstarted publishing in 1881 C.E., 1883 C.E. is the correct date. This date was confiirmed by ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya in the October 1887 issue of Hitabōdhiṉīas reported in the October 1939 issue of the publication of *Kannaḍanuḍi.*ṀṢPuṭṭaṇṇa began the magazine in collaboration with ṀB. Śrīnivāsayyaṇgār, and ran it for six months, having to move to Madras in 1884 to take his examination for the B.A. degree, at which time ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya took charge of the magazine. It was later in the charge of A.C. Subbarāv, who remained in charge until it ceased publication about ten years later.

104

sons of sarasvatī

contributed many excellent articles on a variety of subjects were Ma∥ K.

Śyāmayyaṇgār, K. Veṇkaṭasāmayyar, B.A., Ma∥ Cuṁ. Raṇgācār, ṀA., Ma∥ ṀŚāmrāv, ṀA., Ma∥ B. Rāmasvāmi, B.A., Ma∥ ḤV. Nañjund.-

ayya, ṀA., B.L., Ma∥ ṀGaṇēśasiṇg, Ma∥ A.C. Subbarāv, B.A., Ma∥ H.

Kr̥ṣṇarāv, ṀKr̥ṣṇayyaṇgār, and the Ānandāḷvār Svāmi.331

Ma∥ Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya was especially committed to the Hitabōdhiṉī’s publication, and devoted himself to its development. Knowing Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s abilities well, he arranged for him to be employed in the offiices of the *Hitabōdhiṉī.*His work consisted of editing the writings of the 1884

aforementioned scholars, correcting the press proofs, and selecting the best articles for publication. During this time, Ma∥ ṀVeṇkaṭa-kr̥ṣṇayya and Ma∥ ṀŚāmarāv, who is now the Inspector General of the Mais ūru Department of Education, were both engaged in advanced studies in Saṁskr̥tawith the Śāstri.332 The high regard both these illustrious gentlemen had for the Śāstri will become apparent in what follows.

At this same time, the Śāstri quit his post at the Mahārāṇī’s College, and worked as a teacher in the Sarasvatīprāsāda Pāṭhaśāla ( Saṁskr̥taCollege) for some time. His brother Rāmāśāstri and Sajjaya Tātācārya also taught literature, logic, and science at the Pāṭhaśāla during this period.

As is well known, the Bhāṣōjjīviṉī Pāṭhaśāla was founded in the city of Mais ūru in 1887. Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was then appointed Saṁskr̥tainstructor 331The ĀnandāḷvārSvāmiwasknownbythenameof ĀsūriAnantācāryabeforehebecame a *saṁnyāsi.*The following information appears in Anantācārya [1991]: Vidwan Asoori Ananthacharya (also known as Anandalvar) was a direct descendant, in the male line, of Sri Ramanujacharya, the famous Sri Vaishnava saint. . . Sri Anandalvar was born on 24-2-1859. He studied Veda, Vedanta, Sastras, and and Sahitya at the feet of Natampalli Alasingacharya, the then famous Mathadhipati of Yathiraja Matha and later under the guidance of Panditharatnam Kuppannayyangar Swami of Mandaya Agrahara. . . It is learnt that he was a sahadhyāyiof Sosale Ayyasas-tri (1854–1934), the son of the famous Samskrita scholar Sri Sosale Garalapuri Sastri. Ananthacharya stayed for some time at Badarinath, and on his way back, visited Tehri-Garhwal, Bikaner, Reva, Baroda, Thiruvananthapuram and Thanjavur, where he received high honours from the rulers. After his return to Mysore, he joined the Sadvidya Pathashala, and worked as a Samskrita Pandita. . . On 11-2-1921, he entered Samnyasashrama and became the head of Melkote Yathiraja Matha, founded by Sri Ramanujacharya, as the 36th Acharya of the Parampara. . . (His scholarly works are listed. . . ) The Acharya left this world on 17-5-1943.

332ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya confiirms [in Śāstri 1934, p. 23] that he studied Saṁskr̥tafor thirty years with Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 105

at a monthly salary of twenty *R ūpīs.*In 1894, this same Pāṭhaśāla became known as the Normal School.333 At this time, the Śāstri taught the Saṁskr̥taportion for the *“Paṇḍita”*examination. Bhābhā *sāhēb,*who was Inspector General at the time, was well acquainted with the Śāstri’s abilities.334

He appointed him to the Textbook Committee, as well as Examiner for various Local Examinations, such as *“Paṇḍita”, “Upādhyāya”,*and for students who chose Saṁskr̥taas a First Language.335

The Śāstri’s renown as a scholar grew by the day. Since he had extraordinary mastery over grammar, persons with ordinary ability in grammar and those learned in fiields such as logic and literature were ever hesitant to challenge him. Though he was as a lion in his scholarship, his nature was as meek as that of a cow. He never declared himself a scholar even when his self-interest was involved. He never applied to the government for a promo-tion, unlike the scholars of today. Pleased with his gentle nature, Bhābhā sāhēbhimself raised his salary from thirty to forty-fiive *R ūpīs,*and encouraged him in many other ways, besides. Since he was an observant brāhmaṇa, 333Rice [1868] observes: “From this institution are derived the masters of the Government schools. It contains two classes in one of which the instruction is Anglo Vernacular and in the other purely Canarese. The course of study embraces besides the ordinary school subjects daily lessons on school management. Each student receives while under training an allowance of Rs. 9, 7, or 5 a month according to his standing and progress. Before appointment to a mastership he is required to pass an examination for a certifiicate of qualifiication.

This test was adopted for the fiirst time during the past year and has had a benefiicial effect.”

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri taught in the Normal School for around 18–20 years [Śāstri 1934, p. 13].

This institution later became the “Training College”.

334Hormusjī Jehangīr Bhābhā had been Head Master of the Maharājā’s College, and was appointed Education Secretary for Mysore on April 25, 1890, and Inspector General of Education in July 1895. His grandson was the well-known physicist Homi Jehangīr Bhābhā.

335Śāstri [1925b, p. 24] documents that whenever the strictly observant Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri went to Beṇgaḷūru for Textbook Committee work, he would refrain from eating in anyone’s home, and would take along some pounded rice to sustain himself. Rice [1897b, p. 793]

notes regarding this Committee: “ . . . A Text book Committee has charge since 1892 of the selection and preparation of suitable school books. . . In 1887 the Mysore Local Examination for pupils and teachers in vernacular schools was instituted under the management of a Committee. This gave a defiinite aim to vernacular studies similar in effect to what was provided for English by the University and Middle School examinations and proved a great stimulus to the Taluq and Hobli schools. It was modifiied in 1891 by substituting a Lower Secondary examination in English, Sanskrit and the vernaculars with a Vernacular Upper Secondary and a Teachers Certifiicate examination. A Sanskrit Pandits examination is held every year before the Dasara at the Maharaja’s Sanskrit College Mysore and an examination for Kannada Pandits was established in 1893.”

106

sons of sarasvatī

a special exception was made for him, allowing him to report to work after one o’clock in the afternoon, after completing his bath, *Sandhyā,*and other daily rituals.336

We have seen that DharmādhikāriCakravartyayyaṇgār and the ŚrīŚrī-kr̥ṣṇa Brahmatantra Parakālasvāmi were his fellow-students. They knew the Śāstri’s abilities well. They urged the Śāstri: “Dear Śāstri! Your knowledge of grammar is extraordinary. One is even led to believe that elements of the great Pāṇini himself are discernible in you. Saṁskr̥tais among the hardest of languages to master. Saṁskr̥tagrammar is harder still. Ver-1891–1898

bal conjugations are truly the hardest. You have mastered grammar in its entirety, including the various commentaries. Write a book that details all known verbal conjugations in a form that would be accessible to the ordinary scholar.” Encouraged thus, he toiled for seven or eight years and produced the Dhātur ūpaprakāśikā, a massive and comprehensive compendium of all verbal conjugations. Since this work exceeded a thousand pages in length, he had despaired of ever having it published.

Cakravartyayyaṇgār then stepped in, and had it published in his own publishing house, the Vidyātaraṇgiṇī Press.337

336This accommodation caused unhappiness among his fellow-workers, which Bhābhā dealt with cleverly [Śāstri 1934, p. 13]. He acknowledged the complaints, and agreed to replace Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri if the complainants could fiind a scholar of equal calibre to replace him. Other accommodations that ḤJ. Bhābhā made for Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri included bringing him on as a government employee when he was well past the mandatory retirement age of 55 (the rules required government service to start before age 25). Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri remained a government employee till the age of 70, an unheard-of accommodation. Śāstri [1934, p. 38]

reports that Bhābhā also purchased some number of copies of the Dhātur ūpaprakāśikā, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s magnum opus, published in 1898 C.E., and arranged for him to obtain nearly 1000 R ūpīsin return. Perhaps not coincidentally, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri moved that same year to a new house which he bought for 600 R ūpīsin the Rāmacandra Agrahāra opposite the ¯

*Anekarohaṭṭi *[Śāstri 1927, p. 1]. (This date differs from the date we may infer from information on page 110.) Till that time, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri had lived within the Maisūru fort, in a street called Kandukada Bīdi, near the Diḍḍī Bāgilu to the east. The fort had three Diḍḍī Bāgilus (sally ports), to the east, south, and west, respectively.

337Amazingly, the Dhātur ūpaprakāśikāwas Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s second work on grammar.

The educator and journalist ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya, reports [in Śāstri 1934, p. 23] that Śrīkan.-

ṭha Śāstri’s fiirst work, the Ti ˙nantar ūpāvali, was misappropriated by a trusted friend, who published it as his own. The translator has been unable to locate this work. The Dhātur ūpaprakāśikā, however, begins with verses rebuking this unnamed person: “kārye duṣkara-nirvāhe yatitvā yō_ticāpalāt | prōtsāhya māṁ śramaṁ ṉītvā pralōbhya phalagauravāt ∥4∥

madhyē_nyathā samāśvāsya kr̥tārthassvayamanyathā | atyākṣīdudyamaṁ tatra svahāniṁ

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 107

There is absolutely no way to comprehend the calibre of this work, or the effort that it entailed, without inspecting the book itself. This book has been thoroughly scrutinized and greatly lauded by many scholars of great repute, including Vē∥ Gau∥ A. Mahadēvaśāstri, who is curator of the Oriental Library, the Śrīkr̥ṣṇa Brahmatantra Parakālasvāmi, Paṇḍitaratnaṁ Kast ūriraṇgācār, PaṇḍitaratnaṁSītārāma Śāstri, Sajjaya Tātācārya, and S.

Veṇkaṭarāmāśāstri of Mahārāja’s College.338 We omit further details, lacking space.339 Interested readers may examine the book and judge its merits.340

We are all familiar with the work well-known as the Arabian Nights, or as the Yavanayāmiṉī Vinōda Kathegaḷuin English and Kannaḍa.341 Upon being urged to convert this work into Saṁskr̥ta, the Śāstri proceeded to complete three-quarters of it. This work was not published, however, due to lack of subsequent interest on the part of those who had been so encouraging.342

At this time, Ca ˙ncala Rāv, who was Councillor in the State of Maisūru, was accomplished in Saṁskr̥ta, but was not particularly strong in verbal conjugations. He had indicated to DīvānSir K. Śēṣādri Ayyar his interest in having a compendium of verbal conjugations published, if a person thoroughly knowledgeable in the subject were available.343 Accordingly, the nāpyajīgaṇat ∥5∥ matphalasyāyatiṁ bhavyāṁ vilambāddarśayanbahuṁ | chadmanāntē ni-jāvāsaṁ vyajahāddeśamēva yah. ∥6∥ guṇāṁstasya bahiṣkartuṁ kurvāṇasyēmamudyamaṁ |

*samīhitaṁ mē bhagavāntsandadhātu nr̥kēsarī ∥7∥”*The Dhāturūpaprakāśikāwas published in 1898 C.E., and is in Telugu script, not unusual for the time. Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri would have been sixty-fiive years old, which would then have been reckoned a ripe old age. This monumental work has recently been published in Devanāgariscript by Avadh ūta Prakāśanaṁ of S ōmapuraṁ in Cikkamagaḷūru district in Karṇāṭaka, under the editorship of VidvānSo.

Ti. Nāgarāja Śarma [Śrīkaṇṭhaśāstri 2012].

338Footnote in original ( reVeṇkaṭarāmāśāstri): “He is the author of well known works such as the Kathāśatakaand *Akṣaraśikśā.*He possessed extraordinary scholarship in English as well as Saṁskr̥ta.”

339Many of the persons mentioned above have expressed their admiration for this monumental work in their eulogies of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri [in Śāstri 1934].

340Footnote in original: “This book is priced at three *R ūpīs.*Interested persons may contact the editor of the Kādambarīsaṁgrahain Mais ūru. The book runs to a thousand pages of demi 8 size.” The page size referred to is 8" ×5.5".

341The Yavanayāmiṉī Vinōda Kathegaḷuis a version of the Arabian Nightsin Kannaḍa by P. Veda-mitra, published at Mysore in 1905.

342ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya writes [in Śāstri 1934, p. 24] that he encouraged Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri to write the Saṁskr̥taversion of the Arabian Nights, and that he had also planned to have him translate many Saṁskr̥taworks into Kannaḍa.

343Ca ˙ncala Rāv, known within the Mysore administration as the Honorable P. Chentsal

108

sons of sarasvatī

Dīvāndiscussed the matter with a group of *paṇḍitas,*but no one brought up the Śāstri’s name.344 Many years later, when Śēṣādri Ayyar came across the Dhātur ūpaprakāśikāafter its publication, he sent for the Śāstri, recalled his conversation with Ca ˙ncala Rāv, and expressed much regret. After all, has it not been common for scholars, all through the ages, to look upon each other with envy? This point will be obvious to anyone who reads the story of Rāja Bhōja.345

By this time, the Śāstri’s father, of his previous āśrama, had attained muktiin Kāśī.346 After a few years, the Śāstri’s mother too, attained the Eternal State.

Rao, C.I.E, held many signifiicant administrative posts in the Madras Presidency, and was appointed member of the Council of His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore in April 1889.

In 1890–91, the Council consisted of Chentsal Rao, Mr Thamboo Chetty, and DīvānŚēṣādri Ayyar. See Sundaram [2012, p. 123] for a biography of Chentsal Rao.

344Among scholars, ŚrīkaṇṭhaŚāstri’sreputationforgrammaticalscholarshipwasextraor-dinary. His grandson sōsale Kr̥ṣṇasvāmi Śāstri recounts in Śāstri [1934, p. 18]: “Our Śāstri’s reputation as a preeminent scholar was ever on display at the great conference of scholars convened each year at the maṭhaof Śrī∥ Śrī∥Parakālasvāmi. Whenever a controversy arose in a matter relating to grammar, especially pertaining to declensions or conjugations, all eyes would turn to the Śāstri. What issued forth from his mouth was taken by all as axiomatic and established truth.”

345Bhōja is the king of Malwa referred to in footnote 156. According to legend, Bhōja lost his father Sindhula when still very young, and his uncle Muñja took the throne. Bhōja soon became a great scholar, and began to attract great acclaim. His uncle began to see him as a threat, and asked Vatsarāja, one of his tributary princes, to take the young Bhōja into the forest and kill him. Vatsarāja, who could not bring himself to murder the boy, hid him in his own house. When Muñja inquired as to what Bhōja said before his death, Vatsarāja showed him a palm leaf with the verse “māndhātā ca mahīpatiḥkr̥tayugālaṇkārabhūto gataḥ| setur-yena mahodadhau virachitaḥkvāsau daśāsyāntakah. ∥ anyecāpi yudhiṣṭhira prabhr̥tayo yātā *divaṁ bh ūpate | naikenāpi samaṁ gatā vasumatī n ūnam tvayā yāsyati ∥” *. The rebuke in this verse brought Muñja back to his senses. He was greatly relieved to learn that Bh ōja was still alive, and in due course, abdicated in his favour.

346Śāstri [1925b, p. 55] gives the date of Śaṇkarānanda Svāmi’s passing as “… bahuḷa dvitīyā of the month of Vaiśākha of the Dhātu *saṁvatsara *(1874 C.E.).” We see an inconsistency.

The tithigiven corresponds to Wednesday, May 10, 1876 C.E., rather that to some date in 1874 C.E. Reference is made to his “previous āśrama” because a saṁnyāsi, in discarding all worldly attachments when entering the āśramaof saṁnyāsa, has also discarded all relationships. Relationships are meaningful only in the context of his previous existence, called his p ūrvāśrama. A saṁnyāsiis, in fact, ritually dead.

(a) Portrait of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III seated.

(b) Equestrian portrait of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III.

Plate 11: Portraits of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III. Images from the San Diego Museum of Art.

Plate 12 and Plate 13: Maps of Mais ūru north and south, 1876 C.E., from Rice [1877b].

Plate 14: The interior of the sōsale Vyāsarāja Maṭha, 2010. In earlier times, the floor would likely have been made of limestone plaster, rather than tile.

Plate 15: The Parakāla Maṭha in Maisūru. (Adapted by the translator, under a Creative Commons license, from an image of current façade by C.J. Fynn.) Plate 16: Traditional house in Mais ūru’s Katvāḍipura Agrahara, where Garaḷapurī Śāstri built his house. This house belongs to Mr Gōpayya, who stands in the foreground, 2008.

(a) VyākaraṇaNarasiṁha Śāstri

(b) Kar ūra Śrīnivāsācārya, Viśiṣṭādvaita

(c) Kempu Śāstri

scholar.

Plate 17: Some luminaries at the court of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III. (Images by courtesy of Professor ṬV. Venkatachala Sastri.)

(a) VīṇeVeṇkaṭasubbayya. Vīṇāexpert and (b) “Cikka” VīṇeŚēṣaṇṇa.

(c) VīṇeSāmbayya. Vīṇāexpert.

close confiidant of the king.

Plate 18: Some musicians at the Mais ūru court. Images of Veṇkaṭasubbayya and Sāmbayya by courtesy of Mr Niranjana Rājē Arasu. Image of Śēṣaṇṇa by courtesy of Mr Soolamangalam Rammohan.

Plate 19: Ubhaya Bhāṣā VidvānPerīsvāmi Tirumalacārya, student of Sōsale Garaḷapurī Śāstri. Portrait at entrance to the Sadvidyāśāla.

Plate 20: AḷiyaLiṇgarājē Arasu. Original painting is in the possession of his grandson Mr Nirañjana Rājē Arasu of Mais ūru.

Plate 21: Portrait of Bhāgavata Subba Rāv standing behing Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III.

Note the striking similarities between this depiction of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III and that in Plate 11(a), a representation of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III which appears in many variants. It is unrealistic to expect that such portraits were painted from actual sittings with the monarch. This image is by courtesy of Mr Sunil Subbakrishna.

Plate 22: Portrait of DīvānP ūrṇayya (1746–1812) by Thomas Hickey, c. 1800.

P ūrṇayya had been Dīvānunder T.ippu Sultān, and following T.ippu’s defeat and death at the hands of the British in 1799, served as Dīvānto Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III till 1811. He was highly respected in the administrations of both T.ippu and Kr̥ṣṇa-rāja Voḍeyar III for his administrative and fiinancial acumen. He had kept the numerous restless local pāḷeyagārasin check, and at the time of his retirement in 1811, left the Mais ūru treasury flush with cash to the extent of two crores of *R ūpīs *[Rice 1897b].

Plate 23: Portrait of Three Princesses from Mysore, by Thomas Hickey, *c.*1805.

Long believed to have been a painting of three courtesans in the Mais ūru court, the painting’s current title derives from strong arguments made by Chancellor [2001]

that the subjects are in fact, royals. The lady on the left is believed to be Paṭṭamahiṣī Dēvājammaṇṇi, the seniormost queen of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, whom he married in 1801. The lady in white on the right, believed to be Lakṣmīvilāsa Sannidhāna Dēvājammaṇṇi, the second queen of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, draws attention to the region of her left arm where a vaccination against smallpox would have been administered. It is certain that she had been vaccinated, and that she became a symbol of the safety and value of the practice of vaccination [Row 1916]. The identity of the lady in the middle remains uncertain. See footnotes 611 and 614.

Plate 24: The Cāmarājeśvara temple at Cāmarājanagara. Image courtesy of www.goroadtrip.com.

(a) Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri. Image courtesy of

(b) Tryambaka Śāstri. Image courtesy of

(c) Kāśī Śēṣa Śāstri. Frontispiece in Lakshmi-

Professor ṬV. Venkatachala Sastri.

Professor ṬV. Venkatachala Sastri.

narasimhaiya *et al., *[1970].

Plate 25: Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri, Tryambaka Śāstri, and Kāśī Śeśa Śāstri (Rāmaśēṣa Śāstri).

(a) Lakṣmīnarasiṁha Śāstri. Painting in the possession of (b) Saccidānanda Śivābhinava Nr̥siṁha Bhāratī, 1879–1912

Mr Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri, Maisūru.

C.E., 33rd Jagadguru, Śr̥ṇgēri Śāradā Pīṭha.

Plate 26: Elder son and younger son of Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri.

Plate 27: The Abhinava Śaṇkarālaya, a branch of the Śr̥ṇgēri Maṭha in Maisūru. The structure marks the birthplace of JagadguruSaccidānanda Śivābhinava Nr̥siṁha Bhāratī, the spot where Kuṇigala Rāmaśāstri’s house once stood.

8. Sorrows Without End

LetusrecallthatVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇaśāstri’shouseholdwasresidentinCāmarājanagara. Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri regularly visited Nagara, as occasioned by the need to perform śrāddharites for ancestors or worship rituals for divinities. On such occasions, he would also share words of advice and counsel with his son. Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇaśāstri has a daughter named Veṇkaṭalakṣmī and two sons named Narasiṁha and Veṇkaṭaramaṇa.347 Veṇkaṭalakṣmīhad now completed her tenth year, and was running her eleventh year. At this time, he had her married to Narasiṁhaśāstri,348 the eldest son of a śrōtrīya brahmaṇa called Narasiṁhabhaṭṭa from Mattigūdu, near Rāmanāthapura.

This individual had achieved great profiiciency in Vēdicrecitation, ritual practice, literature, astrology, and *dharmaśāstra. *

Narasiṁha was his second-born. The Śāstri had taken him along to Mais ūru when only four, and had been caring for him there, while also instructing him in the traditional manner. Having been born into a scholarly family, this boy had an excellent intellect. There is no more need to describe his manner of study! The third child was Veṇkaṭaramaṇa. His father had tutored him since childhood. He was particularly adept at the *Amara,*declensions, and poetry. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa and Narasiṁha were two years apart. A daughter followed three years after Veṇkaṭaramaṇa. This child was named “Veṇkaṭasubbi”, but everyone calls her “Subbatāyi” out of affection.349 Thus, when this child was born, her elder sister was already in her husband’s house, managing her own household. Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇaśāstri was in Nagara with his wife and family.

347This Veṇkaṭaramaṇa is of course, the author of this biography and of that of Garaḷapurī Śāstri.

348Footnote in original: “Vē∥Narasiṁhaśāstri is now jōḍīdārin Mattigūḍu in Hāsana district. He is a member of the Representative Assembly.”

349“Veṇkaṭasubbi” is a diminutive of “Veṇkaṭasubbamma”. “Subba” is a common male name in Karṇāṭaka, and often a diminutive of “Subrahmaṇya”, but is also the tadbhavaor Kannaḍa version of the Saṁskr̥taword *śubhra *(“white” or “pure”). It can refer to Ādiśeṣa, the lord of the realm of serpents, especially in the form “Subbarāya”. “Subbamma” can be taken either as the feminine form of this reference, or as “the pure one”. “Veṇkaṭa” is a common prefiix referencing the deity Veṇkaṭēśvara, and is often elided in diminutive forms of names. Tāyiand ammaboth mean “mother”, and are used in constructing affectionate or respectful forms of address. Also see footnote 409.

109

110

sons of sarasvatī

All will recall that some twenty years ago, in the Viḷambi and Vikāri *saṁvatsaras *(1899–1900), the demoness Plague arrived in Mais ūru, and began to sate her hunger, engorging herself on entire families. Many husbands lost their wives and children, and many ladies lost their husbands, and all suffered great sorrow at this time. The disease spread to all regions of Mais ūru, and flames of anguish seared the entire country. Who would not be heartbroken at the death and desolation in Mais ūru and Beṇgaḷūru?

The sounds of lamentations everywhere! The scramble of funerary activities everywhere! Graveyards choked with people! Such cries of anguish!

Such tales of suffering on everyone’s lips! More often than not, it was the children who died right before the eyes of their elders. Surely, no household was spared suffering at the time, and if there were one or two, they have surely escaped our attention. This demoness fiirst entered Cāmarājanagara in the Vikāri saṁvatsara. Frightened, the people left town, becoming forest-dwellers. Undeterred, the demoness devoured lives enough to sate her hunger.350

Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇaśāstri’s household, too, sheltered in a little hut at the time.

Somehow, Providence saved them from danger that year. The saṁvatsara Śārvari arrived all too quickly. In those times, plague would drop into every town each year. Plague began as early as the month of Mārgaśira. As usual, everyone began leaving town. Only a handful of brave souls remained, having sent their families away to live with friends and relations elsewhere.

When Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇaśāstri wrote to his father, thinking it better to send his wife and children to Mais ūru than force everyone to endure suffering in a little hut, our protagonist agreed to this course. It had been four 1900

years since Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri had moved from his house in the fort to the Rāmacandra Agrahāra.351 The administration demolished his house, which had been near the Diḍḍī Bāgiluon the eastern side of the 350The chances of surviving the disease were very low. According to testimony in March 1899 by Mr P.R̥Cadeil before the Plague Commission [1900, p. 275], there occurred 4,000

plague cases and 3,298 deaths in Bangalore between 15th September 1888 and 28th February 1899, for a mortality rate of over 82%. In Mais ūru, there were 1,930 plague cases and 1,519

deaths between 1st October 1898 and 28th February 1899, for a mortality rate of 78.7%. Plague was responsible for around half of all deaths during this period. The annual number of deaths in the state of Mais ūru were 6,382 (in 1898), 6,629 (in 1899), 13,268 (in 1900), 11,936

(in 1901), 28,316 (in 1902), and 22,088 (in 1903), respectively [Simpson 1905, p. 72].

351See footnote 336. Śāstri [1927, p. 1] dates this move to 1898, not to 1896 as done here.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 111

fort, and similarly razed to the ground other squalid areas that were focal points for the development of disease. The Government of Mais ūru expended large sums of money, with the aim of somehow eradicating plague.

After that time, this disease began to diminish gradually each year.352

352See Parsons [1930, p. 135] concerning the congestion within the fort built after the British moved the capital from Śrīraṇgapaṭṭaṇa to Maisūru in 1799 C.E.: Less than 20 years ago the interior of the fort was a mass of houses and narrow streets. They were picturesque in the extreme. The streets of the brass-sellers (from which the vendors would always obligingly produce any kind of antique brass or copper utensil desired—given a fortnight to ‘fiind’ it), and the street of the flower-sellers were eminently so; masses of gorgeous colours against a background of dark and elaborately carved doors and windows. They were streets which, during Dasara and Birthday weeks, were thronged with Government House guests—royally mounted on elephants, or riding in barouches which almost fiilled the width of the narrow streets—bargaining with shopkeepers who naturally demanded extortionate prices from people so great.

But the packed dwellings, however picturesque, were anything but healthy; plague broke out in 1898, and in that and the years that followed, again and again took a heavy toll of human lives. So a scheme for removing all inhabitants to higher, healthier sites, where each house should have air and light on at least two sides, where streets should be wide and tree-bordered, and where pure water and electric light should be supplied to even the poorest homes, was put in hand.

Most of the uprooted Sirdars—whose houses in the fort resembled small fortresses—built spacious dwellings on the windswept uplands to the south-east of the city. For the poorer people land and facilities for building were given in the south-west extensions.

Vāsudevācārya [1962, p. 40] too indicates that many houses in the fort were massively built, and that some wooden columns were so heavy as to have required two elephants to move.

Regarding relocation to sites outside the fort, Śāstri [1927, p. 1] indicates that the fort’s residents were allowed to purchase land outside the fort at the rate of 2 ¯

Aṇeper square foot

when the homes in the fort were demolished. The fort forms a quadrange of about 450 yards on three sides, the fourth side being a little longer, so that its area was well under a tenth of a square mile. This is the second time the fort was rebuilt, an even older fort and town having been razed by T.ippu Maisūru sometime after 1787 [Rao 1936a, p. 139]. Wellesley writes to Earl Mornington in June 1799 [Wellington 1858, p. 245]

. . . Henry and I went over to Old Mysore yesterday, and I am sorry to tell you that not a single house is standing in it. In New Mysore there are some houses, but very bad ones. . . I am at a loss to say where the Rajah ought to be musnuded. . .

The fort seems to have always been crowded. The following account of what existed in the older fort, razed by T.ippu, is from Row [1922, p. 90], based on a manuscript dated 1785:

. . . 1 inner fort, 1 outer fort, 1 anṭufort adjacent to the pleasure gardens, 1 basti street (Jainas?), 1 Tamiḷs’ street behind the palace, 1 street behind the storehouse and next to the temple of Nāraśidēva of H ūḍya, 1 storehouse street. In the outer

112

sons of sarasvatī

The Śāstri had his daughter-in-law and grandchildren come to Mais ūru in the bahuḷahalf of Mārgaśira.353 Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇaśāstri alone remained in Nagara. The need for fiinal rites commonly arose unexpectedly, and he won the gratitude of the many people on whose behalf he performed them. No one in the region could match his skill in performing rites for the living or the dead. It was now the month of Puṣya. A telegram arrived from Nagara for the Śāstri at four in the afternoon, on the third.354 It read: “Your son is ill with plague. Please leave immediately.”

The grief of the Śāstri and his daughter-in-law upon receiving this news is beyond description. Wasting no time, the Śāstri left with everyone by the 5 o’clock train for Nañjanag ūḍu. Three-fourths of the households in Cāmarājanagara lived in huts at this time; the town was very sparsely populated. People would come to town only at the time of the temple rituals, and then leave promptly. When the Śāstri arrived in Nagara the morning of the fourth, he found his helpless forty-eight-year-old son bedridden. Everyone was completely overcome by grief at this sight. But what does grief accomplish? They arranged for medical treatment. He begged Providence humbly to spare his only son. But what can mere Man do to thwart the Boatman of Time?

On the eighth day was the anniversary of the Śāstri’s mother’s death.355

Here lay his son, incapable even of speech. Somehow or the other, and as quickly as he could, he completed the śrāddharites for his mother. The sun slowly set. The moon rose in the heavens and spread its immortal rays across the world. Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa gradually prepared to face death. The grandchildren were young! It was the dead of night! Concerned that they might fort, 1 Royal street in front of the Durbar Hall, 1 *Daḷavāyi *(army general) street, 1 *tammaḍi *(priest) street, 1 street in front of the taxation offiice, 1 smaller street of brāhmaṇas, 1 larger street of brāhmaṇas, 1 *kaḍale *(legume) street, 1 florists’ street, 1 street around the Triṇayana temple, 1 street behind the stables, 1 shepherds’

street, 1 washermen’s street, 1 barbers’ street, 1 potters’ street, 1 sweepers’ street, 1

street inside the pleasure garden, 1 prostitutes’ street, 1 jānasāle, 1 potter’s market, 1

lime-mortar market, 2 tiger cages, similarly in the anṭufort, 29 streets, 1238 homes in 462 vaṭhāras, 14 stores, 120 wells, 13 maṇṭapas, 4 large halls, 2 rest houses, 2

revenue and taxation offiices. . .

353His daughter-in-law was Kr̥ṣṇamma (see page 102).

354That is, on the third śukla tithiof Puṣya of the Śarvari *saṁvatsara *(Monday, December 24, 1900).

355Puṣya śukla aṣṭamīof Śarvari would be Saturday, December 29, 1900 C.E.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 113

be frightened, the Śāstri sent the three children to the home of Bank Agent Ma∥Rāmaṇṇa, who lived across the street. Midnight too, came and passed.

As dawn was breaking, Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa’s life departed this mortal world and vanished.356 At his head was his father, and at his side was his wife, both enduring their grief and thinking of Nārāyaṇa. Here lay the Śāstri’s only son dead in his prime. . . Is further account needed of the father’s grief and of that of the wife?

This pen deserves to be reduced to ashes! We are unable to write of what follows! Dear reader! This pen refuses to move! This tightness in this throat is unbearable! Tears of sorrow flow freely from these eyes! These events of seventeen years ago stand clearly before these eyes. A wretch is this writer! Here he sits, writing of his own father’s death: his anguish is beyond control. Forgive him, it was not his intention to bring these matters up with you. It is his duty, however, to be forthright in writing this biography. Do bear him out with patience.

After his son’s death, the Śāstri returned to Mais ūru with his widowed daughter-in-law, the fourteen-year-old Narasiṁha, the twelve-year-old Veṇkaṭaramaṇa and the eight-year-old Subbatāyi. Things must go on, as ever.

After Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri suffered the inconsolable loss of his son, his brother Rāmāśāstri came to see him in Mais ūru. No sooner had their eyes met, than grief descended on them, surging as a torrent of tears from the eyes of both these learned brothers.

356This would have been Puṣya *śukla navamī,*or December 30, 1900 C.E.

9. Grandchildren’s Progress. A Time of

Change

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was a manof courage. Consoling himself that such were the ways of the world, he devoted himself to the education of his grandchildren. Narasiṁha, his eldest grandson, had passed the Mais ūru Lower-Secondary examination in the First Class.357 He now wanted to study English. The Śāstri, determined to educate him in the traditional areas of scholarship, stopped sending him to school. He also stopped sending his younger grandson to school, wanting him to study with his elder brother, and began to teach them both poetry and Vēdicrecitation.

In the meanwhile, the Government decided to impose retirement on the Śāstri when he turned seventy in 1903, although he remained fully capable of teaching.358 The Śāstri petitioned for a continuance of his term of service on the grounds that he would remain competent to teach for many more years. This petition was not granted. The Śāstri then applied for his grandson Narasiṁha to be appointed as a teacher in the A.V. School in Cāmarājanagara, considering that he had passed his Prathamaexamination in Kannaḍa.359 This request was approved. Narasiṁha did not agree to this course, however. Not wanting to start working at such a young age at such a low salary, he now expressed a preference for working towards his Upper Secondary examination,360 were he to be granted the same amount as a scholarship. That request was approved. Given the acuity of his intellect, he passed the examination for a Teaching Certifiication within two years, fiinishing at the top of his class. By this time, the Śāstri had taught both his grandchildren the cantos of Māgha as well as the *Naiṣadha.*361

357A middle school certifiication examination after 7th standard. Standards 1–4 were “primary” and standards 5–7 were “lower secondary”. The “Primary” and “Lower-Secondary”

certifiicates suffiiced for “inferior” government service. “Superior” service levels required the

“Upper Secondary” or “Secondary School Leaving Certifiicate (ṢṢḶC.)” credential.

358See footnote 336.

359The Prathamaexamination typically certifes the fiirst level of competence in a fiield, usually a language. Subsequent levels may progress from Dvitīyato *Viśārada.*The A.V.

School would be the Anglo-Vernacular School in Cāmarājanagara.

360A certifiication examination after 10th standard, three years past “Lower Secondary”.

361This refers to the twenty cantos of the Śiśupāla Vadhaby Māgha and the Naiśadha-caritaby the 12th-century poet Śrīharṣa. Also see footnote 236.

114

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 115

A surprising turn of events occurred in Mais ūru at this time. We may recall that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri had joined the ranks of the palace scholars when he was twenty-eight. One day, our present king Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV personally reviewed a list of palace scholars, their accomplishments, and details of how long they had served in their capacity.362 The king used to be taught Kannaḍa and Saṁskr̥taby Sōsale Ayyā Śāstri, who was Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s son-in-law. On some occasion, when Ayyā Śāstri was away on leave, he had asked his father-in-law to substitute for him. Our king, having studied with our protagonist, came to know his abilities well. Cāmarāja Voḍeyar X, the father of our king, had also entrusted the education of our king and 1903

the Yuvarājato our protagonist.363 The Śāstri would instruct these these two children, aged six and eight, in various elementary subjects, including material that they were to commit to memory. Remember-ing this well, and being generous and a great patron of scholarship, our king ordered that he be appointed to the rank of *Mahāvidvān.*He obtained a salary commensurate with this status.

Deciding to return to Cāmarājanagara after he became a pensioner, he went there with his younger grandson Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri. There, he instructed him in subjects such as the R.gveda Saṁhita, the Aṣṭādhyāyī, and śikṣā.364 He would also ensure that he constantly reviewed the poetry he had learned in Mais ūru. During this time, this boy studied Kannaḍa on his own, on the strength of his knowledge of Saṁskr̥ta. He also subscribed to various Kannaḍa magazines, and began to write in Kannaḍa. The Śāstri did not approve of this course. He remained silent, however, not wanting to become an obstacle in his path.

His grandchildren were both married by this time, so their wives were at home, as well. Following his Upper Secondary, Narasiṁhaśāstri had also completed various certifiications, such as in Training and Drawing. Śrīkan.-

ṭha Śāstri applied to the Government to fiind him a position in Cāmarājanagara on this basis, and they happily obliged.

362Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV (1884–1940 C.E.) ascended to the throne in 1894 C.E.

363These children were Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV and YuvarājaKaṇṭhīrava Narasiṁharāja Voḍeyar, his younger brother and heir to the throne. These princes were both sons of Cāmarāja Voḍeyar X by Mahārāṇī Kempa Nañjammaṇṇi, Vāṇī Vilāsa *Sannidhāna. *

364The R.gveda Saṁhitais the metrical portion of the R.gveda. The Aṣṭādhyāyīis Pāṇini’s work on Saṁskr̥tagrammar. Śikṣāis the science of proper pronunciation and articulation of the *Vēdas. *

Plate 28: Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s second wedding, 1909 C.E. The bride sits at extreme right next to the turbaned bridegroom.

See footnote 369 for the names of the individuals in this photograph. Image courtesy Smt. Pārvatī Upavarṣa, granddaughter of Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 117

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s entire family lived in Cāmarājanagara in 1908. Narasiṁha Śāstri and Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri were employed as teachers in the A.V. School and in the Saṁskr̥taPāṭhaśālā, respectively. The Śāstri was teaching them both grammar at this time.

Kr̥ṣṇamma, the Śāstri’s daughter-in-law, was now in charge of household matters. Everything functioned as she directed. The Śāstri was devoted entirely to his own studies, teaching his grandchildren, his daily rituals and worship, and to spiritual matters. He had distanced himself from worldly discord.

*“Kālasya kuṭilā gatih..”*365 We seem to be returning often to the topic of Time! Time operates in strange ways, indeed. No one could stand fiirm to oppose its course. Time has no compassion. It cares little for who is rich, who is learned, or who is good. It should be clear to our readers that Time has been especially cruel to our protagonist. Going forward, Time showed particular intransigence with regard to the Śāstri.

In 1909, on the seventh śuddha tithiof the month of Vaiśākha in the Saumya saṁvatsara, Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri’s wife passed away in Mattigūḍu, near Rāmanāthapura, after giving birth to a daughter.366 It is impossible to describe the Śāstri’s grief. Bearing this with fortitude, he had had Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri married to the daughter of Gaṇapatiśāstri of Cāmarājanagara on the tenth śuddha tithiof the month of Śrāvaṇa of the very same year.367

Strange indeed were Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri’s fortunes. Whether this was designed to increase the Śāstri’s grief, or due to Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri’s ill fortune, or for some other reason, we cannot say. But this girl, too, died of the plague within two months of her marriage. Now ensued a battle between Kālapuruṣaand the omniscient Śāstri.368 The one was all-knowing, the other a master of deception. But could the master of subterfuge stand fiirm before the omniscient? Subduing Kāla, the Śāstri arranged for Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri to wed a girl from Śrīraṇgapaṭṭaṇa in the month of Māgha that same year.369

365“Time flows in devious ways.” The original is “apsu plavante pāṣāṇā mānuṣā ghnanti *rākṣasān | kapayaḥkarma kurvanti kālasya kuṭilā gatih. ∥” *

366The given tithicorresponds to April 26, 1909 C.E. In keeping with South Indian custom, the wife would have been in her father’s house for the child’s birth.

367See Plate 28. The tithigiven corresponds to July 27, 1909 C.E.

368 *Kāla-puruṣa *(“death-person”) may be taken to mean either Death personifiied, or as Death’s messenger.

369The individuals in Plate 28, as identifiied by Sarōjā Veṇkaṭarām, granddaughter of

118

sons of sarasvatī

Kālapuruṣabecame ever more resentful of the Śāstri. To sate his grudge, he opposed himself to the Śāstri by assuming the name Virōdhikr̥t, and on the fourteenth śukla tithiof Vaiśākha, seized as sacrifiice the mortal body of the Śāstri’s younger brother ¯

Asthāna MahāvidvānCāma-

May 12, 1911

rājanagara Rāmāśāstri.370 The Śāstri now burned with regret at having challenged someone as base as Kāla. Recalling the saying *“alpara saṇga abhimānabhaṇga” *,371 he refused to engage this base individual, and thinking only of the deep regard he had for his brother, composed several caramaślōkason him. We give only one of these here.372

aham’apy’anuyāsyāmi bhavantam’acirād’iva |

vatsa rāma mayi prītiṁ nijān’draḍhaya mānasē ∥

Meaning: Dear child! Rāma! Ever keep in mind my love for you! My only wish is to follow you!

What love the Śāstri had for his brother! What compassion! How unbearable his sorrow! What a paragon of brotherly affection! Bravo! An exalted Self! Bravo! An ample example of brotherly love!

Ayyā Śāstri: *Standing, L–R:*Subbamma (wife of Narasiṁhaśāstri, who is seated to her left), Veṇkaṭalakṣamma (daughter of Ayyā Śāstri), Veṇkaṭasubbamma (“Subbatāyi”, sister of Narasiṁhaśāstri, daughter-in-law of Ayyā Śāstri), Lakṣmīdevamma (wife of Ayyā Śāstri, daughter of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri), *Seated on chairs, L–R:*Narasiṁhaśāstri (grandson of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri), Veṇkaṭalakṣmī (with baby, elder sister of Narasiṁhaśāstri and wife of Mattig ūḍu Narasiṁhaśāstri), Mattigūḍu Narasiṁhaśāstri, Cāmarājanagara Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri (bridegroom), Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri’s bride (second wife). *Seated on ground, L–R:*unknown girl in the background (daughter of Narasiṁhaśāstri?), Māṇikyā (eldest daughter of Veṇkaṭalakṣamma, granddaughter of Ayyā Śāstri), Subbamma (Ayyā Śāstri’s daughter-in-law, wife of Kr̥ṣṇasvāmiśāstri), Śēśagiri (Veṇkaṭalakṣamma’s third son), Veṇkaṭaramaṇayya (Śeśagiri’s elder brother, also called “Subbaṇṇa”), Śāmaṇṇa (Veṇkaṭalakṣamma’s second son), Lalitā (Veṇkaṭalakṣamma’s youngest daughter)

370 Virōdhikr̥tmeans “The Opposer”. Virōdhikr̥t is also the name of a saṁvatsarain the South Indian calendar. The given tithicorresponds to May 12, 1911 C.E.

371“Keeping company with the dishonourable leads to naught but dishonour.”

372These ślōkasappear in Śāstri [1925b, p. 83]: “vidvadvr̥ndair aśeṣairvinutasukavitāsīma-pāṇḍityagehai | śrīkr̥ṣṇabrahmatantrānkitavara parakālākhya karmandivaryaiḥ|| bhūyo-bh ūyassaharṣaṁ pracalita śirasā ślyāghyamānātyudāra | śleṣotprekṣāpratīpaprabhr̥ti bahu-vidhālaṁkr̥ti prauḍhamedhaḥ|| 1 || śrīmatcāmendra kr̥ṣṇakṣitipa nr̥pasabhā prollasac.-

choṇaratnaṁ | vidvaddhr̥dyānavadyābhinavakavicaḥprauḍhapadyādhvaṉīnaḥ|| jāto rāmassumedhāssurasadasi mahāvaiduṣīślāghaṉīyaḥ| lokā ślokān yatheṣṭaṁ racayatakava-yaḥprākr̥taślāghaṉīyān || 2 || yathābaroḍāprabhuṇihayo bhavatkavitvam ākarṇya jaharṣa-nirbharaṁ | tadvatsarāmādya sa cāmarāṭtathā niśamyahr̥ṣyatyahi vidviṣādivi || 3 || ahamapi anuyāsyāmi bhavantamacirādiva | vatsarāma mayiprītiṁ nijāndhraḍayamānase || 4 *||” *

10. The King’s Favour

WerecallthatNarasiṁhaŚāstriisnowworkingasAssistantTeacher

at the school in Cāmarājanagara. At this time, he was invited by the Government to obtain his Paṇḍitacertifiication from the Normal School in Mais ūru.373 Narasiṁha Śāstri went alone to Mais ūru to complete his course of study. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri lived with his grandfather in Nagara, and continued his Vēdicstudies while working as instructor at the Saṁskr̥taSchool there. He started the monthly magazine Kādambarīsaṇgraha in 1912. Narasiṁhaśāstri obtained his Paṇḍitacertifiication in a timely manner, and returned to Nagara. The Śāstri’s income being modest, and there being many hindrances to the smooth publication of his monthly, Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri came to Maisūru with his grandfather’s permission.

On November 1st, 1913, the Kannaḍa teacher in the Marimallappa High School happened to be on leave. At this time, Ma∥ ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya, a great admirer of learning, having heard accounts of Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s learning through others, sent for him and asked him to begin work as a Kannaḍa *paṇḍita.*He knew the all-round scholarship of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri very well. Even to this day, he continues to foster Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, engaging with him on discussions of the Śāstri’s scholarship, and sharing with him many valuable suggestions related to teaching. The writer wishes to salute and acknowledge his gratitude to the Headmaster.374

At this time, Kuṭṭanarasiṁhaśāstri, who held the title of Dharmādhikāriat the palace, passed away.375 Our king, personally considering the question of who was deserving of the title of *Dharmādhikāri,*selected our protagonist, as a great scholar and fully qualifiied for the honour.

Narasiṁha Śāstri, of course, was still in Nagara. His income was insuf-fiicient to sustain his household. Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri had remained in Maisūru, having to visit the palace frequently after his appointment as *Dharmādhikāri.*The Śāstri was concerned that his family continued to face fiinancial 373This school trained teachers. See footnote 333.

374ṀVeṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇayya served as Headmaster for thirty-fiive of the forty-three years he worked at the Marimallappa School. He became a revered fiigure in Mais ūru, and was affectionately known as Mais ūru Tātayya, or “Mais ūru Grandfather”. See page 104.

375Kuṭṭi Narasiṁha Śāstri was the son of Kuṭṭi Śāstri, who also had been Dharmādhikāri.

See footnotes 588 and 604.

119

120

sons of sarasvatī

hardships, and that his grandchildren’s earnings were not commensurate with their learning. He wrote about his grandchildren’s situation to Ma∥

ṀŚāmrāv, then Inspector General of the Mais ūru Department of Education, and who had earlier studied Saṁskr̥tawith him. We give the letter here for the information of our readers.

ślō ∥

śyāmarāyaś’cirāyus’syāt saha·putra·prapautrakaḥ|

mahāmātra·padē sthitvā jagad’rakṣaṇa·dakṣiṇah. ∥1∥

vēdē śāstrē pravīṇān avitari viduṣi sthūla·lakṣyē kudaivā j’jātē svarg’āvataṁsē yadu·kula·tilakē kr̥ṣṇa·rājē tr̥tīyē |

tatpautrē rakṣati kṣmāṁ sadasi sacivatām’ētya rakṣan budhēndrān jīyāc.’chri śyāmarāyas’saha·suta·sasutaḥpūrṇa·kāmaś’cirāyuh. ∥2∥

yaṁ kañcit samayaṁ prapāṭhya mahatīṁ prāptaḥpratiṣṭhāṁ jaga·

ty’ēṣō_dya sthavirōbhavan budhamaṇiḥśrīkaṇṭha·śarmā budhaḥ|

*lōkādr̥tya·kalā·pravīṇa·sasut’ānālamba·pautra·dvayah. *

sīdan’ prārthayatē bhavantam’adhunā vidyāvatāṁ jīvitam ∥3∥

alpīyasī sthāvira·jīvikā mē nālaṁ tath’ālpaṁ nija·vētanaṁ’ca |

ēvaṁ viniścitya jagat·pratīta·kalā·vidagdhatvam’ avāpatus’tau ∥4∥

gurau purāṇē mayi pakṣapātā·t’svatantra·suślāghya·padē niviṣṭaḥ|

vatsāv’ih’ēmāv’acirān’madīyaṁ padam bhavān prāpayat’īti manyē ∥5∥

triṁśad’any ūna·r ūpyāṇi bhr̥tir’yatra na tatpadam |

na kāṁkṣati pravīṇatvāt’ pautrō jyāyān kalāsu mē ∥6∥

rājājñ’ōddiṣṭa·vidyāsu niṣṇātas’suciraṁ mama |

pautraḥkutsayatē matka·bhavad’ēkānta·saṁgatam ∥ 7∥

yath’aitat’kutsanaṁ mēdya na syāt kr̥tvā tathā bhavān |

mahāmātr’ādhikār’ārhō bhavatv’ity’arthayē_niśam ∥8∥

pañcōnapañcāśad’rūpyāṇy’āsan mē vētanaṁ purā |

tat·padaṁ nēṣyas’īmaṁ drāg’ iti manyē dr̥ḍhaṁ vibhō ∥9∥

mahīs ūra·purī

iti bhavataḥśrēy’ābhilāśī

ānanda·saṁvatsara

*cā ∥ śrīkaṇṭha·śāstri. *

A paraphrase of this in Kannaḍa is as follows.

May Śāmrāv, who is devoted to the service of the people, live long, together with his children and grandchildren. ∥1∥

May Śāmrāv, who protects scholars and graces his ministerial position in the reign of the grandson who rules after the ascension to

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 121

heaven of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, ornament to the Yadu race and great patron of learning, live a long and exalted life, his wishes fulfiilled, and in the company of his children and grandchildren. ∥2∥

A scholar named Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, having spent his time on teaching his students and attaining some distinction, is now aged, but has two grandchildren who have families but insuffiicient income.

Both his grandchildren are learned in fiields that are valued in this world. Therefore, this old man makes this request of you, who provide livelihood to the learned. ∥3∥

These two grandchildren, considering that their aged grandfather’s income is meager, have attained scholarship in the currently valued fiields of Kannaḍa and Saṁskr̥ta. ∥4∥

Being in a distinguished position of independent authority, and out of regard for me as your former teacher, I am hopeful that you will be able to appoint my grandchildren to the position I once occupied. ∥5∥

My elder grandson being well-learned in Kannaḍa and Saṁskr̥ta, believes it would be unbefiitting to accept a salary of less than thirty *R ūpīs. *∥6∥

Having passed all his examinations in accordance with the Government’s directives, he now urges me to request the benevolent Śāmrāv to fiind him an appointment. ∥7∥

I trust that you, who are in a position of authority, will be able to oblige me in accordance with his wishes. ∥8∥

My salary in the Normal School was forty-fiive *R ūpīs.*I am hopeful that you will defiinitely appoint him to that position. ∥9∥

Mais ūru

wishing for your greater acclaim

Āṣāḍha *māsa, *Ānanda saṁvatsara

Cā ∥ Śrīkaṇṭhaśāstri.

This letter reached Ma∥ Rā∥ Śāmrāv in a timely manner. He read it, and on account of his great regard for the Śāstri, appointed Narasiṁha at a salary of twenty-fiive *R ūpīs,*although deserving of more, and transferred him to the Normal School in Mais ūru. In a short while, in accordance with new Government rules fiixing the salary for all Kannaḍa teachers at thirty *R ūpīs,*Narasiṁha Śāstri began to receive a salary of thirty *R ūpīs.*In due course, he is certain to qualify for the position that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri held,

122

sons of sarasvatī

and we have every expectation that his salary will soon match the amount the Śāstri received.

Let us now recall that our king, after deep reflection and consideration, had appointed Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri to the position of *Dharmādhikāri.*As the Śāstri, immersed in an ocean of joy at the unbidden benevolence of the king, fervently wished for his greater glory, reflecting again and again upon his generosity, compassion, and commitment to scholarly patronage, the gratitude in his heart expressed itself in the form of several *ślōkas.*He had Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri write down these *ślōkas,*which issued forth spontaneously. He now wanted to recite these ślōkashimself, in the king’s presence. Veṇkaṭaraman. Śāstri had these verses and their meaning published, as the Śāstri’s directed, as a book with the title *Mahārājābhyudayapraśaṁsā. *

It is, of course, impossible for the common man to have an audience with the king. Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri had the book published, but how was he now to fulfiill his wish to read it before the king and express his gratitude?

Upon discussing this matter with several offiicials at the palace, they recommended that he apply to the king’s Private Secretary. After the Śāstri accordingly submitted his request, an envelope arrived from the Offiice of the Private Secretary at ten in the morning of the ninth śuddha tithiof Āṣāḍha

of the Ānanda saṁvatsara.376 Upon being opened, it read as follows: The Palace

Mais ūru

To DharmādhikāriŚrīkaṇṭha Śāstri.

Your application was received. Upon being presented with it, His Majesty was pleased to grant you an audience between 1 O’clock and 2 O’clock in the afternoon of Prathamēkādaśī, and to hear a reading of the verses you have composed.377 You are requested to favour us with your presence accordingly.

The Śāstri, elated upon learning the contents of the letter, called out:

“Veṇkaṭaramaṇa! Come here!”, and as his grandson too was delighting in the letter, said to him: “The king’s command is that he wishes to hear my *ślōkas.*Rather than go to the palace alone, it appears better for me to take you with me, have you read the *ślōkas,*and explain their meaning myself.

376This date corresponds to July 2, 1914 C.E.

377 Prathama ekādaśīis the name given to the eleventh śukla tithiin the month of Āṣāḍha.

(a) ḤḤKr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV.

(b) Yuvarāja Kaṇṭhīrava

(c) Personal Secretary

Narasiṁharāja Voḍeyar

Mirza Ismail

Plate 29: Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV, his brother Kaṇṭhīrava Narasiṁharāja Voḍeyar, and Personal Secretary Mirza Ismail (later Dīvānof Mais ūru).

(a) Procession at the marriage of ḤḤYuvarāja Kanṭhīrava Narasiṁharāja Voḍeyar to ḤḤKempu Celuvammaṇṇiyavaru, June 17, 1910. Construction of this new palace began after the fiire of 1897, and was completed in 1912.

(b) Karīkallu Toṭṭireception area in the new palace.

Plate 30: Palace facade and the Karīkallu Toṭṭiaround the time of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s visit in 1914 C.E. The current facade of the palace differs from that seen above. By permission of the British Library.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 125

You have never had the opportunity to visit the palace. Our family has been well known to the Palace since the reign of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III. The two of you (grandchildren) will need the Palace’s patronage in the future. The king is well acquainted with the scholarly tradition within our family. You must maintain this reputation going forward. Be ready by noon on the day after tomorrow. Let us go to the palace together,” and proceeded for his bath.

The day of Prathamēkādaśīarrived. The Śāstri and his grandson Veṇkaṭaramaṇa completed their baths, daily rituals, and p ūjasby ten that morning, and readied themselves to go to the palace. They both wrapped on their turbans, and wearing shawls and crisp dhotīs, arrived at the Karīkallu Toṭṭi with phalamantrākṣatein their hands at half past noon.378 The offiicer in attendance seated them, and informed Private Secretary Mirzā sāhēbof their arrival.379 Mirzā sāhēbarrived immediately, and respectfully inquiring after the Śāstri’s well-being and that of Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, conveyed news of their arrival to the king’s presence. The king, observing that it was nearly one o’clock, and thinking to himself: “The Śāstri is fasting today, since it is Ekādaśī. He is advanced in years. He must be very tired, having been asked to come here today,” directed Mirzā sāhēbto request the Śāstri to come up if he weren’t too tired. Accordingly, Mirzā sāhēbasked the Śāstri to proceed upstairs, and began ascending the stairs himself.

378This is the traditional formal dress in Karnāṭaka. See the picture of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri in the frontispiece. The *Karīkallu Toṭṭi *(“black stone courtyard”) is one of the entrances to the palace. See Plate 30b. (British Library notes accompanying this photograph: “The room is at the extreme end of the Palace on the west. Its construction is in the Hindu style, with carved wooden pillars, spaced 10 feet every way, connected at top with arched carved panels, and roofed with ceiling planks. It is furnished in the European style, and is the room chiefly used by the late Maharaja for receiving visitors and the chief offiicers of state.”) Phalamantrākṣate is a gift of coconut and fruits, accompanied by a benediction in the form of mantrākṣate, which are whole grains of rice ( *“akṣata”*meaning “unbroken”), dyed with turmeric and consecrated with mantras. These are cast on a person while delivering a benediction. Also see footnote 161 for a different meaning of akṣate.

379This “Mirzā sāhēb” is none other than Mirzā Ismail, a distinguished public servant who became Private Secretary to Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV after R̥ḤCampbell retired from service in 1912 C.E. He went on to serve as Dīvānof Mysore 1926–1941 C.E., Dīvānof Jaipur 1942–

1946 C.E., and Dīvānof Haiderābād 1946–1947 C.E. Mirza Ismail’s family came to India from Iran in the 1800s, and sold horses to the British and regional armies. The family had always been close to the Voḍeyars, and Mirza Ismail and Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV were even classmates at the Royal School [Guṇḍappa 1970, v. 4, p. 149].

126

sons of sarasvatī

When Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri began to follow them, the Sāhēbasked him to remain behind. When Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri politely requested the Sāhēb:

“It is important that he remain with me. May it please you to allow that,” he was pleased to conduct them both to the king’s chamber, and leaving them outside, went into the room, informed the king, returned, and indicating that the Śāstri should proceed into the room, and that Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri could enter if the king so directed, sent the Śāstri into the room, and returned downstairs. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri seated himself next to a curtain near the door.

Since our readers may be interested in seeing the Mais ūru palace, it would not be out of place to say a few things in that regard. Certainly, all visitors to Mais ūru will have seen the marvellous palace within the fort. The present structure was only recently built. The old palace was not as robust as the present building. After it burned down, the present beautiful stone structure was built at an expense of crores.380 Some parts of the old palace remain. That point is what we must now elaborate.

The palace facade, as it now appears, is called the *sejje.*The royal darbār is held on the second floor during the Navarātri festivities. That is familiar to all. If one enters the palace, turns left, and walks a few steps, one beholds the magnifiicent maṇṭapaof Bhuvanēśvarī. The darbaris also held here, on occasion. Upon ascending the staircase to Bhuvanēśvarī’s left, one arrives at the royal maṇṭapacalled the Ambā Vilāsa. This is a unique sight. Nowhere else does such an attractive structure exist. Across from the Ambā Vilāsa is the Cāmuṇḍī Toṭṭi.381 Here are performed daily ahōrātra abhiśēkas, p ūjās, various sacraments, japās, tapas, and Vēdicrecitations, for Cāmuṇḍēśvarī, our king’s family deity. To the Cāmuṇḍī Toṭṭi belong many offiicials and great scholars.382 The palace also has many other sections, including the 380The old palace was erected in 1799 C.E., when the Voḍeyar dynasty was restored after the death of T.ippu Sultān in the Fourth Mysore war. This palace was constructed primarily of wood, and partially burned in February 1897 C.E., during the wedding of Princess Jayalakṣammaṇṇī and ṀKaṇṭharāj Arasu, who went on to become Dīvānof Mysore. The current palace is a stone structure designed by Henry Irwin, and was completed in 1912 C.E., at a cost of approximately 4.1 million *R ūpīs. *

381The term toṭṭiis best translated as “courtyard”, and can have various meanings. It may, for instance, refer to the apartments within the palace of the various queens. In other contexts, it refers to administrative units of the palace.

382The Cāmuṇḍī Toṭṭi had a signifiicant religious function. In 1868 C.E., when the palace

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 127

Sammukhada Toṭṭi, Madanavilāsada Toṭṭi, Kannaḍi Toṭṭi, and the Karīkallu Toṭṭi.

To the west of Bhuvanēśvarī is the Kannaḍi Toṭṭi. Here are performed during Navarātri many japas, pārāyaṇas, and worship rituals for Cāmuṇḍī.

During this time, the king presents himself both morning and evening, at the time of dīpārādhanefor the deity.

To the west of the Kannaḍi Toṭṭi is the Karīkallu Toṭṭi.383 Across from the Lakṣmīramaṇasvāmi temple in the fort is the large door that leads to the Karīkallu Toṭṭi. On special occasions, such as the king’s birthday, ceremonies such as āratiand akṣateare performed here. The offiices of the king’s Private Secretary are in the Karīkallu Toṭṭi. A fortress wall runs next to it, and a charming garden faces this *toṭṭi.*If one enters through the door opposite the Jaganmōhana Palace and turns right, one sees the garden mentioned above on the right and the Karīkallu Toṭṭi on the left. This toṭṭiis so called because it is built entirely of black stone. On the upper floor of this toṭṭi, facing the garden, are visible many large windows. These windows are covered with thin curtains of silk. Inside the Karīkallu Toṭṭi is a staircase. If we ascend this staircase and turn left, we espy a small apartment. This small apartment is the king’s residence.384

was reorganized by Raṇgācārlu and Elliot after the death of Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III, this toṭṭi had 96 religious employees and 100 paṇḍitasattached to it [Elliot 1878].

383See Plate 30b.

384A substantial fort and palace had long existed on this spot (see Row [1922, p. 90]), but T.ippu had razed the old town and palace. Also see footnote 352. Wilks [1869, p. 119]

remarks regarding T.ippu’s actions: “The town and fort of Mysoor, the ancient residence of the Rajas. . . was an offensive memorial of the deposed family, and he determined that the existence, and if possible, the remembrance, of such a place, should be extinguished.” The description given in the main text is of the new palace rebuilt after the fiire of 1897, which we may contrast with the following account by Furneaux [1895, p. 411] of the old palace built by the British upon moving the capital from Śrīraṇgapaṭṭaṇa to Maisūru after T.ippu’s death in 1799 (also see Rice [1877b, p. 254]):

. . . The Maharajah’s palace is in the centre of a walled garden, a part of which is laid out with flowers, and the rest planted with fruit trees. It was built in 1800, and is of the ultra-Hindu style of architecture, extravagantly ornamented with numerous small balconies and coned roofs, surmounted by gilt pinnacles. The front of the palace is tawdrily painted, and supported by four square pillars, covered with fantastic carvings. Immediately within this, is the Seije, or Dasara Hall.

This is an open pillared gallery, in which the Maharajah shows himself at the Dasara feast, and on other state occasions, seated on the great Mysore throne, which is the most remarkable thing in the palace. A palace legend says it was

128

sons of sarasvatī

Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri entered here, and was seated on a cane couch before the king. The king, whose compassion is boundless, reminisced with the Śāstri about many matters, starting with his early years of educa-July 3, 1914

tion down to the present. When the Śāstri, amazed that the

king had remembered such details, profusely praised the king’s virtues and his generosity, declared his eternal gratitude for having been the throne of the fiirst chiefs of Mysore, the Panders, who buried it at Penkonda.

It was found there, 250 years after, by a late dynasty, to whom a *Jogi,*or holy man, revealed its whereabouts. It was then used by the Mysore sovereigns up to the time of Tippoo Sultan. When Seringapatam was taken by the British, it was found in a lumber room, and was used at the coronation of the young Rajah. It was originally of fiigwood, overlaid with ivory. After the restoration of the Rajah, the ivory was plated with gold and silver, and beautifully carved with Hindu mythological fiigures, especially the lion and the swan. The roof of the palace is terraced, and from the windows of the upper rooms, one steps into a lovely flower garden. The palace contains many prettily decorated and well proportioned rooms. Some of the walls and ceilings are covered with small pieces of glass, having various coloured foils. On the walls are also small mirrors, arranged in patterns, and by candlelight the effect of the reds, blues and greens is very striking and brilliant. On some of the walls are pictures representing incidents in the history of the Hindu gods, painted on cardboard and covered with glass. There is a striking view from the windows of one of the apartments; a large tank forms the foreground, on the opposite side of which is a series of small temples, and on the left a marble cenotaph to the memory of a former Rajah. The background to this picture is formed by the rugged and wild-looking Chamundi Hill. This, together with some of the buildings, is mirrored in the waters of the tank. Other rooms worthy of mention in the palace are the *amba-vilasa,*with its dazzling white chunam floor and beautifully carved silver and inlaid ebony, and ivory doors, a reception room for European guests, and the painted hall, with massive walls of mud, the only original relic of the original palace, which was destroyed by Tippoo Sultan. The whole palace is in bad repair, and is fast crumbling into decay. It presents, with its gorgeous doors and chairs of solid silver, its ramshakle staircases and tumble-down turrets, a curious mixture of magnifiicence and sordid squalor, which is so often found in the palaces of Indian potentates.

Opposite the western gate of the fort is a fiine and lofty building, called the *Mohan Mahalar,*or “Pleasure Palace,” which was built for the entertainment of the European offiicers of Mysore. The lower story is a pillared colonnade, running round a large courtyard. The walls of the upper story are decorated with grotesque paintings of Indian hunting scenes. The state jewels and a magnifiicent collection of splendid diamonds, rubies, sapphires, emeralds and enormous pear-shaped pearls, some uncut and merely roughly thrust into solid gold bands, or strung together on golden threads, others beautifully cut and set as necklaces, pendants, ear-rings, etc., are now strongly guarded in the palace.

There had been a theft of palace jewels in 1868 C.E. See footnote 226.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 129

favoured with the status of *Dharmādhikāri,*and said that he had composed some ślōkasin his praise, and that he had brought along his grandson to read them, the king said: “*Oho!*Where is he, then? Why did he not come in?” to which the Śāstri responded that he was awaiting the king’s command. Ever playful, the king himself arose immediately, went and turned the knob of the apartment’s spring door, peeked at Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri seated outside, and called him in. While Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri sat astonished at having been called by the king himself, the king returned and stood within the apartment. As Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri stood struggling and distressed by the door, not knowing how to open it, the king came outside, smiling and saying: “Is there a problem? Do open the door and come in!” and showed him how to open the door. They both entered the room. “Where are the ślōkas?

Do read them,” the king commanded.

Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri now read the ślōkasslowly, and with clear articulation.385 The Śāstri translated the verses as they were read. It took about three-quarters of an hour to read them all. Delighted at having heard the verses, the king again asked after the well-being of the Śāstri and the grandson, taking great satisfaction in hearing about the grandson, graciously accepted the books, and bid farewell to the Śāstri. After returning home, the Śāstri remained afloat in an ocean of happiness, repeatedly praising the king’s excellent disposition, his high character, and the clarity of the memories of his childhood.

385Footnote in original: “These ślōkashave been published with their translations. The book is priced at one ¯

*Aṇe.*They describe the virtues of the king, and of the Vāṇīvilāsa and Lakṣmīvilāsa matriarchs, the glories of the Navarātri celebrations, the wonders of plumbing and electricity, and prayers for the king’s welfare. Interested readers may obtain this work by writing to the offiices of the Kādambarī Saṇgraha.” The verses were published under the title Mahārājābhyudayapraśaṁsā. There were sixteen ¯

Aṇeto the Rūpīat the time. The lady

Vāṇīvilāsa was the king’s mother ḤḤKempanañjammaṇṇī, and the lady Lakṣmīvilāsa was ḤḤMahārāṇī Srī Pratāpa Kumārī Ammaṇṇī, the king’s consort. Also see footnote 774.

11. Perseverance

Rightlyhasit been said: *kālaḥkrīḍati gacchatyāyuh. *.386 Two years slipped away into the ocean of time. The Varṣhaseason of the Naḷa saṁvatsarawas under way. Festivals such as *Gaurīhabba, Vināyakana Cau-ti,*and Anantapadmanābha Vrata, followed by the Apara Pakṣaand then Śarannavarātriturned with the wheel of time and vanished. The festival called Narakacaturdaśīarrived in the waning fortnight of the month of Āśvayuja.387 It is the tradition on this day for everyone to arise at four o’clock in the morning and bathe. According to the *śāstras,*the practice of bathing after anointing oneself with oil on this day protects against the possibility of perdition. Everyone, widows included, is hence enjoined to apply some oil to one’s head, even in token deference to the *śāstras,*and then bathe.388

386This is from the Bhajagōvindamby ¯

AdiŚaṇkarācārya, and translates to “time sports and life ebbs away”. The full verse is “dinayāminyau sāyaṁ prātaḥśiśiravasantau punar-

*āyātaḥ| kalaḥkrīḍati gacchatyayuḥtadapi na muñcatyāśāvāyuh. ∥”*This translates to: “Day and night, evening and morning, winter and spring, arrive one upon the other. Time sports and life ebbs away, and yet we remain ensnared in the tempests of desire.”

387 Narakacaturdaśīfell on October 25, 1916 C.E. this year. The festivals mentioned are as follows. Svarṇagaurīvrata, or Gaurīhabba, as it is popularly known, falls on Bhādrapada śukla tritīyā, and Gaṇēśa Caturthīfalls on the following day. The Anantapadmanābha Vratafalls on Bhādrapada śukla caturdaśī. The apara pakṣais the following bahuḷafortnight.

Śarannavaratrīis the name given to the fiirst nine days of the śuklafortnight of the month of Āśvayuja, with the tenth day being Vijayadaśamī, more popularly known as Dasara, the state festival of Mais ūru. Narakacaturdaśīis the fourteenth tithiin the bahuḷafortnight of

Āśvayuja, marking the killing of the demon Narakāsura by Kr̥ṣṇa.

388 *Abhyaṇga *(or abhyañjana) *snāna *(bathing after inunction) is regarded as a propitious act, and is traditionally mandated on all auspicious occassions, including on one’s birthday, wedding day, and on important festive occassions. Abhyaṇgais also used as an ¯

Ayurvedic

prescription. It is an ancient practice. See, for example, Kālidāsa’s *Kumārasambhava *(2:7) :

*“sā gaurasiddhārthaniveśavadbhird ūrvāpravālaiḥpratibhinnaśobham | nirnābhikauśeyam-upāttabāṇamabhyaṇganepathyamalaṁcakāra ∥”*The last pādaof the verse describes how Pārvatī’s beauty, as she is about to be ritually bathed following anointment with oils just before her marriage to Śiva, embellishes the charm of her clothing (rather than the other way around). The extraordinary value attached to abhyañjanais illustrated by the tradition in the region of Śr̥ṇgēri in Karnāṭaka of showing hospitality to guests by inviting them home for the specifiic purpose of *abhyañjana *[Prasad 2007, p. 55]. Traditionally, oil is liberally massaged into one’s skin and head, and permitted to soak in. This is followed by a bath in water as hot as can be tolerated, and the oil removed using the flour of chickpeas ( Cicer arietinum) on one’s body and powdered soap nuts ( Sapindus) or *sīgekāyi *( Acacia concinna) in one’s hair.

130

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 131

The ladies and children in the Śāstri’s household arose at four that morning and completed their ritual oil baths. Everyone was done by a half past seven. The Śāstri alone was yet to start anointing himself with Oct. 25, 1916

oil. He had planned to start doing so after fiinishing his morning chores and washing up, and now entered the backyard.

Adventitious Fate caused the Śāstri to trip next to the drain and fall.389 The injury from the fall caused him to sprain his back. The Śāstri somehow managed to wash up, came indoors, and said that he would forego his ritual bath that day, since his back was hurting. He obtained some relief when his back was immediately massaged with oil, and in about three days, he felt better. He had his oil-bath after these three days. After this, the month of Kārtīka ended after festivals such as Dīpāvaliand *Utthānadvādaśī.*390

The Śāstri who had thus far been very robust bodily, now began to show signs of weakness. We all know the month of Mārgaśira as the season of harvest. Disregarding his infiirmity, the Śāstri travelled to Cāmarājanagara with his daughter-in-law Kr̥ṣṇamma in the bahuḷafortnight of Mārgaśira, since the rice paddy fiields needed harvesting. It being the time of Christ-mas vacations, Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri also travelled to Nagara to assist the Śāstri. The Śāstri never depended on anyone else. He always relied on his own exertions in accomplishing all tasks. He would supervise the threshing of the paddy himself. He would also wash all his own clothes himself. If his daughter-in-law or his children said to him: “Do not exert yourself! Let things be! We will do this work for you!”, he would simply remain silent.

He never said to anyone: “Do this for me. This is too much for me to do.”

Things remained as they were, until others perceived what was on his mind, and did what was required.

At this time, the Śāstri was studying the one hundred and eight Upaniṣadsand various Vēdiccommentaries. As had been his practice since his 389The original uses the term anicchāprārabdha. *Prārabdha *(see footnote 283), fructifiica-tion of prior karmain this birth, is classifiied into three kinds: icchā, parēccha, and anicchā.

The fiirst is driven by one’s own intention, the second by that of someone else, and the third operates independently, not subject to anyone’s intention. See, for example, Vidyāraṇya’s Pañcadaśī, chapter 7, verse 152: “naiṣa doṣo yatonekavidhaṁ prārabdhamīkṣyate | iccānicchā *parecchāca trividham smr̥taṁ ∥” *

390 Narakacaturdaśībegins the three-day period celebrated as Dīpāvali. Utthānadvādaśī is the twelfth śukla tithiin the month of Kārtīka, celebrated as the day when Viṣṇu awakens, having gone to sleep on Āṣāḍha *śukla ekādaśī. *

132

sons of sarasvatī

younger years, he would arise at three in the morning and review the formulæ of the Aṣṭādhyāyīand recite the Vedas. If he tired of sitting at home, he would walk two miles in the afternoon to the paddy fiields, supporting himself with his stick. His body continued to diminish every day. He conducted himself in accordance with the injunction391

ajarāmaravat’ prājñō vidyāmarthaṁ ca sādhayēt |

gr̥hīta iva kēśēṣu mr̥tyunā dharmam’ācarēt ∥

People who observed him on his walks feared for his well-being, concerned that he was weak, that he might fall, or that he might suffer confusions, even as they marvelled at his devotion to work and duty. The Śāstri paid no heed to what anyone said, performing all his work with care and thoughtfulness.

The Śāstri returned home at eleven in the morning on the third day of the śuklafortnight of the month of Puṣya, after supervising work in the fiields.392 Veṇkaṭasubbayya of Nagara then approached him, saying that a śrāddharitual was to be conducted at his home, that a priest was unavailable, and asking him to greatly oblige him by conducting the ritual. It was the middle of the afternoon! The possibility loomed of losing his brahminhood!393 Despite facing this dilemma, the kind-hearted Śāstri considerate of Veṇkaṭasubbayya’s abject state, agreed to go to his house. The afternoon past, Veṇkaṭasubbayya’s work was done, by the Śāstri’s goodwill. It was now about six in the evening.

391This slōkais from the Hitopadeśa. It translates to: “Let the wise man pursue knowledge and wealth as if he were ever youthful and immortal. Let him pursue dharmaas if Death had in its grasp the very hair on his head.”

392This would be December 16, 1916 C.E.

393The sentence is ambiguous, and the reasoning is unclear. The obvious reading is that the afternoon is an unsuitable time for the śrāddha. However, according to Manu (III, 278), and the ¯

*Apastamba S ūtra *(II, 7, 16), the afternoon is better than the forenoon for the ritual. Veṇkaṭasubbayya is a brāhmaṇa name, so the chances of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri coming into contact with impure materials at his home is unlikely. (See footnote 335.) The most likely possibility is that the śrāddhabeing a mandatory ritual, severe demerit accrues to one who fails to perform it. The demerit would clearly attach to Veṇkaṭasubbayya, but could also attach to Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri if his unwillingness to perform the ritual were to prevent Veṇkaṭasubbayya from performing it.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 133

At this time, Veṇkaṭasubbayya lived in a hut near the Kaṭṭe Haḷḷa bridge on the road to Nañjanag ūḍu.394 This hut is half a mile distant from the Śāstri’s farm. When the Śāstri indicated that he wished to look over the farm and then proceed home, and Kāśī Pāṇḍuraṇga Bhaṭṭa and Kempina Veṇkaṭarāmāvadhāni, who were both there, said: “Dear Śāstri! It is almost dark, and you are of advanced age. Please come with us, and we will take you home. Will it not be a problem if it gets dark by the time you reach your farm?”, the Śāstri responded: “There really is no problem. I will be sure to hurry. Please do not trouble yourself. Please go on,” and having sent them away, he proceeded alone along the path to the farm at dusk. It gradually became dark.

When the Śāstri, thinking that he would look over the farm and proceed home with one of the workers, called out, he found no one. The farm hands had all left for home before dusk. There was little moonlight, and there was a fence all round. Considering it best to proceed home,

Dec. 16, 1916

the Śāstri fiinished his Sandhyāvandanein the Kaṭṭe Haḷḷa, crossed the fence, and began walking between the hedgerows.

Getting home from the Śāstri’s farm required crossing several farms, fiields, hedgerows, and fences. This distance is about three-fourths of a mile. Since the fiields had just been ploughed, there lay about many large and heavy clumps of dirt, each of which a man could barely lift. Since it was dark and he was unable to discern the proper path, the Śāstri strayed from the proper hedgerows and paths, and turned the wrong way, his clothes becoming ripped by thorns as he crossed several thorny fences, his feet hurting as they were pricked by thorns, reached a freshly ploughed fiield, and having lost his bearings, wandered in that fiield for quite a while. He was utterly unable to fiind his way. Deciding it best to spend the night in the fiield, and walk to town in the morning, he spread a cloth on the ground, and using a clod of earth for a pillow, declared: *“Svāmin! Nr̥siṁha! Māmuddhara!” *,395

and lay himself down. The exhausted Śāstri soon fell asleep.

394Kaṭṭe Haḷḷa appears to have been a spring fed by an aquifer that has now run dry due to groundwater depletion. Electricity is provided free of cost for agricultural use, so indiscriminate pumping of groundwater is widespread. As a consequence, many long-standing groves of trees in the region, such as coconut palms, are now dead.

395“Lord! Narasiṁha! Protect me!” Clearly, this is a prayer to his family deity Yadugiri Lakṣmīnarasiṁhasvāmi of Mēlukōṭe [Śāstri 1934, p. 40]. According to Śāstri [1925b, p. 8], Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s great-great-grandfather Gaṇgādhara Vāraṇāsi had remained childless after he moved to Sindhughaṭṭa, even until the age of forty (see footnote 243). His meditations

134

sons of sarasvatī

The Śāstri not having returned for so long even after dark, his daughter-in-law Kr̥ṣṇamma and Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri awaited his return till ten that night, their minds fiilled with anxiety, trying to reassure themselves that he would soon return.396 The Śāstri having failed to return even at that late hour, they became truly fearful. Carrying a lighted lantern, they went up to Puṭṭammaṇṇi’s farm, but learned nothing from inquiries they made of a couple of people and a cart driver they encountered. They fiinally returned home and went to bed, deriving some reassurance from the possibility that he had slept at the farm, it having become very late. But it was impossible to sleep. Unpleasant thoughts kept disturbing the mind.

Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, who had anxiously awaited the morning, left for the farm at six o’clock, as soon as it was light. Going slowly, and looking carefully this way and that, he walked some distance along the route to Narasīpura, and turned left near Pāpaṇṇa’s farm en route to the farm. On his right was Pāpaṇṇa’s farm. A freshly ploughed fiield was to his left, next to a thorny fence. As Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri walked down the hedgerow in between, he met Siddha, the guttigeholder on Pāpaṇṇa’s farm,397 who asked:

“How is this, master? Up and about at this early hour?”

As Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri replied: “*Yelā,*Siddha! Our grandfather did not return home last night. I understand he came to the farm. I have come by to see if he slept in the fiield last night. . . ,” the Śāstri, hearing these words, shouted from a few yards past the adjacent fence: “*Yelā,*Veṇkaṭaramaṇa! I am over here, come this way!” When Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, hearing his grandfather’s voice, looked over the fence, he saw the Śāstri covered in a shawl, reclining against a large clod of earth. Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, greatly distraught at this sight, crossed the fence, and stood sobbing out loud by the Śāstri: “*Aṇṇayya!*I cannot bear to see you suffering in this manner! How could we have let this happen to you! Arise, and let us go home!” Siddha, seeing the state that the Śāstri was in, burst into tears and wept: “Master!

My lord! How could I have missed your presence in the farm, being right upon the deity Lakṣmīnarasiṁhasvāmi of Mēlukōṭe bore fruit, and he was blessed with two sons. This deity has remained the family deity since. The name Narasiṁha remains common to this day in this household.

396Kr̥ṣṇamma was Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa’s widow, and Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s mother.

397 Guttigeis a type of land tenancy in which the tenant bears the cost of cultivation, but gives the owner a fiixed rent in cash or kind.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 135

here! Is there a greater sinner than me? If I had known, I would have made sure that you slept in warmth and comfort in my hut! Śiva, Śiva!”

At this, the Śāstri’s eyes, too, fiilled with tears. He said to his grandson:

“Dear Veṇkaṭaramaṇa! I tried mightily to return home last night. But the stars were aligned otherwise. I became lost, and had to endure this trouble.

I would surely have returned home had I known either that Pāpaṇṇa’s farm or that the road was nearby. But let us put this aside! Compared to all else I have endured, this is but a trifle,” and returned home. Although overjoyed at the Śāstri’s safe return, the eyes of his daughter-in-law Kr̥ṣṇamma flowed with tears when she heard what had transpired the previous night.

Obsequial rites and worship of deities, respectively, were observed in the Śāstri’s household on the eighth, ninth, and fourteenth śukla tithis, and on the day of the full moon in Puṣya.398 Narasiṁha Śāstri was to arrive from Mais ūru during this period. When Kr̥ṣṇamma suggested asking her younger daughter Subbatāyi to come from Mais ūru, feeling that it would be very helpful to have some young ladies present at such a time, the Śāstri agreed with her, and had a letter written accordingly to Narasiṁha Śāstri. Subbatāyi is married to Garaḷapurī Śāstri,399 the eldest son of her 398The anniversaries of the Śāstri’s mother’s death and that of his son were on the eighth and ninth śukla tithiof Puṣya, respectively (see footnotes 355 and 356). The anniversary of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s father’s passing was observed as an ārādhanaon the third and fourth bahuḷa tithiof the month of Vaiśākha (see page 143). The vr̥atascalled Śākaṁbarīand Banaśaṇkarīoccur on the fourteenth tithiand on *p ūrṇima,*respectively. The family had observed these rites of worship for the deity *Banaśaṇkarī *(also called Śākambarī) even in their ancestral home of Bādāmi, from where Gaṇgādhara Vāraṇāsioriginally came (see footnote 243). According to Śāstri [1925b], certain rules are to be strictly followed in these observances. For instance, only members of the Hoysaḷa Karṇāṭakacommunity could be invited for meals on these days.

399Footnote in original: “Having passed the B.A. examination from Madras in the First Class, he is presently in London on a scholarship from the Government of Mysore, and has completed advanced degrees there, such as the ṀSc. He is to return to his native land shortly. He is the fiirst son of Mahāvidvān KavitilakaAyyā Śāstri.” Ayyā Śāstri’s fiirst son Garaḷapurī Śāstri (1888–1955 C.E.) was named after his grandfather. In a letter of 1902–1903

to Rāvbahād ūrR̥Narasiṁhācār (see footnote 445), Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri indicates his determination to have his granddaughter, then aged 11, married within the year. Subbatāyi must hence have married Garaḷapurī Śāstri around 1904. Garaḷapurī Śāstri graduated in 1911 from the Presidency College, Madras, with a degree in Chemistry. Following two years as a research student at the Tata Institute in Bangalore with Professor J.J. Sudborough on a scholarship from the Mysore Government, he proceeded to London on a Dāmodar Scholarship in 1913, where he completed his ṀSc., and conducted research at the University College

(a) Veṇkaṭasubbamma, granddaughter

(b) Sōsale Garaḷapurī Śāstri, son of Ayyā

of Cāmarājanagara Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri

Śāstri

Plate 31: Portraits of sōsale Garaḷapurī Śāstri and his wife Veṇkaṭasubbamma. Courtesy Mysore University.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 137

own paternal aunt Lakṣmīdēvamma.400 She has a lovely daughter called Rukmiṇī. Narasiṁhaśāstri, Subbatāyī, and Rukmiṇī arrived in Cāmarājanagara on the evening of the seventh śukla tithiof Puṣya. After the rites on the eighth and ninth were complete, the Śāstri travelled to Mais ūru, and returned to Nagara after eight days. The Śākambarīand Banaśankarīrituals were performed in Mais ūru by Narasiṁhaśāstri, and in Nagara by Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri.

and the Imperial Institute of Science and Technology, publishing several scientifiic papers.

After returning to India in 1918, he joined the Mysore Soap Factory, which he ultimately managed. His accomplishments there included creating Mysore Sandal Soap, which is still being manufactured. Subsequently, he became Director of the Department of Industries and Commerce in Mysore. His work took him to Japan and the United States of America, in addition to England. He retired in 1943. He also made signifiicant literary contributions, starting as early as 1913. His literary output included original plays and short stories, as well as translations of many English works into Kannaḍa. He was a leading citizen of the time, and socially well connected. He was one of the founders of Century Club in Beṇgaḷūru.

400Such cross-cousin marriages (where the bride and bridegoom have different male lineages) were very common, the dominant concern being the preservation of gōtraexogamy.

Gōtrabeing a patrilineal attribute, such marriages automatically respect gōtraexogamy, if it was also respected in the marriage of the parents. In this case, the gōtraswere Bhāradvāja for Subbatāyi (footnote 239) and Kāśyapafor Garaḷapurī Śāstri (page 8). Exogamy practices vary considerably between northern and southern India. In the north, a very rigid system of patrilineal descent and virilocal residence often leads to strict exogamy forms, such as village exogamy. In such cases, there may be few pre-exisiting social or familial ties between the families, visitations by the bride’s family may be uncommon, and visitations by the husband’s family to that of the bride may be even rarer, to preclude the possibility of obligations being incurred. It is even common for the bride’s family to consider her a *parāyī *(alien, outsider) after marriage. Brides can experience considerable alienation under such conditions. This is in marked contrast to southern India, where kinship ties play an important role in determining marriages, marriage within the extended family is welcomed, and gōtraexogamy seen more important than any other form. Matrilocal or uxorilocal residence is widely accepted in southern India, as was the case with Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri’s son-in-law (see page 91). South Indian brides may therefore feel less alienation than their northern sisters, and can typically count on family support in adversity or abandonment (again, see page 91). Cross-cousin marriages have always been common in southern India, and were in fact viewed very favourably. This fact may be reflected in the Kannaḍa terms for maternal uncle and paternal aunt, *“sōdara māva”*and *“sōdara atte” *, literally “co-uterine father-in-law” and “co-uterine mother-in-law”, *“sōdara”*being a tadbhavaform of the *Saṁskr̥ta “sahōdara” *. It is striking how the “co-uterine” relationship between parents is treated as secondary, serving merely to qualify the more important “in-law” relationship with the child. In contrast, the terms for younger/elder maternal aunt and paternal uncle happen to be *“cikka/doḍḍa amma”*and

*“cikka/doḍḍa appa” *, or “junior/senior mother” and “junior/senior father”, suggesting marriage there to be incestuous. Cross-cousin marriages are by no means unique to southern India, and are still seen all across the world.

12. The Final Days

ThoughtheŚāstrihadnosurvivingsons,Lakṣmīdēvammahadhelp-

ed diminish the anguish in his heart by being both daughter and son to him. Lakṣmīdēvamma was a virtuous and talented lady. Her skills in managing the household were exemplary. Her house is fiilled with children and grandchildren. Her sons are all well-educated. Her daughters are all virtuous wives, and accomplished ladies of discrimination. In them has truly been realized the meaning of the saying *“asārēkhalusaṁsārē sārabh ūtānita-mbiṉī” *.401 The noble housewife who manages the household in a principled manner, brings joy to her beloved, nurtures her children, and promotes their progress, is indeed worthy of the highest praise. It is known to all that households, nations, and even this world achieve greatness only due to the efforts of such gems of womanhood. It is proper to regard such noble ladies as being mothers to all Humanity. Lakṣmīdēvamma, a lady of high character and principled upbringing, had devoted herself to the care of her husband and children, never letting them experience the slightest sorrow, and being a source of joy to them through her many virtues. It is no small accomplishment to have managed a household with judgment and sagacity, maintaining propriety and decorum in dealings with all relatives, and becoming the object of universal praise. Lakṣmīdēvamma held fast the reins of the household, indeed as Īśvara holds the world in his grasp.402 This is why her children and grandchildren are upright, widely-respected, honourable, 401This quote is intended to convey the sense that while this world may be without worth, a virtuous woman is a noble exception. It is based on two verses from the Vikramacaritathat appear in the story told by the sixth statue, where king Vikramāditya indulges a dishonest ascetic. These verses read [Edgerton 1926]: “asārabh ūte saṁsāre sāraṁ sāraṇgalōcanā |

*tadarthaṁ dhanamicchanti tattyāge dhanena kiṁ ∥ asārabhūte saṁsāre sārabhūtā nitambiṉī | iti sañcintya vai śambhurardhāṇge kāmiṉīṁ dadhau ∥” *, and translate as follows: “In this unprofiitable round of existence the best thing of all a gazelle-eyed woman. For her sake men seek after wealth, and without her, what is the use of wealth? ‘In this unprofiitable round of existence the best thing of all is a fair-hipt woman;’ it was with this thought in mind, I ween, that Śambhu took his beloved on his lap.” It may seem surprising that the bahuvrīhicompound nitambiṉī, meaning “heavy-hipped one”, is used instead of “woman”, but it is common in Saṁskr̥tapoetry to refer to such physical characteristics. Nitambiṉī is used as a fiirst name even today.

402Although Īśvaradenotes Śiva in common usage, īśaliterally means “master” or “controller”. Accordingly, Īśvara, the possessor of the attribute of īśa, is the one who controls.

138

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 139

well-educated, and virtuous individuals. Rare indeed are such households in this world, or housewives such as Lakṣmīdēvamma. Lakṣmīdēvamma was not educated. Yet, much would it behoove the so-called educated ladies of these times to apprentice themselves to her, that they might learn what it means to be a homemaker. Her word was never transgressed within the household. It is on account of her many admirable virtues and excellent counsel that her daughters Mīnākṣīand Viśālākṣī, though widowed in childhood, are distanced from worldly atrractions, and remain immersed in spirituality and devotion to Īśvara. In all, it would be right to say that Lakṣmī-dēvamma’s household was a model of good conduct, ethics, and virtue.

But Kālapuruṣais indeed hard of heart.403 He is devoid of even the smallest iota of mercy. Making the soul of Lakṣmīdēvamma, the model consort, the target of much anguish starting the morning of the eighth bahuḷa tithiof the month of Puṣya of the Naḷa saṁvatsara, he wrested it away into the other world within eight days, that is, on the fiirst śuddha tithiof the month of Māgha.404

If a relative inquired after her health, she would simply respond: “This body is subject to illness! This world is subject to Īśvara! Even the gods are subject to karma! Man is not at liberty! One must not covet this body!”, and if her husband or children urged her to take some medicine, she would smilingly take some, and lie down composedly. She would inquire unhurriedly after the well-being of all visitors, giving them her good counsel. If her husband or children said to her: “Conversation is exhausting; you should rest quietly”, she would refrain from expressing her suffering overtly, so as not to alarm them. For their satisfaction, she would take her medicine, and observe the salutary dietary norms prescribed for her.

Ayyā Śāstri, wishing to save his wife somehow, had excellent medicines prescribed by the greatest and most accomplished physicians. *“Apidhanvan-tarirvaidyaḥkimkarōti gatāyuṣi?” *,405 that is, even Dhanvantari, the physician of the gods, cannot save one whose time has come. Lakṣmīdēvamma’s breathing became laboured at four o’clock in the morning on the fiirst tithi 403See footnote 368.

404The fiirst date alluded to is January 16, 1917 C.E.

405This hemistich is from the *Hitopadeśa (vigrahaḥ,*146 ): “prakr̥tiḥsvāminā tyaktā *samr̥ddhā’pi na jīvati | api dhanvantarirvaidyaḥkiṁ karoti gatāyuṣi ∥” *.

140

sons of sarasvatī

of Māgha.406 She was immediately given Gaṇgā water to drink.407 As her breathing weakened, Lakṣmīdēvamma began to lose her powers of speech.

Even so, she gestured for her husband to come near, and

Jan. 24, 1917

touching his feet, she pressed her hands to her eyes, and

speaking indistinctly, said that she was about to depart, and

sought his permission.408 She then looked long and well at her sons and daughters seated nearby. As she meditated on Nārāyaṇa, her soul left this mortal body, even as they all looked on.

The loss of a thing so precious plunged everyone into sorrow, not just the family, but even those who knew her as acquaintances, or even merely by reputation. Many lamented that such a treasury of virtue would never again be seen. Narasiṁha Śāstri and Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri, the nephews of the deceased, arrived at seven in the morning, and seeing the corpse and the strong resemblance of its facial features to those of their father, lamented: “When our father died, his face appeared to bear a smile, exactly as this face does!

*Ayyo!*Kiṭṭaṇṇayya! *Ayyo!*Maisūrakka!409 have you now both departed 406This would be the early morning of January 24, 1917 C.E.

407A common service to a dying person, the Gaṇgā being the holiest of the Indian rivers.

408The great mutual affection between Ayyā Śāstri and Lakṣmīdēvamma is captured by the following account by their granddaughter Sar ōjā Veṇkaṭarām. It also appears in Iddar ū Irabahudu, a collection of short stories by Ayyā Śāstri’s son Garaḷapurī Śāstri [Śāstri 1946b].

Returning from a train trip to Paṣcimavāhiṉī on one occasion, Ayyā Śāstri saw a vendor selling Tāḷeflowers ( Pandanus odoratissimus) and bitter gourd ( Momordica charantia), both great favourites of Lakṣmīdēvamma. He had on his person the sum of three-and-a-half Āṇe.

The return fare being one-and-a-half ¯

Aṇe, he nonetheless chose to spend three Āṇeon Laks.-

mīdēvamma’s favourite items, and walked 12 miles home to Mais ūru in the moonlit night.

409 Kiṭṭaṇṇayyamay be taken as a compound of *Kiṭṭa *+ Aṇṇayyaor of *Kiṭṭaṇṇa *+ Ayya.

Kr̥ṣṇaundergoes phonological simplifiication to Kittanna, and thence to Kiṭṭaṇṇa, parsed as *Kiṭṭa *+ *aṇṇa *(“older brother Kiṭṭa”). Thereby, Kiṭṭabecomes a diminutive of Kr̥ṣṇa, itself a contraction of Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa, the name of the writer’s father. When the noun Veṇkaṭa appears as the fiirst component of a compound name, it is often treated as a qualifiier and elided in contractions, leaving the second component, which may further suffer diminu-tion. Thus, Veṇkaṭa-Kr̥ṣṇa becomes *Kiṭṭa,*and Veṇkaṭa-Subraḥmaṇya becomes *Subbu *(but also see footnote 349). Aṇṇaand Akkaare the Kannaḍa terms for elder brother and elder sister, respectively, with Aṇṇayyabeing a honorifiic form for *Aṇṇa.*It may seem odd that the speakers of these words refer to the two deceased individuals as Aṇṇaand *Akka,*despite being the sons of the fiirst and nephews of the second. However, it is common in South-Indian joint families for children to adopt the form of address for adults prevalent in the household.

Children often grow up referring to their father as *Aṇṇa,*or even *Bhāva *(brother-in-law), to their mother as Akka, and grandmother as *Amma *(mother).

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 141

this world? Where shall we ever again see such a brother and sister?” Be everyone else’s sorrow as it might, the deep anguish of Ayyā Śāstri and that of his children who had just lost their mother, especially that of Mīnākṣamma and Viśālākṣamma, was beyond description. But one must accept what transpires. Lakṣmīdēvamma’s virtues and high character underwent cremation with her body, and accompanied her soul, giving it much comfort en route to the other world.410

Let us recall that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, Kr̥ṣṇamma, and Lakṣmīdēvamma’s daughter-in-law Subbatāyī were now still in Nagara. The news of Lakṣmī-dēvamma’s illness reached them. The Śāstri left Nagara on the night of her demise, and upon reaching Mais ūru on Thursday morning, he inquired:

“Where is Lakṣmīdēvi? Is she well?” When the Śāstri, still ignorant of his daughter’s death, learned of her demise, he sat stunned and speechless for a long time, thinking, “What? Is it all over? Is Lakṣmīdēvī gone?” We have not the skill to describe his anguish. This elderly, august, and venerable personage, reflecting over and over on his daughter’s demise, fiinally arose and walked away, as his anguish surpassed the bounds of his endurance.

Grief, like woodworm, began to eat away at him. First, his own sons had died. His younger brother had died next. What now remained for the Śāstri, who had yet consoled himself that his daughter remained, and saw her as his source of contentment? His anguish continued to grow. An aversion to worldly matters began to build. Passions such as anger and attachment began to diminish in him, and his spirit exalted itself through contemplation of spiritual matters. His bodily strength began to wane. Feeling that he would have no respite from worldly sorrows as long he remained in Mais ūru, he returned to Nagara in the month of Caitra. Kr̥ṣṇamma remained at hand to serve him. In the month of Phālguṇa, the Śāstri had already developed dysentery.411 This turned especially severe after his return to Nagara.

Paying no regard to his bodily infiirmities, the Śāstri continued his physical activities, his daily ritual observances, his spiritual meditations, and his well-being, while accepting treatment from skilled physicians. His physical 410Agni, the only Vēdicdeity present on this earth, is seen as the conduit through which things pass from this world to that of the gods. Cremation is not mere destruction of the material body, but rather, the means of conveyance to the other world through Agni’s agency.

411The month of Caitra (Piṇgaḷa saṁvatsara) commenced on March 24, 1917 C.E. The prior month of Phālguṇa (Naḷa saṁvatsara) had commenced on February 22, 1917 C.E.

Plate 32: Ayyā Śāstri (1855–1934) and Lakṣmīdevamma (1860–1917). On his right wrist, Ayyā Śāstri wears the bejewelled bracelet bestowed upon him in 1912 C.E.

(see footnote 777). The photograph thus dates to between 1912 and 1917, the year of Lakṣmīdēvamma’s passing.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 143

vigour and his ambulatory capacity, however, continued to diminish each day. Nonetheless, his mental and sensory abilities remained acute. His teeth remained strong. After his meals, it was his practice to eat hurigāḷu, cakkuli, followed by tāmb ūla.412 He always consumed the areca nut sliced in halves, never when cut into pieces.

The ārādhanaof Śaṇkarānanda *Svāmi,*who had attained unity with the Absolute, was to take place on the third and fourth bahuḷa tithisof the month of Vaiśākha of the Paiṇgaḷa saṁvatsara.413 The Śāstri, who had always performed this ritual himself, and with great devotion, was feeling especially weak, and just this once, had the ceremonies completed on both days by his eldest grandson Narasiṁhaśāstri. Both grandsons were in Nagara at this time, all schools being closed on account of summer vacations.

They both returned to Mais ūru after the ārādhana.

The eleventh śuddha tithiof Jyēṣṭha being the birthday of the Mahāraja,414 the Śāstri determined to be in Mais ūru on that day, and had Narasiṁhaśāstri come to Nagara four days prior, leaving for Mais ūru in his company. While still in Nagara, the Śāstri suddenly being troubled by the loss of his hearing and eyesight, he had a paṇḍitabrought from Rāmasamudra, from whom he obtained treatment.415 This treatment succeeded in restoring his previous health and his sensory capacities. At ten o’clock on the morning of Sunday, the sixth śuddha tithiof Jyēṣṭha,416 the Śāstri, Ḳr̥ṣn.-

amma, and Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri had fiinished their meal, and were ready 412 Hurigāḷuis a savoury and pungent preparation of dried legumes with chillies, salt, and spices. *Cakkuli *( śaṣkuliin Saṁskr̥ta) is spiced rice flour paste extruded in circular rings and fried in oil. Tāmb ūlais a combination of betel leaf ( Piper betle), areca nut ( Areca catechu), and slaked lime, consumed after meals as a carminative. In its natural spherical form, the areca nut is called gōt.-aḍike, but is usually cut into halves ( baṭṭal-aḍike), slices, or into fiine pieces. Strong teeth and gums are essential if the areca nut is to be eaten in the fiirst two forms.

413These dates correspond to May 9 and 10, 1917 C.E. Śrāddharites are not performed for the soul of a *saṁnyāsin,*since it has attained unity with the Absolute, and thus has no need of propitiatory kārmic saṁskārasperformed on its behalf by earthly descendants. Instead, an ārādhana, or worship ritual is performed in its memory. The act of accepting saṁnyāsa is ritually equivalent to death; the associated rites include ātmaśrāddha, which is a śrāddha rite performed for oneself. For some interesting conundrums involving renunciation, see Freiberger [2005].

414This would be Friday, June 1, 1917 C.E. Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar IV was born on June 4, 1884, but his birthday would have been observed on the tithicorresponding to that date.

415Rāmasamudra is about 3 km due east of Cāmarājanagara.

416This would be May 27, 1917 C.E.

144

sons of sarasvatī

for the trip. Before departing, the Śāstri had a look all around the house, approached the vehicle, prayed to the family deity Nr̥siṁhasvāmi, looked long and well at the Cāmarāja temple, prayed to that deity, and ascended into the vehicle. This was to be the last time the Śāstri would be in Cāmarājanagara.

“The heart knows, even if the eye does not,” so goes an old saying. Accordingly, it appears that the Śāstri’s heart had indeed come to recognize that his end was near.

On that sixth *tithi,*they arrived at the railway station at Nañjanag ūḍu in the evening,417 bought their tickets, and reached Mais ūru at nine o’clock that night. Since they were unable to fiind any conveyances that night, the Śāstri, his grandson, and his daughter-in-law lodged with his son-in-law Ayyā Śāstri, whose house was near the Cāmarājapuram railway station.418

After his Sandhyāvandaneand dinner, he stayed there the night, and travelled by foot to his house in the Rāmacandra Agrahāra the next morning.

On the day of the birthday, the Śāstri made his trip to the palace without anyone’s help. When a number of palace offiicials urged the king to prevent the Śāstri, who was awaiting death, from coming to the palace, June 1, 1917

the Mahārāja, a most pious person, is said to have replied that his well-being and that of the kingdom both being contingent

on his receiving blessings in the form of mantrākṣatefrom this elderly and venerable person, his coming to the palace was most essential! We leave it to the reader to judge the sincere and upright character of our king.

After the day of the birthday, the Śāstri visited the Cāmuṇḍi Toṭṭi on two occasions, once to collect his honorarium, and once to participate in a dhārmicdiscussion. Around this time, our Mahārāja, for some reason, ordered the well known photographer Varadācārya to photograph the Śāstri and send the picture to the palace. Unwilling to contravene the king’s 417This town is 40 km northwest of Cāmarājanagara, en route to Maisūru. The Maisūru–

Nañjanag ūḍu railway line, a metre-guage track 15.8 miles in length, was opened to the public on December 1, 1891 C.E. It had been built as an extension of the track from Bangalore to Mais ūru. Nañjanag ūḍu served as the southern terminus of the Mysore State Railway. This route’s reputation as being agonizingly slow remained intact even decades after the events mentioned. The 25 km trip took around three hours, so the Śāstri is likely to have boarded the train at around 6pm. The Mais ūru-Nañjanag ūḍu track was not extended to Cāmarājanagara until August 27, 1926.

418 Kavitāvilāsa, Ayyā Śāstri’s house, was a couple of hundred yards from the railway station. He had received this house as a gift from the palace, most likely in 1894, when Cāmarāja Voḍeyar X died.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 145

orders, the Śāstri consented, and was photographed. The image has been handsomely framed and kept in the Mais ūru palace. We have included that photograph in this volume, so that our readers may view that image.

After this, the Śāstri’s movement outside the home diminished even more. He remained at home, performing his bathing and daily rituals and his spiritual devotions. It is of course normal for high offiicials to visit the capital during the king’s birthday celebrations. During this

July 20, 1917

time, Prāktana Vimarṣā Vicakṣaṇa RāvbahādūrR̥Narasiṁ-hācār, ṀA., ṀR̥A.S.,419 visited the Śāstri, inquired after his health, and becoming much distressed at his condition, left lamenting that Learning itself would be lost if the Śāstri, a treasury of knowledge, were to be lost. The extent of the Śāstri’s scholarship was certainly well known to Narasiṁhācār.420

As the Śāstri’s ability to move about diminished, so did the strength of his limbs. His activities were limited to arising and bathing with the help 419As this list of titles and honours suggests, Narasiṁhācār was a distinguished literary scholar, as well as epigraphist and historian. The title *Prāktana Vimarṣā Vicakṣaṇa *(“one distinguished in historical research”) was conferred upon him by the king in 1913. The title Rāv Bahad ūr, reserved in British times for individuals who had rendered exceptional national service, was conferred on him by the Government of India in 1916. He also held the titles Karṇāṭaka Prācyavidyā Vaibhava, conferred on him by the All-India Literary Association, Calcutta, and Mahāmahopādhyāya, conferred on him by the Government of India. He served as Director of Archeological Research in Mysore. Among his many accomplishments are his editorship of the Mysore Gazetteerafter B.ḶRice, and his Karṇāṭaka Kavicarite, a monumental work on Kannaḍa poets. He died December 6, 1936, aged 77.

420Narasiṁhācār recalls [in Śāstri 1934, p. 38]:

. . . When I was in positions of authority, the Śāstri would often stop by to see me.

I would spend much time in discussions with him, and end up shaking my head in wonder and appreciation for the depth and extent of his scholarship. . . When the Śāstri was close to his impending death, I had visited him a week prior to his demise. Despite his extreme weakness, he gestured for help, and getting up with great diffiiculty, said tearfully: ‘A visit by a luminary such as yourself is surely a sign of my puṇya’. I too, responded with words appropriate for the occasion. We are truly unlikely to ever again see such a scholar as him. . . His younger brother Rāmaśāstri was also a well-known scholar. He was without peer in literary scholarship. His elder brother was without peer in grammatical scholarship. Scholars of such great ability are born to this blessed soil but only rarely. . .

146

sons of sarasvatī

of others, and then performing his rituals and eating by himself, then rising with help and washing his hands, and then lying down.421 He remained in bed except when he bathed or ate. He would sit up for a bit if he tired of lying down. After completing his evening *Sandhyāvandane,*he would drink some milk and go to bed, to arise only to bathe the following morning. During these times, Kr̥ṣṇamma would wash his clothes every day, prepare his bed, and remove the dirtied linen. Indeed, she built herself a stair-way to Heaven through her unselfiish devotion to her father-in-law. Both grandsons were also deeply engaged in serving their grandfather. The Śāstri had his grand-daughter Subbatayī come stay with him.422 This young girl too, served her grandfather tirelessly, spending time with him and speaking pleasantly to him.

In this manner, on account of the regard his daughter-in-law and his grandchildren had for him, and their service, the Śāstri remained contented and free from worry. He continued his medicines and salutary dietary prescriptions both owing to the possibility that his dysentery would relent, as well as in conformance with social protocols. He never expressed his suffering overtly. He appeared perfectly healthy. Yet, his feeble body continued to decline. It was impossible to tell that he was ill, from just looking at him.

Nor did one feel any sense of anxiety.

On the eighth śuddha tithiof the month of Śrāvaṇa, he began to suffer extreme bodily anguish.423 However, he endured it without telling any of the children. That was a Friday. His grandsons Narasiṁha Śāstri and Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri had left for school, which had been moved to the morning, that day being the vrataof Varamahālakṣmī. At eight that morning, his suffering increased greatly. He immediately called out to his daughter-in-law Kr̥ṣṇamma, and asked what time it was. Upon being told that it was eight-thirty, he replied that there was no stopping things now, since this body would no longer endure, and that since he had not the strength to turn over, she should place him on a bed of darbhagrass on his left side; lying with his right ear upwards, he then asked where Narasiṁha was.424

421Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri would have eaten his meals with his hands sitting cross-legged on the floor, and would have needed help in getting up and washing up.

422Subbatāyi’s husband ṢG. Śāstri was still in England at this time, working on his Master’s degree in Chemistry. See footnote 399.

423This would be Friday, July 27, 1917 C.E.

424See footnote 221.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 147

Upon being summoned, Narasiṁha Śāstri came immediately, and seeing his grandfather on his deathbed, cried our tearfully: *“Aṇṇayya!”*The Śāstri, seeing that his grandson had arrived, said, “Have you arrived? Come near,” and simply looked at his grandson once. His ability to speak having left him by this time, he began to meditate upon Īśvara. When Narasiṁhaśāstri, quite alarmed, called a physician to examine him, that inexperienced physician said: “There is no imminent danger. This will hold till evening,”

and departed. It was about ten o’clock now. By this time, Narasiṁhaśāstri had dispatched his seven-year-old son Vidyām ūrti to fetch his brother, bathed, completed his daily rituals and worship, asked all his relatives to have their meals and arrive quickly, and began reading the Viṣṇusahasranāmaaloud, sitting by his grandfather. When Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri arrived, and seeing what had come to pass, tearfully cried *“Aṇṇayya!”*gazing at his grandfather’s face, the Śāstri looked at him once and remained silent.

Narasiṁhaśāstri admonished his brother, saying: “Weeping at such a time? Keep your courage, go bathe, and fiinish your meals,” and continued reading the *Viṣṇusahasranāma.*The Śāstri continued listening, his mind fully engrossed. His breathing had begun to diminish. By

July 27, 1917

about eleven-fiifteen, Kr̥ṣṇamma and Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri, having fiinished their baths and rituals, sat by the Śāstri’s head.

Narasiṁha continued reading the *Viṣṇusahasranāma.*Kr̥ṣṇamma fed him Gaṇgā water. Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri ritually bathed his grandfather through mantrasnāna,425 applied vibh ūtito his forehead,426 and began reciting the name of Nārāyaṇa into his right ear. The Śāstri’s soul, fiinding this to be a propitious time, now left this material body and blissfully departed. Just then, the noon hour was announced by the sound of a cannon.427

425 Mantrasnānais a ritual bath performed by the sprinking of water accompanied by the recitation of a mārjana mantra. A commonly used mantrais *“apavitraḥpavitrovā sarvāvasthāṇgatopiva | yassmaret puṇḍarīkākṣaṁ sa bāhyābhyanntaraḥśucih. ∥”*Another, of greater antiquity, is *“āpohiṣṭhā mayobhuvastā na ūrje dadhātana | mahe raṇāya cakṣase ∥ yovah. *

śivatamo rasastasya bhājayate ihanaḥuṣatīriva mātarah. ∥ tasmā araṁ gamāmavo | yasya *kṣayāya jinvatha | āpo janayathācanah. ∥” *

426Three stripes of ash worn across the forehead by brāhmaṇas of the Smārtatradition.

427During the period, the hours of 5 a.m., noon, and 9 p.ṁwere marked by the sound of cannon fiired within Mais ūru fort, as Vāsudevācārya [1962, p. 41] documents. Daily life in the city would largely have been bracketed by these markers. Also see page 169 for additional signifiicance of a cannon shot at this instant.

148

sons of sarasvatī

Relatives, from spiritual ignorance, were distressed at the sight of the Śāstri’s lifeless body.428 Narasiṁhaśāstri, the son of the Śāstri’s brother,429

upon beholding the death of his uncle said:

tāta·pāda·viyōgō’ttha·ś’śōkō vismāritas’tvayā |

tridivaṁ prastithēn’ādya pitr̥vya dviguṇīkr̥tah. ∥

Meaning: “Uncle! Your presence had diminished the sorrow of our father’s death. Your demise has now doubled the intensity of this grief.” He then began to weep, as common people do.

It took only a little while for the news of the Śāstri’s demise to spread across the city. A large number of people soon assembled. The corpse was taken to the cremation grounds by a half past three in the afternoon. Acced-ing to requests from Narasiṁhaśāstri and Veṇkaṭaramaṇaśāstri, Asthānamahāvidvā ˙n DvivēdiSubrahmaṇya Ghanapāṭhiarrived, oversaw the rituals, ensuring that the offiiciating priest performed the funerary rites without the slightest lapse, and himself recited Vēdic mantrassonorously and with great dignity. The sound of Vēdicrecitation continued to resound in all ten directions till the evening.430 Many relatives, including the Śāstri’s sonin-law Ayyā Śāstri, were present. At six in the evening, the Śāstri’s mortal remains were placed on the pyre, and made an oblation to the fiire-god.

Grammatical scholarship has now come undone. The Śāstri’s grandchildren both performed the post-funerary rituals with respect, devotion, and in the prescribed manner.431 Although the din of the grandchildren and great-grandchildren fiilled the Śāstri’s house at this time, yet bereft of the Śāstri, the house was like the night sky bereft of the moon. Things continue as always; the days dawn and the evenings come, people are born and die, but one may never again behold the Śāstri. Though his physical body has turned to ashes, he lives on in the body of his fame.432

428See footnote 237.

429Footnote in original: “This is none other than the well-known C.R̥Narasiṁhaśāstri, B.A. He is the son of Cāmarājanagara Rāmāśāstri. He is now lecturer at the Mahārāja’s College in Mais ūru, having completed his B.A. degree. His scholarship in English and Saṁskr̥ta, and his poetic abilities are both exceptional.” Narasiṁhaśāstri went on to become Professor of Sanskrit at the Mahārāja’s College.

430The four cardinal and the four intercardinal directions, as well as the zenith and nadir.

431Only the male descendants are entitled to perfom these rituals.

432See footnote 238.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 149

The talented poet Mattig ūḍu Vāsudēvaśāstri, who is the son-in-law of Ayyā Śāstri,433 describes his scholarship and abilities in this manner: carama· śl ōk’ āvaḷi

n ūnam prāk’saṁbhavē_sau vibudha·gaṇa·maṇiḥpāṇinēs’sūtrajālaṁ vyācakhyāv’adya janmany’api kr̥tim’akarōd’dhātu·rūpa·prakāśam |

itthaṁ śabd’āgam’ābdhiṁ vibudha·jana·tatēr jānu·daghnaṁ vidhāya śrīkaṇṭhā’khyaḥphaṇīndrō vitata·nija·yaśā dhāma naijaṁ jagāma ∥1∥

bhō bhō nāgās’tvaradhvaṁ vyajanam’ayi sakhē vasukē tvaṁ gr̥hāṇa c.’chatraṁ kārkōṭaka tvaṁ maṇi·gaṇa·rucirāṁ takṣaka tvaṁ patākām |

yasmād’asmākam’ adya prabhur’avatarati kṣmā·talād’ity’abhīkṣṇaṁ n ūnam śēs.’āvatārē tvayi jahati bhuvaṁ saṁbhramō_nyatra jātah. ∥2∥

gurō tvaṁ yāhy’agrē tad’anuja·kaviṁ rāma·vibudhaṁ kavē tvaṁ kr̥tv’āgrē vraja bhaja gaja·dvāra·savidham |

asau śrīkaṇṭh’ākhyō budha·maṇir’ih’āyāti sucirāt saparyāṁ tasy’ārhāṁ kuru suragurō tvaṁ vyavahitah. ∥3∥

*surais’sārdhaṁ tasy’āgatim’iha sudharmām’adhigatah. *

pratīkṣē raṁbhā’dyā apasarata yuyaṁ bahir’itaḥ|

śacī·nāthēn’ētthaṁ viracita·saparyaṁ budha·varaṁ dhruvaṁ svargō vismārayati bhuvam’ēnām’atitarām ∥4∥

tvayi budha·maṇau śābdaṁ tantraṁ gurōḥpurataḥkramā·

d’apagata·bhayaṁ vyākurvāṇē kavēr’dhuri tē_nujē |

sarasa·kavitā’lāpān kurvaty’ahō maghavā yuvāṁ

amara·sadasō bh ūṣā·yugmaṁ cirād’iva manyatē ∥5∥

nijāgra·nakha·kuṭmal’āhati·vipāṭit’ēbhac.’chaṭā

visr̥tvara·yaśā gatō divam’asau mr̥g’ādhīśitā |

*ahō bata bilād bahis’sarata nirbhayaṁ phēravah. *

rutam kuruta sāṁprataṁ śruti·vidāraṇaṁ dāruṇam ∥6∥

yātē’staṁ sva·kara·tirōhit’ānya·r ūpē

mārtāṇḍē divam’abhitō yath’aiva tārāḥ|

lakṣyantē vibudha·śikhāmaṇau ca tad vat

śrīkaṇṭhē jahati bhuvaṁ budhā vayaṁ ca ∥7∥

svarga·pratīhāra·gataṁ bhavantaṁ

putrō_nujas’tē duhitā ca pūrvam |

gatās’samēty’ābhimukhaṁ praharṣā

d’aṇṇayya tē svāgatam’īrayanti ∥8∥

433He was married to Jānakīamma, Ayyā Śāstri’s second daughter.

150

sons of sarasvatī

Meaning:

In an earlier birth, this Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri composed a commentary on the s ūtrasof the Aṣṭādhyāyī.434 He wrote the Dhāturūpa Prakāśikāin this birth. Thus did this Śāstri, an incarnation of Patañjali ( Ādiśeṣa) himself,

change grammar from the vast ocean it is into what is only knee-deep, making it easy for the community of scholars to wade through it with ease, achieved great acclaim, and then returned to his own home.435

O serpents! Rejoice that your lord is returning to your world from ours.436

O Vāsuki, take up that fan! O Karkōṭaka, hold you that umbrella! O

Takṣaka, hold aloft that bejeweled flag! When the Śāstri, an incarnation of Ādiśeṣa left this world, much elation there was in Pātala.437

O Br̥haspati! Walk ahead of this distinguished scholar called Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, who is leaving this world! O Śukrācārya! Approach the gateway of heaven, with Rāmakavi, the Śāstri’s brother! O Guru! Venerate the Śāstri, as indeed his great accomplishments warrant!438

Is it any wonder that the Śāstri should forget about this world when Indra himself, seated in his court Sudharma, bade Rambhā and the other apsaras leave upon learning of the Śāstri’s arrival, and then began to venerate him?

O jewel of learning! As you sit in Indra’s court discoursing upon grammar, and your brother composes delicate verses, the two of you are indeed ornaments to this divine assembly!

434The translation of the Saṁskr̥ta versesgivenintheKannaḍasourcealsoincorrectlysays here that Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was Pāṇini reborn. As is clear in the rest of the verse, the suggestion is that he was Patañjali reborn. Patañjali is a revered grammarian, and is the author of the Mahābhāṣya, the most respected commentary on Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī.

435This “own home” is heaven. Patañjali is traditionally regarded as an earthly incarnation of Ādiśeṣa, who is the king of all serpents, a primal being of creation, and a manifestation of Nārāyaṇa.

436A reference to Ādiśeṣa.

437The fan, the umbrella, and the flag are all insignia of royalty, to which Ādiśeṣa would be entitled. The serpent Vāsuki was used as a rope around Mount Meru by the dēvasand asurasas they used Meru to churn the primordial ocean of milk. In the Nalopākhyānam of the Mahābhārata, the serpent Karkōṭaka transforms the handsome Nala into an ugly being by biting him. Takṣaka is also a serpent mentioned in the Mahābhārata. In Indian cosmology, Pātalarefers to the nether regions, the lowest of which is inhabited by the Nāgas, the serpent-people.

438Br̥haspati is the purohitaof the gods, and also the deity of wisdom and eloquence.

Śukrācārya is the preceptor of the daityas. Guru (here, suraguru) is the preceptor of the gods, also identifiied with Br̥haspati.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 151

The fearless lion has departed for heaven. Now let the foxes exit their bur-rows and shriek their cacophony!

When the sun has set, only then are the stars visible. Only when Śrīkan.-

ṭha, the crest-jewel of learning, has left this earth, do scholars like us begin to appear.

*Aṇṇayya!*Your son, your brother, and daughter are eagerly waiting to welcome you, who are now approaching the gates of heaven.

Dear readers! All who knew the Śāstri’s abilities agree that this poet’s words are literally true. Such a luminary it was who left this world in his eighty-fourth year.439

mahāvidvān dharmādhikr̥d’api mahāraja·bhavanē

cirād’apy’āsīd yas’taraḷa iva mālāsu sudhiyām |

catasraś’c.’āśītiṁ śarada iha bhuktvā sura·purī·

m’avāptuṁ śrīkaṇṭhō nijam’iha jaḍam dēham’ajahāt ∥

439This verse, although unattributed here, is in fact by Mattigūḍu Narasiṁhaśāstri. He was the brother of Mattig ūḍu Vāsudēvaśāstri, who wrote the Caramaślōkāvaḷiappearing above [Śāstri 1934, p. 5]. Narasiṁhaśāstri was the husband of Veṇkaṭalakṣmī, who was the daughter of Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa, and granddaughter of Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri. See footnote 348.

Gaṇgādhara “Vāraṇāsi” (c. 1710–1770)

Kr̥ṣṇabhatta

Narasi ˙

mhabhaṭṭa

(c. 1750–??)

Kr̥ṣṇa

Gaṇgādharabhaṭṭa

Narasi ˙

mha Śāstri

Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri

Lakṣmīpati Śāstri

(Moved to Muduga ˙nd¯

uru)

(c. 1800–1876)

(Moved to Mais¯

uru)

´

Sr

īkan

Narasi ˙

mha

Kr

Na˜

njamma

´

. ṭha ´

S¯

astri

.ṣṇa

r

ama Śāstri

Sa ˙

mkaramma

(1833–1917)

(1835–1845)

(1837–1853)

(1840–??)

(1842–1911)

(1844–??)

Dharm¯

adhik¯

ari

Mah¯

avidv¯

an

C.R̥Narasi ˙

mha Śāstri

Bhāgīrathī

Narasi ˙

mha

Veṇkaṭakr̥ṣṇa

Lakṣmīdēvī ∗

Subrahmaṇya

Bhāgīrathī

(1889-1965)

(Daughter)

(1852–1866)

(1853–1900)

(1860–1917)

(1861–1879)

(1873–1881)

Professor of Sanskrit

Veṇkaṭalakṣmī

Narasi ˙

mha

Veṇkaṭaramaṇa ‡

Subbamma †

(c. 1880–??)

(1886–??)

(1888–1945)

(1892–1981)

∗ Lakṣmīdēvī married Sōsale Ayyā Śāstri (1855–1934), son of Sōsale Garaḷapuri Śāstri (1822–1877).

† Subbamma married Sōsale Garaḷapuri Śāstri (1888–1955), son of Sōsale Ayyā Śāstri.

‡ Veṇkaṭaramaṇa Śāstri is the author of the biographies of Sōsale Garaḷapuri Śāstri and Cāmarājanagara Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri.

Plate 33: Genealogy of DharmādhikāriCāmarājanagara Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri, compiled by the translator from the information in this biography and in [Śāstri 1925b].

13. His Many Virtues

Thusdidthisgreatandaccomplishedscholardepartfromthisworld.

In aspect, Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri was tall and slender. His face was round, and full of a divine radiance. His forehead was broad. His eyes were most handsome. His appearence left no doubt that he was fiirm of character. His vibh ūticovered his forehead most becomingly. His forehead would also bear three stripes of sandalwood paste, like Śiva’s tripuṇḍra, and a large akṣatemark, like Śiva’s third eye.440

He dressed himself in a spotless dhōtra, and on his shoulder he wore a shawl folded with a dhōtra. When visiting the palace, he would wear a shawl as turban. The Śāstri was always engrossed in learning. He maintained complete control over his mind, never allowing it to fall prey to distractions. He was always teaching. Even at the end, when death appeared imminent, he took the time to teach a student. He never ate in a state of ritual impurity.441

He kept up his practice of bathing and performing his daily rituals, till the very end.

He had instituted a rule requiring everyone at home to eat together. He did this out of consideration for the ladies of the household, who would be inconvenienced if everyone ate at different times. He never ate before two o’clock. He never complained about the food. He would simply eat what he was served, even on occasions when it had no salt at all. It was up to others to notice and remark on the lack of salt.

Never did a day pass without his studying the Aṣṭādhyāyī. He washed his clothes himself. After awaking each morning, he would engage himself in back-breaking work such as splitting wood, digging, and carrying in heavy loads from the farm. He would not have enjoyed such excellent 440The tripuṇḍrarefers to the three horizontal stripes of ash or sandalwood paste worn by Śaivaite or Smārtabrāhmaṇas across their foreheads. They represent the three bonds which ensnare the soul, namely *aṇava *(“smallness”, or consciousness of the ego), karma (“action”, that is, the fruits thereof), and *maya *(“illusion”, or the erroneous perception of the world mediated by our minds). The akṣateis a red circular mark work at the centre of the tripuṇḍra, said to symbolize Śiva’s third eye. Also see footnote 143.

441Ritual purity ( maḍi)isattainedbybathing, recitationofappropriate mantras, donning a minimal set of ritually pure vestments, and avoiding all contact with impure items. Even household tasks (such as cooking) in observant brāhmaṇa households require the performer to be ritually pure.

153

154

sons of sarasvatī

health had he not performed such hard work. He was never known to take to bed due to illness. He would go to bed at ten, awake at three, and begin to study. He would say nothing if he saw a grandchild of his whiling away the time without studying, but would himself begin to study what the child was to study. The child, ashamed of seeing his grandfather study in his stead, would start studying.

It is clear from many indications that he was always engaged in introspection. During his fiinal illness, he would remain in bed, covered in a sheet from head to toe. If a grandchild came by and called out *“Aṇṇayya!”*to him, he would uncover his face, and after speaking, cover himself again. Someone looking at him as he lay silently and still, might indeed wonder if he were still alive. He was a great devotee of Narasiṁhasvāmi of Mēluk ōṭe.442

He worshipped him constantly. At night he would sometimes loudly exclaim: “*He!*Lakṣmīnarasiṁha!”

While no one could face him when was angry, he was always calm and collected. There was little opportunity for conversation with him on matters other than scholarly and technical. As hard as it was for beginners to study with him, in equal measure did advanced students derive pleasure and satisfaction from their studies with him. Many are those who have undertaken advanced studies with him and achieved great distinction as scholars. Starting with Ve∥ Kānkānhaḷḷi Varadācārya, who teaches Kannaḍa and Saṁskr̥taat Mahārāja’s College in Maisūru, and Ve∥ Timmappayya Śāstri, a distinguished scholar at the Normal School in Mais ūru, it is universally accepted that practically all the Kannaḍa and Saṁskr̥tascholars in the colleges and high schools of the state of Mais ūru were among his students.

The Śāstri always spoke the truth. He would have no patience with those who spoke falsehoods. A person called Mādana who tended his fiields had cheated and lied to him, not giving him his proper share of the grain the fiields yielded. The Śāstri discovered his dishonesty after some considerable time, and discharged him. Although the Śāstri, out of consideration, caused him no unpleasantness, Mādana’s own deceit caused him to lose both his eyes, even in this birth. Our eyes have been witness to many others who have, in this same fashion, cheated, lied, and otherwise troubled this gentle soul, and are now suffering greatly, experiencing the results of their misdeeds. It has been said in this connection:

442See footnote 395.

biography of cāmar ājanagara śrīkaṇṭha śāstri 155

dāru·carma·viniśvāsaṁ dahatē lōha·pañcakam |

sādhu·sajjana·santāpaṁ kim’āṣcaryaṁ kula·kṣayam ∥

Meaning: Even the breath that the bellows blows burns all metals. It it any wonder that the suffering of the good and gentle should ruin an entire clan?

satāṁ santāpam’utpādya śāpaṁ dēh’īti nō vadēt |

satāṁ santōṣam’utpādya hy’āśiṣaṁ naiva yācayēt ∥

meaning that those who bring suffering to the good and gentle need invite no one to curse them. Those who bring them happiness have no need of blessing. Indeed, stealing the property of a brāhmaṇa, causing suffering to the meek and gentle, causing the ruin of someone without just cause, not helping the righteous when one is able to render such help, and killing a brāhmaṇa, are all considered as being the worst among evils. The śāstras assure us that perpetrator of such evils is certain to suffer the consequences of his misdeeds.

tribhir’varṣais’tribhir’māsais’tribhiḥpakṣais’tribhir’dinai |

aty’utkaṭaiḥpuṇya·pāpair ihaiva phalam’aśnutē ∥

meaning that the perpetrator of these worst of evils is certain, even in this very birth, to suffer their consequences, whether in three years, three months, three fortnights, or in just three days.443 Because good deeds, in like manner, have good consequences, it is simply this writer’s purpose that everyone reflect upon good and evil in their pursuit of piety.

It would upset the Śāstri exceedingly to hear anyone disparaging the Vēdic śāstras. Indeed, he would stop speaking with such persons altogether.

His radiant appearance would cause people to remark that in him were present elements of Īśvara’s divinity. This feeling was expressed not just by Hindus, but also by many Muslims. When he was teaching at the Normal School, the resident Maulaviwould respectfully render him “salāms”, remarking that he was indeed godly, not merely human. On one occasion, the Śāstri was returning home from his fiields. It was about ten in the morning. The Śāstri had worn his vibh ūtibroadly across his forehead, and was dressed in a substantial dhōtraand a gold-embroidered shawl, and held a 443This verse is from the *Hitopadeśa (mitralābha:*82 *). *

156

sons of sarasvatī

stick in his hand. A Muslim from south of the valley,444 who had come to trade at the Tuesday fair at Marahaḷḷi, looking at the Śāstri from head to toe, prostrated himself before him, saying: “Svāmi, to my eyes you appear divine. Your shawl surpasses the sort that ordinary people wear. Your radiance is extraordinary. I am truly blessed to have seen you this day.” The inner qualities that the heart of a pious person has accumulated from good deeds over many births are often outwardly manifested in this manner.

Abdul Khāliq *sāhēb,*who is now Amaldārof Nagara, used to be Śirastedārof Cāmarājanagara. Whenever the Śāstri visited his offiices to collect his pension, the *sāhēb,*moved by the Śāstri’s radiance, would have him sit on the chair next to him, and proceed to discuss Hindu śāstrasand *Purāṇas. *

Devotion to god and good nature always go together. These qualities are generally to be found in the hearts of the pious.

The Śāstri always wrote in verse to those whose stature matched his own. His poetry was most dignifiied. We are in possession of many of his verses, but have not published them due to lack of space.445 He would 444From the Coimbatore region, that is. The valley referenced is the Gajjala Haṭṭi valley in the Ṉīlagiri mountains. The epithet “from south of the valley” is also applied to brāhmaṇas, as elaborated by Lakshminarasimhaiya *et al., *[1970, p. 4]: “Another group of Vadadesha Vadamas moved south to Karur, Coimbatore and Bhavani along the upper Kaveri, and quietly entered Mysore rajya from Satyamangalam and became known as Kanive-Kelaginavaru (the settlers from Coimbatore district through Gajjala Hatti Valley in the Nilgiri mountains).” Kaṇive keḷaginavarumeans “people from south of the valley”.

445Also see page 120. In Śāstri [1934, p. 38], the distinguished scholar R̥Narasiṁhācār remarks on Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri’s extraordinary scholarship and modesty, and quotes the following excerpt from a letter from Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri as illustration: “śrīmān dhīmān nr̥siṁ-hāryassakāmān vibudhān bhuvi | tanvanvijayatāṁ ṉīcaiḥkurvan svargadrumānapi ∥1∥

śrīmatp ūruṣa siṁhadēśika lasatkīrtiṁ jagadvyāpiṉīṁ | dr̥ṣṭvābjāsana ārurukṣati samā-śiślikṣatihyadrijā ∥ sutrāmōpavivikṣati praṇayataḥśambhurvivakṣatyathō | cāpē svēpi dhr̥ḍhaṁ ninatsati tathā śrīśōpi śiśrīṣati ∥2∥ svarbhānurnijigīrṣati praṇayiṉī jighrāsati svarvaśā | sindhuścōpacicīṣati pratidinaṁ śauriḥpradidhmāsati ∥ saṁvivyāsati digvadhūr-anuvapurhaṁsī jighatyatyathō | paulastyōpi samunniṉīṣati vidhō kāntōpi didrūṣati ∥3∥

*asya śrī narasiṁhadēśikamaṇēḥkarṇāṭabhāṣācaṇa | prakhyātārtha taṭāka vāgupapada-syānaśvara śrīnidhēh. ∥ śrīkaṇṭhaḥśritacāmarājanagarō vijñyāpayatyādarāddīrghāyuṣyamarōgatāṁ navanavāmāśāssyabuddhiṁ muhuh. ∥4∥ āśubhakr̥tsaha. . . (*illegible here *). . . *

jīvikāmālambya kālam yāpayāmi. svargatasya tanayasyaikādaśa varṣa dēśīyaikā kanyā pañcadaśavarṣadēśīyō brahmacāryaikassutaścētyapatyayugaḷaṁ vartate. kanyāvadbhissutō-dvāhaṁ pratipārthyamānōpyavaśyaṁbhāvikanyōdvāhane kr̥tasaṁkalpaḥkathañcitkañcid-varamapi niṣcitya kanyāyā vayōtikramabhiyā niṣcita varasya sulabhatarānyakanyōdvāhē sati varāntara daurlabhya śaṇkayācalitamānasa svataritaṁ tatkarma nirvarya kr̥takr̥tyō bhavitumākiñcanyānniruddhayatnaḥprakr̥takāryē muhussaṁprārthya dattābhayopyāpta

biography of kuṇigala r āmaśāstri

157

never abandon any task he undertook, until it had yielded results. While employed in the Cāmarājanagara temple, the Śāstri was much troubled by regulations changing with administrations. The Śāstri endured such vexations.

In the middle of prākāraon the western side of the Cāmarājēśvarasvāmi temple that Kr̥ṣṇarāja Voḍeyar III built in his father’s name, he also established a śivaliṇgacalled “Khāsa Prasanna Nañjarājēśvara”, his father’s given name, and ensuring that it would unfailingly receive abhiṣēkaand other devotions by placing his beloved Śrīkaṇṭha Śāstri in charge of its mantrapuṣpa ritual and making various other arrangements, he also established inscriptions, in which he has had the following ślōkacarved: mad’vaṁśajāḥpara·mahīpati·vaṁśajā vā

yē bh ūmipās’satatam’ujvala·dharma·cittāḥ|

mad’dharmam’ēva satataṁ paripālayanti |

tat’pāda·padma·yugaḷaṁ śirasā namāmi ∥

Meaning: I offer my salutations at the feet of the one who, in devotion to *dharma,*preserves my dharmicworks, be he from my own family or from that of another king.446

Dear reader! We shall not ever see another such king born. What an upright and pious king! What a symbol of righteousness! Could such a generous heart really have existed? We are not competent to take the measure of the generosity of such a king, born from sparks of divinity, or of his deep devotion to god and brahmaṇas! Ah, did Death, in his heartless way, take away from us a person of such greatness?

*saciva prōtsāhanābhāvāt kāśakusumāyamāna parivr̥ḍhaprasādōsmi. tasmādāgāmini vatsarēvāhaṁ parīkṣakēṣu niyōjya labdhakāmō yathāsyāṁ tathā srīmadbhiravaśyaṁ. . . ity-abhyarthanā ” *

446The noble sentiment expressed here is is in fact quite old, and found in earlier inscriptions. For example, Baḷḷāla Dēva’s Gaddak inscription no. 2 of 1192 C.E. ends in a very similar fashion [Fleet 1873, p. 301]: “madvaṁśajāḥparamahīpativaṁśajā vā pāpādapēta-manasōbhuvi bhāvi bh ūpaḥ| yē pālayanti mama dharmamimaṁ samagraṁ tēṣāṁ mayā *viracito_ṁjalirēśa mūrdhni ∥” *

**śrī