[[TODO - proofread]]
“The Sattāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas” [Robert C. Lester, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 114, No. 1, Jan. - Mar., 1994, pp. 39-53, 15 pages].
THE SATTĀDA ŚRĪVAIṢŅAVAS ROBERT C. LESTER UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO The Sättada Śrīvaisnavas are a distinctive, though little-known, community of Tenkalai Śrivaisnavas, spread throughout Tamilnadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, dedicated to temple service. The Sattadas have a long history, perhaps from the time of Rāmānuja (11th c.), and guru-lineages and a literature dating from, at least, the fifteenth century. The evidence strongly suggests that they are descendents of both brahmins and non-brahmins who followed the anticaste Alvär/Bhagavata Vaisnavism formalized by Pilļai Lokācārya and Maṇavāļamāmuni—the brahmins renouncing their sacred thread and top-knot and. thereby, the performance of Vedic rites, in favor of temple service and life-cycle rituals and pūjās engaging songs of the Alvars in place of Vedic mantras. From the eleventh through the sixteenth centuries Sättādas enjoyed supervisory status in many of the most important Śrīvaisnava temples.
INTRODUCTION THE DISTINCTIVENESS OF ŚRĪVAISNAVA HINDUISM lies not only in the fact that it gives special attention to the female mode of the godhead (śri), but also in its claim to inspiration by both the Sanskrit Veda and the devotional poems of the twelve devotees known as Āļvārs (650-850 C.E.)-considered to be the Tamil Veda. The two vedas are not of equal weight for all Śrīvaiṣṇavas-Vatakalai, or Northern-branch, Śrīvaiṣṇavism gives precedence to the Sanskrit and Tenkalai, or Southern-branch, Śrīvaiṣṇavism to the Tamil; nonetheless both lineages of theologians come to speak of their theology as ubhaya vedanta-“the wisdom of both” the Tamil Veda and the Sanskrit Veda. Among the Āļvārs-one female and eleven males, at least five are non-brahmin and it is the works of one of these, Nammāļvār, a sūdra, that most properly constitute the Tamil Veda. The literature of both the northern and southern lineages stipulates that mokṣa is by the grace of the supreme Lord through rituals open to both male and female members of all castes, and theologians of the southern lineage expressly criticize those Vaiṣṇavas who attribute significance to caste status.
At the same time, it appears that the entire lineage of theologians, on both the Tenkalai and Vaṭakalai sides, from the beginning (Nathamuni, c. 900) to the present, is brahmin. Sociological and ritual studies show that both Tenkalai and Vațakalai brahmins consider the maintenance of caste purity important and continue to perform the prescribed Vedic rituals-and that those who administer initiatory rites (dīkṣā), as well as Śrīvaiṣṇava temple priests, are invariably brahmin. Indeed, the rather extensive scholarly literature describing and interpreting 39 Śrivaiṣṇavism represents it as essentially a brahmin tradition. Non-brahmin devotees are mentioned, sometimes prominently, in the traditional accounts of the lives of the early theologians (guruparamparaprabhāva [Tam. kuruparamparaippirapāvam]) and in temple chronicles (oluku), but then disappear from or, at the least, appear to have had no significance for the later movement.
My “discovery” of the Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavas sheds some light on who some of these devotees were and what happened to them; and it significantly alters our understanding both of contemporary Śrīvaiṣṇavism and of its historical development. The Sättādas are not only a sizeable, distinctive contemporary community-a jāti-of non-brahmin Śrīvaiṣṇavas, but a community with a lengthy history, a guru-lineage and a substantial literature a heritage which, though now subdued, still plays a significant part in and had a major impact on the historical development of Śrīvaiṣṇava Hinduism.
PRESENT DAY SATTĀDAS V. Śrinivasa-ayyal is a full-time servant to the Sriranganathaswami Temple, Śrirangam, the chief temple for Śrivaisnavas. His duties include opening the curtain ayya is an honorific common among Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavas. It is used in the south as a term of respect.
The data on present day Sättādas presented here was gathered by interview of Sättada leaders residing at various Śrīvaiṣṇava centers throughout Tamilnadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, during the summer of 1988. Many of the interviews were facilitated by A. Tiruvengadathan, Professor of Sanskrit at Vaishnava College, Madras. This research was supported by a grant 40 Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.1 (1994) to the main sanctum at the commencement of daily worship (pūjā), providing and offering the flower garland for presentation to the deity and guiding the placement of it by the priest (arcaka), assembling the worshippers for receipt of prasāda and maintaining order during the distribution, and acting as “herald” (Tam. kaṭṭiyakkāran)-announcing the commencement and conclusion of all processions of the deity.2 Only he and the government-appointed overseer hold the key to the door of the inner sanctum. In performing his duties, Srinivasa is following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather and other males of his family line, and is training his eldest son to succeed him. He claims that this lineage of temple service dates back to at least the 11th century, when the great ācārya, Rāmānuja, in reorganizing temple activities, appointed his ancestors to these duties; or, perhaps, confirmed them in duties they were already performing.
Śrinivasa-ayya is the elder-leader of a distinctive community (twelve families) of servants to the Śrirangam temple known as Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas-a community that gains its livelihood from flower trade, the sale of prasāda and a share of temple income. Sättāda/ cāttāta (masc. noun, sättādavan), from Tamil cattu “to wear,” means “not wearing” and it is generally agreed that what is implied is not wearing the sacred thread (Skt. yajñopavita; Tam. pünül) or the top-knot (śikhā). Śrirangam Sättādas do not wear the thread, but some have the top-knot and Srinivasa noted that, while he does not, his father used to wear the top-knot. The Sättādas are otherwise known as “Kōyil [Temple]Śrīvaiṣṇavas,” the term being understood to mean, according to Sriniväsa, brahmin Śrivaiṣṇavas who have given up Vedic rites in order to give their full attention to temple service. Indeed, the lifestyle of the Śrirangam Sättādas-diet, dress, household appointments, marriage considerations, etc.-is strongly similar to that of Tenkalai brahmin Śrīvaiṣṇavas; unlike the latter, they do not perform certain Vedic rites and they recite portions of the Nalayira Divya Prabandham instead of Vedic mantras in their daily pūjās and rites of the life-cycle (samskāra). The five-fold rite of initiation (pañca-samskāra dikṣā) authorized by the Päñcarātrāgamas and undertaken by all Śrīvaisnavas is the upanayana for Sattādas. Śrirangam Sättādas receive from the National Endowment for the Humanities, administered by the American Institute of Indian Studies.
2 In the latter capacity, he carries a large silver cane and is accompanied by bearers of a large and distinctively fashioned torch. 3 There is a substantial literature representing Sättäda Śrivaiṣṇavism-texts in Kannada, Telugu and Tamil as well as initiation from Kōyil Annan, a Śrirangam ācārya belonging to the Kantatai family, which claims descent from Mutaliyaṇṭan, a disciple of Rāmānuja. This arrangement is recent, however, up to fifteen years ago, Sattāda initiations were performed by the head (mathādhipati) of the Kantāṭai Rāmānuja Mutt at Srirangam, which belongs to the Sättäda tradition. As we shall see, this mutt was founded by a Sättāda disciple of a Kantāṭai ācārya, in the fifteenth century. The head of this mutt, the last one of which was Śrinivasa’s uncle, is a renunciate bearing the title Ekängi Swami. According to Śrīnivāsa, the candidate for this office is elected such by other Sattādas and is inducted into samnyāsa by the head (titled, jiyar) of the Sriranga Nārāyaṇa Mutt." The Srirangam Sattādas are not a unique phenomenon; there are Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas throughout Tamilnadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, some of them Sanskrit none of which has received scholarly attention. I am aware of the following: 1) the Śrivaiṣṇavasamayācāranişkarṣaṇam, “A Compendium of Śrivaiṣṇava Practice,” by Periya Jiyar, with a commentary by Pillai Lokam Jiyar (c. 1550) [a disciple of Maṇavāļamāmuni, brother of Paravastu Bhattar Piran Jiyar, and author of the Yatindrapravanaprabhāvam, a biography of Maṇavāļamāmuni] (Madras: Srinivasa Press, 1911); 2) the Sampradayacandrika of Bhattanatha Munindra (also a disciple of Manavāļamämuni), describing the religious life of the paramaikantin; 3) the Samayācāracurukum of Śrimat Vädikesari Venkaṭācārya, which defines various types of renunciation (n.p., 1894); 4) the Śrivaisṇavasiddhāntadipika of Vadhula Kantāțai Rāmānujācārya, the seventh jiyar of the Paravastu Mutt, evidently written to establish the lineage of this Mutt as a lineage to Nammāļvār, revived by Ramanuja (see p. 14 and n. 31); 5) The Särtadaśrīvaiṣṇavaşodaśaprayogagrantha of Sri Venkatacāryulu, the sixth jiyar of the Paravastu lineage, which details the sixteen rituals of the life-cycle-from a glance, it is evident that the ritual forms are Smärta, but hymns of the Alvärs rather than Vedic mantras are to be chanted, and the pañca-samskāra or fivefold Śrivaiṣṇava dikṣā takes the place of upanayana; 6) the Prapannānuṣṭhānabhāskaram (Light on the Practice of a Prapanna), by V. Rāmānuja Ayyangar (Tirucci: Singaram Press, 1934), which describes daily and special rituals, very much as they are described in a Śrivaiṣṇava brahmin manual, except that the songs of the Alvårs replace Vedic mantras.
A mutt (Tam. maṇam: Skt. matha) is an organization by which certain persons’ worship-interests are represented at the temple. Śrīvaisnava mutts are usually presided over by a sam nyasi called a jiyar “lion” (ciyam/simha) or an ekāngi.
5 This information is corroborated by K. Gnanambal. “Śrivaiṣṇavas and Their Religious Institution,” Bulletin of the Anthropological Survey of India XX (1977); 117.
LESTER: The Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavas serving large temples in a manner similar to the Śrīrangam Sättādas, others serving as overseers (dharmakārtṛ) and/or priests (arcaka) to small temples, and still others who once served the temple but now gain a livelihood by other means. Sāttādas are sometimes referred to as dasa-nambi [Tam. tācanampi], “respected servant.” The Sättädas of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are commonly known as “Sätänis”, a variant of sātṭāda.
Another Śrinivasa-ayya is the elder of twenty-two families of Sāttādas at Srivilliputtur, ten of which are engaged in service to the Srirangamannar temple. In addition to his duties as herald, performing which he, like Śrirangam Śrīnivāsa-ayya, carries a silver cane and is accompanied by bearers of a large torch, Śrinivasa daily prepares a leaf and straw parrot for the hand of Antal, who stands to the right of Lord Rangamannar in the sanctuary. Śrivilliputtür Śrinivasa also exercises “the Kelvi [kēlvi] office” in removing the deity’s garland at the end of procession. Other Sättādas at Srivilliputtür guard the jewel-treasury and the hundi (chest for monetary offerings) and guard and maintain the deities’ vehicles (vāhana). Śrīnivāsa receives food and a modest monthly stipend for his services. Those in charge of the jeweltreasury live on the income from land gifted to them by the temple. The Śrivilliputtür Sättādas live near the center of the village surrounding the temple, next out from the arcakas; an indication of their relatively high status. Two of the twenty-two families at Srivilliputtür are Teluguspeaking; the other twenty, Tamil-speaking. The two groups live on opposite sides of the temple and have quite distinct roles the Telugu Sättädas performing the relatively less prestigious duties of looking after the foodstores, lighting lamps and sealing locks at night. Recently, there has been some intermarriage between the groups.
Vāṇamāmalai Tothadri, a Telugu Sättāda whose grandfather came from Srivilliputtur, is the sole Sättāda servant at the Vāṇamamalai temple, Nanguneri, the headquarters of the Väṇamamalai Mutt. He performs essentially the same services as the above mentioned Śrīnivāsas, in addition, enjoying the privilege of singing praises to Nammāļvār after the Iyal Köşti [Gosthi] has concluded. On special occasions, such as 6 Judiciary oversight; kelvi, “question, judiciary inquiry.” Iyal refers to the non-musical portion of the Nalayira Divya Prabandham which is chanted in a particular metrical style by a select group (göşthi) of devotees.
8 One of the most important Śrīvaiṣṇava temple festivals, beginning on the eleventh (ekädast) of the month of Vaikuntha (Dec.-Jan.).
41 Vaikuntha Ekādasi, he is addressed as “Rayar Rãmănuja Dāsar”; rayar? is a royal title in use during Vijayanagar rule and revealing of the fact that this Sättada’s ancestors were agents of the crown.
The brothers Devapiran and Śrinivasan Sättādavar serve at the Adhi Nadha Perumal temple, Alwar Tirunagari, performing the same duties as Vanamamalai Tothädri and, in addition, enjoying the status of consultants on temple affairs. They receive a regular stipend and are honored each year at the conclusion of Vaikuntha Ekadasi. The elder brother wears the topknot. Chakrappāṇi Dharmakarttar is one of two Sättädas serving the Tirukōṣṭiyur temple.10 He provides flowers for pūjā and keeps account of the temple-stores. His ceremonial name is “Bhattar Piran Dasan.”" The Tirukōṣṭiyür Sättādas three families-intermarry with the Sättädas of Śrivilliputtür, Nanguneri, and Alwār Tirunagari.
A. C. Narasimha is the elder of two Telugu-speaking families of Sättädas serving the Śriperumbudur temple, providing flower garlands and guarding the image (tirumēņi-kāval, “divine-body protection”) and jewels. Narasimha wears the thread; his father before him wore both thread and sikha. He reports that in his community the upanayana is performed with songs of the Alvārs rather than Vedic mantras.
Most of the Sättādas who are engaged in temple service serve as arcakas or as overseers (dharmakartṛ) in small village temples or the less-prominent city temples. Often, the two functions are performed by one and the same person. J. Kannaiyarāmānuja Dāsan of Madurai has a land endowment to support his service as arcaka to a small temple outside the city. His father and grandfather served this temple before him. His maternal uncle is overseer of a similar rural temple. The brothers Raghavan and Konnapa own and control a Tirumalisai Āļvāär temple adjacent to the main temple at Kumbhakonam. They say the temple is the Alvar’s samādhi and was built by their ancestors. Although there are twenty families of Sättādas at Kumbhakonam, none are in service to the main temple (Śārngapāņi [Tam. Carankapāņi] Perumal Kōyil). Some are native 9 Derived from Tamil, araiyar “king/ruler,” which, in turn, is related to aracu, Skt., rājā.
10 The temple where, it is said, Rāmānuja revealed the secret mantra from the balcony.
][ Paṭṭar piran, “lord of the learned,” is a title associated with Periyälvär, who served the Lord by providing flowers for worship. Dāsan means “servant.” The name also connects. Chakrappäni with the founder of the Paravastu Mutt, Tirupati, in the early sixteenth century.
42 Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.1 (1994) speakers of Telugu and some of Tamil; the Telugu Sāttādas wear the sacred thread.
N. Varada-ayya, now in retirement from railroad service, says that his father, Nammāļvārayya, grandfather (Varada-ayya), great-grandfather (Nammālvärayya) and great-great grandfather (Tiruvengadathan) served as overseer and arcaka at a Varadaraja temple near Tiruchirräppali. His father also served as ācārya to Sättādas and Naidus. His great-great grandfather was originally from Tirupati.
In the Coimbatore and Salem districts of Tamilnadu, there are numerous Hanuman temples controlled and served by Sattādas. My informants commonly remarked that Sattādas give special honor to the servants and insignia of Visnu; considering themselves “servants of the servants” (dāsānudāsa) of the Lord, they worship Hanuman, Garuda, the Discus (sudarśana), Conch (pañcajanya) and Forehead-mark (Tam, nāmam).
Sättädas of Karnataka and Andhra states typically serve as pūjāris/arcakas to small temples. There are no Sättādas serving the major temples of Tirumalai-Tirupati and one family performs minor service to the Tirunarayana temple at Melkote, providing flowers and namamclay. A number of small temples in southeastern Karnataka state have “Nammālvār” mutts which belong to Sättādas and reportedly were once served by Sättäda jiyars. Throughout the three-state area, a significant number of Sättādas, some in temple service and some in secular work, function as ācāryas and purohitas to the Sattāda community and various lower caste Śrīvaisnavas.
The Sättadas are Tenkalai Śrīvaiṣṇavas. Most have received their initiation (pañca-samskāra) from the Köyil Annan ācārya-lineage of Srirangam; some are disciples of the Vāṇamāmalai Mutt, Nanguneri, and others belong to the Paravastu Mutt, Tirupati. They consider themselves a distinct jäti, with numerous subdivisions–they have a traditional vocation, intermarry along well-defined lines within the Sattāda community and enjoy a distinct ritual status. Over the past seventy years, Sättādas have formed local, state and national associations for uplift (abhyudaya) of the community. According to the souvenir1? published on the occasion of the most recent (1980) national conference, six previous All India Sattāda Śrīvaiṣṇava Conferences were held, dating back to 1921.
Who are the Sattādas? In the situations I surveyed, in most circumstances of ranking, Sättādas rank below Śrī12 Abhyudayam, published on the occasion of Seventh All India Sättāda Śrīvaisnava Conference. Bangalore, December 13-14, 1980.
vaiṣṇava brahmins and above all other castes. In a few major13 temples, certain Sättādas are regularly honored (receive prasada, etc.) ahead of certain brahmins. In a sizable number of major temples, Sättādas receive high honors on special occasions, such as Vaikuntha Ekādasi. It can be argued, as, indeed, some brahmins as well as some Sättādas do, that the Sättädas are brahmins who gave up the thread and top-knot, either or both, in order to give full attention to temple service (köyir-kainkariya) and/or to honor the egalitarian “Bhāgavata” theology of Pillai Lōkācārya and his commentator, Maṇavālamāmuni. It can also be argued, as many non-Sättädas do and some Sattādas concede, that the latter are sūdras, mixed castes, or both, who established themselves as “pure” (at least, purer than other non-brahmins), either or both by once having control of major temples or by reason of inspiration by the Pillai Lokācārya/Maṇavāļamāmuni theology and pancarātra dikṣā. With respect to either of these scenarios, Sättāda Śrīvaisnavism may have arisen during or just after the time of Manavāļamāmuni (13701445), or it may represent the continuation of a very old bhāgavata (sātvata corrupted to sattāda?) Vaiṣṇavism inspiring and inspired by the Alvārs, and progressively “taken over” by certain smärta brahmins.14 13 “Major,” one of the 108 temples celebrated by the Alvårs and thus known as divya-desa (“most sanctified place”).
14 The Census of India for Madras Presidency and Mysore, for the years 1871, 1891, 1901, 1911, 1921 and 1931, contains remarks on Sättādas and Sātanis. The earliest of these accounts (1871) describes Sātanis as being persons who are: … frequently religious mendicants, priests of inferior temples, minstrels, sellers of flowers used as offerings, etc., and having probably recruited their numbers by the admission into their ranks of individuals who have been excommunicated from higher castes. [p. 159] The 1891 account defines Sätäni/Sättäda as “…a class of temple servants,” “Tenkalai Vaiṣṇavites,” “sūdras.” It explains the origin of the category by reference to Ramanuja’s division of Vaisnavas into sättinavan, who are “… invariably Brahman…”; and säntädavan, who are “… invariably Śūdras….” They shave their heads completely and tie their lower cloth like a Brahman bachelor. In their ceremonies they more or less follow the Brahmans, but the sacred thread is not worn by them…. The principal occupations of Sātanis are making garlands, carrying the torches during the god’s procession, and sweeping the temple floor. They also make umbrellas, flower baskets and boxes of palmyra leaves, and prepare the sacred balls of white HISTORY LESTER: The Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas There can be no doubt that Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavism has a long history and that Sättädas enjoyed greater status in Śrīvaisnava temples in times past than they do today. The number of temples served by Sattādas and the number of Sattāda families serving where services continue, have significantly declined over the last fifty years. Govinda Tāda, a schoolteacher at Tirukkurunkuți, remembers when Sättādas served at the Tirukkurunkuți temple and that his father’s house in Nănguneri was an honored stopping place for the Iyal Gōşthi, when proceeding outside the temple. According to Srinivasa, the number of Sättādas at Srirangam was much larger in earlier times; some of those who left Srirangam went to serve other temples and some sought a livelihood outside of temple service. Privileges have been cancelled or, at least, eroded. Śrirangam Sättadas recited alongside brahmin Śrīvaiṣṇavas in the Iyal Gōsthi up to 1942, when the privilege was cut off by legal action. Present day Sattādas say that their ancestors were in charge of the major Śrīvaiṣṇava temples of south India, as dharmakārtṛ or śrikaryakārtṛ (Tam. śrikariyakarttan), and that, in a few of these temples, they served as arcakas. Chakrappāņi Dharmakarttar (as his name suggests) says that his ancestors, who used the title “tatan” (Tamil for dāsa), served as dharmakarty to the Tirukoṣṭiyur temple 150 years ago. This is corroborated by a document of the court,15 dated 1851, which indicates that a Sättāda clay and saffron powder. Their usual agnomen is ‘Aiya". [pp. 269-70] This account, with the possible exception of the designation of Sātānis as sūdras, is quite consistent with the findings of my Tamilnadu survey. The census indicates 145 sub-divisions of Sătănis, including “Sättäda,” “Dasanambi,” “Dasa,” “Kulasekara Vaiṣṇavan,” and “Rāmānuja-matam.” The 1891 census of Mysore indicates that certain Sātanis rejected being labelled “sūdra” and sued (unsuccessfully) for defamation of character; they preferred enrollment as “Prathama Vaiṣṇava” (“First/original Vaisnava”) or “Nambi Venkatapura Vaisnava,” the latter name associating them with Tirupati and, according to present day Venkatapura Śrīvaiṣṇavas at Melkote, a brahmin community. The 1931 census for Mysore lists only “Sätäni” and records a request from certain Sătănis that they be listed as “Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas.” The request was rejected. …because Śrī Vaisnava is the distinctive name of one group of ‘Brahmins’ and the Sätäni community is not generally treated as a Brahmin community" (Census of India [Mysore. Bangalore, 1932), 25.1:318).
15 On file at the temple office.
43 was currently dharmakārtṛ and entitled to receive onetenth of the puja-income. Väṇamamalai Tothadri does not receive honors in the distribution of prasādam at the Vāṇamāmalai temple; but the recitation that accompanies the distribution of prasādam makes reference to two Sāttādas, Lakshman Dasar and Ilaiyāļvar Dasar, who, at some time past, occupied the position of dharmakārtṛ and were entitled to fourth place honors.
K. N. Muthurāju, of Bangalore, whose grandfather came from Kāñcipuram to serve as pūjāri in a Kolar temple, east of Bangalore, and whose brother now. serves this temple, is president of the All India Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇava Federation. Muthuraju claims, as do the Sättādas serving temples near Melkote, that up to 150 years ago the main temples at Melkote-Yoga Narasimha and Tirunārāyaṇa-had Sättāda arcakas. He points out that the Paravastu Mutt at Tirumalai is a Sättäda mutt and shows the one-time prominence of Sāttādas at Tirupati-Tirumalai. N. A. Rāmasāmi, a retired teacher and an elder of the Sättäda community of Melkote known as the Venkatapuram Śrīvaiṣṇavas, says there are 150 families of Tamil-speaking Sättādas in Karnataka. They are originally from Tirupati (Venkatapuram) and came to Mysore from Śrirangam. According to Rāmasāmi, from among these families, the Ajjanakattu family used to serve as pūjāris at the Yoga Narasimha temple and the Modur family performed pūjā at the Tirunārāyaṇa temple. The former still reside at Melkote and make their living by practicing ayurvedic medicine and astrology and overseeing the processing of white clay found only at Melkote and especially desired by Śrivaiṣṇavas for marking the namam on the body. The latter are now farmers in the area surrounding Melkote. Tirunārāyaṇa temple registers available with Araiyar Rāma Sharma, a brahmin in service to the temple, show that Sättādas, identified at Melkote by the honorific “ayya,” were prominent in service to the temple throughout the 19th century.
Kantāṭai Rāmānuja Ayyangār There is substantial inscriptional evidence for Sättāda prominence at Srirangam, Tirupati-Tirumalai and Käñicipuram (Varadarajasvāmi temple) during the 15th and 16th centuries, under the leadership of one Kantatai Rāmānuja Dāsar (c. 1430-1496), alias Kantäṭai Rämänuja Ayyangar or Kantatai Ayodhya Rämānuja Ayyangār (hereafter, KRA). The earliest notice of KRA is in a 16 This may be the earliest occurrence of the honorific ayyangār or ayyangāru, later used only by Śrivaisnava brahmins. The form is of Telugu derivation.
44 Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.1 (1994) Tirumalai inscription dated 1456,17 in which it is said that Kantātai Rāmānujayyan, the disciple of Alakiyamaṇavāļa Jiyar, is the trustee (kärtṛ) of rămänujakūtams (feeding houses for pilgrims, in commemoration of Ramanujācārya), constructed by the Vijayanagara ruler, Saluva Narasimha, at Tirumalai and Tirupati. Numerous inscriptions, thereafter to 1495, refer to him as “Kantāṭai Rāmānujayyangār, disciple of Alakiyamaṇavāļa Jīyar and manager of the Tirumalai-Tirupati rāmānujakūṭams.” These texts indicate that, 1) as the agent of Saluva Narasimha, he constructed and managed feeding houses at Srirangam and Varadarajasvami temple, Käñcipuram, as well as Tirumalai-Tirupati;18 2) he became quite wealthy, himself financing a number of improvements to the temples;193) in his later years he exercised considerable power over Tirumalai-Tirupati temple affairs as trustee of the Gold-treasury (porpantāram):20 4) he had disciples known as the “Sättāda Ekäki Śrīvaiṣṇavas,” designated to administer the feeding houses and receive benefactions after his demise; and 5) his successors in the office of “Kantāṭai Ayyangar” held the office of dharmakārtṛ at both Kāñcipuram and Śrirangam, for a time (discussed below).
KRA himself is not labelled “sättada” in the Tirumalai-Tirupati inscriptions. From the perspective of later Śrīvaiṣṇavism, one may take the honorific “ayyangar” [aiyankār] to indicate that he was a brahmin. “Brahmin” and “Sättada” are not necessarily contradictory, and even if they are. “ayyangar” doesn’t necessarily indicate “brahmin” in the fifteenth century, especially in light of the Sattada use of the abbreviated form “ayyap.” The Tirumalai Oluku (Tirumalai temple chronicle) describes KRA as a Sättāda, and the KRA Mutt at Srirangam is clearly a Sattāda institution.
The name “Kantaṭai” connects KRA to Srirangam, either as a member or as a disciple of the Kantatai family of ācāryas established at Srirangam in descendence from 17 Tirumalai-Tirupati Devasthanam Epigraphical Series, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 7-8 [= 2.4:7-8. Henceforth, references to this work will follow this abbreviated format.].
18 TIDES 2.13-14:17-18. KRA’s activity at Käñcipuram is confirmed by a Varadarajasvāmi temple inscription of 1487 noting that he was “… the trustee of the Rămănuja-küṭam on Sannidhi Street” (South Indian Temple Inscriptions, 1,348 [Madras: Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, 1953]). At about the same time-1489-we find reference to his activity at Srirangam, as discussed below.
19 For example: TTDES, 2.128:289-91.
20 For example: TTDES, 2.134:310-15.
21 For example: TTDES, 2.22:35-36.
Kantatai Mudaliaṇdän, cousin and disciple of Rāmānuja. The only possible inscriptional reference to KRA at Śrirangam is a 1489 document recognizing a gift for the support of pūjā and charitable feeding by Kantatai Ayodhyā Rāmānujayyangār, “. …a Tiruvarangam [Śrirangam]-Temple Sättada Parama Ekängi….“22 This Kantāṭai Ayodhya may be either Tirumalai-Tirupati KRA, under a variant name, or his disciple. The facts that other Rāmānujayyangars are specifically designated as disciples and successors to Tirumalai-Tirupati KRA (see below) and that we have clear evidence of the latter’s activity at Srirangam, argue for identity.
The Kōyil Oluku (chronicle of the Śrirangam temple) says that Kantatai Rāmānuja was one Ramaraja by name, elder brother of the Vijayanagara ruler Saluva Narasimha. Rāmarāja chose the religious life and, while on pilgrimage, took samnyasa at Ayodhya, where he also obtained several of the Lord Rama’s gold coins and a powerful weapon called the sparśa-vedhi (“that which wounds by touch”). Returning to his brother’s palace, he presented the ruler with one of several gold coins and in return was granted the privilege of being honored with the desantari mudra (“visitor’s seal of authority”) at any of the 108 divyadeśas of Śrīvaiṣṇavism. Thereafter, he traveled to Tirumalai, where he offered a coin and his credentials and took charge of all the shrines at that place. Coming to Śrirangam in 1489, he offered a coin to Śrīranganatha, donned the vestment of an ekangi and became a disciple of Köyil Annan (a Kantätai-lineage acārya) with the dasya-name “Kantāṭai Rāmānuja Dasar.” Exercising his royal grant, he became leader of the Srirangam ekängis, possessor of the Añjaneya (Hanuman) mudra—the most powerful deśāntari mudrā at Śrirangam, and thereby became overseer (śrikaryakärtṛ)23 of the entire Śriranganathasvami temple. In the latter capacity he performed numerous major services (kainkarya) of new construction and reparation, such that the Lord (through the priest) titled him “Kulasekhara Perumal.” The chronicle account concludes with the remark that Kantāțai Rāmānuja’s activities are the reason why, since his time, one of the desantari ekängis has held the title of Kantatai Rāmānuja, has presided over a mutt, has branded visiting ascetics (deśāntari vairāgi) with the desantari mudrā and has regularly received a portion of the temple prasādam.24 22 Annual Report of Epigraphy (Government of Madras, 1939), 13.
23 Senapatidurantara and dharmakārtṛ are equivalent terms. Köyiloluku, ed. Sri Krishnaswami Ayyangar Swami (Tirucchi: Srinivasam Press, 1976), 92-96. Koil Olugu, tr. V. N. Hari Rao (Madras: Rochouse & Sons, 1961), 164-70.
LESTER: The Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas There are, at least, two difficulties with this Kōyil Oluku account; indeed, it would appear that the account was conveniently “made up” to explain the 1489 inscription. First, Saluva Narasimha had an elder brother, but his name was Timmarāja and no sources other than the temple chronicle associate him with renunciation or temple service. Second, whether KRA was a member of the Kantatai family or a disciple of Kōyil Kantatai Annan, the Tirumalai reference to him as “Kantǎțai” in 1456 means he must have been at Śrirangam much earlier than 1489. It is noteworthy that the chronicle nowhere refers to KRA with the honorific “Ayyangar,” calling him rather, “Kantāṭai Rāmānuja Dāsar,” a name appropriate to a Sättäda, on the assumption that ayyangar designates a brahmin and that Sättādas are non-brahmin.
KRA is consistently referred to as a disciple of Alakiyamaṇavāļa Jiyar, the latter, by title,25 a renunciate, and traditionally associated with Maṇavāļamāmuni (1370-1445) and the Varadarajasvāmi temple, Käñcipuram. Alakiyamaṇavāļa Jiyar is one of the names of Maṇavāļamāmuni; but KRA would have been too young to be disciple to Maṇavāļamāmuni himself. The Periyatirumuți Ațaivu records that Alakiyamaṇavāļa was disciple to Paravastu Bhaṭṭarpiran Jiyar, the latter himself a disciple of Maṇavāļamāmuni.26 The one reference to Bhattarpiran Jiyar, in a Tirumalai inscription dated 1493, notes favor to “Bhattarpiran Jiyar, the disciple of Bhattarpitän Jiyar.” Inscriptions dated 1514, 1523, and 1535, record favor to one BhattarpiranAyyan….a Sāttāda Ekāki [Ekāngi?-see below] Śrīvaiṣṇava and a disciple of Paravastu Annan.“28 We note the characteristic Sättäda honorific, “ayyan”; the names Bhaṭṭarpiran and Paravastu, which associate these persons with Paravastu Bhattarpirän; and the ekangi status of the disciple, strongly suggesting, although not insuring, that the guru, Paravastu Annan, is a renunciate, in charge of a mutt. Given that the disciple of the disciple of Paravastu Bhaṭṭar Piran (namely, KRA) was 25 Jiyar/ciyam, “lion,” is a title taken by Śrīvaiṣṇava samnyasis who are heads of mutts (mathadhipati/sinhasanapati).
26 Kandadai Naiyan, Periyatirumuți Alaivu, printed with and under the title of Arayirappați Guruparamparaprabhavam, ed. Krishnaswami Ayyangar (Tirucchi: Srinivasam Press, 1975), 607. See also TTDES, 3.101:203, and Tirupati Devasthanam Epigraphical Glossary, 4.2 of TTDES, 37. All translations from this text are my own.
27 TTDES, 2.102:212-13.
28 TTDES, 3.102, 156:208-10, 324-26; 4.59:116-19. Periyatirumuți Ataivu, 610, says Paravastu Annan was a disciple of Paravastu Bhaṭṭar Piran Jiyar.
45 a Sättāda, we may reasonably conclude that the entire line was Sättäda. The Periyatirumuți Ataivu says that Paravastu Bhattar Piran Jiyar was a vaidika brahmin. However, a 1612 inscription at Srirangam records a gift to support offerings during the recitation of the Tiruvaymoli on a day special to Rämänuja. The gift was given by one Jiyar Rāmānuja Jiyar, also known as Rāmānujadāsa, and given in the name of his guru Yatindrapravanaprabhava Pillai Lokācārya Jiyar, the disciple of Paravastu Nayinar Acarya of Tiruvenkatam (Tirupati).29 The Śrīvaiṣṇavasiddhantadipika, written around 1700 by one Vadhula Kantāṭai Rāmānujācārya, argues the case of Sättäda Śrivaiṣṇavism and the authority of Paravastu Kantopayantrumunindra Jiyar, said to be the seventh head of the Paravastu Mutt, which began with Paravastu Bhattarpiran Jiyar. The text lists the above mentioned Nayinar Acarya as fourth in the line, which placement is consistent with his appearance at Srirangam in 1612.30 29 South Indian Inscriptions, ed. H. K. Narasimhaswamy (New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India, 1982), 24.523: 505 [= vol. 24, no. 523, p. 505].
30 The Srivaisnava Siddhanta Dipika, ed. C. Alagsingara Pandit (Madras: Haddon and Co., 1918), 70-73, declares the authority of the lineage from Nammālvār (Śrī Parāňkusa Paramācārya) to Śrimat Paravastu Kantopayantru Munindra JiyarRāmānuja is seventh in line from Nammālvār. Maṇavāļamāmuni seventh from Rāmānuja and Kantopayantru seventh from Maṇavāļamāmuni. Kantopayantru is a complete acarya in all respects and the one who has firmly established Sättāda Śrīvaisnavism. He is the one whose feet must be taken by Sättadas, following the example of Madhurakavi toward Nammāļvār and the teaching of Piļļai Lokācārya concerning the necessity of having the grace of the ācārya. Rāmānuja perfected himself at the feet of 1) Nammāļvār, 2) Tirukacchi Nambi, “… the first follower of the Vaiṣṇava Darśana…” who gave Rämānuja the six teachings, and 3) Piļļai Urangǎvilli Dasar, and revived Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavism. He installed images of Parankusa (Nammälvär) and instructed Sättādas to worship them. According to the Dipikā, the Dravida Veda was revealed through Nammāļvār to show the easy way to moksa, especially for women, sūdras and the downtrodden. Nammalvår communicated this truth to Vadama Smärta brahmins in a special revelation through Näthamuni. These brahmins, afraid that evil persons would misuse this truth, kept it secret. Other brahmins discarded their thread and top-knot and openly proclaimed this “True Heritage of the Conqueror of the Evil Humor” (sajajir [after Śatakopa - Nammā vār]-sat-sampradaya); these are the Sattādas (the Vadamas being the Sattinas) and they stand in the ancient Parama Ekânta tradition of “those who have renounced all associations (sarva-sangha-parityägi), those who as temple-servants were 46 Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.1 (1994) KRA’s successor at Tirumalai was Kantātai Mādhavayyangar: … Saka year 1442, We, the Sthanattar of Tirumalai have registered this silasasanam in favour of Kandadai Madhavayyangar, the disciple and successor of Kandadai Ramanujayyangar, who was the manager of Ramanujakutams established at Tirumalai and in Tirupati, and the agent of the gold treasury… 31 K. Madhava also appears in a Śrirangam inscription dated 1500, as the disciple of KRA, the dharmakārtṛ of the Śrirangam and Tirupati rämānujakūṭams, 32 K. Madhava is succeeded at Tirumalai-Tirupati by KRA’s son, first mentioned as Kumāra Rämänujayyangår and later as Kantāļai Rāmānujayyangar.33 A KRA, presumably the son of the original KRA, presented gold coins to Varadarajas vāmi at Kāñcipuram, 1530,34 was entrusted with endowments at Srirangam, 1532, and in 1538 was serving as the overseer of the Varadarajaswāmi temple, Kāñcipuram. 35 The latter is the last refercalled “Vişnu-mundaka brahmins”-“brahmins renounced (to serve) Visņu.” “Sättädas” are brahmin only: Śrīvaisnavas of the other castes are called kulasekhara (kṣatriyas), trivarnika (vaisyas), namadhari (sūdras) and tirukulattar (pañcamas). The Dipika continues, noting that Rāmānuja sought initiation (pañca-samskära) from the low-born Tirukacchinambi, who refused to give it, urging Rämänuja not to compromise his standing with brahmins. Even though Rāmānuja taught and outwardly followed the vaidika brahmin way, including the taking of samnyasa, he had, in fact, renounced Vedic karmas; that is to say, in order to communicate with the Vadama brahmins he assumed an appropriate posture. In renewing the tradition, he assigned the Sattādas to teach the Saṭajit siddhanta to nonbrahmins and to take care of the worship of the Lord in shrines and temples. The foot-water (śri-pada-tirtha) and foodremnant (ucchiṣṭa) of Sattādas is most sanctifying.
It is clear that the Śrivaiṣṇava Siddhanta Dipika belongs to the tradition of Pillai Lokācārya and Maṇavāļamāmuni, and it expressly argues the case for the Paravastu Mutt lineage and for Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavism; perhaps, under duress, i.e., in a struggle for leadership of the Śrīvaiṣṇava community and, specifically, control of the temples.
31 TTDES, 3.142:297-99.
32 South Indian Inscriptions 24.357:355-56.
33 TTDES, 4.1, 3:1-7.
34 SII (Madras: Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, 1953), 1.378:363.
35 Cited in K. V. Raman, “Kandadai Ramanuja-Ayyangar,” Bharatiya Vidya 29 (1969): 34-35.
ence to a KRA at Käñcipuram. The final reference to a KRA at Tirumalai-Tirupati-1534-is to one Kantātai Ariya Rāmānujayyangar, who must have succeeded Kumāra Kantāṭai Rāmānujayyangār at this temple.36 KRA’s most frequently referenced disciples are called “Sättāda Ekāki Śrīvaiṣṇavas.” Ekāki, literally. “one alone, a solitary person,” is not a term used in present day Śrivaiṣṇavism; it occurs as a title for others besides Sättādas and is interpreted by Viraraghavacārya as meaning “person without family who has dedicated his entire life to temple service.“37 The term may easily be confused with ekangi (Tam. ekanki, a nasalization of ekaki?), which occurs less frequently in the Tirumalai-Tirupati inscriptions, but also in relation to both Sättädas and others. The above mentioned Bhattarpiran-ayyan is, in one text (no. 102, dated 1514), called an ekāki and, in another (no. 156, dated 1523), called ekangi:38 the Tamil Lexicon defines ekāngi: 1) “a class of Vaisnava devotees”; and 2) “a single person, one who has no family”; Winslow’s Tamil-English Dictionary says: 1) “a single person, bachelor (brahmachari)”; and 2) “an ascetic, monk (samnyasi).” Thus, both sources allow the equivalency of ekangi with ekāki. At the same time, the Lexicon’s first and Winslow’s second definition indicate that ekangi has a specialized meaning for some Vaiṣṇavas; indeed, both historical evidence and present day understanding indicate that an ekangi is a renunciate (perhaps not an ascetic or a samnyāsi, however) and that the term signifies “one having a single distinguishing mark.“39 This mark, according to present day ekangis at Tirupati and documents of the Kantāțai Rămănuja Mutt tradition, is the wearing of a white loincloth and a saffron upper garment or simply a strip of saffron cloth; the “single mark” is the single piece of saffron cloth,40 whereas the samnyasi wears two pieces of saffron (top and bottom).
36 TTDES, 4.34:70-71. The editor, evidently because of the term ariya, attempts to explain this personage as “… one of the ācārya-purusas or religious teachers residing in Tirupati….” “This is an unlikely explanation.
37 History of Tirupati (Tirupati: Tirumalai-Tirupati Devasthanams Press, 1954), 2:660-61.
38 TTDES, 3.102, 156:208-10, 324-26; 4:59:116-19. 39 See my “The Practice of Renunciation in Srivaishnavism.” The Journal of Oriental Research LXII (1992): 77-95.
40 It has been suggested to me that eka-angi is a mixture of Sanskrit eka and Tamil anki-“cloth”; thus, “one cloth”; but the form cannot serve, as it must, to refer to “one who wears only one piece of cloth.” LESTER: The Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavas It is possible that the early ekangis were householder-renunciates; such are mentioned in the traditional biographies as among the disciples of Rāmānuja. The Samayācāra-curukkum of Vadikesari Venkațăcărya, part of a Sättāda literature possibly dating from KRA’s time, defines an ekängin as a vanaprastha-he has a wife, wears a saffron upper garment and a white lower garment which he receives as a disciple of a Srivaiṣṇava samnyasin, may or may not wear the thread and top-knot and engages in nothing but service in the temple. There is today a Paravastu Mutt at TirumalaiTirupati, claimed by Karnataka and Andhra Sättādas. The mutt is currently without leadership. T. P. Sampath of Tirupati, the son of the last head of the mutt, says that this mutt has been a “gṛhastha mutt” for some time; his father wore the vestment of an ekangi, was called a “jiyar,” and yet, lived the life of a householder. His son, Tiruvengaḍa Rāmānujācārya, is in training at the Sanskrit College, Mysore, preparing to assume leadership of the mutt. There is evidence that the Śrīvaiṣṇava temple-mutt institution, under the headship of one called jiyar, began with Sättāda Śrivaiṣṇavas at Tirumalai-Tirupati in the early 14th century; the earliest mutts were essentially flower gardens and were managed by jiyars whose names bear the Sättäda honorific ayyan. A 1540 inscription refers to one such jiyar, Yatirajayyan, who is, like KRA, the disciple of Alakiyamaṇavāļa Jiyar and the Chief Overseer (periya kōyil kelvi) of the Tirumalai temple.42 If the early ekängis were householder-renunciates, perhaps all Sättadas were such and their ekängi (or, jiyar) status specifically explains the practice of giving up the thread and sikhā.
43 As noted, KRA himself is called “Parama Ekāngi.” This latter title allows the possibility that ekangi is a variant or corruption of ekanti-(the written Tamil g and t are very similar in form). It is noteworthy that in lists of Ramanuja’s entourage occurring in two different 41 The Samayacara-curukum, 94-95, defines Sättäda samnyasins as those who strictly follow the nivṛtti marga-totally surrendered to Nārāyaṇa, wearing saffron (kāśaya) only, they give up the thread because they give up the practice of Vedic rituals and because the strands of the thread represent gods other than Narayana. In giving up the thread, the text points out, Sattāda samnyasins are more akin to followers of Sankara and Madhva than to the brahmin tridandins who follow Rāmānuja.
42 TTDES, 4.151:277.
43 Annual Report of Epigraphy (Government of Madras, 1939), 13.
47 texts-Ārāyirappați Guruparamparaprapāvam (6000 Stanza Guru-Lineage Account) and Periyatirumuți Ataivu (Longer Genealogical Lists), the first speaks of “12,000 ekāngis” and the second of “12,000 ekäntis” (see below). Ekänti(n), “one solely devoted to one object,” and paramaikānti(n), “one supremely devoted to one object,” are titles special to Satvatas/Pañcarātrins/ Bhagavatas, in the sense of sole devotion to Vasudeva/ Nārāyaṇa. The term ekangi may have arisen due to the fact that ekantis came to be distinguished as wearers of one piece of saffron cloth.
KRA, evidently, had householder disciples: perhaps householder-renunciates. A Tirumalai inscription dated 147645 stipulates that a portion of prasadam is regularly to go to the Sattada Śrīvaiṣṇavas who tend certain gardens and who reside in the sixteen houses on Kantātai Rämänujayyangar Street. In addition to providing flowers, KRA’s disciples supplied sandal paste, musk, camphor, turmeric paste, areca nut and betel leaves, etc., for temple worship.46 They also participated in the recitation of songs of the Alvärs at the shrine of Rāmānuja, a practice evidently introduced at Tirumalai by KRA. The 1476 inscription noted above also remarks that a share of prasādam is to go to “… the Sattina Śrīvaisnavas and the Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas who chant the Prabandhas of the Alvārs in the shrine of Udaiyavar [Rāmānuja].“47 Sättina, from Tamil sattu, means “wearing,” as distinct from sāttāda, “not wearing”; presumably, in reference to the sacred thread and top-knot. If the Sattādas are nonbrahmin, then it is noteworthy that they were permitted to recite along with brahmins; it is more likely that sattina and sättāda designate two types of brahmins-those who wear the thread and those who do not; otherwise, why not simply speak of brahmins and sättādas? Other Evidences of Sāttādas To my knowledge the earliest inscriptional reference to Sättādas, by this name, is in a Tirupati edict of 1442 “… in favour of Karunakaradasar, one of the Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavas of Tirupati.“48 The edict records a sizable donation by the dasar, the interest on which is to underwrite pūjā-offerings, in perpetuity-”… as long as the 44 Pinpalakiya Perumal Jiyar, Ārāyirappați Guruparamparaprabhāvam, ed. Sri Krishnaswami Ayyangar (Tirucchi: Srinivasm Press, 1975). All translations from this text are my Own.
45 TTDES. 2.68:129-38.
46 TTDES, 2.81:154-55 and 2.22:35-36.
47 TTDES, 2.68.
48 TTDES, 1.211:212-13.
48 Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.1 (1994) moon and sun endure.” This record indicates that Sattāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas exist at least somewhat before KRA’s coming to prominence. As well as the several Sättäda jiyars mentioned between 1520 and 1545, there is mention in a 1536 inscription of one Alakiyamaṇavāļayyan, “… of the Kausika gotra, Āpastamba sūtra and Yajus śākhā and a disciple of Alakiyamaṇavāļa Jiyar, “49 clearly a brahmin Sättäda. Beyond the time of KRA and his successors, a Śrirangam inscription of 163650 records a gift from one Emaluranar, “…a templesättāda Vaiṣṇava (tiruppati sättāta vaiṣṇava)….” Again, at Srirangam, in 1665, there is a record of the gift of one Muddirai-Raman, son of Alakiyasinkar, a Sättäda Vaisnava of the Śrīvatsa gotra. The reference to the Śrīvatsa gotra appears to give us a clear reference to a brahmin Sättāda. If so, it is all the more remarkable that both inscriptions refer only to “Vaiṣṇava” rather than “Śrīvaiṣṇava.” Both the Kōyil Oluku and the Periyatirumuți Aṇaivu appear to refer consistently to Sättādas as merely “Vaiṣṇava.” The Srirangam temple chronicle, Kōyil Oluku, mentions Sattādas with reference to the activities of Rāmānuja (1017-1137). The chronicle, as it stands, was likely composed only in the 18th century; but the text is based on much older records, one of which, the Arayirappați Guruparamparāprapāvam, may date from the early 13th century.52 Even so, it is difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish clearly what is early and what is late; much of what is said about the early period may be a projection back from a later time.
The chronicle lists and describes the duties of: 1) ten classes of Śrīvaiṣṇava servants, 2) the Ekängis, 3) the Sättädamudalis, 4) the Vettirapāņis and 5) ten classes of low-caste servants-which five groupings, according to the chronicle, constituted those serving the Srirangam temple as organized by Ramanuja. The briefer and probably older of two Kōyil Oluku texts53 does not clearly distinguish brahmin and non-brahmin among these servants. The more elaborate description of servants’ duties in the longer text specifies that the ten TTDES, 4.71:139.
50 SII 24.531:511.
51 52 SII, 24.544:524.
B. V. Ramanujan, History of Vaishnavism in South India Upto Ramanuja (Chidambaram: Annamalai University, 1973). 48-49.
53 Ed. Sri Krishnaswami Ayyangar Swami (Tirucchi: Srinivasam Press, 1976).
groups of Śrīvaiṣṇava servants and the Vettirapāņis were brahmin and the ten groups of low-caste servants were sudra. We note that it is only this brahmin category that is referred to as “Śrīvaiṣṇava,” and this seems to be consistent throughout the chronicle. In describing a ritual important to the duties of the chief overseer, the longer text says: Then tirtham and satakopan would be offered to all the Jiyars, the Śrivaiṣṇavas, the Ekängis, the Sattādamudalis and others. Before the days of Udayavar these were addressed merely as “Śrīvaisnavas.“55 The text, here, abruptly goes on to another subject. Does this mean that it was Ramanuja (Udayavar) who introduced exclusivism into Śrīvaiṣṇavism, distinguishing the smärta brahmins as the “true” Śrīvaiṣṇavas? The Ekangis and the Sättādamudalis of the chronicle are not associated with any caste. “Mudali” is an honorific meaning “head” or “chief,” or alternatively, “honored,” “distinguished.” In the first sense the title probably indicates that there were other Sättādas. The translator, Hari Rao, calls all non-brahmins “sättāda,” but there is no warrant for this in the text. In the second sense, the title may indicate that Sättādas are unusually respected persons, either because they are nonbrahmins, yet quite distinguished, or because they are a special kind of brahmin. Clearly, the Sattādamudalis are distinct from either the brahmin or the sudra groups. They may be a special category of brahmin or distinguished non-brahmins, yet not sūdras. The Oluku labels them “outsiders, foreigners” (deśāntari)–presumably, “those not native to Srirangam.” Four of the Ekängis are also called deśantari.56 (Where are these “outsiders” from? Are they from Tirupati, having come to Śrirangam with Kantāțai Rāmānujayyangar, their existence in Rāmānuja’s time being a projection back from what prevailed later?) According to the chronicle, the Sattādamudalis have the “permanent” duties of decorating the mandapams with flowers, making and offering garlands, arranging for the start of the procession of the Alvārs, following behind the Prabandham reciters, reciting the last two lines of each stanza, “bearing the Rāmānujan sword and acting as the bodyguard of the Jiyars and the Śrivaiṣṇavas.“57 They are also mentioned as carrying the images of the Alvārs in procession when the latter are honored 55 KO, translation, 60.
54 Ananda Press, 1909. V. N. Hari Rao’s translation follows this text.
56 KO, text, 44; translation, 50.
57 KO, translation, 89.LESTER: The Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavas on their birthdays. 58 Among the Śrivaisnava groups (presumably, brahmins) are the Dasanambis, whose duties include planting and tending flower gardens, making garlands, decorating the palanquin for procession and carrying torches, one “… a huge torch, the dasari pandam…“59 They are also known as “Pundarika-dāsas,” the name for a community of flower-provisioners to which Tondaradipoḍi Alvar belonged.60 The Vettirapānis, “mace-holders” (also brahmin), go before the procession, keeping order with gold and silver rods and canes, organizing the Śrīvaiṣṇavas “… according to their qualifications to receive the prasādams….” commanding silence before the beginning of Prabandham recitation and “reciting panegyrics.“61 The activities of present day Sāttādas at divyadeśa temples incorporate the key elements of activities ascribed to the three of these early groups, combined; and, we remind ourselves that the Sattādas today are alternatively called “Dāsanambis.” Does this mean that, over time, certain brahmins became non-brahmins or that the ancient Sāttādas (here, the Sättädamudalis) were indeed a special class of brahmins? The Arayirappați Guruparamparāprapāvam lists Sättādamudalis along with twenty other Mudalis. All but four have “Dāsar” names and “Dāsar” appears only with respect to Mudalis in the list of 179 disciples.62 The Tamil Lexicon and Thurston’s Castes and Tribes… 63 indicate that the other Mudalis are sub-divisions of the Veļāļas, considered to be either südra or vaisya. We then note two points: that Sättädas characteristically, but not exclusively, use the “Dasar” name and others who anciently used this title were certain sub-groups of the Velāļa. If all these “Mudalis” are Veļāļa, what makes them “Mudali” and why are some Velāļa singled out as “those who do not wear…?” Summing up Rāmānuja’s following, the 6000 says: 58 59 …seven hundred adherents of the highest asrama (uttama-ācirāmikal), seventy-four ācārya-puruṣas firm on lion-thrones, innumerable Sättinaand Sattada-64 KO, translation, 52; text, 45.
KO, translation, 88.
60 KO, text, 44.
61 KO, translation, 89-90.
62 6000 Guruparamparam, 269.
63 Tamil Lexicon, rpt. (Madras: University of Madras, 1982). E. Thurston, Castes and Tribes of Southern India (Madras: Government Press, 1909), 7.
64 The term here and in the above listing of disciples is sāṛṛina and săṛṛåda, colloquial back-forms of sättina and sättāda.
49 mudalis, and three hundred female ascetics (korriyammai),65 It is possible that sättina and sättäda here identify all of the brahmin and non-brahmin male devotees who are completely dedicated to temple service and are not samnyāsis or ācāryas; or, the terms signify two types of brahmins.
Some of the names in the 6000’s list of Sättādamudalis are of interest: Śri Kulasekhara Perumal, Bhattar Piran Dasar [Pattar Piran Tacar], Päkaivillidāsar, Śrivilliputtūrdāsar, Śri Nārāyaṇa Dasar, Śri Govardhanadasar, Tiruvalutivalanadudasar, Śri Rāmānuja Dāsar, Pillai Urangavilli Dasar, Vantar, Cuntar and Rāmānuja Vēlaikkarar.66 Kulasekhara Perumal and Bhaṭṭar Pirän call to mind Alvärs, the latter being a title for Periyā]vär, who tended flowers. Pillai Urangavilli Dasar was guardian of the treasury and belonged to a caste of wrestlers; Rāmānuja used to lean on him returning from the bath. Although he is not in the list, the 6000 speaks of Tirukacchi Nambi (Kāñcipūrṇa) as a sāttādavar.67 According to the biography, Rāmānuja sought initiation with Tirukacchi, a śūdra (? the text here actually says “non-vaidika”) devotee of Lord Varadaraja of Kāñcipuram, and failing in that, invited Tirukacchi to eat at his home so that he (Rāmānuja) might partake of the grace of his leavings.
The Periyatirumuți Aṭaivu (16th century) may shed some light on the above issues. It sums up Rāmānuja’s entourage as: 12.000 ekāntis… 74 ācārya-purusas, 700 jiyars, a multitude of Sättinas and Sättādas, and innumerable Sättinamudalis and Sättädamudalis, Tirunamadharis led by Pillai Urankävilli Dasar, and Tirunamadhari women led by Ponnacchiyar.68 We notice: 1) “12,000 ekäntis” rather than the “12,000 ekängis” of the Kōyil Oluku and 6000 Guruparamparam; 2) both Sättina/Sättäda and Sättinamudali/Sattadamudali, whereas in the inscriptions, chronicles and biographies it has been one or the other only; 3) Pillai Urankävilli Dasar, whom all sources consider südra and who is listed in the 6000 as a Sättädamudali, is here 65 6000 Guruparamparam, 271. The Samayācāra-curukkum, 75, defines korriyamma as wives who live a disciplined life, refraining from sexual activity while looking on their husbands as fathers.
66 6000 Guruparamparam, 269. 67 6000 Guruparamparam, 167.
68 Periyatirumuți, 576; my translation.
50 Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.1 (1994) leader of a new category: “those who wear the Vaisnava forehead mark (nāmam).” There is no mention of brahmins, except we take Sättinamudali and Sättina as such; then, Sättädas are either other brahmins or “pure” śūdras, as distinct from the other südras, i.e., the Tirunamadharis. In the list of names that follows this general statement, the category “Śrīvaiṣṇavas, led by Kottaiyammaraiyankar” is followed by the category “Sättāda Vaiṣṇava,” inclusive of several “däsars” as found in the 6000 list of Sättādamudalis; then, come the Tirunamadharis led by Pillai Urankāvilli Dāsar and finally the female Tirunamadharis led by Urankavilli’s wife. This arrangement appears to say that Sättinamudali and Sattina equals Śrīvaiṣṇava, Sattādamudali and Sättāda are just Vaiṣṇava, not Śrīvaiṣṇava, and “Tirunamadhari,” while related to Visņu, is neither “Vaiṣṇava” nor “Śrīvaiṣṇava.” As we shall see below, Sättäda literature offers two hierarchies of Śrīvaiṣṇavas: one says that the Sättadas are brahmin, the Kulasekharas are kṣatriya, the Trivarṇikas are vaisyas and the Namadharis are sūdra. The other says that all are Sättada; brahmin Sättädas are called Sättādamudali, kṣatriya Sättādas are called Kulasekharas, etc.69 In the light of contemporary understanding and historical evidence we can reasonably assume that inscriptional reference to persons bearing the honorific ayya is reference to Sättādas or those who come to be known as Sättādas. It is possible that däsanambi and dāsar are always references to Sättādas or those who come to be known as such; the latter (dāsar) certainly is a title never used publicly by Śrīvaiṣṇava brahmins, consistently used by Sattādas, and possibly also by non-sättäda sūdras and pañcamas. In the Kōyil Oluku, certain “Dasar” names occur in two other categories of brahmin servants-Tirupparkadal Dasar, among the Tiruppatiyar (the group from whom the chief overseer is chosen), and Tiruttalvarai Dasar, Tirukkurugur Dasar, Nalukavipperumal Dasar, Śatakopa Dasar, Tirukkalikapri Dasar and Rāmānuja Dāsar, among the Tiruppani-saivar (a particular type of arcaka). Are these personages, in fact, Sāttādas? According to the Periyatirumuți Aṭaivu, Nathamuni, the disciple of Paränkusa Dāsa, had “dāsar” disciples: Pillai Karuṇākara Dasar and Nambi Karuṇākara Dāsar.70 Among Yamuna’s disciples were: Tirukātci Nampi alias Gajendra Däsar, Tirukkurukur Dasar, Govinda Dasar, 69 See discussion of Śrivaiṣṇava Siddhanta Dipikā, note 31, and Abhyudayam, Souvenir of the Seventh All India Sathada Srivaishnava Conference, Bangalore, 1980.
70 Periyatirumuți, 565.
Näthamuni Dāsar and Periya Nambi alias Paränkuśa Däsar.” Nampillai (the guru of Pillai Lokācārya) is known as Tirukkalikapri Dāsar; Pillai Lokācārya had several “dāsar” disciples, one of whom-Kollikavali Dasar-was the father of Maṇavāļamāmuni’s mother.72 Possibly relevant inscriptional references to dasar, dāsanambi, and ayya include a Śrirangam text of 1316, recording the sale of garden plots to certain brahmin arcakas (pattan/bhattan) by Śrivaikuṇṭha Dāsan, Kōyilponmeynda Perumal Dasan, Van Saṭakopa Dasan (or Tam. Tātan), Piraguvāļi Alagiya Perumal Dasan and Anukkavilli Dāsan, all of whom are däsanambis at Śrirangam (tiruvarankam tiruppati).73 A 1557 Śrirangam inscription records a gift of land by Ekangi Narasingayya.74 In a 1359 Kāñcipuram (Varadarājasvāmi temple) inscription we find reference to one Perumal Tādan, who is the supervisor of the temple and upon whose representation the Lord has granted to the Vaisnavadāsa, hereafter known as Brahmatantrasvatantra Jiyar, a mutt (matha, matam), land-endowment, library, right to conduct worship, etc., so that he may propagate the “Rāmānuja-darśana.“75 Brahmatantrasvatantra Jiyar is considered to be the founder of the Parakala Mutt jiyarlineage. The inscription may indicate that the jiyar as well as the supervisor are Sättādas. According to the Guruparamparaprabhavam (3000) written by the third Brahmatantrasvatantra Jiyar (15th century) the original name of the first jiyar was Viravalli Perarulal-ayyan; he belonged to the Kaundinya gotra and was a disciple of Vedanta Desika.76 This could mean that Brahmatantrasvatantra was a brahmin Sättāda. In later times the jiyars of Parakala Mutt are clearly Vaṭakalai brahmins.
At Melkote (the Tirunärāyaṇa temple) there is mention of Govinda Dāsa, Śrīrāma Dāsa and Sriranga Dāsa, Śrivaiṣṇavas who received a grant of a village from the local ruler in 1310.” Here too, in inscriptions of 1504, 1521, 1610 and 1640, we find reference to several “ayyas,” one of whom is the junior manager of the 71 Periyatirumuți, 569.
Periyatirumuți, 602-5.
73 SII. 24.229-35:252-58.
74 SII, 24.480:459.
75 N. Desikacharya, The Origin and Growth of Śri Brahmatantra Parakala Mutt (Bangalore: The Bangalore Press, 1949), xii-xv.
76 (Madras: LIFCO, 1968), 225-27. This is the authoritative guruparamparam chronicle for Vatakalai Śrīvaiṣṇavas.
77 Epigraphia Carnatica (Mysore: Institute of Kannada Studies, University of Mysore, 1974), 3.152:123, 623.
LESTER: The Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas 51 Tirunārāyaṇa temple, another, the minister of Krsnadevaraya, the Vijayanagar ruler; yet another is the chief of Mysore.78 Two fifteenth-century Melkote inscriptions are interesting for a different reason. They refer to “supreme vaidika (Vedic) Śrīvaiṣṇava brahmins (paramavaidika śrīvaiṣṇavabrāhmaṇa);” evidently emphasizing either that Śrivaiṣṇava brahmins are Vedic or that some Śrīvaiṣṇava brahmins (others [Sāttādas?] are not).
The earliest record I have found that can be construed in relation to Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavism is an inscription of 1276, at the Saumyanatha temple (Mysore area), recording an agreement between the local ruling body and one Ulakamuntōn Tacar (Dāsar], a member of the Srivaiṣṇava assembly (variyam). The däsar is granted use of a garden from which he is to supply flower garlands to the temple.80 For the same year, there is record of a similar arrangement with Ulakamuntōn Täcar and Kecavapperumālpiļļai Cokkan Dāsar. The garden they are to establish and cultivate is to be called “the Rāmānuja temple garden (tirunantaṇavaṇam).“81 In a 1293 inscription at the same temple, there is mention of “dāsanambis,” who are to supply flower garlands and vegetables to the temple daily.82 CONCLUDING REMARKS Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavism is a complex phenomenon, much deserving of further study. Conclusions concerning its origin and early development can, at best, be tentative. The “hard,” i.e., inscriptional, evidence indicates an origin at Tirupati in the fifteenth century, under the leadership of Kantāțai Rāmānujayyangar, who enjoyed the patronage of Vijayanagar rulers and whose activities had a significant impact on religious life at Śrirangam and Kāñcipuram as well as Tirupati. Burton Stein has presented the Sättädas of Tirupati as Veļāļa śūdras who, already enjoying prominence in temple affairs, experienced enhanced status under royal patronage and sought respect comparable to that given the 79 78 Epigraphia Carnatica, 85, 88, 69 and 90, respectively.
Epigraphia Carnatica, ed. Lewis Rice (Bangalore: Mysore Government Central Press, 1905), 9.86, 89:26-27, 55-57.
80 South Indian Inscriptions, ed. Shri G. V. Srinivasa Rao (New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India, 1979), 23.591: 411-12.
81 82 SII, 23.593:413-14.
SII, 23.594:415-16.
brahmin,83 Stein’s remarks are brief, not well documented and based on only a small part of the evidence; his identification of the Sattadas as Veļālas is based on Hari Rao’s interpretation of the Kōyil Oluku, an interpretation we have shown to be suspect. At the same time, we have noticed that the 6000 Guruparamparam associates Sattādas with several Velāļa groups and we must recognize that many Velāļas, considered by others to be südra, are traditionally farmers and traders and claim the status of vaisya, ritually imitating brahmins.84 With the patronage of Saluva Narasimha, certain Veļālas may have come into such prominence in the temples, that alongside of brahmin temple-servants, they came to be designated “not wearing,” and the brahmins in close relationship to these non-brahmins came to be designated sättina. The title sättāda may have been given by brahmins by way of distinguishing those non-brahmins who were considered acceptable in temple servicepersons who look and act like brahmins (or, at least, twiceborn) but are not. Or, more likely, these Velāļas, who apparently controlled the temple prior to brahmin influence, may have named themselves sättäda, by way of indicating that even though they do not wear the thread, they are nonetheless qualified for temple service. As brahmins came into increasing prominence and power in the temple, the Sattāda Velālas, necessarily, would have attempted to consolidate and enhance their status with reference to the brahmin lifestyle, claiming high purity by reason of pañcarātra dīkṣā and possession of Veda in the form of the Nalayira Divya Prabandham and performing all domestic rituals with prabandhams rather than Sanskrit mantras.85 “Social Mobility and Medieval South Indian Hindu Sects,” Social Mobility in the Caste System in India; An Interdisciplinary Symposium, ed. J. Silverberg (Paris: Mouton, 1968), 78-94. See also, Burton Stein, Peasant State and Society in Medieval South India (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1980), 233.
84 David G. Mandelbaum, Society in India (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1970), 2:458-60. See also André Beteille, Caste, Class and Power (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1965), 8-85, 97.
85 It is worth note that a recent non-brahmin Śrīvaiṣṇava renunciate, Bhuvanagiri Śrīmat Alagiya Maṇavala Rāmānuja Ekängi Svāmi (1868-1927), defines Sättina and Sättāda Śrivaiṣṇavas in the course of expounding “… the Velalar caste way of the South Indian Śrīvaiṣṇava sampradaya, having Śrimad Nammalvär as its preeminent acharya” (Śri Vaiṣṇava Dipikai [Madras: Ratnam Press, 1968], 15). The swami was a Naidu and does not identify himself as a Sättäda, but clearly associates himself with Sättāda tradition, showing, at the least, 52 Journal of the American Oriental Society 114.1 (1994) KRA was energetic in establishing and enhancing at Tirumalai-Tirupati regular and special pūjās for the Alvārs and recitation of the songs of the Alvars within the temple, the latter performed by Sättinas and Sättādas together. Recognition of the Alvars and the Prabandham in the temple was based not only on the fact that certain of the Alvārs sang about the Lord of TirupatiTirumalai but also the belief that the songs of Nammälvär constitute the Tamil Veda, as argued by Pillai Lōkācārya and his brother, Alakiya Maṇavāla Perumal Nainar Acārya and commented upon by Maṇavāļamāmuni. Piļļai Lōkācārya also argued that, as Bhāgavatas, on equal footing with the Lord by reason of their saraṇāgati, Śrīvaiṣṇavas have no legitimate concern with caste distinctions.86 Maṇavāļamāmuni was instrumental in developments at Srirangam, Käñcipuram and Tirumalai-Tirupati; Kantățai Rāmānujayyangar, we recall, was a disciple of a disciple of Maṇavāļamāmuni. Thus, Sättāda Śrīvaiṣṇavism can be seen as a logical result of the theology of Pillai Lōkācārya et al. This theology opens the way for the full participation of non-brahmins in Śrīvaiṣṇavism and may have encouraged certain Veļāļas. In the face of what appears to have been a restriction of the term “Śrivaisnava” to brahmins only, some non-brahmins said, in effect, “We are Śrīvaiṣṇavas; non-thread-wearing Śrīvaiṣṇavas. We have the Veda-the Tamil Veda, as good or better than the Sanskrit Veda, and we are solely dedicated to service of the Lord and his devotees (bhagavad-bhagavatakainkaryam).” One problem with this “Velala hypothesis” is the fact of hard evidence for brahmin Sättädas and, for a time, their exercise of the distinction “vaidika” and “non-vaidika.” Recognizing this together with the possible impact of Lōkācārya’s bhāgavata theology, we must recognize the possibility that certain brahmin Śrivaiṣṇavas gave up the thread and top-knot and, along with them, the performance of Vedic rituals, in favor of a life of service in the temple and as purohitas and ācāryas. In this situation, alongside of vaidika brahmin that this tradition is concerned to identify the Sättäda. The swami defines both the Sattina Vaiṣṇava and the Sattāda Vaiṣnava as “prapanna Vaisnavas”; the former wears the top-knot and thread, regularly recites both Sanskrit and Dravida Vedas, and performs sandhyavandana and other prescribed nitya and naimittika karmas; the latter (the Sättäda) does not wear the top-knot and thread and recites only the Tamil Veda [ibid., 35-36].
86 See Śrivacana Bhuṣaṇa of Pillai Lokācārya, ed. and tr. Robert C. Lester (Madras: Kuppuswamy Sastri Research Institute, 1979).
Śrīvaiṣṇavas, they would have called themselves sattāda, meaning essentially brahmin but non-vaidika. There is also the matter of existence of a sophisticated Sättāda literature in relation to a lineage of acāryas, dating, at least, to the sixteenth century. This literature still needs to be fully and carefully examined, but it appears as a logical continuation of Pillai Lokācārya/ Maṇavāļamāmuni Śrīvaiṣṇavism and in relation to a practicing community.
Of course, both of the above hypotheses can be valid: Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavism practiced by both brahmin and non-brahmin; indeed, this is what one would expect as the practical implication of the bhāgavata theology. Sättäda Śrīvaiṣṇavism, having had its origin in Telugu country, would have spread with the activities of Maṇavāļamāmuni and particularly KRA and his successors and throughout the area of Vijayanagar rule. If we accept that the Kōyil Oluku account of Sattādas is a projection back to Rāmānuja’s time of what actually developed only in the 15th century, this would explain the Kōyil Oluku reference to Sättädamudalis as “outsiders” to Srirangam. In the course of time, given the weight of vaidika tradition and the slackening of Vijayanagar patronage, the Sattādas, perhaps never considered the equal of vaidika brahmins, lost ground. They may have been compromised from within by encouraging all manner of followers, but they were also progressively denied arcaka status in the major temples.
What of the claim by some Sattādas that their tradition is unbroken back to Nammāļvār and Paränkuśa Dāsa and, in fact, is the continuing Satvata-Pañcarātra heritage? This seems to me to be a reasonable hypothesis. The theology attributed to Pillai Lōkācārya et al. did not arise in a vacuum-without context and precedent. While the term sättāda is not found in inscriptions earlier than the mid-15th century, we have references to Sättādas in the 6000 Guruparamparam and the Kōyil Oluku which may represent the situation in the time of Rāmānuja, even if the name sättada is from a later time. It is, of course, difficult, if not impossible, to determine what, if anything, in the biographies of Rāmānuja and the Śrirangam accounts of his activities actually took place as stated; clearly, much of what appears in these accounts is projected back to (or, simply on to) Rāmānuja as a means of authorizing or validating some relationship, doctrine or behavior that originated in another context. Regardless of what actually were Ramanuja’s circumstances, the accounts reveal great diversity in the 13th-century (and probably earlier) Vaiṣṇava movement, tensions between theologies and lifestyles and attempts to reconcile differences. We may ask, for instance, why Rāmānuja requires five gurus-except that, long after his time, several different strands LESTER: The Sattāda Śrīvaiṣṇavas of Vaiṣṇavism are being reconciled in the personage and circumstances of the Bhāṣyakära? The Päñcarătra Bhāgavatas, whose case Yamunācārya argues in his Āgamaprāmaṇyam, are good candidates for ancestors of the Srirangam-Tirupati Sättādas.
At this point, I tentatively conclude that, indeed, the Sāttādas are the descendants of ancient Bhāgavatas, anti-caste Vaisnavas from all circumstances of birth 53 and strata of society, most of all the leadership of a Tamil Vaiṣṇava, non-Vedic bhaktimärga centered on the temples. The term sättäda must have arisen as vaidika and non-vaidika traditions joined battle for control of the temples. Over the long run, the Sättādas largely lost the battle, ironically, protecting themselves from total annihilation by becoming a caste along with all the others, albeit relatively prestigious.