Commentaries

These are, in roughly chronological order: the vivekatilaka of varadarAja uDAli, the rAmAnujIya attributed to rAmAnuja, the tattvadIpikA of maheSvaratIrtha, the amRtakataka of mAdhavayogin, the rAmAyaNabhUshaNa of govindarAja, the rAmAyaNatilaka of nAgeSa bhaTTa, the rAmAyaNaSiromaNi of vamSIdhara (bansidhara) SivasahAya, and the dharmAkUTam of trayambaka makhin. In addition, extracts from the commentaries of satyatIrtha, munibhAva, and sarvajnanArAyaNa have been used.

These works range in date from around the middle of the thirteenth century A. D. (in the case of varadarAja) to the eighteenth (in the case of trayambaka), and vary from the sparse glosses of the former to the dense and often copious commentaries of mAdhavayogin, govindarAja, nAgeSa, and SivasahAya, who have at least something to say on almost every verse in the poem.

M.G. Srinivasan (द्रष्टुं नोद्यम्)

I believe among the commentaries mentioned above, those of uDAli (also known as uDAri), rAmaAnuja, and govindarAja are along the lines of Sri vaishNava precepts. I think the translators have not heard about the taniSloki of Sri PVP because it is not available in English. As you pointed out in a recent posting, the rAmAnuja referred to above is not Sri emberumAnAr.