Bhattoji Diksita On Sphota

Author(s): Johannes Bronkhorst
Publisher: Johannes Bronkhorst

Page 12

14
JOHANNES BRONKHORST
The remark attributed to the 'former one is found in the Prakriyākaumudī (ed. Trivedi I p. 283; ed. Miśra I p. 387), and the one attributed to his grandson in Vitthala's Prasāda (I p. 283).
Bhattoji's criticism of Sesa Krsna is polite, too. We have seen that the latter is sometimes referred to as ‘his commentator' (in the plural). He is occasionally referred to as prāc 'former one' but always, it seems, in the plural.” Elsewhere Bhattoji gives no specification as to whom he is referring to, simply saying "they say'. For example, his statement yat tu vadanti: 'napumsake sasi yunji ity atra num na syād' iti$2 refers to a line in Sesa Kșsna's Prakāśa which says: tena napumsake sasi yunji ity atra num bhavati." And Bhattoji's yat tu vyācakhyuh: "upadeśakāle yau sakāranakārau tadantety arthah / devadattasya gurukulam itivat samudāyenasambandhan nāsamartha[ sa]māsa' iti4 literally cites a passage from Sesa Kșsna's Prakāśa." Sometimes Sesa Krsna is referred to under the heading 'others' (again in the plural). Bhattoji mentions, for example, 'others' in connection with Rāmacandra (prāc) and Vitthala (tatpautra) in the following line: yac cānyair vārttikena pūritam artham udāharati' ity avatāritam." The phrase attributed to these 'others' occurs in exactly that form in Sesa Kșsna's Prakāśa.57 But however politely Sesa Krsna's positions are referred to, they are always rejected.
[The Praudha Manoramā also refers to an Tīkākst on the Prakriyākaumudī. On the one occasion that has come to my notice it ascribes a phrase to him which occurs in but slightly different form both in Vitthala's Prasāda and Sesa Kșsna's Prakāśa.58 This designation therefore remains ambiguous.]
It is true that Bhattoji did not write his Praudha Manoramā until after the death of Sesa Krsna.” It is also true that while referring to his teacher he respectfully uses the plural (tad)vyākhyātsbhih, anyaih, prāñcah, or quite simply a plural form of the verb) where the singular has to be good enough for Rāmacandra (prācā) and his grandson Vitthala (tatpautreņa, prasādakstā). It is even true that he begins this commentary with a verse in which he emphasizes that he has composed it after careful reflection on his teacher's words. We yet learn that the family of his teacher was not amused by the systematic rejection of the latter's points of view. Both Cakrapāņi (or Cakrapāņidatta), the son of Sesa Krsna's son Sesa Vīreśvarao?, and Panditarāja Jagannātha, Vīreśvara's pupil, composed a criticism of the Praudha Manoramā.03 According to the latter, Bhattoji's mind had been marred by hatred for his teacher (ed. Sadashiva Sharma p. 2; ed. Madhusudana p. 3: gurudvesadūsitamati). These critical