________________
346
The Philosophy of Vallabha
(CH. leads us from the known fact to the unknown, and as such it is regarded as a separate pramāna.
Purusottama thinks that in some cases where knowledge is due to the accessory influence of memory its validity is not spontaneous, but is to be derived only through corroborative sources, whereas there may be other cases where knowledge may be self-valid.
Concept of bhakti. Madhva, Vallabha and Jiva Gosvāmi were all indebted to the Bhāgavata-purana, and held it in high reverence; Madhva wrote Bhāgavata-tātparya, Jīva Gosvāmī Şaț-sandarbha, and Vallabha wrote not only a commentary on the Bhāgavata (the Subodhini) but also a commentary (Prakāśa) on his own kārikās, the Tattvadīpa, based on the teachings of the Bhāgavata. The Tattvadīpa consists of four books: the Sāstrārthanirūpana, the Sarvanirnaya of four chapters, Pramāņa, Prameya-phala, and the Sadhanā, of which the first contains 83 verses, the second 100 verses, the third no and the fourth 35. The third book, of 1837 verses, contains observations on the twelve skandhas of the Bhāgavata-purana. The fourth book, which dealt with bhakti, is found only in a fragmentary condition. This last has two commentaries on it, the Nibandha-țippaņa, by Kalyāṇarāja, and one by Gotthulal (otherwise called Bālakṣşna). The Prakāśa commentary on the kārikās was commented upon by Purusottama in the Avaranabhanga, but the entire work has not been available to the present writer. According to the Tattvadīpa the only śāstra is the Gītā, which is sung by the Lord Himself, the only God is Krşņa the son of Devakī, the mantras are only His name and the only work is the service of God, the Vedas, the words of Krsņa (forming the smộtis), the sūtras of Vyāsa and their explanations by Vyāsa (forming the Bhāgavata) are their four pramānas. If there are any doubts regarding the Vedas, they are solved by the words of Krsņa; any doubts regarding the latter are explained by reference to the sūtras, and difficulties about the Vyāsa-sūtras are to be explained by the Bhāgavata. So far as the other smặtis are concerned, such as that of Manu and others, only so much of them is valid as is in consonance with these; but, if they are found contradictory in any part, they are to be treated as invalid. The true object of the śāstras is
