Anda di halaman 1dari 22

ROQUE MESQUITA

THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU IN THE


PHILOSOPHY OF MADHVA 

The Dvaitavāda is the only Vedānta system in which the God Vāyu –
known by the names Anila, Gandhavaha, Marut, Mātariśvan, Mukhya
Prān.a, Parjanya, Pavan, Prabhañjana, Pravaha, Sadāgata, Satataga and Vāta
– holds a unique position in the philosophic and theological concept of the
School. His person is intrinsically connected with the avatāra-doctrine,
specifically with Madhva as an incarnation of Vāyu, the son of Vis.n.u. This
topic has hardly received the scholarly attention it deserves.1 The present
paper attempts to provide a survey of some of the important quotations
Madhva attributes to different known and unknown sources which under-

 I am indebted to Anne MacDonald for useful remarks and improvements to the


English expression of this paper.
1 Cf. for instance, the studies on Madhva by K. Narain (An Outline of Madhva Philo-
sophy. Allahabad 1986), B.N.K. Sharma (Philosophy of Śrı̄ Madhvācārya. Delhi 1986),
T.P. Ramachandran (Dvaita Vedānta. Delhi 1976), I. Puthiadam (Vis.n.u the ever free. A
Study of the Mādhva Concept of God. Madras 1985) and D.N. Shanbhag (Śrı̄ Madhvācārya
and his Cardinal Doctrines. Dharwad 1990) completely ignored this topic, whereas H. von
Glasenapp (Madhva’s Philosophy of the Vis.n.u Faith, Transl. by S.B. Shrothri. Bangalore
1992: 22f.) was of the opinion that the followers of Madhva considered him as an Avatāra
of Vāyu. Glasenapp remarks on this point: “It can’t be said of sure, whether Madhva
considered himself as the human form of the Wind-god, or whether his worshippers have
made him one, because the passages in Madhva’s works in which he himself appears to
be referring to his divine origin, could have been later insertions. At the same time: Why
should he have not considered himself as an Avatāra of Vāyu”? Mme. S. Siauve, who for
the first time discussed this problem at some length (cf. Les hiérarchies spirituelles selon
l’Anuvyākhyāna de Madhva. Pondichéry 1971: 9–18), missed the point while evaluating
the unknown sources adduced by Madhva in support of his doctrine of the preeminence of
Vāyu which clearly enhance Madhva’s claim of being an avatāra of Vāyu. According to
her, Madhva is following an old tradition as transmitted in the passages quoted by him. As
a matter of fact, the passages in question were composed by Madhva himself. Madhva is
sincerely convinced that he, as an incarnation of Vāyu, is under direct inspiration of Vis.n.u,
as I have shown extensively in Mesquita 2000: 47ff. [= 1997: 38ff.] and p. 24 n. 26 [= 1997:
21 n. 19]; p. 98 n. 176 [= 1997: 78 n. 165]; p. 100 n. 178 [= 1997: 80 n. 167]. Therefore,
the views put forward by Madhva on the superiority of Vāyu are original creations of his
for the sake of strengthening the avatāra-claim and can in no way be considered as later
insertions by the followers of Madhva (see Mesquita 2000: 47ff.; 55 n. 93 [= 1997: 38ff.;
44 n. 83]); also below n. 57.

Indo-Iranian Journal 46: 97–117, 2003.


© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
98 ROQUE MESQUITA

score the priority of Vāyu among gods and confer upon him the highest
position of prathamāṅga or pradhānāṅga of Vis.n.u – from which the three
2
am. śāvatārāh. , namely Hanumat, Bhı̄ma and Madhva arise.
In Vedic literature Vāyu is a mighty god closely associated with Indra,
who is his charioteer. In the hymn of Purus.asūkta Vāyu is said to have
sprung from the breath of Purus.a (X 90,13). In R.gveda X 168,4 he is the
Ātman of the gods, while in X 16,3 the human Ātman enters at death into
Vāyu. He is the first among gods to drink the Soma juice after winning the
race for the first draught of Soma.3 Vāyu is the generator and nourisher of
plants and living creatures. In the Epic literature Vāyu is the reputed father
of Bhı̄ma and of Hanumat4 and the proclaimer of Purān.as such as VāyuP
and Brahmān.d.aP.5
Madhva develops his concept of Vāyu in the light of this religious back-
ground, allotting to him a very unusual priority amongst gods and beings.
Before I start to elaborate on this concept in detail, a preliminary remark
ought to be added. While discussing the hierarchical order (tāratamya)
among gods Madhva makes several contradictory statements regarding
the position of Śrı̄, Vāyu and Brahmā and puts forward in their support
many untraceable and sometimes anonymous (iti ca) quotations.6 In this
connection, Śrı̄ is referred to in some hierarchical lists before all other gods
and immediately after Vis.n.u:
...
etebhyo ’bhyadhikā śris tu sadā muktā viśes.atah. /
tatsamo nāsti paramo harir eva na cāparah. /
sam 7
. hitāyām
. br.hatyām
. tu svayam
. bhagavatoditam /

2 Cf. Mesquita 2000: 49 n. 75f. [= 1997: 40 n. 67f.]; see below p. 13ff.


3 Cf. Thomas Oberlies, Die Religion des Rgveda. Erster Teil – Das religiöse System
.
des R.gveda. Vienna 1998: 435; 217–219; also Paul Deussen, Allgemeine Geschichte der
Philosophie mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Religionen. Leipzig 1894, I,1 p. 294–
305; I,2 p. 93–101.
4 See below n. 12.
5 MBh III 189,14; KūrmaP I 1.15; Harivamśa VII 11; 21.
.
6 This seems to be an inherent feature of Madhva’s unknown sources which differ in
their content even though they refer to one and the same doctrine; they give the impression
that not a single author but many authors were at work in composing them; see Mesquita
2000: 23 n. 21; p. 116 [= 1997: 19 n. 14; p. 93].
7 Anuv (p. 166,24+167,25); see also Mesquita 2000: 85 [= 1997: 67]; Siauve 1971:
42f.; Anuv (p. 153, 26f.): nirdos.atvam . ramāyāś ca tadanantarā tathā . . . satsiddhānta iti
jñeyo nirn.ı̄to harin.ā svayam; also Mesquita 2000: 82 n. 146 [= 1997: 65 n.135]; Siauve
1971: 9; 34f. Vāyu is not mentioned at all in this list!
While discussing the threefold infinity (ānantyam . trividdham) of Vis.n.u, namely in space
(deśatah.), in time (kālatah.) and in essence (vastutah.), Madhva remarks that Śrı̄ follows
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 99

Similarly, some of Madhva’s sources state that Vāyu comes after Brahmā
in age and rank:
vis.n.or brāhman.ajātih. san brahmā jajñe caturmukhah. /
ito ’gre jagatas tasmāt ks.atrajātir ajāyata /
vāyuh. . . .
iti vāmane.8

Vis.n.u, since she is infinite in space and in time; Vāyu comes after Śrı̄ (jñeyas tadavaro
vāyuh.); cf. BhāgTN (p. 186,10–182,2):
deśatah. kālataś caiva vastutas tu tridhā hareh. /
yathānantyam . na cānyasya prakr.ter deśakālatah. /
tathā śabdasya kālasya deśānantyam . ca kālatah. /
kālaśabdātmikā saiva tathāpi tu hareh. sadā /
nāsyāh. sāmarthyaleśo ’pi jñānānandagun. es.v api /
jñeyas tadavaro vāyuh. śesavı̄ndraharās tatah. /
avarās tata indrādyā gun.aih. sarvair na sam . śayah. /
iti brahmavaivarte
ibid. (p. 198,8–199,2: . . . iti vis.n.ukr.te tattvaviveke); see Mesquita 2000∗ : 417ff.; 493f.
Śrı̄ is mentioned after Vis.n.u in the hierarchical ladder because of her infinite (anādinitya)
knowledge, cf. PL (p. 65,3–10); Mesquita 2000∗ : 240f.; 494f.; VTN (p. 18,5f.); Mesquita
o.c. p. 98 n.140; see also Tattvasaṅkhyāna (p. 69,5–6); GiT [ad VII 7] ChUBh (p. 454,28):
alpāpi hy amr.tā devı̄ śrı̄h. pūrn.ātipriyatvatah. / iti ca; Gı̄Bh (p. 49,11–14): . . . avyaktarūpā
laks.mı̄ś ca varāto ’to harih. svayam / na tatsamo ’dhiko vā . . . iti ca. All gods and souls
are reflections of the supreme Ātman, but Śrı̄ is His first and immediate reflection, other
souls such as Brahmā etc. follow her (Anuv p. 136,8): ābhāsa evam . purus.ā muktāś ca
paramātmanah. / cāyā vis.n.o ramā tasyāś chāyā dhātā . . . (see Mesquita 2000∗ : 495ff.). Śrı̄
alone is in possession of full consciousness during the Pralaya, whereas other gods remain
in the state of sleep (AiUBh p. 209,20+213,16):
...
suptās tatra yato jı̄vāh. sarve brahmaśivādikāh. /
asuptā śrı̄ś ca muktāś ca svatantronmes.avarjanāt /
...
ityādyaitareyasam . hitāyām (untraceable); see also BĀUBh (p. 344,15–16):
anyes.ām amr.tatvam . tu bhaved vis.n.oh. prasādatah. /
nityāmr.tah. sa bhagavān śrı̄ś ca nānyah. katham . cana /
iti nāradı̄ye.
There are some other quotations ranking Vāyu above Śrı̄, for instance AiUBh (p. 181,13–
19: . . . ityādi brahmān.d.e); BhāgTN (p. 583,11–15):
svatantro nāparah. kaścid vis.n.oh. prān.apateh. prabhoh. /
yathā prān.āt paro nāsti svatantro jagati kvacit /
tathā prān.o ramā caiva na vis.n.oh. pr.thag ı̄śvarau /
yady ucyante prān.atantrā bahavah. purus.ā iti /
satyam eva hy asaṅkhyātā na niyamyanis.edhikāh. /
ekādvitı̄yaśrutayah. kim . tv ı̄śāntaravārakāh. /
tathā svagatabhedasya tadatantranis.edhakāh. /
iti brahmān.d.e; see also below n. 9.
8 BĀUBh (p. 274,12f.).
100 ROQUE MESQUITA

According to some other sources, Vāyu is identical with Brahmā and at the
same time Brahmā is said to be superior (prādhānyāt) to him:
vāyur eva brahmā bhavatı̄ti darśayitum. vāyoh. sr.s..tih. prathamam uktā –
vāyur eva yato brahmapadam . niyamato vrajet /
sahaiva janane ’py asmāt pūrvam . vāyor janim. vadet /
kvacit tu brahman.ah. pūrvam. prādhānyāt tatpadasya ca /
iti brahmatarke

“Vāyu becomes indeed Brahmā.9 In order to show that the creation of


Vāyu is referred to first, [the following] is stated in Brahmatarka: ‘Since
even Vāyu achieves as a rule the status of Brahmā [and] although He is
born together with Him, Vāyu is referred to as being born prior to Him. In

9 BĀUBh (p. 283,19f.):

uttamah. sarvadeves.u prān.a eva harer anu /


caturmukhasya prān.asya na viśes.o ’sti kaścana /
...
iti nārāyan.aśrutau.
BhāgTN (p. 198,8–199,2):
...
niyamād vāyur evaiko brahmatvam
. yāti nāparah. /
...
iti vis.n.ukr.te tattvaviveke
ibid. (p. 687,6ff.): sa eva vāyur uddis..to vāyur hi brahmatām agāt . . . iti tantrabhāgavate;
ibid. (p. 98,3–4):
sarvajı̄vanikāyes.u brahmavāyū harer vidau /
na cānyas tādr.śo vettā yāvad vetti harih. svayam /
tāvat tāv api no vis.n.um
. jānı̄to lokavanditau /
iti brahmān.d.e
see also MBhTN II 34:
brahmātmako yato vāyuh. padam. brāhmam agāt purā /
vāyor anyasya na brāhmam . padam
. tasmāt sa eva sah. /
. . . ityādi brahmān.d.e
142ab: vāyur hi brahmatām eti tasmād brahmaiva sa smr.tah. /
III 10cd: vāyur ya evātha viriñcanāmā bhavis.ya ādyo na paras tato hi /
see also ChUBh (p. 401,22f.):
...
vāyor hiran.yagarbhatvāt padadvayam udāhr.tam . /
...
iti ca
and BhāgTN (p. 686,5ff.): sarvagun.aih. sarvottamas tu vāyur eva sa eva hiran.yagarbha iti
darśayitum āha . . .
cf. Siauve 1971: 10f.; Mesquita 2000: 47f. [= 1997: 38f.].
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 101

some places [the birth] of Brahmā is reported as prior [to Vāyu],10 because
He is higher in rank [than Vāyu]’ ”.11
Despite these disparate statements just referred to, Madhva draws
throughout his works a clear and a consistent outline defining the specific
features of Vāyu based on traditional material which he has worked over.
One of these special characteristics is that Vāyu appears as an avatāra on
earth in different ages. However, while depicting Vāyu as such Madhva
makes a very significant change to the traditional idea, handed down in the
Rāmāyan.a and Mahābhārata, that Vāyu is the father of the heroes Hanumat
and Bhı̄ma.12 The specification of Brahmā, on the contrary, remains strictly
within the line of the tradition. He is chiefly the creator and maintainer of
the world as well as the universal guru.13 But there are no incarnations of
Brahmā on earth.
In accord with a selected number of Madhva’s numerous quotations (all
of them are untraceable!) one could describe the priority of Vāyu under the
following headings:
1) Vāyu as the origin and sustainer of the world:
A) syūtam. jagad idam. yasmin sūtram. vāyur asau smr.tah. /
tam. cāpi yamayed yasmād antaryāmı̄ harih. smr.tah. /
pr.thivyādyā devatās tu dehavad yadvaśatvatah. /
śarı̄ram iti cocyante yasya vis.n.or mahātmanah. /
10 Cf. BĀUBh (p. 275,12f.):

...
prān.inām
. dhairyarūpam
. ca vāyo rūpāntaram. punah. /
sasarja matimān brahmā vis.n.or ājñāpurah.sarah. /
...
iti nāradı̄ye.

11 BĀUBh (p. 248,15–18); see also BhāgTN (p. 160,4–5: . . . iti brahmānde).
..
12 Rāmāyana VII 35,20ff.; Mahābhārata I 114, 9; Mesquita 2000: 47 [= 1997: 38]; see
.
above n. 4 and below p. 13ff.
13 BhāgTN (p. 530,1):

vis.n.uh. pradhānatah. sras..tā gun.asras..tā caturmukhah. /


iti nāradı̄ye
cf. BĀUBh (p. 248,18–20):
...
ātmā viriñcah. sumanāh. sudhautaś ceti kathyate /
brahmā caturmukhaś ceti pūrvajo yah. prajāpatih. /
iti śabdanirn.aye
cf. BhāgTN (p. 102,6–9): . . . iti skānde; ibid. (p. 145,6–7): . . . iti brāhme); BSūBh
(p. 35,20–21: . . . iti brāhme); MBhTN I 122ab: tasmād brahmā gurus mukhyah. sarves.ām
eva sarvadā . . . ity etat pañcaratroktam ∗
. purān.es.v anumoditam; see also Mesquita 2000 :
382 n. 395; Siauve 1971: 12.
102 ROQUE MESQUITA

...
iti brahmatarke
“God Vāyu is called ‘Thread’, since this world is woven together
in him.14 And Vis.n.u is also called internal ruler because he
controls him (= Vāyu). Earth etc. [mentioned in this section]
are [presiding] deities. They are called the body of the supreme
soul Vis.n.u, as they are controlled by Him, in the same way as
[a man] controls [his own] body . . .” This is mentioned in the
Brahmatarka.15
...
B) tasmād vāyoh. paro nāsti r.te vis.n.um. sanātanam /
śes.ādı̄nām
. ks.atriyān.ām
. vāyur evādhipah. smr.tah. /
dhāran.ād dharma ityāhur vāyur dhārayati prajāh. /
abalo ’pi tato vāyor vis.n.ubhaktyādirūpin. ah. /
prāptum icchati yuktah. san vis.n.um . subalavattaram /
yathaiva yuvarājena mahārājam abhı̄psati /
prāptum . dharmabhimānı̄ sa vāyuh. satyābhimānavān /
tasmād āhur dharmavidam . satyavetteti vedinah. /
satyajñam atha dharmajñam . vāyur devo yatas tayoh. /
iti nāradı̄ye
14 Cf. ChUBh (p. 400,23f. = sūtrātman . . . iti brahmāndapurāna); MBhTN III 11a:
.. .
sūtram. sa vāyuh.; cf. also BSūBh (p. 111,9–10):
bhūtāni ces..tā mantrāś ca mukhyaprān. ād idam
. jagat /
mukhyaprān. ah. parasmāc ca na parah. kāran.ānvitah. /
iti ca vāyuprokte
also ibid. (p. 111, 12–15):
prān.ād idam āvirāsı̄t prān.o dhatte prān.e layam abhyupaiti na prān.ah. kim
. cidāśritah. /
ityāgniveśyaśrutau /
(cf. below nārāyan.aśruti, n. 18; 20)
yadāśrayād asya ces..tā so ’nyam . katham upāśrayet /
yathā prān.as tathā rājā sarvasyaikāśrayo bhavet /
iti ca yuktir bhārate
prān.asyaitad vaśe sarvam . prān.ah. paravaśe sthitah. /
na parah. kim . cid āśritya vartate paramo yatah. /
iti ca paiṅgiśrutih.
also ibid. (p. 112,7ff.; p. 209,1–2): vāyor vāva rudra udeti vāyau vilı̄yate tasmād āhur
vāyur devānām. śres..tha itı̄ti ca kaun.d.in.yaśrutih. (untraceable); BhāgTN (p. 90,7–8):
sarvaces..tayitr.tvāt tu prān.o ’bhibhavaśaktitah. /
ojas tv anabhibhāvyatvāt sahaś ca svecchayā kr.teh. /
balam . vidhārakatvāc ca vidhr.tir vāyur ucyate /
iti ca bhārate; cf. ibid. (p. 618,5–8; 619,5–10: . . . iti harivam . śes.u [all untraceable]).
15 BĀUBh (p. 308,23f.); see also MānUBh (p. 515,21+516,10: . . . iti harivamśesu);
. . .
KathUBh (p. 485,20f . . . iti mahākaurme).
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 103

“. . . Therefore, there is none who is superior to Vāyu except the


eternal Vis.n.u. Vāyu alone is called the Lord of Ks.atriyas, such
as Śes.a and so on. Since Vāyu upholds mankind they call him
‘Dharma’, because he protects [them]. One who is weaker than
this Vāyu, having the nature of devotion towards Vis.n.u, [and] who
wishes to attain Vis.n.u is fit to attain the extremely powerful [Vis.n.u
with his help], just like one who wishes to reach the emperor with
the help of a prince. This Vāyu is the presiding deity of Dharma
[and] of Satya. Therefore, the people versed [in these matters] say
that the knower of Satya is the knower of Dharma. Now, one who
is the knower of Dharma is [also] the knower of Satya, because
Vāyu is the presiding Deity of them both”. This is taught in the
Nāradı̄yaP.16
2) Vāyu is higher than the R.s.is and Devas:
...
r.s.ibhyas tūttamā devā devebhyo vāyur uttamah. /
vāyoś ca bhagavān vis.n.ur na tasmād uttamo guruh. /
ityācāryasam . hitāyām
“Among the Rs.is the gods are the highest in rank. Among gods Vāyu
is the highest and higher than Vāyu is the divine Vis.n.u. There is no
Guru higher than He”. This has been said in the Ācāryasam.hitā.17
3) All gods and their activities are derived from Vāyu:
A) vis.n.or vāyuh. samutpanno vāyoh. sarvāś ca devatāh. /
prān.ādyās tān nayan prān.a ājñāpayati rājavat /
16 BĀUBh (p. 274,28+275,18); BSūBh (p. 112,21–25):

yatah. sarvam . jagad vyāpya tis..thati prān.a eva tu /


ato dhr.tam. jagat sarvam anyathā kena dhāryate /
iti yuktir vāyuprokte
an.unaitat sr.jyate ’n.unaitad dhāryate ’n.au layam abhyupaiti prān.o vā an.uh. prān.e hy etad
bhavatı̄ti ca śrautrāyan.aśrutih.; see also BhāgTN (p. 251,1–3):
prāpnoti vāyuh. sarvam . tu svata eva hares tathā /
atah. prāptir iti prāhur vāyum . bhūtapatim
. prabhum /
pradhānavāyur anyes.u nityāvis..to yatas tatah. /
tadgun.ās tes.u cocyante nı̄catā nāsya tatkr.tā /
iti brahmavaivarte; see also ibid. (p. 583,11–15, above n. 7).

17 ChUBh (p. 417,24–26); MBhTN II 149:

balam indrasya giriśo giriśasya balam . marut /


balam . tasya harih. sāks.ān na harer balam anyatah. /
(iti bhārate [untraceable]); ibid. III 24; 65; see also KathUBh (p. 484,21–23: . . . iti
bhavis.yatparvani); cf. below n. 19.
104 ROQUE MESQUITA

svayam . ca pañcarūpah. san dadyān moks.ādikam


. prabhuh. /
iti prabhañjane
“From Vis.n.u Vāyu is born and from Vāyu all [other] gods
like prān.a, apāna etc. Vāyu/Mukhya Prān.a rules and commands
them like a king [command his officers]. Himself being five-fold,
the Lord grants salvation [to mankind]”. This is stated in the
Prabhañjana.18
B) acetanam. cetanebhyo daivatebhyaś ca cetanāh. /
devāh. prān.āc ca sa prān.o vis.n.or sadaiva tu /
svabhāvam . ca pravr.ttim. ca vikāram . ca samāpnuyuh. /
...
iti brahmatarke
“An insentient being receives [his] natural state, activity and modi-
fications from the sentient beings and from gods. And gods receive
[them] from Prān.a (= Vāyu), while Prān.a gets [them] always from
Vis.n.u”. This is stated in the Brahmatarka.19
C) uttamah. sarvadeves.u prān.a eva harer anu /
caturmukhasya prān.asya na viśes.o ’sti kaścana /
18 PraśUBh (p. 504,22–23); ibid. (p. 507,15–20):

vis.n.oh. prān.as tatah. śraddhā tasyā rudro mano ’bhidhah. /


tasmād indras tv indriyātmā tasya somo ’nnadevatā /
tataś ca varun.ah. sr.s..tas tasmād agnis tato ’varah. /
ākāśadevatā vighnas tato vāyoh. suto marut /
tasmād agnih. pāvakākhyah. prathamo ’gneh. sutas tatah. /
tatah. parjanya udbhūtah. svāhāto mantradevatā /
udakātmako budhas tasyā us.ā nāmātmakā tatah. /
tatah. śanih. pr.thivyātmā karmātmā pus.karas tatah. /
kramāt pratyavarā ete muktāh. sarvagun. air api /
nityamuktas tathā vis.n.uh. prān.ād apy uttamottamah. /
iti ca
MuUBh (p. 498,23–25):
pratibim . bo hareh. prān.as tasya cānyāh. kalāh. kramāt /
kalānām . devatā anyā devatānām. narā api /
tasmāt sarve ’pi muktes.u nares.v api niyāmakāh. /
tis..tanti nātra sandehah. paramātmani cākhilāh. /
iti muktaviveke
see also BhāgTN (p. 79,3–80,1: . . . iti brahmatarke); ibid. (p. 619,5–10: . . . iti
harivam. śes.u) [untraceable !]; BĀUBh (p. 283,19f . . . iti nārayanaśrutau); cf. above n. 9
and below n. 20.
19 ChUBh (p. 452,13–19); see also MBhTN II 148–149:

aśvamedhah. kratuśres..tho jyotih.śres..tho divākarah. /


brāhman.o dvipadām . śres..tho devaśres..tas tu mārutah. /
balam indrasya giriśo giriśasya balam . marut /
balam . tasya harih. sāks.ān na harer balam anyatah. /
(iti bhārate [second stanza is untraceable]).
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 105

...
tam. jñātvā tena cāvis..tās tadbhr.tyatvam upāgatāh. /
tasmāt prān.āś ca maruta ity es.ām . nāma sam
. sthitam /
vāyor devā hi jāyante layam es.yanti tatra ca /
...
iti nārāyan.aśrutau
“After Vis.n.u, god Vāyu is higher in rank than all gods. There
is no difference at all between the four-faced god and Vāyu . . .
After knowing Him [as superior to them] they were possessed by
Him [and] were devoted to him. For this reason they received the
names Prān.a and Marut. Hence the gods are born from Vāyu and
disappear in Him”. This is stated in the Nārāyanaśruti.20
4) Unlike all other gods Vāyu is not originated. His sole origin is the
supreme Self.
. . . nais.a prān.a udeti nāstamety ekala eva madhye sthātāthainam āhur madhyama
itı̄ti mukhyaprān.asyānutpattih. śruyate /
yatprāptir yatparityāga utpattir maran.am . tathā /
tasyotpattir mr.tiś caiva katham . prān.asya yujyate /
iti ca yuktir vāyuprokte / ātmata eva prān.o jāyata iti ca / (= PraśU III 3).

“This Prān.a is not produced, nor does he perish; [rather he] stands
as a solitary in the middle. Hence [wise people] call him the Middle.
Therefore, the absence of the origin of Mukhya Prān.a is taught in the
Scriptures. And the reason [for it] is given in the following statement
of Vāyupurān.a: ‘How can the Prān.a who has the power to penetrate
everywhere [and] to desert, as well as who is the origin and death
[of others], be himself originated and dissolved’? And another text
declares: ‘This Prān.a springs from the Supreme Self’.21
5) Vāyu is superior in qualities to all other gods and liberated souls:
muktebhyo ’pi manus.ebhyo devā eva gun.ādhikāh. /
tebhyo vāyus tato vis.n.uh. paripūrn.agun.ah. sadā /
ye tv etad anyathā vidyus te hi yānty adharam . tamah. /
ye tv etad evam. jānanti te yānti paramam . harim /
iti ca

In MBhTN III 23–24 the superiority of Vāyu is defended with the allusion to the legend of
the quarrel of the life-forces regarding their rank (BĀU VI 1,7–14; ChU V 1,6–15; Kaus.ı̄tU
II 14).
20 BĀUBh (p. 283,19+284,27).
21 BSūBh (p. 110,22–24); see also NyāV (p. 111,27–30): na ca yatprāptir
yatparityāga utpattir maran.am . tathā / tasyotpattir mr.tiś caiva katham. prān.asya yujyata
ityādimāhātmyavacanān mukhyaprān.asya notpattir iti vācyam / mahattvān mahatām .
vis.n.uh. kartā pran.āsya caikarāt. / kim
. nāma na sr.jed es.a yena śaktyedam āvr.tam iti śrutes
tato ’pi māhātmyād vis.n.oh..
106 ROQUE MESQUITA

“The gods have qualities superior to even the liberated souls, while
Vāyu has [higher qualities] than these [gods], [higher] than Vāyu is
Vis.n.u, who is always endowed with the fullness of [infinite] qualities.
Those, however, who perceive it otherwise go to lower darkness, but
those who know it as it is, attain the supreme Hari”. And this has been
handed down [in the tradition].22
6) Vāyu is the only mediator between men and Vis.n.u:
nānyair devair harim
. paśyej jñānarūpen.a vāyunā /
brahman.ā paramajñānarūpen. a harin.ā tathā /
prasannenaiva tam . paśyed anye ’nujñāpradāyinah. /
iti ca
“Hari cannot be seen with the help of other gods except through Vāyu
in the embodiment of knowledge. In the same way, he is ought to be
seen through the gracious Hari [himself] as Brahman in the embodi-
ment of the highest knowledge. Other gods give [their] assent [to it]”.
And this has been handed down [in the tradition].23
7) God Vāyu leads the soul to the ultimate salvation, namely to Brahman:
A) sa vāyum āgacchatı̄ti prathamam ucyate – utkrānto vidvān param abhigacchan
vidyutam evāntata upagacchati dyaur vāva vidyut tatpatim . vāyum upagamya
tenaiva brahma gacchatı̄ty ante ’pi vāyugamanaśruteh. . . .
It is stated that he reaches Vāyu first, because the following is
taught in the Vāyugamanaśruti: “A sage departing [from the gross
body and] on [his] path to the highest Brahman, attains finally
Vidyut only. Vidyut is indeed Dyauh.. After attaining Vāyu, who is
his [‘namely Dyaus’] Lord, [the departing sage] reaches Brahman
in the end only through Him [= Vāyu]”.24
B) ı̄yus trı̄n karman.ā lokān jñānenaiva taduttarān /
tatra mukhyāh. harim . yānti tadanye vāyum eva tu /
apakvā ye na te yānti vāyum . vā harim eva vā /
sthānamātrāśritās te tu punar janivivarjitāh. /
iti brahmatarke
22 MuUBh (p. 500,6–8).
23 MuUBh (p. 497,15–16).
24 BSūBh (216,17–19f.); ibid. (p. 217,2–4): vidyutpatinā vāyunaiva sa enān brahma
gamayatı̄ti brahmagamanaśruteh. –
vidyutpatir vāyur eva nayed brahma na cāparah. /
kuto ’nyasya bhavec chaktis tam .rte prān.anāyakam /
iti ca br.hattantre
cf. also SŚS v. 25:
arcirādipathā vāyum
. prāpya tena janārdanam /
yanti uttamā naroccādyā brahmalokāt sahāmunā /
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 107

“Through [the performance] of Vedic rites [such as Agnis.t.oma


etc.] they would go to the three [lower] worlds. Through know-
ledge alone they will go [to the worlds] which are higher than
these. The best [among them] reach Hari. However, the others
[‘namely inferior to these’] reach only Vāyu. Those whose [know-
ledge and devotion] is unripe, attain neither Vāyu nor Hari.
Moreover, those resting in the state of perfect tranquility are free
from birth”. This is stated in the Brahmatarka.25
C) . . .
vis.n.ur hi dātā moks.asya vāyuś ca tadanujñayā /
...
iti bhavis.yatparvavacanam
“Vis.n.u grants namely liberation and the god Vāyu [as well but
only] with his consent”. This is declared in the Bhavis.yatparvan26
8) Vis.n.u is denoted by the word Vāyu since prān.a is His distinguishing
mark:
uktam . ca br.hatsam . hitāyām
...
mukhyatah. sarvanāmā tu vis.n.ur eko na cāparah. /
tasmāt prān.ādiśabdāś ca vis.n.āv eva hi mukhyatah. /
anyavyapeks. ayā vāyau mukhyavr.ttir vidhı̄yate /
vāyuś ca sūryasam . sthah. sam. stapaty etaj jagattrayam /
ājñayaiva harer vāyoh. śaktyā sūryas tapaty ayam /
. . . prān.ād vā es.a udeti prān.e ’stametı̄ti ca śruti (BĀU I 5,23) prān.aśabdaś ca
mukhyato vis.n.au vartamāno ’pi vāyāv api vartate /
atah. sarvavedādyabhidheyatvam. vāyor apy asti /
prān.asya prān.a iti śruter (KeU I 2) ubhayor api prān.aśabdah. siddha eva / ayam .
vāva śiśur yo ’yam . madhyamah. prān.ah. iti (BĀU II 2,1) vāyor viśes.an.ād uttamah.
prān.o vis.n.ur iti ca siddham.

And the following is said in the Br.hatsam.hitā –


“. . . All the names in [their] primary meaning [denote] Vis.n.u alone
and none other. And consequently, the words such as Prān.a etc. refer
truly in [their] primary meaning to Vis.n.u only. The primary usage
is allotted to Vāyu through its application to another [higher Being,
namely Vis.n.u]. Besides, Vāyu being in the sun shines upon the three
worlds. The sun shines upon them only on command of Hari through
the power of Vāyu . . . And the Śruti says: ‘Or it arises out of Prān.a
[and] sets in the Prān.a’. And [therefore] the word Prān.a denotes
[primarily] also Vāyu as it denotes primarly Vis.n.u. Hence, all the
25 BhāgTN (p. 74,4–6).
26 MBhTN I 78–99; see Mesquita 2000: 169ff. [= 1997: 139ff.].
108 ROQUE MESQUITA

Vedas and other scriptures speak also of Vāyu. On account of the Śruti-
statement: prān.asya prān.ah. it is surely established that the word Prān.a
denotes [primarily] both of them. It is [equally] established that Vis.n.u
is the highest Prān.a because Prān.a is the distinguishing attribute of
Vāyu, as taught in the BĀU (II 2,1): ‘This young animal is indeed the
middle prān.a’ ”.27
9) God Vāyu is the son of Vis.n.u:
yam indram āhur varun.am . yam āhur yam . mitram āhur yamu satyam āhuh./
yo devānām . devatamo janitram . vāyos tasmai somam ebhyo juhomi /
evam . vāyoh. pitaram. vis.n.um eva yajanti devaih. saha ye kr.te janāh. /
evam . tretāyām
. kecid anye pr.thak tān is..tvā vis.n.āv arpayante na cānye /
iti ca brahmān.d.e

“Him whom they call Indra, whom they call Varun.a, whom they call
Mitra, whom they call Satya, whom they call father of Vāyu, who
is the highest among gods, to Him I offer together with these [gods
this] Soma. Thus in the Kr.tayuga the people together with the gods
worshipped only Vis.n.u, the father of Vāyu.28 In the Tretāyuga [only]
some worshipped Vis.n.u in this way. Others surrendered [ultimately] to
27 AiUBh (p. 180,28+181,19):

dvāu ātmānau hi vedes.u dvau prān.au dvau ca cetanau /


ajñānābhibhavāspr. s..tau vāyur nārāyan.aś ca tau /
tadanye cetanāh. sarve prān.āś cātmāna eva ca /
ajñānābhibhavaspr. s..tās tasmāt te hy adhamāh. śrutāh. /
madhyamo vāyur evaika uttamah. kevalo harih. /
sarvaśabdoditau tasmād etau dvāv eva nāparah. /
anye caiva mitaih. śabdair ucyante nāmitaih. kvacit /
śrı̄r apy akhilaśabdoktā vis.n.uvan na tu mukhyatah. /
tasmād amitanāmānāv api tau mitanāmavat /
śrı̄ś ca vāyuś ca vis.n.us tu mukhyokter amitābhidhah. /
anantanāmakatvāc ca so ’nantagun.a ı̄ritah. /
pr.than.nāmāni yasmāt tadgun.ān eva pracaks.ate /
ityādi brahmān.d.e.

28 Cf. ChUBh (p. 409,10+410,22):

...
dharmajñānādirūpen. a vis.n.or bāhucatus..tayāt /
jātam
. vāyum
. viditvaiva putro bhūtvā na rodati /
na jāyate na mr.iyate mukto bhūtvā sukhı̄ bhavet /
vāyum. hareh. sutam
. jñātvā nāham . putratayārudam /
hareh. prasādasāmarthyād ajarā cāmarā hy aham /
...
iti ca.
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 109

Vis.n.u after they had worshipped [other gods like Indra etc.] as different
[from Him], while others neglected it”. And this has been taught in the
Brahmān.d.apurān.a.29
This brief sketch shows how Madhva’s description substantially differs
from the traditional specification of the personality of the god Vāyu. Not
only is the god Vāyu without origination, being himself origin of the
world and of all gods, he plays a unique role as a mediator between
men and Vis.n.u and as a giver of final liberation, which Madhva in
numerous other places views as an exclusive right of Vis.n.u.30 Furthermore,
Vis.n.u is also in intimate relation with the name Vāyu/Prān.a and with
the personality of Vāyu as his father. According to an unknown source
of Madhva, (iti ca) the knowledge of the fact that Vāyu is the son of
Vis.n.u is an essential prerequisite for final liberation.31 This enhance-
ment of God Vāyu expressed in several of Madhva’s untraceable sources
cannot be coincidental and must be rather positively intended by Madhva
since he uses them as the basis for substantiating his claim of being a
partial incarnation (am . śāvatāra) of Vis.n.u. This implies an intermediate
agency of god Vāyu. Madhva develops this doctrine in a number of
steps. The first outstanding statement in this connection which Madhva
attributes to the Brahmān.d.apurān.a (untraceable) is that Vāyu is a prin-
cipal inherent member (pradhānāṅga/prathamāṅga), of Vis.n.u, which
necessarily implies that Vāyu, unlike other gods, has no origin:
...
bhūbhārahārin. o vis.n.oh. pradhānāṅgam
. hi mārutih. /
...
ityādi kathitam 32
. sarvam . brahmān.d.e harin.ā svayam /

“Māruti is indeed the principal inherent member of Vis.n.u who removes


the burden of the earth . . . All this has been proclaimed by Hari himself in
the Brahmān.d.apurān.a”.
In his second important remark in this regard, ascribed to an unknown
source, namely the Bhavis.yatparvan,33 Madhva declares that Vāyu is the
origin of three avatāras:
...
tasyāṅgam
. prathamam
. vāyuh. prādurbhāvatrayānvitah. /
prathamo hanumān nāma dvitı̄yo bhı̄ma eva ca /
29 MuUBh (p. 493,21–23).
30 See Mesquita 2000: 171 n. 348 [= 1997: 139 n. 335]; Mesquita 2000∗ : 489f.
31 See above n. 28.
32 MBhTN II 15f. [9–49ab].
33 Ibid. II 112–123.
110 ROQUE MESQUITA

pūrn.aprajñas tr.tı̄yas tu bhagavatkāryasādhakah. /


tretādyes.u yuges.v es.a sam . bhūtah. keśavājñayā /
ekaikaśas tris.u pr.thak . . .

“. . . Vāyu as His (= Vis.n.u’s) first inherent member has three avatāras as


essential parts. The first one is called Hanumat and the second is indeed
Bhı̄ma. The third is Pūrn.aprajña (= Madhva). He took [these incarnations]
in the three Yugas separately one by one, beginning with Tretā on the
command of Vis.n.u, [and each of them] carries out the deeds of the divine
Vis.n.u . . .”.34
While developing this doctrine of am . śāvatāra of Vis.n.u, Madhva makes
use of the traditional idea handed down in the Rāmāyan.a and Mahābhārata,
as I mentioned above, that Vāyu is the father of Hanumat and Bhı̄ma,
which explains why they are known in the tradition as Marutsutas. In
order to adapt this notion to his concept of am . śāvatāra Madhva modi-
fies it decisively. According to Madhva, Hanumat and Bhı̄ma are not
simply Marutsutas but they are identified as prādurbhāvas/avatāras of
Vāyu. And the inclusion of Madhva alongside these two avatāras neces-
sarily implies that Madhva himself is responsible for this set-up of three
avatāras of Vāyu. Thus the conclusion seems inevitable that the source-
quotations attributed to the Brahmān.d.apurān.a and Bhavis.yatparvan which
are supportive of the said structure of avatāras are to be traced back to
Madhva as their author.
The elaboration of this thought pattern does not take place in an iso-
lated and independent way but in close relationship with full avatāras of
Vis.n.u, namely Rāma and Kr.s.n.a. This is also attested in the same quotation
ascribed to the Brahmān.d.apurān.a:
tasmād balapravr.ttasya rāmakr.s.n.ātmano hareh. /
antaraṅgam. hanūmām. ś ca bhı̄mas tatkāryasādhakau /

“Therefore, Hanumat and Bhı̄ma being essential parts of Hari – who is


identical with Rāma and Kr.s.n.a [and] engaged in [the task] of physical
force [namely in the removal of the burden of the earth] – carry out the
deeds of Hari [in the tretā and dvāpara age respectively]”.35
34 Ibid. II 118–119; ibid. II 33:

tasmād balapravr.ttasya rāmakr.s.n.ātmano hareh. /


antaraṅgam . hanūmām
. s ca bhı̄mas tatkāryasādhakau /
. . . ityādi kathitam
. sarvam . brahmān.d.e harin.ā svayam.
For a detailed examination of this doctrine, see Mesquita 2000: 47ff.; 43 n. 56 [= 1997:
38ff.; 35 n. 48].
35 MBhTN II 33; II 23ab: krsnarāmādirūpes u balakāryo janārdanah . . . ityādi kathitam
.. . . . .
sarvam . brahmān.d.e harin.ā svayam.
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 111

To these two Madhva adds a third full avatāra, namely Vyāsa,36 whose
duty, unlike Rāma’s and Kr.s.n.a’s, is on the intellectual level and consists
in imparting knowledge to mankind (vyāsādirūpes. u jñānakāryas tathā
prabhuh.) in the kali age.37
In this arrangement there are also some discrepancies. For instance,
according to the tradition Vyāsa is assigned to the dvāpara age [not to the
kali age] and he is taken as a secondary avatāra.38
It is noteworthy that in this arrangement of avatāras of Vāyu Madhva
also, exactly like Hanumat and Bhı̄ma, is carrying out the deeds of Vis.n.u
(pūrn.aprajñas tr.tı̄yas tu bhagavatkāryasādhakah. ) but his task consists, as
in case of the full avatāra Vyāsa, in imparting knowledge (jñānakārya)
and not in balakārya as in case of full avatāras such as Rāma, Kr.s.n.a
and of the secondary avatāras such as Hanumat and Bhı̄ma.39 According
to Madhva’s understanding, the point of difference among these tasks is
based in Vāyu’s nature itself which consists of knowledge and physical
40
force (vāyur balasam . vidātmā). That means that the three am. śāvatāras of
Vis.n.u, through the mediation of Vāyu, are consigned to the same tasks and
in the same succession as the three full avatāras of Vis.n.u. The subordina-
tion of Madhva to Vyāsa, the teacher and author of all canonical texts in the
dvāpara (kali?) age, also makes it possible for Madhva himself to appear as
the author of the texts in the kali age.41 The difference between the primary
and secondary avatāras is that the former are absolutely identical with
Vis.n.u,42 whereas the secondary avatāras have only a temporary conscious-
ness of identity with Vis.n.u. Madhva expresses this distinction of rank in
36 See Mesquita 2000: 42ff. [= 1997: 35ff.].
37 MBhTN II 23cd.
38 See Mesquita 2000: 48ff. [= 1997: 39ff.].
39 It cannot be coincidental that Madhva praises in MBhTN (II 151–152; 162–168) the
excellent qualities of the soldier Bhı̄ma fulfilling his task (balakārya).
40 MBhTN III 74ab; Gı̄T (p. 61,16): parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śruyate svābhāvikı̄
jñānabalakriyā ca; see Mesquita 2000: 49 n. 75 (= 1997: 40 n. 67).
41 See Mesquita 2000: 44–48; 63ff. (= 1997: 36–39; 51ff.); also MBhTN II 7cd–8ab:

yathā sa bhagavān vyāsah. sāks.ān nārāyan.ah. prabhuh. /


jagāda bhāratādyes.u tathā vaks.ye tadı̄ks.ayā /
cf. Mesquita 2000: 76f. [= 1997: 60f.].
42 MBhTN II 27:

...
ityādyāh. kevalo vis.n.ur nais.ām
. bhedah. katañcana /
na viśes.o gun.aih. sarvair balajñānādibhih. kvacit /
...
ityādi . . . brahmān.d.e
see Mesquita 2000: 52f. n. 82 [= 1997: 41f. n. 73].
112 ROQUE MESQUITA

a very conspicious way when he states that Vis.n.u appears in the shape
of Vyāsa (vyāsarūpin), and never asserts that Vis.n.u appears in the shape
of Madhva (madhvarūpin)! The expressions used in this connection are
that Madhva is the third earthly form of Vāyu (ānandatı̄rthavaranāmavatı̄
tr.tı̄yā bhaumı̄ tanur marutas)43 or that he has a divine appearance (divyam .
rūpam).44 Additionally, Madhva is called the disciple (tasyaiva śis.ya
45
jagadekabhartuh. ) and devotee of Vis.n.u (nārāyan.asyaiva padam . sis.eve).
Furthermore, the secondary avatāras are subjected to human weaknesses
and other infirmities.46 These particulars do not apply to Vyāsa.
In a further step, Madhva articulates how an am . śāvatāra, being an
earthly incarnation of Vāyu (bhaumı̄ tanur marutas), can possess a
temporary consciousness of identity with Vis.n.u. Again Vāyu is at the
bottom of Madhva’s explanation. Appealing to an anonymous and untrace-
able source (iti ca), Madhva declares that an am . śāvatāra, i.e., Madhva
himself, spiritually appropriates Vis.n.u through the mediation of Vāyu,
who is the best abode of Vis.n.u. The immediate consequence of this appro-
priation is that Vis.n.u enters the prān.a of the meditating Madhva and takes
possession of him (āveśa). Madhva compares this prodigious phenomenon
with demonical possession. The source reference in question runs:
pradhānam . dhāma vis.n.os tu prān.a eva prakı̄rtitah. /
upāyair yo vijānı̄yat prān.astham . parameśvaram /
tasya prān.e harir nityam āvis..to bhavati dhruvam /
nityam . prān.asthitasyaiva vis.n.or āveśa eva hi /
prān.advāren.a yajjñānadı̄panam . jñāninah. sadā /
sannidhānam . yathā prāptāh
. piśācāh
. purus.es.v api /
tatra sthitvāpi bhuñjanta āviśeyuh. punaś ca te /
mantrādibhis tathā vis.n.uh. sadā prān.asthito ’pi san /
jñānadı̄ptyādikam . kuryāj jñāninah. punar eva tu /
iti ca

“The prān.a alone is called the best abode of Vis.n.u. One who can know
with the help of right means (like śravan.a, manana etc.) that the almighty
God is dwelling in the prān.a, his prān.a Hari enters by constantly [and]
firmly taking possession of him, since it is a possession by Vis.n.u, who
always dwells in this very prān.a. Through the mediation of prān.a the
illumination of the wise men based on his [= Vis.n.u] knowledge takes
place without interruption. Just as demons enter human beings, who also
43 MBhTN III 8cd; XXXII 162; AiUBh (p. 242,29f.):

madhv ity ānanda uddis..to veti (va+iti) tı̄rtham udāhr.tam /


madhva ānandatı̄rthah. syāt tr.tiyā mārūtı̄ tanuh. / [iti ca].
44 Ibid. (p. 242,22–25).
45 MBhTN XXXII 157; IX 116.
46 See Mesquita 2000: 52f. [= 1997: 42f.].
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 113

dwelling in them enjoy and take [total] possession of them with the help
of mantras, in this very manner, Vis.n.u also dwelling permanently in the
prān.a can repeatedly produce the illumination, etc. of wise men based
on the knowledge [of Vis.n.u]”. And this has been handed down [in the
tradition].47
Accordingly, we can attest that Madhva twice underlines the special
role of Vāyu: first, in his earthly appearance as the third am . śāvatāra
and secondly, in his confirmation as the authorized proclaimer of all
canonical texts due to his illumination through the mediation of Vāyu. In
the framework of amśāvatāra, as the third incarnation of Vāyu, Madhva
was allotted the task of imparting the knowledge (jñānakārya) and the
illumination based on the knowledge of Vis.n.u (yajjñānadı̄pana) autho-
rizes him to fulfill that task in the name of Vis.n.u (bhagavatkāryasādhaka).
His name pūrn.aprajña and supūrn.aprajña48 is possibly meant to allude to
this authorization. The possession or seizure (āveśa) of Madhva by Vis.n.u
implies that Vis.n.u is personally present in Madhva: anyāveśanimittam. ced
49
balam anyātmakam . hi tat.
In this sense, Madhva appears as a self-confident literary author with
divine warrant not only of his own original and other commented works50
but also of all other literary texts which in the tradition are known as
works of Vis.n.u or of Vyāsa.51 His model of truthfulness and realization
of his divine task is Vyāsa (yathā sa bhagavān vyāsah. sāks.ān nārāyan.ah.
prabhuh. / jagāda bhāratādyes. u tathā vaks.ye . . .). Madhva underscores
in this fact the difference between himself and Vyāsa. Whereas Vis.n.u is
identical with Vyāsa, he is only present in Madhva due to the illumination
(jñānadı̄pana), i.e. due to Madhva’s being possessed (āveśa) by Vis.n.u.
With the help of this double-track which allows for the setting of Vis.n.u’s
47 MuUBh (p. 497,20–24); see Mesquita 2000: 72ff. (= 1997: 57ff.).
48 Cf. MBhTN XXXII 157ab; see also my forthcoming paper: Die Idee der Erlösung bei
Lebzeiten im System Madhvas (W. Halbfass Commemoration Volume, Vienna).
49 MBhTN II 17cd. In this connection Madhva differentiates (ibid. II 32) between two
forms of possession viśes.āviśes.ino hareh. and kim . cidāveśino hareh. / . . . ityādi kathitam
.
sarvam . brahmān.d.e harin.ā svayam; cf. also BĀUBh (p. 262,11; 263,1): āvis..to vis.n.ur etes.u
na vis.n.us tatsvarūpakah. . . . sarve te vis.n.unāvis..tā vis.n.or bhinnāh. sadaiva tu [= p. 261,11–
264,5: . . . ityādi paiṅgiśrutih.).
50 Cf. MBhTN I 22: artho ’yam . . . nirnı̄yate sahrdayam harinā sadaiva; ibid. I 136f.:
. . . .
vis.n.vājñāyaiva vidus.ā tatprasādabalonnateh. /
ānandatı̄rthamuninā pūrn.aprajñābhidhāyujā /
tātparyam . śāstrān.ām
. sarves.ām uttamam
. mayā proktam /
ibid. IX 116f.: vis.n.or eva prasādatah. . . . mayeyam
. satkathoditā.; VTN (p. 44,4): madhvo
tu tr.tı̄yam etad amunā granthah kr.tah. keśave.
51 See Mesquita 2000: 63ff. (= 1997: 51ff.).
114 ROQUE MESQUITA

presence in Madhva and Vis.n.u’s identity with Vyāsa side by side, Madhva
can show in an emphatic way that in both cases Vis.n.u alone is ultimately
the proclaimer of all canonical texts.
This line of argument is pursued further when Madhva offers a literary
reference to prove his claim. It is very striking that Madhva quotes from
the verifiable Purān.a and Itihāsa sources to establish the identity of Vyāsa
with Vis.n.u,52 but in order to substantiate his own claim of being an avatāra
of Vāyu and partial incarnation of Vis.n.u he can put forward only unknown
sources, anonymous and unidentifiable references. For instance, a refer-
ence based on a prophecy in/of the Bal.itthāsūkta (R.gveda I 141,1–3)
heralding the arrival of Madhva:
yasya trı̄n.y uditāni vedavacane rūpān.i divyāny alam .
bat. taddarśatam ittham eva nihitam . devasya bhargo mahat /
vāyo rāmavaconayam . prathamakam . pr.ks.o dvitı̄yam
. vapur
madhvo yat tu tr.tı̄yakam . kr.tam idam. bhās.yam. hi tena prabhau /
...

“In the verses of the Veda, there are described three divine forms [incar-
nations] of Vāyu [see Rigveda I 141,1–5]. The third of those forms
has composed this Commentary, explaining it as describing Hari. The
archetypal form of Vāyu, of which these are the various avatāras, consists
of power and wisdom. By the command of God, these qualities appear fully
in the avatāra-forms of Vāyu, the mighty, the supporter and mover of the
universe. His first form of avatāra is as Hanumat, who carried the message
of Rāma [to Sı̄tā], or who ever obeys the words of Rāma. The second
form is that of the warrior Bhı̄ma, who destroyed the army of the Kurus.
His third is that of Anandatı̄rtha, called also Madhva, who composed this
Commentary . . .”.53
Madhva mentions this prophecy not only at the end of his works but
also in several places within one single work of his, namely MBhTN.
Most conspicious is the fact that he appeals directly to the said prophecy as
52 Cf. MBhTN II 7cd; II 51:

vāyuprokte ’pi tat proktam . bhāratasya praśam . sanam /


kr.s.n.advaipāyanam
. vyāsam . viddhi nārāyan.am. prabhum /
ko hy anyah. pun.d.arı̄kāks.ān mahābhāratakr. d bhavet /
This is actually a verse from PadmaP (I 143cd–44ab) with slight deviations. It also occurs
in Vis.n.uP (III 4,5) and in MBh (XII 334,9), see Mesquita 2000: 42ff. (= 1997: 35ff.).
53 A literal translation of this passage by a person staying outside of the tradition of
Madhva school cannot do justice to the context implied here. In order to read and interpret
this passage in the context of Madhva school I have given above a rendering through a
madhvite scholar, which is, however, by no means a literal translation but rather an inter-
pretation, cf. Chandravasu [Chandogya Upanis.ad. With commentary of Madhvāchārya.
Allahabad 1910]. For full quotation see Mesquita 2000: 55f. [= 1997: 44f.].
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 115

evidence (tatpramānam) for his avatāra-claim, while he reports his birth


year.54 That means we have here a clear case of a vaticinium ex eventu,
a prophecy after its fulfillment. Thus the conclusion is unavoidable that
all quotations articulating this prophecy are in fact statements made by
Madhva himself, as I have shown extensively elsewhere.55 The same eva-
luation holds for the untraceable quotations in support of the privileged
position in rank and function allotted to Vāyu, as they are in perfect
harmony with Madhva as avatāra of Vāyu and amśāvatāra of Vis.n.u. The
question of credibility implied here is to be solved within the framework of
am. śāvatāra. From Madhva’s own statements it is clear that he is sincerely
convinced of his mission to proclaim all canonical works in the name
of Vis.n.u in the kali-age by virtue of divine charisma (vis.n.uprasādāt).
And this implies that God Vis.n.u is co-cause and co-author and hence
co-founder of Madhva’s Vedāntic system. Consequently, Madhva puts
forward his own teachings as co-authored by Vis.n.u: bhagavadrādhāntah.
and ascribes to Vis.n.u even the logical argumentation in defence of his
teachings: yuktayo nirn.ayasyaiva svayam bhagavatoditāh. . This claim
enables Madhva, on the one hand, to justify that the unknown sources
and the untraceable quotations supportive of his peculiar doctrine are not
fabricated by him but inspired by Vis.n.u himself, and on the other hand,
to explain why Vis.n.u is ultimately the author of the literary compositions
of Madhva without Madhva ceasing to be their author.56 This position is
very similar to the Christian concept of scriptural inspiration in which the
possibility of a deceit is excluded, since inspiration as a divine revelation
implies a divine authorship.57 Although the sacred books are of human

54 MBhTN XXXII 120–124.


55 The outer form of this reference also points very clearly to the authorship of Madhva.
As a matter of fact, this reference consists of three segments consisting of verses. Although
the first part, in Śārdūlavikrı̄d.ita-metre, is not identified as a quotation and therefore has
to be taken as a self-statement of Madhva, the second and third parts, in Śloka-metre, are
ascribed to an unknown source, namely to “Sadbhāva”. Nevertheless, all three segments
together, despite their different metrical structure, are closely connected, since the explana-
tion of the prophecy in the Bal.itthāsūkta (R.gveda I 141,1–3) is shared by all three parts,
as in the fictitious quotation attributed to the Bhavis.yatparvan (cf. MBhTN II 112–123).
This implies that the quoted portions should be attributed to Madhva himself exactly as the
self-statement at the beginning; see also Mesquita 2000: 60ff. [= 1997: 47ff.).
56 Cf. Mesquita 2000: 78ff. [=1997: 62ff.]; see also my forthcoming rejoinder to the
review of my monograph on Madhva’s unknown Sources by B.N.K. Sharma (Asiatische
Studien, Lausanne).
57 Curiously, the first Indian Scholar who pointed out to this similarity was a Madhvite
himself, namely Śrı̄śa Chandra Vasu, at the end of his introduction to the translation of
the Chandogya Upanis.ad. (With the Commentary of Madhvāchārya [Sacred Books of the
Hindus, ed. by B.D. Basu, Vol. II, Part III], Allahabad 1910: XV): “Before closing this
116 ROQUE MESQUITA

origin, God is their author through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This
fact lays down the lines of the theological speculation how God is active
as a principal cause in all the essential operations of the composition of a
book by an inspired author.58
A special feature of Madhva’s school is the originality of its teachings
which, not depending on a guruparam . parā, goes back to the otherwordly
authority of Madhva. The doctrine or the message of Madhva thus appears
as a revealed religion. And Madhva is the very first Indian author to
introduce the concept of charisma of inspiration, however, not under the
influence of Christian thoughts but by adopting and working out original
Indian concepts.59

ABBREVIATED TITLES

AiUBh Madhva, Aitareyopanis.adbhās.ya, see Anuv


Anuv Madhva, Anuvyākhyāna [Works of Sri Madhwacharya], in:
Sarvamūlagranthāh. – Prasthānatrayı̄, sam
. put.a 1, B. Govindacharya, ed.
Udipi 1969
BĀUBh Madhva, Br.hadāran.yakopanis. adbhās.ya, see Anuv
BhāgTN Madhva, Bhāgavatatātparyanirn. aya [Works of Sri Madhwacharya], in:
Sarvamūlagranthāh. – Purān.aprasthāna, sam. put.a 3, B. Govindacharya,
ed. Udipi 1980
BSūBh Madhva, Brahmasūtrabhās.ya, see Anuv
ChUBh Madhva, Chāndogyopanis. adbhās.ya, see Anuv
Gı̄Bh Madhva, Bhagavadgı̄tābhās. ya, see Anuv
Gı̄T Madhva, Bhagavadgı̄tātātparya, see Anuv
KathUBh Madhva, Kathopanis.adbhās.ya, see Anuv
introduction, I may mention a point on which perhaps Madhva is unique, namely, his claim
that he is an incarnation of Vāyu. The Vāyu, called also Prān.a, is the highest being next to
God. He is called ‘the beloved son of God’, the ‘servant of God’, the ‘mediator between
God and man’ the ‘saviour’. The functions assigned by Śrı̄ Madhva to Vāyu correspond
very closely to the Christ principle of the Christian theology. I have, therefore, not hesitated
in translating Vāyu and Prān.a by Christ. Some may think that Madhva’s idea of Vāyu is not
the same as the Christian idea of Christ. No one can expect exact similarities in such cases,
but the approach is still remarkable. But more remarkable than this, is the claim of Madhva
that he is an incarnation of Vāyu. Other authors have been more modest, and left it to their
disciples to deify them, but Madhva, like Jesus, boldly lays claim to be the incarnation of
Vāyu, the son of God”. This important remark escaped notice of latter Madhvites, since
none of them tried to explore the peculiar rank and funktion of Vāyu in the Philosophy of
Madhva (see above n. 1).
58 Cf. K. Rahner/H. Vorgrimler, Concise Theological Dictionary transl. by R. Strachan.
London 1983: 231, s.v. inspiration; see also Mesquita 2000: 15; 75 n. 130 (= 1997: 12; 60
n. 119).
59 Cf. Mesquita 2000: 15 n. 7 [=1997: 12 ∗∗ ].
THE RANK AND FUNCTION OF GOD VĀYU 117

MBh Mahābhārata, crit. ed. by V.S. Sukthankar etc. Poona 1933ff.


MBhTN Madhva, Mahābhāratatātparyanirn. aya [Works of Sri Madhwacharya].
In: Sarvamūlagranthāh. – Itihāsaprasthāna, samput.a 2, B. Govin-
dacharya, ed. Udipi 1971
Mān.UBh Madhva, Mān.d.ūkyopanis.adbhās.ya, see Anuv
MuUBh Madhva, Mun.d.akopanis.adbhās.ya, see Anuv
NyāV Madhva, Nyāyavivaran.a, see Anuv
PraśUBh Madhva, Praśnopanis.adbhās.ya, see Anuv
R. Mesquita Madhva und seine unbekannten literarischen Quellen. Einige Beobach-
1997 tungen Wien 1997
R. Mesquita Madhva’s Unknown Literary Sources. Some Observations. New Delhi
2000 2000
R. Mesquita Madhva: Vis.n.utattvanirn.aya. Annotierte Übersetzung mit Studie. Wien
2000∗ 2000
SŚS Madhva, Sarvaśāstrārthasaṅgraha, see Anuv
S. Siauve La Doctrine de Madhva. Dvaita-Vedānta. Pondichéry 1968
1968
S. Siauve Les Hiérarchies Spirituelles selon l’Anuvyākhyāna de Madhva.
1971 Pondichéry 1971
VTN Madhva, Vis.n.utattvanirn.aya [Works of Sri Madhwacharya]. In:
Sarvamūlagranthāh. – samput.a 5, by B. Govindacharya, ed. Udipi 1974

University of Vienna

Anda mungkin juga menyukai