SAIVA SIDDHÄNTA WITH REFERENCE TO
SIVÄGRAYOGIN'S COMMENTARIES
ON THE SIVAj5rÄNABODHAM
By Jayandra Soni, Innsbrucic
The Sivajmnabodham (SJB) is a text that has the special status of being a
sruti for the religio-philosophical system of Saiva Siddhänta in the form in
which it still survives today, especially in South India. On the basis of this
text the paper discusses the major concepts of the system — the entire text
and translation of the Sivajmnabodham are given at the end and the survey
is based on Sivägrayogin 's commentaries on it; I pointed out at the meeting
that his brief gloss (laghutiliä) provides an excellent overview of the entire sy¬
stem — for reasons of space, the full text of the gloss together with a trans¬
lation cannot be included here. This paper therefore limits itself to a discuss¬
ion of a few points about the origin of the Sivajhänabodham, about the
commentator Sivägrayogin, and then provides a brief summary of the main
tenets of Saiva Siddhänta thought on the basis of Sivägrayogin's commen¬
taries.
About the Sivajhänabodham (SJB)
It has not yet been conclusively established whether the Sivajmnabodham
is a text that is originally in Sanskrit and part of the Raurava Ägama or whe¬
ther it is an independent work and, possibly, originally in the Tamil lan¬
guage. As regards this problem it is interesting to read what the editor Pandit
N. R. Bhatt says with authority in the Preface (pp. ii — iii) to his two-
volume edition of the Rauravägama:^
"There exists a work of 12 s'lolcas, the Sivajhänabodham. This is the fun¬
damental text which is the most important authority of the Saivite philoso¬
phy which is called Saivasiddhänta. Two commentators of these sülras, Sivä¬
grayogin and Sadäsiva Siväcärya claim that these 12 s'lolcas are taken from
the Rauravägama. Certain Tamil commentators even claim that it belongs to
the 12th adhyäya of the 73rd patala called päsavimocana-patala, of the
Rauravägama ...
Published by the Institute Francais d'Indologie in Pondichery, 1961 —
1972. The English translation of the French given here is taken from the
manuscript of my forthcoming book Philosophical Anthropology in Sai¬
va Siddhänta with Special Reference to Sivägrayogin. Delhi: Motilal Ba¬
narsidass.
These twelve sütras do not appear in the abridged version which we are publishing. There is no indication that they could have belonged to this Äga¬
ma nor have we yet found a patala called päs'avimocanapalala. Further, it is not usual to find a patala divided into adhyäyas. Finally, the last ha.U-s'loka which concludes the Sivajhänabodham declares: "evarri vidyäc chivajhäna- bodhe saivärtha-nirnayam" (thus one should know the decision regarding
Saivism in the Sivajnänabodham). From this it seems that it is an in¬
dependent work. However, it is not possible to have a definite opinion on this point since we do not possess a complete manuscript."
The Tamil tradition considers the original text to be in Tamil and com¬
posed in the thirteenth century by Meykaii^hadeva, who influenced the Saiva
Siddhänta tradition in the form in which we know it today.^ Whatever the
situation may be about the problem concerning the origin of the text, it is
without any doubt one of the basic texts, and perhaps also the most im¬
portant one, of the tradition today. The text is extant in both Tamil and
Sanskrit and has inspired several voluminous commentaries on it. In the Sai¬
va Siddhänta tradition the Sivajhänabodham has the same status accorded to
Bädaräyaria's Brahmasütras by the Vedänta tradition.' Akhough the content
of both the Sanskrit and Tamil versions is regarded as being semantically
identical, textually there are many differences in the expressions used.'* One
2 The Tamil version with the famous commentary on it by Arunanti has
been recently published ir German. H. W. Schomerus: Arunantis
Sivajnänasiddhiyär. Die Erlangung des Wissens um Siva oder um die Er¬
lösung. 2 Vols. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag 1981. If the SJB is origi¬
nally in Tamil then one would have to assume that the Raurava Ägama, to which it is claimed to belong, was also originally in Tamil. This raises serious questions about the original language of the Ägamas in general.
Whatever the case may be, many of the extant ones are originally in
Sanskrit, in the Grantha script (a script invented by the South Indians in which to write Sanskrit; many of the letters bear a close resemblance to the Tamil script). Further, if it is true that the SJB was originally in Ta¬
mil, then Meykantha would have to be regarded as the one who 'recalled' it in the 13th century. See Schomerus' above work p. 21 with regard to
how Meykantha was taught it.
' This point is not only significant for the respect shown to the work but one also sees the influence of the Vedänta tradition in the commentaries on this work. This is in any case clear with Sivägrayogin's commentaries on this work, where the influence of the Advaita Vedänta tradition is ob¬
vious; see below for details about his commentaries. For a comparison of the SJB and the Brahmasütras, see K. Sivaraman: Saivism in Philoso¬
phical Perspective. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1973, pp. 35—36.
"» Compare the Sanskrit version translated in this paper with the English translation of the Tamil version comprising the bulk of the book by Gor¬
don Matthews: Siva-häna-Bodham. Oxford: University Press 1948.
The German translation of the Tamil version is in the work by Schome¬
rus cited in the previous note, pp. 21—38.
452 Jayandra Soni
of tfie remarkable features of the Sivajnänabodham is that it contains only
12 verses and the Sanskrit version is set to the commonly used anustub
metre, i. e., consisting of 32 syllables, divided into 8 units (pädas) with each unit consisting of 4 syllables. It is certainly one of the shortest treatises of the world's religio-philosophical literature.
About Sivägrayogin
and his commentaries on the Sivajnänabodham
Biographical details about Sivägrayogin are scanty and there is insufficient
authentic historical evidence on which to rely, in attempting to relate bim to
his predecessors and contemporaries with absolute certainty. What we have
are legendary accounts which are given in introductions to Sanskrit texts,
without any supporting evidence. Even his dates cannot be fixed with pre¬
cision, oscillating within a hundred years. However, it seems quite certain
that he flourished in the 16th century, in all probability in the latter half of it^
and according to tradition belonged to the tradition of teachers called the
Skanda-pararhparä.
He is perhaps the only Saiva Siddhäntin who wrote in both Sanskrit and
Tamil* and there is no doubt that he has his own 'brand' of Saiva Siddhänta
that emerges from his commentaries on the Sivajnänabodham. One case in
point, for example, is his conception of the non-difference of the essential
natures of both Siva and the ätman: being under the influence of Advaita
Vedänta, albeit within the confines of the philosophical assumptions of the
5 See my book Philosophical Anthropology in Saiva Siddhänta with Spe¬
cial Reference to Sivägrayogin. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1989, p. 39.
' Although Jiiänaprakäsar, his younger contemporary, also wrote in San¬
skrit, he is regarded as being a Saivasamavädin, and not strictly a Saiva Siddhäntin, because of his view "that souls at release are equal to Siva in every respect, a view which is interesting and ably argued but totally at variance with Siddhänta", V. A. Devasanapatthi: Saiva Siddhänta as
Expounded in the Sivajnänasiddhiyär and ils Six Commentaries. Ma¬
dras: University of Madras 1944, p. 9.
' What distinguishes him from the others, e. g., Umäpati (14th century) and Sivajfiänayogin (18th century) may be reduced to one fundamental difference: whereas for Sivägrayogin Siva is both the material and in¬
strumental cause (upädäna-nimhia-kärana) in his sense of the terms and reflects a position which seems to be a qualified vindication of the Siväd- vaita standpoint of Srikantha (12th century) in his commentary on the Brahmasütras, for Umäpati and Sivajfiänayogin, on the other hand, Siva is only the instrumental cause (kevala-nimhia-kärana).
Saiva Siddliänta tradition, Sivägrayogin conceives of a unity or identity that allows what he calls a "slight difference" (Isad-bheda) between the two.^
Apart from a short gloss, Sivägrayogin wrote two other Sanskrit commen¬
taries to the Sivajmnabodham which are much more detailed and lengthy.
The most elaborate one is called the Sivägrabhäsya'^ and the other work,
Saivaparibhäsä^^ which complements it in several respects resembles its scho¬
lastic and systematic approach. The most concise of all these commentaries
is his Sivjmnabodhalaghutilcä.^^ Unfortunately there is no indication in
which chronological sequence these three works, all of which deal specifical¬
ly with the Sivajiränabodham, were undertaken'^ nor is there any evidence
whether they were composed for any specific reason." The Saiva Siddhänta
system is a complicated one and there is no doubt that the Sivajhänabodham
constitutes an excellent and authoritative compendium of the entire system.
It will therefore be useful now to briefly describe some of the main concepts
of the school in the hope that more may be extracted from this short, preg¬
nant work.
8 For details about Sivägrayogin's concept of non-difference (ananyatva) see my book, op. cit., pp. 179—183.
' This was originally published in the Grantha script by Krishna Sastri
(ed.), Madras: Suryanar Koil Adinam 1920, and has never been trans¬
lated in full. My book, cited above, is based largely on this work with translations of several lenghty sections.
10 First published in the Devanägari script by H. R. Rangaswamy Iyen¬
gar and R. Ramasastri (eds.). Mysore: Government Press 1950 (Orien¬
tal Research Institute Publications, Sanskrit Series no. 90.). Another edition of the text is also available, with an English translation by S. S.
Suryanarayana Sastri in R. Balasubramanian and V. K. S. N.
Raghavan (eds.). Madras: University of Madras 1982 (Madras Univer¬
sity Philosophical Series. 35.).
" The edition I have followed here is a copy kindly provided to me by the Adyar Library in Madras. It is a reprint from the Pandit Series, Vol. 29.
Benares: E. J. Lazarus and Co. Nov. 1907. I am grateful to Prof M. Na- rasimhacary of the Madras University for kindly reading this text with me. The responsibility for the translation, however, is mine.
'2 Although the Saivaparibhäsä does not mention the SJB in its title, nor does it contain the 12 verses of the text, as do the other two works by Sivägrayogin, there is no doubt from internal evidence that it too is in fact a commentary on the SJB.
'3 In the Preface to Madras University edition of the Saivaparibhäsä, op.
cit., p. iii, however, it is said that this work "which is a valuable manual on Saiva Siddhänta is comparable to Dharmaräja's Vedänta-paribhäsä of the Advaita school and Sriniväsa's Yatindramata-dipikä of the Visis- tädvaita school."
454 Jayandra Soni
Some important concepts in Saiva Siddliänta
All concepts and ideas in Saiva Siddhänta are directly concerned with the
conception of the three categories (tattva-traya) sivam, ätman and malam,
together with the system of 36 categories which is derived from the last of
these. These three categories constitute uhimate reality and are, therefore, those to which everything can be ultimately reduced. It is convenient to refer
to these as 'impersonal' categories or as existing at the ontological level to
contrast them from their reference as pati, pasu and päsa, which may be con¬
veniently said to be 'personal' categories that operate at the cosmological
level. In other words, when one talks of the world, the beings in it and of a
creator then it is appropriate to speak of these as päsa, pasu and pati. The
world is päsa means that it is a fetter, it binds the beings which exist in it by
limiting their expression and manifestation. Therefore, the beings in the
world are fettered, bound beings, they are pas'us. Both, the world and the
bound beings owe their existence to the creator pati who is the lord not only
of the world but of the bound beings as well (verse 2 speaks of the creator
making the world for man). The creator is personified as Siva whose imper¬
sonal form is referred to in the neuter as sivam. The bound beings, pas'us are
ontologically denoted by the word ätman. The common feature of sivam or
pati, on the one hand, and ätman or pasu on the other hand, is that of cit;
they have a nature that is essentially one of consciousness, i.e., they are ani¬
mate. Their natures are essentially in direct contrast to malam or päsa which
is essentially unconscious, inanimate matter and which stands for the prin¬
ciple of 'impurity' at the ontological level (verse 7).
One way in which to account for these categories is to begin with the idea
of bound beings, which Saiva Siddhänta applies chiefly to man. In the last
part of verse 4 man, whose essence is of the nature of the ätman, is described
as a limited being whose powers of consciousness are hindered by not being
in a position to fully use the powers of willing (icchä), knowing (jnäna) and
doing (kriyä). The instruments at man's disposal are limiting factors and
make possible only a reduced expression and manifestation of the powers
(sakti) intrinsic to his nature of consciousness (cit). It is in this sense that man is also referred to as ariu (verse 3), which literally means small, atomic. The point imphed here is that the abilities of the ätman are reduced to their mini¬
mum. It is assumed that this limitation has a cause, that there must be a prin¬
ciple which operates as a limiting agent. This factor is malam (verse 4) and
because it is a hindrance it is also called päsa, a fetter. And, for the third cat¬
egory, it is argued that since there must be a cause for the existence of the
world, i. e., since there must be a creator of the world (verse 1) and since
there must be a power through which the ätman itself (being overpowered by
malam) is able to manifest its own powers (verses 5 and 11), the concept of
pati or sivam has to be acknowledged. When the term malam is used by itself
it generally refers to the fetter called änava-malam, i. e., the factor which
makes the ätman into an anu, a being that is reduced or restricted. Atiava-
malam is a limiting factor that is said to be born with (sahaja) the ätman and
exists with it since beginningless time (anädi). This is a euphemistic way of
saying that it is not possible to account for the origin of ätman's and
malam's association, or that since we are limited we are not in a position to
grasp the original cause of this association. The ätman is at first completely overpowered by this original fetter and its state is referred to as a forlorn and
isolated one (/cevala-avasthä). Fortunately, however, sivam comes to the as¬
sistance of the ätman and an opportunity is given for the ätman to manifest
itself, albeit still under the limiting influence of äriava-malam. This state of limited expression is called salcala-avasthä.
The opportunity for the ätman's expression is made possible, ironically,
by the lord (pati) providing two other fetters, karma-malam and mäyä-
malam. These are adventitious (ägantuka) fetters, they are made available as
a result of the ätman's contact with änava-malam and in this sense serve a
beneficient function. They make possible a limited expression of the ätman's
powers of consciousness (cit-saktis) in order, eventually, to be completely rid
of all fetters through the fetters themselves. Thus, these two fetters karman
and mäyä have a soteriological function and finaly it is sivam's power of
grace (anugraha-sakti) which detaches the ätman from the influence of
änava-malam, once karma and mäyä have served their function. Their func¬
tion is to allow the ätman to follow a religious discipline which brings about
hberation (moksa or mukti) through the grace of the lord. This grace, or
"descent of grace" as it is called (sakti-nipäta), is necessary in order to re¬
move the overpowering factor of änava-malam. In the Hght of these differ¬
ences in the states of the ätman Saiva Siddhänta speaks implicitly of a 'jour¬
ney' that the ätman undergoes, viz., from an isolated state (kevala-avastha)
to one of limited expression that makes possible the experiences in the world
(sakala-avasthä) and a 'return' to the socalled essential state of purity
(s'uddha-avasthä).
The system of 36 categories is derived from the category of mäyä-malam
(see the tabel of categories for the names of each). Through these categories the ätman is provided with the instruments of experience in the world, instru¬
ments that are able to partially pierce the overwhelming power of äitava-
malam. The limited expression that is in this way provided, is no reflection
on the essential nature of the ätman, i. e., its limitation does not mean that it
cannot become unlimited, free of the limiting agent, malam. The 36 catego¬
ries operate at three different levels depending on when their functions come
into play. The first 24 categories are ätma-tattvas because they provide the
means for the expression of the ätman in the form of experiences in the
world; the next seven categories are called the vidyä-tattvas which make pos¬
sible a knowledge of the experiences, i. e., they are related to the ätman as an
456 Jayandra Soni
experiencer; and the final five categories are called the siva-tattvas which
make up the range in which sivam can operate through its sal<ti, i. e., the
power through which all actions take place and which intrinsically belongs to
sivam.
In other words, the journey to liberation is a gradual awareness of the na¬
ture of the categories through a discipline which bears a close resemblance to
the yogic discipline, until the ätman is 'mature', until the socalled 'ripening'
of änava-malam takes place (mala-paripäka) and the lord's power is in a po¬
sition to operate through the categories of mäyä and bring about liberation.
Sivajnänabodham
Stri-pum-napumsaka-äditväj-jagatah kärya-darsanät /
asti kartä sa hritvaitat-srijaty-asmät-prabhur-harah / (1)
1. There is a creator of the world on account of seeing the effect having
female, male and neuter IgendersI, etc; he creates it having dissolved it;
therefore Hara |Siva| is the lord.
Anyah san vyäptito' ananyah kartä karma-anusäratah /
Karoti sarhsritim pumsäm-äjhayä samavetayä (2)
2. Being different the creator is [stilll non-different by virtue of being all-
pervasive; with an intrinsic, unlimited power he makes the world for man in
accordance with [man's] karman.
Netito mamatodrekäd-aksoparati-bodhatah /
Sväpe nirbhogato bodhe boddhritväd-asty-anus-tanau (3)
3. There is an anu in the body on account of: [the cognition of] not-
thisness; the excess of mineness; there-being consciousness |even| when the
senses have ceased [e. g., in the dream state]; [the recollection of] there being
no experience in deep sleep; and on account of there being one ]an agent |
who perceives when awake.
Atma-antahkaranäd-anyo'py-anvito mantri-bhüpa-vat /
A vasthä-pahcakastho 'to mala-ruddha-sva-drik-kriyah (4)
4. The ätman is different from the internal organs also [apart from citta
and präna\ associated [with them, though [ like a king with ministers. There¬
fore, it \ätman\ exists in the five states having its own knowledge and action restricted by malam.
Vindanty-aksäni pumsä-arthän-na svayam so 'pi s'ambhunä /
Tad-vikäri sivas-cen-na känto'yovat-sa tan-nayet (5)
5. The senses do not know objects by themselves [but only[ with [the help
of] a spirit (puriis) and this [spirit[ with [the help only of [ Sambhu [Siva|. If jit
is saidi Siva is liable to a change jin nature! through this then, it is not so — he ISivaj leads this jspirit in man| like a magnet an iron.
Adrisyam ced-sad-bhävo drisyah-cejfadimä bhavet /
Sainbhosdad-vyatirekena jneyam rüparn vidur-budhäh (6)
6. If Isomething isj not seen it would be non-existent, if seen it would be
insentient. The wise ones say that the nature of Sambhu is to be known dif¬
ferently from IknowingI these [visible and invisible objectsl.
Na-acic-cit-sannidhau kintu na vittas-te ubhe mithah /
Prapahca-sivayor-vettä yah sa ätmä tay oh pri thak (7)
7. In the presence of consciousness there is no non-consciousness; further
these two mutually do not experience each other. The one that knows both
Siva and the |non-conscious| world is the ätman, which is different from
these two.
Sthitvä sahendriya-vyädhais-tväm na vetsi-iti bodhitaft /
Muktvadän gurutiänanyo dhanyah präpnoti tat-padam (8)
8. Being taught by a guru thus: "Having lived with the hunters, the sen¬
ses, you do not know yourself," the blessed one, not different |from Siva| at¬
tains that state |of sivahood], having abandoned these |senses|.
Cid-dris'a-ätmani dristyesam tirthvä vrUti-maricikäm /
Labdhvä siva-pada-chäyäm dhyäyet-pahca-aksarirh sudhi/i (9)
9. Having seen Isa |Siva| within oneself through the eye of consciousness,
having crossed the mirage of existence, and having obtained the shade of Si¬
va's state, the wise one should contemplate the five [sacredI syllables.
Sivenaikyam gatah siddhas-tad-adhina-sva-vnttikah /
Mala-mäyä-ädy-asarhsprisjo bhavati sva-anubhütimän (10)
10. Untouched by malam, mäyä, etc., the perfected one — become one
with Siva — is one, who has self-knowledge and has [hisi own activity de¬
pendent on that [Siva|.
Dris'or-darsayiteva-ätmä tasya darsayitä sivah /
Tasmätdasmin parärn bhaktirh kuryäd-ätmopakärake (11)
11 Siva is the guide of this \ätman\ like the ätman is the guide of sight [and
the other sensesi; therefore, supreme devotion should be had to this one [Si¬
va) who is the ätman's aid.
Muktyai präpya satas-tesäm bhajed-vesarh siva-älayam /
Evarhvidyäc-chivaffiäna-bodhesaiva-artha-nirnayam (12)
12. Having resorted to the virtuous ones, one should worship their habit,
which is the dwelling place of Siva, for the sake of liberation; thus one should know the established view of matters Saivite in the Sivajhänabodham.
458 Jayandra Soni
Table of Saiva Siddhänta Categories
pati
ätman pasu
malam päsa
äriava-malam mäyä-malam karma-malam
suddha-mäyä (bin¬
du, kundalini)
1 \ \ \ 1
36 näda 35 bindu 34 sädäkhya 33 mahesvara 32 suddha-vidyä
I
31 suddha-asuddha-mäyä (asuddha-mäyä, mohini)
i \ \ \ \ I
30 käla 29 niyati 28 kalä 27 vidyä 26 räga 25 purusa (puiris)
24 müla-prakriti (asuddha-mäyä, prakriti, guna, citta)
23 buddhi ,
taijasa (sattva)
22 ahankära
vaikärika (rajas)
bhütädi (tamas)
21 manas and
5 jhänendriyas 5 karmendriyas 5 tanmätras
20 s'rotra (hearing) 15 väk (speech)
19 tvak (touch) 14 päda (feet)
18 caksus (sight) 17 rasana (taste) 16 ghräna (smell)
13 päni (hands) 12 päyu (anus) 11 upastha
(genitals)
10 s'abda (sound) 9 spars'a
(touchability) 8 rüpa (form) 7 rasa (tastability) 6 gandha (smell)
5 bhütas
5 äkäsa (ether) 4 väyu (air)
3 tejas (fire) 2 äpa (water)
1 prUhivi (earth)
1 —24: ätma-tattvas (bhogya-khanda) 25—31: vidyä-tattvas (bhojayatri-khatida) 31 —36: siva-tattvas (preraka-khanda)
Ein wenig bekanntes buddhistisches Mahälcävya
Von Mifhael Hahn, Marburg
1. Wenn man die Gattung des indischen Kunstepos (sargabandha) von
seinen ältesten Anfängen bis ins 12. Jh. betrachtet,' dann fällt auf, daß in
der nachklassischen Periode, die sich von Bhäravi bis Sriharsa erstreckt, ins¬
gesamt nur sieben auf Sanskrit abgefaßte Mahäkävyas bekannt und erhalten
sind: das Kirätärjuniya des Bhäravi (ca. 530—550 n. Chr.), das Jänakiha-
raria des Kumäradäsa (ca. 600 n. Chr.), der Rävariavadiia des Bhatti (vor
650 n. Chr.), der Sis'upälavad/ia des Mägha (ca. 700 n. Chr.), der Haravi¬
jaya des Ratnäkara (zwischen 826 und 838 n. Chr. entstanden), der
Kapphinäbfiyudaya des Sivasvämin (ca. 850 n. Chr.) und das Naisadhacarita
des Sriharsa (ca. 1150 n. Chr.). Textlich und inhaltlich gut erschlossen sind
die Werke von Bhäravi, Bha{ti, Mägha und Sriharsa. Zu diesen vier Werken
gibt es jeweils wenigstens einen einheimischen Kommentar, sie sind alle in
moderne Sprachen übersetzt, und die Zahl der ungelösten TextsteUen ist sehr
gering. Die elementare philologische Arbeit scheint also mehr oder weniger
geleistet zu sein.
2. Von den verbleibenden drei Werken ist offensichtlich nur der Haravi¬
jaya des Ratnäkara von seinem Wortlaut her einigermaßen gesichert.^ Vom
Jänakiharana liegt erst seit 20 Jahren eine vollständige Ausgabe vor,' und
durch die Studie von C. R. SwaminathaN'* wissen wir, daß viele Partien die-
' Sriharsas Naisadhacarita wird allgemein als ein vorläufiger Abschluß die¬
ser Gattung betrachtet, auch wenn Mahäkävyas bis in die Gegenwart ge¬
schrieben werden.
2 Ich beziehe mich auf die folgende Ausgabe: Durgäprasäda and KAslili-
NÄTH PÄND|!|URANG Parab: The Haravijaya of Räjänaka Ratnäkara.
With the commentary of Räjänaka Alaka. Bombay 1890. {Kävyamälä.
22.) Nachgedruckt als Bd. 223 der The Kashi Sanskrit Series durch den Chaukhamba Sanskrit Sansthan, Varanasi 1982. Das Buch Haravijayam
of Ratnäkara. Ed. by Goparaju Rama, das S. P. Bhardwaj im Vish-
veshvarand Indological Journal 21 (1983), S. 306, rezensiert hat, konnte ich bisher nicht einsehen und weiß daher nicht, ob es sich um eine unab¬
hängige Neuausgabe auf der Grundlage von neuem Handschriftenmate¬
rial handeh.
' S. Paranavitana and C. E. Godakumbura: The Jänakiharana of
Kumäradäsa. (Colombo:) Government Press Ceylon 1967.
C. R. Swaminathan: Jänakiharana of Kumäradäsa. A Study, Critieal
Text and English Translation of Cantos XVI—XX. Ed. by V. Ragha¬
van. Delhi 1977. XXI, 163, 96, 95 pp.
