The Caritas as a Continuation of an Oral (Historical) Tradition: Analysis of Two Passages from Bhusana and Daityari

What are the exact words used for ‘holy men’ in the passage above? Are they identical in meaning to mahantas and mahajanas in Daityari’s passage? The words ‘holy men’ appear there too: ‘the holy men discuss [this tale] in various ways [versions].’

Could the meaning of the epithet srimanta, in the context of the sentence above, be made more clear?

It is interesting to note that, as in Daityari, the caritakara has referred to an oral tradition of the carita. Daityari refers to ‘holy men’ discussing the Guru’s tale (katha) in ‘various ways.’ So also, Bhusana says: ‘all the great pandits used to recount this tale to others joyfully.’ A lively tradition is indicated.

Both the caritakaras—Daityari and Bhusana—were, it seems, witness to this oral tradition. Both are now going to put facts, hitherto only transmitted orally, into writing. Daityari says that he has—possibly at the instance of some of the participants of these carita sessions (‘carrying out their word’) themselves—put it down in the same form in which he has heard it from the Mahantas. This would further imply that either Daityari himself was also a participant—as a listener—in this oral tradition or that he was provided with the facts relating to the Saint’s life, recounted at these carita sessions, by other participants [senior to him]. It should be noted, however, that Daityari does not say that he was ordered—in the literal sense of the term—to compile a (written) carita by any particular Mahanta. He only says that he was asked [possibly requested] by some Mahajanas to put the tale (katha) to verse. At this point, at least, he does not name any person.

In the case of Bhusana, there is a fond reminiscence of the oral tradition. ‘Previously’, says Bhusana, ‘all the great pandits used to recount this tale to others joyfully’. But all of them have reached the abode of vaikuntha and now, ‘who recounts these tales (kathā)?’ We should note that, unlike Daityari (in the passage in question), Bhusana is not-at least in this passage-carrying out the word of the Mahajanas. His motivation seems to be based purely on his own inner urge to recount—record, rather—the life and deeds of the Guru before these facts fade away from the devotees’ collective memory. Unlike Daityari, he does not refer to ‘holy men’ [still] discussing the tale in ‘various ways.’ Nor is there any statement to the effect that he [himself] has ‘heard it from the Mahantas.’ Instead there is commitment that he, the caritakara, will put down ‘whatever comes to mind’ by the grace of the ‘holy men’. 

From these two passages, it would be correct, perhaps, to view the (written) carita as a particular recension of the original, oral, carita tradition.

The Caritakara's Salutation: Prefatory Lines from Bhusana Dvija's Carita

The manuscript begins with salutations to Sankaradeva and Krsna (sri sankarāya namah and sri krsnāya namah).

The caritakāra, first paying obeisance at the feet of Krsna, declares that incarnating Himself as Sankara, it is Lord Hari Who propagated His own guna, karma and yasa, listening to which the people survive this unsurvivable (dustara) world in the age of kali. The carita of Sri Sankara is the nemesis of evil (pāpa antaka), and Bhusana, foolish and devoid of jnāna, is going to narrate it in metrical form (pada bandhe). Descending into this world, the Saint exhibited his various divine sports (kridā) to the people. He composed the Bhāgavata in verses and [now] even the ‘lowest of the low’ (antyajas), reading it and understanding its meaning, hold Sankara as their guru and worship Mādhava. All people have achieved happiness by taking to devotion to Lord Hari (hari-bhakti) and it is on account of this that the Saint has come to be known as Srimanta Sankara. Whoever has the capacity (sakati) to narrate in full all the details relating to his qualities (guna) and glory (mahimā)? The caritakāra, remembering the favor of Krsna, will put down whatever comes to mind by the grace of the holy men. Previously, all the great pandits used to recount this tale to others joyfully. But, with time’s passage, all of them have reached the abode of vaikuntha and now, who recounts these tales (kathā)? Therefore, this necessity has fallen on the caritakāra.

The Source and Motivation of the Caritakara: Analysis of a Passage from Daityari

Sometimes in the middle of the carita, the biographer mentions the motivation behind his undertaking to write about the Saints. For instance, Daityari (pp. 154):

Listen, O saintly people! Folding my hands, I say these words to you; forgive me for any chronological fault that might occur.

If something deviates, then do not ascribe any fault to me, know that the holy men discuss [this tale] in various ways [versions].

I have put it down in the same form in which I have heard from the Mahantas, do not find fault with me.

And if anything remains [to be told], then also do not criticize me; you all discuss it in the proper manner yourselves.

Some Mahajanas said to me: “You inscribe the facts of the two Mahapurusas.”

Some [other] Mahajanas joyfully said,

“You put it in verse so that it is great to read.”

Carrying out their word, I am rendering [this tale] in verse-form; please do not find fault with me on this, with folded hands I say.

Thinking of one’s own welfare, O saintly men, keep repeating the name of Madhava and Sankara at regular intervals.

From passages such as these, it appears that the caritas such as the one referred to above were written by the biographers (caritakaras) at the request of the Mahajanas. Further, the source of the caritakara was the Mahanta. Daityari clearly mentions that he has written whatever he has heard from the 'Mahantas' mouth' (mahantara mukhe). The facts relating to the two Mahapurusas (Sankaradeva and Madhavadeva) are referred to simply as katha.

One more fact which emerges from the passage is that the caritakara seems to acknowledge the presence of multiple versions of the katha. That is what seems to be suggested when Daityari says that 'the holy men discuss in various ways' (nanana prakare jana carcce sadhu loka). The expression nanana prakare taken literally would mean 'various ways' of recounting the biography of the Saints. But the context seems to suggest 'various versions'.

What is the meaning of the words mahajana and mahanta in the passage above? Are these terms encountered frequently in the literature? In what sense are these terms employed in the passage in question? Do they refer to some specific personalities?

Sankaradeva Preached 'kevala bhakti'

Sankaradeva preached kevala bhakti-pure, exclusive devotion (Bhusana, pp. 213; 866)-discarding other forms of bhakti. It seemed to indicate a departure from those forms of bhakti which were largely based on the ceremonial worship (puja) [of idols (murtti) of the deity]. It was a source of great consternation among the ritualists (dharmi). 

At this point, a discussion of the major forms of worship might help to clarify matters. Comparison may be made, for instance, between the traditional forms of 'Vaisnava' worship through pujas, etc.which seemed to exist in some form even prior to Sankaradeva, and the bhaktic redefinition of the nature of the relationship between man and God , touching upon the immanent aspect, which formed the cornerstone of Sankaradeva's philosophy of Eka-Sarana.