Parvata in VP 2.486

[Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan]

In a message dated 2/25/99 10:25:58 AM Central Standard Time,
narayana at HD1.DOT.NET.IN writes:

> You haven't yet. But Sri S.Palaniappan has gone ahead and did it.
>
>  regards,
>
>  sarma.
>
>  At 05:28 AM 2/25/99 PST, you wrote:
>  >>I knew that there is an attempt to hyjack Nagarjuna to tamilnadu when
>  >>Ganesan was posting about Madhura having name Uragapuram.

The mention of uragapuram had nothing to do with nAgArjuna. Independently, I
wanted to discuss the significance of uragapuram which I shall do in a later
posting.

Coming to nAgArjuna, Sarma may not be aware of this, but Andhra historians
know of two nAgArjunas. I plead innocent to the imagined crime of
"hyjacking":-) I am giving below the discussion from "Early History of the
Andhra Country" by Dr. K. Gopalachari, 1976, p.130-131.

"Scholars like Burgess and Dr. J. Ph. Vogel take seriously the Tibetan
tradition preserved by tAranAtha that nAgArjuna, the expounder of the
mAdhyamika philosophy (second century A D.), lived at zrI-parvata. Whilst they
are agreed in identifying it with Hieun-Tsang's Po-lo-mo-lo-ki-li where a
sAtavAhana is said to have quarried a monastery for nAgArjuna, Burgess
identifies them both  with 'zrIzailam' in the Kurnool District, and Dr. J. Ph.
Vogel and the Epigraphy Department with nAharaLLaboDu or nAgArjunikoNDa, a
lofty hill overlooking the kRSNA at the northern end of the plateau. The
chinese pilgrim places Po-lo-mo-lo-ki-li in dakSiNa kOsala in a place 300 li
(50 miles) to the south west of its capital. While speaking of T'o-na-kie-tse-
kia (dhAnyakaTaka where the nAgArjunikoNDa plateau would have lain) he speaks
of neither nAgArjuna nor his monastery. To identify Po-lo-mo-lo-ki-li of the
dakSiNa-kosala, which is placed by Hieun Tsang 1200 li to the north of T'o-na-
kie-tse-kia, with 'zrIparvata' in the Guntur and Kurnool Districts is to go
too wide of the mark. General Cunningham has identified dakSiNa-kosala with
the province of vidarbhA, modern Berar, and its capital with modern Nagpur
AGI, p. 595. This agrees with the Tibetan tradition that nAgArjuna was a
native of vidarbhA (Wassiljeu, Appendix to tAranAtha, pp.301, 303). The
Tibetan tradition that nAgArjuna surrounded the stUpa at dhAnyakaTaka (the
amarAvatI stUpa) with a railing is supported by none of the extant amarAvatI
rail inscriptions of the second and third centuries A.D. N. Dutt has pointed
out (IHQ, Vol. VII, p. 639) that the gaNDavyUha, a work of about the third
century A.D., speaks of dhAnyakara as a great city of dakSiNApatha and a seat
of manjuzri, who lived in an extensive forest and converted a large number of
nAgas and inhabitants of the place, but refers neither to nAgArjuna nor to
zrIparvata."

Since I may be close to or already exceeding the size limit of the post, let
me just say Gopalachari goes on to discuss the second tantric nAGArjuna of the
7th century A.D., who, based on solid inscriptional and textual evidence, was
born near kAJci, educated at nalanda and then came to zrIparvata.

Regards
S. Palaniappan