MH.com Home

Saints & Life History Accounts

Sri Jayatirtha and his mula brindavana has become a dispute between two Madhva mathas and many arguments are being exchanged since 2014. This issue is not as infathomable as Bermuda Triangle or Shangrila city. It only needs a little bit of commonsense, an unfalsified will and an unbiased research. More importantly, this issue demands for the unity of mindsets under the grace of Sri Jayatirtharu himself. I don't think that the future generations shall ever waste their time to dispute for the sake of dispute and there shall come a day on which this issue will be closed on the merits instead of myrid blind faith.

Having said this and after a long spell of silence over Jayatirtha’s mula brindavana, I have been part of an online discussion forum in which I have posed a question Narahari Sumadhwa, the lone online voice of Malkheda, and then posted a reply to it.

It raked up the “Smarana” issue that Malkheda camp always applies to the 18th shloka of TP’s Purva Prabandha.

Also, Chiran Chidambarji, the guru for many members of that online forum, too asked a critical question on my reply.

Hereunder I reproduce the screen shots of the discussion that form the basis of the present article.


This article is an uncommon one as it doesn't exactly fit in to any of the categories listed on this website. But I trust that the readers will find the topic as "historical" as the others that were presented here!


Sanatana Dharma’s grandiose lies in its simplicity and inclusivity.

It not only reveres fellow humans but also the meanest animals, plants and lifeless objects such as hills and rivers!

Sanatana Dharma recognizes the quadrate of Mother, Father, Teacher and the Guest as the most venerable persons in whom the God dwells-in, always!. Amongst these four revered persons, Dharma treats Mother as the personification of unequivocal love and compassion.

In His avatars of Kapila, Rama and Krishna, the SupremeGodhead Vishnu has demonstrated utmost devotion towards mothers. Following His footsteps, Madhva Gurus too have exhibited undeterred devotion and reverence towards their mothers.

This article is a humble obeisance to those Gurus who should be the role models for the new generation to learn and follow.


This is 4th part in the series of the articles published in MadhvaHistory.com on exploring the historical anecdotes of the event connected to the conferment of 'Sripadaraya' title on Sri Lakshminarayana Tirtha of Mulbagal Matha.

In the previous articles, I have made an argument against a particular story propagated by some sections of Maadhvas that Sri Raghunatha Tirtha conferred the title of 'Sripadaraya' to Lakshminarayana Tirtha of Mulbagal Matha. In order to prove that this story is historically wrong, I have presented few inscriptions, archeological evidences, scriptural references (from contemporary sources of Sripadaraya) etc. and have established the fact that the title has been earned by Lakshminarayana Tirtha after being felicitated by Saluva Narasimha of Vijayanagara Empire and not through an appreciation passed by another Saint.

Subsequent to the publishing of these articles, I had received certain comments and responses which have raised additional questions about the verasity of the facts presented by me. Now, I am herewith producing fresh archeological and scriptural database that are either predates Sripadaraya or of post-date in nature.


When I wrote an article on “Who gave the title Sripadaraja to Sri Lakshmi Narayana Tirtha?”, I have got a mixed bag of reactions and responses. Some of them are noteworthy and some were driving the same old unsubstantiated rhetoric of “We gave the title!”

Soon after I have posted the link of this article in Madhva Yahoo groups in which I am a member, in one of the groups there came a response with a link to this article. The author of this article posed some 22 questions but most of which have been created to help the writer to run a script that has certain prejudged inputs.

As in the basic tenets of Law & Justice that allow every litigant to offer their version of the story, all the accounts including those faux pas myths must be attended to with equanimity.

Now, let me dissect the old rhetoric of “We gave the title!” and show its hollowness.