Author: ravi rajagopalan

History, Raga

Andhali – An Enigma

Andhali – An enigma – Ravi Rajagopalan

Andhali is an old raga with a textual tradition which is now virtually extinct. Its close cousins, Purnachandrika and the much latter born Janaranjani have usurped much of its musical material. We have compositions of both Tyagaraja and Dikshitar in this raga. There is an element of a controversy, nay a puzzle about the nativity of this raga, which we will see while we look at the raga lakshana of this raga. For this blog post I shall use the Dikshitar composition ‘Brihannayaki Varadayaki’ as the benchmark to understand this raga.


There have been several writers of musicological texts since 10th century AD. Vidyaranya, Parsvadeva, Sarangadeva, Pundarikavittala,Ramamatya, Somanatha and others. Each one of them has captured the snap shot of the musical milieu as it existed during their times, in their works. Every one of these illustrious authors took a step forward for us in understanding the science of melody and harmonics and of instruments and voice. They drafted the technical aspect of musicology or the science of intonation & svarasthanas on one hand and the raga lakshanas of ragas, gramas, jaatis on the other. Many of the melodies that they have dealt with have long since died. It has also become irrelevant for us to investigate those melodies for, the ever dynamic system of ours has spawned newer melodies in their place. At best a discussion of those ancient melodies serves to understand history but nothing beyond.

However from a raga lakshana angle and formulation of ragas perspective, especially for the extant/present day ragas, 3 musicological works produced during the 16th & 17th centuries remain relevant to us even today. They can be labeled as the ‘Early Triad” and are:

  1. The Caturdandi Prakasika of Venkatamakhin(circa 1620)
  2. Raga Lakshanamu by King Shahaji ( circa 1700)
  3. Sangita Saramruta (1735)by King Tulaja

These 3 works remain till date, a constant source of reference for us in understanding the ragas that existed in the run up to the Trinity’s time period. They deal with many a raga, which are still with us today either in practice or atleast in text. These 3 works offer us clues and a surfeit of musical material to help us understand the musical transformation that the Trinity undertook in the period of 1765-1835. They also offer us assistance in terms of assessing the musical worth of 3 other subsequent musical works or the “Latter Triad” that came about in the period of 1800-1910, namely:

  1. The Anubanda to the Caturdandi Prakashika (circa1750)
  2. The Sangraha Cudamani of Govinda ( Late 18th century-Early 19th century or possibly late 19th century according to scholars)
  3. The Sangita Sampradaya Pradarshini of Subbarama Dikshitar (1904)

The authorship as well as the timelines of works 1 and 2 above of the ‘Latter Triad’, is a subject matter of dispute and controversy. Additionally the formulation of the heptatonic system and janaka/janya relationship amongst melas/ragas by Sangraha Cudamani through the “Kangi-Priya” or the Kanakangi- Ratnangi scheme and its allied text, “The Meladhikaralakshana” has been a subject of debate & controversy. Be that as it may, the point remains & is undeniable that all these works have had a remarkable & profound impact on the world of music as we see/hear today.

So whenever we get to discuss a raga especially one which the trinity have handled, we need to reach out the Early Triad as these texts shaped up the musical acumen of the trinity and constituted perhaps the very basis of their learning.


Andhali is a raga of antiquity which probably went by the name of Andol or Andola prior to the times of Ramamatya (1550). Ramamatya was the first to capture it in its current name as a raga belonging to the Sriraga mela in his Svaramelakalanidhi. The next mention of Andhali is by Venkatamakhi in the Caturdandi Prakashika. Again Venkatamakhi places Andhali under the Sriraga mela. Next Tulaja in his Saramruta places it under Kambhoji mela. This is carried forward by the Anubandha to the CDP as well as Subbarama Dikshitar(SD) who classify it as a janya raga under the Kedaragaula mela. We have a kriti of Muthusvami Dikshitar as notated in the SSP, “Brihannayaki Varadayaki”. Tyagaraja also seems to have a kriti in triputa tala, “Abhimanamu ledemi” in this raga which is not in currency. There are no other available compositions in this raga.


Pre 1700 :Let’s look at Andhali’s raga lakshana through the eyes of Venkatamakhi first. According to him¹:

  1. Andhali has pancama as its graha svara and is also its nyasa and amsa
  2. Its an audava raga of the Sriraga mela

Circa 1735: Tulaja in his Saramruta takes a different view¹:

  1. Its is a shadhava raga, dhaivata varjya of the Kambhoji mela
  2. Shadja is its graham and is sung in the evenings
  3. RGMR is it key murccana
  4. Given Tulaja’s murccanas, the nominal arohana/avarohana is SRMPNS/SNPMRGMRS

Circa 1750 – Muddu Venkatamakhi creates the Anubandha² and also composes the lakshana gitam for Andhali. At this juncture it is worth noting that there is evidence on hand that Anubandha and the Kanakambari list is clearly latter to Tulaja’s Saramruta³. The raga Andhali is mentioned along with Devakriya and others as an upanga janya in the Kedaragaula raganga gitam, which is given in the SSP, attributed to Venkatamakhi himself by Subbarama Dikshitar. Needless to say that the gitam based on facts is ascribable only to Muddu Venkatamakhi. His gitam captures the following raga murccanas²:

  1. RGMRS
  3. rmgrsN
  4. MPNPs

Dikshitar’s Interpretation:

Circa 1800 and Dikshitar constructs his ‘Brihannayaki Varadayaki’ . From Subbarama Dikshitar’s notation² we see the following:

  1. The nominal arohana avarohana that Dikshitar employs is SRMPNS/SNPMRGMRS under Kedaragaula.
  2. Nishada and Gandhara are adorned with nokku type of gamaka, Madhyama is adorned with kampita and jaarus are encountered as in PR, R/M and MR.
  3. PM-RGMR is a motif that is that is repeatedly emphasized by Dikshitar.
  4. The raga is purvanga centric and spans from the mandhara nishada till tara madhyama.
  5. Ri seems to be the jiva svara and Dikshitar commences both the pallavi and the anupallavi/samshti carana section with Rishaba.
  6. His raga conception is encapsulated in the pithy cittasvara section which gives the essence of his conception of the raga.

Very clearly one can see that the conception of Andhali by Dikshitar is in line with the raga lakshana as laid down by Tulaja in his Saramrutha.

Circa 1900 – Subbarama Dikshitar composes the Sancari for this old raga². Needless to say he follows Dikshitar in emphasizing PM-RGMR and also reaches till mandhara pancama in one place. Subbarama Dikshitar’s raga lakshana commentary implies that SRGM and MGRS are allowed, but as one can see Dikshitar refrains from using these krama murccanas.The gitam of Muddu Venkatamakhi, the Dikshitar kriti and the sancari all find place in the magnum opus Sangita Sampradaya Pradarshini.


From Venkatamakhi on to Tulaja & Muddu Venkatamakhi and to Muthusvami Dikshitar & Subbarama Dikshitar we see the following two transforms taking place:

  1. Andhali moves from Sriraga mela to Kambhoji/Kedaragaula mela
  2. The graha svara is shifted from pancama to shadja and back to pancama.

In other words, during the late 16th century /early 17th century the gandhara of Andhali morphs from sadharana to antara gandhara, making this raga move from the Sriraga clan to the Kedaragaula clan. This transformation is captured by the 3 compositions that one finds in the SSP.

Subbarama Dikshitar summarizes the raga lakshana for our benefit, crisply² :

  1. A shadava raga, dhaivata varjya
  2. Pancama is graham and can be sung at all times
  3. On the strength of the (Muddu)Venkatamakhi shloka, SD gives a krama murccana arohana/avarohana as SRGMPNS/SNPMGRS under Kedaragaula mela However Muthusvami Dikshitar prefers SRMPNS/SNPMRGMRS, which Subbarama Dikshitar highlights in his explanatory notes.
  4. The key murccanas include pnSRGMR and sNPMRGMR. One is constrained to note that the murccana SRGMR is suggestive of Janaranjani and SNPMRGMR suggest Purnachandrika¹ .
  5. The key motif for Andhali is RGMR as Dikshitar illustrates in his kriti. Prof SR Janakiraman says that the gandhara found in the phrase RGaMR is a dheerga gandhara¹ . The true import of this statement will become obvious when we discuss the renditions in the section below.

Before we move to the composition and its renditions, we can have a quick look at the lakshana of this raga as found in the Sangraha Cudamani ¹ .It gives the arohana/avarohana as SRMPNS/SNPMRGMRS, which tallies with the Dikshitar conception. However the lakshana shloka curiously states that the dhaivatha of this raga is suddha dhaivatha, when there is no dhaivatha to be found in the raga murccana! Obviously it looks like a transcribing error but nonetheless it is one of the several such issues that one faces with the Sangraha Cudamani.


Thus the Andhali of today is defined and survives through the Dikshitar composition which is modeled in the so called samashti carana format. Composed by Dikshitar on Goddess Brihannayaki at Tanjore, the consort of Lord Brihadeesvara the kriti carries both the raga mudra as well as his colophon ‘guruguha’. The contrasting usage of the word ‘Ahanta’ can be seen in the lyrics ‘Ahantaa svarupini”, in this composition and “Ahantadi rahitam” found in “Mahaganapatim vande” in Todi. The raga name ‘Andhali’ as used in the lyric as “Andhaali harana carana”is used to mean ‘ignorance’. The cittasvara encompasses the entire raga lakshana in a nutshell.

‘Brihannayaki Varadayaki’ is found notated in the following publications ⁴ :

  • Subbarama Dikshitar’s Sangita Sampradaya Pradarshini (1904)
  • Tatchur Singaracharya’s Gayakaparijatamu(1877 & 1927)
  • K V Srinivasa Iyengar’s Gana Bhaskaramu(1934)
  • Dikshita Keertanai Prakashikai of Tiruppamburam Natarajasundaram Pillai(1936)
  • Vina Sundaram Iyer’s Dikshitar Kirtana Mala ( series from 1941)
  • Chinnasvami Mudaliar’s Oriental Music in Staff Notation (1892-96)
  • Veenai Ananthakrishna Iyer’s Ganamanjusha(1934)
  • Rangaramanuja Iyengar’s Kritimani Malai Vol V(1963)


We have 2 extant renditions of this rare Dikshitar composition and both are from famous scions belonging two different sishya paramparas of Muthusvami Dikshitar.

  1. The first one is by Smt Brinda from the Muthusvami Dikshitar Bi-Centenary year Concert broadcast by AIR originally in the year 1975 where she is accompanied by her daughter Vegavauhini Vijayaraghavan. Her version/patha traces back to Sathanur Panchanada Iyer and to Suddhamaddalam Tambiappan Pillai the disciple of Muthusvami Dikshitar himself.
  2. The second is by ‘Dikshitarini’ Kalpagam Svaminathan who traces her patantharam directly to Ambi Dikshitar himself via Justice T L Venkatarama Iyer & Calcutta Ananthakrishna Iyer. Her rendition is from a chamber recital in 2007 where she is accompanied by Vid Tanjore Kumar on the Mridangam and is supported on the veena by her disciple Vid Ramakrishnan.


Smt Brinda renders “Brihannayaki”

Smt Brinda renders the kriti in a steady vilambakala typical of Dikshitar’s compositions. A number of features of her rendition invite our attention:

  1. She starts the kriti with M…P rather than R…P, which is given in the Sangita Sampradaya Pradarshini.
  2. Secondly, her intonation of the gandhara svara portions in the composition is (sadharana gandharam) G2 rather than G3.
  3. The gandhara is shaken much with the kampita gamaka and the sequence of G2M1R2S impart the color of Kanada to Andhali. The words Brihannayaki and sahasradala are examples where the G2 is seen conspicuously along with the Kanada flavor.
  4. The cittasvara as given for this composition in the SSP is not rendered by Smt Brinda.

It’s worth reiterating here that Venkatamakhi in his CDP assigns Andhali to the Sriraga mela. Its only Muddu Venkatamakhi and Tulaja who record that Andhali belongs to the Kedaragaula/Kambhoji mela. One is forced to consider the possibility of the composition having been taught with the raga being in the Sriraga mela itself given the fidelity to patantharam that the Dhanammal family is justly known for. Is it the Andhali of Venkatamakhi, which Dikshitar himself composed in? Did he want to follow the grand patriarch rather than his (great) grandson Muddu Venkatamakhi? We do not know. All that we know for sure is on the authority of Muddu Venkatamakhin’s lakshana gitam and the Dikshitar’s kriti as well Subbarama Dikshitar places Andhali under the Kedaragaula mela.

Interestingly this kriti is notated by Sri Tiruppamburam Natarajasundaram Pillai (TNS) in the Dikshita Kirtanai Prakashikai⁴ . Sri TNS is a disciple of Sathanur Pancanada Iyer as well. An examination of the notation therein holds out a clue to us in assessing the gandhara intonation.

  1. In his notation Sri TNS clearly gives the mela for this raga/kriti as Kedaragaula (28th mela) and uses the notation sign for antara gandhara (G3) only.
  2. The key difference between his notation on one hand and SSP’s notation on the other is that Sri TNS gives the kampita gamaka as an adornment for G3 which is not given in the SSP. On the contrary the adornment for G3 by SD is nokku in the SSP
  3. Sri TNS also gives the cittasvara for this composition as given by Subbarama Dikshitar.

It’s thus obvious that the kampita gamaka that is seen in the gandhara of Smt Brinda’s rendition is reflected in the notation seen in the DKP.Apparently its is on the strength of this perhaps that Prof SRJ avers that the gandhara is ‘dheerga’. It needs to be pointed out that the SSP does not make any mention of this ‘dheerga’gandhara. The notation of this composition by both TNS and SD clearly point to only usage of G3. The G2 that one gets to hear is apparently a patanthara variation. Because of the influence of Kanada, the G3M1R motif of Andhali may have morphed to G2M1R the Kanada ang is a surmise one can make. Thus one is unable to justify this version of Andhali uing G2.

Smt Kalpagam Svaminathan renders “Brihannayaki”

Vid Kalpagam Svaminathan renders Brihannayaki, in a faster kalapramana in comparison to Smt Brinda’s version. Her version is very close to the notation as seen in SSP. The gandhara is G3 and is very prominent as one can hear in the cittasvara section as well. There is no trace of the wide oscillation on the gandhara, which one gets to see in Smt Brinda’s version. Both in the sahitya and in the cittasvara, I invite attention to the sequence R/M ( the madhayama being oscillated wih the kampita gamaka (as in Brah (R)/madhi(M)) and also in the cittasvara section. These are the embellishments that one needs to observe & render and indeed goes to show the greatness of the performer and in the instant case it is no wonder Musiri Subramanya Iyer coined the epithet of ‘Dikshitarini’ for her. Also it needs to go on record that Smt Kalpagam Svaminathan has been the only vidvan who has been rendering this rare composition frequently in concerts these days.

I have also heard a vocal rendition of this composition from another musician Vidvan Radhakrishnan who learnt it from Kaliddaikurichi Ramalinga Bhagavathar another Dikshitar sishya parampara member. The patantharam of the composition as well as the kalapramana was the same as that of Smt.Kalpagam Svaminathan.


Given the variation in the treatment of the gandhara in this kriti of Dikshitar, it is worth examining some precedents and also analyze the fact of existence of such variations as well.

  1. It goes without saying that the values of the different svarasathanas/srutis have been generalized across the board with the advent of the Melakartha system. Many of the older ragas & scales which were anterior to the current Melakartha system will/do not have these so called ‘normalized’ sruti value for some of its svaras. For example the Rishabha of Gaula is ekasruti and not dvisruti as is applicable to Malavagaula’s generic Ri. Is Andhali’s Gandhara a variant to be sung with a lower sruti value?
  2. The value of the G3 in Sahana is another case in the point. Subbarama Dikshitar classifies Sahana under Sriraga mela and thus Sahana should have predominantly G2 with G3 also occurring occasionally as per his raga lakshana. Over a period of time, the gandhara of Sahana has morphed. Today Sahana is placed under the Kedaragaula mela with the gandhara being ‘only’ G3. In fact some of the practitioners as well as musicologists strongly believe that Sahana’s gandhara is neither G2 nor G3 per se but something in between, the so called tri-shanku gandhara!
  3. The G2/G3 of Sahana as well as the fact that Sahana has the GMR has an interesting point of comparison with Andhali as Sahana also has moved from being under the Sriraga mela to Kedaragaula mela. While the Sahana gandhara is termed ‘trishanku’, Prof SRJ terms the gandhara of Andhali as a ‘dheerga’ version.The gandhara intoned by Smt.Brinda ‘may’ be a version of this. Or it can also be theorized that this Andhali ( with G2) is an archaic version. Suffice to state that we do not have any textual evidence to advance this hypothesis.
  4. The deviation that one notices in versions especially as between authentic sishya paramparas needs to be analyzed and dealt with carefully. These variations or interpretations have come to us via an authentic lineage and should not be just dismissed in a cavalier fashion. These instances need to be differentiated from instances , where contrary to established raga lakshana as obvious from texts as well as authentic oral traditions, ragas of compositions have been short changed or raga lakshana itself changed, inflicting much damage to our musical fabric. Kritis & the ragas thereof composed by Tyagaraja as well as Dikshitar have been subject to such changes and in the absence of a reliable mechanism to capture orally/textually, authentic patantharams, we have issues in dealing with these changes.
  5. In the instant case given the facts on hand, one can observe with certainity that the version of Andhali & the kriti by Smt Kalpagam Svaminathan is aligned to the raga lakshana as seen in the Saramrutha and in line with the notation in the SSP.

Let me hasten to add that to comment on the music of these great masters would be construed as impudence. Readers may be rest assured that observations herein have been made in good faith in furtherance of the sole objective to understand our music better. Nothing more and again if there are additional facts or points that need consideration, do let know so that they can be taken in the right perspective.


In summary, the raga lakshana of Andhali is encapsulated by the Dikshitar composition and the cittasvara as notated by Subbarama Dikshitar. The operative arohana and avarohana murccana is SRMPNS/SNPMRGMRS with repeated use of the motif RG3MRS. The raga is almost extinct today in the popular concert platform. One hopes that Andhali would get some air-time atleast as a filler in recitals, going forward. and performers should render this Dikshitar composition with its elegant cittasvara as well.

Tailpiece: There is a rendition of the Tyagaraja composition in Andhali, “Abhimanamu ledemi” which I did hear. The raga lakshana closely mapped to the one found in the Dikshitar composition as played by Smt Kalpagam Svaminathan, without any flavor of Kanada. Given the antiquity of the raga, Tyagaraja could have definitely composed in this raga. However in the absence of details as to authenticity of the kriti, patantharam of the said version and also the notation of the said composition, I am refraining from posting any further observations. I would greatly appreciate further inputs from readers of this blog in this regard.


  1. Sangita Kalanidhi T V Subba Rao & Dr.S R Janakiraman(1993) – “Ragas of the Sangita Saramruta by King Tulaja of Tanjore” – First Edition- Published by The Music Academy, Madras
  2. Subbarama Dikshitar (1904) – Sangeetha Sampradaya Pradarshini – Published in Tamil by the Music Academy
  3. V Raghavan (1941) – “Venkatamakhin and his 72 Melas” – Journal of the Music Academy Vol XII Pages 67-79
  4. Tiruppamburam Natarajasundaram Pillai(1936)- ‘Dikshita Kirtanai Prakashikai’- Part 1 ( Tamil)
  5. Dr V Raghavan(1975) – Muttuswami Dikshitar – Special Bicentenary Number – National Center for Performing Arts- Quarterly Journal – Vol IV Number 3 September 1975

Raga Lakshana – Vamsavati – A Sequel

Raga Lakshana – Vamsavati – A Sequel – Ravi Rajagopalan


Since the original post and the feedbacks that were received, an update to the post had become imperative. This sequel is intended to cover 3 areas:

  1. Update the discography by providing audio links to the renditions, to illustrate raga lakshana as found in the Dikshitar kriti “Bhaktavatsalam”
  2. Consider one other rendition, that of “Bhaktavatsalam” by Vid Kalpagam Svaminathan, to complete the analysis.
  3. Discuss in brief the raga lakshana of 2 ragas allied to Vamsavati, namely Mandhari and Vijayavasantam.

Audio Links:

  1. Here is the link to the Semmangudi Srinivasa Iyer’s rendition: Bhaktavatsalam – SSI .
  2. Here is the link to the rendering of the same composition by a lady duet (not by Lalitha Sivakumar as the label/link says), probably the Mambalam Sisters: Bakthavatsalam – Duet .
  3. Here is the link to the rendition of Vid. Kalpagam Svaminathan: Bhaktavatsalam – Vamsavati -KSw
  4. Here is the link to the rendition of the other Vamsavati kriti of Dikshitar, “Vamsavati Sivyuvati” by Vid Kalpagam Svaminathan: Vamsavati – Sivayuvati – KSw


Since the original blog post, I have heard the rendering of “Baktavatsalam” by Vid. Kalpagam Svaminathan. Her rendering closely follows the notation in the SSP. I invite the attention to pR1S that she emphasizes as in the notation, which is the motif that Dikshitar has employed in his Vamsavati. She intones the D3N3 in all the 3 places. The intonation is similar to the one found in her rendition of the other Vamsavati kriti “Vamsavati Sivayuvati”. One other observation is that in some places where PNS is notated in SSP, one hears PNDNS (as in the place paakashasa naadi).

I also invite the attention to the D3N3 intonation ( the lyric “vataka”) in the kriti rendered by the lady duet in the recording, around the madhyamkala portion in the carana, as in “…Sushobito utpala vataka sthitam suramaya…..”,which I believe is fairly close to the way in which it can be rendered to bring out the SND/NS which is notated for Vamsavati. The depth and extent of intonation, the interpretation of the notation or how it was taught/learnt (the patantharam in other words) are relevant factors, which makes this exercise of determining D3N3 intonation very subjective.

That said, the most relevant factor in the intonation of D3 in succession to N3 “adequately”, is melody and aesthetics. From an acoustic/aural perspective, the D3 sruti occupies the level of 9/5, with the Madhya shadja at 1, pancama at 1.5 and tara shadja at 2. In fact Prof N S Ramachandran says that with shadja at 256 vibrations per sec, D3 would be at 474 Hz.1 or 50/27 (not 9/5) for Naganandhini mela¹. Let’s consider the scenario where the vocalist prepares to execute the sND/Ns sancara. He starts off at the tara shadja(factor 2 or 512 Hz) and then “jump” to N3(15/8 or about 480 Hz). Now from N3 position the short downward journey to D3 (460 Hz) is to be executed via the erakka jaaru or the downward glide. This is not a “jump” but a downward glide & so all the microtones in that band 480Hz-460Hz should be heard when one executes the N3D3 and then rise back to the N3 sruti and then on to tara shadja.Needless to say the 480Hz-460Hz jaaru is the key component which has to be rendered in an aurally aesthetic manner. Thus the intonation of D3 will be weak if the drop in frequency from N3 level is small /inadequate to touch the D3 sruti zone (around the 460Hz) or where the vidvan jumps over to the D2 sruti level to gloss it over.

So the moot point is how strong or adequate should the intonation be & that is where subjective’ness steps in. In that context we can discuss a number of other ragas which use the D3N3 combination, but that can wait for now. In this blog post sequel, let’s quickly look at 2 melodically allied ragas of Vamsavati, both of them being much younger to Vamsavati in our music.




This raga can be said to be a creation of Tyagaraja vide his ekaika composition “Nee Cittamu”. However no mention of this raga is found in the Sangraha Cudamani. The raga and the kriti can be found from the books of S.Parthasarathy of the Tillaisthanam school of Tyagaraja’s disciples² who give its arohana and avarohana as follows:

Aro :S P M2 P D3 N3 S

Avaro: S N3 D3 N3 P M2 G3 S

However Nadamuni Pandita³ gives its Arohana and Avarohana, slightly differently as:

Aro: S M2 P D3 N3 S

Avaro: S N3 D3 P M2 G3 S

Under the sampurna mela scheme, Vijayavasantam is placed as an upanga janya under the 54th Mela Vishvambari. It’s worth noting here that the avrohana murccanas SN3D3P and SN3D3N3P will be melodically very different. The Tyagaraja composition as per the Tillaistanam sishya parampara has predominantly SN3D3N3 and D3N3S prayogas. Incidentally, one can also observe that there are patantharams/version of the composition which do not use D3. Devoid of D3 this raga will sound like Amritavarshini. The jeevasvaras of this raga are M2, D3 and N3.

There is apparently another composition, “Kamalambike” in this raga by Sri N S Ramachandran set to rupaka tala.


I am venturing to add this section for Vijayavasantam as it sports the D3N3 combination and provides us an opportunity to understand the svarupa of this raga through the kriti of Tyagaraja. I have perused 2 available renditions of this composition.

  1. First is an excerpt of a Lec Dem by Prof S R Janakiraman on raga lakshana and a clip of his rendition of the Tyagaraja composition “Nee cittamu”.
  2. Second is the rendering of the same kriti by Vidvan Madurai G S Mani . The details of this recording are not available.

First is the demonstration of the raga itself by Prof S R Janakiraman. He has in the recent past done a number of Lec-dems on the Ekakriti ragas of Tyagaraja, including the latest one in the Music Academy during Season 2008. An album, recording one of his Lec-Dem for posterity is commercially available with his pithy analysis⁴. His delineation of the lakshana of Vijayavasantam and his rendering of “Nee Cittamu” is available therein.

In the first clip, Prof SRJ outlines the contours of Vijayavasantam here : Vijayavasantham – Ragalakshana -Prof SRJ

I invite attention to the intonation of D3N3S and that of the D3 svara in the murccana SN3D3N3S by Prof SRJ. There can be no better illustration of how D3 needs to be intoned in succession with N3, other than this.Prof SRJ follows up with the kriti rendition. Here is the link for the clip, with the rendition of the pallavi of the composition of Tyagaraja : Nee Cittamu – Excerpt – Prof SRJ

We end this section with the rendition of the same kriti by Vidvan Madurai G S Mani, who is usually known for his no holds barred, zestful rendering of vivadi ragas. Here is the link to the Vidvan Madurai G S Mani rendition of kriti: Nee Cittamu – GS Mani.

Surprisingly his version is devoid of D3 and is much less colorful than the effervescent D3 flavored version of Prof SRJ. As pointed out earlier, shades of Amrutavarshini show up in the absence of D3.

Tailpiece : This Vijayavasantham kriti of Tyagaraja finds place in the one of the oldest, professionally recorded gramophone disc dating back to 1913 . An artiste by name Ms Godaveri ( from Salem, probably the third or fourth Indian lady to have her voice recorded, the first one being the legendary Gauhar Jan) has recorded this along with other kritis such as Paridanamichite(Bilahari), Ennadu Jutano ( Kalavati) and Cetah Sri Balakrishnam (Dvijavanti). If somebody can get hold of a copy of this recording, let me know!

The Vamsavati kriti of Dikshitar has been rendered in the past by Sangita Kalanidhi T L Venkatarama Iyer and also by his disciple and Sangita Kalanidhi B Rajam Iyer in the Music Academy as a part of the Experts Committee lecture demonstrations. I would be grateful if somebody can share the recording if they have it.


We consider Mandhari as an allied raga for the simple fact that if D3 is not intoned or avoided totally in Vamsavati it “may” morph into Mandhari.

Mandhari is another raga without a textual tradition. It is known to us for the first time through the composition “Paraloka Bhayamu” of Tyagaraja.The origins of this raga seems shrouded in mystery. As per books published during the early 20th century, the raga for this composition (Paraloka Bhayamu) is given as Yamuna ( Yamunakalyani). K V Srinivasa Iyengar in his preface to his own publication “Tyagaraja Hrudayam” (1922) alludes to this & bemoans saying that the valuable compositions {of Tyagaraja} have been mutilated beyond recognition by the musicians and singers of South India. Other glaring instances of Tyagaraja’s compositions getting short changed of their original ragas include “Marubalka” ( originally Abheri as per books while the current/popular version is in Sriranjani) and “Sujana Jeevana” ( Nattakurinji as per books while the extant version is in Khamas)! ⁵

Leaving aside the controversy, which itself merits a seperate blog post, suffice to say “Paraloka Bhaya” is currently rendered in Mandhari. The raga is considered to be the janya of Kamavardhani, the 51st mela by musicologists with the following arohana/avarohana⁶.

Aro: S R1 G3 M2 P N3* S

Avaro: S N3* P M2 G3 R1 S

*-There were some differences of opinion on the nishada in this raga. Some were of the opinion that Kaishiki nishada(N2) ought to be employed and this raga to be considered as a janya of Namanarayani(50th melakarta). The Experts Committee of the Music Academy has however decided that the nishada is only kakali nishada (N3) and that this ought to be reckoned as a janya of the 51st mela⁶.

The svaras R,G,M,N – provide raga chaya and are mRdu kampita swaras. The raga has a range from mandhra sthayi panchama to tara sthayi prati madhyama. Mandhari is considered a madhyama kala pradhana raga where Jantai, dhAtu, pratyAhata and Ahata prayogas abound.In the phrases P N3 P M2 and M2 N3 P M2 the kakali nishada “may be” softened but in prayogas like p n N S and in s n N P there is no scope for nishada to sound lowered⁶.

Compositions in the raga:

We have a tana varna each from Patnam Subramanya Iyer and Mysore Vasudevacar. Apart from the Tyagaraja Kriti “Paraloka Bhaya” we have “Ninnu jeppa ” and “Endukitu capalamu”, both of Patnam. Harikesanallur Muthiah Bagavathar has composed “EnnALu tirigedanu”, “Atishaya Varaprasadhini” and “Anagham Akhilanda nayakam” in Mandhari.

Addendum:  Izuppur(Illupur) Ponnusvami Pillai – vocalist & violinist of the late 19th century & composer of the Adi tala tana varnam ‘Taruni Ninu pasi” in Kambhoji, has composed a kriti in Mandhari – “Sri Sugunakara Seetamanohara” in tisra rupakam. The notation of this rare kriti has been published in the Music Academy Journal by Prof. T Visvanathan ( Journal of the Music Academy XXXIV Pages 174-175)


  1. Prof.N.S.Ramachandran( 1938& 2003) – “Ragas of Carnatic Music”-Published by Trinity Music Book Publishers, Chennai. Chapter VII, pages 162-164 & 197
  2. Tillaistanam Narasimha Bagavathar (1908) -“Tyagaraja Swami Keertanalu” (Telugu)
  3. Naadamuni Panditar (1914) – Sangita Svaraprasthara Sagaramu
  4. Prof S R Janakiraman (2005) – “Tyagaraja’s Ekaika Kriti Ragas” – Twin CD Album – Parampara – Vintage Classics Series, Product Code:CAR CD 134/35 – Produced & Distributed by Shristi’s Carnatica P Ltd, Chennai
  5. Prof N Ramanathan(1994) – “Indian Musicology in the Early Modern Period – A Survey of the Pre-1940 Publications”- extracted from “Music Publications From 1800-1930 In Tamiz, Telugu And Malayalam” – Paper presented on 08-11-1994 at a Seminar organised as part of the Thakur Jaidev Singh Centenary Celebrations organised by INTACH Foundation, Varanasi held from 7th to 11th November, 1994.
  6. S R Janakiraman(1995) – Raga Lakshanangal (Tamil) – Published by the Music Academy, Madras
  7. Michael S Kinnear (1994) – “The Gramophone Company’s First Indian Recordings- 1899-1908” – Page 120-Published by Popular Prakashan P Ltd, Bombay

Raga Lakshana – Vamsavati


Raga Lakshana – Vamsavati – Ravi Rajagopalan

The raga Vamsavati (the Asampurna 54th raganga of the latter Kanakambari* nomenclature), the equivalent to the sampurna mela raga Vishwambari has been given an expansive treatment by Muthusvami Dikshitar who has invested 2 krithis in this raga. His co-trinitarians Tyagaraja and Syama Shastri have not composed in either of the ragas. We have a composition of Tyagaraja in a janya Vijayavasantham. Given the textual evidence on hand, Vamsavati is probably a circa 1700-1750 entrant into our music system, if not earlier. This blog post is an analysis of the raga lakshana of this raga through a deep dive of Dikshitar’s composition, a magnum opus:

Krithi: ‘Bhaktavatsalam’
Raga: Vamsavati
Tala: Adi
Kshetra : Composed on Lord Bakthavatsala at Thirukkannamangai a pilgrim town near Tiruvarur


This kriti of Muthusvami Dikshitar is not a typically short (the so called samashti charana krithi) one from the prati madhyama family considering the fact that the raga is also vivadhi in nature as the shatshruthi dhaivatha( D3) and kakali nishada(N3) occur in succession in this raga. The majority of the kritis in the vivadhi ragangas as found in the SSP are short kritis with just a pallavi & an anupallavi, called today as samashti charana kritis. In the midst of these short kritis , the raganga mela 54, Vamsavati has been invested by Dikshitar with 2 kritis and one of them ‘Bakthavatsalam’ a kriti dedicated to the Perumal at Thirukkannamangai,one of the holy 108 shrines (Divyadesas), revered by the vaishnavites on whom the Alwars have performed Mangalasaasanam. This temple town is located very close to Tiruvarur town (about 6 kms) where Dikshitar resided for a good part of his life.

Musical Aspect:

The raga for this krithi is the 54th ragangam – Vamsavati (equivalent to Vishvambari in the Kanakangi-Ratnangi Sampoorna scheme*). In the so called earlier Kanakambari nomenclature*, it was referred to as ‘Vaishaka’. The murcchana arohanam / avarohanam as given by Subbarama Dikshitar in the Sangeeta Sampradaya Pradarshini (SSP) is:

S R1 G3 M2 P D3 N3 S
S N3 P M2 G3 R1 S

The lakshana shloka given by SD attributed to Venkatamakhi is given as: ‘Purna rago vamsavati avarohe dha varjitah’

The following are the compositions that are presently available to us & all of them are notated fortunately in the SSP. They are presented in chronological order:

  1. The Gitam attributed to Venkatamakhi
  2. ‘Vamsavati Shivayuvathi’ in Adi tala of Muthusvami Dikshitar
  3. ‘Bhaktavatsalam’ in Adi tala of Muthusvami Dikshitar
  4. ‘Viragamuvasa’ – A cauka varna in tamizh – dhatu of Balasvami Dikshitar and matu of Muttukumara Pulavar & set to Adi tala.
  5. The Vamsavati raga portion, starting with ‘Momu momu na jerci’ in the raganga ragamalika ‘E Kanakambari’ composed by Subbarama Dikshitar in rupaka tala, found in the Anubandha of the SSP.
  6. The sanchari of Subbarama Dikshitar in rupaka tala.

Here are some relevant observations, which would help us understand the raga svarupa of Vamsavati.

  1. Subbarama Dikshitar in his commentary says that the native murcchana prayogams for this ragam include NDNS, PNS & PRS. However if one analyses the lakshana gitam attributed to Venkatamakhi, the treatment is more krama sampurna. PDNS is the default usage & is found even in the opening ‘dhruvam’ part of the gitam. Also there is no usage of PRS anywhere in the gitam.
  2. Both the kritis of Dikshitar have PRS, PNS and PNDNS. PDNS is not found in the krithis at all while Venkatamakhi’s gitam has this prayoga.
  3. The gitam on one hand and the 2 krithis of Dikshitar, on the other, lead us to conclude that the musical conception of Vamsavati was improvised by Dikshitar.
  4. We can safely conclude that Subbarama Dikshitar has substantially based his lakshana conception on Dikshitar’s interpretation. And in fact he has attempted to bridge the versions of Venkatamakhi & Dikshitar through his sancari.
  5. Though the Caturdandiprakashika theorizes the existence of the 72 melas, Vamsavati is not among the 19 purva prasiddha melas that Venkatmakhi lists out. It is only the Anubandha or the Ragalakshana section which lists out the the 72 ragangas that Vamsavati makes its first appearance as the 54th entry, therein. The date of this anubandha is however a matter of controversy.
  6. Vamsavati is also not found amongst the 21 popular melas dealt with by Tulaja I (1729-1735) in the Sangita Saramruta & apparently it wasn’t in the musical mainstream at that point in time.
  7. Arguably the first composition in this raga is the lakshana gitam given in the Sangeetha Sampradaya Pradarshini attributed to Venkatamakhi himself. Given certain facts it can be deduced that the gitam may probably be a creation of his descendant Muddu Venkatamkhin or perhaps Venkata Vaidyanatha Dikshita. It is to be noted here that the gitam doesnt have any mudra whatsoever.
  8. One can see that the varna set to music by Balasvami Dikshitar closely follows the contours drawn by Muthusvami Dikshitar. In fact D3 occurs only 4 times in the long varna which also has a very unusual anubanda. This varna is apparently on the crown prince Muthusvami Ettendra of the Royal House of Ettayapuram.
  9. Also in the Vamsavati portion of the Subbarama Dikshitar raganga ragamalika, we see that he emphasizes PRS and SNDNS on the lines of Dikshitar.
  10. Subbarama Dikshitar usually gives the jeeva/nyasa svara for the raga under discussion. Here is doesnt mention the same. Given the fact the Dikshitar begins both his krithis on the pancama note; we can reasonably surmise that pancama is the jeeva/nyasa/vadi svara for this raga. Also gandhara is encountered prolifically & probably it is the samvadi.

Dikshitar’s Treatment of Vamsavati:

His Conception of Vamsavati’s raga Lakshana:

Dikshitar’s conception and how it differs from the older conception of Vamsavati as found in the lakshana gitam attributed to Venkatamakhi can be understood by the comparison given below.

Raga Lakshana as evidenced by Venkatamakhi’s Lakshana Gitam:
Salient sancaras/murcanas : PDNS, SNP
Murccanas not seen: SNDNP, PNS, Prs, pRS
Murccana Arohana/avarohana: SRGMPDNS-SNPMRS
Sancara span: Madhya stayi shadja till tara pancama

Raga Lakshana as outlined by Muthusvami Dikshitar:
Salient sancaras/murcanas : PNS, Prs, pRS, PNDNS
Murccanas not used : PDNS
Murccana Arohana/avarohana: pRSRGMPNs – PrsNDNPMGRS
Sancara span: Mandhara pancama till tara gandhara
Jeeva/Nyasa/Vadi Svara – Pancama ( inferential)
Samvadi – Gandhara( inferential)
Gamaka – Kampita predominantly for Ga and Ri and Jaaru as in to reach the Dhaivatha

(Note: Lower case signifies mandhara stayi svara , upper case signifies madhya stayi svara and italics in lower case denotes tara stayi)

It may not be out of place to mention here that the foregoing also proves that Dikshitar was no blind follower of tradition. He suitably improvised & innovated to enhance aesthetics, while leveraging the legacy left behind by the illustrious purvacharyas. Such examples abound, which is recorded for posterity by Subbarama Dikshitar in the SSP.

Dikshitar’s treatment of the vivadi combination of D3 & N3 in Vamsavati :

Given the presence of D3N3 combination in its structure, the PN3D3N3S workaround and omission of D3 in the avarohana is executed by Dikshitar. D3 usage in the 2 Vamsavati krithis of Dikshitar is characterized by the use of the jaaru (glide) type of gamaka, denoted in SSP notation as SN3D3/N3P (the refers to the erakka jaaru and / refers to the ettra jaaru).That is D3 is approached by the ettra and irakka jaaru & is not intoned directly. Also executing PN3D3N3S may be considered difficult given the fact that vocalists render very frequently the close cousins of Vamsavati namely Ramakriya (SN3D1P) and Purvikalyani or Gamakakriya (SN3D2P) which differ only on the dhaivatha.

The analysis of Dikshitar’s vivadi raga krithis would show that he has,” in general as a rule”, employed a three pronged strategy while utilizing the vivadi combinations. They are:

  • Adjusting the usage density of the vivadi combination within the krithi
  • Intelligently encasing the vivadi notes into a pattern (as in this case flanking the D3 between the 2 N3 svaras) &
  • Utilize a type of gamaka to embellish it (as in this case jaaru for D3, denoted as / or ) so that the intonation of the svara by a vocalist or on the veena is manipulated and is heard appropriately by our ear.

Sangita Kalanidhi T V Subba Rao in his Lec-Dem in the Music Academy on the usage of shatshruthi dhaivatha in succession with kakali nishada in the raga Kaikavasi (a janya of Nitimati, mela 60) for the Tyagaraja composition ‘Vachamagocharame’ deals with a similar point. It may be interesting to note that this axiom pertaining to the D3N3 combination has an exception in the raga Samantha (under Mela 30), where even in the SSP, its avarohana murcchana is given as SN3D3P. Subbarama Dikshitar in his raga lakshana commentary wonders how the purvacharyas had given a direct descent instead of SN3D3N3P and virtually castigates them & considers the SN3D3P as a typo on the part of the scribe!

Turning back our focus on Vamsavati, the jaaru gamaka is to be rapidly executed as in the PN3D3/N3. This ensures that only an attentive listener can hear the so called semi-tonal dissonance just for a fleeting moment. The objective is, the listener has to hear but only a wee bit. It has to be executed via the jaaru & time and not by weakly intoning the svara. Non usage of D3 for Vamsavati can render it as an upanga janya of say a mela like Dhavalambari. So at least for ensuring its raganga status, D3 needs to find a place. Dikshitar by his three pronged approach intended to achieve the right balance between raga lakshana, the so called vivadhitva/dosha on one hand and harmony & aesthetics on the other.

A mention here needs to be made about the usage of pRS and Prs as recurring prayoga by Dikshitar in his Vamsavati conceptualization. The use of such leitmotifs is a regular feature of Hindustani ragas and we can see relics of this approach in the compositions notated in SSP. This feature indeed is worthy of a separate blog post & shall be dealt with then. Needless to say, Dikshitar has made use of this concept for Vamsavati. It can be surmised that these motifs would also serve to distinguish Vamsavati from its more famous cousins Ramakriya( Pantuvarali) and Gamakakriya ( Purvikalyani) & so Dikshitar has apparently ornamentedthe raga with this unique musical identity or anga, as all these ragas share a common purvanga.

Some Statistics :

D3 Usage:

In this krithi the counts of D3 usage, via the only N3D3N3S prayoga is (per SSP notation) given below.

  • Pallavi – None
  • Anupallavi -Only once at ‘Su(S/R1) ra(SN3) dhya(D3N3) ksham(S)’
  • Charana- Once at ‘guru guha(PN/s) ve(ND3N)dhyam(s)’ & another in the madhyama kala section at ‘sushobito tpala(R1G3) vata(R1S) ka(N3D3)sti(N3) tham(S)’

Thus there are only 3 instances and also the D3 usage is restricted to madhya stayi only. If we investigate the musical setting of the other Vamsavati krithi (the much smaller samashti carana kriti namely ‘Vamsavati Shivayuvathi’) we find that D3 has been profusely used as much as 7 times, one for every avarta of adi tala, with last avarta accounting for 2. All of them sport the ND3NS combination while using D3. In one instance N3D3N3P has been used when looping back to the pallavi. Probably Dikshitar wanted to provide an exercise for a learner in executing the vivadi svara D3 and the piece is short, sort of a gitam.

pR1S & Pr1s Usage:

As pointed out earlier, the anga/leitmotif which has been repeatedly used is the pRS or Prs. It is encountered twice in the pallavi, twice in the anupallavi and 4 times in the carana section, reinforcing the fact that Dikshitar had indeed wanted this to be Vamsavati’s unique musical identity.


While elaborating as in a raga alapana or adding sangatis or while performing neraval or svara prastara for the Bakthavatsalam kriti, the following need to be borne in mind.

  • Emphasize G3 as is done throughout the kriti and employ kampita gamaka in profusion for G3 and R1.
  • Employ the musical contours as S R1 G3 M2 P N3 D3 N3 S – S N3 P M2 G3 R1 S.
  • Employ PNs, pRS and Prs in profusion.
  • Employ PND3NS or/& SND3NP sparingly.

Lyrical aspects of this composition:

As in the case of many of the other Dikshitar kritis, this kriti also is replete with sthala references and pointers to the kshetra puranas, iconography etc. Here is a listing of them:

“Bukthi-Mukti pradayaka daksham”-
There is a practice/belief that if one spends a night in this holy town, it would enable one to be liberated of the cycle of births and deaths by the benign grace of Lord Bakthavatsala.

“Krishnamangala kshetrapatim”-
There are 5 temples in the banks of River Cauvery in Tamilnadu, which are dedicated to Lord Krishna and are among the 108 Divya Desams (Holy Shrines of Lord Vishnu) where the Azhwars had sung hymns in praise of the Lord. They are

  1. Thirukkannapuram
  2. Thirukkannamangai
  3. Thirukkannangudi
  4. Kapisthalam
  5. Therezhundur

These five are revered as the five Krishna mangala kshetras and Thirukkannamangai is one of them.

“Vidhi durita nivrittikkaram”-
The Lord here saved the four Vedas from demons Madhu Kaidaba at the request and penance of Brahma, the Creator. Brahma himself is believed to have built the sanctum sanctorum of the Lord here. He also prayed to the Lord that he be accorded blessings and have the privilege of being next to the Lord in this temple.

“Lakshmi Vivahotsavam”-
The Lord married Mahalakshmi here.

“Vishaala veda saagara mantapam” –
The temple complex has a spacious mantapam, so named. As the Lord himself saved the Vedas, in eternal gratitude perhaps they have lent themselves as the four stately pillars of this mantapam located in the temple premises & hence the name.

“Shashanka gurutalpa doshahara darsha pushkarini thata paschimabhaga” –
Chandra got rid of the dosha (of having had a relationship with Brihaspati’s wife (Tara)), by merely having a darshan of the holy tank and so the tank was hence christened Darsha pushakarini. The legend of Chandra having had a dip and rising from the holy waters of this tank is musically signified by Dikshitar with an upward glide starting from the mandhara panchama to the adhya stayi rishaba which is also a leitmotif murccana that he has employed widely in this krithi.

Also in this kriti, Dikshitar directly & indirectly alludes to the seven attributes of a sapthamrutha kshetra ( this kshetra being one), which are:

  1. The Vimana or the canopy above the sanctum sanctorum
  2. The Mandapam in the temple complex
  3. The status of the forest( vanam) found here
  4. The river that flows through the kshetra
  5. The location of the temple
  6. The city or nagari and
  7. The pushakarini or tank

“Sushobitotpalavataka stitham” –
The temple canopy above the sanctum sanctorum belongs to the Utpalavata type/style as per shilpa sashtras. Also the other Saptamruta kshetra Thirukannapuram ( Lord Sowriraja Perumal) too has a Utpalavataka vimanam. Similar references in other Dikshitar krithis include ‘Pranavakara vimanam’ (Ranganayakam Bhavaye-Nayaki), Kusumakara vimanam ( Kusumakara Sobhita-Kusumakaram) and Somacchanda vimanam ( Sri Sundararajam-Ramakriya).

“Suramaya madhumakshikaraadhitam”-

The local legend has it that the Devas wanted to secretly witness the marriage of the Lord and hence took the form of bees and stayed on in the beehive in this temple.


For the purpose of this article, the following renditions were considered.

  • ‘Bhaktavatsalam’ by Vid Semmangudi Srinivasa Iyer from an undated AIR Madras Broadcast accompanied by Vid T N Krishnan on the violin and Vid Umayalpuram Sivaraman on the mridangam
  • ‘Bhaktavatsalam’ by an anonymous lady duet, from an undated AIR broadcast.
  • ‘Vamsavati Shivayuvathi’ by Vid Kalpagam Svaminathan from a 2007 AIR Chennai FM Gold Arangisai broadcast.

I have not heard any other version of these krithis or that of the varna of Balasvami Dikshitar. I suspect that Semmangudi Srinivasa Iyer may have reconstructed it directly from the SSP. I would greatly appreciate pointers to any oral or other patantharam, if there exists.


  1. Semmangudi Srinivasa Iyer’s kriti rendition was ‘fairly’ adhering to the SSP notation. He does not execute any sangathi in the krithi with D3 other than the 3 places mentioned above. However the D3 doesn’t figure prominently in all the three places & was intoned rather ‘weakly’ or rather not heard at all. There was additionally a few avarthas of kalpana svaras on the pallavi line featuring D3 such as SNDNP again the D3 coming very weakly. No PDNS was noticed. Also the PRS usage was not conspicuous.
  2. The other rendition of “Bhaktavatsalam” by the lady duet in fact uses PDNS in a sangati for the pallavi itself. The anupallavi and a good portion of the charana section was way off the notation given in SSP with liberal usage of D3 as PDNS. I am not sure of the notation or patantharam they were following. However it’s worth noting here that the PNDNS in the madhyamakala sahitya section (utpalavataka sthitam) was beautifully executed with the right & fleeting intonation of the D3 with the jaaru. Wish they had struck to the SSP patantharam throughout to make it a real archival rendition.
  3. Kalpagam Svaminathan’s rendition of the other Vamsavati krithi is very close to the SSP. She also renders the cittasvara portion as well. Her D3 is played more as an anusvara for N3.


  1. Subbarama Dikshitar (1904) Sangita Sampradaya Pradarshini (Telugu) and its Tamil translation published the Music Academy, Madras.
  2. T V Subba Rao -‘Vachamagocharame & Banturithi’-The Journal of the Music Academy Vol XXV, parts I-IV, Editor Dr.V. Raghavan.
  3. Prof. S.R.Janakiraman(2002) -‘Ragas at a Glance’-Shrishti’s Carnatica P Ltd, Edited by Kiranavali Vidyashankar.
  4. * Earlier Kanakambari Nomenclature – The naming convention/tabulation as given in the Sangraha Cudamani. Names given here do not always conform to the Katapayadhi scheme of prefixing.
  5. * Latter Kanakambari Nomenclature – The naming convention adopted in SSP and these names given in the headings adhere to the Katapayadhi convention
  6. * Kanakangi-Ratnangi Nomenclature- The naming convention & tabulation scheme, currently prevalent and found in the Sangraha Cudamani and considered to have been adopted by Tyagaraja.

Footnote: I have made every reasonable effort to present fair and accurate information to the best of my abilities. Also my thoughts and comments herein have been made in good faith . Should there be any errors or points of opinion feel free to post them as a comment.