Thread by @cbkwgl

Today is #NarasimhaJayanthi. Let me tell you the story of a Bhakta who was saved by Lord Narasimha from Abhisara done on him by another Bhakta of Lord Narasimha. Its a story you all know, but not in the way you know - the legend of Krimikantha Chola.

Let me start the story with Rajamahendra Chola, the son of Rajendra II and his successor. After the Battle of Manimangalam, both he and his father disappeared from the scene and the throne devolved to Virarajendra. At that time, Vijayaditya siezed Vengi yet again but

because his brother Rajaraja Narendra was old and dying, he left him on the throne. What happened to Rajaraja Narendra's son Rajendra Chalukya, later known as Kulottunga Chola? There is no information except for the fact that he operated in the forests of Chakrakuta.

Was that as an agent of his uncle Virarajendra or was that because Virarajendra after making Rajendra and Rajamahendra exit the scene, he is after the only one capable of challening Virarajendra on throne. And parallel to this, a Chalukya alliance was forming -

Vengi, Chalukya and Kalinga. By that time Rajaraja Narendra died. Vijayaditya abdicated in favour of his son Saktivarman and retreated to his estate near Mysore. Remember, Vijayaditya is a very capable and high achieving Chalukya General.

His contingent was the one which killed Rajadhiraja Chola and is treated equal to the sons of the Chalukyan Emperor. Now, the story slightly diverges from the standard narrative. Virarajendra marched on Vengi - both Saktivarman and his cousin(or uncle),

the Telugu Choda ruler were killed. On the other hand, Vijayaditya decisively defeated the Chola armies marching towards Kalyani and he was devastated when the news struck. He rushed back to Vengi to bring the situation back to order.

Virarajendra advanced till Chakrakuta and returned after confirming Vijayaditya as king and marrying his daughter to the crown prince of Kalinga. Now, the question is this. Why would the Chola emperor do that when, all he was to do to ask his nephew operating in that area to

strike from back and sieze Vengi? Is it because Kalinga Devendravarman Vengi Chalukya Saktivarman were protecting Rajendra? At least two campaigns were launched in that direction but both missed Rajendra.

In desperation to protect his throne, he tried to create a counter front against Rajendra. Added to this, what does he do? He marries another daughter to the younger son of Chalukya Someshwara creating a counter front. Now, there are two stories at play here -

Chalukya Someshwara protecting Rajendra Chalukya to foment a civil war in Chola Empire and Virarajendra instigating a Chalukyan prince to create a civil war in Chalukyan Empire. Now, let's go to the next player in the game -

Adhirajendra Chola, Virarajendra's son and successor. He was a hardcore Saivite and the confusion in Tirumala(being claimed as a Saivite shrine) happened during his tenure as governor there. Was he capable enough? We don't know but he seems to be.

Chalukya Someshwara died by then and his son Someshwara became the king. Suddenly, at that time, Virarajendra died. His son in law Chalukya Vikramaditya marched on Kanchi and placed Adhirajendra on the throne. What happened, we don't know.

Suddenly, Rajendra Chalukya erupted on the throne and the empire erupted in a civil war. Now, in a classic case of game of thrones, Vikramaditya marched on Kanchi(Rajendra was ruling from Kanchi, not Gangaikondacholapuram) to topple Rajendra and

to bring the empire under his control. But, Rajendra played his trump card. He asked the new Chalukyan Emperor on the throne to attack Vikramaditya from the back. Is it possible if Rajendra is a Chola asset? Battle happened. Bilhana claims Vikramaditya won the war but

he had to accept Rajendra on the throne. His brother-in-law was still alive and is fighting a losing war. But, on the other side, Chaulkya Someshwara was captured by his brother. Vikramaditya's ally lost the throne and he gained his own,

Rajendra's ally lost his throne but he regained his!! Now, there is another parallel story going on here - Ramanujacharya. Ramanujacharya is a Vaishnavite Sadhu who siezed Srirangam and replaced Panchatantra with Vaikhanasa there.

There was much bad blood flowing there and there is a very high chance that Ramanujacharya had open backing of Rajamahendra Chola. But, he is a troublesome candidate. He converted the Saivite temples of Srikurmam, Tirumala and Simhachalam but

he was humbled by the Lord at Puri and Simhachalam. In Simhachalam, he was able to prove the moolavirat is that of Lord Narasimha but the Lord was happy with old rituals and ordered the old ones be continued. In Puri, when he was supposed to change Agama Sastras in the morning

and everyone was waiting for him, it turned out that Lord Jagannatha was not happy with the changes and bodily threw him in Srikurmam. Now, when the civil war was happening and Rajendra Chalukya was marshalling resources,

its possible that the highly powerful farmer-soldier lobby who lost Srirangam to Ramanuja demanded his expulsion in return for supporting him. It took 12 years for Rajendra to get complete charge of the area is a clear hint that his control was not that great.

And then, that he took Srirangam temple under his personal charge is another. So, what would have happened? Rajendra Chalukya, the future Kulottunga Chola ordered Ramanuja out of the kingdom and sent him out with an escort. Proof for that?

Ramanuja hagiography mentions that Ramanujacharya was hosted by a village head near Narayanavanam. Why would the head of a village that close to Kanchi risk his head trying to protect a fleeing Sadhu? But, what does Ramanuja hagiography say?

Krimikantha Chola, a Saivite bigot ordered him to be brought before him with the intention to make him say Lord Siva is greater than Lord Vishnu. Its a famous story - sensing harm.to him, his disciple Kuresha took his place giving Ramanuja time to escape -

Kuresha insulted Krimikantha and was blinded by the king - Ramanuja fled to Melukote by then and hearing the news, performed Abhisara on Krimikantha killing him through a festering wound on his neck. But, what happened is slightly different. Krimikantha is not a religious bigot.

He did that out of a political exigency. May be, he was ready to bring him back when things calmed down but forgot. But, remember he wasn't against Ramanuja. 10 years or so after Ramanujacharya left, he needed a Vaishnavite scholar for managing Cheluvanarayana Temple at Melukote.

A delegation was sent and Kulottunga sent the best available at Srirangam for that!! Why would he do that if he hated Ramanuja? Let's talk about Abhisara.. Ramanuja hagiography says Ramanuka prayed to Lord Narasimha and did Abhisara on Krimikantha.

The Abhisara was stopped when the Homa Gunda started smelling of flesh indicating Krimikantha died. But, that did not happen. Was the Abhisara done against Adhirajendra who is known to be a Saivite bigot? If so, why didn't Kulottunga accepted his back? Anyways.

Let's assume that the Abhisara happened. It happened around 1111 and not 1070 when Ramanujacharya fled. That was when Kulottunga fell seriously ill and prayed to, again, Lord Narasimha at Ennayiram. If Abhisara happened,

Krimikantha also prayed to Lord Narasimha to relieve him of the curse. If it didn't happen, Kulottunga prayed to Lord Narasimha. Now, what's the proof Ramanuja's Abhisara happened in 1111? Immediately after Abhisara, he returned back to Srirangam. Ramanuja returned in 1111.

Kulottunga didn't die in 1111. He lived till 1120. But. He surrendered power to his son Vikrama who was made the ruler with Kulottunga as co-ruler - he retired from governance. Its as good as saying Krimikantha died.

So, the story turns out that it's not a Saivite Krimikantha but two Bhaktas of Lord Narasimha fighting against each other through their Bhakti!! Who won and who lost? Both won and both lost.