ABSTRACT
The stereotypic view of the Vārkarī tradition (sampradāy) pictures the black and stumpy Viṭhobā (Pāṇḍuraṅg, Viṭṭhal) from Pandharpur as the main object of worship. This male god is perceived as a local form of Kṛṣṇa but referred to as māulī (“Mother”); his iconic image – both in sculptures and pictures – is multiplied in Maharashtrian temples and beyond them as a kuldevatā of the region. 1 Although Dñyāneśvar (Dñyāndev) never mentioned Viṭhobā in his thirteenth-century Marathi commentary on the Bhagavadgītā, he was enunciated as a founder of the Pandharpur cult (a bhakti movement) on the account of hymns attributed to him and narratives composed about him. Contemporary Vārkarīs accept him as another object of veneration manifested by a replica of his footprints, a mask, or an anthropomorphic icon, and they appeal to him as māulī as well. The third māulī of the Vārkarī tradition is the commentary itself, eponymously referred to as the Dñyāneśvarī. The text stands as a source of theological precepts, a mode of spiritual training, and an object of ritual worship. Besides its significance within the Vārkarī fold, the book is evoked in secular contexts as an embodiment of regional pride and identity.
