Wiki
The Badagas(Kannada:ಬಡಗ ಜನರು) are an indigenous people inhabiting the Nilgiri Hills of Tamil Nadu, southern India.The term 'Badagu' in old Kannada means 'North',so 'Badaga' should mean 'Northener'.
They form the largest indigenous community in the Nilgiri region, with a population of approximately 150,000 encompassing some 370-odd villages and smaller settlements. They are registered as a Backward Caste, (now referred to as other backward caste(OBC) caste). Their aspirations to be recognized as a tribe, rather than a caste, is complicated by their historical and contemporary social relations with other Nilgiri peoples, from whom they have asserted some differences and even a social precedence.
For example, the Badagas have traditionally hired musicians from other Nilgiri groups (such as the Kota and Irula) to play at their social functions, which is symbolic of submission and control in that region. However, they are also known to have paid tribute in grain to other groups, such as the Todas. In general, neither stereotype of caste or tribe can be readily applied. They are most likely Dravidian by descent and they are by religion Hindus of the Saiva sect. Research has indicated they migrated to the Nilgiris from the Mysore region, sometime around 1600 after the break-up of the kingdom of Vijayanagara. They are an agricultural people and far the most numerous and wealthy of the hill tribes. Many have relocated to towns and cities of the region, and earn income from urban-style employment. Their language is Badaga, a dialect of Kannada. This is the correct representation of Badaga people ,let us see why there is confusion.
Natives of the Nilgiris
Philology states that in the beginning languages existed without scripts and only later scripts were developed. Hence this seems to be a justification that the badagas were completely an indegenous people to due to the absence in their script, but an ancient indegenous group would have a higher population or would have been completely extinct which questions the validity of this theory.
The European Connection
Badaga ethnic group from Central/East Europe for survival had to accept the local language after migration to southern India and then to the Nilgiri Hills (the nilgiris then belonged to the Vijayanagara Empire), hence the dialect of Kannada. The badagas hence adopted the language for verbal communication and did not accept the Script as it was Foreign to them. The date of the second migration from present Karnataka is probably said to be around 1500 AD - 1600 AD. But this theory is put up to convert badagas to Christianity. The same theory has been put forward in neibhouring kodagu to successful effect in conversion. To somehow show they are closer to European to spread Christianity.
Genomic studies
Genomic Studies i.e. a Y-chromosome DNA marker test on the badagas have resulted in the badagas belonging to the broader R1a and specifically R1a1 Haplogroup. A good percentage of people in Central Europe,East Europe,Scandinavia and the people of Punjab also belong to this R1a1 Haplogroup. Hence this has been suggestive of the fact that the badagas are of an Eurasian origin.
The above statement of "origin" is further diluted based on the examination of R1a1 in South Indian tribals and Dravidian population groups Saha et al. (2005) questioned the concept of its Indo-Iranian origin. Sengupta et al. (2005) claim R1a's diverse presence including even Indian tribal and lower castes (the so-called untouchables) and populations not part of the caste system. From the diversity and distinctiveness of microsatellite Y-STR variation they conclude that there must have been an independent R1a1 population in India dating back to a much earlier expansion than the Indo-Aryan migration. The other Ethnic group from southern India which belongs to the R1a1 haplogroup are the Kodava whose customs and cultural aspects for centuries have been said to be related to the Badagas.
Proto Kannada-Tamil origin
Some tamil scholars say they split from Proto-Kannada-Tamil. But this is without any basis and is linguistic chuvanism of the Tamils. This theory is mainly put forward to keep the beautiful and Nilgiris and ooty within Tamil nadu. With this theory they also forced Badagas to use Incompatible Tamil Script. The widespread use of ha indicates that Badagas migrated to Nilgiris after the Pa-Ha shift happened in Kannada, that is post Hoysala.
Conclusion
The Badagas are very much a part of the Gowdas (Land Lords in Karnataka). Many also follow Lingayat tradition. It remained as a dialect because of the isolation in the hills. The language is also believed to be the older form of Kannada (Hale Kannada). Though the practices may be unique, the culture is very much the same as the Kannadigas. This uniqueness is by shedding out old practices and adopting new ones to keep the bond among members of the community and the other tribes like Todas, Kurumbas etc.
Any Lay kannada person can understand Badaga speaking, It has retained the old charms and also some of the cultural practices. All the words in Badaga has kannada origin, they have borrowed some from neibhouring Toda, Korta , Kuruba(all Kannada tribes) and Irula (Malayalam tribe). Recently they have been using more of Tamil, because of the use of tamil script and tamil administration.
To know the origin of Badagas we dont need such elaborate analysis , the reason for migration , time of migration , placed stopped on the way are all in the Badaga folk songs.
Showing posts with label tamil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tamil. Show all posts
Myth of Cheraman Mosque
Cheraman Juma Masjid is a mosque in Kodungallur in the Indian state of Kerala. Believed to be built in 629 AD by Malik Ibn Dinar, it is considered as the oldest mosque in India, and the second oldest mosque in the world to offer Jumu'ah prayers. Constructed during the lifetime of Muhammad, the bodies of some of his original followers are said to be buried here. Unlike other mosques in Kerala that face westwards this mosque faces eastwards.
Let us analyse the Facts
Keralopathi Account(16th century AD)
As the tradition goes, a Chera king, Cheramanperumal of Kodungallure, left for Mecca, embraced Islam, and accepted the name Thajudeen. He married the sister of then King of Jeddah. On his return trip, accompanied by many Islamic religious leaders, led by Malik-ibn-Dinar (RA), he fell sick and passed away. But he had given introductory letters for the team to proceed to ‘Musiris’ (Kodungallur, the Chera capital. The visitors came to Musiris and handed over the latter to the reigning king, who treated the guests with all respect and extended facilities to establish their faith in the land. The king also organised help for the artisans to build the first Mosque at Kodungallur, by converting Arathali temple into a Juma-Masjid. It was build in 629 A.C., and the area around it had been ear-marked for the team’s settlement. This is said in Book called Keralopathi, not anywhere. But there are different versions of Keralopathi giving different accounts. In one version he converted Buddhism.
Scholarly visitors
None of the early or medieval travelers who visited Kerala has referred in their records. Thus Sulaiman, Al Biruni, Benjamin of Tuleda, Al Kazwini, Marco Polo, Friar Odoric, Friar Jordanus, Ibn Babuta, Abdur Razzak, Nicolo-Conti – none of these travelers speaks of the story of the Cheraman’s alleged conversion to Islam.
No cheraman in 7th century AD
Sreedhara Menon authoritatively states that Kerala never had a king called Cheraman Perumal and quotes Dr. Herman Gundert, the German who composed the first Malayalam-English dictionary and the grandfather of Herman Hesse for this. But there seems to have been a Cheraman Perumal, whose history is overlaid by legend. According to Saiva tradition, he had an association with a Sundaramurti, the last of the three hymnists of Devaram. This Cheraman Perumal vanished in 825 A.D, about 200 years
Legend
A mention of the Cheraman Perumal legend appeared in the 16th century book Tuhafat-ul Mujahidin by Shaik Zainuddin, but he too did not believe in its historical authenticity. But later cut and paste historians seem to have forgot to add his disclaimer.
Source :Varnam
Let us analyse the Facts
Keralopathi Account(16th century AD)
As the tradition goes, a Chera king, Cheramanperumal of Kodungallure, left for Mecca, embraced Islam, and accepted the name Thajudeen. He married the sister of then King of Jeddah. On his return trip, accompanied by many Islamic religious leaders, led by Malik-ibn-Dinar (RA), he fell sick and passed away. But he had given introductory letters for the team to proceed to ‘Musiris’ (Kodungallur, the Chera capital. The visitors came to Musiris and handed over the latter to the reigning king, who treated the guests with all respect and extended facilities to establish their faith in the land. The king also organised help for the artisans to build the first Mosque at Kodungallur, by converting Arathali temple into a Juma-Masjid. It was build in 629 A.C., and the area around it had been ear-marked for the team’s settlement. This is said in Book called Keralopathi, not anywhere. But there are different versions of Keralopathi giving different accounts. In one version he converted Buddhism.
Scholarly visitors
None of the early or medieval travelers who visited Kerala has referred in their records. Thus Sulaiman, Al Biruni, Benjamin of Tuleda, Al Kazwini, Marco Polo, Friar Odoric, Friar Jordanus, Ibn Babuta, Abdur Razzak, Nicolo-Conti – none of these travelers speaks of the story of the Cheraman’s alleged conversion to Islam.
No cheraman in 7th century AD
Sreedhara Menon authoritatively states that Kerala never had a king called Cheraman Perumal and quotes Dr. Herman Gundert, the German who composed the first Malayalam-English dictionary and the grandfather of Herman Hesse for this. But there seems to have been a Cheraman Perumal, whose history is overlaid by legend. According to Saiva tradition, he had an association with a Sundaramurti, the last of the three hymnists of Devaram. This Cheraman Perumal vanished in 825 A.D, about 200 years
Legend
A mention of the Cheraman Perumal legend appeared in the 16th century book Tuhafat-ul Mujahidin by Shaik Zainuddin, but he too did not believe in its historical authenticity. But later cut and paste historians seem to have forgot to add his disclaimer.
Source :Varnam
Date of Karikal chola
Date of Karikal Chola
Karikalan is one of the most legendry kings of Tamil literature. His legendry status include.- Building kallanai or Grand anicut.
- Waging a war on North India and Etching the chola emblem on the Himalayas
- Making Kanchi the capital of Cholas
Cilapthikaram
Cilapathikaram is the most ancient literary work to speak about Karikalan. This work says karikalan is Maternal Uncle of Cheran Cenguttuvan. To look further on this kindly follow the link
When we cannot establish the date of Cilapathikaram how can we date karikalan using this.
Pattinappaalai
Here is the dating frenzy gone mad. The pattinappaalai is dated to 1st century BC to 1st century AD, But the king mentioned in work is dated 2nd century AD. That is author praises a king and gives vivid accounts who is born 100 years later Let us not go to another myth of antiquity of tamil article. Written by Uruttirankannanar the work talks about mostly karikalan and puhar.
Let us see info about him.
One inscription throws a different light about uruthirang kannanar A mandapa was donated to kannanar by Karikala . Around 1200 AD Sundara pandiyan ransacked the whole of chola kingdom. He destroyed all forts, palaces etc. but left this one single mandapa untouched. There is a detailed inscription in thiruvellarai - in the form of a Tamil poem – which records this. Though it was a chola who donated the gift, it was a gift for a Tamil poet - uruthirang kannanar - that's all pandiyan considered. Did a mantapa donated by Karikala survived 1000 years. Most unlikely, the date of the above poet cannot be taken for dating karikalan.
Kalingathu Parani
Kalingathu parani was composed at the time of Kulothunga chola (1070-1120). Kulothunga was chalukyan prince who crowned himself as chola king. The difference between the said date of karikala and composition has to noted here.
Ponniyn selvan
Most of the myths about cholas and tamil in general are from this book, Ponniyn selvan written in 20th century. Making the cholas great legendry builders, fighters and naval power belong to this book. The author carelessly twists the historical facts to suit his theories. Most tamil people get their history from this book and naturally gungho about their language and history.
Inscription
The first inscription to date are copper plates of Udayendram, This is in 10th century AD ,so the king who ruled cannot be remembered only after 700 years and not any where else, that should be strange. Because medieval cholas start around 9th century AD. Also see article here link2 about telugu chodas.
So there is no definite date for karikalan, Tamil historians follow circular logic in dating , they say karikala is 2nd century AD and so the authors should be around that time. And in another instance the literary works are of that age, so the king should be that age. If karikalan cannot be dated around 9th century and 10th century AD , why date him to 2nd century AD , he can be dated to 7th and 8th century AD.
Ancient Pandya kingdom - Location
The Early Pandyas of the Sangam period were one of the three main kingdoms of the ancient Tamil country, the other two being the Cholas and the Cheras. Most of the information about the Early Pandyas comes to us through literary sources. The capital of the Early Pandyan kingdom was initially Korkai, around and was later moved to Kudal (now Madurai) during the reign of Nedunj Cheliyan I. The Medieval Pandyas kingdom is well documented and replete with archeological evidence. But the Early pandyas was not.
Let us analayse the early pandyas, how they came into history.
Sangam LiteratureMaduraikkanci (761-763), by Mankudi Maruthanaar contains a full-length description of Madurai and the Pandyan country under NedunjCheliyan III. Netunalvatai (9th century AD)(in the collection of Pattupattu) give a glimpse into the society and commercial activities. One expert has said, since in one sentence in this poem there is a mention of a vembu flower adorning the spear of the hero, he could be identified to belong to the Pandya dynasty, but it is not certain. until 8th century Kanchi was referred as madurakanchi and Madurai was called Koodal,so we do not know if the said city and dynasty are same.
Descriptions of three major kings of Tamil nadu Chera, chola, pandya and minor chieftains called Velir are found in the Akananuru and the Purananuru collections (both 9th century AD). The second poem by Mudinagarayar addresses the Chera king Uthayan Cheralaathan and praises him for his feeding the armies at the Kurukshetra war. This is an obvious anachronism suggesting a king of the early Common Era Tamil country had a role to play in a mythological battle of the Mahabharata epic. Based on this one poem, there have been attempts at dating the Purananuru poems to around 1000 BCE or older. Which as we can see is full of legends and inaccuracies. Akananuru was compiled by Rudrasarman at the behest of the Pandya king Ukkiraperuvazhuthi. This also contains poems from Perunthevanar(9th century AD).
Silapathikaram and Manimekalai Both these works deal with pandya kings extensively. But dating has always been a issue. refer link1
Epigraphy
Meenakshipuram edictEventhough Meenakshipuram edict is said to refer nedunjeliyan , there is noway to verify authenticity of the inscription. And the inscription does not refer to pandyas or nedunjeliyan.
Ashoka edictAshoka edict mentions coda pada satyaputo , ceraputo. Experts says pada in edict means Pandyas , but we do not know for sure. Since no other evidence suggest this. Kautilya when discussion about his southern country karnataka does not say anything about kingdoms beyond that.
Hathigumpha inscriptionsThe Hathigumpha inscriptions of the Kalinga King, Kharavela, (c. 150 BCE) refers to the arrival of a tribute of jewels and elephants from the Pandu king. We have nothing other than that.
Srilankan
Singhalese chronicle Mahawamsa claims that King Vijaya (c. 543 BCE) married a daughter of the Pandu king Kulasekaran, to whom he was sending rich presents every year. Let us see what dipavamsa(4th century AD) say about this, it says Pandu king kulashekara , does not specify whether he is from tamil nadu or he is tamil king. This might be an attempt to link up with Pandavas.
Foreign sources
The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (c. 60 - 100 CE) describes the riches of a 'Medura Regia Pandionis ': ...Nelcynda is distant from Muziris by river and sea about five hundred stadia, and is of another Kingdom, the Pandionis. This place also is situated on a river, about one hundred and twenty stadia from the sea....
The Chinese historian Yu Huan in his 3rd century text, the Weilüe, mentions a The Kingdom of Panyue:"...The kingdom of Panyue is also called Hanyuewang. It is several thousand li to the southeast of Tianzhu (Northern India)...The inhabitants are small; they are the same height as the Chinese..."
The Roman emperor Julian received an embassy from a Pandion about 361.
The 1st century Greek historian Nicolaus of Damascus met, at Damascus, the ambassador sent by an Indian King "named Pandion or, " to Caesar Augustus around 13 CE.
PandionPandion Historians dispute term pandion and they say it is porus that is mentioned not pandyas
Pandu
There are numerous pandu kings in India , both Big and small. Each is an attempt to link up with Pandavas in mahabharata.
Pandyas of West Coast of karnataka
Pandya Bhutala pandya devipandyaAs per Bhutala Pandya Charitam – A Sanskrit book with 13 chapters - Bhutala Pandya’s rule begins at 77 A.D in Barkur as capital in south canara district of Karnataka. Their rule also included parts of Kerala. They are also mentioned in Puranas. Many claim the western sources and the indian sources mentioned refer to Pandyas in south canara. It is interesting to note that the kingdom of Bhutala Pandya was the first to have a delegation of Chinese traders in this part of the Vijayanagar Empire. Chinese porcelain relics can still be found in the temple built by Bhutala Pandya in Barkur (now in Udupi district). Many argue that the ambassador to Rome was from Bhutala pandya kingdom.
Siri Paddana
Antiquity of the Siri paDdana dates back to the period of Tamil Sangham literature. There are several Pali proper nouns in the Siri paDdana that show the backdrop of Buddhism during the composition of the oral epic. Buddhist elements have also been recognized in the environs of Tamil Sangham. The word Sangham (=association) itself is a word associated with. Analogy between the Siri paDdana and the story of Kanaki in Sangham literature suggests that both epics were two different regional versions been built on the same story element. As noted by Peter Claus “there are some tantalizing similarities between the Siri cult and that of Pattini, and also between the Siri legend and that of Kanagi (Pattini)”.The similarity of story element in the Sangham Kanaki and Tulu Siri, leads us to conclude that the composition of Siri paDdana was contemporary of Tamil Sangham literature. Many words in cilapathikaram are of tulu origin.
Barkur in Tulu nadu.
Greek and Roman sources say lot of about the ports of barkur, Kalian, Malpe,Olokhoira(which tamil scholars mention as korkai, tulu people call it as alavakhedu in South canara)
Medieval chera kingdom is Tulu
Medival chera kingdom we know is a Tulu origin. The Namboodaries are from Tulu nadu and they established the chera kingdom. Many of the sangam works are by Chera kings.
Chetty (chettiyar) Tale
The Nagarathar are migrated towards Pandya kingdom(707AD). The reason is that one of the Chola kings fell in love with one of the nagarathar girl, but the King refused to marry her. The nagrathars requested the King to marry her, but the king was very stubborn. Therefore the whole women community gave up their life and the men moved to the Pandya kingdom. The Pandian welcomed the Nagarathars and asked them where they wanted to live in his land. The nagarathars opted for the Chettinad Area. The Pandian wanted the community to grow and therefore he requested the nagarathars to marry again. Therefore they married the girls from the Saiva Vellalar community from Tirunelveli area. May be that is the reason they still have the practice of addressing the dad as Appachi, mom as Aatha, granny as Appatha / Aaya & granddad as Ayya.
Nagarathar, presently known as Nattukottai Nagarathars, are believed to have originated from Chandrapuri in the former Naganadu. There appears to be no authentic record in writing for said belief, excepting what has been handed down to our ancestors by word of mouth, especially 'Thalattu Padal' which itself has taken twist and turn over the years and has lost its originality. Our 'Isaikudimanam' (marriage deed) also bears testimony to our origin wherein it refers to 'Nagavalla…..' Location of former Naganadu is also debatable. Some of our Nagarathars say it is the border between Kerala and Tamilnadu. So many argue that it is the evidence of ancient trade with Rome Greece and South canara
PandavasThe most famous Panadavas has been mentioned in many literary souces , many are pronounced differently. Many say most of the ancient inscriptions refer to pandavas.
so we are not able to come to any conclusion on Ancient pandyas. Many of Sangam literatures who mention Pandyas are after written after 7th century AD. Many of the inscriptions referring to pandyas may not refer to pandavas. Many similar sounding names and trying to attach themselves to Pandavas has made the task of seprating myth and reality very difficult.
Let us analayse the early pandyas, how they came into history.
Sangam LiteratureMaduraikkanci (761-763), by Mankudi Maruthanaar contains a full-length description of Madurai and the Pandyan country under NedunjCheliyan III. Netunalvatai (9th century AD)(in the collection of Pattupattu) give a glimpse into the society and commercial activities. One expert has said, since in one sentence in this poem there is a mention of a vembu flower adorning the spear of the hero, he could be identified to belong to the Pandya dynasty, but it is not certain. until 8th century Kanchi was referred as madurakanchi and Madurai was called Koodal,so we do not know if the said city and dynasty are same.
Descriptions of three major kings of Tamil nadu Chera, chola, pandya and minor chieftains called Velir are found in the Akananuru and the Purananuru collections (both 9th century AD). The second poem by Mudinagarayar addresses the Chera king Uthayan Cheralaathan and praises him for his feeding the armies at the Kurukshetra war. This is an obvious anachronism suggesting a king of the early Common Era Tamil country had a role to play in a mythological battle of the Mahabharata epic. Based on this one poem, there have been attempts at dating the Purananuru poems to around 1000 BCE or older. Which as we can see is full of legends and inaccuracies. Akananuru was compiled by Rudrasarman at the behest of the Pandya king Ukkiraperuvazhuthi. This also contains poems from Perunthevanar(9th century AD).
Silapathikaram and Manimekalai Both these works deal with pandya kings extensively. But dating has always been a issue. refer link1
Epigraphy
Meenakshipuram edictEventhough Meenakshipuram edict is said to refer nedunjeliyan , there is noway to verify authenticity of the inscription. And the inscription does not refer to pandyas or nedunjeliyan.
Ashoka edictAshoka edict mentions coda pada satyaputo , ceraputo. Experts says pada in edict means Pandyas , but we do not know for sure. Since no other evidence suggest this. Kautilya when discussion about his southern country karnataka does not say anything about kingdoms beyond that.
Hathigumpha inscriptionsThe Hathigumpha inscriptions of the Kalinga King, Kharavela, (c. 150 BCE) refers to the arrival of a tribute of jewels and elephants from the Pandu king. We have nothing other than that.
Srilankan
Singhalese chronicle Mahawamsa claims that King Vijaya (c. 543 BCE) married a daughter of the Pandu king Kulasekaran, to whom he was sending rich presents every year. Let us see what dipavamsa(4th century AD) say about this, it says Pandu king kulashekara , does not specify whether he is from tamil nadu or he is tamil king. This might be an attempt to link up with Pandavas.
Foreign sources
The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (c. 60 - 100 CE) describes the riches of a 'Medura Regia Pandionis ': ...Nelcynda is distant from Muziris by river and sea about five hundred stadia, and is of another Kingdom, the Pandionis. This place also is situated on a river, about one hundred and twenty stadia from the sea....
The Chinese historian Yu Huan in his 3rd century text, the Weilüe, mentions a The Kingdom of Panyue:"...The kingdom of Panyue is also called Hanyuewang. It is several thousand li to the southeast of Tianzhu (Northern India)...The inhabitants are small; they are the same height as the Chinese..."
The Roman emperor Julian received an embassy from a Pandion about 361.
The 1st century Greek historian Nicolaus of Damascus met, at Damascus, the ambassador sent by an Indian King "named Pandion or, " to Caesar Augustus around 13 CE.
PandionPandion Historians dispute term pandion and they say it is porus that is mentioned not pandyas
Pandu
There are numerous pandu kings in India , both Big and small. Each is an attempt to link up with Pandavas in mahabharata.
Pandyas of West Coast of karnataka
Pandya Bhutala pandya devipandyaAs per Bhutala Pandya Charitam – A Sanskrit book with 13 chapters - Bhutala Pandya’s rule begins at 77 A.D in Barkur as capital in south canara district of Karnataka. Their rule also included parts of Kerala. They are also mentioned in Puranas. Many claim the western sources and the indian sources mentioned refer to Pandyas in south canara. It is interesting to note that the kingdom of Bhutala Pandya was the first to have a delegation of Chinese traders in this part of the Vijayanagar Empire. Chinese porcelain relics can still be found in the temple built by Bhutala Pandya in Barkur (now in Udupi district). Many argue that the ambassador to Rome was from Bhutala pandya kingdom.
Siri Paddana
Antiquity of the Siri paDdana dates back to the period of Tamil Sangham literature. There are several Pali proper nouns in the Siri paDdana that show the backdrop of Buddhism during the composition of the oral epic. Buddhist elements have also been recognized in the environs of Tamil Sangham. The word Sangham (=association) itself is a word associated with. Analogy between the Siri paDdana and the story of Kanaki in Sangham literature suggests that both epics were two different regional versions been built on the same story element. As noted by Peter Claus “there are some tantalizing similarities between the Siri cult and that of Pattini, and also between the Siri legend and that of Kanagi (Pattini)”.The similarity of story element in the Sangham Kanaki and Tulu Siri, leads us to conclude that the composition of Siri paDdana was contemporary of Tamil Sangham literature. Many words in cilapathikaram are of tulu origin.
Barkur in Tulu nadu.
Greek and Roman sources say lot of about the ports of barkur, Kalian, Malpe,Olokhoira(which tamil scholars mention as korkai, tulu people call it as alavakhedu in South canara)
Medieval chera kingdom is Tulu
Medival chera kingdom we know is a Tulu origin. The Namboodaries are from Tulu nadu and they established the chera kingdom. Many of the sangam works are by Chera kings.
Chetty (chettiyar) Tale
The Nagarathar are migrated towards Pandya kingdom(707AD). The reason is that one of the Chola kings fell in love with one of the nagarathar girl, but the King refused to marry her. The nagrathars requested the King to marry her, but the king was very stubborn. Therefore the whole women community gave up their life and the men moved to the Pandya kingdom. The Pandian welcomed the Nagarathars and asked them where they wanted to live in his land. The nagarathars opted for the Chettinad Area. The Pandian wanted the community to grow and therefore he requested the nagarathars to marry again. Therefore they married the girls from the Saiva Vellalar community from Tirunelveli area. May be that is the reason they still have the practice of addressing the dad as Appachi, mom as Aatha, granny as Appatha / Aaya & granddad as Ayya.
Nagarathar, presently known as Nattukottai Nagarathars, are believed to have originated from Chandrapuri in the former Naganadu. There appears to be no authentic record in writing for said belief, excepting what has been handed down to our ancestors by word of mouth, especially 'Thalattu Padal' which itself has taken twist and turn over the years and has lost its originality. Our 'Isaikudimanam' (marriage deed) also bears testimony to our origin wherein it refers to 'Nagavalla…..' Location of former Naganadu is also debatable. Some of our Nagarathars say it is the border between Kerala and Tamilnadu. So many argue that it is the evidence of ancient trade with Rome Greece and South canara
PandavasThe most famous Panadavas has been mentioned in many literary souces , many are pronounced differently. Many say most of the ancient inscriptions refer to pandavas.
so we are not able to come to any conclusion on Ancient pandyas. Many of Sangam literatures who mention Pandyas are after written after 7th century AD. Many of the inscriptions referring to pandyas may not refer to pandavas. Many similar sounding names and trying to attach themselves to Pandavas has made the task of seprating myth and reality very difficult.
Origin of Cholas- Tamil Myth
Cholas are said to be the three dynasties who ruled Tamil nadu from ancient times, But all three dynasties origin remain a question. Let us see the cholas origin.
Sora
The etymology of the word Chola has been agreed upon by many historians and linguists to be derived from the Tamil word Sora or Chora. Moreover, numerous inscriptions confirm that the name of the Dynasty was Sora but pronounced today as Chola(sanskrit).
kalvar caste
Cholas belong to kalvar caste, Kalvar are said to be invaders in sangam literatures better known as kalabhras. The kalvar people still live around tanjor. So are the Cholas natives of Tamil nadu.
chalukya cholas
The Eastern Chalukyas ruled a kingdom in Vengi (eastern Andhra Pradesh) from about 625 until 1070, Then they took over the chola kingdom and dynasty. Earlier three generations of Eastern Chalukyan prince have married chola princess. So the question is how they did not face any resistance. In this background Rajendra Chalukya accended chola throne as Kulothunga chola I , thus annexing chola empire to Eastern chalukya empire and there again was no resistance eventhough Virarajendra died and his son and successor Adhirajendra was assassinated. That clearly caste doubts on cholas as any different from chalukya stock.
Chalukya author Bilhana gives a version of the background to Athirajendra’s troubles in his Vikramankadeva Charita.
'On hearing news of trouble and revolt in the Chola country following the emperor’s death, Vikramaditya, immediately marched to Kanchipuram to quell troubles there. Then he went to Gangaikonda Cholapuram, destroyed the forces of the enemy and installed the prince (Athirajendra) on the throne. After spending a month in the Chola capital, Vikramaditya apparently satisfied that peace was restored, returned to his country. '
Vikramaditya VI has come to chola country and he is called Kannadasandhivigrahi as said by his kannada inscription at the Ranganatha Swami Temple, Srirangam as peacemaker between fighting cousins.
Udayaditya, Choda wrote a treatise Udayadityalankaram in Kannada, 75 stanzas on the art of Poetry based on Dandin Kavyadarsa
And they never combined with pandyas and after accession Rajendra chalukya defeated pandyas and annexed the whole of tamil nadu. This raises the question whether chola are kannada stock.
Cholas and Prakrit.
All the Inscriptions are in prakrit, not in tamil. That has to be noted. If they are Tamil rulers then what was the hesitancy in promoting tamil.
Telugu choda
We do not know the origin of Cholas dynasty,but we know the origin of Telugu cholas pronounced Chodas from 5th century AD onwards. We have inscriptions on the following telugu dynasties who were feudataries of Chalukyas. The chodas trace their decent to Ikshavakus , who trace their origin to Manu, the cholas also trace their origin to Manu, Manu Needhi Cholan
But Rajendra chola came to help Eastern chalukya king Danarnava against Telugu choda king jata choda bhima(Amma II brother in law). Later after Kulothunga I acended throne as chola king, they shifted loyalty to Chola kings.
Muttaraiyar
Before Cholas the area round about Tanjavur was under the sway of a dynasty of chieftains known as the Muttaraiyar whose inscriptions are found at Sendalai and Niyamam, and who seem to have ruled either independently or as vassals of the Pallavas. The Muttaraiyar believed to be ruled from 655AD to 860AD. The city name " Thanjaur" seems to be derived from the name of a Mutharayar king "Thananjay" or "Dhananjaya".
Perumbidugu Muttaraiyan alias Kuvavan Maran (c. CE 655-c.680)
Ilangovadiyariyan alias Maran Paramesvaran (c A.D. 680-c.705)
Perumbidugu Muttaraiyan II alias Suvaran Maran (c. CE 705-c.745)
Videlvidugu Vilupperadi-Araisan alias Sattan Maran (c.A.C. 745-c.770)
Marppidugu alias Peradiaraiyan (c. CE 770-791)
Videlvidugu Muttaraiyan alias Kuvan Sattan (c. CE 791-c.826)
Sattan Paliyili (c. CE 826-c.851)
Tradition says that the muttaraiyar came from North. We find Renati cholas ruling the kadapa region around 600 AD(We have First full length Telugu Inscription). Renati cholas being feudatories of Pulakesi, could have got the kingdom in south during pulakesin raid in tamil nadu. We have Ayyavole 500 (Merchant Guild from Aihole ) using pudukottai as one of their bases. So may be Muttaraiyar were installed in Tanjore by Pulakesi II. There is a kannada inscription in Kodumbalur.
The rule of Muttaryaiyar was ended by Vijayalaya chola, who established the chola dynasty. Vijayala Chola conquered Thanjavur from Elango Mutharayar who was the final ruler of Mutharaiyar dynasty. It is said that in the year A.D.852 Vijayalaya Chola waged war with the Muttaraiyar king Sattan Paliyilli (A.D.826-852) in the neighbouring east, and captured his territory of Thanjavur. While Vijayalaya Chola was supported by Pallava , the Muttaraiyan chief was supported by Pandya. Making use of the opportunity during a war between Pandyas and Pallavas, Vijayalaya having matrimonial relations with cheras captured Thanjavur. After being replaced by cholas, muttaraiyar ruled as Chola vassals in the same region.
Now where was vijayalaya from, how did vijayalaya got an army to defeat a dynasty entrenched in the region. The answer is, he is from another branch from the same mutturaiyar family. First temple work of Vijayalaya was rebuilding a mutturaiyar temple later known as vijaya cholewaram. Both Mutturaiyar and cholas worship Angamma (Ankalamma) devi. Family feud exploited by Pallavas and pandyas. The reason we don't see any swearing from each other. Thus the Chola line of Mutturaiyar comes into place.
Chola decended from Muttaraiyar and Muttaraiyar decended from Telugu Chodas. Dravidian scholars describe muttaraiyar as kalvar or kalabhra and dismiss them as uncivilized.
Pallava origin
Killivalavan was a chola king mentioned in Sangam Literature, and of a period close to that of Nedunkilli and Nalankilli , in the Purananuru and Agananuru.The etymology of Killi is kilai (Branch in Tamil)
The word Pallava means branch in Sanskrit, denoting that they are a later offshoot (Kilai-> Branch(tamil)) of Chutus (satkarnis).Pallava is rendered as Tondaiyar in the Tamil language. The Pallava kings at several places are called Thondamans or Thondaiyarkon.The territory of the Pallavas was known as Tundaka Visaya or Tundaka Rashtra.(tundaka - Branch) The Sanskrit meaning of Pallava is Kilai The Tamil Thondai means the same, It shows that Pallavas are descendants (Kilay or Pirivu) of Chutus(satakarnis).
Karnata dynasties Chalukyas and Rastrakutas call themselves Vallabhas and Pallava also from Karnata have called themselves vallabhas in some places, which translates to valavan in Tamil.
If we take the killi -> Kilai and Pallava -> kilai and vallabha -> valavan
We have killi valvan and it shows that killi valavan is generic term applied to pallava vallabha.
After the pallavas revenge against pulikesin II, Ganga king who had marital relations with chalukyas defeated the pallavas and chased them out of kanchi. So the pallavas shifted themselves to a place called Kaduvetti, which is now in chola country. Many of their inscriptions are from kaduveti. Only after this time we see cholas rising. Cholas might have marital relations with pallavas and putting killivalavan as one of their ancestors, shows their ancestors are pllavas. Until Nirputunga pallava cornation ,they were feudatories of pallavas.
This also solves myth Pallavas are not mentioned in Sangam literature ,so sangam literature has to be dated before pallavas.
Others
There is no tiger in chola country ,but their emblem is Tiger has to be noted, which show they are from outside Chola region.
Chola kingdom fell despite efforts to propup their proxy administration by Hoysalas of Halebidu against Pandyas.
Bengali 's
The Following is a interesting take from Bengali community. Some Sangam works talks about five tribes who settled in Tamil Nadu. These are Naga tribes from north who moved down to south.the
Bengali's say many Naga-worshipping tribes proceeded from Bengal as well as from other parts of Northern India to establish their supremacy in Tamil Nadu. Of these tribes, the Marans, the Cheras and the Pangala Thiraiyar interest us most. The Cheras, it is stated, proceeded to Southern India from the north-west of Pangala or Bengal and established the "Chera" kingdom of much historical note. It is significant that the Cheras are mentioned in the old Brahmin literature as occupying the eastern tract of the Magadba country. As to the Marans, who are said to have been the neighbours of the Cheras in Northern India, it is equally important to note, that the Pandya kings claim to be of Maran descent. The Marans, who were also called Maravars, are reported to have been a very fierce and warlike people, and that they worshipped the goddess Kali on the top-knot of whose hair stood an infuriated cobra snake. The Pangala Thiraiyars are recorded as the latest immigrants, and it is narrated of them, that they proceeded from the sea coast of Bengal by boat and founded the Chola kingdom at Kanchi. As the phrase Pangala or Bangala Thiraiyar is equivalent to (Tlra-Vanga), we can assert un- hesitatingly, that these people had received Aryan influence in Bengal before they left for the Madras coast.
So the question is who are cholas , From the above points they are not definitely tamils, they are either Telugu or kannada stock.
Related Posts
Date of Karikala
Myth of Kallanai by Karikalan
Myth of Tamil Sangam
Kalabhra Interruption
Pallava Origin
Ikshvaku origin
Sora
The etymology of the word Chola has been agreed upon by many historians and linguists to be derived from the Tamil word Sora or Chora. Moreover, numerous inscriptions confirm that the name of the Dynasty was Sora but pronounced today as Chola(sanskrit).
kalvar caste
Cholas belong to kalvar caste, Kalvar are said to be invaders in sangam literatures better known as kalabhras. The kalvar people still live around tanjor. So are the Cholas natives of Tamil nadu.
chalukya cholas
The Eastern Chalukyas ruled a kingdom in Vengi (eastern Andhra Pradesh) from about 625 until 1070, Then they took over the chola kingdom and dynasty. Earlier three generations of Eastern Chalukyan prince have married chola princess. So the question is how they did not face any resistance. In this background Rajendra Chalukya accended chola throne as Kulothunga chola I , thus annexing chola empire to Eastern chalukya empire and there again was no resistance eventhough Virarajendra died and his son and successor Adhirajendra was assassinated. That clearly caste doubts on cholas as any different from chalukya stock.
Chalukya author Bilhana gives a version of the background to Athirajendra’s troubles in his Vikramankadeva Charita.
'On hearing news of trouble and revolt in the Chola country following the emperor’s death, Vikramaditya, immediately marched to Kanchipuram to quell troubles there. Then he went to Gangaikonda Cholapuram, destroyed the forces of the enemy and installed the prince (Athirajendra) on the throne. After spending a month in the Chola capital, Vikramaditya apparently satisfied that peace was restored, returned to his country. '
Vikramaditya VI has come to chola country and he is called Kannadasandhivigrahi as said by his kannada inscription at the Ranganatha Swami Temple, Srirangam as peacemaker between fighting cousins.
Udayaditya, Choda wrote a treatise Udayadityalankaram in Kannada, 75 stanzas on the art of Poetry based on Dandin Kavyadarsa
And they never combined with pandyas and after accession Rajendra chalukya defeated pandyas and annexed the whole of tamil nadu. This raises the question whether chola are kannada stock.
Cholas and Prakrit.
All the Inscriptions are in prakrit, not in tamil. That has to be noted. If they are Tamil rulers then what was the hesitancy in promoting tamil.
Telugu choda
We do not know the origin of Cholas dynasty,but we know the origin of Telugu cholas pronounced Chodas from 5th century AD onwards. We have inscriptions on the following telugu dynasties who were feudataries of Chalukyas. The chodas trace their decent to Ikshavakus , who trace their origin to Manu, the cholas also trace their origin to Manu, Manu Needhi Cholan
- Velanati Chodas ( Ruled the Velanadu Region Current E.G,W.G and Krishna Districts)
- Renati Chodas (Ruled the Renadu Regions Current Cuddapah, Kurnool Regions)
- Pottapi Chodas (Ruled the Renadu Regions Current Cuddapah, Chittor Districts)
- Konidena Chodas (Ruled the Palanadu region Current Guntur, Prakasam Districts)
- Nannuru Chodas (Ruled the Pakanadu region Current Anantapur District)
- Nellore Chodas (Ruled the Nellore,Chittor, Chengalpeta and Cuddapah Regions)
But Rajendra chola came to help Eastern chalukya king Danarnava against Telugu choda king jata choda bhima(Amma II brother in law). Later after Kulothunga I acended throne as chola king, they shifted loyalty to Chola kings.
Muttaraiyar
Before Cholas the area round about Tanjavur was under the sway of a dynasty of chieftains known as the Muttaraiyar whose inscriptions are found at Sendalai and Niyamam, and who seem to have ruled either independently or as vassals of the Pallavas. The Muttaraiyar believed to be ruled from 655AD to 860AD. The city name " Thanjaur" seems to be derived from the name of a Mutharayar king "Thananjay" or "Dhananjaya".
Perumbidugu Muttaraiyan alias Kuvavan Maran (c. CE 655-c.680)
Ilangovadiyariyan alias Maran Paramesvaran (c A.D. 680-c.705)
Perumbidugu Muttaraiyan II alias Suvaran Maran (c. CE 705-c.745)
Videlvidugu Vilupperadi-Araisan alias Sattan Maran (c.A.C. 745-c.770)
Marppidugu alias Peradiaraiyan (c. CE 770-791)
Videlvidugu Muttaraiyan alias Kuvan Sattan (c. CE 791-c.826)
Sattan Paliyili (c. CE 826-c.851)
Tradition says that the muttaraiyar came from North. We find Renati cholas ruling the kadapa region around 600 AD(We have First full length Telugu Inscription). Renati cholas being feudatories of Pulakesi, could have got the kingdom in south during pulakesin raid in tamil nadu. We have Ayyavole 500 (Merchant Guild from Aihole ) using pudukottai as one of their bases. So may be Muttaraiyar were installed in Tanjore by Pulakesi II. There is a kannada inscription in Kodumbalur.
The rule of Muttaryaiyar was ended by Vijayalaya chola, who established the chola dynasty. Vijayala Chola conquered Thanjavur from Elango Mutharayar who was the final ruler of Mutharaiyar dynasty. It is said that in the year A.D.852 Vijayalaya Chola waged war with the Muttaraiyar king Sattan Paliyilli (A.D.826-852) in the neighbouring east, and captured his territory of Thanjavur. While Vijayalaya Chola was supported by Pallava , the Muttaraiyan chief was supported by Pandya. Making use of the opportunity during a war between Pandyas and Pallavas, Vijayalaya having matrimonial relations with cheras captured Thanjavur. After being replaced by cholas, muttaraiyar ruled as Chola vassals in the same region.
Now where was vijayalaya from, how did vijayalaya got an army to defeat a dynasty entrenched in the region. The answer is, he is from another branch from the same mutturaiyar family. First temple work of Vijayalaya was rebuilding a mutturaiyar temple later known as vijaya cholewaram. Both Mutturaiyar and cholas worship Angamma (Ankalamma) devi. Family feud exploited by Pallavas and pandyas. The reason we don't see any swearing from each other. Thus the Chola line of Mutturaiyar comes into place.
Chola decended from Muttaraiyar and Muttaraiyar decended from Telugu Chodas. Dravidian scholars describe muttaraiyar as kalvar or kalabhra and dismiss them as uncivilized.
Pallava origin
Killivalavan was a chola king mentioned in Sangam Literature, and of a period close to that of Nedunkilli and Nalankilli , in the Purananuru and Agananuru.The etymology of Killi is kilai (Branch in Tamil)
The word Pallava means branch in Sanskrit, denoting that they are a later offshoot (Kilai-> Branch(tamil)) of Chutus (satkarnis).Pallava is rendered as Tondaiyar in the Tamil language. The Pallava kings at several places are called Thondamans or Thondaiyarkon.The territory of the Pallavas was known as Tundaka Visaya or Tundaka Rashtra.(tundaka - Branch) The Sanskrit meaning of Pallava is Kilai The Tamil Thondai means the same, It shows that Pallavas are descendants (Kilay or Pirivu) of Chutus(satakarnis).
Karnata dynasties Chalukyas and Rastrakutas call themselves Vallabhas and Pallava also from Karnata have called themselves vallabhas in some places, which translates to valavan in Tamil.
If we take the killi -> Kilai and Pallava -> kilai and vallabha -> valavan
We have killi valvan and it shows that killi valavan is generic term applied to pallava vallabha.
After the pallavas revenge against pulikesin II, Ganga king who had marital relations with chalukyas defeated the pallavas and chased them out of kanchi. So the pallavas shifted themselves to a place called Kaduvetti, which is now in chola country. Many of their inscriptions are from kaduveti. Only after this time we see cholas rising. Cholas might have marital relations with pallavas and putting killivalavan as one of their ancestors, shows their ancestors are pllavas. Until Nirputunga pallava cornation ,they were feudatories of pallavas.
This also solves myth Pallavas are not mentioned in Sangam literature ,so sangam literature has to be dated before pallavas.
Others
There is no tiger in chola country ,but their emblem is Tiger has to be noted, which show they are from outside Chola region.
Chola kingdom fell despite efforts to propup their proxy administration by Hoysalas of Halebidu against Pandyas.
Bengali 's
The Following is a interesting take from Bengali community. Some Sangam works talks about five tribes who settled in Tamil Nadu. These are Naga tribes from north who moved down to south.the
- VaeLir - the farmers,
- Mazhavar - the hill people who gather hill products, and the traders
- Naagar - people in charge of border security, who guarded the city wall and distant fortresses .
- Kadambar - people who thrive on forests
- Thiraiyar - the seafarers.
Bengali's say many Naga-worshipping tribes proceeded from Bengal as well as from other parts of Northern India to establish their supremacy in Tamil Nadu. Of these tribes, the Marans, the Cheras and the Pangala Thiraiyar interest us most. The Cheras, it is stated, proceeded to Southern India from the north-west of Pangala or Bengal and established the "Chera" kingdom of much historical note. It is significant that the Cheras are mentioned in the old Brahmin literature as occupying the eastern tract of the Magadba country. As to the Marans, who are said to have been the neighbours of the Cheras in Northern India, it is equally important to note, that the Pandya kings claim to be of Maran descent. The Marans, who were also called Maravars, are reported to have been a very fierce and warlike people, and that they worshipped the goddess Kali on the top-knot of whose hair stood an infuriated cobra snake. The Pangala Thiraiyars are recorded as the latest immigrants, and it is narrated of them, that they proceeded from the sea coast of Bengal by boat and founded the Chola kingdom at Kanchi. As the phrase Pangala or Bangala Thiraiyar is equivalent to (Tlra-Vanga), we can assert un- hesitatingly, that these people had received Aryan influence in Bengal before they left for the Madras coast.
So the question is who are cholas , From the above points they are not definitely tamils, they are either Telugu or kannada stock.
Related Posts
Date of Karikala
Myth of Kallanai by Karikalan
Myth of Tamil Sangam
Kalabhra Interruption
Pallava Origin
Ikshvaku origin
Date of Shankara
Date of Shankara the great saint of Hinduism is always been controversial. Dates ranging from 5th century BC to 9th century AD. Let us analyze the dates.
Internal Evidence
The most important internal evidence comes from Sankara's verbatim quotation of Dharmakirti, the buddhist logician. Hsuan Tsang , the Chinese pilgrim, who visited India in the time of Harshavardhana, king of Thanesar (606 - 647 CE), gives clues to Dharmakirti's date. He also mentions Bhartrhari , but not of Sankara. It follows that Sankara is post-Dharmakirti, and possibly post-Hsuan-Tsang also.
Astronomical Details
Various Sankara-vijaya texts are not of much use. The details in one work contradict those in another. Dates ranging from the 5th cent BCE to 8th cent CE have been calculated on the basis of such astronomical details. One further complication is that some astronomical information is said to have been obtained from works which are not available anywhere in India. So no firm conclusion can be drawn based on this.
Records of Mutts
Whether Sankara established any Mutts at all has been questioned. Paul Hacker attributes the tradition of four amnaya-maths at Sringeri, Puri, Dvaraka and Joshimath to Vidyaranyasvamin. The native oral tradition, takes the history of these four Mutts,each associated with one of the four geographical directions and one of the four vedas, to Sankaracarya himself. The dasanami sannyasi-sampradaya, with its various akhadas in northern India, accepts affiliation only with these four mutts. There historical evidence for the existence of the oldest dasanami akhadas as early as the 9th cent. CE. It is immaterial whether Sankara established them himself or whether these four mutts developed naturally at the places where the four famous disciples of Sankara lived and taught. Of these four mutts, the Joshimath title had long been vacant, till it was revived in 1940 CE. So, it does not have many ancient records. The Dvaraka and Puri mutts have, in the past, claimed a date of 5th century BCE for Sankara. This is partly based upon a dating of a grant by a king named Sudhanva who is supposed to have been a contemporary of Sankara. Nothing else is known about this king, and the grant itself has not been dated with any accuracy.And Dvaraka and puri mutts have patchy histories, with periods when there were no presiding Sankaracaryas.
Sringeri Mutt
Sringeri mutt in karnataka has been the only mutt of the original four which has had an unbroken succession of mathadhipatis, as southern India has not experienced as many political upheavals as the north. The Sringeri mutts record states that Sankara was born in the 14th year of the reign of Vikramaditya. The record does not give any clue about the identity of this king. Some 19th century researchers identified this king with the famous Vikramaditya of the Gupta dynasty, thereby postulating a date of 44 BCE for Sankara. Gap of 700 years was then assigned to Suresvara. The later successors in the Sringeri list can all be dated reasonably accurately from the 8th century downwards. If one identifies the Vikramaditya as a member of the Western Chalukya dynasty, which ruled from Badami in Karnataka. The Chalukya dynasty reached its greatest fame in the time of Pulakesin II, who defeated Harshavardhana. There were two kings named Vikramaditya in this Chalukya dynasty - Vikramaditya I ruled in the late 7th century CE, while Vikramaditya II ruled in the early 8th century. It is more reasonable to identify the Vikramaditya of the Sringeri record with one of these two Chalukyan kings, who ruled from Karnataka, rather than the northern gupta king, whose empire did not include southern India. This interpretation of the Sringeri record is also consistent with the internal evidence from Sankara's works.
Mutt Politics
In addition to these four original mutts, a number of other advaita mutts have come into being over the centuries, some of which are quite well-known. These mutts either started out as branches of the original institutions, or were set up as independent monasteries by notable sannyasis of the dasa-nami order. With the proliferation of such mutts came a number of "traditions," many of them conflicting with one another in details. some of these mutts also claim to have been established by Sankara himself., Some of them also claim 5th century BCE to be the date of Sankara.
The intimate connection of the founders of the Vijayanagara empire with the Sringeri mutt, and the competition by other mathadhipatis in the south for similar honors as traditionally accorded to the Sringeri Mutt. Every southern Mutt with a claim to be the "original" one wants to deny Sringeri's chronological primacy. This denial only has the effect of reinforcing the fact that Sringeri has been the most important advaita mutt for centuries. As such, their conflicting claims about Sankara's date have to be evaluated in the context of their political motivations in putting forth such dates.
Kanchi Mutt
Fifth advaita mutt at Kanchipuram is very active today, does not mean that it has always been so, nor does such activity lend any special credibility to its claims to antiquity. The political influence and prestige that a Mutt enjoys today also do not confer any legitimacy to such claims. It is inconceivable that the dasa-nami-sampradaya would have overlooked a fifth mutt in choosing its affiliations. Claims to historicity that are made in a spirit of political one-upmanship seldom stand up to serious scrutiny. There is no necessary correlation between the modern activity of an advaita mutt and its claimed antiquity.
Gaudapada
Gaudapada is ParamaGuru of Shankara. Guru Govinda was Shankara's guru. So if we find the date of Guru, we can arrive at the date of Shishya. Gaudapada lived after the major Buddhist writers especially, Vasubhandhu, Nagarjuna, aryadeva (disciple of Nagarjuna) whose work he clearly reflects. In the 6th century work of Bhavaviveka, there is a direct quotations from Guadapada. Bhavaviveka was junior contemproary of Dharmapala whose date is confirmed by Chinese travellers in 5th century AD. So he has to be earlier than that, that is 5th century AD. Traditional advaitha list Gaudapada is student of Shukdeva who in turn was student of Ved Vyasa of Mahabharata. We can even argue bhavaviveka and Gaudapada are arguing from same source. Many also argue that Gaudapada is a institution not a person. To cut short the discussion, we can say that Gaudapada lived around 5th century AD. When shankara says Gaudapada to be his paramaguru, we have to take the context. Guru Govinda padacharya was shankara's guru and his guru greatest Guru is Guru Gaudapada. In this context we can see shankara comes around 800 AD date.
conclusion
The official date accepted currently is 788-820 CE, and the Government of India celebrated the 1200th anniversary of Sankara's birth in 1988. This date is largely based upon one traditional view prevalent in India.
Internal Evidence
The most important internal evidence comes from Sankara's verbatim quotation of Dharmakirti, the buddhist logician. Hsuan Tsang , the Chinese pilgrim, who visited India in the time of Harshavardhana, king of Thanesar (606 - 647 CE), gives clues to Dharmakirti's date. He also mentions Bhartrhari , but not of Sankara. It follows that Sankara is post-Dharmakirti, and possibly post-Hsuan-Tsang also.
Astronomical Details
Various Sankara-vijaya texts are not of much use. The details in one work contradict those in another. Dates ranging from the 5th cent BCE to 8th cent CE have been calculated on the basis of such astronomical details. One further complication is that some astronomical information is said to have been obtained from works which are not available anywhere in India. So no firm conclusion can be drawn based on this.
Records of Mutts
Whether Sankara established any Mutts at all has been questioned. Paul Hacker attributes the tradition of four amnaya-maths at Sringeri, Puri, Dvaraka and Joshimath to Vidyaranyasvamin. The native oral tradition, takes the history of these four Mutts,each associated with one of the four geographical directions and one of the four vedas, to Sankaracarya himself. The dasanami sannyasi-sampradaya, with its various akhadas in northern India, accepts affiliation only with these four mutts. There historical evidence for the existence of the oldest dasanami akhadas as early as the 9th cent. CE. It is immaterial whether Sankara established them himself or whether these four mutts developed naturally at the places where the four famous disciples of Sankara lived and taught. Of these four mutts, the Joshimath title had long been vacant, till it was revived in 1940 CE. So, it does not have many ancient records. The Dvaraka and Puri mutts have, in the past, claimed a date of 5th century BCE for Sankara. This is partly based upon a dating of a grant by a king named Sudhanva who is supposed to have been a contemporary of Sankara. Nothing else is known about this king, and the grant itself has not been dated with any accuracy.And Dvaraka and puri mutts have patchy histories, with periods when there were no presiding Sankaracaryas.
Sringeri Mutt
Sringeri mutt in karnataka has been the only mutt of the original four which has had an unbroken succession of mathadhipatis, as southern India has not experienced as many political upheavals as the north. The Sringeri mutts record states that Sankara was born in the 14th year of the reign of Vikramaditya. The record does not give any clue about the identity of this king. Some 19th century researchers identified this king with the famous Vikramaditya of the Gupta dynasty, thereby postulating a date of 44 BCE for Sankara. Gap of 700 years was then assigned to Suresvara. The later successors in the Sringeri list can all be dated reasonably accurately from the 8th century downwards. If one identifies the Vikramaditya as a member of the Western Chalukya dynasty, which ruled from Badami in Karnataka. The Chalukya dynasty reached its greatest fame in the time of Pulakesin II, who defeated Harshavardhana. There were two kings named Vikramaditya in this Chalukya dynasty - Vikramaditya I ruled in the late 7th century CE, while Vikramaditya II ruled in the early 8th century. It is more reasonable to identify the Vikramaditya of the Sringeri record with one of these two Chalukyan kings, who ruled from Karnataka, rather than the northern gupta king, whose empire did not include southern India. This interpretation of the Sringeri record is also consistent with the internal evidence from Sankara's works.
Mutt Politics
In addition to these four original mutts, a number of other advaita mutts have come into being over the centuries, some of which are quite well-known. These mutts either started out as branches of the original institutions, or were set up as independent monasteries by notable sannyasis of the dasa-nami order. With the proliferation of such mutts came a number of "traditions," many of them conflicting with one another in details. some of these mutts also claim to have been established by Sankara himself., Some of them also claim 5th century BCE to be the date of Sankara.
The intimate connection of the founders of the Vijayanagara empire with the Sringeri mutt, and the competition by other mathadhipatis in the south for similar honors as traditionally accorded to the Sringeri Mutt. Every southern Mutt with a claim to be the "original" one wants to deny Sringeri's chronological primacy. This denial only has the effect of reinforcing the fact that Sringeri has been the most important advaita mutt for centuries. As such, their conflicting claims about Sankara's date have to be evaluated in the context of their political motivations in putting forth such dates.
Kanchi Mutt
Fifth advaita mutt at Kanchipuram is very active today, does not mean that it has always been so, nor does such activity lend any special credibility to its claims to antiquity. The political influence and prestige that a Mutt enjoys today also do not confer any legitimacy to such claims. It is inconceivable that the dasa-nami-sampradaya would have overlooked a fifth mutt in choosing its affiliations. Claims to historicity that are made in a spirit of political one-upmanship seldom stand up to serious scrutiny. There is no necessary correlation between the modern activity of an advaita mutt and its claimed antiquity.
Gaudapada
Gaudapada is ParamaGuru of Shankara. Guru Govinda was Shankara's guru. So if we find the date of Guru, we can arrive at the date of Shishya. Gaudapada lived after the major Buddhist writers especially, Vasubhandhu, Nagarjuna, aryadeva (disciple of Nagarjuna) whose work he clearly reflects. In the 6th century work of Bhavaviveka, there is a direct quotations from Guadapada. Bhavaviveka was junior contemproary of Dharmapala whose date is confirmed by Chinese travellers in 5th century AD. So he has to be earlier than that, that is 5th century AD. Traditional advaitha list Gaudapada is student of Shukdeva who in turn was student of Ved Vyasa of Mahabharata. We can even argue bhavaviveka and Gaudapada are arguing from same source. Many also argue that Gaudapada is a institution not a person. To cut short the discussion, we can say that Gaudapada lived around 5th century AD. When shankara says Gaudapada to be his paramaguru, we have to take the context. Guru Govinda padacharya was shankara's guru and his guru greatest Guru is Guru Gaudapada. In this context we can see shankara comes around 800 AD date.
conclusion
The official date accepted currently is 788-820 CE, and the Government of India celebrated the 1200th anniversary of Sankara's birth in 1988. This date is largely based upon one traditional view prevalent in India.
Who are Sangam Cheras
There are two cheras . Sangam cheras and Medieveal cheras.
Sangam Cheras
Early cheras were in Tamil Nadu in what is today Karur, Coimbatore,Erode and salem districts in Tamil Nadu. Had their capital in Vanchi, present day Karur. The only source available for us regarding the early Chera Kings is the anthologies of the Sangam literature. There is a lot of dispute on the age of sangam literature. The internal chronology of this literature is still far from settled. The Sangam literature is full of names of the kings and the princes, and of the poets who extolled them. Despite a rich literature that depicts the life and work of these people, these are not connected history to history so far. Their capital is stated to be modern Karur in Tamilnadu and were also called Kongars.
Ganga rule
If we see other rulers at that time. Gangas who also ruled some parts of kongu nadu(Karur, Coimbatore,Erode and salem districts in Tamil Nadu), do not show any signs of presence of Cheras in the neibhourhood. Even though they ruled same parts of Kongu nadu in tamil nadu at the same time as sangam cheras, they did not have any conflict or any relation with cheras that is puzziling and is one of the reasons of dismissing the sangam sources.
Epigraphic sources
Aihole inscriptions mention kadamba rulers in kerala
So there is no clarity on the sangam chera rule. By sangam anthologies the date should be around second century AD. The Ganga rulers seems no knowledge of them. Many of the sangam works have loopholes like Gajabahu synchronism. Eventhough the sangam literature talks of chera rulers, the rulers in inscriptions called themselves as ai's , ori's. The foreign sources mention about ports of west coast. We do not know if chera is kerala in ancient times. The only sources girinar inscription of ashoka talks about keraputo, again we do not know it means kerala or chera. so the arguement continues.
Sangam Cheras
Early cheras were in Tamil Nadu in what is today Karur, Coimbatore,Erode and salem districts in Tamil Nadu. Had their capital in Vanchi, present day Karur. The only source available for us regarding the early Chera Kings is the anthologies of the Sangam literature. There is a lot of dispute on the age of sangam literature. The internal chronology of this literature is still far from settled. The Sangam literature is full of names of the kings and the princes, and of the poets who extolled them. Despite a rich literature that depicts the life and work of these people, these are not connected history to history so far. Their capital is stated to be modern Karur in Tamilnadu and were also called Kongars.
Ganga rule
If we see other rulers at that time. Gangas who also ruled some parts of kongu nadu(Karur, Coimbatore,Erode and salem districts in Tamil Nadu), do not show any signs of presence of Cheras in the neibhourhood. Even though they ruled same parts of Kongu nadu in tamil nadu at the same time as sangam cheras, they did not have any conflict or any relation with cheras that is puzziling and is one of the reasons of dismissing the sangam sources.
Epigraphic sources
- Ashoka girinar inscription say keraputo
- Periplus of erythraeon sea mention Muziris cited as musiri in sangam literature
- Ptolemy refers to Muziris, Nelcynda and tyndis in kingdom of keraputra
- Pugalur (Aranattarmalai) inscription. This inscription refers to three generations of Chera rulers Adam Cel Irrumporai, his son Perumkadungo, and his son Ilamkadungo. But this inscription is highly disputed.
- Jambai inscription tells about atiyaman found in sangam literature. Also this inscription is highly disputed.
- GajaBahu synchronism, which we have discussed in silapathikaram article
Aihole inscriptions mention kadamba rulers in kerala
So there is no clarity on the sangam chera rule. By sangam anthologies the date should be around second century AD. The Ganga rulers seems no knowledge of them. Many of the sangam works have loopholes like Gajabahu synchronism. Eventhough the sangam literature talks of chera rulers, the rulers in inscriptions called themselves as ai's , ori's. The foreign sources mention about ports of west coast. We do not know if chera is kerala in ancient times. The only sources girinar inscription of ashoka talks about keraputo, again we do not know it means kerala or chera. so the arguement continues.
Myth of Saint Thomas India Visit.
The chief items of information contained in C.A. Simon's writings are as follows:
- St. Thomas, one of the twelve apostles of Christ (a disputed fact), came to India in A.D. 52 with Habban, a foreign trader.
- He landed at Maliankara (Cranganore) in Kerala, preached the Gospel, wrought miracles, and got many converts.
- Then he came to Mailepuram (Mylapore), then went to China, after some time returned to Maliankara, and from there came again to Madras where he spent the rest of his life teaching, preaching and drawing a large number of the oppressed and the suppressed into his fold.
- He performed miracles which made the local king Mahadeva offer him a place near the seashore where the old church of Mylapore now stands.
- His conversion activities incensed the orthodox and enemies from their rank vowed to finish him.
- He had therefore to hide himself in a cave at the Little Mount near the present St. Thomas Mount (about five kms. away from Mylapore).
- Finally, he was murdered there, i.e., at St. Thomas Mount, by those fanatical enemies.
- His body was brought to Mylapore and buried in A.D. 73 at a spot which was forgotten for many centuries.
But the greatest miracle was to occur in 1523, nearly fifteen hundred years after the saint was supposed to have died. That was the rediscovery of the tomb and remains of the murdered saint by the priest in charge of the Mylapore church for building a new church—pieces of bones, a skull, a vessel containing mud supposedly from the place where the saint's blood was shed, and a spearhead of the shape of an olive leaf fixed on a wooden shaft.
Wonder of wonders! Even after about fifteen centuries these remains, including the stick, had not become fossilized or crumbled into dust, but could be got intact and buried at an undisclosed place in the church. That church was damaged beyond recognition in the course of the battles waged round it during the rivalry between the Dutch, the French, and the British and Hyder Ali. (Strangely, the Portuguese are not said to be involved in it, perhaps because they were the heroic defenders) At last in 1893 the present Santhome Church with Gothic architectural excellence was built. (It must be by the Portuguese and none else.) The papal seal over this whole story was stamped in 1956 when Pope Pius XII gave it recognition as a Minor Basilica , all the four major ones being outside India.
while some Christian historians doubted the very existence of an apostle named St. Thomas, some others had denied credibility to the Acts of Thomas, I am more concerned about the visit of st. Thomas and his stay here. Let us now analyze the facts.
1.The respected Mylapore archaeologist Dr. R. Nagaswami, who has worked on San Thome Cathedral with the Jesuits, tells of the destruction of Jain and Buddhist temples along with all of the buildings of the Kapaleeswarar Temple on the Mylapore beach. Before him the Portuguese historian Gaspar Correa describes a holocaust that extended from Mylapore to Big Mount, south of the Adyar River. Even the St. Thomas protagonist Archbishop Arulappa admitted that Hindu temples once stood on the sites now occupied by St. Thomas–related churches in Madras, at Mylapore, Saidapet, and Big Mount now called St. Thomas Mount.
2.the Protestant missionary Claudius Buchanan, writing in the last century, in Christian Researches in India, says, "The nation in general are called St. Thomas Christians in all parts of India, and it imparts an antiquity that reaches far beyond the Eutychians and Nestorians or any other sect... I am satisfied that we have as good authority for believing that the Apostle Thomas died in India as that the Apostle Peter died in Rome."
This "good authority" is of course no authority at all. There is no historical evidence that St. Peter died in Rome or that St. Thomas died in India. The assertion that the appellation "St. Thomas" Christians is used in all parts of India and imparts an antiquity, is simply not true. Syrian Christians were not called St. Thomas Christians until after the fourteenth century and that too by Roman Catholic missionaries in Malabar. Claudius could as easily argue that Syrian Christians come from Syria because they are called "Syrian" Christians. He would be closer to the truth.
3.the Roman Catholic historian Fr. A. Mathias Mundadan, writing in the early 1980s, in History of Christianity in India: From the Beginning up to the Middle of the Sixteenth Century, says, "Our effort should be to concentrate on the common, basic content of the tradition upheld by the various versions and couched in many unnecessary flourishes. The investigations made ... into the western tradition and different aspects of the Indian tradition give me the impression that the central content stands out in clear relief, namely St. Thomas the Apostle preached, died and was buried in South India."
Fr. Mundadan is saying that he supports the Portuguese tale introduced into India in the sixteenth century and imposed on Mylapore by fraud and force of arms, even though it is known to be a fabricated tradition. This suggests that his position is political rather than academic. He has done his research with a foregone conclusion in mind and has reached the inevitable result. It is typical Roman Catholic scholarship and until the story of St. Thomas is taken out of such hands and looked at in its totality, which includes the traditions of the Hindu society in which it survives, we will never know the full truth of St. Thomas and India.
4.There is yet more reasoning for St. Thomas in India, which is often presented to laymen by motivated clerics. It is a psychological device to put the unwary St. Thomas doubter on the defensive. It is called the "Why not?" argument. Duncan Forbes uses it in his book The Heart of India, more in an attempt to convince himself than his reader. He writes, "And why not believe?... There is really no reason why St. Thomas should not have come here. The route between the Roman world and India, which was Romes source for large quantities of fine muslins, pearls and spices, was well established."
The route between Rome and India was indeed old and established and the travellers went the other way too, to Alexandria and Rome from India. But the possibility that St. Thomas could come to India from Palestine does not prove that he did so. The possibility does not even make for a probability. We are looking for historical proof—travellers' tales just don't constitute proof; they only excite the imagination.
5.the Acta Indica by P.V. Mathew. It has everything in it to make a good nights read—exploding meteors over Malabar and Prophet Mani of Persia camping at Kanchipuram—but it doesn't have St. Thomas buried in Mylapore. P.V. Mathew believes that St. Thomas came to Malabar but not to Mylapore and asserts that the Mylapore story is a Portuguese invention. Not willing to leave well enough alone, he then asserts that Prophet Manis disciple Mar Ammon is buried in Mylapore instead. This Mar Ammon, according to P.V. Mathew, is now worshipped in Tamil villages as Goddess Mariamman, that Prophet Mani is worshipped in the same villages as God Subramanian, and that the Pallavas were really Persians.
6. Papacy: Its Doctrine and History (Voice of India, New Delhi, 1986) the historian Sita Ram Goel writes about the St. Thomas myth:
7.some historians have seriously doubted the very existence of an apostle named Thomas. Distinguished scholars like R. Garbe, A. Harnack and L. de la Vallee-Poussin have denied credibility to the Acts of Thomas, an apocryphal work on which the whole story is based. Some others, who accept the fourth century Catholic tradition about the travels of St. Thomas, point to the lack of evidence that he ever went east beyond Ethiopia and Arabia Felix. The confusion, according to them, has arisen because the ancient geographers often mistook these two countries for India.
8.Stephen Neill in his History of Christianity in India: The Beginnings to 1707 A.D. published by the Cambridge University Press, England, as late as 1984. He says,'A number of scholars, among whom are to be mentioned with respect Bishop A.E. Medlycott, J.N. Farquhar and the Jesuit J. Dahlman, have built on slender foundations what can only be called Thomas romances, such as reflect the vividness of their imaginations rather than the prudence of rigid historical critics.' Pained by the spread of this spurious history among large sections of Indian Christians, he observes,'Millions of Christians in India are certain that the founder of their church was none other than apostle Thomas himself. The historian cannot prove it to them that they are mistaken in their belief. He may feel it right to warn them that historical research cannot pronounce on the matter with a confidence equal to that which they entertain by faith.' Stephen Neill was a bishop who had spent long years in India.
9.There is reason to believe that St. Thomas Church stands on the ruins of a Jain Neminathaswami temple and a Hindu Shiva temple which had a Nataraja shrine attached. The epigraphical data for the existence of the Jain temple on this site is recorded in Jain Inscriptions in Tamil Nadu by A. Ekambaranath and C.K. Sivaprakasham (Research Foundation for Jainology, Madras, 1987). The evidence for the existence of the Shiva temple, which may be the original Kapaleeswara Temple on the Mylapore beach that got eroded by the sea, is compiled in an excellent Tamil-language book called Indiavil Saint Thomas Kattukkadai (The Saint Thomas Myth in India) by Ved Prakash (R.A.F.R., Madras, 1989).
What is mentioned about the Shiva temple is as follows: "...many evidences available in Santhome Church show there was a Shiva temple and it was occupied, then step by step demolished and converted into a church. Many documents and books also prove this. A fragmentary Tamil inscription of 8 lines on a stone found at the cathedral registers a tax-free gift for burning at night a lamp before the image of Kuthadumdevar (Nataraja) in the temple of Suramudayar (Suramudayar Kuthadum Devarkku) was found in 1924. It belongs to Vikrama Chola's time, i.e., 12th century. Moreover, when the urchava murthy was taken for procession from the existing Kapaleeswara Temple, there was a practice of lowering it reverently three times before the Santhome Church at that time (16th-18th centuries). The temple was there up to the 16th century. Then, when the Christians started demolishing it completely, Hindus built the present temple out of whatever they could salvage from the ruins of the old temple.
10.Sometime about A.D. 450 one Canai Thomas with seventy-two Syrian families arrived in Kerala and whatever traces of early Christianity there were got mixed up with this Syrian brand of it. So these Christians, known till then as Nazaranis (Nazarenes), got also the name Syrian Christians. Their connection to this day is with the Orthodox Church of Syria. The grafting of this powerful group with the existing fragmentary Christian groups must have led to the identification of Kerala Christians with the Thomas tradition, to which they hold steadfastly to this day. The St. Thomas of their fancy must really be Canai Thomas of Syria.
11.The great Saivite saint of sixth century A.D., Tirujnanasambandar, sings in the 6th Poompavai Padikam Thevaram:
The Lord of Kapaleeswaram sat watching the people of Mylapore
A place full of flowering coconut palms
Taking ceremonial bath in the sea on the full moon day of the month of Masai.
So in conclusion the Visit of St. Thomas is a myth. why was such a myth spread
Some of other Thomas visit Legends
1.S. Muthiah's Madras Discovered published by Affiliated East-West Press. The following are the facts gleaned from it: Thomas shunted between St. Thomas Mount and Mylapore, separated by about five kms., doing his preaching work and converting thousands. He lived in a cave at Little Mount in Saidapet, three kms. from St. Thomas Mount. There is, to the east of the cave, an opening which is said to have opened in those days into a tunnel from the Little Mount to St. Thomas Mount. The saint is supposed to have fled from his persecutors through this cave. He was however murdered by them at St. Thomas Mount. Mylapore has only the honour of being the place where his dead body was brought and buried. From there his remains were taken to Edessa in Syria where every July a great festival is held to commemorate his reburial. From Edessa they are said to have been moved to the Greek island of Chios, thence to Ortona on Italy's Adriatic coast where they remain to this day. But each resting place still has some relic of Thomas—Madras has a small hand bone and the head of a lance in the St. Thomas Basilica crypt.
2.n 1547 the Vicar of Mylapore during excavation at St. Thomas Mount discovered a A bleeding cross with old Pahlavi inscriptions. It had spots that looked like blood stains which, it is claimed, reappeared after being rubbed away. This cross is built into the wall behind the altar of the church on the Mount dedicated to Madonna of the Mount. The tradition about this cross is that it was chiselled from a rock by the apostle himself. It is said that it used to bleed periodically. The first publicly noticed bleeding was on 15 December 1558 and the last in 1704.
Source
The Myth of Saint Thomas and the Mylapore Shiva Temple by Ishwar Sharan
8.Stephen Neill in his History of Christianity in India: The Beginnings to 1707 A.D. published by the Cambridge University Press, England, as late as 1984. He says,'A number of scholars, among whom are to be mentioned with respect Bishop A.E. Medlycott, J.N. Farquhar and the Jesuit J. Dahlman, have built on slender foundations what can only be called Thomas romances, such as reflect the vividness of their imaginations rather than the prudence of rigid historical critics.' Pained by the spread of this spurious history among large sections of Indian Christians, he observes,'Millions of Christians in India are certain that the founder of their church was none other than apostle Thomas himself. The historian cannot prove it to them that they are mistaken in their belief. He may feel it right to warn them that historical research cannot pronounce on the matter with a confidence equal to that which they entertain by faith.' Stephen Neill was a bishop who had spent long years in India.
What is mentioned about the Shiva temple is as follows: "...many evidences available in Santhome Church show there was a Shiva temple and it was occupied, then step by step demolished and converted into a church. Many documents and books also prove this. A fragmentary Tamil inscription of 8 lines on a stone found at the cathedral registers a tax-free gift for burning at night a lamp before the image of Kuthadumdevar (Nataraja) in the temple of Suramudayar (Suramudayar Kuthadum Devarkku) was found in 1924. It belongs to Vikrama Chola's time, i.e., 12th century. Moreover, when the urchava murthy was taken for procession from the existing Kapaleeswara Temple, there was a practice of lowering it reverently three times before the Santhome Church at that time (16th-18th centuries). The temple was there up to the 16th century. Then, when the Christians started demolishing it completely, Hindus built the present temple out of whatever they could salvage from the ruins of the old temple.
10.Sometime about A.D. 450 one Canai Thomas with seventy-two Syrian families arrived in Kerala and whatever traces of early Christianity there were got mixed up with this Syrian brand of it. So these Christians, known till then as Nazaranis (Nazarenes), got also the name Syrian Christians. Their connection to this day is with the Orthodox Church of Syria. The grafting of this powerful group with the existing fragmentary Christian groups must have led to the identification of Kerala Christians with the Thomas tradition, to which they hold steadfastly to this day. The St. Thomas of their fancy must really be Canai Thomas of Syria.
11.The great Saivite saint of sixth century A.D., Tirujnanasambandar, sings in the 6th Poompavai Padikam Thevaram:
A place full of flowering coconut palms
Taking ceremonial bath in the sea on the full moon day of the month of Masai.
12.Arunagirinathar, who came to Mylapore in 1456, in his Tirumayilai Tiruppugazh:
O Lord of Mailai (Mylapore) temple, situated on the shores of the sea with raging waves... 13 The destruction of the seashore Temple of Kapaleeswara is said to have taken place in 1561. The new temple at its present site, about one km. to the west, was built by pious Hindu votaries about three hundred years ago, i.e., about two hundred and fifty years after its destruction. When the Santhome Church was repaired in the beginning of the current century, many stones with edicts were found there.
Firstly, it is one thing for some Christian refugees to come to a country and build some churches, and quite another for an apostle of Jesus Christ himself to appear in flesh and blood for spreading the Good News. If it can be established that Christianity is as ancient in India as the prevailing forms of Hinduism, no one can nail it as an imported creed brought in by Western imperialism.
Secondly, the Catholic Church in India stands badly in need of a spectacular martyr of its own. Unfortunately for it, St. Francis Xavier died a natural death and that, too, in a distant place. Hindus, too, have persistently refused to oblige the Church in this respect in spite of all provocations. The Church has had to use its own resources and churn out something. St. Thomas about whom nobody knows anything, offers a ready-made martyr.
Thirdly, the Catholic Church can malign the Brahmins more confidently. Brahmins have been the main target of its attack from the very beginning. Now it can be shown that the Brahmins have always been a vicious brood, so much so that they would not stop from murdering a holy man who was only telling Gods own truth to a tormented people. At the same time, the religion of the Brahmins can be held responsible for their depravity.
Fourthly, the Catholics in India need no more feel uncomfortable when faced with historical evidence about their Churchs close cooperation with the Portuguese pirates in committing abominable crimes against the Indian people. The commencement of the Church can be disentangled from the advent of the Portuguese by dating the Church to a distant past. The Church was here long before the Portuguese arrived. It was a mere coincidence that the Portuguese also called themselves Catholics. Guilt by association is groundless.
Lastly, it is quite within the ken of Catholic theology to claim that a land which has been honoured by the visit of an apostle has become the patrimony of the Catholic Church. India might have been a Hindu homeland from times immemorial. But since that auspicious moment when St. Thomas stepped on her soil, the Hindu claim stands cancelled. The country has belonged to the Catholic Church from the first century onwards, no matter how long the Church takes to conquer it completely for Christ.
Some of other Thomas visit Legends
1.S. Muthiah's Madras Discovered published by Affiliated East-West Press. The following are the facts gleaned from it: Thomas shunted between St. Thomas Mount and Mylapore, separated by about five kms., doing his preaching work and converting thousands. He lived in a cave at Little Mount in Saidapet, three kms. from St. Thomas Mount. There is, to the east of the cave, an opening which is said to have opened in those days into a tunnel from the Little Mount to St. Thomas Mount. The saint is supposed to have fled from his persecutors through this cave. He was however murdered by them at St. Thomas Mount. Mylapore has only the honour of being the place where his dead body was brought and buried. From there his remains were taken to Edessa in Syria where every July a great festival is held to commemorate his reburial. From Edessa they are said to have been moved to the Greek island of Chios, thence to Ortona on Italy's Adriatic coast where they remain to this day. But each resting place still has some relic of Thomas—Madras has a small hand bone and the head of a lance in the St. Thomas Basilica crypt.
2.n 1547 the Vicar of Mylapore during excavation at St. Thomas Mount discovered a A bleeding cross with old Pahlavi inscriptions. It had spots that looked like blood stains which, it is claimed, reappeared after being rubbed away. This cross is built into the wall behind the altar of the church on the Mount dedicated to Madonna of the Mount. The tradition about this cross is that it was chiselled from a rock by the apostle himself. It is said that it used to bleed periodically. The first publicly noticed bleeding was on 15 December 1558 and the last in 1704.
Source
The Myth of Saint Thomas and the Mylapore Shiva Temple by Ishwar Sharan
Myth of Murugan the Tamil God
I have dealt with theories in murugan origin in a seprate article. Now let us see one of the common held misconception that of
- Muruga is tamil god and of tamil only.
- Muruga patronized tamil language and literature.
We have seen that murugan is not tamil origin and various theories surrounding murugan origin. So that question is settled now that murugu is all India
Next let us see how muruga started patronizing tamil. Let us see the history.
There is no reference to Murugan in tamil literature until Kanda puranam got written in tamil from skanda purana in 14th century AD. All the legends come later. Eventhough there is talk of murugan in Sangam age , there is no evidence of that.
Kartikeya - Differences in puranic and Tamil traditions
There seems to be some intriguing differences in the traditions associated with Kartikeya in the Puranic and Tamil. The Sanskrit epics and Puranas seem to indicate that he was the eldest son of Shiva, as the tale of Shiva's marriage to Parvati indicates. In the Shiva-Purana, he is seen helping Shiva fight the newly born Ganesha, Shiva's other son, when Ganesha stopped Shiva from entering his home in Kailasa. Tamil tradition states he was the younger of the two. In the north, he is generally seen as a bachelor hence the name kumara whereas the southern tradition has him married to two wives.History shows that the legend comes from sanskrit and puranic traditions , with imperfect translations and introducing legends of their own while doing so. The translation Kanda puranam and Thiruvilayadal and susequently Thirupugazh has fundamentally altered the Kanda- Karthikeya story to Tamil Murugan. Until 14th century the karthikeya was obscure in tamil divinity and was worshipped in a similar way to being worshipped in other parts of India and srilanka. So around 15th century and subsequently dravidian- aryan ideology has made Murugan the cult figure in tamil.
To quote Paripadal
"Oh God of Kadamba wreath! "
This line shows that muruga came to tamilnadu with kadamba rulers. Lord Subramanyawhich is present in kadamba territory is transported to Tamil Nadu as Murugan.skanda, muruga, karthikeya, Shanmuga origin legend
In the words of zevelibil the following are the most common myths attached with Muruga, which he claims is no way exhaustive list.
· In the field of physical geography, the myths of Murugan account for the vision of Tamilnadu as his sacred realm. Mythical, puranic space-time is as if spread over the concrete land of the Tamils in the past, present and future.
· In the field of social structure. Murugan's marriage to Devasenā and Valli reflects and legitimizes the cakkalatti 'co-wife' institution.
· On the level of historical development of religion in South India, Murugan's marriage to Devasena and Valli may have been an attempt to consolidate the unity of the Hindus irrespective of whether they were Saivites or Vaisnavites.
· On the level of culture, the myth of Murugan supports the claim that Tamil is of divine origin, and accounts for divine patronage of Tamil literature.
· On the cosmological level and in the mythological order, the myth reflects the struggle between the cosmic forces of order and chaos, creation and annihilation, good and evil - a permanent topic of Hindu mythology.
· On the metaphysical level. Murugan the teacher of Brahma and Siva is revealed as the expert in esoteric knowledge of the most sacred domain.
Let us see the Myths related to origin
Kalidasa version
According to one legend, he was the son of Uma and Maheswar. He was burn only to put an end to the astocities of Taraka, a cruel demon, who perpetrated countless wicked acts ondevas for years. When the entire amarakula was totally debilitated, they sought help of Lord Srimannarayanan, who counselled that the son born to Lord Siva alone would kill that remorseless Danava. But Siva was doing penance after the self - immolation of Sati, reborn as Parvathi and was in full bloom at this time. and she was offering worship to Lord Siva at the behest of her father Himavan.
They utilised the services of manmatha to awaken his love instincts. Poor Manmatha was burnt to ashes, when the Lordopened his third eye as punishment for disturbing his tapes, yet in the end Siva was wedded to Parvathi and the son begotten to them became the Chief-marshal of Amarasena, who vanquished Taraka; and devas breathed freely. Devendra gave his doughter Devasena to the valorous Subrafmanya in wedding then. This legend was immortalised by Kalidas in his Kumarasambhava.
Valmiki VersionThe Balakanda of Ramayana has a different version, though Karthikeya in his role of Army-General killed Taraka. According to it. Gods wanted Siva to preserve his energy for denavasamhara. though Siva applauded the request, he admitted that he had already discharged his seed.
Gods then requested the Earth. Agni and Vayu to receive the seed and enter it. Agni at once entered the seed which turned into a white mountain from which Karthikeya was born. He was the aspect of Siva and so inherited invincibility that destroyed the Asurakula.
Vyasa version
The Vanaparva of Mahabharatha has yet another legend. It narrated that once Devasena was put to route by Kesin, a dreadful demon of unusual powers. And he carried the Devasena pesonified as Lady. Devasena had a asister called Daitysena.
They were Prajapati's daughters. When Brahma was invoked for help by Devendra, he said that Subrahmanya alone could kill that Danava and promised a valorous life partner for Devasena, who would become War Lord of the Devaloka. The later stroy - Subrahmanya was born to Uma and Maheswar and killing etc, is same as above, and neet not be repeated
Krithika episode
Yet one more: Another fantastic legend narrated that once Agni appeared before Siva and Parvathi, when they were absorbed in the act of copulation. the sudden appearance of Agni made Siva discharge his seed abruptly. Angry Parvathi asled Agni to bear that seed. He humbly accepted, infear of severe consequences, but he could not bear it longer. He threw it into the river Ganges and the later transferred it to the six enchanting young girls called Kritikas, who were bathing in it. they gave birth to children, each one. All the six were combined into one with six heads and twelve arms but with one neck and one belly. Later his peerless career crowned him with the generalship of his celestial army along with Devendra's daughter as wife.
saravanabhavaAnother legend narrates that was also called Saravanabhava due to the fact of the seed of Siva thrown into the forest of Sara of seeds, where he was born according to another story.
Agni episode
It happened once the Saptarishis performed a great yagna. Agni then had the accasion of seeing the Munipatnis closely. And for long since he was carrying the ablations to the gods. their sublime charm enkindled love in him. He could not fulfil his lust due to chastity strictly practiced by them. So he was found despaired now and then. Just during this period Swaha, the lovely daughter of Daksha, who was in deep love for Agni contrived a plan to marry him by fulfilling his desire.
Accordingly, she assumed the forms of the wives of the Rishis and consorted with Agni, who ignorant of the trick felt elated. Except Arunadathi, she took the forms of the six rishipatnis and pleased him, and was pleased too. Every time she consorted with him, she used to keep the seed in a golden receptacle on a white mountain. This happened six times. The child thus born to them was called Skanda, since he came into the world with the seed of Agni and women. He had six heads and twelve arms, but one neck and a belly. Agni and Swaha later brought up their child.
Kartikeya - In the Tamil landIn the Tamil, it is a different story. Kartikeya, known as Murukan, has enjoyed continuos popularity with all classes of society right from the Sangam age. This lead to the more elaborate accounts of his mythology in Tamil.
The most popular and eruduite, the Kanda-Puranam (Sanskrit Skanda-Puranam), is by Kacchiappa SivachariyAr(1350-1420 A.D.). A scholar in Tamil and Sanskrit he was votary of Shaiva Siddhanta. Based mainly on the Sanskrit Skanda-purana, this Tamil epic, makes Kartikeya the destroyer of Taraka but also of his elder and more powerful demonic brothers, Shoorapadman and Simha-mukhan. Shiva let out a stream of fire from his third eye on his forehead, that split into six streams. Each landed on a lotus in a lake called Saravana Poigai. Six women, called Karthigai Pengal (literally Woman of the Pleiades) saw the babies and each took one with her to look after. On the day of Karthigai, Parvati united the six children into a six-headed child, unable to cuddle all of them together. This is also the origin of a common Tamil name of the deity, Arumugan or Shanmugan, which literally means "one who has six faces". Apart from the festival of Karthigai, the Thaipusam festival, celebrated by Tamil communities worldwide, commemorates the day he was given a vel (lance) by his mother Parvati in order to vanquish the demons.
He married two deities, Valli and Devayani. The latter is identical to Devasena and the former is a daughter of a tribal chief. However, other Hindu legends he is unmarried, and call him Kumaraswami (Kumara meaning a bachelor and Swami meaning God)
Kartikeya rides a peacock and wields a bow in battle. The spear (called "vel" in Tamil) is a weapon closely associated with him. The flag of his army depicts a rooster. In the war, Shoorapadman was split into two, and was granted a boon by Kartikeyan, to become the peacock, and the rooster.
As Karttikeya is worshipped predominantly in south India, many of his names are of Tamil origin. These include Senthil (the "Red" or formidable one); "Arumuga" (the six-faceted one); "Muruka"; "Guha"; "Maal-Marigan" (nephew of Vishnu) and many others.
· In the field of physical geography, the myths of Murugan account for the vision of Tamilnadu as his sacred realm. Mythical, puranic space-time is as if spread over the concrete land of the Tamils in the past, present and future.
· In the field of social structure. Murugan's marriage to Devasenā and Valli reflects and legitimizes the cakkalatti 'co-wife' institution.
· On the level of historical development of religion in South India, Murugan's marriage to Devasena and Valli may have been an attempt to consolidate the unity of the Hindus irrespective of whether they were Saivites or Vaisnavites.
· On the level of culture, the myth of Murugan supports the claim that Tamil is of divine origin, and accounts for divine patronage of Tamil literature.
· On the cosmological level and in the mythological order, the myth reflects the struggle between the cosmic forces of order and chaos, creation and annihilation, good and evil - a permanent topic of Hindu mythology.
· On the metaphysical level. Murugan the teacher of Brahma and Siva is revealed as the expert in esoteric knowledge of the most sacred domain.
Let us see the Myths related to origin
Kalidasa version
According to one legend, he was the son of Uma and Maheswar. He was burn only to put an end to the astocities of Taraka, a cruel demon, who perpetrated countless wicked acts ondevas for years. When the entire amarakula was totally debilitated, they sought help of Lord Srimannarayanan, who counselled that the son born to Lord Siva alone would kill that remorseless Danava. But Siva was doing penance after the self - immolation of Sati, reborn as Parvathi and was in full bloom at this time. and she was offering worship to Lord Siva at the behest of her father Himavan.
They utilised the services of manmatha to awaken his love instincts. Poor Manmatha was burnt to ashes, when the Lordopened his third eye as punishment for disturbing his tapes, yet in the end Siva was wedded to Parvathi and the son begotten to them became the Chief-marshal of Amarasena, who vanquished Taraka; and devas breathed freely. Devendra gave his doughter Devasena to the valorous Subrafmanya in wedding then. This legend was immortalised by Kalidas in his Kumarasambhava.
Valmiki VersionThe Balakanda of Ramayana has a different version, though Karthikeya in his role of Army-General killed Taraka. According to it. Gods wanted Siva to preserve his energy for denavasamhara. though Siva applauded the request, he admitted that he had already discharged his seed.
Gods then requested the Earth. Agni and Vayu to receive the seed and enter it. Agni at once entered the seed which turned into a white mountain from which Karthikeya was born. He was the aspect of Siva and so inherited invincibility that destroyed the Asurakula.
Vyasa version
The Vanaparva of Mahabharatha has yet another legend. It narrated that once Devasena was put to route by Kesin, a dreadful demon of unusual powers. And he carried the Devasena pesonified as Lady. Devasena had a asister called Daitysena.
They were Prajapati's daughters. When Brahma was invoked for help by Devendra, he said that Subrahmanya alone could kill that Danava and promised a valorous life partner for Devasena, who would become War Lord of the Devaloka. The later stroy - Subrahmanya was born to Uma and Maheswar and killing etc, is same as above, and neet not be repeated
Krithika episode
Yet one more: Another fantastic legend narrated that once Agni appeared before Siva and Parvathi, when they were absorbed in the act of copulation. the sudden appearance of Agni made Siva discharge his seed abruptly. Angry Parvathi asled Agni to bear that seed. He humbly accepted, infear of severe consequences, but he could not bear it longer. He threw it into the river Ganges and the later transferred it to the six enchanting young girls called Kritikas, who were bathing in it. they gave birth to children, each one. All the six were combined into one with six heads and twelve arms but with one neck and one belly. Later his peerless career crowned him with the generalship of his celestial army along with Devendra's daughter as wife.
saravanabhavaAnother legend narrates that was also called Saravanabhava due to the fact of the seed of Siva thrown into the forest of Sara of seeds, where he was born according to another story.
Agni episode
It happened once the Saptarishis performed a great yagna. Agni then had the accasion of seeing the Munipatnis closely. And for long since he was carrying the ablations to the gods. their sublime charm enkindled love in him. He could not fulfil his lust due to chastity strictly practiced by them. So he was found despaired now and then. Just during this period Swaha, the lovely daughter of Daksha, who was in deep love for Agni contrived a plan to marry him by fulfilling his desire.
Accordingly, she assumed the forms of the wives of the Rishis and consorted with Agni, who ignorant of the trick felt elated. Except Arunadathi, she took the forms of the six rishipatnis and pleased him, and was pleased too. Every time she consorted with him, she used to keep the seed in a golden receptacle on a white mountain. This happened six times. The child thus born to them was called Skanda, since he came into the world with the seed of Agni and women. He had six heads and twelve arms, but one neck and a belly. Agni and Swaha later brought up their child.
Kartikeya - In the Tamil landIn the Tamil, it is a different story. Kartikeya, known as Murukan, has enjoyed continuos popularity with all classes of society right from the Sangam age. This lead to the more elaborate accounts of his mythology in Tamil.
The most popular and eruduite, the Kanda-Puranam (Sanskrit Skanda-Puranam), is by Kacchiappa SivachariyAr(1350-1420 A.D.). A scholar in Tamil and Sanskrit he was votary of Shaiva Siddhanta. Based mainly on the Sanskrit Skanda-purana, this Tamil epic, makes Kartikeya the destroyer of Taraka but also of his elder and more powerful demonic brothers, Shoorapadman and Simha-mukhan. Shiva let out a stream of fire from his third eye on his forehead, that split into six streams. Each landed on a lotus in a lake called Saravana Poigai. Six women, called Karthigai Pengal (literally Woman of the Pleiades) saw the babies and each took one with her to look after. On the day of Karthigai, Parvati united the six children into a six-headed child, unable to cuddle all of them together. This is also the origin of a common Tamil name of the deity, Arumugan or Shanmugan, which literally means "one who has six faces". Apart from the festival of Karthigai, the Thaipusam festival, celebrated by Tamil communities worldwide, commemorates the day he was given a vel (lance) by his mother Parvati in order to vanquish the demons.
He married two deities, Valli and Devayani. The latter is identical to Devasena and the former is a daughter of a tribal chief. However, other Hindu legends he is unmarried, and call him Kumaraswami (Kumara meaning a bachelor and Swami meaning God)
Kartikeya rides a peacock and wields a bow in battle. The spear (called "vel" in Tamil) is a weapon closely associated with him. The flag of his army depicts a rooster. In the war, Shoorapadman was split into two, and was granted a boon by Kartikeyan, to become the peacock, and the rooster.
As Karttikeya is worshipped predominantly in south India, many of his names are of Tamil origin. These include Senthil (the "Red" or formidable one); "Arumuga" (the six-faceted one); "Muruka"; "Guha"; "Maal-Marigan" (nephew of Vishnu) and many others.
Case of Sourashtrians
Sourashtrians are mostly silk weavers and silk thread merchants, originated in the Saurashtra region (present day Gujarat, and parts of Maharashtra) in Northern India and later settled in Madurai and surrounding regions of Tamilnadu, few centuries ago.
The origin is certain, and research has proved the current day Sourashtra spoken by us is a modern form of pre-Gujarati spoken thousands of years ago. "
Their home language (Sourashtra language) is still a modern form of the old Saurashtri or Pre-Gujarati as it was over a thousand years ago, which was the language they brought with them through Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra pradesh to Tamilnadu. This language preserves, naturally enough many archaic features of Gujarati and at the same time shows influence of the sister Aryan languages of Konkani and Marathi and of Dravidian Telugu, kannada besides of course Tamil which has now virtually become the second mother tongue of the Sourashtrians...." says Suneetkumar Chatterjee a famous linguist.
But the time period when they migrated from Saurashtra region to south is still uncertain.
Theory 1:
The first theory is that, during the times when the infamous Ghazani Mohammed invaded Northern India from Afghanistan, a few families might have migrated South to escape from the series of invasions.
Theory 2:
Another assumption is a few families that came with the entourage of Shatrapathi Shivaji when he invaded south, might have stayed back to form their own community.
Theory 3:
This is the most popular and widely accepted theory by historians. During the Vijayanagaram Empire rule in Northern India, the Nayakars ruled the South as part of the empire with Madurai as their capital. During that period a few families from the Saurashtra region were called into Madurai to be the "Royal Weavers" for the Nayakars. This would explain very high concentration of Sourashtrians still today around the Thirumalai Nayakar Mahal, the Nayakar's Palace. Since Sourashtrians are Silk Weavers by profession it would also disprove the theory that they came with Shivaji.
Later Sourashtrians settled in Madurai, spread around to Trichy, Salem, Kumbakonam and other surrounding areas as the population grew, but still managed to keep their unique language, and culture intact. Current day Sourashtrians, refer themselves as Tamilians as their identities and still speak Sourashtra at home. An estimated half a million Sourashtrians are living now mostly in Tamilnadu and a few are spread around all over the world.
The origin is certain, and research has proved the current day Sourashtra spoken by us is a modern form of pre-Gujarati spoken thousands of years ago. "
Their home language (Sourashtra language) is still a modern form of the old Saurashtri or Pre-Gujarati as it was over a thousand years ago, which was the language they brought with them through Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra pradesh to Tamilnadu. This language preserves, naturally enough many archaic features of Gujarati and at the same time shows influence of the sister Aryan languages of Konkani and Marathi and of Dravidian Telugu, kannada besides of course Tamil which has now virtually become the second mother tongue of the Sourashtrians...." says Suneetkumar Chatterjee a famous linguist.
But the time period when they migrated from Saurashtra region to south is still uncertain.
Theory 1:
The first theory is that, during the times when the infamous Ghazani Mohammed invaded Northern India from Afghanistan, a few families might have migrated South to escape from the series of invasions.
Theory 2:
Another assumption is a few families that came with the entourage of Shatrapathi Shivaji when he invaded south, might have stayed back to form their own community.
Theory 3:
This is the most popular and widely accepted theory by historians. During the Vijayanagaram Empire rule in Northern India, the Nayakars ruled the South as part of the empire with Madurai as their capital. During that period a few families from the Saurashtra region were called into Madurai to be the "Royal Weavers" for the Nayakars. This would explain very high concentration of Sourashtrians still today around the Thirumalai Nayakar Mahal, the Nayakar's Palace. Since Sourashtrians are Silk Weavers by profession it would also disprove the theory that they came with Shivaji.
Later Sourashtrians settled in Madurai, spread around to Trichy, Salem, Kumbakonam and other surrounding areas as the population grew, but still managed to keep their unique language, and culture intact. Current day Sourashtrians, refer themselves as Tamilians as their identities and still speak Sourashtra at home. An estimated half a million Sourashtrians are living now mostly in Tamilnadu and a few are spread around all over the world.
Myths of Indus script
The world of scholars was totally ignorant about the culture known as Indus Valley Civilization or Harappa Culture till the early twenties of this century. The excavations at Mohenjodaro in Sind and at Harappa in Panjab (now in Pakistan) in 1922-23 and later and the discovery of numerous steatite seals in these excavations pushed back, at one stroke, the history of Indian Civilization including writing to the third millennium before Christ. After partition of India in 1947 when Mohenjodaro and Harappa went to Pakistan, similar sites in Eastern Panjab, Western Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Gujarat were discovered. Of these Ka#liban#gan in Rajasthan and Lothal in Gujarat are important ones which have also yielded seals (and sealings) and have contributed much in establishing the chronological sequence of early and late phases of Harappan Culture. During the last fifty years and more, different views have been expressed by scholars about the authors of this great and highly developed culture which is comparable to that of Sumer, Babylon, Egypt and Assyria. And the key to the understanding of it lies in the decipherment of the writing on the seals and sealings. But unfortunately, the decipherment of this writing has defied the attempts of several scholars during the past fifty years and more. While some scholars think that this writing is of indigenous origin, others feel that it is of foreign origin. Even amongst those who think of indigenous origin, one set of scholars propound the theory of Dravidian origin while the other set put forth the theory of Aryan origin. These different views may be briefly mentioned here.
As stated above, the Indus script appears on a large number of steatite seals which are beautifully prepared. From Lothal in Gujarat some sealings are also found. From these sealings, which are found in association with packing material:; such as cloth, matting and twisted cords, it has been suggested that the sealings were used as labels and affixed to the packages of goods were thus of commercial or merchandise value10.
Waddel was one of the earliest scholars to attempt the decipherment of the Indus script. He thought that the writing represents the Sumerian script and, based on the identity of Sumerians with Aryans, he read the names of Vedic and Epic persons11 . Pran Nath assigned alphabetic values to the script and suggested their connection with the later Bra#hmi# script12. Sankaranand and Barua also thought that the script was alphabetic. Sudhansu Kumar Ray also held a similar view. Hrozny tried to connect the script with the Hittite language. But Heras suggested that the script is picto-phonographic and connected it with Dravidian languages reading old Tamil on the seals. Hevesy sought to establish similarity between the Indus script and the script of the Eastern Islands in the Pacific ocean. Hunter felt that the Indus script is derived -partly from Egyptian script and partly from Mesopotamian script. Flinders Petrie also connected the Indus script with the Egyptian hieroglyphs and thought that the seals contained only the titles and not the names of the officials. He also assumed that the symbols were ideographs while Meriggi thought that while symbols were ideograms, others were phonemes so that the writing was of ideo-phonographic system. Amongst other early scholars who have attempted to read the Indus script may be mentioned Gadd, Sydney Smith and Langdon13 . David Diringer remarks "it seems obvious that the Indus Valley script which is rather schematic and linear on the extant inscriptions, was originally pictographic but it is impossible to decide whether it was truly indigenous or imported"14.
The above discussion would show how scholars are holding different views regarding the Indus script and how difficult the problem of decipherment of this script has been during the last several years. It is possible to decipher an unknown language in a known script or a known language in an unknown script. But in regard to Indus script, it is a case of deciphering an unknown language in an unknown script and hence it has baffled and defied the attempts of many a well-known scriptologist. For the success of such an attempt certain points of contact are necessary15. For example, the script of the Egyptian hieroglyphs remained undeciphered for a very long period until the discovery of the famous 'Rosetta Stone' inscription in 1799 by the French engineer Bouchard at the time of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt. This sensational discovery proved to be a turning point in understanding the nature of the hieroglyphic script, because the Rosetta Stone contained inscriptions in three different kinds of script, viz., hieroglyphic, demotic (or local script) and Greek. With the help of the Greek text attempts to decipher the other two scripts were made by pioneers like the French orientalist Silvestre de Sacy and the Swedish diplomat Akerblad. And it was left to the fortune and credit of Sacy's pupil and French scholar J. Fr. Champollion to finally and conclusively decipher the inscriptions of the Rosetta Stone in 1821-2216. Again, the decipherment of the Cretan Linear B inscription, whose language was unknown and for which no bilingual text was available, was made possible for Ventris and Chadwick by the existence of, similar scripts n Cypriot and in Greek mainland written in Greek language17. Similarly some points of contact are necessary to find a satisfactory solution to the problem of the decipherment of the Indus script like the biscriptal or bilingual inscriptions.We shall now review the recent attempts made by Indian and foreign scholars about the decipherment of the Indus or Harappan script. Amongst the foreign scholars, the Russian team consisting of Knorozov, Volcok and Gurov may be mentioned. They are credited to have taken the help of the computer machines. They assign word value to the signs and suggest that the script belonged to the Dravidian family of languages18. The Finnish team of scholars led by Asko Parpola also believed the language of the Indus script to be Dravidian. Amongst the Indian scholars I. Mahadevan and S.R. Rao have made a detailed study of the problem19. While the former is inclined to attribute the script to be Dravidian, the latter thinks it to be pre-Vedic. Mahadevan has also made use of the computer facilities and has attempted to achieve 'word-division' in the script assuming the language to be Dravidian. S.R. Rao claims that his approach is without any presumption and has tried to show that there has been a change in the script from its earlier phase to the later phase in that the number of signs which were more in the earlier period were reduced considerably in the later phase. He compares the signs of this later phase with the symbols of the North Semetic script of a comparative date and by showing similarity between them gives the same phonetic value to the Harappan script that is found in the Semetic script, other words, S.R. Rao suggests that there was evolution of the Indus script from an earlier period or mature peri9d (2500 B.C. to 1500 B.C.) and that the early syllabic-cum-alphabetic writing was disciplined into an alphabetic system by 1500 B.C. He also suggests that the Indus people spoke an Indo-European language which shows close affinity to Indo-Aryan in vocabulary, semantics and phonology. The names of the rulers and chiefs and of countries, sacrifices and divinities, as read by him, would suggest that the Harappans were the progenitors of the Vedic Aryans.
B.B. Lal has pointed out the difficulties in accepting the views of both I. Mahadevan and S.R. Rao20. Mahadevan himself has changed his views and methods of approach on more than one occasion and we have yet to wait and see what his final views in the matter of decipherment of the Harappan script are. In one of his latest papers entitled 'Study of the Indus Script : A Bilingual Approach'21 he has suggested that the problem should be studied from the point of view of interpreting the ideograms in the light of the Indian historical tradition which has come down to us in two main streams, viz., Indo-Aryan and Dravidian. This theory still remains to be tested by scholars before expressing any opinion.
As regards S.R. Rao's approach, viz., assigning the phonetic values of the Semitic script to the late Harappan script and reading it as pre-Vedic Sanskrit is also not decisive and final. As pointed out by Lal, Rao compares the symbols of the late Harappan with those of the Semitic ones and this material is not enough to arrive at any conclusion. Regarding the vowel sign Rao compares it not with any Semitic sign, since Semitic has no vowel signs, but with Sumerian sign for a following Waddel. And for some signs, Rao suggests different sources, viz., Akkadian and Ugaritic. This will be a difficult proposition. Moreover, while the late Harappan script, as suggested by Rao, has many vowel marks, the- Semitic script is completely devoid of any vowel marks. In justification of his approach, Rao says that he is proceeding from the known script (Semitic) to the unknown script (Harappan). But he is silent about the known origins of both these scripts which are different. While the Harappan is descended from the early Indus script according to Rao himself, the origin of the Semitic script is suggested to be Egyptian. So Rao has to explain at what stage the Semitic script acquired the phonetic values of the Indus script if his theory is to be supported. He has not attempted to answer these questions but has only instituted some comparison between the two scripts and has tried to establish some kind of phonetic relationship. Another defect in Rao's findings is that while he has given his reading as pre-Vedic or Indo-European, he has quoted not a single authority of Indo-European Linguistics or even an authority of Vedic language that the readings given by him can be accepted. In view of what is said above, it is not possible to accept Rao's claim that he has deciphered the Indus script. Of course, every scholar who makes an attempt at decipherment of a new script does claim that he has deciphered, but a new script can be taken as deciphered only when the world of scholars accept his views without any doubt22. So we can say, without any fear of contradiction, that the Indus script has defied the attempt of all scholars so far and has not yet been deciphered just as the Asokan Bra#hmhi# script has been deciphered. The discovery of longer record in the script or a bilingual or biscriptal writing or some definite contact point would help us in finding a satisfactory solution to this unknown script in an unknown language.
Rleated Posts
Was Ancient India Literate
Brahmi Script Origin
Tamil Brahmi
Pallava Granta Script
As stated above, the Indus script appears on a large number of steatite seals which are beautifully prepared. From Lothal in Gujarat some sealings are also found. From these sealings, which are found in association with packing material:; such as cloth, matting and twisted cords, it has been suggested that the sealings were used as labels and affixed to the packages of goods were thus of commercial or merchandise value10.
Waddel was one of the earliest scholars to attempt the decipherment of the Indus script. He thought that the writing represents the Sumerian script and, based on the identity of Sumerians with Aryans, he read the names of Vedic and Epic persons11 . Pran Nath assigned alphabetic values to the script and suggested their connection with the later Bra#hmi# script12. Sankaranand and Barua also thought that the script was alphabetic. Sudhansu Kumar Ray also held a similar view. Hrozny tried to connect the script with the Hittite language. But Heras suggested that the script is picto-phonographic and connected it with Dravidian languages reading old Tamil on the seals. Hevesy sought to establish similarity between the Indus script and the script of the Eastern Islands in the Pacific ocean. Hunter felt that the Indus script is derived -partly from Egyptian script and partly from Mesopotamian script. Flinders Petrie also connected the Indus script with the Egyptian hieroglyphs and thought that the seals contained only the titles and not the names of the officials. He also assumed that the symbols were ideographs while Meriggi thought that while symbols were ideograms, others were phonemes so that the writing was of ideo-phonographic system. Amongst other early scholars who have attempted to read the Indus script may be mentioned Gadd, Sydney Smith and Langdon13 . David Diringer remarks "it seems obvious that the Indus Valley script which is rather schematic and linear on the extant inscriptions, was originally pictographic but it is impossible to decide whether it was truly indigenous or imported"14.
The above discussion would show how scholars are holding different views regarding the Indus script and how difficult the problem of decipherment of this script has been during the last several years. It is possible to decipher an unknown language in a known script or a known language in an unknown script. But in regard to Indus script, it is a case of deciphering an unknown language in an unknown script and hence it has baffled and defied the attempts of many a well-known scriptologist. For the success of such an attempt certain points of contact are necessary15. For example, the script of the Egyptian hieroglyphs remained undeciphered for a very long period until the discovery of the famous 'Rosetta Stone' inscription in 1799 by the French engineer Bouchard at the time of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt. This sensational discovery proved to be a turning point in understanding the nature of the hieroglyphic script, because the Rosetta Stone contained inscriptions in three different kinds of script, viz., hieroglyphic, demotic (or local script) and Greek. With the help of the Greek text attempts to decipher the other two scripts were made by pioneers like the French orientalist Silvestre de Sacy and the Swedish diplomat Akerblad. And it was left to the fortune and credit of Sacy's pupil and French scholar J. Fr. Champollion to finally and conclusively decipher the inscriptions of the Rosetta Stone in 1821-2216. Again, the decipherment of the Cretan Linear B inscription, whose language was unknown and for which no bilingual text was available, was made possible for Ventris and Chadwick by the existence of, similar scripts n Cypriot and in Greek mainland written in Greek language17. Similarly some points of contact are necessary to find a satisfactory solution to the problem of the decipherment of the Indus script like the biscriptal or bilingual inscriptions.We shall now review the recent attempts made by Indian and foreign scholars about the decipherment of the Indus or Harappan script. Amongst the foreign scholars, the Russian team consisting of Knorozov, Volcok and Gurov may be mentioned. They are credited to have taken the help of the computer machines. They assign word value to the signs and suggest that the script belonged to the Dravidian family of languages18. The Finnish team of scholars led by Asko Parpola also believed the language of the Indus script to be Dravidian. Amongst the Indian scholars I. Mahadevan and S.R. Rao have made a detailed study of the problem19. While the former is inclined to attribute the script to be Dravidian, the latter thinks it to be pre-Vedic. Mahadevan has also made use of the computer facilities and has attempted to achieve 'word-division' in the script assuming the language to be Dravidian. S.R. Rao claims that his approach is without any presumption and has tried to show that there has been a change in the script from its earlier phase to the later phase in that the number of signs which were more in the earlier period were reduced considerably in the later phase. He compares the signs of this later phase with the symbols of the North Semetic script of a comparative date and by showing similarity between them gives the same phonetic value to the Harappan script that is found in the Semetic script, other words, S.R. Rao suggests that there was evolution of the Indus script from an earlier period or mature peri9d (2500 B.C. to 1500 B.C.) and that the early syllabic-cum-alphabetic writing was disciplined into an alphabetic system by 1500 B.C. He also suggests that the Indus people spoke an Indo-European language which shows close affinity to Indo-Aryan in vocabulary, semantics and phonology. The names of the rulers and chiefs and of countries, sacrifices and divinities, as read by him, would suggest that the Harappans were the progenitors of the Vedic Aryans.
B.B. Lal has pointed out the difficulties in accepting the views of both I. Mahadevan and S.R. Rao20. Mahadevan himself has changed his views and methods of approach on more than one occasion and we have yet to wait and see what his final views in the matter of decipherment of the Harappan script are. In one of his latest papers entitled 'Study of the Indus Script : A Bilingual Approach'21 he has suggested that the problem should be studied from the point of view of interpreting the ideograms in the light of the Indian historical tradition which has come down to us in two main streams, viz., Indo-Aryan and Dravidian. This theory still remains to be tested by scholars before expressing any opinion.
As regards S.R. Rao's approach, viz., assigning the phonetic values of the Semitic script to the late Harappan script and reading it as pre-Vedic Sanskrit is also not decisive and final. As pointed out by Lal, Rao compares the symbols of the late Harappan with those of the Semitic ones and this material is not enough to arrive at any conclusion. Regarding the vowel sign Rao compares it not with any Semitic sign, since Semitic has no vowel signs, but with Sumerian sign for a following Waddel. And for some signs, Rao suggests different sources, viz., Akkadian and Ugaritic. This will be a difficult proposition. Moreover, while the late Harappan script, as suggested by Rao, has many vowel marks, the- Semitic script is completely devoid of any vowel marks. In justification of his approach, Rao says that he is proceeding from the known script (Semitic) to the unknown script (Harappan). But he is silent about the known origins of both these scripts which are different. While the Harappan is descended from the early Indus script according to Rao himself, the origin of the Semitic script is suggested to be Egyptian. So Rao has to explain at what stage the Semitic script acquired the phonetic values of the Indus script if his theory is to be supported. He has not attempted to answer these questions but has only instituted some comparison between the two scripts and has tried to establish some kind of phonetic relationship. Another defect in Rao's findings is that while he has given his reading as pre-Vedic or Indo-European, he has quoted not a single authority of Indo-European Linguistics or even an authority of Vedic language that the readings given by him can be accepted. In view of what is said above, it is not possible to accept Rao's claim that he has deciphered the Indus script. Of course, every scholar who makes an attempt at decipherment of a new script does claim that he has deciphered, but a new script can be taken as deciphered only when the world of scholars accept his views without any doubt22. So we can say, without any fear of contradiction, that the Indus script has defied the attempt of all scholars so far and has not yet been deciphered just as the Asokan Bra#hmhi# script has been deciphered. The discovery of longer record in the script or a bilingual or biscriptal writing or some definite contact point would help us in finding a satisfactory solution to this unknown script in an unknown language.
Rleated Posts
Was Ancient India Literate
Brahmi Script Origin
Tamil Brahmi
Pallava Granta Script
Myth of Divine Tamil
Article from Passions of the Tongue by Sumathi Ramaswamy
The Polarization of Tamil and Sanskrit
From the turn of this century, neo-Shaivism engaged in a complex set of maneuvers. On the one hand, it had to counter the damaging caricatures of Dravidian religion in colonial narratives. On the other, these very texts also contained much ammunition that could be deployed for its battle against neo-Hinduism and its surrogate, Indian nationalism: the declaration that Dravidian religion far preceded Aryan arrival, not just in the Tamil-speaking country but all over India; the suggestion that Tamil-speaking Brahmans had never participated in this religion; the pronouncement of ancient Tamilian society as egalitarian, untainted by the hierarchical and oppressive caste system of the Aryans; and above all, the possibility that that most important Hindu deity, Shiva, might be Dravidian in origin (Elmore 1915: 13-14; Gover 1871: 1-15). Neo-Shaivism appropriated such colonial propositions, fused them with statements drawn from pre-colonial Shaiva narratives, and proposed the following tenets of the emergent “Tamilian religion,” tamiḻar matam (also called by some, “Dravidian religion,” tirāviṭa matam): Shaivism is the true and original religion of all Tamilians who are not Brahman. It is also the most ancient religion of India, predating Sanskritic Hinduism by many centuries. Its principles are enshrined in the devotional and philosophical texts of divine Tamil, and it would be in vain, therefore, to seek it in the demonistic rituals of the populace (as the colonials were wont to). Further, it was not the Dravidians who corrupted a pristine Hinduism (as neo-Hindus were inclined to suggest); on the contrary, it was Brahmanism and Aryanism that had debased the original Tamilian religion and diverted it from its hallowed path of monotheism, rationalism, and egalitarianism into the “gutters” of polytheism, irrational rituals, and unjust social hierarchies (Maraimalai Adigal 1930a: vii-viii; Savariroyan 1900-1901: 269). The removal of such impurities brought in by Sanskritic Brahmanism would lead to the retrieval of pristine Shaivism, the restoration of a pure Tamilian subjectivity, and the growth of self-respect and pride among speakers of Tamil. And it is for this project that Tamil was enlisted by neo-Shaivism, its divinity reemphasized and popularized in the process. Cleansed of its Sanskritic impurities, the divine language would be the beacon that would throw light on all that was originally Tamil/Dravidian. It would sift and separate the pure Tamil Shaiva texts from all those masquerading as such.
The writings and speeches generated by neo-Shaivism show that this was not an easy or consistent project, not least because there was little agreement over what constituted the original Shaivism, and because it was difficult—in certain cases impossible—to dismantle the complex linkages that had developed between Tamil and Sanskrit over the centuries of their coexistence from the early first millennium C.E. In the early decades of neo-Shaiva activity, from around the 1880s to around 1905, there were few explicit statements against Sanskritic Hinduism per se. The focus instead was on countering the negative characterizations of Dravidian religion by asserting its distinctiveness, its uniqueness, its rootedness in high philosophy, and its parity with the Sanskritic tradition. “Moderate” neo-Shaivism, therefore—as exemplified by the writings of J. Nallaswami Pillai, for instance— visioned Tamilian religion as part of a larger Hindu complex, but oriented around divine Tamil and its scriptures rather than around Sanskrit.
Gradually, however, such assertions gave way to overt antagonism towards Sanskritic-Brahmanical-Aryan-Hinduism, and even to calls for a complete break from the latter by the 1920s. This transformation took place in the context of changes in the curriculum of Madras University, which, starting in 1906, became the site of an acrimonious debate over the compulsory study of Sanskrit and the elimination of the “vernaculars” the growing demand for “Home Rule” by the Besant led factions of the Congress, beginning in 1915; the British promise of “self-government” by stages in 1917; the many attempts after that by the colonial state to play off the “non-Brahman” against the Brahman in electoral politics; and finally, the iconoclastic atheism of E. V. Ramasami (1879-1973) and his followers (Irschick 1969; Nambi Arooran 1980: 35-139; Washbrook 1976: 274-87). In the “radical” neo-Shaivism that crystallized in response to these events, and is perhaps best exemplified by the later religious writings of Maraimalai Adigal, a Tamil-speaking Dravidian “non-Brahman” Shaiva community was clearly posited against Sanskritic, Brahmanical, Aryan Hinduism (Maraimalai Adigal 1930b, 1974b; K. Subramania Pillai, 1940: 45-47). Talk of parity between Tamil and Sanskrit gave way to assertions of the superiority of the former. Legends and stories that had accumulated over the centuries about Tamil’s divine powers were recycled and embellished, and the very legitimacy of Sanskrit was questioned in this process.
One such story, based on an incident in the life of the nineteenth-century mystic Dandapanisami, is especially popular in neo-Shaiva tellings. When challenged by a Brahman who invoked the superiority of Sanskrit because the Vedas were in that language, Dandapanisami declared that unlike them, the Tamil scriptures did not advocate the sacrifice of goats and the consumption of meat. The argument between the two notables continued for a while, and it was finally decided to settle the matter by calling upon the deities. They placed in front of the spear of Lord Murugan three chits with the following messages: “Tamil alone is eminent,” “Sanskrit alone is eminent,” and “Both are eminent.” A virgin maiden was asked to choose among the chits and she picked out the one that declared, unambiguously, “Tamil alone is eminent.” Dandapanisami rejoiced, brushed his eyes reverentially with the chit, and then placed it in his mouth. Subsequently, he composed his famous verse on Murugan which praised him as the lord who himself had declared Tamil’s superiority over Sanskrit. He then went on to write the Tamiḻalanḳāram, a hundred-verse eulogy of Tamil recounting its various miraculous abilities and supernatural powers (Velayutam Pillai 1971: 124-61). In the same vein, another of Tamil’s admirers, years later, narrated a story his mother had told him about one of his ancestors who had had the power to cure the sick and the dying with the help of Tamil hymns. One day, a cobra, with its hood raised, wandered into the room where he sat, offering his prayers in Tamil. It drank some milk and slithered away, leaving him unharmed. “Is it not clear from this that Tamil has supernatural powers!” he asked rhetorically of his readers. Such stories, of which there are many, reminded Tamil speakers that the Tamil scriptures were infinitely superior in their moral and ethical content, and in their salvific potential, to the Sanskrit Vedas. It was a Brahmanical conspiracy that denied the divinity and ritual efficacy of Tamil, designated it as a “Shudra” language, and appropriated all its treasures, including the mighty Shiva himself, for Sanskrit (Maraimalai Adigal 1936a: 105-6; K. Subramania Pillai n.d.: 15-17).
By the time radical neo-Shaivism was under full steam in the 1920s, it was declared unequivocally that Tamil, and not Sanskrit, was the only appropriate ritual language for all pious Tamilians. Indeed, Tamil is the world’s first divine language, and the religion it expounds the most eminent: “In the whole wide world, there is no greater god than Paramashivam [Shiva]; no religion loftier than Shaivism; no land more superior to the Tamil land; no language more divine than Tamil…and no people more auspiciously pure than Tamilians” (Swaminatha Upatiyayan 1921: 20). Taking advantage of the technologies and communication possibilities generated in the colonial milieu, neo-Shaiva associations and publications took this message of Tamil’s divinity to the public. They urged Tamil speakers to make divine Tamil the center of their renewed religious lives, the core of their (recast) beings. Prior to the neo-Shaiva revival, the cause of divine Tamil and of Shaivism had largely been the purview of religious specialists, temples, and monasteries. Now, lay intellectuals and activists—who were career bureaucrats, lawyers, academics, and even civil engineers—established societies for propagating the message of neo-Shaivism in various cities and towns across the Tamil-speaking parts of the Presidency. They published books and journals, conducted religious and Tamil classes, arranged conferences, and ran local libraries (Nambi Arooran 1980: 20-21; Ramaswamy 1992b: 84-89). Many of these societies as well as their journals were short lived, and suffered throughout their careers for want of support and subscription. Yet there are success stories as well, such as the Tirunelvēli Teṉṉintiya Caivacittānta Nūṟpatippuk Kaḻakam, founded in 1920. Both this organization and its journal Centamiḻc Celvi (founded in 1923) continue to exist today, albeit not without their share of problems. Although neo-Shaiva organizations eschewed direct participation in associational politics, they threw their influence behind many causes dear to tamiḻppaṟṟu such as the demand for education in Tamil, the numerous protests against Hindi, and the movement for renaming Madras state as Tamilnadu, the land of Tamil.
Being Religious, The Tamil Way
Movements for religious reform in colonial India have been extensively studied, and a recent volume clearly shows that spoken, rather than scriptural, languages were the sites of some of the most intense debates and discussion in this regard (K. Jones 1992). Yet, while we have a growing understanding of the recastings of religious doctrines, practices, and conceptions of community, the changes undergone by the languages through which such reconfigurations were attempted have been left largely unexamined. Tamiḻppaṟṟu’s divinization of Tamil to authenticate its project(s) reminds us that the medium itself has to be empowered in order to empower the message, to invoke an overused but nevertheless appropriate cliché. Neo-Shaivism declared that Shaivism and divine Tamil are the two “eyes” with which modern Tamil speakers would regain their lost vision and be redeemed. Divine Shiva and his divine Tamil go together, hand in hand, and cannot be separated: each lends power and authority to the other.
Neo-Shaivism emerged to counter what was perceived as the recasting of India as predominantly Aryan, Sanskritic, Brahmanical, and Hindu by both colonialism and neo-Hinduism. Such a countering was necessary because of the fear that “non-Brahman” Tamil speakers would inhabit such an India only in the fissures: ritually denigrated, socially demoted, and symbolically cast out, as “Dravidians” and “Shudras.” Yet speakers of Tamil had once been the dominant people of the subcontinent, a preeminence they had lost with the arrival of Sanskritic Aryan Brahmanism. In Maraimalai Adigal’s version of this imagined history, “the religion of the land, that is Shaivism, underwent a marked change.” Yet, he wrote, this was a change that was limited to the “outer rim,” for “in its center, it remained as pure as crystal and as impenetrable as a hard diamond. What is bound and true to its core, what is perfect and complete in itself, requires no change, requires no improvement” (Maraimalai Adigal 1930c: iii). Neo-Shaivism attempted to recover this imagined pure center and use it as the foundation on which to (re)constitute a true Tamilian religious subjectivity untouched by Brahmanism, Aryanism, Sanskrit, and Hinduism. Cleansed of its Sanskritic impurities, Tamil, the language in which its pure and original scriptures were deemed written, was the means through which this center could be reached. The language had perforce to be (re)divinized for this project, for it had to take on and counter the power of divine Sanskrit. Other religious groups in earlier times had advocated the divinity of Tamil, but not always at the expense of Sanskrit, and not in such a sustained and prolific manner using the modern technologies of print and communication (Ramaswamy 1996). In the changed circumstances of the late colonial period, when a devolving state rewarded communities that could establish their timeless distinctiveness and religious autonomy, there was much to be gained by claiming the existence of a unique Tamilian/Dravidian community, bonded together from time immemorial by its own distinctive religious traditions that were embodied in its own sacred language. Such a claim necessarily called for a delegitimization of Sanskrit and a radical distancing from its scriptures and tradition. Such a project also perforce needed the projection of Tamil as divinity, the ranking favorite of the gods themselves
The Polarization of Tamil and Sanskrit
From the turn of this century, neo-Shaivism engaged in a complex set of maneuvers. On the one hand, it had to counter the damaging caricatures of Dravidian religion in colonial narratives. On the other, these very texts also contained much ammunition that could be deployed for its battle against neo-Hinduism and its surrogate, Indian nationalism: the declaration that Dravidian religion far preceded Aryan arrival, not just in the Tamil-speaking country but all over India; the suggestion that Tamil-speaking Brahmans had never participated in this religion; the pronouncement of ancient Tamilian society as egalitarian, untainted by the hierarchical and oppressive caste system of the Aryans; and above all, the possibility that that most important Hindu deity, Shiva, might be Dravidian in origin (Elmore 1915: 13-14; Gover 1871: 1-15). Neo-Shaivism appropriated such colonial propositions, fused them with statements drawn from pre-colonial Shaiva narratives, and proposed the following tenets of the emergent “Tamilian religion,” tamiḻar matam (also called by some, “Dravidian religion,” tirāviṭa matam): Shaivism is the true and original religion of all Tamilians who are not Brahman. It is also the most ancient religion of India, predating Sanskritic Hinduism by many centuries. Its principles are enshrined in the devotional and philosophical texts of divine Tamil, and it would be in vain, therefore, to seek it in the demonistic rituals of the populace (as the colonials were wont to). Further, it was not the Dravidians who corrupted a pristine Hinduism (as neo-Hindus were inclined to suggest); on the contrary, it was Brahmanism and Aryanism that had debased the original Tamilian religion and diverted it from its hallowed path of monotheism, rationalism, and egalitarianism into the “gutters” of polytheism, irrational rituals, and unjust social hierarchies (Maraimalai Adigal 1930a: vii-viii; Savariroyan 1900-1901: 269). The removal of such impurities brought in by Sanskritic Brahmanism would lead to the retrieval of pristine Shaivism, the restoration of a pure Tamilian subjectivity, and the growth of self-respect and pride among speakers of Tamil. And it is for this project that Tamil was enlisted by neo-Shaivism, its divinity reemphasized and popularized in the process. Cleansed of its Sanskritic impurities, the divine language would be the beacon that would throw light on all that was originally Tamil/Dravidian. It would sift and separate the pure Tamil Shaiva texts from all those masquerading as such.
The writings and speeches generated by neo-Shaivism show that this was not an easy or consistent project, not least because there was little agreement over what constituted the original Shaivism, and because it was difficult—in certain cases impossible—to dismantle the complex linkages that had developed between Tamil and Sanskrit over the centuries of their coexistence from the early first millennium C.E. In the early decades of neo-Shaiva activity, from around the 1880s to around 1905, there were few explicit statements against Sanskritic Hinduism per se. The focus instead was on countering the negative characterizations of Dravidian religion by asserting its distinctiveness, its uniqueness, its rootedness in high philosophy, and its parity with the Sanskritic tradition. “Moderate” neo-Shaivism, therefore—as exemplified by the writings of J. Nallaswami Pillai, for instance— visioned Tamilian religion as part of a larger Hindu complex, but oriented around divine Tamil and its scriptures rather than around Sanskrit.
Gradually, however, such assertions gave way to overt antagonism towards Sanskritic-Brahmanical-Aryan-Hinduism, and even to calls for a complete break from the latter by the 1920s. This transformation took place in the context of changes in the curriculum of Madras University, which, starting in 1906, became the site of an acrimonious debate over the compulsory study of Sanskrit and the elimination of the “vernaculars” the growing demand for “Home Rule” by the Besant led factions of the Congress, beginning in 1915; the British promise of “self-government” by stages in 1917; the many attempts after that by the colonial state to play off the “non-Brahman” against the Brahman in electoral politics; and finally, the iconoclastic atheism of E. V. Ramasami (1879-1973) and his followers (Irschick 1969; Nambi Arooran 1980: 35-139; Washbrook 1976: 274-87). In the “radical” neo-Shaivism that crystallized in response to these events, and is perhaps best exemplified by the later religious writings of Maraimalai Adigal, a Tamil-speaking Dravidian “non-Brahman” Shaiva community was clearly posited against Sanskritic, Brahmanical, Aryan Hinduism (Maraimalai Adigal 1930b, 1974b; K. Subramania Pillai, 1940: 45-47). Talk of parity between Tamil and Sanskrit gave way to assertions of the superiority of the former. Legends and stories that had accumulated over the centuries about Tamil’s divine powers were recycled and embellished, and the very legitimacy of Sanskrit was questioned in this process.
One such story, based on an incident in the life of the nineteenth-century mystic Dandapanisami, is especially popular in neo-Shaiva tellings. When challenged by a Brahman who invoked the superiority of Sanskrit because the Vedas were in that language, Dandapanisami declared that unlike them, the Tamil scriptures did not advocate the sacrifice of goats and the consumption of meat. The argument between the two notables continued for a while, and it was finally decided to settle the matter by calling upon the deities. They placed in front of the spear of Lord Murugan three chits with the following messages: “Tamil alone is eminent,” “Sanskrit alone is eminent,” and “Both are eminent.” A virgin maiden was asked to choose among the chits and she picked out the one that declared, unambiguously, “Tamil alone is eminent.” Dandapanisami rejoiced, brushed his eyes reverentially with the chit, and then placed it in his mouth. Subsequently, he composed his famous verse on Murugan which praised him as the lord who himself had declared Tamil’s superiority over Sanskrit. He then went on to write the Tamiḻalanḳāram, a hundred-verse eulogy of Tamil recounting its various miraculous abilities and supernatural powers (Velayutam Pillai 1971: 124-61). In the same vein, another of Tamil’s admirers, years later, narrated a story his mother had told him about one of his ancestors who had had the power to cure the sick and the dying with the help of Tamil hymns. One day, a cobra, with its hood raised, wandered into the room where he sat, offering his prayers in Tamil. It drank some milk and slithered away, leaving him unharmed. “Is it not clear from this that Tamil has supernatural powers!” he asked rhetorically of his readers. Such stories, of which there are many, reminded Tamil speakers that the Tamil scriptures were infinitely superior in their moral and ethical content, and in their salvific potential, to the Sanskrit Vedas. It was a Brahmanical conspiracy that denied the divinity and ritual efficacy of Tamil, designated it as a “Shudra” language, and appropriated all its treasures, including the mighty Shiva himself, for Sanskrit (Maraimalai Adigal 1936a: 105-6; K. Subramania Pillai n.d.: 15-17).
By the time radical neo-Shaivism was under full steam in the 1920s, it was declared unequivocally that Tamil, and not Sanskrit, was the only appropriate ritual language for all pious Tamilians. Indeed, Tamil is the world’s first divine language, and the religion it expounds the most eminent: “In the whole wide world, there is no greater god than Paramashivam [Shiva]; no religion loftier than Shaivism; no land more superior to the Tamil land; no language more divine than Tamil…and no people more auspiciously pure than Tamilians” (Swaminatha Upatiyayan 1921: 20). Taking advantage of the technologies and communication possibilities generated in the colonial milieu, neo-Shaiva associations and publications took this message of Tamil’s divinity to the public. They urged Tamil speakers to make divine Tamil the center of their renewed religious lives, the core of their (recast) beings. Prior to the neo-Shaiva revival, the cause of divine Tamil and of Shaivism had largely been the purview of religious specialists, temples, and monasteries. Now, lay intellectuals and activists—who were career bureaucrats, lawyers, academics, and even civil engineers—established societies for propagating the message of neo-Shaivism in various cities and towns across the Tamil-speaking parts of the Presidency. They published books and journals, conducted religious and Tamil classes, arranged conferences, and ran local libraries (Nambi Arooran 1980: 20-21; Ramaswamy 1992b: 84-89). Many of these societies as well as their journals were short lived, and suffered throughout their careers for want of support and subscription. Yet there are success stories as well, such as the Tirunelvēli Teṉṉintiya Caivacittānta Nūṟpatippuk Kaḻakam, founded in 1920. Both this organization and its journal Centamiḻc Celvi (founded in 1923) continue to exist today, albeit not without their share of problems. Although neo-Shaiva organizations eschewed direct participation in associational politics, they threw their influence behind many causes dear to tamiḻppaṟṟu such as the demand for education in Tamil, the numerous protests against Hindi, and the movement for renaming Madras state as Tamilnadu, the land of Tamil.
Being Religious, The Tamil Way
Movements for religious reform in colonial India have been extensively studied, and a recent volume clearly shows that spoken, rather than scriptural, languages were the sites of some of the most intense debates and discussion in this regard (K. Jones 1992). Yet, while we have a growing understanding of the recastings of religious doctrines, practices, and conceptions of community, the changes undergone by the languages through which such reconfigurations were attempted have been left largely unexamined. Tamiḻppaṟṟu’s divinization of Tamil to authenticate its project(s) reminds us that the medium itself has to be empowered in order to empower the message, to invoke an overused but nevertheless appropriate cliché. Neo-Shaivism declared that Shaivism and divine Tamil are the two “eyes” with which modern Tamil speakers would regain their lost vision and be redeemed. Divine Shiva and his divine Tamil go together, hand in hand, and cannot be separated: each lends power and authority to the other.
Neo-Shaivism emerged to counter what was perceived as the recasting of India as predominantly Aryan, Sanskritic, Brahmanical, and Hindu by both colonialism and neo-Hinduism. Such a countering was necessary because of the fear that “non-Brahman” Tamil speakers would inhabit such an India only in the fissures: ritually denigrated, socially demoted, and symbolically cast out, as “Dravidians” and “Shudras.” Yet speakers of Tamil had once been the dominant people of the subcontinent, a preeminence they had lost with the arrival of Sanskritic Aryan Brahmanism. In Maraimalai Adigal’s version of this imagined history, “the religion of the land, that is Shaivism, underwent a marked change.” Yet, he wrote, this was a change that was limited to the “outer rim,” for “in its center, it remained as pure as crystal and as impenetrable as a hard diamond. What is bound and true to its core, what is perfect and complete in itself, requires no change, requires no improvement” (Maraimalai Adigal 1930c: iii). Neo-Shaivism attempted to recover this imagined pure center and use it as the foundation on which to (re)constitute a true Tamilian religious subjectivity untouched by Brahmanism, Aryanism, Sanskrit, and Hinduism. Cleansed of its Sanskritic impurities, Tamil, the language in which its pure and original scriptures were deemed written, was the means through which this center could be reached. The language had perforce to be (re)divinized for this project, for it had to take on and counter the power of divine Sanskrit. Other religious groups in earlier times had advocated the divinity of Tamil, but not always at the expense of Sanskrit, and not in such a sustained and prolific manner using the modern technologies of print and communication (Ramaswamy 1996). In the changed circumstances of the late colonial period, when a devolving state rewarded communities that could establish their timeless distinctiveness and religious autonomy, there was much to be gained by claiming the existence of a unique Tamilian/Dravidian community, bonded together from time immemorial by its own distinctive religious traditions that were embodied in its own sacred language. Such a claim necessarily called for a delegitimization of Sanskrit and a radical distancing from its scriptures and tradition. Such a project also perforce needed the projection of Tamil as divinity, the ranking favorite of the gods themselves
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)