Evolution of Saivaism and it's development in Tamil Nadu [Archive]

View Full Version : Evolution of Saivaism and it's development in Tamil Nadu

virarajendra

26th February 2005, 09:14 AM

Author - Virarajendra

Evolution of Saivaism and it's development in Tamil Nadu

(1) Introduction to Hinduism

"Hinduism" is a "general term" given to a religion which is essentially "a grouping of the ancient religious - beliefs and rituals of India" known as Saivam (Saivaism), Vainavam (Vaishnavaism), Saktham (Sakthism), Kanapathiam, Kaumaram, and Vedam (Vedism).

In India the "God Supreme" was given many different forms and names as God Siva (Shiva) in Saivaism, God Vishnu in Vainavam, Goddess Shakthi in Saktham, God Kanapathi in Kanapathiyam, God Skanda in Kaumaram, and God Agni in Vedism etc - among the various religious beliefs of Hinduism, and was worshiped by the Hindus from the time immemorial. The above God Forms never took birth in this world in human forms. Hence they were called by the prefix title (the) "God". However in Vainavam (Vaishnavaism) it was further considered that God Vishnu took ten incarnations in this world among which, are the incarnations as Lord Rama and Lord Krishna.

Jainism and Buddhism preached by Lord Mahaveer and Lord Buddha - being the two other religions of India, upheld the principle of non-existance of God. Sikism recognises the "God Supreme" as the Guru (Preacher) to the mankind.

Among the world religions - the Islamic religion referred to the "God Supreme" - of no specific form or name - as "Allah" and Prophet Mohammad as the Messenger of the "God Supreme". The Christian religion referred to Lord Jesus Christ - as the Son of this "God Supreme" - of no specific form or name. Judaism too recognised the existance of the "God Supreme" - but of no specific form or name. In reality the "God Supreme" of the religions that sprung from India and of the other world religions - "is none but one".

From the early days different Hindu religious beliefs and rituals that sprung from India, were practiced side by side with the patronage of the kings ruling the different regions of then India.

At times the beliefs and rituals that received the preferential patronage from the kings of a particular region, caused much influence over the other beliefs and rituals practised in the same region and undermined them. This to a certain extent caused the fusion of the (Hindu) beliefs and rituals of the preferential religion, with the other religions of that region.

Today Hinduism is a religion that is practised predominantly in India, Nepal, and Bali Islands of Indonesia, and to a great extent in Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, in certain regions - of Sumatra & Java of Indonesia, in ceratain regions of Bangaladesh & Pakistan, Thailand, Miyanmar, Andamam & Nicobar Islands, Fiji Islands, Mauritius Islands, South Africa, Re-Union Island, U.S.A, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, to some extent in Germany, France, Netherlands, Switzerland, Norway, Italy, and to a reasonable extent in few other countries.

(2) Evolution of Saivaism

The Saiva 'beliefs and rituals" was known as Saivam and Saiva Samayam in Tamil, and as Saivaism and Saiva religion to the rest of the world, is the main branch of the Hindu Religion of today. It acclaims the worship of the "God Supreme" - "the one who has not even a name or a form" - as enlightened by the Tamil Saiva Saint Maanikkavaasakar of Tamil Nadu as "Oru naamam oor uruvam, ontrum illaarkku" in his religious text Thiruvaasakam (in Tamil).

The Tamil Saiva Saint Kaaraikkaal Ammaiyaar also of Tamil Nadu too asks the God himself "what shall I say to those who ask which is the form of your God, tell me which is your form" - as "Ev uruvoan num piran enbaar hatkku en uraihen, Ev uruvo nin uruvam eathu" in her religious text Atputhath Thiruvanthathi (in Tamil), being quite uncertain of his real form.

In Saivaism, the "God Supreme" who is invisible to all human beings and the other living beings, has been given the name as "God Siva" and a form as human - and held supreme of the universe. He is known to have given vision - to those who have reached a very high state of spiritual conciousness - in the very forms he was intensely worshiped by them in great piety, being either human forms or symbolic forms having different names for each of these forms.

The origin of the worship of "God Supreme" as "God Siva" is still not clear, but in all probability the religion Saivaism professing the worship of "God Siva", originated among a very early civilisation(unknown to us) in the Tibetian region adjacent to the present northern - Nepal and Uttar Pradesh of India.

It is here the Mount Kailash, also known to the Indians as Mount Meru of the vast and breath taking heights of the Himalayan mountain range is situated, and the river Bahirathi originating as a tributary from the Mount Nanda Devi - also of this range about 100 miles south-west of Mount Kailash, joins with another tributary known as Alaknanda at a point known as Gangoththri to form the great river Ganges.

This early civilisation of this region in all probability conceived the original form of "God Siva" as a human masculine, having - a lock of hair (kontrai) on his head bearing the crest moon and the river Gangai flowing from it, a third eye in his forehead and a blue mark around his neck, holding a trident in one hand and dressed in tiger skins with cobra snakes around his neck and arms, with "Goddess Sakthi" - deemed as his inherent energy - on his left side as a human feminine, and both having the bull as their vehicle, and with the snow capped Mount Kailash of the Himalayan mountain range as their abode.

The point of the earliest era from whence the worship of "God Supreme" in the form of "Siva" took shape, among the civilisation in the vicinity of Mount Kailash in the Tibetian region, could be taken as the time of inception of the Saiva religion. The Saivaism over a period of time gradually spread all over India, including the regions in its north-west among the Indus Valley civilisations, and in the remote south upto Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka, where the sage Agastiya and king Ravana respectively became the ardent devotees of God Siva.

Thus the original Saiva religious concept of God, and the related forms of worship that reached various parts of India from the Tibetian region, continued to be practised in their original forms "being a common religion (Saivaism) to both Aryans and Dravidians of then India". This was the reason why the Tamil Saiva Saint Thirunaavukkarasar of Tamil Nadu has mentioned in his religious text the "Thevaaram" in the sixth Thirumurai (in Tamil) as ".....Ariyan kandaai, Thamilan kandaai....."

Over a period of time in some regions of India the original Saivaism underwent further developments evolved by the Sages and Saints of those regions, independently with their own "new" - God forms of "Siva" and "Sakthi", religious philosophies, modes of worship, and religious texts - greatly influenced by the language, culture and traditions "of those regions of India", and integrated with the practices of the original Saivaism.

(3) It's early development in Tamil Nadu - Thamil Saivam

During the early period of Tamil Nadu too, the original form of Saivaism with the "God Supreme" represented in the form of "Siva & Sakthi", and the forms of their worship as evolved in the Tibetian region were well known.

With the passage of time the original Saivaism gradually underwent further developments in Tamil Nadu - with the evolution of new religious concepts on the special attributes and glories of "God Siva" & "Goddess Sakthi", and "their new forms of representation in relation to these special attributes and glories" too cameforth in Tamil Nadu with God Siva as Lingeswarar (God Siva represented in the form of Lingam), Thenmukakkadavul (Thetchanamoorththy), Maathorupaakan (Arthanaatheeswarar), Kalyaanasunderar, Uma-Maheswarar, Somaskandar, and as Aadavallaan (Nadarajar), and with Goddess Sakthi as Malaimahal (Parvathi), Alaimahal (Lakshmi), Kalaimahal (Saraswathi), and Kaali (Durga).

The "new" concept that God Siva having performed eight Thaandavams (Dances - Nadanam) for the welfare of all living beings of the Universe at eight Thandava Thalams, namely the Aanantha Thaandavam at Ponnambalam in Thillai (Chithambaram), Santhiyaa Thaandavam at Velliambalam in Thiruaalavaai (Mathurai), Gowri Thaandavam at Chittrambalam in Thirupputhoor (Paandiya Nadu), Thiripura Thaandavam at Chiththiraaambalam at Thirukuttraalam, Kaali Thaandavam at Raththinaambalam at Thiruvaalankadu, Muni Thaandavam at Thaamiraambalam in Thirunelveli. Sangara Thaandavam ?? All these eight Temple Shrines were all located within Tamil Nadu.

The concept of God Siva being represented in five element forms of the universe too developed in Tamil Nadu as fire, water, air, earth, and space, and was represented in his symbolic forms as Panchalingams (five Lingams) with each Lingam representing an element. Further concepts that these five elements were associated with five important Siva-Temple Shrines all being within Tamil Nadu too developed, and were known as Panchabootha Thalams (shrines). These Temple Shrines were Thiruvannaamalai, Thiruvaanaikkaa, Thirukkaalaththi, Kanchipuram, and Chithambaram respectively. (However very unfortunately the Thirukkaalaththi temple which has been a part of Tamil Nadu, has been included into Andhra Pradesh during the formation of States on linguistic basis within India in A.D.1956)

Also new concepts of God Siva's eight deeds with mythological stories relating to them too developed in Tamil Nadu, and these deeds were associated with further eight Siva-Temple shrines which too were all within Tamil Nadu, and were known as Atta Viratta Thalams. These Temple Shrines were namely, Thirukkandiyoor, Thirukkovilur, Thiruvathikai, Thiruppariyaloor, Thiruvirtkudi, Thiruvaluvoor, Thirukkurukkai, and Thirukkadavur.

Likewise "new"- holy religious texts, modes of worship, and religious practices - too took shape independently, influenced by and blended with the culture and traditions of Tamil Nadu that existed during the early period.

These developments in Tamil Nadu undoubtedly would have been the reason that made the great Tamil Saint Maanickavaasakar praise "God Siva" as "then naadudaiya Sivane Portri, ennaattavarkkum irraiva poatri" in his Portri Thiruakaval of Thiruvaasakam (in Tamil), claiming him specifically as the God of the southern country the Tamil Nadu - where he evolved in new human, symbolic, and element forms of the universe, with the associated temple shrines "all being within Tamil Nadu itself" - while he was also the God of all other countries (in India).

Also he is referred to as "Thillaiyut Kooththane, then Pandi naataane" in the Sivapuraanam of the same Thiruvaasakam, meaning he as the 'Dancing God of Chidambaram' (Thillai) of Tamil Nadu, and also associating him with the southern Pandiya Nadu of the Tamil kings. It was the southern most region of the ancient Tamil Nadu where the holy mountains of God Siva, namely the Mahendra Malai and Pothikai malai were situated.

This could have been the reason why the poet Kallaadanar who wrote the Saivite religious work known as Kallaadam (In Tamil), has mentioned God Siva as the "then Thamil Kadavul" meaning the "Southern Tamil God".

Also the poet Perumpattra Puliyoor Nambi who composed the religious work the Thiruvaalavaayudaiyaar Thiruvilaiyaadal Puranam (In Tamil) has referred to God Siva as "Thiruvalar Thamil Chokkan", and as "Senthamil Mukkat Chokkan" (Chokkan or Chokkanathar = God Siva).

During the early period of Saivaism in Tamil Nadu, the Saiva religious texts that evolved from this region were called the Agamams. Saivaism apparently was the first known religion of Tamil Nadu, and the Agamams were the original holy texts of Saivaism of this region.

Agamams means religious texts, and was a general term used to specify the Saiva religious texts that evolved and developed in the early Tamil Nadu. However during the later periods with the coming of the Vaishnava, Saktha and Jain religious texts, to differentiate the Saiva religious texts from the others, it was called as the Siva Agamams. The Tamil Saiva Saint Thirumoolar mentions in his Tamil religious text Thirumanthiram that the original Agamams were in Tamil in addition to it being in Sanskrit.

Thus the Saivam or Saivaism which developed in Tamil Nadu is called "Thamil Saivam" (or Tamil Saivaism), as much as the Saivam that developed in Kashmir is known as "Kashmira Saivam" and that developed in Karnataka as "Vira Saivam".

(4) The Mahendra Malai(Mountain) in Tamil Nadu considered a Holy abode of God Siva

In ancient times there had been mountains in Tamil Nadu which were held as holy abodes of God Siva and Goddess Sakthi by the Saivites of Tamil Nadu, as much as Mount Kailash of the Tibetian region, having their own concepts on the importance and significance of these mountains coming forth from the Sages & Seers of Tamil Nadu over a period of time. They were evidently the Mahendra Malai in the Kanyakumari district, Pothikai Malai in the Thirunelveli district, (Thiru) An-naa Malai in Thiruvannamalai district, and the Eengoi Malai in the Namakkal district (near Musiri), all being within Tamil Nadu.

Among them the "Mahendra (Mahenthiram in Tamil) Malai" draws our importance, as this mountain is not only held as the holy abode of God Siva and Goddess Sakthi, but also related with the evolution of the original Agamams.

The following references confirms the association of God Siva with this mountain.

"Thuu vellai neerani emperumaan
sothi Mahenthiranathan vanthu
thevar tholumpatham vaiththa Easan"
Thiruvaasakam by Saint Maanikkavaasakar, Thiruvarththai, Verse 9

"seer Mahenthiraththu pirappl avan Palli"
2nd Thirumurai by Saint Thirugnanasambanthar, Pathikam 39, Verse 4

"Mahendra mamalai.....Pothiyin malai......atethuvoam
idar keda nintru atethuvoam"
6th Thirumurai by Saint Thirunaavukkarasar, Pathikam 70, Verse 9

"mani neer aruvi Mahenthira mamalai mel uraiyum
kuravaa...Thillai ambalak kooththane"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 1

"vaane thadavum nedung kudumi Mahenthira mamalai meliruntha thene.....Thillai ambalak kooththane"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 3

"varuneer aruvi Mahenthirap pon malaiyin
Malaimahalukku arulum kuru nee"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 10

"malai sool Mahenthira maamalai mel kurava.....Thillai ambalak kooththane"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 9

"Mahenthira vertpa.....Thillai ambalak kooththane"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 2

"maventhu saaral Mahenthiraththil valar nayaha.....Thillai ambalak kooththane"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 8

"mariyeru saaral Mahenthira malai mel iruntha marunthe.....Thillai ambalak kooththane"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 4

The Mahendra Malai was also known as Manthira Maamalai which too is confirmed by the following references:

"Manthiram enba Mayenthira Vetpe" (Vetpu - Mountain)
Kooththa Nool Chapter Thari Nool, Line 15

"Sinththanaikku ariya Sivame pottri
Manthira maamalai meyay pottri"
Thiruvaasakam by Saint Maanikkavaasakar, Pottri Thiruakaval, Line 205

"Manthira maamalai Mahenthira Vetpan"
Thiruvasakam by Saint Maanikkavaasakar, Keerththi Thiruakaval, Line 100

(5) Location of Mahendra Malai

The Mahendra mountain range was situated in the extreme south of the present Tamil Nadu, evidently stretching beyond the present Kanyakumari region which formed an integral part of the Pandiya Nadu of the first Tamil Sangam period.

At some stage a great sea tide (tsunami) coupled with a very big under water land slide took place, resulting in many mountains including Pahruli river and the vast tracts of land beyond the present Kanyakumari region belonging to then Pandiyan king submerged in to the sea.

Evidently in this tragedy the southern most part of the 'Mahendra Mountain range' sank into the sea, while the northern part of same with a single tall peak known as Mahendra Malai survived. The great sea tide that took place with the sinking of an extensive land area, is confirmed by the following reference in the Tamil Epic Poem of the third Tamil Sangam period (B.C.200 - A.D.200) namely the Silappathikarem.

"Pahtruli aatrudan panmalai aduk kaththu Kumarik Kodum kodung kadal kolla vada thisai Gangaiyum Imayamum kondu then thisai aanda Thennavan vaali"
Silappathikarem, Mathurai Kandam, Kaadu kaan kaathai - Lines 19-20

The above reference in Tamil in Silappathikarem means: "Praise to the Thennavan (Pandiyan king) who on the fearce sea submerging the river Pahruli with many range of mountains including the Kumari range, conquered the Gangai (river) and Imayam (Himalayan mountain) and ruled from the south".

The fact that many range of mountains submerged under sea is confirmed by the Epic Poem the Silappathikarem which states it was the territory of the then Pandiyan king. This falls in line with what is stated in the Valmiki Ramayana (in Sanskrit), that beyond the Pandiyan kingdom was the Mahendra Malai, the northern peak of this Mahendra mountain range that escaped and survived to this date.

The following reference confirms the sinking of the southern part of the Mahendra Mountain range, and the location of it's northern surviving peak. The reference is as follows.

"……From there you shall cross over the river Taamraparni……from there that is divine and fully golden and decorated with pearls & gemstones you shall see the Pandiyan's Kavadam. From there you reach the ocean and on resolving - the resolve of the purpose. There "with its one end verily penned in by Sage Agastya inside the ocean, the fortunate Mt Mahendra is there, with its marvellous pinnacles and the best among the mountains……."
Valmiki Ramayana, Kiskinda Kanda (English Translation)

The Valmiki Ramayana further indicates that the remaining portion of the Mahendra mountain was lying down south of India beyond the Thamiraparani river in between the then Pandiyan capital Kavadam and the sea in the days of the Ramayana epic, and even today. The Kavadam or Kavadapuram was the Pandiyan capital of the second Tamil Sangam period.

The fact about the survived portion of the Mahendra mountain range, is further confirmed by the reference in the Tamil Thirumurai as follows:

"aluntha Mahenthiraththu antharam putkku arasukku arase"
9th Thirumurai by Saint Thirumaalikaithevar, Pathikam 3, Verse 5

Further the location of the Mahendra Malai is also indicated by another reference as follows:

"then munai vattil ma Mayenthirame"
Kooththa Nool by Saththanaar, Chapter titled Thari Nool

The survived peak of the Mahendra mountain range could be seen even today, south of Thamiraparani river in the present Kanyakumari district, almost midway between the Thirukkurungudi and Bhutapandi having a height of 1,654 Metres (5,425 Ft), and presently called as the Mahendragiri. (Giri is mountain - in Sanskrit & Malai in Tamil)

(6) Naan Marai revealed by God Siva to four Munivars on Mahendira Malai

"Marai in Tamil means "Samaya Koatpaaduhal" - that is "Religious Doctrines", intended for or understood by learned people and the Priests with specialized knowledge of the religion. Naan Marai means four religious Doctrines, which at a subsequent period were known as Agamangal

There exists a mythological tradition which states that the Agamangal were first revealed by God Siva to Goddes Sakthi, and then re-revealed to fours Munivars on Mahendra Malai(mountain). This tradition is confirmed by the follows:

".....Arul arunth thiru Mathurai Aalavaayit Chokkan
parivaaka munoru kaat parpoha mukthi tharum
porul aru Agamangal Poruppu Araiyan thavap payanaanth
thiruvaana Umai ketpa selunth thiruvaai malarnth thananaal...."
Thiruvaalavaayudaiyaar Thiruvilaiyaadal Puraanam - by Perumpattra Puliyoor Nambi, chapter - Valai veesina thiruvilaiyaadal

"......Velli maalvaraik kayilaiyil veetriruntharulith
thullu vaarpunal Veniyaar arul seya tholuthu,
thellu vaaimaiyin pin Agamath thirannelanth theriya
ulla vaaru kettarulinaal ulakai Aludaiyaal....."
Thiruththondar Puraanam - by Seikkeelaar, chapter on Thirukurippuththonda Nayanaar

It is said, that it was after the revealation of the Agamangal to Goddess Sakthi, that God Siva re-revealed them again to the four Munivers on the Mahenthra Malai. This is confirmed by the following reference:

".....mannu maamalai Mahenthiram athanil
sonna Agamam thotruvith tharuliyum......"
Thiruvaasakam - by Maanikkavaasakar, keerththi thiruvahaval

The above reference is inline with the tradition, that the earlier revealed Agamangal (sonna Agamam) were re-revealed (thottruvith tharuliyum) to the Munivers.

The Naan Marai of Saivaism were namely Aram, Porul, Inbam, Veedu. God Siva revealed these four original Marais (religious doctrines) to the visualising senses of four Munivars, "under the shade of the Aalamaram" (Aal nilal keel) on the Mahendra mountain on their intense worship of him, which were later composed in Naan Marai by these four Munivars. This attribute of God Siva, evolved with his new form as Thetchanamoorththy.

The "Kooththanool" a third Sangam period (Second century A.D) - Tamil dance treatise too confirms that the four original Marais were revealed by God Siva to the four Munivars on the Mahendra Mountain.

"Manthira maamalai Yanthira thavacil vadakku parithi kidakkap poam vali, naalvarkku Thanthira Naan Marai koorum Kooththanum Kooththiyum iyatriya kooththai kandaan Agaththiyan"
Kooththa Nool - by Saaththanaar, Line 8

The essense of the Naan Marai was the Sivathanmam.

These are confirmed by the following references.

"Arisaiyum vada aalin keelirunthu angu eer irruvarkku
irangi nintru neriya Nann Marai porulai uraiththu"]
1st Thirumurai by Thirugnanasambanthar, Thiruvilimalai pathikam, Verse 1

"Nantraha Naalvarukkum Naanmaraiyin utporulai
antru Aalin keel irunthu angu aramuraiththan kaanedi"
Thiruvaasakam by Saint Maanikkavaasagar, Thirutchaalal Pathikam

"Arunthavarukku Aalin keel aram muthalaka naankanaiyum
irunthavarukku arulumathu ennakariya iyambedi
arunrhavakku ara muthal naanku antru aruli sethilanel
Thiththavarukku kula iyatkai theriya kaan saalalo"
Thiruvaasakam by Saint Maanikkavaasagar, Thirutchaalal Pathikam

"Aal athan keel irunthu naalvarkku Aram, Porul, Veedinpam (Veedu + Inpam)....therinthaanai[/u]"
6th Thirumurai by Saint Sundaramoorthi Nayanar, Pathikam 66 Verse 2

"Saiva vedham, thaan ninaiththa iympulanum
alintha sinthai Anthanaalarkku, Aram, Porul, Inpam, Veedu
molintha vaayaan mukkanaathi....."
1st Thirumurai by Saint Thirugnanasambanthar, Pathikam 53, Verse 6

Note: "vedham" in Tamil in the above refers to "disguise" and not to Vetham - that is the Vedas. Also "alintha sinthai" means restrained mind.

"Senthamilar theiva Marai naavarselu nat kalai therinthavar"
3rd Thirumurai by Saint Thirugnasambanthar, Pathikam 80, Verse 4

"Aram kondu Sivathanmam uraiththa piran"
2nd Thirumurai by Saint Thirugnanasambanthar, Pathikam 43, Verse 6

(7) The earliest Tamil Saiva Priests of Tamil Nadu were the Paarppanar and the Anthanar

The God Siva was given many names to exibit his various attributes, resulting in he being also known as the "Paarppanan" and the "Anthanan" during the early days of Tamil Nadu.

The abode of God Siva in the original Saivaism was Himalayas the Paarppatham in Tamil. The Goddess Shakthi of the Paarppatham mountain was called Paarppathi and the God Siva of the Paarppatham was called as the Paarppanan - in Tamil.

This is confirmed by Thiruvasakam of the Tamil Saiva Saint Maanikkavaasagar in which he addresses God Siva as Paarppaane !!

".....moopaai moovaa muthalaai nintra
muthalvaa munne enai yaanda
Paarppaane em parama......"
Thiruvaasakam by Saint Maanikkavaasagar, punarchchi patthu, verse 10

Saint Maanikkavaasagar again refers to Paarppaan as follows:

".......Paraaparan paaril vanthu Paarppaan ena,
Siththar suula Sivapiraan Thillai muuthoor nadam seivaan......"
Thiruvaasakam - by Saint Maanikkavaasagar, Senni Paththu.

That is - the Paraaparan (the God) came to earth (known) as "Paarppanan", (was the) Sivapiraan (who) performs dance at Thillai muutoor (Chithambaram) surrounded by Siththar (Sages).

The significance of the name Anthanan to God is still not known, but however it was also a name used to refer God as Siva with a prefix during the very early periods, which is confirmed from the follows:

"Pirai mudi Anthanan"
Kallaadam by Kallaadanaar, chapter 44, line 16

"Piramanum Thirumalum kaithola peralall aya pemmaan
aravam 'Ser sadai Anthanan" Ananginodu amarum idam"
1st Thirumurai - by Thirugnanasambanthar, Thirukatchiehambam pathikam, verse 9

"Piravaa neri thantha per arulaalan
maravaa arul thantha maathvan Nanthi
"Aravaali Anthanan" Aathi Paraaparan
uravaaki vanthu en ulam puhunthaane"
Thirumanthiram by Thirumoola Naayanaar, 7th Thanthiram, verse 1803

Here God Siva is specifically referred to as "Aravaali Anthanan" meaning the Anthanan of the ocean of Aram (Virtue) by Thirumoola Naayanaar of the fifth century A.D. in his religious work Thirumanthiram in Tamil.

Incidently it should be noted that Sage/Poet Thiruvalluvar who belonged to the period first century B.C. too uses the term "Aravaali Anthanan" in his great Tamil work on Code of Ethics namely the Thirukkural, in the first chapter on Adoration of God as follows"

"Aravaali Anthanan thaal senthaarkku al-laal
piravaali neeththal arithu"
Thirukkural - by Thiruvalluvar, chapter on Kadavul Valththu, verse 8.

meaning: Only those who submit at the feet of the God of
Virtue it is possible to overcome the ocean of
births.

The above resulted in Tamil Saiva Priests who officiated the rituals of worship to God Siva {the Paarppanan or Anthanan} in the Saiva temples, to be known as the "Paarppanar" and the "Anthanar".

The earliest Tamil Grammer treatise the Tholkaappiam and the Tamil Thirukkural clearly says the virtue maintained by these Tamil Saiva Priests as follows.

"...penu thahu sirappit Paarppanan.."
Tholkaappiam, seyyul iyal, verse 182

"Anthanar enboar Aravoar matru evvuyirkkum
senthanmai poondu oluhalaan"
Thirukkural by Thiruvalluvar, chapter on Neeththaar perumai

(8) Evolution of Vedism in the Sind Valley region of East Pakistan

Around the year B.C.1500 the Indo-Aryans migrated to the Sind region (the Punjab region of the present Pakistan and India) from the north-west through Kabul valley region, defeating the Dravidians of the Mohenjodaro & Harappa civilisations of the Sind Valley along the river Sindu (Indus) which flourished between B.C.2500-1500, and settled along the river Saraswathi of this region running parallel to the river Sindu.

The fact the 'Rig Veda' was composed by them around B.C.1500 'from this region' is confirmed by the references to the river Sindu and many references to the river Saraswathi of this region - being the 'only two main rivers mentioned in the entire Rig Veda' (not the great rivers Gangai or Yamunai or even the Himalayan mountain range). The religious culture that was developed by the Indo-Aryans in this region after their migration was known as the "Vedic Culture". This Vedic Culture gradually spread to the other regions of North and North-East India over a period of time.

During this period the 'Cyrus the great' (B.C.580-529 BC), the first Achaemenid Emperor founded Persia (present Iran) and conquered the Asia Minor and led his armies towards east and further-east and conquered many kingdoms including the Sind valley region (the Punjab region of present Pakistan and India) around B.C.570. Thus came the end of the 'cradle of the Vedic Culture' the Saraswathi and Sind valley region of North-West India.

Also around this period appeared two great Sages in North India namely Lord Mahavira (B.C.599-527) and Lord Buddha (B.C.563-483) spreading their respective religious doctrines namely the Jainism and Buddhism - in North India. The rise of the new waves of religious culture of these two faiths, lead to the gradual decline of Vedic Culture in the Sind region of North-West India from around B.C.600. The Persians (Non-Islamic) of this period were referred to as "Yavanas" in the Sanskrit Ramaayana of Sage Vaalmiki of little later period.

This period of Vedic Culture from B.C.1500-600 was known as the "Vedic Period" of North India in history, and the Sanskrit language that was professed during this period as "Vedic Sanskrit". The literature that developed during this time was known as the "Vedic Literature".

Around B.C.600 the great Grammerian Panini wrote the first Sanskrit Grammer. The Sanskrit language that was in use as from B.C.600 was referred to as the "Classical Sanskrit". No where in any Sanskrit Literature of the Vedic Period the Epic story of Raamaayana has been mentioned. However there are references to Vedas in the Sanskrit Raamaayana of Sage Vaalmiki. Hence it is clear the Ramaayana episode took place 'after' the period of "Vedic Sanskrit" around B.C.600 - during the period of "Classical Sanskrit".

(9) The coming of Vedism to Tamil Nadu

With the coming of the Vedism to Tamil Nadu the Vedic Priests namely the Brahamanar also known as the Vediyar (Vethiyar in Tamil) introduced their Vedic Doctrines namely the Rig, Yajur, and Sama Vedas and the connected Vedic Rituals namely the Homam & Yaagam (Yagna). At a subsequent stage there developed the fourth Veda known as Atharva which too was introduced to Tamil Nadu

During Silappathikarem period it was clearly evident that they performed their Vedic Rituals (Homam & Yaagam) in their own Religious Centres outside the Siva and Vishnu Temples of Tamil Nadu, but gradually received much authority in performing their Vedic religious rituals within these Temples and in the Social life of the Tamil people - parallel with the Tamil Saivite - Paarppanar and the Anthanar performing Saivite religious rituals, under the patronage of the ruling Tamil kings of then Tamil Nadu.

This caused the original Tamil Saiva Priests - the Paarppanar and the Anthanar - the necessity to differentiate themselves from the Vedic Priests, and referred to themselves also as the "Aathi Saivar" meaning the original Saivas.

Earlier those who were entitled to do "all the daily rituals of worship" in Siva Temples at the time the four Agamams came into existance, were only the "Aathi Saivar" as seen mentioned in the subsequent Siva Agamams.

With the comming of the Vedism into Tamil Nadu, it appears the original Tamil Naan Marais have been translated into Sanskrit by the Vedic Seers with modifications to the original Tamil texts, newly incorporating some Vedic rituals and values in same and called them the Agamams, with the Aram, Porul, Inbam and Veedu being referred to in them as Sariya, Kiriya, Yoga and Gnanam.

There are two evidences found, in the recent Tamil translation of the "Uttara Kamika Ahamam" confirming that the principal four Sanskrit Agamams were the translations of the original Tamil Naan Marai, while it appears that the other Agamams were later developments based on the four original Agamam written directly in Sanskrit by the Vedic Priests, who came into Tamil Nadu.

This made them claim subsequently that the Vedas were the general treatises, whereas Agamams were the special treatises of the Vedism, as also seen referred in the Thirumoolar's Thirumanthiram by which time Vedism has already penetrated into Tamil Nadu.

The Naan Marai which was the earlier specific name for Siva Agamams, which later was also used to refer the four Vedas with the introduction of same into Tamil Nadu. As they had to be differentiated among them, the Agamas were called as "Thanthirams" and the later Vedas were called as "Manthirams" - in Tamil Nadu.

They were also known as "Thanthira Naan Marai" as seen in the Kooththa Nool - by Saaththanaar, Line 8 and "Vedaththu Nan Marai" as seen in the early Tamil Literary work the Paripaadal - Chap 3, line 66.

The Tamil Saiva Saint Maanikkavaasagar of Tamil Nadu of later period confirms in the Sivapuraanam of his work Thiruvaasakam, stating that God Siva revealed the - "Nan Marais" which later were also known as the Agamams - on the Mahenthira Malai.

The reference is as follows.

"Mannu maamalai Mahenthiram athanil
sonna Akamam thotruviththu aruliyum"
Thiruvaasakam, Section on Sivapuranam, Page 22

"Maa etaakiya Akamam vaankiyum matravai thammai Mahenthiraththu irunthu Uttra iym muhankalaal panintharuliyum"
Thiruvaasakam, Section on Sivapuranam, Page 23

"Thattham samayath thahuthi nillaathaarai aththan Sivan sonna Agama Nool Neri eththandamum seyum ammaiyil…."
Thirumanthiram, verse 247

(10) The original Siva Agamams and it's subsequent growth

Siva Agamams were originally four in number grew later to nine and finally ended up at twenty eight. The following references confirms the above.

"naalvarkku Thanthira Naan Marai koorum Kooththanum
Kooththiyum"
Kooththa Nool - by Saaththanaar, Line 10

Note: The term "Marai" (Religious Doctrines) was used earlier only for Agamams, and with the comming of the Vedism to Tamil Nadu it gradually became a common term to indicate both Agamams and the Vedas. However at times even in the late periods it was still used as special term to indicate the Agamams as seen below.

"Angamaai aathiyay Vedamaahi,
aru Maraiyodu Iym pootham thaaneahi"
6th Thirumurai by Saint Thirunaavukkarasar, Nintra thiruththaandakam, Verse 6

Arisaiyum vada aalin keelirinthu angu eer irruvarkku
irangi nintru neriya naanmarai porulai uraiththu
oliser neri aliththoan nintra koyil
paarisaiyum panditharkal pannaalum payintrothum
osai kettu verimali polirt killai Vethangal porut sollum Milalaiyaame
1st Thirumurai by Thirugnanasambanthar, Thiruvilimalai pathkam, Verse1

In the above references the Agamams have been shown seperately from the Vedas, and refered to as Marai and NaanMarai which later increased to Nine, and subsequently to twenty eight during the time of Tamil Saiva Saint Thirumoolar as confirmed in his Tamil religious work Thirumanthiram, the references to which are as follows.

"Munthi uthikkintra muulan madavarai
Thanthiram onpathu saarvu muvayiram
Sunthara Agama sol molinth thane"
Thirumanthiram, verse 101

"Anjana Meni Arivaiyor paahaththan
Anjodu irupaththu muntru ula Agamam Anjali koopphi arupaththu aruvarum
Anjaa muhaththil arum porul kettathe"
Thirumanthiram, verse 57

(11) Names of the original Siva Agamams

It is not clear which were the first four Agamams revealed by God Siva to (the visualising senses) of the four Munivars on Mahendra Malai. However with the growth of these Agamams to nine, we are made aware of the names of these nine Agamams by the Tamil Saiva Saint Thirumoolar in his Tamil religious text the Thirumanthiram. In fact he has said that his Thirumanthiram was based on these nine Agamams. This is confirmed as follows.

"Moolan madavarai Thanthiram onpathu saarvu (mu)vayiram
sundara Agama sol molinthaane"
Thirumanthiram - Sirrappu Payiram, verse 101

The names of these nine Agamams are as follows.

(1) Kaarana Agamam
(2) Kamika Agamam
(3) Veera Agamam
(4) Siththa Agamam
(5) Vaathula Agamam
(6) Viyamala Agamam
(7) Kaaloththira Agamam
(8) Suppira Agamam
(9) Mahuta Agamam

The names of the nine Agamams mentioned above are confirmed by the following verse of the Thirumoolar's Thirumanthiram.

"Pettra nal Agamam, Kaaranam, Kamikam
uttra nal Veeram, uyar Siththam, Vaathulam
matrav Viyamalam ahum Kaaloaththiram
thuttra nat Suppiram sollu Mahutame"
Thirumanthiram, verse 63

Subsequently the Siva Agamams grew into twenty eight, and the additional Agamams which made this number are as follows.

(1) Yosaka Agamam
(2) Sinthiya Agamam
(3) Asitha Agamam
(4) Theeptha Agamam
(5) Suukuma Agamam
(6) Anjuman Agamam
(7) Visaya Agamam
(8) Nisuvaasa Agaam
(9) Suwaayambuva Agamam
(10) Aakineya Agamam
(11) Rouvara Agamam
(12) Chandragnana Agamam
(13) Mukavimba Agamam
(14) Prokeetha Agamam
(15) Lalitha Agamam
(16) Santhana Agamam
(17) Sarvoththa Agamam
(18) Paaramesuvara
(19) Kirana Agamam

(12) Original Agamams were in Tamil and subsequently also in Sanskrit

The original four Nan Marais were in Tamil, and subsequently they have also been in Sanskrit - translated with modifications and were called as the Agamams, which is gleaned from the references in the verses in various religious texts, and in the Saint Thirumoolar's Thirumanthiram which are as follows:

"Muththamil NaanMarai mulaiththa
arul vaakaal vithi koori"
Kallaadam by Kallaadanaar - Line 16/17

"Muththamil NaanMarai Gnanasampanthan"
1st Thirumurai - by Saint Thirugnanasampanthar

"Van ThamilMarai yorkku vaan urai koduththa
thinthiral neduvel Seralan kanku"
Sillappathikaaram - by Ilango Adigal, Katturai Kaathai Lines 63/64

"Thangi mihamai vaiththaan Thamil Saththiram"
Thirumanthiram - Verse 87

"Sadasiva Thaththuvam Mutthamil Vedam"
Thirumanthiram - Paayiram - Verse 76

"Thamil sol Vada sol enum ivvirandum
unarththum avanai unaralumame"
Thirumanthiram - Verse 66

"Ariyamum Munth(u) Thamilum udane solli
kaarikaiyarkku karunai seithaane"
Thirumamthiram - Verse 65

From the above reference it should be noted, that Thirumular himself confirms Tamil being earlier than Sanskrit in antiquity.

(13) Siva Agamams were the principal religious texts of early Saivaism of Tamil Nadu

From all available evidences it could be proved beyond doubt that Siva Agamams in Tamil were the original holy texts of Saivaism of Tamil Nadu, long before the Vedic religion from North India having Vedas (in Sanskrit) as it's principal holy texts, gradually took a place of pride along with Saivaism in Tamil Nadu in the subsequent periods.

The Siva Agamams essentially consists of informations on the represention of God as Siva in different forms with each form to represent his different attributes, the iconographic details in casting these forms of God Siva in metal and stone for the purpose of worship, the details of constructing the structural shelters namely the temples and connected structures in stone and brick to house these Icons, the forms of worship and religious practices to be followed in worshiping the Icons installed in these temples, to invoke the presence of God as Siva in them, and prey for their salvation and blessings by way of various forms of worship, for the well being of the human beings.

Finally it spells out the religious philosophy of Saivaism known as "Saiva Siththantham" an illumination on the God - Soul relations, and the worldly bonds which prevents the soul reaching the God and as to how to relieve themselves from these bonds in their quest in reaching the God's feet.

The God Siva's form such as Sivalingam, Siva with Gangai and crest moon in his knots of hair with snake around his neck and a blue kandam on his throat, and the trident in one hand, and the other forms such as Lingothbhavar, Arthanaatheeswarer, Thetchanamoorthy, Kalyanasunderar, Uma-Maheswarer, Somaskandar, etc are only known to us from the Siva Agamams.

Only the Siva Agamams mention about Panchabootha Thalams, and Atta Virratta Thalams. Hence we could very correctly and evidently conclude that the Siva Agamas were the earliest principal religious texts of the Saivaism that developed in Tamil Nadu.

(14) Saivaism during the period of "Thamil Sangams" of Tamil Nadu

To follow soon before - End Dec 2012

The above Research Article is "not the ultimate" on the Subject of it's Title, but "to be further improved" with "corrections made where necessary" - for it's perfection and reliability.

"New additions will be made" with the findings of new authentic informations on the title of this Article from various sources from time to time, to make this Thread in this Website more informative.

The Article itself will be continued further exploring the "Development of Saivaism in Tamil Nadu from the ancient times to this day"

r_kk

26th February 2005, 09:35 PM

Dear virarajendra,
It seems you have lot of interest in Saivam. If you can write about scientific beliefs of Siddha medical system, Sivananabotham's explanations about exixtence of universe, it will be benificial for hubbers to understand the scientific knowledge of earlier Tamils. If it can be discussed as science rather than religious system, it will be more interesting.

F.S.Gandhi vandayar

2nd April 2005, 01:07 PM

Some think that 'saival' means vegetarian. It is not so. saivaism classified the days of week for vegetarian food according to the astrology to do their pujas and other things.

Vaishnavism and jainism spread among saivaist and they also insisted some other days for vegetarian intake during pujas slightly different from saivaite people made all saivaite of today following vegetarianism and Veer saivals were produced.

Anyway the root of saivaism is not vegetarianism so all saivaite followerers need not bother about the criticism of non- vegetarianism.

Raghu

16th June 2005, 03:46 PM

excellent topic, excellent info about Saivam hats off sir

I wish to put some questions before the intellectuals here regarding Saivam

shall do very soon

Idiappam

16th June 2005, 08:10 PM

Ok, This is about 'evolution of Saivism'. Can we start from Sangam literature - what is mentioned there about Siva.........

viggop

16th June 2005, 08:16 PM

Idiappam Sir
Please post the sangam literature on Lord Siva too.I'm very eager to learn that.

solomon

23rd September 2005, 02:40 PM

Friends,

Tholkappiyam does not have any indirect reference to Siva worship.

But Sangam Lit. fully has both Saivam and Vaishnavam.

Friends, the word- Saivam is of SANSKRIT Origin and hence equivalent is SIvaniyam used by many.

Friends- Which ever religion we follow- Vegitarianism is a must.

THIRUVALLUVAR IS Clear, for one who Kills other animal and eat flesh of other animal to grow his Flesh- cannot expect mercy in God's vision.

I await detailed presentation of Saivam, else let me present it shortly.

MosesMohammedSolomon

r_kk

23rd September 2005, 06:20 PM

Friends- Which ever religion we follow- Vegitarianism is a must.

****

Why it is must Mr. Solomen?

What is Vegetarianism? Do you think plants have life? What do you prescribe as food to Eskimos and other people who are live in non-fertile lands or environment which is not proper to grow any vegetables?

Do you kill mosquito or not? Do you take medicine to kill virus and bacteria entered in to your body or not?

Veg. is luxurious food concept and applicable in a place like India. For survival, one should able to eat what his/her body can chew, digest and take energy out of it. In my opinion if one kills an animal just for stomach (not for tongue) is nothing wrong. As far as possible, giving pain to the animals which has more sensory perception should be avoided.

Idiappam

5th October 2005, 05:22 AM

solomon said:

Tholkappiyam does not have any indirect reference to Siva worship.
There is a direct reference --- Seyon = Siva! Not like you said elsewhere as 'Murugan'.

Friends, the word- Saivam is of SANSKRIT Origin and hence equivalent is SIvaniyam used by many.
That is rubbish! 'Saivam' is Tamil.

Friends- Which ever religion we follow- Vegitarianism is a must.
Vedas prescribe meat eating. Manu Smriti encourages meat eating too.

solomon

7th October 2005, 11:48 AM

Friends,

Pavanar to all Tamil Non-sense Chavunists use only Sivaniyam as Saivam is Sanskrit and that is the Truth.

Tholkappiyam says Kurinji LaND'S God as Seiyin- The God of Kundurukal and that is MURUGAR, Friends, IDiyappam's Fakery does not help.

Saivam or any religion Vegetarionism is important, and God has made all internal parts of HUMANS, As Vegetarians only.

Vedas belong to 2000 BCE, and why only read the wrong verses.and I can quote similar from Tamil LIt., BELONGIng to 2000 YEARS later. Manusmirithi, for your conveninence would be by A Tamil King Manu or YOU Criticise it, PLEAse read Kural and Practice. Stop Forgery and force me to quote more from Tamil Lit.

MosesMohammedSolomon

r_kk

7th October 2005, 12:34 PM

[tscii:99c9a65b5d]

Saivam or any religion Vegetarionism is important, and God has made all internal parts of HUMANS, As Vegetarians only.

Dear Solomon,

1. I feel, Veg. concept was a very later one to Vedic Hinduism and the major contributors to such concept were Buddhism and Jainism.
2. There was/is no clear cut definition about Vegetarianism in Vedic Hinduism. For example, fish is considered as Veg among Bengali Hindus.
3. Human body can digest non-veg food easily. I had seen most of my Korean/Japanese/Chinese friends eating raw fish heavily and digesting it without any problem. So, your statement is wrong.
4. Your statement "God made human" is highly doubtful. I feel opposite way.

Regarding other points, I don't want to poke my nose at this moment.

For others,
why can't we use latest genetic research to discuss history and beliefs? I read the following interesting articles recently after reading about Dr Spencer Wells’s documentary "Journey of Man" telecasted in National Geographic.

1. The Piramalai kallar, Suthroids and many south Indian tribes have been found to be close match with remote African tribes.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=379225

2. East African tribes also have a "mountain god" named "Murungu" (omnipotent universal god)
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/1335/Anthro/sud_afr.html
Surprisingly, the piramali Kallar community and some Adi Dravidian communities also praise "Murugan" as the primary God and these community had settled in and around madurai (early rulers too) long time back (pre sankam, even pre-historic)

Did Dravidians (early settlers) had their own God before (assumed) later migration of other human races to India?

(Note: All the caste names used here are purely for educational/understanding purpose only. I personally feel all humans are equal irrespective of their races, migration periods, origins. No human/language is superior than another)
[/tscii:99c9a65b5d]

solomon

10th October 2005, 10:41 AM

Friends,

Rrk, has put a simple query, but highly thoughtful and needs complete History to be seen. Firstly Vegetarianism is not Vedic, but influenced by Buddhist and Jains. Firstly I Explain with example, by all available Proofs Buddhism came to Tamilnadu by King Asoka, first landing at Srilanka, and then Crossing to TN. Srilankan Bud-Bikshus have always been Non-Vegetarians in History. So fully putting that Buddists and Jains are responsible is not fully supported by History. Secondly Buddhism and Jainism are not Different Religions to say. They are Developments of Reformations, as a branch of Hinduism, as Protestants to Christinaity. 20th Century Cunning Missionary Minded Indologists divide and called it that way. All Buddhist Statues and Stupas where Buddha is depicted has with Tilak in Head, and quiet a few Godess Lakshmi Statues have been in Archeological findings dated to PreBCE datings in this Stupa areas, and similar is Jainism.

Rrk, puts Rational Question-Did God Created Man? Friend This thread is on Saivite God worship method, I am sure I CAN present Theistic views.

For Rrk- friend Vupanishads have Argued all positions including Atheistic and Buddhism and Jainism are Historically developments of Vupanisadic Argument and the Oldest Lit. of both are More Agnostic, than Theistic is the Truth, with belief in Karma Theory, of repeated Births.

Personally I believe more Agnostic, and with Para Sciences proving Repeated Births, I Trust Karma Theory is scientific. Every Activity You do in this birth would give reflect in your Next Birth, in which Country you are born, to which family, are you full or with any Physical or Mental Handicaps etc.,, are all Decided before Birth and the Individual Child has no choice.

Rrk- I ACCEPT that All Humans were first created in Africa and later moved to other Continents. However We need to understand, man is another Animal till Man started using Brains, and thrived in Civilisation, by Destroying Forests and making Villages and Towns. Friends, all these happened only after the Great IceMelt AS Scientist call around BCE12,000 and Probably speaking all started later.

Man as a Mammal was made Vegetarian and not otherwise is the Scientific view. Simple example is look at all Vegetarian Mammals, they do not have Harsh Teeth to eat Flesh of other Animals, and similar is the Internal Digestive System. Of all Animals in land Elephant a Vegetarian Lives for long life, with Stamina for long hours, Horses run with Vegetarian food, for example. Man must live for up to 150 to 200 years Healthily, but due to his wrong eating habits we see all sorts of ailments and life time curtailed, Digestive power of Man reduces and every Doctor asks you to eat less you cross 40.

So Science do not support Non-Vegetarianism, Man Lives non for his Needs but for Desires and get into troubles, and Non Vegetarianism is one.

Vedas belong to a Period of BCE 2000 or earlier, Now world is changed and become a village, even a Desert or a Famine Hit Country can import from other parts Vegetarian foods. You showed Eskimos; even they can live with Canned Veg. foods. I Do not compel anybody, but give you both Scientific and Theistic Views, as Tiruvalluvar said Very clearly on that, so below-

Than Vun Perkkathirku Than Pirithu Vun Vunban
Enkanam Alum Arul. Kural-251
If some body eats Flesh of other animal to maintain his body and flesh, he cannot expect Divine Blessings. Everybody must avoid eating Meat etc., if you want to reach God' Blessings.

Hence Vegetarian is not only Theistic, but Scientific, Rrk on your other links I have answered basically, still I NEED much more detailed answer in coming postings. If need be please Open another Thread on Vegetarian verses Non-Veg and let me link you to various Scientific sites.

MosesMdSolomon

Idiappam

12th October 2005, 01:56 AM

Solomon blabered:

b]Than Vun Perkkathirku Than Pirithu Vun Vunban
Enkanam Alum Arul. Kural-251 [/b]
If some body eats Flesh of other animal to maintain his body and flesh, he cannot expect Divine Blessings. Everybody must avoid eating Meat etc., if you want to reach God' Blessings.
Which word in the above kural means 'God'??
Which word in the above kural means 'Divine'??
Which word in the above kural means 'Blessings'??

How long more are you going to stay around in this world misinterpreting Tamil works?

aravindhan

12th October 2005, 05:16 AM

So fully putting that Buddists and Jains are responsible is not fully supported by History.
All orthodox Jains are very strictly vegetarian. As far as buddhism goes, there was historically a split between Mahayana (which urged vegetarianism) and Hinayana / Theravada (which permitted meat eating). Mahayana was far more influential in India than Hinayana.

Secondly Buddhism and Jainism are not Different Religions to say. They are Developments of Reformations, as a branch of Hinduism, as Protestants to Christinaity. 20th Century Cunning Missionary Minded Indologists divide and called it that way.
It depends on how you define Hinduism, I think. Traditionally, both Buddhism and Jainism were considered nastika, and therefore were beyond the pale as far as orthodox Hindus were concerned. This was in particular caused by the way they expressly - and agressively - denied the sanctity of the vedas. This is as close to heresy as you can get in Hinduism.

I think we need to draw a distinction between religions which belong to the same tradition, and between sects of one religion. Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism belong to the same tradition but are not the same religion, largely because Buddhist and Jain doctrine is heretical from the perspective of Hindu orthodoxy. Their relationship is therefore more analogous to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam than to Protestantism and Catholicism.

For Rrk- friend Vupanishads have Argued all positions including Atheistic
Which of the 108 upanishads accepted by orthodox Hinduism (and considered part of the vedas) espouses an atheistic position (as distinct from describing it in the course of purvapaksha)? Please don't drag in non-vedic "upanishads" like the shvasanaveda upanishad (or, for that matter, Dara Shikoh's so-called "Allah upanishad").

Personally I believe more Agnostic, and with Para Sciences proving Repeated Births, I Trust Karma Theory is scientific.
Could you please elaborate on the "scientific" basis of the theory of karma?

Man as a Mammal was made Vegetarian
The situation is a little trickier than that. Scientists agree that we are not designed to be carnivores exclusively, but that doesn't mean we were "made vegetarian." The scientific consensus is actually that man is designed to be an omnivore. The evidence for this is, in brief:
- our closest genetic relatives, the chimpanzees, are omnivores.
- we lack bodily organs to break down cellulose, which herbivores generally have in one form or another
- our molars resemble those of ominvores (such as pigs) very closely. The fact that our canines are short is irrelevant - gorillas and baboons have extremely long canines, and they are almost exclusively vegetarian. The fossil record from australopithecus to homo erectus appears, on the contrary, to indicate an evolution away from a diet based primarily on fruit.
- our intestinal tract, in terms of surface area, is almost midway between those of carnivores and herbivores, particularly when one takes into account the quality of the tract surface, in terms of relative numbers and distribution of the various types of cells.

Hence Vegetarian is not only Theistic, but Scientific
I think the primary argument in favour of vegetarianism is not moral or scientific, but ethical. Vegetarianism represents a more demanding ethic, one which has progressed from "do not harm other people" to "minimise the harm you cause other living things". The ethical argument is an extremely strong one, in my opinion.

Badri

12th October 2005, 05:30 AM

Kindly stick to the topic of this thread: Evolution of Saivaism and it's development in Tamil Nadu.

You can have discussions on vegetarianism as a separate thread, though the Indian History & Culture maynot be the right forum for it!

r_kk

12th October 2005, 06:21 AM

Dear Sbadri,
Is it possible for you to move the arguments related to vegan concept to a separate thread (starting from Solomen's writing on compulsory vegetarianism for so called spiritual life)? I feel Aravindan's post will be very useful to many hubbers.

solomon

24th October 2005, 10:11 AM

Friends,

We shall look on Development of Saivam, or Proper Tamil word Sivaniyam. We do not have Sivan in Tolkappiyam, however As Vedas are referred in at various points, certainly Siva-Rudran is Known to TholKappiar.

Of the Sangam Collections- Kalithogai and ThiruMurugatrupadai are fully Saivastic, and Paripadal when refers to God Muruga’s birth and on Devas Getting Amirtham-Parkadal Kadaithal and Siva Drinking of Poison is said.

The Name Siva is not seen in Sangam Literature at all. Earliest use is as SaivaVathi- in Manimekhalai. Siva is referred as ManiMidarran- Who drank Poison; Sadaian- who has Ganges and Moon in his Sadai; and Mukkannan – for having Third Eye.All of this have been covered in Sangam Lit.

Sangam Literature and Tholkappiyam gives two different worship methods, One is Vedic- by Anthanars; with Fire, Mantras etc., and other is Veriyattu, specifically said for Murugan and also for Durga-Korravai. The Priest is called Velan, and He Sings And Dances Loudly and starts speaking for God, and tells solutions for problems of people.

Friends, Surprisingly- the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament’s altimate God is called ElShaddai and as Bible Lexicons say its Etymology and origin is unknown, and as OT is dated close to Sangam Period- we can say Elshaddai is Siva- My detailed posting shortly in Sanskrit Literature is Elder forum.

When Tamilnadu was dominated by Samanar’s Arrogance, the arrival of 63 Nayanmars took place and Saivam was Revived.

Friends- My posting on Saiva food is due to specific posting bt FSG earlier and as usual Idiyappam has DeConstructed Tirukural, friends please read PulanMaruthal Athikaram26- Arul is always considered as Divine Blessings in Kural 251 and Kural 252 is much more clear here and Valluvar finishes the Atikaram with

Kollan Pulalai Maruttanai KaiKooppi
Ella Vuyirum Tholum -260.

Certainly those of us who are used to Non-Veg, it would be difficult- but Valluvar is clear and Non-Veg is a start from Later Vedics.

Of the Tamil Saiva Literture-Thirumoolar is considered the Oldest- end 5th Cen or mostly 6th Cen, but we have quiet a lot of interpolations in TiruMoolar works.

I shall give you a major collection of Verses on Siva in Sangam works in my next postings.

MosesSolomon

Idiappam

24th October 2005, 10:20 PM

[tscii:83a397327b]

We shall look on Development of Saivam, or Proper Tamil word Sivaniyam. We do not have Sivan in Tolkappiyam, however As Vedas are referred in at various points, certainly Siva-Rudran is Known to TholKappiar.
Why isn't 'Saivam' a proper Tamil word? The name 'Sivan' not in Tholkappiam -- the author prefers to call him 'Seyon'. The vedas ar NOT 'refered in' the Tholkappiar. There is no God called 'Siva-Rudran' during his Time. The god 'Siva' has no mention in the Vedas.

The Name Siva is not seen in Sangam Literature at all. Earliest use is as SaivaVathi- in Manimekhalai. Siva is referred as ManiMidarran- Who drank Poison; Sadaian- who has Ganges and Moon in his Sadai; and Mukkannan – for having Third Eye.All of this have been covered in Sangam Lit.
Not true- Siva is talked about many places (at least 100) in Sangam Literature.

Sangam Literature and Tholkappiyam gives two different worship methods, One is Vedic- by Anthanars; with Fire, Mantras etc., and other is Veriyattu, specifically said for Murugan and also for Durga-Korravai. The Priest is called Velan, and He Sings And Dances Loudly and starts speaking for God, and tells solutions for problems of people.
Many forms of worship are mentioned there, not only Vedic and veriyaatu! Check on them!

When Tamilnadu was dominated by Samanar’s Arrogance, the arrival of 63 Nayanmars took place and Saivam was Revived.
No --- only a couple of Nayanmars took on the Samanars (Jains). Please note that not all Nayanmars wrote songs. Kannappar did not write (or sing) anything. He knew no Samanars either.

Friends- My posting on Saiva food is due to specific posting bt FSG earlier and as usual Idiyappam has DeConstructed Tirukural, friends please read PulanMaruthal Athikaram26- Arul is always considered as Divine Blessings in Kural 251 and Kural 252 is much more clear here and Valluvar finishes the Atikaram with
Kollan Pulalai Maruttanai KaiKooppi
Ella Vuyirum Tholum -260.
Irellavant - But anyway, it is nice to see that you have started to read the Kural.

Certainly those of us who are used to Non-Veg, it would be difficult- but Valluvar is clear and Non-Veg is a start from Later Vedics.
What are you saying there??

Of the Tamil Saiva Literture-Thirumoolar is considered the Oldest- end 5th Cen or mostly 6th Cen, but we have quiet a lot of interpolations in TiruMoolar works.
You are wrong again. Madam Karaikkaal Ammai is the earliest of Saivite Saints. Her songs are placed under Thirumurai 11.

I shall give you a major collection of Verses on Siva in Sangam works in my next postings.
Just a few paragraphs above you said -- "The Name Siva is not seen in Sangam Literature at all." Scroll up and see. Solomon you better stop pretending you know Sangam Literature.

And please post the verses on Siva in Sangam works. If you don't , I will.[/tscii:83a397327b]

mahadevan

25th October 2005, 05:34 AM

Bhaktha Markandeya, this story just as other saivite works is clearly tamil. The word Markandeya clearly illustrates the tamil(hindu) concept of creation/destruction. According to mythology this guy was given the boon of immortality by Siva. Creation/destruction is defined as a cycle in our mythology(ofcourse it is also translated to sanskrit). Every thing comes from nothing and then becomes nothing and so the cycle continues. When every thing becomes nothing even the gods die a natural death, just to rise again. But since our Markandeyan has immortality even in this nothingness, he is levitating some where. He has seen the other side (the side of nothingness) that even the gods did not see. So he is the one who has seen(kanda) the other(mar) side, so he is called as Markandavan, markandeyan. Nice story buy etymology says its tamil origin.

Badri

25th October 2005, 05:50 AM

And here I was thinking that since he was the son of Mrikandu Maharishi he was named Markandeya!! :)

viggop

25th October 2005, 09:42 AM

Markandeya story.
http://www.templenet.com/beliefs/kaalasamhara.htm

In Hindu mythology, there are 7 other chiranjeevis.Hanuman,aswathama,Kripacharya,vibisha na etc

Uppuma

31st October 2005, 10:05 AM

Hai,

Worship of Siva is prevalent fully in Ancient Tamil (sangam) period.

Purananuru Kdavul Vazhthu and Song No2 on Udayam Cheralathan refers to Siva and Vedas.

I quote from PARIPADAL On Murugan Birth song

Aathi anthanan Arinthu pariKoluva
VETHA Mapun Vaiyather Vurnthu
Naga Nana Malai Villaga
Muvagai Areil Orazhal Ambin Muliya
Mathira Mazhalveithu Amarar Velvi
Bagam Vunda PAingat Parppan 5:22-27KaduvaliVeiinar

Lord Brahmma, took Earth as Chariot, with Four Vedas-Rog-Yajur-Sama and Atharva as Horses, God Siva took HImalayan Mountan as Bow and took Vasuki Snake as Nan Tie for his Bow and with Fire Arrow Siva Crushed Muppuram erected by Rakshasas.

This instance is confirmed by Puram and other Lit.

Siva and Vetham are regularly covered in Tamil Ancient(Sangam)
Literature.

karthikaipoo

31st October 2005, 11:10 AM

இந்து சமயத்தில் வேதம் சார்ந்த சமய வழிபாடு, வேதம் சாராத சமய வழிபாடு என இருவித வழிபாடுகள் காணப்படுகின்றன. வேதம் சார்ந்தது ஆரியர்களுக்கும் வேதம் சாராதது திராவிடர்களுக்கும் உரியது என்கிறார்கள். வேதம் சார்ந்த வேள்விச் சடங்குகளை உள்ளடக்கிய வழிபாடு நிகமம் என்றும் வேதம் சாராத புூசை வழிபாடு ஆகமம் என்றும் குறிப்பிடுகிறார்கள்.

தற்போது இந்து - சைவக் கோயில்களில் நிகமம் ஆகமம் இரண்டையும் ஒன்றாக இணைத்து புூசையையும் வேள்விச் சடங்குகளையும் ஒன்றாகச் செய்கின்றனர்.

அடிப்படையில் இந்து சமயம் ஆரியருடைய வேத சமயமேயாகும். சைவசமயத்தைப் பொறுத்தளவில் அதில் பேரளவு ஆரிய வேத சமயக் கூறுகளும் சிற்றளவு திராவிடக் கூறுகளும் காணப்படுகின்றன. நீரும் புூவும் கொண்டு செய்யப்படும் திருமால் வழிபாடும் முருக வழிபாடும் திராவிடக் கூறுகளாக எடுத்துக்கொள்ளலாம்.

பிற்காலத்தில் திருமால் வழிபாடும் முருக வழிபாடும் முறையே ஆரியரது காத்தல் கடவுள் விஷ்ணுவோடும் போர்க் கடவுள் ஸ்கந்தனோடும் இணைக்கப்பட்டன.

கந்தசுவாமிக்கு வள்ளி - தெய்வானை என்ற இரு தேவியர் வாய்த்ததற்கு இந்த இணைப்பே காரணமாகும்.

வேதங்களும் ஆகமங்களும் தாமே தோன்றியவை, அதாவது மனிதனால் இயற்றப்படாமல் சிவபெருமானால் வெளிப்படுத்தப்பட்டவை என்று சைவ சித்தாந்தம் கூறுகிறது. அதனைத் திருமுறைகள் அப்படியே ஏற்றுக்கொண்டுள்ளன.

சைவ சிந்தாத்துக்கு முதல் நு}ல் மெய்கண்ட தேவர் எழுதிய சிவஞானபோதம் ஆகும். ஆனால் இந்த நு}ல் வடமொழியில் உள்ள இரௌவ ஆகமத்தில் பாவ விமோசனப் படலத்தில் சிவஞான போதத்தில் காணப்படும் சூத்திரங்களுக்கு நேரிடையான வடமொழிச் சூத்திரங்கள் காணப்படுகின்றன.

இதில் எது முந்தியது எது பிந்தியது என்பதில் கருத்து வேறுபாடு இருக்கிறது. தமிழில் மெய்கண்ட தேவர் எழுதிய சிவஞான போதத்தைத்தான் வடமொழியில் மொழிபெயர்ச்துச் சேர்த்து விட்டார்கள் என்பது சைவ சித்தாந்திகளது மதமாகும்.

தமிழிலுள்ள சைவ சித்தாந்த சாத்திரங்கள், வடமொழிச் சொற்கள். கருத்துக்கள், தத்துவங்கள் நிறைய எடுத்துக் கையாளப்பட்டுள்ளன. சிவஞானபோதம் என்ற சொல்லில் காணப்படும் சிவன், ஞானம், போதம் வடமொழி சொற்களாகும். இத்தியாதி காரணங்களால் சைவ சித்தாத்தமும் ஏனைய, இந்திய தத்துவ முறைகள் போல வடமொழி மூலமுடைய போலும் என்ற கருத்து அறிஞர்களிடையே காணப்படுகிறது. (தமிழர் சமய வரலாறு- பக்கம் 205-206)

மெய்கண்டரின் குருவாக விளங்கிய சகலாகம பண்டிதரே (திருத்துறையுூர் சதாசிவ சிவாசாரியார்) பின் அவரது மாணாக்கராகிறார். அதன் பின் அவரது பெயர் அருணந்தி சிவாசாரியார் ஆயிற்று. இவரே சிவஞானசித்தி, இருபா இருபஃதும் என்ற இரண்டு சைவ சித்தாந்த தத்துவ நூல்களை இயற்றியவர்.

அருணந்தி சிவாசாரியாரின் மாணவர் மறைஞானசம்பந்தர், அவருடைய மாணவர் உமாபதி சிவாசாரியார். இவர் பதினான்கு மெய்கண்ட சாத்திரங்களில் 8 சாத்திரங்களை எழுதியவர். இவரே சிவஞான போதத்திற்கு உரை செய்தவர் ஆவார். 'வேதாந்தத் தெளிவாம் சைவ சித்தாந்தம்" என்று கூறி வேதத்துக்கும் சைவ சித்தாந்தத்துக்கும் உள்ள தொடர்பைக் காட்டுகிறார். உமாபதி சிவாசாரியார் தில்லை தீட்சகர்களில் ஒருவர். சைவத்துக்கும் இந்து சமயத்துக்கும் அதிக வேறுபாடு இல்லையென்பதையும் முன்னது பின்னதில் இருந்து தோற்றம் பெற்றதை எடுத்துக்காட்டவே மேலே உள்ள தரவுகளை எடுத்துச் சொன்னேன்.

சென்ற நு}ற்றாண்டில் சைவம் தமிழர்களுடைய சமயம் என மறைமலை அடிகளார் நிறுவ எடுத்த முயற்சி வெற்றி பெறவில்லை. அவருக்குப் பின்னர் குன்றக்குடி அடிகளார் எடுத்த முயற்சியும் வெற்றி பெறவில்லை.

ஒரு நாள் உமாபதி சிவாசாரியார் கோயில் புூசையை முடித்துக் கொண்டு பல்லக்கில் வீடு திரும்பிக் கொண்டிருந்தார். அரசன் அளித்திருந்த அதிகாரப்படி குடை, கொடி, சாமரம், தீவட்டி போன்றவற்றை ஏந்தி அவர் பின்னால் பணியாட்கள் வந்து கொண்டிருந்தனர்.

அப்போது ~பட்ட கட்டையில் பகற்குருடு ஏகுது பாரீர்| என்றொரு குருல் கேட்டது. தாம் பல்லக்கில் ஏறிச் செல்வதையும் முன்னால் தீவட்டி ஏந்திச் செல்வதைப் பார்த்தே அவ்வாறு கூறப்பட்டதை உமாபதி உணர்ந்தார். உடனே பல்லக்கை விட்டு இறங்கி அக்குரலுக்குரியவரைத் தேடிச் சென்றார். அவ்வாறு கூறியவர் மறைஞான சம்பந்தர் ஆவார்.

உமாபதியைச் சோதிக்க எண்ணிய சம்பந்தர் நெசவாளிகள் வாழ்ந்து வந்த ஒரு தெருவில் புகுந்து பாவுக்கு வார்க்கும் கஞ்சியைக் கையில் ஏந்திக் குடித்தார். உமாபதி சிறிதும் தயங்காமல் அவருடைய முழங்கை வழியே ஒழுகிய கஞ்சியைத் தம் கையால்வாங்கிப் பருகினார். சம்பந்தர் அவரைத் தன் சீடனாக ஏற்றுக் கொண்டார்.

இதனை அறிந்த தில்லை மூவாயிரவர் உமாபதியைப் பிராமண சமூகத்தில் இருந்தும் ஊரினின்றும் விலக்கி வைத்தனர்.

நாயன்மார்களில் ஒருவரான பெத்தான் சாம்பன் உமாபதி நடத்தி வந்த திருமடத்துக்கு விறகு வெட்டிக் கொண்டு வந்து கொடுத்தவன். அவனுக்கு உமாபதி நிர்வாண தீட்சை செய்ய அவன் உடனே முக்தி பெற்றான்.

உமாபதி அவனைக் கொன்றுவிட்டதாக அரசனுக்கு முறையிடப்பட்டது. அரசன் அந்த அற்புதத்தை மீண்டும் செய்து காட்டுமாறு உமாபதிக்குக் கட்டளையிட்டான்.

முக்திக்குத் தகுந்தவர் யாரும் அங்கு இல்லாமையால் ஒரு முள்ளிச் செடிக்கு முக்தி கொடுத்து அதை மறையச் செய்ததாகச் சொல்லப்படுகிறது.

இன்றும் சாதி பாராட்டுவதில் தில்லைத் தீட்சதர்கள் விடாப்பிடியாக நிற்கின்றனர். நாயன்மார்களுக்குப் புூசை செய்யவும் பாராயணம் பண்ணவும் வழிபாடியற்றவும் மறுத்த தில்லைத் தீட்சகர்கள் நாவலரின் கடும் கண்டனத்துக்கு ஆளானார்கள் என்பதை ஏற்கனவே பார்த்தோம்.

'இக்காலத்தார் தங்கள் தங்கள் கருத்துக்கிசைய நடந்த பிராமணர்கள் எத்துணைப் பாதகர்களாயினும் அவர்களையே மேன்மக்களென்று பிரதிட்டை புூசை திருவரிழா முதலியன செயய நியோகிக்கிறார்கள.; நமது சைவசமயிகள் ஒற்றுமையுடையர்களாய்த் திரண்டு, தேவாலயங்களெங்கும் சைவாகமங்களில் விதித்த இலக்கணங்களமைந்த பிராமணர்களைக் கொண்டே பிரதிட்டம் புூசை திருவிழா முதலியவற்றை வழுவாது இயற்றுவித்தலும்????"

நாவலரைப் பழி தீர்த்துக் கொள்ள இராமலிங்க அடிகளாருக்கும் ஆறுமுக நாவலருக்கும் இடையில் நடந்த அருட்பா - மருட்பா சொற்போரில் தில்லைத் தீட்சகர்கள் அடிகளார் பக்கம் நின்று நாவலரை வாய்க்கு வந்தபடி வைதார்கள்.

Idiappam

31st October 2005, 12:09 PM

Aathi anthanan Arinthu pariKoluva
VETHA Mapun Vaiyather Vurnthu
Naga Nana Malai Villaga
Muvagai Areil Orazhal Ambin Muliya
Mathira Mazhalveithu Amarar Velvi
Bagam Vunda PAingat Parppan 5:22-27KaduvaliVeiinar

Lord Brahmma, took Earth as Chariot, with Four Vedas-Rog-Yajur-Sama and Atharva as Horses, God Siva took HImalayan Mountan as Bow and took Vasuki Snake as Nan Tie for his Bow and with Fire Arrow Siva Crushed Muppuram erected by Rakshasas..

I don't see the "Four Vedas-Rog-Yajur-Sama and Atharva" in the above verse... Is something wrong with my monitor screen.. :lol:

Or was that deliberately added by you to hookwink us?

Siva and Vetham are regularly covered in Tamil Ancient(Sangam)Literature.

Where is the reference to the vedas - "Four Vedas-Rog-Yajur-Sama and Atharva" in Sangam Literatures. Why were they not named?

Idiappam

31st October 2005, 12:33 PM

sivajayan

31st October 2005, 05:55 PM

Unfortunately KarthikaiPoo's post is full of barcodes and Idiappam's quotings of KPoo turned to small boxes. I don't know what to do.

Yes, karthikaipoo is very nice but very toxic.

Liberation Tigers honour this flower.

Some info about Gloriosa Superba = Karthikaipuu
http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=79&artid=11778
http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=79&artid=11322

karthikaipoo

1st November 2005, 04:52 AM

Yes, karthikaipoo is very nice but very toxic.

There are many countries in the world have toxic plants as their national flower for various symbolic and cultural reasons. The tulip also a toxic plant, it is the national flower of Holland, Hungary and, Turkey. Even Iris, the National flower of France and Shamrock, the national flowers of Ireland are also toxic plants. Kartigaipoo has many medicinal properties.

Karthigaipoo has a symbolic importance to Eelam Tamils. It has the spectrum of colors contained in the Tamil Eelam national flag and which in November, the month of Heroes day celebrations, ubiquitously spreads, sprouts new shoots and blooms throughout the NorthEast.

"Ancient Tamil kings each had a favorite flower which he adopted as his own. For the Chola's it was the ficus glomarata ("Aththipoo"), the Chera's, the Palmyrah flower, the Pandyas, the Margosa flower, which in each case was the Kingdom's flower. In "Tamil Civilization and Culture," Thadchinamoorthy mentions that these kings wore only garlands made of each one's flower on his way to war.

He further mentions that smaller sovereigns also had their own emblematic flower garlands and that the more valiant of the Tamil chieftains, Aai Andiran, wore mastwood flower garlands of Karnthal, the traditional Tamil name for Karthigai".

viggop

2nd November 2005, 11:01 AM

Adi Sankara is supposed to have installed a "yantra" at Tirupathi to draw crowds to that temple
He is actually considered to be an "extension" of Lord Shiva.

what is an "yanthra" and are there still people who can put such "yanthras?"

r_kk

2nd November 2005, 01:12 PM

[tscii:c1910b4f67]
what is an "yanthra" and are there still people who can put such "yanthras?"

“Yantra” is generally a copper foil inscribed with mystical geometric pattern and so-called holy words. It has been prepared to meet the materialistic expections (solace/threat ). The believers consider that certain yantras bring good fortunes to themselves and even destruction to their enemies (Thakadu Vaithal). Please don’t misunderstand this word as “Iyanthiram”, which means mechanical equipment (generally useful).

These days, lots of so-called Tantrics, godmen and astrologers are making this kind of yandras. People are buying it based on their nature of materialistic expectations. Yandras are made in Gold and silver for rich and wealthy people or for people those who are in big troubles!!!

[/tscii:c1910b4f67]

Uppuma

2nd November 2005, 01:36 PM

Natpugale,

Purananuru -166 says

Nandru aintha NinimirSadai
Muthumuthalvan Vaipoka
Thondru Purintha Virirandin
Arunarntha Oru MuthuNool PURAM 166: 1-4

This is the reference to God Siva giving Vedas - Rig,Yajur, Sama and Athrva to Munivarkal and this is also confirmed by Tholkappiyam and Tirukural and I quote Kalithogai for easy reference.

Aru ari Anthanarku Arumarai Pala Pagarnthu Kali 1:1

The ancient Tamil King was called PalYagasalai MuthuKudumi and on him the Sangam Song is

Velviyil Kadavul Aruththinai! Kelvi
Vuyarnilai Vulagathu Iyer Inpuruthinai!.... Pathrirrupattu 70:12,13.

Natpe, Every Objective Researcher who can really understand Tamil clearly confirms all this are referring to Vedas and even the name Sama Veda is named in one of the Sangam Songs

Hence let us ignore meaningless postings and constrate on what Sangam Lit. tells on evolution of Sivaniyam in Tamilnadu.

Nandri

Idiappam

2nd November 2005, 09:44 PM

Purananuru -166 says

Nandru aintha NinimirSadai
Muthumuthalvan Vaipoka
Thondru Purintha Virirandin
Arunarntha Oru MuthuNool PURAM 166: 1-4

This is the reference to God Siva giving Vedas - Rig,Yajur, Sama and Athrva to Munivarkal and this is also confirmed by Tholkappiyam and Tirukural

Uppuma, you don't understand Sangam Tamil, do you! Why do you misinterpret the four lines. Why did you not post the lines in Tamil - afraid readers may know the meaning clearly? You are trying to mislead. Ok -The verse in Tamil Script,
[tscii:333f5c6fe3]¿ýÈ¡öó¾ ¿£û¿¢Á¢÷º¨¼
ÓÐÓ¾øÅý Å¡ö§À¡¸¡Ð,
´ýÚÒÃ¢ó¾ ®Ã¢ÃñÊý,
¬Ú½÷ó¾ ´ÕÓÐáø [/tscii:333f5c6fe3]
Where is these lines are the names of the Four sanskritic vedas - the rig, sama, yajur and atharvan mentioned - as you claimed. The poet clearly talk about "oru muthu nool" - one ancient book. That exposed your lies - and stop your lies about Tholkappiyam and Thirukkural as well. Nothing of the vedas there!.

and I quote Kalithogai for easy reference.
Aru ari Anthanarku Arumarai Pala Pagarnthu Kali 1:1
So?? Where is Rig in here?

The ancient Tamil King was called PalYagasalai MuthuKudumi and on him the Sangam Song is

Velviyil Kadavul Aruththinai! Kelvi
Vuyarnilai Vulagathu Iyer Inpuruthinai!.... Pathrirrupattu 70:12,13.
How ancient was the king? Any dates? Can YOu please explain the meaning of the Pathirrupathu Song.. Who is that 'velviyil kadavul'? The Third Sangam Period began after Tholkappiam - and contined till === When?? do you know, Mr Uppuma?

The Sangam Period overlapped the Bhakti period .. Some Sanga Pulavars lived after Thirungana Sambandar too. So?? If Sambandar talks of Velvi -- why shouldn't Sanga Pulavars - as a narration of what they witnessesed then!

Natpe, Every Objective Researcher who can really understand Tamil clearly confirms all this are referring to Vedas and even the name Sama Veda is named in one of the Sangam Songs

Hence let us ignore meaningless postings and constrate on what Sangam Lit. tells on evolution of Sivaniyam in Tamilnadu.

There is very little religion you can extract from Sangam Literature - mostly heroic and love themes only. Keep trying but stop lying!

virarajendra

7th November 2005, 07:40 AM

Anbulla Vaasaharkale,

Please also read through my thread titled "The evolution of Siva Agamams in Tamil Nadu" for more informations on the Agamas, appearing in this same Forum Hub screen.

Uppuma

8th November 2005, 11:07 AM

Friends,

I quote back my original from Paripadal-

Aathi anthanan Arinthu pariKoluva
VETHA Mapun Vaiyather Vurnthu
Naga Nana Malai Villaga
Muvagai Areil Orazhal Ambin Muliya
Mathira Mazhalveithu Amarar Velvi
Bagam Vunda PAingat Parppan 5:22-27KaduvaliVeiinar

Natpe- We have MR.Idiyappam who always mistreats and misinterprets Tamil Literaure and its contact with Sanskrit Vedas- which are root of Indian Civilisation. Indian Vedic- Indic.

Now let us see Aathi Anthanan; translate it it is First Brahmin, and I on the Basis of Vedic Tradtion called it Brahma.

Amarar Bagam Vunda Paingat Parppan- Brahmin who eats Devas Yagna part, and I translated it as Siva.

The name Siva, Vishnu, and if my rememberance is riight - the very names does not occur once even in Sangam Lit.

Now Idiayppam has no problem in applying to Brahma and Siva, but when Veda is referred he Comes with Meaningless Postings.

Mr.Idiyappam has been answered several times by PAVANAR and other Quotes, but he spoils each thread, I request Moderators should look.

Uppuma.

sivajayan

8th November 2005, 04:26 PM

Is solomon active again?

Last post of solomon occured on 24.october!
Last post of Anchaneya on 24. october!

Uppuma joined the hub on 24. october! And talks like Solomon! Why?

Idiappam

9th November 2005, 12:40 AM

Friends,
I quote back my original from Paripadal-

[quote]Aathi anthanan Arinthu pariKoluva
VETHA Mapun Vaiyather Vurnthu
Naga Nana Malai Villaga
Muvagai Areil Orazhal Ambin Muliya
Mathira Mazhalveithu Amarar Velvi
Bagam Vunda PAingat Parppan 5:22-27KaduvaliVeiinar

Before you start your round-the-bush-beating, Mr Uppuma (solomon), you should first post some details of the poet - when did he live? I have said many times that the Sangam period overlapped the bakti (a far as the Sangam Literatures are dated). Now would you please give a date for the poet, Mr KaduvaliVeiinar.

Natpe- We have MR.Idiyappam who always mistreats and misinterprets Tamil Literaure and its contact with Sanskrit Vedas- which are root of Indian Civilisation. Indian Vedic- Indic.
Root of Indian civilisation???? Then what happened???

Now let us see Aathi Anthanan; translate it it is First Brahmin, and I on the Basis of Vedic Tradtion called it Brahma.
Amarar Bagam Vunda Paingat Parppan- Brahmin who eats Devas Yagna part, and I translated it as Siva.
Great - though your translation is wrong and grossly misleading!

A poet sitting down there, looking are the Parppans (Brahmins, as you say) eating Devas roasted in their Yagna Fire, writes the story. So??? So what now?

The name Siva, Vishnu, and if my rememberance is riight - the very names does not occur once even in Sangam Lit.
Your 'rememberance' is ok you think?? Take a look again!

Now Idiayppam has no problem in applying to Brahma and Siva, but when Veda is referred he Comes with Meaningless Postings.
I don't understand. Applying what to Brahma and Siva? Nilagiri Thailam? Siva have rheumatic problems? Or Brahma?

Mr.Idiyappam has been answered several times by PAVANAR and other Quotes, but he spoils each thread, I request Moderators should look.
Yes, and Mr Idiyappam always catches all the flaws in your proofs.

mahadevan

9th November 2005, 01:34 AM

Uppuma wrote : Now let us see Aathi Anthanan; translate it it is First Brahmin, and I on the Basis of Vedic Tradtion called it Brahma.

hey Uppuma if brahma is a brahmin, what is siva/vishnu and the other gods of hindu pantheon. Please elaborate more on the caste system among the gods !

paulthomas

28th November 2005, 12:17 PM

Friends,

Most of you have missed the latest Research Truths.

Dr.M.Deivanayagam from Pavanar School, has in Doctoral Thesis on "Comparitive study if Tirukural, Bible and SaivaSidhantham"
has clearly extablished, that Saivam and Vaishnavam are a branch of Christianity; developed from the Missionary work of Apostle Saint. Thomas disciple of Our Lord- Jesus. Tiruvalluvar wrote Kural from Bible, and Saivam developed as an Indian form of Christianity.

I would provide various links in my next postings.

PaulThomas

Bebeto

28th November 2005, 06:01 PM

mahadevan

29th November 2005, 12:47 AM

hey Solomom, you are looking at a non existant enemy to blame for the sorry state of hindus. Fanning passions with anti non hindu religions would not convince us that they are the enemies, to be frank atleast they have given dignity for some of our masses. The conversions work just because certain self appointed authorities in hinduism discriminate, and worship crap that praises such inhuman practices, thereby subjucated the masses. Sorry buddy, with education and common sense the masses are no more accepting you authority and crap litreature as a citadel of knowledge(If you cannot dazzle with your brilliance, just baffle with bullshit!). Your days are gone buddy, call it kalli yug and go to vanavasam, you might find lesser evolved living things willing to be dominated by vedic crap.

paulthomas

20th December 2005, 11:24 AM

[tscii:21ecbd7c26]Friends,

We all want to hear or read and only, to their LIKINGS, and any Truth found after Great Effort and Spending of Huge Money

Friends,

We all want to hear or read and only, to their LIKINGS, and any Truth found after Great Effort and Spending of Huge Money, must be respected well.

For A Millennium of years we have been living under illusions, by proper interpretations of Words,applying proper Linguistics and different interpretations than what was originally been done for 1000 odd years, Thani Tamil Movement leaders brought some revolutionary ideas. Dr.Deivanayagam with the help of Christian Church funding did a Marvelous job and Proved that Saivaism, Vaishnavism are all the Products of Movement came after Tirukural, And Tirukural was written by ThiruValluvar, who received the teachings of Our Lord Jesus, from Saint.Thomas, the Apostle, who came to India, landed in KERALA’s Kodungallore or Cranganore, spent most time establishing churches in Chera Nadu, and later came To Thondainadu, Chennai’s Mylapur and died here.

The very names “ Siva, Vishunu” or God having wife Children are Alien to Tamils, and does not exist in Sangam Lit., and the Idea of Trinity- FATHER, Son and Holy Spirit” became- Siva-Muruga-Parvathi and so on.

Dr.Deivanayagam’s book were all released by Dravidian Scholars and Politicians and I have given from Foreword by Pavanar School- Panmozhi Pulavar APPAdurai in Tirukural Forum.

AS PulavarDr.M.Deivanayagam developed his Truths on Saivaism, his daughter, Dr. D.Deivakala, has further researched and established Vaishnavam as Bi-product of SaintThomas Teaching of Bible to Tiruvalluvar.

Famous Tamil website- Geocities/Athens has beautiful article on this, and the link is : http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/344...erthirteen.html.

And Prof. M.M.Ninar has developed on Deivanayagam and his articles can be seen from together..http://www.acns.com/~mm9n/hind/

Pulavar Deivanayagam’s Articles are available at
www. geocities/Dravidian_religion
and also www/geocities/appiusforum etc.,

Please let us all be proud that All Saivates or Vaishnavites all Worship The True God, i.e., Our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Let us not envy truths, though it would be difficult in the first attempt to accept.

PaulThomas

[/tscii:21ecbd7c26]

mahadevan

21st December 2005, 12:01 AM

Hi solomon long time no see, if you have forgotten this is a thread for 'Evolution of Saivaism and it's development in Tamil Nadu' if you want a thread for bashing christianity please open another one.

paulthomas

23rd December 2005, 11:59 AM

SINEKITHARKALE,

The very words, Siva- Vishnu etc., does not appear anywhere in Tholkappiyam or Sangam Lit.

Saint.Thomas teachings inspired Tiruvalluvar and Tiruvalluvar wrote Kural to probagate Tirukural and I have given quotes from Various Scholars about his work in Tirukural Thread in Tamil Lit. Please go through them.

I do not want to discuss on your meaninless points.

And Famous Tamilnadu's Christian Schloar confirms this in his book :"It is noteworthy that Mr.Deivanayagam in his doctral Dissertion titled "Comparitive Study of Bible -Thirukural-Saiva Sithantha books14" established that Thirukural an important Sangam Literature was developed from Chrstianity-was brought to India by Apostle Thomas. Saivism and Vaishnavism are the Offshoots of early Christianity and Saiva Sithantha Sastharas are early Indian Christian Theology. Furthermore this Dissertion proves the Development of Tamil Christian Literature from early centuries of Christian Era. - Page44, Rev.Samuel Jayakumar, Missionary Reader-Historical Models for Wholistic Mission.

So Dr.Deivanayagam established that Saivam AND VAishnavam developed from Christianity and I Am putting only releavent points.

PaulThomas

bis_mala

23rd December 2005, 10:27 PM

Idiappam

23rd December 2005, 10:57 PM

Probably he misses his regular dose of Kural - now that someone has taken it away.

bis_mala

24th December 2005, 10:23 AM

Hi PaulThomas:

'Comparative Study of Bible, Thirukkural and Saiva Siddhantha'. by Dr Deivanayagam:

"It is explained in these dissertations on the basis of historical evidences that Sivalinka worship of the Indus Valley civilization was the basis for the development of major world religions. Sivalinka worship is not only the basis for the development of major Indian religions viz.,Buddhism, Jainism, Saivism and Vaishnavism but also for the other religions developed outside India viz,Israelite religion, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.."
[/b]
[/i]YOU READ THE BOOK YOURSELF FIRST. There are points at which the reader will be with the author and there are conclusions in it one may not entirely agree.

Your idea here is to start a controversy!!?

Uppuma

24th December 2005, 10:25 AM

Dear PaulThomas,

You have given huge references to Dr.Deivanayagam here and Tirukural thread, and it is really noteworthy, that he was able to do that Great disservice to Tamil.

Your Point- His Book
'Tirukural,Bible,SaivaSiththantha-a Comparitive Study" being published by TN. Govt. "International Institute of Tamil Studies" is not fully correct; Mylapur Santhome Catholic Church under Archbishop Rev.Arulappa, established- an Arakattalai (Trust) and funded 100% for this book .

I have not read any of his books to comment; and I am now frantically trying to collect them.

Now It is easily -we can understand how his work can be?
karthikaipoo gave a very good posting How ThaniTamil movement leader like MAraimalai Adiagal and later Kundrakudi Aadigalar tried to Falsely say Tamil Saivam is independent of Vedas.

This must be the base of your PulavarDr.Deivanayagam, and we can see Bismala, Idiayppam, fsKandhi etc., even today harp on this Meaningless arguements as karthikaipoo himself explained.

Mr.PT please avoid this thread and post the Misinterpretaions of
your PulavarDr.Deivanayagam in Tirukural Thread, which I shall answer.
As Mahadevan said Keep this Thread for Saivam only.
Uppuma

bis_mala

24th December 2005, 02:29 PM

[tscii:67c5dc9023]¾Á¢úî ¦º¡øÄ¨ÁÒ¸¨Ç ¿ýÌ ¬ö× ¦ºö¾¡ø, (¦ºö§Â¡ý)>§º§Â¡ý ±ýÈ ÀÆó¾Á¢úî ¦º¡øÖõ º¢Åõ ±ýÈ ÀÆí¸¡Äî ¦º¡øÖõ ´ý§È ±ýÀÐõ ´§Ã §ÅÃ¢ø þÕóÐ ºüÚ §ÅÚÀðÎ «¨Áó¾¨Å ±ýÀÐõ «È¢ÂôÀÎõ.

¦º > ¦ºõ¨Á.
¦º > (¦º + µý ) - ¦ºö§Â¡ý> §º§Â¡ý = etymological meaning: º¢Åó¾Åý, ¦ºõ¨ÁÂ¡ÉÅý. usage meaning: º¢Åý. elongation of che to chE is usual and have occurred in many words. Note: ¦º + «Ê > §ºÅÊ
¦º + §Åû + ¦ºù§Åû.
vEL is word used for princes ruling under a king carrying a crown. It is also used for Murugan, considered to be the younger form of God, compared to Sivan. It also carries a notion of popularity as you can see that vEttal ( liking ) is from the same root.
¦º > º¢ +«ý = º¢Åý. (meaning: he who is red/righteous).

Compare: ¦ºóàÃõ > º¢óàÃõ.

Thus the word is proven to be a Tamil word.

The following lines also confirms the origin:

"¦¾ýÉ¡Î¨¼Â º¢Å§É §À¡üÈ¢
±ó¿¡ð¼Å÷ìÌõ þ¨ÈÅ¡ §À¡üÈ¢."

He is also referred to as ¦¾ðº¢½¡ã÷ò¾¢ which is a corruption of the word: ¦¾ý+¸½+ ã÷ò¾¢. (¦¾ý+¸½õ = ¦¾ü¸½õ > ¦¾ì¸½õ > ¾ì¸½õ.

The other derivation given by etymologists is: ¾ìÌ+ «½õ. with the same result.

One more supporting reason is that the Rig did not accept Siva as fit for worship and in fact the worship was condemned, Only later it began to be accepted.

Now for the word: saivam. This is the Sanskritised form of the Tamil word: Sivam.

º¢Åõ (¾Á¢ú) > ¨ºÅõ. (¾Á¢Æ¢ý Å¼ ÅÊÅõ)

The "i" to "ai" change is common in Sanskrit.

mithilaa > maithili.

Also see: bible > biblical (pronunciation chage). example for IE languages.

Thus it is clear from linguistic evidence, that sivam is a Tamil word and that sivamatham is the religion of the ancient Tamils. It was later adopted by the North.

Historians too say that saiva samayam belonged originally to the Tamils. Nothing to do with the Vedas.

§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû ¬ÅÐ
¿¡¾ý ¿¡Áõ ¿Áîº¢Å¡Â§Å!!

§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ = beyond the Vedas. or comaparatively to the Vedas.

like: «ÅÉ¢Ûõ þÅý ¿øÄÅý . This is the sense in which it is used in this line.
[/tscii:67c5dc9023]

bis_mala

24th December 2005, 03:48 PM

[tscii:13d5884071]¨ºÅÁ¡¸ þÕó¾¡Öõ ¨Å½ÅÁ¡¸ þÕó¾¡Öõ, þ¨Å ±øÄ¡Óõ ¬Ã¢Â÷ ¦¾ýÉ¡ðÎìÌì ¦¸¡ñÎÅó¾Ð ±ýÚõ «Åü¨È¦ÂøÄ¡õ ¨¸Å¢¼§ÅñÎõ ±ýÀÐõ ¾¢Ã¡Å¢¼ þÂì¸ò¾¢ÉÃ¢ý Å¡¾Á¡Ìõ. «Å÷¸û ¸ÕòÐôÀÊ, ÀÆó¾Á¢Æ÷ ¦¸¡û¨¸Â¢ø, þÂü¨¸ ÅÆ¢À¡ÎÁðÎ§Á ¾Á¢Æ÷ «øÄÐ ¾¢Ã¡Å¢¼÷ìÌ ¯Ã¢ÂÐ ±ýÀÐ ¾¢Ã¡Å¢¼ þÂì¸ò¾¢É÷ ÜÚõ ÅÃÄ¡Ú. þùÅ¢Î¨¸Â¢ø Å¼¦Á¡Æ¢ ¬÷ÅÄ÷¸û ÜÚÅÐõ «¾üÌî ºÁÁ¡¸§Å ¯ûÇÐ. Á¨ÈÁ¨Ä «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ¬ö× ÓÊ×¸û ÀÆó¾Á¢úì ¦¸¡û¨¸§Â ¨ºÅºÁÂõ ±ýÀÐ. þÐ ´Õ ¬ö×: þÂì¸ÁýÚ ¬¨¸Â¡ø þ¾¢ø ¦ÅüÈ¢ §¾¡øÅ¢¸û þø¨Ä. þóÐ Á¾ò¨¾ ¦ÅÚòÐ ´Ðì¸¢ÂÅ÷¸û Á£ñÎõ §¸¡Å¢ÖìÌõ §À¡öò ¾Á¢úì ¸¼×Ç÷¸û ±ýÚ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¡ø ¸ñ¼È¢Âô Àð¼ ¦¾ÂÅí¸¨Ç Å½í¸ò ¦¾¡¼í¸¢Â¾üÌ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ¬ö× ¯¾Å¢ÂÐ ±ýÀÐ ÁÚì¸¦Å¡ñ½¡ ¯ñ¨Á ¬Ìõ. þÐ «Ê¸Ç¡ÕìÌ ´Õ ¦ÅüÈ¢§ÂÂ¡Ìõ.[/tscii:13d5884071]

The part which is about Sanskrit - Tamil is moved to the thread: Is Tamil derived from Sanskrit? in the Tamil literature section. Please submit your arguments there if any. Thanks.

SRS

25th December 2005, 10:57 AM

[tscii:424d08975e]¨ºÅÁ¡¸ þÕó¾¡Öõ ¨Å½ÅÁ¡¸ þÕó¾¡Öõ, þ¨Å ±øÄ¡Óõ ¬Ã¢Â÷ ¦¾ýÉ¡ðÎìÌì ¦¸¡ñÎÅó¾Ð ±ýÚõ «Åü¨È¦ÂøÄ¡õ ¨¸Å¢¼§ÅñÎõ ±ýÀÐõ ¾¢Ã¡Å¢¼ þÂì¸ò¾¢ÉÃ¢ý Å¡¾Á¡Ìõ. «Å÷¸û ¸ÕòÐôÀÊ, ÀÆó¾Á¢Æ÷ ¦¸¡û¨¸Â¢ø, þÂü¨¸ ÅÆ¢À¡ÎÁðÎ§Á ¾Á¢Æ÷ «øÄÐ ¾¢Ã¡Å¢¼÷ìÌ ¯Ã¢ÂÐ ±ýÀÐ ¾¢Ã¡Å¢¼ þÂì¸ò¾¢É÷ ÜÚõ ÅÃÄ¡Ú. þùÅ¢Î¨¸Â¢ø Å¼¦Á¡Æ¢ ¬÷ÅÄ÷¸û ÜÚÅÐõ «¾üÌî ºÁÁ¡¸§Å ¯ûÇÐ. Á¨ÈÁ¨Ä «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ¬ö× ÓÊ×¸û ÀÆó¾Á¢úì ¦¸¡û¨¸§Â ¨ºÅºÁÂõ ±ýÀÐ. þÐ ´Õ ¬ö×: þÂì¸ÁýÚ ¬¨¸Â¡ø þ¾¢ø ¦ÅüÈ¢ §¾¡øÅ¢¸û þø¨Ä. þóÐ Á¾ò¨¾ ¦ÅÚòÐ ´Ðì¸¢ÂÅ÷¸û Á£ñÎõ §¸¡Å¢ÖìÌõ §À¡öò ¾Á¢úì ¸¼×Ç÷¸û ±ýÚ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¡ø ¸ñ¼È¢Âô Àð¼ ¦¾ÂÅí¸¨Ç Å½í¸ò ¦¾¡¼í¸¢Â¾üÌ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ¬ö× ¯¾Å¢ÂÐ ±ýÀÐ ÁÚì¸¦Å¡ñ½¡ ¯ñ¨Á ¬Ìõ. þÐ «Ê¸Ç¡ÕìÌ ´Õ ¦ÅüÈ¢§ÂÂ¡Ìõ.[/tscii:424d08975e]
BTW:
Western researchers (linguists or philologists) classify Sanskrit as Indo-European and to find out whether a word is Sanskrit or not (disregarding for the moment the differences between Rigkrit, Pali, other related languages and the latter- day Sanskrit ) they look for equivalents in Old Iranian (Avestan etc ) and other Germanic tongues. If there is no equivalent, then it is a Dravidian word. The early Aryan had a limited vocabulary. If you adopt this method, Sivan, Vishnu etc are Dravidian.

If you do not believe in the Aryan Migration Theory of the Western researchers, then Sanskrit is not Indo-Euro. Then you must say that it grew up in India and the west-related words in it were then "borrowed" by Sanskrit. But all other words which have no relatives in the West may or may not have common orgin with Tamil words or were borrowed from Tamil and other South/Middle/Northern Dravidian languages now living as well as those extinct. Tamil is primitive and older; if roots show a word to be Tamil, then the word is Tamil.

A word may be said to be Sanskrit because of early documentation and usage and not necesssarily by origin. Some authors prefer this method. In this method, colloquial Tamil usage may become ignored and this is the risk. A colloquial word in one area may have found its way into literary usage in another area of a different language but then the roots of the word will betray its origin. I therefore sometimes think it did not matter whether a word is Tamil or Sanskrit or of other language. The roots are looked for usually with the view to better understanding of history and culture; also for definition of its meaning and proper usage.. This is academic and not for people to boast.

If Sanskrit came from Tamil, then Vedas would state that Sanskrit comes from Tamil. However, nowhere in the Vedas does it say Sanskrit comes from Tamil. Conclusion? Sanskrit does not come from Tamil. Its as simple as that. No matter how hard Dravidian nationalists try to twist the facts, there are too many obvious holes in their arguments.

bis_mala

25th December 2005, 08:23 PM

I have moved the linguistic argument to the relevant section as stated in my edited post above.

paulthomas

28th December 2005, 08:59 AM

[tscii:2d498a103b]Friends,

Dravidian Relgious Movement Founder, Pulavar Dr.M.Deivanayagam; explains all this in his book- ±ØÀ¢ÈôÒ; and his other books include
³ó¾Å¢ò¾¡ý Â¡÷?
“¾¢ÕÅûéÅ÷-¸¢È¢Š¾ÅÃ¡?”-
º¡ý§È¡÷ Â¡÷?
¿£ò¾¡÷ Â¡÷?
Å¡ý ±Ð?
¦Áö¸ñ¼¡÷ «ÕÇ¢Â º¢Å»¡É §À¡¾õ, Å¢Çì¸×¨Ã
«Õð¦ºøÅõ Â¡Ð?
And ofcourse his Monumental Research Thesis book:-
Å¢Å¢Ä¢Âõ - ¾¢ÕìÌÈû - ¨ºÅº¢ò¾¡ó¾õ- ´ôÀ¡ö×
In this book he relates Saivam with Bible, Later HIS Daughter Tamil Pulavar-Dr.D.Devakala Jothimani; got a P.Hd. for relating Vaishnavam with Bible, and his other disciples continues this with the help of Madras Christian College and others; doing a marvelous work to probagate for Dravidian cause and for telling Tamil public on Lord. Jesus Christ.
The name Sivan does not come in Tolkappiyam or Sangam Lit, at all.
And Siva worship came from Bible thru Saint Thomas.
Paulthomas[/tscii:2d498a103b]

bis_mala

28th December 2005, 04:34 PM

The name Sivan does not come in Tolkappiyam or Sangam Lit, at all.
.

It could have been in Agaththiyam!!

And Siva worship came from Bible thru Saint Thomas

New Testament? Old Testament?

Uppuma

30th December 2005, 06:25 PM

[tscii:c6373e6a0a]Friends,

Mala wrote
§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû ÅÐ
¿¡¾ý ¿¡Áõ ¿Áîº¢Å¡Â§Å!!
And Mala says §Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ = beyond the Vedas. or comaparatively to the Vedas. like: «ÅÉ¢Ûõ þÅý ¿øÄÅý . This is the sense in which it is used in this line.

I sincerely regret the Complete MISREADING, DONE PURPOSEFULLY, WRONGLY. This is the most Typhical of Thani-Tamil Movement,and Pavanar groups Heap of Literaure consist.

§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ- means what ALL Four Vedas say; and the full meaning of the text is- “ The True Meaning of All Four Vedas are Lord’s name Namasivaya. The very quote Bis.mala gives is that Saivam- Tamil for this Sanskrit word Sivaniyam has its root In Vedas.

Friends, I referred to Maraimalai Aadigal, as it was referred by karthikaipoo. Bismala CLAIMS Á¨ÈÁ¨Ä «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ö× ÓÊ×¸û ÀÆó¾Á¢úì ¦¸¡û¨¸§Â ¨ºÅºÁÂõ ±ýÀÐ. þÐ ´Õ ö×: þÂì¸ÁýÚ ¨¸Â¡ø þ¾¢ø ¦ÅüÈ¢ §¾¡øÅ¢¸û þø¨Ä. þóÐ Á¾ò¨¾ ¦ÅÚòÐ ´Ðì¸¢ÂÅ÷¸û Á£ñÎõ §¸¡Å¢ÖìÌõ §À¡öò ¾Á¢úì ¸¼×Ç÷¸û ±ýÚ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¡ø ¸ñ¼È¢Âô Àð¼ ¦¾ÂÅí¸¨Ç Å½í¸ò ¦¾¡¼í¸¢Â¾üÌ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ö× ¯¾Å¢ÂÐ ±ýÀÐ ÁÚì¸¦Å¡ñ½¡ ¯ñ¨Á Ìõ. þÐ «Ê¸Ç¡ÕìÌ ´Õ ¦ÅüÈ¢§ÂÂ¡Ìõ.

I am sorry of Bismala, and I give Maraimalai AADIGAL:
“ .. .. þÕìÌ §Å¾Óõ (¸, ¸¸Í, ¸) "ÅÄ¢§Â¡Ûï, º¨¼ÓÊ Å¡öó §¾¡Ûõ Å£Ã÷¸ÙìÌò ¾¨ÄÅÛÁ¡É ¯Õò¾¢ÃÛìÌ" (þÁ¡: ÕòÃ¡Â ¾Å§… ¸À÷¾¢§¿ ì„ÂòÅ£Ã¡Â) ±É µ¾¡ ¿¢ü¸¢ýÈÐ.
þùÅ¢ÕìÌ §Å¾×¨ÃÂ¢÷ §À¡ó¾ "¸À÷¾¢ó" ±ýÛï ¦º¡ø 'º¨¼Âý' ±ýÛõ ¦À¡Õ¦Ç ¼ÕÅÐ. ¯Õò¾¢Ãý§Áü À¡¼ôÀð¼ þÕìÌ§Å¾ À¾¢¸í¸û ÀÄÅüÈ¢Öõ þì '¸À÷òó' ±ýÛõ ¦º¡ø «ÅüÌÃ¢Â ¦¾¡ýÈ¡¸§Å ÅÆí¸ôÀðÎ ÅÕ¾ø ¦¸¡ñÎï, 'º¨¼Âý' ±ýÛó ¾Á¢úî ¦º¡øÄ¡Öí, '¸À÷òó' ±ýÛõ Å¼¦º¡øÄ¡Öí ÌÈ¢ì¸ôÀð¼ ¸¼×û º¢Å¦ÀÃ¡ý ´ÕÅ§É ±ýÀÐ ¦ÅûÇ¢¨¼ Á¨Ä §À¡ø Å¢Çí¸¡¿¢ü¸¢ýÈÐ.”
¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ. Pakkam ¸¯Ü

Again- Maraimalai Aadigal on Seyon etc.,
þô§À¡Ð ¸¢¨¼òÐûÇ ÀÆó¾Á¢ú áø¸Ùû Á¢¸ôÀ¨ÆÂÐ ¦¾¡ø¸¡ôÀ¢Âõ ´ý§È Ìõ. «¾ý¸ð ÜÈôÀð¼ ¸¼×ð ¦ÀÂ÷¸û
§º§Â¡ý Á¡§Â¡ý, ¦¸¡üÈ¨Å ±ýÀ¨Å¸§Ç Ìõ. §º§Â¡ý ±ýÀÐ º¢Åó¾ ¿¢Èò¾¢ÉÉ¡É ÓÕ¸ô ¦ÀÕÁ¨Éì ÌÈ¢ì¸¢ýÈÐ. Á¡§Â¡ý ¸Ã¢Â «øÄÐ ¿£Ä ¿¢Èò¾¢ÉÉ¡É ¾¢ÕÁ¡¨Ä ... ¦¸¡üÈ¨Å...¾¢ÕÒÃÍó¾Ã¢ «õ¨Á¨Âì ÌÈ¢ì¸¢ýÈÐ. ¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ. P-¸¯Õ

We have Bramins and Vedas even much prior to Tholkappiyam written, now strictly concluded to last half of 1st Cen. BCE OR LATER. Again M.M.Aadigal here:
þô§À¡¾¢ÕôÀÅüÚû Á¢¸ô À¨ÆÂ áÄ¡¸¢Â ¦¾¡ø¸ôÀ¢Âò¾¢ý ÒÈò¾¢¨½Â¢ÂÄ¢÷ §À¡ó¾,

«ÚÅ¨¸ô Àð¼ À¡÷ôÀÉô Àì¸Óõ
³Å¨¸ ÁÃÀ¢ý «Ãº÷ Àì¸Óõ
þÕãýÚ ÁÃÀ¢ý ²§É¡÷ Àì¸Óõ

±ýÛõ Ýò¾¢Ãì¾¡Öõ, «ííÉõ ÜÈôÀð¼ «ó¾½÷ Ó¾¡Ä¡Â¢É¡÷ìÌÃ¢Â ¯Ã¢¨Á¸¨Çì ¸¢Çó¦¾ÎòÐ¨ÃìÌõ

á§Ä ¸Ã¸õ Óì§¸¡ø Á¨½§Â
Ôí ¸¡¨Ä «ó¾½÷ì ÌÃ¢Â

±ýÈ ¦È¡øì¸ò¾ÉÅ¡¸ Ååõ ÁÃÀ¢Â÷ Ýò¾¢Ãí¸Ç¡Öõ
¿ýÌ½Ãì ¸¢¼ì¸¢ýÈÐ. Àì¸õ- ¸¸
¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ-Á¨ÈÁ¨Ä «Ê¸û

Friends, giving roots to interpret as you want have been the Practice of the Thani-Tamil group. Please bear in mind Tamil belongs to all, and as per Tholkappiyam Out of 18 Tamil VUyirmei from ka- Na, 9 letters cannot be the beginning of words, which includes “sa”. So Please do not overdo things that everybody would criticize Tamils as Forgers as you Neglect Grammer.

As for MM.Aadigal openly moved with Rarionalists and His writings did not do any good to Tamil Aanmigam. Rather I Suggest and recommend any individual to read the above book, as an example as to how Not to write a book, He attacks Vaishnavam as Later and wrong interpretation, even though Paripadal has complete Dasavathar etc., The words used are Highly worded Against a section of Indians whose Contribution to Society is no smaller. MM.Aadigal also preaches in this book as His Caste is superior among Tamils, and we see this trend even among Pavanar, and this has spread as a venom now.
I Want to stop here, as they belong to yester years and we can leave them.

Where as over the last 10 years certainly, the Temples attract more people, more due to mobility of Transport available, and also TV channels and many Bakthi magazines have come. We should thank God, for this inspite of Thani-tamil and Dravidian movements, and do not preach lies.

Seyon is misrepresented as Sivan, because of Artificial MisDating of Tholkappiyam and the absence of Siva in it. Now dates are concluded and no more need to misreading required.

As per Major Indologist and Linguists- Proto Dravidian Language Speakers
(Mother of TAMIL) came from abroad, as Aryans were said. All this because
Westerners do not believe, that Indians are incapable of Vedas and other Civilization; Both Sanskrit and Tamil have developed in India, and helped each other.

Tamil Bakthi movement, both Sivaniyam and MALIYAM( Vaishnavam is Sanskrit) are products of Indian Vedas;with contribution of all including Tamils. We do not have any single Lit. to say this belongs to them and that belongs to they, All are written with Tendentios motives.

Let us love God, and the name Shaddai, is presented fully in Genesis and Exodus of Bible which are dated to 300BCE. And worship of this Shaddai or Elshaddai as Lingam with Abishekams are mentioned in Bible.

Vedic Culture extended from Indu MAhasamutra to Egypt.
Hindustan came from Himalayas to Indu Mahasamutra Stan-place. Hindustan,
Later shourtened to India.

Please understand Lit. as it is and not mistranslating it.

For PaulThomas posts I have requested my Maam-ex faculty to full reply, and sending her the details and She promises it very shortly. PT please give details of Interpetation of Tamil Pulavar-Dravidian Religious Movement Founder Dr.M.Deivanayagam’ in Tirukural Thread please.

I Shall give more on Saivam, from ThiruMurugatrupadai next post.
Uppuma.
[/tscii:c6373e6a0a]

bis_mala

1st January 2006, 06:07 PM

[tscii:4e84af2468]Friends,

Mala wrote
§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû ÅÐ
¿¡¾ý ¿¡Áõ ¿Áîº¢Å¡Â§Å!!
And Mala says §Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ = beyond the Vedas. or comaparatively to the Vedas. like: «ÅÉ¢Ûõ þÅý ¿øÄÅý . This is the sense in which it is used in this line.

I sincerely regret the Complete MISREADING, DONE PURPOSEFULLY, WRONGLY. This is the most Typhical of Thani-Tamil Movement,and Pavanar groups Heap of Literaure consist.

§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ- means what ALL Four Vedas say; and the full meaning of the text is- “ The True Meaning of All Four Vedas are Lord’s name Namasivaya. The very quote Bis.mala gives is that Saivam- Tamil for this Sanskrit word Sivaniyam has its root In Vedas.

Friends, I referred to Maraimalai Aadigal, as it was referred by karthikaipoo. Bismala CLAIMS Á¨ÈÁ¨Ä «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ö× ÓÊ×¸û ÀÆó¾Á¢úì ¦¸¡û¨¸§Â ¨ºÅºÁÂõ ±ýÀÐ. þÐ ´Õ ö×: þÂì¸ÁýÚ ¨¸Â¡ø þ¾¢ø ¦ÅüÈ¢ §¾¡øÅ¢¸û þø¨Ä. þóÐ Á¾ò¨¾ ¦ÅÚòÐ ´Ðì¸¢ÂÅ÷¸û Á£ñÎõ §¸¡Å¢ÖìÌõ §À¡öò ¾Á¢úì ¸¼×Ç÷¸û ±ýÚ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¡ø ¸ñ¼È¢Âô Àð¼ ¦¾ÂÅí¸¨Ç Å½í¸ò ¦¾¡¼í¸¢Â¾üÌ «Ê¸Ç¡Ã¢ý ö× ¯¾Å¢ÂÐ ±ýÀÐ ÁÚì¸¦Å¡ñ½¡ ¯ñ¨Á Ìõ. þÐ «Ê¸Ç¡ÕìÌ ´Õ ¦ÅüÈ¢§ÂÂ¡Ìõ.

I am sorry of Bismala, and I give Maraimalai AADIGAL:
“ .. .. þÕìÌ §Å¾Óõ (¸, ¸¸Í, ¸) "ÅÄ¢§Â¡Ûï, º¨¼ÓÊ Å¡öó §¾¡Ûõ Å£Ã÷¸ÙìÌò ¾¨ÄÅÛÁ¡É ¯Õò¾¢ÃÛìÌ" (þÁ¡: ÕòÃ¡Â ¾Å§… ¸À÷¾¢§¿ ì„ÂòÅ£Ã¡Â) ±É µ¾¡ ¿¢ü¸¢ýÈÐ.
þùÅ¢ÕìÌ §Å¾×¨ÃÂ¢÷ §À¡ó¾ "¸À÷¾¢ó" ±ýÛï ¦º¡ø 'º¨¼Âý' ±ýÛõ ¦À¡Õ¦Ç ¼ÕÅÐ. ¯Õò¾¢Ãý§Áü À¡¼ôÀð¼ þÕìÌ§Å¾ À¾¢¸í¸û ÀÄÅüÈ¢Öõ þì '¸À÷òó' ±ýÛõ ¦º¡ø «ÅüÌÃ¢Â ¦¾¡ýÈ¡¸§Å ÅÆí¸ôÀðÎ ÅÕ¾ø ¦¸¡ñÎï, 'º¨¼Âý' ±ýÛó ¾Á¢úî ¦º¡øÄ¡Öí, '¸À÷òó' ±ýÛõ Å¼¦º¡øÄ¡Öí ÌÈ¢ì¸ôÀð¼ ¸¼×û º¢Å¦ÀÃ¡ý ´ÕÅ§É ±ýÀÐ ¦ÅûÇ¢¨¼ Á¨Ä §À¡ø Å¢Çí¸¡¿¢ü¸¢ýÈÐ.”
¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ. Pakkam ¸¯Ü

Again- Maraimalai Aadigal on Seyon etc.,
þô§À¡Ð ¸¢¨¼òÐûÇ ÀÆó¾Á¢ú áø¸Ùû Á¢¸ôÀ¨ÆÂÐ ¦¾¡ø¸¡ôÀ¢Âõ ´ý§È Ìõ. «¾ý¸ð ÜÈôÀð¼ ¸¼×ð ¦ÀÂ÷¸û
§º§Â¡ý Á¡§Â¡ý, ¦¸¡üÈ¨Å ±ýÀ¨Å¸§Ç Ìõ. §º§Â¡ý ±ýÀÐ º¢Åó¾ ¿¢Èò¾¢ÉÉ¡É ÓÕ¸ô ¦ÀÕÁ¨Éì ÌÈ¢ì¸¢ýÈÐ. Á¡§Â¡ý ¸Ã¢Â «øÄÐ ¿£Ä ¿¢Èò¾¢ÉÉ¡É ¾¢ÕÁ¡¨Ä ... ¦¸¡üÈ¨Å...¾¢ÕÒÃÍó¾Ã¢ «õ¨Á¨Âì ÌÈ¢ì¸¢ýÈÐ. ¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ. P-¸¯Õ

We have Bramins and Vedas even much prior to Tholkappiyam written, now strictly concluded to last half of 1st Cen. BCE OR LATER. Again M.M.Aadigal here:
þô§À¡¾¢ÕôÀÅüÚû Á¢¸ô À¨ÆÂ áÄ¡¸¢Â ¦¾¡ø¸ôÀ¢Âò¾¢ý ÒÈò¾¢¨½Â¢ÂÄ¢÷ §À¡ó¾,

«ÚÅ¨¸ô Àð¼ À¡÷ôÀÉô Àì¸Óõ
³Å¨¸ ÁÃÀ¢ý «Ãº÷ Àì¸Óõ
þÕãýÚ ÁÃÀ¢ý ²§É¡÷ Àì¸Óõ

±ýÛõ Ýò¾¢Ãì¾¡Öõ, «ííÉõ ÜÈôÀð¼ «ó¾½÷ Ó¾¡Ä¡Â¢É¡÷ìÌÃ¢Â ¯Ã¢¨Á¸¨Çì ¸¢Çó¦¾ÎòÐ¨ÃìÌõ

á§Ä ¸Ã¸õ Óì§¸¡ø Á¨½§Â
Ôí ¸¡¨Ä «ó¾½÷ì ÌÃ¢Â

±ýÈ ¦È¡øì¸ò¾ÉÅ¡¸ Ååõ ÁÃÀ¢Â÷ Ýò¾¢Ãí¸Ç¡Öõ
¿ýÌ½Ãì ¸¢¼ì¸¢ýÈÐ. Àì¸õ- ¸¸
¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ-Á¨ÈÁ¨Ä «Ê¸û

Friends, giving roots to interpret as you want have been the Practice of the Thani-Tamil group. Please bear in mind Tamil belongs to all, and as per Tholkappiyam Out of 18 Tamil VUyirmei from ka- Na, 9 letters cannot be the beginning of words, which includes “sa”. So Please do not overdo things that everybody would criticize Tamils as Forgers as you Neglect Grammer.

As for MM.Aadigal openly moved with Rarionalists and His writings did not do any good to Tamil Aanmigam. Rather I Suggest and recommend any individual to read the above book, as an example as to how Not to write a book, He attacks Vaishnavam as Later and wrong interpretation, even though Paripadal has complete Dasavathar etc., The words used are Highly worded Against a section of Indians whose Contribution to Society is no smaller. MM.Aadigal also preaches in this book as His Caste is superior among Tamils, and we see this trend even among Pavanar, and this has spread as a venom now.
I Want to stop here, as they belong to yester years and we can leave them.

Where as over the last 10 years certainly, the Temples attract more people, more due to mobility of Transport available, and also TV channels and many Bakthi magazines have come. We should thank God, for this inspite of Thani-tamil and Dravidian movements, and do not preach lies.

Seyon is misrepresented as Sivan, because of Artificial MisDating of Tholkappiyam and the absence of Siva in it. Now dates are concluded and no more need to misreading required.

As per Major Indologist and Linguists- Proto Dravidian Language Speakers
(Mother of TAMIL) came from abroad, as Aryans were said. All this because
Westerners do not believe, that Indians are incapable of Vedas and other Civilization; Both Sanskrit and Tamil have developed in India, and helped each other.

Tamil Bakthi movement, both Sivaniyam and MALIYAM( Vaishnavam is Sanskrit) are products of Indian Vedas;with contribution of all including Tamils. We do not have any single Lit. to say this belongs to them and that belongs to they, All are written with Tendentios motives.

Let us love God, and the name Shaddai, is presented fully in Genesis and Exodus of Bible which are dated to 300BCE. And worship of this Shaddai or Elshaddai as Lingam with Abishekams are mentioned in Bible.

Vedic Culture extended from Indu MAhasamutra to Egypt.
Hindustan came from Himalayas to Indu Mahasamutra Stan-place. Hindustan,
Later shourtened to India.

Please understand Lit. as it is and not mistranslating it.

For PaulThomas posts I have requested my Maam-ex faculty to full reply, and sending her the details and She promises it very shortly. PT please give details of Interpetation of Tamil Pulavar-Dravidian Religious Movement Founder Dr.M.Deivanayagam’ in Tirukural Thread please.

I Shall give more on Saivam, from ThiruMurugatrupadai next post.
Uppuma.
[/tscii:4e84af2468]

Please let me know why you say I am purposefully misreading.

"in" "il" enpana ain-thAm vERRumai urupukaL Akum. ivai iraNdumE oppIddup poruLil varum enpathu ilakkaNam. n-An kURiya viLakkam ilakkaNappadi amain-thuLLathu. athu umakku oththuvaravillai enpathu vERu, thavaRu enpathu vERu.

"ithaninum athu meyporuL Akum" enRAl oppiduvathuthavira vERillai!!

bis_mala

1st January 2006, 06:15 PM

[tscii:383de4cbf6]Please let me know why you say I am purposefully misreading.

"þý" "þø" ±ýÀÉ ³ó¾¡õ §ÅüÚ¨Á ¯ÕÒ¸û ¬Ìõ. þ¨Å þÃñÎ§Á ´ôÀ£ðÎô ¦À¡ÕÇ¢ø ÅÕõ ±ýÀÐ þÄì¸½õ. ¿¡ý ÜÈ¢Â Å¢Çì¸õ þÄì¸½ôÀÊ «¨ÁóÐûÇÐ. «Ð ¯ÁìÌ ´òÐÅÃÅ¢ø¨Ä ±ýÀÐ §ÅÚ, ¾ÅÚ ±ýÀÐ §ÅÚ.

"þ¾É¢Ûõ «Ð ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû ¬Ìõ" ±ýÈ¡ø ´ôÀ¢ÎÅÐ¾Å¢Ã §ÅÈ¢ø¨Ä!![/tscii:383de4cbf6]
//[color=red]
This is the most Typhical of Thani-Tamil Movement,and Pavanar groups Heap of Literaure consist. //

Please do not keep "identifying" on your own, the people here as belonging to this group and that group. You in your country may belong to some group and owe allegiance to them. Do not presume everyone who discusses something in the hub belongs to some group which exists in your imagination or in the country you are living.

By stating that a "group" has been interpreting in that manner, you are admitting or stating that I am not the first person to do so. I am not aware of any such previous interpretations. Please let me know when and where others had interpreted in that manner. What reasons they gave and why you also reject those interpretations. Please let me know why you think I belong to that group.

Which group do you belong to??

[tscii:383de4cbf6]]//þô§À¡¾¢ÕôÀÅüÚû Á¢¸ô À¨ÆÂ áÄ¡¸¢Â ¦¾¡ø¸ôÀ¢Âò¾¢ý ÒÈò¾¢¨½Â¢ÂÄ¢÷ §À¡ó¾,

«ÚÅ¨¸ô Àð¼ À¡÷ôÀÉô Àì¸Óõ
³Å¨¸ ÁÃÀ¢ý «Ãº÷ Àì¸Óõ
þÕãýÚ ÁÃÀ¢ý ²§É¡÷ Àì¸Óõ

±ýÛõ Ýò¾¢Ãì¾¡Öõ, «ííÉõ ÜÈôÀð¼ «ó¾½÷ Ó¾¡Ä¡Â¢É¡÷ìÌÃ¢Â ¯Ã¢¨Á¸¨Çì ¸¢Çó¦¾ÎòÐ¨ÃìÌõ

á§Ä ¸Ã¸õ Óì§¸¡ø Á¨½§Â
Ôí ¸¡¨Ä «ó¾½÷ì ÌÃ¢Â

±ýÈ ¦È¡øì¸ò¾ÉÅ¡¸ Ååõ ÁÃÀ¢Â÷ Ýò¾¢Ãí¸Ç¡Öõ
¿ýÌ½Ãì ¸¢¼ì¸¢ýÈÐ. Àì¸õ- ¸¸
¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ-Á¨ÈÁ¨Ä «Ê¸û //[/[/tscii:383de4cbf6]

What is the relevance here and why are you so interested in discussing about "paarppanar" and "anthaNar" in this thread. If they are not foreigners, then they are just a section of the Tamil community at the time and I have explained it elsewhere. If they r just Tamils, why isolate and discuss about them? What does it matter here whether they carry karakam or nuul? How does it help in enhancing the knowledge of the topic of this thread? If you r (wrongly )contending that these terms refer to some caste, these should not be discussed at all. You know that well.

bis_mala

2nd January 2006, 03:21 AM

As for MM.Aadigal openly moved with Rarionalists and His writings did not do any good to Tamil Aanmigam. Rather I Suggest and recommend any individual to read the above book, as an example as to how Not to write a book, He attacks Vaishnavam as Later and wrong interpretation, even though Paripadal has complete Dasavathar etc., The words used are Highly worded Against a section of Indians whose Contribution to Society is no smaller. MM.Aadigal also preaches in this book as His Caste is superior among Tamils, and we see this trend even among Pavanar, and this has spread as a venom now.

MaRaimalai AdigaL did not move with any "Rationalists" (what grouping is this?) and his writings have done a great deal of good for Tamil Aanmiigam. All his books should be read by anyone who aims to attain scholarship and proper thinking. His books are exemplary and show the right way to write books. He did not attack VaishNavism or any other religion but merely said in his research that Saivism originated in Tamil Nadu. It is a research and nothing else. There is no wrong interpretation in it that can be interpreted as attack against any other faith. AdigaL preached equality and tolerance. This is not a thread to discuss Paripaadal and Thasaavathaar. AdigaL did not belittle the contribution of other Indians and in fact says nothing derogatory about others who do not believe in Saivism. He did not say that his caste is superior among Tamils. Do not bring in questions about caste, as it is a taboo in this forum. Thanith thamiz movement aims to induce Tamiz writers and speakers to use proper Tamiz and it is not against other World languages. PaavaaNar is a scholar and a researcher in Tamil etymology and there is no trend such as you have depicted seen in PaavaaNar. If you want to discuss about PaavaaNar, please proceed to the thread that is devoted to him. Please do not do it here as you will be out of topic. The venom you have unleashed against particular authors is mischievous and in my view you should not misuse the forum to maintain attacks against individual authors. You should know that they are not here to defend themselves. You have brought in multiple issues in your post most of which are not relevant to this thread. Many of these issues are adequately covered/ answered/being discussed in other threads. Yours is a fine example of how a post should not be written.

I am sorry, I would not have responded in this manner if you have kept to the rules and confined your material to the topic.

Uppumaa = PaulThomas = M0sesMohamedSolomon!! Please do not waste our time.

Pavitra

8th January 2006, 03:11 PM

[tscii:5641498564]§¾¡Æ¨Á¸ðÌ Å¡úòÐì¸û,

The Topic is the Development of Saivism is Tamilnadu.

As per Tamil Bakthi, God Siva is the HEAD OF THE Triune- Siva,Vishnu and Brahma, ofcourse the Vaishnavites say Vishnu the HEAD of this Triune.

We have the following names in Tamil Sangam Lit.

¸¨ÈÁ¢¼Ú «½¢ÂÖõ «½¢ó¾ýÚ; «ì¸¨È
Á¨È¿Å¢ø «ó¾½÷ ÑÅÄ×õ ÀÎ§Á; Puram1

À¢¨È Ñ¾ø Åñ½õ ¸¢ýÚ; «ôÀ¢¨È
À¾¢¦Éñ ¸½Ûõ ²ò¾×õ ÀÎ§Á;
±øÄ¡ ¯Â¢÷ìÌõ ²Áõ ¸¢Â,
¿£ÃÈ× «È¢Â¡ì ¸Ã¸òÐò,
¾¡úº¨¼ô ¦À¡Ä¢ó¾ «Õó¾Åò §¾¡ü§¸ Puram1

That is Siva drank Poison in the Parkadal Tradition and In his Head (Sadai) God has Moon and Ganges. This Ganges in head comes from Ramayan’s Bahiratha bringing Ganges from HEAVEN to Earth Traditions.

Puram Song-2, has a Legendary claim that Chera King- Udayan Cheralathan served food to both The warring sides during the Mahabaratha War. Devaneyan, Maraimalai Aadigal used to put this song to BCE3000; but today all Historical researchers do not take this seriously.

This Udayan Ceralathan is put at 3rdCen BCE, and this Purananuru-2 says:

¿¡«ø §Å¾ ¦¿È¢ ¾¢Ã¢Â¢Ûõ

«ó¾¢ «ó¾½÷ «Õí¸¼ý *ÚìÌõ
Óò¾£ Å¢Çì¸¢ü, ÚïÍõ
¦À¡ü§¸¡ðÎ *ÁÂÓõ, ¦À¡¾¢ÂÓõ, §À¡ý§È! Puram2

If We take this Cronology- then UDAyan Ceralathan is 200 years before Tholkappiyam.

Siva is called God, with 3 Eyes- Triambagar,

Óì¸ñ ¦ºøÅ÷ ¿¸÷ÅÄï ¦ºÂü§¸!
*¨ÈïÍ¸, ¦ÀÕÁ! ¿¢ý ¦ºýÉ¢; º¢Èó¾
¿¡ýÁ¨È ÓÉ¢Å÷ ²óÐ¨¸ ±¾¢§Ã! Puram6

The following Puram song calls him God sits below AAla maram

ø«Á÷ ¸¼×û «ýÉ¿¢ý ¦ºøÅõ,
§Åø¦¸Ø ÌÕº¢ø! ¸ñ§¼ý; Puram 198

Ovaiaar calls Siva as Head of Vedas

«ÈõÒÃ¢ ¦¸¡û¨¸ ¿¡ýÁ¨È Ó¾øÅ÷
¾¢ÈõÒÃ¢ ÀÍõÒø ÀÃôÀ¢É÷ ¸¢¼ôÀ¢, Puram 93 Avaiyar

This following Kalithogai song tells that Siva as the giver of Vedas to Brahmins, and He burnt the 3 cities or 3 forts of Devil Kings.

ஆறு அறி அந்தணர்க்கு அரு மறை பல பகர்ந்து,
தேறு நீர் சடைக் கரந்து, திரிபுரம் தீ மடுத்து,
கூறாமல் குறித்ததன் மேல் செல்லும் கடுங் கூளி;
மாறாப் போர், மணி மிடற்று, எண் Kali- kadavul VAZTHU

This is confirmed in Puram

µíÌ Á¨Äô ¦ÀÕÅ¢ø À¡õÒ»¡ñ ¦¸¡Ç£*,
´Õ ¸¨½ ¦¸¡ñÎ ã¦ÅÂ¢ø ¯¼üÈ¢ô
¦ÀÕ Å¢Èø «ÁÃ÷ìÌ ¦ÅüÈ¢ ¾ó¾
¸¨È Á¢¼üÚ «ñ½ø ¸¡Á÷ ¦ºýÉ¢ô
À¢¨È Ñ¾ø Å¢ÇíÌõ ´Õ¸ñ §À¡Ä, Puram55

The following song from MaturaiKanchi tells that Siva is the Chief of the world:

¿£Õ ¿¢ÄÛó ¾£Ôõ ÅÇ¢Ôõ
Á¡¸ Å¢Íõ§À¡ ¨¼óÐ¼ É¢ÂüÈ¢Â
ÁØÅ¡ ¦½Ê§Â¡ý È¨ÄÅ É¡¸ Mathuraikanchi 453-5

There are many more and If possible, I Shall give you more in coming posts. The Vedas are called Vedas, Marai, Ooththu, Aaranam, Agamam etc., in Sangam Lit. and many researchers from various Part of World, including Pavanar has confirmed that all the above refers Rig-Yajur- Sama and Atharva Vedas in Tholkappiyam to TIrukural to till date.

Siva, the Proper Noun does not appear in TholKappiyam to Sangam to Kural, first to appear is Manimekahalai- as Saiva Vathi’s words.

"þ¾É¢Ûõ «Ð ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû Ìõ" ±ýÈ¡ø ´ôÀ¢ÎÅÐ¾Å¢Ã §ÅÈ¢ø¨Ä!!
The quote here was
§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû ÅÐ
¿¡¾ý ¿¡Áõ ¿Áîº¢Å¡Â§Å!! Here it is Not §Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢É¢Ûõ; but
¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ- means ¿¡ý¸¢ý ¯ûÙõ- hence Mala’s Interpretation is certainly not on with the spirit of the Author. Every Tamil with Theism accepts this; but tendentious thoughts and motives blinds few eyes.

Silapathikaram and Manimekhalai gives a mirror view of Sangam period,and we can see Great presence of Vedas and the high regard to it in this books.i`

Siva is hailed as the Head of Vedas and the head of Velvi’s conducted by Brahmins- right from Tholkappiyam to Today’s Lit.]
Tiruvalluvar saying “Enguanahan” is referring God Siva, I shall explain in my next post.
More on Siva in Sangam Lit. later.

PAVITRA

[/tscii:5641498564]

bis_mala

9th January 2006, 04:36 PM

[tscii:f3a878ddb2]§¾¡Æ¨Á¸ðÌ Å¡úòÐì¸û,

The Topic is the Development of Saivism is Tamilnadu.

As per Tamil Bakthi, God Siva is the HEAD OF THE Triune- Siva,Vishnu and Brahma, ofcourse the Vaishnavites say Vishnu the HEAD of this Triune.

We have the following names in Tamil Sangam Lit.

¸¨ÈÁ¢¼Ú «½¢ÂÖõ «½¢ó¾ýÚ; «ì¸¨È
Á¨È¿Å¢ø «ó¾½÷ ÑÅÄ×õ ÀÎ§Á; Puram1

À¢¨È Ñ¾ø Åñ½õ ¸¢ýÚ; «ôÀ¢¨È
À¾¢¦Éñ ¸½Ûõ ²ò¾×õ ÀÎ§Á;
±øÄ¡ ¯Â¢÷ìÌõ ²Áõ ¸¢Â,
¿£ÃÈ× «È¢Â¡ì ¸Ã¸òÐò,
¾¡úº¨¼ô ¦À¡Ä¢ó¾ «Õó¾Åò §¾¡ü§¸ Puram1

That is Siva drank Poison in the Parkadal Tradition and In his Head (Sadai) God has Moon and Ganges. This Ganges in head comes from Ramayan’s Bahiratha bringing Ganges from HEAVEN to Earth Traditions.

Puram Song-2, has a Legendary claim that Chera King- Udayan Cheralathan served food to both The warring sides during the Mahabaratha War. Devaneyan, Maraimalai Aadigal used to put this song to BCE3000; but today all Historical researchers do not take this seriously.

This Udayan Ceralathan is put at 3rdCen BCE, and this Purananuru-2 says:

¿¡«ø §Å¾ ¦¿È¢ ¾¢Ã¢Â¢Ûõ

«ó¾¢ «ó¾½÷ «Õí¸¼ý *ÚìÌõ
Óò¾£ Å¢Çì¸¢ü, ÚïÍõ
¦À¡ü§¸¡ðÎ *ÁÂÓõ, ¦À¡¾¢ÂÓõ, §À¡ý§È! Puram2

If We take this Cronology- then UDAyan Ceralathan is 200 years before Tholkappiyam.

Siva is called God, with 3 Eyes- Triambagar,

Óì¸ñ ¦ºøÅ÷ ¿¸÷ÅÄï ¦ºÂü§¸!
*¨ÈïÍ¸, ¦ÀÕÁ! ¿¢ý ¦ºýÉ¢; º¢Èó¾
¿¡ýÁ¨È ÓÉ¢Å÷ ²óÐ¨¸ ±¾¢§Ã! Puram6

The following Puram song calls him God sits below AAla maram

ø«Á÷ ¸¼×û «ýÉ¿¢ý ¦ºøÅõ,
§Åø¦¸Ø ÌÕº¢ø! ¸ñ§¼ý; Puram 198

Ovaiaar calls Siva as Head of Vedas

«ÈõÒÃ¢ ¦¸¡û¨¸ ¿¡ýÁ¨È Ó¾øÅ÷
¾¢ÈõÒÃ¢ ÀÍõÒø ÀÃôÀ¢É÷ ¸¢¼ôÀ¢, Puram 93 Avaiyar

This following Kalithogai song tells that Siva as the giver of Vedas to Brahmins, and He burnt the 3 cities or 3 forts of Devil Kings.

ஆறு அறி அந்தணர்க்கு அரு மறை பல பகர்ந்து,
தேறு நீர் சடைக் கரந்து, திரிபுரம் தீ மடுத்து,
கூறாமல் குறித்ததன் மேல் செல்லும் கடுங் கூளி;
மாறாப் போர், மணி மிடற்று, எண் Kali- kadavul VAZTHU

This is confirmed in Puram

µíÌ Á¨Äô ¦ÀÕÅ¢ø À¡õÒ»¡ñ ¦¸¡Ç£*,
´Õ ¸¨½ ¦¸¡ñÎ ã¦ÅÂ¢ø ¯¼üÈ¢ô
¦ÀÕ Å¢Èø «ÁÃ÷ìÌ ¦ÅüÈ¢ ¾ó¾
¸¨È Á¢¼üÚ «ñ½ø ¸¡Á÷ ¦ºýÉ¢ô
À¢¨È Ñ¾ø Å¢ÇíÌõ ´Õ¸ñ §À¡Ä, Puram55

The following song from MaturaiKanchi tells that Siva is the Chief of the world:

¿£Õ ¿¢ÄÛó ¾£Ôõ ÅÇ¢Ôõ
Á¡¸ Å¢Íõ§À¡ ¨¼óÐ¼ É¢ÂüÈ¢Â
ÁØÅ¡ ¦½Ê§Â¡ý È¨ÄÅ É¡¸ Mathuraikanchi 453-5

There are many more and If possible, I Shall give you more in coming posts. The Vedas are called Vedas, Marai, Ooththu, Aaranam, Agamam etc., in Sangam Lit. and many researchers from various Part of World, including Pavanar has confirmed that all the above refers Rig-Yajur- Sama and Atharva Vedas in Tholkappiyam to TIrukural to till date.

Siva, the Proper Noun does not appear in TholKappiyam to Sangam to Kural, first to appear is Manimekahalai- as Saiva Vathi’s words.

"þ¾É¢Ûõ «Ð ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû Ìõ" ±ýÈ¡ø ´ôÀ¢ÎÅÐ¾Å¢Ã §ÅÈ¢ø¨Ä!!
The quote here was
§Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ ¦Áöô¦À¡Õû ÅÐ
¿¡¾ý ¿¡Áõ ¿Áîº¢Å¡Â§Å!! Here it is Not §Å¾õ ¿¡ý¸¢É¢Ûõ; but
¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ- means ¿¡ý¸¢ý ¯ûÙõ- hence Mala’s Interpretation is certainly not on with the spirit of the Author. Every Tamil with Theism accepts this; but tendentious thoughts and motives blinds few eyes.

Silapathikaram and Manimekhalai gives a mirror view of Sangam period,and we can see Great presence of Vedas and the high regard to it in this books.i`

Siva is hailed as the Head of Vedas and the head of Velvi’s conducted by Brahmins- right from Tholkappiyam to Today’s Lit.]
Tiruvalluvar saying “Enguanahan” is referring God Siva, I shall explain in my next post.
More on Siva in Sangam Lit. later.

PAVITRA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MY REPLY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have erroneously stated the analysis of the word ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ. There is no reason why it should be "¿¡ý¸¢É¢Ûõ".

«Åý+þý+¯õ = «ÅÉ¢Ûõ. take note that "É¢Û" comes here because «Åý ends in "ý".

¿¡ýÌ+þý+¯õ = ¿¡ý¸¢Ûõ. take note that this word does not end in "n". So "É¢Û" does not occur here.

If you put a double þý there in «Åý, then it would become «ÅÉ¢É¢Ûõ. Such a construction is not nececessary.

Should a double þý occur in any word, one of the þýs will be a º¡Ã¢¨Â and not a comparative intermediary.

The word «ó¾½÷ means Tamil munivar.
The word "§Å¾õ" a Tamil word refers to books on ethics then in existence in Tamil states Since these covered aRam, poruL, inbam and viidu, they were known as naalvEtham.

Arya Vethams ("northern" books of knowledge) had not been reduced to writing by then!!

[/tscii:f3a878ddb2]

devapriya

9th January 2006, 06:50 PM

Friends,

Every Siva Divoti with Neutral view bvelieves Vedas inspired by Siva. Vedas inspired Tamil writnings.

This can be seen in writings of Thirumular to Nayanmars.

As Mala has an internal attitude due to wrong notions She does not want to accept the Truths.

Aryan Vedas- as per internal evidences itself was put in writing as close tp 1000 BCE, but once Panini made the Grammer in 5th Cen BCE, as Vedas was not fully following the Grammer of Panini, so any body trying to derive Vedas would misinterpret and hence
Writing was stopped for sometime, and so Sangam Tamil calls Vedas as Marai, Ezhutha Marai etc.,
All World Language Literature prior to 17th Cen.,CE ar in Poetry, because of rememberig and passing on to next Generation, Writing is only secondary. Tamil remains same. Stop Hate on One language and you get Biased look only. Your Wrong Specs stops Your vision.

Tamil Brahmi Script came thru Samana Munivargal from North, and that too thru Srilanka.

M/s Pavitra, You could be attacked much if you tell Truths, Please give us Tamil Saivam Development Please, the Thread has remained vaccum.

Devapriya.

stranger

10th January 2006, 05:04 AM

As Mala has an internal attitude due to wrong notions.

How about your attitude?

You seem to make outrageous statements without any references or evidences or whatsoever.

Tamil Brahmi Script came thru Samana Munivargal from North, and that too thru Srilanka.

Still living in Vedic-time????

Even a 5-year old will ridicule at your post as we all living in the 21st century unlike you! :cool:

Madurai Veeran

10th January 2006, 10:18 AM

Dear Mahadevan, Bis_mala, Iddiappam Iyya, Virarajendira and other friends:

Most of you, barring Iddiappam, may not know me. Please accept my salutations. Please continue in your battle to unmask the lies and deceit of the self-serving Vedic zealots.

Once in a while I do take a peek at the discussions. I wish I have more time to actively participate. Sigh!

Best regards,
Madurai Veeran

P.S:

Iddiappam: Does Karthikaipoo remind you of someone we have known in the past?

bis_mala

10th January 2006, 11:44 AM

Thank you Mr Madurai Veeran.

Devipriya wrote:

Every Siva Divoti with Neutral view bvelieves Vedas inspired by Siva.

So, there are categories of Siva devotees - neutral, biased, ignorant etc, just like fanatic, moderate etc in another religion.....You are creating these categories.

Vedas inspired Tamil writnings.

What does this mean? Tamil writing evolved from Vedas? Good, good, please now declare Tamil to be the devabasha!!

This can be seen in writings of Thirumular to Nayanmars.

Let's have all those stanzas with their meanings explained by you!!

As Mala has an internal attitude due to wrong notions She does not want to accept the Truths.

You analysed the word "naankinum" wrongly and I pointed it out to you. What is the internal attitude and the wrong notion here?

Aryan Vedas- as per internal evidences itself was put in writing as close tp 1000 BCE,

What internal evidence is there in the Vedas to show that they were put to writing in 1000 BCE? Pl enumerate and explain.

but once Panini made the Grammer in 5th Cen BCE, as Vedas was not fully following the Grammer of Panini, so any body trying to derive Vedas would misinterpret and hence
Writing was stopped for sometime, and so Sangam Tamil calls Vedas as Marai, Ezhutha Marai etc.,

Can you write clearly what you are trying to tell us. You mean the Vedic writers ignored Panini. How did this question of likelihood of misinterpretation come about? Who was misinterpreting? What were the misinterpretations? Who stopped it? Where? Then who started it again? What writing was being used?

Writing is only secondary. Tamil remains same. Stop

That's the thing I have been trying to explain. The northerners never committed the Vedas to writing for a long time. So anyone could have made any changes. Even now you are saying writing is secondary. Writing was not important to them!! Whereas Tamil had always been in writing. How do you compare something solidly written down with something that was not for a long long time?

Hate on One language and you get Biased look only. Your Wrong Specs stops Your vision.

Who hates any language? Is it hatred to say that a certain language had oral tradition and had never been written down if that is the truth in history? You want me to tell a lie for you and say that it was in writing from the beginning?

Even Malay does not have its own writing. Even English is using Roman writing system. Is it degrading English to say so? Please note that a number of Sino-Tibetan langauges do not have their own script and are using Chinese script (characters).

Tamil Brahmi Script came thru Samana Munivargal from North, and that too thru Srilanka.

Who came from the North? Unknown persons or they have names?
But you say Tamil writing was inspired by(evolved through) vedas??
Only Tamil Brahmi by SamaNar - not from vedAs?? Do you see any conflict there?

Of what relevance to Saivam and its development please?

KoH

10th January 2006, 03:52 PM

Hi MV,
I did not expect you at all. I feel like it is Christmas once again :lol:
It is only the baddie left :wink:
CU

Uppumaa = PaulThomas = M0sesMohamedSolomon!! Please do not waste our time.

I won't be surprised if Devapriya is also one of the Uppumaa dish. Also starting with Friends like Uppumaa. And the day will come when Davapriya signs off with Uppumaa and vice versa :lol:

Anyway Pavitra joined the hub on 24 Oct 05 on the same day as Uppumaa but posted remarkably only once on 08 Jan 06! In case of Pavitra the time and text will reveal.

Idiappam

12th January 2006, 05:47 AM

P.S:

Iddiappam: Does Karthikaipoo remind you of someone we have known in the past?

Mmmmm.... You just got me wondering... Yes... Mr Periyar Arivar???

Madurai Veeran

13th January 2006, 10:16 AM

P.S:

Iddiappam: Does Karthikaipoo remind you of someone we have known in the past?

Mmmmm.... You just got me wondering... Yes... Mr Periyar Arivar???

No.. No.. No.. Periyar Arivan would not say such things.

Do you recall a thread titled 'Vedic Roots of Tamil Culture'? It was started by one Karthik Iyer (sic!). It was one of the longest and most active thread two years ago. It ran for almost two years. Mr.Karthik Iyer went on to become the moderator of Yahoo "Indian Civilization" (IC) discussion groups. In case you did not know, IC owner is none but the very one Dr. Kalyanaraman of the Sindu-Saraswathi Vedic wonderland theory. After I left Forum Hub, I participated in IC for a little while when the then 'moderator' Mr.Kalavai Venkat (yes, our very own Karthik Iyer) decided to throw me out, because I would not buy into their Vedic disneyland theory of IVC. May be you were not active in Forum Hub during those days; otherwise you would certainly know who this Karthikai poopoo is .

Madurai Veeran

P.S: Hopefully, the moderator of this thread is not going censor my message because I talk about poopoo! :roll:

karuvaadu

13th January 2006, 06:43 PM

P.S: Hopefully, the moderator of this thread is not going censor my message because I talk about poopoo! :roll:

As far as I see your post abide by the rules. But you'll never know! They also don't give reasons, never give reasons! They simply do it for reasons only known to them! The only reason that is givven looks like: -deleted-

:lol:

Idiappam

14th January 2006, 01:11 AM

No.. No.. No.. Periyar Arivan would not say such things.

But what did our Karthikaipoo say that is "not so Tamil". Somehow, our Mr Karthikaipoo failed my 'Iyer detection' test. He can't be. From his few posts he appears to be a pure bred Tamil of Eelam origin - always voicing for Tamil.

http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?t=5084&highlight=

Do you recall a thread titled 'Vedic Roots of Tamil Culture'? It was started by one Karthik Iyer (sic!). It was one of the longest and most active thread two years ago. It ran for almost two years. Mr.Karthik Iyer went on to become the moderator of Yahoo "Indian Civilization" (IC) discussion groups. In case you did not know, IC owner is none but the very one Dr. Kalyanaraman of the Sindu-Saraswathi Vedic wonderland theory. After I left Forum Hub, I participated in IC for a little while when the then 'moderator' Mr.Kalavai Venkat (yes, our very own Karthik Iyer) decided to throw me out, because I would not buy into their Vedic disneyland theory of IVC. May be you were not active in Forum Hub during those days; otherwise you would certainly know who this Karthikai poopoo is .

I don't recall Karthik Iyer - but our Mr Kartikaipoo's name must be just a coincidence. That's what I feel. I wish Mr karthikaipoo would comment.

Mail me if you wish to see some of Mr Karthikaipoo's contribution on other sites.

Meanwhile I will look at Karthik Iyer and Kalyanarama!
------------------
aaruran aaruriR ammaanuk kALE! :wink:
--- Thevaram

Ronnie The Dutch

14th January 2006, 09:19 PM

I came across an Organisation called Tamil Tigers who etablished this flower as the national flower for their homeland.

Uppuma

16th January 2006, 11:27 AM

Friends,

The Thread is effectively used for other than The purpose, i.e., evolution of Sivaniyam, and every body who writes on that is attacked. Lord Siva Bless all.

Maraimalai Aadigal has been explained in Arabic-Vedic Past Thread and Bismala is silent-why?

Allow those who tell about the Great Saivam- a Vedic Worship
Uppuma

Idiappam

16th January 2006, 11:39 AM

Friends,

Maraimalai Aadigal has been explained in Arabic-Vedic Past Thread and Bismala is silent-why?

Uppuma -- you are notorious for quoting part-text from Tamil Scholars. you have done that before - calling your self solomon.

Your quote Pavanar's lines - just four of them - and claimed that Pavanar supported and prasied Panini. YOu were exposed when I posted the whole page of Pavanar. He meant the exact opposite.

So please stop your mischief by quoting just four lines of Maraimalai Adigam. Take your time and post the whole page please.

And please stop reapeating the same over and over agian.. I have see you doing the same in other forum - 'that'stamil'

Uppuma

17th January 2006, 10:39 AM

Dear Idiappam,
The quotes of Pavanar stands right of what Mr.Solomon has said and you only confirmed that, His point was only dating of Panini. And Nobody can bluff like you.

Maraimalai Aadigal is again quoted by me to required level. Pavanar or MMAadigal's other meaningless ideas needs no mention in Educated forums.

bISmala wrote
Uppuma wrote:
Friends,

Siva - the very name doesnot appear any of the texts of Sangam lit, or Tholkappiyam.

The words iNaiyam, pErunthu, tholaipEsi, naadaaLumanRam, etc etc., all not in Tolkaappiyam and Sangam Lit. So these are not Tamil words??

This is exactly the point; INTERNET is referred as Inaiyam a Tamil Word, but that does not prove that TAMILS had Internet in Indus Valley Period or they found it. That is what is you are saying.

When we research and say what is in Sangam Lit, YOUshow complete ignorance. and your postings refer to Kural about an Ignorant talking.

Please read Sangam LIT.; Assumed roots prove nothing.
Uppuma

bis_mala

17th January 2006, 11:52 AM

This is exactly the point; INTERNET is referred as Inaiyam a Tamil Word, but that does not prove that TAMILS had Internet in Indus Valley Period or they found it. That is what is you are saying.

So you agrree sivam is Tamil but only disgree that it was (is) a Tamil god?

Please read Sangam LIT.; Assumed roots prove nothing.
Uppuma

So according to you uppumaa cannot be broken into uppu + maa.
If you do not see the ingredients of uppuma and remain ignorant, you cannot make it again!!

bis_mala

17th January 2006, 02:04 PM

When we research and say what is in Sangam Lit, YOUshow complete ignorance. and your postings refer to Kural about an Ignorant talking.

The meanings ascribed by you to certain words in Sangam Lit were wrong. So we cannot agree. Certain words in use today carried different meanings in those days. You interpret those words in utter disregard of changes in meanings. You have shown complete and absolute ignorance and misinterpreted. That's your fault. Be displeased with your ownself.

Ronnie The Dutch

17th January 2006, 05:35 PM

bis_mala

17th January 2006, 08:00 PM

[tscii:e486fa8597]Uppuma wrote:

The Thread is effectively used for other than The purpose,

Yes, you are using it to attack Maraimalai Adigal which is not the purpose of the thread. I cited him as supporting evidence that Saivam is Ancient Tamil creed. The conclusions reached in that respect by him is the same as what I have stated in this thread. On the question of Rudra in Rig, he might think or conclude that Rudra and Sivan are same. He has given his reason as to why he thought so. Western authors said that the two subsequently merged. The merger might have taken place because of the similarities. Adigal may have said the same thing as the Western Authors in a different way. Whilst religiously the two, Siva and Rudra, could have been considered as one subsequently, they were originally different entities, having different names, worshipped in different places. Historians consider it as a merger.

Maraimalai Aadigal has been explained in Arabic-Vedic Past Thread and Bismala is silent-why?

Please do not make it a habit to write about one matter in so many threads. The readers might miss your posts. Readers cannot be searching every post of yours as to where you are writing about Maraimalai AdigaL. Why write about him in a thread dealing with Arabia?

[
b]Allow those who tell about the Great Saivam- a Vedic Worship
Uppuma[/b]

The word Siva as well cognate expressions of the word do not occur in Rig. Please quote from Rig if the word Siva occurs.. You do not have to tell us about Rudra as we already know about Rudra.

If the word Siva does not appear in Tolkappiyam, it is no big deal because that is a grammar book and not a religious thesis or sivaagama nikandu. The author never said anywhere that he was developing an exhaustive list of all Tamil words for you.. It may have existed as a commoner’s word for the deity and not in poetical use (cheyyuL vazakku). Or it may have been an archaic word at the time only to emerge later into popular use again. In poetry, choice of words is always an important matter.

The word Sivan or Sivam is not Indo-European.. So it is a Tamil word.
[/tscii:e486fa8597]

bis_mala

17th January 2006, 08:18 PM

So according to you uppumaa cannot be broken into uppu + maa.
If you do not see the ingredients of uppuma and remain ignorant, you cannot make it again!!
Unless you code it and chant as a mantra :lol: Who knows, there is already a coded cooking book in Sanskrit! Someone only has to decode it.

The word uppuma is one word which can be used in one short sentence twice:

uppuma saappittaal vayiRu uppumaa?

Your name cannot be repeated like that in a single sentence. Try?

bis_mala

17th January 2006, 09:22 PM

[tscii:a1e50a1d92]¸¢Çó¾ «øÄ ¦ºöÔÇ¢ø ¾¢Ã¢¿×õ
ÅÆí¸¢Âø ÁÕí¸¢ø ÁÕ¦Å¡Î ¾¢Ã¢¿×õ
Å¢ÇõÀ¢Â þÂü¨¸Â¢ý §ÅÚÀ¼ò §¾¡ýÈ¢ý
ÅÆí¸¢Âø ÁÕí¸¢ø ¯½÷ó¾É ´Ø¸ø
¿ýÁ¾¢ ¿¡ð¼ò ¦¾ýÁÉ¡÷ ÒÄÅ÷!!

þó¾ò ¦¾¡ø¸¡ôÀ¢Âô À¡¼Ä¢ø þÕóÐ ±ýÉ ¦¾Ã¢Â§ÅñÎõ ¾¢Õ ¯ôÒÁ¡×ìÌ?

"¸¢Çó¾ «øÄ" ±ýÀ¾¢Ä¢ÕóÐ ¦¾¡ø¸¡ôÀ¢Âò¾¢ø ¦º¡øÄôÀ¼¡¾ ¦º¡ü¸û ÀÄ ¯ñÎ ±ýÀÐõ ¦ºöÔÇ¢Öõ ÅÆì¸¢Öõ «¨Å ¾¢Ã¢óÐ ÅÕ¾ø ¯ñÎ ±ýÀÐõ ¦¾Ç¢Å¡¸ò ¦¾Ã¢ÂÅ¢ø¨ÄÂ¡? º¢Åõ ±ýÈ ¦º¡ø ¦¾¡ø¸¡ôÀ¢Âò¾¢ø þø¨Ä þø¨Ä þø¨Ä ±ýÚ²ý «ÊòÐì¦¸¡û¸¢È£÷ ±ýÀÐ¾¡ý Ò¾¢Ã¡¸ þÕì¸¢ÈÐ.

kiLan-tha alla seyyuLil thirin-avum
vazangkiyal marungkil maruvodu thirin-avum
viLampiya iyaRkaiyin vERupadath thOnRin
vazangkiyal marungkil uNarn-thana ozukal
n-anmathi n-Addath thenmanAr pulavar!!

in-thath tholkAppiyap pAdalil irun-thu enna theriyavENdum thiru uppumAvukku?

"kiLan-tha alla" enpathilirun-thu tholkAppiyaththil sollappadAtha soRkaL pala uNdu enpathum seyyuLilum vazakkilum avai thirin-thu varuthal uNdu enpathum theLivAkath theriyavillaiyA? sivam enRa sol tholkAppiyaththil illai illai enRu En adiththukkoLkiRIr enpathuthAn puthirAka irukkiRathu.[/tscii:a1e50a1d92]

Idiappam

18th January 2006, 03:44 AM

It is a common mischief of Uppuma, previously known and MosesSolomon - to quote part text of Tamil scholars to give the impression that these scholars are supporting the Vedic propaganda. But when you read the whole text of these Scholars - like Maraimalai Adigal and Pavanar, you can see that they mean the exact opposite.

These kind of mischief is taught in Vedic schools when the students are given practice in 'debates'. - Called 'vitanda vatham' in sanskrit.

Uppuma has that traits of a Vedic Stooge!

devapriya

18th January 2006, 10:42 AM

[tscii:0c660b815e]Friends,
Indian Culture and Civilisation is the Oldest and If Foriegners wrote meaninglessly, then the Indian by Birth, but Christian Fathers- and writers did it, and MahaKavi Bharati condemens it in his Short ARTICLE called Á¾¢ôÒ
þó¾¢Â¡¨Å ¦ÅÇ¢ÔÄ¸ò¾¡÷ À¡ÁÃ§¾ºõ ±ýÚ ¿¢¨ÉìÌõÀÊ ¦ºö¾ Ó¾ü ÌüÈõ ¿õÓ¨¼ÂÐ. ÒÈì¸ÕÅ¢¸ û ÀÄ.
Ó¾Ä¡ÅÐ, ¸¢È¢ŠÐÅô À¡¾¢Ã¢. «¦ÁÃ¢ì¸¡Å¢Öõ ³§Ã¡ôÀ¡Å¢Öõ º¢Ä
¸¢È¢ŠÐÅô À¡¾¢Ã¢¸ û, ¾í¸û Á¾ Å¢„ÂÁ¡É À¢Ãº¡Ãò¨¾ ¯ò§¾º¢òÐ ¿õ¨Áì ÌÈ¢òÐô ¦ÀÃ¢Â ¦ÀÃ¢Â ¦À¡ö¸û ¦º¡øÄ¢, þôÀÊð ¾¡úóÐ §À¡ö Á¸ð¾¡É «¿¡¸Ã¢¸ ¿¢¨ÄÂ¢ø þÕìÌõ ƒÉí¸¨Çì ¸¢È¢ŠÐ Á¼ò¾¢§Ä §º÷òÐ §Áý¨ÁôÀÎòÐõ Òñ½¢Âò¨¼î ¦ºöÅ¾¡¸î ¦º¡øÖ¸¢È¸û. ¢
þóÐì¸û ÌÆó¨¾¸¨Ç ¿¾¢Â¢§Ä §À¡Î¸¢È¡÷¸û ±ýÚõ, ŠòÃ¢¸¨Ç (Óì¸¢ÂÁ¡¸, «¿¡¨¾¸Ç¡öô ÒÕ„÷¸¨Ç þÆóÐ ¸¾¢Â¢øÄ¡Áø þÕìÌõ ¨¸õ¦Àñ¸¨Ç) ¿¡ö¸¨Çô §À¡Ä ¿¼òÐ¸¢È÷¸û ±ýÚõ ÀÄÅ¢¾Á¡É «ÀÅ¡¾í¸û ¦º¡øÖ¸¢È¡÷¸û. ¿õÓ¨¼Â ƒ¡¾¢ô À¢Ã¢×¸Ç¢¦Ä þÕìÌõ ÌüÈí¸¨Ç¦ÂøÄ¡õ â¾ì¸ñ½¡Ê ¨ÅòÐì ¸¡ðÎ¸¢È¡÷¸û. þó¾ì ¸¢È¢ŠÐÅô À¡¾¢Ã¢¸Ç¡§Ä ¿ÁìÌ §¿÷ó¾ «ÅÁ¡Éõ «ÇÅ¢ø¨Ä. Barathiyar, ¸ðÎ¨Ã- Á¾¢ôÒ

Now we have the same by Dravidians.

Friends - The INTERpretation taken by many friends like Uppuma do go the same with Professor HART and KamilZevilabil to name few, which Idiappam and Mala cannot accept.

The name Siva was coined after Sangam period where as Rig in 10 has it. Please Show me where Lingam Worship is mentioned in Sangam Litr.
Devapriya

[/tscii:0c660b815e]

bis_mala

18th January 2006, 07:37 PM

Now we have the same by Dravidians.

Dravidian. we mean a group of languages and those who speak these languages. Please clarify in what meaning you use it.

Indian Culture and Civilisation is the Oldest

Oldest or one of the oldest? Is Chinese culture older or younger than Indian? What about Greek, Jewsih/Hebrew?
What is meant by Indian culture and civilisation? The nation-state of India was constituted only recently. Just for my understanding, is this culture and civilisation so defined as to include Pak, Afganistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh (SARC countries)?

Idiappam and Mala cannot accept

Your mission is to convince us. Keep trying with more and more facts.
Do not be disheartened. Work harder!! Why cannot accept?
Rise to an acceptable level.

The name Siva was coined after Sangam period where as Rig in 10 has it.

Rig: Has the word Siva or Rudra? Please explain what you are trying to say.

Read your post carefully once more. Is it relevant to the development of Saivism in TN except for the last two lines? You are mostly out of point Devapriya = Uppuma!! How do you expect me to be convinced if you write in this manner?

stranger

18th January 2006, 08:28 PM

Devapriya = Uppuma!!

well, why does he/she exist in two disguises I wonder?!

Is that because if nobody listens to his/her bs then, he/she can listen to him/herself as if another hubber :?:

Well...

mahadevan

19th January 2006, 03:22 AM

Solomon wrote: The name Siva was coined after Sangam period where as Rig in 10 has it. Please Show me where Lingam Worship is mentioned in Sangam Litr

Solomon how do you explain the presence of the word Jesus in vedas ? does it mean that the vedics were christians

devapriya

20th January 2006, 10:45 AM

[tscii:5189484411]Friends,

Mala starts her techniques,Tholkappiyar has very clearly tells 4 types of words- Natural words, Twisted words, Directinal Words from 12 Directions and Sanskrit words.

Sanskrit words must be Tamilised by avoiding Sanskrit letters. So Siva is absorbed in to Tamil, and Uppuma's quote proves that MM.Aadigal regards that way only.

As Fsg named MM.Aadigal in Arabic Thread we find MMAadigal quotes there, but MALa can well answered here- instead of wasting time.

I QUOTE from MM.Adigal-"thamizar matham" Page number -¸¹Õ i.e.,135.Here he says, close to 2nd Century A.D.,those worshipped SIVA (appan) Pridominantly AND those Who worshipped Umai or Parvathi (ammai) Predominantly got separated and I now quote tamil in full:

þùÅ¢Õ §ÅÚ ÌØÅ¢ÉÃ¢ø «ôÀ¨É Å½íÌ§Å¡÷, «õ¨Á¨Â Å½íÌ§Å¡¨ÃÔõ, «õ¨Á¨Â Å½íÌ§Å¡÷ «ôÀ¨É Å½íÌ§Å¡¨ÃÔõ þÆ¢òÐô §Àº¢ì ¸Ä¡õ Å¢¨Çì¸Ä¡Â¢É÷. þì¦¸¡û¨¸ô §À¡Ã¢ø þÕ ÌØÅ¢ÉÕõ ¦ÀñÀ¢ÈÅ¢¨Âì Ì¨ÈÅ¡¸ì ¸Õ¾×õ §Àº×ó ÐÅí¸§Å, «õ¨Á¨Â Å½í¸¢Â ÌØÅ¡Ã¢ø ´Õ ¦ÀÕõ ÀÌ¾¢Â¡÷ ¸¼×¨Çô ¦ÀñÅÊÅ¢ø ¨ÅòÐÅÆ¢À¡Î ÒÃ¢¾ø ¾ÁìÌ þÆ¢¦ÅÉì ¸Õ¾¢ «õ¨ÁÔõ «ôÀÉ¡ì¸¢ «ÅüÌ Á¡§Â¡ý, ¾¢ÕÁ¡ø ±ýÛõ ¦ÀÂ÷¸¨Çô Ò¨ÉóÐ Å¢¼Ä¡Â¢É÷.

We know Tholkappiyam and Sangam Lit. has extreme Vishnu worship, but See MM.Aadigal who to substantiate his Saivite belief, made Unwarranted abuse against Vaishnavam and gave as Research Opinions. Friends if somebody reads Pavanar or MMaadigal, see how Unnecessary attacks on Certain Tamils and Inidans are made, which cannot be put in a Decent Forums.

Professor HART on Burrowing of Sanskrit words in to TAMIL AS FOLLOWS:
lNeither Sanskrit nor Tamil are particularly old in the world scheme of things. Sanskrit is documented earlier than Tamil.

Sanskrit has borrowed quite as much from Dravidian as Dravidian has from Sanskrit. Tamil has borrowed more words from Sanskrit than Sanskrit has from Dravidian.

Both languages are carriers of wonderful and rich intellectual and literary traditions. The only way to appreciate either language is to read these literatures and spend a lot of time pondering them.

Friends- I QUote from Tamil Arignar R.Shanmugasundaram-
§Å¾ì ¸¼×û ¯Õò¾¢Ã§Éº¢ÅÉ¡É¡ý ±ýÀ¾¢ø ³ÂÁ¢ø¨Ä. §Åòì ¸¼×û ÁÕ¾õ ÓÕ¸ý É¡ý. «¸ò¾¢Â÷ §Å¾¾¢Öõ ÜÈôÀÎ¸¢È¡÷. Å¢‰Ï×õ þó¾¢ÃÛõ §Å¾ì ¸¼×Ç÷. ±É§Å Ã¢Âì ¸¼×û ¾Á¢úì ¸¼×¦ÇÉô À¡ÌÀ¡Î ¦ºö¾ø «÷ò¾ÁüÈ¾¡Ìõ. Àì 128

vEthak kadavuL uruththiraneesivanaanaan enbathil aiyamillai. veethk kadavuL marutham murugan aanaan. agaththiyar veethathilum kuuRappadukiRaar. vishNuvum inththiranum veethak kadavuLar. enavee aariyak kadavuL thamizk kadavuLenap paahupaadu seythal arththamaRRathaakum. pak 128

I do not want to repeat, please see Arabic Vedic Past for Sivalinga Worship Thread.

More details follows.

Mahadevan, Do you want me to respond for your Question to Solomon- about the Dirty Techiniques of Missionaries- NO Name of Jesus is is Vedas, is the truth. Are do you agree PaulThomas position of Bible Inspired Tirukural and Saivam and Vaishnavam is Christian?

[/tscii:5189484411]

devapriya

23rd January 2006, 10:44 AM

Friends,

Idiayappam Uncle wanted to Know where is Bible is Sivalingam worship and Aibshekams done and Undle Guessed Psalms.
Uncle it is verymuch in Genesis and Exodus.
And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for A PILLAR, AND POURED OIL UPON THE TOP OF IT. Ge 28:18
And he called the name of that place Bethel: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first Ge 28:19

There are many more such that can be shown.IT is the Hatred that spoils your views. And God here is called El-Shaddai, a pure Tamil word for the name of VEDIC RUDRA Siva

rw_2005

24th January 2006, 05:36 PM

"And God here is called El-Shaddai, a pure Tamil word "

At this rate Devapriya is going to say that Hebrew is nothing but Tamil :)

rw_2005

24th January 2006, 05:59 PM

[tscii:aaab14fd34]Friends,

Are do you agree PaulThomas position of Bible Inspired Tirukural and Saivam and Vaishnavam is Christian?

[/tscii:aaab14fd34]

Whether you agree or not, Dharmapuri Adheenam Sri La Sri Shanmuga Desiga Gnanasambantha paramachaariyar did not disagree

bis_mala

24th January 2006, 10:27 PM

[tscii:46f1b957e1]Mala starts her techniques

I raised some issues but you have your own tricks whereby u avoid.

Tholkappiyar has very clearly tells ................... Sanskrit words.
He never mentioned Sanskrit. Do not try to edit Tolkappiyam.

So Siva is absorbed in to Tamil, and Uppuma's quote proves that MM.Aadigal regards that way only.

Siva is aborbed into Sanskrit. That's the way all Tamil exponents including AdigaL regard. Siva comes from Sivaththal, meaning chemmai or redness, symbolic of righteousness. "chEyOn" from chE = red, chevvEL from chE=red. Just pass your "elementary Tamil course" and you know this.

As Fsg named MM.Aadigal in Arabic Thread we find MMAadigal quotes there, but MALa can well answered here- instead of wasting time.

It has been answered. Why do you bring up something already done with. Your quote here has no relevance.

I QUOTE from MM.Adigal-"thamizar matham" Page number -¸¹Õ i.e.,135.Here he says, close to 2nd Century A.D.,those worshipped SIVA (appan) Pridominantly AND those Who worshipped Umai or Parvathi (ammai) Predominantly got separated and I now quote tamil in full:
It is correct. By 2nd c ACE, the concept of Ammaiappan arose. So what?

We know Tholkappiyam and Sangam Lit. has extreme Vishnu worship, but See MM.Aadigal who to substantiate his Saivite belief, made Unwarranted abuse against Vaishnavam and gave as Research

Vishnu is from Tami: viNNu, the sky god of Dravidians, and ViNNu (sky) is blue. Adopted by the North later. AdigaL did not attack any religion. Please do not lie.

lNeither Sanskrit nor Tamil are particularly old in the world scheme of things. Sanskrit is documented earlier than Tamil.

Prof Hart may have his own opinion. But it has been proven by M. Lahovery and his team and also other linguists that 1/3 of Sanskrit vocab is clearly Dravidian (Tamil) and Dravidian had tremendously influenced Sanskrit in other aspects too beside the lexical.

Tamil has borrowed more words from Sanskrit than Sanskrit has from Dravidian.

I would rather be guided in this respect by Lahavery (researcher ) than other academicians (who are teachers only). But it is true that koil kurukkaL borrow a lot of words from Sanskrit.

The only way to appreciate either language is to read these literatures and spend a lot of time pondering them.

How else - any language!!

Friends- I QUote from Tamil Arignar R.Shanmugasundaram-
vEthak kadavuL uruththiraneesivanaanaan enbathil aiyamillai. veethk kadavuL marutham murugan aanaan. agaththiyar veethathilum kuuRappadukiRaar. vishNuvum inththiranum veethak kadavuLar. enavee aariyak kadavuL thamizk kadavuLenap paahupaadu seythal arththamaRRathaakum. pak 128

There are hardly any Ariyak kadavuL. All are Dravidian. There are no Indo-European kakavuL.

[/tscii:46f1b957e1][/quote]

stranger

24th January 2006, 11:21 PM

[tscii]Mala starts her techniques

devapriya,

I think it is about time to stop this comment in every post of yours! :P

We all have the same skill like you have to see whose techniques are what using our own brain. :P

Idiappam

26th January 2006, 01:12 AM

bis_mala

26th January 2006, 05:11 AM

indian224080

26th January 2006, 08:23 AM

Devapriya, Solomon, Uppuma and all those anti-tamil vedic stooges can't give a single quote from the Vedas - to support their view that Siva is Vedic..

There is no Siva in the Vedas ..

End of argument!
Corollary to that is: Sivam<>Sivan is Tamil word; Sivan worship originated in Tamilnadu/ (Dravidian country).

Yes yes I agree with Mala.
It originated from Dravidian country. Dravidian country extends from Seattle in the West to Tokyo in the east. Tamil is the mother of English.
English is itself derived from tamil word Aangilam.
Aangilam->Engilam->Adding the sanskrit sh (done by vedic stooges)->English.

bis_mala

26th January 2006, 10:40 AM

Devapriya, Solomon, ............................... is Vedic..

There ................ Vedas ..

End .......
Corollary to ......................... country).

Yes yes I agree with Mala.
It ..............................................>English.

Hai Indian brother! You will forever be unhappy. I have looked into the causes. You have this number 224080 my dear! It adds up to 7 and according to numerology, not only that you will be unhappy, but you might also end up attaining reverse enlightenment. Do apply quickly to admin of the hub to change it and have a re-look at our presentations. That will give you a much-needed lead to recovery. Best regards!!

devapriya

5th February 2006, 08:45 PM

[tscii:328ac42bd7]Friends,

I have requested many to show me Lingam Worship in Sangam Lit. , or the Proper Name used as Sivan in Sangam Lit. and we see
Idiappam wrote: There is no Siva in the Vedas ..
bis_mala Corollary to that is: Sivam<>Sivan is Tamil word; Sivan worship originated in Tamilnadu/ (Dravidian country).

Why don’t you show me , proofs for these assumptions?

When you say Hart did not say and I quote Prof.Hart you run away, or say that is his opinion. Prof.Burrows was the incharge of Lexicon project i.e., a Head of Many Linguistic Scholars and also consult many before publishing.
His point that 20 words of Rig is Tamil is of Much more objective than any others. Burrows, Lahavery, Caldwell are of the Scholars who say Dravidians Language speakers are from Outside India, who settled in India, around 3000 BCE. Now Aryan Invasion Theory is totally dropped and comes Aryan Incoming theory and it says Aryans came from 8000BCE to 1500 BCE, in small groups. Now you can also read the book “The Real Eve : Modern Man's Journey Out of Africa (Paperback)”
by Stephen Oppenheimer which analyses DNA research, little details in Maths thread.
For the benefit of Idiyappam and Friends,
þÕìÌ §Å¾ò¾¢ø ¯Õò¾¢Ã¨É ÁðÎõ ãýÚ À¾¢¸í¸Ç¢Öõ (1:114, 2:33, 7:46) Å¢‰Ï¨Å ÁðÎõ ãýê À¾¢¸í¸Ç¢Öõ (1:154,155; 7:100) À¡¼ôÀðÎ þÕì¸¢ýÈÉ. þì¸¡Äò¨¾ô §À¡Ä§Å §Å¾ ¸¡Äò¾¢Öõ Áì¸û þ¨ÈÅÉ¢ý ¸¢¨Ç¨Âô ¦ÀÕí ¸¼×Ç¡¸ô §À¡üÈ¢É¡÷¸û. «¾É¡ø ¯Õò¾¢ÃÉ¢ýý Á¸ý ÁÕ¾Óõ «ì¸¢É¢Ôõ Å¢‰ÏÅ¢ý §¾¡Æý þóò¾¢ÃÛõ þÕìÌ §Å¾ò¾¢ø ÀÄ À¾¢¸í¸Ç¢M À¡¼ô Àð¼¡÷¸û. þÕóÐõ §Å¾¸¡Äò¾¢ø ¯Õò¾¢ÃÛõ Å¢‰Ï×õ ¸¼×û¸éìÌò ¾¨ÄÅ÷¸Ç¡¸ô §À¡üÈô Àð¼¡÷¸û. Àì- 217
§Å¾ì ¸¼×û ¯Õò¾¢Ãý ¾ý º¢Åý ±ýÀ¾üÌ §Å¾ò¾¢ø «¸îº¡ýÚ þøÄ¡ÁÄ¢ø¨Ä- "²À¢ º¢Å;” ±ýÚ þÕìÌ §Å¾õ(10:92:9) ÜÚ¸¢üÐ. Í§Å¾¡ŠÅ¾Ã ¯ô¿¢¼¾ò¾¢ø "¯Ã¢ò¾¢Ã¨É- ¯Õò¾¢Ãº¢Å¡" "º¢Åõ" "º¢Å¡õ" "º¢Å¡" ±Éì ÜÚ¸¢È¡÷. º¢Åõ ±ýÀ¾üÌ º¡ó¾õ ±Éô ¦À¡Õû ÜÚÅ÷. Àì 89

§Å¾¢Â÷¸û Â¡¸º¡¨ÄÂ¢ø µÁÌñ¼òòüÌì ¸¢Æì¸¢ø âÁ¢Â¢ø ¸õÀí¸¨Ç ¿ðÎ ¦¾öÅí¸Ç¡¸ Å½í¸¢É¡÷¸û. þì¸õÀí¸¨Ç §ÅñÊì ¦¸¡ñÎ þÕìÌ 3:8ø À¡ÊÂÅ÷

"µ ÅÉŠÀ¾¢§Â! þ¨ÈÀ½¢ ÒÃ¢§Å¡÷ ¯ÉìÌ ±ñ¦½ö ¦¾öòÐ ×¾¢ «Ç¢ì¸¢È÷¸û. ¿£ §¿Ã¡¸ «ý¨ÉÂ¢ý Á¡÷À¢ø þ¨ÇôÀ¡Úõ §À¡Ð ±í¸ÙìÌî ¦ºøÅõ «ÕûÅ¡Â¡¸. §Å¾¢Â÷ ¸¢Æì¸¢ø ¯Â÷ò¾¢Â ¸õÀí¸û ¸¼×Ç÷¸Ç¡¸¢ì ¸¼×Ç÷ ÌÊÂ¢ÕìÌõ þ¼í¸ÙìÌô §À¡¸¢ýÈÉ”
±ýÚ Ó¾ü À¡¼Ä¢ø ÜÈ¢É¡÷.

þ¾É¡ø §Å¾¸¡Äò¾¢ø ¸õÀí¸¨Ç ¿ðÎ ¦¾öÅÁ¡¸ Å½í¸¢ Åó¾Ð ¦¾Ã¢ÂÅÕõ. «ì¸¡Äò¾¢ø ¸õÀò¾¢üÌ ±ñ¦½ö §¾öòÌ «À¢§„¸ï ¦ºö¾Ð §À¡ø þì¸¡Äò¾¢ø ¦¾öÅî º¢¨Ä¸ÙìÌõ º¢ÅÄ¢í¸ò¾¢üÌõ ±ñ¦½ö §¾öòÐ «ô§„¸ï ¦ºöÂô ÀÎ¸¢ÈÐ. º¢ÅÄ¢í¸ò¾¢üÌ «ô§„¸ï ¦ºöÔõ §À¡Ð "¾¢¨ÃÂõÀ¸õ Âƒ¡Á§†" ±Éò ¦¾¡¼íÌõ §Å¾ Áó¾¢Ãõ (þÕìÌ 7:59:12, Âƒ¤÷ 6:30) µ¾ô ÀÎ¸¢ÈÐ. þÐ §Å¾ ¸¡Ä¾¢Ä¢ÕóÐ º¢ÅÄ¢í¸ò¾¢üÌ «À¢§„¸ï ¦ºöÐ âƒ¢ì¸ô ÀðÎ Åó¾¨¾ì ¸¡ðÎ¸¢ÈÐ. Àì- 101

quotes from Tamil Arignar R.Shanmugasundaram- PazhanthTamil Varalaru-this book has supportive foreword by Dr.R.mathiwanan- former Director of Tamil Etymological Dictionary project (NuulNalan).

Now Bismala says Siva is Tamil Vishnu is Tamil and Idiyappam says Saivam is Tamil etc., Sorry friends, in this book’s foreword Dr.R.Mathiwanan- clearly puts Sivaniyam and Maliyam for Saivam and Vaishnavam. And even the Author’s name Shanmuga Sundaram, a name of Muruga- Shan- from Sanskrit Six and Sundaram for Beauty for Sanskrit- Dr.Mathivanan wrote it as Arumuga Alaganar.
SO any amount of repeating same and misinterpreting with roots do not prove any thing. Please give proogs from releavant period please.
There is no Dravidian or Aryan God , all are one and all derived from Vedas.
Please see my post in Kural Thread for clarifications.
Devapriya.
[/tscii:328ac42bd7]

bis_mala

6th February 2006, 05:27 AM

[tscii:d08108b23c]//Idiappam wrote: There is no Siva in the Vedas ..
bis_mala Corollary to that is: Sivam<>Sivan is Tamil word; Sivan worship originated in Tamilnadu/ (Dravidian country).
//Why don’t you show me , proofs for these assumptions?//

Well you have been given the Tamil root words. That is proof enough. But if you want to carry out a DNA test on the word Sivan, then please carry on.

//When you say Hart did not say and I quote Prof.Hart you run away, or say that is his opinion.//

Prof Hart can say whatever he wants and so can the others. What we can accept we do. What we cannot, well sorry. There is no such thing as "He is a prof, so he must be believed". An Islamic prof said that Islam is the truth. So according to you, since he is a prof, you would readily become a Muslim and give up your research on anthaNar, iyer, vEtham etc. I learnt from other professors and not Hart. Hart is not my prof. Sorry.

// Prof.Burrows was the incharge of Lexicon project i.e., a Head of Many Linguistic Scholars and also consult many before publishing.//

He has done what he could. There were also professors in Nalanda University. But they could not produce the atom bomb.
They did not know it, just like your grand dad did not know what you know and vice-versa.

//SO any amount of repeating same and misinterpreting with roots do not prove any thing. Please give proogs from releavant period please.//

You repeat ad nauseam. You change me if you can. Your quotes are unconvincing for reasons I have given before. Sorry.[/tscii:d08108b23c]

bis_mala

6th February 2006, 08:07 AM

[tscii:2bef9fdd60]
//
Now Bismala says Siva is Tamil Vishnu is Tamil and Idiyappam says Saivam is Tamil etc., Sorry friends, in this book’s foreword Dr.R.Mathiwanan- clearly puts Sivaniyam and Maliyam for Saivam and Vaishnavam. And even the Author’s name Shanmuga Sundaram, a name of Muruga- Shan- from Sanskrit Six and Sundaram for Beauty for Sanskrit- Dr.Mathivanan wrote it as Arumuga Alaganar//

º¢Åõ ±ýÀÐ ¾Á¢úî¦º¡ø. º¢Å Å½ì¸ò¨¾Ôõ ¦¸¡û¨¸¨ÂÔõ ÌÈ¢ì¸ "º¢Å¡É¢Âõ" ±ýÈ ¾Á¢ú ÅÊÅõ Ò¨ÉÂôÀð¼Ð.

º¢Åõ+ ¬(É) + þÂõ. º¢Åõ ¬¸¢Â ¦¸¡û¨¸. þÂõ ±ýÀÐ Å¢Ì¾¢ «øÄÐ À¢ý¦É¡ðÎ.

º¢Åõ (¾Á¢ú) > ¨ºÅõ (¾Á¢úî¦º¡øÄ¢ø þÕóÐ Ò¨ÉÂôÀð¼ ºí¸¾ ¦Á¡Æ¢ ÅÊÅõ. ¾ò¾¢¾¡ó¾ ¿¡Áõ ±ÉôÀÎõ.

þý¦É¡Õ ¯¾¡Ã½õ:

§ºÃø (§ºÃý)(¾Á¢ú) > §ºÃÄõ(¾Á¢ú) > §¸ÃÇõ (Sanskritized) > ¨¸Ã¡Ç¢ (¾ò¾¢¾¡ó¾õ).

ÌÃÅ÷ (¾Á¢ú) > ÌÕ (¾Á¢ú) (¸¨¼ìÌ¨È) > Guru (Skrt) > ¦¸ªÃÅ÷ (¾ò¾¢¾¡ó¾ ¿¡Áõ ).

ÌÁÃ¢ (¾Á¢ú ) > ÌÁ¡Ã¢ ( ¾Á¢úò ¾¢Ã¢Ò) > kumari (Skrt) > ¦¸ªÁ¡Ãõ (¾ò¾¢¾¡ó¾ ¿¡Áõ ).
[/tscii:2bef9fdd60]

Saivam is the sanskritized form of the Tamil word Sivam.

devapriya

6th March 2006, 04:09 PM

[tscii:c324abee55]Bismala wrote
////When you say Hart did not say and I quote Prof.Hart you run away, or say that is his opinion.//

Prof Hart can say whatever he wants and so can the others. What we can accept we do. What we cannot, well sorry. There is no such thing as "He is a prof, so he must be believed". An Islamic prof said that Islam is the truth. So according to you, since he is a prof, you would readily become a Muslim and give up your research on anthaNar, iyer, vEtham etc. I learnt from other professors and not Hart. Hart is not my prof. Sorry.

// Prof.Burrows was the incharge of Lexicon project i.e., a Head of Many Linguistic Scholars and also consult many before publishing.//

He has done what he could. There were also professors in Nalanda University. But they could not produce the atom bomb.
They did not know it, just like your grand dad did not know what you know and vice-versa.//
- I do not understand a single point of what you are Conveying- but making clear that your Position is “I am not amenable to any Scientific Views, My Views could be wrong, My mind is closed, but keep giving more evidences, so that I would use all my tricks to misinterpret it and make world feel that Tamils are Hypocrites””
Friend Where is Sivalingam worship or The Name “Siva” in Sangam Tamil Lit. Silapathikarm tells us about Triupathi where Lord Vishnu is worshiped in Standing Posture (.¿¢ýÈ ¾¢Õì§¸¡Äõ) and SriRangam as Lying Posture(¸¢¼ó¾¡ý …ÂÉõ- ÀûÇ¢¦¸¡ñ¼ ¾¢Õ§¸¡Äõ), ThiruMurugatrupadai gives the various Murugan Temples, but no Lingam is mentioned.

I look History only from the Evidences and not Blind Superstition and I understand your Arrogance of Intelligence which is without any base, and the root of Siva as per International Scholars-for all to see-from
Colin Renfrew, Professor of Archaeology at Cambridge, in his famous work, Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins, Cambridge University Press, 1988,
”The words Shiva and Shambhu are not derived from the Tamil words civa (to redden, to become angry) and cembu (copper, the red metal), but from the Sanskrit roots si (therefore meaning “auspicious, gracious, benevolent, helpful, kind”) and sam (therefore meaning “being or existing for happiness or welfare, granting or causing happiness, benevolent, helpful, kind”), and the words are used in this sense only, right from their very first occurrence.”

Maraimalai Aadigal’s said- Óì¸ñ½ý, º¨¼Âý, Á½¢Á¢¼üÈ¡ý ±ýÛõ ¾Á¢ú áü ¦ÀÂ÷¸Ç¡Öõ "¯Õò¾¢Ãý", "º¢Åý" ±ýÛõ Å¼ëü ¦ÀÂ÷¸Ç¡Öõ ÌÈ¢ôÀ¢¼ôÀð¼ ÓØÓ¾ü ¸¼×û º¢Å¦ÀÕÁ¡§É ±ýÀÐ «í¨¸Âí¸É¢ §À¡ø ¿ýÌ Å¢Ç¹¸¡ ¿¢üÌ¦Áý¸. -Àì 129 ¾Á¢Æ÷ Á¾õ. Maraimalaiar agrees here Siva from Sanskrit source.
The word Kerala, comes from Sanskrit – Keralam, rather in full- for Coconut- it is Nariyal Keralam- and the earliest written source- Asoka’s inscriptions refer them as Keralo Putras.

Gouravas are referred as by that name or equivalent in Sangam to Manimekhalai and your meaningless breaking to Guru does not help, please do not spoil Tamil.

The dating of Tamil usage and Sanskrit Usage and the Literatire are “Well Established”, and international Linguists agree that Sanskrit is the Eldest Sister (for Many Mother) to Latin and Greek and Germanic Groups and Tamil uses One Third of words burrowed from Sanskrit and half that from its Branches Prakrit and Pali. Now picking this Burrowed words and showing its usage in world languages for Tamil does not make Any Good to Tamil.

Please allow me to quote from Sangam to Bakthi Movement to show Saivite Tamil Lit.
By Attacking Personally You have not allowed anybody to give the Historic evolcution of Saivam in Tamilnadu.

Devapriya[/tscii:c324abee55]

devapriya

8th May 2006, 03:34 PM

[tscii:5aa4d2533c]Friends,

We were trying to analyse Siva Bakthi Movement in Tamilnadu.

The very name Siva does not come till ThiruMular. The Sanskrit form Saivam comes in Manimekhalai.

Siva in Purananuru is always referred to as Vedic God.

Quiet a few Tamil Scholars have confused Tholkappiyam’s God for Kurinji Land- God of mountains Seyon- Lord Muruga as Siva, because they were of the illusion that Tholkappiyam was older literature and absence of Siva as embarrassing. Today Tholkappiyam is dated to 50-100CE, late Sangam Lit. and these forgeries need not be done at all.

The Oldest of Saiva Thirumurai Collection is “Thirumurgatrupadai” a Sangam Lit. a part of 11th Thirumurai.

Details of this in my next posting.

Devapriya
[/tscii:5aa4d2533c]

bis_mala

17th May 2006, 08:52 AM

Devapriya, how would you reply to MP Prakash of 13th Distr Sahitya SammaLan who says that Kannada is 1500 years OLDER than Tamil which is only 1000 years old according to him.

Prakash said that he had international scholars on his side.

That means your date lines are wrong??

LET'S HEAR FROM YOU.

devapriya

17th May 2006, 01:14 PM

Dear Bismala,

Thank you for your post, following the hIGHLY Unscientific methods adopted by Thani-Tamil movement, now this methodis used by all.

Any Scholar can claim, what I quote is an almost Unanmous, mostly accepted by Scholars of International Acceptance.

I give an example, Pavanar in his first book dated Tholkappiyam to 2000BCE, on later findings he backed to 650BCE, while Tho.po.mi, L.Rasamankanar and all said close to 200-300BCE, today with more and more proofs coming Tholkappiyam cannot be dated earlier than 50-100CE.

As for as Kannada, During Indus Dechiphering, Parbola took words like "Thinkal" in Kannada means date and moon similar to Tamil, and few words were Tamil does not have that meaning but kannada has, so Indus Dechipherers tried Proto Dravidian close to Kannada also. But Parbola's method has not yielded and not a sucess, and that can not be quoted. Earliest Kannada Stone Inscriptions start from 4th Cen. CE, but many Tamil Brahmi Inscriptions have Kannada and Telugu words from 100 bce, Kannada or Telugu donot deny Vedic Influence.

So your purpose of this post is not understood.
\
Devapriya

bis_mala

17th May 2006, 06:20 PM

Any Scholar can claim, what I quote is an almost Unanmous, mostly accepted by Scholars of International Acceptance.

Thanks so much. But MP Prakash is also saying that what he says has been accepted by Scholars of International standing and repute!! So you see, among the "international scholars " one bunch contradicts and conflicts with another bunch...How do you decide who is acceptable to you and who is not? Can you briefly expound the methods they use? (All of them seem to rely on similar methods and identical data). Yet widely differing opinions?

I am sure most other hubbers would also like to know these things from you.

When experts give scientific evidence in courts, they are cross-examined in detail by the advocates for the plaintiff and defendants and then the judge makes a ruling to accept or reject. You do not have such facility. So, how do you accept or reject madam devapriya?

mahadevan

17th May 2006, 08:32 PM

Devapriya accepts those international scholars of (dis)repute that sing her tune.

devapriya

21st May 2006, 01:53 PM

[tscii:5bb028b012]Friends,
The Purananuru Song 166 sung by ç÷ ãÄí ¸¢Æ¡÷ about §º¡½¡ðÎô âïº¡üê÷ô À¡÷ôÀ¡ý ¦¸ª½¢Âý and this is in Ð¨È: À¡÷ÀÀÉ Å¡¨¸.

¿ý È¡öó¾ ¿£û ¿¢Á¢÷º¨¼
ÓÐ Ó¾øÅý Å¡ö §À¡¸¡Ð,
´ýÚ ÒÃ¢ó¾ ®Ã¢ ÃñÊý,
Ú½÷ó¾ ´Õ ÓÐáø
This refers to Vedic Shiva. ´ýÚ ÒÃ¢ó¾ ®Ã¢ ÃñÊý- 2 x 2 = 4 Vedas.
Vedas has Six Branches called ஆறு அங்கங்கள்- They are also named in Manimekhalai, even few with Author’s name. This SONG is praising Vedas and Brahmins of the day and all confirm Truths, which are Confirmed by Thani-Tamil Scholars like Pavanar and SalaiIlanthiraianar.

Shiva is mostly been related to Vedas in Sangam Literature.

As for Scholars and acceptances, I just want you to look in to the link given by K.P.Aravinthan’s Thread and Thirukual Research articles Thread, morethan 40 Price winning Articles on Kural are there, None uses Pavanar, Marai malai Aadigal, PTS , Appadurai who are highly sectarian views. More When Newer and newer informations come, the Scholars can leave the Old mis-conceptions and come to more natural truths. Example- Maritmer Wheeler a Scholar of high Repute in Archaeology misinterpreted RigVeda- and also Indus Findings – saying this Verse of Cities being Hunted, many killed- such wars are the reasons for Saraswathi Valley’s demise. Complete Opposite to the Truths, None of the findings prove anything, and Rig Verses also do not say a War, is the correct interpretation.

Further to Burrows Lexicon claiming many Indo-European words as Dravidian, the research by otherside proved :

Yes, indeed. The Dravidian Etymological Dictionary of Burrow and Emeneau contains over 5,000 etyma and it has been shown that over 4,000 of these etyma have Indo-Aryan, Munda cognates (cf. http://www.hindunet.org/saraswati/Indian_Lexicon which contains over 8,000 semantic clusters.)

But even today Quoting PTS,Pavanar and Wheeler etc., when further more research opinions have come, is the method adopted by Thani-Tamil and its inspirations as Kannada Mr.Prakash article and I can answer them myself or contact experts and then reply that in an appropriate threads.

Please maintain these thread for Shiva and Saivam only.

DEVAPRIYA
[/tscii:5bb028b012]

bis_mala

22nd May 2006, 12:07 PM

Shiva is mostly been related to Vedas in Sangam Literature.

There is no Siva or SHiva is Vedas. He is "discovered" there only through interpretation of some scholars. Siva =? Rudra.

On the other hand, you have been contending that Siva is not a Tamil word and Siva does not therefore exist in Sangam Lit.

Your quoted statement is therefore a paradox.

You are therefore saying: 0 + 0 = 1.

OR IT MAY BE THAT YOU ARE CHANGING SLOWLY.- for the better or for the worse?

devapriya

29th May 2006, 11:03 AM

Dear Friends,

I HAVE quoted Tamil Scholars and a book with the Introduction of Prof.MAthiwanan, and also from Cambridge University Scholar- the very name Shiva and Linga Worships are in Vedas.

Sangam does not have the name; wHAT IS YOUR Problem?

Why do you want to distirb Indian Unity as the Christian Missionaries. by Artificial Dravidiayan race myths.

Let us look at Shive in both.
Devapriya

bis_mala

29th May 2006, 04:33 PM

Dear Friends, I HAVE quoted Tamil Scholars and a book with the Introduction of Prof.MAthiwanan, and also from Cambridge University Scholar- the very name Shiva and Linga Worships are in Vedas.

Tamil scholars (not every) are conditioned by their own religious and political beliefs. The Europeans learnt from the Tamil scholars and poets. So they follow their teachers. Hence you need to be objective. Siva is a Tamil word. Linga worship grew up in TN. Siva (verb) > sivaththal. siva+ an = sivan. This etymology is in accord with the fact other deity names such as chEyOn, chevvEL all have red colour as the theme. Linga > ilingkam cognate with ilanguthal, (oLi cheythal).

Sangam does not have the name; wHAT IS YOUR Problem?

Do you know that a lot of vulgar words used in Tamil (heard when some low people abuse each other ) are also not in Sangam or Tolkappiyam. Do you want to claim them all for Sanskrit? Please wake up your ideas.

Why do you want to distirb Indian Unity as the Christian Missionaries. by Artificial Dravidiayan race myths.

You are breaking Indian unity by saying Tamil has no place in the consideration of sivam and lingam etc., Dravidian is a family of languages. I never said it is a race.

Let us look at Shive in both.

What do you mean by this? That Sivan belongs to Tamil and Sanskrit??

devapriya

27th June 2006, 10:56 AM

Friends,

We need to understand that We do not have a Single Sentence of Lit, which is Pre-Vedic.

So to say separate Dravidian or Tamil are meaningless Bluffs.

Friends, please go through my post in Tirukural Thread page19, in Tamil Literature.

Siva is the Vedic Head and has been absorbed to Tamil.

Devapriya

bis_mala

27th June 2006, 01:19 PM

Friends, please read in the same thread those replies from me and other hubbers after reading Devapriya's bluff. You can confirm for yourself the extent of her lies!!

Vedas were in oral tradition for a long time (estimated 1500yrs) and were reduced to writing 400 ACE or so!!

Tolkappiyam is pre-Vedic. Many Sangam stanzas are pre-Vedic.

Veda is from Tam: "vetham". A Tamil word.

devapriya

28th June 2006, 05:06 PM

Dear Friends,

Bismala doesnot undewrstand what is replied, every his of blabber is replied.

These Dubious Thani Tamil Scholars took few odd verses positive only about Tamil Civilisation and extensively used Kural for their Highly Partial works.
I give-Historian M. G. S. Narayanan, who finds in Sangam literature –
“no trace of another, indigenous, culture other than what may be designated as tribal and primitive.” And concludes :
“The Aryan-Dravidian or Aryan-Tamil dichotomy envisaged by some scholars may have to be given up since we are unable to come across anything which could be designated as purely Aryan or purely Dravidian in the character of South India of the Sangam Age. In view of this, the Sangam culture has to be looked upon as expressing in a local idiom all the essential features of classical “Hindu” culture. M. G. S. Narayanan, “The Vedic-Puranic-Shastraic Element in Tamil Sangam Society and Culture,” in Essays in Indian Art, Religion and Society, p. 128.

Nilakanta Sastri goes a step further and opines,
“There does not exist a single line of Tamil literature written before the Tamils came into contact with, and let us add accepted with genuine appreciation, the Indo-Aryan culture of North Indian origin.” “THE HARAPPAN] RELIGION IS SO CHARACTERISTICALLY INDIAN AS HARDLY TO BE DISTINGUISHED FROM STILL LIVING HINDUISM.”

Colin Renfrew, Professor of Archaeology at Cambridge, Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins, Cambridge University Press, 1988,
“IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE WHAT IS PARTICULARLY NON-ARYAN ABOUT THE INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION.”

Kenoyer, Jonathan Mark, Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization (Karachi & Islamabad : Oxford University Press & American Institute of Pakistan Studies, 1998) -“MANY SCHOLARS HAVE TRIED TO CORRECT THIS ABSURD THEORY [OF AN ARYAN INVASION], BY POINTING OUT MISINTERPRETED BASIC FACTS, INAPPROPRIATE MODELS AND AN UNCRITICAL READING OF VEDIC TEXTS. HOWEVER, UNTIL RECENTLY, THESE SCIENTIFIC AND WELL-REASONED ARGUMENTS WERE UNSUCCESSFUL IN ROOTING OUT THE MISINTERPRETATIONS ENTRENCHED IN THE POPULAR LITERATURE.”

devapriya

Eelavar

28th June 2006, 10:10 PM

Sangam litterature is very old as the vedic one...

There must be a strong relationship between the two literrature..

virarajendra

22nd October 2006, 10:17 PM

This article has been newly edited

Uppuma

23rd October 2006, 03:22 PM

Dear Friends,

Vedas are dated by International Scholars at 2000BCE, and Sangam Lit 200BCE - 200 CE, Tholkappiyam to 100CE.

Vedas have Siva and Lingam.

Idiappam

31st October 2006, 04:28 PM

Vedas have Siva and Lingam.

Where? -- give the lines please!!!

virarajendra

20th September 2007, 12:53 AM

Brought forward for the benefit of New Readers

virarajendra

22nd January 2008, 11:43 PM

Brought forward to the benefit of New Readers

Raghu

23rd January 2008, 11:16 PM

Dear virarajendra

You are doing an excellent job, but not sadly not many people participate in such valuable discussions...and my knoweldge is limited in Tamil literature, as i have migarted aboev at a very young age, hence i did not learn Thamizh properly

please continue your service for maheswar

thanks a lot sir

virarajendra

22nd February 2009, 12:10 AM

Brought forward for the benefit of New Readers

virarajendra

24th November 2009, 05:56 PM

Brought forward

Raghu

25th November 2009, 06:16 PM

The most ancient Shiva lingam known to mankind is standing at the crossroads. Sri Parasurameshwara temple, located in Gudimallam, a hamlet 13 km from Renigunta junction in Chittoor district in southern Andhra Pradesh, has a 2,200-year old history as the longest continuously worshipped Shiva temple in the world. Its fascinating past and equally gripping present have culminated in a classic confrontation between modern values and ancient traditions.

apperantley this is where Parusuram' worhisped Eashwar, hense called Parasurameshwar (parasuramamrin Esahwar), similar to Rameshwaram

has any one been to this temple in Andra Pradesh?

lathaji

27th November 2009, 08:44 PM

Quiet a lot of information on Gudimallam here.

http://yahwehfraud.indiainteracts.in/2009/02/16/gudimallam-a-ancient-temple-belongs-to-500bce/

lathaji

10th May 2010, 02:07 PM

இந்த வலைப்பு மிக அழகாக குடிமல்லம் சிவலிங்கம் பற்றி கூறுகிறது.

தொன்மையான குடிமல்லம் லிங்கம்
December 7, 2009 by ankaraikrishnan

http://ankaraikrishnan.wordpress.com/2009/12/07/gudimallam-lingam/

Narashima

14th May 2010, 03:57 PM

Dear virarajendra

You are doing an Excellent job, keep it up :thumbsup:

virarajendra

4th September 2010, 07:23 AM

brought forward

lathaji

26th August 2011, 07:51 AM

வேத நெறியும், சைவத் துறையும் முரண்படுகின்றனவா? ஒரு விவாதம்: பகுதி 1
------------
கேள்வி: சித்தாந்தம் - வேதாந்தம்... விளக்கம் தருக.

பதில்: 'அந்தம்' என்ற சொல்லுக்கு, 'முடிவு' மற்றும் 'குறிக்கோள்' என்று இரண்டு அர்த்தங்கள் உண்டு. வேத நூல்களைப் பிரமாணமாகக் கொண்டு, அவை காட்டும் முடிவை ஏற்பது, வேதாந்தம் (வேத அந்தம்- வேதாந்தம்). தன் சித்தத்தின் முடிவுக்கு இசைந்து போகும் பட்சத்தில், வேதப் பிரமாணங்களையும் ஏற்பது அல்லது விடுவது... இந்த தத்துவ நெறிமுறையே சித்தாந்தம். வேதாந்தம் வடக்கின் கொடை; சித்தாந்தம் தெற்கின் கொடை!
--------------

தமிழில் எல்லா உச்சரிப்புகளும் இல்லாத காரணத்தால் Siddha என்பதையும், Chitta என்பதையும் "சித்தம்" என்றே எழுதுகிறோம்.

Siddha = சித்தி (Siddhi) என்கிற இறுதிநிலையை அடைந்தவன்
Chitta = சித்தம், அதாவது எண்ண ஓட்டங்கள் கொண்ட மனம்

சித்தாந்தம் (Siddhanta) என்கிற சம்ஸ்கிருத சொல் Siddhi + anta என்ற சொற்களால் உருவானது. உச்சரிப்புக் குழப்பத்தால் Chitta என்ற சொல்லைக் கொண்டு தவறான பொருள் கூறியிருக்கிறார் விடையளித்தவர். "சித்ததிற்கு இசைந்த வகையில்" என்றால் என்ன - "மனம் போன போக்கில்"?

சித்தாந்தம் என்பதற்கு இறுதியான தர்க்க முடிவுகளை உள்ளடக்கிய சமய தத்துவம் என்று பொருள். பல இடங்களில் சமயம் தவிர்த்த அறிவியலைக் குறிக்கவும் இச்சொல் பயன்டும்: ஜோதிஷ சித்தாந்தம், ரஸாயன சித்தாந்தம், கணித சித்தாந்தம் போல. தமிழ்ச் சூழலில் பொதுவாக "சைவ சித்தாந்தம்" என்கிற சைவ சமயப் பிரிவைக் குறிக்க இச்சொல்லைப் பயன்படுத்துகிறோம்.

வேதாந்தம் என்பதற்கு வேதத்தின், மெய்அறிவின் எல்லை என்பது பொருள். இந்து தத்துவங்கள் எல்லாவற்றின் உச்சம், அறுதி நிலை, பிரமாணம், வேதாந்தம் தான். வேதாந்தம் என்கிற தத்துவ அமைப்பின் மீது தான் சைவம், வைணம், சாக்தம், கௌமாரம் ஆகிய எல்லா சமயப் பிரிவுகளும் கட்டமைக்கப் பட்டிருக்கின்றன. அதனால் "வேதப் பிரமாணத்தை விடுவது" என்ற பேச்சிற்கே இந்த சமயப் பிரிவுகள் எவற்றிலும் இடமில்லை. அவை வேதாந்தத்திற்கு முரண்பட்டவை அல்ல.

"வேதாந்த, சித்தாந்த சமரச நன்னிலை பெற்ற வித்தகச் சித்தர் கணமே" என்று இந்த ஒருமையைத் தான் தாயுமானவர் குறிப்பிடுகின்றார்.

மேலும், வடக்கு, தெற்கு என்று இந்தத் தத்துவக் கொடைகளைப் பிரிப்பதும் தவறு. வேதாந்த தத்துவத்தை நாடெங்கும் நிலைநாட்டிய ஆதிசங்கரர் தென்னாட்டில் தான் பிறந்தார். பின்னர் விசிஷ்டாத்வைதம், த்வைதம் என்கிற வேதாந்தப் பிரிவுகளை உருவாக்கிய ஆசாரியார்களும் தென்னாட்டில் பிறந்தவர்களே.

அதே போன்று சைவசித்தாந்தமும் சரி, சித்தர்கள் மரபும் சரி, பாரதம் முழுவதும் வேர்கள் கொண்டது. இமயமலையில் இருந்து வந்த சிவயோகி ஒருவரே மூலன் என்ற இடையன் உடல்புகுந்து திருமூலர் ஆகி திருமந்திரம் என்ற தத்துவக் களஞ்சியத்தை அளித்தார் என்று பெரியபுராணம் கூறும். கோரக்கர் (கோரக் நாத்) உள்ளிட்ட தமிழ்நாட்டு 18 சித்தர்கள் போன்று வடபாரதம் முழுவதும் நவநாத் (Navnath) என்னும் 9 சித்தர்கள் பற்றிய பழைய மரபு உள்ளது.

பத்திரிகைகளில் சுருக்கமாக பதில் எழுதவேண்டும் என்கிற கட்டுப்பாடு உள்ளதைப் புரிந்து கொள்கிறேன். ஆனால் அவை தவறாக இருக்காமல் பார்த்துக் கொள்ளவேண்டும். அதுவும், இணையம் என்ற தகவல் களஞ்சியம் நம் கைக்கெட்டும் தூரத்திலேயே இருக்கும்போது என்ன கவலை?

பிற்சேர்க்கையாக: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon சம்ஸ்கிருத அகராதியிலிருந்து Vedanta, Siddhanta ஆகிய சொற்களின் பொருள்.

அன்புடன்,
ஜடாயு
// கேள்வி 1 : வேதத்தில் சொல்லப்பட்ட தெய்வங்கள் எத்தனை? தெய்வம் பற்றி வேதத்தின் கொள்கை என்ன? இதிலிருந்து வேதாந்தத்தின் கொள்கை ஏன் மாறியது? இப்படிப்பட்ட வேதாந்த முடிவை சைவ சித்தாந்தம் ஏற்றுக் கொண்டுவிட்டதா? //

பதில்: வேதம் கூறும் தெய்வம் ஒன்றே. “ஏகம் சத் விப்ரா பஹுதா வதந்தி” (சத்தியம் ஒன்றே; முனிவோர் அதைப் பலவாறாகக் கூறுகின்றனர்) என்று விவேகானந்தர் சிகாகோவில் மேற்கோள் காட்டிய அமுதவாசகம் இந்திரனையும், அக்னியையும், யமனையும் துதிக்கும் ஒரு ரிக்வேத சூக்தத்தில் தான் வருகிறது.

பரம்பொருள் என்றால் என்ன என்று பிரம்ம சூத்ரம் முதல் கீதை வரை கூறும் விளக்கங்கள் அனைத்தின் மூலமும் வேதத்தில் உள்ளது. “சத்யம் ஞானம் அனந்தம் ப்ரஹ்ம” “அஸ்தி, ப்ரீதி, பாதி” (அது என்றும் இருப்பது, அன்பு வடிவானது, ஒளிப்பொருள்) ஆகிய வாசகங்கள் கர்மகாண்டம் எனப்படும் சம்ஹிதை மந்திரங்களிலேயே உள்ளன.

“ஹிந்து, பொய்யிலிருந்து உண்மைக்கல்ல, உண்மையின் ஒரு தளத்திலிருந்து இன்னொரு தளத்திற்குச் செல்கிறான்” என்று விவேகானந்தர் கூறுவதை எண்ணிப் பார்க்கிறேன். மழையிலும், காற்றிலும், இடியிலும், இருளிலும், ஒளியிலும் தெய்வ சக்தியைக் கண்டு போற்றிய ரிஷிகள் அதனூடாகவே இவை அனைத்தின் உள்ளும் உறையும் பொருள் என்பதை அனுபூதியில் கண்டு உணர்ந்தனர்.

“வேதங்கள், உபநிஷதங்கள், சனங்கள்” என்ற எனது பழைய கட்டுரையில் இருந்து ஒரு பகுதியைக் கீழே தருகிறேன்.

“நான்கு வேதங்களிலும் சம்ஹிதா (துதிப் பாடல்கள்), பிராமணம் (யாக செயல்முறைகள்), ஆரண்யகம் (விளக்கங்கள்), உபநிஷத் (தத்துவம்) என்ற எல்லா பகுதிகளும் உள்ளன. மந்திரங்கள் ரிஷிகளின் மெய்யுணர்வில் உதித்த காலத்தில் இந்த எல்லாப் பகுதிகளிலும் உள்ள பாடல்கள் ஒன்று கலந்தே வந்தன. இத்தகைய பகுப்புகள் பின்னால் வேதவியாசரால் உருவாக்கப் பட்டவை.

உபநிஷதம் ஓரளவு படித்தவர்கள் கூட அது வேத கர்மகாண்டத்தினின்றும் வேறானது அல்ல, மாறாக அதன் தொடர்ச்சி, வளர்ச்சி, முதிர்ச்சி என்ற முடிவுக்குத் தான் வரமுடியும். சுவாமி விவேகானந்தர், ஸ்ரீ அரவிந்தர் இருவருமே இக்கருத்தைக் கூறியுள்ளனர். சுவாமி விவேகானந்தர் வேத சம்ஹிதைப் பகுதியில் இருக்கும் ஒரு பகுதியில் உள்ள வாசகத்தினை சுழுமுனைக்கு குறியீடாக தமது இறுதி நாளில் சீடரிடம் பேசினார். ஸ்ரீ அரவிந்தர் இன்னும் ஒருபடி மேல் சென்று சம்ஹிதை மந்திரங்களில் எல்லாம் கூட அடிநாதமாக இருப்பது உபநிஷதங்களின் வேதாந்தம் தான் என்கிற கருத்தை மிக அழுத்தமாகக் கூறுகிறார். இந்த கருத்து அடங்கிய அவரது “Hymns to the Mystic fire” என்ற நூல் மிகவும் புகழ்பெற்றது. உதாரணமாக, உபநிடதத்திலேயே மிகவும் அழகான இரட்டைப் பறவை படிமம்…..”

// கேள்வி 2 : சித்தாந்தமும் வேத மூலத்தையே கொண்டது உண்மை என்றால் வேதாந்தமே போதுமானது. சித்தாந்தம் என்ற ஒரு பிரிவு தோன்ற வேண்டிய அவசியம் என்ன?//

பதில்: நல்ல கேள்வி. சித்தாந்தம் மட்டுமல்ல, ஏன் இத்தனை சமயப் பிரிவுகள் - சைதன்யர், துகாராம், கபீர்தாசர், வள்ளலார், வல்லாபாசாரியார், ராமானந்தர், பசவேஸ்வரர் என்று ஒவ்வொரு அருளாளர்களும் தனி முத்திரை பதிக்கும் வகையில் ஒவ்வொரு பிரதேசத்திலும் வண்ணமயமான, ஒவ்வொரு பக்தி மரபுகள், சமய மரபுகள் பாரதத்தில், இந்து மதத்தில் தோன்ற வேண்டும்? காரணம் மோதல், முரண்பாடு அல்ல; இதைப் புரிந்து கொள்வது அவசியம் என்று நினைக்கிறேன்.

செமிட்டிக் (semitic) மதங்கள் போன்று “இதோ வந்துவிட்டார் தேவகுமாரன், கடவுள் அனுப்பிய தேவதூதர், இவர் சொல்வது எல்லாம் உண்மை, ஒரே வழியும், சத்தியமும், ஜீவனும்” என்றோ “உலகத்தின் *இறுதி* இறைத்தூதர், உலகம் முழுதுக்குமான ஒரே புனிதநூல்” என்றோ திடீரென்று ஒரு குழுத் தலைவர் (cult leader) தோன்றி தன் சமயத்தை நிறுவியதோ, அவரை எதிர்த்தவர்களை வன்முறை, யுத்தம், கொலைகள் மூலம் ஒழித்துக் கட்டி, எல்லாரையும் ஒட்டுமொத்தமாக அந்த மதத்தில் வாள்முனையில் சேரவைத்ததோ பாரத தேசத்தில் நடைபெறவில்லை. மதம் என்ற போர்வையில் ஆதிக்கம், அரசாட்சி, அதிகாரப் பரவல், ஆள்சேர்ப்பு இவற்றைத் தான் உலகெங்கும் இந்த மார்க்கங்கள் நிகழ்த்தின, நிகழ்த்தி வருகின்றன. அவ்வப்போது இந்த நிறுவன மத அமைப்புகளில், சில உண்மையான ஆன்மிகவாதிகளும் தோன்றுகிறார்கள், மறுப்பதற்கில்லை.

ஆனால், இந்திய கலாசாரத்தின் நடைமுறைப் படி, சமய மரபுகளை உருவாக்குபவரும், அதைப் பின்பற்றுபவர்களும் தங்கள் சமயத்தை நிலைநாட்ட வேண்டுமென்றால், ஆள் பலம் அல்ல, அதற்குப் பின் ஆழ்ந்த அனுபூதி, அந்த அனுபூதி பெற்ற ஞானியர் விளக்கும் உறுதியான தத்துவம் இவை இருக்க வேண்டும் என்பது அவசியமாகக் கருதப் பட்டது. ஏனெனில் இந்த சமயங்கள் ஒரு கூட்டத்துடன் பேசவில்லை, ஆன்மிக தாகம் கொண்ட ஒவ்வொரு தனிமனிதனிடமும் அவை பேசின.

தனிமனிதனிடமே இந்த சமயங்கள் பேசியதால், மனிதர்களின் மனப்பாங்கிற்கேற்ப வேறுவேறு விதமான சமய வழிபாட்டு முறைகள் இயல்பாகவே எழுந்தன. இந்த மட்டற்ற சுதந்திரத்தால் பல போலி, ஏமாற்று, துர்மதங்களும் தோன்றின. ஆனால் உண்மையான ஆன்மிகத் தேடல் இல்லாமல் வன்முறைச் சடங்குகள், வக்கிரங்களை முன்வைத்துப் பிழைத்த காபாலிகம், காளாமுகம், பைரவம், வாமமார்க்கம் போன்ற பயங்கர cult மதத்தவர்கள், வேதாந்த தத்துவத்தின் ஒளியால் கனன்ற சைவ, வைஷ்ணவ சமயங்களின் தத்துவ தர்க்கத்திற்கு முன் மண்டியிட்டு தீய ஆசாரங்களை விட்டொழித்தனர். இந்த சன்மார்க்கங்களில் இணைந்தும் விட்டனர்.

lathaji

26th August 2011, 07:51 AM

உபதேசங்கள் தெளிவாகவும், கட்டுக் கோப்பாகவும் இருக்கவேண்டியிருந்ததால், சமயப் பிரிவுகள் மூலதத்துவத்தை அடித்தளமாகக் கொண்டு தங்களுக்கென்று பிரத்யேகமாக வடிவமைக்கப் பட்ட ஒரு தத்துவ அமைப்பை உருவாக்கிக் கொண்டன. இந்தத் தத்துவங்கள் வெறும் நூலறிவால் மட்டும் அல்ல, அனுபூதியையும் மையமாகக் கொண்டவை என்பதால், அந்த சமயப் பிரிவின் முக்கியமான கருவே (உதாரணமாக, பக்தி, சரணாகதி தத்துவம், அடியார்களைப் போற்றுதல்) மையப் படுத்தப் பட்டது, அதனால் தான் எல்லா சமயப் பிரிவுகளிலும், எல்லாவிதமான தத்துவங்களும் இல்லை.

சைவசித்தாந்த சாத்திரங்களே மிகத் தெளிவாக தாங்கள் சாரும் நெறி அத்வைதம் என்று ஐயத்திற்கிடமின்றி அறிவிக்கின்றன.

“பண்ணையும் ஓசையும் போலப் பழமதுவும்
எண்ணுஞ் சுவையும்போல் எங்குமாம்-- அண்ணல்தாள்
அத்துவிதம் ஆதல் அருமறைகள் ஒன்று என்னாது
அத்துவிதம் என்று அறையும் ஆங்கு.”

“அத்துவிதம் ஆதல் அகண்டமும் தைவமே
அத்திவிதி அன்பின் தொழு!”

-சிவஞானபோதம்

சைவ, வைணவ நெறிகளை உருவாக்கியவர்கள் எவரும், செமிட்டிக் மதஸ்தாபகர்கள் போன்று “நாங்கள் ஒரு புதிய மதத்தை உருவாக்குகிறோம்” என்று கூவவில்லை. “வாழையடி வாழையென வந்த திருக்கூட்டமதில்” தங்களை இணைத்துக் கொண்டனர். “முன்னைப் பழம்பொருட்கும் முன்னைப் பழம்பொருளே, பின்னைப் புதுமைக்கும் பேர்த்தும் அப்பெற்றியனே” என்று திருவாசகம் சொன்னது.

“வேத பிரமாணம்” என்று நாம் கூறுவது உண்மையில் இந்தத் தத்துவ வேர்களுடன் ஒவ்வொரு இந்து சமயப் பிரிவும் தன்னை ஆழப் பிணைத்துக் கொள்ளுவதைத் தான்; வேதம் என்கிற ஒரு பழைய நூலில் உள்ள ஒவ்வொரு சொல்லையும் அதன் நேரடியான அர்த்தத்தில் அப்படியே ஏற்றுக் கொள்வதை அல்ல. அதனால் தான் ஒரே விஷயத்தைப் பற்றிய பல interpretations (வியாக்கினங்கள்) இந்து மதத்தில் உள்ளன. ஒரே கீதைக்கு இத்தனை பேர் உரை எழுதுகிறார்கள். மாறாக, செமிட்டிக் மதங்களில் புனித நூல்களின் வாசகங்கள் நேரடிப் பொருள் கொள்ளப் படுகின்றன, அவற்றில் interpretation என்ற இந்த விஷயம் இல்லை. அதனால் தான் அவை பல சமயங்களில் வெறுப்பையும், வன்முறையையும் வளர்க்கின்றன. உதாரணமாக, ஜிஹாத் என்பது மற்ற மதத்தவர்களுடன் சண்டை போட்டு அவர்களைக் கொல்வது அல்ல, அது உள்மனதில் நிகழும் ஆன்மிக, மனப்போராட்டம் என்று இஸ்லாமிய மௌல்விகளிடம் சொல்லிப் பாருங்கள். எந்த இஸ்லாமிய அறிஞரும் அதை ஏற்றுக் கொள்ளமாட்டார்கள் (தீவிரவாதம் தலைவிரித்து ஆடுவதற்கு இதுவும் ஒரு முக்கிய காரணம்). ஆனால் ஒரு இந்து மனத்திற்கு இத்தகைய விளக்கங்கள் இயல்பாகவே தோன்றும்..

எங்கெங்கோ போய்விட்டேன்..

// கேள்வி 3 : வேதத்தில் சிவலிங்க வழிபாடு பேசப்படுகிறதா? சிவலிங்க வழிபாடு வேதத்திற்கு முந்தியதா? பிந்தையதா? வேதப் பிராமணர்கள் ஸ்ரீ ருத்ரத்தில் குறிக்கும் ருத்ரனே சிவன் என்பதை சித்தாந்திகள் ஒப்புக்கொள்கிறார்களா? மறுக்கிறார்களா? //

பதில்:
(அ) சந்தேகமில்லாமல், கண்டிப்பாகப் பேசப் படுகிறது. “லிங்கம்” என்கிற சம்ஸ்கிருதச் சொல் முதன்முதலில் வேத மந்திரங்களில் தான் வருகிறது. இமயம் முதல் குமரி வரை எல்லா சிவபூஜைகளிலும் தவறாமல் இடம்பெறும் “நிதனபதயே நம:” என்று தொடங்கும் வேத அர்ச்சனையில் “ஊர்த்வாய நம:, ஊர்த்வலிங்காய நம:” முதல் “சிவாய நம: சிவலிங்காய நம:” “பரமாய நம: பரமலிங்காய நம:” வரை லிங்கரூபங்கள் துதிக்கப் படுகின்றன. இம்மந்திரமும், “ஸத்யோஜாதம் ப்ரபத்யாமி” என்று தொடங்கி ஐந்து முகங்களுக்குமான மூலமந்திரங்கள் மற்றும் சிவபூஜையில் ஓதும் சகல மந்திரங்களும் யஜுர்வேதத்தின் ஒரு பகுதியான “தைத்திரிய சம்ஹிதா”வில் இருந்தே தொகுக்கப் பட்டவை.

சிவலிங்க வழிபாட்டின் மூலம் வேத காலத்தில் வேள்விகளில் வணங்கப் பட்ட யூபஸ்தம்பம் (கம்பம்). சுவாமி விவேகானந்தர் மிகத் தெளிவாக இதைக் கூறியுள்ளார் –

“The Swami said that the worship of the Shiva-Linga originated from the famous hymn in the Atharva-Veda Samhit sung in praise of the Yupa-Stambha, the sacrificial post. In that hymn a description is found of the beginningless and endless Stambha or Skambha, and it is shown that the said Skambha is put in place of the eternal Brahman. As afterwards the Yajna (sacrificial) fire, its smoke, ashes, and flames, the Soma plant, and the ox that used to carry on its back the wood for the Vedic sacrifice gave place to the conceptions of the brightness of Shiva's body, his tawny matted-hair, his blue throat, and the riding on the bull of the Shiva, and so on — just so, the Yupa-Skambha gave place in time to the Shiva-Linga, and was deified to the high Devahood of Shri Shankara. In the Atharva-Veda Samhita, the sacrificial cakes are also extolled along with the attributes of the Brahman.

In the Linga Purna, the same hymn is expanded in the shape of stories, meant to establish the glory of the great Stambha and the superiority of Mahdeva.”

From: Complete-Works / Volume 4 / Translations: Prose / The Paris congress

சிவலிங்கம் பழங்குடி ஆண்குறி வழிபாட்டினின்றும் பிறந்தது என்று மேற்கத்திய ஆராய்ச்சியாளர்கள் பலர் கூறியதையும் இதே உரையில் சுவாமிஜி கடுமையாக மறுக்கிறார். பின்னாளில் வாமாசார தாந்திரீகம் ஓங்கியபோது ஆத்மா, ஜீவன், பிரம்மம் என்று எல்லா சமயக் குறியீடுகளுமே ஆண்-பெண் உறவை மையமாக வைத்து விளக்கப்பட்டபோது சிவலிங்கம் பற்றிய உருவகம் இவ்வாறு மாறியதே தவிர அதன் மூலம் அதுவல்ல என்றும் வேறு ஒரு இடத்தில் குறிப்பிடுகிறார்.

(ஆ) வேதத்தில் இல்லாத, ஆனால் அதற்கு முந்தைய வழிபாட்டு முறை என்றால், அதற்கு ஆதாரம் என்ன? இந்தியத் துணைக்கண்டத்தின் மிகப் பழைய நூல் ரிக்வேதம் என்று அனைத்து வரலாற்று ஆராய்ச்சியாளர்களும் ஏற்றுக் கொள்கின்றனர். சிவலிங்க வழிபாடு அதற்கும் முந்தையது என்றால் எந்த நூலில் இருக்கிறது?

(இ) “சிவன் வேறு, ருத்ரன் வேறு; சித்தாந்திகள் ஸ்ரீருத்ரத்தை மறுக்கிறார்கள்” – என்பவை சிறிதும் ஆதாரமற்ற கூற்றுகள்.

சைவத்தின் ஆணிவேரான “நம: சிவாய” என்கிற பஞ்சாட்சரத்தையே தன்னுள் அடக்கிய மகா மந்திரம் அல்லவா ஸ்ரீருத்ரம்!

“வேதம் நான்கினும் மெய்ப்பொருளாவது நாதன் நாமம் நாமம் நமச்சிவாயவே” என்று சம்பந்தர் பாடியதன் தாத்பர்யம் என்ன? “வேதங்களின் நடுநாயகமான யஜுர்வேதத்தின் நடுவில், நாலாம் காண்டத்தில் உள்ள ஸ்ரீருத்ரம் என்கிற துதியில், மையமாக உள்ள ஏழாவது அனுவாகத்தில் “நம: சிவாய ச, சிவதராய ச” என்கிற இந்த மாமந்திரம் வேதரத்தினம் போன்று வைக்கப் பட்டுள்ளது” என்று முழுதுணர்ந்த சைவர்கள் உணர்வர். காஞ்சி மகாஸ்வாமிகள், வாரியார் ஸ்வாமிகள் இருவருமே இந்தக் கருத்தைக் கூறியுள்ளனர்.

அறுபத்து மூன்று நாயன்மார்களில் ஒருவர் உருத்திர பசுபதி நாயனார். ருத்ரம் என்கிற மந்திரத்தை தினம்தோறும் ஓதி அதனாலேயே முக்தியடைந்தார் இவர் என்று பெரியபுராணம் கூறுகிறது.

“தள்ளுவெண்திரைக் கங்கைநீர் ததும்பிய சடையார்
கொள்ளும் அன்பினில் உருத்திரம் குறிப்பொடு பயின்றார்”

என்பது சேக்கிழார் வாக்கு.

வேத பிராமணர்கள் மட்டுமே இந்த மகாமந்திரத்தைப் போற்றினர் என்பதும் சரியன்று. கார்காத்த வேளாளர் நற்குடியில் அவதரித்த அப்பர் பெருமான் இந்த உத்தமமான துதியின் சாரத்தையே நின்ற திருத் தாண்டகமாகப் பாடினார். இந்தத் தாண்டகம் ஸ்ரீருத்ரத்தின் நேரடி மொழிபெயர்ப்பு போலவே அமைவது சிறப்பு. இது பற்றி சைவ, தமிழ், வரலாற்று அறிஞரும், ஆராய்ச்சியாளருமான டாக்டர் இரா. நாகசாமி அவர்கள் எழுதியிருக்கும் இந்த அருமையான கட்டுரையைப் படிக்குமாறு வேண்டுகிறேன்.

Vedic Nature of Appar’s Saivism

இந்தக் கட்டுரையின் தொடக்க வரிகள் – “The Saivite saints of Tamil country followed the Vaidika Saiva School, which later on came to be designated as the Saiva Siddhanta Marga. Innumerable references to the Vedas, Vedangas, and the Vedantic concepts in the Tevaram hymns, especially of Appar and Sambandar attest that they chose the Vedic path.."

virarajendra

27th April 2012, 11:52 PM

brought forward

virarajendra

29th September 2012, 11:49 PM

brought forward

virarajendra

8th January 2014, 08:18 AM

brought forward

virarajendra

10th November 2014, 03:09 PM

brought forward

virarajendra

2nd September 2015, 10:58 PM

brought forward

virarajendra

21st October 2015, 12:26 AM

brought forward

virarajendra

21st October 2015, 06:34 AM

brought forward

virarajendra

21st October 2015, 07:17 AM

brougt forward

virarajendra

16th June 2016, 05:59 PM

brought forward

virarajendra

15th December 2016, 05:53 PM

brought forward

virarajendra

23rd February 2017, 08:27 PM

brought forward