A Historical account of the Mahabharata(m) war

[ramraghav]

[tscii:069b7738d1]The Mahabharata (m) is a wonderful work of religious literature that teaches us valuable lessons in moral justice and human duty. It is a work that shall remain timeless forever.

While there may be no debate on the nature of its contents, the Mahabharata (m) is perhaps controversial due to the nature of its origin. While some claim that it based on hard facts, some others claim that it is based purely on fiction. The fact that the Mahabharata (m) is essentially a piece of religious literate does not help either side.

This is because religion is essentially about belief - one may choose to believe or not to believe. And until the concept of God has been comprehensively studied and explained, each person will be justified in holding his/her religious beliefs.

Having said that religious literature is unhelpful to prove beyond debate the nature of its own origins, one is left with three options to analyze the said origins: geology, archaelogy and non-religious literature studies. The first two are fairly obvious and speak for themselves.

The third, non-religious literature, is acceptable as a historical account of ancient events simply because it is removed from the realm of belief and is based firmly on factual events that happened prior to or during the narrator’s lifetime. Further, such literature attributes itself to human origins driven by rational human behavior.

Personally, for sometime now, I have been interested in knowing whether the Mahabharata (m) is actually a work of fact, fantasy or a combination of both. I came across this poem in the Purananooru, a literary product of the third Tamil Sangam, in the library archives of the Tamil Virtual University (www.tamilvu.org) The Purananooru, being non-religious in nature, qualifies to be considered as an historical account. The qualifications of Tamil literature in general are strengthened by the fact that its claims have always been verified by geological, marine and archaeological studies wherever they have been conducted.

I present here the poem, along with a (attempted!) translation, and wish to draw your attention to a few references that seem interesting. Please correct me if there are mistakes in the translation.


ÒÈ¿¡ëÚ - 2

Áñ ¾¢½¢ó¾ ¿¢ÄÛõ
¿¢Äý ²ó¾¢Â Å¢ÍõÒõ
Å¢ÍõÒ ¨¾ÅÕ ÅÇ¢Ôõ
ÅÇ¢ò ¾¨Äþ ¾£Ôõ
¾£ Óý¢Â ¿£Õõ ±ýÈ¡íÌ
³õ¦ÀÕõ â¾òÐ þÂü¨¸§À¡Ä
§À¡üÈ¡÷ô ¦À¡Úò¾Öõ ÝúÂÐ «¸øÓõ
ÅÄ¢Ôõ ¦¾ÈÖõ «Ç¢Ôõ ¯¨¼§Â¡ö
¿¢ý ¸¼ø À¢Èó¾ »¡Â¢Ú ¦ÀÂ÷òÐõ ¿¢ý
¦Åñ ¾¨Äô ҽâì ̼ ¸¼ø ÌÇ¢ìÌõ
¡½÷ ¨ÅôÀ¢ý ¿ø ¿¡ðÎô ¦À¡Õ¿
Å¡É ÅÃõÀ¨É ¿£§Â¡ ¦ÀÕÁ
«Äį́Çô ÒÃÅ¢ ³Å¦Ã¡Î º¢¨Éþ
¿¢Äõ ¾¨Ä즸¡ñ¼ ¦À¡Äõ âó Ðõ¨À
®÷ ³õÀ¾¢ýÁÕõ ¦À¡ÕÐ ¸Çò¦¾¡Æ¢Â
¦ÀÕ狀¡üÚ Á¢ÌÀ¾õ ŨÃ¡Р¦¸¡Îò§¾¡ö
À¡«ø ÒÇ¢ôÀ¢Ûõ À¸ø þÕÇ¢Ûõ
¿¡«ø §Å¾ ¦¿È¢¾¢Ã¢Â¢Ûõ
¾¢Ã¢Â¡î ÍüȦÁ¡Î ÓØЧºñ Å¢Çí¸¢
¿Î츢ýÈ¢ ¿¢Ä¢Â§Ã¡ «ò¨¾ «Îì¸òÐ
º¢Ú¾¨Ä ¿ùÅ¢ô ¦ÀÕí¸ñ Á¡ôÀ¢¨½
«ó¾¢ «ó¾½÷ «Õí¸¼ý þÚìÌõ
Óò ¾£ Å¢Ç츢ý ÐïÍõ
¦À¡ü §¸¡ðÎ þÁÂÓõ ¦À¡¾¢ÂÓõ §À¡ý§È

§ºÃÁ¡ý ¦ÀÕ狀¡üÚ ¯¾Â狀ÃÄ¡¾¨É ÓÃﺢä÷ ÓÊ¿¡¸Ã¡Â÷ À¡ÊÂÐ

Purananooru - 2

Like Land, fertile in its content
Sky that lies high above the Land
Wind that brushes the Sky
Fire that is fed by the Wind
And Water that is opposite to the Fire
You possess the qualities of the five elements
Patience to forgive the mistakes of your foes, if they cross the line the Expanse,
Power and Fury to crush them and Benevolence to grace him if he relents
Your greatness has grown to such extent
Your noble head is held in such esteem that even the ocean will sink
In your land which houses so many cities, Oh ruler of this prosperous nation!
The sky is the limit of your fame
The Five men, sitting on horses with shaking heads, whose
Land was taken by those with the thumbai flower -
The Hundred men, when both were exhausted at the battlefield
You gave them sumptuous food without any limit!
Milk, which turned sour and day which turned night
In contrast to the principles of the four Vedas
Without change (of loyalty) with your trusted people, remain powerful all your life
May you live long, without (military) tremor, piling on your success!
Like wide-eyed deer, and its children,
Of the saints of past who did their duty,
Sleep in the protection of the three-headed lamp
So shall we live in the protection given by You, like the Himalayas and Podhiyam hills

Sung by Mudinagarayar of Muranjiyur, in praise of Cheran Udayan Cheraladhan who provided sumptuous food


Points of interest:
1. There was a war between a group of five people and a group of 100 people
2. This war was caused because the 100 people took away land which rightfully belonged to the five people
3. The magnitude of this war was such that it lasted several days and it flouted the principles of the four Vedas
4. Cheran Udayan Cheraladhan sumptuously fed both the warring armies.
5. This war occurred sometime during the period of the third Tamil Sangam (approx 18th to 2nd centuries BCE).
6. The existence of the four Vedas was known to the Tamil people of the time.
7. The Podhiyam hills (past/present not specified) were comparable in extent and proportions to the Himalayas. [/tscii:069b7738d1]

[Idiappam]

Land was taken by those with the thumbai flower -

Who wore the thumbai flower???? Did Duryodhana wear them??

If he did not then - the 5 versus 100 war being the mahabaratha war is just a later assumption!

[viggop]

[tscii:54ad524622]¿¡«ø §Å¾ ¦¿È¢¾¢Ã¢Â¢Ûõ

So,the word "Veda" has been mentioned in purananuru itself.Purananuru is dated 600BC,the oldest Tamil literature. I thought Vedas were always mentioned as "Nan Marai" by Tamils.So,ancient Tamils have known the sanskrit word "veda" too.Definitely, they must have known its contents and must have mastered it.
Also, the existence of Himalayas so far north in India.Podihai hills is supposed to be the residing place of Agasthiyar muni.
Very Very interesting RamRaghav.

Atleast by Silapadhikaram time(dated 2nd AD) , Mahabharatha has become very famous among Tamilians.


[/tscii:54ad524622]

[viggop]

Ramraghav
Please post this in the Mahabharatha thread too.Thanks

[viggop]

Idiappam Sir
What is this thumbai flower? Its current biological name? This flower should be growing throughout India(Both in chera nadu and hastinapuri) for duryodhana to wear it. :)

[Idiappam]

[tscii:5813c1115c]¿¡«ø §Å¾ ¦¿È¢¾¢Ã¢Â¢Ûõ

So,the word "Veda" has been mentioned in purananuru itself.Purananuru is dated 600BC,the oldest Tamil literature. I thought Vedas were always mentioned as "Nan Marai" by Tamils.So,ancient Tamils have known the sanskrit word "veda" too.Definitely, they must have known its contents and must have mastered it.[/tscii:5813c1115c]

Viggop a few point on your posts above.

1. Purananuru is not written by one author! It has 400 songs by many poets spanning a few hundred years. You can't fix its date as 600BC. The authour of this paricular song - Mudinagarayar of Muranjiyur - came someone tell me his date...

2. Nan marai does not and need not refer to the four Sanskritic Vedas. Please note that there were only 3 vedas when Manu smriti was written sometime in 2nd or 3rd Century CE. Manu mentions only three Vedas. (Do you want the verses of Manu?)

3. The words 'naal vedas' appears in Sangam literature, Thirumurais, and Vaimozhi etc. - but none of the Vedas were named - Rig, Saman, Yajur, Atharvan, - in Tamil Literature till the 13th Century - Meikandar!

[Idiappam]

Idiappam Sir
What is this thumbai flower? Its current biological name? This flower should be growing throughout India(Both in chera nadu and hastinapuri) for duryodhana to wear it. :)

Thumbai, a common weed in the tropics. Labiatae.
Leucas aspera (syn. Leucas zeylanica).

But the thumbai flowers are small, white, less than 10mm, about the size of a rice grain.

I don't know how the people wore that - garlands maybe!

[Badri]

Hmm, this is interesting to find out...does anyone know the Sanskrit/Hindi name for the Thumbai poo?

[Idiappam]

Hmm, this is interesting to find out...does anyone know the Sanskrit/Hindi name for the Thumbai poo?

Hindi: chOtA halkkUsA (chota halkusa)
Sanskrit: drona pushpi

[Badri]

Hmm, this is interesting to find out...does anyone know the Sanskrit/Hindi name for the Thumbai poo?

Hindi: chOtA halkkUsA (chota halkusa)
Sanskrit: drona pushpi

Thanks Idiappam! That is what I ended up finding too! Would it be too too far fetched to make the connection between Drona and Drona Pushpa?

I personally think it is far fetched, unless used as a poetic metaphor by the poet in question :roll:

[viggop]

Idiappam Sir
This particular song mentions the sanskrit word "Veda".Also, the poet says "Veda Neri".So, he must have read the Vedas to say the "dharma of veda".It might not be the 4 vedas as we know today.I dont know which books he referred to as "Veda".But it definitely must have contained "dharmic paths" so that the poet could use "Veda neri" and king can accept it.

i still think this song must predate Silapadhikaram.
Or do you think this purnanuru song could be after 13th century?

Sanskrit name is "Drona pushpi".related to Dronacharya by any chance?

Is this King Manu referred in Tamil literature.I know about mythological characters like Manuneedicholan but any other literature mentions the word "Manu".

really interesting,is it not?!

[viggop]

Dear Idiappam Sir
What are the oldest references to ramayana and mahabharatha in Tamil literature?the mythological stories.
Silapadhikaram mentions lot of these mythological stories like churning of the parkadal using vasuki snake(vadakaraiyai mathakki vasukiyai nanaki made famous by MS), lot of incidences of the mahabharatha etc.is there any literature predating silapadhikaram which mentions legends of mahabharatham/ramayanam?

[Idiappam]

Would it be too too far fetched to make the connection between Drona and Drona Pushpa?

I personally think it is far fetched, unless used as a poetic metaphor by the poet in question :roll:

That what I wonder. Someone must tell me, -- Is there any mention of the 'Drona pushpa' people in the Mahabharata - the original Sanskrit version! If there is, then we can be say, perhaps, that the Punaanooru Song refers to Mahabharata. Could you check please!

[Idiappam]

Dear Idiappam Sir
What are the oldest references to ramayana and mahabharatha in Tamil literature?the mythological stories.

Frankly, I don't. But I know Appar allocates on line in every Pathigam for Ravana. I have not read the Alwars well. But the Vaishnavite puranas are quoted by them -

Ongi ulagaLantha uthaman....
yasOthai iLam singam ...
--- Andal.


Silapadhikaram mentions lot of these mythological stories like churning of the parkadal using vasuki snake(vadakaraiyai mathakki vasukiyai nanaki made famous by MS), lot of incidences of the mahabharatha etc.is there any literature predating silapadhikaram which mentions legends of mahabharatham/ramayanam?

By the time of Silapathigaram the stories have reached the Tamil Lands - See the Manaiyaraipadutha Kathai of Silappathigaram - even Manmathan was there!

[ramraghav]

[tscii:70e236bf88]Honestly, I am surprised by the analysis of the thumbai flower. This thought never occurred to me. However, I am a bit hesitant to accept the stated theories regarding the reference to this flower. To me it does not make any sense why Mudinagarayar would use a flower as a metaphor for a character who is clearly out of relevance in the concerned lines. Besides, Drona, as a character (if he did exist), is only peripheral to the story of the Mahabharata. Surely, Mudinagarayar could have picked more prominent and pertinent persona such as Bhishma, Karna or Krishna. To decide that Mudinagarayar was taking a cue from the character Drona seems a little hasty to me. Is it not equally likely that the thumbai flower was used because the 100 people were genuinely fond of (or identified with in some other way) with this flower? I consider Mudinagayar to have written this poem as a factual account of contemporary events; there would have been no need for him to use cryptic metaphors.

Please note that I have judiciously avoided usage of the terms ‘Pandavas’/ ‘Kauravas’ and have stuck to the terminology used by the poem itself i.e. ‘5 people’ and ‘100 people’. Though it is slightly unhelpful, the non-specific identification of these characters of interest could be explained by the presumption that the intended audience was already familiar with the events and characters portrayed in the poem.

While it is certainly a possibility, it is highly unlikely that the 5 people and 100 people who went to war over a land dispute arising from land-grabbing by the 100 people, as described in the poem, would be different from the 5 people and 100 people who went to war over a land dispute arising from land-grabbing by the 100 people, as described in the Mahabharata (m).

Considering this poem, it does appear that the war described in the Mahabharata (m) was based on historical fact. However, that is as far as I would go at this moment. To me, this poem does not provide any indication that the other characters and events portrayed in the Mahabharata (m) actually existed and happened.

Here are a couple more references to the same event:

º¢ÄôÀ¾¢¸¡Ãõ - ÁШÃì ¸¡ñ¼õ - ¸ðΨà ¸¡¨¾: 55-56
¦ÀÕ狀¡Ú ÀÂó¾ ¾¢ÕóÐ §Åø ¾¼ì¨¸
¾¢Õ¿¢¨Ä ¦ÀüÈ ¦ÀÕ¿¡û þÕ쨸

º¢ÄôÀ¾¢¸¡Ãõ - Åïº¢ì ¸¡ñ¼õ - Å¡úòÐì ¸¡¨¾: °ºø Åâ (24)
µ÷³Å÷ ®÷³õÀ¾¢ýÁ÷ ¯¼ý¦ÈØó¾
§À¡Ã¢ø ¦ÀÕ狀¡Ú §À¡üÈ¡Ð ¾¡ÉÇ¢ò¾
§ºÃý ¦À¡¨ÈÂý Á¨ÄÂý ¾¢Èõ À¡Ê

(¦À¡¨ÈÂý, Á¨ÄÂý = §ºÃ÷ ÌÊô¦ÀÂ÷)

To think about it, the non-mention of Krishna must actually make us think. Why does a character who is supposed to have been held as God, not find any mention whatsoever in references to the war? If he was such an important player in the general scheme of things, how come he is completely omitted? The war is fact, we can say. But what about the rest? What was Vyasa writing? Fact, fiction or fiction building on fact?

As for the mention of the Vedas, may I point out that the poem refers to the ‘4 Vedas’ but does not specify them as the ‘4 Vedas in Sanskrit’? Mr. Sabapathy may remember what I told him in a PM long time back.

P.S.: There is one more reference in the Akananooru (233). Could someone please provide a translation (I would take ages!)? [/tscii:70e236bf88]

[Badri]

To think about it, the non-mention of Krishna must actually make us think. Why does a character who is supposed to have been held as God, not find any mention whatsoever in references to the war?

Silapdhikaram has its own references to Krishna and his role, including "panjavarukku thoodu"

In the Mahabharatha per se, there is a mention of a Pandya king fighting alongside the Pandavas.

And look at the following, which Duryodhana descibes as being given to Yudhistra during the Rajasuya Yagna


And the Kings of Chola and Pandya, though they brought numberless jars of gold filled with fragrant sandal juice from the hills of Malaya, and loads of sandal and aloe wood from the Dardduras hills, and many gems of great brilliancy and fine cloths inlaid with gold, did not obtain permission (to enter). And the king of the Singhalas gave those best of sea-born gems called the lapis lazuli, and heaps of pearls also, and hundreds of coverlets for elephants. And numberless dark-coloured men with the ends of their, eyes red as copper, attired in clothes decked with gems, waited at the gate with those presents.

This has been picked up from the Dyuta Parva Section 51 of the Sabha Parva of the MB

[ramraghav]

Can you please tell where I can find those lines in the Silappadhigaram? Also, if the Mahabharata contains references to the Singhalas, doesnt that auomatically become suspect? The Singhalas are a relatively new culture (exactly how new I am not sure).

[Badri]

Can you please tell where I can find those lines in the Silappadhigaram? Also, if the Mahabharata contains references to the Singhalas, doesnt that auomatically become suspect? The Singhalas are a relatively new culture (exactly how new I am not sure).

Ramraghav: Listen to the song Vadavarayai mathaaki rendered by MS Subbulakshmi. It has been composed by Ilango Adigal as part of the Silapadhikaram

As for the reference to Sinhala, I have no idea again how ancient or new the culture is. Why, the Mahabaratha also has references to Yavanas or Greeks! Now, that puts another spin. How old is Greek Culture? And if Yavana kings came at Yudhistra's coronation, when did that event take place?

[Badri]

I actually tried to research a bit on how ancient the Greek civilization itself is! Funnily, the Bronze Age civilization of Greece began in 3000 BC!!

The Minoan period stretches from 3000 - 1200 BC! And has been named after the legendary king Minos. Now, MB itself is supposed to have occured 5000 years ago, which, giving enough of leeway for all historical fallacies that might occur, still occurs c.a. 2500 BC!

[ramraghav]

[tscii:c7e514cfde]To Viggop and everyobody, heres a reference to Raman and Seethai in the Purananooru. There are other references too, summarized in a nice article by Periyannan Chandrasekaran (Atlanta, USA) on the Project Madurai website at www.tamil.net/projectmadurai The article is titled 'Á¨ÈóÐ §À¡É ¾Á¢ú áø¸û - À¨Æ ¾Á¢ú þáÁ½õ' In case you are having difficulty locating it, please pm me. I can send the pdf by email.

ÒÈ¿¡ëÚ - 378

¦¾ý ÀþÅ÷ Á¢¼ø º¡Â
ż Åθ÷ Å¡û µðÊÂ
¦¾¡¨¼ «¨Á ¸ñ½¢ ¾¢ÕóÐ §Åø ¾¼ì ¨¸
¸ÎÁ¡ ¸¨¼þ ŢΠÀâ ÅÊõÀ¢ý
¿ø¾¡÷ ¸ûÇ¢ý §º¡Æý §¸¡Â¢ø
ÒÐôÀ¢¨È «ýÉ Í¨¾§ºö Á¡¼òÐ
ÀÉ¢ì¸ÂòÐ «ýÉ ¿£û¿¸÷ ¿¢ýÚ ±ý
«Ã¢ìÜÎ Á¡ì¸¢¨½ þâ ´üÈ¢
±ïº¡ ÁÃÀ¢ý Åﺢ À¡¼
±ÁìÌ ±É ÅÌò¾ «øÄ Á¢¸ô ÀÄ
§ÁõÀÎ º¢ÈôÀ¢ý «Õí¸ø ¦ÅÚ쨸
¾í¸¡Ð ¦À¡Æ¢¾ó§¾¡§É «Ð ¸ñÎ
þÄõÀ¡Î ¯Æó¾ ±ý þÕõ §À÷ ´ì¸ø
Å¢Ãø ¦ºÈ¢ ÁÃÀ¢É ¦ºÅ¢ ¦¾¡¼ìÌ¿Õõ
¦ºÅ¢ ¦¾¡¼÷ ÁÃÀ¢É Å¢Ãø ¦ºÈ¢ìÌ¿Õõ
«¨ÃìÌ «¨Á ÁÃÀ¢É Á¢¼üÚ Â¡ìÌ¿Õõ
Á¢¼üÚ «¨Á ÁÃÀ¢É «¨ÃìÌ Â¡ìÌ¿Õõ
¸Îó¦¾Èø þáÁÛ¼ý Ò½÷ º£¨¾¨Â
ÅÄ¢ò¾¨¸ «Ãì¸ý ¦ÅªÅ¢Â »¡ý¨È
¿¢Äõ§º÷ Á¾Ã½¢ ¸ñ¼ ÌÃí¸¢ý
¦ºõÓ¸ì ¦ÀÕí¸¢¨Ç þ¨Æô ¦À¡Ä¢ó¾¡«íÌ
«È¡« «Õ ¿¨¸ þɢР¦ÀüÚ̧Á
þÕí¸¢¨Çò ¾¨Ä¨Á ±ö¾¢
«ÕõÀ¼÷ ±ùÅõ ¯Æó¾ ¾ý¾¨Ä§Â

§º¡Æý ¦ºÕôÀ¡Æ¢ ±È¢ó¾ þÇ狀ð¦ºýÉ¢¨Â °ý ¦À¡¾¢ ÀÍį́¼Â¡÷ À¡ÊÂÐ

Purananooru - 378

At a time of weakness for south Indians
You, who drove away the invading northern Vadugars
Decorated Your spear with an unbroken string of flowers
And used it with such force that before the day was done
Your army wrought sorrow on who came to thieve the Chozha palace
Which stood white, like the new moon, with its multiple storeys
Which other city has such vast lakes with fresh water?
We shall sing to the tune of large drums
Your glory in battle is surpassed by none
Your wealth you shared with many
Of fame is Your giving, of the jewels kept for God,
To those who are poor, on receiving which
My respected companions here, who were relieved of their poverty
Tried those that fit the fingers to string with the ears
And those that string the ears to fit with the fingers
And those that beautify the waist to decorate the neck
And those decorate the neck to beautify the waist
Which has been hilarious like when Seethai, angry Raman’s companion
Was stolen away by that man of cunning evil
Her expensive jewels reached the ground, on seeing which the monkeys
Climbed down with their red faces and played with
Without pause nor thought tried fitting the jewels out of their places
Such people live under your leadership
To remember this only causes sadness

Sung by Oon Podhi Pasungudaiyar, in praise of seruppazhi erindha Chozhan Ilanjetchenni

Points to note:
1. The poem clearly explains that Seethai, the wife of Raman, was stolen by an evil person. Seethai and Raman are referred to by name.
2. This act is said to have happened in the forest (due to the monkey infested surroundings)
3. The poem talks of these events as if they were common knowledge among the Tamil people.
4. The poem describes the hilarious act of the monkeys in repeatedly trying out Seethai’s jewels without knowing how and where to fit them. The Valmiki Ramayana does not contain any reference to such an event. In fact, the Valmiki Ramayana says that Sugrivan told Raman that he (Sugrivan) and 4 monkeys found the jewels lying on the ground and assumed that they must have thrown by Seethai. Since this poem contains details that are not available in the Valmiki Ramayana, it can be safely stated that the source of this poem is independent of the Valmiki Ramayana. This leads to two possibilities:
i. The Valmiki Ramayana is based on the source of this poem
ii. The Valmiki Ramayana as well as the source of this poem are based on a third (also unidentified) source

Please note that unlike in the Mudinagarayar poem, the Raman/Seethai episode here is not referred to as a contemporary event. Thus, the portrayed event may be based on fact, fantasy or belief.[/tscii:c7e514cfde]

[viggop]

Ramraghav
Thanks a lot.So, purananooru mentions ramayana too long before Ilango Adikal!!!
Please see the link
http://www.geocities.com/promiserani2/c1473.html
where the song "Vadavarayai mathaki" is explained by ilango adikal.

Lot of stories associated to Lord Krishna is known by Ilango Adikal.He must have known the Bhagavatham very well indeed.And he denotes Krishna as God inspite of modern scholars calling him a Jain monk!

[viggop]

Ramraghav
especially note the lines
"
nadandha_adi panchavarkkuth thoodhaaka nadandha_adi madangalaay maaRattaay maayamO marutkaiththE
"

Here Lord Krishna is mentioned as the messenger of peace for the "Panchavar"(Pandavas)

[viggop]

[tscii:9030ffb149]¦¾ý ÀþÅ÷ Á¢¼ø º¡Â
ż Åθ÷ Å¡û µðÊÂ

Ah Ha!!! Another interesting thing here.So, the poet of this song refers to India as "Bharatham".South Indians are "Then Bharathar" !
mmm....
So, there was concept of Bharatha nadu then and Tamil Nadu was considered as southern part of bharatha Nadu? I thought it was the British who unified India and there was no concept of "Indian/Bharatha" nation before British. Interesting , interesting...[/tscii:9030ffb149]

[viggop]

Ram raghav
Again , see the last stanza in the Ilango Adikal song

nooRRuvarpaal naaRRisaiyum pORRap patarndhu aaraNam muzhangap panchavarkkuth thoodhu nadandhaanai Eththaatha naavenna naavE naaraayaNaa ennaa naavenna naavE

Here again the 5 versus 100 is mentioned.But no mention of Kauravas and Pandavas.Also, the vamana,rama avatarams are also mentioned by Ilango Adikal.

[viggop]

naavenna naavE naaraayaNaa ennaa naavenna naavE

here, the name "Narayana" has been used."raman" and "sita" has been used in purananuru song as ramraghav pointed out.
Has the name "Krishna" been used as is in any Tamil literature?

[Idiappam]

Ramraghav
Thanks a lot.So, purananooru mentions ramayana too long before Ilango Adikal!!!

Before we assume that, we have to confirm the age of the poet who wrote the Puranaaru song , 'Oon Podhi Pasungudaiyar'!

[ramraghav]

Ramraghav
Thanks a lot.So, purananooru mentions ramayana too long before Ilango Adikal!!!

Before we assume that, we have to confirm the age of the poet who wrote the Puranaaru song , 'Oon Podhi Pasungudaiyar'!

Pretty simple, fix the date of seruppazhi erindha Ilanjetchenni :D

[Idiappam]

Yes, Yes! would someone fix that please!

[Idiappam]

[tscii:47cdcdd30b]¦¾ý ÀþÅ÷ Á¢¼ø º¡Â
ż Åθ÷ Å¡û µðÊ [/tscii:47cdcdd30b]

Ah Ha!!! Another interesting thing here.So, the poet of this song refers to India as "Bharatham".South Indians are "Then Bharathar" !
mmm....
So, there was concept of Bharatha nadu then and Tamil Nadu was considered as southern part of bharatha Nadu? I thought it was the British who unified India and there was no concept of "Indian/Bharatha" nation before British. Interesting , interesting...

Please Viggop, that not what the poet meant!

"Then barathavar midal saaya
vada vadugar vaal ottiya"

In the South, the mischief of the Bharatha people (clan, tribe) was suppressed
The might of the Vadugars who came from North was crushed .....

India was not "Bharatham' or the South Indians 'Then Bharathars' as you say.

[ramraghav]

Sabapathy and Viggop Avargale

'தென்பரதவர்' need not refer to a nation. Indeed, as far I know, Sangam literature considers Chera, Chozha and Pandiya nations as seperate sovereign republics and there was no question of a 'greater' republic encompassing non-Tamil areas. On the other hand, it may not refer to a clan/tribe either.

In my opnion, it refers to the inhabitants of the southern part of பரதம் (பரத கண்டம்), as opposed to குமரி கண்டம் (which was probably already gone by that time).

[viggop]

Dear Idiappam Sir
Since the english translation given by ramraghav says South Indians, i thought it mean bharatha nadu only.

ANyway, who are these "Bharathars" and "Vadugars". Which part of India are these tribal people from.Strange that they are known as "barathars"(they believed themselves to be descendants of mythological king bharatha?)

[viggop]

I would like to know whether the word "Krishna" has been mentioned in the Tamil literature before 16th century.

[ramraghav]

Dear Idiappam Sir
Since the english translation given by ramraghav says South Indians, i thought it mean bharatha nadu only.

ANyway, who are these "Bharathars" and "Vadugars". Which part of India are these tribal people from.Strange that they are known as "barathars"(they believed themselves to be descendants of mythological king bharatha?)

Dear Viggop
Please notice that I said 'south Indians', not 'South Indians'. That is because I wanted it to convey 'inhabitants of the southern part of a geographical region called India'. I still feel தென்பரதர் refers to inhabitants of the southern part of பரத கண்டம்
Thanks
Ram

[ramraghav]

FSG.........any idea on the date of Chozhan seruppazhi erindha Ilanjetchenni?
Thanks
Ram

[viggop]

'வற்கலையர்; வார் கழலர்; மார்பின் அணி நூலர்;
விற் கலையர்; வேதம் உறை நாவர்; தனி மெய்யர்;
உற்கு அலையர்; உன்னை ஓர் துகள்-துணையும் உன்னார்;
சொற் கலை எனத் தொலைவு இல் தூணிகள் சுமந்தார்

Meaning:-
They know all martial arts.They wear sacred thread across their body.They are unmatched in arhcery.vedas reside in their tongue.They are truth personified as humans.They keep their words and speak beautiful words.


This is from Kamba Ramayana
Again ,kambar also uses the word "Veda" and says Vedam sits in the tongue of Rama and Lakshmana.Kamba Ramayana is dated 8th century AD by scholars.

[Uthappam]

FSG.........any idea on the date of Chozhan seruppazhi erindha Ilanjetchenni?
Thanks
Ram

Well according to senthilkumaras

ilanjaetcenni cerupazhi erinda, 275BCE


http://forumhub.mayyam.com/hub/viewtopic.php?t=3336

[viggop]

Thanks Uthapam for digging this out.
275BC is long before Ilango Adikal.neary 5oo years before him.so, Tamils has knowledge of rama and seetha during that time

[ramraghav]

Hi Viggop I would be cautious on this.............the date of 2nd century CE for Ilango Adigal is rather ad-hoc, and probably even more ad-hoc is the timeline referred to by Senthilkumars.

[aravindhan]

[tscii:2783397f87]Honestly, I am surprised by the analysis of the thumbai flower. This thought never occurred to me. However, I am a bit hesitant to accept the stated theories regarding the reference to this flower. To me it does not make any sense why Mudinagarayar would use a flower as a metaphor for a character who is clearly out of relevance in the concerned lines. Besides, Drona, as a character (if he did exist), is only peripheral to the story of the Mahabharata. Surely, Mudinagarayar could have picked more prominent and pertinent persona such as Bhishma, Karna or Krishna. To decide that Mudinagarayar was taking a cue from the character Drona seems a little hasty to me. Is it not equally likely that the thumbai flower was used because the 100 people were genuinely fond of (or identified with in some other way) with this flower? I consider Mudinagayar to have written this poem as a factual account of contemporary events; there would have been no need for him to use cryptic metaphors.[/tscii:2783397f87]

I do not have the time to write a full reply to the very fascinating questions discussed in this thread, but I'll just briefly say that it is extremely unlikely that the thumpai flower is a coded reference to Drona. In puram poetry, the thumpai flower has a very special significance - it is associated with the frenzy of battle. Puram poems describing the heat of battle repeatedly refer to garlands of thumpai flowers worn by the warriors. And according to the Tolkappiyam, "thumpai" is the puram thinai dealing with battle (corresponding to the "neytal" thinai of akam poems). Given the context in which it appears, it is almost certain that it is intended to have this significance in the poem.

[happyindian]

Interesting to note abt the Thumbai flower. Extract of the Leucas aspera is supposed to have anti-bacterial and anti-inflamattory properties. So it had a definite place in wars for wounds. Wonder if Dronacharya discovered its medicinal properties so its called Drona Pushpi?? The whole plant is considered medicinal actually.

[ramraghav]

The first part of this pdf deals with an attempt to date the Mahabharata war (though it involves both historical and non-historical references).

http://www.ece.lsu.edu/kak/MahabharataII.pdf

[aravindhan]

Slightly more detailed comments:

1. "Paratavar" was most certainly not a general name for the people of the subcontinent. Despite the tempting similarity of the name to the Sanskrit "Bharata", "paratavar" in classical Tamil was actually the name of a coastal people from the south of Tamilakam, quite possibly the ancestors of the modern-day karaiyars (of whom one Mr. Velupillai Prabhakaran is perhaps the most famous). This is not so obvious from the puram verse you quoted, but it becomes very obvious when one looks at other occurances of the word in Tamil literature. We see the paratavars in the pukArkkANTam of the cilappatikAram, where they are described as fisherfolk ("மீன்விலைப் பரதவர்"), and named in connection with the preparations for intiravizha (pukArkkANTam, Ch. 5 line 25). They also find a mention in the maturaikkanci (one of the pattupATTu), where they are actually called "tenparatavar", exactly as in the puram song. For whatever reason,there is no general name for the people of the subcontinent in the main sangam anthologies. The first two lines should therefore read:
He routed the strength of the southern coastmen
and put to flight the swords of the Andhras"
[Vadukar=inhabitants of modern south-AP]

2. The problem with dating the Mahabharata to the time of Udayacheralatan is that it simply doesn't fit. The CilappatikAram tells us that Gajabahu of Ilankai and CenkuTTuvan were contemporaries. We know that Gajabahu reigned around the second century AD. From this, we can approximately date all the Chera kings mentioned in the PatiRRupattu, because it gives use a very good idea of the generation of to which they belonged relative to CenkuTTuvan. I do not remember offhand how many generations lie between CenkuTTuvan and Udayaceralatan, but at any rate he could not have reigned much before the 1st century BC, and most certainly only after Alexander. This is a little too late for the Mahabharata.

3. Quite apart from that, Purananuru 2 itself gives much less support to the historicity of the Mahabharata than it may seem to. In interpreting puram poems, it is important to remember the context in which the poems were written, particularly their tinai and turai, because the same words could have very different connotations in different turais. The turai for purananuru 2 (the Mahabharata) is described as being either ceviyaRivuRUu (an instruction to the king on the path of righteous living), or vAzttiyal (a song which describes how a king has been praised by one or more bards). A technique used in the former type of poem is to attribute to a king great deeds of the sort which a moral king would do; in the latter, it is possible to attribute to the king the great deeds of all legendary kings. Hence when the poet spoke of Udayacheralatan "feeding the hundred" as if it were a historic act, there is no reason to suppose that either he or his listeners took this literally: it is, on the contrary, extremely likely that they took it as a statement that this is what a king of Udayacheralatan's stature would have done. The fact that Peruntevanar classified the poem as belonging to one of these two, but was not certain which of the two it belonged to, would to me seem to indicate that it was never considered as being literal. I'm not very sure what to make of the references in the cilappatikaram to the same legend, but it is also worth noting that other bits of the song are also historically quite untrue. Lines 9 and 10 in my translation (see below) speak of the Chera king holding both the sea the sun rises in and the one it sets in. This is utter rubbish from a historic perspective - the Chera kings did not rule the Bay of Bengal coast in Udayacheralatan's time.

Also, my translation of purananuru 2 is rather different from yours, particularly between lines 9 and 18. I've re-ordered the lines somewhat, particularly at the end, in order to conform to English syntax, but not too much.

Like the earth made firm by mud
And the sky raised high by the earth
And the wind that sweeps across the sky
And fire that spreads on the wind
And water, that opposes fire - 5
your nature is like that of these five great elements
for you have endurance against your foes, and wide-ranging wisdom
and strength, and an all-consuming wrath, and noble love!
Rising from your sea, the sun once again
sinks into your western sea of white-headed waves. - 10
O king of a good land of fair towns!
O great one, bounded by the sky!
You who generously gave such food, the finest rice,
to the hundred until they were destroyed, fighting in fury
the five with horses of waving manes, - 15
the five whose land they had seized!
And even if milk turns sour, or the day dark,
or the four vedas turn from the path of virtue,
may you shine on, with no loss, with unwavering confidants,
unmoving, like Potiyam, like Imaiyam, - 20
where large-eyed does sleep in the twilight
near their small-headed fawns, by the light of the three fires
where the antaNars perform their difficult duties.

The main differences in translations are lines 9 and 10. நின்கடற் பிறந்த ஞாயிறு பெயர்த்தும் நின் வெண்தலைப் புணரிக் குடகடல் குளிக்கும் seems to clearly talk about the sun rising from one sea and setting in the other [nayiru - the sun; peyarttum - maruppaTium, puNari - wave; kuTakaTal-western sea, kuTaku is an old word for "west", related also to the name for Coorg (Tamil kuTakam, Coorgi kodagu)] which, as I point out above, is significant. In addition, in my reading the king is only described as having fed the hundred, not both armies; and the war is not described as having destroyed dharma (because line 16 ends with a vocative construction "koTuttOy", the following lines form a new sentence and therefore should be understood as being in the subjunctive, i.e., "Even if").

[devapriya]

Friends,

It is felt by many Tamil Scholars, as he is called Perunchotru; it is probable that there USED to be annual event of Celebrations when Mahabaratha is told as story and PLays are enacted; and The king fed both the Viewers and Actors. The tradtion got mixed that he fed the War itself.
Udayan Cheralathan is dated to around 25O BCE, by V.P.Purushotham, there could be some mistakes. but still this work was really researched with deep over complete Sangam Lit.

[sundararaj]

Very interesting discussion here. Very informative. Thanks for all the participants.

[P_R]

Interesting discussion.. brought forward

[aanaa]

interesting
proceed

[podalangai]

It is felt by many Tamil Scholars, as he is called Perunchotru; it is probable that there USED to be annual event of Celebrations when Mahabaratha is told as story and PLays are enacted; and The king fed both the Viewers and Actors. The tradtion got mixed that he fed the War itself.

The problem with this theory is that the motif of Udiyan Cheran feeding the armies occurs so many times in Sangam literature, and is assigned so much significance (as seen from the appellation "perunchoRRu", for example) that it's unlikely to have been given for something as trite as feeding actors. It makes far more sense (I'd even say it only makes sense) to interpret it as referring to a legend that, in the Sangam period, was believed to be historically true.

There's another theory, originally proposed by N. Subrahmanian, which I (personally) have come to find rather persuasive, which it finds a possible historical event to which the poem might refer.

In ancient Tamil literature, the term "the hundred" is used of a known, historical dynasty of the Deccan - the Satakarni line of Satavahanas. In the Silappathikaram, for example, they're called "nuRRuvarkannar" ("nuRRuvar" < "sata"; "kanna(r)" < "karni"), and they're described as allies of the Cheras who assist Senguttuvan in his wars in the North.

Other historical sources also confirm that the Satavahanas had dealings with the ancient Tamil land. We know from excavated Satavahana coins, for example, that at least one (possibly more) of the Satakarnis issued bilingual coins with inscriptions in Tamil and Prakrit.

N. Subrahmanian suggests that the "ir aimpathu" mentioned in Purananuru 2 were the Satakarnis, and the "aivar" were the "aimperum velir", the five Velir chieftains of Kongu Nadu in the Sangam period. He suggests that at some stage, the Satakarnis invaded Kongu Nadu, were opposed by the Velirs and lost. The Velirs were feudatories of the Cheras, and the Satakarnis their allies. Udiyan Cheran therefore followed the ancient Tamil custom of "peruncoRRunilai" - where a king fed a general and his army in a great hall before a battle - but with both armies in the same hall before the battle. You can easily see why this would have made a huge impression on the Tamils of the time, and why it became almost a leitmotif associated with Udiyan Cheran.

Historically, too, it's plausible. The Mahabharata war makes no sense, either in time or location. But the Satavahanas were right on the doorstep of the Tamil country, right around the time of Udiyan Cheran, and an attempt by them to invade Kongu Nadu is certainly quite likely from a historical perspective - ambitions of ruling the Tamil country would explain why they issued a brief spate of bilingual coins, for example. It also fits with the contemptuous references to the army of the hundred fed by Udiyan Cheran in the Akananuru (in poem 233, they're referred to as "kULi cuRRam") - as foreigners trying (unsuccessfully) to invade the Tamil country, they would have been treated with contempt by at least some poets.

[Shakthiprabha]

Podalangai,

Please check ur pm.

Can u please mention the name of book written by

N.Subrahmanian?