EARLY HISTORY OF V AISHNAV IS M

IN SOUTH I NDIA

R N A WAM A I Y S . K I SH S I AN GAR , M . A

a‘ is r fi A c h P r ofess o r of I Wian H t o y é r ae ology 6 F e llow of th e Madras Univ ers ity Membe r of th e

R oy al A sia tic S oc i e ty of Gre a t B ritain <5 I re land

F e llow of th e R oy a l H is t o ric al S oc ie ty

P rofe sso r (5 S om e time Fe llow

of th e My s ore UnQ've rsity

R ead e r C a c u tta Uni it v e rs . , l y

TH E OXFOR D U I V E R T N S I Y PRESS . L OND ON N E W Y O K , R , TOR ONTO ME L BOUR E , N , BOM BAY A N D MAD R AS .

1 920

P R E F A C E

H E c following le tures , presented to the public as the fourth course of Madras University Special L ectures in the Department

a r and c a m Indi n Histo y Ar h eology , for ed ” of the subject on which I i nte nded to send a paper to the International Congress of Orient

alists was a at d , which to h ve been held Oxfor

! was but for the outbre ak of the War. It suggested as vibrth doing as the result of a dis lc ussion o n the subject which I h ad with Sir

G wh o at m was t eorge Grierson , the ti e interes ing himself in the subject; He wanted more of Vaishnava literature sho uld be made known to the E uropean pubh c and suggested the t a a Yatindramatadi ik a a a a o f r nsl tion of p , m nu l

a a m and Arth a anc h ak a V ishn vis , the p of Pillai

L ok r ac h a y a. The translation work h as been m . in done since , by y friend Mr A . G ov dac h ary a of Mysore ; and the historical part of the

u was a a for a a s bject w iting study v rious re sons , a mong which other occupatio n was the principal ontribu § tary . The time ly appe arance of Sir R ’ . . Bh andarkar s a a h a m G tre tise on V is n vis , a m and R n S ivis , Minor eligio s made taking up of the subject more urgently me a I s ry . n a review of the work in th of c B a a the Mythic So iety , ng lore , I ind th at I would work up the subj ect so bring to bear upon the question all the th at may be got from sources recently made available . I took advantage o f the occasion offered by the First Oriental Conference a

’

- a R . . B h andark ar h i Poon , over which Sir G m self was to h ave presided but was unfortunately prevented from doing so by illness at ‘ the tim ‘ The objection was made in c fértain friend quarters th at it was highly improper th at should have taken up a controversial su this and presented axpape r to a Conference held

n . B h nd rk r of S R G . a a a m in honour hi self , ” “ s s c ritic ising h i v iew . The word criticism a a conveys little too often unfortun tely , the s of finding fault which is far from the ac c e p significance of the term . Criticism is of essence of historical research and no o ne is j u fi ed in proceeding o n research work making sure th at th e footing gained al previous work is actually beyond cavil .

a t e - e xami be , done only by thorough

a a not a the work lre dy done , with vie ix

au e h m s a f lt or xhibit s ortco ing only , but to t ke stock of what h as been satisfactorily established

' and what cannot equally satisfac torily be so u an am a l a . h reg rded Wit out s ch ex in tion it wou d ,

“ be assuming too much to proceed further in a a re se rch work . It is in th t view th at the work was a and h ad undert ken , I not the slightest a doubt , nor do I cherish the le st touch of it

d rk r a R . G . Bh an a a m now , th t Sir hi self would

r - welcome such a e examination . I t is not want o f respect fo r h im th at prompted the

work but muc h rather. the wish to complete the work that he has done in a subject in which such work as he h ad done h ad to be done by him at a a gre t disadvantage . I have no doubt wh at soe ver th at this investigati on will be received in

ff as a a the spirit in which it is o ered , critic l study

fan . o R . G B a a interesting question , by Sir h nd r

k ar h himself . I would appeal to ot er friends who may ch ance to read the bo ok to consider any c riti c ism in th e book in the spirit of the most friendly tigation of the position of other scholars th no f urther object th an the evaluation of

tual achievement . I cannot conclude th is e fato ry note better th an by m aking an extract one of the most eminent recent auth orities

‘ su of s L 1 e bject Hi tory , ord Acton Fo r our purpose the main th ing is not th e art a m a a a m r of ccu ul ting m teri l , but the subli e art a o disc ernin tru th ro m of investig ting it , f g f

d taint r m d al seh oo and c er o ou bt. f , y f It is by solidity of c ritic is m more than hy t heplenitude

' of erudition th at the study of history streng ” 1 a and . thens , str ightens extends the mind To avoid clumsiness in print transliteration in the body of the book h as been given up . The necessary and the correct pro nou nc iatio n is given in the index whic h the reader is roques

to a of or ffi ted consult in c ses doubt di culty . I am grateful to His E xc ellency L ord \V illingdo n for kindly according permission to my insc ribing this c ourse of U niversity

L ts me e ectures , the first ; be published by sinc

’ His E xcellency s assu mption of offic e as

a of th e U of a a to Ch ncellor niversity M dr s , him as a slight token of my estee m for his sympathy for oriental research .

B . I am o bh ge d to Mr . R . Srinivasan th e

Y of a a t Work s th e Proprietor the T t Prin ing , for neatness and expeditation with which he put th e work through th e Press .

M AD RAS S K RISHNASWAMI A . I YANGAR .

1 ~ S tu o i dy f H story . p . 40 . university of madras

Madras Univ e rsity S p e c ial Le c tu re s

Fo u rth C o u rse .

23

i h E arly Hist ory o f V aish nav ism n So u t I ndia. h

L ec tu re L — a a m a — ' V ishn vis , wh t it is the — subject the stage re ached by research work. — upon this by previous work Sir R . G , ’ ‘ B h andark ar s a a m a m. work V ishn vis , S ivis and rR E nc l ae dia o f mino eligions —in the y p I ndo - Aryan Research Alvars and Ach aryas .

’

- . Bh andark ar previous to R amanuja Sir R . G s

- — views his general position R ecognised order

- L . ec tu re I I . The specific question of Alvar — — K ulasek h ara his age evidence upon which

Sir R . G . Bh andark ar bases his concl usions — evaluation of th e evidence another similar

- — view wh o was K ulasek h ara evidence of his .

— ! o wn works at wh at period we may h ave to xii — look for him evidence of literature and — inscriptions c h ro nologIc al order of the Alvars .

L ec tu re I I I . N am Alvar the last of i— t hem all Arguments in support of th l S posi — — t ion other views general po sI tion of this — Alvar - his works th e name Tiruv ay moli and — its explanation the school of Bh ak tim S aiv ism — looked upon as collaborator Tiruv iruttam a nd Tiruv a moli— a a c a y O ther Alv rs , p rti ul rly — — Pe riy alv ar evidence of his works probable ag e .

L c Alv a —h I r e tu re I V . The first rsz t e general — position and works Po y gaiy ar and Po y gai — Alvar identical osibihty of two P oy gaiy ars — p possible contemporaneity with To ndaman — — Ilam Tiray an Tirumalisai Alvar His Pallav a — contemporary E vidence of secular literature — — — other criteria of age Paripadal position of — Vaishnavism effect on general position in regard to Sanskrit literature and history of

I ndian culture . EARLY HISTORY OF V AISIINAV ISNI IN SOUTH INDIA

LECTURE I .

V A I S H N AV I S IVI : WH AT I T I S

At the outset of a course of lectures o n Vaishnavism it will be expected th at th e

term Vaishnavism should be defined . I t will be equally cle ar to everybody th at anything like a defi nition o f the term Vaishnavism should be difficult unless a small tre atise is written upon a the subject . L ike most other religions of Indi Vaishnavism h as a Philosophy and Religion of

its o wn. As a philosophy it bases itself upon

the U panish ads and is acknowledged by scholars .

to a at an a a be , in cert in respects y r te , more faithfu l and closer rendering of the upanish adic

te aching . As a religion it reaches its roots into

a a. u a h r the T ntr Its religio s ritu l t e efore , is of

am or Tan r i h the Ag ic t a c c aracter in general . 2

Its philosophic ch aracter is Upanishadic . To give merely a practical notion of what is to be understood by V aish nav ism I might say here th at Vaishnavism regards Vishnu as the supre me being with Sri or L akshmi in c lose associa h h im . as o wn tion with I t its tenets , which for the sake of brevity might be given in the following text of a conte mporary writer of th e L a life of R amanuj a. With kshmi I am supreme my conviction is differe nce (o r su rre nde rin an a re c e q g oneself into the h ds of p p to r is the most secure way to salvation holy

“; thoughts on the eve of death unnecessary ;

salvation to a be liever certain . At the present t ime Mah apu rna (Periya N ambi) is the guru ”1 to be sought . Th e se are the words in which G o d directed R amanuj a to the acceptance of his mission when at the critical moment he a a a a h was v cill ted , h r ssed by doubt whet er he equal to the burden of the propagation of the am a a gospel of Vaishnavism . The fund ent l ide of Vaishnavism is contained in o ne verse of

' r m m S iman param tattv am ah am, matta 6

’ bé dah prapattir nirapziy a h atuh l

' ' navasy ak ic ha smrti ranty ak alé

' ' ’ mok sh o Mah a ama ih ar avar a , p y y h l l ’ ' n r A dh ap fi rna s Y atirajavaibh avam SI . 40 . ’ i i l a ma f Tirmal sa A v r , which y be reely render e d L e t Your Grace be fo r me to - day let it come to - morrow let it w ait still longer and

m a Y ac am c ome so etime fter our Gr e , I sure is

am a O a a a a am no t mine . I cert in , l N r y n , I ” nor are me 1 without you , you without It will thus be seen th at both in its ph iloso ph ic al and in its ritualisti c aspec ts V aish nav ism reaches back to the same antiquity as other B rah maw and on a question of o it e a e rigins , will b found th t there is yery littl .

ei e f and . to choos ng sp‘ ectfi priority posteriority ” Vaish navism is th e dire c t offspring of the sc hool

‘ of B h ak ti as a m and m S ivis is , it see s to me

" that Vaishnavism diverged from Tantraism definitely in its early associ ation with the

Vaidic philosophy . I t is no t my pu rpose to

t a m c discuss his spect of the subject , y con e rn

o f a a m . R . being the history V ishn vis Sir G . Bh andark ar h as shown in his book V aish na v ism etc that the school of B h ak ti so called is

a ab a e B m and tr ce le to the g of uddhis Jainism .

° 1 60 267T6wwm93 6277953Q 157 7m @ ; c § ’ {fi ec /y a {fleérc orc m cziTu /reufi g adag e;

i ' ’ o ng m cérfl uflGevcér a cawm rru} mnfl m fé eor

' N fi nmuk an Tiruvandadi 7 . m ‘ This ight be regarded as the legitimate o rthodox development of the orthodox Madhy

adesa at a ti me when th e fe rment o f dis satisfac tion and free th ou gh t o n the U panish ads led on in th e E ast to th e protests of Jainism and B m a a a uddhis g inst Vedic ritu lism . I ts

history in northern Indi a is trac eable in its ma at a r m th e 5 th c in lines le st f o entury B . C .

but our c onc ern here is the histo ry of V aish na v ism in the south . TH E S U B JE C T . q, The history of Vaishnavism in South Indi a c ame in for attention as a subje c t o f study while yet th at eminent Tamil sc holar and phi lo lo ist B a was a n g , ishop C ldwell , ctively worki g in the field of the history of th e literatu re o f

c Tamil . I n the ourse of his investigations he a at a an c rrived , to us somewh t str ge , onclusion th at Vaishnavism was the foundation of R ama nuj a more or less . It is no thing strange sinc e h e regarded the Augustan age o f Tamil litera ture to h ave been in the 1 3th century of the Christian e ra and later but wh at is still more st range is th at the late professor M . S e sh agiri

S astr iar a c c a o f c h a r , the first Indi n o up nt the i of Sanskrit and Comparativ e Philology in th e

h a ame Presidency College , should ve held the s

6

“ the A ge of Manik k av asagar contributed by

. L . the l ate Mr C . I nnes . As became a l ate eminent j udge of the High Court t h e article de alt with the main thesis With a very large number o f obiter dic ta scattered about the artic le on various m atters of vital interest to a am a a at an the liter ry history of T il , p rt y rate o f the hi story of Vaishnavism c ame in fo r m a w m a . so e observ tion , which dre y ttention At a ame n h bout the s time the l ate Mr . G opi at a Bao was writing a history of Vaishnavism in the pages of th e Madras Review . The esse n

“ tial part o f it be repeated very re c ently in h is S ir S u brah mania Iyer L ectures delivered

r before the U niversity of Madras . During e

r M . A . c a . : a a a ent ye rs Mr M Sriniv s Iyeng , devoted a c onsiderable spac e to this h istory in his le arned work Tamil Studies Professo r

R a a o alac h ariar o f L aw a a j g p the College , M dr s de alt with the subject but not from th e a historic al point of view essenti ally . Me nwh ile

h v ai n ar a th e Pundit M . R ag a y a g de lt with history of some of the Alvars in the Sen Tamil with his usu al learning . The culmination of this series of efforts upon the history o f Vaishnavism was reached in S ir

’ “ B h nd rk ar s a a m a m R . G . a a V ishn vis , S ivis and minor Religions This was published by the veteran orientalist as a part o f the E nc y

c ae i - lop d a of Indo Aryan R esearch . The first part Vaishnavism atte m pts to deal with th e whole hi story of Vaishnavism from the be gin ning whic h the le arned Doctor fi nds in the

period c o - eval with the rise of B uddh l sm and

a a . 18 a s c a k J inism , if not e rlier It this cl s i l wor on the subject th at c hallenged my attent ion as the learned scholar quoted from me when h e reached the history of Vaishnavism in South f a and me m m . Indi , of ered so criticis of y work He agreed vx’lth me th at the Alvars and Acharyas were previous to R amanuj a and should be looked fo r in th at particular period but he questioned my views in regard to the tradition ally recognised order in which these

m a c a are mentioned . This criticis natur lly lled

for a re - examination of my position with th e fulness that the great reputation of the vener a

ble doctor and his learning alike demanded . I t is therefore necessary to state his views more fully and exhibit h is general position before

proceeding to examine them carefully . V Bh a av ta a XI . The g itself st tes in book , Ch that Vishnu assumed different forms in the first a and ff gre t periods of time , describes the di erent 8

of o f H im Fo r K ali a e modes worship , the g he h as simplified even the ag am ic worship of the previous age to the extent of offeri ng salvation to those who would devote themselves to h im without even subjecting themselves to the discipline of ac quiring spiritual knowledge and

a n V aira a wa th e pr ctisi g g y , (not giving y to m desires of the flesh) . In order the ore

f ac c a ef ectively , to hieve His obje t of s ving the people of this earth He will come into this

r a c a a a a ar wo ld , c ording to the Pur n , in ten v t s

ff m o f re v 10 u s of His , di erent fro those the p m s ons of time . His real devotee will be found scattered here and there in the whole of

Bh aratav arsh a a , but they will be found in l rge numbers in th e Dravida c ountry on the banks o f Tam ra arni V ai ai K ritamala the p , the g ( ) , the

a a Pa asv ini a and a a a P l r ( y ) , the K veri the M h n di a a flowing west (th t is , Periy r) It is in this favourable spot th at He would desc end to do 1 a am a the wo rk of s alvation . I n th e l nd of T r

' ' ’ Kalau kh al u bh av rsh y antl N fi ray anaparay anéh

' ky ac h it k vac h it Mah fi réj a D rav ide sh u c h a bh urisah

Tamraparni nadi yatra K ritamfi la P ay asv ini

’ K avEri c h a mah ezpunyapratic h u c h a Mah anadi

Y e pibanti j alam tasam manuj a manu j é sv ara

‘ ’ r h B i V u d m - p ay?) b akta h ag avat as éve a alfi s ay Eih I l . 9

Madh urak av i p arni w as born N ammalv ar and i f V ai ai P e ri alv ar and n that o the g , y his

a of a a Po ai d aughter Andal in t h t the P l r , y g

a Bh udatta v ar a and Tirumalisai A lv r , l , Pey Alv r

a a o f a To ndaradi odi A lv r in th t the K veri , pp , Tiru ppan Alvar and Tiru m angai Alvar ; and

a a K u lase kh ara in th t of the Periy r , , if his birth place was Tiru v anjik k u lam in the state o f

m a t e C ochin . This citation would ke h B h agav atam a work posterior to the age of the

a I S a a a Alv rs , but it possible th t this ch pter is

a a . a a it l ter inter pol tion Gr nting th t it is , ough t to have been interpol ated long before

V a a D e sik a as a a as ed nt , he quotes the p ss ge authority for certain of his posit ions in his

work R ah asy atray asaram . It w ould be an interesting enquiry in itselfto c ompare in detail t h e Prabandh a works and the B h agav atam . Th at work will h ave to be left over for the n p I e se t . Wh at Is to the pomt in the history o f Vaishnavism i n this citation is th at B h ak ti

a ia h a m g ets ssoc ted with the sout , l ost exclu siv e l as o y i t were , though even here its c nnection w ith the Agam a and Tantra is c le arly a indic ted .

a I n reg rd to this however , it would be just as well to call attention to wh at the Padm a I O

Purana h as to say regarding S rimad Bh aga- v vatam and h o w it ac tually came into existence I n the course of his intermin able pe re gri nations sage N arada h appened to be in the vicinity of G ok ula on one occasion when he

' saw a young wom an in distress in a desert tract with two elderly men lying apparently

de ad ne ar her . The sight of the sage put a a a h i t some he rt into her to ppe l to m o. solve to her the riddle th at brough t her to her then

! distressful c onditI o n. She said she was born a a h ad a in the Dr vid country , , her e rly growth in the Karnataka and flouri shed to some

extent in the Mah arashtra. She pro c eeded thence to Gujarat with her two sons when life

m f c e r be c a e di fi ult for h . As she moved further from there life to her was becoming gradu ally impossible ; but she kept trudging o n as best she c ould till she came to where she ac tu ally

m s h was at the ti e . When h e touc ed the ground

n was o which she then stood , she suddenly transformed into th e y ou thful woman she was while her two young sons were grown old and

ma a a as t withered , ulti tely f lling de d she though

they were . Sage N arada pondered a little while and th e n addressed the young woman like one wh o I I

‘ a h a knew it all . He said th t she d no cause to

s h k i ! distress herself . She wa B a t (devotion) and h er two little ones were Gnana (spiritu al

knowledge) and V airag y a (negation of desire) . I n olden times even B h ak ti required the

“ assistanc e of these two auxili aries for the . attainment of salvation ; but in this age of

a B h ak ti a was — K li , lone quite enough the more so when she was actually in the ground h al lowed by the feet of L ord Krish n a as a c hild . Henc e the de ath of her children who were mere

e superfluiti s for her purpose . The points worth noting in this story for our purposes is th at the Dravida country was the land of birth o f B h ak ti which flouri shed to a gradually diminish

( a a a a a a a a and ing extent in the K rn t k , M h r shtr G uj arat .

Whatever m ay be the - source which th e Purana quoted above might have taken its a m a a a inform tion fro , it is ctu lly found th t the Alvars and Ach aryas o f the Vaish navas as well as the Adiy ars of the Saivas were people born"

am all c in the T il country , of them ex lusively , and a a ° prop g ted their gospel there . Dr Bh andark ar h as given satisfactory evidence of a very much e arlier and a northern origin for " the cult ofB h ak ti and there are evidences of its . 1 2

p revalence in the centuries preceding the

“ C hristian e ra in the region of the middle ” c a a ountry in northern Indi . We sh ll show a a presently th t the inspir tion , for Vishnu B h k i n a t at a a am m . y r te , c e fro the north The sc hool of B h ak tas in the Tamil l and el aborated and worked it up with fe atures ch aracteristic of Tamil culture and sent it back in a more real istic reflex wave which swept over a the whole l and of I ndia. We sh ll now proceed to the history of this school of

V aishnavism in the south . T VA I S HNAVA TE ACHERS OF TH E S OU H . a a a a ac as c The V ishn v te chers , cepted su h a a a a a among the V ishn v s of South I ndi , f ll into

two a a t e a a and th e bro d cl sses , h Alv rs (s ints) su c e sssion Ac h aryas (te ac hers) . The c of the l atter began some five generations before R am anuj a and is a continuously growing list in na ac a o f respe c t of each section , y e h f mily ,

h e c a the Vaishn avas of th e South . T other l ss nd is by c ommon consent anterior to this a more holy acc ording to the recognised guru

’ 7 ‘ are m paramparas . They twelve in nu ber and a a as a a f ll into three cl ses , rr nged in Sir

‘ ’ rk ar s . . Bh anda R . G work under reference The list which is in the order of the dates given

1 4

impliedly before th at date but there Is distinct e vidence to show that K u lase k h ara flouri

r shed much l ater . He was a k ing of T a

v anc ore and c m , one of the works o posed by h im styled Muk undamala contains a verse m B a a a a a a XI 2 fro the h g v t Pur n ( , , Again in an inscription o n a tablet existing in

a m at a a in a wa te ple N reg l the Dh r r district , 1 t a a . F a a r nsl ted by Dr leet , it is st ted th t Per m adi of the Smda dynasty vanquished Kula

m k h arank a a a u a ak e sin , besieged Ch tt , purs ed J y aiid se ized upon the royal power of Poy sala a nd D h o rasamudra c a a o f Po sala , the pit l the y 2 d na . a Pe r adi y sty I n nother inscription , this m is represen ted to be a vassal of Jagade k amalla a a 1 1 8 and . . 3 I I , whose d tes r nge between A D

1 1 50 . While the former was in power as Mah a

m andale sv ara a of a ade , in the seventh ye r J g

'

ma i. e . . a a . D 1 1 44 a c a a k ll , , in A , ert in gr nt was made by a body o f sellers of betel leaves n a d nuts . The K ulase k h ara mentioned as

a t Pe rmadi m a being v nquished by his , ust be prince reigning on the western c oast as the

a ak e sin a am a G oa others , J y , the K d b prince of ,

1 . B . o . A R s . S c J o . X I . 2 44 . 2 . i Ib d page 2 5 1 . 1 5 t h H o ala n 1 n e y s ki g a d so forth were . Pu tting

‘ this statement and the quotation from the Bh a a a a a a a a g v t Pur n together , it ppe rs high ly probable th at the Alvar K ulase k h ara lived in

o t h e first h alf f the 1 2 th century . The sequence

a a be therefore , given bove c nnot implicitly ma a m a believed in . Still it y be d itted th t the earliest Alvars flourishe d abo ut the time of the revival of Brah minism and Hinduism in the

to th e a a a' north , which extended up M hr tt

as a m country , we h ve shown fro inscriptions and a a a ma and m ave ntiqu ri n re ins , ust h e xtended still farther tbthe south . The earliest

a ma a a 5 or Alv rs y be pl ced before , bout the th 6th a century , but there is nothing to show th t Vaishnavism h ad not pe netrated to the Tamil

a a abo . country e rlier , th t is , ut the first century B ut an impetus such as the rise of the Alvars a all a indic tes could in . prob bility come only from the energy of the revival .

The hostile rel ations into whic h the

and a a a N a anmars am Alvars the S iv s ints , y , c e w e B and a a u ith th uddhists J in s , lend s pport ” t o the view we h ave advocated . In this

1 i u u if H o sala owe r e v er r h . I t s do btf l th e y p ea c e d th e c oast at th is period . I 6 critic ism of the venerable Doctor there are three points that emerge into relief (1 ) th at Alvar K ulasek h ara l ived sometime 1 a m 2 th . bout the iddle of the century A D . (2 ) As a consequenc e the order in which these Alvarsare usually named is unreliable . (3) Th at the earliest Alvars must h ave

flourished about the time of revival - of B rah ~ minism and m and Hinduis in the north , there a fore bout the fifth o r the sixth century A . D . while the possibility I S admitte d th at V aish na v 1sm might h ave penetrated to the south as

‘

D . a as a c . e rly bout the first entury A , TH E A T A T VA I S HNAV R DI I ON . We sh all proc eed to examine these three positions in the orde r in whi c h they are e nu me rate d above . In regard to the whole of this position it h as to be reme m bered that Vaishnavism is a liv mg religion with a v ery considerable following and a continuous tradi tion so th at even tradition in a m atter like this

m h c a l h as to be given so e weight istori l y , though we are not entirely dependent upon tradition

w k o f alone in regard to this subject . The or s

a are c a a these Alv rs omposed in the vern cul r ,

f c am and was c and o the ountry , T il , ollected

' in f c th e h av e thrown into the form, whi h y 1 7

come down to us by oral tradition as well as in

m in th e a a of e written for , l tter d ys the lifetim

“ P r ndh r of R amanuj a himself . The aba a fou th ou sand includes in it a centum on R ama nuj a himself by one who called himself

Amudan of Aran am a am and wh o g (Srir ng ) ,

a m of decl res hi self , in the course the work ,

’ to be a disciple of R am anuj a s chief I disciple K u rattalv an . He refers to these a a a a a Alv rs in th t work in p rticul r order ,

r a N am a a all fo ; but pl ces Alv r , the l st of them whic h there is a particu lar re ason which we

' a sh ll notice prese ntly . The order is “ 2

1 . Po i iga Alvar .

2 . P udattalv ar.

3. Pey Alwar . 4 Tiru panalv ar.

T ru S. i lis ma ai Alvar .

6. o n i T darad ppodi. 7 K ulase k h ara.

' 1 mnu N rr nd di S . R a a j a fi a a t 7 .

Omn leacu aia m gf rbOu m a orrezire j e oé / ro u nd) g g g qg éj g (g ee g flm wé a m acg w/smfi ne s /753611 17657 a naba mwdlczir

u m wé rs m y uSlrrrrLo/zer/ ait r u rr wcbcvn fl fi g o g qéb m

’ w m wé a m Q wsareifi eufi wfr tb m w fi fl g e g g g e m h y .

2 - 8 1 . Ibid S tt . 7 B 1 8

8 . Pe r lv iy a ar.

9 . Andal .

1 iru n . 0 . T ma gai Alvar

am N am a a of The n e of Alv r , with th t m Madurak av i . m , is omitted The for er co es in for more elaborate reference in the verses mm a 1 ma n i edi tely following . While we y ot be warranted in assuming any strictly chrono a a m logic l order perh ps fro this , we ought to grant that it is the recognised general order of precedence I n ' point of time as there is no other kind of order known or recognised among the Vaish navas with the solitary e xception of the

position of Tiruppan Alvar . The exception in c for a satisfac the ase of N am Alvar comes in . tory explanation as he is the only one among the Alvars wh o figures in a succession of reli ’ gious preceptors proceeding from one s own a a m p rticul r guru righ t up to Vishnu hi self ,

° 1 — i S tt . 1 Ib d , 8 1 9 .

b m dl dl ud /rd) a u g fi g fi w ewp a ?ev wru m czir ga y ’ ’ r ‘ r irGar Gg ubg fi g evfi éu Q ICI§L2> a m Ga /ru hc oré Q em g uj e

Q u b é fi m g dnQ u rfi ru azri Gem/ra uihi 5 67m eila>mb g r w j Q w a ufi rb m flnwfi ezir a eér zn . g ' g g q Q j g gw a g Q u ®Q Q aey wcgoe s eaward /é e rqGOIu /icg cgranb n fi e wadr mu /Li) wa /pair aflm zé/n ri g g g gy r ° 63/5 /79 Oa é fl ae em GwQ uJair 15w 6 ami 5 n g bp fl 5 , ’ mfi czir rp e nwn czirc rm é ae e oG . g /flg r g g g g g 1 9

1 ' I s the chief Guru of them all . t is thi 2 pre - eminence of N am Alvar th at is re spo nsi ble for this particul ar work removing h im o ut of his place arid tre ating of h im in a number of stanzas immediately following . As against this order might possibly be quoted a sloka

m a s and m a c fro Pill n , the di ciple im edi te suc es sor in the apostol ic seat of R amanuj a to whom the latter entrusted the work of commenting 3 o n Tiru v a moli 1 000 - m y , the work by pre e inence N am a . all am o ne of Alv r He sets the n es in , single sloka 4 and giy e s the names of only

1 ' . Adhik araisan rah f V da ik a o 3. g e ntadé s a S t .

' emer ed /i i afi é e l eme é e e em rc ag? g g g f e g

UJITGUTGZD L GQ J Lucy /ig cg s} a cwfi eci e afcvvr/zi/Q Q

Lllc orear a mei) cg G u g fo lg g m m g g m sil al cfi) l c O - u ffmgfmfi In t en tmi sfi t

’ ’ rsczic vr d e q w r e nieig em g g arriJ maisG a fl eimu n

‘ {BJ éfi HJGUP a L Ge uu cir Ge h mg cfir

‘ mes Gal r r m ea n czir {fi g ai fl eo eufi d.

a nG u tm cit fi wma m emd fi airQ mCP g cg ‘

. 2 S e s . note 1 1 8 , p . above . R amanuj anu rrandadi 1 8 3 S tanza 1 9 note un e r no 1 d d te , p . 1 8 abov e .

R amanu N rran j a fi dadi 1 9 .

4 . ‘ B h utam S arasc h a Mah adah v ay a B h attanath a

' Sri B h ak tisfi ra K ulasé k h ara Y 6g iv ah 5 n

‘ ' B h ak tangh rirenu Parakala Y atindramisrzm

' Srimat Parfi nk fi smunim ranatosmi ni p ty am . 2 0

1 1 l - fi a . , omitting And The exigencies of v e rsifi cation perh aps would no t warrant the inferenc e

of an c y chronologi al order . It must be noted in this connection th at the Tamil poe m s of K ulase k h ara are included in the colle c tion

c th e a R m n whi h received s nction of a a uj a. VE DANTA D E S I K A ’ S ARRA N G EMEN T

a a D e sik a a a t ac Ved nt the gre t schol r , e her ,

and c o ntro v e rsalist o a t , who lived thr ugh lmos

" th e first three qu arters o f the 1 4th century and who in a Tamil P rabandh am of his own

h as a c h apter o n those that are entitled to ” m n ma e com unio with God , k s , i n the first

a a of a a am of st nz this section , recit l of the n es these Alvars omitting those of Andal and

Madh urak av i. The first four are mentioned

a c m S atak o a and i n the usu l order , then o es in p then follows V ish nuc itta ; immedi ate ly follow

h im K u lase k h ara th e n Yo iv ah a i ng is , follows g , then follow Bh ak tangh rire nu and Tirumangai

r Alvar . Madh u ak av i is mentioned in the next following stanz a as the man who first taught

’ th at God s com munion is attain able only by a and k means of preceptor (guru) , his wor included in the P rabandh am is one of 1 1 stanzas which state th at h e h ad made h is

of a u ru S atak o a and a choice g in p , th t there

2 2

This arrangement is what exactly detaches N am Alvar from the group of the Alvars in the

r 1 a rangement of Amudan of Srirangam . That ought not to be interpreted as it h as been at

an a m a as a y r te in so e qu rters done , rguing the

posteriority of N am Alvar to the other Alvars . In a c onsideration of the question whether there was any rec ognised order of precedence

c a ma in hronology , the v lid source of infor tion t a am is the one first quo ed bove , n ely the order i w ndic ate d in the poem R amanuj a N urrandadi

o o f Amu dan of Srirangam . We sh all return t

it l ater .

i n note I . 1 nza uote a ov e . 1 . S e e sta q d b , p 9 LECTURE I I .

SPECIFIC Q UESTION OF ALV AR K ULASEK IIARA

K UL A S E K H AR A ’ S LIFE ACC ORDING TO TH E G UR U PAR A MPAR A

According to the ordinarily prevalent ac cou nts in the Vaish nava guruparampara K u lasak h ara is regarded as the incarnation of

K ustu bh a a a (the jewel in the bre st of Vis h nu) ,

nd was a Parabh av a th a born in the ye r , g F a in am a . a a a month M si T il , (S ns M gh ) rid y the 1 2 th of the bright fort - nigh t and N ak sh atra

was P unarv asu . He born according to this

“ au i olli thority in the city of I (Q uilon) , other ” r n wise Ti uv a j ik ulam . He is said to h av e

been the son of a king by name D ridh av rata. After the usual education he was installed as

ruler . E arly in his career he became attached to the Vaishnava sch o ol of bh ak ti (devotion) and was particularly interested i n h aving th e

R amay ana read out to him . I n the course of this reading he became absorbed in “ it so muc h th at o n a particular occasion when they read out the portion where R ama marched

‘

- forth S i ngle h anded against . the gre at army of 2 4

K hara and his two brothers he c alled out in his abstraction and ordered the whole of his army being put i n motion to the assistance of

R ama. The reader understanding his position went through the rest of the story rapidly and brought it to its termination bringing R ama victori ous back to the hermitage where Sita

was and K u lase k h ara a a , then is s id to h ve felt

rel ieved . On another occ asion it would appear his ministers wanted to wean h im of this ex t raordinary devotion to Vish nu and brough t “ about the loss o f some jewels and valuables

a o f a a a left in the s nctum his p l ce , ccess to which was denied to everybody else exc epting to himself and to the few Vaishnava priests

e ngaged 1 11 service in it . When the responsi ble offic ials c h arged the V aishnavas with the theft he is said to h ave affirmed “ no Vaish nava will ever Commit s uch an enor ” m and of a m ity , , in token his f ith in the , t o have thrust his right hand into a pot into

which was put a malignantly poisonous cobra . Wh en the c obra did him no h arm and his court felt satisfied th at he was right they

ce ase d to interfere with h im . His devotion to Vish nu grew stronger day by day till at l ast he

a u a a a am g ve p roy l life , went forw rd to Srir ng 2 5

“ t o be perpetually in the divine prese nce .

It is ther e th at . he is said to h ave com posed h is Muk undamala h is a and S nskrit work , the l arger portion of the P e ru mal Tiru mo li in th e Tamil P rabandh am . At the instance o f R anganath a himself he moved forward to i a a T rup ti taking K nchipuram on the way . He

h as one te n relati ng to Tirupati . He returned a and a a from ! Tirup ti tr velled on to v rious Vaish nava pl aces till he came to Mannanar

all a K attumannark o v il kovil (in prob bility , in " t h e h is South Arcot district) where , while in devotion to god he is believed to h ave given up mortal life His whole life is said to h ave bee n not more than 2 5 ye ars . This acc ount m akes it c le ar that the h agiologists knew

‘ almost nothing about h is life exce pt perh aps

a . E a a his pl ce of birth ven in reg rd to th t ,

there is appare ntly an error . The guru parampara makes Kolli and V anj ik u lam two am m a a n es of the sa e pl ac e . We h ave lre dy p ointed 1 out th at Vedanta D e sik a in the 1 Q u neérqm e qtb Ga b J a e Gea m e n r n

’ em i r r éj su fl / air fi? g / g s e eu é dis is i gfin Cy fl ’ ’ ecir mfi ew ri w/Tcir Q E dQ u e /b Gs /1 11 5763) c e/ q a n r ' Qevr flaiélair Ou czur a m n u /Tr} ra/e ar c e/ g g cg gb j e e ’ eziv u “9 Q u s/ a é a fl m wes fi w Q 65 ay g ap , ‘ ’ all anhfi w OwezirQ O e aflemsmi a t /rairea cg a e r L ’ e airQ u /T cir Gs i Q w/T fl a m /5 7 u ntLOIb cg fi g g g ma ,9 i b s eb meag e Omm é aqy drfii e u) Q /éfo w . 2 6

P rabandh asaram a a 8 m a e St nz , entions his pl c of birth as V anj ik ulam while K ulase k h ara

m a a was hi self st tes th t he ruler of Kolli . Th e

‘ guru param para seems merely to attempt at a solution of the inconsistency in these two statements by the simple expedient of equating

w s t e am . U as a h one n e with the other nless , ‘ a a a D e sik a h ad th e pointed out bove , Ved nt specific knowledge that K ulase k h ara was born

In V an ik ulam was j though he king of Kolli ,

’ e a K ulase kh ara s a m A w ought to ccept st te ent th at he was a native of K olli while the other

a a as the B a a a a is cert inly very prob ble , h g v t account specifies Periyar among the river s k h allowed by the birth of B h a tas . Th e astrological details t h at are given are appar ently the work of the h agiologist s and are of m a a a no value historically as they ust h ve m de .

a c a c a at all to backw rd l ul tion , if they did so ,

re al suit their own partic ul ar dating . Of the

details of his life this biography gives nothing . TH E A G E OF K UL AS E K H AR A P roc e ding now to an examination of the age of K u lase k h ara the extract quoted above makes it cle ar th at it is the opi n i on of the

“ Bh andark ar a R . a . venerable schol r , Sir G th t

‘ the Alv ar K ulase k h ara liv e d in t h e first h alf of 2 7

” 1 a m the 2 th century . It will lso be re embered th at this conclusion is arrived at specifically on the consideration of two inscriptions which m a K ulase k h arank a and r ention , which refe ' th th e C h aluk y a m Ja adek a emselves to — e peror g 1 1 . a a . . 38 50 a m ll , A D More gener lly , how

h as n n ever , he been led to this positio by fixi g the latest limit for K ulase k h ara In the Madhva

' c h ar a a a Tirth a fi ourish e d a y , An nd who bout

1 ‘ . . m i A D . 1 1 99 to 2 78 The downward li it s

fixed as the d ate of composition of the B haga-a v atapurana which this Ach arya regarded as

R . a and as a . s cred quoted uthority Sir G .

Bh andark ar therefore would place it two . centuries e arlier th an Ananda Th irth a o n the

h a “ ‘ a m ground t t it c nnot be very uch older , fo r its style often looks modern and in copying a a a m a from the older pur n s it f lls into ist kes , such as the one pointed out by m e in another

’ 1 ‘ pl ace K ulase kh ara s posteriority to the

B hagavata is also sought to be established from a. citation which the learned doctor found of the

slok a a a XI 2 6. a a of the Pur n , , , 3 Th t Kul sek h ara was later th an the B h agavata may be

‘ V . G z. ol . r 1 . ee om a a 1 S B I , p t 1 , page 1 64 for th e

reasons : 2 8

provable but this citation from the B hagavata purana I do not see in the southern editions of

Muk undamala a to K an the ccessible me . A

a a a a a and a n d edition , Gr nth edition new e dition whic h was published sometime bac k in f l k a a a o s o a. Dev n g ri , none them show this There is bes ides the fact that this particular s lok a is recited in apology for any shortcomings ma a mm in the perfor nce of religious cts co only , at the end of almost every religious ceremony

so far as I know . I t will be admitted therefore that som e editions of the Muk h u ndamala might bring it in at the end ; but even so it is not

found in the southern versions known to me ; The citation referred to therefore lose s its d ecisive character . Th at apart this c h ro no lo g ic al position c an easily be demonstrated 1 m

- possible The period A . D . 1 1 50 is e ac c P rabandh am x tly the period in whi h the , 4000 must h ave been c ast into the present

m R amanu a at an a h I s a for by j , y r te with s nc

and R amanu a N urrandadi inc or o tion , the j p r ated into it gives an honourable pl ace to

K ulasek h ara as an Alvar . Most of these separate Prabandh as and their authors are g iven commendatory verses which are generally recited before beginning the recital of the par

30 f m a of am of and or s p rt the n e every sovereign , about the time with which we are just at present concerned it is possible to mention two other K ulasekh aras with the earlier of whom perhaps

K u lase k h arank a ma m at this y see , first sight ,

riv andra t o be identical . In the T m Sanskrit

and e m ma series , edited publish d fro nuscripts ,

a a a a a S astri al by the le rned P ndit G n p ti g , there are two works Tapatisam v aranam and Subh a

dradh anan a am o f m ama a j y , both the dr s by

K u l ase k h arav arm a c as l , who is des ribed ru er

e c s o f i sl ah oday apura. He is b sides des ribed a the best o f the des c endants c f the Keral a ” was a as family . He devotee of Vishnu the fin al v erse of the pl ay expresses a lo nging for

c omplete devotion to S ridh ara. He seems to h ave been an ardent admirer of the Parama a h asmas (scetics of the highes t order) . The

’ a ma a r c le rned Pundit kes refe en e , in the

c th e ama a c m introdu tion to first dr , to onte

orar c a p y of this prin e , the uthor of the

V y angy a V y ak h y a. He pl aces the author of this c ommentary later th an the author of the D asaru pak a wh o flourished i n the l 0th century

A . D . He is also said to be the author of a

Asc h ar aman ari prose work , y j , which is quoted in a commentary o n the Amarak osa called 3l ~

Tik asarv asv a a a k u sala , in nnot ting the word in K nd the first a a . In th at comment a date is g iven in Saka and Kali eras corresponding to th e a . . 1 1 ye r A D 59 . From this he asc ribes t h e author to the period betwee n the “ latter

j a 1 p rt of the 0th century and the early part of t h e 1 2 th c 1 entury . Mah oday apura the capital o f V an ik ulam Tiruv an i this ruler , is j or j k ulam a f i n the modern st te o Cochin . It is j ust possible th at this prince is referred to by the name K ulasak h arank a in the inscriptions c ite d) .

. B nd rk ar m by Sir R . G h a a but it ust be noted there is no refe rence to any war in the dramas

and an a a under reference , y identific tion b sed o n the mere similarity of n ame will at the very best be only a probable guess - which might turn out correct or prove to be wrong . I refer tothis ruler here as th e le arned editor of t h e a a Tr v ncore series , identifies him with

K ulasek h ara a an a Alv r , id e ntific tion which we s a e w a h ll presently sh to be equ lly im possible , w ith the other

a K ulase k h ara m of There is nother , this ti e

a a i n m a a a Tr v ncore , who very ny p rticul rs might come nearer in point of description and

1 I ntro du c tion to Tapatisamvarana. 32

i d stinctive political achievements to K ula k h ra se a a . w , Alv r This as R av iv arman Kulase

a a m m a R av i r kh r , so eti es c lled v a mabh upa a , of P radh umnabh u da a merely the uthor the y y y , and a a Alank ara S arv asv of comment ry on a,

a of c S amudrabandh a am the uthor whi h , by n e , states th at his work is based on the c omme n tary propounded by R av iv armade v a at th e

o f 1 request the pundits of his court . We h ave a number of i nscriptions o f th is ruler and a rather el aborate prasasti (panegyri c ) by a poe t 2 K av ibh u sh ana. I n addition to being th e author o f the works above referred to he was a gr e at deal responsible fo r turni ng out th e Muh ammadan garrisons left in the Tamil coun a a a try fter the inv sion of M lik Kafur . His i nscriptions give the inform ation that he was 1 — born in A . D . 2 66 7 came to the Kerala padam (Kerala throne) at K o lambapura

33rd a and m f (Q uilon , ) in his ye r , got hi sel anointed victor on the banks of the V e gav ati (river running c lose to Kan c hipuram ) in his 3 ai 46th year . He cl ms conquest as far north as and h as c o of Nellore , left behind ins ripti ns

1 ~ n P r h u n u a . ii I ntro duc tio to ad y m fibh y d y a p . .

2 ’ i i 1 49 . p graph ic I ndic a v . E , 3 ° n i 1 4 . E pigraph ic I d c a IV . 6 33

1 H h is at least as far north as Poonam allee . e

a m of a a a and th e cl i s conquest the P ndy , Chol c and Kongu ountry , gives himself the titles

m d r k s m n I S ang ra a h i a and Tri h atrac h u da a i . f

a m of ac hiev me nts we go by ere description , this R av iv arman K u lase khara2 would come nearest to the Alvar K ulase k h ara.

. 1 at a His date however is A . D 2 66 to le st

. . 1 31 6 a a a m th e A D , d te cle rly i possible for Alvar fo r the re asons given i n the previous " a a p r graph . Th ere is besides the cruciai

’ evidence th at a record of the Ch ol a K u lottunga s 1 8 a . th ye r (A D . mak es provi sion for th e recital of one of the works of K u lase k h ara beginning Te ttaru m - tiral There is an 4 inscription in Pagan in Tamil ch arac ters of

a . E . H ul zr the 1 3th century ccording to Dr t ah .

th e c s uc o f a m anta a This records on tr tion , p , and the making of provision for burning a l amp in the temple by a K u lase k h ara N am bi of

’ 1 r r 2 Epigraph is t s R e po t fo 1 9 1 . 1 l 34 of 1 9 1 . ol . E p . C

r 8 . E pig aph ia I ndic a VI I I . pp . 9

’ 2 Fo r th e wh ole of th is ruler s h istory

see an artic l e by me in th e E ranak ulam e a zme or ul 1 C oll e g M g a f J y 9 1 9 .

3 - . 0 . 1 2 S ou th I ndian I ns c riptions I I I 7 pp 48 5 . ,

4 - n 1c . 1 97 8. E p . I d a VI I 0 34

Mah o da ar attinam Malaimandalam y p in . The record begins with quoting stanza 61 of the

Muk un damala. This quotation and the name

o f a of a e and the donor rgue priority the g of , may justify the assum ption even Of some anti

uit for a . q y , the Alv r

m K ulase k h ara We ust look therefore for , a at m ccording to the first inscription , so e

f m . a o . 1 0 dist nce ti e before about A D . 88 H aving regard to the commendatory verses of Manak k al N ambi we sh all h ave to look fo r a e m a him some consider bl ti e nterior to this , and adequately removed from the middle of

h e l h . D s m a 0 . t 0t . a 95 century A , y fro bout

K UL ASE K H AR A ’ S OWN E V I D E N C E ON THE P O I N T Before passing out of this portion of the subject ; le t us see wh at Alvar K ulase k h ara h as to say of himself in the works of his th at h ave c m a a 40 o e down to us . St nz of the Mukun damal a gives by way o f personal details no more th an th at the author was king Kula

' ' N asth adh arme na v as unic h ay e naiva

' Y ady ad bh avy ain bh avatu Bh agvan p ii rva [k armanurfi pam

’ E tatprzi rth y am mama bah umatam j anmaj amfi ntarépi ' ' ' i Tvatpadambh druh ay ug agatfi nisc h alabh ak t rastu . 35

se kh ara and . h ad e n am , he two fri nds ed D v ij anmav ara (best among B rahmans) and

Padmasara a was a (one whose rrow the lotus ,

am o f ia G o d L ama . n e the I nd n of ove , K ) He describes himse lf otherwise as the devotee of

‘ Vishnu which character of his is made c le ar in every stanza of the Sanskrit work . The part of his work included in the Tamil P rabandh am

m 1 05 a a and c o lle c co prises st nz s , goes by the tive name of P eramal Tiru moli the first word " h aving reference to the l atter part of his name

K ulase k h ara Pe rumal . I n the l ast stanza of e very section of 1 0 he descr i bes hi mself as the ‘ n author a d gives some personal details . Taking t hem all together these facts in regard to h im

a : am was K u lase k h ara h e was st nd out his n e , ruler o f Kolli (Q uilon) ; he was master of Kudal (Madura) ; h e was ruler over Koli

U a a a a . a ( r iyur , the Chol C pit l) I n nother of these stanzas h e c alls himself the ruler over 1 a a Kongu . Thus then we h ve ruler whose

a m was n m a a c p tri ony the ki gdo of Tr v n ore , with its capital Q uilon . Sometime in the course of his career he be c ame entitled either to the rule or overlordship of the Pandya and the Chola kingdoms with their c apitals

1 P rumal Tirum li 1 e o . 0 , I , I I . 1 0 , I I I . 1 0 in partic ular 36

. c a a and a respe tively of M dur Ur iyur . H e seems also to h ave ac quired possession of

Kongu . Thus he would have be c ome rule r

over the whole o f the possession of R av iv arman

K u lase kh ara referred to above . The inscription f o a . 1 0 88 . and c m d te A D , the o mendatory verses o f Manak k al N am bi make the ide ntifi cation of R av iv arman K u lase kh ara with th e

l a m K u se k A v r i possible . Alvar la h ara h as there fore to be located at a pe riod of time anterior to

M anak k al m r v n N a bi . The as c endancy o f T a a core which these ac hieve me nts o f K u lase k h ara ( m at all m a r i plies , does not see possible fte

A . D . 900 when the first gre at Chola Parantak a be c ame supreme in South I ndia when the Chol a

a a was a e U a . are C pit l T nj or , not r iyur We therefore bound to look for his position some

m a i a a c was ti e e rl er th an 900 . If h is scend n y a histo ric al fact sinc e we h ave it in so many

r m m a s a h a to wo ds fro hi self lone , we h ll ve put his time of life at some period whe n the dis position of powers in South I ndia would admit

a ala a c a c of Ker overlordship . Such s end n y woul d h ave been possible either before the rise of the gre at Pallav as under the dynasty of

N r . 600 a asimh av rman m . a someti e before A D , o r' afte r the collapse of this dynasty following

38

One of the two eleme nts of difference in th e was a l a order expl ined e ving only one item ,

a th e Tiru an a th t is , position of pp Alv r about whom there is a differenc e among th e a w authorities . Th e list th t as set out at the

’

. r c ommence ment from Sir R . G Bh anda k ar s book is the order of precedenc e according to the fabulously fanciful dates given to these

ac Alvars . When hagiologists tually attempted to a m to give these precise d tes , the order see s h ave been a recognised fac t . Vedanta D e sik a h as a o f P rabandh am 1 9 in section his , the th

a l Prabandh a S aram 1 8 order , which he c l s of a wa stanzas . The first stanz is by y of intro duc tio n ; th e next 1 2 are devoted o ne stanza

ac a and are out e h to the Alv rs , they set in the following order gIV I hg the name of the Alvar and a to a a and lluding the ctu l works , the

a a a h ac of number of st nz s cont ined t erein , of e h

the Alvars .

P o ai a y g Alv r ,

B h u dat a Alv r , a Pey Alv r ,

irum alisai a T Alv r ,

N am a Alv r ,

k v i Madh ura a ,

s k h r K u la e a a, 39 .

a a Periy Alv r , a And l ,

ndaradi odi To pp ,

iru analv ar T pp ,

Tirumangai Alvar . Stanza 1 4 deals similarly with the Ramanuj a N urrandadi of Amudan of Arangam making a a 1 5 and 1 6 up the P rabandh am 4000 . St nz s a a and a a repeat the counting of the st nz s , st nz 1 7 gives the names in th e order in which the y

a a a th e were be fore recounted . The l st st nz is ” usual P h alasru ti giv mg the name of the m author of the work P rabandh asara . It cannot be said th at Vedanta D e sik a in thu s c o mpos mg the P rabandh asaram did not know the

R amanu a N u rrandadi ff j , or the di erences in the order in whic h Tiru ppan Alvar and N am

Alvar h appened to be mentioned there . E ither he regarded the order followed by

Amu dan Aran a a of g m not chronologic l , or because he knew th at these differences in the said a at an a uthor were , y r te in his opinion , due to n error . In a y case we are bound to accept the order of precedence set out by Vedanta

D e sik a as a a the uthorit tive order in h is time . But the chief qu estion in connection with th is order is whether it was me ant to be 40

e chronological . The probabiliti s are th at they

and m a c an a a a were , the ost th t be s id g inst ’ Vedanta D e sik a s order be ing chronological is that it was the order of precedence in point o f time set o ut by h agiologists who came before m h im . As a atter of fact in the form in whic h the g u ruparamparas h ave come down to us the most elaborate among the m are the works of a

’ disciple and disc iple s disciple of Vedanta

D e sik a. Their works were based on the previ o usly existing g u ruparamparas of which o ne at least went bac k to the time of R amanuj a. Therefore then the orderin whic h the names o f these Alvars are arranged seem the chrono

a at an a c a logic l order , y r te the hronologic l

c c as a m order on eived by those long b ck . fro us

l c an as R amanuj a himse f . We hardly infer more from this order as stanza 8 referri ng to K u lasek h ara states that the Alvar was born in n 1 a a V a j ik ulam. The Alvar himself st tes th t he

1 . S tanza 8, P rabandh asaram .

Loirfflij czmi sr Q éfl Ou rrezir emm ib(Bar/55 m (3& 5 l q e fi q q r 5 éfi fl ’ f‘ eu glj cfd

’ ai Q eor f5 Lb®LJ LDIT®YT Ost ri Ou zr/b Gs rmilev 2637 §fg 76v §7air c e/ q ® r Ou g e mgba) minim /i g et/5 6h 4 1

w as ruler of Kolli (Q uilon) . I t is just possible

was son o f a a he the the ruler of Tr v ncore , but was born actually in Tiruv anjikk alam . I t would no t be constructive criticism not to re c ognise this order except for very satisfactorily s ubstanti al reasons . Such have not been a dvanced in regard to K u lase k h ara as we h ave h pointed o ut above . An attempt as been made to bring N am Alvar chronologically to th e

of a o f all position the l st them , which goes a a a a a a a and g inst the gr in of V ishn v tr dition , fo r which the positive proofs offered are perh aps

c m wa a are not worth criti is , in the y th t they

i are o ffered . There points in them which it will be just as well we examine here .

’ eiiru uil Ori /El ) ss ‘ l Q @ g g ar a /rem wcuiir GLoai g afi rfm Gw aiTQ /p Ogle ails- me me Oe nezir cor

e strOu n eirQ s /i 6 1 ir / a; Oai eor g 5 5 113 95 5 11 51 6211 5!) i 14 11 11 03we dy ' Cfi’ sa g cirOe ulr rscv éhfi uJ .

S ee also e xtrac t from th e B h ag avatam quote d

a ove re errin ifi - e ll . 8 . b f g sp c c a y to Periyar note . 1 , p L C T RE E U III .

WAS NAM ALV AR THE LAST OF THEM ALL

N am Alvar whose baptismal name was

Maran son of Kari Is by pre - eminence known by the name N am Alvar meaning our Alvar said by th e h agiologists to h ave been given to h im by no less an authority th an L ord R anga k n a i d ath a at Srirangam . It was alre dy po nte o ut th at he is regarded a s h aving followed the

a and as a am first four Alv rs , consequence , ong those of them whose life was c ast in a period Of considerable antiquity .

GUR U P AR AMP AR AI ACC OUN T

According to the guru paramparai ac count

N am a was 43rd da a Alv r born on the y of K li , the year P ramadi o n the full moon of th e

V aisakh a F a V isak h a. was month of , rid y , He

at K uruk ai of ad a o f born , the son the hik ri the township by name Kari and his wife Udaya

nangai . From birth the baby conducted itself

a a u m peculi rly t king no no rish ent , nor doing

wh at c hildren do in th at stage . The parents in sorrow for this peculiar birth gave him th e 4 3 n ame Maran and set h im in front of the go d and goddess of the Vish nu temple in the locali ty The child is said to h ave crawled along to the front of the tem ple where there was a tam arind tree and assumed h is seat at the foot of the tree in wh at is c alled Yog amu dra (the

u e attit d o f one rapt in deep contem plation) . He is supposed to h ave continued in this state for 1 6 ye ars when he obtained the inspiration by favour of Vish nu which found vent ulti m ately in the part of the P rabandh am ascribed to h im . i Such as be . was h e re quire d some one to a prop gate his gospel . The fit instrument for

h a a of a t is”purpose ppe red in the person B rahman of the top - knot community of the S amav e di section in the village Tiruk k olur in

h o e . a t t Tinnevelly district He is , ccording

ac c a ha th e this ount , s id to ve been born in

D v a ara u a 863 879th a a . p y g , ye r , the ye r

I sv ara m C h ittirai 1 4 of , onth , the th the bright

F a nak sh atra a. a fortnight , rid y , Chitr H ving

o i a a d ne his school ng he went on pilgrim ge ,

and th e a while in north in Ayodhy , he turned

a a a o ne and tow rds his n tive pl ce night , while

casting his eyes in th at direction he is said to ! h ave sigh te d a great column of ligh t of an 44

u B nusual character . eing curious to know

a was o f n wh t it , he thought returni g to his native country and kept j ourneying along in

the direction of th e light . At last he came to

a a a o r K u ruk ai m Alv r Tirun g ri , wherefro he

took the direction towards the south . As soon as he moved out towards the south he found

t h e light c h anging positio n to the north . He returned to the lo c ality where the light appe ar ed to h im and se arching fo r wh at might be th e cause he discovered the presence of the mira c u lou s Alvar indic ated He remained there .) fo r some time and putting N am Alvar a particul arly recondite question he got an answer w th at satisfied h im . He therefore sat do n to receive the inspiratio n of the Alvar which would throw light upon the various problems

o f and a a h im . life religion , which git ted N am Alvar gave his exposition at the instanc e of Vish nu himself in the works inc luded in the

P rabandh am r to m . They a e supposed e body th e truths that lay hidden in the four Vedas 1 and thus provided the means for the attain

' ' 1 é euzirOG/ar e Q L eér a nfi wa 'LflflneiT

LJ PfDTQ DL u r Z Q JO) aflM afi flwg e fi gg

' c revvrcac marlqtbwfl iu

‘ é’ mg fl é J L e rru car rf w g m G g 2a .

46

t h e N am a are N ath amu ni works of Alv r , his grandson Alav andar and the spiritual successor

o f Ramanu a a m n j , Pill n , not to ention the o e

a a a to Madh urak a st nz scribed v i himself . Madh u rak av i himself received two verses of c m a m N th om end tion fro a amu ni. This is so far the traditional account preserved in the

r guru pa amparas . We sh all proceed to an

e xamination of this .

As against this tradition o ne effort h as been a l n h E made at an ide t ifi c ation by t e pigraphists . A c e r tain ministe r of an early Pandya king is am a a a and g iven the n e M r n K ri , is described ” s h k h rak av i a a mad u ra av i. Minister Mad u was somehow equated with this Alvar and ‘ was made therefore posterior to this particular a inscription of A . D . The main re son for this is that N am Alvar is trad itionally said to h ave h ad a disciple by name Madh urak avi whose 1 1 stanzas upon his attainment of the

’ 7 proper Gur u in N am Alvar is included in the P rabandh am O ther details of the life o f this N am Alvar and his disciple as recorded a a a in living tr dition go ag inst this identific tion , a nd at the very best the identification on the

1 ~ — Th 2 1 . n im . 31 3 e A I . 7 a alai ns . E p . I nd VII I p 47

basis of th e occurre nce of the descriptive e pithet madh u rak av i to the neglect of all th e other essential details is of doubtful validity It is o n a par with the inference that Kulase khara was later th an Ramanuj a be cause the

Muk undamala a R a a cont ins the word m nuj a. There h as however been a more pretentious e ffort to make him the last o f the Alvars by the author of the Tamil Studies which while it e xhibits a c onsiderable amount of le arning bases its argument throughout u pon assum p m a a a a tions of the ost unw rr nted ch r cter .

’ P assing over what are perhaps positive misre re se ntatiohs p of others , it is not de sirable here even to go into the wh ole of the

a but ma a um det ils , the in rg ents deserve to be a m a e xamined . The first ssu ption of this uthor warranted by no historical source is that N ath amuni was a personal disciple of N am Al — v ar he h ad two disciples Sri N adamuni and — Madh urak av i to whom he taught his Tiru

ms E ; v ay moli and oth er P rabandh a . ven ac cording to h im the first heads the list of the ” Ac h aray as while the second is elevated to th a e rank of a saint (Alvar) . In reg rd to the fact that N ath amuni was a disciple of N am Al y ar no reason wh atsoever is given nor any ‘48

a a source of the inform tion indic ted . . Tradition me r a N ath amuni o ic ely st tes drew , by y g prao

~ Tiruv . tice , the forgotten ay mo li from N am Al

“ v ar with the assistance o f a disciple of

M dh ur k a a av i. If tradition is ac cepted it ought to be properly interpreted and expl ained ; be otherwise it ought to given u p . There is no evidence given for this assumption of dis c i le sh i o n a p p the p rt of the first Ach arya. If the two were alike disc iples why is the o ne only an Ach arya and why is the other an

Alvar . This differential treatment require s

‘ m a a h e so e expl n tion ; none such is o ffere d . T " Alvar belongs to th e earlier group and th e Ach arya to the later according to accepted Vaishnava tradition I n regard to this m atter he h as further down some arguments drawn from a misre pre se nta~

at ~ th e m a of a tion , very best isunderst nding ,

a m m m a c Tiru man st te ent of ine , in y rti le on

ai a a a 1 906. g Alv r , in the Indi n Antiqu ry for

We sh all return to this l ater . The first argument in favour of the position o fN am Alvar as the l ast of the Alvarsis the

al a a o i to i a cruci rgument , cc rd ng th s uthor , of

’ ’ m a of philology . He entions a cert in number

a are u a and S nskrit words which sed, by the Alv r 49

( ' which he says do not occur in the Sangam

I a two ou t of a works . will t ke j ust list th at h e gives . He speaks of Sodi (Sans .

i and Mak av aik undam a . a h a Jyot s) , (S ns M g

' or Makh a V aik u nth a) . The fi rst word is fo und in the Tiruv asak am o f Manikk av asagar and a am o f a and a at a of , Tev r App r p rt le st second term occur s in the very early Sangam works Paripadal and Purananuru . He refers

' a a to ama a m of a g in two gr tic l for s , the use

a rm and o f a a a double plur l fo , the use p rticul r

a i s a a tense p rticle , which st ted to be the us ge “ ” of this time by the commentator N ac h c h inar m a a k iniy ar. The com ent tor pparently uses the expression this time to mean the time following the classical age and does not seem w m an a . u a to imply y ‘ very n rro li its The cr ci l c h a test ac ording to t is uthor would thus fail . The second argument is based uponthe fact th at the works of the Alvars give evidence o f

a e a and e following the g of the Puran s , h refers to a passage of N am Alvar where there is an

h e L in r 1 apparent reference to t gapu ana. This

' 1 r . Q aflé afi fi g g qnnm g fi g ma mamcg tb am s éhqtb 621 61 915 § 162NT§ wp y n n axg ow/rQ /fi d r(p air 3 ) ai 13 ’ m w/5 . 95 0 9 15 61 m/9619 o m e g ( 5 fi g g g (sa ng g y ' ’ Q u mfl/é fl {fi ezfl mLflfl /rzziresevbnmi air / Lb Q u fli fuflé w Gw/r ) g ‘ g g j c l ’ IV 1 0 / fi m . . , Q 50

' begs the question . The age of the Puran as c annot yet be regarded as suc h a settled matter

'

t o a of a lic a i n x i dmit decisive pp t o s n th is fashion . a We sh ll have to revert to it again . Another a a m a N am p rt of this rgu ent , is reference in

a to w c am Alv r the use of flo ers , in ense , l ps ,

and a o 1 unguents w ter in the process f worship . He says th at these are from the rules laid down

in th e Puranas . I t will perh aps be more accurate to say these are the forms of worshi p a th e ama at an a ccording to Ag s , y r te , th e

P anc h aratra Agama . The next is an argument based upon the

“ statement that the chewing of betel - leaves was almost unknown to the Hindu populace

. prior to A D . . 500 The mention of the word betel by the Alvar is held to involve the

“ c hewing of betel - leaves by the populace A

a ma S ila adh ik aram quot tion is de from the pp , w hich this scholar describes as belonging to

u . D . a a th e second cent ry A , where there is cle r

’ 1 é m g . Gwaflg n repgfluD idlsvffig e a L} qa fi g oflg

mnofl a évbrL ér fi c éT maiTM W Q Q Jun au /769m fi g l W Q e

' 61 /é u) b w flé 5 615763) qm aaqtb 5 157 75 n g fl g g o Igc a g

'

7 u 575 s; a s . Q w oflg ©5 69 m m my ?) u cflseu g fb (1 g c

2 9 V . . . 15 1

reference to the chewing of betel - leaves ; but h e gets round this inconvenience with the remark but we doubt whether the custom h ad b so a a an - Adik al een univers l in the d ys of Il go , i ’ as t was in our Alvar s time . The assum ption in the first part of this remark as well as th at 1 in the next requires some demonstration . The next argument is based upo n the

' absence of any acrimonious reference in ‘ N am

’ Alvar s works to the Saiva sect whi c h he

. finds in some considerable number in the

‘ works of the other Al vars such as Tiruma lis n nd r d d ai Tiruma ai and To a a i o i . , g pp , etc He draws the inference therefrom th at this concili atory attitude o f N am Alvar towards the

’ ‘ / 1 . a d m gzl GJ IT z/Lb u rg/i ezirs mb Q w fb zsv u’ l é ) gg Cg g fl éy g g c g r ,

. 6mm)

’ E mbrm m tb wnGlm c i mGzirG /p weiJQ n r r 7 m ewm fi gg/m azc ér Q /iésmm b 11 5535 tang / moflm afl w ram fi airsofi m wnm qg cgozi fi cg é

Tiru a moli v y VI . VII . l .

Q g régg su u /i (Pu n/To rrid

' 5 /b6lto657rgé76mfi w Q wflm m g afi' es rmfg g ° ° m wu5 6 UHQ GUMJ afcgr®5 6vru

Sila adh ik fi r m X - a . V I l . l . 4 5 56. 38 pp p . 4 .

a ns-raj ri

‘ ’ Q v ésL wfi fi fia é Q GoJ /Tri (g kg tbu g qmm) R e fe rring to be tel le af and nuts bazar i 2 Ib d . V . 6. 52

Saivas was due to a sort of reconcili ation (that) h ad been effe c ted among the Saivas and ” a na a a t a m and B V ish v s , f er J inis uddhism h ad

been vanquished . Having regard to the age th at this scholar h as as c ribed to N am Alvar it a m would be h rdly possible to believe , fro wh at

t th e we know of the his ory of period , that suc h

c c ia h ad f c t re on il tion been ef e ed at all . The

normal inferen c e from this c on c iliatory spirit would be th at N am Alvar lived at a time when Vaishnavism and S aivism h ad to o rganise them

s l as a a B m and a m a r e ves g inst uddhis J , r the ( inis th an to a l ater period when a histori c ally u n

r h s war anted re c onc ili ation a to be postulated . The next argument involves two assu mp tions the first is that if ac c ording to tradition Tiru mangai Alvar m ade ar range ments for the

re c ital of the Tiru v ay moli annually in S riran gam th e author of the Tiru v ay mol i must h ave n visited Srirangam . How the o e follows from

the other it is not clear to see . Supposing as tradition says Tirumangai Alvar did muc h for organising worship at Srirangam and suppos ing th at he felt drawn to the Tiru v ay moli of N am Alvar which he arranged should be recited at a particular period of the year in i ' an am a aff am a ~ Srir g , how does th t ect N Alv r

54

th at wherever there is such a name it must

always h ave been drawn from a parti c ular

person . This scholar h as made an application

o f this kind , in connection with Tirumalisai a a Alv r , where there is reference to a Gun a bh ara which is inte rpreted as referring to the Pallav a Mahendra V arman The passage

‘ there refers to the G unabh ara wh o gave

’ us o ur body and prote c ts us in it and

‘ continues that those th at h ave learnt the t ruth will neve r find the courage to give H im

’

. a r an a c an up How refe ence (to e rthly ruler

a m Gu nabli ara be re d into this ter so used , ordin ary human i ntelligence fails to under I f it a . a in st nd . were term used c onnec tion with a particular temple or with a particul ar form of go d in a temple which might otherwise be conne c ted with the Pal

a a m a a c l v s , one y see subtle referen e to the living ruler as a c ompl iment . This is a supre mely good illustration of where such appli

’ N a cations fail . am Alv r s reference to Var a

1 ' S tanza 9 3o f th e N anm uk h an Tiru Andadi.

’ 5 i7t wp /ég flatu efrr Q wafi flggij u cfi ° — Li u iz§7 Gi g /T ; Q Lbu eiJ y uSI/iaf ti é m g % Q M / Q g c g ’ lg (3& e eom ca r 673r?637 G irCMg afi é g fi u tr ar 2 . f g

' fi ' w fi /é i d) aflg gg zsw UJ/Tfl Q uJa g m g ir . 5 5

gunamangai is of]almost the same character . B oth terms are terms of common use among th e Vaish n avas because a bh ak ta h as to postu l ate the Saguna B rah mam as Opposed to ” N ir una and a a the g One , gun s (qu lities) ascribed to such a Being cannot be the a f ordinary gunas . Th t is the im port o these and a a expressions , unless reference to hum n sovereign is otherwise actually warranted it will not do to put th at interpretation upon them . The next argu ment is th at N am Alvar omits

a o S l as a o the celebr ti n of rivil iputtur , ls Tirumangah This omission is explaine d in the case of the l atter as due to the non - existence

m ac and a of of the te ple in this pl e , in the c se ’ the former to th e fact th at th o u gh it h ad come

was into existence it not sufficiently prominent . The futility of such an argument is apparent in the obvious petitio princ ipi . The next argument is th at the Tiru v ay m oli hymns are set to particular tunes while those

Tiru n i r of even ma ga Alvar a e not . This is ascribed to the Vaishnavas h avi ng copie d this arrangement from the Saivas who adopted it a a and a a inv ri bly , since this rr ngement is pre i served only for N am Alvar he must h ave ‘ been 5 6

later . E ven in respect of the S aiva Adiy ars this was an arrangement introduced not by a m the uthors the selves but by others . I t m a requires usici ns to do it . The ancient “ classic Parripadal gives at the end of eac h poem the name of the author and th e n ame of the pe rson who set it to tune dis i t nc tly . Th at apparen tly refers to the custom

a was a or th t it the musici n , the professional cl ass of people whose duty it was to sing

t o t . hese , to set these p ems to unes Whether the Saivas copied the Vaishnavas o r the

a a a c Sa a o f V ishn v s opied the iv s , or both them

c m m a m opied fro so ething older , or e ch of the

a c a a followed the est blished ustom , this rr nge

ment is no partic ular test of age .

' The ne x t argumefi t h as referenc e to th at of the E pigraphists alre ady referred to at the outset and he falls foul of them because the ir

a m a . h a rgu ent would . le d to the conclusion t t

. B c a N am Alvar lived prior to A . D 770 . e use N am Alvar h as not celebrated the deity in the tem ple at An ai Mal ai which was founded in a a . 0 a . 77 the ye r A D , the inference is dr wn th t

a m a the Alv r ust therefore. h ve lived either

0 but im ossibi D . before or long after A . 77 the p lity of the first h as been proved in previous 57

f p ages . H e postulate s the hypothesis the

v a built ' at m eix e nditure ill ge so uch p in AND . 770 h ad l a i . 00 n . 9 a d f len nto ruins by A D , N am hence Alvar c ould no t refer to it .

“ la m m ta t ar u e nt ‘ in The st , the ost i por n g m favour o f o ur theory th at S atago pan was th e l ast of all the Vaishnava Saints is furnished by

a e N ath amuni one o h is two esteemed the g of , f

’ l s a disc ip e . It is here th at a misrepresent tion

f m m c m o y state ent o es in . According to the

a a a m N ath a u ni i s a tr dition l st te ent , m s id to m a . . 5 82 and a a h ve been born in A D , fter re in ’ ing in S amadh i at the foot of N am Alvar s tamarind tree fo r o v er 300 ye ars he died in

. . 9 2 2 . ac A D I wrote , discussingjust ex tly the points in the life of N ath amuni th at this scholar a t a i a th at a n kes into cons der tion , it cert i ly would not be u nreasonable to ascribe Nath a muni to a period beginning with the earlier half o f l h a the 0 t century A . D . This is ex ctly the c onclusion warranted by the proper under

a of a i a a st nding the tr d tion l ccount , which is t a N ath a n . and h t mu i was born in A . D 582 t hat he was in wh at is called Yogasamadhi

fo r 3 . 40 years . This would give th e date A . D

92 2 a ' of N ath amuni not for the de th , which is at ' all m a a all a i prob ble , t king circumst nces into 58

consideration . Why did th e h agiologists then ascribe this long life or long de ath in life to N ath am u ni The explanation is not far to n seek . They believed a d the Vaishnavas do

a was an believe even now , th t there unbroken

a and u a succession of these s ints , nfortun tely they found a gap between N ath amuni and the

last Alvar . This they bridged over in thi s

clumsy fashion . On the basis o f this I am convicted with believing in the statement n L th at N ath am u i was born in 5 82 . e t that

pass . We h ave alre adv pomte d ou t that there is no reason wh atsoever to assume th at N ath a muni was a disc iple of N am Alvar except in a

m etaphori c al sense . Coming to the actu al

’ a N ath amuni s a e to f cts , g is sought be deter mined by his h aving been born in a vill age Vira N aray anapuram taken to be a foundation o f the Chola king Vira N arayana or Parantak a I ; by his h aving died in G angaigondaso la a a R a a pur m , the found tion of jendr , the

n i o n - G a a daso la . . 1 0 1 1 1 042 and g g , A D ; by the fact th at he was the grandfather of Alav andar wh o died at Srirangam when R amanuj a was a m n a . a young In regard to part I , who is it th t asc ribes the birth of th e Ach arya to Vira

N ara ana uram P a h y p His biogr p er , whoever he 5 9 was and at h , the time of the biographer t e

a was as a ra an pl ce known Vir N a y apuram . The Cholas were in the h abit of c h anging th e am a a i and n es of pl ces in this f sh on , it does not m a a a was t e n th t the pl ce not in exis ence before , nor the temple in it . I t is tod ay known by

am K u ruk ikk v l n the n e a a a appa K ovil . It must a e a a am h ve b en known perh ps by th t n e before , and N ath amuni could h ave been born in th e H village without coming after Parantak a. e n died at Gangaigo ndasolapuram . Th at agai was not altogether a p e w foundation . I t is

a a m ga a a m t h e a h rdly ile nd h lf fro first pl ce , the pl ace of birth it is j ust possible there was a village there anterior to the springing up of the C apital city . There are numbers of “ respectable villages about . There is nothing to preve nt N ath amu ni h aving died in o ne of these places which the l ater biographer refer s to by the name of the vast capital city which took in all the villages around within its own

a a a a . limits . The tr dition l ccount , however , s ys th at he returned to his vill age to die . The last

a a Alav andar a a a f ct is th t , the gr ndson of N th

m e old R amanu a was . uni , di d very when j just

a m an ma a 2 5 . a young , y be bout Th t is the

be fact upon which we have to go . Wh atever 60

a a a a the v lue of the horoscopes , or the ctu l d tes

R amanu a as u ru aram ara of j , given in the g p p there c an be no doubt about the period of his life whic h was the l ater h alf of the 1 l th

century A . D . and the first part o f the follow in c g entury . Alav andar might have been born

a 60 a h im and N ath amuni bout ye rs before , his g randfather about that length or a little more so that a d i fference of 1 20 to 1 50 years bet wee n N ath amu ni and R amanuj a wo uld no t err o n the side of too much liberality . Th at

a N ath amu ni was m would me n , born so ewhere

u about A . D . 900 . B t th at is o f no use to this question as the direct discipleship of N ath amu ni to N am Alvar is a mere unwarrant I n a ed assumption . f a infere nce c ould be dr wn

m a o e h a iol o ists fro tr diti ns pres rved by g g , we ought to look for N am Alvar the three centuries and a h alf almost o f the y ogic years of N ath a muni previous to the age o f the l atter . Th at would take us to the middle of the sixth cen

a no t a m a . tury , in itself perh ps n i prob ble time We sh all investigate this further later o n in

the c ourse of this thesis . Before passing on it would be j ust as well to point out that it is not i n any spirit of carping th at th i s somewh at detailed criticism of other

62

l ist 1 s tradition ally also brought i n along with t a a w his group of three , but th t tr dition ho ever exhibits the clumsy efforts by me ans of which t his position is sought to be attained . Ac c ord

ing to the story B h ak tisara or Tirumalisai h ad t o re m ain for the long period of 700 years in the Y og asamadh i to come into c ontact w a Fa a a ith ll v ruler of Kanc hi . This is ap pare ntly the usu al c lumsy effort to get over the c h rono logl c al inc om patibility when the h agio lo g is ts se t abou t at te m pting a p re c ise c h ronology

bu t the assoc i ation be tween B h ak tisara with the sh rine Yadh o k tak ari preserved in t h e tradi l al a . are tion is , in prob bility true There a few separ ate verses quoted to suppo rt his

c c th c a and a a onne tion with e lo lity , wh t tr ns p ire d there be tween h im and the Fallava king o f the town being fugitive pie c es they are open t o the suspi c ion th at they might h ave been

m fo r co posed the purpose by others , but there is one unlooked for pie c e of evidence which see m s to lend some support to the associ ation of B h ak tisara wi th this parti c ul ar shrine

‘ in K anc hi e n the o ne side and a Fallava

ruler on th e other . A long poe m of the

' ’ Sangam c o lle c tron cal led Pattuppattu refers i tself to the e arly ruler of Kanchi known to 63

s Tondaman I landira an d e sc rib l iterature a y , ing h im as a patron whose bounty would satisfy the utmost wishes of those th at sought a a it . The poet le ds on his prospective b rd s eeking patronage through various loc alities

a and a outside K nchi , entering within m kes spec ific reference only to this shrine of Yadh o k 1 takari called in Tamil V e h k a. The author o f this poem was a B rahman des c ribed as K adiy alu r R udran K annanar who also cele brates in another poe m of the same collection t h e great ancient C hola Karikala. This raises

the presumption th at the . Pallav a contempo rary of Bh aktisara was probably the To ndaman

I landiray an . To ndam an I landiray an turns out from a re a ference to h im by Po y gai Alv ar to h ave been

c m a u and a wa onte por neo s with him , in y con firms the presum ption raised by the indirect

reference in Bh ak tisara. The V e hk a Or Yadok

t a a a as a k ri , referred to bove speci lly connected

“ Bh ak tisara G o d with , the doing his bidding

as th e a am m a was S nskrit n e e ns , the birth place of Po y gai Alvar whatever his particular

‘ 1 . l fi Em cs s noe err t bd ép a a fi q/u t ls mm u n r éfi ‘ e rg g

u flmu W Du efi afi ww/i/é r/é s e a g z vix .

' P e rumbfi na u ad i 3 - rr pp a 11. 71 3. 64

B a v age . efore investig ting the e idenc e avail

' a a Po ai a m ble to loc te y g Alv r , it would be eces sary to consider the period allotted to h im in the work alre ady drawn upon in connection with N am Alvar . This work quotes a stanza e a m P o ai a and a 1 ch fro y g Alv r Pey Alv r , which refer to a place called V innagaram where God Vishnu is said to h ave been seated while in three other holy shrines mentioned along with this in the same stanza he is stated l c a and a . respe tively to be st nding , lying w king

a m of a The pl ce entioned in the order st nding ,

and a are V e nk adam sitting , lying w lking

a inna ar V eh k a Yadh ok tak ari at (Tirup ti) , V g , ( )

a r K nchi and Ti uk k o v alur. The philologists author would der ive the Tamil V innagar from

Vish nu - N agar which h as no justific ation in grammar fo r the kind of c oalescenc e brough t

' r A n i F i st dad 77 . 0 ‘ m fi u SgJTM 83 G fo u c fl s /r G m gpfn o S 5 10 m as aqm e

zé/Q L fbi/ t dr (B n r a rg a an a? G u fi d ema> 5 fn i s m

réiezir ezrfl é s nair e é n ér G L /fi é /TQ W qy g r g r Gl adTC/jl év 675 ® tomn7g rh i 2 d . Th ird An iid . 6

O ‘ 80“ GM U aSl/fi m fl ]? Gm fi its n fb 61576 N B LD Gm fo asrt fi —if wezfmem s mb LD /TLDITL msuin6w 5 e re ,

' ir Q G /rel . Q geérg m é emg Q g g d fi qbaj méj a fl e a é m

' / / o szzr m 536035 q air e rr b . v g , (g i y é f 65 :

a o . about by th e combin tion f the words . Dr

H ultzsc h and his assistants derived - it from he V ish nu Grih a . It will be seen in t second of the stanzas referred to above th at it is brough t

n- in contrast with Ma nagar (city on earth) .

- i a a a . Th s compound , is Vin n g r of He ven)

. Thatzis again anoth er matter . Deriving it i n

, ma to a this nner , he seeks identify the pl ce with

Para e sv ara V inna ar Tiru man ai a m g of g Alv r ,

H u ltzsc h a taken by Dr . to h ve been built by

the Pallav a k ing Parame sv ara V arman . This identification is made o n the ground th at the g other places me ntione d in connection with this

Vin - n agar are in Tondai N adu (Fallava

and a o ai and e P B a . e country) , th t y g y Alv r wer

“ l ocal sai nts and their peregrinations were confined to Tondai N adu The other plac e s

are all m a a and ' if not of the in Tond i N du , Tiruk k o ttiy u r and Tiru malirunj olai are well

are a am and Tiruk k ov l r known , so Tiruveng d a u The wrong notion arises in the conce ption th at every pl ace referred to by an Alvar must

“ h ave been visited by h im . The absurdity of the position becomes apparent when the second of these Alvars referred to Park k adal (K sh irabdi) and V aik unth am itself to either

of which certainly he . did not travel in 66\

th e course o f his peregrinations . These are mere allusions to places of holy reputation at

° the time . The case is different when an Alv ar l ays himself out to c elebrate a particular shrine when the presumption of a visit and actual p resence may be warranted . It is unnecessary

' t o postulate a V isit and absurdly narrow . t h e a a a ai re of the peregrin tions of these s nts . C oming to the V innagar under disc ussion there are five of these in the Chol a country in addi

P ra e sv ara V inna aram a tion to a m g in K nchi . The actu al reference here is V aik unth a Vin

h e Tah ore n agar near Shiyali in t j district . The only difficult y about this identifi c atio n is th at it does not enable us to bring the Alvars

a e our a down to p riod of , own choice , the l tter h alf of the seventh century A . D . LECTURE ' IV

THE FIRST ALV ARS

i L e t us now procee d o n the way th at th e

a us—Po ai B h utam are e vidence le ds y g , , Pey , a ll three of them regarded the first Alvars in

p oint of time . With them Tiru malisai gets

a is c associated later . This l st losely associ ated with V e h k a (Yadh ok tak ari temple) in K anchi

' by a miracle that Vishnu performed by vacating m and a wa the te ple first returning to it fter rds ,

at the bidding of his de votee . The shrine is mentioned as a prominent fe ature of Kanc hi i n the poem Pe rumbanarru ppadai of R udran

' K annanar c mm a o n o n . The o ent ry the work Tamil prosody called Yapparu ngalam quotes

one a largely from uthor , who is referred to as e 1 Po y gaiy ar. Of th se quotations two verses

re m a uch to the point here .

'

1 . uflm ifiu ei u asaJCfu iT c gj y gg — Og iéig j m wngg uJ /i fi g w amg57 ‘ m v n ull / g wnzs g g e /T e fi emgi mQ ai r t eu sfi rfigné ga to b ) g / m [ pp 4 5 and 51 8

all /5 /w ‘fi w omer LD LDLJ6U ( 5 g ei D ? w y , cg G @ l n wQ Q mQ Q Q J T/i ifi gog /a fi ew (Sh an nan (39 111 8 2511 3?

' es Q M /rwm m a m ra/ewes - Q e . 1 33 t/ Q . [ p .

’ ewan h ur B D Ba ad S . h avanandam Pillai s e dition of Y a run pa gala V ritti urai. e r L on mans p y M ss s g Co . 68

The first of these spe c ifies the name of

Tira an and c a a y , the se ond Chol ruler Terk

c mm a as killi . The o ent ry refers to the first

“ th e natural name Po y gaiy ar speaking o f the Chol a and Fall ava in c ompliment together

ma all t th e a and two would ke hree , uthor the

m ~ a m a . m m p trons , conte por ry It ust be re e ber ed in this conne c tio n th at th e c h arac ter of th e

e referen c e le aves something to be desi red . Th l arger se c tion of Tamil grammar dealing

“ m r a a and o rul with i port (A th of S ns , p of Tamil) h as its fi rst two se c tions devoted

“ ‘ respe c tively to emotion and ac tion I t is a re c ognised c onvention th at the tre atment of a subje c t in the first mode is of the “ dram a ” t ic c harac ter (nadah a v alak k u ) ; and th at in the second mode is of the c harac ter o f actu al life (ulagav alakk u 1 These two references

“ n are of the. former c ategory ; but there is o

in c was m a as a point the referen e , unless it de c ompliment either to the patron himself or to

c s a descendent of his . Hence these referen e may be interpreted as me ant in di rec t address

’ 1 —P ran r s o mme n o n S tr S e e . I lam fi a C t ii a

A oru l 56 of h app .

’ v . id m r o . h am i (Mr. G a ba P llai s e dition)

70

wh o is otherwise known K ariy arruttunj iy a

N e u d m K illi . There are good re asons for regarding th i s latter as the Chol a wh o

c c a 1 su eeded the great K rikal a. There are seventee n poems celebrating thi s

a am i th e c P n N l Kill in ollec tion ura anuru . The

e a ira an other p rson ge referred to , T y , is known to the literature of this period only as I landi rayan assoc iated closely with Kanc hi as its

V iceroy . Thus these two rulers come in th e generation following almost immediately th at of the gre at Chol a K arikal a.

‘ From wh at was said we come to the c onclu sion th at there was a P o y gaiy ar who was con

m a all a a te por ry , in prob bility , with the Tond n n n ma Il am Tiray a a d the Ch ola N alam Killi . This author is quoted i n the commentary on

Y apparu ngalu m as P oy gaiy ar. There are

a m Po ai ar c o m other quot tions fro y g y , in this mentary and in th at of Pe rasiriy ar (equivalent of the Sans . Mah ac h ary a) on the Old gram matic al To lk a i am i a fe w work pp y , which g ves P details in regard to the author . e rasiriy ar w o a m c m a a hg is u h older com ent tor th n the other , and is among commentators o ne of the most

1 , i n 2 - Anc n i . 35 . e t I d a . pp 55 7 1

“ respected re fers to the andadi . v e rse s of lP ai arl and oth ers and ts a o y g y , pu these long

Mu ll ir . side of the old classical work tto ay am This is an unmistakable indication that the

Po ai ar a as ma y g y quoted is the Alv r , his in

and th e o ne am a a work , only in the T il Pr b n

d am Tiruv andadi. h , is the first The purpose of the quotation in this particul ar connection is to illustrate th at other and abnorm al modes of composing verses th an those laid down fo r th e particular class were alre ady in consi derable

of vogue . This ide a independence of the rules of prosody 1m authors is noted in regard to Po y gaiy ar by the other commentator in h is 4 comment on Sutra 0 . After quoting three

’ stanzas of Po y gaiy ar s; irregular from th e j am a a mm m strict gr m tic l point of view , the co e

a to a ‘ are t tor proceeds note th t , though these irregul ar they ought to be ac cepte d as arsh a T m “ ( a aridam) . He defi nes arsh am as the

“ Composition o f rishis who were able to u nde rstand a ll a u “ bo t this life , the life here

C omme nt on S fi tra 2 40 o f th e s e c tion

2 r. 5 o h e l e M . . on Pro s o dy p . 5 f t at C W

’ ' Th amo th aram Pillai s editionunde r

' ’ th e mistak e n nam e N ac h c h inzirk iniy ar s

c omm n e tary . 72

a and a and zfuture u fter the p st , present , q oting

as a th e o d w r his uthority l o k o nprosody : called

- P lm attiy a am bu . Hence it is cle ar th at in

c a a a t m s P o ai ar omp r tively e rly i e even , y g y c ame to be regarded as a superhu man

a . c omm a 94 person lity I n enting on Sutr , this same commentator quotes two stanzasl

of the first Tiruv andadi of Po y gai- Alvar under the name P oy gaiy ar as in the other cases a before . This quot tion puts it beyond doubt that t h e P o y gaiy ar of the commentator is no other I than P oy gai Alvar . t is cle ar from this series o f re ferences th at the poet Po y gaiy ar quoted

as a a and a a a uthority is the Alv r , th t he pp rent ly was the author of other works th an the o ne a ppe aring under his name in the P rczbcmdh am c ollection . There is one such recently publish ed which exhibits the ch aracteristi c fe atures of

’ a m this Alv r s co position , besides giving conclu ’ sive evidence of the author s devotion to a I nnilai Vishnu . This is the work c lled included in the Sangam collectionof shorter ” p oems This work of 45 stanzas ch allenges a and ready c omparison with the Kur l , is

deservedly held i n high esteem . It shows the

‘

1 ~ n i 5 1 and 69 of th e fi rst Tiruv a dad . '73

' ' ' pec u liarities l of v e rsifi c atio n. and arch aisms i ii

‘ l anguage th at ' would ' stam p it as the work

' Of the Alvar . The fi fth stanza of this work

. . o m is quoted by . P e rasiriy ar in his c m e nt o n Sutra 1 1 3of th e prosody se c tion Of the

To lk a i am and a c ro babl b mis pp y , s ri bed , p y y H a ar t a Bh u tattar. o w ke , to the mist ke ose it is difficult to say . O ne . explanation see ms

possible . Th e two A lvars were so closely asso c iate d with e ac h other and their works

' so m a i n and a a were si il r both form m tter , s in t h e P rabdndh am s a are they most ssuredly , t h at the great c ommentator fell into error m nodding like gre at H o er himself .

THE S E EAR L Y A LVA R S BELO NG To TH E S O T EC ND CE N URY A . D .

Then arises th e ' que stio n whether he is the

' s ame as the Poy gaiy ar wh o c elebrated th e g re at Chola Sengan in the poe m Kalava li forty another o f the collection above

r e and two m P urananuru ef rred to , poe s in the

- upon the C hera king Kok K o daimarban. O n c onsiderations of literary criticism this author n f is regarded as different . I n o e o the t wo

poems in the Pu rananu ru he says o ur! t own

” ‘ is Tondi referring to th e Tondi of th e C h e ras . 74

- a Po a a a The birth pl ce of y g i Alv r is K nchi ,

ac all a cording to ccounts . Another expl an a

a a and tion is perh ps possible for the st temen t , th at is th at he was referring to the town of h is

a as h is a h im o r p tron , own out of reg rd for in m ere compliment . I n case the two authors

t o am th e P o ai ar should prove be the s e , y g y who celebrated the Chola Sengan and released

m a a fro prison his own p tron , the Cher king , would fix the limit of time . In a ny case the difference is not likely to be many generations . The age o f Po y gai Alvar should be the age o f

a a a . W a ( t a th e the l st S ng m h tever h t be , striking similarity betwee n the K u m l of Tiru

’ v alluv ar and P o y gaiy ar s I nnil ai would make n m him e arly in the age of the S a g a . I h ave disc ussed with the requisite fullness the ques tion of the age o f the S ang am in my bo ok The Beginnings of South Indian History I h ave not seen anything of evidence offered by my critic s to c hange the position ; nor have my own further studies given me re asonto ch ange my views . The question still rests u pon the sync hronism established betwee n

' th e bo dy of rulers of this period and Gaj a

n a c a B ahn of Ceylon . The e w epigr phi l light th at comes from one of th e Pandya grants goe s 75 .

so far only to confirm t h e concl usion I arrived at n years ago . Still keeping a open mind upon the question and being constantly on the l ook out for substantial facts or re asons in support ofany

fo r S an am am other period the g , I believe I

a a a h e a w rr nte d in scribing , in t present st ge of a rese rch upon the question , the second century

. f P o i . A D . as the age o y ga Alvar The com ment of Pe rasiriy ar alre ady quoted refers to

andadi P o ai ar and a the verses of y g y oth ers , descriptio n which implies the two others

. Bh u tattar and Pey Al v ar at any rate . This

" connec tion of? the three is borne out by the

m a and im si il rity of style sent ent , which

‘ a e is very close indeed , mong the thr e

nd d s m a a i . We ight then ascribe these a a c d . e rly Alv rs to the se on century A D . th e

a e am Tira an a am and g of Il y , N l Killi

S e nguttuv an .

THE TR A D I TI ON A L ORDER O F THE S E S U PPORTED ON OTHER GR OUNDS

We h ave alre ady shown the re ason fo r th e

i a a at an a m : th e princ p l inference , th t y r te , fro days of R am anuj a there came to be a recog nis h ‘ e d . c ro nolo ic al in e a h e , g order r g rd to t es

' A a and that it was , lv rs recognised order . which , 6

. w n m m at was a ith o ly one inor odific ion , ccepted

b ‘ y the h agiologists and handed down to us e l aborated in the fashion it is in the guru

parampara. There is however an inscription f 1 o date 1 1 8 and referring itself to the reign of

V ik rama h a c s C ol . whi h specifies the N ak atra a m ( steris under which they were born) Of two o f a a . Po ai a and the e rliest Alv rs , viz , y g Alv r

Bh u tat u t Alvar . The asterism is given as esta T am . K e t i Jy ( ta ) . According to th e h agiologists these were born respectively i n a a a and D h ni ' Sr v n a sta. This raises the ques

, far a i are and tion how the h g ologists correct , whether we should no t prefer the inscription

t o a the h giologists . I t is just possible th at in

t his partic u lar / th e h agiologists are wrong ; but t h e question arises th at in regard to this detail wh at better information the writer of the insc ription c ould h ave h ad ; the presumption w ould be the hagiologists put th emselves to the t rouble of investigat ing the matter when they se t

t m a . he selves up to . write the lives of these s ints

. The inscription - writer could h ave been under

no Such Obligation . He might simply h ave set down ' wh at he might honestly have h eard about

’ ' th e ma r O d Or m m tte either utsi e , fro the te ple l 1 h n pe ople . Th at after al is a 2t ce tury piece

78

" o f d i S a and as 1 escrib ng iv Vishnu one ,

although t hey do recognise th e united form as

Vishnu . From this we advance o ne stage

w m N am hen we co e to Alvar . He is a little more of a Vaishn ava and continues to regard

a a with ' s m ath s these S iv s y p y no doubt , but doe not ge nerally give Siva the s ame pedestal th at h t e e arlier Alvars do . Tirumah sai comi ng bet w een the two h as something ch aracteristic to

sa Of a h c a o f y the riv ls , w i h is indic tive

' i h is attit ude towards them . Tradit o n say s

‘ t at o a m a a t re h he pr cl i ed , we h ve le rn the ligio n of the S ak h y a (Buddhism) , we h ave

1 I Jfl air 5 11 5 6607657 m uni) eiroflewg eir ii @ ( ) C g/ c g g @ , O — Q Q JDU /I GV LD 6ZD / 603/ fé} G n fl mfleb ai emmgrié J rt rt ’ ’ 5 ® LD wfld u afi dqém e wg f GQ i év Gmufl O ' sac/5621 6?nifi {S HII GLD GD'HQ UJ ITQ JTQ L ir t An a F s d di 5 .

‘ ii i ®LIJ 6ffi LL LD eéT ai tb (I?) gag g ai eore za 5 /@ 07J xfi g y g ‘ ° — Om eziru nigg 5 6g mi gecgg au b %Q MJITLOaiaizrrewrw fl/ie im aui 6 6UhI Lfi /f

UJ é ) wm e fi fi u ifQ /r nfi fil m y . i S e c ond Andad 60 .

(3) fi fl ébF GZDl—UJLZ) [gmg oiniqw grem wggaj m 5 5 5 1760 113 ’ (fi ip fl fi y tbQ u naiTQ Q ggz/ibGg treziTg /Lorreil ’ ‘ ’ Q fl m g g aflu mqib fi g w amGc -wé ewe é g

e e- 351 3 61 Owheér ufl /i g 605 ) w mjg g .

' ' Th ir Andadi 3 d 6 . 79

re li io n o f: ama a ainisim le arnt the g the Sr n (I ) , we h ave examined the Agama of S ank aranar (Saiva Agam a) but by fortunate good luck we

’

' h ave come to rest ou r faith . in the B l ack One

"

‘ - with re d eyes : and got rid of all th at is evil . 1 There is here after nothing impossible to us .

a a as This is fugitive piece , the v lue of which , e i th e am a vidence , m ght be . doubted ; but s e ide is found repe ated almost in ide ntical terms but

' far less aggressively in stanza 6 of his work

“ ” N anmu an Tiruv andadi a a Sa g This st nz ys ,

' S ram anas are a B auddh as the ignor nt , the

i a a intb a h ve f llen delusion , the followers of Siv are unknowing innocents and those th at will 2 not worship Vishnu are low people indeed . m a m a Si il r senti ent , but identifying Siv with Vish nu is found scattered through the works of N am a m a a Alv r . In one of h is poe s lre dy referred to above he makes reference to the

1 ’ (5 1 5349111 121 a rBQ /i tb e meéme b / w é s rfi la fl r Cj r Cp gg

nirmanufié CEe rnh- u nei@wsie rré)

Oar/El asL a zfi wrrfis‘ arer Gerri/EQ uJ /TEQ Q Q G WM

. H IE/5 L e wO eér é ) fl e /r fi .

2 nlwmr e eomtl iu fr mr u m , g /g m e e G fi g fi

' O dt lleb— l w w Q flUJ/Tflt £61] fi u fi u fi g Gaj ffi n Lorr§ 6v 266r Q wfi g flg fli} ° w d g enre/617 aJ/ris rrall n z. 80

a m of and r n det iled ite s worship , efers disti ctly

Adi ar and Bh a av ar 1 to y g , possibly indicating the existenc e of Siva B h aktas along with Vishnu ” Bh aktas . In the te n from which the above

a out n a is one , he bre ks i to hymn of th anks giving for th e success of the propagation of bh czk ti m a ar to Vishnu , by e ns of which the e th w s f 2 a o a . a rid the evil , K li On the b sis therefore of the development of the struggle of the sc hool of bh czk ti and bh ak tas against

' B m and a m a e of th e se uddhis J inis , the g ,

Bh ak tisara and N am a w Alv r , ought to follo m i mediately that of the first Alv ais . Madhura

’ kavi s work in the P rabandh am is only 1 1 stanzas on devotion (bh akti) to his guru and

into e ne ral uf c does not come k g line s fi iently for c riticism of th is kind ; but he pl ac es himself in intim ate c onnection with N am Alvar as h is

and a a as . disciple , in ordin ry f irness critics we a ought to c onc ede him the honour . In Kul

2 . 2 S e e v e rse qu ote d in note p 5 .

° i 2 . fi t Lb fi otb fli Q I L/ asa9 ui j > 1 0 g cg qg gfl 6714 e n és mu p fi u Q u /fi eziru d fm tbOu g e c 7 ezir a i m n 5 n UJGDQ SNJ mam m Oearibw/r g an/ a ir e g e ms ar [ m ’ ww l D a mg ufg mQ S TQ JBTL GUTQ Q

2 . ru a mo i . 3 Ti v y l . V . 81

sekara we do reach a very high stage of

' e nth usiastic devotion to the god of his he art . Almost th e same might be said of P e riy alv ar and a and d l his d ughter , these woul fol ow S atak o pa on this basis ; but when we pass to Bh ak tangrire nu we see a pronounced attitude o f hostility to the B auddh as and Jainas ; one may trace a hostile reference to the S aiv asl

v a lso . Yogi ah a or Tiruppan h as only 1 0 stanzas in the P rabandh am which give us h ardly a hint of his personality ; and in Tiru ma a a a Of m s to ng i Alv r , l st the , it is pos ible ) the detect occasional reference to the inferiority of

'

S a in h is a - w a iv gr ce besto ing qu lity to Vishnu ,

u h o stilit to a a but of prono nced i y the S iv s ,

n o ut there is perhaps o t very mach . He goes o f his way to cele brate th e early Chola King

K o - Sengan in 1 0 stanzas celebrating Tiru; ma a u ma a m r iy r , wherein he even kes the st te ent

L ‘ 1 ‘ ZaJuJ TI Lo/I Q filefiT ro i G l G E LD GGUTQ LD SV GV ITLD q r qg g

a w /395 es fo nio mi s /i n r g r 5 251) n s qGOiJTOeEHQ Q JGzir g efi iu /E/ e rraim rllezir g nu /r

6926 ) sullen/El m a; Oa /big 6 5 Q Q ai anmir n r r 2 e é g

l OQ J /u Ou /T EM T Lfi sfm 61 71 5765) m nemfi ezir Q O (E LD I n i 25 e aii a i

u /Du eir 3 (L Gi O flgz flwevra (1 1 e i ma/Gig mme /7&7 [ L i/763)

’ fi Ou m as g an i io év ‘ / g fl g qrrfi ewevq mgi G is

“q in n/Emu) ” me m /TQ W 4 ,145 e cg .

ir Th o u an : Tiru miil i an 8 F st s d a 7 d . 82

a a 70 m th t he (Seng n) built te ples to S iva. This Chola king is one of the recognised

Adi ars a and th e m ac c y of Siv , ir le whi h Siva

performed in c onnection with him comes in fo r

‘ allusio n both S ambandar and a frequent in App r , the two Te v arm hymne rs of the early 7th c entury . After all the re may be a c onsiderable amount of personal equation in this matter and t a c a c o f his lone nnot be held to be de isive age .

OTHER CRITE R IA OF A G E

are o c a a There ther riteri , however of perh ps a m a c a ac me a c ore reli ble h r ter , by ns of whi h ,

e f we c an fix the ag o some of these . We have already pointed out the reasons why N am

t l c Alvar c ould no be referred to the 0th entury . There is one more point whi c h might be

c c onsidered quite de c isive . He elebrates th e t m Tiru e rna ar a c a e ple pp g , ordin rily lled

K ov iladi now in the Tanjore distri c t .

th e a a There is in first st nz of the ten , the

‘ statement th at Tiruppe rnagar is On the southern

a th e Po nni Tiru e rna ar b nk of pp g is ,

‘ ‘ f ‘ l . G n v t b Za) OweirG ziraireor n na9@ @ e Zo e g fi cgwe wsziTGm ére; p iu iiiqg fie frair

i (5 n manila/fig ? new ) G u nefiT euffi Gg eit u i d)

i mirei) (li ar/ i g n: O air Q Gu GJ fi g fe g £5 .

' iru m i 8 1 T v iiy o l JX . . . 8 3

' a m a a north e rn bank I m infor ed , ctu lly on the

' of the Kaveri and the southern - bank of th e

n a a fo r C o leroo . The only expl n tion possible this disc repanc y iS ' th at in his days the C o le roo n was as th e a as m a b known K veri , it ust h ve een , because the two branches into which the Kave ri divides itself as it strikes the island of Srirangam reunite at th e so uthern end Of the w isl and . Wh at as the Kaveri perh aps took o ff a l ittle way below from the main river ; the ch anne l now known as the Kaver i is called i n the locality Solan Kaveri ; and i according to the K o ngude sa Raj ak k al the channel of the a was constructed by ' K veri a a a a a so n V i a ala e Adity , the K rik l Chol , of j y y a n i d father of the great Chola Parantak a. H s ti me would be be tween V araguna P andya

6 - 6 and P r n 0 r 8 7 8 a a tak a 9 7. If N am Alva located this pl ace o n the southern side of the

Go le ro on and c a a lled the river K veri , he must h ave lived before h im. We h ave therefore to h im a and a look for much e rlier, the test pplied in the previous paragraph perh aps holds good

r in his case . We ought therefore to look fo

N am a at a bh ak tas Alv r time when the , both n c m of Vishnu a d Siva were oming into . pro i

ne nc e and Of bh ak tas , when the work these 84

was be ginning to tell upon those people th at were following the persuasion of the Buddh a 1 and a. 5 Jin About the th century A . D . would

m a m fo r h im and seem the ost suit ble ti e , stylistic and literary criticism would support

this view . The main part o f his work is c alled

iru T v a mo li. a m a y This n me , so e scribe to

m a a a as a a for tion by n logy , the S iv work

Manikk av asa ar was a Tiruv asa am of g c lled g , implying the posteriority of the Alvar to th e Saiva saint . In truth the n ame Tiru l P r v ay mo i means the Veda. The a ipadal

“ ” distinguishes V ay mo li (the Veda) from ” 2 Marai (the Upanishads) . I n fact the l atter

“ 3 u i s c alled V e dattumarai. Tir mangai

1 a/ 5 m s- air u evu ev é w a } . enem 1 a m gl afl u né (5 c a p fi fi

r dim d) ca/m u ni u ev u ev a mefél JGUJQ HLJGDQ J Q /T e/ (Q (5 ‘ g

' ain /Ei ui u ev u eva meiQ /fi ezir o/i 7 u ntitllewaj s mb p g eg 56 e r ’ Qj eo'onéig eldTQ Q Q m fl uflma d (flair e eohrGQ JL Lm ss

T i m 9 iruv ru tta 6.

’ w um fl tfi Gmfi fl ai m/ni r; 2 . n a é t g c e ’ w an n m xifJGmWfiL GuJ /mm . i g

Lfl /iQ fl /i nm tb anmm nfi e fl /fi . p e Q g e q ( g g

P - m mm . I I ]. . 1 1 1 4 (EOuJ emOwflbélqnmfi g t j m [ ll .

1 75 s ? 3. r/111 66 11 (Sal inge 5 g a es

6. Ib id 1. 6

86

a i e s of h as qu l fi d to ing in glory Vish nu , but he also attempted doing SO in Tamil very much like the blind cow that j o m s i n t h e frolics of the seeing one . Th e name apparently goes back to antiquity wh ich would make imitation n of Ma ik k av asagar impossible . In the absenc e o f m a a a i d am si il r uthorit t ve prece ent , the n e Tiruv asagam may reasonably be argued as h aving been formed by analogy from the

Tiru v a m ol y i. We h ave given reasons enough to show th at

K u lase k h ara m h av e fo llo we d a a ust . perh ps e rly

' F r in the 7th century or late In th e 6th . o

Pe riy alv ar we have got the le ad from himself .

a m an He refers to two person ges , one of the Officer of some influenc e in the c ourt of the Pandya and attached to th e tem ple o f Tiruk

k i u r a h im o tt y . The Alv r refers to twice i n the course of his works and on both o c c asions exhibits great regard fo r him as a devotee of 1 a a far. Vishnu , but th t does not le d us very I n another connection he refers to a c ertain

' 1 . 51 1611 aliOcsrreriT uflebevrr 4 go c n

’ mm fi fi k sn l tp wfi fi s n m fi mum g iifii n sfir

fi w ta 9 6m Gnc m M Q Gu n e fi es /1

’ ei ij u fi Q wav fang ) ; g om g gg g . 87

Pandya king whom he calls Nedu Maran . 1 I n yet another connection 2 he refers in g eneral terms to th e Panday a wh o set up the

fish emblem on th e Himalayas . These two attributes are given to the Pandya who forms t h e subject of the modern illustrative stanzas of the Tamil grammar I raiy anar Ah appo rul . I ' 3 h av e for good reasons identified that Nedu

e afi fi /ie fi evair fain /re evair a fi mwm g l fi j e w e nGDE /n fn

Ge afi ée Ge m e é Q is /reaifl m

’ OJ /é e eéarw/rei) fi g eiGesmLLng /i

aflii/i m mfi eér Gs noSl/i zzir (g g j r p e (g erm ?) U lT®62HT® 6fT®TT e nd leg y air ’ ollhsmie e /Teafi iu eo ullm eiese riufg f ’ Q e drm e e fém fl fi wni .

8 . l l . I . I . IV . 4

1 . meireoT/i LO6 5 Q e rfieirQ wei)

‘ (Em/7m mOu gp af/gig ai ezir Lo Ba) ’ ’ Q e vewm aflei) emirGQ Jzb Ge freir (35 03111 1 B ait G ezira g ga ’ 5 { e l f [C e mair

' i zirm eiir Q éE L Oe o ITGUhT IT@ /5 Oe ezirélcg wflallcgg 2 8 IV . . .

’

2 . ? cs i) u u CgeJu e eig /s iu o O ng e e u rreciarinaJ/i

' O ‘ t JOu afl/i (35 O /r 8 6). wezir Q E GOTQ fi UQ GOTGLD QDQ LJlTfi é q e n f I / [ g rub

' n Ou nélgfe iruli w ev ev g riee fluli 67 6137 67magi/air a ware- C? LO (

' a JOu rraSl/i m é rfi é u qy e y g ee a Q M Gi .

V . 4 . 7 .

3 2 8- r Pp . 5 70 of B eg ini ng s of S ou th I ndian H isto y . 88

a a ~ M r n with No . 2 of the genealogical table based on the V e lv ik k udi gran t in the report m E Of the govern ent pigraph ist for 1 906. The only other possibility is the Nedu Maran his a and m a gr ndson conte por ry of S ambandar. Th at would bring h im to be almost a contem

orar K u lase k h r ‘ p y with a a. Tirumangai Alvar

’ stands o ut cle ar by his reference to (D antidurga) V airamegh a as the overlord 1 fo r the time being

of the ruler of Kanchi . There is another pec uli ar referenc e in his c le bration of Sri rangam he there speaks of a mirac le th at Vishnu performed o f accepting the Tondaman

Pallav a as and a (the ruler) his devotee , te ching ” c a a 2 an ac t of be nefi c e nc e him the se ret m ntr ,

1 S ee th e v e rse q u o te d in note 2 4 . p .

i . 8 . 1 Pe riya Tirumo l I I 0 .

' rl g aming /far eng in e e r} e dig C/gfi ev

‘ G ndarm e meir ear m air afirt mOa m ai p e fi g r g r g b a m ié GDés/rm ezin llfo eimzsr ar arm /i ? gg m g c e

' i O f 5601 a t i u g gE/ s ircg sn5 7 5 G g g svfi cg

ai m rE/Oesimirw fi aib w rb au/ié s' afi ei fi r p g b GeruJe Q i fl flLnCo uJ m gfilég xwe b ’ w ei r/55 Gu nedT Q uJ w m g fi uJ/ifii ezir , n g e

Jm fiOu /r flei) l a m£1 5 tbtot b T . C g/ g E g 5 g

i T r Pe r ya i umoli V . 8 .

90

a Av e r al a Aiy r g , whose service to T mil litera t a a be a a a ure c nnot e sily ex gger ted , is wh t is called Paripadal o ne of the eight famous a a a a cl ssic l collections , st nding longside Of ” Ah ananuru and P urananuru The o ri g inal work is supposed to h ave been com posed of 70 poems of varying length of which the present edition brings out only 2 2 with portions

m r o f j ust a few ore . Among those there a e

a a . bout seve n rel ting to Vish nu Of these , the a are am Pe ruv alu di K aduv an a uthors Il , Il ve

K n l i r a ira dai ar N al e lun a . yin n , y , y These ‘ a are m m n t uthors , so e of the , k own by heir

c a m works in other ollections lso , while so e of the m are known by their work in this . The greater part of the work available h as the a a a a mm a a dv nt ge of co ent ry by , in sever l res

e c ts a am p , the best of comment tors , by n e Parime l Alagar whose commentary on the

a m c o f Kur l , is by co mon onsent the best all . He was one of those whose proficiency in both Sanskrit and Tamil was very great a nd equally so . I n a commendatory verse regarding h im this work Paripadal is referred to as the nectar coming out o f the ocean of ” a th e literature of the Sangam . He c me of t h e family of worshippers of the Parame sv ara 9 1

V innagaram temple . (Ulah alanda Pe rumal

' n temple) in C o j e e v aram . The text of the poems devoted to Vishnu indicates in a fulness o f a t e a c a det il , the mode of worship of h P n h

a a ama a a c r tr Ag , not to spe k of other br n hes of V aidik a li terature (not ordinarily to be expected

v a a in such sources) . Poem I I I by K adu n Il ve y inam states in detail the four v y uh as of the

P anc h aratrins a a S ank arsana Pradh , V sudev , , 1 umna Aniru ddh a. a y , It further refers in det il t o a a v rious of the doings of the child Krishn ,

- a a a and th e thus indic ting th t the , cult of Krishn

’ Agamic work of the P anc h aratrins alike h ad

ac and h ad a a a re hed tt ined to consider ble vogue , in the distant south (Madura) in the early centu

i o f a r m 1 a r es the Christi n e a. Poe 5 by Il m Pe ruv aludi which is devoted to Tirumaliru n j olai states in clear terms that the temple there

contained the images of Krishna and B alade v a. These are not to be found in the temple in the a present day . It is not alone in this s peci l

a . work , th t this worship is found described

a a P urananu ru Other S ng m works , like the mention the divine character of Krishna and

‘ 1 . Cale /ine d asmfi a g ree d ” Q aieirgerr

‘ i t Ou /reziris i u a ems ei

2 . Poe m 1 1 1 line s . 81 and 8 92

1 B alade v a in as clear terms . Among th e ! numbers of temples mentioned in a pl ace like a a a am a a a K verip tt n , c pit l of the Chol country , the Silappadh ik aram refers to the temples of 2 Krishna and B aladev a again . These references together would take us at

a to a a m and wa at le st the S ng m ti es , the y th the details of the cult of Krishna are h andled in these poems indicate th at they were of a e al a considerably anterior vogue . We h v re dy given a reference to the Saiva agama in de aling

Bh ak isara o e d a with t . We also qu t reference to wh at seems me ant for the Saiv a Adiy ars in

’ N am a Alv r s work . These taken toge ther

‘ ‘ a ww wnlm} Gl mho l fi y g y a cg a afi fi $ 661 1 . i mngim réj is m fi e fi [ 0 15 66m t ‘ g 5 L ®® W fi 41 119611 25 1 1 14 6151 11 1146m l w L ehOa i rm Q fif) u emu ai) Oe n sGu mn fh f éS ‘ Loading /g r £5 mm f qemnmfnGmasf olieuivrg oz/wri Q u in/59 5 m; aflp é l fiJ Gmmegll ih wm fi mfi g j mrfm w vcly fiiev eirflt }

' Lflm fi eoe am rifi Oiu flaiai Ge ifl (SLU H Q I GLD W s mw wfi rfi dr ’ i Gy mnndmfiim e p umm g si gpfii .

r P uram poe m 56 by N ark ira .

‘ ‘ ‘ al freiiai 2m 8 weafi su ti aSGu neir Ge mifi g mh

’ ‘ l gmGweflrfi Ge aGmnair Gn mugg j ib.

- 1 1 nd 1 2 . V . 1 1 7 a 7

94 within the limits of this paper to go into more

i a s m . a det il on thi interesting proble , but , ny casu al re ader o f Tamil literature could see for himself the working of the no rthern B rahman and the southern Dravidian in a common effor t at preserving B rahman orthodoxy against th e B encroachment of uddhism . It is fashionable criticismi n certain quarters th at Saivism h ad the allegianc e of South Indi a first of all and V aishn avis m came into the place as an interloper i mitating Saivism and

adapting itself to their clientele . A mere per

“ usal of early literature gives the lie direct

s to this assumption . What wa said of the

ai a a a of a at an V shn v liter ture the Alv rs , y

‘ a a a a r te the gre t m jority of them , in reg rd t

to the tolerance of Saivism . is true per h aps in a slightly lesser degree of the

Saiva Adiy ars . Passing out of the age of the Sangam we come to the age of the Pallav as

a of m h as of the e rly rulers who , history yet n a known but little . The dy asty of the S nskrit

charters called themselves Bh agav atas . When

a e a we come , however to the g of th e gre t

Pallav as fi nd . , we the two going together Some scholars h ave made capital out of a pas

' sage in one of the Pallav a insc riptions to an 95 explicit reference to Saiva Siddh anta i n c o n

r 1 B h e ne c tio n with N arasimh a V a man I I . u t t

same Pallav a re c ords refer to his great - grand father Simh a Vish nu i n terms which le ave no possibility of escape from regarding h im as a

2 a ar V aish n ava . M hendra V m an built shrines both of Vishnu and Siva several of h is cave m all B a m a te ples exhibit shrines to th e three r h ,

Vishnu and Siva. I n the age of th e P allav a m a mm a do in tion , which followed i edi tely , both Vaishnavism and Saivism flou rished ; V aish na v as and Saivas on the one side wrangling and disputing againt the B au ddh as and Jainas but so far the e vidence Of any systematic per

t e se c utio n a . is , the very b st , very slender We pass from the age of the Pallav as to the age Of the great Chol as among whom the rulers were

1 ' ’ Te sh amv amse p rasfi tadrana rasik ap urOnmm ardda nad Ug radanda

S ubrah inany ah k umarah G uh a iv a

‘ ' Pari mfi diév ariidattaj anm

' Sak tik sh u nnariv argg o v idita

‘ ' boh u nay aséaivasiddh antam arg g o Si’ iman A ty antak amah k sh atasak alamal o

‘ ‘ dh ii rdh arah P allav anam

I n i S . . 2 l . n . . I I 4 . s 5 a d

‘ 2 - k fi i a V i nuh Bh a ty rad t sh Simh avish nuh .

'

. . I n. 1 2 S 1 . I II . 74 . Uday Endiram G rant ‘ 96

a a a a as i n the m jority of c ses S iv s ; but , with

a m and“ a I ndi n sovereigns before the fter them , th e persuasion of the individual monarc h did

aff a a all e n a not ect their p tron ge of r ligio s like . I t was in this particular age th at Saivism and Vaishnavism alike h ardened into sec ts with a systematised canonical literature and it is the work of systematisation that emphasised the differences and brought into religious contro versies a certain degree Of ac rimoniousness .

“ Mu c h the same state of things c ontinued till f some o t h e great aggressive V irasaiv a se c ts “ E t th e r c ame into existence . ven hen ulers of ‘ the ki ngdom s did their best to h old th e balance

a a of - at even , despite consider ble mount ill tre

a and m ment of the we e sects , so e possible

' destruc tion even Of temples and buildings chiefly as a res ult of o c casional outbreaks of m a a a a am popul ar fury . The e pire of Vij y n g r c e into existence under circ umstances which did no t permit o f se c tarian ranc our being given

ra and vent to . The state therefore of tole nce development in religion c ontinued unbroken all through the history of Hindu India from almost

t m a , Mauryan i es in the , dist nt south

u as to in Before closing it wo ld be just . well dic ate th at if this outline . of the history of

98

- post Christian ch aracter . It is at the very best doubtful whether this position could stand . There are various other lines of investigation

u as a e of m of a a th e s ch the g so e the Pur n s ,

a a a a a a &c . h a ar M h bh r t , M nu , w ich this p rticul

u and subject s ggests , it is to be hoped they will all get worked up satisfactorily in course

as a a a of time so to c rry rese rch work sever l , stages farther i n respect of th e history of th e

literature and cul ture of I ndia.

P N ’ H E Y S T M D R S . TH E TATA R I T I NG “ OR K S , 5,T H A M B U C TT A A E R R ATA .

1 . f r Tir i i T r li p . 3. l o mal sa read i uma sai

c o m p . 5 . l . 9 . omit both th e m as

r m m or B h av rea h a a ta . 3rd 1. o o to f a ta v a p . 7 f b t g d B g

f r r 8 no te 1 . 1 la t o h ea p . . . s d h or ra c h u rea ratic h i l . 4 . f p ti d p

’ V 5 ud = amalasa ali l . 6. read 5 6V § y

P i. . P i i r o n . 1 r o ea a p . 1 7. o fo g a d y g

‘

c mm . l 2 . ele e o a 32 . t p . d

o

le e mm er and . p . 49 . l . 7 . de t c o a aft

ic r r 8 for r m l a amma i al . l . . g a at a e d g t c

rm re norm 1 0 . or o a O 50 . l . f f s d s "

“3 4 57 1 in e r e ore . note 1 . . s t b f

1 r m m 65 3. m ot o o it) 5 . note 1 . f o b t .

i 2 r G f /7 3. n r 6 ote 1 . . fo ead f 69 .

m o tom for h ilo o i r 64 . l . 4 fro b t p l g sts ead ph ilol ogist

2 rom o tom for k sh ir b i re k ir 65 . 1. . f b t a d ad sh abdh i

8 n l t line re h e fi r t le ter of t 6 . ote as ad t s t h e nam e . C

instead Of G .

la line i e r th is e we e n w s n r c 75 . st ns t b t a a d e ognis e d .

c lo e uo ti n r 79 . l . 6. s q ta o afte us .

i in r 8 . l . r t ea i i 5 . 7 fo b t g d b t ng .

m ot om r l r 88 l . 5 ro fo c e i . f b t b at on read c ele bration

no e f r 2 1. 1 n 4 . . r a t . o ote e no 1 . 3 p d te p . 7.

fi ift Q J” 5476 3’ 9 m n 2 fi r. D 88. ote 1 . 2 . for t read . 4 fi “

W m éBGW ff ff fi ‘ms c w fi l . 4 . for fl P re t CS ad b cf . 1 00

8 . l p 9 . ast line for Mah amah Opady ag/u read padhy ay a 9 1 8 p . . l . . for yimam re ad yinan

9 r . . no e 3. for oh u e u p 5 t 1 . l . b ad bah

n 2 in h k k ri O p . 6 and th e fo ll o w g page s for Y ad o ta a

read Y ath ok tak ari : Y adok tak ari w ould be popular

S h h r in T Y k k ari C o r. n ot e am . ath o ta a s t e be g

ne ith e r th e one nor th e oth e r.

1 0 2

sc h r m n A a y a a jari,

r i of A v ii , s e ge ,

e te l - leav e re e renc e to c h ewin of in h B s , f g , t e Tiru v ay moli and Silappadik aram

h a a atain th e 1 0 its B g v , , date ,

h a a a u rana r m v ta a v e e ro . uo e i B g P , s f q t d n M uk un

’ amala 1 4 K ulasek h ara s o te riori d , ; p s ty to,

B h ag av atas, th e ,

' h a ti e v o tion h e r two littl e o n B k , (d ) e s G ri Ema

r l l h e r V ai fi g y a, t D av ida c ountry th e i land of th e b rth of, 1 1 assoc iate d with

th e south in th e h ist of Vaish

i at i u e o th r B h ak tang riré nu , h s t t d t o e re ligions and

se c ts i ' k tisara and N am A lv ar 80 Tiru m lis B h a , ; a ai, h is

assoc iation with Kanc h i on th e one side

and a P allav a ruler on th e oth er 62 :

and aiv a A ama 92 and Ton a an S g , ; d m ,

' andira an c omte m orari I l y p e s, ‘ 1 ir R - 2 D r. 1 . 38 B h andark ar, S G 6, ; H is V aish ii a

v ism Saiv i m and minor e li ion 6 , s R g s ,

7 h is wor 1 2 on th e ama- c ult 9 k, R , 7

on th e c h ool of hakti s B ,

B haratavarsh a,

B h utattar,

rah mini m orth o o in th e outh B s , d x , s ,

rah mani m and in ui m th e rev iv al of B s H d s ,

u h i m and th e e m eror Asoka 93 and aini m B dd s p , J s ,

al we ll i h o h is vie w of th e ori in of V aish na C d , B s p, g

A u u n of T mi i v ism, 4 , o f th e g sta ag e a l L t

ir Ch olas, th e , and th e ag e , 10 3

D antidurg a (V airamégh a) and Tirumangai A lvar

‘ k 30 h e au h or of h e his time 30 D asarii pa a, ; t t t , , h 8 — D rav ida c ountry , t e , , l O; S aints , th e Div ine

wisdom of 5

n a ra 35 D v ija m v a ,

Ga a ah u 74 j B , i i n i Ganapat Sastr P a d t, 30

Gan aik oni ac h ola: or R a é ndra 5 8 9‘ g l ( j ) , 5

n iri u l nowle e Gh a a, sp t a k dg , 1 1

’ o h l r G opinath a R a , t e ate M , h istory of Vaish navism 6

' ' i in r. . Wi Of G ovindac hary a, M A h is D v e sdom

’ th e D rav ida S aints

G ujarat,

G unabh ara re e nc e to a B Tirumalisai A v ar f re , y l m ra w c c G uru ara a t el ve A var a . to 1 2 rom p p , l s , ; f

e ant D ik b k ' o R amanu a V d a es a ac t j . 40 35 H ultzsc h D r. E . , 65

am P e ruv al udi 90 9 1 Il , , ) am Tira an 69 Tondaman 63 I landir Il y , ; , ; ay an (Tiray an)

i i n n I ndia S o uth , rel g o s a d sec ts c ompare d by th e

A lv ars i . a k nne Mr. . C h is a e of M n k av asa ar I s , L , g g I nnilai

I raiy anar Ah apporul

a adEkamalla 2 7 Pé rmadi va al of J g — , ss , aini m and u h i m rote t of a ain t e ic J s B dd s , p s s , g s V d Ritualism

' ' K adiy alfi r R udran K annanar

K aduv an I lav ey inan, 90, K alavali 1 04

li Ka ag e , th e ,

Karikala K i av bh fi sh ana,

anc h i o c ti n n K , c upa o of, by a ov e rlord Of th e

P allav a

K ariy ari' uttunj iy a N e dum Killi Karnataka Ke rala ov e rlordsh ip in S outh India

K att umannark oil

K a r n v é i th e , a d th e C ol e roon at S rirangam

' K irandaiy ar

K Ok k Odaimarban Ch e ra in P urananuru

K Olambap ura (Q uilo n)

olli ui n 35 nd V an k ul m wron l e uate . K (Q lo ) , a j fi a g y q d

n u ra r Ko g , K ulasek h a ule r ove r

- K o S e ngan, Ch ola,

K OIi (Uraiy ur th e Ch ola c apital)

‘ r u in P urana u K ish na c lt, th e , nii r and o th er Sangam w orks , 9 1 th e fiult of, and th e Panc h aratra

u n k A gama, 9 1 c lt, th e , i Silappadi aram ,

' and B aladé va at Tirumé lirunj Olai

K fi dal (Mad ura)

K ula k h ra 86 ro a le ate of 1 5 h is a e éé a , ; p b b d , d t 0 88 34 mu st be b efore 1 , ; traditional

u tu 2 3 uilon inc arnation Of K a s bh a, ; Q

ru an ik ul m ir h (Kolli) oth e rwise Ti v j a , b t

f 2 3 h is oath o n th e h one ty plac e O , ; s

nd h is ev otion to Of Vaish nav as , 24 a d

is oe m 20 and th e h is g od, 81 h p s , ;

m c ul 97 ante rior to Manak k al Ra a t,

Tra anc ore Nambi, 2 9 ; of v ,

1 06

a k k a M na l Nambi, 2 9 ,

Manik k v am r h e f a a t a e o Mr. . . nne 6 g , g , by L C I s ,

h is Tiru v asag am ,

r n f i Ma a , son O Kar , (N am A lv ar)

i ran ari mini ter of an e rl an M K , s a y P dya king ,

ur in a ion o f h e u Ma ya v s t so th , th e

Mu k undamala, 1 4 , 2 5

i i of o m M us c , s e tt ng t o, p e s

’ Muttollay iram

9 60 w s h i N ath amuni, 2 , 4 6, a e th e d re c t disc ipl e of N am A lv ar

k illi 70 h ola o h erwi e S t h nni N al am , ; C , ( t s , a C e ,

i T r P u tpah a , é v ank i l li)

' ' N alle luniy ar

8 8 h is a e 4 2 i N am A lv ar, 1 , 60 , 7 , d t , , h s

n ir i i h nu 4 3 i sp at on from V s , ; h is

r - in n 9 h i ic i n p e e m e c e , 1 ; s d t o exami

n 48 n r mm 9 e d , a d h is g a ar, 4 , e x

‘ position 0 1 th e v arious proble ms of

r i i n w h f life and e l g o , 54 , as e o th e

n ur 2 i ni u 1 0th c e t y 8 , h s u q e position

amon th e A v ar 2 2 and aiva g l s , , S Adiy ars

a N andiv arman, P allav

N anmug am Tiruvandadi

Narada, th e sage

arw r te m le in c ri i n in i Naregal . in Dh a , p , s pt o t

N arasimh avarman

Narasimh a V arman I I and Saiva S iddhanta

‘ n ars h e or h e 8aiv a saints N ay a m , t , t . N édu Maran Pandya 1 07

‘ ' c n e m orar Of S ambandar N e d u Maran, I I , o t p y

' ' o n Srimad B ha avatam Padma P urana, th e , g

P admasara

n ri i n in Pagan, I sc pt o ,

36 th e ir a e P allav as, th e ; g , h Panc h aratra Agama, t e ,

P aramé évara V arman

Paramesv ara V innag aram

P arantak a

P arantak a Ch ola

’ Park k ailal (K sh irabdh i)

P rimel A a ar th e ural c omm e ntator a l g , K

P ri ad a p al,

’ ' P ari adal Ah anzi fi ru and P urananuru p , p Pa i r tt y alma abu ,

' P attupattu

q uote d

P GrESiriy ar

Parasiriy ar (Mah ac hii ry a) .

' in n P ermaEIi of th e S da dy asty , v anquish e d K ulase

kh are nka

Periy alvar and h is daugh te r 81 ; h is time by inte rnal e vide nc e

Periyar

P erumal Tirumoli, 2 5 ,

‘ - i f R u r P erumbanzi i ruppada , o d an K annanar P ey Alv ar

il an th e iritual uc c e or Of R amanu a 46 h is P l , sp s ss j , ;

or er o h e A l ar in ’ i d f t v s a sloka, h s c ommem

tar on T iruv a mo li 1 000 , , y y

P on iii, th e , (th e K even) 1 08

Poonamallee

Post - Ch ristian c h arac ter of th e Krish na c ult P o y gai Alv ar 63; h is date

A ndadi, h is 71 ; h is Tiruvandadi

P o ai nd h u r ri y g a B utat t Alv as , th e aste sm unde r

wh ic h born Jy é sh ta or K attai

P rabandh th e 1 w n in r n r a, 9 ; h e c ast to its p e s e t fo m.

r umn - P ady Zi bh y uday a 2 8,

P urananuru

urana th e h e aha har h m nd i P s , , t M b ata, A a , a th e r

i i n age s , th e nv e stigat o of

R a h a ai an r n i g v y ga , Pa d t M .

R ah as a ra ‘ y t y asaram, th e , of V edanta D é sika

R a a o l h ri r r j g pa ac a a , P of .

R amanu a 1 2 h i i 2 i rk r i n j , , 60; s m ssio n, ; h s wo re ga d g

th e P rabandham 1 7 th e A v ar rev io u , ; l s p s

u h ir uc to, 7; th e pre c e ding g ur s , t e s c e s

' ’ sion ac c ording to V e dantac h airy a

r m E N . 1 7 1 8 R amanu ja N urrandadi, 28; q uote d f o , , ;

n a re ni o r e r of th e A v ar in a d c og se d d l s ,

ama ana th e av o urite w ork of K ulasek h ara R y , , f ,

' R av ivarman K ulasEk h ara ome time c alle av i , , s s d , R varma bh fi p a

i R av iv arma dév a, and h is pand ts

iv er ac re th e of th e o uth R s , s d , , s S ag u na B rah mam as oppose d to N irg una

Saiv ism

S ma h i h muni a d , t e , of N ath a

n r r nc e to K o S amba dar and Appar, th e ir efe e n ée gan, C h ola

S amudrabandh a

1 1 0

Tark k i i ll , F . N . 67, 68

a r Tik sa v asva, c ommentary on th e Amarak osa

Tir n ay a F . N . 67

Tiruk k ottiy ur and Abh imfi na

Tiruk k fi valfi r

Tir r r r i uppé naga , o K ov ilad

Tirumalisai A lv ar

Tiumaliéai A lv ar, H is N anmug an Tiruv andadi q uote d w F . e N . 3; b t e e n th e earliest A lv ars and N am Alv ar

Tiruman ai A var 37 81 g l , , , Tirunaraiy ii r

Tiru i K ul k h r n t pat , ase a a goi g o,

Tiru an A lv ar pp " a:

Tiru mo i h e re i a o n r n v ay l , t c t l f th e , i Sri a gam i Tiruv ay moli and T ruv asagam, arg ument on analogy

be twee n 84

Tiru andadi h fi r v , t e st 71 ' c Tiruv iruttam of Satak opa 85

Tolk appiy am 70

’ ' Tondainadu 65 88 Tondaman, th e Pallava rul e r

Tondi of th e Ch eras 73

Tr n nc f no o i le a ter 36 av anc ore , as c e da y o , t p ss b f

‘ Trik sh atrac h ii déimani 33

Uday anangai 4 2 Ulah alanda P erumal te mple at C onj eevaram 9 1 f i na i m Upanish ads , base s o Va sh v s

‘ o 69 Uraiy iir, sie ge f

V adak alai Vaish navas

V aik unth am V aik unth a V innagar

n ti n of e ire te o alvation 8. V airi gy a, ( eg a o d s ) a s p t s ,

l 2 h i tor of 9 V aish nawsm, 61 D efi nition of, , ; s y ;

of rin of th e a liv ing religion, 1 6 ; fsp g

c h ool of h a ti 3 was it an inter s B k , ; loper in th e S outh

“ i i r in Va sh nav a Tradition, 1 6 ; h s to y

V aish nawsm and 8aivism h ard ening into s ec ts , 96

n tole ranc e be twe en, 94 ; as agai st th e

B auddh as and Jainas

V r u aman ai re e re nc e to in o e of N a ag n g , f n am

’ l ar o m w n A v s p e s , as th e ame derivative of

V arag unapandy a

i nd ag i V fi y mol a M a , th e Vé da and th e Upanish ads

V edantac h ary a

' e anta D é sik a uo e F 2 t . t V d , q d , N 5 ; h e s c h olar, h is

Tamil P rabandh am 2 0 i , ; h s R ah asy atray

a é ram 9 h is Prab ndh sar s , ; a a am, 38 ;

' Adh ik ara S an raba uo r g , q te d f om, V Egavati, near Kanc h ipuram

’ ‘ V ehk a

V e h k a Y a k , ( th 6k ta ari te mpl e)

V e ik k udi Gra lv nt, th e

V énk adam

V ik ram h ol h n a C a, t e i sc riptio n re fe rring to V innagaram

i a an r V j y aga , th e e mpire of

Vira N aray anap uram

ira ara an h V N y a C ola, (or P arantak a I) V irasai a v sec ts , th e i h nu h ru 9 c i V s , t e c h ie f g u , 1 ; asso iate d w th Sri, or

a h mi u reme 2 L ks s p ,

i h nu h a ti rom th e orth 1 2 h a ta in th e V s B k , f N , B k s

Tamil lan 1 2 and S iva h a ti 77 d , B k , ge tting rid of Kali

V y angy a V y fi k h y a

h r n r V y ii as, th e f o u , of th e P a c h a atrins

W i w fl r P urfi nic or orsh p ith owe s , inc ense e tc

A gamic ? Y a n pparu g alam , c ommentary o f

Y atbok tak iiri

Y o iv aha or Tiru an A v ar g , pp l