Tamil and Sanskrit

[Guest guest]

>> Dravidologists like Zvelebil have written about some millennia

>> old rivalry between tamil and sanskrit. TolkAppiyam commentaries

>> do mention old poems like "aariyam nan2Ru, tamiz tiitu". etc.,

>> (Aryam is good, Tamil is bad).

 

>Could you give the exact references ?

>Regards, Narayan Prasad

 

All of Zvelebil's books contain ref.s to rivalry between

sanskrit and tamil portrayed in literature. More elaborate

treatment on the figure of agastya, aryanization in his book:

Companion studies to the history of tamil lit. (1992).

A possible parallel in another Dravidian language, Telugu

is V. Narayanravu's Coconuts and Honey paper. VNR's article

is online, and have given details in

http://www.services.cnrs.fr/wws/arc/ctamil/2002-12/msg00000.html

 

(I wish some western universities and Indian govt. fund efforts

to put the scholarly journals in Indian languages online & in CDs

by scanning into jpg, pdf files. some important Tamil journals

are Centamil, Tamizp Pozil, Centamizc Celvi, KalaimakaL magazine,...)

 

The contest between Tamil and Sanskrit is evident

for a long time. There are many Tamil stalapurANams where Agastya's

tamil is made equal to Panini's sanskrit by Shiva, Nataraja, etc.,

Srivaishnava poems tell that Bhuvaraha Vishnu has on his lap

who was originally born in Malaya/Potiyil. Bhartrhari records

Sanskrit being rescued from Parvata mountain (Vakyapadiya 2.486).

This is most likely the Malaya/Potiyil refered to as Parvatam

and Poruppu in Tamil literature.

INDOLOGY/message/2819

 

Buddhist texts extant in tamil mention that

Avaloitezvara taught agastya, the malayamuni, the tamil grammar.

While Saivaites claim that it's actually Shiva who taught him.

http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9812&L=indology&P=R10625

http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9812&L=indology&P=R10898

http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9812&L=indology&P=R11199

http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9812&L=indology&P=R25840

 

Saivaite texts claim Dakshinamurti, Shiva as agastya's teacher.

About the Dakshinamurti cult, Patanjali, see Dr. S. Palaniappan's

papers:

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/members/palaniappan-patanjali.html

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/members/palaniappan-parvata.html

 

About the tamiz tAy vAzttu song taken by TN govt. Few points:

the state poem doesn't refer to Sanskrit. There never was any

PIL or case. The original poem comparing tamil and sanskrit

(eg., it mentions that tirukkuRaL doesn't buy Manu's varNa system

of differential justice based on caste, etc., Sumathi has analyzed

the poem, gave pointer to her book online).

 

Comparing tamil with Sanskrit is not just a colonial idea, fostered

by Christian missionaries alone. There exist numerous precedents in

tamil

talapuranams. Rememeber about 5-10 lakhs of tamil saiva stalapuraanam

verses remain in Olai, paper mss. Even 19th century printed

talapuranams are decaying, and remain hard to find. Unlike

Sanskrit books, or Indology books (in english), Tamil old texts

never get reprinted. No market, wrong ideology, ....

 

P. Sundaram Pillai's poem is cast in the net as tho' it's brahman vs.

nonbrahman conflict. It is too simplistic. Sunadram Pillai's guru

was a brahmin sannyasi, KotakanallUr Sundara SwamikaL.

In manonmaniyam drama, Sundara Munivar is Kodakanallur Swami.

I think he founded Kovilur Math in Chettinad. Recently,

some Chettinad people have given some million dollars

to it. Nagaswamy has written articles about many nonbrahmin

saints excelling in sanskrit. One such is Maadava Sivajnaana

Yogi, who wrote Sivagnaana MaapaaTiyam

a commentary quoting Vedic texts to expound Saiva Siddhantam.

paaTiyam is from bhaashyam, something like paaTai is bhaashaa.

paaTai is used for sanskrit and tamil many times refering

to language for centuries. Somebody gave some wrong meanings as

corpse, body etc., & questioned paaTai's use as language.

To give an example, KuRaL says "maRappin2um Ottuk koLal Akum".

Ottuk koLal may have many meanings, but here Valluvar uses

in the well known meaning of Ottu as veda. There was also question

of Kanchi Sankaran for Kanchi Sankaracharya is seen in some tamil

list. But in a rare inscription from 12th century, we hear of Kalati

Sankaran named after Adisankara. It's common practice to call humans

and, even gods are refered as Sivan, Sankaran, KrushNan, Kannan.

Tamil poems address Raamaanuja, the philosopher as Ramanujan also.

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

>Could you give the exact references ? Regards, Narayan Prasad

 

K. V. Zvelebil, Companion studies to the history of Tamil literature, 1992=

, E. J. Brill,

Leiden, p. 240 "Originally there were perhaps two rival medieval legends ab=

out Agastya

current in Tamil Nadu. Both admit that the Vedic sage was the pioneer of Ar=

yanisation, but

one maintains that he was also the creator of the Tamil language and gramma=

r and that

Tolkappiyar was his pupil, whereas the other asserts that Agastya and Tolka=

ppiyar

quarreled and were antognists, and that the work of the latter is independe=

nt of the

former. In the second legend we may perhaps recognise elements of the oppos=

ition

to Aryan influences. There is yet another, Buddhist tradition, according to=

which Agasti

learned Tamil from Avalokita."

 

p. 242 "Peraciriyar's and Naccinarkkiniyar's commentaries on TP (Tolkappiya=

m Porul) 490

(CeyyuL. 178) quote two stanzas ascribed to a certain Nakkiran which connec=

t Akattiyan with

Potiyil an cen tamiz. Interestingly enough, these verses mention the antogn=

ism between

"Aryan" (Ariya nan2Ru "Aryan is good") and Tamil (tamiz tItu "Tamil is bad"=

); the holder of

this view was killed by a mantra (maRaimozi)."

 

While this "Appendix 3 The case of Akattiyam; Sanskrit and Tamil" CaGkam" (=

p. 236-261) is

of interest, pl. read the Ch. 5 with the title, The dichotomy of Norm (ilak=

kaNam) and

iApplication (ilakkiyam); The dichotomy of Marga and desi; The dichotomy of=

Centamil and

Kotuntamil; The dichotomy of Tani and ToRar; The concept of Muttamiz. (Note=

that Zvelebil

says the concept of Muttamiz is not in sangam texts. But, it's in Paripatal=

.. Ctamil has

discussion on that.) p. 128 " 5.0 The conceptual framework of the ancient T=

amil men of

learnig seems to have been dominated by a number of binary contrasts (1). I=

n this chapter, I

shall select some of them - those which appear to have originated in the pr=

oto-literate

or even pre-literate Tamil civilisation while one of the most fundamental a=

nd far reaching

binarisms, that of akam:puRam, ...(1) The rudiments of the Dravidian sem=

antic alzebra

seem to contain as germinal the two notions of binarism (dichotomic opposit=

ions) and

hierarchy; and a conception of time in which all events are part of a singl=

e synchronic

totality (a circular rather than linear conception of time); and the fact t=

hat one of the

basic and almost all pervading binary oppositions is the notion of 'clean' =

versus 'unclean',

the idea of pollution; these terms seem to constitute the basic elements of=

the code in

which Hindu-Dravidian cultural messages are expressed."

 

The binarism akam:puRam landscapes seem to exhibit relationship with the Ri=

shi names,

Agastya and Pulastya respectively. Sinhala settlement dating to 800 BC or s=

o has been

excavated in Anuradhapura. It's traditionally called Pulastyapuri, while Ag=

astya, the Tamil

sage, is said to reside in Potiya/Malaya mountain. Tamraparni river is bor=

n in the Malaya,

and Greeks call the north Lanka as Tambapanni. Mahavamsa chronicles mention=

Pandya

princess getting married to the first Lankan king, and Tol. comm. mentions =

Agastya marries

Lopamudra, sister of Pulastya!

 

Early works in Tamil (Tolkappiyam, Kural, ...) have, acc. to many scholars)=

have Jaina

leanings. Early Tamil loans are from Prakrit whereas Sanskrit loans are fro=

m a latter

period. There is lot of material on how latter day Shaivaites suppressed an=

d, burnt early

Tamil works, and prohibited reading books of heterodox Jaina authorship. Ta=

mil saiva

puraaNams mention the equality and sometimes rivalry of Tamil and Sanskrit=

, both produced

by Shiva.

 

Many aspects of early Aryanization of the south and lanka are

explained in: Parpola, Asko, 2002. Pandaíê and Sîtâ: On the historical back=

ground

of the Sanskrit epics. Journal of the American Oriental Society 122 (2).

For the Dravidian concept of time,

Parpola, Asko, 1975-76 (1977). Sanskrit kAla- 'time', Dravidian kAl 'leg', =

and the mythical cow

of the four yugas. Indologica Taurinensia 3-4: 361-378. Torino.

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

[Guest guest]

> > Dravidologists like Zvelebil have written about some millennia

> > old rivalry between tamil and sanskrit. TolkAppiyam commentaries

> > do mention old poems like "aariyam nan2Ru, tamiz tiitu". etc.,

> > (Aryam is good, Tamil is bad).

> >

>

> Could you give the exact references ?

>

> Regards.

>

> Narayan Prasad

>

 

 

The beginnings of Tamil nationalism can be seen in sangam texts

like PuRanAn2URu (Eg., the poetess Auvai advising tamil kings

to stand united to face enemies). The clearest expression

of nationalism is in the epic, Cilappatikaaram.

 

The historical tension between Sanskrit and Tamil is

evidenced in Srivaishnava works also (Cf. K. K. A.

Venkatachari). More than Saivism, Srivaishnavas put Tamil

paasurams on an equal level with Sanskrit, and call their

philosophy as Ubhayavedantam (Samskrutam and Tamil aalvar poems).

 

A. K. Ramanujan, Hymns for the Drowning, Poems for ViSNu by

Nammaazvaar,

Princeton university press, 1981

 

"From the 13th century on, the commentators debate endlessly the

relative virtues of Sanskrit and Tamil as religious languages.

For a list of pros and cons, see K. K. A. Venkatachari, The

maNipravAla literature of the zrIvaiSNava aacaaryas, 12th to 15th

centuries, AD. p. 25-27. One story about the tension in this dual

heritage is poignant: VaGkIpurattu Nampi, a disciple of Ramanuja,

was found praying to Vishnu standing among cowherd women. A disciple

accosted him: 'Why do you stand among these illiterate women instead

of among Vaishnava bhaktas?'. Nampi answered: 'Lord's grace flows

over these illiterate cowherds as water flows from a higher to a

lower level'. The disciple asked: 'How did they pray? How did your

grace pray?' Nampi said: 'They prayed to the Lord in pure Tamil.

They said - "Please drink this milk, eat this fruit. Live a hundred

years. Wear this silk uppercloth" -. I prayed in Sanskrit: Be

victorious, be victorious'. The other man finally said: 'You couldn't

forget your rough-sounding Sanskrit even among the cowherds. It

looks as if we will be the same wherever we are".

 

A. K. Ramanujan translates "muraTTuc samskritam" as rough-sounding.

Another example is from a 13th century zrIvaiSNava commentary: "vaTa

ticai pin2pu kaaTTi - vaTakkut tikku aariya puumi aakaiyaalE,

camaskrita muraNaraay, aazvaarkaL iirac collum naTaiyaaTaata

tEcamAkaiyaalE, attikkait tiruttum pOtu, pin2pazaku ellaam vENum

en2Riruntaar". This famous commentary says that Sriranganatha faces

south, to listen to the pleasant bhakti poetry in tamil. Note that

"camaskrita muraNaraay" is "opposing/contra to". I think scholars

like Vasudha Narayanan, LS can tell us more.

 

In Saiva puraaNa tradtions too, there are theological explanations

as to why Nataraja is in the south, how Siva makes Tamil

opposed to ("etir") Sanskrit & so on. These examples from literature

predates missionaries and colonials.

 

Regards,

N. Ganesan

 

Zvelebil quotes the medieval poems in Tolkappiyam commentaries:

http://www.services.cnrs.fr/wws/arc/ctamil/2003-01/msg00024.html