Kannappar was only stopped by the Lord when he attempts to gauge his second (left) eye.
Master narrator he was, Chekizhar recreates state of perilous mind of Thinnanar ( Kannappar) upon seeing blood dripping from Siva lingam's (Kalasthinathar) left eye. Thinappar first doubts if the wound was caused by some wild animal in the forest or an inconsiderate hunter. When his search to find the offender turns fruitless, he turns to look for medicinal herbs to stop the bleeding. Failing to stop the bleeding after applying herbal remedy, Thinappar realizes that organ transplant could prove to be a solution. ( ooney oonu-k-ku marundhu). He finds in a state of delirious happiness that the bleeding indeed stopped after he transplanted his right eye on the lingam's injured right eye.
The Lord wanting to demonstrate the Sivacharya Thinappar's implicit faith and devotion (Sivacharya is the devout up-keeper - arachagar - pujari, who is very upset with the offerings of meat by an unknown hunter every night defiling the sanctity of the shrine. Lord appears in Sivacharya's dream and tells him Thinaapa's love is unconditional and he could watch hunter's devotion by hiding in the sanatorium), this time bleeds profusely from the left eye. Thinappar has already found the solution to this problem, so without hesitation chooses the sharpest arrow from his quill, lifts his feet and sets on the injured eye as a mark and prepares to gouge his only eye for a second transplant.
The kind Lord couldn't hold longer, his divine arm appears from the lingam to stop Thinappar; a sweet command echoes three times 'Kannappa nir-k-ka'. ( Kan-appa being the kaarana peyar)
Chekizhar's immortalized verses in Periya Puranam is a treat to read and relish.
Kannapar cant be really ancient! Shiva is a vegetarian in his Story. In ancient times( vedic or sangam ..)animal sacrifice was present as a form of worship. So the origins of the story should be after phase complete vegetarianism came into Hinduism.
It is difficult to determine decisively who is ancient among the nayanmars, nor the Thiruthondar Puranam that lists hagiography of 63 saints and 9 Thogai adiyargal is conclusively exhaustive. For example, Auvayar is not in the list. There are countless devotees over the ages have dedicated themselves to the pathway to realization of God through bhakti.
Maani-k-ka vasagar is perhaps oldest in the list of 63.
Below, clarifications from Sri Subramaniam ( his site http://www.geocities.com/nayanmars/) - great teacher - most of my posts on periapurnam panels of darasuram are with his blessings and guidance ( must thank Dhivakar sir once again for introducing him to me)
Kannappar is mentioned by manikkavasagar in tiruvasagam, while the language used by ammai dates her between 2 - 5th C and not later than that for sure.
இவரது யாப்பமைதி சொற்பொருள் அமைதி முதலியவற்றைக் கொண்டு ஆராயுங்கால் இவரது காலம் இருண்ட காலப்பகுதி எனப்படும். கி.பி. நான்கு அல்லது ஐந்தாம் நூற்றாண்டாகக் கொள்ளலாம் என்பதும் ஆய்வாளர்களின் கருத்தாகும்.
> - Alvargal Kaala Nilai (à®à®´à¯à®µà®¾à®°à¯à®à®³à¯ à®à®¾à®² நிலà¯) (work on the historical > dating of Alwars)
Actually for this topic you can refer to Kamil Zvelebil's Tamil Literature. One good thing about this book is he compares dating of various scholars. Usually after 1975 all works quote this book for dating of various literature.
> Thanks to today internet, google and chat windows - plus the wisdom of the > ancients. I really amazes me to know I have never met or talked to VJ. But Nearly every day in the last 1-1/2 years we have been in contact thanks to google chat!
Agreed, think it must be after the pallava reign. However, there is a specific narasimha temple in Ahobilam where they offer meat to the Lord. I guess that is much older in time line.
There is no documented history on Kannapar ofcourse, so it is difficult to find the time line. Same story with En Kann / Ettu Kudi sirpam's of Lord Muruga. where the sirpi is said to have first lost his thumb after the initial statue, then sculpts exactly the same one again at ettukudi finally his eyes gouged out by a 'chola king'. Lands up doing same act at Enn Kann (using the Lord's eyes - hence Enn Kann).
Was this physically possible ? How was this accomplished? Belief is one thing yet reality is another.
PS: Who was this chola king who did it anyways :-) was he as brutal as the moslem rulers of north ?
History does not account for various stories and tales of the bard, which seems to be having many lines of history before being sung.
Even though Zvelebil has a good account of the time line and research, his sequence has small yet important gaps. I am not sure if that is due to his Western native and cultural onset prior to researching dravidian scripts. It is anything but natural that these researches would have a base line that starts with a western ideology.
Nothing wrong, but then there are gaps that can derail a train.
Hi Ravi, Dr.Zvelebil most of the time, acts just as accumulator of data in his book Tamil literature. He consolidates all the dating given by various scholar till his time and gives his explanation for his dating. He leaves to the reader to accumulate the data and make up their minds.
> Even though Zvelebil has a good account of the time line and research, his sequence has small yet important gaps. I sure by making this comment you have read the page 152 to 161 of his great work Tamil Literature. As usual he has given dating of all Indian scholars and his dating. So it would be really helpful to all members of the group if you can let us know the important gaps he has left in these pages.
> I am not sure if that is due to his Western native and cultural onset prior to researching dravidian scripts. > It is anything but natural that these researches would have a base line that starts with a western ideology. Unlike George L Hart or A K Ramanujan - his works have never been controversial. He was more interested in the History of Tamil Literature than the literature itself. Only other western scholar to my knowledge who has done research on Tamil history is JR Marr (his great work - The Eight Anthologies). He was one of the western scholars to have put weight behind the claim for Tamil as a classical Language(argued literary in every book of his , how ancient the language was - in a time where Tamil was belived to an off spring of Sanskrit by scholars like KAN Shastri). From 1952 to nearly 1990 he has done field research in Tamil. Nearly 40 years of Tamil study- makes him more Tamilian than we are(N.Ganesan sir pointed out he calls his daughter Kanamma). I request you to read his short biography by Dr.Elangovan in his blog http://muelangovan.blogspot.com/2008/11/17-11-1927.html
So put such charge on him would require some valid reasons from you , which I am sure you would have it. I wouldbe interested to hear your views on Dr.Zvelebil's works.
you seemed to have hijacked the topic. My question was very specific regarding the pages in discussion. You said you have feeling that there is gaps in his dating of alwars. It would be better if you can explain it.
Murugan its always argumentative in this forum whether its myth or history.
But Alwars are for sure history and not Myth - and I would like to know what gaps you have found in that.
I guess you are still in Hangover over the Murugan History debate we had year ago!
I surely do not wish to start the Murugan debate again. You are a believer and I am in search of History. No use we two arguing. Writer of History can base his arguments and on what is found and what can be proved or at least tentatively proved/accepted. Myth and history can never co exist. Your argument can also be held against various Indian Scholars then - Romila Thapar, Jesudasan and other major Tamil Scholars. It has no western mind applied to it. If finding evidence to validate a claim is western mind - then I am here to welcome it. Archeology,numismatic are product of western mind.
Lets put this talk very specific to Alwars else we are entering the labyrinth again.
I am not any expert on the topic being debated but i whole heartedly agree with Vairam's stance - myth and history cannot co exist.
The compulsion to push myth as history exists in every culture and is overwhelmingly so in ours. What that does is pollute history with stories and take away the metaphysical and spiritual dimensions of the myth.
There are two lives every human has - one that is spiritual, inner life and thereby related to mythology and para psychology - the outer factual life that is related to history, archaeology and other factual sciences. Zvebil, George Hart and others are analysing it from the latter standpoint - to them Murugan is a concept whose origins are analysed in dry neutral ways. It is unrelated to Variar swamigal's or Arunagiri's concept of Murugan as a divine spirit.
Each perspective deserves credit depending on what the individual is looking for that is all.
Enna sir periya varthai, hijack, ellam solaringa... :-) I have posed the gap questions on the previous email (Refer Sooran - Mahendra puram etc).
Alwars are real, but what they sung were a myth..(??). If one alwar used another one's theory as a base line, it makes sense on the base line start concept, which again comes back to me that Dr.Zvelebil may have had a western base line.
If Murugan is a myth, then why are there so much different historical references ? Poratha kulapathukku, pal veru Murugan vere, version control problem irukke?
Ancient Dravidian Murugan or Ceyyon, was still a myth to start with... according to Dr.Zvelebil and other western scholars??. In this case,history has no standing without the strong myth background.
Myth-History may not always,coexist, especially where history has many patches where as myth does not, it is, but natural, that history MUST be proper in its explanations.And historians must have a convincing record to prove when researching myth or our foundational thoughts.If our current human mind cannot comprehend, we cannot conclude that this is a bard's tale and cannot be real.
Without Murugan the myth, what would have been a start for this research anyway.
Itheppadi irukkuna, there is a story about a mid sea accident with no survivors, what an oxymoron! If there are no survivors, how does the story come by?
I am a believer, but I do have a rational thought. I do not question all the contemporary historical thoughts, Simply those that do not make sense.
As much as yourself or Dr.Zvelebil(rest his soul), I am in search of Murugan, just that I expect him in reality.If history can show me where he is or what he is, it would make my life more easy and possibly a short cut :-).
Heinrich Schliemann found Troy, exactly where Iliad stated Troy was, now that is myth becoming history. Troy is not without Achilles or Hector, but then was Achillies the son of Thetis - a sea nymph. Troy is real - history it became one from the myth, but just because Achilles's birth data is not documented or found, we cannot, until then say Thetis was not a sea nymph, how ever hard it would be for our scientific mind to accept.
My English Professor, defined king as a small emperor and emperor as a big king.
History, when proved, is a small or a portion myth; and, when validated history is proved false, it again becomes a myth. Myth is also history in a sense, because we have several versions of myths, as we have several versions of history (jinnah, freedom movement, partition, role of Gandhi etc.)
It is preferable not to get swayed or bulldozed by the 'scientific' tag attached to extrapolated and biased versions of 'history'.
You are clearly getting confused with this topic. Let me start of with the basics,
Karthigesu Sivathambi in his work"literary history of Tamil Literature" details the two modes of history through Literature.
Literary History and History of Literature.
Literary History: To study the literature to understand the people who have written the literature , their social status, their economic status, their pass times etc. Tamils 1800 years ago,Study in Tamil by Raghava Iyengar. All of Sangam Tamilians history is Literary History.
Say lets take eg. lets take the Movie Subramaniya Puram. Suppose after some 500 years they see this movie. They would make observations like in 1980s they used to was pant and shirt , women used to were Sari. Around Madurai region there was lot of violence. Heaving beard was a style.Rajnikanth was a very popular actor.
History of Literature: To study the history of the literature itself rather than the content of it. Books like Tamil Literature by Venugopala Pillai, History of Tamil Literature by Kamil Zvelebil,History of Tamil Literature by Jesudasan.
This approach is like when people watch Subramaniyapuram 500 years later, they would observe(if they didnt know when the movie released) The movie must not have been taken in 1980s since The photography standards have improved It has heavy influence of Spanish cinema which is very late development The actor Sasi Kumar can also be found nearly in the same get up in film Nadodigal which is closely dates around 2010. The same can be said of other cast because all of them seem to be of the period around 2010. This film should have been released before the movie Pasanga,Mothi Vilayadu,Saroja because all these movie have mentioned Suramaniyapuram. SO Lower limit of the films age is around 2009 . The movie also seems to have been a realistic movie.This wave was supposedly started by a movie Kadhal. So the upper limit can be kept as 2005. So the movie should have been released in some where between 2007-2008.
Sampath, history can become myth and myth can become history over time, both are true, not necessarily one or the other. Ravana was a king of lanka is history (maybe), ravana had ten heads is myth (most probably). Mary was the mother of Jesus is history but Mary was a virgin mother is myth. Unfortunately people have lost the ability to distinguish what is what. Just fyi I am not a history buff like Vairam I am more into myth and story telling. I find it equally difficult as history buffs when people talk of myth like 'fact' (it has origins in some fact that is all).
Another example - Draupadi married to five men is actually metaphysically the soul wedded to its five senses. If you dive deep into metaphysical meaningso f the MAhabharat is a fascinating, rich and unbelivable metaphor for spiritual challenges. Instead of learning from that people waste time debating on how one woman wedded to five men is a 'karpukkarasi', Draupadi was attracted to KArna and even Sri Krishna, on and on the ridiculous arguments continue. That is the sad plight of mistaking myth to be history and fact.
hmm...interesting read.... I have not read Dr.Zvelebil and I am not well versed in history. But I strongly belive (and concur with Ravi and Sampath) that without a fact, there is no myth (maybe as malathi said...myth has origin in some fact). Just because we dont have proof or scientific evidence, we tend to brush them aside as mere myth and not history, which is typically a wester thought process.
Vairam - your post was excellent. But what if only prints of subramaniyapuram is available after 500 years and no print of other movies you specified are available, what will be the research output? definitely a wrong conclusion. So is our current history knowledge.
One of the best philosophical movie I have seen is the 'BEE MOVIE'. Pixar needs no introduction for their story boards. Cars and Bee Movie are my favourite as it has very good philosophy. Especially Bee Movie...I think the story is inspired by Gita. The message - do your duty without looking at other aspects and the world will be real good.
The movie starts with the caption, even before the title - "AS PER THE KNOWN LAWS OF AERODYNAMICS, BEE CANNOT FLY, BECAUSE THE BODY OF THE BEE WITH ITS SMALL WINGS AND LARGE BODY IS NOT SUITABLE FOR FLYING.
BUT STILL BEE'S FLY.....BECAUSE BEE'S DO NOT BOTHER ABOUT WHAT HUMANS THINK"
what a great philosophy...reflecting avvai's katrathy kai man alavu.
and we fight over petty things in the name of history and myth... :)
Dear Satish, I love 'bee movie' :)) Just fyi the misconception again over the word 'mere myth' - the idea that myths are lies evolved again much later - the dictionary definition of the word 'symbolic narrative'. By forcing a symbolic narative to be a 'real world' the value of the symbolism is lost and real world narrative gets confused.
Just a very mundane example - the tortoise is a slow moving creature. This is a proven fact, the tortoise moves slowly due to the heavy weight of its shell. There are numerous stories evolved around this as around other animals - like the famous one of the race between the hare and the tortoise where the tortoise wins to prove the point that slow and steady wins the race. There was no race between a hare and a tortooise and really the speed at which the tortoise moves means nothing to the scientific world other than that it has a heavy shell. But the allegorical story signifies the virtues of patience. If this story was part of some purana the way we argue is trying to prove that story like some centuries ago hare and tortoise did compete, the tortoise is some spirit/deva that has patience and so on. How ridiculous does that sound?
The point about a myth is not at all about whether it was 'true' or 'factual' it is about what it signifies, unfortunately the obsession with making it real often times overrules the desire to even understand what the story signifies.
Dear,Very interesting mail. After 500 years, two dimensional cinema may be improved to three dimensional cinema . What is my imagination is that an actor could be seen as equal to a man/ woman in a TV cube. There may be option to select the actor for each role. As an example if we want to see Dasavaratham with Rajini acting, it may be possible. Sridevi could be replaced for shreeya in Sivappu Rojakkal. All the 'Kar silaikal' are one dimensional cinema. Now we are enjoying two diemensional, as it is moving. We may have three dimension cinema as explained in future with various options. Now we are wondering of 'Kar silaikal' at Mahabalipuram and temples. The software Sivakamai Sabaptham developed by kalki help us to enjoy the great actor Sivakami in the Karsilaikal and the director his father who created them.Similarly our grand grand grand children would enjoy our two diminsional cinema by using appropriate software. Though there may technolgical improvement there may reduction of human values. Compared to earlier generations human values were reduced to a lowest level. Joint family is very rare now a days. In future it may furter liqudiate or go down family concept may go. Our Subramaniapuram will tell the future generation the human values and affection existing at our time.YoursDr L Kailasam
Every religion has a theory of evolution of man and universe, Old Testament describes about God’s creation ofearth in six days, Srimad Bhagavatam defines elaborately the churning of the ocean of milk from which almost everything came about to live. How much of these stories of creation are true? Do they sound credible to all segments of society, for all the time even after man has walked on the moon and mankind seems to have achieved a giant science and technological leap?
The answer is a resounding yes. Some conservative states in the US have voted in favor of removing Darwin’s evolution theory from their school curriculum as it conflicts with Bible. Science may say Big bang is correct but for some the world is a creation of omniscient God; the debate is still continuing.
God’s creation story could be an embodiment of truth, but how would anyone who believes that to be true is correct when they were not alive at the time of world’s creation? Was there really a ‘ksheer sagar’ or ‘Paal kadal’? Was there a thousand headed venom spewing snake Vasuki? Did Lord Shiva really drink killer toxin ‘halahal’ to save mankind? These stories are best suited to be dubbed as lies, but are they?
It appears that those who created these stories are the one who reasoned out from what they observed and understood of the world’s origin. They created allegorical stories that would explain what they knew. Myths are in fact truthful narrations and figurative explanations when not taken literally but allegorically. We see there is some history but not entirely everything is verifiable or stand for validation. Thus the common dealing of myth in synonymy with lies is entirely wrong.
May be the theory of Big bang is explained with limited scientific knowledge our ancestors had in mythological stories. Man’s constant quest to find answers to complex and nebulous questions of metaphysical dimensions, origins and nature of cosmos were shaped as myths. They are antediluvian and pre-scientific attempt to clarify nature and its genesis.
It could very well be possible that our future generation in another five thousand years will view well researched, scientific theories of our times as myths.
Dear Member Mistaking history with myth and with facts cannot be explained more clearly than this, I think. Simple and clear explanation. Appreciations.
> > Sampath, history can become myth and myth can become history over time, both are true, not necessarily one or the other.
Hi Maloo I think its a question of generating interest. the human mind likes stuff that tickles the intellect. like imagining a ten headed man. the logical next step is what would he do if he had a head ache( saridon stole the idea for an ad) so a dollop of imagination added to history every time the story is repeated takes it further away from the original.
I am sure RRc would have been a lot different from ponniyin selvan we knew.
venketesh
Ravana was a king of lanka is history (maybe), ravana had ten heads is myth (most probably). Mary was the mother of Jesus is history but Mary was a virgin mother is myth. Unfortunately people have lost the ability to distinguish what is what. Just fyi I am not a history buff like Vairam I am more into myth and story telling. I find it equally difficult as history buffs when people talk of myth like 'fact' (it has origins in some fact that is all). > > > > Another example - Draupadi married to five men is actually metaphysically the soul wedded to its five senses. If you dive deep into metaphysical meaningso f the MAhabharat is a fascinating, rich and unbelivable metaphor for spiritual challenges. Instead of learning from that people waste time debating on how one woman wedded to five men is a 'karpukkarasi' , Draupadi was attracted to KArna and even Sri Krishna, on and on the ridiculous arguments continue. That is the sad plight of mistaking myth to be history and fact. > > > > Malathi
> I am sure RRc would have been a lot different from ponniyin selvan we knew. RRC at least we can forgive. Think about VT - now he is hero - then probably he was some veetoda mapila - who knows!
On future filming techniques > some time down the line animation will look as real as reality > So from then on we need no actors > MGR,Rajni,Kamal,Shivaji,Surya,Vikram can all be in cast of same movie > Interacting films(its there in experimental stage now itself) Like the first scene can be Villan try to kill some one now user can have choices >>do u want villan to kill >> do u want police to stop >>do u want an into fight for hero Based on his choice movie will move forward.So within one movie itself user can form diff combintations and watch diff movies! - this is the future of Cinema!
> "Think about VT - now he is hero - then probably he was some veetoda mapila - who knows!" > > Ooops... Couldn't even imagine!!! :-((
oopsaa? you should check the archives of aug sep oct 2005. diwaker basker in his peak. kalki would have forgotten what his hero was like if he had read diwakers mails
Why bring in metaphysics and complicate the issue when the event is narrated by Veda Vyasa without bells and whistles? All including Kunti, Drupada have reservations, pros and cons are discussed (even Kunti says she made a mistake and wants to retract her order - sarve sametva bhunkte - krishnam prasamiikshya kashtam maya bhashitam ityuvacha); after extensive deliberations, the issue of Draupadi marrying five brothers was settled.
When did Draupadi fancy Karna? na aham varayami sutam - this is what she says loudly on seeing Karna.
When did she fancy Sri krishna?
"That is the sad plight of mistaking myth to be history and fact." I don't see the connection. Is Draupadi is a myth or Draupadi with 5 husbands is a myth? Sampath
Sampath saar, Malathy's metaphysics puriudu. Unga Sanskrit lines onnumey puriyaley. Please explain what those lines mean to see how Veda Vyasa finds a solution to our problem.
Oru naal leave pottuten... matter engayoooo poyiduchu :-) Subramaniya puram movie to gene mutation... nambo makkal chanceless combination of intellects...Kudos!
Anyway, Dear Vairam
I get this concept of History of Literature and Literature's history, it would be easier if the agenda were to concern subramaniyapuram or so, but the hero of this topic seems to be Subramaniyan :-)
There is a 3rd view to literature, embedded information.This is a thin thread that does really string the actual jewels of these literature.Which apparently is not seen by many historians, some are exceptionally gifted in decoding it.
In context, it is like looking at subramaniyapuram as a movie, but we are talking the essence of subramaniyapuram - the reasoning for the story (Why) is different from the concept of the story (What) or the positioning of the story (How).
My point is, history has a starting point, by terms of song/songs or books or what ever similar document.
This 'document' gets lost in transit and has multiple versions. Some dudes who are having a brighter brain power are able to come up with documentation as per their standards of thoughts.
Now researching these documents are fantastic and enterprising, though the base line virtually throws a lot of light into what comes as a finished product.
If I were to look at Murugan only as a human who was a bearded hunter who wooed valli in the forest of Kurinji, that would be a nice amar chitra katha tale. The problem here is, that is just one of the many faces of murugan. By virtue of possessing an energy force is not the same as becoming one (Relativity theory).
Murugan, as said by the real biography writers of His Lords story, Guru Arunagiri or Sivachariyar or Nakkiran have clearly identified these jewels in their works. Infact, Guru Arunagiri goes a step further and talking about Anubuthi, the translation of Dr.Zvelebil effectively misses the concept(Jewel) I had explained earlier in the verse 51 pointer.
Literature without understanding of its soul(Why) becomes a fossil, while one reads it with life, it is a beautiful flower that fragrant forever.
I believe post mortem reports are for dead people,I am looking for the life.I certainly, am not confused in this aspect :-)
Draupadi's fraternal polyandry is metaphysically expalined by Malathi. But it is true Draupadi had real husbands, children and above all a real mother-in- law Kunti ! Pandavas, Hastinapur and Kurukshetra were very much part of history.
Both virigin Mary and Kunti became mothersunconventionally;Is calling virgin Mary a myth justified?
So what in real is the myth here ? I can believe that draupadi had 5 husbands and 5 children and kunti had unconventional children and same as virgin mary concept (which some hardline western thoughts find it difficult to believe). Malathi infact, explained the 'why' in the metaphysical sense, we are talking the lines of how and what in our historical prespectives.My tread is there is no how or what without the why!
Ravi, yes the argument is oxymoronic in a way. And in some ways it goes back to - what do we want to beleive as 'real'? Lot of people have issues even believing RRJ and RJC did not exist like Kalki or some historical writer imagined them to be, they did not speak 'pure tamil' and have the same eat/drink/civilian habits. By 'real' we mean something that has origins in history or happened the way I think it did?
Origins is history..is perhaps the closest we can come to. Happened the way I think it did..probably not. BTW Kunti and Mary are not quite the same...Kunti begets a child as a result of an actual relationship with Surya, not via 'spirit' as Mary does. The guilt around human man woman relationships that was introduced by the church particularly the catholic church has a lot to do with this idea of spirit child. There are lot of Christian mystics who believe the Adam and Eve story is also not the way it is commonly said that is subject for another discussion.
In all these things we have to first ask ourselves - what do I want to believe. If i do not have any agenda in my beleif then the 'whys' make more sense to examine than the how or what.