Hi, With sugesstions from Satish, I will keep the posts short so that members will not get bored reading this. Today I will talk about Simhavishnu, all references are from 'The Pallavas' by Dubreuil.
Simhavishnu is the first Pallava king, from onward whose we have many evidences to support genealogy. As per Velurpalaiyam plates (SII, III/II, p 510), it is stated, "quickly seized the country of Cholas embellished by the daughter of Kavira (river Kaveri), whose ornaments are the forests of paddy and where (are found) brilliant groves of areca (palms).”This suggests that Simhavishnu acquired Chola region which was not with Pallavas before.
Kasakudi plates (SII Vol II Part III, p 356) say that Simhavishnu vanquished Malaya, Kalabhra, Malava, Chola, Pandya, the Simhala who was proud of strength of his arms, and the Kerala. This suggests that the military operation to conquer Chola region was not a easy one as many of the southern kings got together to oppose this. These two epigraphical evidences Dubreuil gave in describing Simhavishnu.
Clarifications: 1. Where was Simhavishnu reigning when he conquered Chola region? Kanchi or somewhere else? 2. Till now we have seen mostly invasions into Pallava domain from outside, mostly from Chalukyas. We have not seen any invasionby Pallavas into other's domain, except the reactive actions on some invasions. Was this Chola war a reaction of invasion or started by Pallavas? 3. Who would be the Chola king/representative in this war? 3. We can rely on epigraphical evidences, however we should also look into the architecture to understand the genealogy. Is there any monument in existence of his reign?
Chendan's Son Nedumaaran was Mangaiyarkarasi's husband who was converted from Jain to Saivam by Thiru Gnana Sambandhar. "Niriai konda sindhaiyaan nelveli venru ninra seer Nedumaaran" (நிறைக் கொண்ட சிந்தையான் நெல்வேலி வென்ற நின்ற சீர் நெடுமாறன்” as sung by Sundara moorthi naayanaar.
Hi Satish, Regarding point 4 - As per Mangadapattu inscription of Mahendravarman I, he constructed the temple without mortar, brick etc. It is assumed that this is the first such creation in Tondamandalam region. Singapuram is also a cave temple, and if it was started by Simhavarman then why Mahendravarman put such an inscription at Mangadapattu. It may be that Simhavarman did start Singapuram and died before it was completed. Later on it was finished by Mahendravarman, but if this is the case, I assume that Mahendravarman should first finish his father's project before starting his own in Mangadapattu. Many scholars did believe that rock-cut style was started by Mahendravarman only, and it was not existing before in Tamil country. The above comments are only about cave temples, but there are evidences that temples were constructed, in their normal brick, mortar form, before the reign of Mahendravarman. Charudevi's grant, one of the early Prakrit grants, was issued for a temple of Narayan in Dalur. As per the time of Dubreuil, he did not have any information about existence of such a temple which can be dated before Mahendravarman. However he wrote this book in 1917, and a long time has passed since then. Do we have information of any previous temple now, or as we assume that temples were made of perishable materials hence none has survived till now.
1. Pandya caves are supposed to be older than Mahendra. Then how can he claim to be the first? or the reference is only for his country ie thonadai mandalam.
2. There are lot of discussions on Gomugam not present in earlier temples and that is told as a proof of No abishegam those days.
There are references of abishegam in Thevaram. But again it can be considered either as Lord Shiva himself taking bath or Abishegam by devotees to the lingam. any idea on that?
And the Thillai Vazh andhanar left the chola country to chera's hill country - leaving only one person to do the pooja.That may be one reason for their front kudumi.
Coining of the word Narayan..na..aryan was the result of a backlash against sanskrit/aryan domination. Therefore, eistence of any temple before the nayanmars/alwars is improbable. We should not labour under the impression that Dravidians invented God and worship. World history is against such a misleading proposition. R. Narasimhan
Hi Saurabh / Sateesh, Narashimavarman also had a title of Simhavishnu. K R Srinivasan also sums up based on this, stylization and similarity between Kottravai and Ranganatha form to those found in Mallai to post Mahendravarman, which could be during Narashimavarman or even Parameswara Varman. Hence the claim of Mahendara at Mandagapattu as the first rock cut structure in that area is true.
Narayan is a coined word. It is a form of getting an identity by the non-aryans. You should go by the projected meaning of their new identity for their god That is why the word..na-aryan-mars..closed in as nayanmars!! Manickavasagar is an aryan, hence he is not a nayanmar!! "kandu konden narayana ennum namam" of Thirumangai Alwar. R. Narasimhan
Temples were present in TN even in sangam age. Purananooru - " Murugan Kottathu Kalam thoda magalir" line clearly indicatea: Presence of templeb: certain rules were also practiced. in this case women in periods not touching the utensils of the temple.299. கலம் தொடா மகளிர்!
I'd really have to dispute that; Narayana Suktam is Vedic (or at least, from an Upanishad), and the etymology of Narayana is (among others) "The one who rests (ayana) in water (naara)", or "The one (nara) who is the ultimate goal (ayana)"...
I didn't mean that the cave temple was excavated by Simhavishnu, he might have started a temple (may be) with brick then later his successors would have converted to cave temple. Since, a place for a temple already existed it is easy for them to carryout their designs. Who knows the inscription hidden under the brick work may contain some information!
Dear Sir, In Sivagamiyin Sabatham, 4th Volume, Chapter 10 - Kalki mentions about Mangayarkarasi... I am quoting that paragraph; pls see if it is useful... உறையூரில் நிலைபெற்ற சோழ வம்சத்து மன்னர்கள் ஒரு சிறு ராஜ்யத்துக்கு உரியவர்களாயிருந்தார்கள். கொடும்பாளூர்க் கிளை வம்சத்தின் பிரதிநிதியாக அப்போது விளங்கிய செம்பியன் வளவனுக்குப் புத்திர பாக்கியம் இல்லை. குலத்தை விளங்க வைக்க ஒரு புதல்வி மட்டுமே இருந்தாள். அந்த அருமைக் குமாரிக்கு 'மங்கையர்க்கரசி' என்ற செல்வப் பெயரைச் செம்பியன் வளவன் சூட்டினான். ஆசை காரணமாகத் தகப்பன் சூட்டிய பெயர் என்றாலும் பெண்ணைப் பார்த்தவர்கள் அனைவரும் இத்தகைய பெண்ணுக்கு இந்தப் பெயரே தகும் என்றார்கள். RgdsVardhini
Can any one have details of the epigraphs mentioned in the " Thevaaram.org". Already Gokul pointed out that - Lalgudi is not a single one but 2 different epigraphs.
Just if we can see all the 3 - we can have an idea that - Manivasgar is pre so and so period in the first place.
Dear Vardhini, I am sorry to say that I do not understand Tamil. It would be very nice if mail content can be translated into English, however it be an extra effort on your side. I am trying to get some Tamil books in English so that whenever such a reference is quoted, I can refer my books and understand the content.
Dear Mr. Saurabh, I have tried to translate it into English... "The kings of the Chola clan who were in Uraiyur were ruling over a small kingdom. The branch of Kodumbalur clan’s representative was Sembian Valavan who did not have any sons. He had only one daughter and he named her as Mangayarkkarasi. Though he named her out of his love, those who saw the girl said that this could be right name for the girl. (Mangayarkkarasi – means the queen for all women)" This comes in the novel Sivagamiyin Sabatham written by Kalki, which describes the story of how Narasimhavarman defeated Pulikesi and destroyed Vatapi. RgdsVardhini