Mirror

chap22 chapter_21.html chapter_22.html chapter_23.html MIRROR OF TAMIL AND SANSKRIT R. Nagaswamy 22. A MEDIAVAL TRANSLATION OF A TAMIL KAVYA INTO SANSKRIT UPAMANYU BHAKTA VILĀSAM

Contents | Previous | Next | Home

This chapter is mainly concerned with an extraordinary Sanskrit text called Upamanyu Bhaktavilāsam, ascribed to sage Upamanyu but in effect a close translation from Tamiḻ Periya-Purāṇam of Sēkkiḻār. The text has been published in grantha script in two parts in Chennai in the years 1913 and 1915. The work has been brilliantly edited by one Sundaresa Sastri of Tiruvaiyāru with an exhaustive introduction and citations from original Tēvāram hymns and in giving them he gives the first and the last verse of each hymn. In some instances, some Tēvāram verses are mentioned in the Sanskrit texts (and also Tamiḻ texts) but these have not survived. The Editor has taken care to mention that this hymn was lost or disappeared after Sēkkiḻār. So, he seems to be aware of the close similarity between Tamiḻ and Sanskrit versions. The author has made use of four palm leaf manuscripts and followed scrupulously and critically editing methodically. In editing Samskrit texts he may be compared to Dr. U.V.Swaminatha Iyer.

22.1. Purpose of Purāṇas

Before taking up this work for detailed analysis, it may be useful to note the main intention of writing such Sanskrit works. It is claimed that the study of Vedas and Vedantic texts was confined to Brāhmins and others were prohibited from reading them. This is a wrong notion, for right through the centuries it is told that the first three varṇas, Brāhmaṇas, Kṣatriyas, and Vaiśyas and some of the mixed castes were entitled to study the Vedas and they did study the Vedas is known. Those who studied the Vedas could achieve liberation through Brahma-vidya. It is also known that Śūdras were not entitled to study the Vedas. This prohibition is against the proclaimed doctrines of the Vedāntas which hold all souls are equal and there is no distinction. So, if a particular section of the society is excluded from studying the Vedas, are they eligible for liberation or not was the question that was debated from the Vedic time itself. In the Vedic tradition, the foremost text to be studied under Brahma-vidya is the Brahma-sūtras of Vyasa which is assigned to the 4th -5th centuries BCE, which takes up this question whether the Śūdras are eligible for liberation. Contrary to the popular notion, Śri Śaṅkarāchārya, the great exponent of Advaita Vedanta, stoutly declared that the Śūdras are also eligible for liberation. (adhyāya 1, 3rd pāda, adhikaraṇa 10, sūtra 39). He cites that they are eligible to learn Itihāsa and Purāṇas and through them are eligible to achieve liberation which cannot be prevented because it is stipulated in the epics and Purāṇas. Vidura, Dharma-vyādha, and others who were Śūdras were such illustrious men who have achieved liberation because of their great knowledge. (yeṣām punaḥ pūrvakṛita samskāravasat vidura dharmavyādha prabhritinām jānotpattiḥ teṣam na sakyate phalapraptiḥ pratiṣeddhum, jñānasya ekāntika phalatvāt. srāvayet caturtho varṇāniti ca itihāsa purāṇādhigame caturvarṇasya adhikarasaraṇāt — Śaṅkara) The purpose of Purāṇas is said to confer this path to all sections of the society to achieve mokṣa. It is mentioned that the writing of such Purāṇas which illustrate the lives of great Śaiva devotees is specifically meant for that purpose. The tradition of writing Purānas in Sanskrit is a parallel development from the Sūtra period onwards if not earlier. A work called Śiva-rahasya exists in several volumes as a compilation of various stories and precepts and it contains in one of the chapters a short account of the 63 Śaiva saints which is considered the source for this text, Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa. Till almost the middle of the 20th century, it was considered that the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilasa was the main source of this Periya-Purāṇam. There has also been some heated debate on this assumption and held that Periya-Purāṇam was an original work. But as may be seen from the following the claim that Upamanyu Bhakta-Vilāsa was the source for Periya-Purāṇam is easily dismissed and that the Periya-Purāṇam was the source and the Upamanyu Bhakta-Vilāsa is a full-length translation. However, it at least shows one interesting point. Such works in Sanskrit did support the equality of castes to liberation. That the aim of the Purāṇas was to make all people eligible for liberation is alluded to by Sēkkiḻār remarkably. At the very end of the story of Jñāṉasambandar when he gets married and attains liberation at Tirumananceri, there were many assembled to witness the marriage and all of them irrespective of caste, creed or sex also attained the same liberation that Jñāṉasambandar attained. The following are mentioned as those who attained mokṣa at that time. Nīlanakkar, Murukar, Śivapada-Hṛdayar (the father of Sambandar), Nambāṇdar, Nilakaṇṭa perumbāṇar, the carriers of palanquins, those who carried the paraphernalia, women who prepared garlands, those who carried auspicious symbols, did all types of works, and all servants, followers of six systems of religions, devotees, Vedic saints, and all those who came to adore the scene, and also those who came to attain moksha through other paths all attained the samemokṣaattained by Jñāṉasambandar. An important point to note is that the father of Sambandar and Nīlakaṇṭayāḻpāṇar (who was an outcaste) and followers of other paths also attained mokṣa considering the life of Sambandar and his friendship with Nīlakaṇṭar-yāḻpāṇar as an illustrious path. This understanding is the path of liberation. We are to study the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa as a translation of the Periya Purāṇam. It would be interesting to see how Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa treats this situation. Amazingly the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa verbatim repeats what Sēkkiḻār says and holds that men and women irrespective of caste or creed or high or low or religious persuasions achievedmokṣasimilar to Sambandar. nīlanagnaḥ, skandhanātaḥ, nīlakaṇṭhasca gāyanaḥ sa yajjvā mahādeva śiva-pāda-vratī ca saḥ devāṅganāḥ pārijanāḥ sibikāvāhakādayaḥ shaṭadhva-darśinaḥ prajnāḥ viraktās ca tapasvinaḥ vikṣyamānāḥ kaṭākṣena guruṇā karuṇābdinā tadaiṣām vivisuḥ tejaḥ sarvepi utsava darśnaḥ - Ad 25.v 24-26

22.2. Epigraphic Reference to Translation

My attention was drawn to an inscription found on the east wall of the shrine in the Ekāmbaranātha temple of Kāñchīpuram by His Holiness, late Śri Saṅkarāchārya of Kāñchī who attained liberation at the age of 100. He wanted me to copy the same and tell him the contents. When I copied the inscription I found it was an important record of the Śaiva canon. Subsequently, I also got my reading verified with the copy available from the Epigraphy Department of ASI who were kind enough to provide me with the transcript. I am thankful to the Āchārya and to the ASI for their help. The inscription is in Grantha characters and in Tamiḻ and Sanskrit languages. After a few invocatory verses the record states that in the year 1532 (saka year 1454) when the Vijaya-nagara king Acyuta-devaraya was ruling the country, a certain Śrīnivāsa-kavi rendered the Purāṇa of sixty three Śaiva saints into Sanskrit in the presence of the deity which was seated in audience. The Sthānattar and Maheśvarās were pleased and appealed to the local Governor Bogayyadeva Mahārāja, who obtained the approval of the king and presented a house site and land for the poet, conferred on him a title and issued certain privileges during the worship in the temple. This was a great inscription that shows the Purāṇa of 63 saints was rendered into Sanskrit. “thiru ekāmbam uṭaiya nāyanār aṟupattu-mūvar purāṇam samskrita bhāṣaiyil ceytha śiva bhakta-vilāsattai uhantu cevi cāyttu arulukaiyil ikkōyil tānattārum māheśvararum santoṣittu sthalattukku karttarāna bogayyadeva mahārāja” திரு ஏகாம்பம் உடைய நாயனார் அறுபத்து-மூவர் புராணம் ஸம்ஸ்க்ரித பாஷையில் செய்த ஶிவ பக்த-விலாஸத்தை உஹந்து செவி சாய்த்து அருளுகையில் இக்கோயில் தானத்தாரும் மாஹேஶ்வரரும் ஸந்தோஷித்து ஸ்தலத்துக்கு கர்த்தரான போகய்யதேவ மஹாராஜ His Holiness further drew my attention to two important Sanskrit texts, the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa and Agastya Bhakta-vilāsa, both dealing with the lives of 63 Śaiva saints. My study showed that the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa was a very close translation of Sēkkiḻār’s Periya Purāṇam and not vice versa. In the colophon of the work, the author of this text gives the following biographical information about himself. upamanyu kṛte mahāpurāṇe kalidoṣeṇa khilam khvacit āsīt taṭapūri śivājñayā mahīnduḥ kavi vādībhasimhaḥ ratna khetaḥ From this, we understand that the original work of Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa was found incomplete in some parts due to the passage of bad times and that the same was completed by the grace of Śiva by Kavi- vādībha-simhaḥ Ratna khetaḥ. From the records of the Sarasvati Mahal library it is known there lived a kavi named Srinivasa-dīkṣita who had the title “Ratna-khetaḥ”. This work by Ratna-khetaḥ who was also known as Srinivasa-kavi is identical to the author of this text Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa. It also seems to have had another name called Śiva Bhakta-māhātmyam. Mention has been made earlier that there was an opinion that this work was based on an abbreviated text forming a part of Śiva-rahasya. The Siva-rahasya narration seems to be unaware of the true stories of the 63 saints, with reference to much of its information is perceptibly wrong and could not have been the original source. So, it is not discussed here. The Upamanyu mahāpurāṇa did not have this part dealing with the lives of 63 Śaiva saints which was added by Ratna-kheta-dīkshitaḥ. It is almost certain that this is the text mentioned in the Kāñchīpuram inscription and hence it could be dated to 1532.

22.3. Anapāya Kulōttuṅga

First and foremost information that receives our attention is that Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa refers to Anapāya Cōḻa exactly in the same places where Sēkkiḻār mentions him in the Periya-Purāṇam. Sēkkiḻār who served under him as a minister refers to him in his work at ten places. The Tiruvarur inscription also refers to him as Anapāya. There is no doubt that Sēkkiḻār was his contemporary. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa refers to him both as Anapāya and Kulōttuṅga and wherever this reference is seen it is in the same place where Sēkkiḻār mentioned him. For example, while mentioning Manu-nīti-Cōḻa, Sēkkiḻār states: “mannu anapāyaṉ vaḻi mudalōṉ minnu māmaṇip pūn manu vēntaṉe” In the same situation Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa mentions: “anapāyāhvayo nāma manur nāma mahīpatiḥ” The port town of Pūmpuhār that has fostered the richness of the Cōḻa empire Sēkkiḻār describes it as the city of the great family of Anapāya (Kulōttuṅga), in the chapter on Iyaṟpakai nāyaṉār. “ceṉṉi veṇkuṭai nīṭanapāyaṉ tirukulam pukaḻperukkiya ciṟappu” — v.404 The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa mentions Anapāya at the very same place in the following words. “meru mudrita sārdula lanjanena jagat jitā anapāyena cholendra arkānvaya janmana” p.154 v.2 Similarly in the narration of caṇṭeśvara nāyanār caritam, Sēkkiḻār refers to Anapāya but this time in his Paṭṭābhiṣeka name also as Kulōttuṅga. It is a reference to the village “Ceyjñalūr” the native place of Caṇṭeśvara. The verse says that “the village is one among the five privileged villages that had the right to coronate the Cōḻa kings of the ancient lineage of Anapāya Kulōttuṅga Cōḻa who caused the whole of Tillai to shine with gold”. ceṉṉi aṉapāyaṉ kulōttuṅga cōḻaṉ tillai tiruvellai poṉṉiṉ māyamākkiya vāṉavar pōrēreṉṟum puvi kākkum maṉṉar perumāṉ aṉapāyaṉ varum tolmarapiṉ muṭi cūṭṭum taṉmai nilavu pati aintil oṉṟāy nīṭum takaittatu avvūr Exactly in the same place UB also gives the following verse mentioning him as Kulōttuṅga in Sanskrit: puṇṭarīkapureśasya dhāmam haimam cakāra yaḥ cholendrasya kulottuṅga nāmnaḥ tasya mahīpateḥ yasyābhiṣeka satkāraḥ yaiḥ eva pratipadyate grāmaṣu pañcasu eteṣu skandha grāmaḥ cakāsti ha Puṇṭarīkapura is another name of Tillai. Skandha-pura is Ceyjñalūr, the village of Caṇṭeśa. As may be seen in the Sanskrit verse it is an exact equivalent of the Tamiḻ version. Now it is established that Anapāya Kulōttuṅga is the name of the Cōḻa in whose instance Sēkkiḻār composed the Periya-Purāṇam and that his date is well settled as the mid CE 1140., from many inscriptions. Sēkkiḻār himself has recorded that he followed the Tiruttoṇṭattokai of Sundarar, and Tiruttoṇṭar-Tiruvantāti of Nambiyāṇṭār Nambi, and does not refer to any other Purāṇa as his source. As the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa refers to Kulōttuṅga it needs to be placed after him. Obviously, it cannot claim to be earlier than or even contemporary with Sēkkiḻār, as it follows him very closely throughout his work. Obviously, it is 400 years (1532) later that took Sēkkiḻār’s work as its source.

22.4. Upamanyu, a Translation

Both the verses are sufficient to show it is a close translation. But, it is not these two verses alone that are the translation. The whole book of Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa is a close translation that can be demonstrated from any part. A few sections are cited here. At the beginning of the work Sēkkiḻār begins his description of the Kailāśa mountain and at the outskirts of his abode waited for Brahma and Viṣṇu. The verse begins: nāyakaṉ kaḻal cēvikka nāṉmukaṉ mēya kālam alāmaiyin mīṇṭavaṉ tūya mālvarai cōtiyil mūḻkiyoṉṟu āya annamum kāṇātu ayarkkumāl — Sēkkiḻār antaḥ samsevya gaurīśam dvāri nirgacchato vidheḥ bhāsato bhāsamullasaiḥ hamsa bhrāntim vitanvati — Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa kātil veṉ kuḻaiyōṉ kaḻal toḻa neṭiyōṉ kālam pārtiruntatum aṟiyāṉ coti veṉ kaiyilait talvarai muḻaiyil tutikkaiyōn ūrtityaik kaṇṭu mīteḻu paṇṭaic ceñcuṭar iṉṟu veñcuṭar āṉateṉṟu ataṉ kiḻ āti ēṉamatāy iṭakkaluṟṟān eṉṟatanai vantaṇaittarum kaluḻaṉ — Sēkkiḻār sevārthīti harau antaḥ cirāyati phaṇidruhaḥ bahir niryacchat gaṇe ākhuh kiritanādi krita bhrame — Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa According to Sēkkiḻār, when Sundaramūrti challenged the old Brāhmin to show the written document to prove that he was the old man’s slave, the document contained the following agreement: arumarai nāval āti caivaṉ ārūraṉ ceykai perumuni veṇṇainallūr pittaṉukku yāṉum eṉpāl varumurai marapilorum vaḻittoṇṭu ceytarkkōlai irumaiyāl eḻuti nērntēṉ itaṟkkivai eṉṉeḻuttu — Sēkkiḻār jambugrāmādi śaivārya kamalālaya śamkara navanīta pureśaya dāśya-patram dadāmy-aham aham mama vamsa jātāsca navanīta pureśituḥ sarve parampara bhrityaḥ ityetat likhitam mayā — Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa As the whole book contains true translations it is needless to give more details than to say that Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa is an out-and-out translation of the Periya-Purāṇam and that makes this text great as a complete kāvya translated into Sanskrit from Tamiḻ, as early as the 16th century.

22.5. Tamiḻ Vedam

Sundaramūrti sang the list of 63 saints in eleven verses called Tiruttoṇṭattokai. Sēkkiḻār mentions in his Periya-Purāṇam the reason for writing eleven verses instead of ten for listing the saints. Sēkkiḻār’s verses indicate the reason for this choice. It is said that the first line of the poem tillai vāḻ antaṇar tam aṭiyārkkum adiyēṉ was given to him by the lord with “the same mouth that gave the Vedas”, and thereby suggests this hymn has the same sanctity as the Vedas. tollai māl varai payanta tūyal tan thiruppākan allal tīrntu ulakuyya maraiayaḷitta thiruvākkāl tillai vāḻ antanar tam aṭiyārkkum adiyen eṉṟu ellaiyil pukaḻānai edutticaippa enṟār — 345 It is known that the most respected hymn in the Vedas is what is called Śatarudrīya also known as Rudram. It consists of eleven anuvākas and it is in the middle of this hymn that the most sacred pañchākṣara namaḥ śivāya occurs. So, it is held as the very essence of the Vedas by the Śaivaites. Obviously, Sundarar was inspired by this Vedic hymn to sing eleven verses in his Tiruttoṇṭattokai. As the first line was given by the lord with the same mouth that gave the Vedas this Tamiḻ hymn also is a Veda. However, Sēkkiḻār makes it clear that Sundarar sang the hymn in the Tamiḻ tradition, suggesting that there was no Purāṇic source for this work.

22.6. Narrative Format in Tamiḻ and Sanskrit

Sēkkiḻār wrote his work in two kāṇṭams and thirteen sargas and followed the order of listing the saints as given by Sundarmūrti in his Tiruttoṇṭattokai, beginning with Tillai-vāḻ-antanar. Also, Sēkkiḻār says that he followed the Tiruttoṇṭar Tiruvantāti of Nambiyāṇṭār- Nambi. This makes it clear that Sēkkiḻār took the Tamiḻ tradition as the base and not any early Purāṇa in Sanskrit. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa follows the same order in listing the stories of the 63 Śaiva saints, beginning from Sundarar. Sēkkiḻār introduces the Sage Upamanyu at the beginning as the narrator of this Purāṇam. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa follows the same order and hence its name Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa. Sundara’s Tiruttoṇṭattokai consists of 11 verses, and in each verse, he gives a list of the saints and completes the list in 11 verses. At the end of each verse, he says that “he the Ārūraṉ is a servant of lord of Tiruvārūr” “ārūraṉ ārūril ammāṉukku āḷe”. Sēkkiḻār has taken these 11 verses as units and as introductory and concluding chapters making thirteen Sargas for his work. Sēkkiḻār’s Periya-Purāṇam consists of 13 Sargas. Nambiyāṇṭār Nambi went further and taking the last sentence of each verse introduces events in the life of Sundarar as the concluding part of each verse and introduces an event of Sundarar in one verse each. At the end, he narrates the event of Sundarar returning to Kailāśa. Thus, Sēkkiḻār taking the structure as laid out by Nambi makes the life of Sundarar cover the whole kāvya and virtually makes him the hero of the entire Periya-Purāṇam. Sēkkiḻār calls his work Tiruttoṇṭar Purāṇam. The first part is called Tiruppatikam which includes several chapters including the Taṭuttaṭkoṇṭa Purāṇam. Sēkkiḻār ends his first kāndam with the story of Naminandi-aṭikaḷ. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa has divided the text into three parts. The first part of the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa ends at the same place as Naminandi’s story. The second part of is called the madhya bhāga and deals with the life of Sambandar only. The third part called uttara bhāga concludes the text. Sēkkiḻār mentions most of the lives of the saints as service (toṇṭu), acts (ceyal) are exploits (tiram) and calls some of the lives of the saints as Purāṇam. However, he calls the chapters on Sundarar, Appar, and Sambandar as caritam i.e., history. But the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa call all chapters as Purāṇams. Sēkkiḻār ends the Periya-Purāṇam with an account of Isaijñāniyār and Saṭaiyanār, the parents of Sundarar. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa also ends the text with an account of the same lives. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa makes a slight change in narration in some places. It takes up the life of Sundarar first and completes his story at the beginning itself, before going on to the next saint. We will examine this further when we take up the comparison between Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa and Agastya Bhakta-vilāsa. We have noted that the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa is a close translation of Periya-Purāṇam. I may cite the famous episode in the life of Sundarar as to how he started singing Śiva as “You Madman” with the hymn pittā piṟai cūṭi. When Sundara was won over as a slave Śiva asked him to sing. Sundara asks Śiva how could I sing? Śiva tells him as you called me a “madman” earlier among all men, you start singing me with the same word. The Periya-Purāṇam says: aṉpaṉai aruḷin nokki aṅganar arulic ceyvār munpeṉai pittanenṟē moḻintanai ātalāl eṉ peyar pittaṉ eṉṟe pāṭuvāy eṉṟār niṉṟa vaṉperum toṇṭar āṇṭa vaḷḷalai pāṭaluṟṟār periay purāṇam — taṭuttāṭkoṇṭa purāṇam v 43 The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa also says the very same thing as that you called me a “madman” first in the assembly and so you sing beginning with the same name. bhrāntosi iti sadasi proktam tvaya mām prati sundara tadāya padam pūrvam stuhi vācā tu argala — Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa Ch.7.v.41 bhrantosi iti yadāttha tvam prathamam mām jaradvijam tadādau padam ahridya stuhi ityādisat īśvaraḥ — Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa Ch.7.v.120 It may be seen that the Sanskrit rendering is close to the original. I may also cite another example in this connection. When Sundara sang the Tiruttoṇṭattokai, he was asked by Śiva to sing by praising the Brāhmins of Tillai — tillai vāḻ antaṇar tam aṭiyārkkum aṭiyeṉ. Sēkkiḻār mentions the same thing as tillai vāḻ antar tam aṭiyārkkum aṭiyēṉ eṉṟṟu ellaiyil vaṇ pukaḻārai edutticaippa moḻi eṉṟār The same is rendered by the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa as follows tillāpuri bhuṣnu dvija kiṅkara kiṅkaraḥ asmītyārabhya nissīma māhātmyan sthuhi mat paran ca — Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa Ch6.v.19

22.7. Citations of Tēvārams

There are some remarkable trends noticed in Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam. As Sēkkiḻār cites at many places the songs sung by the Tēvāram singers Appar, Sambandar and Sundarar, the Upamanyu bhakta-vilasam also follows the same method and cites verbatim Sēkkiḻār’s citations with the result the beginning or two or three lines of Tēvārams are translated in this manner. Thus, this forms the first known effort to translate Tēvāram into Sanskrit in early times. We may cite a few examples here.

22.8. Sēkkiḻār’s Citations

Sēkkiḻār is a master of narration and introduces the first line or part of the Tēvāram sung by the saints at places to give the narration absolute authenticity. When Sambandar visited the Kāmākṣi temple at Kāñchi he sang one hymn in yamaka format and another called in Tamiḻ tiru irukku kuṟaḷ. Sēkkiḻār sings about this event and mentions these two compositions as yamakam and tiru irukku kuṟaḷ. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa also gives the same information following Sēkkiḻār and states that Sambandar sang “gāna yamaka” and “Vāmanaka vṛtta”. The last one “Vāmanaka vṛtta” is the Sanskrit equivalent of irukku kuṟaḷ. Thus, the translation helps us to know some of the Sanskrit equivalents of Tamiḻ technical words. kāle kāle kālakālam ekāmra nēyakam natvā śrī gāna yamakam agāyat nāyako giram gāṇaih vamana vṛttādyaiḥ aparaiḥ pravarāni prabhoḥ nigamāntika nihitaiḥ jagau ekāmra nāyakam — Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa Ch20.v23 Sambandar gives the name of one of his compositions at Kāñchīpuram as Kalikkōvai to which he also gives an alternate name as chandam. Check this verse: am taṇ pūṅkacci ekampaṉai, ammāṉai kantu aṇ pūṅkāḻi ūraṉ kalikkovaiyāl cantame pāṭa valla tamiḻ ñāṉacam pantaṉ col pāṭi āṭa, kēṭum, pāvame Evidently, this metrical composition was called Kalikkovai in the time of Sambandar. Sēkkiḻār referred to the same states in an emotional outpouring that he sang “the tune set to the first tala”. Thus, it represents Kalik-kovai of Sambandar. 994-996. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsa also at the same place gives the name of the composition as sapta svarottāni. Here we get a new nomenclature in Sanskrit for the poetry kalikkovai Pp 228. There are many such instances where the Sanskrit equivalent for Tamiḻ usages of Some rare musical forms could be discerned from Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam. For example, when Sambandar as a child went to the temple of Tirukkolakkā he is said to have received Cymbals from the presiding god. He began to sing from then on with Cymbals in his hand and set his compositions suited to different time measures Tāḷa. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam states that Sambandar started singing his songs in the tālas like caccatpuṭa which is one of the important tālās mentioned in musical treatises. Sēkkiḻār does not mention this tāla but simply says Sambandar played the Cymbal suited to the song “eṭutta pāṭalukku icainta aḷavāl otta”. The word ottal is used in its musical sense as beating the appropriate tāla. Further, the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam says that Sambandar’s songs were rich in both Saṅgīta and Sāhitya (rāga and literary beauty) sangīte api ca sāhitye praudāni ākarnito aśeṣaiḥ At another place, Sambandar is shown as an expert rasika. While he was at Sīrkāḻi many people came to see him. Tiru-nīlakṇṭa-yāḻ-pāṇar, the great instrumental musician came to see Sambandar, who asked him to sing with his yāḻ. Pāṇar was accompanied by his wife Mataṅga-chulāmaṇiyār who sang the compositions vocally. When he heard Pāṇar he was so captivated by his music he immediately made Nīlakanṭar his companion and ever since Pāṇar always accompanied Sambandar wherever he went. Nīlakaṇṭa-yāḻ-pāṇar was an outcaste, but Sambandar always treated him as his friend. Once while he was on a pilgrimage to sacred places near Chidambaram, Pāṇar requested him to visit his native place Erukkattam-puliyūr. Sambandar immediately agreed and went to his village where he was received by Paṇar’s wife Matanga-chūlāmaṇiyār and Sambandar accepted the hospitality with affection. There was no caste feeling between the two and so great was Sambandar’s respect for Pāṇar he praised the musician saying that the village had done penance to have him born in this village. It is an illustrious example of a Vaidika Smārta Brāhmaṇa moving with an outcaste musician for all Śaivite devotees to follow.

22.9. Tēvāram Translation into Sanskrit

It has been mentioned above in many places the Tēvāram lines cited by Sēkkiḻār are rendered truly into Sanskrit in Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam. As there are many citations I give below only some select passages. Sundara’s song of Tiruttoṇḍattokai, uses repeatedly the phrase I am the Devotee of Devotees aṭiyārkkum aṭiyeṉ. And also ends each verse as I am the servant of ārūraṉ “ārūraṉ ārūril ammaṉukkaḷē”. This is cited by Sēkkiḻār which is also rendered truly by Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam as: tvat bhritya bhritya bhrityosmīti asthāvit At Tiruppaṇaiyūr, Sundarar sings in a hymn that “Śiva who dances is beautiful” which is cited by Sēkkiḻār as: āṭumāru vallār avare aḻakiyarē and this is rendered closely by Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam in Sanskrit as: ayam namro mahānṛittam dakṣaḥ saundaryavān asau One of the famous hymns of Sundara is addressed to the lord of Kodumudi where he sings that “even if I were to forget you my tongue will continue to repeat namas śivāya”. In all the ten verses of his hymn, Sundara repeats this which is a very lucid and memorable poem recited by Śaivites. Sundarar's first verse of this hymn reads: maṟṟu paṟṟenak kiṉṟi nin tiru pādamē maṉam pāvitteṉ peṟṟalum piṟantēṉ ini piṟavāta taṉmai vanteteytiṉeṉ kaṟṟavar toḻu tēttum cīrkkaṟaiūril pāṇṭik koṭumuṭi naṟṟavā uṉai nāṉ maṟakkiṉum collum na namaccivāyave This verse is rendered in Sanskrit by Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam as deva deva mahādeva bhagavantam candraśekharam vismaratyapi me asmāt jihvā pañcñākṣharīm manuḥ na vismarati deveti jagau pañcākṣharāncitam Similarly, many of Appar’s hymns are also found translated into Sanskrit. purāre moha rogārti bhaya śoka sramāpahā bhaveti prārtayan yavat śri gaṇaiḥ daśabhiḥ śivam There is an important suggestion in the Sanskrit version. The Saint seems to pray for the removal of “the disease of moha” (with Jain doctrine) and does not refer to physical pain. Similarly, the first hymn of Sambandar which is well known as tōṭuṭaiya ceviyaṉ is given in Sanskrit as ratna tāḍāṅga vat karṇaḥ. What is important to note is that this is the first attempt to translate the Tēvāram hymns into Sanskrit.

22.10 What is New?

Though the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam follows closely the work of Sēkkiḻār at some places he gives some additional information not found in Periya-Purāṇam. For example, the Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam gives the name of the mother of dancing girl Paravai whom Sundarar married at Tiruvārūr. This is not found in any other source. She is said to belong to the family of Rudra gaṇikas and was named "Sriṅgāra nāyikā". It is also seen that among the Rudra gaṇikas there seems to have been su-castes and she belonged to the Patiyilār family of the Rudra gaṇikas. The name Paravai of the dancing girl is given in Sanskrit as Sāgarikā who is said to be adept in both vocal and instrumental music. She played beautifully on the vīṇa called Pārivādini. According to the account, such dancing girls also lived a married life and Sundara is said to have married her. Similarly, the Sanskrit portion gives valuable information on Dīkṣitas of Chidambaram which is not found in Periya Puraṇam. Saints Vyāghrapāda and Patañjali witnessed the great dance of Śiva at Tillai-vaṉam. It also mentions the sage Jaimini worshipped lord Nataraja here (p.143). It also mentions that the 3000 Dīkṣita Brāhmins were settled at Chidambaram by the king Hiraṇyavarman. "hiraṇyavarmanā ānītāḥ trisahasra mahisurāḥ" They were great masters of the four Vedas (Caturvedis) and learned in the six aṅgas. They were greatly learned in Dharma, Purāṇas, Mīmāmsa, Nyāya, and exposition of Dharma śāstras and Purāṇas. The text gives also list of yajñas they were performing like pāka-yajña, havir-yajña, soma-yajña, vājapeya, triśahasra, and pauṇḍarika, and so on, all of whom were devoted to Śiva. Consequently, they had the right to carry white umbrellas. They also underwent initiations like sāmānya-dīkṣa, viśeṣa-dīkṣa, samaya-dīkṣa, nirvāṇa-dīkṣa and ācārya-dīkṣa and initiated other devotees who sought their blessings. Further, they also mastered kriyās, and practiced caryas properly and mastered the philosophy of tripadārtha (pati, pasu and pāśa). This chapter is of great use in knowing about the Dīkṣita community. Another point of interest is that this text also mentions the temple of Goddess Śivakāmi situated on the banks of the Śivagaṅga tank inside the temple. When Appar was at Tiruppuhalūr towards the end of his life, divine dancing girls are said to have come to him singing and dancing to distract his devotion. There the Sanskrit text says that they used svara, jati, śruti, grāma, murccanas tāna all technical terms found in musical treatises.

22.11. Tiruvaṇṇamalai Disappeared

After visiting Tirukkōyilūr Sambandar was on his way to other temples when his attendants pointed to him Tiruvaṇṇāmalai hill and its temple seen at a long distance. Worshipping the hill from a distance he proceeded to the temple and sang the presiding deity of Tiruvaṇṇāmalai. This event is sung by Sēkkiḻār in two verses. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam introduces an episode not seen in Sēkkiḻār. Sambandar after worshipping Śiva at Tirukkōyilūr came out of the temple and saw a temple on the banks of Peṇṇār thinking that it was also a Śiva temple he saluted the temple. The attendants around, told him it was not Śiva but a Jain temple. But Sambandar continued to visualize the image of Jina as Śiva and paid his obeisance. The image of Jina miraculously turned into Śiva to the surprise of all. Later Sambandar reached Arakanda-nallūr then called Ariayani-nallūr where there exists a cave temple with five cells. The local people associated the five cells with the Pāṇḍava brothers and believed that the Pāṇḍavas stayed there for some time. The UB refers to this cave temple with five cells and associates them with the Pāṇḍavas. śrīmat kuharīm prāpya vaidiko antaka vairinam tatra pennātaṭe jainam tam dṛṣṭva bhramāt naman boditaḥ kimkaraiḥ jñāni jinam śivataya jagau tatjñānana vaibhavat sopi jinasya pratimā kṣanāt lingākāratayā jāta tenāsit vismitam jagat guhe pañcakam abhyetya yatra pāṇḍu putrā sthitāḥ tatra dṛṣṭe guhe kanta pureśam asthuvan sthitaḥ These two episodes and the popular notion about Pāṇḍava’s stay are not found in the Periya-Purāṇam. It is possible that they originally were in Periya-Purāṇam but have been lost subsequently.

22.12. Tiruvaṇṇāmalai Forgotten

Tiruvaṇṇāmalai is one of the most venerated Śiva kṣetra of Tamiḻnāṭu. It is praised from the very beginning as the hill itself was visualized as the jyotirliṅga and the story of Brahma and Viṣṇu in the form of swan and boar tried to fathom the origin and end of the flame which forms the story of liṅgodbhava. At the very beginning of the Periya-Purāṇam a description of the Kailāśa mountain appears. The description shows that Brahma, Viṣṇu, Indra,, and other celestials waited at the doors of the abode of Śiva at Kailāśa. The next verse states that Brahma stayed there in the form of a swan. In some editions of Periya-Purāṇam a verse states that Viṣṇu in the form of a boar waited at the doors but some printed versions have removed it stating that it is an interpolation and so have deleted it. They even went to the extent of stating that this was interpolated by Velli-amabala-vāṇa Swāmikaḷ who lived in the 17th century and called it veḷḷi pāṭṭu. But this verse is very much there in the UB. A comparative study of both the available Tamiḻ and Sanskrit verses we find that they are identical with the Sanskrit verse being a close translation of the Tamiḻ verse. The following are the verses. kātil venkuḻayōṉ kai toḻa neṭiyōṉ kālam kāttiruntum ariyāṉ coti venkaiyilai tāḻvarai muḻaiyil tutikkaiyōn ūrtiyaik kaṇṭu miteḻu paṇṭaic cencuṭar iṉṟu veṇcuṭar ānateṉṟu ataṉ [mel/kīḻ ?] āti eṉamatāy iṭakkal uṟṟāṉ ataṉai vantaṇai tarum kaluḻan In this verse Viṣṇu is said to have experienced difficulty in entering the place of Śiva. sevartini harau antaḥ cirāyati phaṇidruhaḥ bahir niryāt gaṇeśākuḥ kritanati kiṭi bhrame It may be seen it is an exact translation of the verse of Periya-Purāṇam. There is no doubt that the Tamiḻ version formed the basis for the translation. It is not correct to delete verses without a detailed study. In this case, when Brahma is mentioned in his swan form the story is not complete without Viṣṇu in his boar form. It is a good example of using the Sanskrit text to bring out a critical edition of Sēkkiḻār’s Periya-Purāṇam. Arbitrary editions are not scientific in approach.

22.13. Kumāra Gānam in Inscription

An inscription in the Nataraja temple of Chidambaram dated in the reign of Vikrama Cōḻa, the father of Kulōttuṅga II, is important. It is in poetic form and consists of 75 verses in Tamiḻ and the same in Sanskrit as well as mentioning the benefactions of a Senapati Commander of the Cōḻa rendered at Chidambaram. It is seen that the Sanskrit version is an exact translation of the Tamiḻ verses thus illustrating that under the Cōḻas both Tamiḻ and Sanskrit received patronage. In this bilingual inscription, there is a verse in Sanskrit that says that the donor built a golden hall for the recitation of the kumāra gāṇa adored by the world, sung with devotion by the worshipping Dīkṣitas for their spiritual merit. ayam iha vṛṣaketoḥ pūjakānām dvijānām akṛta suci muninām muktihetoḥ vibhūtim itarad api kumāra stotra pārāyaṇam tribhuvana nutam uktaiḥ kāñcanam maṇḍapam ca This is a pointed reference to the building of a golden hall for the recitation of kumāra gāna by the Dīkṣitas. What is this kumāra stotra? that has received such exalted attention for which a golden maṇḍapa was erected for reciting the thirup-patiyam of the Jñāṉi who was fed with knowledge by the grace of lord Nataraja. The reference here is Jñāna-sambandar and his Tēvāram and the maṇḍapa was specifically intended for its recitation. The Sanskrit part says that the Tēvāram was adored by the three worlds - tribhuvana nutam. The Upamanyu Bhakta-vilāsam describing Sambandar’s visit to Chidambaram includes a Sanskrit verse. It says that a beautiful singer standing at Tillainagar adored Naṭarāja with kumāra gāna day and night. sthitva tillainagare sa ca mataṅga gāyanaḥ kumāra gāṇaiḥ tilleśam aśevata divā nisam The thirup-patiyam of Sambandar was called kumāra stotra by the Senapati of the Cōḻa in the 12th century and after 400 years the same term is used in Sanskrit to denote Sambandar Tēvāram as kumāra gāna. This information is not found in any Tamiḻ source.

22.14. Found and Lost

While we have been pointing out that we benefit from Upamanyu bhakta-vilasam to resurrect the lost verses in Periya-Purāṇam, some valuable data have been lost because either the translator of Upamanyu bhakta-vilasam from Periya-Purāṇam has left out some verses may be for brevity or other reasons. For example, there are two verses in Periya-Purāṇam of Sēkkiḻār which provide the names of Poetic forms that list the variety of poems of Sambandar. Poetic forms called “patikam jñāṉa ilakkiyam”.

tamiḻ mālai
vikarpac-ceyyul
moḻi māṟṟu
col cir
mālai māṟṟu
vaḻi moḻi madakku
chanda yamakam
ēkapādam
irukkuk-kuraḷ
eḻukuṟṟiukkai
īraṭi-īraṭi-vaippu
nālaṭi-mēl-vaippu

The corresponding Tamiḻ verse found in Sēkkiḻār: centamiḻ mālai, vikarpac-ceyyul, moḻi māṟṟu vandal sorcir mālai maṟṟum, vaḻi moḻi ella madakkum chanda yamakam, ēkapadam, tamiḻ irukku kuraḷ catti — īradi īradi vaippu 276 nālaḍimēl vaippum mēnna nadaiyum mudukkum irāgam cālbinil cakkaram ādi vikaṟpaṅkaḷ cārum padika jñāla ilakkiyam aka ellapporuḷ-kaḷum muṟṟa jñalattu talavarai pādiṉār Jñāṉāsambandar. - 277 Some of these forms are known by their Sanskrit names such as: ēkapādam, yamakam, irukku-kuraḷ (called vāmanaka vṛttam) and cakkaram, but for the other forms in Tamiḻ we do not have the equivalent Sanskrit forms. Had the translator rendered these two poems we would have known the corresponding names in Sanskrit.

22.15. Agastya Bhakta Vilāsam

There is another Sanskrit text called Agastya Bhakta-vilāsam (ABV) which also gives the lives of 63 Śaiva saints. (triṣaṣṭi bhaktānām nānā caritraiḥ alamkṛtam). The text was published in the year 1907 and edited by Raja Śāstri, a disciple of Vaidyeśvara Śāstri of Māyūram, and printed at Chennapuri. It is in grantha characters. According to the colophon, it forms a subsidiary part of Skanda Purāṇam (skanda upa purāṇiye śiva bhakta vilāse) in its 9th chapter in abridged form. It is said to have been expounded by Haraṣarma muni. There is also an old commentary named Manavalli also called Śrī Bhakta-vilāsa prakāśikā written in the year Tāraṇa by one Narasimha. The commentary seems to be post-17th century. This work has also been published by the Vāranāsi Kāsiraj trust in the late 19th century. This is more in tune with other early Purāṇas and begins the narration with Sutapaurāṇika. The first two chapters are on the path of liberation and the dialogue between Śiva and Pārvati.The first chapter introduces Mārkaṇḍeya, Upamanyu, Viṣṇu, and Agastya as the foremost Śiva bhaktas. From the third chapter onwards Sundara is introduced as a reflection of Śiva himself (bimba prati bimba) and then two attendant girls of the Goddess Uma are introduced. They were sent to earth to enjoy earthly happiness and then return to heaven. Then the story of Sundara is narrated as found in the Periya-Purāṇam. This text is attributed to Sage Agastya and as such is called Agastya Bhakta-vilāsa. It does not divide the text into kāṇḍams but treats the lives of the saints one after the other in the same order given by Sēkkiḻār in his Periya-Purāṇam. For example, this text gives towards the end the story of Caḍaiyanār and Isai-jñāniyār the parents of Sundara as given in Periya-Purāṇam. Though the major part of life of Sundara is dealt with in one stretch in the beginning a small part of his life is told at the very end of the text as in the case Periya-Purāṇam of Sēkkiḻār. But this part does not deal with Sundara ascending to heaven but the rescue of a boy from the mouth of a crocodile described in the Avināśi temple of Koṅgu country. However, it is seen that the author of this text Hara Sarman is fully aware of the Periya-Purāṇam and in many places, he gives the same version as found in his source. In some instances, a remarkable coincidence is also noticed between UBV and ABV. For example, when Sundara was taken as his servant by Śiva he asks Sundara to sing his praises. Sundarar asks Śiva with what word he can begin his poems. Then Śiva told him that since he called him “Madman” (pittā-பித்தா) in the midst of the assembly he should start singing with the same word. This is the version of Periya-Purāṇam. The ABV presents the episode exactly with the same beginning: bhrāntosi iti sadasi proktam tvayā mām prati sundara tadāya padam sthuhi vākyaiḥ tvam anargala - Ch.7.v.41. The UB also gives almost the version bhrāntosi iti yat tathatta tvam prathamam mām jaradvijam tādau padam abadhya sthuhi ityādisat īśvarah - Ch 4.v 20 But a comparison between UB and AB shows that the former is very close to the original of Sēkkiḻār. This trend continues throughout between the two, the UB being true to the original while the AB takes only the outline and gives it in its own words. In the translation of the personal names also this is clearly seen.

22.16. Translation of Personal Names

The translation of personal names especially of the saints provides interesting insight into the approaches of the translators. Some of the names are common and so given by both alike. like Sundarar, Nīlakaṇṭar, Mūrti, Śakti, etc. As the Tamiḻ does not use the varga letters the Prākṛtised form of the letters is found in Tamiḻ as in the case of Kananāta rendered in Sanskrit as Gana-nātha. Similarly, Atipattar of Tamiḻ is rendered as āti-bhakta. The name Tiru-Jñāna-Sambandar is rendered as Śrī-Jñāṉasambandhar by UBV which shows that the word Śrī is the equivalent of Tiru in Tamiḻ. The ABV calls him simply Jñāna-sambandhar. The name Nīlanakkar is rendered into Nīlanagna by both. Similarly, Kulacciṟai is rendered as Kula-pakṣa in both the Sanskrit works. The word kuṟippu is rendered by both as Vicāra. The word Iśai is given as Śīla by both Sanskrit works. The following words are rendered by the same words in both the Sanskrit texts.

Kaliyaṉ	Kāla-nithi
Somāsi	Soma-yāji
Aḍigal	Pāda
Tāyaṉ	Dāyan

There are variations between the two Sanskrit works in rendering the words

Puli	Vyāgra	Sārdūla
Pukaḻ	Dharma	Kīrti

In some instances the one goes into the given name while the other gives the title.

Tamiḻ	ABV	UBV
Kaṇṇappaṉ	Nilaṉ	Netrārpaṇa
Appūti	Abhūti	Tadbhūti

In two instances the UBV gives interesting derivations. Miḻalai is rendered as Mithilai, while Kañcaru is rendered as a river by UBV the ABV gives Vikrama as the equivalent. A careful study of both the Sanskrit texts it is seen that the UBV is closer to Periya-Purāṇam than the ABV, as in the case of Maṅgayarkarasi who called “Mahilaulanāyaki” by UBV, whereas the ABV gives her name as Padmāvati not known to any. Another instance is the name Caḍaiyanār the name of the father of Sundara. UBV calls him Kapardin while ABV calls him Śiva-vṛati. From these we understand that Ratna Kheta Dīkṣīta, the translator of the Upamanyu-bhakta-vilāsa, is conscious of his role as a translator. The author of Agastya-bhakta-vilāsa, Hara Ṣarma is concerned only with the narration of the abbreviated story. However, it seems probable that one of the translators was aware of the other’s work as both use these same words in rare usage. For example, Kaliyar is translated by both as Kali-nihi. The word icai may mean music in Tamiḻ, both translate the name word as Śīla, and ciru-toṇḍar is translated by both as dabhra-bhaktaḥ. Kāraikkāl Ammaiyār is called by both Sanskrit authors as Pūtavati while in Tamiḻ we get the name Punitavati.

22.17. Interest of Sanskritists in Tamiḻ Studies

While the date of Upamanyu bhakta-vilāsa is known as 1532, the exact date of Agastya bhakta-vilāsa is not precisely known but seems to be very close to the other in point of time. For, it has also attracted a commentator Narasimha. This shows that in the 16th century, under the Vijayanagara rulers, there was a great interest evinced by the Sanskrit Scholars to study the Tamiḻ works and render them into Sanskrit as illustrated by these two works. Curiously, in the publication of these works, there seems to have been close competition among Sanskrit scholars in bringing out the Sanskritised Tamiḻ texts in print. The ABV was printed in Grantha in 1907 while another one came in 1913. Scholarship was not lagging behind in closer studies whatever the language in which the text might have been written.

Tamiḻ	ABV	UBV
Aiyaṭikaḻ	Pañcapāda	Kāṭavarājaḥ
Amarnīti	Amarnītiḥ	Amarnītiḥ
Ānāya	Gonāthaḥ	Gonāthaḥ
Appūti	Abhūticaraṇaḥ	Tadbhūtiḥ
Aruvāttāyanār	Sankuladāyaḥ	Dāyaḥ
Atipattar	Atibhaktaḥ	Atibhaktaḥ
Caḍaiyar	Śivavratar	Kapardi
Cākkiyar	Sākyaḥ	Sākhyanāthaḥ
Cacti	Śaktiḥ	Śaktināthaḥ
Caṇṭēcar	Vicāraśarman	Candes-śvarah
Cheramāṉ Perumāl	Kṣhanavān	Cerah
Cirattuṇai	Sāhasānkah	Raṇamitrah
Ciruttoṇḍar	Dabhra-bhaktah	Dabhra-bhaktah
Dandi-aṭikaḷ	Dandah	Dandi-bhaktah
Enādinātan	Enādināthah	Enādināthah
Eripattar	Darakah	Vira-bhaktah
Icaijñāniyar	Sīlajñā	Sīlajñā
Idaṅkaliyar	Bhutidah	Idankṛshih
Iḷayaṉ-kuḍi-māraṉ	Marah	Ilanandakuti-mārah
Kalijampar	Mahādhanah	Svabhāvaripuh
Kalikam	Minadhanah	Kalikam
Kalik-kāmar	Kalikāmah	Kalikāmah
Kaliyar	Kali-Kālaniti	Kalinitih
Kanampullar	Ganalavah	Kanolapah
Kaṇanātaṉ	Gananāthan	Gananāthah
Kaṇṇappaṉ	Nīlah	Netrāpaha
Kāraik-kālammaiār	Pūtavati	Punitavati
Kārināyanar	Avikāri	Kārināthah
Kōcceṅkat-Coḻa	Lohitākshah	Arunākṣhah
Kotpuli	Saravyagraha	Virasirdla
Kulacirai	Kulapaksha	Kulpaksha
Kunngila Kalayar	Kalanathah	Srikalanathah
Kūrrrruvar	-	Kritānthah
Mānakkancārar	Manavikramah	Minakanaja-nadisvarah
Mangayak-karaci	Padmāvati	Mahilākulanika
Meyporul	Satyartah	Satyarta-natha
Munaiyaduvar	Simhanga	Nasirabhajanah
Murkar	Bhaktārccakah	Mūrkhah
Mūrti	Mūrtināthah	Mūtināthah
Murukanāyanar	Skandha nathah	Skandhanathah
Naminandi	Navanandi	Naminandi
Narasiṅga-muṉaiya-rāyar	Pratāpasuryah	Narasimhamunih
Nēcar	Kirtinithah	Snehah
Nedumāraṉ	Abhimāraha	Dirgamāraha
Nīlakaṇṭar	Nīlakaṇṭah	Śri Nīlakaṇṭah
Nīlakaṇṭa Yāḻpāṇar	Nīlakaṇṭahah	Nīlakaṇṭahah
Nīlanakkar	Nīlnagnah	Nīlanagnah
Perumilalaik kurumbar	Vidyisūrah	Mithiladvijasūrah
Poi-aṭimai-illa-pulavar	Satya Dasah	Asatyadāsyarahitakavayah
Pūcalar	Sambucittah	Bhasalah
Pukal Cholaṉ	Dharmaketuh	Kīrti Cholah
Pukaḻtuṇaiyar	Kirtlsakhah	Kidimitrah
Rudra Paśupati	Rudra Paśupatiḥ	Paśupatiḥ
Silappuli	Nirūddhasārdūlah	Nirodhirdūlah
Somicimārar	Māra Somaji	Soma mārah
Sundarar	Sundaramūrti	Sundaraḥ
Tirujñāṉasambandar	Jñāṉasambandhaḥ	Śrī-Jñāṉasambandhaḥ
Tiruk-kurippu-toṇṭar	Vicāravān	Vicārabhaktaḥ
Tirumūlar	Mūlanāthaḥ	Mūladevaḥ
Tirunāḷaipōvār	Nandaḥ	Svogantā

It is seen that both these Sanskrit works, Upanamyu Bhakta-Vilāsa and Agastiya Bhakta-vilāsa or both translation of a Tamiḻ Periya-Purāṇam, the former a close verbatim translation, while the latter is an abridged narration of the Periya-Purāṇam. It is interesting that one and the same Tamiḻ Kāvya was translated into Sanskrit in the 16th - 17th Century, which is a tribute to the Periya-Purāṇam and its popularity. This is an illustrious example showing the Tamiḻ Brahmins did not neglect nor suppress the study of Tamiḻ.

Contents | Previous | Next | Home