chap07 chapter_06.html chapter_07.html chapter_08.html Tamil Nadu, The Land of the Vedas R. Nagaswamy 7. DIVYA PRABANDAM
Contents | Previous | Next | Academy

7.1. Philosophical Ethos of Vaiṣṇava Āḻvārs

 The great Vedic seers, Ṛṣis immortalised natural powers by creating fascinating poetic imagery, which during later centuries, gave rise to new manifestations of the same powers by their sheer poetic appeal. The appeal was so vivid and realistic that it became impossible to accept the later imagery as an extension of the early Vedic concepts, though the Vedic roots were accepted in a vague manner. The dual powers of Agni in its destructive and benign nature, sung by the Vedic sages as an inseparable body praised as Agnā-Viṣṇu in the Vedas. This dual body, called arccā in the Yajur Veda, stands for the nature of Agni, which has the terrific power to burn down anything and at the same time has the benign nature providing sufficient heat for life to be born on earth and supported by regulation. The Vedic Ṛṣis sang these dual powers as Agnā-Viṣṇu. They clarified that Agni in this combined form is named Rudra standing for the destructive power (ghorā) and Viṣṇu for the protective power (Śivā). The sacrificial Agni is therefore called Rudra-Viṣṇu in one dual form. This Agni-Viṣṇu of the Vedas - also called Rudra-Viṣṇu, came to be deified as Hari–Hara or Śaṅkara-Nārāyaṇa in the succeeding period. The same Agna-Viṣṇu was also called “Śiva–Śivā” in the Vedas, the first word Śiva denoting Rudra and Śivā with a long ā, denoting the feminine form of the same power. This is the root of the united form of Śiva and Devi, which gave rise to the more familiar form of Ardhanāri. The same dual but combined form of Agnā-Viṣṇu gave rise to another concept the more powerful nature – ghora was equated to manly power and assigned the right side while the benign power was assigned the left side of the body. So, Śiva was always given the right half of the body in Harihara or Ardhanāri form whereas Viṣṇu, or Devi, was always shown on the left. Thus, both Viṣṇu and Devi occupied the left half, so much so they were considered, identical in some instances while in others, considered brother and sister. Viṣṇu is called Māya, and Devi is also called Māyā. These concepts rooted in the Vedas, deserved to be noted, in connection with what follows from the writings of the Vaiṣṇava saints Āḻvārs. The following poem of Poykaiy Āḻvār describes the unity of Viṣṇu and Śiva in clear terms. Viṣṇu and Śiva are indeed our refuge One rides on a Bull while the other on a bird One burnt the forts, of the three demons the other tore the chest (of Hiraṇya) One wears white sacred ash, the other has the colour of black gems, One has Umā as part of his body and the other has Lakṣhmi One has a matted hairdo, and the other has a tall crown. One has Gaṅgā on his head, and the other has a sacred foot - (‘that measured the world’ ) ēṟṟāṉ, puḷ ūrntāṉ; eyil erittāṉ, mārvu iṭantāṉ nīṟṟāṉ, niḻal maṇi vaṇṇattāṉ; kūṟṟu orupāl maṅkaiyāṉ, pūmakaḷāṉ vār caṭaiyāṉ, nīḷ muṭiyāṉ kaṅkaiyāṉ, nīḷ kaḻalānāppu — 74 Śiva, the puṇya who wears a matted lock, is of golden colour, while Viṣṇu who measured the world, manifests in two different bodies but one remains ever in the other’s body. poṉ tikaḻum mēṉip puricaṭai am puṇṇiyaṉum, niṉṟu ulakam tāya neṭumālum, eṉṟum iruvar aṅkattāl tirivarēlum, oruvaṉ oruvaṉ aṅkattu eṉṟum uḷaṉ — 98 One is named Hara while the other is Nārāyaṇa; One has the bull and the other the bird as vehicle They expounded are Āgama and Vedas, Their abodes are mountains and waters. Their acts are destruction and protection, They carry in their hands, śūla and cakra, Their forms are fire and clouds But their body is one. araṉ, nāraṇaṉ nāmam; āṉviṭai, puḷ ūrti; urai nūl, maṟai; uṟaiyum kōyil varai, nīr; karumam aḻippu, kāḷippu; kaiyatu vēl, nēmi; uruvam eri, kār; mēṉi, oṉṟu. It seems by saying that the texts expounded by Viṣṇu as Vedas (maṟai), the Āḻvār suggests the Vaikānasa system of Vaiṣṇava school. The Pāñcarātrins, emphasises the teaching of Āgamas, not the Vedas. The three verses of one of the earliest Āḻvārs, Poykiayār clearly point out that there was no rivalry between Śaiva and Vaiṣṇava schools. The other early Vaiṣṇava saint, Pēyāḻvār also echoes the same view, when he says the Lord of Tirumalai (Tiruvēṅkaṭam/Tiruppati), has the combined forms of Śiva and Viṣṇu in one. The Lord standing on the Tirumalai (Vēṅkaṭam) with his hanging matted locks of hair the sūla and cakra in his hands. Locks of hair, the tall crown, and the snake around his waist and golden waist chain, appear in the unified form. tāḻ caṭaiyum nīḷ muṭiyum, oṇ maḻuvum cakkaramum, cūḻ aravum poṉ nāṇum tōṉṟumāl-cūḻum tiraṇṭu aruvi pāyum tirumalaimēl entaikku, iraṇṭu uruvum oṉṟāy icaintu! The verse suggests though the dual nature of the headdress, weapon, and waist bands are distinct, his form is inseparably one, thus he appears as Harihara. It is evident that the early Āḻvārs recognized the inseparable nature of Śiva and Viṣṇu in the true Vedic tradition. When later Vaiṣṇavites refer to the prabandham of the Āḻvārs as tamiḻ-maṟai, they clearly meant the prabandhas render the essence of Vedas in Tamiḻ and it is in that sense, the poems of Āḻvārs are called Tamiḻ Vedas (Divya Prabandham). A graphic description of the dance of Śiva is provided by the Vaiṣṇavite Āḻvār – Tirumaṅgai Āḻvār in his poem Periya-thirumaṭal. The Āḻvār sings with great veneration and feeling this part. A study of this part would raise doubt whether it comes from devout Śaiva or Vaiṣṇava! Umā the golden daughter of Himavān (malai-aṟaiyaṉ), with coral lips and a white moon-like smile, with swan-like gaits and slender waist like a creeper, performed a severe penance. Śiva danced subduing his thousand arms, revealing fire in his arms in the sky, his anklets sounding a resonant sound, his hair with matted locks, and wielding a trident in his hand appropriate to her penance–Umā embraced him (lines 65- 72). The much-venerated Vaiṣṇava saint Nammāḻvār speaks of the essential nature of Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva as one and the same deity and their nature are inseparable. This conforms to the Vedic tradition and the Purāṇic accounts which follow closely the Vedic ideas. It is evident that early Vaiṣṇavism was too close to the roots of their origin and exhibited no rivalry. It seems to be of the Vedic Vaikhanasa system that we encounter in the hymns of the Āḻvārs. However, a discordant note is stuck, by Tirumaḻisai Āḻvār. When he attacks vehemently the followers of other religious systems like Jains as ignorant, the Bauddhas and Śiva Bhaṭṭas are two small men. All these are mean people as they do not adore Viṣṇu. We may say it is a perceptible deviation and the beginning of extreme sectarian divide. But this divide did not take deep roots for five centuries after Tirumaḻisai Āḻvār. Any such expression is found to be sporadic. In this connection, we may draw the reader’s attention to a text in Sanskrit named Dramiḍopaniṣad Tātparya Ratnāvali composed by Vedānta Dēśika the great Vaiṣṇava scholar. This text is a commentary on Nammāḻvār’s hymn - Tiruvāymoḻi. Dēśika calls the hymns of Nammāḻvār as Dramiḍopaniṣad and asserts that the hymns are the essence of the Vedas. Deśika summaries the hymns in the following words: - “First, this Prabandha, tells the subject dealt with in the Vedānta in 21 verses. It expounds the 21 Śākhas of the Ṛg Veda. It also treats the 1000 verses of Sāma Veda contained in the Sahaśra Śākhās with their symphony. They also tell us the Yajur Veda, by their 100 Śatakas detailing their meaning and finally poems to the essence of the nine Śākhas of the Atharva Veda. ādau sārirakārthakam iva viśvadam viṁsati pankthi sargam saṁkṣepo asau vibhāgam prathayati ca ṛcam cāru padeopapannam samyak gitānubhaddham sakalam anugatam sāma sākha sahasram samlakṣyam sabhidheyam yajur api satakaiḥ bhāge atharva rasais ca Dēśika clearly points out that Nammāḻvār’s songs are the exposition of the four Vedas and the Upaniṣads and so appropriately calls it Dramiḍopaniṣad. He also suggests that the Prabandam of the Āḻvārs reflect the nature of pādā of Ṛg Veda, the meaning of Yajur Veda, the music of the Sāma Veda and the Rasa (essence) of the Atharva Veda and suggests the reader of Tiruvāymoḻi derives the benefits of all the Vedas together. There is a traditional prayer in Sanskrit recited by the Vaiṣṇavite when they recite Nammāḻvār’s hymns. It calls the hymns as the very ocean of Dramiḍa Veda. It is also mentioned as the collection of Sahasra-Śākhā Upaniṣad, the Upaniṣad of the Sāma Veda. It can also be read by all sections of the people and bestows all the puruṣārthas. Thus, the Vaiṣṇava tradition clearly points to the Vedic roots of the hymns of Nammāḻvār. With this background when one starts the study of Nammāḻvār’s poems, the very first of the verses of the Āḻvār strikingly brings forth the upaniṣadic concept of the supreme. It says supreme is none but the Ānandam Brahmam of the Upaniṣad in the first line uyarvaṟa uyarnalam uṭaiyavaṉand in the second line the Āḻvār says that Brahman is Vijñānam - vijñānam Brahma; mayaṟara mati nalam uṭaiyavaṉ. He is the lord of the celestials he is of the nature of effulgence sacred feet - (Savita). In the eight verses of the first decade, the Āḻvār clearly brings out the trinity aspect of the supreme. In fact, the first ten verses of the Tiruvāymoḻi are nothing but a clear exposition of Upaniṣadic meaning, as rightly held by the Vaiṣṇavite tradition. It is evident that in this Vedic approach to Āḻvār’s poems, there is no scope for exclusion.

7.2. Divya-Prabandham

 (An Archaeologist view of Divya Prabandham) Tradition and Alternate route - The study of Divya-Prabandham hymns of Vaiṣṇavite Āḻvārs is hitherto based mainly on the commentaries of Vaiṣṇavite seers that have come down to us through the recent centuries. These commentaries were written by true devotees of the faith centred on Viṣṇu temples to communicate the joy of divine experience that they had, to their fellow followers. These commentaries help us in fathoming the emotional fervour (bhakti) reflected in the hymns. It is almost impossible to study the hymn without recourse to the commentaries of these seers. However, one may, keeping aside these commentaries, explore an alternate route purely based on history, chronology, and monuments that either preceded or were contemporary with the Āḻvārs. The question that would arise is whether the Divya-Prabandham could be perceived as mirroring the earlier tradition, than the later ones reflected in the writings of the commentators. Paripāṭal - The Paripāṭal poems of the Saṅgam age, extol the supremacy of Viṣṇu based on the Vedic ideology that is not exclusive in approach but is contextual and in the broad spectrum of adoring Muruga, Śiva, and Durgā that are acceptable to the devotees. One may say that all Gods were revered alike though one god may be extolled in one context, the others appearing in the secondary position. One finds an equal number of hymns addressed to Muruga in the same Paripāṭal collection. The Saṅgam poems and the post-Saṅgam epics, the Cilappatikāram and Maṇimekhalai also praise Śiva and Durgā. They speak of Viṣṇu, and Muruga in identical terms. For example, the Paripāṭal extols Viṣṇu in the following lines. “Thou, Lord, art the inner meaning of the Vedas of Brāhmins. Thou manifest in the sacrificial fire (agni of the yajñas) duly kindled according to the Vedic Kalpas and receive the sacrificial offerings. Yajñarūpa is thy form and that is how the Vedic Brāhmaṇas invoke thee in fire”. How the other deities occupy a secondary position in this context may be seen from Paripāṭal (no 3 lines 1 to 78). This may also be compared with the hymn on Muruga, where he is praised as the inner meaning of the Vedas of the Brāhmaṇas, the other deities including Viṣṇu and Śiva appearing in a secondary position (no 8). There are several Purāṇic legends about the manifestations of Viṣṇu, Śiva, and Muruga in Paripāṭal that closely follow the earlier Purāṇic accounts, closer to Vedic thoughts. One interesting phenomenon that needs attention is that Madhura Bhakti (love emotions) is more associated with Muruga than Viṣṇu, who is looked upon with wonder and veneration (adbhuta). Purāṇic theology - The Vedic tradition was enhanced and made more popular by illustrative legends compiled into 18 Maha-Purāṇas. A study of all the Mahā-Purāṇas would show that the Vedic ideas are simplified into stories and clearly emphasize that both Viṣṇu or Śiva are identical and that one who differentiates them, as totally separate, knows neither Śiva nor Viṣṇu. The division into Śaivite or Vaiṣṇavite Purāṇas is purely artificial and does not reflect their true nature, explicitly stated by them. Early Vedic religion emerged as Purāṇic religion with the codifications of the latter. From the Mauryan age to the end of the 10th century C.E. one may say that Purāṇic religion dominated the Indian scene as an extension of the Vedic tradition. Pallava age (3rd to 9th century) - It may also be mentioned that there is no exclusiveness in the early Pallava age. The Pallava copper plate charters of the early period reveal an interesting aspect of religious devotion. One and the same ruler is addressed as a supreme devotee of Māhēśvara, Viṣṇu, and Brahmaṇya (Parama-Māheśvara, Parama-Bhāgavata and Parma-Brāhmaṇya), all in one. Most Indologists consider Śaivism and Vaiṣṇavism as mutually exclusive but cannot conceive both are complementary to each other as part of one and the same Ideology. It is impossible for some to even conceive that a Vaiṣṇavite could also be a Supreme devotee of Śiva, but epigraphs of the 5th to 9th century mention the Pallava rulers as Śaivites, Vaiṣṇavites and devotees of Subrahmaṇya. They are the followers of Smārta tradition. There is a tradition among the rulers when making a gift to a deity to extol the greatness of that deity in the invocatory verse of a royal order and record it in the copper plate charters. If the grant is made to a Viṣṇu temple, the invocatory verse would be in praise of Viṣṇu and so is the case with a grant to Śiva temple. If the charter relates to the Buddhist or Jain establishment, the record will invoke Buddha or Jina respectively. Several examples could be cited from copper plate grants. If however the grant is addressed to a Brāhmin settlement the invocation addresses both Śiva and Viṣṇu. It may not be correct to consider a king either an exclusive Vaiṣṇava or Śaiva based on invocatory verses found in their orders. It is the Vedic ideology that is reflected in the royal orders that are often mentioned as Sanātana Dharma or Vaidika Dharma, the ancient tradition. We may briefly note some monuments of the 6th to 10th century C.E. One of the early temples recorded in the inscription is that of Mahēndra Pallava, 600 C.E., excavated at Manḍagappaṭṭu, in Tamiḻnāḍu. The temple that still exists was called Brahmā-Īśvara-Viṣṇu Lakṣitāyatana i.e., the temple dedicated to Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva. On the side of the facade are representations of Garuḍa and Nandikeśvara as Dvārapālas. The Lower Rock cut cave temple at Tiruchirāppaḷḷi belongs to the same age and has two sanctums scooped, one on either side of the temple, meant for Śiva and Viṣṇu, while the rear wall has Gaṇēśa, Brahmā, Subrahmaṇya, Sūrya and Durgā, with Brahmā occupying the central position making it a temple dedicated to the Trinity. A cave temple at Māmallapuram assignable to the beginning of the 8th century, houses Śiva, Viṣṇu, and Subrahmaṇya in the three cells and is rightly called the Trimūrti temple. There are both Śaivite and Vaiṣṇavite temples at Māmallapuram, assignable to the same age. The famous seashore temple complex is dedicated to both Śiva and the reclining form of Viṣṇu. The Adi-Varāha temple in the same place is dedicated to Varāha form of Viṣṇu and carries an inscription extolling the greatness of Rudra in characters of the same age and the temple itself named Parameśvara-Mahāvarāha-Viṣṇu Gṛaha. The vast open-air sculptures of Arjuna’s penance, the Kṛṣṇa maṇḍapa portraying the Govardhana-dhāri panel and the Mahiṣāsuramardini cave situated nearby clearly show, the overwhelming role of Purāṇas in their creation. Similarly, the sculptural portrayal at the Kailāsanātha temple of Kāñcīpuram is a clear example of the Purāṇic tradition in the temple arts of the beginning of the 8th century. A cave temple on the Tiruppaṟamkuṉṟam hill near Madurai excavated by a Pāṇḍya ruler of the 8th century has sanctums to both Śiva and Viṣṇu, one on either side of the side walls of the sanctums manifestations of the concerned deities including dvārapālas. Similar are the Cave temples at Tirumēyyam, Tiruchi, and other places. In ancient village settlements, temples to Viṣṇu, Śiva, Saptamātā, Durgā, and other deities were all consecrated in separate temples as part of the whole village layout, as is evidenced by the Uttaramērūr village, founded by the Pallava emperor, Nandivarman II in the mid 8th century. Uttaramērūr was a village laid as per the Vaikhānasa-āgama, the Marīci-samhitā. It is well-known that the Vaikhānasa school of the Vaiṣṇava system was mainly Vedic, admitted by the texts themselves and the living traditions. Though the Viṣṇu temple of Uttaramērūr is Sundaravarada Perumāḷ it has on its Vimāna, Śiva as Umāmāhēśvara, Gaṇēśa, Subrahmaṇya and others. Though there were temples dedicated individually to Śiva or Viṣṇu, there was harmony in approach, and they were held part of the whole system, and wherever praises are found to any single deity, the same is to be understood contextually and not in isolation. Pāṇḍyan tradition - Two illustrations may be cited from the Pāṇḍyan country. Two cave temples were excavated side-by-side, one dedicated to Śiva and the other to Viṣṇu in his reclining form at Tirumēyyam in Pudukkōṭṭai state. It is clear enough that though these are now separated by later walls, originally they formed part of the same dedication. Tirumaṅgai Āḻvār has sung the Viṣṇu temple in the 8th century. Both the temples are assignable to the beginning of the 7th century C.E. As mentioned earlier, the famous Subrahmaṇya temple at Tiruppaṟamkuṉṟam near Madurai is an excavated temple with two sanctums excavated one on either side, one dedicated to Viṣṇu and the other to Śiva. While the Facade of the rock on the side of the Viṣṇu sanctum carries three images of Viṣṇu as Ādinātha, Varāha, and Narasiṁha. The other facade on the side of the sanctum of Śiva carries a beautiful form of dancing Śiva, accompanied by other deities. At the back wall of the sanctum are seen Subrahmaṇya, Durgā, and Gaṇēśa. The image of Subrahmaṇya has assumed importance through the centuries and is the main deity now. However, the cave temple was consecrated in the 8th century, to both Śiva and Viṣṇu. Many more such temples dedicated to both Śiva and Viṣṇu could be cited but suffice it to say that when the Āḻvārs were composing their poems, it was the Purāṇic synthesis that permeated the Tamiḻ landscape.

7.3. Tiruvāymoḻi of Nammāḻvār

 It is against this background the poems of Āḻvārs are to be studied. The dates of Āḻvārs are well settled between the 5th to 9th century C.E. The Divya-Prabandham hymns should be viewed in the prevailing situation. Though the Āḻvārs sang the supreme nature of Viṣṇu, there was no doubt in their minds, that Viṣṇu, Śiva, and Brahmā were identical and that they sang truly Purāṇic ideology of oneness of Trimūrties, and in this approach they were the true spokesmen of Vedic tradition. We may take up the poems of Nammāḻvār, the most respected among the Āḻvārs, whose thousand verses called Tiruvāymoḻi constitute the last collections of the Divya-Prabandham group. Nammāḻvār himself says that the last hymn of ten verses of his composition was the end of his thousand poems. Thus, the last hymn serves as the very Summum Bonum of the Āḻvār’s theology. Even among the ten verses of the last hymn, it is necessary to see the last verse and three others, as his conclusions. Nammāḻvār says that among all the desires, the greatest desire is the achievement of salvation, which once achieved, no further desire remains, in other words, “one reaches a desire-less state”. The Āḻvār says that having extolled Hari (Viṣṇu), Aja (Ayan/Brahmā), and Hara (Śiva) he has obtained salvation and there is no further desire in him (ariyai, ayaṉai, araṉai alaṟṟi, avā aṟṟu, vīṭu peṟuṟṟa, tirukkurukūr saṭakōpaṉ). He says he achieved both salvation and the desire-less state at the same time. These last words of Nammāḻvār, which enabled him to attain salvation by singing Viṣṇu, Brahmā, and Śiva, prove that his brand of Vaiṣṇavism was not an ideology of excluding Śaivism but an all-embracing Hindu faith of adoring the Trinity of Purāṇic theism. It needs to be emphasized that this is the concluding verse of the Āḻvār. avā aṟac cūḻ ariyai, ayaṉai, araṉai alaṟṟi avā aṟṟu vīṭu peṟurṟa kurukūr catakōpan coṉṉa avā il antātikaḷāl ivai āyiramum muṭinta avā il antāti ippattu arintār piṟanatār uyarnte (Verse 11) அவா அறச் சூழ் அரியை, அயனை, அரனை, அலற்றி, அவா அற்று, வீடு பேறுற்ற குருகூர்ச் சடகோபன் சொன்ன அவா இல் அந்தாதிகளால் இவை ஆயிரமும் முடிந்த அவா இல் அந்தாதி இப் பத்து அறிந்தார் பிறந்தார்-உயர்ந்தே. (Verse 11) Birth of liberation is certain for those who realize this antāti verses ten, that ends the thousand poems Sung by Satakōpaṉ of Tirukurukūr, Who has conquered his desires, And attained salvation that ended his wishes by singing the greatness of Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva

7.4. Nammāḻvār and Naṭarāja

 A most significant verse of the Āḻvār, that speaks of Viṣṇu as Ākāśa, param-joti, Jñāna, and Ānanda residing in the heart of the devotee, recalls the figure of Naṭarāja. cūḻntu, akaṉṟu, āḻntu, uyarnta muṭivil perum pāḻe ō cūḻntu, atanil periya para nal malarc cōti ō cūḻntu, atanil periya cutar jñāna iṉpame ō cūḻntu, atanil periya en avā aṟac cūḻntāye (verse 10) சூழ்ந்து, அகன்று, ஆழ்ந்து, உயர்ந்த முடிவில் பெரும் பாழே! ஓ! சூழ்ந்து, அதனில் பெரிய பரநல் மலர்ச்சோதீ! ஓ! சூழ்ந்து, அதனில் பெரிய சுடர் ஞான இன்பமே! ஓ! சூழ்ந்து, அதனில் பெரிய என் அவாஅறச் சூழ்ந்தாயே. (verse 10) Encompassing and expanding, Fathoming and soaring high, Thou art the expansive endless void; Thou encircling the void appear (As the auspicious, and rising, Supreme light). Encompassing the great light Thou art the great Knowledge and bliss and Thou hath consumed me to put an end to my desires. umpar taṇ pāḻe ō atanuḷ micai niyē ō amparam aṇal cōti ataṉuḷ piramaṉ araṉ nī umparum mātavarum paṭaitta muṉivaṉ avan nī emparam cātikkaluṟṟu eṉṉai pōra viṭṭayē Thou art the cool space of the celestials Thou resideth in that vast apace Thou art the ambaram- The vast expansive sky as illuminating light Thou art Brahmā and Śiva residing inside that shining light Thou art the sage who created the celestials and the great saints Thou have conferred on me that supreme state And also made me cross that state In another verse of the same hymn, the Āḻvār addresses the Lord as “Mukkaṇ Appā - Śiva my father with the three eyes”. muṉiye nāṉmukane mukkaṇṇappā eṉ pollāk kaṉivāy tāmaraikkaṇ karu mānikkamē eṉ kaḷvā taṉiyēn āruyire en talai micaiyāy vantiṭṭu ini nān pōkal oṭṭēn, onṟu māyam ceyyēl eṉṉaiyē முனியே! நான்முகனே! முக்கண்அப்பா! என் பொல்லாக் கனிவாய்த் தாமரைக் கண் கரு மாணிக்கமே! என் கள்வா! தனியேன் ஆர் உயிரே! என் தலைமிசையாய் வந்திட்டு, இனி நான் போகல் ஒட்டேநொன்றும் மாயம் செய்யேல் என்னையே. Oh, thou Sage, Brahmā, and Śiva My lotus-eyed, sweet-lipped, black-gem My thief! My intimate life As thou hast manifested on my head I wouldn’t let you go away Don’t play any maya on me! The Āḻvār calls the Lord as Śiva in at least three verses of his last hymn and extols him in identical terms as one would address the dancing form of Śiva. Viṣṇu is the support of the celestials - the vast space also called Ambaram-Ākāśa. Ākāsa is addressed by the Śaivite Nāyanmār, Appar as kaṭuvēli, i.e., vast immeasurable empty space. The word perum pāḻ employed by the Āḻvār is the exact equivalent of the term, kaṭuvēli of the Nayanmārs. The Āḻvār calls Viṣṇu as the great, auspicious, and supreme light that emanates in Ākāśa, periya, para, nal malar joti - the effulgent light. This could also be understood in the sense of Śiva - Naṭarāja, who dances in the midst of Ākāśa. Often Ākāśa in which Śiva Naṭarāja dances is called parama-ākāśa, the metaphysical Supreme space. It is the same lord whom the Āḻvār addresses as auspicious, supreme light in the great void, perum pāl cūḻntu ataṉul periya para nal malar cōti. Two concepts are emphasised in the form of Naṭarāja. First, Naṭarāja represents supreme knowledge, frequently called jñānamā-naṭarāja. This knowledge appears as resplendent light dispelling the darkness of ignorance, appearing as the dwarf (apasmāra), shown beneath his foot. Second, the dance of Śiva culminates in Supreme happiness Ānanda, and hence Naṭaraja’s dance is called jñāna-ānanda-tāṇḍava, the dance of knowledge and bliss. This dance resides in chit, the consciousness of the devotee. The supreme desire in the mind of the devotee is to attain salvation, by visualising the dance of Śiva in his consciousness. The song cūḻntu akaṉṟu, of Nammāḻvār elaborates the same concepts as the vast space, (para ākāśa), the supreme light, param joti, in the midst of space Ākāśa, who appears as jñāna and ānanda, knowledge and bliss (jñānam-inbam) and the consciousness of the devotee where the god’s dance takes place. This verse of Nammāḻvār could be applied either to Viṣṇu or Naṭarāja. as the Āḻvār does not mention any God by name. That the Āḻvār had Śiva also in his mind is unquestionable as he identifies lord Śiva with Viṣṇu three times, in the same hymn. As mentioned already he addresses explicitly that “thou appear as joti in ambara and thou art Brahmā and Śiva in it”. Also, he prays muniye, nāṉmukaṉe, ayane, araṉe, mukkaṇ appā referring to the Trinity. The term muṉi is employed to denote Viṣṇu’s incarnation as Nara Nārāyaṇa. Nāṉmukaṉ is the four-headed Brahmā. Mukkaṇ Appā is Śiva, the three eyed. The Āḻvār’s address to the Lord as Trinity is couched in such an emotional appeal that for him the Supreme Lord is Viṣṇu, Brahmā, and Śiva.

7.5. Bhārgavi Vidyā

 This is the deep-rooted Purāṇic position where the question of Śaiva Vaiṣṇava differentiation does not exist. I have mentioned earlier that the Purāṇas is the extension of the Vedic tradition. There is a Vedic passage called Bhṛgu-valli, in which Bhṛgu, approached his father Varuṇa and requested him to teach him the nature of Brahman, the Supreme. His father advised him to do penance and realize Brahman himself. Bhṛgu first thought that annam i.e., food was Brahman, then he thought that it was vital breadth - prāṇah and then he thought it could be one’s mind - manas. In this way, he repeatedly approached his father after each thought. His father persuaded him to do further penance and realize Brahman. The last two stages of Bhṛgu’s realization are interesting. He realized it was supreme knowledge vijñāna, that is Brahman and lastly, he realized it was bliss – Ānanda that is Brahman. All searches, ended up in knowledge and bliss, jñāna and Ānanda as the ultimate Brahman. This Vedic hymn is well known as the Bhārgavi Vidyā in the Vedas itself. The dawn of knowledge ending in bliss is considered as Ānanda in the Vedas. That is what Nammāḻvār says as jñāna-inbam in his last hymn. This takes place in the illuminating light appearing in Ākāśa. Citing this Vedic passage Srīkaṇṭa, the Śivādvaita commentator on Brahma-Sūtrās, says the term Ākāśa denotes Ānanda, “ākāśa iti ānandaḥ ucayte”. Ākāśa and Ānanda are synonyms. He also says the term is used to denote chidambaram; “ākāśa iti chidambara prakṛtiḥ ucyate”. This is the direct extension of the Vedic concept that is indicated explicitly by Nammāḻvār.

7.6. Nammāḻvār’s Firm Faith

 Thus, Nammāḻvār concludes that his Tiruvāymoḻi extolled Hari, Hara, and Brahmā, eliminated all his desires and enabled him to attain salvation, and those who realized this end verse of his thousand poems, reach the highest state among mortals. That these are direct reflections of the Purāṇas can be demonstrated from several passages from Purāṇas especially the Viṣṇu Purāṇa and the Kūrma Purāṇa. We cite these Purāṇas as they are considered Vaiṣṇava texts. “In the ultimate state, there is no difference between Mahādeva and me. The Supreme lord out of his own volition created the divines, the demons, and the human beings of the three worlds, made himself the inner propelling force (antaryāmi) and the overlord (Īśvara) manifested as Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Trinity by their respective actions.” aham caiva mahādevaḥ na bhinnaḥ paramārthathaḥ vibhāvya svecchayā ātmānam saḥ antaryāmi iśvaraḥ sthitaḥ trialokyam akhilam sriṣṭum brahmatvam samupāgataḥ tasmāt brahmā mahādevaḥ viṣṇuḥ viśveśvaraḥ paraḥ ekasyaiva smritāḥ tiśraḥ tadvat kārya-vasād prabhoḥ (Kūrma Purāṇa) This is a clear declaration that the Supreme being is called Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva though have functional differences, are not different entities. At one stage Śiva says in the Kūrma Purāṇa that: - “I am Time - Kāla who burns down all bondages and am Hara, the creator of time Kāla. I activate the entire mobile and immobile beings. Viṣṇu is Puruṣa, the propelling force of all beings, while I am Puruṣottama. Viṣṇu is the Māyā Prakṛti called by men Parāśakti, the germinal abode (jagat yoni) of the universe. Nārāyaṇa, the creator of the whole world is the Supreme Unmanifest Principle according to the Vedas. I am called the Supreme when I assume the role of Destroyer. My Supreme power, Parā-Śakti is called Vidyā-Deha body of knowledge. Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Īśvara are the entities that have neither beginning nor end but reside in Brahman, the unmanifest and imperishable. This is the Supreme state of bliss of the Soul (ātmānanda and param-tattvam) that is the essence of consciousness (chin-mātrā) also called ākāśa, the blemish less Brahman” (Kūrma Purāṇa- Uttarārdham c.35-62-73) This passage of the Kūrma Purāṇa deserves special attention. It speaks of the identity of Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva, the manifests of Para-Brahman (of the Vedāntins). The Purāṇa also connects Para-Brahman with the inner consciousness, which is also called Ākāśa. This is designated the supreme statei known as Parama-Pada. Nammāḻvār’s poem cited, mentioning the same concepts seems to be a direct rendering of the Purāṇa. To conclude we may now cite some verses of Nammāḻvār at the very beginning of his Tiruvāymoḻi: - "It is the supreme That took forms as one and many That is beyond all comprehensions That revealed itself as Beautiful Nārāyaṇa, Brahmā and Śiva, Effaced our bondages hither and beyond And made our days auspicious and Blissful oṉṟu eṉap pala eṉa aṟivu arum vaṭivuṉuḷ ninṟa naṉṟu eḻil nāraṇaṉ nāṉmukaṉ araṉ eṉṉum ivarai oṉṟa num manattil vaittu, uḷḷi, num iru pasai aṟuttu naṉṟu eṉa, nalam ceyvatu avaṉiṭai nammuiṭai nāḷe ஒன்று எனப் பல என அறிவு-அரும் வடிவினுள் நின்ற நன்று எழில் நாரணன் நான்முகன் அரன் என்னும் இவரை ஒன்ற நும் மனத்து வைத்து, உள்ளி, நும் இரு பசை அறுத்து, நன்று என நலம் செய்வது அவனிடை நம்முடை நாளே. The Vedic tradition is further explicitly mentioned in Nammāḻvār’s poem as the following statement made by Kṛṣṇa “I am the cause of rituals and the fruits of all ritual action”. karumamum karuma-palaṉum ākiya kāraṇaṉ taṉṉai At another place he echoes the same words of Kūrma-Purāṇa when he says “whichever is dear to an individual, that form is his chosen God, to whom he should perform worship. For Saṭakōpaṉ it was made possible by taking refuge in lord Viṣṇu”. yāvaiyum evarum tānāy avaravar camayam tōrum tōyvu ilan pulan aintukkum colappaṭan uṇarvin mūrti āvi cēr uyirin uḷḷāl ātum ōr paṟṟilāta pāvaṉai atanaik kūṭil avaṉaiyum kuṭalāme. யாவையும் எவரும் தானாய், அவரவர் சமயம் தோறும் தோய்வு இலன்; புலன் ஐந்துக்கும் சொலப்படன்; உணர்வின் மூர்த்தி; ஆவி சேர் உயிரின் உள்ளால் ஆதும் ஓர் பற்று இலாத பாவனை அதனைக் கூடில், அவனையும் கூடலாமே. curar aṟivaru nilai viṇ mutal muḻuvatum varan mutalāy avai muḻutuṇṭa parāparan puram oru mūṉṟu erittu amararkku ariviyntu araṉ ayan eṉa ulaku aḻittu amaittu uḷane சுரர் அறிவு-அரு நிலை விண் முதல் முழுவதும் வரன் முதலாய், அவை முழுது உண்ட பரபரன் புரம் ஒரு மூன்று எரித்து, அமரர்க்கும் அறிவிய்ந்து, அரன் அயன் என, உலகு அழித்து அமைத்து உளனே. It is appropriate to mention here that Madhurakavi Āḻvār a disciple and a contemporary of the Āḻvār sums up the theology of Nammāḻvār in the following words: - “Śrī Saṭakōpaṉ sang the inner meaning of the Vedas of the Vedic Brāhmins and made me retain them in my mind, as I have taken refuge in him”. mikka vētiyar vetattiṉ uṭporuḷ niṟkap paṭi eṉ neñcuḷ niṟuttiṉāṉ takka cīr caṭakōpan eṉ nampikku āṭ pukka kātal aṭimai payaṉ aṉṟē (9) மிக்க வேதியர் வேதத்தின் உட்பொருள் நிற்கப் பாடி என் நெஞ்சுள் நிறுத்தினான்; தக்க சீர்ச் சடகோபன் என் நம்பிக்கு ஆட்- புக்க காதல் அடிமைப் பயன் அன்றே (9) This essentially is a commentary on Nammāḻvār’s theological position. Nammāḻvār is clear in his mind and sings in his verses, that his theology is Vedic ideology and is based on the identity of Trinity and that he is adoring - Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva as the Supreme that bestows salvation to the devotee. He declares the same ideology both at the beginning and end of his Tiruvāymoḻi hymns. It has also been shown that Kūrma-Purāṇa specifically mentions that the Vedas declare Trinity as the Supreme and not mutually exclusive. From the elucidation of Trinity in the early Purāṇas it would be appropriate to hold that the Āḻvārs were propagating the Purāṇic theology of Trinity with the contextual emphasis on Viṣṇu. வலத்தனன் திரிபுரம் எரித்தவன், இடம்பெறத் துந்தித் தலத்து எழு திசைமுகன் படைத்த நல் உலகமும் தானும் புலப்பட, பின்னும் தன் உலகத்தில் அகத்தனன் தானே; சொலப் புகில், இவை பின்னும் வயிற்று உள; இவை அவன் துயக்கே. valattaṉaṉ tiripuram erittavaṉ, iṭampeṟat tuntit talattu eḻu ticaimukaṉ paṭaitta nal ulakamum tāṉum pulappaṭa, piṉṉum taṉ ulakattil akattaṉaṉ tāṉē; colap pukil, ivai piṉṉum vayiṟṟu uḷa; ivai avaṉ tuyakkē. திரு-உடம்பு வான் சுடர்; செந்தாமரை கண்; கை கமலம்; திரு இடமே மார்வம்; அயன் இடமே கொப்பூழ்; ஒருவு இடமும் எந்தை பெருமாற்கு அரனே; ஓ! ஒருவு இடம் ஒன்று இன்றி, என்னுள் கலந்தானுக்கே. tiru-uṭampu vāṉ cuṭar; centāmarai kaṇ; kai kamalam; tiru iṭamē mārvam; ayaṉ iṭamē koppūḻ; oruvu iṭamum entai perumāṟku araṉē; ō! oruvu iṭam oṉṟu iṉṟi, eṉṉuḷ kalantāṉukkē. ஒளி மணி வண்ணன் என்கோ? ஒருவன் என்று ஏத்த நின்ற நளிர் மதிச் சடையன் என்கோ?- நான்முகக் கடவுள் என்கோ?-- அளி மகிழ்ந்து உலகம் எல்லாம் படைத்து, அவை ஏத்த, நின்ற களி மலர்த் துளவன், எம்மான், கண்ணனை, மாயனையே. oḷi maṇi vaṇṇaṉ eṉkō? Oruvaṉ eṉṟu ētta niṉṟa naḷir matic caṭaiyaṉ eṉkō?- Nāṉmukak kaṭavuḷ eṉkō?-- aḷi makiḻntu ulakam ellām paṭaittu, avai ētta, niṉṟa kaḷi malart tuḷavaṉ, em'māṉ, kaṇṇaṉai, māyaṉaiyē.

7.7. Piṇakkar: Disagreement Trusting Difference

It seems that the Āḻvār was aware that his philosophy of Eka-Bhakti, i.e., Steadfast devotion to one deity, might lead on to disagreement among devotees and perhaps lead on to fundamentalism. He makes a specific mention of this scope of disagreement and warns that there is no difference between the Trimūrtis and that all devotees should direct equal devotion towards the Trimūrti - Śiva, Viṣṇu, and Brahmā in his Tiruvaymoḻi hymns. 1-3-4 to 8. It seems clear that the Āḻvār holds one Supreme being as parāparaṉ - whom the Āḻvār specifically mentions as Brahman. All the commentators have held muni-mā-Brahmām mudal-vittu (8-10-7). It clearly shows that the Āḻvār holds the Vedantic Parabrahmām as the Supreme reality. However, he identifies the Supreme with Nārāyaṇa in some instances, obviously reminded of the Nārāyaṇa Sūkta which calls Nārāyaṇa as the Parabrahman (nārāyaṇa param brahma tattvam nārāyaṇaḥ paraḥ). It is also clear that the Āḻvār holds this Nārāyaṇa different from Viṣṇu of the Trinity group. The commentators mix him up with the Viṣṇu of the Trinity group, and as a result, they separate Viṣṇu to be considered superior to Śiva and Brahmā. Wherever mentioned they say Brahmā, and Śiva are pervaded by this Viṣṇu. If the direct meaning of the poem is held that all the Trinities, Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva are pervaded by Parabrahmam, who is Nārāyaṇa, then the Āḻvār’s verses seem to be perfectly logical; for example, Nammāḻvār says that the Lord emanates as Trimūrti (muvarāhiya mūrti), and he is the origin of the first Trinity (mutal mūvarkku mutalvaṉ) (2360). It is a clear example of the Āḻvār’s stand that the Supreme is above the Trinity, Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva. Here, Viṣṇu is certainly different from Nārāyaṇa– the Parabrahman. This position of the Āḻvār deserves to be grasped to understand his theology. The Āḻvār sings the Supreme as both inner and outer entity - akattaṉaṉ purattaṉaṉ amainte - 1005. This is an important Vedic concept found for example in the Nārāyaṇa Sūkta. antar bahiśca tad sarvam vyāpya nārāyaṇ sthitaḥ - Nārāyaṇa Sūktam Nārāyaṇa remains encompassing both the inner and outer world. But contrary to the explicit meaning, the commentators hold the Supreme resides in the devotees and is beyond the approach of non-believers. This interpretation is certainly not in conformity with the Ālvār’s Vedic approach. The commentators have certainly missed the point. In 2107 - the Āḻvār says “Our lord is beyond the comprehension of any as a specific entity, and everyone can comprehend him easily in a single form. It is not that he has no name. He has a thousand and more names. He also has no name or form. There is no contradiction in this nature". The Āḻvār uses the word piṇakku to denote this “contradictory nature of the Supreme”. It is only to suggest that he is easy to comprehend, at the same time being beyond comprehension. He is beyond name and has a thousand names, he has no form and is in all forms. So, he says it is the ”Māyā Nārāyaṇa” (2106). The commentators take the word piṇakku as “conflict between the ṣaḍ-darśanas and Vedic tradition". Following the texts of the Vedic traditions the Lord is possessed of endless auspicious qualities and that he is the Primordial entity without any end. One who controls his senses and is steeped in Bhakti-Jñāna path one should eradicate the bondage, by remaining in his contemplation. According to most commentaries on Āṟāyirappaṭi (ஆறாயிரப்படி) and Onpathāyirapaṭi (ஒன்பதாயிரம் இருபத்து), the conflict is said to be between “ṣaḍ-darśanas and Vedic tradition”. But according to Paṉṉīrāyirappaṭi (பன்னீராயிரப்படி), the conflict exists among the followers of the ṣaḍ-darśanas and between ṣaḍ-darśanas and Vaidic schools. According to a) the ṣaḍ-darśanas are Sāṁkhyas, Ulukhya, Akṣpāda, Kapila, Kṣapanaka and Patañjali. Alternately Lokāyata, Arhata, Bauddha, Nyāya - Vaiśeṣika, Sāṁkhya - Yoga, and Pāśupata schools are the six systems referred to by the term Aruvagai Samayam (அறுவககைச்சமயம்). The Jīyar mentions Sāṁkhya, Ulukhya, Akṣapāda, Kṣapanaka, Kapila and Patañjali schools. But it seems that we can take this verse to denote a different meaning. The conflict or misunderstandings could be removed by holding the Lord as one with endless auspicious qualities, explained by the six systems, and following the jñāṉam that propounds devotion to the Lord, controlling the senses that eradicate the bondage". This approach would suggest that the ṣaḍ-darśanas are not rejected but whatever is conducive to the realization of the Lord is accepted. This syncretism is justified by the succeeding two verses of the Āḻvār. In the next verse, the Āḻvār says it is rare to experience the Divine nature (இறைநிலை உணர்வு அரிது உயிர்காள்!). So, the Āḻvār repeatedly reflects on his experience and praises “Hari, Brahmā, and Hara", Viṣṇu, Brahmā, and Śiva single-mindedly. In many places Nammāḻvār sings that Viṣṇu is the Supreme above the Trinity. In many verses he sings the Śaṅkara-Nārāyaṇa form. In many places he sings the Trinity form. In many places he sings that he is Trinity and other Gods, In some verses he sings that he is Ardhanāriśvara. In some verses he says Viṣṇu is the inner meaning of six systems. In some he says that Viṣṇu is the presiding deity of Śaivaism, Buddhism, and Jainism. In some he sings that he is beyond form - he has no form. In some he says Viṣṇu is in all forms. In many places he shows literal translations of the Vedic passages. In some places he speaks of inner and outer world - aham and puṟam As Hara, he destroyed three cities (Tripurāntaka Śiva) and as Ayaṉ he bestowed knowledge to the Devas (Vedic knowledge) (2089). Nammāḻvar adores them as Hari, Hara, and Ayaṉ (Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva, by repeatedly praising and meditating him (2109). The Lord manifested in forms difficult of comprehension and is beautiful Nārāyaṇa, Brahmā and Śiva, whom one should meditate and severe the twin attachments - towards this worldly desire and the longing for the other worlds (2010). The Lord has Śiva, the destroyer of three cities, on his right half of his body as Harihara and Brahmā on his left. This refers to the Trimūrti form in which he appeared in the centre (2112). The lord appears as all inert and living beings and as their God in their religious system and yet is not affected by their blemishes. Here, the Āḻvār accepts a pluralistic approach and God’s nature to appear in multiple forms as God of different religious faiths (2346). The lord appears as Trinity - Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva and as the origin of these three Gods (2360). In this sense it is clear that the Āḻvār speaks of the Supreme nature of Parama Puruṣa who is above Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva. There is no wavering here where the Āḻvār speaks of Viṣṇu on par with Brahmā and Śiva and at a lower level than the Parama Puruṣa. But the commentators twist the meaning of the verse and separate Viṣṇu from Brahmā and Śiva and interpret Viṣṇu as the inner soul of the other two. By interpreting this way, they make Viṣṇu in this verse identical with two Parama Puruṣa. There is no scope in the verse for such a meaning for it clearly makes Parama Puruṣa separate from the Trinity (2360). The nature of Parama Puruṣa is clearly mentioned in another verse 2493. In verse 2517, the Āḻvār says that the Lord appears as their God for Śaivites who follow Liṅga-Purāṇa, Jains and Buddhists, and the Nyāya Vaiśeṣikas who rely upon disputations through logic. It is a clear indication that the Āḻvārs admit that each system could have its own form of god. (nun deivam āki niṉṟāṉ) (2517). It seems there was an Ekapādamūrti of Viṣṇu who had in his body Śiva with bull mount and Brahmā with four heads, and Śrī (as Śrīvatsa). (2491) The lord here is said to have a single body in which Brahmā, Śiva, and Śrī appear as parts. In another verse the saint addresses directly “Oh my Lord Śiva and my Lord Brahmā You are my soul”. 2801. All three gods are said to be the Lords and address the Lord as “You are the great three-eyed Śiva, and you are Brahmā the Great”. The reverence with which the saint addresses Śiva as the great Lord (uyar mukkaṇ piṟāṉ) and Brahmā, the Great (perumāṉ) deserves special attention (2802). In another verse the saint says when will I see my Lord who has Śrī on his chest, when will I see my Lord Ardhanāriśvara, who has the daughter of the mountain as part of his body? When will I see my Lord Brahmā who has Sarasvati in his heart? When will I see the Lord, Indra? and when will I see my Lord (2805). The Lord is addressed in another poem as the foremost Lord who took the form of Trinity (2833). “Who can fathom the nature of my Lord who is Viṣṇu, Brahmā and Śiva” - 2884. This Lord who has no form, takes the three forms of Creator, Protector, and Destroyer of the three worlds – 2888. In another verse, the same idea is put in different forms as - He is himself Brahmā, Śiva Paraṉ and Parātpara. Who creates sustains and destroys (2895). The Lord appeals as a sweet entity, who appears as one, two, and three, (one as Parama Puruṣa, two as Harihara, and as Trinity, Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva) (2911). The same is also said as Ekamūrti, Dvimūrti and Trimūrti (2438). The Trimūrti form is again repeated as “the Supreme Lord who flowered as Śiva, Brahmā, and himself” (2934). In this verse, the Saint himself identifies Viṣṇu of the Trinity with the Parama Puruṣa which made the commentators hold Viṣṇu of Trimurti as a different category from Brahmā and Śiva (2934). Speaking about himself the saint says that he is Śaṭagopaṉwho received the grace from Tirumāl in the form of Brahmā Viṣṇu and Śiva (2941). உணர்ந்து உணர்ந்து இழிந்து அகன்று உயர்ந்து உரு வியந்து இந் நிலைமை உணர்ந்து உணர்ந்து உணரிலும், இறைநிலை உணர்வு அரிது உயிர்காள்! உணர்ந்து உணர்ந்து உரைத்து உரைத்து uṇarntu uṇarntu iḻintu akaṉṟu uyarntu uru viyantu in nilaimai uṇarntu uṇarntu uṇarilum, iṟainilai uṇarvu aritu uyirkāḷ! uṇarntu uṇarntu uraittu uraittu அரி அயன் அரன் என்னும் இவரை உணர்ந்து உணர்ந்து உரைத்து உரைத்து, இறைஞ்சுமின் மனப்பட்டது ஒன்றே. உணர்வின் மூர்த்தி; ஆவி சேர் உயிரின் உள்ளால் ஆதும் ஓர் பற்று இலாத பாவனை அதனைக் கூடில், அவனையும் கூடலாமே. மூவர் ஆகிய மூர்த்தியை, முதல் மூவர்க்கும் முதல்வந்தன்னை, சாவம் உள்ளன நீக்குவானை, தடங் கடல் கிடந்தாந்தன்னை, தேவ தேவனை, தெனிலங்கை எரி எழச் செற்ற வில்லியை, பாவ நாசனை, பங்கயத் தடங் கண்ணனைப் பரவுமினோ. ari ayaṉ araṉ eṉṉum ivarai uṇarntu uṇarntu uraittu uraittu, iṟaiñcumiṉ maṉappaṭṭatu oṉṟē. uṇarviṉ mūrtti; āvi cēr uyiriṉ uḷḷāl ātum ōr paṟṟu ilāta pāvaṉai ataṉaik kūṭil, avaṉaiyum kūṭalāmē. தஞ்சம் ஆகிய தந்தை தாயொடு தானும் ஆய், அவை அல்லன் ஆய், எஞ்சல் இல் அமரர் குலமுதல், மூவர் தம்முள்ளும் ஆதியை, அஞ்சி நீர் உலகத்துள்ளீர்கள்! அவன் இவன் என்றும் கூழேன்மின்; நெஞ்சினால் நினைப்பான் எவன், அவன் ஆகும் நீள் கடல் வண்ணனே. tañcam ākiya tantai tāyoṭu tāṉum āy, avai allaṉ āy, eñcal il amarar kulamutal, mūvar tam'muḷḷum ātiyai, añci nīr ulakattuḷḷīrkaḷ! avaṉ ivaṉ eṉṟum kūḻēṉmiṉ; neñciṉāl niṉaippāṉ evaṉ, avaṉ ākum nīḷ kaṭal vaṇṇaṉē. ஏக மூர்த்தி இரு மூர்த்தி மூன்று மூர்த்திப் பல மூர்த்தி ஆகி, ஐந்து பூதம் ஆய், இரண்டு சுடர் ஆய், அருவு ஆகி, நாகம் ஏறி, நடுக் கடலுள் துயின்ற நாராயணனே! உன் ஆகம் முற்றும் அகத்து அடக்கி, ஆவி அல்லல் மாய்த்ததே. ēka mūrtti iru mūrtti mūṉṟu mūrttip pala mūrtti āki, aintu pūtam āy, iraṇṭu cuṭar āy, aruvu āki, nākam ēṟi, naṭuk kaṭaluḷ tuyiṉṟa nārāyaṇaṉē! Uṉ ākam muṟṟum akattu aṭakki, āvi allal māyttatē. ஏறு ஆளும் இறையோனும், திசைமுகனும், திருமகளும், கூறு ஆளும் தனி உடம்பன், குலம் குலமா அசுரர்களை நீறு ஆகும்படியாக நிருமித்து, படை தொட்ட மாறாளன் கவராத மணி மாமை குறைவு இலமே. ēṟu āḷum iṟaiyōṉum, ticaimukaṉum, tirumakaḷum, kūṟu āḷum taṉi uṭampaṉ, kulam kulamā acurarkaḷai nīṟu ākumpaṭiyāka nirumittu, paṭai toṭṭa māṟāḷaṉ kavarāta maṇi māmai kuṟaivu ilamē. இலிங்கத்து இட்ட புராணத்தீரும், சமணரும், சாக்கியரும், வலிந்து வாது செய்வீர்களும், மற்றும் நும் தெய்வமும் ஆகி நின்றான், மலிந்து செந்நெல் கவரி வீசும் திருக்குருகூர்-அதனுள் பொலிந்து நின்ற பிரான் கண்டீர்-ஒன்றும் பொய் இல்லை, போற்றுமினே. iliṅkattu iṭṭa purāṇattīrum, camaṇarum, cākkiyarum, valintu vātu ceyvīrkaḷum, maṟṟum num teyvamum āki niṉṟāṉ, malintu cennel kavari vīcum tirukkurukūr-ataṉuḷ polintu niṉṟa pirāṉ kaṇṭīr-oṉṟum poy illai, pōṟṟumiṉē. காத்த எம் கூத்தா! ஓ!--மலை ஏந்திக் கல்-மாரி-தன்னை; பூத் தண் துழாய் முடியாய்! புனை கொன்றை அம் செஞ்சடையாய்! வாய்த்த என் நான்முகனே! வந்து என் உயிர் நீ ஆனால்-- ஏத்து-அரும் கீர்த்தியினாய்!— உன்னை எங்குத் தலைப்பெய்வனே? (3) kātta em kūttā! Ō!--Malai ēntik kal-māri-taṉṉai; pūt taṇ tuḻāy muṭiyāy! Puṉai koṉṟai am ceñcaṭaiyāy! vāytta eṉ nāṉmukaṉē! vantu eṉ uyir nī āṉāl-- ēttu-arum kīrttiyiṉāy!— uṉṉai eṅkut talaippeyvaṉē? (3) எங்குத் தலைப்பெய்வன் நாநெழில் மூவுலகும் நீயே; அங்கு உயர் முக்கண்-பிரான், பிரம-பெருமாநவன் நீ; வெம் கதிர் வச்சிரக் கை இந்திரன் முதலாத் தெய்வம் நீ;-- கொங்கு அலர் தண் அம் துழாய் முடி என்னுடைக் கோவலனே? (4) eṅkut talaippeyvaṉ nāneḻil mūvulakum nīyē; aṅku uyar mukkaṇ-pirāṉ, pirama-perumānavaṉ nī; vem katir vaccirak kai intiraṉ mutalāt teyvam nī;-- koṅku alar taṇ am tuḻāy muṭi eṉṉuṭaik kōvalaṉē? (4) என் திருமார்பந்தன்னை, என் மலைமகள் கூறந்தன்னை, என்றும் என் நாமகளை அகம்பால் கொண்ட நான்முகனை, நின்ற சசிபதியை, நிலம் கீண்டு, எயில் மூன்று எரித்த, வென்று புலன் துரந்த விசும்பு ஆளியை-காணேனோ? (7) eṉ tirumārpantaṉṉai, eṉ malaimakaḷ kūṟantaṉṉai, eṉṟum eṉ nāmakaḷai akampāl koṇṭa nāṉmukaṉai, niṉṟa cacipatiyai, nilam kīṇṭu, eyil mūṉṟu eritta, veṉṟu pulaṉ turanta vicumpu āḷiyai-kāṇēṉō? (7) தாள்களை எனக்கே தலைத்தலைச் சிறப்பத் தந்த பேர் உதைவிக் கைம்மாறாத் தோள்களை ஆரத் தழுவி, என் உயிரை அற விலை செய்தனந்-சோதீ! தோள்கள் ஆயிரத்தாய்! முடிகள் ஆயிரத்தாய்; துணைமலர்க் கண்கள் ஆயிரத்தாய்! தாள்கள் ஆயிரத்தாய்! பேர்கள் ஆயிரத்தாய்! தமியனேன் பெரிய அப்பனே! (10) tāḷkaḷai eṉakkē talaittalaic ciṟappat tanta pēr utaivik kaim'māṟāt tōḷkaḷai ārat taḻuvi, eṉ uyirai aṟa vilai ceytaṉan-cōtī! tōḷkaḷ āyirattāy! Muṭikaḷ āyirattāy; tuṇaimalark kaṇkaḷ āyirattāy! tāḷkaḷ āyirattāy! Pērkaḷ āyirattāy! Tamiyaṉēṉ periya appaṉē! (10) திருமால், நான்முகன், செஞ்சடையான் என்று இவர்கள் எம் பெருமான் தன்மையை யார் அறிகிற்பார்? பேசி என்? ஒரு மா முதல்வா! ஊழிப் பிரான்! என்னை ஆளுடைக் கரு மா மேனியன்! காதல் கலக்கவே. (9) tirumāl, nāṉmukaṉ, ceñcaṭaiyāṉ eṉṟu ivarkaḷ em perumāṉ taṉmaiyai yār aṟikiṟpār? Pēci eṉ? oru mā mutalvā! Ūḻip pirāṉ! Eṉṉai āḷuṭaik karu mā mēṉiyaṉ! kātal kalakkavē. (9) படைப்பொடு கெடுப்புக் காப்பவன், பிரம பரம்பரன், சிவப்பிரான் அவனே; இடைப்புக்கு ஓர் உருவும் ஒழிவு இல்லை அவனே; புகழ்வு இல்லை; யாவையும் தானே— கொடைப் பெரும் புகழார் இனையர் தன் ஆனார் கூரிய விச்சையோடு ஒழுக்கம் நடைப் பலி இயற்கைத் திருச்செங்குன்றூரில் திருச்சிற்றாறு மர்ந்த நாதனே. (9) paṭaippoṭu keṭuppuk kāppavaṉ, pirama paramparaṉ, civappirāṉ avaṉē; iṭaippukku ōr uruvum oḻivu illai avaṉē; pukaḻvu illai; yāvaiyum tāṉē— koṭaip perum pukaḻār iṉaiyar taṉ āṉār kūriya viccaiyōṭu oḻukkam naṭaip pali iyaṟkait tirucceṅkuṉṟūril tirucciṟṟāṟu marnta nātaṉē. (9) ஒருவர், இருவர், ஓர் மூவர், என நின்று, உருவு கரந்து, உள்ளும்தோறும் தித்திப்பாந் திரு அமர் மார்வன், திருக்கடித்தானத்தை மருவி உறைகின்ற மாயப் பிரானே. (3) oruvar, iruvar, ōr mūvar, eṉa niṉṟu, uruvu karantu, uḷḷumtōṟum tittippān tiru amar mārvaṉ, tirukkaṭittāṉattai maruvi uṟaikiṉṟa māyap pirāṉē. (3) அடியேன் உள்ளான்; உடல் உள்ளாநண்டத்து அகத்தான், புறத்துள்ளான், படியே இது என்று உரைக்கலாம் படியன் அல்லன், பரம்பரன், கடிசேர் நாற்றத்துள் ஆலை இன்பத் துன்பக் கழி நேர்மை ஒடியா இன்பப் பெருமையோன், உணர்வில் உம்பர் ஒருவனே. (2) aṭiyēṉ uḷḷāṉ; uṭal uḷḷānaṇṭattu akattāṉ, puṟattuḷḷāṉ, paṭiyē itu eṉṟu uraikkalām paṭiyaṉ allaṉ, paramparaṉ, kaṭicēr nāṟṟattuḷ ālai iṉpat tuṉpak kaḻi nērmai oṭiyā iṉpap perumaiyōṉ, uṇarvil umpar oruvaṉē. (2) யானும் தானாய் ஒழிந்தானை- யாதும், எவர்க்கும் முன்னோனை-- தானும், சிவனும், பிரமனும் ஆகிப் பணைத்த தனி முதலை-- தேனும், பாலும், கன்னலும், அமுதும் ஆகித் தித்தித்து, என் ஊனில், உயிரில், உணர்வினில் நின்ற ஒன்றை-உணர்ந்தேனே. (4) yāṉum tāṉāy oḻintāṉai- yātum, evarkkum muṉṉōṉai-- tāṉum, civaṉum, piramaṉum ākip paṇaitta taṉi mutalai-- tēṉum, pālum, kaṉṉalum, amutum ākit tittittu, eṉ ūṉil, uyiril, uṇarviṉil niṉṟa oṉṟai-uṇarntēṉē. (4) தெருளும் மருளும் மாய்த்து, தன் திருந்து செம்பொன் கழல் அடிக்கீழ் அருளி இருத்தும் அம்மானாம், அயனாம், சிவனாம் திருமாலால் அருளப் பட்ட சடகோபன் ஓர் ஆயிரத்துள் இப் பத்தால் அருளி, அடிக்கீழ் இருத்தும் நம் அண்ணல் கருமாணிக்கமே (11) teruḷum maruḷum māyttu, taṉ tiruntu cempoṉ kaḻal aṭikkīḻ aruḷi iruttum am'māṉām, ayaṉām, civaṉām tirumālāl aruḷap paṭṭa caṭakōpaṉ ōr āyirattuḷ ip pattāl aruḷi, aṭikkīḻ iruttum nam aṇṇal karumāṇikkamē (11) தனி மாப் புகழே எஞ்ஞான்றும் நிற்கும் படியாத் தான் தோன்றி, முனி மாப் பிரம முதல்-வித்தாய், உலகம் மூன்றும் முளைப்பித்த தனி மாத் தெய்வத் தளிர் அடிக்கீழ்ப் புகுதல் அன்றி, அவன் அடியார் நனி மாக் கலவி இன்பமே நாளும் வாய்க்க-நங்கட்கே. (7) ------------------------------------Song 3004 taṉi māp pukaḻē eññāṉṟum niṟkum paṭiyāt tāṉ tōṉṟi, muṉi māp pirama mutal-vittāy, ulakam mūṉṟum muḷaippitta taṉi māt teyvat taḷir aṭikkīḻp pukutal aṉṟi, avaṉ aṭiyār naṉi māk kalavi iṉpamē nāḷum vāykka-naṅkaṭkē. (7) ------------------------------------Song 3004 In another verse, Nammāḻvār says that the Brāhmins of Tiruppūliyūr, were great donors and belong to highest Kula and are Vedic Brāhmaṇas who perform numerous vēḷvis (sacrifices), the smoke arising from their sacrificial fires, fill the air. There are very good Brāhmaṇas in this village who practise recitation of Vedic “Padas”. There are parrots in the groves, which listen to this recitation and repeat this Vedic “Padas". It is evident that form the 6th to 10th Century, the Vaiṣṇava Āḻvārs, who sang Divya Prabandham were followers of the Vedantic system that goes with hundreds of Vedic colonies of Brahmins in Tamiḻnāḍu, where the temple of both Śiva and Viṣṇu were found together as part of the village layout. The Śiva temple is constructed in the Northeast and Viṣṇu temple in the middle of the village layout with the separate provisions for priests for each temple. As far as Tamiḻnaḍu is concerned the priests in the Viṣṇu temple were mentioned as Vaikānasas in the Cōḻa inscription up to about the 11th Century. Thus, the Brāhmins worshipped both the deities as reflected in the Vaikānasa school.
Contents | Previous | Next | Academy