Evidence of secular literature

 

It will be clear from the above that the opinion formed by Sir R. G. Bhandarkar that Vaishnavism might have travelled to the South as early as the first century A. D. stands substantiated from Vaishnava literature; but there is fortunately for us secular literature which takes us further backward than this limit for which the earliest we have ascribed is the commencement of the 3rd century A.D. A work that was recently published by our veteran Pandit and Editor of the "Ancient Classics'', Mahamahopadyaya V. Swaminatha Aiyar Avergal, whose service to Tamil literature cannot easily be exaggerated, is what is called "Paripadal", one of the eight famous classical collections, standing alongside of “Ahananuru" and “Purananuru”. The original work is supposed to have been composed of 70 poems of varying length of which the present edition brings out only 22 with portions of just a few more. Among those there are about seven relating to Vishnu. Of these, the authors are Ham Peruvaludi, Kaduvan Ilaveyinan, Kirandaiyar, Nalleluniyar. These authors are, some of them, known by their works in other collections also, while some of them are known by their work in this. The greater part of the work available has the advantage of a commentary by, in several respects, the best of commentators, by name Parimel Alagar whose commentary on the Kural, is by common consent the best of all. He was one of those whose proficiency in both Sanskrit and Tamil was very great and equally so. In a commendatory verse regarding him this work Paripadal is referred to as the "nectar coming out of the ocean of the literature of the Sangam." He came of the family of worshippers of the Parameshvara Vinnagaram temple (Ulahalanda Penimal temple) in Conjeevaram. The text of the poems devoted to Vishnu indicates in a fulness of detail, the mode of worship of the Pancharatra Agama, not to speak of other branches of Vaidika literature (not ordinarily to be expected in such sources). Poem III by Kaduvan Ilaveyinam states in detail the four vyuhas of the Pancharatrins, Vasudeva, Sankarshana, Pradhyumna, Aniruddha. It further refers in detail to various of the doings of the child Krishna, thus indicating that the cult of Krishna and the Agamic work of the Pancharatrins alike had reached and had attained to considerable vogue, in the distant south (Madura) in the early centuries of the Christian era. Poem 15 by Ilam Peruvaludi which is devoted to Tirumalirunjolai states in clear terms that the temple there contained the images of Krishna and Baladeva. These are not to be found in the temple in the present day. It is not alone in this special work, that this worship is found described. Other Sangam works, like the Purananuru mention the divine character of Krishna and Baladeva in as clear terms. Among the numbers of temples mentioned in a place like Kaveripattanam, capital of the Chola country, the Silappadhikaram refers to the temples of Krishna and Baladeva again.

These references together would take us at least to the Sangam times, and the way that the details of the cult of Krishna are handled in these poems indicate that they were of considerably anterior vogue. We have already given a reference to the Shaiva agama in dealing with Bhaktisara. We also quoted a reference to what seems meant for the Shaiva Adiyars in Nam Alvar's work. These taken together make it clear that Vaishnavism of the agamic kind and Shaivism were both prevalent in the Tamil land as long back as the age of the Sangam; the best part of it, to which these works relate cannot be brought very much this side of the commencement of the 3rd century.

I have pointed out in my book "The Beginnings of South Indian History" that there are references to an invasion of the south by the Mauryas in some of the older poems of the Sangam, and indicated that the opposition that was set up and maintained persistently against northern conquest had possibly in it an element of religion, the south standing up for orthodox Brahmanism as against the encroachment of Buddhism by the persuasive eloquence and persistent effort of the great Buddhist emperor Asoka. The Tamil literature of this period has references scattered all over to the colonies of Brahmans brought and settled down in the south, and the whole output of this archaic literature exhibits unmistakably considerable Brahman influence in the making up of that literature. It is impossible within the limits of this paper to go into more detail on this interesting problem, but any casual reader of Tamil literature could see for himself the working of the northern Brahman and the southern Dravidian in a common effort at preserving Brahman orthodoxy against the encroachment of Buddhism.

It is fashionable criticism m certain quarters that Shaivism had the allegiance of South India first of all and Vaishnavism came into the place as an interloper imitating Shaivism and adapting itself to their clientele. A mere perusal of early literature gives the lie direct to this assumption. What was said of the Vaishnava literature of the Alvars, at any rate the great majority of them, in regard to the tolerance of Shaivism is true perhaps in a slightly lesser degree of the Shaiva Adiyars. Passing out of the age of the Sangam we come to the age of the Pallavas of the early rulers, of whom, history has yet known but little. The dynasty of the Sanskrit charters called themselves Bhagavatas. When we come, however to the age of the great Pallavas, we find the two going together. Some scholars have made capital out of a passage in one of the Pallava inscriptions to an explicit reference to Shaiva Siddhanta in connection with Narasimha Varman II.  But the same Pallava records refer to his great-grandfather Simha Vishnu in terms which leave no possibility of escape from regarding him as a Vaishnava.2 Mahendra Varman built shrines both of Vishnu and Siva; several of his cavetemples exhibit shrines t6 all the three Brahma, Vishnu and Siva. In the age of the Pallava domination, which followed immediately, both Vaishnavism and Shaivism flourished; Vaishnavas and Shaivas on the one side wrangling and disputing against the Bauddhas and Jainas: but so far the evidence of any systematic persecution is, at the very best, very slender. We pass from the age of the Pallavas to the age of the great Cholas among whom the rulers were in tile majority of cases Shaivas; but, as with Indian sovereigns before them and after them, persuasion of the individual monarch did not affect their patronage of all religions alike. It was in this particular age that Shaivism and Vaishnavism alike hardened into sects with a systematised canonical literature; and it is the work of systematisation that emphasised the differences and brought into religious controversies a certain degree of acrimoniousness. Much the same state of things continued till some of the great aggressive Virashaiva sects came into existence. Even then the rulers of the kingdoms did their best to hold the balance even, despite considerable amount of ill-treatment of the weaker sects, and some possible destruction even of temples and buildings chiefly as a result of occasional outbreaks of popular fury. The empire of Vijayanagar came into existence under circumstances which did not permit of sectarian rancour being given vent to. The state therefore of tolerance and development in religion continued unbroken all through the history of Hindu India from almost Mauryan times in the distant south.

Before closing it would be just as well to indicate that if this outline of the history of “Vaishnavism before Ramanuja" should stand the test of further criticism and make the chief landmarks in its history accepted by the world of scholars, several of the now accepted positions in literary and religious history of India even in regard to Sanskrit will have to be revised. All along I have advisedly kept from drawing in any Sanskrit evidence for the reason that it strikes me that several of the positions of a general character in respect of that literature may have to be modified. By way of illustration it may be pointed out that Dr. Schraeder ascribes the Pancharatra Samhitas, to about A. D. 300. This position would cease to be tenable. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar himself in his book on Vaishnavism states that the cult of Rama came into vogue in the 11th or the 12th century. There is ample evidence to Rama being identified with Vishnu by the earliest of the Alvars. Kulashekhara gives a summary of the whole of the Ramayana as it is in his ‘ten’ on Chidambaram. Much has been written about the coming in of the Krishna cult and of its importation into India by the Abhiras and of its post-Christian character. It is at the very best doubtful whether this position could stand. There are various other lines of investigation such as the age of some of the Puranas, the Mahabharata, Manu &c., which this particular subject suggests, and it is to be hoped they will all get worked up satisfactorily in course of time so as to carry research work several, stages farther in respect of the history of “the literature and culture of India.”

 

 

***

 

 

THE TATA PRINTING WORKS. 5, THAMBU CHETTY ST., MADRAS.