Tuesday, January 29, 2008

He is not IYAN Thiruvalluvan, he is ARYAN Thiruvalluvan!

No Aryan - Dravidian divide - it was one Aryavartha - (7)

This statement may seem chauvinistic to some,

but a patient and thorough analysis of ThirukkuraL

will tell us that Thiruvalluvar has extolled Aryan values only.

The application of Thirukkural’s value system

to the life and rule of the kings in ancient Tamil nadu also reveals

that those kings have lived up to be Aryan in essence.

Continuing the analysis of what makes one Aryan or SaandrOn,

we can see that Thiruvalluvar has characterized

‘piranil vizhaiyaamai ’ (not desiring another man’s wife)

as a virtue of SaandrOn!

In the chapter on ‘piranil vizhaiyaamai’ (chapter 15),

he has said,

“piran mania nOkkaadha pEraaNmai SaandrOrkku aRan”

Not to desire another man’s wife is the DHARMA for SaandrOn.

The very first verse in that chapter

(“ piran poruLaal pettozhugum pEdhamai gyaalatthu

aram poruL kaNdaar ka Nil”)

reiterates our contention that

the one fixed in Aram and pOruL (dharma and arttha / karma)

will not desire another man’s wife!

Whatever he has described of this ‘saandrOn’

is identical to

whatever is regarded as Aryan in Sanskrit.

According to KuraL the saandrOn will

# do his duty

# have compassion, humility, complacence, mercy, kindness and truthfulness.

# not expect anything in return for the good he has done to others ,

# be non-violent , will not kill

# not find fault with others

# be humble to the extent that this quality will change the attitude of his adversary for good

# accept defeat and not pass on the blame on others

# help those in need

# not be poor in goodness

# be balanced and steadfast and not waver under any circumstance.

This ultimate quality makes one “sthitha prajgyan”

according to Bhagavad Gita.

Such a person will consider both victory and defeat with equanimity.

This is the ultimate aim of human endeavour.

This quality was gone in Arjuna when he refused to fight.

Such a tendency made him Non-Aryan, according to Krishna.

It is ‘Anaaryam’.

The same concept is promoted by Thiruvalluvar

by the name ‘saandraaNmai’

and the Aryan as ‘saandrOn’

It was the wish of every mother in Tamil nadu

To see that her son grows to become an Aryan!

“eendra pozhudhil peridhu vuvakkum

than maganai

saandrOne ena –k- kEtta thai”

The moment of extreme happiness for the mother

is not the moment of the birth of her son.

It is the moment when she hears others

celebrate him as SaandrOn” or Aryan!!!

It must be noted that Thiruvalluvar could have used other terms

in the place of saandrOn,

such as

‘arinjan’ (intelligent)

‘arulOn’ (kindness)

‘paNbhaan’ (one with good character)

‘poraiyOn’ (one with patience)

‘eedhalan’ (the one who gives)

‘isaiyOn’ (one who is famous)

‘valiyOn’ (one who is strong)

‘periyOn’ ( great man)

But he used ‘sandrOn’ which encompasses all the above qualities

and even more such ones.

This shows how the values enshrined in that term Aryan

was dear to the people of this land of Tamils

Nothing else can prove convincingly

that Tamil nadu was also part of Aryavartha!

Such being the case,

it is ridiculous to hear people hate this term.

It is all the more ridiculous to see people who swear by Thiruvalluvar

to say that they don’t like Aryanism and that they are against Aryanism.

It is nothing but the height of ignorance to say this

and also consider in the same breath that

the ancient Tamils were not Aryan.

Let me quote Thiruvalluvar himself.

We can prove that he was very much Aryan

and he propagated nothing but Aryan values in his master piece.

Even Tamil scholars have accepted that Thirukkural is “utthara vedam

which means Upanishads!

Thirukkural is Tamil Vedam (thamizh maRai)

Three of he 4 purushaarthas of Vedantha namely,

Dharma, karma, kaama and mOksha are explained by it

as Aram, poruL and inbham.

The 4th one was left out because,

adherence to the first three will take one to the 4th one

which is Moksha (veedu in Tamil) or the Ultimate Release.

Thiruvalluvar has sequenced the chapters in such a way

as to give continuity and connectivity to each of the issue

that is discussed.

In the 1 st group on Dharma,

he has placed the chapter on Destiny (oozh or vidhi)

as the ultimate one.


He has accepted the role of destiny in a person’s life

and by placing it at the end of the group on Aram (dharma)

and by the explanations on destiny,

he has reinforced the vedic concept

that destiny ultimately decides the outcome ,

come whatever may be one’s effort or action.

This view is also the concealed interpretation of

the famous Bhagavd Gita exposition

that we have control over only our actions ,

and not on the results of the actions.

(karmaNi eva adhikaarasthE maaphalEshu..)

So the last chapter of the Aratthu-p-paal (group on dharma)

is the teaching of Gita!

Not only that

Even the first verse of the entire body of ThirukkraL is

about the A-kaara Brahamn!

(agara mudala ezhutthu)

The aadhi bhagavan is again the Vedic god Bhagavan

having 6 qualities called ‘bhaga’

namely supremacy, valor, renown, auspiciousness,

knowledge, and detachment.

At many places Thiruvalluvar brings in the concept of Devas

and has even compared the knowledge by hearing (kELvi)

to the havis (offerings) to Devas.

Such persons are like devas.

A number of connections from Vedas, vyakaranas, habits of the vedic people etc

can be quoted from ThirukkuraL.

Thiruvalluvar who has never quoted any specific god by name,

has indeed quoted one by implication

and another god by his name.

The one he has indicated by implication is Rama!

In kuraL 773,

he has said that the Height of Manliness (pEraaNmai)

is that of showing mercy to the bitter rival in battle,

when that rival is low in spirits.

The crucial version implying Rama comes now.

Thiruvalluvar says that

this is what is being said of PeraaNmai (Height of Manliness)”.

This means that this episode must have been coming down the ages

and the PEraaNami also as one of the highest virtues

which can not be handled by anyone other than Rama!

Another God he has quoted is Thrivikrama in kuraL 610

He has named him as “adiyaLandhaan

“madiyilaa mannavan yeidhum adiyaLAndhaan

thaaya dhella morungu”

That king who is not at lethargic will get

what the AdiyaLAndhaan got by his steps.

The AdiyaLAndhaan got this world and heavens by his 2 steps

and the greatness as the Lord of this universe by his 3rd step.

Such worlds will be gotten by that king who is not lethargic.

Lord Thrivikrama

or the symbolism behind the avatar of Thrivikrama,

seems to have inspired Thiruvalluvar

in a very astounding way.

If not, why should he have used the 2 -stepped kuraL,

which is not a widely used form for composition?

He has aptly chosen the 2-stepped KuraL,

to express the rules of Dharma, Karma and Kaama,

the adherence to which will lead one to finish the third step too,

which is nothing but Moksha or Ultimate Release!

The above quoted KuraL (610)

looks like a self-made inference

or a sort of self-comment by himself, on his work,

in that

by the 2 steps of the KuraL,

he has conquered

and helps the followers of KuraL to conquer

what "AdiyaLandhaan" had done -

that of conquering this world and the heavens -

of conquering life in this world and the life after!!!

The crux of the issue is that

ThirukkuraL extols Aryan culture and

that the culture of Tamils also was Aryan.

And this can be best understood by the way he has named the chapters.

The final division of Thirukkural is called Adhikaaram.

The division is into 3

by naming them as ‘paal’ on 3 purushaarthas,

which are divided into Iyal,

and which are further divided into Adhikaaram.

Paal and Iyal are Tamil words while, Adhikaaram is a sanskrit word!

Thiruvalluvar found a Tamil equivalent for Aryan (as SaandrOn),

but did not name a Tamil Equivalent for Adikaaram!!

It is because of the uniqueness of the kind of Adhikaaram

that Thiruvalluvar wanted to convey.

Adhikaaram means ‘rule’ in usual understanding in Tamil,

but it also means ‘chapter’ in sanskrit.

But Adikaaram by its derivation means “adhikaritthal” (increasing)

implying that the control or rule or influence will increase.

What is this increasing control?

According Sanskrit lexicon, Adikaaram can be of 2 types,

“yatho-dEsa paksham” and “kaarya kaala paksham”

In the former case, yatho-dEsa paksham,

the rule or influence of the king will be spread by itself.

The king does not make any special effort or law

nor appoint any enforcing authority

to spread his rule or to make everyone in his country obey the rules.

The dissemination is automatic and natural

and the influence reaches far and wide on its own.

In the other case, “kaarya kaala paksham”,

The king appoints persons who will see to it

that the rule is enforced throughout his kingdom.

The best example to understand this adhikaaram is

King Ashoka’s efforts to spread Buddhism.

But the message spread by ThirukkuraL does not need any agency to spread it,

because it was the message of Aryan culture,

the Sanatanadharma

as practiced by anyone who qualified as Aryan in behaviour.

This existed and

spread by itself by the yatho-dEsa paksham!

That is why Thiruvalluvar coined this term for his basic division.

By choosing this term Adhikaaram as the basic unit of division

of rule book-like Constitution, which is what ThirukkuraL is,

he has succinctly made it known

that the values incorporated in Thirkkural spreads on it own

everywhere in this land and in this entire world!

The message of Universal Truth will spread like that.

The Universal truth he has said is the Tamilised version of

Vedanta and Sanatana Dharma,

of Aryan Culture.

Aryanism and sanatana dharma go hand in hand in that

an Aryan is the follower of Sanatana dharma

and sanatana dharma lives as long as an Aryan lives.

This message is again given by Thirvalluvar only

in his last verse in the Adhikaaram on “SaadraaNami” that

when the SaandrOn loses his saandraaNmai, the earth will perish!

The day when no one person lives as an Aryan,

on that day this earth will perish.

Until then this, world will go on.

and Aryan will live in some person,

or any person from any corner of this world.

When such is the greatness of Aryan,

it is not only ridiculous but also distressing to see

misguided persons (particularly of Tamil speaking origin)

claim that they hate Aryan

and refuse to accept

that their ancestors were the best custodians of Aryan culture

and lived as Aryans to the core.

The fear of Aryan is unfounded.

The hatred for Aryans also is uncalled for.

If we fear so or hate so,

it means, we the Tamils are fearing ourselves and hating ourselves.

Our past is nothing short of Aryanism.

It is high time, the Tamil scholars re-visit

the ancient Tamil works and Thirukkuaral

with an open mind.

They will know that we are Aryans in this land of Aryavartha

(to be continued)

Monday, January 28, 2008

Thirukkural speaks of ARYAN culture only!

No Aryan - Dravidian divide - it was one Aryavartha - (6)

None other than the Great Thiruvalluvar

can be a better guide to us to know

whether Aryanisation enveloped the Tamil land too.

I look upon him for guidance for the following reasons.

Thiruvalluvar seems to be from a much older time than what many think.

He seems to have preceded many well known poets of the remote past

and the treatises of Tamil grammar too.

Many have quoted him in their works,

but none have been quoted by him,

as though indicating that he lived prior to them.

One may say that such non-quote is by itself his style of composing.

May be.

But he did make references or quotes

that had concealed reference - not to kings of Tamil nadu of the last 5000 years,

but to Aryan kings, Aryan Gods and Aryan values!

Another reason is the land where he was supposed to have lived.

The name Maathaanubhangi, associated with him in an ancient reference

identifies him as having lived in Then-Madurai.

(“Uppakka nOkki UpakEsi thOL maNanthaan,

Utthara MAdurai-k-ku acchu.

Ippakkam Maathaanubhangi maRuvil pula-ch

ChennaappOdhar punal koodal acchu”

The explanation to be found in my blog on

“The original name of Nappinnai”)

The ‘punal koodal acchu’ places him at a time more than 5000 years ago

in a land lined with the sea in the east that was dug by sagara


where the river Kumari was flowing

that was a witness to a legendry and grand ‘punal aadal’ (bathing)

in its confluence with the sea,

which also saw the confluence of the three seas from east, south and west!

It will be wiser to look into his words of wisdom

to decipher whether he has said of this entire land as Aryavartha.

Aryan In Thirukkural.

What was Aryan known as in Tamil is a good question to begin with.

Two instances help us to pin point the Tamil Equivalent of Aryan in ThirukkuraL.

(1) The opening verse by Krishna in Bhagavad Gita.

This happens in the 2nd chapter of the gita.

On seeing Arjuna put down his bow and refuse to fight,

Krishna says that it is “an-aaryam” (not noble) to get into such despondency.

It is “a-swargyam” (will not grant him a place in Heaven)

It will get him “a-keerthi” (un-fame)

What is referred to as ‘anaaryam” is his refusal to do his duty

- the duty of fighting in the war.

This is also the opening verse of “SaandraaNmai” (kuraL 981)

which means ‘nobility’.

“kadan enba nallavai ellaam kadan aRindhu

saandraaNmai mEr koLbhavarkku.”

This says that “saandrOn is one who knows his duty and does his duty”

Krishna refers to “an-aaryam” as dereliction of one’s duty.

This means,

the foremost attribute to be an Aryan is to do one’s duty!

To cross check whether “saandrOn” is indeed the synonym of Aryan in Tamil,

Let us look at another instance.

(2) This instance is from Puranaanuru, (“vadaadu..” by Kaari kizhaar)

written in praise of the Pandyan king “pal yaaga shaalai mudu kudumi peruvazhuthi”

This verse is of importance because

this king had lived before the sub-mergence of kabaada puram,

that is, 5000 years ago

when the II sangam was held.

(This is mentioned by another verse by another poet

who wished the king

that he live for long

more than the number of the grains of sand of the river PaHruLi.)

The verse dedicated to him speak of his raj-neeti, the just and stable rule.

His rule was compared to a Balance.

The three seas,

the one dug by Sagara in the east,

the olden sea in the west

and the big sea in the south

join at his kingdom and are at a balance.

The land and sea and the heaven join at his place

as though they are held stable by a balance.

He, the king was capable of analyzing everything

at the convergence of

the land, the sub-terrain and in the ‘gO-lokam’ (aa-nilai) situated in the heavens!

(The Go-lokam is an off-shoot of Vedic concept!

It is mentioned in this verse.)

The king never wavers but is upright like a Balance.

What kind of a person one will be if he is ‘balanced’,

is something mentioned by Thiruvalluvar.

He is a “SaandrOn”, a noble person,

translated as Aryan in Sanskrit.

In kuraL 118, he speaks of this balanced nature as that of a ‘balance’

that is the jewel of ‘saandrOr’.

(“saman seidhu seer thookkum kOl pOl amaindhoru paal

kOdaamai saandrOrkku aNi”)

SaandrOn is Aryan as per the description from Kural.

It is interesting to note that Thiruvalluvar had sequenced his kural

in a methodical fashion.

The 2 important purushaarthas, namely dharma and arttha

(aRam & poruL)

have been explained in 108 adhikaaramas (chapters).

Of these “saandraaNmai” on the nature of Aryan is

set as the 99th chapter.

All the chapters preceding this chapter

talk about the attitudes

and requirements

without which a person can not be called as “SandrOn”.

The 100th chapter further glorifies this attitude of the SaandrOn

as “paNbu”

Thereafter till the 108th chapter,

(barring one on ‘vuzhavu’ or farming –

this was brought here as it can not be placed earlier)

it is about the ‘don’ts’ to be followed

by one who wants to be a SandrOn.

It appears that the entire range of 108 chapters is about

how one must conduct oneself to be a SaandrOn or Aryan.

The rest 25 are about the 3rd purushaartha, namely kaama.

It must be noted that Thiruvalluvar assigned importance

to the mystic number 108

that encompass all that is needed for betterment in this world

and the other world (or after death).

Kaama was not included in this group.

This is perhaps because kaama is something of personal life

that may differ in accordance with

differences in space and time,

from country to country,

from culture to culture

and from time to time.

The first two are about

how one must be in the society

or in matters that can affect the society.

There lies a crucial issue of the Aryan life.

In matters of love life, certain rules are relaxed.

The great persons who have been praised as wonderful Aryans

have had personal life / relationship that is questionable.

The great Parashara who wrote sutras and astrological treatises

and even the yuga dharma for Kali yuga had indulged in a way

that is questionable in a civil society.

But he was accepted as an Aryan,

because of his adherence to Dharma –arttha (aRam – pOruL)

His son Vyasa who had questionable birth

also begot children in questionable ways.

But that in no way spoiled his image as an Aryan.

Kings married many girls, either with or without their consent.

But that did not reduce their stature as Aryan.

In such marriages, there is only one exception which will make the king Anaaryan.

That is ‘piranil vizhaidhal’.

“desiring another man’s wife”.

Ravana – an otherwise Noble person became a fit candidate to be removed,

because he desired another man’s wife.

Ravana had many wives who were married by him by force or by consent.

Hanuman was impressed with Ravana’s riches and kingdom

to an extent that

a silly thought ran into his mind for a moment,

“couldn’t he (Ravana) bring in Sita in a straightforward way?”

Because Sita was the only woman who was already married

when he brought him.

All the others were not so.

Ravana was such a noble soul, having lot of good things to his credit.

He could not be eliminated unless he wavered from his Aryanism.

That is why the God had to stake his wife to trap him

to behave in an un-aaryan way..

Similar incidence is seen in Mahabharatha too.

No one can fault the good natured-ness of Duryodhana.

(Even Krishna was praising him Duryodhana at his death-bed

that made Arjuna jealous.)

His ambition to take away the land of the Pandavas was well within his raja dharma.

And he did that within the established rules of the day and

with the consent of others

(for the dice game).

But what changed the story is

dis-honouring the woman

who married into their household!

Such dis-honouring activities are un-aaryan.

We find the similar trends in Tamil lands too.

At no time the three kings of the three Tamil lands were at peace.

There was regular blood-shed in the name of expansion of territory.

But when it comes to personal life, one must not cross the established rules.

Particularly, in matters concerning woman,

Upholding the honour of other women was of prime importance.

But the man / king was within his rights to get the girl of his liking,

even if it is not liked by her –

with the condition that he has not trespassed into another man’s territory.

The girl will elope with the boy or

the boy will kidnap the girl and forcibly marry her.

The boys had to attract girl by hook or crook.

All that was not considered un-Aryan.

But an Aryan can not and will not do an activity

that will bring dishonour to the woman.

That is why Bheeshma asking Amba to leave was Aryan.

Krishna abducting Rukmini was Aryan.

Interestingly enough and intriguingly too,

I am not able to locate a single incidence of

such un-aaryan behaviour by any king of Tamil land!!!

I can only recall a Pandyan king

who actually didnt bring dis-honour to the woman,

but brought dis-repute to his rule,

by harming her in a grave way.

HE was Aryan to the core,

as he died instantly

on knowing from Kannagi

that he had unjustly ordered the execution of kOvalan!

The Tamils were indeed more Aryan

than those who are branded as Aryans !

(to be continued)

Nobility of Tamils - it is being ARYAN!

No Aryan - Dravidian divide - it was one Aryavartha - (5)

The ancient Tamils had categorized the VallalgaL (philanthropists) into 3 groups

on the basis of the time period they belonged to

(mudhal, idai and kadai

meaning first /early , middle and last / later).

It is obvious that the categorization was not

on the basis of the place where they belonged to.

They were from different parts of India,

yet they found their way into Tamil’s categorization.

This shows that the Tamils considered them as one with themselves.

When will someone consider another as one with himself?

When the culture, the values and whatever of the other also was their’s too!

I am instantly reminded of Mei-p-poruL Nayanaar’s words,

“thattha, thamar” .

When his enemy managed to get close to him in the garb of an ascetic

of an order which was dear to him, (the king Mei-p-poruL Nayanaar)

and stabbed him,

the dying king stopped his guard, named Thatthan,

from killing the enemy who was in ascetic robe,

by saying ““thattha, thamar”

“thattha, he is ours”.

He was ‘ours’ because

though he was an enemy, though he was the murderer,

he was in the garb of a Shivite ascetic!

The king was one who was an ardent devotee of Shiva.

He treated the Shivite ascetics with great reverence and considered them as ‘his’ clan.

Even though he realized that the one in the ascetic garb was a cheat and his enemy,

he didn’t want any harm to be done to him

because he was in that garb that identified him as ‘ours’!

Such was the solidarity or the flocking mentality of the people of this land.

This must be borne in my mind before making any claim

that the Aryans were different from Tamils or vice versa.

It was in this mentality of ‘ours’ or ‘they are like us’,

that the philanthropists who ruled the lands other their own,

were regarded as ‘our kings’,

by the Tamils,

and perhaps by people of other lands of this Bharatha varsha also,

who were not directly ruled by them.

So where does this kinship lie?

Or how does this kinship develop?

As found in the instance of Mei-p-poruL Nayanaar,

Kinship is developed when people share a common ideology,

Common culture and value system.

This is where the identity of Aryan comes in.

We find people using this term to identify a race,

drawing their inputs,

that were based on the assumptions and interpretations of an invader class,

who were not ready to accept the superiority of the land and people of Bharatha varsha.

That invader class which depended on the divide and rule policy,

inserted this division of Aryan versus Darvidian too into the psyche of the people.

Atleast now we must wake up

And shake off ourselves from this colonial game plan.

Before knowing what was Dravidian, let us know what was Aryan.

I say this because, none of the olden texts in Tamil

speak about Dravida, nor do they identify the Tamils as Dravidian.

They only speak about a value system

that was common to all and followed in the entire land of Bharatha varsha

-a system that is termed by this colonial game-infested people

as that of Aryan!!

Aryan, according to the ancient Sanskrit dictionary, Amarakosha, means

Noble mindedness or a noble person.

A noble person can be anyone!

Even an animal or a bird can be an Aryan.

In Kikindha khandam of Valmiki Ramayana,

Tara, the wife of Vaali addressed Vaali as

Arya puthra” – son of Arya / noble soul.

Even a Vanara can be an Aryan!

Elsewhere in Ramayana, Rama eulogizes a pigeon as a noble and superior soul.

This pigeon offered itself as food for a hunter, who killed its mate,

because he took shelter under tree in which it was living.

And it was its duty to satisfy his hunger by offering him food.

Since it had nothing to offer, it offered itself as food for him!

Such was the nature of an Aryan.

The Tamils were in no way lacking in Aryan mentality.

That is why they found kinship with all those who were Aryan in mind and life.

When Dasharatha did Ashwamedha yajna, he invited the kings from the South.

When the Pandyans conducted the Assembly of Sangam,

they invited Krishna to preside over it!

The kinship was there!

Meeting of minds was there!

In the Kurukashethra war, many rulers of the North sided with one of the sides.

But the Cheran king (mentioned earlier in this series)

did not take sides, and instead chose to feed both the sides!

He was definitely more Aryan,

-ChEramaan perum chOttru udhiyam chEralaadhan

was more Aryan

than any Aryan of that time!!

(to be continued)