From naga ganesan@... Thu Jan 24 18:10:30 2002
Return-Path:
X-Sender: naga ganesan@...
X-Apparently-To: agathiyar@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8 0 1 3); 25 Jan 2002 02:10:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 38697 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2002 02:10:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 25 Jan 2002 02:10:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n16.groups.yahoo.com) (216.115.96.66) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Jan 2002 02:10:30 -0000
Received: from [216.115.96.145] by n16.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Jan 2002 02:09:29 -0000
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 02:10:26 -0000
To: agathiyar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Earliest Reference to muttamiz or "threefold tamiz"
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <20020124192601.2868.qmail@...>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 5598
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
From: "naga ganesan"
X-Originating-IP: 209.223.24.169
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=9040551
X-Yahoo-Profile: naga ganesan
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 15184

--- In agathiyar@y..., "Ganapathi S" wrote:
>
>
> சந்திரா,
>
> அவ்வையால் எழுதப்பட்ட"பாலும் தெளிதேனும்" சங்கத்தமிழ் மூன்று என்று சொல்கிறது.
மொழிநடை பார்க்கையிலே அது காலத்தால் மிகவும் பிற்பட்டதாக யிருக்கவேண்டுமென்பது
தெரிகிறது.
>
> மேலும் எழுதுங்கள்.
>

"தெரி மாண் தமிழ் மும்மைத் தென்னம் பொருப்பன்
பரி மா நிரையின் பரந்தன்று வையை"

iஇந்த அடிகளில் பழந்தமிழ் மறைந்த கதையும் உள்ளது.
iஇது பரிபாடலாக iஇருக்கலாம் என்று ஊகிக்க
திருக்குறள் (23) பரிமேலழகர் உரையைத் தழுவி
எழுந்த நுண்பொருள்மாலை துணை நிற்கிறது.
நுண்பொருள்மாலை 17ஆம் நூற். திருமேனி
iஇரத்தின கவிராயர் செய்தது என்று நினைவு.

iஇவ்வடிகள் உ. வே. சா. அவர்கள் பரிபாடல்
பதிப்பில் iஇடம்பெறவில்லை.

(ஆதாரம்: பரிபாடல், எஸ். ராஜம், மர்ரேஅண்டு கம்பெனி,
சென்னை, 1957, ப. 67)
-----------

அகநானூற்றுக்குப் பழைய உரை ஒன்று உண்டு.
அது கிடைக்கவில்லை, ஆனால், அதன் உரைப்பாயிரம்
கிட்டியுளது. அதிலும் மூன்று தமிழ் குறித்துப்
பேசப்பட்டுள்ளது.

பழுதில் கொள்கை வழுதியர் அவைக்கண்
அறிவு வீற்றிருந்த செறிவுடை மனத்து
வான்றோய் நல்லிசைச் சான்றோர் குழீஇi
அருந்தமிழ் மூன்றும் செறிந்த காலை - அகம் உரைப்பாயிரம்

(ப. 45, தமிழியல்: ஓர் அகநோக்கு,
Dr . T. E. Gnanamurthy 61st birth day commemoration
volume).

அன்புடன்,
நா. கணேசன்

> மதுரபாரதி


>
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 Periannan Chandrasekaran wrote :
> > Earliest Available Reference to muttamiz or "threefold
> > tamiz"
> >
> > Zvelebil in his treatise "Companion Studies to the
> > History of Tamil Literature"
> > (1992, E.J.Brill, Leiden, Handbuch Der Orientalisk,
> > ISBN 90-04-09365-6) says on
> > page 140 in the interesting section dealing
> > philologically and metaphysically
> > with the deeper significance of the concept of muttamiz
> > or triple tamiz:
> > "How old is the concept of 'threefold Tamil'?
> > ஸif it was an ancient concept, we have no trace of its
> > left. Neither
> > pre-Pallava texts nor any ancient inscriptions refer to
> > muttamiz. It seems that
> > chronologically the earliest reference to the "three
> > fold Tamil" is to be found
> > in muttoLLAyiram, a fragmentary text mostly in veNpA
> > quatrains, which it is
> > extremely difficult to date: the end of the sixth
> > century was suggested as well
> > as the tenth centuryஸ."
> >
> > But we do find that the cangkam texts paripATal indeed
> > has a reference to
> > muttamiz. It occurs in the fragmentary lines obtained
> > from commentaries. It has
> > not been identified with a particular song in the
> > anthology which originally
> > had 70 songs but only 22 of which have survived in full
> > and we have others
> > available only in fragments gleaned from commentaries
> > of other books. These
> > lines, not having the original song number to be
> > associated with, are
> > categorized under the heading "paripATal tiraTTu". The
> > relevant line referring
> > to muttamiz was obtained from the commentary to
> > tirukkuRaL by parimElazakar.
> > Not incidentally, he is also the author of the sole
> > commentary on paripATal
> > available.
> >
> > The lines are from the Cologne Digital Tamil Thesaurus :
> >
> > Qpariti4x01 \BT teri mAN tamiz mummai ten2n2am
> > poruppan2 \et
> > Qpariti4x02 \BT pari mA niraiyin2 parantan2Ru vaiyai \et
> >
> > Let us focus on the first line that has the triple
> > tamil reference:
> >
> > teri = choice; mAN = glorious; mummai = triad;
> > ten2n2am = southern;
> > Poruppan2 < poruppu = the ruler of the Potiyil hills
> > i.e., pANTIyan2.
> >
> > [translation mine; there are no commentaries available
> > for this]
> > "The ruler of the southern mountain (Potiyil)
> > associated with the choice and
> > glorious tamil triadஸ"
> >
> > Note the phrase "tamiz mummai" or "the Tamil triad"
> > associated with the Potiyil
> > hills ruled by PanTiyan2s.
> >
> > Looks like Zvelebil has missed this critical reference
> > to muttamiz in his
> > discussion on muttamiz' historicity.
> > Another important point is that this triple tamiz is
> > associated the Potiyil
> > hills which is invariably connected with sage Akattiyar
> > (Agastya) who is said
> > to have resided there and composed Akattiyam, a
> > treatise dealing with muttamiz.
> >
> > As Zvelebil himself in the same section and elsewhere
> > in the same book and his
> > earlier work "Tamil Literature" (1975, E.J. Brill, page
> > 60) , asserts that a
> > treatise like Akattiyam, composed by a semi-mythical
> > figure Akattiyar (Agastya)
> > must have been extant in hoary antiquity.
> > This paripATal line further strengthens his assertion.