X-Sender: naga ganesan@...
X-Apparently-To: agathiyar@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8 0 1 3); 26 Jan 2002 00:24:10 -0000
Received: (qmail 99094 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2002 00:24:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m6.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Jan 2002 00:24:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n34.groups.yahoo.com) (216.115.96.84) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Jan 2002 00:24:09 -0000
Received: from [216.115.96.150] by n34.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Jan 2002 00:24:08 -0000
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 00:24:07 -0000
To: agathiyar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Akattiyan myth (400 AD)
Message-ID:
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: 6465
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
From: "naga ganesan"
X-Originating-IP: 209.223.28.182
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=9040551
X-Yahoo-Profile: naga ganesan
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 15202
>>--- In agathiyar@y..., "naga_ganesan"
> > What I try to show is that the tol. sUtra recognizes
> > the 3 aspects, nATakam, iyal and icai.
> > pATal means
> > "songs" in general, and this includes music.
> >
> > As the two instances of nATakam in pattuppATTu works
> > are late chronologically, increasing aspects of sanskritization
> > can be seen. Of course, Agastya is the Vedic sage
> > and the myths about his learning Tamil in Potiyil
> > from Siva, etc., are late also. Agastya is the symbol
> > of sanskritization of Tamil.
> >
> > akattiyam is most likely an "invention" said to
> > predate TolkAppiyam.
>
> சுவெலெபில் அவ்வாறு நினைக்கவில்லை. தொல்காப்பியத்தின் முன்
> அகத்தியம், மாபுராணம் போன்றவை இருந்திருக்கவேண்டும் என்றுதான்
> அவருடைய 1975 நூலில் சொல்கிறார்.
> அவர் முச்சங்க நிகழ்ச்சியில் 9000 ஆண்டுகள் போன்ற கால அகவைகள் வேண்டுமானால்
> புனைவு என்று எண்ணுகிறார். ஆனால் அச்சங்கள் இருந்ததை ஒதுக்கவில்லை.
>
> அன்புடன்
> பெ.சந்திரசேகரன்
See prof. Jean-Luc Chevillard (Paris), a TolkAppiyam expert,
quoting prof. T. P. Meenakshisundaram.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CTamil/message/268
Of course,
TPM writes that the work of Akattiyar as mid_Pallava,
not of *hoary antiquity*.
Also, pl. read Jean-Luc Chevillard's comments
on how the Agastya myth legitimizes TolkAppiyam:
[Begin Quote]
I had the same feeling that, if I understand
you well, Agastya was very useful in making the jain work tolkAppiyam
acceptable to a society of scholars where Siva had become supreme.
tolkAppiyan2ar being one of his 12 disciples, he was an acceptable
character, even though he had slightly "misbehaved" with Agastya's wife
by rescueing her from drowning
[End Quote]
http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9905&L=indology&P=R29501
I'm not so sure as to whether Zvelebil absolutely buys the notion
that Agastya to be very ancient in Tamil grammatical tradition.
Zvelebil has his own doubts:
K. Zvelebil, Lexicon of Tamil literature, 1995
Entry om Akattiya_n, p. 12
"The essential stuff of the Akastya-Akattiyan myths is
Sanskritic in nature and origin, going as far back as
Rgveda. In Tamil tradition there is no direct and specific
reference to Akattiyan in any of the early (CaGkam) texts.
The earliest (?) appearance of Akattiyan in Tamil
sources is in -> ParipATal (c. 350-400 AD)., -> CilappatikAram
(c. 450 AD) and Manimekalai (c. 500-550 AD). It is probable
that Akattiyan must have been known in Tamil lore
at least from c. 350 AD onwards."
Even in the 1975 book, Zvelebil mentions that Akattiyan
myth in Tamil is late:
KZ, Tamil literature, Leiden:E.J.Brill, 1975, p. 63
" Agastya is, however, not mentioned either in the
text of TolkAppiyam or in PanampAranar's preface. There
is not a single reference to Agastya in the entire
body of the early corpus of bardic poetry. In fact,
for nearly one thousand years of Tamil literature,
Agastya remains unmentioned (111). The earliest references
in Tamil texts are found in Par., Cil., and MaN.,
Par. XI. 10-11 speaks of vAynta potiyi_n mu_niva_n
"the famous sage of Poti". In Cil. XV. 14, a mAtava
mu_niva_n is mentioned as residing beside the
Southern sea; acc. to the commentator A.tiyArkkunallAr,
the reference is to Akattiya_n. The earliest occurrence
of the name itself seems to be that in Ma.n. Patikam 11
which speaks of amara mu_niva_n akattiya_n "the
immortal seer Akattiya_n". In later texts, and in the
commentaries, ref.s to Agastya are constantly
present.
(111) P. T. Srinivasa Iyengar, History of the
Tamils, p. 224."
Zvelebil, Companion studies to the history
of Tamil literature, 1992, p.140
"Again it is the consensus of the indigenous
tradition that it was Akattiya_n (Skt. Agastya),
a seer of the legendary First and Second
Sangams who is believed to have composed
a treatise on these three divisions of
Tamil verbal art in 12000 aphorisms,
called Akattiyam. Unfortunately, IF EVER
A WORK LIKE THIS DID EXIST, it is not
available now (save for a couple of fragments,
almost certainly spurious and forgeries)."
ibid., p. 241,
"4.3 Agastya, however, is NOT mentioned either
in the text of Tol. or in Pa_nampAraNar's preface
and, as stated above, there is not a single
reference to him in the entire body
of the early corpus of Tamil poetry.
This, to say the least, is quite striking."
The concluding lines of the foll. URL reads:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/agathiyar/message/15170
PC>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.
On the other hand, as is evident from Zvelebil's words,
and the late occurrence of Agastya myth in
the Tamil corpus, "akattiyam" grammar is most likey
an "invention" of mid-Pallava period.
Agastya's occurrence in late-sangam text (ParipADal) and post sangam texts,=
Cil., and MaNi., reinforces the fact that they coincide with
sanskritization of Tamil. Brahmadeya land grants
to brahmin caturvedimaGgalams by Pallavas
as a means to form and expand large political realms (on the
model of Gupta dynasty) and the Agastya-Saiva legends
increase in Tamil texts. Previously Tamil kingdoms
were quite small.
Undoubtedly there were Bauddha and Jaina competitions with
Saiva claims: Buddhists claim Avalokita taught Tamil to Agastya
at Potiyil/Malaya (Cf. ViiracOziyam grammar), just as Saiva legends
claim that it is Siva who taught Tamil to Agastya
at Potiyil. Potiyil-Malaya, is refered to
in gaNDavyUha sUtram as Potalaka and Huan Tsang
in the 7th century confirms Malaya-Potiyil
as Potalaka where Avalokita(Kuan-yin) resides.
Around the same time, in this Tamil mileau, the Sanskrit
legends about PaaNini being taught by Shiva was also born.
Regards,
N. Ganesan
PS: the mention of pUtapurANam (bhUtapurANa) and mApurANam (< mahApurANa)
occurs at the end of 1st millennium AD., If at all they
existed, they need not be of hoary antiquity.
