X-Sender: bala@...
X-Apparently-To: agathiyar@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8 0 3 2); 20 May 2002 01:49:51 -0000
Received: (qmail 34364 invoked from network); 20 May 2002 01:49:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 20 May 2002 01:49:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO sydney.net) (203.22.101.2) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 May 2002 01:49:49 -0000
Received: from bala (nas1ppp54.sydneywerks.com.au [203.22.103.246]) by sydney.net (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id LAA09070; Mon, 20 May 2002 11:52:58 +1000
X-Authentication-Warning: churchill.sydneywerks.com.au: Host nas1ppp54.sydneywerks.com.au [203.22.103.246] claimed to be bala
Message-ID: <013701c1ffc6$253dd020$d8bafea9@bala>
To:
Cc:
Subject: Tamil In Temples: Breaking The Stalemate?
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 11:48:09 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="x-user-defined"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "Bala Pillai"
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=1292804
X-Yahoo-Profile: bala2pillai
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 18134
----- Original Message -----
From: Vivek Anand Ganesan
To:
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 1:05 AM
Subject: Re: [akandabaratam] tamil-> 'theetu mozhi' ?
> I am sorry that Thiru. G. Balasubramai Iyer feels this
> way about tamil. I would hasten to add that his view is
> probably his own and is not endorsed by any firm authority,
> either scriptural or organizational. I would also like to
> point out that the late shrI shrI chandrashekara saraswati
> mahAswamigaL made considerable efforts to popularize tamil
> and to promote tamil worship. He was also a consummate
> scholar in tamil devotional lore. He made it a point to
> speak in pure tamil to tamil audiences. So, I am sad that
> Mr. Iyer has espoused such a dim view of tamil.
>
> With regards to using tamil in temples, we have to look
> at what the scope and extent of this usage would be. At the
> outset it needs to be mentioned that tamil WAS in usage in
> most temples in Tamil Nadu until the 19th century. Many
> vaiShNava temples still follow this custom ( as the sri
> vaiShNava religion is considered to be ubhaya vedAntam i.e.
> equal respect to sanskrit and tamil ). The saiva religion
> of the tamils is of course devoted to tamil and it was
> quite common to hear the devotional works of the tamil
> saiva saints being recited in saiva temples in tamil nadu.
> This situation changed in the 19th century because most of
> the saiva temples were taken away from the Adheenams ( the
> traditional guardians of the temples ) and handed over to
> individual managers. This started the headlong decline in
> tamil usage in saiva temples ( I believe both shrI U. Ve.
> SwaminAtha Iyer and thavathiru. nAvalar fought against the
> erosion of tamil in the 19th century ).
>
> Then in the 1930s onwards the periyar movement took hold.
> The periyarist movement was fundamentally anti-religion
> ( particularly against hinduism which it equated with
> brahminism, a false equation still followed by many left
> oriented people ) and avowedly anti-sanskrit. It was not
> even pro-tamil as some people mistake it to be ( Periyar
> himself was not a native tamil speaker and considered tamil
> to be a barbaric language! ). In some ways I consider the
> periyarist movement to be a backlash against the extreme
> anti-tamil sentiment of the 19th century.
>
> Be that as it may, today we have found ourselves in a sad
> situation. We have two camps of people - one that considers
> sanskrit to be an "alien" and "hostile" language and wants
> it to be banished completely from our temples. Another is
> equally hostile to tamil and considers it to be a "low"
> language and unfit to be used in temples. IMHO, both these
> extreme views are wrong. I appeal to return to the pre-19
> th century tradition where sanskrit was used for Agamic
> rituals and tamil devotional poetry was also sung to please
> the Lord. Also, we must strive to return the temples to
> the Adheenams who have been their traditional caretakers
> for centuries and also make sure that the sivAchAryAs, the
> traditional saiva priests are returned to their former
> pristine position in saiva temples. AFAIK, this is the wish
> and desire of the learned saiva scholars as wells as the
> AchAryAs of kAnchi maTham.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Vivek.
