Saivism and Saiva Siddhanta – A Historical Perspective – International Interdisciplinary Conference – Second and third days proceedings [2]

Saivism and Saiva Siddhanta – A Historical Perspective – International Interdisciplinary Conference – Second and third  days proceedings [2]

11-08-2018 – the second day proceedings [Sat] – first session: Lalita presided over the  session.

1. Lakshmi [Malaysia] – Worship during the period of Appar – people were divided based on gothra, kula etc. “Agathava vazipadu” was there.
2. Venkata Kalaiyarasi – Sivavakkiyar – there was problem in fixing the date of Sivavakkiyar as to in 6t or 10^th cent CE. Otherwise, the points discussed were of repetitive nature.
3. Natarajan – Sivanjana botham – explained how Swethana Perumal became Meykandar and compiled the work “Siva njana botham” in Tamil.
4. Lalita – Sivavakkiyar – also repeated the same points already talked and discussed.
5. Anur Devi – Thirumular and the present-day issues. She tried to address the current problems and crimes involving school children and college students. Her approach has been relevant and important.
6. Asin Visapa [Nepal] – Saiva philosophy of Pasupathi, Nepal. When I asked about the animal sacrifice offered during the festivals at Nepal and how it could be compatible with the ahimsa concept of Saiva siddhanta, Natarajan, the advocate and Saravanan tried to argue that animal sacrifice continue even today. Saravanan also tried to argue, but, when I asked about ahimsa to be followed by the Saiva siddhantiats, he calmed down realizing the contradiction. When I pointed out that is against the tenets of Saia Siddhanta, then, they kept quite obviously realizing the issue.

As usual Saravanan commented that those who did not want to sit and listen to papers could  leave the hall, so that Siddha would come and occupy the chairs! He was also telling that Woman-Siddhar Chakkaraiyammal had the power of flying! V. Kalyanasundaram in his book had noted about it. 

Audience during the session

Second session: The presided over person talked about, “Saiva Siddhanta in Periya Puranam.”

Sacrifice, non-violence, killing and Saiva siddhanta: The delegate from Annamalai University, but claimed a “Delegate from Nepal” presented paper of Pasupati of Nepal, philosophy and related issues. After presentation, I asked how the sacrifice offered there at Nepal would be compatible with the Saiva siddhanta followed here. While he was explaining why sacrifice was offered, S. Natarajan intervened that sacrifices were offered here in Tamilnadu also. Then, I asked him [Natarajan], “that means, Saiva siddhanta accepts killing and non-violence?” Immedately, Saravanan ran to the stage and started  telling that all religions accept sacrifice and so on. I reminded that when Saiva siddhanta promotes non-killing, non-violence, Jivakarunya and all how sacrifice was justifiable, was my question, he was harping upon that all religions accept sacrifice.

Life, Karma, body, death and life after death differ among the world religions: Manickam presented a paper on “The concept of Karma among the World Religions.” He revealed that his paper was different, but Saravanan suggested and urged to present a paper on this topic. In  general, he pointed out the  concepts of life, atma, body etc., but, when the western religions came, he was confused. Therefore, finally, I raised the issue and clarified that the concepts of Judaism, Christianity and Islam cannot be equated with the Eastern religions.  They believe that their bodies have to be entombed and preserved, so that when the day of judgment comes, their bodies would be raised, resurrected, gone to heavens and with the grace of God, they get punishment or redemption. Saravanan tried to show that Vallalar also had such view.

audience on the second day, second session

audience on the second day, second session- another view

Without knowing the meaning of “अक्ष” wrong interpretation given: The lady who presented a paper on “pal varait teivam” was giving wrong meaning to the word “अक्ष” exposing herself  that neither she knw Sanskrit nor referred to any Sanskrit dictionary to know the meaning of it. When I pointed out that it was not correct, Saravanan intervened that I did not have any right to say so, as that was her opoinion! I again pointed out that I was objecting to her wrong meaning given to the word “अक्ष” and her further wrong interpretation given based on such wrongly perceived meaning. Saravanan was diverting the issue. Really, I was shocked to note the way the proceedings were going.

Third session: It was presided over by a person, who acted as “Vallalar” in Pothigai TV. The papers had been so general, repetitive, overlapping that the audience was made to get disinterested. As the list of papers was not given and the paper-presenters were also changed according their convenience, nothing could be tracked.

Fourth session – G. Ilango can be seen.

fourth session

Fourth session, audience

Fourth session: After lunch, the fourth session started with paper reading.

1. Arunagirinathar
2. Ilango –He was trying to differentiate Saiva sddhanta and Vedic worship of Siva. Emphacizing “Tamizhar samayam,” as if it is different from the religion followed by the Tamils, he was interpreting like a Marxist. Of course, he was mentioning Kausambai, Jha, R. S. Sarma and others. He was claiming that there was no India and therefore, no religion was there. Whereas, Tamil is the ancient language and thus the religion of Tamil was different. Following M.M. Adigal, it was interpreted that Saivism and Saiva Siddhanta takes the form of a polemical attack on Vedanta and Brahmanical Hinduism. Thus, without going into the facts of Sivagnanabotham e tc., he tried to show that Tamils were following different religion. After reading, I asked him, “Had India not been there, why Coloumbus was sent to discover “India”?, he was evading.
3. Without any historical evidences, he was talking like a Dravidian, DK-atheist type, that was intriguing.
4. The next speaker pointed out that Kumaragurubaran went to north and spread Saiva Siddhanta. In other words, he went there and conversed with the Delhi Sultan, evidently in Persian and thus, the myth that Saiva Siddhantis were confined to Tamilndu and knew only Tamil.
5. Selvi – Ramalinga Adigal – Tiruvarutpa
6. Tree-worship

Fifth session: Siva. Ilangovan presided over

1. Avvaiyar – the paper presenter was not specific about the chronology etc. , thus, she was reading without any specific time and place reference. The chair also pointed out the fact that there were more than one poet with the name “Avvaiyar” and therefore, all poems cannot be put in a particular period and interpret.
2. Veriyadal – Again, the paper presenter was making presentation without proper understanding of Sagam literature. She was not understanding the difference between murugu and muruga, velan and priest etc. In fact, when I raised the issue, there was interaction between Saravanan and myself. Obviously, he was trying to show that Murugan, Karttikeya, Subramanjan etc., are different and so on. But I restricted to the concepts of “Kandu-kandazhi-kadamba,”[1] “Se-Sey-Seyon”[2], and pointed out how the concepts were developed.
3. Manicavasakar
4. Priya- Stalapuranangkal

12-08-2018 – the third day proceedings [Sat] – first session: Lokanayaki presded over the session.

1. Vasuki Kannappan – Saiva Siddhanta in Tirukkural = Saiva Siddhanta in tirukkural. Incidentally, this has been the theme of more than one paper presenter and none has been bringing out anything new, instead of repeating the stuff that has been there already in hundreds of books. Ironically, they are also not refuting contradictory issues brought in and trying to misinterpret the wrks in question. Therefore, it is not know how these repetitive narratives would help for “Saiva Siddhanta in historical perspective”! Moreover, she came hurriedly, read her paper quickly and went away immediately on the pretext that she is getting “Kalaimamani” award tomorrow.
2. Vijayalakshmi – Vinai tirkkum Tiruppati – She was descfribing anf justifying the miracles without discussing about time and place. When Saravanan has been criticizing myth at one side and appfreciating at other side, she has not taken any effort to prve her stand scientifically or historically, so that such narratives are acceptable to the present-day youth and society.
3. Saraswati Iyyappan – Kannadasan padalkalil Mupporul – Ironically, she took the cinema songs of Kannadasan and tried to show that the Saiva Siddhanta principles are there in his songs by singing also. It is not known such “research” is required to approach “Saiva Siddhanta in historical perspective”!
4. Sandhya – Vallalarin sinthanaigal – i.e, the Saiva sidhanta thoughts are in Vallalar’ works. Ramalinga Adigal belongs to recent times and therefore, there is nothing surprise that it his works contain Saiva siddhanta. Incidentally, why he opposed Chidambaram and wanted to devlop Vadalur as parallel place of worship etc., are not discussed. If Chidambaram us not required for Saiva sddhanta, then, they could restrict their “Tamizhar saayam” within Vadalur.
5. Saroja – Manickavasakarin Ilakkiya sirappu, she tried to appreciate the literary beautiness of Manickavasakar’s Tiruvasakam.
6. Geetha – Karaikkaal Ammaiyarin padalkalil Mopprul. Again the same theme, she tried to show that the concepts of Pati, Pasu and Pasam are there in the songs of Karaikkal Ammaiyar.

 

Second session:  Chidambaram Balu presided over the session.

1. Veerasaivam – In general, the paper presenter explained the features of Saiva Siddhanta.
2. Arogya Mary – In general, the paper presenter explained the features of Saiva Siddhanta.
3. Sivapackiyam – How bakti is found in the literature of Saiva Sidddhata was explained.
4. Again one more paper on Veerasaivam.

The paper presenters have not been comfortable to explain, interpret and approach the tenets of “Veerasaiva” in Saiva siddhanta context. At many times, they were more interested in delving upon the conflicts between the Jains and the Veerasaivas.  Without Sanskrit and Kannada, the Verrasaiva literature cannot be read and researched. However, these pro-Tamil rsearchers have been trying to interpret from the secondary sources and therefore, they are get exposed, when fundamental issues like non-violence etc, are discussed in the context. Basava led a crusade against the caste system and popularized the worship of Siva in Karnataka. His followers were known as lingayats. They do not observe many Hindu practices like shraddha and the cremation of the dead. They bury the dead bodies. God cannot be realized just by recitation of the Vedas and other holy books. They suggest that only by renouncing desires, God be realized in the mind. Pampatticittar ciricises that Vedas, agamas, sastras, tantras and puranas are useless. Those who preach them do not know even their real meaning and such preachings are useless. They accuse the Vedas are written for earning the bread of some persons.

Aghorasivachrya approach towards Siddhanta[3]: Aghorasivacharya, the head of a branch monastery of the Amardaka order in Chidambaram, in 12^th twelfth century, decided to unite Sanskrit and Tamil Siddhanta traditions. Strongly refuting monist interpretations of Siddhanta, Aghorasivacharya brought a change in the understanding of Siva by reclassifying the first five principles, or tattvas (Nada, Bindu, Sadasiva, Isvara and Suddhavidya), into the category of pasa (bonds), stating they were effects of a cause and inherently unconscious substances, a departure from the traditional teaching in which these five were part of the divine nature of God. Aghorasiva was successful in preserving the Sanskrit rituals of the ancient Āgamic tradition. Thus, Aghorasiva’s Siddhanta philosophy is followed by almost all of the hereditary temple priests (Sivacharya), and his texts on the Āgamas have become the standard puja manuals. His Kriyakramadyotika is a vast work covering nearly all aspects of Shaiva Siddhanta ritual, including the daily worship of Siva, occasional rituals, initiation rites, funerary rites, and festivals.

Tamil Saiva Siddhanta cannot exist without original sources: In 13^th century, Tamil Shaiva Siddhanta, Meykandar, Arulnandi Sivacharya, and Umapati Sivacharya further spread Tamil Shaiva Siddhanta. Meykandar’s twelve-verse Śivajñānabodham and subsequent works by other writers, all supposedly of 13^th and 14^th  centuries, laid the foundation of the Meykandar Sampradaya (lineage), which propounds a pluralistic realism wherein God, souls and world are coexistent and without beginning. Siva is an efficient but not material cause. They view the soul’s merging in Siva as salt in water, an eternal oneness that is also twoness. Thus, by a thin difference, they cannot claim that they are different and they have nothing to do with the original literature, Vedas etc.The Dravidian ideology of anti-theses cannot be brought here to confuse.

Saiva Vellalas, non-Indian groups cannot confuse: Saiva Siddhanta today is practiced widely among the Saiva’s of southern India and Sri Lanka, especially by members of the Vellalar community. It is also prevalent among Saiva’s of the Tamil diaspora around the world. Prominent Siddhanta societies, temples and monasteries also exist in a number of other countries. The United States island of Kauai, a part of Hawaii, is home to the Saiva Siddhanta Peetam, an organization that promotes the union of worldwide Hindus, through a publication called Hinduism Today. This was founded by Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami (1927–2001), which is currently under the auspices of Subramuniyaswami’s designated successor, Satguru Bodhinatha Veylanswami (1942- ). This lineage, which traces itself back to the Shaiva Siddhars of Northern Sri Lanka, adheres to the philosophical position that the original Shaiva Siddhanta as expounded by Tirumular, was and is monistic, and propagates this teaching as Advaita Saiva Siddhanta. The famous songs of the Sri Lankan Shaiva Sage, Shiva Yogaswami, attest to this view of the nature of God, Soul and World as being ultimately one. Ironically, because of modernization, they have vegetarian and non-vegetarian eating believers. Many times, it creates conflict in their rituals, rites and ceremonies.

Those researchers are interested in Agamas: Here, in this site – http://www.agamaacademy.org/digital-library-en.php, Kamika-agamam, Yogaja-agamam, Chintya-agamam, Purva Karanagma, Uttara Karnagama, Sahasra Agama, Suprabedhagama, Makutagama, Kiranagama, Vathula Suddakyam, Sarva Gnanottaram, Veera-ragomattoram, with kriya, tantra parts can be downloaded. Serious researchers should read them

© K. V. Ramakrishna Rao

15-08-2019

[1] During the Murugan conferences held,  as some groups tried to misinterpret, I seriously involved in reading Sangam literature and presented papers at the International Conferences conducted in the name of Kuruka-Sakanda-Kartikeya by Jouhn Samuel at Madras, Mauritius and Malaysia. I discussed with the issues with many Saivites, exchanged views through e-mail and personal correspondence. In fact, I personally met Dr Rajamanickkam, G. J. Kannappan, Raju Kalidass, Joh Samuel, Patrick Harrigan and others. I cannot bring all issues here, but, a similar type of attempt is made here in the context of Saiva Sddhanta.My papers on Mugan worship are here in the links – http://murugan.org/research/rao-zodiac.htm; https://archive.org/details/FireCultOfTheAncientTamilsK.V.RamakrishnaRao

[2]  Patrick Harrigan has published paers her e- http://murugan.org/research/rao.htm

[3] Dominc Godal et al [ed.], The Pachavarnastava of Agorasivacharya: A twelth century South Indian prescription for the visuaisation of Sadasiva and his retinue, French Institute, Pondicherry, 2005.