2

My dear murugappan,

I have received your letter. Iam well and I am glad to know your progress in your work. In the letter you have sent me you have asked me “what are the precursors for the saiva agama schools “. This is a difficult question to answer most scholars believe it as indian origin while some scholars who are  call it  as ‘sumero dravidians hypothesis’, doubt the indian origin of agamas and think it could have come from mesopotomia in 4000 BC.  They say

“The Dravidian animal cult practices are thought to be of West-Asian Elamite origin. Scholars hold, that animal worship of buffaloes and serpents are clearly attested in the ancient Elamite religious system. There is also a scholarship, who think, that the Elamites and Dravidians share a common language family and culture of an agricultural society, spanning from Elam to the Dravidian Indus Valley Civilization (IVC). This theory is being gradually accepted by linguists however Dravidologists still look for more evidence. The IVC culture shared also many features with the ancient Sumerian society. Representations of the legend of Gilgamesh and the similarities of priestly practices indicate a common origin to the extent, that the culture is also been called "Sumero-Dravidian". Several scholars have attempted to show a direct linguistic relationship between them, while general agreement hasn't been established yet”.

Dear murugappan , this origin of Dravidian language and agamas outside the south asia hypothesis is very much questionable and needs lot of evidences to prove it.

In the same way some tamil scholars also dispute the vedic(indian) origin of the agamas and saiva siddhantha.  K.Ganesalingam,saiva siddhantha scholar, meykandar adheenam, London writes in this direction. He says in his book “Vedas and Saiva Religion”,

“Vedas are considered as the source book of culture of the Aryans and direct revelations from God.  They are also considered by certain schools of thought, like Poorva Mimamsa, as “pre–existent and apaurusa”, not the work of any person, either human or divine. The original Vedas, whether revealed by God or was pre-existent, had gone into oblivion and not known to anyone now. With no knowledge of them, many are speaking of Vedas as eternal, sanadhana dharma, ultimate truth, originated many yugas earlier etc, etc. They also consider Vedas as superior to other literatures like Agamas and Thirumurais, and Sanskrit in which they are available as superior to any other language.Vedas which are available now are literatures which came during a long period of time before the Common Era. This is the view of all the scholars. Most scholars assume the earlier limit of the Vedic period as 1200-1500 BCE and the later limit as 500 BCE. These Vedas were said to have been collected and classified by Vyasa as Rig, Yajur, Sama and Athatva Vedas. Each of these Vedas is divided into four parts as Mantra or Samhita, Brahmana, Aranyaka and Upanishad. Mantra and Brahmana parts come under Karma kanda (relating to rituals); Aranyaka comes under Upasana Kanda (relating to meditation) and Upanishad comes under Jnana kanda (relating to Supreme knowledge). Main purpose of Karma kanda and Upasana kanda is attainment of material gains. Main form of worship in it is sacrificial rites (velvi) intended to gain favour from various Gods like Indra, Agni etc, which were thought to be associated with natural calamities and occurrences. Jnana kanda (Upanishad) is the only part intended to gain supreme knowledge and spiritual evolution. Because of this, Upanishad gains importance in realizing the Divine.

Many Vedic views are not clear and contradict each other. This is expected as Vedic literatures were given out by various people at various times over a long period of time. They were preserved through oral transmission over thousands of years. Comparatively Upanishads have better clarity and few contradictions. However scholars are of opinion that even Upanishads are difficult to understand. Following words of Prof Hiriyanna, a well known scholar on Indian philosophy, testifies to it.  ‘There are great, almost insurmountable, difficulties in deciding what exactly is the teaching of the Upanishads in certain important respects. This accounts for the emergence in later times of diverse schools of Vedanta, all of which claim to propound the Upanishadic teaching’. – (‘The essentials of Indian Philosophy’, M. Hiriyanna, Motilal Banrsida publishers Pvte Ltd, Delhi, 19995).While this is the case with Upanishads, just imagine the confusions and contradictions which would be prevailing in Vedas. Speaking of its superior position, therefore, becomes utterly deplorable.Still, many Indian religions give higher place to Vedas and consider them as their authority. Saiva religion also considers them as its authority to the extent they are not contradicting Saiva agamas. The Saiva luminary Arumuga Navalar, in his note (soosanam) to his Periyapuranam publication explains it clearly, and gives a higher position to Agamas. His word are as follows:

‘வேதம் முதலிய சகல சாத்திரங்களும் சிவாகமத்திற்கு விரோதமல்லாத வழியே

பிரமாணங்களாகும்’.‘Vedas and all other sastras are authorities to Saiva religion only in the way they do not contradict Saiva Agamas’. Compared to Vedas, Agamas are clearer and form the bedrock of Saiva practice and philosophy. This may be the reason for Thirumoolar to say that Vedas are of general significance and Agamas of special significance to Saiva religion.‘வேதமோ டாகமம் மெய்யாம் இறைவன் நூல்

ஓதும் பொதுவும் சிறப்பும் என்றுள’.‘Vethamodu agamam meiyaam iraivan nool

Othum pothuvum enrula’‘Vedas and Agamas are truly divine texts. They are of general significance and special significance’. The Tamil word ‘iraivan nool’ may be interpreted to mean ‘book of God’, ‘book about God’ or ‘book given by God’. Whatever meaning is taken, it is clearly seen that Agamas are given a higher place than Vedas by Thirumoolar.  The view that Vedas are words of God is seen in some places in Thirumurais and Meykanda Saaththira books which are the authoritative devotional and philosophical texts of Saiva religion. Following lines are examples.

‘மறை நான்கும் விரித்துகந்தீர்’ - சுந்தரர் தேவாரம்.‘You rejoiced detailing the four Vedas’ – Sundarar     ‘ வேத மெய்ந்நூல் சொன்னவனே’ – திருவாசகம் Oh, The One who revealed the book of Vedic truth’ – Sundarar.‘மறைகள் ஈசன் சொல்’ - சிவஞானசித்தியார்

‘Vedas are words of Siva’ – Sivagnana Siddhiyar.The word ‘Veda’ has ‘Vid’ as its root. It means knowledge. Veda means book of knowledge. Any book of knowledge is Veda. Devotional books and philosophical texts are Vedas. The Saiva Saint Appar adikal says that God stands as devotional and philosophical texts. (‘தோத்திரமும் சாத்திரமும் ஆனார் தாமே….’). He also says that He became Sanskrit and Tamil (‘வடமொழியும் தென்தமிழும் …. ஆயினான் காண்’). Another Saiva Saint Sekizhar calls the devotional works of Thevaram as Thamizh Vetham (Tamil Veda). Aruaga Navalar, in his book ‘Saiva Vinavidai’, Book.1, says that Thevaram and Thiruvasagam are Thamizh Vedam, and those who chant them with love would enjoy eternal bliss under the feet of Lord Siva. Vaishnavaites call their Divya prabandham as ‘Senhamizh Vetham’ and ‘Dravida Vedam’. Even the words of knowledge of ordinary humans are Vedas. All such words and texts have their origin in God Siva who is wisdom personified.  The ancient Tamil work Tholkapiyam says that God gave the first book of knowledge. (‘விளங்கிய அறிவின் முனைவன் கண்டது முதல் நூலாகும்’.). So, when the saints speak of God giving out Vedas, it should be understood that He gave knowledge. The Tamil word ‘marai’ for Veda also has to be taken with the same meaning and import.According to puranas God sat as Guru and gave the four Vedas first to the four Saints, Sanagar, Sananthanar, Sananthanar and Sanartkumarar. Manickavsagar says that He first gave the four virtues of Aram, Porul, Inpam and Veedu to the four saints in his Thiruvasagam.

‘அருந்தவர்க்கு ஆலின்கீழ் அறம்முதலா நான்கினையும்

இருந்தவருக் கருளும்அது எனக்கறிய  இயம்பேடி’‘Explain to me the Grace He showed in teaching under Aal (banyan tree) the four virtues of aram etc to the saints of rare goodness’.These four virtues, purusarthas, in Sanskrit, are dharma (righteousness), ‘artha’(wealth), ‘kama’ (sensual enjoyment) and ‘moksa’ (liberation). These are objectives worthy of human persuiits. Thus, for Manickavasagar these four virtues are the four Vedas.It may, therefore, be understood that from God all things, knowledge, virtue, language, etc originated and given to the world through the four saints for the existence and evolution of world. God remaining as Vedas, Agamas etc, and chanting them should be seen this way and understood. If understood properly, Veda or Agama or any other scripture would not be considered as superior to another. The statements of the Saints in Saiva religion have not spoken of the superiority of Vedas or Sanskrit. Yet some claim superiority of Vedas and Sanskrit, and lamentably many Saivites consume it with no hesitation.  Even our actions, good and bad, and our bondage and liberation, are seen by the saints as having originated from God. Manickavasgar says that God does good and bad.

‘நன்றே செய்வாய், பிழை செய்வாய்’.‘You do good, You do bad’. ‘பந்தமும் வீடும் படைப்போன் காண்க’ See, He creates bondage and liberation’.He also ays that God binds us with Punniyam and bavam (“அறம் பாவம் என்னும் அருங்கயிற்றால் கட்டி”). Going by the direct meaning it may be understood as God also does evil to us, keeps us under bondage, and binds us with bavam (evil). If understood properly these words have different meanings. (Detailed explanation is omitted as it may go lengthy). Similarly if the Thirumurai lines under reference are understood properly, we will not speak of the superiority of Vedas. Vedas gain importance as they are the earliest texts of knowledge.It is said that the Saiva saint Rudrapasupathy Nayanar chanted the sacred line of Sri Rudram in Veda and attained liberation. This is often quoted to claim superiority of Vedas. Of the many Nayanmars, he was the only one who attained liberation this way. Chanting any sacred sentence in any scripture relating to the Divine will give its benefit. It should be done with love and devotion to God. Not only chanting mantra, any act with love and devotion helps to reach God. Sakiya Nayanar threw stones at Siva. Kannappar fed meat to Siva. Appar did service in the way of Siva. Sundarar spoke ill of Siva. Still, they moved towards Divine because of the intense love and devotion to Siva shown by them. So chanting of Sri Rudram by Rudrapasupathy Nayanar does not qualify Vedas to gain superiority over other scriptures. The Saiva Luminary Arumuga Navalar gives high place to Vedas. However in his preface to Periyapuranam publication, he says that liberation can be achieved only through Saiva Siddhanta and not through Vedas. His words are as follows: 

"இதுகாறும் கூறியவற்றால் சைவசித்தாந்தத்தைத் தவிர பரமுத்தி சித்தியாது என்பதும், அப்பரமுத்திக்கு சாதனம் சிவஞானமே என்பதும் அச்சிவஞானத்தை பயப்பன சரியை முதலிய மூன்றுமே என்பதும், வேதத்துள் விதித்த வேள்விகள் முதலியன எல்லாம் அநித்தியமான காமியங்களை பயப்பன என்பதும் பெறப்பட்டன. வேள்வி  முதலியன  ஞானத்தை பயவாமை மாத்திரையே அன்றி தீவினைபோல் அது நிகழவொட்டாது தடை செய்து நிற்றலும் உடையனவேயாம்" -(திருத்தொண்டர் புராணம் – உபோற்காதம்).

‘From what is said till now, it is understood that liberation to divine cannot be realised except through Saiva Siddhanta, the means for it is Sivagnanam (wisdom of Siva), Sivagnanam can be obtained through the three exercises of sariyai etc., and the Velvi (sacrificial ritual) etc., prescribed in Vedas, give only temporary earthly benefits. Velvi etc, not only do not grant gnanam, but also remain as obstacle to receive it’. – (Thiruththondar Puranam – Introduction)As seen, liberation to the divine cannot be achieved through the way of Vedas. However, Siddhnata Saivam (Saivism) is sometimes called Vaidhika Saivam (Saivism) and it may create confusion. (Vaidhikam - Vedic religion; that which is sanctioned by Vedas). Arumuga Navalar clears this confusion by giving his views on it by quoting the following passage from Kamiga Agama. ‘சைவமே வைதிகம் எனப்படும். வைதிகமே சைவம் எனவும்படும். சைவமானது வைதீகத்தில் அடங்கியும் அடங்காமலும் இருக்கும். வைதீகமும் சைவத்தில் தாழ்ந்தது. முனிவரே, அற்றாயினும் சைவம் வேதப் பொருளோடு ஒற்றுமையாய் இருத்தலால் வைதீகம் என்றும் வேதசாரம் என்றும் கூறப்படும். சிவப்பிரகாசமாகிய சிவஞானம் பரஞானமாம். பசுபதார்த்த போதமாகிய வேதம் முதலியன் அபரஞானமாம்’ - (திருத்தொண்டர் புராணம் - சூசனம்) ‘Saivam is also called Vaidhikam. Vaidhikam is also called Saivam. Saivam is within Vaidhikam and Vaidhikam is within Saivam. Also Vaidhikam is inferior to Saivam. Oh! Munivar, nevertheless as Saivam is associated with the Vedic essence it is called Vaidhikam and Vedasaaram (essence of Veda). Sivagnanam which shines as Siva is Paragnanam. Vedas which give knowledge of earthly needs of the soul are Aparagnanam. – (Thiruththondar Puranam – Introduction).  Thus Navalar has indicated that the Vedic rituals, apart from not giving gnanam (knowledge), also prevent it as an obstacle. He has clearly stated that Vaidhikam is inferior to Saivism, and liberation is possible only through Siddhanta Saivam. Following words of Thirumoolar compliment this view. ‘தற்பரம் கண்டுளோர் சைவசித்தாந்தரே’.‘Saiva Siddhantists have seen God Siva’. “  This view of Ganesalingam is also shared by some tamil centric scholars  in malaysia and srilanka  and assert the independent evolution of agama.

More studies are needed in this area as. Agama’s influence is predominantly seen in tamil speaking areas in the world. Hence it is possible tamil sided opinions have an axiom of truth.

I hereby told you about the agama, their evolution, relationship with vedas and their importance to the saiva siddhantham. As you have seen there is a controversy about the agamas relationship with vedas. But majority of the indologist like Dr.Alexis Sanderson-All Souls University –UK., believe agamas are related to or followed the vedic thoughts only.

I wish you read this letter critically regarding the opposing views like the one proposed by K.Ganesalingam and the traditional indocentric views.  Refer appropriate texts and come to your own conclusion. Please take care of your health reply me along with your comments.

Affectionately

gandhibabu