"Sangam" Literature
  • There is an opinion among certain scholars that the usage of word
    sangam for the ancient literatures of tamil is a wrong usage.

    The word "sangam" does not appear in any of the odes ! Surprising,
    is'nt it, given the belief that all poems were censored by the sangam
    board. The first historic sangam which can be verified is
    the "thiramila sangam" by saint vajranandhi of kalabhra times.

    It is in a much later and highly questionable literature - Iraiyanar
    agapporul / kalaviyalurai - that the myth of sangap palagai etc comes
    into pictures. In later pandiyan copper plates we find mention about
    sangam - and we also find lot of other stories which are mythical.

    Any thoughts ?
  • Dear Gokul,

    > There is an opinion among certain scholars that the usage of word
    > sangam for the ancient literatures of tamil is a wrong usage.
    Sangam is not a Tamil word. It came from the Sanskrit root word
    sanga: it means the assembly place of people or society etc,.

    It is not a wrong usage Gokul, Tamil had taken almost 850 words from
    Sanskrit and Tamil also gave almost 650 words to Sanskrit. It will be
    difficult to believe that the word 'siva' had gone from Tamil to
    Sanskrit but it is the fact according to the Madras University
    publication. Tamil is the only language which gave some basic letters
    or alphabets to Sanscrit[ called pulliyitta ezhuththukkal].

    This is simply the mere colloboration of the only two dominant
    languages of that time. Hope we need a different view to understand
    this fact.

    > board. The first historic sangam which can be verified is
    > the "thiramila sangam" by saint vajranandhi of kalabhra times.

    > sangam - and we also find lot of other stories which are mythical.

    May be or can be but we cannot say firmly.

    I'll give an example,

    .........................................
    .........................................
    nalantharu thiruvirp pandiyan avaiyaththu
    aRankarai nAvin nAnmarai muRRiya
    athankOttasaRk karilthapath therinthu
    mayanga marapin ezuththumurai kAtti
    malgu nIr varippin ainthiram niraintha
    tholkAppiyan.............................
    .........................................

    Given above is the words of tholkAppiyar. What he says is he learned
    and attained expertisation of a book written by 'inthiran' the chief
    of devas.

    Can you believe this? Hopefully not. But can you reject his setence?
    No, you cannot. Because it is not written by us.

    This is the most ancient topic and the most everliving topic and many
    peoples tried and failed to attain any grounds but still what
    surviving will live for ever.



    anbudaiyEn,

    vallavarayan vandhiyaththevan.
  • >
    > .........................................
    > .........................................
    > nalantharu thiruvirp pandiyan avaiyaththu
    > aRankarai nAvin nAnmarai muRRiya
    > athankOttasaRk karilthapath therinthu
    > mayanga marapin ezuththumurai kAtti
    > malgu nIr varippin ainthiram niraintha
    > tholkAppiyan.............................
    > .........................................
    >
    > Given above is the words of tholkAppiyar. What he says is he

    IS IT NOT THE THOGAI PAATU FOR THOLKAPPIYAM BY PANAMPAARANAR ? I don't
    think these were the words of tholkappiyar. Pl correct me if I am wrong.
  • > difficult to believe that the word 'siva' had gone from Tamil to
    > Sanskrit but it is the fact according to the Madras University

    The word "sivaniya" appears in tholkappiyam many time, but with a
    different meaning. Can you pl elaborate what madras univ publication
    says in this reg ? Very interesting

    > This is the most ancient topic and the most everliving topic and many
    > peoples tried and failed to attain any grounds but still what
    > surviving will live for ever.

    You are right. As we go back and back with lesser evidences we need to
    surmise from what is available and there is serious diff of opinion !
  • > IS IT NOT THE THOGAI PAATU FOR THOLKAPPIYAM BY PANAMPAARANAR ? I
    don't
    > think these were the words of tholkappiyar. Pl correct me if I am
    wrong.

    % O My GOD I am very sorry Gokul. It is a great blender I did. You
    are very correct. %

    It is written by panampAranAr only. Actually he was the
    classmate 'oru salai mAnAkkar' of tholkappiyar and as this is the
    sirappuppAyiram it have to be written by some known person other than
    him. But it says all about tholkappiyar because this is the
    introductory report note read at the arasavai of Pandiyan.

    But I can confirm you that this was not added in later time. This was
    written and staged on the same time. Saiva Siththantha Noorppathippuk
    kazhagam's publication affirms this.

    But what I said about the grammer book 'ainthira viyagaranam' is
    still correct and all the other words stands as it is.
  • Coming back to the original intend of this thread, the question was
    whether a group of poets were functioning under a single umbrella
    and whether this was patronized by pandiyan kings.

    We hear things like "Mangudi marudhan ullita pulavar kuzham" in
    sangam literature which could be the grouping of poets under a given
    lead. But this does not translate to sangam or sangap palagai etc.

    The lord himself is supposed to have been the lead in first sangam.
    Iraiyanar being attributed to lord is questionable from historic
    perspective.

    "sanga" word is of bali (buddhist / Jain) origins.

    So, purely focussing on the existance of a group of poets or a
    censor board which attested every good literary work - I look
    forward to hear views from members

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Top Posters