Chapter 1 - Rise of the Temple cult in Saivism

[Full title: Rise of the Temple cult in Shaivism or Temples and Tevaram]

I

The Temple Cult gradually developed, thanks to the Tevaram saints, into Agama public worship. Arurar himself explained the importance of these temples in the spiritual development of the soul in his hymn on ‘Alakkoyil’: “Calak koyil ulanin koyil avai-en talaimel kontali malait tirnten vinniyum turanten vann rariya neriyane” —‘O Lord, whose path is not known even to the Heavenly beings; many are your temples. Considering them as my crest jewel, I adored and worshipped and danced. I got rid of my illusions. My karma, I escaped, by brushing it aside.’ How this importance came to be placed on the temple is indeed an interesting study. As the Tevaram verses are sung in relation to the temples, the development of the temples has to be understood.

Tirumurukarruppatai of the Cankam age gives us the various places of natural beauty and social congregation which were held sacred. The Cankam poems and Cilappatikaram refer to the temples of Shiva probably built of bricks. Most of the Shaivite temples of the later times grew out of the original places of worship in and around natural scenery in forest areas, on mountain tops, on the banks of rivers, of tanks, or on the seashore. When the country became richer, the temples arose in cities with elaborate gates, where, in course of time, the ancient historical festivals came to be attached to these temples.

Some of these temples remind us of the ‘Potiyil’ and ‘Ampalam’ and ‘Manram’ of the Cankam Age, all connected with communal and religious gatherings. Perhaps there was the tree cult as well. In every Shiva temple there is a special tree or plant connected with the temple. Probably because there was no other temple except the tree to start with, a few temples have come to be known after the names of such trees or plants as Nalalkoyili Kokutikkoyil, Alakkoyili Patirippuliyur, etc. The temples came to be built as tiled houses with platforms all around, even as we see in Malabar today. They are called ‘Ampalams’ and the Citamparam temple, called even now Ampalam, preserves this appearance even today in the sacred hall of Nataraja. Even in other old temples, the place, where the idol of Nataraja is worshipped, suggests from outside this ancient appearance. ‘Vauvanatti mantapas’, otherwise known as ‘Vauvalnerri mantapas’ are of this type.

II

There are references in literature to the construction of temples and other places with ‘cntuman’ or brick. The various shapes of the old temples of brick are probably represented by the varying shapes of rathas in Mahabalipuram. Even in the times of Arurar there must have been one such temple of brick which he refers to in his poems as ‘Paravai un mantali’, often understood as a place of private worship inside the house of Paravai Nacciyar. Because the meaning of this term has not been well appreciated, a mythological story based on folk philology came to gain currency. It is said that the sea (paravai) overflowed into the city of Arur and this temple (mantali) alone remained rearing up its head gloriously above the waters of the great flood and swallowed (un) its waters sent by Varuna. This temple is shown as the one existing on the south-west of the temple car. What the great Temple could not do, this minor shrine is said to have done.

At this stage the word ‘Tali’ may be examined and explained. A distinction is made by Tirunavukkaracar between ‘Tirukkoyil’ and ‘pala talikal’, both of which according to him should be in any city worth the name and in their absence, a city is but a thick forest: “Tirukkoyil illata tiruvil urum.... pankinotu pala tajikal ilia urum......avai ellam ur alia alavi kate”.

If Tirukkoyil is a temple, the talis must be something like choultries or mutts with many rooms where the pilgrims could rest and perform their private worship before visiting the temple for public or congregational worship. Probably they are places of tapas as is made clear by Nampi Arurar: “Tali calaikaj tavam avatu tammaip peril ante”. These talis for private worship in due course of time would have become independent temples.

‘Tali’ is a temple. ‘Kurakkuttaji’ is referred to by Nampi Arurar. We have the usage Kaccimerruli, Palaiyarai merrali, Palaiyarai vat a tali, Palaiyarait tenreli- Appar mentions in his hymns Kaccimetrali and Palaiyarai vatatali. Palace is known as ‘Ayiram tali’ or 1,000 rooms and an inscription speaks of the Palaiyarai Palace as Ayiram tali. Temples in addition to gates grew as guardian angels on the four sacred points of the compass.

Tirupputtur in Ramnad District has traces of a fort wall, and in this wall must have been built the present temple of Tiruttalinatar, establishing once again the connection between Tali and the fort wall. When Tali developed into a temple of public worship, we have a temple official called ‘Karralip piccani who was a sculptor and engraver on the wall. Kaccimerruli may be taken, on this basis, to be also a temple on the west of the fortress and palace of Kanci. There is also a place called Onnkantan Tali in Kanci. Tiru Arur also was a place of special importance to the Colas, and they must have had a palace, at least since the times of Manuccola. If ‘Paravai ul mantali’ does not refer to Paravai Nacciyar, it may refer to a temple within the fortress walls, for, according to Pinkalantai, ‘Paravai’ means a wall.

But it is not here intended that this temple ‘Paravai, ul mantuli’ was built of mud. The artistic work of giving shape to the brick framework with plaster and attractive painting is even now practised by those ‘kottans’ who work on modern gopurams (towers). This meaning of plaster on bricks (cutai) is given for the word ‘man’ by the commentator Parimelalakar in explaining the term ‘man man punni pavai’. The word ‘cutai’ is used in the sense of lime plaster even now, especially with reference to the plaster giving human and other forms to the bricks. This usage is as old as the Twin Epics: ‘Velli ven cutai ilukiya matam’. This name arose probably because of its pure white colour. This reference really explains the meaning of ‘man’ in other places: ‘Neni nilai mannilu ninra vayil’ and ‘Pankuna mannittir punpura vakuttu’. ‘Mannini’ seems to be the technical term for this art and the experts in this art were called ‘Munnittalar’ in Cilappatikaram and Manimekalai the very people whom modern Tamilians call ‘cutai velaikkarar’.

Tirukkunal also takes us back to an anterior period when instead of bricks, wood was used. When the plastering art developed and constructions in brick grew in number, the old decaying wood works were also probably plastered for restoring the former shape. This leads to a new art of plastering on wooden frame as a skeleton. It is this which is referred to according to some commentators in the kural which speaks of such artistic works: “Mannotiyainta mar am”.

Such artistic plaster work continued to beautify the temples and cities in the Pallava period as well. Tirunanacampantar refers to such ‘cutai’ work in malams: “Culavu ma matilum cutai malamum nilavu tantalai nineri”. Maturai was famous for this kind of work: “Nila mulaikkum ankalakac cutai malak kulal Alavay”. ‘Kalakam’ is probably ‘kalapam’, another name for this mixture of lime used as plaster as is seen from Manikkavacakar’s Tirukkovaiyar, ‘Nun kalapat-toli paya.’ This suggestion is strengthened by the use of the word ‘kalakam’ by Campantar himself: “Kalakap purinaik kavinar carum kalik kali”. This reference reveals the way in which the fortress walls were beautified by such artistic plaster work and ‘Paravai-un-mantuli’ may he one such work of plaster art.

III

A systematic attempt at spreading this temple cult by building imposing temples was made in the reign of Koccenknnan. This was such an important event that Tirumankai Alaar, though a Vaisnnvite himself, refers to the construction of seventy-eight temples by the Cola in his sacred hymns. These were built on high basements with running steps on the style of niatamalikais’. These were therefore called ‘malak koyils’. As compared with the old puny temples, these were huge and big. Therefore, these were called ‘perunkoyils’ or the big temples: Nannilattup perunkoyil. Koccenkanan must have lived before the Pallavas came into power and after Ceran Cenkuttuvan. It was probably from his time that the temples came to be known as koyil or kovil. Koyil originally meant the palace of the king, fortified by fortress walls, on the model of the Tanjore temple. Koccenkanan thought of building the temples like palaces. The Tamil Lexicon (by referring to verse 2363, Canka Ilakkiyam, Samajam edition) gives the meaning of temple for the word koyil, as having obtained in the Cankam age; but a reference to the poem shows that ‘Annal koyil’ is really the palace of the Pandya king. Cintamani speaks of the palace as Koyil. Patirruppattup Pathigam speaks of the Queen as ‘Koyilali. But by the time of Tirunavukkaracar it has come to mean any temple. Perunkoyil, therefore, refers to a particular kind of temple. As contrasted with these perimkoyils, we have references to ‘Ijankoyils’ either because they are new temples or because they are smaller in size We have the ‘Tunkanaimatam temples’ with what are called ‘Gajapr?ta Vimanas’.” There is a reference to ‘Karakkoyil’ probably because the approaches and steps being in the form of the trunk of the elephant. It is said that these temples are in the form of chariots. Tevaram also refers to ‘Manikkoyil’, probably because of muni-like (bead-like) spherical domes in those temples. Campantar speaks of Maturai Temple as Manikkoyil. These Munikkoyils were probably modelled on the Buddhist Caityas with apsidal domes. Perhaps ‘Alakkoyil’, Nalal koyil’, ‘Kokutikkoyil’ were also names after the peculiar shapes of the domes.

Later on, the pallis or caves of the Jains and the Palis of the Buddhists attracted the attention of the people, and cave temples developed during the reign of Mahendravarma Pallava. From then onwards started the building of temples in rocks. This development can be traced from the sixth to the twentieth century. The Shaiva temples came to be called the ‘Iccurams’ either after the patrons who built the temple, such as Mahenareccuram, Coliccuram, or after the particular sect worshipping there, Kapaliccuram.

Rev. Father Heras speaks of the rock temples first starting as cave temples with Garbagrha, developing during the time of Narasimha I, the Mahamalla, into Rathas, and rock cut sculptures and during the time of Narasmhha II or Rajasmhha into craft-constructed temples of hewn and hand placed stones. He also notes that during the reign of Mahamalla, the development of Mukha muntapa, Navaranga, Pradaksinas round garbagrha and of smaller shrines, the pradaksinas according to him increasing in number after Mahamalla. But these may be new developments with reference to the temples in rocks, but these must have been old features in ancient temples built by Koccenkanan and others. The pradaksinas were old gardens. This conception of new kind of temples which is preserved even now as against the old temples of brick and wood which have all disappeared, is the gift of Mahendra, the disciple of Appar. In his Mundagapattu cave inscription he is rightly proud of his eternal achievement and he speaks with all the joy of a new discovery and creation: “This is the temple caused to be constructed by Vicitracitta, for Brahma, Lsvara and Visnu without bricks, without timber, without metals and without mortar”. He is justified in calling himself Vicitracitta or ‘Man of original conceptions’. Koccenknnan was the first great Templebuilder, and Mahendra the second great Temple-builder.

The temples in rocks have become a natural institution of South India. On the banks of Kaviri, where there is not a single block of granite available, these temples of rock with their heavenward looking ‘gopurams’ of rock brought from distant mountains speak even today in their majestic voice of the Titanic labour involved in the transportation of the rocks, of the great engineering skill involved in the construction of the temples themselves, of the great love of the people for the temples and of their sincere reverence to God which inspired them to raise the domes and halls.

First starting with the garbagrha or the sanctum sanctorum adorned with a ‘vimana’ or dome, for worshipping the Imga in the centre, it began to grow in ever enlarging circles, from age to age with a ‘natu-mantapam’ or central hall in front, with the putting up of compound walls, thus giving place for enclosing with a certain amount of vacant space within the compound. Gradually there developed within the compound, the ‘curralai’ or a pillared corridor accommodating therein the shrines of Candesvara, Ganesa, Sapta-matru, Subrahmapya, Surya, Candra, Jyesta, etc. Still later, gateways were opened on the four points of the compass with small gopurams raised on their tops, gopurams which soon eclipsed the vimanas and grew to gigantic heights. These inspired, in time, the devotees to dig tanks and to build more and more prakaras or compounds with malikais and matams full of beautiful workmanship, wherein Puranns were expounded, or to build mutts and colleges and Sarasvati pantarams or libraries attached to the temples. These were under the supervision of great spiritual men called Tirumalikaittevar, one of whom had composed some verses of Tiruvicaippa included in the ninth Tirumurai. The devotees were also inspired to construct a separate shrine, Kamakkottam, for the Mother Goddess, who till then was housed as Bogha feakti in the Lord’s shrine itself or in a shrine in the curralai.

IV

These developments clearly reveal the place the temples came to occupy in the minds of the people and in the social life of the country. The architect, the sculptor, the painter, the dancer, the musician, the philosopher, the religious man, the pouranika, the administrator, the humanitarian and the poet found their vocations there. When the temples thus became the centre of the political, social, cultural, religious, artistic and educational life of the Tamil country, mantapas or halls, where these varied activities could be carried on, were built in these temples by kings and patrons to perpetuate their memories or the memories of saints or the particular forms of God they worshipped or the memories of the particular activity for which the hall was built. The mantapas were originally bowers or gardens as is made clear by such terms as ‘Tevaciriyak kavunam’ and they became gardens in stone. The hall of grammar, the hall of dance, the hall of drama, the hall of music, the hall of hymns and the hall of Purann, the open air theatre, the round of wrestling and other tournaments with four pillars, sixteen pillars, hunared pillars and thousand pillars—all these came into existence. Election to the local self-governing assemblies and committees took place in these halls and their meetings also were held under their roof.

Public documents and grants were preserved by being inscribed on these temple walls. On account of this great importance, elaborate rules were laid down for renovating and preserving these charters when temples were rebuilt. ‘Karralip piccani, the sculptor and engraver, therefore, assumes such a great importance that we find in one place at least, his image being erected in a temple.

On account of this importance, the temple administration became a matter of state concern and we have temple assemblies of Mahesvaras or Sri kariyam ceyvar or Koyil kanapperumakka} or Patamulattar in those places where the village assemblies themselves did not look after these temples. The Amrta Gana, probably, was the Temple committee. There was provision (1) for the maintenance of the accounts, SrIpantarappottakam, (2) for a treasurer, Sivapunlari, in charge of the treasure of the temple called Sripantaram, (3) for the auditing of the accounts by the Government officers and (4) for the condemnation of the Sivadrohis. Devadanas were granted sometimes in the form of whole villages for the families living therein in connection with the temple service—the koyilparivaram—Devakarmi, Arccakar or Kulankilar, Tattalikkottuvar or Tiruppali kottuvar, Taliyalvar, Vilakkut tavacikali Patiyam Paduvar, Mantiracaryar, Pukkoyvar, Manikal (Students), Malattuccattap perumakkal, Dancing girls like Kuttikal, Manikkattar, Uruttira knnikaiyar, Uvaccar. There Tfrere regular feeding houses and sometimes what may be called hospital arrangements within the temple. A compulsory contribution called ‘Makamai’ or ‘Makanniai’ was also collected. This explanation, of the story of the development of Temples, shows how the Tevaram Saints played an important part in the history of Temples. Mahendran was Appar’s disciple and provisions were made for singing Tevaram. But this is not all.

V

With the development of temples, grew the cult of pilgrimages to Shiva temples and people reverentially made lists of these temples, ‘Ksettirakkovai’, to be seen and worshipped by them on their pilgrimage or journey within the Tamil Country. These lists took the form of songs addressed to the Lord of temples. The earliest known literary list of temples, is from the pen of an ancient Pallava king. The book is called ‘Ksettirat tiruvenna’ and the author is called Aiyatika} Katavarkon and this book is included in the eleventh Tirumurai and the author is one of the 63 Shaiva saints sung by Nampi Arurar.

VI

The name of the author Aiyatikal Katavarkon is interesting as it throws a flood of light on the early Pallava history. Katavarkon—the last two words (Kanivar and kon) in his name mean the king of the Pallavas. Dr. Minaksi is wrong in stating that the title of Katava as applied to the Pallavas was of a later origin. The father of Nandivarman II is spoken of as Katavesakula Hiranyavarma Maharaja and this term Katavarkon is used by Nampi Arurar in his Thiruthondathogai in the 7th or 8 th century itself. Narasimha I, the Mamalla, is spoken of as ‘Kaniluvetti’ (Kaul nasalised as Kundu by mistake) in the Mahavamso of Ceylon. The term Aiyatikal remains to be explained. Adigal can be translated by the Sanskrit word Svami. The remaining word ‘Ai’ means the Lord, the father or the brother, most often in later times the father, he being the head of the family. This Aiyatikal, therefore, reminds us of the interesting title known to the students of the Pallava History ‘Bappasvami’. The Hirahailagalli plates mention one Maharaja Bappasvami whose gifts were confirmed by the king Sivaskandavarman. On the basis of the oft recurring title of

Bappa Bhattaraka, Dr. Minaksi feels that Bappasvami also similarly should mean a religious instructor or guru. The gift specifically mentions Bappasvami as a Maharaja and Sivaskanda-varman as the Yuvamaharaja. Dr. Minaksi explains this away by reference to religious instructors being respectfully addressed as Maharajas. But the name in Tamili Aiyankal Katavarkon, which appears to be a Tamil rendering of the term Maharaja Bappasvami of the Pallava dynasty admits of no such' explanation. Whatever doubt that might have arisen at the mention of the term Maharaja Bappasvami whose gift is confirmed by Yuvaraja Sivaskanda-varman must now be set at rest by this specific reference to Aiyankal as the Katavarkon, the Pallava king.

The Sanskrit works like Upamanyu Vilasam, Sivabhakta Mahatmya, Skandopapurann, Sivarahasya and works in Kannada try to translate the names found in Thiruthondathogai of Arurar without appreciating the genius of the Tamil Language. Arurar in some places refers to his contemporary saints and one such is Kalarcinkan, a Pallava king. This is translated as Pada Smhha. Kalali like the Victoria cross, was a symbol of victory and heroism; in the form of an anklet it was worn by the victorious heroes. Therefore, Kalarcinkan means only the king, the victorious, perhaps a Rajasmhha or a Narasirmha. In translating the term Aiyankal Katavarkon, these Sanskrit works once again go wrong. Katavarkon is taken to mean the king of the forest, the Simha of the land, and Aiyankal is translated as Pancapada assumed to refer to the five topics of the Pasupata Philosophy and therefore the Aiyankal Katavarkon is variously spoken of in these Sanskrit and Kannada works as Sirnhanka, Padasmhha or Pancapadasmhha. Evidently these books are confusing Aiyankal Katavarkon with Kalarsinga. Some of these will make it out, that Simhanka or Kalarsinga was the son and Aiyankal Katavarkon was the father called Bhimavarma, who retired from his kingdom early in life but unfortunately this imaginary story of the Sanskrit works goes straight against the Epigraphical records which made Simha-varman the father of Bhimavarman. Therefore, no reliance can be placed on these Sanskrit versions and one may safely proceed on the basis of our identification with Maharaja Bappasvami of Aiyatikal Katavarkon whose important work on the temples is collected along with the ancient poems of the Tamil Country in the eleventh Tirumurai. Aiyankal, therefore, must belong to the third century. But there are difficulties in the way. His work refers to Ciramalai (Cirappalli), which name could not be older than the fifth century; for, the name of the Jain Saint ‘Cira’ found inscribed in the Tiruccirappalli cave could not be on palaeographical grounds older than the fifth century A.D.

VII

If the term Aiyankal Katavarkon of Arurar does not refer to the original Bappasvami, it at least proves the usage at the time of Arurar, in that way explaining also the older usage of the times of Sivaskanda Varman of the third century. The kings were called Svamis or Ankal; in the Pallava age ‘Peruman ankall is the usual reference to the reigning king. An inscription of the age of Aparajita refers to the verse of this king as that of ‘Peruman Ankal’. To distinguish God, who is the king of kings, from the kings of this world, Arurar calls Shiva, ‘Periya Peruman ankall—the Greater King. If this usage is understood, it will be clear that ‘Aiyankall must be a reference to the previous king—the king who preceded the ruling prince. It will be later on explained that Aiyankal was Mahendravarman II.

VIII

Whether this identification is correct or not, it cannot be doubted that this work of a Pallava king preceded the age, at least of Arurar who still further popularised the temple cult by singing, not one verse as Aiyankal did at each altar, but ten verses and in some cases tens of verses in praise of the Lord Shiva, in each one of these temples. This practice of singing ten verses (Pattu) is older than that of the three Tevaram Saints. This ‘pattu’ is called ‘patiyam’ or ‘Pathigam’. The exact derivation of this word is not clear; whether it is a corruption of the word for Padyam or of Pratika, a preface or a summary, or from Pathika, the traveller or pilgrim singing the hymns, or from Pati, the Lord, in whose praise the poem is sung.

Evidently this has a reference to the Tamil word ‘Pattu’ since these Patikams consist of ten verses, in addition to the last verse giving the name of the author. Before one passes on to consider the conception of Pathigam, the thoughts on the sacred lists of the temples may be gathered together. Reference was made to the Ksettira venpa of Aiyankul This is found included in the eleventh Tirumurai after the works of Karaikkal Ammaiyar, but before the works of Ceraman. Perhaps this arrangement is chronological. Campantar has sung one Tiruksettirakkovai —the string of holy places. This is very important but unfortunately many lines of the hymn are missing and even with reference to the portions available, it is not possible to understand his references like Turai 8, Kaul 9, Kujam 3, Kalam 5, Pali 4, Pali 3 etc. Campantar has composed hymns on many of the temples in existence during his time with the set purpose of making these musical compositions systematically sung during the times of daily worship. The benedictory verses taken in this light assume very great importance. The poems of Appar have no such aim; they are best fitted for mystic musings and contemplation. But he has not forgotten the temple worship and the sacred list of holy places. He sings his string of holy places in his Tiruttantnkam verses. There are two hymns of this kind: one is ‘Ksettirakkovait tiruttantakam’; the other is the more interesting ‘Alaivu tiruttantakam’ which tries to arrange the temples into groups of Palli, Virattanam, Kuli, Ur, Koyili Kaul, Vayili Iccuram, Malai, Aru and Turai to which Campantar had referred to in numbers. The fact that Appar gives greater number of these has still to be studied as an interesting problem of the growth of the temples. Perhaps new temples came into existence. Arurar has three hymns giving the lists of holy places still further throwing light on the growth of the temples—the Urthogai the Nattut tokai and Itaiyarrut tokai. These have been systematized in ‘Ksettira akaval’.

IX

Turning to examine the conception of Pathigam, Karaikkal Ammaiyar who is anterior to these three saints, a contemporary of Putattalvar according to Yapparunkala Virutti, perhaps belonging to the sixth century, has sung the earliest known Pathigam (Mutta Thirupathigam). Tiruvacakam, which is by a few claimed to be earlier than Tevaram, has a number of ‘pattus’ and one Mutta Thirupathigam. It is not clear why and when the term Mutta Thirupathigam was used by the compilers of Tiruvacakam and Karaikkal Ammaiyar’s works. Is it because they were the ancient patikams in Tamil land? Such an interpretation must depend upon a conclusive proof of the greater antiquity of Tiruvacakam than allowed by most of the scholars of the day. Or, is the term Mutta Thirupathigam a corruption of Mukta Thirupathigam, a Pathigam of ten verses where each verse forms a separate unit or a ‘rnuktaka’ verse as opposed to other ‘pattus’ or patikams and ‘irattai manimalais’ etc.?

A suggestion may be thrown out at this stage. In Tiruvacakam where two patikams are found on Koyil or Tillai, one of them is known as Mutta Thirupathigam probably because it was composed earlier than the other. Of the two patikams by Karaikkal Ammaiyar, it is the first alone that is called the Mutta Thirupathigam by Cekkilar, justifying the suggestion of having been sung earlier than the second which Cekkilar refers to as merely Thirupathigam. This suggestion thus explains the usage in Tiruvacakam and in Karaikkal Ammaiyar’s works. The only difficulty is that the present editions of Karaikkal Ammaiyar’s works wrongly call even the second Thirupathigam as Mutta Thirupathigam as against the specific distinction made by Cekkilar himself.

X

A reference has already been made to Kamikagama, where the singing of Tevaram verses in accompaniment to music and dance is insisted upon as a necessary part of daily worship in temples. This usage came to be called as ‘Tiruppatiyam Vinnappittal’. Though there might have been stray patikams as that of Karaikkal Ammaiyar, the systematic attempt to sing the Tiruppatikams must have come into vogue only after the Tevaram hymns. Possibly Karaikkal Ammaiyar’s poems were themselves classified as Patikams only after the Tevaram hymns came into vogue. By the 8th century this practice had become fully established in the Tamil country as is made clear by an inscription of the great Pallavamalla which refers to this usage.

The Madras Epigraphical Report 255 of 1916 refers to an inscription under an image which states that the image is that of Tampiran Tolar Manakkancarar who recited the Tiruppatiyam of this temple and took leave. Manakkancarar is one of the contemporaries of Nampi Arurar and it is not clear whether this Tiruppatiyam was composed by him or by Manakkancarar or whether the words Tampiran Tolar were by mistake inscribed before the name Manakkancarar instead of before Tiruppatiyam. Tampiran Tolar is the name of Arurar and it is not clear how Manakkancarar got that name. It may be in honour of his association with the great Saint that he assumed this name. Tampiran Tolar occurs in inscriptions in the sense of the companion to the king as in the term “Puliyur kilavan Tampiran Tolan and Kaliyan Centan alias Tampiran Tolan. In that case Manakkancarar must have been a companion of the ruling prince. In any case it is clear that this practice of reciting hymns had become an established one even during the life time of Arurar, the contemporary of Manakkancarar.

Reference had already been made to the Patikams composed by Royal princes and others included in the 9th Tirumurai. By the time of Rajaraja, it was felt that the Tiruppatikams should be sung in every temple. When there was no ancient Pathigam available, a new one was to be composed by poets leading a saintly life. An inscription of the age of Rajaraja reveals this interesting tradition. That inscription mentions the composition of a Thirupathigam on the Lord of the temple of Tirumarperu, now known as Tirumalpuram, by the father of Kulakkntaiyan Arunilai Sri Krishnan alias Muventapprtavur Velar and endowments were made by the son for the regular singing of this Thirupathigam of the father in that temple. The beginning of the Thirupathigam is ‘Kolanarkulal’.