Chapter 5 - Universalism

I - Appalum Aticcarntar:

This insistence on Tamil and the Tamil group of saints does not signify any parochialism because as already explained our poet Nampi Arurar hastens to conclude, “Appalum aticcarntar atiyarkkum atiyen” —‘I am the servant of those living beyond the region of the Tamil land, beyond the present time, those who had lived in the past and those who live in the future’.

One verse in the Thiruketharam hymn is significant from this point of view—“Talicalaikal tavamavatu tammaip peril anre” He seems to condemn in this verse the narrow parochialism, reminding us of the fundamental unity of India. The choultries and mutts become places of spiritual development of Tapas only when one gets absolute self control’. The words ‘tammaipperil’ reminds us of the Tirukkural phrase, ‘Tannuyir tan arapperran’ He refers to the cult of holy waters and pilgrimages. He mentions Kurukkettiram (Guruksetra), Kotaviri (Godavari) and Kumari (Cape Comorin) to which people then flocked for bathing in the holy waters. But our poet along with Tiruvalluvar feels that bathing and thereby cleaning the outer body alone are not enough. The mind has to be purified in these holy places: “Kuliyirulam Kurukkettiram, Kotaviri, Kumari”—‘You have to bathe your mind at Kurukkettiram, Kotaviri and Kumari .

The pilgrimage to Sriparvatam involves a purification. It is not the outward sight of Sriparvatam but its inward contemplation and the resulting purification, that are more important. ‘This great truth about Sri Parvatam, you do not clearly realize’—“Teliyirulam Sri Parppatam” —thus he admonishes the pilgrims.

“This great country, from the south to the north, containing these holy places, forms a cultural and spiritual unity to be experienced through realization not to be merely known and to be travelled through. The parrot there pierces through the plantain fruit from south to north and eats it as a symbol of this realization and experience of unity of the land from north to south. With this experience in mind you should utter the word Ketharam, but alas! you do not” he sings. It is this wider outlook that inspired our poet to sing of Sri Parvatam and Thiruketharam in the north and Thiruketheeswaram in the south (in Ceylon).

II - Arurar and the federation of living beings:

It is not merely a federation of men of all times and climes that Nampi Arurar is contemplating but a federation of living beings as was made clear by our reference to the federation of love involved in the folk-lore of this country and glorified by Nampi Arurar in his poetry. In that famous verse describing Daksinamurti? he brings the tiger, the serpent and the lion to listen to the message of the Shaivite God along with rsis and Devas.

The Jains emphasize the principle of ahimsa or kinaness to all living beings including the plants and invisible germs. This is the great principle given expression to by Tiruvalluvar in his memorable words, “Knowing one’s own sufferings, how does one inflict suffering on other living beings?” The word used for the living being covers all the varieties contemplated by the Jains. But the Jaina philosophy will restrict the attainment of salvation only to the human beings, and Digambara Jains will restrict it further to the masculine human beings. It is this Jain theory that is referred to by Ilampuranar when he explains the special significance of the Tamil alphabet ending in ‘n which is important as the masculine suffix denoting the masculine human form which alone is capable of attaining salvation. But the more kindly heart of the ordinary people lived and moved amongst the beasts, birds and trees as though amidst brothers and sisters like St. Francis of Assisi, speaking with them and understanding their heart, thanking every one of them for the help so kindly and ungrudingly given by them. They looked upon some of them as divine messengers—the serpent was deified; the bull was deified and so were many trees. Coming to be born in the midst of their innocent folks of Tamil Land, the trees and rocks appeared as great rsis lost in their contemplation. It is from this point of view that Arurar feels that the serpents, the tigers and the lions of the forest and the mountain, where Daksinamurti preached, also listened to His message.

A later day philosopher of Shaiva Siddhanta, Umapati Sivam is said to have given salvation to a thorny plant and also to an outcast ‘Perran Camp an’ and thus this belief in the possibility of attaining salvation by all living beings without any more births had become the bedrock of Shaivism in South India. This is to a great extent due to the message of Nampi Arurar contained in the verse referred to above. The Puranas have elaborated this message by narrating stories of pigs and birds attaining salvation. Therefore, though Nampi Aurar was a Tamilian through and through believing in the greatness and divinity of Tamil poetry and culture he never ceased to be a citizen of the loving federation of living beings.

III - Arurar’s mystic and universal vision:

Thiruthondathogai is therefore a vision of Arurar. It is a mystic and universal vision. The History is there; the particular individual and their peculiar modes of worship form the basis but this basis rises to the spiritual greatness of poetic truth and a mystic vision of universal significance. The whole yniverse is brought within its scope and transcended. All the contradictions and conflicts are dissolved in this vision of self sacrifice and love. This universal outlook of the mystic should not be spoken of as mere toleration. A short note on this universal outlook may help us to realize fully its significances.

IV - Universal outlook:

Experience of God is claimed by the mystics of the world all over as real. They speak almost with one voice. This experience, or soul-sight of God or the Absolute, is not a mere feeling or thought or desire or will; it is real, objective, illuminating, elevating and blissful. The means to attain this goal is a great thirst for God, where, as Prof. Srinivasachariyar beautifully puts it, ‘God-hunger of the soul is answered by the soul hunger of God’. There, God is seen in all, all in God. This experience is not a passing whim or fancy, but is the very life of God in the love of the soul, which expresses itself in the service to all beings. The Absolute is the ground and basis, the ‘Sat’ without a second: “Eka,m eva adintiyam Brahma” is the Upanisad. But it is also the Great Dancer in the heart of the soul, seen also as the incarnation of love, in art-form pervading presence of God lost in His all pervasive love. The Absolute of Philosophy is the God of Religion and the Great Dharma of Ethics and the Beauty of Aesthetics.

If this were so, the question arises why should there be the conflicts of Philosophies, the wars of Religions. Experience is one and this mystic experience is beyond words. One has, therefore, to express it through symbols and metaphors. Here begins the source of all disputes which are to a certain extent verbal. “Ekam Sat Viprah Bahuda vadanti”— ‘The Real is One; the Seers speak of it variously’—That is the great truth of Rg Veda which characterizes the Indian thoughts from that time to the present. The mystics, therefore, never differ, though their followers and interpreters do. “The true mystics of all ages and climes claim to have had a direct experience of God and proclaim in their joy ‘Come and see’ and invite humanity to have similar experiences. They are free from the barriers that divide one man from another and therefore extend their spiritual hospitality to others”.

Thus do they promote the fraternity of faith. Theirs is a catholicity of universal brotherhood which is not tolerance, experience, expediency, ecclecticism, condescension or compromise. “The theological method of purvapaksa and siddhanta or the establishment of one’s view by the disjunctive elimination of the views of others may be logically justified but is alien to the synthetic temper of mysticism which is grounded in love, sustained by love and realized through love”.

“Mysticism insists on the idea of every jiva as the son of God as its inner source and sustenance. Every man can seek God and see Him spiritually in his own way, provided the quest satisfies the tests of moral purity and he invites others to share his experience. Though the experience of God is one, its expressions vary owing to the psychological differences of the mystics due to their birth and training and, therefore, homogeneity and regimentality have no place in mysticism. The starting points alone are different but the goal arrived at by spiritual induction is the same. Likewise, sects and religions may vary but the God of sects and religions is the same as He is their inner Soul. Unity in variety is thus the master thought of mystic experience and it removes the evils of regimentation arising from standardizing spirituality. Reality is posited as one and the sidalidnta deduced from it is true; but at the same time it is inductively realized as one in spite of psychological variations due to the temperaments of the mystics as adhikarins. Thus mysticism is shown to be one though the mystics describe it in various ways; light is white but it is multi-coloured. This view promotes freedom and catholicity and avoids the pitfalls of individualism and ecclesiasticism.

V - Mysticism of Arurar:

This catholicity is the very life of the mysticism of Arurar. The vision he makes us see by his beautiful phrase, “Appalum aticcarntar” is a vision of the brother-hood of universe enveloped in divine love and living in the loving service of the Lord. It is an eternal brotherhood transcending the past, the present and the future, wherein are found all the great sduls thirsting for God of all times and of all climes. The Thiruppungur hymn praises another vision this time of the soul hunger of God embracing in His universal love all kinds of living beings whatever their faults may be deifying and making all one with him. In this very hymn he speaks of the various religions. The religions were in his days divided into categories of six—“Aruvakaic camayam”. It has come to mean, in a generic sense ali the religions, and to the later day Tamilians the six Akaccamayams (Saivam, Pacupatam, Maviratam, Kalamukam, Vamam and Vairavam), excluding the Akappuraccamayam, Puraccamayam, and Purappuraccamayam. Arurar speaks here of the Lord blessing with His rare Grace the respective followers of these religions of great knowledge, in their respective spheres. Here is no condemnation of any religion. On the other hand, our poet addresses God as the Prince of all religions—“Samayankalin Nampi’. He becomes the refuge of all kinds of worshippers. Our poet describes Shiva as the very forms worshipped by other religions. He is the king of the Devas; He is Visnu and He is Brahma. Whoever amongst Devas, Rsis, Kings—and there is an infinite number of them—stand everywhere—anywhere they may be—and praise Him, He blesses them all with what all they desire. Thus He has become the refuge of all those coming to Him. He is all forms of Mercy to these—the Ocean of Kanpaka, our Lord. He is all kinds of prayers and songs, all varied ways of approach, the ancient and the Good. Hinduism knows of the Creator, the Protector and the Destroyer and Arurar asserts all the three are His forms. “He is of the colour of the gem; He is of the form transcending these and He is of many many beautiful forms” —says our poet. Therefore, our poet begs the people of the world to contemplate and praise Him as it suits them, according to the nature of this world. Our poet assures them all freedom from death which is the characteristic feature of Salvation. Those who contemplate on Him in many ways—they escape from the clutches of the miseries of death.

VI - Mysticism, a synthetic philosophy, and its value:

This aspect of mysticism—its synthesis of all conflicting philosophies and, therefore, its value are beautifully expressed by Prof. Srinivasa Achariar, in his valuable book “Mystics and Mysticism”.

“Mysticism is synthetic philosophy par excellence and the supreme religion of love. It is the meeting ground between science and philosophy as the method of both is the same, namely, pursuit of truth without any prejudice. The opposition between faith (sruti) and reason (yukti) is overcome by the test of spiritual realisation (anubhava). The truth that the Absolute of philosophy or Brahman is the personal God of religion or Bhagavan reconciles the extremes of monism and theism. It removes the antithesis between metaphysics, psychology, and religion by insisting on the unity between existence and value, by the affirmation that God, the Infinite, is the ground of finite existence and the goal of experience. Psychology starts with the study of the empirical self or the jwa and ends with the knowledge of the atman which is distinct from the jiva fettered by karmas and the gunas of prakrti. Mysticism is a theoretical speculation as well as a practical way of life and thus satisfies philosophic speculation and the spiritual ends of ethics and religion. Mysticism is divine dynamics and is more than theoretics. The contradiction between ethics as a pursuit of goodness and religion as the attainment of God is overcome by the basic assumption of ethical religion that God or the All-Self is the endeavour as well as the end. There is really no disparity between the logical ideal of truth, the ethical ideal of goodness and the aesthetic ideal of beauty as they are eternally self-realized in God as the home of the eternal values”.

“The philosophy of mysticism harmonizes the claims of revelation, reason and intuition and thus avoids the pitfalls of dogmatism, intellectualism and subjectivism by its Amdamental postulate, that Reality is realizable by all. Truth is true for ever and true for all and Brahman or God is the sat without a second though its seers may express it in different ways. Revelation is a body of spiritual verities spiritually verifiable by all and is not to be identified with any historic revelation, prophet or book. Though verifiability by personal experience is the highest test of religion, it is not its sole test as it may lapse into subjectivism or pragmatism. Reason mediates between revelation and intuition and when it is well disciplined, it can correct the evils of mere faith leading to fanaticism and mere intuition lapsing into subjectivism. But reason or tarka by itself has no finality as the logical or analytical intellect can only dissect Reality and not intuit it as a whole or Soul. The philosophy of mysticism ultimately takes its stand on or refuge into the Truth that Reality as Brahman or God reveals Himself to the mystic who seeks Him with all his heart and soul. In this way revelation, reason and intuition are ultimately one and all the pramanas are reconciled in the supreme test of Reality as realisation”.

“Mysticism expounds the nature of God or Brahman as the inner ground of all beings and the ultimate goal of life and, therefore, it unifies existence and value. God is the Being of all beings beyond changing nature or acit and the empirical self or jlva subject to ignorance, evil and misery and is, therefore, the ultimate sat. He is also the supreme end of life satisfying the logical needs of truth, the ethical needs of goodness and the aesthetic needs of beauty as He is Himself satyam, jhanam and sundaram. These values are eternal and ultimately one as they are all housed in the Absolute. The mind functions in the three ways of thinking, willing and feeling and the jiva or atman having jnatrtva, kartrtva, and bhoktrtva is intellectual, volitional and emotional. They are the expressions of the self-consciousness of the self and when it is fully expressed in mukti or the unitive state Beyond, it is infinite. In this way, in Brahman, existence and value are one; He is the ground of all existents and their final goal. By attaining Brahman, everything is attained as He pervades all things as their inner Self and is their endeavour and end. As existence and value are integral, Brahman or God is and has truth, goodness and beauty and the mystic can realize God as the home of all values. This view renders mysticism all-comprehensive and inclusive”.

These passages may help us to understand and appreciate the universal outlook of Arurar and the value of this outlook. He has referred in loving terms of the various kinds of worship; for, to the mystic, “Karma, jnana and bhakti are not mutually exclusive as they all lead to the same goal and the contemplative, the worker and the devotee may start differently, but they all meet in God who is Light, Life and Love. As every mystic seeks and sees God and transmits his experience to others, there is no conflict between individualism and socialism. Finally Brahman is beyond space-time and finite-infinite and therefore the mystic attains the security and stability of eternal bliss by ascending to the Absolute and becoming one with Him. He transcends the world of spacetime but does not deny it and, therefore, what is yonder does not negate what is here. It is a fulfilment of the herenow and not its negation”.

VII - The Jains and the Buddhists:

Arurar’s description of the Jains and the Buddhists may at first sight appear to be contradicting our theory of his catholicity and universal outlook. It must be remembered that the remarks of the Tevaram Saints do not apply to all the Jains and Buddhists in general. The importance of one great verse of Nanacamparttar has not yet been fully realized. In his Nagaikaronam hymn (84), in the usual 10th verse, which always refers to the Buddhists and Jains, Campantar speaks of the Lord blessing His followers whilst he distinguishes among others, which, in the context of the 10th verse usually referring to the Buddhists and Jains should refer to these sects—three kinds of people, viz., (1) the good people who expound Dharma; (2) the bad people who indulge in backbiting and (3) the others who being neither good nor bad spread scandals: “N attar aram collap pollar puram kura altar alar turra atiyarkkarul coy van”. Therefore, it is clear Nana campant ar himself recognizes that there are good and great men, amongst the followers of Buddhism and Jainism, who went about expounding Dharma and thev cannot be the objects of Campantar’s criticism which can, therefore, refer only to those who back-biteland who spread scandal about Shaivites in particular.

Arurar’s poems justify this conclusion of ours; for, his gravamen of the charge against these sects is, that they abuse and scandalize the Shaivites and the Lord. Descriptions of Jains and Buddhists which appear to us as very ungenerous, should, therefore, be taken to apply to this kind of people amongst them and not to all the Jains and Buddhists in general. The critics amongst these sects, in the eyes of our poet, were not even sincere, their minds being clouded by their prejudice, hatred and jealousy, they themselves indulging in force and mean subterfuges. Our poet speaks of their ‘mintatutal’, their way of rule or might; ‘kuntatutal’, their revelling in meanness: ‘kuntu’ may also mean their stoutness. These critics of Shaivism were ostensibly ascetics, pretending to perform Tapas, but really slaves of their tongue; for, they were stout and sturdy, characterized by their ‘nwtu’ or belly, always hankering after rich food with ‘kati’ or ghee Some of them were also ignorant. Therefore, our poet speaks of their ‘kariya manam’ ‘mutam’ ‘poyccaman’ and describes their enjoying their nakedness. The real Tapasvins lost all their attachment to the world and gave up everything, becoming, unconscious of even their nakedness. But such were not those people whom our saints criticized. Therefore, our poet often refers to them as ‘Camanatiyum’, relishing in their nakedness. Our poet like Campantar in describing these sects emphasize the fact that they were contradicting each other by their very appearance: the Jain ascetics appearing naked; the Buddhists appearing clothed: the former eating whilst standing; the latter eating whilst sitting. In one place the description of the Buddhists occurs as ‘Utaiyutaiya’, those who are clothed but it is sometimes read ‘Mutaiyutaiya’ when it will mean, those who are addicted to flesh eating or having the odour of flesh on their body. The Buddhists are against the slaughter of animals but latterly they found no objection in eating flesh obtained otherwise. As against them, the Jains refuse to eat even the flesh obtained otherwise and Arurar calls them ‘Vitakkinai olittavar’. The intolerance of the people is brought out by the story of Talntiyatikal but there the spiritual greatness of Tanti converted his erstwhile persecutors. Our poet refers to this incident.

If the Lord is everywhere and within the heart of every one, He has to be in the heart of these people as well, becoming that way their great truth and our poet gives expression to this fundamental principle of mysticism. In this view of our poet’s remarks there is really no hatred against the Jains and Buddhists as such, but against certain fanatics who are to be found in any religion, especially in a religion which has gained power and which is feeling that it is losing that power.

VIII - References to Jains and Buddhists in Arurar’s work:

References to these sects in Arurar may now be studied:

i. “Kuntatum Camanarum Cakkiyarum purankurum Kokutik-koyil”.

‘The Lord of the jasmine temple whom Camanars (Jains) and Cakkiyars (Buddhists) who revel in their depth of meanness, backbite and slander’,

ii. The very word used by Campantar, ‘Purankural’ is found in Arurar’s criticism as well in the above passage and here they said to hurl abuses upon the Lord:

“Namananantiyum Karumaviranum Tarumacenanum enrivar
Kumanamamalaik kunruRdlninru tankalkuraiyon rinriye
Namanananana nanananamen rotiyaraiyum nanila
Amanarar palip putaiyard namak katika lakiya atikale”.

‘Is our Lord, the One, full of abuses hurled liy the Jains?’

In this verse our poet refers by names to certain leaders of this kind of critics amongst the Jains, viz., Namana Nanti, Karumaviran and Tarumacenan. It is curious that the name Tarumacenan is referred to as one of the leaders of Jains by Campan tar. This Tarumacenan must be different from Appar, who went under that name whilst he was a Jain. Their sturdy and proud forms are also referred to as appearing like ‘Kumana mamalaik kunru (‘Kumana Tnamalai’ is not clear; it may be the hill belonging to Kumanan of the Cankam age, viz., Mutira malai. ‘Kumanam’ may mean ‘bad smell’ probably due to the Jains, not bathing, and perspiring whilst standing in the sun; or, it may mean the smell of the earth as referring to that of the mountain). Our poet refers here also to their nakedness and their shamelessness. He parodies not the idea behind the mantras, but the nasal sound of their prakrt mantras which signify their taking refuge in Arhat, Siddha, Sadhu and Dharma. This parody is based on the purist view of our poet on languages. The Tevaram writers insisted on preserving the languages in their pure state. They, for instance Campantar, looked upon prakrtam or pakatam as the corruption of Sanskrit: ‘Sangada bangam’.

The ‘manipravala style’ in which the Jains and Buddhists indulged was anathema to the Tevaram poets; for, in that mixture of languages they found neither the sweetness of Tamil nor the majesty of Sanskrit—“Ariyattotu Centamilp payan arikila antakar”.

iii. “Kariya manaccaman katiyatu kalukkalal
Eriya vacavuinum tanmaiyo?”

The critics referred to here are said to be with a dark mind, i.e., a mind clouded by prejudice and hatred. The Lord is abused by them out of their fire of jealousy. “Should the Lord be a prey to these eagles?” Our poet seems to suggest that our Lord takes pleasure in such abuses out of His overflowing Grace and love and he enjoys this as being one of His characteristic features. This is once again a great truth of mysticism. But the description katiyatu kalu’, ‘the eagles almost bathing in ghee’ seems to be rather hard on the critics and this is probably due to the contrast which the poet wants to emphasize between the sincere love of the Lord and the cruelty of the pretenders.

iv. “Iruntun Terarum ninrun Camanum ecaninravan”.

Here again the ridicule by those who hanker after food is underlined. The contrast between these warring sects is characterized by their very outward acts—one, sitting and eating and the other standing and eating. Our poet is simply echoing the very phrases of Campantar: “Ninrun Camanar iruntun Terar”

v. “Poyccaman porulaki intu Nampi”.

‘Our Lord, the great Prince, who gathers the truth of the false pretenders.’

These refer only to the Jains but it was already pointed out not to the devout followers of that religion but to the fanatic pretenders. Even unto them He becomes a Reality.

vi. “Nanmai onrilat Terarpun Camanam
Camayamakiya tavattinar avattat tanmai vittoli nanmai-yai ventil
............................Sivakkoluntinaic cenratai manane”.

‘The Terars or Buddhists who have not any goodness about them and those Jains who are mean, have renunciation of Tapas for their religion and they are themselves in the form of ascetics. But their characteristic feature is their falsehood (what a calamity!). If you leave this out and aspire for the good, O, my mind! go and reach the sprout of Shiva’

Here again the attributes ‘nanmai onrila , ‘pun are restrictive rather than descriptive in their scope.

vii. “Kuntatiyum Camanatiyum kurrutukkaiyar tamum
Kantarkanta karanammavai karutatu kaitolumin”.

‘Those who indulge in mean acts, those who indulge in nakedness and those who have short dress or clothes—these have seen or realized certain truth as the great cause of causes. Do not think of them. Go and worship the Lord’.

The causes referred to, may be the explanations which they give for various forms of Shiva, explanations which amount to scandalizing Shaivism. Or, it may mean the great truths of their religion explaining the cause of all the miseries of the world, and the causes which effect freedom. Their theory of Karma has no place for God’s Krpa, and it may be because of this our poet is begging of the Shaivites not to take their philosophy to heart.

But in view of the other references to these critics it is better to take this also as referring to their scandals on Shaivism.

viii. “Kuntikaip, patappinil vitakkinai olittavar
Kantavar kantati vllntavar kanaikalal
Tantutait tantita ninamutai aravutan
Enticaik korucutar itam valampurame”.

This verse has been discussed in our study of the hymn on Valampuram. Our poet describes the Jains as carrying water pots—a characteristic feature of the Jain ascetics. He also refers to their refusing to touch flesh. These praises have probably an underground satire as referring to the persecutors of a poor blind innocent soul (Tanti).

These persecutors were ultimately converted by Tanti.

ix. “Kuntatiya Camanatarkal kutaic Cakkiyar ariya
Mintatiya vatuceytatu vdnal varu vitiye”.

Here also our poet refers to the leaders ‘Natarkal’ of Jainism. These are not righteous leaders but those who revel in mean acts. The Cakkiyars or Buddhists are described as carrying umbrellas. These sects in their ignorance abuse the Lord and follow the path of might or rowdyism. They reap the fruit by themselves becoming embodiment of rowdyism and the very form of all their abuse. This is but the rule—the law of Nature that always comes to work. Our poet seems to suggest that by the working of this law of nature which always comes to be fulfilled, these pretenders who abuse the Lord of the Shaivite followers, always thus meditating as it were, on this abuse, become themselves what they have been abusing.

Here again the reference can only be to the false fanatics and not to the true devotees.

x. “Motutaiya Camanarkkum mutaiyufaiya Cakkiyarkkum mutam vaitta
Pitutaiya puliyurc cirrampalattem perumanaip perram anre”

‘The Lord who has established ignorance for the (false) Jains characterized by their protruding bellies and the (false) Cakkiyar or the Buddhists with their clothes or flesh’.

This reference is obviously to the pretenders.

xi. “Kuntaraik kuraiyinrit tiriyum Caman Cakkiyappey
Mintaraik kantatanmai viravakiya tennaikolo”

‘How is this that our Lord is one in the very outward form in which we see them with the Kuntar, the mean, Mintar, the arrogant, these diabolical people who roam about without clothes?’

This is the mystic experience of seeing the Lord everywhere. The charge against them is that they are arrogant and mean, always wandering about like ghosts (and slandering the Shaivites). This verse expresses the wonder of the mystic experience of seeing the Lord in the very forms which the Shaivites usually hated as diabolical, mean and arrogant.