4. CILAPPATIKĀRAM AND MAṆIMĒKALAI 4.1. Vedic Traditions in Cilappatikāram Cilappatikāram, one of the earliest Tamiḻ epics reflects deep rooted Vedic traditions in Tamiḻnāḍu. It begins with the marriage of Kaṇṇaki and Kōvalaṉ as per the Vedic rites and ends with the Cēra Seṅguṭṭuvaṉ performing the Rājasūya Yāga. This clearly points out that from the beginning to end, it reflects the Vedic tradition. In fact, the whole story is about a woman who was married according to the Vedic rites, called Kaṟpu. The term Kaṟpu mentioned in the ancient Tamiḻ grammatical text Tolkāppiyam is the most exalted system among the eight systems of marriage, approved by the Brāhminical tradition. That she was a symbol of chastity throughout her life in this world and beyond forms the main crux of the epic. Such a chaste wife was called “patṉi” and as she exhibited extraordinary talent even in worst circumstances, she was called Mahāpatṉi and Vīrapatiṉi. The whole epic is about deification of that system.
She was given in marriage to Kōvalaṉ according to the Vedic tradition of Pāṇi-grahaṇam, where in the bridegroom holds the hand of bride and circumambulates the sacrificial fire, as directed by an old Vedic Brāhmaṇa, māmudu pārppāṉ maṟaivaḻi kāṭṭiḍa, tī valam vantu. This system is called “maṟaivaḻi” (Vedic path) in which Kōvalaṉ held the hand of Kaṇṇaki which is mentioned as kavavuk-kai(கவவுக்கை) holding the hand and she looked at Arundati (aṅkaṇ ulagiṉ aruṅtati annāḷai), the star of chastity. A study of this passage proves it is the same marriage system that is followed to this day in Hindu families. It is this chaste (kaṟpu) marriage that is extolled as the main theme of the whole text. மாமுது பார்ப்பான் மறைவழி காட்டிடத் தீவலம் செய்வது காண்பார்க்கண் நோன்புஎன்னை. The Tamiḻ country was ruled by the three crowned kings Cēra, Chōḻa and Pāṇḍya, whose capitals were Vañci, Puhār, and Madurai respectively. According to the text, all the three capitals, and their country sides, including the region of the hill tribes were reverberating with Vedic chanting.
Vedic sacrifices were offered in the temples of the capital that are listed as temples of Śiva, Ṣaṇmukha, Balarāma, Kṛṣṇa and Indra. The worship in all these temples was performed as per the Vedic rites attributed to Brahmā. Besides these temples, there were also worship of the eight Vasus, 12 Ādityas, 11 Rudras and the two Asvini devatas, who were all Vedic gods. māmudu mudalvaṉ vāymaiyiṉ vanta nāṉmaṟai marapiṉ tīmuṟai oru pāl nālvahai tēvarum, mūvaru ganaṅgaḷum
The worship was done with hōmas in sacrificial fire. The four main deities were Śiva, Kumāra, Balarāma and Kṛṣṇa. They were worshipped with Vedic chants.
At Pūmpuhār, the capital of the Chōḻa country, Iḷaṅgō Aḍigaḷ the author of the text introduces the festival of Indra; called Indra Viḻā. In the first canto, he describes the city celebrating the “Indra Viḻā” as the greatest festival to Indra, the king of gods in the Vedas. The city fell within the marudam landscape as a cultivated region and the festival was dedicated to Indra in expectation of rains and prosperity. This festival lasted till the commencement of another festival dedicated to Varuṇa celebrated by the coastal people. As the king of gods, he destroyed the demon Vṛtra and let loose the rain, the festival was held for him which according to faith usher in prosperity to the ruling Chōḻa king. Indra is the king of gods, described in the Vedas, we see the Vedic god and his festival at the beginning.
This was followed by the maiden dance of the dancing girl Mādhavi in an araṅgam or dance hall. The facade of the stage had deified figures of the four castes, Brāhmaṇa, Arasar (Kṣatriya), Vaiśya (Merchant) and Veḷāns (Agriculturists). The deification of the four castes, a Vedic tradition, was symbolic of all inhabitants of the city. It was customary to adore Kṛṣṇa first at the start of the dance recital followed by the four-fold Bhūtas called Varṇa Bhūtas.
The epic Cilappatikāram is the best source in any Indian regional language to furnish details about classical Indian dance, as outlined in Bharata’s Nāṭya Śāstra and used practically in a dramatic context. In fact, the life of the dancing girl is so beautifully delineated, and she is considered the second heroine of the epic. The epic has been recognized for the wealth of information it furnishes on Indian classical music and dance. But what has not been recognized is that the text is a full-scale dramatic composition nāṭaka-kāvya, making it the earliest dramatic text in any regional language of India. This has been effectively put forward by the mediaeval commentator, Aḍiyārkkunallār, who places the text in dramatic perspective at the beginning of his commentary. Here, we see how the, Iḷaṅgō Aḍigaḷ introduced the text in the overall layout.
Iḷaṅgō Aḍigaḷ has divided the whole text into three cantos as Puhār canto, Madurai canto and Vañci canto, based on the place where three principal events took place. The cities were the three capitals in Tamiḻnāḍu, ruled by the three crowned kings the Chōḻa, the Pāṇḍyas and the Cēras and this distribution makes the text related to the whole Tamiḻ country.
The text is further divided into 30 chapters named appropriately. Most of the chapters are called kātais. The other chapter headings are Vari, Kuṟavai, Mālai and Pāḍal. The term kātai in Tamiḻ has made some scholars to derive it from the word Katai i.e., story. The Sanskrit equivalent is Kathā, and this view was prevalent before the commentator Aḍiyārkkunallār who refers to that view and rejects it as incorrect. There is a grammatical sūtrā in Tamiḻ, which prescribes that all the varga sounds in Sanskrit should be spelt with the varga prathamai which evidently is for prioritizing northern words into Tamiḻ. Such a rule is found in Prākṛt grammar such as the Prākṛta prakāśa. As for example, the term “rājā” could be spelt as “rācā”. The third varga letter “Ja” is used here in the first varga as “Ca”. Similarly, the word gāthā in Sanskrit is spelt as “kātai” in Tamiḻ. It is known that the word gāthā, is derived from the root “gā” to sing and applied to musical rhythmic singing, different from the recitation of Vedic mantras (hymns), called ṛicas while the rendering of the Vedic hymns in music is called Sāmans. In other words, even in the Vedic age, musical singing other than the Vedic hymns ṛicas and the sāman, was called “gāthā” (see Monier Williams under gāthā). So, the word for songs in Tamiḻ was called kātai for musical compositions. The word “katai” in Tamiḻ stands for story (kathā of Sanskrit) whereas kātai is a musical composition. So, the term “kātai” employed by Iḷaṅgō Aḍigaḷ for the 22 chapters, should be taken as musical compositions. It may also be noted that chapters in which no story is found are also called kātai such as Vēṉir kātai, Antimālai kātai and so on.
We may also see other chapter headings in the text. Vari is a technical word for a variety of dance and in some instances also for a variety of musical songs. Another word used to denote a chapter is Kuṟavai which also stands for a variety of dance.s The third word is mālai is a musical composition. I have shown there is a difference between the meaning of ceyyuḷ (standing for a literary poem) and pāḍal (standing for musical songs). Thus, we find Iḷaṅgō Aḍigaḷ has chosen the titles of all chapters as kātai (gāthās), vari, kuṟavai, mālai and pāḍal to indicate that the whole text of Cilappadikāram was meant to be sung and danced.
The text Cilappadikāram, also contains urai pāṭṭu prose passages also meant to be sung. Iḷaṅgo Aḍigaḷ himself says urai iḍaitta pāṭṭuḍaic ceyyuḷ. It may be seen that many of the chapters have long poems, and the question then is if all of them were meant to be sung? Here, it may be necessary to point out, that many traditions of Bharata’s Nāṭya Śāstra, are preserved in Kerala even today, especially in Chākkiyār-kūttu and Kathakaḷi etc. In that tradition we notice long poems are rendered into music for which abhinaya is performed.
Evidently, the whole of Cilappadikāram was meant to be sung and danced is therefore unquestionable. The reason Aḍiyārkkunallār, the commentator called this text a Nāṭaka kāvyam can be understood.
As mentioned before, the first chapter of Cilappadikāram, deals with the marriage of Kaṇṇaki and Kōvalaṉ and their happy married life for some years. The third chapter deals with the maiden dance recital of Mādhavi, the dancing girl. The whole text of this dance chapter introduced at the very beginning follows Bharata’s Nāṭya Śāstra. This chapter begins with the legendary origin of the family of dancing girls, who are called Nāṭaka gaṇikās; then it deals with the qualifications of a dancing girl, followed by the qualifications of Nāṭyācārya, the composer of poems. This in turn is followed by the qualifications of the vocal musicians, the flutist, the vīna player, mṛdangist and the drummer. A detailed description on the construction of a dance theatre is provided. The worship of Jarjara (banner staff) and presentation of this Talailkkōl to the dancing girl, the protocol for seatings of the king and his retinue, the pūrva-raṅga, and how Mādhavi entered the stage first, the dance items and sequence she performed and finally the honour conferred on her by the king are all described in great detail. The arangēṟṟu kātai is an abridged description of the Nātya Śāstra.
Thus, it is a self-contained chapter dealing with the first recital of a dancing girl, which furnishes for the first time a detailed description of Nātya Śāstra, the theoretical treatise used in practice in Indian theatre. This also slows it was a court dance which is described as vēttiyal in Tamiḻ tradition. Vēntu means “royal” in Tamiḻ. Such an elaborate description with the whole sequence of maiden dance is not necessary for the run of the story, but the author introduces this chapter to emphasize the whole art of dance. Both the commentators state that the first section of this chapter deals with the nature of the professional dancing girl (kūttiyin iyalpu).
It starts with the curse of sage Agastya on Jayanta, the son of Indra and the celestial dancing Apsara Ūrvaci. Jayanta was cursed to go to the earth from heaven as a bamboo and will be redeemed after being worshipped as Jarjara before any dance performance and thus returning to heaven. The girl born to Ūrvaci on earth, named Mādhavi, became the progenitor of the families of dancing girls on earth. In this story of Cilappadikāram, a descendent of this first Mādhavi, who was also called Mādhavi (II) performed maiden dance recital in the court of Karikāla Chōḻa.
The birth of “Art of dance” can thus be traced to divine Apsara and this in fact is what is found in the Nāṭya Śāstra. The second point worthy of note is that all the human beings on earth trace their origin to some Vedic ṛṣis like Bhāradvāja, Viswāmitra, Gautama and others, so also the families of dancing girls trace their discordance to Ūrvaci, the Apsara dancer. They had absolute freedom of their own and were not controlled by other social laws presented in the Dharma Śāstras. It indicates where women had absolute freedom and independence and derive their power from their divine origin.
Iḷaṅgō Aḍigaḷ gives two important notes on the dancing girls family. They followed a blemishless profession, and that their birth was noble and not considered despicable. This is a pointer to the fact that the dancing girls, who were also courtesans, were not considered low in status by reason of birth. Theirs was a section in the society in which they were masters of themself.
About this dancing girl Mādhavi, the author says that she possessed all the three qualifications prescribed for her profession namely beauty, mastery of music and the art of dance. She was not short of any among the three, beauty, music, and dance. She learnt her art for seven years, commencing her training from the age of five. She was ready to exhibit her art at the maiden dance recital at the age of 12.
The following are highly technical vocabulary related to dance. They are given here to illustrate that as early as first century CE, the art of dance in Tamīlnāḍu has imbibed northern traditions and at the same time has developed its own regional variations as well. They are also meant to show that besides Bharata, there was also Agastya School of dance which combined both Sanskrit and Tamiḻ forms that needs to be explored. For example, the commentator Aḍiyārkkunallār says these classifications were formulated by Agastya.
It is also known that Bharata’s Nāṭya Śāstra mentions Indra-dhvaja-maha day of “Indra festival” also called Indra vijayotsav at the beginning of the text. In a similar way, Iḷaṅgo Aḍigal introduces the debut of Mādhavi’s dance and Indira Viḻā at the beginning. The two events, the Indra festival, and the appearance of Mādhavi, are deliberately brought by Iḷaṅgo to remind us about the origin of dance in Bharata’s Nāṭya śāstra. Though the Nāṭya Śāstra deals with teaching of dramatic art to the sons of Bharata, it begins with a Nāṭya, the dance of a Nartaki in pūrva-raṅga which includes the worship of Jarjara, the shaft of royal umbrella of Indra used to drive away the demons. The same type of worship and pūrva-raṅga is mentioned in araṅgēṟṟu kātai chapter of Cilappatikāram when describing the maiden dance of Mādhavi. The Nāṭya Śāstra gives an interesting ritual at the start (purva-raṅga). The Nāṭyācārya sprinkled water on the dancing girls and said that they were born in exalted families and their profession was flawless. Similarly, we find that the family of celestial dancers Apsaras, were extolled as glorious families and their services were considered ever flawless, in the Cilappatikaram. This praise mentioned both in the Nāṭya Śāstra and Cilappatikāram at the beginning, shows the unmistakable borrowing from the Nāṭya Śāstra. This must also be seen in the context of a statement in Cilappatikāram that Mādhavi strictly followed the text of Nāṭya naṉṉūl (Nāṭya Śāstra). These are the unmistakable evidence affirming that it was Bharata’s Nāṭya śāstra, Iḷaṅgō Aḍigaḷ was following.
After the araṅgēṟṟu kātai, the scene shifts to the seashore watersports at the culmination of Indra festival after which the festival of Varuṇa begins. The people of Puhār go to the seashore and spend their evening in a hilarious mood. Varuṇa is the presiding deity of coastal regions and is propitiated to mark the start of neidal tiṇai. This is the second tiṇai Iḷaṅgō introduces as a part of the canvas to portray the movement of the story. It may be seen that the coastal environment was brought in deliberately by Iḷaṅgō to give a place in the story for the five-fold landscape (tiṇais) of the Tamiḻ grammar, otherwise there was no need for the coastal region in the run of the story. Though Iḷaṅgō brings in the coastal region, purposely, it is shown as a part of the Marudam region (the agricultural land). Here, we feel sorry for Mādhavi, as for no fault of hers, she is violently separated from Kōvalaṉ. This is the import of this chapter, when Kōvalaṉ refuses to accept the pleadings of Mādhavi and abandons her once and for all. Kōvalaṉ then returns to his wedded wife Kaṇṇaki and decides to leave Puhār for good to go to Madurai, in search of a profession. Kōvalaṉ and Kaṇṇaki go through the banks of Kāvēri, crossing Śrīraṅgam, then crossing the river on a boat and move southwards and enter a forest which was the abode of wild hunters.
As Kōvalaṉ and Kaṇṇaki left Pūmpukār in the early morning hours to go to the city of Madurai and were moving through the woods, they heard the Brāhmin boys reciting the Vedas. This shows the Chōḻa country had Vedic students in many parts, even the rural regions.
After narrating the story in the cultivated region (Marudam) and coastal region (Neidal), the story moves through this transitional region, suggesting that we are entering into greater trouble in the story. This is the third tiṇai, Iḷaṅgō spreads for the continuation of the picture. This region is called Pālai tiṇai, desert land. According to Tamiḻ grammarians, this is called the middle tiṇai. Pālai means a desert, but in literary convention it is a region where two other regions overlap each other. The highway robbers and merciless hunters are the chief occupants of this region. It is supposed to infuse awe and terrific fear in the mind of the passersby.
The presiding deity of the Pālai is Koṟṟavai or Durgā, to whom the hunters perform gruesome sacrifices that will strike horror in our mind. An important dance form to the goddess Durgā, called Vēṭṭuvavari, performed by hunters and huntresses. The Pālai desert land where these events take place was unbearable with scorching heat of the sun. It prepares the spectator’s mind to receive an imminent crude shock.
In Vēṭṭuvavari, as Kaṇṇaki and Kōvalaṉ were passing through the forest two incidents took place. One the Veṭṭuvars decorated a young virgin girl of their family as Durgā and seating her on a stag brought her in procession to the temple of Durgā which was in the centre of their village. They were accompanied by Veṭṭuvar women and followed the hunters. First the women offered her flowers, porridges etc., and then followed a dance called Vēṭṭuvavari in which they praised Durgā in three verses of superb quality. The description of Durgā in these verses are likened to Stotras in Tamiḻ and called “praises in front” (mun nilai paraval). The forms of Śiva as Gajasamhāra, Gaṅgādhara, Ardhanāri, and the form of Viṣṇu carrying Śaṅkha, Cakra, in hands are attributed to her. She is described as one who defeated Mahiṣāśura in battle, severed his head and stood on the severed black head of that wild buffalo. What is more fascinating is that she is praised as the Veda of Vedas and one who resides in the heart of Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva as a flame of knowledge1. This praise coming from the forest dwellers show that supreme knowledge of Vedas was part of all sections of the Tamiḻ people, even in remote areas of the land of the hunters. The second event that took place was a horrible sacrifice. One of the Veṭṭuva cut his own head and placed it on the altar as an offering to the goddess for the prosperity of the hunters. This no doubt is a tribal custom. We have seen that at the beginning of the Cilappatikāram, the Indra festival was performed, and some heroes cut their own head and placed on the altar praying that the king and people of the Chōḻa country should prosper. Both at the agricultural land (marutam land) forest land (pālai) head offering was performed as a gruesome act, sent a shrilling fear and experience in the mind of Kaṇṇaki. It is just a forewarning how the story is going to turn. We are going to see that when Kōvalaṉ arrives at Madurai city to sell the anklet of Kaṇṇaki, his head is to be chopped of under the orders of the Pāṇḍya king. We find that the Vedic and tribal customs were cleverly interwoven by Iḷangō Aḍigal to drive home the message that finally dharma won in the life of a chaste (Patini) wife.
The couple Kōvalaṉ and Kaṇṇaki moved to the outskirts of the city of Madurai, which was a high land, called Mullai. The people inhabiting that region were cowherds and shepherds rearing cattle. They were identical with Yādavas, and their main profession was rearing cows.
According to Tamiḻ grammar the presiding deity of such land, was Kṛṣṇa. A delightful dance in praise of Kṛṣṇa, accompanied by an enchanting song was danced here, called Āycciyar Kurṟavai. It is here that Kōvalan and Kaṇṇaki, took refuge and Kōvalaṉ went to sell one of the anklets of Kaṇṇaki in the city of Madurai and was killed. After the tragic death of Kōvalaṉ, Kaṇṇaki appeared before the king in his court and proved that her husband was not the thief and that the king erred in his judgement. Being ashamed of his own conduct the king fell dead, following which the queen also died.
The nature of Vedic tradition is illustrated by two events in this landscape in Cilappadikāram. Both these events are mentioned in the chapter called kaṭṭurai kāthai in which the presiding deity of Madurai city, Madurāpati who is none other than goddess Durgā appeared before Kaṇṇaki and told her that the Pāṇḍya king who beheaded her husband belonged to a noble lineage, who never tolerated any injustice done to any in their country. She narrated an event that happened in the city of Madurai. The king had never heard any call of the bell of justice at any time but had always heard only the sound of Vedic chants.
One Vedic Brāhmaṇa, Parāsaraṉ having heard that the then Cēra king gifted heaven at the request of his minister Pālai Gautaman, who performed a great sacrifice, went to the Cēra country. Some Brāhmins who had mastered the four Vedas, who performed regularly the three Vedic sacrifices and the pañca-mahā-yajñās as enjoined in the Vedas and followed all six functions enjoined in the Vedic tradition, challenged this Parāsaraṉ for a debate, in which the victor would get sumptuous reward while the vanquished would lose his status. Parāsaraṉ accepted the challenge, argued, and won the debate. This conquest in Vedic debate was called “Brāhminical conquest”, Pārppana vāhai. Parāsaraṉ received the precious riches for his mastery of the Vedas, and on his way back reached the village Taṅgal in the Pāṇḍya country where beneath an Asvatha tree he kept down his staff, kuṇḍika, and his bundles and rested praising the Cēra. He saw several young boys with tufts, sporting in the streets. He called the boys and said, “You young boys, if any one of you could recite the Vedas without any mistake as I recite, I shall present you all my money and all other possessions”. There was one among the boys named Dakṣiṇāmūrti, son of one Vārtikaṉ, who recited the Vedas without any mistake as recited by Parāsaraṉ. He gave away all the presents he had to that boy and went away.
But other boys who were present at the scene grew jealous of this boy, reported to the village guards that the boy had acquired the wealth illegally and at their instigation imprisoned Vārtikaṉ, the father of the boy, saying that he had obtained royal treasures belonging to a king. The wife of that Brāhmin Vārtikaṉ, cried, wept, and appealed to all to get her husband released. At this, the door of the temple of Goddess Koṟṟavai at the capital of the Pāṇḍya closed. If any injustice was found within the country the gate of the goddess would automatically close. The door won’t open until the wrong was rectified. That would cause disasters to the kingdom.
When the king came to know the temple door of goddess Durgā remained closed, he immediately recognised some great injustice had been done somewhere in his kingdom. When he learnt an injustice had been done to a Brāhmaṇa, ordered his release, opened his prisons, and released all the prisoners and then went to Taṅgal and fell at the feet of that Brāhmaṇa, and prayed for forgiveness.
“The Pāṇḍya king who delivered such an upright justice, ordered the beheading of her husband” said goddess Durgā. Continuing the narration, goddess Koṟṟavai told Kaṇṇaki, that she and her husband were born in a merchant family in their earlier birth. Her husband was serving the then ruling king and did a wrong to another man, and that sin came down to the present life. Her suffering in this birth was due to that fate. The king’s action against Kōvalaṉ was not intentional but due to that fate.
Kaṇṇaki burnt down the city of Madurai. This was the preamble to Kaṇṇaki’s death at the end and she became a Pattiṉi Deivam (goddess).
This story of the Vedic boy illustrates some aspects of the Vedic life in Tamiḻnādu. It describes in great detail the education and lifestyle of a Vedic Brāhmaṇa which includes learning the four Vedas as a Caturvedi, performing the three Vedic sacrifices, (āhavanīyam, gārhapatya, and dakṣiṇāgni), and the pañca-mahā-yajña (deva, pitṛ, brahma, manuṣya, and bhūta).
Kaṇṇaki went from Madurai to the hill region of Vēlāṉ kuṉṟu. The hill people came and saw the pitiable state of Kaṇṇaki. They asked her who she was and what was the cause of her pathetic state. Kaṇṇaki narrated to them her life story but at that time, on the slopes of that Vēlāṉ hill, the Dēvas came down from heaven with Kōvalaṉ and took Kaṇṇaki away to heaven. Kaṇṇaki had attained heaven where the heroic and the noble reach. This stands for the eternal union of Kaṇṇaki with her husband. There is a subtle message here. A woman who lost her husband is called a widow. Only the women who live with their husbands are called Pattiṉi. In this case Kaṇṇaki came to this hill some days after of her husband’s death and yet she is called a Pattiṉi and even deified as a goddess. Here comes the tenet of the Vedic Dharma Śāstras which specify that after the death of her husband, women continue to be a sumaṅgali living with her husband for certain number of days. The number of days varies according to the caste of the couple; for Brāhmins it is 10 days, for kings it was 12 days and for merchant communities it was 14 days. Since Kaṇṇaki belonged to the merchant community she continued to remain a sumaṅgali for fourteen days after her husband’s death. Here the text tells us that she united with her husband on the hill on the fourteenth day. This confirms that it was the custom of the Vedic tradition that she followed and remained forever a Pattiṉi. The women of hilly region danced a dance called Kuṉṟak-kuṟavai.
Up to this point, the author of this drama was directing the story in ahak-kūttu tradition, laying each important episode, in one of the tiṇais such as Marudam, Neidal, Pālai, Mullai and Kuruñci, each standing symbolically for one of the love emotions.
The story of the Cēra King, Seṅguṭṭuvaṉ, proceeding to fetch a stone for carving the image of Kaṇṇaki, from the Himālayas and soaking it in the river Gaṅga, bringing it to his capital and installing it as a goddess in a temple he built, are in the tradition given in the Tamiḻ grammar Tolkāppiyam, as kātchi, kālkkōḷ, nīrppaḍai, nadukal, perumpeyar and vāḻttal. The process of erecting a temple of Kaṇṇaki and deifying her as a goddess are same as described in Āgama Śāstras for the erection of an image of stone in a temple. Here, again we find the temple of Kaṇṇaki comes up as per the Vedic tradition. Seṅguṭṭuvaṉ, having erected a temple for Kaṇṇaki and arranged for her regular worship, retired to his royal grove with his minister to do the Rājasūya yāga. We started the story with Seṅguṭṭuvaṉ when he was seated at his capital and ended the story with his Rajasūya yāga which shows the whole story is a compact unitary theme connected with the Cēra king and so probably it was enacted in his court as a dance drama. Secondly, we started the story with Kaṇṇaki’s marriage when she became life partner of Kōvalaṉ on earth as a maṅgala madantai and ended with her eternal union with him in heaven. Third we started with the Chōḻa capital and passing through the Paṇḍya Capital of Madurai and ending up the story with Vañci the capital of the Cēra kingdom thus whole Tamiḻnāḍu was the stage where the story was enacted. As a dramatic piece it is an unparalleled creation furnishing remarkable details about the lifestyle of the people of Tamiḻnāḍu, in which the underlying principles were the Vedic traditions.
Thus, we find the drama is divided into two main parts as ahat-tiṇai and purat-tiṇai or what we may call as sukumāra and āviddha.
4.2. Pañcatantra in Cilappatikāram (paper presented at the International conference on “Global Impact of PañcaTantra, held at Leipzig, Germany, Sept 27 to 29, 2012). Cilappatikāram is the earliest, most fascinating, and longest dance drama ever written in Tamiḻ and this is assigned to end of first century CE. Aḍiyārkkunallār, the most learned commentator on this text assignable to 12th-13th century CE calls this a fully-fledged dance drama Naṭaka Kāppiyam and is therefore not history. The author has drawn freely from several existing stories to weave this outstanding drama. One such work that the author of this poem has taken and mentions the same verbatim is Pañca Tantra of Viṣṇu Śarman which is ascribed to first century BCE. Some of the stories are found in Indian art. As for example, the story of ten monkeys and crocodiles is found in the Buddhist sculptures of Barhut, 2nd century BCE and the Ajanta paintings.
As the story of Cilappatikāram is well known, it is not given in full here. As per the story, Kōvalaṉ the hero of this poem, a rich merchant of Pumpuhār, wastes all his wealth by going after a dancing girl, returns to his wedded wife Kaṇṇaki. He goes with her to the city of Madurai for starting a new life by entering a business. Just at the out skirt of Madurai he meets his friend, a Vedic Brāhmaṇa named Mādalaṉ (Mādala Maṟaiyōṉ), a day before entering the city of Madurai. Mādalaṉ is sorry to see Kōvalaṉ in a pitiable state, narrates three events which praised Kōvalaṉ for his philanthropic nature during his early life.
At the first sight the events so disconnected with the main theme, one wonders why Iḷaṅgo should bring in these events at this juncture. We will deal with one event here. Iḷaṅgo begins this episode straight away.
The story is about a mongoose and a foolish lady. Once a Brāhmaṇa kept a mongoose as a pet at home. He had a child and the mongoose used to play with the child. Once he was not at home and his wife left the child in a cradle and went to fetch water, a snake entered the house. The mongoose fought with the snake and killed it. When the Brāhmin lady returned she saw the mongoose with blood in its mouth. She thought that the mongoose had bitten her child and threw her water pot on it and the mongoose was killed. Upon hearing this, the husband of the Brāhmin lady deserted her and refused to live with her any longer and started on a pilgrimage to the Gangetic River to expiate the sin of killing an innocent animal. She pleaded pardon as she did the act out of ignorance and thoughtlessness and wanted him to stay back and live with her as before. The Brāhmaṇa stoutly refused but gave her a palm leaf manuscript with a message written in “northern language”. He departed after advising her to take it to any who by reading it would help her to expiate that sin. She showed the leaf to many in the street of merchants and showed it to Kōvalaṉ who took pity on her and gave her the required money with which she could make spiritual gifts and wash off her sin. Her husband later returned to her. Mādalaṉ, the friend of Kōvalaṉ recalled this event and was sorry for such generous person was thrown into a such a destitute level.
Iḷaṅgō Adigaḷ in his text says that the leaf contained a stanza in a “northern language”. vaṭamoḻi vācakam ceyta nallēṭu The commentator Arumpadaurai āciriyar says in his commentary it was a Grantham that read “aparīkṣya na kartavyam kartavyam su parīkṣitam paśchāt bhavati santāpaḥ brāhmaṇi nakulam iva”
At this stage, it is necessary to revisit the commentator’s time period. Arumpadaurai urai Āciriyar is ascribed to 10th century CE. Aḍiyārkkunallār, the 12th-13th century commentator, in his comment gives the following meaning.
vaṭa moḻi i.e., Āryam (Sanskrit). vācakam i.e., kavi (poem or stanza). (The stanza is published by UVS in Nāgari script. Probably the same was in the Grantha script in the manuscript itself from which UVS transcribed it.) aparīkṣya na kartavyam kartavyam su parīkṣitam paśchāt bhavati santāpaḥ brāhmaṇi nakulam yathā UVS also gives a variant reading for the stanza which read as brāhmaṇya nakulam acirāt iva. UVS adds his own note within brackets (Pañcatantram: 5:18) i.e., no act should be undertaken without proper examination and only such acts that have been thoroughly deliberated should be undertaken. Otherwise, it would lead to tragic suffering like the Brāhmin lady who suffered on account of mongoose (episode).
Aḍiyārkkunallār further continues his commentary as ēṭu i.e., the leaf with this stanza (kavitai) aparīkṣya na kartavyam kartavyam su parīkṣitam paścāt bhavati santāpaḥ brāhmaṇī nakulam yathā” It is to be noted that this passage is given in the text by Iḷaṅgō Aḍigal, but also by both the commentators. The original Sanskrit sloka itself is provided by both the commentators. As the story of Brāhmaṇi and Mongoose is a well-known story in the Pañcatantra, and as the sloka is in Sanskrit there could be no doubt that the citation is from Pañcatantra of Viṣṇu Sarman which is in Sanskrit language. It is known that some of the stories of Pañcatantra were also found in Buddhist Jātaka tales and in Tantra ākhyānas, but it is Viṣṇu Sarman’s Pañcatantra that is in Sanskrit and hence the commentator says the stanza was in Āryam. The mongoose story is brought under the category of thoughtless action, aparīkṣya kārakam.
The question is what is its connection and why is it introduced at this stage of Cilappadhikāram text? Mādalaṉ, the Brāhmin friend of Kōvalaṉ, who narrated this event then left. After which, Kōvalaṉ went to his wife and repented to her on how foolish he was not to have thought of her sufferings in isolation, by going after a dancing girl, did not take care of his own parents, spent his life in the midst of rogues surrounding the dancers and squandered all his wealth. This was the last conversation he had with his wife and in the next morning he went into the city with one of the anklets of Kaṇṇaki to sell in the market and with that money he wanted to start a new and loving life with his wife.
Enroute, he saw the royal goldsmith to whom he showed the anklet. The goldsmith had himself stolen the anklet of the royal queen and was afraid he might be caught. When he met Kōvalaṉ, the goldsmith thought this was a golden opportunity. Under the pretext of showing, it to a prospective buyer he made Kōvalaṉ wait, went to the king, and told him he found the thief who stole the royal anklet. The king who was on his way to the harem to settle a love quarrel, ordered the soldiers to go with the goldsmith, behead the thief and bring the anklet. The fatal tragedy took place. Kōvalaṉ was beheaded and the anklet brought to the king.
When Kaṇṇaki came to know of the fate of Kōvalaṉ, she rushed to the court and challenged the king to prove that her husband was a thief and demanded the king to show the material with which the royal anklet was made. The king showed that it was made of pearls. Kaṇṇaki showed that her anklet was made of precious gems like diamond, emerald, and others. She threw the anklet in the court breaking it from which diamond and other gems scattered. Seeing the gems and the injustice he meted to innocent Kōvalaṉ the king died on the throne and his queen also died with him. Kaṇṇaki then burnt the city of Madurai.
That was the disastrous turning point of the entire story of Cilappatikāram that led to tragic end of the hero of the poem Kōvalaṉ who lost all his wealth, fame, and finally his life because he did not act with diligence and acted senselessly. The famous Pāṇḍya king of Madurai without making proper enquiry into the theft of the anklet of his queen listened to the cheat goldsmith and murdered Kōvalaṉ and thereby died on the throne for his injustice, along with his queen. The end result was the city of Madurai was set ablaze. Both are the results of aparīkṣya krita kārya which was the main message of the Pañcatantra story. Iḷaṅgō, the author of the Cilappatikāram, dexterously introduced the Pañcatantra story just before Kōvalaṉ’s death, through the mouth of Mādalaṉ, who met Kōvalaṉ earlier and narrated the story of Brāhmin lady and the mongoose. Thus, the Pañcatantra has played a crucial role in Cilappatikāram.
This is not the only story of Pañcatantra that has been used in Cilappatikāram, there is another story of the same text which has left its deep impact on this dance drama. The story is that of a Goldsmith. According to the story, a Brāhmaṇa was passing through a forest when he came across a deep and dried up well, in which he saw a tiger, a monkey, a snake, and a man fallen and struggling to come out. When the monkey saw the Brāhmaṇa peeping from above it requested him to help him come out. The monkey promised to help him in times of need. When the monkey came out it asked the Brāhmaṇa to think of it and it would come and help him. Similarly, the snake prayed that it be helped to come out. It promised that it wouldn’t bite him but help him in times of need. The snake was also rescued. Similarly, the Tiger also prayed for help. It promised that it wouldn’t eat him but help him. Though the Brāhmaṇa hesitated initially he helped the tiger. Finally thanking him for his help, the tiger told him not to trust the man who was inside the well and went away. The man who was inside the well was crying for help. He said he was also a human being like him, and he should take pity on him and get him out. The Brāhmaṇa, taking pity on him rescued him. The man told him he was a goldsmith living in the nearby town and if any help was needed, the Brāhmaṇa could approach him.
As the Brāhmaṇa was proceeding further, he felt hungry and thought of the monkey which brought him fruits, honey etc., and sumptuously fed him. Then the Brāhmin thought of his poverty when the tiger came and gave him many precious jewels and gold chains and told him that it killed a prince who passed through the forest, and he could take the whole and convert it into money and use it. The Brāhmaṇa was happy and now thought of the goldsmith and requested him to sell them and get money for it. On seeing the jewels, the goldsmith immediately agreed to the request and asked him to wait so that he could get a buyer. He went with the jewels to the ruling king and showed them as the jewels of his lost son and the thief is now in his house. The king ordered his soldiers to arrest the man and throw him into a prison and rewarded the goldsmith. The Brāhmaṇa now thought of the snake that immediately appeared inside his prison told him that it would get him out. The snake worked out a plan and said that it would bite the chief queen who would swoon but wouldn’t die. The king will try with doctors and māntrikas, but she wouldn’t be revived. Then the king will call the Brāhmaṇa who could revive her and so get him out. The snake would take back its poison and the queen would be brought back to life.
The events took place as planned by the snake. When the Brāhmaṇa brought back the queen to life, the king asked him what happened to him. The Brāhmaṇa narrated the help rendered by the animals and the treachery of the goldsmith. The king immediately set him free and imprisoned the goldsmith for life. This story of the unreliable goldsmith told in the Pañcatantra has been utilized in Cilappatikāram by Iḷaṅgō Aḍigal who brought in the story of the treachery of the royal goldsmith that led to the killing of Kōvalaṉ.
Though there is no direct reference in Cilappādikaram to the Pañcatantra, that this story as a part of the Pañcatantra tales is well attested in sculptures assignable to the 9th-10th century in western India. It shows there could be no doubt that it was the main source for Iḷaṅgō to use. As the story of mongoose is specifically mentioned by Iḷaṅgō there could no doubt about the source of this goldsmith episode.
4.3. Kūttu and Nāṭya Śāstra As mentioned earlier, there are two mediaeval commentaries on Cilappādikaram (silambu), one by Arumpatavurai āciriyar (AP) and the second Aṭiyārkku-nallār (AN). The first commentator is ascribed to 10th century and the second to 13th century. According to the commentators, the dance master must be an expert in the grammar of two categories (iru vakaik kūttu) of dance. These two categories of dance, according to the first commentator AP are desi and mārgam and says ahak-kūttu is sukumāra dance (lāsya dance) and puṟak-kūttu is external dance which is “aviddha” dance. The commentator says the Nāṭyacārya knew how to use various elements (called vilakku). He says the mārga dance stands for northern school, which has six kinds of dance sthānas (standing poses). Elaborating on the two categories of dance, AN describes them in pairs as: 1. vacaik-kūttu, pukaḻk-kūttu; 2. vēttiyal, poduviyal; 3. varik-kūttu, vari-sāntik-kūttu; 4. sānti-kūttu, vinōtak-kūttu; 5. āriyam, tamiḻ; 6. iyalpu-kūttu, dēsik-kūttu Speaking about the kinds of puṟak-kūttu, the commentator lists nahaik-kūttu and vidūṣaka dance forms.He also refers to three main kinds of vilakku, vēntu vilakku (royal vilakku), paṭai vilakku (army vilakku - probably relating to dance in war front), and ūr vilakku (village vilakku). In the beginning of his commentary uraippāyiram, AN has clarified this use vilakku as fastening or attaching all these parts or elements of the music with the movements of hands, legs, and circular movements of dance (according to Monier Williams, विलग्न - “clung or fastened or attached to”; लग्न - lagna means “to bind things together or clinging together”).
The vilakku dance consists of fourteen elements such as poruḷ, yoni, vṛitti, sandhi, rasam (suvai), jātis, kurippu (suggestions), sattva, avinaya, padam, variation in padas, varṇam, vari and cedam. Though AN follows AP in first giving a summary exposition, he then elaborates each element and deviates from AP in certain interpretations. As AN’s commentary is too elaborate, I am only giving below the summary of his comments.
AN he holds that there are two kinds of vakaik-kūttu the grammar of which was mastered by Nāṭyācārya (he does give the names of two kinds of ahak-kūttu, which are called tamiḻ and vaḍugu by AP ācriyar). AN says as the Nāṭtyācārya knew the art of puṟak-kūttu (the external dance, āviddha) with all its elements of vilakku. He also mastered the eleven dances, beginning from alliyam to koṭukoṭṭi which come under the āriyak-kūttu, the songs suited for each of them, the vādyam used for these items, as prescribed for performing ahak-kūttu or puṟak-kūttu, which are danced with songs, tāḷas and the layas. One uses the four hand gestures namely piṇḍi (asumyta-hasta), piṇaiyal (samyuta-hasta), eḻirk-kai (nṛitta hastas), and toḻirk-kai (abhinaya hastas). Here piṇḍi, the single-handed gesture and piṇaiyal, the two-handed gestures are employed puṟak-kūttu, whereas eḻirk-kai and toḻirk-kai are employed in ahak-kūttu.
Another text mentions kūḍai gati hasta as single-handed gesture and vāra gati as double handed gesture. kūḍai gati should not be mixed up in performance with vāra gati while performing puṟak-kūttu. Similarly, while performing pure dance (suddha nṛtta), abhinaya gesture should not be used. Having given this summary of comments, AN describes delimits of each technical word of vinōtak-kūttu. Also, AN says that these divisions were classified by sage Agastya. Evidently there seems to have been an “Agastya school of dance” in Tamiḻnāḍu. Describing the two categories of dance, AN gives several combinations as follows. 1. ahak-kūttu x puṟak-kūttu 2. vacaik-kūttu (ridicule) x pukaḻ-kūttu (praise) 3. vēttiyal (royal court dance) x poduviyal (public dance) 4. varikkuttu x varic śānti kūttu 5. śānti kūttu x vinōtak-kūttu 6. āryam (sanskrit) x Tamiḻ 7. desik-kuttu x iyalbuk-kūttu (natural dance classic) The two-fold division of kūttu dance according to AN is 1) śāntik-kūttu and 2) vinōtak-kūttu All categories namely chokkam, mey-kūttu, abhinayam and nāṭakam are brought under śāntik-kūttu, essentially based on śṛngāra mārga. 1. chokkam is called śuddha-nṛttam and consists of 108 karaṇas according to scholars (the 108 karaṇas are the nritta karaṇas defined by Bharata in his 4th chapter of Nāṭya Śāstra). 2. mey-kūttu is divided into three as 1) dēsi, 2) vaḍugu and 3) siṅgalam. Since this is related to ahac-cuvai (racātham, tāmatam, sāthuvikam), it comes under aha-mārgam. The term aha-mārga is based on three guṇas, rājasam, tāmasam and sāttvikam. 3. abhinaya is conveying through gestures the meaning of a song. 4. nāṭaka is a dance based on story. 5. Vinōtak-kūttu are classified into: - 1) kuravai, 2) kali, 3) kuṭam, 4) karaṇam 5) nōkku, 6) tōl-pāvai 6. kuravai is also a particular category of song (beside dances). 7. kali naṭam is said to be dance on poles. 8. kuṭak-kūttu, is what Kṛṣṇa danced with pot in a hand. 9. karaṇam is said to be paṭinta āḍal 10. nōkku is described as pāram, nuṇmai, and māyam. 11. tōl-pāvai is leather puppet show. In addition to the above six, the dance of clowns is called viduṣaka-kūttu have been mentioned in some texts. Since this can represent ridiculing others, it is also called as vacaik-kūttu, the opposite of it being pukaḻ or praise. It is also further divided into royal and public (vettial and potuviyal).
AN says that according to a sūtrā ascribed to Agastya, the profession of these seven kinds of dances was to be performed by low caste people. He also deals with other terms like mukham (sprouting), prati mukham (leafs appear and ready to grow into a plant), garbha (grown ready to yield), viḷaivatu (yield fruits) and ready for use, tūcal harvest, remove husks, unwanted chaff, and taste and eat. These are the stages laid out for a dance recital.
vilakku: - AN uses this special word. The origin of the word is not clearly explained. It seems it is a Sanskrit word, standing for “fastening” or “attaching”. (See Monier Williams - vilagna, lagati, lagān). This term is used also for music with various components, which was classified as royal (vēntu-vilakku), war-music (paṭai-vilakku; paṭai is army) and the third village music (ūr-vilakku). These were used for victory dances (veṟṟik-kūttu) with different rhythm, and these are classified as puṟa-naṭam, āviddha type). The text uses the term porumtap puṇaṟttal in line 13. AN explains this word “to fasten appropriate tunes to the songs suited to a specific type of dance” (itu pāṭṭtukaḷukku vaṟaivu vakuttal). The parts of vilakku songs are said to be fourteen in number. They are: - poruḷ, yōni, vṛddhi, sandhi, suvai (rasa), jāti, kuṟippu (suggestion), sattva, abhinaya, col (pada), col-vakai (classes of padu), vaṇṇam, vari and chēdam.
AN first adopts this meaning from AP āciriyar, who has mentioned that vilakku is a kind of music, classified into three categories as used in external dance (not śṛngara, but another category of dance) such as nakaik-kūttu (humourous dance). AP elaborates the 14 parts of the vilakku dance as: -
1) poruḷ (artha), 2) abhinaya, 3) yōni, 4) vṛddhi, 5) col (padam), 6) sandhi, 7) collin 8) kuripadu, 8) suvai (rasa), 9) vaṇṇam, 10) jāti, 11) vari, 12) elatva, 13) cēdam AN, giving this same list in the same order, citing AP’s list as a poem.
As this is a citation from an earlier work in a verse form and mentioned by both AP and AN, this was obviously meant by Iḷaṅgō Aḍigal when it comes to the term vilakku.
In the next chapter which is indra-viḻavu-etutta-kātai, kāvar gaṇikaiyars are mentioned as women guards, but AN call them “dancers in battlefields” (women). They were also night watchers. āṭal kūttiyar are called by AN as “pātiyilār” who perform erotic dance. pūvilai madantaiyar are recognised as courtesans (AN translates this term as sellers of flowers). ēvar siladiyar are servants and kitchen maidens.
In kaṭalāṭu kātai “water sports in sea waves”, we see the description of people going to the seashore, on the day of Cittirai. Here, some were dancing the eleven dances, performed by gods and goddesses, when they vanquished the demons2. While in the chapter on dance of Mādhavi we get only a general reference mentioning that she danced the eleven dances at the beginning, in the kaṭalāṭu-kātai, we get the Purāṇic background to all the eleven dances of gods. It also gives jewels, worn from head to foot, providing an insight into how a dancing girl beautified herself with jewels. While her previous dance recital was in the royal theatre in the presence of kings and would fall under court dance vēttiyal, the present one in kaṭalāṭu-kātai, was in public falling under public dance poduviyal. When Mādhavi performed poduviyal dance, it created envy in the mind of Kōvalaṉ which finally led to their separation. There are eight dance stages that dancing girls’ resort to attract the attention of heroes which are called eṇ varik-kōlam. These are the eight dances: 1. Kaṇkūdu-vari (கண்கூடுவரி) - Priya darsanam attract attention 2. 2. Kāṇ-vari (கானல்வரி) - to appear and disappear 3. 3. Uḷ-vari (உள்வரி) - appear in disguise 4. 4. Puṟavari (புறவரி) - exhibiting love externally 5. 5. Kiḷar-vari (கிளர்வரி) – Act as feigning 6. 6. Tērcci-vari (தேர்ச்சிவரி) – send a messenger 7. 7. Eduttukōḷ-vari (எடுத்துக்கோள்வரி) – open by tell people about her suffering and fall on her play mate as swooned 8. Kātci vari (காட்சிவரி) – appear as married These dances are mentioned both in Cilappatikāram and Nāṭya Śāstra. Kōvalaṉ reacted to these saying that these were acts of Nāṭaka gaṇikās who are experts in such deceptive acting. During a visit to the seashore, Mādhavi tunes her harp to eight modes of yāḻ, a stringed instrument. She then hands it to Kōvalaṉ and asks him to play to which he agrees. Accompanied by the yāḻ music, Kōvalaṉ sings praising river Kāviri (வாழி காவேரி). Eight different modes of playing on yāḻ in mentioned in the commentary. பண்ணல் பரிவட்டணை ஆராய்தல் தைவரல் கண்ணிய செலவு விளையாட்டுக் கையூழ் 1. paṇṇal (பண்ணல்) 2. celavu (செலவு) 3. parivarṭṭanai (பரிவட்டணை) 4. ārāital (ஆராய்தல்) 5. viḷayātal (விளையாட்டு) 6. taivaral (தைவரல்) 7. kaiyaḻ (கையூழ்) 8. kuṟumpōkku (குறும்போக்கு) It is after this episode that Kōvalaṉ unfairly accuses Mādhavi of infidelity and leaves her permanently. In this chapter, the author Iḷaṅgo brilliantly inter weaves the rich repertoire of music and dance in ancient Tamiḻ culture. Cilappatikāram refers to different classes of women, including dancing girls, who were living independently in separate streets in the city of Kāvirippūm-paṭṭiṇam. The city is described with its population divided into two major parts, one the inner part where the king, merchants, Brāhmins and others lived and the outer part where different artisans and seafarers lived. In between, there was a central marketplace. The outer part of the city was called Maruvūrppākkam. The palace was located in royal quarters in Paṭṭinappākkam. The king’s palace was situated among long and broad streets through which chariots of the king and other royalties travelled. The palace was surrounded by the quarters of the warriors. Then came the streets with multistoried palaces of merchants, and the colony of the Vedic Brāhmaṇas. In other streets, lived the Māgadas, Sūtas, Jockers and Timekeepers. There were separate streets where the dramatists and dancers called Śānti Kūttar lived. It is after their streets some classes of women lived. The foot soldiers, cavaliers, elephant riders, and charioteers lived in their own colonies.
When describing the streets of the dancing girls, they are mentioned as “Āṭar Kūttiyar” who perform ahak-kūttu or Śṛṅgāra dance. The others mentioned in these streets were called kāval kaṇikaiyar or nocturnal prostitutes by the commentator AP. The pūvilai maṭantaiyar are called “aṟṟai parisam koḷvār”, who accepts contractual courtship. “ēvar siladiyar” were considered servant maids who perform small services (kuṟṟēval makaḷir). The other groups called “payil toḻil kuyiluvar”, were those who could make leather instruments, pipes and flutes, and metal instruments. panmurai ōtuvar — were drummers for festivals and battle of regiments. Nahai vēḷambar were spies.
AN gives a slightly different meaning for these words. “kāval kaṇikaiyar” were able dancing girls performing dance in the battlefield. AN also says some people call them noctornal prostitutes. Therefore, he shows that there were different interpretations for this word. He says that āṭal kūttiyars were called patiyilar who dance ahak-kūttu. They were known as separate class of dancing girls. “ēval siladiyars”, refers to cooks in the royal kitchen (maṭappaḷḷi peṇṭir) or assistant cooks (are those engaged for prostitution at nights). payil toḻil kūttiyar according AN are those who play for songs (pāṭalukkum) during festivals. Drummers were also considered players of stringed instruments. AN seems not to have got the correct manuscript for he leaves out players of different musical instruments paṇmuraik karuviyar. Though he gives the meaning as drummers, he leaves out percussion, wind, and metal instruments.
Whatever be the omission, the meaning assigned to these categories of women, mentioned in the original Cilappatikāram text and the two commentators show all these categories of women were musicians and dancers by profession.
A comparison of these categories with the Nāṭya Śāstra show these women are mentioned as dancers. It is known that the Nāṭya Śāstra deals with crowned queens and other women, who form part of the royal retinue. I give below the relevant part in Nāṭya Śāstra.
VRR Dik****ar gives the names of these women as prostitutes, actresses, maidens bearing flowers and betels, maid servants, musicians and drummers of different sorts, buffoons, and jesters (Pg.122)3. We may see the definition of two classes of these women mentioned in Nāṭya Śāstra; one category is called “preṣaṇa cārika” who are called errand girls, who were sent on secret mission to convey messages, especially in love situations. preṣaṇā, i.e., to send, cāri means one who moves or goes on specific mission. Among the girls mentioned in Cilappadikāram, we find one class “ēval ciladiyar”. This term is an exact Tamiḻ rendering of the set word “preṣaṇa cārika”. The second category of women mentioned in Nāṭya Śāstra is “prati-haryaḥ” — prati-haris or the gate keeper. According to Nāṭya Śāstra, they inform the king of various actions especially relating to secret conversations. This exact post is what is known as “kāval gaṇikaiyar” or women guards mentioned Cilappadikāram. There is one more class of older women, who always remain by the king’s side, carrying the parasols, cleaning up the throne and carrying fragrance, jewels, and garlands etc. They are called paricārikās in Nāṭya Śāstra (they also called Mālādhāras). These are the “pūvilai-maṭantaiyar”. “pūvilai” means getting flowers are flower garlands. The most important among these categories are the Nartakis — the dancing girls whose definition is given in Nāṭya Śāstra and they are the “āṭal kūttiyar” in Cilappadikāram, performing especially the sukumāra type of dance. Thus, we find nartaki, paricārika, preṣaṇā, pratihārya mentioned as the retinue of the king. These are mentioned in Cilappatikāram as dwelling colonies near the royal residence. This is a pointer to the impact of Nāṭya Śāstra on Cilappadikāram. The addition we have two more categories of people mentioned in Cilappadikāram. They are instrumental musicians and drummers. They are mentioned in continuation of the above categories of women. It is known that sculptural representations of women playing on flute, vīṇa, cymbals and mṛdanga are found in mediaeval Tamiḻnāḍu. So, the reference to the instrumental players may include both men and women “kuyilutal” is defined in Cilappadikāram text as playing on instruments like Idakka. It is necessary to mention here, that the girls who take part in dramatic performances were called nāṭakiya, while others who devoted themselves only to dance were called Nāṭya Makaḷir. There are very many details in this text that needs to be compared with Nāṭya Śāstra that is sure to yield fascinating findings.
Maṇimēkalai is essentially a Buddhist text, but it reflects a Vedic society with a sprinkling of other sects like the Jains, Ājivikas and others. It is against this background, the author Cāttaṉār paints the picture of Buddhist ideologies and ends the story emphasizing the superiority of the Buddhist faith over other faiths. Although at the very end of the work, the author portrays various philosophical systems like Jains, Ājivikas and Śaiva-vādins, it is the Vaidika Brāhmaṇas the author singles out to ridicule in the main run of the story. In particular, there are two notable instances of Brāhmaṇa women portrayed as immoral. These are the instances of Cutamati and the mother of Āputtiraṉ. Obviously, Brāhmaṇas commanded respect in society and by casting aspersions on their conduct, the author choses to lower that respect for Brāhmaṇas as a preliminary step towards propagating Buddhism.
The Vaidika system found in the text can be studied under different headings. At the outset it must be said that the Vaidika conduct is not only reflected in the life of the Brāhmaṇas but also in the life of other sections of the society like the Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas, dancers and others.
The Vedas are mentioned using various terms such as nāṉmaṟai, mutumaṟai, māmaṟai, āraṇam, antaṇar, naṉṉūl, arumaṟai, vetam and ōttu. Brahmā is said to have handed down the Vedas.
Among the different terms used to denote the Brāhmaṇas, Antaṇaṉ, and Pārpanaṉ occur frequently. In fact, the word Antaṇaṉ is used exclusively to denote a Brāhmaṇa in this text. The Vedic Brāhmaṇa is referred to as Arumaṟai Antaṇaṉ, i.e., the Brāhmaṇa of the sacred Vedas; Maṛai-Ōmpālan i.e., one who preserves the Vedas; Ōttuṭai Antaṇaṉ, one who recites the Vedas, and Ōtal Antaṇaṉ, i.e., one given to recitation. The Vedas were consciously preserved by the Brāhmaṇas and were also studied by two other castes, the Kṣatriyas and the Vaiśyas. The Brāhmaṇas headed the three Varṇas in studying the Vedas and were the foremost among the Vaidikas. This is reflected in the term Māmaṛai mutalvaṉ. The Brāhmaṇas were also called as iru pirappāḷaṉ.
Another significant term used in the Maṇimēkalai text to denote a Brāhmaṇa is Vaṭamoḻiyāḷaṉ, i.e., one who employs the Northern language. The term Vaṭamoḻi may indicate either Prākṛt or Sanskrit. The Maṇimēkalai text mainly reflects the pan Indian society as it refers to people from Kocāmpi (Kosāmbi), Uncai (Ujjayini), Vāraṇāsi (Vāraṇāsi), and other places. It seems that the term Vaṭamoḻi is employed not in the sense of the Prākṛt language, but of Sanskrit. It is interesting to note that not only were the Brāhmaṇa males called Vaṭamoḻiyāḷaṉ, but that the Brāhmaṇa women were also called Vaṭamoḻiyātti. This probably indicates that the Brāhmaṇa women, spoke Sanskrit in their domestic life. The Brāhmaṇa women were also called Māmaṟaiyātti. It is not known whether they studied the Vedas or whether they were referred to by this term in a general way.
Brāhmaṇa boys were initiated into the Vedic studies by wearing a sacred thread, muṉṉūl. All literature appropriate for a Brāhmaṇa boy was taught. He learnt the Vedas perfectly after Upanayana. This included perfect pronunciation and intonation; something that is mentioned in the Āputtiraṉ episode. The rite of wearing sacred thread was performed in the presence of all relatives.
The Brāhmaṇas were identified by the respective Ṛṣigaṇas. Acala, Ciruṅki, Viriñci and Kecakampalan etc., are some of the Ṛṣigaṇas identified in the text. Vasiṣṭha and Agastya, the foremost amongst the Brāhmaṇas, were said to have been the sons of Devagaṇikas.
There were different functions for the Brāhmaṇas of which one function was to teach the Vedas. In teaching the Vedas, one has to recite the hymns with the students and these teachers were called Upādhyāya, i.e., teacher cum co-recitor. Upādhyāya seems to have remained a distinct category among the Brāhmaṇas. Two of their traits are described in Maṇimēkalai, namely āraṇa uvātti, i.e., a teacher of the Vedas, and antaṇar uvātti, i.e., a teacher of the Brāhmaṇas. They seem to zealously observe the moral injunctions of the Dharma Śāstra.
The Vaidika system laid great emphasis on the presence of the wedded wife in all rites. Sacrificial rituals required the invariable presence of the wife, Patni. This was so important that the Patni was considered the prime necessity for a man to attain mokṣa. Dharmadatta, a merchant was counselled by a Brāhmaṇa to marry a woman, otherwise any number of sacred gifts would not give him spiritual merit. Women are not entitled to freedom. They were under protection as a virgin, as a married woman, as a widow. She remains away from the sight of others and worships no god other than her husband, says Cittirāpati, the mother of Mādhavi when she contrasts this life of a chaste woman with that of a courtesan. The dancers (courtesans) display their beauty, perform music and dance in public stages. They attract the attention of those who pass by, further inciting them with speeches, enjoy their company, and later move on to others in search of more wealth. Cittirāpati also mentions that if a courtesan refuses to pursue the life of a prostitute, the king is expected to punish her. The Arthaśāstra holds that a Courtesan, who does not approach a man at the command of the king and refuses to cohabit with him, should be punished.
The text distinguishes family women and courtesans by the protection afforded by society. Courtesans are not bound by the restrictions of the caste system, varuṇak-kappilal. They amassed wealth by selling their body, poruḷ vilai aṭṭi. Married women were called patni.
The nature of the death of women is divided into three categories. Both types of death viz: 1) instantaneous death on hearing the demise of her husband, and 2) the woman entering the funeral pyre of her husband are called kaṟpuk kaṭan. The death of a woman after observing severe penance following the death of her husband is called tavam mēr koḷḷal. 3) The third category is the death of a woman within a stipulated period of her husband’s death. According to the Dharma Śāstras this varies for different castes; as for example, ten days for Brāhmaṇas, 12 days for the Kṣatriyas and 15 days in the case of Vaiśyas. If a woman dies within this stipulated period, she is not considered a widow but a Sumaṅgali. The epic Maṇimēkalai calls this a kaṟpuk kaṭan. Kaṇṇaki ascended heaven on the 14th day of her husband’s death and so she was called a patni.
Cālini, the wife of Āraṇavuvātti from Vāraṇāci committed adultery unbecoming of a Brāhmaṇa woman. She therefore lost her right to maintenance and protection and to expiate the sin went on a pilgrimage to Kanyākumari. Āputtiraṉ was her son. The lady feared retribution for her immoral act and her visit to Kanyākumari was to escape from punishment. In a later part of the text, the penalty for this immoral act is mentioned as a capital punishment. The Smṛtis prescribe different types of punishments for adultery, depending upon the circumstances. It ranges from the highest capital punishment to a fine of few paṇas.
The Brahmāṇa settlement was called grāma. In the layout of township, the Brāhmaṇas lived in separate quarters. The village or town settlement was deified as a devatā. Campāpati is such a deification. The Vedic texts indicate that the Nagara devatā or the Grāma devatā would protect the inhabitants of the settlements from calamities and answer their prayers. Gautami, the Brāhmaṇa lady who lost her son at the cemetry in Pumpukār, also called Campāpati, appealed to the Goddess Campāpati to restore the life of her son. She claimed that the texts of the Vedic Brāhmaṇas asserted that the gods would protect and answer the prayers of the inhabitants.
Gautami’s husband was called Pārppāṉ and her son pinaṅku nūl mārpaṉ, i.e., one wore sacred thread on his breast. The Nagara devatā is said to protect the banks of rivers, public places, trees, residences, and temples.
The Vaidika Brāhmaṇas regularly performed Vedic sacrifices. The smoke emanating from the Vedic sacrificial fire would fertilise the clouds and bring rains, and consequently prosperity to the people; a faith often mentioned in Vedic texts [31]. That the Brāhmaṇas freely performed sacrifices in which animals were killed is illustrated by the story of Āputtiraṉ. The story relates how Āputtiraṉ freed a cow that was to be sacrificed in a Brahmāṇa’s house and tells of the subsequent quarrel between the Brāhmaṇas and the boy.
The Vaidika system is called vaidika mārga or maṟai muṟai. Vetaviyātaṉ (Veda-vyāsa), Kirutakoṭi (Kṛtakoṭi), Jaimini (Jaimini) [32], Kecakampalaṉ and Kānātaṉ (Kānada) are said to be the expounders of the Vaidika logical systems. The different aspects of Vaidika mārga are described in great detail in the chapter on camaya kaṇakkar tantiram kēṭṭa kātai, “The episode of listening to different Philosophers”.
It is needless to go into all the details. We may note only one or two important points. It is clear that there were several sub-sects among the Vaidikas as seen from the term vaidika mārkkattu aḷavai vādi (வைதிக மார்க்கத்து அளவை வாதியை), “those who argue on the valid sources of cognition following the Vedic tradition”.
One of the sub-sects was called Vēdiyaṉ, the follower of the Vedas. This school laid stress on the six auxiliary sciences of kalpam, cantam, niruttam, cōtiṭam, cikkai and vyākaraṇam called the ṣadaṅgas. According to this school kalpam was considered the hand, candam the leg, cōtiṭam the eye, niruttam the ears, cikkai the nose and vyākaraṇam the face of the Veda. They are indicative of the role these auxiliary texts played in the study of the Vedas. This school also believed that the Vedas were not created by any agency but were self-manifest. They neither have a beginning nor end; ādi antam illai [38]. The Vedic texts were also believed to be injunctions to be strictly obeyed; vēdiyaṉ uraiyum vidhiyum kētṭu, “having listened to the injunctions of the Vedic follower”.
Similarly detailing the Śaiva school, the Maṇimēkalai gives the important concepts of Śaivas. According to this school Īśa is the Supreme God. The system speaks of the eightfold nature of the God consisting of the five elements, pañcabhūtas, the sun, the moon and the Yajamāna which constitute the eight entities. What was developed as Śarira Śariri bhāva by the Viśiṣṭādvaita school of Rāmānuja, was originally the main plank of Śaivism. It speaks of body and soul, uyir and yākkai. By using the word kaṭṭi. Cāttanār indicates the Śaiva concept of bondage. The Lord, according to this school has the nature of Kāla. He is the creator and destroyer. By destroying he removes the sufferings of human beings. Lord Śiva is considered without a second, Mahādeva.
Cāttanār uses the most significant terms of each school to denote their tenets. For example, the Vaidikas hold that the Vedas are of absolute and unquestionable authority and should be obeyed strictly. This is called a vidhi. Cāttanār uses the same word viti, vētiyan vitiyum kēṭṭu. Similarly, he uses the word paracu with reference to Śaivism. Paracu means little axe, in Tamiḻ. Śiva is pāracu paniyaṉ, one who wields the paracu. This is the most distinguishing weapon of the Lord. It is with this weapon Śiva cuts asunder the bondage of human beings. Paracu also means “to tell”. By using the term paracu nin teyvam. Cāttanār intends a double meaning. The first meaning for the phrase paracu niṉ teyvam means “tell me who is your God”. The second meaning is paracu niṉ teyvam - “your God is paracu (Śiva)”. Cāttanar’s treatment of different schools of philosophy is full of such significant terms exclusive to the respective schools.
4.5. Disposal of the dead Several customs relating to the disposal of the dead is mentioned in the text. In the cemetery sepulchral shrines were erected and there were clear indications on them that they were meant for different castes. Such shrines of bricks were built for saints, kings and women who committed sati. The cemeteries were laid out along with the original layout of the village settlements. The cemetery had an enclosing wall and was approached through four entrances. One of the entrances had a huge stucco figure of a Bhūta with a sūla and pāśa in its hands. Inside the cemetery was a temple dedicated to Cāmuṇḍā. The temple had an open yard and a bali pītha, i.e., sacrificial altar in front, and was surrounded by tall trees. Severed heads of those who had performed heroic self-sacrifice hung on the trees. The description of the cemetery closely resembles the temple of Kāḷi described in Bharaṇi literature like the Kaliṅkgattup-paraṇi or Takka-yāka-paraṇi. Inside the cemetery, posts had been erected which were believed to be inhabited by spirits to whom bali was offered. Clearly, all these were the faiths of the followers of Vaidika mārga.
There were some who observed smāśana vrata called cuṭalai nōṉpu as part of which they offered cooked food in front of the vanni trees. Different modes of disposing of the dead are mentioned in the text. There were those who cremated the body, exposed the dead, buried them, or laid them in an urn, etc.
When a king died, not in warfare, but due to other causes like old age, it was customary to place his body on a bier of darbha grass and symbolically cut his body with a sword. The Brāhmaṇas used to recite a Vedic mantra at that time saying, “you the dead king, you now will go to the abode of kings who died heroically at the battle front”. This was a Vaidika system which was prevalent in Tamiḻakam from the Saṅgam age. Puṟam 93 refers to this custom4. Informing the queen of the death of Prince Utayakumāran, an old lady tells her that it was customary to lay the dead body of the ruler on a grass and cut it with a sword reciting the mantra: taruppaiyil kiṭatti vālir polntu ceruppukal mannar celvali celkena “Placing (your dead body) on a spread of sacred grass, we now pierce your body with a sword [symbolically] so that (you) may reach heaven attained by kings who meet with heroic death.”
4.6. Bali offering Two of the customs mentioned deserve notice. The heroic warriors offered Bali in the yard of the Bhūta praying for the victory of the ruling monarch. There were mantira mākkaḷ (māntrikas) who offered Bali to the spirits pēy mākkaḷ to cure girls, children, pregnant women, and those suffering from deep wounds. Such Bali’s were thrown into the air with the cry addressed to the spirits to come and partake the Bali offerings. Similar offerings are made mainly to the spirits even to this day during the grāma śānti in the dead of the night. The epic Maṇimēkalai makes specific mention of such offerings.
The offering of Bali occupies an important place in Hindu domestic and temple rituals. It is frequently mentioned in the Maṇimēkalai. The Bali ranged from simple offering of flower or cooked rice to extreme sacrifices such as severing one’s own head and presenting it as a headflower – siras-puṣpa. Maṇimēkalai refers to such Bali pītha as divine altars (kadavuḷ pīṭikai). Such offerings are made at the beginning of festivals, and they are called Śānti during which offerings are made for the prosperity of the village and were known as grāma śānti. The dvipa-śānti, tivaka-śānti mentioned at the beginning of the text is such a vāstu-śānti. It was made for the well-being of the king, for plentiful rains and the prosperity of the country. Such śānti festivals were conducted in all the temples ranging from Śiva temples to that of the Bhūta Kṣetrapāla (pati val catukattu pūtam). A point of interest is that according to the Maṇimēkalai such festivals were performed by the Vaidika Brāhmaṇas, ārari Antaṇar.
There seems to be a suggestion by the text that the Tirukkuraḷ by Vaḷḷuvar mentioned as poyyil pulavaṉ, was related to the Vaidika system. In the legend narrated to the king, the father of Udayakumāraṉ, the Mahābhūta appears before Māruti, a Brāhmaṇa lady and tells her that she has been too fond of music, dance, and festivals. As a result, she lost her power of bringing down the rains, although she did not lose her chastity. In this context the Kuraḷ of Vaḷḷuvar is quoted verbatim. The whole context is set against the Vaidika background and this needs to be noted. teyvam toḻāḷ koḻunaṟṟoḻutu eḻuvāḷ peyyenap peyyum maḻai
Endnotes and References 1. Cilappadikāram - Veṭṭuvavari. ஆனைத்தோல் போர்த்துப் புலியின் உரியுடுத்துக் (7) கானத் தெருமைக் கருந்தலைமேல் நின்றாயால் வானோர் வணங்க மறைமேல் மறையாகி ஞானக் கொழுந்தாய் நடுக்கின்றி யேநிற்பாய்; வரிவளைக்கை வாளேந்தி மாமயிடற் செற்றுக் (8) கரியதிரி கோட்டுக் கலைமிசைமேல் நின்றாயால் அரியரன்பூ மேலோன் அகமலர்மேல் மன்னும் விரிகதிரஞ் சோதி விளக்காகி யேநிற்பாய்; சங்கமும் சக்கரமும் தாமரைக் கையேந்திச் (9) செங்கண் அரிமால் சினவிடைமேல் நின்றாயால் கங்கை முடிக்கணிந்த கண்ணுதலோன் பாகத்து மங்கை உருவாய் மறையேத்த வேநிற்பாய்; 2. The 11 dances are 1. Koḍu-koṭṭi - Śiva, 2. Pandaraṅgam - Bhārati, 3. Āriyak-kūthu - Kṛṣṇa fighting with an elephant, 4. Mallādal - Kṛṣṇa, 5. Tuḍi - Muruga 6. Kuḍai, 7. Kuḍam - Kṛṣṇa, 8. Pēdi - Kāmaṉ, 9. Marak-kāl - Durga, 10. Pāvai - Thirumakaḷ, 11. Kaḍaiyam - Indrāṇi. These were also classified as dance in standing and seated postures. 3. The Śilapadikāram, by V.R. Ramachandra Dik****ar, Oxford University Press, 1939. 4. Puṟam 93, poet Avvaiyār on Atiyamāṉ 93. பெருந்தகை புண்பட்டாய்! பாடியவர்: ஔவையார். பாடப்பட்டோன்: அதியமான் நெடுமான் அஞ்சி. திணை : வாகை. துறை: அரச வாகை. திண் பிணி முரசம் இழுமென முழங்கச் சென்று அமர் கடத்தல் யாவது? வந்தோர் தார்தாங் குதலும் ஆற்றார், வெடிபட்டு, ஓடல் மரீஇய பீடுஇல் மன்னர் நோய்ப்பால் விளிந்த யாக்கை தழீஇக், காதல் மறந்து, அவர் தீதுமருங் கறுமார் அறம்புரி கொள்கை நான்மறை முதல்வர் திறம்புரி பசும்புல் பரப்பினர் கிடப்பி, ‘மறம் கந்து ஆக நல்லமர் வீழ்ந்த நீழ் கழல் மறவர் செல்வுழிச் செல்க! என வாள்போழ்ந்து அடக்கலும் உய்ந்தனர் மாதோ; வரிஞிமிறு ஆர்க்கும் வாய்புகு கடாஅத்து அண்ணல் யானை அடுகளத் தொழிய, அருஞ்சமம் ததைய நூறி, நீ பெருந் தகை! விழுப்புண் பட்ட மாறே.
