The Pandyan Kingdom from the Earliest Times to the Sixteenth Century c9.46

c9.46

The chief argument against this conclusion has generally been found in the absence of any reference to Mānikkavāśagar in the catalogue of Śaiva saints (Tiruttondattogai) given by Sundaramūrti, who may be taken to have lived within a century of Gnānasambandar, the contemporary of Arikēsari Parānkuśa in the late seventh century. This may have been an accident, and at best an argument from silence cannot be pressed far. But Mr. Sesha Aiyar has pointed out with great plausibility that the expression ‘பொய்யடிமையில்லாத புலவர்’ in Sundara's list of saints does refer to our saint as it fits in very well with the traditional history of his life and doings. Those who hesitate to accept this suggestion are influenced by the authority of Nambi Andār Nambi and his successors, who have regularly followed him in interpreting this expression as a reference to the poets of the Madura Sangam. Great as must be the authority of Nambi and his successors in matters of religion and theology, I have no hesitation in declaring with Mr. Sesha Aiyar that the history involved in their interpretation of the Tiruttondattogai seems to be, much of it, wrong. The point is that continuity in religious tradition seems to be quite compatible with a break in secular historical tradition. For an illustration I may refer to the case of another saint in the list, Śeruttunai, who is spoken of as a king of Tanjore by Sundaramūrti; Nambi makes no mention of his having been a king at all, evidently because in his day nothing was known about such a ruler of Tanjore; and a little later, Sēkkilār in his Periyapurānam actually makes a Vaiśya (வேளாள்குடி முதல்வர்) of this king of Tanjore.