TAMIL SAIVISM AND SELF-RESPECT

The Saivaites Meet

Tinnevelly has witnessed the august gathering of the Saivaites of the province. For the last three months, there was such a great fuss about the conference that we were spending sleepless nights as to what would result from a congregation of the great savants of Saivism. We were also one of those who were anxiously expecting some good results from the assemblage of the great Tamil scholars of our province. We thought that the Saivaites have begun to take a sincere interest in the idea of reforming their religion according to the present standards of society. We also hoped that they would do something towards the enlistment of the depressed and the downtrodden. It was only with that fond hope that we published a series of questions in our papers to be carefully considered by those who were interested in the spread of Saivism.

We now see that we have been disappointed in our expectations. Our hopes have vanished into the thin air. The learned president has not only given vent to his cherished ideals, but has been an obstacle to those who came forward with sane views. He has attacked the Self – respect movement, but has not taken the pains to justify his attack. In short, he has joined the band of such vaidiks of the province as the president of the Varnashrama Conference, and the president of the Asthiga Sangam. Saivism, we are aware, owes its present position only to the few English educated scholars who recently attempted some reforms in it. Swami Vedachalam, the late V. P. Subramania Mudliar, Mr. K.Subramanian Pillai and others of this category are inseparably connected with Saivism.Their work in the sphere of reform and research has been chiefly responsible for the little popularity that is claimed for it. Or else Saivism would have been a thing of the past.

The intolerant nature of Saivism is clearly evident from the following passage, which we quote from the preface of “Caste and its Evil”, by Swami Vedachalam. He says, “The occasion which called it (this book) into existence was this. I was present at the annual gathering of the Saiva Siddanta Saba held at Tuticorin in December 1910. The lecturers were treated rather badly, simply because they happened to belong to non-vegetarian castes. Only those whose lineage was known to have originated with the vegetarian Vellala parents, were invited to sit in one hall and dine together; while others, whose adherence to Saiva religion and clean vegetarian mode of living could not be questioned, but whose only fault was, what was occasioned by the mere accident of birth, were made to sit aloof in a separate place and served meals rather lately. I made up my mind to dine rather with the excluded party than with such self-conceited Saivaites. And accordingly, I did dine with the forbidden brethren. But so much did this action of mine enrage the Saivaite brethren that, on the next day, they forbade me entering their dining hall during meal-times”.

This is one aspect of the present state of Saivism. Another aspect is with reference to the marks on the forehead. The present day Saivism is so emphatic about the necessity of the ‘holy’ ashes on the forehead that one of the resolutions of conference emphasizes upon the mark as an essential feature of Saivism. The twelve Thirumurais and certain portions of Vedas and Agamas are accepted as the scriptures of Saiva religion and yet Saivism is said to be acceptable for all states of society and for all time. We hear for the first time, of a religion for all time and for all states of society. We shall be glad to be informed by these Saivaites, what is the proportion of the Saivaites to other religionists of the world. A religion of universal love, as Saivism is claimed to be, had played an important part in the impaling of the Jains and Buddhists. The Puranas say this and festivals are also held in Saiva temples. And today the ardent followers of this religion are the most intolerant religionists of the world. Saivism stops in many cases with vegetarianism. Even then, the superiority of birth plays its mischievous part. For, we know as a matter of fact, the pillars of Saivism, in spite of their being vegetarians are not allowed the privilege of dining with the so-called hereditary vegetarians. Then again, Saivism stops with the mark on the forehead, the tuft of hair and the beads. This is the dress aspect of this universal religion.

Then with regard to the question of untouchables, the Saivaites pride themselves in the universality of their religion by citing the example of Nandanar, as one among the band of 63. But when it comes to the question of practicability, the living Nandanars are treated worse than animals. If today there are any people in our province who are deliberately bent upon suppressing the depressed classes, it is, we can boldly say, the, the so-called Saivaites and yet it is an ‘universal’ religion. If the Saivaites are really sincere about introducing reforms in their religion, if they are really alive to the inequalities perpetrated in the name of god and religion, shall we ask them how far they have attempted to bring their words to action.

A three month’s fuss about the Conference has ended in a little bit of smoke at Tinnevelly. The conveners, we understand have been very careful in disallowing ‘undesirable elements’ into the ‘universal religionists’ gathering. Placards stating that nobody should raise questions were hung. Perhaps this ingenious method was adapted from the Saivaite magnate of Puvalur, where the same thing was done recently on the occasion of the 19^th anniversary of the Saiva Siddhanta Sangam. The spread of Saivism under police bandobust is a new feature to be noted by the historian. This is but a reflection of impaling of the Jains and Buddhists by ‘Saint’ Gnanasmbandar. And yet this is a religion of ‘universal love’. It is not a negligible factor that one Saiva Conference has led to another at Cuddalore. If Tinnevelly has done anything, it is this: It has intelligently suppressed the raising of questions, and has given out some vague suggestions. If Mr. Thirukudasundram Pillai was denied admission, it shows only another aspect of this ‘universal’ religion. We anxiously await the next gathering of these ardent advocates of the Saiva religion.

Revolt, 10 April 1929

The Tinnevelly Saiva Conference (By Sam Fuller)

The readers of Revolt will be glad to note that this Conference was the direct outcome of the energetic exposure of the morbid growth of Saivism for ages by the Self-respecting party at its conference recently held at Chengleput. Under the auspices of the Madras, Tuticorin, Palamcottah and Tinnevelly Saiva Sabhas, this Conference met at the Ganapathy Vilas Theatre, Tinnevelly town on the last three days of March during the Easter season. Almost every Tamil District had its representatives, both educated and orthodox Saivaites. During its sittings about twenty five subjects were discoursed on; and though the Subjects Committee arrived at certain conclusions, they were not adumbrated as resolutions at the public meeting. Mr. Sachithanandam, who presided at the Conference, was tactful enough to steer clear of the shoal and shallows of Orthodox Saivism. It is to the great credit of Kudi Arasu and Revolt that the thoroughly sectarian Saivaites accepted free-entry in temples, of the untouchables and unshadowables, should they turn Saivaites and (accept) vegetarianism as an important creed, and also re-conversion of Indian Christians and admission of men of alien faith into the fold of Saivism under a specified declaration and costless ceremony. Though vegetarianism implies ahimsa, non-killing and non-flesh eating, it need not be a condition for temple-entry and for absorption into the Saivaite band; for, at the present day many flesh-eating sections such as Maravas, Yadhavas, Naidus etc., come under the category of Saivaites and have free temple entry without the imposition of vegetarianism. This being the case, the imposition of vegetarianism on the re-converts and new embracers of Saivism is an obstacle or a stumbling block to the spread of that faith.

Another point that engaged the long and serious attention of the Conference and the Subjects Committee was the fixing of the Scriptures or the standard authorities (text books) for Saivaites. The Conference had not the courage of its conviction to cut adrift from the Vedas and Agamas and the twelve Thirumurais imbued with Vaidik Saivism. The Vedas are a forbidden fruit to the Non-Brahmins as a whole and the Agamas are yet to see the light of the day in Tamil.

These two authorities have been and are being quoted ever and anon by the Sanskritist to hoodwink the vernacular-knowing peoples and to appropriate their hard earnings for the performance of one ceremony or other. Voluminous in themselves, they cannot be gone through even by the wealthy individuals of the learned and leisured community. The happy suggestion made by a casual visitor, who was not a member of the Subjects’ Committee that the Saivaite Scripture for the present day world absorbed in making both ends meet, must be a small compendium but comprehensive one like the Christian Decalogue and the Sivagnana Botham in Tamil is of that description was accepted by the majority, but sacrificed at the altar of the Saivaite’s sentiment towards the four hymns of the four great religious Teachers. It is deplorable, that the Conference though apparently large-intentioned, succumbed to the prestige of the earthly human gods and has thereby consigned the masses to time-honoured ignorance and superstitions.

Further, the Subjects’ Committee trembled and trepidated when the question of an intermediary between God and man came on the anvil; and when Benares and Goharnam were cited as instances, some were audacious enough to quote the priest in Christian Churches, in Mosques, etc., to justify the continuance of the pujari in the temples. They altogether ignored the vulture aspect of the pujari muttering and mumbling mantras, ununderstandable by the worshippers as distinguished from the parson or mullah who helps or leads the congregation in prayer in its own tongue, and preaches a sermon calculated to raise the wretched up to virtue’s high path or to enlighten the spiritually thirsty assembly. The temple ‘tharshan’ question being the most important one, it must be sat on the forthcoming Conference at Cuddalore, lest the Conferences of this kind lose public confidence.

Whatever be the decisions of the Conferences, it would take a long time to put them into practice. So steps were suggested to educate the masses in the principles of reason and rational religious freedom before the temple authorities could be approached for giving effect to them. Thanks to the presence of double and triple barreled graduates, the conference was able to overcome the narrow prejudices of the orthodox Saivaites and come to reason in the matter of temple entry and of conversion or re-conversion of men of alien persuasion. So far so good. It is hoped that as years advance, and more light is thrown on the subjects of the Saivaite creed and belief, greater toleration will prevail and make for higher civilisation and universal brotherhood.

Revolt, 10 April 1929

To the Saivites

We have time and again pointed out in these columns how the Saivites of our province have begun to feel the impending necessity of reconstructing their religion. Some of the orthodox elements of Saivism who were persistent about the retention of age-long customs are beginning to realise that their very religion runs the hazard of being washed away in the rationalistic current that is flowing rapidly in every bosom of the younger generations. Our frank observations about the present day Saivism and its intolerant attitude have only roused the fury of some puritanic members of the creed. Our intention is not to purposely wound the religious feelings of any person, but to do away with anything which is a hindrance to equality, liberty, justice and progress. But we know, that things look yellow to jaundiced eyes. And that is no fault of ours. We wish to draw the attention of our readers, especially the staunch Saivaites to the series of articles written by our learned friend Mr. Chidambaram Pillai, the first of which we are publishing elsewhere in this issue. As one belonging to Saivism itself and as one who has studied the subject in detail, Mr. Pillai is dealing with all disputed questions, point by point, and gives an unprejudiced opinion about them. His arguments are chiefly based upon the critical study of Saivism by the famous Jurist, Mr. K. Subramania Pillai. Our friend shows how the Saivaite mentality and vision are blurred by an overdose of the religious bigotry and how the Self-respect movement is humanitarian in its outlook. Let those Saivaite magnates who cry hoarse at the introduction of reforms, read these articles with a clear mind and think over them in their solitude.

Revolt, 1 May 1929

Saivite Mentality and Self-respect (By P.C. Chidambaram Pillay, B.A., B.L)

In the balanced words of Mr. A. Ramasami Mudaliar, “the rising star of the unbending Non-Brahmins,” the leaders of the Self-Respect movement “have done their task; they have increased the literature over this question; (of temple worship and temple entry); they have driven you to examine the whole position; they have made you realize that your religious system wants an examination and while you were sleeping, the need has arisen – if need be – even to combat the Self-respect propaganda, that you should come forward with your views, with your ideas, with your facts of the religious and social system in the country. That, I believe, has been the result of their activities”.

The Saivites of Madras Presidency, as a result of this aggressive movement, very properly examined their position at a Conference in Tinnevelly recently. Somehow or other, their attitude was not considered sympathetic towards the Self- respect Movement. That is why Mr. Ramasami Mudaliar had to say in his Gokhale Hall speech as regards temple worship, “Tinnevelly is up”. Tinnevelly was up against a stiff proposition; Mrs. Grundy in Tinnevelly was trying to sweep the ocean back from her doorsteps.

From the nature of the proceedings which took place in that conference and the resolutions passed therein particularly with reference to the entry of the oppressed classes into temples for worship it looks as though the Saivites are not with the Self-respect movement. It is indeed regrettable that it should be so.

As a born Saivite, for what it is worth, I am indeed sorry that my learned friends should have pursued such a short sighted and suicidal policy at Tinnevelly.

Let us see what exactly is the position of the Non Brahmin Saivites themselves in the matter of temple worship. I can do no better than quote my esteemed friend Mr. K. Subramania Pillai M.A., M.L., a scholar of very wide repute in Tamil; one of the few profound Jurists in India; and an acknowledged authority on Saiva Sidhanta Philosophy. (The extracts are from his publication styled “A Note on the Madras Religious Endowments Bill”.)

First of all, let us see where exactly the Saivite public in South India stand, in the matter of their religious beliefs. Says Mr. Pillai.

(1)    “Even in Tamil land, the sly and ever aggressive tide of Aryan spiritual domination has been long creeping into the minds of the ignorant Tamil public and threatening to shake the foundations of Tamilian thought and culture.”

(2)    “It is a pity that the majority of the Tamil Saivite public are grossly ignorant of the very ends and aims of their institutions and what is worse, are labouring under a confusion of their faith with Smarthaism.” (The italics are mine; by Smarthaism is meant I suppose, Brahminism).

(3)    “The average Saivite or Vaishnavite is generally ignorant of the tenets of his religion and he goes to worship in a temple with a material end in view led by the prospect of a divine blessing which superstition holds up to the public gaze.”

(4)    “The Majority of Hindus little care to respect the rules of their religion.”

(5)    “The religious ignorance of the Saivites and the temple priests is a source of self-sought confusion to them.”

(6)    “The ordinary Non-Brahmin Saivite with little knowledge of his religion is apt to be victimized by the glib tongued Smartha diplomat.”

Now these observations of Mr. K. Subramania Pillai will go to show that the Tamil Saivite public are vastly ignorant of what religion is and what their temples are for, and what is more significant, that Tamilian worship is based purely upon superstition.

I cannot conclude this aspect of the question more pertinently than by adopting his own words. “In the present state of popular indifference to religion, it may happen that the reasonable cry of the educated few in support of the legitimate ideals, is drowned in the confused din and stir of the materially minded and their leaders, and the true character and purpose of the temples is lost sight of.”

Very weighty words, these. But one may well ask the Tinnevelly Saivites who are as ignorant of their religion as their neighbours, that even if the reasonable cry of the educated few (and we do not know their number nor who they are) is getting systematically drowned and that even before the Self-respect movement was started, one may well ask them, as to what is going to happen, now, to the unreasonable cry of the Saivite, many or few, educated or uneducated, that the oppressed classes should not be given an entry into the temples for worship.

There is a proverb in Tamil which says; “It is not the beating by the husband that irritated the wife but because the mother in law was looking on”. There is absolutely not the slightest reason for any Saivite to get offended with the Self-respect movement. On the other hand, as I shall show presently, he ought to be right in the forefront, in the vanguard of the movement itself.

II

Let us see who exactly is responsible for the deplorable condition of the temples of the Non-Brahmin Saivite. To be guided again by Mr. Subramania Pillai, he says:-

1. “Even today the Puja in the Saivite temple is performed only by Adi-Saivites and the Agama expressly forbids Smarthas from entering the Holy of Holies and performing the Archanai on pain of disaster to the king and community.”
2. “In the Saivite religion the Adi-Saivites are given the highest place in society, although by the Smarthas they are viewed as half-sudra aliens.”
3. “The Adi-Saivites themselves were probably a sub-class of Vellalas.”
4. “The Adi-Saivite who performs the Puja is not of the same race as the Smartha Brahmins.”
5. “The temple priest in most cases goes to a Smartha assistant for Agamic information who naturally presents to him a medley of Agamic and Smritic rules in respect of temple ceremonies.”
6. “The uninitiated Smarthas look down upon Tamil as the language of the Sudras and the foolish Adi-Saivites carried away by the glamour of their wealth and position falls a prey to their suggestion that Sanskrit alone is a language of the Brahmins.”
7. “The priest of the temple is mostly sunk in gross ignorance of the tenets of his religion and treats his office more or less in a mercenary spirit. He feels as a kind of Brahmin that he has no common interest with the members of the religion and he is carried away by the material progress and prosperity of the English knowing Smartha gentry and feels it the fullness of bliss that life could give him if he wins a corner in the fold of the Smarthas.”

There is a well known proverb: “The Dhoby loved his wife and his wife loved the ass.”

So then, the pujari is the tragedy; and not the Self-respect movement. The Pujari must be an Adi -Saivite – a sub class Vellala – according to Saivism. He was permitted to occupy the highest position in Non Brahmin Saivite society. Not because of his culture or learning. He was most often a fool entirely ignorant of his own religion and working for purely mercenary ends. Instead of being satisfied with the highest position given to him by the Vellala-Saivite-Sudra Society he wanted to become something better, a Brahmin and quite properly said, it was a proper ambition on his part because it is the ambition of every Non Brahmin Saivite to reach a higher level, to become something of a Brahmin in spite of protestations to the contrary. The net result of it is, the Adi-Saivite Pujari deserted the Vellala Saivites and is making (and has all along been doing it) common cause with the Brahmins. According to Mr. K. S. Pillai, it was due to the mischief of the Brahmin, the ignorance of the Saivite and the never ending cupidity of the Adi-Saivite. Partly also it seems to have been due to the ignorance of the Saivite Committee Members and Trustees of Temples.

The Non Brahmin Saivite was between the Devil and the Deep Sea.

Now let us see what happened to the Non Brahmin Saivite at the hands of the Brahmins after the latter had got hold of the Adi Saivites.

1. “As a well organized intellectual body, the Smartha Brahmins best know how to make the most of their chances in the temples and convert them into Smritic institutions. Already they have won the outskirts of the Saiva system by making people believe that Saiva Siddhantam or Agamic system is nothing else than a part of their so called big religion and are simply biding their time to make them selves masters of the situation.”
2. “The realization of their object is visible in the application of the increasing surplus of a Saivite temple like Rameswaram (which was till lately under the control of a Saivite Pandarasannadhi according to immemorial usage) not at all for the proper religious instruction of the temple priests or Saivite worshippers thereof, but to Sanskrit education little useful to the temple, exclusively in the interests of Smartha and Vaishnaivite Brahmins.”
3. “Within living memory almost all the Saivite temples were wholly in the hands of Saivite gentlemen and Saiva Madathipathies but the face of affair has been wholly changed by the Smarthas coming into power.”

Therefore it is a grievance on the part of the Saivite that there are, at the present movement, very few temples which he can call his own. They are now almost all of them under Brahmin domination. Therefore the quarrel, in so far as the puristic Saivite is concerned, is not with the followers of the Self Respect Movement, who avowedly are not interested in the domination of any human being in any temple which is professedly dedicated to God and neither to a Saivite nor to a Brahmin.

III

And what happened next, in the Saivite temples, after the Brahmin domination? Let Mr. K .S. Pillai himself narrate it.

1)       “Strenuous attempts have been and are being made to set up the idol of Adi-Sankara in Saivaite temples and the smarthas are thus waiting for an opportunity to avail themselves of the ignorant and credulous Saivites to assert unwarranted claims of this nature.”

2)       “At Tiruchendur some of the Smarthas are fed at a spot in the Sannidhanam of the deity at the time of Naivedyam by way of providing messmates to God Subramanya. This will show how the Smartha Guru will be naturally viewed as God’s peer.”

3)        “The Saivite trustees and committee Members ignorant of and indifferent to their religion are misled by Smarthas into celebrating two Sivarthri days, one for the Saivites and the other for the Vedists.”.

4)       “Even last year (1921) a respectable gentleman who is a good Tamil scholar and a High court Vakil was required to obtain the special permission of the Smartha trustees to deliver lectures on Saivism in the Tinnevelly Temple for the simple reason that he wanted to preach the true ideals of the religion.”

5)       “In Tiruchendur, for instance, the Madhva or Smartha priests substituted for Adi Saivites to perform the Puja to the central deity are ignorant of the Agama called Kumara Tantram which was the original code of ceremonies for the temple. The proper course ought to have been the reform of the Adi Saivites or substitution of other Saivite priests for them.”

6)       “Because the Vedic hymns were sung in Sanskrit, the ordinary Saivites were ignorant of the fact that the Smarthas sang songs about their various petty gods in the Saiva temples.”

7)       “In many of the Saivite temples where Thevaram is sung, its singing is interfered with by the distribution of Prasadams to Brahmins before it is completed. (In all the temples in Travancore which are entirely under Govt. control, Prasadams are never offered to a Non Brahmin by the priest but are thrown on the floor. Seemingly Mr. Pillai is not aware of this.)

8)       “The Sanskrit college founded out of the Saivite temple at Rameswaram had been already adverted to.”

Put in plain language, what does the complaint of the Saivite amount to? There is no temple for the Saivite; his pujari has either disappeared or has joined the Brahmin ranks; the Saiva Madathipathies have fallen a prey to Brahmin influence, and have forgotten all about Saivism; the Brahmins have constituted themselves the peers of the Gods and are actually dining with the Gods leaving the Saivite out in the cold; the Brahmins Prasadam is seemingly more important to him than the Saivites Thevaram; Brahmin priests are singing hymns in Saivites temples in a language which neither the singer nor the sung understand but the Gods seemingly understand and appreciate them. Thus put, all the rituals and ceremonies in all Saivite temples are purely Brahminical and nothing Saivitic about it. And the crowning insult of it all was that it is being found necessary to get the permission of Brahmins for “respectable and educated” Saivites to lecture in those temples and lecture on their own religion.

IV

Now under such circumstances, one thing is perfectly clear. It ought to come with an ill grace from a Non-Brahmin Saivite to have to refuse permission to any member of any class whatever of the so called Hindu society to go and worship in such a temple; which avowedly does not now belong to the Saivite; where the ceremonies are not conducted by his own Pujari; nor according to his Saiva religion; where the singing of his Thevaram is being interfered with and where even discourses on his religion by “educated” and “respectable” Saivites are not countenanced.

Anther thing is equally clear. The purist of a Non-Brahmin Saivite must have his hands full and his work cut out for him. He must have very little time left to look after the spiritual or religious welfare of others while he cannot call his soul his own. He requires all the time and energy at his disposal for conveying the “true religion” to his own ignorant “Saivite Public”; to his equally “ignorant” Guru or Madathipathi; to his still more ignorant priest of an Adi Saivite and to the not less ignorant Temple Trustees and Committee members. He has got to lead “the famous temple builders of the South” – the Nagarathars – into the right track and dissuade them from founding Vedapatasalas. He has got to dislodge the Brahmin from the Saivite temples, prevent him from performing Pujas and Archanais and from dining with the Gods, prevent him from constructing more Sanskrit college out of Saivite funds than the one at Rameswaram.

It is because many a Saivite found it manifestly impossible to achieve any of the above objects and not worthwhile achieving it at that, that he left the Saivite fold and joined the Self-respect movement. Here is at any rate something that is alive. It is not exactly flogging a dead superstition. It is a live issue intended to conserve the Self-respect of every individual being.

Why should a “respectable” Saviite gentleman seek the permission of Brahmin Trustees for delivering lecturers upon his religion in his “own” temple? Why enter that temple at all?

Why should you permit Brahmins to perform puja in your temple, when your religion says it ought not to be done and it is not to the good of the king or the community?

Why should you permit Brahmins to dine with your Gods? Why do you allow all these things? Have you any Self- respect? Why do you stick on to such miserable temples where you can find admittedly, no religious consolation yourself?

Why don’t you build other temples yourself – your own temples, to worship your own Gods in your own way according to the dictates of your one and only “true religion” Saiva Siddhanta and retain something of your Self- respect?

My friend Mr. Sachidanandam Pillai has said of the Depressed Classes in these touching words in his little book, “The present condition of Saiva Religion” – published in 1926 (in Tamil):

“We must add on to our numbers our poor brethren. All of them, at least most of then, right from the beginning, were noble minded people wearing holy ashes, as suited to their condition in life, that were worshiping petty Gods. It is but correct and proper that they also should be included in the statistics of the Saivites as such. As by remaining Saivites, there is no hope for them either in this life or in a future one, these poor people with a view to enjoy some happiness in this life at least have entered other religions. Those that are thus deserting the Saivite religion amount to lakhs” – etc. (Translated).

Is it not unfortunate, even if it is not impertinent, that you should advise these ”poor brethren” of the oppressed classes – Saivites according to you for ststistical purposes – that you should ask them to build separate temples for their worship and not use “your” temples where you worship not your Gods, but the Gods of this earth? Is it not a little unreasonable, entirely uncharitable, and totally subversive of the first fundamental of your Saivisim that “God is love”?; a sheer waste of your educated enthusiasm that you should prevent by thought, word or deed, these oppressed classes from entering these temples for worship, please, and for nothing else? Then why do you sit up and howl? Why do you accuse Brahmins thus? “What ever savours of cosmopolitanism in Saivite Temples is discouraged by Smartha worshippers” Is it true? Is it honest?

The Smartha worshipper cares a brass farthing for your Saivite temples or who goes and worships therein. “In India”, wrote Sir. H.K. Beauchamp in one of his notes in editing the Memoirs of the Abbe Dubois, “we see the grossest forms of superstition side by side with the most wonderfully refined system of philosophy. The philosophic Brahmin contends that it is ridiculous to try to inculcate into the common and uneducated herd the subtler forms of doctrine. Hence the various forms of idolatrous worship”. Substitute “Saivite” for Brahmin and it will hold equally well. Ask Mr. E. V. Ramasami of Erode who led the Satyagraha at Suchindram temple as well. The Brahmin is always only in the background. It is your ignorant Non-Brahmin Saivite and men with the like mentality who create all the bother. The Saivite is worse, infinitely worse in religious bigotry and is a source of immense trouble and a huge stumbling block to all progress. If Nemesis is going to overtake Saivism, no right thinking man will regret it. On the other hand, it will be all to the good of the country.

I can do no better than quote a few lines from Mr. R. J. Minney’s proscribed book “Siva or the Future of India” (taken from the Illustrated Weekly of India dated 7^th April 1929):

“Within the next hundred years India can be the greatest and most prosperous country in the world; She has three times the population of United States, untold mineral wealth, tremendous agricultural possibilities … all can be made predominant in the world markets. Britain can secure India this future, But Britain is too hesitant. Left to herself India can accomplish nothing. The three hundred million people have neither the wish nor the will to attain predominance or prosperity. Caste, religion and sex are the most formidable barriers in the obstacle race. Drastic action for reform will have to be undertaken. Religion will have to be purged of its impurities. Material ambitions must be infused into the people. Persuasion or propaganda can achieve nothing at all. The same stern methods that brought about abolition of suttee can alone effect the cure here.

And today where does Saivism stand? “God is love”; they sing in Hate. Your God said, your Siva said, “Let there be light”! And what happened?

And there was Darkness! That is modern educated Saivism and its last refuge happens to be Tinnevelly seemingly.

Some more Light please, and not more Darkness. Don’t disagree with your God.

Revolt, 1, 8, 15 May 1929

Self-Respect Saivites Conference, Pattukottai

The above Conference was held at Pattukottai in the Traveller’s Bungalow on the 26^th May, under the Presidency of Mr. S. Murugappan, Editor, Kumaran. The President was proposed and seconded by more than two representatives for each district in the province. There was a very large gathering of Self-respecting Saivites. Mr. N. Dandapani, Chairman of the Reception Committee delivered a humorous but instructive speech on the priest-ridden and Puranic Saivism that is obtaining today and condemned the narrow outlook of the present day Saivites.

The President traced the origin and history of Saivism, cited innumerable instances of the catholicity of its views and showed how the present day Saivites are not the real Saivites at all. He criticised the ill intentioned attitude taken by the Saivites at Tinnevelly and Cuddalore. Saivism, the religion of pure ‘love’ has swerved from its main tenets, and has degenerated into outward show of ashes and bead. He held that those references and expressions in the Saivite books which are calculated to wound the feelings of any living being, and which are calculated to spread the baneful spirit of intolerance, ought to be immediately removed. He dwelt upon the various aspects of Saivism and proved how all of them are in perfect consonance with the aims of the Self – respect movement.

The following resolutions were passed:

(a)    This Conference resolves that all those who subscribe to its views without any distinction of caste, or religion, shall become members of the Self respect Saivites League which preaches the real Saivite creed, viz “Siva is Love”

(b)    This Conference informs the public that the resolutions passed at the Tinnevelly and Cuddalore Conferences by narrow minded people will not in any way bind the true Saivites.

(c)     This Conference resolves that a true Saivite need not necessarily wear the ashes and the beads, which are nothing but mere outward show.

(d)    This Conference resolves that all people, without distinction of caste or religion who desire to worship the image may have entrance into the Saivite temples.

(e)     This Conference congratulates the Erode Devasthanam Committee for its resolution in favour of temple entry for all and also congratulates Messrs. Eswaran, Pasupathy and Karuppan, for having boldly acted upon it.

(f)     This Conference resolves that those references and passages which are antagonistic to the “love” creed of the real Saivism, and which are revolting to our commonsense, ought to be deleted, and fresh editions should be published with a view to encourage and enrich the literature.

(g)     This Conference enjoins upon the Self-respect Saivites to sacrifice their all, for the purpose of establishing the real Saivism, which is nothing but “love”, in the place of the false one which is existing today.

(h)    This Conference resolves that the next Self-respect Saivites Conference shall be held at Trichinopoly, and the following gentlemen shall be requested to be the members of the Reception committee (with powers to co-opt) :

Messrs. Mani Tirunavukkarasu Mudaliar, Madras; C. Chidambaram Pillai, Vakil, Kovilpatti: T. Thirukutasundaram, M.A., B.L. Tinnevelly; N.M. Selvakkanapathi, Puvalur; K. A. P. Viwswnathan, Trichy; Mayuramani R. Chinnaiah, Karugudi; A. R. Ramanatha Desikar, Tinnevelly; N. Dhandapani, Chidambaram; S. Guruswami, Sholavandan; A.R. Sivanandam, Coimbatore; V.S. Sivagnana Desikar, Tinnevelly ; C. A. Aiyamuthu, Coimbatore; Swami Chidambaranar, Rajamatam and S. Murugappar, Karaikkudi.

Revolt, 5 June 1929

Saivism – An Exposure (By P. C. P)

Who is a Saivite? And What is Saivism?

Some twenty years ago in Travancore we started defining who a Tamilian was – we have not arrived at any settlement till now.

The initial difficulty is to define a Saivite and Saivism. Sometimes it denotes a caste or sub-caste; at other times it denotes a religion; at a third it denotes a system of philosophy. It may be all three at the same time. It may indicate a Vellala or not; it may indicate a vegetarian or non-vegetarian. At one time it may even have denoted a Brahmin as undoubtedly it did; but one is afraid whether it does now.

Before we proceed any further let us be clear upon one or two points first. Leaving out the question of caste for the present and taking into account the religion of the Saivite, a well known Tamil Saiva Siddhanta scholar, now no more, said :-

“The majority of every people and nation are virtually atheistic and materialistic, though professing a belief in God and conforming to the usages of society”. That is as true of the ordinary Saivite community as of any other. This has been endorsed by other Saivite scholars as well. The ignorance of the Tamil Saivite public in religious matters has been placed beyond controversy. Such being the case and the Self-respect movement being a mass movement there is nothing offensive when it is accused of being ignorant; nay even when it is said to be composed of Nasthigars or Atheists. Under the eclectic Hindu religious system the worst Atheist may be a very good Hindu – provided there was a profession of a belief in any Hindu God, and provided there was the observance of the caste or social usages. This is what Mrs. Besant meant when the spoke of “the Hindu’s principle of rigidity of conduct and freedom of thought”. This is known as eclectic Hinduism. It may mean anything or nothing.

Practical religion always falls short of the ideal that is the case with every religion. There is what is known as “the dull level” of the religionist. Each religionist in this essentially materialistic world most often attempts what his co-religionist does, rather than understand and appreciate his religion itself, and there it ends.

The ideal is always sought only by the intellectual few. They are in a minority; and necessarily they must be. First there is the question of leisure; secondly mental equipment and philosophic bent; thirdly religious fervor.

The intellectual Saivites who are forced by circumstances to be in a minority; they are philosophers, most of them, they are exponents of our famous Saiva Siddhanta philosophy, which has been evolved as a science out of the Saivite religion as it existed more than a thousand years ago.

If, as admitted, ignorance is the monopoly of the majority of Saivites and we of the Self-respect movement can candidly say we are in that majority, then the intellectual Saivites – a mere handful – will feel provoked by our very presence. That is only reasonable. Intellect, especially the tabloid intellect of the inelastic type, is always impatient at the sight of ignorance.

But, as they say, misfortunes never come single. The Saivite intelligentsia have been sour long before the ‘ignorant’ Self-respect movement appeared on the field. To put it shortly intellectual Saivism met with treachery from all sides.

While Brahmin Saivites and Vellala Saivites joined hands and fought like brothers in putting down Jainism, we find the self same Brahmins leave the Saiva fold and flocking round Sankaracharya who had evolved a magnificent and at the same time a very convenient philosophy and that out of Buddhism which was also ruthlessly suppressed.

Thus Smarthaism permitted a good deal of elasticity of conduct to its followers while leaving to the Saivities all the rigidity as of old. The result was, the Smarthas benefited materially and politically as later events showed.

The Saivites in order to treasure up their philosophy founded Mutts on the monastic pattern of the Jains and Buddhists and now disaster has overtaken the Saivite and his philosophy here also.

These Adhinams (Saivite mutts – editors) of today were our old Annamalai Universities – for promulgating our Saivite religion and Saivite philosophy. Today when we think of our Saiva Adhinams we, Saivities have to hang down our heads in very shame. These Adhinams have fallen among others under the political and legal influence of Smarthaism. Inculcation of Saivite philosophy, is today at any rate, not within the curriculum of these Adhinams. Years ago one angry Saivite, Arumuga Navalar consigned these Adhinams to hell-fire. Nothing happened to the Adhinams at any rate; perhaps there was no fire in hell.

Our temples have become ‘dens of prostitution’ and our Mutts have become ‘dens of iniquity’. Of course, there are a very few honourable exceptions though unimportant.

With the disappearance of Saiva Siddhanta Universities for propagating our philosophy, our Saiva religion also fell under the spell of Smarthaism or Brahminism. Thus far Saiva Religion and Philosophy.

Let us for a moment turn to Tamil Literature. From that glorious moment when Brahmins and Vellalas banded themselves together to root out the Jain, nemesis overtook Tamil literature also. Associations – religious and literary – led to translation and admiration and even servility. One very ardent Saivite, in his enthusiasm for Sanskrit, even went the length of saying that he was ashamed of the Tamil language. For centuries together, under the auspices of Saivism and the influence of Brahminism, Tamil quite willingly and very meekly submitted itself to a second place by the side of Sanskrit until it was retrieved by an English Missionary of honoured name – Dr. Caldwell among others.

This servile and meaningless admiration of the Saivite for Brahminism has led to the offering of the deepest insult to Dravidian culture and genius. Atrocities committed by the unholy Brahmin-Vellala combine upon Jains and Buddhists, especially Jains, came to be faithfully recorded in the Tamil Puranas. The revolting story as it stands must be historically untrue or grossly exaggerated; if true, the verdict of the historian today will be that the Brahmins and Vellalas of those times must have been a set of bloodthirsty ruffians. But were they really? It cannot even now be subjected to criticism because these silly stories are contained in the Puranas and therefore they have become sacred.

The same dodge was tried with Ramayana as well – I am dealing with it subsequently. If this canon of literary and historical criticism as regards sacerdotal literature was accepted, it would just mean, that no literary work of any importance, which appeared within the last 1500 years in Tamil can be criticized at all, for there was practically no literary work of any merit after that period which was not religious and which was not, therefore, sacred.

The admiration of the Vellala Saivite for Brahmanism reached its highest water mark when it was bluntly laid down that Tamil was born of Sanskrit.

It did not stop here; it also laid down that Saiva Siddhanta system was Aryan in inception and genius and not Dravidian at all. The joke is complete when you remember that the foundations of Tamil Saivism are laid deep in Sanskrit. And it is all the Vellala Saivite who did it. For fear of getting drowned in lay criticism and appreciation for safety’s sake, the Tamil Vellala Saivite jumped into the Sanskrit Smartha well. The body is now claimed by both.

Now what is the net result of it all? The intellectual Saivite, at best in a hopelessly microscopic minority, has been deserted by his academies or Adhinams; has been deserted by his old militant religious allies, the Smartha Brahmins; not merely that the self same Brahmin adopted a new philosophy diametrically opposed to Saiva Siddhantam. The tale continues. The Brahmin has wrested the temples from the Saivites. And on the top of it, both Tamil literature and Tamil religion are at the intellectual and literacy mercy of the Smartha Brahmin.

Have we seen the end of it? No. The political power today is with the Brahmin. A thousand years ago it might have been with the Vellala. With the Jain fratricide, that political power of the Vellala disappeared. He was made to pull the chestnuts out of the fire by the Brahmin and for the Brahmin. The power of the Vellala since then has been a benami – he has been a bare name lender; he is today also, that and nothing else.

Within the last century with his political power, a fresh impetus has been given to Smartha intellect and Smartha religion: while the Saivite was hanging on to his old rigidity – his exclusiveness; his isolated splendour.

Publicity of Smarthaism

Look at the tours undertaken by the Smartha Guru, Sankaracharya. They are being undertaken mainly for the purpose of impressing Smarthaism upon the ignorant masses. Who are the disciples who bear the palanquin? A Smartha District Collectors; a District Judge or two, the lesser fry; the shining lights or the bar; the elite of society. He becomes and has become the Loka-guru. The Vellala Saivite who is spoiling him anywhere, does the next best thing – spends it upon the Smartha Guru: and no doubt feels immensely pleased with himself.

His Smartha friends, the elite of society, admire his Saivism, his Asthigam: his many qualities of head and heart. He is in their good books. The Saiva Vellala at his own expense feeds many a Brahmin, most of them better placed than himself.

In Travancore, during Car festivals, when the car has to be pulled leaves are spread inside the temples. It is a splendid feast which is to take place – the best of its kind: the grandest. You go on pulling: they go on eating. If you don’t pull, you may be fined by the Government; if they don’t eat, the Government offices responsible for it may be fined. It is even handed Justice.

This tour business of Sri Sankaracharya, is publicity stunt No.1 of the Smarthas.

Take the Yajnam sacrifice, for instance. It is another publicity stunt indulged in by the Smarthas. That also is intended and performed to impress the power and prestige of Smarthaism upon the Saivite public. Such a Yajna sacrifice is opposed to the very life principle of Saivisam and temple worship. Not a single Saivite Vellala has come forward to condemn it, as he is bound to do, by his very religion. Without feeling hypocritical, we may say Brahmins now a days are not so unused to non-vegetable food, that there is really no necessity to demonstrate that if meal is partaken it is only during a sacrifice and that also in the lime-light. It deceives nobody, least of all the Brahmins themselves. It is part of the Brahmin publicity programme.

It is again this publicity stunt which has made the Madras Brahmin take up Varnashrama Dharmam also. What is the Varnam of the Madras Brahmin? Has he any? And what is the Madras Brahmins’ Dharmam? Job-hunting? Echo answers “what?”

What prevents the Varanshramites from inviting respectable Vellala Saivites to their Conferences? Why can’t they go together and work together as of old, when they hunted down Jains? Why waste energy, money and time in holding separate Conferences – Saivite Conferences and Varnashrama Dharma Conferences? Why could not they pool their resources in hunting down a common enemy even more dangerous than the Jain? Why should these two respectable parties be suspected of working collusively, secretly and in the dark? Why could not they come out jointly into the open and fight the Self-respect movement, if they really mean fight? Here again the old Brahmin treachery is at work. The Varnashramite makes no mention of the Self-respect movement in his conferences, even though he scents the danger to his prestige and power. It is our friend the Vellala Saivite who is made to do it as of old; the Saivite is made to pull the chestnuts out of the fire. The Vellala Saivite gets the kicks; the half-pence goes to the Brahmin.

What I have stated hitherto must establish one thing; the longstanding enemy of the Saivite and his only enemy is not the follower of the Self-respect movement. It is his own crony, his chum, his bosom friend, his mental preceptor and his moral guide – the Smartha Brahmin; who has brought the Saivite Vellala to this predicament – a house divided within itself.

It does not suppose that the Saivite Conferences were directly aimed at our movement. At any rate, I do not think my friend Mr. Sachidanandam Pillai is privy to it. These views which have been ventilated recently in the Saiva Conferences have been held by him long earlier than the appearance of our movement itself. But, at the same time, it cannot be denied that these Saivite Conferences were extremely inopportune and ill timed though possibly well intentioned: but out of tune with the present Dravidian Renaissance.

What I have been aiming hitherto to establish was, that there should be no split among the Saivites; that all of us can join together and can stand together on the same platform. There is and there can be no antagonism as among the Saivites themselves.

If the intellectual Saivite wants a philosophy and a religion both of which he has lost, let him make a new system, a new philosophy and new religion out of the Self-respect movement. Let him bury the old effete benami affair of a Saiva Siddhantam. At any rate it badly wants overhauling.

Apples were falling to the ground even before Newton discovered his principle of gravitation – and falling since. The earth was going round, the sun even before Galileo discovered it. Einstein’s theory of Relativity is likely to explode Newton’s principle of Gravitation. But no mathematician will dare say that Einstein’s theory should not be accepted because he is a Jew or because by custom and usage they are acquainted only with Newton’s law of Gravitation. Science must progress, philosophy must progress. Let Saivite genius which founded that universal religion Siva Siddhantam, found another, suited to the times, the spirit and the mood of the community. That we gladly welcome. That will be the Dawn of a new era for the Tamils and the Saivites – for Dravidian culture and genius.

Saivites who accept the Self-respect programme are not going to enter too deeply into the quagmire of religious controversy. It is barren. It leads to nothing. And it profits nobody. In so far as religion is concerned, they remember the lines of the Persian poet, as well as our old Siddhars:-

Myself when young did eagerly frequent

Doctor and Saint and heard great Argument

About it and about: but evermore

Came out by the same Doors as in I went.

It must not be forgotten that we are Saivites: and as such interested in the good name of our religion. If we are to be fixed with a religion, we shall have the best of it and not an intellectual nor a Brahminical refuse. We are Hindus. As Hindus and as Saivites, we have the right to criticize both Hinduism and Saivism if they are open to it.

Gautama the Buddha was a ‘Hindu of Hindus and the best of Hindus’; Mahavira, the founder of Jainism was a Hindu; Jesus Christ was a Jew; Martin Luther, who originated Protestantism, was a Roman Catholic. And today we are all of us Saivites.

Why, Gautama the Enlightened was treated by Brahmin Pandits in later days not only as a Hindu but the very incarnation of the God Vishnu himself. If we can help it, our ambition is to be Saivities in the best sense of the word. The great Siddhars of South India have been our forerunners. We are wearing part of their mantle also.

Castes and Outcastes

Let us for a moment go back to the days when the present castes began in South India, and see what Saivism was like before caste began. It need not be pointed out that historians are groping in the dark about this period. It is also a long story but a short sketch may be attempted.

During the beginning of the Christian era or thereabout, during the last Sangham period, during what is known as the Augustan period of Tamil literature, during those days Saivism was a very tolerant religion, as were Buddhism and Jainism which existed side by side and in friendly rivalry, with it. This is evident from the glorious epic of Manimekalai where it is described how discourses on all religious faiths were given by their respective followers in the same hall for the benefit of the masses without any of the bitterness at all that we now find in religious controversies. It goes without saying that such a system must have had a tremendous educative value not only to the general masses but to the teachers and also to the sovereign.

Similarly in the Hindu Kingdom of Java in the 14^th century, A.D. Dr. Chatterjee writing in May 1929, Modern Review, quotes Prapancha, contemporary historian, “East of it (in Mapapahit capital of Java) is a place where the Shaiva and Buddhist priests speak and argue about their doctrines”.

In those days Saivism was broad-based upon toleration and love and it was bound to be such, because of association with the two most humane religions in the world – Buddhism and Jainism. Because of such association and even otherwise, Saivism was casteless in South India’s most glorious period of existence.

It was a friendly and healthy rivalry between the several religious persuasions which existed in South India.

Look at Tirunavukkarasu Nayanar himself. He was Jain; his sister was a Saivite. He himself has sung how even when he was a Jain, “he never ceased worshipping at time with water and flowers, water representing purity and sincerity and flowers love.” And he was something of a religious turncoat.

It was while this friendly relationship was subsisting in South India, that Brahminism was revived in North India. That revival was militant and violent. And those methods were also introduced in the South. North India set the fashion for the South, in the matter of introduction or reformation of the caste religion and literature too.

This marks the turning point in South Indian history. It was from the time of this Brahminical revivalism, the main characteristic of which was ritualism, that a social system on the analogy of the North Indian Caste; Saivism with the violent propaganda of the north; a literature, founded on a mixture of Sanskrit and Tamil necessitated by contact, a literature also came into existence.

What happened when caste was introduced in South India?TheTamil Andanars or Adi-Saivites whoever they were became Brahmins: and they began to think and act as thought they were made in the very image of the Arya-Brahmins of the North. Nobody would be prepared to accept them either as Aryas or as Brahmins of the North: stripped of their holy thread which also is misleading and with some slight tonsorial changes, the Dikshitars of Chidambaram and the Mookani Brahmins of Tiruchendur will look like any of us, Dravidians.

Commensurate with their vanity, the rules of the time, small and big, were provided by Brahmins with genealogies which took them to the sun and moon, as in the North. The status of the Vellalas who seem then to have been the politically dominant class was nebulous. Upon the length of their purse and the strength of their arms, those Vellalas under the new caste system, were permitted by the Brahmins to be Sudras or become “good” Sudras, Vaisyas and even Kshatriyas. It was then also that the outcastes in South India came to be formed.

Thus with the advent of militant Saivism, at any rate contemporaneously with it, was introduced the castes and outcastes in South India also.

In order that it may not appear that these are mere fancies born of Non-Brahmin prejudice, it may be fair to see what a Brahmin writer of some distinction himself has to say about it.

“Before the arrival of the Aryans there was no caste system in the Tamil country… The Tamil Kings alone were elevated to the rank of Kshatriyas in spite of their marriage connections with the ancient Velir or Vellala tribes. These Velirs were on that account called Ilangokkal or Minor Kings. The Brahmins got up for them very decent genealogies which traced their ancestry to the sun, moon or the fire. This rendered the position of the Vellalas who had to oscillate between the Vaisya and Sudra castes, dubious and unsettled.”

Casteless Tamil Nadu became Caste-ridden Tamil Nadu with the advent of Brahminical Saivism.

Then began in South India that violent religious propaganda on behalf of Brahmino-Saivism – a propaganda which has staggered humanity. Saivism become Brahminical then and it is Brahminical today; for Saivism, as apart from and stripped of Brahminism cannot for a moment stand on its own legs.

In carrying on that propaganda, Brahmins and Vellalas under the auspices of St.Gnanasambhanda and Tirunavukarasu joined hands in putting down Jainism.

We must know something of this Hindu warfare against Jainism, and what fate overlook the later – in order to understand how the outcastes came into existence in Hindu society.

A century ago the Frenchman, the learned Abbe Dubois wrote:

“Brahminism underwent a hard struggle before it succeeded in establishing its dominion in India, owing to the opposition offered to it by the Jains; but after a long and bloody war, the latter were crushed and had to submit to whatever conditions the Brahmins chose to dictate. The jealousies and animosities which these religious wars stirred up still prevail as strongly as ever, even after the lapse of thousand years. Time, which softens the strongest hatreds and brings together the greatest enemies, has, in this case, failed to obliterate the traces of the ancient wrongs of which each sect mutually accuses the other. The daily prayer of a certain sect of Brahmins contains a curse leveled at the heads of the Jains who retaliate by exclaiming when they rise to pray: “Brahma Kshayam”– “May the Brahmin Perish.”

“The immediate cause of this rupture was the introduction of Yajnam – sacrifice at which some living creature must be immolated. A ram is the victim usually offered… The sacrifice of Yajnam is, in the opinion of its advocates, the most meritorious sacrifice of any. It is considered extremely acceptable to the Gods; and the person who offers or causes it to be offered, may count on abundant temporal blessings and on the entire remission of the sins which he has committed for hundred generations. Furthermore Brahmins possess the exclusive privilege of performing this sacrifice. Other castes may not even be present at it, though by a special grace they are authorized to provide the means of carrying it out.

It is only very recently that such a sacrifice has been carried out by Brahmins in South India inspite of protests from the Humanitarian Society of the place. Another interesting thing to remember is that this sacrifice was held in Conjeevaram of all places. When Hieun Tsang, the Chinese Buddhist traveler visited Conjeevaram in 640 A.D., “there were in that city 100 Buddhist Monasteries with about 10,000 Brethren (Monks) and about 80 temples, the majority of which belonged to the Digambara Jains.” Conjeevaram in the 7^th century A.D. was one of the strongholds of Buddhism and Jainism.

In the old days, such a sacrifice would have led to bloodshed, says the Abbe Dubois: “The Yajnam Sacrifice, the Jains contend, is directly opposed to the most sacred and inviolable principles of the Hindu religion which forbids the destruction of any living thing, for any reason or an any pretext whatever.”

“From that moment things came rapidly to a climax; and it was then that the defenders of the pure primitive religion took the name of Jains and formed themselves into a distinct sect composed of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas and Sudras. They were the descendants of the Hindus of all Castes who originally banded themselves together to oppose the innovations of the Brahmins and they alone have preserved the religion of their forefathers intact to the present day.”

This development of Jainism must be interesting to the followers of the Self-respect movement. And what happened next? The Abbe continues, “After the schism the, Jains or true believers, perpetually taunted the Brahmins with their debased religion and what at first merely furnished subject matter for scholastic disputes finally became the cause of long and bloody hospitalities. For a long time success was on the side of the Jains but in the end, the majority of the Kshatriyas and other castes having seceded and adopted the innovations of the Brahmins, the latter gained the ascendant and reduced their adversaries to the lowest depths of subjection. They overthrew all the temples of the Jains, destroyed the objects of their cult, deprived them of all freedom, both religious and civil, and banished them from public employment and all positions of trust; in fact, they persecuted them to such an extent that they succeeded in removing nearly all traces of these formidable antagonists in several provinces where formerly they had been most flourishing”. Substitute Vellala for “Kshatriyas and other castes” in the above and you will see how outcastes came into existence in South India.

On account of the violent militant propaganda carried out by the Brahmin-Saivite combine, Jainism was wiped off the face of the earth in South India. Perhaps it was not dissimilar to that memorable campaign carried on by Tippu Sultan of Mysore on the West Coast of Malabar. His cry was “Islam or the Sword”. St. Gnananasambandar’s cry must have been “Saivism or the gibbet”. It might have been pure bluff; but it had its effect. The effect was historically tremendous. It led to the formation or rather segregation of the millions of outcastes whom we find even today.

Those who stood out of this Brahmin-Saivite propaganda; those who happened to be dissenters such of the Jains and also Buddhists who might have refused to surrender their conscience; those who did not count politically in importance or who did not obey the political religion were thrown out of the pale of society; became outcastes; untouchables; with no cognizable religion; with no place for worship; with no wealth, for they would have been deprived of it; with no temples, for theirs would have been taken over by the Brahmin-Saivaites (as historical research is now disclosing it); with no literature, which was ruthlessly suppressed; with no Monks and no monasteries. Remember the phrase of the Frenchman: “reduced to the lowest depths of subjection”. Those noble sons and daughters of Tamil land were reduced to the position of slaves.

Is this theory pure fancy? Let us examine existing arrangements in caste and religion among those who are called Hindus and verify the above theory.

Puranas & Ithihasas

They are said to be sacred books; literary works; and historical narratives. No religion and no religious work, however literary and however historical it may be, will stand if in this twentieth century, it runs away from honest criticism. No religion is worth having, worth preserving or worth espousing if it will not brook criticism. If Saivism has not been in recent times criticized so very strongly or violently it has been the loss of Saivism rather than its gain. If Saivism is dying out, it is because it was not sufficiently criticized, its weaknesses removed and its good points strengthened. It has had hitherto a very sheltered career; it was coddled too much; it was wrapped up in wool; today the slightest sneeze upsets the whole Saivaite system. The net result of it is in the struggle for existence, Saivism goes under. The first great essential of any religion to survive, in this materialistic world, is the capacity to receive hard knocks. You must think of what Padikkas Thambiran, the last of the great Tamil poets, said of Tamil Scholarship when it went a begging for want of a critic of the old vigorous type. That is just the matter with Saivism today.

Some of our “Asthiga” opponents complain bitterly of the Self-respect movement that the followers of the latter are criticizing the Ramayana and lowering the prestige of Sri Rama in the confidence of the public. Why, one journal went the length of throwing out the characteristically ill mannered gibe: “the self-respecters like the Rakshasas and Asuras of the Ramayana try to set at naught all the time honored customs and practices of the Asthiga Hindus and would gain a victory as Ravana and his company had at the hands of Sri Rama.”. Another journal wanted the self-respecters to be placed under arrest because when Pundit Malavaiya wanted the Ezhava audience at Kottayam to recite Rama Nama, the audience shouted “Ravana-ki-jai”, The Ezhavas claim they have come from Ezham or the Lanka of Ravana.

If only our opponents knew any thing about the history of this critical study of the Ramayana they would not have indulged in such kind of literary trash. For one thing the self-respecters are in no way responsible for this criticism of the Ramayana at all. I quite concede that with a critical study of the Ramayana, the Dravidian renaissance was started in South India but then it was not Mr. E.V.Ramasami or his present day followers who started that critical study.

I may be pardoned if I go into the question with some detail as with the beginning of that controversy, the foundations of the present day self-respect movement may be said in part to have been actually laid.

The New Renaissance the Dravidian Revolt, the parent of the Self-respect movement originated in Tinnevellly. Please remember that. And note further, the far more important thing that the mischief was started – our opponents will agree that it was a mischief – this unheard of mischief was started by Saivaite Vellalas.

You ought to know Rao Bahadur V. P. Subramanian Mudaliar of Vellakkal, in this district, the distinguished Tamil scholar and poet. He published in Tamil more than twenty five years ago a critical study of the Ramayana based upon the impressions of a conversation he had with the late Professor Sundaram Pillai of Travancore, the author of ‘Manonmanyam.’

This is how the Preface read: “I may without vanity be allowed to say that I am behind few of my countrymen in point of religious fervour. Some of my views may seem irreligious at first but a careful and scientific examination of the same will show that they are not actually so. Caste system and religion are not necessarily connected with each other. So my ideas of caste may differ from those of others without in any way affecting the common religious sentiments. My views on the Ramayana have no concern with religion.”

In spite of the protest underlying it, this preface of Mr. Mudaliar would show that caste and religion always stood together even though Mr. Mudaliar thought differently and risked it. It was rank heresy in those days when the Brahmin was ruling the roost to have talked of caste or  religion except with bated breath. Mr. Mudaliar was extremely careful to avoid giving offence to the ‘common religious sentiment’ as he called it.

Mr. T. Ponnambalam Pillai the G.O.M. of Travancore Saivaite Vellala published Mr. Mudaliar’s study of the Ramayana in the now defunct Malabar Quarterly Review edited by another Travancore Saivaite Vellala.

Mr. T. Ponnambalam Pillai wrote: “They ( Professor Sundaram Pillai’s opinions) have been portrayed with Boswellian fidelity in Tamil and published posthumously by Mr.V. P. Subramanian Mudaliar, one of the Professor’s admirers and himself no mean thinker on social and allied questions. I have taken the liberty to give the substance an English garb”

Mr. Pillai further added: “It must be stated at the outset that the learned Professor had no faith in the authenticity of the story of Ramayana. He was of the opinion that it was meant to proclaim the prowess of the Aryans and represent their rivals and enemies, the Dravidians who had attained a high degree of civilization at that period in the worst possible colour.”

In the Ramayana, you have the vilest the most characteristic and despicable attempt of the Aryan to cry down the Dravidian, his civilization, his culture, his genius, his society, his customs and manners – an attempt which has persisted down the ages till today.

In the days when I was performing the Sraddha of my parents through the good offices of a Brahmin Purohit, he made me repeat in Tamil at the end of it all what till then was conducted in a language known to neither of us, he made me repeat word for word, something like this: “even though what I give you now is very small and insignificant and unworthy of you, you will be generous enough to receive it as something noble and grand.” Of course, I repeated it, word for word. Look at the Brahmin’s way of doing it – I knew that my Brahmin Purohit was going straight to his concubine’s house with the rather for me, costly thing I had given him to be dispatched through his agency to my parents in the other world. But then it was the religion which I had imbibed and which prevailed then and even now does.

The attempt to foist Ramayana as a sacred thing upon the Dravidians is not dissimilar to that of the Brahmin Purohit I have just mentioned.

Now one can understand why when the Aryan Brahmin gentleman Pundit Malaviya instead of suggesting ways and means for removing untouchablity called upon the Ezhavas or Tiyyas of Travancore assembled at Kottayam to recite Rama Nama, and why because they were wide awake they went in for Ravana Nama out of sheer self-respect. In Dravidian India today Rama Nama is an insult; but of course the learned Pundit was not aware of it.

To go back to our main line, this critical study of the Ramayana by the Saivaite Vellala leaders, though it was professedly historical and not at all religious, yet brought forth a very formidable Brahmin opponent. That was the late Sir. T. Sadasiva Aiyar who was then Chief Justice of Travancore. By the time this Brahmin attack was over poor Mr. Ponnambalam Pillai was counting his bones and his bruises. Mr. Pillai was then holding one of the highest offices in Travancore, as was Mr. Aiyer then chief justice of that same state.

Mr. Pillai had to cry out in anguish “I least expected so furious but pointless attack from the pen of Mr. Sadasiva Aiyer, the talented Chief Justice of Travancore who is known for his perfect equanimity of temper and who never until now permitted it to be ruffled by anything, as became an arbiter of Justice in the Highest Court of the kingdom. I also regret that in the heat of the fight he should have so forgotten himself as to introduce into the arena of discussion, a large number of unparliamentary expressions (about 4 in number besides unlimited invectives).” You see Mr. Pillai had counted it.

Mr. Sadasiva Aiyer, later on became a Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Madras and was afterwards the President of the H.R.E.Board. For a Brahmin he was a Catholic minded man of very advanced views, highly talented end deeply religious. And yet this is how Mr. Ponnambalam Pillai fared at his hands – an estimable Brahmin gentleman and a very mild historical controversy.

This bring to our memory the varied and cultured language employed by respectable and educated Brahmin councilors of the Madras Corporation towards the President who is a respected Non-Brahmin leader in connection with the visit of the Simon Commission.

The strongest point about the Brahmin is his rich vocabulary – that was noticed a century ago by Abbe Dubois. “If the language of the Brahmins” wrote the Frenchman, “is rich in gracious and flattering expressions, it is even more so in abuse and coarse indecent invective. Though they pride them selves on their courtesy and knowledge of the world when they lose their temper they are no better than our lowest rag-pickers; and an incredible quantity of disgusting and obscene language pours from their mouths on such occasions.”

There is something even more interesting in this Ramayana controversy. A cultured gentleman like Sir T. Sadasiva Aiyar actually stated “that some evil spirit from the (nether) world impelled Mr. Pillai to open the article”. And Mr. Ponnambalam Pillai laid the flattering unction unto his soul:- “It is however gratifying to me that my reviewer (meaning Mr. Sadasiva Aiyar) credits me with the Saiva Siddhandantha faith.” It does not look like anything creditable.

This Brahmin attack was as unwarranted as it was impertinent. Such is the case whenever a Brahmin attacks. After this attack, after such an assault by a Brahmin gentleman of ‘repute, culture and equanimity of temper’ is it any wonder that some of our critics who can neither understand nor appreciate what Dravidian culture is, should fall foul of the self- respecters for criticizing the Ramayana?

And these critics of ours are not Brahmins, either; Dravidian blood is still running in their veins, so they say. I have already indicated how the Brahmins have gone into hiding. They dare not criticize the self – respect movement. They know they are being ruthlessly exposed. The shrewd people that they are they feel that their game is up. But not our “Asthiga brethren” who are still under the influence of Brahmin soporifics.

At about this time of very active research into the historicity of Ramayana, another independent investigator came to a very interesting conclusion about Saivism and Brahmanism based upon a study of Ramayana. This has a considerable bearing upon the evolution of modern Saivism.

Says Mr. Nanu Pillai, B.A.: “The Vedic Brahmin never worshipped Siva. The name of Siva is not even mentioned in the oldest parts of the Vedas. The contempt in which this deity was held by the Brahmins may be seen from the fact that even to this day they do not partake of the food placed at the alter of Siva. The reason alleged for this attitude of the Brahmin is that Siva was a Brahmin-killer. What does this mean? If it means anything at all it is that Siva was a god of another religion entirely opposed to and subversive of Brahminism”.

Ravana as every child knows was a Siva bhakta. Saivism was Dravidian and Dravidian Saivism was opposed to Brahmanism.

In spite of the protests and professions by the Saivaite Vellalas, the Brahmin gentlemen were not quite satisfied with their cultural intentions. The learned Brahmins saw that the study of Ramayana was merely the beginning of the Dravidian Revolt.

Mr. Sadasiva Aiyar said long ago – mark there words – “The ambition of many of my Southern Vellala friends and of the so-called non Brahmin portion of our community in Southern portion of India to cut themselves entirely adrift now from Sri Rama and Sri Krishna and the Sanskrit Vedas and the Tiruvaimozhi, Prabandham and to rise a standard of revolt on a pure Tamil Saivaite, anti Brahmin and non Aryan basis, is, if I may be permitted to say so, another wild goose chase.” It is not a wild goose chase, but a terrible reality, the flaming self-respect movement.

I would not have cared to drag this moth-eaten controversy out of the dust in which it has lain buried till now but that it fully justifies the position I have taken up till now.

The point at which I was, before I entered upon this, perhaps tiresome, digression was that there can be nowadays no shutting out of criticism of any work. Profane or sacred, Puranas or Ithikasas, all these and the likes are within the rule and as open to criticism as my other.

The main practical planks in our platform are three in number. (1) intermarriage including widow-marriage (2) interdining and (3) temple-entry – all three for all the Hindus who are within the Caste and those outside it, without any distinction whatever. These are our practical demands. There can be no ambiguity about those demands. And whoever is not with us in these essentials is against us. We shall neither ask for nor give any quarter in these three fundamentals – which are instinctively Dravidian. But it is our plain duty to warn everybody who is interested in Hindu Social and religious reform to drop that general air of arrogance and superiority towards the so called Untouchables and Depressed Classes which is so very irritating and painful to witness.

I may tell you that caste arrogance and superiority is based on ignorance. The Saivite Vellalas as also all the Caste Hindus must be prepared to shed their scales from their eyes. The so-called Untouchables and Depressed Classes are progressing in such rapid strides; and it is a mere question of time whether they may not, very shortly, become the foremost community in all India – as in justice and fairness they very well deserve to.

If you want to gain some idea of the tremendous advance made by some of these people against innumerable odds, you must go to the Tiyyas or Ezhavas of the West Coast. It is there you come across the worst type of untouchability, unimaginable, unforgettable, a thousand times worse than slavery. That was the condition of the Tiyyas or Ezhavas till about twenty-five years ago.

Today the Ezhavas are a homogeneous community numbering about 20 lakhs of people. It is very rarely you can come across an illiterate man or woman among them. There are hundreds and hundreds of eminent scholars in Malayalam and Sanskrit. Under the guidance of their Guruswamy, the late Sainted Narayana Guru, to whom they showed unswerving allegiance they have consecrated more than fifty temples right throughout the West Coast; they have taken to educating themselves with zest; they are the most industrious community in the South; they have in spite of obstacles, unheard of elsewhere, to their entry into public schools, have now many great men who have attained considerable distinction in science, literature and art. To think of such a wonderfully progressive community in terms of the old untouchable is to write yourself down an ignoramus. Not that their troubles from caste Hindus are over: not, by any means. But they are wide awake. Neither a Hindu Mahasabha nor a National Congress can deceive them in the name of Anti-untouchability and all that empty talk. The fate of Hinduism is in their hands and not in ours – a small microscopic minority. They can carry on a fight for themselves in any good cause they undertake without any of our assistance.

And all this, you must remember, has been their achievement within the brief space of twenty five years And the Christian Missions, have not only not been getting a single convert during these twenty five years, but such of them who were Christians before have been taken back to their own community.

You will now understand, for one thing, that if Tiyyas want temple entry, it is not because they have no temples of their own but because they feel and feel rightly, that every Hindu public temple is just theirs as well. My esteemed friends Mr. S. Sachidanandam Pillai, B. A. L. T.,

Deputy, Inspector of Schools has said: “The best way to remove untouchability is to propagate Saivite religion. When the conduct of the Depressed classes assumes a better level, their entry into the temples will naturally take place without any obstruction. Till that day comes arrangements must now be made (by Saivites presumably?) for the construction of separate temples exclusively for the Depressed Classes and for their worship in those temples.”

Comment is entirely out of the question: I can only be sorry. If only my esteemed friend knew that Vellala Saivite as he is, were he to visit the Hindu State of Cochin, he will not be allowed to enter a Hindu temple or bathe in a temple tank, while a Nair will be, he might have then known to a small degree, that he would be an untouchable in Hindu Cochin and what it would be like to be an untouchable. Ignorance in Mr. Pillai about the untouchables and the Depressed Classes is excusable; but not insult, intentional or unintentional.

If the Tiyyas assert a right to every public institution, religious or charitable, founded or maintained out of public funds it is just to assert their self-respect and to demonstrate to the whole world that they also have contributed to the same public fund like any other caste Hindu. I may assure you that they are merely putting the caste Hindu to the test. You profess to call them Hindus; you use them for your political advancement by using their numbers as against the Muslims; you have even chosen to administer your Mitakshara Law to them; you profess equality and fraternity and all that on public platforms. They are taking you at your word. They are just now testing your sincerity. They seem to suspect that the Anti-untouchability programme adumbrated by the Brahmin Congress is just eyewash; mere political window-dressing. You cannot go on deceiving them for ever.

Have you heard of the Pulayas and Cherumas of the West Coast, the lowest among the untouchables? You have not got their likes here; the lowest form of human beings, on God’s earth. Their condition long ago was thus described by a western observer – “They are looked upon as below the level of the beasts which share this wild country with them. They are not even allowed to build huts to protect themselves from the inclemencies of the weather. A sort of lean-to supported by four bamboo poles and open at the sides, serves as a shelter for some of them and keeps off the rain, though it does not screen them from the wind. Most of them however, make for themselves what may be called nests in the branches of the thickest foliage trees, where they perch like birds of prey for the greater part of the twenty four hours. They are not even allowed to walk peaceably along the high roads. If they see any one coming towards them, they are bound to utter a certain cry and to go a long way round to avoid passing him. A hundred paces in the very nearest they may approach any one of a different caste. The Puliahs live an absolute savage life and have no communication whatever with the rest of the world.” Most of the description is true, even today, in some places on the West Coast.

And today, even though the caste Hindu prejudices are still as strong as ever and even though their economic condition cannot be said to be very much brighter today, still there is one achievement of theirs which is worth mentioning. Their able leader Mr. Ayyankali managed to win, at any rate, for the fairer members or his community the warm admiration and favour of the Nair youth of the land; and the result today (within the last 20 years) is a growing dynamic community possessed of handsome girls and virile and intelligent boys who are forging their way ahead through innumerable caste and religious obstacles and prejudices even now existent. This is what the educational authorities of the Government of Cochin had to say of these Pulaya boys and girls in 1929: “Many members of this class are found very eager to take advantage of the facilities offered to them by Government, nay some of them have even found means to start schools of their own. The average intelligence of the Pulayas is not in any respect inferior to that of the other castes. The teacher of these pupils report that all those pupils who attend the schools regularly are able to hold their own against pupils of any other class or caste. The Pulaya pupils have, as a rule, more taste for music than the average pupils of other classes. All this is inexplicable” concludes the Hindu Government of Cochin “considering that these people did not have any culture whatever at any time known to history.” They had Buddhist and Jain culture.

This senseless ban, this meaningless ostracism, this unimaginable barbarism as against the so-called untouchables and Depressed Classes, has penetrated even statutory institutions like Municipalities on the West Coast. An incident within my own cognizance will reveal how far this pernicious prejudice is still prevalent in some places. One Municipal Councillor was responsible for getting a resolution passed in a certain Municipality after a heated debate, that no citizen or rate-payer of the Municipality shall be denied access to any institution, road, well, tank etc. upon which a pie from the Municipal funds was being spent. The Government under a Brahmin Dewan vetoed it; and that resolution is now a dead letter. And there was such a furore against that Municipal Councillor from his caste Hindu Constituency.

With this sort of mentality still strong in us, we want to fight against racial discrimination in far-flung places like South Africa, Kenny, Canada etc. We get offended when we are treated as Asiatics and called “Natives.” “Niggers” or “Blackies.” We raise such a hullabaloo. Then, in the name of our National self-respect, we rage and howl and foam in the mouth. Why not begin it nearer home, my caste Hindu masters? Why not employ that self-respect in India itself and thus avoid becoming the laughing stock of the whole civilized world? The salvation of India lies that way – in maintaining our self-respect in India first and abroad next.

And now to conclude. As Mr. Manika Nayagar holds, Saivism or Saiva Sidhantam advertised today as your religion is not Tamilian; it is just pure Aryanism or Brahminism; it is known only to a very few and it is not and never was a popular religion. It will be unworthy of any Tamilian to profess it; we have got to cast it out and retain only whatever is of the genius of the Tamilian which present day Saivism is not. As regard the Saivite caste, as Kapilar truly put it, that again is the offspring of Brahminism, and in numbers, we are in a hopeless minority. We must read the signs of the times; we must keep pace with the march of events; or we may become as extinct as the dodo. We Saivites ought not to sit like Neroes singing Thevarams, while Tamilakam is burning. We must not bury our heads, like the ostrich, in the shifting sands of orthodoxy of superstition. We must be up and doing. The Self-respect Movement heralds the dawn of a new era. It furnishes a golden opportunity for the Saivite youth. It is the clarion call to their genius, their spirit of adventure; their spirit of love and sacrifice. Under its auspices they are bound to rise to the very height of their manhood. The three barriers to our progress based upon caste, religion and sex, must be removed – ruthlessly if necessary. Now is the time and never afterward.

(1) The moving finger writes and having

writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor wit

Nor all thy tears wash out a word of it.

(2) And that inverted Cowl we call the Sky

Where under crawling Coop’t we live

and die Lift not they hands to It for help;

for It Rolls impotently on as Thou or I.

Revolt,18, 25, August, 1,15, 22 September,1929