About the existence of the Nagas in this country, V. K.

Rajwade mentions that

Rajtarangini describes in detail about the Naga kingdoms in Kashmir in olden days. Astik
parva of Mahabharata is related to Nagas from beginning to end. It mentions the
inhabitation of Nagas in the Khandavaprastha and Khandav vana situated to the south of
Yamuna river. Harivamsha mentions the residence of Nagas to be in Nagpur. Therefore,
there is no doubt that in olden days, during the Pandava times and thereafter, there were
Nagas residing on a vast territory of India. It can definitely be stated on the basis of
description of 'sarpa satra', that there was a fierce war between the Nagas and Manavas
for some time. Arjuna married a Naga princess Ulupi. From this it can be inferred that
many Nagas were friendly towards the Manavas." [Kosare: 270]

Who were the people who inhabited South India? The scholars think that they were the
descendants of people from Indus Valley Civilization. Dasaku Ikeda observes:

"... Study of the Vedic Indus script reinforces the assertion that the creators of the
Indus civilization were the forefathers of the Dravidians, who today mainly inhabit
southern India. ..." [Karan Sing: 1988: 2]

That they were the Nagas is clear from the account by Dr. Ambedkar, who
observes:

"When students of ancient Indian History delve into the ancient past they do often
come across four names, the Aryans, Dravidians, Dasas and Nagas.."
[Untouchables:58]

"Starting with Aryans, it is beyond dispute that they were not a single
homogeneous people. That they were divided into two sections is beyond
doubt..." [Ibid:59]

A greater mistake lies in differentiating the Dasas from the Nagas. Dasas are the same
as Nagas. Dasas is another name for Nagas... Dasa is the sanskritised form of the Indo
Iranian word Dahaka. Dahaka was the name of the king of the Nagas... Who were the
Nagas? Undoubtedly they were non- Aryans. A careful study of Vedic literature reveals a
spirit of conflict, of a dualism, and a race superiority between two distinct types of culture
and thought...The mention of the Nagas in the Rig Veda shows that the Nagas were a
very ancient people. It must also be remembered that the Nagas were in no way
aboriginal or uncivilized people. History shows a very close association by intermarriage
between the Naga people with the Royal families of India... Not only did the Naga people
occupy a high cultural level but history shows that they ruled a good part of India... That
Andhradesa and its neighborhood were under the Nagas during early centuries of
Christian era is suggested by evidence from more sources that one. The Satvahanas,
and their successors, the Chutu Kula Satkarnis drew their blood more or less from the
Naga stock..." [Ibid:63]

"Who are the Dravidians? Are they different from the Nagas? Or are they two different
names for the people of the same race? The popular view is that Dravidians and Nagas
are the names of two different races. This statement is bound to shock many people.
Nonetheless, it is a fact that the term Dravidians and the Nagas are merely two different
names for the same people." [Ibid: 66]

"...the word "Dravida" is not an original word. It is the Sanskritised form of the word
`Tamil' when imported into Sanskrit became Damila and later on Damila became
Dravida. The word Dravida is the name of the language of the people and does not
denote the race of the people. The third thin o remember is that Tamil of Dravida was no
merely the language of South India but before the Aryans came it was the language of
the whole of India, and was spoken from Kashmir to Cape Camorin. In fact it was the
language of the Nagas throughout India..." [Ibid: 75

Brahmanism Controlled Masses Through

Language
Dr. K. Jamanadas,

National Language of India

A lecturer friend of mine, who was trying to convince me that learning becomes
easy in student's mother tongue, was taken aback to hear from me that India
does not have a mother tongue, it has mother tongues. Does India have a
national language? Presumably, it does, and it is Hindi. How it came to become
a national language is described by Dr. Ambedkar who was present in the
Congress Party meeting as Chairman of the Drafting Committee when the Draft
Constitution of India was being considered, on the issue of adopting Hindi as the
National language:

"...There was no article which proved more controversial than Article 115 which
deals with the question. No article produced more opposition. No article more
heat. After a prolonged discussion when the question was put, the vote was 78
against 78. The tie could not be resolved. After a long time when the question
was put to the party meeting the result was 77 against 78 for Hindi. Hindi won its
place as a national language by one vote. I am stating these facts from my
personal knowledge. ..." [Ambedkar B. R., Thoughts on Linguistic States,
Writings & Speeches, Maharashtra Govt., 1989, vol. 1, p. 148]
It is not known, whether the member had gone out in the mean time and was
absent during voting the second time, but surely it does not speak highly of a
language to have been declared as "National" under such circumstances. This is
specially so, when in practice, whole of India thinks in English, may be it is Law,
Medicine, Sports, Commerce, Accounting, Cinema, Literature, Poetry or any
other field of life. In the homes of elites, English is not only spoken by children
and servants but also their pets like cats and dogs.

Language Problem of India

The question of language is a tricky problem in India. India is a vast country.

True. It was much vaster in ancient times. Now it has been divided into three
countries. In India itself, there are numerous languages. Some of them are
official languages and some are struggling to become official. The country is
divided into provinces on the basis of language. Gandhiji had promised to do
that before independence. So it was done. The strangest thing is that the people
fight among themselves on the basis of language, as if the linguistic provinces
are two different nations. Dr. Ambedkar had warned that there is a very thin line
between linguistic provinces and linguistic nations and he had suggested some
safeguards and remedies to prevent the calamity of converting the linguistic
provinces into linguistic nations. Unfortunately no heed was paid to his wise
advice. We have to consider whether India was always having multiple
languages, and why there are so many languages in India and why does the
speech differ every few miles.

Origin of language

Itihasacharya V. K. Rajwade explained that Language originated from sound,

script originated from pictures, expression from natural body movements and
utensils from the figures seen. All this was invented by the wisdom of man
himself by hard work of trial and error, and not due to any imaginary gods or
asuras in imaginary heaven or hell. That voice originated from damaru of
Shankara, Gandhaba-kanya taught the art of drawing pictures, acting was taught
by some kinnara, and making of utensils was taught by some imaginary
vishwakarma are all myth, fantasy and a pack of lies, nothing is divine, all these
arts are acquired by man by efforts and by learning from trial and error.
[Rajwade V. K., bharatiya vivah sansthe cha itihas, marathi, p. 106]

Language of masses was different

Mr. Nair explains quoting authorities, that language of the masses is different
from that of the "classes". This difference is calculated by the elites for
establishing and maintaining their supremacy. As Nair quotes Lapier:

"A language is a system of cultural definition whereby meanings are assigned to

a great variety of specific sound combinations thereof and among a literate
people, graphic representations thereof. But the members of the society seldom
speak or even write in terms of the culturally designated definitions. They speak
and write in some special vernacular which differs both quantitatively and
qualitatively from the official language i.e. from the language as embodied
among a literate people in dictionaries, manuals of grammar and the like".
[`Theory of social control' p. 261, quoted by Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin",
p.68]

Was Sanskrit a spoken language?

Contrary to the recent hindutwavadi propaganda, it is a well established fact that

Sanskrit was never a spoken language:

"Let us remember that Sanskrit as its meaning indicates was never a spoken
language and that it was only a purified version of the language that was in
popular usage such as Prakrit, and that its refinement and the codification of
grammar in an unalterable form was the work of grammarians like Panini." [Nair
B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.67]

Even strong protagonists like Pandit Mishra aver that it was a spoken language
but the "spoken" means, it was spoken by "shishtas" i.e. elite (meaning
Brahmins) alone. Rest of the masses were speaking Prakrit. [Mishra, p.376]
Even in late Sanskrit drammas, as is well known, the charectors of higher castes
speak Sanskrit, and the others speak Prakrit. So speech depended on the caste.

Views of Prof. Rhys Davids

His opinion is perhaps the consensus opinion and based upon deep study of
scriptures, sculptures and epigraphs both Brahmanical as well as Buddhistic. He
observes:

"... Priests have preserved for us, not so much the opinions the people actually
held, as the opinions the priests wished them to hold. ... What had happened
with respect to religious belief is on a par with what had happened with respect
to language. From Takkasila all the way down to Champa no one spoke
Sanskrit. The living language, everywhere, was a sort of Pali. Many of the old
Vedic words were retained in more easily pronounceable forms. Many new
words had been formed, on analogy, from the existing stock of roots. Many other
new word had been adopted from non- Aryan form of speech. Many Aryan
words, which do not happen to occur in the Vedic texts, had nevertheless
survived in popular use. And mean while, in the schools of the priests, and there
only, a knowledge of the Vedic language (which we often call Sanskrit) was kept
up. But even this Sanskrit of the schools had progressed, as some would say, or
had degenerated, as others would say, from the Vedic standard. And the
Sanskrit in actual use in the as it is from the so- called classical Sanskrit of the
post Buddhistic poems and plays." [Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, p. 211 ff.,
emphasis ours]

He avers that, outside the schools of the priests, the curious and interesting
beliefs recorded in the Rig Veda had practically little effect, and Vedic theosophy
was never a popular faith. Vedic rituals are not of simpler faith, and are
advanced. The gods of the older system - the dread Mother Earth, the dryads
and the dragons, the dog-star, even the moon the sun have been cast into the
shade by the new gods of the fire, the exciting drink, and the thunderstorm. The
mystery and the magic of the ritual of the sacrifice had complications and
expense. [Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, p. 211 ff.]

Max Muller, who believed that thoughts in Rigveda were primitive, as these
thoughts are so bizarre and absurd that they cannot be considered as advanced,
and one is so accustomed to consider the priesthood as the great obstacle to
any way of reform in India, he averred, that it is difficult to believe that the
Brahmins could ever, as a class have championed the newer views. Rhys
Davids, disagreeing with Max Muller, believed that the beliefs recorded in the
Rig Veda are not primitive or original, as proved by comparison with evolution of
religious beliefs elsewhere. These beliefs were in the view of the men who
formulated them, a kind of advance on the previous ideas. And when the Rig
Veda was finally closed there were many other beliefs, commonly held among
the Aryans in India, but not represented in that Veda. [Rhys Davids, Buddhist
India, p. 211 ff.]

Social Control through language

The so called "purity" of Sanskrit makes it a dead language, may be true, but
that was the intention of the users, to safeguard their own supremacy over the
masses. Nair exclaims:

"... The maintenance of the purity of Sanskrit language since the days of Panini
until the present day is wonder of wonders that is largely to be explained by the
tenacity of the Brahmin to preserve it as such, as the sacred language of status
group even though their spoken language was, by and large, the local languages
or a mixture of the two. This is not to admit that early Sanskrit before it reification
did not borrow words from Dravidian languages and made them its own. As a
matter of fact detailed research in the linguistic prehistory India is bound to
reveal many instances for such a fusion of Tamil words into Sanskrit, especially
that style of Sanskrit which came to be used for limited secular purposes." [Nair
B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.68]

Sanskrit is static language

Ancient Tamil grammar Tolkapium, Nair says, was a "scientific treatise on

grammar" created to "safeguard the system of cultural definitions". Brahmins
maintained purity of their language because of the fear of local language of
masses. Why did the Brahmins try to keep their language different than that of
the masses? The reason is that they wanted to maintain their supremacy
through it. The process is continuing even now. When elites speak of it a "pure"
they actually mean "static", and anything becomes static then it merits the title of
"dead". Mr. Nair explains the tendency:

"The purity of Sanskrit since the days it assumed its present grammatical shape
is to be explained by it static state, as the restricted and sole vehicle of a
sacerdotal class who jealously preserved it from the corroding influence of non-
Brahmin languages. This they did out of fear as experience had already taught
them that in the mutual impact it was Sanskrit that stood the chance of loosing
its integrity and getting assimilated with the "Paisachi" language which was
widely prevalent in the subcontinent of India at the time of their arrival. So then
true to the spirit and apostolic motivation of cultural conquerors they set about to
conquer the speakers of the language but also the latter's language itself. There
is a hymn in the Rig Veda which expresses this wish most solemnly and which
may have been recited by countless generations of Brahmins,"May we conquer
the ill-speaking man" [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.69]

Panini was ignorant about history: Rajwade

Itihasacharya Rajwade had done a lot of work not only in history but also in
linguistic field. He explained the code language of Mahanubhavas as well as he
explained origin of Sanskrit. He declared that Panini had no knowledge of
amalgamation and mixture of primitive societies. He explained how the use of
neuter gender in Sanskrit originated from the mixture of two societies, one
having a nasal twang and other without it. While explaining grammar, Rajwade
scientifically uses the sociological concepts, and clarifies what Panini could not.
He declares boldly that Panini had no historical perspective and that Panini's
belief, that Sanskrit is the language of the devas and hence anaadi, (having no
beginning), as "eccentric". He avers that there is not a single word or a phrase in
whole of ashtadhyai of Panini, which could suggest that Sanskrit originated from
Vedic language. Panini could not ever think that Sanskrit is the corrupt or hybrid
form of Vedic language. Because of this disregard of history, Panini thought
there was no world before Vedas, and no time before it. His thoughts are thus
opposed to progress and because of his ignorance, the society became dejected
about the future. There were many pre-vedic languages, then Vedic, then
Panini's Sanskrit, then Prakrit, and regional languages like Marathi etc. is the
progressive evolution, but because of Panini's thoughts this was considered as
degeneration. Panini's ashtadhyai is the well known example of how the
unhistorical attitude causes the gross damage, he observes. [Rajwade V. K.,
bharatiya vivah 0sansthe cha itihas, marathi, introduction by S.A.Dange p. 21]

Ancient language of whole of India was Tamil

Rajwade acknowledges the Aryans have come from outside India and the
original indigenous residents were the Naagas. They were expert in drawing
pictures, they later married Vedic Aryans and it is customary to include Naaga
vamsha into the Aryan fold. He also acknowledges the presence of non-Aryan
languages like Asur bhasha, Dravida bhasha, Chinese and Red Indian and
African languages. [Rajwade V. K., bharatiya vivah sansthe cha itihas, marathi,
p. 100]

Paishachi language was Tamil is the experts' view. Having made it clear that
Paishachi language was a very rich language, and very widely spoken, let us
see the experts' views on what was this language. Before Aryans could influence
things here, the language of India was "Paishachi", which meant Tamil, and it
was spoken from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. Nair observes:

"According to Mr. Oldham there are ample evidences to show that the so-call
"Paisachi" language was spoken throughout India. He says "It is evident that the
old Sanskrit Grammarians considered the language of the Dravidian countries to
be connected with the vernaculars of Northern India; and that in their opinion it
was especially related to the speech of those who as we have seen, were
apparently descended from the Asura tribes. Thus in the Shahasha Chandrika
Lakshmidhara says that the Paisachi language is spoken in the Paisachi
countries of Pandya, Kekaya Vahlika, Sahya, Nepala, Kuntala, Sudarsha, Bota,
Gandhara, Haiva and Kangana and there are Paisachi countries. Of all the
vernaculars the Paisachi is said to have contained the smallest infusion of
Sanskrit". [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.70]

Dr. K. M. Panikar has something equally interesting to say; "The distribution of

the indigenous races even today in the uplands of South Bihar and in the
eastern areas of Madhya Pradesh and the persistence of the Bhils in the Aravalli
and Vindhya ranges show that as a population momentum the Aryan invasion
ceased to have any momentum after it reached the Gangetic valley. The gradual
spread of Hinduism all over India and with it the Aryan speech should not blind
us to the fact that even in North India outside the Punjab the Aryans contributed
only a racial strain. In Gujrat and in Maharashtra the neo-Aryans were able to
improve their language but in the Deccan and in the South the Dravidian speech
not only held its own but was able to drive out the Austric and other linguistic
elements. The spread of Aryanism and Sanskrit, originally associated with
Agastiyas' crossing of the Vindhyas became, an accomplished fact only in the
first centuries of the Christian era as may be seen from the earlier Paisachi
tradition of the Satavahana Emperors of Pratishtan" [K. M. Panikker,
Geographical Factors in Indian History, 1955, quoted by Nair B. N., "The
Dynamic 0Brahmin", p.70]

Paisachi was Tamil

Nair confirms that Paishachi was Tamil.

"Now we may ask: what could have been this Paisachi language other than the
Tamil of pre-Tholkappian epoch? Indeed, the author of Tholkappiyam (who is
considered to be a Brahmin himself) felt as much nervous about the vigour of
Sanskrit or more possibly Prakrit as the Brahmin Aryans felt consternation about
the richness of this "Paishachi" language. In spite of this, it is evident that the two
languages could not continue side by side in certain regions without influencing
one another for their mutual benefit. Hence it is that we find that rules have been
laid down in Tholkappiyam for the adoption of Sanskrit words under certain
conditions and subject to certain rules while Prakrit itself normally absorbed
certain Dravidian 0features." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.70]

Ashokan India was speaking Prakrit and not Sanskrit Hindutwavadis like to
project that the main stream of Indian thought flows through Sanskrit. This is
totally false, as can be seen by historical evidences of epigraphs. Original
inscriptions were not Sanskrit. Apart from Ashoka's edicts, the most ancient
inscriptions of Arekmedu, which talk of Buddha's teachings, were not in Sanskrit
but in Prakrit. Another European authority Dr. J. Filliozat is worth quoting in this
respect:

"Even much later, in the first half of the first century of Christian era when
appeared the first dated Tamil inscriptions, those of Virapatnam - Arikamedu
near Pondicherry, Sanskrit was not yet current in Tamilanad as the inscriptions
in an Indo-Aryan language found along with the Tamil inscriptions are in Prakrit.
These inscriptions are no doubt very short and very few but we can at least be
sure that they are exactly comparable with those of Ceylon at the same epoch;
here also middle-Indian was employed and not Sanskrit. The characters of these
inscriptions around the beginning of the Christian era the same and very similar
in their shapes to the ancient Brahmi of Ashoka, giving supplementary evidence
of the importance of the contribution of Ashoka's empire to the culture in the
South. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.71]

As late as Pallava times, the earlier Pallava inscriptions were in Prakrit and not
Sanskrit.

Sangam literature

Not only the inscriptions, but even the classical Tamil literature of second or third
century was not Sanskrit, but Tamil. The same author observes:

"If we now consider the ancient Tamil works, we find in almost all some allusion
to vedic or Brahmanic rites and the use of some Sanskrit words though very few.
When Indo Aryan words are adopted in Tamil in Sangam literature they are more
frequently borrowed form Prakrit forms or with Prakritic features. Surely Sanskrit
and Prakrit cultures were known to some extent in Tamilanad but rather through
Prakrit than through Sanskrit. Massive influence of Sanskrit in Tamil literature
took place much later". [Dr. J. Filliozat on Tamil and Sanskrit in South India, in
Tamil Culture, vol. IV, No. 4, Oct. 1955 quoted by Nair B. N., "The Dynamic
Brahmin", p.71]

Sanskrit gained ground because it was sonorous Nair explains why Sanskrit
could catch up:

"Now going back to the base of our theoretical structure viz. local Hinduism we
find that Sanskrit language spread through ritualistic practices introduced by the
Brahmins in the "Gramakshetra" or village temple. Ritualistic Sanskrit was mostly
poetry and it was poetry in the form of Manthras and stotras that first caught the
profane ears of the non- Brahmin temple worshipper. These Manthras and
Stotras were resonant with sonorous words and phrases and so replete which
imagery that when recited aloud they seldom failed to evoke strong feelings of
devotion in the minds of the hearer who knew the mythology behind this majestic
poetry. Here lies the beginnings of the social control of the Brahmin through a
language which was reified and strengthened to suit their purposes." [Nair B. N.,
"The Dynamic Brahmin", p.72]

Nair further explains:

"As was pointed out earlier the spread of Sanskrit began with the recital of
Sanskrit poetry rich in resonant poetic forms and phrases, e.g. Vedic hymns,
strotras such as that by Shankaracharya. These verses with their suggestive and
powerful words were so much in contrast with the soft and liquid sounds of the
non-Aryan speeches that as compared to the former, the equivalents in the latter
failed to evoke any feeling in the crowd. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin",
p.74]

Hindi was retaining Sanskrit Influence

At a time, when Brahmins decided to divide the country on the basis of language
at the time of fall of Buddhism, they were careful enough to maintain superiority
of Sanskrit influence. As Nair quotes:

"In fact historically also the growth of Hindi, despite its variations, has taken
place in the Gangetic valley in such a way as to retain the purity of sense and
meaning of Sanskrit words. This will be further seen by a study of the semantic
changes that have taken places in Sanskrit words after their absorption in other
regional languages. Viewed in this way, it is also clear why many orthodox
Hindus are not willing to accept Hindustani as the national language because it
contains a large strata of words from Persian, Arabic and Turkish which were
spoken by former cultural conquerors. The adoption of Hindustani as the official
language in place of Hindi would not be in keeping with the Brahmanical revival
that is making itself prominently felt in India during the post-Independence
period." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.75]

Trick of trigger phrases

Nair explains how Sanskrit has been the effective vehicle for the spread of
trigger phrases in Indian thought. The average educated Indian, especially a
Hindu, cannot easily recognise these artificial trigger phrases and words in his
speech, as he is unconsciously habituated for centuries to use these as a matter
of second nature for him. In fact without these trigger words and phrases, he
cannot find the correct word or a substitute word or phrase which is free from
Sanskritic influence." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.76]

Spread of Sanskrit

Nair explains, in the initial period, how Sanskrit spread so rapidly and influenced
the thought processes of the masses while it started only as the language of
ritual.:

"...The answer is simple enough. With the growth in power of Brahmin priests in
their temples there was also the growth the growth in their importance and
influence in the courts of kings and chieftains. The Dharma Shastras were
incorporated in the puranas at a time (about the middle of the 4th century A.D.)
when the Brahmins acquired the position of a status-group within the caste
hierarchy. ... The gradual stages by which Sanskrit became powerful in the
South is best described by Dr. Filliozat. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin",
p.77]

Dr. Filliozat's views are summarized below. Sanskrit words were borrowed but
Tamil scholars continued the use their own grammar. Most known Sanskrit texts
were Ayurveda and Jotishya, apart from Gita. Tamil saints, who were non-
brahmins, used ordinary Tamil words without technical meaning, though Sanskrit
ideas are alluded to. Their compositions were devotional and not philosophical.
Tamil was used more till Shankara wrote on upanishadas etc. in c. 800 A.D.
Thus Tamil received double dose of Sanskrit words from north and south. Tamil
works of religious import were reinterpreted as Vedantic, and awarded status of
Vedas. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.78]

Non-brahmin dignitaries were coopted

Tamil saint poets attained great fame at a later stage, but though men like
Nammalwar were denied the status of Kulapati of Vaishnavas only because he
was a non-brahmin, these saints were made use of to further the cause of
chaturvana, by declaring them as their own. Nair explains the tendency:

"However, every time a non-Brahmin attained remarkable stature in the

assimilation of Brahmanical culture and produced some work of intrinsic merit in
his own language for the use of his fellowmen, the Brahmins lost no time in
giving the work a Sanskritic interpretation as to disallow it an independent
existence of its own and continued esteem in popular mind. It is clearly due to
the insecurity in the Brahmin mind that leads them to adopt this strategy as is
evident from many modern instances. In fact it is not quite a well-known fact that
the orthodox Brahmins had at one time offered to Mahatma Gandhi the choice of
the acceptance of Brahminhood which he characteristically refused. The fact that
he was finally assassinated by a fanatic Chitpavan Brahmin of Poona is more
than significant of the suppressed hostility of those caste-conscious Brahmins all
over India who could not share the enlightened views of that great soul." [Nair B.
N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.78]

Brahmanism flourished due to British rule

Nair explains how the British helped spread of Brahmanism throughout India,
and exclaims that the Brahmin succeeded in utilising the Britishers as an
unconscious tool for the strengthening of his social control over masses by four
streams of activity by the British administration which directly contributed to the
strength of all-India Hinduism under Brahmin leadership. Dr. M. N. Srinivas
classified them as follows.
(a)systematic reconstruction of Indian history
(b)development of mass communication media, films of mythological themes
and Brahmanical control over press. To this could now be added electronic
media and mythological serials.
(c)growth of movements against defects in Brahmanical religion like
untouchability, child marriage etc.
(d)study of Sanskrit literature and philosophy

Nair exclaims that, thus the Brahmin discovered his soul and saw with clear eyes
the beauty and ugliness of his own handiwork in India, and the regrouping of
social forces that took place under the British regime. [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic
Brahmin", p. 80]
Christians not influenced by the sanskritisation

Concluding, Nair mentions another weakness of Sanskrit: "And this concerns its
failure to leave the psychological impress on the Christian community in India.
Christianity of the real proselytising variety came to India and drew it strength
only during the British occupation so that it must be considered intrinsically as
the religion of a cultural and political conqueror. The conversions of Christianity
were mostly from people who were outside the pale of Brahmanical Hinduism so
that the cultural influences of Sanskrit were not felt by these people to any extent
before conversion or after it." [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.81]

Sanskrit has no relevance with daily life

With rapid Sanskritisation, Nair feels, it lost relevance in daily life of people,
specially the non-Brahmins:

"... The 'weltanschauung' [i.e. outlook of world] of the South Indian (non-
Brahmin) was rendered highly unreal and abstract infusion of Sanskrit words
created a disjunction between the symbol and the phenomenon. It was not
merely the haphazard spread of Sanskrit or its deliberate and principal use for
sacerdotal purposes that brought about this mental situation but also to a large
extent the esotericism that was imported in the use of the language, the word-
meanings, etc. And above all it was a leisure class (only) that used Sanskrit. As
Prof. Kosambi so aptly puts it "The language suffered from its long monopolistic
association with a class that had no direct interest in technique, manual
operations, trade agreements, contracts or surveys. The class did have leisure
enough to write their tenuous ideas in a tortuous manner above the reach of the
common herd and to unravel them from such writings. Prose virtually
disappeared from high literary Sanskrit. Words that survived in literary usage
took on so many supplementary meanings that a good Sanskrit text cannot be
interpreted without a commentary. The glosses are often demonstrably wrong
and succeed in only confusing the text which has to be restored by critical
methods first developed in Europe. The older terms used in administration (e.g.
in Arathashastra and Copperplate charters) were forgotten. In some cases,
where obscurity was deliberately imposed (i.e. the Tantric mysticism) cult and
meaning of the text vanished together. There were astounding mnenomic
developments but they too contributed to the same end by over-specialization
and particular jargons for every discipline". (An Introduction to the Study of
Indian History pp.225-266) [Nair B. N., "The Dynamic Brahmin", p.85]

Sanskrit has nothing to do with Computer

Some people, whose forefathers themselves were the sufferers of this language,
try to take pride and seek solace in believing that Sanskrit is a good language for
computer. The inventor of this myth seems to be a person, not only with
perverted sense of egotism about his heritage and ignorance of his ancestral
history, but also an urge to befool the gullible masses of India. The minimum
expectation from such scholars would be to pause and think how a language
which was not allowed to be learned by a scholar like Dr. Ambedkar can ever be
considered a good language worth learning by masses. It is language of control
by a few over multitude. It is a language of oppression.

It has nothing to do with computer language, which is a binary language, a

language of 1s and 0s, a language of ON and OFF. After all a computer is
nothing but a collection of millions of fast acting switches. It is by creating
computer codes like EBCDIC and ASCII, various alphabets can be assigned
numbers, and these numbers representing alphabets are converted into binary
for computer processing. Any language on the earth is equally good or equally
bad for the computer purpose. Those who claim that Sanskrit is a useful
language for computer have got a cruel and malevolent intention of projecting
the misdeeds of their forefathers. A scholar in them is dead, only a caste
superiority prejudice is seen in their such statements.

Most unfortunate thing is that so called scholars from among the sufferers of
tyranny of this language, seem to have a liking of this language through
misconceived ideas about it. Their multiple degrees are worth throwing away in a
dust bin. Just by becoming learned in Sanskrit does not qualify anybody to
receive respect, you have to be born. Read Dasbodh of Ramdas, if you have
doubts. The language which ruined this country, is respected by these so called
scholars. It was Ramdas himself, a Brahmanical social activist, who coined a
phrase for such people in Marathi- "padhat murkh", the nearest English
rendering of it should a learned fool.

What did the propagators of this language give to the people of this country
apart from disintegration and slavery of centuries. What kind of society they have
produced? A society full of discriminations where more than half of people are
unfit even for a touch, another one third driven to forests and another group
whose occupation is crime, a society where prostitution is practiced in the name
of God and religion, a society where suicide is sacrosanct, a society where
uttering obscene abuses is a part of religion, a society where daughters are
murdered immediately after birth, a society where widows are burnt on the
funeral pyre of their husbands, a society where a vast section of people are
deprived from holding any property, holding any arms, getting any education, a
society where taking a marriage procession on a public road brings atrocities,
murder, rape and arson, a society where nearly the whole country uses the
public roads as a toilet. And one expects these very people the sufferers of this
extreme exploitation to regard this language as holy and sacrosanct. One only
has to remember the words of Theludesus: It may be your interest to be our
masters, how can it be ours to be your slaves. Still this is probably the only
country in the world where the slaves are enjoying their slavery and prisoners
guard the prison gates and display their fetters as ornaments.

There are people who try to propagate that the Sanskrit language is the original
language which was gifted by God (to Brahmins of India). Despite all other
languages in the world, to consider one particular language as "god given" is the
worst form of imprudence and arrogance, to say the least; and is not only
derogatory to the inventor of the idea, but also marks the god with partiality to a
caste.

Importance of Pali

After obtaining Buddhahood, the Buddha preached orally for the rest of His life of
45 years, and these preachings were learned by heart by the disciples. They
were compiled into Tripitakas in various sangitis, the first being 3 months after
Mahaparinirvana, second 100 years later, third in the reign of Ashoka, after
which Bhikkus were sent to various places. Mahinda and Sanghmitra went to
Simhala. All these years, all the preachings were preserved by oral tradition. It
was after this that they were reduced in writings, in Simhala during the reign of
Vattagamini (29 B.C.). This was fourth sangiti. The Buddha did not insist for any
particular language, and everybody learned them in their own language. As a
matter of fact, Tripitaka was preserved in many languages. According to one
famous Tibetan tradition, the scriptures of Sarvasti-vadis' are in Sanskrit, those
of Mahasanghikas in Prakrit, those of Mahasammaitis in Apbhramsha and those
of Sthaviras in Paishachi. Today we know the word Pali as a name of language.
It contains whole of Tripitaka and Anupitaka of Thervada. Originally, this word
meant Original Teachings of the Buddha or Tripitaka. Later it denoted the
language of them. Thus the use of term Pali as a name of language is rather
new, and more in vogue since 19th century. The language, we call today Pali is
actually known traditionally as Magadhi. It is well known that the Buddha had
refused permission to use Sanskrit as the vehicle of teachings, and declared it
as a minor crime. [Rahul Sankrutyayana, "pali sahitya ka itihas", (hindi), 3rd ed.,
1992, Uttar Pradesh Hindi Sansthan, Lukhnow, p.5]

Dr. Bhagchandra Jain also mentions that, Pali literature is rendered in writing in
Srilanka in First Century B.C., in the reign of Vattagamini. Before that it was
prevalent by oral recitation. This is the reason why we find the compilation of
many references could not be made in chronological order in Pali literature.
Some references are twisted to suit them, some are omitted and some are
added. Even then, the available material is historically and culturally important.
The valuation from this angle is still not done. ["Chatushatakam" Translator
Editor : Dr. Bhagchandra Jain, Alok Parakashan Nagpur 1971 (Hindi), p.4] The
study of Aryan languages in the middle age is complete only after scientific study
of Pali Language. Pali has affected not only the modern Indian Languages but it
has enough contribution in the development of modern languages in countries
like Sinhala, Burma, Thailand, China, Japan, Tibet, Magnolia etc. and Pali
literature has proved to be a greatest help in fixing the dates of ancient history.
[Jain, p.6] L. M. Joshi also describes the influence of Buddhist language and
script as follows:

"... Indian paleography and epigraphy owe a great deal to the original and
pioneer inspiration of Buddhism and its lithic records. The earliest historical
inscriptions of India are the Buddhist inscriptions. The dhammalipi of Ashoka
became the mother of all subsequent varieties of Brahmi and its derivative
Indian scripts." [L. M. Joshi, Aspects of Buddhism in Indian History, p.32]

Study of Sanskrit

Rigveda is said to be the most ancient book. Study of language started in west
after William Jones translated Shakuntalam into English. In India, modern study
of languages started after Ramkrishna Bhandarkar opined through "Wilson
philological lectures" that Sanskrit is the original language and all the Indian as
well as foreign languages originated from it. [Mishra, p.351] Greek Helenic
language also has some similarities with Sanskrit. ["Vangmay Vimarsha" by
Pundit Vishwanath Prasad Mishra, Hindi Sahitya Kutir, Varanasi - 1, v.samvat
2023, p.358]

Some relate the Dravidian languages with Australian languages. After

Mohonjodaro excavation, now they are being related with Sumerian languages.
[Mishra, p.355] Word "mund" is used in Vayu Purana and in Mahabharata it is
used for a caste. The word "shabar" is still ancient, which is found in Ateriya
Brahman. Their language is called Munda, Kol, or Shabar. There is a great
influence of these languages over several Indian languages, various examples
are quoted by the author of this influence on Bihari, Gujarathi and
Madhyapradesh language. [Mishra, p. 363]

Dravidian languages

Kumaril Bhatt made only two divisions Dravida and Andhra, But the modern
scholars have made following classification of Dravidian languages:

1. Dravida- with (a) Tamil (b) Kannada (c) Tulu (d) Kodagu (e) Tod
2. Andhra- (a) Telugu
3. Central- with (a) Gondi (b) Kurukha (c) Kui (d) Kolami Tamil has two forms. A
poetic language called "shen", the other is called "kodun", Malayalam is
supposed to be elder daughter of Tamil. Influence of Sanskrit is less on Tamil
contrarily Malayalam has great influence. [Mishra, p.365]

Languages of Indian Branch

There are two views. The scholars of ancient school believe that original
language is Sanskrit, form which all Aryan languages originated, Prakrit from
Sanskrit, Apbhransha from Prakrit and regional languages from Apbhransha.
New linguistic scholars believe that Vedic Sanskrit itself originated from some
original Aryan language. On one side Vedic language, modified or Sanskrit was
used and on the other hand, unmodified or Prakrit was being used as a
language of common speech. Both these originated from some common root.
Sanskrit, the spoken language of elite (shistas - meaning Brahmins), and Prakrit,
the spoken language of the masses are sisters of each other. That Prakrit is
termed by them as "Aadim Prakrit" meaning original Prakrit. From this evolved all
other Prakrit languages. Some people believe that, from original Prakrit the
classical Sanskrit, i.e Sanskrit of literature, evolved. But some believe that
classical Sanskrit evolved from Vedic Sanskrit through stages of Brahmanas,
Upanishadas, Kavyas, and Gathas. The divisions of Indian languages made in
"pratisakhyas" are considered by them as regional forms of the original Prakrit -
"Oudichya" (Northern), "Pratichya" (western), "Dakshinatya" (southern) "Madhya
Deshiya" (bichali) and "Prachya" (eastern). Late Dr. Bhandarkar believed in
Evolution of Prakrit from Sanskrit. He thought Classical and Vedic Sanskrit
together as the original source of Prakrits. But scholars have discarded this old
view and they now believe Original Prakrit as the source. [Pandit Vishanath
Prasad Mishra, "Vangamay Vimarsha", (hindi), published by Hindi Sahitya Kutir,
Varanasi - 1, 5th edition, Vikram Samat 2023, p.371]

Prakrit

Prakrit can be divided into three stages if we consider Apbhransha as a late

Prakrit. There were three periods in its evolution. They are ancient, middle are
late Prakrit. [Mishra, p.376] Why it is called Prakrit? 1. Prakriti means nature, so
Prakrit a language of more people. 2. Comparing Sanskrit and Prakrit, Sanskrit
is refined and Prakrit is unrefined. 3. Jains have defined Prakrit as the most
ancient language. They divide the word into 'Prak' and 'krit', and they believe all
other languages originated from Prakrit (Ardhamagadhi).

Some people term all the languages placed under ancient Prakrit as Pali, but we
find there are many ancient Prakrits other than Pali. Edicts of Ashoka, Hinayani
Tripitakas, Mahavamsha, Jatakas etc., ancient Jain Sutras, and Prakrits of
ancient dramas are grouped under this language. [Mishra, p.377]

The language of Ashoka's edicts and Hinayana Scriptures has come to be

known as Pali. The language of scriptures is considered by Buddhists as
"Magadhi". [Mishra, p.377]

Ashoka Edicts

The language of Ashoka's Edicts differs in different areas. At least two different
types can be discerned. As the Buddha was from Magadha, and he preached in
people's language, it should be Magadhi, but after due consideration, it seems
that it was not Magadhi but general Prakrit, because later Buddhist scriptures do
not show the traits seen in Magadhi Prakrit. [Mishra, p.377] Therefore, His
preachings were in "Pacchahi" language from which was originated Shouriseni
Prakrit of the middle lands and Maharashtri Prakrit of the whole country. Ashoka
also considered it the main language. The language of Jain sutras is considered
Ardha Magadhi, which should mean that it has got traits of both Shourseni and
Magadhi thus it is clear that the language of middle country was the basis of
evolution of Prakrit. [Mishra, p.378]

Middle Prakrit consists of Maharashtri Prakrit, Prakrit used in dramas, Prakrit of

later Jain scriptures and Paishyachi i.e language of Brihat Katha.

Maharashtri had more respect among the Prakrits. The Maharashtri name could
be because of region like Shourseni or Magadhi but, it should be considered as
Maha as vast and Maharashtri means language of the greater part of the country
as becomes clear from a verse of Dandin. [Mishra, p.379]

Apabhransha

Apbhramsha originated from Prakrit. Grammarians consider two forms of it,

"Nagar" and "Brachad". Sindhi evolved from Brached and Gujarathi, Rajasthani,
Braji etc. evolved from Nagar. There are two types according to time. Early and
late. Avahatha can be considered a late type. The Apbhramsha more nearer to
modern regional languages can be placed in late type of Apbhramsha. [Mishra,
p.382]

Modern Regional Languages of India

They originated after Apbhramsha. It can not be said definitely when the poetry
in regional languages started. But looking at the late Apbhramsha, it is clear that
the words of modern regional languages are seen in them. Therefore, the time of
the origin of regional languages must be placed in Tenth or Eleventh centuries of
Vikram Era. [Mishra, p.383]

Hindi

Hindi was the first regional language to originate. Its ancient roots are in
Shourseni and also Magadhi or Ardha Magadhi. Name Hindi originated from
Hindu. Others do not agree with this. Hindu is a name given by Muslims.

There are four types, Khadiboli, Rekhata, Nagari, and high Hindi. [Mishra, p.389]
Urdu evolved from language soldiers spoke in the market, and thus it is basically
hindi only. [Mishra, p.391] After Britishers came Hindi got mixed with words from
all languages and was called "Hindusthani". [Mishra, p.393]

Classification of Hindi

1. Western (paschimi) (a) Khadi boli - 

(i) Urdu - of three types of Northern (Uttari) - Rekhati; Dehalvi; and Lakhanavi.
And one Southern (Dakhani)
(ii) Mixed
(iii)High Hindi (uccha hindi)
(b)Bangaru (c) Central (Madyavarti) with
(i) Braji (ii) Kanauji and (iii) Bundeli

2. Eastern (Purvi) : - (a) Avadhi - with (i) Western (Pashimi) and (ii) Eastern
(Purvi) (b) Bagheli (c) Chattisgadhi
Scripts of India

Only two scripts were in vogue at the time of Ashoka, Brahmi and Kharoshti. On
the basis of available Brahmi inscriptions, the time of Brahmi script is considered
to be from 500 B.C. to 350 A.D. Two styles were visible in Brahmi in 4th century
A.D. which are called Northern and Southern. The scripts evolved from Northern
are, Gupta, Kutil, Nagari, Sharda and Bangala, and from Southern are Western,
Madhya Pradeshi, Telugu Kannad, Grantha, Kalinga and Tamil. [Mishra, p.454]

Script of Gupta kings is termed as "Gupta", from which evolved in sixth to nineth
century, a script called "Kutil". From tenth century onwards, we find traces of
"Nagari" in North India. In South, it was called "Nanda Nagari" and appeared
around 8th century. From Nagari evolved the Bangala, Kaithi, Gujarathi, Marathi
languages. Sharda of Kashmir evolved from Kutil. From Sharada evolved,
Takkari and Gurumukhi. From early Bangala script originated, present Bangala,
Maithili and Udiya. [Mishra, p.454] Out of Southern Styles, script found in
Kathiyavad, Gujarath, Nashik, Khandesh, Satara etc. is termed Western. That
found in Madhya Pradesh, North Hyderabad and Bundelkhand is called Madhya
Pradeshi, and Telgu-Kannad script was precursor of present Telgu and Kannad
scripts. A different script called "Grantha" was being used to write Sanskrit
works, from it evolved Malayalam and Tulu. Kalinga script was in Kalinga.
[Mishra, p.455]

About origin of word Nagari, there are different views. One view is it was Urban
(meaning Nagari) script. Some connect it with Nagar Brahmins. There are others
who consider that, previous to image worship, devas were worshiped in the form
of Yantras, the symbols of which were called "Devnagar" giving the name to the
script. [Mishra, p.455]

How India got divided into numerous linguistic areas

The picture of diversity of languages and scripts in India - past and present. How
India, which, during Buddhist period, had only one main language and one or
two main scripts, got divided into various groups with their intrinsic rivalries? This
is the main problem, which nobody bothers to refer to. After the fall of Buddhism,
Brahmanism not only divided the people into numerous castes with graded
inequality and numerous tiny dynasties with rivalries due to sense of high and
low, but also divided the whole country into small segments. It taught that each
kingdom, though small, is a different country. The result was that the feeling of
oneness was never present among the Hindus. There never arose a feeling on
one India among them. In scriptures, we find definitions of 'foreign' lands at
many places. They denote the mischief caused. [Surendra Kumar Adnyat -
"hindu dharm ne bachaya ya pitavaya", Sarita Mukta Reprint vol. 7, p. 24]

Brahspati says that if there is a big river or a big mountain in between, or if the
language differs, then the countries on either side should be treated as foreign
lands of each other. Some say after 60 yojanas, new country starts, some say
40 and some say 30 yojanas. (One yojana equals 8 miles). Brahaspati mentions
another opinion using the word 'videsh' in place of 'deshantara', that the videsh is
that where one can not get messages within one day. [Surendra Kumar Adnyat -
"hindu dharm ne bachaya ya pitavaya", Sarita Mukta Reprint vol. 7, p. 24]

Dharmasindhu defines 'deshantara' or 'videsh' on the basis of caste. For a

brahmin distance of 20 yojanas from his residence, is 'deshantara', for ksatriya it
is 24 yojanas, for a vaishya it is 30 yojanas and for a sudra it is 60 yojanas. If a
big mountain or river comes in way or if there is difference of language, then it is
a different country, as said by some people. It only means, in such an event,
even though the distance is less than 20, 24, 30 or 60 yojanas, even then it is
'deshantara' for brahmins, ksatriyas, vaishyas and sudras respectively.
[Surendra Kumar Adnyat - "hindu dharm ne bachaya ya pitavaya", Sarita Mukta
Reprint vol. 7, p. 24]

Thus as per scriptures, at the most 480 miles is the limit of your country, every
thing beyond is a foreign land. Even today, we use the word 'pardeshi' meaning
a foreigner for a resident of a town, some distance away. When the sastras
declare all areas except in immediate vicinity are alien lands, how can one
expect the rajas and subjects consider other fellow Indians as their own in this
vast land.

Kalivarjya was the method of control

That the kalivarj is the method of Brahmins to tackle with the Buddhist influence
over the masses and impose their supremacy. They changed their laws without
actually condemning them. All laws and rules, were amended including Civil,
Criminal, Revenue and personal laws. It is not properly realized by the masses,
that King was not the Law maker; he had no legislative powers, contrary to the
popular belief. He was only the executive head and had a responsibility to
implement the laws made by the Brahmins. At the most he could only legislate
on revenue matters, that too, as per the rules already laid down. He had some
judicial powers, but that too, he could not pass judgment against the law given
by the Brahmins.

Who suffered in Kalivarjya

In Kalivarjya, main law was against sea voyage. That is how the sea worthy
races of Pallava and Chola countries suffered. All the trade that was being
conducted through the sea stopped. Who suffered? Not the Brahmins, surely. It
will be clear, if we take a look at the products of export. Most of the products of
export were based on the agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry and forest
economy. Even the textile industry which had reached a high acclaim in foreign
lands, was based on cotton, silk and wool. All these occupations were in the
hands of working classes, who were all doomed to be shudras. All these
industries suffered. All these castes in the village economy suffered. All these
occupational groups, which were prosperous during the Buddhist rule, were
degraded into castes, due to rigid caste rules imposed.

The mobility of the professions was stopped. Telis, who extracted oil from oil
seeds, Malis, who grew the vegetables, the Dhangars, who reared the goats and
lambs, Sutars, who made and repaired the farmers' implements, Kumar, who
suppled earthen pots to villagers and Mahars and Mangs who protected the
villages from strangers, all were segregated. All these professions became
hereditary and social intercourse among them stopped. Not only this caused
multiplicity of castes, and regional variations in languages but also a different
language for various castes. This ultimately lead to present situation of
confusion, distrust and hostility among the people destroying social fabric of
country, for which we have only to thank the fall of Buddhism and rise of
Brahmanism.

Send e-mail to dalits@ambedkar.org with questions or comments about this web site. 

No Copyright © 2000 dalit e-forum Last modified: March 28, 2000
Chapter 22
Early History of Vengadam And Sangam Age

India was land of Nagas and its language Tamil

To understand the history of Vengadam, it is necessary of know the history of South

India in general. Though we need not go into details of pre-Asokan period, a few
salient points would be necessary.

It is propagated by Brahmanic scholars that main stream Indian culture is Vedic,

which is erroneous. Shri H. L. Kosare quotes the opinions of Datta Ray Chaudhari
and Majumdar that:

"The main basis of Indian social cultural system is presumed to be Vedic Culture.
This presumption is baseless, and this opinion can not be accepted. There is no
doubt that, the Indus valley culture played a great role in the development and
preservation of Indian culture." [Kosare: 1989: 263]

He further says that:

"About the existence of the Nagas in this country, V. K. Rajwade mentions

that Rajtarangini describes in detail about the Naga kingdoms in Kashmir in olden
days. Astik parva of Mahabharata is related to Nagas from beginning to end. It
mentions the inhabitation of Nagas in the Khandavaprastha and Khandav vana
situated to the south of Yamuna river. Harivamsha mentions the residence of Nagas
to be in Nagpur. Therefore, there is no doubt that in olden days, during the Pandava
times and thereafter, there were Nagas residing on a vast territory of India. It can
definitely be stated on the basis of description of 'sarpa satra', that there was a fierce
war between the Nagas and Manavas for some time. Arjuna married a Naga
princess Ulupi. From this it can be inferred that many Nagas were friendly towards
the Manavas." [Kosare: 270]

Who were the people who inhabited South India? The scholars think that they were
the descendants of people from Indus Valley Civilization. Dasaku Ikeda observes:

"... Study of the Vedic Indus script reinforces the assertion that the creators of the
Indus civilization were the forefathers of the Dravidians, who today mainly inhabit
southern India. ..." [Karan Sing: 1988: 2]

That they were the Nagas is clear from the account by Dr. Ambedkar, who observes:

"When students of ancient Indian History delve into the ancient past they do often
come across four names, the Aryans, Dravidians, Dasas and Nagas.."
[Untouchables:58]
"Starting with Aryans, it is beyond dispute that they were not a single homogeneous
people. That they were divided into two sections is beyond doubt..." [Ibid:59]

"A greater mistake lies in differentiating the Dasas from the Nagas. Dasas are the
same as Nagas. Dasas is another name for Nagas... Dasa is the sanskritised form of
the Indo Iranian word Dahaka. Dahaka was the name of the king of the Nagas...
Who were the Nagas? Undoubtedly they were non- Aryans. A careful study of Vedic
literature reveals a spirit of conflict, of a dualism, and a race superiority between two
distinct types of culture and thought...The mention of the Nagas in the Rig Veda
shows that the Nagas were a very ancient people. It must also be remembered that
the Nagas were in no way aboriginal or uncivilized people. History shows a very
close association by intermarriage between the Naga people with the Royal families
of India... Not only did the Naga people occupy a high cultural level but history shows
that they ruled a good part of India... That Andhradesa and its neighborhood were
under the Nagas during early centuries of Christian era is suggested by
evidence from more sources that one. The Satvahanas, and their successors,
the Chutu Kula Satkarnis drew their blood more or less from the Naga
stock..." [Ibid:63]

"Who are the Dravidians? Are they different from the Nagas? Or are they two
different names for the people of the same race? The popular view is that Dravidians
and Nagas are the names of two different races. This statement is bound to shock
many people. Nonetheless, it is a fact that the term Dravidians and the Nagas are
merely two different names for the same people." [Ibid: 66]

"...the word "Dravida" is not an original word. It is the Sanskritised form of the word
`Tamil' when imported into Sanskrit became Damila and later on Damila became
Dravida. The word Dravida is the name of the language of the people and does not
denote the race of the people. The third thin o remember is that Tamil of Dravida
was no merely the language of South India but before the Aryans came it was the
language of the whole of India, and was spoken from Kashmir to Cape Camorin. In
fact it was the language of the Nagas throughout India..." [Ibid: 75]

Nagas were Buddhists

That the Nagas were sympathizers and followers and followers of Buddha is well
knows. Dr. Ambedkar in 1956, while converting half a million of his followers to
Buddhism at Nagpur, had remarked that his selection of Nagpur was due to the
historical association of the area with the Nagas, who were friendly towards
Buddhism. We might also quote a Buddhist tradition from Mahavatthu:

"Nagas are generally devoted to the Buddha. The enthusiastic devotion that our
compilers believed Nagas to possess towards the Teacher and the Teaching finds
expression in the popular episode of Mucalinda's extraordinary way of protecting the
Exalted One during the seven days of untimely rain. The were also among the
beings who formed a body of guards protecting the Bodhisattva and his mother. At
the Bodhisattva"s birth some Nagas came to bathe him, a scene that had long been
a favourite among sculptors. On the Buddha's visit to Vaisali they displayed their
respect for Him in a magnificent demonstration of bearing parasols. From other
sources we learn how they happened to obtain relics of the Buddha, which they
jealousy guarded for a long time." [Bhikku Telwate:1978:172]

T. A. Gopinath Rao discussing Hindu iconography has agreed that majority of

Buddhists were Nagas. This is what he said, quite a long time back:

"In historical times, portions of India were inhabitated by race of men who went by
the name of Nagas and they are said to have formed the majority of persons who
joined the newly started Buddhistic religion. Some scholars of Malabar are inclined to
believe that the modern Nayars (Shudras) of Malabar might be descendants of
early Nagas as name within modern times might have been corrupted into
Nayars. The hypothesis is more fictitious and fanciful than real and tenable." [Rao:
II,554 emphasis ours]

Prof. Rao, who categorically mentions Nayars were Shudras, finds the theory
untenable. It is difficult to understand what faults Prof. Rao found with the theory. At
least, I do not find any particular reason to disbelieve this theory. One thing is certain
that the Nayars were the original inhabitants of the region, they did not come from
outside. Before the Brahmins came from the North and establish 'sambamdhams'
with the female folks of Kerala, and thus dominate the Nayar community, the original
inhabitants were the Nagas only. From 'Naga' they could have become 'Nayar'. What
is so peculiar in this, that Prof. Rao finds, is hard to understand. Let it be as it may,
the fact remains that the Nagas became Buddhist in great numbers, is a fact that is
certain. Todays Indian society is made up of and is developed from the erstwhile
aboriginal tribal people, is a fact recognized by all the scholars. Then what is the
difficulty in accepting that the word 'Nayar' might have come from 'Naga'?

There was a casteless society among the Naga culture

The non-aryan Naga people were believers in Buddhistic social culture. During their
rule, there was a society based on social equality in India, because their cultural
values were influenced by the Buddhist traditions. This social system of Nagas, even
in those early days, is noteworthy in contrast to Brahmanical social system of
inequality. It is unfortunate that the modern high caste scholars, while narrating the
greatness of ancient Indian culture, ignore this fact. Shri H. L. Kosare opines:

"As all the elements in the Nagas society were treated with equal status, casteless
social order was the main basis of social system of Nagas. As the Naga culture was
based on Buddha's principles of equality, it received the status of Buddha's religion.
Thus, Naga culture played the greatest role in the process of establishing a
casteless egalitarian and integrated society in Indian cultural life." [Kosare: 256]

"A. L. Basham has shown that there is no mention of caste anywhere in ancient
Tamil literature. But after Aryan influence increased, and political and social system
became more complex, caste system which was somewhat more severe than in
north, evolved even here. ('The wonder that was India', Rupa & Co., 1975, p.151)
The period of Sangam literature is third century A.D., This shows that during the
Satavahana rule there was no caste system." [Kosare: 251]

Nagas had their Republics

Not only their social system was public oriented, but unlike the Brahmanical system,
their political system also was designed to give social justice to all sections of
people. Kosare observes:

"From first to the beginning of fourth century A.D., the central countries in India
comprised of strong Republics of Nagas. Samudragupta destroyed these republics.
About the system of administration of Bharshiva Nagas, Dr. K. P. Jaiswal has
observed that their social system was based on the principles of equality. There was
no place for any caste system in them. They all belonged to one and the same
caste." [Ibid.]

He further avers that:

"There were independent kingdoms of Nagas in South India. These kingdoms came
together and formed a federal republic. This federal republic of Nagas was termed as
Fanimandal or Nagamandal. This Cheromandal republic of Nagas of South India
was very powerful and indivisible at the time of Periplus, i.e. in 80 A.D. Later during
Ptolemy's times, i.e. 150 A.D., north eastern part of Tondemandalam became
separate. (Dr. J. P. Jain, bharatiya itihas, p. 239). This Cheromandal or Fanimandal
was a federation of separate kingdoms of Nagas coming together to form a united
national federation. In reality, it was a united Naga Nation of South India." [Kosare:
179]

Region of Tirupati was within Asoka's Empire

Coming to the Asokan times, it is a well known fact that the empire of Asoka
extended to the whole of modern India excepting the extreme regions of south India.
The region of Tondamandalam was included in the empire of Asoka. K.A.N. Sastri
observes:

"...it seems not unlikely that a part of the Tondamandalam was included in it; at any
rate, a Pallava inscription of the ninth century A.D. (the Velurpalaiyam plates)
mentions an Ashokavarman among the earliest rulers of Kanchipuram. ..." [Sastri:
1966: 89]

There is ample evidence to show that in post-Asokan period, Buddhism flourished in

South India, and there was a great Buddhist atmosphere all over South India. Sastri
says:

"The kingdoms of South India, together with Ceylon, are mentioned in the second
and thirteenth rock-edicts of Asoka. The list in the second edict is the more complete
and includes the name of Chola, Pandya, Satiyaputa, Keralaputa and Tambapanni
(Ceylon). All these lands are distinctly stated to have lain outside the empire of
Asoka;but the great emperor was on such friendly terms with them that the
undertook to arrange for the proper medical care of men and animals in all of them
and for the importation and planting of useful medicinal herbs and roots wherever
they were needed. He also sent missionaries to preach the dhamma, the essentials
of Buddhism, among the people of these countries, thus evincing a keen interest in
their spiritual and moral well-being no less than in their physical fitness..." [Sastri:
1966: 85]
"... The political unification of India under the Mauryas was then very real, and the
court of Pataliputra was interested in occurrences in the extreme south of the
peninsula. `Vadugar' literally means `northerners', and was the name applied in
Sangam literature to the ancestors of the Telugu Kannada people living in the
Deccan, immediately to the north of the Tamil country whose northern limit was
Vengadam, the Tirupati Hill..." [Sastri: 1966: 89]

Earliest Inscriptions were definitely Buddhist

In addition to these Asokan Edicts many more inscriptions The short Bare found in
South India. K.A.N. Sastri observes: [Sastri: 1966: 89]

"The short Brahmi inscriptions found in natural rock caverns in the hill of the South
have many features in common with the similar, but more numerous, records of
Ceylon, and are among the earliest monuments of the Tamil country to which we
may assign a date with some confidence. The script employed resembles that of the
inscriptions from Bhattiprolu and may well be assigned to the second century B.C.
The later inscriptions may be taken to be of the third century A.D. like the one at the
auricular Cave in Coimbatore district. The Brahmi graffiti found on the pottery from
Arikamedu excavations may be taken also to belong to his class of inscriptions. They
are definitely datable to about A.D. 50 and fall chronologically about the middle of the
period covered by these records. These inscriptions have not yet been fully
elucidated; but clearly they re mostly either brie donative records or he names of the
monks who once lived there. One of the places where the caverns are found bears
the name Kalugumalai, `vulture's hill', Tamil for Gridhrkuta, name hallowed in the
annals o early Buddhism. From this fact it ha been deduced that these monuments
were all of them of Buddhist origin; but it is premature to formulate final conclusions
of this matter. New caves and inscriptions are still being discovered, such as the
inscribed natural cave at Malakonda in Nellore district [*** 5 ***] and the one at
Ariccalur just mentioned. And tradition is strong, as we have seen, that Jainism came
into South India about the same time as Buddhism, if not earlier. It is not possible to
assert that these monuments owe their origin exclusively to Buddhists or Jains; it is
probable that some may be attributed to the one and some to the other...."

"The exact contents of these inscriptions still remain obscure, but a few facts emerge
from tentative studies of them. We can say, for instance, that among the cities
named are `Maturai' (Madura) and ` Karu-ru' (Karur), that among the donors of
monuments were a husbandman (Kutumbika) of Ceylon (Ila), besides a woman,
merchants (vanikar), and members of the Karani caste. The professions of pon-
vanikam (gold merchant), and kaikkolan (weaver?) are mentioned. The term
nikamttar (members of a guild) occurs twice, once as donor, and again as donees.
The word kon (chief of king) also occur. Some words of religious import are:
atittanam (abode), dhamam (dharma), arattar (followers of dharma), tana (gift),
upasaa (lay worshiper), paliy (palli, a Jaina or Buddhist place of worship), and yakaru
(Yakshas) and Kuvira (Kubera). These brief inscriptions are thus seen to bear
testimony to the support commanded from all classes of the laity by the ascetics who
pursued their spiritual life in the solitudes of mountains and forests. Yet it seems
easy to exaggerate their social and religious significance; there is no evidence that
the Tamil people in general had accepted Jainism or Buddhism in this early period;
and the evidence form the literature of the succeeding age, that of the Sangam
shows the Vedic religion of sacrifice and some forms of popular Hinduism
entrenched in the affection of the people and their rulers." [Sastri: 1966: 89]

It is rather strange that Sastri places more importance on the literary evidences of
Sangam poets of later date than on the inscriptions and underestimates the
inscriptions and expresses uncertainty on the clear cut proofs. However, we feel this
is no justified and all these inscriptions do give an unmistakable evidence that South
India was in fact very much under the influence of Buddhism, and that the Brahmanic
influence was minimal.

South India was free from Brahmin influence

About the early history of South India, Barnet rightly observes:

"Even in the first entry of Christian era the south seems to have felt little influence
from the Aryan culture of Northern India. Some Brahmin colonies had made their
way into the south, and in a few cases Brahmins had gained there a certain position
in literature and religion; but on the whole they counted for little in the life of the
people, especially as their teachings were counter balanced by the influence of the
powerful Buddhist and Jain churches, and Dravidian society was still free from
the yoke of the Brahman caste system..." [Barnet L. D.: I, p.540]

About Agastya he observes:

" The tradition that the Brahman sage Agastya led the first Aryan colony to the
Podiya Hill and created Tamil literature probably arose in a later age, after Brahmin
influence had gained the ascendant in the south, on the basis of the legends in the
Sanskrit epics." [fn.]

Satvahanas and Later

K.A.N. Sastri, who expressed doubts about early inscriptions as mentioned above,
observes about the Satvahana period.:

"Buddhism was well established by the third century B.C. and continued to flourish
throughout the Satvahana period; indeed, the first two centuries of the Christian era
constitute the most glorious epoch of Buddhism in the Deccan. The stupa of
Amaravati was enlarged and embellished, and at Alluru, Gummandiduru, Ghantsala,
Gudivada and Goli new stupas were built or old ones enlarged. New caves were cut
and additional benefactions made at Nasik, Karle, and Kanheri. In the inscriptions of
the time appear the names of a number of sects as well as of monks of various
grades of learning and eminence engaged in enlightening the faithful in the Law of
the Master. Stupas, the sacred tree, the footprints of the Master, the trisula emblem,
the dharmachakra, relics and statues of the Buddha and other great teachers and of
the Nagarajas were all objects of worship. The sculptures of this time show men and
women in states of ecstatic devotions rather than merely kneeling or perhaps
prostrating themselves with joined hands before the objects of their devotion."
[Sastri: 1966: 89]
Even after the Satvahanas, the Buddhist tradition still continued to flourish. Further
he observes:

"...The Satvahanas were described as `lord of the three oceans' and promoted
overseas colonization and trade. Under them Buddhist art attained the superb forms
of beauty and elegance preserved to this day in the cave-temples of western India
and the survivals from the stupas of Amaravati, Goli, Nagarjunikonda and other
places in the Krishna valley; and the tradition was continued long after the
Satvahanas by their successors both in the eastern and western Deccan." [Sastri:3]

Satvahanas were Buddhists and not of Brahmanic faith

Because Goutamiputra Satkarni performed the sacrifices, some scholars tend to

think that he belonged to Brahmanic faith. This is a wrong interpretation. They were
in fact Buddhists. The nature of yajnyas performed by him was political. Shri Kosare
avers:

"Satvahanas were not Brahmanic, they were Kshatriyas of Naga race. Nanaghat
inscription of Naaganika (Journal of Bombay Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 13, 1870,
p.311) mentions yajnyas being performed by Gotamiputra Satkarni. The nature of
these Vedic yajnyas must be considered as a political act of a Kshatriya to raise
ones own political prestige, status and glory as an Emperor. These yajnyas had
absolutely no Brahmanic effect on the republican style of their social culture in
Satvahana times. Similarly, there are no records to show that any other king of
Satvahana dynasty performed any Vedic sacrifices. On the contrary, it appears that
Buddhism flourished and developed to a great extent during the Satvahana period
only." [Kosare, p.167]

Ikshvakus reign

After Satvahanas, started rise of Ikshvakus of Sriparvata, which is definitely identified

with Nagarjunkonda, an ancient Buddhist site destroyed under the supervision of Adi
Shankara, as already seen. K.A.N. Sastri, observes:

"The Ikshvakus ruled over the Krishna-Guntur region. The Puranas call them
Sriparvatiyas - Rulers of Sriparvata and Andhrabhrityas (`Servants of the Andhras').
Though seven kings are said to have ruled for 57 years in all, only a few are known
by name from Inscriptions. Originally they were feudatories of the Satvahanas and
bore the title mahatalavara. Vasithiputa Siri Chantamula, the founder of the line,
performed the asvamedha and vajapeya sacrifices.The reign of his son
Virapurisadata (A.D.275) formed a glorious epoch in the history of Buddhism
and in diplomatic relations. He took a queen from the Saka family of Ujjain and
gave his daughter in marriage to a Chutu princes. Almost all the royal ladies were
Buddhists: an aunt of Virapurisadata built a big stupa at Nagarjunikonda for the relics
of the great teacher, beside apsidal temples, viharas and mandpas. Her example
was followed by other women of the royal family and by women generally as we
know from a reference to one Budhisiri, a woman citizen. The next member of the
line, son of Virapurisadata, is Ehuvula Chantamula, who came after a short Abhira
interregnum (A.D.275-80) and whose reign witnessed the completion of a devivihara,
a stupa and two apsidal temples. We hear also of a Sihala vihara, a convent founded
either by a Sinhalese, or more probably, for the accommodation of Sinhalese monks;
and a Chaitya-ghara (Chaitya hall) was dedicated to the fraternities (theriyas) of
Tambapanni (Ceylon). Ceylonese Buddhism was thus in close touch with that of the
Andhra country. ... The sculptures of Nagarjunikonda, which include large figures of
Buddha, show decided traces of Greek influence and Mahayana tendencies,..."
[Sastri: 100 ff.]

Tondamanadalam was the land of Nagas

About this area, Dr S.Krishnaswami Aiyangar observes:

"...in the age of the inscriptions, Vengadam is generally described as belonging to

Tiruvengadakottam of the Tondamandalam...In classical Tamil literature, however,
the division called Tondamandalam is described generally as
Aruvanadu indicating Tondamandalam proper; and the country beyond and still
dependent upon Tondamandalam and having intimate connection with it, is
described as Aruvavadatalai, that is northern Aruva. Taking the two together the
whole territory would be territory occupied by the people to whom belongs the
Aruvanadu..." [Aiyangar:103]

That these people were none but what we understand as Nagas. It is well known that
the Nagas were the followers and supporters of Buddhism. L. D. Barnet observes:

"...Another group is that termed by the poets Nagas, a word which in Hindu literature
commonly denotes a class of semidivine beings, half men and half snakes, but is
often applied by Tamil writers to a war like race armed with bows and nooses and
famous as free booters. Several tribes mentioned in early literature are known with
more or less certainty to have belonged to the Nagas, among them being the
Aruvalar (in the Aruva-nadu and Aruva-vadatalai around Conjeeveram), Ennar,
Maravar, Oliyar, and Paradavar (a fisher tribe)..." [Barnet, L.D., Camb.Hist. I, 539]

Old name of Vengadam was Pullikunran, land of Pullis

Dr. S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar described this area on the basis of Sangam poets:
[Aiyangar: 5]

The name of the hill was Vengadam. Mamulanur the most important and perhaps the
oldest poet, has seven poems referring to Vengadam. He refers to Vengadam as
belonging to Pulli, the Chieftain of Kalvar, and notes that Vengadam was famous for
its festivals. In another poem he refers undoubtedly to Tirupati as Pullikunran, the
Hill of Chieftain Pulli. Another poem says these Pullis were liberal in gifts. There is
no mention of the great shrine in any of the authors, though festivals are
mentioned.

"It will be noticed that although a number of authors of eminence in this collection
actually refer to Vengadam, ... there is no reference to the great shrine...Mamulanur
refers to it as Vengadam of great prosperity, prosperous because of its having
festivals. ..." [Ibid p. 7]
"...region was under government of chieftain by name Pulli ruling over a people who
are described as Kalvar, possibly with a variant from Kalvar. Subsequently to him it
seems to have come under the authority of a chieftain called Tiraiyan with a capital
at Pavattiri, a little further north..."

This territory was considered part of Tondamandalam. Mamulanar's poem 61 of

Ahananuru has a passage that,

"the chieftain of Kalvar who are in the habit of handing over elephant tusks, barter in
them for liquor prepared from paddy, and who wore anklets characteristic of warriors,
was Pulli famed for conquest of the land of the Malavar, and for great gifts to those
who went to him. (Your lover) it is rarely possible will reconcile himself to stay away
even if he got thereby Vengadam, the capital of Pulli which is prosperous because
of the festivals celebrated in it. This is how a heart broken damsel is consoled for
delay of her lover's arrival from distant parts." [Aiyangar: 5, emphasis original]

Rulers of Vengadam were Kalabhras who were Buddhists

These Kalavars are the same as Kalabhras. When Satvahanas put pressure on
them, these anti-Brahmanic Buddhist people who were ruling around Tirupati
migrated to whole of South India and ruled most of it for centuries, and these
centuries are now termed by Brahmin historians as `dark age', not only because
scanty information is available from Brahmanic sources but also because it was anti-
Brahmanic age. They were abused by the Brahmins and their history was wiped out.
But the Buddhist books still preserve their history.

Dr. Aiyangar observes:

"The Andhra rulers...had an alternative capital in the basin of lower Krishna at

Amaravati wherefrom they stretched south wards, and, perhaps at one time, made
an effort to extend their authority successfully even down to the southern Pennar..."
[Ibid. p. 108]

"...The gradual pressure from the Andhra Empire seems to have set up a popular
movement resulting in the migration of the somewhat less civilized people who seem
to have completely upset the Governments of South India and introduced what may
well be regarded as a period of anarchy to which later inscriptions refer to in
unmistakable terms. This is the movement of the people called Kalvar or Kalavar,
and they must have moved down from the region round and about Vengadam, if not
from the whole of Tondamandalam. ..." [Ibid. p.108]

Kalabhras fought against Brahmin supremacy and were abused by Brahmin

epigraphists after their rule ended

Now we will discuss the history of these people now known as Kalabhras, who were
the rulers of this area. Shri K.A.N. Sastri has the following to say about them: [K.A.N.
Sastri: 144 ff.]

"A long historical night ensure after the close of the Sangam age. We know little of
the period of more than three centuries that followed. When the curtain rises again
towards the close of the sixth century A.D., we find a mysterious and ubiquitous
enemy of civilization, the evil rulers called Kalabhras (Kalappalar), have come and
upset the established political order which was restored only by their defeat at the
hands of the Pandyas and Pallavas as well as the Chalukyas of Badami. Of the
Kalabhras we have yet no definite knowledge; from some Buddhist books we hear
of a certain Acchutavikkanta of the Kalabharakula during whose reign
Buddhist monasteries and authors enjoyed must patronage in the Chola
country. [emphasis ours] Late literary tradition in Tamil avers that he kept in
confinement the three Tamil kings - the Chera, Chola and Pandya. Some songs
about him are quoted by Amitasagara, a Jain grammarian of Tamil of the tenth
century A.D. Possibly Acchuta was himself a Buddhist, a political revolution
which the Kalabhras effected was provoked by religious antagonism [emphasis
ours] At any rate the Kalabhras are roundly denounced as evil king (kali-arasar) who
uprooted many adhirajas and abrogated brahmdeya rights; there was no love lost
between these interlopers and the people of the lands they overran, The Cholas
disappeared from the Tamil land almost completely in this debacle, though a branch
of them can be tranced towards the close of the period in Rayalaseema, the Telugu
Cholas, whose kingdom is mentioned by Yuan Chwang in the seventh century A.D."

" The upset of the existing order due to the Kalabhras must have affected the Chera
country as well, though there is little evidence on this country in this period apart
from the late legend of the Keralotpatti and Keralamahatyam. According to these,
the rulers of the land had to be imported from neighbouring countries, and
they assumed the title of Perumal. [emphasis ours] Possibly the Vaishnava saint
Kulasekhara Alvar was one of these Perumals; in his poems he claims sovereignty
over Chera , Chola and Pandya, besides the Kongu country and Kolli mountain. His
age cannot be determined with any certainty, though a date as early as the sixth
century has been suggested for him, on the ground that at no later period could this
claim to rule over Pandya and Chola be plausible. It seems more likely, however,
that this claim was merely rhetorical, and that he belonged to a much later time, say
ninth century A.D."

"This dark period marked by the ascendancy of Buddhism, and probably also
Jainism, was characterized also by great literary activity in Tamil. Most of the
works grouped under the head, 'The Eighteen Minor works' were written during this
period as also the Silappadhikaran, Manimekhalai and other works. Many of the
authors were the votaries of the `heretical' (meaning Buddhists and Jains)
sects." [K.A.N. Sastri: 144. ff.]

Strangely enough, even the modern scholars such as Sastri like to call this period as
`dark' only because it was an anti- Brahmanic age, not withstanding the creation of
the excellent literature. This is the psyche of Indian scholars. Nothing appears great
to them unless it is done for bettering the cause of chaturvarnya.

Kalabhras were Buddhists

About these so called `wicked' Kalabhras, R. Sathinathaier observes.

"We have already made a few references to the Kalabhras, and to their king
Achchutavikranta. The Velvikudi plates of the third regnal year of Ndunjadaiyan
Pandya (c.765 - c.815) say that Palyagamudukudumi - Peruvaludi Pandyadhiraja
gave the village of Velvikudi as brahmadeya (gift to a brahmana). It was enjoyed for
long. Then a Kali king named Kalabhran took possession of the extensive earth,
driving away numberless great kings (adiraja), and resumed the (village mentioned)
above. After that...the Pandyadhiraja Kodungon recovered the territory under the
Kalabhra occupation. It would appear from the brief account that the Pandya country
was seized by the Kalabhras long after Mudukudumi. They overthrew many
adhirajas and resumed even brahmdeya lands. Thus they were terrible and ruthless
conquerors. Their sway was put an end to by Kodungon, who may be assigned
conjecturally to c.590 - 620. There are other references to the Kalabhras in Pallava
and Chalukya inscriptions; they are said to have been conquered by Simhavishnu
and Narasimha Varman I and by Vikramaditya I and II." [Sathianathier: 1970: 265]

"The identification of the Kalabhras is very difficult problem of South Indian History.
They have been identified with the line of Muttaraiyar of Kondubalur (eighth to
eleventh century). Others regard them as Karnatas on the strength of a reference in
Tamil literature to the rule of a Karnata king over Madura. A third view is that the
Kalabhras were Kalappalar, belonging to Vellala community and referred to in Tamil
literature and inscriptions. But the most satisfactory theory identifies the
Kalabhras with the Kalavar, and the chieftains of this tribe mentioned in
Sangam literature are Tiraiyan of Pavattiri and Pulli of Vengadam or
Tirupati. The latter is described as the cattle lifting robber chief of the frontier. The
Kalavar must have been dislodged from their habitat near Tirupati by political events
of the third century A.D., viz. the fall of the Satvahanas and the rise of Pallavas, as
well as by the invasion of Dakshinapatha by Samudragupta in the following century,
resulting in political confusion in Tondamandalam. The Kalabhra invasion must have
overwhelmed the Pallavas, the Cholas and the Pandyas." [Ibid. p.266 Emphasis
ours]

"Despite the various explanations given above, the Kalabhras cannot but be
regarded as mysterious people who convulsed the affairs of the Tamil country for a
few centuries. Achchutavikranta caused the dispersal of the Cholas. In the Pandya
country even brahmdeya gifts were not treated as sacrosanct by the predatory
Kalabhras. Ultimately their power was broken by Kodungon Pandya and
Simhavishnu Pallava, and Chalukya campaigns against them in the seventh and
eighth centuries." [Ibid. p.266]

" The Muttaraiyar and Kodunabnalar chiefs of Kalabhra origin, according to one view,
were feudatory to the Pallavas and the Pandyas respectively, and in the contest
between two powers, they fought on opposite sides. The Muttaraiyar ruled over
Tanjore and Pudukkotai as the feudatories of the Pallavas from the eighth century to
eleventh. There is a reference to Perumbidugu - Muttaraiyan II who attended the
coronation of Nandivarman Pallavamlla. One of the titles of the Muttaraiyar was Lord
of Tanjore. Vijayalaya Chola, who conquered Tanjore from a Muttaraiyan in the ninth
century, was a Pallava feudatory. A vindication of the law of nemesis is discernible in
the victory of a Chola chief over a descendant of the Kalabhras who had overthrown
the earlier Chola kingdom." [Ibid. p.266]

" The history of Cholas of Uraiyur (near Trichinoply) is exceedingly obscure from
fourth to the ninth century, chiefly owing to the occupation of their country by the
Kalabhras. Buddhadatta, the great writer in Pali, belonged to Uraiyur. He mentions
his contemporary, King Achchutavikranta of the Kalabharakula, as ruling over the
Chola country from Kaveripatnam. He was a Buddhist, Tamil literary tradition refers
to an Achchuta who kept the Chera, Chola and Pandya king in captivity. On the
basis of the contemporaneity of Buddhdatta with Buddhaghosha, Achchuta may be
assigned to the fifth century. Thus after the Sangam age, the descendants of
karikala Chola were forced into obscurity by the Kalabhras, who disturbed the placid
political conditions of the Tamil country." [R. Sathianathier: 1970: 263 ff.]

According to 'Chulavamsa', Buddhadatta and Budhaghosa are certainly represented

as contamporaries. The formar belongs to Uragapura [Uraiyur] near modern
Trichinopoly in South India. He himself speaks patriotically of the kingdom of Cola
and associates his literary activity with the reign of Accutavikkanata or
Accutavikkama of the Kalabbha or Kalamba [kadamba] dynasty. The vinaya -
vinicchaya at its end describes that Buddhadatta of Uragapura wrote it. The
Abhidhammavatara at its end also refers to it.

He is said to have flourished when king Accutavikkanta of the Kalamba (Kadamba)

dynasty was one the throne. It is difficult to identify King Accuta or Accutavikkanta
(Acyta Vikrama) of Kalabhra or the Kadamba dynasty. But the Kalabhras once made
a great influence over the Chola territory and Simhavishnu, the Pallava king,
defeated them in late sixth century. Colian king Acytavikranta or Acytavikrama who is
described as 'Kalambakulnandana' or 'Kalabbhakulanandana' (also Vaddhana).
[Hazra K.L.: 1991: 90, 128]

Alvara's views

Raghavacharya, who assigns date prior to that of Sankaracharya, to all Alvars,

mentions that according to Poygai Alvar, the Vengadam hill was the habitat of
elephants, which the "Kuravars" or "Kurbas" who inhabited or frequented the hill
used to capture and tame and also scare away huge pythons. He observes that, the
Tamil term Kuravar used by the early Alvars is corruption of "Kuraba", who were
residents of this area and also of Kurnool, Mysore, Salem, Koimbtore and the
Nilgiris. He mentions the names of Kurubalakota, Kurubalpatti, Kuruba
Nagalapuram, Kurumba Palayam, Kurumbapatti, Kurumbharhalli etc. in various
areas. He says Kurabas or Kuravar were a verile people, who were in possession of
Tirumalai Hills and surrounding area before Pallavas conquerred it. [Raghavacharya:
II,1006]

In a nutshell

Thus it is clear that the people around Tondamandalam were Nagas, though the
name Naga is now a days restricted to a few groups of people and not applicable to
the whole race unlike in pre-Aryan times, but the fact remains that those Naga tribes
who are mentioned above were Buddhists, as that was the original area of
Kalabhras. Thus we find that this area was under the influence of Buddhists before
the coming up of the Brahmin culture and was free from the caste rivalries. It was
forming the part of Asokan empire, and consequently had the advantages of all the
religious reforms brought in by Asoka. In later times it came under the Satvahanas
who were also having friendly relations towards Buddhism. Nagarjuna's relations
with Satvahana king are well known.

The local people were the Pullis and Tiraiyan of Pavattiri and these so called less
civilized Kalavar people later migrated from the land of Tondamandalam to
southward areas and caused so called anarchy and got designated as wicked by the
Brahmin epigraphists. And these Kalabars were the same as Kalabhras, and were
Buddhists. The whole situation boils down to one thing that during the period from
Satvahanas to the ascendancy of Imperial Pallavas and even in later times the area
of Tondamandalam was inhabited by the Buddhist people and ruled by the Buddhist
kings, initially under the Satvahanas and later independently, and not only that but
they ruled whole of South India for about three centuries. And these Kalabhras were
termed as 'uncivilized', 'wicked' and by all sorts of abuses, and their history
suppressed, only evidences remaining extant in Buddhist books, i.e. whatever was
left of these books. The real bone of contention seems to be that they cancelled the
rights of the Brahmins from the brahmdeya villages, i.e. the villages gifted to
Brahmins.

Presence of Festivals but absence of Murthi is against it being a Brahmanic

shrine

That there was no deity in Vengadam in Sangam age, is agreed by all scholars.
Veera Raghavacharya has the following to observe:

"Vengadam or (Tiruvengadam) is the name of the hill according to the Tamil

grammar Tolkappiyam. The Sangam poet Mamulanur gives the same name to the
Hill. But the name of the deity Tiruvengadamudiyam (or any variant thereof) is not
mentioned by either of the above; nor is the existence of any temple for any other
deity mentioned. ..." [Raghavacharya: I,106]

It is quite clear that Murthi was absent but festivals existed on the hill during the
Mamulanar's time which is considered to be in 2nd century A.D. The festivals always
are held at the places where some religious activity is taking place. The people meet
and transact secular business activities and enjoy merry making, but always the
nucleus is the religious object, around which all other activities are centered. It is
impossible to believe that the people would undertake the hazardous journey to
Tirumalai only for secular purposes of barter etc. and if the festivals were taking
place, the have to be for something sacred. If there was no murthi on the Vengadam
hill, what was that object which was venerated and in whose honour the festivals
were celebrated? Certainly, the worship of Vishnu cannot be performed when there
is no murthi of Vishnu. It is, therefore, certain that the festivals on the hill were not
connected with worship of Vishnu in any form.

These festivals are referred to by Tirumalsai as Ona Vilavu meaning "Sravana

Festivals" [Aiyangar: 11]. It is worth mentioning that Sravana Festivals are a well
known Buddhist entity. Lord Buddha delivered His first sermon at Sarnath
on Ashadha full moon day and went into varshawasa from next day, which was
Monday, being 1st day of Sravana. In North India, months end on full-moon day.
There used to be festivals in Sravana all over the Buddhist places. People
considered it meritorious to visit these festivals on these days, listen to the sermons
of Bhikkus, observe uposatha, offer food to bhikkus before having meals themselves,
[Dharma Rakshita:1956:21] and also to become shramner or shramneri on these
occasions. Such practices are common in Buddhist countries even now and the
month of Sravana is considered as auspicious. Therefore, the presence of "Sravana
Festivals", without the presence of any image, on the hazardous hill, in the midst of
the Buddhist Tribal inhabitants can have only the Buddhist meanings. This period
of Varshavas had tremendous effect on Indian population, and we find, even now,
the lay people refrain themselves from eating meat and other forbidden objects of
food during this period, and observe fasts on Mondays.

Murthi came into existence during Buddhist rule

It is already shown that the Murthi is that of Avalokitesvara. In about 2nd century
A.D., fairs and festivals existed but no deity. This gives us the approximate time of
installation of the Murthi between 3rd to 5th century. This would also agree with the
times of Kalabhras, proving thereby that the murthi came into existence during the
period when Kalabhras were ruling the area around Tondamandalam, during so
called 'dark age' - dark age for Brahmanism.

Puranic Tondaman is a myth

Traditional story of Tondaman is already mentioned. The contention of Aiyangar,

seen in Chapter 8, is that the Tondaman Chakravarthy of Puranas was a historical
person and that he installed the Murthi and built a small temple for the Lord, and this
was in the times around beginning of Christian era. He identifies this Puranic
Tondaman with Tondaman Tiraiyan of Pavattiri and has averred that he is different
from Tondaman Ilam Tiraiyan of Kanchi. Tiraiyan means men of sea. He observes:

"...We found that the region dependent upon Vengadam or Tirupati changing hands
from the Kalvar chieftain Pulli and passing into the possession of the Tondaman
chieftains before the time of the great Pandyan victor at Talaiyalanganam, from
reference to Sangam literature. This very literature gives us a Tondaman, ruling from
his northern capital at Pavattiri, Reddipalem in the Gudur Taluk, and held rule over
the northern Tondamandalam. We have referred rather more elaborately to another
Tondaman that the literature knows of, namely, the Tondaman Ilam Tiraiyan. So we
seem to have now three Tondamans before us, the Tondaman or the Tondaman
Chakravarthi referred to in the Puranas, the Tiraiyan of Pavattiri or northern
Tondamandalam and Tondaman Ilam Tiraiyan of Kanchi..." [Aiyangar:I,22]

Tondaman Ilam Tiraiyan of Kanchi, he observes, was "a great celebrity in Tamil
literature...The Tolkappiyam,...classes him as of royal descent, but not of
monarchical standing. He is regarded as the son of a Chola ruler (from a Naga
Princess)..." [Ibid.p.11] The story says that the king fell in love with a Naga princess
and when a child was about to be born, advised her to put the baby in a box and
send it afloat on the sea with a twig of creeper of the Tondai tied round his ankle.
This was done and the baby reached somehow the shore and was brought to the
king who brought him up as his own child and appointed him as Viceroy of Kanchi in
due course, from where he was ruling over whole of Tondamandalam. [Ibid. p.13]
Tiraiyan of Pavattiri and Ilam Tiraiyan were different from each other, [Ibid. p.23] and
the Tondaman Raja of Puranas is distinct from Tondaman Ilam Tiraiyan can be seen
from "...The Perumban-arruppadi which gives specific details regarding the
Tondaman Ilam Tiraiyan and mentions the Vishnu temple at Vekha at
Kanchi, makes no mention whatsoever of Tirupati, nor of Ilam Tiriyan's
association with Tirupati. This omission on the part of Ilam Tiraiyan is significant, and
stands against an identification between the two..." [Ibid. p.23]

The attempts to connect the Tondaman Raja of Puranas with the celebrities from
Sangam era are unjustifiable because firstly there was no murthi at that time as
agreed by all scholars and secondly the prayer of Tondaman to wear the weapons
invisibly, as mentioned in later Puranas, indicates that this Puranic story
mentioning the absence of weapons is definitely a later introduction to justify
the absence of weapons. Around the beginning of Christian Era, the Buddhists
cults were the only cults in vogue in South India and the area concerned was a
predominantly Buddhist area, therefore it is more logical that this cult started in
Vengadam was a Buddhist cult.

It is clear that the Kalvar chieftains Pullis and Tiraiyans of Pavattiri are people of one
and the same stock, i.e. of Kalabharakula, as already seen. They were all Buddhists
and they migrated south wards and uprooted various kings. There was religious
animosity with Brahmins, villages gifted to whom were cancelled by them and
consequently they were abused by Brahmin epigraphists. In spite of all this it seems
Brahmins could not get rid of the name of Tondaman who finds a place in the
Puranas as founder of Tirupati. We have to remember that Pullis, Tiraiyans,
Tondamans represent people rather than individuals, and that all these people being
the same, one could see how Tondaman is designated as 'Chakravarthi' when in
story itself he was described as no more than a small chieftain. At the same time, the
Kalabhras who were the same people, when they uprooted various kings and
convulsed the great Emperors for centuries, are designated as 'wicked', 'kali-asar'
etc. simply because they had to depict these people in the first place as devotees of
Brahmanism and in the second place as enemies of Brahmanism. Such is the
mentality and scholarship of our elites.

Chapter 21          Chapter 23