Maramalai Adiga – Book Review

Religion, Caste, and Nation in South India: Maraimalai Adigal, the Neo-Saivite Movement, and Tamil Nationalism, 1876-1950.

There is nothing wrong in holding any particular ideology. In order to promote that ideology, one has to present the facts with proper research and analyse, no matter how others may disagree. But in the name of promoting a particular ideology, if one twists and turns the facts to accommodate her point of view, then it becomes propaganda. This is how one feels after reading this book.

In this book, Vaithees has done a great service for us to help us understand that any narrow-minded ideological narrative of any society that twists its cultural, social and textual facts won’t withstand the test of the time. My imagination of Maraimalai Adigal as the pioneer and champion of the pure Tamil movement was based on listening to a few who glorified him and his legacy as the golden period of (pure) Tamil revivalism in the early 20^th century. That is now challenged by the facts presented by Vaithees. This does not mean that one can easily dismiss Adigal’s contribution to the revival of the pure Tamil movement or to the Neo-Saiva Siddhanta. But the overall picture one gets after the reading this book does not match with the idealistic picture presented by many Tamil ideologues and zealots.

This book is divided in four parts around the life and writings of Vedanayagam Pillai, who later become known as Maraimalai Adigal. In the first, the author gives a frame of the Neo-Saivite Revival in Tamil Nadu that began earlier than Adigal particularly by his mentor Somasundara Nayakar¹ (1846-1901) from whom Adigal took the mantel to promote it (pp. 20-60). This frame also gives the historical role played by Christians Missionaries like Robert Caldwell, G. U. Pope² and others along with other prominent figures like P. Sundaram Pillai,³ Arumaga Navalar of Jaffna and J. M. Nallasvami Pillai and their attempts to link this Tamil Saivism and Saiva Siddhanta.⁴

The next section is the biographical sketch of Maraimalai Adigal. His mother was from Chettiar and his father was from Pillai. He went through a formative period which took a major turn after his meeting with Somasundara Nayakar and he worked closely with him at Chennai. He soon claimed Nayakar’s mantle and become his disciple to take forward his movement. Later, he was appointed as Tamil Pandit at Madras Christian College and established the Saiva Siddhanta Maha Samasam (Great Organisation of Saiva Siddhanta). He had a career as a Swami and Itinerant Lecturer⁵ of Saiva Siddhnata and established his mutt⁶ at Pallavaram, “the inauguration of the Pure Tamil Movement with Adigal as its chief architect”.⁷ Adigal established the ‘Saiva Siddhanta Kazhagam’ to publish his writings with the partnership of his son-in-law, V. Thiruvarangam Pillai. He had links with the Self-Respect movement and later had confrontations with the conservative wing of the Saiva Siddhanta (like T.V. Kalyanasundara Mudaliar).⁸ Finally, the author discusses Adigal’s personal interest in reading various books,⁹ his life-style,¹⁰ his romance with three (married) women,¹¹ and his personal family tussle because of his other wives.¹² After reading all of this, one is struck at how fascinating a person he was.

The next two sections of the book show how Adigal theorized the (Naveenar) Saivite Revival, focusing on ‘Reinscribing Religion as Nation’ (Chapter 3) in which Saivism is projected as a Tamil non-Brahminical religion which paved the way for a ‘Tamil Nationalism’¹³ (chapter 4) using ‘ The Politics of Language, Race, Caste and Gender’.¹⁴ Based on the life and writings of Adigal and relating them with his contemporary socio-religio-political movements, Vaithees presents a clear picture of what Adigal managed to achieve. The conclusion presents Adigal’s ambition of a ‘Non-Brahmin Tamil Nationalism’. (Vaithees gives a clear summary of the entire book in pp. 16-19 under the heading ‘Organization of the Book’. This section itself can be presented as a clear review of this book. However as it will again repeat what the author says, I will avoid it here).

In India, particularly in Tamil Nadu, Brahmins played the role of the scapegoat for anyone wanted to blame caste and other kind of social/cultural/religious hegemony on others. There might be some truth in it. But Adigal brought a new twist in his propaganda for Tamil nationalism. In this process the first attempt was to make the ‘othering’ the Brahmins. “…neo-Saivite figures such as Maraimalai Adigal were attempting to forge a new non-Brahmin Tamil religion and a non-Brahmin caste bloc that would unite all non-Brahmin Tamils and essentially redefine Tamilness by displacing or othering the Tamil Brahmins….”(9). But the sad fact in it was that even Indian Nationalism led by leaders like Gandhi were linked with this and was condemned by Adigal:

Yesterday the three so-called leaders of Gandhi movement were arrested in Madras and were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment. The madman Gandhi is originating unruly mob rising by his utterly non-sensical [non-sensical] and blind teachings against the wise and established English Government. May God alone avert this evil. {Adiga, MMAD [Maraimalai Adigal Diaries (English), 1898-1950. Unpublished. Madras, Tamil Nadu: Maraimalai Adigal Library. (22 April 1930)}—p. 293

Of course there is no surprise as some political parties like the Justice Party and Tamil leaders like E.V.R. Ramaswami opposed the very idea of Indian getting Independence and we need to read Adigal’s comment in this context adding with his spirit of Tamil Nationalism.¹⁵

But this scope for Tamil Nationalism should not be treated as a narrow-minded ethnicity limited only with a tiny part of India. Once upon a time, as it had a universal impact on other world civilization, it now deserves its legitimate place in Tamilnadu as,

…his argument that the ancient Tamil civilization was the root and source of the world’s greatest ancient civilizations such as the Egyptian, Babylonian, Hebrew, and Sumerian. { Adigal, Maraimalai, Mutkala Pitkalath Tamil Pulovor, Madras: The South India Saiva Siddhanta Publishing Works Ltd. [1936] 1957, 1-16} Drawing liberally from the work of Orientalist scholars, Adigal sought to demonstrate that even the words for God in languages such as Hebrew, Greek, and Roman—Jehovah, Zeus, and Jupiter respectively—were essentially derived from the Tamil word for God, ‘Sivam’, and that the ancient Phoenicians who spread civilization in ancient times were no other than the class of Tamil merchants (Vannigar), the forerunners of the Nattukottai Chettiar trading castes. {[1936] 1957, 12-16}.—p. 241

Recently I heard about a new movement in Tamilnadu known as ‘Tamil Samayam’ (Religion of Tamil) that makes similar claims. When I heard about them, I thought that how far their claim about the superiority of Tamilism in every sphere of life is from documented history and wondered where they got all these kinds of ideas. But when I read a similar claim by Adigal, I am not sure whether to ignore it as mere fanaticism or to take it seriously based on these kinds of claims from so many new Tamil-centred theories floating in Tamilnadu.

For example, Sri. Seeman, the Founder and President of the ‘Nam Tamilar’ (We Tamilian) party regularly claims that Tamil civilization is 50,000 old. This fanaticism even spread among some Tamil Christians claiming that Adam was a Tamilian. Returning back to Adigal, according to whom,

…the crucial period of ancient Indian history is not the arrival of Indo-Aryans around 1800 BCE but much earlier, a time well before the Mahabharatha (war) 3,500 years ago. This period, according to Adigal, was the high-water mark of Indian civilization when the Tamil kings reigned supreme and the Tamil people were spread as far north as the Himalayas and as far west as Afghanistan….(236)

But the downfall of such grand Tamil civilization began with the Aryan invasion as Tamilians failed in their efforts to civilize the barbaric Aryan nomads:

…The Tamils whose literature, Adigal argues, enjoyed its heyday long before the arrival of the Aryans, had however treated the incoming nomadic Aryans hospitably and knowing their uncivilized state and violent practices sought to gradually teach them their peaceful, non-violent philosophy of Saivism. These initial efforts at teaching the less-sophisticated and violence-prone Aryans had to focus on the much more modest goal of cultivation of civility, ethics, and morality. It is such early imperatives that compelled Tamils to develop and expound Upanishadic and Buddhist philosophies.¹⁶ The ancient Tamils composed the Upanishads, and an ancient Tamil sage, Gauthama Sakiar¹⁷, had arisen and formulated the simple ethical creed of Buddhism and non-violence simply to curb and instruct the warlike Aryans given to massacring innocent animals. Adigal argued that the reason that these philosophies were different from Saivism was that (p.234) they were crafted for the sole purpose of weaning the Aryans away from their violent and crude forms of worship. {Adiga, Maraimalai, Mullaippattu Araichiurai (A Critical Commentary on Mullaippattu). Madras: The South India Saiva Siddhanta Publishing Works Let, [1903] 1962, 11-17}. All this took place, Adigal maintained, between the fourth century before Christ and the age of Tiruvalluvar, a hundred years after Christ—which for Adigal was a golden age of Tamil literature in which ‘pure Tamil reigned’.—p. 234-35

But the endeavour of civilizing the Aryans didn’t go to waste as it resulted in the emergence of Saivism:

…He creatively combines Orientalist findings with tremendous ingenuity to offer a rather long but ingenious explanation. When the nomadic Aryans with their practice of worshipping their dead ancestors came into India with their train of goats and cows, the Tamils had accommodated them warmly. When they began their cruel practice of slaughtering cows and buffaloes as offerings to their minor God, the Tamils attempted, to no avail, to stop this barbaric and cruel practice which went against the very essence of their own non-violent creed and civilization. Having no option, some of the Tamil sages at first tried to lessen the suffering of the animals by developing methods of hypnotism as a way of numbing and anaesthetizing the animals. When further efforts also failed, the Tamil sages came up with works such as Sankyam and Yoga as well as the various Upanishads and some Puranas in order to educate the Aryans about the evil consequences of their deeds. Not satisfied with this and in order to completely discourage such barbaric practices, the Tamils built a circular platform to represent the fire pit where animal sacrifices were offered and a lingam-shaped stone arising out of it to represent the sacrificial fire. Then, opposite this structure, to represent the animal brought for slaughter they fashioned the image of a cow (Nandi) and beside it a circular stage to represent the slaughtering platform. {Adigal, Maraimalai. Saiva Siddhanta Jnanabotham (The Wisdom of Saiva Siddhanta). Madras: The South India Saiva Siddhanta Publishing Works Ltd, ([1906] 1959, 218-23} These then became the foundations of many of the Saivite temples. In order that these structures did not remind them of this cruel practice of animal sacrifice, the Tamils also used these three symbols to represent the three essential principles of Saiva Siddhanta. The sivalingam thus came to represent Lord Shiva, the cow (Nandi) came to represent the human soul, and the sacrificial stage came to represent the various bonds of ignorance that had been shed by the soul by the grace of Lord Shiva. Thus, for Adigal, both temples and the Saivite doctrines were founded and built on such lines in southern India. {[1906] 1959, 223} (204)

Another important point of contention that need to be confronted was caste—for which, as usual, Bramins were blamed as the ones who invented it in order to establish their hegemony over others, particularly the native people. Here also Adigal has his own way of confronting it for his advantage to promote Tamil Nationalism:

…Firstly, reflecting his central preoccupation with displacing the Aryan-Brahmin from the pinnacle of Tamil, if not Indian society, Adigal sought to take back India from the Indo-Aryans and claim it as essentially a Tamil civilization, the central message being that it was to the Tamil ‘race’ that we owe the high culture of India and not so much to the Indo-Aryan or Brahmin. Secondly, Adigal sought to subvert the established order of the varna hierarchy by dismissing as irrelevant or inappropriate the demeaning Sudra varna category to which all non-Brahmin Tamils were assigned. Consolidating this subversion of the established order even further, Adigal even claimed Tamils to be the originators of caste and offered up the system of caste as a peculiarly Tamil contribution to Indian society. Thirdly, Adigal refashioned and reordered caste in Tamil society on a new ethico-religious basis which, though positing the Tamil-Saivite Vellalars as the ideal counterpoint to the Aryan-Brahmins, at the same time sought to subvert its more ascriptive or caste-as-essence argument and make the category more broadly inclusive. Fourthly, despite privileging the Tamil Vellalars in opposition to the Brahmin even as he sought to empty the ‘Vellalar’ of ascriptive qualities, it is evident from his voluminous and passionate writings against the evils of caste that Adigal was primarily concerned with forging a unified ‘Tamil caste’. …he sought to open up membership to this Vellalar fold to anyone who adhered to what he considered its ideals and ethics….¹⁸—p. 266

Thus once the emptying the ascriptive qualities of Vellalar, then he can neatly explain the caste differentiation in Tamil society as a result of the professional differentiation:

Now as to caste differentiation in Tamil society, it is interesting that of the five caste groupings that Adigal divides Tamil society into, the first three all emerge from the very same Vellalar stock that discovered agriculture. These all evolved as a result of the professional differentiation such a wealthy and complex agrarian society required. Since the wealth generated by agriculture necessitated its protection, the institution of kingship and a warrior caste emerged. So did other institutions such as temples and matams all of which required various professionals such as anthanar (sages/ministers), priests such as aathisaivar, saiva kurrukal, nambiar, and pattar, all of whom came from various segments of the same Vellalar stock. Thus priests and officiants of temples who now claim Aryan Brahmin status are in reality what Adigal depicts as Vellalar Brahmins. Most of the Brahmins in Tamil Nadu today are, in fact, descendants of these Vellalar Brahmins. A segment of these original Vellalars also went into trade and came to be called Chetties but again for Adigal they are in reality of the same Vellalar stock…. (273)

No matter how Adigal tried to idealize a ‘Tamil caste’ based on Vellla ethics, in real-life he has to face the reality of caste discrimination and arrogance, even among his own Vellala community between the two division of ‘vegetarian Vellala’ and ‘non-Vegetarian’. Strictly speaking, Adigal had a mixed parentage, where his mother was from a local Chettiar community and his father was a ‘Soliya Vellalar’ who are not ‘Saiva Vellalar’ (vegetarians). One time in the Tuticorin Saiva Siddhanta Association he had to face the division among them, though he ‘successfully conceal his mixed-caste heritage’ (257). In that meeting when the vegetarian–Vellalars were served food separately from the non-veg-Vellalas, the estranged Adigal confronted it by dinning with the non-veg-Vellalas. The next day, when he was forbidden to enter the vegetarian-Vellala’s dinning hall, feeling doubly insulted as ‘he was the chief guest and speaker of the function’, Adigal refused to eat till the Vegetarian group apologized and promised to treat all equally. (258) And in such reality alone Adigal strived to theorize caste in Tamil society:

…That he was particularly troubled by the caste arrogance of certain elite Vellalar castes is also confirmed by an observation he had once made in his diaries regarding the visit to his home of a Vellalar man displaying such a supercilious attitude: ‘An arrogant old man of silly and vain Tondaimandal Vellalar caste came from Kundrathoor and stayed for the night. This caste people while possessing no virtue of any kind think themselves superior to other people! Silly and mischievous mass of putrid flesh they are!’ {Adigal, MMAD [Maraimalai Adigal Diaries] (English), 1898-1950. Unpublished. Madras, Tamil Nadu: Maraimalai Adigal Library. (10 October 1925)} It was this difficult task of positing the Vellalars as the ideal caste while at the same time being wary of their caste arrogance that served to animate Adigal’s rather elaborate attempt to theorize caste in Tamil society. (260)

But considering the reality of caste-based identity in Indian society and particularly in Tamil Nadu, it is not surprising that, as the obituary says, the Vellalas lost their revolutionary leader:

…When the end came, it came quite unexpectedly, and the news of his passing elicited tributes from far and wide. As one of the many tributes published following the news of his death in the journal Senthamil Selvi observed: ‘Saiva Siddhantists have lost their true head; Pure Tamil Mother has lost her only handsome prince; the Vellalar community has lost its true revolutionary leader.’ {Submitted by one A. Muthukumarasamy Pillai of Thenkasi….}—p. 164

Apart from this central theme of this book of Tamil nationalism, in this biography of Adigal, the author has also managed to open several important events in the life of Adigal that go along with his idealism. What is more interesting to me is that through the life sketch of Adigal, the author presents the origin of the Tamil Nationalistic movement. At the same time by giving several personal autobiographical details of Adigal, he presents his fascinating personality.

Adigal’s colourful stories and accounts include his Brahmin bashing, an imagined Tamil golden period, twisting many Tamil texts and historical facts to suit his ideology, reinterpreting the life and teaching of several Tamil saints like Manickavacagar ¹⁹, being projected as the champion of Vellalars (while he opposed caste²⁰ discrimination), scientific rationalism. Finally, without making a judgement based on the personal life, Adigal’s many wives and romances with married women, along with his attitude towards sex²¹ further colours his legacy.

One more important point for us to note is the role played by the Christian Missionary in this Saiva Siddhanta Movement:

Clearly the revival of Saiva Siddhanta was aided by Christian missionary participation and support….Nallasvami Pillai was a great friend and admirer of Pope. Pope had been a regular contributor to Nallasvami Pillai’s Saiva Siddhanta revivalist journal Siddhanta Deepika through which the latter attempted to attract greater attention to Pope’s contributions, going so far as to serialize his life and work (J.M.Nallasvami Pillai, ‘Introduction’. Tamilian Antiquary 1, no. VI, 1910, 1). Nallasvami announced Pope’s death in his journal as ‘the passing away of this great Tamil scholar, Missionary and Saint’. ‘The loss to the Tamil land and literature is immense. He loved the Tamil people and their literature. He was the greatest living scholar, among the living or the dead….If he was born in (p.58) the old day’, Nallasvami insisted, ‘he would have been catalogued with the 63 (Saivite) Saints. His service to the Saivite religion and Siddhanta Philosophy are incalculable as he was the first to bring their importance to the light of the English-speaking world. May his soul rest in Sivam.’ {Siddhanta Deepika III, no. 11 (February 1908): 336-8}.—pp. 58-59

Before Pope, the contribution of Rev. Caldwell was a pioneering one in the Dravidian movement:

…Reverend Robert Caldwell (1814-91)….not only coined the word ‘Dravidian’ to describe the languages and peoples of South India…(p.28) His use of the term ‘Dravidian’ came to have an enormous appeal for the rising non-Brahmin classes of South India, providing a single category under which all the linguistically disparate non-Brahmin caste groups in South India could unite. (28-29)….In coining the word ‘Dravidian’, Caldwell posed it in opposition to a northern Brahmin identity and in the process highlighted the word’s subaltern association, ‘a man of an outcaste tribe’. By this very definition itself, Caldwell not only deftly erected a divide between the Brahmins and the non-Brahmin peoples of South India but also gave the term a subversive potential. He thus set the conceptual basis for the ‘Dravidian’ cultural-religious identity, with an accompanying history—and even the Dravidian nation.—p. 30

At the same time, however, the Tamil Saivites appreciated and glorified the contribution of the missionaries, yet,

…Pope, who pursued an academic career at Oxford after his missionary work in India, devoted himself to the task of encouraging what he regarded as certain progressive traditions and elements within the Indian tradition—one which he had found among the Tamils—which for him uncannily reflected a Christian inspiration if not spirit. Thus, as early as 1879, Pope believed that Christianity could make an impact through a deeper exploration and perhaps a selective encouragement of certain strands within Hinduism….(italics added) (33)²²

Trying to read history and re-interpret it to suit one’s contemporary issues and creating a golden past that never existed may create some temporary excitement among those who endeavour for that, but it won’t withstand the test of the time. After the initial excitement dies down and disappears along with that person, the future presents an unbiased analysis about that person and exposes several hidden skeletons in the cupboard. Through the relentless (politically motivated) efforts of the Dravidian political parties and the promotion by several sincere and serious Tamil scholars, Tamil has gained a respectful space again in Indian culture. Yet, all the past legacies like the ‘Pure Tamil movement’ led by such personalities like M. M. Adigal, have almost disappeared from the common collective memory of modern Tamils. People know the name Maraimalai Adigal not for his (biased) contribution to the Pure Tamil Movement but because of the famous bridge in his name at Chennai.

One shouldn’t come to a definite conclusion after reading just this one book and not looking at all of his original writings, and particularly the biography by his own son. However, this book has discouraged me to not invest my limited time to knowing more about Adigal and his legacy as a lover of the Tamil language.

As a Tamilian first, my desire to know about the Tamil revival movements that I have witnessed since my school days was presented as secular and not religious.²³ But Vaithees presents a clear picture that without understanding its origin in its early period with a Tamil religious revivalism, all our understanding will remain only a half truth. Of course those who want to separate religion from secular can conveniently neglect its early origin and development from the revival of Neo-Saivam. But for us to understand the historical origin and growth of Tamil revivalism, we cannot ignore it just to present what suits us best.

Vaithees’ summary of what this book is will help those who want to understand in nutshell about the Tamil revival movements and how it continues to shape the new political developments in Tamilnadu:

…The present study also demonstrates how language, literature, and literary history were the principal modes though which Adigal secularized the neo-Saivite message. What is important to note is that in this very process of historical reconstruction many internal contradictions and fissures in Tamil society and history were flattened in order to not only project an unblemished Tamil past but to distinguish this untrammelled Tamil past and Tamil culture from that of the Aryan/Brahmin…. (p.313) Was thus conceived as free from the fetters of caste, untouchability, and patriarchy until the arrival of the Aryan-Brahmin colonists. It was this foundation of cultural politics based on an Aryan/Dravidian and a Brahmin/non-Brahmin dichotomy that the subsequent Dravidian political parties took forward in different way. The entire cultural politics, especially of the more populist phase of the Dravidian movement, was centred on a call for a retrieval of this lost Tamil golden age. The quest for pure Tamil, the invoking of ancient Tamil Sangam literature, ancient Tamil music, and even the appeal to the chastity of ancient Tamil women were different versions of this cultural politics. Framed this way, there was no real need for the Tamil populists to interrogate the Tamil past or call for reforms other than to expel the Aryan Brahmin and efface his alleged impact on Tamil culture. At the heart of such a construction of the Tamil past was an uncritical flattening of the complex and contradictory sociocultural history of the Tamil past in which all inequity and social evils were wiped out and projected on to the Aryan/Brahmin Other.—ibid. pp. 313-14

This book is essential for those who want to understand the origin and growth of the (Pure) Tamil movement that contributed and shaped the political landscape of Tamilnadu. By giving a biographical sketch of the pioneer of the Pure Tamil movement, the author gives us a holistic view rather than only a secular one.

I have no other option but to give extensive notes, as merely giving a short summary in the text or quoting them entirely at each point will end up mere repletion. In fact there are few repetitions in the book itself, which is quite natural as the author approaches the point from different points of view.

Notes

1. {Somasundara} Nayakar’s early efforts here in the religious realm to mark and revive a unique Tamil Saiva Siddhanta tradition, particularly through his celebration of the Tamil-Saivite Saint Tirujnasambhandar, can be seen as paralleling the efforts made at the linguistic level to define and delineate a distinct Tamil Dravidian tradition from an Aryan one.—notes. 64, p. 51
2. …One of the earliest and most influential European advocates of Tamil Saivism and Saiva Siddhanta was the Scottish missionary George Uglow Pope. He had, for example, boldly declared in the preface to his translation of one of the most important Tamil-Saivite works, Thiruvacagam, in the year 1900:

The Caiva Siddhantha system is the most elaborate, influential, and undoubtedly the most intrinsically valuable of all the religions of India. It is peculiarly the South Indian, and Tamil, religion….Caivism is the old prehistoric religion of South India, essentially existing from pre-Aryan times, and holds sway over the hearts of the Tamil people….Its textbooks (probably its sources) exist in Tamil only….(Classical Tamil is very little studied, yet this key alone can unlock the hearts of probably ten millions of the most intelligent and progressive of the Hindu races). (Pope, G. U. The Tiruvacagam or Sacred Utterances of the Tamil Poet, Saint, and Sage Manikka-Vacagar: The Tamil Text of the fifty One Poems with English Translation, Introduction and Notes. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1900, lxxx)—p. 33

3. …{p.} Sundaram Pillai observes:

By the Saiva community, I mean the Hindus that regard Siva as the head of the Hindu trinity. Saivas, in this sense, form the bulk of the population … in short, wherever Tamil is the prevailing tongue … For all the Saivas, and particularly for the non-Brahmanical Tamil Saivas, Tirujnanasambhandha is the highest authority…. The Tamil Saivas have their own system of sacred literature, compiled and arranged so as to match the Vedas, Puranas, and Sastas in Sanskrit. (Sundaram Pillai, ‘Some Milestones in the History of Tamil Literature or the Age of Tirujnana-Sambhanda’. The Tamilian Antiquary (New DelhI; Asian Educational Services) 1, no. 3[1909] 1986, 1-2).

Here, Sundaram Pillai is clearly intent on not only conflating Saivism with Tamil-speaking people but also positioning it in opposition to the Sanskritic Vedic and Puranic tradition….—pp. 52-53

4. It was this unique sense of Tamil culture and identity that non-Brahmin Saiva Siddhanta revivalists of the late nineteenth century wanted to resurrect with the help of missionary Orientalism to counter the rising Aryan-Brahmin hegemony in both the religio-cultural and social spheres. Inspired by the Dravidian ideology of the missionaries, many non-Brahmin Saiva Siddhanta revivalists claimed the Saiva Siddhanta tradition as a unique product of Dravidian civilization and denied the role that Brahmins and Sanskrit culture had played in its evolution. In the process, they e clearly disrupting not only an earlier vision and practice of a less ‘racially’ or caste-bound/defined Saiva Siddhanta tradition but also a Tamil tradition.—p. 16
5. …He was, however, still open to accepting invitation for speaking engagements although at a much heavier price, as he had observed just a few months before his sudden death: ‘Received a letter from the registrar from Annamalai University inviting me for Rs. 66 [to] deliver lectures on Saiva Siddhanta in Benaras and Allahabad’. He had replied ‘…declining to accept the lectureship … (unless I am provided) with a travelling allowance of Rs. 200 and demanding 2,000 for the talk.’ {See MMAD {Maraimalai Adigal Diaries} (English), 1898-1950. Unpublished. Madras, Tamil Nadu: Maraimalai Adigal Library.entry for 20 and 21 June 1949}.—p. 163
6. The three main objectives of his order were as follows. The first was to cultivate among the Tamil people the principles and methods of leading a spiritual life. The second was to propagate a lifestyle and attitude among the people that eschewed caste and religious distinctions, killing and meat-eating, and the compassionate treatment of all life forms. It was to propagate such ideals that the third objective was articulated, namely the cultivation of pure Tamil.—p. 157
7. …he saw himself as the anointed defender of pure Tamil in the face of threats to its revival is also evident from an observation he had made during this time:

…The Tamil Lovers Conference: which had been arranged by the crafty Brahmins….The cunning Brahmins… {See MMAD {Maraimalai Adigal Diaries}(English), 1898-1950. Unpublished. Madras, Tamil Nadu: Maraimalai Adigal Library. entry for 20 December 1930}….—p. 127

Though in hindsight Adigal’s stubborn attempt at writing in pure Tamil may seem like a rather arcane obsession, it had great resonance during the 1920s and 1930s. The increasing need for new technical and philosophical terms that were coming into circulation at the time necessitated finding suitable words in the Tamil language leading to controversies and debates over how such words were to be coined. The question of whether they should be derived from Sanskrit words already in circulation or whether attempts should be made to find (p.128) appropriate root words in Tamil led to great debates and controversies. Adigal, of course, argued that attempts be made to find appropriate words that may already exist in Tamil rather than to look to Sanskrit or English—a stance that can be seen as an essential outcome of his quest for pure Tamil.—pp. 128-29

8. There were clear differences between the more conservative and orthodox position of the Jaffna Saivites and the Ramalinga faction on matters such as caste and ritual practices. It is hardly surprising that Ramalinga’s reformist vision appealed to Adigal whose own Tamil and Saiva Siddhanta gurus were not from the ‘purer’ (sat) Sudra Vellalar castes. The conservatism of Navalar extended well beyond his views on Tiruvarutpa. Navalar was also deeply conservative on maters such as Agamic temple rituals, caste rules, and rules of personal hygiene, and so on, as compared to Ramalinga. For example, Poolokasingam’s work suggests that the conflict between the two camps may have escalated when Kathiravel Pillai began defending Navalar’s view that Vellalars were Sudras. A segment of Tamil Nadu Saivite-Tamil scholars who argued that Vellalars were Vaishyas were incensed by Kathiravel Pillai’s defence of Navalar’s views and began attacking not only Kathiravel Pillai but the contributions of Jaffna Saivite scholars, including Navalar and Tamotaram Pillai….—notes, 91, p. 97
9. Adigal’s taste in reading, his hobbies, as well as his observations and utterances certainly suggest that despite his growing role as a major propagandist of Saiva Siddhanta, he had acquired by this time a deeply Anglicized sensibility and outlook. He notes casually for example about reading The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes, framing ‘Classical European paintings’ and the paintings of Ravi Varma for his home, having his horoscope read by a so-called Professor Edisson of America or even sending money for the Paris Lottery. Once, in a moment of pain and exasperation, he had even observed, ‘I have little belief in the existence of God’ revealing quite a modern, rationalist sensibility if not secular sensibility. {Adigal had noted this in his diary in 1906.} Such modern, cosmopolitan sensibilities are also evident for example when he notes having ‘dreamt of marrying a European Lady’, {Mentioned in the diary in 1906}, the casual reference to a woman with a ‘libidinous nature’, or even when he makes this rather confessional observation about himself in his diaries, the slightest touch of a female body excites me’.{ Noted in the diary in 1906}.—p. 107

…Revealing both the number of books he {Adigal} would often acquire in a day’s purchase as well as the kind of Christian works that he was reading, he noted on 2 February 1930 {Maraimalai Adigal Diaries} (English), 1898-1950. Unpublished. Madras, Tamil Nadu: Maraimalai Adigal Library.}:

This noon received from Lansey Press, Dr. J. Drummond’s Pauline Meditations, Thoughts on Christology, The Pauline Benediction…The Ethics and Theology of the Old Testament for credit; and from William and Norgate J. H. D. Miller’s From the Other Side, L.A. Muirhead’s The Message of the Fourth Gospel, F., Delitzsch’s Bable and Bible, A. V. Harnack’s The Origin of the New Testament and Monasticism, The Confession of St. Augustine, T.K. Cheynes’ Bible Problems, J. Revillas Liberal Christianity, J. J. McConnell’s Is God Limited?, R. Eucken’s Present Day Ethics, G. Pflenderes’ The Early Christian Conception of Christianity, H.H. Henson’s Notes on Spiritual Healing and C. Howard’s Sex and Religion for which I have already sent money on the 18^th of December 1929….—p. 154

10.. …His personal charisma also played a significance role, as did his oratory and dramatic prowess—which, however, came at a price, both literally and metaphorically: since he made considerable demands both in terms of cash and arrangements for his public lectures, this earned him the rather caustic and ambivalent title of ‘Sathu-Mudaliar’ suggesting an affluent sannyasi (Mudaliars being a high-status subsect of the Vellalar (p.120 caste)….—pp. 120-21

…Despite his general ‘Western’ approach to scholarship and writing, Adigal seems to have appealed to his audiences in quite a ‘traditional’ manner. He would begin his lectures by singing verses from Saivite hymns, often breaking down with emotion, and at times weeping and shedding tears while rendering these hymns. When speaking of Saivite saints he would actually re-enact on stage some of their renowned deeds. Thus, in addition to the attractive message he was preaching, Adigal’s good looks, charm, and his abilities as a great orator and dramatist must have contributed to his popularity.—p. 121

11..         In fact, Adigal during these early years in Madras, despite his all consuming role as a propagandist, also appears to have made time for sensual pursuits. One of his most memorable and passionate romances had begun the year after Nayakar’s passing in the year 1902 and continued for well over half a decade.¹¹⁵ Given Adigal’s self-confessed ‘highly-passionate’ nature, such affairs and liaisons became a regular feature of his personal life although they never assumed such romantic (p.107) intensity as the one that had begun in 1902. Adigal’s more libertine approach to erotic love and sex certainly was reflected in his later writing on women, sexuality, and gender relations….—pp. 107-08

115. In his diaries, he refers to the young woman as ‘Kannu’ and there were frequent tussles over their meetings as she was a married woman. The often stormy and passionate affair lasted until Kannu’s eventual departure for Rangoon. See MMAD {Maraimalai Adigal Diaries} (English), 1898-1950. Unpublished. Madras, Tamil Nadu: Maraimalai Adigal Library. —p. 107

12.. …A major preoccupation was to maintain harmony between the financial claims of his first wife and her children, and those of the others. Perhaps it was his own circumstances that prompted him to note in his diary with a hint of irony that ‘Ramasamy Naicker is being scandalized by his Self-Respect Movement Party for marrying in his seventieth year’. {See MMAD {Maraimalai Adigal Diaries}(English), 1898-1950. Unpublished. Madras, Tamil Nadu: Maraimalai Adigal Library. entry for 16 June 1949}. Adigal’s age at the time of writing was clearly well beyond that of Naicker. The care and raising of very young children as well as maintaining harmony in the face of increasing squabbles and quarrels between his many wives and children preoccupied him a great heal….—p. 163

13.. …It was the anti-Aryann, anti-Sanskrit, and anti-Vedantic imperatives and spirit of the neo-Saivite movement—forged in the context of the rising tide of neo-Vedantic and Vaishnavite revivalist currents as well as the ‘official’ Orientalist discourse privileging the Aryan and the Sanskritic—that came to inform and animate the neo-Saivite readings of the Tamil Dravidian past and indeed the articulation of neo-Saivism as a form of non-Brahmin Tamil Dravidian identity and nationalism.—p. 28

…He was in essence attempting to provide a broadly inclusive Tamil nationalist ideology that would unite all non-Brahmin Tamils albeit under a diffused Tamil-Saivite Vellalar hegemony….—p. 205

…Adigal argued that that if not for the act of alien northern/Sanskritic influences the Tamils would constitute the entire population of India ‘from its southern tip in Kanyakumari to the Himalayas….{ Adigal, Maraimalai, Mutkala Pitkalath Tamil Pulovor, Madras: The South India Saiva Siddhanta Publishing Works Ltd. {[1936] 1957, 26-8}….—p. 242

For Adigal, then, ‘true history’ was essential to build a robust and sturdy Tamil nation.—p. 251

14.. Three imperatives appear to have inspired and animated Adigal’s more mature vision of caste, gender, and race in Tamil society. First and foremost, Adigal’s writings on caste appear to have been primarily impelled by the need to forge a united Tamil caste bloc that would challenge what he believed to be the continuing hegemony of the hierarchical and divisive Aryan-Brahmin system imposed on Tamil society and legitimized through religion and myths found in the Sanskrit texts. Second, Adgal’s own vision of caste, race, and gender appears to have been influenced by the need to ensure that it was consistent with that of the more enlightened and scientific vision of society propagated by the progressive European thinkers of his day as well as that espoused by the more progressive and radical mystical figures of the Tamil-Saivite and Siddha tradition. Third, Adigal’s vision appears to have been guided, as well as constrained, by his own recourse to and reliance on Tamil, and particularly ancient Tamil, sources, to fashion his vision of caste, gender, and race.   Thus, the chapter {four} argues that though Adigal offered a complex and sometimes ambivalent vision of caste, race, and gender (p.18) in Tamil and Indian society, he was primarily impelled by the desire to counter what he felt to be the deeply divisive and hierarchical caste and gender practices in Tamil and Indian society….—pp. 18-19

15. “‘Periyar’ was the title given to E.V. Ramasamy Naicker, who joined the Justice Party in the 1920s after his early immersion and engagement with Congress politics. Resigning from the Congress Party over issues of separate dining for non-Brahmin castes, his entry radically transformed the Justice Party and mobilized many social reformist campaigns, including the Self-Respect Movement. In 1944 he officially renamed the Justice Party the ‘Thiravida Kazhagam (Dravidian Associan) (DK) Party.” —notes. 11, p. 8

“…The newspapers established by the SILF {South Indian Liberal Federation, known as the Justice Party} openly attacked {Annie} Besant and the Congress and carried such headlines as ‘Home Rule Is Brahmin Rule’” —notes, 154, p. 123

“…The rise of the Justice Party as a strong political force and voice in the Presidency helped create a political and intellectual environment in which Adigal’s work acquired a high degree of legitimacy as well as popularity and appeal.”

“…Adigal also utilized his presiding address at the anniversary gathering of one of (p.146) the Saiva Siddhanta Associations in Madras, the Balasubramania Bhakta Sabha in July 1928, to vehemently criticize the movement. (146-147)

For mutual co-operation between Neo-Saivites and the Self-Respect Movement see pp. 303-04

16. “It was because Tamils were naturally hospitable that they had welcomed the Aryans and even tolerated their barbaric customs and only slowly tried to educate them in their own more peaceful and reflective philosophies. Hence the difference between the crude ramblings found in the early Vedic corpus and the later more reflective philosophies found in such works as the Upanishads, Sankhya, Yoga, and even the Vedanta Sutras which are essentially all creations of the Tamil philosophers. It is in the vein that Adigal asserts that if the early Vedas are Aryan, Vedanta as reflected in the philosophy of the Upanishads is a Tamilian creation. These were, after all, written by the Tamil sages in order to educate the uncivilized and barbaric Aryans. Even Buddhism and Jainism for Adigal, as noted earlier, were invented by Tamil kings to curb the countless animal sacrifices and flesh-eating practices of the incoming Aryans.” (268)

17. “In this context it is not surprising that Adigal claimed that the Kshatriya lineage from which Buddha (Sakiar, Gauthama) arose was a Tamilian lineage. If Tamil Saivism’s relation to Buddhism and Jainism had posed problems for Sundaram Pillai, one sees no such reservations in Adigal’s reimagination of the Tamil past.” (235)

18. “Consistent with his argument that the Vellalars and agrarianism were the source of all civilization in India, including the development of the complex division of labour, it was only a small step for Adigal to suggest that caste too was originated and developed by the Tamil Vellalars. He thus boldly asserted that it was the Tamil Vellalar King Manu who originated and introduced caste among the Dravido-Aryans as a way to bring order and civilization to them⁹⁴. Thus caste had originated as an effort by the Tamils to bring order to the mixed populations of Dravido-Aryans and had not been intended for the Tamils. Why, then, do we find caste among the Tamils? It is here in his innovative reading of the origin and evolution of caste among the Tamils that one can see Adigal attempting to ethicize caste to subordinate his reading of caste to his project for the Tamil nation….For it is clear that Adigal’s discussion of caste was very much in the service of, and subordinate to, his broader project of ethicizing caste in the Tamil region. I would also like to suggest without being overly reductionist that the various Hindu sectarian struggles in nineteenth century south India may be viewed as closely imbricated with caste competition and struggles. They were efforts to refashion and reorder social hierarchies in culturally meaningful ways. It is from such an angle that I read Adigal’s writings on caste.” (270-71).

    94. Adigal cites from the Matsyapurana and other works to argue that Manu was indeed a Tamil Vellalar king who had sat in meditation in the hills of southern India. However, he argued that caste was certainly not mentioned in the early Vedas and even if there is mention of caste in later works such as the Upanishads and the Mahabharata, it mostly takes the form of referring to the various professions, or to the conduct of individuals, rather than to any ascriptive hierarchies. How, then, did caste originate? If there is no evidence of caste in the initial period of the arrival of Indo-Aryans and only much later is there evidence of caste in its elaborate form, simple logic indicates it was the advanced civilization of the Tamils that was responsible for its origins and elaboration. The institution of caste was, then, originated by the Tamil Vellalar king Manu who wrote the Manusmriti in his efforts to bring order and civilization to the mixed population of Dravido-Aryans; Adigal (Maraimalai. Manikkavacagar Varalarum Kalamum (Manickavacagar: His Life and Times), 2 vols. Madras: The South Indian Saiva Siddhanta Works, (1930), 1957, 42). (270-271)

19. “…In a series of essays he wrote on the subject entitled Sivajnabotha Araichi, Adigal, after carefully tracing Meyakandar’s as well Sivajnabotham’s pure Tamil genealogy, rejected and opened to ridicule a persistent narrative tradition that regarded Sivajnabotham as originating from a northern Sanskritic tradition. To mask the attempt to attribute such an origin, Adigal contended, later Aryan writers had attributed it to the very lips of Shiva himself who had whispered its secret to the sage ‘Nanthithevar’ who in turn had whispered it into the ear of the sage ‘Sanatkumar’ who in turn had passed it on to Meykandadeva. Rejecting and ridiculing such a ‘fantastic’ and ‘fabulous’ tradition, he insisted that it clearly originated from the genius of Meyakandar himself as well as his Tamil predecessors. He also in this regard put forward the argument that if the Western scientists had come to make such important discoveries as the steam engine through their own efforts and talent without having God whisper them into their ears why should the truths of Saiva Siddhanta, which were often much simpler, need such divine interventions. {Adigal, Maraimalai. Sivajnanabotha Araichi (A Critical Analysis of Sivananapotam). Madras: South India Saiva Siddhanta Works Publishing Society (SISSW) 1958, 255}. This style of reasoning and intervention appealing to reason, science and ‘common sense’ came to characterize Adigal’s critical reading of Saiva Siddhanta.” (192-193)

20. “…the book explores how the noe-Saivite project of critiquing contemporary caste practices in Tamil society and its valiant efforts to unit the various Tamil castes under a non-Brahmin Tamil caste bloc through such critical discourses on caste were again impelled by such anti-Aryan and anti-Vedantic imperatives. (14)

21. “…Adigal asserted that since Sundaramurthi himself had taken two wives it was not unusual or absurd for Tamil men to have more than one wife. In fact, Adigal asserted that it was clearly consistent with the nature of men as opposed to that of women. {Palan Tamil Kolkaiye Saivacamayam (Ancient Tamil Religion Is Saivism), Madras: Appar Achakam, [1930] 1968, 28} Here he even went as far as to exhort that every Saivite should encourage his fellows to follow the ‘fine example’ of Sundaramurti Nayanar and not the ways brought in by Aryan/Brahmin priests. {[1930] 1968, 29}. In one of his most important later works, Tamilar Matam, Adigal gave an alternative reason for the need for more than one female partner arguing here for such a need since after delivering a child, women find it painful to have sex for around two years.” (285)

22. “For Pope, the friends of the Tamils were the English and it was the task of these English friends to guide the ‘Tamil race’:

To understand [the] Tamil, to free him from mistaken glosses, to teach his works, to correct their teaching where it is misleading, and to supplement where it is defective, would seem to be the duty of all who are friends of the race that glories in the possession of this poetical masterpiece (Pope G. U. The ‘Sacred’ Kural of Tiruvalluva-Nayanar: With Introduction, Grammar, Translation, Notes, Lexicon, and Concordance. London: W.H. Allen & Co. 1886, xxi).

“Pope called on the English to support Dravidian civilization for what he regarded as its Christian elements and its difference from Brahminical ideology. As he wrote in the introduction to the Kural: ‘The truth seems to be that the Madura school of Tamil literature, now too full of Sanskrit influences, was supreme till the advent of the St. Thome poet’ (Pope 1886, iv). Sanskrit culture is thus the ‘other’ of Tamil literature, and Christianity is its ally…….Indeed, {G.U.} Pope is most remembered for his vigorous support of Saiva Siddhantha as a uniquely Dravidian religion. He seems to have supported Saiva Siddhantha for the same reasons that he championed the Tamil ethical treatise, the Tirukkural. He saw in both an alternative religious philosophy to Brahminism that had, in his mind at least, some earlier Christian inspiration.” (34-35)

23. “The tendency to seek the roots and sources of Tamil nationalism and the Dravidian movement in more ‘secular’ antecedents has persisted despite the fact that the intellectual and cultural roots of Tamil nationalism and the Dravidian ideology have been clearly traced to the work of Tamil-Saivite pioneers of the late nineteenth century who served as key ‘cultural-brokers’ heralding a ‘Tamil literary and cultural renaissance’ in light of the colonial and missionary impact. While most scholars have conceded these early religio-cultural beginnings, the predominant tendency has been to distance such religious origins in favour of later, more ‘secular’ developments—developments that are claimed to have all but overshadowed these earlier religious beginnings….” (2)