________________
161
JUNE, 1896.]
THE AGE OF TIRUNANASAMBANDHA.
veracity of the Purána in which it is found. It is not possible in this connection to open an explicit discussion on the historical value of the Tiruvilaiyáḍal-Puranam, but from what has been already said with regard to the version contained in it of the earlier part of the very story in question, I trust it may be inferred that it is not altogether a safe ground to build historical theories on. My own impression is that in adding on this episode, the Purana is but trying to patch together two independent old traditions. Who knows whether this penultimate chapter in the Purána is itself not written to flatter the pride of the Nayaka rulers of the times ?12 That this and the two chapters immediately preceding it should have Sambandha for their hero, would seem also not devoid of meaning, when we remember that the author belonged to a monastery which still claims Sambandha for its founder. It is quite possible, too, that the life of Mânikkavasagar is given in an earlier chapter just to enable the author to conclude his work with the life of Sambandha, the patron saint of his convent. But such speculations apart, I would earnestly beg to repeat that, for my part, I would prefer to wait till better evidence is found to take the tradition of the vanni tree miracle as originating with or in the time of Tiruñânasambandha.
This position would appear to be further confirmed by the way in which the miracle is alluded to in the Silappadigáram. There the heroine couples with the tree that appeared in the temple to attest the marriage, not a well and the Siva linga as in the Purana, but a kitchen.1 The Vaniga lady for whose sake the tree appeared, is claimed again as a native of Pûmbugar in the Chola kingdom, and not a nameless sea-port town in the Madura country as in the Purana. The version of the episode in the Tiruvilaiyáḍal-Puranam then would seem to differ in essential particulars from the one referred to in the Silappadigáram, nearly as much as the earlier part of the same story in the work does from what is found in the more trustworthy treatise of Sêkkilar. Taking then into consideration these suspicious variations in details, as well as the conspicuous absence of the historical sense in the Tiruvilaiyáḍal, I humbly submit, I am not prepared to take the allusion in the Silappadigáram to the vanni tree miracle as proving that Sambandha lived before the composition of that indisputably old and genuine classic. On the other hand, critics may not be wanting who may look upon this very allusion in the more ancient work as discrediting the date assigned to the miracle in the Tiruvilaiyádal. Nevertheless the opinion of so able and enlightened a gentleman cannot but be of immense value for the purpose for which it is here cited, viz. to attest the modesty of the theory I am advocating.
To the opinions of these native scholars, I am glad, I am now in a position to add the view of so esteemed an authority in South-Indian epigraphy as Dr. Hultzsch. He writes: "As poems in the Tamil language are thus proved to have been composed in the time of the early Chôlas" (i. e. Karikala and Kôchcheůgannân), "there is no objection to assigning the authors of the Déváram to the same period,"14 The moderation of the hypothesis here advocated which assigns them to a later period cannot, I hope, be then questioned.
For after all, we allow, it is only a hypothesis. All that we are sure of is that the age of Samkaracharya is the lower limit of the age of Sambandha; whatever century we assign to Samkara, the sixth, seventh or the eighth as may be hereafter finally determined, that century will form the latest period that can be assigned to Sambandha. We reach this conclusion in a diversity of ways. The religious history of Southern India points to the priority of Sambandha to Samkara. The absence of all traces of non-dualistic philosophy in the Dévára songs is a well-known fact enforcing the same conclusion. The independent historical facts gathered from the sacred Saiva works, not only enable us to trace the influence of Sambandha,
11 I mean no disparagement to the Purina as a literary work. So charming is its diction and so great its powers of clear description that for years together I have been in the habit of reading a few verses of it every day. 12 The word Nayaka appears several times in this chapter itself; see for instance verse 11. 18 See the Silappadigaram, chapter xxi, lines 5 to 35.
14 South-Indian Inscriptions, Vol. II. p. 153.
