Myth of Murugan the Tamil God
I have dealt with theories in murugan origin in a seprate article. Now let us see one of the common held misconception that of
- Muruga is tamil god and of tamil only.
- Muruga patronized tamil language and literature.
We have seen that murugan is not tamil origin and various theories surrounding murugan origin. So that question is settled now that murugu is all
Next let us see how muruga started patronizing tamil. Let us see the history.
There is no reference to Murugan in tamil literature until Kanda puranam got written in tamil from skanda purana in 14th century AD. All the legends come later. Eventhough there is talk of murugan in Sangam age , there is no evidence of that.
Kartikeya - Differences in puranic and Tamil traditions
There seems to be some intriguing differences in the traditions associated with Kartikeya in the Puranic and Tamil. The Sanskrit epics and Puranas seem to indicate that he was the eldest son of Shiva, as the tale of Shiva's marriage to Parvati indicates. In the Shiva-Purana, he is seen helping Shiva fight the newly born Ganesha, Shiva's other son, when Ganesha stopped Shiva from entering his home in Kailasa. Tamil tradition states he was the younger of the two. In the north, he is generally seen as a bachelor hence the name kumara whereas the southern tradition has him married to two wives.History shows that the legend comes from sanskrit and puranic traditions , with imperfect translations and introducing legends of their own while doing so. The translation Kanda puranam and Thiruvilayadal and susequently Thirupugazh has fundamentally altered the Kanda- Karthikeya story to Tamil Murugan. Until 14th century the karthikeya was obscure in tamil divinity and was worshipped in a similar way to being worshipped in other parts of India and srilanka. So around 15th century and subsequently dravidian- aryan ideology has made Murugan the cult figure in tamil.
12 comments - Tell Me What do you Think:
Thirumurgattruppadai by Nakkeerar does not belong to sangam age ??!!
Nakkeerar had composed a single work of 400 verses, under the name of Naaladiyaar, as already mentioned. In verses 200 and 296, there is a reference to a minor chieftain by name Perumuttharaiyan. Having regard to the date of this person, many scholars hold that the ‘Naaladiyaar’ should be after 7th century A D
Refer to sangam myth
http://controversialhistory.blogspot.com/2007/06/myth-of-tamil-sangams.html
Hi,
Neither of your lines in the previous posts says that Lord muruga was worshiped all throughout India.
//http://controversialhistory.blogspot.com/2007/09/skanda-muruga-karthikeya-shanmuga.html//
It infact gave different version of what people said or the stories around and none of these storied denied that Lord Muruga's origin is from Tamilnadu. And if at all his origin is all over India, why can't we see even a single idol or some kind of evidence about Muruga in other places except in places where tamil people live?
Karthikeya is a vedic god and got shrines all over India , Search for Karthikeya in google you will find temples everywhere, Muruga and Karthikeya different? , Dont start new myths
If search for "pillaiyar" u will get information of temples more in tamil nadu only.
Murugan is a tamil word and therefore its used mostly in southern part.
You're quite right that the date of Nakkirar isn't clear, and is probably after the seventh century A.D. Nevertheless, you said:
"There is no reference to Murugan in tamil literature until Kanda puranam got written in tamil from skanda purana in 14th century AD. All the legends come later."
No serious scholar holds Tirumurukarrupatai to be that late. It certainly can't be post Chola. So it's clearly earlier than the Kanda puranam. There are also temples from the Pandiyan period in Tamil Nadu that were dedicated to Murugan. An example is the Ladan Koil, which archaeologists generally date to the late 8th / early 9th century. There you go - we have precisely the sort of archaelogical evidence whose absence you lament.
Thankyou for agreeing that there is a doubt in nakeerer date , you are the first one to agree on this blog, otherwise i just get lot of crap.
I never said murugan appeared after kandapuranam translation. My main point of argument is Murugan is tamil version of Karthikeya.
Srilanka has temples for karthikeya preceding tamil temples. Many of Muruga legends are from Srilanka.
hi im Dr.ganesh.we still believe that murugan or subramaniyar is a siddar and roamed this world in flesh and blood.if you have opurtunity read books by desigar frm tiruchy.still livin..,
jus imagine murugar as a siddar and feel the immense pleasure it gives......
I dont have problem with Lord Muruga, I am Just Fed up with some of the myth spread around in his name, not for divine purposes
From : N.Shankarappa Toranagallu
Visit the site :http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/SHUBUNKEN/publications/afs/pdf/a478.pdf
which has the article : ‘The Sanskrit and Tamil Folklore in Thiru-murugatru p padai
By PADMANABHSAN. SRI , The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
For discussion on date of Thiru-murugatru p padai and which fixes it to 10 th Century.
well said and i agree that skandapurana was composed by vedvyas in sanskrit and muruga was the God of the indian subcontinent
Veda Vyasa collected religious texts and presented in a form which could be easily understood by everyone.
Karthikeya , Muruga or Shanmuga , the diety is same. Why play politics with faith.
Post a Comment