Vairamuthu’s research on Andal, the “quoted quote research methodology,” and the confession of “eminent historians”!

Vairamuthu’s research on Andal, the “quoted quote research methodology,” and the confession of “eminent historians”!

Andal, Vairamuthu controversy

The controversy started with Vairamuthu on Andal (07-1-2018): What Vairamuthu wrote about Andal as appeared in “Dinamani” in Tamil, and its translation is given as follows[1]: “As Andal was not born to Periyazhwar, there were no details available about her birth, though, she was brought up by a Brahmin, as the society that was controlled with caste stratification might not accept her into such caste hierarchy, Andal herself had already attained the freedom of word with force and there was a practice of offering women to temple accepted by the then society, some researchers have been compelled to arrive at stunning conclusions. The book ‘Indian Movement: some aspects of dissent, protest and reform’ edited by Subash Chandra Malik of Indiana University, USA contains such reference as follows: Andal was herself a devadasi who lived and died in the Srirangam Temple. The devotees might not accept this, but, those who oppose patriarchy and socio-religious (code) might think about it.” This created the controversy that is still raging in Tamilnadu and some parts of Andhra and Karnataka. Ironically, now, Dinamani has removed the controversial or rather blasphemous article and their regrets are appearing there[2].

Vairamuthu, Vaidhyanathan, dinamani

Verification of the book referred to by Vairamuthu: Now, let us analyze the “quote” of the learned poet and writer of Vairamuthu. As he has given the reference, now, as a “researcher”, anyone can go to the source and verify.

India movements, S C Malik edited book

Thus, let us see the book under reference. M. G. S. Narayanan and Veluthat Kesavan published a paper, “The Bhakti Movement in South India” in “Indian Movements: Some Aspects of Dissent Protest and Reform,” edited and introduced by S. C. Malik and published by Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla in 1978. In which, what they claimed was,

Cheraman Perumal Nayanar notes the reception given to Shiva by devadasis of all ages while he went out in procession around the streets in Kailas35, and Andal herself is a Devadasi who lived and died in the Sri Rangam Temple36.

Quotations of MGS

The two footnotes given for support for those two lines are as follows:

  1. Ceraman Perumal Nayanar, Adiyula, M. Raghava Aiyangar, ed. Caruventar Ceyyukovai, 1951, Trivandrum, Vol.II, pp.136-64.
  1. T. A. Gopinatha Rao, The History of Sri Vaishnavas, Madras, 1923, Madras, p. 5.

MGS, Kesavan , tthe book

So when we look at page no.5 of the said book, what, T. A. Gopinatha Rao recorded is this, “When she reached marriageable age, she refused to marry anyone except the God Ranganatha of the Srirangam temple. The God appeared to the Alvar in a dream to declare before him his acceptance of the girl in marriage and ordered her to be brought to his residence at Srirangam. Periyalvar took her there with great eclat and left her in her Lord’s house and returned to his quiet residence at Srivilliputtur.

Quotations of MGS- TAG Rao reference

Therefore, there is nothing like what the learned historians M. G. S. Narayanan and Veluthat Kesavan reportedly claimed, “Andal herself is a Devadasi who lived and died in the Sri Rangam Temple.” Why then, the leaned “historians” wrote in that way and what was their motive?

Quotations of MGS- TAGopinatha Rao reference,p.5

M. G. S. Narayanan clarified to Dinathanthi that there was no such reference to Devadasi[3]: When Asoka Vardhini contacted M. G. S. Narayanan through phone, he accepted that there was no specific reference to Andal as devadasi and he mentioned it based on inference only. He also accepted that Veluthat Kesavan was a student of him, doing M.A history (implying that he might not have been having research expertise at that time). There is no inscriptional evidence to that effect and it was written only based on “oral tradition.” When she asked specifically, he specifically confessed that there is no primary evidence and even secondary evidence to that effect, it was a controversial interpretation and a “matter of inference”. Then, naturally, it is intriguing and shocking to know as to know how they could have written conclusively, “Andal was herself a devadasi who lived and died in the Srirangam Temple.” Now, he is considered as one of reputed and eminent historians of India, former chairman of ICHR and so on. Why them, they stooped to such “quoted quote” research methodology, amounting faking and forging such lies and falsehood in historiography?

Vairamuthu regrets for Andal comments

The implications of “quoted quote research,” bogey of “eminent historians” and other modern-day mythistories: Now let us analyze their quotations, reportedly lifted from two books mentioned above.

  1. The book in question was published by Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla in 1978 and not by Indiana University, USA as claimed by Vairamuthu.
  1. Vairamuthu should have verified the sources before quoting, that too, part of a sentence picking up from their paper. He must have consulted the original sources (as he knows Tamil very well) and also other secondary sources after 1978 to present his speech and “researched” article appeared.
  1. Ironically, he and the press, still carry such wrong and falsified blabbering[4]. “As part of my research for writing this article on Aandaal, I happened to read a collection of articles edited by Subhash Chandra Malik in the name of “Indian Movements: Some Aspects of Dissent, Protest and Reform”, the original from Indiana University and published by Indian Institute of Advanced Study in 1978. It is very much an Indian research study by Indian historians,”thus claimed Vairamuthu.[5]
  1. Vairamuthu added, “Professor M.G.S Narayanan & Professor Kesavan Veiuthat. Professor M. G. S Narayanan is considered as “one of India’s top authorities on ancient history” and has served as the chairman of Indian Council of Historical Research. Professor Kesavan Veluthat is the Professor of History in University of Delhi. The line mentioned in my article was from a reputed publication and by reputed historians.” But, M. G. S. Narayanan now refuted. Here, Vairamuthu mentioned, “G.S Narayanan is considered as “one of India’s top authorities on ancient history,” whereas, the subject dealt with has not been so ancient!
  1. Cheraman Perumal Nayanar notes the reception given to Shiva by devadasis of all ages while he went out in procession around the streets in Kailas35.” M. G. S. Narayanan himself accepted that the story of Cheraman Perumal was a myth floated after 13th century by the vested Mohammedan groups. Therefore, the question of devadasis of all sorts going out in procession is redundant, immaterial and incompetent.
  1. Andal herself is a Devadasi who lived and died in the Sri Rangam Temple36.” This is also fake, fraudulent and deceptive, as T.A. Gopinatha Rao never mentioned such sentence in his book, as pointed out above.
  1. It is unbecoming for these researchers, now, paraded as “historians” to quote that was not there in a book, secondary source.
  1. It exposes the dubious and dangerous nature of “quoted quote” research methodology, as most of the researchers, may not look into the quotes recorded by the “eminent historians.”
  1. Coming to ideology, it is evident that the involved personalities have been Marxists and atheists and thus, their speeches and writings have been tarnished with bias, prejudice and without objectivity.
  1. As the Marxist ideology is coupled with Dravidian ideology of atheism, that is directed against Hindu religion, evidently, Hindus have come to streets. How they have been oppressed, suppressed and attacked by them since 1960s have been too well-known to be repeated here.

© Vedaprakash

19-01-2018.

 

[1]ஆண்டாள் பெரியாழ்வார்க்குப் பிறந்த பெண் இல்லை ஆதலாலும், அவள் பிறப்பு குறித்த ஏதும் பெறப்படாததாலும்ஓர் அந்தணரே வளர்த்திருந்தாலும், குலமறியாத ஒருத்தியைக் குலமகளாய்க் கொள்ள சாதிக் கட்டுமானமுள்ள சமூகம் தயங்கியிருக்கலாம் என்பதனாலும், சமூகம் வழங்காத பாலியல் சொல் விடுதலையை ஆண்டாளே ஆவேசமாய் அடைந்துவிட்டதாலும், கோயிலுக்குப் பெண்ணைக் காணிக்கையாக்குவதை அரசும் சமூகமும் அங்கீகரித்ததாலும் கலாசார அதிர்ச்சி தரத்தக்க முடிவுக்குச் சில ஆய்வாளர்கள் ஆட்படுகிறார்கள்அமெரிக்காவின் இண்டியானா பல்கலைக்கழகம் சுபாஷ் சந்திர மாலிக்கை ஆசிரியராகக் கொண்டு வெளியிட்ட Indian Movement: some aspects of dissent, protest and reform என்ற நூலில் ஆண்டாள் குறித்து இப்படி ஒரு குறிப்பு எழுதப்பட்டிருக்கிறது Andal was herself a devadasi who lived and died in the Srirangam Temple. பக்தர்கள் இதை ஏற்றுக்கொள்ள மாடார்கள்ஆனால் ஆணாதிக்க எதிர்ப்பாளர்களும், சமய சமூக மறுப்பாளர்களும் இதை எண்ணிப் பார்ப்பார்கள்.

http://www.dinamani.com/editorial-articles/center-page-articles/2018/jan/08/%E0%AE%A4%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%B4%E0%AF%88-%E0%AE%86%E0%AE%A3%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%B3%E0%AF%8D-2840681.html

[2]  Those who talk about freedom expression, speech and rights thereof and such issues should note this that the persons involved have evidently understood the gravity of the issue of sentiments of crores of belivers.

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASUAnINM_jw

[4] TheNewsMinute, Devadasi is female servant of god, not prostitute: Vairamuthu’’s clarification on article, Saturday, January 13, 2018 – 22:04

[5] https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/devadasi-female-servant-god-not-prostitute-vairamuthus-clarification-article-74709

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

3 Responses to “Vairamuthu’s research on Andal, the “quoted quote research methodology,” and the confession of “eminent historians”!”

  1. Seshadri Damodaran Says:

    Thanks for some light on a topic that hurt many recently.

  2. A.Seshagiri Says:

    வைரமுத்து விவகாரத்தை பற்றி மிகத் தெளிவாக விவரங்களை ஆராய்ந்து தொகுத்து வெளியிட்டு என் போன்றவர்களின் சந்தேகங்களை நீக்கியதற்கு மிக்க நன்றி!.ஆனால் தெரிந்தே அவதூறுகளையும் ,பச்சை பொய்களையும் பேசும் இவரைப் போன்றவர்கள் கவிஞர் என்று சொல்லுவதற்கே தகுதியற்றவர்கள்!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: