I am from Saurashtra Community. I realized that my ancestors have surname of Iyer (both my father and mother side) . I have never considered myself as Brahmin. I was shocked to see that my both of my grandparents have surname of Iyer .It seems this is contradictory to have this surname as I am don't belong to that community . I have heard/seen some of Saurashtrians had surname like Achary , Rao and Sharma which is fine because this will not conflict with original Iyer from TamilNadu. I am curious to know that why did they used this surname if it is completely unrelated. I asked this same questions to my parents they said few generations back my ancestors are doing Purohitam so they used this surname and they a. My question is can a non south person use this surname?
I am from Saurashtra Community. I realized that my ancestors have surname of Iyer (both my father and mother side) . I have never considered myself as Brahmin. I was shocked to see that my both of my grandparents have surname of Iyer .It seems this is contradictory to have this surname as I am don't belong to that community . I have heard/seen some of Saurashtrians had surname like Achary , Rao and Sharma which is fine because this will not conflict with original Iyer from TamilNadu. I am curious to know that why did they used this surname if it is completely unrelated. I asked this same questions to my parents they said few generations back my ancestors are doing Purohitam so they used this surname and they a. My question is can a non south person use this surname?
Why are sourastrians follow vadakalai sect ?
Recent question from a thread.
Before we even tend to answer these questions two or more questions comes in our mind.
Who first called us sourastrians? Or who coined the term sourastrians to denote us. What is meant by Palkar? Which language is that, does it have a specific meaning or compound term etc.
In due course of my writing let us try to decipher these questions…………….
Back to the point why most of the Sourastrians are vadakalai? When did it all started? before that who were we ? …… mere weavers or smarthas? are some more questions coming into our minds and even I believe most of the readers will get such questions.
Well let me start like this.
Nyogi Purohitam, Kasi Purohitam were two main sects of apastamba karmas followed by Sourastrians from time not recorded period. Even today whether you belong to saiva, vasihnava etc they follow these andra apastamba sutra karmas as directed by kasi or nyogi purohitam only with few exceptions of vadakalai iyans following srivaishnava tradition to an extent recently.
Before that…… Purohitam, vedam, sastras and agamas will not be taught to non-Brahmins on any grounds. Then how come Purohits in our sourashtras who were pandits and stalwarts? did brahmins of tamilnadu accepted them?. Nothing happened what so ever and additionally thanks to the Sourashtra Saba which pulled us into BC creating confusion among our yesteryear generations and utterly deviating from brahminical faith ---- a greatest victory for a portion of orthodox tamil brahmins especially smarthas who never wanted another group to compete with them in supremacy. This is the second victory first one being misleading Ramarai Iyyan by then his Brahmin gurus to have own lipi (which is baseless on any grounds) so that Nagari will not be learnt or used by Sourastrians to become great scholars.
I did not spark anything here but the true incidents might have been masked due to time and current elders are just elders by age (I am sorry to say but cannot help it out as truth is always truth). Any one can refute my statement with suitable illustrations on elders on philosophy, religion and sasthras (Don’t think it as arrogance it is just my grievance). I do accept if some substance is there on such claims. At the same time there are n numbers of Philanthropist of all ages who are doing a great service to our community guys and my shastanga namaskrams to them all.
Coming back………………..
Early settlements of sourahtrians in Rameshwaram, Tanjore, Kumbakonam, Madurai, Salem were sishyas of Madwa sampradhaya under Mysore Majihalli Mutt. My maternal grandfather and his family (patrons of) Choolai Permal temple itself basically belonged to Madwha sampradhaya only. Even Venkatasuri swamigal, Suganda Doopadeertharya Swamigal were all madwa vaishnavites only. If anyone having old thriuman of perumal (Choolai temple) will know the truth. Madwa achariyas saw our people in the devagiri and vijayanagara and wanted to make sishyas as we were pancha gowda brahmans of Kandalola sect though not Gauda Saraswath Brahmins (GSB). These achariyas had a big problem that apart from ashta mutt other three mutts (Bhandarikere Matha, Bhimanakatte Matha and Chitrapura Matha were only to GSB while other eight for udipi pariyaya only. Hence the Mysore Majihalli mutt (Tambehalli Matha) achariyas one of the Deshastha Mathas were asked to adopt us as shishyas and that’s how we first become Madwas from Smarthas. Deshastha mutts are madwa mutts which can accept sishyas from maraths, telugu, tamil, mythili, gujarathis etc.(if you want I can give list of such mutts). When Bhava Birahaspathi was brought from Beneras (pasupathi nath sect) to take care of Somanatha temple in post 10 century destruction, he says more than 50,000 brahmins of somnath were displaced or vanished from the site. Further he adds that these priests were complete community by themselves without any outside involvement in whatsoever day to day life and temple activities. (Like Chidambram Dikshidhars we were closed community with all works done by us for us – First meaning of Palkars (people doing all kinds of works no weaving alone). There were great stalwarts like one of chief Krishna Yajur Veda pandit (achariya and mudra adikari for salem and surrounding places) of the Mysore Majihalli mutt was Salem Krishna Ambli Pandit a Salem Sourashtra Brahmin. Many examples can be showed on this line…… but vadakalai ? to see that we have to know what agamas are we following in our temple. We all know it is Pancharathra but which sagai? In Chennai which sagai was followed and now what are they following etc.
To be continued (Please be patient and stay with us to see more excitement in our ancestry)
Part II cont……….
Vadakalai………wait.....what is the proof that we followed Madwa samparadya? can anyone show in day to day karmas?. Let us take example of Chennai….. 25 years before there were Ruppin Iyan, Geddin Iyan, Gendan Iyan, Bochin Iyyan, Pilla Iyyan or Ramachari Iyyan and from Walaja Narayana Sharma Iyyan and few more to add I am not able to remember their names because when I was 15 years old some of them were nearly 70 years of age. Some of the elders who stayed in Choolai, Manikka chetty street can throw light on these figures as all these iyyan stayed at Line1, Line 2 of manikka chetty street, Maidhan and Rangiyya chetty street. Their way of mantra japa in Sanskrit was excellent and they did weaving most of the time and during tithi, moron (death), sintham, Ayush homam, Guruvar Pooja for Krishna and madwa gurus etc they become Iyyan with excellent mantra pronunciation which used to astonish me. Except Gendan and Pilla Iyyan (they wore vadakalai namm) other Iyyan used Gopi chandan only. Who taught them all these? Was there a veda patsala or purohita pat sala in Chennai? No all from their elders/parents etc. 25 years before tithi in sourashtra family is Hiranya Sirardham only. 5 or 7 or 11 Iyyans will come perform tithi,take new clothes for themselves and their gher ammans, they will change into new vastrams and eat 11 types of fruits with honey, jaggery and ghee with sambhavana in big banana leaves followed by food. This is the proof that we followed madwa sampradhaya with kasi purohitham model as followed by deshasta brahmins.
Next coming to vadakalai, Our perumal temple in Madurai (Sourashtra Krishnan Kovil) is following Pancharatra agama. History of temple can be divided into two - before installation of Venkatesha Perumal ( Srinivasar) and original Vennai Kannan Kolam Moolavar (old moolavar). Which sagai of Pancharatra was followed in these two times… can anyone say or even know that there existed two timeline in this temple?. Well come to Chennai Choolai temple? Do any one know what Pancharatra agama samhita was followed in these temple? Can any know how to identify a temple belong to Pancharatra or Vaikashana agama?. Go inside the temple look at the Kodimaram and Balai peetam position and you will find the difference.
Ahobila Mutt… the only mutt which is ancient after Parakala mutt belonging to Vadakalai sect is meant for pracharam of srivaishnava philosophy and can accept sishyas while all thenkalai mutts were mere temple administrators with some exceptional mutts like Lakshmana Ramanuja Mutt etc. These thenkalai mutts will not accept new shishyas (currently srirangam Jeeyar and some more independent achariyas like melkote sampathkumarachariya accept thenkalai sishiyas of sourashtra community but recently within 20 years only). While Ahobila mutt has looked at the merits of sourashtra vaishanavites who were madhwa and accepted them as shishyas. It all happened from the time of 31st Jeeyar of Abobila mutt Srivan Satakopa Sriman Narayana Vedanta Yatindra Mahadesikan during 1845 have recorded history of accepting some sourashtra brahmins from Madurai and Kumbakonam into Ahobila mutt and initiated agama studies in thirukudanthai. My great grandfathers (father side Chinna Konda) and their fathers were first few sishyas of Ahobila mutt who were atharvana veda pnadits of Mutt. 40th Jeeyar Sri Lakshmi Nrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka Srivan Satakopa Sri Ranganatha Satakopa Yatindra Mahadesikan was great initiator of sourastrians and during his period only the Srinivasar idol got from vaigai river was initiated into sourashtra Krishnan kovil and mangalasasanam was done by Jeeyar himself. This Jeeyar attained Vaidkuntam at Thuvariman near Madurai Vaigai Dam. That is the time we sourashtirans followed Pancharatra agama Sriprasna Samhita as followed in Thirukudanthai. Raja Bhattar father of Madurai Vijaya Raghavachariyar (Vijayan Iyyan) was greatest stalwart of Sriprasna Samhita and he was one of Rithivk during 1950 thiurumala samprokshanam. These all paved way for young sourastra Brahmin boys to study vedas, agams and prabandams in Madurantakam, Thirukudanthai and TTD (Thirumala) veda patshala. While back in Chennai it was pancharatra agama Brahma Samhita till Narayana Sharma Iyyan took charge and followed Pancharatra agama Padma shamhita. Coming back few of the Walaja Iyyan were thenkalais as their achariyas were from Thirupathi. Does any one know our Sourashtra kenchu Iyyan in thriumala… I have got prasadams in his hands. He will ask us to sing natanagopala nayagi song if we tell him that we are sourashtrian. He will give any prasadam of our wish from the prasadam stall inside thirumala temple. This was the pact with my Ahobila mutt sishyas that taking inside the temple is their job and getting all types of prasadams was my job. We used to go the Jeeyar Sevai Birth right of every sourashtrian Srivaishnava. The Jeeyars of Thirumala well know that sourastrians are either sishyas of ramanuja jeeyar or ahobila mutt and they accept us in Jeeyar sevai. There were atleast 4 sourshtra iyyans at thriumala veda Narayana swamy temple some 30 years before… is this surprising currently none is the sad truth.
Part III cont…..sourashtrians vadakalai.
So it can be easily observed that if panchasamaskaram is done you can be trained in agama (pancharatra) and you can practice as bhattar. This was easier for yesteryear sou Brahmin boys who parents were already losing touch with madwa mutt (Majhihalli) as there was about 30 years (may be more) of time gap for mudra-dharana by current Majhihalli mutt swami. Recently some 20 years before Majihalli swami did grand pattanapravesam in Madurai by then madhwa sishyas (I think K.V.Krishnamoorthy bhava family was one of instrumental people to do that madwa mutt swami pattanapravesam). To add kasi purohitam iyyan to lost their connection with kasi brahmins who taught vaideega kramams to them. This was directly told to me by then veluvesu iyyan (Gerud nag Iyyan) who were all madwa and followed kasi purohitam.
Further while escalating my writings, I don’t refer much for google or wiki since it has huge errors which are corrected then and there. My reference are from direct books available at connimera, kuupuswami sastri research institute library and University of Madras centenary library, books in my collection, some of PDFs of old sourashtra books kindly shared by Mr.Subramaniyan Obla Bhava, Konda Senthil Kumar babu etc additionally my experiences with samooga iyyan and our oldun (there is a saying in dharma sashtra that if you want to refer some family practice and day to day brahminical rites please ask your women of house who are best aware of such practices no need to refer smriti books).
Coming back to the topic of vadakalai….. how come tamil nadu srivaishnavites accepted us easily while other did not!!! is the question. We don’t know from when we people started following srivaishnava sect though some reference is available from 30th ahobila mutt jeeyar only. I have given the same in part II. So let us examine one of important pattayam or sasanam by Rani Mangammal given to sourashtra Brahmana for performing yajur upakarma. Enough has been discussed in many groups and books about the contents like…… sasanam clearly mentions that sourashtrians are people of brahminical order who have weaving as their profession and brahmins with such professions and their references are available in manu, bodhayana, kathyayana, devala smritis as well as bhagavath sastra smritis and poorvanga sangraha granthams. Like today some brahmins raise that this sasanam clearly does not say that sourashtra people are brahmins but are under brahminical fold entitled to perform yajur upakarma. Generally, like current government giving orders that this community belongs to FC and BC, those time direct orders was not required as the case was being sourashtra brahmins entitled to perform yajur upakarma? and if so by themselves?. If the kottai adikari would have seen our ancestors performing upakarma with the help of tamil or telugu or tulu Brahmin vathiyas, I doubt there would have not been this sasanam or pattyam. Hence upakarma performed by ourselves was the point observed and not tolerated by Joshyam Venkatarangaiyya garu then the kottai adikarai. What I am going to write here is not the contents but one important observation that readers should understand about nayaya mandram proceeding and how dharma is restored in this nayaya vicharanai.
First let me tell you that case for performing yajur upakarma was filed or sourashtra people arrested and brought in front of Rani Mangammal on Avani Avittam day or may be next day (Avani Month). The pattayam or sasanam was given to sourashtra people on 19th of Arbasi month which is Iypasi in tamil. To make it easy 1627 of salivahana saka is 1705 Gregorian, Avani avittam was on 4th August of 1705 and sasanam was given on 19th of Iypasi 1627 which corresponds to 11th October 1705 that is nearly 99 days for giving this sasanam (days + or – as avani in salivahana saka had 36 days). Has anyone thought why it took so long if 4 or 5 dharma sastra has to be referred and judgement written by nearly 11 vedic pundits of Srivaishnava, Smartha and Madhwa sampradhaya?.
To understand the proceedings, we need to know one more important landmark judgement given by rani mangammal on Palani Dhandayuthapani temple as well as those days function of Brahmana sabai with primordial aim in giving orders relating to temples, caste claims by rulers and individuals, suddhi patrams, clearing doubts on sastric interpretations, copying of old smriti, suruthi (by this time sruthi was recorded in palm leaves), puranas and mantra/agamas every 100 years into new palm leaves) etc. It was during the time of Rani Mangammal, the queen ordered pandaram murai puja at palani temple to be replaced with agama Pooja by adhisaiva sivachariyar. (there is another version too that Dalavay Ramappayan of Thirumalai Nayak visited Palani temple and saw pandarams doing Pooja and refused to accept prasadams from them and ordered 5 families of adhisaiva sivachariyas to be initiated to carry out palani temple puja). This pattayam of replacing pandarams with sivachariyas was also carried out by dharma sabha searching reference for pandaram performing puja (though pandarams and valluvars are entitled to do puja at murugan temple, siva sannadhi at palani temple did not permit pandaram puja and therefore sivachariyas were appointed with pandarams to help them and perform certain puja of hereditary origin till today.
Coming back to 99 days’ lag in our sasanam by dharma sabha and finally pattayam by Rani Mangammal, you will have to know the procedure of dharma sabai. For that I will tell a small story of Nivirutti nath, Dnyaneshwar, Sopan and Muktha bai of varkari sampradhaya. These four were born to a man who denounced sanyasa and came back to family (the four were born after his return from sanyasa) which is not accepted in darma sastra hence excommunicated from Brahmin caste of Maharashtra. To add both the parents thought that they have done a huge mistake and self-immolation will be an act of correction, so that their four kids will be accepted in the Brahmin fold. All of these went in vain when brahmins added that additionally your parents have done the sin of self-immolation and to do suddhi and get accepted in Brahmin caste, the elders of the local community advised the four kids to go to Brahmana saba at Paithan to check whether they (there is any sastric practice or reference for a child born to sanyasi) can be inducted back in the Brahmin caste as well get a patram of their acceptance. After long struggle these kids were finally able to convince the paithan saba to check dharama sastras and give a patram of acceptance and story goes like this………..Likewise though if you read the mangammal sasanam, it is clearly mentions that we sourastra people migrated from sourastra desam having gothram…..etc and then routine issues like brahminical status granting that they can perform upakarma (note that they can perform upakarma meaning that, we can perform upakarama by ourselves without any outside Brahmin bhrispathi requirement which is not the case with any other community like devangars, aasaris and chettys performing upakarma). Now question is that how did dharma saba of 11 members that too elders sitting in srirangam/thiruvanaikaval confirm that we people migrated from sourashtra desam and had a aryan language and brahmanical practices? In any court or saba what will be weightage given to the claims of accused group? These claims have to be rightly assessed and proof of such claims have to be properly explained to Queen and dharamaadhikari for the landmark judgment about Sourashtra people. Let me tell you the royal procedure now. If someone has access to examine kovil olugu of srirangam and royal charters of Rani Mangammal in Tanjore saraswathi mahal library where many of the palm leaf manuscripts of mangammal time are lying without translation can throw some light. To confirm the claims of sourashtra brahmins an emissary with royal charter and questions would have been sent to Brahmana sabha of Mysore, Udipi, Satara, Aurangabad and Subrahmanya Sthanika Brahmana Sabha (devagiri) or may be more places. (These are the places where still age old Brahmana saba are there and vedas/purans and other Sanskrit books of ancient palm leaves are obtained, printed, documented and referred with source place as same copy of vedas or puranas of other brahmama saba for example Calcutta or Puri have difference in verse, we call it pada bedham. These sabha record all the small changes in the society of any caste and records it. Shivaji maharaja caste was also questioned and his family lineage was identified form kashi brahmins of Maratha origin and rightfully accepted as ruler (huge opposition was there initially to accept shivaji maharaj as ruler by then castes of marthwada) When one such emissary from Rani Mangammal would have given the sourastra claims to these Brahmana sabha, so they would have examined the questions and rightly form their records, patram would have been released that sourashtras are brahmins who migrated and having so and so veda and rightfully their claim can be honored to perform upakarma in orthodox method (This is only method available in those days to check the claims and routinely performed by many rulers) This would have been the source of Rani Mangammal Sasanam with so much of back ground work done on smrithi and emissaries coming back with patram and finally assimilation by the 11 member pundits to inform the queen about our brahminical status. Please be advised that 11 members of the committee were all brahmins and they would have done justice based on the evidence only and just not from books. These nayaya adhikaris basically rely on another authentic source like patram from Brahmana saba which was authoritative and very powerful during those days. This is the procedure by any kings and queens on dharma matter and claims which has to be verified at various points to rightfully accept the claim or reject it just as oral bluff. Therefore our many of south indian mutts including Sringeri mutt started showing softness towards sourashtra community especially in Rameshwaram.
