Talk:Purāṇa:Interconnected Stories

By Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati Swami

The events described in one Sthala Purāṇa are linked to those mentioned in another. Thus the strand of the same story is taken through a number of Purāṇas. We have to read them together to learn the entire story. That one Sthala Purāṇa begins where another ends is one proof of their authenticity. Another proof that could be adduced is that it is these Sthala Purāṇas that fill the gaps in the 18 main Purāṇas and Upa-purāṇas.

Once Śiva and Ambā (Pārvatī) played dice in Kailāsa. “I have won the game,” said Ambā. “No, I am the winner,” said Śiva. The two played thus to impart lessons in dharma to mankind. If now their game of dice ended in a quarrel it was because the divine couple wanted the world to learn that playing for stakes was an evil, that it leads to disputes and misconduct.

To resume the story: In his anger, Śiva cursed Ambā thus: “You shall be born a cow and shall keep roaming the earth.” Śiva is Pāśupati, Lord of animals. Yes, he is the Lord that controls the animal senses (the indriyas) that are in a frenzy. It is to demonstrate that he does not bless people with a big ego that he cursed even Parāśakti (the Supreme Power). Though she is Mahāśakti herself, she realised her error and, the great pativratā that she is, she became submissive to her husband. She roamed the earth as an ordinary cow.

In her One Thousand Names (Sahasranāma) Ambā is extolled as Gomātā, Guhajanmabhū. She came to the earth as Gomātā (Mother Cow).

Viṣṇu is Ambā's brother, is he not? He is very much attached to her and, as soon as he knew that his brother-in-law (Śiva) had “driven her out,” he thought to himself: “Let him not protect her, Lord of animals though he be. I will have my sister under my protection.” So, taking the guise of a cowherd, he accompanied the divine cow. He was not the victim of any curse that he should roam the earth thus. It was to demonstrate to the world the dharma of filial affection that he came down to the world of mortals with her.

(He developed a liking for the job of the cowherd now. That is how he took delight in grazing cows in his incarnation as Kṛṣṇa. He then came to be called Gopāla which name also means Pāśupati. If you reflect on these two names of Śiva and Viṣṇu you will cease to make any distinction between the two gods.)

Tiru-Aḻundur is the place to which sister and brother came as cow and cowherd. It is the same as Terazhundur. It also happens to be the birthplace of Kampaṉ and in fact there is a locality here called Kampaṟmeṭu. Tirumaṅgai Āḻvār performed the maṅgala-śāsanam in a temple here. Viṣṇu is in the sanctum sanctorum as Gopāla with the cow. Since he came as a companion of the cow he is called Go-sakha. Go-sakha-kṣetra is another name for Terazhundur. Go-sakha in Tamil is Amaruviyappan, the initial a in the name meaning cow.

There is a temple to Śiva also here. According to our ancient system of town-planning, there must be a temple to Śiva at one end of a village or town and one to Viṣṇu at the other. If the Viṣṇu temple at Terazhundur is associated with the songs of the Āḻvārs, the Śiva temple is associated with the Tēvāram hymns of Jñānasambandhar. The places sung by the Āḻvārs are said to have had maṅgala-śāsanam, while any place associated with the Tēvāram is called pāṭal perra sthalam [place that has been sung]. Many places in the South have had both types of distinction. Terazhundur is one of them.

Near it is a village called Pillūr where Viṣṇu, as the cowherd, grazed the cow that was Ambā. (Pillūr means a place where grass grows, pil meaning grass. In the Tañjāvūr region, pul is known as pil.) Mekkiṟimaṅgalam also is one of the places where Viṣṇu grazed the cow and Ān-aṅgūr another (ān = cow).

For brother and sister to worship Śiva, Viṣṇu installed Vedapureśvara (Śiva) in Go-sakha-kṣetra. (Both the Vedapureśvara and Amaruviyappan temples are today under the same management.)

The cow as well as the brāhmaṇa is essential to the practice of Vedic dharma. Milk and ghee are indispensable to sacrifices, while without the brāhmaṇa the sacrifices cannot be performed. This fact is underlined in the prayer: Go-brāhmaṇebhyo śubham astu nityam [May cow and Brahmin ever prosper].

The one (that is Śiva) who had cast a curse on Ambā came as Vedapureśvara to the same place where Ambā had also come. Until recently there were many brāhmaṇas in this place learned in the Vedas and śāstras. Sambandhar often refers to them as Aḻundai Maraivor (Vedic scholars of Aḻundur). The Āḻvārs call Viṣṇu by these names: Chāndogya, Pauzhiya, Taittirīya, Sāmavediyāṇe.

One day, when the cow (that is Ambā) was grazing, her hoof dug into the earth and a stone was revealed. It proved to be a Śiva liṅga. The cow, thinking that she had committed an offence against Śiva, ran about in bewilderment. Viṣṇu pacified her and brought her back. The place where this incident occurred is Tirukkuḷambiyam.

Viṣṇu was pained by all these developments and regretted that his sister had shown herself to be egoistic, albeit playfully, and that this fact had led to such unfortunate consequences.

It was Viṣṇu who had married Minākṣī to Sundareśvara. Wishing to unite them again, he now performed pūjā to propitiate Śiva. The latter was pleased and he said to Viṣṇu: “Keep grazing the cow until you come to the river Kāverī. Bathe her in the river and she will be restored to her original form. I shall tell you later when I will marry her.”

Viṣṇu, as bidden by Śiva, bathed the cow in the Kāverī. The place where the cow was seen after she had bathed in the river is Tiruvaḍuturai. (It is also important for the reason that it was here that Tirumūlar composed his Tirumantiram.)

Ambā was restored to her original form and Śiva himself appeared on the scene. But he wanted to play a game again. There is a place called Kurrālam. (It is not the same as the Kurrālam in Tirunelveli district that is famous for its waterfall. This Kurrālam is near Mayūram in Tañjāvūr district. It was once called Tirutturutti. This is one of the 44 places which Appar, Sambandhar and Sundaramūrti have sung.)

A sage was performing austerities here for Ambā herself to be born as his daughter. Śiva thought that this was the opportune moment to grant his wish. He said to Ambā: “Go and be born the daughter of the sage at Tirutturutti. I will come and marry you at the appropriate time.”

Śiva made his appearance as promised. There is proof for the fact that the one who gave his word at Go-sakha-kṣetra appeared here also, in that in this place too the deity is called Vedeśvara. The sage and Viṣṇu — the latter had been waiting for the day his sister would be married again to Śiva — received Śiva and took him to the place of marriage.

The spot where Śiva was received came to be called Etirkoḷpāḍi. The vrata before the marriage was performed by Śiva in a nearby place which later came to be called Velvikkudi. The spot where he saw Ambā as the bride and performed the pālika ceremony is called Kurumulaippaḷi. The marriage paṇḍāl was spread over two or three villages. The one in the middle came to be called Tirumaṇañjeri. It was here that Viṣṇu married Pārvatī to Parameśvara and it was an occasion of great joy for him.

From this account you will realise how wrong it is to dismiss Sthala Purāṇas as of no significance. The present story contains a warning against the evil consequences of ahaṅkāra and gambling and tells us how a wife should be dutiful towards her husband and how a brother should be affectionate towards, and concerned about, his sister.

Actually I did not tell the story with this idea in mind. I wished to demonstrate how a number of Sthala Purāṇas fit into one another, how the incidents narrated in different Sthala Purāṇas are woven together — those of Terazhundur, Pillūr, Ānaṅgūr, Tirukkuḷambiyam, Tiruvaḍuturai, Kurrālam, Etirkoḷpāḍi, Velvikkudi, Kurumulaippaḷi and Tirumaṇañjeri.

The interconnected narrative also shows that the story must be authentic.

A story with which people of Tañjāvūr should be more familiar links Kumbhakoṇam with places in its neighbourhood.

During the great deluge, Brahmā prepared himself for the next creation. He put all the seeds in amṛta (the elixir of immortality) and kept them together in a mudpot to the chanting of Vedic mantras. With due ceremony, he placed a coconut with mango leaves on it and invested the same with the sacred thread. Now he placed the pot on the summit of Meru.

When it came floating in the waters of the deluge, Parameśvara wished to recommence creation. Then the coconut on the pot was dislodged in the storm and fell into the water. At once the water receded revealing the land there. This spot is four miles north-west of Kumbhakoṇam. The deity here is even today called Nārikeleśvara (nārikela means coconut).

Then the mango leaves fell off. The water receded there too revealing land. This is Tiruppurambayam, four miles north-west of Kumbhakoṇam. Payam [or bayam] is from pāyas, that is water, but in this context deluge. Puram means outside or beyond something: the name of the place thus means "outside the waters of the deluge".

Now the sacred thread (sūtra) also got loosened from the pot and fell off. The deity in the place where the sūtra fell is Sūtranātha, sūtra meaning the sacred thread.

The kumbha (pot) had a "nose" in addition to a "mouth" — it was like a ghiṇḍi or kamaṇḍalu. Water is filled in the pot through the mouth and poured out through the nose.

Parameśvara watched the scene. Since the pot with the amṛta and the seeds in it were not overturned on their own, he decided to break it with his arrow to bring out its contents. The place where he discharged the arrow is called Bāṇapurī — now it is known as Vaṇatturai. The deity here is Bāṇapureśvara and the spot where the mouth of the pot fell in pieces is Kuḍavāyil (Kuḍavāsal).

Parameśvara wanted the amṛta to be discharged in the śāstric manner, from the nose of the pot. The place where the nose broke and the elixir fell is holier than other places. It is called Kumbhakoṇam — koṇ (koṇam) meaning nose. In the Tēvāram the place is referred to as Kuḍamukku.

Here the mudpot itself came to be the liṅga and even today it is so. The liṅga is ceremonially bathed along with a protective wear outside. Kumbheśvara is the name of the deity. The Mahāmagham pond is the spot where the amṛta first fell.

Since the place is hallowed by the fact that it was here that the amṛta fell, the Vaiṣṇava deity here, Śārṅgapāṇi, is called Ara-amudan by the Āḻvārs. To Vaiṣṇavas Kumbhakoṇam itself is Kuḍandai.

Thus there are many sacred places that are interconnected, which fact also confirms that the Sthala Purāṇas are authentic. Tiruvāḻundur, Kumbhakoṇam, etc., are situated within a radius of four miles.

There will be further confirmation of the authenticity of these Purāṇas if we note how the places mentioned in them and which are far apart are connected together.

Rāmeśvaram, Vedāraṇyam and Pattisvaram are not near one another. Rāmeśvaram, in Rāmānathapuram district, is on the seacoast. Vedāraṇyam is in a corner of Tañjāvūr district and is also on the seashore in the tāluqa of Tirutturaippuṇḍi. In the same district, but not nearby, is Pattisvaram, near Kumbhakoṇam.

These places which are far apart are connected by the same thread of a story. Would you call such a story baseless?

In all these three places there are great Śiva temples and the name of the deity in each is Rāmaliṅga, suggesting that they are connected with Rāma. That he installed liṅgas in these places strengthens the concept of Śaiva-Vaiṣṇava unity.

These places have other special features too. Of the four great religious centres, known as cār-dhāma, Rāmeśvaram alone is in the South. In the North is Badarīnātha, in the West Somanātha, in the East (Puri) Jagannātha and, of course, Rāmeśvaram in the South.

Vedāraṇyam is associated with the salt satyāgraha during the freedom movement. The place is mentioned in the Tēvāram as Tirumāraikka (Tamil for Vedāraṇyam). Here the temple door was closed after the Vedas had worshipped the deity Śiva.

Appar sang his paṭigam here and the door flung open. Tirujñānasambandhar made the door shut again when he sang before the deity.

Pattisvaram is the place where Śiva was worshipped by Patti, one of the four daughters of Kāmadhenu. Like Tiruvaḍuturai mentioned earlier, there are many places where the cow has performed worship.

Tiru-Amattūr is near Paṉṟuṭṭi. It is connected with Appar. Here too the cow has performed pūjā. Pattisvaram is a similar place. When Jñānasambandhar was a child he sang the praises of Śiva and went dancing before the deity in the hot sun. The Lord was moved by the sight and ordered his attendants to build a canopy to protect his devotee from the sun.

Jñānasambandhar was an incarnation of Subrahmaṇya. Govinda Dīkṣita was a minister to the Nāyaka kings of Tañjāvūr. He was very much drawn to Pattisvaram and made additions to the temple there. Images of Dīkṣita and his wife may be seen before the sanctum of Ambā.

Where did Agastya witness the marriage of Śiva and Pārvatī? Three places are mentioned — that is, three places are associated with the same event. As mentioned before, the Rāmaliṅga was installed in three places, each with a different reason.

Rāma committed a threefold sin by slaying Rāvaṇa. Rāvaṇa, the son of the sage Viśravas, was a Brāhmaṇa. By killing him Rāma incurred the sin of brahmahatyā. To wipe away the same he installed the liṅga at Rāmeśvaram.

Some people today describe the war between Rāma and Rāvaṇa as a quarrel between Āryans and Drāviḍians. Such a view is totally baseless — and there is no better proof of this than the fact that Rāvaṇa was a Brāhmaṇa.

If the Rāmāyaṇa is a lie, so must be the battle between Rāma and Rāvaṇa. It cannot be claimed that there is a historical basis for this battle alone. If the Rāmāyaṇa is accepted as true, the account of Rāvaṇa contained in it must also be accepted.

It is said again and again in the epic that Rāvaṇa was the son of a sage, that he was conversant with the Vedas, that he pleased Śiva by chanting the Sāmaveda, and that it was for this reason that he was saved from being crushed under Kailāsa.

It does not stand to reason to accept only that part of the Rāmāyaṇa which suits you and reject the rest.

Leave aside the Rāmāyaṇa and what it says about Rāvaṇa: the temple of Rāmeśvaram is there for all of us to see. It has the biggest corridor in the world (prākāra, ambulatory). All India worships Rāmanāthasvāmin in the form of the liṅga Rāma installed for the removal of the sin he had incurred by killing the Brāhmaṇa Rāvaṇa.

For centuries, our forefathers in Tamil Nadu never thought of Rāvaṇa as belonging to a caste other than that of Brāhmaṇas.

Apart from being a Brāhmaṇa, Rāvaṇa was also a great warrior. All the worlds trembled before him. He fought successfully all the powerful rulers of the time except two — Kārtavīryārjuna and Valī.

By killing such a warrior, Rāma committed the sin of vīrahatyā. It was in expiation of it that he installed the liṅga (Rāmaliṅga) at Vedāraṇyam.

In addition to the qualifications already mentioned, Rāvaṇa had another; he was an ardent devotee of Śiva and proficient in playing the vīṇā, besides being a singer.

Excellence such as this comes under the term chāyā: it means both light and shadow. The goddess Minākṣī is addressed as Marakatachāyā (emeraldine in radiance). By killing Rāvaṇa who possessed chāyā, Rāma also earned the sin of chāyāhatyā. To expiate it he installed the liṅga at Pattisvaram.

From the śāstric point of view, by slaying Rāvaṇa Rāma brought on himself the threefold sin of brahmahatyā, vīrahatyā and chāyāhatyā. Actually Rāma is patita-pāvana and he cannot be tainted by any sin. By uttering His name a man is freed from the most terrible of sins. So Rāma has no need to perform any prāyaścitta (he does not have to do any expiatory rite) — he is Tāraka Rāma.

But he had descended to this world to serve as an ideal for all mankind and so he acted strictly according to the canons even with reference to matters that might be considered trivial. In the observance of dharma according to the śāstras no one excelled Him. Throughout the Rāmāyaṇa we see this remarkable trait in His character. He regarded himself as an ordinary individual, observed all the rules of the śāstras; in this way he also performed the prāyaścitta according to them.

This is not mentioned in the Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki; but the Sthala Purāṇas of Rāmeśvaram, Vedāraṇyam and Pattisvaram fill the gap.

"The Rāmāyaṇa does not contain these incidents. They must be some old wives’ tales." — To think so is not correct. The incidents described in the Sthala Purāṇas are in keeping with Rāma's character. He must have performed the three types of penitence. What is left out in the Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki is mentioned in the Sthala Purāṇas.

Rāvaṇa had caused suffering to all mankind and it was with an evil intent that he had stolen Sītā, the Mother of the world. Rāma killed such a wicked character and made all the world happy. At a time when there was universal rejoicing over his victory, Rāma thought himself to be a sinner because he had killed an enemy eminent in three different ways. The loftiness of His character is further enhanced by these acts. That he installed the liṅga in three different centres goes to demonstrate the unity of Hari and Hara (Viṣṇu and Śiva).

These Sthala Purāṇas do not contradict one another nor is there any overlapping in them. Those pertaining to Rāmeśvaram, Vedāraṇyam and Pattisvaram deal respectively with how Rāma, by installing the liṅga in each place, was freed from the sins of brahmahatyā, vīrahatyā and chāyāhatyā.

Rāma must have proceeded north from Rāmeśvaram along the coast. From Vedāraṇyam he must have gone to Pattisvaram in the interior. It is the strand of the same story that takes us through three Sthala Purāṇas. The three places are 150 or 100 miles apart from one another. When there were no fast modes of transport, these distances correspond to 1,500 or 1,000 miles today.

The fact that the stories belonging to the three places fit into one another shows that the Sthala Purāṇas relating to them must be true.

I would like to express a view that might seem strange to modern researchers and traditional scholars alike. It is generally believed that the Sthala Purāṇas cannot be considered authoritative to the same extent as the Rāmāyaṇa. But I think that such of them as are authentic are more authoritative than the Rāmāyaṇa, the Mahābhārata, the Viṣṇu Purāṇa and Bhāgavata Purāṇa, and so on. I have come to this conclusion from examples like the one I have cited above.

Now I am going to speak about Sthala Purāṇas that connect places in different parts of the country.

There are two versions of the Kāverī Purāṇa. One gives importance to the Ammā-maṇḍapa on the Kāverī in Śrīraṅgam. It states that bathing in the Kāverī in the month of Tula (October–November) is specially meritorious. The chief character in this Purāṇa is the Cola king Dharmavarman. He reigned from Niculapurī. The Sanskrit words nicula, nicola, colī mean a garment covering the body [or a part thereof] like a case (urai in Tamil). The place called Uraiyūr is known in Sanskrit as Niculapurī. The kingdom with its capital as Niculapurī came to be called Coladeśa.

What is remarkable about a corn-cob? The grains growing on the top of the stalk are encased in the “cob”. It means the grains of the cereal called colam or maize wear a colī so to speak.

In the second version of the Kāverī Purāṇa the bathing ghat called Tula-ghaṭṭam in Māyavaram (Māyūram) is given importance. It is popularly called Lagadam; the word must be a distortion of Tula-ghaṭṭam. This ghat has been specially built for the convenience of pilgrims who bathe in the Kāverī in the month of Tula. There are such ghaṭṭas in six or seven other places on the Kāverī, all built to the same plan.

While in the first version of the Kāverī Purāṇa Śrīraṅgam and Dharmavarman figure as important, in the second, apart from Māyavaram, a Brāhmaṇa couple find a prominent place. The couple were liberated by bathing at this ghat.

The Brāhmaṇa was called Nāthaśarman and his wife Anavadya. They were freed from worldly existence by bathing day after day in the Kāverī in the month of Tula in the manner prescribed by the śāstras.

The Brāhmaṇa couple had during their pilgrimage visited Kedāra and Kāśī. (This story is known only in Māyūram.) Kāśī is a thousand miles from here. One of the ghaṭṭas there is called Kedār-ghaṭṭa. The Sthala Purāṇa of Kedār-ghaṭṭa mentions that the Brāhmaṇa couple, Nāthaśarman and his wife Anavadya, bathed there.

People in our parts are not much familiar with the story of Nāthaśarman. He is not like Rāma, Kṛṣṇa, Hariścandra, Nala and so on to be known all over the land. It is amazing that the story of such a man as told in the Sthala Purāṇas of Māyavaram and of Kāśī, a thousand miles away, tally.

This story shows how wrong it is to be sceptical about the authenticity of Sthala Purāṇas.

Kāśī, which is a thousand miles from Kāñcipuram, is famous for the goddess Annapūrṇī. In Kañci too, when the World Mother observed the 32 dharmas, she distributed food among people. Opposite the doorway of the sanctum of the Kāmākṣī temple in Kañci is the sanctum of Annapūrṇeśvarī. It has a vimāna or tower that is unlike that of any other temple in the South. It has six spires (śikharas).

The explanation for this is the fact that the tower of the Annapūrṇeśvarī temple in Kāśī too is similar. Even in such small matters there is agreement about places as far apart as Kañci and Kāśī.

Are Sthala Purāṇas then to be dismissed as of no consequence?