Myth of Christian contribution to Tamil

by Thamizhchelvan
July 21, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian

The case

In the recently concluded “World Classical Tamil Conference”, and also in columns, articles and
reports about it, there was a fresh attempt to project the myth that the Tamil language would have
died but for the contribution of Christian Missionaries. There was also an immense propaganda
that the “prose” style of writing was a gift from Christian Missionaries to the Tamil language.

Indeed, such a misinformation campaign has been sustained for years since the Dravidian
Movement was started, and fully supported by the Church. Dravidian racists who conducted the
conference, and the crowd which rushed there to wash the feet of Dravidian racists for personal
benefits, may blow trumpets in support of this misinformation campaign. But true lovers of
Tamil and true nationalists who value the importance of national integration and adore the
magnificent cultural bond between the various Bharatiya languages and linguistic groups would
undoubtedly reject this misinformation. (External Links:- One | Two| Three )

Misinformation campaigners project missionaries such as G.U. Pope, Constantine Joseph Beschi,
Robert Caldwell, Barthalomaus Ziegenbalg, Francis Whyte Ellis and Dr. Samuel Green et al as
great champions of Tamil and magnificent contributors to its development, including the
introduction of “prose” writing. Of these, Francis Whyte Ellis or ‘Ellis Durai’ in Tamil, was a
Madras-based civil servant in the British government and Samuel Green a doctor in Sri Lanka;
both supported missionaries in evangelical causes.

All the above mentioned missionaries landed in Tamil Nadu with one ‘holy’ aim of converting
Tamil Hindus and Christianising Tamil Nadu. Ironically, the writer Dr. K. Meenakshisundaram
termed the era of these evangelists as the “Golden Period” of Tamil in his book, “The
contribution of European scholars to Tamil”, originally presented as the author’s thesis at the
University of Madras, 1966. So it is all the more imperative for us to demolish this myth of
Christian contribution to the development of Tamil and bring out the truth.

Missionaries and their Mission

After landing in Tamil Nadu, the padris understood the need to learn the local language to
converse with the populace for effective evangelization. They soon realized that the local
populace, rooted in a centuries-old civilization, was culturally and religiously strong; hence they
focused on Tamil literature to understand the cultural heritage and religious traditions, so they
could devise different strategies for conversion. It needs to be understood clearly that these
priests learnt Tamil language and literature with an agenda and not out of love or passion or with
an intention of contributing to the growth of the language.

Moreover, it would not have been enough if these padris alone understood the cultural heritage
and religious tradition of India; it had to be understood by the Church establishments which sent
these missionaries on “holy” assignments. Only then could the masters realise the extent of
manpower, money power and political power needed to destroy the 5000 year old culture and
convert a spiritually strong India. That was why the priests learnt Tamil and translated the main
literatures and wrote similar Christian works.

Abrahamic religions are political in nature; they are intrinsically political concepts more than
religions, and aim to bring the entire world under their rule. They gain political power, capture
territories and convert people. This was also the agenda of the Christian missionaries and the
motive for them to learn our languages and literatures.

The Establishments

Starting from the 16th century, Christian aggression slowly spread to many parts of India. The
Portuguese, Dutch, French, German and British establishments landed in places such as Goa,
Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Bengal and the North-East, etc., in the guise of trade and missions, and
started encroaching fast and armed invasions followed suit. The Portuguese Inquisition in Goa
was a bloody and terrible chapter in Indian History and the British oppression started with the
advent of East India Company.

After capturing power and establishing Crown rule in 1858, the British government gifted vast
stretches of lands to the Churches and supported them with other infrastructures. They knew that
the combined onslaught of political and religious power would produce quick results. It is
pertinent to note that Indians have not woken up to this threat even after Independence, hence the
government is being run by an Italian Catholic via a puppet Prime Minister, and many policy
decisions are being taken in deference to the US Administration.

Journalist Subbu in Dravidian Maya (Tamil) says that the Christian priests who landed in Tamil
Nadu from foreign lands laid the foundation for Dravidianisation in Tamil Nadu as they knew
Indians could not be subjugated as long as Hindu Dharma prevails. Speaking about the beginning
of Christian encroachment, Subbu says, “The Dutch established their trade centers in Pulicat
(Pazhaverkaadu) in 1609, Sadras (Sadurangapattinam) in 1647, Nagapattinam in 1660; the
British set up shops in Masulipatnam in 1622, Madras in 1639, Cuddalore in 1683 and also in
Calcutta; the French got Pondicherry in 1674 and the Danish settled in Tranquebar
(Tharangampaadi) in 1620.”

He adds, “On one hand the Padires straight away indulged in conversions and on the other hand
they started creating rift among the Hindus to divide them.” In the chapter “Caldwell’s Cousins”,
he explains vividly the various methods of conversion used by the Padires and how they divided
Hindu society (Dravida Maayai, Trisakthi Publications, Chennai, 2010; pp. 20-28).

As part of the agenda of grabbing political power and converting the population, the Christian
missionaries, to destroy the native culture, also indulged in “Inculturation”. (‘Inculturation’ - A
danger to communal amity!(External Link)

Roman Brahmin!
The man who laid the foundation of inculturation was the Italian priest Robert de Nobili (1577-
1656). He learnt Sanskrit and Tamil, wore saffron robes, sacred thread (attached with a small
Cross!), sandal mark on forehead and called himself a ‘Roman Brahmin’. He set up an “Ashram”
in Madurai, became a vegetarian and used “Pathukas” (wooden footwear). He claimed the Bible
was the “Lost Veda”, the “Jesuit Veda” revealed by God, and was considerably successful in
harvesting souls. Fortunately for Tamil Nadu, his European masters were not happy with his
inculturation methods and subjected him to an enquiry which forced him to shift to other places
like Trichy and Salem. Finally he settled in a small house in Santhome, Madras, and died in
1656. (“The Portuguese in India”, Orient Longman, Hyderabad, 1990, & “Christianity in India:
A critical study,” Vivekananda Kendra Prakasham).

Nobili is supposed to have written some 15 books apart from preparing a Portuguese-Tamil
Dictionary. He is credited with the insertion of many Biblical terms in Tamil and no wonder
Christianity was developed rather than the Tamil language!

Approving Untouchability, he said in 1650, “A person need not disown his caste, creed and
culture to become a Christian. Those who say that these would get spoilt if one becomes a
Christian are ‘Saathaans’. This teaching is the main obstacle in spreading Christianity”. [A.
Sivasubramanian, “Kiruththvamum Saathiyum” (Christianity and Caste), Kaalachuvadu
Publishers; cited in Dravida Maayai, p. 19).

Italian Munivar!

The next Italian missionary, Constantine Joseph Beschi (1680-1746), called himself
Veeramaamunivar (Veer-Maha-Munivar) to pretend he was a great lover of Tamil. Outwardly
conducting himself like a Hindu Sanyasi, he took care of the conversion business in the districts
of Madurai and Thanjavur. His work on a biography of St. Joseph, Thembaavani, was hyped as a
great work and projected as equivalent to Kambar’s Ramayana!

Even now it is propagated that impressed with the beauty and richness of Kamba Ramayana,
Beschi wanted to create a similar Christian work and hence came out with Thembaavani. It
benefitted Christianity by establishing St. Joseph in Tamil Nadu. But it contributed nothing to the
development of the Tamil language. How could the biography of a Christian saint help the
growth of Tamil? He then came out with another work, Paramartha Guruvum avarin
Seedarkalum (Paramartha Guru and his Disciples), to ridicule our centuries old ‘Guru-Sishya
Parampara.’ This “Munivar”, who denigrated our Guru-Sishya Parampara, was honoured by
Dravidian racists who installed a statue of him on Marina Beach.

German Iyer!

In the same period, a German missionary Barthalomaus Ziegenbalg (1683-1719) also worked in
Tamil Nadu and called himself Ziegenbalg Iyer. This Protestant priest landed in Tranquebar
(Tharangampaadi) in 1706 and worked with a Danish company which was the first to bring
German printing machines to Tamil Nadu. He printed the first Tamil Bible (New Testament).
Even while indulging in conversions, he often quarrelled with the Danish authorities who put
him in jail for some time. He was the first to stoke anti-Brahmanism by creating a hatred for
Brahmins among other communities. As he fell sick often, he died at the age of 36 in 1719,
leaving behind two Churches, a training institute for converted Indian priests, and 250 converts
in Tranquebar.

When the Lutheran Church, which grew in size over the years, celebrated the 300th anniversary
of his arrival in Chennai in July 2006, Tamil Nadu Governor Surijit Singh Barnala eulogized
Ziegenbalg for his “services” to the Tamil language and Tamil people. A commemorative Stamp
was also released.(External Link)

Ironically, even the British government didn’t bother to celebrate the second century of his
arrival in 1906! It is truly unfortunate that a constitutional head of an Indian state eulogised a
person who was instrumental in creating caste animosities among the natives in order to convert
them and destroy the native culture.

The critical question is, did Tamil grow because of his Tamil Bible and other Tamil Christian
works? Of course not! Only Christianity grew.

Italian Iyer and Thiruvaachakam distortion

Next in the list of Christian Priests who “served” the cause of Tamil was another
‘Iyer’ - G.U. Pope (1820-1907) or ‘Pope Iyer.’ He translated a few Tamil literary
works such as Thiruvaachakam, Thirukkural and Naaladiyaar, and said he could find
the teachings of Apostle St. Paul and St. Francis of Assisi in Sri Maanickavaachakar’s
Thiruvaachakam; innocent Tamil scholars felt elated at his ‘graciousness’.

Even some Tamil Saivite Mutts felt proud at G.U. Pope’s statement. Tamil scholar
Muthukumaraswamy, who has in-depth knowledge on Saiva Siddhanta, demolishes
this myth, citing Pope’s own statement, “In the whole legendary history of this sage
… there stands out a real historical character, which seems to be a mixture of that
of St. Paul and of St. Francis of Assisi. Under other circumstances what an apostle of
the East might have become,” as evidence of Pope’s sarcasm and disdain. He
exposes the mindset of G.U. Pope who states that a Religious Guru from the East
would not have attained a spiritual level beyond this in order to undermine the
spiritual greatness of Sage Maanickavaachakar.

Supporters and admirers of G.U. Pope in general and the Dravidian-Christian combo
in particular have spread the following story for years:

G.U. Pope has the habit of beginning with a Thiruvaachakam hymn every time he
writes a letter to his acquaintances in Tamil Nadu. One such time, he was so moved
by the sacred hymn that the tears rolling down from his eyes fell down and erased a
few words. As he thought that the tears (due to the sanctity of the hymn) too were
sacred, he decided not to rewrite those words and sent the letter without adding
them.
– The story was circulated to show that Pope was a lover of Thiruvaachakam, and a
great admirer of Tamil Savant Sri Maanickavaachakar.

Dr. Muthukumaraswamy asks, “Who was the recipient of that letter? Which hymn
was written in that letter? What happened to that letter? Is there any record of
either Pope or the recipient or the recipient’s relatives and friends mentioning about
that letter? Had this been a true story G.U. Pope would have certainly included it in
the reprints of his translation. But why he had not done so? Even well-known Tamil
Scholar ‘Thiruvaachakamani’ K.M. Balasubramaniam, who has great admiration for
G.U. Pope, has not recorded that story in any of his works. Why?”

‘Thiruvaachakamani’ K.M. Balasubramaniam says, “….the genuine and gigantic

efforts of Dr. Pope in uttering ‘Open Sesame’ to throw open the doors of the
Treasure-cave of Thiruvachakam to the cultured Savants of the West stung the
Tamils of their callousness and startled them into an awakening and appreciation of
their past”. What more need be said about the innocence (or ignorance?) of Tamil
Hindu scholars? Balasubramaniam has translated Thiruvaachakam in English!

In the course of an article in www.tamilhindu.com, demolishing the myth about G.U.

Pope, Dr. Muthukumaraswamy exposes how Pope deliberately distorted the hymns
titled ‘Neeththal Vinnappam’ (Praying for Mukti), which becomes an insult to Sage
Maanickavaachakar. He explains:

Bhagwan Shiva presents himself before Sage Maanickavaachakar in the Temple at

Thruthuraipoondi, blesses him and tells, “You embark on a yatra and finally come to
my abode Kailash. Wherever you go, I will present myself before you as your Guru”.
The Sage embarks on his yatra and one day reaches the temple at
Uttarakosamangai near Ramanathapuram. As he didn’t get the darshan of Bhagwan
Shiva, he feels let down and unable to bear this parting, with mounting sorrow and
emotion sings a hymn earnestly praying for Bhagwan’s appearance.

Explaining the above context, G.U. Pope infers, “The serene and beautiful
environment prevailing in Uttarakosamangai Temple was too ‘testing’ for
Maanickavaachakar to continue his Sanyas. He also remembers his family life in
Madurai married to a beautiful woman, and the patronizing which he got from the
Pandya King. His retrospection of married life leads him to keep contact with the
Deva Dasis serving the Temple. As he lost his control and crashed down from the
higher level of Sanyas, he developed a sort of complex, which created a guilty
consciousness forcing him to sing this hymn.”

To quote Pope, “From the evidence of these verses, we conclude that there were
two things from which he suffered. One of these was the allurements of the female
attendants who in bands pertained to the temple. We have noticed this elsewhere,
Hindu commentators will often find mystic meaning, which are harmless, - if
unfounded. Again and again in this and other poems he deplores the way in which
he has been led to violate his vow. The other difficulty often referred to was the way
in which mere ceremonial acts had to be performed, affording no relief to his
conscience.” By giving such a blasphemous introduction to this divine hymn, G.U.
Pope not only insulted Sage Maanickavaachakar and denigrated Thiruvaachakam,
but shocked the Hindu majority and hurt their religious sentiments.

Dr. Muthukumaraswamy explains:

It is a norm in Bhakti Literature for the authors to take the sins committed by the
people upon themselves... Maanickavaachakar takes upon himself all the sins
continuously committed by the people without making any attempts to seek Mukti,
and sings the said hymn praying for Bhagwan’s appearance and His blessings for
Mukti. Does the distortion made by G.U. Pope add any value to the beauty and
sanctity of Thiruvaachakam? Does it add value to the greatness of Sage
Maanickavaachakar? Has it helped the development of Tamil? Will any self-
respecting Tamil Hindu appreciate and eulogise G.U. Pope and thereby insult
Maanickavaachakar?
(http://www.tamilhindu.com/2009/10/gu_pope_and_thiruvasagam/)

It is also a norm in Bhakti literature for poets to talk about ‘Sitrinbam’ (Kama) and
later surrender at the lotus feet of Bhagwan praying for ‘Paerinbam’ (Mukti). Many
poets have written such poems considering the presiding deity as their ‘Nayaka’ or
‘Nayaki’. The poets employ the entire range of ‘Nava Rasas’ in order to create a
‘Kaavya.’

In this case, Sage Maanickavaachakar’s hymn was not a confession, but a prayer for
Mukti by taking upon himself all the sins committed by the people. He ultimately
surrenders to Bhagwan requesting Him to liberate him from this Maya called
Prapancha and bless him with Mukti. Pope’s interpretation is a nothing but an
expression of Christian fundamentalism.

Dr. Muthukumaraswamy quotes another instance where G.U. Pope ridicules murti
worship or vigraha aradana: “G.U. Pope says that a person who attains a higher
level of spiritualism also indulges in Murti worship and rustic rituals, which go totally
against his level of spiritualism.” To quote Pope’s own words, “There is in them a
strange combination of lofty feeling and spirituality with what we must pronounce to
be the grossest idolatory. And this leads to the thought that in Saiva system of
today two things that would appear to be mutually destructive are found to flourish,
and even to strengthen one another. The more philosophical and refined the Saivite
becomes the more enthusiastic does he often appears to be in the performance of
the incongruous rites of the popular worship”.
Pope exhibits the typical Christian hatred for murti puja by terming it an act of
stupidity. Dr. Muthukumaraswamy rightly asks, “When Thiruvaachakam is full of
Guru Stuti (Invoking the Guru), how come G.U. Pope ridicules murthi worship? Was
it fair on his part to criticize such a divine act of Bhakti?”

Dr. Muthukumaraswamy cites another instance where Pope deliberately insults

Maanickavaachakar, “All must be aware of the specific incidence (mentioned in
Thiruvilaiyaadal Puranam – Purana on Bhagwan’s plays) that Bhagwan Shiva takes
the blows from Pandya King’s flog for the sake of Maanickavaachakar, after which
the King realizes the Sage’s greatness and appeals for pardon and later allows
Maanickavaachakar to leave Madurai for Thiiruthuraippoondi. But G.U. Pope distorts
this incident as follows:

As there was a conflict between Madurai and Chidambaram Temples,

Maanickavaachakar left Madurai for Chidambaram and never returned to Madurai.
He was afraid of going back to the Pandya King, who had not pardoned him for
misappropriating the money given by the King for the purchase of Horses. So, he
never got back to Madurai.

To quote Pope, “It does not appear indeed, that Maanickavaachakar ever revisited
Madura after his formal renunciation of his position there. It may almost be inferred
that he was never heartily forgiven by the king for the misappropriation of the cost
of horses.” So much for G.U. Pope’s love for Thiruvaachakam!

Dr. Muthukumaraswamy says, “G.U. Pope wrote the translation of major portion of
Thiruvaachakam staying in a town called Lugano in Italy, wherein he used to
regularly visit the St. Maria degili Angioli Church to have the needed diversion,
relaxation and a sort of rejuvenation by seeing the paintings of Bernardinao Luini.
He has also recorded that he always used to feel the presence of Sage
Maanickavaachakar beside him kneeling down and praying to Jesus. Pope avers that
the Sage must have been a follower of Jesus until the time of his (Jesus) going to
Heaven, which must be the only reason behind the feeling of great devotion found
in his work. He also says that, he believed Maanickavaachakar, Mylapore’s
Handloom worker (Thiruvalluvar) who wrote Thirukkural and the Nomad Gnanis (Jain
Sages) who wrote Naaladiyar and others who have freed themselves from the flesh
must have certainly visited this Church and realized themselves through the history
of Jesus and Christian
thoughts.”(http://www.tamilhindu.com/2009/10/gu_pope_and_thiruvasagam/).

There is another concocted story about G.U. Pope in Tamil Nadu which says that
Pope wanted the statement, “Ingu oru Thamizh Maanavan urangukiraan” (A Tamil
student is sleeping here) sculpted on his cemetery and that the statement is still
present there on his cemetery. But those who have gone to the cemetery have
confirmed that there was no such statement written on his cemetery except the
ones from the Bible. G.U. Pope’s cemetery can be seen in this link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/93039296@N00/759184087/

Motivated lies on Thiruvaluvar and Thirukkural

G.U. Pope translated and published Sage Thiruvalluvar’s Thirukkural in 1886. There
is an ancient folklore that Thiruvalluvar was friends with a captain of a ship and
used to meet him often at the beaches of Mylapore. G.U. Pope accepted this as a
true story. As a true Christian, he also believed the myth of St. Thomas and relied
on the concoction that Thomas converted a large number of families in and around
Mylapore. He then gave an introduction to the Thirukkural as follows:

“Thiruvalluvar worked hard to acquire knowledge by all means. Whenever a ship

anchors in Mylapore coast, Valluvar’s ‘Captain’ friend would send him message
about the arrival of new visitors including foreigners. Many foreigners could have
travelled in his friend’s vessel and landed in Mylapore via Sri Lanka. Within me I see
the picture of Thiruvalluvar talking with the Christians gathering information and
knowledge. He has gathered a lot of Christian theories in general and the minute
details of Alexandrian principles in particular and incorporated them in his
Thirukkural. The philosophy of Christian theories from the Church situated near
Valluvar’s place is present clearly in Thirukkural. Thiruvalluvar lived between 800
AD and 1000 AD. The Christian Biblical works were certainly an evidence for
Valluvar’s Thirukkural. He was certainly inspired by the Bible.”

(Dr. T.N. Ramachandran, Thamizhaga Andhanar Varalaaru, (History of Tamil

Brahmins), Vol. II, LKM Publications, Chennai, 2nd pub. 2005, pp. 641 to 643).

This sordid introduction to his translated work shows G.U. Pope’s fanatic mindset
and the ulterior motive behind his “love” for Tamil language and literature!
Dravidian racists have installed a statue of this Christian missionary on Marina
Beach, an inexplicable honour for a man who denigrated the sacred hymns of
Thiruvaachakam and insulted Sage Maanickavaachakar and Sage Thiruvalluvar.

No wonder they blithely ignore Saivite and Vaisnavite literary works, the great
Nayanmars and Alwars, and sing paeans on Christian missionaries during the so-
called Classical Tamil Conference!!! The irony is that Thiruvalluvar’s picture was the
emblem of the conference!

Caldwell the Racist!

Another missionary who inflicted massive damage on Tamil Hindus was the Scot
Robert Caldwell (1814-1891) who, along with his wife Elissa Mault, resided in
Tirunelvelli and made huge conversions. While he focused on the male population,
she converted the womenfolk.

He sowed the poisonous seed called Dravidian Racism. He fully utilised the Aryan-
Dravidian theories concocted by German linguist Max Mueller and imposed them on
Tamil Hindus as true history. He abused the word ‘Dravida’ to the hilt and projected
Tamil Hindus as a separate Dravidian Race. His book, Dravida Mozhikalin
Oppilakkanam (A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South Indian Family of
Languages, Harrison: London, 1856), which gave him the reputation of a great
champion of Tamil, spewed venom on Brahmins and accused them of spreading
lies. If Ziegenbalg was the founder of anti-Brahmanism, Robert Caldwell was
responsible for spreading it throughout the region, giving a stimulus to the
radicalization of the Non-Brahmin movement.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Caldwell)

Ironically, ‘A comparative grammar of the Dravidian or South Indian family of

languages’ cannot be termed his own work as he allegedly took lots of passages
from Francis Whyte Ellis, who wrote “Dravidian Language Hypotheses”. To
understand why Caldwell resorted to ‘research’ South Indian languages, one should
read Dr. K. Muthaia’s article, Caldwell Oppilakkanaththin Arasiyal Pinnani (The
Politics Behind Caldwell’s Comparative Grammar), published in the April 1997 issue
of the Tamil monthly magazine Kanaiyaazhi.

Muthaia states, “Many research conclusions found in Caldwell’s book on

comparative grammar of Dravidian languages have political reasons and
undertones. The motive behind his arrival was to convert the South Indians and
Christianise the southern region. He was also considerably successful in his religious
mission… A detailed and in-depth study of his work would make us understand that
he had had Sanskrit hatred, anti-Brahminism and denigration of Hinduism as
objectives, but not establishing the antiquity of Tamil and the individuality of Tamil
people… Knowing pretty well that he would not be able to spread Christianity
among Tamil people unless their mindset on Hindu culture and Sanskrit language
was changed, he indulged in creating hatred for North Indians in the minds of the
Tamil Hindus. As a first step in that direction, he created the concept of ‘Dravidian
Language Family’ ” (Dravida Maayai, Subbu, op. cit., pp. 26-28).

Caldwell’s infamous book Tinnevelly Shanars proved to be his nemesis. Though his
focus for conversion was mainly on Shanars (Nadars), the dominant community in
Tirunelvelli, he literally denigrated them and their lifestyle in the said book. The
outraged and agitated community allegedly decided to punish him which forced him
to shift base from Tirunelvelli to Ootacamund, where he breathed his last.

Robert Caldwell was instrumental in creating anti-Brahmin, anti-North, anti-Sanskrit

and anti-Hindu feelings among the Tamil people and dividing them through Aryan-
Dravidian racial theories. His activities laid the foundation for Tamil separatism,
which badly affected the national integration. His Comparative Grammar of
Dravidian Languages also played an ugly role in creating racial differences between
Sinhalese and Tamils in Sri Lanka, for he argued in that book that “there was no
direct affinity between the Sinhalese and Tamil languages”. There is not even an
iota of truth in the propaganda that he was a lover of Tamil and helped the
development of Tamil. That is a misinformation campaign floated by the Church and
supported by Dravidian racist parties.

At a seminar on the last day of the recent Classical Tamil Conference, Prof. Parveen
Sultana said, “Protecting our Mother Tongue is very important. We have come
across many instances in world history where nations are conquered by capturing
and dominating their languages. For example, a famous quote doing rounds in
Africa says, ‘When they came here, they had the Bible and we had our lands. Now
we have the Bible and they have our lands’! This has happened wherever
Christianity has landed”.

That she spoke this truth in a conference where the likes of Caldwell were eulogised
shows her courage! Delving into the great culture of this land, the learned professor
spoke about the construction of temples and their greatness. Parveen Sultana’s
speech was one of the rare highlights of the conference which was otherwise
dominated by Christianity, Dravidian racism and eulogies for Kalaignar Karunanidhi.

More on Padires’ love for Tamil!

The history of Tamil Nadu has many more evidences of the ‘divide and dominate’
policy of the White Church. During the reign of ‘Kizhavan Sethupathi’ in the
kingdom of Ramanathapuram, a Portuguese Padire by name John-De-Britto indulged
in heavy harvesting of souls. He even converted the close kin of Sethupathi Raja,
but was finally punished by the King. V. Gopalan has written a detailed essay on this
missionary and his activities: http://www.tamilhindu.com/2010/06/truth-behind-john-
de-britto-history/.

Sri Thyagaraja Chettiar was a great exponent of Tamil literature and had great love
for the language. Once a European missionary who claimed to have mastered Tamil
Grammar came and showed some changes he had made to a few verses of
Thirukkural. Outraged by the audacity of the Padire to change verses of such a
great work, adored as a Tamil Veda, Sri Thyagaraja Chettiar scolded him and
literally drove him away. This incident is mentioned in “Dr. Vu. Ve. Swaminatah Iyer
Urainadai Noolkal” (Dr. U.V. Swaminatha Iyer’s Prose Works, Vol.-3, pp. 520-523).

Sri Pandithurai Thevar of Madurai, another great exponent of Tamil language and
literary works, learned that a British missionary had made changes to the very first
verse of Thirukkural and printed the same. He immediately purchased the entire lot
and burnt them! (Dravida Maayai, op. cit., pp. 21-22).

Baptising Thiruvalluvar and Blaspheming Thirukkural

Christians who had the temerity to lay their hands on Thirukkural then, have now
gone to the extent of baptising Thiruvalluvar!!! Taking a cue from G.U. Pope’s
atrocious introduction to Thirukkural, a fanatical evangelist called Deivanayagam,
supported by the Madras Catholic Diocese, has been on a relentless campaign that,
“Thiruvalluvar was a disciple of St. Thomas and most of the teachings in Thirukkural
have been either taken from Bible or from the preaching of St. Thomas.”

The Roman Catholic Dioceses of Kerala and Tamil Nadu had announced in 2008 that
they would be producing a film on the life and times of St. Thomas, wherein they
would depict Thiruvalluvar as a disciple of St. Thomas.

Later, as confirmation of the unholy Christian-Dravidian nexus, Tamil Nadu Chief

Minister Karunanidhi graced the occasion of the said film’s inaugural function as
Chief Guest. Though himself an expert on the Thirukkural, the Chief Minister chose
to participate in the inauguration of a film falsely portraying Thiruvalluvar as a
disciple of St. Thomas, a complete concoction and an audacious expression of
extremist evangelism.

Tamil prose and Christian farce!

An oft repeated propaganda is that Christian missionaries introduced “Prose”

writing in Tamil. A blatant lie! When Tamil Hindus have been adept at art, literature,
music, architecture and theatre, wouldn’t they have been good in prose too? Is it
not outrageous and insulting to say that people from Europe came and introduced
prose writing to Tamil Hindus?

Tamil as a language is at the least 2000 years old. Starting from the Sangam Era,
Tamil tradition has been a literate tradition with written records, preserved down
the centuries by late classical and early medieval Tamil Brahmin and Saivite Hindu
scholars. It was not an ‘oral’ legacy as alleged by Christians and Dravidian racists.

We have had commentaries on almost all ancient literary works, Sangam and post-
Sangam, in prose, by learned scholars such as Ilampooranaar, Senavaraayar,
Peraasiriyar, Parimelazhagar, Nachinaarkkiniyaar and Deivachchilaiyaar. Saivite
Hindu Adheenams have helped preserve the Classical Tamil literary tradition down
the centuries. The important fact to be noted is that the continuance and
preservation of written Tamil literary heritage happened despite repeated invasions
and unsettled political conditions.

The rich tradition continued in more modern times by devout Hindus such as U.V.
Swaminatha Iyer, Ramachandra Dikshidhar, Neelakanda Shastri, P. Narayanaswami
Iyer and Raghava Iyengar, etc in Tamil Nadu and staunch Hindu activists such as
Arumuka Navalar, C.W. Thamotharam Pillai and Swami Vipulananda in Sri Lanka.

The so-called contribution of Christian missionaries comes nowhere near the

contribution of these devout Hindus to Tamil scholarship in recent times. That is
mainly because these devout Hindus had Bhakti, involvement in the growth of Tamil
language, passion towards the culture of the soil and the mind to sacrifice
everything for the development of the language, continuance of the culture and
preservation of the tradition. The missionaries focused destructively on the
Christianisation of the native culture. They had ulterior motives unlinked to the
Tamil language - consolidation of European rule in India and conversion of the
natives to the religion of Europe.

The Lexicon story!

The website www.cathnewsindia.com says, “The task of setting down on paper the
alphabet, grammar, rules and vocabulary of the Tamil lexicon began in Christian
schools, towards the end of the 19th century. It was pioneered by Father Swamy
Gnanapragasam, who transcribed hundreds of ancient scripts into print. A statue in
his honor can be seen in Jaffna city. His work was continued by Father Hyacinth
Singarayer David, a master in Indo-Aryan languages and doctor in linguistics, who
published six volumes of the lexicon...” (External Link)

This is an inappropriate claim - the alphabet, vocabulary and rules of Tamil lexicon
by far precede the Christian colonial missionary era. It seems Tamil Scholars in Sri
Lanka are divided over the acceptance of Father Gnanapragasam as a scholar and
historian. Some say he had made claims on history and linguistics that were not
backed by historical evidences. For example, he said Tamil was the mother of all
languages in the world! They also say that none of his works were peer reviewed by
well known academics on the subject or published in reputed journals of history; he
lacked post-graduate training in the historical method and was hardly a scholar of
note.

Long before the arrival of Christian missionaries we had “Nigandus” or dictionaries.

Tamil scholar/poet Dandapani Desikar’s direct student Sri Maniyan, who had written
lexicons for many ancient Tamil literary works, says, “Nigandus were in the form of
poetic verses, which made the students, teachers and research scholars to
remember them easily. These Nigandus have been there since 11 century CE. But,
the dictionary of alphabetical order was introduced by Foreigners”. (Interview in
Rasanai monthly magazine, July 2010, Chennai) To claim that “Prose” writing was
introduced by Christian missionaries and only because of their contribution Tamil
got a second life in the 18th century and survived is outrageous.
Padires; Proselytisers; Printers!

The fact of the matter is that the white Christians imported ‘printing machines’ from
their countries and introduced printing technology here. What for? To help them in
proselytisation works and to speed up the process of conversion!

Before the introduction of paper and printing, valuable books in Tamil language
were written on both sides of “palm leaves” and committed to memory. Writing on
the palm leaf, a common practice in those days, was a difficult work which only a
trained person could do (so also writing on stone, copper plates etc). Several written
leaves were bound together with wooden or brass boards at each end and tied up
into a book. For referring to anything in a book, it had to be untied, the relevant
page spotted, and the matter read. This laborious process was quite easy to Tamil
Hindus.

But the missionary found it extremely difficult. So he transported the printing

machine, the paper and the techniques, from his native west. Another great
handicap with the palm leaf was that only one copy could be written at a time; it
could be duplicated only by hand copying one at a time. Every pupil under a teacher
copied his own book in manuscript. But for the proselytizing missionary, many
copies had to be taken at a time for distribution among prospective converts. Hence
the printing machine was essential for them.

We may note that printing for the first time in India was in the Tamil language.
Printing machines were imported by Jesuit priests and the first books in Tamil Nadu
were printed in Tirunelvelli. The books printed through German collaboration for
Danish Protestant missionaries were in vogue in the east coast around Tranquebar
in Thanjavur district. (We have already seen that the German Protestant Padire
Barthalomaus Ziegenbalg printed the Tamil Bible through a German machine owned
by Danish Church in Tranquebar).

Similarly, the British established a printing press at Vepery in Madras for their own
missionaries. The East India Company had a law which prohibited natives from
opening any printing press or from printing any book. Only foreigners and
missionaries (including native Christians) were permitted printing. The admirers
among native Christians say the missionaries did great service to Tamil by
introducing printing. But, it was done with an ulterior motive. In the matter of
printing, only missionaries were encouraged by the Company. Printing in local
languages helped the missionaries in their conversion work and the Company
wanted proselytisation. The history of printing in India, as of any other progressive
enterprise like education, shipping or even medicine, is the history of suppression of
Indian activities.

Ellis, who was a civilian, and Munroe, who was governor of Madras, both took great
trouble to get the Press Law annulled, but this was done only in 1835. But for this
ban, printing of Tamil books by eminent Tamil Hindu scholars of the day would have
commenced even in the 18th century, and a great volume of classical Tamil
literature could have been preserved through print.

The Company positively helped only in the loss of a vast literary wealth in the whole
of India. The loss is said to be the greatest in Tamil, because Tamil had the largest
heritage of ancient classical literature in the whole of India, barring perhaps
Sanskrit. (‘History of Early Printing’ from “Christianity in India – A Critical study” by
Vivekananda Kendra Prakashan)

This being the truth, the claim by Christians and Dravidian racists that Christian
missionaries helped the development of the Tamil language is outrageous,
atrocious, and simply fallacious. It is evident that the Christian establishment in fact
destroyed the Tamil language and culture to a great extent by not allowing natives
to own printing presses and print books by promulgating a law to this end. Ergo, this
is the “great Christian service” to Tamil!!!

According to the website www.cathnewsindia.com, “It was Father Xavier Stanislaus

Thaninayagam who founded the International Association of Tamil Research and
called the first International Conference of Tamil Studies in 1965. That event
ultimately led to this year’s highly prestigious conference”.(External Link)

While one can agree that Father Thaninayagam founded the IATR, one can only say
that the claim of his IATR leading to the just-concluded First World Classical Tamil
Conference is dubious. In fact, the Christian website should have had the courage to
say IATR refused to conduct the World Tamil Conference this year despite a request
from Karunanidhi.

Yet it attempts to take credit for the event even though Karunanidhi ignored IATR
and went ahead with the First World Classical Tamil Conference, wherein he
announced the setting up of “World Tolkappiyar Classical Tamil Sangam” (WTCTS)
to the utter shock of IATR.

Depending on the political climate, both may merge tomorrow, for the Church is
capable of going any lengths to establish its ‘love’ for Tamil. The IATR has
conducted 8 conferences in the last 45 years, of which one was a DMK conference
(Madras, 1968, when Annadurai was CM), two were AIADMK conferences (Madurai,
1981, by MGR and Thanjavur, 1995, by Jayalalithaa); the remaining five (Kuala
Lumpur1966, Paris 1970, Jaffna 1974, Kuala Lumpur 1987, Mauritius 1989) were
relatively lacklustre.
And what did the Tamil language, literature, archaeology or culture receive from
these eight conferences - NOTHING! Undeniably, the just concluded Classical Tamil
Conference was also a DMK jamboree. Television channels clearly confirmed this
through their live telecasts. And Christian domination was also quite visible in this
conference, which again underlined the Christian-Dravidian nexus.

Rev. Thamil Nesan, in his article on Rev. Thaninayagam in the Christian website
www.transcurrents.com says, “At this memorable occasion (Tamil Meet at
Coimbatore), it is very much appropriate to remember gratefully Rev. Prof.
Thaninayagam (1913–1980) who toiled hard and dedicated his entire life to make
Tamil Language, Tamil Literature and Tamil Culture better known and appreciated
in the world… The name, having served so well this Catholic ambassador of Tamil
culture, now stands immortalised in the history of the Tamil people and Tamil
Studies… Since he was well versed in many European Languages and their
literatures, he was able to blaze a trail in the comparative study of Tamil Literature
with the literature of European Languages”.

A question arises, what is Tamil culture or rather, what do these Christians define as
Tamil culture? Is there such a thing as Hindi culture, Telugu culture, Marathi culture,
Gujarati culture, Bengali culture, when all the Bharatiya language communities are
united by a single civilisational inheritance, that is, the Hindu in inspiration? That is
the culture of this Hindu Bhumi! There may be minor differences in customs and
rituals, but the culture and tradition are one and the same. Though the spoken
languages are diverse, the Gods and Goddesses, festivals and way of living are all
the same for ages. In the Hindu way, Unity is not at odds with Diversity; indeed,
Diversity flows from Unity.

In the above mentioned article Father Thamil Nesan says, “Tamil festivals are
celebrated in many parts. All this was possible, thanks to the strenuous efforts by
one individual: Xavier S. Thaninayagam, a Catholic Priest from Jaffna.” He does not
list the so-called Tamil Festivals. If we ask the Dravidian racists who changed the
traditional ‘Tamil New Year’ to list out the Tamil festivals, they would come out with
only one – Pongal, also claimed as Thamizhar Thirunaal. Yet this is none other than
the Makara Sankranti celebrated throughout India. But what about other festivals
celebrated by Tamils? The Dravidian racists have not included them as they are
Hindu festivals.

So why did Father Thamil Nesan use the word “Tamil Festivals”? Here is the answer!
In course of his article Thamil Nesan says, “Fr. Thaninayagam has made a
tremendous contribution towards internationalising Tamil Studies. He was a Catholic
priest who championed Tamil Culture”. As Tamils world over celebrate each and
every festival with great fanfare, would it not have added respect and pride to
Father Thaninayagam had the Christians addressed him as a “Champion of Hindu
culture”? They wouldn’t have, because they wanted to remove the Hindu identity of
the Tamils! They have not said “Indian culture” either. Destroying “Hindu” identity
and establishing “Tamil” identity would be possible only by hijacking the language,
literature and culture. That is why all Christian missionaries have been projected as
champions of Tamil, Tamil literature and Tamil culture.

Thamil Nesan literally confesses:

“….Fr. Thaninayagam, an ardent advocate and zealous Apostle of Tamil language of

the 20th century… From his younger days, he was quite conscious of the linguistic
and literary talents that God had given him and he cultivated them well in order to
use them in the service of God and men. As a priest he made a deep study of the
Tamil language and literature in order to equip himself better for his ministry among
the Tamil speaking people of South India and Sri Lanka… Fr. Thaninayagam has
made a tremendous contribution towards internationalising Tamil Studies. He was a
Catholic priest who championed Tamil Culture. Catholic Christianity is an
international religion and it seemed to have helped him a great deal in his lifetime
task of internationalising Tamil Studies… In the midst of all his international
activities for the acknowledgement of the antiquity, richness and beauty of the
Tamil language and literature, he remained always a devoted priest of God.”

Thamil Nesan quotes Prof. C.R. Boxer, University of London, UK, as saying, “He
(Thaninayagam) was in the best sense a ‘Citizen of the World’ widely travelled in
four continents and on seven seas, he was always alert and receptive to new ideas,
people and places; but he was never deflected by them from his vocation as a
Roman Catholic Priest.”

A section of Tamil scholars, unconvinced about Thaninayagam’s ‘contribution’, ask,

“what precise contribution did Thaninayagam make to the Tamil language in terms
of publications in reputed journals of history, in the study of Tamil linguistics as peer
reviewed by accredited academics or the study of Tamil history? Did he add to the
store on knowledge?” They aver, “no doubt, his organizational skills were excellent
in spearheading the IATR. But let’s not forget that the IATR was a joint endeavour
with several others participating in it to make it a success. One cannot confine the
credit to just one individual”.

Compare that to U.V. Swaminatha Iyer who did yeoman service in first publishing
the Sangam era Tamil classics for posterity. His contribution to the preservation of
Tamil classics was phenomenal. Or to the role of Hindu savant Arumuka Naavalar in
Sri Lanka who was the first to use the modern printing press to publish early Tamil
classics.

As for Vaiyapuri Pillai, noted Tamil lexicographer, he remains the only scholar who
critically evaluated the dates of Tamil literature by addressing issues of syntax,
vocabulary and literary cross references. He was the only academic schooled in the
science of textual criticism. His dating of Tamil literary works would demolish the
subsequent exaggerated claims by Dravidian parties in general and DMK in
particular on Tamil literature, an exaggeration aided and abetted by the Christian
missionary effort.

Conclusion

All Christian missionaries from Robert-De-Nobili to Robert Caldwell, all Christian

priests like Thaninayagam and evangelists like Deivanayagam, worked and are
working for the same agenda of hijacking Tamil language, erasing its Hindu identity,
destroying the native culture, converting the natives and ultimately forming a Tamil
Christian Nation comprising Tamil Nadu and North and East of Sri Lanka.

Dravidian racists, lacking in pride, passion and patriotism, have joined hands with
the Church and Christian establishments to alienate the Tamil region from the
national mainstream. The situation is ominous, and we need to defeat the nefarious
designs of vested interests at any cost. The present political climate in both Tamil
Nadu and Sri Lanka is not encouraging and the political establishments are of no
help in both regions. The onus lies on Tamils living in Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka.
They must re-Hinduise their identity and reiterate themselves with pride, passion
and perseverance. They must understand that their language, music, art and
architecture are all part and parcel of the Great Hindu culture inherited from the
Vedic civilisation, which evolved along the sacred rivers Sindhu and Saraswati.

Tamil identity is linked to the broader Hindu identity. We witness this in Carnatic
music, the Bharatanatyam dance form, temple architecture, sculpture, classical
literature, politics and overseas trade. The Sangam era literature may not have
been explicitly religious in theme, but whenever the early poems referred to
religious practice, one discerns Hindu observance as in the worship of Mayon or
Vishnu, Seyon or Murugan, Kotravai or Durga, Venthan or Indra, and Varuna.

Immediate post-Sangam works like Tirukkural, Silapadhikaram and Manimekalai

resonate even more with the broader Indic philosophic currents. The subsequent
era of the Thevaram and Naalaayira Dhivya Prabandham or Hindu devotional
classics sponsored the growth of Tamil imperial power and the political
consolidation of the land which in turn facilitated overseas trade and prosperity.
Agriculture and irrigation grew in no small measure. The origins of the Tamil
language and its development were linked throughout history with the broader Indic
world. Let’s never forget that!

This explains why the Thiruvaachakam is sung at the coronation of the Thai king,
why the traditional ‘Tamil New Year’ in April is the ‘New Year’ observed in Cambodia
and Burma, and the Tamil influence in the Hindu religious iconography of Indonesia.
The Hindu identity is connected even to New Zealand. The bronze temple bell
presumably gifted by the Maoris (tribals of what later became New Zealand) to
Protestant missionary William Colenso (around 1836) contained Tamil inscriptions!

Tamil is Hindu; Tamil culture is Hindu culture; Tamil tradition is Hindu tradition;
Tamil heritage is a continuity with the Vedic civilisation which evolved on the banks
of Sindhu-Saraswati and flows down to Kanyakumari.