Skip to main content

Manabharana Is Not Malay (Manabharana Bukan Melayu)

In recent times, an alarming narrative has emerged within the Malaysian blogosphere, suggesting a historical event that appears to be a misinterpretation or perhaps a deliberate misinformation campaign. The claim revolves around a so called Malay prince named Manabharana from Srivijaya, purportedly attacking and conquering the Chola kingdom. This misleading story has gained traction and is spreading like wildfire across various social media platforms. The need to address and rectify such inaccuracies is crucial not only for the sake of historical accuracy but also for fostering a responsible and informed online community. To delve into the matter, it is essential to clarify that historical records reveal the existence of multiple individuals named Manabharana throughout history. However, a nuanced understanding reveals that all these figures were Tamils (Damila) hailing from the Pandya kingdom, with references to their exploits documented in Tamil inscriptions and Sri Lankan chronicles

Pitchavaram Zamin Are Not Cholas, Rajaraja Chola Is Not Vanniyar

Zamindar of Pitchavaram
During the British rule, the traditional Tamil kings were no longer in power. They no longer had a say in governance. Unlike the previous dynasties which ruled Tamil Nadu, the British suppressed the native rulers and prevented them from rising. 

Those who were favored by the British seized the opportunity to make false claims about themselves. They changed their caste names and also claimed that they are descendants of ancient kings.

One such claim is made by the landlords of Pitchavaram. They claim that they are the real descendants of Cholas. They justify this by stating that they have the coronation right in the Chidambaram Nataraja Temple just like the Chola kings. 

The Pitchavaram zamin family claims that since the traditional priest of the temple, the Dikshitars, perform the coronation and also pass the temple key to them, then they must be the real Cholas under the title Cholanar or Cholanganar. 

Having coronation in Chidambaram with titles like Cholanar in the hands of Dikshitar during British era does not make one a Chola king. Temple management can always change when different rulers rule the land.  The former Chola country was ruled by the Pandyas, the Vijayanagars, the Nayaks, the Marathas and finally it fell into the hands of the British

When the Nayaks conquered Madurai, they crowned themselves in the Meenachi Temple. However, this does not make them Pandyan kings. 

Gettibommu Naicker, the Telugu Palayakarar of Panchalankurichi was called VeeraPandya Kattabomman. This does not make him a Pandyan king. 

The Cholas were defeated by the Pandyas in the 13th century. Some historian puts the year as 1280. The earliest record of Pitchavaram coronation in Chidambaram is only in 1908. 

So for 628 years, there were no news about any Chola kings. All of a sudden in 1908, somebody calls himself Chola king and that too only during the British era

The Pitchavaram family could not provide any record of coronation prior to 1908. If they were indeed the real Chola kings, then they should be able to provide a list of successors since 1280.

As we know, the Dikshitars pass the key to the Pitchavaram family after closing the temple each day. It is not the duty of a king to hold the key of the temple. 

That is actually the duty of the temple guardians who are appointed by rulers to manage and guard the temple. Such people will usually be given lands near the temple so that they can live nearby and help to manage it. 

Since they have the key, they will also need to rush to the temple if there is an emergency during wee hours. The priest will knock on their door each morning as early as 4am to retrieve the key. 

The priest will also pass it back to them late in the night once the prayers are over. Practically speaking, kings will not commit themselves to such responsibility. 

They will have to hold the key and stay in the palace daily if they commit to this. It is logical to just appoint someone and let him handle it.

Holding the key of a temple makes one important but that does not make him a king. There were also many communities such as Kaikolars who were made temple guardians. 

The Pitchavaram family belongs to a community which calls itself as AgniKulam (Fire Race). Lately, many cyber cadres from the Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) waged an online crusade claiming that Rajaraja Chola belongs to the AgniKulam community which is also known as Palli or Vanniyar in Tamil Nadu.

This cannot be true because Rajaraja Chola belongs to SuryaVamsam (Solar Lineage). This is why he is also known as RaviKulaManikam and RaviVamsaSikamani. Ravi is the other word for Surya. So there is no chance of Rajaraja Chola being a Vanniyar because he is not from AgniVamsam.

To counter this, the PMK cadres claimed that SuryaVamsam descended from the AgniKulam or AgniVamsam (Fire Lineage). This is actually a baseless myth.

Let us examine some of the myths which is used by the PMK cadres to justify their claims....

Myth #1
They claimed that SuryaVamsam and ChandraVamsam (Lunar Lineage) came from AgniVamsam. Dushenthen was believed to be a descendant of Agni. Dushenthen's son was King Guryamen or Karendhamen: he had four sons called Pandyan, Keralen, Solen (Cholan) and Kolen. The kingdom was divided among the sons by their father who called the divisions after their names Pandya, Sola (Chola), Kerala and Kola.

If this myth is true, then the Pandyan and Chola dynasty will become brother dynasties. Their children will become panggali (parallel cousins). Therefore they cannot intermarry.

We know this is not true because Pandyas and Cholas are not panggali. They are muraipasangga (cross cousins) and they intermarry.  The Pandyas belong to ChandraVamsam and the Cholas are SuryaVamsam.

The actual origin of the royal lineages of India is written in the Puranas. 

According to the Puranas, Manu was the progenitor of mankind. He was the son of Surya (Sun). Manu had 9 sons and a daughter named Ila. Manu's son, Ishvaku, is the founder of the SuryaVamsam dynasty named after his grandfather, Surya.

Ishvaku's sister Ila married Budha, son of Chandra (Moon). Their union created the ChandraVamsam dynasty named after Chandra.

Both Rama of Ayodhya and Rajaraja Chola belong to the SuryaVamsam dynasty created by Ishvaku. The Pandyas belong to the ChandraVamsam created by Ila and Budha. 

That means, those of ChandraVamsam and SuryaVamsam are muraipasangga. They can intermarry.

The origin of the AgniVamsam is different. AgniVamsam was created later during the time of Sage Vasistha. Vasistha performs an AgniHoma (Fire Sacrifice) and from the burning fire, emerges a man. He is the founder of the AgniVamsam.

This is the real origin of the royal lineages as written in our Puranas. People of the same lineage cannot intermarry because they are SaGothra; of the same gothra.  

Myth #2
Vanniyars were born in opposition to two demons named Vatapi and Mahi. These demons received the boon of invincibility against everything except fire allowing them to swallow the wind and the sun. The first Vanniyar (known as Veera Vanniyan, Rudra Vanniyan, Vanni Raja or Banniraya) was born from the flames of the sacrificial fire with a host of armed horsemen to defeat the demons. He then sired 5 sons who later become the ancestors of the divisions in Vanniyar caste.

In this myth, it is said that the subdivisions of the Vanniyar caste was created by 5 brothers who were born to the first Vanniyar. That means all Vanniyars will become panggali as they are descendants of brothers from the same father. If this is true, the Vanniyars cannot even marry other Vanniyars. They will have to look for brides from other castes because this will make all of them panggali.

This is another myth which cannot be taken as true.

Myth #3
The Vanniyars claim to also descend from the Dvarapalakas or "gate guardians" who were created to guard a particular Vanni tree which the Pandava brothers used to hide their weapons upon entering the kingdom of Virata. The descendants of these gate guardians worshiped Draupadi, the shared wife of the Pandava brothers. For this reason, Draupadi cult is quite popular among present day Vanniyar community members.

Anyone who read Mahabaratha or Ramayana knows that both the Pandya and Chola dynasty existed even before the era of Draupadi or Pandavas. These dynasties were mentioned in our Itihasas.

That means the Vanniyars cannot be the founders of these dynasties because the Vanniyars were only born after the kingdoms were created.

The cadres are relying on mythology to justify their fire origins. Not only these myths contradict with one another, the myths also does not match the origins of royal lineages as written in our Puranas. Therefore, claims of fire origins based on unreliable mythology holds no water.

Based on this, the following can be established:

 1.The fire myth origin of the Vanniyars does not conform to the originaly mythology as written in our Puranas.
 2.SuryaVamsam and ChandraVamsam did not originate from AgniVamsam.
 3.SuryaVamsam, ChandraVamsam and AgniVamsam did not originate from the same father.
 4.AgniVamsam was created only after ChandraVamsam and SuryaVamsam were created.
 5.Vanniyar's claim of Agni origin and that they have Surya and Chandra lineages is questionable.
 6. Pandyas and Cholas existed even before the fire myth of Vanniyars happened.
 7. Rajaraja Chola is SuryaVamsam, therefore, he cannot be a Vanniyar.
 8.There is no record of Pitchavaram Zamin coronation prior to 1908.
 9.There is no historical proof to support claim that Pitchavaram Zamin are descendants of Cholas.
10.There is no mention of Pitchavaram Zamin as Cholas for 628 years.

The communal identity of Tamil kings can only be established by proper research. It cannot be established by making false assumption. Since we know that the real Pandyas belong to ChandraVamsam and the real Cholas belong to SuryaVamsam, we can use this information to research about them. 

The Tamil royal families also intermarried with other royalties irrespective of linguistic differences. They also have descendants living in Southeast Asia. 

All these needs to be considered when researching. One has to research genuinely by putting aside communal affiliation else the truth will never be out.

Comments

  1. Very Good explanation, not only cholas and pandyas the vanniyars have a long list of claim according to them Chera Chola Pandya Velir hoysalan pallava all are vanniyars the biggest crack of joke they made is “Bodhi Satva to be a vanniyar and palli by caste no wonder they may claim all the dynasty of India were rulled by Vanniyar’s
    The coining of the caste Vanniyar itself is highly debatable because there are lot of castes uses the Vanniyar title
    1.ஈசனாட்டு கள்ளர்(மத்திய அமைச்சர் பழனி மாணிக்கம் வன்னியர்)

    2.வலைய முத்தரையர்(வழுவாடி வன்னியர்)

    3.வன்னிக்கொத்து மறவர்(வன்னியர்,வன்னியடி மறவர்)

    4.ஆர்க்காடு அகமுடையர்(வன்னிய முதலியார்)

    5.துளுவ,கொங்கு வெள்ளாளர்(வன்னியர் கவுண்டர்)

    6.பார்க்கவ குலத்தார்(வன்னிய மூப்பனார்)

    7.பரவர்,கரையர்(வன்னியர்)
    என பல்வேறு சமூகதினருக்கு இருக்கிறது
    So here how are “Palli vanniyar associated with the royal clans is the question for that they are associating themselves with castes with “Vanniyar title
    It is quite clear they are trying to transmute history


    ReplyDelete
  2. The straight forwarded narration and with more clarity. The comment provided above also very crisp and clear. Thanks dudes. :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Super sir, very clear and smart research. Why don't we try to get copyright for chola dynasty or let the govt to research this and announce this results to put fullstop for this controversies? coz lots of people are refering wiki and Google not incription or history. Google information are half true and half wrong. They are publishing what they get. And in YouTube anybody can post anything all people claiming for chola dynasty and fighting by posting comments.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Travancore royal family might be the chola followers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Travancore royal family seems chola followers

    ReplyDelete
  6. வன்னியர்கள் வடக்கில் ஏதாவது உங்கள் வீர வரலாறு சொல்ல இருக்கா என்று பாருங்கள், பிச்சாவரம் ஜமீன் (இவர்களுக்கு வீர வரலாறு ஓன்றும் இல்லை) பட்டம் கட்டுவதை வைத்துக் கொண்டு சோழர்கள் என்று பெருமை பேசலாம் அதுவும் இவர்கள் கனவே

    பிச்சாவரம் ஜமீன் கதை :

    // 1) களப்பிர அரசனான கூற்றுவ நாயனார் தில்லை வாழ் அந்தணர்களை முடிசூட்ட வேண்ட அவர்கள் சோழர்க்கன்றி சூட்டோம் முடி என மறுத்தது தெளிவாகிறது.

    2) தில்லை வாழ் அந்தணரால் முடி சூட்டப்படும் பேறு பெற்ற ஒரு குடும்பத்தினர் இன்றும் சிதம்பரம் பகுதியில் வாழ்ந்து வருகின்றனர்.

    3) இந்த சோழனார் மரபில் கி.பி 1844 -இல் இரத்தினசாமி சூரப்ப சோழனார் பிறகு இராமபத்திர சூரப்ப சோழனார், கி.பி. 1911 -இல் தில்லைக்கண்ணு சூரப்ப சோழனார், 1943 - இல் ஆண்டியப்ப சூரப்ப சோழனார், பின்பு 1978 - இல் சிதம்பரநாத சூரப்ப சோழனார் முதலானோர் நடராசர் திருமுன் பட்டம் புனைந்திருக்கிறார்கள்.

    4. இங்கு மற்ற இனத்தவர் பட்டம் கட்ட முடியாது. // இது தான் வன்னியர்கள் சோழர்கள் என்று சொல்ல காரணம். அதற்கு விளக்கம்

    1. களப்பிர அரசன் (காலம் கி.பி 300) - வைதீக எதிர்ப்புச் சமயமாகிய பெளத்த சமயத்தவர்களாக இருந்தார்கள், இவர் சைவத்தை ஆதரிக்க வில்லை, இவர் தாழ்த்தப்பட்டவர்கள் என்ற கருத்தும்உண்டு (களப்பறையர் என்று அழைக்கபடுபவர்களே அன்று களப்பிரர் எனப்பட்டனர் என கருத்தும்உண்டு : ஆதாரம் விக்கி ) அதனால் அந்தணர்கள் இவர்களுக்கு முடி சூட்டப்படாது தவிர்த்திருக்கலாம்.
    அதனால் சோழர்க்கன்றி சூட்டோம் முடி என மறுத்திருக்கலாம்.

    2) அப்போது உள்ள அந்தணர்கள் காலம் (கி.பி 300 ) இப்போது உள்ள தில்லை வாழ் அந்தணரால் காலம் ( கி.பி 1800) கிட்டத்தட்ட 1500 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு பிறகு உள்ள
    இவர்கள் அதே அந்தணர்களா? (இப்பொழுது உள்ள அந்தணர்கள் கோவில் தங்களது என்று பொய்யாக வழக்கு போட்டதை எல்லோரும் அரிந்ததே). நிர்வாகம் சோழனுக்கு பிறகு பல பேரிடம் போய் 18ஆம் நூற்றாண்டில் இவர்களிடம் வந்தது, ஆதாரம் கீழே

    3) கி.பி 1844 முன்பாக இவர்கள் யாருக்கும் முடி சூட்டவில்லை
    மேலாக சோழனாரே தம்மை இரண்யவர்ம பல்லவன் வழியினர் என்று கூறுகிறார். 1844 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன் யாருக்கும் கட்டப்பட்ட ஆதாரமும் இல்லை.

    4) வெள்ளையர் காலத்தில் அந்த அந்த பகுதியில உள்ள ஜமீன்களே அங்குள்ள கோயிலுக்கு முடி சூட்டப்படும் உரிமையைப் பெற்றார்கள். அதர்க்கு உதாரணம் இப்பொழுதும் தஞ்சை கோவிலில் மராட்டிய சரோபோஜி வாரிசுக்கும், இன்றும் பட்டம் கட்டுவதை காணமுடிகிறது. இது போல தான் பிச்சாவரம் ஜமீன்களுக்கும்

    ReplyDelete
  7. கோயில் வரலாறு:

    கி.பி.14_ஆம் நூற்றாண்டுத் தொடக்-கத்தில் மாலிக்காபூர் நடையெடுத்த-போது நிகழ்ந்த கலவரத்தில் கி.பி. 1311 முதல் 76 ஆண்டுகள் சிதம்பரத்தில் பூசை இல்லை. நடராசர் கோயிலை விட்டு வெளியேறி ஒரு பெரிய புளியமரப் பொந்தில் இருந்தார். இரண்டாம் அரிகரனின் அமைச்சர் முத்தய்யத் தண்டநாயகன் மீண்டும் நடராசரைச் சிதம்பரத்திற்குக் கொண்டு வந்து பூசைக்குத் தக்க ஏற்பாடுகளைச் செய்தார். இதனைச் சோழ மண்டல சதகம் என்ற நூல் மிகத் தெளிவாகக் கூறுகிறது (பாடல் எண் 99).
    கோயில் கல்வெட்டும் இதனைத் தெரிவிக்கிறது.

    1610_ஆம் ஆண்டு லிங்கமநாயக்-கர் என்ற வீரசைவர் அளித்த உதவியால் கும்பகோணம் சைவ வேளாளர் சிவப்பிரகாசர் என்பவர் சிதம்பரம் கோயில் பரா-மரிப்பையும் நிர்வாகத்தை-யும் மேற்கொண்டார்.

    கி.பி. 1648 வரை துறை-யூர்ப் பாளையக்காரர் ரெட்டி-யார்களின் நிர்வாகத்தில் கோயில் இருந்தது.

    பீஜப்பூர் சுல்தான் படைத் தாக்குதலில் 24.12.1648 லிருந்து குடுமியாமலையில் 40 மாதம் நடராசர் இருந்தார். அங்கு பாதுகாப்புக் குறைவு ஏற்பட்டதால் நடராசரை மதுரைக்குக் கொண்டு சென்று 37 வருடம் 10 மாதம் 20 நாட்கள் வைத்திருந்தனர்.

    மராட்டியர் ஆட்சி நடை-பெற்றது. தஞ்சையில் ஆட்சி செய்த வீர சிவாசியின் மூத்த மகன் தன் சிறிய தந்தையார் மகன் சகசி உதவியோடு மதுரையி-லிருந்து நடராசரை சிதம்பரம் கொண்டு வர ஏற்பாடு செய்தார். 21.11.1684 (இச்செய்திகள் திருவாரூர்க் கோயிலி-லிருந்து மைய அரசின் தொல்லியல் துறை படியெடுத்த 4 செப்பேடுகளில் விரி-வாகக் கூறப்படுகிறது.

    21.1.1711 - வேளூர் அம்பல-வாணத் தம்பிரான் என்பவரிடம் நிர்வாகம் இருந்தது

    19 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டுத் தொடக்கம் முதல் 20 ஆம் நூற்றாண்டின் இடைப்-பகுதி வரை சிதம்பரத்தை அடுத்துள்ள பிச்சாவரம் சமீன்தார்கள் நிருவாகத்தில் சிதம்பரம் கோயில் இருந்துள்ளது.

    மூவர் தமிழ்த் தேவாரப் பாடலைச் சிற்றம்பல மேடையில் பாடக்கூடாது என்று தீட்சிதர்கள் தடுத்தனர். வடமொழிக்கு நிகராகத் தமிழ் இருக்கக் கூடாது என்றனர்.

    ஆதாரம் சொன்னவர்:
    புலர் செ.இராசு எம்.ஏ., பிஎச்.டி.,
    முன்னாள் தலைவர்
    கல்வெட்டியல் - தொல்லியல் துறை

    ReplyDelete
  8. Some research says that agamudayars are the descendants of cholas

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Indian confusion - Race, Caste, Clan & Surnames

Before you read, keep in mind that this was not written with the intention to divide the people. It was written with the intention to explain the meaning of each group. The write up on my journey in Bali is still in progress. I have to transfer some image files in order to upload them. So I thought of writing about the biggest confusion in the Indian Malaysian community. It is a sensitive one too. But clarification should be given. Else, when are we going to understand it? To my friends of other races who happened to read my blog, this will probably be enlightening as many may not be aware of our demographics. First of all, there are two main classification for us in Malaysia. Indian & Ceylonese. Many assume it to be a homogenous race like Chinese, but it isn't. The Chinese have many languages but they have a common language called Mandarin. They also have one writing script. This is what makes the over 1 billion Chinese worldwide as a homogenous race. Ancient Chinese

Dogs of Tamil Nadu

Pictures taken from Google. Credit goes to the various people who uploaded them. I apologise for not being able to identify the original owner of the pics. Whenever we speak of dogs, we tend to focus on the European breeds.  This is due to their popularity and demand. Unknown to many, India has about 88 native dog breeds. Six of these breeds are from the southern state of Tamil Nadu. Most of these dogs from Tamil Nadu evolved naturally. That makes them more suitable to the hot climate in the south. Furthermore, these dogs require less medical attention as their immune system is stronger, making them less prone to disease which are common among the European breeds. In Tamil Nadu, we can find breeds like the famous Rajapalayam, Kombai, Alangu Mastiff, Chippiparai, Kanni and Malayeri. Both the Alangu Mastiff and Malayeri are now extinct. Malayeri The Malayeri (hill climber) was a shepherd dog used by the tribals to herd sheeps. It was commonly found in the hills of Tamil Nadu-K

How To Find Your Kula Deivam?

*DISCLAIMER-Article written from a believer's perspective.  One of the most common questions I get from my readers is  "How do I find my Kula Deivam?" Kula Deivam is the patron deity of your lineage. Some families have more than 1 deity.  The easiest way to know your Kula Deivam is of course by knowing the ancestral village of your patrilineal lineage (father's side).  Usually the Kula Deivam shrines will be in the ancestral village. If the family has migrated to several villages, then the shrine will usually be in the main village where the family originated from. Knowing your caste or clan background is also helpful in finding out more about your Kula Deivam. For females, they have an advantage. They also inherit the Kula Deivam from their matrilineal lineage (mother's side). So if you are a woman, your mother's Kula Deivam (from her mother) will continue to be present throughout your life. If you are married, your husband's Kula Deivam (from