Since Muruga won over Sooran here & did Jayanthi Abishekam, this town was called Jayanthi.
Jayanthi became Sendhi & Sendhi became Thiru-Sendhoor overtime.
Why did this town become a center of conflict b/w invaders?
Because of its location.
It was just 9km south of Kaayalpatnam, where Dutch had opened their factory in 1645.
However, Portuguese who were a force to reckon in the 17th century, captured Kayalpatnam and forcibly departing the Dutch to Ceylon by 1648.
Thirumalai Nayak, the Madurai ruler, favored the Portuguese (Parangiyar) over the Dutch (Ulaandhargal), which enragëd the Dutch.
They decided to capturë Tuticorin, a Portuguese stronghold & put forth a plan.
Tiruchendur would be their base camp for carrying out this expëdition.
On Feb 1649, a fleet of 10 vessels set sail from Galle under Gov.Maetsuycker.
The expeditionary force setup a base of operation at the Tiruchendur shore temple .
They fortified the temple & used it as a garrison. The Gold & silver of the temple was freely lóóted by the soldiërs.
Stone images in the temple were mutilated by iron hammers.
The gopuram was attempted to be tórched.
Von Der Behr, a sóldier has documented in his travel accounts that:
"When they left the temple, it looked more like a pigsty (an enclosed area where pigs are kept) than a temple"
M. Rennel, French author of "A Description, Historical and Geographical of India" writes:
"The Dutch halted in the temple & on leaving did their best to destroy it by fire & by a heavy bombardment.
But they only partially succeeded & the tower defied all their efforts."
A truce was achieved, and the Dutch decided to take away the idols of Shanmukhar and Natarajar from the temple assuming they were made of gold.
Their attempt at melting it proving futile, so they tried to carry them away by sea to Ceylon.
What happens next is based out of oral traditions of the local legend.
The sea suddenly grew boisterous, and rocked the ship violently.
Frightened that the idols had caused the bad weather, the Dutch sailors dropped the murtis into the ocean.
The loss of idols was informed to Vadamalaiyappa Pillaiyyan, a local administrator of the Nayak at Tirunelveli.
A great devotee, Pillaiyyan was sorely affected & ordered for a similar idol to be made in panchaloka.
After 4 years, Pillaiyyan had a dream that changed everything.
Muruga himself appeared on his dream to instruct that the idol was to be found at the spot where a lemon would be floating & marked by the overhead circling of a Garuda.
Miraculously, Pillaiyyan recovered the original idol from the spot mentioned & reinstalled it in 1653.
One version mentions that the idols were purchased back from Dutch for 1 lakh reals.
This is clear: Tiruchendur was bereft of its deities for 4 years from 1649-53
Venrimaalai Kavirayar has documented it in a song:
"These 4 years, Tiruchendur looked like a sky without its moon"
Today in Tiruchendur, Soorasamharam will be recreated in grand fashion with lakhs of public in attendance.
Interestingly, in this samhara, Sooran is not k!llëd but transformed.
Sooran conceals himself as a tree & is cut by Muruga's vel, to transform him into a peacock & rooster.
The peacock becomes his vehicle &the rooster becomes his flag.
Muruga has slain the ego, the arrogance that is so prevalent.
The ego is now transformed into subservient vehicles of the divine.
May Skanda perform it in the heart of every devotee eternally.
If you liked this thread, please tag and share it with your friends.
Follow @labstamil for more such well-researched content.
RT the first tweet in this thread to help us reach more audience:
When things you don't want to happen, happens, how do you respond?
Do you fatalistically blame it on destiny and accept it, or take initiative to overcome it?
What is the guiding principle in the fate vs free will debate?
What did Sri Rama do in such circumstances? (1/8)
In the epic's defining moment, Sri Rama who was about to be crowned as King, was instead sentenced to exile for 14 years.
Lakshmana was outraged by the injustice of this request, but Sri Rama calmly considered the exile as the will of destiny.
Kambar writes - "நதியின் பிழையன்று நறும்புனலின்மை; விதியின் பிழை"
"it is not the fault of river to dry up when rains fail. Similarly, Kaikeyi isn't at fault for fate's doing", says Sri Rama.
Here Lakshmana is for free-will, to not passively accept injustice, and to fight for the kingdom which was Sri Rama's right.
But Sri Rama defers to destiny and accepted the extraordinarily difficult situation that circumstances suddenly placed upon him and agreed to be exiled.
I've read Ponniyin Selvan cover to cover thrice, and this is my biggest takeaway from it.
It was a decision made by the hero Arulmozhi, inspired by his Suryavanshi ancestor Sri Rama. And it has a relevant lesson for all of us to learn in current political climate.
A🧵(1/8)
BG: Arulmozhi is the more popular prince among public, and they wanted him to be king, even when his elder brother was the crown prince.
This popularity constantly unsettles him, as he wants to do the right thing. And he wants to go beyond public opinion and shape it.
He is influenced by 2 tales - the sacrifices of Shiva he hears from priests at Thiruvarur Thyagaraja temple, and Ramayana.
Rama left for the forest at night when citizens were asleep & also informs his charioteer to take it along a circle so that they can't retrace his path.
2. "My dear Anna, shall I compare thee to Thiruvalluvar or to Marcus Aurelius?"
3. "Like Socrates was punished in ancient times, fake cases, imprisonment is the punishment of our times.
When they checked the pulse of A Raja during 2G case, it was normal. Infact it was the investigating officers who were pulsating with a rapid heartbeat!"
Sati was the most forceful issue created by the Evangelical-Utilitarian alliance to validate Brit rule in India.
The missionary-Brit nexus inflated the # of incidents to horrific levels for politics.
Cholas have documented Sati giving a much needed nuance to this topic (1/8)
The colonial term Sati to refer to this practice is incorrect . Sahagamana/anugamana is the right Indic term.
Anugamana was a rare and sporadic practice in ancient Thamizhagam.
Vaanavan Maadhevi (mother of Rajaraja) chose to do it after the passing of Sundara Chola.
There are several conditions for it to be permitted in Chola tradition:
1) the wife must be in perfect physical and mental health 2) it should be purely voluntary without external influences 3) the close family members must request her to reconsider until the final moment
Kadhalikka Neramillai - a lighthearted film on the surface that espouses the Drav question of - "Is marriage really necessary?"
Directed by Kiruthiga Udhayanidhi, the film has a puratchi pudhumai pen at its helm, and yes she is not a random girl, but a TamBrahm.
An analysis:
This rom-com has Shriya Chandramohan as its central character - she has a BF, registers her marriage months before the engagement (WHY?), drinks, has premarital fun, doesn't know to wear a saree, smokes after a breakup etc.
In summary, a modern day career-centric, jolly good woman. No issues. But is she a "random" modern day woman? Nope.
In egalitarian EVR land where there are no c@ste surnames, the film portrays her family as TamBrahms with no hesitation whatsoever.
Shriya finds days before her "official" engagement that her legally wedded husband is cheating on her.
So, in a case of role reversal, she drinks, and tries smoking in an attempt to move on, like "men". Her father is sorta cool with it. Her aunt (played by Vinodhini) jokingly hints at having "properly" smoked before.
Just moments before there's a deliberate scene where the aunt calls Shriya's father as "Athimber" (a word used by Ds to m0ck TBs)
But why this depiction of community is necessary? Read on.
An asset can be at risk due to both internal vulnerabilities and external threats.
In this analogy, D is the threat - the bad actor who attacks the system.
The comm's flaws (giving up tradition, embracing liberalism/modernity, poor parenting etc.) are the vulnerabilities.
While no doubt both internal and external risks have to be addressed, is it really the right time to discuss vulnerabilities when the system is under attack?
Some say Ds shouldn't be blamed for a systemic flaw - this is such a self-flagellating view that also underestimates D.