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.