DAVID SHULMAN

M U R U K A N _ , T H E M A N G O AND E K A . M B A R E S V A R A - S 1 V A :

F R A G M E N T S OF A T A M I L C R E A T I O N M Y T H ?

Every important South Indian temple contains within its walls a sacred tree

(sthalavr.ks.a). The tree constitutes one element in a conventional set, which also

includes water in some form (a river, a temple tank, the sea) and an image or symbol

of the deity, usually fashioned from stone. Analogous to, and sometimes equated

with, the image (and the god) is the mountain found near some shrines, t Together

these elements create a microcosm - an 'ideal landscape' of water, rock and tree; -

enclosed by the temple walls. The walls serve both to isolate the idealized cosmos

from the surrounding realm of disorder and to contain within strict limits the

potentially dangerous power which is felt to inhere in the sacred site. Tile concept

of imposing limits upon powerful forces is basic to the temple cult; for the micro.

costa, to be complete, must contain representatives of the primeval chaos out of

which the known universe has emerged. Both tree and water belong in part to

Chaos. In the classical puran.ic cosmogonies, creation takes place against the back-

ground of the pralaya, the cosmic flood: Visn.u rests upon the great serpent Adis'es.a,

who floats upon the waters into which the universe has dissolved. The lotus which

rises from Visnu's navel and upon which sits Brahmfi, the demiurge of creation,

becomes the earth rising up from the waters. 3 In some myths land can emerge only

after a form of sacrifice: thus from the fat (medas) of Madhu and Kait.abha, slain

by Visn. u, the earth (merlin f) solidifies in the midst of the waters. 4 In Tamil temple-

myths, the entire process of creation takes place at the shrine, which inevitably sees

itself as the center or navel of the universe, the one point of land which is never

conquered by the flood: it is at this site that Brahm~ s or Siva 6 burns away the flood-

waters and produces the world, while the waters of the primeval deluge are retained

within the shrine in the reduced form of the temple tank or lake - a symbol o f

chaos subdued. 7 And just as below the lotus-world of Brahma there remain the

Serpent and the dark water, so the shrine is connected to the nether world, Patgla -

an area of death and disorder, but also oftfidden sources of fertility and power.

Almost invariably, the waters of the temple-tank or river are thought to well up

from this subterranean region. 8

The tree, too, emerges from PatNa. Its roots are sunk deep into the darkness of

the earth; hence the n~kakkal, the stones sacred to the serpent denizens o f the

nether world, are strewn about the base of the temple tree. Like the serpent, the

tree becomes a symbol of fertility: barren couples worship at the tree and its serpent

icons in order to be blessed with progeny. 9 Vitality proceeds from a transcendent

lndo-Iranian Journal 21 (1979) 27-40. 0019-7246/79/0211-0027501.40. Copyright �9 1979 by D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland, and Boston, U.S.A.

28 DAVID SHULMAN

source from the hidden reaches of P~t~la, or from the celestial worlds of the gods.

The latter case is often represented by the famous image of the inverted world-tree,

with its roots in heaven and branches belowJ ~ The inverted tree also appears in the

myths of Tamil shrines: At Tiruvaraficaram, for example, Vis.nu waters an upside-

down mull.i-shrub with a watering-can without a bot tom) 1 In both cases - whether

the tree is rooted in P~t~la or in heaven - the sthalav.rks.a represents the axis mundi, the vertical link passing through the center of the universe and connecting heaven

to the nether world.

The symbolic role of the tree in the temple thus embraces at least three related

facets: The tree is the axis rnundi at the center of the world; it is a natural symbol of

creation and fertility, of the growth of new life from a seed; and it is linked to the

life-producing yet terrifying realm of primordial chaos which survives under the

earth. This association is sustained by another aspect of symbolism - for the tree

also recalls the original chaos of the wilderness or forest 12 which opposes its disorder

to the regulated world of social life. The wilderness is conquered, sometimes

violently, 13 by the advance of civilization. Yet it survives both as a perennial source

of new life - a necessary testing-ground of kings and heroes (such as R~ma and the

P~n.davas) no less than the home of ascetics and sages - and as a focus of sacred

forces within the ordered and bounded universe of the shrine) 4

We shall be concerned here with one tree, in a single shrine, whose history has

been the subject of some controversy. Medieval Tamil poets associate the ancient

city of K~ficipuram with the mango tree. Thus 0t.t.akkgttar (12th century) says

that V;rabhadra was adorned with shoots from a mango tree (like that) of K~fici

(Kacci) when he set out to destroy Daksa's sacrificeJ s The reference is undoubtedly

to the mango tree inside the temple of Ek~mran~tha-Siva, the 'lord of the one mango

tree' (popularly known as Ek~mbare~vara). Today, this shrine forms together with

the temple of K~m~ksi--Devf the main focus of Saiva worship in K~fici. As in all

other South Indian shrines, the local name for the god is explained by a myth

incorporated into the sthalapur~na: Siva asked the Vedas (pal a rn~ mar ai) to take

the form of a single mango tree (tani rn~) at a spot to the west of the cremation- ground in Kgfici; Siva himself appeared as a radiant lihga at the foot of the treeJ 6

The mango tree which has thus given Siva his title is situated today in a courtyard

inside the second pr~k~ra. No pilgrim to the shrine fails to worship at this tree; its boughs are hung with miniature wooden cradles brought by childless couples who

have sought the help of the god. At the foot of this tree one finds a stone relief in

three sections depicting the major myth associated with this site, that of the goddess K~,mgksi"s worship of the lihga. The twelfth-century poet Cekkil~r tells the story

thus: Once when Siva was teaching P~rvati the rules of the Agamas, the goddess asked to be allowed to practise the prescribed form of worship (aruccan_ai), and

Siva sent her to his shrine at the foot of the mango tree in K~fici. She worshipped

MURUKAN, MANGO AND EKAMBARESVARA-SIVA 29

the lihga there until Siva, as an amusement (tiruvil.aiyd.t.til), 17 made the river Kampai

flood. DevL afraid the raging waters would sweep away her lord, embraced the linga, which grew soft in her embrace. The flood abated, but ever since the lihga at K~fici

bears the marks of Devg's nipples and the bracelets she wore on her arms. ts Other

versions make the goddess come to K~fici to expiate the sin of hiding Siva's eyes. ~9

The myth usually concludes with the wedding of Siva and Devi-(Ek~'nran~tha and

K~m~ks.f) at tttis shrine. 2~ The liizga under the mango tree is usually said to have

been fashioned by the goddess from the sandy soil on the banks of the Kampai. zl The Ekgmbare~vara temple is therefore known as the site of the 'earth-linga '22 and as such has a place in the series of five shrines linked with the five elements. 23

Cekkil~r's version of the above myth is probably the oldest complete account. 24

Cekkil~r is also apparently the first to mention the name Ek~mparam, zs which looks

very much like a Tamilization of Ekgmra-, with the cluster broken up (compare

Tamit Tg_rnpirapa_n_ni for Skt. T~mraparnf). Ek~nparam would then give us the

popular, pseudo-Sanskrit 'Ekgmbare~vara'. But we have no early attestation for the

title 'Ek~mran~tha'; 26 the Tevdram-poets (seventh to ninth centuries) invariably

refer to Siva at KSfici as 'Kampa_n' or 'Ekampan' and make no mention of the

mango. We might derive the Tamil 'Ekampa_n' from Prakrit eka + arnba, 'mango',

with shortening of the g before a group of consonants) 7 'Kampa_n' would then be

an abbreviation, and the original Prakrit title ('the one mango') would naturally

have been Sanskritized as 'Ekgmra-' and ultimately completed by the addition of

ndtha (to give us the 'lord of the single mango'). V. Ramanatha Ayyar, however,

has argued persuasively that the Tamil name 'Kampa_n' was derived from Prakrit

kharnbha, Sanskrit skambha, 2s 'pillar'. 29 This conclusion is supported by considerable

evidence on the site. There are, first of all, the three liiTgas situated in the corridor

outside the main sanctum of Ek~mran~tha and known as VO!]akkampa_n, Nalla

Kampa_n, and Ka!!akkampan, or, in popular Sanskrit, Svaccha Khambha, Bhadra

Khambha, and Cora Khambha. The purina tells us that these three lihgas were

installed and worshipped by BrahmS, Rudra, and Visnu, respectively, 3~ but their

original link with the pillar seems to be preserved in their names; moreover, there is

every reason to believe they form a set together with the main lihga in the inner

sanctum, which Cuntaramftrtti - perhaps deliberately establishing the relationship

between this image and the other three - calls P~riya Kampan, 'the great Kampa_n'. at

Nor are these the only 'pillar deities' at K~fici. The Vgli-ccaram lihga, which the

pur~n.a classes together with the three Kampans, 32 is a pillar over four feet high and

lacking the conventional yoni base. 33 Even more striking is the central importance ascribed to the dharrnastambha orja),astambha inside the shrine of the goddess K~m~ks.i-. 34 The association of the goddess with a pillar, still worshipped by all

pilgrims to the Kgm~ks.f shrine, recalls the Orissan cult of pillar deities, which survives in Brahmanized form in the Jaganngtha-Subhadr~ complex at Purl. 3s Indeed,

30 DAVID SHULMAN

so close is the resemblance between the cults of K~fici and Orissa in this respect

that one suspects an historical connection. We may note at least in passing that

some traditions connect the origin of the worship of Jagann~tha with a king of

K~fici. a~ All this lends support to the theory of Ramanatha Ayyar. 37 Even if 'Ekampan'

embodies an original Prakrit amba, 'mango', we can by no means ignore the

proliferation of pillar deities at K~fici. At the very least we have a congruence of the

mythological associations of the Skambha, the cosmic support (as in Atharvaveda

10.7), 3s with the image of the single mango tree. How did this association come

about? What is the specific significance of the mango tree at K~fici? Why is the

lord of Kgfici so intimately tied to this tree? Ramanatha Ayyar offers no solution

to this problem, simply assuming that "by the twelfth century, when the Periyapur- dnarn was composed, the presence of a mango tree closeby was used to add to the

importance of the legend" ?9 We believe, however, that the role of the mango in the

Ek~mbaregvara myth is not quite so much a matter of chance. Rather, the mango

at K~ficipuram belongs to an ancient, local tradition connected with the god Murukan.

The Murukan myths in Yamil are, in their present form, largely the product of the T6n.t.ai region and, specifically, of the city of K~fici. 4~ The basic text of the

Tamil mythology of Murukan, the Kantapur~.nam of Kacciyappaciv~cgriyar, is said to have been composed in the Kum~rakot.t.am shrine at K~fici, not far from the temple of Ek~mbaregvara; the poet celebrates the Thn.tain~t.u and the city of K~fici in the preface to his pur~.na. The Sanskrit ~ivarahasyakhan..da, upon which Kacciyappar seems to have based his poem, 41 was also almost certainly composed in K~fici. These two texts offer a late 42 but very complete account of the Southern

MurukaD myths, in which we may distinguish two main strands - one indigenous, the other derived from the northern traditions about Skanda, with whom Murukan

is identified. Those Tamil texts which describe Murukan's birth from the seed of Siva 43 and his war against the demon T~raka 44 may be seen as Tamil variants of an

all-Indian myth of Skanda familiar to us from the classic accounts in the Mahgtbhd- rata, the Rdm~yan.a, the mahdpur~n.as, and K~lid~sa's Kumdrasambhava. 4s The

specifically Tamil elements in the Muruka_n myths appear mainly in two major

stories, both of which are mentioned in early Tamil sources but seem to be entirely lacking in the northern tradition; these are the myths of the god's marriage to his

second and better-loved local bride, Va.l.fi, 46 and of his combat with the great demon

C~r (Crarapanman, Sanskrit Sfirapadma). 47 In the Kantapurgtnam these stories have pride of place. It is with the climax of the second myth, the fight against Cgr, that we shall be concerned here.

We begin with a brief summary of the myth as told by Kacciyappar. The demon Crlr ('Cruelty', 'Fear') 4s together with his brothers Cifikamukan (Sanskrit Si .mha-

MURUKAN, MANGO AND EKAMBARESVARA-SIVA 31

mukha) and T~rakan worshipped Siva and in this way won control over the universe.

They enslaved the gods, banished death, and in other ways tampered with the

workings of nature. The gods complained to Siva, who agreed to give them a son to

lead them against the demons. Murukan, born from Siva's seed, slew T~rakan by

piercing the mountain in which he was hiding; then, after a great battle fought in

the midst of the sea, he overcame Cfir and his demon hosts. As the sun set, Muruka_n

ascended his throne at Tirucc6ntOr, where he was worshipped by Bralun~ and the other gods. 49

Let us look more closely at the final stage of the combat between Murukan and

C~r. At the end of their long struggle, the two antagonists stand alone. As always

in the wars of the gods and the demons, both sides use magical powers; Cgr takes

on various terrifying forms (a raging flood, devouring fire, the Trim~rti, Death, a

huge mountain, a cloud, etc.), while Murukan appears to his enemy in an immense

form embracing the whole of creation. Crar is at first intimidated, but his yearning

for glory (pukaD drives him to fight on. He produces a mass of dark shadows, in

the midst of which he hides in a terrible, multiheaded form; Murukan sends his

fiery spear (vel) to dispel the darkness. Now Cgr makes his last stand - this time

as a mango tree situated in the center of the ocean (kat.a' n_at.uvan), its branches

stretching to the limit of the heavens and to the ends of the four quarters, its roots

reaching the tortoise which bears the earth on its back. This great tree, with golden

flowers and fruit radiant as jewels, casts its shadow over the entire ocean, the sky,

and the face of the earth (velaikan mul_utum vin. n. un taHltala varaippum ~Ilan tan. n. ilal parappi ninran_). As the tree sways, the stars fall from their places, mountains are

turned upside down, the seas flow together, and many creatures perish. Again the

spear leaves the hand of Murukan and, spitting flames which dry up the oceans, cuts

the root of the mango tree ( v ~ cur md muta'rat.intatu). But Cfir is not yet destroyed;

he resumes his original form, only to have his body cut in two by the spear. The

severed halves of the demon become a cock and a peacock; Muruka_n takes the cock

for his banner and the peacock for his vehicle, and the war is over. s~

Kacciyappar's account of this episode clearly echoes earlier Tamil sources. In the

Tirumuruk~_~_ppat.ai, for example, Muruka_n is praised as "he of the long fiery spear

which cut the root of C~r after he (Muruka_n) violently entered the cool sea which

surrounds the earth" (par mutir pan i kkatal kalahka vu] pukku cc~r muta' ratinta cut.ar ilai ndtu vel). sl A few lines later this same text refers to the god's cutting off

the root of the mango (ma muta'r_at.inta...) in order to overcome the demon

(avun.ar) "of the two great forms and the single great body" (iru per uruvin_ 6ru per iyakkai), s2 Commenting on these verses, the pseudo-Parimel~akar says that the

demon had one form but two names (per), Caran and Patumam; Naccin~rkk' i_niyar

suggests that he had both human and animal forms. The latter view would be closer

to Kacciyappar's version of the myth, in which C~r in the end loses his human form

32 DAVID SHULMAN

entirely but survives in two parts as a cock and a peacock. The commentators

generally identify the mango with Cfir, although Nacci_n~rkk' in iyar seems to know of another mango, a magical tree created by the demons to draw away half of their

enemies' strength, s3 Other texts leave no room for doubt: in Paripgqal 18.1-4, Ctlr

is the mango which enveloped the world (nirantu cu~_'ya rnd) and which was destroyed by Murukaln. s4

How are we to understand the role of the mango in this myth? There is, in the

first place, a link with the ancient Tamil tradition of the kat.imaram, the tutelary

tree which symbolized the safety and prosperity of the kingdom; the cutting down

of this tree by an enemy was a symbolic act of conquest and destruction, ss Thus

the Cera king C6fiku.t.tuval3 is said to have cut down his enemies' Kat.ampam tree,

which, like the mango-Cfir, may have been situated in the sea. s6 Muruka_n's

destruction of the mango would then be a fitting expression of his total victory

over his opponents. But there seems to be a deeper level of meaning to the myth,

which clearly recalls a number of well-known cosmological motifs. As described in

our sources the mango is evidently the cosmic tree, a form of the axis mundi stretching to the limits of the world and passing through its center; like the great

a~vattha tree under which M~rkap..deya finds the infant Vis.n.u during the universal

f l o o d s the mango in our myth is located in the midst of the sea. But in the Tamil

myth of Cfir, the cosmic tree is not a Tree of Life but a Tree of Death, a dangerous

embodiment of uncontrolled power which has upset the proper workings of the

universe. Like V.rtra in the Vedic creation myth, s8 it is a force opposed to order,

filling and blocking the space necessary for creation, a source of darkness and chaos.

This is the axis mundi in its negative aspect, represented by the tree associated with

primordial chaos, and, as Indra must kill Vrtra and split open the cosmic mountain with which V.rtra is associated, s9 so Muruka_n must cleave the mango tree. 6~ C~r's

subsequent metamorphosis into the cock and the peacock may even reflect the

ancient motif of the birds which surmount the cosmic tree. 6~ This element also

takes on a sinister aspect here, for in India both cock and peacock are linked with

death and the nether world. Cocks are said to have been born from the blood of

V.rtra; 62 Yama is given a cock by his father to pick the worms from his festering

foot. 63 The dark-necked iitikan, t.ha feeds upon the dead; 64 Sikhan..dinf, the man-

woman who causes the death of Bhrs.ma in the Mah~bhFtrata, is associated by her name with the devouring peacock. As master of the cock and peacock, Muruka_n

is thus in a sense the conqueror of death.

Seen in this light, Murukan's war against the mango belongs to a series of myths

in which a cosmic pillar - mountain or tree - is attacked. Murukan himself pierces

Mount Kraufica, where the demon T~raka is hidden. Similar instances of aggression

against the mountains are related of Indra, who is said to have cut off the mountains'

wings, and of the goddess Durg~, who in a Tamil myth from Tiruv~t.pokki cleaves

MURUKA_N, MANGO AND EKAMBARESVARA-SlVA 33

a mountain identified with her husband Siva. 6s One should also recall Krs.na's advice

to Arjuna in the Bhagavadgftd to cut down the cosmic Mvattha tree with its roots

above and branches below. 66 One more myth of a tree's destruction must be

mentioned here: Siva's burning of Kgma is sometimes depicted and celebrated as the burning and rebirth of a tree. 67 One variant of this myth turns up, in fact, in

the traditions of Ek~mran~tha-Siva at K~fici: According to the Vais.n.ava K~ficrm& hatrnya, Siva and Devi-quarrelled after a game of dice, and Siva cursed Devi to be

black, to have a terrifying form, and to have mis-shapen eyes. She worshipped

V~mana (Vis.n. u), her brother, at Kgfici, and he made her eyes beautiful and gave

her the name K~m~ks.f. He also advised her to build a linga of sand and worship it,

in order that Siva might come to marry her. While she was worshipping, Siva came

down to see her; he burned her with the fierce heat of the sun, and she called to

Vgrnana for help. V~mana created a mango tree to shade her, but Siva burned it

and the goddess as well with his glance. V~mana hastened to cool Devi-with rays of

nectar (sudh~) from his moon-form (p~rn. acandr~k.rti). He created a lake full of

nectar and made her bathe in it. The mango, although burned, grew and bore fruit

because of that lake, and Devf created the sand-lihga at its base and worshipped

Siva. 68 Here the mango tree, the site of Devi-'s seductive tapas, has taken the place

of Kgma in the classical acco~ants of Siva's marriage; just as Siva burns K~ma when

the latter wounds him with the arrows of passion (for Pgrvatf), here Siva burns

both his enticing, troublesome bride-to-be and the tree which her loyal brother

creates to shade her. Trial by fire precedes trial by water in this text, for the sequel

to this myth is the story of K~m~s.i-'s saving the sand-lihga from the flood. 69 The

mango described here is, of course, the same tree in the Ekgmrangtha shrine which

has given the god his name.

The burning of K~ma, or the tree of Kgma, is ultimately a creative act, a step

in the direction of Siva's marriage to the goddess and the birth of the divine warrior,

Skanda; its concomitant rituals, like the related fire-festivals in Europe, are essentially

rites of fertility. 7~ If, as I wish to suggest, the myths of Ekgmran~tha - both the

burning of the mango-K~ma and the myth of the sand-lihga - are in some ways

analogous to the Murukan myths from K~fici, then we might expect to find the

notion of birth or rebirth present at some point in the myth of C~r. The destruction

of the mango-demon by Muruka_n does, in fact, appear to have a creative aspect: as

in the Vedic V.rtra myth, vl the conflict ends with the liberation of light. The mango

has cast the worlds into darkness; by cutting it down, Murukan releases the light and restores the sun to its course, v2 Moreover, the myth alludes to the god's own identi-

fication with brightness in general and with the fiery sun in particular. The sun sets in the ocean as Murukan ascends his throne at Tirucc6ntfir (after the victory over

Cgr), and the gods worship their young warrior-king throughout the night. The

timing here is significant: sunset coincides with the conquest of night by the god

who is himself compared to the sun. 73

34 DAVID SHULMAN

In the myth of the killing of Vrta, the birth of light is accompanied by the release of the imprisoned, life-giving waters. 74 This element has no parallel in the

Tamil myth of Murukan, but its converse - the release of land from water - is

central to a series of myths closely allied to the Muruka_n-Cgr cycle. As we have

seen, the traditions of many Tamil shrines describe the creation of the world at the

sacred site, the center of the universe which, alone, is never inundated by the cosmic

deluge. At some sites this concept has evolved into the simple theme of surviving a

flood, and one well-known example links this theme with a form ofMurukan: Once

the sea rose against the ancient city of Maturai; Siva appeared to his son, the king

Ukkirap~n.t.iyan, in a dream and told him to throw his spear against the sea. The

king did as he was urged, and the sea became calm and lapped at his feet. Siva

(Tamilcc6kkan) appeared and erected a man..dapa on the site of the first two Tamil Academies (cahkam)] s This story is elaborated in the Tiruvi.laiy6t.arpurd.narn of

Paraficotimu_nivar, where the building of a home for the Cafikam is replaced by the

king's consecration to Siva of all the fields and villages between the wails of the

city and the retreating sea. 76 Here we see the focal point of the myth: not only does

the city survive the flood; it is in part (fields and villages, or the site of the legendary institution which symbolizes the beginnings of Tamil culture) created from the flood by the casting of the spear. Ukkirap~n.t.iyan is an incarnation of Skanda/Muruka_n,

the son of giva-Sundaregvara and Mrn~ks.[, the goddess of Maturai] 7 He attacks the sea with his spear just as he throws the spear against Cgr in the battle in the sea. Note that in the latter myth, too, the spear dries up the oceans on its way to the mango-C~. The same image occurs in another popular origin-myth in South India: Paragur~ma is said to have created the land from Gokarn.am to KanySkum~rg by throwing his axe at the ocean] s R~macandra also attacks the sea at R~megvaram in order to force it to create a land-bridge to Lafik~. 79

These stories of creation from the waters bring us back to our starting point. The

myth of Ek~mran~tha-Siva with which we began also describes a flood: the god sends the river Kampai 8~ to test K~m~ks.i-'s devotion; the goddess protects the lihga created from the sacred earth of K~fici. The flood is powerless against this symbol

of the god, which is anchored in the center of the universe by the love of the goddess.

As in other South Indian shrines, Dev~ assumes here the role of providing pratist.h~, the firm basis needed to establish creation in the face of invading chaos. 81 The shrine survives the flood; the center endures in order to become the site of Siva's marriage

to the goddess as well as the birthplace of their child, Skanda/Muruka_n, the slayer of Cfir. a2 Creation - the birth of the divine hero from the seed carried by the

waters - thus follows upon the flood, and the cosmogonic overtones of the Ekgmran~tha myth survive in the names of Siva at this shrine. The god is Kampan

or Ekampan, the single cosmic pillar at the navel of the universe, the lord of the mango tree identified with the pillar and with the chaotic forces out of which

MURUKAN, MANGO AND EKAMBARESVARA-SIVA 35

creation must emerge in the ancient myth of Muruka_n. Order is born from an

enduring substratum of disorder and death. In the sacrificial cult, a controlled act

of slaughter is intended to produce new life and strength for the participants. The

slaying of Cfir, like the sacrifice of V.rtra by Indra s3 and of Madhu and Kait.abha by

Vis.1)u, 84 permits the establishment of an ordered cosmos through the channelling

of violence. Pierced by the spear of Muruka_n, transformed into cock and peacock,

Car submits to the rule of the divine. The Ekgmran~tha myths discussed above

offer no explicit parallel to this theme of the creative sacrifice, ss By implication,

however, Kampan is himself incarnate in the mango-pillar with its roots in the

realm of darkness and violent power, just as in other shrines and folk traditions s6

the deity is made to appear as a tree. Murukan, it is interesting to note, becomes a

vehkai tree at a critical moment during his wooing of Val.li; s7 and Pgrvati-nourishes

the sprout of an aYoka tree as a substitute for the infant Skanda. 8s Here the creative

force of the tree-image is stated bluntly by the goddess herself: "A tree is equivalent

to ten sons", s9 Moreover, the mango has a special place within this range of metaphor.

The Tortoise-Prince of Tamil folklore is born when his mother swallows the pit of

a mango-fruit. 9~ From the ocean of milk emerge four mango-fruits covered with

amrta 91 - symbolic allotropes for the seed/sun born from the sea.

To sum up: The Muruka_n myths of the T6n.t.ai region provide a background for

basic elements of the Ekgmbare~vara cult at K~fici. As in the story of Chr, the mango

of Ek~mran~tha is the axis mundi , a vehicle for powerful, potentially dangerous

forces: in one myth Siva burns the tree just as Muruka_n cleaves the mango-Car. The

ocean, the water of chaos in which the mango-demon stands, becomes the flooding

river which threatens the shrine. The release of light or the sun from the engulfing

darkness is now the birth of the fiery seed of Siva, which in most versions of the

myth of Skanda's birth is said to burn the waters just as Muruka_n's spear dries up

the seas. It seems possible that parts of an ancient Tamil creation myth, now lost,

have survived in a number of later Tamil myths; the mango in the stories of Car

and Ekampan embodies the central strand of the lost cosmogony. Let us note in

conclusion that Murukan is himself known at Kfffici as M~vat.ikkantar, 'Kantar

(Skanda) at the foot of the mango'. 92 In the main myth of his shrine there, the

Kumffrakott.am, the primeval a~vattha tree in the ocean under which M~rkan..deya

finds the infant Vis.n. u 93 is replaced by the mango tree at K~_fici. 94 Did an original

cult of an indigenous Tamil god, a youthful warrior and creator, master of death

and lord of light, lose its primacy at this site to the Brahminized worship of Siva

together with his powerful and seductive local bride Kgmgks.F?

Hebrew University, Jerusalem

36 DAVID SHU LMAN

NOTES

See, e.g., Arun?lcalapur~.nam of Ellappanayi_n~r,(Madras, 1907) 2 .1-88; Tiruv~tpokkippur~nam of Kamalainakar Vaitti_n~tatecikar, Madras, 1911, 10-11. 2 See Jean Przyluski, La Grande Ddesse: Introduction a l'btude comparative des religions, Paris, 1950, pp. 60, 64-65 . 3 Bhhgavatapur?tna, Bombay, 1905, 3.8-11. Cf. Heinrich Zimmer, Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization, Princeton, 1972, p. 52. * M-6rkan..deyapurh.na, Bibliotheca Indica, Calcutta, 1862, 81.68-76; Hariva.m~a, Varanasi, 1964, 3.13.1-29; Khlik~tpur~na, Bombay, 1891, 64.1-48; and cf. Virutthcalapur~tnam of /q~nakkfittar, Madras, 1876, 1.12-39. s Tiruvdrr_iyftrpur~.nam of Tiruv6rriyfir N~nappirak~car, Madras, 1869, 2.1-36. 6 C~k{djttalapurhnam of Arun~cala kkavirgyar, Madras, 1887, 2.15-41. Here Siva dries up the waters with his third eye. Clk~_li is known as Tonipuram, 'city of the boat' , because Siva and Pgrvati came there during the pralaya in a boat (ton t) fashioned from the pranava. 7 See Tiruvdrr_iy~rpurh.nam, loc. tit. (the flood-water becomes a lake to the north-east of the lihga ).

The river is often called the P~thlagafig~, as at Sri~aila (Arion Rosu, 'A la recherche d'un tirtha ~nigmatique du dekkan m~di~val', BEFEO 55, 1969, p. 36) and Tiruv~lafikgtu (Vat.hranyam~h{ztmya, Natukkaveri, 1898, 11.12); and cf. Tiruppaifi~ilipur~nam, Madras 1927 4.7-9; Tirukkantiy~rppurhnam Tirupp~ttirippuliy~ar, 1939, 7 (p. 21); Tah/~purim?lh~tmya, India Office Library, London, Burnell Manuscripts, San.10 492a, fol. 1. 9 The symbolism of procreation is sometimes made explicit by the 'marriage' of two trees. The tree's association with ideas of fertility and growth may explain the description of the ideal South Indian city as a tree: cf. D. Sridhara Babu, Kingship: State and Religion in South lndia, Inaugural Dissertation, G6ttingen, 1975, p. 140. ~o On the inverted tree, see Ka.thopanis.ad 6.1;Bhagavadgft6 15.1-4; F. B. J, Kuiper, 'The Bliss of A~a', Indo-lranian Journal 8 (1964), 1 1 6 - t 18; F. D. K. Bosch, The Golden Germ." An Introduction to Indian Symbolism, The Hague, 1960, pp. 73-74: J. C. Arapura, 'The Upside Down Tree of the Bhagavadg~th', Numen 22 (1975), 131-144. ~ Tiruvarahcarattalapur{ln. am of Arun~calakkavir~yar, Tirukkovalhr, 1925, 6.3-48, 7.3-39; W. Francis, South Arcot District Gazetteer, Madras, 1906, p. 344. ~ Cf. Kampan's suggestive phrase, maru'taru va_nattin_, in Ir{~m{~vat?~ram 1. 208. ~ As in the case of the Khan..dava forest burnt by Agni with the assistance of Arjuna and K.r.sna according to Mah~bh?~rata (Southern Recension), ed. P. P. S. Sastri, Madras, 1931, 1.213-218. ~ See Nancy E. FaN, 'Wilderness and Kingship in Ancient South Asia', History o f Religions 13,4 (1974), 1-15. ~ Takkayhkapparani, K{7.likku kk~tli k~r_iyatu, Madras, 1971, verse 625. An anonymous verse of unknown date collected by Mu.. Ir~tkavaiyankhr (PFruntdkai, Maturai, 1935-36, no. 46) also refers to the mango at K~fici. ~6 K~hcippurhnam of Civafi~_nacuv~tmikal K~nScipuram, 1964, 62.2-5. ~ Or, in other versions, in order to test Devi's devotion: of. Skandapur?zn.a, Calcutta, 1959, 1.3.1.4.21-22; K~hcippurhnam 63.366. ~ PFriyapurhn. am of Cekkil~, ed. A_rumukan~tvalar, 5th ed., Madras, 1916, 4.5.62-70 (Tit ukk ur_ipp ut t ~n.. t. anfiya n~r pttrh .ham). ~ K?thcippurh.nam 63.20;34; Skandapurh.na 1.3.1.3.7-72;Khmhks~vilhsa Bangalore, 1968, 8.13-25. The blinding of Siva is the most common cause of Devi's descent from heaven to a Tamil shrine: see D. Shulman, 'The Murderous Bride: Tamil versions of the Myth of Devi and the Buffalo-Demon', History o f Religions 16, 2, (1976), 120-146. z0 Cekkil~tr (verse 67) also describes Siva's appearance after the flood as manavh.la nar kolam, a bridegroom.

M U R U K A N , M A N G O A N D E K A M B A R E S V A R A - S I V A 37

21 Cf. Cilappatikilram of I!afikovat.ika.1, Madras, 1970, 21.6-10, where a woman embraces a sand image of her husband on the bank of the K~ver~ to protect it from the flood. 22 Prthvi-lihga. This lihga is o f ten referred to as saikata, 'made o f sand' (e.g. Kdmgzks. fvilizsa 8.81); according to the Brahmin priests of this shrine, the sandy soil at the foot o f the mango is intended by bo th epithets. Tiruv~rfir also claims to possess the prthv~-lihga. 23 The others are Kg.latti (wind), Tiruvannfimalai (fire), Tiruvfinaikkfi (water), and Cidambaram

24 The story also appears in the ArungzcalamgthFztmya of the Skandapurfina (1.3.1-2), which consists o f at least two separate Sanskrit composi t ions o f uncertain date. The K~mfik.sf my th is there the prelude to the m y t h o f Devf 's war with Mahis~sura at Tiruvann~malai. The 9th- century (?) poet Cuntararnfirtti seems to refer to the story in his Tevglram, Tarumapuram, 1964, pat#cam 61.10. 2s Pdriyapurgm. am 4.5.127. 56 Note, however, that the Pallava poet-king Mahendravarman (c. 580 630) makes his Kfip~lika at K~fici a 'dweller in Eamvva'; the Sanskrit chgzygz, of unknown date, reads here ekglmravizsf. See Mattavil~saprahasana, ed. N. P. Unni, Trivandrum, 1974. p. 51. z7 Thus R. Dessigane, P. Z. Pattabiramin, et Jean Filliozat, Les l~gendes r de Kgl~eipuram, Pondich6ry, 1964, p. xvi. z8 The grammarians o f course derive khambha from Skt. stambha; see R. Pischel, Comparative Grammar o f the Prakrit Languages, 1879, reprinted Delhi, 1957, p. 214. 29 V. Ramana tha Ayyar, 'Development o f the Name and Composi t ion o f a Divine Symbol at Kfificf', Adyar Library Bulletin 29 (1965), 144--176. The prefix e- is, in Ayyar ' s view, to be connected with Skt. tejas; for reasons which will become apparent, we prefer the suggestion of Suniti Kumar Chatterji (ibid, p. 164) which leads back to Skt. eka, 'one ' . 30 K#hcippurh.nam 62.83-88. 3~ Cuntaramf~rtti, TevZzram 61.3. The poet refers to Nalla Kampan and KalJakkampan in verses 5 and 10 o f this patikam. Ki. VS~ Jakann~tan in his notes on these verses (Cuntaramhrtticuvfi. mikal tevdram, Tiruppanant~.l Srf Kgtcimatam edition, Srivaiku.n.tam, 1958, pp. 2 5 0 - 2 5 1 ) identifies the two Kampa_ns with the above-mentioned lihgas. Ramana tha Ayyar (op. cit., p. 163f.) and Ci. Arunaivativel Mutaliyfir, the commen ta to r on the Tarumapuram edition o f the Tevfiram, prefer to regard the appearance of the two titles here as an accident. ~2 Kghcippur~am 62.102. 33 Ayyar, pp. I 4 9 - 1 5 0 . 34 See Pu. Mfi. Jayacgntilnfita_n, Sr; kglmglksi tevi, K~ficipuram, 1975, p. 39, where this pillar is associated bo th with K~,mfiksf's victory over Bhandakfisura/Bha.n.d~sura the central my th of this shrine - and with Safikara's t r iumph over his rivals. Safikara plays a major role in the tradition o f the Kfim~ks~ shrine: see V. A. Devasenapathi, K~makot.t.am, Nglyanmglrs, and,4di Sahkara, Madras, t975 , pp. 2 9 - 8 1 . 3s See H. Kulke, 'Some Remarks about the Jagann~tha Trinity ' , in Herbert H//rtel and Volker Moeller (ed.), Indologen-tagung 1971, Wiesbaden, 1973, pp. 1 2 6 - 1 3 9 . 36 See the materials collected by K. C. Mishra, The Cult o f Jagannatha, Calcutta, 1971. The resemblance does not end with the goddess and the pillar: there is also a shared mot i f o f brother-sister incest (K~m[~ksfvildsa 8.13-133, where Devf mistakes her brother Visnu for her husband), and the cus tom of preserving the wooden image o f Varadar~ija-Vis..nu at K~fici in the temple tank recalls the Orissan tradit ion o f wooden images in the sea. Cf. Bani Kanta Kakati, Visnuite Myths and Legends, Gauhati , 1952, p. 91. Orissa also produced an Ekdmrapurfl.na. 3~ His a t t empt to establish a further link between the pillar and the Buddhist Triratna-imagery is, however, less convincing in the context o f the Kfifici shrines. We may also rule ou t the interesting suggestion o f J. C. Wright (in a review of Dessigane et. al., Bulletin o f the School o f Oriental and African Studies 29, 1966, 6 2 7 - 6 2 8 ) that the names for Siva at Kfifici developed from an original .Ek~mba, 'having one mother ' . It may be tempt ing to relate the symbolic role o f the breast in the Kfimfik.si my t h narrated above to a lost m y t h o f incestuous marriage;

38 DAVID SHULMAN

but the variation of Ekampan/EkS, mpara-, which Wright cites in support of his theory, merely reflects the continued use of the earlier (E)kampa_n alongside Ekfimranfitha and its derivatives. 38 Recall, too, the use of skambh or stambh in Vedic cosmogonic passages, and cf. B. L. Ogi- benin, Structure d'un mythe v~dique, Paris and the Hague, 1973, pp. 74-83. Note that already in PurangTn_~ru, Madras, 1894, 169.11, kampam means 'post' or 'pillar'. 39 Ayyar, pp. 169-170. 40 See Kamil V. Zvelebil, The Poets o f the Powers, London, 1973, p. 131. 41 See Kamil Zvelebil, Tamil Literature, Leiden, 1975, pp. 221-222. The (sivarahasyakhan.da is known from manuscript collections (e.g. India Office Library, London, San. I0 1431 and San. I0 238) and has also been published under the title (sr~skgmdamahg~purglna, ed. Anantar~ma Tik.sitar, Celam, c. 1963. References to this work are to the printed edition. 42 Kacciyappar probably lived sometime between the 15th-17th centuries. The (divarahasya- khan.da is almost certainly post-Choir. 43 E. g. KantapurfLnam of Kacciyappaciv~cSxiyar, Madras, 1907, 1.1-13; Kdhcippur~.nam 25 ; TirumayilaittalapurgTn.am of Amurtalifikattampirfin, Madras, 1893, 9; ParipgTtal, ed. Franqois Gros, Pondich~ry, 1968, 5.26-54. 44 Kantapurh.nam 1.18-20. 4s MahgTbh~rata (Southern Recension) 3.183-188; Vgtlm[kirg~mglyana ed. K. Chinnaswami Sastrigal and V. H. Subrahmanya Sastri, Madras, 1958, 1.36-37. For further references and discussion, see Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty, Asceticism and Eroticism in the Mythology of (Siva, London, 1973, pp. 93-110. 46 Narri.nai (with commentary by A. Ngr~yanac~ni Aiyar), Madras, 1956, 82, line 4; Kantapuriz.nam 6.24.1-200. 47 j. Filliozat in his introduction to the Tirumurukg~r_ruppatai (Un texte de la religion Kaumglra, Pondich~ry, 1973, p. xxii n. 3) suggests that Sfirapadma is the Mahi.sfisura slain by Skanda in the Mahgzbhglrata. But even if this identification is correct - and the single verse cited in support of this hypothesis is hardly conclusive - we would still have to explain the very different role allotted to the demon by the two tradition~ However inclined we may be to seek Vedic sources for South Indian traditions, there is no avoiding the fact that the Muruka_n of Tamil has a strikingly different character from the northern Skanda, and that the myths of Va.lli and C ~ are without true parallels in the northern traditions. 48 See T. Burrow and M. B. Emeneau, A Dravidian Etymological Dictionary, Oxford, 1961, p. 176 (2250). 49 KantapurgTnam, kgm. t.am 2-4; (sivarahasyakhan. .da, khn. .das 2-4. 5o KantapurgTnam 4.13.392-499 Sivarahasyakhanda 4.35.1-70. sa Tirumuruk~_~_ppat.ai, lines 45-46. This much-loved text, which is ascribed to Nakkfrar and included in the 1 l th tirumurai of the Tamil Saiva canon, is dated by Filliozat in the 7th century (pp. cit., p. xxxviii) but may in fact be considerably older. Cf. Paripgzt.al 5.1-4; Cilappatikhram 24, pgtt. t.umat.ai 7. s2 Tirumuruk~rruppat.ai, lines 57-61. s3 See the quotations from the commentaries and discussion in Filliozat, pp. 74-75, and Gros, p. 276. 54 Cf. also Patir__ruppattu (with commentary of Auvai Cu. TuraicS.mippiUai), Madras, 1950, 2.1.5-6. s5 N. Subrahmanian, Sangam Polity, London, 1966, pp. 84-85; George L. Hart, III, The Poems o f Ancient Tamil, their Milieu and their Sanskrit Counterparts, Berkeley, 1975, pp. 16-17. s6 Cilappatikgzram 25.1. C~fikut.tuvan is said by the commentators to have fought against pirates who made their strongholds in the sea; in this way he 'drove back the sea' (kat.al pirakk' ot.t.iya c~hkutt.uvan_). See the colophon to the patikam of the 5th decade of Pati_rruppattu, and 46.11-13, 42.21-23 in the text. But the verses never refer to the pirates explicitly, and there remains a strong possibility that the C~fiku.t.tuvar 3 legend is an allotrope of the early Muruka_n myths; cf. the discussion of the Maturai flood myth below.

M U R U K A N , MANGO AND E K A M B A R E S V A R A - S I V A 39

s7 Mah{zbh~rata (Southern Recension) 3.160.87-89 Matsyapur~zna, :mandMrama Sanskrit Series no. 54, Poona, 1909, 167.13-67; cf. Kathglsaritshgara, ed. Durg~pras~d and K~in~th Pfindurang Parab, Bombay, 1930, 26.1 ft. s8 See W. Norman Brown, 'The Creation Myth in the Rig Veda', JAOS 62 (1942), 85-98; J. Gonda, Les Religions de l'lnde, L" V~disme et hindouisme ancien, Paris, 1962, pp. 74-75; Ogibenin, pp. 81-83. s9 .Rgveda, London, 1849-1864, 1.32.1-15. For the ancient image of the serpent and the cosmic mountain, see F. B. J. Kuiper, 'Cosmogony and Conception: A Query', History o f Religions 10 (1970), 108. 60 Note that the slain V.rtra is compared to the branches of a tree cut down by an axe' (.Rgveda 1.32.5). In later versions V.rtra continues to present a threat by swallowing the universe.and making off with the five elements: cf. Mah{lbh~rata 5.9.61-63. And just as Indra must be cleansed (sometimes by water) of the evil of slaying his enemy, so Muruka_n's spear is bathed in the celestial Gafig~ before returning to the hand of the god (Kantapur~nam 4.13.491), and Murukan himself is occasionally required to expiate the act of slaughter (see Tiruvarahearattala- pure.ham 6.25). ~ See Eva Baer, Sphinxes and Harpies in Medieval lslamic Art, Jerusalem, 1965, pp. 56-68; Willard Johnson, 'On the .Rg Vedic Riddle of the Two Birds in the Fig Tree (RV 1.164.20-22) and the Discovery of the Vedic Speculative Symposium', JAOS 96, 2 (1976), 248-258; and the South Indian bronze of the Tree of Life, reproduced in Roger Cook, The Tree o f Life: Symbol o f the Centre, London, 1974, plate 19. InMBh 3.186.40 the cock is agift to Skanda from Agni; Parip{zt.al 5.59-60 makes Indra the donor of the peacock. These gifts are sometimes attributed to Vi.snu: see the discussion by Gros, p. 196. 6z Mah{zbh~rata, ed. Vishnu S. Sakthankar et. al., Poona, BORI, 1933-1959, 12.273. 63 Matsyapur~na l l . 64 MahYlbh?zrata (BORI) 1.85.6. Cf. D. D. Kosambi, Myth and Reality." Studies in the Formation of Indian Culture, Bombay, 1962, p. 75. 65 TiruvMpokkippurgnam 10.1-45. 66 Bhagavadgit{z, 15.1-4. Note that Tirumuruk~r_ruppat.ai 59-60 describes the mango-Cfir as kavil i.nar, usually taken to mean 'having low-haI~ging branches'; this would suit the later versions of Kacciyappar and the Sivarahasyakhan.da and is probably correct, but kavil can also mean 'to be turned upside down'. (See the TamilLexicon, Madras, 1934, s.v.) The phrase could thus conceivably refer to the inverted branches of the cosmic tree; but one looks in vain for such an image in the later literature of Murukan. 6~ See O'Flaherty, pp. 158-162; J. J. Meyer, Trilogie derAltindischer Mdchte und Feste der Vegetation, Zurich, 1937, I, pp. 98-100, 106-132, 204--206. Cf. V~manapur6.na, ed. Anand Swamp Gupta, Varanasi, 1967, 6.94-107. 6~ Kfzhc~m~h?ltmya, K~cipuram, 1906, 23.3-35, 24.1-56. 69 Ibid., 25.1-24. See the version of Cekkil~r cited at the beginning of this article. 7o Meyer, loc. cit.; O'Flaherty, loc. cir. ~a A. A. Macdonell, VedicMythology, 1897, repr. Delhi, 1971, p. 61; Brown, pp. 96-97. 72 From which C~r had earlier deflected it: Kantapur~nam 2.17.3. The earlier episode in which Murukap's spear disperses the shadows created by C ~ (see the summary above) thus adumbrates a major element in the myth's climax. 73 7~'rurnurukflrmppa.tai, lines 1-2. 74 Macdonell, p. 59; Brown, loc. cit. 7s TiruvMavhyut.aiy?zr tiruvi.laiy~t.arpurhnam of P~rumpa_rlappuliyfirnampi, ed. U. Ve. C~minSt' aiyar, Madras, 1906, 21.1-9. 76 Tiruvi.laiy~t.~pur{z.nam of Paraficotimunivar (with commentary by Na. Mu. Ve/aka.tac~mi N~tt~r), Madras, 1965, 13.1-20. ~7 Tiruvi.lai. 11.19 plays on this identification. v~ K. P. Padmanabha Menon, History ofKerala, Ernakulam, 1924, I, pp. 17-20; Raghuvam. ga

40 DAVID SttU LMAN

of KNid?tsa, Bombay, 1891, 4.53 and 58; Kanniygzkumarittalapurh.nam of Cahkarangvalar, Maturai, n. d., 18.66-75; P&iyapurhn.am of Cckki_lfir, 2.6.1; SkandapurgTn.a 6.68.6-16; for the prototype of this tradition, see MBh (BORI) 12.49.53-60. 79 Skandapurgma 3.1.2.54-96; Cetupurgm.am of Nirampavalakiyatecikar, ed. Arumukanfivalar, Madras, 1932, 5.27-41. In this myth, however, the sea holds its own. 80 Is this name also to be derived in some way from skambha? Oris the local tradition correct in linking it with kamp, to tremble (kampa, earthquake, cataclysm: cf. Kampaharegvara, the name for Siva at Tirupuvanam in Tanjore District)? 8~ See J. Gonda, Loka: Worm and Heaven in the Veda, Amsterdam, 1966, pp. 31-32. 82 K~hcippurgTljam 25.1-45. a3 On the slaying of V.rtra as a sacrifice; see Ogihenia, pp. 122-123. 84 See note 4 above. 8s The theme does, however, appear clearly in the closely related myth of Bhan.dfisura, which is attached to the cremation-ground (~ma~itna) near the Ekgunbaregvara shrine. See Upateca- kgmt.am of Ko_neriyappan~valar, Madras, 1913, 30.1-72; (Sivarahasyakhand. ka 7.74.1-60; KiThcippuril .na m 61.1-23; Khmglks~vilg~sa 12.17-47. ~6 Cuc~ntirastalapurhn.am of Muttam'flkkavir~tyar, Tirun~lveli, 1894, 7.17-18; Wilber Theodore Elmore, Dravidian Gods in Modern Hinduism, Nebraska, 1915, pp. 81-82. 87 Kantapurhn. am 6.24.65-81; Tiruccgnt~rppurg~nam of Vgnrim~lai kkavirficar, Jaffna, 1907, 8.11. ,8 MatsyapurgLn a 154.506-512. 89 Ibid., and cf. Tiruv6~3aikkgppurgl.nam of Kacciyappamu_nivar, Srirahkam, 1909, 11.1-53, 12.91-92. 90 Mata~akhmarg~jankatai, Madras, 1975, 4 (pp. 72-74). Precisely the same motif explains the birth of the three main characters in a LiflgSyat folk version of the Cilappatikhram story: M. Frere, Old Deccan Days, 2nd ed., London, 1870, pp. 250-252. 9~ Sring~gegaksetramglhhtmya, Madras, 1935, 8. One of the mangoes becomes the tree at K~fici. Gan. ega and Skanda each receive one. Brahm~ squeezes the juice of the last over the lihga at N~ge~aksetra (Tirnpp~tfi!~ccaram, Tanjore District). 92 TiruiSg~3acampanta cuv~mika!, Tevilram, Tarumapuram, 1953, introduction, p. 116. 93 See the first two references cited in note 57 above. 94 Khhcippurhnam 58.27-44.