Mr.Sharmalan Thevar, who belongs to kallar community have wrote several blogs claiming that sivagiri is vannikutti maravar zamin and the vanniyar name used by pallis is just a title, not a caste.
For his false claim Mr.Murali Naicker have given a strong reply in his blog. But he removed those reply. So i am posting those reply here. And too I will seperately put a article in my blog regarding it with this reply.
Thanks to Mr.Murali Naicker.
His Reply follows,
=====
Reply 1 :
======
Mr. Sharmalan Thevar, the Sivagiri Zamin is absolutely "Vanniya Kula Kshatriyar" by caste. If you have any doubt in this regard, please go and verify the "Community Certificate" of "Vigneswara Raja", in which it is clearly mentioned that he belongs to the caste of "Vanniya Kula Kshatriyar". But at the same time, his mother community certificate says that she belongs to "Maravar". You must know first of all, how this was happened, leaving your false and fabricated writings.
The descendant of "Sivagi Zamin" family Mr. Saravana Pandian, Veera Pandian, Jagadiswara Pandian and his brothers are good friend of mine for the past one decade. Myself along with the eminent archaeologist/scholar Thiru. Natana Kasinathan Sir and the above said my friends conducted a research about the caste of "Sivagiri Zamin". In that we find, upto the last zamin was "Vanniyar" by caste. Thereafter, in the year 1952 the "Sivagiri Zamindar" got love marriage with the "Singampatti Maravar zamin" women by name "Parvatha Vadhani Nachiyar" and from that time onwards, the drastic "U" turn has happened in the Sivagiri Zamin caste. Thereafter, the "Sivagiri Zamin" heirs forcibly got marriage alliance with the "Maravar Zamin". It is cristal clear from our records that "Sivagiri Zamin" are "Vanniyar" by caste.
At the time of interview with "Vigneswara Raja" by the then "NDTV Hindu News channel. The caste question was raised. The "Vigneswara Raja" unable to answer the same and contacted his relative uncle "Singampatti Thirthapathi Raja". The great noble man said such "Mappillai neenga vanniya Kula Kshatriyar, pallavar vamsaminu solunga, nanga ungaluku ponnu koduthirukom"
At the time of our research, the "Sivagiri Zamin" madam " Smt. Balakumari Nacchiyar" at first hesitated and then told the fact that, "My husband is vanniyar by caste only, very few are living in sivagiri", She further told that, "You please write history that they were upto 1950 "Vanniyas" but now "Maravas". The eminent scholar Thiru. Natana Kasinathan Sir, put a question there itself. Madam caste name to be taken from the husband's line and not from the mother's line. Madam told with little smile, Sir our "Maravar" community from mother's line.
Still now the other vanniya zamins such as "Alagapuri". "Ezhariyampannai", "Thenmalai" and "Samusigapuram" all are "Vanniya Kula Kshatriya" by caste. At the time of interview with them we put the question about their caste. The "Thenmalai" old madam instantly told we are "Kshatriya Kula Vanniyar". They are telling in this fashion only even "Alagapuri Zamin" madam also. When we asked whether you are from the line of "Maravas" ? The old madam of "Thenmalai" got anoid and stated, who said we are "Maravas" we are "Kshatriyas". She further told, now-a-days their relatives are getting marriage with "Maravas" is common. The "Maravas" are willing for marriage with Vanniyas without any hesitation since Vanniyas being "Kshatriyas". We tried to stop but being a "Very Minority Community in the South of Tamil Nadu" we are unable to do so. However, the Alagapuri Madam told they are totally strict about their caste and they go for marriage alliance only with "Vanniyas" and not with "Maravas". The Alagapuri madam further told, their ancestors were the chief guest during the "Vanniya Kula Kshatriya" Maha-sabha meeting.
When the press meet held at Chennai a few years before. One of the descendants of "Sivagiri Zamin" Thiru. Selvaraj told to the "Press" that. they are "Vanniya Kula Kshatriya" by caste.
Reply 2 :
=====
Mr. Sharmalan Thevar, you must understand one thing that, the history is fact based on evidence only. Your sayings are mere theory based and has no value at all. Your sayings that, "In some inscriptions Palli refers to vanniyas, that does not mean every inscriptions refers to Palli". You kindly show, where the "Kallars", "Agamudaiyars" and "Maravars" referred in "Cholas inscriptions" as "Vanniyars". You know one thing there is no sort of proof that the above three caste people served as "Chieftains", "Feudatories" and even as "Warriors" in the Cholas Army. The later period is almost different even "Sudras" and "Below Sudras" attained Kingship. First of all the above said three castes does not belongs to "Kshatriya Clans". Only "Vanniyas", "Surutiman", "Nattaman" are "Kshatriyas. There is a possibility to rule the "Mutharaiyar Community" as "Kshatriyars". You must under this basic rule. The "Kallar Community" people came to "Tanjore" and its adjoining areas during the period of "Nayakas" and "Marathas". Still they used to go to south of Tamil Nadu for their family deity (Kuladeivam) worship. This strange practice existing with "Kallar Community" for many centuries. More over, there is no single evidence to rule them as "Warriors" in the Chola Army. Other than "Vanniyar Community" if any people used/using the name "Vannian/Vanniar" means, that is up to them, which has no value since they don't have any evidence during chola's period. More over, we people (Vanniyas) might have given the authority to use our name for honorary purposes.
Your view on "Sivagiri" is highly irregular. During 1919, H.R. pate, I.C.S. specified in the "Thirunelveli Gazetter" (Page 416 - 419) that, the "Sivagiri Zamindar" belongs to the caste of "Vanniyars" and they are to distinguished from the sect of people who call themselves as "Vannikuti Maravar". Even "Edgar Thurston" has quoted that, the Sivagiri, Ezhayiram Pannai and Alagapuri belongs to Vanniyar Caste. Mr. Orme, in his "History of the Military Transactions of the British Nation in Indostan" (1861 A.D) has said that, the "Sivigiri Zamindar" belongs to "Vanniyar Caste" they helped "Muhammed Usuf" to conquer Tirunelveli in the year 1775 A.D. Even, we have the "Thuthukudi Court Judgement papers" of the year 1920, which says the "Sivagiri Zamindar" belongs to "Vanniyar Caste". The present descendants of "Sivagiri Zamin" such as "Saravana Pandian", "Vira Pandian", "Jagadeesvara Pandian" are very good friends of mine. If you say such stories to them, they will definitely treat those as invalid.
The "Maravar Community" people mingled with "Sivagiri Zamin" during 1952 A.D. only. Upto last "Zamindar of Sivagiri" were "Vanniyars". The "Parvatha Vadhani Nachiyar", who belongs to "Singampatti Zamin" married with Sivagiri Zamindar in the year 1952 and thereafter, they switched over their matrimonial alliance with other "Maravar Zamindars". This is fact. Even, the present Zamindarini of "Sivagiri" Mrs. Balakumari Nachiyar, agreed to Former Director of Tamil Nadu Archaeology Thiru. Natana Kasinathan Sir, that his husband belongs to "Vanniyar Caste" and she belongs to "Maravar Caste". We both went and interviewed the respected madam. Further, the "Sivagiri Zamindarini" requested to my guru Thiru. Natana Kasinathan Sir, that henceforth kindly quote "Sivagiri Zamin" as "Maravar" from 1952 onwards, since they adopt the traditions from "Mothers Line descendants" (Penvazhi Samudhayam).
Reply 3 :
======
Your "Kallar community" people continuously saying that, you people are having "Thousands of titles". Whether all those titles assumed by your community during imperial cholas times. If yes, kindly show the inscriptional evidence for the same.
Is there any inscriptional evidence proving "Kallar community people" as Chieftains/Feudatories during imperial cholas times. If yes, who are they ?
Inscriptional evidence of "Nadalvar", "Senapati" and other high ranking officers of "Kallar community people" during imperial cholas period.
Is there any inscriptional evidence proving "Kallar community people" participated in the war during imperial cholas period ?
List out of the Temples constructed by "Kallar community people" during imperial cholas period with inscriptional evidence.
What are all the donations/gifts rendered by the "Kallar community people" during imperial cholas times with inscriptional evidence ?
From which time onwards your "Kallar community people" using the title "Thevar" ? Whether from imperial cholas times ? If yes, kindly show the inscriptional evidence for the same.
Is there any rights in the ancient temples from Cholas times onwards to till now ?
What are all the rituals and other customs being followed by "Kallar community people" at the time of marriage ? Whether it is like the same of "Kshatriyas" ?
I think, your community people never participated even as solider during imperial cholas times. Since, there is no inscriptional evidence available in S.I.I and A.R.E inscriptions.
Reply 4 :
=====
The Kamudi Temple Case reveals Vellalas, Maravars and Nadaras as Sudras/below Sudras
==============================
=========================
The temple of kamudi in the Madura District within the Zamindari of Ramnad was founded; by whom it was founded; whether it was a public or private temple; who made the endowments, if any, and when; by whom the trustee was appointed; or when it began; whether as a public temple, if at all, it was within the control of the Board of Revenue before 1863 and if so, when the control was diverted. What one gathers from the findings and observations of the Courts in India and the Privy Council in the said case is that it was assumed to be a caste village temple.
"The shanars admittedly have a temple of their own in Kamudi dedicated to Subramonia, Badrakali," etc. said their Lordships of the High Court.
"First of all, the appellants (Nadars) as a matter of fact, worship by themselves in a temple of their own" observed the Privy Council.
"The suit was brought by Rajha Mr. Bhaskara Sethupathi, the Zemindar of Ramnad and as such the hereditary trustee of, among others, the temple of Kamudi in the Madura District in which siva is worshipped under the form of Meenatchi Sundareswara. The defendants were residents of Kamudi and belonged to the Shanar Community. They were sued as representing the community under the procedure laid down in Section 30 of the Civil Procedure code." Act XIV of 1882).
The subordinate Judge came to the following among other conclusions:
"I find the custom set-up by the defendants of the right of entry into the plaint temple is not supported by those that are best competent to speak on the matter. It has not been proved that the defendants being Nadars are distinct and separate from the general community of Shanars. The hereditary occupation of the Shanars is proved, by Census records and contemporary writers beginning from the early years of the Century to be the cultivation of the palmyra tree and the coconut palm and the extraction and manufacture of their juice. The local usage also supports the statement that Shanar Community hereditarily follow the occupation of the manufacture of the palmyra toddy. The rulers of worship in the plaint temple prohibit the entrance of persons engaged in that occupation within its wall. I also find that they belong to a class which, under custom and shastras, are precluded from entering the plaint temple which is governed by the ritual prescribed in the Saiva Agamas adopted as authoritative and current in the Madura District."
The learned Judges of the High Court, Benson and Moore J.J. who heard the appeal preferred by the Nadars (against whom the suit went) observed; (in upholding the judgement of the subordinate Judge).
"The Shanars, as a class, observed their Lordships of the High Court in their Judgement, "have from time immemorial been devoted to the cultivation of the palmyra palm and to the collection of its juice and the manufacture of liquor from it. Their own local traditions connect them with the toddy drawers of Ceylon whence the Tiyans or toddy drawers of the West Coast, are also supposed to have immigrated. There are no grounds whatever for regarding them as of Aryan origin. Their worship was a sort of demonology and their position in general social estimation appears to have been just above Pallas, Pariahs and Chucklies (who are on all hands regarded as unclean and prohibited from the use of Hindu temples) and below that of Vellalas, Maravars and other cultivating castes usually classed as Sudras and admittedly free to worship in Hindu temples. In process of time many of the Shanars took to cultivation, trade and money lending and today there is a numerous and prosperous body of Shanars who have no immediate concern with the immemorial calling of their caste. In many villages they own much of the land and monopolise the bulk of the trade and wealth. With the increase of wealth they have, not unnaturally sought for social recognition and to be treated on a footing of equality in religious matters."
In dealing with the following issue their Lordships of the High Court said:
"Whether there are Shastras prohibiting the defendants from entering and worshipping in the plaint temple ?"
"The subordinate judge has examined this question at length and his conclusion is that, according to the Agama Shastras which are received as authoritative by worshippers in the Madura District, entry into a temple where the ritual prescribed by these Shastras is observed, is prohibited to all those whose profession is the manufacture of intoxicating liquor and the climbing of palmyra and coconut trees. The inference to which the Shastras would lead is that Shanars are prohibited owing to their hereditary caste occupation from entering the Saivite temples. No doubt many of the Shanars have abandoned that occupation and have won for themselves by education, industry and frugality, respectable positions as traders and merchants and even as vakils and clerks, and it is natural to feel sympathy for their efforts to obtain social recognition and to rise to what is regarded as a higher form of religious worship; but such sympathy will not be increased by unreasonable and unfounded pretensions and in the effort to rise the Shanars must not invade the established rights of other castes. They have temples of their own and are numerous enough and strong in wealth and education, to rise along their own lines and without appropriating the institutions or infringing the rights of others, and in so doing they will have the sympathy of all right-minded men and, if necessary, the protections of the Court."
The Privy Council, to whom an appeal was taken by the defeated Nadar defendants observed:
"Both Courts in India have decided against the appellants.
===============================================
Reference Book : Right of Temple Entry, by P. Chidambaram Pillai
Changanachery, K. Parameswaran Pillai, (Nagercoil)
B.A., B.L., M.L.A.,
Retired High Court Judge
Travancore
Publishers : MJP Publishers
Chennai 600 005
===================================================
Replied on December 4, 2014 at 5:34pm Via Facebook
link --> Reply to Sharmalan Thevar by Murali Naicker regarding Sivagiri Vanniya Zamin
====================================================================
External References --> Sivagiri Zamins are Vanniyar or Palli according to Edgar Thurston
====================================================================
External References --> Sivagiri Zamins are Vanniyar or Palli according to Edgar Thurston
