What does "Iyengar" mean?

[Guest guest]

Dear Madhuri and Mohan,

I said the word Ayyagaru is used specially to denote Sri Vaishnavas in our

Telengana parts of Andhra Pradesh by common folk. This is not used in the

Circar regions or Rayalaseema. But Iyengar no doubt is a word mostly used by

Tamil and Karnataka Sri Vaishnavas. There are many Sri Vaishnavas in Andhra

Pradesh whose origin should have been in Tamil speaking regions or Tamil

Kingdoms of yester years which is clear from their surnames like Kandadai,

Mudumbai, Nallanchakravathi etc and some of them use the title Iyengar even

though they do not speak Tamil at all. I agree that mostly the word Acharya

or Acharyulu is used at the end of their names in AP. Even the title "Chari"

as it is used in Tamil areas is not used in AP mostly.

The name "Ayya" itself should have been derived from ARYA in Sanskrit to

address an exalted person (not to be confused with word Aryas and Dravidas

as used by Christian and Marxist historians to divide and rule). In Telugu

we have many Sanskrit words called Tatsama Padas. They are referred to as

Prakriti which might also be words from Prakritam or equivalent Sanskrit

words. The equivalent colloquial words are called Vikrutis. For example

Bhojanam is Prakriti (the noun form of food or the verb form for the act of

eating) and the Vikruti is Bonamu in Telugu. Vikruti itself can mean

distorted. There are other words in Telugu which are not Sanskritised but

are akin to Tamil. The old Telugu and Tamil are very similar and should have

been sister languages.

Similarly the word Hrishikesa is made to sound Irudeekeysan in Tamil poetry.

Sri becomes Thiru.

Even the word "Ayyar" or "Iyer", which is the title used by Tamil speaking

Vaideekas, should be a distorted form of "Aryar".

I personally feel that the titles have more mundane origins rather than some

deep philosophical origins.

Regards,

Ramanujam.

 

 

 

>Madhuri and Mohan <mmsagar

>ramanuja

>ramanuja

>[ramanuja] What does "Iyengar" mean?

>Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:57:28 -0600

>

>The term "garu", as Sri Ramanujam and Smt. Jayasree have said, is a term

>of respect akin to "avar" in Tamil. However, while Ayyagaru is used to

>refer to Brahmins in general, Iyengar is not at all used by SriVaishnava

>families in Andhra Pradesh. In fact, the term Iyengar is used to refer

>only to Tamil speaking SriVaishnavas. Vaishnavas in Andhra generally

>refer to themselves and are referred to by others with the term

>Acharyagaru, or in more colloquial term simply as Charigaru. The only

>unique variation on this is the term "Jeeyengar", which is used by

>traditional families to address Jeeyars.

>

>Be that as it may, however, I think it is important to note that

>historical references do not limit the use of the term Iyengar just to

>Brahmin SriVaishnavas alone. Indeed, there was one Kandadai Ramanuja

>Iyengar of non-brahmin origin who was instrumental in convincing the

>Vijaynagaram kings to renovate and support Thirumala. He took the name

>of Kandadai from his acharyan, but Iyengar was a title that I personally

>feel could only have been conferred upon him because of his dedication

>to Sri Vaishnavam.

>

>adiyen Ramanuja dasan

>Mohan

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

SRIMATEH RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA

 

 

------------ramanuja, "Ramanujam Varada

Srinivasa Thatta" <acharyatvsr@h...> wrote:

 

 

> The name "Ayya" itself should have been derived from ARYA in

Sanskrit to

> address an exalted person (not to be confused with word Aryas and

Dravidas

> as used by Christian and Marxist historians to divide and rule).

 

 

> Even the word "Ayyar" or "Iyer", which is the title used by Tamil

speaking

> Vaideekas, should be a distorted form of "Aryar".

> I personally feel that the titles have more mundane origins rather

than some

> deep philosophical origins.

> Regards,

> Ramanujam.

>

----

 

Some more inputs from my little understanding of Tamil.

There is a sutra for Aryar in Tamil

"aaryar mlehchar nallOr enbathu idai-ch-cholaavaam/

aariyE kadhavu chozhan azhagodu mEnmaikkum pEr//

 

By this it is stated that Aryar are mlechchar, foreigners. Also means

good people. This is a clear indication to Aryar being different from

Tamil people. But the term has been used with 'aan' idai-ch-chol

(middle term)like aaryaan to denote people who are good natured. That

is in writing, it is not 'aaryanai' or 'aaryanukku. It is 'aaryAnai'

or aaryAnukku'. But this word has not been used anywhere to denote

Brahmins or vaidiks or learned persons. It is only to denote people

who did not belong to the Tamil country. This shows that they have

referred to only the aryans in the north of Vindhyas.

 

But there is a root word 'aari' in Tamil, which is the other name for

Chozha king and to any one who was great. Here also there has never

been any specific refernce to Brahmins.

 

In contrast,Aiyar has 'ai' root denoting chief or respectable person

(I have covered this in my previous mail on this topic)which when

connected with 'an' or 'ar' vighuthi to denote respect to the person

became aiyan or aiyar(like ai+an= aiyan. ai+ ar= aiyar)

 

Aiyan was originally (in olden texts)used to denote Lord Iyappan,

while resepctable persons were addressed to as 'ai' only. In course

of time, ai+ an = aiyan came into usage (poetry, prose and

colloquial) and used to denote anyone who was respectable and

deserved to be worshipped. That is how this word came to mean god as

well as learned Brahmins. Aiyan was used as aiya and aiyanE in

address in II person.

 

As you said, the term had been of mundane relevance and not of

philosophical, which was only later attributed (the 5 attributes).

This is proved by the 'punarchi' vidhi of Tamil grammar which has

rules for how words are to be joined. For numbers like 1, 2, 3 etc,

the rules are different. For instance if the term Iyengar were to

have originated from aindhu (no 5), it would have been ainkaar not

iyENgar, for the word aindhu becomes ain as in ainthiNAi (aindhi +

thiNAi), ainkurunooru (aindhu + kurumai + nooru), aimpaal (aindhu +

paal), aimpori (aindhu + pori) etc. But that the word has 'iyan'

shows that the derivative is not from aindhu (no 5), but from iyan.

 

If we were to say that it was aindhu + kaaryam or aindhu + angam,

then by grammar rule (which decides the way that such combinations

occur)it will be aingaaryam and aindhangam. Clearly, no 5 can not

have become the root of Iyengar. The 'an' vighuthi only makes the

difference.If it still be assumed that no 5 had been the basis, then

the other questions arise as to who coined this term and when -

which need to be answered.

 

Regards,

jayasree saranathan