Hindu Gods in Zend Avesta-3 (Post N0.10,645)


Post No. 10,645

Date uploaded in London – –    9 FEBRUARY   2022         

Contact – swami_48@yahoo.com

Pictures are taken from various sources for spreading knowledge.

this is a non- commercial blog. Thanks for your great pictures.

tamilandvedas.com, swamiindology.blogspot.com

Kavi Ushanas was one of the most celebrated poets of Rigveda. Two great Tamil poets also were from the same family. In the Bhagavad Gita Lord Krishna said that he was Poet Ushanas among the Kavis/poets . Kavi Ushans is in Zend Avesta as well.

Kava Us ( corrupted in Shahnamah as Kaikkaus) is Kavya Ushanas of the Vedas. He is one of the great heroes of the Iranians and believed to have been a ruler of Iran .

2000 year old Sangam Tamil  literature also had several poets cum kings. In Hindu literature Bhoja Vikramaditya was an all rounder. He was a scientist, artist ,a poet and an able ruler. Janakar was a philosopher cum ruler. In the same way Ushanas was a poet cum ruler. Moreover, Kavi meant one who could see far, who has a good vision. In short a visionary. Hindus , in post Vedic days identified Ushanas with Shukra, also known as planet Venus . He was the Asura Guru, which fits very well with the Zoroastrian religion.

Vedic hymns associated him with Indra. He called himself Kavya Ushana, R V 4-26-1 and is invoked by the name Kavi Ushna, RV 1-130-9.

This Kavya Ushna, meaning Ushana, son of Kavi, installed Agni as a high priest for mankind RV 8-23-17; he led the heavenly cows/clouds to pasturage RV 1-83-5 and made Indra’s iron club, by which the god killed his enemy Vritra.

In the Bhagavad Gita 10-27, Krishna identified himself with poet Ushanas.

If we know that the word Indra is only a title and not one person and if we understand that Asura had good connotation in the oldest part of Rigveda, description of Ushana as Asura Guru would not surprise us . Even in Tamil, the Kavya clan is called ancient ( Tol in Tamil) . The author of the oldest Tamil book called himself Tol Kavya; in Tamil, Kavya is changed to Kappiya. Another poet called himself as Kaappiyaatru Kaapiyanaar.

According to Mahabharata, Ushanas had four sons, who offered sacrifice to Asuras. In the Iranian legend he does not appear blameless; he is said to have been so proud and self-conceited as to endeavour to fly up to heaven, for which arrogance he was punished.

But his Asura connection is confirmed both by the Hindu and Parsi scriptures.


Danava and Danu

Both Danava and Danu, as enemies of God, figured in both the scriptures. Druj, as a demon or a bad virtue is also portrayed the same way in both the religions.

Danava, as enemies of God, in Yasht 5-73 and AV 4-24-2

In the Rigveda, it is often a name of the arch demon Vritra, with whom Indra is fighting.

In the legend of Tishtrya of Zend Avesta, some particulars are similar to Indra and Brihaspati in the Vedas. Tishtrya cannot bring the rain from the sea Vouru-kasha over the earth, if not assisted by the prayers of men. In the same way Indra cannot release the celestial cows/clouds from the rocky caves, without the assistance of Brihaspati, who is the representative of the prayers sent up by men.

Lord Krishna also explained this Prayer- Rain Link in the Bhagavad Gita

Men’s sacrifice only brings the rain…

Lord Krishna says,

“From food creatures come into being; from rain is the birth of food; from sacrifice rain comes into being and sacrifice is born of work.”—Bhagavad Gita 3-14

Dr Radhakrishnan compares it with

Manu 3-76 and RV 10-117-6

Manu says ,

“An offering cast properly into the fire /sacrifice approaches the sun; rain is created from the sun, from rain comes food, and from that progeny”.

Now we know these two scientific facts : 1.cloud seeding (Yaga smoke) helps raining; 2.Sun evaporates sea water and it becomes food and produces food.

In the next part I will show how Vedic Nabhanethishta is figuring in the Zend Avesta.

Source book- The Parsis by Martin Haugh, first published 1878 with my inputs.

To be continued……..

Tags- Kavi, Ushanas, Kavya, Tolkappiyar, Danava, Danu, Rain-Prayer link


There is an interesting story about Tolkappiar in the commentary written by Nachinarkkiniar (abbreviated as Nachi.)  Nachi was a Brahmin who lived in 14th century Tamil Nadu. He wrote commentary after commentary like the greatest commentator of India, Adi Shankara. Nobody has beaten Adi Shankara in Sanskrit and Nachi in Tamil. Nachi was a Tamil enthusiast and so he believed Tolkappiam was written even before the Vedas were classified in to four by Veda Vyasa. So he committed many blunders. In spite of his blunders, still he is held in high esteem by all the Tamil scholars for his sheer qualitative and quantitative Tamil commentaries.

(Kanchi Paramacharya Swamikal has pointed out the blunder committed by Nachi. without naming him in one of his lectures. See his 1932 lectures in Madras)

Tolkappiyar’s name was Trnadumagni and he was one of the 12 disciples of Agastya was the old story. Agastya’s wife was Lopamudra.

Now I give the version of PT Srinivasa Iyengar’s translation from his book “History of the Tamils”, page 224)

“ The worst myth is what what Nachinarkiniyar tells us in his commentary on the prefatory ode to the Tolkappiyam, called Payiram, that Agathiyanar asked his disciple, Trnadumagni, to escort the master’s wife, Lopamudra of Vidarbha to the Podhiya Hill. He at the same time warned his disciple not to approach his wife nearer than the length of four rods. When Trnadumagni and Lopamudra had to cross the river Vaigai, the river was in flood, and fearing that she would be washed away by the river, he extended his walking stick to her and asked her to cling to it. He thus isobeyed his master’s solemn injunctions, for in crossing the river, he was but one rod’s length from her.The irate master, when he heard of this, exclaimed, “ May you two not reach Swarga”. The pupil in turn said, “ As you have cursed us for no fault of ours, may you not reach svarga”. This legend was invented perhaps to explain the fact tht the Agathiyam has perished, where as the Tolkappiyam has not.”


My Comments:

People who wanted to date Tolkappiyar must remember certain facts:

  1. The Payiram says that it was launched at the court of Nilam Tharu Thiru Vil Pandyan in front of the teacher Athangottu Asan, who was well versed in the four Vedas.
  2. Tolkappiar’s Tamil is not very far from Sangam Tamil. So there was not a big gap between the two.
  3. Tolkappiayar mentined Vedic Gods Indra and Varuna as Tamils’ Gods. He also mentioned Dharma Artha Kama Moksha (Aram Porul Inbam Veedu).
  4. He also mentioned the pamyra flag of Balarama, Krishna’s brother.
  5. He used the word Adhikaram for the the three sections like Tirukkural and Sillpadikaram.
  6. If anyone argues any of the above as interpolation then we have to reconsider everything in Tolkappiyam. We are shaking the very foundations of Tamil. My guess is, if given into computer, his vocabulary will show that he belongs to 5th century or fourth century AD. No body dared to probe into this for the fear being dubbed as a Tamil Traitor.
  7. If he was proved to be a Brahmin belonging to Kappiya Gotra and his original name was Trna Dumagni or Trna Bindu, he must be the person who invented the special Tamil letter (247th in Tamil Alphabet known as Aytha Ezuthu). Trna Bindu means Three Dots=  Aytha Ezuthu of Tamil language.


Please read DID TOLKAPPIYAR  COPY SANSKRIT BOOKS? In the second part: London swami. Contact swami_48@yahoo.com



Ancient Tamil literature speaks of three Tamil Sangams (Tamil Cankam or Tamil Academies). First two Sangams were devoured by the sea during Tsunami catastrophes and the third academy was established at Madurai. We have enough literary materials to confirm the third academy. But the other two were doubted by several scholars because of some unbelievable claims. Even about the third academy there are some unsolved puzzles. Let us look at the facts first. The total years given for all the three academies are 10,040 years!


From the third and the last Sangam we have over two thousand poems composed by over 470 poets. This is grouped as Ten Idylls and Eight Anthologies and classified as Sangam Tamil literature. But according to the legend only 49 poets formed the third Tamil Sangam or academy. So we do not know who the academic members were and who just poets were. There was another Dravida Sangam established by a Jain scholar known as Vajranandhi in 470 AD. Was it part of the Tamil Sangam or was it a Sangam for Jain Tamil scholars? The later works like Tiruvilaiyadal Puranam talks about rivalries and fights among Sangam poets and Shiva had to come to the rescue of genuine poets. But this division was not mentioned in the old Tamil literature.


Existence of third Tamil Sangam in Madurai was confirmed by Appar Thevaram and Andal Tiruppavai.  Appar not only refers to Tamil Sangam but also refers to a popular episode of a poor poet called Dharumi and his clash with Nakkeerar.  Over forty of Sangam poets had the prefix Madurai in their names.

Two Tsunamis

Since there were at least two references to Tsunamis and four references to earth quakes in Sangam Tamil and post Sangam Tamil verses we can be sure of some natural catastrophes. The reason for the doubts about their existence came from the big number of kings, big number of poets they sponsored and the years the kings ruled. If we take those years as exaggerated or coded language then we can reconcile the contradictions.


Adirakku Nallar, the commentator of Tamil epic Cilappatikaram had given the geography of the Tamil Land that was devoured by the sea. He wrote that there were seven big areas and each one was divided into seven smaller areas. Seven is a sacred number for Hindus and this type of land division is already in Hindu mythologies. When the first Tamil Sangam at South Madurai went into the sea ,they moved south and established the second academy at Kapatapuram. When that was also devoured by the sea they moved further south and established the third Tamil Sangam in modern Madurai. During the second academy Tolkappiyam was written by Tolkappiyar. At present Tolkappiyam  is the oldest available Tamil work, which is grammar book. Scholars date it to first century BC or AD. Some kings and poets who were part of First (Murinjiyur Mudinagarayar) and Second Sangam wrote a few poems which are included in Sangam corpus of Tamil literature ( Panamparar, Kakkaipatiniyar).


Any student of linguistics will easily find out that their poems were not very old as claimed by the commentator. The language of Tolkappiyam and verses by Muda Thirumaran (King during second Tamil Sangam) and Murinjiyur Mudinagarayar (First Tamil Sangam)betray their age. The language was not very different from other Sangam poems. If we apply the thumb rule followed by Max Muller to date the Vedic literature (two hundred years for language changes) both Tolkappiyam and other Sangam works will be grouped under the same period. Tolkappiyar himself indirectly says that he compiled whatever materials available at that time. He adds in hundreds of places the journalist’s cliché “they say”, “it is said that”. This makes it clear that he was not the one who wrote every bit of the book, but it was only a compilation. If we go by his language we can’t put him back any further than first century. His colleague Panamparar wrote the introduction (prefatory verse) for his treatise. His language was not archaic either.


The commentator of “Iraiynar Agapporul” gives a full account of the three Tamil Sangams .In the background of this linguistic evidence and in the absence of any historical proof, the claim that the  First Tamil Sangam existed for 4400 years under  89 kings and 4449 poets composed poems wont command any credibility. It is the same story about Second Tamil Sangam which existed for 3750 years  under  59 kings and 3700 poets. The third Tamil Sangam existed for 1850 years.

The book Tolkappiyam was launched in the royal court of Nilam Tharu Thiruvil Pandya under the chairmanship of Athakottu Asan (Teacher of Athankodu, a village in Kanyakumari District) who was well versed in the four Vedas. According to legends both Tolkappiyar and the teacher Athankottu Asan were Brahmins. It wouldn’t surprise anyone because the highest contribution in Sangam corpus of 2000 + poems was from the Brahmin poets such as Kapilar ,Paranar, Mamulanar, Nakkiran ,Uruththiran Kannan (Please read my article “No Brahmins, No Tamil”). The name “Kapatapuram” (place of second Tamil Sangam) and the word “Sangam” are all pure Sanskrit words. Tolkappiyam has three chapters. Many scholars consider the third chapter to be a later addition.



Another word that betrays Tolkappiyam is “ADHIKARAM”. This Sanskrit word is used in Tirukkural of fourth or fifth century AD and CilappADIKARAM of same period (The Kannaki-Kovalan story happened in second century ,but the language of Cilappadikaram is definitely Post Sangam i.e after third century AD). Tolkappiyam is divided into three chapters and they are also classified as ADIKARAMS: Ezuththu/alphabet, Sol/word and Porul/worldly matters ADHIKARAMS. So we can put Tirukkural, Cilappadikaram and Tolkappiyam in the same period. But one must remember the date of writing and the date of events or grammar rules are different. Tamils very often get confused with the script and the language and the event and the actual date of putting it in writing.



To solve the puzzle of big numbers, one scholar suggested to divide the numbers by 37, saying that Jains were obsessed with this number.  Then we will get 120,100 and 50 for the first, second and third Tamil Sangam respectively. People can question this method. They will ask why 37 number. What has it got to do with the Tamil Sangam. Even when we do it, it won’t go well with the number of kings and poets, which is very high again.

Patanjali, the author of Mahabhasyam followed a simple solution when Ramayana said that Lord Rama ruled for several thousand years. He simply divided that big number by 365 and arrived at the figure of 28 years for Rama. Any one would believe that Rama ruled for 28 years. We may also follow Pathanjalis scientific method and divide the years 10040 by 365 and arrive at 270 years.

Another problem with the previous two Tamil Sangams is the books attributed to those Sangams. They are pure Sanskrit names such as Maa Puranam, Bhuta Puranam, Pancha Marapu, sikandiyam, Kuna nul, Thakadur Yaththirai etc. When the last Tamil Sangam didn’t have many Sanskrit names how come the previous one’s had so many Sanskrit names for the books would be a valid question.


I suggest the following solution; once again it cannot be explained logically:

If we divide the number of years of three Tamil Sangams by 37 we arrive at 120,100 and 50=270 years.  This is possible for three Tamil academies. If you add the kings number 89 (8),59 (5) and 49(4)  after dropping 9 we arrive at 17. If anyone asks why should we drop nine and add only single digits there is no logical answer. Since we believe that they have used coded language,  we do it.


First Sangam                Second                          Third

Years 4440             3700                        1850

Kings 89                 59                       49

(If we drop number 9 the total will be (8+5+4=17). 17 kings ruling for 270 years is acceptable to historians)

Poets 4449               3700                          449

(Though the number of poets is huge there is nothing wrong in accepting it as the total number of scholars in the country )

Academy Members 549        69                     49


By using the methods used by Patanjali and Maxmuller we can arrive at a reasonable figure for the three academies.( I have written another article about the Tsunamis and Earth quakes that affected ancient Tamil Nadu and the Tamil Academies).