Talk:Cheraman Perumal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Salafs article assessment section, a WikiProject related to the Salaf. It has been rated - on the quality scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale. (add comments) |
 |
This article is maintained by the Kerala workgroup. |
|
More information about this article...
|
|
Is this the same as the Nayanar Saint Cheraman Perumal? If not, I suggest that there be a disambiguation page.
Whats going on here? It is almost a known fact now that the legend of Cheraman (or Cheran) Perumal converting to Islam is false. Even staying within the 'Kali Yuga' and the tenets of 'conventional history' while the existence of such a Perumal is not doubted, scholars do not know exactly when the Perumal lived as I have come across at least four possible dates ranging from before 400 AD to 800 AD. The legend of his converting to Islam probably arose as a justification of Islamisation of the region and the emergence of the Muslim Royal Family that is the Arakkal (which in came into being as a result of marriage between a younger Chirakkal Princess and an Arab some time in the Seventh Century of the Common Era). In fact this Perumal was in *ALL* probability a Hindu (Shaivite) saint and one of the 63 Nayanars of South India. I have deleted the last part of the article that says that he converted to Islam after meeting the Prophet and other such events. Also it is not exactly true that the Arabs were 'thugs' before Islamisation. The Malabar Coast and the whole of the Tamilagam region had been trading with all great cultures of known history from 3000 BC and with the Arabs long before the birth of Islam. They would not have been trading with them had they been 'thugs'.
- The phrase, "It is almost a known fact" doesn't make any sense. Assuming what is really meant by that is, 'it is a known fact', the question is: fact according to what, or who proved the legend false? (No one has proven it either way; wouldn't that be the real fact?)
- As for the article, it is supposed to be about Cheraman Perumal, but all it talks about is the legend! A proper article should speak about the person, then mention the legend, just as a legend, and yes, not as a fact. This article should be re-done. 192.30.202.18 18:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
