The Bhikṣuṇī Maṇimēkhalai

45 - The Poem
was generally Buddhists alone that would regard it as of importance.
From literary tradition that has come down to us, it cannot be [11]
said that it was exclusively so. Tamil works bearing on literary
criticism sometimes quote from the work. Tradition has preserved
two verses of commendation from such different people as
Ambikāpati, son of the great poet Kamban, and Śivaprakāśasvāmi,
Saiva Maṭādhipati. This is an indication that the work is really a work
of merit and the approval of the discerning Tamil public that it is so is
in evidence in its inclusion among the five great kāvyas of Tamil. Is it
then a Śangam work?
Śangam works strictly so-called, are works presented to the Śangam
and approved by them. Later the expression came to mean no more
than that the works so described were of a sufficiently classical
character that, had they the chance, they would have met with the
approval of the Śangam. There is nothing in the work itself, nor is
there any tradition that this work of Śāttaṉār was presented to the
Śangam at all. The non-existence of a tradition like that may not
necessarily mean that it was not so presented, but on the evidence
accessible to us, we are not in a position to state that it was so
presented and received the approval of the Śangam. None the less, it
would be correct to describe it as a Śangam work for the reason that it
was a work that was produced in the age when the Śangam output was
perhaps the highest, and that it is undoubtedly so in point of quality
and eminence such as it is.
On the face of it therefore, and from the circumstances of its
composition, we have to regard it as a Śangam work, at least in the
secondary sense of the term. This position can be supported by an
examination of its literary character in comparison with other works