पुण्ड्रेतिहासः

Source: रविलोचनः, लक्ष्मीनारायणः, विजयः, विश्वासः

विकास-परम्परा

तटस्थैतिहासिकदृष्ट्येदम् उच्यते।
Simpler memes appear earlier.

• रिक्त-ललाटता
  • KS varadAchArya was very objective as usual - he plainly said “RShi-s did not wear a puNDra at all”
• भस्मना तिर्यक्-पुण्ड्रम् (just the ease of application!)
• ऋजु-तिलकम् - दीपशिखावत्, रेखामात्रं वा
  • एतद्धि प्राचीनविष्णुविग्रहेषु दृश्यते।
  • भस्म, हरिद्रा, कुङ्कुमम् इति द्रव्यं तत्र।
• उत्तरकलार्यपुण्ड्रम् समध्यमरेखम्
  • क्वचित् प्रथमं श्रीचूर्णं धृत्वैव ततः परितः परिधिम् इव पुण्ड्रं धारयन्ति स्म केचित्, तत्-प्राधान्यं ज्ञापयन्तः । (YT)
• U without the middle line क्वचित्।
• पश्चाद् एव “नासिकामूलं स्पृशेद्” इति भावे प्रचुरे जाते, पीठादियोजनम् आरब्धम् भाति।

Depictions

Perumal idols with such namams are very late. They are found on pillars and walls first. As well as in the sculptures in the walls and pillars. Such depictions show both namams. Hampi temples show the state of affairs before 1565 and we see both types in these temples..

Pre 1500 depictions are seen in hazara Rama temple and vitthala temple in hampi where you find majority of proper vdk namams in former and majority of tk namams in latter. But the other style namams are also seen in both places.

(Claim made by people like Sri Vaishnava Sri Krishnamachari that tk namam is the only original one is proven wrong by this fact.)

viShNu

There developed some smriti vachanas prohibiting shUnya-lalATa for all people, due to which viShNu images too started sporting a decoration.

Originally viShNu idols did not wear the 3-line Urdhva-puNDra - which would make sense since they symbolize his foot and so befit vaiShNavas instead.

Perumal idols with such are very late.

सच्चरित्ररक्षायां च -

ननु भगवदर्चावतारेषु दीपशिखाकारोर्ध्वपुण्ड्रस्य दर्शनात् “यच्छीलस्स्वामी"ति न्यायेन भागवतैरपि तथैवानुष्ठेयमिति चेन् न

Textual reference

गन्ध-पुष्प-प्रदान–अलङ्कार–ऊर्ध्व-पुण्ड्र–अञ्जन-आदर्श-धूप-दीप-आचमन-ध्वज-छत्र-चामर-वाहन-शङ्ख-चिह्न-काहल-भेर्यादि-सकल-नृत्त-गीत-वाद्यादिभिः अभ्यर्च्य,

इति रामानुज-नित्य-ग्रन्थे ॥

Old depictions

The diamond urdhvapundra used on devaraja of kanchi during one utsavam was apparently donated by achyutaraya as per inscription, iirc. So, the usage of such urdhvapundra on bhagavan Himself is definitely more than 5 centuries old - No doubt. We see such usages in hampi as well. But not in the chola and pandya murtis.

We see puNDras in lepakshi Dashavatara murals for instance (eg. Mahavishnu with abhayahasta) - These are datable to Achyutaraya if not slightly before- so post-1526, perhaps?

विश्वास-टिप्पनी

so, originally viShNu did not wear puNDra - which would make sense since they symbolize his foot and so befit vaiShNavas instead?

And interestingly there seems to have been another variant of the Urdhvapundra for men, which today is restricted to women. Eg. Lakshminarayana and Kurmavatara

i.e. the little shvetapundra crescent below (the diamondish mark for Kurma is usually made of javvadu or kasturi)

sampradAya-difference

सच्-चरित्र-रक्षायां वेदान्त-देशिकेन दक्षिण-कलार्येषु प्रसिद्धं शूलष्पुण्ड्रम् नोल्लिखितम् इति बहवः।

I would go to the extent of saying that both types were in use and did not even determine which sampradaya you belonged to - till late 1600s perhaps. That one type became an identification for a particular sampradaya and another for the other sampradaya - is a later innovation. There is no evidence for a pundra difference based on sampradaya in the 1400s/1500s.