Is Thirukkural a jainist work ?
Sundara Pandian
---------------------------------
I like to start a discussion on this
topic.
It is debated among Tamil scholars
whether or not Thirukkural is a jainist
work, but no conclusion has been drawn
to my knowledge.
It is my opinion that ThirukkuraL is
a jainist work and I will write my views
in my future articles on this topic.
- Vengaimaran.
------------------------------------------------
[ Posted for Vengaimaran : s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ]
------------------------------------------------
m vishnu
> Is `thirukkuraL' a jainist work ?
> ---------------------------------
> whether or not Thirukkural is a jainist
> work, but no conclusion has been drawn
> to my knowledge.
> It is my opinion that ThirukkuraL is
> a jainist work and I will write my views
> in my future articles on this topic.
> - Vengaimaran.
> ------------------------------------------------
> [ Posted for Vengaimaran : s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ]
>------------------------------------------------
Of this, n~aa. thEvanEyan, the author of 'thirukkuraL thamiz marapurai'
writes:
'ulahiRku oru muthalvan vENduvathillaiyenRum, illaRaththinum thuRavaRam
ciRanthathenRum, mahaLirkku veedupErillaiyenRum, meyyuNarviRku
inRiyamaiyaatha 'sukkilath thiyaanam' ennum paramavoozham ikkaalaththil
nihazvathillaiyenRum, kooRum camaNak koLhaihaLai oppuk koLLaamaiyaal
thuvaLLuvar cainarallar'
Translation: Thiruvalluvar is not a Jain because, he does not accept
the following Jain beliefs:
(1) A Lord is not necessary for the world
(2) Renounciation (thuRavaRam) is better than house-holder-ism (illaRam)
(3) Women does not attain Liberation (veedupERu)
(4) A necessary component of attaining Liberation, 'white mediation',
is not present nowadays. (?? read the Tamil version above, I am
not sure, if this translation is correct)
n~aa. thEvanEyan is a well known Tamil scholar. He wrote his 'thirukkuRal
thamiz marapurai' to refute, what he calls, 'aariya naccuk karuththukkaL'
of parimElazahar's TK urai.
Meenan Vishnu
Note: (n~aa as is in 'n~aayiRu' == sun)
Srini Pichumani
>In article <920716175...@cec2.wustl.edu> s...@cec2.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian) writes:
>> Is `thirukkuraL' a jainist work ?
>> ---------------------------------
>> a jainist work and I will write my views
>> in my future articles on this topic.
>> - Vengaimaran.
>> ------------------------------------------------
>> [ Posted for Vengaimaran : s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ]
>>------------------------------------------------
>
>thamiz marapurai' to refute, what he calls, 'aariya naccuk karuththukkaL'
>of parimElazahar's TK urai.
>
>Meenan Vishnu
>
>Note: (n~aa as is in 'n~aayiRu' == sun)
There is no definitive word on this. Every generation of scholars has
held differing opinions on this. The rhetoric of these scholars
itself is an accurate pointer to their biases.
For example, scholars like G.U.Pope and Caldwell and others wanted to
see Christian influence in the Tirukkural; given their Victorian
outlook (a very puritanical outlook), it was not surprising that one
of them said something to this effect: even if Tiruvalluvar went to
hell because he was a heathen, his tongue would have gone to heaven
for the strong ethics that he espoused in the TirukkuRaL.
Tiruvalluvar has been appropriated by virtually every group since
they wanted very much to be associated with his work.
The people who have argued for a Jaina influence or origin for the
TirukkuRaL have advanced arguments like the following: the very
first kuRaL makes a mention of "Adi Bhagavan" -- a technical term
occuring in Jaina literature, his condemnation of both the
Brahminical practice of sacrifice that involves killing of animals,
and his condemnation of the Buddhist practice of eating meat as
long as the animal concerned was not killed by the eater.
Tiruvalluvar's organisation of his book into "muppAl" also has
been pointed out in their refutations. (as opposed to the
Brahminical stress on the 4 purushArthas).
Scholars like Appasvami Chakravarti, and recently KA.NA.Subrahmaniam
have argued for the Jaina influence/origin very effectively.
--Srini.
M. Sundaramoorthy
>In article <BrHxp...@watserv1.waterloo.edu> mvi...@morse.waterloo.edu (m vishnu) writes:
>>In article <920716175...@cec2.wustl.edu> s...@cec2.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian) writes:
>>> Is `thirukkuraL' a jainist work ?
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> It is my opinion that ThirukkuraL is
>>> a jainist work and I will write my views
>>> in my future articles on this topic.
>>> - Vengaimaran.
>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> [ Posted for Vengaimaran : s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ]
>>>------------------------------------------------
>>
>>n~aa. thEvanEyan is a well known Tamil scholar. He wrote his 'thirukkuRal
>>thamiz marapurai' to refute, what he calls, 'aariya naccuk karuththukkaL'
>>of parimElazahar's TK urai.
>>
>>Meenan Vishnu
>>
>>Note: (n~aa as is in 'n~aayiRu' == sun)
>
>There is no definitive word on this. Every generation of scholars has
>held differing opinions on this. The rhetoric of these scholars
>itself is an accurate pointer to their biases.
>
>have argued for the Jaina influence/origin very effectively.
>
>--Srini.
Srini is right. I remember reading a review of a book in 'The Hindu' Tuesday
supplement about two years ago, in which the author tries to establish
thiruvaLLuvar is a Vaishnavite and tries to correlate many kuRaLs with
Vaishnavite philosophy. There may be many kuRaLs coinciding with different
philosophies and it must be true even among themselves.
But thirukkuRaL is the first book in the classification of post-sangam
literature, 'pathineN keezh kaNakku noolkaL' all of which belong to
moral literature (neethi ilakkiyam) and most of them (I think) are
written by Jain saints. I don't know whether the time period during which
Srini is right. I remember reading a review of a book in 'The Hindu' Tuesday
supplement about two years ago, in which the author tries to establish
thiruvaLLuvar is a Vaishnavite and tries to correlate many kuRaLs with
Vaishnavite philosophy. There may be many kuRaLs coinciding with different
philosophies and it must be true even among themselves.
it was supposed to be written is sufficient to claim it is Jain
literature.
In 'kamaththup paal' Valluvar talks 'kaLvu' and 'kaRpu' and doesn't denounce
sex or family life, as the famous Jain epic 'ceevaka cinthamaNi' does.
The important concept of 'vadakkiruththal' (fasting to death) is not
But thirukkuRaL is the first book in the classification of post-sangam
literature, 'pathineN keezh kaNakku noolkaL' all of which belong to
moral literature (neethi ilakkiyam) and most of them (I think) are
mentioned anywhere in ThirukkuraL to my knowledge.
Dr. Shanmugasundaram of Kaavya books has written a book 'vaLLuvarkaL',
a reaserch work on what all said about ThirukkuRaL and ThiruvaLLuvar.
That might give some insight on this issue (I haven't read the book).
written by Jain saints. I don't know whether the time period during which
it was supposed to be written is sufficient to claim it is Jain
literature.
In 'kamaththup paal' Valluvar talks 'kaLvu' and 'kaRpu' and doesn't denounce
sex or family life, as the famous Jain epic 'ceevaka cinthamaNi' does.
Incidentally, Shanmugasundaram's pen name is Sundara Pandian.
aSrini is right. I remember reading a review of a book in 'The Hindu' Tuesday
supplement about two years ago, in which the author tries to establish
thiruvaLLuvar is a Vaishnavite and tries to correlate many kuRaLs with
Vaishnavite philosophy. There may be many kuRaLs coinciding with different
philosophies and it must be true even among themselves.
But thirukkuRaL is the first book in the classification of post-sangam
literature, 'pathineN keezh kaNakku noolkaL' all of which belong to
moral literature (neethi ilakkiyam) and most of them (I think) are
written by Jain saints. I don't know whether the time period during which
Srini is right. I remember reading a review of a book in 'The Hindu' Tuesday
supplement about two years ago, in which the author tries to establish
thiruvaLLuvar is a Vaishnavite and tries to correlate many kuRaLs with
Vaishnavite philosophy. There may be many kuRaLs coinciding with different
philosophies and it must be true even among themselves.
it was supposed to be written is sufficient to claim it is Jain
literature.
In 'kamaththup paal' Valluvar talks 'kaLvu' and 'kaRpu' and doesn't denounce
sex or family life, as the famous Jain epic 'ceevaka cinthamaNi' does.
The important concept of 'vadakkiruththal' (fasting to death) is not
But thirukkuRaL is the first book in the classification of post-sangam
literature, 'pathineN keezh kaNakku noolkaL' all of which belong to
moral literature (neethi ilakkiyam) and most of them (I think) are
mentioned anywhere in ThirukkuraL to my knowledge.
Dr. Shanmugasundaram of Kaavya books has written a book 'vaLLuvarkaL',
a reaserch work on what all said about ThirukkuRaL and ThiruvaLLuvar.
That might give some insight on this issue (I haven't read the book).
written by Jain saints. I don't know whether the time period during which
it was supposed to be written is sufficient to claim it is Jain
literature.
In 'kamaththup paal' Valluvar talks 'kaLvu' and 'kaRpu' and doesn't denounce
sex or family life, as the famous Jain epic 'ceevaka cinthamaNi' does.
Incidentally, Shanmugasundaram's pen name is Sundara Pandian.
Thanks
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
M. Sundaramoorthy
>>In article <920716175...@cec2.wustl.edu> s...@cec2.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian) writes:
>>> Is `thirukkuraL' a jainist work ?
>>> ---------------------------------
>>> It is my opinion that ThirukkuraL is
>>> a jainist work and I will write my views
>>> in my future articles on this topic.
>>> - Vengaimaran.
>>> ------------------------------------------------
>>> [ Posted for Vengaimaran : s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ]
>>>------------------------------------------------
>>
>>n~aa. thEvanEyan is a well known Tamil scholar. He wrote his 'thirukkuRal
>>thamiz marapurai' to refute, what he calls, 'aariya naccuk karuththukkaL'
>>of parimElazahar's TK urai.
>>
>>Meenan Vishnu
>>
>>Note: (n~aa as is in 'n~aayiRu' == sun)
>
>There is no definitive word on this. Every generation of scholars has
>held differing opinions on this. The rhetoric of these scholars
>itself is an accurate pointer to their biases.
>
>have argued for the Jaina influence/origin very effectively.
>
>--Srini.
(I messed up the file while editing in my previous posting on this
thread. Apologies - MS)
Srini is right. I remember reading a review of a book in 'The Hindu' Tuesday
supplement about two years ago, in which the author tries to establish
thiruvaLLuvar is a Vaishnavite and tries to correlate many kuRaLs with
Vaishnavite philosophy. There may be many kuRaLs coinciding with different
philosophies and it must be true even among themselves.
But thirukkuRaL is the first book in the classification of post-sangam
literature, 'pathineN keezh kaNakku noolkaL' all of which belong to
moral literature (neethi ilakkiyam) and most of them (I think) are
written by Jain saints. I don't know whether the time period during which
it was supposed to have been written is sufficient to claim it is Jain
literature.
In 'kamaththup paal' Valluvar talks 'kaLvu' and 'kaRpu' and doesn't denounce
sex or family life, as the famous Jain epic 'ceevaka cinthamaNi' does.
The important concept of 'vadakkiruththal' (fasting to death) is not
mentioned anywhere in ThirukkuraL to my knowledge.
Dr. Shanmugasundaram of 'Kaavya book' has written a book 'vaLLuvarkaL',
a reaserch work on what all said about ThirukkuRaL and ThiruvaLLuvar.
That might give some insight on this issue (I haven't read the book).
Incidentally, Shanmugasundaram's pen name is Sundara Pandian.
Thanks,
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
Rangaswamy Rajamanickam
> Is `thirukkuraL' a jainist work ?
> ---------------------------------
> It is my opinion that ThirukkuraL is
> a jainist work and I will write my views
> in my future articles on this topic.
> - Vengaimaran.
Thiruvalluvar's philosophies being so universal, has led to people
of different religions to claim him as their own.However, here is
a Kural on ascetics in arthuppal (Translation by Kasturi Srinivasan)
in which there is a reference to Indra, the king of Gods :
'Indra, the heavenly lord, can bear witness,
To the five conquered's great prowess.'
This is one of the few times there is reference to a purely Hindu
God. The poet probably alludes to Indra being cursed by sage Gauthama
for cheating his wife Ahalya.
How do you explain it?
--
RAJAMANICKAM,RANGASWAMY
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt6060a
Internet: gt6...@prism.gatech.edu
Dorai Sitaram
>
>Thiruvalluvar's philosophies being so universal, has led to people
>of different religions to claim him as their own.However, here is
>a Kural on ascetics in arthuppal (Translation by Kasturi Srinivasan)
>in which there is a reference to Indra, the king of Gods :
>
>'Indra, the heavenly lord, can bear witness,
>To the five conquered's great prowess.'
>
>This is one of the few times there is reference to a purely Hindu
>God. The poet probably alludes to Indra being cursed by sage Gauthama
>for cheating his wife Ahalya.
>
>How do you explain it?
Indra is mentioned (quite often) in Jaina and Bauddha writings.
Reference to him cannot be used to eliminate J. or B. authorship.
--d
--
do...@titan.rice.edu ! It may be that the gulfs will wash us down;
do...@owlnet.rice.edu ! it may be we shall touch the Happy Isles.
Srini Pichumani
thereof) of the TirukkuRaL.
The scholarly opinions that I have read say the following: Tiruvalluvar
has cast his work in a fairly difficult form/metre -- the kuRaL veNpA
-- and has achieved a terseness of expression that stands unrivalled
to this day. One of these scholars, P.T.Srinivasa Iyengar (1861-1931),
who was a historian-cum-multilingual scholar,
opines that this style of Tiruvalluvar is superior
to the "sutra" style followed in Sanskrit, in which form also, brevity of
expression is favoured; one reason he offers is that the TirukkuRaL is
in verse, while almost all of Sanskrit sutra literature is prose.
Of course, lavish praise is showered upon the TirukkuRaL for the ethical
code that it espouses -- by one and all.
However, there is not much unanimity with regards to the poetic excellence
of the TirukkuRaL. Scholars, like P.T.S, literatteurs like KA.NA.Su have
written that the kuRaL does not have the same poetical fire that
inspired the eTTutokai; and is quite deficient in imagery and what not.
--Srini.
ps: This type of questioning need not bother anyone. Throughout Tamil
history, the kuRaL has been held in great veneration and it will remain
so forever.
pps: KA.NA.Su seems to have changed his earlier opinions somewhat; in a recent
book, "Tiruvalluvar and his TirukkuRaL", (put out by the Bharatiya Jnanpith
Publications in 1987), he revises his earlier opinions about the poetical
merits of the kuRaL. Incidentally, this book argues that the TirukkuRaL is
a Jaina work.
Sundara Pandian
"Indhira" is mentioned in many Jaina books
as observed by Dorai Sitaram.
ILangovadikaL , author of "Chilappadhikaaram"
is a Jain. In the second part of his epic, we find
KOvalan and KaNNagi ( both are jains ) visiting
temples - "kOttams" on their way to Madurai. One of
the kottam is "Indhiran kOttam". I hope this throws
some light on the usage of "indhiran" in the kuraL
that you had mentioned .
Aside : ThiruvaLLuvar also uses the word "kOttam"
in one kuRaL in "aRaththup paal". I don't
remember the kuRaL now.
- vEngaimaaran.
------------------------------------------------------
[ Posted by : S.Pandian (s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ) ]
-------------------------------------------------------
Bala SWAMINATHAN
>In article <63...@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6...@prism.gatech.EDU (Rangaswamy Rajamanickam) writes:
>>in which there is a reference to Indra, the king of Gods :
>>
>>'Indra, the heavenly lord, can bear witness,
>>To the five conquered's great prowess.'
>>
>>This is one of the few times there is reference to a purely Hindu
>>God. The poet probably alludes to Indra being cursed by sage Gauthama
>>for cheating his wife Ahalya.
>>
>>How do you explain it?
>
>Indra is mentioned (quite often) in Jaina and Bauddha writings.
>Reference to him cannot be used to eliminate J. or B. authorship.
>
>--d
There is yet another KuRaL in the section 'madiyinmai' (Abstention
from sloth).
madiyilA mannavan eythum adiyaLandhAn
thA-ayadhu ellAm orungku. (610)
The prince who knows not sloth will bring within his sway
all that has been attained by the steps of ThirumAl.
And there are a few references about 'kooRRam' (in the sense of
God of Death). But these should not be taken as a proof (whatever
that means) for Valluvan being a vaiNavan.
I guess it only shows Valluvans depth of knowledge in various religions
rather than his creed.
S_Bala
---------------------------------------------
aRivaik koduththadhO thuroNarin kauravam
avarmEl thoduththadhE archchunan kauravam ...
M. Sundaramoorthy
> ---------------------------------
> I like to start a discussion on this
> topic.
> ------------------------------------------------
> [ Posted for Vengaimaran : s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ]
>------------------------------------------------
I want to add more on this thread, but from differnt perspective.
The philosophies, religious or non-religious, should be looked from
social view point. They are also superstructures of production relations.
And 'thirukkurRaL' should be looked from this perspective rather
than giving it a particular religious color. It should be looked from
the perspective whome it represents and whose purpose it serves, like
any other philosophy or literature. The attempt to make it Universal
(in time and space) moral piece of work is as orthodox as giving it
a particular religious colour in my opinion. It does represents a class.
New literary critics in Tamil, Nagarjunan, Tamilavan and Rajgouthaman
classify Tamil literature from ancient days till today into
three major classes.
(1). brahmana ilakkiyam - literature of upper class/castes
(2). veLLaaLa ilakkiyam - literature of landowning/ruling class/castes.
(3). dhalith ilakkiyam - literature of oppressed/lower class/castes.
These critics put 'thirukkuRaL' into 'veLLaaLa ilakkiyam' which
teaches morals of middle castes/class.
While the first two classes of literature are abundant, the third class is
yet to take off. The earlier attempts of K. Daniel of Sri Lanka and Poomani
of Tirunelveli region portrarying the lives of oppressed/lower class/caste
people are not recognised as genuine dalit literature by the critics, as they
are 'outsiders'. The dalit literature from 'insiders' is yet to be developed.
The recent novel, 'pazhaiyana kazhidhalum..' by Sivakami is such an attempt
and has created wide spread debate among literary circles about dalit
literature.
The proportions of literature available in these classes reflect their
social status, political power, control of media, access to
privileges like education etc, rather than the proportions of those classes
in terms of population.
Comments (not flames) are welcome.
Thanks
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
Sundara Pandian
------------------------------------
Sundaramoorthy writes :
-----------------------
> I want to add more on this thread, but from different perspective.
> The philosophies, religious or non-religious, should be looked from
> social view point. They are also superstructures of production relations.
> And 'thirukkurRaL' should be looked from this perspective rather
> than giving it a particular religious color.
I start with making a remark that
ThirukkuRaL, mostly a book of morals,
differs from epics like Chilambu or
MaNimEkalai.
I am not trying to paint a religious
color to ThirukkuRaL. There is already a
Hinduistic paint applied to KuRaL and I
have posted a opinion that KuRaL is a
Jainistic work, contrary to the public
opinion.
Not much is known about VaLLuvar other
than the simple details that he was born
at Mylapore in Madras city. We don't know
his caste or what religion that he practised
in his life. There is a belief that VaLLuvar
was a married man ( the believed name of his
wife is Vasuki ) and not a monk. In the
VaLLuvar statues that you find in Tamilnadu,
you would find VaLLuvar wearing "thiruneeRu"
[ sacred ash ] in his forehead and he is
portrayed as a Hindu. I am not 100% certain
that VaLLuvar practised Jainism, but my
opinion is that ThirukkuRaL cannot be taken
into account as "just another Hinduistic
work" and my plan is to post some KuRaLs
which differ in principle from the Buddhism
or Gita or Brahminism practised those days
- some of which were already posted in net
and other kuRaLs expressing jainistic views.
Already some work has been done in
studying KuRaL from a social point of view.
VaLLuvar's "pOruL paal" is more suitable for
this study than the other two "paal"s.
> It should be looked from
> the perspective whom it represents and whose purpose it serves, like
> any other philosophy or literature.
I see a Marxist in the net!
What do you call it ? "Dialectical
Materialism " ?
I once attended the "book-releasing"
function held for Tho.Mu.Chi.Raghunadhan's
book "ILangOvadigaL yaar ?" The author spoke
on these lines and answered many questions
pertaining his scholarly work. He used this
dialectical materialism ( correct me if I am
wrong ) to deduce some revolutionary truths
about ILangOvadikaL and his epic chilambu.
I am sure that such a study can be carried
out for KuRaL and I am sure that it would make
an interesting reading. We will be benefitted
if Tho.Mu.Chi. takes that work.The question
session on that function was over, before I
could make a request to Tho.Mu.Chi to undertake
a similar work on KuRaL. VaLLuvar's religion
won't be overlooked in such a work anyway and
such a query is not to paint a religious color.
> The attempt to make it Universal
> (in time and space) moral piece of work is as orthodox as giving it
> a particular religious colour in my opinion. It does represents a class.
In one of his articles on KuRaL,
Meenan Vishnu gave an impression that
"ThirukkuRaL is forever" but he was
corrected by another writer quoting
some kuRaLs from "peN vazhi chERal'.
It is believed that "ThirukkuRaL"
and other moral works from "padhinenkeel
kaNakku" were written in a "dark period"
in the Tamilnadu. This was the period
when KaLappiraas ruled Tamilnadu and
their rule seems "bad" to get the name
"dark period".
>New literary critics in Tamil, Nagarjunan, Tamilavan and Rajgouthaman
>classify Tamil literature from ancient days till today into
>three major classes.
^^^^^^^
Bad terminolgy. You could have used
"divisions" instead as "class" has a
distinct meaning in Marxist studies.
> (1). brahmana ilakkiyam - literature of upper class/castes
> (2). veLLaaLa ilakkiyam - literature of landowning/ruling class/castes.
> (3). dhalith ilakkiyam - literature of oppressed/lower class/castes.
Do you really need these divisions ?
Tho.Mu.Chi. didn't use any such division
in his scholarly work. He just used the
word "varkkam" for "class" and he was
able to assert his views without the
three divisions pointed out. ( It is his
view that Chilambu - with its first two
parts- illustartes the class struggle
between the merchant class and the ruling
class and Tho.Mu.Chi. points out how the
ruling class countered the views of
ILangO ( of merchant class ) by adding the
third part to Chilambu in the lines of the
class feelings of the ruling class. ( In the
third part, ChEran Senguttuvan builds a
"paththinik kOttam" for KaNNagi. )
>These critics put 'thirukkuRaL' into 'veLLaaLa ilakkiyam' which
>teaches morals of middle castes/class.
I agree .
> While the first two classes of literature are abundant, the third class is
>yet to take off.
It is worthwhile here to mention the
controversial drama "nandhanaar" by
Indhira Parthasarathy. In this book, the
author writes about Brahmins conspiring to
kill Nandhan by inviting him to the Shiva's
temple and throwing him into the fire when
he visits the temple and addressing people
that Nandhan had united with the God Shiva
when he entered the fire. This book was
announced as a text-book for a certain
University and just before the school started
the text was called off in the last minute
and was replaced by another book considered
by the evaluation committee. If you ask the
author, he would tell you which university
in T.N. did that. It came on the newspapers.
>Thanks
>M. Sundaramoorthy
>sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
- vEngaimaaran.
------------------------------------------------
Posted By : S.Pandian ( s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ) ]
--------------------------------------------------
M. Sundaramoorthy
> Re: Is Thirukkural a jainist work ?
> ------------------------------------
>
> Sundaramoorthy writes :
> -----------------------
>> I want to add more on this thread, but from different perspective.
>
>> The philosophies, religious or non-religious, should be looked from
>> social view point. They are also superstructures of production relations.
>> And 'thirukkurRaL' should be looked from this perspective rather
>> than giving it a particular religious color.
>
> color to ThirukkuRaL. There is already a
I didn't mean you are trying to paint a religious colour. I am
sorry if I sounded so. There
were already many sholars who did. I just picked up the first
posting, which happened to be yours, in this thread.
> Not much is known about VaLLuvar other
> than the simple details that he was born
> at Mylapore in Madras city. We don't know
Even this claim is debatable. There is another version of Mylopore
ThiruvaLLuvar. Some beleive he is one of the 'pathineN ciththarkaL',
Maruththuvar ThiruvaLLuvar Naayanaar.
> wife is Vasuki ) and not a monk. In the
> VaLLuvar statues that you find in Tamilnadu,
> you would find VaLLuvar wearing "thiruneeRu"
> [ sacred ash ] in his forehead and he is
The book 'vaLLuvarkaL' which I mentioned has photos of all kinds
of statues and portraits of ThiruvaLLuvar. However, the "officially
recognised" one is the portrait painted by Artist. Venugopal Sharma.
That is what we see in govt. buses in TN
> Already some work has been done in
> studying KuRaL from a social point of view.
> VaLLuvar's "pOruL paal" is more suitable for
> this study than the other two "paal"s.
>
>> It should be looked from
>> the perspective whom it represents and whose purpose it serves, like
>> any other philosophy or literature.
>
> I see a Marxist in the net!
> What do you call it ? "Dialectical
> Materialism " ?
Thanks for giving me a label. Periyar also said similar thing.
May be there is someone out who will give a DK label.
I don't mind as long as you don't hate Marxists. I assume so
because you attended Tho. Mu. Ci.'s meeting ;). Anyway there
are some vague books comparing ThiruvaLLuvar and Karl Marx. So
Valluvar is also a Marxist, like he is Jain, Budhist, Vaishnavite etc.
> I once attended the "book-releasing"
> function held for Tho.Mu.Chi.Raghunadhan's
> book "ILangOvadigaL yaar ?" The author spoke
> could make a request to Tho.Mu.Chi to undertake
> a similar work on KuRaL. VaLLuvar's religion
> won't be overlooked in such a work anyway and
> such a query is not to paint a religious color.
>
I read about Tho. Mu. Ci.'s book on Chilabu, but haven't read the book.
It seems he is now working on 'Bharathi'.
>
>>New literary critics in Tamil, Nagarjunan, Tamilavan and Rajgouthaman
>>classify Tamil literature from ancient days till today into
>>three major classes.
> ^^^^^^^
> Bad terminolgy. You could have used
> "divisions" instead as "class" has a
> distinct meaning in Marxist studies.
You are right. I didn't mean varggam here. categories.
>
> > (1). brahmana ilakkiyam - literature of upper class/castes
> > (2). veLLaaLa ilakkiyam - literature of landowning/ruling class/castes.
> > (3). dhalith ilakkiyam - literature of oppressed/lower class/castes.
>
> Do you really need these divisions ?
Not just me. Yes we do need such classification. Only when it
was classified this way we could feel the vacuum. Tamil literature as
available now do not reflect the Tamil culture and society completely.
It does only a part. And only after this kind of classification
people feel the need of the third kind. Even American literature
is classified so. Don't we hear words like 'Black American writers'
'Asian American writers' etc. As a reader of Tamil literature I
feel there is a need for that. I don't mean that the first two
categories should be rejected. I say the third category should be
developed only to complement the first two. Only then there will
be meaning in talking about richness of Tamil literature and it
will be complete in portrying the Tamil society and culture.
> Tho.Mu.Chi. didn't use any such division
> in his scholarly work. He just used the
> word "varkkam" for "class" and he was
> three divisions pointed out.
Yes. We can't expect Tho. Mu. Ci. to do that. He is a classical
Marxist who would look only in terms of 'class' as imported from
Russian literature. He can classify only like Romanticism,
Realism, Socialist Realism etc.
Caste is an Indian concept and I don't expect
the first generation critics, including the Marxists, to take
this into account. This is a new trend since 80s, after
Dalit literature has developed as a movement in Marathi and Kannada.
It is more meaningful to import the concept from within Indian
languages rather than from Europe.
(P.S: I do respect Tho. Mu. Ci. for his contribution to Tamil
literature as he introduced 'Socialist Realism' to Tamil by
translating Maxim Gorky's 'Mother' (thaai) and his novel
'panjum paciyum' is cosidered to the first novel of socialist
realism in Tamil).
>
>>These critics put 'thirukkuRaL' into 'veLLaaLa ilakkiyam' which
>>teaches morals of middle castes/class.
> I agree .
>
>> While the first two classes of literature are abundant, the third class is
>>yet to take off.
>
> It is worthwhile here to mention the
> controversial drama "nandhanaar" by
> Indhira Parthasarathy. In this book, the
As I mentioned in my previous posting, even Poomani and K. Daniel
who consistently wrote on low caste themes are not cosidered as
Dalit writers. In in my opinion Indira Parthasarathi comes no way
near Poomani.
>>Thanks
>>M. Sundaramoorthy
>>sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
> - vEngaimaaran.
>------------------------------------------------
> Posted By : S.Pandian ( s...@cec1.WUSTL.edu ) ]
>--------------------------------------------------
We will discuss these issues in a separtly in future. We will first
settle 'ThiruvaLLuvar' issue!!
Thanks.
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
M. P. Krishna Raj
I don't remember exactly the references.
I was taught in class by tamil teachers that valluvar is
is a weaver(kai kolar). There is also some story relating
vasuki dropping vessel in the when her husband called.
Besides there is a reference
Anthanar enber arovor....
Anthanar is only mentioned to denote iyers and iyengars.
We cannot expect a jaina to portray saivism as good.
Besides in many areas, valluvar describes military strategy which was
only meant for killing people. I don't think any jaina literature
would cover this kind of militaristic ideas. Besides what about
last section of the Kural?
Seevaga Cinthamani also has full dose of same kind of stuff. Kemasari Ilambagam
is the perfect example. I read the text book for Annamalai University
B.A ,B.Sc students.(1979-81). I wondered how a lecturer can teach this stuff
in the class.(Seevaga cintamani is a jaina literature, Manimegalai is buddist)
"Porul illarkku ivvulagu illai; Arul illarkku Auulagu illai". I am not quite
sure that these lines are from tiru kural.
Raj
Sundara Pandian
>In article <920717211...@cec1.wustl.edu> s...@cec1.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian) posts for Vengai Maran
>
>> Re: Is Thirukkural a jainist work ?
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Sundaramoorthy writes :
>> -----------------------
>>> I want to add more on this thread, but from different perspective.
>>
>>> The philosophies, religious or non-religious, should be looked from
>>> social view point. They are also superstructures of production relations.
>>> And 'thirukkurRaL' should be looked from this perspective rather
>>> than giving it a particular religious color.
>>
>> I am not trying to paint a religious
>> color to ThirukkuRaL. There is already a
>
> I didn't mean you are trying to paint a religious colour. I am
> sorry if I sounded so. There
> posting, which happened to be yours, in this thread.
>
I wrote that line just for the record.
To put my stand clear.
>> Not much is known about VaLLuvar other
>> than the simple details that he was born
>> at Mylapore in Madras city. We don't know
>
> Even this claim is debatable. There is another version of Mylopore
> ThiruvaLLuvar. Some beleive he is one of the 'pathineN ciththarkaL',
> Maruththuvar ThiruvaLLuvar Naayanaar.
>
>> wife is Vasuki ) and not a monk. In the
>> VaLLuvar statues that you find in Tamilnadu,
>> you would find VaLLuvar wearing "thiruneeRu"
>> [ sacred ash ] in his forehead and he is
>
> The book 'vaLLuvarkaL' which I mentioned has photos of all kinds
> of statues and portraits of ThiruvaLLuvar. However, the "officially
> recognised" one is the portrait painted by Artist. Venugopal Sharma.
> That is what we see in govt. buses in TN
Thinking about, the one I saw in Madurai
ThiruvaLLuvar kazhagam had a "sacred thread".
No wonder, someone -in his flame to Meenan
Vishnu considered VaLLuva as a Brahmin. He
must have got that impression from such
statues.
>
>> Already some work has been done in
>> studying KuRaL from a social point of view.
>> VaLLuvar's "pOruL paal" is more suitable for
>> this study than the other two "paal"s.
>>
>>> It should be looked from
>>> the perspective whom it represents and whose purpose it serves, like
>>> any other philosophy or literature.
>>
>> I see a Marxist in the net!
>> What do you call it ? "Dialectical
>> Materialism " ?
>
> Thanks for giving me a label. Periyar also said similar thing.
> May be there is someone out who will give a DK label.
> I don't mind as long as you don't hate Marxists. I assume so
> because you attended Tho. Mu. Ci.'s meeting ;). Anyway there
> are some vague books comparing ThiruvaLLuvar and Karl Marx. So
> Valluvar is also a Marxist, like he is Jain, Budhist, Vaishnavite etc.
>
Even with my little knowledge of
Marxism, I can safely say that Valluvar
is NOT a Marxist. He believed in fate.
"vakuththaan vakuththa vakai allaal kOdi
thokuththaarkkum thuyththal aridhu."
He also advised people to stick to the
world and not revolt against it.
"evva thuRaivadhu ulagam - ulagodu
avva thuRaivadhu aRivu."
I can add more if you want.
I don't hate Marxists. I like the Marxist
works by Tho.Mu.Chi and S.V.Rajadhurai. I have
to admit, however, that I had a very difficult
time to follow the latter's scholarly work
on "Existentialism" published by Cre-A.
Tho.Mu.Chi.'s books are easier to read than
S.V.Rajadhurai's works.
>> I once attended the "book-releasing"
>> function held for Tho.Mu.Chi.Raghunadhan's
>> book "ILangOvadigaL yaar ?" The author spoke
>
>> could make a request to Tho.Mu.Chi to undertake
>> a similar work on KuRaL. VaLLuvar's religion
>> won't be overlooked in such a work anyway and
>> such a query is not to paint a religious color.
>>
> I read about Tho. Mu. Ci.'s book on Chilabu, but haven't read the book.
> It seems he is now working on 'Bharathi'.
Surprising. He had already done quite
some work on Bharathi, before publishing
an authoriatative work on Chilambu. This
book took Chilambu scholars by storm.
>>
>> > (1). brahmana ilakkiyam - literature of upper class/castes
>> > (2). veLLaaLa ilakkiyam - literature of landowning/ruling class/castes.
>> > (3). dhalith ilakkiyam - literature of oppressed/lower class/castes.
>>
>> Do you really need these divisions ?
>
> Not just me. Yes we do need such classification. Only when it
> was classified this way we could feel the vacuum. Tamil literature as
> available now do not reflect the Tamil culture and society completely.
> It does only a part. And only after this kind of classification
> people feel the need of the third kind. Even American literature
> is classified so. Don't we hear words like 'Black American writers'
> 'Asian American writers' etc. As a reader of Tamil literature I
> feel there is a need for that. I don't mean that the first two
> categories should be rejected. I say the third category should be
> developed only to complement the first two. Only then there will
> be meaning in talking about richness of Tamil literature and it
> will be complete in portrying the Tamil society and culture.
It is my opinion that we don't need
this classification, though I hold the
view that contribution on the third
division is definitely in order.
>
>> Tho.Mu.Chi. didn't use any such division
>> in his scholarly work. He just used the
>> word "varkkam" for "class" and he was
>> three divisions pointed out.
>
> Yes. We can't expect Tho. Mu. Ci. to do that. He is a classical
> Marxist who would look only in terms of 'class' as imported from
> Russian literature. He can classify only like Romanticism,
> Realism, Socialist Realism etc.
May be, I am also suffering from the
classical Marxism that I studied once.
>
> Caste is an Indian concept and I don't expect
> the first generation critics, including the Marxists, to take
> this into account. This is a new trend since 80s, after
> Dalit literature has developed as a movement in Marathi and Kannada.
> It is more meaningful to import the concept from within Indian
> languages rather than from Europe.
>
> (P.S: I do respect Tho. Mu. Ci. for his contribution to Tamil
> literature as he introduced 'Socialist Realism' to Tamil by
> translating Maxim Gorky's 'Mother' (thaai) and his novel
> 'panjum paciyum' is cosidered to the first novel of socialist
> realism in Tamil).
I don't remember his pseudonym. He
used to write stories once in a pseudonym.
>>
>> It is worthwhile here to mention the
>> controversial drama "nandhanaar" by
>> Indhira Parthasarathy. In this book, the
>
> As I mentioned in my previous posting, even Poomani and K. Daniel
> who consistently wrote on low caste themes are not cosidered as
> Dalit writers. In in my opinion Indira Parthasarathi comes no way
> near Poomani.
I have not read Poomani or K.Daniel.
I don't read stories a lot.
>
>>>Thanks
>>>M. Sundaramoorthy
>>>sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>> - Vengaimaran.
>
> We will discuss these issues in a separtly in future. We will first
> settle 'ThiruvaLLuvar' issue!!
I have not really started writing on
this issue. The only reference books that
I have are kuRaL and a book by Kanagasabai.
I will, however, post some KuRaLs which
pertain to the topic under consideration.
- Vengaimaran.
>Thanks.
>M. Sundaramoorthy
>sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
------------------------------------------------------------
Meenakshi Arunachalam
>In article <BrHxp...@watserv1.waterloo.edu> mvi...@morse.waterloo.edu (m vishnu) writes:
>>
>>the following Jain beliefs:
>>Meenan Vishnu
>
>The alternative is that Mahavir Jain was aware of some of the concepts
>expressed in TirukkuraL. That would put some of the kuraLs earlier than
>500 BC. Any comments?
>
>rinivasan K.
In the "Kanthar Sashti Kavasam"[Pazhani], there is a kural venba
at the beginning:
Amarar idartheera amaram purintha
kumaranadi nenje kuri.
Thiruvalluvar has referred to Lord Muruga in this kural.
I was wondering if this could throw some light on his belief.
Or is he just talking about the then popular saivite faith?
any idea as to which chapter/athikaram this kural is from?
thanks
-meena
M. Sundaramoorthy
>
>In the "Kanthar Sashti Kavasam"[Pazhani], there is a kural venba
>at the beginning:
>
> Amarar idartheera amaram purintha
> kumaranadi nenje kuri.
>
>Thiruvalluvar has referred to Lord Muruga in this kural.
>I was wondering if this could throw some light on his belief.
>Or is he just talking about the then popular saivite faith?
>any idea as to which chapter/athikaram this kural is from?
>
>thanks
>-meena
This may be just a part of 'kantha cashtik kavacam', and this has
nothing to do with thirkkuRaL.
All verses in thirukkuRaL are kuRaLs, but the reverse is not
true.
'kuRaL' in general is a special case of 'veNpa' type verse
with two lines and seven 'ceer'. So not all kuRaLs were written
by ThiruvaLLuvar and hence doesn't come under any adhikaaram. There
are many non-thirukkuRaL kuRaLs. Best example is a kuRaL on
thirukkuRaL itself, supposedly composed by Auvaiyaar.
kadugaith thuLaiththEzh kadalaip pugatti
kuRugath thaRiththa kuRaL.
So the refered kuRaL from 'Kantha cashti kavacam' neither throws
light nor paint on ThiruvaLLuvar's religious background.
Thanks,
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
m vishnu
>at the beginning:
>
> Amarar idartheera amaram purintha
> kumaranadi nenje kuri.
I don't this is from ThirukuraL. It is no doubt in the Kural format,
but it is not one of the 1330 couplets written by VaLLuvar.
Remember, many people wrote their works in this format, including
the famous Tamil poetess auvvaiyaar, which is called 'avvaiyaar KuraL'.
Some latter day Saivaite saint must have written the above.
>
>Thiruvalluvar has referred to Lord Muruga in this kural.
>I was wondering if this could throw some light on his belief.
>Or is he just talking about the then popular saivite faith?
>any idea as to which chapter/athikaram this kural is from?
>
>thanks
>-meena
Meenan Vishnu
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
I don't think this is "Thiruvalluvar's" kuraL. There are quite
a few who have written "kuRaL" venpaa. There are avvaiyar's
and many others as well.
Selva Selvakumar
Patteaswaran
>In article <1992Jul20.1...@newstand.syr.edu> me...@top.cis.syr.edu (Meenakshi Arunachalam) writes:
>>In the "Kanthar Sashti Kavasam"[Pazhani], there is a kural venba
>>at the beginning:
>>
>> Amarar idartheera amaram purintha
>> kumaranadi nenje kuri.
>
>I don't this is from ThirukuraL. It is no doubt in the Kural format,
>but it is not one of the 1330 couplets written by VaLLuvar.
Yes, this is not from Thirukkural.
... some stuff deleted ...
>>
>>Thiruvalluvar has referred to Lord Muruga in this kural.
>>I was wondering if this could throw some light on his belief.
>>Or is he just talking about the then popular saivite faith?
>>any idea as to which chapter/athikaram this kural is from?
>>
>>thanks
>>-meena
>
>
>Meenan Vishnu
I would like to point out that Thirukkural does not refer to any religion
or subsect in its entire 1330 couplets. There were half a dozen subsects
under the Hindu religion during that time ( Saivam, Vainavam, Goumaram,
Ganapathiam, etc. ) and probably other religions too, but Thirukkural stands
above these divisions and that's why it is called a 'Pothu Marai' ( a
common 'veda' like ). There are of course mentions about God, but not in a
specific form relating to certain particular beliefs. There are references
like 'Venduthal Vendamai Ilan' ( one without want or dislike ) etc.
An interesting point : The number of times the word 'Kadavul' appearing
in Thirukkural = 0.
Anbudan,
Easwaran
********************
YAdum Ore YAvarum Kelir
K.P.Easwaran
k...@calmasd.prime.com
San Diego
CA
********************
Sornam Sankara
> with two lines and seven 'ceer'. So not all kuRaLs were written
> by ThiruvaLLuvar and hence doesn't come under any adhikaaram. There
> are many non-thirukkuRaL kuRaLs. Best example is a kuRaL on
> thirukkuRaL itself, supposedly composed by Auvaiyaar.
>
> kadugaith thuLaiththEzh kadalaip pugatti
> kuRugath thaRiththa kuRaL.
>
This was composed by poet Idaikkadar. The one written by Auvaiyar is the
same but the first 'ceer' is 'aNuvaith'.
I was wondering in my childhood days that Auvaiyar did know the scientific
fact that atom is the fundamental particle of all elements and she had used a
scientific term in poetry.
Another kuRal in which TiruvaLLuvar used the weapon 'thuppakki' but not
with the meaning of gun.
thupparkku thuppaya thuppakki thupparkku
thuppaya thUvum maZhai.
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Sornam Sankara
iranthum uyirvazhthal veNdin paranthu
keduca ivvulagi yatRiyan
my poor translation:
If somebody has to live by alms, let the creater of this world be ridden.
S. Sankarapandi
S.N. Muthukrishnan
>
> I don't remember exactly the references.
>
> I was taught in class by tamil teachers that valluvar is
> is a weaver(kai kolar). There is also some story relating
> vasuki dropping vessel in the when her husband called.
>
> Besides there is a reference
>
> Anthanar enber arovor....
>
> Anthanar is only mentioned to denote iyers and iyengars.
Anthanar _does not_ denote the iyer and iyengar surnames. Unfortunately
this concoction of terminology is much recent than one can imagine. It is
my presumption that it can into vougue since the turn of 19the century.
The Sanskrit word, Brahman denotes a way of life. To attain Brahman hood
certain "karma" is necessary. The attainment of Brahman signifies that
the person is complete. The person has evolved into one who has no hatred,
no distinction for the rich or poor. The reference to "Anthanar enboor.."
is similar to what goes below from "silapathikaram",
AkAthu Ombi, Apayan aLikkum ... > anybody can own a cow and sell milk!
This does not mean that only the "Ayar kulam" has to own a cow and sell milk.
That is socialistic attitude. We have never had a socialistic culture, in the
ancient tamizh kingdoms. (sorry to have digressed).
Coming back to Anthanar enboor ..., I think that we should go back and look
into history instead of generalizing facts. History is rich and let us not
jump into bandwagons of communalism.
Finally , I think it does'nt matter as to which religion or caste or creed
Thiruvalluvar belongs. The greatest literary and philosophical work procreated
by him is enough to put a full stop to this meaningless and endless discussion.
> We cannot expect a jaina to portray saivism as good.
> Besides in many areas, valluvar describes military strategy which was
> only meant for killing people. I don't think any jaina literature
> would cover this kind of militaristic ideas. Besides what about
> last section of the Kural?
>
> Seevaga Cinthamani also has full dose of same kind of stuff. Kemasari
Ilambagam
> is the perfect example. I read the text book for Annamalai University
> B.A ,B.Sc students.(197981). I wondered how a lecturer can teach this stuff
> in the class.(Seevaga cintamani is a jaina literature, Manimegalai is
buddist)
>
> Raj
Well, I wanted to quote from Sillapthikaram (authored: in (year?)), but I
am unable to recall from memory the author. Can someone help me please...
Muthukrishnan
S. N. Muthukrishnan mu...@mecad.uta.edu (NeXT mail)