New Indian-Chennai News + more

The Kural

The Tamil Jains claim that the author of the Kural was the famous Kundakundācāvyā who had epithets Vakragrīva , Elācārya , and Gridhrapichcha and whose original name was Padmanandin . But he wrote his learned works only in Prakrit and he could not have been the author of this famous work in Tamil .
Samaya-Divākara , the author of the commentary on Nilakēsi, cites this frequently as em - õttu that is our authority ’ ( e.g. 32 , 6 comm . ) ; but nowhere he ascribed this authoritative work to Kundakunda . The confusion has arisen because of the slight resemblance in sound between Elācārya and Vaļļuvar, the real author of the work . An enterprising researcher has tried to
identify Elelasinga, a supposed friend of Vaļļuvar with Elārā of the Ceylonese chronicles ( Sen Tamil , VII , p . 232 ) and made the confusion worse confounded . A bad case invites worse arguments .

About Vaļļuvar , very little is known . Tradition says that he was an outcaste by birth . This might well be true , as the name itself suggests . This tradition adds that he was the issue of a union between a Brahmin Yāļidatta and a woman of pariah caste (Gnānāmirutan , ahaval ) . Some think that he was a weaver by caste , relying on a late spurious stanza found in a fable which purports to be his life -history. Some others suggest that he must have been a Vellala , since he praises agriculture which
is the peculiar occupation of this caste . A scholar opines that
Vaļļuvar does not denote a caste ; but merely means a person noted for his liberality . Another scholar equates vaļļuva with vallabha on inscriptional authority , takes the term to mean a superintendent and infers that he was a king s officer ( M. Raghava Iyengar s Ārāicchitokuti , pp . 206-209 ) . There is some justification for this view ; but tradition would not have forgotton it , had it been a fact. Moreover the expression ul - patu - karuma - t - talaivar given in Divākaram ( II , 29 ) as a definition of Vaļļuvar had in Tamil , the technical sense of the chief of the proclaiming boys analogous to a trumpet - major of an army ( See Comm . on VIII , 1-13 of Silappadikāram . ) This agrees entirely with the traditional interpretation .

The birth place of Valļuvar is equally a matter of controversy . Tradition says that it was Mylapore , long known to have been a Jain centre . Some scholars say , on the strength of a stanza occurring in Tiruvalluvamālai ( st . 21 ) that it was Madurai . This
The Didactic Works 59

city also was a stronghold of Jainism from the 5th to 7th century A.D. when it was finally overthrown by the , Saiva Saint Sambandar . The religion of Valluvar has also been a favourite topic of discussion among scholars . But that he was a Jain admits of no doubt . The epithets ‘malar-misai-ye- kinān ( literally he who walked on the lotus - flowers ), aravāli - antanan ? ( lit. the Brahmin who had the wheel of dharma) and eņguņattān
( lit. he of the eight - fold qualities ) which Vaļļuvar gives to his God ( ch . 1 , 3 , 8 , 9 ) clinch the question once for all . All the three epithets are jointly and severally applicable to Arhat alone and to none else . Even Parimēlalagar , the orthodox Hindu commentator had to admit this , though somewhat reluctantly . The earlier commentators of Vaļļuvar s great work were Jains and Samaya - Divakarar s citing it as em - õttu already noted , is strong evidence .

The greatest problem of all is the date of this Tamil genius . From references to his Kuraļ in Silappadikāram and Manimekalai which are claimed to have been written in the 2nd century A.D. , he has been assigned to the 1st century A.D. or B.C.1 But this date of the above kāvyas are no longer accepted . There are very strong grounds for concluding that these works were composed circa 800 A.D. and we shall discuss this matter later on . Independently of Silappadikāram , it is possible to
arrive at an approximate date for Vaļļuvar . His Kural, as is well - known , is one of the Kil- k - Kanakku works ( didactic manuals) and these always distinguished from the earlier Sangam anthologies . In point of date , they are later works and their authors are called by Pērāśiriyar and other commentators * pir - cānror ( lit. great men of later times ) . Vide Tolkāppiyam Seyyul - iyal S. 158 , 235. comm . Even the most conservative of
scholars hold that the Sangam Age began only in about the 2nd century A.D. and so Vaļļuvar s date could not be earlier than this . A study of his work reveals that he is largely indebted to well - known treatises in Sanskrit , such as Manu , Kauțilya , Kāmandaka , Ayurvedic treatises and Kāma - sútra . Kura ! 41 and 47 emphasising the importance of the Grahasthas ( house - holders ) are based upon Manu III , 78. Kural 58 describing the merits of a married woman who bestows loving care on her husband owes its idea to Manu V , 155. Kura ! 396

1 One writer in Kalaik - kadir ( Jan. , 1950 ) says that Valluvar lived in circa 250 B.C. Some people have recently made an effort to start a Valluvar Era , beginning from January , are 30 B.C.
60 History of Tamil Language and Literature

which says • the more inen study the more is their knowledge and exemplifies this , saying the deeper a pond in a sand -bed is dug , the greater will be the springwater, has a parallel in Manu II, 218. Instances can be muliplied . Similarly Kura ! 501 which gives in detail the methods of testing the faithfulness of ministers and other officers is undouhtedly based upon Kautilya , adhikarana I , Adhyāya 10 , treating of the four kinds of Upadhās . So also Kurals 431 and 432 which enumerate the six kinds of faults in a king are taken from Kautilya , adhikarana I , adhyāya
6 , treating of arishad - varga . Vaļļuvar in his detailed treatment of the seven constituents of a State follows the order given by Kāmandaka ( IV , I ) . Kura ! 385 about the acquisition of wealth , etc , mentions the same four kinds of acts as those stated in Kāmandaka I , 20. Kura ! 581 which says that the spies are the eyes of a king is indebted to Kāmandaka XIII , 28 , 29 , 31 .
Moreover , in the omission of details and in giving prominence to didactic morality, the Kural follows the Nītisāra of Kāmandaka ( Keith , p . 460 ) Kurals 948, 949 , and 950 dealing with the treatment of patients have taken their ideas from Ayurvedic works . Finally Kural, 1101 , stating that the pleasures of the five senses are all found , in the person of one s beloved , is a beautiful rendering of an idea in Kāma - sūtra , 1 , 2 , 11. In the
same way , Kural 1312 , referring to the convention of wishing one long life if one sneezes has perhaps for its basis Kama - sútra VI , 2 , 15. Of these works , the date of Manu - Smộti can be fixed only within large limits and the date of Kautilya s Arthasāstra is open to grave doubts , most of our Indian scholars placing it in the third century B.C. and the western scholars in the third century A.D.1 (A. B. Keith : A History of Sanskrit
literature , p . 461 ; Winternitz : History of Indian literature , German Edition , Vol III , p . 523 ) . Kāma - sūtra is assigned to A.D. 400 by both Keith ( p . 461) and Winternitz ( Vol . III , p . 540 ) , though the former is inclined to give it a later date , 500 A.D. ( p . 469 ) . As for Kāmandaka s Nītisāra to which Vaļļuvar seems to have a greater partiality , all are agreed that it is a
still later work . Keith says that its date may be c . 700 , though others have put it contemporaneous with Varāhamihira , ( p. 463). Most probably, the latter view is nearer the truth and Nītisāra might very well be assigned to A.D. 550. Taking into consideration the dates of these Sanskrit works , we are compelled to conclude

The contemporaneity of Chanakya and Chandragupta is mentioned in the Mahavamsa - tika written between 1000 and 1250 A.D. and in the Parisista - parvan of the Trisasti - salaka - purusa Charita ( A.D. 1160-1172) by Hemachandra -vide Winternitz ,H.I.L. , Vol . II , pp . 217 and 507.
The Didactic Works 61

that the earliest date to which Valluvar can be assigned is 600 A.D. This date accords well with our date for Tolkāppiyar to whose work Vaļļuvar is indebted . Compare Kura ! 28 with Seyyul- iyal 179 of Tolkāppiyam .
The above conclusion is strengthened by linguistic considerations also . A study of the word - content of the Tamil works of different periods reveals the fact the Sanskrit words and expressions have been increasing gradually as time advances and this forms one of the main features in the growth of the Tamil language . There is a higher percentage of Sanskrit words in the Kuraļi than in the early Sangam works and in the Tolkāppiam . This is a clear indication that Kural is of later date than Tolkāppiyam .

Not only this . New forms of functional words appear in the Kural for the first time in the history of Tamil language . 2 So we shall be fairly justified in concluding that Vaļļuvar lived about the time of Appar , that is about A.D. 600 .

Valļuvar s great work consists of three books, the first book treating of aram ( dharma ) , the second , of poru ! ( artha ) , and the third , of inbam ( kāma ) . There are 37 chapters in the first book the first four called pāyiram ( which by the way is a Prākrit word ) or prefatory matter ( invocation , etc. ) , the next twenty about Ill-aram ( gộihastha - āśrama ) and the next thirteen about turavaram ( sanyāsa āśrama ) . The second book on poruļ contains seventy chapters, the first twenty - five dealing with kings , their duties , etc. , the succeeding thirty -two chapters, with the rest of the constituent elements of a state , and the next thirteen , with miscellaneous matters . The third book on inbam contains twenty - five chapters , the first seven being on pre - marital love ( kaļavu ) and the next eighteen on marital love . There are thus one hundred and thirty - three chapters in all - each chapter containing ten couplets in the metre known as Kura !. Hence

For a list of Sanskrit words in the Kural , see Tamil - Chudar -Manigal, pp . 72-3 . • Nouns , including those of uyar - tinai category , have begun take the suffix gal to denote plural ( e.g. Pūriyargal, 919 ). Verbs have begun to take the infix of āninru to denote the present tense (e.g. iravāninra , 1157 ) and the termination an has begun to take the place of al indicating future tense of 1st person , singular (eg ., irappan , 1067).

The subjunctive endings ēl ( enin enil ēl : 386 ) and ānāl ( ā - y - in āyin - āl- ānāl: 53 ) are late arrivals very far from the in ending of the Sangam post- fixing themselves, to the roots en and à respectively . The adverbial ending mal added to the negative particle a with verbal themes as in sey - y - a -mal ( 101 , 313 ) is unknown to early Sangam works, the earlier ending being tu as in Narriņai 306. So also is the negative al - l - āl meaning except , the earlier from being anri , as in narrinai 27. Moreover vān , pân and * pākku ’ are late endings of verbal participles . Of these , two occur in the kural-arivān (701 ),
62 History of Tamil Language and Literature

it has become usual to call the work itself by the name Kural, though it is fairly certain that the name given by the author was Muppăl or the trichoromous ( book ) .1

Never before , nor since , did words of such profound wisdom issue forth from any sage in the Tamil land . It is true that Vaļļuvar drew his material from Sanskrit sources , as indicated above ; but his genius transmuted them into real gold . Manu had features which were peculiar to his own time and to the times of his subsequent redactors. His society was godordained hierarchic in its structure and unalterably fixed by the Karmic influence . It denied equality between man and man , in the eye of the law . Kautilya was more a politician than a statesman . He found in his great work room for a state - craft motivated by an unquenching thirst for conquest and characterised by a mechanistic efficiency and thoroughness which we now associate with the Germans. He would consider humane considerations a weakness. Vātsyāyana devoted himself in his Kāmasūtra to a treatment of carnal pleasure in all its ramifications and he had no eyes for the ennobling aspect of love which is one of the most fundamental urges in human nature . Vaļļuvar , the Tamil sage , excels each one of these ancients in his respective sphere . He makes humanity and love the cementing force of society, and considérations of birth are of no account to him . His
political wisdom is characterised by a breadth of vision at once noble and elevating . The sexual love which he depicts with inimitable grace and delicacy is idealistic , even if it be schematic and mannered . Its romance is ethereal and carries us to an atmosphere where purity of emotion , freshness and beauty reign supreme . No wonder his great work took by storm the learned Academicians of Madurai as tradition would have it . The utter simplicity of his language, his crystal clear utterances , precise
and forceful, his brevity , his choice diction , no less his inwardness , karappáku ( 1127, 1129 ) and vēpākku ( 1128 ). Finally in the case of words which have been
changing their forms in course of time, later forms are found in Kural -polu ( 412 , 539). 569 , 930 and 1229 ). Besides these , many new words which are definitely known to have been in use about the beginning of the 7th century A.D. and not earlier are found in Valluvar s Kural. Examples are oppäri ( 1071 , Appar V , 3 , 1 ) , patti ( 1074 , Appar V , 5 , 1 ) , mādu, (wealth : 400 , Appar V , 77 , 4 ) , tuchchu ( 340. Appar IV , 69 , 8 ) .pākkiyam (Kural 1141 , Appar V , 48, 6 ) , Püsanai ( 18 , Appar IV , 76, 4 ) , naman ( 360, Appar V ,
90 , 5) , kodu ( 1264 , Appar V , 5 , 8 ) .
See Tamil-chudar -manigal, pp . 83-88.
The Didactic Works 63

his learning , culture and wisdom , his catholicity and eclecticism , his gentle humour and wholesome, counsel have made him an object of veneration for all time and his book is considered the Veda of the Tamils . The genius of the Tamil race has flowered to perfection in this great author believed to be a man of lowly birth .

The influence which his work , since its publication , exercised over the mind , life and literature of the Tamils is phenomenal . Gods and goddesses and poets of different times considered to be members of the Madurai Academy , are believed to have poured out their grateful encomia in verses collected together under the name of Tiruvalļuva -Mālai. Almost all the later poets are indebted to this work in one way or another . Some have enshrined a few of Valļuvar s sayings in their own verses . Some have composed works illustrating selected sayings with puranic and other stories. Several poets have been inspired to compose works on didactic morality , an apparently inexhaustible theme . Several learned scholars , as many as ten have tried to understand the mind of Vaļļuvar by writing commentaries on the work , the greatest of ten all being Parimēlalagar, a Brahmin commentator of the fourteenth century. Some scholars have written notes and glosses on the commentaries themselves . Above all , the work itself has been the subject of reverent study ever since its appearance . People of all ages , from children to old men , of all sorts and conditions , and of all religious persuasions have been devoutly studying this work , that followers of every religion began to claim him as their won . In short, he became a universal poet and his work became a universal work , appealing to the widest human interests and the simplest human emotions . When law courts were first instituted in our country, the judges and lawyers used to cite the Kura ! as a authority. Like the Bible , it was held sacred and used in administering oath to witnesses in courts . Even at the present day , it is studied as much as ever and it has been translated into several European languages .