Thirukural in Malayalam.
The book in its introduction does not give any authentic and critical biography of the author of Kural, who was he, what caste, community or religion. The time he lived and other details are just guess work on the part of scholastic people. In a serial novel published in Matrubhumi weekly last year, it was claimed that the author of Thiru Kural was in fact a Malayalee, a son of Vararuchi and Parachi, the legendary parents of 12 separate community personnel. According to the novelist Thiruvalluvar was on the Kaveri banks in Tanjavur under the Chola kings. However, author also said that Valluvar was resident of Mylapur in Madras
The 2nd chapter is about the rains therefore water. The rains are the source of everything worldly and also because of its godly aspect. This statement looks not much connected to god as such.
The 3rd chapter is about ascetics, those who have overcome their worldly desires and controlled their five senses. An example is made by taking the name of Indra. Indra was cursed by rishi Gautama. A question can be raised, whether it was proper for a rishi to get angry since, a rishi called rishi for his absolute control over his own senses. If any of his actions is caused or governed by his senses, he may not be rishi at all. In another stanza, the author is cautioning people against a rishi’s ire or anger. The characterization and explanation are pre-set and not amenable to questioning. This chapter at its end mentions about Veda teachings as being Dharma.
On the one hand people are asked to control and renounce sensual pleasures and on the other they are asked too to do Dharma so that they go to and enjoy the heavenly pleasures. No commentator makes any explanation and or gives reason on the contradictions in such exhortations. The commentator in this edition is not at all worried about such niceties. At certain occasions the meaning of Dharma is constricted to giving alms and performing rituals.
After going through the chapters one might find that the teachings in Kural more or less follow Brahminic concepts of Hindu Dharma. In several places the author makes out that the woman has no identity or existence apart from her wedded husband. . she should follow the advices and dictates of her husband in a way as a dutiful slave to the man. She also has the extra duty of begetting sons to the man to continue the family line. All exhortations for virtue, honesty and compassion are aimed at society divided into higher and lower castes. At one stage Kural makes out as it is in Geetha that one’s own caste dharma is higher than any other virtues. Swadharma will be more rewarding in other world, than others’ dharma though those are more virtuous in this world. One finds it difficult to go on reading these passages.
The expectation to find something different than the brahminic in the Kural did not materialize. Those thoughts are seemed to be of second hand. Still not all ideas are exact copies of Hindu dharma shastras. There are no rigid barriers emphasizing differences between castes. But some of the virtues extolled in Kural, sounds a little foreign to traditional Hindu thoughts and ideas. Some deep reading is necessary to make an honest opinion. One may correct in concluding that no one in Kerala thought of translating Kural i.e. the entire text in Malayalam for reasons that Kural does not contain anything new and they were already available in other compositions in Malayalam.
Chapter 27 starts with saying that accepting sufferance on oneself and not inflicting sufferance on others is the essence of Tapas. But the next stanza explains that such Tapas cannot obtained in this life unless he has accumulated the good of Tapas in his previous births. The meaning of the two stanzas amount to an assertion that no one in any life could meet the standard set to attain the Tapas. This seems to be an absurd argument. After so much of good though some contradictory thoughts through out the chapters on asceticism, the last chapter climaxes on fate, a fatalistic belief in unchanging fate that cannot be changed in any way. The fate or Vidhi is foreordained due to acts done in earlier birth or births. Even good and bad acts being practiced in this birth are fated from the earlier ones. This will mean that all thoughts and admonitions to do good, to act virtuous etc. advised by Kural itself are futile. If fate s followed back to earlier births, the result might be laughable. At certain stage we may have to stop and say that this is the first birth and there was earlier one. At that stage the meaning fate tumble down and collapse. At beginning there cannot be any fate to keep you guided since at that moment everything was fresh and new and there is no evil at all and for that matter anything good as well. One is amazed by such naivety of the thought. No commentator seems to be bothered on such statements. All Hindus stumble upon the thought of fate as their ultimate reality. Thirukural seems to have no other message than those there in several neethi shastras in Sanskrit. Ofcourse there is no proclamation of chaturvarnyam system or the superiority of Brahminism, as in case of others. On the hand there exists an exaltation of asceticism combined with similar exaltation of grihasta or house holders life. Although the characterization of these two modes of life contradict each other, they exhort people to be a good grihasta and do good in life.
There is general approval for divine grace but they are depicted as something separate entities from gods and goddesses. The words used in their description are not not exactly equivalent to Sanskrit words nor do they carry similar meanings. A significant point through out the text is one that it sees no separate entity as a god unlike in other dvaita or advaita philosophies. Some later literary scholars find the Kural as a composition of a Jaina monk. This Malayalam translator makes him a Hindu.
K.N.Krishnan.
February 1999.
No comments:
Post a Comment