| Tamil versus Sanskrit Passion of Language Although as a joke I often say that Tamil is the only heavenly language, I am happy that Tamil is my mother tongue. Though there are only a few languages that have a classical status, Tamil does deserve it, not just because of political pressure, but because of its recognition by non-Tamil scholars.¹ So, due to my passion for Tamil and the rich literature it has both on the secular and religious side, I naturally get irritated if anyone tries to underestimate its originality. In the field of comparative study with other languages, particularly with Sanskrit, if any scholar only refers to select sources that serve her purpose without presenting the whole picture, I doubt her very scholarship.² So, when I read Sheldon Pollock’s scholarly book The Language of the Gods in the World of Men, I was a bit taken aback by his approach to Tamil in comparison with Sanskrit. I am not a scholar in any field, not even in my mother tongue, so I was waiting patiently for other scholarly criticism of Pollock’s approach. When I read Bilingual Discourses and Cross-Cultural Fertilisation: Sanskrit and Tamil in Medieval India,³ I was satisfied as Pollock’s thesis was not accepted as the final one in this bilingual discourse. I have high regard and respect for every scholar, particularly outsiders who have invested their time and energy to learn one or more Indian languages and have done breakthrough research in their respective fields of scholarship. But just because they are non-Indians or have white skin and the universal commercial language, English, as their mother tongue, I cannot bow before them with reverence to glorify them. There is a general tendency among Indians that anything and everything from the West alone is best, and all the local name and form are the worst. I am not trying to condescend to them either; I respect all and accept that each one is best in her place and field. When I go to rural areas in the North, some village people used to glorify my scholarship and say that they are illiterate. Not agreeing with them, I would say, “You too are a scholar in your own field. I cannot plough even a small piece of land properly, whereas you plough several acres with much ease and with the utmost skill.” Coming to the subject of academic scholarship, however learned one is in her chosen field, the natives have a greater advantage of knowing all the minute details that a scholar cannot acquire by mere academic studies or selective field research. Take the Tamil language, for example. (I am not talking about Dravidian culture). However one may master all the major literature in Tamil, there are so many unwritten oral literatures that can only be learned through listening. Uncollected and unrecorded oral literature is so vast that even one lifetime is not enough for a person to master them all. Even among written texts, with such a vast ocean of secular and sacred literature, arriving at one definite conclusion on any thesis will never do justice to that particular subject. In recent days, Makkal TV is broadcasting Tamil music and comparing it with Carnatic music from ancient Sangam literature. In one program, Prof. Mahalingam was giving the meaning of the word ‘Dhevaram’ and pointed out how the traditional meaning derived from the Sanskrit word ‘Dhe-Hram’. Dhe means god, and Haram means garland; therefore, Devaram means ‘garland of poems for god’. But quoting from several pieces of literature, he proved that the word ‘varam’ is a dwelling place, and the song which is sung standing in that place of ‘Deva’ (god) is the correct meaning of the word ‘Devaram’. All these years, I also thought that ‘Devaram’ meant poems of garland for gods. In giving references, Prof. Mahalingam quoted one Kudambai Chittar song: தாவாரம் வீடில்லை; தனக்கோர் இடமில்லை தேவாரம் ஏதுக்கடி குதம்பாய் தேவாரம் ஏதுக்கடி There is no outer courtyard; there is no place to claim as one’s own Why the need for a dwelling (‘Devaram’) place for God? Of course, Mahalingam never explained the context of Chittar’s song, but he pointed out that in the first word, தாவாரம் (Thavaram), the word வாரம் (vaaram) stands for the dwelling place. He also quoted from various other sources, including royal edicts and copper plates. I too know that Chittar’s song, and that is one of my favorite lines. But I never understood its real meaning until now. As Chittar always opposed temple and idol worship, naturally here Kudambai Chittar too questioned the need for any temple. Further, Prof. Mahalingam gave the reference that ‘varam’ also means ‘giving a place or land for lease’ and also quoted, saying that this body is also considered as ‘varam’ that he got on lease from God. So, no matter how well-versed a scholar is in her chosen field, there is so much information scattered in oral literature and tradition that is not easily collected. Knowing this limitation, it is better for scholars to refrain from arriving at any strong conclusions, particularly in fields where vast amounts of information are available only outside their scope. For another scholarly discussion on this subject of comparing Dravidian languages with Sanskrit, see: K. Venkateswarlu, Colonialism, Orientalism and the Dravidian Languages, Routledge, New Delhi, 2012. I am restricting my temptation to quote elaborately from this book to endorse my view, which I read after I wrote this article. 15-11-2014 End Notes 1. …Although recognized by scholars for its ancient wealth of literature and being genuinely classical due to it, Tamil was boxed into a difficult position from which it had always to fight, so to speak, for its place against Sanskrit. Pushed into the corner of vernacular languages, Tamil struggled to obtain official status as a classical language from the Central Government of India. Through the machinations of Dravidian political parties and coalition electoral politics of the recent past, it was finally granted classical status in 2004.12—Passages: Relationships between Tamil and Sanskrit, ed. By Kannan M. Jennifer Clare, Institut Francais De Pondichery, Tamil Chair, Department of South And Southeast Asian Studies, University of California at Berkeley, 2009, Introduction by Kannan M. p. xiii.12 …Further to this, with other states of South India demanding classical status for their languages (Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam), regional electoral politics pushed the Central Government to grant classical status to Telugu and Kannada in 2008-2009. In this vein, what is not classical in India?—p. xiv. 2. A good example is the well-positioned book, rapidly coming to be regarded as a classic in the field, The Language of the Gods in the World of Men by Sheldon Pollock, which ventures to present a cultural history of Sanskrit. The uneasiness caused by Tamil and its history and literature being integral to the central thesis of the book cannot account for that presence. Ideally, this book should be read along with another, The Last Brahmin by Rani Siva Sankara Sarma (Rani Siva Sankara Sarma, translated from the Telugu by D. Venkat Rao, Permanent Black, New Delhi, 2007), for a clear picture of Sanskrit and its religious, caste foundations. Also see the review of The Languages of Gods in the World of Men by David Shulman, The Journal of Asian Studies (2007), 66:819-825, Cambridge University Press.—notes 20, p. xv, Introduction ibid. 3. Bilingual Discourses and Cross-Cultural Fertilisation: Sanskrit and Tamil in Medieval India, ed. Whitney Cox and Vincenzo Vergiani, Pondicherry, Institut Francais De Pondichery, 2013, and Passages: Relationships between Tamil and Sanskrit, ed. By Kannan M. Jennifer Clare, Institut Francais De Pondichery, Tamil Chair, Department of South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of California at Berkeley, 2009. |
Tamil versus Sanskrit
by
Tags:
Leave a Reply