chap_5_3
chapter_5_2.html
chapter_5_3.html
chapter_5_4.html
TIRUKKURAL
An Abridgement of Śāstras
R. Nagaswamy
VOLUME - II
Poruṭpāl
5.3. SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Whatever be the decision which future research will arrive at in regard to the above particulars, it is a fact of the utmost importance that the Kuṟaḷ and other poems of Kīḻkkaṇakku deal with the trivarga or the muppāl. Though a cursory examination of the work has been made already, still we shall proceed to examine the same in detail to know whether any facts could be gleaned from the fiction that has gathered around this notable poet and philosopher. The chief sources of information for the life sketch of this author are the Kapilar Ahaval and the Tiruvaḷḷuvamālai, while the Ceylon traditions as transmitted in its chronicles throw some welcome light. Besides, we have multifarious references in Tamiḻ classical literature which go a long way to fix the chronological limits of Vaḷḷuvar's age.
Legends — Of these the story contained in the Kapilar Ahaval belongs to the realm of pure mythology. A reference to this work and its value to the historian of Tamiḻ India has already been made in our study of the Saṅgam poet, Kapilar. The story runs that he was the son of a Brāhman, Bhagavān by name, by his wife, a Pulaya woman, named Ādi. The circumstances which brought about their marriage are peculiar and quite incredible. One vow taken by them on the eve of the marriage was to give away their children as presents and retain none. It is said that the marriage was over and as time went by, they had seven children four daughters and three sons. The four daughters were Uppai, Uruvai, Avvai and Vaḷḷi. These were presented to a washerman, a toddy-drawer, a pāṇaṉ, and a kurava respectively, who brought them up. The three sons were Atikamāṉ, Kapilar, and Vaḷḷuvar. While Atikamāṉ became the adopted son of the chieftain of Vañji, Kapilar was brought up by a Brāhaman. Vaḷḷuvar was presented to one Vaḷḷuva, a resident of the modern Mylapore. Thus the parents fulfilled the vow which they took on the occasion of their marriage. Tradition further narrates that the adopted father introduced Vaḷḷuvar to the profession of weaving in which he spent his time.
Criticism of the Legend — The story is so full of inaccuracies and incredible statements that we are afraid there is no basis of truth in it except the mention of the two names Bhagavān and Ādi. These names are found in the first Kuṟaḷ in the order of the Ādi-Bhagavan, which means, the God of the Universe and has possibly nothing to do with his parentage. There is no reliable literary evidence, first in regard to his parents, his brothers and sisters. Secondly, his adoption by a Vaḷḷuva, and thirdly his being brought up in Mylapore, and lastly his taking to the profession of a weaver. It seems that the ingenious author of the legend took up the compound word Ādi-Bhagavan in the first Kuṟaḷ and also the name of Vaḷḷuvan, and wove a story out of his fertile imagination. அகர முதல எழுத்தெல்லாம் ஆதி பகவன் முதற்றே உலகு — (1.1). To repeat once again, it is a very late work and the account contained therein cannot be credited with any authenticity whatsoever.
The story of the Tiruvaḷḷuvamālai — The circumstances under which the Tiruvaḷḷuamālai came to be written, and the legend that has gathered around this, are of supreme interest. It is said that Vaḷḷuvar was not merely a weaver but also a man of letters and an erudite scholar (See Abhidānachintāmaṇi). His profound scholarship attracted to him Elelasinga, a prominent merchant, who carried on overseas trade. Elelasinga became much attracted to Vaḷḷuvar and accepted him as his teacher. At his request and for the use of his son, Vaḷḷuvar composed the great Kuṟaḷ. What was originally intended for a single individual has become the book of morals to be usefully read by the whole world. In that golden age when Vaḷḷuvar had the good fortune to live, it was the custom to get every literary work approved by the Saṅgam Assembly, then located at Madura. In accordance with this practice, the book was taken to the Saṅgam Hall. At that time, forty-nine poets were the guiding lights of the Academy. When the work was presented it met with opposition from all sides. It was remarked that it was an inferior composition much beneath the recognition of the Saṅgam. But when it was pressed that it might be placed on the Saṅgam plank and thus tested, it was agreed to. Once this was done, the Saṅgam plank made enough room to be occupied by the book, to the utter surprise of the members of the Academy. They then recognized the great value of the work and placed the author in the first rank of the poets.
This was not all. Every one of the forty-nine realized their mistake in having rejected Vaḷḷuvar’s work in the first instance, and perhaps to make up for it, every one of them hailed it as a first-class work by singing a verse in praise of the work, the Kuṟaḷ and it's celebrated author. Iṟaiyanār (God Śiva in disguise) compared the poet’s tongue to the kalpa flower. Goddess Sarasvati claimed it as the Veda itself. The King Ukirap-peru-vaḻuti compared Vaḷḷuvar to Brahma himself. Similar panegyrics were uttered by every one of the poets constituting the Saṅgam. A collection of these songs was then made and thence it went by the name of Tiruvaḷḷuvamālai.
The story in the Ceylonese Chronicles — Another source of information is the semi-legendary story of Elelasinga as narrated in the Ceylon Chronicles. These documents mention various incidents connected with the story of Alara and the term Alara is only a corruption of the Tamil world Elela, the just and proper ruler that ever ruled the island of Ceylon. It is said that this Alara of Elela was a noble of the Cōḻa kingdom who invaded Ceylon with an army, had the local ruler Asela defeated and slain, got himself crowned king of the island, and reigned for forty-four years from 145 to 101 B.C (Mahavamsa, Ed. Wm. Geiger (1912) Intro, p. xxxvii) He ruled the island so justly and impartially that he was loved by all classes of people. The details of his administration of justice, such as hanging up a bell of justice to be rung by such who should be in need of justice, killing his son who had accidentally killed a calf, offering his head to be cut off as a penalty for unwittingly damaging a stupa, need not detain us at present (Mahavamsa, S. B. of Ceylon, vol, I, pp. 107-10)
Apart from the story, what is of importance to us is, that if Alara or Elela can be proved to be the Elela, disciple, and contemporary of Vaḷḷuvar, then there is a clue and a remarkable clue to attribute the author of the Kuṟaḷ to the second century B.C.E.
Criticism of the Legends — The following arguments disprove the authenticity of the legends mentioned above. First, the reference to semi-Brahmanical parentage is curious and unworthy of the birth story of a saint like Vaḷḷuvar. The Ādi-Bhagavan in the first Kuṟaḷ veṇpā refers to God and certainly not to his parents.
Secondly, Atikamān is a king of much repute who is extolled by poets like Kapilar and Avvaiyār. Thirdly, the adoption of the poet by a Vaḷḷuva at Mylapore is yet to be proved. Even if this were proved there is the difficulty of interpreting the term Vaḷḷuva. Was it the name of caste, or the name of a person, or the name of an office, these are questions, the answer to which is shrouded in deep mystery. Vaḷḷuva may mean a member of the depressed classes, a priest, a foreteller, a nobleman, and an officer of the State. This interpretation could be sustained if the term could be identified with the Sanskrit term Vallabha (See The Tamilian Friend, vol. x, pp 7-9).
Fourthly, there is nothing to corroborate the fact that Vaḷḷuvar took to the occupation of weaving (See the twenty-first poem of Tiruvaḷḷuvamalai attributed to Nalkur Veḷviyār). What is known is that Vaḷḷuvar was a native of Madura. But if we could credit the tradition in the Tamiḻ Nāvalar Caritam with any authenticity, there is here a stanza attributed to Vaḷḷuvar himself where he says that his profession was weaving - கக்கிநூனெருடு மேழை.
From the fact that this line and the stanza wherein occurs this line admit other interpretations, we cannot cite this as an authority to hang anything like a theory.
Fifthly, the circumstances narrated for the composition of the Tiruvaḷḷuvamālai contain an epic interest not quite useful for purposes of historical investigation.
Sixthly, the introduction of Gods and Goddesses like Śiva, and Sarasvati presupposes a super-human atmosphere far from being believed by ordinary men. The introduction of these deities detracts from the value of the document as a reliable account.
Seventhly, the same epic and puranic interest centers around the story of the Alara in the Ceylon traditions. How this story is an authentic one is not possible to say.
Probable Historical Data of the Legends —Despite such inconsistencies and incredibilities, the legends could not be set aside as affording any value to a student of history. Bereft of the story, the Tiruvaḷḷuvamālai bears out the suggestion that Vaḷḷuvar was a member of the so-called third Saṅgam and a contemporary of some of the celebrated Saṅgam poets. We can also gather that he bore the name of Vaḷḷuvar. It may be that the saint belonged to the Vaḷḷuvakkuṭi, a community whose profession was to publish Government orders by the beat of the drum. It is the interesting suggestion of Professor Rangacariyar that the term Vaḷḷuvar is equal to Rajanya in Sanskrit literature, and that from the political and practical wisdom he displays in the book (See Studies in Sangam History, Ed. Review, October 1928.), Vaḷḷuvar must have held one of the high offices of the State. We are reminded of the fact that a political theorist like Kauṭalya wrote his treatise, the Artha Śāstra for his Narendra or King Chandragupta. In a similar manner, Vaḷḷuvar might possibly have done this as a guide to his friend Elela or his son. It is also possible that just as Kauṭalya was appointed Chancellor of the Empire, Vaḷḷuvar might have been chosen for a high office of the State.
Though there is nothing impossible in this, yet, there is nothing definite to venture a conjecture like this. If this could be proved, it would falsify the suggestion that the term denoted the caste, and not office or occupation.