Not for me Not for you

Sometime ago my friend Ravikumar mentioned on Twitter TL that Sanskrit has a powerful tool of religion that even ancient Sangam Tamil lacked it. This is a common current and I guess I too swam along the current without giving it a much thought.

The discovery by Sanskrit grammarians of potency or energy at the root of a sound or a letter is what propelled Sanskrit towards becoming a ‘religious’ language and ‘deva bhasha.’ This Bija Shakti or potency at root enables mantras and hastens a person’s march towards realization of the Ultimate. This gave rationale to the existence of Sanskrit as exclusively ‘religious’ language, often not connected with things mundane and also gave ‘elitist language’ image to it.  

Contrary to facts, many believe that Tamilians did not stumble upon this ‘secret’ and hence remained, by and large as language of masses completely devoid of infrastructure to address the aspirations of those attempting to transcend the phenomena. Nothing could be farther from truth than this. 

The very formation, nomenclature, genealogy and evolution of Tamil characters and sounds as evident in numerous works like Tolkaappiam and Ainthiram of the past to later sangam treatises to extraordinary works of Aalvaars and Naayanmaars betray sound understanding of the sound and energy surrounding the language.

Then why don’t Tamil traditions boast of eclectic philosophies of language as Sanskrit? Tamil philosophical traditions highlight the correct understanding and practice of religion and spirituality. It is very short sighted and amateurish to measure that which is immeasurable (yo vai bhuma tat sukham …) or reach the Ultimate with sound of words which is beyond senses (eyes go not, ears hear not…that). All along what one sees is the amplification of wailings, aspirations, hopes and despairs of humans set out in search of the Ultimate. Here Tamil scores a resounding victory over Sanskrit.

What about this claim of ‘deva bhasha’? It is widely assumed that it is Sanskrit that is used in the Vedas. I am not very sure. Yaaska, the master of Sanskrit and who lived more than 2000 years ago claims that he could not recognize more than 400 words. By the time Saayana, the forerunner of U.Ve.Sa arrived, some 1300 years later, meanings to more than 2000 words were unknown. I am not arriving at any conclusion here. Let those read this, let them decide for themselves.

A lot has been written about the pre-dominantly secular nature of Sangam poetry.  The influence of Jainism and Buddhism is cited as a main reason for this. This is the slap on the face of Tamil traditions. Even their most abstract metaphysics or the religious traditions are not very evocative about that which lies beyond and are highly understated. It is their strength.

I love Sanskrit. I love reading and writing it. It is very ancient and very dense. I have stumbled upon some of the finest expressions that human mind can think of in Sanskrit. But my vote would still go for Tamil, for it is still an open language and yet has not lost its core. It is a language which can be used in metaphysics and mathematics, yet not far away from the illiterate masses. It spreads its wings to farthest corners of the cosmos and yet does not lose sight of the near and immediate.

Tamil epitomizes that which is quietly efficient. That which can be expressed should be expressed and that which has to be wondered at, dreamt about and philosophized with should remain unexpressed. My ears are deaf to the fanatical screams of the disciples of 36^th chamber of devaneya paavaanar school. My ears do not open for the disciples of 37th chamber of discrete sanskritists either. 

If you haven’t noticed yet, I am writing all this in English, not in Tamil or Sanskrit. That in itself should narrate a wonderful tale of ……….. Ha ha ha!