1.1.
Brahminical Hinduism
During the time of Valluvar (100 to 600 AD), what we call Hinduism now must
have existed then as the Brahminical Hindiusm, a religion based on the varna
or caste system. It is also important to distinguish between Vedic
and Brahminical Hinduism. The actual Vedas themselves do not emphasize
Brahmnical ideals, unlike later texts like Brahmanas, Upanishads or the Sastras
and Smritis. Since Valluvar's period is generally agreed to fall somewhere
between the 1st century AD and 4th century AD, it is only pertinent that we
compare Valluvar's work with the thoughts and ideas that were expressed in
texts that appeared during the post-Vedic period of Brahminical dominance.
Though Brahminic law is said to have been based on the Vedas (Manu II.7), there
is no doubt that the law superceded the Vedas. Moreover, Valluvar makes
references to the priestly class (அறுதொழிலோர்) or Brahmins (பார்ப்பான்) which further goes
on to show that he must have lived during the period of Brahminical Hinduism.
Manu
Smriti (Laws of Manu) is widely regarded as the defining document of
Brahminical Hinduism (Kishwar, 2000). We take Manu Smriti, a text to which the
Kuŗal has some resemblances (Aiyankar, 1923; Sundararam, 1990), for comparison
here.
Five
virtues (dakshinās) in Upanishad
In
every religious tradition of India, there appears to be a set of five mandatory
moral commandments to be followed by householders and/or monks. Chāndogya
Upanishad (3.17.4) mentions that the inculcation of the following five virtues
for priests and others (Sharma, 1991):
(i) Penance (tapah)
(ii) Charity (dānam)
(iii) Right conduct (ārjavam)
(iv) Non-injury (ahimsā) and
(v) Speaking truth (sathya vacanam)
Kuŗal
has specific chapters dealing with these virtues. Penance (Ch. 27), Charity
(Ch. 23), Right Conduct (Ch. 14), Not killing (Ch. 33) and Truthfulness (Ch.
30). We see another closely similar set of five ethical commandments in Manu
Smriti. Manu declares the following as the summary of the law for the four
castes (Manu Smriti. X:63):
(i) Abstention from injuring (creatures), (ahimsā)
(ii) Veracity or Truthfulness (satyam)
(iii) Abstention from unlawfully appropriating (the goods of others), (asteyam)
(iv) Purity (saucham), and
(v) Control of the organs (indriya nigraha)
Once
again, we can identify the equivalent chapters in Tirukkuŗal for most of these
virtues. The most obvious similarity between these two lists is the mention of
"Non-injury" (ahimsā) but at the same time
"truthfulness" (satyā). We see Manu condemning meat
eating, that too in Valluvar's own terms (Manu 5:52 is just like Kuŗal 251!),
which makes us believe that Manu promoted vegetarianism. Though this sounds
very similar to the ethics of Tiruvalluvar, Manu does not consider animal
sacrifice as himsa!
Svayambhu (the Self-existent) himself created animals for
the sake of sacrifices;
Sacrifices (have been instituted) for the good of this whole (world);
Hence the slaughtering (of beasts) for sacrifices is not slaughtering.
(Manu Smriti 5:39)
But
the most important reason for considering Manu Smriti as a Brahminical text
stems from the the frequent references Manu makes on the four varnās -
the caste system, giving special preference and exceptions to Brahmins. Manu
says a Brahmana retains his divinity whether he is learned or ignorant
(IX: 317), but Valluvar would say "The
ignorant, however high-born, is lower than the low-born learned"
PS (409). Manu Smriti
adores varnā system, but the Kuŗal has not a word about it. Valluvar, in
the following couplet, says inequality arises not by birth but by one's deeds:
Kuŗal
972:
By birth all men are equal. The differences in their action
Render their worth unequal. SM
With
respect to the varņā concept, the Gītā is also no different from Manu
Smriti for it also sanctions the division amongst men. Lord Krishna says in
Gītā (4:13) that the four divisions of human society were created by him.
By
highlighting the absence of clear cut references to the āśrama scheme
(i.e. stages of Student, Householder, Retirement, Renunciation) and the absence
of delineation of duties as per the Vedic varņā concept found in Dharma
Śāstras like Manu Smriti, Gopalan (1979) concluded that the Kuŗal does not
wholly accept all the major ideas of Brahminical Hinduism. But Gopalan missed
out this verse which Chakravarti (1944) believes is a condemnation of animal
sacrifice, an age old Vedic practice.
Kuŗal
259:
Better than a thousand burnt offerings
Is one life un-killed, un-eaten. PS
This is the only
couplet in Chapter 26 "Shunning meat" that links meat eating with
burnt offerings or sacrifice. Since "burnt offerings" (அவிசொரிந்து வேட்டல்) has been linked to
"killing and not eating" (உயிர் செகுத்து உண்ணாமை), one may be tempted to argue
that Valluvar is discouraging the practice of animal sacrifice here. The truth
of the matter is that Valluvar here does not consider offerings as a practice
to be avoided. We see verses of similar import in may sacred texts of the word
that employ "burnt offerings" as simile to compare with a virtuous
act. In Dhammapāda (106), Buddha says "Better is reverence to one soul
than a hundred years of sacrifice with a thousand offerings". Hitopadesa (IV.13) has this verse:
"When weighed against each other, truth alone weighs more than thousand
horse sacrifices". In the Bible also we have few verses that speak
about offerings. We see this, for instance, in Hosea (6:6): "I desired
Mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God is more than burnt offerings".
Even Sankardeva, 16th century Vaishnavite saint of Assam,
had this to say: "Even the performance of millions of
horse-sacrifices is not equal to the one deed of giving shelter to a distressed
creature” (Bhagavata,
VIII. V. 205). All these verses do not condemn offerings or sacrifices done
with animals. So also when Valluvar says leaving one life without being killed
is better than a 1000 burnt offerings.
Interestingly, the Manu who promulgated animal sacrifice says in another
place that one who abstains from meat obtains the same reward as one who does
hundred years of horse-sacrifice (Manu Smriti, V.53). This is similar to what Valluvar said. In many other
couplets, Valluvar links meat eating with grace, compassion and mercy (couplets
251, 252, 253), predicts hellish life for meat eaters (255) and even digs at
those who eat meat without themselves being responsible for killing (256). It
is pertinent to refer to Parithiyar's commentary on this verse here because it
differs from what we have inferred so far: "நெய் முதலானவற்றை ஓமத்திலே சொரிந்து ஆயிரம் யாகம் செய்வதில், ஓர் உயிரைக் கொன்று புலால் தின்னாமை நன்று என்றவாறு." (i.e. Better not kill a life and
eat it while doing 1000 burnt offerings). Being such a staunch promoter of
vegetarianism and not-killing, it is quite natural that Valluvar would have
anyway opposed the Vedic practice of sacrifice with animal offerings.
Though Hindu
Sāstrās sometime dictate not to take any life, the Hindus at least hold that it
is not a sin to kill animals during Yājnās involving animal sacrifice
(Vivekananda, Complete Works V 481.2). In fact animal killing is obligatory on
the part of Hindu householders in some occasions like Shraddha
(Vivekananda, Complete Works V 482.1) (Vivekananda, 1989). This is what exactly
has been reflected in Manu Dharmasāstra. Though Manu has prescribed ahimsā,
it is conspicuously missing from the tenfold law (Manu Smriti VI:92) that he
prescribes for Brahmins and others (Table 1).
Table 1. Tenfold law
of Manu and the corresponding chapters in Kuŗal
No
|
Prescribed by Manu
|
Equivalent chapters in Kuŗal
|
1
|
Contentment (Dhairiya)
|
Avoiding fraud (கள்ளாமை)
Self
control (அடக்கமுடைமை)
|
2
|
Forgiveness (Kşamā)
|
Forbearance (பொறை உடைமை)
|
3
|
Self-control (Dama)
|
Self control (அடக்கமுடைமை)
|
4
|
Abstinence from misappropriation (Asteya)
|
Not coveting (வெஃகாமை)
|
5
|
Obedience to the rules of purification (Śauca)
|
(Not represented in Kuŗal)
|
6
|
Coercion of the organs (Indriya nigraha)
|
(Not found, though chapter 15 can be considered)
|
7
|
Wisdom (Dhi)
|
Possession of wisdom (அறிவுடைமை)
|
8
|
Knowledge of the Supreme (Vidyā)
|
Truth Realization (மெய்யுணர்தல்)
|
9
|
Truthfulness (Satya)
|
Truthfulness (வாய்மை)
|
10
|
Abstention from anger (Akrodha)
|
Avoiding wrath (வெகுளாமை)
|
From
the information we have gathered so far, we cannot conclusively establish that
Valluvar was against the Vedic practice of killing animal during Yājnās.
Valluvar makes occasional references to some of the Brahmincal religious
beliefs that prevailed amongst the people of his time, some of which appear to
be of Brahminical Hindu origin. This has been dealt in section 4 on "God
and gods in Kuŗal".
1.2.
Affiliation to Buddhism
Though claims on Kuŗal being a Buddhist work are rare, it is not uncommon to
see questions being raised, and articles being written every now and then
to show that Valluvar could have also belonged to the Buddhist sect.
Uthayakumar (2004), in his detailed article on "Kuŗal and Indian
Politics" reiterates that the Kuŗal is nothing but a work of a Buddhist
author of Mahayana sect. He asks why the chapters in Kuŗal namely "Praise
of God", "Glory of rain", "Greatness of ascetics" and
"Emphasis on Virtue" have been placed in the beginning as the first
four chapters. He identifies Chapters 1, 4 and 3 (Praise of God, Emphasis on
Virtue and Greatness of ascetics) with the Buddhists Triple gems of Buddha,
Dhamma and Sangha. The Dhammapādā (190) says "One who takes refuge in the Buddha, in the Dhamma and the
Sangha, with perfect knowledge, perceives the four Noble Truths".
No one has thought of the Proem (பாயிரம்) in Kuŗal in this angle and the claim
definitely is worth considering. The invocations in the first chapter should
then fit the descriptions of Lord Buddha. We will take this for a detailed
analysis in section 5.
While
investigating the possible affiliation of the Kuŗal to Buddhist philosophical
tradition, Gopalan (1979) took five characteristics of Buddhism namely anātma
(no soul), atheism, nihilism, pessimism and renunciation and compared these
with the ideas found in Kuŗal. He pointed out the difference in the treatment
of renunciation between Kuŗal and Dhammapāda, and the similarity in the
treatment of extirpation of desire between these texts. Since there is no
evidence of nihilism or pessimism in the Kuŗal, he concluded that it cannot be
considered a work of Buddhist influence. However, as we will see repeatedly in
the article, the religious affiliation of an ethical treatise like Tirukkuŗal
cannot be established by looking for the presence or absence of
religio-philosophical ideas in it.
Five
moral percepts (pañca-sila) in Buddhism
Like
the five virtues enlisted in the Chāndogya Upanishad and Manu Smriti, Buddhism
has first five (pañca-sila) of the 10 moral percepts (Mahāvagga 1:56):
(i) To abstain from killing,
(ii) To abstain from taking what has not been given,
(iii) To abstain from sexual misconduct,
(iv) To abstain from false speech, and
(v) To abstain from intoxicants that cloud the mind.
The
fact that these five moral percepts are important Buddhist virtues can be
realized from its very presence in Dhammapādā itself: "Whoever destroys life in the world or speaks wrongly, takes
what was not given, or goes to another's wife, or a person who drinks intoxicating
liquors, digs up his own root in this very world" (Verses:
246-247). The householders could observe these first five in lieu of observing
the second five, and also support the monks who observed all of them (Mathews,
1991). But for the last percept, the first four look strikingly similar to the
five vows or vratās of Jains! Valluvar has indeed devoted a chapter each
for all these moral percepts!
The
second five percepts to be followed by monks are (i) Eating moderately, (ii)
avoiding spectacles like singing and dramas, (iii) not using flowers, perfumes
or jewelry, (iv) using simple beds and (v) accepting no gold or silver (money).
Of these five, Valluvar has only emphasized on moderate eating.
In
addition to pañca-silas, Buddha has put of forward a second course of
action for laymen to follow, called Brahma-vihāra or the 'sublime way of
life' (Baruah, 2001). These are kindness (mettā), compassion (karuña)
and equanimity (upekkhā). No doubt Valluvar has devoted chapters for
these as well. Parallels from the Kuŗal can be found even for the 10
perfections (pāramis) enrolled in Buddhism (Sangharakshita, 1985). These
have been tabulated in Table 2 with corresponding chapters in Kuŗal.
Table 2. Buddhism's ten perfections and the relevant
chapters in Kuŗal
No
|
Ten Perfections
(paramis)
|
Relevant
chapters in Kuŗal
|
Chapter number
|
1
|
Generosity (dāna)
|
Charity (ஈகை)
|
23
|
2
|
Morality (síla)
|
Virtue (அறன் வலியுறுத்தல்)
|
4
|
3
|
Renunciation (nekkhamma)
|
Renunciation (துறவு)
|
35
|
4
|
Wisdom (paññā)
|
Wisdom (அறிவுடைமை)
|
43
|
5
|
Energy (viriya)
|
Energy (ஊக்கம் உடைமை)
|
60
|
6
|
Patience (khanti)
|
Forbearance (பொறை உடைமை)
|
16
|
7
|
Truthfulness (sacca)
|
Truthfulness (வாய்மை)
|
30
|
8
|
Resolution (adhitthāna)
|
Self control (அடக்கம் உடைமை)
|
13
|
9
|
Loving kindness (mettā)
|
Kindness (அருள் உடைமை)
|
25
|
10
|
Equanimity (upekkhā)
|
Impartiality (நடுவு நிலைமை)
|
12
|
Parallels
can also be found in the Kuŗal for nearly all the 10 good acts advised for lay
and monastic in Mahayana sutras. (i) Not to kill, (ii) Not to steal, (iii) Not
to commit adultry, (iv) Not to lie, (v) Not to use harsh words, (vi) Not to
utter words causing enmity between people, (vii) Not to engage in idle talk,
(viii) Not to be greedy, (ix) Not to be angry and (x) Not to have wrong views.
The first four coincide with the first four concepts emphasized in Hinayana
Buddhism, the fifth one being not to drink intoxicants which also finds a place
in Tirukkuŗal. Subramanian and Rajalakshmi (1984) mention that the Tamil
Buddhist work சீலபாரமிதை
prescribes many of the ethical values found in the Kuŗal. These include கொல்லாமை (Ch.33), கள்ளாமை (Ch. 29), காமமின்மை (Ch. 37), பொய்யாமை
(Ch. 30), புறங்கூறாமை (Ch. 19), வன்சொலியம்பாமை (Ch. 10), பயனில மொழியாமை (Ch. 20), வெஃகாமை (Ch.
18), வெகுளாமை
(Ch. 31), தற்காட்சி (Ch. 36).
We
can safely say that Kuŗal contains plenty of Buddhist ideas as well for us
consider the Kuŗal as a work based on Buddhist percepts. Since Kuŗal is an
ethical work and Buddhism is a religion of moral values, the author has only
taken advantage of the moral teachings like percepts and perfections found in
Buddhism and not the Buddhist doctrines like existence of suffering, cause of
suffering, methods of cessation of suffering etc.
However,
Valluvar seem to differ in one important aspect from the Buddhist views. Let us
go back to the first of the five percepts, namely abstinence from killing which
is nothing but an emphasizes on ahimsā dharma. One of the
unanswered mysteries in Buddhist concept of ahimsā has been the sanction
to eat meat as long as they do not kill the animal (see Chakravarti, 1944, page
34). We do not know if Buddha himself gave this relaxation, but we know for
sure that this is the practice in Buddhism. It is clear from Kuŗal that
Valluvar was not in agreement with this Buddhist compromise. The following
couplet from Kuŗal seem to have been composed to answer the Buddhist conception
of eating meat of animals that have not been killed by them:
Kuŗal
256:
The world may say: “Meat we eat, but don’t kill’.
But no one will sell if there is none to buy. * KS
ahimsā
Gopalan (1979)
deals with Jaina claims more elaborately for he himself agrees that stronger
claims have come from Jainism than from Buddhism. Let us now look for Jaina
ideas in Kuŗal. If ahimsā or no-violence is the foundation
of Jainism, then we have many places in Kuŗal that reiterate the principle of
non-killing.
- Valluvar himself asks the
question: What is virtue?
And the reply is "not killing because killing causes every ill"
(321)
- In a different context, he
asks: “What is grace and disgrace?”.
He gives the same reply: "killing is disgrace and non-killing
grace". (254)
- To another question, “What is
the perfect path”, he says the same:
“It is the path of avoiding killing anything” (324)
- If you ask him “What is the
characteristic of penance”
He says it lies in "harming no life" (261) and in
"non-killing" (984)
- And what is the topmost teaching ever written?
Here also the answer is no different:
"It is to share your food and protect all life" (322)
Sutrakritanga of Jainism says "A man should
wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated"
(1.11.33). Valluvar even goes a step higher and says in couplet 327:
Avoid removing the dear life of another
Even when your own life is under threat. NV
There is no doubt that the foremost teaching of Valluvar is ahimsā or
Not killing. But are these references to ahimsā sufficient enough to
conclude that only a person of Jaina faith would have written the Kuŗal? Many
non-Jaina works also reiterate the concept of ahimsā, but they do not
repeatedly emphasize Not-killing as a virtue, grace, as a characteristic of
penance, as the perfect path and the topmost code to have been ever written!
Five
vows (vratās) in Jainism
Valluvar has also dealt with the five vows in Jainism in different chapters.
Just like the five moral percepts in Buddhism, the Jaina religion has laid down
the five small vows for a householder. A Jaina householder is expected to
abstain from following acts called (five) small vows:
(i) Injury to living beings (himsa),
(ii) Speaking falsehood,
(iii) Taking away a thing which is not given (theft),
(iv) Sexual enjoyment with other than one's own wife (incontinence), and
(v) Limitless desire for possessions (parigraha)
(Saman Suttam, Sūtrā 309)
A closely similar set of five vows are listed as five great vows (mahāvratās)
for monks. These include: (1) Non-injury (2) Refraining from falsehood, (3) Not
appropriating un-offered things (4) Celibacy and (5) Freedom from possessions
(Ashta Pahuda, III:31). As in the case of Buddhist moral percepts, so too for
Jaina vows one can identify relevant chapters in Tirukkuŗal. Valluvar has
devoted separate chapters to discuss all these five, spread across Domestic
virtue and Ascetic virtue.
Chapter
33: Non-killing
Chapter 30. Not speaking falsehood
Chapters 18 & 29. Not coveting & Avoiding
fraud
Chapters 15 & 28. Not coveting another's wife and
Hypocrisy
Chapters 3718, & 29. Eradicating desire, Not
coveting & Avoiding fraud
However
these five vows also occur in some Hindu scriptures like Yoga Sutra as five
restraints. We have already seen Manu (10:63) summarizing the law for the four
castes in five points using almost the same words and roughly in the same
order! In Yoga Sutra, Patanjali's says "Non-harming,
truthfulness, non-stealing, chastity and greedlessness are the restraints"
(Yoga Sutra, II.30). This uncanny resemblance of these five yāmās to the
five vows of Jainism has been already pointed out by scholars like Worthington
(1982) and Zydenbos (2006) who attribute this to the strong influence of
Jainism [*].
Patanjali's work has been traditionally attributed by scholars as a 'Hindu'
work (Sivananda, 2009) as it contains references to
Ishvara and prānava (the symbol "OM") (Sutras I.24-26).
However Patanjali has been frequently criticized for his diluted concept of
Ishwara (Feuerstein, 1979) as it is not according to the established tradition
(Pungaliya, 2004). His Ishvara is not a creator
but a person whose sins are destroyed, a concept said to be very near to Jaina dharshana
(Sree Swatmarama Yogi, cited by Pungaliya, 2004). Prior to the period of Hindu
revivalism, when no clear distinction with regard to moral percepts existed
between Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina and Sankhya systems, it not surprising to see
such an overlap of ethical ideas in sacred texts of these philosophical
systems. It is therefore difficult to accredit certain works to any particular
system recognized in the present day. The vows are sometimes emphasized by
Hindu monks even in contemporary times. Swami Vivekananda, says: "These practices - non-killing, truthfulness,
non-stealing, chastity, and non-receiving - are to be practiced by every man,
woman and child....." I.261.1.
The
characteristic of Jainism is that, of the five vratās or vows, the
second vratā truthfulness is subordinate to the the first vratā of
ahimsā (Jain, 2002a). Valluvar states this explicitly in Kuŗal in the
following words:
Kuŗal
323.
ஒன்றாக நல்லது கொல்லாமை மற்றதன்
பின்சாரப் பொய்யாமை நன்று.
The first and foremost good is ‘Non killing’.
Next to it in rank comes ‘Not lying’. NV
Valluvar
places satyā after ahimsā which is in direct contradiction to Harichandra
who put satyā above ahimsā (Subramanian and Rajalakshmi, 1984).
Interestingly, the Jaina definition of 'Truthfulness' or 'Not speaking
falsehood' itself has ahimsā connotation. Says Jain (2002) in his book
on Jaina Tradition: "It is interesting to note that even speaking truth
which results in injury to others should be avoided". Sūtrā 400
under Self-control in Saman Suttam, an anthology of popular Jaina sūtrās,
says:.
तहेव फरुसा भासा, गुरुभूओवघाइअणी ।
सच्चा-वि सा न वत्तव्वा, जओ पावस्स आगमो ॥१७॥
The monk should not use harsh words
Or speak what is harmful to other living beings;
Even if its true, because it is sinful. (400)
Three
points have been brought out in the above Sūtrā:
(i)
What is to be avoided? Speaking harsh words.
(ii) What is a harsh word? That which harms other living beings.
(iii) What to do if the truth to be conveyed causes harm? Avoid it, because it
is a sin.
The
last point is worth taking note of. Anything that harms others should be
avoided, even if it is the truth. In other words, better lie than speak the
truth in situations that may harm the other. This is exactly what Valluvar says
in the very first two couplets in chapter 30 on Truthfulness.
Couplet
291.
வாய்மை எனப்படுவது யாதெனின் யாதொன்றும்
தீமை இலாத சொலல்.
What is truthfulness? It is nothing but
Utterance wholly devoid of ill. VS, PS
Couplet
292.
பொய்மையும் வாய்மை இடத்த புரைதீர்ந்த
நன்மை பயக்கும் எனின்.
Even a lie would take the place of truth,
If it brings blameless benefit. NV, VR
Valluvar's
definition of truthfulness is perhaps the most clinching evidence, if one may
say so, to prove his inclination towards Jaina ideals and morality.
The Jaina commentator of the 16th century AD Vāmana Munivar (சமய திவாகர வாமன முனிவர்)
while commenting on the Jaina work Neelakéci, cites this couplet from Kuŗal and
adds the phrase "so says our scripture" (எம் ஒத்து ஆதலின்)
(Zvelebil, 1975; Shanmugampillai, 2005). Sabramanyam (1987) reiterates
that it is in this chapter that the poet implies the ahimsā doctrine of
the Jainas. Interestingly such a definition of truthfulness is not hard to find
in other texts as well! In Panchatantra (Book III in 'Crows and Owls'), we see
a similar pronouncement: "Even truth should be
concealed if causing sorrow when revealed". The popular
recensions of the Pancatantra have anyway been the works of the Jainas ensuing
in a number of Jaina editions of Pancatantra (Jain, 1999). In Manu Smriti
(8:103) we see Manu saying that one does not lose heaven even if one, though
facts are different, gives false evidence for a pious cause. This list does not
end here as we see a similar one originating from the Semitic world where a
Hadith attributed to prophet Muhammad speaks the same way as that of Manu.
1.4.
Conclusions
Valluvar spoke of Love (Chapter 8), Kindness
(Chapter 58) and Compassion (58) which he believed are essential qualities for
leading a life of non-violence. Some of these qualities have also been
emphasized by Hindu sages like Kabir, in the sacred texts of Buddhists like the
Dhammapada and even in the Bible of the Christians. The keynote of Jainism is
"ahimsā" and Valluvar's emphasize
on ahimsā (Not hurting, Not killing and Avoiding meat) alone cannot be
considered proof enough to show the Jaina inclination of Tirukkuŗal, for the
simple reasons that such ideas exist even in some non-Jaina texts in one form
or the other (e.g. Manu 4.48, 5:52; Tirumandiram 199). Moreover, all the five
principal moral inculcations of Brahminism, Buddhism and Jainism taken into
consideration for discussion in this section, also speak of ahimsā (see
table 3 below):
Table 3. Five virtues in Hinduism, Buddhism and
Jainism
Five virtues in Brahminism
|
Five percepts in Buddhism
|
Five vows in Jainism
|
| (i) Penance |
(i) To abstain from killing,
|
(i) Avoid injury to living beings
|
| (ii) Charity |
(ii) Avoid what has not been given
|
(ii) Avoid speaking falsehood
|
| (iii) Right conduct |
(iii) Avoid sexual misconduct
|
(iii) Avoid things not given
|
| (iv) Non-injury |
(iv) Avoid false speech
|
(iv) Avoid sexual misconduct
|
| (v) Speaking truth |
(v) Avoid intoxicants
|
(v) Avoid undue desire for possessions
|
There is a remarkable similarity between these five virtues, percepts and
vows of Hindu, Buddhist and Jaina dharmas! Two virtues that runs through
all these these are ahimsā and sathya, i.e. non-violence and
speaking truth. In the order of priority, they occupy the fourth and fifth
position according the Upanishad, first and fourth place in Buddhism and first
and second position in Jainism. The characteristic of Jainism is that,
of the five vratās or vows, the second vratā truthfulness is
subordinate to the the first vratā of ahimsā (Sharma, 1991; Jain,
2002a). Since Valluvar also places Non-injury as the first and foremost good
and next in rank to "Not lying" (Kuŗal, 323), we can infer that
Valluvar's virtue (அறம்)
follows Jaina dharma than any other system. It is not a surprise to see
Webster's Encyclopedia of World Literature mentions that the principal
teachings of Kuŗal are Not-killing and Not-lying (கொல்லாமை,
பொய்யாமை). We have also seen Valluvar's definition of
"truthfulness" matching perfectly with the Jaina one found in Saman
Suttam. We have also seen the relaxation given to ahimsā by Manu during
times of animal sacrifice and the exception given to Buddhists on meat eating,
both of which were denounced by Valluvar in couplets 259 and 256 respectively.
It is clear from all these evidences that it is to Jaina philosophical system
that the Kuŗal shows the greatest affiliation.
Next Section II. The Kuŗal in
light of Jaina, Buddhist and Hindu classics
