01. Jaina ideas in Kural - I

திருக்குறளில் சமண தழுவல்கள் (பாகம்-1) 

I. Kuŗal's affiliation to various Indian philosophical traditions

"There is no doubt that the author of Kuŗal fully accepted the Jaina teaching on ahimsā"
(H.A. Popley, 1931)

Diaz (2000), like majority of translators and commentators, mentioned that Valluvar was a Hindu and that the all pervading basis of his work was a proof for this. If Valluvar was a Hindu, to which sect of Hinduism did Valluvar's work bear affiliation? Rajasingham (1987) and many others like Satguru Subramania Swamy (2000) consider the message of the Kuŗal to be of Saivism or Saiva Siddhanta, which by far appears to be the most widely held view among native scholars. Subramanian and Rajalakshmi (1984), while introducing the Kuŗal to the readers in their work on Concordance of Thirukkuŗal, mentioned Valluvar as an 'unconventional Hindu'. Chakravarti (1953), Vaiyapuri Pillai (1956), Zvelebil (1975), Subramanyam (1987) and many other scholars were convinced that that the Kuŗal is the work of a Jaina. G.U. Pope (1986), being a Christian scholar himself, was convinced that the author of the Kuŗal was a Hindu who at the same time was influenced by Biblical ideas. Though Buddhist claims have always been a feeble one, there are occasional vehement arguments in support of this (see Uthayakumar, 2004). Kaul Graul (1814-1864), who carries the distinction of translating the Kuŗal into Latin as well as German, had characterized the Kuŗal as `a work of Buddhist hue' (*). We will soon see in the later chapters and sections of this essay how closely Tirukkuŗal resembles some of the well known Buddhist texts.

The objective in this section is to find out the affiliation of the Kuŗal to the different philosophical traditions existed during the time of Valluvar (between 100 to 400 AD). Gopalan (1979) compared Kuŗal with the Indian traditions that were prevalent during the time of Valluvar to find out the school of Indian philosophy the Kuŗal resembles the most. He identified Brahminical Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism as the three possible philosophical traditions that could have influenced the author of Kuŗal. Though these sects wouldn't have existed as established religions as we see them today (Veeramani, 2005), their ideas and ideals were indeed in practice among people as we see evidences for this in many literary works of that period (e.g. Samayasārā of Jainism, Manu Smriti of Brahminical Hinduism and Prajna-pāramitā of Buddhism). In this section, we investigate one by one the possibility of Valluvar being influenced by these philosophical traditions.

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