Tamil Heritage

[Bharat Gupt]

Swaminathan Madhuresan wrote:

>    Notion of Chastity in Tamil sangam poems is of paramount importance:
> Sangam poems mostly (> 90%) describe `interior landscape' (love) poems.
> In the Tamil poetics of Tolkaappiyam, Life is divided into interior/love/akam
> and exterior/puRam components.

Isnt this identical with Valmikiiya Ramayana, Mahabharat, Naat.yas.aastra, Kaamsuutra,
Arthas.aastra and the succeeding literature. The distinction for women as kulavadhuus
(meant for akam) and  vaarivadhuus (puram) is found in the all post Vedic Sanskrit
vaangamaya.

This distinction should not be taken as linguistic/regional but as pan Indian social
behaviour. Chastity is for "family-women" only, never for men or bulls. It holds true
all over India even now, even among tribals. Raama and Yudhishth.ara are icarnations
of the dhrama-purushas,  they are rather dull for artha and kaama, good for dharma and
moksha. They eventually fail in protecting their wives.

By the way Sita's chastity was given a new dimension in medieval times in India,by
saying that Ravana was able to abduct only the maayaa Sita not the real Sita.
Valmiki makes no such apology.  However, the Greeks have a tradition as old as Euripides
who postulates that a maayaa Helen was abducted by Paris not the real one.
So is the supra-chastity notion of the deep  South or the far North?
Best wishes,
Bharat Gupt
Associate Professor, DU