old tamil

[Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan]

When I said,

It is not even a scale with seven notes.
I was referring to Cīkāmaram as Śuddha Dhanyāsi.


Regards,
Palaniappan



-----Original Message-----
From: Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan <palaniappa at AOL.COM>
To: INDOLOGY <INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk>
Sent: Mon, Nov 19, 2012 7:29 pm
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] old tamil



Dear JLC,





Thanks for pointing out the Tirumuṟaikaṇṭapurāṇam (TMKP) usage. In this case, it refers to a specific paṇ (melody) and not a paṇ in general. If we assume the author of TMKP was Umāpati Civam, then he was a contemporary of Nacciṉārkkiṉiyar (14th century) whose commentary I referred to in my post. We do not know who influenced whom or if both were just following somebody else. In any case, it is Nacciṉārkkiṉiyar who makes the explicit equivalence of CT kāmaram and the specific paṇ Cīkāmaram as found in the 14th century usage. Nacciṉārkkiṉiyar's interpretation has been the basis for interpreting the occurrence of kāmaram in the Tēvāram also as a specific melody, which is really not warranted. 


Now check what VMS says with respect to Tev. 6.28.4 
காமரங்கள் பாடித்திரிவார் (போலும்)

will be wandering singing melody-types.
[[காமரம் - சீகாமரம்; முதற்குறை; ம் ; i.e. poetic licence which consists in the shortening of a word by one or more letters at the beginning; the name of particular melody-type is used to denote all melody-types.]]


Now look at 4:78.9
காமரம் கற்றும் இல்லேன்

I have not learnt musical compositions
[[காமரம் may also mean சீகாமரம் one of the melody-types]]



Now look at Tev. 4.79.5

காமரம் கற்றுமில்லேன்
I have not learnt music (cf. verse of previous decade).


In all three instances, the meaning is a general one and not a specific melody.


The interpretation of kāmaram as derived from Cīkāmaram is not really warranted. Cikāmaram paṇ (considered by many as equivalent to the rāga Nādanāmakriyā) has nothing extraordinary going for it to be generalized as a signifier for paṇs in general. It is not the basic scale of Tamil music. It is not even a scale with seven notes. Unfortunately, this equivalence of kāmaram with Cīkāmaram has been uncritically accepted by many including the late musicologist, V.P.K. Sundaram who considered it to be equivalent to Śuddha Dhanyāsi. (If Sundaram had really looked at the usage of kāmaram, which he described as  a melody that expresses passionate love, he would have noted that according to Kampaṉ (6.36.158) Rāvaṇa got his sword from Śiva after he sang kāmaram. This refers to the episode when he tried to lift Kailāśa and  Śiva punished him by pressing down his toe. Rāvaṇa pleaded for mercy singing with the guts of his hand as strings.) If one were to accept the kāmaram-Cīkāmaram equivalence, going by the use of kāmaram in Tamil texts, one would think that it represented the ideal mellifluous speech of women, melody sung by Śiva, the music made by bees, melody played by lutes, etc. 



As for the use of the word 'silly', I am sorry it upset you. But it will make sense if one imagines a Carnatic vocal music concert in which the musician is doing a rāga improvisation  in Kalyāṇi. If one tells the connoisseurs in the audience that the singer is singing Śrīrāga wonderfully (naṉṟāka irākam pāṭukiṟār vs. naṉṟāka Śrīrākam pāṭukiṟār), one can only imagine how one will be treated by them. It is in this sense, Kāḻi-Cīkāḻi pair is not an appropriate analogue to kāmaram-Cīkāmaram pair, although many think so and superficially it seems to be so. I guess Umapati Civam's use underlines the separation between the non-music and music traditions of Tamil by the 14th century, even though he was dealing with a musical situation in his text. But then the story itself is about the loss of the Tēvāram musical tradition and the hymns being re-set to music by a Pāṇar woman. 


Regards,
Palaniappan




-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Luc Chevillard <jean-luc.chevillard at univ-paris-diderot.fr>
To: INDOLOGY <INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk>
Cc: palaniappa <palaniappa at aol.com>
Sent: Sun, Nov 18, 2012 8:55 pm
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] old tamil


Dear  SP,

you write


<QUOTE SP>

"This interpretation of /kāmaram/ as /cīkāmaram/ is as silly as
  equating the word /rāga/ with /Śrīrāga/, a specific melody, and 
reflects these commentators' ignorance of epigraphic evidence of the use 
of the word /kāmaram/.

</QUOTE SP>

How would you comment on the use of Kāmaram
in the Tirumuṟaikaṇṭapurāṇam?
in this verse:

ஒன்றாகுங் காந்தார பஞ்சமத்துக் கோரிரண்டாம் /
நன்றான சீர்நட்ட பாடைக்கு நவின்றுரைக்கில் /
குன்றாத புறநீர்மைக் கிரண்டாகுங் கூறுமிசை /
ஒன்றாகக் காமரத்துக் கொன்றாகப் போற்றினார் (42)

oṉṟākuṅ kāntāra pañcamattuk kōriraṇṭām /
naṉṟāṉa cīrnaṭṭa pāṭaikku naviṉṟuraikkil /
kuṉṟāta puṟanīrmaik kiraṇṭākuṅ kūṟumicai /
oṉṟākak kāmarattuk koṉṟākap pōṟṟiṉār (42)


This is part of the enumeration where kaṭṭaḷai-s are attributed to the 
various paṇ-ṣ

See the translation by Karen Pechilis Prentiss
in the /International Journal of Hindu Studies 5, 1 (April 2001)
where this verse is translated on pp. 40-41.

See also the pages 212-213 inside the 1947 book /Yāḻ Nūl/
by Vipulānanta Cuvāmikaḷ
(published by the Karantai Tamiḻ Caṅkam).
where he reproduces a section of
Tirumuṟaikaṇṭapurāṇam.

He later discusses two kaṭṭaḷai-s for cīkāmaram
on p. 235-236.

That seems to mean that Vipulānanta Cuvāmikaḷ
accepts the equation between "cīkāmaram"
and "kāmaram".

(is this not parallel to the fact that the same place can be referred to 
as Kāḻi and as Cīkāḻi?)

I suppose that means that all of that is open for discussion.

I would like to comment that usings words such as "silly" and 
"parroting" does not belong in an academic discussion. These words are 
unnecessarily aggressive or insulting. :-(

It is enough to say that one disagrees with other people's interpretations.

Thanks for the many interesting insights which your post contains

-- Jean-Luc Chevillard (CNRS, UMR 7597)
  (currently in Pondicherry, at the EFEO center)




 

 
 
 
 
 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20121119/7e2288f4/attachment.htm>