Contemporariness of Agastya and Rama is proof of presence of Tamil in Rama’s times. (Spoken language of ancient India – Part 5)

Disclaimer: I hereby declare that there is no chauvinistic intention of promoting Tamil, which happens to be my mother tongue, in this series. The intention is to bring to the notice of readers, the presence of Tamil alongside Sanskrit in the Indian Subcontinent for many thousands of years. A deeper analysis might give us leads on why a fused Tamil and Sanskrit presence can be seen from India to Ireland to Ice land and from Polynesia to the Incas. 

The series:

Part 1: Valmiki of Ramayana knew Tamil

Part 2: Tamil was the Human Tongue or Manushya Bhasha

Part 3: Hanuman and Sita conversed in 'Madhura' language

Part 4: Rama and Sita spoke Tamil

Part 5: Contemporariness of Agastya and Rama is proof of presence of Tamil in Rama's times

Part 6: Southern Madurai (தென் மதுரை) of 1st Tamil Sangam was submerged at the time of Rama’s exile.

Part 7: Early floods at Southern Madurai (தென் மதுரை) coincide with the first sea-level rises at the end of Last Glacial Maximum.

Part 8: Tsunami at Setu and formation of Sāmbhar salt lake find mention in Valmiki Ramayana.     

Sage Agastya, a contemporary of Rama was known to have enriched Tamil grammar, as per Tamil sources.  The two have met at Agastya’s hermitage situated near Panchavati, in the 11^th year of Rama’s exile. In what language they conversed at that meeting? There is no reference to ‘Madhuram’ anywhere in those chapters on the meeting in Valmiki Ramayana. It goes without saying that they had conversed in the language of the learned (Pandita), namely Sanskrit.

Looking at Kamba Ramayana, Kambar’s account of Rama- Agastya meeting is longer than that is found in Valmiki Ramayana. For a greater part, Kambar has delved into instances of Agastya’s greatness among which two are related to Tamil. The rest are on episodes related to Vātāpi, Vindhya etc that are well-known across India. Though one may be tempted to down-play the Tamil connection to Agastya as fictitious or an add-on from the local tradition of Tamils, due to lack of reference to it in Valmiki Ramayana and the north Indian sources, there is indeed a reference to Agastya’s connection to Tamil lands in Uttara kanda, which will be discussed later in this article.  

Kambar on Agastya’s expertise in Tamil

Coming back to Kamba Ramayana, Kambar gives an introduction to Agastya by listing out the feats associated with Agastya. In contrast, Valmiki gives the narration on Agastya’s feats through the mouth of Rama and there is no reference to Tamil knowledge of Agastya in that narration. Kambar’s direct narration on Agastya’s greatness contains a couple of references to his association with Tamil.

He says that Agastya measured the world with Tamil, implying either the presence of Tamil over a vast region or the vastness of the corpus of Tamil itself. There is reference to Vishnu in this verse on measuring the world with his steps.

“நீண்ட தமிழால் உலகை நேமியின் அளந்தான்” (1)

Meaning: Like Vishnu he measured the world with Tamil.

The next reference is on how he got the knowledge of Tamil from Lord Shiva. Sanskrit grammar authored by Panini was said to have been revealed by Shiva. The same idea is found in the Tamil tradition too with reference to receiving the knowledge of Tamil grammar. Kambar repeats that idea by saying that Agastya imparted the nuances of Tamil that was originally given by Lord Shiva.

உழக்கும் மறை நாலினும், உயர்ந்து உலகம் ஓதும்
வழக்கினும், மதிக் கவியினும், மரபின் நாடி,-
நிழல் பொலி கணிச்சி மணி நெற்றி உமிழ் செங் கண்
தழல் புரை சுடர்க் கடவுள் தந்த தமிழ்-தந்தான் (2)

Meaning: On the basis of the four Vedas, the wisdom of the learned, the poems that are the product of the mind and by tradition, Agastya analysed and imparted Tamil that was given by the one who has the third eye and who glows like fire.

This verse by Kambar implies mainly 3 features, namely,

(1) Lord Shiva was the originator or the imparter of Tamil letters in the same way He imparted Sanskrit letters,

(2) Poetry in Tamil and a tradition of expression of the same had already existed when Agastya had taken up the work of refining Tamil and

(3) Vedas have a role or connection with the way that Tamil or grammar of Tamil is framed.

Expanding these features, Lord Shiva is associated with generating sounds through the beating of his drum in his non-stop dance. The one who meditates on Him to gain the knowledge of those sounds, acquires it. Panini and Agastya had acquired their knowledge in respective languages in this process.

The 2^nd feature shows that literary Tamil had existed even before Agastya of Rama’s times. The time-scale of the three Sangams show that Agastya of Ramayana can be positioned at the 2^nd Sangam. There exists a reference to the Pandyan capital at Kavātam in Valmiki Ramayana (3) by which it is deduced that Agastya had taken part in the 2^nd Sangam at Kavātam. He has also revealed his grammar ‘Agattiyam’ in this Sangam period. By this it is also deduced that Agastya of Rama’s times was different from the Agastya of the 1^st Sangam period.  There existed another one by name Agastya (Agattiyar) during the 1^st Sangam when it was inaugurated around 9990 BCE. It will be explained in the course of this series.

 The 3^rd feature shows that there is a connection between Vedas and Tamil or Tamil grammar. This will be discussed at another context in this series.

Time of origin of Tamil and Sanskrit.

Not many know that there is textual reference to Tamil as existing side by side with Sanskrit. This idea is a very old one – being found in old texts and also coming by tradition. There is even a time period for this, mentioned in Tirumandiram given by Tirumular. The verse runs as follows:

மாரியும் கோடையும் வார்பனி தூங்கநின்று
ஏரியும் நின்றங்கு இளைக்கின்ற காலத்து
ஆரிய முந்தமி ழும்உட னேசொலிக்
காரிகை யார்க்குக் கருணைசெய் தானே (4)

Meaning: There was a time when rainy season and summer season ceased to exist. There was snow everywhere that made the lakes to shrink. At that time Lord Shiva taught Sanskrit and Tamil to Karikai (कारिका).

The time corresponds to the Ice age or pre-Holocene. For Sanskrit, the word used is ‘Arya’ - the way it is often referred in Tamil. The knowledge of these two was originally imparted to Karikai – his concert Parvati, in popular understanding.

The popular abode of Shiva being Kailash, it is possible to interpret the location to be Kailash in pre-Holocene days when monsoon season had not yet started. But looking at the tradition of Tamil being nurtured by Southerner- Pandyan, the most likely place is somewhere in the South where mankind was thriving during Ice age.

The start of the first Tamil Sangam around 9990 BCE (refer Part 1) at a place that later got submerged into the ocean places the location of the origin of Sanskrit too somewhere in the Indian Ocean, perhaps in Sundaland. Sundaland could in all probability be Shaka Dweepa of olden times whose lord was Shiva (5). All these are subject to multi-disciplinary research, but what is not to be missed is that a tradition had existed in Tamil that Shiva had given both Sanskrit and Tamil sometime in a remote past. A self contradicting feature in the above discourse is how a language (Sanskrit) that is supposed to have originated in the south could have gained a name as Northern language (Vada sol) in Tamil lexicon. A discussion on this is reserved for another article.

Panini and Agastya on the same plate but at different times.

The idea that Lord Shiva revealed the grammar of the two languages is found in another text called “Tiruvilaiyaadal Puranam” that describes the pastimes of Lord Shiva in olden Pandyan domains.

 விடையு கைத்தவன் பாணினிக் கிலக்கண மேனாள்

வடமொ ழிக்குரை தாங்கியல் மலயமா முனிக்குத்

திடமு றுத்தியம் மொழக்கெதி ராக்கிய தென்சொல்

மடம கட்கரங் கென்பது வழுதிநா டன்றோ. (6)

Meaning: In olden times, the lord who rides on the bull had given Sanskrit grammar to Panini. In the same way He established the Southern language (then-sol), as a complement to the Northern language (vada-sol) in the great sage of Malaya. The Pandyan land is the stage for that damsel of Southern language.

This verse conveys that Panini preceded Agastya which is not true. Perhaps the name Panini was used by the author as a symbolic representation of Sanskrit grammar.

These references could not have come to stay without some truth in it, say, by means of some kind of prayer or penance to Lord Shiva by which Agastya had written down the grammar for Tamil. Basically what this conveys is that Agastya was a knower of Tamil.

Kambar continues to recognise Agastya’s connection with Tamil in the scene that Rama was welcomed by Agastya.

நின்றவனை, வந்த நெடியோன் அடி பணிந்தான்;
அன்று, அவனும் அன்பொடு தழீஇ, அழுத கண்ணால்,
'நன்று வரவு' என்று, பல நல் உரை பகர்ந்தான்-
என்றும் உள தென் தமிழ் இயம்பி இசை கொண்டான். (7)

Meaning: (On seeing Agastya) Rama fell at the feet of Agastya. Agastya affectionately embraced Rama and uttered ‘welcome’ and many good words with tears swelling in his eyes – Agastya who became famous by uttering the ever present southern Tamil.

Agastya in Valmiki Ramayana

There is no evidence from non-Tamil sources on Agastya’s association with Tamil language. The only available  non-Tamil source, namely, Raghu Vamsam written by Kalidasa  attests to Agastya’s association with the Tamil kings (Pandyan) in the southern quarter (dakshinasya disha),  surrounded by the girdle of ocean studded with gems (8).  But nowhere in Valmiki Ramayana there is any allusion to Agastya’s expertise in Tamil. His association to Tamil lands in south India is however found in Valmiki Ramayana from which we are able to get vital clues to link him with Tamil.

Agastya’s location is mentioned in Valmiki Ramayana in 3 Kandas, Aranya, Kishkindha and Uttara Kanda, but all these are different from one another, though the direction is the same, namely, the South. When Rama went to meet Agastya along with Seetha and Lakshmana (Aranya Kanda), the sage was in the southern most part of the hermitages in Dandaka forest. It was closer to Panchavati.

This location was in the south of Vindhyas and also was part of a location where demonic daityas like Vātāpi and Ilvala lived once. The south is always identified with death and lorded by Yama. Valmiki Ramayana says that by conquering death in the Vātāpi episode, Agastya made South a liveable region.

From the words of Rama to Seetha and Lakshmana:-

“Sage Agastya with meritorious deeds, who wishing well-being of the world, controlled death by his efficacy, and who made this southern region a liveable region..’ (9)

 "He who impeding death by his yogic might and wishing well-being for worlds made this southern extent a liveable province by his pious deeds, his hermitage is this" (10)

"This very worthy southern quarter is known in the name of that godly saint Agastya and this remained unattackable to the demons with cruel deeds." (11)

This description of Agastya’s location comes in the 11^th year of Rama’s exile, just after he has completed 10 years in exile. Rama meets Agastya at this time and after describing his greatness as above to Seetha and Lakshmana. There is no reference to Madhuram in the conversation between them.

Agastya’s residence at Kaveri

The next reference to Agastya’s abode comes in Kishkindha Kanda, but the abode is not the same as above. Agastya’s residence has moved further south.

To know the background, in the beginning of the 14^th year of exile Seetha was abducted by Ravana and Vanaras went in search of Seetha. In that context Sugreeva gives the landmarks in all the four directions for the search teams. In the case of southern direction he mentions two places as Agastya’s location. The first one is where Kaveri springs up in the Western Ghats and the second is in Deep South, which is now in the Indian Ocean. Of the two, Sugreeva mentions the first location at Kaveri as where Agastya was residing at the time of his narration.

The first location is on Mount Malaya where Kaveri is mentioned. Strangely enough, Kaveri is not mentioned as a river but just as ‘Aashaya’ (आशय) of ‘aapagaam’ (आपगाम्) (12)

It means Kaveri was a receptacle of water!

Sugreeva says that Agastya can be seen on top of Mount Malaya.

This is a crucial piece of evidence of Agastya’s relocation to Malaya at a time when Kaveri was just a receptacle of water and not yet flowing as a river. Kaveri looks exactly like a receptacle at its origin. It is a huge pot-like structure of the mountain (Brahmagiri hill / Kodagu) with a mouth-like opening inside which water can be seen coming out of a spring. Therefore the myths of how Kaveri flowed as a river are post-Ramayana developments.

To the question what Agastya was doing on top of Malaya at Kaveri has a reply in Ramayana itself. The background of it is given below.

Sometime after ascending the throne, Rama meets Agastya. This episode mentioned in Uttara kanda has a perfect continuity to this location of Agastya found in the 14^th year of Rama’s exile.

In Uttara kanda Rama goes to meet Agastya after his encounter with Sambuka in Saivala mountain.  Saivala Mountain was originally the southernmost border of Dandaka forest (13).  There is a “Saiya” Mountain in the Western Ghats in Kerala, found mentioned in the Tamil Sangam text Paripadal (14) 

This name is not a Tamil word, but seems to be corrupt form of Saivala which means a kind of moss found on wet surfaces. This name is apt, given the fact that Western Ghats are on the path of monsoon rainfall.

Ramayana says that Agastya had vowed to live within waters for 12 years and that vow was just over when Rama reached Saivala (15). In the meeting Rama keeps addressing Agastya as “Kumbhayoni”! 

This name does not appear in his previous meeting near Panchavati, but appears for the first time in Valmiki Ramayana after Agastya had finished his penance on top of Malaya. This name and the context reveal that Agastya had made a terrible penance at or near the Kumbha-like receptacle containing Kaveri. From then onwards he must have come to be known as Kumbha-yoni – a name addressed by Rama! Every myth of Agastya as having born from a pot or jar and associating him with Kaveri must have sprung up after the period of Valmiki Ramayana.

Agastya legends connecting him to Tamil lands also begin from his association with Kaveri and Kodagu. The Tamil Epic Manimegalai links the formation of river Kaveri to sage Agastya by saying that the sage overturned the Pot (kumbha) to make Kaveri flow down to Pumpukar. This has happened at the time of a Cholan king by name Kānthaman according to Manimegalai. The name is different in the Tiruvālangādu copper plate inscriptions. The inscriptions say that the Cholan King Chitradhanvan wanted to bring Kaveri to his dominion just like Bhagiratha who brought down river Ganga to earth. The underlying fact is that Tamil dynasties were already thriving in the south at the time of Ramayana, which means spoken Tamil was prevalent at that time.

Agastya’s migration to the origin of Kaveri in Saivala Mountain is the last information about him in Valmiki Ramayana and after that his life was spent in Tamil lands. His role in Tamil must have started after his birth in “Kumbhayoni”!

His association with Tamil could not have been new. For someone to have authored the grammar book of Tamil, his knowledge of Tamil must have been profound and of long standing even before he migrated to Kodagu. This pre-supposes the existence of Tamil in North India too, apart from its presence in south India, or how else a sage like Agastya known for having composed Vedic verses could have gained mastery over Tamil language as well? 

There comes another question too. Of all the Vedic sages, why Agastya alone developed the interest in mastering the refined form of Manushya Bhasha and spent rest of his life on that.

 

The answer for this can be found in Tirumular’s Tirumandiram which will be discussed in the next article.

References:

(1) Kamba Ramayanam: Aranya Kandam – Agattiya Patalam – 36

(2) Kamba Ramayanam: Aranya Kandam – Agattiya Patalam – 41

(3) Valmiki Ramayana – 4-41-19

(4) Tirumandiram – verse 65

(5) Mahabharata: 6-11

(6) Tiruvilaiyadal Puranam: Tirunaatu-ch-chirappu – verse 87.

(7) Kamba Ramayanam: Aranya Kandam – Agattiya Patalam – 47

(8) Raghu Vamsam, 6^th sarga, verses 59-65.

(9) Valmiki Ramayana 3-11-54

(10) Valmiki Ramayana 3-11-81

(11) Valmiki Ramayana 3-11-84

(12) Valmiki Ramayana 4-41-14 &15

(13) Valmiki Ramayana 7-89

(14) Paripadal 11

(15) Valmiki Ramayana 7-89

Rama and Seetha spoke Tamil (Spoken language of ancient India – Part 4)

Disclaimer: I hereby declare that there is no chauvinistic intention of promoting Tamil, which happens to be my mother tongue, in this series. The intention is to bring to the notice of readers, the presence of Tamil alongside Sanskrit in the Indian Subcontinent for many thousands of years. A deeper analysis might give us leads on why a fused Tamil and Sanskrit presence can be seen from India to Ireland to Ice land and from Polynesia to the Incas. 

The series:

Part 1: Valmiki of Ramayana knew Tamil

Part 2: Tamil was the Human Tongue or Manushya Bhasha

Part 3: Hanuman and Sita conversed in 'Madhura' language

Part 4: Rama and Sita spoke Tamil

Part 5: Contemporariness of Agastya and Rama is proof of presence of Tamil in Rama's times

Part 6: Southern Madurai (தென் மதுரை) of 1st Tamil Sangam was submerged at the time of Rama’s exile.

Part 7: Early floods at Southern Madurai (தென் மதுரை) coincide with the first sea-level rises at the end of Last Glacial Maximum.

Part 8: Tsunami at Setu and formation of Sāmbhar salt lake find mention in Valmiki Ramayana.     

“Madhu” or “Madhuram” – the other name of Tamil appears often in Valmiki Ramayana suggesting it to be a lingua franca of people across ancient India. That name appears predominantly in the conversation between Seetha and Hanuman as the human tongue (Manushya Bhasha). Numerous instances in support of this from different chapters of Ramayana were highlighted in Part 3.

In the current part, we will be focusing on a strong evidence for the presence of Tamil in a conversation in Valmiki Ramayana.

The context occurs in Ashoka Vana after Hanuman had caused havoc in the grove. After having met Seetha, Hanuman went about destroying the grove. Seeing his might and the gigantic body, the female-demons surrounding Seetha were terrified. They started taunting Seetha and wanted to know who he was and what she was talking to him.

Seetha gave a reply that contains a Tamil proverb!

She said,

“You alone can recognise who he is and what he does. A serpent only can recognise the feet of another serpent. There is no doubt about it." (VR: 5-42-9)

She said, “अहिः एव अहेः पादान् विजानाति”

अहिः एव (ahi: eva) – serpent alone

अहेः (ahe) – of serpent

पादान् (pādān) – feet

विजानाति (vijānāti) – can know

“Ahireva ahe pādān vijānāti” means – Only a serpent knows the feet of the serpent.

This is the exact translation of the Tamil proverb,

“Pāmbaŗiyum pāmbin kāl” (பாம்பறியும் பாம்பின் கால்).

The word by word meaning of this proverb is,

Pāmbu – serpent

Ariyum – knows

Pāmbin – of serpent

Kāl – feet.

The exact replication in Tamil is surprising. One can say that the Sanskrit proverb had entered Tamil language. But this cannot be so, as this proverb is not found in Sanskrit.

Proverbs of this kind are known as ‘Lokokti’ in Sanskrit - owing to the fact that they have come up among common people. The beliefs and ideas prevailing among a group of people and coming down for ages get crystallized as lokokti. One can find similar types of lokoktis across many cultures, but the above one pertaining to serpent and its feet cannot be a common one across cultures and language systems, for, it is about the non-existent ‘feet’ of the snake. It is unlikely that people from different cultures and different places had conceived the same idea.

There is another proverb found in Valmiki Ramayana in the words of Hanuman. That proverb is in Tamil and also in English or perhaps in many other languages. The proverb is ‘face is the index of the mind’.  The expanded version of it is found in Manu smriti too where it is written that ‘the internal (working of the) mind is perceived through the aspect, the motions, the gait, the gestures, the speech, and the changes in the eye and of the face (8-26). Among the various features, face alone is picked out in the proverb in Tamil which says, “the nature of the inside (mind) is seen on the face” 

அகத்தின் அழகு முகத்தில் தெரியும்

The same expression is found in the dialogue of Hanuman in his justification for accepting Vibhishana into their fold. He says “It is not possible to hide expression of the face, even if it is concealed. By force, the internal intent of the persons certainly gets revealed.” (VR: 6-17-64)

आकारः चाद्यमानो अपि न शक्यो विनिगूहितुम् |
बलाद्द् हि विवृणोति एव भावम् अन्तर् गतम् नृणाम्

The gist of this verse told by Hanuman is that antargatam will be revealed in one’s appearance or in facial expression. This can be rephrased as

आकारश्छाद्यमानोपि भावं व्यङ्ते मुखं नृणाम् 

to mean "Even if body language is restrained & covered, face will uncover/unveiled emotions that one tries to cover-up". {Rephrasing and meaning courtesy: Dr.S.Venugopalan , Professor, Dept of Sanskrit & Indian culture, SCSVMV University, Kanchipuram}

The Tamil proverb is an exact replica of this idea. However it is not correct to say that this was exclusive to Tamil speakers,  as this idea is about human nature and could have been picked up by any in any culture. But the proverb on snakes cannot be generalised like this.

Snakes do not have feet. But the way a snake recognizes the location of another snake or appears in a place where another snake is there had been perceived by the people of a common denomination as though the snake knew the steps or the feet of another snake and therefore had appeared suddenly from nowhere.

This kind of perception of the feet of the snake is not universal but had come up within a community. This perception found in Seetha’s words make it known that the community had spread across India from Videha and Kosala to Lanka where she has actually spoken this. This perception having its presence among the speakers of Tamil gives rise to another perception that this vastly-spread community had conversed in Tamil!

In other words, Tamil, in whatever form – crude or refined – had been spoken by people across India covering north and south India. This proverb appearing in the conversation with the female demons of Ravana reiterates the possibility that Ravana and his subjects also had spoken Tamil. This is not surprising given the fact that sea-bound Southerner (Thennan) namely the Pandyans had close proximity to Lanka. And there is an episode involving  Ravana and the Pandyan king in which Ravana bought peace with the Pandyan king. This is found mentioned in Raghu Vamsam and Sinnamanur copper plate inscriptions (read here).

The proverb in Tamil.

Lokokti or proverb is known as ‘pazha mozhi’ (olden saying) or “Mudhu mozhi” (wisdom of the old or ancient sayings) in Tamil, thereby conveying the antiquity of it and the wisdom contained in it.

A Tamil Sangam composition (“Pazhamozhi 400”) exclusively on such proverbs describes 400 proverbs, each with an analogy. The analogy helps in understanding the exact purport of the proverb. The proverb used by Seetha appears in the 8^th verse of this composition and it is reproduced here:

புலமிக் கவரைப் புலமை தெரிதல்
புலமிக் கவர்க்கே புலனாம் – நலமிக்க
பூம்புனல் ஊர பொதுமக்கட்(கு) ஆகாதே
பாம்பறியும் பாம்பின் கால்.

Meaning: The wisdom of the learned is palpable only to the learned, like how the feet of the serpent is known only to the serpent.

In a striking similarity Seetha uses the proverb in the same kind of comparison as found in the verse form Sangam text produced above. She compares the female-demons with Hanuman equating him with a demon (in an attempt to project Hanuman as unknown to her) and asks how she can know about the demons. Only the female- demons around her can know about him like how a serpent can know about the feet (movement) of another serpent.

This comparison by Seetha is exactly as in the above quoted Sangam verse on this proverb. This Sangam verse is more recent, say about 2000 years ago, but the idea it conveys is no different from what Seetha had conveyed in her conversation.  This shows that the idea appropriate to this proverb had been in vogue for all times in the past.

Probing further, a cross-check can be done in the Tamil version of Ramayana by Kambar (Kamba Ramayanam). When we look up for the same proverb in the same context, we are in for a surprise. Kambar did not translate that conversation of Seetha verbatim, but uses another comparison.

Seetha does say that the bad deeds done by bad people can be understood only by the bad people and not by pure persons like herself. But she does not continue to reiterate this with the snake-proverb. She gives a contrasting scenario - on how good people like her fail to understand the bad people. She says that only bad people understand the bad intentions of the bad people, whereas she being a pure person could not understand the bad intentions of Maricha and fell into his trap by desiring the golden form of Maricha. Thus we find Kambar retaining the same idea of Valmiki’s Seetha, but adding an expression of lamentation by Seetha by comparing herself in a similar situation.

தீயவர்  தீய  செய்தல் தீயவர் தெரியின் அல்லால்,
தூயவர்  துணிதல் உண்டோ, நும்முடைச் சூழல் எல்லாம் ?
ஆய மான் எய்த,அம் மான், இளையவன், "அரக்கர் செய்த
மாயம்" என்று உரைக்கவேயும், மெய்என மையல் கொண்டேன்,' (5476)

The omission of this Tamil proverb by Kambar is a bit intriguing, and can be interpreted to mean that Kambar did not see anything special with this Tamil proverb. But a search into other verses of Kamba Ramayanam reveals that the presence of Tamil in Rama’s times was taken for granted by Kambar or by the people of Kambar’s period (12^th century CE).

Kambar had certainly taken note of this proverb but had felt that it may not do justice to the emotions that Seetha was undergoing at that moment. Valmiki’s was original –for, he had conveyed the actual conversation between Seetha and the female- demons. He did not tamper with any dialogue mouthed by the original characters – something known from the verses 3 & 4 of 3^rd sarga of Bala kanda. So, one cannot doubt the presence of the Tamil proverb in Valmiki’s version as an imagined one.

Kambar uses the same proverb in another context – in the dialogue of Surpanakha. The encounter with Surpanakha is quite long in Kamba Ramayana and there are additional dialogues that are not found in Valmiki Ramayana. Surpanakha of Kambar tries to lure Rama by offering to help him in defeating the demons. She as a demon knows the tricks of demons like how a serpent knows the feet of another serpent. So she reminds Rama of the proverb ‘Pāmbaŗiyum pāmbin kāl’ (Ahireva ahe pādān vijānāti)

'காம்பு அறியும் தோளாளைக் கைவிடீர் எனினும் ,
        யான் மிகையோ ? கள்வர்
ஆம் , பொறி இல் அடல் அரக்கர் அவரோடே
        செருச் செய்வான் அமைந்தீராயின் ,
தாம் பொறியின் பல மாயம் தரும் பொறிகள்
        அறிந்து , அவற்றைத் தடுப்பென் அன்றே ?
''பாம்பு அறியும் பாம்பின்கால் '' என மொழியும்
        பழமொழியும் பார்க்கிலீரோ ? (2967)

Surpanakha asks Rama, “don’t you know the proverb – the serpent knows the feet of the other serpent?’” This is a remarkable positioning of the proverb, as it conveys that Rama is expected to know of this proverb.

In Valmiki, Seetha is shown to have known that proverb and she used it in the context of the female-demons.

In Kambar, Rama is shown to have known this proverb from the dialogue of a female- demon.

This cannot be treated as a poet’s way of expression as there is yet another Tamil connection to Rama, given by Kambar. That occurs in the conversation between Rama and Lakshmana in Ayodhya Kanda at the time of exile. On coming to know of the exile, Lakshmana gets terribly angry and goes to the verge of harming his own father. Rama pacifies him in many ways. In that context Kambar describes Rama as one who has surpassed the limits of Tamil and has analysed the limits of Sanskrit literature!

‘நன் சொற்கள் தந்து ஆண்டு, எனை
     நாளும் வளர்த்த தாதை
தன் சொல் கடந்து, எற்கு
     அரசு ஆள்வது தக்கது அன்றால்;
என் சொல் கடந்தால், உனக்கு
     யாது உளது ஊற்றம்?’ என்றான் -
தென்சொல் கடந்தான்,
     வடசொல் - கலைக்கு எல்லை தேர்ந்தான் (1741)

The word given here is ‘Thensol’ meaning ‘southern word/ language’. It’s complementary word is ‘vadasol’, meaning Sanskrit (northern word / language). By bringing in ‘vadasol’, it is made clear that ‘thensol’ refers to Tamil, the language identified with south and southern Pandyas. There is no need to describe Rama as a knower of Tamil, unless that is what the people of the times of Kambar had thought so. Such a thought could have come up from the reference to Manushya Bhasha spoken by Seetha and Hanuman.  

There is likely to be a dispute here in this verse, that the word is not ‘thensol’ (தென் சொல்), but ‘thEnsol’ (தேன் சொல்), meaning sweet word/ language.

ThEn means honey or sweet. Honey or sweetness is precisely what Tamil was meant to be – something discussed elaborately in the previous part for “Madhuram’. If it is argued that ‘thEnsol’ does not refer to Tamil, but only to Rama’s sweet words, one can see that such a meaning is absurd in this context. In this verse Rama is questioning Lakshmana why he is so eager to ignore his (Rama’s) word of acceptance of father’s order (to go to the forest). An admonition of such a kind cannot be told in sweet words. So the word cannot be ‘thEnsol’

Another reason is this word does not align with the poetic measure called ‘monai’ (மோனை) if taken as ‘thEnsol’. On the contrary, ‘thensol’ aligns with the poetic rule of monai. Therefore it is very clear that Kambar had used the word ‘thensol’. Moreover the meaning of the line implies the knowledge of a language than the sweetness or otherwise of the word spoken by Rama.

Even if it happens to be ‘thEnsol’ it does not negate the reference to Tamil language as we have a parallel in Valmiki Ramayana wherein Hanuman describes Rama as one who speaks sweet language, like Vachaspati, the lord of speech. We established in Part 3 how this refers to Manushya bhasha, the language of the humans, which is nothing other than Tamil.

Having highlighted the presence of Tamil in Rama’s times, and in the speech of Rama and Seetha we will move on to the stronger evidence that can be established from the fact that Agastya, the originator of Tamil grammar was a contemporary of Rama. That analysis will be taken up in the next article.