THIRUKKURALH

[NVK Ashraf]

(4) The God beyond compare

To Devapriya:

You wrote:
¾ÉìÌŨÁ þøÄ¡¾¡ý- Now Mahavira, Buddha, Valluvar, Rishaba Deva, Jesus or Mohammed all are Mortal Souls and Never Valluvar would have referred this to any Man and this has been the interpretation of morethan 95% of Commentators, who looked at them Impartially.

Once again, I reproduce here from what I have written in my article to be uploaded soon at http://free.hostdepartment.com/n/nvk...uvar/jaina.htm

The attribute of this couplet "thanakkuvamai illāthān" (தனக்குவமை இல்லாதான்), meaning "the one beyond compare" could perfectly suit any deity, be it of Brahmana, Śramana or Semitic origin. This attribute of being not equal to others or being unique is easily the commonest quality attributed to God in most religious scriptures.

"No one can compare to You, Lord" (ਤੁਮ ਸਰਿ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਲਾਗੇ) says Guru Grant Sahib (p. 688).

"There is none like unto the Lord our God" (אֵין כַּיהוָה אֱלֹהֵינו), says the Bible (Exodus 8:6).

"There is none comparable unto Him" (وَلَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ) says the Qur'an (Qur’an 112:3-4).

"There is none here below to equal Shiva" (அவனொடு ஒப்பார் இங்கு யாவரும் இல்லை) says the principal text of Saiva Siddhānta, Tirumandiram (verse 5).

"ஒப்பில்லா ஒருவன் றன்னை" (6.26.4), "மற்றாருந் தன்னொப்பார் இல்லாதான் காண்" (6.24.10), "தன்னொப்பு இலானை" (7.68.1) says Thévāram of Thirumurai.

Baghvad Gita says "There exists none who is equal to You" (न त्वत्समः) (Gita, 11:43).

In Samaya-sāra, the Jaina āchāryā Kundakunda describes Jaina God as the one without compare (anovamam)
वन्दित्तु सव्वा सिद्धे धुवम् अचलम् अणोवमं गदिं पत्ते
वोच्चामि समया पाहुडम् इनामो सुय केवली भणियं॥

From the numerous examples cited above, it is evident that this attribute is commonly used for a Creator God. The only religion missing from the list is Buddhism (of course Zoroastrianism and Bahai). I am sure there must be a reference somewhere, either in Theravādā or Mahāyānā tradition, that refers Lord Buddha as "Incomparable".

[NVK Ashraf]

(5) Sea of Virtue and Wheel of Virtue

Dear Devapriya:

You said:
«ÈÅ¡Æ¢ «ó¾½ý- Referring God by the term ”«ó¾½ý” is a Practice to Shiva, Brahma etc., In Sangam Literature itself and never to Jainistic Rishba till atleast next 800 years after Valluvar. «ÈÅ¡Æ¢ is Secular word.

However, Chakravarti (1953), Subramanyam (1983) and Sundaram (1990) mention that F.W. Ellis, who translated the Kuŗal into English in 1812, found the word "anthañan" in the then dictionaries meant only two gods, namely the Brahminical Brahma and Jaina Arugan. The use of the word "anthañan" (அந்தணன்) in the chapter on "Praise of God" is rather surprising, especially when the literal import of this word is "Brahmin". Since it comes under the Chapter 1, it has to be taken as a reference to a godhead.

«ÈÅ¡Æ¢ «ó¾½ý ¾¡û§º÷ó¾¡÷ì ¸øÄ¡ø
À¢ÈÅ¡Æ¢ ¿£ó¾ø «¡¢Ð.
À¢ÈÅ¢ô ¦ÀÕí¸¼ø ¿£óÐÅ÷ ¿£ó¾¡÷
þ¨ÈÅý «Ê§ºÃ¡ ¾¡÷.

- In both this Kurals Valluvar cannot refer to Deadmen feat, but to the Supreme God, even Diehard Jain or Buddha believer would ask us to follow their Teachings and not on holding feet, Valluvar is very Clear, He refers to Supreme God, and Valluvar when names at 25 Different Kurals various Hindu Deity names, follows Henotheism.

Once again I reproduce here from my article to appear at: http://free.hostdepartment.com/n/nvk...uvar/jaina.htm

With the word "அழி" meaning both "circle" as well as "sea", the phrase aŗavāzhi (அறவாழி) can be taken to mean, either "sea of virtue" or "wheel of the virtue”. Both the meanings appear to be correct. Similarly the word "பிறவாழி" in the second line could either mean "ocean of births" or "other oceans". As far the common English rendering of couplet eight is concerned, the rendering by Drew and Lazarus has been presented here as an example:

None can swim the sea of births, but those united
To the feet of that Being, a sea of virtue. DL

However, depending on the combination of these meanings chosen, the couplet can also be translated in the following ways:

[i] "Only those who reach the feet of the lord, the ocean of virtue, can cross those other oceans" - * NC. (The other two oceans could be oceans of Wealth and Pleasure)
[ii] "Only by clinging to the feet of the Lord of the wheel of virtue, that one can swim the ocean of this life" * - SG.

But it is the Jaina God Aruhan who is the benevolent Lord with the wheel of Dharma (Chakravarti, 1953) and thus "caused and possesses the circle of virtue" (Sundaram, 1990). Jains believe that human beings are subjected to a continuous cycle of time represented by upward and downward turning of a wheel. The 24th and the last Fordmaker or Tirthankara of the present turning wheel (ஆழி) was Mahavira. Buddhists also believe in cyclical time period. Thus the phrase "அறவாழி அந்தணன்" could also mean Lord Buddha for he is said to have set in motion the wheel of dharma (Dharmachakra), the popular symbol of the Buddhist universal law (Gour, 2001). There is indeed a reference to this effect in Mañimékalai "ஆதி முதல்வன் அறஆழி ஆள்வோன்" (Mañimékalai 6.7)! To make matters worse, even Vishnu, one of the gods of Hindu trinity, has wheel of Vishnu (Vishnuchakra) but there is evidence to show that it can also be called as "Wheel of Dharma". Interestingly in Tiruvāimozhi (திருவாய்மொழி) we find the statement "அறவனை அழிப்படை அந்தணை" referring to "the one of aŗam, the anthañan who has the wheel/disc weapon". Even though saint Nammāzhvār refers to Vishnu here, the use of the three words aŗam, āzhi, and anthañan strongly suggest he has modeled this on the usage in Kuŗal (Palaniappan, undated).

Interestingly many literary works that came after Kuŗal also contain this phrase. I had earlier cited this verse from Kayādara Nigañdu, a Jaina work:

கோதிலருகன் திகம்பரன் எண்குணன் முக்குடையோன்,
ஆதிபகவன் அசோகமர்ந்தோன் அறவாழி அண்ணல்

Emphasizing that the aŗavāzhi anthañan of ThirukKuŗal is none other than Arhat, Venkataramaiyah (2001) cites the following references from several Jaina works in Tamil:

Ceevacintāmañi (1611) "அறவாழியண்ணல் இவன் என்பார்"
Ceevacintāmañi (செய்யுள் 7) "அருளோடெழும் அறவாழியப்பா"
Annūl (செய்யுள் 27) "அறவாழி கொண்டே வென்ற அந்தணனே"

And what about Saiva works? They also contain numerous references to Shiva as "அந்தணன்"

Thirumurai (1.107.1) "அந்தணனைத் தொழுவார் அவலம் அறுப்பாரே"
Thirumurai (2.110.7) "அறவனாகிய கூற்றினைச் சாடிய அந்தணன்"
Thirumurai (6.33.4) "இமையோர் போற்றும் அந்தணனை"

Therefore we have enough evidences in Tamil literature to show that both Jaina, Buddhist, Saiva and Vaishnava deities being called "அந்தணன்". What about "அறவாழி அந்தணன்"? Only in Mañimékalai and many Jaina treatises like Ceevacintāmañi, Ceevacintāmañi etc.

References:

Chakravarti, A. 1953. Kuŗal. Deccan Press, Vepery, Madras. 648 pages

Gour, H.S. 2001. The Spirit of Buddhism. Rupa and Co. pp 590

Palaniappan, S. (undated). The couplet showing Buddhist influence. indology@liverpool.ac.uk

Sundaram, P.S. 1990. Introduction. In: Tiruvalluvar: The Kuŗal. Penguin Books. pp 7-16

Venkataramaiah, K.M. 2001. திருக்குறளும் சமண சமயமும். In: வள்ளுவம்: Valluvam. Editors: Palladam Manickam and E. Sundaramurthy. திருக்குறள் பண்பாட்டு ஆய்வு மையம், விருத்தாச்சலம். Tiruvalluvar Year 2032. Issue No. 14. Pp 14-24.

[NVK Ashraf]

(6) Life denial and Life affirming

To Devapriya:

You wrote:
Now Secondly Both Jainism and Buddhism and even Christinity follow Negative Ethics- Be Disciplined, are else You would Perish; No Enjoyment at all (LIFE NEGATION). Tirukural is more a Postivie Life Oriented Ethics i.e., “World and Life affirmation as Hinduism”. This basic trait completely takes Valluvar away from Jainism. Due to this Jainish ethics say- “must not drink Honey, Do not take Bath, do not Wash Tooth etc., Valluvar is clear on bathing, drinking Honey etc.,

Of course, yes (but why include Christianity here?). The Kural life affirming and it is only because it does not endorse Jaina religious teachings of this type, that it is not considered a work on Jaina philosophy. While Kuŗal is life-affirming, Nāladiyār like any other Jaina work is life-denying. Unlike typical Jaina works, Tirukuŗal does not harp on the transitory nature of life. Valluvar does talk about "Impermanence" (நிலையாமை) and at one place (Kuŗal 345) even asks why carry other attachments when the very body itself is a burden on the way to liberation [PS], but he does not go overboard and indulge in statements that are typical of a Jaina work. Emphasizing on the transient nature of youth, Nāladiyār asks not to cherish the love for woman whose beauty will soon disappear when she is old (Nāladiyār 17). But Valluvar on the contrary, in the third division "Love" (காமத்துப்பால்), wondered if heaven can be sweeter than slumbering on the soft shoulders of the women you love (Kuŗal 1103). To cite more examples, Valluvar describes soul as something distinct from the body (Kuŗal 338, 340) but does not go into details of the nature of soul. Being a Jaina ethico-metaphysical anthology, Saman Suttam (Jinendra Varni, 1993) describes soul as consciousness, something eternal, formless and enjoyer of Karmas (23:592). It also differentiates Soul as ajiva and jiva (593, 594) but the Kuŗal makes no such distinctions. I am only saying that Valluvar's ethics has its basis in Jainism and the deity invoked in first chapter suits perfectly for Jaina godhead(s).

Secondly the thoughts such as Vegetarianism and other ethics are the Continuation of Vedic Tradition, Pythogorous who spent 9 years in India, and was the Father of Greek Philosophy, suggests Vegetarianism, no doubt He got from India in 8th Cen BCE, much before Mahaveera founded Jainism. Only that Mahavira emphasised more on this.

I am sorry to say that I disagree with you on this. Studies have shown that the doctrine of ahimsa practices by the Śramanās existed even before the Aryan's came! Many Western scholars like Jacobi, Vincent Smith, Furlong and Zimmer have accepted the Pre-Aryan prevalence of Jainism (Kalghatgi, 1984). I think you need to update your understanding on the history and antiquity of Jainism. In fact I also used to be under the impression that Jainism is an offshoot of Aryan Brahminical 'Hindiusm' but it is not.

What we call "Hinduism" today existed as "Brahmana" sect in the past, and what we call "Jainism" now existed as "Sramana" sect before.

References:

Kalghatgi, T.G. 1984. Jaina View of Life. Lalchand Hirachand Doshi, Jaina Samskrti Samraksaka Sangha, Sholapur. 233 pages

Jinendra Varni (Compiler), 1993. Saman Suttam. Edited by: Sagarmal Jain. Translated by T.K. Tukol and K.K. Dixit. Bhagwan Mahavir Memorial Samiti, New Delhi. pages 290.

[NVK Ashraf]

(7) Twin deeds of dark illusion

To Devapriya:

You wrote:
þÕû§º÷ þÕÅ¢¨ÉÔõ §ºÃ¡ þ¨ÈÅý
¦À¡Õû§º÷ Ò¸úÒ¡¢ó¾¡÷ Á¡Ðî
The twin deeds of dark illusion do not affect those
Who delight meaningfully in Lord's praise. -----from NVK website.
Here again It is on God’s Praise, and if we say on Dead Great men- I feel a great disservice to Valluvar. And þ¨ÈÅý ¦À¡Õû§º÷- He directs things - is against Jainism.

How do you say Valluvar is praising a creator God here? I think you are being mislead by the word "இறைவன்" here which for most of us, due to years of indoctrination and habituation, regard it as a reference to a creator God. How do you say "இறைவன் பொருள் சேர்" means God directing things? Reproduced below are 10 different translations of the fifth couplet. Will you please browse through them and tell me one translator rendering "இறைவன் பொருள் சேர்" as "God directing things" which you believe is against Jainism?

1) Good and bad, delusion's dual deeds, do not disturb those who delight in praising the immutable, worshipful One (SS)
2) The twin deeds of dark illusion do not affect those who delight meaningfully in Lord's praise (SM Diaz)
3) God's praise who tell, are free from right and wrong, the twins of dreaming night (Suddhananta Bharati)
4) Those lost in the Lord are free from the stain of two-fold human actions (Srinivasa Iyengar)
5) Results of good or bad actions springing from ignorance will not affect those devoted to the true greatness of God (K. Krishnaswamy & Vijaya Ramkumar)
6) The men, who on the 'King's' true praised delight to dwell, affects not them the fruit of deeds done ill or well. (G.U. Pope)
7) The two-fold deeds that spring from darkness shall not adhere to those who delight in the true praise of God. (Drew and Lazarus)
8) The delusions caused by good deeds and bad shall never be theirs who seek God's praises (P.S. Sundaram)
The twin deeds affiliated to darkness of ignorance will not affect those who ever sing the true glory of God (G. Vanmikanathan)
9) They who take delight in praising the real Great will be free from the baneful effects both good and evil actions. (Poornalingam Pillai)
10) The two kinds of dark karmas will never approach those that sing the praise of the Lord (A. Chakravarti)

Now let me come to my understanding of the couplet. Reproduced from my article I am writing:

"இருள்சேர் இருவினையும் சேரா" (The twin deeds of dark illusion) here refers to the fruits of good and evil deeds. Using the word "இருவினை", Rajasingham (1987) interprets this to mean the inseparable dualities in union of the opposites, a characteristic feature of Saiva Siddhānta (eg. Shiva and Sakti as fire and heat, flower and fragrance etc. Tirumandiram 2341, 1137). According to Chakravarti (1953), these twin deeds of dark illusion refer to the two groups of four Destructive Karmās and four harmless Karmās of Jaina philosophy. In Jainism, like in Hinduism and Buddhism, life in this world of Samsārā is associated with Karmic Bondage. Since Jainism does not believe in a Creator God, this effect of Karma on the quality of life has its great emphasis in Jainism.

Uthayakumar (2004) who claims Kuŗal to be a work of a Buddhist, provides an interesting interpretation for "இருள்சேர் இருவினையும் சேரா இறைவன்". According to him the word "இருவினை" refers to the extremes of "self-mortification" and "self-indulgence" and therefore the god (இறைவன்) to be praised here is the One who has avoided these extremes! If we are to go by this interpretation, then the couplet be only translated like this: "Find delight in the meaningful praise of the Lord Who has avoided the twin deeds of darkness". This does not read well simply because the word by used Valluvar is "சேரா", meaning "will not reach or affect" and therefore refers to the devotee than as an attribute of the deity (in this case Lord Buddha). or Vedic deity. However, there is no need to contort the translation like this, since the usual translation itself can mean Lord Buddha. By translating the word "iŗaivan" as Lord, the rendering could be made equally valid for Jaina, Buddhist or Vedic deity.


References:

Chakravarti, A. 1953. Kuŗal. Deccan Press, Vepery, Madras. 648 pages

Rajasingham, C. 1987. Thiruk-Kuŗal: The Daylight of the Psyche. International Institute of Tamil Studies, Madras. p

Uthayakumar, A.S. 2004. இந்திய அரசியல் உதைபந்தாடலில் சிக்கியுள்ள திருக்குறள் பெருநூல்! தமிழ்ப்பௌத்தம்-3. Available at Sooriyan.com. (http://sooriyan.com/index.php?option...=705&Itemid=32)

[NVK Ashraf]

(8) Antiquity of Jainism

[This is the last posting of the series of responses to Devapriya's last posting]

To Devapriya:

You wrote:
Tho.Po.Me. who wrote the Book “SAMANA TAMIL ILAKIYA VARALARU” - on Thiru Valluvar his opinion is Kural does not confirm that Valluvar was Jain after a detailed Analyses on KURAL, because Valluvar goes many ways against Jain Ethics.

Please explain me how. I am keen to know and even ready to revert my opinions on my Jaina foundation of Tirukkural if the explanations given are found satisfactory. After all, in the past, I also used to deny the claims of Kural's Jaina affinity! Whether Valluvar was a Jain or not, his work is dominated by Jaina ideas! By the by who is Tho Po Me? Anyway, reproduced below are some of the statements made by great Tamil scholars (once again from my article on Jaina ideas in Tirukkural (http://free.hostdepartment.com/n/nvk...uvar/jaina.htm)

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

"The book Kuŗal is an exposition of the fundamental principles of Jainism"
A. Chakravarti, 1953

"Descriptions of God found in chapter 'Praise of God' lead one to conclude that Valluvar must have been a Jain"
Prof. Vaiyapuri Pillai (1956)

"According to my modest capacity of research and the establishment of truth, Valluvar's work has as its basis the Dharma of Jainism"
V. Kalyanasundaranar (cited by Kulandai Swamy, 2000)

"The ethics of Kuŗal are rather a reflective of the Jaina moral code"
K.V. Zvelebil, 1975

"Though the Kuŗal contains ideas cherished by the Jainas, it is not probably a Jaina work"
S. Gopalan, 1979

"None of the positions that the poet advocates in his verses are inconsistent with Jaina practice"
K.N. Subramanyam, 1987

"There are some indications in the Kuŗal of Valluvar having being a Jain"
P.S. Sundaram, 1990

"One can see the touch of Jain philosophy in the aphorisms of Kuŗal"
Shanker Dayal Sharma, 2000

"He most likely was a Jain ascetic of humble origin who worked as a weaver"
Webster's Encyclopedia on Literature

You also wrote:
Buddishism and Jainism, for that reason every Man made religions absorbed from the Older existing religions and changed and claimed as its own. Buddhism and Jainism took Ramayan and Mahabaratha and wrote to suit their beliefs. Judaism took from Zoroastrianism. Christianity took from Judaism, Mithraism. Manichism took from Zorashraism , Christianity and Buddhism and claimed Manes as the Last Prophet for all of these. Islam’s Prophet took from Manes and Christianity and made similar claims.

You are giving the impression that only Hinduism I mentioned earlier about the pre-Aryan existence of Jainism. Well, it didn't exist as "Jainism" like what we call now, just like what we Hinduism today did not exist as Hinduism in the past! Jains were called "Śramanās" (Strivers or Equals) in the past and Buddhist texts have numerous reference to them as naked ascetics. The historicity of the 23th Tirthankara 'Parsva' of Jains has been established and is accepted by most Scholars. Writes I.C. Sharma (1991) in his book on Ethical philosophies of India (on page 121, Johnsen Publishing Company, New York) "There is no doubt that Mahavira cannot be considered the founder of Jaina religion, for he was only a reformer or rejuvenator of Jainism".

History has shown that every religion has taken and given ideas to other religions. I agree that Islam was an offshoot of Judaism and Christianity, and Judaism itself owes a lot to Zoroastrianism. You may say Buddhism evolved from Brahiminical 'Hinduism', but not Jainism. Ninian Smart (1964. In: Doctrine and Argument in Indian Philosophy, Allen and Unwin, p 163), one of the greatest of religious scholars known in the West, mentions that the Indian view of Karma was doubtless of non-Aryan provenance and it was a kind of natural law.

References:

Ellis, F.W. 1812. Kuŗal on Virtue with commentary. II Edition in 1955 by University of Madras

Gopalan, S. 1979. Kuŗal and Indian traditions. In: The Social Philosophy of Kuŗal. Affiliated East-West Press Pvt Ltd. pp 41-74

Chakravarti, A. 1953. Kuŗal. Deccan Press, Vepery, Madras. 648 pages

Kulandai Swamy, V.C. 2000. Foreword. In: Kuŗal. Translation by S.M. Diaz. General Editor: N. Mahalingam. Ramanandha Adigalar Foundation, Coimbatore. pp 9-30.

Popley, H.A. 1931. The Sacred Kuŗal or the Tamil Veda of Tiruvalluvar. The Heritage of India Press, Calcutta.

Sharma, S.D. 2000 (b). Foreword. In: Kuŗal. Translated by S.M. Diaz. General Editor: N. Mahalingam. Ramanandha Adigalar Foundation. pp 5-8

Subramanyam, Ka. Naa. 1987. Tiruvalluvar and His Kuŗal. Bharatiya Jnanpith Publication. 220 pages

Sundaram, P.S. 1990. Introduction. In: Tiruvalluvar: The Kuŗal. Penguin Books. pp 7-16

Venugopala Pillai, M.V. (undated) Who is Adhibagawan? (English translation of Tamil essay). Available at Ahimsā Foundation.

Zvelebil, K.V. 1975. Tamil Literature. E.J. Brill. p. 125-26

[NVK Ashraf]

Dear Sivamaalaa,

You had pointed out to the occurrence of the following statements in the Kural . . . . . .

"¦¾öÅõ ¦¾¡Æ¡«û"
"¦¾öÅò¾¡ø ¸¡ ¦¾É¢Ûõ"
"Å¡Û¨ÈÔõ ¦¾öÅòÐû ¨Åì¸ôÀÎõ".

. . . . and wondered how Valluvar mentioned these in a Jaina work.

I had produced my explanation for the first two and not for the last one. Please read through the following paragraphs, you will understand everything on god, gods, celestials in Kural better.

The Kuŗal has many references to celestials (இந்திரன், அமரர், தேவர், புத்தேளிர், வானத்தவர், வானோர்), female deities (செய்யவள், செய்யாள், தவ்வை, தாமரையினாள், திரு, முகடி), manes, ghosts and evil spirits (அணங்கு, அலகை, தென்புலத்தார், பேய்). There is a tendency amongst scholars to nail the Kuŗal as Hindu work because these words exist. Apart from worship of Tirthankaras, Jainism also has a large pantheon of gods, godlings, celestials or angels who are divine beings but not divinities or deities (Kalghatgi, 1984; Jain, 1999). Sharma (1989) in his work "Jaina Yakshas" mentions about the tradition of even Yakshini worship prevalent in many Jaina communities. Kalghatgi (1984) believes that such forms of worship, though foreign to Jainism, have been absorbed and assimilated, in the struggle for survival amongst other religions. One of the daily Jaina recitations that fall under the 32 "Pious Aspirations" (Bhāvanā-dvā-trimśikā) composed by Acharya Amita-gati, goes like this:

O' Sarasvati (goddess of learning), pray, forgive me for the mistake I may have committed inadvertently, in pronouncing, spelling, uttering, putting, explaining or understanding, grammatically or otherwise, and grant me the boon of 'knowledge absolute' (Recitation No. 10) (Jain, 1999)

Therefore goddesses like Sarasvati and Lakśmi , dévās like Indra and many celestials like angels, yakshās and demons fall under the scheme of Jainism. Sri Kundakunda, a well known Jaina Āchārya, in his work Ashta Pahuda says "Good people adorned with virtue are dear to the gods" (AP, VIII: 17). Valluvar also says in couplet 388: "A just king, who guards over his subjects, will be deemed god by them" NV. Therefore gods and goddesses very well fall into the scheme of Jaina beliefs though they do not believe in an outside creator God (Mathews, 1995). Moreover, a reference to a god or goddess of other faith cannot be taken as an indication to show Valluvar's inclination towards that faith, for the simple reason that the author seem to have had no hesitation in using the prevailing beliefs amongst the people of his time and use them often as similes to emphasize his message. Some of these words like செய்யவள் and முகடி are found in many established Jaina literary works as well. செய்யவள் is found in Cilappadikāram (2.12.69) and முகடி is Cūdāmañi Nigañdu (Verse 145).

References

Diaz, S.M., 2000. Tirukkural. Tirukkural. General Editor: N. Mahalingam. Ramanandha Adigalar Foundation, Coimbatore. India.

Jain, J.P. 1999. Religion and Culture of the Jains. Bharatiya Jnanpith, New Delhi. 234 pages

Kalghatgi, T.G. 1984. Jaina View of Life. Lalchand Hirachand Doshi, Jaina Samskrti Samraksaka Sangha, Sholapur. 233 pages

Mathews, W. 1991. Buddhism. In: World Religions. II Edition. West Publishing Company. pp 128-177

Sharma, J.P. 1989. Jaina Yakshas. (Kusumanjali Indian art and culture series). Kusumanjali Prakashan. 128 pages

[NVK Ashraf]

Hi to everyone,

I am proceeding on a week long tour. I don't think I will get access to emails.

See you guys after a week.

[bis_mala]

Thiru Ashraf, thanks for your painstaking explanation. I can see that you have amassed a great deal of lmowledge in your selected field. Best regards.

[NVK Ashraf]

Dear Sivamaalaa,

Thanks for the appreciation, but you have not said anything on the correctness of my line of presentation. Am I correct in saying that all the couplets in Chapter 1 could easily be attributed to Jaina deities like Arhats and Siddhas? And that some of the couplets are more relevant for a Jaina deity than a Creator God? And that some of the attributes used by Valluvar are not suitable for a Creator god?

While I wait for Devapriya's reply, I would like to get your comments on this as well.

I think we have not discussed two couplets (No. 3 and 6) so far. I necessary, we can take them also for discussion.

[Uppuma]

Dear Friends,

Mr. NVK said first that many feel that Valluvar was UNorthodox Hindu.

Can he please say why he does not support.

If Valluvar is agianst negative ethics of Jainsism, then how is Valluvar is Jain.

Has NVK read TiruvalluvaMalai and what is his opinion.

How does NVK feel Valluvar is not Hindu, when his Web site clearly gives meanings chosen closer to Hindu etics.

Devapriya- Please give proofs that El- of Bible which forms basis for Quran's Allah as Tamil. I have read many Articles that Allah is just one of the Moon gods of Pre Muhammed Arabia.

I also remember a Tamil Muslim Scholar confirming Allah is from Tamil El in AnanthaVikatan or so. Please give proofs.

Instead of looking at forced interpretation of First Chapter- nvk see in totality of Kurals.

Devapriya respond quicer.

uppuma.