Talk:Tirukkural

Kamathupaal

kamathupal teaches divine love.

Excuse me, but kamam, derived from kama, is pleasure/lust. -- Arvindn 20:35, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Whether the word kamam is really derived from kama is another argument. Anyway the classification of the last section as kamathuppal is bit old; the recent accepted version is இன்பத்துப்பால். You may look at other online versions especially the one by Karunanidhi and http://www.cs.utk.edu/~siddhart/thirukkural/ Also, Tirukural didn't exactly/explicitly teaches the sex or kamam as Kama Sutra. If you look at http://www.thedmk.org/thirukural/111.htm , you may understand that. So, IMHO, the word can be loosely translated as divine love (p.s. I'm not the author of the para). Anyway, this article needs more work. --Rrjanbiah 05:00, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It would be a little strange for the to words to mean roughly the same thing but be etymologically unrelated.

You're right about inbathuppal, I think its better to change it to that.

Again, the Tirukkural is definitely not explicit about sex, as you say (I wasn't under the illusion; I did Tirukkural in school too.) Its kind of like some of the romantic works of Shakespeare.

On the other hand, the primary meaning of divine is relating to a deity, which the inbathuppal is clearly not. So I don't think divine love is appropriate.

Incidentally, why do you insist on spelling my username with an extra 'a'?

Arvindn 06:28, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice your spelling. I just read it as Aravind (reflexive??). Just noticed that you didn't use the extra 'a'. Sorry. --Rrjanbiah 10:40, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

No prob :) Arvindn 11:41, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Tiruvalluvar was not averse to referring to deities nor the personalized God, so i don't see how your argument stands. --LordSuryaofShropshire 08:13, Apr 4, 2004 (UTC)

Thiruvalluvar might not have been averse to referring to deities, but I don't see how that is relevant to referring to Inpathupal as divine love. I agree that Inpathupal is better (and free of Sanskrit loanwords) and also that divine love is not appropriate here.

Sundar 09:24, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)

Hinduism?

Ambarish insists on having {{Hinduism}} in the article. I searched for the word "Hindu" in the article as suggested by him in his last edit summary and still find no reason to have {{Hinduism}} in the article. There was a mention of a speculation that Tiruvalluvar was a Hindu. Even if that was true, it doesn't matter Tirukkural as much as Tiruvalluvar as he never claimed his philosophy as Hindu. Even if matters there (Tiruvalluvar), {{Hinduism}} doesn't apply there. Ambarish, please help me understand your rationale. -- Sundar 05:07, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and removed {{Hinduism}}. Please reply here before reverting me. -- Sundar 10:35, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

My point is that {{Hinduism}} is as relevant in this article as a section titled "Tirukkural and Religion" that talks primarily about Valluvar's religious beliefs. So long as the article mentions a controversy about Valluvar's religion, the category is pertinent. It's a different argument that the text in the section should probably go into Tiruvalluvar instead. In that case, the category should go there too. BTW, re: "as there is no response yet from my question on Talk:Tirukkural#Hinduism" from your edit summary, I don't have a problem at all with your being bold and re-reverting my revert. I just thought I'd point out that you can't expect a response within 6 hours everytime. Ambarish 10:48, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, if Tirukkural/Tiruvalluvar has to be categorized under Hinduism, there are few things to be clarified: 1. Which Hindu group, particularly orthodox brahmins accept Tirukkural as a Holy Hindu text? 2. Incase, if brahmins/aryans accept Dravidian Tiruvalluvar as Hindu saint, why don't they accept dravidian gods like Kali (not durga, but pathrakaali), Azhagar, etc as Hindu gods?

I presume, the problem is with the loose translation; often in Tiruvalluvar context, the Tamil words meaning "Philosopher" and "Scholar" are wrongly translated into "Saint" in English. IIRC, this even made Dr.Ambedkar to think, Tiruvalluvar as a Hindu/brahmin saint.

--Rrjanbiah 18:08, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Response

Thiruvalluvar belongs to Vaishnavism sect of Hinduism, as he mentions God Vishnu in couplets 610 and 1103 and Goddess Lakshmi in couplets 167, 408, 519, 565, 568, 616, and 617.

Brahmins are not only the Hindus. This was taught by the pseudo athiest under Dravida maayai. Whoever follow Vedas/Bhagawat Gita are all known as Hindus.

Bhagawat Gita clearly states' Chathur varnam - guna karma vipasakaha. The four castes come by deeds and character and not by birth. Same is told by Valluvar as Pirappokkum Kural. One sect called themselves as brahmins and spoiled hinduism.

Aryans are not only hindus. Sangam literature including puranaanooru, thol kaappiyam, silappathikaram, Pari padal clearly speaks about God Narayana/Vishnu as Thirumaal and God Krishna as Maayon.

Bhathra kaali itself a sanskrit name, well famous in rajastan sides.

Azhagar is nothing but God Vishnu, who is worshipped by currently known iyengars and all villagers.

The word Adhi Bhagawan is not pure tamil, but sanskrit. Pure tamil words of it are "Thodakka" and "irai".

More than Adhi Bhagawan in jainism, its completely linked to vaishnavism.

Nammalwar states God Narayana as Andhamil "Aadhi am Bhagawan" - Divya Prabandham. 2701

Sanskrit Author Baanini refers "Adhi Idhi Bagavatho Narayana". Hence, adhi bhagavan cant stand for Rishaba devar, but God Narayana.

EnGunathan can also mean as Ennatra Gunangaludayaan - which is famouns as "Anatha Kodi Gunangaludaya Narayanan" by Alwar talk. Thiruvalluvar cannot be atheist, as he mentions Iraivanadi, Aadhi bhagavan. He cannot be christian, as he mentions "Oozh"(prior birth deeds), Piravi perunkadal(re-birth) and vegetarianism(pulal unnaamai). He cannot be Jain, since he mentions "Avi soriyum Velvi(Yagna)", "Aravali Andhanan", "iruvinayum cheraa iraivan" The only God names he mentions are Thamarai Kannaan (God Krishna), Adiyalandhaan(God Vishnu - Vamanan), Thamarayinaal, Thiru, Seyyaval as Goddess Lakshmi [ref. Parimelazhagar urai]. Hence, there is no place to change its identity.

He not ever mentioned tamil dominant religion Saiva God "Shiva" or Tamil Kadavul "Muruga" or Jain God "Arugan" or Village goddess "Kotravai" or others. He mentions only God Krishna and Lakshmi in his kurals.

Thiruvalluvar must would have belonged to madurai region vaishnava kshathria(being a minister) as the books were handled by its first commentators, who were belonged to same area. Parimelazhagar (Names stands for God of Alagar Kovil), Pari perumal(God of alagar kovil), Kalingar (Kalinga krishna).

Kural also has the meaning "Vamana" (as referred by Nammalwar in Nalayira Divya prabandham).

Thiruppathisaram temple near Nagarkovil and Aranmula Parthasarathy temple in kerala, have the Vishnu deities in the name of Thirukkuralappan.

Barring above all concepts, thiruvalluvar himself shows his own identity by denoting God Vishnu on his Kural no. 1103 and Kural no. 610 and notes on Goddess lakshmi by Kural nos. 167, 617, 408, 519, 565, 568 and 616.

Hence, as the followers of Valluvar, we are not supposed to manipulate or over-change his straight forward own words from our concepts and need to follow "Therindhu Seyal vagai" and "Vaaimai". Changing or generalizing his identity are totally against him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maayan pandithevan (talk • contribs) 15:50, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Please see WP:OR. If there is any reliable citation that supports your claim, you can add it to the article. utcursch | talk 14:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC)