“
|
... Early Tamil poetry was rather unique not only by virtue of the fact that some of its features were so unlike everything else in India, but by virtue of its literary excellence; those 26,350 lines of poetry promote Tamil to the rank of one of the great classical languages of the world ...
All other Dravidian literatures—with the exception of Tamil—begin by adopting a model—in subject-matter, themes, forms, in prosody, poetics, metaphors, etc.—only the language is different; in spite of the attempts of some Indian scholars to prove that there were—that there must have been—indigenous, "Dravidian," pre-Aryan traditions, literary traditions, in the great languages of the South, it is extremely hard to find traces of these traditions, and such attempts are more speculative that strictly scientific. ...
But in Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam, the beginnings of written literatures are beyond any doubt so intimately connected with the Sanskrit models that the first literary output in these languages is, strictly speaking, imitative and derived, the first literary works in these languages being no doubt adaptations an/or straight translations of Sanskrit models. The process of Sanskritization, with all its implications, must have begun in these communities before any attempt was made among Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam peoples to produce written literature, and probably even before great oral literature was composed. ... Whoever has written so far on the history of Kannada, Telugu, and Malayalam literatures take refuge in a formulation which is characteristic for speculative conclusions; cf. "the beginnings of Kannada literature are not clearly traceable, but a considerable volume of prose and poetry must have come into existence before the date of Nrpatunga's Kavirajamarga (850 AD), the earliest extant work on rhetoric in Kannada;" or "beyond doubt there must have existed much unwritten literature (in Telugu) of popular character ...." etc. The facts are different.
The beginnings of Kannada literature were almost totally inspired by Jainism. The first extant work of narrative literature is Sivakoti's Vaddaraghane (cca 900 AD) on the lives of the Jaina saints. The fundamental work on rhetoric in Kannada, and the first theoretical treatise on Kannada culture, is based on Dandin's Kavyadarsa—that is Nrpatunga's Kavirajamarga. Pampa, the first great poet of Kannada literature—and one who is traditionally considered the most eminent among Kannada classical poets—is again, indebted entirely to Sanskrit and Prakrit sources, and in his two compositions, in his version of the Mahabharata story, and in his Adipurana, dealing with the life of the first Jaina Tirthankara. The beginnings of Kannada literature are, thus, anchored firmly in traditions which were originally alien to non-Aryan South India. Quite the same is true of Telugu literature. Telugu literature as we know it begins with Nannaya's translation of the Mahabharata (11th Cent.). The vocabulary of Nannaya is completely dominated by Sanskrit. ... In Malayalam, too, the beginnings of literature are essentially and intrinsically connected with high Sanskrit literature ...
An entirely different situation prevails in Tamil literature. The earliest literature in Tamil is a model unto itself—it is absolutely unique in the sense that, in subject-matter, thought-content, language and form, it is entirely and fully indigenous, that is, Tamil, or, if we want, ..., Dravidian. And not only that: it is only the Tamil culture that has produced—uniquely so in India—an independent, indigenous literary theory of a very high standard, including metrics and prosody, poetics and rhetoric.
There is yet another important difference between Tamil and other Dravidian literary languages: the metalanguage of Tamil has always been Tamil, never Sanskrit. As A. K. Ramanujan says (in Language and Modernization, p. 31): "In most Indian languages, the technical gobbledygook is Sanskrit; in Tamil, the gobbledygook is ultra-Tamil."
|
”
|