Agamic Semiotic Science with Western Comparison Part 1

Talk by Dr Sivakumar, University Science Malaysia, Penang

The Linguistic Philosophy of Tolkaapiyar - Part 9 ( Final )

The TG Phonology of Tolkaappiyar ( Part 2 )

The Linguistic Theory of Tolkaappiyar is a form of TG grammar but quite different from that of Chomsky. The Process Grammar of Tol. moves around the notions of Ilakkiyam , the texts and IlakkaNam the processes ALREADY within the language and which go to account for the grammatical COHERENCE that any normal speaker understands implicitly. 

Part of this implicit understanding are the TG processes that he sees at various levels, the phonological, syntactical, semantical, the prosodic and so forth. The Uriccol are those words which have undergone SEMANTIC transformations and as such in order to get the root meaning one has to PEEL OFF (urittal, the peeling off the superficial layers) the transformations it has undergone. This line of thinking can easily be extended to form the basic principle of Etymological Science where the collection of similar etymas is just the beginning but where the real task is TO GO TO THE ROOTS of these semantic clusters by processes of de-transformation evidenced by archaic occurrences of the these words. For example we have ‘karam” meaning hands and which can be connected with Sumerian ( Su )  gar-u: to do or Su. suu : hands. This ‘suu’ itself can be related Su./Ta: suur, suul: to radiate out. The common theme is that of radiating out like rays- the hands radiating out from the body just like the rays of light radiate out from the sun. 

Meanings evolve and so do the sounds that have words and sentences that are collections of words with a grammatical coherence. Thus the Process Grammar of Tol allows the looking at the Linguistic Competence of Man on an evolutionary model. And as another development of this Process Grammar is Mantrayana, the science of meaning (and objects) creations where the notion of ezuttu but as mantra-phoneme plays a crucial role as in the Mantrayana of Tirumular. 

With this prelude let us come back to the TG notions implicit in Tol. that Nac. is trying his best to bring out in the passage quoted above. 


We have already mentioned that Karuvi means the Generative Basis, that which serves as the basis for the transformations and Ceykai are the various kinds of transforms that have actually taken place. Now we shall inquire why they are sub-classified into Akak Karuvi, Purak Karuvi, PuRac Ceykai, Akac Ceykai and so forth. 


Let us consider Nac. observation that the chapter of Nuun Marabu and PiRappiyal (phonetics) are PuRappuRak Karuvi i.e. very very distant Generative Basis. The chapter on Mozi Marabu that deals extensively with the dependent phonemes, the caarbezuttu is said to be Purak Karuvi (distant generative basis), chapter on PuNariyal that deals with the transformation processes when two independent words conjugate in a sentence is said to be Akak Karuvi and those sutras that say the phonemes of the type short ‘e’ and ‘o’ will not occur as word endings are said to be Akak Karuvi. 


What additional meaning is implicit in this classification of the Generative Basis? 


The essential notion is available in the Akak Karuvi and which is said to be the study of phonetic transforms the phonemes undergo when two words conjugate. The most distant are the chapters that simply either enumerate or describe the various processes underlying their production. Thus it is clear the various chapters of Ezu. have IMPLICIT ANTICIPATION or hidden intentions. Where the description do not have in mind of the transformational processes the different phonemes may undergo, then phonemes of such description are said to be the Most Distant (PuRappuRam) in the sense that there is NO ANTICIPATION of the possible transforms they may undergo. And when such transforms are explicitly spelt out as PuNariyal, then because the hidden intention is made explicit then it is said to be Akak Karuvi, the kind of descriptions that are in fact intended. We can make sense of the intermediate categories in terms of these basic notions. 


Now what about the PuRpuRac Ceykai and so forth? Is there also a HIDDEN INTENTION that Nac. saw in the sutras of Tol? 


Here as an instance of the Most Distant Transform he cites the sutra 140 concerned with the appearance of the semivowels in the context of word conjugations and it goes as below: 



140: 

ellaa mozikkum uyirvaru vaziyee 

udampadu meyyin uruvukkoLal varaiyaar 

and it means: for both the initial word and conjoining word, the insertion of semivowels to the vowels that occur initially will not be censored as ungrammatical. 

As example we have : kiLi azakitu> kiLiyazakitu where the ‘a’ is transformed into ‘ya’ by the insertion of the new ‘y’. Here we note the semivowel is IMPORTED from the general phonological basis of the language. 

As an example of the Akac Ceykai is said to be Tokai Marabu and which mentions which phonemes are replaced with what phonemes etc. An example of this will be the following sutra: 

143. 

ka sa ta pa mutaliya mozimeeR RoonRum 

meelelzutt tiyaRkai colliya muRaiyaal

nga nja n_a ma vennum oRRaa kummee

anna marabin mozivayi naana: 



This explains what phonemes are DISPLACED by what phonemes and in what kind of conjugations. For maram+ kuRitu > maraGkuRitu and where we have the ‘m’ displaced with ‘G’ 


But what is the difference between this and the above where there is an INSERTION of the semivowel? 


While in the former there is ADDITION of the semivowels, in the latter we have DISPLACEMENT of one phoneme with another that makes the utterance more convenient. While the Most Distant Transform is one of insertion of an extraneous sound, the Most Intimate Transform is that of DISPLACEMENT of one phoneme with another. 


Thus the MEASURE used in the classifications of TRANSFORMS appears to be that of insertion of additional phonemes compared to that of DISPLACEMENT where the former counts as the Most Distant while the latter the Most Intimate. 


Thus Tol in his TG phonology in describing the phonemes seem to had the INTENTIONS or not at all of describing also how the phonemes suffer TRANSFORMS when words conjugate and how in such transforms we have either insertion of new phonemes along with the existing or displacement of one phoneme with another and so forth. Thus such phonemic insertions and displacements are phonological TRANSFORMATIONAL processes of the language and which constitute the IlakkaNam of the language. 




ULLAGANAR

( Editing and re-paragraphing by his student )

Human Freedom in Saiva Siddhanta

I would like to outline a summary of the concept of Human Freedom in Saiva Siddhanta.  1. The notion of Human Freedom and its metaphysical analysis is already available in the famous Patikam of Appar (c. 7th cent AD) that begins with Nam yaarrkum Kudi Alloom ( we are not subject to anyone).  This  is the genuine human freedom where there is absence of subjectivity to a nation, cult, religion, ideology or whatever.  This notion is also expressed by Tolkaappiyar(c. 5th Cent BC) as the Munaivan , the illuminated who enjoys the Vinayin Niigki viLangkiya Arivu, an understanding that is FREE of all prejudices (vinai) and hence truly objective. Now while Tokaappiyar  does not bring in BEING to explain this human freedom Appar does where he says that he is subject to no one only because he has neared BEING who is Taan Yaarkkum Kudi allaat tanmaiyoon:  One is absolutely FREE in the sense He is the authority unto Himself. 2. The overall implication is that a person becomes truly free and autonomous only by gravitating towards and become totally under His influence for BEING is NOT an enslaving Power but rather one who FREES all souls for He is himself  absolutely FREE.  In other words, because of His essence as the absolutely FREE and subject to no power other than himself,  He also promotes such a freedom so that an individual who comes close to Him becomes equally FREE and LIBERAL, totally autonomous in his existence in the world.  Now this may sound puzzling and self contradictory where bringing a soul under the total influence of BEING also means letting the individual enjoy absolute freedom, This puzzle cannot be unfolded without bringing in the Fundamental Ontology of Triadism,  an Ontology that remains peculiarly siddhantic to this day, to the best of my knowledge. 3. BEING,  the countless number of souls and binding fetters (Pati Pasu Paasam) are anati , uncreated and eternally there, remaining indestructible and where, while they enter into the configuration of all individuals, they themselves remain free of such constituents.  Here it is  also noted that while the souls are Samalan,  infected with Malam the primordial binding fetter, BEING is Nimalan, One who is absolutely free of this Malam.  This means that while the soul even in its most primitive form of existence is BOUND , infected with fetters, BEING is NOT - He remains always absolutely free. Thus the bound nature of the souls is their essence and that they can become free and autonomous only by the Grace of BEING who remains forever free and absolutely autonomous. In other words it is NOT the case where the human being is robbed of his initiative and exercise of will, conscious and unconscious  as said below but rather one already begins existence with total loss of freedom.  In bringing the soul under the regulation of BEING, He does not rob the initiative and exercise of will of the individual but rather promotes them. There is exercising of free will by humans or for that matter even other lower forms of beings only because of the Grace of BEING who violates the hold of Malam. 4. Here we must also note that even in Saivism,  the religious individual is bound and not free. For he remains cultic - a Sakta, A  VaishNava , the  Saiva and so forth  and fight bitterly among themselves. However among the really great individuals no matter what cult they favour, there is a Transcendence of all cults with the understanding that finally it is one and the same BEING who presents Himself in many different archetypal forms.  There is Metatheism and not Polytheism  and this Metatheism so characteristic of Saivism  is also another reason why an individual's thinking is promoted so that it becomes totally Free and purified of all prejudices. 5. But even here since there is regulation of the individuals thinking and so forth, isn’t it restricting the exercise of Free Will  and so forth? Here we can bring in an analogy to explain the matter. When good parents in their care and love for their children regulate their behaviour pedagogically so that they grow up as excellent and autonomous individuals, matured and independent,  we do not say they are depriving  the free will of the children. What we can say is that they NURTURE the mind of the children so that the growth is healthy and the children become great. BEING as Siva nurtures the souls as do good parents to their their children so that the souls grow up healthy and finally enjoy Moksa. It is here that He promotes the ascendance of the Cakras and which is possible only by dislodging the various fetters, the binding Pasas.  Unless a person’s Free Will is developed he cannot free himself by his own efforts, the binding fetters and become genuinely autonomous.  He has to LEARN to the very end to attain Moksa and BEING promotes LEARNING to the end.  BEING promotes this kind of growth, concealing Himself for the most part so that the individual would exercise his Free Will to the very end.  Only when a person is sufficiently matured that BEING discloses Himself and at which point out of great love and gratitude he becomes a bakta. To be a Bakta is NOT to be a slave but rather deeply loving  as was the case with Appar and all other Azwars and Nayanmars. ULLAGANAR ( 25-5-2010. AT ) ( editing and re-paragraphing by his student ) ( photo taken from https://www.pexels.com/ with thanks