”
Arul.2009/FB/#69032
TREATMENT OF FEMININE BEAUTY IN TIRUKKOVAIYAR
AVVAI. D. NATARAJAN, M.A., M.Litt
The Ramalinga Mission,
9/15 Edward Elliots Road,
Mylapore,
MADRAS-4.
Ever since the earliest times feminine beauty has been a powerful source of inspiration for all poets.
St. Manikkavaacakar is not blind to the tremendous influence of the beauty of woman which cannot be either ignored or resisted fully by man.
A poet is all the more concerned with this theme, as he is also a lover of beauty.
James Laver rightly points out the irresistible appeal of female beauty in his “Homage to Venus.”
“Ever since the first dawn of thought gleamed upon the dark landscape of instinct, man has regarded woman with a mixture of attention and awe.
Woman as the gate of life, woman as the object of desire; between these two poems has this emotion swung.
The body of woman has always been heavy with magic, mysterious as life itself, “1
Sri B.G. Gokhale also points out in his “Indian Thought through the Ages.
” “The appeal of female beauty and its mystery occupies a prominent place in the concept of pleasure.
This ideal of female beauty is described by all classical writers.
Kalidasa for instance regards lips the colour of young buds,
1. James Laver Homage to Venus, p.2.
arms like lotus stalks, a slender waist and swaying hips and youth pervading every limb as essential costituents of feminine beauty.
Even the more prosaic puranas think it appropriate to lay down certain characteristics of feminine beauty.
Poets like Vidyapati and Chandidas, therefore, are free to speak of ‘shapely hips’, ‘slender waist and Plumlike breasts growing larger and harder and orisport
Manikkavaacakar too has brought out the beauty of woman in memorable inages of rich poetic appeal.
The ideal woman’s gait is like that of female swan and the gentle movement of the cow-elephant.
The general charm of slender beauty reminds him of the graceful peacock and the painted picture.
The forehead is like the crescent; the eyes is that of the deer; the lustre of the eye reminds him of the bright sword; the restless movement of the eyes reminds him of the bright sword, the restless movement of the eyes reminds him of the Kentai and Kayal fish; and the general shape of the eyes is that of the unripened, tender mango. The rainbow serves as the
image of the arched brows; the Kovvai fruit, the coral and the sampal flowers serve as comparison for the red mouth and
the teeth are like the white oyster-pearls. The face is like the Moon.
She is sweet-tongued like the parrot, sweet-voiced like the kuyil, or the Yaazh or sugarcane; the tender bamboos serve as an image of the shoulders, the slender waist is likened to the tuti, a percussion instrument or the Vanci crooper or a slender twine.
The breasts are taken to be pair of cups. Most of the epithets and similes are traditional and oft-repeated.
Numberless are the epithets used in connection with woman’s sweet voice. Our poet uses the following phrases:
The sweet voiced (Inmozhi), the sugar-cane voiced, Kuzhal mozhi (the voice soft as lispings), the soft voiced, the chasto-voiced, the honey-tongued; the voice sweet as the music of the Yaazh, the voice trainod in palying on the Yaazh etc.
I.c. Karumbana menmozhi (T.K.248), Kuzhanmozhi (T.K.198), Cinmozhi (T.Κ. 181, 183, 343), Tuumozhi (T.K.112), Teemozhi (T.K.99,100), Teenmozhi (T.K.232), Panimozhi (T.K.345), panimozhi (Τ.Κ. 18, 32, 264, 387), menmozhi (T.Κ.10,83,84,220), Yaazhmozhi (T.K.93), Yaazhmozhi (T.K, 230, 269), Yaazhkarra mozhi (T.K.78), Yaazharmozhi mankai(T.K.93),
Tiinkuzhal Vaaymozhi (T.K.94)
The thinners, tenderness, softness, of the slender waist has inspired many verses.
Here are some typical phrases of description Vanjci marungkul) (T.K.22), minumun paniyum purai maraungkul (T.K.5), Minnolhi maraungkul (T.K.272), Teeyum maraungkul (T.K.3), Marungkul (T.K.121), Valli Marungkul (T.K.128), curungkum Marungkul (T.K.353,) Thalhar Marungkul (T.K.359), Nuulottha neer itai (T.K.45), Koti itai (T.K.7,8,9,11,64,132) Cirritai (T.K.169,197) Tuti itai (T.k.21,73), Teempalitai (T.K.165), Nutankitai (T.K.359,81), Nunnitai (T.K.342, 363), Nintangitai (Τ.Κ. 220, 221, 268), Minnitai (T.K.10,37,178,201,386) Vanjei itai (T.K.32).
The Innocence of early maidenhood in pointed out in such terms as Matakkoti (T.K.113), Matappanvai (T.K.19), Matappiti (T.K.34), Matammanathu (T.K.330) Matamaan (T.K.124), Matavaral (TK.15,18).
The Tamil poets are certainly enthusiastic in their description of the full-orbed bosom borne with difficulty by the slender limbs. The common comparisons are to a pair of golden oups, the rounded prominencos on the elephant forehead, pented hills, Lotus buds Vannappayoothara poaran (T.K.136),
Araalran poyinru amizhtham potninuthu cornjounaanku aatakattnin paraakanj citharnhth payootaran (T.K.194), Pannittu irumantha payootharon (T.K.242), Vempayootharm (Τ.Κ.378).
The intural and manifold beauty of the eyes as in index to inward emotion makes such a direct appeal that the poets very seldom allow thetorical subtleties to get the better of them and obscure the naturalness of their description.
Now accompanied by a playful arching of the eyebrows and now weighed dom with bashfulness, now daring with glee and now timid with an unknown fear, now moving languidly and now expanding like a bud, now soft with tenderness and now sportive with an affection of conquetry, now directed with child like frankness and now averted with coy embarrassment, now wide open with eagerness and now half-closed with feeling, now red and frowning with anger and now misty and wet with tears the poets love to describe the glances along with all the phases of emotion which they betray.
The amorous look and the beauty of the eyes are mentsoned by our author in various pharases as follows:
Navvinookku (T.K.97), Nookkethir nookku (T.K.363), Matanookku (T.K.21), Marimaan nookku (T.K.5,26), Maaviyanranna nennookku, maanamar nookku (T.K.21,274)
Mennookku (T.K. 41, 111, 200), Arieinthukan (T.K.200), Ayilenap perungkan (T.K.224), kataikkan Karungkan (Τ.Κ. 30,70, 169, 366), Kayallan (T.K.117,137,331,312,381), Kentaiyangian (T.K6), Tatangkan (T.K.83,163,277), Taamaralkan (T.K.184), Pankayakkan (T.K.120), Pataildan (Τ.Κ. 3,5,18,237), Panildan (T.K.345), Malaridan (T.K.170, 387), Maittatangkan (T.K.163), Varikkan (T.k.287), Vatikkan (T.K.34,197), Vatukkan (T.K.32), Varikkan (164), Vaatkan (T.K.48,153,301), Vaalarikkan (T.K.225), Veelkan (T.K.43, 50, 179, 250, 201,368),
The beauty of the forehead is pointed out in the following phrases:
Onnuthal (T.K.193), Cirumuthal (T.K.3), Tirumuthal (T.K.122), Nann thal (T.K. 105,332), Fanimatinathal (T.K.40), Pirai-nuthal (T.K.91,125), Mathinuthal (T.K.126,147,204,214), Mathivannuthal (T.K.2), Vaanuthal (T.K.43, 48, 95, 101, 121, 129, 169,235, 348, 374, 397), Viilanthal (Τ.Κ.368), Vircerimuthal (T.K.133,134), Virpatuvaanathal (T.K.348), Virpolinuthal (T.K.304).
The graceful gait is mentioned as follows:
Annamennatai (T.K.6), Annanatai (T.K.78), Amanataiyaalh (T.K.342), Thullunataiyaalh (T.K.369), Matanatai (T.K.80, 97, 151, 328).
The tender beauty of the shoulders is mentioned in the following:
Amaitool (T.K.10), Amaitothi (T.K117), Kaampana toolhi (T.K.371), Panaittoolhi (T.K.215, 219), Peruntoolhi (Т.К.5), Рerumpanitoolhi (T.K.3), Montroolh (T.k.23,204), Valaittoolhi (T.K.131), Veeynaar toolhi (T.K.232), Veeyinn mentoolh (T.K.282), Veeyina toolh (T.K.234), Veeyutaitoolhi (T.K.42), Vecyootta telhi (T.Κ.127).
Many epithets are used in relation to the abundant, jet black locks of hair often not with flowers. EErkuzhal (T.K.284), Karungkuzhal (T.K.73, 114), 162,333), karpuraik-kuzhal (T.K.357), Curikuzhal (T.K.63,172) Curumpivarkuzhal (T.K.321), Taazhkuzhal (T.K. 125, 126, 312, 340), Toompinai-voarluzhal (T.K.38), Notikuzhal (T.K.61, 122, 125, 159), Netiyutukuzhal (T.K.39), Purikuzhal (T.K.4,216,270,277), Puunkuzhal (T.K.50,224), Malarkkuzhal (T.K.301), Meykuzhal (T.K.93,278,314), Vantamarkuzhal (Τ.Κ.221), Vaarkuzhal (T.K. 81, 119, 176), are some examples.
The general complexion is described by the image of the tender leaves of the mango (Maantalhirmooni -Τ.Κ.107, 128).
This topic of epithets in relation to the various physical aspects of female beauty is almost inexhaustible.
It can supply matter for a treatise by itself. period (19th century) specialised in these strange images and Shelley, as we have seen, is the best exponent of this poetic method.
We come across over so many fictitious images, so to speak, in the Tirukkovaiyaar.
Though lacking in factual truth, they appeal to us by their poetic truth.
The hero for instance, once bids farewell to the heroine after enjoying her company in a lovely place.
Her arched in frowns look like the bar in shape, the red lips brings the ruddy kovvai fruit to the lover’s mind, her face shines like the full moon.
Her soft and slender frame reminds him of the soft tender crooper. The sensuousncss of the description is almost koatsioan in its appeal to the imagination.
The lover is overcome by the experience of joy issuing from her looks and thinks of any a fictitious tender crooper which bears a full moon, which in turn has in it a rainbow, a red fruit and white pourls. (T.K.16).
Thore is no such crooper except in the poet’s world of ‘fine frenzy. Yet the image serves the context here by its poetic truth.
The maid-companion thinks of been setting on a lotus flower to gather honeys when she sees the eyes of the heroine rivetted on the lotus-like face of the hero. And love is the honey they suck (T.K.66).
Another time the hero remarks that his heart is caught in the coils of the lady’s eye just as a fish is netted. He induges in the self-satisfying conceit of a lost heart! (T.K.74).
The hero suggests to the Iady that their love is known to her maid-companion. Instantly, her face brightens.
Thereupon the hero exclaims that she is verily the newly-blossomed Cengazhuniir flower and that he is the happy bee sucking honey therfrom (Т.К.123).
When the hero understands that his lady is delighted to meet him at night, he exclaims that she is the Kumuta blossom; and he the full moon that makes it blossom.
The hero at first declines to take the lady away from her home. The maid-companion wants to suggest that the heroine cannot bear the thought of living without the lover. He must take her away.
She uses the image of the fish out of water and says,
“of Lord, what more have you got to say? You are a pond full of lotus blooms. She is the Kayal fish in the waters. It is enough if you understand this much. (Τ.Κ. 203)
Above all there is a striking verse wherein the maid-companion suggests the impossibility of drawing the figure of the heroine
. She asks the hero whether he can do it successfully. The liniations of the fine art contrasted with real life are exquisitely brought out in the verse.
She thinks of images and asks whether she can draw the Yaazh, the pearls and the darkness.
Here she has in her mind the sweetness of her voice (Yaash), the shining teeth and the dark locks of hair. Hero the images serve as similes.
Next it must be noted that the poet dignified and elevates the images by imparting to them a spiritual significance.
The hero’s description of the eyes of the lady is remarkable. The eyes are said to be large or vast as his love for God, dark as “The dark rope of his attachment pacam (to wardly objects), whito as the sacred ashes and long as hymns of praise”.
Indeed this is the supreme achievement in the world of poetic images, where sensuous experience is spoken off in terms of spiritual bliss.
What is familiar and common is not only made unfamiliar, as in many poets of the romantic school, but also rised to heights of divine ecstasy. The use of this image shows the poet-saint at his best.
Add a Comment