Song of the Divine Dog

தெய்வீகநாய் / தெய்வீகனாய் - கோவிறை

தெய்வீகநாய்-பைரவன் . எருமை-அரி ஆடு-அரி கரி-அரி அரி-அரி

நாகம்-அரி காகம்-சனி என விலங்கொடு-புத்தேள் இயைவதேனோ?

அரியின்-அரியும் விடையும் சேவலும் எலியும் புலியும் மீன்-ஆமை-பன்றியும்

அரியான-அரியும் பிறபலவுயிரும் கோடரியால் கொன்று குறுகுவார் நரரோ?

குரங்கும் கரடியும் பாறும் அணிலும் மயிலும் ஆவினத்தாயும் அதுபோல்

பாலூட்டும் எருமையும் ஆடும் அதனை புத்தனே ஆயினும் புசிப்பது கலியோ?

விலங்கிய ஒழுக்கால் அறம் தாழ்ந்து விலங்கிய வலையில் தானாய் வீழ்ந்து

விலங்கினம் வருத்தி உண்டூன்பெருக்கி விலங்கணிதர்க்கு மறுபிறப்போ(4)?

.

எவ்வுயிர்க்கும் செந்தண்மை பூண்டார் அறவோர்

எதிர்ப்பும் வெகுளியும் நீக்குவார் அருகினோர்

வள்ளுவன் பதஞ்சலி பிறபல சான்றோர்

வருத்தாமைக்களித்த வல்லிய சான்று

.

பாலும் தெளிதேனும் . புலாலும் அண்டமும்

தோலும் பட்டும் பவழமுத்தும் விலக்கி .

வீணாய் விலங்கினம் தெய்யா வீக(ர)னாய்

வியத்தகு விளக்காய் விளங்கு தெய்வீகனாய்

.

(TL;DR: தெய்யா வீகனாய் விலங்கை விலக்கு, தெய்வீகனாய் விளக்காய் விளங்கு)

Translation

Divine Dog / Be Divine

• by Kovirai (a coined Tamil rendering of the author’s name Rajesh)

The divine dog—Bhairava; the buffalo—Yama; the ram—Agni; the elephant—Indra; the horse—Surya;

The serpent—Shiva; the crow—Shani. Why are gods associated with animals?

The Sun’s steed(s), the bull, the rooster, the mouse, the tiger, the fish, the tortoise, and the boar—

The lion that Hari became, and many other lives: those diminished by killing them all with an axe, are they human?

Monkey, bear, vulture, squirrel, peacock, and the mother among cattle;

Buffalo and goat that give milk—is it the Kali age that even one that becomes a Buddha eats them?

Through crooked conduct, Dharma declines; of own accord, one falls into the net that has been cast.

Harming animals in order to eat and grow one’s flesh—is this to be born again wearing fetters?

Those who maintain tender compassion toward every life are the righteous.

Hostility and anger fall away from those who come near them.

Valluvar, Patanjali, and many other sages—

Have given mighty testimony to non-harming.

Milk and clear honey, meat and eggs;

Leather and silk, coral and pearls—all to be renounced;

Without needlessly killing animals, become a vegan—

Shine as a wondrous light; become divine!

(TL;DR: Be a non-killing vegan, renounce animals / remove the fetters; be divine, shine forth as an example, as a lamp.)

Commentary

The poem makes a case for veganism through reverence for the divine, an appeal to our humanity, spiritual enlightenment, liberation from rebirth, and the ethical authority of Valluvar and Patanjali. It culminates by presenting veganism as a path toward becoming divine.

It drives home the point by placing on an equal footing the dog, the horse, the boar, the cow, the buffalo, the goat, the rooster, the fish, and other creatures: the poem therefore suggests treating their lives as equally worthy of consideration. It also argues that the maternal sacredness accorded to an animal that gives milk ought to be extended to the others – a message of universal benevolence toward living beings and non-harming that Valluvar and Patanjali spoke of. The implicit corollary is that taboos on eating an animal should be extended to the others as well. The poem predominatly draws on Indic cultural and spiritual traditions; its allusions enrich the argument, but they should not obscure the central ethical message.

Although the poem’s free-form structure does not conform to Tamil grammar for poetry (யாப்பிலக்கணம்), it nevertheless employs classical poetic resources of poetic ornamentation.

Rather than reading the poem silently, I suggest vocalizing it to a rap-style beat. The dots in the verse signal an abrupt shif tin prosody, and (4) after மறுபிறப்போ suggests that the word be repeated four times.

The title, தெய்வீகநாய் / தெய்வீகனாய், frames the poem through a phonetic pun: theiveeganai. At the opening it means “divine dog”; at the close it means “become divine.” This transformation links the recognition of sacredness in animal life to the ethical transformation of the human being. Additional poetic elements are discussed in each part below.

The pen name கோவிறை (Kovirai) is an unattested coinage devised as a Tamil rendering of the author’s name, Rajesh, using words of largely Dravidian origin.

The poem has a six-part progression, and I will explain each part. Content-wise each part can stand alone, however, there are threads that run through the poem from the first word to the last, and reading them in sequence is recommended.

Part 1: Divine Association of Animals

This part asks rhetorically asks why animals are associated with Gods and provides a catalog of associations starting with the divine dog associated with Bhairava. The idea is to establish an association of animals with divinity, suggesting that all life should be seen as sacred. The catalog continues into the next two parts as well, with progressively new messages being introduced.

In my primary intended reading, the dog, the buffalo, the goat, the elephant, the horse (denoted by அரி), the serpent, and the crow are associated respectively with Bhairava, Yama (denoted by அரி), Agni (denoted by அரி), Indra (denoted by அரி), Surya (denoted by அரி), Shiva (denoted by அரி), and Shani. The primary reading is slightly biased somewhat toward older Vedic deities, although their animal associations were developed later in the Puranas. The buffalo here is the Indian water buffalo which is domesticated cattle.

• Note: My primary reading takes அரி as Shiva, following the Tamil Lexicon, which cites Tirupporur Sannithimurai, Periyakattiyam 2.5, as an attestation of this usage. The verse praises Lord Murugan as திருநயனவரியுதவுமுருவே, which I interpret as “the form that helps the three-eyed Ari (Shiva).” The textual evidence, however, is not uniform: I find திருநயனவரியுதவுமுருவே in the 1893, 1917, and 1925 editions, திருநயனவரனுதவுமுருவே in the 1894 edition with commentary, and திரிநயன அரனுதவும் உருவே in the 1967 edition. I have not yet found an independent literary attestation of அரி meaning Shiva, nor established whether these editions represent independent textual witnesses. The verse remains intelligible if அரி is understood as Vishnu, with the நாகம் referring to his serpent couch, Adisesha. My interpretation of அரி as Shiva, and of the serpent imagery as referring to Shiva's snake ornaments, therefore depends on accepting the dictionary's gloss. If that gloss or its textual basis proves uncertain, readers may instead understand the passage in light of the traditional saying அரியும் அரனும் ஒண்ணு; அறியாதவன் வாயில் மண்ணு (“Hari and Hara are one; mud in the mouth of whoever does not know”), which expresses their theological unity without requiring the two names to be lexically interchangeable.

The verse is an antanaclasis, using the word அரி (ari) multiple times in different senses. This versatile word has a wide range of attested meanings, in particular including the Gods Vishnu, Shiva, Indra, Fire/Agni, Sun/Surya, Moon/Chandra as well as the animals lion, horse, monkey, snake, frog, and parrot. The word-play with அரி is intentional: the verse works as long as an animal is paired with a God under some interpretation. For example, the serpent நாகம் can readily be associated with either Shiva or Vishnu (both denoted by அரி under attested usage). The அரி-அரி is the catch-all, allowing the cross-product pairings of the animals and deities denoted by அரி. Note that the dog and crow are deliberately bound to Bhairava and Shani. Such nuances are not captured in the translation.

The older Sangam word புத்தேள் (putthel), meaning a god or celestial being, evokes an older Tamil register and anticipates the later invocation of Valluvar, who also uses the word. Its rhyme with புத்தனே ஆயினும் (putthane ayinum) further binds the opening catalogue to the later stanza. The word இயைவு is translated as associated, but, joined with or matched with or other meanings of the word that also work here.

Part 2: Challenging Killing with Appeal to One’s Humanity

The catalog of animals continues with the Sun’s steed (again using அரி for both the Sun and the horse), the bull, the rooster, the mouse, the tiger, the fish, the tortoise, and the boar. Except for the first one, they are not explicitly connected with Gods, however, an astute reader will notice two patterns in this line. First, the animals symbolize the six major devotional traditions (the Shanmata established by Adi Shankaracharya)—Saura, Shaiva, Kaumara, Ganapatya, Shakta, and Vaishnava. Second, the last three symbolize the first three incarnations of the Dashavatara.

• Why the tiger with Shakta? While the lion is commonly associated with Devi as her vehicle, the Shiva Purana, Vayaviya Samhita, Purvabhaga 26, explicitly associates the tiger with Devi Parvati. She identifies it as one that has taken refuge with her and protected her ascetic grove, and later proceeds with it affectionately as though it were her own son—देव्युवाच \| दृष्टः किमेष भवता शार्दूलो मदुपाश्रयः \| अनेन दुष्टसत्त्वेभ्यो रक्षितं मत्तपोवनम् \|\| २ \|\| (“Have you seen this tiger that has taken refuge with me? By him my ascetic grove has been protected from harmful creatures”) and पुरस्कृत्य च तं व्याघ्रं स्नेहात्पुत्रमिवौरसम् \| देहस्य प्रभया चैव दीपयन्ती दिशो दश \|\| २८ \|\| (“Placing that tiger before her, with affection as for her own son, she illuminated the ten directions with the radiance of her body”). And if reason were not enough, there is rhyme too: புலி rhymes with the preceding எலி.

The catalog continues into the next line explicitly mention the lion that Hari became (again using அரி for both Hari/Vishnu and the lion), and then takes a sharp turn to deliver the core message: those diminished by slaying them all with an axe, are they human? This is an appeal to one’s humanity to challenge the brutal killing of animals, whether it be with an axe, or by other means. The line also hints at Parashurama, through the axe, and Vamana, through the idea of diminished stature. These allusions are secondary; neither avatar is associated with animal harm, so they should not be pressed too far. The avataras hinted in this line are at least part human, playfully resonating with the நரரோ (are they human).

It is very important to understand that the imagery of the six devotional traditions and the Dashavatara correspondences are merely poetic ornamentation; an arbitary list of animals or even the Linnaean classification of the animal kingdom will not achieve the intended aesthetic. I re-emphasize that the point of this part remains the challenge to one’s humanity on the killing of animals.

Part 3: Challenging Eating Animals with Appeal to Spiritual Enlightenment

The catalog of animals and the Dashavatara correspondences continue into this part. The monkey, bear, vulture, and squirrel evoke the Ramayana through Hanuman, Jambavan, Jatayu, and the squirrel said to have helped build Rama’s bridge to Lanka. Legend has it that the stripes on the Indian squirrel were formed when Lord Rama affectionately stroked its back. Then the peacock and the cow (the mother among cattle) are associated with Krishna avatara. The peacock is also associated with Murugan, but the Dashavatara correspodence drives the narrative.

As in the previous two parts, the second half of the verse delivers the key message, which in this case is of two parts. First ஆவினத்தாயும் அதுபோல் பாலூட்டும் எருமையும் ஆடும் explicitly sets up an equivalence between the cow, the buffalo, and the goat as animals that give milk (which humans consume), implicitly suggesting that the sacred maternal status be accorded to all of them, and more broadly to all creatures. Second it asks the rhetorical question, அதனை புத்தனே ஆயினும் புசிப்பது கலியோ, is it the Kali age (where civilization degenerates and creation is dissolved) that even one who becomes Buddha eats these creatures? The message is an appeal to spiritual enlightenment to avoid the eating of animals. Although the main emphasis of this part is on eating of animals, the vegan position on dairy consumption which appears later in the poem is anticipated here.

The poetic ornamentation continues with references to the last two avatars: Buddha and Kalki (foretold at the end of the Kali age). Puranic accounts vary on whether Balarama or Buddha is to be included in the ten, and furthermore, there is diagreement on whether that denotes the Siddhartha Gautama Buddha or some other form. Care must be taken not to read these ornamentations literally or carry the allusions too far, but to focus on the message of the poem: eating of animals is not spiritually enlightened and is reflective of degeneracy of the highest values of human civilization.

Part 4: Challenging Harm Done to Animals for Obtaining Food with Appeal to Karmic Consequences

This part turns aphoristic. Its central poetic device is antanaclasis: the word விலங்கு recurs in four senses, each advancing the ethical and philosophical argument.

• Keeping the thematic conitnuity with the Kali age referenced at the end of the last part, the verse starts with, விலங்கிய ஒழுக்கால் அறம் தாழ்ந்து: the righteousness (Dharma) being lowered due to crooked conduct. Here விலங்கிய is used to mean not upright, crooked, or slanted.
• Then it says, விலங்கிய வலையில் தானாய் வீழ்ந்து, falling of one’s own accord into the net that has been cast. Here விலங்கிய is used in the sense of casting (of the net). The net alluded to is maya jala, the net/web of maya, that keeps one immersed in the illusory samsara, with repeated deaths and rebirths.
• Then it introduces the despicable act of fattening oneself (literally increasing one’s own flesh) by eating food resulting from tormenting creatures of the animal kingdom, விலங்கினம் வருத்தி உண்டூன்பெருக்கி. Here விலங்கு is used in the sense of animal, as in the very first part where animals are associated with Gods. The word வருத்தி implies in the sense of harming or himsa, the opposite of the yogic injunction of Ahimsa (வருத்தாமை, which is discussed in the next part). This part goes further into the vegan position beyond just killing and eating with the umbrella term of harming. From a vegan perspective, such harm encompasses killing, eating, killing or separating the calves, taking the eggs or milk intended for calves, physical and psychological abuse, confinement in small spaces, forced artificial insemination, exploiting them for product testing, leather, wool, or hard labor, and others. The word வருத்தி packs a lot.
• The final quarter of this part, விலங்கணிதர்க்கு மறு பிறப்போ, asks rhetorically whether humans do all the previous three just in order to be born again into this world wearing fetters. Here the word விலங்கு means fetters, but its usage in this context is attested to mean the body which is metaphorically the fetter for the soul. The அணிதல், wearing the fetters of embodied existence, recalls the image of the embodied self discarding old garments at death and donning new ones at rebirth (Bhagavad Gita 2.22). This connects with the immediately preceding image of the net into which one falls into willingly. It also connects to appeal to enlightenment in the previous verse, as the goal of enlightenment is to break out of the karmic cycle of deaths and rebirths. In several Dharmic traditions, liberation from the cycle of rebirth is a central spiritual goal. Through sinful acts such as harming of animals, one may be reborn as an animal in the next life and experience the suffering they meterd out in this lifetime. The primary image is embodied existence as bondage; rebirth as an animal is a secondary resonance, not the governing meaning of the line.

In addition to its poetic flair, aphoristic verse packs a lot of ethical content, but it can be unpacked into a simpler message: from a salvific perspective, the negative consequences of any harm to living beings is dire.

Part 5: Scriptural Testimony of Valluvar and Patanjali

This part presents the case for non-harming of animals from scriptural testimony.

The first quarter, எவ்வுயிர்க்கும் செந்தண்மை பூண்டார் அறவோர், that is, those who maintain benevolence and tender compassion toward every life are the righteous, echoes Valluvar’s kural 30 : அந்தண ரென்போ ரறவோர்மற் றெவ்வுயிர்க்குஞ் செந்தண்மை பூண்டொழுக லான். The same message connecting benelovence to all creatures and Dharma is corroborated similarly in the Mahabharata Shanti Parva 12.14.15 (BORI): मित्रता सर्वभूतेषु दानमध्ययनं तपः | ब्राह्मणस्यैष धर्मः स्यान्न राज्ञो राजसत्तम ||

The second quarter, எதிர்ப்பும் வெகுளியும் நீக்குவார் அருகினோர், that is, hostility and anger fall away from any who nears their presence (this refers to the presence of those established in Ahimsa), paraphrases Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra 2.35: अहिंसाप्रतिष्ठायां तत्सन्निधौ वैरत्यागः ||.

Then the poem asserts quite directly that Valluvar, Patanjali, and many other sages have borne powerful witness to non-harming. The word used is வருத்தாமை which denotes Ahimsa. In addition to concretely establishing shabda pramana (scriptural testimony) for the core message of Ahimsa of this poem, it also suggests that this is widely attested by many sages and is not the individual opinion of two sages.

Part 6: Definition of, Praise for, and Invitation to Veganism

This part opens with the words of a popular prayer to Lord Ganesha, பாலும் தெளிதேனும், milk and clear honey, then shifts abruptly to a vegan propsition. It is almost as if this verse invokes Ganesha’s blessings for the vegan proposition. The verse follows the list with meat, eggs, leather, silk, coral, and pearls, representative of animal-derived products, and asks the reader to renounce these (விலக்கு). Basically an approximate, but concise, definition of veganism, the word itself is introduced later in this part.

This part then delivers the most important message: வீணாய் விலங்கினம் தெய்யா வீக(ர)னாய், be the vegan who does not needlessly kill animals, and வியத்தகு விளக்காய் விளங்கு தெய்வீகனாய், as a wondrous lamp, shine forth as an example, be divine!

The poetic elements in the second half of this part are notable.

• It closes with the phonetic echo of the opening: the verse started with the image of the divine dog signifying sacredness of animal life to becoming divine (by adopting ahimsa and veganism). The repeated phrase, used as the title, reveals its full significance at the close.
• The ends of the last two quarters have a clever rhyming word-play: theiyya-veganai (தெய்யா வீகனாய்), vegan who does not kill, and theiveeganai (தெய்வீகனாய்), become a divine person. For purists, who do not accept the word vegan as a Tamil word, a parenthetical in the verse provides a wording alternative veeranai (வீரனாய்), that is, as a brave person. While the rhyme is retained for the most part, it does not carry the same power that connects vegan and divine. It also loses the connection to the first half of this part that essentially defines vegan. A different parse of theeyaveeganai as valid Tamil may be possible (say, through, ஈகை, giving), but the point of the verse is to introduce the vegan proposition. So I recommend importing வீகன் into Tamil as a loanword, and it stays in this verse in any case.
• The word-play is clarified by this reordered excerpt extracted as an aphorism: தெய்யா வீகனாய் விலங்கை விலக்கு, தெய்வீகனாய் விளக்காய் விளங்கு (theyyaa-veekan-aai vilankai vilakku, theiveekan-aai viLakkaai viLanku). Basically, it says: be a non-killing vegan, renounce animals; be divine, set an example as a shining lamp. The aphorism can also be read as follows: be a non-killing vegan and remove the fetters, be divine and shine as a lamp.
  • The aphorism will also work with the Tamil word variant வீரன் (brave one) instead of my preferred வீகன் (vegan); if you choose that alternative, my recommended reading is to interpret வீரன் in this context as the Kathopanishad 1.2.2’s dhira (one with mental fortitude and wisdom), who will choose shreyas (the higher good) over the preyas (the merely pleasant), and who will become enlightened. Pick wisely: the alternative that leads to the higher good!
• The older word தெய் (“to kill”) sits alongside அரி, கரி, and புத்தேள், as well as the older scriptural and mythological traditions invoked earlier. This older vocabulary frames a contemporary vegan proposition in a traditional literary register. The poem does not explicitly argue that veganism is an ancient doctrine; rather, it invites the reader to see its ethical demand as consonant with inherited traditions of non-harming.
• There is word play with the phonologically close விலக்கு (renounce/remove), விலங்கு (animal), விளக்கு (lamp), and விளங்கு (become/be an example), further accentuated by the recurrence of word beginning with வ் (v).

Concluding thought

Patanjali’s Yoga Darshana has eight limbs. The first is yama, which comprises five restraints; the first of these is Ahimsa, non-harming.

Ahimsa is the first stone in the foundation of yogic spirituality.

Himsa, harming, occurs through action, words, or thought; all three must be purified.

Himsa can be done, caused, or approved of; the last one is worth pondering deeply about.

In the presence of one firmly established in Ahimsa, all hostilities cease: this is the summit of Ahimsa.

Veganism is only the base camp to Ahimsa.