Namaste
by Rajesh Krishnan
| 133 : காமத்துப்பால் : கற்பியல் : ஊடலுவகை | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1 | இல்லை தவறவர்க் காயினு மூடுதல் வல்ல தவரளிக்கு மாறு |
बाले नाथ विमुञ्च मानिनि रुषं रोषान् मया किं कृतं खेदोऽस्मासु न मेऽपराध्यति भवान् सर्वेऽपराधा मयि | तत्किं रोदिषि गद्गदेन वचसा कस्याग्रतो रुद्यते नन्वेतन् मम का तवास्मि दयिता नास्मीत्यतो रुद्यते || Amarushataka 53 |
| 2 | ஊடலி்ற் றோன்றுஞ் சிறுதுனி நல்லளி வாடினும் பாடு பெறும் |
चरणपतनप्रत्याख्यानात्प्रसादपराङ्मुखे निभृतकितवाचारेत्युक्त्वा रुषा परुषीकृते | व्रजति रमणे निःश्वस्योच्चैः स्तनस्थितहस्तया नयनसलिलच्छन्ना दृष्टिः सखीषु निवेशिता || Amarushataka 17 |
| 3 | புலத்தலிற் புத்தேணா டுண்டோ நிலத்தொடு நீரியைந் தன்னா ரகத்து |
सन्दष्टाधरपल्लवा सचकितं हस्ताग्रमाधुन्वतीम् मामामुञ्च शठेति कोपवचनैरानर्तितभ्रूलता | शीत्काराञ्चितलोचना सरभसं यैश्चुम्बिता मानिनी प्राप्तं तैरमृतं मुधैव मथितो मूढैः सुरैः सागरः || Amarushtaka 32 |
| 4 | புல்லி விடாஅப் புலவியுட் டோன்றுமென் னுள்ள முடைக்கும் படை |
श्रुत्वा नामापि यस्य स्फुटघनपुलकं जायतेऽङ्गं समन्तात्दृष्ट्वा यस्याननेन्दुं भवति वपुरिदं चन्द्रकान्तानुकारि | तस्मिन्नागत्य कण्ठग्रहणसरभसस्थायिनि प्राणनाथे भग्ना मानस्य चिन्ता भवति मम प्नर्वज्रमय्याः कदा नु || Amarushataka 57 |
| 5 | தவறில ராயினுந் தாம்வீழ்வார் மென்றோ ளகறலி னாங்கொன் றுடைத்து |
लग्ना नांशुकपल्लवे भुजलता न द्वारदेशेऽपिता नो वा पादतले तया निपतितं तिष्ठेति नोक्तं वचः | काले केवलमम्बुदातिमलिने गन्तुं प्रवृत्तः शठः तन्व्या बाष्पजलौघकल्पितनदीपूरेण बद्धः प्रियः || Amarushataka 62 |
| 6 | உணலினு முண்ட தறலினிது காமம் புணர்தலி னூட லினிது |
प्रवासानन्तरे तस्याभ्यवहारार्थतेष्यते | तत्र ह्युपोषितैरन्नमिव निर्विश्यते रतिः || Bhoja Sarasvatikanthabharanam 5.81 |
| 7 | ஊடலிற் றோற்றவர் வென்றா ரதுமன்னும் கூடலிற் காணப் படும் |
सत्यं कलहे कलहे सुरतारम्भाः पुनर्नवा भान्ति | मानः पुनर्मनस्विनि गुरुकः प्रेमेह नाशयति || Gathasaptashati 6.21 |
| 8 | ஊடிப் பெறுகுவங் கொல்லோ நுதல்வெயர்ப்பக் கூடலிற் றோன்றிய வுப்பு |
कान्तामुखं सुरतकेलिविमर्दखेद- संजातघर्मकणविच्छुरितं रतान्ते | आपाण्डुरं विलसदर्धनिमीलिताक्षं संस्मृत्य हे हृदय किं शतधा न यासि || Sridharadasa, Saduktikarnamrtam 2.100.4 |
| 9 | ஊடுக மன்னோ வொளியிழை யாமிரப்ப நீடுக மன்னோ விரா |
कल्यां किल खरहृदयः प्रवत्स्यति प्रिय इति श्रुतं जनतः | भगवति वर्द्धस्व निशे तथा, यथा कल्यमेव नोदेति || Gathasaptashati 1.46 |
| 10 | ஊடுதல் காமத்திற் கின்ப மதற்கின்பங் கூடி முயங்கப் பெறின் |
सोऽवस्थाद्वितयभेदाद् द्विप्रकारः सम्भोगशृङ्गारः, विप्रलम्भशृङ्गारश्च | अभिलषणीयालिङ्गनादीनामवाप्तौ सम्भोगः | स चतुर्धा प्रथमानुरागानन्तरः मानानन्तरः प्रवासानन्तरः करुणानन्तरः, इति | Bhoja Shringaraprakasha 23.1 |
As a close conceptual parallel to the kural, I propose Amarushataka 53, which is an exquisite miniature of Shringara poetry presented as a conversation between a nayaka and a manini nayika. The nayaka tenderly asks her to abandon her anger and protests his innocence; when she insists that he has done nothing wrong, he asks why she is nevertheless weeping, whereupon she reveals that her tears arise from the doubt whether she is truly his beloved. The correspondence with the kural is as follows:
The final correspondence is deliberately indirect. The Sanskrit nayika does not explicitly say that she is sulking in order to obtain more of her lover’s affection. Instead, by professing doubt about whether she is truly his दयिता, she provokes precisely the response that the kural identifies as the purpose of ஊடுதல்: an increased demonstration of his love and attention. Her apparent grievance has no factual basis; it is a feint through which she elicits reassurance of her beloved status.
The difference in poetic expression and dramatic setting does not diminish the parallel: Valluvar states the principle aphoristically through the nayika’s conversation with her confidante, whereas Amaru masterfully dramatizes it in the longer, more elaborate style of Shringara-kavya through a direct exchange between the lovers. In both, however, the heroine’s मान / ஊடுதல் is not occasioned by any real offence but functions as a means of eliciting a stronger demonstration of the lover’s affection. Amaru thus masterfully dramatizes the crux of the kural: வல்ல தவரளிக்கு மாறு — ஊடுதல் as a means of eliciting greater loving attention from him.
A further corroborating parallel is the Sanskrit chaya of the Gathasaptashati 4.6 (RadhaVallabhaTripathi ed.): अनुनयसुखलोलुपया कष्टमकृतमपि कृतं प्रकुर्वत्या | दयितः सरलनिसर्गोऽप्यविनयमार्गं बलान्नीतः ||. The correspondence to the kural is striking in its narrative logic. இல்லை தவறு (there is no fault) is mirrored by अकृतमपि कृतं (even what was not done, she made into what was done): the grievance is deliberately created despite the absence of an offence. दयितः … अविनयमार्गं … नीतः, that is (the beloved is brought into the path of entreaty) corresponds closely to வல்ல தவரளிக்கு மாறு, that is her action is capable of eliciting a greater loving response from him. The ஊடுதல், or feigned quarrel, is implicit in the Sanskrit through अनुनयसुखलोलुपया (“desirous of the pleasure of being entreated”).
I present Amarushataka 17 as the primary parallel to this kural, which admits two readings. On the traditional interpretation, the confident nayika considers the small distress arising from the lover’s quarrel (ஊடலிற் றோன்றுஞ் சிறுதுனி) worthwhile (பாடு பெறும்), despite the possibility that her lover’s good grace or affection may wane (நல்லளி வாடினும்). Alternatively, பாடு பெறும் may merely describe the condition that arises: சிறுதுனி is the distress associated with the waning or withholding of the lover’s affection as a consequence of the quarrel, without necessarily declaring the quarrel praiseworthy.
Amarushataka 17 offers a dramatic parallel open to either interpretation. சிறுதுனி may be inferred from the woman’s tears (नयनसलिलच्छन्ना), and ஊடல் from her anger (रुषा). நல்லளி வாடினும் finds a suggestive, though inexact, counterpart in प्रसादपराङ्मुखे रमणे—the lover turns away without granting favour or appeasement. In contrast to Valluvar’s aphoristic style, Amaru dramatises the sequence: the woman has rejected his supplication (चरणपतनप्रत्याख्यानात्) and spoken harshly in anger (रुषा परुषीकृते); as he departs, she sighs and looks towards her friends through tears (नयनसलिलच्छन्ना दृष्टिः सखीषु निवेशिता). The verse does not state that his affection has already faded or that it will fade: it depicts the withholding of prasada and leaves the ultimate consequence unresolved. On the first reading, the manini maintains her position despite its emotional cost; on the second, her tears register the distress and possible risk of estrangement.
The alternative reading is supported by three considerations. First, பாடு has a broad semantic range, including condition, occurrence, coming into being, propriety, duty, benefit, quality and greatness. Second, Valluvar focuses here on the circumstance of ஊடல் itself, not on eventual reconciliation or union, which he addresses elsewhere in the chapter. Third, common sense suggests a mixture of emotions in quarreling lovers, rather than certainty of reconciliation and union. Indeed, Valluvar says elsewhere in the same chapter, ஊடலிற் றோற்றவர் வென்றார்: the one who loses in ஊடல் is ultimately the victor. Implicit in this is the danger of insisting on winning the quarrel at any cost.
Amarushataka 12 provides a complementary portrait of a more explicitly distressed yet ultimately hopeful manini, who tells her confidante: कथमपि सखि क्रीडाकोपाद्व्रजेति मयोदिते कठिनहृदयस्त्यक्त्वा शय्यां बलाद्गत एव सः | इति सरभसं ध्वस्तप्रेम्णि व्यपेतघृणे जने पुनरपि हतव्रीडं चेतः प्रयाति करोमि किम् ||. In playful anger, she had said व्रज; the lover actually leaves, and she now fears that his love has been destroyed (ध्वस्तप्रेम्णि). Yet her heart still turns towards him (पुनरपि … चेतः प्रयाति). This corroborates the distress of the manini, but is not a direct parallel to the kural: her distress is substantial, not சிறுதுனி, and the verse does not praise her action under the traditional interpretation of பாடு பெறும். Its value lies in showing how playful kopa can cause considerable distress and anxiety that it may lead to real estrangement, even as the woman continues to desire a way back.
The broader perspective emerges from Bhoja’s Sarasvatikanthabharana 5.52, which explicitly supports the traditional, positive interpretation of distress: न विना विप्रलम्भेन सम्भोगः पुष्टिमश्नुते | कषायिते हि वस्त्रादौ भूयान् रागोऽनुषज्यते ||. Union does not attain fullness without separation, just as dye takes more strongly to cloth that has been treated. This perspective is tempered by the caution in Gathasaptashati 6.21: सत्यं कलहे कलहे सुरतारम्भाः पुनर्नवा भान्ति | मानः पुनर्मनस्विनि गुरुकः प्रेमेह नाशयति ||, which while reinforcing the benefits of kalaha, also warns that prolonged mana can destroy love.
My dual reading of Valluvar’s பாடு பெறும் seeks to capture this mixture of emotions, a nuance latent in the kural, that a reading of it as unqualified praise of ஊடல் does not fully do justice to.
For this kural, I propose Amarushataka 32 as a conceptual parallel. Valluvar’s புலத்தலிற் புத்தேணா டுண்டோ elevates the pleasure arising from புலத்தல், the lovers’ feigned quarrel, to the level of the land of the gods. Amaru likewise places the pleasure of reconciliation with the मानिनी in a divine frame: यैश्चुम्बिता मानिनी प्राप्तं तैरमृतं मुधैव मथितो मूढैः सुरैः सागरः, after the dramatized resistance, anger and reconciliation, those who kiss her have obtained amrita, while the gods have foolishly churned the ocean for amrita. Thus, although the comparison is expressed differently, both poets use a divine standard of supreme pleasure to exalt the erotic experience produced by the lovers’ quarrel.
The correspondence is asymmetric in the second half. Valluvar gives the distinctive Tamil metaphor நிலத்தொடு நீரியைந் தன்னார் அகத்து, that is, the lovers’ hearts are joined through the image of land and water. Amaru supplies no corresponding metaphor for the lovers’ inner state. Instead, he dramatizes the transition from mana to reconciliation through the physical act of kissing: शीत्काराञ्चितलोचना … यैश्चुम्बिता मानिनी, those by whom the manini, her eyes filled with sighing sounds, was kissed. Valluvar therefore achieves the elevation through the compact land-water image, while Amaru achieves it through the kavya dramatization of mana and its resolution. The parallel is consequently conceptual rather than verbal or structural: both poets elevate the pleasure associated with lovers’ quarrel and reconciliation to a divine plane, but each poet expresses that elevation through his own distinctive poetic idiom.
The Sanskrit and Sangam witnesses we present below do not establish that any or all of these readings were intended by Valluvar, but they show that each occupies an independently recognizable classical erotic semantic field, that resonate with the kural’s cryptic vocabulary.
புத்தேள் and நாடு can each carry more than one sense. The traditional reading takes நாடு as the noun, land/country: In feigned quarrel, is there the land of the gods? Kalingar comes close to this formulation: புலத்தல்போல இன்பம் தருவது ஒரு தேவர் உலகு உண்டோ?—Is there a world of the gods that gives pleasure like feigned quarrel? A related Sanskrit corroboration occurs in Gathasaptashati 893 (Weber numbering), where reverence for the manini is explicitly contrasted with the need for other gods: प्रणमत मानस्य सख्यश्चरणौ किं दैवतैरन्यैः | यस्य प्रसादेन प्रियो घूर्णति पादान्तपार्श्वयोः ||—Worship the feet of the manini; what need is there of other gods, through whose favor the beloved moves about beside her feet? Another conceptual resonance occurs in Amarushataka 32 discussed earlier, where the pleasure obtained through reconciliation with the manini is itself elevated to the level of divine nectar.
A second reading takes புத்தேள் in the sense of new woman and நாடு as the verbal, to resemble, as in ஒத்தல் வேயொடுநாடிய தோள் (தொல். பொ 286, உரை). So the reading is approximately: In feigned quarrel, is there the resemblance to a new woman?—that is, the same beloved experienced as newly renewed after reconciliation. The idea of renewal (पुनर्नवा) has a strong resonance in Gathasaptashati 6.21 (RadhaVallabhaTripathi ed.): सत्यं कलहे कलहे सुरतारम्भाः पुनर्नवा भान्ति |
मानः पुनर्मनस्विनि गुरुकः प्रेमेह नाशयति ||.
A third reading takes நாடு as the verbal, to seek/desire, yielding: In feigned quarrel, is there seeking a new/another woman? This admits two related sub-readings:
The resulting semantic range is consequently broad: the land of the gods; renewal/resemblance to a new woman; or seeking another woman. In ordinary prose, for “to seek” and “to resemble”, one would expect forms such as நாடுதல் or நாடுவது, but poetic compression may permit நாடு. A Sangam precedent strengthens the lexical possibility: in Kalittokai, Marutam 82, புத்தேளிர் கோட்டம் denotes the shrine of the gods, while in புத்தேள் இல் புக்கான், the word is also used in the same verse in the sense of புதியவள், the new woman. Valluvar may therefore be exploiting a similar double semantic field, allowing புத்தேள் to evoke both the divine and the new/renewed woman.
The second half admits a different cluster of possible readings. At its most straightforward reading, நிலத்தொடு நீரியைந் தன்னார் அகத்து compares the lovers’ inner union to two things that become one through contact with one another. Four possible extensions of the image suggest themselves: (1) rainwater mingling with soil, corresponding to the lovers’ hearts becoming one; (2) earth and water combined into the single substance of clay; (3) water hidden beneath the earth, corresponding to affection concealed beneath the outward refusal of the manini; and (4) sea and shore repeatedly meeting and withdrawing, corresponding to alternating union and separation. The first has a close Sangam resonance in Kuruntokai 40: யாயும் ஞாயும் யாரா கியரோ / எந்தையும் நுந்தையும் எம்முறைக் கேளிர் / யானும் நீயும் எவ்வழி அறிதும் / செம்புலப் பெயல்நீர் போல / அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் தாம்கலந் தனவே. Who are my mother and your mother? How are my father and your father related? How did you and I come to know one another? Like rainwater mingling with red earth, our loving hearts have mingled.
Sanskrit kavya provides resonances for the same physical and erotic imagery, though no exact parallel to the kural has been identified. In Kalidasa’s Meghaduta 1.44, the cloud is described as त्वन्निष्यन्दोच्छ्वसितवसुधागन्धसम्पर्करम्यः—delightful through contact with the fragrance of the earth stirred by your falling water. The image is one of rain contacting earth and producing a new, sensuous state. A more explicitly erotic personification occurs in the Varsharambha section of the Saduktikarnamrita 2.161.2: स्थलीभूमिर्निर्यन्नवकतृणरोमाञ्चनिचयप्रपञ्चैः प्रोन्मीलत्कुटजकलिकाजृम्भितशतैः | घनारम्भे प्रेयस्युपगिरि गलन्निर्झरजलप्रणालप्रस्वेदैः कमपि मृदुभावं प्रथयति ||—When the clouds begin, the earth near the mountain, with the sweat of streams of water flowing down, manifests a certain tenderness toward her beloved. The commentary treats the earth as the preyasi and the cloud as her lover, with the flowing water figured as sweat and the earth acquiring tenderness. These passages corroborate the erotic potential of the earth–water image, but they do not reproduce Valluvar’s precise equation of land and water with the lovers’ hearts.
For the second reading, a modern Sanskrit work, Lahari Dashakam, Mrittika Lahari 4.8.16, is noteworthy because it places mrittika in an explicitly erotic semantic field: न शिष्यतेऽत्र कामना न वासना न भावना | न केलिकौतुकान्विता न मानिनीषु राधना | न शिष्यते कथा वृथामदस्मरस्मयान्विता | इयं परन्तु शिष्यते विशिष्यते च मृत्तिका ||—Here there does not remain desire, longing, or thought; nor playful dalliance, nor conciliation of proud women. A tale accompanied by vain intoxication and the smile of Smara does not remain; but this clay remains, and indeed remains distinctly. This is not an ancient parallel and does not compare lovers’ hearts to clay, but its juxtaposition of mrittika with मानिनीषु राधना makes it an interesting semantic resonance for the clay reading.
The third reading—affection hidden like water beneath the earth—has a suggestive physical analogy in Ashvaghosha’s Saundarananda 12.33, although the verse is not erotic: अन्तर्भूमिगतं ह्यम्भः श्रद्दधाति नरो यदा | अर्थित्वे सति यत्नेन तदा खनति गामिमाम् ||—When a man has confidence that water is situated within the earth, and has need of it, then with effort he digs this earth. The image can be transferred to the manini: outward refusal does not entail absence of affection, just as visible earth conceals water; by analogy, the lover’s anunaya becomes the effort by which the hidden affection is brought forth. This is, however, my analogy rather than an erotic parallel.
The fourth reading finds its strongest classical resonance in Pravarasena’s Setubandha 2.8, where earth and sea are explicitly imagined as nayika and nayaka. The verse describes the sea touching and withdrawing from the earth: घुतवनराजिकरतलां मलयमहेन्द्रस्तनोर् आर्द्रीकरणसुखिताम् | वेलालिङ्गनमुक्तां स्पृष्टापसृतकैर्वेपयन्तमिव महीम् || The commentary of Shri Ramadasa Bhupati makes the erotic allegory explicit, explaining the sea’s touching and retreating as a succession of embraces and withdrawals, and the earth as the nayika: समासोक्त्या समुद्रस्य नायकत्वं भूमेनायिकात्वं च लभ्यते—by implication, the sea obtains the role of nayaka and the earth that of nayika. The commentary compares the movement of the waves to the lover’s repeated embracing and releasing of the beloved. This is therefore a particularly relevant witness for the land–water erotic metaphor, although, importantly, it neither asserts nor requires the specific state of mana.
Taken together, these witnesses do not yield a single Sanskrit source corresponding to the whole kural; rather, they show that its compact imagery participates in several established classical conventions.
புத்தேள் has independent Sangam witnesses for both divine imagery and the suggestion of a new beloved (though not specifically connected to புலவி). As Valluvar uses வானோர் elsewhere (for example, in kural 18: வானோர்க்கு மீண்டு), I speculate on the possiblity of intentional polysemy as well as intentional hint of thematic affinity to Sangam Thinai. The independent Sanskrit/Prakrit witnesses specifically connect mana to divine imagery, to the renewal of love as it were a new woman, to a new beloved, and even to the nuance of a new beloved reminiscent of the old.
With நிலத்தொடு நீரியைந் தன்னார் அகத்து, Valluvar simply says நிலம் and நீர், which allow a range of manifestations of each. The phrase is versatile enough to admit the mingling of soil and water, the repeated meeting and withdrawal of sea and shore, water concealed beneath the earth (that requires digging), and the making of clay from earth and water, several of which have Sanskrit witnesses, though not in connection with the pleasure of feigned quarrel elevated to divine levels.
Sangam poetry has a beautiful witness in செம்புலப் பெயல்நீர், where soil and water provide a metaphor for the mingling of hearts, however, Valluvar does not specify rain, nor does he specify (red) soil particularly, and we cannot rule out other Sangam imagery that corroborate the other readings. The exquisite imagery in the Sethubandha of bhumi and sagara as nayika and nayaka (embracing and withdrawing) remain plausible, however, Valluvar does not specify ocean/waves.
Thus we have converging literary motifs and suggestive lexical echoes, but no independent witness that brings the kural’s feigned quarrel, divine imagery, and land–water metaphor together in the same construction. The kural’s distinctive achievement lies in compressing several potentially resonant semantic fields into a single two-part image.
The kural finds a close parallel in Amarushataka 57: कण्ठग्रहणम् corresponds to புல்லி, the act of embracing; स्थायिनि to விடா, staying without letting go; and मानस्य to புலவியுள், both denoting the offended reserve or feigned love-quarrel expressed. The inward response is given by मम चिन्ता, corresponding to என் உள்ளம், while भग्ना corresponds to உடைக்கும் and भवति to தோன்றும். The remaining image is especially suggestive: वज्रमय्याः depicts the nayika’s resolve as vajra-like, while भग्ना is its breaking; correspondingly, படை can mean a weapon, implement, means, or agency, making the embrace itself the “weapon” or means that breaks her adamantine resolve. The dual sense of vajra—both the adamantine/diamond-like substance and the thunderbolt, a weapon—thus resonates particularly well with Valluvar’s choice of படை.
The natural summary gloss given by the Kural Thiran website: காதலரைத் தழுவி விடாத ஊடலில் என்உள்ள உறுதியை உடைக்கும் கருவி தோன்றுகிறது corroborates this reading by unpacking the compressed kural as a situation in which, while the heroine remains in her ஊடல், there appears a means of breaking the firmness of her inner state: என் உள்ள உறுதியை உடைக்கும் கருவி. The gloss’s உறுதி is especially close to the Sanskrit वज्रमय्याः, making explicit the quality that Valluvar leaves implicit in உள்ளம்.
The first half of the Amarushataka verse goes further by establishing the nayika’s true mental and physical state: श्रुत्वा नामापि यस्य स्फुटघनपुलकं जायतेऽङ्गं समन्तात्दृष्ट्वा यस्याननेन्दुं भवति वपुरिदं चन्द्रकान्तानुकारि, that is, merely hearing his name causes goosebumps throughout her body, while seeing his face transforms her body into something resembling moonstone. Thus her मान (which corresponds to புலவி) is presented as outward resistance coexisting with intense inward attraction; the lover’s embrace, कण्ठग्रहण (which corresponds to புல்லி) becomes the means of overcoming her resolve.
The kural finds a striking parallel in Amarushataka 62, beginning with the shared image of the slender arms: Valluvar’s மென்றோள் corresponds to Amaru’s भुजलता / तन्व्या, the arm-creeper and the slender woman. The image is immediately placed in the context of separation: அகறலின் finds its concrete dramatic counterpart in लग्ना नांशुकपल्लवे, where the woman’s arm does not cling to the edge of his garment as he is about to depart (गन्तुं प्रवृत्तः). Valluvar then says ஆங்கொன்று உடைத்து, only that separation has something in it, leaving the emotion deliberately unspecified; Amaru beautifully supplies that something through the woman’s tears, बाष्पजलौघकल्पितनदीपूर, which well up as a flood in response to his departure. Finally, Valluvar’s தாம்வீழ்வார் finds a suggestive counterpart in Amaru’s बद्धः प्रियः: the lover is bound, while the nayika’s welling tears signal the emotional force of the separation and the prospect of reconciliation. The caveat is that தவறிலராயினும் is not positively represented in Amaru 62: the verse neither establishes nor contradicts the lover’s lack of fault. Valluvar’s use of வீழ்வார், suggesting both one who is loved as well as one who falls (at the beloved’s feet), resonates with the recurring Shringara motif of पादतले तया निपतितं in Amarushataka 62.
The divergence from the traditional commentary is deliberate: we read what Valluvar actually says rather than importing into ஆங்கொன்று the commentators’ specification that the something is the man’s joy in the prospect of reconciliation. Valluvar leaves both அகறல் and ஆங்கொன்று abstract. Amaru, by contrast, dramatizes the process of separation through a whole sequence of things the nayika deliberately does not do—she does not cling to his garment, does not fall at his feet, and does not ask him to stay. Amaru dramatizes the “there is something in that separation” by the tears that well up and reveal the emotion with remarkable delicacy. Neither poet explicitly names the cause of the separation: for example, Valluvar does not use ஊடல்/புலவி in this kural, and Amaru does not use मान/कोप here.
The no-fault and slender-arm motifs are both well established in Sanskrit Shringara: Amaru gives the slender-arm image in कोपात्कोमललोलबाहुलतिकापाशेन (8), and the no-fault motif explicitly in तनुरपि न ते दोषः (27) and न मेऽपराध्यति भवान् (53); Kalidasa likewise describes Shakuntala’s arms as कोमलविटपानुकारिणौ बाहू (Abhijnana Shakuntalam 1.19), arms resembling tender branches, while Kumarasambhava 4.7 gives the explicit no-fault formulation कृतवानसि विप्रियं न मे / प्रतिकूलं न च ते मया कृतम् … किमकारणमेव दर्शनं.
Valluvar’s comparison of the pleasure of ஊடல் with that of eating after hunger finds a parallel in Bhoja’s Sarasvatikanthabharanam 5.81. Just as உணலினு முண்ட தறலினிது காமம் evokes the relish of food after hunger, Bhoja’s उपोषितैरन्नमिव निर्विश्यते रतिः compares erotic pleasure to food savoured by those who have fasted. Just as Valluvar declares ஊடல் sweeter than union (புணர்தலின் ஊடல் இனிது), Bhoja compares erotic enjoyment (रतिः) after the lover’s return from absence (प्रवासानन्तरे) to food relished by those who have fasted (उपोषितैरन्नमिव निर्विश्यते). While Valluvar explicitly states that the prelude of sulking is sweeter than union, Bhoja conveys the heightened relish of reunion implicitly through the metaphor of food after fasting. In Sanskrit poetics, मान (the lover’s offended pride or sulking) and प्रणयकलह (a lovers’ quarrel) offer close conceptual parallels to ஊடல். Valluvar may be using ஊடல் in a broader sense, though this remains tentative; at a minimum, the terms overlap in describing the affective estrangement between lovers that gives way to reconciliation.
Bhoja also states the general principle explicitly in the Sarasvatikanthabharanam 5.52: न विना विप्रलम्भेन सम्भोगः पुष्टिमश्नुते | कषायिते हि वस्त्रादौ भूयान् रागोऽनुषज्यते ||, that is, just as cloth takes a deeper colour after mordanting, so sambhoga (union) gains fullness through vipralambha (separation). This furnishes a theoretical corroboration of the idea underlying the food analogy, but through a different metaphor of dyeing cloth. A similar metaphor recurs in later discussions of Shringara, including Vishvanatha’s Sahityadarpana 3.213. Together, the two passages place Valluvar’s ஊடல் within Bhoja’s broader principle that विप्रलम्भ intensifies the relish of सम्भोग.
I propose Gathasaptashati 6.21 as a close conceptual parallel to this kural. Valluvar positively asserts that the one who loses the ஊடல் is the victor, for that victory becomes manifest in the கூடல். The Gathasaptashati expresses a similar idea, though in a different manner: कलहे कलहे सुरतारम्भाः पुनर्नवा भान्ति—as each quarrel makes the union fresh again. This closely corresponds to the kural’s assertion that the victory of the one who loses the ஊடல் becomes evident in the union. While Valluvar leaves the pyrrhic victory of winning the ஊடல் at any cost implicit in the antithesis of தோற்றவர் and வென்றார், the Gathasaptashati states that danger explicitly: मानः … गुरुकः प्रेमेह नाशयति, for excessive pride can destroy love. The Gathasaptashati thus articulates both sides of the erotic logic: quarrels can renew union, but an overbearing insistence on pride can destroy the love that makes such union possible. Valluvar compresses this double insight into the rhetoric of winning and losing.
As the primary parallel for the kural, I propose Saduktikarnamrutam by Shridharadasa Verse 2.100.4. The correspondence is suggestive in its sequence of images: रतान्ते (at the end of love-play) echoes கூடலிற் (in union); संजात (arisen) corresponds to தோன்றிய (arisen); मुखम् (face) to நுதல் (forehead); and घर्मकण (drops of perspiration) to வியர்ப்ப (perspiration). The final உப்பு (delight) finds its emotional counterpart in the Sanskrit verse’s poignant remembrance of the pleasures of union.
The difference lies in their poetic movement. Valluvar asks: ஊடிப் பெறுகுவங் கொல்லோ, Might we attain this delight again through a lovers’ quarrel? The Sanskrit poet instead addresses his heart: संस्मृत्य हे हृदय किं शतधा न यासि, O heart, why do you not break into a hundred pieces at the remembrance? The kural directly expresses the desire to renew the pleasure of feigned estrangement followed by union; the Sanskrit verse conveys the intensity of longing through the memory of a past union. Its register is one of vipralambha shringara, the erotic sentiment of separation and longing.
A lexical point is important: the final word உப்பு (uppu) is understood here as uvappu or uvakai, delight, rather than salt. A Sangam parallel supports this sense. Akananuru 390 reads: “அவ் வாங்கு உந்தி, அமைத் தோளாய்! நின் மெய் வாழ் உப்பின் விலை எய்யாம்.” The speaker tells the beloved, “O woman of the lovely curved navel and bamboo-like shoulders, we cannot reckon the price of the delight that dwells in your body.” This usage supports the erotic reading of the Kural’s uppu.
References to perspiration on the face or forehead after sexual union recur in Sanskrit sringara poetry:
As an approximate parallel to the kural, I propose Gathasaptashati 1.46. Valluvar’s நீடுக மன்னோ விரா corresponds to the Gathasaptashati’s भगवति वर्द्धस्व निशे (O Goddess Night, grow longer) in its direct appeal to the night to extend. Valluvar’s explicit யாமிரப்ப (as I plead) is matched by the Gathasaptashati’s vocative भगवति निशे, which personifies Night as a goddess addressed in entreaty. Both evoke vipralambha, love in separation: Valluvar explicitly wishes ஊடல் to continue, leaving the desire for reconciliation implicit; the Gathasaptashati implies estrangement in खरहृदयः प्रवत्स्यति प्रिय (the hard-hearted beloved will depart), while the plea to prolong the night likewise leaves the hoped-for resolution unstated. The roles differ: the Gathasaptashati calls the man about to leave simply प्रिय (beloved), whereas Valluvar evokes the woman through ஒளியிழை, the radiant, ornamented lady due to whose quarrel, the speaker wishes to prolong the night.
A suggestive, though not exact, resonance may also be found in Jagannatha Panditaraja’s Bhaminivilasa Shringaravilasa 2.56: आयातैव निशा निशापतिकरैः कीर्णं दिशामन्तरं भामिन्यो भवनेषु भूषणगणैरङ्गान्यलङ्कुर्वते | मुग्धे मानमपाकरोषि न मनागद्यापि रोषेण ते हा हा बालमृणालतोऽप्यतितरां तन्वी तनुस्ताम्यति ||. The verse evokes the arrival of night (आयातैव निशा), with the beams of the lord of the night (moonbeams) spreading in all directions (निशापतिकरैः कीर्णं दिशामन्तरं), while other women adorn their bodies with ornaments (भामिन्यो भवनेषु भूषणगणैरङ्गान्यलङ्कुर्वते). These images offer a suggestive echo of both ஒளியிழை and நீடுக மன்னோ விரா: the radiance of the ornamented women is juxtaposed with moonlight spreading through the night. The verse also explicitly invokes मान (offended pride) and रोष (anger): Jagannatha’s speaker urges the heroine to relinquish her pride and anger, thus bringing into focus the lovers’ quarrel that Valluvar evokes through ஊடுக மன்னோ. Valluvar’s யாமிரப்ப leaves the object of the plea productively ambiguous: the speaker may be entreating the woman to prolong the quarrel, or the night itself to endure while he pleads with the woman. Jagannatha’s speaker makes no explicit plea to prolong the night, whereas நீடுக மன்னோ விரா expresses precisely this wish. While Jagannatha’s verse offers a thematic resonance in its conjunction of night, radiance, ornamentation, and lovers’ quarrel, it does not reproduce Valluvar’s distinctive wish to prolong the night or the ambiguity of his plea.
A few verses later Jagannatha writes in 2.74: आयातैव निशा मनो मृगदृशामुन्निद्रमातन्वती मानो मे कथमेष संप्रति निरातङ्कं हृदि स्थास्यति | ऊहापोहमिमं सरोजनयना यावद्विधत्तेतरां तावत्कामनृपातपत्रसुषमं बिम्बं बभासे विधोः ||. This verse is also interesting for the kural because it not only brings night and lovers’ quarrel into an erotic tension, but evokes the manini wondering how her offended pride can survive the arrival of night; this is a predicament suggestive of why Valluvar’s lover wishes that the lovers’ quarrel continue and the night itself be prolonged.
I propose Bhoja’s Shringaraprakasha 23.1 as the primary parallel to this kural. The correspondence begins with ஊடுதல் காமத்திற்கு and Bhoja’s विप्रलम्भशृङ्गारः. शृङ्गारः denotes the rasa of love and erotic experience, and directly maps to காமம். Bhoja’s classification makes विप्रलम्भ one of the two forms of erotic experience, alongside सम्भोगः (union). Bhoja further clarifies the complementary definition in Shringaraprakasha 23.2, defining विप्रलम्भ as the non-attainment of the embraces and related intimacies just described, and explicitly including mana among its four varieties: तेषामेवानवाप्तौ विप्रलम्भः | सोऽपि चतुर्धा प्रथमानुरागः मानः प्रवासः करुणः इति |. Valluvar’s ஊடுதல், however, may be broader than the specific mana or lovers’ quarrel that Bhoja identifies as one variety of vipralambha: Bhoja develops the concept in far greater theoretical detail, while Valluvar leaves the precise scope of ஊடுதல் open.
The second sequence, கூடி முயங்கப் பெறின், finds a close counterpart in Bhoja’s definition: अभिलषणीयालिङ्गनादीनामवाप्तौ सम्भोगः. Here सम्भोगः corresponds to கூடி, आलिङ्गन to முயங்க, and अवाप्तौ to பெறின். The அதற்கின்பம் then points to the pleasure implicit in the attainment (अवाप्तौ) of the desired (अभिलषणीय) embraces and related intimacies. Bhoja thus supplies a concrete counterpart to Valluvar’s second inbam, while leaving the Kural’s distinction between the pleasure of oodal itself and the pleasure of the subsequent union unstated. The first இன்பம், in காமத்திற் கின்பம், can accordingly be read as asserting that ஊடுதல் belongs within the domain of erotic pleasure, although the pleasure itself remains implicit in Bhoja’s classification.
This kural carries the central message of the entire chapter, ஊடலுவகை: lovers’ estrangement is not merely an unfortunate interruption of erotic fulfilment, but an experience that belongs to love and can itself be relished, while also lending renewed intensity to reunion. Bhoja’s formulation that separation can enhance union helps explain the larger aesthetic logic of the chapter.
Bhoja makes the priority of vipralambha still more explicit in Shringaraprakasha 24, explaining why he treats it first: तत्र सम्भोगो विप्रलम्भमन्तरेण न प्रकर्षमारोहतीति विप्रलम्भ एव प्रथममुपादीयते |. Since sambhoga does not attain its highest intensity without vipralambha, Bhoja says, vipralambha is taken up first. This further corroborates the importance of ஊடல் in Valluvar’s discourse: estrangement is not peripheral to erotic fulfilment, but integral to its fullest expression. Earlier in Shringaraprakasha 23, he gives this relationship an especially striking expression: वैचिञ्ये रागवर्धनत्वे वाऽपि विप्रलम्भः सम्भोगात् सर्वतः सर्वो बलीयान् इति |, that is in the variety of experience and in the enhancement of passion, vipralambha is in every respect superior to sambhoga.
Bhoja expresses the relation between separation and union as a shloka in Sarasvatikanthabharanam 5.52: न विना विप्रलम्भेन सम्भोगः पुष्टिमश्नुते | कषायिते हि वस्त्रादौ भूयान् रागोऽनुषज्यते ||. He says that sambhoga does not attain fullness without vipralambha, comparing the intensification of passion to the deeper color acquired by cloth after treatment with a mordant. This directly corroborates the kural’s linking of ஊடுதல் with the fulfilment of erotic love: estrangement can enrich the union that follows. Then in Verse 5.53: स्त्रीपुंसयोर्विप्रलम्भे वैचित्र्याकल्पनादयः | चेष्टाविशेषाः संभोगे चुम्बनालिङ्गनादयः ||, Bhoja distinguishes the characteristic activities of vipralambha from those of sambhoga, explicitly naming kissing and embracing in the latter, thus complementing the correspondence between கூடி முயங்கப் பெறின் and Bhoja’s account of union. Together, the verses reinforce the Kural’s central insight that estrangement and union are not merely opposites, but interrelated states of erotic experience, with vipralambha contributing to the fullness of sambhoga.
Magha offers a further, more oblique corroboration of the pleasure associated with mana in Shishupaalavadham 10.21: दुस्त्यजः खलु सुखादपि मानः, that is, indeed, mana is difficult to relinquish even for the sake of pleasure. Though embedded in a scene involving wine, the verse suggests that mana possesses an attraction of its own—an inference that resonates with Valluvar’s assertion of ஊடுதல் காமத்திற் கின்பம்.
In Sanskrit poetics, Shringara is the erotic rasa, the aesthetic experience of love. Bharata’s Naṭyashastra provides the foundational framework for understanding Shringara. In 6.46, while defining the rasas, he identifies Shringara as arising from rati, the enduring affective state of love, and declares its two modes Vipralambha (separation) and Sambhoga (union). There Shringara is that which arises from rati as its enduring affective state, and whose nature is radiant. Whatever in the world is pure, auspicious, radiant, or beautiful is compared with Shringara. … It has two bases: sambhoga (union) and vipralambha (separation). … It has already been stated that Shringara is produced by sambhoga and vipralambha. … Thus Shringara is associated with all the emotional states:
तत्र शृङ्गारो नाम रतिस्थायिभावप्रभवः । उज्ज्वलवेषात्मकः ।
यत्किञ्चिल्लोके शुचि मेध्यमुज्ज्वलं दर्शनीयं वा तच्छृङ्गारेणोपमीयते । […]
तस्य द्वे अधिष्ठाने सम्भोगो विप्रलम्भश्च । […]
पूर्वमेवाभिहितं सम्भोगविप्रलम्भकृतः शृङ्गार इति । […]
एवमेष सर्वभावसंयुक्तः शृङ्गारो भवति ॥
Bharata’s formulation is central to the present inquiry: separation and union are not independent of Shringara, but constitute its two modes. Verse 22.96 further connects kama with the union of woman and man: धर्मकामोऽर्थकामश्च मोक्षकामस्तथैव च | स्त्रीपुंसयोस्तु योगो यः स तु काम इति स्मृतः ||. Then in 22.98 he identifies the union of woman and man that produces erotic enjoyment as Shringara: यः स्त्रीपुरुषसंयोगो रतिसंभोगकारकः | स शृङ्गार इति ज्ञेय उपचारकृतः शुभः ||. Bhoja’s Shringaraprakasha (Chapters 23–24) develops the relationship between these modes, emphasizing the capacity of separation to intensify erotic passion.
Bharata establishes the foundational framework for reading Valluvar’s ஊடலுவகை. Just as Shringara has two modes, vipralambha (separation) and sambhoga (union), the kural terms ஊடல் and கூடல் evoke the lovers’ separation and union. Although ஊடல் is often interpreted narrowly as mana or praṇayakalaha—the nayika’s offended reserve or a lovers’ quarrel—it can be situated within the wider experiential field of erotic separation, covering the emotional estrangement, longing, resistance, and anticipated reconciliation, through which union acquires greater intensity. The narrower situation of mana thus belongs within the wider experiential field of vipralambha, as later expounded by Bhoja.
The extant Sanskrit translation of the Thirukkural by S. N. Srirama Desikan repeatedly uses विप्रलम्भ for ஊடல், for example, as in विप्रलम्भसुखम् for ஊடலுவகை. This attests to the erotic significance of the distress arising from estrangement, rather than confining the verse’s meaning to a narrowly defined quarrel.
The literature of Shringara, that was just discussed through the Natyashastra perspective, developed over several millennia across Sanskrit and Prakrit poetry through successive representations of lovers’ longing, separation, quarrel, and reunion. Bhoja’s Shringaraprakasha brings this rich literary experience into an elaborate theoretical system, illustrated with concrete examples drawn from various older sources. Its chapters 23 and 24 are especially illuminating for Valluvar’s chapter. The central propositions relevant to this kural chapter are:
This framework gives us a theoretical reading of ஊடலுவகை: Valluvar is not merely describing quarrels between lovers. He explores how estrangement belongs to erotic pleasure, how it may be endured or prolonged, and how its resolution renews the experience of union.
The chapter can be read fruitfully through Bhoja’s theory, which illuminates the relationship between estrangement, renewed passion, and union. Such a theoretical framework, however, cannot exhaust the nuance, metaphor, and semantic range of the kurals. The primary parallels I have proposed are chosen to address those aspects.
Placing the kurals in Manakkudavar’s order reveals an interesting structure. The last six verses in Manakkudavar’s order—2, 8, 5, 4, 1, and 3 in traditional order—are matched primarily with Amarushataka and other Sanskrit Shringara poetry. Kural 8, which uses the familiar image of perspiration after love-play, has a secondary partial parallel in Amaru. Kurals 9 and 7 find parallels in the Sanskrit chaya of the Gathasaptashati, while 6 and 10 find their principal theoretical corroboration in Bhoja.
| No. | Kural in Manakkudavar Order | Principal Parallel | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | 1. ஊடுக மன்னோ … நீடுக மன்னோ விரா | Gathasaptashati 1.46 | The plea to prolong the night amid separation and anticipated departure. |
| 7 | 2. ஊடலிற் றோற்றவர் வென்றார் | Gathasaptashati 6.21 | Union is renewed through quarrel, but excessive pride can destroy love. |
| 6 | 3. உணலினு முண்ட தறலினிது … புணர்தலின் ஊடல் இனிது | Sarasvatikanthabharanam 5.81 | Erotic pleasure after absence resembles food enjoyed after fasting. |
| 10 | 4. ஊடுதல் காமத்திற் கின்பம் … கூடி முயங்கப் பெறின் | Shringaraprakasha 23.1–2, 24 | The theoretical culmination: separation belongs to Shringara, and union and embrace complete the experience. |
| 2 | 5. ஊடலிற் றோன்றுஞ் சிறுதுனி … | Amarushataka 17 | The distress of estrangement, the withholding of favor, and the heroine’s tears. |
| 8 | 6. ஊடிப் பெறுகுவங் கொல்லோ … | Saduktikarnamrita 2.100.4, Amarushataka 58 | Perspiration after love-play evokes the remembered sweetness of union; a common Shringara motif. |
| 5 | 7. தவறில ராயினும் … மென்றோள் அகறலின் | Amarushataka 62 | The slender arm, impending departure, tears, and the emotional force of separation. |
| 4 | 8. புல்லி விடாஅப் புலவியுள் … | Amarushataka 57 | The embrace becomes the means of breaking the heroine’s adamantine resolve. |
| 1 | 9. இல்லை தவறவர்க் காயினும் … | Amarushataka 53 | Feigned grievance despite the lover’s innocence elicits reassurance and affection. |
| 3 | 10. புலத்தலிற் புத்தேணாடுண்டோ … | Amarushataka 32 | Reconciliation with the offended heroine is exalted above divine nectar. |
The two Bhoja matches are especially significant. Kural 6 compares the pleasure of ஊடல் with eating after hunger; Bhoja’s उपोषितैरन्नमिव compares pleasure after absence with food savoured by those who have fasted. Kural 10 then supplies the conceptual key to the chapter: ஊடல் belongs to the pleasure of love, and the pleasure of reunion is realised when the lovers embrace. Bhoja’s theory explains why these are not contradictory assertions.
The remaining parallels show how the same aesthetic principle appears in different situations. Amaru dramatizes the heroine’s tears, resistance, inward longing, and eventual surrender. The Gathasaptashati captures the renewal of erotic pleasure through quarrel while warning that excessive mana may destroy love. One of the parallels concerns pravasa rather than mana specifically. This is not a defect: it illustrates the broader range of vipralambha within which the kurals can be understood.
The correspondences are not always verbal or structural; the parallels do not require Valluvar to reproduce the dramatic situations of Sanskrit poetry. Rather, the Sanskrit works help us see the emotional and aesthetic possibilities compressed into his terse images.
Kural 4, for example, presents the embrace as the படை—the means or weapon—that breaks the heroine’s inward resolve. Amaru’s image of the adamantine heroine (वज्रमय्याः) whose mana is broken when the lover embraces her provides an unusually close conceptual and lexical correspondence. Kural 5, by contrast, leaves the significance of the heroine’s withdrawal deliberately open: Amaru supplies a dramatic scene in which her failure to cling to the departing lover, followed by her tears, binds him more powerfully than an explicit plea could.
Kural 3 is more difficult. Its image of lovers’ hearts as நிலத்தொடு நீரியைந் தன்னார் is distinctively Tamil. The familiar Sangam comparison of loving hearts to rainwater mingling with red earth offers a resonance, while Pravarasena’s Setubandha imagines the sea and earth as lovers repeatedly embracing and withdrawing. Neither establishes an exact Sanskrit counterpart to Valluvar’s complete metaphor. The proper conclusion is that the image belongs to a wider field of suggestive natural and erotic associations, without reducing its particular meaning to any one of them.
Kural 2 is not simply a celebration of quarrel. The qualification பாடு பெறின் is crucial: even when the beloved’s generous affection wanes, the distress of estrangement is to be acknowledged; it may yet prove worthwhile. Valluvar compresses this paradox into a few words, leaving the precise value and outcome of the distress suggestive. Amaru’s heroine, who rejects supplication and speaks harshly yet watches the departing lover through tears, offers a dramatic embodiment of the சிறுதுனி Valluvar evokes. Where Amaru unfolds the contradiction through gesture and speech, Valluvar’s aphoristic economy leaves its implications open.
Kural 7 also merits a lexical reconsideration: the recurring Sanskrit motif of padapatana (falling at the beloved’s feet in supplication) may provide an alternative line of comparison for வீழ்வார், although the primary interpretation remains that of one who is loved/desired.
Vatsyayana’s Kamasutra provides a distinctive practical perspective on Valluvar’s compressed aphorisms, complementing Bhoja’s theory of Shringara and the dramatic poetry of Amaru and the Gaathasaptasahti. Where theory explains the relationship between separation and union, and poetry renders it through metaphor and dramatic situation, Vatsyayana tells the nayaka and nayika what to do. His account of pranayakalaha supplies the practical choreography of ஊடல் and கூடல். Kamasutra Chapter 2.10 offers the most insights relevant to this kural chapter:
अवसानेऽपि च प्रीतिरुपचारैरुपस्कृता। सविस्रम्भकथायोगै रतिं जनयते पराम्॥ 2.10.10 ॥
परस्परप्रीतिकरैरात्मभावानुवर्तनैः। क्षणात्क्रोधपरावृत्तैः क्षणात्प्रीतिविलोकितैः॥ 2.10.11 ॥
हल्लीसकक्रीडनकैर्गायनैर्लाटरासकैः। रागलोलार्द्रनयनैश्चन्द्रमण्डलवीक्षणैः॥ 2.10.12 ॥
आद्ये संदर्शने जाते पूर्वं ये स्युर्मनोरथाः। पुनर्वियोगे दुःखं च तस्य सर्वस्य कीर्तनैः॥ 2.10.13a ॥
कीर्तनान्ते च रागेण परिष्वङ्गैः सचुम्बनैः। तैस्तैश्च भावैः संयुक्तो यूनो रागो विवर्धते॥ 2.10.13b ॥
संदर्शनात्प्रभृत्युभयोरपि प्रवृद्धरागयोः प्रयत्नकृते समागमे प्रवासप्रत्यागमने वा कलहवियोगयोगे तद्रागवत्॥ 2.10.15 ॥
वर्धमानप्रणया तु नायिका सपत्नीनामग्रहणं तदाश्रयमालापं वा गोत्रस्खलितं वा न मर्षयेत्। नायकव्यलीकं च॥ 2.10.27 ॥
तत्र सुभृशः कलहो रुदितमायासः शिरोरुहाणामवक्षोदनं प्रहणनमासनाच्छयनाद्वा मह्यां पतनं माल्यभूषणावमोक्षो भूमौ शय्या च॥ 2.10.28 ॥
तत्र युक्तरूपेण साम्ना पादपतननेन वा प्रसन्नमनास्तामनुनयन्नुपक्रम्य शयनमारोहयेत्॥ 2.10.29 ॥
तस्य च वचनमुत्तरेण योजयन्ती विवृद्धक्रोधा सकचग्रहं अस्यास्यमुन्नमय्य पादेन बाहौ शिरसि वक्षसि पृष्ठे वा सकृद्द्विस्त्रिर्हन्यात्। द्वारदेशं गच्छेत्। तत्रोपविश्याश्रुकरणमिति॥ 2.10.30 ॥
अतिक्रुद्धापि तु न द्वारदेशाद्भूयो गच्छेत्। दोषवत्त्वात्। इति दत्तकः। तत्र युक्तितोऽनुनीयमाना प्रसादमाकाङ्क्षेत्। प्रसन्नापि तु सकषायैरेव वाक्यैरेनं तुदतीव प्रसन्नरतिकाङ्क्षिणी नायकेन परिरभ्येत॥ 2.10.31 ॥
स्वभवनस्था तु निमित्तात्कलहिता तथाविधचेष्टैव नायकमभिगच्छेत्॥ 2.10.32 ॥
तत्र पीठमर्दविटविदूषकैर्नायकप्रयुक्तैरुपशमितरोषा तैरेवानिनीता तैः सहैव तद्भवनमधिगच्छेत्। तत्र च वसेत्। इति प्रणयकलहः॥ 2.10.33 ॥
The Kamasutra is broadly consistent with the Shringara tradition’s distinction between vipralambha and sambhoga, and Valluvar’s ஊடல் and கூடல். In 2.10.15, Vatsyayana includes reunion following quarrel and separation among the circumstances associated with intensified passion: कलहवियोगयोगे तद्रागवत्. This provides a concise parallel to Bhoja’s account of the intensification of raga through separation, and to Valluvar’s paradoxical assertion that ஊடல் can itself be pleasurable when followed by கூடல்.
Vatsyayana also describes what sustains or renews affection. In 2.10.10–13, affectionate gestures and intimate conversation, consideration for one another, alternating anger and loving glances, and recollections of the desires of the first meeting and the sorrow of subsequent separation all contribute to the growth of passion. The sequence culminates in रागेण परिष्वङ्गैः सच्चुम्बनैः—passionate embraces and kisses through which raga increases. These actions which Vatsyayana collectively calls प्रीतिरुपचारै offer a practical counterpart to the affection and desire implicit in Valluvar’s வல்ல தவரளிக்கும் மாறு (kural 1) and நல்லளி (kural 2). Remarkably, Vatsyayana includes within these means of renewing affection the recollection of both the joys of union and the sorrows of separation: आद्ये संदर्शने जाते पूर्वं ये स्युर्मनोरथाः। पुनर्वियोगे दुःखं च तस्य सर्वस्य कीर्तनैः॥ (2.10.13). This adds a further dimension to Valluvar’s claim that ஊடல் is pleasurable: the உவகை of estrangement and reunion lies not only in the experience itself, but also in remembering and recounting its joys and sorrows.
Earlier Vatsyayana connects food and erotic desire with states of the body in 1.2.36: शरीरस्थितिहेतुत्वादाहारसधर्माणो हि कामाः ||. When read along with कलहवियोगयोगे तद्रागवत् in 2.10.15, we can see the basic ideas underpinning Valluvar’s comparison of hunger and erotic pleasure in kural 8: உணலினும் உண்ட தறலினிது காமம் புணர்தலின் ஊடல் இனிது.
Vatsyayana provides a practical dimension to Valluvar’s expression, ஊடுக மன்னோ வொளியிழை (kural 6) and ஊடிப் பெறுகுவங் கொல்லோ (kural 8). In Kamasutra 2.10.27–33, he describes the circumstances that may initiate a quarrel, its physical and verbal manifestations, and the process through which it is resolved. He begins with the growing love of the nayika, वर्धमाणप्रणया तु नायिका (2.10.27). He describes circumstances that may provoke the heroine’s displeasure, including the lover’s mention of rivals or a slip in which he uses another woman’s name (2.10.27); Valluvar does not discuss causes in this chapter. Vatsyayana then details the manifestations of the quarrel: tears, agitation, dishevelled hair, striking the lover, abandoning the bed or seat, removing ornaments, and lying on the ground (2.10.28). As her anger grows, she responds with further reproaches, strikes him, withdraws to the doorway, and sits weeping (2.10.29). Vatsyayana thus makes concrete what Valluvar leaves implicit in the action word ஊடல்: the quarrel is enacted through speech, gesture, bodily withdrawal, and tears.
His account also anticipates two further aspects, யாமிரப்ப (while I plead) in kural 6 and வல்ல தவரளிக்கும் மாறு (the capacity of to elicit a response from the beloved) in kural 1. The nayaka seeks to restore her good humour and bring her back to bed, and his task is to appease her through conciliatory words or supplication: साम्ना पादपतनेन वा (2.10.30). This gives a practical context for தாம்வீழ்வார் in kural 5: falling at the beloved’s feet is one possible enactment of supplication, though it should remain a secondary resonance rather than the primary reading of this kural. Vatsyayana’s account of the nayika who, even while being appeased, continues to speak resentfully yet desires erotic union—प्रसन्नापि तु सकषायैरेव वाक्यैर् … प्रसन्नरतिकाङ्क्षिणी (2.10.31)—offers a practical counterpart to Valluvar’s ஆங்கொன் றுடைத்து (kural 10): the lovers’quarrel contains within it several coexisting movements of feeling, resistance, and desire, which Vatsyayana spells out as conduct.
Even after her anger begins to subside, the nayika may continue to speak resentfully while desiring erotic union: रसन्नापि तु सकषायैरेव वाक्यैर् … प्रसन्नरतिकाङ्क्षिणी नायकेन परिरभ्येत (2.10.31). Vatsyayana instructs the lover to embrace her in this state. This gives a practical dimension to Valluvar’s புல்லி விடாஅப் புலவியுட் டோன்றுமென்னுள்ள முடைக்கும் படை (kural 7): the embrace that does not let go becomes the means of breaking the nayika’s inward resolve while the quarrel is still in progress. The embrace bridges the interval between lingering displeasure and reconciliation, giving concrete form to the power that Valluvar attributes to the lover’s embrace.
This overall sequence is particularly illuminating for kural 9: ஊடுக மன்னோ ஒளியிழை யாமிரப்ப நீடுக மன்னோ இரா. While the wish that the night be prolonged is uniquely Valluvar’s poetic creation, Vatsyayana describes what the extended process of entreaty can involve. His practical instructions make such a night imaginable.
Vatsyayana shows how the lover who entreats and appears to yield can bring about renewed intimacy: साम्ना पादपतनेन वा … तामनुनयन् … शयनमारोहयेत् (2.10.30). The heroine, though still speaking resentfully, desires erotic union, and the lover embraces her: सकषायैरेव वाक्यैः … प्रसन्नरतिकाङ्क्षिणी नायकेन परिरभ्येत् (2.10.31). Valluvar compresses this reversal into a paradox—the one who loses in ஊடல் wins in கூடல் in kural 7: ஊடலில் தோற்றவர் வென்றார் அதுமன்னும் கூடலிற் காணப்படும்.
The sequence concludes with alternative ways of restoring the relationship: the nayika approaches the nayaka while maintaining the appropriate gestures of displeasure, or the lover’s associates soothe her anger and bring her to his residence (2.10.32–33). Vatsyayana names the whole process इति प्रणयकलहः—Thus, the lovers’ quarrel born of affection.
The contribution of the Kamasutra is distinct. Rather than offering direct parallels to individual kurals, it provides practical instructions for putting the dynamics of the lovers’ quarrel into action. Bharata and Bhoja supply the theoretical framework; Amaru and the Gathasaptashati dramatize the lovers’ emotional contradictions; Vatsyayana describes how the quarrel is enacted, managed, and brought towards resolution.
Read alongside Bharata’s and Bhoja’s theories of Shringara, the dramatic poetry of Amarushataka and the Gathasaptashati, and Vatsyayana’s practical account of pranayakalaha, Valluvar’s ஊடலுவகை reveals a unified erotic logic in which separation can renew passion and union can complete it.
தலைவனைக் கண்ட தலைவியின் புலவியைக் கண்ட புலவன் வள்ளுவன்.
வள்ளுவன் கூறும் ஊடலும் கூடலும் காமக்கூறு; அதற்கு பரதனும் போசனும் சான்று.