:
As many readers know, about half the traffic to this site comes from web searches for the Nagumomu Ganaleni song. This song draws most of the comments we get too. And most of these comments are laudatory. So, we only feature some of them. Instead, whenever we get criticism or questions, we feature them, "as is" more readily and try to clarify these as best as we can, because each such instance gives us a chance to explain our innovations and approach a little further. So, we are extraordinarily respectful towards critical comments.
But, today, May 8, 2011, we got our first "frothing at the mouth", rabid and pointless critical comment. God knows what breeds hostility, because the same points could have been made in a sane manner. Here is that comment, "as is", within which are interspersed inline, our clarifications and replies. It would interest the fastidious and enquiring reader to go over this page in full. We have been as restrained as possible despite the indecorous conduct of this anonymous complainant, who did not have the courage to attach his name to his vehemence.
----------------
This highly critical comment came from an anonymous reader. We have no problem in featuring it, unedited. But, we didn't include the comment in our usual "as is" form so that we can respond below in another comment, because, due to the caustic and immoderate nature of the verbiage, we needed to respond inline. Nevertheless, we don't expect everyone to applaud all that we do; holding contrarian opinions is anyone's prerogative, as is our prerogative in refuting and clarifying them. If someone wanted to criticize so trenchantly, it would have behooved them to identify themselves. Even Nobel Laureates have their detractors, and some detractors have valid points and not just empty criticism. It is truth and validity that matter. Also, the same matter could have been conveyed politely, in more even-toned words, with the deference customary to the august subjects from Indian culture and antiquities, that are at hand. Anyhow, here are the criticisms, which we explain with no vehemence and all the moderation at our command. Our responses are marked by the "-->" arrow symbol.
---
---
PART 1
****************
"I am sorry to disagree with the most of the comments here but I have to take issue with your translation and your principles of translation. At the outset, let me say that I am not a big Telugu or a Tyagaraja scholar."
-->Fine. We welcome knowledge from all quarters, so long as it is good and useful. Now, let's see what is good and useful in what you have to say.
"Having said that, here are my issues with your translation:
1. Your choice of word -- bereft. The words actually are saying "Not knowing your smiling face." In other words, Tyagaraja is unable to see the Lord's smiling face (anymore). It is not that Tyagaraja has just gained the knowledge of bereavement but that is unable to know the Lord's smiling face anymore."
--> Bereft is quite the right word to use. Our "art of translation" and the conventions used are detailed throughout our introductory pages and translation and philological comments are given through the work. These translation details developed further in the printed book. Please read the whole as instructed in the themes and introduction pages, and not just this one song. The meaning is exact. Also, please appreciate different shades of meaning, turn of phrase and stylistic usage in English. A verse translation has its own beauty and conventions and has to stand by itself. Please realize this too. Further, note that though this particular site is anonymous, in real life, we do have a formal background in both philology and linguistics and the "art of translation" as we practise, is well commended. [Of course, even the anonymity we maintain on this site, for the sake of privacy, is held only in the limited sense to keep off bots. In all direct correspondence pertaining to this site, we do not remain anonymous.]
--> Translation is an art; and we, as an exponent of an art, have our own style. Don't expect crude cut, characterless, bazaar-guide quality, robotic reproductions in our creative work.
------------------------------------------------
2. Where is this word "alleviate" come from. What is this? Is Tyagaraja asking for an aspirin to reduce the pain? He is actually saying: "Can you have pity on me and save/rescue me." Unless you use such words, you cannot express the pathos in the song -- it is a deep despair that Tyagaraja is expressing -- not something that can be alleviated.
--> See above. The same thing applies-- learn turn of phrase etc. You are making elaborate and hostile statements without understanding the original lyrics, poetic conventions in Tyagaraja's time, or the verse translation. All you manage to show with your vehemence is your shallowness of scholarship. You could have better phrased yourself. When Tyagarja says, "naa jaali telisi", "knowing my state", indicating it is pitiable and Rama is his savior or the "cure", what on earth do you think he meant? Please read the lyrics closely. Understand from reading the intro pages and our commentaries that we follow a "strict constructionist" approach to translating Tyagaraja and do not let even conventions and legends about different songs (such as his having actually seen Devarishi Narada and then composing Sri Narada Mune) interfere with our translations. Yes, he certainly felt he was ill and did want an aspirin called a vision of Rama. I think you are just not used to reading literature in any language; this is not a crime at all, as modern education has tended to move more and more towards a science based curriculum. But, we must make it a point to know what we do not know! Finally, your comment should have started "Where does this word alleviate..." and not "Where is this word.." (sic.)
--> To be as crudely literal as yourself, (which Tyagaraja was seldom), what would you say, "nanu-brovaga-raada-" means? That Rama would come with his Kothanda, rain astras, and save Tyagaraja? What exactly was the "saving" that Tyagarja sought? What did he want to be saved from? Was it not the pain of the material world, that is devoid of Rama? Does that not mean he wished to be alleviated from, rescued from and relieved from the "pitiable state" of not being one with Rama? You may not know Telugu or Tyagaraja as you say. But, English? Plain English? The ubiquitous business language, English?
-----------------------------------
PART 2
********
“3. What is so convoluted by using Tyagaraja's name? This was the convention of the time - a convention expressed by the Bhakti movement becoming common and popular. This is the culmination of Advaita philosophy (which professes you can't know reality or the phenomenal world and have to introspect to reach Moksha). The Bhakti movement is an antidote to the proscriptions of that time which asserted that Passion/Pathos was a way to achieve Moksha. Using one's name is a humble act which all the saints of that day used (including Tukaram, Purandara Dasa, Miraben, etc.).”
--> You are complaining because you didn't read the intro pages or anything else on this site which explains what exactly this work is. As the poet, writer and researcher of some standing and maturity, who is writing the verse translation (and not a word-for-word rendering dubash peon), it is my prerogative to choose what flows with the verses. I demonstrate both MY "art of translation" and "poetical art" alongside the greatness of Tyagaraja's lyrical art. I am NOT in the business of giving a crude, mindless, desensitized word-for-word translation. There are several good and bad compendia which give the kind of word-for-word translation you crave. If you want a reasonable, but sometimes imperfect, "plain paraphrase" type translation of Tyagaraja's songs, I have no hestitation in recommending Shriman TKG's volume to you.
-->Verse translations and treating Tyagaraja extensively as a lyrical poet (which is our innovation and contribution to Carnatic musicology), are among the foci of this site; such matters are purely for the discerning reader and musician or for the reader or musician wishing to learn. Why else would we feature "Tyagaraja yoga vaibhavam" of Diskhista on this site? Go look up that page; and see the high art we strive to practise in this work- trying to match the yati from a language with easy coalescence of words with one that doesn't have it! You have to understand what this work is about. You cannot go to a football match expecting to see the players score a lot of runs and not goals!
-->Since you don't seem to know this, Tyagaraja's using his name, was a mudra or a signature. Even Sadasiva, who was a total renunciant who traveled without a strand of clothing, uses a mudra, "Paramahamsa" in his compositions. This mudra was before you could happily put a copyright symbol next to your song and let the RIAA loose on your transgressors. Since I identify the composer as Tyagaraja very clearly, it is perfectly valid for me to render his signature as "bard" or however I choose to phrase it. Tyagaraja often says "praised by Tyagaraja" in his songs. Is that or is that not a bard's function, even if he be self-appointed, to the "Eternal king" Rama? Does not Tyagaraja himself say in many places that that is how he views his purpose in life?!
-->After reading everything we suggest, and understanding musicology, literature and linguistics, you still begrudge us anything, please write your own verse translation of this song. If it reads well, we will applaud you wholeheartedly, because Tyagaraja belongs to everybody!
-->Where did you find out that Tyagarajaw as a paragon of Advaita? Have you studied one or the other well? And if Advaita, which Advaita? Sankara's? Other? In reality, he was much more a syncretist who stood for devotion and nama-sankeertana than a diehard Advaitin. Even his first deeksha mantra was for Rama, as evidenced by the first song he is said to have composed and despite the deeksha, Rama doesn't belong to the Shanmatha devata directly, being an incarnation. There is a lot of non-traditional Advaitic thought and non-Advaitic thought in Tyagaraja's songs. Please study him closely to realize this. And who told you that the others you name had anything to do with pristine Advaitic thought? Are you talking about Tyagaraja or Appaya Dikshita?
-->Lastly, please don't try to offer lessons on Advaita or the Bhakti movement or namedrop other saints, for we methodically develop such matters through the various thematic trails in this work. Neither do we need instruction in them, nor do you do such weighty matters, any justice.
Part 3
*********
“4. IMHO, it is more important to communicate the original sentiment of the song than to use big words in English.”
---> There is no humility in anything you have conveyed just before this line. In fact, much humility was necessary in your case. As someone said, you seem a "modest man, with much to be modest about." If you wrote in your comments with only good intent, but in disagreement, you will do well to read, learn and reflect on all that was pointed to and explained earlier.
---> As for conveying the "true sentiment", I don't care who you are in real life, but you are clearly "bereft" of both the musical and the lyrical-poetic arts. Only a few comments before yours, in this comment: http://www.tinyurl.com/LTBEffects , we explain how closely we follow Tyagaraja's lyrics, in such a different language, and how the musical and lyrical tension building to a climax, and the resolution thereof, are also followed in the verses. In fact, I even note that my tension is a phrase before his, due to the structure of English. I wished it were more exact, though so few, excepting scholars of both Indian literature and English literature. would notice the gap of a single phrase. That is how diligent this work is. After searching through the few hundred translation works of Tyagaraja that exist in books and journal articles in different languages, please show me even one, that "follows" Tyagaraja so closely and so scrupulously, and if, imitating you, I choose to flatter myself for a moment, so artfully.
---> We do welcome all constructive criticism on this site and feature the criticisms and questions more often than the laudatory comments we get, because, criticisms give us a rostrum to explain "our work and innovations" better and better. But, your comments are just a litany of absurdities, which we featured ONLY to reassure other readers who might have conflicting reactions to "our work".
--> All in all, your comment is a clear case for why we are taught "Look before you leap!" when we are young.
-------------------------------------
Part 4:
********
In noting all the blunders in this sophistic and opprobrious comment, I missed one key element- the muddling up of several elements of history- Mira, Tukaram and Purandara Dasa were not saints of Tyagaraja's day. Tyagaraja's time was much later. He came centuries after the Bhakti movement, and his king was the well documented Serfoji II of Thanjavur. Also, I got a good laugh over the misplaced fulminations marked here about Advaita, Bhakti and Moksha. Introspection, aka meditation, etc. emerged even before Advaitic thought emerged. It is only when you take Advaitic positions as a point of faith, can you make such a statement. But, Dvaitins and Vishishtadvaitins and others will never agree with that statement; not to mention non-Vedantins from within and without Hindu/Indian traditions. I could go on and on, but we already develop these subjects accurately in the book, and to an extent on this preview site too. So, I will sign off at this point on this matter.
Detailed criticisms and disagreements are good, because they enrich this site. But, they must have good intent and a valid point to make and shouldn't never be written frothing at the mouth like this comment has been! If it had been written sincerely, and appropriately, such a detailed objection would have been a really useful one to clarify. Consider for example the comments in Manasa Sancharare, where a reader asked why we wrote "Ponder!" in exhortation, than the literal address to the lyricist's mind. Very valid question, asked appropriately, such that we were beholden to clarify adequately. There are other such questions too raised in different places. Such purposeful discussion is a joy to all,- the questioner, the writer and the readers and it enriches this work. It is precisely for quickly including such interaction that we use blogger and not static pages on some web server.
So, please do send your valid objections and differing questions more often than your congratulations and thanks! They enrich!
I would like to reiterate that the same criticisms as in this comment, could have been made in a more appropriate and courteous manner, inviting an even discussion, than needlessly adopt a confrontationist posture, with no territory or position to defend truly and well!
Another misguided soul's take:
The following comment was received on Sep. 28, 2011, for the song Jagadanandakaraka. The strong words used by this poster outshine even the previous commenter in their effrontery, idiocy, ignorance and of course, buffoonery. Ironically, the comment gives us many chances to explain our approach better. Here is the comment in full, verb-atim, in red. The non-abuse portions are explained immediately below. Of course, this commenter, who is from Bangalore, remained anonymous, without the guts to post under his or her name.What an atheistic translation!. Someone should sue this atheistic serpent which has acid in its heart.Even a christian or a muslim would have in a much more respectful way. "This is a common practice in Hinduism, where the one Supreme Spirit or Brahman is seen in the manifest forms of one's chosen deity" which scripture says so?? "This god was not obliging due to Rama's being a mere human " what's all this nonsense ??? What do you mean by this god, that god?? Parabrahman means Rama and He's God(Bhagavan) and the rest are demigods. Go and take a plunge in the ganges and wash your sinful tongue with some detergent. Stop writing such nonsensical translations.
After laughing out aloud for several minutes at the sheer stupidity of this comment, I decided to explain certain points in it, for the benefit of sincere questioners.
1. What an atheistic translation!
It is not atheistic, theistic or anything. It is "rigorous and respectful" as our mission statement, which this idiot has not bothered to read, makes clear. Our approach is to present Tyagaraja's words in their unvarnished, pristine form. This means, not taking any position, for or against. Taking an atheistic position, is also taking a position, and is not unbiased, not to mention the position of an ardent Tyagaraja devotee. We strive to remain equidistant from all such positions. This hate-mongering commenter is of course new to scholarship, whether Eastern or Western, or would know how much neutrality is valued in either system. We praise Tyagaraja where praise is due and criticize him where we must. This authenticity, which is hard to find in the traditional model of Carnatic music development, is the main value of our work.
2. Someone should sue this atheistic serpent which has acid in its heart.
Why wait for someone else? Why don't you sue me yourself? No guts? No know-how? Why stop at a lawsuit? Please glorify me further with a death-threat.
3. "This is a common practice in Hinduism, where the one Supreme Spirit or Brahman is seen in the manifest forms of one's chosen deity" which scripture says so??
Almost every single one, starting from the Vedas. More importantly, every major Acharya of modern Vedanta, such as Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva, repeatedly maintains this. In fact, the major Acharyas of the different Vedantic schools, go to great lengths to demonstrate this above fact as being self-evident in the Vedas when interpreted according to the tenets of their school, as Shruti trumps all in Hinduism. Please take a beginner's course in Hindu philosophy before exposing yourself like this.
4. "This god was not obliging due to Rama's being a mere human " what's all this nonsense ??? What do you mean by this god, that god?? Parabrahman means Rama and He's God(Bhagavan) and the rest are demigods. Go and take a plunge in the ganges and wash your sinful tongue with some detergent. Stop writing such nonsensical translations.
The nonsense is in your comment. The god who was barring Rama from building a bridge over the ocean, is referred to here, in the phrase, "abdi madahara", or literally, "Ocean vanity-destroyer", not the Paramatma or Rama himself. Further, the god identified here, varies among different versions of the Ramayana prevalent in different parts of India. In some, it is Varuna himself, who is the god of all waters, and hence the god of the ocean too. In others, it is Sagara, presumably a sea-god subordinate to Varuna, since Varuna is one of the most important deities in the pantheon. First, understand the phrase. Then, study the Ramayana and all other necessary literature. And then, understand what else is being said by Tyagaraja in this charana. Finally, gripe.
Rama was a human raised to divinity, as the scriptures make clear. That was the point of this incarnation, as opposed to the Krishna incarnation, where His divinity was evident from birth. In fact, this is the premise with which the Ramayana itself begins, viz. "Who is the ideal man?", as explained, with the relevant verses from the Ramayana, elsewhere in this site and work. This new theology that you propound, 'Rama is Parabrahman alias Bhagavan, and the rest are demigods', is a position no major, scripture-based, traditional school of Hindu theology accepts.
If you wished to question our approach, or raise the points clarified above, you could have well done that politely. What barred you? If you had been respectful, I would still have given the same clarifications as above, for facts are facts.
After all this ignorance and bile you have shown, I have two questions. Did you even read any of the other songs or pages in this site to understand what we do? Did it not occur to you why, even from the fraction we show in the site,- the comments received from so many, many people, of all extractions- Indian, non-Indian, Hindu, non-Hindu, music-pro, casual listener etc., are actually so thankful?
It is this frothing at the mouth for the wrong reasons, by truly ignorant persons like you, that allows motivated persons, particularly in the west, to get away with hateful and erroneous characterizations of various aspects of Indian Culture,- Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism, Indian classical Literature and Music etc.
Finally, a word of advice.
Please don't go anywhere near the Ganges with this kind of clod in your head and hatred in your heart. Even the Ganges has not the wherewithal to cleanse you.
/\
