Pasuram 3.9.2

Tamil text and transliteration:

உளனாகவே எண்ணி தன்னை ஒன்றாக தன் செல்வத்தை
வளனா மதிக்கும் இம் மானிடத்தைக் கவி பாடி என்,
குளன் ஆர் கழனிசூழ் கண்ணன் குறுங்குடி மெய்ம்மையே,
உளனாய எந்தையை எந்தை பெம்மானை ஒழியவே?

uḷaṉākavē eṇṇi taṉṉai oṉṟāka taṉ celvattai
vaḷaṉā matikkum im māṉiṭattaik kavi pāṭi eṉ,
kuḷaṉ ār kaḻaṉicūḻ kaṇṇaṉ kuṟuṅkuṭi meymmaiyē,
uḷaṉāya entaiyai entai pemmāṉai oḻiyavē?

English translation of verse 3.9.2:

What use is there in composing hymns
In praise of these frail humans
Who think no end of themselves and their wealth ephemeral.
Without lauding my benefactor great, the Lord eternal,
Truly abiding in Kuṟuṅkuṭi, with many a pond and fields fertile?

Notes

(i) The Lord’s wealth and His auspicious traits are unlimited, in dire contrast to the petty wealth possessed, for a short while, by the mortals who still think no end of themselves and their so-called possessions. It provokes the righteous indignation of the Āḻvār when he finds people running after the petty men and their equally petty wealth, as good as non-existent, without turning their minds on God (near at hand, full of auspicious traits) and singing His glory.

(ii) (a) What to do: The Lord Who stays in Heaven in His transcendental Form, Who reclines on the milkocean in His ‘Vyūha’ aspect, Who incarnated as Śrī Rāma, Kṛṣṇa and so on, who resides in His Iconic Form in Pilgrim centres like Kuṟuṅkuṭi, is alone praiseworthy and, therefore, the few of us gifted with poetic talents should compose hymns singing the Lord’s glory, His countless auspicious traits and wcndṛous deeds, cosmic wealth of unlimited dimensions etc.

(b) What not to do: Don’t debase your poetic talent by composing poems glorifying the insignificant humans, importing merits where there is none and overlooking all their faults although they are too numerous to be ignored. Here is an interesting anecdote: A wealthy man, named, Cōḷa Brahmarāya, wrote out a commentary on ‘Tiruvāymoḻi’ and gave it to Nañcīyar for perusal and writing out the Foreword. The Saint did not, however, like to get involved in this, lest he should have to point out the mistakes and incur the displeasure of the glossator. He, therefore, passed it on to his disciple, Nampiḷḷai, who discreetly gave it back to the author after some time, complimenting him, more as a matter of formality, on his close adherence to Saint Nammāḻvār’s philosophy. Thereupon, Cōḷa Brahmarāya felt unduly elated and went even to the extent of rating himself above Nammāḻvār on the ground that, with his superior talents, he was able to write out the commentary in the midst of the multifarious duties his high position demanded of him, while Nammāḻvār had nothing else to do when he composed ‘Tiruvāymoḻi’. This brings to the fore the vanity of people who easily lose their heads, the more so, when they are surrounded by sycophants indulging in fulsome flattery.

(iii) ‘Kuṟuṅkuṭi’, a pilgrim centre, in the deep south in Tamil Nadu, is also known as ‘Vaiṣṇava Vāmana Kṣetra’. It was due to the grace of the Lord enshrined here that Nammāḻvār was born.