and, Nasy gaaru added:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The SlOkam was recited a 'paarvatee paramESwarau' for a long time. (I think
this SlOkam figures as an invocation in kaaLidaasu's kumaarasambhavam). The
controversy was this.
jagatat pitarau, vandE paarvatee paramESwarau
The phrase 'pitarau' is in dual number, meaning 'to the two fathers of the
world'. Then the following phrase contradicts this by quoting a woman
(paarvati). How can paaravti be a father of the world? So the common man
consoled himself that the poet meant parents, and not fathers when he said
'pitarau'. Then, some wise guy came to the rescue of kaaLidaasu: he said
kaaLidaasu is not an idiot to write 'pitarau' when he wants to say parents;
he would have said 'maataa pitarau' or some such thing. In this case, he
means exactly what he says: 'to the two fathers of the world, namely
husband of paarvati, and husband of rama' -> hence the split 'paarvateepa
ramESwarau'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My own interpretation:
the above mentioned SlOkam is the first one in "raghu_vamSam" written
by Kalidasa. And, it goes as follows:
"vaagarthaa_viva sampRktou vaagartha: pratipattayE
jagata: pitarou vandE paarvatee paramESwarou"
( Sabdaarthaalu kalisi vunnatlu kalisi vunna (sampRktou) paarvatee
paramESwarulaku, SabdaarthaalalO "expertise" kOsam ( read, for
word-power) namaskaristunnaanu! )
from the meaning of the SlOkam, i think it was the paarvatee
paramESwarulu who Kalidasa had in mind - otherwise, he wouldn't have said
"viDadeeya lEnaTlugaa kalisi vunna jagata: pitarou". i think it is much easier
to assume Kalidasa used "pitarou" to mean "mother & father" rather than to
imagine Siva and Vishnu entwined like the words and their meanings. After all,
isn't it Siva who has the name "artha_naareeSwaruDu" ? ( don't we say
"pitR dEvatalu" to refer to ancestors - both male and female?
Performers introducing "virupulu" in an old poem/song and there by
bringing to our attention a new and equally delightful meaning is nothing new.
when N people have sung the same song before you were ever born, that is one of
the ways you could show some ingenuity.
sometimes, in "kavi sammELanaalu", you hear the poet himself repeating a line
twice, each time suggesting a different meaning via a different separation of
the words. but somehow, i could never enjoy SPB singing "vaagarthaaviva.." the
way he did - probably because the meaning is inappropriate. ( by the way, the
credit or discredit for the word-break should go to the lyricist / music
director NOT the singer. )
Talking about "virupulu", we see /hear them in almost every classical
music performance. The reason is quite different from the one I mentioned above
though. In classical music, the performers sacrifice the most beautiful
saahityam (lyrics) to do justice to the raagam or to the technical aspects of
the performance. I often think it is actually a clever scheme by the madrasi
musicians who couldn't really appreciate the lyrics anyway. by making it a
standard practice, they ensured even the telugus don't enjoy the lyrics.
regards,
-rao