Tyagaraja composed compositions mainly in Telugu. But Papanasam Sivan composed most of the songs in Tamil. A study of the status of these two languages as medium for classical music compositions is worthwhile here.
The tendency to borrow Sanskrit words freely has been there in both Tyagaraja and Papanasam Sivan. It is said that Telugu and Sanskrit are more compatible than Tamil and Sanskrit. ‘Desabhashalandu Telugu lessa’ was quoted by Krishnadevarayar in his book ‘Aamukthamaalyada’. Many Tamilians including right from Shyama Sastri laid the hands upon Telugu. Telugu had a natural affinity for Karnatic music. But Tyagaraja was composing in Telugu living all the time in Tamilnadu. Though musicians were not fluent with the language, Tyagaraja’s kritis became staple food for them because of its musical excellence.
Papanasam Sivan had the advantage of starting his career in the film music field and quite a few of his songs proved very popular. That was the time that even in films only classical singers were actors. A person with classical music background were acting in films. For example, G.N.Balasubrahmaniam, V.V.Sadagopan, M.S.Subbulakshmi were basically classical singers and the music ruling the film field was also serious classical music. This gave an opening to the outpouring of Papanasam Sivans compositions to find the place in the films. Because he started a as a classical musician and put classical music in the films.
For example some of the famous compositions like “Maarubalka” of Tyagaraja, by keeping the tune as the same he composed the lyrics “Enna seiven” ( ) which was very famous song in the film during his period. Likewise “Maravene ennallumey” ( ) was modelled on one of the javali “Chelinenetlu sahinthune”.
148
A brief study of the suitability of various languages for classical music here will be appropriate.
In the popular quotation ‘Sangitamapi Sahityam Saraswatyah sthanadvayam’, the indication given is that music and literature (not language) are equally great fine arts.
The word ‘Sahitya’ in this quotation is wrongly taken by many to mean the ‘Sahityam’ of a music composition.
Though language is common both to literature and music composition, the importance given to it is not the same in all expressions. Even in literature the yardsticks for prose, poetry and drama are different and in a musical composition language is reduced to a status of just a vehicle or medium for expressing a musical thought. It should be remembered that there are great aspects of classical music like Raga alapana, Tanam and Kalpana svara, where it is all music and no language at all. Even in compositions, the language has full significance only in vocal music. Music is itself a language that can create a rapport of its own. Music is said to be ‘Apaatamadhuram’ i.e., that which pleases with its sweetness the moment it falls in the ear and literature is said to be ‘Alochanaamritam’ i.e., that which is like nectar while ruminating. It should thus be clear that the calibre of a ‘poet’ and that of a ‘Vaggeyakaraka’ need not be identical. The former will have everything to do with language, euphony, rules of prosody etc., and may even have nothing to do with music. But the latter has to have some poesy in him while his magnificent obsession should be only with music. A minimum felicity with a language is a must for a composer (Vaggeyakara) and any command over music is not a must for a poet.
Looked from this background, a composer for a kriti should automatically be given a lenient treatment when the language used in a kriti is being analysed. Any of the Vaggeyakaras have been
149
adepts in language too, while there have been quite a few whose lack of command over language often betrays. The appeal of music is very wide, often transgressing regional, political and even national boundaries. But the appeal of a sahitya is limited to the linguistic boundaries. If the Telugu compositions of Tyagaraja have been so jealously guarded in Tamilnadu it must have been more because of the great music in them than for the words.
There must have been a time when all that was known about Tyagaraja’s kritis was only the music in them and only latterly, with the spread of the empire of the musicologists, more and more time, energy and ink became to be spent on the sahitya portion. These tribe of commentators whose only claim to dabble in the realm of music is their knowledge of language, - cannot sing a single line of music but can go on pouring out more and more of written matter, often to the extent that would have baffled Tyagaraja himself.
In this context to call Tyagaraja’s kritis as ‘Tyagabrahmopanishad’ would seem to be an exaggeration. The music in Tyagarajs’s kritis is enough to make his name immortal and the lesser mortals, the dry musicologists, need not and cannot add to the glory of the great composer by writing volumes about his sahitya. But what else can they possibly do?
There are many authors who have annotated Tyagaraja kritis in such too comprehensive detail as to make a musician, who is generally a literate, shun even knowing an outline meaning of even popular kritis.
Of these Tyagaraja and Shyama Sastry composed mainly in
Telugu while Dikshitar used Sanskrit for almost all of his compositions. A very prominent aspect here is that Telugu is a living language and Sanskrit is not