One of Tyagaraja's most famous kritis is "nagumomu ganaleni". It is a favorite with both vocalists and instrumentalists. We are reminded of masterly renditions by Semmangudi and an altogether novel interpretation of the same song by Balamuralikrishna. Instrumentalists from Mandolin Srinivas to the violin wizard Kunnakudi loved to perform this piece. The song has a theatrical feel to it as it builds up tempo...reaches a crescendo and thereafter, comes down in cascades of notes. It is a favorite at all marriage functions where nadaswaram vidvans latch onto this kriti with great gusto. We know all this.
In this essay, we look at the kriti to understand Tyagaraja's frame of mind when he composed this piece. The main theme behind this song is one of anguish. Tyagaraja is pained that he cannot see Rama's charming face ("nagu" - beautiful, "momu" - face) anymore and accuses Rama of indifference. He says that he pines to see Rama's smiling face but Rama, not understanding Tyagaraja's plight (naajaali thelisi), chooses to stay away. For emphasis, he words this as a question to Rama, addressing him as "Hey Raghuvara! Don't you understand my plight, and still, you choose to stay away?" Tyagaraja deliberately chooses to address Rama as Raghuvara and almost mocks him with that epithet. Rama is supposedly the best in the Raghu clan "Raghu-vara", a clan which had an unbroken chain of illustrious kings. We know about Dileep, Raghu, Aja and Dasharatha...all ancestors of Rama, and each a glowing pendant in that necklace. King Dileep had such a noble heart that he was willing trade places with a cow so that the lion could eat him instead of the cow. Rama belongs to this clan and yet, shows least empathy for Tyagaraja. He almost admonishes Rama through this address as "Raghuvara". The Pallavi ends with this.
In the anupallavi, Tyagaraja takes certain possibilities on why Rama could be indifferent towards him and dismisses those reasons too. He says...it is likely that Rama may be busy. He is a chakaravarti with so many people and things to attend to, that it is possible that he may miss Tyagaraja's earnest call. But Rama will be surrounded by attendants, whose job would be to remind him on what he needs to do. Tyagaraja questions...ok...Rama may be preoccupied...but what about these attendants? Have they forgotten their duty? He also explicitly says that it is unlikely that these attendants will be partial and leaves the sentence open. It is for us to interpret the rest. By taking the Rama's attendants also out of the picture, the needle of accusation is squarely on Rama. Yes, the attendants did remind, yes, the attendants did convey Tyagaraja crying himself hoarse, but Rama still chose to be indifferent. Interestingly, Tyagaraja starts the anupallavi with the phrase "nagaraaja dhara", the one who lifted the mountain. Tyagaraja never bothers about chronology. For him, every manifestation is Rama alone. Krishna lifted "nagaraaja"...the king of mountains and thereby, saved entire Gokulam. He could save the whole of Gokulam through one act of grace, and now, when Tyagaraja explicitly asks for his grace, Rama does not oblige him. "Nagaraaja dhara" can also mean the Lord as kurma avatara, where he helped the Devas by carrying the entire mountain on his back, but interpreting it as "govardhana giri dhara" fits the context more appropriately. The anupallavi ends with this.
The charanam starts with "khaga-raaja". The anupallavi began with "naga-raaja" and here, it is "khaga-raaja" creating a nice alliteration. "Khaga-raaja" is the king of birds, i.e. Garuda. It is also appropriate to start the "charanam" with Garuda who is often called "periya tiruvadi", "holy feet". It is as if the charanam should start with charana (feet)! Here, he questions Rama (in his form as Vishnu), whether Garuda does not obey his orders, perhaps? He enquires whether Garuda says that the distance from the sky "gagana"...i.e. Vaikunta..to the earth is too far...bahu dooram? Though Tyagaraja leaves it as an open question, here too, the implicit assumption is the same. It is unlikely that Garuda would have complained. After all, when the elephant Gajendra was in pain and crying for help, it was Garuda who immediately swung into action. Again, the tone is one of accusation. Tyagaraja says...definitely Garuda would not have said that. It is Rama and his stone-like heart, that is the only reason why he chooses to stay away from Tyagaraja.
Though all the previous lines in this song are one of accusation, Tyagaraja does not end the song in the same vein. He implores Rama even more. He calls him "jagamele paramatma", the Lord of the whole universe and says, other than Him, to whom can he cry his heart out ("moralida") (like Gajendra did)? He pleads with Rama to shun his indifference and forthwith come and bless him! The song ends on this note.
Tyagaraja's songs are his personal conversations with Rama. Nagumomu-ganaleni is an earnest cry by Tyagaraja asking Rama to give up his indifference "upeksha" and immediately come and bless him with the vision of his beautiful face.
This song can be looked in a philosophical way too. There is a verse in the Upanishad which says- "satyasyaa pihitam mukham". We are not able to see the Lord's face "satyasya mukham" because it is covered- "pihitam". In the context of the Upanishad, the Lord has been already defined as "Truth" (satya), the One Truth that fills the entire universe "ishaavaasyam idam sarvam". It is this all pervading Being, which is here referred as "satya" and the Upanishad says...that that Being's face is covered! How can....that...which is all pervading...its face be covered...we will ask. The Upanishad itself answers..."hiranmayena paatrena"....covered with a golden-lid. The intent here is to say...that our eyes and mind are so extroverted (conveyed through the word "gold"), that we successfully miss to see that which is everywhere! It is as if, we cover our eyes with the lucre of gold and all else and fail to see the face of that Being which is everywhere! This is the "nagumomu" that we miss.
After all, he is "sahasra sheersha purushah"...with a 1000 heads...and "vishvatomukhah" "with faces everywhere". All the faces we see, whether a human's or an animal's or an insect's....they are His faces. That being the case, how can we miss to see this "nagumomu"? If we are still successfully missing, it means, we lack the divya-chakshu, the "divine eye of wisdom" to appreciate all faces as His beautiful faces.
Hence, we pray for his grace, so that we can finally gain this "eye of wisdom". Tyagaraja's cry of anguish can be taken as this cry for grace. The indifference that Tyagaraja ascribed to Rama previously, is owned up here, as our indifference, our inability to see the obvious.
The Upanishad continues..."yat te roopam kalyaanatamam tat tey pashyaami"...I pray for that grace so that I can "see" (pashyaami) i.e. appreciate the Truth which is all mangala "kalyaanatamam". And further says...that Truth is everywhere, in "that sun" (asau purushah) and then, slowly adds..."soham asmi"....in me too!
Thus, the Upanishad begins by saying Truth's face is covered and I am unable to see it...just like Tyagaraja says and then concludes by saying...how can I miss that Truth...when it is all around...in the sun up there...as well as in me!?
In this essay, we look at the kriti to understand Tyagaraja's frame of mind when he composed this piece. The main theme behind this song is one of anguish. Tyagaraja is pained that he cannot see Rama's charming face ("nagu" - beautiful, "momu" - face) anymore and accuses Rama of indifference. He says that he pines to see Rama's smiling face but Rama, not understanding Tyagaraja's plight (naajaali thelisi), chooses to stay away. For emphasis, he words this as a question to Rama, addressing him as "Hey Raghuvara! Don't you understand my plight, and still, you choose to stay away?" Tyagaraja deliberately chooses to address Rama as Raghuvara and almost mocks him with that epithet. Rama is supposedly the best in the Raghu clan "Raghu-vara", a clan which had an unbroken chain of illustrious kings. We know about Dileep, Raghu, Aja and Dasharatha...all ancestors of Rama, and each a glowing pendant in that necklace. King Dileep had such a noble heart that he was willing trade places with a cow so that the lion could eat him instead of the cow. Rama belongs to this clan and yet, shows least empathy for Tyagaraja. He almost admonishes Rama through this address as "Raghuvara". The Pallavi ends with this.
In the anupallavi, Tyagaraja takes certain possibilities on why Rama could be indifferent towards him and dismisses those reasons too. He says...it is likely that Rama may be busy. He is a chakaravarti with so many people and things to attend to, that it is possible that he may miss Tyagaraja's earnest call. But Rama will be surrounded by attendants, whose job would be to remind him on what he needs to do. Tyagaraja questions...ok...Rama may be preoccupied...but what about these attendants? Have they forgotten their duty? He also explicitly says that it is unlikely that these attendants will be partial and leaves the sentence open. It is for us to interpret the rest. By taking the Rama's attendants also out of the picture, the needle of accusation is squarely on Rama. Yes, the attendants did remind, yes, the attendants did convey Tyagaraja crying himself hoarse, but Rama still chose to be indifferent. Interestingly, Tyagaraja starts the anupallavi with the phrase "nagaraaja dhara", the one who lifted the mountain. Tyagaraja never bothers about chronology. For him, every manifestation is Rama alone. Krishna lifted "nagaraaja"...the king of mountains and thereby, saved entire Gokulam. He could save the whole of Gokulam through one act of grace, and now, when Tyagaraja explicitly asks for his grace, Rama does not oblige him. "Nagaraaja dhara" can also mean the Lord as kurma avatara, where he helped the Devas by carrying the entire mountain on his back, but interpreting it as "govardhana giri dhara" fits the context more appropriately. The anupallavi ends with this.
The charanam starts with "khaga-raaja". The anupallavi began with "naga-raaja" and here, it is "khaga-raaja" creating a nice alliteration. "Khaga-raaja" is the king of birds, i.e. Garuda. It is also appropriate to start the "charanam" with Garuda who is often called "periya tiruvadi", "holy feet". It is as if the charanam should start with charana (feet)! Here, he questions Rama (in his form as Vishnu), whether Garuda does not obey his orders, perhaps? He enquires whether Garuda says that the distance from the sky "gagana"...i.e. Vaikunta..to the earth is too far...bahu dooram? Though Tyagaraja leaves it as an open question, here too, the implicit assumption is the same. It is unlikely that Garuda would have complained. After all, when the elephant Gajendra was in pain and crying for help, it was Garuda who immediately swung into action. Again, the tone is one of accusation. Tyagaraja says...definitely Garuda would not have said that. It is Rama and his stone-like heart, that is the only reason why he chooses to stay away from Tyagaraja.
Though all the previous lines in this song are one of accusation, Tyagaraja does not end the song in the same vein. He implores Rama even more. He calls him "jagamele paramatma", the Lord of the whole universe and says, other than Him, to whom can he cry his heart out ("moralida") (like Gajendra did)? He pleads with Rama to shun his indifference and forthwith come and bless him! The song ends on this note.
Tyagaraja's songs are his personal conversations with Rama. Nagumomu-ganaleni is an earnest cry by Tyagaraja asking Rama to give up his indifference "upeksha" and immediately come and bless him with the vision of his beautiful face.
This song can be looked in a philosophical way too. There is a verse in the Upanishad which says- "satyasyaa pihitam mukham". We are not able to see the Lord's face "satyasya mukham" because it is covered- "pihitam". In the context of the Upanishad, the Lord has been already defined as "Truth" (satya), the One Truth that fills the entire universe "ishaavaasyam idam sarvam". It is this all pervading Being, which is here referred as "satya" and the Upanishad says...that that Being's face is covered! How can....that...which is all pervading...its face be covered...we will ask. The Upanishad itself answers..."hiranmayena paatrena"....covered with a golden-lid. The intent here is to say...that our eyes and mind are so extroverted (conveyed through the word "gold"), that we successfully miss to see that which is everywhere! It is as if, we cover our eyes with the lucre of gold and all else and fail to see the face of that Being which is everywhere! This is the "nagumomu" that we miss.
After all, he is "sahasra sheersha purushah"...with a 1000 heads...and "vishvatomukhah" "with faces everywhere". All the faces we see, whether a human's or an animal's or an insect's....they are His faces. That being the case, how can we miss to see this "nagumomu"? If we are still successfully missing, it means, we lack the divya-chakshu, the "divine eye of wisdom" to appreciate all faces as His beautiful faces.
Hence, we pray for his grace, so that we can finally gain this "eye of wisdom". Tyagaraja's cry of anguish can be taken as this cry for grace. The indifference that Tyagaraja ascribed to Rama previously, is owned up here, as our indifference, our inability to see the obvious.
The Upanishad continues..."yat te roopam kalyaanatamam tat tey pashyaami"...I pray for that grace so that I can "see" (pashyaami) i.e. appreciate the Truth which is all mangala "kalyaanatamam". And further says...that Truth is everywhere, in "that sun" (asau purushah) and then, slowly adds..."soham asmi"....in me too!
Thus, the Upanishad begins by saying Truth's face is covered and I am unable to see it...just like Tyagaraja says and then concludes by saying...how can I miss that Truth...when it is all around...in the sun up there...as well as in me!?
Thanks!
ReplyDelete