PENANCE OF THE TONGUE
By
K. VISWANATHAM, M.A.
(Reader
in English, Andhra University)
All
human problems come back to the question of speech. Words may ignite the fuse
or pour oil on troubled waters. Beatrix’s brittle remark that Lord Mohun was
awaiting Lord Castlewood’s death to marry Lady Castlewood sets human boulders
cataracting and crashing to red ruin. How far and how disastrously words
influence or control thought is shown by Stuart Chase in ‘The Tyranny of
Words’. Communism–the word–throws a great continent off her balance and
Capitalism stinks in the nostrils of another. Due consideration to the
listener, propriety and moderation in the use of words, might prevent the
Gordian-knotting of human problems. Compliment may be like the encounter of dog
apes, but it does stop much barking or simian jargoning. Convention or
formality, though dry, is the grace of our life ‘red in tooth and claw’.
Etiquette is the measure of a nation’s development though the vitamins are
boiled out of it. Euphuism may be, and is, artificial moulding of language, but
euphemism is not a figure of speech merely. It is a figure of thought, and a
command of euphemism is a command of life and a conquest of culture. To say
that a fellow ‘kicked the bucket’ is an offensive way; to say that he was
gathered to the bosom of Abraham is a friendly way. The various figures of
Rhetoric are not a barren faggot of futile ingenuity but an attempt at thought
in as many charming ways as possible. Even abuse becomes the delicatest
compliment, as in the devotee’s words:
Kas
svardhuni vivekas te nayase papino’ divam
(Ganga! Is there
wisdom in you? You take even sinners to Heaven.) Abuse is purged of its
crudeness to look like its opposite, as in the words of a heroine to her Maid:
Yanmadartham
vilunapi dantairapi nakhairapi
(Maid! For my sake
your body is bruised by teeth and nails. A loyal confidante you!)
In
‘The Fairie Queene’ of Spenser (Book VI, Canto VI) the Squire and the Dame seek
the help of the Hermit to become whole:
No
wound, which warlike hand of enemy
Inflicts
with dint of sword, so sore doth light
As
doth the poysnous sting, which infamy
Infixeth
in the name of noble wight.
The Hermit advises
them to seek the cure in themselves:
First
learn your outward senses to refraine
From
things that stirre up fraile affection;
Your
eies, your eares, your tongue, your talk restraine
From
that they most affect, and in due termes containe.
The wounds that are
inflicted by a rabid tongue are a villainous gangrene. A harsh tongue is a
rabid dog and ought to be chained. To be blamed as some one that you are not is
the most unkindest cut of all. To condemn Karna as a hard-fisted curmudgeon, to
brand Christ as a self-seeker, to abuse hospitality as formality, to censure a
silent man as a blab–is to abuse words and make the tongue a poison duct; cobra
bite or scorpion sting is less harmful than a shrew’s eloquence.
In
his Plays Shakespeare deals with the pangs of the Heroes about their ruined
name. Hamlet asks his friend to ‘absent him from felicity awhile’ to tell his
story aright. Othello desires that nothing should be extenuate nor aught set
down in malice. The most memorable expression of this mood comes in the
Sonnets. Shakespeare who is said to be ‘gentle’ according to contemporary
witnesses (and it is by that gentle epithet, says Prof. Raleigh, that
Englishmen wish to remember their greatest Poet) shouts challengingly at the
top of his voice:
No,
I am that I am and they that level
At
me abuses reckon up their own.
These lines, says a
commentator, are his single and final self-criticism. They are almost appalling
in their superb brevity and concentrated insight; beside them even the pride of
Milton dwindles and grows pale, for here Shakespeare, for one revealing moment,
speaks not as though he were God’s elect but as though he were God Himself.
Shakespeare is aware that none is so superior to another as to censure him:
For
why should others’ false adulterate eyes
Give
salutation to my sportive blood?
Or
in my frailties why are frailer spies
Which
in their wills count bad what I think good?
These lines explain
Shakespeare’s understanding of sin and his almost divine compassion.
Philosophers might write the style of gods but they do not endure tooth-ache
patiently; they are as weak as water. We are all weak and we should not judge
and condemn but understand and interpret. “Lilies that fester smell far worse
than weeds.” Shakespeare is the Englishmen’s Christ, and Milton their
Rhadamanthus. Shakespeare, writes C. S. Lewis, is in one sense not only the
greatest love poet but the only love poet in English Literature. “He conceals
nothing and condemns nothing,” writes Dover Wilson. It is rather
ununderstandable why Greene attacked him.
Hang
up philosophy, cries Romeo, unless it can return Juliet to his arms. Hamlet
asks Polonius to use the players ‘better’. “Use everyone after his desert and
who should escape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.” The
Duke in ‘As You Like It’ condemns Jacques’ censuring tongue as a most foul sin.
One who condemns the world, said Burke wisely, condemns only oneself.
Nothing
is ever cherished by us so lovingly as a good word about us. ‘I am hurt past
surgery’, weeps Cassio. ‘Are you hurt?’ asks Iago. ‘No’, says Cassio, ‘my
reputation is gone.’ One whose name is ruined is hurt past surgery. Antony is
disqualified with very shame because he has offended reputation. One whose name
is besmirched is
Defaced,
deflowered and to death devote.
Arjuna is tempted by
Krishna by this appeal to the most strongly entrenched weakness of man:
Avachyavadamscha
bahunvadishyanti tavahitah
Nindantastava
samarthyam tato duhkhataram nu kim.
(Many a vile word will
thy enemies speak slandering thy strength. Could anything be more painful than
that?,
The
Gita in the 17th chapter speaks of three kinds of Penance (14-16)
(i)
of the Body,
(ii)
of Speech,
(iii)
of the Mind.
The worship of the
gods, of the twice-born, of teachers and the wise, purity, uprightness,
abstinence and non-violence constitute the Penance of the Body. Serenity of
mind, beneficence, silence, self-control and purity of heart are the penance of
the Mind:
What
is the Penance of the Tongue?
anudvegakaram
vakyam: inoffensive statement,
sat
yam: truthful,
privahitam:
pleasant and beneficial,
svadhyayabhyasanam:
recitation of the Vedas.
What
can be possibly regarded as the finest delicacy of utterance and unimpeachable
courtesy occurs in the Ramayana. In the last great fight with Ravana, Rama
tells the charioteer sent by Indra how he should drive the chariot and then
Valmiki makes him say:
smaraye
tvam na sikshaye,
one of those miracles
of poetry that turn up as if casually, and light up a whole personality and
suggest the culture of a nation. Rama tells him: I am just reminding you, not
instructing you. Perhaps Rama thought: Matali is the divine charioteer. Who am
I, a mortal, to instruct him? It may be like instructing a monkey in hopping or
an old man in coughing. Even if Rama instructed him it would not be a lapse.
But Rama will not be Rama if he did not say: na sikshaye. In another
context, passing by a lake, Rama hears melodies rising from beneath the waters
and asks his companion sage to explain to him the mystery if proper. To
know the measure of Valmiki’s culture one has only to count the number of times
expressions like vagvidamvarah, priyamvadah, etc., occur in the great
Epic. Chained by Rama’s nobility and fineness any woman other than Sita would
have conducted herself like Sita; any brother other than Bharata or Satrughna
would have clung to him as they did. Rama is the greatest and the finest and
the kingliest of men in literature. He is characterised as
Buddhiman
madhurabhashi purvabhashi priyamvadah.
It is the word
‘purvabhashi’ that gauges the height of Aryan culture and idealism. Elsewhere
he is smitapurvabhashi. The mellowness of Sanskrit culture is seen in
the pleasant aspect and words of even gods. One has to note prasannavadanam
dhyavet in the sloka about Vighneswara, or in ‘Srisukta’ ‘kam sosmitam’
……………sriyam’ etc.
Thucydides
makes Pericles say of Athens: We give free play to all in our public life and
carry the same spirit in our daily relations with each other; we have no black
looks or angry words for our neighbour if he enjoys himself in his own way.
The
art of conducting a controversy without acrimony or bitterness is a lost or
languishing art. Even in academic discussions–let alone the irremediable
political debates–crude verbal porcupines bristling with stinging quills are
thrown about. We need not conduct controversies like the Epic heroes on the
field of fight. I believe the Epic heroes use such barbed
speech to strike terror into the opponent or to stimulate their courage, as a
lone traveller whistles or sings to put the lid on his fears. Such speech is
the privilege of the game, though heroes of a higher cast refrain from immodest
boasting. A hero of the front rank is said to be an ‘avikatthana’. C. F.
Andrews once remarked that the controversy between Tagore and Gandhiji was a
measure of the culture attained by the country.
We
should be extremely careful in the use of words. There is an Egyptian saying
that as long as words remain within the lips we are their masters; but when
they are out we are their servants. An unkind word may set families flying
apart or create an ever-widening chasm between two nations. Kind words are
better than coronets or a royal feast. The elders say: Food that is given is
digested in a few hours, but a kind word uttered remains for ever and ever. A
kind word leaps across centuries of time or centuries of miles and throws a
bridge of love over yawning gulfs.
Even
in laughter purposeless laughter is said to be of the purest English make.
British humour is a kind of mysticism. Laughter which is supremely itself
without any ulterior motive is the ally of the Penance of the Tongue. When
advised by a doctor to walk on an empty stomach. Lamb replied, ‘Whose?’ That is
a story which the doctor would have delighted in broadcasting out of high
jinks.
Words
are such rascals that the law should bind them. Words have overtones and
undertones, and what one regards as an innocent word may be a red rag to
another. We have to cultivate the art of thinking through words and not with
words, as otherwise we become the slaves of words. Words should be the ‘ifrits’
of our minds; we should not become the ‘jinns’ of words. This is what is called
word independence or resistance to suggestion. Bombs lose much of their terror
by being called eggs; ‘wives and children in danger’, if repeated half a dozen
times, may create the wildest emotional stampede.
If
we use words strictly defining them, half the controversies will cease; if we
avoid emotive words, three-fourths of the conflicts can be evaded; if offensive
words are jettisoned, there is a cent per cent disarmament of minds and hearts;
if we constantly associate with high-souled persons, our very propensities to
use words that hurt may be effectively scotched.
The environment definitely shapes our linguistic
variety. ‘Speak that I may know thee’, is a profound maxim. HigginS in Shaw’s
play has so perfected his Phonetics that he easily spots the region of speech-sounds he listens to.
What we speak is What we are. The seawaves beat in a sailor’s speech as the
air-currents drift in an airman’s slang. The speech of the slaughter-house differs by the breadth of the whole
heavens from that of the hermitage. The story is told of two parrots having
been separated when young and
brought up, one in a slaughter-house and the other in a hermitage. The first
one shocked a tired traveller by his ‘Kill him! Murder him!’ into continuing
his journey till he reached the hermitage, where the other parrot uttered
heart-easing words like ‘Welcome, please! Rest awhile!’
Angry
words bite like falchions; soft Words are a spread of ‘Burnol’. By a well turned
compliment to the excellent wine, the soldiers of Augustus escaped from the
executioner’s axe. There is the popular saying that if our tongue is good, the
whole town will be good to us. A Samskrit sloka says: Lakshmi moves on the tip
of the tongue; friends and relatives are there; imprisonment is on the tongue’s
tip as also even death. Instead of saying crudely appreciatively that a woman’s
breasts are plump, one can say with a poet: Her ripening youth like a gracious
host is meeting half-way Kama (the god of love), the guest. In the Great March
to Meru the Pandavas drop, one by one, all except Dharma. When Arjuna sinks,
Bhima asks his brother and king why Arjuna the mighty warrior sank, and is told
that he once let slip the boast that he would singlehanded destroy the entire
host of the enemies in a single day. This boast, even if a slip of the tongue,
even if appropriate on the lips of a ‘maharatha’, was enough to strike
down Arjuna. What a noble courtesy even to the power of the enemy is implied in
that story! How gracefully does Kalidasa speak of Ahalya’s error: kshanakalatratam
yayau. He does not say that she was whored by Indra but
became for a moment his leman. In the Ramayana, Rama constantly checks Lakshmana:
whenever he is passionate against Kaikeyi, or instructs him to slur over the
episode.
Every
time a harsh word is said, Christ is crucified, the Buddha is denied and one’s
own true self is banished. If after a lapse of time we think of our
petty quarrels and stinging words, we are ashamed of our own speech. Anger is
temporary madness, Let us count a
hundred before we utter the one vitriolic word. Angry Words have
harvested only angrier words; we sow the wind and reap the whirlwind. A gentle
word calms the opponent, consoles the distressed, dissolves tension, stimulates
a person, mellows the mind of the speaker himself. Those who chastise and
revile others may exploit the gentleness of the victims. But those who come to
scoff may remain to pray.
Let
us go out into the world with a smile on our lips and a kind word on our
tongues. Of course the smile should not be fashion’s wear and the kindness a
pose. They should blossom out of an inner kindliness and charity. Even truth
should not be spoken offensively. There are some who speak rudely and claim
they are blunt and outspoken. But one can be frank and gentle. Such people
cover up their crudities by explanations. To be dispraised of some, as Milton
says, is praise indeed. Good old Gonzalo tells Sebastian:
The
truth you speak did lack some gentleness
And
time to speak it in: you rub the sore
When
you should bring the plaster.
Anything is removed by
its opposite. If vices are to be banished it should be by their opposites.
Bitterness is removed, by sweetness, not by a greater dose of bitterness. If so,
how can wars end wars? How can war-like speeches help the cause of Peace?
War-like preparations are a negation of the efforts towards Peace. The one who
achieved the Penance of the Tongue to the greatest extent in recent times was
Gandhiji. It is hard to discover in even a stray utterance of his even the
suggestion of harshness. His whole life is lighted up by that ‘toothless’ smile
(to which Romain Rolland draws our attention). There may be a tooth in others’
smiles but his is toothless. The toothless smile is the midwife of the
toothless speech, i. e., speech that does not bite:
‘He
never saide no vilenye unto no maner wight.’
In
his interpretation of Gandhiji, Stanley Jones writes: “The candid are not
courteous and the courteous are not candid. But Mahatma Gandhi was both, and he
was both at one and the same time. He spoke exactly what he thought and yet did
it so gently and courteously that you loved it, even when it was cutting across
your own views!”
He
was the perfect Architect of Courtesy.