संत साहित्य
Work in progress. Translations and commentary are AI-generated and may contain inaccuracies or hallucinations — please use your own judgement and check against the original sources.
संत साहित्य · Tukārām · Abhanga 2780 of 4582

Abhanga 2780

A useful substance-vs-appearance verse. Experience speaks through the voice; one's inner-dhyāna is the source. The chikā-latex isn't milk even if it looks white. Each kind shows its color. The firefly's light is just around its own backside. The diagnostic-tests: (1) does the voice come from anubhava or imitation?; (2) is the appearance-of-substance the actual-substance?; (3) is the self-illumination genuine, or just lighting one's own backside? The khadyota image is especially-useful for the self-styled-luminaries.

Distinguishing anubhava-speech from appearance-imitation
Recognizing the latex-not-milk-even-if-white test
The wry firefly-around-its-backside image of self-illumination

The verse

अनुभवें वदे वाणी । अंतर ध्यानीं आपुलें ॥१॥ कैंची चिका दुधचवी । जरी दावी पांढरें ॥ध्रु.॥ जातीऐसा दावी रंग । बहु जग या नावें ॥२॥ तुका म्हणे खद्योत ते । ढुंगाभोंवतें आपुलिया ॥३॥

Literal translation

Anubhave vade vāṇīexperience speaks through the voice; antara dhyānī āpule(through) one's own inner dhyāna. Kaiñcī chikā dūdha-chaviwhere is milk-taste in chikā (latex/sap); jarī dāvī pāṇḍhareeven if it shows white. Jātī-aiśā dāvī rangaeach jātī (kind) shows its (own) ranga (color); bahu jaga yā nāvemany in the world by these names. Tukā says: khadyota tē — ḍhungā-bhōmvate āpuliyāthe khadyota (firefly) — around its own ḍhungā (backside).

What it means

A short substance-vs-appearance verse. Anubhave vade vāṇī — antara dhyānī āpuleexperience speaks through the voice — through one's own inner dhyāna. The principle: the voice expresses what the inner-dhyāna actually-contains. Speech is the output of inner-content.

The dhrūpada: kaiñcī chikā dūdha-chavi — jarī dāvī pāṇḍharewhere is milk-taste in chikā (latex/sap)? — even if it shows white. The chikā — the white-latex-sap of certain plants — looks like milk but has no milk-taste. Appearance is not substance. The white-color doesn't make the latex milk.

The second verse: jātī-aiśā dāvī ranga — bahu jaga yā nāveeach kind shows its own color — many in the world by these names. Each jātī (type) is identified by its ranga (color, character). The world has many things named by their kind-color.

The close has a witty image: khadyota tē — ḍhungā-bhōmvate āpuliyāthe firefly — (its light is) around its own backside. The khadyota (firefly) emits light from its ḍhungā (backside, posterior). The image is wry: the firefly thinks it's lighting the world, but the light is just around its own backside. The self-illuminated-claimer who only-illuminates-his-own-rear.

This is a sharp anti-pretender image. Compare 2767's royal-swan-called-cattle, 2740's poison-called-amrta. Tukārām is consistent on this theme.

For someone today

A useful substance-vs-appearance verse. Experience speaks through the voice; one's inner-dhyāna is the source. The chikā-latex isn't milk even if it looks white. Each kind shows its color. The firefly's light is just around its own backside. The diagnostic-tests: (1) does the voice come from anubhava or imitation?; (2) is the appearance-of-substance the actual-substance?; (3) is the self-illumination genuine, or just lighting one's own backside? The khadyota image is especially-useful for the self-styled-luminaries.

Where this applies