Sandhya Kathaसंध्या कथा

Sixteen Years Without a Word

Divya Sūri Caritam and the Guruparamparā Prabhāvam — The life of Nammāḻvār and of Madhurakavi Āḻvār

Tradition note. Madhurakavi's own eleven verses name Nammāḻvār, his father and his town, and say that he saw him and took him in. The silence, the tree, the light and the riddle come from the hagiographies, centuries later. The tamarind at Āḻvārtirunagari is still there and still venerated.

Before you begin. A newborn who does not cry or feed, and parents who leave him at a temple, can alarm a child who takes it literally. The telling gives the tradition's frame first — he was already full, already looking at something — and is precise that his parents gave him back, in the town where they went on living.

Ages 10+6 min alouda question worth a long walkknowing who the teacher is
Illustration for Sixteen Years Without a Word
Illustration

The first strange thing was that the baby did not cry.

Everybody in the room was waiting for it, the way you wait for it, and it did not come. He was breathing and he was well and he was entirely quiet.

The second strange thing was that he would not feed. Not weakly — he was not a sick child. He simply had no interest in it, the way a person has no interest in dinner when they are in the middle of something.

The third was his eyes, which he kept shut.

pause

His parents had wanted a child a long time and had gone to a temple and asked for one. Now they had him, and they sat and looked at him, and worked out something very hard to work out: he had not quite arrived here. He was somewhere else already, and full already, and looking at something already.

pause

So they did the thing the story is careful to describe properly. They did not leave him anywhere. They carried him to the temple at , where they had asked for him, and they gave him back.

And they set him down at the foot of an old tamarind tree in the temple ground, in the town where they went on living.

pause

He sat down under that tree. And then he sat there for sixteen years.

He did not speak in all that time, or eat, or sleep. He sat cross-legged with his eyes closed and the tamarind grew over him. The tree is still there and people still go and see it.

Children who were born after he sat down were sixteen by the time anything happened.

pause

What happened came from about as far away as it could.

Far north, a man named was on pilgrimage — older, learned, a long time travelling, and Mathurā and all the northern places.

One night he noticed a light low in the southern sky. Not a star. It was in the same place the next night, and the night after, and on the fourth he stopped arguing with himself, turned round and walked south.

pause

He walked south a long way, town after town, each time the light further on, until he came to a small place on the Tāmiraparaṇi river and it stopped and stayed.

And he looked, and under a tamarind tree in the temple ground there was a boy of sixteen sitting with his eyes shut.

pause

Now here is the thing about , who is the older one, and the travelled one, and the one who has read everything.

He did not wake him. He did not introduce himself. He did not explain about the light.

He asked him a question — a hard one, the kind you would put to a teacher — because he had worked out within about a minute who was the teacher here and who was not.

pause

If the small is born inside the great and lifeless, he asked, what will it eat, and where will it lie?

He meant the soul, which is small, inside a body, which is not alive by itself.

pause

And the boy who had not made a sound in sixteen years opened his eyes and said six words back to him.

That it will eat. There it will lie.

pause

The boy's name was Māṟaṉ, and nobody uses it. He lived to thirty-two — sixteen years silent, sixteen talking — and in the second half he made one thousand two hundred and ninety-six verses, and one of his four books is held to be the Tamil counterpart of the .

And the man who had walked from to ask him one question spent the rest of his life saying that he had no god of his own, only a teacher, and that this was enough.

slow down hereThey call him Nammāḻvār now — our own one. Not his name either. Something a whole people decided to call him.

Now turn to your child

Madhurakavi was older, had read more, and had travelled further. Why do you think he decided the boy was the teacher?

And if they shrug, you can leave it at this: Knowing more than someone and having more to learn from them are not opposites.

If they ask: “How did he live for sixteen years without eating?”

The tradition says he did, and does not explain it. What it is telling you is not a fact about food — it is that he was somewhere else the whole time, and that being there was enough to live on.

If they ask: “Why did his parents leave him?”

They did not leave him — they gave him back. They had asked for him at that temple, they understood he was not going to be theirs in the usual way, and they went on living in the same town. It is a different thing from walking away.

If they ask: “What does the answer mean?”

People have argued about those six words for a thousand years and they still do. One reading is about what a soul settles for; another is about what it really lives on. The story does not choose, and neither will I.

Something isn't right here

If a name, a detail or a tradition is wrong here, tell us. Nobody needs an account and we do not ask who you are — so please leave your own details out of the box.

More source-linked stories from Āḻvārs.

This is the complete telling. Sandhya Katha chooses one for your child's age and the calendar each night — free, nothing to install.

Open tonight's pick