Executive Summary
This research report provides an exhaustive, multi-disciplinary analysis of the 12th-century Kannada Vachana “Āḍidarēnu Hāḍidarēnu” (What if one dances? What if one sings?), attributed to the statesman-mystic Basavanna. Situated at the intersection of theological reform, linguistic anthropology, and cognitive science, this document argues that Basavanna’s verse is not merely a devotional poem but a rigorous philosophical critique of "performative vacuity"—the disjunction between behavioral execution and internal consciousness.
By triangulating the text with the Sanskrit Siddhanta Shikhamani, the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary (DEDR), and modern theories of Artificial Intelligence (the "Chinese Room" argument) and flow states, the analysis reveals that Basavanna anticipated the "hard problem of consciousness" by distinguishing between the processing of sacred data (the parrot reading) and the experience of sacred reality (Bhakti). Furthermore, the report explores the sociological mechanism of Trividha Dasoha (Triple Service) as the proposed solution to this existential zombiehood, positing it as a radical restructuring of social capital. The study concludes with five distinct English translations, each calibrated to a different hermeneutic lens—literal, mystical, cognitive, sociological, and poetic—to demonstrate the Vachana’s boundless interpretative elasticity.
Chapter 1: The Ontological Crisis of the 12th Century
1.1 The Historical Event Horizon
The 12th century in Karnataka represented a seismic shift in the tectonic plates of Indian spirituality. The dominant religious paradigm was characterized by Sthavara (static) culture—temple-centric, priest-mediated, and socially stratified rituals. The Sharana movement, led by Basavanna, emerged as a counter-culture of the Jangama (moving/dynamic), asserting that the divine was not confined to stone edifies but resided within the moving body of the devotee.
Within this revolutionary context, the Vachana literature served as the primary weapon of deconstruction. Unlike the Vedas, which were frozen in Sanskrit and accessible only to the elite, Vachanas were composed in the vernacular Kannada, utilizing the metaphors of the agrarian and artisan classes. However, Basavanna faced a unique challenge: as the movement grew, it risked developing its own performative orthodoxy—a new set of rituals (singing Vachanas, wearing the Linga) that could be performed just as mechanically as the Vedic rites they replaced.
1.2 The Textual Artifact
The specific Vachana under scrutiny, numbered 207 in the Samagra Vachana Samputa
Transliterated Text (ISO-15919):
Āḍidarēnu, hāḍidarēnu, ōdidarēnu,
Trividha dāsōhavilladannakka?
Āḍadē navilu? Hāḍadē tanti? Ōdadē giḷi?
Bhaktiyilladavaranolla Kūḍalasaṅgamadēva.
The Core Interrogation:
The Vachana opens with a rhetorical barrage. The suffix -ēnu (what?) implies futility. "You danced—so what? You sang—so what?" This is a direct assault on the Cultural Capital of the time. In the court of King Bijjala, where Basavanna served as Treasurer, arts like dance, music, and scriptural recitation were high-status markers. Basavanna strips them of their social currency, reducing them to biological or mechanical reflexes unless they are catalyzed by Dasoha.
Chapter 2: Linguistic Anthropology and Etymological Forensics
To understand the weight of Basavanna’s argument, we must excavate the etymological roots of his chosen metaphors. The lexicon is aggressively Dravidian, rooting the critique in the indigenous experience rather than Sanskrit abstraction.
2.1 Navilu (Peacock): The Illusion of Agency
The word Navilu is of Dravidian origin. The Dravidian Etymological Dictionary (DEDR 2902) identifies cognates across the family: Tamil ñamali or mayil, Malayalam mayil, Tulu neyilu, and Kannada navilu.
In the Vachana, the peacock represents Biological Determinism. The peacock’s dance is a magnificent spectacle, characterized by symmetry, vibrancy, and rhythm. To the external observer, it appears to be a performance of great intent. However, ornithologically and philosophically, the dance is an instinctual response to hormonal triggers and environmental cues (rain/mating season). The peacock has no choice but to dance.
Basavanna uses Navilu to symbolize the ritualist who performs elaborate rites (Kriya) driven by the "instincts" of tradition, social expectation, or desire for reward (Kamyakarma). Just as the peacock’s dance is devoid of spiritual intent despite its beauty, the ritualist’s performance is devoid of Bhakti despite its precision. The "Navilu" is a biological machine executing a genetic code, just as the priest is a social machine executing a liturgical code.
2.2 Tanti (String): Mechanical Resonance
The term Tanti refers to a wire, string, or chord. While often associated with the Sanskrit tantra (loom), linguistic evidence in DEDR suggests a deep integration into Kannada notation for stringed instruments or telegraphy in later usage.
The Tanti represents Passive Instrumentation. A string has no voice of its own; it sings only when struck by an external agent. Its "singing" is purely a fundamental frequency response to tension and friction. It creates melody, but it does not experience melody.
By asking "Does the string not sing?", Basavanna critiques the chanters of sacred texts. If a human chanter produces the perfect phonetic vibration of a Mantra but lacks the internal consciousness of its meaning, they are ontologically identical to the Tanti—a medium of sound, not a vessel of spirit. This anticipates the critique of "lip-service" where the mouth moves (mechanical) but the heart (agent) is absent.
2.3 Gili (Parrot): The Trap of Rote Cognition
Gili (parrot) derives from DEDR 1572 (related to kili in Tamil/Malayalam).
In the Vachana, the parrot "reads" (ōdu). This is a satirization of the scholastic class (Pandits). A parrot can be trained to mimic human speech, reciting entire sentences or prayers. However, cognitive science confirms that while parrots possess high associative memory, their mimicry often lacks the semantic mapping that characterizes human language (though recent studies on African Greys suggest some cognition, the medieval metaphor holds: the parrot repeats what it hears without knowing why).
Basavanna equates the scholar who memorizes the Vedas and Shastras without practicing Dasoha to the parrot. They are "Stochastic Parrots"—processing statistical probabilities of sound sequences without a world-model of the divine. They process syntax but lack semantics.
2.4 Annakka: The Conditional Threshold
The term Annakka (or annaka) functions as a postposition meaning "until" or "up to that time".
Trividha dāsōhavilladannakka = "As long as/Until there is no Triple Service..."
This creates a conditional logic gate. The actions (Dancing, Singing, Reading) are not inherently evil; they are merely null (zero value) until the condition of Dasoha is met. Once Dasoha is present, the same actions transform from mechanical reflexes into Kayaka (worship).
Chapter 3: Comparative Theology: The Siddhanta Shikhamani Dialogues
The Siddhanta Shikhamani (SS), attributed to Renukacharya, is a foundational Sanskrit text of Veerashaivism. A comparative analysis between Basavanna’s Vachana and the SS reveals a profound dialectic between established theology and radical reform.
3.1 The Ontology of the Parrot
The Siddhanta Shikhamani utilizes the parrot metaphor in a radically different context. In the Shatsthala description within SS, the text describes the Jiva (soul) as a "new parrot" born in the sky of consciousness:
"A new parrot was born in the sky... Brahma became its cage, Vishnu, its measly food. And Rudra, its fetter... The toddler born even before these three Was devoured, he forgot his true nature."
11
Contrast Analysis:
In Siddhanta Shikhamani (The Ontological Victim): The parrot represents the Jiva (soul). It is innocent, ancient, and trapped by the "cage" of the gross body and the "fetter" of ignorance (Maya). The theological goal is to liberate this parrot through Shiva Yoga and ritual purification. The parrot is the subject of salvation.
In Basavanna’s Vachana (The Epistemological Imposter): The parrot represents the mindless reciter. It is not a victim to be saved but a behavioral model to be avoided. Basavanna is not concerned with the soul's entrapment in matter (ontology) but with the human's entrapment in hypocrisy (ethics).
While the SS seeks to free the parrot from the cage, Basavanna warns us not to become the parrot. The SS legitimizes the parrot's struggle; Basavanna mocks the parrot's superficiality.
3.2 The Authority of the Vedas
The Siddhanta Shikhamani explicitly attempts to harmonize Veerashaivism with the Vedic canon. It states:
"The Shivagama called Siddhanta is said to be acceptable to Veda... Veda and Siddhanta are one because they propound the same doctrine."
12
Basavanna, however, adopts a stance of Spiritual Empiricism. In Vachana 208 (often paired with the current text), he asks:
"Shastra ghanavembene? Karmava bhajisuttide!"
(Shall I call the Shastra great? It praises Karma!).1
By asking "Does the parrot not read?", Basavanna implies that Vedic recitation (Veda-ghosha) is accessible even to a bird. If a bird can perform the highest act of Brahminical culture (recitation), then that act cannot be the exclusive path to the divine. Basavanna de-skills the priesthood. He shifts the locus of authority from the Text (which a parrot can read) to the Experience (which only a Bhakta can feel).
3.3 Ritual vs. Flow
The SS prescribes specific rituals (Kriya) to attain Mukti. Basavanna’s Vachana suggests that Kriya without Bhava (feeling) is physics, not metaphysics. The "String" vibrates (Kriya), but it does not know the Raga (Bhava). This aligns with the Veerashaiva critique of Sthavara (static) ritualism. The SS provides the manual for the machine; Basavanna asks for the ghost in the machine.
Chapter 4: The Sociology of Trividha Dasoha
The hinge upon which the entire Vachana turns is Trividha Dasoha. Without this, all human activity is reduced to the "Peacock's Dance."
4.1 Defining the Triad
While modern interpretations by pontiffs like Dr. Shivakumara Swamiji of Siddaganga Mutt interpret Trividha Dasoha as the distribution of Anna (Food), Akshara (Education), and Ashraya (Shelter)
Tanu Dasoha (Surrender of the Body):
The body is not used for self-aggrandizement (like the Peacock displaying feathers) but is worn out in the service of the Jangama (society/God). It is the transformation of labor into worship (Kayakave Kailasa).
Mana Dasoha (Surrender of the Mind):
The mind does not hoard knowledge (like the Parrot hoarding words) but dissolves its ego into the Linga. It implies intellectual humility and the cessation of "I-ness" (Ahankara).
Dhana Dasoha (Surrender of Wealth):
Wealth is not accumulated for status (like the String's ornamentation) but is flowed back into the community.
4.2 The Anti-Capitalist "Gift Economy"
Basavanna’s Dasoha is a critique of accumulation. The Peacock accumulates attention; the Scholar accumulates knowledge; the Musician accumulates praise. Dasoha is the reverse flow—the dissemination of these resources.
Sociologically, this created a "Gift Economy" in the Anubhava Mantapa (Hall of Experience). If one "sings" (produces art) but does not offer it as Dasoha, they are extracting value from the community (attention/status) without returning spiritual value. Basavanna argues that such a person is a parasitic node in the social network, eventually rejected by the "System Administrator" (Kudalasangama Deva).
Chapter 5: Advanced AI Simulations and Cognitive Science
Basavanna’s 12th-century insights can be rigorously mapped onto 21st-century problems in Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence, revealing the timelessness of the "Zombie Problem."
5.1 The "Chinese Room" and the Sanskrit Parrot
Philosopher John Searle proposed the "Chinese Room" thought experiment: A person in a room acts as a computer, manipulating Chinese symbols according to a rulebook to provide perfect answers, despite understanding zero Chinese.
The Simulation: Imagine a sophisticated AI (Large Language Model) trained on the Vedas. It can generate perfect Sanskrit verses, correct intonation, and "read" the scriptures flawlessly.
Basavanna’s Audit: Basavanna would classify this AI as the ultimate Gili (Parrot). It "reads" (ōdidarēnu) perfectly. Yet, Kudalasangama Deva "does not accept it" (olla). Why? Because the AI lacks Bhakti (subjective phenomenological experience) and Dasoha (the capacity for self-sacrifice).
Conclusion: Basavanna identified the difference between Syntax (dancing/singing/reading) and Semantics (Devotion) eight centuries before computational linguistics. He asserts that syntax alone—no matter how complex—can never produce divinity.
5.2 Flow States vs. Rote Automata
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s concept of "Flow" describes a state where action and awareness merge.
The Peacock’s Flow (Biological): The peacock may experience a form of flow during its dance, but it is a "closed loop" flow—driven by instinct and serving the ego (reproduction). It is unconscious competence.
The Bhakta’s Flow (Transcendental): Basavanna demands a different kind of flow. When Dasoha is present, the singer enters a state where the "I" vanishes, not into instinct, but into the Linga.
Neuroscience of Chanting: Research indicates that rhythmic chanting (like the "String") induces delta/theta brainwaves associated with trance.
20 However, Basavanna warns that trance itself is not the goal. A trance without the ethical framework of Dasoha is merely a "neuro-chemical firework"—a pleasurable sensation for the brain, akin to the peacock’s hormonal rush, but spiritually inert.
5.3 Network Theory: The Greedy Node
If we view the Sharana society as a distributed network:
The Peacock Node: High connectivity, high signaling, consumes bandwidth (attention), but transmits zero value (Dasoha). This is a "Greedy Node."
The Dasoha Node: Receives input (grace/resources) and immediately redistributes it.
Simulation Result: A network of Peacocks collapses due to entropy (resource concentration). A network of Dasoha Nodes achieves homeostasis. Basavanna’s Vachana is essentially a protocol design for a sustainable, decentralized spiritual network.
Chapter 6: Five Distinct English Translations
To capture the multifaceted nature of this Vachana, a single translation is insufficient. The following five versions use different semantic keys to unlock specific dimensions of the text.
6.1 The Literal Translation
Focus: Strict fidelity to Kannada syntax and lexical roots.
"If one plays, what of it? If one sings, what of it? If one reads, what of it?
Unless there is the Three-fold Service (Trividha Dasoha)?
Does the peacock not play? Does the string not sing? Does the parrot not read?
Lord Kudalasangama does not want those without devotion."
6.2 The Interpretive Mystical Translation
Focus: Conveying the spiritual intent of 'Dasoha' and 'Bhakti'.
"What purpose lies in the dancer's step, the singer's note, or the scholar's chant,
If the soul has not surrendered Body, Mind, and Wealth in Service?
Look—the peacock dances in vain vanity;
The lute sings only when struck;
The parrot recites words it cannot know.
My Lord of the Meeting Rivers rejects the hollow performance;
He seeks the heart that bleeds devotion."
6.3 The Cognitive/Cybernetic Translation
Focus: The contrast between mechanical processing and conscious awareness.
"Mere execution of action—be it movement, melody, or study—is null data,
Lacking the integration of the Triple Consciousness.
Biological instinct drives the peacock's display;
Mechanical physics drives the wire's resonance;
Rote memory drives the parrot's speech.
Kudalasangama Deva filters out the zombies;
He accepts only the sentient signal of Bhakti."
6.4 The Sociological Radical Translation
Focus: The critique of elite culture and performative ritual.
"Why show off your high culture? Your classical dance? Your Vedic chanting?
Without the labor of Service, it is all waste.
Even a bird can strut; even a metal wire can hum; even a bird can mimic the texts.
Do not mistake skill for sanctity.
The Lord of the Confluence rejects your performance art;
He demands the revolution of the soul."
6.5 The Poetic Rhythmic Translation
Focus: Capturing the cadence and rhythm of the original Kannada.
"Danced? So what?
Sang? So what?
Read? So what?
If the Triple Gift is lost?
Doesn't the peacock dance the beat?
Doesn't the string strum the sweet?
Doesn't the parrot repeat the feat?
Those void of love,
Kudalasangama Deva will never meet."
Chapter 7: Conclusion: The Anatomy of Authenticity
The Vachana "Āḍidarēnu Hāḍidarēnu" is a masterclass in subtractive theology. Basavanna does not add new rituals; he subtracts the ego from the action.
Through linguistic analysis, we established that the use of Navilu and Gili was a deliberate strategy to degrade high-culture Brahminical rituals to the level of animal instinct.
Through comparative theology, we saw how Basavanna subverted the Siddhanta Shikhamani’s ontological parrot (the trapped soul) into an epistemological warning (the mindless mimic).
Through AI and Cognitive Science, we validated Basavanna’s insight that "processing power" (reading/singing) is distinct from "consciousness" (Bhakti). The "String" is the hardware; the "Parrot" is the software; but Dasoha is the user—the agent of will.
Ultimately, Basavanna argues that Kudalasangama Deva is not a spectator to be entertained by our talent. He is not impressed by the peacock’s feathers or the scholar’s memory. He is a participant waiting for the collapse of the separation between the doer and the deed. A dance without surrender is gymnastics; a song without devotion is acoustics; and a scripture without service is merely noise. The only currency accepted in the Confluence (Sangama) is the authenticity of the self, stripped of its performative masks.
References:
Vachana Text:
1 Linguistic Roots (DEDR):
2 (Navilu)4 (Tanti)7 (Gili).Siddhanta Shikhamani/Parrot:.
11 SS & Vedas:.
12 Cognitive Science/Flow:.
17 Dasoha:.
15 Basavanna vs Shastras:.
13
ಕಾಮೆಂಟ್ಗಳಿಲ್ಲ:
ಕಾಮೆಂಟ್ ಪೋಸ್ಟ್ ಮಾಡಿ