Kural 117 seems to settle the matter. One who stood impartial and remained in goodness may fall into poverty, and the world will not count that a loss. The verse is a reassurance, and it is given without qualification.
Kural 1046 withdraws it. Though a man has grasped sound doctrine clearly and spoken it well, says the chapter on poverty, the sense of a poor man's words comes to nothing. Parimelazhagar makes the humiliation sharper than the verse alone conveys. He glosses the doctrine as மெய்ந்நூற் பொருளைத் தெளிய அறிந்து சொன்னாராயினும், even though he has understood the matter of the true books clearly and spoken it, and the outcome as நல்கூர்ந்தார் சொல்லும் சொற்பொருள் இன்மையைத் தலைப்படும் — the sense of what the poor man says arrives at nothingness. He is not contradicted. He is not weighed at all.
The pair does reconcile, and where the reconciliation lives is worth stating plainly. The Tamil of 117 says உலகம், the world. Parimelazhagar does not. He writes வறுமை என்று கருதார் உயர்ந்தோர் — the high-minded do not regard it as poverty — and supplies the unspoken remainder himself: செல்வம் என்று கொள்ளுவர் என்பது குறிப்பெச்சம், that they will take it for wealth is the implied rest. The subject has quietly narrowed from the world to the few. 1046 speaks of the world as it is, and there is no conflict between what the discerning few honour and what the general run of people will hear.
What should be said as well is that a reader holding only the two verses cannot arrive at this. Both appear to speak of the world, and on their faces they say opposite things about whether poverty destroys a good man's standing. The resolution is not in Valluvar's words. It is in one substitution the commentator makes without announcing it, and a reader is owed the knowledge that the peace between these two verses is the commentator's work.