Topic started by pm (@ 202.88.236.2) on Sat Mar 10 21:17:22 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

I have read Aurobindo's one particular statement wherein he has stated that both Tamil and Sanskrit descended from a common source,,,,he has told that certain missing links in sanskrit he has found them in Tamil.
I sometimes think that it could be true,,,in srilanka great fight was for 'sri' or 'thiru'..thinking that thiru is a pure tamil word,,,
but 'thiru' has its root in the vedic sanskrit word 'thri' or 'thra' ,, the word thrisulam denotes a sacred thing ,not thirisulam,,
even the word tamil is from dravid which is a sanskrit word.
The earliest Tamil grammar work as per legends is 'agathiam',,,which got its name from the word 'agasthyah'which is again sanskrit.
The other known and prevalent oldest Tamil grammar book is 'thol kappiyam',,,again 'kappiyam' is a degraded form of 'kavya' again a sanskrit word.
The Tamil works speak of three sangams,,,,again a sanskrit word meaning'meeting'.
The Sangam works hailed throughout the world are 'purananooru' and 'agananooru',,,,again sanskrit words puram and aham.
Could it be that Tamil is a degenerated form of Sanskrit or if Aurobindo's statement that both had some common ancestor be true??
(I here recollect one age old tamil legend which states that both sanskrit and tamil came out from the two sides of Shiva's udukkai-damaru in sanskrit.)

Responses:

• Old responses
  
• From: Elango (@ 203-195-199-21.now-india.net.in) on: Fri Jan 23 07:37:28
  
  PM,
  
  You are mistaken in your comments while starting this topic by the way you mention words alike Sangham ,AGAM, PURAM are all sanskrit.
  
  Actually what ever you thought were all Tamil words got in to Sanskrit.
  
  For Example it is not Sangam in Tamil, it is actually "Changham", which is purely a TAMIL WORD.
  
  TAMIL is the language of the lords, for example take any incarnations of the lords they did speak only Thamizh.
  
  Example Lord Rama (Chandiran), Krishna, THIRUpathi Srinivasan and Padmavathi(Born as a Chola Kings foster daughter.), ANDAL and the Hamsams of the Lord Vishnu AZHWARS, NAYANMARS etc...
  
  HOPE NOW EVERY BODY IS CLEAR!!!
  
  Thanks
  
  Elango
  
  
• From: Gogiya (@ 57.73.12.98) on: Fri Jan 23 12:23:44 EST 2004
  
  Just for a thoughts!!!!!
  
  The Atharva Veda is
  also known as ‘Brahma Veda’ or in its meaning as the Devine Knowledge. An
  Analysis of the Vedas reveal that ‘Brahma’ is actually Abraham, where the
  initial letter A in Abraham is moved to the end making it Brahma. This analysis
  is accurate when one writes the two words in Arabic script, a language close to
  that spoken by Prophet Abraham. Similarly, Abraham’s first wife Sarah is
  mentioned in the Vedas as Saraswati, and Prophet Nuh (Noah of The Flood) is
  mentioned as Manuh or Manu. Some Pundits consider Atharva Veda as the Book of
  Abraham. Prophets Ismail (Ishmael) and Ishaq (Isaac) are named Atharva and
  Angira, respectively, in the Vedas.
  
  There are many languages combined into sanskrik.It is absolutely true!. Many Sanskrit words have borrowed from Arabic and Hebrew with a slight change as
  was shown in the examples of Brahma, Saraswati and Manu.It appears that this word is derived from the Hebrew word
  Ma-Hekha (), which means thy brethren (e.g., And he (Ishmael) shall dwell in the
  presence of all his brethren. Genesis 16:12; i.e., Ismaelites are the brethren
  of the Israelites). In the context of Biblical scriptures this word meant a
  descendant of Prophet Ismail (Ishmael), and it is well known that Muhammad (s)
  is a descendant of Prophet Ismail through his second son Kedar. Those who can
  read Arabic Script can easily see that a mistake in separating Ma from Hekha
  will produce a single word ‘Malhekha,’ and when adapted in another tongue like
  Sanskrit might sound like Malechha.
  
  
  
  
• From: Ed (@ 202.9.176.202) on: Thu Jan 29 18:29:39 EST 2004
  
  Theres a new tamil bible that has been completely tamilised and is increasingly being followed in churches. of course it has no thirukkural.
  
  
• From: Blue (@ 62.85.49.47) on: Thu Feb 5 11:17:36 EST 2004
  
  I thought Tamil and Sanskrit were as old as each other, but Sanskrit just wasn't good enough to last as long as Tamil did. Tamil lives and is evolving into one of the world's richest language.....think it is spoken in so many countries .....
  
  
• From: John (@ 12.163.39.254) on: Thu Feb 5 12:11:39 EST 2004
  
  Ed,
  Any idea who translated our old Tamil Bible? it is full of sanskrit words.. Thanks for giving info about the fully Tamilised Bible. Hope we see simple words like 'pen' (woman) instead of 'sthree'.
  
  
• From: Prakash Gomathinayagam (@ dhcp16479045.woh.rr.com) on: Thu Feb 5 20:40:12 EST 2004
  
  Hi,
  In Unicode system, Tamil has been allocated only 128 character positions. Unicode system is using iscii ( Central goverment's Indian lanaguge encoding standard). iscii has lot of bugs and also not-efficient for tamil (approxmately 3-times slower). please read below the articles and sign the petition. Tamil has already got lot of efficient encoding sytesm, which are already in use. Unicode is an international standard, So an efficient encoding system has to be used for tamil. So we have to raise our voice to get unicode to be re-constructed for tamil (Which is highly feasible) ...
  And don't forget, Pass it on ....
  
  In Tamil : http://www.kanithamizh.org/unicode-il-tamil.htm
  In English: http://www.tamil.net/people/sivaraj/tamil_unicode.html
  
  IMPROTANT :
  SIGN THE PETITION
  http://www.petitiononline.com/ta4e5234/petition.html
  
  Cheers,
  Prakash
  
  
• From: jldf (@ wc09.ym.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com) on: Fri Feb 6 17:24:45 EST 2004
  
  Bible was written by Tamilian and in Tamil langauge originally.
  
  
• From: babu (@ 61.247.245.252) on: Sun Feb 15 10:11:30 EST 2004
  
  Brahmins are frauds, they have cheated whole dravidian lot and even cheated thiruvalluvar logic and made him hindu without any means, when his original name was kunda kunda and he talks of Adhi bhagwan( first thirthankar).
  He cannot be related to brahminism or sanskritism.
  He was a sraman monk.
  Brahmins had nothing of own so they renamed rechristined, fabricated dravidian culture to their taste, by avatar funda and mutilation. Not even a single temple (ancient) belongs to brahmins they tookover from dravids and renamed. This is one of the reason why gods of south are differntly known from Hinduism of north.
  
  Brahmin survival has made caste among dravids and brahmin religion. Even today you will find lot of hindu temples with mutilated jain idols and some remains can still be traced with hands cut or head cut. Similarly in Mamallapuram one can find jain idols head being chopped and from some places even removed.
  
  It it all brahmin technology which killed original culture, religion, language, heritage of dravids, AVATRIFIED most of dravid gods.
  The prooves are 100s of stone inscription found dating back to 3 B.C. belonging to Kunda kunda religion and heritage.
  
  
• From: babu (@ 61.247.248.120) on: Wed Feb 18 15:40:01 EST 2004
  
  there are so many temples are converted to Shiva temple, originally belonged to Adinath thirthankar whose symbol is a bull.
  
  the story is that all Idols are removed and lingam is kept there. for instance we can still find remains of Jain temple in famous Thiruvanmalai Temple and so many jain idols are also found burried in and around the temple. Stone scripts would clearly reveal that this temple was Adinath temple.
  Many Dravidian Jain even today believe that Adinath Thirthankar in Tamilnadu was called as Sivan by most of dravidians who converted to Shaivism and those temples are even today depicts the real history burried. there is good amount of research has been initiated by some historians in this field
  
  
  
• From: Elumpan (@ 142.76.1.62) on: Thu Feb 26 15:24:56 EST 2004
  
  -----I have read Aurobindo's one particular statement wherein he has stated that both Tamil and Sanskrit descended from a common source,,,,he has told that certain missing links in sanskrit he has found them in Tamil.
  I sometimes think that it could be true,,,in srilanka great fight was for 'sri' or 'thiru'..thinking that thiru is a pure tamil word,,,
  but 'thiru' has its root in the vedic sanskrit word 'thri' or 'thra' ,, the word thrisulam denotes a sacred thing ,not thirisulam,,
  even the word tamil is from dravid which is a sanskrit word.
  The earliest Tamil grammar work as per legends is 'agathiam',,,which got its name from the word 'agasthyah'which is again sanskrit.
  The other known and prevalent oldest Tamil grammar book is 'thol kappiyam',,,again 'kappiyam' is a degraded form of 'kavya' again a sanskrit word.
  The Tamil works speak of three sangams,,,,again a sanskrit word meaning'meeting'.
  The Sangam works hailed throughout the world are 'purananooru' and 'agananooru',,,,again sanskrit words puram and aham.
  Could it be that Tamil is a degenerated form of Sanskrit or if Aurobindo's statement that both had some common ancestor be true??
  (I here recollect one age old tamil legend which states that both sanskrit and tamil came out from the two sides of Shiva's udukkai-damaru in sanskrit.) -----
  
  pm why don't you say Thamizh came from sanskirit...it would be easier than touching your nose by brining your behind the head (which is un-necessary) and it will also tell what you are trying to say. Now you see those examples you just gave above proves that originated by Thamizh or another source that had lot of Thamizh. Now to the idea of Dravidam ...again there were no community which were called Dravidans until the arrival of Aryans from Afghanistan to now day India. Now the word Thamizh which was mis-pronounced by those of Foreign origins (specificly Aryans) which later on became the name of Thamizh people and then as some Thamizh people began to speak broken Thamizh to Thamizh and Sanskirit mixed ..there the new languages were formed and later on the Dravidan pointed out to all of the people who are Thamizh speaking and to the Thamizh origin in South Asia. Now the thing about Sivaniyam is very clear that Thamizh people prayed their God 'kottavai' or 'kAli' and Sivan. There weren't pictures of Sivan around 4,000 years ago or before but the 'sivalingam' existed from the start of Sivaniyam which still can be dated beyond 5,000 years ago or so. Now When sanskirit speaking people Came to 'India' their first mission was to bring down Sivaniyam and 'saiva neri ((again saiva neri is not a religion but rules that are built to live life according to it and which is believed to help mankind and you can easily get that from the following sentence (mAenmaikoL saiva nEethi vizhangkua ulagamellAm)). Now when the Sanskirit speaking or Aryans tried to influence their religion which was 'vaithikam' into Thamizh people (who were following 'sivaniyam (saivaneri)) and they failed and infact the opposite thing happened in the past 2 thousand years or so where the Aryans were influenced by saiva neri and there fore the ideal concept of non-religious belief to lead mankind in a good life became as religion by those Aryans. Then the influences of Buddhism and Jainism made 'saiva neri' to be more religious than what it was believed to be at the start and you can see this in the 'silapathikaaram' where Ilango tries to show the fact by singing about the sun first instead of God beside the fact that he was trying to bring all Thamizhan together. Not only that but also in Thirukkural the first kural is wrong because the fact is lot of Thamizh scholars belief that the first 30 kurals or so didn't exist when it was written by Thiruvalluvar originally and when you analyze the first kural for instance
  "Akata muthal ezhuthellam aathi
  pakavan muthatae ulaku"
  Now first thing is pakavan is a sanskirit word that came into Thamizh during the 12th century A.D or so.
  Second thing is during valluvar time it couldn't have been written like that and that valluvar wrote this kural for all mankinds and at that time there wasn't any religion but there were rules that were forced by our ancestors to live the life and when i mean it was told to live the life happily anyway and if valluvar wrote that kural he would have wrote it like this:
  
  Akata muthal Ezhuthellam aathi
  pakalan muthatae ulaku
  
  pakalan = kathiravan which mean sun in English so what valluvar would have tried to say would have been the fact that like the 'a' the akatam is the first letter in all of the letters that make a language and similarly the Sun is the beginning of our solar system and the theory is that later on someone added 30 kurals or that it was written differently with different scientific prespective and was converted after or during the 'pakthi' or pallavar illakiyam in Thamizh then someone made mistakes in translating it like 'la' to 'va' anyway I am saying to say that the fable stories of Thamizh came from one side of Sivan and sanskirit came from the other side is a myth that is infact doesn't make SENSE!
  
  

Want to post a response?