Sanskrit is purely a Dravidian Origin !!

[Nara]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

I love the sound of Ghanam, the cascading and at the same time advancing repetition does give the kind of high the best music can give. However, in the past, and to a large extent in the present as well, a lot is made of Sanskrit -- the perfect language, deva bhasha, the mother of all language, and much more.

The truth is, for all its greatness, it is nothing much more than any other language. It borrowed from other languages, particularly Tamil, just as much as any other language. It is no more perfect than any other language. It has its own shortcomings, it lacks many sounds, like ழ ள ஓ ஏ sounds. The language of Bushmen of Africa can give Sanskrit a run for its money in number of sounds they can depict.

Sanskrit is a great language, it holds in its bosom much of Indian intellectual tradition. But, Brahmins have used Sanskrit as a means of separation, as a means of enforcing Brahminical supremacy. It is undeniable that it carries this stain as well.

Please read the following of Dr. George Hart in this context.

"Sanskrit has borrowed quite as much from Dravidian as Dravidian has from Sanskrit. Tamil has borrowed more words from Sanskrit than Sanskrit has from Dravidian. It is a trivial thing for a language to borrow vocabulary. But when it uses another language's syntax to form the way it expresses things, and uses another language's phonology for its sounds, that is really profound influence.

The fact is, Sanskrit HAS been influenced in this way by Dravidian. Of course, some Dravidian languages have also borrowed Sanskrit sounds (bh, etc.) But none of the four Dravidian languages I have read has borrowed anything from Sanskrit syntax that I can identify. Much of the syntax of Sanskrit is Dravidian, and it has a large Dravidian vocabulary. Its system of phonetics is profoundly influenced by Dravidian -- Indo-Aryan is the only IE family with retroflexes."
​

JK, for all his outlandish and unsusbtantiated claims (IMO), may have some kernel of truth in what he says.

Cheers!

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri. Nara, Greetings.

But, Brahmins have used Sanskrit as a means of separation, as a means of enforcing Brahminical supremacy.

This comment is uncalled for. I agree with your message in post #51, bar the quoted portion.Brahminism can be practised by anyone (need not be brahmins) using any language ( need not be Sanskrit) as long as the vulnerables don't understand that language. Your targetting brahmins while talking about a language is uncalled for.

Anyone including an illeterate can speak Sanskrit if they learned it.

Jhiri comes under Rajgarh district of Madhya Pradesh. Total population of the village is 976 and all the people including small children, women, elder people, school-going children, literate and illiterate speak fluently in Sanskrit.

Sanskrit Speaking Village !! | Krishna.com

And this...... eNidhi India: Sanskrit village Mathur near Shimoga

Cheers!

 

[saidevo]

namaste everyone.

Here is the counter to Nara's quote from George Hart of UC Berkeley in post #44:

What Hart tries to do here is inculcate in a subtle way a contempt for sanskrit when he says that using sanskrit words in tamil diminishes elegance in tamil. Had this really been true, Subramanya Bharati--the greatest tamil poet of 20th century India--would not have freely used sanskrit origin words in his tamil writings. It is ridiculous to conceive that George Hart is a better judge of elegant Tamil than Subramanya Bharati.What Hart wants to do is to continue the hateful purging of words of sanskrit origin from tamil. Secondly, if Hart would have been a genuine scholar he would have given us the specific Rig Vedic Hymn for which he claims almost every word is to be found in modern Tamil. Hart's claim of finding almost all words in a Rig Vedic hymn in modern tamil is pure bunkum--it cannot possibly be true. Thirdly, the Tamil Brahmin dialect is full of words of sanskrit origin. George Hart is clearly implying that he considers the Brahmin dialect Tamil to be inelegant and inferior. This is why i am saddened when i notice a few Tamil Brahmins swallowing George Hart's ridiculous views without doing any critical analysis.

and to the quote in post #47:

Compare Hart's claim with the following:

A quote from the Constituent Assembly debate that took place on 12.9.1949 in our Constituent Assembly :-

“The Hon’ble Shri Ghanshyam Singh Gupta - We want to hear your views on Sanskrit.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – I am extremely thankful to the Hon’ble Member Mr. Gupta. If you have to adopt any language, why should you not have the world’s greatest language? It is today a matter of great regret that we do not know with what reverence Sanskrit is held in the outside world. I shall only quote a few brief remarks made about Sanskrit to show how this language is held in the civilized world. Mr. W.C. Taylor says “Sanskrit is the language of unrivalled richness and purity”.

Mr. President – I would suggest you may leave that question alone, because I propose to call representatives who have given notice of amendments of a fundamental character and I will call upon a gentleman who has given notice about Sanskrit to speak about it.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – Yes, Sir, I shall not stand in between. I will only give a few quotations. Prof. Max Muller says that “Sanskrit is the greatest language in the world, the most wonderful and the most perfect”. Sir William Jones said “whenever we direct our attention to the Sanskrit Literature the notion of infinity presents itself. Surely the longest life would not suffice for a perusal of works that rise and swell protuberant like the Himalayas above the bulkiest composition of every land beyond the confines of India”. Then Sir W. Hunter says that “the Grammar of Panini stands supreme among the grammars of the world. It stands forth as one of the most splendid achievements of human invention and industry”. Prof. Whitney says “Its unequalled transparency of structure gives it (Sanskrit) undisputable right to the first place amongst the tongues of the Indo-European family”. M. Dukois says “Sanskrit is the origin of the modern languages of Europe”. Prof. Weber says “Panini’s grammar is universally admitted to be the shortest and fullest grammar in the world”. Prof. Wilson says “No nation but the Hindu has yet been able to discover such a perfect system of phonetics”. Prof. Thompson says “The arrangement of consonants in Sanskrit is a unique example of human genius”. Dr. Shahidullah, Professor of Dacca University, who has a world wide reputation as a Sanskrit Scholar, says “Sanskrit is the language of every man to whatever race he may belong”.

To the above one may add another quote:
Sir William Jones writes that Sanskrit has "a wonderful structure; more perfect than Greek, more copious than Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either".

Ref:A critique of George Hart (apropos Sanskrit)

 

[sudeshwer]

interest to read. jaykay creats a new history. well, let us see how far we go

 

[Nara]

...This comment is uncalled for.

Dear Raghy I don't think so.

.Brahminism can be practised by anyone (need not be brahmins) using any language ( need not be Sanskrit)

this is true, lot of NBs practice Brahminism.

Your targetting brahmins while talking about a language is uncalled for.

I am not targeting anyone, I just stated a fact. I don't think it was uncalled for.

Anyone including an illeterate can speak Sanskrit if they learned it.

So? Now, when they are on the retreat, they want to promote Sanskrit. When they were dominant they took the attitude "par..ppaya, onakku ennadaa padippu".

Cheers!

 

[suraju06]

Folks,

So? Now, when they are on the retreat, they want to promote Sanskrit. When they were dominant they took the attitude "par..ppaya, onakku ennadaa padippu".

i remember that a 'sage' among our members here said a few days back "there is no restrictions on a member being mean here".

Unlike the sage, I am an ordinary soul here in this forum(not even a veteran for the number of days spent here) and so am not going to complain and ask for the deletion of the quoted sentences.

Cheers.

 

[suraju06]

Folks,

I love the sound of Ghanam, the cascading and at the same time advancing repetition does give the kind of high the best music can give.

More than the cascading sound which is there even in the routine chanting of vedas-the pleasant appeal to the ears come because of the Daatam and anudaatam involved in loud recitation - the genius of our ancestors which took the ganam route to ensure the purity of the vedas impresses me more. Vedas exist today as they existed a few thousand years ago without any mutilation, addition deletion etc because of this unique method adopted by our ancestors. I appreciate this thoughtfulness in an ancient time when there was no known tamper proof method available to keep permanent records of the vedas-no papers, no leaves, no implements to carve on stones etc., . I request the members here to understand and appreciate this.

As far as I know only the Jews have gone to such great lengths to keep their religious texts pure.

Cheers.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri.Nara, Greetings.

I refer to your message in post #55. What is the need for such a message? The subject under discussion is Sanskrit language, it's simplicity or the lack of it's simplicity and it's grammer. Why can't you stay on the subject at hand? If you want to discuss about brahmin's domination with regards to Sanskrit language, kindly open a seperate thread and start a discussion in that, please. Commenting about brahmin community in this thread is not relevant to the subject, in my opinion. To learn a language, one does not have to be literate. I understand Malayalam; I never learned to read or write. But, I do talk passable Malayalam. That's what I meant in my message. Kindly stay on the topic, please. Thank you.

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

Why can't you stay on the subject at hand? If you want to discuss about brahmin's domination with regards to Sanskrit language, kindly open a seperate thread and start a discussion in that, please.

Dear Raghy, The supramcist aspect of Sanskrit is an integral part of how the language developed and used. Pointing this out is not irrelavant IMO. There are many POV that are expresed here, mine is one. Take it, or leave it.

Also, with due respects, you are not the thread purity police, are you? If so, where were you when some people were routinely posting all sorts of inanities in a thread I started even after I requested them not to do so?

Anyway, dear Raghy, please, I request you to refrain from offering me free advice, or whatever you call it, suggestion, request, et al., as to what to post and not.


Thank you ....

 

[suraju06]

Dear Raghy,

Also, with due respects, you are not the thread purity police, are you? If so, where were you when some people were routinely posting all sorts of inanities in a thread I started even after I requested them not to do so?

The thread purity police has not yet abdicated so you wont be permitted to usurp his position. Moreover you have no halo.

Cheers.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri.Nara, Greetings.

dear Raghy, please, I request you to refrain from offering me free advice, or whatever you call it, suggestion, request, et al., as to what to post and not.

No sir, I was not making any request or suggestion. I was not interested in the thread purity either.

I am standing up for a community. I am questioning the remark made out of context in this discussion. I was not around when others were posting inanities in a thread started by you. So, sorry If I did not ask then. A discussion about Sanskrit language can not get in to discussion about brahmin community.

A language would not have supramacist aspect. It can be only conncted to persons. Such persons would have used any language.

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

...No sir, I was not making any request or suggestion. I was not interested in the thread purity either.

Dear Raghy, I knew you would come back with something like this. That is why I said:

dear Raghy, please, I request you to refrain from offering me free advice, or whatever you call it, suggestion, request, et al., as to what to post and not.​

I repeat that request, whatever it was that you were doing, please refrain from giving me unwanted or wanted, advice or not advice on what I should post and what I should not.

I am standing up for a community. I am questioning the remark made out of context in this discussion.

Of course you can stand up for a jAti, that is your prerogative. But, I don't accept your charge that my comment was out of context. I have already given my reasons. If you insist it was out of context, then let it be.

I was not around when others were posting inanities in a thread started by you. So, sorry If I did not ask then

It was last week, I think you were very much around. In any case, I am not asking you to question anybody on my behalf, let not anybody twist what I am trying to say.

Cheers!

 

[Jaykay767]

interest to read. jaykay creats a new history. well, let us see how far we go.
JK, for all his outlandish and unsusbtantiated claims (IMO), may have some kernel of truth in what he says.

Hi Nara, Sudeshwer,

I can understand the reaction . Let me add some more perspective specifically on the Ramayana & Troy stories !!

There are 4 possibilities:

1. Ramayana & Troy are 2 events that are NOT interlinked. One came up in India, the other in Greek. But the stories are almost identical barring a few minor changes, so this is not a possibility. almost all events are the same. for eg. Ulysseus wins his wife in a "swayamwaram contest" where he lifts a Bow & strings an arrow like Rama etc.. even on the Trojan Horse, in all out village/city gates in the ancient times, we keep 2 wooden horses as the protectors!! so I can point out endless similarity between these 2 texts.

2. Valmiki copied Troy story, the Greeks who came to India came with the "Victor's version, & NOT the Homer version". If so, there is NO evidence of the victor's version in Greece. It doesnt make sense for Homer's version to survive & not the Victor version when the Greeks win this war ! I dont believe Valmiki would copy Homer's story & reverse it entirely to potray (Priam/Ravana) as the the Villan !!

3. Homer Copied Ramayana but the "loser version of the story". Dravidian texts have "both the versions". Possible, but I dont believe Homer would copy & pass it as their history.

4. Ramayana & Troy both happened in either Greece or India. Homer & Valmiki wrote the history of their country men - they didnt copy each other story & pass it as their own !!. Indians do not migrate to Greece, but Greeks come to India through the Alexander Invasion & subsequently the Greek Army stays back under the leadership of Seleucus. so for Homer, India is a Greek Land since they come & rule many parts of this country & hence his country & their stories.

Hence in my view, the option 4 is the most plausible one.

Cheers,
JK

 

[Malayalakara]

Sanskrit is based on a Dravidian language structure. It is the product of Dravidian people, who came in contact with a new language, Indo-Iranian. This hybridized language is given the name Sanskrit. As white people found words in Sanskrit similar to theirs, they created a new identity for themselves, "Aryan" or more modern "Indo-European", to connect Sanskrit to the white race. This identity was later used by Adolf Hitler. The Nazis said, the purest Aryans were white, had blonde hair and blue eyes. They said, these original Aryans originated in Atlantis, a mythical sunken landmass, described by famous Greek Plato. They lamented, that the modern Aryans were polluted by other races and hence they had brown hair, swarthy skin. The Nazis attempted to revive the supremacy of glorious Aryan Atlantis by purifying themselves from other races. The Nazi SS officers were required to have blonde hair and blue eyes. They had to be tall and strong. Women were selected per similar definitions. They had to make babies with the SS officers to create the pure Aryan race. Most of these women had more than one partner and most babies wouldn't know, who were their parents.

This type of racism is why Europe needed Sanskrit. If they propagated Sanskrit as a Dravidian language, they would have failed to create the supremacy story, because this would mean, that the Dravidians were superior to Aryans, which is the truth. It is the black race, which created Sanskrit and preserved their culture in this hybrid language, not the "white, blonde, blue eyed". The culture and language of Sanskrit speakers was formerly of pure Dravidian origin. This is a mere fact, scientifically proven and documented all over modern de-politicised Indology. The best way to teach the white people a lesson is to ban all non-Dravidian elements in Sanskrit.

 

[Nara]

Not very long ago, i.e. less than 100 years ago, the so called Shudras and Panchamas were systematically discouraged from pursuing any studies whatsoever, let alone Sanskrit. Here is a jovial take on this issue by NSK, even if you don't like the message you will like the music and humor. I am posting this here because there is an attempt to silence me in the background.
Kindanar - YouTube

Cheers!

 

[renuka]

Not very long ago, i.e. less than 100 years ago, the so called Shudras and Panchamas were systematically discouraged from pursuing any studies whatsoever, let alone Sanskrit. Here is a jovial take on this issue by NSK, even if you don't like the message you will like the music and humor. I am posting this here because there is an attempt to silence me in the background.
Kindanar - YouTube

Cheers!

I hope what I am posting does not get deleted but I feel its still in the Halal range.

I often wonder why in each and every thread which is started in Forum some dark past history is often dragged in.

The thread is about Sanskrit being Dravidian in origin.I do not see the relevance of dragging in dark history where certain quarters of society were denied education in the past.

Past is past..let bygones by bygones.How can progress be possible if we keep harping on the past?

That way many countries in the past have been arch enemies but now have diplomatic ties.
During the Japanese occupation in Malaysia..enough people were tortured by the Japanese.
Thats all long forgotten now cos that was the past and at present Malaysia has wonderful diplomatic ties with Japan.

I dread to wonder how the world would be if our mind set is set on Rewind & Replay mode.

Dear Nara, please dont feel as if you are being persecuted.No one is planning to silence you in the background or in the forefront.

BTW in the Sound of Silence is the Voice of God.

 

[Raghy]

Not very long ago, i.e. less than 100 years ago, the so called Shudras and Panchamas were systematically discouraged from pursuing any studies whatsoever, let alone Sanskrit. Here is a jovial take on this issue by NSK, even if you don't like the message you will like the music and humor. I am posting this here because there is an attempt to silence me in the background.
Kindanar - YouTube

Cheers!

Dear Sri. Nara, Greetings.

( I am rushing off to work. I shall enjoy the 'villupaattu' when I come back. Thanks for the link. I am sure to enjoy few from there!).

N S K ஒரு கழகக் கண்மணி இல்லையோ?

Kalaivanar was an active member of the Dravidian Movement.

N. S. Krishnan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Let's leave that aside. Subject of this thread is Sanskrit language. Taking this thread to talk ill of a community is not ethical. Such offences against one community is not relevant in this thread.

I am standing up for that affected community. I am not trying to win a popularity contest here. I am not aiming to back down. Yes, I will work in the background, fore front and every avenue possible for me.

I am standing up for the brahmin community inthis thread and that is final.

Cheers my friend!

 

[கால பைரவன்]

One can't reason with hatemongers. I do not know why some people are unable to realize this simple truth.

There was another forum "karuthu", that was very active once. All sorts of topics were discussed but the threads that attracted the most attention were always the ones that flogged one community or the other. Especially, people had a field day when it came to flogging brahmins. In the same forum, there was a thread titled "Ways and Means to destroy caste system" - that hardly attracted anybody's attention. Most people who claimed themselves to be caste-free and anti-caste are charlatans who support caste discrimination when it suits them. There were, are, will always be hatemongers. Ignoring them or engaging is one's preregorative but, IMO, reasoning with them won't work!

 

[Malayalakara]

I hope what I am posting does not get deleted but I feel its still in the Halal range.

I often wonder why in each and every thread which is started in Forum some dark past history is often dragged in.

The thread is about Sanskrit being Dravidian in origin.I do not see the relevance of dragging in dark history where certain quarters of society were denied education in the past.

Past is past..let bygones by bygones.How can progress be possible if we keep harping on the past?

That way many countries in the past have been arch enemies but now have diplomatic ties.
During the Japanese occupation in Malaysia..enough people were tortured by the Japanese.
Thats all long forgotten now cos that was the past and at present Malaysia has wonderful diplomatic ties with Japan.

I dread to wonder how the world would be if our mind set is set on Rewind & Replay mode.

Dear Nara, please dont feel as if you are being persecuted.No one is planning to silence you in the background or in the forefront.

BTW in the Sound of Silence is the Voice of God.

Caste discrimination is not "the past". Tamil Nadu might be more progressive due to the Periyar movement, but overall discrimination is very much present today.

 

[Nara]

One can't reason with hatemongers. .....There was another forum "karuthu", that was very active once.

It does not take a whole lot of courage or skill for these wonderful haters of hatemongers to stand up for a jAti, or advocate physical confrontation from the cozy confines of adoring crowd, egging each other on, offering up loads of accolades for every arrow of personal insult laced with hate for hatemongers, secure in the assurance that they enjoy majority support, if not the support of all but one. I wonder how far their courage will take them if they want to stand up for their jAti in a forum like Karuthu where they will be in the minority, no jAti-based majority they can count on, no accolades, no cheering, no "Likes". I invite them to go there and take off their figurative shirts and get down into figurative fist fights, that would be courage and skill. It is all so easy to call the only opponent here a hatemonger.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

where they will be in the minority, no jAti-based majority they can count on... It is all so easy to call the only opponent here a hatemonger.

In an internet forum, numbers don't mean anything. Few hatemongers with enough drive, time and resources can create havoc as was happening in this forum until a few weeks back.

The camarederie that is being spited now was virtually non-existent among the jAti majority then. It is a fact that majority was suffering silently. The hatemongers were having a field day enjoying accolades, cheers, likes among each other, scratching each other's back, cherishing their imagined intellect and bogus reformist mindset.

Things changed when the commoners decided to fight back and now the hatemongers are crying hoarse forgetting the shenanigans they happily indulged in.

BTW, "Karuthu" is dead. Everything was fine as long as hatemongering, in the name of reform, was directed only against brahmins. Once "other" communities were also discussed, the forum came to a standstill and is no longer active.

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri. Nara, Greetings.

I did go to that 'Karuthu' forum. I could not join that forum. I filled up so many pages of information, asked to write all sorts of twisted alphabets etc..... at last it got no where. I think thee is a glitch in that joining procedure. Anyway, I didn't persue later. I thought of letting you know.

Cheers!

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri. Kalabhiravan, Greetings.

I refer to your message in post #68. What is the need for name calling like 'hate mongers'? In this thread, it is pretty much Sri. Nara vs rest of the posters. So, it is so obvious who that 'name' referes to. Name calling is not in a good taste. We can discuss without such names.

Cheers!

 

[Naina_Marbus]

....
.......easy to call the only opponent here a hatemonger.

Dear Sir:
You seem to be obsessed with an idea - or as the English man would say ' a bee in your bonnet'.
It takes only a single cell to mutate and become cancerous.
It was a monomaniacal idea that produced people like Adolf Hitler, Timothy McVeigh, Osama bin Laden, Andres Breivik and the like. But the larger community moved on.
Yes, you have made your point, please move on.

 

[Nara]

Dear Sir:
You seem to be obsessed with an idea - or as the English man would say ' a bee in your bonnet'.
It takes only a single cell to mutate and become cancerous.
It was a monomaniacal idea that produced people like Adolf Hitler, Timothy McVeigh, Osama bin Laden, Andres Breivik and the like. But the larger community moved on.
Yes, you have made your point, please move on.

Naina_Marbus, thanks a lot for your free sage advice, a lot of people have taken to giving me unwanted advice these days. Please think about this Mr. Naina_Marbus, you may think differently if you are called a hate-monger.