Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 09 Jul 2017 05:36

Dipanker wrote:Cameroonians Speak Tamil? Another example of OIT?? I have no idea, I don't speak/understand tamil. I thought one word was in Punjabi!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWyAYGlFZjk&t=8s

It could just as well be old Kannada.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SaiK » 09 Jul 2017 06:27

Even the current Google Earth satellite map one could get the ocean depth marks.

https://earth.google.com/web/@8.2027281 ... ,-0h,0t,0r
/it might take time to load.

UB ji, there are folklore stories in Tamil about lands sinking after multiple deluges. lost artifacts, submerged temples, and a lot more eroded away. The pre-sangam era it was called.

Deep ji, yes, there is also a story in Tamil, that tells scripts came much later and we had grammatical languages even before. Sanskrit and Tamil were equated to two Ears of Lord Shiva.

Again, it is my belief, that perhaps languages split up ( don't bash me as an AITian - it is just a matter of zonal/ migrational boundaries) largely into two major dialect - one more influenced by the Mountaineers (Tamil) and the other from the Plains (Sanskrit). When I believe Two major dialect, that includes other sister languages as well (like calling all southies as madrassi). [again just a story - like Ma Ganga from Shiva's head]

Still, I find a lot of words common with Tamil and Sanskrit. I strongly disprove when people say, there is strong disconnect between the two, but I would agree there are large differences, the larger the differences, the older the language it seems to appear (again don't bash me - I might not be logical here)

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SaiK » 09 Jul 2017 06:44

Image

This the same pattern of engulfing land seen all over the Earth. It must be a connected event! match any Indic kathas to such geological event, we should be fairly connecting the dots in the right direction.

ps:
-- if romans had villas 2000s of years ago, then Indics must have had lot more destroyed landmarks even much before.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2563
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Prem Kumar » 09 Jul 2017 06:52

SaiK; no need to be apologetic. Both OIT'ians and AIT'ians don't dispute that Tamil & Sanskrit belong to 2 different language families. They also don't dispute that Tamil originated in India. The only dispute is whether the parent of the Indo-European languages arose in India.

The beauty of this great nation of ours is that it has sustained astonishing bio/human diversity for 100K+ years and birthed many civilizations, ideas & cultures. I cannot think of any other country which gave birth to 2 different but super-influential language families

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2428
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby sudarshan » 09 Jul 2017 07:01

SaiK wrote:Still, I find a lot of words common with Tamil and Sanskrit. I strongly disprove when people say, there is strong disconnect between the two, but I would agree there are large differences, the larger the differences, the older the language it seems to appear (again don't bash me - I might not be logical here)


What words do you find common between Tamil and Sanskrit? It is well known that Tamil has a lot of loan words from Sanskrit, known as "vadach-chol" (i.e., northern words, or words from the northern language (Sanskrit)). The Tamil script by itself couldn't express some of the sounds in Sanskrit, which is why more letters were added on (like sha, ha, etc.) just so people could write out those loan words.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby UlanBatori » 09 Jul 2017 07:22

While we have read a lot on "Arya", Aryan, Iryan, etc, we have not read much on the origin of the word Dravida. Could some experts pls comment? Clearly Rahul Dravid could not be a DMK construct, nor a Nazi construct. Who named the Dravida people thus? What does it mean?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 09 Jul 2017 07:25

One of the things that I notice about people who call themselves scientists or good at science (we have more or them today that the world has ever had before) - is a gradual degeneration from "best scientific practice/theory" to GIGO. Typically these result from rhetoric, media coverage and just plain shoddiness.

Everyone loves to repeat the truism "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" , but in science it has become normal to infer absence of evidence is evidence of absence. In fact in modern science this puts a brake on thinking and having an open mind.

For example - let us say the latest find of ancestral human being is dated back to 200,000 ybp. Normally this should be referred to as "The oldest evidence we have dates back to 200,000 years. Humans could be older, but we have not found evidence yet"

Almost no one working in science wants to be that honest. They are typically more interested in saying "We have found the oldest humans - 200,000 ybp" That is what gets fame and funding. That is what gets reported in the media. Gradually the idea gets set that the oldest ever humans are from 200,000 years ago and this then becomes dogma.

If someone were to enter the field now and say "Maybe humans existed 300,000 years ago" because legends speak of humans and humanoid apes living together and the earliest evidence we have of humanoid apes with art and tools goes back 300,000 years (this is just an example date). There is no proof of this, so this hypothesis cannot be fact. But hypotheses are the basis of exploration and research. Hypotheses and theories are needed to search for new information. The minute any information is declared as final it becomes dogma. No information is final. If you spend enough time on YouTube you will find at least 25 videos of children and parents interviewed and followed up to reveal that they remember a past life (I now have a relative by marriage who remembers a past life as having been her own dead aunt). So even death is not final. But that is old hat for you guys on here. Monotheistic religious dogma tells us that it is final.

There are so many weird links between the so called "Dravidian languages" and languages in Europe and there are links between Pacific Island languages and Sanskrit (IIRC) that the dogma that linguists have imposed on the rest of the world needs to be discarded. No one is claiming proof, but a bunch of beliefs is always the basis for exploration and innovation.

About "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

In the steppes of Kazakhstan there is no evidence of language from 2400 BC. Using the same logic one can clearly assert that the absence of evidence of language in the Eurasian step is not evidence of absence of language. This is 100% correct.

But the problem is that linguists have said that "Absence of evidence of any language in the steppe in 2400 BC is not evidence of absence of language, so we say that language was a precursor of Sanskrit" This is GIGO. There was likely some language in 2400 BC. But claiming that it is a particular language and that it moved in a particular direction is bullshitting of the highest order. Yet this has been accepted as fact and is quoted in academic papers (eg genetics papers). Speaks very poorly about the direction in which science in general is going. There is so much information that researchers cannot process and examine if "accepted knowledge" is accurate or not.

And because evidence or "writing" barely goes back 6000 years it is said that writing did not exist before then. This has become dogma. In fact simple empirical observation will tell you that written material does not need to survive more than 20-30 years. For example professions like medicine and law depend on written material initially. But after a point written material is unnecessary for practice. This is not to say that writing is useless or unnecessary but to suggest that writing by smart people would have been on media that are easy to write on like bark, leaves or stone using dyes - all of which are temporary. You would need a stonemason to carve writing onto stone or a clay worker for tablets.

And what if - over the course of 6-7 generations a people discovered that if human knowledge is human knowledge only when humans know that information, then the best method is to pass on the information to be stored in memory, using only temporary writing materials to aid memorization. That is what every doctor does. People go back to the same doctor not just because he has finished memorizing his books but because "He remembers my case". The value of oral transmission and meme sharing has been undervalued by claiming that "That which is written alone is accurate and true". There are so many ways in which written material is corrupted. In fact - as far as AIT is concerned - every bit of written evidece that goes against AIT has been studiously ignored. So much for the value of "that which is written"

Ah. I feel better now. Having had my rant.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 09 Jul 2017 07:33

sudarshan wrote:
SaiK wrote:Still, I find a lot of words common with Tamil and Sanskrit. I strongly disprove when people say, there is strong disconnect between the two, but I would agree there are large differences, the larger the differences, the older the language it seems to appear (again don't bash me - I might not be logical here)


What words do you find common between Tamil and Sanskrit? It is well known that Tamil has a lot of loan words from Sanskrit, known as "vadach-chol" (i.e., northern words, or words from the northern language (Sanskrit)). The Tamil script by itself couldn't express some of the sounds in Sanskrit, which is why more letters were added on (like sha, ha, etc.) just so people could write out those loan words.


In that Cameroon video it is claimed that "salam"="jalam"= Tamil for water. Jal/Jalam is Sanskrit as well. Tamil is not the only "Dravidian" language although Tamil chauvinism (which I admire) is the strongest and most effective relative to wimpishness of the average Kannadiga

As I see it Kannada, Telugu, Tamil and Malayalam are "different" mainly in day to day "primitive" words like eyes, nose, father, mother, arm, leg, run, eat, cry, laugh etc. But when more abstract concepts come in there is a close relationship between the so called Dravidian languages and Sanskrit. I am sure there has been mixing of two language streams but if you ask my opinion that mixing is at least 10,000 years old if not older. It probably matches the so called ASI/ANI mixing. The mixing is too thorough to be recent because it extends down to the last man.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby UlanBatori » 09 Jul 2017 07:42

Dang! Web does not give meaning or origin of the word "Dravida"! Absence of meaning (so far) means that meaning is absent. Q.E.D.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 09 Jul 2017 08:25

UlanBatori wrote:Dang! Web does not give meaning or origin of the word "Dravida"! Absence of meaning (so far) means that meaning is absent. Q.E.D.


This simple Yak herder's brain has been befuddled and corrupted by actually telling the truth for so long that he has forgotten a fundamental rule. Leave out words like "so far" and call it "oversight" to create law/dogma out of hypothesis

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby UlanBatori » 09 Jul 2017 08:30

Oops! Yes my bad. I searched 3 sites, and NONE of them gave the meaning. That should be PROOF that there is no meaning. They had such fundamental insights as
"Tamizh" PROBABLY means "Tamil"
and "Dravidian" refers to ppl of Tamil Nadu etc. And Afghanistan!!! Not to mention Cameroon mud hills.

Ppl in Chennai just woke up one afternoon and declared:

Let's call ourselves Dravidians!

I think it is a clumsy misspelling of DAVIDians*, so it is definitely imported from Syria by St. Thomas.

*Remember the bunch that got fried at Waco, Texas.

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2428
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby sudarshan » 09 Jul 2017 08:35

shiv wrote:In that Cameroon video it is claimed that "salam"="jalam"= Tamil for water. Jal/Jalam is Sanskrit as well. Tamil is not the only "Dravidian" language although Tamil chauvinism (which I admire) is the strongest and most effective relative to wimpishness of the average Kannadiga

As I see it Kannada, Telugu, Tamil and Malayalam are "different" mainly in day to day "primitive" words like eyes, nose, father, mother, arm, leg, run, eat, cry, laugh etc. But when more abstract concepts come in there is a close relationship between the so called Dravidian languages and Sanskrit. I am sure there has been mixing of two language streams but if you ask my opinion that mixing is at least 10,000 years old if not older. It probably matches the so called ASI/ANI mixing. The mixing is too thorough to be recent because it extends down to the last man.


See, that's the thing. The "pure" Tamil word for water is "neer." "Jalam" is widely acknowledged to have come from up North - at least, that's the narrative. Likewise, for "sun," the "pure Tamil" word would be "kadhiravan" (literally, "the one with many rays") or "gnayiru," while the borrowed word would be "suriyan." For "moon," it would be "nila" or "madhi" (pure Tamil), versus "chandiran." And so on. Now whether all this is just the "Dravidian narrative" of "pure Tamil" versus "northern words," I don't know. "Neeru" is also used in Kannada for water (right?).

Net sources are very suspect, when it comes to Sanskrit/ Tamil, many sites have specific agendas. Some sites claim that it is Sanskrit which has Tamil loan words, and these sites even go on to specify (speculate?) which are these loan words.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 09 Jul 2017 08:40

Neeru in Kannada.

One great Anatomy teacher (namaskar to you sir wherever you are) I had (now no more) took Tamil classes for us in 1972-73. He taught us to say "gnayirthi-kilamai"

Isn't it fascinating that we have
gnayirthi kilamai (Sunday) in Tamil
Bhanu-vara- Sunday in modern Kannada and
Ravi-war in Hindi?

It is budhan kilamai in Tamil
budhwara in Kannada
and Budhwarpeth was the red light district of Pune where I was taught how to swim

And Wednesday comes from the pagan European God "Woden" - Boden anyone??

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 09 Jul 2017 08:49


Muthuchetty ka goda
kya ottam re oda
kya ottam re oda woh ek pallu mein gir gaya
Ek aal pakda, waal pakda, oopar mein daala



This tragicomic story is told in Tamil-Hindi
Muthuchetty's horse
ran really fast
he ran so fast that he fell in a ditch
a man held him by his tail and pulled him out

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2428
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby sudarshan » 09 Jul 2017 08:51

Saturday, Sunday, Monday - obviously, Saturn, Sun, and Moon.

Tuesday - The Norwegian God Tiv is associated with Mars (Tiv's day).
Wednesday - Woden is associated with Mercury (Woden's day).
Thursday - Thor is associated with Jupiter (Thor's day).
Friday - Freya is associated with Venus (Freya's day).

In the book on the Ramayana dating by Nilesh Oak, the appendix has a description of the weekday system. Why are the weekdays ordered in that particular way - Saturn, Sun, Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, and Venus? (Yes, I deliberately put Saturn first). European/ Greek/ Roman/ Egyptian/ Hebrew sources do not have any kind of rationale for why the weekdays are in that particular order.

The only known rationale, from anywhere in the world, for this particular ordering of the weekdays, is from the Indian source, the Suryasiddhantha. Please do read through this appendix section in Nilesh's Ramayana dating book. I can reproduce the gist of why the weekdays are in this particular order (as explained in the Suryasiddhantha), if anybody is interested. We also went over it in the earlier archaeo-astronomy thread.

Some might argue that this is not "proof" of the Indian origin of the weekday system. And they would be right, this is not proof by any means, but it is corroboration, and by the same token that we tentatively accept Lucy Tanzaniawali (as UB ji is so fond of calling her - even though her remains were found in Ethiopia!) as the very first human being, we should tentatively accept that India is the origin of the current seven-day week.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SaiK » 09 Jul 2017 09:03

Sudharshan ji,

There are tons of common words between Sanskrit and Tamil. I had made some notes, but it is missing if I had to link a photocopy. Let me try from online resource a few:

sandhi - सन्धि, சந்தி - Union/Connection
sAyanGkAla - सायङ्काल, சாயங்காலம் - Evening
vanam - वनम्, வனம் - Forest/Jungle
pAdam - पाद, பாதம் - Foot
angam - अङ्ग, அங்கம் - Limb
Adhi - आदि, ஆதி - First, Beginning
mukha- मुख, முகம் - Face
pAnaka पानक, பானகம் - Sweet Drink/beverage
vijayam विजय, விஜயம் - Victory
viShayam विषय, விசயம் - subject matter/issue

plenty.. countless. If I can get this much, you should be able to get millions

syam
BRFite
Posts: 749
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 09 Jul 2017 15:49

SriJoy wrote:Err, Arabian horse is from the fertile crescent. the lands between Euphrates and Tigris until recently used to be desert grassland and Arabian horse is from there. We see 'Arabian horse' being called so by the Romans. We also have plenty of archaeological evidence depicting Assyrian emperors riding horses and hunting, riding chariots,etc. So does Egypt. And last i checked, Assyrian empire is in Arabia....
If Indians had good horses before the arrival of the Hunas, we'd not be owned by mounted cavalry of turks and arabs in the first place.

This is the history from your trusted source Wiki.
Arabian horses are the topic of many myths and legends. One origin story tells how Muhammad chose his foundation mares by a test of their courage and loyalty. While there are several variants on the tale, a common version states that after a long journey through the desert, Muhammad turned his herd of horses loose to race to an oasis for a desperately needed drink of water. Before the herd reached the water, Muhammad called for the horses to return to him. Only five mares responded. Because they faithfully returned to their master, though desperate with thirst, these mares became his favorites and were called Al Khamsa, meaning, the five. These mares became the legendary founders of the five "strains" of the Arabian horse.[62][63] Although the Al Khamsa are generally considered fictional horses of legend,[64] some breeders today claim the modern Bedouin Arabian actually descended from these mares.[65]

Another origin tale claims that King Solomon was given a pure Arabian-type mare named Safanad ("the pure") by the Queen of Sheba.[64] A different version says that Solomon gave a stallion, Zad el-Raheb or Zad-el-Rakib ("Gift to the Rider"), to the Banu Azd people when they came to pay tribute to the king. This legendary stallion was said to be faster than the zebra and the gazelle, and every hunt with him was successful, thus when he was put to stud, he became a founding sire of legend.[66]

Yet another creation myth puts the origin of the Arabian in the time of Ishmael, the son of Abraham.[67] In this story, the Angel Jibril (also known as Gabriel) descended from Heaven and awakened Ishmael with a "wind-spout" that whirled toward him. The Angel then commanded the thundercloud to stop scattering dust and rain, and so it gathered itself into a prancing, handsome creature - a horse - that seemed to swallow up the ground. Hence, the Bedouins bestowed the title "Drinker of the Wind" to the first Arabian horse.[68]

Finally, a Bedouin story states that Allah created the Arabian horse from the south wind and exclaimed, "I create thee, Oh Arabian. To thy forelock, I bind Victory in battle. On thy back, I set a rich spoil and a Treasure in thy loins. I establish thee as one of the Glories of the Earth... I give thee flight without wings."[69] Other versions of the story claim Allah said to the South Wind: "I want to make a creature out of you. Condense." Then from the material condensed from the wind, he made a kamayt-colored animal (a bay or burnt chestnut) and said: "I call you Horse; I make you Arabian and I give you the chestnut color of the ant; I have hung happiness from the forelock which hangs between your eyes; you shall be the Lord of the other animals. Men shall follow you wherever you go; you shall be as good for flight as for pursuit; you shall fly without wings; riches shall be on your back and fortune shall come through your meditation

If you observe the common thread in all of these legends, one thing you notice is gifting of horse from one to another.

and the legend in bold part,
the queen is famous for trading spices with people. See this excerpt,
The queen of Sheba came to Jerusalem "with a very great retinue, with camels bearing spices, and very much gold, and precious stones" (I Kings 10:2). "Never again came such an abundance of spices" (10:10; II Chron. 9:1–9) as those she gave to Solomon. She came "to prove him with hard questions," which Solomon answered to her satisfaction. They exchanged gifts, after which she returned to her land.[6][7]

Again spices. Only people who had traded spices with world were Indians in those times.

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 1023
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Primus » 09 Jul 2017 16:54

Some perceptions are very hard to kill. Even Yuval Harari, in his otherwise excellent book 'Sapiens' falls victim to the AIT = India's caste system garbage and keeps flogging those two dead horses.

Would you believe that today there is an active group of people who are believers in the 'Flat Earth'? They go into all kinds of contortions explaining natural phenomenon like gravity and solar/lunar eclipses, heck even sunrises and sunsets - but they are quite serious about there being a conspiracy against them! Check out these guys here: http://www.tfes.org/ Funny thing is, there are many such groups that believe in this nonsense.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Dipanker » 09 Jul 2017 18:43

sudarshan wrote:See, that's the thing. The "pure" Tamil word for water is "neer." "Jalam" is widely acknowledged to have come from up North - at least, that's the narrative. Likewise, for "sun," the "pure Tamil" word would be "kadhiravan" (literally, "the one with many rays") or "gnayiru," while the borrowed word would be "suriyan." For "moon," it would be "nila" or "madhi" (pure Tamil), versus "chandiran." And so on. Now whether all this is just the "Dravidian narrative" of "pure Tamil" versus "northern words," I don't know. "Neeru" is also used in Kannada for water (right?).

Net sources are very suspect, when it comes to Sanskrit/ Tamil, many sites have specific agendas. Some sites claim that it is Sanskrit which has Tamil loan words, and these sites even go on to specify (speculate?) which are these loan words.


Neer is also a Hindi/Sanskrit word for water.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 09 Jul 2017 19:17

Water in Sanskrit (an illustration - by no means a complete list)
--

कम् kam water
सलिलवत् salilavat adj. water
काण्ड kANDa adj. water
स्वर् svar adverb water
अप् ap f. water
सुधा sudhA f. water
सुरा surA f. water
इरा irA f. water
काष्ठा kASThA f. water
नीथा nIthA f. water
पीवा pIvA f. water
भावना bhAvanA f. water
वारी vArI f. water
वर्णसि varNasi f. water
शक्वरी zakvarI f. water
सदनि sadani f. water
सिरा sirA f. water
आप Apa m. water
सूम sUma m. water
अङ्कुर aGkura m. water
आवयास् AvayAs m. water
घनसार ghanasAra m. water
चन्द्र candra m. water
घृणि ghRNi m. water
जीवक jIvaka m. water
दहनाराति dahanArAti m. water
तोयरस toyarasa m. water
धरुण dharuNa m. water
नार nAra m. water
पूर्ण pUrNa m. water
बुबुर bubura m. water
मेघप्रसर meghaprasara m. water
मेघप्रसव meghaprasava m. water
रस rasa m. water
यादु yAdu m. water
ष्ट्युम STyuma m. water
वेष्प veSpa m. water
वृष vRSa m. water
व्योमन् vyoman m. water
शुभ zubha m. water
सल sala m. water
सार sAra m. water
हिमारिशत्रु himArizatru m. water
होमि homi m. water
सोम soma m. water
स्तीर्वि stIrvi m. water
स्यूम syUma m. water
अहि ahi m. water
गो go m. water
व va m. water
ह ha m. water
हल hala m. water
सत् sat m. water
योनि yoni m.f. water
घनरस ghanarasa m.n. water
तोज toja n. water
अम्भस् ambhas n. water
तोय toya n. water
वारि vAri n. water
सलिल salila n. water
पाय pAya n. water
पयस् payas n. water
उदक udaka n. water
कम्बल kambala n. water
सुक्षेमन् sukSeman n. water
सुनौ sunau n. water
अकावङ्क akAvaGka n. water
अक्षित akSita n. water
अग्निभु agnibhu n. water
अक्षर akSara n. water
अङ्काङ्क aGkAGka n. water
अङ्कावङ्क aGkAvaGka n. water
अङ्कुप aGkupa n. water
अन्ध andha n. water
अन्न anna n. water
अमृत amRta n. water
अररिन्द ararinda n. water
अरुल arula n. water
अर्णस् arNas n. water
आपस् Apas n. water
आयुध Ayudha n. water
उद uda n. water
उद्र udra n. water
ऊर्ज Urja n. water
ऋण RNa n. water
ऋत Rta n. water
कमन्ध kamandha n. water
कमल kamala n. water
कर्बुर karbura n. water
कवन kavana n. water
कशस् kazas n. water
कीलाल kIlAla n. water
कुलीनस kulInasa n. water
कुश kuza n. water
कोमल komala n. water
कृपीट kRpITa n. water
कृषीट kRSITa n. water
कृत्स kRtsa n. water
कृत्स्न kRtsna n. water
क्षद्मन् kSadman n. water
क्षणद kSaNada n. water
तामर tAmara n. water
तृणोदकभूमि tRNodakabhUmi n. water
तृषाह tRSAha n. water
तूय tUya n. water
दार्दुर dArdura n. water
देय deya n. water
ध्वस्मन्वत् dhvasmanvat n. water
नलिन nalina n. water
नेप nepa n. water
नीचग nIcaga n. water
नीर nIra n. water
नीवर nIvara n. water
नृपीट nRpITa n. water
पयस payasa n. water
पाथ pAtha n. water
पाथस् pAthas n. water
पवन pavana n. water
पवित्र pavitra n. water
पाय्य pAyya n. water
पिप्पल pippala n. water
क्षर kSara n. water
क्षत्र kSatra n. water
क्षौद्र kSaudra n. water
क्षीर kSIra n. water
घनपद ghanapada n. water
चल cala n. water
घृत ghRta n. water
जड jaDa n. water
जन्मन् janman n. water
जह्मन् jahman n. water
जलाष jalASa n. water
जामि jAmi n. water
जीवन jIvana n. water
जीवनीय jIvanIya n. water
दक daka n. water
पीथ pItha n. water
पुष्कर puSkara n. water
बादर bAdara n. water
बर्बुर barbura n. water
बर्हिस् barhis n. water
भवन bhavana n. water
भविष्यत् bhaviSyat n. water
बृबूक bRbUka n. water
बुस busa n. water
प्रजाहित prajAhita n. water
प्राणद prANada n. water
भेषज bheSaja n. water
भुवन bhuvana n. water
महस् mahas n. water
मलिन malina n. water
मरुल marula n. water
मेघजा meghajA n. water
मेघपुष्प meghapuSpa n. water
रत्न ratna n. water
यादस् yAdas n. water
यहस् yahas n. water
यशस् yazas n. water
रेतस् retas n. water
रोम roma n. water
वह्निमारक vahnimAraka n. water
वाज vAja n. water
वन vana n. water
वारुण vAruNa n. water
वसु vasu n. water
षड्रस SaDrasa n. water
शबल zabala n. water
शबर zabara n. water
शम्बर zambara n. water
शर zara n. water
शरलक zaralaka n. water
शरण zaraNa n. water
शवस् zavas n. water
शीतोत्तम zItottama n. water
सदन sadana n. water
सद्मन् sadman n. water
सहस् sahas n. water
सरस् saras n. water
सरिल sarila n. water
सर्णीक sarNIka n. water
सर्वग sarvaga n. water
सर्वतोमुख sarvatomukha n. water
सतीक satIka n. water
सतीन satIna n. water
सत्य satya n. water
हविस् havis n. water
सेव्य sevya n. water
स्मृतिक smRtika n. water
स्रोतस् srotas n. water
स्वृतीक svRtIka n. water
स्यमीक syamIka n. water
स्यन्दन syandana n. water
अम्Bअस् amBas n. water
आनर्त Anarta n. water
उडु uDu n. water
क ka n. water
ओजस् ojas n. water
कबन्ध kabandha n. water
गु gu n. water
नामन् nAman n. water
म ma n. water
वार् vAr n. water
वार्दर vArdara n. water
हेमन् heman n. water
सर्व sarva n. water
सुख sukha n. water
शक zaka n. water
शव zava n. water
अम्बु ambu n. m. water

sudarshan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2428
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby sudarshan » 09 Jul 2017 19:49

SaiK wrote:Sudharshan ji,

There are tons of common words between Sanskrit and Tamil. I had made some notes, but it is missing if I had to link a photocopy. Let me try from online resource a few:

sandhi - सन्धि, சந்தி - Union/Connection
sAyanGkAla - सायङ्काल, சாயங்காலம் - Evening
vanam - वनम्, வனம் - Forest/Jungle
pAdam - पाद, பாதம் - Foot
angam - अङ्ग, அங்கம் - Limb
Adhi - आदि, ஆதி - First, Beginning
mukha- मुख, முகம் - Face
pAnaka पानक, பானகம் - Sweet Drink/beverage
vijayam विजय, விஜயம் - Victory
viShayam विषय, விசயம் - subject matter/issue

plenty.. countless. If I can get this much, you should be able to get millions


SaiK, are those simply loan words, or common words? As an example, there are common words between English and German, and then there are loan words.

Common words are like "Horse" in English, "Ross" in German, "Dale" in English (for valley), "Tal" in German*, "Water" in English, "Wasser" in German, "Mother" or "Father" in English, "Mutter" or "Vater" in German, etc. These are because English is basically a dialect of German - there were two branches of German, Hoch Deutsch (High German), and Platt Deutsch (Low German). Hoch Deutsch is what we know as the "German" of today. Platt Deutsch became English. So there are a lot of common words between them.

But loan words are different. Like "Schadenfreude" or "Ersatz". These aren't just common words, they are German words which are acknowledged as "foreign" words in English, but which crept in due to "internationalization" or "globalization." Whereas "Horse," "Water," or "Dale" are considered native to English.

For many of the words you mentioned above, I can produce a "pure Tamil" equivalent. Like:

Sayankalam - Maalai
Vanam - Kaadu
Aadhi - Mudhal
Vijayam - Vettri

And so on. For many such words, the loan word from Sanskrit did end up driving out the "native" Tamil word, which was dropped because it sounded too antiquated - but those antiquated words are still there in old Tamil literature.

So - no doubt that there are Sanskrit words in Tamil, the question is one of - do those words have a common origin, or are they simply loan words which came in from Sanskrit slokas and such, recited in Hindu temples in TN?

Edit: As an interesting aside, on the * above: There was a coin called the "Joachimsthaler," minted from the town of Joachimsthal (now in the Czech Republic), which served as currency in Europe for a long time. The name "Sankt Joachimsthal" means "Valley of Saint Joachim" (like I said above, "Tal" means valley in German). Over time, the name of the coin was abbreviated as "Thaler" (or "coin from the valley"). This is the origin of the name of the currency "Dollar." So the "Dollar" simply means - "currency minted in a dale (valley)."
Last edited by sudarshan on 10 Jul 2017 08:53, edited 2 times in total.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 09 Jul 2017 20:28

ORIGIN OF WEEKDAY NAMES

All,

The appendix A from my book 'The Historic Rama - Indian civilization at the end of Pleistocene' is at the following link

https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2016/09 ... day-names/

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 09 Jul 2017 20:41

chanakyaa wrote:
Nilesh Oak wrote:...
https://youtu.be/RedV48OCEFg

Nilesh-ji, I watched the entire discussion. Compelling and khup changle kaam kele aahe. Saglya, skeptics and counter arguments madhey kuthlya counter argument var saarvat jasta vichar karava lagla?


This is what Dr. Raj Vedam wrote, after listening to this debate...
--
Just finished watching the entire video.

Nilesh ji, congratulations on the very expert handling of all the objections. I am delighted at the skepticism shown by the esteemed Dr. Koenraad Elst, bringing the familiar set of “old-school” arguments based on PGW by B.B. Lal, local Dwarka flooding by S.R. Rao, the Chariot-burial data-point, and so many other pieces of true, but inconsequential (to the topic) data that cannot logically be connected with the dating of the epics.

Skepticism is good because it tests how strong your hypothesis and thesis is. Nilesh ji, I am absolutely delighted at your strong, logical answers that completely invalidate the counter-arguments, showing the strength of your thesis. Also, very glad that Dr. Koenraad Elst’s skepticism gave an opportunity to address such data points.

If I was not familiar with Dr. Koenraad Elst’s earlier works (much of which I greatly admire for his strong opinions), I would think that he has bought the arguments of the discredited John Bentley – which I dearly hope he has not – and in his recent writings (on Rajiv Malhotra’s Yahoo mailing list) and discussion here, knowingly or unknowingly, is leading up to such conclusions. For the benefit of readers, John Bentley was a foremost exponent of the Young Earth idea of the Anglican church and worked furiously to invalidate the ancient astronomical observations contained in Indian texts as “modern forgeries”, a position strongly refuted by Colebrooke and a select few Western Indologists of the period. Bentley’s work was gleefully picked up by missionaries to invalidate Hindu narratives. And combined with the potent Max Muller linguistic dating of Indian texts, formed a powerful tool of colonial disinformation. (so important that Cambridge University Press re-publishes this faulty work to the current date!).

Dr. Koenraad Elst must state what he thinks of the many consistent astronomical observations contained in various Indian texts. Are they “modern forgeries” as stated by Bentley, or are they valid observations which can be scientifically verified to certain periods of time? When debating any one person’s work, it will be good to separate out the facts from opinions that cannot stand scrutiny (or we have no means to evaluate). In this respect, Dr. P.V.Vartak (a lightning rod for much criticism based on some of his claims), has done much to isolate astronomical phenomena and events from Indian texts, that can be dated to a full cycle of Precession. How should we approach this? Ignore the evidence presented, or dismiss out of hand?

At the very least, people who dismiss astronomical observations as a valid means of reconstructing a story of the past, should state the grounds on which they reject such data. As I state after all my talks,

(a) Is there a criticism of the data?

(b) Is there a criticism of the methods applied on such data?

(c) is there a criticism of the conclusions drawn after applying said methods on the said data?

The opinions of the esteemed researchers who negate such data/methods/conclusions can then be evaluated accordingly on the merits of their arguments.

I thank Srijan Foundation and Pragyata for making this conversation possible, and publishing this video.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 09 Jul 2017 21:50

Oldest language - Vedic -Sanskrit/Tamil - Hebrew?

https://satyavijayi.com/maha-periyava-m ... w-scholar/

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby UlanBatori » 09 Jul 2017 22:45

Gee! After reading all these, I am 400% strengthened in my conviction that Malloostani is the Original Language. Even the Discovery Channel agrees that Lucy Bibi Tanganykawali first came to Malloostan after marrying Appu of Alappuzha. They only made one error. The whole model of walking up the Sahara desert, down the Khyber Pass etc is totally bogus. They just walked over to the Seychelles via the Lakshadweep/ Maladweep, did a small boat ride across to Madagascar and strolled the rest of the way to Tanganyka (Tanzania was formed by the merger of Tanganyka and Zanzibar). The sea level history proves this. As for language, the commonality of words with BOTH Tamil and Samskrtam is so clear in Malloostani that there is no room for doubt, which is the superset and origin. The days of the week are named for different cosmic bodies.
Gnayar Azhcha: Sun din of the Week
Tingal Azhcha: Moon din of the Week
Chovva Azhcha: Mars din of the Week
Budhan Azcha: .. (and so on. I don't know the names of all dem planets etc).

Incidentally, my belief is that if one wants to hear pure Tamizh, one should go to Madurai (at least they were good some 40 years ago). Beautiful language, and easy to comprehend for Malloostanis and probably Samskrtam speakers as well. Chennai etc are way too contaminated with gibberish, in 5 years I could never figure out what they were saying when they talked among themselves. In Karnataka there is way too much Hindi/Urdu, must be Tippu contamination.

But I still have not figured out what is the meaning of "Dravida".

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 09 Jul 2017 23:19

UlanBatori wrote:But I still have not figured out what is the meaning of "Dravida".


I posted one explanation for the word itself few posts ago...
but the colonial history of the word Dravida and its racist as well as religious bigoted corruption is another story:

The Mangolion should plan a trip to Marina beach and visit with tomatoes or worse the statue of one Robert Caldwell -
Robert Caldwell

Robert Caldwell used the term Dravidian to separate the languages spoken in South India from other, more Sanskrit-affiliated languages of India.


While Caldwell's A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South-Indian family of languages was prescient in recognizing that Dravidian languages constitute a distinct language family, "Caldwell's primary concern was to convert the south Indians to Christianity"[5] and at times the work deliberately ventures beyond the scope of linguistics to advance that goal.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 09 Jul 2017 23:39

It is important to pay attention to perhaps a friend of South India - Charles E. Grover - while he was unsuccessful in countering the missionary zeal of Caldwell (and perhaps the language families needs much reach research and work to be rectified of Christian Dogma and Western racism), it did not stop him from writing a pretty scathing criticism of Robert Caldwell and his machinations to divide the peoples of India.

The first principle is of vital importance in connection with a subject that has never been thoroughly examined the race to which the Dravidian nations belong Since the learned book by Dr Caldwell Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian languages was issued it has been taken for granted that the Tamils are a Turanian people The progress of philological enquiry and the new means of analysis furnished by the great German writers on language have shown the error of this classification Driven at a very early period into the extreme south and cut off by vast oceans from intercourse with other peoples the Dravidian nations have preserved with singular purity the vocabulary they brought with them and it is probably not extravagant or untrue to say that there is not one true Dravidian root common to the three great branches Tamil Telugu and Canarese that cannot be clearly shown to be Aryan. As an interesting example both of the true character of the language and the linguistic progress made since the publication of Dr Caldwell's book it may be noted that the learned doctor gives an appendix containing a considerable number of Dravidian words which he asserts to be Scythian and most efficient witnesses to prove the Turanian origin of the language It is now known that every word in this list is distinctly Aryan although some of them have representatives in the Finnish group of Turanian tongues the group which has been most constantly exposed to Aryan influences The greater portion of them are included in Fick's Indogermanischen Grundsprachc as Aryan roots although Fick does not appear to have seen Caldwell's work.


Reference: The Folk-songs of Southern India - Charles E. Grover

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby UlanBatori » 10 Jul 2017 03:32

But there MUST be some basis. I missed your long-ago reasoning of the word root, could you pls restate it? For example, Rahul Dravid. Surely his family name did not come from some British book, but from a hallowed tradition and lineage. The term Dravid-i-an is british, but Dravida is probably not. People use the term as if it has always been there. Does it occur in, say, the Kamba Ramayana or other ancient works? Did the kings of Mahabalipuram (how did that get its name, BTW) consider themselves "Dravida"? Clearly that kingdom extended way out into what is now under the sea (maybe 4 or 4 of those 9.6 continental shelf dhoti-shivers ago), so there is a very long history there.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 10 Jul 2017 07:29

Yak Herder. I think I have the answer to your question about the origins of the name "Dravidian". My laptop is losing its charge and I need to shut down soon - no power access in the garden. Will post later.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby ShauryaT » 10 Jul 2017 08:02

Mahabharat BORI critical edition has the term Dravida to refer to as one of the "kingdoms". Reference seems to indicate Southern India.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7047
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby JE Menon » 10 Jul 2017 08:15

UB, oldest reference I have heard (can't remember exactly where to be frank, family circles I think) is that it was first used by Adi Shankara to describe the southern areas ... that would be around 7-8th century AD

But that could be a much later fiction perpetrated by the Brits or their lapdogs.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Dipanker » 10 Jul 2017 08:19

Wikipedia has some info, origin of the word apparently is from Prakrit phase, meaning is South India. Did not refer to ethnicity or language.

Historically the word "drāviḍa" is used to denote the geographical region of South India,[4]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_people

ShyamSP
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2496
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby ShyamSP » 10 Jul 2017 08:27

Dravidulu are a subsect of brahmins in Telugu where they are referred so because they were migrants from Tanjavur to Coastal Andhra long before Dravidian ideology propaganda started.

http://pudurdravida.com/2%20Puduru%20Dr ... istory.pdf

If you rely on English literature of South India, you only get Colonial history and interpretations.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 10 Jul 2017 09:07

TED Radio Hour on US National Public Radio: http://www.npr.org/podcasts/510298/ted-radio-hour
(Look for the July 7, 2017 show, "Hidden") included a talk by Sarah Parcak.

This TED talk on doing archaeology via satellite is probably very relevant for India:
https://www.ted.com/talks/sarah_parcak_ ... from_space

Archaeologist Sarah Parcak says that "we have barely scratched the surface...In the Egyptian delta alone we have excavated less than one-one-thousandth of one percent of the total Egyptian sites". She believes there is a revolution due in our knowledge of the human past; and as I listened, I remembered this thread.

If we want to take a stab at substantiating archaeo-literary-astronomical dates with archaeological evidence, it means that there must be a lot of archaeological sites to be discovered. Satellite photography in beyond-the-visible spectrum seems to be a viable way to locate candidate sites.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 10 Jul 2017 09:08

^^I think all the above statements are correct.

It appears that the word Dravidian was coined by a fellow called Robert Caldwell.

His book Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or south Indian family of languages is available for download here
https://archive.org/details/comparativegramm00caldrich

Read the Introduction on page 4 onwards for a few pages.

Caldwell states his reasoning to call the languages "Dravidian" languages but when you look at the subtext - the racist assumption of South Indian "Dravidian" inferiority can be recognized in Caldwell's words although the Indian sources he quoted do not necessarily treat the South in that manner

He says that Kumarila Bhatta refers to an Andhra-Dravida bhasha where "Dravida" probably refers specifically to Tamil. he says Kumarila Bhatta was from the south. I don't know

He quotes Manu as saying that the following races are "vrishala" which he translates as "outcastes" However "vrishala" has both a derogatory meaning as well as an honorific sense. The tribes named by Manu are said to be:
Pandrkas, Odras, Dravidas, Kambojas, Yavanas, Sakas, Paradas, Pahlavas, Chinas, Kiratas, Daradas, Khasas

That is one helluva interesting list in its geographic spread if the names are what i think they are. The racists date Manu around 1200-1000 BC though they don't like it

Caldwell refers to Pandits who speak of 5 Dravidas:
Telinga, Karnata, Marathi, Gurjara and Dravira



Caldwell claims that "Dravida" are the only South Indian tribe named by Manu - but elsewhere he says that the word Dravida refers to even a Tibetan dialect. In general Caldwell reached the view that Dravida was a generic term for the south even though there is no firm proof. Daravida may originally have meant only Tamil, or only one tribe. In fact Pandyas and Cholas and others find separate mention and the generic term Dravida is Caldwell's inference as far as I can tell - from what he quotes of a translation of Varaha Mihira. I don't know.

But the subtext of an alleged contempt for Dravidians runs through Caldwells work and this appears to stem from the basic inference that Aryans were uperior and speakres of Sanskrit were the representatives of Aryans and others were degenerate races.

Just like racial superiority cannot be divorced from Aryan, the idea of a degraded race cannot be divorced from 'Dravidian" a word coined by a person who was as racist as anyone else in his day. It is interesting to me that although Indian sources quoted by Caldwell included Gujaratis and Marathi speakers among "Dravida', Caldwell used philological excuses to change that to exclude Gujaratis and Marathi speakers and that conveniently made everything fit into the racist paradigms of that era where the peninsula was inhabited by "Dravidians and Kolarians"

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Satya_anveshi » 10 Jul 2017 10:39

Please check out this post of mine and reference to a book by Alexander D. Campbell in 1816 ( Grammer of the Telogoo Language) which then is used by the Caldwell fellow to further bolster his fake linguistic branches.

This was clearly an agenda driven book from get go and Telugu was first targeted to be the "Tamizh" of today (naturally as it was biggest populace).

There is a dire need to use this book and refute it in scholarly work and therefore the other works that use this book as basis will automatically crumble.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 749
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 10 Jul 2017 13:10

shiv wrote:Robert Caldwell.
~~

That dude is famous in old days. Last night, I was reading about C.P. Brown. This dude name came up somewhere.

An excerpt from internet
There is a brief assessment of Caldwell’s life and service in the last few pages
of this work. Caldwell a chosen vessel of God to minister in His Vineyard, was of
Scottish descent. He became a mass missionary by his sheer personal integrity any
sincerity. He had come to India, only to promote proselytizing. He is respected all over
the world as a missionary, linguist, historian and philanthropist. The Lord has called
Caldwell to be used by him to bring about revival. He was a dynamic and multifaceted
phenomenon. He is respected all over the world as a protagonist of Evangelism,
linguistics and history. He entered the Mission as a London Missionary and turned
society for the Propagation of Gospel at different circumstances. He left LMS and
identified himself with S.P.G. He was a missionary with a different zeal. He was a born
adventurer and had a burden to take the Gospel to places like India. Having committed
his life to Christ he chose the path of the cross and decided to bear the cross at all costs.
Althrough his ministry of 53 years he joyfully proclaimed the message of the Lord. His
mission was active.

About C.P. Brown friendship,
He secured the friendship of C.P Brown during his eventful voyage from England to India.
This comradeship helped him a lot in his future venture of writing comparative
grammar of Dravidian languages and to undertake a successful career in India.
He arrived at Madras on January 8, 1838 where God equipped him for service.

link
World is such a small place.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 10 Jul 2017 14:55

syam wrote:
He secured the friendship of C.P Brown during his eventful voyage from England to India.
This comradeship helped him a lot in his future venture of writing comparative
grammar of Dravidian languages and to undertake a successful career in India.
He arrived at Madras on January 8, 1838 where God equipped him for service.

link
World is such a small place.

Caldwell was a missionary who deliberately fiddled with old Indian definitions of Dravida to include only "dark skinned people" who were all "Hamites" - the slave descendants of Noah's son Ham. Thus he ignored all references to Dravidia as a tribe, or as Tamil alone or an area or ones that included the entire west from Gujarat down - so that Dravidians meant dark races who would later have to be saved from Brahmanism by Christianization because he was projecting the European "Aryan" contempt for dark races onto Indian "Aryans" Having blamed "Indian Aryans" for the caste system, thee guys have set about converting the black races which their own culture held in such contempt.

Here is a passage he wrote:
The only property these languages can have possessed in common must have been the contempt in which
they were held by Brahman philologists


But what are we Indians? We must be idiots to not understand how our minds have been fuked with

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8217
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Gus » 10 Jul 2017 18:00

sudarshan wrote:What words do you find common between Tamil and Sanskrit? It is well known that Tamil has a lot of loan words from Sanskrit, known as "vadach-chol" (i.e., northern words, or words from the northern language (Sanskrit)). The Tamil script by itself couldn't express some of the sounds in Sanskrit, which is why more letters were added on (like sha, ha, etc.) just so people could write out those loan words.


and old sangam tamil or even stuff like Thirukkural will leave modern tamils befuddled. They can read but cannot understand the meaning of the words much less the meaning and context of entire verse / sentence.

There's a reason we have 'Konar Urai' type books that explain Thirukkural because we lost ability to understand the words directly.

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby UlanBatori » 10 Jul 2017 19:13

Hmm! Sounds like I am on to something. Ignorance is always the best policy to maintain a clear mind uncluttered by such "orignal definitions" as
"Dravida refers to ppl of southern India".
The question that any 2-year-old would ask is: WHY? What does the word mean? For instance, the word "Punjab" which the idiots pronouce as "Poonjab" means " Panch Ab". Five Rivers. "Kanchenjunga" was really "Kaanchana Ganga" as anyone can see in the golden afternoon sunlight, though "modern" PC usage claims it is some silly Chinese word.

Some places are named after people, but even people names had grand meanings. This MEANING is the most important feature of Indian language and culture, an aspect totally lost as rote memorization and parroting, an extremely good skill learned when there was no alternative, morphed into the nasty habit of non-thinking in more modern times. For instance, Schmitt meant "smith" as in someone who would smite hot metals. Steinbrenner meant, IIRC, stone-breaker. "Bhima" meant "Big". So there MUST be a meaning for the word Dravida that goes a lot deeper. Finding this is IMO absolutely essential to the AIT/OIT tamasha. I don't think "Dravida" meant "dark" : the word "Krishna" expressed that adequately. For instance Draupadi was called "Krishna" by --- who else? Krishna!!! They were good friends, but were both "Dravidian" along with Sri Rama? OTOH, Radha is not pictured as dark-skinned. To quote from the song from Satyam Shivam Sundaram featuring (ooh!) Zeenat Amman:

Radha kyon gori?
Mein kyon kaala!
which leads to all the explanations on why Kaala is superior.
And of course, Sri Rama was also "krishna".

That's at least TWO of our 9 Avataras as "Kaala". Many representations of Shiva also show a "blue" skin, ascribed to partial swallowing of the Great Poision HalaHala, predecessor of todin's ZamZamCola. I don't have authorities on skin color of Vamana & Parasurama, but that's about it hain? Balarama is not accepted by many as the Eighth Avatara, but that's another of my sources of confusion: Who were # 8 & 9 to-date? Of course Tamizh authorities say

Moovvaindu
(3x5) for # of Avataras until the time of the great Tamizh mathematician

This leaves modern-day Pakis as the only TFPA "Aryan" descendants around? :shock:


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests