Tamil words in English
mahadevasiva at HOTMAIL.COM
Fri Feb 20 21:52:07 UTC 1998
Mr Subrahmanya writes:
>3. Mr. S.Krishna
> If someone claims to be a descendant from the moon it IS logical to
laugh at it... but if someone claims he is from Dwaraka, dont you think
that it maybe possible ?
Now, the conventional interpretation is that the residents of dvAraka
were all yAdava and that the yAdava race self annihilated as a result
of debauchery/merry making/partying before the passing away of kr~SNa
1.unless you have proof that there are people who survivedthe
deluge/annihilation, you couldn't have had migration from dvAraka( this
is scientific, isn't it?)...
2. assuming they went to Tamil Nadu, how did iruGkOvEl come up with
figure of 49 generations? Is the genealogy recorded in any place? How
can you arrive at the number of generations elapsed without knowing the
Dear MR Subrahmanya, I had asked you for references on Indians asser
ting that all languages are descended from Sanskrit and all I get
is assertions from you that they exist but no proof i.e. no text is
quoted..I wonder why?:-)
Please give me a source that says: "Telugu, Tamil, Kannada,Malayalam
sarvE samskrtabhASAya: zizava:"( or a paraphrase there of) or some text
that says, ( pardon my poor Sanskrit/ versification/both)
" yathA gajAnanaSaDAnanayO: gaurI jananI |
tathA telugukannaDayO : samskrt jananI ||"
FYI, Monier Williams was the first one to postulate that all languages
are derived from Sanskrit( Monier Williams was a great *nationalist*
scholar, eh?...Arun Shourie assures us that his dictionary was compiled
to help missionaries translate the bible into samskrt)until
Alexander Campbell noted something contrary and the Dravidian theo
ry was postulated much later....
IF kannaDa were really descended from Samskrt, then why is it that the
kavirAjamArga( 850 AD) tells us that "A compound consisting of kannaDa
and samskrt words is like putting a drop of buttermilk on boiling
milk"...the mother's milk is poison for the child, huh?:-)
> Is an outright rejection valid ?
> All the original sources refer to only places within the
> never was any argument among pandits about some kind of origin from
> lands - until the word Arya was bastardized and all kinds of racial
> connotations were ascribed to passages in the Vedas.
>I waited to see reactions to Edwin Bryants posting, but there doesnt
>to be any.Could it be one of shock ?
>Now that Mr.Edwin Bryant has made his position clear, maybe some of the
>supporters of the AIT are thinking that the Invasion theory is not on
>footing after all - especially now that a **non-Indian** (ignoring
>Mr.Jim Shafer, after all he is a mere archeologist) has said that
>THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF A ALTERNATIVE TO THE INVASION/MIGRATION
>No one knows what that alternative is, but atleast accepting that there
>might be an alternative
>is indeed a mighty positive change.
>The so called "evidence" for the Invasion theory has been built up over
>almost 150 years
>wheras the challenge to it from has come only within the past 15-20
>and has become more organized only within the past decade or so. After
>India gained independence only 50 years ago and time is needed to
>old euro-centric colonial thinking.
>Atleast a beginning has been made.
>Again, at the end - the thing that started this discussion thread was
>Does anyone out there have an answer as to why it HAS to be of
>Dravidian origin ? anything else other than just assertions ?
>BTW,is the word for crow in Sanskrit, also of a supposed dravidian
>coz after all a cuckoo depends on the crow for its survival.
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
More information about the INDOLOGY