Tamil heritage

[C.R. Selvakumar]

This will be my last posting in response to Nanda Chandran.

Nanda Chandran wrote:
*>Would you say brAhmanas, the so-clled
*>   "Saiva" mudaliyaars and pillais etc. are also Jainas, because they also
*>   follow vegetarianism? The vegetarianism indeed was appreicated all
*>   across Indian subcontinent and Jainism (and to a lesser extent Buddhism)
*>   must have been a major influence.
*
*But though the brAhmanas took up vegetarianism, even till a very late date
*they didn't give up animal sacrifices as per Vedic regulations. Even
*ShankarAchArya doesn't forbid them and he's much later than
*Thiruvalluvar. And animal sacrifices
*to Gods are still carried out in Tamil Nadu by Tamils. And I doubt if
*animal sacrifices would go well with Thiruvalluvar and this is one of the
*main objections of Jainism had against Vedic brAhmanism.

   I don't know whether there is evidence for ancient Tamil brAmanaas
   having conducted animal sacrifice, though it appears animal sacrifices
   have been conducted recently by brAhmanas who live in Tamil Nadu. The
   Saiva Mudaliyars and Saiva Pillais and many individual families
   in other castes are vegetarians. My point is strong support
   or belief in vegetarianism does not mean the person is a Jain.
*
*And since you already accept he might be influenced by Buddhism or Jainism
*on vegetarianism, also note that Thiruvalluvar himself mentions brAhmanas in
*his work. So that would prove the existence of brAhmanas also in his
*environment.

   tiruvaLLuvar does not mention any caste. The word antaNar does *NOT*
   mean members of the brahmin caste. Words like antaNar and cAnROr
   are like 'compassionate ones and wise ones'. When tiruvaLLuvar
   mentions in Kural 259 about *not* eating meat
   ("avi corintu Ayiram vEttalin.."), he probably means
   Vedic brAhamanas (who may not be original Tamil
   brAhamanas), but still he does not mention any caste names.
*
*And since there're dharmashAstras and other ethical Samskrutam texts, either
*Astika or nAstika, which predate Thirukural and teach most of what
*Thirukural has to say, how can you call it original or distinct?

   There is *no* dharmashAstra texts in Samskrutam which can be
   compared with tirukkuRaL! The loftiness of tirukkuRaL and its
   intricate depth are incomparable. Vast majority of dharmashAstras
   including the Manu Smrithi (which is a monumental shame if you
   ask me) are very discriminatory in a fundamental way. Also
   they are not older or much older than tirukkuRaL.
*
*Also, take into account that only a very small minority of Tamils are
*vegetarian. And judging by the type of reaction against brAhmanas during the
*dravidian nationalist period, Thiruvalluvar's, "innA saithArai oruththal
*avar nAhna nannaiyam saidhu vidal," obviously held no meaning for the Tamils.

   You are hopelessly mixing up issues! (I've an answer but this is not the
   place; you don't seem to understand the meaning of 'innA seytaarai..')

*So in what way can Thirukural be said to represent the 'Tamil' way of life?

   If you read tirukkuRaL and understand the Tamil ethos and way of life
   you will see.

[..]
*   >For example Asoka's edicts declare about the Tamil kingdoms
*   >south of his empire, but hardly any tamil literature can be
*   >securely attributed to those periods.
*
*   But Ashoka is later than the Rg Veda by atleast a milleneum. And mention
*of a people doesn't necessarily imply progress of their culture, in terms of
*art or literature.

  But there are literatures from an earlier period like tolkAppiyam
  and the internal references point to the existence of highly regarded
  literature. That art and literature was well developed is
  evident from references in Sangam literature also.
*
*   >Tamils have lost lots of their
*   >literature due to floods and other reasons.
*
*   If this finds academic acceptance, then there's something very wrong
*indeed!  North India which faced the most barbaric invasions,
*which also had to fight deliberate assaults against its culture,
*could still preserve a good part of its literature
* (did it?), while due to floods and other reasons (???) Tamils have lost
*  their literature? Does this even sound reasonable?


    For a moment forget about the lost Tamil literature. What is
    available today is enough to make one understand about the
    development of art and literature among Tamils. Some of the possible
    reasons for the preservation of Samskrutam literature could be
    following: (1) Most of the literature being zealously guarded
    for religious purposes and orally communicated, (2) brAhmanas are
    protected, (3) the invaders might have wanted to learn the
    what was worthwhile there as they were acclaimed as great by
    brAhmanas, etc.

    There is plenty of evidence available from the last 200 years or so
    for the systematic destruction of Tamil works. Burning down the
    Jaffna library is just one example.
*
*   >Is it not accepted that there are many words and ideas
*   >of dravidian origin in the Vedas and Vedic literature ?
*
*   I do not know who accepts this or what proofs warrant such acceptance.
*But the simple logic would be that since there's no dravidian literature which
*predates the Rg Veda, all such speculations are without
*a solid base and can be at best learned guesswork and conjecture.
* And to go on about loan words and such, on such a base, is but shooting
*in the dark.

   Well, your premise is wrong!
*
*  > The aims and goals of almost all of humanity is somewhat similar, not
*  > just for the people of Indian subcontinent, but the diversity is
*  > more in style and approach than in content. What is different then?
*
*  Not so. Never in the history of any other culture, has a concept called
*samnyAsam been integrated into normal life, the way it was in BhArathvarsha.
*And ofcourse it is totally related to the aim and goal of life.

   I don't know what you call 'a normal life', but sanyAsam in one form
   or other is there in many cultures.
*
*  > First the language (it is not an 'Arya' language),
*
*  Educated Indians are just getting into this field. Let's see what a few
*more years of study in linguistics and Indology brings forth!

  Okay.
*
*  > second the Tamils way of classification of lands and their people and
*their culture, value system,
*
*  I still fail to see any major distinctness.

     May be you don't know the Tamils 'thiNai'
*
*  > the spiritual paths (illaRam and thuRavaRam,
*  > and not as four stages of life as in 'Arya' culture),
*
*  brahmachArya + grhasta - illaram
*  vAnaprastha + samnyAsin - thuravaram

     No, this is not correct. In Tamil system one can attain 'vITu'
     (mutti or mukti, liberation, salvation or whatever you call the
     great ultimate) in *illaRam* and not only that
     it is the preferred and supreme path (according to
     tiruvaLLuvar). It(illaRam) is fundamentally different from the
     male-oriented two stages of brahmachArya and grhasta.
     Similarly, Tamil tuRavaRam has nothing to do with vAnaprastha or
     and also samnyAsa stage.
*
* >  classical arts, music and dance, architecture etc.
*
*Again, I don't see any major distinctness. And I'm still waiting for a
*response from Tamil scholars to Prof. Gupt's query regarding Carnatic music.

     Perhaps you don't understand, and I will be replying to
     Prof. Gupt's comments separately.

*   >I don't agree with your claims. I think English today has more wealth of
*   >literature including a record of diverse philosophical development than
*   >Samskrutam.
*
*   But translations of Greek, Roman and German philosophers from their
*original languages cannot be accounted for as original English literature. And
*English has been a literary language for only the past three or four centuries
*(or is it much later?).

    Antiquity is not everything. A person who knows English can
    understand, enjoy, and pursue far more diverse set of thoughts
    with excellent starting points.
*
*   >But for the contributions and interest of
*   >a small number of western (plus Japanese) indologists, and their
*   >contributions in English and european languages, few in India would
*   >care for all the 'philosophical development'.
*
*   Ofcourse, that's what I pointed out. Apart from brAhmanical circles, I
*doubt if there ever was any interest in other sections of the Indian society
*about systematic philosophy.

    My point was about people knowledgeable in Samskrutam and not just
    brAhmanas, and I understand that there were and are many non-brAhmana
    scholars. Your exclusivity claims are  as I've seen without
    any basis.
*
*   And just because most don't "care", it doesn't in any way affect the
*importance of such literature. And for those concerned about culture and
*civilization, it's ofcourse the most important.

    I hope you know there were and are many who attain the mukti
    (or whatever the great state is called) without any knowledge of
    samskrutam! Many people develop many philosophies and schools of
    thought without any samskrutam!

*>Further a large part of what you claim did come from Tamil land
*>and flourished in Tamil milieu.  Can you deny that ?
*
*   I doubt if there's much proof. And since we're talking about Samskrutam
*which obviously met with such hostility amongst the Tamils,
*I doubt if it makes a whit of a difference where it was produced.
*And definitely very little 'dravidian' involvement in the whole thing.

   Tamils did not show any hostility to Samskrutam, except may be
   some critical comments about the claim is superiorty for Samskrutam.
   Samskrutam enjoyed great support in Tamil Lands (if you look at the
   number of works, epigraphical records). Time will tell whether
   'dravidian' had any involvement or not. I would recommend
   reading Prof. George Hart's works for a start.
*
**Systematic philosophy is not doctrinal in a religious way, but an effort to
**solve the puzzle of the universe based on pure reason or in some cases to
**reconcile the experiences of seers with reason.
*
*   >There is plenty of that in Tamil!
*
*   For example? Ofcourse I'm talking about original texts and not
*translations from Samskrutam.

   Sri Ramanujar is said to have listened daily to Tamil Azvaars words
   and their meaning but he produced works in Sanskrit. Now, will you say
   what he learned from Tamil influenced him ? What about Adi Sankara ?

   Now, about works in Tamil: Tamil has a *different* system and approach.
   The thousands of songs of tEvAram, tiruvAcakam,
   AzvAr nAlAyiram, the fourteen works such as civajjaana pOtam,
   uNmai viLakkam etc. etc. are excellent examples.

[..]
*   Actually I've a few questions and would be grateful for answers from
*Tamizh scholars :
*
*   1. Was there ever any Tamizh literature found in the other four 'dravida'
*states?

         Yes, in present-day Kerala and at least suthern parts of Karnataka
         for sure.

*   2. Is there any record of any 'invasion' by Aryas in Tamizh literature?

         Yes. For example a Pandian King is called
         'Ariyap-padai-katanta neTunjceziyan'.

*   3. Apart from references which can also be explained from the language
*context, is there any clear reference to brAhmanas or North Indians
*are a seperate race in Tamizh literature?

     There are references to Greeks/Romans and Mouriyas.

*   4. Even if Tamils are indeed a seperate race, what proof is there that
*they were the inhabitants of Harappa?

     People debate about these things based on insufficient evidence
     as far as I can see.

*   5. BrAhmanas even in Tamil Nadu due to sub sect names and literature can
*be traced to the North. Is there any indication in Tamizh literature
*or culture, which points to a prior North Indian homeland?

    Would you 'trace' the Tamil Christians to England and
    say they came from England or Italy etc. ?

    Tamil literature except for a few declare the south the land of
    'good tamil'. Tamils talk about 'corrupted forms of Tamil'
    in the north. Tamils refer to Himalayas and its flora and fauna.

    C.R. Selvakumar