Indian identity vs Tamil identity

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

In Delhi in my cousin's place I saw a tv program. Pattimandram.

I know it is a light hearted comedy.


It made me uncomfortable. It did not seem to bother other Indians from India.
Why this Tamil identity is needed at the expense of Indian identity, or even human identity?
We claim Vasudeva kutumbakam but never practice it.
Is it hypocrisy?

 

[prasad1]

Let me explain who we are first: we are the true Indian( nagas ). I must blame BJP (RSS) Govt. They really wants to destroy our Identity. so we are fighting against it. This is why you guys feel this way…

Pls read the statement below, which was written by Dr.B.R.Ambedkar .

Who are the tamilans? Are they different from the Nagas? Or are they two different names for a people of the same race? It is a fact that the term Dravidians and Nagas are merely two different names for the same people. It is not to be denied that very few will be prepared to admit the proposition that the Dravidians and Nagas are merely two different names for the same people and fewer that the Dravidians as Nagas occupied not merely South India but that they occupied the whole of India—South as well as North. Nonetheless these are historical truths.

Nagas and Dravidians are one and the same people. Even with this much of proof, people may not be found ready to accept the thesis. The chief difficulty in the way of accepting it lies in the designation of the people of South India by the name Dravidian. It is natural for them to ask why the term Dravidian has come to be restricted to the people of South India if they are really Nagas. Critics are bound to ask: If the Dravidians and the Nagas are the same people, why is the name Nagas not used to designate people of South India also………….

The word ‘Dravida’ is not an original word. It is the sanskritized form of the word ‘Tamil’. The original word ‘Tamil’ when imported into Sanskrit became ‘Damilla’ and later on ‘Damita’ became Dravida. The word Dravida is the name of the language of the people and does not denote the race of the people. The third thing to remember is that Tamil or Dravida was not merely the language of South India but before the Aryans came it was the language of the whole of India, and was spoken from Kashmir to Cape Comorin. In fact, it was the language of the Nagas throughout India. The next thing to note is the contact between the Aryans and the Nagas and the effect it produced on the Nagas and their language.

Strange as it may appear the effect of this contact on the Nagas of North India was quite different from the effect it produced on the Nagas of South India. The Nagas in North India gave up Tamil which was their mother tongue and adopted Sanskrit in its place. The Nagas in South India retained Tamil as their mother tongue and did not adopt Sanskrit the language of the Aryans. If this difference is borne in mind it will help to explain why the name Dravida came to be applied only for the people of South India. The necessity for the application of the name Dravida to the Nagas of Northern India had ceased because they had ceased to speak the Dravida language. But so far as the Nagas of South India are concerned not only the propriety of calling them Dravida had remained in view of their adherence to the Dravida language but the necessity of calling them Dravida had become very urgent in view of their being the only people speaking the Dravida language after the Nagas of North had ceased to use it. This is the real reason why the people of South India have come to be called Dravidians.

The special application of the word Dravida for the people of South India must not, therefore, obscure the fact that the Nagas and Dravidas are the one and the same people. They are only two different names for the same people. Nagas was a racial or cultural name and Dravida was their linguistic name. Thus the Dasas are the same as the Nagas and the Nagas are the same as the Dravidians. In other words what we can say about the races of India is that there have been at the most only two races in the field, the Aryans and the Nagas.

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar

 

[Jaykay767]

There is nothing wrong in having a sub national Tamil pride under the overall national pride of being Indian. Same with Marathis, Kannada, etc..

Having said this, I agree it should not come at the expense of other Indians.

 

[Jaykay767]

obviously I have to set the history right -

Most logical view -

Africans occupied the entire lands from Egypt till south india and Sri Lanka. Subsequently the Tamils (same as the Australian aboriginals) from south east Asia occupied south india and Lanka. They then conquered all the lands till Egypt and Ethiopia.


Caste system is a Tamil origin and it is a "history marker" and where ever they ruled, they carried it. How is it a Tamil origin ? King Manu is the author of manusrmriti and the caste system. Only one King in history is known as Manu - Tamil King Manu Needhi Cholan and hence the caste system is a Tamil origin.

And you can see where they went they carried this in south east Asia - Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Cambodia, etc.

Now from this "history marker" we can see that caste system exists today in north india, Pakistan and in Ethiopia. So the Tamils had conquered all the way till Egypt and Ethiopia in the ancient past before the Mughal invasion in the north contained them only to south india and Sri Lanka.

As I said earlier, it is the Dravidians who are the correct Aryans in our texts.

 

[Jaykay767]

To add, the above is just a gist, refer my earlier posts on detailed analysis on history and how the Tamil civilisation is the root for all civilisations. Also how Sanskrit and Tamil are sister languages, Ramayana and mahabharat refer to actual wars in history in south india, etc..

 

[mkrishna100]

According to Tamil Nationalists they are neither Aryans or Dravidians but Tamilians and have their own distinct identity that is different from Aryans and Dravidians and they must not be confused with Dravidians which include most of the people from South India

 

[CHANDRU1849]

Since most of the Tamil Nationalists have no place in any political party in Tamil Nadu with reasonable positions, they switched over to this Tamil Nationalism topic.

If somebody questions their position in Tamil Nadu, since it is believed Indus Valley Civilization was actually a Tamil related one, will they go back to Sindh which is in Pakistan.

 

[Jaykay767]

i am referring to entire South Indians as Tamils aka Dravidians. There are other groups intermixed with Tamils via Mughals who ruled south and races that migated and settled here.

Having said that some more details..

1. Tamils claim they come from Kumari Kandam. My view is it is either Indonesia ( some researchers have already suggested this) or most likely Australia.

2. Egyptians themselves claim they came from the lands in the east.

3. Egyptians told the Greeks of the famed indae kingdom and that's why Alexander wanted to conquer india. MOst logical explanation - Alexander wanted to match the Tamils and conquer all the lands till south india. So he can proclaim as the greatest ruler.

4. The so called Aryans had 3 markers - language/culture, caste system and oral traditions.

5. Now there is clear evidence that caste system is Tamil origin. No caste systems exists in Europe. Not even in Greek or Italy. None. And we have a sanskrit text that King Manu is the originator and that he is a south Indian King.

6. Oral traditions - it was through this they preserved Sanskrit texts, and Greeks did the same with Iliad Troy's and Virgil aeinid.

7. Only pure native tribe today that has the oral traditions is Australian aboriginals. They have a sacred land called "Uluru" and worship the mountain as the place of God. And their languages is clearly Tamil. Hence oral tradition is also Tamil. No other native tribe across the world including whites - Greeks, Germans Russians British do not have this traditions. only Romani people carried this to Europe who are the Hindu gypsies.

8. Culture - al the culture and traditions written in Sanskrit texts are followed in Tamils. From the cross cousin marriages to superstitions to traditions to Bharatanatyam to Carnatic music to the various legends and stories of kings in the puranam are found in south, either as written inscriptions or followed by Tamils in different parts of south. If whites had brought this, why don't they have any of this ? No cross cousin marriages like Aryans - Pandavas Arjuna Krihsna ? There must be some such marker though which we can connect ? None.

9. Greeks have this culture of spitting on a new born baby 3 times to ward off evil like the Tamils. Similarly many such practices have been borrowed from Tamils that are not with us Brahmins, so even if aryans had come to south, they have clearly borrowed the culture from the Tamils.

10. Now from all accounts Tamils conquered from south india till Egypt / Ethiopia before Alexander conquest. How ? Sumerian Akkadian and Elamite empires existed prior to Persian conquest. Alexander defeats Egypt and then Persia and then comes to india. egypt claim they come from east and hence people from east went prior to Alexander conquest. Most importantly caste system exists in north india parts of Pakistan Afghanistan and Ethiopia.

11. Post Persian and Alexander conquest, there are no record of any Indian King conquering til Egypt. Persian and Alexander conquest shaped around the same time. Alexander just delayed the Persian expansion and very briefly for 20'yrs by defeating the Persian King Darius

12. Hence Tamils conquered all the lands from south india til Ethiopia and carried the caste system prior to Alexander invasion. They could not have done this later by cultural exchanges across so many lands - north india, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Ethiopia. And Tamil is found in north india and , Pakistan. And the Elamite empire which all researchers agree is a Tamil civilisation.

13. So if caste system existed prior to Alexander conquest, then the Tamils had the so called Aryan culture prior to his conquest.

14. This is why Max muller found the need to cook up a Caucasian migration from Central Asia so that they can claim Aryan culture as a white contribution. No records exist for this, there are no unique history markers like caste system or oral traditions to show this migration. It would have been so easy to claim the credit to Alexander soldiers and hence the entire Aryan culture is a white origin. But this is why he could not.

15. There are no oral traditions in Europe except by the Romani people who are by their own definition Hindu gypsies. Most importantly there is no oral traditions in the lands conquered by Alexander and none exists in Central Asia from where Aryans are supposed to have come from.

16. And because the Aryan civilisation is a Tamil origin, you can se the Tamils gaurding their culture and languages so zealously. This kind of pride in our language does not exists anywhere in the world, not even in the north.

17. Finally the so called North Indian Raman has no written proof, but you have the proof of this war in south- Tamil Narasimhan vs Kannda King Pulekeshi and the epic Sivakamiyan Sapatham where Tamil Dravidian devadasi Sivakami writes that she is kidnapped by the rival King and her Tamil lover King Narasimhan will come and rescue her,

Hence there is absolutely no-doubt that Aryan civilisation is the same as Tamil civilisation. Tamils = Dravidians = Aryans. Given such rich history and culture, Tamil pride is something to be celebrated,

And given that north india was also Tamil prior to Mughal invasion, the north Hindus should adopt Tamil language and culture if they want to go back to their roots.

 

[S Narayanaswamy Iyer]

Those who consider Harijan-turned Buddhist Ambedkar as uttering incontrovertible veda-vaakyams are entitled to say so. And accordingly extol "Indian identity" and "human identity" versus all other identities.

Nagas are Tamils? And vice versa?

What the Sanskrit-knowers call "naaga" is "paambu" to Tamils, "sarppam" to Malayalis.

The Tamils alone are exclusively "dravidians"?

Consider the lofty pedagogic proclamation:-

"The word ‘Dravida’ is not an original word. It is the sanskritized form of the word ‘Tamil’. The original word ‘Tamil’ when imported into Sanskrit became ‘Damilla’ and later on ‘Damita’ became Dravida. The word Dravida is the name of the language of the people and does not denote the race of the people."

H-t B Ambedkar does not, cannot, explain how the word "tamil" came to exist before it was "sanskritised". Nor who sanskritised it and when. What proof has he about degradation of "Tamil" into "Damilla", thence into "Damita", and eventually into "Dravida". Armchair logic? Pipe-dream? Wishful invention?

The monumental mendacity is asserting, "Even with this much of proof......", when not an iota is provided (four our verification).

"The Nagas in South India retained Tamil as their mother tongue."

Another incredible (and inedible) old chestnut.

Pseudo-historians tend to forget (or deliberately ignore or suppress) the facts that Telegu and Kannadam existed prior to Tamil, and that Tamil evolved (or descended) from these two "Dravidian" tongues. In the process Tamil had and still has only very limited sounds, compared with the two parent tongues. For example, just one ka, one cha, one ta, one tha, one pa. Compared with four sounds each in the parent tongues. Malayalam however retains all four sounds. Professional career philologists will confirm all this.

Mendacity is compounded with blasphemy in the declamation:

So far as the Nagas of South India are concerned not only the propriety of calling them Dravida had remained in view of their adherence to the Dravida language but the necessity of calling them Dravida had become very urgent in view of their being the only people speaking the Dravida language.

This tramples on the truth. The concocted fable of all-India "Nagas" being reduced to "the only people speaking Dravida language" defies the reality that there is no, and never was any, "Dravida language". There were, and are, Telegu, Kannadam, Tamil, and Malayalam -- inter-twined maybe, but identifiably distinct.

All glory, therefore, to Tamil identity, to Telegu identity, to Kannada identity, to Malayali identity. May they all thrive and blossom forth, overcoming horrendous Hindi hegemony!

S Narayanaswamy Iyer

 

[S Narayanaswamy Iyer]

"Well-known member" Prasad1 quotes Ambedkar as writing:-

"The word ‘Dravida’ is not an original word. It is the sanskritized form of the word ‘Tamil’. The original word ‘Tamil’ when imported into Sanskrit became ‘Damilla’ and later on ‘Damita’ became Dravida. The word Dravida is the name of the language of the people and does not denote the race of the people. "

Well, well!

If sipid (i.e. non-insipid) speculation plus uninspired invention and not informed intellignece is the order of the day then should not "Ambedkar" be said to derive from the Palghat-Brahmin Tamil word "ambattan", i.e. untouchable barber shearing human arm-pit and groin hair behind the cowshed?

Alternatively, could not the name Ambedkar originate from the Malayalam (also a genuine living Dravidian language) words Aa medu-kaaran, i.e. that (uncultured) man from the hills, i.e. loincloth-clad aadivaasi?

No offence intended. Just a Sunday spoof.

S Narayanaswamy Iyer

 

[ashoktwinn]

In Delhi in my cousin's place I saw a tv program. Pattimandram.

I know it is a light hearted comedy.


It made me uncomfortable. It did not seem to bother other Indians from India.
Why this Tamil identity is needed at the expense of Indian identity, or even human identity?
We claim Vasudeva kutumbakam but never practice it.
Is it hypocrisy?

 

[ashoktwinn]

I reproduce the entymology of Dravida (source-wikipedia)
The Sanskrit word drāviḍa is used to denote the geographical region of South India.[6] It was coined by Adi Shankara (788 CE-820 CE) when he was questioned as to where he had come from by locals in Mandhata, to which he proclaimed himself to be a "Drāviḍa Śiśu," with shishu meaning 'child' or 'child of' and dravida being a sandhi word combining the elements dravya, meaning water, and vida, meaning meeting place. Therefore, drāviḍa could be interpreted as meaning "the place where the three waters meet" with those "three waters" being the Indian Ocean, the Arabian Sea, and the Bay of Bengal.[7][8] Southern Brahmins are known as Pancha Dravida while northern Brahmins are known as Pancha Gauda, denoting geographical region.

Hence Dravida means meeting place of waters in sanskrit. I suggest we appreciate every language and culture as such instead of being parochial.

 

[Raj Rajamani]

Dear Mr.Prasad 1

How do you reconcile the following statement made by Dr.Ambhedkar on Aryan Invasion Theory to your quoted passage:
“ The theory of invasion is an invention. This invention is necessary because of a gratuitous assumption that the Indo-Germanic are the purest of the modern representation original Aryan race. The theory is perversion of scientific investigation. On the contrary, the theory is preconceived and the facts are selected to prove it. It falls to the ground at every point. The Vedas do not know any such race as the Aryan race.”

 

[Zephyr]

In Delhi in my cousin's place I saw a tv program. Pattimandram.

I know it is a light hearted comedy.


It made me uncomfortable. It did not seem to bother other Indians from India.
Why this Tamil identity is needed at the expense of Indian identity, or even human identity?
We claim Vasudeva kutumbakam but never practice it.
Is it hypocrisy?

Of late there has been strident statements and slogans about Tamil identity, as if TN is already separated from the rest of India. It doesn't bode well for the sovereignty of the country. The sooner such a dangerous trend is controlled, the better for the nation. Else we are going to have fragmented country, divided on the basis of language. Shiv Sena had tried it in the 60s and as a group, the Tamils had suffered the most then. So why repeat the same now? Every Indian is Indian first and Tamilian, Maharashtrian, Bengali, Bihari, etc, after that. Jai Hind!

 

[S Narayanaswamy Iyer]

Thamizhagam vaazhga! Kairalam valarga!

Zephyr and others of his mind should accept the harsh ground reality that "India" is merely a political concept of the invaders. Prior to that we were known as Bhaaratha varsham, Bharatha khandam. We still use that identifying descriptive phrase in our religious rites. There is no "Indian" race, much less an "Indian" language. After the loss of the Indus valley to Pakistan is it still even correct to call India "India"?

Languages and customs, on the other hand, have been handed down through the millenia and generations and protected fiercely and proudly. Politicians cannot erase them. They are the markers of civilisations.

Can Kashmiris do Kathakali? Can Tamils do Krishna-aattam? Can Uttar Pradeshis read Grantham script? Can Bengalis say what is avial? Can Gujarathis say what is mor-kuzhambu? These questions are endless.

Let us be. Do not force Hindi (or Urdu) down the throats of Tamils. Do not compel those who wear podavai and mundu to don salvaar-kaameez. Let us eat rice (parboiled, brown, and polished white) while you feast in wheat and corn. Carry on with your roti and your dhaal, while we prefer thosai, idli, oothappam, adai, uppumaa and chutney-saambaar.

S Narayanaswamy Iyer

 

[Zephyr]

Thamizhagam vaazhga! Kairalam valarga!

Zephyr and others of his mind should accept the harsh ground reality that "India" is merely a political concept of the invaders. Prior to that we were known as Bhaaratha varsham, Bharatha khandam. We still use that identifying descriptive phrase in our religious rites. There is no "Indian" race, much less an "Indian" language. After the loss of the Indus valley to Pakistan is it still even correct to call India "India"?

Languages and customs, on the other hand, have been handed down through the millenia and generations and protected fiercely and proudly. Politicians cannot erase them. They are the markers of civilisations.

Can Kashmiris do Kathakali? Can Tamils do Krishna-aattam? Can Uttar Pradeshis read Grantham script? Can Bengalis say what is avial? Can Gujarathis say what is mor-kuzhambu? These questions are endless.

Let us be. Do not force Hindi (or Urdu) down the throats of Tamils. Do not compel those who wear podavai and mundu to don salvaar-kaameez. Let us eat rice (parboiled, brown, and polished white) while you feast in wheat and corn. Carry on with your roti and your dhaal, while we prefer thosai, idli, oothappam, adai, uppumaa and chutney-saambaar.

S Narayanaswamy Iyer

Sir, I would first like to clarify that I am not a north Indian, but a Tambrahm like yourself, only I use my pseudonym for online interactions, including my blog which, if you were to browse, would realise belongs to a Tamilian. Also, I am a woman in her senior years.

That said, I look upon all of Bharatavarsham as my country, including Tamil Nadu, Bengal and all the other states that were created after Independence and which are still being created. I am fluent in four Indian languages, having lived in the North and West of the country, most of my life. I completed my schooling in Tiruchi and did my PUC from SRC. I guess that establishes my identity.

And today sir, everyone from Kashmir to Kanyakumari know about the cuisines of the rest of the country and also the culture and customs, thanks to the visual medium and now social media. Ironically, it is the south, which has adopted the salwar kameez with alacrity, while women in the so-called north Indian state of Bihar and MP still favour the sari. I am one of those who still wear the sari, both the 6 and 9 yards version (on occasions), while Tambrahm ladies much older than me have shifted to this garment on the plea of it being comfortable.

No one is foisting these sartoraial preferences, but we ourselves are adopting them, just as making chapati and chole and paneer and other north indian foods a part of our tiffin/meals.

My humble point: Political or not, we are a nation. And by demanding separate identity, and status, we will disintegrate, which is what those who don't want a strong nation are trying to achieve - for it endangers their plans. Which is why efforts to revive the ancient cultures, which are rooted in Sanatana Dharma, are ridiculed and dismissed as being fundamental, communal and regressive.

 

[renuka]

I guess being human first is of utmost importance.
Do we get up in the morning thinking of our racial identity?

Nope ...we dont..we just go about life in the method we are accustomed too..which can include culture we are born in and acquired cultures.

So finally Dravid or Nordic..we are all humans.

 

[prasad1]

Mr. Swamy and his elk are bent on destroying India as we know. There is no difference between a khalistan separatist and a tamil separatist.

 

[S Narayanaswamy Iyer]

Mr. Swamy and his elk are bent on destroying India as we know. There is no difference between a khalistan separatist and a tamil separatist.

No, Sri well-known member Prasad1.

I do not have a giant reindeer for a pet.

And please, let me differ politely, humbly and agreeably from you.

"India as we know" is essentially a million villages with their own unique distinctions as to millenia-old highly-prized and carefuly-guarded systems, traditions, values. They are the very essence of the soil.

They should not be obliterated because rabid Hindu ISIS/Talibans seek to wreck everything ancient and replace with a regimented Wehrmacht era.

S Narayanaswamy Iyer

 

[Zephyr]

I guess being human first is of utmost importance.
Do we get up in the morning thinking of our racial identity?

Nope ...we dont..we just go about life in the method we are accustomed too..which can include culture we are born in and acquired cultures.

So finally Dravid or Nordic..we are all humans.

I so agree with you, having lived among many different cultured people in our country and acquired not only the good in theirs, but also learnt their language. _/\_