If we propose this theory to western linguist . They will roll their eyes . Legends should always be legend even i find it amusing when people say tamil created by agathiar on shiva instructionJust an Intuition. Any views? A related logical thought that the earlier rishis were from a different part of the universe
Then you should read the book by Shri M, Apprenticed to a Himalayan Master where he explains how Nagas came to earth from space through light orbs and taught the world all about Kundalini etc.I am in no way putting down earth. My personal belief is that earth is a great planet, among the most blessed in the universe as much as those from where the rishis originated. Yes I also strongly believe the rishis originated from a different solar system.
Views welcome.
Spirituality is NOT logical magic.Science at least when significantly evolved can be logic that is magical
Spirituality on the other hand can be seen as the reverse, magic that is logical
Truth ultimately is one.
There is no such evidence that rishis and sages have come from different parts of the universe, it's all in the myth. Even if one takes such a possibility at face value, then also Tamil should have been the universal first language, just a common-sense approach will make this possibility more acceptable, then unnecessarily crediting the same in favor of Sanskrit. If Tamil is the first language spoken on earth, how we designed it, when Sages came from different planets and spoke a different language called Sanskrit, it is highly unlikely. If sages have come from different planets, they must have spoken Tamil only, and that is the reason, Tamil became the first language on Earth and we have supporting evidence for the same, Lord Shiva is considered an alien (and such theories are in circulation on the net too), and he is the one who chaired the first Tamil Sangam, so when Lord Shiva himself chaired first Tamil Sangam, and he taught us Tamil, it is certainly possible that Tamil is the first language on the universe. Further, the pandits and scholars have already agreed that Sanskrit is a composed language (the very name 'Sanskrit' confirms this), so it is designed as linga franka for a purpose on earth and the purpose was to write slokas, puranas, and a couple of epics and this it was called 'Deva Basha' too, it was mistaken as a language spoken by devas based on false propaganda.Just an Intuition. Any views? A related logical thought that the earlier rishis were from a different part of the universe
I’m happy there are wise people like you amongst us! Thanks!Since I know Sanskrit and also teach it, let me answer this.
Honestly its a very rich scientific language but when it is not a pre requisite for experiencing the state of balance.
In the state of balance every experience is coded and our brain translates it into the default language of our brain.
So one whose default language of the brain is English would decipher his experience and relate them in English, another who speaks Tamil would relate it in Tamil.
The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence.
Sir,There is no such evidence that rishis and sages have come from different parts of the universe, it's all in the myth. Even if one takes such a possibility at face value, then also Tamil should have been the universal first language, just a common-sense approach will make this possibility more acceptable, then unnecessarily crediting the same in favor of Sanskrit. If Tamil is the first language spoken on earth, how we designed it, when Sages came from different planets and spoke a different language called Sanskrit, it is highly unlikely. If sages have come from different planets, they must have spoken Tamil only, and that is the reason, Tamil became the first language on Earth and we have supporting evidence for the same, Lord Shiva is considered an alien (and such theories are in circulation on the net too), and he is the one who chaired the first Tamil Sangam, so when Lord Shiva himself chaired first Tamil Sangam, and he taught us Tamil, it is certainly possible that Tamil is the first language on the universe. Further, the pandits and scholars have already agreed that Sanskrit is a composed language (the very name 'Sanskrit' confirms this), so it is designed as linga franka for a purpose on earth and the purpose was to write slokas, puranas, and a couple of epics and this it was called 'Deva Basha' too, it was mistaken as a language spoken by devas based on false propaganda.
It is even more interesting when we read about the sage Agastiyar, he is the one and only sage who figures in each and every Purana despite the fact that the time period between each of the Puranas is thousands of years. He is accepted as a Tamil saint and he too has chaired the Tamil Sangam. Based on the fact that he had an enormous life span as it is evident from his appearance in all the Puranas, it is either a myth or if one does not take it as myth, then it goes without saying that Tamil happens to be the numero uno language on this universe. Any which way Sanskrit is no way close to the antiquity of Tamil. Please do not have such crazy thoughts and tarnish the image of a divine language called Tamil.
I’m happy there are wise people like you amongst us! Thanks!
Just to devils advocate you, especially the last para.. let me quote,Sir,
I am definitely not tarnishing the image of Tamil. I speak Tamil at home and love the language. The logic behind the Intuition that rishis are from a different part of the universe is this. The rishis are considered to have attained the pinnacle of spiritual development. It takes innumerable births to reach that stage. But according to science there is no evidence that humans were so advanced and evolved at the time rishis existed.
Let us consider that the concept of yugas was working. We have talked about the Gods avatars only from the latest mahayuga beginning with Satya Yuga. Nothing has been said about what happened during the previous mahayugas.
There are two possibilities. One is nothing happened and the inhabitation of earth happened from the current mahayuga. If such advanced thinking as we see from the scriptures and puranas are seen in such inhabitants it is very likely they came from another part of the universe which was sufficiently advanced already. If something happened during the previous mahayugas why has nothing been said about them even though the concept of time and yugas were well developed.
Another possibility is that we dismiss the concept of yugas but if so how come people with such advanced thinking were existing when there are no evidences that evolution was happening to the point of such advanced thinkers on earth. These people had extremely well developed minds and the truths they grasped are of the highest order which are yet to be matched by science even now.
The logical inclination is to conclude that they were indeed from a different part of the universe and since the language they employed was sanskrit, it should predate any language on earth because no other language talked about events that went such further back in history of the earth.
It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge.
Since I know Sanskrit and also teach it, let me answer this.
Honestly its a very rich scientific language but when it is not a pre requisite for experiencing the state of balance.
In the state of balance every experience is coded and our brain translates it into the default language of our brain.
So one whose default language of the brain is English would decipher his experience and relate them in English, another who speaks Tamil would relate it in Tamil.
The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence.
I am glad that Shivashares is using verifiable evidence to support the fact that Tamil is older than Sanscrit.Just to devils advocate you, especially the last para.. let me quote,
"It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge."
As per your view, Sanskrit is older than Tamil.... but then we do not have any evidence to prove that. The oldest stone carving or clay tablets with Sanskrit script ( I mean Devnagari script) is found much later (perhaps, around Gupta Dynasty). Further, we have traced out plenty of stone inscriptions during the Ashoka period, but none were Sanskrit, they are all in Prakrit or a language prior to that. So it is very unlikely, that sage-like Agastya who appears in all the 18 Puranas spoke Sanskrit as a medium of communication.
The oldest stone carvings of Sanskrit were found in Athipara in Rajasthan and in Junath in Gujarat. This stone carving is dated 100 AD (1st Century AD). Whereas, Tamil's oldest stone carving is from Mangulam in Madurai and PullimaanKombai in Theni and these carvings are from 600 BC (6th Century BC). The difference is a huge 700 years.
In India from 600 BC to 1800 AD, some 60,000 carvings were discovered which belong to Tamil but starting from 600 BC till now, only 4000 carvings of Sanskrit have been discovered.
Further, a good number of Sanskrit words have etymological roots in the Tamil language... take for instance the word 'aarati' (a fire ritual in front of God). The word 'aarati' has roots in Tamil and it was adapted into Sanskrit. Aaram in Tamil is a circle ( we say poo aaram, a garland which is in a circle) and the suffix 'thee' in Tamil is 'fire'. Thus a fire ritual in a circular fashion is aptly called 'theeyin-aaram" or "aarathee". Not only this we have plenty of words in Ramayana and Mahabaratha too which are of Tamil origin. For instance, the Kishkanda king 'Vaali"; is a Tamil name " Val" in Tamil is tail, he is described in the Ramayana as the monkey with biggest tail, thus he was aptly called in Tamil as 'Vaalan' or 'Vali" (I can list down some good number of words added to the Sanskrit language which are undisputably Tamil), so it is very unlikely that Sanskrit existed in the whole universe as the first language.
Honestly, it does not really matter to me which language is the oldest.You have answered well, but the question here is the antiquity of languages. If you say, let me quote:
" The oldest language in the world is the inner voice spoken in the sound of silence".
It is perfectly ok for all logical and sensible people. Nonetheless, the discussion here is about a language that could be used as a medium of communication. As silence cannot be used as a medium of communication ever (exception being "mounam angikaara lakshanam"), we have to meaningfully choose other options available. Is Hebrew the older language or Sanskrit the older one is the right question ( and not Silence or Hebrew /Sanskrit)? The comparison of Hebrew and Sanskrit is an apple to apple comparison 'cos both were once in vogue, both were linga franca, both are departed languages now (if one does not agree to that, at least its a fact that they are on ventilators).
Consequently, 'silence' cannot be accepted as the correct answer. Correct me if I am wrong.
Sir,Just to devils advocate you, especially the last para.. let me quote,
"It is said that Tamil was created by Agastya. But before that he should definitely have spoken some other language and Sanskrit would seem to be that knowledge."
As per your view, Sanskrit is older than Tamil.... but then we do not have any evidence to prove that. The oldest stone carving or clay tablets with Sanskrit script ( I mean Devnagari script) is found much later (perhaps, around Gupta Dynasty). Further, we have traced out plenty of stone inscriptions during the Ashoka period, but none were Sanskrit, they are all in Prakrit or a language prior to that. So it is very unlikely, that sage-like Agastya who appears in all the 18 Puranas spoke Sanskrit as a medium of communication.
The oldest stone carvings of Sanskrit were found in Athipara in Rajasthan and in Junath in Gujarat. This stone carving is dated 100 AD (1st Century AD). Whereas, Tamil's oldest stone carving is from Mangulam in Madurai and PullimaanKombai in Theni and these carvings are from 600 BC (6th Century BC). The difference is a huge 700 years.
In India from 600 BC to 1800 AD, some 60,000 carvings were discovered which belong to Tamil but starting from 600 BC till now, only 4000 carvings of Sanskrit have been discovered.
Further, a good number of Sanskrit words have etymological roots in the Tamil language... take for instance the word 'aarati' (a fire ritual in front of God). The word 'aarati' has roots in Tamil and it was adapted into Sanskrit. Aaram in Tamil is a circle ( we say poo aaram, a garland which is in a circle) and the suffix 'thee' in Tamil is 'fire'. Thus a fire ritual in a circular fashion is aptly called 'theeyin-aaram" or "aarathee". Not only this we have plenty of words in Ramayana and Mahabaratha too which are of Tamil origin. For instance, the Kishkanda king 'Vaali"; is a Tamil name " Val" in Tamil is tail, he is described in the Ramayana as the monkey with biggest tail, thus he was aptly called in Tamil as 'Vaalan' or 'Vali" (I can list down some good number of words added to the Sanskrit language which are undisputably Tamil), so it is very unlikely that Sanskrit existed in the whole universe as the first language.
Sravna, believe me, no language is specifically more divine than the other.Tamil might well have divine origins. I am inclined to believe in that. This is my theory. God created something universal and another specific for a planet. Sanskrit is the universal language and Tamil for earth. All other languages should derive from these two. The physical world is always a mix of universal and indigenous.
Ok. Agree. We will stick to what is oldest.Sravna, believe me, no language is specifically more divine than the other.
Every language is frequency of uttered words and everything came from God, so all languages are divine.
I think we sometimes get carried away that some things are more divine than others.
E
Tamil oldest language on earth, Sanskrit first in the universe