Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    0

    Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    I have been reading a little on the origin of the languages and it seems to me that the undeciphered script from the Indus Valley Civilization is apparently a 'Dravidian' script which means it was an early form of Tamil (?).

    The archeological findings in the IVC show that the language used then was some Dravidian language and not Sanskrit. This is one of the major weapons the anti-Hindu/anti-Indian 'scholars' (i.e.Witzel) use to insist that Sanskrit was not indigenous to geographical 'India'; and therefore validating the Aryan Invasion Theory. Sanskrit was obviously a major part of Aryavarta and although that may have included regions currently outside geographical 'India', it was still an integral part of the Subcontinent.

    The current explanations and 'scholarly' works are so inadequate and rather marred with blatant eurocentricity that getting a definitive answer seems out of the question. They (western 'scholars') link Sanskrit to some "indo-european" (how convenient) family of languages that apparently pre-dates Sanskrit. Some sources claim that the earliest written source of Sanskrit was ~1500 BCE.

    This is the date given to the Rig Veda which seems absolutely ridiculous! Now I've read that Sage Agastya codified both Sanskrit and Tamil and since both share no direct relation to each other, it is quite interesting to probe into their origins. Also, the Sumerian script seems to be closely related to the (early) Tamil script so perhaps there was some connection (?) between the civilizations.

    Anyway, do the scriptures talk about the origins of either language? If so, what do they say (infer)? The dating of anything to do with the History of Aryavarta is so aggravating since they never kept any records; or those records were destroyed by the marauding muslims and christians. Tamil Nadu is the only state where education in Hindi is not enforced. In fact, the Tamil Nadu govt., run by dalits, is so anti-Sanskrit that they wanted the priests in the temples to recite the shlokas in tamil! Of course, that was out of the question but it certainly is interesting that both Tamil & Sanskrit gave birth to all the other languages in India.

    The question of ages comes into concern here and has always bugged me. According to the scriptures, the first Manvantara of Svayambhuva Manu is supposed to have existed almost 2 BILLION (solar) years ago! Is that even remotely true/possible? That human beings, quite advanced I might add, existed on earth almost 2 billion years ago? And they must have spoken Sanskrit because they had the Vedas etc. Any further speculation on this?

    As some of my Tamil friends used to say, "Agastya codified Tamil in the morning and Sanskrit in the evening; thus Tamil is superior"! HAHAHAH.

    Subham.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    India
    Age
    40
    Posts
    116
    Rep Power
    39

    Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    Sanskrit is timeless. Tamil is 10,000 years old. All the languages on the earth & in the universe are daughters of sanskrit. Sanskrit is the mother language.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    191

    Post Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    saMskRtam descended from heaven, whereas prAkRta rose up from the earth.

    saMskRtam developed on the northern face of himAla, while prAkRta developed on the southern face of himAla.

    And since the dAsharAjñam confluence (c. 2,000 BC) the two sides of this linguistic coin have been continuously reflecting one another.

  4. #4

    Wink Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    hello
    we cannot find out which language ist older, you can only proof which piece of paper or palmleafe is older. and why is it so important to you?this body might talk tamil and wants to be proud about it. as hindus we know, that we are not this mind-body, but parabrahma. pure consciousness. the source of all languages. you are not the doer, the talker, but the devine source.

    seen from the historical side:
    if you find an old paper or stone it only proves, that the people using it had some troubles in keeping the message in the mind. do not forget, that the vedas have been passed from generation to generation thoughout ages just by oral tradition. being the first to write could also mean: being first in need of a peace of paper.

    regards
    karun

  5. #5
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    44
    Posts
    742
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    Quote Originally Posted by soham3 View Post
    Sanskrit is timeless. Tamil is 10,000 years old. All the languages on the earth & in the universe are daughters of sanskrit. Sanskrit is the mother language.
    There is no one Sanskrit. The language of the Vedic Shruti is very different from the language of Agamas or Smriti. And while Vedic mantras are considered direct form of Paravak, divine speech, it isn't the case with other Hindu scriptures. (There are few exceptions though.)
    So assuming fundamentalist point of view we may say that Vedic Sanskrit is timeless. And not classical

    P. S. 10000 years is rather fantastic dating of Tamil i think

  6. #6
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    1. Let's assume Sanskrit is older than Tamil. This gives North Indians a feeling of superiority over their dravidian brethren.

    2. May be the first assumption is not true & we found out that Tamil is older than Sanskrit. This brings a sense of superiority in the mind of Tamil speaking Indians over the rest of Indians.

    ...........

    So, where does either result lead us to ? Division of Indians on the liguistic lines. Mother India is already suffering from the wounds inflicted on her by the British & the present politicians with their Divide & Rule policy .... why rub salt on her wounds ??
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  7. #7
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    44
    Posts
    742
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    2 Devotee:

    How many north indian who are SPEAKING Sanskrit have U seen? And are U sure there are less south indians speaking it?
    Again, nowadays Sanskrit is not at all the ancient language of the Vedas. And modern Tamil is also very far from the original...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna View Post
    2 Devotee:

    How many north indian who are SPEAKING Sanskrit have U seen? And are U sure there are less south indians speaking it?
    Again, nowadays Sanskrit is not at all the ancient language of the Vedas. And modern Tamil is also very far from the original...
    Namaste Arjuna,

    Sanskrit is not spoken ( for exchange of views & not for prayer or chanting Mantras ... neither by North Indians nor by the South Indians) today but it is the mother of all North Indian languages. Similarly. Tamil is the origin of the Dravidian languages. No language can remain original ... in fact, it is not desirable. If a language really remains Orginal, it will be so much lacking in words to express exact "things" that it would die its own death in the changing socio-economic environment. So, if Tamil has changed, it is for good & it has certainly enriched Tamil. That is true for any language for that matter.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  9. #9
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Guru-mandala
    Age
    44
    Posts
    742
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    Well, there are people who can *speak* Sanskrit, but they are few. What i wanted to say is that antiquity of Vedic Sanskrit doesn't provide any special reason for being proud for northern indians.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: Sanskrit and Tamil -- Which one is older?

    Namaste Arjuna,

    Quote Originally Posted by Arjuna View Post
    What i wanted to say is that antiquity of Vedic Sanskrit doesn't provide any special reason for being proud for northern indians.
    I agree. The problem is that human mind is designed in such a way that it has a strong tendency to play the unholy mind-game, " Mine is better than yours !" ... and the problem starts from here. Though there is no "mine" here in the first place but who cares as long it serves a few people's interests & who actively fuel such sentiments ?

    We really don't own any language, region or a particular race or for that matter any tradition ... but we tend to "think" that way & feel possessive about it & create unnecesary avoidable boundaries. There is a necessity to preserve old traditions but that should not be at the cost of socio-economic-scientific-cultural-spiritual development or unity of the people.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •