From: selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering)
Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Unity of India
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 03:37:27 GMT

In article <92253.171644DXS23@psuvm.psu.edu>, Deepak Srivastava <DXS23@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> In article <BuAn1F.J74@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>, selvakum@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca
> (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) says:
> 
> >         It's true Sanskrit has a considerable literature but so does an
> >         equally ancient language with matching richness, namely Tamil. All
> >         the modern Indian languages I believe are more closely based on
> >         Tamil syntax than Sanskrit ( please correct me if I am wrong).
> >         Since syntax is a more deeply related to the inner life-current
> >         of a language it might not be incorrect to say almost all
> >         Indian languages have a deeper connection to Tamil than to
> >         Sanskrit although there is a heavy borrowing of Indo-Aryan words
> >         in Hindi and other such languages. I might be able to show that
> >         there were still numerous native ( which appears to be
> >         Tamil/Dravidian) words left in tact in Hindi-Bengali-Marathi-
> >         Oriya-Punjabi-Gujarathi...etc. inspite of the influx of Indo-Aryan
> >         words if time permits on another occasion.
> 
> 
> This is interesting, because recently a debate ensued (ref:
> Girish Bonde posted Subhash Kak's research articles) about whether
> Aryans came from outside or were original natives of India who
> spread from inside out. In any case, given Aryan influence on
> indus vally civilization and the attempts by Kak etc to connect
> Vedic era with indus vally civilization. My question is where does
> Tamil/Dravidian language/culture fit into this ? This is a significant
> aspect of the whole picture because BJP ruled UP and MP states have
> already introduced in their history books: that Aryans were original
> natives of India. Are we seeing another north/south problem here ?
> 
> 
> regards..          Deepak
> 
> 
> 

   Yes, Prof. Kak had sent me a few of his articles and I read another 
   two from Cryptologia. I submit that Prof. Kak has put forth some
   interesting ideas BUT his study is far short of showing that Indus 
   civilization is Aryan. Let me say a few words about my reading of
   Prof. Kak's ( co-authored or otherwise) statements in this regard.
   Prof. Kak ( as a co-author along with George Feuerstein and David Frawley)
   state in " A New View of Ancient India" Yoga Journal July/August 1992 issue
   page 68:
         "What the new linguistic evidence suggests is that the Indus 
          Civilization, which flourished around 3000 B.C. and collapsed
          around 1800 B.C. may have included a strong contingent of
          Indo-European speakers. Hitherto the Indus people were thought
          to have been exclusively Dravidian speaking."
  And, just a few lines later he says in the same page:
         " ..the Indus people themselves were in fact the creators of 
           Rig-Veda, the most sacred scripture of Hinduism"

 First it was suggested that "Indus Civilization MAY have INCLUDED 
 a strong (??) contingent of Indo-European speakers" but later he says
that "Indus people themselves were in fact creators of Rig-Veda". I felt
the subtle shift in emphasis shown above will lead most readers to inaccurate
conclusions. I have no trouble in accepting the conjecture that 
Indo-European speakers might have lived ( as Prof. Kak and his 
co-authors say "included") in the cities at that time and I also don't 
have any trouble in accepting the conjecture that Rig-Veda could have
been composed at this time even in those cities BUT it is misleading
to say that "Indus people were creators of Rig-Veda" or to imply that
Indus people were Indo-Aryan people based on the
existing evidences. Prof. Kak's correlation of Brahmi and Indus glyph
and his assumptions of phonetic values and frequency analysis do not 
convince me in the least that Indus script is Vedic/Sanskrit as claimed. 
Much more work has to be done to change the existing views that Indus
people were non-Aryans. I know similar claims by more professional 
workers claiming that the Indus language is proto-Tamil/Dravidian and they
also claim based on frequency analysis etc. There was also an article recently
in Scientific American.
A few interesting finds such
as the Bronze Head ( which appears to be like that of a King) which is
6000-years old
is claimed by Prof. Kak ( in the side bar on the same article on page 67)
to be that of Vasishta because the hair style depicted in the statue is 
supposed to be unique to him ! A critical reading of Prof. Kak's articles
in the Yoga journal and the Cryptologia and his Technical Report ( The
Architecture of Rig-Veda) will show that there is no subtantive evidence
offered to his claims.  

The linguistic history of India is quite well documented and it is
abundabtly clear that the Indo-Aryan Speech slowly spread from North-West
to Magadha region and then very slowly to Middle India but did not make
any significant dent in the present Tamil land. [If you read
Prof. S.K. Chatterji's works it will become clear the gradual
spread of Aryan speech] The Sanskrit's alien orign is quite clear 
from numerous evidences such as Hittite writings and the work of Avesta 
( the Iranian's "veda" once) and numerous deep grammatical connections with
Greek and Latin etc. Sanskrit was indeed quite significantly influenced
in many ways including borrowing words from Dravidian right from Rig-Vedic
times. [ Dr. S.K.Cahtterji's words from "The Origin and the Development of
the Bengali Language" page 42: " The language of Rig-Veda is as yet
purely Aryan or Indo-European in its forms, structure, and spirit, but its
phonetics is already affecterd by Dravidian; and it has already begun to borrow
words from Dravidian ( and Kol); not only names of objects previously
unknown to the Aryans, but also a few words of ideas.."]

Well, more can be said but the main point is: S.Kak-S.R.Rao-Frawley-..
studies are interesting but can not be taken that the 
Indus civilization is Aryan. Their studies are worth watching just as
the research done by other groups which adduce more evidence to prove that 
the Indus script is Old Tamil ( I understand even a small book had been 
published by Dr.R. MathivaaNan claiming to have read numerous words ). 

Anyway, the topic of this discussion was supposed to be Sanskrit as
a national language. If this is considered a sane proposal, then
Tamil will be a better choice for the reasons I mentioned in my original
posting.

It will be a gross distortion of the present understanding of research
studies to claim that Indus civilization is an Aryan one.

regards,

Selva Selvakumar
 
be able to show some rudimentary evidences ( linguistic)