From: sp2@cec1.wustl.edu (Sundara Pandian)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
Subject: Re: Ancient Indian history
Date: 13 Nov 1992 20:42:48 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Raj Sharma writes :

>
>Now I wonder
>Am I Aryan?
>who plunder
>in sion.
>
>Or
>
>Am I dravidian?
>who are
>truly indian
>in car.

     Leave it to historians. "Who am I?" is a better question    
for philosophers to think about.           

>
>How does it matter?
>this unending chatter
>from history
>so ancient.
>

      One will be showing bias in his historical probe if he 
looks at it with a view how this history affects him or what
best he could do to present the history so that he stands in
a better place in society with the history that he presents
to others. 
      One should not look at history and ancient civilization
in today's standards. If he does that, he may not be able to
fully comprehend the culture and civilization that existed
thousands of years ago. Civilization is a continous evolvement.
The culture that we have today did not arrive in a day or
night. It carries many traditions that were practised among
the people thousands of years ago. The fact is that this
tradition that prevails today is by no means a complete picture
of the ancient civilization. If one bears this in mind, he will
be able to see the harsh truths - obscene rituals, cruel animal
sacrifices, blind faiths, superstitions, caste divisions,
untouchability that existed in the ancient India.     
      Your question is "How does it matter?" History is not a
study intended to benefit the people of the present world, like
the field of medicine. It is a matter of study. It is to register
the observations on the culture that existed before our days.
We don't study the period of the "Sangam age"[Tamil] with a view
that it should matter for the Tamils today. It doesn't matter
at all whether the Sangam age was before the birth of Christ or
after the third century as it doesn't affect the Tamil poets today. 
But it is a good study to understand the date of the earliest
available Tamil works and the Tamil civilization that existed
before.                                           

>History so ancient,
>that no one knows;
>Was there indian then?
>or merely (wo)men.

      If you are making a vedantic observation here, I might
try to give a vedantic reply. Else, history is a  growing  
field and in my opinion, the works on indology have to go into
a lot of revisions as the ancient Tamil works have not taken
into account in the available works on indology. I am glad that
Selvakumar is highlighting the Tamil works in his articles.
The influence of Tamil on Sanskrit also needs more exposure.
This is not only a matter of linguistics but it has historical
implications as well. 
       
>
>Now I wonder
>when my stomach is full.
>well covered I am
>in the land of plenty.
>
>Nothing new to think,
>all so boring,
>need new exitement,
>So I wonder.

    As I wrote in one of my articles in S.R.E., something new
to think about is to try to think freely and to understand
what is this process of thinking.

>
>How ancient am I?
>Indian?
>or not?
>Do I have "historical foundation?"
>because my present foundation
>is so shaky
>in the land of the plenty.

   It all boils down to "Who am I?" ultimately, philosophically
speaking.

>
>Am I aryan?
>Are Iranians my brothers?
>or Germans?
>or Indo-Europeans.
>Any one, but
>my fellow Indian brothers,
>those lovely Dravidians.
   
   Leave it to historians or start your own investigation if
you are seriously concerned about your roots.

>
>Could Bharat be Bharat
>without
>Tamil brothers
>or
>Telgu sisters
>or
>Kannada neighbors
>or
>Malayali friends?

   "Unity in diversity" is what is needed for the unified stand
of India. The diverse cultures in India have to be understood,
if not appreciated. It is easy to destroy what is built, but
it is hard to maintain friendship with those who built.

>
>Let Bharat be Bharat
>Vibrant,
>Living,
>Dynamic,
>Not a cultural mosiac
>nor a melting pot.
>Let Bharat be Bharat.

   Bharat will be Bharat as long as we don't encourage the
divisive forces and if we try to see unity in diversity.

>
>Now I know.
>For sure.
>Neither I am
>an Aryan
>or Dravidian
>I am but a Human
>born in India
>and now
>making a living 
>in the land of the plenty[?]
>
>
>---raj

   The Aryan-Dravidian division is in the minds of the people
today. The "Aryan Invasion" theory, whether it is proved or
not, has no bearance to the people of India today. The Aryan
culture has influenced the Dravidian culture and has benefitted
from Dravidian culture in turn. The ancient Indian languages,
Sanskrit and Tamil have influenced each other, but it is a
distortion and lie to say that Tamil is born of Sanskrit or
to say that Sanskrit gave birth to all Indian languages. 
   A netter who posted an article on an obscene ritual involving
a queen and a horse was flamed by a few readers, whereas I have
seen a research article analyzing this ritual in a journal by
Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty (sp?). This is an instance. The problem is,
we view the ancient culture in today's standards. Just because
we have not heard of something, it doesn't mean that it was not
there and it will be very egotistical to cling to it.

   It will be very egotistic to demand that a study on ancient
history should have direct bearance on the people today and
unless we change this attitude, we won't be able to appreciate
the works and views of others on ancient history.
 
  S.Pandian
  sp2@cec1.wustl.edu