Dravidianist Movement

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/india.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Siddis were Ethiopians kidnapped into slavery by the usual racists: islamis. The Ethiopians in India were brought by Indian muslims (=slavers).
One branch I hear managed to break free after a ship-wreck off coastal India near Goa I think, and so they were never converted to the scary religion but still remain African Religionists. I read that they also helped Hindus fight against the muslim oppressors.
But the others forcibly brought to India were not so fortunate and today they're all islamis, sadly.

That page has so many ridiculous mistakes in it ("Bengal was ruled by Abyssinians" said some Portuguese guy - of course he would, to colonial Europeans all Indians were Africans because they weren't white), but perhaps the following deserves a mention:
the page quotes someone saying that Buddha was an Egyptian priest, referring to some description of him with woolly hair. Yeah, sure. Why not. This is after all, the only version I hadn't yet heard. But how is it more likely than other random descriptions of the Buddha with red hair which the Oryanists like to hold up as proof for the Oryan ancestry of the Buddha? (And <i>they</i> think Sakhya Muni = Shaka Muni, mwahahahahaha). But then, they <i>need</i> an 'Oryan' Buddha to make the Central Asianists have practised and spread an 'Oryan' religion. Like these Pan-Africanists need an African Buddha to prove the same, but about Africans.

The oldest Egyptian culture was African. And it is hypothesised that the Sphinxes were possibly built by them, but scholars never seemed to agree about the dating of the Egyptian monuments. I've heard dates ranging from 10,000 years, 5,000 years, 3,000 years. Which is it?

But later, Egypt was taken over by another ethnic group and its culture. And this happened repeatedly until the time when Greece took over Egypt (Alexander's time certainly, before that possibly). Cleopatra of the 1st century BCE was a Greek, descended from Ptolemy I think.

When dating is in question, where's the proof that in 6th century BCE Egyptians were all still African?

Of course, this has no bearing on the Buddha, who was Indian, and of which there is no doubt. He was of a Kshatriya dynasty, and dynasty means you need to have been in India pretty long. 'Sakhya' in Muni also indicates this. But there need be no question of foreign origins for his ancestors either.
But why believe any Indian literature or tradition to this effect - none of which make mention of his Egyptian origins or ancestry? Why not believe some random European who thinks Buddha had 'woolly' or 'red' hair and, like Indologists, ignore the Indian tradition altogether or misinterpret it wherever useful to <i>make</i> Buddha fit the Oryan or African mould, depending on who is the one doing the appropriating.

Anyway, whether it's the Oryanists or the Pan-Africanists, they're all reconstructing history with very little knowledge of the places, figures, civilisations and people they are appropriating. They make huge mistakes and assumptions and try to imagine that black skin means African. The pictures of tribal and other South Indian people and 'dalits' at that link above makes bad argument. Just because they are dark doesn't mean they are African. (Same with Australian Aborigines or Fijians.) Most South Indians are dark. Then where are the pictures of many of the equally-dark Brahmanas of South India with a label beneath saying they are African too? The omission might be due to the fact that Pan-Africanists believe just as fervently in the racist AIT as the Oryanists.

Here's a hint: dark people can be appropriated as African only if they are from Africa in recent times - like the Siddis. Not if they lived in India for 5,000 or 10,000 years or more, say. In which case they are Indian.

Else what then, the whole world's brown people would be considered 'African'? That's no different from the ignorant racists among the Americans who think everyone in the world is either Caucasian ('white'), African or 'Chinese'.

There are a thousand sites like the one mentioned in the previous post. There's nothing different or special in this one to bring it up.

<b>CORRECTIONS:</b> lots of typos, spelling and plain absent-minded errors in the above are corrected; the changes are in blue.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Apr 1 2007, 05:38 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Apr 1 2007, 05:38 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/india.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Siddis were Ethiopians kidnapped into slavery by But later, Egypt was taken over by another ethnic group and its culture. And this happened repeatedly until the time when Greece took over Egypt (Alexander's time certainly, before that possibly). Cleopatra of the 1st century BCE was a Greekfor his ancestors either.
But why believe any Indian literature or tradition to this effect - none of which make mention of his Egyptian origins or ancestry? Why not believe some random European who thinks Buddha had 'woolly' or 'red' hair and, like Indologists, ignore the Indian tradition altogether or misinterpret it wherever useful to <i>make</i> Buddha fit the Oryan or Else There are a thousand sites like the one mentioned in the previous post. There's nothing different or special in this one to bring it up.

<b>CORRECTIONS:</b> lots of typos, spelling and plain absent-minded errors in the above are corrected; the changes are in blue.
[right][snapback]66408[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In many pictures Buddha has mongol eyes.As he was near nepal,maybe he has some mongol ancestry also?(beside his african and european ancestry <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> )

Arheological speaking,the ruins of Egipt are older then thoose of Ethiopia or Sudan.If you wonder how faraonic egiptians look like,look at today egiptians.I belive that egiptians of today(and same about the greeks) have more subsaharian genes then thier ancestors.Was a big trade of slaves from Kush in ancient and medieval world.So big that even scandinavians have 0.6% subsaharian genes.

i read that an white can become black (whit broad nose) by staying 20000 years in a tropical habitat.

Ethiopians speak a semitic language by the way(not hamitic) but semito-hamitic was replace whit afro-asiatic because of racist conotations of the former term.

Some belive that Sphinx is 10000 years old because his erosion,who they belive was produce by rain ,which was a common thing in Egipt 10000 years ago .But the erosion of Sphinx is produce by salt not water.A phenomen stil happend today.So date for the Sphinx is 2600bc.
If we think at the genetic bottle-necks ,then we have 5 "races"-african(subsaharian),caucasian(including north africa !),mongol,australian,american.But are no clear cuts delimitations of these "races.Is clear that this bottle-necks are created by separation of continents by waters and deserts betwin.
Australian aborigenals are same geneticaly distant from africans as european are(even we are tented to see australians more close to africans because their dark complexion).

PS-i read that roma gypsy are the most genetic similar whit sinhala people.Qwestion-sinhala are people from Sri Lanka?Are the same whit the singhalese?

[Guest]

Dear Friends,

Tamils have equal Distribution of FourVarnas as north, except that Brahmins are little less. Vedas do not have castes. But Tholkappiam and Sangam Literaure has all that.

Sangam Literature(200BCE-200CE), Thol Kappiam(100-200CE), TIRUKURAL -250CE, Silapathikaram & Manimekhalai(300CE) EACH ONE them regards Vedas highly an I Can post literal Tamil if fonts are availble.

Ofcourse False Researches tried to claim a Artificial Tamil Vedas and I QUOTE vERBATIM BY A Communist Researcher in this.
concludes :
“The Aryan-Dravidian or Aryan-Tamil dichotomy envisaged by some scholars may have to be given up since we are unable to come across anything which could be designated as purely Aryan or purely Dravidian in the character of South India of the Sangam Age. In view of this, the Sangam culture has to be looked upon as expressing in a local idiom all the essential features of classical “Hindu” culture. M. G. S. Narayanan, “The Vedic-Puranic-Shastraic Element in Tamil Sangam Society and Culture,” in Essays in Indian Art, Religion and Society, p. 128.

Nilakanta Sastri goes a step further and opines,
“There does not exist a single line of Tamil literature written before the Tamils came into contact with, and let us add accepted with genuine appreciation, the Indo-Aryan culture of North Indian origin.”

The falsehood of a Separate Tamil NanMarai was well ANALYSED BY Communist Scholar V.Krishnamurthy, and I quote from his article.

தமிழகத்தின் அண்மைக் கால வரலாற்றில் பிராமணர்- பிராமணர் அல்லாதார் இயக்கத்திற்குப் பெரும் பங்கு உண்டு. இதன் தொடக்கத்தைச் சோழர் காலம் தொட்டு காணுதல் கூடும். அக்காலத்தில் பிராமணர்களைப் போன்றே வேளாளர்களும் சமுதாயத்தின் மேல்தட்டில், சாதி ஏணிப்படியில் மேல் இடத்தைப் பெற்று இருந்தனர்.

பிரமதேயம் எனப்படும் நிலங்கள் எவ்வாறு பிராமணர்களுக்கு நிவந்தங்கள் அளிக்கப் பட்டனவோ அவ்வாறே வேளாளர்களுக்கு வெள்ளான் வகை நிலங்கள் மன்னர்களால் அளிக்கப் பட்டன. இது இவ்விரு வகுப்பினரின் மேலாண்மையைக் காட்டுகிறது. இத்தகைய சமூக, பொருளாதார நிலை இவ்விரு சமூகத்தின் இடையே கலாச்சாரப் போட்டியையும் கருத்துப் போராட்டத்தையும் உருவாக்கியது. தத்துவத்துறையிலும் இப்போராட்டம் வெளியாயிற்று. நிலவ்ய்டமை முறைவலுப் பெற்றுவிட்ட பிற்காலத்தில் சைவ நூல்களும் அதனடியாக சைவசித்தாந்தம் தோன்ற்லாயின.

பாரதத்தின் பல்வேறு பகுதிகளில் தத்துவ விசாரணை என்பது பிராமணரின் ஏகபோகமாகத் திகழ்ந்தபோது தமிழகத்தில் வேளாளர்களும் தத்துவ விசாரணையில் ஈடுபட்டனர். அதன் விளைவாகவே தமிழில் சைவசித்தாந்தம் உருவாக்கப் பட்டது.
ஆங்கிலேயர் வருகைக்குப் பின் இவ்விரு வகுப்பினரிடையே முரண்பாடு மேலும் முற்றியது. அறிவு ஜீவிகளான இம்மேல்தட்டு வகுப்பினரிடையே ஆங்கிலேய அரசுப் பதவிகளில் அமர்வதில் கடும் போட்டி ஏற்பட்டது. இம் முரண்பாடு பிராமணர் எதிர்ப்பௌ இயக்கமாக உருவெடுத்தது, நீதிக்கட்சியில் சங்கமம் அயிற்று. பின்னர் ஆரிய-திராவிட இனப் பாகுபாடாகப் பரிணாமம் பெற்றது.

இவ்வியக்கத்தின் கொள்கைகளை கலாச்சார, சமய மட்டத்தில் பிரச்சார்ம் செய்யும் பணியில் பல பிராமணர் அல்லாத அறிஞர்கள்- குறிப்பாக வேளாளர் சமூகத்தைச் சேர்ந்தவர்கள் ஈடுபட்டனர். அவர்களில் கா.சு.பிள்ளை, மறைமலை அடிகள், சிவராச பிள்ளை போன்றோர் தத்துவத் துறைகளில் பிராமண ஆதிக்கத்தை குறைக்கும் நோக்கோடு தமது ஆய்வுகளை இவர்கள் நடத்தினர்.

ஆனால் சைவ சமய குரவர்களாகிய அப்பர், சம்பந்தர், சுந்தரர் மற்றும் வாசகர் ஆகியோரின் தேவாரம், திருவாசகம் ஆகிய நூல்களில் வேதங்களையும் அந்தணர்களையும் போற்றியிருந்தும், நெடுங்காலாமாகவே அவ்வேதங்களே, தத்துவங்களின் மூல நூல்கள் எனக் கருதப் பட்டு வரும் மரபும் இவ்வறிஞர்களது பணிக்கு இடைஞ்சல் ஆயிற்று.
" வேறு விதமாக சொல்வதானால் ரிக், யஜுர், ஸாமம், அதர்வணம் அகிய நான்கு வேதங்களும் ஆரியர்களின் படைப்புகளே என்ற உண்மையும், பிராமண்ர்களே காப்பாளர்கள் என்ற யதார்த நிலையும் அவர்களது நோக்கிற்கு இடையுறாக வந்தது.

இந்த இடையூறை கடக்க முன்பு எப்போதும் இல்லாத புது கொள்கைகளை நீதிக்கட்சியின் கருத்துக்காவலர்களாகிய இந்த அறிஞர்கள் (கா.சு.பிள்ளை, மறைமலைஅடிகள், சிவராசபிள்ளை) உருவாக்கினர். அதாவது வேதங்கள் என்றும் மறை நூல்கள் என்றும், சைவ குரவர்களால் குறிப்பிடப்படுபவை வடமொழி வேதங்கள் அல்லவென்றும், வடமொழி வேதங்கள் தோன்றுவதற்கு முன்பே தமிழில் வேதங்கள் தோன்றி விட்டன என்றும் அவற்றை கண்ட வடமொழியார், தெளிவாக சொல்வதானால் பிராமணர்கள் அவற்றை வடமொழியில் பெயர்த்துக் கொண்டார்கள் என்றும் கூறத் தலைப் பட்டனர். அவ்வாறாயின் அத்தமிழ் வேதங்கள் இன்று உள்ளனவா என்ற வினாவிற்கு அவை கடல்கோளால் அழிந்துபோயின என்றும் அவர்கள் கூறினர். எக்கூற்றுக்கள் முற்றிலும் வரலாற்று விரோதமானவை; விஞ்ஞானபூர்வ மற்றவை என அறிஞர்களால் தள்ளப் பட்டன, என்றாலும், அவற்றின் தாக்கம் இன்று வரை தமிழக மக்களிடையே நீடித்திருக்கிறது எனின் மிகையாகாது. – பக் 52-53; ஆய்வு வட்டக் கட்டுரைகள்.;வெ.கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி


தமிழில் எழுதப்பட்ட வேதங்கள் அல்லது நான்மறை நூல் (ரிக், யஜூர், சாம, அதர்வண வேதங்களின் தமிழ் மூல நூல்கள்) கடல் கோளில் அழிந்து போயின என்றாலும் அவற்றின் பெயர்கள் முறையே தைத்திரீயம்; பௌடிகம்,தலவகரம்; அதர்வணம் ஆகும் என கா.சு.பிள்ளை, தனது நூல்களில் குறிப்பிட்டுள்ளார்.

இந்த நான்மறைகள் எவை என விளக்கத் “திரு நான்மறை விளக்கம்” என்ற நூலையே கா.சு.பிள்ளை எழுதியிருக்கிறார். தமது கூற்றை நிருபிக்க தொல்காப்பியத்தில் பாயிர உரையில் நச்சினார்க்கினியர் கூறியுள்ள விளக்கத்தை ஆதாரமாகக் காட்டுகிறார்.

இது குறித்து “கா.சு. பிள்ளையின் ஆய்வுமுறை” என்ற எனது கட்டுரையில் ஏற்கனவே நான் ஆராய்ந்துள்ளேன். இக்கட்டுரையில் தமிழ் வேதங்கள் எனக்
கா.சு. பிள்ளையால் குறிப்பிடப்பட்டுள்ள பவுடிகம் தைத்திரீயம்; தலவகரம் ஆகியவை யாவை என்றும் இவைகள் உண்மையில் தமிழ்வேதங்கள் தானா என்றும் ஆராய்வோம்.( இப்பெயர்களே தமிழ்ச் சொற்கள்தானா என்பது வேறு விஷயம்).

The Author analyses the above names usage in Tamil Old Lit, and finds the earliest in a Copper Plate Grants called as “Parvathiva sekara puram copper plates” issued by Aay King Kokkarunan Thadakkan giving Paddy Grants to the Practices of Paviziyam, Thaththiriyam and Thalavarkarams. This Pandiyan Copper Plate is earlier than Nachinaarkiniyar writing the Commentary for Tholkappiyam.

Communist Scholar Mr.V.Krishnamurthy then goes on to analsyse these with the Assistance of S.C.Bannerji’s “Dharma Sutras- A study in that Origin and Development” and finds from Veda developed Samhitas and Sutras.
· Paviziyam refers to Apasthamba Sutra from Yajur Vedic School.
· Thaththiriyam is from Yajur Vedic School, i.e., Thaththiriya Prmana- and its brach Vaikaana dharma Sutra
· Thalavarkara is from Sama Veda School,, referring Gowthama Dhara Sutra.

Finally Concludes- எல்லாவற்றிற்கும் மேலாக தமிழில் நான்கு வேதங்கள் வடமொழி வேதங்களுக்கு முன்னரே இருந்தன எண்றும் அவை முறையே பவுடிகம், தலவாகரம், தைத்ரேயம் மற்றும் அதர்வணம் எண்றும் கா.சு.பிள்ளை போன்ற தமிழ் வேத ஆர்வாளர்கள் கூற்று அர்த்தமற்றது எனவும் துணியலாம். THIS ARTICLE COMES IN Page 51-65. அ

For the benefit of friends, earlier some Scholars tried to claim that Nanmarais referred to Tamil – அறம், பொருள், இன்பம் மற்றும் வீடு, but all this fell flat when TholKappiayam was shown
­ýÀÓõ ¦À¡ÕÙõ «ÈÛõ ±ýÈ¡íÌ
«ý¦À¡Î Ò½÷ó¾ ³ó¾¢¨½ ÁÕí¸¢ý
¸¡Áì Üð¼õ ¸¡Ïõ ¸¡¨Ä
Á¨È§Â¡÷ §¾±òÐ ÁýÈø ±ð¼Ûû
Ð¨È «¨Á ¿ø ¡úò Ш½¨Á§Â¡÷ ­Âø§À.1 ¸ÇÅ¢Âø

Now for the benefit of Doubters who have been always cheated by ThaniTamil movement Scholars- Devaneya Pavanar in his book “Oppiyan Mozhi Nuul” written in 1939, has analysed the same and came to the same conclusion, of the fact that Nachinarkiniyar claim of Tholkappiyam being written before Vedas being written is just a wrong Prideful claim and the names Paviziyam, Thaththiriyam, Thalavarkarams and Atharvanam are Part of Indian Vedas. Devanyan when this Meaningless book of KA.SU.Pillai- “ThiruNanMarai Vilakkam” raised a controversy has to give clarification

நால்வேதம் அல்லது நால்மறை, ஆரங்கம் ஆகமம் என்பன எல்லாம் ஆரிய நூல்களே என்பதும், திருக்குறள் தவிர இப்போதுள்ள பண்டை நூல்களெல்லாம் அந்தணர் என்பதும் பிரமணரையே குறிக்கும் என்பது சரியே.
பக்க- 102 தமிழர் மதம்.தேவநேயன்.

Devapria Solomon

[Guest]

Post 103:
Thanks Solomon.

If it's not any trouble, could you please repost the following. I'd like to save it and add it to my archive of information related to India. At present, the following crucial paragraph shows an unintelligible font instead of Tamizh (or other language's) characters.<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->For the benefit of friends, earlier some Scholars tried to claim that Nanmarais referred to Tamil – அறம், பொருள், இன்பம் மற்றும் வீடு, but all this fell flat when TholKappiayam was shown
­ýÀÓõ ¦À¡ÕÙõ «ÈÛõ ±ýÈ¡íÌ
«ý¦À¡Î Ò½÷ó¾ ³ó¾¢¨½ ÁÕí¸¢ý
¸¡Áì Üð¼õ ¸¡Ïõ ¸¡¨Ä
Á¨È§Â¡÷ §¾±òÐ ÁýÈø ±ð¼Ûû
Ð¨È «¨Á ¿ø ¡úò Ш½¨Á§Â¡÷ ­Âø§À.1 ¸ÇÅ¢Âø<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Separate matter. About this paragraph:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nilakanta Sastri goes a step further and opines,
“There does not exist a single line of Tamil literature written before the Tamils came into contact with, and let us add accepted with genuine appreciation, the Indo-Aryan culture of North Indian origin.”<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Nilakanta Sastri obviously did not question the Oryans or even the AIT, so his explanation incorporates them. I think such explanations ought to be revisited based on what we today know did not happen (AIT). And in that case, I think we may turn back to what we traditionally knew about our country and its beliefs (Sanatana Dharma).

Without presupposing the AIT or existence of Oryans, the case becomes simpler. Ancient Hindu Tamils eventually received Vedic knowledge which had passed South from the Northwest where the Vedas were composed. (All other areas of India only got the Vedas from the NW anyway, so in this matter, time is all that separates the inundation of various regions of India with the Vedas). Later, much after the incorporation of Vedic knowledge, Tamils started writing the literature down. By this time the Vedic Hindu elements had long become part of the older Hindu traditions that Tamil Nadu (and the rest of India) already had.

[Guest]

To do with my own post 104:
In case anyone is wondering what I mean with 'Hindu' Indians (including Tamils) 'before the Vedas', guess I'll have to explain, although I am sure I wrote about this long ago in some other thread at IF.

To put it in a simple way: Well, what do we call all the Indians before Buddhism? Followers of Sanatana Dharma. Similarly, what were Indians before Jaina literature or the Vedas? The same. Or, if one were to take a western phrase, we were 'animists' - all of India was 'polytheistic, animistic, semi/fully idolatrous heathens'. So we remained after the Vedas, too, of course <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo--> (since it was no change of religion in the first place) as were Indians after Buddhism for the most part.

Before Madhya Pradesh, Kashmir or Orissa or Bengal and elsewhere in the North got the Vedas from the NW, they too were ... followers of Sanatana Dharma / 'animists'. As were the peoples of the Southern regions. As were the pre-Vedic NW Indians themselves (also 'polytheistic animists'). Moreso since we can ignore the AIT fantasy. The Vedas were founded on the existing cosmogony of India's Sanatana Dharma. They don't set out a new religion, they expanded the knowledge on it: explaining this newly received knowledge <i>within</i> the eternal Dharma of India.

Besides, as per old tradition, the pan-Indian Gods have been known and revered in Tamil Nadu for longer than the Vedas have been known of. And I am certain this is true for all North Indian places as well.
Since the AIT fell through for me, I can easily turn back to traditional Indian (and Tamil) understanding of our past. No more need for the recent christocolonial inventions about this - not for me.

[Guest]

Dear Husky,

I quoted Tholkappiyam in TSC Avarangal Fonts, which was downoaded, where as my postings where in Tsc Cuthuma. Can you Kindly get this Tamil Fonts downloaded, as Most of the Sangam Lit. downloaded from Project Madurai are in this Fonts.

I do not agree AIT, but when we quote Old Authors, we maintain Verbatim. Even though many Authors do not fully believe AIT STILL they wrote the words incoming Aryans, when referring, we need not take it seriously.

My Point is There is not a Single word in Tamil Lit. about Separate Aryan or Dravidian Race.

[Guest]

Thanks for your explanation, Solomon. I will download the required font as you suggest.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Apr 3 2007, 12:19 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Apr 3 2007, 12:19 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ancient Hindu Tamils eventually received Vedic knowledge which had passed South from the Northwest where the Vedas were composed. (All other areas of India only got the Vedas from the NW anyway, so in this matter, time is all that separates the inundation of various regions of India with the Vedas). Later, much after the incorporation of Vedic knowledge, Tamils started writing the literature down. By this time the Vedic Hindu elements had long become part of the older Hindu traditions that Tamil Nadu (and the rest of India) already had.
[right][snapback]66476[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

doesn't that imply that parts of india outside the north west part had religions different from vedic hinduism, and converted to hinduism only after vedic knowlegde reached their part of the subcontinent.

[acharya]

There has been reconversion to Hinduism across India from Buddism and other sects.

This has applied a new mark with local languages in all regions.

[Guest]

i am not talking about Buddhism.

did parts of india have some other religion apart from Hinduism and buddhism (which itself sprung from hinduism) or not. seems very likely that vedic hinduism was originally limited to those parts of india which spoke/understood sanskrit.

[Guest]

<b>DRAVIDIAN PARTIES OF TAMIL NADU - Their Origin</b>

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I quoted Tholkappiyam in TSC Avarangal Fonts, which was downoaded, where as my postings where in Tsc Cuthuma. Can you Kindly get this Tamil Fonts downloaded, as Most of the Sangam Lit. downloaded from Project Madurai are in this Fonts.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

http://www.tamil.net/projectmadurai/akaram_uni.html

Here Tholkappiyam and also the great body of tamil literature is available in pdf format and are in unicode encoding.

[Guest]

Karunanidhi pays homage to slain LTTE leader
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In his poem, written in a manner as if Karunanidhi was addressing it to Thamilchelvan, the Chief Minister said by dying "(you) turned yourself into fertiliser, for the sake of the struggle for (Tamil) rights."

A prolific writer, Karunanidhi added in his poem:

The 'Utham Purush' that you are,
Your life is not extinguishable nor
Would you let your brethren die;
Selva, you have carved a place for yourself
In every Tamil habitat and heart;
Where have you gone?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This homage to Lankan Tamil of a branded terrorist org is very enlightening. <!--emo&:thumbdown--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif' /><!--endemo-->

Karunanidhi cares more for Tamil from a black-listed organization in Lanka than any security personnel in India, why? Surely there are thousands of cops and security personnel who put their lives in the line of fire every day to save the miserable hides of these politicians, how about a tribute to them or their family?

[Guest]

http://www.dailypioneer.com/150613/The-Peb...nd-the-Pea.html

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Until last year, the Tamils used to celebrate their New Year Day on 14 April. That day usually falls on the first day of Chitrai which used to be the first month of the Tamil calendar. Chitrai has now been unceremoniously pushed from its prime position to the third spot. For no fault of hers, she has lost her position to another Tamil month, Thai, thanks to Karunanidhi. At his behest, The Tamil Nadu Assembly passed last year a fiat which decreed that the Tamil New Year day would henceforth be shifted to 14 January — the first day of the month of Thai, which used to be the tenth month of the Tamil Calendar. Presumably, from now onwards, the tenth month will become the first month and the original first month will have to be satisfied with the third position.

....

In the year 1921, a few Tamil scholars belonging to a movement called ‘The Pure Tamil Movement’, which sought to detoxify Tamils of the Aryan poison, affirmed that it would be a wanton insult to the hoary Tamil Culture, if the Tamils continued to accept the first of Chitrai as the beginning of their New Year. The position, according to them, rightly belonged to the first of Thai, the day of Pongal, the harvest festival of the Tamils. There was no logic in their contention as both Chitrai and Thai are months in a calendar whose origin can be traced back to the Hindu religious, and hence non-Tamil, sources. But logic and ‘The Pure Tamil Movement’ were not exactly coeval. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

email..

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Yesterday, the TV news channel which Kalaignar (Tamil for 'Artist') Karunanidhi began as poor competetion to his grand-nephew Maran's SUN TV, named after him, Kalaignar TV, aired live a programme which gave us all scintillating moments of this senile geriatric's literary skills.

Vairamuthu, a film song writer and scumbag dravidian Green Tamil with Red blood and Black skin (pl take it from me, this is how they describe themselves, in red, green and black), regaled audiences with this narrative.

The occasion was also of towering national importance - scumbag dravidian Green, Red and Black  anti-Hindu Tamil failed poets doubling as court-jesters felicitating their one-foot-in-the-grave Chief Minister for standing Hindu customs and traditions on their head by declaring January 14 the Tamil New Years' Day.

Just as Justice Markandey Katju did not have the courage to refer to the harijans by name and sought to hide his naked anti-Hinduism behind the fig-leaf 'Hindu', just so these scumbags did not have the courage to refer to 'Hindus' by name and preferred to beat up the brahmins (a profitable green,red and black political industry).

How scumbag Vairamuthu compared April 14 and January 14. This is a free translation of the dravidian Tamil vomit -

Vairamuthu's First bout of vomit

So used are our fishermen and women to the smell of dried fish that they cannot sleep without the nauseating smell and so they place a pillow of stinking dried fish under their heads at night.

Educating these people to appreciate the smell of fragrant flowers is an uphill task.

Just as uphill is the task of dravidian tamils to wean away the people of Tamil Nadu from the stench of brahminical April 14 to smell the fragrance of January 14.

It is the responsibility of all our men gathered here to educate the women of your household to greet each other and others on Januray 14, not on the occasion of 'Pongal' but as Tamil New Years' Day.

The vomit was enthusiastically endorsed and welcomed by the artist chief minister with enough strength and energy to nod his head vigorously.

Vairamuthu's second bout of diahorrea

I had the privilege of travelling with the honourable artist by flight from Chennai to Madurai to campsign for the Thirumangalam bye-elections.

An airhostess approached our artist and offered him some butter.

Our inimitable literary genius artist chief minister told her, "I dislike both butter and Bhattar. Both are saturated with "kozhuppu".
(Kozhuppu in Tamil is both saturated fat and arrogance)

To which the air-hostess replied, "Sir I belong to the Bhattar community'.

Oh, this is better.
(The implication being that the lady had the courage to admit to the green,red and black dravidian anti-hindu chief minister that she was a brahmin)

Vairamuthu's second bout of diahorrea was welcomed by loud guffaws of laughter from all the scumbag dravidian tamil ministers of the Tamil Nadu government present at the function.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->