Topic started by amala (@ webcachew02b.cache.pol.co.uk) on Sun Oct 29 16:35:44 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.
|
Hi,
|
Responses:
- From: ravi sundaram (@ pa-bethelpark4a-171.pit.adelphia.net)
on: Sun Oct 29 17:15:15 EST 2000
amala,
Tamil is not from sanskrit. Definitely.
Tamil is probably older than sanscrit, because
Indus Valley Civilization is dravidian.
- From: PK Sivakumar (@ tnt1.ey.com)
on: Tue Oct 31 15:16:28 EST 2000
Sometime back, I had a chance to read Professor George Hart's views (who holds Tamil Chair at Berkeley, California) on Tamil as a Classical Language. Please fint it below. Hope Professor does not mind me sharing his article with forumhub readers. Thanks to Professor for the article. - PK Sivakumar
Status of Tamil as a Classical Language
Prof.George Hart
Professor Maraimalai has asked me to write regarding the position of Tamil
as a classical language, and I am delighted to respond to his request.
I have been a Professor of Tamil at the University of California, Berkeley,
since 1975 and am currently holder of the Tamil Chair at that institution.
My degree, which I received in 1970, is in Sanskrit, from Harvard, and my
first employment was as a Sanskrit professor at the University of Wisconsin,
Madison, in 1969. Besides Tamil and Sanskrit, I know the classical languages
of Latin and Greek and have read extensively in their literatures in the
original.
I am also well-acquainted with comparative linguistics and the literatures
of modern Europe (I know Russian, German, and French and have read
extensively
in those languages) as well as the literatures of modern India, which,
with the exception of Tamil and some Malayalam, I have read in translation.
I have spent much time discussing Telugu literature and its tradition with
V. Narayanarao, one of the greatest living Telugu scholars, and so I know
that tradition especially well. As a long-standing member of a South Asian
Studies department, I have also been exposed to the richness of both Hindi
literature, and I have read in detail about Mahadevi Varma, Tulsi, and Kabir.
I have spent many years -- most of my life (since 1963) -- studying Sanskrit.
I have read in the original all of Kalidasa, Magha, and parts of Bharavi and
Sri Harsa. I have also read in the original the fifth book of the Rig Veda
as well as many other sections, many of the Upanisads, most of the
Mahabharata,
the Kathasaritsagara, Adi Sankaras works, and many other works in Sanskrit.
I say this not because I wish to show my erudition, but rather to establish
my fitness for judging whether a literature is classical. Let me state
unequivocally that, by any criteria one may choose, Tamil is one of the
great classical literatures and traditions of the world.
The reasons for this are many; let me consider them one by one.
First, Tamil is of considerable antiquity. It predates the literatures of
other modern Indian languages by more than a thousand years. Its oldest work,
the Tolkappiyam, contains parts that, judging from the earliest Tamil
inscriptions, date back to about 200 BCE. The greatest works of ancient
Tamil, the Sangam anthologies and the Pattuppattu, date to the first
two centuries of the current era. They are the first great secular body
of poetry written in India, predating Kalidasa's works by two hundred years.
Second, Tamil constitutes the only literary tradition indigenous to India
that is not derived from Sanskrit. Indeed, its literature arose before
the influence of Sanskrit in the South became strong and so is qualitatively
different from anything we have in Sanskrit or other Indian languages.
It has its own poetic theory, its own grammatical tradition, its own
aesthetics, and, above all, a large body of literature that is quite unique.
It shows a sort of Indian sensibility that is quite different from anything
in Sanskrit or other Indian languages, and it contains its own extremely
rich and vast intellectual tradition.
Third, the quality of classical Tamil literature is such that it is fit
to stand beside the great literatures of Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Chinese,
Persian and Arabic. The subtlety and profundity of its works, their
varied scope (Tamil is the only premodern Indian literature to treat
the subaltern extensively), and their universality qualify Tamil to
stand as one of the great classical traditions and literatures of the
world. Everyone knows the Tirukkural, one of the world's greatest
works on ethics; but this is merely one of a myriad of major and
extremely varied works that comprise the Tamil classical tradition.
There is not a facet of human existence that is not explored and
illuminated by this great literature.
Finally, Tamil is one of the primary independent sources of modern Indian
culture and tradition. I have written extensively on the influence of a
Southern tradition on the Sanskrit poetic tradition. But equally important,
the great sacred works of Tamil Hinduism, beginning with the Sangam
Anthologies, have undergirded the development of modern Hinduism. Their
ideas were taken into the Bhagavata Purana and other texts (in Telugu and
Kannada as well as Sanskrit), whence they spread all over India. Tamil
has its own works that are considered to be as sacred as the Vedas and
that are recited alongside Vedic mantras in the great Vaisnava temples
of South India (such as Tirupati). And just as Sanskrit is the source
of the modern Indo-Aryan languages, classical Tamil is the source
language of modern Tamil and Malayalam. As Sanskrit is the most conservative
and least changed of the Indo-Aryan languages, Tamil is the most conservative
of the Dravidian languages, the touchstone that linguists must consult
to understand the nature and development of Dravidian.
In trying to discern why Tamil has not been recognised as a modern
language, I can see only a political reason: there is a fear that if
Tamil is selected as a classical language, other Indian languages may
claim similar status. This is an unnecessary worry. I am well
aware of the richness of the modern Indian languages -- I know that
they are among the most fecund and productive languages on
earth, each having begotten a modern (and often medieval) literature
that can stand with any of the major literatures of the world. Yet
none of them is a classical language. Like English and the other
modern languages of Europe (with the exception of Greek), they
rose on pre-existing traditions rather late and developed in the
second millennium. The fact that Greek is universally recognised as a
classical language in Europe does not lead the French or the English
to claim classical status for their languages.
To qualify as a classical tradition, a language must fit several
criteria: it should be ancient, it should be an independent tradition
that arose mostly on its own not as an offshoot of another tradition,
and it must have a large and extremely rich body of ancient literature.
Unlike the other modern languages of India, Tamil meets each of these
requirements. It is extremely old (as old as Latin and older
than Arabic); it arose as an entirely independent tradition, with
almost no influence from Sanskrit or other languages; and its ancient
literature is indescribably vast and rich.
It seems strange to me that I should have to write an essay such as
this claiming that Tamil is a classical literature -- it is akin to
claiming that India is a great country or Hinduism is one of the
world's great religions. The status of Tamil as one of the great
classical languages of the world is something that is patently
obvious to anyone who knows the subject. To deny that Tamil is a
classical language is to deny a vital and central part of the
greatness and richness of Indian culture
- From: saravanan (@ 203.197.24.131)
on: Thu Nov 9 19:02:57 EST 2000
thanks for this report
saravanan
- From: Ruby (@ cache155.156ce.scvmaxonline.com.sg)
on: Wed Mar 6 07:47:02
That was a very beautiful explanation and essay.
But how does one get in touch with the author?
List all pages of this thread
Tell your friend about this topic
Want to post a response?
Back to the Forum