Archive for October, 2009

The scourge of consumptive culture

Introduction

Americans and Western Europeans have had a lock on unsustainable over-consumption for decades. But now developing countries are catching up rapidly, to the detriment of the environment, health, and happiness,according to the Worldwatch Institute, a Washington D.C.-based research organization focuses this year on consumerism run amuck.

Approximately 1.7 billion people worldwide now belong to the “consumer class”—the group of people characterized by diets of highly processed food, desire for bigger houses, more and bigger cars, higher levels of debt, and lifestyles devoted to the accumulation of non-essential goods.

Today nearly half of global consumers reside in developing countries, including 240 million in China and 120 million in India—markets with the most potential for expansion.

“Rising consumption has helped meet basic needs and create jobs,” Christopher Flavin, president of Worldwatch Institute said in a statement to the press. ”But as we enter a new century, this unprecedented consumer appetite is undermining the natural systems we all depend on, and making it even harder for the world’s poor to meet their basic needs.”

The report addresses the devastating toll on the Earth’s water supplies, natural resources, and ecosystems exacted by a plethora of disposable cameras, plastic garbage bags, and other cheaply made goods with built in product-obsolescence, and cheaply made manufactured goods that lead to a “throw away” mentality.

“Most of the environmental issues we see today can be linked to consumption,” said Gary Gardner, director of research for Worldwatch. “As just one small example, there was a story in the newspaper just the other day saying that 37 percent of species could become extinct due to climate change, which is very directly related to consumption.”

And yet another disturbing trend according the reports from World Bank is that the wealthiest 20% of the world accounted for 76.6% of total private consumption, while the poorest 5% just 1.5%. This stark inequality in consumption is widening the distance between the have’s and have-nots. while the one become exploiters and others exploited or shall we call big munchers and small nibblers.

From Luxuries to Necessities

Globalization is a driving factor in making goods and services previously out of reach in developing countries much more available. Items that at one point in time were considered luxuries—televisions, cell phones, computers, air conditioning—are now viewed as necessities.

China provides a snapshot of changing realities. For years, the streets of China’s major cities were characterized by a virtual sea of people on bicycles, and 25 years ago there were barely any private cars in China. By 2000, 5 million cars moved people and goods; the number is expected to reach 24 million by the end of next year.

In the United States, there are more cars on the road than licensed drivers. Increased reliance on automobiles means more pollution, more traffic, more use of fossil fuels. Cars and other forms of transportation account for nearly 30 percent of world energy use and 95 percent of global oil consumption.

Changing diet, with a growing emphasis on meat, illustrates the environmental and societal toll exacted by unbridled consumption. To provide enough beef, chicken, and pork to meet the demand, the livestock industry has moved to factory farming. Producing eight ounces of beef requires 6,600 gallons (25,000 liters) of water; 95 percent of world soybean crops are consumed by farm animals, and 16 percent of the world’s methane, a destructive greenhouse gas, is produced by belching, flatulent livestock. The enormous quantities of manure produced at factory farms becomes toxic waste rather than fertilizer, and runoff threatens nearby streams, bays, and estuaries.

Chickens at a typical farm are kept in cages with about nine square inches (about 60 square centimeters) of space per bird. To force them to lay more eggs, they are often starved. Chickens slaughtered for meat are first fattened up with hormones, sometimes to the point where their legs can no longer support their weight. Crowded conditions can lead to the rapid spread of disease among the animals. To prevent this, antibiotics are included in their feed. The World Health Organization reports that the widespread use of these drugs in the livestock industry is helping breed antibiotic-resistant microbes, complicating the treatment of disease in both animals and people.

The World Bank has also rethought its policy of funding livestock factory farming. In 2001, a World Bank report concluded “there is a significant danger that the poor are being crowded out, the environment eroded, and global food safety and security threatened.”

Not Much Happier

The increase in prosperity is not making humans happier or healthier, according to several studies. Findings from a survey of life satisfaction in more than 65 countries indicate that income and happiness tend to track well until about $13,000 of annual income per person (in 1995 dollars). After that, additional income appears to produce only modest increments in self-reported happiness.

Increased consumerism evidently comes at a steep price. People are incurring debt and working longer hours to pay for the high-consumption lifestyle, consequently spending less time with family, friends, and community organizations. ”Excess consumption can be counterproductive,” said Gardner. “The irony is that lower levels of consumption can actually cure some of these problems.”

Diets of highly processed food and the sedentary lifestyle that goes with heavy reliance on automobiles have led to a worldwide epidemic of obesity. In the United States, an estimated 65 percent of adults are overweight or obese, and the country has the highest rate of obesity among teenagers in the world. Soaring rates of heart disease and diabetes, surging health care costs, and a lower quality of day-to-day life are the result.

Some aspects of rampant consumerism have resulted in startling anomalies. Worldwatch reports that worldwide annual expenditures for cosmetics total U.S. $18 billion; the estimate for annual expenditures required to eliminate hunger and malnutrition is $19 billion. Expenditures on pet food in the United States and Europe total $17 billion a year; the estimated cost of immunizing every child, providing clean drinking water for all, and achieving universal literacy is $16.3 billion.

There is, of course, no easy solution to the problem. But first and foremost we need to reorient our way of thinking, says Gardner.”The goal is to focus not so much on sacrifice, but on how to provide a higher quality of life using the lowest amount of raw materials,” he said. “We need to change the way we produce goods and the way we consume them.”

How consumerism affects society and the Environment

Consumerism is economically manifested in the chronic purchasing of new goods and services, with little attention to their true need, durability, product origin or the environmental consequences of manufacture and disposal. Consumerism is driven by huge sums spent on advertising designed to create both a desire to follow trends, and the resultant personal self-reward system based on acquisition. Materialism is one of the end results of consumerism.

Consumerism interferes with the workings of society by replacing the normal common-sense desire for an adequate supply of life’s necessities, community life, a stable family and healthy relationships with an artificial ongoing and insatiable quest for things and the money to buy them with little regard for the true utility of what is bought. An intended consequence of this, promoted by those who profit from consumerism, is to accelerate the discarding of the old, either because of lack of durability or a change in fashion.

Landfills swell with cheap discarded products that fail early and cannot be repaired. Products are made psychologically obsolete long before they actually wear out. A generation is growing up without knowing what quality goods are. Friendship, family ties and personal autonomy are only promoted as a vehicle for gift giving and the rationale for the selection of communication services and personal acquisition. Everything becomes mediated through the spending of money on goods and services.

It is an often stated catechism that the economy would improve if people just bought more things, bought more cars and spent more money. Financial resources better spent on Social Capital such as education, nutrition, housing etc. are spent on products of dubious value and little social return. In addition, the purchaser is robbed by the high price of new things, the cost of the credit to buy them, and the less obvious expenses such as, in the case of automobiles, increased registration, insurance, repair and maintenance costs.

We shouldn’t allow this or anything like this happen. Things may be starting to turn around in our favor. But it takes work and time and attention to details and a willingness to try new things for our own and our the next generation’s benefit. There are serious changes ahead. We can control some of these for our benefit or we can just react to them after they have happened.

Simply stated, there’s a lot of money being made and a lot of power being gathered by the people that promote consumerism. You pay for it in gradually limited economic mobility, pollution, threats to your health and a declining standard of living, as measured by the things that really matter.

In addition to the everyday things that you can do, there are concepts that need to be discussed and not just in a trite way. The mantra “Reduce, Reuse and Recycle” is pregnant with meaning, and reflects worthwhile goals, but it hardly contains solutions to the real integral problems of the world.

Vedic Observer

Malls have replaced parks, temples and community gatherings for many who no longer even take the trouble to meet their neighbors or care to know their names. People move frequently as though neighborhoods and cities were products to be tried out like brands of deodorant. Consumerism sets each person against themself in an endless quest for the attainment of material things or the imaginary world conjured up and made possible by things yet to be purchased.

Indian ethos have always stood for simple living and high thinking. Lord Krishna recommends in BG 4.22 how one should not endeavor more than required rather focus his endeavors in side in the pursuit of the self. So does Isoupanishad which riterates the need for being contended. There are numerous examples of extravagance in puranas but all of them have a strong undercurrent of renunciation. Take for example the story of Saubhari Muni who created an opulent city filled with human pleasurables and yet he renounced it once and for all. Sage Vasishta could create a opulent palace filled with heavenly pleasures by the dint of his spiritual prowess but he himself lived in his hermitage.

The world will have sustainable and balanced progress only if we recognize that it is not an object of exploitation rather an wonderful boon bestowed by the creator in our care. Then sense will prevail. To conclude in the words of Mahatma Gandhi “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not every man’s greed”.

References

  1. Startling facts of Consumerism
  1. Global Issue of Consumerism

L Narasimha Rao

Comments (2)

Big Bang or Big Bluff

Introduction

Imagine yourself taking a walk in the heart of a city like New York or Tokyo and looking around at the well developed infrastructure around you. Infrastructure of that magnitude never ceases to amaze us. The tall buildings, monuments (such as statue of liberty) the well planned roads and the underground railway all point to meticulous planning (by the government authorities), amazing engineering skills (Architects and Engineers) and well managed execution (Contractors, Laborers, etc).

Now imagine some one coming up and telling us that all this automatically came up due to some ‘big bang’ or due to some ‘automatic molecular combination” that formed a simple structure and then ‘evolved’ into more and more complex buildings! We would think that such a person is likely to be out of his mind.

And yet, that is exactly what we ourselves seem to think when it comes to explaining the origin of the universe, which is so complex and vast, that millions of such well developed cities would constitute only a fraction of it! We attribute the origin of a well developed city to thoughtful planning, excellent engineering and meticulous execution. However, we tend attribute the creation of the universe to some automatic combination of molecules or some ‘Big Bang’.

The Big Bang Theory:

‘Big Bang’ a scientific theory, developed from observations of the structure of universe and from theoretical considerations. Everybody knows that the theory of big-bang generally refers to the idea that the “universe has expanded from a primordial hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past, and continues to expand to this day.”.

In 1924 Edwin Hubble found that the universe is constantly expanding. As the universe is constantly expanding, scientists came to a conclusion that the universe would have started at some time in the past and named it as Big Bang.

Are we made of cosmic dust?

The basis of this theory, as explained scientifically, is that we owe the creation of the universe to the breaking away of the absolute symmetry of the absolute emptiness that existed before the creation began. There is a theory called vacuum genesis, which suggests that the universe began from a single particle arising from an absolute vacuum. A particle so powerful that it gave raise to the cosmic creation. Of course, a particle from nothing is admittedly not very likely. But it is a theory that they still work with, possibly for a lack of anything else.

The premise of the Big Bang Theory is based on the Redshift, the evidence that the universe seems to be expanding. This is when the wavelength of the light from a distant celestial object shifts toward the longer wavelength. This is figured to be caused by the Doppler Effect that the space between the objects giving the light is increasing, caused by an expanding universe. The Vedic version of the universal creation is that it was created by the guidance of the Supreme Being and, indeed, has been steadily expanding. But this does not imply an unnatural Big Bang from which everything appeared. The bottom line is that the Big Bang Theory is founded on a few assumptions that if ever negated or proven wrong will dismiss the whole theory. And, low and behold, it seems that after a closer look into this theory, there are some major flaws that prevent it from being acceptable for everyone.

TomVanFlandern, the space scientist, has presented three major problems found in the Big Bang Theory. One is that the law of conservation of matter and energy is not upheld within this theory. Secondly, this theory offers no calculations of the early ages of the universe that can properly deduce the temperature of the microwave background radiation. Thirdly, though the theory may be able to explain how such substances as helium and deuterium were formed, there are problems in understanding how the nuclei in such substances as lithium, beryllium and boron were created.

Furthermore, the inflation that would have taken place with the Big Bang makes the age of the universe unreasonably small when compared with the estimated ages of the galaxies or globular clusters that are in existence. It also puts a limit on the amount of ordinary matter in the universe, forcing some astronomers to speculate that there must be a large amount of “dark matter” to fill in the spaces. But such dark matter cannot account for the observable superclusters and galaxies, says Anthony Peratt, a physicist at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Thus, the superclusters are not what would be expected from the Big Bang model.

One last point is that the smooth nature of the background microwave radiation would not be the result of an explosive beginning, which would have produced a less organized and more chaotic or unsmooth result.  As it stands, science still cannot answer the question regarding what started the explosion of the Big Bang. Where was the original substance, or particle? What caused the creation? Even now science is still looking for another theory that can explain how nature would have behaved at the time of the threshold of creation under the extreme conditions during the original explosion of the Big Bang. How would it have happened in a way that caused the original atoms that then changed into forms that paved the way for all of the additional atoms to have developed? Because of these concerns and problems, along with others not mentioned, some scientists now feel that the Big Bang Theory is “thoroughly unsatisfactory” as an explanation of the universe’s origin. Besides, even if there was a Big Bang origin, where did consciousness come from? Why would there now be a bunch of entities running around trying to figure this out and not merely a bunch of dust and molecules drifting through space?

Encyclopedia Britannica admits: “It should be emphasized that no theory of the origin of the solar system has as yet won general acceptance. All involve highly improbable assumptions.”

Vedic Observer

Big Bang has been another theory that at first is applauded as the answer to the questions, yet with time is found to be too faulty, typical of the ever-changing scientific process that starts with one theory and in time gives way to something else. It is even admitted by science that the cause of the creation is “almost supernatural”. So it is still a mystery–why is there anything instead of nothing? But unfortunately it is still the theory found in the schools textbooks.

The formation of universe is best explained by the “Vedas” which is present at the time of universe creation. The “Vedas” are like a manual for universe. It explains the functionality and formation of universe. In science you cannot go outside the creation to find its cause. However, the Vedic creationism does indeed take us to the point before there was anything at all in the cosmic creation. That is the difference. The Vedic version points out that the cause of the creation is indeed outside the universe, just as an architect for a building may be living outside the building, someplace else rather than within it. Science still owes a lot to religion. Science still accepts that we have a “uni-verse”, a single system governed by a single set of laws. This admittedly is based on the religious concept of one God, one creator, and thus one system of laws, and a single source from which everything began. That is what the Vedanta Sutras explain, that the Absolute Truth is “He from whom all else manifests.” So to me, the faults found within the scientific creation theories only lends further credence to a Divine Source for the material manifestation. It also shows that there are many answers that can be found by researching the Vedic version of the Divinely guided creation. And unlike us Human beings, whose imperfections are sometimes very costly (the bridge of the Delhi Metro rail collapsed recently, causing heavy damage, one death and 15 injuries), God’s creations do not have such anomalies (imagine the consequences if God had made a small error while designing the orbits of planets in the solar system - there would have been a collision of planets!)

Quotes from renowned scientists on creation

Many renowned scientists acknowledge the need for an existence of an intelligent creator behind the universe, quite unlike the statements from the Big Bang Theory:-

  • “There is a perfect brain behind all the natural physical laws”. – Albert Einstein
  • “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man…” - Albert Einstein
  • “It is the perfection of God’s works that they are all done with the greatest simplicity” - Isaac Newton
  • Sir Isaac Newton further continues to say that “Can it be by accident that all birds beasts & men have their right side & left side alike shaped (except in their bowels) & just two eyes & no more on either side the face & just two ears on either side the head & a nose with two holes & no more between the eyes & one mouth under the nose & either two four legs or two wings or two arms on the shoulders & two legs on the hips one on either side & no more?. Did blind chance know that there was light & what was its refraction & fit the eyes of all creatures after the most curious manner to make use of it? These & such like considerations always have & ever will prevail with man kind to believe that there is a being who made all things & has all things in his power”.
  • “If you think strongly enough, you will be forced by science to believe in God” – Lord Kelvin
  • The story of Newton and his Atheist Friend: Once Newton engaged a craftsman and had a nice model made of the “Solar System” which would even depict the movement of the planets on the push of a lever. He then called over one of his friends who happened to be an atheist and showed him the model. His friend expressed his appreciation at the craftsmanship and asked whose work it was. Newton promptly replied that the model just ‘came up by itself’. His friend laughed at the answer and when Newton insisted on that answer, the friend remarked that Newton must be kidding. Then Newton pointed out that this was the same explanation that was being given by the scientists (including the friend) for the origin of the ‘actual’ solar system which was much obviously much more complex than this one!
  • Newton used this situation to drive home the point that there is an intelligent creator behind everything, and that nothing can come up on its own, due to random molecular combinations or some big bang.

Authored by Giridhari Gopal and Vivek Devarajan
Edited by L Narasimha Rao

Comments (4)

Vedic roots of early Tamil culture

Introduction

In recent years attempts have been made to cast a new look at ancient India. For too long the picture has been distorted by myopic colonial readings of India’s prehistory and early history, and more recently by ill-suited Marxist models. One such distortion was the Aryan invasion theory, now definitively on its way out, although its watered-down avatars are still struggling to survive. It will no doubt take some more time—and much more effort on the archaeological front—for a new perspective of the earliest civilization in the North of the subcontinent to take firm shape, but a beginning has been made.
We have a peculiar situation too as regards Southern India, and particularly Tamil Nadu. Take any classic account of Indian history and you will see how little space the South gets in comparison with the North.

The Background

It is a fact that archaeology in the South has so far unearthed little that can compare to findings in the North in terms of ancientness, massiveness or sophistication : the emergence of urban civilization in Tamil Nadu is now fixed at the second or third century BC, about two and a half millennia after the appearance of Indus cities. Moreover, we do not have any fully or largely excavated city or even medium-sized town. All in all, the archaeological record scarcely measures up to what emerges from the Indo-Gangetic plains—which is one reason why awareness of these excavations has hardly reached the general public, even in Tamil Nadu ; it has heard more about the still superficial exploration of submerged Poompuhar than about the painstaking work done in recent decades at dozens of sites.

Political interests fuels the theory

But there is a second reason for this poor awareness : scholars and politicians drawing inspiration from the Dravidian movement launched by E. V. Ramaswamy Naicker (“Periyar”) have very rigid ideas about the ancient history of Tamil Nadu. First, despite all evidence to the contrary, they still insist on the Aryan invasion theory in its most violent version, turning most North Indians and upper-caste Indians into descendants of the invading Aryans who overran the indigenous Dravidians, and Sanskrit into a deadly rival of Tamil. Consequently, they assert that Tamil is more ancient than Sanskrit, and civilization in the South older than in the North. Thus recently, Tamil Nadu’s Education minister decried in the State Assembly those who go “to the extent of saying that Dravidian civilization is part of Hinduism” and declared, “The Dravidian civilization is older than the Aryan.”8 It is not uncommon to hear even good Tamil scholars utter such claims.

Now, it so happens that archaeological findings in Tamil Nadu, though scanty, are nevertheless decisive. Indeed, we now have a broad convergence between literary, epigraphic and archaeological evidence.[9] Thus names of cities, kings and chieftains mentioned in Sangam literature have often been confirmed by inscriptions and coins dating back to the second and third centuries BC. Kautilya speaks in his Arthashastra (c. fourth century BC) of the “easily travelled southern land route,” with diamonds, precious stones and pearls from the Pandya country ;[10] two Ashokan rock edicts (II and XIII[11]) respectfully refer to Chola, Pandya and Chera kingdoms as “neighbours,” therefore placing them firmly in the third century BC ; we also have Kharavela’s cave inscription near Bhubaneswar in which the Kalinga king (c. 150 BC) boasts of having broken up a “confederacy of the Dravida countries which had lasted for 113 years.”[12] From all these, it appears that the earliest Tamil kingdoms must have been established around the fourth century BC ; again, archaeological findings date urban developments a century or two later, but this small gap will likely be filled by more extensive excavations. But there’s the rub : beyond the fourth century BC and back to 700 or 1000 BC, all we find is a megalithic period, and going still further back, a neolithic period starting from about the third millennium BC. While those two prehistoric periods are as important as they are enigmatic, they show little sign of a complex culture,[13] and no clear connection with the dawn of urban civilization in the South.

Therefore the good minister’s assertion as to the greater ancientness of the “Dravidian civilization” finds no support on the ground. In order to test his second assertion that that civilization is outside Hinduism, or the common claim that so-called “Dravidian culture” is wholly separate from so-called “Aryan” culture, let us take an unbiased look at the cultural backdrop of early Tamil society and try to make out some of its mainstays. That is what I propose to do briefly, using not only literary evidence, but first, material evidence from archaeological and numismatic sources as regards the dawn of the Sangam age. I may add that I have left out the Buddhist and Jain elements, already sufficiently well known, to concentrate on the Vedic and Puranic ones, which are usually underemphasized. Also, I will not deal here with the origin of South Indian people and languages, or with the nature of the process often called “Aryanization of the South” (I prefer the word “Indianization,” used in this context by an archaeologist[14]). Those complex questions have been debated for decades, and will only reach firm conclusions, I believe, with ampler archaeological evidence.

The Myth of Dravidian Culture

And yet, such statements do not go deep enough, as they still imply a North-South contrast and an unknown Dravidian substratum over which the layer of “Aryan” culture was deposited. This view is only milder than that of the proponents of a “separate” and “secular” Dravidian culture, who insist on a physical and cultural Aryan-Dravidian clash as a result of which the pure “Dravidian” culture got swamped. As we have seen, archaeology, literature and Tamil tradition all fail to come up with the slightest hint of such a conflict. Rather, as far as the eye can see into the past there is every sign of a deep cultural interaction between North and South, which blossomed not through any “imposition” but in a natural and peaceful manner, as everywhere else in the subcontinent and beyond.
As regards an imaginary Dravidian “secularism” (another quite inept word to use in the Indian context), it has been posited by many scholars : Marr,60 Zvelebil[61] and others characterize Sangam poetry as “secular” and “pre-Aryan”[62] after severing its heroic or love themes from its strong spiritual undercurrents, in a feat typical of Western scholarship whose scrutiny always depends more on the magnifying glass than on the wide-angle lens. A far more insightful view comes from the historian M. G. S. Narayanan, who finds in Sangam literature “no trace of another, indigenous, culture other than what may be designated as tribal and primitive.”[63] He concludes :

Vedic culture flourished in Dravidian areas

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.[64]

Dravidian contribution to Vedic culture

However, it is not as if the Tamil land passively received this culture : in exchange it generously gave elements from its own rich temperament and spirit. In fact, all four Southern States massively added to every genre of Sanskrit literature, not to speak of the signal contributions of a Shankara, a Ramanuja or a Madhwa. In addition to the writing of these medieval scholars there have numerous temples especially in Tamilnadu popularly referred as Divyadesams which as per the local scholars date back to 3000 B.C. The tradition of Srivaishnavism glorified and epitomized in the Divyaprabandha literature of the Alvars have practiced and propagated the worship of various of Vishnu whom the Dravidian chauvinists regard as Aryan God . The existence of Srivaishnavism in itself is the greatest challenge to the prevalent theory of origin of Dravidian culture which regards worship of Vishnu are from Aryan roots.

Origins of Bhakti Movement

More importantly, many scholars suggest that “the bhakti movement began in the Tamil country [and] later spread to North India.”[67] Subbiah, in a profound study, not only challenges the misconceived “secular” portrayal of the Sangam texts, but also the attribution of the Tamil bhakti to a northern origin ; rather, he suggests, it was distinctly a creation of Tamil culture, and Sangam literature “a reflection of the religious culture of the Tamils.”[68].The Bhagavatha Mahatmya of Padma Purana mentions that the Bhakti was born in the Dravida country, had her early growth in the Karnataka and flourished in the Maharashtra. And the Vedic literature is abound with references to Dravida desa especially the Bhagavatha Purana refers more than once about the rivers like Tamaraparini as a sacred river. Matsya Purana also mentions that Matsya Avatara one of the Vishnu’s incarnations as a fish appeared in the Dravida desha when the Dravidian King Satyavrata was ruling.

As regards the fundamental contributions of the South to temple architecture, music, dance and to the spread of Hindu culture to other South Asian countries, they are too well known to be repeated here. Besides, the region played a crucial role in preserving many important Sanskrit texts (a few Vedic recensions, Bhasa’s dramas, the Arthashastra for instance) better than the North was able to do, and even today some of India’s best Vedic scholars are found in Tamil Nadu and Kerala.[69] As Swami Vivekananda put it, “The South had been the repository of Vedic learning.”[70] In other words, what is loosely called Hinduism would not be what it is without the South. To use the proverbial but apt image, the outflow from the Tamil land was a major tributary to the great river of Indian culture.

Conclusion

It should now be crystal clear that anyone claiming a “separate,” “pre-Aryan” or “secular” Dravidian culture has no evidence to show for it, except his own ignorance of archaeology, numismatics and ancient Tamil literature. Not only was there never such a culture, there is in fact no meaning in the word “Dravidian” except either in the old geographical sense or in the modern linguistic sense ; racial and cultural meanings are as unscientific as they are irrational, although some scholars in India remain obstinately rooted in a colonial mindset.
The simple reality is that every region of India has developed according to its own genius, creating in its own bent, but while remaining faithful to the central Indian spirit. The Tamil land was certainly one of the most creative, and we must hope to see more of its generosity once warped notions about its ancient culture are out of the way.

Vedic Observer

The Bhagavatha Mahatmya of the Padma Purana mentions that the Bhakti culture was born in Dravida desha. There is a mention of Dravida only as a historical place not as a Dravidian race which is incongruous invention of British and further developed by some political interests of some section of people to keep a check on the growth of Vedic culture in the south. And the sad part is this prevailing concept have been fossilized in the history text books and whole country is suffering from lack of cultural integrity thereby accelerating the slow death of glorious heritage of the ancient Indians.

The falsehood spread by the Dravidian parties should be refuted and reviewed in the light of the truth and let the truth prevail over the political interests.

References

  1. Dravidian Race
  2. Vedic roots of early Tamil culture by Michel Danino.

Edited by LNDAS

Comments

A Truth Quote

A person who is not disturbed by the incessant flow of desires — that enter like rivers into the ocean, which is ever being filled but is always still — can alone achieve peace, and not the man who strives to satisfy such desires.

by Gita 2.70