DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - True history of Dravidians. Rama Krishna Shiva Vishnu are all Dark Dravidian Gods !

**Veronnisa** · 12-28-2011, 07:30 PM

Dear Prasad, Ramayana, Mahabarata cannot exist in vaccum. It is NOT possible to write such "unbelievably long/detailed/sub stories texts" without references to local kings, folk tales, stories, intervowen with myth. Troy story was taken as a legend/myth by all greeks, but now you know it is a Lankan version of ramayana. South dravidian kings were warring for centuries with Lanka & ransacked/burning Anuradhapura/Lanka - documented by all history books on Lanka. All cities of ramayana/mahabarata/vedas etc.. are in south india!!. The problem with this version (which fits perfectly all of them), is that it cuts of North India & they want to/are claiming for last 200+ yrs that Rama is a North Indian King. But u dont find Thai/Indonesia/etc.. claiming Rama is their King despite Ayodhya being there !!. So u will find many NOT agreeing with this. The problem of introducing a North Indian King is that there is ABSOLUTELY NO HISTORICAL BASIS IE. NO NORTH INDIAN KING EVER CAME TO SOUTH INDIA & WAGED ANY TYPE OF WAR, LET ALONE WITH LANKA - NONE OF THE HISTORICAL FIGURES/TEXTS HAVE ANY SUCH INFO BUT MANY SOUTH DRAVIDIAN KINGS WENT TO WAR WITH LANKA !!

TRUTH needs to be told no matter what & MOST IMPORTANTLY THE SOUTH DRAVIDIANS NEED TO KNOW THEY ARE THE ORIGINATOR OF HINDUISM, JAINISM, BUDDHISM & THROUGH LANKA - ORIGINATOR OF TROY/GREEK GODS/CULTURE !. PEOPLE LIKE KUNJUPPU/ETC.. WILL NEED TO BE UNDOUBTLY PROUD ABOUT THIER CULTURE INSTEAD OF LOSING IT IN THE UNFORTUNATE ISSUE OF CASTE SYSTEM !

AND WE AS TAMIL BRAHMINS MUST BE MAGNANIMOUS ENOUGH TO ADMIT THAT RAMA KRISHNA SHIVA VISHNU ARE DARK DRAVIDIAN GODS MODELLED ON DARK DRAVIDIAN KINGS & WE ARE ALSO DRAVIDIANS & NOT SOME IMPORTED ARYAN RACE !! WHICH IS THE TRUTH & ALL LEGENDS/TEXTS, HISTORICAL BOOKS, EVIDENCES POINT TO !!

"I AM HAPPY TO DEBATE, STAND CORRECTED, CHANGE MY OPINION IF ANY OF MY DATA/THESIS & DERIVATIONS ARE INCORRECT"

Satya Meva Jayathe !

Shri jaykay,

I feel that your proposition has the apparent ring of truth but not the strength to withstand rigid scrutiny. My doubts (I am just an ordinary tabra without any special knowledge or scholarship) are as under:—

How come the oldest rama account is written in sanskrit by valmiki, an apparently sanskrit name rather than in a Tamil or some other dravidian language by someone like Kamban?
If brahmins originated in south India and were african+yedda+etc., why did they give all respect to the vedas and other scriptures all written in sanskrit, an alien tongue, and that too from the dim past, till today? Why was it that the brahmins did not think of learning their mother tongue (whether african, yedda, or anything)?
Since vishnu was named as மால் in early tamil vaishnavite devotional hymns, it probably became a custom to picturize vishnu as dark coloured, மால் perhaps meaning dark also; valmiki's aim was just to depict a prince and he does not, to the best of my knowledge, describe the skin colour of any of the four except saying mahAtEjaH (very brilliant). The depiction of Rama as dark coloured (and as green coloured in "kolu bommais" since the last few decades), is a fashion trend possibly, to give the vishnu-like attributes to Rama.
In the case of M.Bh. most of the place names do not belong to south India, and there is specific reference to the south as well as some areas in the NW. I would like to know how you view this point.
Just as it is possible that africans reached the south Indian shores through sea, it is also possible that Australian aboriginees might have colonized south India in the pre-historic past.
Srilanka's existence was well-known to Ashoka in that he sent his children Mahinda and Sanghamitra, his children, as emissaries to Lanka. Hence, it may not be unacceptable to consider that the existence of a land by name Lanka (lankaa f. in sanskrit means an unchaste woman.) was known even in the north of India from times before Ashoka itself and with some poetic imagination, and news filtering through for generations, valmiki could have imagined an island, a very prosperous city and all that.
Are all hindu gods and goddesses dark coloured? No, possibly. If so, how do we explain the change from white=bad; black=good, to sugriva being golden coloured in Valmiki ramayana itself?

12-28-2011, 07:30 PM	#23
Veronnisa Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 342 Senior Member	Dear Prasad, Ramayana, Mahabarata cannot exist in vaccum. It is NOT possible to write such "unbelievably long/detailed/sub stories texts" without references to local kings, folk tales, stories, intervowen with myth. Troy story was taken as a legend/myth by all greeks, but now you know it is a Lankan version of ramayana. South dravidian kings were warring for centuries with Lanka & ransacked/burning Anuradhapura/Lanka - documented by all history books on Lanka. All cities of ramayana/mahabarata/vedas etc.. are in south india!!. The problem with this version (which fits perfectly all of them), is that it cuts of North India & they want to/are claiming for last 200+ yrs that Rama is a North Indian King. But u dont find Thai/Indonesia/etc.. claiming Rama is their King despite Ayodhya being there !!. So u will find many NOT agreeing with this. The problem of introducing a North Indian King is that there is ABSOLUTELY NO HISTORICAL BASIS IE. NO NORTH INDIAN KING EVER CAME TO SOUTH INDIA & WAGED ANY TYPE OF WAR, LET ALONE WITH LANKA - NONE OF THE HISTORICAL FIGURES/TEXTS HAVE ANY SUCH INFO BUT MANY SOUTH DRAVIDIAN KINGS WENT TO WAR WITH LANKA !! TRUTH needs to be told no matter what & MOST IMPORTANTLY THE SOUTH DRAVIDIANS NEED TO KNOW THEY ARE THE ORIGINATOR OF HINDUISM, JAINISM, BUDDHISM & THROUGH LANKA - ORIGINATOR OF TROY/GREEK GODS/CULTURE !. PEOPLE LIKE KUNJUPPU/ETC.. WILL NEED TO BE UNDOUBTLY PROUD ABOUT THIER CULTURE INSTEAD OF LOSING IT IN THE UNFORTUNATE ISSUE OF CASTE SYSTEM ! AND WE AS TAMIL BRAHMINS MUST BE MAGNANIMOUS ENOUGH TO ADMIT THAT RAMA KRISHNA SHIVA VISHNU ARE DARK DRAVIDIAN GODS MODELLED ON DARK DRAVIDIAN KINGS & WE ARE ALSO DRAVIDIANS & NOT SOME IMPORTED ARYAN RACE !! WHICH IS THE TRUTH & ALL LEGENDS/TEXTS, HISTORICAL BOOKS, EVIDENCES POINT TO !! "I AM HAPPY TO DEBATE, STAND CORRECTED, CHANGE MY OPINION IF ANY OF MY DATA/THESIS & DERIVATIONS ARE INCORRECT" Satya Meva Jayathe ! Shri jaykay, I feel that your proposition has the apparent ring of truth but not the strength to withstand rigid scrutiny. My doubts (I am just an ordinary tabra without any special knowledge or scholarship) are as under:— How come the oldest rama account is written in sanskrit by valmiki, an apparently sanskrit name rather than in a Tamil or some other dravidian language by someone like Kamban? If brahmins originated in south India and were african+yedda+etc., why did they give all respect to the vedas and other scriptures all written in sanskrit, an alien tongue, and that too from the dim past, till today? Why was it that the brahmins did not think of learning their mother tongue (whether african, yedda, or anything)? Since vishnu was named as மால் in early tamil vaishnavite devotional hymns, it probably became a custom to picturize vishnu as dark coloured, மால் perhaps meaning dark also; valmiki's aim was just to depict a prince and he does not, to the best of my knowledge, describe the skin colour of any of the four except saying mahAtEjaH (very brilliant). The depiction of Rama as dark coloured (and as green coloured in "kolu bommais" since the last few decades), is a fashion trend possibly, to give the vishnu-like attributes to Rama. In the case of M.Bh. most of the place names do not belong to south India, and there is specific reference to the south as well as some areas in the NW. I would like to know how you view this point. Just as it is possible that africans reached the south Indian shores through sea, it is also possible that Australian aboriginees might have colonized south India in the pre-historic past. Srilanka's existence was well-known to Ashoka in that he sent his children Mahinda and Sanghamitra, his children, as emissaries to Lanka. Hence, it may not be unacceptable to consider that the existence of a land by name Lanka (lankaa f. in sanskrit means an unchaste woman.) was known even in the north of India from times before Ashoka itself and with some poetic imagination, and news filtering through for generations, valmiki could have imagined an island, a very prosperous city and all that. Are all hindu gods and goddesses dark coloured? No, possibly. If so, how do we explain the change from white=bad; black=good, to sugriva being golden coloured in Valmiki ramayana itself?
	Quote