Review of Clyde's Video on SumeruTamil

Review of Clyde’s Video on SumeruTamil-1

Dr K.Loganathan 15-8-12

The production of Clyde’s video on Sumerian as CaGkam Tamil or more specifically the Tamil of the First CaGkam to go along with the tradition of the sophisticated Academies in Tamil literature, is certainly a momentous event that records a dramatic change in the understanding of World History. The video can be seen and heard at the address:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZ3_zCzupLM&list=UUryp_DYeagKtvL-pw1BpZeA&index=1&feature=plcp

I venture to review this great video as a way of appreciating the efforts of Clyde and expressing my profound thanks. I know Clyde has been reading my studies since my first major publication “Sumerian: Tamil of the First CaGkam” in the Journal of Tamil studies in the year 1975, a paper that I wrote when I was doing my masters degree in the University of London. I used to frequent the library of SAOS where one day I accidentally saw the Sumerian texts (Dumuzi’s Dream, Suruppaks Moral Instructions etc) on reading some of which I realized immediately that I was reading some kind of Tamil, certainly an archaic form. Then I spend the whole of three month vocation reading many necessary treatises and wrote that paper and which was published in the Journal of Tamil Studies, where Dr S,V Subramaniam, then the Editor saw it fit for publication. I knew it was a major breakthrough in Dravidian studies but was very disappointed that it did not catch the attention of the Tamil scholars who, I hoped would pursue it further. But my expectations were not fulfilled and the paper went almost unnoticed except for the Eelam scholar Dr A. Velu Pillai who also connected it with the great research by Prof Sathasivam (whom I met in person in 1988 in Kuala Lumpur) who also advocated the view that Sumerian is in fact Tamil. But I now I realize that the paper had attracted the attention of Dr Clyde Winters who also contributed many research papers to the Journal of Tamil Studies as well as many other journals of universities in Tamil Nadu. I realize now that Clyde had read that paper and absorbed the details and made it the base of many of his later studies including the present video presentation.

For this is the first point he makes in his video presentation: That Sumerian is the Tamil of the First CaGkam and by which the Sumeriologists view that Sumerian is an isolate language, long dead and gone is refuted. I am really glad to note that Clyde saw how great a discovery this is and how important it is for understanding or re-understanding World History. Sumerian is Tamil of a kind and as Clyde remarks, to understand Sumerian it must be linked with the Tamil language and culture that is very much alive to this day

Any way despite the lack of appreciation of such discoveries by the Tamil scholars and politicians I persisted in my studies of Sumerian texts that I collected when I was in London during the years 1974-75 and later in 1988-89 . During this time also developed in greater details my Process Grammar, a grammatical theory based on Tolkaappiyam and which I developed as an alternative to Chomsky’s Transformational Generative Grammar. This grammar also includes the Process Calculus and which I developed as an alternative to the highly misleading Predicate Calculus of Russel and Whitehead, the authors of Principia Mathematica the basis of Logical Positivism of the West. All the articles I published during this time are now available in the Cyber Space and those interested can see them at:

http://www.ulakaththamizh.org/JOTSAArticle.aspx?id=51

The list of papers also includes the now world famous “Sumerian: Tamil of the First CaGkam”

I must mention that my studies in Process Grammar and the development of Process Calculus are now being pursued further by Dr Sivakumar, a lecturer in the Universiti Sains Malaysia and who has been a long time student of my studies in almost all fields. I hope in the near future he will begin to write to our groups on how he is developing further the essentials of Process Grammar that I developed in the seventies and eighties.

Now I must mention that Process Grammar is my first major contribution to Dravidian Studies where I used the insights of Tolkaappiyar to develop it. Here I must mention that it was my development of Process Grammar that served me later to develop various branches of Evolutionary Linguistics where I also used the insights of Aurobindo as well as PavaNar. These essays under the title Viri Linguistics Uri Linguistics Veer Linguistics Uur Linguistics and so forth still remain sporadic developed more in the contexts of many challenges to my claims by such great scholars like BVK Sastry the great Turkish scholar Polat Kaya and so forth.

Now I am already quite old (in the seventies) where my interests are more metaphysical, and where I am preoccupied with writing the massive History of Dravidian Philosophy, I am not sure I can get back to my earlier linguistic interests. I will be happy if some young linguists would read these essays and come up with a treatise outlining my ideas on Evolutionary Linguistics and which will be an effective alternative to Constructive Historical Linguistics of the West and which has helped many European scholars to sustain the lie that Sk is Indo-European and not Dravidian.

My essays on Evolutionary Linguistics are available at:

https://sites.google.com/site/ulagansessays/evolutionary-linguistics

I think Clyde has not made a mention of this though he is very familiar with the controversies with BVK Sastry and Polat Kaya where he also has contributed substantially in favor of my claims.

To continue- 1

Review of Clyde’s Video on SumeruTamil-2

Dravidians and Proto Dravidians

The next important point that emerges in the video is the twist Clyde introduces to the generally accepted view of the African origins of the Homosapiens and how they spread across the globe beginning about 70k years ago. This view has been well established even though some have traced the origins to Myanmar and now also the Narmada Valley in India. But these studies are ongoing and nothing definite is established as yet. The idea of multiple origin of the Homosapiens remains still conjectural and there are no evidences to support it firmly.

Now this Afro-centric view has been advocated by many scholars and even our Clyde is one of them. However in contrast to others, he introduces a twist to this generally accepted view: it is as Proto Dravidians or Dravidians that the Africans spread across the globe and spread the rudiments of civilization as such.

Now why should Clyde do this?

It is here that the linguistic facts that Sumerian is Archaic Tamil and that Elamite of ancient Iran, and as pointed out by David MacAlpine (1975) is also a species of Dravidian language that makes him construct the concept of Proto Dravidians and locate them in the Sub-Saharan areas prior to their migration towards Sumeria Elam and possibly also the Indus. He also uses the linguistic facts linking Dravidian languages to the Ural-Altaic languages Finnish-Ugrian and so forth. He sees the general drift of these proto Dravidians from Sub Saharan areas, quite fertile about 10k years ago, into Sumerian Elam and even Indus. In an another phase migration they went into Central Asia China Europe and so forth. Clyde talks about even Black Chinese where I think. is a fact that may explain the presence of Taoism with its concepts of Yin and Yang paralleling the Sumerian An- Inanna and Dravidian Siva Sakti

It is here he identifies the people of Sumeria Elam Egypt Nubia and so forth, all blacks but perhaps non-negroid as the Kusites, those who constituted the Ma- confederation etc. On the basis of the Black and Red Pottery and as pointed out by B.B.Lal as something common to the Nubians and South Indians, he also notes the spread of these Proto Dravidians across the globe in many ways as noted above. He also mentions the spread of Dravidians as such subsequent to the collapse of Sumerian and Elamite civilizations. Earlier, about 8k years ago, these Proto Dravidian may be the group of people who migrated into Europe and introduced agriculture as such

He also notes that it is mastery of agriculture and the domestication of the cattle and other animals in Sub-Saharan areas that enabled these proto Dravidians to develop the great riverside civilizations along the shores of Nile Tigris-Euphrates and Indus. Here we must note that while the Sumerians and Elamites were clearly Dravidian speakers, it is not clear yet whether the Pharonic Egyptians and the Nubians were also Dravidian speakers even though there are many identities in religion culture and so forth. Clyde notes that these people collectively worshipped Amun or Amma the great Mother Goddess that the Dravidians worship to this day as Ammaa, Ambal etc. Here Clyde also notes many linguistic affinities between Dravidian and African languages such as Manding the languages in the Niger-Congo areas and so forth.

Here we may note the linguistic and anthropological studies of Prof K.P ARavaNan and the Upadhyayas and which studies I have uploaded at:

https://sites.google.com/site/tolkaappiyam/african-dravidian

The Absence of Kumari in Clyde’s Account

Now all these linguistic and anthropological facts are interesting and serve to disclose a connection between all these divergent groups of people that Clyde calls the C-group of people. The locating of Proto Dravidians in the Sub Saharan areas which about 10k years ago was quite fertile, seems also to make sense. However all these and which are quite consistent with the general view of the Out of Africa origins and spread of mankind, does not agree with the account of the origins of the Tamils in Kumari, a idea quite widespread in the classical Tamil literature including those of the Third SaGkam.

Now we cannot also dismiss it as simply mythological as the Sumerians or Akkadians called Sumer ‘kumari or Kuar” as I have pointed out. While Clyde notes that the SumeruTamils called their nation Ki-en-gi( Ta, kiiz eeNki: a lofty country) which the Akkadians understood as Sumerittu ( Su-Meru: the divine land?) and from which we have the current name Sumer. However elsewhere the land surrounding the city of Ur (Ta, uuru) was also called Kumari and where was located the ‘sag-gam’ that I identify as the First CaGkam of the Tamil literature

Of course this itself does not contradict the Sub-Saharan origins. Perhaps subsequent to their Sub-Saharan origins the proto Dravidians moved into Sumer and called the country Kumari and so forth.

Now this account doesn’t square with the traditional account of Kumari where many Tamil scholars locate it as the submerged landmass in Indian Ocean, perhaps because of a massive Tsunami in the ancient times

There is also a recent study that locates the sunken island in the Persian Gulf as the place of origins of Sumerians. This submerged island, said to be as large as Great Britain, may the Kumari from which the Dravidians spread into valleys of Tigris-Euphrates and renamed that area Kumari by way of remembering the sunken landmass.

All these are intriguing questions for the future studies so that we have an account that is quite consistent with facts

To continue-2

Review of Clyde’s Video on SumeruTamil-3

When it comes to understanding the ancient Indian History we are so dominated by what can be called the British mischief of Aryan Invasion Theory which led to the politically disastrous Aryan-Dravidian divide in Indian History. While the bulk of the Northern Indians and the Sk loving Brahmins rejoiced at this British myth where they used the ancient Dravidian term of Aria in a racial sense, this also led to the birth of various kinds of Dravidian movements that are politically very powerful at least in the Tamil country and to this day. Against this mindset that perpetuates the colonial mental slavery, it is difficult to accept the African connections of Indians as Dravidians that the ancient civilizations in Sumer Elam Egypt Nubia and so forth disclose. The Indian scholars still remain blinded by the Aryan Myths of European connections of some Indians overlooking all the deep and profound connections Indians have in language and culture with the Africans specially those in Egypt Nubia Sudan and so forth,

The African Scripts

It is here that Clyde’s study of the close linkages the Indus Script has with the Manding Vai script and so forth becomes enormously significant in suggesting that the developers of Harappan civilzation may be another group of Dravidian speakers ethnically related to the Sumerians Elamites and so forth and all emerging into history from the Sub-Saharan areas.

Clyde has published many papers on this theme and the following is an interesting one:

http://www.oocities.org/ekwesi.geo/anwrite.htm

The Figure 1 in this paper is the clearest diagram that speaks volumes. There are also many other studies and various kinds of ancient African Scripts that date back to 40k years ago. For it appears that it was in South Africa that the Symbolic Behavior of human beings as such emerged as various kinds of marks on some beads and so forth some of which specially the one resembling a mountain range is still available in such ancient scripts as the Indus Script , the Vai Script of Mande in the Sub Saharan areas and so forth.

Clyde has isolated the Vai script of Mande in the Sub Saharan areas and where some samples of the script datable to about 3000 BC or so has been discovered. Related to this is also Egyptian Pottery marks, Anatolian script the Proto Elamite Proto Sumerian scripts and, interestingly enough the Indus script. He has also noted similarities in oracle bone script in China.

Who Developed the Indus Civilization?

Now while the cuneiform script has been deciphered and the language is now seen as Archaic Tamil and the Elamite is also noted as Dravidian by many scholars, the Indus script still remains undeciphered and hence the language still unknown though great scholars like Asko Parpola I. Mahadevan and so forth believe that it must be a Dravidian language possibly Tamil. There are many problems in their studies and general acceptance is still lacking.

Now Clyde also claims that he has deciphered the Indus Script and read some strings of symbols as some Tamil invocations and so forth. Now even if we do not accept Clyde’s decipherment, it is clear that he has succeeded in showing that people who developed the Harappan civilization must be Dravidian folks, one of the C-Group of people ethnically related to the Sumerians Elamites Nubians and so forth. The figure of the Dancing Girl recovered in the Indus is also a clear indication that people were a kind of Black people ethnically similar to the Sumerians and so forth.

Can the Indus Language be SumeruTamil?

Now the problem with the decipherments of Parpola Mahadevan and so forth is that they project the Tamil of Third Academy( 300 BC- 200 AD) into the Indus period that is dated to 2500 BC and which overlooks the evolutionary changes Tamil might have undergone in the intervening 2000 years. It is against this that I find the attempts to read Sumerian into the Indus Script by Kinnier Wilson Jr quite interesting, a point that Clyde also mentions in the video under review.

SumeruTamil is contemporaneous to the Indus and seeing that there is an underlying unity at the earliest layers of all these scripts in being similar to the Vai script of Mande people, of Sub-Saharan area, it may be possible that Indus language is also a kind of Tamil possibly the same as SumeruTamil where the Sumerians had active trade relations with the Indus people whom they called Meluha or Tilmun and so fort

To continue

Review of Clyde’s Video on SumeruTamil-4

Now I come to the part where Clyde agrees with me that Sk is Dravidian and where he notes very carefully all the linguistic evidences I have marshaled in support of this claim. I have said in many places that my twin claims that Sunmerian is Archaic Tamil and Sk is a also a variant of this same language where it has this language as its base language is very beautifully and accurately grasped by Clyde that really pleased me. Of course in view of the colonial mischief where Sk was wrongly identified along with Greek Latin and so forth into an Indo-European family of languages, this claim of mine was hotly disputed by many and where in defense of my claims even Clyde has composed many posts.

Here what I want to do is to outline the background behind this momentous event that took several decades of careful studies before I became convinced enough to publish it but mainly in my egroups.

Sk is Dravidian and NOT Indo-European

The colonial construction of AIT where it also talked of Dravidian folks, identified as the Dashus of Rig Veda, who were conquered by the invading Aryans and pushed to the South and forth, was based on the wrong classification of Sk as Indo-European allied to the Greek Latin and such other European languages. What I challenged is this basic assumption by denying it and claiming that Sk, seen as a variant of SumeruTamil is also Dravidian as much as Tamil and so many other Indian languages. I also claimed the same goes for Pali and hence suggested that possibly all Indian languages are Dravidian in essence and hence the construct of Indo-European or Indo-Aryan family of languages quite vacuous, a view that is highlighted with all the supportive evidences by Clyde in this great video.

Here what I want to describe is the story behind it all, on how I came to this conclusion that goes counter to the widespread view of the Indologists both European and Indian that led to the marginalization of the Dravidian contributions in shaping the essences of Indian languages and culture with disastrous political repercussions as well.

Now when I started my SumeruTamil studies in the seventies, I became aware of the fact that many Sumerian words are better retained in Sk than in C.Tamil. A good example is Su. ji; meaning life, soul etc and which is Sk jiwa rendered ciivan in Tamil. I also noticed that many words actually Pure Tamil are wrongly attributed to Sk even by Tamil scholars. I good example of such words is “karma’ where it is derived from the Sumerian root ‘garu: to set up, to do etc”. This word that is philosophically so important and present in almost all Indian languages is actually ultimately SumeruTamil.

Such observations made think of a common origin for both C.Tamil and Sk where later I also included Pali.

The Early Sk Texts I Studied

Even as a young man in the sixties, still an undergraduate student, over and above my mathematical courses, I also attended philosophy course which the university ( University of Otago, Dunedon, New Zealand) allowed. The course was mainly on Western philosophies and in order to compare them I also collected books on Indian philosophies which included the Ten Upanishads translated and transliterated into English by Prof. S. Radhakrishnan himself. Later after returning to Malaysia I also collected many other texts in Sk. Now it was in the eighties that I collected the Vedas specially the whole of Rig Veda, translated and transliterated into English by Swani Satya Prakash Sarasvati and Satyakam Vidhyasankar and published by Veda Pratisthana, New Delhi. Using these and many other texts including of course the quite easily available Bagavath Gita, I began, comparing the lexicon and grammar of Rigkrit and Sk with SumeruTamil and convinced myself that there is a linkage but the nature of which I was not clear.

It was then that I had rudiments of Evolutionary Linguistics forming in my mind and on the basis of which I began to articulate that while C.Tamil is a direct evolute of SumeruTamil, Rigkirit is not so because such a direct recognizability was lacking. However I described the relationship that Rigkrit has SumeruTamil as its base language and where the original meanings of the Rig Veda slokas can be recovered only by recovering the SumeruTamil BASE.

The Publications

I did not rush into publications on this discovery and so far I have not published any major paper on this as I have dome on SumuruTamil. However having convinced myself over several years of thinking, I began publishing these findings only in the Cyber Space, around the year 2000 in the various egroups I created and had access to. This is how it stands to this day where I am in the hope of a future generation of Linguists will take up such studies and discover more and more of the linkages Sk has with SumeruTamil.

I took Rig Veda as my source of Rigkrit and Bagath Gita as my source of Sk language. I did not use many of the dictionaries as I wanted to anlyse whole sentences and not isolated words as available in the dictionaries. Consistent with the basic principles of Evolutionary Linguistics the basic unit of analysis is the sentence and not the words. In this way I also avoided the pitfalls of seeking the protoforms of Constructive Historical Linguistics of the West where they can easily construct protoforms by comparing a collection of similar etymas and claim language family identities. Taking the sentence as the basic unit of analysis it was not necessary for me to construct protoforms and so forth. Having taken a sentence in Rig Veda or Bagavath Gita, what I did was to construct the Base Form and which is a sentence in SumeruTamil, possibly that by transforming which the sentences in Rig Veda and Bagavath Gita were produced.

Evolutionary Linguistics

I believe that Aurobindo initiated Evolutionary Linguistics where he does not talk of Protoforms but rather embryonic forms because he was quite unhappy with the quite unfounded claims of the Western scholars with their Constructive Historical linguistics where they can easily be mistaken about the root words. The protoforms are not the ROOTS and hence such studies cannot help out in identifying the language from which a certain word could have originated and spread through diffusion to many other languages.

I believe the enormous influence of Sumerian in the formation of ancient European languages and the fact that Rigkirit (Sk) has SumeruTamil as its base language, may account for the lexical correspondences between these languages. They constructed the notion of Indo-European family of languages only because they failed to notice the COMMON origins of most of these words from Sumerian.

Thus the evolutionary view into Historical Linguistics and the common origin of both C.Tamil and Sk explains why there are many similarities and parallels between both languages so much so that both can be said to be from the same family of languages viz, Dravidian.

Prayoga Viveekam

It is here that I came across the 17th cent AD Pirayoga Viveekam in Tamil where the author takes up a comparative study of the grammatical features of both Tamil and Sk and concludes that the differences are very little so much that in modern parlance both languages can be classified as belonging to the same family of languages, a concept that was not available at that time. But what fascinates me is that Clyde notes this point and mentions it in the video under review

Loga

to continue

Review of Clyde’s Video on SumeruTamil-5(Final)

Now I come to the final point that Clyde mentions in the video and which really caught me by surprise. There are many elements in the deepest layers of Third CaGkam literature that suggests a strong Vedic presence as well the Himalayas. It appears both Vedism in its essence and contacts with the North of India were quite strong as was the trade with the Romans Egyptians and so forth. Now Clyde notes that quite early in one of my posts I mentioned that one of the most ancient Pandya Kings of deep South was known as Palyaaka Saalai Mutu Kudumi PeruVazuti where the description Palayaaka Saalai( a place of many yajnas) is the same both the language and concept with the Yajna Val Ki-a, the name of a famous Rishi in the Brihad AraNayaka Upanishad. This and many such descriptions caught me by surprise and made me wonder about such Vedism in ancient Tamil literature.

Now without knowing the COMMON origin of Vedism and Agamism in Sumerian, many ventured to claim that it was the Vedic Brahmins who cultured the barbaric Dravidians and it was Sk language that contributed towards the evolution of Tamil as a Classical Language , a view that is even currently promoted by the Smartha Brahmins of Tamil Nadu and many in the North still drugged by the Ariyan myth, unaware that even the concept of Ariya is in fact SumeruTamil that Clyde does not fail to mention

Now I think there is a need to distinguish between Dravidian Vedism and VarNa Vedism where it was the former that is coeval with SumruTamils while the latter a corruption that and which has been vehemently opposed by the Tamils from very ancient times. The VarNa social philosophy was never accepted by the Tamils and continues to battled against to this day

The Solar Cosmology and the Pyramid

It is against these views the important dialogs I had with Raymond, a great African scholar and Alexander Jacob, an Indian from Kerala are very important in that they supplement the views of Clyde as mentioned above. The temple-centered Agamism that constitutes the essence of Hinduism is coeval with the religion of the great Proto Dravidians or Dravidoids who developed the Pyramidal cultures , Nubian Kemetian Sumerian cultures where a profound metaphysical insight or a cosmological view is enshrined in a monumental fashion in the Pyramids and Ziggurats, even now retained by the Dravidians in the architecture of temple towers, the e-u-nir (Ta. Il un neer: the erect and tall towers of the temple) as called in Sumerian.

The discussions mentioned above are available at the following pages:

Alexander Jacob:

https://sites.google.com/site/sumerutamiltex/drav-found-religion

Raymond:

https://sites.google.com/site/sumerutamiltex/sum-gods-dravidian

Clyde also discusses the religion of the Proto Dravidians called the Sub Saharan people in the article below:

http://olmec98.net/rel2.htm

What does the Pyramid Represent?

The pyramid or temple tower is not simply a matter of architecture but rather metaphysics, a metaphysics that lives till to-day among the Tamils. The first burst of Symbolic Thinking that is noted in the scribbles on the beads made in South Africa 40k years ago continued to develop and around perhaps 10k years ago the growth of human intelligence was so great that they developed the mighty riverine civilizations as well as built the stepped pyramids and Ziggurats by way of symbolically representing the Cosmology that broke into their consciousness.

The stepped pyramid and the Ziggurat that was built with steps to the very peak was not simply a monument built to represent a Hill or a Mountain but rather a cosmological or metaphysical understanding of what the cosmos is and what is the significance it has for human existence. Perhaps it is the sacred Mount Meru of Indian puraNas and which represents a metaphysics that combines Solar Cosmology and the Tantric Mountain of Cakras, the Atara VeRpu as called by KaNNudiaya Vallal, and which finds wide mentioning of in the Tirumantiram of Tirumular reading which one feels that it is really an ancient concept that somehow continued to survive and shape the religion of the Dravidian folks

Fire Worship and Ascending the Cakras

The Ziggurats, the stepped Pyramids where the steps number around seven is the model of the metaphysical world where the soul has to ascend step by step and reach the peak and on reaching which the body becomes Golden a notion well articulated in mummification of Pharaohs who also covered up the body with Gold. This is the Cenbu Pon aakutal of Tirumular, the copper-like body becoming Gold by burning to ashes the dirt of Ignorance, the Malam,

It is this need to burn off the Malam, the Darkness of Ignorance that Fire Worship was instituted and in Sumeria, as it is till to-day among the Tamils, as a part of the temple rituals. The Dravidian Vedism celebrates only Temple Yajnas and not grand ones with animal sacrifices and so forth as in VarNa Vedism, a corruption of the ancient Dravidian Vedism

Siva holds Agni, the Sacred Fire in one of His hands to symbolize the Tiikkai, (> Sk Diksa) in the Natural Pedagogy where Siva Himself is the MahaGuru, the great Teacher. The Yajna is a ritual practice of seeking the Grace of BEING, to dispel the Darkness of Ignorance and with that get illuminated metaphysically and become more and more enlightened.

And it is here where occurs the ascending of Cakras or the climbing up Mount Meru, the Pyramid that ultimately leads to Moksa on reaching the Peak. At the peak we have the witnessing the Pure Brilliance, the Combined presence of BEING as Sun-Moon, the Tantric RaviMati. Thus we have here also a continuous widening and deepening of the visions, the SEEING so that what was initially Unconscious or in the Dark becomes a matter of clear vision or Consciousness.

The Pyramid represents the dynamics of the soul developing deeper and deeper VISIONS so that ultimately and on reaching the peak begins to enjoy the same vision as BEING and at which point, it begins to enjoy also the moksa

The Natural Pedagogy of the Pyramidal Cosmology

This natural Pedagogy that the Pyramid represents is lost in the jungle of various religions. The Pharonic religion of the ancient Egyptians is no more and so is also that of Nubians. However that of the Sumerians somehow survives as that of the Dravidian folks. Any one who walks into a typical South Indian Temple will encounter the rituals and mythical figures that in fact graced the most ancient religion in the world, underlying the very metaphysical insights that gave rise to civilization as such.

This Natural Pedagogy can be summarised by a clause of Tirumular: KaLimbu aRuttaan kaNNutal Nanti, KaLimbu aruttan kaN vizippittu: BEING, the Third Eyed, destroyed the Darkness of Ignorance, the Malam by widening and deepening the visions of the souls so that eventually all is seen and hence there is no Darkness or Unconscious in the soul at all.

Concluding Remarks

I am writing now the great History of Dravidian Philosophy tracing the growth of metaphysical ideas among the Tamils from Sumerian times where I bring together all my studies related to this theme. I have already written Six chapters and there are many more such chapters to write. By this effort I hope to bring out the essences of the deep and profound metaphysical insights which are there in all world religions but perhaps submerged and hence lost sight off leading to various inter-religious animosities. I believe that this task of recovering the Metaphysics of the Pyramids of the ancient civilization will bring into human consciousness again the GENUINE RELIGION that would illuminate all human beings and with that overcome the religious animosities that have caused and continue to cause the death of millions.

Personally this great Video of Clyde confirms me that this task that I am currently working on is an important one and will serve immensely to bring peace and harmony among people of different religions by pointing out a deep commonality and as enshrined in the Pyramid of the ancients and interpreted and brought into words in the Saiva Siddhanta of the Tamils.

Loga

=