"Tholkappiam preceded Rig Veda"
  • Guna Claims "Tholkappiam preceded Rig Veda"

    Mr. Guna, a research Scholar has released his Tamil book titled "Tholkaappiyaththin Kaalam" ( The Period of Tholkappiam)

    Guna is an intellect well known to the Tamil enthusiasts. He relentlessly studies and propagate the antiquity of Tamil Language, Literature, Race and Culture. By this way he uncovers the truth deliberately hidden by the conspirators against Tamil Language.

    His book " Tholkaappiyaththin Kaalam" was released in Santhome Chennai amidst much funfare on 13.08.2011. The function was lively with performances of Paraiyaattam, Chakkaikkuchchi aattam, Street play etc well organized by Thamizhar kalam.

    Dr. David Prabhakar has released an introduction on this book which is translated and produced below:

    Guna tries to establish that tholkaappiyam belongs to 7000 B.C based on eight Prime factors. The research is based on Astronomy, Mathematics, Religion, Philosophy, Archetypes, History, Archeology, Inscriptions and etymology.

    1.Guna explains how Sun ( El) worship transforms to Athan worship which later turned into Maayon worship based on the verse " Elle Ilakkam". Pointing out how Seyon is said to be the son of Kotravai, the period in which kotravai was not transformed to Sivan is established as the period of Tholkaapiam. Morover the word el is the origin of the gods and worship in Mediterranean sea.

    2.No hint about Indra, the god more celebrated in Rig Veda is seen in Tholkaappiam. Therefore Tholkaappiam precedes the period of collection of four Vedas

    3.Guna explains Kandhu worship based on his knowledge in Sangam literature and other world traditions. He explains that Kandhu was a form of Seyon ( Muruga cult) which later arrives as Lngam worship through siva worship. He narrates this is the period following the period of Tholkaappiam.

    4.He explains how the word " kelvi" denotes four Vedas. This word no place in Tholkaappiam confirming why it precedes the period of Vedas.

    5.The research dragging the period of Tholkaappiam to a later period is based on the Panamparanaar's special Paayiram ( a type of introductory poem) . Guna well establishes that the tradition of Paayiram writing belongs to later period. He also establishes neither Inthiram nor Ahaththiyam cannot be a base work for Tholkaappiyam.

    6.After going through Brhami and Indus Valley scripts Guna describes the ancient writing methodology recorded in Tholkaappiam.

    7.The antiquity of Tholkaappiam is also examined with reference to the inscription of Karavela ( B.C.176 to 163) inscription at Athikumba which explains the military alliance of Tamil Kings Chera, Chola and Pandyas against their enemies.

    8.Many words found in Tholkappiam are not used in Sangam literature and many types of poems for which grammar is furnished are not matching with sangam poems. This shows why Tholkaappiam precedes Sangam literature

    India is basically a mix of two cultures of Tamil and Sanskrit. There are two school of thoughts based on these two cultures claiming to occupy the earliest period of history.

    The Vedas written in Sanskrit and Tholkappiam written in Tamil are the earliest works available in these languages.

    Some scholars have tried to push Tholkappiam to a later period. However who read the Tamil literature from Sangam period to this date can easily come to a conclusion that Tholkappiam should have been written many centuries prior to earliest date of Sangam literature. The period of sangam literature ranges from BC TO AD.

    The latest work of Guna is a significant one which deserves serious examination. Since Guna refers Rig Veda it is bound to raise some loud voices from Sanskrit lovers

  • Yet another case of "Breaking India" Syndrome !!!
  • An intellect will not pre-formulate a theory and then look for facts to support it.

    A true intellect will look at the facts and formulate a theory to match them. If subsequently, new facts come to light, the theory needs to be adjusted. It is not correct to ignore facts that do not match the theory.

    at Tamil language is older than Sanskrit) and this is a compilation with supporting facts.
  • I love my Mother Tongue and that love is not lesser to any others. I was happy when a pot shred Tamil engraving was traced to 500 -1500 BC. I amhappy withat scientific proof
    However i am cofused with many statements in this article:
    In Tolkappiyum Vendan ( Indiran) was the lord of Marudham .
    I dont know how the author comes to this conclussion?
    2.No hint about Indra, the god more celebrated in Rig Veda is seen in Tholkaappiam. Therefore Tholkaappiam precedes the period of collection of four Vedas
  • Thanks for posting -

    Also read the scholarly article by Dr. Iravatham.


    He has almost deciphered Indus script on the basis of Tamil. This link is one such example and you can read his other decipherments in the above website.

    And proves the existence of archaic Tamil during the Indus era.
  • I do not agree with Guna, but you cannot deride it because in Scientific methods, a theory is first formulated based on some observations or prior conclusions, then experiments are carried out to corroborate that theory to reach conclusions.


    We all remember in our school days, all our 'practical notebooks' where we noted down our science experiments, we first wrote the Objective. Then we carried out experiments and inferred the conclusions.


Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Top Posters