The glue that binds together Indian culture

by Guest Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:08 pm

Sanskrit is a glue that binds together different fragments of Indian culture. This is evident not just when we consider important literary works written in sanskrit, but also in philosophical works. In the great philosophical works of India, we do not just have philosophers espousing their own philosophical views. In fact our philosophers make it a point to voice their agreement or disagreement with other major Indian philosophical thinkers. Here is an example:

There was a philosophical contest between the Nyaya school of Hindu philosophy and the school of Mahayana Budhism. It began when the great Budhist logician Dignaga attacked the views of Vatsyayana, whose commentary on the Nyaya Sutra is the first such commentary available today (although there must have existed other earlier commentaries because Vatysyayana refers to them in his writings). Dignaga's attack on Vatsyayana resulted in a centuries old debate on critical philosophical questions involving ontology and epistemology. The Nyaya philosopher Uddyotakara put forward a vigorous defense of Vatsyayana in which he also attacked Dignaga. Dignaga's Budhist commentators continued the Budhist attack. But the real philosophical battle was continued by another great Budhist philosopher called Dharmakirti who put forward an extremely sophisticated defense of Dignaga and framed what is now known as the celebrated sahopalambha niyama argument which is essentially a sophisticated defense of philosophical idealism. In return Vachaspati Mishra and Udayana continued the philosophical defense of the Nyaya by attacking Dharmakirti and defending Nyaya from his attacks.

It should be noted that both the Nyaya and Mahayana Budhism benefited from this philosophical struggle. Great thinkers came forward who enriched both philosophies. This would not have been possible if these philosophies would have grown in isolation and not encountered fierce criticism.

What was it that enabled these philosophers--who were separated not just geographically, but also in time (a difference of six or seven centuries separates Vatsyayana from Udayana) to communicate with each other? It was no doubt the sanskrit language. This great language of India encompasses within it all the great philosophical literature of India since every eminent Indian philosopher has expressed his philosophical views in sanskrit.

This is one reason why this great language of India needs to be cherished by all Indians.

by MulaiAzhagi Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:20 pm

Sanskrit is a glue that binds together different fragments of Indian culture.

===> More precisely, it is the Hinduism that binds India together.

There is more anti-brahmin feelings in TN because Sanskrit is shunned by the Dravidian crowd. They see Sanskrit as a Brahminical language.

by Guest Tue Feb 14, 2012 7:28 pm

MulaiAzhagi wrote:Sanskrit is a glue that binds together different fragments of Indian culture.

===> More precisely, it is the Hinduism that binds India together.

There is more anti-brahmin feelings in TN because Sanskrit is shunned by the Dravidian crowd. They see Sanskrit as a Brahminical language.

i liked the views of R. Nagaswamy.

PUDUCHERRY: “Historically, Tamil and Sanskrit are blended together, they are inseparable. Their growth over the centuries has been natural. Tamil has words from Prakrit, which is a spoken form of Sanskrit. At no point of time has there been a conflict between these two languages,” R. Nagaswamy, former Director of Archaeology, Tamil Nadu, said on Wednesday.

Speaking to The Hindu after presenting a paper on ‘Tamil-Sanskrit relationship from Epigraphs’ at a conference on the ‘Relationship between Tamil and Sanskrit: Affinities and oppositions’ at the French Institute of Pondicherry (IFP), Dr. Nagaswamy said Pallava kings of the North, from the 4th century to the 6th century AD , issued royal orders inscribed on copper plates using both Sanskrit and Tamil.

“In the South, the Pandya rulers issued bilingual royal and administrative orders and judicial pronouncements in excellent poetic Tamil, which even today we don’t see. They also combined Sanskrit and Tamil in their prose,” he added.

The amalgamation of the two languages, he said, was a continuous process. Any attempt to separate the two would be a failure, he said. Dr. Nagaswamy said: “The contribution of Muslims to Sanskrit is equally great and so is the interest shown by Christians of the 18th and 19th century. It is not to be confined to one religion or caste.”

http://www.hindu.com/2007/09/13/stories/2007091350320200.htm

by Guest Tue Feb 14, 2012 7:31 pm

i would also like to place on record Propagandhi's views on Sanskrit which he once shared with me on sulekha CH:

in any case, I do agree with you that it's disgraceful when certain ppl argue that sanskrit should not be 'forced' on them - when they're so willing to learn a completely foriegn language (english) in interest of getting good jobs but loathe learning the language that is the fount of civilization all hindus are born into. I hope it's just minority opinion of pompous, fanatic nitwits that haunt this place and not the majority opinion. hindi imposition is one thing but sanskrit is hinduism and hinduism is sanskrit..that must be respected, imo.

by MaxEntropy_Man Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:56 pm

english is not a foreign language. it is less foreign to me than for example hindi. english doesn't just serve the purpose of professional communication for me, but of leisure and pleasure too. and i am sure there are many indians who would say the same thing. i have much more of an emotional connection to it that i do to sanskrit and hindi.

if you want to call english foreign, you'd have to call sanskrit a foreign langauge too. it's only a matter of when these languages got to india.

by Guest Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:59 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:english is not a foreign language. it is less foreign to me than for example hindi. english doesn't just serve the purpose of professional communication for me, but of leisure and pleasure too. and i am sure there are many indians who would say the same thing. i have much more of an emotional connection to it that i do to sanskrit and hindi.

if you want to call english foreign, you'd have to call sanskrit a foreign langauge too. it's only a matter of when these languages got to india.

but would you agree that if you remove sanskrit from Indian culture, you would also have to remove hinduism (and to some extent budhism and jainism) also?

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:08 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:english is not a foreign language. it is less foreign to me than for example hindi. english doesn't just serve the purpose of professional communication for me, but of leisure and pleasure too. and i am sure there are many indians who would say the same thing. i have much more of an emotional connection to it that i do to sanskrit and hindi.

if you want to call english foreign, you'd have to call sanskrit a foreign langauge too. it's only a matter of when these languages got to india.

do you have a better emotional connect with english classics than you do with the Ramayana and Mahabharata? Do not forget that the original stories of both Ramayana and Mahabharata were in sanskrit.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:38 am

rashmun: we've been doing this kabuki dance for probably close to a decade now. in all that time neither have you changed my opinion about anything pertaining to language, nor have i yours. it's futile. let it go.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:52 am

Here is another example of Sanskrit acting as a glue binding together people from across India:

In around the 10th or 11th century AD, there was a man called Vijnaneshwara who lived in either modern Andhra Pradesh or modern Karnataka. He wrote a legal treatise called Mitakshara which was a commentary on the Yajnavalkya Smriti. This Mitakshara was considered such a stupendous intellectual achievement that it quickly attained recognition all over India. Every kingdom all across India adopted the Mitakshara as the Hindu law and this continued to be the case even under muslim kings. (The only exception was Bengal and the North-East where a different Hindu legal code called Dayabhaga prevailed. )

The fact that the Mitakshara originated in South India but gained acceptance in all of India (except Bengal and North-East India) indicates the stupendous importance of the Sanskrit language in the evolution of Indian culture. The acceptance of Mitakshara all across India was only possible through the means of the Sanskrit language which needs to be cherished by all Indians since practically every aspect of Indian culture is connected directly or indirectly with this great language of India.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:57 am

Here are some other example:

The classical medical works composed in India (dealing with the science of Ayurveda) are all in sanskrit. These include the Charaka Samhita, Susruta Samhita, and various other works.

Every major scientific work--whether in astronomy or mathematics or atomism-- is also in sanskrit.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:06 am

There is no need to belabor the fact that Sanskrit Literature is a very rich one, from old religious texts (Veda, Puranas) to the great epics, from classical dramas to historical inscriptions, and on to medicine, law, Machiavellian state craft, agriculture, etc. Even the science of gems, cook books, and the art of thievery (Shanmukhakalpa) are found.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?212581

--> i have not read this art of thievery book but i understand it contains suggestions like the following:

when entering a house, make a hole in the wall and then do not enter head first but enter with your feet first. the idea being that if you enter head first and if the occupants are around you could get hurt more seriously than if you enter feet first.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:09 am

Rashmun wrote:There is no need to belabor the fact that Sanskrit Literature is a very rich one, from old religious texts (Veda, Puranas) to the great epics, from classical dramas to historical inscriptions, and on to medicine, law, Machiavellian state craft, agriculture, etc. Even the science of gems, cook books, and the art of thievery (Shanmukhakalpa) are found.

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?212581

--> To this could be added works like the Kamasutra and the Arthashastra which are unique not just in India but in the whole world.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:14 am

Although, i am a strong supporter of sanskrit, i am at the same time opposed to the artificial sanskritisation of the Hindustani language. this consists of replacing familiar, simpler words of persian origin (for instance kitaab) with esoteric words of sanskrit origin (for instance pustak). In conversational hindi, a hindi speaker will call a book 'kitaab' and not 'pustak' unless he is a hindi purist who enjoys purging hindi of all words of persian origin.

Ironically, it is tamilians who use the word pustakam for book in conversational tamil. many words of sanskrit origin which are considered esoteric in hindi (like pustak) seem to be considered the norm in tamil.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:26 am

Sign that Rashmunullah is losing the argument...

When he indulges in 4 or 5 continuous posts. Gives him a false sense of victory as he does not realize that others have given up on his a (totally) lost cause.

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:45 am

>> it is tamilians who use the word pustakam for book in conversational tamil. many words of sanskrit origin which are considered esoteric in hindi (like pustak) seem to be considered the norm in tamil.

I have to contradict our resident sanskrit-hindi-tamil-urdu scholar but

puththakam is a Tamil word. puthu - new. aka m - inside (new knowledge inside)

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:57 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:>> it is tamilians who use the word pustakam for book in conversational tamil. many words of sanskrit origin which are considered esoteric in hindi (like pustak) seem to be considered the norm in tamil.

I have to contradict our resident sanskrit-hindi-tamil-urdu scholar but

puththakam is a Tamil word. puthu - new. aka m - inside (new knowledge inside)

langDino
Junior Member
'pustakam' is a loan word from Sanskrit. 'ka' is the actual pronunciation. But when people pronounce it, I've heard them use 'ga' or 'ha' in place of ka. It is just a matter of convenience. FYI, 'Nool' is the equivalent word for book in tamil. 'Raagam' is again borrowed from sanskrit. 'ga' is the right pronunciation. 'gha' is not the right way but still some people use it. The meaning of the word does not change if you pronounce it as 'ga' or 'gha', so people accept it as long as they can understand.
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1737606
-----
is 'Raagam' also not a loan word from sanskrit?

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:12 am

One of the great philosophical battles in India took place in South India. Between the followers of Adi Sankara on one side and Madhva and his followers on the other. This intellectual fight could never have taken place without the sanskrit language.

Earlier, an intellectual fight between Ramanuja (and his followers) against the followers of Adi Sankara had taken place. But the Madhva versus Advaita fight was particularly nasty and bitter with a lot of name calling and abusive exchanges.

Note: Advaita Vedanta is the school of philosophy founded by Adi Sankara. Madhva's school is known as Dvaita Vedanta.

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:14 am

rashmun,

i gave you the etymology of puththakam. you go around beating the bush. if it is a sanskrit word, what is the etymology?

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:16 am

Ramanuja, the great tamil philosopher, wrote all his serious philosophical works in sanskrit. Why so? Because that was the norm of the time. Ramanuja knew that to reach out to intellectuals all across India he had to write his serious works (like his commentary to the Brahma Sutra) in sanskrit.

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:22 am

Thirukural has more wisdom in it in a condensed form than all that Sanskrit offers.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:29 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:rashmun,

i gave you the etymology of puththakam. you go around beating the bush. if it is a sanskrit word, what is the etymology?

Birdcall
Senior Member
I have heard many pronunciations for the letter ka between short a's. My mother and father both speak "Brahman" Iyer Tamil, but they pronounce this sound differently.

For example, for the word spelled "pustakam" (book), my mother would say "pustaham" with a voiced ha sound but my father would say "pustagham" with the "soft gha" sounding like a g after a vowel in Spanish (like in "la gata" or "lago") and kind of like the guttural gha in Urdu/Arabic, but much more toned down. I have also heard "pustakam," but not from anyone in my family. Which pronunciation, if any, is correct?

Note: when the ka/ga between vowels is from a Sanskrit ga, like in raagam (music I think), both my mom and dad would pronounce it raagham with a soft ga; it sounds unnatural to me with a fully pronounced hard ga like in "bhaagaa" in Hindi.

langDino
Junior Member

'pustakam' is a loan word from Sanskrit. 'ka' is the actual pronunciation. But when people pronounce it, I've heard them use 'ga' or 'ha' in place of ka. It is just a matter of convenience. FYI, 'Nool' is the equivalent word for book in tamil. 'Raagam' is again borrowed from sanskrit. 'ga' is the right pronunciation. 'gha' is not the right way but still some people use it. The meaning of the word does not change if you pronounce it as 'ga' or 'gha', so people accept it as long as they can understand.
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=1737606

----
Even George Hart--who cannot be accused by anyone of having an anti- Tamil bias given his views on Tamil--says that pustakam (for book) in tamil is a sanskrit loan word.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:31 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:Thirukural has more wisdom in it in a condensed form than all that Sanskrit offers.

Wrong.

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:32 am

Rashmun,

I ask you again. What is the etymology for pusthakam in Sanskrit?

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:33 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:Rashmun,

I ask you again. What is the etymology for pusthakam in Sanskrit?

Irrelevant to our discussion. The question here is whether pustakam in tamil is a loan word from sanskrit or not.

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:36 am

do you know what etymology means?

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:38 am

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamil-Mutar-Pustakam/dp/1173260994

http://www.parleremo.org/forum/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=117

http://www.uyirvani.com/forums/index.php/topic/31540-ajiths-first-film-prema-pustakam/

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:39 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:do you know what etymology means?

yes, but the etymology of the word pustakam is irrelevant when it is clear that it is a loan word from sanskrit in tamil.

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:42 am

not clear to me or other thinkers on this forum.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:51 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:not clear to me or other thinkers on this forum.

this may help:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4715-the-glue-that-binds-together-indian-culture#37591

by Kayalvizhi Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:55 am

since Rashmun does not have an answer and I have provided the atymology supporting that Puththakam is Tamil, case closed.

END OF THREAD.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:58 am

Kayalvizhi wrote:since Rashmun does not have an answer and I have provided the atymology supporting that Puththakam is Tamil, case closed.

END OF THREAD.

KV wants to deny the existence of the word 'Pustakam' in tamil (and insists on spelling it as 'Puththakam') but i have shown that her claim is false.

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:01 am

Rashmun wrote:http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamil-Mutar-Pustakam/dp/1173260994

http://www.parleremo.org/forum/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=117

http://www.uyirvani.com/forums/index.php/topic/31540-ajiths-first-film-prema-pustakam/

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamil-second-book-irantam-pustakam/dp/B0000CQ85M/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329289276&sr=1-3

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:27 am

The following excerpt is from the Constitutional Assembly Debate which took place on deciding what should be the official language of India. Note that the speaker is a Bengali.

Pandit Lakshmi Kanta Maitra: If today India has got an opportunity after thousand years to shape her own destiny, I ask in all seriousness if she is going to feel ashamed to recognise the Sanskrit language-the revered grandmother of languages of the world, still alive with full vigour, full vitality? Are we going to deny here her rightful place in Free India ? That is a question which I solemnly ask. I know it will be said that it is a dead language. Yes. Dead to whom ? Dead to you, because you have become dead to all sense of grandeur, you have become dead to all which is great and noble in your own culture and civilisation. You have been chasing the shadow and have never tried to grasp the substance which is contained in your great literature. If Sanskrit is dead, may I say that Sanskrit is ruling us from her grave? Nobody can get away from Sanskrit in India, Even hi your proposal to make Hindi the State language of this country, you yourself provide in the very article that that language will have to draw its vocabulary freely from the Sanskrit language. You have given that indirect recognition to Sanskrit because you are otherwise helpless and powerless. But I submit that it is not a dead language at all. Wherever I have travelled, if I have not been able to make myself Understood in any other language, I have been able to make myself understood in Sanskrit. Two decades ago, when I was in Madras, in some of the big temples at Madura, Rameshwaram, Tirupati, I could not make myself understood in English or in any other language, but the moment I started talking in Sanskrit, I found that these people could well understand me and exchange their views. I came away with the impression that at least in Madras there was the glow of culture of Sanskrit. Notwithstanding their inordinate passion-which is only natural-for their regional languages-Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada the Southerners did study Sanskrit on a fairly wide scale.

http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/debates/vol9p33a.htm

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:40 am

A quote from the Constituent Assembly debate that took place on 12.9.1949 in our Constituent Assembly :-

“The Hon’ble Shri Ghanshyam Singh Gupta - We want to hear your views on Sanskrit.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – I am extremely thankful to the Hon’ble Member Mr. Gupta. If you have to adopt any language, why should you not have the world’s greatest language? It is today a matter of great regret that we do not know with what reverence Sanskrit is held in the outside world. I shall only quote a few brief remarks made about Sanskrit to show how this language is held in the civilized world. Mr. W.C. Taylor says “Sanskrit is the language of unrivalled richness and purity”.

Mr. President – I would suggest you may leave that question alone, because I propose to call representatives who have given notice of amendments of a fundamental character and I will call upon a gentleman who has given notice about Sanskrit to speak about it.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – Yes, Sir, I shall not stand in between. I will only give a few quotations. Prof. Max Muller says that “Sanskrit is the greatest language in the world, the most wonderful and the most perfect”. Sir William Jones said “whenever we direct our attention to the Sanskrit Literature the notion of infinity presents itself. Surely the longest life would not suffice for a perusal of works that rise and swell protuberant like the Himalayas above the bulkiest composition of every land beyond the confines of India”. Then Sir W. Hunter says that “the Grammar of Panini stands supreme among the grammars of the world. It stands forth as one of the most splendid achievements of human invention and industry”. Prof. Whitney says “Its unequalled transparency of structure gives it (Sanskrit) undisputable right to the first place amongst the tongues of the Indo-European family”. M. Dukois says “Sanskrit is the origin of the modern languages of Europe”. Prof. Weber says “Panini’s grammar is universally admitted to be the shortest and fullest grammar in the world”. Prof. Wilson says “No nation but the Hindu has yet been able to discover such a perfect system of phonetics”. Prof. Thompson says “The arrangement of consonants in Sanskrit is a unique example of human genius”. Dr. Shahidullah, Professor of Dacca University, who has a world wide reputation as a Sanskrit Scholar, says “Sanskrit is the language of every man to whatever race he may belong”.

An Hon’ble Member – What is your view?

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – My own view is that it is one of the greatest

languages, and ………………..

An Hon’ble Member – And should it be adopted as the National Language or not? It is not spoken by any one now.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – Yes, and for the simple reason that it is impartially difficult to all. Hindi is easy for the Hindi speaking areas but it is difficult for other areas. I offer you a language which is grandest and greatest, and it is impartially difficult, equally difficult for all to learn. There should be some impartiality in the selection. If we have to adopt a language it must be grand, great and the best. Then why should we discard the claim of Sanskrit?

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:58 am

Here are a few more quotes of scholars praising Sanskrit:

Sir William Jones writes that Sanskrit has "a wonderful structure; more perfect than Greek, more copious than Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either"; and Count Keyserling says "This philosophical nation par excellence has more Sanskrit words for philosophical and religious thought than are found in Greek, Latin, and German combined".

by Guest Wed Feb 15, 2012 5:00 am

Rashmun wrote:A quote from the Constituent Assembly debate that took place on 12.9.1949 in our Constituent Assembly :-

“The Hon’ble Shri Ghanshyam Singh Gupta - We want to hear your views on Sanskrit.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – I am extremely thankful to the Hon’ble Member Mr. Gupta. If you have to adopt any language, why should you not have the world’s greatest language? It is today a matter of great regret that we do not know with what reverence Sanskrit is held in the outside world. I shall only quote a few brief remarks made about Sanskrit to show how this language is held in the civilized world. Mr. W.C. Taylor says “Sanskrit is the language of unrivalled richness and purity”.

Mr. President – I would suggest you may leave that question alone, because I propose to call representatives who have given notice of amendments of a fundamental character and I will call upon a gentleman who has given notice about Sanskrit to speak about it.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – Yes, Sir, I shall not stand in between. I will only give a few quotations. Prof. Max Muller says that “Sanskrit is the greatest language in the world, the most wonderful and the most perfect”. Sir William Jones said “whenever we direct our attention to the Sanskrit Literature the notion of infinity presents itself. Surely the longest life would not suffice for a perusal of works that rise and swell protuberant like the Himalayas above the bulkiest composition of every land beyond the confines of India”. Then Sir W. Hunter says that “the Grammar of Panini stands supreme among the grammars of the world. It stands forth as one of the most splendid achievements of human invention and industry”. Prof. Whitney says “Its unequalled transparency of structure gives it (Sanskrit) undisputable right to the first place amongst the tongues of the Indo-European family”. M. Dukois says “Sanskrit is the origin of the modern languages of Europe”. Prof. Weber says “Panini’s grammar is universally admitted to be the shortest and fullest grammar in the world”. Prof. Wilson says “No nation but the Hindu has yet been able to discover such a perfect system of phonetics”. Prof. Thompson says “The arrangement of consonants in Sanskrit is a unique example of human genius”. Dr. Shahidullah, Professor of Dacca University, who has a world wide reputation as a Sanskrit Scholar, says “Sanskrit is the language of every man to whatever race he may belong”.

An Hon’ble Member – What is your view?

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – My own view is that it is one of the greatest

languages, and ………………..

An Hon’ble Member – And should it be adopted as the National Language or not? It is not spoken by any one now.

Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed – Yes, and for the simple reason that it is impartially difficult to all. Hindi is easy for the Hindi speaking areas but it is difficult for other areas. I offer you a language which is grandest and greatest, and it is impartially difficult, equally difficult for all to learn. There should be some impartiality in the selection. If we have to adopt a language it must be grand, great and the best. Then why should we discard the claim of Sanskrit?

by FluteHolder Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:16 pm

Thanadhu Muyarchiyil Satrum Thalaratha Vikraman, Murungai Marathil Eari, Angu Irunda Vedhalathai keele irakki.... (Thanks for bringing some good old memories Smile

).

by Sponsored content

The glue that binds together Indian culture

The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture

Re: The glue that binds together Indian culture