Dear Mr Ravi,
>> Instead of merely claiming that "Tolkappiam mentions Panini's work on phoentics (siksha) as Pirappiyal and Bharata'ss Natya Shastra as Meyppattiyal", pl compare those works and Sutras in details.
>>Tholkappiyar never mentioned anything about Indra or Aindra. It is mentioned by panambāranār (பனம்பாரனார்) only in his Special prologue to Tholkappiyam.
You are not correct on above and as usual go by putting no corroborating reference and why panambāranār should not be taken into consideration, I see, you skip Agastya's point on making Tamil laguage who was a Sanskrit speaking Vedic Rishi, still,let's begin the comparison or in better words the study.
For your note :
You like most of others, seem to have no idia asto how retroflexe words came into existence in India, It's due to pronounciation practiced in Samved's Jaimini shakha. Not only in Tamilnadu but in other states also Jaimini followers use retroflex in their recitals.
On everybody on Vedas :
The AIT prejudices and in efforts made by Indians to counter that, errors are done by both, Vedas are pronounced as per strict traditions adopted by different branches, no work as of now is done by anybody on this aspect in 150 Yrs period and errorneous theories, thesis are made like aging of Rigvedic Mandals,
All that has come to surface and being discussed here and there is a useless show of linguists, First, get to know how Vedas are recited and how are they interpreted by followers of Vedas, without initiation into traditional system, you cant know what's what.
Same is the matter of Indian languages and dialects.
Lalit Mishra
[Unnecessary quoting removed - RW.]