Three Qualities to Make Sense of Everything

Form, Stability, and Change

Most of what we call knowledge explains how things behave.

Physics explains how matter moves.
Biology explains how life evolves.
Computer science explains how information is processed.

But there is a quieter question we rarely stop to ask.

Why does anything make sense at all?

Why are there laws instead of chaos?
Why do objects have identity instead of dissolving instantly?
Why can explanations connect one fact to another?

This post looks beneath specific theories and asks a simpler question.
What must already be true for anything to be intelligible, describable, or law-governed?

The answer, surprisingly, turns out to be very simple.

Everything that makes sense seems to express three qualities:
form, stability, and change.

---

What do I mean by “qualities”?

A quality is not something that acts or causes effects.

It is something inherent, unavoidable, and expressed wherever something exists or can be coherently described.

I tried other words such as force, principle, or property. Each of them misled. They suggested causation, measurement, or mechanisms that were never intended.

Quality fits precisely.

---

The three qualities in simple terms

Form

Something must be distinguishable.

If nothing can be told apart from anything else, then there is nothing to talk about. No structure, no identity, no description.

Form is what allows states, patterns, and differences to exist at all.

Without form, everything collapses into indistinction.

---

Stability

Something must persist.

If whatever exists immediately dissolves, then nothing can be identified, tracked, or related to anything else.

Stability does not mean permanence. It only means enough persistence for identity to make sense.

Without stability, there can be no objects, no laws, and no meaning.

---

Change

Something must be relatable or transformable.

If nothing can differ, relate, or transform, then nothing can explain anything else. Inference, learning, and explanation all disappear.

Change does not have to mean motion or flowing time. It means structured difference, states that are related in some way.

Without change, explanation collapses.

---

These three are mutually dependent

This point is crucial.

Form without stability becomes pure flux, where nothing has identity.
Stability without change becomes isolated facts that explain nothing.
Change without form becomes indistinguishable noise.

These qualities are not independent ingredients. They form a minimal structure.

Remove any one of them, and intelligibility breaks.

---

Checking the framework against known laws

Rather than asserting universality, it helps to test specific cases directly.

Gravity

Form appears as mass, distance, and spatial configuration.
Stability appears as persistent orbits, galaxies, and large-scale structure.
Change appears as motion, collapse, and formation over time.

Without form, gravity has nothing to apply to.
Without stability, no orbit could exist.
Without change, gravity would explain nothing.

---

Electromagnetism

Form appears as positive and negative charge, fields, and atomic structure.
Stability appears as atoms, molecules, and solids.
Change appears as chemical reactions, currents, and radiation.

The same interaction both preserves structure and enables transformation.

---

Strong nuclear interaction

Form appears as quarks, protons, and neutrons.
Stability appears as long-lived atomic nuclei.
Change appears as fusion, fission, and element formation.

Extreme stability at small scales enables complexity at larger scales.

---

Weak nuclear interaction

Form appears as distinct particle types.
Stability appears indirectly by removing unstable configurations.
Change appears as particle decay and transmutation.

This interaction exists almost entirely to enable change.

---

Thermodynamics

Form appears as distinguishable microstates.
Stability appears as local order under constraints.
Change appears as entropy increase and energy flow.

Thermodynamics explains the limits of stability, not its absence.

---

Quantum mechanics

Form appears as allowed states defined by the structure of the system.
Stability appears statistically through expectation values.
Change appears as transitions, interference, and measurement outcomes.

Here, stability is probabilistic rather than classical.

---

Information theory

Form appears as distinct symbols or bits.
Stability appears as signal persistence against noise.
Change appears as encoding, transmission, and decoding.

Information cannot exist without all three.

---

Computation

Form appears as distinct memory states.
Stability appears as stored values persisting across steps.
Change appears as algorithmic state transitions.

Remove any one, and computation collapses.

---

Mathematics and logic

Form appears as distinct symbols and structures.
Stability appears as fixed definitions and truths.
Change appears as inference, proof, and transformation.

Even timeless truths require structured relational movement to be intelligible.

---

Edge cases that fail and why

Pure chaos lacks stability and cannot be understood.
Perfect stasis lacks change and cannot explain anything.
A single undifferentiated state lacks form and is indistinguishable from nothing.

These are not counterexamples. They show why the qualities are necessary.

---

A note on origin

The idea of three fundamental qualities is not a modern scientific construction.

It appears explicitly in the Triguna doctrine found in the Vedas and developed in classical Indian philosophy. In that framework, guna means quality, not force, law, or substance. Exactly three qualities are identified and treated as irreducible.

They are described as the first expression of prakriti, understood not as a deity but as the physical world itself. Everything that arises from prakriti is said to inherit these qualities, differing only in proportion.

Modern science does not independently define universal qualities in this way. It works with forces, fields, symmetries, and equations.

This work does not reinterpret Triguna or appeal to authority. It asks a simple modern question. If these really are universal qualities, do we ever find a counterexample?

So far, none has appeared.

---

Is this a scientific theory?

No.

This framework makes no predictions, replaces no equations, and competes with no scientific law.

It sits beneath science, not against it.

It asks what must already be true for laws, explanations, and meaning to exist at all.

---

Is this a definition or a discovery?

It is neither in the usual sense.

Nothing here is invented. Nothing is asserted by authority.

These qualities were already operating everywhere. This framework simply makes them explicit.

That is why it feels obvious once you see it.

---

Where this leaves us

This is not a final truth.
It is not exclusive.
It is not closed.

But it is minimal, coherent, and universally expressed as far as we can tell.

That alone makes it worth thinking about.

Form gives us distinction.
Stability gives us identity.
Change gives us explanation.

If that is right, then many debates about reality, meaning, computation, or even artificial intelligence may share a deeper common ground.

This does not end the conversation.
It opens it.

Find your Varna(Brahmana,Kshatriya,Vysya,Shudra) with help of Gita

Have you come across this famous Gita sloka and always felt uncomfortable thinking, "How can I work the whole month and not expect salary at the end of the month?" Your feeling is genuine—there's nothing wrong with the sloka, nor with you to feel that way. It's just that the standard interpretation might not match your temperament.

The Bhagavad Gita gives a profound principle on how to act in the world without getting trapped by anxiety about results. This simple exercise uses one famous verse to help you discover which mental temperament (varna) you naturally resonate with.

Bhagavad Gita 2.47 – The Verse

Original Sanskrit
कर्मण्येवाधिकारस्ते मा फलेषु कदाचन ।
मा कर्मफलहेतुर्भूर्मा ते सङ्गोऽस्त्वकर्मणि ॥ २.४७ ॥

Simple meaning
You have a right only over your actions, never over the results. Do not make the results the motive for your actions, and do not be attached to inaction.

Four Ways to Hear This Verse

Read each of the four versions below slowly. Then close your eyes, contemplate for a minute, and notice which one feels the most “natural” or “obvious” to you. Don’t overthink it – just see which one your mind relaxes into.

1. Version 1
   “I have the right only on action. I don’t have rights on the results.”
2. Version 2
   “I have the right only on action. Whatever may be the results — I fight as that’s my duty.”
3. Version 3
   “I have the right only on action. If results are not what I want, I will not escape from my work and will continue to perform my duty.”
4. Version 4
   “I have the right only on action. I can’t control the outcome fully, so I just give my best in my action which I have control on.”

How to Use This Exercise

1. Read all four versions once or twice.
2. Close your eyes and sit quietly for a minute.
3. Ask yourself: “Which version feels most like my natural way of thinking?”
4. Pick one number: 1, 2, 3, or 4. Don’t pick by idealism; pick by honest resonance.

Now Reveal Your Varna

If you connected most with…

• Version 1 → Brāhmaṇa temperament (Mokshārthi)
  You resonate with the pure principle: action is yours, results are not. You are naturally drawn to truth, clarity, and inner freedom more than to outer scenarios.
• Version 2 → Kṣatriya temperament
  You hear the verse as a call to duty. Right action matters more to you than success or failure, and you think in terms of responsibility and courage.
• Version 3 → Vaiśya (Vysya) temperament
  You notice results, you care about them, but you value persistence even when outcomes disappoint you. You think in terms of consistent effort, stability, and not running away from your work.
• Version 4 → Śūdra temperament
  You see clearly that outcomes are not fully in your hands, so you focus on what you can actually control. You are practical, grounded, and ready to serve by doing your part well.

Important Note

Here “varna” refers to inner mental makeup (guṇa-based temperament), not birth, surname, or social status. Every temperament has its own strength and its own path of growth. This exercise is meant for honest self-understanding, not for judgement of yourself or others.

Entropy as per Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika (Indian Philosophy on Physics, Meta Physics and Logic)

Entropy shapes everything from cooling coffee to the universe’s fate, but its modern definition falters—assuming it always increases and requiring fixes for decreases. The ancient Indian philosophy of Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika, through its concept of samskara, redefines entropy as a triadic framework—tendency, state, and velocity—offering a complete model. This blog explores modern entropy’s limits, unveils Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika’s solution, and shows how it explains dynamic systems like black holes, the universe’s end, and the immortal jellyfish.

TL;DR

• Standard entropy mixes tendency (always increasing) and state (disorder), leading to conceptual flaws.
• Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika adds a third aspect: velocity, as per the sloka संस्कारः त्रिविधः — वेगः, भावना, स्थितिस्थापकः.
• This triad (tendency, state, velocity) fixes the issues seen in entropy models from thermodynamics to black holes.

Modern Entropy: Tendency and State

Modern entropy blends a tendency to increase disorder (Second Law) with a state measuring that disorder. Examples:

• Thermodynamics: Coffee cools down (tendency), molecular disorder increases (state).
• Cosmology: Universe moves to heat death (~10¹⁰³ k, dominated by black holes).
• Biology: Aging increases entropy; Turritopsis dohrnii reverses it (polyp from medusa).
• Markets: Prices stabilize (tendency), current price is the state.
• Information Theory: Tendency toward max uncertainty, state is current randomness in bits.

This conflation of direction and measurement ignores how fast and in what direction entropy changes—leading to flawed or patched models.

Flaws in Modern Entropy

Modern entropy assumes a one-way increase, needing “negative entropy” hacks when decreases occur. Examples:

• Black Hole Mergers (GW150914): Entropy decreases, violating the second law.
• Big Crunch: A collapse contradicts the entropy increase rule.
• Immortal Jellyfish: Rejuvenation (entropy decrease) defies the one-way assumption.
• Thermodynamics: Cooling rates vary, but entropy’s rate is ignored.
• Markets: Price fluctuations aren’t captured by state or tendency alone.

This limitation results in patchwork, ignoring real-world dynamics.

Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika's Triadic Model of Entropy

The sloka संस्कारः त्रिविधः — वेगः, भावना, स्थितिस्थापकः defines samskara (here interpreted as entropy) as:

• Velocity (वेगः): Rate and direction of change.
• State (भावना): Current condition or disorder.
• Tendency (स्थितिस्थापकः): The driving force or inclination.

This model separates what modern entropy combines, allowing for bidirectional changes.

Caption: A bird’s-eye view of entropy as samskara: The car’s velocity shows rate and direction, its destination is tendency, and the distance traveled is state. T. dohrnii reverses this path, which modern entropy cannot explain.

Velocity Solves Entropy’s Shortcomings

Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika's velocity component enables entropy to move forward or backward. Examples:

• Black Hole Condensation: Tendency to collapse, state is entropy, velocity is rapid decrease.
• Big Crunch: Same triad explains decreasing entropy without contradictions.
• Immortal Jellyfish: Moves from adult to polyp, i.e., reverse entropy, explained as negative velocity.
• Thermodynamics: Cooling is not constant—velocity tracks this changing rate.
• Markets: Bidirectional price changes are tracked by velocity, not just tendency or state.

At equilibrium (e.g., heat death), velocity = 0, tendency = 0, and the state becomes uniform—bhavana shunya.

In addition to the technical flaws that arise from viewing entropy solely as a tendency toward ever-increasing disorder, the triadic perspective—comprising tendency, state, and velocity—offers a more intuitive and complete understanding. This view even allows us to interpret gravity as a manifestation of entropy. By considering entropy in its triadic form, its role across physical phenomena becomes clearer and more conceptually meaningful.

Conclusion

Modern entropy’s assumption of one-way growth fails in dynamic systems. Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika's concept of samskara—a triad of tendency, state, and velocity—offers a timeless model rooted in Indian logic and atomism. It captures both entropy increase (e.g., heat death) and decrease (e.g., T. dohrnii) without contradiction.

The sloka बद्धो हि वासनाबद्धो मोक्षः स्याद्वासनाक्षयः from Yoga Vāsiṣṭha mirrors this: liberation (mokṣa) is achieved when tendency (vāsanā) dissolves and the state fades (bhavana shunya)—entropy at rest.

Appendix: Philosophical Depth of Bhavana Shunya

Bhavana is the system’s state. In the final stage—like heat death or mokṣa—velocity and tendency reach zero, and bhavana vanishes, becoming bhavana shunya.

Yet, T. dohrnii keeps entropy alive with dynamic velocity, refusing to fade. This aligns Nyāya–Vaiśeṣika’s model with both natural cycles and metaphysical ends.

In summary, entropy is not just disorder—it’s movement. And in ancient Indian physics, it moves both ways.

The Marriage Sutras: Ancient Yoga Wisdom for Modern Relationships

How All Eight Limbs of Patanjali's Yoga Can Transform Your Marriage

---

We have all been there. You are in the middle of a heated argument with your spouse about whose turn it is to take out the trash (again), and suddenly you remember that morning meditation where you felt so centered and peaceful. Where did that zen go? Why does maintaining inner calm seem impossible the moment your partner leaves their dirty socks on the bedroom floor?

Here is a thought that might sound crazy: What if marriage itself is the ultimate yoga practice that tests all eight limbs of Patanjali's ancient system?

When Life Becomes Your Yoga Mat

I have been studying Patanjali's Yoga Sutras for years, fascinated by how this ancient wisdom applies to modern life. But it was not until a particularly challenging period in my own marriage that I realized something profound: the eight limbs of yoga are not just for the meditation cushion. They are a complete blueprint for navigating the beautiful, messy, transformative journey of partnership.

Think about it. Marriage tests every aspect of your being - from your physical health to your deepest spiritual capacity. These are exactly the levels of consciousness that yoga addresses. Marriage, it turns out, is the perfect laboratory for practicing all eight limbs in real time.

Limb 1: The Marriage Yamas - Avoiding Relationship Karma

The yamas are ethical restraints that, in marriage, become guidelines for avoiding the kind of behavior that creates negative "relationship karma."

Ahimsa (Non-violence): This goes way beyond physical harm. In marriage, ahimsa means no emotional violence, no passive-aggressive comments, no weaponizing your partner's insecurities during fights. It means choosing love over being right.

Satya (Truthfulness): Real honesty in marriage is harder than it sounds. It is not just avoiding lies – it is having the courage to say "I am hurt" instead of "I am fine" when you are clearly not fine. It is communicating your needs clearly instead of expecting your partner to read your mind.

Asteya (Non-stealing): You might not steal money from your spouse, but do you steal their time by being constantly late? Do you steal their emotional energy by bringing drama into every conversation? Do you steal their space by never giving them room to breathe?

Brahmacharya (Energy management): This is not about celibacy in marriage – it is about loyalty. It is channeling your relationship energy toward one person instead of scattering it. It is being fully present with your partner instead of constantly looking over their shoulder at what else might be out there.

Aparigraha (Non-possessiveness): The hardest one. This means loving your spouse without trying to control them. It is supporting their dreams even when they do not align perfectly with yours. It is letting them be themselves rather than the person you think they should become.

Limb 2: The Marriage Niyamas - Building Positive Relationship Habits

The niyamas are positive observances that, in marriage, become the daily practices that strengthen your bond.

Saucha (Cleanliness): Sure, this means basic hygiene (please, brush your teeth). But it also means keeping yourself emotionally clean. Do not bring yesterday's resentments into today's conversations. Take responsibility for your own emotional baggage instead of dumping it on your partner.

Santosha (Contentment): This is about finding joy in your spouse as they are, not constantly wanting them to change. It is appreciating the way they make coffee in the morning instead of focusing on how they always forget to wipe the counter afterward.

Tapas (Disciplined practice): Marriage requires daily discipline – the choice to be loving even when you do not feel like it. It is showing up for your partner on the days when love feels more like a verb than a feeling. It is the inner fire that keeps you working on the relationship even when it is hard.

Svadhyaya (Self-study): In marriage, this becomes the ongoing study of your partner. Really listening to understand, not just to respond. Learning their love language, their triggers, their dreams. And yes, studying yourself too – recognizing your patterns and taking responsibility for your part in conflicts.

Ishvara Pranidhana (Surrender): Perhaps the most challenging aspect of marriage yoga. This is about letting go of your need to control outcomes. You can be the best partner possible, but you cannot control whether your spouse appreciates it. You can communicate clearly, but you cannot control how they respond. Surrender is about doing your part and trusting the process.

Limb 3: Asana - The Physical Foundation of Marriage

Traditional meaning: Steady, comfortable posture for meditation Marriage application: Maintaining your physical well-being and presence

Your body is the foundation of everything else. In marriage, asana means taking care of your physical health despite busy schedules and relationship stress. It means not falling apart from neglect and presenting yourself as someone worthy of love and respect.

But marriage asana goes deeper. It is about being physically present when you are with your partner. Not scrolling your phone during dinner. Not fidgeting impatiently when they are talking. It is the practice of stable, comfortable presence in your shared physical space.

When you argue, your asana practice shows up as not storming out of the room, not slamming doors, not using your physical presence as a weapon. It is maintaining your center even when emotions run high.

Limb 4: Pranayama - Breath as Relationship Medicine

Traditional meaning: Control and extension of life force through breath Marriage application: Using breath to regulate emotions and communicate consciously

This might be the most practical marriage tool in the entire yoga toolkit. When your partner says something that triggers you, breathe before you respond. Seriously. Count to five deep breaths. This simple practice can save you from saying things you will regret.

Pranayama in marriage means learning to breathe through difficult conversations instead of holding your breath in tension. It means using conscious breathing to stay calm when discussing finances, in-laws, or whose turn it is to clean the bathroom.

I have found that couples who breathe together stay together. Try synchronized breathing when you are both stressed. Lie down together and simply breathe in rhythm. It is remarkable how this simple practice can restore connection when words fail.

Limb 5: Pratyahara - Not Taking Everything Personally

Traditional meaning: Withdrawal of the senses from external distractions Marriage application: Not letting every little thing your spouse does affect your emotional state

This is perhaps the most necessary skill for marriage survival. Pratyahara means not letting your spouse's bad mood automatically become your bad mood. It means not taking their stress from work as a personal attack on you.

Your partner loaded the dishwasher "wrong"? Pratyahara says let it go. They forgot to pick up milk on the way home? Practice withdrawal from the impulse to make it mean something about how much they care about you.

This is not about becoming indifferent to your spouse. It is about developing the wisdom to know when something is about you and when it is just about them having a human moment. Most of the time, their irritation, distraction, or forgetfulness has nothing to do with you.

Limb 6: Dharana - Single-Pointed Focus on What Matters

Traditional meaning: Concentration, focusing the mind on one object Marriage application: Staying focused on love and partnership despite daily distractions

In marriage, dharana is the practice of staying focused on what really matters in your relationship. It is not letting small irritations distract you from the bigger picture of love and partnership.

When you find yourself fixated on how your spouse chews their food or leaves their coffee cup on the counter, dharana asks: Is this really what you want to focus on? Is this the most important thing about this person you chose to share your life with?

Dharana in marriage means concentrating on your partner's good qualities when you are tempted to make a mental list of their flaws. It means focusing on solutions rather than problems, on gratitude rather than complaints.

Limb 7: Dhyana - Sustained Awareness and Understanding

Traditional meaning: Meditation, sustained awareness without effort Marriage application: Developing deep, sustained understanding of your partner

If dharana is focusing on your partner, dhyana is the sustained awareness that leads to truly knowing them. This is the difference between looking at your spouse and really seeing them.

Dhyana in marriage means developing the kind of deep awareness where you notice when your partner is tired before they say anything. Where you understand their communication style so well that you can hear the love underneath their criticism. Where you can sense their needs and respond from genuine understanding rather than assumption.

This sustained awareness also extends to yourself. Dhyana helps you recognize your own patterns in relationship. You start to notice when you are projecting your own insecurities onto your partner, when you are reacting from old wounds rather than present reality.

Limb 8: Samadhi - Unity Consciousness in Partnership

Traditional meaning: Union, absorption, the goal of all yoga practice Marriage application: Moments of complete connection and transcendence of separateness

Every married couple knows these moments, even if they do not have a name for them. Samadhi in marriage is when you feel completely connected with your partner, when the sense of "me" and "you" dissolves into "us." It might happen during lovemaking, during deep conversation, during shared laughter, or in quiet moments of simple presence.

These moments of unity consciousness are what sustain you through the challenging times. They remind you why you chose each other and what you are working toward together.

The goal is not to live in permanent samadhi (that would probably be weird for everyone involved), but to cultivate more of these moments and let them nourish your relationship. To remember that underneath all the daily drama and negotiations, there is something deeper connecting you.

The Eight Limbs as Daily Practice

Here is what a complete "marriage yoga" practice might look like:

Morning: Set an intention (dharana) to be present and loving today. Take three conscious breaths together (pranayama) before starting your day.

During conflict: Remember your yamas and niyamas. Practice pratyahara by not taking things personally. Use your breath to stay centered.

Throughout the day: Maintain your asana by staying physically and emotionally present. Practice dhyana by really seeing and understanding your partner.

Evening: Practice svadhyaya by reflecting on the day together. Surrender (ishvara pranidhana) any need to control tomorrow's outcome.

Always: Stay open to moments of samadhi, unity, and deep connection.

The Real Test

Here is what I have learned: if you can maintain these eight practices while married, you have probably achieved something close to enlightenment. Marriage has a way of revealing every spiritual bypass, every area where your practice is purely theoretical rather than embodied.

Your spouse knows exactly which buttons to push because they helped install most of them. They see you at your worst, when you are tired and stressed and have not had coffee yet. They witness your growth and your backsliding, your breakthroughs and your stubborn resistance to change.

This is not a bug in the system – it is a feature. Marriage provides the perfect conditions for spiritual development because it demands that you practice all eight limbs not just when you feel like it, but especially when you really do not want to.

The Ultimate Partnership

Maybe Patanjali knew something we are just rediscovering: that the path to enlightenment does not require escaping from relationship, but diving deeper into conscious partnership. The householder's path is not a compromise with spiritual life – it might just be the most challenging and transformative practice of all.

So the next time your spouse leaves their socks on the floor, remember all eight limbs. Take a breath (pranayama), maintain your presence (asana), do not take it personally (pratyahara), focus on what really matters (dharana), understand their humanity (dhyana), practice your ethical guidelines (yamas and niyamas), and stay open to the deeper connection that brought you together (samadhi).

After all, if you can find inner peace while figuring out whose turn it is to take out the trash, you are probably ready for anything life throws your way.

---

What do you think? Have you found parallels between all eight limbs of yoga and relationship dynamics? I would love to hear about your own discoveries in applying ancient wisdom to modern partnership.

Is Kannada Really a Dravidian Language? The Evidence Suggests Otherwise

📌 TL;DR

The Current Claim
Kannada is traditionally classified as a Dravidian-origin language that underwent deep Sanskrit influence over time.

Our Revised Claim
The evidence suggests Kannada is better understood as a Sanskrit-origin inscriptional language that gradually absorbed Dravidian morphological features, especially in its spoken form — a convergence visible from the very first records.

👉 To understand the linguistic evidence, timeline, and scientific reasoning behind this new perspective, keep reading.

---

I’ve been researching Kannada’s linguistic history for a project, and I’ve stumbled onto something that challenges everything we’ve been taught. The more evidence I examine, the more convinced I become that Kannada might not be a Dravidian language at all.

Let me walk you through what changed my mind.

---

🔎 The Halmidi Inscription Problem

The Halmidi inscription (c. 450 CE) is considered the earliest known Kannada text. Here’s what it actually contains:

• First line: Entirely in Sanskrit

• Rest of text: Heavily loaded with Sanskrit compounds and syntax

• Grammar: Uses Sanskrit passive constructions and case forms

• Vocabulary: Only about 25 clearly identifiable Kannada-origin words

This is the first and foundational record of Kannada. If it was truly a Dravidian language, we should expect Dravidian grammar at its core. But we don’t.

So where is the pre-Sanskrit Dravidian Kannada? It doesn’t appear in any inscription, manuscript, or fragment. Not even one.

---

🔄 Grammar Defines Language, Not Vocabulary

Just because a language borrows words doesn’t change its core structure. For example:

• English has a Latin/French-heavy vocabulary but remains a Germanic language because of its grammar.

Now look at Kannada:

• Sandhi (phonological joining): Follows Sanskrit rules

• Compound formation (samāsa): Sanskritic structure

• Passive voice & relative clauses: Based on Sanskrit models

• Case endings: Originally Sanskrit-based, not Dravidian-style postpositions

These are deep grammatical features, not superficial borrowings. No language simply "borrows" an entire grammatical skeleton. If Kannada grammar was truly Dravidian at its root, these features wouldn't exist in the oldest records.

---

📅 The Timeline Impossibility

The traditional view argues:

• Kannada started Dravidian

• Got increasingly Sanskritized during 450–1200 CE

But for this to be true, we must believe that:

• A deeply Dravidian language lost nearly all core features in just a few centuries

• Without printing, schools, or mass education

• And then magically re-adopted Dravidian grammar later without leaving behind intermediate stages

Yet no inscription shows gradual transformation. Halmidi starts off highly Sanskritic, and subsequent inscriptions only slowly adopt more Dravidian traits.

There is no inscription that looks like a transition from full Dravidian to full Sanskrit and back.

---

🔢 Increasing Dravidian Features Over Time

Instead of starting out Dravidian and becoming Sanskritized, the inscriptional evidence shows the opposite trend:

• Kannada begins as a Sanskrit-structured language

• Gradually gains Dravidian features over centuries

This fits a trajectory of convergence, not origin. One clear case of this is case marking.

📊 Case Marking Evolution in Old Kannada

Period	Case Marking Characteristics	Interpretation
Pre-Halmidi / Early Inscriptions (Before 450 CE)	Sanskrit/Prakrit-style inflections, minimal postpositions	Sanskritic grammatical base
Halmidi (c. 450 CE)	Sanskrit passive, mixed morphology, rare Dravidian particles	Transitional phase
6th–8th Century	Frequent appearance of Dravidian particles (-ge, -alli)	Growing Dravidian influence
9th–12th Century	Postpositional case markers dominate	Dravidianized morphology
Modern Kannada	Fully agglutinative case system	Deep Dravidian convergence

🧠 So what can we derive from this?

• The earliest phase of written Kannada (up to ~6th c.) mirrored Sanskrit grammar and style, especially in inscriptional and formal domains.

• Over time, spoken Dravidian features “reasserted” themselves in morphology and syntax.

• The case system is the clearest indicator of this convergence — transitioning from Sanskritic endings to Dravidian agglutinative postpositions.

---

🛰️ The Kinship Puzzle

Kinship terms tend to be highly conservative. Yet in the so-called Dravidian family:

Language	Word for Father
Kannada	appa, tande, anna
Telugu	naanna, tandri
Tamil	appa, tantai
Malayalam	appa, achan

Instead of uniformity, we see a mess. If these came from one Dravidian root language, this kind of variation shouldn't exist in such core vocabulary.

This suggests parallel development with multiple influences rather than shared inheritance.

---

📜 The Inscription Language Hypothesis

What if what we call "Old Kannada" wasn’t a mother tongue but an administrative or inscriptional standard?

• Crafted by scribes

• Used formulaic Sanskrit structures

• Spoke differently at home

This model would explain:

• Abrupt language differences between inscriptional periods

• Absence of gradual evolution

• Disconnect between old and modern Kannada

---

⚖️ Let’s Compare the Two Theories

Feature	Traditional Theory ❌	Revised Theory ✅	Tamil ✅	Telugu ❌
Early Inscriptions	Dravidian grammar + Sanskrit lexicon	Sanskrit grammar, Sanskrit lexicon	Pure Dravidian grammar	Sanskritic grammar
Morphology Direction	Dravidian → Sanskritized	Sanskritic → Dravidianized	Stable Dravidian	Less Dravidianized
Tamil Consistency	Unexplained	Explained	Consistent	Divergent
Pre-Halmidi Evidence	Ignored	Central	Exists	Missing
Change Pattern	Illogical U-turn	Smooth convergence	Linear	Sanskrit-retentive

---

🔍 What About Telugu?

Telugu, like Kannada, has:

• Sanskrit grammar in earliest inscriptions

• Very few native Dravidian grammatical markers initially

Yet Telugu shows even slower Dravidianization than Kannada. Why?

• Andhra wasn't as closely linked to Tamil cultural zones

• Fewer early Tamil/Dravidian political influences

This supports the idea that both Kannada and Telugu were Sanskritic lingua francas that gradually absorbed Dravidian features due to geographic and social proximity.

---

🕵️‍♂️ Mutual Intelligibility & Scholar Access

• A native Tamil speaker cannot easily understand spoken Kannada

• But a Sanskrit grammarian can parse Kannada syntax far more easily than a Tamil grammarian can

This is odd if they supposedly come from the same family. It makes perfect sense if Kannada began with Indo-Aryan roots.

---

❓ What Makes More Sense?

Traditional View:

• Dravidian core language

• Sanskrit only layered on top

• Sudden Sanskritization and then reversal

Revised Theory:

• Kannada began as Sanskritic lingua franca

• Gradually adopted Dravidian features

• Matches inscription evidence and evolution logic

---

📊 The Numbers Don’t Lie

Feature Type	Sanskritic	Dravidian
Syntax	Passive, Compounds, Relative Clauses	Verb-final, Agglutination (later)
Case System	Inflectional (early)	Postpositions (later)
Kinship	Mixed, non-uniform	Partial retention
Script	Brahmi > Kadamba > Kannada	Dravidian scripts emerge later

---

💡 Why This Matters

This is not about cultural pride or diminishing any language. It’s about:

• Re-examining evidence without bias

• Acknowledging flaws in established models

• Understanding how languages evolve through contact

Until we find a single pre-Sanskrit Dravidian Kannada inscription, it’s more scientific to accept what the data shows:

Kannada and Telugu originated with Sanskritic grammar and slowly adopted Dravidian morphology.

---

🤔 What Do You Think?

Have you noticed these inconsistencies too? Let’s discuss.

#Kannada #Linguistics #LanguageHistory #Karnataka #EvidenceBasedResearch #Dravidian #Sanskrit

Vāsanā vs Saṁskāra — A Clear Philosophical Clarification

 

🔹 The Confusion Between Vāsanā and Saṁskāra

In many modern and traditional discourses, the terms vāsanā and saṁskāra are often used interchangeably. This has led to considerable confusion, because although they are deeply related, they are not the same.

Saṁskāra is the mental-layer expression of vāsanā — like a ripple on the surface of a deeper undercurrent. To clearly grasp this distinction, we must understand the structure of the jīva (individual self) as laid out in Vedāntic and Yogic traditions.

---

🔹 The Structure of the Jīva

According to Vedānta, the jīva is composed of:

1. Ātma (Self) — the unchanging witness

2. Anātma (Non-self) — the composite of body, mind, energy, and impressions

Anātma is further divided into three bodies:

• Sthūla śarīra — Gross body

• Sūkṣma śarīra — Subtle body

• Kāraṇa śarīra — Causal body

These map to five kośas (sheaths):

1. Annamaya kośa — physical body (food sheath)

2. Prāṇamaya kośa — energy/life force sheath

3. Manomaya kośa — emotional mind sheath

4. Vijñānamaya kośa — intellect/discriminative sheath

5. Ānandamaya kośa — bliss sheath, causal layer

It is said in traditional commentaries that the Ātman resides in the ānandamaya kośa, the innermost layer.

---

🔹 Understanding Puruṣārthas — Desires of the Soul

The soul (puruṣa) is said to carry puruṣārthas — a compound of puruṣa (soul/self) and artha (meaning, object, acquisition). So puruṣārtha means “that which is sought by the soul.”

Rather than treating puruṣārtha merely as external “goals,” it's more helpful to see them as deep existential desires that guide human life:

1. Dharma — Desire to be right or feel righteous (regardless of correctness)

2. Artha — Desire to acquire, accumulate, or possess

3. Kāma — Desire to experience pleasure or fulfillment

4. Mokṣa — Desire for liberation, transcendence, or cessation of bondage

These puruṣārthas are not merely abstract values — they are vāsanās at the soul level.

---

🔹 What is Vāsanā?

Vāsanā means tendency — the latent momentum or predisposition that pushes a system toward a specific state.

In Vedānta and Yoga, every layer of our existence — from body to mind to soul — has its own inherent vāsanā. Left alone, each layer will gradually return to its default or imprinted state, much like how a river finds its path to the ocean.

---

🔹 Mapping Vāsanās Across the Kośas

Kośa	Vāsanā Type	Explanation
Annamaya	DNA structure	Our physical makeup, inherited traits, and genetic blueprint shape our bodily tendencies.
Prāṇamaya	Doṣic balance (vāta, pitta, kapha)	The Ayurvedic constitution governs reflexes, metabolism, and vitality.
Manomaya	Rāga–dveṣa (likes and dislikes)	Emotional biases, attachments, and aversions that drive behavior.
Vijñānamaya	Saṁskāra (mental imprints)	Cognitive memories and impressions formed by repeated thoughts/actions.
Ānandamaya	Karma-vāsanā (causal karma)	Residual karmic seeds that shape destiny and rebirth.
Beyond (Ātma)	Puruṣārtha-vāsanā (desire for dharma, etc.)	Aspirations seeded in the soul’s core seeking righteousness, experience, and freedom.

---

🔹 Textual Support from Yoga Vāsiṣṭha

The following verse from Yoga Vāsiṣṭha beautifully explains that different vāsanās operate at different levels, and mokṣa requires giving up even the desire for mokṣa:

बद्धो हि वासनाबद्धो मोक्षः स्याद्वासनाक्षयः ।
वासनां संपरित्यज्य मोक्षार्थित्वमपि त्यज ॥
मानसीर्वासनाः पूर्वं त्यक्त्वा विषयवासनाः ।
मैत्र्यादिवासनानाम्नीर्गृहाणामलवासनाः ॥
ता अप्यतः परित्यज्य ताभिर्व्यवहरन्नपि ।
अन्तःशान्तः समस्नेहो भव चिन्मात्रवासनः ॥

Translation: Bondage is caused by vāsanā, and liberation is its destruction. Renounce even the desire for mokṣa, which is itself a vāsanā. First give up mental vāsanās, then sensory ones, then even virtuous ones like friendliness. Eventually, act in the world while remaining inwardly silent and established in pure consciousness-tendency alone.

---

🔹 Final Insight

Understanding vāsanā as the structural tendency of each layer, and saṁskāra as its mental-layer reflection, allows us to:

• Avoid the common mistake of treating them as synonyms

• Build a clearer bridge between Yogic psychology and Vedāntic cosmology

• Map our inner architecture in a way that is both scripturally supported and logically rigorous

Letting each layer be understood by its own default drift (vāsanā), and understanding mokṣa as a process of progressive vāsanā-kṣaya (burning of tendencies), brings us closer to self-mastery and inner peace.

---

🙏 If this clarified a long-standing confusion for you, share it or discuss with others. Truth is revealed more clearly through collective inquiry.

Purusharthas: The human desires

Sanatana Dharma and numbers have a great relation. Below are miniscule few of them,

0. Sunya state of meditator

1. Brahman

2. Shiva and Shakthi

3. Trimurti

4. Purushartas (The topic of discussion here)

5. Pancha prana. Pancha kosha

6. Arishadvargas

7. Saptha rishis

8. Astalakshmi

9. Navagrahas

10. Dashavataras

11. 11 Chakras ( As taught by my guru Master Choa kok sui)

12. 12 Chakra ( Seat of Incarnated Soul/Jivatma, as As taught by my guru Master Choa kok sui)

I always get marvelled by Sanatana Dharma, Its details on topic of the purpose of our existence is astounding. Today we will learn about purusharthas. One of the term least understood. Earlier reference to this word can be found 

1. Suryopanishad 

aum atha sūryātharvāṅgirasam vyā̎khyāsyā̱maḥ | brahmā ṟṣih | gāya̍trī chha̱ndaḥ | ādi̍tyo de̱vatā | haṁsa̍ḥ so̱’ham agni nārāyana yu̍ktam bī̱jam | hrille̍khā śa̱ktiḥ | viyadādi sarga saṁyu̍ktaṁ kī̱lakam | catur-vidha puruṣārtha siddhyarthe jape vi̍niyo̱gaḥ ||

2. Ganapty Atharvashrisha Upanishad

सायमधीयानो दिवसकृतं पापं नाशयति । प्रातरधीयानो रात्रिकृतं पापं नाशयति । सायं प्रातः प्रयुञ्जानो पापोऽपापो भवति । सर्वत्राधीयानोऽपविघ्नो भवति । धर्मार्थकाममोक्षं च विन्दति ॥१३॥

Purushartha is compound word formed by Purusha + Artha. Purusha in sanatana dharms stands for the soul. Artha has many meanings,

1. Goal

2. That which is acquired

3. Prosperity

Traditionally Purushartha means human goals. Its very difficult to understand purushartha as goals. For discussion we will go with much easier explanation which is "Desires". Purushartha stands for 4 kinds of desires which drive human evolution, without which the world is stagnant.

1. Dharma: The desire to be right. Dharma is the one which makes Scientists,Mathematicians,Physicists,Chemists to experiment and verify their understanding. Dharma is the one which makes people standup for their beliefs. Dharma is the one which make kid argue 1 + 1 = 2 and not 1 + 1 = 10, But 10th Standard student will argue that both are true in its own sense, one is base 2, one in base 10. Dharma is the ultimate desire to be right. For humans, we have limitations of the understanding of universe, But we try to be right within our own little understanding. As we expand our knowledge and understanding, our Actions also change. This is because of desire to be right, Which we call as Dharma.

Satya yuga has many incidents where divinity trumps the bad. All of these stories are centered around Ego. Take for example of Hayagriva avatar or Narasimha avatar, The villains in both the stories were destroyed because of their Ego. They thought they are the one who is right. They thought themselves as ultimate knower of the truth.

All these stories hints us one common thing. Humans in Satya yuga had capabilities of only Dharma, Or could desire to be right only. They were incapable of any other desires like Artha, Kaama or Moksha. All their actions were because of desire to be right, Whether its to acquire wealth, Procreation, or any other actions. All were cause of desire to be right. They thought its right thing to do to acquire wealth, its right thing to procreate.

Humans are evolved enough to fulfill dharma, Desire to be right.

2. Artha: Desire to possess. Artha is the one which makes humans put effort to acquire. Be it Wealth. Be it name or fame. Be it beautiful house, car, kingdom, desire for any form of possession is because of Artha. 

Humans in Treta yuga had capabilities of both kinds of desires, Dharma and Artha. All of tretha yuga incidence are mostly centered  around acquiring. But both Dharma and Artha are responsible for happenings in Treta yuga. Bali chakravarthi wanted to acquire all lokas and liberated by Vaamana avatar, Vali wanted Sugrivas wife, Sita wanted golden deer, Raavana wanted Sita. Kaikeyi wanted kingdom to her son. All were cause of desire to acquire. They were primarly motivated by Artha. 

Humans are evolved enough to fulfill both dharma and artha

3. Kaama: Desire to experience. Kaama is the one which makes humans want to experience. Humans jump from flight to experience the thrill, Go for scuba diving, Have Sex, Get angry, Show empathy, Eat delicious food, Drink what they enjoy, All because of Kaama, Desire to experience.

Humans in Dwapara yuga additionaly had capabilities of kaama, i.e desire to experience. The mahabharata was result of kaama, Duryodhanas hate towards his brothers. He enjoyed hating. This is possible only because humans now could experience and desire for it. However all three, Dharma, Artha and Kaama are responsible for happenings in Dwaapara yuga. Kaama being most prominent.

Humans are evolved enough to fulfill Dharma, Artha and Kaama by now

4. Moksha: Desire to unite with the one. Moksha is the one which makes humans want to unite with the Brahman. We worship, We meditate, We want to be spiritual, We want to be religious, We want to die in the name of god, We want to kill in the name of god, We want to convert and destroy society in the name of god. All these are fuelled due to desire to unite with God. However humans are now balancing all four purusharthas. All four kinds of desires. 

Humans are evolved enough to fulfill Dharma, Artha, Kaama and Moksha by now.

I hope you enjoyed reading this and have fair understanding of purusharthas, You can now analyse your actions and see what motivates them, Dharma, artha, kaama or moksha