Talk:Tamil Muslim/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

The Muslims in Sri Lanka are not "Tamil Muslims" but Sri Lankan Moors. The term "Tamil Muslim" would indicate that the Sri Lankan Moors are in fact part of the Tamil ethnic group, which is totally incorrect. They are a separate ethnic group who do not share the same ethnic origins as Tamils.

Tamil-speaking Muslims in Tamil Nadu, Sri Lanka and elsewhere share the same Sufi traditions of Turkey, Malaysia, China and the Moors of Maghreb. Many of their rituals resemble Tamil Hinduism. It is nonsense to claim they are Moors.Anwar 09:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Only very few Sri Lankan Muslims follow the Sufi traditions. However unlike the Indian Muslims, Sri Lankan Muslims do not see themselves as being Tamils on the account that there are recorded and proven facts that they are of Middle Eastern descent. Most of the Sri Lankan Muslim community has remained insular and has only adopted the Tamil language recently after being cut off from the Middle east for so long. Furthermore, most Sri Lankan Moors do not even physically reassemble the Dravidian "Tamil Muslims" of Southern India, so by using the term " Tamil Muslim", you are indicating that they are of the Tamil ethnicity. The Arabs mostly intermarried with the Sinhalese women in Southern Sri Lanka, which further disproves your claim. There is a big difference between "Tamil-speaking Muslims" and "Tamil-Muslims", so in this case your claim of "Tamil Muslim" should not even relate to Sri Lankan Muslims. One's ethnic origins cannot be determined by language, therefore in Sri Lanka, the Muslims are recognized as the Sri Lankan Moor and Malay ethnic groups. if you need confirmation see the Sri Lankan Moors stub and do some more research with articles about Sri Lankan Muslims rather then generalizing.

I think you are confused. Tamil Muslim is not the same as Dalit/Dravidian Muslim. Please see our Oriental connections. Incase you are interested, my mother was born in Saigon, Vietnam. Anwar 19:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

In Sri Lanka it is very easy to be confused because of the politics. Muslim communities of the Southern coast India and Sri Lanka are similar in composition to the Swahili speaking Muslims of East Africa. That is a small minority of Arabs, Persian and even Turks intermarry with local community, accept new converts (that is full bloodded locals) then move around creating a cohesive community. Because of the explosive politics of Sri Lanka, the Sri lankan moors exlusively claim Arab origins when they are most probably from South India in general (From Tamil Nadu and Kerala) of mostly of local origin with minor Arab and other infusion. Physically they look the same in general to Tamil muslims of TN. The Tamil identity of muslims of TN too is a product of the Dravidian politics of recent Tamil Nadu history. That aspect has been brought out in this artice with proper citations. Sri Lankan Moor article though is still a propaganda piece without critical contributions from academic books simply parroting a mythological view of themselves. It is not a balanced article yet. But someday it will improve, I have faith in the intelligence of the humanity to go over petty politicsTaprobanus 22:15, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Your argument is a very popular one which has been debated several times, most famously by Poonambalam Ramanathan who claimed that the Sri Lankan Moors were of South Indian Tamil Origin. This argument is essentially propaganda created by Tamils who wish to increase their numbers in Sri Lanka for political gain. You said: "they are most probably from South India in general (From Tamil Nadu and Kerala) of mostly of local origin with minor Arab and other infusion" ( note the term "probably"). So according to your personal judgment, you claim the Sri Lankan Muslims to be mostly from Tamil origins which is an argument that is just as skewed because you cannot claim something which is unsure. This particular group of people should be able to determine their identity on their own because ethnicity is both genetically and socially constructed! There are several major differences between the Muslims of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka. It is foolish to claim that the Sri Lankan Muslims are mostly of South Indian origins because the majority of the population in Sri Lanka is actually Sinhalese which would mean that the Muslims would have mixed mostly with the Sinhalese. Furthermore, as you mentioned earlier, the Sri Lankan Muslims are a highly mixed ethnic group, therefore the term “Tamil Muslims” is misdirection because it does not sufficiently describe the entire population. I know that there are definitely Muslims of Tamil origins in Sri Lanka; however you cannot label an entire group of mixed-race people by generalizations. It would be like saying that the Metis People of Canada are entirely of Native blood. I agree with you about the errors in claiming pure Arabic roots, however the term “Tamil Muslims” is also an error and should be renamed "Tamil-Speaking Muslims" if it were to include Sri Lankan Muslims. As I mentioned earlier, your view is very typical amongst ethnic Tamils therefore I will not argue anymore because we will be going around in circles. The term "Sri Lankan Moors" is an all encompassing label which has been used academically and politically for hundreds of years. One reason why there is so much animosity between the Moors and Tamils in Sri Lanka is because one group is very keen on overpowering the other for political reasons. So as a Sri Lankan Muslim, I am happy being a mixed race Sri Lankan Moor.

I think you are still confused and living in the past and fighting the political fight about an encyclopedic article about Tamil Muslims. Tamil Muslim identity is a political identity that may or may not have ethnic verifiability. But it does not matter, Muslims or Tamil Nadu and Kerala are no different in composition that Muslims of Sri Lanka (infact most of them came from Kilakarai and other Muslim majority towns in Tamil Nadu and Kerala). But the most Muslims of Tamil Nadu have chosen their identity as Tamils. So do the Muslims of Kerala who have proudly chosen their identity as Malayalees. But the Mulism of Sri Lanka have chosen an identity as a separate group (nothing wrong with it) BUT deny their roots in Tamil Nadu (that needs to be contested in the article). Most Tamils are mixed not just Muslims.

Also this article is about the Muslims of Tamil Nadu not about Sri Lanka. For that we have anothger article that still is not done in a neutral way simply reflects a political angle. Are you denying that there is not a single Tamil Muslim from Tamil Nadu in Sri Lanka ? There are citations in this article that says that there are number of them. This article does not say that every Muslim in Sri Lanka is from Tamil Nadu but simply mentions that there are Tamil Muslims from Tamil Nadu in Sri Lanka (doing business or what ever). I have a lot of Mulsim friends in Sri Lanka who are Indian in origin. Dont deny their heritahe because of a political view point you have. Thanks Taprobanus 13:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

There are several things that you have misinterpreted from my message. First of all, I never said that there were no Muslims in Sri Lanka from Tamil Nadu. I know for a fact that there are, however the VAST MAJORITY of Sri Lankan Muslims do not identify themselves as being from Tamil Nadu. This article is poorly researched and written, as it does not clearily distinguish the difference between Muslims of Sri Lankan and Tamil Origins. If you look at the Sri Lankan Moors article, it does in fact say that there are Muslims from Tamil Nadu (you just chose to ignore that part).

Your said: "But it does not matter, Muslims or Tamil Nadu and Kerala are no different in composition that Muslims of Sri Lanka (infact most of them came from Kilakarai and other Muslim majority towns in Tamil Nadu and Kerala). But the most Muslims of Tamil Nadu have chosen their identity as Tamils. So do the Muslims of Kerala who have proudly chosen their identity as Malayalees. But the Mulism of Sri Lanka have chosen an identity as a separate group (nothing wrong with it) BUT deny their roots in Tamil Nadu (that needs to be contested in the article)." SO according to your view, Most Muslims in Sri Lanka are from Tamil Nadu and Kerela, right? You honestly need to do some serious research on the history of Sri Lankan Muslims because the term Muslim and Moor are not the same!!!!!!! The term "Moor" is ethnic while Muslim is religious, therefore in Sri Lanka if the Muslims are Tamils, then there is an equal chance that they are Sinhalese. So why not label them Sinhalese Muslims? ...I hope that you understand where I am getting with my argument. You seem so keen on a mythical Tamil dream of claiming a much larger Tamil population in Sri Lanka, but it is never going to happen. Your argument is just as politically charged as mine, therefore I suggest you do some hard research on the origins of the Sri Lankan Moors before claiming that "most come from Tamil Nadu". Furthermore you also state that "this article is about the Muslims of Tamil Nadu not about Sri Lanka". Then why are you trying to claim the Muslims of Sri Lanka as Tamils?. I say that if you want to create a clearer article, name it "Tamil-Speaking Muslims" rather then Tamil Muslims. Thanks

Now that we agree identity is politics more than reality then the political view alone cannot be the only view presented in an encylopedic article. All views have to be presented including ethnographic including DNA analysis etc. As I dont want to make it into a WP:SOAP violation, you need to find WP:RS sources for Sinhalese Mulims article and create one if you wish. If you want to create an article on Tamil spaeking muslims please go ahead and create one using WP:RS sources. This article though is about the Tamil Muslims of Tamil Nadu who have spread around the world including Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Hong Kong etc.Taprobanus 14:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

All Tamils are not Dravidians

All Tamils are not Dravidians. If you have difficulty in understanding this, you will never understand Tamil psyche. A single drop of Tamil blood is sufficient to include anyone into the fold. I have seen Tamil Muslims from Sri Lanka who seem closer to a Israeli than a Dravidian. Marakkayar means Moor. Anwar 11:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Muslims in Sri Lanka are more closely related to the Maldivians than Israelis. Consider, Farveez Maharoof, etc.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 03:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

AFYKI, a Moor is an inhabitant of North Africa not Israel-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 03:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess thats a factual error Ravi. Marakkayar actually is a title bestowed upon the first few Arab inhabitants of Tamil Nadu by one of the kings who ruled over the place.Its a pure Tamil term derived from 'Marakkalam' indicating that the inhabitants travelled in wooden rafts and boats. It definitely does not mean Moor, but can probably refer or implicityly imply that the person is a person of Islamic race with a Tamil identity. Its a puritanical 'Tamizh' word. -------- Al Marakayaar

There is a difference between "Tamil Muslim' and "Tamil Speaking Muslim"

The title of this article does not sufficiently describe Sri Lankan Muslims. If you want to include Sri Lankan Muslims, please clearly indicate it in the article.

This is not about Sri Lankan Muslims, this about Muslims from Tamil Nadu who are also found in large nmbers in Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Sigapore. Thanks Taprobanus 14:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Sri Lanka population?

What is the population of Tamil speaking Muslims in Sri Lanka? Please give link.Anwar 09:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

There aren't any censuses that show the population of "Tamil Speaking Muslims" in Sri Lanka because most of the census are actually taken by ETHNICITY! Take a look at the CIA world factbook. Out of 21 Million people " Sinhalese 73.8%, Sri Lankan Moors 7.2%, Indian Tamil 4.6%, Sri Lankan Tamil 3.9%, other 0.5%, unspecified 10% (2001 census provisional data)". In Sri Lanka, the term "Tamil Muslim" has no legitimacy as it is only used by very few Tamils themselves . All I'm saying is that, most Muslims in Sri Lanka are not exclusively of South Indian Origin because they have a highly mixed society. Because of unclear writing, this article earlier claimed that the Muslims in Sri Lankan were exclusively "Tamil Muslims", which is erroneous. I am glad that you at least changed the first sentence of this article. The only way to refer to the vast majority of Sri Lankan Muslims by ethnic terms is by calling them "Sri Lankan Moors". This is a hard fact that you don't seem to understand. I am not denying that there are no Tamil Muslims in Sri Lanka, all I'm saying is that this article was erroneously claiming that the Muslims of Sri Lanka were entirely of Tamil Origin by using the term "Tamil Muslims". The "Tamil Muslims" are actually a small population of Muslims in Sri Lanka who are categorized under the term "Indian Tamil(4.6%) ". Hope this finally makes sense to you.

Here is the link (notice the term "Tamil Muslim" is nowhere to be found) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ce.html

Multi-ethnic?

An editor removed the section entitled "Racial identity" as being OR,[1] but another editor restored it.[2] A section that was removed in good faith as being OR should not be restored without more, and definitely not without supplying some supporting citation or at least a plausible argument why the label OR does not apply. I've now tagged the section as being OR.  --Lambiam 23:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The racial origins section is highly flawed and should not be included in this article because it contradicts the very idea of "race". That section erroneously claims that "Tamil Muslims" belong to various ethnicities; however isn't the label "Tami Muslim" a single ethnic term in itself? Anyways, I hope this section gets flagged because it is so contradictory in so many levels and does not even make sense with the mere concepts of ethnicity vs language.

Racial origins section

"Racial origin" sections are to be discouraged due to the nature of "race". Additionally, citations need to be found for anything, usually historical definitions, suggesting that Tamil Muslims look other than what they actually look like, i.e typical of a non-Brahmin Tamil, and that they are all composed of various ethnicities. Trips (talk) 08:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Stop vandalising here. The section is already tagged for expansion. Anwar (talk) 08:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

For expansion?, no that would not be smart. Please defend these far-fetched claims instead of edit-warring, uncited OR can be removed at any time on WP, without the OR writing authors consent. Trips (talk) 09:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but there is no Wiki policy on time limits for bringing vernacular sources. This is a encyclopaedia that grows forever. Anwar (talk) 09:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thats a double-edged sword, as uncited OR styled material do not have to be kept for a certain time while waiting for references, it can be removed at any time. Trips (talk) 09:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

If the first editor of the first article on Wiki had thought like you, there would not have been a free encyclopaedia today. Use this forum wisely. Anwar (talk) 09:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

We are talking in the context of the "ethnic origins" material, not uncited population stats, which involve fact. Trips (talk) 09:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Even fact material can be removed justifiably with the edit summary "Rm unsourced information." It is good to assume good faith and wait for some time, especially for newer users unfamiliar with Wiki policy but the WP:BURDEN still lies with the edtior who added the unicted information to eventually add the citations. Even Jimbo agrees. [3]. Gizza^{Discuss ©} 10:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Tamil Muslim Population and definition?????

This article makes several far fetched claims based on personal beliefs of user Anwar Saddat rather than actual facts. In the case of population, the article inflates the number of "Tamil Muslims" in Sri Lanka as well as several other places. In Sri Lanka, "Tamil Muslims" are those who came to the country as indentured laborers from Tamil Nadu during the British Colonial period, hence they are ethnically distinct from the Sri Lankan Moors who form the majority of the country's Muslim population. There were approximately 800,000 Indian tamils in Sri Lanka, of whom the vast majority were Hindus! The Muslim population has been grossly overinflated by Anwar Saddat who erroneously claims that there are over 300,000 Tamil Muslims when in reality the population was far less ( Approximately 30, 000)!!! This entire article is poorly written and has been fabricated on the personal beliefs of the user rather than actual facts! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.228.147 (talk) 17:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:Be bold and edit factual inaccuracies, User:Anwar saadat is known to edit without regard to fact and truth. Trips (talk) 14:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Let's keep personalities out. Be aware of WP:NPA and lets keeop editing Taprobanus (talk) 15:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

We need to rewrite this based on actual sources. Hopefully after a block, the parties involved will actually bring sources to edit from. Trips, you are wrong on Anwar Ibrahim, he is Tamil, but Mahathir is Malayali. As for the other Anwar, the allegations from the IP are probably plausible, though we have to assume good faith.24.21.50.248 (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Please try and find even one citation that Anwar Ibrahim is Tamil. Trips (talk) 07:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Megat Iskandar Shah is a Tamil-Muslim?

err.. i don't think he is a tamil muslim, as far as i learn from the Malaysia's history textbook, he's actually a malay from palembang (sumatera) and he's actually a hindu before converted to islam after he had establish the kingdom... how can he become a tamil muslim, if he was not a tamil and a muslim in the first place..?

Plus, I have checked the link on the article and it is a dead link. hurm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.102.83 (talk) 20:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Reversion note

I have reverted to the last clean version before the latest round of edits from the indef blocked sockmaster Shinas/Anwar Sadaat. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shinas/Archive. After being blocked he is now editing through open proxies. So i am reverting back to the last clean version before he got started on the article.--Sodabottle (talk) 07:07, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I find more room in this article to work on. Is anyone interested to start from scratch? Wasifwasif (talk) 14:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I want to join you, but no time. that guy is still around using open proxies and opening accounts in other wikimedia projects. my time is being spent chasing him aroung :-) go ahead with the expansion, will join when he gets bored and wanders off--Sodabottle (talk) 14:16, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Good job. First lets get rid of him and then start with. So that we can proced without any hindrances. Wasifwasif (talk) 14:18, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Education section

I was wondering if there is any possible improvement to the Education section of the article, as it only shows educational institutes in Tamil Nadu, whereas the article is about Muslims with Tamil as there mother tongue. In Tamil Nadu itself there is a significant population of Dakhini Urdu-speaking muslims, who make up the majority of Muslims in many areas and some of the institutions in the list use Urdu as the language of medium. --MJLRGS (talk) 10:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)