Sorry for putting words in your fingers
It appears to me you have an emotional socio-political bondage with Tamil. So my words may not matter much to you, but I believe I have a wider readership, so here goes.
>>Only easy sounds exist in Tamiz.<<
That is an (if I may add, misinformed) opinion, not a fact. There are no easy or hard sounds. Sounds are sounds, and they have a particular pronunciation. Zha may be a hard sound for those who are used to saying it as La, but you get the drift. Else you need to prove to me that easy and difficult are absolute determinants for all people. Mandarin is easy for the Chinese, so it should be easy to all of us. Likewise Sanskrit was easy to Panini, so it must be so for us too. Vedic was easy for Vasishta and Brihaspati. Welcome back from lala land to reality.
>>the common woman/man has no such problem.<<
They dont care a damn, and they are obviously wrong. They prefer the free-flowing madras tamil, rather than split hairs in learning and pronouncing pure tamil as it should be, and it seems you prefer it too.
>>This is because Tamiz has been an old natural language, without any harsh sounds which came into other younger languages.<<
All languages are old natural languages, since all languages derive from older speech. Like tamil, all of them experience changes to varying levels in pronunciation, grammar, vocab, etc. Tamil is no exception to it.
Besides Tamil is just a label for a continuously changing dialect. Tolkappiyar would jump in the well hearing your uneducated tamil men and women speak their free-flowing madras tamil instead of splitting hairs over his hard grammatical pure tamil. People of the 10th century would not agree that the uneducated tamil people of today speak tamil at all. People of the 1st century would not agree with the speech of the people of the 10th century. Anything else is political brainwashing.
>>As compred to these uneducated people the educated ones like us trying to split hairs with each word can not speak one sentence in Tamiz without using English words.<<
The uneducated people are speaking pure free-flowing tamil according to you coz they dont know, and we are the ones having the most difficulty speaking it because we "know better". Right?
>>Probably because of this easy and smooth flow, Tamiz has been a living language for more than 2000 years.<<
Tamil is just a label for a continuously changing set of dialects, nothing more nothing less. I could as well rename Hindi, Vedic and Proto-Indo-European as Sanskrit and say that Sanskrit has been living for more than 5000 years. Or I could rename French as Latin and say that Latin has been living for 3000 years. Today's Tamil is poles apart from the tamil of 2000 years back. The name of these languages is the only thing that has remained constant. Oh no, even that has become tamiL. It is not even the same language that was spoken 2000 years back, it is a different language altogether, as much as Vedic was to Sanskrit and Sanskrit was to Prakrits and Prakrits to modern Indian languages. It needs education to tell apart the differences, and if you believe tamil now is the same language as the language which was called tamil 2000 years back, then you may find your place among your pet uneducated tamil men and women that you so adore. They are totally different in all respects, so much so that one needs explanations to understand tiruvalluvar and tolkappiyam. And I dont even think Tiruvalluvar & Tolkappiyar lived 2000 years back to start with (if you go by Iravatham Mahadevan's research). He says the pulli (dot) which tolkappiyam mentions did not exist in the tamil brahmi (earliest tamil script) until the 7th century. This agrees well with the evidence of other dravidian grammatical literature starting from the 7th century onwards (i.e telugu and kannada).
>>As compred to these uneducated people the educated ones like us trying to split hairs with each word can not speak one sentence in Tamiz without using English words.<<
Again you are reversing the roles. It needs education to speak pure tamil. It is easy to remain uneducated and have a don't care a damn attitude.
>>I wonder if your Tamiz teacher taught you and your class mates the following two kuRaLs without Da and Ta.<<
Yes she did.
>>You have been empnatically maintaing that the soft sounds like ga, ja, da, Da,& ba were not existing in old Tamiz.<<
I have revised my opinion on that. They perhaps did exist in old tamil (50-50 chance), but certainly did not exist in proto-tamil (which was some form of Dravidian). They may have started being used newly by the time the tamil alphabet system was devised, which is perhaps why they were not included in the alphabet system as they were considered to be mistakes in pronounciation. They gained wider acceptability later but did not find the need to change the script since they were included as allophones of the same sound.