Talk:Aryan Invasion Theory (history and controversies)/Archive 1

message: The western `so called' Sanskrit scholars interpreted some sanskrit verse in their advantage to say that aryan are white & south indian people ( dravid people )are black.But in any ancient Indian text there is no mention of Arya as race or different people. Arya in those texts like Ved ( which means knowledge in Sanskrit ), Ramayan , Mahabharat etc. is mentioned as respect gesture in speaking like it's said in English Respected Sir or Madam OR `My Lord' in courts. Arya means one whose is noble in character and this is not said to any person who is Non-virtueous in nature.This is true for virtueous mother like Gandhari who was Duryodhan's mother but the same is not called for Duryodhan who was very non-virtueous person. So, coining `Arya' term as separate race only proved to be disastrous not only on Germans but also on Jews,Gypsies etc.Germany whose Max Muller initially called Arya as separate race but when Hitler's Aryan madness started affecting Germans negatively , after many years gulped the same words and said that by Arya he does not mean any person or race but purely language and not carriars of language.But it was very late and the world saw Second World War.
Arya word is also found in Old Pesian texts, Rock enscripts by kings to mention that they are `Arya' means noble and not any special race. Avesta by Zorostrians will show that there are words which start with `S' in Sanskrit but it's starting with `H' which is very common `apabhransh' ( in Sanskrit it means degraded form )word speaking. Similar types of Apabhransh is found in Modern Indian languages which derives heavily from Sanskrit. (Like `V' becoming `B' in Bangla language ) And these Apabhransh is more nearer than any Non-Indian language word.
In ancient India Dravid term was used to mention south beyond Vindhya Mountain range in central India which roughly divides North & South. But Maharahtra and Gujarat people are also called Dravida in that sense by South Indian texts but there languages means Marathi & Gujarati are called as IE one. Now let me ask you all, is Italic - Greek and Norway - finnish person is not different in look and skin tone wise. Norway is in extreme North and Italy - Greece in South getting Mediteranian sun shine. So clearly more darker then Finnish poeple. So, can we say them as different racially ? ( As same logic is implied on India ). Do you know Lithuanian & Latvian has very much similarity in Grammer & structure wise with Sanskrit. Why these `so called Baltic' group is showing much more similarity with Sanskrit. If you know Sanskrit then it can called very much scientific language. Do you feel that any nomad people in central asia can produce such a scientific language ? Right or wrong ? If right then Why after many milleniums Central Asia is not advanced in language & science wise if same people who have migrated in India in form of `Aryan Migration Theory'. The Aryan Invasion becomes Migration theory ( ya, it's only theory without any proof. Right? ) And what about finding of ancient Saraswati river in NW India with all types of proofs.This same Saraswati river is cherished in Rigveda with naming her Mother River and Greatest River. This river totally stopped flowing Indian soil around 1900 BC and then in 1500 BC ( date given by Max Muller ) so called Aryans migrates to India and writes poems in praise of Saraswati river. Really they have great feeling for the dead river then their `original' central asian homeland river that they are saying verses to praise that river whose width was 3 to 10 Km in width during her hay day. Secondly, I want to quate that when Alexander came to NW India then they were amazed to see big rivers of NW India which is written as very much bigger than any European,Persian or Nile in Egypt.
I say that a great culture like Indus valley civilization ( which had common weights & measurements, planned towns with waste water underground pipelines, very advanced astrology and mathamatics, having area much bigger than ancient Greek , Mesopotamia , Egypt civilizations all combined ) ; very very civilized than central asian nomad wonderers can only produce very logical, phonetical and very structural language like Sanskrit and not nomad people of Steppes. Phonetic's separate understanding is not required ( unlike in English ) in Sanskrit and other Indian languages which is writtern exactly in the same way letters are pronounced. This was biggest feat of Devnagari script in which this became possible.
From Vedic times , great Rishis had put great emphasis on right pronunciation of Sanskrit words as Sanskrit words are derived from some particular word root and so the word should be properly pronounced. That's why all Vedas,Upnishads etc. are available today in the same proper words without any deviation from last atleast 5,000 years. This Vedic Rishis have always believed that Good teachings passed on to future generations is more important and will be more remembered than any Strucure which can / will be destroyed by passing ages. Vedas are written in Poetic forms with Superb mathematical type joining of words ( found only in Sanskrit & it's daughter Indian languages).This  makes remembering them much easier. (What do you remember your childhood poems or pros in better way ? Naturally poems, right ! This is the simple logic of composing Vedas, Upnishads, Ramayan, Mahabharat in verse form so that they are perfectly remembered. That's why Vedas are the first ancient literature available in the world. There are unique mathematical links available in Rig Veda. Also it mentions some unique astronomical observations from which one can get the time of creation of that verse.All this is ignored by Max Muller and his followers and said that they are absurds or written much after than actually happened. If that is possible to write down that unique astronomical situations then it means that ancient Indians were having very highly computer type mind as back dating observations can be known only by today's complicated computer softwares as to do mathematically is impossible.   All this to give credit to nomads of steppes is like attributing USA's current achivements to Eskimos by some `Max Muller' after some milleniums in future.
If `so called Aryans' are Non-Indian origin then why major Hindu gods like Vishnu,Ram,Krishna,Shiva are portrayed as Dark Bluish / Black in skin colour for which `so called white aryans' should have allergy.( Color racism was till recently official in South Africa )
Secondly, Tamil people attribute their language to Sage Agatsya who was ancient great sage ( Rishi ) from `so called Aryan world'. Just explain these riddle please !
In Mahabharat it is mentioned that during that time Saraswati was not perennial river and instead of ending in sea , it is ending in land area. If Mahabharat is thought to be during around 3300 BC then it means that from 3300 BC to 1900 BC ( when Saraswati was almost totally stopped flowing ) the river was flowing and ending in land area. ( Note that Dr. Vartak has scientifically decoded the dating mystery associated with it by using deep knowledge of Indian astonomy and extracting some unique time indiacating verses and told us that Mahabharat actually happened on 16 th October 5561 BC with exact dates and proof of arriving at the date. This available on the net but to understand it you require knowledge of Indian astronomic terms which are from Vedic times and still in use very actively )
 
In Mahabharat also Saraswati is thought to be ceasing continuously. That means the reason because of which Saraswati river got affected and Satluj & Yamuna stopped of being it's tributory ( this is said on proofs and is not theory ) is much older phenomenon then Mahabharat. Also, Krishna was born in Mathura & spent childhood in Gokul which is on the banks of Yamuna. So, Yamuna diverting from Saraswati to Ganga is very older than Mahabharat itself. 
 
Secondly, Mahabharat is some what urben type and many kingdoms mentioning saga. In it Ganga is prominent. 
 
Indians say that Prayag ( Allahabad in U.P. state ) as Triveni Sangam ( confluence ) of Ganga, Yamuna & Saraswati rivers. `Saraswati is thought to be flowing underground & meeting here'. This is though a myth gives idea that Yamuna which was meeting Saraswati in the past , is now meeting Ganga and by underground of Saraswati mentions vanishing of Saraswati in Land area & thinking that it's going underground to meet sea ( which it was previously ).
 
This is combination of thought based on some real history.
Secondly, in dry Saraswati river area like Pushkar in Rajasthan or Sidhpur in North Gujarat there still small river named saraswati. In Sidhpur, there is also old temple after Saraswati. Both area are found to on dry river bed of ancient saraswati river. Indians seem to be remembering very ancient things very nicely. ONLY THEY FORGOT ARYAN INVASION OR MIGRATION THEORY. Really sad for Western so called scholars !
If any thing is required to defend that then write it pure logical manner.
The AIT theory was inspired by British political people to say about its legitimacy of its occupation of India,to get some answer of then found similarity between Sanskrit & other European languages and to facilitate Christian Missionery which were facing hard times to convert Hindu. This will be their agenda of `Divide & Rule' which Britishers used ( I don't have any bad feeling for current Brits ). The details are available on the net. India was the richest country in the world before Britishers rule on India ( like US is today ) and the current situation of poor Indians will give shock to those Western people who are not aware about where India lies geographically ( forget about their knowledge of India's past which is seen with the false fabrication & misrepresented stories). If you want to know about Britishers policy then just know that even though India was highest producer of Cotton crop but then also it was not allowed to make cloth on machine ( to make England rich ).Everything was to be imported from Briton and it was one major reason because of which Briton's economy was steaming ahead. 
HOW WILL YOU REACT IF YOUR RULER BREAKS THE CHURCH AND CONSTRUCTS THE MOSQUE ON THE SAME SITE. FOR YOU SPAIN IS EXAMPLE. THE SAME IS WITH INDIA. WHEN IT WAS FOR SPAIN THEN IT IS CHERISHED CHRISTIAN REACTION BUT WHEN IT COMES TO INDIA THEN IT'S HINDU FASICSTS. WHY CHURCH IS RIGHT AND TEMPLE OF RAM ON HIS BIRTHPLACE IS WRONG ?  For this even historical records speak that there was Ram Temple which Babar broke and made Mosque on it ( like thousands of beautiful temples were broken and that's why you find few temples before Muslim invasion. It's good that Angkor Wat is in Camodia & not in India ). If you have visited Qutab Minar in Delhi then that complex is made from previous Hindu & Jain temples there. Yes, India was so advanced that more than 1600 years old Iron Pillar is not rusted. To make such a long pillar now is also engineering problem or puzzle by Modern Iron makers. Read about it on the net and you will understand India had not only made advanced progress in other subjects but also in Chemistry, Metallurgy. You can say that for almost all subjects which Europeans says sign of culture, you can find lots of systematic written work. Sanskrit written work ( even after huge losts ) is much more than all combined work till 17 - 18 century. Even Indian dance & music has scientific & mathematical basis ( unlike Pop & Disco dance & music. But today's majority Indian youth find hard to understand the science behind Indian Music & Classical dances which not only gives pleasure to body but also mind. That's why they do not require any Heroin,Escatcy type drugs or alcohol to get temporary high which is very bad for youths in every way ) 
Indians are having very ancient traditions that the first civilization spunge up on Indian soil. It was concepulised by Vedic Rishis ( Sages ) who developed very high standards & virtues. For them Knowledge was very much sought after. This also made Ayurveda to develop. Still today their concepts are true. Ancient Indians have observed their land, sky, plants to that deep level that  they were having better knowledge about human body better than few centuries before Europeans. 
To go extreme deep in their knowledge about undestanding this world which led them to develop Ancient Indians to develop major treaties of science, maths , language, arts , music etc. Their systematic development was such that India was sought after by Non-Indian Students in ancient days for Knowledge to Columbus ( who left to search Indian sea route as land route was blocked by Turks by capturing Istambul ), Vasco-Da-Gama to Britishers for HUGE PROFIT  etc.
`Femine of Bengal' in 19th century under British Rule which caused millions of people to die. But why this femine occured. It was not at all due to lack of rain. Bengal region ( current West Bangal + Bangladesh which is highly populated but very poor ) is such that it will alway receive very good rains ( If it does not rain in Bangal or Konkan then whole India will not get any rain - due to Monsoon winds mechanism ). Also , Bengal region is fully mouth area of Ganga & Bramhaputra rivers which will never have problem of water ). IT WAS DUE TO INDIGO CROPS THAT WAS TAKEN FOR SOME YEARS CONTINUOUSLY AS IT WAS FORCED BY THEN BRITISH RULERS WHICH WAS PROVIDING HUGE PROFIT TO THEM. But this Indigo crop which was only source of Blue colour before advent of Artificial Chemical Dyes should not be taken continuously from the same land as it extracts all fertile power of land. Due to this continuous Indigo crops , the land became non-productive for their staple Rice crop. Due to this Rice crop for some years could not happen and millions of Bengalis died. BUT THE WHOLE STORY IS NAMED AS `FEMINE OF BENGAL' AS IF THAT RICE CROP FAILED DUE TO LACK OF WATER.  THIS IS SAME MISGUIDING LIKE `FIRE OF SAN FRANSISCO'. THE FIRE WAS DUE TO TERRIBLE EARTHQUAKE BUT IT WAS MISQUOTED AS DURING S.F. WAS PROSEPROUS CITY IN USA AND IF EARTHQUAKE GHOST WILL REMAIN IN OTHER US PEOPLE THEN IT WOULD BAD FOR SF'S ECONOMY.
THE SAME WAY `ARYAN INVASION THEORY' WAS FABRICATED TO MISGUIDE THE WORLD BY THEN THEIR `GOBBLE'S ' PROPOGANDA. The reasons are well adressed on the internet which I will not repeat again here.
Written by Win
This is not supposed to become a pov fork of Indo-Aryan migration. Rather, that article was swamped by historical controversies, so that a separate article became necessary to address 19th century views, and the history of the concept. dab (ᛏ) 07:39, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: To categorize AIT under Hindutva without categorizing it as well under categories like Eurocentrism or Dravidian chauvinism is pov. Some supporters and critics of the AIT would fall in such categories, but the AIT is first of all a historical (not political) theory. Many supporters, critics or scholars on the AIT do not fall in such political categories, and thus the categorization is too generalizing and pov. --Machaon 14:47, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

text: There is no category. After going through above points one can give some proper & logical answer to above whole points. But it seems that when ever some logical conversation is required , the AIT supporter slips to that words which is not at all connected with the topic and something ( probably ) they only can understand. 
The whole concept of the Aryan Invasion Theory needs to be put into perspective. The time when this was written, the Europeans had at last conquered the world, and to solidify their feelings of control, they needed a creation myth. When the Europeans saw the Polynesian Easter Island sculptures, they immediately claimed to be the creators. They said their Europeans ancestors had somehow managed to sail all the way there and built the sculptures. They said this because they did not want to believe that the native peoples of the region had the faculties for such complex construction. This kind of Cultural appropriation is common for 19th Century Europeans. Everything from the Egyptian and Mayan pyramids to the ruins of African city-states were claimed by Europeans. Because India had a 4000-year old history, and was a land full riches and knowledge, the Europeans sought to use it as the start for their creation myth. When the Japanese defeated the Russians, the Europeans did not see the Japanese as Asian any more, instead, they made the " honorary whites". Cultural appropriation is the only explanation for the ridiculous theory that Max Müeller put forward.
Vvuppala 20:38, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Vvuppala, have you read any of Max Müller's books? I do wonder, because there is nothing "ridiculous" about what he wrote, though of course it has been superceded by more modern research. Look at his essay The Home of the Arya. The notion that the Arya migrated into India is no more insulting to Indians than the accepted notion that the Hellenes migrated into Greece is insulting to the Greeks. I guess it's true that some Europeans have claimed that Mayan pyramids and other artefacts were built by migrating Europeans, but even in the 19th Century this would be a rather minority view. Paul B 16:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

text: It is interesting that you attribute to me statements that I did not make at all. I said the claim that Mayan pyramids and Easter Island heads were built by migrating Europeans was a minority view, even in the nineteenth century. I did not say that nineteenth century Europeans did not have chauvanist or racialist ideas. "Social Darwinism" is a term covering ideas that meant different things to different theorists. Theories of racial divisions and hierarchies certainly were maintream after the 1850s, and were consistent with many different attitudes to Darwinian ideas. Prior to that they had been justified on biblical grounds. I think you underestimate the extent to which ideologies are adaptable. The notion of a superior "Indo-European" or Aryan people would have served European imperialist ideologists just as well if these people had been proven at the time to have originated in India. All you do is say that the original Indian population advanced yet further up the evolutionary ladder as it moved into Europe. It would be the same argument used by racists to associate Africans with "lower" stages of development, by arguing that the more advanced and energetic individuals moved on, creating the "higher" races. This kind of argument was common at the time. Paul B 11:32, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

text: How much more of this drivel do you intend to add? Paul B 13:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Dude, who are you talking to? why are you so hostile? i've seen Nothing on the Talk page for this article that deserves that kind of rhetoric. Tone it down a bit, eh? Vvuppala 15:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Attacking AIT would not "a major blow to world history" at all, but rather a relatively minor matter about the dates of ancient linguistic and cultural movements. Your arguments above actually have nothing to do with AIT. They are about very ancient migrations out of Africa during the stone age. Aryan migrations are supposed to have happened in the late bronze age - many many thousands of years later. The article you cite simply states that during the Ice Age Europe was too frozen and cold for modern humans, so that the first migrants from Africa stuck to the warmer areas, which included India. When the ice receded humans migrated into Europe. This has nothing whatever to do with AIT. It's like arguing that the Romans never invaded Egypt by pointing to evidence that stone age people lived in Egypt before Rome was founded. Paul B 08:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Win, by all means add more of you own comments, but do not delete those of other contributors. Paul B 12:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

text: There's nothing remotely extraordinary about these conclusions and they have nothing to do with AIT. They are about very early primitive humans — paleolithic hunter-gathers. Hence the references to mammoths! Mammoths were extinct by the time the Vedas were written, unless you are suggesting that they were written in the Paleolithic era (i.e. "more than 40,000 years ago"). Do you think that chariots and bronze weaponry were used to bring down mammoths? If so you need to do a bit of research. The astronomical argument is usually considered to be a highly dubious method of dating because of its inherent ambiguity, since it is based on interpreting vague poetic imagery. European languages do not bear "Sanskrit degraded words" any more than Sanskrit bears Greek degraded words, as one anti I-E writer once claimed. Paul B 11:57, 18 October 2005 (UTC)