What's new

No Aryan migration into India / Pakistan? Its' all a myth?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the info. This adds another point to our position.

Just want to clarify, this data is not consistent with Central Asian, they compared only South Asian and Western Asian Y-chromosome distribution where it's found in high frequency.
 
suprimacy of sanskrit grammar is quite evident from what i posted earlier...if you are good at language you will understand that :)
can you completely change meaning of a sentence without moving words in it and just by breaking sandhis and samas?
in sanskrit you can :)

Let me be honest here - I dont know Sanskrit, so by extension I dont know what is a sandhi and a sama. And I think you dont know Tamil (Guessing).

So how can we people who dont know each other's languages declare such things.

It is in this light I asked if any comparitive study has been undertaken ? Or have you done that to declare as such ?

@Karthic Sri

If you are a programmer yourself, or have access to good C or C++ programmers, please look at the construction of the sutras used by Panini, among other things, their recursive nature; that will give you the correct answer, and not what you been told so far.

I am in no way getting into a "whose is bigger" contest here. I am actually asking for a source or a reference to his emphatic assertion. I hope I am not asking too much.

As for the recursive nature of Sutras, I dont know Sanskrit and that is why I am asking for third party reference. Becasue why I am saying this is each language is unique in its own way and some features that might be in Tamil may not be in Sanskrit or vice-versa. So I dont think comparing one language with another makes much sense especially when the full depth of them is not yet explored.
 
@Joe Shearer

why did king Ashok take to Buddhism after the Kalinga war ??

Is n't the peace and non violence principles of Buddhism that attracted him to Buddist fold,.. as he felt disgusted by the death and destruction caused by him in the kalinga war ??

Or did he sudden feel like becoming a buddist monk to get salvation after he conquered the last piece of free land, Kalinga outside his empire ??

People in general follow the life style of the prophets of their religion rather than the complex principles they taught e,g a Muslim prefer to carry long
beard because its sunnah,.. even if he mightn't have in depth knowledge of Koran.

Similarly peace and nonviolence is Sunnah in Buddhism and something along monk life style was exhibited through out the life time Lord Buddha.
 
Lets hear what genetic science say in this regard.

1.There was ancestral north indian gentype( long before any so called Aryan invasion).

2. There was ancestral south indian genotype(long before any so called Aryan invasion).

Most Indians carry both these genes in varying extent. For rest watch.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Aryan-Dravidian Controversy


The Aryan-Dravidian Controversy
By David Frawley
The British ruled India, as they did other lands, by a divide-and-conquer strategy. They promoted religious, ethnic and cultural divisions among their colonies to keep them under control. Unfortunately some of these policies also entered into the intellectual realm. The same simplistic and divisive ideas that were used for interpreting the culture and history of India. Regrettably many Hindus have come to believe these ideas, even though a deeper examination reveals they may have no real objective or scientific basis.
One of these ideas is that India is a land of two races - the lighter- skinned Aryans and the darker-skinned Dravidians - and that the Dravidians were the original inhabitants of India whom the invading Aryans conquered and dominated. From this came the additional idea that much of what we call Hindu culture was in fact Dravidian, and later borrowed by Aryans who, however, never gave the Dravidians proper credit for it. This idea has been used to turn the people of south India against the people of north India, as if the southern ers were a different race.
Racial Theories
The Nineteenth century was the era of Europeans imperialism. Many Europeans did in fact believe that they belonged to a superior race and that their religion, Christianity, was asuperior religion and all other religions were barbaric, particularly areligion like Hinduism which uses many idols. The Europeans felt that it was their duty to convert non-Christians, sometimes even if it required intimidation, force or bribery.
Europeans thinkers of the era were dominated by a racial theory of man, which was interpreted primarily in terms of color. They saw themselves as belonging to a superior 'white' or Caucasian race. They had enslaved the Negroid or 'black' race. As Hindus were also dark or 'colored', they were similarly deemed inferior. The British thus, not surprisingly, looked upon the culture of India in a similar way as having been a land of a light-skinned or Aryan race (the north Indians), ruling a dark or Dravidian race (the south Indians).
About this time in history the similarities betweeen Indo-European languages also became evident. Sanskrit and the languages of North India were found to be relatives of the languages of Europe, while the Dravidian languages of south India were found to be another language family. By the racial theory, Europeans natuarally felt that the original speakers of any root Indo-European language must have been 'white', as they were not prepared to recognize that their languages could have been derived from the darker-skinned Hindus. As all Hindus were dark compared to theEuropeans, it was assumed that the original white Indo-European invadors of India must have been assimilated by the dark indigenous population, though they left their mark more on north India where people have a lighter complexion.
Though the Nazis later took this idea of a white Aryan superior race to its extreme of brutality, they did not invent the idea, nor were they the only ones to use it for purposes of exploitation. They took what was a common idea of nineteenth and earlytwentieth century Europe, which many other Europeans shared. They perverted this idea further, but the distortion of it was already the basis of much exploitation and misunderstanding.
Racial Interpretation of Vedas
Europeans Vedic interpreters used this same racial idea to explain the Vedas. The Vedas speak of a battle between light and darkness. This was turned into a war between light skinned Aryans and dark skinned Dravidians. Such so-called scholars did not bother to examine the fact that most religions and mythologies including those of the ancient American Indians, Egyptians, Greeks and Persians have the idea of such a battle between light and darkness (which is the symbolic conflict between truth and falsehood), but we do not interpret their statements racially. In short, the Europeans projected racism into the history of India, and accused the Hindus of the very racism that they themselves were using to dominate the Hindus.
European scholars also pointed out that caste in India was originally defined by color. Brahmins
 
there was immigration in india...but not aryan...aryan is not a race...it is just a PURELY SANSKRIT word..
 
I wouldn't call Aryan Theory bullshit. They were a people, a culture, a language that spread out into Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

There really is no denying similarities in culture of Ancient Persians and Indians.

Look at similarity between Sanskrit and Avestan.

Basically ancient Sanskrit and Avestan are nearly identical.
 
^^how did u come up with this ...i for one cant even vaguely see any structural or lingual similarities.

Avetsan->
800px-Bodleian_J2_fol_175_Y_28_1.jpg


Sanskrit->
Rigveda_MS2097.jpg
 
how does it even matter if there were Aryans...human existence is proven and claimed to be dispersed out off Parts of Africa.

so anything post tht time period is irrelevant..
 
^^how did u come up with this ...i for one cant even vaguely see any structural or lingual similarities.

Avetsan->
800px-Bodleian_J2_fol_175_Y_28_1.jpg


Sanskrit->
Rigveda_MS2097.jpg

lol. So script is different, it means that there are no lingual similarities. Please read more about it, before posting.

---------- Post added at 11:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:12 AM ----------

I don't believe there was an invasion. Aryan was a culture and bands of nomads that that moved into Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. I believe it was similar to the migration patterns of the Sakas.

I also don't think they displaced Dravidians by war or violence, but rather by a more influential culture. Some dravidians might have mixed, and some migrated South.
 
lol. So script is different, it means that there are no lingual similarities. Please read more about it, before posting.

---------- Post added at 11:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:12 AM ----------

I don't believe there was an invasion. Aryan was a culture and bands of nomads that that moved into Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. I believe it was similar to the migration patterns of the Sakas.

I also don't think they displaced Dravidians by war or violence, but rather by a more influential culture. Some dravidians might have mixed, and some migrated South.

sigh ...Sanskrit has no lingual similarities ...most of the avetsan is said to resemble gujrati...

what u may be reffing to is a commonality in phonetics of each word ... even English has the same similarities and so do almost all languages except Mandarin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom