Global Religious landscape- Pew Forum

[KS]

We have discussed this before, and I know you guys will not accept the fact that Dravidian nationalists reject many Vedic influences. Periyar, for example, was against several, what he called, Aryan impositions like caste system, Sanskrit, etc. Some nationalists favor specific forms of Hinduism, e.g. Saivism, which they consider to be least polluted by Aryan impositions..

Dont give me vague references like Dravidian nationalists etc. Who are they specifically, what have you read on the subject. Be clear.

You mentioned Periyar..do you know what he said of Islam ?

Saivissm - this is what happens when a ignoramus tries to start talking about subjects he has no idea about. Apart from "Dravidians", the other staunchest followers of Saivism are the supposedly last remaining original Aryans - the Kashmiri Pandits. Duh.

 

[Developereo]

Dont give me vague references like Dravidian nationalists etc. Who are they specifically, what have you read on the subject. Be clear.

You mentioned Periyar..do you know what he said of Islam ?

Saivissm - this is what happens when a ignoramus tries to start talking about subjects he has no idea about. Apart from "Dravidians", the other staunchest followers of Saivism are the supposedly last remaining original Aryans - the Kashmiri Pandits. Duh.

Try reading before posting.

It is irrelevant what these nationalists said about Islam or any other religion. What matters is that they are adamant that many Vedic constructs were forced onto the Dravidian peoples. Whether they retain some of them, like Saivism, or not is not the point; the issue is the original forceful imposition, which contradicts the claim of peaceful dissemination of Vedic culture.

Are we then to believe that Sanskrit, caste system and other aspects of Vedic culture were forced onto the Dravidians, but the religious aspects were absorbed willingly?

The Vedic literature, itself, is full of tales of conquest of Aryan gods over "dark skinned" southerners. No one disputes that these refer to actual battles; the only attempt at salvage is to claim that the Aryans were north Indians, as opposed to foreign invaders.

 

[Bang Galore]

Whether they retain some of them, like Saivism, or not is not the point; the issue is the original forceful imposition, which contradicts the claim of peaceful dissemination of Vedic culture.

Beginning to think this is a pointless exercise. Zero proof of any imposition, forceful or otherwise.

Are we then to believe that Sanskrit, caste system and other aspects of Vedic culture were forced onto the Dravidians, but the religious aspects were absorbed willingly?

Same line, same response

The Vedic literature, itself, is full of tales of conquest of Aryan gods over "dark skinned" southerners. No one disputes that these refer to actual battles; the only attempt at salvage is to claim that the Aryans were north Indians, as opposed to foreign invaders.

Nope, it does not. Mistaken interpretation of one single word is not whole vedic literature. And Southerners? You are now in the territory of willful falsification. No one disputes that those might be descriptions of actual battles but there is no proof that it referred to any non-Aryan tribe. There is no non-Aryan(language) tribal name mentioned anywhere in the Rg veda.

 

[Vinod2070]

Dont give me vague references like Dravidian nationalists etc. Who are they specifically, what have you read on the subject. Be clear.

You mentioned Periyar..do you know what he said of Islam ?

Saivissm - this is what happens when a ignoramus tries to start talking about subjects he has no idea about. Apart from "Dravidians", the other staunchest followers of Saivism are the supposedly last remaining original Aryans - the Kashmiri Pandits. Duh.

From prior experience:

Ask a Tamil!

And never mind if you just happen to be one.

 

[Azazel]

Try reading before posting.

It is irrelevant what these nationalists said about Islam or any other religion. What matters is that they are adamant that many Vedic constructs were forced onto the Dravidian peoples. Whether they retain some of them, like Saivism, or not is not the point; the issue is the original forceful imposition, which contradicts the claim of peaceful dissemination of Vedic culture.

Are we then to believe that Sanskrit, caste system and other aspects of Vedic culture were forced onto the Dravidians, but the religious aspects were absorbed willingly?

The Vedic literature, itself, is full of tales of conquest of Aryan gods over "dark skinned" southerners. No one disputes that these refer to actual battles; the only attempt at salvage is to claim that the Aryans were north Indians, as opposed to foreign invaders.

You are an ignorant fool,Which Vedic literature have tales of conquest of Aryan gods over "dark skinned" Southerners.Their are no such tales of conquest Vedas.Go and study Vedas before you talk about them.
You know what is the problem,You are clearly a product of your country poor education system which inject such prejudices and racism in to peoples mind.Dark skinned people are all over India.

 

[Vinod2070]

Beginning to think this is a pointless exercise. Zero proof of any imposition, forceful or otherwise.

Same line, same response

Nope, it does not. Mistaken interpretation of one single word is not whole vedic literature. And Southerners? You are now in the territory of willful falsification. No one disputes that those might be descriptions of actual battles but there is no proof that it referred to any non-Aryan tribe. There is no non-Aryan(language) tribal name mentioned anywhere in the Rg veda.

You remember Naipaul at such times.

To understand what is going on.

There is a pressing need to denigrate their own ancestors and their belief systems.

To try and defend the indefensible.

And make heroes out of the worst the mother Earth has ever seen.

Such people shout "Islamophobe". We won't bother with responding to the obvious Hinduphobia and Indiaphobia.

Because we couldn't care less about people who don't matter to us.

And yes, the return gift. There will be one.

In due time.

You are an ignorant fool,Which Vedic literature have tales of conquest of Aryan gods over "dark skinned" Southerners.Their are no such tales of conquest Vedas.Go and study Vedas before you talk about them.
You know what is the problem,You are clearly a product of your country poor education system which inject such prejudices and racism in to peoples mind.Dark skinned people are all over India.

I think it goes beyond just the education system.

The denigration of their previous identities is common to all Islamic converts all over the world.

They think their Jahiliya was prior to the (forced) conversion to Islam. And they need to justify that every day (sometimes every second).

We just think their Jahiliyah started after.

 

[Developereo]

You are an ignorant fool,Which Vedic literature have tales of conquest of Aryan gods over "dark skinned" Southerners.Their are no such tales of conquest Vedas.Go and study Vedas before you talk about them.
You know what is the problem,You are clearly a product of your country poor education system which inject such prejudices and racism in to peoples mind.Dark skinned people are all over India.

This is just one of many references of Vedic gods defeating dark skinned enemies and demons. The Vedas were very consistent in describing their enemies as having flat noses (RV 5.29.10) and dark skin (RV 9.41.1-2, 9.73.5, 1.130.8).

Varna, Castes, and Scheduled Castes: A Documentation in Historical ... - Shanti Swarup Gupta - Google Books

 

[Vinod2070]

Should we start posting the lovely Quranic verses as well!

Just saying.

 

[Azazel]

This is just one of many references of Vedic gods defeating dark skinned enemies and demons. The Vedas were very consistent in describing their enemies as having flat noses (RV 5.29.10) and dark skin (RV 9.41.1-2, 9.73.5, 1.130.8).

Varna, Castes, and Scheduled Castes: A Documentation in Historical ... - Shanti Swarup Gupta - Google Books

And you assumed they are from South India.Their are dark skinned people all around India and Pakistan.That Could be about some tribals in Indus or Gangetic Plains.This Clearly shows your prejudiced and racist mentality against South Indians.

My question is,Why South Indian literature has no mention of such invasion,Some of the ancient Tamil literature is old as vedas itself.Why they don't mention any thing about it.Why no folklores.Why no archeological evidences????

 

[Developereo]

Beginning to think this is a pointless exercise. Zero proof of any imposition, forceful or otherwise.

Dravidian nationalists, from Periyar onwards, and other impartial scholars without an ulterior Indian agenda, accept the Vedic accounts of conquests over dark skinned southerners as having basis in fact. Do you deny that Vedic texts contain descriptions of such battles?

It is understandable that the new revisionist Indian agenda eschews such interpretations, but the Vedic texts remain unchanged by people's agendas.

Nope, it does not. Mistaken interpretation of one single word is not whole vedic literature. And Southerners? You are now in the territory of willful falsification. No one disputes that those might be descriptions of actual battles but there is no proof that it referred to any non-Aryan tribe. There is no non-Aryan(language) tribal name mentioned anywhere in the Rg veda.

So we have these empirical facts:
- Vedic texts were composed in north India (at least later ones).
- Vedic texts talk about a southward migration of their influence through conquest over dark-skinned people.
- Dravidian culture is known to have an earlier history before Vedic influence was infused.
- South Indians generally have darker skin than northerners.
- Tamil legends corroborate the arrival of wisdom (Agastya) from the north.

Sure, we can come up with creative explanations and jump through hoops to avoid uncomfortable conclusions.

Or we can use logic and stick with the simplest explanation that fits the facts.

And you assumed they are from South India.Their are black colored people all around India and Pakistan.

Read above.

Pay particular attention to the story of Agastya, which is corroborated by both southern and northern legends which talk about a southward migration of a ruling elite, the Velir.

The revisionist claim is that the northern legend talks about a wholly north Indian event, while the southern legend talks about a wholly south Indian event. Unfortunately, both legends match so well that they are considered to refer to the same historical event. So, which one is it? a northern event or a southern event?

Could it be, simplest explanation, that it refers to a north-south transfusion?

 

[Developereo]

Should we start posting the lovely Quranic verses as well!

Irrelevant. No one is denying that military conquest was part of Islam's expansion.

However, the claim was that such conquests were not part of Hinduism's history, and the Vedic texts themselves contradict that claim. Hence the focus.

 

[Bang Galore]

This is just one of many references of Vedic gods defeating dark skinned enemies and demons. The Vedas were very consistent in describing their enemies as having flat noses (RV 5.29.10) and dark skin (RV 9.41.1-2, 9.73.5, 1.130.8).

Varna, Castes, and Scheduled Castes: A Documentation in Historical ... - Shanti Swarup Gupta - Google Books

Discredited. Based on an convenient interpretation when it was still being argued that North Indian & South Indians were of different racial stocks. No one believes that South Indians have flat noses anymore. Now used only by people pushing particular agendas.

 

[Vinod2070]

And you assumed they are from South India.Their are dark skinned people all around India and Pakistan.That Could be about some tribals in Indus or Gangetic Plains.This Clearly shows your prejudiced and racist mentality against South Indians.

My question is,Why South Indian literature has no mention of such invasion,Some of the ancient Tamil literature is old as vedas itself.Why they don't mention any thing about it.Why no folklores.Why no archeological evidences????

This Aryan-Dravid divide had been created by the British just about 200 years ago for their own ends.

Some people with obvious identity crisis just feel the need to latch on to it, despite it having no evidence.

Just their "logic" is the evidence.

The "logic" that is based on their own identity crisis first anf foremost.

 

[Azazel]

Dravidian nationalists, from Periyar onwards, and other impartial scholars without an ulterior Indian agenda, accept the Vedic accounts of conquests over dark skinned southerners as having basis in fact. Do you deny that Vedic texts contain descriptions of such battles?

It is understandable that the new revisionist Indian agenda eschews such interpretations, but the Vedic texts remain unchanged by people's agendas.

Periyar is not a scholar.He simply swallowed Max Muller's Aryan Invasion Theory.Which has absolutly no evidence what so ever.

So we have these empirical facts:
- Vedic texts were composed in north India (at least later ones).
- Vedic texts talk about a southward migration of their influence through conquest over dark-skinned people.
- Dravidian culture is known to have an earlier history before Vedic influence was infused.
- South Indians generally have darker skin than northerners.

Sure, we can come up with creative explanations that fit all these facts.
Or we can use logic and stick with the simplest explanation that fits the facts.



Read above.

Pay particular attention to the story of Agastya, which is corroborated by both southern and northern legends.

You are contradicting yourself.Is it Migration or Invasion.Because both are very different.And Give me the page no.

 

[Vinod2070]

Irrelevant. No one is denying that military conquest was part of Islam's expansion.

However, the claim was that such conquests were not part of Hinduism's history, and the Vedic texts themselves contradict that claim. Hence the focus.

We both know the reason. Having been here for a long time.

You are just shooting in the dark with very little ral knowledge on the subject.

You guys should just accept that India and Dharmic people have nothing to do with you and just be happy being part of the Ummah.

The separation is final. There is no common ground.

We don't care about each others' views or opinions and that is for a good reason.