I'll attempt to answer this I see attempt by Mr. Nilofar Abbasi, dubious at best with half knowledge on what he knows.
This I have already explained, both Indian Hindus and Pakistani Hindus, whoever is left following Dharma, practice the same. If not you're free to prove me wrong, I'll be more than happy to know different practices.
On one side the author says, Indus valley civilization collapsed, then says, they synthesized with the migrating Aryavartis. Anyway, a lot is not known about the time yet. Vedas weren't written during that time, so an accurate cronology of the age of Veda is still unknown. It was an oral tradition for a brief period. Besides there is nothing in Vedas that indicates it's time frame.
Sorry who? These are kingdom sometimes span as much as 500 years in their existence. Also, carefully missing out Panchala, Videha, Kuru, to name a few
.
The dubious part. One god no idolatory, ate beef, buried the dead.
One god, which is a self contradictory, then why worship Indra, Mitra, Varuna if it advocates monotheism. (It does, in a way, but not by forbidding anything).
Ate beef, yes they probably ate beef, but forbidding meat especially cow meat came way later when the sacredness was associated based on an ongoing practice of consuming it's milk after mothers milk. So, they thought killing cow is same as killing your own mother. This feeling cemented strong and then there was epics associated with it when coming to the epics.
Third,
buried dead. It is believed that Human body is made of five elements, Earth, Air, Water, Fire and energy(life). Now, the Rig veda give a detailed explanation on how to burn the body of a departed person.
Rigveda 10.16 Agni, consume him not entirely, afflict him, not scatter, burn his skin not his body, when you have rendered him, send him to his fathers, ..... goes on to say how the body is turned to ashes, using woods/earth, then to water, ultimately the air to the plants, or the organism.
In reality, there wasn't a one single practice, but burning is considered as pure, because of the belief that fire is pure, it cleanse all the impurities without getting impured, unlike water, air or soil. Hence people prefer to be burned.
Vedas are hymns, they are not poems. These hymns are chanted for the good of the public/self. These are not philosophies or stories directions. So, one must be ignorant to think it has details on social customs, or caste system. Imagine someone chanting a hymn on caste system or how one should lead a life.
True that. But this cotnradicts with the previous comment made, that, there wasn't a social division. There was, Mlecchas who were outcasts i.e, those who had completely different structure to Vedas.
Vedic gods also include Vishnu, Shiva, Brahma, Saraswati.
I can find equivalent gods like Thor, a Norse god, who is very similar to Indra. With strikingly similar characteristics. Should I say, it's adopted from here? These are just theories with etymological similarities, their characteristics are so different.
Etymological similarities, they don't have any similarities in practice, Avestans had a completely different text than sanskrit. Their beliefs the fundamental of all is they advocate Monotheism. Mitra is not a god and Mitrha in Veda sounds completely different.
Meh! This may be true, but then again, I haven't completely read the vedas (translation of course). It is very complicated that, translation are subject to a lot of interpretations.
The word Dravida has no mention in any of the Vedas, this term came some 4000 years later the composition of Vedas. Also, there are no mention of Gangetic tribes. By the late vedic periods, these had become Kingdoms.
By that time, agriculture wasn't new. It diversed from mere farming to healing techniques. Including details of surgical equipment and several spells for healing, etc... which doesn't look too nomadic to me.
But given the amount of logical errors as a whole. This is tolerable.
This is where it gets into a complete joke.
Brahma, Vishnu
Rig Veda 1.154, Shiva (Rudra) are mentioned in different Vedas, their purpose is exactly as mentioned in Vedas and continued onto the epics.
Mlechas are anyone who is not part of vedic group. This is authors on creation towards the end, his conclusions are getting comical. And no, Krishna is no dravidian god, nor Aryan god. Not going any further, this has crossed the threshold of fallacy.
Pass
I want to know, these Zoroastrian kings who ruled Indus Valley and their influence on Vedas. Must be something new.
@padamchen ? On the contrary, the introduction of Buddhism, has caused the decline of vedic beliefs for a brief period.
A non Vedic diety, who most probably is a sage. And the connection with Avestan is cannot be confirmed.
Yes, Bhawani is wife of Shiva.
You can find such graveyards here too. Lord Ram and a vast number of people did a water burial. Krishna ended up on the earth. The list goes on and on. These are no conclusive proofs of anything.
@Nilgiri you want to add something to this quote. I have no clue on where to start, this is incorrent in a lot of levels. I think, this you and them have been debunked long before. Whether the author read this or not.
No, I'm a Malayali. But I do know some Tamil guys who were kind enough to share some aspects about the practices there.
