Karachi will be part of India one day,We believe in 'Akhand Bharat' : BJP

[suyog chavan]

You uneducated fool ,Tamil and Sanskrit are not related.

Tamil is a Dravidian language and Sanskrit is an Indo European language. Educate your self before opening your mouth.

And Tamil is not the world's oldest language by a long shot.

Why don't you enlighten me then, with the oldest language in the world by a long shot,
Mr smartbrains

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Your ranting has zero value, Why don't you present sources from Vedas and ancient scriptures of Sanatan Dharm which mentions any caste ,
Running off from reality is not going to help you for long run, mate.

LOL Contradictions again and again and again till making complete fool out of yourself
Rakhigiri study more of contradicts your claims Rather than supporting,

NEW DELHI: The first study of the DNA samples of the skeletal remains excavated from Rakhigarhi, an Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) site in Haryana, has found no traces of Iranian farmer or steppe pastoralist ancestry, which according to the lead archaeologist in the team raises doubt over the long-held theory of Aryan invasion or migration into South Asia.

IN early September, the newspapers reported with considerable excitement the publication of a scientific paper on the DNA analysis on an individual skeleton found in the Harappan site of Rakhigarhi in Hisar district of Haryana. The analysis was conducted by a fairly large group of geneticists and a few archaeologists. The deceptive titles of some of these news reports, particularly the reference to the “Aryan invasion theory” being debunked, has caught the eyes of the interested public. I, and I am sure historians, too, received phone calls asking for comments. I have been told there is much social media traction for this story. I am neither a geneticist nor an archaeologist like the 28 authors of the scientific paper on gene analysis, but as a historian familiar with the debates and the issues involved, I find it necessary to address some concerns that have been raised by several academics. It appears that to separate the wheat from the chaff, we first need to critically look at the paper and then at the media reports.

The report in The Economic Times (published on September 6) has quoted Professor Vasant Shinde, the lead author of the paper in the scientific journal Cell (September 5, 2019), as saying: “The paper indicates that there was no Aryan invasion and no Aryan migration and that all the developments right from the hunting-gathering stage to modern times in South Asia were done by indigenous people.”


It is indigeneity that seems to be the catchword and the great new discovery that the scholar seems to be excited about. I wonder whether the next step will be to go back to the issue of polygenesis of modern humans, to debunk the “out of Africa” thesis.

Let us move to the paper published in Cell titled “An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers”. The main arguments in this paper may be summed up as follows: excavations at the site of Rakhigarhi have revealed a Mature Harappan context dated to about 2800-2300 BCE; the sampling of the skeletal remains was done at this site, of what appears to be a woman with the genetic identification code I6113 and the archaeological skeletal code RGR7.3, BR-01, HS-02. the principal-component analysis technique involving a comparison with similar data from 11 other skeletal remains in two sites [Gonur (3) and Shahr-i-Sokhta (8)] was undertaken. Cutting through the details of techniques and analysis, it appears that “this individual is not only significantly different in ancestry from the primary ancient populations of Bronze Age Gonur and Shahr-i-Sokhta but also does not fall within the variation of present-day South Asians”, according to the authors of the study.

We are further told that the 11 samples that were chosen for comparison were from among 44 individuals because of a distinctive ancestry profile, where the Indus Periphery Cline (IPC) saw a match with the Indus Valley Cline (IVC). (Cline refers to a gradual change of a phenotype over a long period of time in a region due to environmental variability, from the Greek meaning “to lean”.) Hence, the authors postulated the possibility that there was outward migration from the IVC to Iran and Turkmenistan, as the 12 skeletal remains were seen as belonging to the same cline.

Moron. I addressed this rakhigiri issue in post 174. Here we go again for Mr. Goldfish brain..
" 'An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers.’ BUT THIS MADE MANY JOURNALISTS JUMP TO THE CONCLUSION that it meant there was no Arya migration either...

...The journalists would not have reached this hasty conclusion had they read at least the summary of the Cell paper. Here is a direct quote from the summary: “These individuals had little if any Steppe pastoralist related ancestry, showing that it was not ubiquitous in northwest South Asia during the IVC as it is today.” Pay particular attention to the last four words: “as it is today”. The meaning is clear...

The harappans were PRE-ARYAN, HENCE THEY HAD NO ARYAN DNA. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS BASIC INFERENCE?

Bhakts are beyond hope. Bhakts are declaring the absence of Aryan DNA in this individual as evidence that Aryans never migrated ?? Guess what idiot....she also didn't have British DNA, therefore I declare the British never invaded. She wasn't wearing a hijab, therefore Muslims never came there.

Do you see now?

Rakhigiri proves that when this individual was alive, the Aryans had not arrived yet or had not spread their genome yet (to the point where it's 30% prevalent today!).

Keep making an idiot out of yourself by failing to understand that Rakhigiri was a pre-Aryan find. It's so fkin easy I could explain it to a 5 year old.

Yet bhakts declare it as proof of "outward spread of DNA from the subcontinent outwards"!!!???

Jeez.
Key learning points for our bhakt friends. Gowalkar's bubble is truly burst thanks to the following conclusions from Rakhigiri and other studies:


Aryans did indeed migrate from the grasslands around present-day Kazakhstan (known as the Steppe).
They arrived after the decline of the Harappan civilisation. Thus the Harappans are pre-Vedic.

The Aryans who came are likely to have had more males than females in their number.

After the arrival of the Aryans, local male ancestry was replaced (to different extents in different regions). This suggests that the new arrivals may not have always come in peace, but they may have come "peacefully" also, simply enslaving the natives through superiority of will and being more culturally advanced. One can but speculate.

The highest percentage of DNA from the Steppe can be found today in Brahmins, the traditional custodians of vedas and Sanskrit.

The Dravidians, genetically speaking, have higher ancestry from the Harappans.

The above is based on science, not the ramblings of the 12 year old tree swinger who has corrupted this thread.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Moron. I addressed this rakhigiri issue in post 174. Here we go again for Mr. Goldfish brain..
" 'An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers.’ BUT THIS MADE MANY JOURNALISTS JUMP TO THE CONCLUSION that it meant there was no Arya migration either...

...The journalists would not have reached this hasty conclusion had they read at least the summary of the Cell paper. Here is a direct quote from the summary: “These individuals had little if any Steppe pastoralist related ancestry, showing that it was not ubiquitous in northwest South Asia during the IVC as it is today.” Pay particular attention to the last four words: “as it is today”. The meaning is clear...

The harappans were PRE-ARYAN, HENCE THEY HAD NO ARYAN DNA. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS BASIC INFERENCE?

Bhakts are beyond hope. Bhakts are declaring the absence of Aryan DNA in this individual as evidence that Aryans never migrated ?? Guess what idiot....she also didn't have British DNA, therefore I declare the British never invaded. She wasn't wearing a hijab, therefore Muslims never came there.

Do you see now?

Rakhigiri proves that when this individual was alive, the Aryans had not arrived yet or had not spread their genome yet (to the point where it's 30% prevalent today!).

Keep making an idiot out of yourself by failing to understand that Rakhigiri was a pre-Aryan find. It's so fkin easy I could explain it to a 5 year old.

Yet bhakts declare it as proof of "outward spread of DNA from the subcontinent outwards"!!!???

Jeez.

Harappa was after Mahabharata which dates back to 5561 BCE.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

A nice little commentary (not mine) explaining the eternal BUTTHURT felt by bhakts at the simple reality that they have descended from a hybrid source, 30% of which is an imperialistic enslaver from beyond the subcontinent (Aryans are no different from mughals or British....that's what really burns the saffronists):

"The Crowning Glory of India

In the 1920s, excavations along the Indus valley unearthed the Harappan civilisation. It was soon clear that it was a wonder unmatched by any contemporary civilisation.

Harappan cities had grid-like streets, citadels, public baths, and castles. Almost all the houses, many of them storied, had separate baths and toilets – something many Indians don’t have to this day.
It was quite clearly the crowning glory of Indian civilisation.

Soon began efforts to co-opt them into the Aryan scheme of things. It was claimed, as quite naturally follows from the idea that Aryans are indigenous, that the Harappans were Vedic Aryans.

There is strong archeological evidence to refute this, the most striking being the near-absence of the horse and the chariot in the Harappan civilisation and the centrality of the same in the Vedic culture.

“In the language of genetics,” Tony Joseph writes, “the Harappans contributed to the formation of the Ancestral South Indians by moving south and mixing with the First Indians of peninsular India and also to the formation of the Ancestral North Indians by mixing with the incoming ‘Aryans’.”

After the Harappan civilisation declined, India “had to wait for more than a millennium for its ‘second urbanisation’ that began after 500 BCE”. The incoming Aryans, coming as they were from the grasslands of the Steppe where they were herders, had a mobile lifestyle and a distaste for urban settlements.


After the collapse of their civilisation, the Harappan elite migrated to the south. There they found a “more congenial atmosphere for their language and culture partly because the ‘Aryans’ had not yet reached peninsular India,” writes Joseph.

Therefore, if anyone can claim the legacy of the Harappan civilisation, it is the Dravidians who speak languages born out of the Harappan tongue (which we know thanks to remarkable linguistic evidence outside the scope of this article) and carries a higher percentage of Harappan ancestry."

Harappa was after Mahabharata which dates back to 5561 BCE.

Don't bark mythology here please. This thread is devolved by enough pseudoscience already.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Don't bark mythology here please. This thread is devolved by enough pseudoscience already.

Your propaganda will be exposed with real facts.

 

[undercover JIX]

A nice little commentary (not mine) explaining the eternal BUTTHURT felt by bhakts at the simple reality that they have descended from a hybrid source, 30% of which is an imperialistic enslaver from beyond the subcontinent (Aryans are no different from mughals or British....that's what really burns the saffronists):

"The Crowning Glory of India

In the 1920s, excavations along the Indus valley unearthed the Harappan civilisation. It was soon clear that it was a wonder unmatched by any contemporary civilisation.

Harappan cities had grid-like streets, citadels, public baths, and castles. Almost all the houses, many of them storied, had separate baths and toilets – something many Indians don’t have to this day.
It was quite clearly the crowning glory of Indian civilisation.

Soon began efforts to co-opt them into the Aryan scheme of things. It was claimed, as quite naturally follows from the idea that Aryans are indigenous, that the Harappans were Vedic Aryans.

There is strong archeological evidence to refute this, the most striking being the near-absence of the horse and the chariot in the Harappan civilisation and the centrality of the same in the Vedic culture.

“In the language of genetics,” Tony Joseph writes, “the Harappans contributed to the formation of the Ancestral South Indians by moving south and mixing with the First Indians of peninsular India and also to the formation of the Ancestral North Indians by mixing with the incoming ‘Aryans’.”

After the Harappan civilisation declined, India “had to wait for more than a millennium for its ‘second urbanisation’ that began after 500 BCE”. The incoming Aryans, coming as they were from the grasslands of the Steppe where they were herders, had a mobile lifestyle and a distaste for urban settlements.


After the collapse of their civilisation, the Harappan elite migrated to the south. There they found a “more congenial atmosphere for their language and culture partly because the ‘Aryans’ had not yet reached peninsular India,” writes Joseph.

Therefore, if anyone can claim the legacy of the Harappan civilisation, it is the Dravidians who speak languages born out of the Harappan tongue (which we know thanks to remarkable linguistic evidence outside the scope of this article) and carries a higher percentage of Harappan ancestry."

Don't bark mythology here please. This thread is devolved by enough pseudoscience already.

When you will start taking these Indians as a joke, these brainwashed sanghis are only able to see what Hindutva allow them, rest is fake.

But I admire your patience and struggle but Indians are slave to their masters, whatever masters told them that is universal truth, rest is a lie.

sign of slaves, since centuries they were kept as slaves its in their DNA, they always need masters to follow. current masters are Brahmans....

 

[suyog chavan]

Moron. I addressed this rakhigiri issue in post 174. Here we go again for Mr. Goldfish brain..
" 'An Ancient Harappan Genome Lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian Farmers.’ BUT THIS MADE MANY JOURNALISTS JUMP TO THE CONCLUSION that it meant there was no Arya migration either...

...The journalists would not have reached this hasty conclusion had they read at least the summary of the Cell paper. Here is a direct quote from the summary: “These individuals had little if any Steppe pastoralist related ancestry, showing that it was not ubiquitous in northwest South Asia during the IVC as it is today.” Pay particular attention to the last four words: “as it is today”. The meaning is clear...

The harappans were PRE-ARYAN, HENCE THEY HAD NO ARYAN DNA. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS BASIC INFERENCE?

Bhakts are beyond hope. Bhakts are declaring the absence of Aryan DNA in this individual as evidence that Aryans never migrated ?? Guess what idiot....she also didn't have British DNA, therefore I declare the British never invaded. She wasn't wearing a hijab, therefore Muslims never came there.

Do you see now?

Rakhigiri proves that when this individual was alive, the Aryans had not arrived yet or had not spread their genome yet (to the point where it's 30% prevalent today!).

Keep making an idiot out of yourself by failing to understand that Rakhigiri was a pre-Aryan find. It's so fkin easy I could explain it to a 5 year old.

Yet bhakts declare it as proof of "outward spread of DNA from the subcontinent outwards"!!!???

Jeez.
Key learning points for our bhakt friends. Gowalkar's bubble is truly burst thanks to the following conclusions from Rakhigiri and other studies:


Aryans did indeed migrate from the grasslands around present-day Kazakhstan (known as the Steppe).
They arrived after the decline of the Harappan civilisation. Thus the Harappans are pre-Vedic.

The Aryans who came are likely to have had more males than females in their number.

After the arrival of the Aryans, local male ancestry was replaced (to different extents in different regions). This suggests that the new arrivals may not have always come in peace, but they may have come "peacefully" also, simply enslaving the natives through superiority of will and being more culturally advanced. One can but speculate.

The highest percentage of DNA from the Steppe can be found today in Brahmins, the traditional custodians of vedas and Sanskrit.

The Dravidians, genetically speaking, have higher ancestry from the Harappans.

The above is based on science, not the ramblings of the 12 year old tree swinger who has corrupted this thread.

After contradicting yourself many times and failing to give proof or sources, Only option left is ranting and howling,
Here, This might add to burns and grievance of yours,

There are many seals to support the evidence of the Indus Valley Gods. Some seals show animals which resemble the two gods, Shiva and Rudra. Other seals depict a tree which the Indus Valley believed to be the tree of life. The tree was guarded by a spirit to keep the evil forces away from the tree. The guardian was potrayed by many animals such as bull, snake, goat, or any other mythical creature or animal. The evil force is represented by a tiger. One seal shows a figure sitting in a position that may be similar to a yoga pose and is thought to be an early representation of a Hindu God.

The Indus people worshipped a Father God who may have been the forefather of the race.
Figurines found led the scholars to believe that the Indus people worshipped a Mother Goddess symbolising fertility.
They worshipped fertility symbols which were round or pierced stones, a practice that was performed before the worship of Shiva and Parvati in the form of Sivalinga. They may have believed in magical rituals, charms and amulets and also demons and spirits.

A figure of a male god in a seated posture carved on a small stone seal was found. The figure has a white steatite head and bust, clothed in a robe that is placed over the left shoulder, short beard with no moustache, hair cropped and parted in the middle, wearing a necklace, eyes half shut. This was considered as a sacred symbol. The Sun was regarded as one of the greatest gods. Another seal shows a horned figure surrounded by animals such as the deer, antelope, rhinoceros, elephant, tiger and buffalo. The horned figure is called Pashupati which means the lord of the cattle. Pashupati is similar to the gods, Rudra and Shiva.

Swastikas are a sacred symbol for good luck. The Indus Valley people practiced a form of yoga and meditation. The Indus Valley people built bathhouses and practiced ritual bathing. The great bath of Mohenjo-Daro was probably a proto type of a kovil or sacred tank found mostly in ancient temples in southern India where people may have performed important rituals for special occasions.

During the early days of their culture, the Indus people buried their dead. Afterwards, they conducted cremations and kept the ashes in urns. They may have believed in life after death after the discovery of pottery items and ornaments in the burial grounds.

Stop howling like a crybaby and present some solid proof

When you will start taking these Indians as a joke, these brainwashed sanghis are only able to see what Hindutva allow them, rest is fake.

But I admire your patience and struggle but Indians are slave to their masters, whatever masters told them that is universal truth, rest is a lie.

sign of slaves, since centuries they were kept as slaves its in their DNA, they always need masters to follow. current masters are Brahmans....

No one is buying the stuff , your selling, So stop uttering baseless talks and come back with some concrete facts like grown ups do

 

[undercover JIX]

No one is buying the stuff , your selling, So stop uttering baseless talks and come back with some concrete facts like grown ups do

lol at your facts. only brainwashed idiots are buying it ...and you are one of them.

as far as my utterance is concerned, all facts are posted already,
you can go their and bring hindutva proofs, which are well known lies. living in denial and thinking altered history is the truth is idiocy of another level.

or keep repeating one liner denials and feel happy, but you must chant jai modi at the end.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

contradicting yourself many times and failing to give proof or sources, Only option left is ranting and howling,
Here, This might add to

(Sigh).

Calm down.

I haven't contradicted myself at all. Nor have I failed to give proof.

I have literally taken your own references and explained them properly to you. It's very simple.

You declared "rakhigiri abrogates AIT because no Aryan DNA was found therein".

To which I responded, ACTUALLY, rakhigiri being devoid of Aryan DNA quite simply proves that this skeleton was of a person of the IVC, which existed BEFORE THE ARYANS ARRIVED IN ENOUGH VOLUME TO DRIVE A 30%GENOMIC SHIFT IN NORTHERN INDIA'S POPULATION. Rakhigiri was PRE-ARYAN, JUST LIKE THE WHOLE IVC, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN TEACHING YOU. If you don't like hearing this truth, cover your ears. That's all you have to do. But when you claim the absence of Aryan DNA in the Rakhigiri sample disproves Aryan entry into the subcontinent, you're simply lying and misleading your fans. In fact, the absence of Aryan DNA in the Rakhigiri sample ONLY proves that Aryans hadn't entered the subcontinent YET.

THEY HADN'T ENTERED YET. YET. YET.

GOT IT?

 

[suyog chavan]

Aramaic, Hebrew, Coptic. Certainly not ooga booga Tamil.

Your elephant and monkey cult 5000 year old kulcha is only important in your head. No one else takes you seriously.

Acha Dindoo sou baat ki ek baat- we have the IVC in our land now. We took 2 portions of your Aryavarta land where your lords used to walk and dance and steal butter or whatever. Come and get it if you can. We swear we'll welcome you like Ravan welcomed your Sita Maiya.

That was so naive and Pakistani response
twonk, Stop molly ranting and If facts work with you, have a look,

Tamil language

The Tamil language is recognized as the oldest language in the world and it is the oldest language of the Dravidian family. This language had a presence even around 5,000 years ago.

Bhikari Pakistani , Chal bhaak yaha se,

lol at your facts. only brainwashed idiots are buying it ...and you are one of them.

as far as my utterance is concerned, all facts are posted already,
you can go their and bring hindutva proofs, which are well known lies. living in denial and thinking altered history is the truth is idiocy of another level.

or keep repeating one liner denials and feel happy, but you must chant jai modi at the end.

"Living in denial and thinking altered history is the truth is idiocy of another level." Such as Earth is Flat,
Try selling it to illetrate awam of yours, Still aint buying It.
Standing my stance with proofs and facts, unlike most Pakistanis dwelling on lies and feeling like a roaster
Jai Imran khan ✌✌,

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Keep contradicting yourself engot,
Tamil the worlds oldest language and Sanskrit the world's second oldest language are similar, which debunks the Aryan invasion theory at the core belief of itself,
First and foremost Sanskrit was not the language of aryans, whereas the indigenous population spoke both Tamil and Sanskrit languages, which were interrelated to each other,

"The Tamil language is recognized as the oldest language in the world and it is the oldest language of the Dravidian family"

Both the above are your quotes on this thread a few days apart.

You state Tamil and Sanskrit are similar. You're aware that Tamil is a Dravidian language.

Find me ONE SINGLE AUTHENTIC AND INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED SOURCE that declares Sanskrit to be from the same Dravidian family of languages as Tamil. Just find me one.

You will fail, because contrary to your misconceptions, they are not fundamentally similar enough to be rooted in the same family of languages. One is indoeuropean and one is dravidian. These are totally distinct branches.

Otherwise, it's you who has contradicted himself, nobody else.

 

[Cliftonite]

That was so naive and Pakistani response
twonk, Stop molly ranting and If facts work with you, have a look,

Tamil language

The Tamil language is recognized as the oldest language in the world and it is the oldest language of the Dravidian family. This language had a presence even around 5,000 years ago.

Bhikari Pakistani , Chal bhaak yaha se,

5000 old kulcha oh I forgot.

It must hurt that we kicked out your disgusting cult from such a large part of your Akhand Bharat. Must sting really bad. Lol we took 2 parts out of your country. Keep burning. And we'll take it further in the future.

 

[suyog chavan]

(Sigh).

Calm down.

I haven't contradicted myself at all. Nor have I failed to give proof.

I have literally taken your own references and explained them properly to you. It's very simple.

You declared "rakhigiri abrogates AIT because no Aryan DNA was found therein".

To which I responded, ACTUALLY, rakhigiri being devoid of Aryan DNA quite simply proves that this skeleton was of a person of the IVC, which existed BEFORE THE ARYANS ARRIVED IN ENOUGH VOLUME TO DRIVE A 30%GENOMIC SHIFT IN NORTHERN INDIA'S POPULATION. Rakhigiri was PRE-ARYAN, JUST LIKE THE WHOLE IVC, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN TEACHING YOU. If you don't like hearing this truth, cover your ears. That's all you have to do. But when you claim the absence of Aryan DNA in the Rakhigiri sample disproves Aryan entry into the subcontinent, you're simply lying and misleading your fans. In fact, the absence of Aryan DNA in the Rakhigiri sample ONLY proves that Aryans hadn't entered the subcontinent YET.

THEY HADN'T ENTERED YET. YET. YET.

GOT IT?

Aryans did come to Ancient India nor denying it, even accepted this in my previous threads ,
The Harrapans did practice primeval Sanatan Dharma,
You claiming aryans altered and enslaved our religion is complete made out hoax, drilled to your kinds
I have provided enough proofs on my claims and I stand with them,
Rather than ranting Hindutva,, Brahmanism, altered Hinduism, casteism, caste system , etc like a muppet
Contradicting on your claims and frequent reversions is all you have done, with elevating your idiocy at new level, by fallacious claims which you couldn't prove a penny,
Talk of proof, and you start ranting , shows your claims are without a base, to prove what your uttering

"The Tamil language is recognized as the oldest language in the world and it is the oldest language of the Dravidian family"

Yeah true

"The Tamil language is recognized as the oldest language in the world and it is the oldest language of the Dravidian family"

Both the above are your quotes on this thread a few days apart.

You state Tamil and Sanskrit are similar. You're aware that Tamil is a Dravidian language.

Find me ONE SINGLE AUTHENTIC AND INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED SOURCE that declares Sanskrit to be from the same Dravidian family of languages as Tamil. Just find me one.

You will fail, because contrary to your misconceptions, they are not fundamentally similar enough to be rooted in the same family of languages. One is indoeuropean and one is dravidian. These are totally distinct branches.

Otherwise, it's you who has contradicted himself, nobody else.

I stand my stance,
Tamil and Sanskrit are absolutely similar no doubt, Tamil is so called Dravidian language Today but wasn't during ancient India,

Both the above are your quotes on this thread a few days apart.

You state Tamil and Sanskrit are similar. You're aware that Tamil is a Dravidian language.

Find me ONE SINGLE AUTHENTIC AND INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED SOURCE that declares Sanskrit to be from the same Dravidian family of languages as Tamil. Just find me one.

You will fail, because contrary to your misconceptions, they are not fundamentally similar enough to be rooted in the same family of languages. One is indoeuropean and one is dravidian. These are totally distinct branches.

Otherwise, it's you who has contradicted himself, nobody else.

First and foremost Sanskrit was not the language of aryans, whereas the indigenous population spoke both Tamil and Sanskrit languages, which were interrelated to each other,
Tamil and Sanskrit are absolutely similar no doubt, Tamil is so called Dravidian language Today but wasn't during ancient India,
Aryans did come to ancient Bharat but not pre dating Harrapans , whereas Harrapans were already practicing Vedic dharm ,
And No Aryans manipulated, enslaved or altered our religion , rather they were mixed into the indigenous populace adhering to the indigenous practices and rituals ,
People got segregated in India. not due to some invasion by outsiders crap , but due to geographical conditions , Same goes on with the languages of Tamil and Sanskrit,

Find me ONE SINGLE AUTHENTIC AND INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIED SOURCE that declares Sanskrit to be from the same Dravidian family of languages as Tamil. Just find me one.

Here take the source from ancient Agama scriptures,

THE SAIVA AGAMAS, SAIVISM'S REVEALED SCRIPTURES and the foundation of Tamil culture, describe Tamil and Sanskrit as sister languages. The 14th chapter of the knowledge-section of the Chandrajnana Agama states that Lord Siva, manifesting as Dakshinamurti under a banyan tree, revealed the Agamas and Vedas to the sages on the summit of the Mahendra Mountains just as He revealed them on Mount Kailasa to Anantesvara in the previous kalpa (age).
The sages recorded this Sanskrit transmission using the Grantha alphabet, as instructed by the Lord. The great Tamil Saint Manikkavasagar also sings, in Tamil, of this revelation by Lord Siva to the sages in the "Kirti Tiruvagaval" of his Tiruvasagam.
The Grantha script is akin to Tamil. One can see the similarity in letters, such as u, o, ka, ta, tha, na, pa, va, ya and ra, etc., in the two scripts. There are also hundreds of common words found in both Tamil and Sanskrit. Many words appear in their pure Tamil form in the Sanskrit Agamas, Silpa Sastras and related scriptures.
Grantha means "the scripture of systematic rules and directions" and also denotes "sentence/verse." It embodied and safeguarded the construction tenets for temples, palaces and forts and many other subjects using words which could not be written in Tamil. Subsequently,
the silpis who carved images and constructed temples and other buildings documented their science in the Silpa Shastras using Grantha. Prominent among them were Manasara Rishi, Maya Rishi and Kas yaps. Even today, the oldest manuscripts of the Vedas, Agamas and Silpa Shastras are only available in the Grantha script. The influence of Grantha can be seen in all South Indian languages.
In his Tirumantiram, Rishi Tirumular talks of an ancient time of cold climate in India, which some conclude points to an indigenous Indian civilization extant as far back as the last ice age, 11,000 years ago, in areas that may now be submerged. It was then, he writes, that Lord Siva revealed the essential scriptures in Sanskrit and Tamil simultaneously to the body of learned scholars (verse 109). The term used by Tirumular to denote Sanskrit is ariyam (arya). The ancient indigenous people who were using this arya language to communicate among themselves were called the atyas. They never migrated into India from outside, nor to the South from the northwest.
In the classical Tamil works of the Sangam period, such as Purananuru, Paripadal, Patitruppattu, Tirumurugatruppadai, Mullaippaattu and Malaipatukatam, we can see hundreds of Grantha, or Sanskrit, words. Panini, the son of sage Panana, wrote his inimitable grammatical work, Vyakarana Shastra, based on 14 sutras (aphorisms) that emerged from the drum held held by the dancing Lord Nataraja at Chidambaram, Tamil Nadu—not in North India, where Panini is usually placed. My diksha guru at Chidambaram told me many times that the native place of Panini was Thiruvotriyur, in Chennai.
These facts show that Tamil and Sanskrit (in Grantha script) are interrelated. To express certain details or concepts, Sanskrit depends on Tamil. Similarly, to express certain details and concepts, Tamil requires Sanskrit.
The recent attitude of the alienation of Sanskrit was absolutely absent in the literary works written in Tamil during the Sangam and medieval periods. The Tamil kings viewed Tamil and Sanskrit as equally important. Royal inscriptions certifying grants made by the kings to the temples in Tamil Nadu used both Sanskrit (in Grantha script) and Tamil words.
Our Tamil saints frequently sing of Lord Murugan and Lord Siva revealing the Vedas to Sage Agastya and other sages living in Tamil Nadu. Tirujnana Sambandar goes to the extent of saying that those who do not benefit from the study of both Sanskrit and Tamil are blind and that both Tamil and Sanskrit are capable of reaching the feet of the Lord. St. Tirunavukkarasar declares that Lord Siva manifests Himself as Sanskrit and Tamil. Saint Pamban Kumaragurudasa Swamigal, who received instruction on "Dahara Upasana" directly from Lord Murugan in a village near Ramesvaram, composed 6,666 Tamil verses on Lord Murugan. He categorically stated: "Both Sanskrit and Tamil are essential for any devotee if he wants the grace of the Lord. He who abhors Tamil or Sanskrit incurs the displeasure of Lord Murugan." And he further emphasized that for all the ritualistic activities of the temples, only Sanskrit should be used.
The Tamil-Sanskrit divide is clearly unwarranted and unfortunate. Aversion or enmity towards Sanskrit is harmful to the harmonious life of the people and understanding their true cultural and spiritual heritage. Those who hate Sanskrit should understand that they face the heavy loss of not benefiting from the knowledge of many rich and elegant dimensions of Tamil culture and civilization which can only be seen in Sanskrit works and not in Tamil works.
As late as the end of 19th century, Tamil scholars wrote without any spirit of antagonism between Tamil and Sanskrit. This unfortunate, alienated and antagonistic attitude only erupted in the 20th century, adopted by Dravidian political movements for their own agenda, which derived from new ideas of Western scholars, like the Aryan invasion theory.
Neglect of Grantha script in favor of the Devanagari script for writing Sanskrit has added fuel to this unwanted aversion towards Sanskrit. Sanskrit should not be identified exclusively with the Devanagari script, a modern script for North Indian languages. Sanskrit was connected to the old Grantha script of South India long before Devanagari came into use.

If you can counter ( if ) , use facts from ancient scriptures , Not interested in your pep talks plus howling in air,

 

[White and Green with M/S]

@masterchief_mirza don't engage troll like @suyog chavan you can't convince him with logic and commonsense, he thinks Muslims were/are barbaric/evil in subcontinent and only Hindus and others were innocent/angels, just ignore @suyog chavan blabbering bro

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Aryans did come to Ancient India nor denying it, even accepted this in my previous threads ,
The Harrapans did practice primeval Sanatan Dharma,
You claiming aryans altered and enslaved our religion is complete made out hoax, drilled to your kinds
I have provided enough proofs on my claims and I stand with them,
Rather than ranting Hindutva,, Brahmanism, altered Hinduism, casteism, caste system , etc like a muppet
Contradicting on your claims and frequent reversions is all you have done, with elevating your idiocy at new level, by fallacious claims which you couldn't prove a penny,
Talk of proof, and you start ranting , shows your claims are without a base, to prove what your uttering

Yeah true

I stand my stance,
Tamil and Sanskrit are absolutely similar no doubt, Tamil is so called Dravidian language Today but wasn't during ancient India,

First and foremost Sanskrit was not the language of aryans, whereas the indigenous population spoke both Tamil and Sanskrit languages, which were interrelated to each other,
Tamil and Sanskrit are absolutely similar no doubt, Tamil is so called Dravidian language Today but wasn't during ancient India,
Aryans did come to ancient Bharat but not pre dating Harrapans , whereas Harrapans were already practicing Vedic dharm ,
And No Aryans manipulated, enslaved or altered our religion , rather they were mixed into the indigenous populace adhering to the indigenous practices and rituals ,
People got segregated in India. not due to some invasion by outsiders crap , but due to geographical conditions , Same goes on with the languages of Tamil and Sanskrit,

Round of applause for your degree level rationalisation of caste slavery. Well done. Phenomenal apologism for simple slavery.

Harappans didn't do it. Aryans did.

That's why you have no claim over the harappan civilisation.

Your aryan-gangetic civilisation was a BACKWARD step from the great city builders of ancient Pakistan. You couldn't even make bricks! No granaries. No irrigation. IVC had toilets while you shitted in fields - little has changed. Your fathers were horse riding barbarians who lived in mud huts while ours built stunning metropolises and were urbanised. You're unsurprisingly going to try and lay claim to IVC through your weak, flimsy "we wuz all polytheists" argument. It's truly hilarious how you compare their religious beliefs. There are some similarities, just like Christianity and Judaism have similarities, or even between early Christians and post-Nicaea Christendom, but Christianity was radically altered through various interferences,just like the chronologically later manifestation of Aryan Hinduism that you love with its engrained caste structure was unrecognizable from what was previously practiced in harappa.

Why is there no mention of "bricks" or "granaries" in Vedic texts if IVC was an offshoot of Vedic dharm? I can give you countless further examples of how IVC had no significant interaction with your ancestors beyond a few seasonal exchanges. Gangetics were a closed culture who didn't trade. IVC were seafaring and traded with the great western empires of the bronze age.


"1. None of the Veda mentions the abundantly found remains of Phallic and Venus worship practices at the Indus sites. Had the Vedic people been the progenitors of the Indus culture, naturally being part of phallic worship, certainly would also have made mentions of it in The Rig Veda apart from their religious ritual Yajnya. Rather the Rig Veda seems to be hostile towards the phallic worshipers. The Rig Veda clearly makes distinction between sacrificers and non-sacrificers. (i.e. see RV 1.33)

2. No Indus seal depicts image of the fire sacrifice, which was soul of the Vedic civilization. Rather the images over the seals go contrary to the Vedic religious thought.

3. There is no slightest hint in the Rig Veda that the Vedics conducted trade with other civilizations. There is no mention of local or foreign trade-commerce or even cognates for trade or trade related activities in the Rig Veda. Abundant proofs are available from excavations in the IVC and other contemporary civilizations, from Iran to Mesopotamia, to prove IVC trade with them by sea as well as surface routs.

4. The Vedic society was mainly pastoral as evidenced from the Vedic literature. The cattle were their treasured possession and most of the prayers are for the abundant growth of the same. They knew the Agriculture but it was their secondary occupation. There is no cognate for “Plough” in Vedic Sanskrit but they used a loan word “Langal” from other languages for plough. However, the IVC was mostly agrarian, industrial and mercantile society as evidenced from the excavations, unlike the Vedics. Rather the Vedics show great jealousy of the Panis who were expert traders.

5. The Rig Veda has no mention of fired bricks, brick-paved roads, public baths or granaries that was integral part of almost every Indus settlement. However noted historian Ram Sharan Sharma states, “…And yet all these features can be expected if its culture were urban. Fired bricks are a striking feature of the Harappans, and no Bronze Age civilisation can boast of them on such a large scale. But this important construction material is unknown to the Rg Veda. In the great British archaeologist Mortimer Wheeler's view, there is no granary in the pre-classical world comparable in terms of specialist design and monumental dignity to the examples from the two Indus cities. But because of the absence of urbanism, the Vedic people did not need granaries, and consequently the Rg Veda has no term for granary.” (Indus and the Saraswati, Ram Sharan Sharma, article published online )

Had the Vedic Aryans be at the least part of the IVC, they would have cognates for the materials and structures in question.

6. The Vedic society was horse centered as evidenced from its numerous mentions in the Rig Veda with one verse dedicated to him. (RV 1.171) Many personal names are horse and chariot oriented. It was earlier assumed that the horse was unknown to the Indians until the Aryan invaders introduced them. However, this is not true. There are abundant proofs of the horse bones found in the Indian subcontinent dating back to early phase of the Harappan settlements, although belonging to the different families of horse. (The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture: The Indo-Aryan Migration Debate, by Edwin Bryant, 2001.)

This means the IVC too was not unaware of the horses though it carried not much significance in their culture. The horse remains also are so few that renowned archeologist B. B. Lal, as quoted by Ram Sharan Sharma, says, "would like to have more and more examples."

It is natural because the IGVC was mostly agrarian and manufacturing/trading society where bull carried more importance to plow the fields and pull the carts. This is obvious from the fact that the bull is depicted artistically on abundant seals whereas horse finds no place at all on any of the seal. Use of horses to them was scanty and hence carried no major significance in their culture. Obviously, horse images would be redundant for them.

The Vedic Aryans were a mostly pastoral society and hence their life being horse-centered does not come as surprise. Even the life of modern day cattle herders is centered on horses. Abundant mentions of the horse with respect in the Rig Veda and the rite of horse-sacrifice proves the same.

No place for the horses in the IGVC iconography does simply mean that the Horses carried negligible significance in their civilization unlike of the Vedic society. In fact this clearly suggests that the Rig Vedics had no connection whatsoever with Indus Valley civilization. Had it been the case horse would have found prominence in IGVC’s early and later iconography.

Moreover, the horse-chariot issue has unnecessarily been over-debated either by the supporters of the AIT/AMT or OIT propagandists for the sake of proving their futile baseless theories. Even if there was no slightest indication of presence of horse in IGVC, it wouldn’t prove for the lack of that knowledge they were subjugated by the people who knew horse and chariots, for there is no slightest proof that the decline of the IGVC was result of any vicious war won by the mighty invaders who had tamed the horses and used spoke-wheeled chariots!

7. The images of unicorn are abundantly found in IGVC on various seals. The one-horned animal, labeled as unicorn, could be rhinoceros known to the IGVC people. Dr. Ram Sharan Sharma opines, “…The term ganda or khadga is used for the rhinoceros in Sanskrit, and the term ekasrnga for both the unicorn and the rhinoceros, but none of these terms occurs in the Rg Veda.”

8. Vedic people seem to have been at constant wars from the Rig Vedic texts, using variety of arms and armors. At the Indus sites, the finds of arms are meager with no find of armors at all. The IVC cannot be regarded as a warring society the way the Vedic society was. Warring people would naturally have the warlike god, and we find him in the form of the Indra in Rig Veda who helps Vedic people win the wars. However, it is not justifiable to infer from the meager findings of the weapons that the Indus people were peace-loving people. Most probably, either the Indus civilization was unified under a single rule or had established cordial relations with every city-state, minimizing the war-like occasions. Yet it is clear that the IVC was a prospered civilization and the peace that follows in prosperous period was fairly enjoyed by the IVC. Rather, it appears from the Rig Veda that the Vedic people were seekers of the wealth and all the time were engaged in the wars for wealth-hunting, cattle being the treasured wealth to them. Tarkateertha Laxmanshastri Joshi states that Rig Vedic Aryans main professions seems to have been loot the cattle, food, lands of the Das, Dasyu and Panis. This condition certainly cannot be of the prosperous society. (Vaidik Sanskruticha Itihas, Tarkateertha Laxmanshastri Joshi.)

9. Students of the Indus civilization know very well about the abundant finds of variety of the seals bearing assorted motifs and script at every site. These finds exhibit their cultural beliefs and their awareness of the script. However, none of such practice finds mention in the Rig Veda. There is even no cognate for writing or script in the Rig Veda. Here the suggestion is not that the Vedics did not know the script; it simply is that there is no mention of the seal making, motifs on it and the script. Had the Vedics been progenitors of the Indus civilization, there would have been some mention of the widely held practice that involves not only religious beliefs but also the commercial beliefs of the IGVC.

10. Plenty of ornament and other goods manufacturing sites have unearthed at the IGVC sites. There is no mention in the Rig Veda of such manufacturing. Besides, there is no mention of harbors though Indus people had many of them, including artificial harbor like of Lothal. So much that scholars seriously doubt whether the Vedic Aryans even knew the sea or not. (The term Samudra in Rig Veda does not essentially mean the sea but it also means lake or pond at many instances.)

11. Though the Indus script could not be deciphered as yet in want of largest specimens or Rosetta stone, it is clear that they knew the art of writing. We do not find any term or cognate for writing or script in the Rig Veda.

Had the Vedic people migrated from India to the West, as some scholars try to suggest, and if they were progenitors of the IVC, the major question arises why they did not carry the script along with them? If so-called indigenous Aryans, if supposed, left the Indian territories long before the IVC was founded, the whole premise of their theories do collapse because it would be ridiculous and unsupported argument. First of all therde is no proof whatsoever to prove the people those composed Rig Vedic hymns were Indian.

The scholars cite examples of Buddhist migrations to Gandhar and elsewhere where they used extensively Indian Brahmi and Kharoshti scripts for writing. We do not find presence of the Indus script elsewhere in the western world. It means that the Vedic Aryans did not migrate from east to west (from India to Europe) nor were they acquainted with the Indus civilization to the extent Vedic scholars like to believe, forget their being progenitors of the IGVC.

12. The Rig Veda mentions destructions of several cities of Dasyus at the hands of Indra. These cities were made of stones (“Asmanmayi” RV 4.30.20) or of metal (“Ayasi”, RV 2.20.8, 4.26.3). We do not know for sure what Vedic people of Rig Vedic times meant by Ashman and Ayas, or to whose cities they were referring to because the Indus cities were built of fired bricks, not of the stones or metal of any kind thus does not fit in the Rig Vedic descriptions. In all probability they were talking about the BMAC sites, not Indus-Ghaggar.

Dasas and Dasyus (Dahae and Dakhyu) were residents of ancient Iran. Therefore, in all probabilities, they could have been referring to the stone-cities of them. Possibly Ayas too was used alternatively for stone and metal for their hardness. Whatsoever might be the case, the Vedic people certainly did not reside in the walled cities or even towns; they were rather village dwellers and preferred to be so until the Brahmanic era. Fired bricks for fire altars came into the use in late Vedic times. (Vaidik Sanskruticha Itihas, Tarkateertha Laxmanshastri Joshi) This clearly suggests there was not any link of the Vedics with the IVC; otherwise they would have known some civil practices of the IGVC.

13. Rig Veda doesn’t know cotton or it does not have any cognate for it. IGVC people were expert cotton weavers. The Rig Vedic people seem to have been using wool for clothing, but natural for the people living in extreme climatic conditions.

14. IGVC people were master architects. The drainage system and stepped Great Baths had central characteristic of the IGVC, however no such practice finds mention in the Rig Veda.

These facts forced some indigenous Aryan theorists like Kazanas to place the Rig Vedic time prior to the emergence of the IGVC. ( Rig Veda is pre-Harappan, by Nicholas Kazanas, a paper published online

) However, we have seen in the previous chapter that in absence of the Rig Vedic Sarasvati River in Indian geography do not make their claim valid. Vedic scholars can stretch back Rig Veda’s period to the Ice Age if they want to (and many enthusiastic amateur scholars already have attempted it!) but the Rig Vedic texts and other parallel evidences does not correspond to their claim of its being so antique.

Looking at the discrepancies that arise from the closer look at the Vedic culture mentioned in the Vedas and the physical finds of the Indus sites, it is impossible to even imagine that the progenitors of the Indus civilization were the Vedic Aryans. Even it is almost ridiculous to state that the Indus and the Vedic people came into any contact so much so to influence each other’s culture.

source:
https://sanjaysonawani.blogspot.com/2015/02/vedic-and-indus-ghaggar-culture.html"

And, for God sake man, drop the pathetic Tamil argument. Yes, we know loan words flowed between the two languages. That's all that happened. Don't throw b.s. into the argument. Show me how, based on syntax, grammar, lexiconical explanations....how can Tamil and Sanskrit be from the same family.

Sanskrit has far more in common with Greek than Tamil. Can't help your delusions beyond that.
"Sanskrit belongs to the Indo-European family of languages. It is one of the three earliest ancient documented languages that arose from a common root language now referred to as Proto-Indo-European language:[18][19][20]

Vedic Sanskrit (c. 1500–500 BCE).
Mycenaean Greek (c. 1450 BCE)[53] and Ancient Greek (c. 750–400 BCE).
Hittite (c. 1750–1200 BCE).
Other Indo-European languages distantly related to Sanskrit include archaic and classical Latin (c. 600 BCE–100 CE, old Italian), Gothic (archaic Germanic language, c. 350 CE), Old Norse (c. 200 CE and after), Old Avestan (c. late 2nd millennium BCE[54]) and Younger Avestan (c. 900 BCE).[19][20] The closest ancient relatives of Vedic Sanskrit in the Indo-European languages are the Nuristani languages found in the remote Hindu Kush region of the northeastern Afghanistan and northwestern Himalayas,[20][55][56] as well as the extinct Avestan and Old Persian — both are Iranian languages.[57][58][59] Sanskrit belongs to the satem group of the Indo-European languages."

@masterchief_mirza don't engage troll like @suyog chavan you can't convince him with logic and commonsense, he thinks Muslims were/are barbaric/evil in subcontinent and only Hindus and others were innocent/angels, just ignore @suyog chavan blabbering bro

Thanks sir. Just engaging briefly for the benefit of any casual viewers who may be deceived by their fabrications.