Assuming Aryan Invasion theory is incorrect

[Guest guest]

how does that explain brahmins, and other higher castes being of lighter complexion than the lower castes? There was an argument made that the difference between the lighter-skinned North Indians and darker-skinned South Indians was due to the proximity to the equator and was simply geographically based and not genetically. But that still doesn't explain the difference in color between higher and lower castes. So what would be the explanation for that?

 

 

[Guest guest]

There are dark skinned brahmins and light skinned non brahmins.

The people of south India are in general darker.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Cant you think of anything constructive and useful.

You guys have a preset opinion and try to rationalise it by fitting some data to it.

 

[Guest guest]

"Cant you think of anything constructive and useful.

You guys have a preset opinion and try to rationalise it by fitting some data to it."

 

Well, that is the very basis of archaeology and science. You have a hypothesis, you test the data, you form a conclusion whether your hypothesis is true or false. In the case of human civilizations, things aren't nearly so cut and dry though. There could be a multitude of factors that contribute to the fall of the Indus civilization, and invasion may not have been a factor at all.

 

Still, this site: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/1335/Hist/fall_ind.html

 

seems to present some arguments towards why the Aryan Invasion theory is correct. Any opinions on this?

[Guest guest]

"how does that explain brahmins, and other higher castes being of lighter complexion than the lower castes?"

 

Are you on Crack? Either you'r tyring to be funny or you haven't a clue what you're talking about! There are many dark skinned Brahmins all over India and 'higher' caste as well as fair skined lower castes. Are you an Indian at all? Because if you were you wouldn't have made that totally inaccurate assumption...it seems as if you've not met many India Hindus from different castes for you to make that false generalisation.

 

Let's give you a quick example Ravi Shankar the sitar player isn't exactly very fair yet he is 'born' into a brahmin family. Now if that is an example of someone fron brahmin stock, then how come so many people from 'lower' castes in india are fairer thatn him? a very fair family in India are the Kapoor family from the film industry, with members such as Raj, Karisma Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor they do NOT come under the Brahmin caste but are from a non-brahmin family. Now as they are very fair but are non-brahmins going by your rationale shouldn't they be fairer

than Ravi Shankar?

I've only given you one example but their are countless more.

[Guest guest]

I'm sorry, but I'm just looking for arguments AGAINST the Aryan Invasion theory. I'm just posting whatever arguments were made for the AIT so I can understand the points of rebuttal to them.

 

I don't believe in AIT nor do I want to believe it. But I'd like to think I have an open mind, and I just want to understand the points for and against the Aryan Invasion theory.

[Guest guest]

Even rigorous testing like MultiVariate ANOVA and other Cause and effect techniques have a margin of error.

 

And we have something called the Lurking Variables, that can be identified only by complicated DOE techniques.

 

Even in Scientific studies, we find the effect of Unknown variables a big proble. We assume that, the effect is because of a variable, but experimentation shows something else.

 

Thats how major scientific discoveries were made.

 

What I mean to say is even in science where the procedures are documented, its difficult enuff.

 

In archealogical studies, its simply very difficult. It will be like a Sardarji Homo Jokes ( I dont mean to offend sikhs, whom I hold in high regard, and I have lot of friends) if we try to find a cause and effect.

 

Why cant the Indus valley civilisation be Aryan and the dravidians migrated from south to destroy it? After all the tamil port of kaveripoompattinam was devoured by the sea, which shifted northwards? And the great land mass of the south was dovoured by the sea which moved northwards? So this could have made the people already in south now displaced to look for lands in the north, and they destroyed the aryans there?

 

Now I can use "HYPOTHESIS testing" to support this right?

 

 

 

 

[maadhav 0]

<< I'm sorry, but I'm just looking for arguments AGAINST the Aryan Invasion theory. I'm just posting whatever arguments were made for the AIT so I can understand the points of rebuttal to them.

 

I don't believe in AIT nor do I want to believe it. But I'd like to think I have an open mind, and I just want to understand the points for and against the Aryan Invasion theory. >>

 

this is like saying:

 

"i do not belive the sun rises in any other direction that the east, but i am open minded and want to see the arguments

about whether the sun rises in the east or west or any other direction."

 

what purpose does it serve?

whan you know the truth, why not share it?

why not act according to it?

are you so bored that you waste your and others time in debating something that does not need to be debated?

 

[Guest guest]

Here is a great link with references and resources for further information all about the Aryan Invasion Theory. There are some points AGAINST.

 

http://www.atributetohinduism.com/aryan_invasion_theory.htm

[Dravidian 0]

We all know that "Aryan" refers to the noble class of the vedic peoples, and perhaps the oldest of them the Dravidians. To my understanding, the reason why the caste system is viewed as racial and induism takes the blasm is because this is the kali-yuga. The caste system has been corrupted and twisted into a system of biggetry today. Originally, as Krishna said, the caste system was a way in which to show people how they best served there communities and peoples. It was one's dharmic duty to serve one's peoples in this way. One belonged to a certain caste based on one's virtues as a person. Nothing to do with skin colour. Do not forget that Krishna and Rama were dark skinned and they were the noblest of the noble. The term Varna or colour refers to the caste system, that is correct. But this does not refer to skin colour, but clour of virtue. When one is white in virtue this means purity and the highest of virtuous people in this world. To this class belonged the Brahmins. But the Brahmins had dark skin as well as light skin. Realize the original intent of the caste system was to provide a practical structure for people to serve one's people not racial agenda. But as the Kali-yuga dwaned and progressed, the caste system became tainted. And the virtuous were not so virtuous as there forefathers of the same caste. It came to pass that one who was born to a Brahmin was also a Brahmin...this is not how the original caste system worked. For a non-virtuous person can be born to virtuous people. So the caste system is now a way to keep one's family on top of the social structure to reap the benefits and oppress the others, for it is near impossible to move up in the caste system of today. Originally one had the right to move up or belong to the caste that one deserved to. It is no wonder that outsiders and perhaps many Hindus see the racism and discrimination in their own ways. This is because the ways are asuric and not dharmic as was originally intended.

 

We meditate on the glory of the Creator;

Who has created the Universe;

Who is worthy of Worship;

Who is the embodiment of Knowledge and Light;

Who is the remover of all Sin and Ignorance;

May He enlighten our Intellect.