THE MYTH OF ARYAN INVASION OF INDIA BY: David Frawley

[barney 0]

THE MYTH OF ARYAN INVASION OF INDIA BY: David Frawley

 

One of the main ideas used to interpret—and generally devalue—the ancient history of India is the theory of the Aryan invasion. According to this account, India was invaded and conquered by nomadic light-skinned Indo-European tribes from Central Asia around 1500-1000 BC, who overthrew an earlier and more advanced dark-skinned Dravidian civilization from which they took most of what later became Hindu culture. This so-called pre-Aryan civilization is said to be evidenced by the large urban ruins of what has been called the ‘Indus valley culture’ (as most of its initial sites were on the Indus river). The war between the powers of light and darkness, a prevalent idea in ancient Aryan Vedic scriptures, was thus interpreted to refer to this war between light and dark- skinned peoples. The Aryan invasion theory thus turned the ‘Vedas’, the original scriptures of ancient India and the Indo-Aryans, into little more than primitive poems of uncivilized plunderers.

 

This idea – totally foreign to the history of India, whether north or south – has become almost an unquestioned truth in the interpretation of ancient history. Today, after nearly all the reasons for its supposed validity have been refuted, even major Western scholars are at last beginning to call it in question.

 

In this article we will summarize the main points that have arisen. This is a complex subject that I have dealt with in depth in my book ‘Gods, Sages and Kings: Vedic Secrets of Ancient Civilization’, for those interested in further examination of the subject.

 

The Indus valley culture was pronounced pre-Aryan for several reasons that were largely part of the cultural milieu of nineteenth century European thinking. As scholars following Max Muller had decided that the Aryans came into India around 1500 BC, since the Indus valley culture was earlier than this, they concluded that it had to be pre-Aryan. Yet the rationale behind the late date for the Vedic culture given by Muller was totally speculative. Max Muller, like many of the Christian scholars of his era, believed in Biblical chronology. This placed the beginning of the world at 4000 BC and the flood around 2500 BC. Assuming to those two dates, it became difficult to get the Aryans in India before 1500 BC.

 

Muller therefore assumed that the five layers of the four ‘Vedas’ & ‘Upanishads’ were each composed in 200-year periods before the Buddha at 500 BC. However, there are more changes of language in Vedic Sanskrit itself than there are in classical Sanskrit since Panini, also regarded as a figure of around 500 BC, or a period of 2500 years. Hence it is clear that each of these periods could have existed for any number of centuries and that the 200-year figure is totally arbitrary and is likely too short a figure.

 

It was assumed by these scholars – many of whom were also Christian missionaries unsympathetic to the ‘Vedas’ – that the Vedic culture was that of primitive nomads from Central Asia. Hence they could not have founded any urban culture like that of the Indus valley. The only basis for this was a rather questionable interpretation of the ‘Rig Veda’ that they made, ignoring the sophisticated nature of the culture presented within it.

 

Meanwhile, it was also pointed out that in the middle of the second millennium BC, a number of Indo-European invasions apparently occured in the Middle East, wherein Indo-European peoples – the Hittites, Mittani and Kassites – conquered and ruled Mesopotamia for some centuries. An Aryan invasion of India would have been another version of this same movement of Indo-European peoples. On top of this, excavators of the Indus valley culture, like Wheeler, thought they found evidence of destruction of the culture by an outside invasion confirming this.

 

The Vedic culture was thus said to be that of primitive nomads who came out of Central Asia with their horse-drawn chariots and iron weapons and overthrew the cities of the more advanced Indus valley culture, with their superior battle tactics. It was pointed out that no horses, chariots or iron was discovered in Indus valley sites.

 

This was how the Aryan invasion theory formed and has remained since then. Though little has been discovered that confirms this theory, there has been much hesitancy to question it, much less to give it up.

 

Further excavations discovered horses not only in Indus Valley sites but also in pre-Indus sites. The use of the horse has thus been proven for the whole range of ancient Indian history. Evidence of the wheel, and an Indus seal showing a spoked wheel as used in chariots, has also been found, suggesting the usage of chariots.

 

Moreover, the whole idea of nomads with chariots has been challenged. Chariots are not the vehicles of nomads. Their usage occurred only in ancient urban cultures with much flat land, of which the river plain of north India was the most suitable. Chariots are totally unsuitable for crossing mountains and deserts, as the so-called Aryan invasion required.

 

That the Vedic culture used iron – and must hence date later than the introduction of iron around 1500 BC – revolves around the meaning of the Vedic term ‘ayas’, interpreted as iron. ‘Ayas’ in other Indo–European languages like Latin or German usually means copper, bronze or ore generally, not specially iron. There is no reason to insist that in such earlier Vedic times, ‘ayas’ meant iron, particularly since other metals are not mentioned in the ‘Rig Veda’ (except gold that is much more commonly referred to than ayas). Moreover, the ‘Atharva Veda’ and ‘Yajur Veda’ speak of different colors of ‘ayas’(such as red and black), showing that it was a generic term. Hence it is clear that ‘ayas’ generally meant metal and not specifically iron.

 

Moreover, the enemies of the Vedic people in the ‘Rig Veda’ also use ayas, even for making their cities, as do the Vedic people themselves. Hence there is nothing in Vedic literature to show that either the Vedic culture was an iron-based culture or that their enemies were not.

 

The ‘Rig Veda’ describes its Gods as ‘destroyers of cities’. This was used also to regard the Vedic as a primitive non-urban culture that destroys cities and urban civilization. However, there are also many verses in the ‘Rig Veda’ that speak of the Aryans as having having cities of their own and being protected by cities up to a hundred in number. Aryan Gods like Indra, Agni, Saraswati and the Adityas are praised as being like a city. Many ancient kings, including those of Egypt and Mesopotamia, had titles like destroyer or conqueror of cities. This does not turn them into nomads. Destruction of cities also happens in modern wars; this does not make those who do this nomads. Hence the idea of Vedic culture as destroying but not building the cities is based upon ignoring what the Vedas actually say about their own cities.

 

Further excavation revealed that the Indus Valley culture was not destroyed by outside invasion, but according to internal causes and, most likely, floods. Most recently a new set of cities has been found in India (like the Dwaraka and Bet Dwaraka sites by S.R. Rao and the National Institute of Oceanography in India), which are intermediate between those of the Indus culture and later ancient India as visited by the Greeks. This may eliminate the so-called ‘dark age’ following the presumed Aryan invasion, and shows a continuous urban occupation in India back to the beginning of the Indus culture.

 

The interpretation of the religion of the Indus Valley culture -made incidentally by scholars such as Wheeler who were not religious scholars, much less students of Hinduism – was that its religion was different from the Vedic and more like the later Shaivite religion. However, further excavations – both in Indus Valley sites in Gujarat, like Lothal, and those in Rajasthan, like Kalibangan – show large numbers of fire altars like those used in the Vedic religion, along with bones of oxen, potsherds, shell jewellery and other items used in the rituals described in the ‘Vedic Brahmanas’. Hence the Indus Valley culture evidences many Vedic practices that cannot be merely coincidental. That some of its practices appeared non-Vedic to its excavators may also be attributed to their misunderstanding or lack of knowledge of Vedic and Hindu culture generally, wherein Vedism and Shaivism are the same basic tradition.

 

We must remember that ruins do not necessarily have one interpretation. Nor does the ability to discover ruins necessarily give the ability to interpret them correctly.

 

The Vedic people were thought to have been a fair-skinned race like the Europeans, owing to the Vedic idea of a war between light and darkness, and the Vedic people being presented as children of light or children of the sun. Yet this idea of a war between light and darkness exists in most ancient cultures, including the Persian and the Egyptian. Why don’t we interpret their scriptures as a war between light and dark-skinned people? It is purely a poetic metaphor, not a cultural statement. Moreover, no real traces of such a race are found in India.

 

Anthropologists have observed that the present population of Gujarat is composed of more or less the same ethnic groups as are noticed at Lothal in 2000 BC. Similarly, the present population of the Punjab is said to be ethnically the same as the population of Harappa and Rupar 4000 years ago. Linguistically the present day population of Gujarat and Punjab belongs to the Indo-Aryan language-speaking group. The only inference that can be drawn from the anthropological and linguistic evidences adduced above is that the Harappan population in the Indus Valley and Gujarat in 2000 BC was composed of two or more groups, the more dominant among them having very close ethnic affinities with the present day Indo-Aryan-speaking population of India.

 

In other words there is no racial evidence of any such Indo-Aryan invasion of India but only of a continuity of the same group of people who traditionally considered themselves to be Aryans.

 

There are many points in fact that prove the Vedic nature of the Indus Valley culture. Further excavation has shown that the great majority of the sites of the Indus Valley culture were east, not west of Indus. In fact, the largest concentration of sites appears in an area of Punjab and Rajasthan near the dry banks of ancient Saraswati and Drishadvati rivers. The Vedic culture was said to have been founded by the sage Manu between the banks of Saraswati and Drishadvati rivers. The Saraswati is lauded as the main river (naditama) in the ‘Rig Veda’ & is the most frequently mentioned in the text. It is said to be a great flood and to be wide, even endless in size. Saraswati is said to be ‘pure in course from the mountains to the sea’. Hence the Vedic people were well acquainted with this river and regarded it as their immemorial homeland.

 

The Saraswati, as modern land studies now reveal, was indeed one of the largest, if not the largest river in India. In early ancient and pre-historic times, it once drained the Sutlej, Yamuna and the Ganges, whose courses were much different than they are today. However, the Saraswati river went dry at the end of the Indus Valley culture and before the so-called Aryan invasion, or before 1500 BC. In fact this may have caused the ending of the Indus culture. How could the Vedic Aryans know of this river and establish their culture on its banks if it dried up before they arrived? Indeed the Saraswati as described in the ‘Rig Veda’ appears to more accurately show it as it was prior to the Indus Valley culture, as in the Indus era it was already in decline.

 

Vedic and late Vedic texts also contain interesting astronomical lore. The Vedic calendar was based upon astronomical sightings of the equinoxes and solstices. Such texts as ‘Vedanga Jyotish’ speak of a time when the vernal equinox was in the middle of the Nakshtra Aslesha (or about 23 degrees 20 minutes Cancer). This gives a date of 1300 BC. The ‘Yajur Veda’ and ‘Atharva Veda’ speak of the vernal equinox in the Krittikas (Pleiades; early Taurus) and the summer solstice (ayana) in Magha (early Leo). This gives a date about 2400 BC. Yet earlier eras are mentioned but these two have numerous references to substantiate them. They prove that the Vedic culture existed at these periods and already had a sophisticated system of astronomy. Such references were merely ignored or pronounced unintelligible by Western scholars because they yielded too early a date for the ‘Vedas’ than what they presumed, not because such references did not exist.

 

Vedic texts like ‘Shatapatha Brahmana’ and ‘Aitereya Brahmana’ that mention these astronomical references, list a group of 11 Vedic Kings, including a number of figures of the ‘Rig Veda’, said to have conquered the region of India from ‘sea to sea’. Lands of the Aryans are mentioned in them from Gandhara (Afghanistan) in the west to Videha (Nepal) in the east, and south to Vidarbha (Maharashtra). Hence the Vedic people were in these regions by the Krittika equinox or before 2400 BC. These passages were also ignored by Western scholars and it was said by them that the ‘Vedas’ had no evidence of large empires in India in Vedic times. Hence a pattern of ignoring literary evidence or misinterpreting them to suit the Aryan invasion idea became prevalent, even to the point of changing the meaning of Vedic words to suit this theory.

 

According to this theory, the Vedic people were nomads in the Punjab, coming down from Central Asia. However, the ‘Rig Veda’ itself has nearly 100 references to ocean (samudra), as well as dozens of references to ships, and to rivers flowing in to the sea. Vedic ancestors like Manu, Turvasha, Yadu and Bhujyu are flood figures, saved from across the sea. The Vedic God of the sea, Varuna, is the father of many Vedic seers and seer families like Vasishta, Agastya and the Bhrigu seers. To preserve the Aryan invasion idea it was assumed that the Vedic (and later sanskrit) term for ocean, ‘samudra’, originally did not mean the ocean but any large body of water, especially the Indus river in Punjab. Here the clear meaning of a term in ‘Rig Veda’ and later times – verified by rivers like Saraswati mentioned by name as flowing into the sea – was altered to make the Aryan invasion theory fit. Yet if we look at the index to translation of the ‘Rig Veda’ by Griffith for example, who held to this idea that ‘samudra’ didn’t really mean the ocean, we find over 70 references to ocean or sea. If ‘samudra’ does not mean ocean, why was it translated as such? It is therefore without basis to locate Vedic kings in Central Asia far from any ocean or from the massive Saraswati river, which form the background of their land and the symbolism of their hymns.

 

One of the latest archeological ideas is that the Vedic culture is evidenced by Painted Grey Ware pottery in north India, which appears to date around 1000 BC, and comes from the same region between the Ganges and Yamuna as later Vedic culture is related to. It is thought to be an inferior grade of pottery, and to be associated with the use of iron that the ‘Vedas’ are thought to mention. However it is associated with a pig and rice culture, not the cow and barley culture of the ‘Vedas’. Moreover it is now found to be an organic development of indigenous pottery, not an introduction of invaders.

 

Painted Grey Ware culture represents an indigenous cultural development and does not reflect any cultural intrusion from the West i.e. an Indo-Aryan invasion. Therefore, there is no archeological evidence corroborating the fact of an Indo-Aryan invasion.

 

In addition, the Aryans in the Middle East, most notably the Hittites, have now been found to have been in that region at least as early as 2200 BC, wherein they are already mentioned. Hence the idea of an Aryan invasion into the Middle East has been pushed back some centuries, though the evidence so far is that the people of the mountain regions of the Middle East were Indo-Europeans as far as recorded history can prove.

 

The Aryan Kassites of the ancient Middle East worshipped Vedic Gods like Surya and the Maruts, as well as one named Himalaya. The Aryan Hittites and Mittani signed a treaty with the name of the Vedic Gods Indra, Mitra, Varuna and Nasatyas around 1400 BC. The Hittites have a treatise on chariot racing written in almost pure Sanskrit. The Indo – Europeans of the ancient Middle East thus spoke Indo-Aryan, not Indo-Iranian languages, and thereby show a Vedic culture in that region of the world as well.

 

The Indus Valley culture had a form of writing, as evidenced by numerous seals found in the ruins. It was also assumed to be non-Vedic and probably Dravidian, though this was never proved. Now it has been shown that the majority of the late Indus signs are identical with those of later Hindu Brahmi, and that there is an organic development between the two scripts. Prevalent models now suggest an Indo-European base for that language.

 

It was also assumed that the Indus Valley culture derived its civilization from the Middle East, probably Sumeria, as antecedents for it were not found in India. Recent French excavations at Mehrgarh have shown that all the antecedents of the Indus Valley culture can be found within the subcontinent, and going back before 6000 BC.

 

In short, some Western scholars are beginning to reject the Aryan invasion or any outside origin for Hindu civilization.

 

Current archeological data do not support the existence of an Indo- Aryan or European invasion into South Asia at any time in the pre- or protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural development from prehistoric to historic periods. The early Vedic literature describes not a human invasion into the area, but a fundamental restructuring of indigenous society. The Indo-Aryan invasion as an academic concept in 18th and 19th century Europe reflected the cultural milieu of the period. Linguistic data were used to validate the concept, that in turn was used to interpret archeological and anthropological data.

 

In other words, Vedic literature was interpreted on the assumption that there was an Aryan invasion. Then archeological evidence was interpreted by the same assumption. And both interpretations were then used to justify each other. It is nothing but a tautology, an exercise in circular thinking that only proves that if assuming something is true, it is found to be true!

 

Another modern Western scholar, Colin Renfrew, places the Indo- Europeans in Greece as early as 6000 BC. He also suggests such a possible early date for their entry into India.

 

As far as I can see there is nothing in the Hymns of the ‘Rig Veda’ which demonstrates that the Vedic-speaking population was intrusive to the area: this comes rather from a historical assumption of the ‘coming of the Indo-Europeans’.

 

When Wheeler speaks of ‘the Aryan invasion of the land of the 7 rivers, the Punjab’, he has no warranty at all, so far as I can see. If one checks the dozen references in the ‘Rig Veda’ to the 7 rivers, there is nothing in them that to me implies invasion: the land of the 7 rivers is the land of the ‘Rig Veda’, the scene of action. Nor is it implied that the inhabitants of the walled cities (including the Dasyus) were any more aboriginal than the Aryans themselves.

 

Despite Wheeler’s comments, it is difficult to see what is particularly non-Aryan about the Indus Valley civilization. Hence Renfrew suggests that the Indus Valley civilization was in fact Indo-Aryan even prior to the Indus Valley era:

 

This hypothesis that early Indo-European languages were spoken in North India with Pakistan and on the Iranian plateau at the 6th millennium BC, has the merit of harmonizing symmetrically with the theory for the origin of the Indo- European languages in Europe. It also emphasizes the continuity in the Indus Valley and adjacent areas, from the early neolithic through to the floruit of the Indus Valley civilization.

 

This is not to say that such scholars appreciate or understand the ‘Vedas’ – their work leaves much to be desired in this respect – but that it is clear that the whole edifice built around the Aryan invasion is beginning to tumble on all sides. In addition, it does not mean that the ‘Rig Veda’ dates from the Indus Valley era. The Indus Valley culture resembles that of the ‘Yajur Veda’ and they reflect the pre-Indus period in India, when the Saraswati river was more prominent.

 

The acceptance of such views would create a revolution in our view of history, as shattering as that in science caused by Einstein’s theory of relativity. It would make ancient India perhaps the oldest, largest and most central of ancient cultures. It would mean that the Vedic literary record – already the largest and oldest of the ancient world even at a 1500 BC date – would be the record of teachings some centuries or thousands of years before that. It would mean that the ‘Vedas’ are our most authentic record of the ancient world. It would also tend to validate the Vedic view that the Indo-Europeans and other Aryan peoples were migrants from India, not that the Indo-Aryans were invaders into India. Moreover, it would affirm the Hindu tradition that the Dravidians were early offshoots of the Vedic people through the seer Agastya, and not unaryan peoples.

 

In closing, it is important to examine the social and political implications of the Aryan invasion idea:

 

First, it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other. This kept the Hindus divided and is still a source of social tension.

 

Second, it gave the British an excuse in their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago.

 

Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from Middle Eastern cultures. With the proximity and relationship of the latter with the Bible and Christianity, this kept the Hindu religion as a sidelight to the development of religion and civilization to the West.

 

Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis, as any Vedic basis was largely disqualified by the primitive nature of the Vedic culture.

 

This discredited not only the ‘Vedas’ but the genealogies of the ‘Puranas’, and their long list of the kings before the Buddha or Krishna were left without any historical basis. The ‘Mahabharata’, instead of a civil war in which all the main kings of India participated as it is described, became a local skirmish among petty princes that was later exaggerated by poets. In short, it discredited most of the Hindu tradition and almost all its ancient literature. It turned its scriptures and sages into fantasies and exaggerations.

 

This served a social, political and economical purpose of domination, proving the superiority of Western culture and religion. It made the Hindus feel that their culture was not the great thing that their sages and ancestors had said it was. It made Hindus feel ashamed of their culture – that its basis was neither historical nor scientific. It made them feel that the main line of civilization was developed first in the Middle East and then in Europe and that the culture of India was peripheral and secondary to the real development of world culture.

 

Such a view is not good scholarship or archeology but merely cultural imperialism. The Western Vedic scholars did in the intellectual sphere what the British army did in the political realm – discredit, divide and conquer the Hindus.

 

In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary nor archeological but political and religious – that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice. Such prejudice may not have been intentional, but deep-seated political and religious views easily cloud and blur our thinking.

 

It is unfortunate that this approach has not been questioned more, particularly by Hindus. Even though Indian Vedic scholars like Dayananda Saraswati, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Aurobindo rejected it, most Hindus today passively accept it. They allow Western, generally Christian, scholars to interpret their history for them, and quite naturally Hinduism is kept in a reduced role. Many Hindus still accept, read or even honor the translations of the ‘Vedas’ done by such Christian missionary scholars as Max Muller, Griffith, Monier- Williams and H. H. Wilson. Would modern Christians accept an interpretation of the Bible or Biblical history done by Hindus, aimed at converting them to Hinduism? Universities in India also use the Western history books and Western Vedic translations that propound such views that denigrate their own culture and country.

 

The modern Western academic world is sensitive to critisms of cultural and social biases. For scholars to take a stand against this biased interpretation of the ‘Vedas’ would indeed cause a reexamination of many of these historical ideas that can not stand objective scrutiny. But if Hindu scholars are silent or passively accept the misinterpretation of their own culture, it will undoubtedly continue, but they will have no one to blame but themselves. It is not an issue to be taken lightly, because how a culture is defined historically creates the perspective from which it is viewed in the modern social and intellectual context. Tolerance is not in allowing a false view of one’s own culture and religion to be propagated without question. That is merely self-betrayal.

 

[Guest guest]

You can wake a person who is asleep. But you cannot wake one who is acting to be asleep.

 

Hope this well written article puts to rest the quaetions of people who are asleep.

 

Well you cannot help the other category

 

[maadhav 0]

<< You can wake a person who is asleep. But you cannot wake one who is acting to be asleep. >>

 

true.

we need to discuss how to wake the sleeping hindus,

and then do it.

 

now, i am interested to know,

why any hindu would pretened to be sleeping when he is awake? what interest is served by acting like that?

 

[Guest guest]

I am a tamil guy and am aware of the politics of tamil nadu.

It is ultimately the question of satisfying the power hunger of politicians, who would brainwash people to preend they are asleep.

 

Karunanidhi will go to temples in secret, he will do special poojas for his longevity, and all that, yet he will say Hindus are fools. He will say fasting for Ramalan is good for health, but he will make fun of Ayyappa devotees.

 

Awakening ...., we need somebody like Shankara, or Ramana or some Hindu revivalistic politicians, who can tear down the false veil of secularism in the country and liberate people.

[Guest guest]

"why any hindu would pretened to be sleeping when he is awake? what interest is served by acting like that?"

 

I think what he (or she) meant was that there are some Hindus who know that we have problems with certian other religions and types of people, know that Hindusim is being misrepresented on a large scale and know that if we don't act now, there will be far less of us in the future. But for those Hindus who may want to stand up for their religion but because of all the opposing shouts from the 'self-proclaimed secularists' marxist supporters and those representing Abrahamic faiths they choose to back down as they are accussed of being Hindutva-supporters, even though they don't want to be a part of Hindutva either. In the end they do nothing. It seems that even if a Hindu is genuinely interested in his/her religion and preserving it, they are labelled with the the tag of 'Hindutva' by those who are against Hinduism. I know quite a number of people like this. The way you handle this is you make these injustices more visible, you talk to expose the prejudices against Hindus, you bring it to people's attention and get them thinking, only then you'll find after a while people are forced to change. I know of some Hindus who were once sleepers, who have woken up after much honest reflection. Of course there are also those who are just plain lazy...tamas guna is ahold of them, or those who wish they were westeners or something else, this is usually due to the inferiority complex some carry.

 

Speak the truth always, even if it hurts.

 

[Guest guest]

who've been brought up to believe the AIT is true. How many scholars dismiss the AIT theory now anyway?

 

Any ideas?

 

I'm familiar with David Frawley, but is there anyone else that supports his stance and approaching it from an outside perspective (i.e. not Krishna conscious, not Hindu, etc.)?

[maadhav 0]

Aryan invasion was a theory - a fabrication.

 

there is no solid scientific evidence to support it.

AIT got a final blow when saraswati river mentioned in the vedas was found - dried up - by the satellite pictures.

 

now, if some one chooses to not to believe it,

then he has right to think that way - has right to remain in ignorance, or propagete the false theory still furhter.

for dirty political reasons.

 

on the other hand,

those who know the truth hve the duty to spread the truth.

 

we do not need - encyclopedia britanica or any such book made by non-hindus or anti hindus.

 

we need vedic encycopedia of our own, made by our own top vedic swamis and scholars. then we can refer to it when some one lies.

 

 

[xxvvii 0]

You can wake a person who is asleep. But you cannot wake one who is acting to be asleep.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Awakening ...., we need somebody like Shankara, or Ramana or some Hindu revivalistic politicians, who can tear down the false veil of secularism in the country and liberate people.

-------------------

If you bought luxuries with all money, you could be bankrupt at once & couldn't be regard as a rich man. On the other hand, if you keep earning, you may be a rich man one day. Besides, I don't think either nationalism & secularism to be a part of dharma. The former is applied to a certain nationality & the latter is ass.ed with secular affairs.

 

Aryan invasion was a theory - a fabrication.

-------------------

What I concern is the ownership of land, which I have repeated for many times. Who are you, the owners?

[Guest guest]

maybe the Indus civilization was very diverse in ethnicity or skin color?

 

 

[Guest guest]

I was scouring amazon.com for books by David Frawley when i came upon The Search of the Cradle of Civilization. I was scanning the reviews for this book, and I found a person's comments that seemed to make some good points. The comments are posted below:

 

 

"I have a great deal of respect for the scholarship of David Frawley and Georg Feuerstein when it comes to the philosophy of yoga and ayurveda. However, in the book In Search of the Cradle of Civilization, their usual erudite scholarship appears to be based more on myth than on reality. In attempting to debunk the Aryan Invasion Theory, they are instead creating a new, bogus theory based on an overzealous and often inaccurate interpretation of Vedic philosophy, history, rites and (oh yes!) myth.

 

But, who can blame them! It is not an easy task to make sense of Indian history, especially its prehistory.

The first and main mistake these authors make (and they are not alone in doing so!) is to lump most all of Indian history and spirituality into an omnipresent Vedic history lesson. In reality, India is composed of two distinct, yet often co-mingling rivers of rites and spiritual practice: the Vedic and the Tantric.

 

Unlike Frawley and Feuerstein, Tantric historians, such as NN Bahttacharya, and Tantric masters, such as P. R. Sarkar, draw a clear distinction between Aryan and Dravidyan culture and history. The Aryans were predominantly Vedic and the Dravidyans Tantric. Although over thousands of years, these two cultural rivers joined and became what we now call Hindu culture. And, yes, these tantric scholars also claim, that indeed there was an Aryan invasion. Not always violent, and not a sudden one either.

 

The Aryans arrived from central Asia, Iran and Afganistan over a period of thousands of years, and settled first in what is today Kashmir. It was here, claims Sarkar, that the Vedas were first written down in the Sarada script.

 

There are four Vedas, and according to these tantric historians, the Rigveda is the oldest and was mostly composed outside of India. Frawley et al maintains it was composed in India, of course. But the fact that a lot of the Rigveda contains material seemingly indigenous to India is likely due to the fact that it was never written down before thousands of years later, after many linguistic and cultural changes throughout its long oral history on Indian soil!

 

One example of such indigenous Indian influence on the Aryan Vedas can be seen especially in the fourth and often neglected Atharvaveda. As Frawley et al writes: "...many Vedic thinkers have had an ambivalent attitude toward the Atharvaveda." Yes, indeed. And part of the reason for that is that this Veda was greatly influenced by Tantra. P. R. Sarkar points out for example that the Nrsimha Tapaniiya Shruti was far more influenced by "the non-Aryan Tantra than of the Aryan Veda."

 

One important archeological fact mentioned in the book is the pashupati seal, which depict God Shiva, the Lord of the Beasts. P. R. Sarkar points out that this seal is an example of the indigenous tantric symbolism of the Harappan culture. The esoteric Tantric meaning of this seal is that Shiva is the controller of the pashus, the animal desires of man. And, contrary to Vedic scholars, Shiva is not just a mythological God, he was, according to the Tantric tradition, an historical person. Like Buddha and Krishna, he was a great spiritual leader who systematized yogic practices, invented the octave, Indian classical dance (thus he was called Nataraja, the great dancer) and systematized ayurvedic medicine. Shiva lived in India around 5000 BCE, the time when Aryans already had settled in the north of India.

 

So, the great limitation of this book is that it completely discounts this "other" aspect of Indian history. Indeed, it claims that this historical struggle between Tantrics and vedic peoples and their gradual co-mingling never really took place at all.

 

But if the rich tantric history and tradition of India is unable to sway these scholars, maybe western genetic science will.

Recent genetic discoveries by Dr. Spencer Wells (documented in his book Journey of Man) shows that there were at least two large migrations into India, one by dark skinned people from Africa via the coast and then into Australia, and another by (indeed) lighter skinned people from central Asia. By sampling DNA of people in a village close to Madurai in Tamil Nadu, Dr Wells spotted a genetic mutation that had been passed on to aborginial people in Australia - thus offering the first biological proof that African ancestors of the Australian natives passed through India on the way to their new home. He also proved that later the people who moved into India in the north indeed were of Aryan stock.

 

There is also now some historical and archaeological evidence which suggests that as the Aryans came in, they intermarried with indigenous people and also absorbed many of them into their system of ranking.

 

Frawley et al dismiss this theory as a myth, claiming it "devalues" India's history. Now, however, genetic studies have produced strong evidence supporting the theory. A team led by Michael Bamshad of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City compared the DNA of 265 Indian men from different castes with DNA from nearly 750 African, European, Asian and other Indian men.

 

First, they analysed mitochondrial DNA, which people only inherit from their mothers. When the researchers looked at specific sets of genes that tend to be inherited as a unit, they found about 20 to 30 per cent of the Indian sets resembled those in Europeans. The percentage was highest in upper caste males. Overall, though, each caste resembled other Asians most.

 

Indeed, the proof of the Aryan Invasion can be found in the current DNA science and, for those who want to look beyond the Vedas, in the vast cultural heritage of India itself. As Sarkar claimed, "even today the civilization of modern India is intrinsically Tantric. On the outside only is there a Vedic stamp."

 

Roar Bjonnes"

 

[Guest guest]

The aryan invasion can not be proven really. But it can't be unproven either in my opinion. It is all specilation. The vedic people say they have literature that is supposedly 5000 years old or more, but this is all specultaion too. Why is it so important to "prove" the aryan invasion is a myth for the vedic people? Because they want to be somehow superior. It is the same with all religions. They want to convert people and be seen as the "best". It is all just another form of materialism and sectarianism. These anti-aryan-invasion people are simply interested in lording it over others and inflating thier superiority complexes. Ego is thier fuel. I say it is all specultaion, and a complete distaction from genuine spiritual developement. Give it up people! Focus on what matters. Renounce your egos!

 

 

[Guest guest]

You're right and you're wrong. It's about knowing our roots and our culture. Maybe it brings about superiority complex, but it is not the REASON why we seek to discredit the aryan invasion theory. It is not the reason why we need to know. If the aryan invasion theory were true, much of our actual heritage is lost, much of what we seek to practice spiritually is foreign to our lands and came from hypocrisy. The idea that barbarians came to our lands and exerted a racist influence in our culture, yet still proclaim all is God is rather hypocritical don't you think?

 

And it does open up the country to division, not to mention actually SUBVERTS Hinduism so that Christianity and other religions become superior anyway.

[Guest guest]

"First, they analysed mitochondrial DNA, which people only inherit from their mothers. When the researchers looked at specific sets of genes that tend to be inherited as a unit, they found about 20 to 30 per cent of the Indian sets resembled those in Europeans. The percentage was highest in upper caste males. Overall, though, each caste resembled other Asians most."

 

Well this may have NOTHING to do with 'Aryan' invaders who brought the Vedas to India and more to do with the offspring of 'other' Invaders such as the Greeks, Persians, etc, who are genetically more closer to Europeans.

 

 

"And it does open up the country to division, not to mention actually SUBVERTS Hinduism so that Christianity and other religions become superior anyway."

 

I don't see how! Even supposing IF the AIT was true Hinduism has survived through it's Sages (who as far as we know have mainly been Indian) it had developled and grown with Indians. And the Aryan Euro's are no more today (to do with Hinduism), so who's the losers?

 

Christianity can never look superior, don't you know their history...they have blood on their hands which they can't walk away from as it's more recent, like the crusades, forced conversions, the inquisition, burning of 'pagans', etc. They used almost any means possible to convert and it's embrassing for them when people bring up their past.

 

[Guest guest]

AIT has been used to make the caste system into a racial issue. Christian missionaries capitalize this and try to convert lower-caste Hindus into Christians, like the Dalits.

 

It's not that hard to understand.

 

IF AIT is true, then there IS no Hinduism but Tantric Hinduism, since that's supposedly the indigenous religion unaffected by the invaders to some extent.

 

The Vedic Hinduism is nothing but a religion that was introduced by barbarians. What Indian, if AIT was proven, would want to be associated with a religion such as that then?

 

 

[Guest guest]

whats the point of knowing you so-called roots and culture accept to learn lessons from it about how to live now. It is not enough to just say "our race came from such and such and they believed in such and such". I think you should all just get your heads out of the so-called past and live life in the present. Sure the vedas have some good lessons to learn, some wisdom. What difference does it make whether they are literal history or not? Just learn the lessons and apply them to life now. Who cares if someone invaded this way or that. It's not the present reality. It is the past. Get over it. Look around yourself and live your life before its finished. Read your books and learn the lessons that are applicable and move on.

 

It is useless to worship the past! It is nothing but stagnation!

[Guest guest]

Nor does it matter. If you don't care, why participate in the thread? Live YOUR life, but I'd like to know the truth.

 

 

[Guest guest]

"The Vedic Hinduism is nothing but a religion that was introduced by barbarians. What Indian, if AIT was proven, would want to be associated with a religion such as that then?"

 

Well I don't see any Muslims in India ashamed of what the Mughals did, why should Hindus be different? The point I was making IF AIT was true is that Hinduism as far as we know has produced great INDIAN sages (we don't know of any Aryan-euro) so they're irrelevant. It's based on the accumulated spiritual laws discovedred by different Indian sages at different times. Certainly in Mahabharata 'the Vedic religion' looks like an deep, noble and spiritual way of life to be proud of, I don't see any 'barbarians invaders' there.

 

I'm sorry but I think those Indians who are affected if AIT is true, are truly weak-minded individuals who know very little of the greatness Hinduism has played in the past. If it really WAS this barbarism in the early days...look at how well it has evolved...you can't really ignore the strength of the hindus whose civilisation the christians and muslims tried to wipe out but has managed to survive for so long, whereas others fell and were converted.

 

If the lower-caste Hinduism see the caste system as a racial issue (if the AIT was true) the shouldn't all the lower castes revert back to Tantric Hinduism? Wouldn't that be far more sensible than converting to Christianity? If they really didn't want to be Hindu, it would be better they become Buddhist or Sikh than Christian!

 

[Guest guest]

none of the Puranas, none of the Mahabharata, none of the Ramayana is likely to have happened. At the very least, those incarnations of Vishnu turn out to be mere ordinary men, and India is deprived of any kind of claim that God walked on that land once. Hinduism becomes deprived of any presence of God whatsoever, and its claim that it has existed since time immemorial is completely shattered. Any mystique Hinduism has, is gone then.

 

And if you really don't believe that things such as AIT should bother a Hindu, you're really living in a different world. In America, there are a ton of misconceptions about Hinduism, and it doesn't all come from outsiders. Even born Hindus are ashamed to admit they're Hindu simply because they were taught possibly Euro-centric ideas about what Hinduism is and how it was founded.

 

They're not weak-minded, they just don't value the type of religion that Hinduism would become if the AIT is true. And it would be no wonder if they converted to another religion or became atheist.

 

The Bhagavad-Gita becomes just another book, for instance. The Vedas become just "historical" records that should be looked on with disgust. The Mahabharata and Ramayana would be looked upon as superstitious ramblings of ancient Indians, and nothing more than that. All this would be the perspective that Hindus would hold of their own religion if the AIT were true.

[Guest guest]

It seems to me that you're very relient on what is termed "Hindu mythology" and less on spirituality - which is the basis of Hinduism. The people we have which history cannot deny are great Sages who come quite often to teach the same spiritual truths to people of every generation. Rama and Krishna DO NO NEED to be accepted as Avtars, some Hindus do accept them and some Hindus don't, but we are not compelled to accept them. Even some Sages didn't believe they were historical and see the Gita as a book to show you how to live the Upanishadic teachings in everyday life and Krishna is a symbol of Brahman (Paramatma). But the people of authority have always been the sages, though differences of opinion are due to which sect a Hindu belongs to. To be honest with you I don't believe in the Puranas, they are far-fetched, the Ramayana and Mahabharata come under Itihaas, which means they are historical epics and as they are poetry, they contain similes and metaphors need to be interpreted correctly or else they will translate as mythology like you see on Zee TV.

 

"In America, there are a ton of misconceptions about Hinduism, and it doesn't all come from outsiders. Even born Hindus are ashamed to admit they're Hindu simply because they were taught possibly Euro-centric ideas about what Hinduism is and how it was founded."

 

And who's fault is that? It's the Hindus themselves for failing to represent Hinduism properly! There are Hindu leaders who have tackled these misconceptions but most of the Hindu public is unaware. I have come across American Hindus and to generalise most of them are very materialisic and lazy when it comes to religion - they want eveyone else to do work for Hinduism but not themselves, they prefer to keep quiet and make money...until they drop dead. They are more interested in looking non-indian or at bollywood films, religion to them is "too hard to understand", so they decide not to even make the effort. If Hindus have this sort of attitude, muppets like Wendy Doniger are going to take advantage of the situation and sling mud at Hindus. My friend, when you brake it down to the basics, the simple fact is some (not all) Hindus suffer from an inferiority complex whereby if the AIT was true they would be ashamed of being Hindus. They don't look at people of other religions such as Christianity & Islam who were invading and converting throughout history most people who today follow those religions...yet they never complain about their history.

 

Even if they aryans were invaders there is nothing you can do, their blood is running through your veins along with all the blood of all other people who have invaded India. It's long gone pre-history! The aryans would now be a depleted race...or they are us. By the way most scholars who once believed in the AIT are now pushing the Aryan MIGRATION theory, as there is no evidence of an Invasion at that period taking place.

[Dravidian 0]

I'm glad that this was posted for I was going to do the same thing since there were so many discussions on it. Many scholars now dismiss the AIT. I am a University student and study religion of all kinds, but mostly Vedic religion. The scholars in my philosophy department also dismiss the AIT, and I'm sure the same goes for scholars at many other universities.

 

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.

[Guest guest]

Maybe they don't believe an invasion happened, but they probably believe in aryan migration theory. I don't see that much dissent for the Aryan Invasion/Migration theory among scholars in the West. Maybe more in the East, but there don't seem to be many in the West who disbelieve the Aryan migration/invasion theory.

 

If you can point me to articles of dissent written by someone not of Indian origin, nor having to do with Hinduism, particularly in the West, I'd appreciate it.

[Dravidian 0]

<<The aryan invasion can not be proven really. But it can't be unproven either in my opinion. It is all specilation. The vedic people say they have literature that is supposedly 5000 years old or more, but this is all specultaion too. Why is it so important to "prove" the aryan invasion is a myth for the vedic people? Because they want to be somehow superior. It is the same with all religions. They want to convert people and be seen as the "best". It is all just another form of materialism and sectarianism. These anti-aryan-invasion people are simply interested in lording it over others and inflating thier superiority complexes. Ego is thier fuel. I say it is all specultaion, and a complete distaction from genuine spiritual developement. Give it up people! Focus on what matters. Renounce your egos!>>

 

 

The guest that wrote this appears to be one not indian due the response. How would you feel if outsiders tried to usurp your ways and claim that your ancestors were nothing but tribal ignorants that knew nothing of God before they came along?! Though I may not lash out, it strikes anger in my heart and is insulting.

 

Furthermore, it says nowhere in the Vedic literature to convert people. Hinduism is not about converting people at all, tolerance is a staple feature of following the vedas. None of this would really matter if the AIT was not put forth and held as truth. But falsity has been spoken in such a way that it slanders the heritage and name of a people. Would you not agree that truth must take it's place?

 

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.

[Dravidian 0]

<<<The people we have which history cannot deny are great Sages who come quite often to teach the same spiritual truths to people of every generation. Rama and Krishna DO NO NEED to be accepted as Avtars, some Hindus do accept them and some Hindus don't, but we are not compelled to accept them. Even some Sages didn't believe they were historical and see the Gita as a book to show you how to live the Upanishadic teachings in everyday life and Krishna is a symbol of Brahman (Paramatma). But the people of authority have always been the sages, though differences of opinion are due to which sect a Hindu belongs to. To be honest with you I don't believe in the Puranas, they are far-fetched, the Ramayana and Mahabharata come under Itihaas, which means they are historical epics and as they are poetry, they contain similes and metaphors need to be interpreted correctly or else they will translate as mythology like you see on Zee TV.>>>

 

I would like to reply to the guest that wrote this. I understand the view you are coming from for I was there once. You have your reasons for thinking what you do and I don't blame you at all. And it is due to the western ideas of hindus and the east that you may see the puranas and the great epics the way you do. But I have come to regard the puranas and eipcs as true events that occured. It may seem far fetched depending on how you view it. You see, in the ancient times, the vedic people were technologically advanced and were able to do the so called "far fetched" things. The demigods or devas are also higher beings that live on other planets and other realms. If you believe in alliens, then you can believe in the devas. The devas are technologically and spiritually advanced beyond what we are right now. But there was a time when the devas spoke to our ancestors like people speak to each other today, because the ancient vedic people were advanced enough to understand communication with the devas in such a manner. It would be different now, for our civilization has greatly de-evolved. How would you speak to an animal? How would you communicate all the knowledge that you understand on your level to the level of a dog or cat (for lack of a better analogy)?

 

 

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.

[brinthan 0]

Aryan Migration Theory could be true. I did'nt believe in AIT or AMT until one of my teacher who have studied philosophy and tamil literatures well brought up the discussion about it. Whatever he said made a lot of sense. He said that pooja for long life, for better marriage life, pooja women do for their husband's health came after Aryan migrated in India. As evidences, he showed that there are no Dravidian scriptures which have been written before Aryan migration date mention anything about the those type of pooja. And he says that Aryan brought up the different kind of poojas, different gods and the caste system to rule peacfully over the Dravidian. People would be busy doing poojas and worshipping different gods thinking that they are suffering because of god, and if they do those kind of poojas they'll get a better life. So, people won't have time or thoughts of who is ruling them. And the caste system were created to make the dravidians fight each other, so they won't have time to fight aryans.

 

Those things could be facts. If you read dravidian scriputres which were written before aryan migrated to India, you'll find absolutely no mentions about different gods. And Naajanmaarkal only worshipped Shiva, their songs are about Shiva. And they say that you are god, and if you mind is pure, you don't have to worship god. They say your mind is everything. Your mind is the powerful thing in the world. And a lot of tamil politians who have studied tamil literatures in the past did believe that. for example: Arijar Anna, Kamarajar. They believed in Aryan Migration theory. They are not the kind of politians who wanted to rule over the people. They are considered as gods in Tamil Nadu now.

 

If you see that, that would explain a lot of things. Chrisitian miracles are formed because all the christians are gathered together to pray for others as well. So, when all the minds are get together and pray for something to happen, that thing happens because of the powers of the mind. I'm a hindu, so people don't tell me that I'm an outsider and I'm trying to create a fight between hindus. I'm just posting whatever I just learnt, and expecting someone to correct my mistake, if I'm making one.

[Dravidian 0]

If you want some articles check Dr. David Frawley and for more sites:

 

http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/ReportEssay/Science/Social%5CAryan_Invasion_Theory.htm

 

http://www.worldhistory.com/wiki/A/Aryan-invasion-theory.htm

 

http://climbtothestars.org/writing/aryan/

 

http://www.uni-giessen.de/~gk1415/indus_history.htm

 

http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/read/1040

 

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/scholars_of_false_history_of_india_are_a_dying_breed.htm

 

historyspeek

 

There is much much more out there, all you have to do is search with a pure heart. If people really wanted to know they would search themselves. But I have done some work for them, the rest is up to you.

 

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.

 

[moderator's note: link shortened to keep page onscreen]