Question:
Aryans, the destroyers of Dravidian culture?
k
2010-07-21 02:08:16 UTC
In india, so many academic books, history books are saying that aryans from europe or middle asia came to india, destroyed the culture of native people, and slaughtered them and they pushed the native people to south india, the native people are called dravidians. So all i want to know is why south india practising hinduism which is foreign religion to this country. sanskrit is a foreign language to india, the languages that are spoken in north india derived from sanskrit, so hindi is a foreign language to india and national language of india, why?.. who really aryan gods are, who really dravidian gods. why aryans came to india in 1500, and why they wrote vedas,puranas etc... and why they are converted dravidians to hinduism. so if aryan race and dravidian race are still exist in india i mean the government of india accepted aryan invasion theory. Does it mean that dravidians need a seperate nation, why india can't split into two nations like south and north.. i mean north people are foreigners living in this country and ruling south people, how shame is that.. why south india doesnt have its own origins........
Sixteen answers:
Rajyavardhan
2010-07-21 18:01:12 UTC
Aryan Invasion is true according to all valid sources.People accepted Vedic religion in the same way how people accepted Islam and Christianity when these religions arrived in India.Indo-Aryan and Dravidian are different groups of languages(also the two groups are racially and genetically different).The Hinduism in South India was introduced by Aryan sages who crossed Vindhyas.The Aryans who conquered local people in the north introduced the Vedic Religion and also they accepted the gods of local population.

Hindi is the most recent language where as dravidian languages are the most ancient.As ancient as sanskrit.The Proto-Dravidian language is the most ancient language which became extinct now but it s remnants are found in dravidian languages. According to the recent CCMB-Harvard research it has been proved that Indian population can be divided into two groups ,the descendants of ancestral north and the descendants of ancestral south Indians.There was intermixing between the invaders and the local population and the interaction for generations led to the formation of roughly homogeneous Indian culture.Read the Ancient History of India,you will understand everything .
2014-11-19 00:25:47 UTC
why don't white people mind their own business? seriously f off! whites seem to be the only race so obsessed with our culture considering they got caught for their own lies.
indus
2010-07-21 04:18:14 UTC
I dont know which nation u belong to ,.

but understand single concept , India was only colonized as nation only at the time of british ,. Today's India was once group of small kingdom nations , and these disorganized kingdoms were fighting amongst themselves to conquer other kingdoms ,

Being kingdom nations if a Muslim king conquer a Hindu nation, the nation will be made in to a Muslim nation , its simple that way to spread both language and religion ,



"So all i want to know is why south india practising hinduism which is foreign religion to this country"

Why most of the world follow Christianity in which is just 2000 years old and and which is born in Arab land ?



BTW for ur question "Aryans, the destroyers of Dravidian culture "?

ofcoz but the fighting among themselves had made Dravidian not to spread on northern parts of today's India ,. but the fact is Dravidian still flourish in south asia ,

i don't have any idea what was native Dravidian religion , But Dravidian are not converted by Aryans in 1500 ,. but there are temples which are more then 2000 years old build by Dravidian kings .

the literature and other sculptures which proves Dravidian to be one of the oldest living language are also based on Hindu religion .

I dont know what made u to think so" the government of India accepted aryan invasion theory" but accualy the Dravidian kingdoms never invaded or conquered any north part of 2days India ,. but Chandragupta (Maurya Empire )extended the borders of the empire southward into the Deccan Plateau circa 300 BC . followed by Ashoka the Great established superiority over the southern kingdoms. and became ambitious and aggressive monarch of all parts of 2day india and pakistan ( except few south most Dravidian land and east most 2day's India near butan ) from 2nd century BCE , Dravidian land was restored by Dravidian kings ( middle kingdoms) , therefore till 2day Dravidian stands alone with its cultures and its family of language (tamil , telugu , malayalam,kannada )



Noth indian people are not foreigners of that land , and Dravidian are not destroyed by north people.

India is pure democratic country , where we both Dravidian family and north Indians share equal part in governing our self :-)
arun
2010-07-21 02:26:56 UTC
I am giving some links which proves Aryan Invasion Theory is a myth.



http://arisebharat.wordpress.com/2008/01/21/bbc-accepts-that-the-aryan-invasion-theory-is-flawed/



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTgHiLisedU



http://micheldanino.voiceofdharma.com/tamilculture.html



http://www.eastwestcultural.org/public/amt/amt-internet.php



http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/downloads/books/aid.htm





Also,



Asko Parpola, leading authority on the Indus script and Professor Emeritus of Indology in the University of Helsinki, Finland, has been chosen for the Kalaignar M. Karunanidhi Classical Tamil Award for 2009. For his work on Dravidian hypothesis in interpreting Indus script.



So basically India is a diverse nation which has its own origin. Some useless "Aryan Invasion Theory" came into existence with main aim to spoil the rich culture of India.



So we Indians must be clear about this. No split ups, nothing required. Jai Hind!.
2016-03-18 04:48:12 UTC
There is no proof that Arya and Dravidians were actual separate races that once occupied India. This is based on the Aryan Invasion theory, a theory that depends on the belief that the world is only 4,000 y/o, that relies on the genealogies of the book of Genesis, and that was the justification for the Holocaust. It is a theory that today is only advanced by Linguists who can't figure out why else Sanskrit didn't have its own word for "elephant." Genetic evidence casts doubt on this theory, and a lot of archaeological evidence is also starting to cast doubt on the theory.
samar60@ymail.com
2010-07-22 08:16:19 UTC
WHEN WILL PEOPLE LET GO ALL THESE "THEORIES" AND STICK TO HISTORIC FACTS?



http://www.hindubooks.org/david_frawley/myth_aryan_invasion/



THANKS TO THE WESTER HISTORIANS AND INDOLOGISTS WE HAVE A WRONG IMAGE OF THE ARYANS!



IF THE ARYANS INVADED OR MIGRATED TO INDIA WHY DONT WE FIND ANYTHING CULTURALLY SIMILAR ELSE WHERE IN THE WORLD!?!



WHY DONT THE VEDAS MENTION A "HOMELAND" IN EUROPE, RUSSIA OR ELSE WHERE IF THEY CAME FROM THERE!?!



ITS NOT ABOUT A RACE RATHER ABOUT CULTURE... THE INDUS-SARASWATI CULTURE.



THE WORD ARYAN HAS ITS ORIGIN IN SANSKRIT, MAX MÜLLER TOOK THE WORD FROM THE VEDAS, THE AUTHORS OF THE VEDAS CALLED THEMSELVES "ARYA" WHICH MEANS "NOBLE". THEY LIVE IN THE AREA WHICH MAKES TODAYS INDIA, IRAN,AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN.



DEFINITIONS:

the authoritative Sanskrit lexicon (c. 450 AD), the famous Amarakosa gives the following definition:

mahakula kulinarya sabhya sajjana sadhavah

An Arya is one who hails from a noble family, of gentle behavior and demeanor, good-natured and of righteous conduct



And the great epic Ramayana has a singularly eloquent expression describing Lord Rama as:

arya sarva samascaiva sadaiva priyadarsanah

Arya, who worked for the equality of all and was dear to everyone.



The Rigveda also uses the word Arya something like thirty six times, but never to mean a race.



DOES THESE DEFENTIONS REFLECT THE SO CALLED "ARYANS " FROM THE WEST?

THEY WERE NO BARBARIANS AS THE WESTERN "ARYANS" SAY... SEE ALL THOSE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE ARYANS AND THEIR SUCCESSORS IN SCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY, ASTRONOMY, MEDICINE ETC... CAN THAT BE FROM BARBARIANS?

LIKE CHARAKA AND SUSHRUTA IN MEDICINE, SURGERY OR ARYABHATTA IN MATHS AND ASTRONOMY!

THERE ARE STILL NO SCIENTIFIC PROOFS FOR ALL THOSE "ARYAN THEORIES" OF THE WEST...



WE SHOULD STOP MISUSING AND INSULTING THE NAME OF THE ANCESTORS OF THOSE NATION.



THE ARYAN-DRAVIDIAN "THEORY" WAS INTRODUCED BY THE BRITISH FOR THE COLONIAL EXPLOITATION.

Recent studies of the distribution of alleles on the Y chromosome microsatellite DNA, and mitochondrial DNA in India have cast overwhelmingly strong doubt for a biological Dravidian "race" distinct from non-Dravidians in the Indian subcontinent. The only distinct ethnic groups present in South Asia, according to genetic analysis, are the Balochi, Brahui, Burusho, Hazara, Kalash, Pathan and Sindhi peoples, the vast majority of whom are found in today's Pakistan.



ACCORDING TO THE LATEST SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE THE FORFATHERS OF THE HOMO SAPIENS (US HUMANS), THE HOMO ERECTUS ORIGINATED IN AFRICA!

SO WE ALL ARE ACTUALLY AFRICANS... BUT NOT BLACK!?!

AND SADLY THE CURRENT CONDITION OF OUR "HOMELAND" IS A HUMANITARIAN DISASTER!



WHO SAID ARYANS WERE "WHITE-BLOND-BLUE EYED"?

RIGHT HITLER AND WE BELIVE SOMEONE LIKE HIM!?!
2010-07-21 10:34:29 UTC
The aryan invasion theory is a myth . Some of the foremost of hindu sages and teachers(in recent times) like Shri Adi Shankaracharya , Shri Ramanuja and Shri Madhavacharya (the founders of the three schools of vedanta philosophy ) were south indians . The richest shrine in India the Tirupathi temple is in Andhra Pradesh (south india ) People from all over the country visit it . The last incarnation of Lord Vishnu is prophesied to incarnate in Andhra Pradesh . All those who follow the Sanatan Dharma are one .
franciosa
2016-10-03 07:04:28 UTC
Dravidians
Nickhil
2015-05-02 23:36:37 UTC
i don,t like south indians
?
2010-07-21 02:14:19 UTC
You don't need a separate nation. The way the world sees India is that it is one of the most vibrant, exciting, and diverse nations on earth. You have more religions than any nation, more languages than any nation, and you are an intelligent nation who learns quickly to become part of the global economy. Bollywood makes more money than Hollywood; many of the world's best doctors are Indian, and the Tata Nano is made there!



America would LOVE a $2000 car, but by the time all our stupid regulations are built in, the car would cost as much as one made in America.



Love your nation as much as the world loves it. What happened 500 years ago is history. Learn from it, and let it stand.
Vanivinayak Sharma
2014-10-25 13:16:16 UTC
I think its not right to rubbish Aryan invasion theory, just because it was given by the British, Aryan invasion theory is very logical and fits perfectly its supported by reason, logic and even evidence.The attempt to rubbish it I believe is mainly motivated by reasons of emotion , political convenience, sense of security, peace and brotherhood..but this does not mean that history needs to be denied.

I believe there was invasion there took place compromises /adaptations. Aryan gods were adopted dravid gos were adopted ....for instance I feel Vishnu the god who favoured the Aryans/Brahmins was married to the daugther of the sea sri/or lakshmi(dravid) where as Shiva a non Aryan God is seen to have married to Daksha's daughter( Aryan). The difference cannot be denied it can be seen in the colour of the skin,facial features, language, even in the thinking and temperament.

Besides this I also believe Aryan meant the civilised by this I mean the fact that ppl who live by the rules....ppl who would not eat anything, women who would not marry upon the death of their husbands, people who observed fast and purity.....that although Aryan people were high in social order .... I believe life was not simple for them,,,it was governed by rules and order....they could not eat anything,drink anything,sleep anywhere with anyone...and do whatever they pleased. These upper class Aryans not only lived by the rules made to them by the brahmins/priests but also started to copy the rules meant for the priests and drahmins which many a times was not suitable for them in their zeal to prove that they are more Aryan/more pure and more close to the highest among the Aryans, the Brahmins.
Cliffnote's Verstion
2010-07-22 00:14:54 UTC
After all that has been said about Aryan and Dravidian races and invasions and other myths and folktales, I would like to tell you something so that you can decide yourself.



Dravida refers to the present state of Tamil Nadu. Like you have different states and cities and towns, the ancient name for Tamil Nadu is Dravida and modern-day Tamilians would be called Dravidians. It's a geographic identity.



Arya means "civilized". A person could be an African and he would be called Aryan as long as he is civilized.



So you can be Dravidian and Aryan at the same time, like you can be Mongoloid and Aryan at the same time or Filipino and Aryan at the same time.



Aryan is not a race. It's a quality like polite, rude, beautiful, diplomatic, crazy...all adjectives.



The Europeans developed this theory. The scientists who developed this theory hardly visited India or even investigated Indian culture. And we Indians continue to publish this in our textbooks everyday. This theory was put forward in the 19th century. Westerners have debunked and disproved this theory and we still sit with 19th century textbooks with theories by 19th century authors.



And then we say that India is an independent, sovereign, democratic republic.



That's the joke of the century!!
Michael G
2010-07-21 02:17:03 UTC
OK, I will try to answer all your questionsThis is a bit of an exaduration. The Indians have a post colonial hate of all Europeans because there were colonised by them. And their culture is still very much alive, even today. Hinduism originated in the form of Buddism in india then evolved to Hinduism (the budda was originally from north India then china adopted the religion). Ayrans came to india, of course because of the glory and plunder that was there (and because of mans natural urge to conquer). Dravidians converted to Hinduis because it is a very appealing and very blissful. Splitting into two countries i.e. north and south would disrupt commerce and industrie. Anyways all of these are my interpretations, there may be different interpretations out there and it is up to you to figure out your own interpretation.
Logesh
2014-11-02 04:28:59 UTC
Aryans are invaders ..no doubt about that..,they spoils Dravidians culture drastically eg.in Chennai because of them we can see n no of chages in the culture and mannerisms'
?
2010-07-21 02:11:44 UTC
That's what happens when your country is conquered.



It would be impossible for Dravidians to separate, though they might like to, because they are mixed up with the Aryans.



You can't really say HIndhuism is a foreign religion to them, though. It is simply the religion of India, and probably a mixture of Aryan and pre-Aryan beliefs.
DesiBoy .•*¨*`•.¸☆
2010-07-21 21:10:48 UTC
You have been fooled by your state politicians.



If you think that the first set of population to migrate to India owns the whole country then indigenous people of Negroid race of Andaman-Nicobar Islands are first to migrate to India.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andamanese



You are talking about North Indians and South Indians, both belongs to Caucasoid race. They arrived in India in later years. North Indians and South Indians are are same and none of them is invader. At least the genetic similarity proves that.

The study was conducted by CCMB scientists in collaboration with researchers at Harvard Medical School,

Harvard School of Public Health and the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT. It reveals that the present-day Indian population is a mix of ancient north and south bearing the genomic contributions from two distinct ancestral populations - the Ancestral North Indian (ANI) and the Ancestral South Indian (ASI).

The study analysed 500,000 genetic markers across the genomes of 132 individuals from 25 diverse groups from 13 states. All the individuals were from six-language families and traditionally ``upper'' and ``lower'' castes and tribal groups. ``The genetics proves that castes grew directly out of tribe-like organizations during the formation of the Indian society,''

``The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part,'' said Thangarajan. He added, ``At a later stage, 40,000 years ago, the ancient north Indians emerged which in turn led to rise in numbers here. But at some point of time, the ancient north and the ancient south mixed, giving birth to a different set of population. And that is the population which exists now and there is a genetic relationship between the population within India.''

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Aryan-Dravidian-divide-a-myth-Study/articleshow/5053274.cms





This theory, originally devised by F. Max Muller in 1848, traces the history of Hinduism to the invasion of India's indigenous people by lighter skinned Aryans around 1500 BCE.

The theory was reinforced by other research over the next 120 years, and became the accepted history of Hinduism, not only in the West but in India.

There is now ample evidence to show that Muller, and those who followed him, were wrong.

Why is the theory no longer accepted? The Aryan invasion theory was based on archaeological, linguistic and ethnological evidence.

Later research has either discredited this evidence, or provided new evidence that combined with the earlier evidence makes other explanations more likely.

Modern historians of the area no longer believe that such invasions had such great influence on Indian history. It's now generally accepted that Indian history shows a continuity of progress from the earliest times to today.

The changes brought to India by other cultures are not denied by modern historians, but they are no longer thought to be a major ingredient in the development of Hinduism.

Dangers of the theory The Aryan invasion theory denies the Indian origin of India's predominant culture, but gives the credit for Indian culture to invaders from elsewhere.

It even teaches that some of the most revered books of Hindu scripture are not actually Indian, and it devalues India's culture by portraying it as less ancient than it actually is.

The theory was not just wrong, it included unacceptably racist ideas:

- it suggested that Indian culture was not a culture in its own right, but a synthesis of elements from other cultures

- it implied that Hinduism was not an authentically Indian religion but the result of cultural imperialism

- it suggested that Indian culture was static, and only changed under outside influences

- it suggested that the dark-skinned Dravidian people of the South of India had got their faith from light-skinned Aryan invaders

- it implied that indigenous people were incapable of creatively developing their faith

- it suggested that indigenous peoples could only acquire new religious and cultural ideas from other races, by invasion or other processes

- it accepted that race was a biologically based concept (rather than, at least in part, a social construct) that provided a sensible way of ranking people in a hierarchy, which provided a partial basis for the caste system

- it provided a basis for racism in the Imperial context by suggesting that the peoples of Northern India were descended from invaders from Europe and so racially closer to the British Raj

- it gave a historical precedent to justify the role and status of the British Raj, who could argue that they were transforming India for the better in the same way that the Aryans had done thousands of years earlier

- it downgraded the intellectual status of India and its people by giving a falsely late date to elements of Indian science and culture


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...