• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Aryan invasion confusion

Status
Not open for further replies.

biswa

New member
Recently I watched a documentary called The Story of India It started in Tamil Nadu and went all the way to Kolkata, then Mathura, Hasthinapura, Peshawar and even to Turkmenistan to trace the origin of the Aryans. It talked about the nature worship in the Vedas and even discussed Somarasa. It seemed reasonably scholarly and well researched.

Now knowing that this may be considered a politically hot topic, let's have a show of hands: how many believe that there may have been an Aryan race which invaded India from the north-west and slowly migrated southwards and eastwards? And that there was one or more indigenous races that they "interacted" with.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Recently I watched a documentary called The Story of India It started in Tamil Nadu and went all the way to Kolkata, then Mathura, Hasthinapura, Peshawar and even to Turkmenistan to trace the origin of the Aryans. It talked about the nature worship in the Vedas and even discussed Somarasa. It seemed reasonably scholarly and well researched.

Now knowing that this may be considered a politically hot topic, let's have a show of hands: how many believe that there may have been an Aryan race which invaded India from the north-west and slowly migrated southwards and eastwards? And that there was one or more indigenous races that they "interacted" with.

Ok so now this is going to be the next hot thread..way to go Biswa and you know what..just 1 point I want to bring up is all this research about Aryan invasion is pertaining to Kaliyuga only isnt it?

Wasnt Vedas & Vedic lifestyle already present in Bharat in Sathya Yuga itself?

So if we go by the theory that India had Aryan migration..that means during Satya Yuga Aryans would have come..stayed in India till Dwapara Yuga..migrated somewhere to Central Asia and then came back to India again somewhere again in Kaliyuga? Doesnt make sense isnt it?It would be like some Migratory bird story.

renu
 

Yamaka

New member
Recently I watched a documentary called The Story of India It started in Tamil Nadu and went all the way to Kolkata, then Mathura, Hasthinapura, Peshawar and even to Turkmenistan to trace the origin of the Aryans. It talked about the nature worship in the Vedas and even discussed Somarasa. It seemed reasonably scholarly and well researched.

Now knowing that this may be considered a politically hot topic, let's have a show of hands: how many believe that there may have been an Aryan race which invaded India from the north-west and slowly migrated southwards and eastwards? And that there was one or more indigenous races that they "interacted" with.

Aryan theory got some traction during the time of British Raj because of the linguistic similarity between Sanskrit (& its derivatives) and Indo-European languages like German, which has NO similarity with any of the Dravidian languages of the South India.

Furor, the Third Reich propagated the Supremacy of the Aryan race in Germany, and many Indian scholars also subscribed to the theory that nomads of the Central Asia migrated towards West going to Germany and South towards India. Present day Kazakstan could be the place of migration from to Germany or India.

The distinct melanin pigment difference in Indian population gave some credence to the Aryan Invasion Theory: Northern Indians have very low melanin pigment (similar to Aryans of Germany) and Southern Indians have high melanin pigment in their skins (the Dravidians). Of course, there is a continuum of color (melanin concentration) from the North to the South.

How to understand this Aryan and Dravidian Race in India? Population geneticists, mitochondrial geneticists and anthropologists have this hypothesis - All evolutions of human race happened in Africa near Kenya - Homo erectus and Neanderthals from Africa migrated towards Europe and Asia about 200,000 years ago..Homo erectus evolved into Homo sapiens and settled in Northern Asia, and Neanderthals occupied Europe. Around 150,000 years ago, there was another wave of migration from the Homo sapiens of Africa who moved into Persia, South Asia to Australia - these people are the original peoples of India (the dark skinned - the high melanin pigmented Dravidians)...

Then after about 5000 years ago, the people settled in the Central Asia migrated towards South, and some of them came to North India... this could be the Aryans who had plenty of horses and chariots: their Southward movement was successful because they were nomadic tribes who could fight their way through any inclement weather and opposition...Dravidians did not have horses and chariots and they could not stop the Aryans from the Central Asia.

Then what happened? After initial rebellion against the Aryans, the Dravidians started co-habiting in the North India and there were marriages between the light colored Aryans and dark colored Dravidians.

The genes that code for melanin pigments, processing, packaging and maintenance are mutated and the mutant alleles are there in all Indian families after cross-marriages in the past 5000 years at least: This produces different shades of skin color among family members - among Brahmins there are very dark skins and very light skins... even among Dravidians there are very light skinned people.

My view is in all of us there are alleles of Aryans and Dravidians... therefore, we NEED not use the Aryan "Invasion" as a divisive matter in our culture and political process.

President Obama called himself as a Cross Breed.. likewise, all most ALL Indians are Cross Breeds.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
B

biswa

New member
Glad we agree

Thanks for the responses. Here are some things we agree on:

1. Aryans came from Central Asia. They migrated to India over current Afghanistan and Pakistan.

2. They had horses and chariots, were better organized and were a more martial race. They pushed the native Indians (some may say Dravidians) southwards and eastwards.

3. They had a fairer complexion than the native Indians.

4. They had a distinctive language that had roots in common to Latin (hence indo-european family of languages).

Note we are just talking about historical facts, not about superiority of race/religion. So let's go on.

1. The Aryans were quite ruthless, involved in honor killings and women abduction.

2. They converted most of the locals to their form of nature worship, later known as Hinduism.

3. They interbred quite freely with the locals making every Indian a cross-breed, Brahmins or otherwise, ie we are all Aryan and all Dravidian.

Sound good so far? So just for some more controversy.

Like other conquering races, they looked down upon the local converts, and some of this prejudice continues to this day.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Thanks for the responses. Here are some things we agree on:

1. Aryans came from Central Asia. They migrated to India over current Afghanistan and Pakistan.

2. They had horses and chariots, were better organized and were a more martial race. They pushed the native Indians (some may say Dravidians) southwards and eastwards.

3. They had a fairer complexion than the native Indians.

4. They had a distinctive language that had roots in common to Latin (hence indo-european family of languages).

Note we are just talking about historical facts, not about superiority of race/religion. So let's go on.

1. The Aryans were quite ruthless, involved in honor killings and women abduction.

2. They converted most of the locals to their form of nature worship, later known as Hinduism.

3. They interbred quite freely with the locals making every Indian a cross-breed, Brahmins or otherwise, ie we are all Aryan and all Dravidian.

Sound good so far? So just for some more controversy.

Like other conquering races, they looked down upon the local converts, and some of this prejudice continues to this day.

Ok Biswa,

Look at this:

TEXT 2

sri-bhagavan uvaca

kutas tva kasmalam idam
visame samupasthitam
anarya-justam asvargyam
akirti-karam arjuna



The word Aryan was used in Bhagavad Geeta in Dwapara Yuga and it was used to denote a Noble one and not any particular race.
Even the word Dravida has its origins from the word Dramila which denotes a geographical location and not a particular race.
Furthermore Sanathana Dharma was already practised in Bharat much before the proposed theory of Aryan Invasion.

So how do you propose Aryans came from Central Asia somewhere in Kaliyuga?

May be somewhere in Kaliyuga there were other migrating races coming to India like how many races are spread all over the world today and there was interacial mixing and this new migrating races were wrongly dubbed Aryan.

Ok now going by that theory so technically before invasion by the so called Aryan I presume there was no Brahmana in Bharat..so how do you explain the presence of Ravan(A brahmin by birth) far down in South?

For the Ramayana we have proof of the Rama Sethu as seen thru satelite images.

So what do you think dear?

Yamaka's post makes a lot of sense ..but may be we just omit the word Aryan and Dravidian in his post and make it fully a racial migration theory and it explains well the various skin hues and features of all Indians in India today.
 
Last edited:

Yamaka

New member
Hi Biswa:

1. The names "Aryan" and "Dravidian" are very politically charged words used frequently by religious/ethnic supramacists.. by using such words I don't intend to support any theory of supremacy of one group over the other... In fact, I hate them all.

Perhaps, we may call "Dravidians" as early inhabitants of India and "Aryans" the migrated people or similar. We must bring down the rhetorical divisiveness around this topic.

2. Since there was cross breeding for nearly 5000 years, no one can claim to be pure "original inhabitants" or pure "migrated people" today. We all have mutated alleles in our genome for the melanin pigments...

3. I don't want to say "Aryans were quite ruthless, involved in honor killings and women abduction". Because all invading armies were ruthless, and abused women and children.

4. My understanding is some form of Idol Worship was there in ancient India before the arrival of immigrants from the Central Asia; there was Shiva Lingam worship even in the days of Indus Valley Civilization, which some people claim was destroyed by the invading immigrants.

Perhaps, Lord Rama worship came with the arrival of Valmiki's Ramayanam written originally in Sanskrit by Adi Poet Valmiki - presumably an Immigrant - sometime around the birth of Jesus Christ, well after Mahabaratham (presumably written in 200 BC).

Renu is referring to Yugas... it's very difficult to compare our current years to Yugas... as per one calculation, Lord Rama was born about 170,000 years ago in Ayodhya! But we know the history that Adi Poet Valmiki lived around the time of Christ! Ayodhya in the UP became a village/town only around 800 AD.....

Where are we going from here, anyway?

Cheers.

p.s. I believe that the Epic Ramayanam and Mahabharatam were written by very talented literary figures - Epic stories to convey certain religious principles; but the events described were largely imaginary. Nobody lived in flesh and blood, hence it's all mythology. Not REAL historical events.

Prophets Moses, Jesus and Muhammed lived in this planet in flesh and blood... but none of the heroes and women of the Hindu Epics - Mahabharatam and Ramayanam - lived in this world in flesh and blood; they are all characters in a FICTION, IMHO.
 
Last edited:

B.Krishnamurthy

Active member
I am afraid none living today would have seen Moses,Jesus and Mohammed in flesh and blood living in this planet.We only Believe.Similarly we can believe that all Characters of Mahabharatam and Ramayanam also lived in flesh and Blood in this planet at some point of time many many years before.
I will post "ANTIQUITY OF ARYANS" written by a Scholar in another forum separately.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member

Yamaka

New member
I am afraid none living today would have seen Moses,Jesus and Mohammed in flesh and blood living in this planet.We only Believe.Similarly we can believe that all Characters of Mahabharatam and Ramayanam also lived in flesh and Blood in this planet at some point of time many many years before.
I will post "ANTIQUITY OF ARYANS" written by a Scholar in another forum separately.

Dear Krish Sir:

Yes.. you may believe in all what you want to believe.. my only wish is people try to distinguish between historical events and imaginary literary works...

Recently, Mani Ratnam - the ace movie director and a Tamil Brahmin - made a movie called "Ravanan" - it's a cinematic fiction about Ravana and the life of Lord Rama! I enjoyed it and AR Rahman's score and songs were mind blowing to me!

Unfortunately, many people would have believed that the "Ravanan" story as told by Mani was REAL, happened sometime ago... long long time ago!

That's their right, anyway!

Cheers.

Regards

Y
 
Last edited:

kunjuppu

Well-known member
Ravanan is a great movie. Vikram was simply superb as ravanan. There was intensity in his character which vikram took advantage of, to display the plight of the dispossessed folks of this world.

The movie was supposed loosely based on the life of veerappen the dacoit, but we as a society needs to ask ourselves, who is the real dacoit? Is it folks like veerappan or the Maoists, who are carrying out war on behalf of the displaced tribals of the land. Or the mega companies or politicians.

In the name of mining or starting infrastructure projects, it is a fact of india (& china too for that matter) that folks are removed from land which they have been occupying for millenniums. If, a set of people are deprived, so that there may happen the greater good for the society through ‘development’, what is considered a reasonable compensation? So far no one has come up with a formula which is considered ‘fair’.

A lumpsum cash payment is just wasted away, and the victims are thrown out into the street at the mercy of other people.

The seetha in the movie is a fascinating character. She is so pretty enough, that we could change the adverb to a noun re her beautiness. But it is not the docile or dumb sort of beauty. She is kidnapped, and within her confinement, discovers the world of the needy. She becomes more sensitive and sympathetic to her captor. There is no hint of romance here, from both sides. But the mutual respect and regard, definitely exists. Is this the Stockholm syndrome, where the kidnapped gets sympathetic and identifies with the causes of the kidnapper, operating here?

Rama is handsome, sharp, smart and above all cunning. To him, the goal is to capture ravanan at all costs. It does not matter that he has to pawn his wife and her life in doing so. He realizes his wife’s feeling for ravana, and is sure that she will come to no harm by the dacoit. Unwittingly she leads rama to ravanan’s lair and causes his downfall.

Will the seethe go back to the willing hands of rama? After this betrayal.

There is no answer to this question.

An excellent movie. Too bad it did not do well in the box office. ARR excelled. People were wondering how he could top off an oscar and VTV. Ravanan provided the answer. a different beat, but enjoyable all the same.
 
OP
OP
B

biswa

New member
Let's talk history not religion

My view actually aligns more with Yamaka than with Renuka. I think it is somewhat impractical to take the "yugas" concept and mark it with actual dates. Humans in Sathya Yuga were supposed to be 21 ft tall, so it is probably better not to go there.

The pros and cons view are often driven by various agendas, just like the confirmation or denial of global warming is. Yet the science is incontrovertible, and I do believe (most) members of this forum do not have a parochial agenda.

The linguistic and archaeological evidence for migration of a Central Asian race is strong. The biological evidence is unclear (simply because of all the intermixing that went on). Clearly the hybridization happened at all levels. Just look at the gods: Sri Venkateshwara and Andal. Clearly local gods with no mention in the Rig Veda.

It is a developing process, still ongoing. What I don't understand is the objection to considering the migration as a historical possibility. We are not all neo Nazis, are we?
 

Yamaka

New member
My view actually aligns more with Yamaka than with Renuka. I think it is somewhat impractical to take the "yugas" concept and mark it with actual dates. Humans in Sathya Yuga were supposed to be 21 ft tall, so it is probably better not to go there.

The pros and cons view are often driven by various agendas, just like the confirmation or denial of global warming is. Yet the science is incontrovertible, and I do believe (most) members of this forum do not have a parochial agenda.

The linguistic and archaeological evidence for migration of a Central Asian race is strong. The biological evidence is unclear (simply because of all the intermixing that went on). Clearly the hybridization happened at all levels. Just look at the gods: Sri Venkateshwara and Andal. Clearly local gods with no mention in the Rig Veda.

It is a developing process, still ongoing. What I don't understand is the objection to considering the migration as a historical possibility. We are not all neo Nazis, are we?

What I don't understand is the objection to considering the migration as a historical possibility. We are not all neo Nazis, are we?[/QUOTE]

Hi Biswa:

If people are very much into religion and "caste superiority" etc, then history will NOT be relevant to them... in here, Hitler liked the "Aryan Superiority" and many in India love that idea... For many others, it's all heap of crap!

I love history to know how our civilization got started and how it moves along.... and where we are now etc. etc.

____________________________________________________________

What's REAL, what's a Fiction and Fantasy?

1. Is "Sillapathigaram" a REAL story? NO, it is a fictional literary masterpiece of Illango Adigal.

2. Is "Gandhi" by Attonborough a Real story? Yes, it is a biography of MK Gandhi who lived in flesh and blood, although I have not met or seen him in person.

3. Are "Iruvar" "Nayagan" "Guru" REAL stories narrated by Mani Ratnam? Partially true story, but fictionalized to a larger extent by the director and producer.

"Iruvar" was based on the life histories of Karunanidhi and MGR! As per the screen play, MGR had a distinct intuition that Jaya could be "his daughter" - he was afraid of getting into incestuous relationship with her! (Watch the song "Hello Mr. Ethirkatchi" where Jaya (Ash) is dancing for MGR!). Many insiders in the cinema industry feel that J Jaya COULD be MGR's daughter because her mom was having romantic relationship with MGR for a long time! At the time of MGR, DNA testing was not popular to know the fact, for sure!

"Nayagan" was based on the life story of one Varadarajan Mudaliar - an underworld don.

"Guru" was based on the life history of Ambani Sr.

4. Are religious epic masterpieces "Ramayanam" and "Mahabharatam" REAL? No, I believe, they are fictions by very able poets who mastered Sanskrit literature.

People should stand up and clearly say what's REAL and what's a FICTION....we may have lots of bias and prejudices... but we MUST accept the history as it is presented by the unbiased academic historians.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:

kunjuppu

Well-known member
Y,

to the best of my knowledge, nayagan is the story of varadarajan mudaliar, a tamil nadu born don of the bombay underworld.

Nayagan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

in his heyday, VM was the matka king of bombay (matka being the informal gambling which mumbaikars indulged in the 50s, based on the cotton price last trading value in the new york stock exchange).

in a more recent movie, 'once upon a time in mumbai', VM gets a minor role to haji mastan. great stories, both these films.

we have our fascination with the dons in india, same as the 60s america had the fixation with the mafia. :)
 

Yamaka

New member
Dear K:

I don't know why "Ravan" or "Ravanan" failed at the box office! I wonder, may be, people didn't like the title and the way Mani dealt with the character of Ravan... a very reasonable person - a Robin Hood - who was rebelling against the atrocities of Rama!

And, although Ravan loved Seetha (see the first song in the movie) romantically, he never tried to touch her.. he always kept a distance from her! Perhaps, the viewers saw that Mani is glorifying Ravan MORE than Rama! (Rama should be the HERO, and not Ravanan!)

If it's true, then that would ruffle the feathers of religious people!

Anyway, I loved the movie: Mani did not show much of his talent as a "director" here; Hasini's dialogue was not that impressive; but the cinematography and music & songs were mind blowing to me!

Cheers.
 

kunjuppu

Well-known member
Y,

while i loved vikram saying, dandanadadana..., i thought on the overall, prithvi raj pulled off an excellent role.

not only is he fit for the role, physique and lookwise, but he had that ambition seared in his face, the passion to catch ravanan. also, the song kaLvaney, is so erotic. never thought of aish as a sex pot, but even she pulled it off there.

i think the movie failed at the BO, mainly because it was not another masala type. cannot think of any other reason.

it was too perfect!

also liked guru. best part was when madhavan got to kiss vidya balan. would take on that role any day :)

ravan failed because i think the bacchan guy is no match for what the role demanded. he was ok in guru, but as ravan?
 
Last edited:

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Hey Kunjs,

You actually like Vidya Balan ? She is one real "amma" types heroine..more for homely types of roles ala Devayani..
 
OP
OP
B

biswa

New member
Hey Kunjs,

You actually like Vidya Balan ? She is one real "amma" types heroine..more for homely types of roles ala Devayani..

I believe the North Indians call her "behenji". But that doesn't mean she is not beautiful/attractive. We have to cut Mr K some slack. After all beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

And BTW, if you call her homely, you may not have seen her role in "Ishqiya". Sometimes the homeliest are the deadliest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoynumerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks