it depends on the fact that how u look at it, either u looking at it with the prejudice of Indian culture being superior to all (also to state that Britishers were racially motivated) OR with another view that history is not absolute it changes with new findings n time.
Rigveda mentions a lot about a drink called SOM drank by all, n especially by INDRA >> som is not an Indian plant, its found in central asia, and now som is not a part of Hinduism. again because its not found in India. If u try to search hard enough then u can find som in old markets of Peshawar by the name of MAHOO (Peshawar is the region around which Aryans settled first)
secondly Rigveda mentions about horses, which are not native for India..they came from central Asia. Russian Archeologist VICTOR SARIANADI has found remains of a lost civilization in deserts of Turkmenistan (which at that time was a fertile oasis) where there are remains proving a civilization which used to make som (evidences) do rituals with fire (ALMOST EVERY HINDU RITUAL INVOLVES FIRE) n remains of horses n wagons ( RATH =wagons not chariots). then there was a big climate change n river flowing through that area changed its course so they were forced to migrate.This civilization was around 4000 BC, that's the same time around which saraswati river was drying due climate change.
these so called Aryans migrated from central Asia through Turkmenistan n hindukush range ..few went towards Iran others came towards India. they reached by the time sarasvati was almost gone..but here is the point i want to be focused...they were not invading..they were migrating. BY 1000 BC Aryans were well settled in northern India, WITH the people of Indus valley civilization who moved east because of drying of sarswati river. During this period these various Aryan settlements were fighting among themselves A BIG EXAMPLE IS WAR OF MAHABHARATA, (which we Indians believe that took place around 3000 BC). Prof. B. B. Lal found the hastinapur site of mahabharat n evidences that mahabharat was REAL NOT A MYTHOLOGICAL WAR. But the HOLY GITA or Mahabharata was composed (orally and then in script) during a span of 800 yrs dating 400 BC to 400 AD so there were quite a lot of modifications BUT THE SPIRITUAL TEACHINGS OF GITA ARE ABSOLUTE AND PURE AND OF HIGHEST ORDER THAN ANY OTHER RELIGION (but that's a different discussion altogether).
MY point is Aryans were foreigner by the time they came but then they became as much INDIANS as the MUSLIMS who came as invaders THAT'S THE GREATNESS OF INDIA - LOVE AND SHELTER TO ALL, PEACE AND HARMONY ( of which u find written account in Greek n Chinese ancient scripts: other two contemporary civilizations of that time). Now when the BRITISHERs came to india they regarded VEDAS n VEDIC culture as primitive which was a part of their agenda to make indian hate their own history. EXAMPLE : MAX MULLER initially criticized Vedas (but later he was among the scholars who glorified Vedas). it was a racially influenced propaganda to introduce the theory of ARYAN INVASION n prove that english culture is superior.
ARYAN INVASION theory states that aryans came from central asia, conqured north india and brought with them VEDIC culture. Which is not correct, YES, aryans came from central asia but NOT AS INVADERS but as settlers, they brought their culutre and language which EVOLVED into vedic culture n SANSKRIT after coming to india..basically they had seeds which bacame trees ( not a great metamorph). These ayans were the same people who spread in west n then evolved as a different culture n languages there BUT THEY ALL HAD A COMMON ROOTS THATS WHY THERE ARE SIMILARITIES IN LANGUAGE AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGE IS CALLED MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES.
Rigveda mentions a lot about a drink called SOM drank by all, n especially by INDRA >> som is not an Indian plant, its found in central asia, and now som is not a part of Hinduism. again because its not found in India. If u try to search hard enough then u can find som in old markets of Peshawar by the name of MAHOO (Peshawar is the region around which Aryans settled first)
secondly Rigveda mentions about horses, which are not native for India..they came from central Asia. Russian Archeologist VICTOR SARIANADI has found remains of a lost civilization in deserts of Turkmenistan (which at that time was a fertile oasis) where there are remains proving a civilization which used to make som (evidences) do rituals with fire (ALMOST EVERY HINDU RITUAL INVOLVES FIRE) n remains of horses n wagons ( RATH =wagons not chariots). then there was a big climate change n river flowing through that area changed its course so they were forced to migrate.This civilization was around 4000 BC, that's the same time around which saraswati river was drying due climate change.
these so called Aryans migrated from central Asia through Turkmenistan n hindukush range ..few went towards Iran others came towards India. they reached by the time sarasvati was almost gone..but here is the point i want to be focused...they were not invading..they were migrating. BY 1000 BC Aryans were well settled in northern India, WITH the people of Indus valley civilization who moved east because of drying of sarswati river. During this period these various Aryan settlements were fighting among themselves A BIG EXAMPLE IS WAR OF MAHABHARATA, (which we Indians believe that took place around 3000 BC). Prof. B. B. Lal found the hastinapur site of mahabharat n evidences that mahabharat was REAL NOT A MYTHOLOGICAL WAR. But the HOLY GITA or Mahabharata was composed (orally and then in script) during a span of 800 yrs dating 400 BC to 400 AD so there were quite a lot of modifications BUT THE SPIRITUAL TEACHINGS OF GITA ARE ABSOLUTE AND PURE AND OF HIGHEST ORDER THAN ANY OTHER RELIGION (but that's a different discussion altogether).
MY point is Aryans were foreigner by the time they came but then they became as much INDIANS as the MUSLIMS who came as invaders THAT'S THE GREATNESS OF INDIA - LOVE AND SHELTER TO ALL, PEACE AND HARMONY ( of which u find written account in Greek n Chinese ancient scripts: other two contemporary civilizations of that time). Now when the BRITISHERs came to india they regarded VEDAS n VEDIC culture as primitive which was a part of their agenda to make indian hate their own history. EXAMPLE : MAX MULLER initially criticized Vedas (but later he was among the scholars who glorified Vedas). it was a racially influenced propaganda to introduce the theory of ARYAN INVASION n prove that english culture is superior.
ARYAN INVASION theory states that aryans came from central asia, conqured north india and brought with them VEDIC culture. Which is not correct, YES, aryans came from central asia but NOT AS INVADERS but as settlers, they brought their culutre and language which EVOLVED into vedic culture n SANSKRIT after coming to india..basically they had seeds which bacame trees ( not a great metamorph). These ayans were the same people who spread in west n then evolved as a different culture n languages there BUT THEY ALL HAD A COMMON ROOTS THATS WHY THERE ARE SIMILARITIES IN LANGUAGE AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY INDO-ARYAN LANGUAGE IS CALLED MOTHER OF ALL LANGUAGES.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment