Aryan Invasion Hypothesis

[hit&run]

Couldn't find appropriate thread.

Great discussion. Must watch.

 

[HindaviSwarajya]

Not sure why its even debated saraswati valley civilization was older than indus. River saraswati dried some 6000 or more years back and people moved towards central asia. Infact egyptians are the indians who migrated there. I will post these links later

here are some links debunking this theory and that ind-aryan language bullshit which is based on this racist theory

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

http://archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/aryan-invasion-history

This is DNA study which debunks this

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-new-research-debunks-aryan-invasion-theory-1623744

this is also an excellent link

http://www.hitxp.com/articles/history/myth-aryan-invasion-theory/

 

[Peter]

Not sure why its even debated saraswati valley civilization was older than indus. River saraswati dried some 6000 or more years back and people moved towards central asia. Infact egyptians are the indians who migrated there. I will post these links later

NO EGYPTIANS WERE NOT ANCIENT INDIANS WHO MIGRATED THERE.

 

[cannonfodder]

https://storify.com/indianinterest/debunking-the-aryan-invasion-migration-myth

More info on AIT found online...​

 

[HindaviSwarajya]

NO EGYPTIANS WERE NOT ANCIENT INDIANS WHO MIGRATED THERE.

When Indians travelled to egypt manu become something else and the last and 4th name is moses. So indians travelled very long back.Unable to find that link.

Anyways here are some which can prove

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/India_and_Egypt.htm

http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-cha...d-Rathayatra-Festival-in-Ancient-Egypt-1.aspx

http://swamiindology.blogspot.in/2012/09/hindu-gods-in-egyptian-pyramids.html?m=1

High time Indians relalize how old and ancient their religion is. All ancient religions sprouted from it only

 

[pmaitra]

When Indians travelled to egypt manu become something else and the last and 4th name is moses. So indians travelled very long back.Unable to find that link.

Anyways here are some which can prove

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/India_and_Egypt.htm

http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-cha...d-Rathayatra-Festival-in-Ancient-Egypt-1.aspx

http://swamiindology.blogspot.in/2012/09/hindu-gods-in-egyptian-pyramids.html?m=1

High time Indians relalize how old and ancient their religion is. All ancient religions sprouted from it only

Are the authors, by any chance, devotees of Lord Shiva?

 

[pmaitra]

NO EGYPTIANS WERE NOT ANCIENT INDIANS WHO MIGRATED THERE.

Some interesting thoughts. It is clear that Egyptologists disagree on a lot of things.

What appears to be the case is that the people in Egypt were heterogeneous. Now, who were the real Egyptians and who were the immigrant populations, is not absolutely clear.

Here is a reproduction of the four races in Egypt most likely created by Richard Lepsius, althought his work was later complied and edited by others:

Actual photo of four races in Egypt in Tomb of Ramses III taken by historian Prof. Manu Ampim:

Who is Prof. Manu Ampim? In short, he is one person who has challenged the general consensus depicting Egyptians as Indo-European or Caucasoid. Read more here.

Many historians these days are opening up to the possibility that the Egyptians were closest, if not a subset of the Nubians.

 

[Razor]

Some interesting thoughts. It is clear that Egyptologists disagree on a lot of things.

What appears to be the case is that the people in Egypt were heterogeneous. Now, who were the real Egyptians and who were the immigrant populations, is not absolutely clear.

Here is a reproduction of the four races in Egypt most likely created by Richard Lepsius, althought his work was later complied and edited by others:

Actual photo of four races in Egypt in Tomb of Ramses III taken by historian Prof. Manu Ampim:

Who is Prof. Manu Ampim? In short, he is one person who has challenged the general consensus depicting Egyptians as Indo-European or Caucasoid. Read more here.

Many historians these days are opening up to the possibility that the Egyptians were closest, if not a subset of the Nubians.

I don't think anybody in their right mind thought Egyptians were Indo-Europid, and yup they were closer to the nubians.

 

[pmaitra]

I don't think anybody in their right mind thought Egyptians were Indo-Europid, and yup they were closer to the nubians.

Apparently, there are many who are (not) in their right mind.

I am waiting for a repeat of the claim that Kaaba is actually the Arabic name for Shiva.

 

[Razor]

Apparently, there are many who are (not) in their right mind.

I see what you did there, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

I am waiting for a repeat of the claim that Kaaba is actually the Arabic name for Shiva.

Wait, what? Kaaba means Shiva? Who said that?

Anyway kaaba is arabic for cube.

Yes, it did have idols of a variety of gods doesn't mean that it was shiva or something else. I highly doubt it.

 

[pmaitra]

I see what you did there, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Intentionally.

Wait, what? Kaaba means Shiva? Who said that?

Saw one blog (not in this thread). Here's another one - Taj Mahal was originally called Tejo Mahalaya.

Anyway kaaba is arabic for cube.

Yup.

Yes, it did have idols of a variety of gods doesn't mean that it was shiva or something else. I highly doubt it.

Well, one of the links above claims there were Hindu gods in Egyptian pyramids. You might want to check it out.

 

[Razor]

Intentionally.

Saw one blog (not in this thread). Here's another one - Taj Mahal was originally called Tejo Mahalaya.

It may not have been called "tejo mahalaya" but there is reason to suspect that it might've been built over hindu structures.
This is an operating procedure used by both Islam and xtianity (in europe)

Yup.


Well, one of the links above claims there were Hindu gods in Egyptian pyramids. You might want to check it out.

Right.
I think I'll pass, for now.

 

[pmaitra]

It may not have been called "tejo mahalaya" but there is reason to suspect that it might've been built over hindu structures.
This is an operating procedure used by both Islam and xtianity (in europe)


Right.
I think I'll pass, for now.

I have seen at least two mosques built over ruins of temples in UP.

 

[Razor]

I have seen at least two mosques built over ruins of temples in UP.

So, I guess you're agreeing with me that it could've been a hindu structure, but not necessarily named "Tejo Mahalaya"

 

[F-14B]

When Indians travelled to egypt manu become something else and the last and 4th name is moses. So indians travelled very long back.Unable to find that link.

Anyways here are some which can prove

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/India_and_Egypt.htm

http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-cha...d-Rathayatra-Festival-in-Ancient-Egypt-1.aspx

http://swamiindology.blogspot.in/2012/09/hindu-gods-in-egyptian-pyramids.html?m=1

High time Indians relalize how old and ancient their religion is. All ancient religions sprouted from it only

In the scripture devi mahathmiam there is a line that says that the first manu had seven boys and up on reaching ruling age the seven were given the seven continents to rule ( known as bhokantam in sankrit) even though it will be deemed to be just "mythology " i believe that there is a ring of truth in them should be called "sacred history" and should be studied with logic it might be the key that unlocks many enigmas that are posed to us

 

[the wolf]

[emoji38]
I see what you did there, whether intentionally or unintentionally.



Wait, what? Kaaba means Shiva? Who said that?

Anyway kaaba is arabic for cube.

Yes, it did have idols of a variety of gods doesn't mean that it was shiva or something else. I highly doubt it.

Here is one video about shivling under kabba i don't believe in this theory though it must be some pagan Arabian God's idol which mohammed demolished


Sent from my MotoG3-TE using Tapatalk

 

[Srinivas_K]

When Indians travelled to egypt manu become something else and the last and 4th name is moses. So indians travelled very long back.Unable to find that link.

Anyways here are some which can prove

http://www.hinduwisdom.info/India_and_Egypt.htm

http://www.esamskriti.com/essay-cha...d-Rathayatra-Festival-in-Ancient-Egypt-1.aspx

http://swamiindology.blogspot.in/2012/09/hindu-gods-in-egyptian-pyramids.html?m=1

High time Indians relalize how old and ancient their religion is. All ancient religions sprouted from it only

There are trade relations between Ancient Egypt and Arabia with Bharat.

Reason why we see similar stories of Indian puranas in Egypt.

The birth of Christ story is similar to Birth of Krishna etc..etc..

Rama is a decedent of Sun dynasty, The word "Ra" is related to sun in Egypt.

Most of these stories are spread from India to Egypt.

 

[HindaviSwarajya]

Yes but they also were worshipping hindu gods with different name and looks according to them. But anyways their culture off late was not hindu. Even if it was it may have been in very begening. We do not know

 

[Vikas Lohia]

It is one thing that you do not believe in Griffith's translation, and it is another thing that it has been proven that the proof of ritual of horse sacrifice in the Vedas has been provided.

Here is another source:

For example, look at the line starting with Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika, . . .; the translation (actually interpretation) of the verse, according to your source is this: "Just like mother, grandmother, greatgrandmother, provides good education to their children, that way, you people should also impart good education to your children!" Seriously? Is that what the verse says? I don't see any link between what is written and what is being explained. I am sorry, I will give very little credibility to your source. Griffith has done a much better job. He did not understand Amba, Ambika, and Ambalika, so he left them as is, but they are also defined, and in this context, it has something to do with abduction, and not about giving education to children. I guess you can look it up (Hint: the concept of abduction might be found in the Mahabharata, but it exists since much earlier).

Moreover, you seem to be confusing between translation and interpretation. The term "bhavarth" mean interpretation, and I do not know what your source is, but to me, it comes across as a very non-objective interpretation of a poorly understood text.

You have not proven anything. Sure, one must protect animals, does not mean animal sacrifice is prohibited. Even if we look at Indian law today, we must also protect human life, but that does not mean there is no death sentence.

The point is, even after being proven, you are simply not willing to accept that animal sacrifice is allowed in the Vedas. It is not just one or two verses, but a large number of verses spanning several books/chapters. What makes it more complicated is that you are referring to an individual's interpretation, not the translation.

You are free to believe what you want, but the Vedas won't change because of your beliefs.

How Mahabharata characters find mention in Yajur Veda? Didn't Vedas predates Mahabharata ?

 

[pmaitra]

How Mahabharata characters find mention in Yajur Veda? Didn't Vedas predates Mahabharata ?

Yes, Vedas predate the Mahabharatas.

What I am saying is, the concept of abduction is present in the Mahabharata, but it existed even earlier, as in, before Mahabharata.