Who were Aryans and from where and when did they invade India ? Indology

13 points | Post submitted by ichat 265 days ago | 10 comments | viewed 192 times

Around the 17th & 18th centuries, the British, trying to destroy the moral and traditional fabric of the Indian society & culture, sneakily deployed a special weapon of "psychological warfare", called the Aryan Invasion Theory. In one sweeping move, they established - without ANY proof that can be scientifically verified - that this brown-skinned race was an inferior derivative gene-pool that descended from the great, noble, white-skinned Aryan race who came from the Eastern Europe area to India. They brought in Sanskrit (or a preliminary version of it), and their traditions, stories, and horses, in India - and settled here permanently. Along the way, they invaded and destroyed the nomadic indigenous tribes of this land, and also fathered babies using their female kinds.

But there is always more than what meets the eye.

The theory was a hogwash - but underneath the dogma, the politics, the blessings of the Vatican - there was an utter lack of acknowledgement by OUR OWN PEOPLE of our own great culture - that made this endeavour of theirs a great success.

So, do we still believe in that theory? If not, why do we still see it in the NCERT history books all over India?

Learn more here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctH7SW0_TFA

and here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VEdyPxkT3k

and thank me later!


Add your comment

Please Login or Signup to leave a comment
  • suyash95 265 days ago | +2 points

    It’s controversial because it is a racial based theory using linguistics as evidence. The underlying theory behind it is that fair-skinned “Aryan” nomads from somewhere in the northern hemisphere invaded India that was inhabited by dark-skinned aboriginal Dravidians and drove them down to South India and settled the north. According to the 18th and 19th century British the Tamil aka Dravidian people of the south were backward and primitive and the fairer skinned north Indians (Punjabis) were more sophisticated and superior in build and character.

    There are a number of issues here.

    The Tamil literature is older than Sanskrit and is an extremely refined and polished language with an extensive literature. The Tamil presence in South India has an archeological history of thousands of years. There is not a single reference in any of the Tamil literature to an original homeland outside of South India or of wars with “aryan” invaders.

    None of the Sanskrit literature going back over 5000 years mentions a homeland in the arctic circle or an invasion.

    “Aryan” is not a racial epithet, it means “noble” and refers to one’s cultural qualifications as being high-minded. The wars mentioned in the Vedas between the Aryans and the Dasyus according to all the native commentators refers not to racial battles but to the eternal cosmic struggle between the powers of chaos represented by the Dasyus and the forces of order represented by Indra and the Aryans.

    The ancient archeological sites of Mohenjo Daro and Harrapa in what is now Pakistan were abandoned cities of very high sophistication. None of them show any signs of having been destroyed or conquered by war with invading tribes.

    The Vedas for over 5000 years were transmitted orally in complicated mathematical combinations which required many hours of daily study by students subjected to rigorous rules and discipline. The idea that such tuition and transmission could take place on horse-back or in tents of wandering nomads is simply incredible!

    This is an excellent article on the subject with references to DNA studies

    [reply]
    • jay 265 days ago | +1 points

      Can you provide a link of the article? 

      [reply]
  • ichat 265 days ago | +1 points

    Test comment

    [reply]
  • Parijat 265 days ago | +1 points

    Not controversial . Aryan theory is a totally fabricated theory by Max Mueller & gang .It does have a ancient root neither a foot print anywhere in any history. Just a hypothesis promoted by some Europeans to falsely glorify themselves . So it doesn't need any historical dates etc to refer .

    [reply]
  • Santosh shukla 264 days ago | +2 points

    देखिए हमरी मानसिक गुलामी, 900 सालों की गुलामी जो हम अपने आप को बाहरी मानते है।  जब किसी देश के लोगो को अपने देश पे गर्व नही होगा अपने इतिहास का सम्मान नही होगा, वो देश मिट जायेगा और वो मनुष्य समुदाय मृतप्राय है। हमारे सामने कई उदहारण है - रोमन साम्राज्य, एथेंस, ग्रीस, यवन आदि।

    मैक्स मुलर और मेकोंले तथा वामपंथी इतिहास की गुलामी बन्द करो। हम अभी भी गुलामी मे ही है।

    आर्य कोई जाती नही, एक उपाधि है जो मतलब सर्व श्रेष्ट है। ये सरस्वती नदी के किनारे बसने वाले हमारे पृर्वज थे, जब सरस्वती नदी सुख गई तो कुछ समूह गंगा क्षेत्र, कुछ लोग मध्य एशिया, कुछ ऋषिय (आज का रुस), कुछ लोग दक्षिण ( सारस्वत ब्राह्मन) की तरफ चले गाये। 

    संस्कृत एक ब्रह्मांडीय भाषा है जो कि सुर्य की 7 किरणो का 8 डिग्री सुर्य से नीचे पृथ्वी से टकराने से बनती है अर्थात 7* 8 - 56 संस्कृत वर्णमाला। 

    अपने आप को पहचाने, शारीरक गुलामी को पहचानना और निकलना आसन है लेकीन मानसिक गुलमी को पहचानना और निकलना काफी मुश्किल है।  

    जो अपनी वास्तविक इतिहास नहीं जानेगा वो ना तो अपनी माँ को और नही अपने देश को प्यार कर पायेगा क्योकि देश एक भौतिक भूमि रेखा नही मानसिक एकत्मिक लगाव और भावात्मक जुडाव है।

    जय हिंद।

    [reply]
    • jay 259 days ago | +1 points

      Aapki commentes se inspired hokar bahut jaldi Hindi ke liye alag se site start kare rahe he :) 

      [reply]
  • anilrao 264 days ago | +2 points

    the loss of indian history has to be seen as a three pronged assault by the invading forces - whether they were islamic or christian:

    1. The Hindu philosophy with it's built in freedom to choose posed a great threat to the monotheistic - linear abrahamic doctrines - mainly the freedom to question - the Hindu was a seeker of truth - the celestial song Bhagavad Gita was the result of Arjuna seeking answers to his doubts, no blind obedience in Hinduism - even God or you Guru can and should be questioned in order to seek the truth and knowledge, this was also the reason that despite the so-called social inequities - there was resistant to conversion and esp in the case of Islam - conversion was through fear for life or greed for power.

    2. The Muslims lived in self created ghettos albeit luxurious ones when in power, and sallied out to create mayhem or extract tax or pillage and plunder, this is why they are concentrated even today in urban areas and connected with trades that are needed in cities/larger markets. The Hindus were distributed in countrysides and self governed themselves through panchayats. The destruction of the Indian universities and their libraries alongwith desecration of temples that also provided education caused the destruction to imparting of knowledge to the Indian population. The Brahmins who were the designated teachers and scholars found it difficult to survive - however the Hindu resistance was strong and saw revivals and resurgence through the Rajputs, Vijayanagara Empire, Shivaji and the Mahrattas, the Ahom Empire and the Sikhs.

    3. The British, were by far the most poisonous of the invaders who ruled, they created two major rifts, Hindu-Muslim divide, and worse the divide amongst Hindus - the caste system was made legitimate and by demonising the Brahmins who wielded neither political or financial power they broke the back of the indigenous education system, paving way for Indians to persecute and rule other Indians on behalf of the British rulers 

    [reply]
  • hoi470 263 days ago | +1 points

    The theory of aryan migration/invasion from Europe to India is flawed at all levels. 

    (1) First how is it possible that a group of aryan that left less civilized culture in Europe not only endured the hardship of migration but came to India and established a superior civilization where as those who stayed back in Europe barely progressed ?

     (2) If aryans invaded and establish Hindu dharma as claimed by this theory how is it that  Bhagwan Shiv, Bhagwan Vishnu , Bhagwan Krishna, Bhagwan Ram all had Shyam Varna? Christianity was dominated by Europeans and thus Jesus is depicted as white. Victor always impose their religious beliefs, if aryans came from Europe (and established themselves in India) how come all Bhagwans are Shyam varna ? If they were victors would they not have imposed the their religion with light skinned deities like Jesus on Bharat of that time? 

    On the contrary migration is likely to have happened from India to Europe at that time. The hardship of migration resulted in depletion of culture of the migrants to Europe which makes sense as the civilizations in Europe were less advanced than they were in this part of the world.

    [reply]
  • veddev 263 days ago | +1 points

    When the British saw the huge civilizationally heritage of India - they wanted to somehow drive a wedge - so they searched if any such wedges existed in history -   they tried to use - i. caste ii.  aryan theory

    there is no such word - the word was arya - noble. coming from the word arani for the fire derived from rubbing wood. unfortunately some groupings like Alexander and some northern invaders had used the word Arian to designate themselves so the British built up a grand theory without much real basis in our history or literature.

    [reply]

Welcome to HMW!


This site is for discussion about Hinduism.

You must have an account here to participate.

Register here >>>>

We do NOT offer personalized advice based on astrology.

Check the Guidelines for posting >>>>

Suggested Offline Book


Related Posts