Today\'s Indian Muslims were yesterday\'s Hindus, right?

by **johnny** » Sun Nov 02, 2003 12:14 am

be a liltle more specific Mr. justalil.... and mind u all the things i stated are not just my own thoughts they are from people who have really done some vedic research.. people like Swami Dayanand saraswati... he was a pioneer in letting the hidden things of the vedas to surface up and explain wat vedas had in them... anyway thats ur view.. and for ur kind info Murali manhoar joshi wud never agree with me.....

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Sun Nov 02, 2003 12:14 pm

Mr.Johnny, you have written a cute little story and are being modest by not wanting to take credit for that. Fine

Mr.Dayanad Saraswati maybe a great man as a religious person and i\'m not sure about his credentials as a historian. The history that we have been taught is based on scientific findings from archeological and anthropologic studies, and is a widely accepted one.
 
 You may want to fantasize & believe that ancient Indians went in all directions and conquered territory, which is unfortunately not true. The truth is we were invaded and beaten black & blue by every 2-bit country & tribal clan. You better grow up and get used to this already. Rewriting history may probably help in pampering bruised egos of insecure minds, but will not take us any further. Time to get real, buddy.

by **johnny** » Sun Nov 02, 2003 1:47 pm

hi justalilunwell... first and foremost i thank u for recognising my modesty

. Well long back even i was a firm believer of the history that is being taught in schools today... but that history is biased... they r the history that westereners claim to have found out from some archeological findings.. the fact remains hidden still cuz no indian historian has ever thought of scientifically finding out the truth starting frm the scratch unbiased.. he was always unfluenced by the western book of thought.. and their book of thought is based on their presumption of them being superior race.. swami dayanad saraswati was one of the most authentic souce of information even for the westerners they used to fear his command over vedic knowledge and facts.. thats the reason they poisoned him eventually before he could make an overwhelming impact on the current indian society and their way of thought.. he wanted to bring back people to the ultimate truth of vedas... his historical facts are based on his extensive research in sanskrit language and its origin.. which ultimately trace back to the beginning of aryan civilisation.... so u can safely presume his findings to be accurate... even if u cant Mr just a lil
 nothing much can be done,, they r facts and uc ant change history try changing ur future.. try looking beyind the material things of science and wat ur being teached now.. i wont blame u at this juncture cuz u have( infact most of us) have been influenced by the western system of education... which is a nexessary evil now.. cuz we cant instantaneously change our adapted society and make them realise the lost glory and the real science present in vedas... SAD but TRUE.

((
 anyways... have fun.. thanks for invloving urself in this debate and expecting the same degree of participation in future frm u ..

by **VHP** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 1:52 am

Bhai-Bhai, if you accept the concept of a Single God, then why don\'t you apply it? Why do you call Bhagwaan Ram or Krishna?

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 2:47 am

Justa...who ahs researched the so called \'History\'? Arent they the westerners? who couldnt explain good looking Indians.
 It is widely accepted in ur western society that Aryans didnt invade India and were original inhabitants of sub-continent. It is well proven. The so called western archealogists and historians of yester years had no proof of their stupid theory. MANY WESTERN HISTORIANS NOW ACCEPT RIDICULE THE ARYAN INVASION THEORY. GO MEET ANY HISTORIAN OF THE UNITED STATES TO GET THEIR VIEW ABOUT ARYAN THEORY.
 I dont understand why u think everything is safronized. We were fed with wrong history during our school times, communist history which ridiculed India and Indians. And its only now that we are learning the original histroy with the advent of internet.
 
 Indian pure muslim:
 Here is ur source of information
 http://www.allaahuakbar.net/hindu
 by Dr. Zakir Naik

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 2:49 am

my post got botched up. It should read
 \"MANY WESTERN HISTORIANS NOW RIDICULE THE ARYAN INVASION THEORY.\"

by **johnny** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 3:01 am

Ahhhh Finally one who supports my view lol.... thanks mayavi morpheous... ur post makes me feel loved now

lol ( btw i know ur a male MM ..

)

by **tipu** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 3:45 am

Hi Mayavi - I was busy since three days. u have posted lot things to justify ur stand. But try to accept the truth.

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:21 am

Sorry, tipu, I tried hard to understand what u re saying, but it beats me.
 Anyway, if ure speakign about the site http://www.allaahuakbar.com, then its a good site. I like his balanced view and his respect for other religions. Whoever is maintaing that site (I think its an Indian) has great respect for his relgion (Islaam) and at the same time he doesnt insult other relgions. Thats why you can see that I didnt follow it up with any comments. And why I posted it at all, is because I dont like plagarism, If I copy fro many site,I give credit to the author, and dotn try to pass it off as my work.
 And about the site from which u copied (Muslimonline), the site chronicles the events of mosque demolition, and tries to explain why Hinduism is not a religion at all and adds all sorts of biased views and mis quotes. Whatever the unknown author is saying is basically horsesh!t.
 
 ITS A TRIBUTE TO THE TOLERANCE OF THE PEOPLE HERE THAT THEY DIDNT GO HYSTERIC WHEN U POSTED FROM A SITE WHICH ALSO CLAIMS THAT
 \"HINDU LITERATURE IS PORNOGRAPHIC IN NATURE...\"
 
 I REALLY BOW TO THEIR TOLERANCE AS THEY DIDNT SAY A WORD EVEN AFTER U QUESTIONED THEIR FAITH. JUST IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF I ASKED U SOME BASIC QUESTIONS ABOUT ISLAAM AND UR PRACTICES. NO DOUBT U WOULD GO BALLASTIC.

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:23 am

Sorry, tipu, I tried hard to understand what u re saying, but it beats me.
 
Anyway, if u r speaking about the site http://www.allaahuakbar.com, then its a good site. I like his balanced view and his respect for other religions. Whoever is maintaing that site (I think its an Indian) has great respect for his relgion (Islaam) and at the same time he doesnt insult other relgions. Thats why you can see that I didnt follow it up with any comments. And why I posted it at all, is because I dont like plagarism, If I copy fro many site,I give credit to the author, and dotn try to pass it off as my work.
 
And about the site from which u copied (Muslimonline), the site chronicles the events of mosque demolition, and tries to explain why Hinduism is not a religion at all and adds all sorts of biased views and mis quotes. Whatever the unknown author is saying is basically horsesh!t.
 

 
ITS A TRIBUTE TO THE TOLERANCE OF THE PEOPLE HERE THAT THEY DIDNT GO HYSTERIC WHEN U POSTED FROM A SITE WHICH ALSO CLAIMS THAT
 
\"HINDU LITERATURE IS PORNOGRAPHIC IN NATURE...\"
 

 
I REALLY BOW TO THEIR TOLERANCE AS THEY DIDNT SAY A WORD EVEN AFTER U QUESTIONED THEIR FAITH. JUST IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF I ASKED U SOME BASIC QUESTIONS ABOUT ISLAAM AND UR PRACTICES. NO DOUBT U WOULD GO BALLISTIC.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 11:53 am

MM & Johnny, so what is being proposed here? That ancient Indians went to Europe and became Europeans? And then they went to America and Australia to become Americans and Australians respectively?
 
 May I know who is the source of this \'earth shattering\' theory? (apart from Swami Dayanand Saraswati?). Some American history professors who posted their fairy tale on the Internet?

Now, pls dont get me wrong MM, I find you gleefully ridiculing Islamic sources on the Net (and I do not have a specific objection to that), but how come some Hindutva-backed American professor\'s online closet becomes any more credible than the sites you ridicule?
 
 Frankly I am amazed by the views posted on this thread. \"Taa pattina kundelu ki moode kallu\" seems to be the approach of everybody. If this is the outlook of well-placed, well-educated Indians towards knowledge and information, it presents a scary prospect for the future.

by **johnny** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 2:21 pm

hey Justalil.... We never said all over the world people are indians... but the aryan invasion theory is wrong in all respects... IT WAS FOR GODSAKE BIASED geez... i dunno how people fail to understand this... Why do u seem to be happy in believeing wat has been taught to u when u were a child... now when u have some maturity try to know the truth its out there.. if u really wanna know wat is the source of the information learn sanskrit and read vedas and then talk... and mind u all which i post here is not taken from any website.. i challenge u to show me any website that says this... its the authentic info from the books written by great scholars and philosophers...
 Well it seems to me that u like to be called the descendant of the now economically strong race.. wo came frm Europe et al... if u cant accept ur identity atleast dont try to ridicule it Mr.. u haev a glorious past.. try to live upto it... and dont try to imitate the temporary well off societies.. watever happes one shud not forget their ROOTS.. atleast dont ridicule..
 anyways PEACE OUT... justalil.. u continue to believe ur ancestors were europeans if that serves ur EGO...
 bbye

by **tipu** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 2:51 pm

hi,Just--lil,If u tell there is no such theory as Aryans in India,then why their is wast difenece between from white(north,india,now some also setteled in south) Black colored ,southern Indians

by **tipu** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 3:39 pm

Hi,Mayawi,If ur hurt with my statements then I am sorry,I didnot want to hurt u saying old,I just ment that u r matured.By the way whats ur age?

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:02 pm

Johnny, looks like there IS a controversy about Aryans as I discovered after doing some preliminary search on the Internet. I\'m posting pages containing both versions of the story:
 
 Aryans as Invaders: http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/ANCINDIA/ARYANS.HTM
 
 Aryans as Indigenous People:
 http://archaeology.about.com/library/weekly/aa012901a.htm
 
 I was not aware of this controversy / debate and found your initial post to be amusing. Let us hope the real version emerges.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:08 pm

Johnny, thanks to your bringing up this issue, I spent the entire day browsing sites on the subject.
 
 I wouldn\'t be so quick to form an opinion but for the peculiar fact that the ardent anti-AIT-ians (AIT - Aryan Invasion Theory) were all from the Hindutva clan. Now, it is my strong belief that Hindutvawadis are the lowest forms of life this country has ever produced

So, naturally my radars went up and I diligently digged out this gem of a piece by two Indologists from Harvard. This is must read for everyone to understand the extent to which the Hindutvawadis will stoop to manipulate history in order to mobilize public opinion (not very different from the way Pakistani zealots function). Pls read the article that was published in Frontline:
 
 http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1720/17200040.htm
 
 For the uninitiated - the contention of anti-AIT-ians is to establish that Indus Valley Civilization was of course Aryan and nothing else, and that human life originated from Saraswati - an ancient river in Haryana - and spread to the other parts of the world

God save this country from these zealots!

by **bhai-bhai** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 10:18 pm

Hey, MAYAVI, aligaaava, kopammma ?

anyways, why should somebody make you NOT speak out what you have to say,, more so the likes of tipus who try to portray an innocent picture and yet hurt and once hurt/angered, apologise ? They want you gone ! if you do not trun out to be the believer, you are an infidel ! so you must be shut out.. so you gotta go.. and, BUT then thats\' what he wants !! and you have given in !!!
 Look, personally, I find your posts to be very knowledgeable and humorous.. I am sure there are several of us who enjoy ur postings similarly. Theer had been and are there w/ similar caliber, anil/psd/lwalamp/etc.. lots.. do NOT loose out on these guys, please, any of you...

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 10:46 pm

Ok lemme explain in simple and clear terms. 1. I never read about the Aryan invasion theory except in school books. I donot believe in Aryan Invasion theory as it was started by the britishers, who couldnt explain the good looking Indians among dark-skinned fish eating Indians. FYI, there is another theory introduced by Britishers. The Surveyor general of India (or some officer of that ranking) during Raj was intrigued by Northern Indians who had sharp noses and fair and well built body. He commissioned a Historian from Britan to research into this anamoly and establish a lineage of Indians to Europeans. The Historian/archy couldnt establish any link with the Europeans, the comission concluded that the Indians were not of European origin. But the outcome of the research was pre-decided. The research should state that the good looking Indians were descendants of Europeans settlers. 2. Where is the proof to state that Aryans Invaded India? There is proof for the existance of Dinosaurs. There is a proof of Maya Culture and Egyptian culture, which incidentally predates the Aryan Invasion age (around 1500 BC). Egyptian culture which is much older can be proven, then why not Aryan Invasion? 3. The so called aryans, according to the theory, are an advanced civilization. Then why didnt they bring the european culture along with them to India? Instead they found a totally different religion, different set of rules, way of life, dressing, and have different gods and scriptures. 4. The aryan language is sanskrit. All the epics are written in sanskrit, by Aryans, yet there is no mention of any of te European culture, or areas. Instead Mahabaratha Mentions saraswati river which stopped flowing around BC 3000.(satellite imaging methods used to chart its course). Why did everything revolve around Indus valley and why is there a mention of South Indian forests in Ramayana? [Note: Ramayana is a book, not a real story, that means that the author knows what he is writing about and had a good knowledge of geography, atleast India and srilanka are known] 5. The basic flaw in Aryan theory is the same flaw as in Race theory (whites are superior to Blacks). All human beings originated in Africas, some moved to europe and some moved to India (which was then a a part of Africa). Then the continetns seperated and human development took different directions. Europeans are white (Cool climate), Africans are Black (near equator), Indians (in India), Mexicans and Red Indains are all wheatish color (tropical cliamte). Match their DNA all are same. Migration patterns are the same, North India of yester years is the Afghanistan and parts of Russia. u can deride everything by labelling it Hindutva, but do u have anything to prove otherwise? This is what I have for you, from the Hindu link \\

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 10:48 pm

Half of my post, which is important, is lost and I dont have the patience to type it again, may be later.

by **johnny** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 11:09 pm

nice post MM was really informative... gave me more confidence to believe in wat i had always believed... could u please type the missing part of ur post i am waiting for it... see ya... and hope justalil has started to atleast believe that AIT can be false and biased....

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 12:57 am

MM, the good looks of Indians was never an issue and in these days of racial diversity when beauties range from Halle Berry to Naomi Campbell (and a Hispanic Ricky Martin in the case of men) you dont need an AIT to explain anybody\'s good looks.
 
 Coming to the serious issues you raised, I admit my knowledge is limited to today\'s search:
 
 - The proof: The Indus Valley excavations suggest an entirely different culture than what are described in the Rig and other Vedas. The script is different. No evidence of domesticated horses or use of chariots. Worship of Mother Goddess (Vedas describe a masculine form of divinity), well planned and constructed cities (as against a village culture suggested in the vedas), wheels without spokes (Aryan wheels had spokes as per the Vedas) etc. Probably an invasion didnt take place, and probably the Harappans perished (flood, famine) and Aryans took over subsequently. But the indications are that Harappans and Aryans were not one and the same. The Aryans were not a very advanced tribe, so to expect them to bring the present day European culture is probably out of scope. They brought what they knew, and that helped them to survive, unlike the Harappans. And the dates - the anti-AIT lobby has played around with it like anything, that you can lose hope of any scientific method of substantiating a theory. That Aryans came from outside is established from the cultural similarity with ancient Iranians etc. (Zorastrians claim Aryan parentage too) Anyway, these are what i gathered today, and there are better documented sources.
 
 - Implications: I\'m more interested in what\'s in it for the Hindutva brigade. Why are they anti-AIT? By establishing that Aryans are in fact the Harappans, and that they are the indigenous population, the Hindtuvawadis can claim that India is a Hindu nation (doesn\'t this dangerously resemble the title of this thread?) which gave birth to Hinduism and rightfully belongs to Hindus. With this message well-drilled into the gullible minds, they can carry out any number of Ayodhyas and Gujarats, with the blessings of a passive and supportive populace (who can convince themselves with \"The \'outsiders\' should behave or perish\" - an ideology which Hinduism never stood for). There are also the offshoot of ultra-national pride such as Vedic Saraswati is the cradle of human civilization etc. (the very same kind of trash which was fed by Hitler to his masses), and we can see a very explosive concoction emerging.
 
 - Knowledge: Irrespective of all that was said above, should young minds be exposed to propaganda in the name of knowledge? We see that happening in neighboring Pakistan - which has become a terror factory (with gullible minds taking to terrorism) not just for India but the whole world. We need to consider all implications before giving a free hand to politicians to decide what are to be taught in schools.

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:08 am

Justa...You raise some valid points.
 What\'s in it for Hindutva forces. Honestly, I dont know. May be u re right, may be u re wrong. But whats in it for me? A sense of pride that my ancestors belong to India as much as I do. And that India was very much a nation like it is today, unlike the Romila Thapars marxist theory which states that India was never a untied state and doesnt have any History.
 
 Food For thought: Figure out how many of the modern India Historians, funded by foreing countries, are Communists/marxists. McCaulay kids.
 
 Secondly, the AIT tries to prove that India never had any civilization at all. It creates a divide betwen North and south (not relevant in todays society, but u never know, in our country we have seperatist movements based on accent!)
 The AIT theory is used in the North Eastern states to convert native tribes into christianity. The missionaries there very claim that Indians are not natives of India (ARyan invastion theory) so there is no need for them to be part of India (seperatist movements). This may be just one of the many reason, but surely it is one of them. As you can see, the seven sisters are Christian majority states, rest of population is Muslim majority (basically Bangladeshi immigrants).
 BTW, abt the Good looks thing, that happened during Raj, that means British Colonial rule. There were no halley barries and Naomi campbels at that time.
 
 
 Regarding the Harappan culture, my understanding is limited. It never interested me.
 
 You gave me Hitlers example, thats a very good example. It tells me that u can use information anyway u want. Hitler could have used the information to create a sense of national pride, his underlying intentions are altogather different, but the information, if right only helped create a strong sense of National pride. It may be false, but what if it were right? If Germans didnt go to war, then they would have been Todays only super power.
 Same goes for Hindus/Hindutva. If it creats a strong sense of national pride, then its good, but if it is to be used as a veil for their cruel agendas, then we need to counter it. But does that mean that we should accept something which is not true? Are u rejecting the AIT just because some Hindutva forces propose it, without any rationale?
 
 In my previous post I quoted a statement from Hindu, which says, that Indian History needs rewriting (the stanfor? prof says that) at the same time it should not be safronized. So u see, even they believe that the Indian History, as narrated by Britishers, is in-correct and it needs ot be corrected.
 
 To conclude: Figure out why our text books still call 1857 war of independance as \'Sepoy Mutiny\' and not Indias first war of Independance, while the American revolt is called war of Independance? Will it be safronizing History if we call it War of Independance?

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:23 am

Ok Justa...I typed AIT in google and this is what I found in Hindu:
 
 http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_frawley.html
 
 The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India
 By David Frawley
 
 NOTE: he is not Indian, so no question of saffronizing.
 
 Points ot note:
 First, it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other. This kept the Hindus divided and is still a source of social tension.
 Second, it gave the British an excuse in their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago.
 Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from Middle Eastern cultures. With the proximity and relationship of the latter with the Bible and Christianity, this kept the Hindu religion as a sidelight to the development of religion and civilization to the West.
 Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis, as any Vedic basis was largely disqualified by the primitive nature of the Vedic culture.
 
 
 
 I will give you more details about point four later. I have some interesting articles by Dr. Subash Kak about Indian mathematics and Industry.

by **Sinner** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:47 am

All, I want to add a few of my thoughts here : (1). Most of the Hindus who were converted in early centuries were due to of oppressive mughals and muslim invaders and not because of any search for \\

by **rainmaker** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 12:39 pm

I just read all the articles on this board, and only Morpheus & Co are making sense. But i disagree with him/her on one account. People like Tipu should participate in these discussions... his articles are senseless but hilarious...

Who is online