The Out of India Theory- Part 1 Chronology of the Rigveda.
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 07. 2014
- This video is a presentation of the talk given by Shrikant G Talageri in Indore under the auspices of the India Inspires Foundation on 2/1/2014. This is one of a series of talks, in which Talageri disproves the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) and proves conclusively that India was the Original Indo-European or Aryan Homeland, and that the Indo-European languages of Central Asia, Iran, West Asia and Europe were taken to those areas from India in ancient times. This is known as the Out of India Theory (OIT).
Sir, your work is completely based on the Chronology of the Madalas(chapters of Rigveda), based on the chronology of Rishis(sages who composed the hymns), and development of the Vedic sanskrit (like evolution of words and development of meters), which are the roots of it and hence they cannot be challenged or argued upon. You also considered the Physical environment like names(Toponyms) of the rivers, mountains and animals...
Your Theory is simply a "Checkmate" to the western scholars who allegedly spoiled the History of the subcontinent...
I support you...
Kush, I have written some comments at the top. Kindly give some counter points. My main thrust is that this author does not deal with "India" as such! Does "India" mean only Sanskritans? If these Sanskritans reverse migrated from "India", then many dark skinned people would have gone with them right? So I am puzzled as to what is it that the "oit" to most of us "Indians".
Gunzo Gunzo : The skin color changed as per climatic conditions and lifestyle as this migration took place thousands of years. If a British white man lives for few years in tamilnadu and if he works in a field under sunlight. Then you will notice color change.
harish H.M Then, tell me why there are darker colored people in the same latitude, longitude and altitude in Northern India along with lighter colored people side by side. FYI, the average color of a person in TN may actually be lighter than the average person in Bihar but that is beyond the point. The skin color is passed down the generations through genetics mainly. So, an association of color with identity of the people and historic migration cannot be simply overridden just like that. This author, as I understand, tries to justify the "reverse" migration theory. Even if he is right, it will only explain that Sanskrit speaking people migrated (a very tall order) from current day North western India which I call as RigVedia. The rest of current day India is not Sanskritan homeland. Even though this author seems to deduce that there was reverse migration, he gracefully explains the true nature of the population of current day India and the languages of the peoples of India since time immemorial. Most of India is of South Indian (aka Dravidian) and Munda stock.
+Gunzo Gunzo: It will not immediately change...it requires some time...time i can't define
Gunzo Gunzo : Also with in India we have different climatic condition...when i was in western Ghats i was fair...and now when i am in place where climatic condition different i became dark...Different skin colors is because migration within Indian...with in Bharatha Khanda...
11000 years old site found in Ladakh. Let's investigate more.
Our archeological department is sold out
@@shubhamdubey9561 - ASI has to rely on Western sources because it still has a colonial slave mindset which also plagues other Institutions in India.
@@descendedofrigvedicclans2216 - ASI was ordered by the High Court to provide evidence on Janambhoomi; otherwise they would have hid everything as per normal practice.
Very logical, methodical and brilliant presentation!
Actually there’s nothing logical here
India had waves of migrations proved by genetics:
1 The very first people to come into Indian subcontinent are Called Out of Africa migrants. ( OOA)
They are part of great coastal migrations from Africa.
2. The second set of people who came in are : Neo lithic people from Iran who came into Indus Valley region and mixed with the OOA. This population is called ASI
Ancestral South Indians
3. The Indo Europeans who speak Indo European languages migrated and mixed with this ASI
And formed ANI - ancestral North Indians.
The Aryan gene is called R1a1 ,
This wasn’t found in the Indus Valley population ( see Rakhigarhi DNA results )
Proving that R1a1 came later through Indo European migrations.
That’s all.
Read this genetic study by Father of Indian DNA fingerprinting:
Lalji Singh
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3769933/
You will understand better
@Akhand Bharat exactly the Rakhighari skeleton was female...and that too it's the only skeleton they are talking about with one skeleton they're giving result of entire population 😂...
Not sure when will it happen, but honestly sir you deserve and should get Bharat Ratna (that will surely happen) and Nobel Prize for such an intellectual work which changed atleast 200 years of bogus work by western Indologists. Very thankful to you for enlightening world with a true scholarly work.
Nobel Prize is not given on merit; instead it is based on how popular/well know the person or person's work is in the West.
The recent archeological evidence of the chariots found in Sanauli near Delhi is dated to 2200 BC. Mithani records talks extensively about horse training and chariot riding. But they are dated to 1450 BC.
So Srikanths theory goes in line with the recent archeological find. That is chariots are known to west Asia in 1450 BC by the Vedic people who used chariots in 2200 BC in sanauli, India whose decedents migrated to west Asia as Mithani people
Mittani and Hatti are descendants of IVC people's. IVC destruction forced people's to migrate to another civilised fertile land. So some went to Mesopotamia and some to South and east of india.
@@manojjadhav7518 There was no destruction of IVC. The people scattered as the climate changed!
@@manojjadhav7518 not convinced 🙁👎... Show the proof
Sir please continue to write more, continue to challenge the ‘Western ideology’. You have presented the abundance of evidence that appears to be missing in India. God bless. 🙏🏻
One of the most logical arguments i have ever seen!!
Europeans and Americans knows the truth but they simply will not acknowledge that India was their original source rather they will keep on glorifying Greek culture which itself a subculture of India because that suits their agenda. Anyway once India becomes number one again in politically and economically, I bet Europeans and Americans will change their stance and will claim India as their original source.
You are an ingnorant person. America or the western academia are not driven by any jingoistic drive. They are mostly free thinkers. This cannot be said about Indians. Indians are mostly jingoistic, narrow minded, never question their Gurus, just hero worshipping. Indians deride anyone who has thinking than what the religious people say.
India was number one? It is going to be number one again? Keep hallucinating.
What an irony. People claiming to be free thinkers call anyone with contrary views as jingoist and narrow-minded.
so called free thinkers still believe fantasy of aryan invasion/ migration, and anybody who objects them is immediately declared ''hindu nationalists'' why dont you people question your colonial gurus who were die hard christian evangelists who gave you aryan theory in the first place?
@@gunzogunzo4625 you are also a brainwashed product of the leftists who always deliberately trying to destroy the hinduism and its culture and it is happening about 175 years from the british era so the leftists always spread false propaganda and these leftist are the najayaj child of the british. Go to neeraj atri's youtube channel may that help you to know how our history is distorted and I will give you some other video links here
czcams.com/video/F-nNTGK0wFw/video.html
czcams.com/video/6YG6pXE8aDs/video.html
We are still not independent because these leftists are ruling us, getting huge amount of money from foreign church, converting people of rural India, misguiding youth, teaching distorted history, alleging false allegation on hindu organisation, etc, sympathize stone pelters and terrorist, they support azadi of kashmir, kerala, bengal etc, ultimately they are trying to break this country into fragments. They own print media, electronic media everything and we are seeing what they are trying to show us. They are Ravanas in Rama's mask. It is time to wake up and expose them.
India is the source of civilization
Sadhu, sadhu, well done! Muchas gracias
Dear shri shrikant G talageri,
Thank you for your scholarly linguistic analysis. Data presentation and logical analysis make the conclusions strong and almost irrefutable. Leaving aside the personal biases, the conclusions are very significant. As you pointed out any refutation should be data-based and neutral and logical pertaining to the core issue of internal textual evidences. Excellant lecture and thank you very much.
Your work is excellence personified Sir!
I mind you, he thoroughly castigated the people who say "Sanskrit is the mother of ALL languages". He categorically said that Malayalam / Tulu /Tamil / Telugu and Kannada as well as Munda languages are completely different from Sanskrit.
Having me pointed this out, would you still call his work as excellent? I would love to hear it again from you.
Gunzo Gunzo +Gunzo Gunzor Dude! Looks like you are unaware of different language & racial groups of World & especially India otherwise you would have understood his arguments logically !
First of all He is right that Sanskrit is not the mother of all languages, Its the mother of only Indo european group of languages bcuz Vedic is the oldest & purest tongue of this branch.
Secondly The dravidian language group is native to South India only & different from Sanskrit branch but dravidians had a peaceful & amicable relationship with Aryan branch (native to North India) for thousands of years thats why today 60% Tamil, telugu, malyalam etc have Sanskrit vocabulary & Vedas are revered in South India as well. After river Saraswati went dry in 2000BC there was an exodus of Vedic people from Sapt Sindhu to Mesopotamia, Central asia & South India.
Thirdly The Munda languages belong to the austro asiatic group of languages so they are not native to India, They migrated here from south east asia.
You must first know the basic principles of Linguistics to digest his theory, He has given excellent points in terms of Vedic meters & evolution of language from oldest Indian branch to latest European branch, Any unbiased scholar would be convinced or atleast take them into serious reference for further study !
Vedic viki Thanks. He was kind enough to have initiated a conversation with me to share his thoughts. I may not be 100% with him but he seems to me to be searching for some truth in his own balanced scholarly ways with human touch as well.
Anyway, back to your point, thanks again because there is another bunch of crowd going around saying "Sanskrit is the mother of ALL languages" to which you also seem not to subscribe. I wonder why you said "Sanskrit words" were revered! There were and still rules when words are borrowed from not only Sanskrit but from any other language from any direction in Tamil and Old Kannada to suit the phonetic flow of our languages. For the sake of it I would say Sanskrit words in our Language are just words and not "revered" words or such thoughts have not arisen! These Sanskrit words are in usage just as the word "Police" is in common usage now.
Anyway leaving alone silly talk above, I just want to know what is your theory / opinion about the origin of the black colored people in northern India? I am using the word "black" here without any association of inferiority or superiority (which was settled right under the nose of Hitler during Berlin Olympics) but just to denote "people". Do you think that these people were in the land of Rigvedic people and were always part of the Rigvedic people, by that I mean to ask you whether the light colored people and black colored people were sitting next to each other for millennia chanting mantras etc etc? Also, was the converse true? That is, did the lighter skinned people get pushed into Sudrahood and ultimately in large numbers? IMHO, irrespective what others say, whatever happened from whatever period, for whatever reason, darker people were stratified into Sudrahood and lighter colored people were stratified in the first two classes and movement was very rare if it ever in fact happened. So again, what is the origin of the darker people in Northern India?
Viki, You asked me as to who I am. Sure, I would answer in detail later on today and we can converse.
Gunzo Gunzo Hi I was reading your longer comment & I was trying to understand your view point but unfortunately in the process the comment got deleted on my stupid touch screen phone, Im really Sorry....Could you please repost your cmnt if you have copied & saved it as backup so that I can reply point wise effectively !!
Im sorry for inconvenience Bro!
Thank you very much Sir.I am looking forward to listen to more of your lectures.And I feel really sorry for western Scholars who have worked so hard to find their roots and to prove that the epicenter of Indo-aryan civilized society was somewhere near to them and then they end up criticizing in unprepared and foolish manner.
Dear Sir I have few requests, Can you please throw the light on Rigvedic Gods like Varun,Mitra,Maruts their existence and regime.And also the type of trade and life of that time.Thank you very much again, your work is very impressive and self proving.
The fact that Vishwamitra wrote the Gayatri Mantra in the Rig Veda, calls for the need to know when he was active. Words from the text, comparative mythology and comparative philology alone can't ascertain the date of the Vedas and the Upanishads. Also, it is shameful to be judged by foreigners about the facts of our great nation. Why do we have to depend on someone else's "review" and "attestation" to a hard labour to prove what is already proven?
we have to depend on foreigners because we dont do any reserch ourselves. we had to wait for Max Muller to help us understand the Vedas. "most Indians today pay lip service to the Veda and have no regard for the contents of the text."[
Why Part 2 of Out of India theory was not recorded or not uploaded (if recorded)?
So proud and relieved to see the depth of your scholarship. Everything was presented so logically, even a novice like me understood. Your effort is all the more commendable because I understood from another video that you are a banker by profession and doing this work out of passion. Shame on all those academics world wide and especially in India who are just bench-warming, or downright corrupt and intellectually dishonest (note I didn't say everyone is like that)
New education policy hopefully will help so that an engineer can research on history too.
Superab talk given by the author. Kindly inform us from where we can obtain your books
surprising part for me was that earlier before colonisation of india and plundering of its wealth it was Europeans and germans who first claimed India was their ancestral homeland. after they became rich with looted wealth they flipped it on us XD.
Aryan Invasion is a trick eyewas given by British and unfortunately supported by NEHRU and Company too. It is a bluff and there is no Arayans whatsoever who came to India. Your lectures are excellent.
natarajan
CV Raman, Ambedkar, Tagore, + Hindu Leaders until now have internalised this 'fake' Aryan Invastion Theory.
Once this is established.. Greek romans Egyptian Iranian Mesopotamian civilizations will all be from vedic roots...Alexander who is the pride of white race will be gone... Socrates Aristotle plato will be gone...india will emerge as the mother of all civilizations...this is big very big
+Nakul Kumar how wonderful for you
absolutely
Balista, thats how Europeans racists are now doing, basking in superiority (some of them, not all).
Samurai Jack I disagree completely
@Nakul Kumar, I doubt this cannot be so. If so, the cultures or mythological stories of all civilizations would be similar. Moreover, first early humans were from africa.
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070509161829.htm
www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/04/human-finger-bone-points-early-exodus-out-africa
So concluding that all of us are products of Africa would be meaningless since day by day, year after year more evidence keeps on unraveling.
Also westerners had to keep the chronology within 6000 (per Christian belief Adam and Eve incident occurred 6000 yr ago). Following your Linguistic Argument - Abraham is also a Sanskrit/Hindu name made of A + Brahmin (someone not brahmin)
Good work Mr Shrikant Talageri. Thank you and we need to keep spreading truth.
AIT completely demolished ! No western Indologist can refute this ! Great work Sir !
Indiainspires team, Whr do these talks happen? Would like to attend them.
Great to see Indians speak there views
Go read Ramayana, Rama refers to Ravana as "Aryan".
So much for people who celebrate Ravana as Dravidian and South Indian.. 😂
Whole AIT is stupid
@@adityakumarpandey2608
AIT/ AMT is a theory backed by linguistics and genetics.
So you are actually calling science as stupid !
@@randomperson6141 gebetics is a flawed argument while linguists is a controversial subject. Many latest archeological findings have challenged AMT while AIT is completely debunked.
@@randomperson6141 AIT is just hypothesis and speculations and nothing else. That isn't backed by any evidences.
@@randomperson6141 flawed
Dear Sir, please throw some lights on the linguistic difference/similarity between the early rigvedic and the dravidian people. Are the dravidians and the later rigvedic or the classical sanskrit people similar ?
The basic mistake we make it to overlap linguistics (language) with genetics (people), whereas the commonality can range from 0% to 100%.
In case of Rigvedic language and Dravidian languages, the commonality is not very high (as per linguistics)
In case of Rigvedic people and Dravidian people, the commonality is very high (as per genetics).
For example :There are Dravidian language speakers in Jharkhand (Kurukh), Bihar (Malto), and Balochistan/Kalat (Brahui), but these people have similar DNA (RNA marker incidence) to native Hindi (Jharkhand/Bihar) or Baluch (Balochistan/Kalat) speakers as well as Tamil/Telugu speakers in South India.
Really a great work....all your presentations showed us that we must challenge the history taught to us.
excellent work! we came to conclusion that different set of names originated in different period? is it possible that different set of groups must have wrote them. for e.g punjabi names sukhwinder and jatinder ends with inder but maharashtrian names dont and yet we both are contemporaries. vedvyas (krushna dwaipayan) name means compiler of vedas. as per my understanding he just compiled 3 vedas from various sources available at his time to prevent the loss/ corruption of the vedas. i think ramayan mentions 3 vedas and mahabharat mentions 4th (saam)
Are any genetic (DNA) studies available which support one or the other theories?
The theory is on movement of IE languages out of India, not descendants. So dont think there could be a genetic trail.
Please note that genetic evidence can’t tell you anything about the origin of language and culture. It can only tell you whether you are intermixed or distinct. Whether the gene flow was from out of India or into India is irrelevant to whether the Vedic culture originated in India or out of India. Those 2 things are independent.
Yes
It says part 1, is there a part 2 ? Can anyone share, can't find it.
czcams.com/play/PLE6GRFmoDqSJsNaVuCrlSRO0hUYn6u_0a.html
Is there a part II to the Out of India Theory talk?
Thanks for the info about Sudas and the dasha rajas .
Still hoping for the other parts of the lecture .
Thank you for your great work
absolutely brilliant !
Great work. Perhaps the greatest arguments in favour of OIT. I would like to know whether any serious attempts have been made to refute the claims of this Acharya. Again thanks alot for making this available.
Can you read my comments questioning theory. I would appreciate your reply.
Kindly take my comments seriously. If what this author says is all correct, then the Sanskritans would have taken black colored Indians to central Asia and further right? After all, vast majority of Indians even today even in Northern India even in Punjab and Gujarat are dark skinned people or am I wrong?
Skin colour has nothing to do with this. Gypsies went from India, how come they r fair & not like "dark skinned" Indians?
kaoncond I don't know what kind of gypsies you are talking about, but gypsies in Eastern Europe have noticeably darker skin than local white people, and resemble indians in their facial features.
Possibility is that this happened probably long time ago, Indus valley civilization is larger than Egypt and Mesopotamia combined, if this happened more than 10k years ago, then genetic mutations happened and people stature and complexion change.
awesome body of work and thinking.
Europeans moved to their present lands/countries from somewhere, around starting 40,000 years ago according to evolution theory (if I understand it correctly), so did they all come from Anatolia or Mesopotamia? or another other main route is Indus?.
Shrikant Sir, you are inspiring to us.
Shrikant Sir: one feels you deserve Bharat Ratna far more than most people who have got it. I hope I can see you get it Sir.
Where is part 2
Referring to the quote by Michael Witzel (@14:52) where he says "...not one word, not a syllable, not even a tonal accent were allowed to be changed"
Once when I had gone to Nasik for PitriTarpana, I heard the priests chanting the PurushaSukta and what surprised me was to hear them say पुरुख: (Purukhah) instead of the पुरुष: (PuruShah)
And in Kerala, where they say the ल् sound ("-La") where it the letter is त् (-th)
it is surprising to see such distortions.
If anyone could explain why it would be much apprecuated.
that is due to shakha uchaarana. the priest must be a yajurvedi kaanvshakin
It is very interesting but... Sorry, Sir, you talk waaay too fast . I am from Switzerland, I do speak French and I have really hard time to hang on. But thank you for the talk.
It's all about getting used to the accent. Initially I too had hard time understanding.
You can also use CZcams close captioning to read what the speaker is speaking.
Just reduce speed to .75x for the accent
Wonderful explanation Sir.
Our history book should be revised later or sooner. It must be based on as close as the truth we can obtain logically. Such logical enterpreration must be taken into serious consideration.
Great lecture ..,.
So many books ha been written by different scholars on this issue but no one has been able to provide any concrete persuasive answer. The more they bring in new theories, the more complicated and confusing it is getting. Such a great rich
scripture, I think we should try to get wisdom and knowledge out of it. Let us forget the racial implication of the Rig Veda and its origin.
Sir, the National geographic Genographic project has conclusively shown that the first humans came from Africa, came into India thru Yemen through sea, (they could cross sea because of low sea levels) and then migrated further to Europe and beyond. The 'Out of India' Aryan migration is now proven beyond doubt, much to the chagrin of the anti-saffronists.. As we say in India, 'Satya meva jayate' truth will triumph.
Vidya C Who is Satya? Who is Meva? How do you know they two win? 😀
"Proven without doubt". What nonsense. You people rely on the flimsiest of evidence to prove your precious Out of India theory.
I have a slightly different take on this African exodus...and they coming into India through that route. It's based on the tectonic plates shifting. Evidence can be found in Madhya Pradesh...and then the migration upwards of north through Ganga...Yamuna...Saraswati on wards...and thence also to the South of India....we should start looking at this area more seriously. I have sketchy evidence as of now...
If you are going speak English, speak it clearly, slowly, calmly. Adjust the sound levels to get rid of the twang. Put a captions on it. I'm interested but this is most hard to follow.
Very interesting. Does the genetic evidence from ancient DNA also prove this?
Irrelevant for linguistics.
Please note that genetic evidence can’t tell you anything about the origin of language and culture. It can only tell you whether you are intermixed or distinct. Whether the gene flow was from out of India or into India is irrelevant to whether the Vedic culture originated in India or out of India. Those 2 things are independent.
@@SantoshGairola Gene is not the marker of language...one should know who have minimum knowledge in biology
Great work very clear
I agree with the basic thesis.
However, I think he may have brushed-over the subject of the Dasysus too quickly, although I can see how he was focused primarily on aspects of the subject. I think it is an important subaltern of this whole subject. The Five Tribes clearly considered themselves different from the Dasyus. This is seen in verses such as that the Dasyus are “surpassed” by the Aryans (II 11:19) and the sages prayed that the Lord Indra would not “give the water of the Aryans to the Dasyus (X 49:3). They also prayed “may we overcome the Dasyus” (V 70:3). Therefore, the Rishis clearly did not consider the Dasysus to be similar or even connected with them at all. “They are like Vritras” (X 49:6) and obviously rivals.
Statements regarding raids to “gain the wealth of the unbeliever (the Dasysus)” (I 81:9) are legion throughout the whole of the Rig Veda and the Sama Veda. Interestingly, in the Atharva Veda, which is an Iron Age document, there are only a handful. It would seem the conflict was settled by that time.
There were several distinctions between the Aryans and the Dasysus.
First and most greatly emphasized, the Dasysus were religiously distinct from the Aryans. They are “a hostile host without gods” (III 1:6& X 22:8) and the Devas regard them as foes as well. Lord Indra destroys the “unbelievers:” (I 175:3; II 12:10; VIII 2:14 & 98:6) as does Lord Agni: (VII 93:5 & 104:4 X 87:10) and Lord Rudra: (I 64:3) and the sages pray that the Ashvins would “behead the unbelievers” (VI 62:10). Lord Indra also “beheads” them (X 23:2). Lords Mitra and Varuna “exterminate” them (VI 67:9). The text gives us only one detail about the “false gods” when it is written that “Indra destroys the phallus-worshipers” (X 99:3).
Second, the Dasyus did not seem to speak the same language as the Aryans as they are “babbling unbelievers” confounded by Lord Agni (VII 6:3).
I have to wonder if the Dasyus were the Indus Valley Civilization with their stone buildings. This is because Lord Indra is said to have overthrown “100 stone built cities” (IV 30:20) and the Dasysus had “forts of iron” (II 20:8) not literally but poetically as indestructible. This reminds me of the statement of the Goths when they rampaged though the Eastern Empire “we are at peace with walls” since they had no siege technology. The same is said of cities (VIII 100:8 & X 101:8) that they are “iron.” There is even mention of “a stone cow fold” (X 67:3) associated with the Asura but this could simply be calling the Dasysus the name 'Asura' in the way the Germans in WW II were called 'demons,' especially since I have already quoted the verse that they were like the Asura Vritras in his dragon form. Perhaps these are Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro. One point to further support this is the 'Harappan Lingam' since the Dasysus were associated with phallus-worship, as mentioned.
All that this tells us is that the Five Tribes were in conflict with another people in the region and that both engaged in cattle and horse raiding against each other in much the same way that the American Indians once did on the Northern Plains. I don't think this is uncommon in human history and it is not proof that the Aryans invaded from outside. In the universe of possibilities there are a number of possibilities which can be constructed to account for all the facts given in the texts.
James Schuur Hi James! Certainly there were groups which were in constant conflicts with each other. Rigved gives just one perspective of writers of that time. Shrikant mentioned that that not all people on the subcontinent were writers of Vedas.They were Puru's who were basically writing the vedas with the old books written by families.As Asura also said to be enemies but at some points even Varun has said to be one of the Asur and Infact the Zorasthurian's call themselves Asur and consider Dev as bad people and in Vedas Asur are bad and Dev are good.And there is constant conflicts seen between Dev and Asur throughout the Indian Mythology.But there is no clear differentiation of these people over skin color. And for that matter if Asur were dark flat nosed people as said by many western scholars then which will mean the Arab people who called themselves Asur were of dark skin...this will start whole lot of confusion.When I read those hymns I also felt that the important person of that time was praised immensely in the hymns and prayed to provide people riches who were writing these hymns as they considered themselves holy and everyone apart from them was considered non God worshipers cause they had different ways of worshiping God.But it seems all these societies were coexisting and there are no proves that one had better harappan like settlements and other didn't. Plus at Harrapan sites many fire atlar are found being of this society and being Hindu I know what does that means. I have seen lot of images of the sites of the Fire Altars which are definitely not for cooking but for holy rituals.Which explains that these sites were inhabited by the vedic people.
Hi Sir, this is a wonderful work and I am not saying it because I am an Indian (Bharatiya). No-one can challenge (leave the western people) the evidences as these are based upon facts. They will not change AIT as their entire education eco-system of the indology (and other related branches) will collapse. The only question though is: how to develop and put this in our history book so that ours kids understand who we are. I am not worried what europeans study/believe as Vedic literature/culture is ours and not theirs and I do not care and we do not need their certification who we are.
I sincerely thank you for all the harwork you have put into the research and I am going to teach my kids by going through your books who they are. Please lets not even try to convince the European academia. We know, they will not accept because of a very valid reason: They will need to change everything that is related to Vedic literature.
Sir you are saying that oral translation was transmitted without any mistakes for thousands of years. Not even a word was missed. This means that those Rishis must have been very talented equivalent to Einstein in today's term. Is it possible? Is it realistic? People even forgot the Ashokan Bramhi script in less than a thousand years after Ashoka engraved it. The word Brahmi they found it in Buddhist text Lalitbistara of 1st century as Bramhi. Which some scholars interpreted as Brahmi and that it was form Bramha himself. How come this not refereed in the Vedas. Whole issue have been made very complicated due to mixing with myths and and stories that has no historical proof.
You are great sir
@t s Muthuraman I think u r great great fool. Without having any proof if u say anyone a liar then either u r a fool or a bastard like Periyar.
Astronomy chronology of Rigveda can be as it was done by prof. Nilesh with regard to Ramayana and Mahabharata. It may be scientific.
It is not however
Ramyan date can fall either 5114 B. C. Or 5635 B. C.
Vedas weren't written down for a long time. They are Shrutis- that which were heard and learnt and passed down the generations.
The ghanapatam was codified in such a way that there was no way that any letter in the shloka would be misheard.
Every letter in every mantra was repeated in patterns so that it wouldn't go wrong.
So you can't just depend on inscriptions.
Vedas existed much before the scripts or writing came into existence.
gr8 work... thank you sir.../
I mind you, he thoroughly castigated the people who say "Sanskrit is the mother of ALL languages". He categorically said that Malayalam / Tulu /Tamil / Telugu and Kannada as well as Munda languages are completely different from Sanskrit.
Having me pointed this out, would you still call his work as gr8? I would love to hear it again from you.
Gunzo Gunzo This is a well accepted fact in India that South Indian languages are Dravidian languages and Sanskrit is an Indo-European language. So that is not an issue at all.
Thanks for that. My point is that it is a stupid claim of mindless Sanskrittan Indians (not this author though in my understanding) who blabor that "Sanskrit is the MOTHER of ALL languages". I find the Indians to be truly irrational in claiming Sanskrit is the "language of Gods"! A very tall order!
Gunzo Gunzo Yeah few fanatics may claim it. But Sanskrit is a one of the root language of Proto dravidian family basis for many North Indian languages. At the same time or even before sanskrit an alternative version of Brahmi language was spoken. At almost same time, the class of Proto dravidian languages developed which later resulted in Tamil and further the Proto south central language family of Telugu Oriya were developed. But during the later vedic period i.e when Atharvaveda and Samaveda talked about ayurveda and Carnatic music these two class of languages interacted. That is the reason we also find few sanskrit words in dravidian languages too. But both origins were different. It is few fanatics who just spread divisions of Aryan invasion which led to more hatered. I hope I did not bore you.
Gunzo Gunzo I would also want to tell that no much ASI excavations were stressed upon the early age of North East India and South India which is sad but that doesn't deny us to take pride on the history of Indus valley civilization and sanskrit too. After all though I am from South India I am first of all an Indian
Blind people will never understand this
Seems like this aspect of Eurocentricism is showing some major cracks...
what exactly us Eurocenticism, this is a fake propaganda create in last 10 years to have some wind behind political battles, never have the british or germans claimed that Rig Veda or latin languages were created in Europe.
I would like to examine this, but it is too hard to understand and no captions.
I am looking into ancient history. So, a well thought out chronology is very helpful to understand to compare to others, and bridge the histories back further. While I once considered an out of India hypnosis, I have made a number of advances in understanding, but the accuracy of the history let's us down in determining places, and which is the oldest places. But the candidate list is short. There is Agartha (Asgard), a place in the attic north, South/South East Asia, the Caucuses. Sumeria, Egypt, Atlantis etc, are all third or more level places. Our History starts stopping at this level.
The issue we face, is descriptive names and location transference. Like the Greeks, they have their places of the gods, sacred mountain, and other places, which borrow names. And the names, change through local language population, description. So, the official personal name might not be there. This creates confusion and opportunities for miss--information. The Greeks had a a version of stories and characters already corrupted. I'll have to sleep and take this up latter.
I managed to determine the approximate locations where of a few mountains. But, the location of the first are in the caucuses/dead sea, and earlierr towards the Iranian border. But, Thus has proven to be true. We then ga spread around the capsin sea.. there is an association between races with names staring with A, or A in their name. They go east, and return later. So, it seems the origin with there rather tha southern Asia. It was there, where localised flooding, and geological folding led to additional flood stories. But, you get maybe Argartha.
I had
Why Vedas didn't mentioned anything about Indus Valley Civilization?
Because the vedas are philosophical, ritual guidance texts for Vedic priests. There are not political, historical texts. We can deduce bits and pieces of history and chronology from them by the names of rivers and certain geographical areas and names of kings etc
@Malini salim babu please don't comment on something you obviously don't know anything about...stick to pop culture please
If a book is written (composed) by adding chapters for several generations then on can find sabu dana khichidi in Rigveda also......
Nope because it is constant. You cannot change Veda now. It is constant for 3000 years.
😂😀😀😀
Very good example of Mari kingdom, we see some proper names and deities from Indian continent, but no language out.
We have wide spread word like skt. naktan नक्तन्, lat. nom. nox, gen. noctis, germ. Nacht, engl. night etc. If the word it is first attested into Rigveda not means that other languages don't use the word already! But in the case of skt. aapa आप we have no doubt it's an neologism entered into Indian continent.
Where it's actually the demonstration of Out of India languages?
There is also Udak, ud is used for water. The work samudra means huge reservoir of water - ocean Sam+ udra. Udak and Voda are related. So are Water and Vatura.
Aab in iranian ,,Aqua in Greek 👈👈👈👈
The division/sub-division of Rigveda shows that it was compiled over a long period of time (a few thousand years). And in such a long time period, a natural attrition process would have occurred where some verses would have been dropped, lost or replaced. It is simply not possible for RigVeda to have maintained its size 100% over such a long period. Therefore, Talageri's assertion that Rig Veda is same as it was as a 'tape recording' shows preservation of quality at 100%, not size.
Bori a place near Pune, objects escalated suggest civilization 600000 years old.
When u shoot please try to show the slides as well...horrible
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
अतीव उत्तमम्
🙏🙏🙏
I have found sumerian records of a place named aratta from where they imported lapis lazuli. And sutras and Mahabharata place this region in punjab afghanistan eastern iran. And proof is sankrit word for competitor rival and enemy is aratti. So it means indus wasnt vedic civilization but they were sister and rival civilization of kurukshetra in harayana.
I still see videos claiming ait as fact saying that it's all based on mountains of evidence, I don't wanna argue with them because I feel sad about the depth of confusion or insecurities they feel to want to claim another's achievements as theirs,I hope real soon we do away from the lies they tell and take back what truly belongs to us
To spoken knowledge what has been also written up in some point of history cant give any specific date, i dont think that date matters at all you can interpret from stories that some of stories are from stone age some after words,and particular words developed during time. Stories so on knowledge is same still in 1800 in northern Asia/Europe even never written down and goes along Iran and India. good example is egg as birth of the earth and flood.. Only specific words has changed meaning to support exiting power. Normally writing is way to make nation as whole make it stronger, preserve history and so to people to identify the self to history as continuity, there is spiritual need for that.
Pauses and tone is horrible . could not bear to listen even though the topic was very interesting
You must explain the reason
Latest video of Shri Shrikant Talageri on Out of India Theory: czcams.com/video/DKEpERD_U4I/video.html [Aug, 2022]
Aap chronology samajhiye 😁😁👌👌🙏🙏
The harappans had the spoked wheel . He chakra symbol in all its scripturr
अरक (spoke)
So the conclusion is that if you remove Archaeological markers especially Saraswati from old rig Vedic books then there is nothing to connect Indian Aryan civilization to India and hence the validation of the invasion/migration theory.
This analysis may well be a milestone in recreating the true history of Indian civilization.
In this video, I demolish the AIT. If you are interested, there are two others that complete it.
czcams.com/video/aPZFXCHef1U/video.html
So India might actually be the mother of all civillizations? I thought it was Mesopatamia?
There is no language connection between Europeans and Mesopotamians.
Meh, but some of the oldest texts and monuments date back to 3600 bce which was in Mesopatamia.
Rakhigarhi just dated to be 7,000 years old, but establishing connection is still in it's infancy
or may be we didn't read enough material.
What about Mehrgarh? I think it dates back to 7000 bce.
I read about Rakhigarhi just few days ago, they dated it to be I think 7000bce.
et l'Afrique? y'a eut beaucoup de vagues migratoires quand même
matlab ki AIT ka tinke ka sahara bhi Chhoot geya. No migration of language into India and Sanskrit probably sits on the top of the ladder
ASTROLOGICAL RECORDS CAN BE TRACED FROM VEDAS TO CONFIRM THE DATES. OR ECLIPSE OF THESE TIME AND CAN BE TRACED BY COMPUTER MODEL OF TODAY OR NOT
Why is it called Out of India THEORY and not a factual migration; AIT is a theory, false one, but OIT should be called OIM for evidenced migration not a theory, surely, after Talageriji's facts above.
With all due respect to your research, you have too much dependence on Witzel. When you are refuting AIT, it makes sense to quote AIT scholars, but when proposing a new theory like OIT, you should have put the theory as the primary topic. Why do you keep quoting a theory you refuted in your previous lectures in the series? You should put forth your assumptions, evidence, logical arguments, sources, potential objections and answers, and conclusions as the primary topic.
He is defeating their final thesis using their own arguments & findings so that they don't accuse him as some Hindu nationalist or Indian nationalist.
IF YOU FIND ANY ASTORNOMICAL EVIDANCE THIS WILL BE BETTER SEND ME THE REFERAANCE TO ME OF SUCH
"Malhotra" name originates from the Old Rig Veda because of the suffix 'hotra'. Ancient Punjabi surname!
Must read parigter
And know.... "chariot"found in India......time to change the history..
Please study the recent genealogical evidence of people migration and see if there are changes to your arguments.
Started listening to this lecture with a lot of scepticism, thinking it would be the usual right wing jingoism. But I must admit, this lecture made me think that OIT could be a possibility, at least as much as the AIT theory is.
oh, really proof it?? Science needs proof where the fuck is archeological and carbon dating proof in South Russia???? Lol no proof means you are liar. Or you kill me like your God Pope killed Galileo for telling truth. Lol false believers
There is no proof for AIT too only linguist way they try to proof it. Why is that you believe them only
I am not saying believe only this. But you think OIT as right jingoism. But you think AIT is pure logical?? Lol. Please look at those great leftist says about Ram mandir. Please go get RTI from court for Ram mandir see their great argument. For your example one of them says she don't know about mugal structure design neither she research on Ram mandir nor she ever being in Ayodhya but she "believe" there was no mandir. Lol do you think supreme court is stupid and Alhabad high is stupid?? Understand this those AIT supporters hate Hinduism and Can help a rapist mass murder and even those temple looters. Better be central view or right view than left if you want truth or you love your religion
@t s Muthuraman I am not claiming birth of ram. I said there where Ram Mandir on which Muslim built Mosques. Like they did everywhere in the world. Nalanda Destroyed by whom?? Those historians are false who claim there were no Ram Mandir. It was a dispute for Mandir not birth place
The place was known as Ram Janamsthan. But that is a matter of belief. It cannot help you prove that Shri Ram was actually born there. You can only prove that people believed this place to be Shri Ram's birthplace.That belief existed even during the Mughal era and was proven in the court.
But more importantly it was proven that a Ram temple existed before the Babri Masjid was built over it.
Less Evidence, more talk.
Lol... No listening only commenting.
I listened to the author for three hours. I always had a belief that if nobody questions at least some part of the presentation, then they had just been sleeping through or they just act as "yes" people just they do in many many religious gatherings of all sorts. All of the commenters so far for this videao seem to be from "yes" people.
This author is to be commended for the following assertions:
(1) Linguistically Sanskrit and Euoropean Languages are in the same class of languages. This is a concept adopted by all scholars and hence no conflict.
(2) He outrightly dismissed the idea of many Sanskritans who say "Sanskrit is mother of all languages". He in fact scolds them unequivocally. I admire this man for his neutrality. He gave very simple explanation for this saying that for the number "3" the words are "Moonu" (or similar) in Tamil / Telugu / Kannada / Malayalam and Tulu while it is "thiri" or something like that in Sanskrit, Latin, English, German etc etc. (It is not just one word the entire counting words, onnu, rendu, moonu, naalu, anju, aaru, elu, ettu, ombathu, pathu (hathu),... nooru are completely different in these languages from Sanskrit). He also clearly and unequivocally stated that Munda languages are are also completely different from Sanskrit. Again, my laurels to him.
(3) It seems to me that he is completely in agreement with the title of the problem with the AIT theorists: "Since Sanskrit and other Indo European languages have very common words, one needs to explain how this could be so; either people went from "India" to central Asia and Europe or the reverse is true but only one of this is true".
(4) I have a problem to start with both on AIT guys and OIT guys. Why are they using the words "India"? During the times under discussion which obviously is the time of Rig Veda, there was no country called India. India did not exist as we are accustomed to these days! This author also correctly places the "Rig Vedic" land in Punjab/pakistan/Afghanistan and possibly a bit of Rajastan and Gujarat. So I really condemn the use of the term "India" in such discussions. Unless this RigVedic homeland was, let us say in Assam or Vizag country or Trivandrum or area around Chennai and Bangalore, it is very counterproductive to call "rig vedic" homeland to be "India"!
(5) I also object to the use of the word "Indians". In those days there were no "Indians". I can coin a new term called "Rig Vedia" which comprises of the lands of current north western India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and also call the people who lived there as "rig vedic people" or simply as "Sanskritans".
(6) In my humble opinion, this author more or less seems to say that that this "Rig Vedia" was a "country" belonging to the superset of various IE tribal lands. Once the problem is restated as this, one can perhaps accept his theory of OIT or rather "Out of Rig Vedia".
So, temporarily atleast, I agree with this author that OIT (I mean out of Rig Vedia) is a possibility.
But then this author, for what reason I do not know, does not say a word about how his ancestors landed up in Karnataka which is a homeland of the people who were counting the numbers as "onnu, rendu, moonu" etc! He also does not say why Sanskrit or related languages are not the language of the masses from that day to this day in vast territories of current day India. His own boundaries of Rig Vedia is far in the north and west. He neither raises the question nor answers the question of all of the peoples in current day India. Though he says that the dravidian language remaining far north (Brauhi) is that of some people who migrated "recently", he completely omits saying anything about the people of the south. Nor does he touch about the darker skinned people of North India itself! He does not touch upon the skin color of the people at all. In a scholarly article like this, I think it is very much OK to talk about skin color as well and make the dots connect.
Importantly, I want to question this author as to why the Sanskritans "moved" out of "Rig Vedia" to central Asia and onwards. Was it to find pastoral lands? for mining and metallurgy? Or perhaps their uncle and aunts were living there? After all Southern India and Eastern India, would have had people and land and food and water in plenty while those areas like Iran, Anatolia etc would have been colder and not that much greenery! Please tell me how come that people from "Rig Vedia" went as far away as Germany and made them to count 3 as as "Three" but just neither bothered nor successful in making the people in the current day South India to do the same? Why is he not explaining anything about the real people of India?
I commend the author because his attack of the problem is correct. We all know that language of peoples can be changed easily if the rulers are bent on doing that. However, no language can be "created" just like that! So my own conclusion is that the people of all of current day India were black, the rulers came from the west and changed the language of the peoples in the north but failed to advance militarily further into the south; they just settled there and created their caste system. It is not within the realm of common sense that "Indians" reverse migrated through harsh terrains of the north west crossing mountains and deserts (for what? Please tell me)!
I love this author for having scolded the ordinary stupid "Indians" who say things like "Sanskrit is the mother of all languages", "Vedas were spoken by Gods since the beginning of times" and such complete nonsense.
I am so much amazed that all the "yes" people below could not write a point in favor or against!
If the Sanskritans migrated from India to central Asia and onwards, they would have taken taken with them the four fold class system as well as darker colored "Indians" too, right? I honestly believe that this author is a very neutral scholar. He perhaps did not think about this. Can someone answer on behalf of me? Please.
Gunzo Gunzo Firstly, the four class system is post-Rigvedic. Secondly, the emigrants were from non-Rigvedic Indo-European tribes (Anus and Purus, while the Rigvedic people were Purus) to the west of the Purus. Thirdly, the Anus and Druhyus to the west of the Purus were perhaps from more "white" skinned areas than even the Purus, let alone the people further south and east. Fourthly, as in all IE migration theories, the languages were transmitted by complicated historical processes from the original speakers, through chains of migrations in different stages, and the ultimate speakers of the IE languages were the local people of each area, and not genetic descendants of the original emigrants.
Thank you for appreciating the rationality of my basic approach and attitude at least. The questions you have raised, however, are based on the fact that you have seen only the first part of the "Out of India theory", which gives the evidence about the dating of the Rigveda based on datable records. The other two parts (actually not yet recorded) would answer all your questions.
The second part gives the textual evidence: The Rigvedic Aryans were the Purus of Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh. The Indo-European languages now found outside India as far west as Europe (and now all over the World) are descendants of languages originally taken out of India by migrants from two other non-Puru tribes to their west (the Anus and Druhyus), and the people of the rest of India were the other internal tribes of India (Yadus, Turvasas, Ikshvakus, and other recorded and unrecorded ones), speakers of other IE languages, Dravidian, Munda, etc.. So my description of the situation is, as in your own words, that the Rigvedic land belonged "
to the superset of various IE tribal lands" extending inside India. The texts actually describe the spread of the Anus and Druhyus also from the interior of India into Afghanistan and beyond.
And we have to use words like "India", Punjab, Haryana, Europe, etc. even if those names were not there in those times. We can not describe areas in latitudes and longitudes. And India is described in the texts as one unit, by whatever name, and however diverse and itself consisting of totally independent units. And this area is one physically enclosed area bounded by the oceans and mountains. We call it India today, so we certainly can use that term to describe the area. And isn't it better to call it by a name "India" common to the whole area rather than as "Rigvedia" on the basis of a text, the Rigveda, which was one text composed by the people of one small part of the whole?
You find it puzzling as to why Rigvedic people "went as far away as Germany and made them to count 3 as as 'Three' but just neither bothered nor successful in making the people in the current day South India to do the same". No-one set out on a missionary program of making people change their language. The changes took place as part of historical processes unknown to us. Wherever you place the IE homeland, this puzzle will continue to apply to all the other IE areas outside the homeland area. In the case of the Indian homeland, we have textual evidence (my yet unrecorded second part of the OIT) which records the migrations of the IE groups (not "Rigvedic" Puru, but mainly "non-Rigvedic" Anu and Druhyu) out of India as well as the historical developments which triggered off these migrations.
My third (and unrecorded) part of the "Out Of India" theory shows that all the linguistic evidence without exception also proves the Indian homeland theory. This is basically a language issue and not a skin colour one. The dark-skinned Sinhalese speakers (here you have a group of probably Dravidian speakers oif the south who adopted a branch of IE language which uses archaic words like "watura" for water) and the fair-skinned Kashmiris are both IE speakers within India.
Show less
You have asked above why the OIT is so important to Indians from other parts of India. Well, I think any Indian will be proud of achievements of Indians from any other part of India. If the IE languages spoken almost exclusively over four of the seven continents (N. and S. America, Australia and Europe) and importantly in parts of Asia, and known to most other non-IE speakers as well, originated in a part of India, all Indians will be proud of it. I myself am as proud of the Andamanese as of of the Vedic people: the Andamanese constitute one of the three native races of India and one of the six language families of India, and I am greatly pained over their present commercial exploitation and state of near-extiction.
Moreover, it is also a question of the mischief being done in India by regional and casteist forces in the name of the AIT. A refutal of the AIT can be a matter of satisfaction for any Indian from any part of India. All this is apart from the objective academic value of the question.
Shrikant Talageri When do you plan to deliver, record, and upload the other two parts in this series? It's rare to see indigenous, especially self-taught, Indian scholars of linguistics. Please make it soon. Very very soon.
Caucasian s may have migrated into south Asia as pastoralists
Out of India? Let's just assume it's the ultimate truth if anything it can't provide reasons why the Europeans, Central Asians and West Asians lack pan Indo centric genetic pool amongst their population.
@@adityakumarpandey2608 R1a1 is prevalent across Eurasia and south Asia what I referring here is if the Out of India theory is in fact accurate why is that central asian and particularly European don't carry indian haplogroupes like H as well as haplogroupe L ?
@@adityakumarpandey2608 🙄🙏🏼
Out of India theory is genetically wrong. Haplogroup P is the ancestors of Haplogroup R* and haplogroup P is not found in Indian subcontinent.
But genetically wrong doesn't make it wrong because it's proved by other fields
Is there any proof that steppe pastoralists came here with sanskrit
Well genetic evidence has once and for all set this to rest
I agree with Talageri. But please note genetic evidence doesn’t say anything about culture and language.
@Malini salim babu The latest genetic evidence which shows no steppe pastoralist or early Iranian farmer DNA in the Rakhigarhi skeleton proves that language and culture of the IVC/SVC and larger scale agriculture in the subcontinent was indigenous to India and did not come by way of any migration that might have happened in later years.. And besides the out of India migrations is proved by the fact that the same study identified skeletons in Iran and Turkmenistan whose DNA showed that they were of IVC ancestry and were buried with artifacts from the Indian subcontinent. Please read the linguistic, hydrological, archaeoastronomical, archeological, agricultural and genetical studies before you comment.
@Malini salim babu again nobody is saying there were no migrations..IVC is something like 80% of the modern day Indian genome.. The steppe contribution according to the genetic study is after the decline of the IVC period.. again the vedic people (no such thing as vedic Aryan) were not nomadic or pastoralist!!! The Vedas/upanishads/puranas have lots of urban moorings and the earliest books of the Vedas refer to eastern India ( haryana,eastern up) and the later books refer to Western up and further west.. this shows the cultural moving from East to west.. Please read talageri to get an idea..I hate having to write long treatises to explain all this to newbies..
Oh please..r u seriously kidding me with the peer reviewed cartel bull?? They have been exposed for the frauds that they are in field after field except in the hard sciences like physics, chemistry and biology..To wit Peter bogossian, Alan Sokal etc al.. that imbecilic coward Michael witzel wouldn’t even take Talageri’s challenge to debate him or atleast refute his linguistic analysis. The lot are nothing but echo chambers filled with cowards who protect their turf with no regard to scientific research or evidence but simply to stroke their egos. And why would I reference any of that crap if I disagreed with their premise, methodology, evidence interpretation or false translation. Ok just to entertain you here is an idea. The AIT scholars if you have been reading the latest developments have after losing in the field of linguistics, archaeology and archaeoastronomy, hydrology, studies of landmass Submergence after the end of the ice age, have abandoned those fields and renaming their theory aryan migration instead of invasion and are now taking refuge in the field of genetics. What they fail to note is that genes don’t tell you anything about language and culture. For example the R1A1 gene which is considered a marker for the aryan race is 23% in the southern Kota tribe which is considered pure Dravidian, 26% in the Chenchu tribe, above 50% in the Manipuri Meiti tribe which speaks a SINO Tibetan language, in the Arabic speaking shamma tribe of Kuwait 46%, Hebrew speaking ashkenazi Levite’s 52% and all of these are considered non aryan!!! But now the so called aryan races like Zoroastrians who are endogamous and the gene should be the highest concentration the gene is less than 20%,in Germans the pure aryan race 17%, in Brits who colonized us its 11%. Now if I brought you blind samples of this and asked you to pick in which population did the so called aryan race and religion and culture and language originate you would obviously pick the wrong population because based on your theory the population with the highest concentration of R1A1 would be picked but that is found in the non aryan population!! So there goes your genetic evidence for AIT! Thanks for being my onion for the day. Cheers.
@Malini salim babu it's like trying to wake up someone who is pretending to sleep.. It's impossible.. And who told you IVC people didn't use metals or had horses? OMG you really are talking out of ignorance of the literature.. Please read and understand the studies before commenting on a public forum and make a fool of yourself
The rig veda refers to thick lipped and flat nosed dasuys who worshiped a phallic symbol
Rig Veda was strictly scripture of Bharat clan, after battle of 10 kings all other local clan's and their gods/belief systems were integrated into the later Vedic scriptures over time.
This could be another circuitous attempt to slowly encroach on Dravidian identity. Modi, BJP, RSS, and Co. have started bringing three language policy to rub Hindi on South India. Tamil people immediately responded with alertness and Modi backed down little bit. I don’t know when they will try to sneak in again, but a strong and unequivocal threat of separate country must be put forward to ward off from imposing Hindi on South. Threat has to be so credible that any leader in New Delhi should not ever dream of Hindi as acceptable to all Indians. In addition, Northern leaders have to frequently openly declare they’re not going to bring Hindi imposition because they very well understand sentiment, determination to preserve, and ability to defend southern languages and cultures. Unless northies declare so, south will be combative.
Listen Mr separatist Im a southerner too. There are always idiots in the north and south who say stupid and chauvinist things. Are you saying Tamils aren’t chauvinistic sometimes? Separation can only have one outcome and that is death and destruction. We are all one genetic family and there is no separate Dravidian identity genetically, culturally or linguistically. That is the finding of mordern linguistic, cultural and genetic research. The British in their policy of divide and rule introduced the concept of stratified caste and racial division based on pseudo science and phony aryan invasion theory. That is being debunked by mordern science. Bishop caldwell sowed the seeds of Dravidian racial division in his zeal to covert the southerners and 100 years later despite all the science proving it to be false it’s still hard to uproot it. Because a whole ecosystem of us vs them was built to create a “Dravidian power structure” to get rid of Gandhi family congress hegemony. That goal was noble but the means was not. Look at the telugus, they got rid of the congress without resorting to “ Dravidian” racial, linguistic chauvinism. It’s time to end it not just because it is no longer necessary but it’s also scientifically bogus.
mR (so called) southerner , your language and culture being eroded by English and western culture not by hindi or northerners .okay. both of our women wear Saari which is being replaced by jeans etc.your own Tamilians don't know how to write Tamil but fluently can write and speak English. You need to identify real problem and that is westernision not indianisation. We Indians always have shared culture so why fear that some culture would be mixed? Stop this stupidity. And get well.
Nomadic Aryans invaded India and destroyed all indigenous.It was a very highly advanced civilization of the original Indian people of the land of the time. All documented evidences as regards their culture, history and native names for rivers etc were destroyed. IVC script is not deciphered yet for understandable reasons, so was Prakrut on samrat Ashok's shilalekh. It was reaf by Principe, not by any Bramhn scholar. Sanskrit is derived from Prakrut which you do not mention. All of Budhd's religious work was in Prakrut. Most of Puran, Ramayan, Mahabharat are ficttious and stolen from Jatak kathas. In them (P, M, R) ref to Budhd can be found. Sanskrit was derived from Prakrut (do you know this language and Pali? You choose to ignore them!).Veds were written on the banks of rivers in saptsindhu by 200 bce and edited over generations till 800 AD. Shankaracharya was involved. Hindu gods are taken from local Shraman people and used to make money.
There are lot loopholes in his arguments.
Easwaran Santhakumar Michel Wirtzel despite his opponent respects him and considers his work marvelous
Easwaran Santhakumar read his book
oh, really proof it?? Science needs proof where the fuck is archeological and carbon dating proof in South Russia???? Lol no proof means you are liar. Or you kill me like your God Pope killed Galileo for telling truth. Lol false believers
If you want to waste your time, go ahead and listen to this man. Extremely superfluous, shallow argument.
You don't need to anounce your departure, this isn't an airport. 😅