Truth is truth. What happened is happened. Past is past. You cannot change as per your wishes. The Aryans who originally lived in Siberian grasslands migrated seeking new pastures. They followed the trade route and finally entered into India. They were not cultured and civilised. When they rudely entered the cultured groups who lived there nicely moved to other places. The descendants of those highly cultured people are living with us. However you try with hired people to deny the super cultured people’s history, you cannot hide truth. What happened is happened. Truth is Truth. Have the open mind to accept the fact and truth The above hired people and people like him will be only become laughing stock.
Very good research. We shouldn’t let other countries write our history. They didn’t even know Sanskrit and neither made an effort to read our vedas. If aryan migration theory is correct why no other country other than india follows the Vedic practices in the present times? If Aryans wrote vedas in such details then why didn’t the countries they migrated from has no trace of any Vedic culture. It’s impossible to believe that Aryans migrated to India, wrote the vedas and had no prior influence of that culture in other countries from where they migrated.
This is not quite correct. Why so many Indians failed to understand what the Aryan theory/migration theory is all about. This type of blabbering will not disprove the AIT/AMT. I am sorry.
@@raghavarvoltore6517 You're the one babbling here. Excellent evidence was shown here as to how the AIT fell short of explaining the linguistic, archeological and genetic evidence. You can now head back to your cringe dravidian safe space where there will be many illiterates parroting your talking points and you'll feel safe in that echo chamber.
@@raghavarvoltore6517 Listen to shrikant talageri and Dr. Neeraj Rai who has actually done the genetic profiling of IVC skeletons...The scientist himself is disapproving any invasion ...In fact he has found that there has been migration out of India towards the west...In 2500 -3000 BCE
Ncert sucks man thank God i enjoyed my history class upto 10 by standing outside or doing other stuff rather listening to it But I read BRAINWASHED BOOK it's covered all wrong points mentioned in ncert after reading this i was like i wtf .
Even our IAS are studying it despite 10 years of Modi in power. Once the Corporates have exhausted purpose of Modi and kicks him out, all these Hindutva talk would be in the dustbin again just like we saw after they got rid of Trump in America and White Superamist talks
Very very good research sir Very thankful to you, because you're from tamilnadu There is lot of misunderstanding in Tamilnadu about Aryan and Dravidian you just removed the doubts from the minds of tamilnadu particularly and southern India Thank you very much sir all the best for your future endeavours 🙏🙏🙏 #savesoil
the word Tamil came from dramila (dravida), this word is there in so many ancient sanskrit texts. The last letter in tamizh, is unique and came from the veda shakha specific to the land. Kanchi shankaracharya has written about that
We need to be more vocal about this and debunk the Aryan invasion theory from every platform to counter the moolniwasi-videsi narratives being propagated as a political movement
Why don't we do more research into the ancient Indo-Greek kingdoms? Those I believe hold the key to the Arya varta history. Looks like the Greeks absorbed a lot from Indian culture, language.
Crystal clear presentation, clean logic and well documented. Also thorough understanding of the issue smashes the shameful propaganda (ait)to smithereens
every hindu every indian should fight for study of sanskrit to be restored in India and start studying sanskrit from traditional scholars , and master at least one sanskrit text in lifetime
The Sumerian word for Sheep/ Ram is UDU-Mesh while the Sanskrit words for Sheep/ Ram are HUDU and Mesh. The Symbol for Sheep in Proto-Cuneiform Script was also used as it is in Indus Script. This gives us clear evidence that IVC was a Sanskrit speaking civilization or atleast Proto-Sanskrit speaking civilization.
million valuable sanskrit textsstill available even in digitized form, indians not allowed to study one sanskrit text in schools, the treasure that belongs to indians
Tilak wrote in his books that ancient Aryans were originated in the Arctic Circle where the Samudra Manthan took place also before the last Ice Age. Vedas were written there as the Vedas have described a world which can exist in the Arctic Circle. When the Ice Age started in about 27,000 BC , Aryans came to India. Later at about 6000 BC some of those Aryans started going back to Russia via the Middle East, Armenia, Georgia, and to the Ural mountain valleys (Arkheim-Sintasta-Petrovska valleys). That was the way Indo-European languages were developed. Today at least 20 percent of the people of North India have the DNA R1a1, which is the same as 40 percent of the Russians. You are describing Indian civilization after the Ice Age, after 17,000 BC. Aryans came to India at the beginning of the Ice Age i.e., 27,000 BC. According to our Puranas, modern men came this world about 70,000 years ago, when Brahma created Manu and Satarupa.
अयस ayas mentioned as red coz of rusting in outer layer. 2200 year old iron found in Tamil nadu and Telangana by arcahelorists. Iron went from deccan India to the world. 1800 year old Iron in EAST Uttar Pradesh
Excellent observation and explanation of our age old existence and overall advancement in terms of culture science oceanography astronomy and what not. The rest of the world was then leading a nomadic life.So their zealously had led to propound baseless and ridiculous theories, AIT being the prime of them.
#सनातन धर्म और राष्ट्र भारत के सच्चे रक्षकों के साथ-साथ संदेश पढ़ने वाले सभी मानवतावादी और धार्मिक विचारधारा लोगों को सादर प्रणाम , जय हिंद , वंदे मातरम् , जय श्रीराम...। नोट-अखंड भारत में #मसGदों का #अस्तित्व था ही नहीं और तुम मुऽलमानों के मां बाप नहीं होते क्योंकि वे #Hलाला से पैदा होते हो।🥷 हमारे गुरु कुल ज्ञान के भंडार हुआ करते थे जहां हर प्रकार की जानकारी दी जाती थी जिसे विदेशी आक्रांताओं ने नष्ट भ्रष्ट कर दिया। #हर_हर_महादेव... 🚩🛕💐🪔🙏🥷
If their language is similar to us the why is it not possible that people from India migrated to Europe means Aryans wento to Europe from India ad settled there
Arguments favoring Aryan Migration Theory. Please clarify the below Observations: 1)If Sanskrit has 5,000+ years history in India ,why there is no relation between Sanskrit and IVC script. 2)A 2013 paper in Cell entitled “Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India,” by David Reich , emphatically states, based on genetic evidence, that most Indians descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations, called ancestral north Indians, related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians and Europeans; and ancestral south Indians (ASI), not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. Archaeological and linguistic studies provide further support for these genetic findings about Indians being a blend of at least two very distinct populations 3) Another paper in Science published in 2019, entitled “The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia”, provided further evidence in support of the migration of Yamnaya Steppe pastoralist ancestry into India. Steppe pastoralists migrating from Russia mixed with people of the Indus valley civilisation to contribute to Ancient North Indians while the Ancient South Indians derived their ancestry primarily from Indus valley populations. Amazingly, Rigvedic Sanskrit was first recorded in inscriptions found not on the plains of India but in in what is now northern Syria. Between 1500 and 1350 BC, a dynasty called the Mitanni ruled over the upper Euphrates-Tigris basin, land that corresponds to what are now the countries of Syria, Iraq, and Turkey. 4)A recent paper, published in April 2021 in the journal Cell, suggests that proto-Greek and Indo-European languages originated in Anatolia or the Pontic-Caspian Steppe region. 5) Namit Arora in his book points out that Harappan seals never showed horses; their imagery only appears in the subcontinent after the collapse of the Indus Valley civilisation. This would suggest that the horse culture must have arrived along with the Aryans from Central Asia. The language and religion of these migrants brought over proto-Sanskrit and proto-Vedas, and Vedic gods such as Indra, Mitra, and Varuna and fire worship, which is similar to the practices of their Aryan brethren in Iran. They blended in with the local population and with local religious practices, with gods like Shiva-Parvati and Ganesha. 6)In Wanderers, Kings, Merchants, Peggy Mohan delves into the sounds and structures of the Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages, and notes that the Sanskrit of the Vedas did not originally have retroflex consonants. Drawing on the work of University of Michigan linguist Madhav Deshpande, it would appear that “proto-Sanskrit” evolved by incorporating elements of local Indian languages. Further, Deshpande’s linguistic research suggests that the developments are a result of convergence and not of forcible subversion, which is significant since it indicates that the social relationship between Indo-Aryan and Dravidian speakers in early India was one of equality, rather than “Indo-Aryan invaders suppressing an indigenous Dravidian population and forcing it to learn their language”. Indus script relation with Dravidian languages: 1) Ancient Near East of middle-third-millennium to early-second-millennium BC had no native elephants. The Syrian elephants of 1700 BC were also arguably imported from India. Archaeological evidence confirmed that Mesopotamian people imported ivory from only IVC, and the Persian Gulf traders had functioned as intermediaries in the thriving trade between IVC and Mesopotamia. Interestingly, in the current Dravidian languages of south India, elephants are referred to as ‘pilu’ in Kannada, ‘pilluvam’ in Tamil and ‘piliru’ in Telugu. Linguists say that ‘pilu’ entered classical Sanskrit very late, as a borrowed word.Since ancient Iranian languages did not use the sound ‘l’, they change the ‘l’s of foreign word to ‘r’s. Thus ‘pilu’ became ‘piru’, just the way ‘Babilu’ (Babylon) became ‘Babiru’, and the Mesopotamians adapted the same. 2) Finnish Indologist and Indus script expert Asko Parola also feels that the Dravidian(Tamil) words such as ‘mukham’ (face, front, mouth), ‘khalam’ (threshing floor), ‘phalam’ (fruit) and ‘kundam’ (pit) are found in the Rigvedic Indo-Aryan texts which was composed 1500BCE Tamil god “Muruku” (baby boy), according to Parpola, is a hunter god of the hill forests. Muruku, the god of love and fertility, was worshipped with frenzy dances and flesh and blood of a ram or goat. In 300 CE, the god amalgamated with Skanda of north India. “The pictorial and rebus meaning of fish in Dravidian means ‘miin’ and ‘miin’ also means star. I think they both possibly come from ‘min’ which means ‘to glitter’,” 3) In 2019, excavations carried out in the Keezadi site in Tamil Nadu’s Sivagangai district revealed graffiti dating back to 580 BC. The graffiti has been deemed to bear a distinct resemblance to the Indus script.Not just Keezadi, graffiti marks similar to the Indus script were recently discovered onpotsherds excavated from a site in Mariyapuram, Uthirakosamangai which falls in the Ramanathapuram district of tamilnadu 4) In 2017, Indus script expert Iravatham Mahadevan observed in a report that the Tamil sport of Jallikattu was depicted in an Indus seal found in Mohenjodaro (present-day Pakistan) in what he interpreted as a link between Dravidian and Indus cultures. In 2018, symbolist TL Subhash Chandra Bose wrote in his book ‘Ancient Tamizh - The Faculty of Harappan Symbols and Scripts’ that another seal foud in Bannavali referred to the sport of Sallikattu in language similar to that found on a Sangam era stone slab preserved in the Salem Archaeological Museum. All evidence and research therefore points to India being the world’s largest, if not first, melting pot, with both the genetic pool and the languages and culture resulting from a blend of migrants over time with preexisting indigenous populations. Conclusions should be made with arguments of both sides with facts.Let's make it.❤India - A living museum.
It isnt that hard to debunk, there have been swastikas and alters discovered in Indus valley baring very close resemblance to vedic culture, old temples are not large like medieval as it violated agama hence you won't see and shiv Lingas discovered in further proof 2) horse figurines and skeleton found in indus valley and sites outside it like sinauli also reveal horses existing in India well before the arrival of so called Aryans and horses are being made to important for this 3) David reich's paper shows all indians have the same genes and the r1a which all indians have is a foreign importation while oldest evidence and highest diversity within r1a1a is in india Yamnayas in other papers migrated into western Europe and have nothing to do with us indians as their prominent gene is r1b
Excellent Brilliant Master research work Dr.Raja,..kudos to you...amazing... great eye opener. this must be told to every Indian and clear his myopic idiocy immediately,.. must spread this to all Indians, far and wide,... Thanks a million sir.
Sir, the Rigvedic horse has 34 ribs. चतुस्त्रिंशद वाजिनो देवबन्धोर्वङकरीरश्वस्य सवधितिःसमेति | Translation : The four-and-thirty ribs of the. Swift Charger, kin to the Gods, the slayer's hatchet pierces.. Steppe horse has 36 ribs. As simple as that. These suckers have no common sense and they perpetuate idiotic Aryan Migration Theory etc etc.
How can we learn anything from a crowd that has no commitment to satyam? They write anything that comes to mind. Our ancestors were so committed to satyam as primary dharma, but we indians now ignore our ancestors and dont believe them, reading europen translations
I really enjoyed this vdo with factual content But haven’t finished watching it fully yet Recently another guy called mythic concepts released vdo on ‘Indian origins’: Harappans, aryans and BMAC I wonder what your thoughts are on his take
dude people within india & out of india are being fed lies over time even atheist from west specially the ex-abrahamic atheist who claim they are on side of truth and science even they blindly without doing any research not only believe but also promote aryan invasion theory like there is no tomorrow, in my opinion nothing has changed for these ex-abrahamic atheist because they were anti-vedic civilisation when they were abrahamic believer[jew or christian or muslim] and that doesnt change when they become atheist....
lot of authentic veda bhashyas are there in sanskrit. One should learn sanskrit and learn from guru. Vedas should be interpreted only with purana itihasa knowledge, this is asanskrit dictae "itihasa puranabhyam vedam upabrhmayeth" Vedas being very ancient language and the style of communication is so different, it cant be literally translated. Thus one should understand purana itihasas first before going to vedas, (in the original, not from translations, from sanskrit, through traditional teachers who have learnt the real meaning from their teachers)
All respect to Dr. M.L. Raja for his work . He has discussed extensively in a scholarly way. A lot of effort has gone into this work. Hats off to him. But I do not agree that the Aryan/Vedic/Hindu invasion did not happen. I see that the supporters of the Hindutva cult keep blaming the Europeans and especially the British for distorting the history of India. But when the British were here, not a single Indian objected to it. They were busy running around and bending before the Europeans. As for the conversion case, who were the people who converted to Christianity? It was mostly the outcasts and untouchables who were treated like non-humans and animals by the Hindus. Dr. Raja should do some research and tell us who are these people, whom the Hindus hated and who formed 50% of the population of India. I have always believed in the Aryan Invasion theory, because it is simple and easily justified. The proof is the multicolored, multi-caste, multi-linguist people of India. To get this kind of combination, you need an invasion. The Vedic people from Central Asia invaded India around c. 2000 BC. They destroyed the Indus Valley. Now they are saying there was no Aryan Invasion. Sanskrit is a son of the Vedic language. It is a foreign language. The Vedic people mixed with the local women and created the Dravidian race. The Dravidians are the descendants and slaves of the Aryans within the caste system. The Dravidians are Hindus. No Dravidian can be a Tamil. But they can speak Tamil. Archaic Tamil is the opponent of Sanskrit and Hinduism. The great Periyar called Tamil, ''the language of barbarians'' and he called the ''Tirukural'' human excreta. Periyar called himself a Dravidian. He was right'; the Hindu Dravidians destroyed all the pre-Sangam literature (only the Tirukural escaped) and punished the people who spoke Archaic Tamil, till they became extinct. It was the Dravidian Hindu Tamils who destroyed Archaic Tamil, the enemy of Sanskrit. That is why II often say that the Dravidian Tamils are non-Tamils. They could be any other ethnic or linguistic group. The Europeans (cousins of the Indians and the Iranians) were not good people. They looted, cheated and converted. There can be no doubt. But they did something the Hindus did not do for 4000 years. They educated the masses (upper castes and untouchables). That is why India has outclassed even the European countries in education. The rest is cock and bull stories.
Sir Krishna faught Narkasur and freed 16000 women/girls is awellknown story .. but ppl don't know narkasur had a son called Mura .. and his land was called Pragjyotish ..historian claim it to Iran falsely .. but in reality this pragjyotish of Narkasur is actually Marrakech Morrocco (hiranyaksh etc had similar name evn ravan was called Lankesh which was kind of Asur tradition) Marrakech =Marrakesh = Mur(n)kesh .. so I lead my theory that Krishna went to Pragjyotish I.e present Marrakesh Morrocco to fight Narkasur Please check this fact
Praagjhotisha means East. Mahabharatam, Harsa Carita, and Nidhanpur and Dupi Copper Plate Inscriptions of Assam King Bhaskaravarma, prove that Narakasura lived in Assam region of Bharat only.
@@DrMLRaja RAJA ANNA U R LOOKING HANDSOME & ATHI SUNDARAM IN YR THUMBNAIL PICTURE,,YR GYAAN & TRUE WISDOM SHINES FROM YR EYES & SINCERITY FROM YR DEEP RESEARCH...GREAT CONTRIBUTION TO OUR DHARMIC CIVILIZATION...KOTI KOTI PRANAM TO YOU...DHANYAWADAH,,NAMASKARAM...
@@DrMLRaja sir 🙏🚩 maybe thr is something missing .. as u see evn today and near islamic invasions and British slavery red sea and are hv been a part of Women sex slvery or Kidnapping and selling thm in markets .. it has been middle east asias culture or part .. evn in middle est we use east .. no ?? 🙏
@@DrMLRaja pragjyotishpura ..Prag means former or eastern and 'jyotisha' a 'star', 'astrology', 'shining', 'pura' a city thus meaning ***''city of eastern light'*** otherwise ***'city of eastern astrology'*** not really meaning city of/in east actually ..sir
ayaskanta is magnet in sanskrit (that ttracts uron) yes ayas ayaha is iron, iron word itself came from sanskrit aya, though spelt with r illogically in english
THIS LEVEL OF SUCH INTRICATELY TWISTED AND CONVOLUTED WRONG AT EACH AND EVERY LEVEL DOES NOT SIMPLY HAPPEN JUST BY SOMEONE BEING WRONG ABOUT SOMETHING AND NOT WITHOUT PROPER DELIBERATE CONNIVING MALICIOUS THOUGHT BEING PUT BEHIND IT FOR EVIL ENDS. 😑😒
A great talk sir. I love you how you logically took down Aryan invasion point by point and cited so much historical evidence. The only part that I disagree with is your attempt to deny that IE languages family exists and Dravidian does not belong to another totally separate family known as Dravidian. This is anti scientific. It is a well known fact, accepted by all linguists around the world, that Sanskrit is an IE languages. The IE languages family is the most studied in the world with now 2 centuries of solid scholarship. It is not just based on "phonetic similarity" the grammar and syntax is the same too and there are regular and predictable sound changes between Sanskrit and other IE languages, but not with Dravidian. If you take a look at that core vocabulary of Sanskrit and Dravidian such as Tamil, you will see no similarly at all. Such as numbers and familial terms like mother, father etc. Yes it is true that Sanskrit and Tamil share isogloses, but this has been acquired due to later contact and are not genetic. I agree iwith you that Dravidians went north and not South, this explains why there are no Dravidian loan words and isogloses in early Vedic Sanskrit. So overall a great and logical talk, but you do lose a bit of credibility by denying linguistic science. Even OIT scholars Talageri, Kansas, Elst accept linguistics. We cannot go far by denying it, and AIT folks love to portray OIT scholar as anti scientific, religious, nationalistic conspiracy theorists when they deny linguistics. I highly recommend you read Kaznas's papers , he has made it a point to prove to other OIT scholars that the IE family and PIE definitely did exist. Talageri also accepts PIE definitely existed. As does Elst. No serious OIT scholar denies it today.
I am from Tamilnadu. I studied Tamil grammar thoroughly. I learnt Sanskrit grammar also, as Sanskrit belongs to all Bharatians, including Tamil speaking people. Hence in the aspect of similarities between Sanskrit and Tamil I can explain. Thirumoolar in his Thirumanthram also explained this thousands of years before. It is in Tamil. No body knows this text. As I cannot type all these lengthy evidence, I request you to call me please
@@DrMLRaja I am not sure how we could arrange for a call. However, I co-administrate a FB group on AIT/AMT vs OIT where some high profile Indian scholars participate and I invite your participation there. If I may indulge your time, this post is slightly longer than a usual reply on youtube, but it details exactly the main points in a logical way, as just as you did in your presentations. I will divide it into two parts. It is both for your benefit and the benefit of other silent readers. Part 1: Sir, let me just start by saying we are on the same side. I do not believe in AIT either, I believe in OIT, in fact I will even go as far as to say this is not a “belief” for its much "belief" as saying dinosaurs and big bang is a belief. We have explicit evidence of Out of India migrations now that satisfies the stringent criteria of modern science, evidence of Indian DNA moving into Central Asia and West Asia and evidence of Indian material culture in the form of pottery, cattle, technology, symbols and cultural motifs moving from out of India across Indo-Europe. Finally, and this is what I have found surprising in my own research, it is linguistics that is actually the best evidence for OIT, the isoglosses that IE languages share and the way they are distributed across them can only be explained by OIT and no other theory. The evidence we have for OIT is the kind of evidence AIT proponents dreams of. OIT is a fact not a belief and like all scientific facts, eventually it will be accepted by everybody. Now, I have already said I appreciate the evidence you brought forth in this talk and the logic you have explained to show why AIT is absurd, but I reiterate what does not go in your favour is that you ultimately arguing a conspiracy theory -- that PIE, IE family and Dravidian etc does not exist. That for 200 years linguists have been on a conspiracy to lie about PIE to prove AIT --- and it seriously does kill your credibility with the type of audience that matters -- the scholarly and scientific one. You are not presenting their actual position and the arguments and evidences, you are presently a strawman. I know, because I talk to linguists, I have spoken to the same linguists that interacted with Talageri, and they all dismiss OIT scholars as all linguistically illiterate, unscientific and not worth engagement with --- because many Indian scholars really don't understand linguistics or misrepresent it. They have been successful so far in using this, point to a few "bad apples" to shut off OIT scholars from IE debates. If you don’t even believe PIE/exists, how can you have a seat at the table? Sir, you need to remind yourself AIT is a linguistics theory, it is a theory of how the IE language family happened. It is their primary epistemology(mukhya pramana) so if you don’t deal with linguistics, no matter what you say, you will leave no impact. First you must begin by understanding linguistics science(I say this to any Indian researcher who wants to disprove AIT, study linguistics first or at least get some understanding). I will now demonstrate to you(and everybody reading) why Sanskrit is an IE language and why Dravidian is a completely different language family with zero similarity with Sanskrit, other Indo-Aryan and IE languages. First of all, lets begin to by conceding your point yes I know Thriumoolar’s Tamil grammar is heavily borrowed from Panini’s grammar, this is why they are similar. All linguists know this -- this is not a revelation. I also know that modern Dravidian languages, all except Tamil, have nearly 80-90% Sanskrit LOAN words. Tamil use to as well, but during the 20th century Tamil Nationalists purged Tamil to about only 20% Sanskrit words, leaving only pure Tamil words which we have zero similarity with Sanskrit ones and this is why Tamil sounds the most foreign to a Northern IA speaking Indian. Loan words are called “loans” because they are loaned from another language, their etymologies are not derivable from that language e.g., the word “loot” in English is not derivable from English grammar and phonetics or the wider Germanic family. It is a Hindi word, so we know it was loaned to English at some point in history. Knowing this, we have a test in linguistics known as a “Swadesh list” which is used for all languages in the world, a list of only 100 core words that tend not to be borrowed because they are frequently in usage. E.g. The numbers to 1--5. Now lets demonstrate this: Here are the numbers for 1-5 in Old Chinese: one 一 ʔit two 二 ni[jtk]-s three 三 s-hhləm four 四 s-hlij-s five 五 ŋŋaʔ Here are the numbers 1-5 in Dravidian languages: Tamil: 1. oṉṟu 2. iraṇṭu 3. mūṉṟu ; 4. nāṉku ; 5. aintu Telugu: 1. okaṭi 2. iru 3. mūḍu 4. nālugu 5. aidu Malayalam: 1. onnŭ 2. raṇṭŭ 3. mūnnŭ 4. nālku 5. añcŭ Kananda: 1. ondu 2. eraḍu 3. mūru 4. nālakku 5. aidu By studying this you will now see immediately that Chinese bears zero similarity with Dravidian, that’s because they belong to entirely different language families. If you are trained in the science of historical linguistics, you will know by looking at this list which are the older Dravidian languages and which are relatively more recent. We can see Tamil and Malayalam have the more proto-features, and both Telugu and Kanada have undergone similar and recent sound changes. Such as with the word for two, Tamil and Malayalam have the original Irantu and rantu, and Tamil has the older version of I+rantu. Telugu has the newest shortened version iru and Kananda retains the I prefix but changes it to e and t becomes d. You will see sound t > d also happens in the word for 5, Tamil aintu to Telugu aidu. This is how we know Dravidian language forms a single language family and Tamil is the oldest Dravidian language. Now look at Sanskrit and other Indo-Aryan languages Sanskrit : 1. éka 2. dví 3. trí 4. cátur 5. páñcan Prakrit Pali: 1. eka 2. dve 3. tayo 4. catur 5. pañca Hindi: 1. ek 2. do 3. tīn 4. cār 5.pā̃c Bengali: 1. ek 2. dui 3. tin 4. car 5. pãcô Marathi: 1. ek 2. don 3. tīn 4. cār 5. pāc Assamese: 1. ek 2. dui. 3. tini 4. sari 5. pãs I think this should be enough(too many languages to list them all) to show that they form one language family. It is known as Indo-Aryan. It will also become immediately apparent Sanskrit and other IA language bear as much similarity with Dravidian, as Chinese does with Dravidian --- zero similarity. We can also see from this list that Sanskrit is the oldest IA language and we can see the sound changes that happened. Such as éka become eka during the Buddhist period in Pali, and then simply ek in later IA languages. We can see this internally in the development of Sanskrit from Vedic Sanskrit to Classical Sanskrit, that a lot of new innovations are made and very early Vedic Sanskrit has very archaic features more in common with European languages. Now in part 2 I will prove Sanskrit and all indeed IA languages are IE languages.
@@DrMLRaja Part 2 Now lets prove that the IE language exists and Sanskrit is an IE language. Gothic(Old German) 1. ains 2. twái 3. þreis 4. fidwor 5. fimf Latin: 1. oinos 2. duo 3. trēs 4. quattuor 5. quīnque Old Greek : 1. oĩnos 2. dúō 3. treĩs 4. téssares 5. pénte Old Balto Slavic 1. ains 2. dwai 3. tris 4. ketturei 5. penkei We can immediately see that an IE family exists and Sanskrit is a relatively distant cousin of European languages. If you think this is just true for numbers, that is because I am only using the numbers 1-5 of the Swadesh list, it is true for every other word category too. Here a few more and I will showing only from the oldest example of Dravidian, IA and IE I: nāṉ(Tamil) ahám(Sanskrit) azǝm(Old persian, and adam) egṓn(Ancient Greek) egō(Latin) ik(Gothic) You: nī(tamil) t(u)vám(Sanskrit) tū(Avestan) þu(Gothic) tū(Latin) tū(Celtic) Man: āṇ(Tamil) nár(Sanskrit) anḗr(Old Greek) nar(Old Persian) nêr(Celtic) Woman: peṇ(Tamil) gnā(Sanskrit) qēns(Gothic) gʷén-eH(Celtic) gǝnā(Old Persian) Mother: ammā(Tamil) mā́tṛ(Sanskrit) mōdar(Gothic) māter(Latin) mātīr(Celtic) mātar(Old Persian) Father: appā(Tamil) pitṛ́(Sanskrit) fadar(Gothic) pater(Latin) athir(Celtic) pitar(Old Persian) As you can see it's not just numbers, it's across the board in all categories of the core vocab of a language. This can only be explained if at one time the Sanskrit speaking people did not come into contact with the Dravidians and Sanskrit was a part of the same PIE Indo-European people . So I am afraid one of the possible conclusions it forces you to consider is Sanskrit at one time was in Europe and later moved into India where Dravidian exists as a pure isolate, but IE languages are not isolates but are mainly concentrated in Europe --- this is the logic behind AIT. Historical linguistics using the comparative method have also been able to deduce(like we deduced Sanskrit is the oldest IA language and Tamil the oldest Dravidian) that Sanskrit is among the youngest of the IE language family, because it has had many innovations e.g. the satam shift - kh has become cha, such as Sanskrit Cha but in Latin and Slavic it is kha/qua. So we know Latin and Slavic retain the older form. It turns out the European languages all retain archaic features of PIE that Sanskrit has lost, which only leads to one conclusion: the European languages branches are older than the Indo-Aryan branch. It means Sanskrit CANNOT be PIE and European languages have not descended from IA/Sanskrit. One of the likely inferences this leads to then is PIE was somewhere in Europe and Sanskrit came from Europe to India. I hope you see how it appears like we are forced to this inference by the data. You can’t reject the data just because you don’t like it. You can’t accuse all linguists in the world of a white supremacy conspiracy just because the data seems to be supporting what they are saying. So does this mean we accept AIT? Absolutely NOT, and this is what Talageri, Kaznas and Elst have now demonstrated. Yes, Sanskrit cannot be PIE, but it still does not necessarily mean PIE did not start in India. This is our Brahmastra --- and top western linguists have now admitted while Sanskrit being PIE is impossible, PIE in India is not impossible. They still say “unlikely” but not impossible. It is reason what AIT linguist scholars are struggling to disprove - that is why they hate Talageri. But it does mean we need to push back the date when PIE was in India(something Talageri has not even realized, but Kaznas has) PIE is not a recent bronze age 4000BCE phenomenon, PIE in India could be 10,000 years old or even older. In our Vedic history we record the time when all the 5 tribes, all the IE tribes were in Saptasindhu(India) and the first tribe to leave were the Drhuyus in prehistory(The Europeans) this would explain why European languages are older than Sanskrit -- they retain the PIE language features that was spoken in India in prehistory -- but that PIE is likely to be nothing like the PIE they have currently reconstructed(Kaznas is firm on this). When PIE was being spoken in India Dravidians and Northern Eurasian Indians had not yet met. We know that today with a degree of confidence from the Rakhigari skeleton, that Dravidians move up north(as you said in the talk) circa 4600BCE or prior and mixed with Northern Indians, this is why in early Vedic religion and culture there are NO Dravidian loan words and isoglosses. The Vedic Aryans only met the Dravidians much later --- and Dravidians still remember this event with adoration by celebrating sage Agastya coming down and bringing Vedic culture to the South. He is said to be the founder of Tamil grammar and Tamil medicine, and it has been said both in Dravdian and Indo-Aryan literature he came from the North to the South and learned Tamil from Lord Murugan. In the Tamil text Purananuru, Agastya is described as not coming alone but with many other Aryan migrants. They are credited for bringing science of agriculture and irrigation. These myths are not only shared by Dravidians, but other non IE culture such as the old Europeans of Ireland retain their myths how the Celtic Aryans brought agriculture, medicine etc and by old non IE Greek tribes, how the Greeks brought philosophy. So this explains perfectly why Dravidian and Aryans are different ---- Dravidians are like many old tribes like in South East Asia that peacefully adopted Vedic/Aryan culture and allowed themselves to be Aryanized. There is no evidence of violence, hostility or forced conversion. And the fact is Aryans and Dravidians were already a mixed people in 3000BCE and maybe long before, and present day Indians are the same mix of Aryan and Dravidian. None of us are pure Northern/Eurasian or South/Dravidian and that is what makes us Indians beautiful -- in every way. Later it was Dravidians that became the biggest champions of Vedic Aryan culture and spread it throughout South East Asia. Even today it is Dravidians who are the proudest Hindus and preserve all Hindu traditions, customs, aesthetic, philosophies and architecture. Our Rishis said "Make the whole world Aryan" and that is exactly what we have been doing for the past 10,000 years. Modern Hindus are the new Aryanizers of the world. We are all playing our part in reviving Aryavarta.
Arya In Indic and Arrete, Arysto,.. in Greek means more or less the same thing - excellence in virtue, skill, knowledge and wisdom,.. a man who has these qualities is called an Aryan, Arrete..or Aristo or Arysto...
1.paalai means desert ! current "thar" in sangam literature 2.they have mentioned current "rann of kutch" where mule is running where dolphin skeleton in sea shore.3. camel is mentioned many times 4.the "Dravidian language spoken by close to 2 million mostly in the Pakistani province of Balochistan" and pls tell the truth.
Look If there were no Aryan invasion, who were the people fighting in Bahubali? Why were the native Kalakeyas trying to save themselves from the Aryan Mahishnati royals?
@@DrMLRaja That may very well be true but how did the concept came about? The Mahishnati looked like the outsiders and the Kalakeyas were the natives. Could it be long times ago, that was exactly what happened?
@@khllkhn bro in no where movie it propogate about AIT and now if you are learning history from fictional movie then it's no late that you will tell that sex was discovered by adult flims website . Your logic of comment is dumb as your knowledge about this stuff . ❣️❣️
@@Vikramaditya_108 Look I know there was no AIT from the movie but allow me to drift a bit. I am the only person in the world who can imagine adventures where i am the villain.
@@khllkhn dear brother it's youtube and you have right to comment of your opinion but being responsible person comment something which is with fact and logic . And the director of the flim s.s.rajmouli garu is only not telling about the flim is connected to any history . So don't increase your knowledge from unknown source . ❣️❣️
some qstns thamizh scholars are asking: which is the earliest sanskrit inscription in this part of the world (i dont want to say india, bharat, etc for this qstn yet) and where was it found?? likewise what are the corresponding inscriptions, stone edifices of the various native cultures? what is the 'dhev bhasha' original script?? if a lot of sanskrit lit. came out into the open all of a sudden, why shouldnt they be transliterated versions of the scripts of the natives that the immigrants took time to learn, translate and destroy the originals??? where are the original literature of the natives?? if sanskrit lit was preserved for so long or passed on verbally thru memory(!) , how come most of the ancient ethnic lit. were lost? were natives so careless?? if u see the devious methods the north keeps using to exploit the southern resources (eg cheating to grab central govt jobs in the south, etc) , why shouldnt the immigrants have done the same thing to grab the locals' heritage , culture, knowledge, resoures under savarna theories etc?? at the very basic level, why 'union govt' doesnt give money for such research - whther keezhadi or adhichchanalloor/korkai, etc etc but spend crores on finding out saraswati??why so much money for hindi but practically nothing for other languages?? if all those NI names for rivers etc are used in sanskrit scriptures, why no mention of them in thamizh?? later thamizh lits mightve mentioned as by then all people got mixed ,etc that doesnt mean sanskrit was here from the start.
@@DrMLRaja responding to individuals like us doesnt matter , sir. i wish all scholars like u - anthropologists, sociologists, theists, atheists, rationals, etc all debate ALL aspects of this for our benefit. if theist scholars like Saktivel Muruganar, Dheiyanayagam (archeologist), other thamizh desiyam leaders have done their research and debunk sanskrit lit, atheists like subavee and others also quote from manusmriti, vedas to poinit out the injustices to the majority # of society under the caste system etc. and judging from what we've observed from our own indifference to our heritage , resource mgmt , alleged 'frauds' by people like nagasamy, primitive minds as evidenced by the corrupton and social ills vs the exploitative aggressive subjugation of our interests by the north indians, why shouldnt it have been any diferent centuries ago??? point is no one knows the truth , original scripts arent there, as prof. murali says, cultures like charwakars etc have all been lost with their lit. why perpetuate theories with speculations instd of reclaiming the real treasure - our natural resources and innate nobility of minds for our succeeding gens that we're letting down so badly.maybe first let the brahmins get out of the temples they never built but are in control of. let others decide the future.
@@ytadltspv haven't been lost, millions of manuscripts are untranslated, hence we don't know and also in tamizh sangam there are so many verses talking about praising vedas but not a single verse about Indus river, but ganga is mentioned
@@vaibhavkrupakar240 where are those 'M of untransalted mscrpts'?? acc. to observations by thamizh scholars, thirukkural itself was saved just before throwing the bundle as firewood into the fire! north indian scholars mention that the aryans etc destroyed the charkvakas' script too. so theres been a systematic tactical destruction of native scripts by the aryan immigrants whenever the got the chance over the centuries. miraculous that some of them were salvaged and transliterated - still plenty left.
@@ytadltspv clearly sanskrit texts suggest that north and south Indian civilisation are two distinct civilisation but also connected the North Indian civilisation influence whole europe and middle East by its migration while south Indian civilisation influence east Asia and even americas.
First off, to say that AIT is "Without a single evidence" Is silly. I suppose that someone can _disagree_ with the large body of DNA evidence compiled by David Reich and his team at Harvard, but that certainly constitutes evidence, and that's just one example Then to call it "evil"!? At the outset, you're advertising an extraordinary bias and lack of any objectivity. This is a way of discouraging people from even listening to opposing points of view. Over and over, Dr. Raja argues against old, outdated and discarded theories. Not the current, well supported theories. He spends most of the time attacking the theories of Max Mueler from 150+ years ago. He then incorrectly describes what "Indo-European" or "Indo-Germanic" means. Those terms are geographic; meaning that on one end, there's India, and the influence of this language and of these people stretches, on the other end, into Europe The common root language theory isn't based on 25 words. It's based upon sentence structure and a massive number of words that are extremely similar. There was certainly a common root. A few hundred years ago, poofing up one's race or ethnic group as the greatest was pretty universal. Hindus still do this pretty energetically. The fact that there were racist ideas tied up into some early AIT theories doesn't negate the idea that there was a large movement of people who moved from the steppes into India in the second millennium b.c. The evidence supports it overwhelmingly. Whatever a few European racists were saying 170 years ago doesn't invalidate anything. Some of the earliest Europeans advocating the common root language theory speculated that it originated in India. There's so much incorrect stuff on this lecture.... The current theory, held by almost everyone outside of India, is that these indo Europeans invaded Europe AND India... Not that Europeans are the "true Aryans" Examples of people saying incorrect things 170 years ago doesn't invalidate anything. Next, the issues of horses and chariots doesn't prove or disprove anything. It's supporting evidence. The earliest uses of horses and carts seem to have been on the steppes. That makes sense because they were pastoralists. 0p What the DNA evidence now tells us is that the big steppe migration began in 1,800 b.c. or thereabouts, but was preceded by several smaller waves, going back into the late 3rd millennium b.c.
The 'Arya' is a Sanskrit term, and 'Arya' stands for 'Nobel' or 'Nobility'' which is clearly not a race, also Gautama Buddha have said something about 'Four Arya Satya' or 'Four Noble Truths', so it is pretty clear. The Aryan Invasion, migration, tourism theory is totally made-up conspiracy by the Britishers, during the British Imperialism, and as per Archaeological and Historical findings, like Sinauli Excavations, Saraswati River existence dating, Roma Gypsy's having Indian origin, etc completely debunks any kind of "Aryan" invasion/migration myth. The main motive was to morally justify European Invasion and establish the white race as only capable of intelligence. Conclusion: After the Ice age, the ice melted from India, Africa and all other equatorial regions much before Europe and polar regions, and because India had the best fertile land and great natural resources like rivers, etc. the human race multiplied in India much more rapidly and migrated across Europe, than Americas. So never fall into these Aryan Dravidian conspiracy to divide. The so-called "Aryan invasion theory" is actually their motive is to divide us and justify and normalize their European/Christian, Arab/Islamic invasion/enslavement of native Indians.
Aryan tribes primarily lived along saraswati river they were fish eating Brahmins who practiced Vedic religions and composed the vedas and as saraswati dried up they migrated to areas such as bengal and west coast and are called saraswats there were some migrants over period of many centuries and mixed with other tribes including indigenous people so the current inhabitants of India is a mixed population and shows the genetic diversity
north indians have this superiority complex..especially UP Bihar people...they always consider themselves aggressive aryans and others as dravids...especiallu marathi people..jus look at the attitude of Anjana Om kashyap
Please do not generalise individual attitude over a whole population. There are good and not good persons in every group. I have seen very good UP and Bihar as well as Maharastra people.
@@DrMLRaja u must hav experienced nd heard of this "aryan vs dravidian" thing...it is not just on paper but this divisive attitude u must hav seen somewhere that is why you thought of explaining the hidden facts right? I am jus telling some people to be unbiased..ofcourse not everyone has that preconcieved notion
@@youtubemaximizer i have seen good people in all sections and not good people in all sections, including people in Southern Bharat, where I have equally experienced good and not good, equally as I felt in Northern Bharat. There are both Yudhishthira and Duryodhana in all sections. We have to judge them and avoid not good.
What are you talking about people don't even know AIT there in North India I've never seen anyone talking about AIT not most people in North have knowledge of history a lot they are busy with own problems
Sorry to say! I don't know other realms much, but Sangam Talks has always failed me while discussing the realm of Linguistics.. I am personally oriented to the belief that the Aryan I/M theory was politically driven.. But I always come here to see how they refute the Dravidian language family linguistically.. and being a Linguistic student, I can bet that these experts have always dealt Linguistics in the most unknowledgeable and casual manner... everyone who discussed Aryan & Dravidian theory on Sangam Talks is incredibly poor at Linguistics... In your case, Dr. ML Raja, when you discussed a unique characteristic of all languages of India, Nepal, etc; (at 55:45) I was shocked to see your ignorance & confidence simultaneously.. Let me tell you, that the characteristic you discussed there has nothing to do with any language, because all the languages around the world, actually every sound of human speech can be separated into two part vowel & consonant.. And the unique characteristic to write them as joined is related to script not language.. and script can never be considered as a characteristic of any language.. because spoken language has always been prior, and the script of a language has always been decided by politicality.. You should know, that there are many languages in Eastern India, which are written in Roman script, due to British rule, but that doesn't make those languages european.. Hope you understand! One more thing, the writing system that is written as (Consonant+Vowel joined) is termed as 'Abugida' in linguistics.. and your claim about this script, (if you want it to consider) is also totally wrong at 2 levels: (a). There are many languages outside Indian subcontinent(taking Burma & Tibet) that use 'Abugida' kind of writing system, like in Indonesia & Philippines. However, the real hidden thing behind this is that all of those Indian scripts are derived from the Brahmi script which itself was an 'Abugida' kind.. hence is the sameness. However, there is also an Ethiopic script used since 4th century, now used for many Afro-Asiatic languages (in Africa), which is 'Abugida' and has its direct origin in Egyptian hieroglyphs.. and in no way related to India.. (b). The second thing is that, all Indian languages too do not use Abugida script. Other than the politically adopted scripts like Roman and Persian, there are still examples of scripts invented in India, which are not Abugida type. A quick example is Santhali (/Olchiki in Jharkhand)..
A request also to Dr. ML Raja: Being a linguistic student, I honestly want to research on this topic of Aryan & Dravidian families.. with the presumption that they should surely come under one language family.. I have read that Robert Caldwell's book in parts only, and yet haven't been able to read it completely.. And I am pretty sure that you too haven't read Robert Caldwell seriously.. But can you please tell the exact pages, where you got those points of tests, according to which you claimed Hindi to be 100% Dravidian..?? It would be great help if you could share..
Thanks. I request you to consider the following. 1. If the script is unique and is special to Bharat that itself shows that there is a common development and they are one family. The joining of Vowel and consonant into a new combined letter itself is unique to India. Of course any sound even of the animals and birds have vowel and consonant as a sound. Hence the sounds of any language there will be combination of vowel and consonant. But how they developed into a language and script is important. You yourself told the script of Bharatian is of common origin Brahmi. 2. The order of arrangement of letters vowels from अ to औ and consonants from क् onwards is almost same in Indian languages. 3. The addition of विभक्ति to noun is same in all Bharatian languages. 4.The order of the sentence in prose is Subject, additional words with VIBHAKTI etc., and lastly verb. श्री राम : वनं गच्चति, In Tamil Sree Raman Kaattukku Senraar. However in English Sree Rama went to forest. In English verb comes in the middle. Like that there are many common thing and uniqueness in Bharatian Languages. I request you to research on this. I suggest you to read the following book where the linguistic research and the proofs to show how Caldwell is entirety wrong detailed. The book is "Aryan Invasion a Myth" by Dr N R Waradpande, The pages from 18 to 48 details it. The 10 characters based on which Caldwell divided Bharatian Languages into Dravidian and Aryan is detailed in that book from page 22 to 29. I have read it fully. If you wish, you can buy that book and read. Finally, this Aryan Dravidian divide and the language difference is the conspiracy of 18th century CE. No texts written before 18th century CE, mentioned not even in one time these conjectures. No author lived before 1800 CE mentioned this. All the texts you are reading as a part of your curriculum are themselves written based on this preconceived conjecture. Almost all texts are written by foreigners and their followers of the period after 18th century CE. Are you reading any ancient Bharatian texts and author's writing in your course. Please analyse yourself
@@DrMLRaja Sorry Sir! You are again failing me with your hurried and irresponsible responses.. It is hard to explain to people who don't care for linguistic aptitude.. but I am trying it only once more.. 1. I have already told that the 'Abugida' script type is not unique to India. Also, that all Indian scripts are not Abugida type. Second thing, I tried hard to emphasise that writing system is very much a seperate thing from language.. I should also tell that every other script type around the world(viz. Abjad, Alphabet, Syllabic, etc) are dominant in their unique areas, where most of the languages (irrespective of their language families) are written in those scripts only.. Therefore script can never be a parameter of similarity in languages. Scripts come very later, languages and their structures are formed orally very prior.. Still today, there are many languages, which don't have scripts and are used orally only; still today are languages that use more than one scripts of different types.. For e.g. Punjabi is written both in Gurumukhi('Abugida' type) and Shahmukhi('Abjad' type) scripts.. Infact, the great poets of 12th century Bulle Shah & Baba Fareed have written Punjabi in Shahmukhi(Abjad) script.. But that doesn't make their Punjabi a Semitic language, & not Indo-Aryan.. na?!! So, please understand the No-relation of writing system and language.. *** Your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th points are also not arguable, because there are many flaws and misconceptions inherent in making such points.. still trying.. 2. Not true! Don't you know Tamil script has only 18 consonants, while Devnagri (used for Sanskrit) has 36 consonants(including क्ष,त्र, ज्ञ)..! Even if you consider the 6 more adopted consonants in modern Tamil, still the difference is of 12 consonants. Also, I have personally learnt many North-Indian scripts viz. Devnagri, Gurumukhi, Gujarati, Bengali, Oria, etc.. & I can tell you some Vowel differences too among these itself.. and also their different methods of representing conjunct consonants and double consonants.. But remember, Script doesn't say anything about language. 'Karbi' is a Sino-Tibetan language in Assam, written in both Assamese and Roman script, but not able to be complete in any of them, and people are still inventing new scripts for it. And I can bet that there are certain Hindi vowel sounds also, which are not covered by the popular Devanagari script. 3. Hindi itself doesn't use Vibhakti suffix system sir, my 1st language! Sanskrit Vibhakti system is more similar to Greek than many of the Modern Indian languages.. which can be easily perceived personally. Anyway, that is a different context.. and single point. 4. So that is termed as SOV (Sub-Obj-Verb) word order.. that is seen in many languages other than Indo-Aryan & Dravidian.. Also, Japanese, Turkish, Korean, etc.. where Korean is a 'Language isolate' which means that there is no language family in which Korean could be fit in. Hope all of them can't be argued to come under Indian language family.. na? Hope you understand!! *** Ah! So I was right that you haven't read Caldwell.. you have read the things just from a secondary source, making such big claims.. which is not a good sign for me.. But thanks for sharing the information, I would surely read that book further in my research... *** That doesn't look a sound argument! You know that the study branch of 'Comparative Linguistics' itself came to its maturity in 18-19th century, the philologists got equipped to work on such things in that century only, the classification of language families itself happened then only, so how could you get the name of a language family reference prior to that? It's like saying that the kingdoms of 'Protista'(in 1866, Haeckel) and 'Monera'(in 1938, Herbert) are flawed classifications because there is no such naming found before 18-19th century; and that Aristotle had divided all organisms into 'Plantae' and 'Animalia' only. So, such an argument should never be a base for such things.. hope you understand!! *** In my course, I am reading people from Panini, Patanjali, Bhartrihari to the most modern Prof. Kapil Kapoor.. so be unworried about that.. However, I have not read everything, and am still a very-very beginner student.. But I know that those people have majorly worked on the Sanskrit grammar, phonetics, etc.. only, and didn't do any comparative linguistic work. *** However, Let me also tell you that the casual attempts you are doing here to establish the similarities, is also referred to by a popular term called 'Pseudo-linguistic Comparison'.. which is generally done to convince laypersons.. *** But don't feel out of way! I am an insider of Linguistics, and I am keenly interested in the dream that Indo-Aryan & Dravidian languages has to be brought under one umbrella family. I am just against the Pseudo-way of doing it.. But I want to do it properly! And hope I would get support from all of you, in the task... 🙏🙏
If not for the Himalayas.... many of the northies would have looked like the chinese.... like the North Eastern States. ... But now they appear racially closer to the Middle Eastern / European people. This situation is like one of my kids appears more like my neighbour than me !.... and now I have to create a fancy story to cover up this ugly fact.
Hi, almost all the characters in Mahabharat and ramayan were dark, how come one brother is dark and another one is fair. Such illogical. Tamil Sangam literature mentions about the Aryan people living near by Himalayas.
There are still 5 Max Muller Bhavans in India. I am sure they will have books written by this person (Max M) and have courses that teach this false theories.
great work sir,... but please do not use the term 'CASTE" as it was imported and implanted by the Spanish & Portuguese colonialists in to our society falsely,.. the origin is the word CASTA from them, Spain has such 4 divisions, and was never in our land,... they used it to divide us,..we had 70 plus Jaathis based on our profession but never discriminatory, all were equals,.. only the colonialists brought about these caste here after 1800s... gave positions and importance to some and gave menial jobs to others and divided us,..created fight amongst us,..continuing upto today,.. . even Varnas was misinterpreted by them as 'Caste" and Manu meant it only on Guna, Character and not on birth etc.. which is the handiwork of Colonialists and Missionaries, which could not be corrected post independence as Nehru who fell in love with Edna and the pseudo Russian socialist model, did not want it corrected,..
This is well and good in this time frame but there is another story to this. According to PR Sarkar the Vedic civilization with the start of the Rgveda in the Caucasus goes back to 15,000 years ago. 10,000 years ago the Vedas with the Vedic language reached India and the vocabulary was absorbed in the local indigenous Sanskrit of India
Why are south indians more dark skinned and North Indians more fair skinned? Why is Brahmins even in South India fair skinned while rest of the people around them are dark skinned? Obviously the Gene of ancestors are different. Fair skinned have their ancestory from outside while indigenous people of the tropical regions of India are darker skinned. 1st of all it's not Aryan invasion but a prolonged migration and subjugation of the local population ultimately leading many to move further away which explains why there's more dark skinned people towards the East and South India. Aryans obviously didn't invent the Vedas otherwise we could have seen roots of the Vedic scriptures outward towards the west and Europe. Whereas we all know there was a very entrenched civilization in India (Harappan and Mohenjodaro cities) where there was no sign of any Sanskrit language long before the Aryan period. So it can only be concluded that as Aryans dominated the sub continent, they translated old indian scriptures into their languages and suppressed knowledge transmission in native languages. The history of Aryanisation of population as they migrated is not just taught in India but in history books across the world. Why would the rest of the world follow any British version blindly without due scientific process ? Only the politically motivated Hindutva social media University sell this crap. Even for IAS who are the 1st officers of our administration including those of 20 years of Modi administration learnt about Aryanisation of population in their scientific text books. Why didn't ever Modi then question it? This is all just for foolish public consumption to divide and rule
In Tamilnadu 50% of the Brahmins are not fair coloured. In other castes nearly 40% are fair coloured. In my family excerpt me, my two brothers are fair coloured. In every family fair coloured and dark mixed complexion are there. If you work in AC not exposed to Sunlight you will become more fair. Our body parts covered with dress are more fair than exposed part. It is all due to Melanin pigments in skin, and is to protect skin on high exposure to Sun Light. Thus, it is not gene alone, but environmental factor also play a major role. South India is closure to equator and is more exposed both in duration and intensity to Sun Light than North India.
@@DrMLRaja you must be blind not to see the difference in skin colour of Brahmins and Dalits or Tribals in the same region. Does a European become black if he comes to India in generations. Then children of Anglo Indian or Parsis would also have been dark after being in India for hundreds of years. Isn't there ancestry obvious. Why are Brahmins shy of their ancestory
@Mitr Pure BS. There is no evidence of any conflict between so-called Aryans and Dravidians. Why would a civilized Indus valley person be impressed with a nomad from Steppe ? Rigveda mentions the river Saraswati which dried up before 1500 BCE. Rigveda does not mention anything about central Asia or Steppe. If Aryans subjugated Dravidians why would there be a Kamba Ramayanam which is a literary masterpiece
@@harikris5Can't an migrating illiterate Aryans adopt the knowledge of the local population to their advantage. Which explains why the Knowledge were translated into Sanskrit with only the Aryans (Brahmins) in control of it. This also explains why the Genes of the Skeletons found at Indus valley civilisation sites don't show the Brahmins as their descendants and rather the Dravidians. This also explains why later the Dravidians who were the original residents of these places are now moved away from the conquerors in North India.
@@mitryours759 Indian belt is original Indian tribal and others from Iran or Turkey (Barbarian or mix of Barbarian with native Indian) Selva from Madurai
AIT has long been supplanted by AMT. Can't really fight scientific proof in Cell and Science also... Published in the Hindu... How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate UPDATED: JUNE 19, 2017 12:50 IST New DNA evidence is solving the most fought-over question in Indian history. And you will be surprised at how sure-footed the answer is, writes Tony Joseph The thorniest, most fought-over question in Indian history is slowly but surely getting answered: did Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC - 1,500 BC when the Indus Valley civilisation came to an end, bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices? Genetic research based on an avalanche of new DNA evidence is making scientists around the world converge on an unambiguous answer: yes, they did. This may come as a surprise to many - and a shock to some - because the dominant narrative in recent years has been that genetics research had thoroughly disproved the Aryan migration theory. This interpretation was always a bit of a stretch as anyone who read the nuanced scientific papers in the original knew. But now it has broken apart altogether under a flood of new data on Y-chromosomes (or chromosomes that are transmitted through the male parental line, from father to son). Lines of descent Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question
Aryan and Dravidian race theory is 100% true. Only thing its NOT Aryan Invasion rather it is just Aryan migration. Aryans are called as Devas Dravidian's are called Asuras Aryan Gods - Lord Indra, Lord Varuna, Lord Vayu, Lord Brahma & Lord Ram Dravidian Gods - Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya In Four Vedas there is NO Mention about Lord Shiva, Lord Vishnu [Thiru Maal] & Lord Subramanian [Murugan]. In Vedas they only worship Lord Indra, Lord Varuna & Lord Vayu. In Rig Veda they mention about Lord Rudra but he is NOT Lord Shiva. There is NO Place where they mentioned about Lord Shiva or Linga. These are all Tamil gods Lord Shiva, Lord Thiru maal [Vishnu] & Lord Murugan [Subramanian] are all ancient Tamils lived in Tamil Land. Aryan by Birth - Ram, Lakshman Dravidian by Birth - Ravan, Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya Aryan Language - Sanskrit Dravidian Language - Tamil Aryan [Sankrit] Grammar - Panini’s Astadhyayi Dravidan [Tamil] Grammar - Tholkaappiyam [Still available] Panini did not mention the name of even a single earlier Sanskrit grammar which he has followed. The names he mentioned as earlier Sanskrit grammarians are originally Prakrit and Pali grammarians. Prakrit and Pali grammarians have followed Aindhra grammar which is followed by Tholkaappiyar. Tholkapiyar clearly states that there are numerous Tamil Grammar works prior to his Tholkappiyam and he followed Aindharam Grammar for his work. Akathiyar also wrote a grammar for Tamil. Tharanath ,the Tibet scholar has clearly stated that Aindhiram was a Tamil grammar. Sari Buddha had studied Aindhiram. Aryan by Birth - Bramins Dravidian by Birth - Sudras [Tamils - please note Tamils lived through out India] Etymology of the word Bramin [பேர் அமணன் -> பிராமணன் -> பிராமின் ] Payrr Ammanan -> Brahmanan -> Bramin. Its a Pure Tamil word given as Title to people who gained enormous wisdom in their life. In later days this title name was stolen by Aryan Bramins and made it as a varna by Birth. Sanghis will tell that Ravana was a Bramin, But actually Ravana is a Asura [Dravidian] by birth and Bramin is his title name. He is a master of 10 different science Etymology for the name Krishna [ கருதினன் -> கிருத்தினன் -> கிருஷ்ணா ] Karuthinan → Kirutinan → Krishna . Karuthinan means man of philosophy its a Title given to Krishna We all know that Krishna is Dark in Complexion and he is a Cow herder he is a Tamil. Rig Veda has several references to blonde haired Indra destroying Dark skinned Asuras [Dravidian's]. If you read most of the Sanskrit puranas you can notice that its all about Fight between Aryans and Dravidians [Devas and Asuras] Language naturally evolves over 1000s of years it can NOT be invented by one single guy Agathiyar, Tamil language is NOT invented by Agathiyar as told by PERVERTED Sanskrit Myth, one has to Talk with scientific facts should NOT vomit PERVERTED Sanskrit Myths. Just like Tholkappiyar Agathiyar also wrote grammar for Tamil in ancient times thats it. Tamil is older then Sanskrit. Its actually Tamil root words which are there in Sanskrit, NOT the other way around. Recent [year 2020] excavation in Keezadi have written Tamil inscription which is older than 2500 years. But on the other hand Sanskrit didn't even had a script to write until 4 CE note it is CE not BCE, it adopted devanagari script in 4 CE and started writing puranas like Ramayana ... etc. Prior to this Sanskrit Vedas were transferred to next generation only orally, they said it is very sacred and only Brahmins have to recite it Google - Mayiladumparai Excavation in Tamil Nadu - Tamils knew use of iron 4,000 years ago, archaeological findings show Google - Porunai civilisation is 3,200 years old Tamils do not have Vedic culture roots, their roots are different. Vedic culture is a third rated culture. Sanskrit is full of third rated SEXUALLY PERVERTED mythological stories for Lord Shiva, Indra, Ayyappa and for lots of Rishis. You can not find one such sexually perverted literature in Tamil. Sanskrit is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth like Manusimriti. You wont find any such discrimination in Tamil literature Thiruvalluvar in Thiru Kural says all Living Things are equal [Not just humans] (பிறப்பொக்கும் எல்லா உயிர்க்கும் சிறப்பொவ்வா செய்தொழில் வேற்றுமை யான் - திருக்குறள் 972). But in Sanskrit Manusmriti, manu discriminate people based on birth called Varna, Manusimriti is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth. Tamils have the culture of worshiping there fore fathers that is how they are worshiping Siva, Thiru Maal [Vishnu] & Murugan [Subramanian]. Aryan Brahmins stolen Tamil's gods and and inserted FULLY SEXUALLY PERVERTED STORIES in later days for our gods like Vishnu Purana, Shiva Purana, Skanda Purana ... etc Now some idiots are even saying Lord Shiva don't understand Tamil and so we have to worship him only in Sanskrit. Lord Siva himself is a Tamil Tamil too have Sanskrit words its due to Sanskrit became sole authority for Hinduism and for Tamil Gods also. By stealing Tamils gods Sanskrit started influencing Tamil by way Varnasrama by saying Brahmins are great and they are born from Brahmas head. You have to respect Brahmin and you have to allow them to worship your gods in their language Sanskrit. Google - Tamil and Australian aboriginal languages மார் சுபிகள் Marsupial is a A word found in Australian Aboriginals language for Kangaroo kids. Marsupial in Tamil means Breast Suckers, Small Kangaroo kids will grow inside Mother Kangaroos waist bag by sucking milk from its mothers breast. English language derived this word from Australian Aborginals language, This word is more than 10,000 years old it's a pure Tamil word. Archaeological experts all over the world says that Indus valley civilization is a Dravidian civilization, but here in India Sanghis says its a vedic civilization but they do NOT Have any proof for their claim. Indus script - Wikipedia The Russian scholar Yuri Knorozov suggested, based on computer analysis, a Dravidian language as the most likely candidate for the underlying language of the script.[40] Knorozov's suggestion was preceded by the work of Henry Heras, who also suggested several readings of signs based on a proto-Dravidian assumption. [41] Oldest available work in Sanskrit [Note it is only oral No written records] is Rig veda, it has been etymologically proved that there are many loaned Tamil words in Rig veda that proves the pre existence of Tamil during the period of Rig veda Substrata in the Vedic language - Wikipedia There are an estimated thirty to forty Dravidian loanwords in Vedic. [26] Those for which Dravidian etymologies are proposed by Zvelebil include कुलाय kulāya "nest", कुल्फ kulpha "ankle", दण्ड daṇḍa "stick", कूल kūla "slope", बिल bila "hollow", खल khala "threshing floor". [24] Written By - Sampath Kumar Natarajan
There was a migration but it was from Iran , Aryan came as refugees from Iran and the Aryans called dasa to BMCA people in iran not the indigenous peoples,they came here to settle after the Devas and Ashura role were changed in zorastrianism.
Here comes Dravidian racism with shameless lies. Aryan and Dravidian theory is not hundred 100% which is pure fiction believed by Caldwell's children. As it was Iranians who called themselves Aryans not Indians aka aryas next Dravidian word itself modern constructed by Caldwell which was borrowed from Sanskrit. Aryans weren't called devas nor Dravidians were called as asuras. As Tamil literature nowhere calls tamils asuras. Both are Arya god worshipped long before Kartikeya aka Skanda is mentioned in Vedas. Lord Shiva is found in Indus valley as Lord Pashupati. As we could see Hindu gods have thousand of names saying that just because having different names doesn't make it a different god. In each state gods have different names does that make them different gods? Panini’s Astadhyayi exists didn't vanish in thin air and it is called the most complex grammar. Next, it is the grammar of new Sanskrit, not old Rigvedic Sanskrit. Prakrit and pali are descendants of old Sanskrit, not predecessors even your own western masters accept that Also, rig vedia is 5000yrs old far older than tamil. It could be noted as Tamil had Sanskrit letters but Sanskrit didnt have any such tamil letters which clearly shows who copied from whom. Yet Mangis lie it is the opposite. Also agathiyar himself came from outside according to tamil literature. This is nothing but shameless cherry picking and distortion by mangis. Tamils didn't live out throughout India. This is nothing but pure fantasy of mangis as we no proof of tamil throughout india like sanskrit. That's not the etymology of the brahmin word but the fantasy of mangis with no basis in science brahmin word derive from brahman the supreme entity. So nobody stoled it other than in the imagination of tamil supremacists. Ravana is a brahmin by birth as he was born to a brahmin how much you lie it doesnt change the facts. As Ravana was born in north india not in south LOL. Even the name ravana is not tamil. So mangis shamelessly claiming a north Indian as Dravidians is the greatest irony LOL.
@@trollarasan Ha ... Ha .... which is shameless lies. For you scientific facts like DNA studies and Archeological evidences are shameless lies. But your PERVERTED Sanskrit MYTHS are fact. LOL.... Grow up man
@@sandeep_raman You are WRONG. Purpose of language is NOT just to share knowledge. Primarily language represents a ethnic group [Race]. Like Tamil, Sanskrit, German, France & English [Here only English is a global language due to UK & US influence on the Global economy in the last two centuries.] Since all the computer software's were developed in English now it became a defacto Global language. Otherwise English language represent English men.
@@sandeep_raman Fact of the matter is Shiv is a NON Aryan God, he was worshipped by the ancient Indians before the advent of the Aryans. Shiva is not a Vedic God. In Indus Valley Civilization - IVC archeologists found terracotta Pashupathi he is considered as Shiva this scientifically predates Sanskrit Vedas. Also Tamil literature says the First Tamil Sangam was established by Lord Shiva. We have scientific proofs that Ancient Indians worshipped Shiva before the arrival of Aryans
We can’t thank enough people like him and Srikant Teligeri, actually they deserve Bharath Ratna and not crooks like Romila Thapar
Very rightly said...100% right..
Idiotic politicians are busy giving Bharata-Ratna to traitors like Nehru.
Truth is truth. What happened is happened. Past is past. You cannot change as per your wishes.
The Aryans who originally lived in Siberian grasslands migrated seeking new pastures. They followed the trade route and finally entered into India.
They were not cultured and civilised. When they rudely entered the cultured groups who lived there nicely moved to other places.
The descendants of those highly cultured people are living with us.
However you try with hired people to deny the super cultured people’s history, you cannot hide truth.
What happened is happened. Truth is Truth. Have the open mind to accept the fact and truth
The above hired people and people like him will be only become laughing stock.
Very good research. We shouldn’t let other countries write our history. They didn’t even know Sanskrit and neither made an effort to read our vedas. If aryan migration theory is correct why no other country other than india follows the Vedic practices in the present times? If Aryans wrote vedas in such details then why didn’t the countries they migrated from has no trace of any Vedic culture. It’s impossible to believe that Aryans migrated to India, wrote the vedas and had no prior influence of that culture in other countries from where they migrated.
This is not quite correct. Why so many Indians failed to understand what the Aryan theory/migration theory is all about. This type of blabbering will not disprove the AIT/AMT. I am sorry.
@@raghavarvoltore6517 why don't you debate us then? You seem pretty confident. Aryan invasion theory is incorrect.
@@raghavarvoltore6517 You're the one babbling here. Excellent evidence was shown here as to how the AIT fell short of explaining the linguistic, archeological and genetic evidence. You can now head back to your cringe dravidian safe space where there will be many illiterates parroting your talking points and you'll feel safe in that echo chamber.
@@raghavarvoltore6517 Listen to shrikant talageri and Dr. Neeraj Rai who has actually done the genetic profiling of IVC skeletons...The scientist himself is disapproving any invasion ...In fact he has found that there has been migration out of India towards the west...In 2500 -3000 BCE
@@raghavarvoltore6517 first tell me how did Aryan invasion suddenly morph into Aryan migration theory.
Sadly the HRD Ministry of Govt of India has made no attempt to remove the flawed AIT and Aryan/Dravidian theory from school/NCERT history books!
Ncert sucks man thank God i enjoyed my history class upto 10 by standing outside or doing other stuff rather listening to it
But I read BRAINWASHED BOOK it's covered all wrong points mentioned in ncert after reading this i was like i wtf .
Wonder why NCERT bastards still don't change the History ?.
Yes
But it will be removed
#savesoil
@@RK-es8oj when ??.
Even our IAS are studying it despite 10 years of Modi in power. Once the Corporates have exhausted purpose of Modi and kicks him out, all these Hindutva talk would be in the dustbin again just like we saw after they got rid of Trump in America and White Superamist talks
Very very good research sir
Very thankful to you, because you're from tamilnadu
There is lot of misunderstanding in Tamilnadu about Aryan and Dravidian
you just removed the doubts from the minds of tamilnadu particularly and southern India
Thank you very much sir
all the best for your future endeavours
🙏🙏🙏
#savesoil
Thank you
the word Tamil came from dramila (dravida), this word is there in so many ancient sanskrit texts. The last letter in tamizh, is unique and came from the veda shakha specific to the land. Kanchi shankaracharya has written about that
What is vedhic shaka?
word dravid comes from word "travid" meaning triangular land
தமிழ் is diffrerent from Sanskrit
@@tamilnetworks780 what u wrote in Thamil? And who said Thamil is same as samskritham?
First and foremost how is Dramila and dravida related ?.
We need to be more vocal about this and debunk the Aryan invasion theory from every platform to counter the moolniwasi-videsi narratives being propagated as a political movement
Politicians are scum bags.
बहुत ही सुन्दर तरीके से , एक एक बिंदु पर चर्चा करते हुए यूरोपीय उपनिवेशिक पाखंड को ध्वस्त किया गया है 🙏🙏 धन्यवाद है विद्वान् महोदय को 🎉
All Indians are same. Let us remain United
Yes, absolutely correct
Thank you Sir. Very educative , eye opener. Prof.(Dr.) Prem Khosla
Thank you sir calll me pleass
Why don't we do more research into the ancient Indo-Greek kingdoms? Those I believe hold the key to the Arya varta history. Looks like the Greeks absorbed a lot from Indian culture, language.
Crystal clear presentation, clean logic and well documented. Also thorough understanding of the issue smashes the shameful propaganda (ait)to smithereens
Thank you
every hindu every indian should fight for study of sanskrit to be restored in India and start studying sanskrit from traditional scholars , and master at least one sanskrit text in lifetime
ITS MORE ABOUT MAKING SANSKRIT AS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF INDIA'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM . FIRST AND FORMOST. 😑😒
Vanakkam. Namaskar. 🙏
The Sumerian word for Sheep/ Ram is UDU-Mesh while the Sanskrit words for Sheep/ Ram are HUDU and Mesh. The Symbol for Sheep in Proto-Cuneiform Script was also used as it is in Indus Script. This gives us clear evidence that IVC was a Sanskrit speaking civilization or atleast Proto-Sanskrit speaking civilization.
We are happy to accept these assumptions but we aren't accepting what vedas say.
@@AJAYSINGH-ns1vvScholars will accept the fact soon.
million valuable sanskrit textsstill available even in digitized form, indians not allowed to study one sanskrit text in schools, the treasure that belongs to indians
Highly underrated scholar the presentor is. Pranam
Every school must teach both Tamil and Sanskrit upto 10th STD if we have to maintain our cultural values
Sanskrit is more important
Tilak wrote in his books that ancient Aryans were originated in the Arctic Circle where the Samudra Manthan took place also before the last Ice Age. Vedas were written there as the Vedas have described a world which can exist in the Arctic Circle. When the Ice Age started in about 27,000 BC , Aryans came to India. Later at about 6000 BC some of those Aryans started going back to Russia via the Middle East, Armenia, Georgia, and to the Ural mountain valleys (Arkheim-Sintasta-Petrovska valleys). That was the way Indo-European languages were developed.
Today at least 20 percent of the people of North India have the DNA R1a1, which is the same as 40 percent of the Russians.
You are describing Indian civilization after the Ice Age, after 17,000 BC. Aryans came to India at the beginning of the Ice Age i.e., 27,000 BC. According to our Puranas, modern men came this world about 70,000 years ago, when Brahma created Manu and Satarupa.
अयस ayas mentioned as red coz of rusting in outer layer.
2200 year old iron found in Tamil nadu and Telangana by arcahelorists. Iron went from deccan India to the world.
1800 year old Iron in EAST Uttar Pradesh
Correct
Salute Dr M L Raja Sir. INC has to watch and learn our history.
Thank you 🙏
Excellent observation and explanation of our age old existence and overall advancement in terms of culture science oceanography astronomy and what not. The rest of the world was then leading a nomadic life.So their zealously had led to propound baseless and ridiculous theories, AIT being the prime of them.
Gained a whole new perspective!!! Thank you so much sir
Thank you
Very good analysis. All you need is to divide them using abstract theories. God Bless Humanity!
#सनातन धर्म और राष्ट्र भारत के सच्चे रक्षकों के साथ-साथ संदेश पढ़ने वाले सभी मानवतावादी और धार्मिक विचारधारा लोगों को सादर प्रणाम , जय हिंद , वंदे मातरम् , जय श्रीराम...।
नोट-अखंड भारत में #मसGदों का #अस्तित्व था ही नहीं और तुम मुऽलमानों के मां बाप नहीं होते क्योंकि वे #Hलाला से पैदा होते हो।🥷
हमारे गुरु कुल ज्ञान के भंडार हुआ करते थे जहां हर प्रकार की जानकारी दी जाती थी जिसे विदेशी आक्रांताओं ने नष्ट भ्रष्ट कर दिया।
#हर_हर_महादेव...
🚩🛕💐🪔🙏🥷
Superb. Such simple points destroy the foolish AIT theory. I greatly enjoyed your humour, too, Sir 🙏🙏.
Very good video and work. Mr. M.L. Raja should write a book on debunking Aryan invasion theory.
If their language is similar to us the why is it not possible that people from India migrated to Europe means Aryans wento to Europe from India ad settled there
Arguments favoring Aryan Migration Theory.
Please clarify the below Observations:
1)If Sanskrit has 5,000+ years history in India ,why there is no relation between Sanskrit and IVC script.
2)A 2013 paper in Cell entitled “Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India,” by David Reich , emphatically states, based on genetic evidence, that most Indians descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations, called ancestral north Indians, related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians and Europeans; and ancestral south Indians (ASI), not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. Archaeological and linguistic studies provide further support for these genetic findings about Indians being a blend of at least two very distinct populations
3) Another paper in Science published in 2019, entitled “The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia”, provided further evidence in support of the migration of Yamnaya Steppe pastoralist ancestry into India.
Steppe pastoralists migrating from Russia mixed with people of the Indus valley civilisation to contribute to Ancient North Indians while the Ancient South Indians derived their ancestry primarily from Indus valley populations.
Amazingly, Rigvedic Sanskrit was first recorded in inscriptions found not on the plains of India but in in what is now northern Syria. Between 1500 and 1350 BC, a dynasty called the Mitanni ruled over the upper Euphrates-Tigris basin, land that corresponds to what are now the countries of Syria, Iraq, and Turkey.
4)A recent paper, published in April 2021 in the journal Cell, suggests that proto-Greek and Indo-European languages originated in Anatolia or the Pontic-Caspian Steppe region.
5) Namit Arora in his book points out that Harappan seals never showed horses; their imagery only appears in the subcontinent after the collapse of the Indus Valley civilisation.
This would suggest that the horse culture must have arrived along with the Aryans from Central Asia.
The language and religion of these migrants brought over proto-Sanskrit and proto-Vedas, and Vedic gods such as Indra, Mitra, and Varuna and fire worship, which is similar to the practices of their Aryan brethren in Iran. They blended in with the local population and with local religious practices, with gods like Shiva-Parvati and Ganesha.
6)In Wanderers, Kings, Merchants, Peggy Mohan delves into the sounds and structures of the Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages, and notes that the Sanskrit of the Vedas did not originally have retroflex consonants. Drawing on the work of University of Michigan linguist Madhav Deshpande, it would appear that “proto-Sanskrit” evolved by incorporating elements of local Indian languages. Further, Deshpande’s linguistic research suggests that the developments are a result of convergence and not of forcible subversion, which is significant since it indicates that the social relationship between Indo-Aryan and Dravidian speakers in early India was one of equality, rather than “Indo-Aryan invaders suppressing an indigenous Dravidian population and forcing it to learn their language”.
Indus script relation with Dravidian languages:
1) Ancient Near East of middle-third-millennium to early-second-millennium BC had no native elephants. The Syrian elephants of 1700 BC were also arguably imported from India. Archaeological evidence confirmed that Mesopotamian people imported ivory from only IVC, and the Persian Gulf traders had functioned as intermediaries in the thriving trade between IVC and Mesopotamia.
Interestingly, in the current Dravidian languages of south India, elephants are referred to as ‘pilu’ in Kannada, ‘pilluvam’ in Tamil and ‘piliru’ in Telugu. Linguists say that ‘pilu’ entered classical Sanskrit very late, as a borrowed word.Since ancient Iranian languages did not use the sound ‘l’, they change the ‘l’s of foreign word to ‘r’s. Thus ‘pilu’ became ‘piru’, just the way ‘Babilu’ (Babylon) became ‘Babiru’, and the Mesopotamians adapted the same.
2) Finnish Indologist and Indus script expert Asko Parola also feels that the Dravidian(Tamil) words such as ‘mukham’ (face, front, mouth), ‘khalam’ (threshing floor), ‘phalam’ (fruit) and ‘kundam’ (pit) are found in the Rigvedic Indo-Aryan texts which was composed 1500BCE
Tamil god “Muruku” (baby boy), according to Parpola, is a hunter god of the hill forests. Muruku, the god of love and fertility, was worshipped with frenzy dances and flesh and blood of a ram or goat. In 300 CE, the god amalgamated with Skanda of north India. “The pictorial and rebus meaning of fish in Dravidian means ‘miin’ and ‘miin’ also means star. I think they both possibly come from ‘min’ which means ‘to glitter’,”
3) In 2019, excavations carried out in the Keezadi site in Tamil Nadu’s Sivagangai district revealed graffiti dating back to 580 BC. The graffiti has been deemed to bear a distinct resemblance to the Indus script.Not just Keezadi, graffiti marks similar to the Indus script were recently discovered onpotsherds excavated from a site in Mariyapuram, Uthirakosamangai which falls in the Ramanathapuram district of tamilnadu
4) In 2017, Indus script expert Iravatham Mahadevan observed in a report that the Tamil sport of Jallikattu was depicted in an Indus seal found in Mohenjodaro (present-day Pakistan) in what he interpreted as a link between Dravidian and Indus cultures. In 2018, symbolist TL Subhash Chandra Bose wrote in his book ‘Ancient Tamizh - The Faculty of Harappan Symbols and Scripts’ that another seal foud in Bannavali referred to the sport of Sallikattu in language similar to that found on a Sangam era stone slab preserved in the Salem Archaeological Museum.
All evidence and research therefore points to India being the world’s largest, if not first, melting pot, with both the genetic pool and the languages and culture resulting from a blend of migrants over time with preexisting indigenous populations.
Conclusions should be made with arguments of both sides with facts.Let's make it.❤India - A living museum.
It isnt that hard to debunk, there have been swastikas and alters discovered in Indus valley baring very close resemblance to vedic culture, old temples are not large like medieval as it violated agama hence you won't see and shiv Lingas discovered in further proof
2) horse figurines and skeleton found in indus valley and sites outside it like sinauli also reveal horses existing in India well before the arrival of so called Aryans and horses are being made to important for this
3) David reich's paper shows all indians have the same genes and the r1a which all indians have is a foreign importation while oldest evidence and highest diversity within r1a1a is in india
Yamnayas in other papers migrated into western Europe and have nothing to do with us indians as their prominent gene is r1b
Excellent Brilliant Master research work Dr.Raja,..kudos to you...amazing... great eye opener. this must be told to every Indian and clear his myopic idiocy immediately,..
must spread this to all Indians, far and wide,... Thanks a million sir.
Thank you
Very good presentation. I can see lot of hard work has gone into it.
Very well researched and great lecture delivery
every indian scholar was forced to write this aryan invasion theory in all their books during british rule
Wonderful talk
Sir, the Rigvedic horse has 34 ribs. चतुस्त्रिंशद वाजिनो देवबन्धोर्वङकरीरश्वस्य सवधितिःसमेति | Translation : The four-and-thirty ribs of the. Swift Charger, kin to the Gods, the slayer's hatchet pierces.. Steppe horse has 36 ribs. As simple as that. These suckers have no common sense and they perpetuate idiotic Aryan Migration Theory etc etc.
Wonderful and very informative talk.
Loved the presentation. Thank you.
'Must watch and Learn' Video for everyone.
Sir, excellent. Thousand Thanks.
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Surely, I will forward this to my known circle.
Thank you, please forward
vanakam sir..thank u so mugh for debunking this aryan invasion theory❤❤❤❤
How can we learn anything from a crowd that has no commitment to satyam? They write anything that comes to mind. Our ancestors were so committed to satyam as primary dharma, but we indians now ignore our ancestors and dont believe them, reading europen translations
EXACTLY!!! That's the problem
I really enjoyed this vdo with factual content
But haven’t finished watching it fully yet
Recently another guy called mythic concepts released vdo on ‘Indian origins’: Harappans, aryans and BMAC
I wonder what your thoughts are on his take
dude people within india & out of india are being fed lies over time even atheist from west specially the ex-abrahamic atheist who claim they are on side of truth and science even they blindly without doing any research not only believe but also promote aryan invasion theory like there is no tomorrow, in my opinion nothing has changed for these ex-abrahamic atheist because they were anti-vedic civilisation when they were abrahamic believer[jew or christian or muslim] and that doesnt change when they become atheist....
Incredible research sir 🙏
Thank you
Jai Bharat🚩
Vandemataram🙏
lot of authentic veda bhashyas are there in sanskrit. One should learn sanskrit and learn from guru. Vedas should be interpreted only with purana itihasa knowledge, this is asanskrit dictae "itihasa puranabhyam vedam upabrhmayeth" Vedas being very ancient language and the style of communication is so different, it cant be literally translated. Thus one should understand purana itihasas first before going to vedas, (in the original, not from translations, from sanskrit, through traditional teachers who have learnt the real meaning from their teachers)
Max Muller translated "Rishabha Harsha" as "Bull shit". So you can imagine the aim of Max Muller.
All respect to Dr. M.L. Raja for his work . He has discussed extensively in a scholarly way. A lot of effort has gone into this work. Hats off to him. But I do not agree that the Aryan/Vedic/Hindu invasion did not happen. I see that the supporters of the Hindutva cult keep blaming the Europeans and especially the British for distorting the history of India. But when the British were here, not a single Indian objected to it. They were busy running around and bending before the Europeans. As for the conversion case, who were the people who converted to Christianity? It was mostly the outcasts and untouchables who were treated like non-humans and animals by the Hindus. Dr. Raja should do some research and tell us who are these people, whom the Hindus hated and who formed 50% of the population of India.
I have always believed in the Aryan Invasion theory, because it is simple and easily justified. The proof is the multicolored, multi-caste, multi-linguist people of India. To get this kind of combination, you need an invasion. The Vedic people from Central Asia invaded India around c. 2000 BC. They destroyed the Indus Valley. Now they are saying there was no Aryan Invasion.
Sanskrit is a son of the Vedic language. It is a foreign language. The Vedic people mixed with the local women and created the Dravidian race. The Dravidians are the descendants and slaves of the Aryans within the caste system. The Dravidians are Hindus. No Dravidian can be a Tamil. But they can speak Tamil. Archaic Tamil is the opponent of Sanskrit and Hinduism. The great Periyar called Tamil, ''the language of barbarians'' and he called the ''Tirukural'' human excreta. Periyar called himself a Dravidian. He was right'; the Hindu Dravidians destroyed all the pre-Sangam literature (only the Tirukural escaped) and punished the people who spoke Archaic Tamil, till they became extinct. It was the Dravidian Hindu Tamils who destroyed Archaic Tamil, the enemy of Sanskrit. That is why II often say that the Dravidian Tamils are non-Tamils. They could be any other ethnic or linguistic group.
The Europeans (cousins of the Indians and the Iranians) were not good people. They looted, cheated and converted. There can be no doubt. But they did something the Hindus did not do for 4000 years. They educated the masses (upper castes and untouchables). That is why India has outclassed even the European countries in education. The rest is cock and bull stories.
Sangam please start a " change " document for signature collections
🕉️🙏 जय श्रीराम !
Wonderful information. Very very knowledgeable speaker. Good work done, sir.
Sir Krishna faught Narkasur and freed 16000 women/girls is awellknown story .. but ppl don't know narkasur had a son called Mura .. and his land was called Pragjyotish ..historian claim it to Iran falsely .. but in reality this pragjyotish of Narkasur is actually Marrakech Morrocco (hiranyaksh etc had similar name evn ravan was called Lankesh which was kind of Asur tradition) Marrakech =Marrakesh = Mur(n)kesh .. so I lead my theory that Krishna went to Pragjyotish I.e present Marrakesh Morrocco to fight Narkasur
Please check this fact
Praagjhotisha means East. Mahabharatam, Harsa Carita, and Nidhanpur and Dupi Copper Plate Inscriptions of Assam King Bhaskaravarma, prove that Narakasura lived in Assam region of Bharat only.
Why you this info from?
@@DrMLRaja RAJA ANNA U R LOOKING HANDSOME & ATHI SUNDARAM IN YR THUMBNAIL PICTURE,,YR GYAAN & TRUE WISDOM SHINES FROM YR EYES & SINCERITY FROM YR DEEP RESEARCH...GREAT CONTRIBUTION TO OUR DHARMIC CIVILIZATION...KOTI KOTI PRANAM TO YOU...DHANYAWADAH,,NAMASKARAM...
@@DrMLRaja sir 🙏🚩 maybe thr is something missing .. as u see evn today and near islamic invasions and British slavery red sea and are hv been a part of Women sex slvery or Kidnapping and selling thm in markets .. it has been middle east asias culture or part .. evn in middle est we use east .. no ?? 🙏
@@DrMLRaja pragjyotishpura ..Prag means former or eastern and 'jyotisha' a 'star', 'astrology', 'shining', 'pura' a city thus meaning ***''city of eastern light'*** otherwise ***'city of eastern astrology'*** not really meaning city of/in east actually ..sir
ayaskanta is magnet in sanskrit (that ttracts uron) yes ayas ayaha is iron, iron word itself came from sanskrit aya, though spelt with r illogically in english
Very good effort Dr. Raja, your knowledge in both languages is amazing
Excellent research work, presented in simple terms. Great achievement.
Thank you
Thanks a lot Sir!!!
Pl.deliver this lecture in hindi also.
THIS LEVEL OF SUCH INTRICATELY TWISTED AND CONVOLUTED WRONG AT EACH AND EVERY LEVEL DOES NOT SIMPLY HAPPEN JUST BY SOMEONE BEING WRONG ABOUT SOMETHING AND NOT WITHOUT PROPER DELIBERATE CONNIVING MALICIOUS THOUGHT BEING PUT BEHIND IT FOR EVIL ENDS. 😑😒
Excellent sir...
Thank you
people should protest lies in indian text books against our own ancestors
JAI shree RAM 🙏🙏🙏
I like this statement 37:24 of video on the slide "English Language originated in Sahara Desert of Northern Africa" should we say Timbukhtu.
The language analysis of the Indus valley and it's close similarities to Tamil by Basata Anshumali Mukhopadyay is persuasive proof
Dhanyavaadah
Only people in Afghanistan migratr from central Asia uzbakistan but other indians are from india
🙏
Is there an English version of this video?
Then how this false AIT will change?? Is it possible
Definitely we can do it if we work hard unitedly.
Thank you m L raja sir.
ayaskanta magnet is mentioned in so many ancient sanskrit texts
let us teach our children to protest in schools with these facts in schools when they teach lies.
A great talk sir. I love you how you logically took down Aryan invasion point by point and cited so much historical evidence. The only part that I disagree with is your attempt to deny that IE languages family exists and Dravidian does not belong to another totally separate family known as Dravidian. This is anti scientific. It is a well known fact, accepted by all linguists around the world, that Sanskrit is an IE languages. The IE languages family is the most studied in the world with now 2 centuries of solid scholarship. It is not just based on "phonetic similarity" the grammar and syntax is the same too and there are regular and predictable sound changes between Sanskrit and other IE languages, but not with Dravidian. If you take a look at that core vocabulary of Sanskrit and Dravidian such as Tamil, you will see no similarly at all. Such as numbers and familial terms like mother, father etc. Yes it is true that Sanskrit and Tamil share isogloses, but this has been acquired due to later contact and are not genetic. I agree iwith you that Dravidians went north and not South, this explains why there are no Dravidian loan words and isogloses in early Vedic Sanskrit.
So overall a great and logical talk, but you do lose a bit of credibility by denying linguistic science. Even OIT scholars Talageri, Kansas, Elst accept linguistics. We cannot go far by denying it, and AIT folks love to portray OIT scholar as anti scientific, religious, nationalistic conspiracy theorists when they deny linguistics. I highly recommend you read Kaznas's papers , he has made it a point to prove to other OIT scholars that the IE family and PIE definitely did exist. Talageri also accepts PIE definitely existed. As does Elst. No serious OIT scholar denies it today.
I am from Tamilnadu. I studied Tamil grammar thoroughly. I learnt Sanskrit grammar also, as Sanskrit belongs to all Bharatians, including Tamil speaking people. Hence in the aspect of similarities between Sanskrit and Tamil I can explain. Thirumoolar in his Thirumanthram also explained this thousands of years before. It is in Tamil. No body knows this text. As I cannot type all these lengthy evidence, I request you to call me please
@@DrMLRaja
I am not sure how we could arrange for a call. However, I co-administrate a FB group on AIT/AMT vs OIT where some high profile Indian scholars participate and I invite your participation there. If I may indulge your time, this post is slightly longer than a usual reply on youtube, but it details exactly the main points in a logical way, as just as you did in your presentations. I will divide it into two parts. It is both for your benefit and the benefit of other silent readers.
Part 1:
Sir, let me just start by saying we are on the same side. I do not believe in AIT either, I believe in OIT, in fact I will even go as far as to say this is not a “belief” for its much "belief" as saying dinosaurs and big bang is a belief. We have explicit evidence of Out of India migrations now that satisfies the stringent criteria of modern science, evidence of Indian DNA moving into Central Asia and West Asia and evidence of Indian material culture in the form of pottery, cattle, technology, symbols and cultural motifs moving from out of India across Indo-Europe. Finally, and this is what I have found surprising in my own research, it is linguistics that is actually the best evidence for OIT, the isoglosses that IE languages share and the way they are distributed across them can only be explained by OIT and no other theory. The evidence we have for OIT is the kind of evidence AIT proponents dreams of. OIT is a fact not a belief and like all scientific facts, eventually it will be accepted by everybody.
Now, I have already said I appreciate the evidence you brought forth in this talk and the logic you have explained to show why AIT is absurd, but I reiterate what does not go in your favour is that you ultimately arguing a conspiracy theory -- that PIE, IE family and Dravidian etc does not exist. That for 200 years linguists have been on a conspiracy to lie about PIE to prove AIT --- and it seriously does kill your credibility with the type of audience that matters -- the scholarly and scientific one. You are not presenting their actual position and the arguments and evidences, you are presently a strawman. I know, because I talk to linguists, I have spoken to the same linguists that interacted with Talageri, and they all dismiss OIT scholars as all linguistically illiterate, unscientific and not worth engagement with --- because many Indian scholars really don't understand linguistics or misrepresent it. They have been successful so far in using this, point to a few "bad apples" to shut off OIT scholars from IE debates. If you don’t even believe PIE/exists, how can you have a seat at the table? Sir, you need to remind yourself AIT is a linguistics theory, it is a theory of how the IE language family happened. It is their primary epistemology(mukhya pramana) so if you don’t deal with linguistics, no matter what you say, you will leave no impact.
First you must begin by understanding linguistics science(I say this to any Indian researcher who wants to disprove AIT, study linguistics first or at least get some understanding). I will now demonstrate to you(and everybody reading) why Sanskrit is an IE language and why Dravidian is a completely different language family with zero similarity with Sanskrit, other Indo-Aryan and IE languages. First of all, lets begin to by conceding your point yes I know Thriumoolar’s Tamil grammar is heavily borrowed from Panini’s grammar, this is why they are similar. All linguists know this -- this is not a revelation. I also know that modern Dravidian languages, all except Tamil, have nearly 80-90% Sanskrit LOAN words. Tamil use to as well, but during the 20th century Tamil Nationalists purged Tamil to about only 20% Sanskrit words, leaving only pure Tamil words which we have zero similarity with Sanskrit ones and this is why Tamil sounds the most foreign to a Northern IA speaking Indian. Loan words are called “loans” because they are loaned from another language, their etymologies are not derivable from that language e.g., the word “loot” in English is not derivable from English grammar and phonetics or the wider Germanic family. It is a Hindi word, so we know it was loaned to English at some point in history. Knowing this, we have a test in linguistics known as a “Swadesh list” which is used for all languages in the world, a list of only 100 core words that tend not to be borrowed because they are frequently in usage. E.g. The numbers to 1--5. Now lets demonstrate this:
Here are the numbers for 1-5 in Old Chinese:
one 一 ʔit
two 二 ni[jtk]-s
three 三 s-hhləm
four 四 s-hlij-s
five 五 ŋŋaʔ
Here are the numbers 1-5 in Dravidian languages:
Tamil:
1. oṉṟu 2. iraṇṭu 3. mūṉṟu ; 4. nāṉku ; 5. aintu
Telugu:
1. okaṭi
2. iru 3. mūḍu 4. nālugu 5. aidu
Malayalam:
1. onnŭ
2. raṇṭŭ 3. mūnnŭ 4. nālku 5. añcŭ
Kananda:
1. ondu
2. eraḍu 3. mūru 4. nālakku 5. aidu
By studying this you will now see immediately that Chinese bears zero similarity with Dravidian, that’s because they belong to entirely different language families. If you are trained in the science of historical linguistics, you will know by looking at this list which are the older Dravidian languages and which are relatively more recent. We can see Tamil and Malayalam have the more proto-features, and both Telugu and Kanada have undergone similar and recent sound changes. Such as with the word for two, Tamil and Malayalam have the original Irantu and rantu, and Tamil has the older version of I+rantu. Telugu has the newest shortened version iru and Kananda retains the I prefix but changes it to e and t becomes d. You will see sound t > d also happens in the word for 5, Tamil aintu to Telugu aidu. This is how we know Dravidian language forms a single language family and Tamil is the oldest Dravidian language.
Now look at Sanskrit and other Indo-Aryan languages
Sanskrit :
1. éka
2. dví 3. trí 4. cátur 5. páñcan
Prakrit Pali:
1. eka
2. dve 3. tayo 4. catur 5. pañca
Hindi:
1. ek
2. do 3. tīn 4. cār 5.pā̃c
Bengali:
1. ek 2. dui 3. tin 4. car 5. pãcô
Marathi:
1. ek
2. don 3. tīn 4. cār 5. pāc
Assamese:
1. ek
2. dui. 3. tini 4. sari 5. pãs
I think this should be enough(too many languages to list them all) to show that they form one language family. It is known as Indo-Aryan. It will also become immediately apparent Sanskrit and other IA language bear as much similarity with Dravidian, as Chinese does with Dravidian --- zero similarity. We can also see from this list that Sanskrit is the oldest IA language and we can see the sound changes that happened. Such as éka become eka during the Buddhist period in Pali, and then simply ek in later IA languages. We can see this internally in the development of Sanskrit from Vedic Sanskrit to Classical Sanskrit, that a lot of new innovations are made and very early Vedic Sanskrit has very archaic features more in common with European languages. Now in part 2 I will prove Sanskrit and all indeed IA languages are IE languages.
@@DrMLRaja Part 2
Now lets prove that the IE language exists and Sanskrit is an IE language.
Gothic(Old German)
1. ains
2. twái 3. þreis 4. fidwor 5. fimf
Latin:
1. oinos
2. duo 3. trēs 4. quattuor 5. quīnque
Old Greek :
1. oĩnos
2. dúō 3. treĩs 4. téssares 5. pénte
Old Balto Slavic
1. ains
2. dwai 3. tris 4. ketturei 5. penkei
We can immediately see that an IE family exists and Sanskrit is a relatively distant cousin of European languages.
If you think this is just true for numbers, that is because I am only using the numbers 1-5 of the Swadesh list, it is true for every other word category too. Here a few more and I will showing only from the oldest example of Dravidian, IA and IE
I: nāṉ(Tamil) ahám(Sanskrit) azǝm(Old persian, and adam) egṓn(Ancient Greek) egō(Latin) ik(Gothic)
You: nī(tamil) t(u)vám(Sanskrit) tū(Avestan) þu(Gothic) tū(Latin) tū(Celtic)
Man: āṇ(Tamil) nár(Sanskrit) anḗr(Old Greek) nar(Old Persian) nêr(Celtic)
Woman: peṇ(Tamil) gnā(Sanskrit) qēns(Gothic) gʷén-eH(Celtic) gǝnā(Old Persian)
Mother: ammā(Tamil) mā́tṛ(Sanskrit) mōdar(Gothic) māter(Latin) mātīr(Celtic) mātar(Old Persian)
Father: appā(Tamil) pitṛ́(Sanskrit) fadar(Gothic) pater(Latin) athir(Celtic) pitar(Old Persian)
As you can see it's not just numbers, it's across the board in all categories of the core vocab of a language. This can only be explained if at one time the Sanskrit speaking people did not come into contact with the Dravidians and Sanskrit was a part of the same PIE Indo-European people . So I am afraid one of the possible conclusions it forces you to consider is Sanskrit at one time was in Europe and later moved into India where Dravidian exists as a pure isolate, but IE languages are not isolates but are mainly concentrated in Europe --- this is the logic behind AIT. Historical linguistics using the comparative method have also been able to deduce(like we deduced Sanskrit is the oldest IA language and Tamil the oldest Dravidian) that Sanskrit is among the youngest of the IE language family, because it has had many innovations e.g. the satam shift - kh has become cha, such as Sanskrit Cha but in Latin and Slavic it is kha/qua. So we know Latin and Slavic retain the older form. It turns out the European languages all retain archaic features of PIE that Sanskrit has lost, which only leads to one conclusion: the European languages branches are older than the Indo-Aryan branch. It means Sanskrit CANNOT be PIE and European languages have not descended from IA/Sanskrit. One of the likely inferences this leads to then is PIE was somewhere in Europe and Sanskrit came from Europe to India. I hope you see how it appears like we are forced to this inference by the data. You can’t reject the data just because you don’t like it. You can’t accuse all linguists in the world of a white supremacy conspiracy just because the data seems to be supporting what they are saying.
So does this mean we accept AIT? Absolutely NOT, and this is what Talageri, Kaznas and Elst have now demonstrated. Yes, Sanskrit cannot be PIE, but it still does not necessarily mean PIE did not start in India. This is our Brahmastra --- and top western linguists have now admitted while Sanskrit being PIE is impossible, PIE in India is not impossible. They still say “unlikely” but not impossible. It is reason what AIT linguist scholars are struggling to disprove - that is why they hate Talageri. But it does mean we need to push back the date when PIE was in India(something Talageri has not even realized, but Kaznas has) PIE is not a recent bronze age 4000BCE phenomenon, PIE in India could be 10,000 years old or even older. In our Vedic history we record the time when all the 5 tribes, all the IE tribes were in Saptasindhu(India) and the first tribe to leave were the Drhuyus in prehistory(The Europeans) this would explain why European languages are older than Sanskrit -- they retain the PIE language features that was spoken in India in prehistory -- but that PIE is likely to be nothing like the PIE they have currently reconstructed(Kaznas is firm on this).
When PIE was being spoken in India Dravidians and Northern Eurasian Indians had not yet met. We know that today with a degree of confidence from the Rakhigari skeleton, that Dravidians move up north(as you said in the talk) circa 4600BCE or prior and mixed with Northern Indians, this is why in early Vedic religion and culture there are NO Dravidian loan words and isoglosses. The Vedic Aryans only met the Dravidians much later --- and Dravidians still remember this event with adoration by celebrating sage Agastya coming down and bringing Vedic culture to the South. He is said to be the founder of Tamil grammar and Tamil medicine, and it has been said both in Dravdian and Indo-Aryan literature he came from the North to the South and learned Tamil from Lord Murugan. In the Tamil text Purananuru, Agastya is described as not coming alone but with many other Aryan migrants. They are credited for bringing science of agriculture and irrigation. These myths are not only shared by Dravidians, but other non IE culture such as the old Europeans of Ireland retain their myths how the Celtic Aryans brought agriculture, medicine etc and by old non IE Greek tribes, how the Greeks brought philosophy. So this explains perfectly why Dravidian and Aryans are different ---- Dravidians are like many old tribes like in South East Asia that peacefully adopted Vedic/Aryan culture and allowed themselves to be Aryanized. There is no evidence of violence, hostility or forced conversion. And the fact is Aryans and Dravidians were already a mixed people in 3000BCE and maybe long before, and present day Indians are the same mix of Aryan and Dravidian. None of us are pure Northern/Eurasian or South/Dravidian and that is what makes us Indians beautiful -- in every way. Later it was Dravidians that became the biggest champions of Vedic Aryan culture and spread it throughout South East Asia. Even today it is Dravidians who are the proudest Hindus and preserve all Hindu traditions, customs, aesthetic, philosophies and architecture. Our Rishis said "Make the whole world Aryan" and that is exactly what we have been doing for the past 10,000 years. Modern Hindus are the new Aryanizers of the world. We are all playing our part in reviving Aryavarta.
My question is why we don't find well developed cities in post ivc Era.Say for example Maurya Era?
Someone please ans.
Arya In Indic and Arrete, Arysto,.. in Greek means more or less the same thing - excellence in virtue, skill, knowledge and wisdom,..
a man who has these qualities is called an Aryan, Arrete..or Aristo or Arysto...
Indian belt is original Indian tribal and others from Iran or Turkey (Barbarian or mix of Barbarian with native Indian)
Selva from Madurai
1.paalai means desert ! current "thar" in sangam literature 2.they have mentioned current "rann of kutch" where mule is running where dolphin skeleton in sea shore.3. camel is mentioned many times 4.the "Dravidian language spoken by close to 2 million mostly in the Pakistani province of Balochistan" and pls tell the truth.
Sir, it would be nice if you could use new genetic research also to prove/disprove claims.
Look
If there were no Aryan invasion, who were the people fighting in Bahubali?
Why were the native Kalakeyas trying to save themselves from the Aryan Mahishnati royals?
Do you mean the flim Bahubali. If yes then note that it is only a flim and not history. A lim or novel can not be a evidence
@@DrMLRaja
That may very well be true but how did the concept came about?
The Mahishnati looked like the outsiders and the Kalakeyas were the natives.
Could it be long times ago, that was exactly what happened?
@@khllkhn bro in no where movie it propogate about AIT and now if you are learning history from fictional movie then it's no late that you will tell that sex was discovered by adult flims website .
Your logic of comment is dumb as your knowledge about this stuff .
❣️❣️
@@Vikramaditya_108
Look
I know there was no AIT from the movie but allow me to drift a bit.
I am the only person in the world who can imagine adventures where i am the villain.
@@khllkhn dear brother it's youtube and you have right to comment of your opinion but being responsible person comment something which is with fact and logic .
And the director of the flim s.s.rajmouli garu is only not telling about the flim is connected to any history .
So don't increase your knowledge from unknown source .
❣️❣️
some qstns thamizh scholars are asking: which is the earliest sanskrit inscription in this part of the world (i dont want to say india, bharat, etc for this qstn yet) and where was it found?? likewise what are the corresponding inscriptions, stone edifices of the various native cultures? what is the 'dhev bhasha' original script?? if a lot of sanskrit lit. came out into the open all of a sudden, why shouldnt they be transliterated versions of the scripts of the natives that the immigrants took time to learn, translate and destroy the originals??? where are the original literature of the natives?? if sanskrit lit was preserved for so long or passed on verbally thru memory(!) , how come most of the ancient ethnic lit. were lost? were natives so careless?? if u see the devious methods the north keeps using to exploit the southern resources (eg cheating to grab central govt jobs in the south, etc) , why shouldnt the immigrants have done the same thing to grab the locals' heritage , culture, knowledge, resoures under savarna theories etc?? at the very basic level, why 'union govt' doesnt give money for such research - whther keezhadi or adhichchanalloor/korkai, etc etc but spend crores on finding out saraswati??why so much money for hindi but practically nothing for other languages?? if all those NI names for rivers etc are used in sanskrit scriptures, why no mention of them in thamizh?? later thamizh lits mightve mentioned as by then all people got mixed ,etc that doesnt mean sanskrit was here from the start.
The answer will be lengthy. I can not type it fully. Hence it will be nice if you call me and I answer all the questions clearly
@@DrMLRaja responding to individuals like us doesnt matter , sir. i wish all scholars like u - anthropologists, sociologists, theists, atheists, rationals, etc all debate ALL aspects of this for our benefit. if theist scholars like Saktivel Muruganar, Dheiyanayagam (archeologist), other thamizh desiyam leaders have done their research and debunk sanskrit lit, atheists like subavee and others also quote from manusmriti, vedas to poinit out the injustices to the majority # of society under the caste system etc. and judging from what we've observed from our own indifference to our heritage , resource mgmt , alleged 'frauds' by people like nagasamy, primitive minds as evidenced by the corrupton and social ills vs the exploitative aggressive subjugation of our interests by the north indians, why shouldnt it have been any diferent centuries ago??? point is no one knows the truth , original scripts arent there, as prof. murali says, cultures like charwakars etc have all been lost with their lit. why perpetuate theories with speculations instd of reclaiming the real treasure - our natural resources and innate nobility of minds for our succeeding gens that we're letting down so badly.maybe first let the brahmins get out of the temples they never built but are in control of. let others decide the future.
@@ytadltspv haven't been lost, millions of manuscripts are untranslated, hence we don't know and also in tamizh sangam there are so many verses talking about praising vedas but not a single verse about Indus river, but ganga is mentioned
@@vaibhavkrupakar240 where are those 'M of untransalted mscrpts'?? acc. to observations by thamizh scholars, thirukkural itself was saved just before throwing the bundle as firewood into the fire! north indian scholars mention that the aryans etc destroyed the charkvakas' script too. so theres been a systematic tactical destruction of native scripts by the aryan immigrants whenever the got the chance over the centuries. miraculous that some of them were salvaged and transliterated - still plenty left.
@@ytadltspv clearly sanskrit texts suggest that north and south Indian civilisation are two distinct civilisation but also connected the North Indian civilisation influence whole europe and middle East by its migration while south Indian civilisation influence east Asia and even americas.
First off, to say that AIT is
"Without a single evidence"
Is silly. I suppose that someone can _disagree_ with the large body of DNA evidence compiled by David Reich and his team at Harvard, but that certainly constitutes evidence, and that's just one example
Then to call it "evil"!?
At the outset, you're advertising an extraordinary bias and lack of any objectivity.
This is a way of discouraging people from even listening to opposing points of view.
Over and over, Dr. Raja argues against old, outdated and discarded theories. Not the current, well supported theories. He spends most of the time attacking the theories of Max Mueler from 150+ years ago.
He then incorrectly describes what "Indo-European" or "Indo-Germanic" means. Those terms are geographic; meaning that on one end, there's India, and the influence of this language and of these people stretches, on the other end, into Europe
The common root language theory isn't based on 25 words. It's based upon sentence structure and a massive number of words that are extremely similar. There was certainly a common root.
A few hundred years ago, poofing up one's race or ethnic group as the greatest was pretty universal. Hindus still do this pretty energetically. The fact that there were racist ideas tied up into some early AIT theories doesn't negate the idea that there was a large movement of people who moved from the steppes into India in the second millennium b.c.
The evidence supports it overwhelmingly. Whatever a few European racists were saying 170 years ago doesn't invalidate anything. Some of the earliest Europeans advocating the common root language theory speculated that it originated in India.
There's so much incorrect stuff on this lecture....
The current theory, held by almost everyone outside of India, is that these indo Europeans invaded Europe AND India... Not that Europeans are the "true Aryans"
Examples of people saying incorrect things 170 years ago doesn't invalidate anything.
Next, the issues of horses and chariots doesn't prove or disprove anything. It's supporting evidence. The earliest uses of horses and carts seem to have been on the steppes. That makes sense because they were pastoralists. 0p
What the DNA evidence now tells us is that the big steppe migration began in 1,800 b.c. or thereabouts, but was preceded by several smaller waves, going back into the late 3rd millennium b.c.
The 'Arya' is a Sanskrit term, and 'Arya' stands for 'Nobel' or 'Nobility'' which is clearly not a race, also Gautama Buddha have said something about 'Four Arya Satya' or 'Four Noble Truths', so it is pretty clear.
The Aryan Invasion, migration, tourism theory is totally made-up conspiracy by the Britishers, during the British Imperialism, and as per Archaeological and Historical findings, like Sinauli Excavations, Saraswati River existence dating, Roma Gypsy's having Indian origin, etc completely debunks any kind of "Aryan" invasion/migration myth.
The main motive was to morally justify European Invasion and establish the white race as only capable of intelligence.
Conclusion: After the Ice age, the ice melted from India, Africa and all other equatorial regions much before Europe and polar regions, and because India had the best fertile land and great natural resources like rivers, etc. the human race multiplied in India much more rapidly and migrated across Europe, than Americas.
So never fall into these Aryan Dravidian conspiracy to divide. The so-called "Aryan invasion theory" is actually their motive is to divide us and justify and normalize their European/Christian, Arab/Islamic invasion/enslavement of native Indians.
👍👍🙏🙏
🙏
Sir, make a video on this in tamil to awake tamil people.
please make this video in tamil also, so tamilians understand the truth
dwaraka rsearch stopped by cutting of funds, so they dont want to say krishna is before christ
Thanks
educaton department should apologize for these lies
Aryan tribes primarily lived along saraswati river they were fish eating Brahmins who practiced Vedic religions and composed the vedas and as saraswati dried up they migrated to areas such as bengal and west coast and are called saraswats there were some migrants over period of many centuries and mixed with other tribes including indigenous people so the current inhabitants of India is a mixed population and shows the genetic diversity
We need to follow the same logic and enjoy the fault lines in western societies, not sure why we woke ourself in the dog/cock flights
north indians have this superiority complex..especially UP Bihar people...they always consider themselves aggressive aryans and others as dravids...especiallu marathi people..jus look at the attitude of Anjana Om kashyap
Please do not generalise individual attitude over a whole population. There are good and not good persons in every group. I have seen very good UP and Bihar as well as Maharastra people.
@@DrMLRaja u must hav experienced nd heard of this "aryan vs dravidian" thing...it is not just on paper but this divisive attitude u must hav seen somewhere that is why you thought of explaining the hidden facts right? I am jus telling some people to be unbiased..ofcourse not everyone has that preconcieved notion
@@youtubemaximizer i have seen good people in all sections and not good people in all sections, including people in Southern Bharat, where I have equally experienced good and not good, equally as I felt in Northern Bharat. There are both Yudhishthira and Duryodhana in all sections. We have to judge them and avoid not good.
What are you talking about people don't even know AIT there in North India I've never seen anyone talking about AIT not most people in North have knowledge of history a lot they are busy with own problems
Poorva (Indic language) = A Priori (Latin) means 'Former, earlier,.."
Sorry to say! I don't know other realms much, but Sangam Talks has always failed me while discussing the realm of Linguistics.. I am personally oriented to the belief that the Aryan I/M theory was politically driven..
But I always come here to see how they refute the Dravidian language family linguistically.. and being a Linguistic student, I can bet that these experts have always dealt Linguistics in the most unknowledgeable and casual manner... everyone who discussed Aryan & Dravidian theory on Sangam Talks is incredibly poor at Linguistics...
In your case, Dr. ML Raja, when you discussed a unique characteristic of all languages of India, Nepal, etc; (at 55:45) I was shocked to see your ignorance & confidence simultaneously..
Let me tell you, that the characteristic you discussed there has nothing to do with any language, because all the languages around the world, actually every sound of human speech can be separated into two part vowel & consonant..
And the unique characteristic to write them as joined is related to script not language.. and script can never be considered as a characteristic of any language.. because spoken language has always been prior, and the script of a language has always been decided by politicality.. You should know, that there are many languages in Eastern India, which are written in Roman script, due to British rule, but that doesn't make those languages european.. Hope you understand!
One more thing, the writing system that is written as (Consonant+Vowel joined) is termed as 'Abugida' in linguistics.. and your claim about this script, (if you want it to consider) is also totally wrong at 2 levels:
(a). There are many languages outside Indian subcontinent(taking Burma & Tibet) that use 'Abugida' kind of writing system, like in Indonesia & Philippines.
However, the real hidden thing behind this is that all of those Indian scripts are derived from the Brahmi script which itself was an 'Abugida' kind.. hence is the sameness. However, there is also an Ethiopic script used since 4th century, now used for many Afro-Asiatic languages (in Africa), which is 'Abugida' and has its direct origin in Egyptian hieroglyphs.. and in no way related to India..
(b). The second thing is that, all Indian languages too do not use Abugida script. Other than the politically adopted scripts like Roman and Persian, there are still examples of scripts invented in India, which are not Abugida type. A quick example is Santhali (/Olchiki in Jharkhand)..
A request also to Dr. ML Raja:
Being a linguistic student, I honestly want to research on this topic of Aryan & Dravidian families.. with the presumption that they should surely come under one language family..
I have read that Robert Caldwell's book in parts only, and yet haven't been able to read it completely..
And I am pretty sure that you too haven't read Robert Caldwell seriously..
But can you please tell the exact pages, where you got those points of tests, according to which you claimed Hindi to be 100% Dravidian..??
It would be great help if you could share..
Thanks. I request you to consider the following.
1. If the script is unique and is special to Bharat that itself shows that there is a common development and they are one family. The joining of Vowel and consonant into a new combined letter itself is unique to India. Of course any sound even of the animals and birds have vowel and consonant as a sound. Hence the sounds of any language there will be combination of vowel and consonant. But how they developed into a language and script is important. You yourself told the script of Bharatian is of common origin Brahmi.
2. The order of arrangement of letters vowels from अ to औ and consonants from क् onwards is almost same in Indian languages.
3. The addition of विभक्ति to noun is same in all Bharatian languages.
4.The order of the sentence in prose is Subject, additional words with VIBHAKTI etc., and lastly verb.
श्री राम : वनं गच्चति, In Tamil Sree Raman Kaattukku Senraar. However in English Sree Rama went to forest. In English verb comes in the middle.
Like that there are many common thing and uniqueness in Bharatian Languages.
I request you to research on this.
I suggest you to read the following book where the linguistic research and the proofs to show how Caldwell is entirety wrong detailed. The book is "Aryan Invasion a Myth" by Dr N R Waradpande, The pages from 18 to 48 details it. The 10 characters based on which Caldwell divided Bharatian Languages into Dravidian and Aryan is detailed in that book from page 22 to 29. I have read it fully. If you wish, you can buy that book and read.
Finally, this Aryan Dravidian divide and the language difference is the conspiracy of 18th century CE. No texts written before 18th century CE, mentioned not even in one time these conjectures. No author lived before 1800 CE mentioned this. All the texts you are reading as a part of your curriculum are themselves written based on this preconceived conjecture. Almost all texts are written by foreigners and their followers of the period after 18th century CE. Are you reading any ancient Bharatian texts and author's writing in your course. Please analyse yourself
@@learninglearning4509 read srikanth talegeri's works for linguistics
@@gautam7472 Thankyou! Would must read him ahead!
@@DrMLRaja Sorry Sir!
You are again failing me with your hurried and irresponsible responses..
It is hard to explain to people who don't care for linguistic aptitude.. but I am trying it only once more..
1. I have already told that the 'Abugida' script type is not unique to India. Also, that all Indian scripts are not Abugida type. Second thing, I tried hard to emphasise that writing system is very much a seperate thing from language..
I should also tell that every other script type around the world(viz. Abjad, Alphabet, Syllabic, etc) are dominant in their unique areas, where most of the languages (irrespective of their language families) are written in those scripts only..
Therefore script can never be a parameter of similarity in languages.
Scripts come very later, languages and their structures are formed orally very prior..
Still today, there are many languages, which don't have scripts and are used orally only; still today are languages that use more than one scripts of different types..
For e.g. Punjabi is written both in Gurumukhi('Abugida' type) and Shahmukhi('Abjad' type) scripts.. Infact, the great poets of 12th century Bulle Shah & Baba Fareed have written Punjabi in Shahmukhi(Abjad) script..
But that doesn't make their Punjabi a Semitic language, & not Indo-Aryan.. na?!!
So, please understand the No-relation of writing system and language..
***
Your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th points are also not arguable, because there are many flaws and misconceptions inherent in making such points.. still trying..
2. Not true! Don't you know Tamil script has only 18 consonants, while Devnagri (used for Sanskrit) has 36 consonants(including क्ष,त्र, ज्ञ)..!
Even if you consider the 6 more adopted consonants in modern Tamil, still the difference is of 12 consonants.
Also, I have personally learnt many North-Indian scripts viz. Devnagri, Gurumukhi, Gujarati, Bengali, Oria, etc.. & I can tell you some Vowel differences too among these itself.. and also their different methods of representing conjunct consonants and double consonants..
But remember, Script doesn't say anything about language.
'Karbi' is a Sino-Tibetan language in Assam, written in both Assamese and Roman script, but not able to be complete in any of them, and people are still inventing new scripts for it.
And I can bet that there are certain Hindi vowel sounds also, which are not covered by the popular Devanagari script.
3. Hindi itself doesn't use Vibhakti suffix system sir, my 1st language!
Sanskrit Vibhakti system is more similar to Greek than many of the Modern Indian languages.. which can be easily perceived personally.
Anyway, that is a different context.. and single point.
4. So that is termed as SOV (Sub-Obj-Verb) word order.. that is seen in many languages other than Indo-Aryan & Dravidian..
Also, Japanese, Turkish, Korean, etc.. where Korean is a 'Language isolate' which means that there is no language family in which Korean could be fit in.
Hope all of them can't be argued to come under Indian language family.. na?
Hope you understand!!
***
Ah! So I was right that you haven't read Caldwell.. you have read the things just from a secondary source, making such big claims.. which is not a good sign for me..
But thanks for sharing the information, I would surely read that book further in my research...
***
That doesn't look a sound argument! You know that the study branch of 'Comparative Linguistics' itself came to its maturity in 18-19th century, the philologists got equipped to work on such things in that century only, the classification of language families itself happened then only, so how could you get the name of a language family reference prior to that?
It's like saying that the kingdoms of 'Protista'(in 1866, Haeckel) and 'Monera'(in 1938, Herbert) are flawed classifications because there is no such naming found before 18-19th century; and that Aristotle had divided all organisms into 'Plantae' and 'Animalia' only.
So, such an argument should never be a base for such things.. hope you understand!!
***
In my course, I am reading people from Panini, Patanjali, Bhartrihari to the most modern Prof. Kapil Kapoor.. so be unworried about that..
However, I have not read everything, and am still a very-very beginner student..
But I know that those people have majorly worked on the Sanskrit grammar, phonetics, etc.. only, and didn't do any comparative linguistic work.
***
However, Let me also tell you that the casual attempts you are doing here to establish the similarities, is also referred to by a popular term called 'Pseudo-linguistic Comparison'.. which is generally done to convince laypersons..
***
But don't feel out of way!
I am an insider of Linguistics, and I am keenly interested in the dream that Indo-Aryan & Dravidian languages has to be brought under one umbrella family.
I am just against the Pseudo-way of doing it..
But I want to do it properly!
And hope I would get support from all of you, in the task...
🙏🙏
If not for the Himalayas.... many of the northies would have looked like the chinese.... like the North Eastern States. ... But now they appear racially closer to the Middle Eastern / European people. This situation is like one of my kids appears more like my neighbour than me !.... and now I have to create a fancy story to cover up this ugly fact.
10:28
Hi, almost all the characters in Mahabharat and ramayan were dark, how come one brother is dark and another one is fair. Such illogical. Tamil Sangam literature mentions about the Aryan people living near by Himalayas.
Rome is from Rama, they were all hindus before being converted by force to christianity. there is shivalinga in vatican
F haplogroup->HIJK->K->NOQR.India din't have N and Q haplogroup population so not likely in India.
There are still 5 Max Muller Bhavans in India. I am sure they will have books written by this person (Max M) and have courses that teach this false theories.
great work sir,... but please do not use the term 'CASTE" as it was imported and implanted by the Spanish & Portuguese colonialists in to
our society falsely,.. the origin is the word CASTA from them, Spain has such 4 divisions, and was never in our land,... they used it to divide us,..we had 70 plus Jaathis
based on our profession but never discriminatory, all were equals,.. only the colonialists brought about these caste here after 1800s...
gave positions and importance to some and gave menial jobs to others and divided us,..created fight amongst us,..continuing upto today,..
. even Varnas was misinterpreted by them as 'Caste" and Manu meant it only on Guna, Character and not on birth etc.. which is the handiwork of Colonialists and Missionaries,
which could not be corrected post independence as Nehru who fell in love with Edna and the pseudo Russian socialist model, did not want it corrected,..
This is well and good in this time frame but there is another story to this. According to PR Sarkar the Vedic civilization with the start of the Rgveda in the Caucasus goes back to 15,000 years ago. 10,000 years ago the Vedas with the Vedic language reached India and the vocabulary was absorbed in the local indigenous Sanskrit of India
There is no evidence for the begining of Vedic Civilisation outside Bharat. On the contrary plenty of evidence for its origin within Bharat
@@DrMLRaja There is wonderful and revealing evidence if you only can look into the greatest treasure of Bharat.
Why are south indians more dark skinned and North Indians more fair skinned? Why is Brahmins even in South India fair skinned while rest of the people around them are dark skinned? Obviously the Gene of ancestors are different. Fair skinned have their ancestory from outside while indigenous people of the tropical regions of India are darker skinned.
1st of all it's not Aryan invasion but a prolonged migration and subjugation of the local population ultimately leading many to move further away which explains why there's more dark skinned people towards the East and South India.
Aryans obviously didn't invent the Vedas otherwise we could have seen roots of the Vedic scriptures outward towards the west and Europe. Whereas we all know there was a very entrenched civilization in India (Harappan and Mohenjodaro cities) where there was no sign of any Sanskrit language long before the Aryan period. So it can only be concluded that as Aryans dominated the sub continent, they translated old indian scriptures into their languages and suppressed knowledge transmission in native languages.
The history of Aryanisation of population as they migrated is not just taught in India but in history books across the world. Why would the rest of the world follow any British version blindly without due scientific process ? Only the politically motivated Hindutva social media University sell this crap. Even for IAS who are the 1st officers of our administration including those of 20 years of Modi administration learnt about Aryanisation of population in their scientific text books. Why didn't ever Modi then question it?
This is all just for foolish public consumption to divide and rule
In Tamilnadu 50% of the Brahmins are not fair coloured. In other castes nearly 40% are fair coloured. In my family excerpt me, my two brothers are fair coloured. In every family fair coloured and dark mixed complexion are there. If you work in AC not exposed to Sunlight you will become more fair. Our body parts covered with dress are more fair than exposed part. It is all due to Melanin pigments in skin, and is to protect skin on high exposure to Sun Light. Thus, it is not gene alone, but environmental factor also play a major role. South India is closure to equator and is more exposed both in duration and intensity to Sun Light than North India.
@@DrMLRaja you must be blind not to see the difference in skin colour of Brahmins and Dalits or Tribals in the same region. Does a European become black if he comes to India in generations. Then children of Anglo Indian or Parsis would also have been dark after being in India for hundreds of years. Isn't there ancestry obvious. Why are Brahmins shy of their ancestory
@Mitr Pure BS. There is no evidence of any conflict between so-called Aryans and Dravidians. Why would a civilized Indus valley person be impressed with a nomad from Steppe ? Rigveda mentions the river Saraswati which dried up before 1500 BCE. Rigveda does not mention anything about central Asia or Steppe. If Aryans subjugated Dravidians why would there be a Kamba Ramayanam which is a literary masterpiece
@@harikris5Can't an migrating illiterate Aryans adopt the knowledge of the local population to their advantage. Which explains why the Knowledge were translated into Sanskrit with only the Aryans (Brahmins) in control of it. This also explains why the Genes of the Skeletons found at Indus valley civilisation sites don't show the Brahmins as their descendants and rather the Dravidians. This also explains why later the Dravidians who were the original residents of these places are now moved away from the conquerors in North India.
@@mitryours759 Indian belt is original Indian tribal and others from Iran or Turkey (Barbarian or mix of Barbarian with native Indian)
Selva from Madurai
Invasion is impossible. But migration is possible
What Abt tourism? Aryan tourism theory 😂?
Arya is a Character name and qualifying name. Hence Arya is not at all denotes race. Then there is no room for invasion or migration or immigration
AIT has long been supplanted by AMT. Can't really fight scientific proof in Cell and Science also...
Published in the Hindu...
How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
UPDATED: JUNE 19, 2017 12:50 IST
New DNA evidence is solving the most fought-over question in Indian history. And you will be surprised at how sure-footed the answer is, writes Tony Joseph
The thorniest, most fought-over question in Indian history is slowly but surely getting answered: did Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC - 1,500 BC when the Indus Valley civilisation came to an end, bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices? Genetic research based on an avalanche of new DNA evidence is making scientists around the world converge on an unambiguous answer: yes, they did.
This may come as a surprise to many - and a shock to some - because the dominant narrative in recent years has been that genetics research had thoroughly disproved the Aryan migration theory. This interpretation was always a bit of a stretch as anyone who read the nuanced scientific papers in the original knew. But now it has broken apart altogether under a flood of new data on Y-chromosomes (or chromosomes that are transmitted through the male parental line, from father to son).
Lines of descent
Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question
Of course migration is possible, how about Aryas , Sanskrit speaking vedic people migrated outside of India?
@@हिरण्यसिंहराठौड़ science does not support this theory of yours via DNA. It's been looked at by multiple studies.
tamil and sanskrit used same script , grantham
Aryan and Dravidian race theory is 100% true. Only thing its NOT Aryan Invasion rather it is just Aryan migration.
Aryans are called as Devas
Dravidian's are called Asuras
Aryan Gods - Lord Indra, Lord Varuna, Lord Vayu, Lord Brahma & Lord Ram
Dravidian Gods - Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya
In Four Vedas there is NO Mention about Lord Shiva, Lord Vishnu [Thiru Maal] & Lord Subramanian [Murugan]. In Vedas they only worship Lord Indra, Lord Varuna & Lord Vayu. In Rig Veda they mention about Lord Rudra but he is NOT Lord Shiva. There is NO Place where they mentioned about Lord Shiva or Linga. These are all Tamil gods Lord Shiva, Lord Thiru maal [Vishnu] & Lord Murugan [Subramanian] are all ancient Tamils lived in Tamil Land.
Aryan by Birth - Ram, Lakshman
Dravidian by Birth - Ravan, Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya
Aryan Language - Sanskrit
Dravidian Language - Tamil
Aryan [Sankrit] Grammar - Panini’s Astadhyayi
Dravidan [Tamil] Grammar - Tholkaappiyam [Still available]
Panini did not mention the name of even a single earlier Sanskrit grammar which he has followed. The names he mentioned as earlier Sanskrit grammarians are originally Prakrit and Pali grammarians. Prakrit and Pali grammarians have followed Aindhra grammar which is followed by Tholkaappiyar. Tholkapiyar clearly states that there are numerous Tamil Grammar works prior to his Tholkappiyam and he followed Aindharam Grammar for his work. Akathiyar also wrote a grammar for Tamil. Tharanath ,the Tibet scholar has clearly stated that Aindhiram was a Tamil grammar. Sari Buddha had studied Aindhiram.
Aryan by Birth - Bramins
Dravidian by Birth - Sudras [Tamils - please note Tamils lived through out India]
Etymology of the word Bramin [பேர் அமணன் -> பிராமணன் -> பிராமின் ] Payrr Ammanan -> Brahmanan -> Bramin. Its a Pure Tamil word given as Title to people who gained enormous wisdom in their life. In later days this title name was stolen by Aryan Bramins and made it as a varna by Birth.
Sanghis will tell that Ravana was a Bramin, But actually Ravana is a Asura [Dravidian] by birth and Bramin is his title name. He is a master of 10 different science
Etymology for the name Krishna [ கருதினன் -> கிருத்தினன் -> கிருஷ்ணா ] Karuthinan → Kirutinan → Krishna . Karuthinan means man of philosophy its a Title given to Krishna
We all know that Krishna is Dark in Complexion and he is a Cow herder he is a Tamil.
Rig Veda has several references to blonde haired Indra destroying Dark skinned Asuras [Dravidian's]. If you read most of the Sanskrit puranas you can notice that its all about Fight between Aryans and Dravidians [Devas and Asuras]
Language naturally evolves over 1000s of years it can NOT be invented by one single guy Agathiyar, Tamil language is NOT invented by Agathiyar as told by PERVERTED Sanskrit Myth, one has to Talk with scientific facts should NOT vomit PERVERTED Sanskrit Myths. Just like Tholkappiyar Agathiyar also wrote grammar for Tamil in ancient times thats it.
Tamil is older then Sanskrit. Its actually Tamil root words which are there in Sanskrit, NOT the other way around. Recent [year 2020] excavation in Keezadi have written Tamil inscription which is older than 2500 years. But on the other hand Sanskrit didn't even had a script to write until 4 CE note it is CE not BCE, it adopted devanagari script in 4 CE and started writing puranas like Ramayana ... etc. Prior to this Sanskrit Vedas were transferred to next generation only orally, they said it is very sacred and only Brahmins have to recite it
Google - Mayiladumparai Excavation in Tamil Nadu - Tamils knew use of iron 4,000 years ago, archaeological findings show
Google - Porunai civilisation is 3,200 years old
Tamils do not have Vedic culture roots, their roots are different. Vedic culture is a third rated culture. Sanskrit is full of third rated SEXUALLY PERVERTED mythological stories for Lord Shiva, Indra, Ayyappa and for lots of Rishis. You can not find one such sexually perverted literature in Tamil. Sanskrit is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth like Manusimriti. You wont find any such discrimination in Tamil literature
Thiruvalluvar in Thiru Kural says all Living Things are equal [Not just humans] (பிறப்பொக்கும் எல்லா உயிர்க்கும் சிறப்பொவ்வா செய்தொழில் வேற்றுமை யான் - திருக்குறள் 972). But in Sanskrit Manusmriti, manu discriminate people based on birth called Varna, Manusimriti is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth.
Tamils have the culture of worshiping there fore fathers that is how they are worshiping Siva, Thiru Maal [Vishnu] & Murugan [Subramanian]. Aryan Brahmins stolen Tamil's gods and and inserted FULLY SEXUALLY PERVERTED STORIES in later days for our gods like Vishnu Purana, Shiva Purana, Skanda Purana ... etc Now some idiots are even saying Lord Shiva don't understand Tamil and so we have to worship him only in Sanskrit. Lord Siva himself is a Tamil
Tamil too have Sanskrit words its due to Sanskrit became sole authority for Hinduism and for Tamil Gods also. By stealing Tamils gods Sanskrit started influencing Tamil by way Varnasrama by saying Brahmins are great and they are born from Brahmas head. You have to respect Brahmin and you have to allow them to worship your gods in their language Sanskrit.
Google - Tamil and Australian aboriginal languages
மார் சுபிகள் Marsupial is a A word found in Australian Aboriginals language for Kangaroo kids. Marsupial in Tamil means Breast Suckers, Small Kangaroo kids will grow inside Mother Kangaroos waist bag by sucking milk from its mothers breast. English language derived this word from Australian Aborginals language, This word is more than 10,000 years old it's a pure Tamil word.
Archaeological experts all over the world says that Indus valley civilization is a Dravidian civilization, but here in India Sanghis says its a vedic civilization but they do NOT Have any proof for their claim.
Indus script - Wikipedia
The Russian scholar Yuri Knorozov suggested, based on computer analysis, a Dravidian language as the most likely candidate for the underlying language of the script.[40] Knorozov's suggestion was preceded by the work of Henry Heras, who also suggested several readings of signs based on a proto-Dravidian assumption. [41]
Oldest available work in Sanskrit [Note it is only oral No written records] is Rig veda, it has been etymologically proved that there are many loaned Tamil words in Rig veda that proves the pre existence of Tamil during the period of Rig veda
Substrata in the Vedic language - Wikipedia
There are an estimated thirty to forty Dravidian loanwords in Vedic. [26] Those for which Dravidian etymologies are proposed by Zvelebil include कुलाय kulāya "nest", कुल्फ kulpha "ankle", दण्ड daṇḍa "stick", कूल kūla "slope", बिल bila "hollow", खल khala "threshing floor". [24]
Written By - Sampath Kumar Natarajan
There was a migration but it was from Iran , Aryan came as refugees from Iran and the Aryans called dasa to BMCA people in iran not the indigenous peoples,they came here to settle after the Devas and Ashura role were changed in zorastrianism.
Here comes Dravidian racism with shameless lies.
Aryan and Dravidian theory is not hundred 100% which is pure fiction believed by Caldwell's children.
As it was Iranians who called themselves Aryans not Indians aka aryas next Dravidian word itself modern constructed by Caldwell which was borrowed from Sanskrit.
Aryans weren't called devas nor Dravidians were called as asuras.
As Tamil literature nowhere calls tamils asuras.
Both are Arya god worshipped long before Kartikeya aka Skanda is mentioned in Vedas.
Lord Shiva is found in Indus valley as Lord Pashupati. As we could see Hindu gods have thousand of names saying that just because having different names doesn't make it a different god.
In each state gods have different names does that make them different gods?
Panini’s Astadhyayi exists didn't vanish in thin air and it is called the most complex grammar.
Next, it is the grammar of new Sanskrit, not old Rigvedic Sanskrit.
Prakrit and pali are descendants of old Sanskrit, not predecessors even your own western masters accept that
Also, rig vedia is 5000yrs old far older than tamil. It could be noted as Tamil had Sanskrit letters but Sanskrit didnt have any such tamil letters which clearly shows who copied from whom.
Yet Mangis lie it is the opposite.
Also agathiyar himself came from outside according to tamil literature. This is nothing but shameless cherry picking and distortion by mangis.
Tamils didn't live out throughout India. This is nothing but pure fantasy of mangis as we no proof of tamil throughout india like sanskrit.
That's not the etymology of the brahmin word but the fantasy of mangis with no basis in science brahmin word derive from brahman the supreme entity.
So nobody stoled it other than in the imagination of tamil supremacists.
Ravana is a brahmin by birth as he was born to a brahmin how much you lie it doesnt change the facts. As Ravana was born in north india not in south LOL. Even the name ravana is not tamil.
So mangis shamelessly claiming a north Indian as Dravidians is the greatest irony LOL.
@@trollarasan Ha ... Ha .... which is shameless lies. For you scientific facts like DNA studies and Archeological evidences are shameless lies. But your PERVERTED Sanskrit MYTHS are fact. LOL.... Grow up man
@@sandeep_raman You are WRONG. Purpose of language is NOT just to share knowledge. Primarily language represents a ethnic group [Race]. Like Tamil, Sanskrit, German, France & English [Here only English is a global language due to UK & US influence on the Global economy in the last two centuries.] Since all the computer software's were developed in English now it became a defacto Global language. Otherwise English language represent English men.
@@sandeep_raman Fact of the matter is Shiv is a NON Aryan God, he was worshipped by the ancient Indians before the advent of the Aryans. Shiva is not a Vedic God. In Indus Valley Civilization - IVC archeologists found terracotta Pashupathi he is considered as Shiva this scientifically predates Sanskrit Vedas. Also Tamil literature says the First Tamil Sangam was established by Lord Shiva. We have scientific proofs that Ancient Indians worshipped Shiva before the arrival of Aryans
Eminem scholars 😂