Note: This thread is dedicated to Dr B R Ambedkar & Peryar.
This article has been written in the background of Saffronization of Education & educational instutions by Hardcore Hindutvawadis and the boot lickers of Brahmins.
There are Futile attempts going on all over the Country, on net to Disprove Aryan Invasion theory. But yet there are many Questions or rather facts that these Hindutva wadis are unable to answer.
Numerious National & International Secular Archiologists, Historians, Genesists, Archiozoologists have proved Aryan Invasion to be an Established Truth & Reality rather than just a theory.
Even if we consider all the above mentioned fellows WRONG, yet the Scriptures of Hinduism, does give a clear cut picture of Invasion & Genocide of the Inhabitants of this original land.
This article will present all the evidances + links to Zorastraism & the Origin of so called Hinduism from the land of ancient Persia.
Some psyco self claimed historians such as P N Oak & Knapp have started claiming the world belongs to the Hinduism drama. Which will be Exposed in a seperate thread.
One question that a Hindu who does not believe in the Aryan Invasion has to ask himself is, The whole world accepted Aryan Invasion of India till a few years ago, now suddenly why this hypocracy regarding Disproving it ?
Truth Alone Trumphs!
Let the sword of Truth Un-Veil numerious aspects of Aryan Invasion & Genocide of Dasyus.
The Word ARYA has got 4 meanings:
1. The variant *rya- is found unchanged in Sanskrit, where it referred to the upper crust of ancient Indian society. (Brahmins=Aryans)[From Sanskrit rya-, noble, Aryan.]
2. The term “Aryan” as a synonym for “Indo-European” or to a lesser extent for “Indo-Iranian” peoples.
3. The first of these is the form found in Iranian, as ultimately in the name of Iran itself (from Middle Persian rn (ahr), “(Land) of the Iranians,” from the genitive plural of r, “Iranian”).
4. In Nazism and neo-Nazism, a non-Jewish Caucasian, especially one of Nordic type, supposed to be part of a master race.
So Here we will be using the second meaning, which is a group of Indo-europian/ Indo-Iranian people who came to India through Khyber passes of Himalayas.
Though it has a signifance with third point.
Dasa (Sanskrit: दस, IAST: dāsa) is a Sanskrit term. Under the primary meaning ‘enemy’ sometimes relates to tribes identified as the enemies of the Vedic tribes in the Rigveda.
The identity of the Dasa has caused much debate, closely tied to arguments over Indo-Aryan migration, the claim that the Indo-Aryan authors of the Rigveda entered India from outside, displacing its earlier inhabitants.
Recent scholars, notably Asko Parpola, have claimed that they were fellow Indo-Iranians of the BMAC, who initially rejected Aryan religious practices but were later merged with them.
In the Rig Veda, Dasa, Dasyu and similar terms (e.g. Pani) occur sometimes in conjunction with the terms krsna (“black”) or asikni (“black”). This was often the basis for a “racial” interpretation of the Vedic texts.
There are three instances in the Rig Veda where the phrase krsna (or ashikni) tvac occurs, literally translating to “black (or swarthy) skin”:
1.130.8de mánave śâsad avratân tvácaṃ kṛṣṇâm arandhayat
— “Plaguing the lawless he [Indra] gave up to Manu’s seed the dusky skin” (trans. Griffith)
9.41.1 prá yé gâvo ná bhûrṇayas / tveṣâ ayâso ákramuḥ / ghnántaḥ kṛṣṇâm ápa tvácam
— “(Praising the Soma-juices) which descend like streams of water, swift, brilliant, rapid driving off the black covered (Rakshasa who are darkness)”
9.73.5cd índradviṣṭām ápa dhamanti māyáyā tvácam ásiknīm bhûmano divás pári
— “Blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates.” (trans. Griffith)
Tvac “skin” does, however, also take a secondary, more general meaning of “surface, cover” in the Rigveda, in particular referring to the Earth’s surface.
For this reason, there can be debate on whether instances of krsna tvac should be taken to refer literally to a “black skinned people”.
A Dasyu is a member of an aboriginal people in India encountered and embattled by the invading Aryans (c. 1500 bc).
They were described by the Aryans as a dark-skinned, harsh-spoken people who worshiped the phallus.
This allusion has persuaded many scholars that worship of the linga, the Hindu religious symbol, originated with them; it may, however, have referred to their sexual practices.
They lived in fortified places from which they sent out armies.
They may be considered the original Sudras, or labourers, who served the three higher classes of Brahman, Kshatriya (warrior), and Vaishya (mercantile), from whose ritual communion they were excluded.
The main difference between the Aryas and the Dasas in the Rig Veda is a difference of religion.
Already A. A. Macdonell and A. B. Keith (1912) remarked that: “The great difference between the Dasyus and the Aryans was their religion… It is significant that constant reference is made to difference in religion between Aryans and Dasa and Dasyu.”
The Dasas and Dasyus are also described as brahma-dvisah in the Rig Veda RV 5.42.9; 8.45.23; 10.36.9; 10.160.4; 10.182.3, which Ralph T.H. Griffith translates as “those who hate devotion” or “prayer haters”.
Thus Dasa has also been interpreted as meaning the people that don’t follow the same religion as the Aryans. Rig Veda 10.22.8 describes the Dasa-Dasyus as a-karman (non-performers of Aryan sacrifices), anya-vrata (observers of other rites) and in Rig Veda 10.105.8 they are described as anrc (non-singer of laudatory hymns). In RV 8.70.11 they are described as a-deva-yu (not regarding Deva ).
While the terms Dasa and Dasyu have a negative meaning in Sanskrit, their Iranian counterparts Daha and Dahyu have preserved their positive (or neutral) meaning. This is similar to the Sanskrit terms Deva (a “positive” term) and Asura (a “negative” term). The Iranian counterparts of these terms (Daeva and Ahura) have opposite meanings.
Dasyus is in Iranian “dahyu” and means tribe, province and district. “Dah-” means “male, man” in Iranian. The “dahyu-pati” (also dahyunam) was the head of the tribe. The Greek “des-potes and the English “despot” correspond to this term (Windfuhr 1999). A “dahyu-sasti” (command of dahyus) is a confederation of two or more dahyus.
Other hostile tribes, besides the Dasas and Dasyus, that are mentioned in the Vedic texts are the Panis (Afghan Pannis?), Pakthas (Pakthun or Pashtuns?), Parshus (Persian tribes?), Prthus (Parthians?) and Bhalanas (Baluchis?). The Irish term Déisi may be cognate; it originally described “vassals” or “subjects” and was later the proper name of certain population groups.
Thus Dasa has also been interpreted as meaning the people that don’t follow the same religion as the Aryans.
Rig Veda 10.22.8 describes the Dasa-Dasyus as a-karman (non-performers of Aryan sacrifices), anya-vrata (observers of other rites) and in Rig Veda 10.105.8 they are described as anrc (non-singer of laudatory hymns).
In RV 8.70.11 they are described as a-deva-yu (not regarding Deva ).
Sri Aurobindo commented that in the RV III.34 hymn, where the word Arya varna occurs, Indra is described as the increaser of the thoughts of his followers:
“the shining hue of these thoughts, sukram varnam asam, is evidently the same as that sukra or sveta Aryan hue which is mentioned in verse 9.
Indra carries forward or increases the “colour” of these thoughts beyond the opposition of the Panis, pra varnam atiracchukram; in doing so he slays the Dasyus and protects or fosters and increases the Aryan “colour”, hatvi dasyun pra aryam varnam avat.”
The term krsnavonih in RV 2.20.7 has been interpreted by Asko Parpola as meaning “which in their wombs hid the black people”.
Sethna (1992) writes, referring to a comment by Richard Hartz, that “there is no need to follow Parpola in assuming a further unexpressed word meaning “people” in the middle of the compound krsnayonih”, and the better known translation by Griffith, i.e. “who dwelt in darkness” can be considered as essentially correct.
Another scholar, Hans Hock (1999), finds Karl Friedrich Geldner’s translation of krsnayonih (RV 2.20.7) as “Blacks in their wombs” and of krsnagarbha (RV 1.101.1) as “pregnant with the Blacks” “quite recherché” and thinks that it could refer to the “dark world” of the Dasas.
SOURCE:Bhagavan Shri Shanmukha Anantha Natha and Shri Ma Kristina Baird for the correct, nonracial meaning of the terms Dasyus and Asuras in their work “Divine Initiation” (ISBN 0-9582324-0-7) by Shri Kali Publications.
Ambedkar, B.R. (1946) Who were the Shudras?
What do they say on Aryans & Aryan Invasion ?
M.K. Gandhi says, “Hindus (Aryan high caste Hindus) are not considered to be original inhabitants of India.”
—– M.K. Gandhi, Hindu Dharma, Bombay, 1991, p. 33.
The coming of the Aryans into India raised new problems – racial and political. The conquered race, the Dravidians had a long background of civilization behind them, but there is a little doubt that the Aryans considered themselves vastly superior to them and a wide gulf seperated the two.
——- Jwaharlal Nehru in ‘Discovery of India’ (Page 62).
The Ramayana story is one of Aryan expansion to the South. – “Discovery of India” (Page 82).
On the contrary, the Aryans had to learn the languages peculiar to those races and to adopt a portion atleast of their civilization – “Collected work of Sir R. G. Bhadarkar” (Vol III at page 10)
Savarkar: “Hindutva”. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Savarkar Samagra:
” After all there is throughout this world so far as man is concerned but a single race – the human race, kept alive by one common blood, the human blood. All other talk is at best provisional, a makeshift and only relatively true. (…) Even as it is, not even the aborigines of the Andamans are without some sprinkling of the so-called Aryan blood in their veins and vice-versa. Truly speaking all that one can claim is that one has the blood of all mankind in one’s veins. The fundamental unity of man from pole to pole is true, all else only relatively so”.
Complete Works of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in 10 volumes, ISBN 81-7315-331-0
“The Aryans were so barbaric that they did not even have a word for brick in Sanskrit “.
` History of Science and Technology in Ancient India – The Beginnings ‘ – D. Chattopadhyaya, Firma KLM Pvt. Ltd. Calcutta 1986 an excellent rebuff of the opponents of the Aryan invasion idea; quotes from all the following ref’s of Kosambi and Chanda .
L.Woolley, `History of mankind: Culture and Scientific Development’, Vol. I, Pt. 2, pp.353-365, The Beginning of Civilization, UNESCO 1963 .
In 1894, the curator of the Department of Prehistoric Anthropology at the U.S. National Museum wrote:
“[the swastika] is believed by some to have been the oldest Aryan symbol. In the estimation of others, it represents Brahma, Vishnu and Siva.”This particular example is said to date from the 1st millennium BCE. It was found near Gilan, Iran, and is now at the National Museum of Iran.
——– Wilson, Thomas (1894), Swastika the Earliest Known Symbol and Its Migrations: The Earliest Known Symbol, and Its Migrations, Report of the U. S. National Museum, p. 770.
“After the German invasion of Prague in March 1939, Indian opinion on Germany polarized sharply into two camps:
those who would be loyal to Britain in the event of a war between Britain and Germany and those who would not.
The Hindu Mahasabha adopted a particularly strong pro-German position, assuming a close congruence between the Aryan cult of Nazism and Hindu nationalism.”
——————–(Hitler’s Priestess, New York University Press 1998, p.66)
Heinrich Himmler (the Reichsfuhrer of the SS), the person ordered by Adolf Hitler to implement the final solution (Holocaust), told his personal masseur Felix Kersten that he always carried with him a copy of the ancient Aryan scripture, the Bhagavad Gita because it relieved him of guilt about what he was doing — he felt that like the warrior Arjuna, he was simply doing his duty without attachment to his actions.
.—- Padfield, Peter Himmler New York:1990–Henry Holt Page 402
Scientific proof ?
.” Geneticist and anthropologist Spencer Wells states that “The Aryans came from outside India. We actually have genetic evidence for that. Very clear genetic evidence from a marker that arose on the southern steppes of Russia and the Ukraine around 5,000 to 10,000 years ago. And it subsequently spread to the east and south through Central Asia reaching India.” M17 “shows that there was a massive genetic influx into India from the steppes within the past 10,000 years.Taken with the archaeological data, we can say that the old hypothesis of an invasion of people – not merely their language – from the steppe appears to be true.”
—— Wells (2002:167)
In the study by M.J Bamshad and his team they wrote, “Our results demonstrate that for biparentally inherited autosomal markers, genetic distances between upper, middle, and lower castes are significantly correlated with rank; upper castes are more similar to Europeans than to Asians; and upper castes are significantly more similar to Europeans than are lower castes.”
Originally proposed in the late 18th century in an attempt to explain connections between Sanskrit and European languages, it is today deprecated by academics who favor the Kurgan model.
——–Cavalli-Sforza (2000:152) “The Aryan invasions of Iran, Pakistan, and India broughtIndo-European languages to Dravidian-speaking areas.”
“Genetic evidence suggests European migrants may have influenced the origins of India’s caste system”.
Genome News Network (J. Craig Venter Institute).
Kazanas argues that this indicates that the Harappan civilization must have been dominated by Indo-Aryan speakers, supposing that the arrival of Indo-Aryan migrants in Late Harappan times to the remnants of a Indus Valley Civilization formerly stretching over vast area could not have resulted in the suppression of the entire native hydronymy.
Kazanas, Nicholas 2001b – Indigenous Indoaryans and the Rgveda – Journal of Indo-European Studies, volume 29, pages 257-93.
Frustrated Swami Vivekananda asks:
” And what your European pandits say about the Aryan’s sweeping from some foreign land, snatching away the lands of the aboriginals and settling India by exterminating them, is all pure nonsense, foolish talk. Strange, that our Indian scholars too say amen to them, and all these monstrous lies are taught to our boys. This is very bad indeed.
In what Veda, in what Sukta, so you find that the Aryans came to India from a foreign country? Where do you get the idea that they slaughtered the wild aborigines? What do you gain by talking such nonsense?”
— [ ` Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda ‘, 1963, p.534-535 ]
In Rig Veda III:34:9 Indra killed the Dasyus (dark skinned natives) and “gave protection to the Aryan color.”
They arrogantly proclaim, “Let those who have no weapons suffer sorrow” (Rig Veda IV:5:14.)]
Indra is praised for killing thousands of the abject tribes of Dasas with his arrow and taking great vengeance with “murdering weapons.” (Rig Veda IV:28:3−4)
One hymn mentions sending thirty thousand Dasas “to slumber” and another hymn sixty thousand slain. A hymn dedicated to the weapons of war (Rig Veda VI:75) refers to a warrior “armed with mail,” using a bow to win cattle and subdue all regions, “upstanding in the car the skillful charioteer guides his strong horses on whithersoe’er he will.” The arrows had iron mouths and shafts “with venom smeared” that “not one be left alive.”
Hymn VII:83 begins, “Looking to you and your alliance, O ye men, armed with broad axes they went forward, fain for spoil. Ye smote and slew his Dasa and his Aryan enemies.”
The basic belief of the prayers and sacrifices is that they will help them to gain their desires and overcome their enemies, as in Rig Veda VIII:31:15: “The man who, sacrificing, strives to win the heart of deities will conquer those who worship not.”
“He, much invoked, hath slain Dasyus and Simyus, after his wont, and laid them low with arrows. The mighty thunderer with his fair−complexioned friends won the land, the sunlight, and the waters.” −−Rig Veda I:100:18.
The ancient singer praises the god who “destroyed the Dasyans and protected the Aryan colour.” [ Rg.V. III.34.9 ]
Numerous are the references to “the black skin” `Krishnam Vacham’ [ Rg.V. IX.41.1, Sama Veda I.491, II.242 ] which is mentioned with abhorrence.
Again ” stromy gods who rush on like furious bulls and scatter the black skin.” [ Rg.V. IX.73.5 ]
The singers mention “the black skin, the hated of Indra”, being swept ourtof heaven [ RgV. IX.73.5 ] “Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conqured the black skin.”
[ Rg.V. I.130.8 ] The sacrificer poured out thanks to his god for “scattering the slave bands of black descent”, and for stamping out ” the vile Dasyan colour.” [ Rg.V. II.20.7, II.12.4 ] [ ANn. 115 ]
“Dasam varnam adharam” [ Rg.V. II.12.4 ]
Indra is called Puroha or Purandhara, `sacker of cities’ Indra overthrew 100 Puras made of stone ( asmanmayi ) for his worshipper Divodasa [ RgV 4.30.20 ], evidently belonging to Sambara who is a Dasa ( non-Aryan/demon ) of the mountain [ RgV 6.26.5 ]
The famous Harappa hymn of the Rig Veda describes with praise Indra’s destruction of Harappa
” In aid of Abhyavartin Cayamana, Indra destroyed the seed of Virasakha.
“At Hariyupiyah he smote the vanguard of the Vrcivans, and the rear fled frighted.”
— [ Rg.V. XXVII.5 ]
Some more Proof’s from Rig Veda Proving it to be composed OUTSIDE India
1.The Indus Valley Civilization was quite advanced and urbanized for its era. Based on the IAM, he migrating Aryans, who wrote the Rig Veda, would have had some contact with the Harappans before settling in their lands. The Aryans would also have begun to use some of the resources the Harappans possessed; however, the Rig Veda possesses some gaps which indicate it was composed prior to the first use of these resources in India.
A new date for the Rgveda by N Kazanas published in Philosophy and Chronology, 2000, G C Pande & D Krishna, special issue of Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research (June, 2001)
2. The Rig-Veda knows no silver. It knows ayas (metal or copper/bronze) and candra or hiran-ya (gold) but not silver. Silver is denoted by rajatám híran-yam literally ‘white gold’ and appears in post-Rigvedic texts. There is a generally accepted demarcation line for the use of silver at around 4000 BC and this metal is archaeologically attested in the Harappan Civilization.
Allchins 1969: 285
Rao 1991: 171
Allchins et. all cited by Kazanas 2000:1
G C Pande & D Krishna, special issue of Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research (June, 2001)
3. The Harappan culture is also unknown to the RV. The characteristic features of the Harappan culture are urban life, large buildings, permanently erected fire altars and bricks. There is no word for brick in the Rig Veda and iswttakaa (brick) appears only in post-Rigvedic texts.
(Kazanas 2000:13) & G C Pande & D Krishna, special issue of Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research (June, 2001)
The Rigvedic altar is a shallow bed dug in the ground and covered with grass (e.g. RV 5.11.2, 7.43.2-3; Parpola 1988: 225). Fixed brick-altars are very common in post-Rigvedic texts.
Rig-Veda is pre-Harappan by N Kazanas
4. The RV mentions no rice or cotton. A compound term is used which later referred to rice cakes used for sacrificial purposes, but the word vrīhí, meaning ‘rice’, does not occur. Rice was found in at least three Harappan sites: Rangpur (2000 BCE – 1500 BCE), Lothal (c 2000 BCE) and Mohenjodaro (c 2500 BCE) as Piggott, Grist and others testify. Yet, despite the importance of the rice in ritual in later times, the Rig Veda knows nothing of it. The cultivation of cotton is well attested in the Harappan civilization and is found at many sites thereafter.
Piggott 1961: 259
Rao 1991: 24, 101, 150 etc
Piggott et. all cited by Kazanas 2000:13
Elst 1999: Ch 5.3.10
Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate by Koenraad Elst
G C Pande & D Krishna, special issue of Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research
5. Nakshatra were developed in 2400 BCE, they are important in a religious context yet the Rig Veda does not mention this, which suggests the Rig Veda is before 2400 BCE. The youngest book only mentions constellations,a concept known to all cultures, without specifying them as lunar mansions.
Bernard Sergent: Genèse de l’Inde, 1997 p.118 cited by Elst 1999: Ch 5.5) Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate by Koenraad Elst
6. On the other hand, it has been claimed that the Rigveda has no term for “sword”, while Bronze swords were used aplenty in the Bactrian culture and in Pirak. Ralph Griffith uses “sword” twelve times in his translation, including in the old books 5 and 7, but in most cases a literal translation would be more generic “sharp implement” (e.g. vāśī), the transition from “dagger” to “sword” in the Bronze Age being a gradual process.
7. The fore-mentioned features are found in post Rigvedic texts – the Samhitas, the Brahmanas and fully in the Sutra literature. For instance, brick altars are mentioned in Satapatha Brahmanaṇa 18.104.22.168, or 10.2.3.1 etc. Rice ( vrihi ) is found in AV 6.140.2; 7.1.20; etc. Cotton karpasa appears first in Gautama’s (1.18) and in Bandhāyana’s (14.13.10) Dharmasūtra. The fact of the convergence of the post-Rigvedic texts and the Harappan culture was noted long ago by archaeologists. Bridget and F. Raymond Allchin stated unequivocally that these features are of the kind “described in detail in the later Vedic literature” (1982: 203).
Rig-Veda is pre-Harappan by N Kazanas
Based on these set of statements, OIT proponents argue that the whole of the RV, except for some few passages which may be of later date, must have been composed prior to Indus Valley Civilization.
A new date for the Rgveda by N Kazanas published in Philosophy and Chronology, 2000, ed G C Pande & D Krishna, special issue of Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research (June, 2001)
Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate by Koenraad Elst.
What will happen if Aryan Invasion Theory is accepted?
1. The Aryan invasion theory denies the Indian origin of
India’s predominant culture, but gives the credit for
Indian culture to invaders from elsewhere.
2. It even teaches that some of the most revered books of
Hindu scripture are not actually Indian, and it
devalues India’s culture by portraying it as less
ancient than it actually is.
3. The theory included unacceptably racist ideas:
4. It suggested that Indian culture was not a culture in
its own right, but a synthesis of elements from other
5. It implied that Hinduism was not an authentically
Indian religion but the result of cultural imperialism.
6. It suggested that Indian culture was static, and only
changed under outside influences.
7. It suggested that the dark-skinned Dravidian people of
the South of India had got their faith from
light-skinned Aryan invaders.
8. It implied that indigenous people were incapable of
creatively developing their faith.
9. It suggested that indigenous peoples could only
acquire new religious and cultural ideas from other
races, by invasion or other processes.
10. It accepted that race was a biologically based concept
(rather than, at least in part, a social construct)
that provided a sensible way of ranking people in a
hierarchy, which provided a partial basis for the
11. It provided a basis for racism in the Imperial context
by suggesting that the peoples of Northern India were
descended from invaders from Europe and so racially
closer to the British Raj.
12. It gave a historical precedent to justify the role and
status of the British Raj, who could argue that they
were transforming India for the better in the same way
that the Aryans had done thousands of years earlier.
13. It downgraded the intellectual status of India and its
people by giving a falsely late date to elements of
Indian science and culture.
Invading the Sacred @ http://worldmonitor.wordpress.com/2007/08/13/invading-the-sacred/
Ancient Persian influence on Hinduism.
The Aryan invadors who lived in Persia and later, in India, had a lot in common by way of phonetics, language, spirituality and reverence for nature…
Hinduism pertains to Hindus but the word Hindu itself is actually a Persian word coined by Cyrus the great in the 6th century B.C. to describe people who lived beyond the river Indus which was the eastern boundary of the ancient Persian empire. The Persians had a phonetic problem with the letter ‘S’ hence, Sindhu became Hindu just as Rigveda’s Soma came from Zend Avesta’s Hoama. Such fascinating phonetic affinities!
Even the word Shudra in Hinduism’s caste-system came from the Persian word Hatoksha. Originally, there were only three castes but the camp followers collected by Persians on their travels were called Hatokshas. The Romans, who separated from the original Aryanstock at a much earlier date than the Brahmins called fire Athar. In old Sanskrit, lightning is called Atharvan. In ancient Persia Arthvan meant a priest and this word evolved to become Brahmin.
Persian herders of cattle were called Vastrayosh and after they settled down from their nomadic existence to become cultivators and later, traders, the word evolved into Hinduism’s Vaishya caste. In the Vedas, waters are called Apo-Devi and in the Avesta, Apo-Vanghuish. Also, the prominent deities of the Rig Veda like Surya, Varun and Aryaman have come from the Avesta.
In fact, originally, the Rig Veda was written in the Kharoshti script which like Persian is written backwards i.e. from right to left. The Brahmi script came much later and our Devnagri script even later than Brahmi. In Lemuria, Atlantis and Babylon, there was the Akhadian script, found on Babylonian tablets during excavations, from which the Pali script evolved. This is why, since ancient Persia was the melting-pot of civilisations, Sanskrit sounds like old Persian e.g. Veeg the seed became the Sanskritised Beej.
The Aryan invadors who lived in Persia and later, in India, had a lot in common by way of phonetics, language, spirituality and reverence for nature. The five elements of nature called Panchamahabhoot were worshipped, with fire and it’s apex in ancient India. This idea came from Persia and the oldest religion in the world viz. Zorastrianism which as and still is, the most eco-friendly religion in the world. It is a cardinal sin for a Parsi to defile any of nature’s elements which is why, a corpse, a filthy shell after it’s pranic energy has left it, is never to be burnt on fire. That would be a grave sin to the element of agni.
Rather, a Parsi feeds the fire within a fire-temple with sweet-smelling sandalwood and frankincense.
Persian warriors were called ratheshwars, and this word evolved into kshatriyas. Even wars were fought in a noble fashion through there’s nothing noble about a war to my way of thinking. In the ancient world, man lived with nature. He depended on nature for his food, shelter and livelihood. To him, the forces of nature and her five elements appeared to be pulsating with life. The sun, moon, stars, clouds, earth, springs, rivers, oceans, trees, grass, flowers were, he believed, presided over by invisible intelligences which is a cosmic fact. Geofrey Hodsun has proved this through his clairvoyant theosophical books.
In return for nature’s bounties and blessings, man gave homage which took the form of the various hymns and prayers in the Avesta as well as the Rig Veda. Hence, there are so many similarities and spiritual parallels between Ancient Persian theology and that of the pre-vedic and vedic times. The Persian Goddess of water was Ahurani, similar to the vedic Asurani. Feeding the sacred fire was common to the Persians as well as the pre-vedic society. So many similarities, so much in common, because, in the final analysis, it’s the same supreme energy we all worship!
Hinduism vs Zoroastrianism
The history of Indian thought commences only when the Aryans of Central Asia separated themselves into two groups, the one making through Afghanistan to India and the other spreading over the territory called Iran.
The Avesta is nearer the Veda than the Veda to its own epic Sanskrit.
Varuna is the god of sky…He is identical with the Greek Ouranos and the Ahuramazda of the Avesta.
Like the Rigvedic Aryans, the ancient Iranians worshipped gods like Mitra, Vayu, Verutraghna. They also wore the sacred thread and worshipped fire. They had a social organization that was in some ways similar to the Vedic occupation based social system.
Zoroastrian religion was practiced mostly in Iran, or the ancient Persia. Its founder Zarathushtra was born in ancient Iran. The ancient Iranians were Aryans and the world Iran is actually a corrupt form of the word Aryan. The Iranian Aryans were cousins of the Indian Aryans and the language spoken by them was similar to Sanskrit in many ways. They came from the same stock and probably might have even lived together for sometime before parting ways.
However apart from these similarities, there was little else common between Zoroastrianism founded by Zarathushtra and the Vedic Religion that took shape in India. Some differences also seemed to have cropped between Zoroastrians and the Vedic people during the later period as is evident from the use of certain epithets which denote some degree of animosity. The Iranian Ahura (God) became the Indian asura (demon) and the Indian devas (gods) became the Iranian equivalent of evil spirits.
This is the completion, further updates will be added very soon.
Further, this desire by Hindutva supporters to “prove” by any means that Aryans are “indigenous” people directly relate to their contemporary political agenda back in India of distinguishing the “indigenous Aryan Hindus” from “foreign Muslim and Christian invaders” and thereby characterizing India’s Muslim and Christian minorities as “traitors” that need to be marginalized and persecuted.
Inspite of Innumerable Evidences & Proofs of Aryan Invasion, yet some Hindus are Trying to Disprove it in Vain.
“Satya meva Jayate” Truth alone Trumphs!
Note: This thread is dedicated to Dr B R Ambedkar & Peryar.