 Return to LNP
This News Site:
Lanka Newspapers is the largest Sri Lanka News forum online. Thousands of Sri Lankans from around the world gather here daily to discuss current news events of Sri Lanka. Join Today!
|
|
|
Hindus set to convert to Buddhism
Full News Article
Nightfox78
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 562
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 16:24:58 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Muru mate..
Since you have been advising everyone to read Prof.Indrapala's book .. I suggest you read the research work of Dr. Siran Deraniyagala and Dr. Diane Hawkey before making such comments..
Its only fair.. |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 16:36:57 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Nightfox,
Fools still don't understood that there is no Aryans and Dravidians in India ! There are only Indians !
Aryan/Dravidian was purely invented by an European called MAx Muller !
It's your own choice to trust this misinformation !
A MISINFORMATION : THE ARYAN INVASION
The theorem of the Aryan invasion is still taken as the foundation stone of the History of India. According to this theory, which was actually devised in the 18th and 19th century by British linguists and archaeologists, who had a vested interest to prove the supremacy of their culture over the one of the subcontinent, the first inhabitants of India were good-natured, peaceful, dark-skinned shepherds, called the Dravidians. They were supposedly remarkable builders, witness the city of Mohenjo-Daro in Pakistani Sind, but had no culture to speak-off, no written texts, no proper script even. Then, around 1500 B.C., India is said to have been invaded by tribes called the Aryans : white-skinned, nomadic people, who originated somewhere in Ural, or the Caucasus. To the Aryans, are attributed Sanskrit, the Vedic - or Hindu religion, India?s greatest spiritual texts, the Vedas, as well as a host of subsequent writings, the Upanishads, the Mahabharata, the Ramanaya, etc?
This was indeed a masterly stroke on the part of the British : thanks to the Aryan theory, they showed on the one hand that Indian civilisation was not that ancient and that it was posterior to the cultures which influenced the western world - Mesopotamia, Sumeria, or Babylon - and on the other hand, that whatever good things India had developed - Sanskrit, literature, or even its architecture, had been influenced by the West. Thus, Sanskrit, instead of being the mother of all Indo-European languages, became just a branch of their huge family; thus, the religion of Zarathustra is said to have influenced Hinduism - as these Aryan tribes were believed to have transited through numerous countries, Persia being one, before reaching India - and not vice versa. In the same manner, many achievements were later attributed to the Greek invasion of Alexander the Great : scientific discoveries, mathematics, architecture etc. So ultimately, it was cleverly proved that nothing is Indian, nothing really great was created in India, it was always born out of different influences on the subcontinent.
To make this theory even more complicated, the British, who like other invaders before them had a tough time with the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas, implied that the Aryans drove the Dravidians southwards, where they are still today; and that to mark forever their social boundaries, these Aryans had devised the despicable caste system, whereby, they the priests and princes, ruled over the merchants and labourers... And thus English missionaries and later, American preachers, were able to convert tribes and low caste Hindus by telling them : ' you, the aborigines, the tribals, the Harijans, were there in India before the Aryans; you are the original inhabitants of India, and you should discard Hinduism, the religion of these arrogant Aryans and embrace, Christianity, the true religion'.
Thus was born the great Aryan invasion theory, of two civilisations, that of the low caste Dravidians and the high caste Aryans, always pitted against each other - which has endured, as it is still today being used by some Indian politicians - and has been enshrined in all history books - Western, and unfortunately also Indian. Thus were born wrong ?nationalistic? movements, such as the Dravidian movement against Hindi and the much-maligned Brahmins, who actually represent today a minority, which is often underprivileged?. This Aryan invasion theory has also made India look westwards, instead of taking pride in its past and present achievements. It may also unconsciously be one of the reasons why there was at one time such great fascination for Sonia Gandhi, a White-Skinned-Westerner, who may have been unconsciously perceived as a true Aryan by the downtrodden Dravidians and a certain fringe of that Indian intelligentsia which is permanently affected by an inferiority complex towards the West. It may even have given a colour fixation to this country, where women will go to extremes to look ?fair?.
But today, this theory is being challenged more and more by new discoveries, both archaeological and linguistic. There are many such proofs, but two stand out : the discovery of the Saraswati river and the deciphering of the Indus seals. In the Rig Veda, the Ganges, India?s sacred river, is only mentioned once, but the mythic Saraswati is praised on more than fifty occasions. Yet for a long time, the Saraswati river was considered a myth, until the American satellite Landstat was able to photograph and map the bed of this magnificent river, which was nearly fourteen kilometres wide, took its source in the Himalayas, flowed through the states of Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan, before throwing itself in the sea near Bhrigukuccha, today called Broach. American archaeologist Mark Kenoyer was able to prove in 1991 that the majority of archaeological sites of the so-called Harappan (or Dravidian) civilisation were not situated on the ancient bed of the Indus river, as first thought, but on the Saraswati. Another archaeologist , Paul-Henri Francfort, Chief of a franco-american mission (Weiss, Courty, Weterstromm, Guichard, Senior, Meadow, Curnow), which studied the Saraswati region at the beginning of the nineties, found out why the Saraswati had ?disappeared? : « around 2200 B.C., he writes, an immense drought reduced the whole region to aridity and famine » (Evidence for Harappan irrigation system in Haryana and Rajasthan -Eastern Anthropologist 1992). Thus around this date, most inhabitants moved away from the Saraswati to settle on the banks of the Indus and Sutlej rivers. During the January 2000 earthquake in Gujurat, parts of the Saraswati river, which runs underground, came-up for some time, before sinking back into the earth, another proof of the existence of the ?mythical? Saraswati.
According to official history, the Vedas were composed around 1500 BC, some even say 1200 BC. Yet, as we have seen, the Rig Veda, describes India as it was before the great drought which dried-up the Saraswati; which means in effect that the so-called Indus, or Harappan civilisation was a continuation of the Vedic epoch, which ended approximately when the Saraswati dried-up. Recently, the famous Indus seals, discovered on the site of Mohenja Daro and Harappa, may have been deciphered by Dr Rajaram, a mathematician who worked at one time for the NASA and Dr Jha, a distinguished linguist. In the biased light of the Aryan invasion theory, these seals were presumed to be written in a Harappan (read Dravidian) script, although they had never been convincingly decoded. But Rajaram and Jha, using an ancient Vedic glossary, the Nighantu, found out that the script is of Sanskrit lineage, is read from left to right and does not use vowels (which like in Arabic, are ?guessed? according to the meaning of the whole sentence). In this way, they have been able to decipher so far 1500 and 2000 seals, or about half the known corpus. As the discovery of the Saraswati river, the decipherment of the Indus scripts also goes to prove that that the Harappan Civilization, of which the seals are a product, belonged to the latter part of the Vedic Age and had close connections with Vedantic works like the Sutras and the Upanishads.
In this light, it becomes evident that not only there never was an Aryan invasion of India, but, as historian Konraad Elst writes, it could very well be that it was an Indian race which went westwards : ' rather than Indo-Iranians on their way from South Russia to Iran and partly to India, these may as well be the Hitites, Kassites or Mitanni, on their way from India, via the Aral Lake area, to Anatolia, or Mesopotamia, where they show up in subsequent centuries' (Indigenous Indians).
Edited By - KURAL - 12 Dec 2006 16:51:20 GMT |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 16:44:30 GMT Report for Abuse
|
For true information about India and Sri lanka, please read the work done by Sri Aurobindo, Francois Gautier, Elst Konrad, David Frawley or Alain Danielou !
Read their works and maybe you will be able to see the Light..
Edited By - KURAL - 12 Dec 2006 16:49:34 GMT |
Nightfox78
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 562
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 16:52:24 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Kural mate..
Since this new evidence is based on some reasonably solid scientific reasoning verifed by solid material evidence.. I would believe this ''mis-information''..
Tell me Kural .. are North Indians and South Indians genetically the same people?? If they are not, how would YOU differentiate between them??
As an aside .. I too disbelieve the Aryan invasion theory of India talked about by the likes of David Frawley.. however, how would YOU describe the Vedic people??
Are the vedic people described by David Frawley tamil??? |
Nightfox78
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 562
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 17:00:30 GMT Report for Abuse
|
All I'm saying mate is that the people who started the Indus valley civilisation and the civilisation at the Pomparippu site were not descendents of the tamils as argued by the likes of Professor S. K. Sitampalam..
forget the Aryan Dravidian tags .. their only used in this argument to differentiate between north indians and south Indians |
Nightfox78
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 562
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 17:05:43 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Kural mate ..
I will have to say goodbye to you for today.
talk to you later.
bye
Edited By - Nightfox78 - 12 Dec 2006 17:07:03 GMT |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 17:10:02 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Nightfox..
Why white people are white and why black people are black ??
It's due to climate and sun's rays !
In equator the sun's ray hit vertically, while in north the sun's ray don't hit vertically (It depends the season)! It explain the difference of temperature between the North and South !
More you go to North, less the rays will be vertical ! It's proved by Physics !
And the pigmentation of the skin is due to those rays !
This could explain the difference of color ! But another FACT to note is that North India was invaded for 1 thousand years by Muslims coming from North, and as invasions are at 99% followed by rappings and forced reproductions, the descendants were fairer than their rapped parents due to the mixing with Muslims ! Like in Sri lanka you can see very white Sri lankans, why ? Because they are descendants of Europeans !
I'm not denying that North Indians and South Indians have different DNA! It's normal because all people have different DNA , twins are the ONLY exception ! |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 17:15:49 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Now if you refer to the Sangam Literrature, IT clearly indicate that a form of ADVANCED civilisation existed before the Ice Age (12000-10000 B.C !), and personnaly i BELIEVE this LITERATURE.
Now underwater researches are CONFIRMING this !
Please go to see the last article on my personal LNP space, about Myth of Flooded Kingdoms.
At Mahabalipuram they found underwater ruins of buildings !! Is it not enough to prove that a continent was swallowed by the sea ??
Edited By - KURAL - 12 Dec 2006 17:21:00 GMT |
KURAL
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4556
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 17:22:38 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Muru i'm totally agree with you..
Edited By - KURAL - 12 Dec 2006 17:23:07 GMT |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2316
Member Profile
|
12 Dec 2006 17:26:20 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Saervek
It is not a point of doctrinal superiority or any such thing, rather the fact that like Christianity, Islam, and even Atheism, Buddhism encompasses a wide range of nationalities and ethnicities. This is not true of Hinduism, which rather like the Chinese Indigenous Religions is more regional in outlook, i.e. Hinduism for example has a primarily Indic base.
The reason for the above was, most of the other religions spread to the world either through missionaries or invasion. In the case of Buddhism, it was due to Emperor Ashoka.
Hinduism did not spread because they did not send any such missionaries to the other countries.
See you all after a month. |
|
Search All News and Discussions