“And yeah, one more thing…Neville…Sanskrit is a language, not a script. And what was found at Indus valley was not a language, it is a script which still lies undeciphered.

That script may very well turn out to be Sanskrit shlokas/hymns.”

I hope Neville (Ramdeholl) reads this. Don’t wanna waste our time, so I’ve put it point-wise. The following points just cannot be ignored about this AIT/OIT controversy. And I need an answer for each of them by anyone who has the right answers:

1) If the ‘light skinned and mostly blonde haired and blue eyed’ Aryans had really invaded India and settled here thereafter, then why aren’t such people with such ‘white’ features found in India now? If it is because of centuries of racial intermixing, then how come one can still find some quite dark skinned people in India but not central Asian/ European type ‘white’ skinned people in India? Even the light brown skinned people found in the far north of India in places like Kashmir aren’t as fair as the ‘Aryans’ are considered to be.

2) The Aryans divided themselves into 3 classes. The fourth class was the lowly ‘Shudra’ class, explained by the European historians as the Aryan conquered Dravidians’ class. By this logic, all the high castes, esp. the Brahmins had to be white/ light brown skinned and the people belonging to the ‘Shudra’ class had to be dark brown skinned. And yet, many dark skinned Brahmins and light skinned ‘Shudras’ can easily be found in India – both in north as well as south. And upon that, inter-caste marriages, esp. high and low caste ones, are still rare in almost all parts of India.

3) How come almost all the light brown skinned people in India (considered to be the descedants of the original Aryans) belong to the cold climate locations of India like Kashmir and Himachal and the dark brown skinned (considered to be the Dravidians themselves) belong to the warm climate locations? This suggests that skin colour in India has more do do with the climate and atmosphere of a particular region in India.

4) If the Aryans were outsiders in India, then why do their spiritual-cultural-social compilation ‘The Vedas’ do not mention any outside cities, rivers and mountains? Why do they only mention the places that are found in India, as their sacred most? Why not some place in Caucasus or Iran?

5) If the Dravidians’ Indus valley civilization met its end at the hands of the invading Aryans, then how come no weapons, horse remains, broken chariots and burned buildings were discovered in and around the valley?

6) How come there was (and is) no conflict or confrontation of any kind between the people or north and south India, ever? How come Brahmins (the highest Aryan caste) are present at both the locations? They should have been concentrated in the north.

7) If Aryans were outsiders in India (and not the insiders), then how come ‘Swastika’ – an Aryan symbol – was found on some indigenous Indus valley seals?

The invading Aryans have been described as either nomadic or semi-nomadic people. It is difficult to imagine that such nomadic people could write anything even close to the complex Vedas.

9) India (or more specifically Hinduism which forms 80% of Indian population and which considers the Vedas as its highest spiritual-cultural-social authority and ‘Swastika’ as its religious symbol) does not have any oral or written account of any ‘Aryan invasion’ or any north-south or white-dark divide, past 3500-5000 years of its existence. Infact, the Britishers were the first ones to talk about all such things in India, to the utter shock of the Hindus.

10) No race, religion, nation, group, caste and community on this planet that claims an Aryan lineage, has been able to preserve the Aryan devised socio-cultural traditions and symbols on a CONTINUOUS BASIS. Only India, with its Hindus, is an exception to this. Look at Iran – everybody knows that Aryanism (Zoroastrianism/ Parsis) is dead there now. Islam has taken over. And the funny thing is that almost half of the total Zoroastrians in this world live in India now! Look at Caucasus – just a few pieces of historical findings, and that too of no religious, spiritual importance for the people living there. Look at neo-Nazis and Pan Aryans- just 150 years back they and their forefathers hadn’t even heard of the term ‘Aryans/Aryas’.

These above points do not completely destroy AIT, but they make such a mockery of it (AIT)…….
Reply

I dont know about dating of Illiad.. But what substantiation we have to date Ramayan or Mahabharatha?