Sunday 18 March 2018

How do our ancient books debunk this theory?


Homepage       About me    Contact me   Privacy policy

India’s leftist historians and academics have for decades dismissed 'our ancient books' out of hand as “Hindutva”. This is why they decry any attempt to alter the status quo (such as modernizing history textbooks) as “fascism”, and why they have marginalized scholars such as the distinguished archeologist B. B. Lal, whose immense body of work has never been allowed to make it to Indian textbooks.

India’s “mainstream” historians dismiss the Rig Veda as mythology. This is a naive and subjective assumption that betrays an unscholarly bias on their part. If the Rig Veda is mythology, then so are Herodotus‘ fanciful and inaccurate histories. Herodotus, however, continues to be cited as a reliable historian. This smacks of double standards. The Rig Veda is certainly less fanciful than Herodotus’ Histories. Moreover, it is a veritable treasure that gives us the earliest literary insight into human society and thought. As such, it must be taken seriously.



Let's talk about the power of these books to debunk these myths and topple the Leftist regimes (which garner their votes by fooling people on the basis of caste, regionalism and language) when these truths reach the general public:

  1. According to leftists, Rig Veda was written after an Aryan invasion in 1500 BCE when the Saraswati river had declined leading to the fall of Harappan civilization. However, The Sarasvati is extensively mentioned in the Rig Veda, India’s foundational literary text. It is referred to as “greatest of rivers”, “glorious”, “loudly roaring”, and “mother of floods”. This clearly refers to a mighty river in its prime, not one in decline.
  2. Indian literary sources such as the Puranas, the Mahabharata and the Ramayana – which contain extensive genealogies of kings that date back thousands of years – and which mainstream scholars reject as mythology. 
  3. Claims that the Dravidians belong to a separate, non-Hindu civilization are also discredited by ancient Tamil Sangam literature, which dates back to c. 300 BCE. The Mahabharata is mentioned in the oldest Tamil Sangam literature. The Vedas and the Ramayana are also mentioned in Sangam literature. Sangam literature mentions the whole of India, starting from lands to “the north of the Himalayas”, which contradicts the claim that the Dravidians were confined to the south of India.
These books prove that the Vedic civilisation did not replace the Harappan civilisation but they are both a reference to the same civilisation which existed on the banks on Indus and Saraswati.
These books also refute the eastward expansion theory of Aryans and support the westward expansion theory of Aryans.


  1. Consider the Baudhayana Shrauta Sutra, it records "Amavasu migrated westward." This refers to a Vedic king called Amavasu, whose people are the Gandhari (Gandhara – Afghanistan), the Parsu (Persians) and the Aratta, who are tentatively identified as living in the vicinity of Mt. Ararat, which is located in Turkey (eastern Anatolia) and Armenia.
  2. Afghanistan (Gandhara) was historically part of the Indian civilization until the Islamic invasions. The name “Persia” comes from the ancient Parshva people (an Aryan clan). The word “Parshva” is derived from the Sanskrit/Avestan (Old Persian) word “Parshu”, which means “battle-axe”. There are clear linguistic and cultural similarities between India and Persia.
  3. The traditional Armenian name for Mt. Ararat is Masis. It is named after the legendary Armenian king Amasya. The name “Amasya” is linguistically related to the name “Amavasu” of the Indian king recorded in the Baudhayana Shrauta Sutra. This establishes literary evidence for the westward expansion of Indo-Aryans, via Afghanistan, to Persia, Armenia and Anatolia.
  4. The ancient kingdom of Mitanni, located in Syria and Anatolia, had an Indo-Aryan Sanskrit speaking ruling class. They had Indo-Aryan names. The Mitanni belonged to the Indian-origin haplogroup R1a1a. This is clear evidence of a large-scale westward expansion of Sanskrit-speaking Indo-Aryans, and their presence as the ruling aristocracy in lands thousands of kilometers west of India. This quashes the asinine claim that the first speakers of Sanskrit were Syrians, a claim that would be laughable were it not portrayed as serious journalism in a mainstream publication.

  • The primordial Rig Vedic river goddess Danu is the mother/progenitor of the Danava clan of Indo-Aryans. The Danavas revolted against the Devas, and were eventually defeated and banished. As it turns out, that was far from the end of their story. The word dānu means “fluid, drop” in Rig Vedic Sanskrit. The Avestan (old Iranian) word for “river” is “dānu”. The Scythian (Saka/Shaka) & Sarmatian words for “river” are also “dānu”. Now consider this: linguistically, the names of the European rivers DanubeDnieperDniestrDonDonets, Dunajec, Dvina/Daugava, and Dysna are all derived from the Rig Vedic Sanskrit root word “dānu”. These rivers flow across eastern & central Europe. These rivers, all named after the Rig Vedic goddess Danu, seem to trace the gradual westward migration through Europe of the Danava clan of Rig Vedic Indo-Aryans.
So where did the Danavas eventually end up?
According to Irish & Celtic mythology, the Irish & Celtic people are descended from a mother goddess – a river goddess – called Danu. The ancient (mythological) people of Ireland are called the Tuatha Dé Danann (Old Irish: “The peoples of the goddess Danu”). The fact that R1a1a is still present in Ireland proves that people of Indo-Aryan origin settled there in the past.

Previous article: How the lost river debunks the theory?

Next article: How DNA samples debunk this theory?



More Articles:

No comments:

Post a Comment