Highest Sageness -36

Posted by gopalakrishna / 2:36 PM /





























Atrocity Literature
Justification for Colonial Rule in India
Atrocity literature played its part in downgrading women’s right, too. Veena Oldenburg’s seminal book, Dowry Murder, gives details on how the British encouraged the Indians to dish out cases of atrocities that could then be blamed on the native cultures. They systematically compiled these anecdotes, mostly unsubstantiated and often exaggerated and one-sided. This became a justification to enact laws that downgraded the rights of common citizens. The book shows how the dowry extortions that have become so common in middle-class today, were actually started when women’s traditional property rights were taken away by the British through convoluted logic.
(image source: Breaking India: Western Inventions and Dalit Faultlines - By Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan p. 1 - 11 and p.  Introduction).
Refer to The St Thomas In India History Swindle - apostlethomasindia.wordpress.com and The Hoax of St. Thomas - By V Sundaram

The year was 1783, nearly 217 years ago, that the British had lost its 13 colonies in America, and now it was necessary to fully concentrate on India. The East India Company representing the British, was trading since 1690, and it now became necessary to plan a strategy whereby a British rule can be established in a country inherently different from Canada, America and Australia.  

watch on youtube.com. Watch New Discoveries on India 's History
Refer to Romila Thapar’s Kluge Prize – By Dr. Gautam Sen - vigilonline.com. Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser. Refer to Invading the Sacred: An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in America - By Krishnan Ramaswamy, Antonio de Nicolas and Aditi Banerjee. Refer to What Every "Ugly American" Must Know about the "Civilized British - www.larouchepac.com. Refer to The Myth of Aryan Invasion of India - By M L Goel. Refer to Be wary of English translations of Hindu scriptures - By Sheena Patel

In the year 1784, under the patronage of Governor General Warren Hastings, the Asiatic Society of Bengal was formed with a membership of 30 Europeans, headed by Sir William Jones as president. In the very year, he wrote to Sir Warren Hastings how to spread "our pure faith" as "no mission from the Church of Rome will ever be able to convert the Hindus." He wrote about translating into Sanskrit and "then quietly to disperse the work among the well-educated natives." He goes on to state that "all the 14 Menus (Manus) are reducible to one," and that "a connection subsisted between the old idolatrous nations."

(source: West Asian languages derived from Indus script - By Bhikhu Patel). Refer to Geopolitics and Sanskrit Phobia - By Rajiv Malhotra - sulekha.com and chapters on Conversion, First Indologists and European Imperialism.
The Ayran Invasion Theory - AIT specifically justified the presence of the British among their “Aryan cousins” in India, being merely the second wave of Aryan settlement there.  It supported the British view of India as merely a geographical region without historical unity, a legitimate prey for any invader capable of imposing himself.  It provided the master illustration to the rising racialist worldview:
(1) the dynamic whites entered the land of the indolent dark natives;
(2) being superior, the whites established their dominance and imparted their language to the natives;
(3) being race-conscious, they established the caste system to preserve their racial separateness;
(4) but being insufficiently fanatical about their race purity, some miscegenation with the natives took place anyway, making the Indian Aryans darker than their European cousins and correspondingly less intelligent and less dynamic;
(5) hence, for their own benefit they were susceptible to an uplifting intervention by a new wave of purer Aryan colonizers.
Questioning the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) is now widely presented as a part of the alleged hinduization or “saffronization” of history by the BJP-led government in India.  Through the media, the West has vaguely heard an echo of the commotion about this development among Indian Marxist historians trying to hold on to their power positions.
Indo - Anglian snobbery:  English education and more recently the westernization of the workplace, of popular music and other everyday circumstances have generated a class of Indians quite alienated from and ignorant of native culture. More than the English-employed Babus of yore, they delight in mocking and belittling native culture.  In their hands, the AIT is simply an instrument to tease Indian “chauvinists” and deconstruct the very notion of a distinct Indian or Hindu civilization.  With the decline of ideology and the rise of the commercial outlook in the media, this supercilious and nihilistic attitude is now a rising force in the opinion landscape, but it has always been around in non-Marxist sections of independent India’s anglicised elite.

(source: The Politics of the Aryan Invasion Debate - By Dr. Koenraad Elst - bharatvani.org - Indology Review). 
Refer to chapters on First Indologists and European Imperialism.

The Fiction of Aryan Invasion Theory 
The preplanned scheme of Jones to introduce the idea that Sanskrit was an outside language gave birth to the speculation of the imagined existence of some Central Asian (Aryan) race who spoke Sanskrit and who brought Sanskrit language to India when they forcefully entered the country. In this way, the fiction of the Aryan Invasion was created much later, sometime in the 1800’s by the same group of people and was extensively promoted by Max Muller.    
It is a well known fact that India is called Aryavart. Manu Smriti (2/21,22) describes the exact location of Aryavart which lies from the south of the Himalayas and all the way up to the Indian Ocean. Its inhabitants are called the Arya. But it is not a locally spoken name. But it is not a locally spoken name. Commonly, we write Bharatvarsh for India in general and scriptural writings. The territory of India (or Bharatvarsh for Aryavart) during the Mahabharat war (3139 BC) was up to Iran. So the ancient Iranian people also used to call themselves the Aryans.    
People of the British regime using this information, fabricated a story that some unknown race of Central Asia who came and settled in Iran were called the Aryans and they were Sanskrit speaking people. They invaded India, established themselves permanently, and wrote the Vedas. Those who introduced this ideology never cared to produce any evidence in support of their statement because it never existed, and furthermore, fiction stories don’t need evidences as they are self-created dogmas. 
If someone carefully looks into the ancient history of India, he will find that there was no such thing as an Aryan invasion. Since the very beginning of human civilization, Hindus (Aryans) are the inhabitants of Bharatvarsh (India) which is called Aryavart. In the Bharatiya history there are descriptions of Shak and Hun invasions and also of the Muslim invasions but never an Aryan invasion.  
Max Muller promoted this invasion story and formulated his dates of Vedic origin accordingly.  
(source:  The True History and the Religion of India: A Concise Encycloedia of Authentic Hinduism - By Swami Prakashanand Saraswati  p.  266- 267). 
The Aryan Invaders - Hindu historical records as fiction?
The Western experts concluded, somewhere between 1500 and 1000 BE, the primitive barbarians who composed the Veda invaded northern India, driving the helpless Dravidians into the southern part of the subcontinent where they live today. There are two difficulties with this popular theory: 
  1. Today’s northern Hindus have absolutely no memory of having ever driven the Dravidians out of north India. None of their ancient manuscripts mentions any such thing.
  2. Today’s Dravidians have absolutely no memory of ever having lived in North India. In fact, their ancient traditions suggest that their forebears came from the south, not from the north.
Minor problems like these did not discourage the Europeans and American scholars of the time. Thousands of pages of the Hindu’s own historical records were simply dismissed as fiction.
Over and over the Vedas mention a mighty river called the Saraswati where Aryan communities flourished and Vedic priests sang hymns of glorious gods, like Indra. Western scholars speculated that the Saraswati might have been one of the rivers to the east of the Aral Sea in Soviet Central Asia. Perhaps, some even speculated, it had never been anything but a figment of the ancient poet's imaginations! 
In the early 1980's proponents of the Aryan Invasion Theory, got a terrible shock. Satellite imaging was revolutionzing our knowledge of Earth's geography. It allowed scientists to get a look at the planet from low orbit out in space. Satellite photos of the dry bed of an enormous river, so huge it may have been five miles across at one site. While that river was in business, it may been the largest in the world, bigger even than than the Amazon today. The geologists quickly established the river had dried up around 1900 BCE. Yet according to our friend Max Muller the Veda hadn't been composed till at the very least 700 years after the river disappeared. What was this?  Poets pretending they still lived alongside a river that vanished centuries before? Not darn likely!
(source: Hinduism - By Linda Johnsen p. 20 - 24). Refer to chapter on First Indologists and European Imperialism.   Refer to Out of India Theory - wikipedia.org
Westward movement?
Shrikant Talageri  proceeds to demonstrate that the fragmentary Vedic data and the systematic Puranic account tally rather splendidly. The Puranas relate a westward movement of a branch of the Aila/Saudyumna clan or Lunar dynasty from Prayag (Allahabad, at the junction of Ganga and Yamuna) to Sapta Saindhavah, the land of the seven rivers.  There, the tribe splits into five, after the five sons of the conqueror Yayati: Yadu, Druhyu, Anu, Puru, Turvashu.  All the rulers mentioned in the Vedas either belong to the Paurava (Puru-descended) tribe settled on the banks of the Saraswati, or have come in contact with them according to the Puranic account, whether by alliance and matrimony or by war.  Later, the Pauravas (and minor dynasties springing from them) extend their power eastward, into and across their ancestral territory, and the Vedic traditions spread along with the economic and political influence of the metropolitan Saraswati-based Paurava people.
This way, the eastward expansion of the Vedic horizon, which has often been read as proof of a western origin of the Aryans, is integrated into a larger history. The Vedic people are shown as merely one branch of an existing Aryan culture, originally spanning northern India (at least) from eastern Uttar Pradesh to Panjab.  The approximate and relative chronology provided by the dynastic lists allow us to estimate the time of those events as much earlier than the heyday and end of the Harappan cities.  Later the Anavas are said to have invaded Panjab from their habitat in Kashmir, and to have been defeated and expelled by the Pauravas in the so-called Battle of the Ten Kings, described in Rig Veda 7:18,19,33,83.  The ten tribes allied against king Sudas (who belonged to the Trtsu branch of the Paurava tribe) have been enumerated in the Vedic references to the actual battle, and a number of them are unmistakably Iranian: Paktha (Pashtu), BhalAna (Bolan/Baluch), Parshu (Persian), PRthu (Parthian), the others being less recognizable: VishANin, AlIna, Shiva, Shimyu, BhRgu, Druhyu. 
(source: Aryan Invasion Theory, a Reappraisal - By Shrikant Talageri). Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser.
***
Koenraad Elst, Belgian scholar, as pointed out, no Indian until the mid-nineteenth century had heard of the notion that his ancestors were invaders from Central Asia who had destroyed the native Indian civilization and culture. But almost every history book now proclaims so. There was no Aryan-Dravidian divide before, but many people in the south now believe they were the original inhabitants of India who were pushed around and down south by the invading Aryan tribes who imposed their Vedic culture and rituals on the rest of India. 

Winston Churchill who opposed any policy giving independence to India, belligerently points out: 
"We have as much right to be in India as anyone there, except perhaps for the depressed classes, who are the native stock."  
He also points out how such a theory was swallowed hook, line and sinker by a variety of Indians for a variety of purposes: from Jyotirao Phule, the low-caste leader from Maharashtra, who said that the "...Aryans came to India not as simple emigrants with peaceful intentions of colonization, but as conquerors. to Keshab Chandra Sen leader of the reformist Brahmo Samaj, who welcomed the British presence as follows: "In the advent of the English nation in India we see a reunion of parted cousins, the descendents of two different families of the ancient Aryan race."

(source: Secular "Gods" Blame Hindu "Demons" - By Ramesh N. Rao Har Anand pub. ISBN 81-241-0808-0  p. 242 - 246). Refer to Evangelical Intrusions - By Sandhya Jain  Rupa Publications.
The Aryan Invasion Theory served as a theoretical underpinning of the historical legitimacy of the British presence in India. That the British appeared at the end of a long line of invaders of the land, beginning with the Aryans. 
Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941) poet, author, philosopher, Nobel prize laureate as early as 1902 (Bengali Samvat 1309) wrote that:
"There was no Indian in the history of India written by foreigners: as if Indians do not exist; only those who have fought and killed among themselves are real...we are not parasites of India; through hundreds of centuries we have put down tens of thousands of roots in the heart of this land, but unfortunately we have to read a type of history which makes our children forget exactly this."
It appears that in (the history of) India we are nobodies; only those who have come from outside matter in (the history of this) land"
Tagore, whose view of India and Indian history is rarely highlighted wrote a seminal essay entitled ‘The History of Bharatavarsha’. In it he struck a cord parallel to R C Majumdar’s: 
“The history of India that we read and memorize for our examinations is really a nightmarish account of India . Some people arrive from somewhere and the pandemonium is let loose. And then it is a free-for-all: assault and counter-assault, blows and bloodletting. "
“If Bharatvarsha is viewed with these passing frames of dreamlike scenes, smeared in red, overlaid on it, the real Bharatvarsha cannot be glimpsed. These histories do not answer the question, where were the people of India ? Our real ties are with the Bharatvarsha that lies outside our textbooks. If the history of this tie for a substantially long period gets lost, our soul loses its anchorage. After all, we are no weeds or parasitical plants in India . Over many hundreds of years, it is our roots, hundreds and hundreds of them, that have occupied the very heart of Bharatavarsha. But, unfortunately, we are obliged to learn a brand of history that makes our children forget this very fact. It appears as if we are nobody in India …”
(free translation from original Bengali in Tagore's Collected Works, vol. 4, 1965: 378 and A Thematic View of Indian Civilization - By Michel Danino - The Hindu Renaissance Makar Sankranti Yugabda 5108  p 10 - 11).
If Tagore were alive after Independence and if he had then written like this, he would no doubt have been accused of chauvinism or fundamentalism by the new India's "mainstream" historians.

K. M. Panikkar, the author of A Survey of Indian History has written:
"Brought upon text books written by foreigners whose one object would seem to have been to prove that there was no such thing as India, we had each to 'discover' India for ourselves. 
Even today there is a persistent attempt of Western scholars to argue that "India was not a country but a congeries of smaller states, and the Indians were not a nation but a conglomeration of peoples of diverse creeds and sects. Anybody familiar with the relevant situation will know that this attitude still forms the major undercurrent of Western scholarship on India.
(source: Colonial Indology: Sociopolitics of the Ancient Indian Past - By Dilip K. Chakrabarti p. 98, 122, 214 -240 and  The Invasion That Never Was - By Michel Danino and Sujata Nahar p. 45). Refer to Distortion of Indian History and School Textbooks.
The Aryan invasion theory was hypothesized in the 19th century to explain the similarities found in Sanskrit and the languages of Europe. One such person who reported about this is Deen Chandora in his article, Distorted Historical Events and Discredited Hindu Chronology, as it appeared in Revisiting Indus-Sarasvati Age and Ancient India (p. 383). 
He explains that the idea of the AIT was certainly not a matter of misguided research, by was a conspiracy to distribute deliberate misinformation that was formulated on April 10, 1866 in London at a secret meeting held in the Royal Asiatic Society. This was "to induct the theory of the Aryan invasion of India, so that no Indian may say that English are foreigners...India was ruled all along by outsiders and so the country must remain a slave under the benign Christian rule." This was a political move and this theory was put to solid use in all schools and colleges. As can be expected, most of those who were great proponents of the Aryan invasion theory were often ardent English or German nationalists, or Christians ready and willing to bring about the desecration of anything that was non-Christian or non-European. 
(source: Proof of Vedic Culture's Global Existence - By Stephen Knapp  p. 39).
Guy Sorman (1944 -  ) French intellectual, writer, economist and a professor of political science at Paris University, visiting scholar at Hoover Institution at Stanford and the leader of new liberalism in France.  
He writes:
"The Invasion theory has today become the standard explanation for the caste system, though it came up only in the 19th century. Besides, all we have to attest the Aryan invasion is a specious interpretation of the Mahabharata, which is like searching the origins of European aristocracy in the works of Homer! In any case, it is doubtful whether a single invasion, which was more likely a slow infiltration of the North, could have succeeded in structuring so perfectly Indian society along ethnic lines for over three thousand years. Finally, in South India the caste system among the dark, skinned Dravidians is as rigid as it is in the North, though the Aryans in all probability never reached there. 
The racial origin of caste hypothesis tells us little about India but it does tell us a great deal about the 19th century Westerners who invented the Aryan invasion theory.  
It was at the same time that Sieyes and Augustin Thierry claimed that the French nobility was of Germanic stock, whereas the lower classes were of Gallic origin; so the 1789 Revolution was a race war rather than a class war! 
It was also in the 19th century that appeared the myth of the Indo-Europeans being at the source of all Western civilization and for this we have to thank British authors who were taken up with evolutionist theory. Indian historians trained in Europe have fallen victim to this myth but that does not make it any more authentic. Later on, at the beginning of the 20th century, it became fashionable to support the Marxist theory which replaced race with class, though its premises were just as shaky.
(source: The Genius of India - By Guy Sorman  ('Le Genie de l'Inde') Macmillan India Ltd. 2001. ISBN 0333 93600 0  p. 60-61). Refer to chapter on First Indologists and European Imperialism. 
Dr. Subhash Kak (1949 - ) is a widely known scientist and a Indic scholar. Currently a Professor at Louisiana State University, he has authored ten books and more than 200 research papers in the fields of information theory, quantum mechanics, and Indic studies. He is a Sanskrit scholar and is author of Astronomical Code of the Rig Veda, and India at Century's End: Essays on History and Politics, has observed: 
Max Muller is credited with the popularization of the theory that nomadic hordes of horse-riding Aryans invaded India in mid-second millennium B.C.E., subjugated the original inhabitants and imposed their culture and language on them. This theory explained the fact that the language of North India and Europe belong to the same family and that the myths of the Indian and the European worlds have some commonality.  
While this theory provided an explanation within the framework of the then emerging filed of archaeology, it suffered from serious flaws. Also the context in which the word Aryan was used was wrong because this word in the earliest Indian literature refers to culture and not any specific race or linguistic background. A major flaw of the invasion theory was that it had no explanation for why the Vedic literature that was assumed to go back into the second millennium had no reference to any region outside of northwest India. Furthermore, the astronomical references in the Vedic literature allude to events in the third millennium B.C.D. and earlier. Then there was the fact that the earliest Indian sciences and literature and philosophy were very advanced indicating a very long tradition of scholarship which the invasion model did not posit. Most importantly, the discovery of the archaeological sites of the Indus-Saraswati tradition, which go back to at least 6500 B.C.E. and which show cultural continuity with the later Indian civilization, created a fundamental contradiction for the model. If one could explain the cultural continuity by arguing that the invading Aryans eventually adopted the culture of the original inhabitants then how was one to explain the fact that they were able to impose their language on the same people. 
Once the theory of this horse riding invaders, took root, any evidence that went against this view was ignored or simply brushed aside as being ambiguous. But the main reason that the Aryan invasion theory survived so long is because questions about the process supporting the hypothesis were not asked. 
Another reason for the popularity of the invasion theory was that parallels were seen with the conquest of the Americas by the Europeans. The fundamental differences between the two situations were ignored. Europe of five hundred years ago was densely populated unlike the steppes of Central Asia thirty five hundred years ago. European expansion was imperial in design impelled in part by capitalism and by the exclusionary world-view of Christianity in contrast to the Indo-Aryans with their Old Religion that saw the world to be interconnected.  
(source: Astronomical Code of the Rig Veda - by Subhas Kak p 20 - 23).  Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser. Refer to Out of India Theory - wikipedia.org
Scholarly Trickery?
Michel Danino (1956 - ) Born in 1956 at Honfleur (France) into a Jewish family recently emigrated from Morocco, from the age of fifteen Michel Danino was drawn to India, some of her great yogis, and soon to Sri Aurobindo and Mother and their view of evolution which gives a new meaning to our existence on this earth.
He has observed:
"The Vedic Dasyus were arbitrarily identified with the Dravidians by the scholars of the British Empire and the wars between them and the Aryans became "proof" of the bloody conquest of Northern India by "the great army of Aryan immigrants in their onward march" from Central Asia (or Iran or even Tibet, in some variants of this sublime myth). These Aryans became therefore "Indo-Europeans" or "Indo-Germans".  Thus the Rig Veda was shown as being "rather Indo-European than Hindu, and representing the condition of the Aryans before their final settlement in India. Which in another way was of saying that Hinduism really came from "Indo-European" regions, wherever that may be. 
Never mind that this so-called evidence did not stand a moment's scrutiny, that the Rig Veda itself made it clear that the wars between Aryans and Dasysus were battles between powers of light and darkness, that the world "Aryan" was plainly used in the Veda to describe not a racial group but a quality of being and a culture, a dedication to the truth and readiness to fight for it - all this was simply brushed aside, and a whole edifice was promptly erected on these non-existent foundations.
It followed that the lower castes and the Dravidians, both victims of the Aryan “oppressors,” were encouraged to rebel and reject every “Aryan import,” beginning of course with Hinduism. Christianity, shown as being more “egalitarian” was projected as the natural “liberating” force for these sections of Indian society, among which mass conversions did take place as a result. 
Dr. Rev. John Wilson, Scottish missionary, founder of Wilson College, India. Named one of the Seven Founding Fathers of Modern Bombay (Mumbai), declared with a straight face, and naturally this happy reunion had now brought India into contact "with the most enlightened nation in the world." A special effort was made for the conversion of India's aboriginal tribes: 
"They have yet to start on the path of progress," wrote Hunter. "It remains for us to decide whether the path is to lead them to Hinduism, or to the pure faith and civilization which we represent."
(source: The Invasion That Never Was - By Michel Danino and Sujata Nahar  p.19 - 21).
 William Dalrymple, (1965 - ) author of The Last Mughal, and award-winning travel writer and historian, has recently written:  
"By 1813, a change in the charter of the East India Company let loose a wave of evangelical missionaries on India . The act was pushed through parliament by William Wilberforce, who told MPs that "the natives of India , and more particularly the Brahmins, were sunk into the most abject ignorance and vice".  The Rev R Ainslie was typical of the new breed of missionaries filling the cantonments, or military stations, of India during the 1830s. Ainslie wrote of his visit to Orissa: "I have visited the Valley of Death ! I have seen the Den of Darkness!"  According to another outspoken evangelical, the Rev Alexander Thompson: "Those who between 1790 and 1820 held the highest offices in India, were on the whole an irreligious body of men who approved of Hinduism much more than Christianity: some who hated Missions from their dread  of sedition; others because their hearts 'seduced by fair idolatresses, had fallen to idols foul'."
(source: Gods and Monsters - By William Dalrymple - guardian.co.uk).  Refer to chapter on First Indologists and European Imperialism. 
Robert Caldwell (1814 -1891) the Bishop of Tirunelveli, had a strong anti-Brahmin bias (something, again, non-existent in Tamil literature or tradition), affirmed that "few Brahmins have written (in Tamil) anything worthy of preservation" - a crudely false statement when Brahmins (and non-Brahmins alike) have composed so much devotion literature in Tamil. 
This "brahminphobia" makes perfect sense, however, if we remember that Caldwell was first and foremost a Christian missionary and that missionaries always considered Brahmins as the greatest stumbling block to India's Christianization. 
The word ‘Dravida’ was first coined by Adi Sankara, a Brahmin monk from Kerala: in his shasthrath with Mandana Mishra at Varanasi , he had called himself a ‘Dravida shishu’ that is a child of an area where three oceans meet ie. South India .
This "brahminphobia" makes perfect sense, however, if we remember that Caldwell was first and foremost a Christian missionary and that missionaries always considered Brahmins as the greatest stumbling block to India's Christianization. 
The tactic of denigrating India's ancient heritage in order to create divisions in her society continues today with full vigor - only with a little more subtlety.
Watch New Discoveries on India 's History.  Refer to Vedic Roots of Early Tamil Culture - By Michel Danino.  For Cruelty inflicted by Christianity - Watch Constantine's Sword movie - By Oren Jacoby
Caldwell's theories were lapped up by more and more scholars, and finally by E. V. Ramaswamy Naicker ("Periyar") (1879 - 1973).the doyen of Dravidian politics and iconoclast. Founder of the Dravidian movement.
Not only was the teaching and study of Sanskrit starved and discouraged in Tamil Nadu to break its "hegemony," there was also a drive to "cleanse" the Tamil language of its large Sanskrit vocabulary. If anything, this purge of Sanskrit words only contributed to the impoverishment of spoken Tamil, which, today, mixes in numerous English words - many more than other South Indian languages do (for example Malayalam which, though issued from Tamil, still has a large Sanskrit vocabulary). 
The Vedic literature is massive and no other culture has produced anything like it in regard to ancient history. Not the Egyptians, Sumerians, Babylonians, or Chinese. So if it was produced outside of India, how could there not be some reference to its land of origination. For that matter, how could these so-called primitive nomads who came invading the Indus region invent such a sophisticated language and produce such a distinguished record of their customs inspite of their migrations and numerous battle? This hardly likely. Only a people who are well established and advanced in their knowledge and culture can do such a thing. 
(source: Proof of Vedic Culture's Global Existence - By Stephen Knapp p. 49 and Vedic Roots of Early Tamil Culture - By Michel Danino.  Refer to chapter on First Indologists and European Imperialism.  Refer to Jesus Christ: Artifice for Aggression - By Sita Ram Goel and Christian Supremacy: Pushing the Dhimmitude of Non-Christians in America. 
Aryan race did not exist
 Dr. N.S. Rajaram has astutely observed:
“The British appealed to the vanity of English-educated Indians by presenting themselves as ‘new and improved Aryans’ that were in India only to complete the work left undone by their ancestors in the hoary past. It is not hard to notice that many English-educated Indians still carry this chip on their shoulder, especially when their education has been at colonial era institutions like the Doon School, St Stephens and the like. In some ways they act more British than the British.”
(source:  A European look at the Aryan myth – By N.S. Rajaram). Refer to Aryan Idols - By Stefan Arvidsson
Dr Suryanath Kamath former Director of Karnataka State Gazetteer has said:
"The term Aryan only means noble. 'European scholars wrongly interpreted the war mentioned in the Vedas'. ' Indus Valley civilisation and Vedic civilisation are not different'" Indus Valley civilisation and Vedic civilisation are not two different civilisations but the former was only an urbanised version of the latter." Dr. Kamath, former Director of Karnataka State Gazetteer, was speaking on "Ancient India: Overseas Connections" organised as a part of Mythic Society's centenary year celebrations.  
Refuted - Refuting the existence of Aryan race or an invasion by them, he said: "The Vedas speak of a war between light and darkness which was wrongly interpreted by European scholars as a war between light-skinned and dark-skinned people. The term Dravida means 'inhabitants of Tamil Nadu' and not a race, and the term Aryan means 'noble'."

Evidence - On the Indus Valley civilisation, he said: "There are factual evidences of a river that ran parallel to the west of the Sindhu and this was home to the Vedic civilisation but [river] dried up around 1900 BC which brought an end to the civilisation." Dr. Kamat spoke extensively about the Indian trade connections with Persia and Rome during the Indus Valley civilisation. "There is a Roman settlement in Puducherry, established for commercial activities around 2,000 years ago. Romans had a penchant for Indian perfumes, diamonds and garments and in return, there was a constant flow of gold into India."

Sea routes - "Indian seamen had knowledge of sea routes much before the Western sailors could have, and [they] were also well versed in ship building as we can find description of ships in the Rig Veda. "This is proved by the fact that various artefacts of Harappan civilisation were found in countries as far as Rome and Mexico ," "that the Indian connection with foreign lands was not just limited to trade but also extended to culture. "South-East Asian countries such as Cambodia , Indonesia and the Philippines are largely influenced by Indian culture and we can see such influence in Buddhist Stupas and Hindu temples in these countries." 
(source: Aryan race did not exist - thehindu July 14, 2008). Refer to Be wary of English translations of Hindu scriptures - By Sheena Patel
Evangelical Pseudo-Scholarship - Inventing the Dravidian Race
Colonial administrators and evangelists were able to divide and rule the peoples of the Indian subcontinent, based on imaginary histories and racial myths – to the extent of inventing an entire race called ‘Dravidians’.
British colonial administrators, such as Francis Whyte Ellis and Alexander D Campbell, studied the grammar of Tamil and Telugu and proposed that these languages might belong to a different language-family from other Indian languages. Another British administrator, Brian Houghton Hodgson, invented the term ‘Tamulian’ to refer to what he considered to be the non-Aryan indigenous population of India. While Ellis and Campbell proposed a linguistic theory, Hodgson had a race-based perspective.
A Conspiracy theory is born – Cunning Aryan Brahmins exploited Innocent Dravidians!
But the catalyst who is credited with the construction of the ‘Dravidian race’ was a missionary-scholar from the Anglican Church. His name was Bishop Robert Caldwell (1814-91), an evangelist for the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, who combined the linguistic theory of Ellis with a strong racial narrative. He proposed the existence of the Dravidian race in his Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Race, which enjoys extreme popularity with Dravidianists to this day. Bishop Caldwell proposed that the Dravidians were in India before the Aryans, but got cheated by the Brahmins, who were the cunning agents of the Aryan. He argued that the simple minded Dravidians were kept in shackles by Aryans through the exploitation of religion. Thus, the Dravidians needed to be liberated by Europeans like him. He proposed the complete removal of Sanskrit words from Tamil.  Caldwell’s recommended solution was that south Indians should disown Sanskrit influences and rediscover their original culture through Biblical categories. Once the Dravidian mind would be free of the superstitions imposed by Aryans, Christian evangelization would reap the souls of Dravidians.
De-Indianizing Tamil Traditions
Since colonial days, there has been an ongoing attempt to construct an ethnic-religious Tamil identity separate from the rest of India, and to find Christian roots for this so-called ‘Tamil religion.”  This entailed manipulating the interpretations of the literary core of Tamil tradition, which consists of three main elements:
1.    Thirukural, a classical Tamil text containing ethical literature that is very much a part of Indian Smriti tradition.  Written by the great sage Thiruvalluvar and through the ages has become one of the most cherished works of Tamil literature.
2.    Saiva Siddhanta, a Vedanta branch of Saiva philosophy
3.    A huge body of classical devotional literature.
George Uglow Pope (1820- 1908) was another legendary missionary Indologist who played the lead role in claiming Tamil classical literature to be un-Indian, un-Hindu, and linked to Christianity.  Once this decoupling of Kural from Hinduism had been achieved Pope pushed his missionary case further. He declared that Thirukural was the result of Christian influence, that Thiruvalluvar was a great pioneer who learned ethics from Christianity.
Evangelists in the 19th century India encouraged such ideas. Their basic premise claimed that St. Thomas, a direct disciple of Jesus Christ, preached in India starting in 52 CE. But these ideas had been rejected centuries earlier by mainstream Christianity, and even sometimes labeled as heresies.
The Myth of St Thomas – Fabricating History
The story that places the Apostle St. Thomas in India in 53 CE is a lingering medieval myth. It implicitly includes colonial and racial narratives; for instance, that the peaceful apostle ministered to the dark-skinned Indians, who turned on him and killed him. This myth, however, has no historical basis at all. Nevertheless, it has been shaped by various Christian churches into a powerful tool for the appropriation of Hindu culture in Tamil Nadu, by giving credit to ‘Thomas Christianity’ for everything positive in the south Indian culture, while blaming Hinduism for whatever is to be denigrated. It further serves as a tool to carve out Tamils for the common body of Indian culture and spirituality.
There is also evidence to show that the present San Thome was built on the remains of a Hindu temple, which was originally the Kapaleeswara Temple. Archaeological studies by the Government of India confirm that the Portuguese built the church on the ruins of a Hindu temple. They have recovered an inscription of Rajendra Chola, the Imperial Chola who was devoted to the Vedic religion.  A 1967 report of the Archaeological Survey of India on the recovery of the 11th century inscription of Rajendra Chola from San Thome Church in Madras states that the inscription mentions the Chola king as favored by Goddess Lakshmi, ‘who grants him victory and prosperity.’
Nevertheless, these independent reports are downplayed and suppressed. For example, in the 6th standard social science textbook taught across Tamil Nadu, it is blatantly stated as a matter of fact that St. Thomas ‘stayed at St Thomas Mount and preached Christianity. He was murdered due to religious strife. His body was buried at Santome Church. None of this is substantiated by empirical evidence.
Recently, a mega budge film on St. Thomas has been planned by the Catholic Church to propagate this myth.  Rumors that Thiruvalluvar would be shown as a disciple of St. Thomas in the film led to protests that it was a false claim.
(source: Breaking India: Western Inventions and Dalit Faultlines - By Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan  p. 61 - 90).
A Splendid Hoax
The intelligentsia and even the politicians were in for shock at the World Classical Tamil Conference here on Friday, when a Finland-based Indologist turned the spotlight on a Dravidian-Aryan continuum while demolishing the Aryan-Dravidian divide as a myth. 
In a landmark presentation that was a complete turnaround from singing paeans to the 86-year-old Dravidian patriarch M Karunanidhi and Tamil culture’s glory, renowned Indologist, Prof Asko Parpola, presenting the conclusions of his three decades-long research on ‘A Dravidian Solution to the Indus Script Problem’, told a stunned gathering that “an opening to the secrets of the Indus Script (which is yet to be deciphered) has been achieved”.

Older forms of Tamil, Kannada and other ‘Dravidian languages’ in his firm opinion hold the key to take forward this finding that the underlying language of the Indus Valley Civilisation “was proto-Dravidian”.

The best way to “read” the signs in ‘thousands of short texts’ of the Indus script was through old Tamil, Prof Parpola, of the Helsinki University in Finland, drove home in his breathtaking 90-minute talk. 
Proof of hypothesis

As proof of his hypothesis, Prof Parpola correlated several ‘pictograms’ found in Indus Valley inscribed with ‘Harappan’ stoneware bangles with words like ‘Muruku’ (meaning arm-ring/bangle) from old Tamil literature.

“This (old Tamil) is the only ancient Dravidian source not much contaminated by Indo-Aryan languages and traditions,” Prof. Parpola, the first recipient of the ‘Kalaignar Karunanidhi Classical Tamil Award’, argued.
Pointing out that ‘radiocarbon dating’ has fixed the period of the ‘mature Harappan phase’, when the Indus Script was used to 2600-1900 BCE, he said the ‘Indus Civilisation’ collapsed many centuries before hymns were composed in ‘Vedic Sanskrit’ around 1000 BCE.

However, the rich religious/cultural heritage in South Asia till now has been preserved both by the speakers of Dravidian languages (predominantly in South India) and the people of North India, Prof. Parpola emphasised, to demolish the myth of a clear Aryan-Dravidian divide. Dr Parpola’s work left the top DMK leadership seated in front, nonplussed, kindling them to rethink the Aryan-Dravidian divide issue.

(source: Jolt to Aryan-Dravidian divide theory - By M R Venkatesh - deccanherald.com).
Dr. N.S. Rajaram sums up the anti-Brahmin campaign of the British missionaries succinctly in his " Sarasvati River and Vedic Civilization" as follows:  
"Christian propagandists like Bishop Caldwell were unhappy that they could get converts only from the lower strata of Hindu society. Regardless of internal divisions, all segments of Hindu society-and many Muslims as well - looked to the Brahmins for moral and intellectual guidance. Caldwell and his fellow missionaries saw Brahmins as the greatest obstacle to their program. So they attacked the Brahmins in the most venomous language as oppressors of society. This is still the case. The idea was to turn people against those who were seen as the preservers and perpetuators of Hindu culture and tradition".  
(source:  "Casteism"- An open letter to Indian Express - haindavakeralam.org). Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser.
Sri Aurobindo (1872-1950) was the great light that blazed across India during the first half of the twentieth century, and debunked this theory of the North-South racial divide.
He did not subscribe to the theory that the languages of North and South India are unrelated. Sri Aurobindo's study of Tamil led him to discover that the original connection between the Sanskrit and Tamil languages was “far closer and more extensive than is usually supposed.” These languages are “two divergent families derived from one lost primitive tongue.” And, “My first study of Tamil words had brought me to what seemed a clue to the very origins and structure of the ancient Sanskrit tongue.” 
Hindus collectively have no memory of an Aryan invasion of India that supposedly took place around 1,500 B.C. Hindu epics do not mention any such invasion. Surely, the extensive Hindu literature would describe the Aryan invasion if such had indeed taken place.
Hindu epics do not mention any such invasion. Surely, the extensive Hindu literature would describe the Aryan invasion if such had indeed taken place. The voluminous Vedic literature, 8 times the length of the Bible, is completely silent about any Aryan migrations. It pre-supposes an indigenous population. Ancient literatures from Tamil and other languages also do not say anything about any Aryan migration from Central Asia.
Not even the Dravidian speaking peoples who are claimed to have lived in India before the supposed Aryan invasion have any memory of this alleged invasion. It is hard to imagine that both the “invading Aryans” and the “conquered native Dravidians” would conspire to eradicate from their collective memory every trace of the invasion and its consequences.
Some people misread Ramayana as describing an invasion of the South by a Northern prince. The Indian epic Ramayana narrates Rama's tale, who invaded the island of Lanka to rescue his wife Sita. Sita had been forcibly abducted by Ravana to the island of Lanka. Nowhere does Ramayana characterize Ravana as belonging to an alien or an inferior race. Ravana was a scholar of the Vedas and was called a Chaturvedi, a knower of the four Vedas. Ravana belonged to the same stock as the victorious Rama.  An Aryan invasion of India from the outside around 1,500 B. C. did not occur. People of North and South India have lived together in peace as two branches of one family since antiquity. People who talk of an Aryan conquest of India parrot the 19th century British viewpoint and do disservice to the cause of unity of India. 
(Refer to The Secret of the Veda, V 10, Centenary Edition, p 36, 46). Sri Aurobindo also noted that a large part of the vocabulary of the South Indian languages (Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam) is common with Sanskrit. 
(source: The Myth of Aryan Invasion - By Dr. Madan Lal Goel - sulekha.com). For more refer to Vedic Roots of Early Tamil Culture - By Michel Danino and Hating Hindus in a 'Scholarly' Way - By Vishal Agarwal. Refer to chapter on Hindu Scriptures.
Among Greatest Hoaxes of History?
Swami Aksharananda (   )  holds a Ph.D. degree in Hindu Studies from the University of Madison, Wisconsin (USA) has observed:
"Not even the Dravidian speaking peoples who are claimed to have lived in India before the supposed Aryan invasion have any memory of this alleged invasion. It is hard to imagine that both the “invading Aryans” and the “conquered native Dravidians” would conspire to eradicate from their collective memory every trace of the invasion and its consequences."
"This theory, given the manner in which it is being defended by its promoters, sounds more like a dogma serving a variety of political and ideological functions. It is invariably summoned into service to explain almost every traditional institution and social conflict in India. While the AIT is avidly and dogmatically advocated by some, in and out of India, the preponderant mass of the Indian population is blissfully unaware of this interpretation of their history. "
"Though it is now seen as heresy to do so, many scholars, both in the West and in the Indian sub-continent, have long challenged the AIT to be essentially a product of 19th century Eurocentric scholarship built on an edifice of speculation. Now with new tools of investigation, including computers and satellites, new discoveries are regularly made and we are in a position to intern the AIT myth, once and for all, among the greatest hoaxes of history. It will require the chipping away of the Aryan Invasion Theory which according to a Cambridge anthropologist, Edmund Leach, is like cutting down a 300-year-old oak tree with a penknife. But it’s a work that has to be done. Ultimately, it will require nothing less than the total overhaul of Indian history. "
(source: The Aryan invasion of India is a theory built on speculation - By Swami Aksharanda - Stabroek News, Tuesday, June 17, 2003).  Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser. Refer to Be wary of English translations of Hindu scriptures - By Sheena Patel
Refer to Out of India Theory - wikipedia.org
It is for nothing that India is today home to the only ancient culture that has survived the combined waves of Christianity and Islam - all others have disappeared under the sands of Time. 
First of all, let us try to understand why 19th century scholars found the racial Apartheid theory of caste, as an annexe to the AIT, so persuasive. In ca. 1810, the dominant theory of Indo-European origins held that India was the homeland of this language family. In subsequent decades, doubts developed about the primacy of Sanskrit in the Indo-European language tree, and parallel with the increasing linguistic distance between Sanskrit and reconstructed Proto-Indo European, the putative homeland (Urheimat) of Indo-European was moved away from India. Initially the Pamir plateau and other parts of Central Asia were favorites, but from ca. 1850 onwards, a consensus emerged that the Urheimat had been in Europe itself, with Germany, Poland and Russia as the most credible candidates.
The shift from India to Europe as the preferred Urheimat was formally due to new linguistic insights developed in good faith by conscientious philologist, but it was coincidentally also well-tuned to new political concerns. Apart from rising nationalism which explains the scramble among scholars to grab the Urheimat status for their own country, the main factor was European colonialism, then at its apogee. It seemed natural that the continent whose manifest destiny was the domination of the world, had brought forth its own proto-historic Indo-European culture and language. 
Conversely, it seemed illogical that a backward country like India, badly in need of the White Man's civilizing mission, could have brought forth the superior European culture. "Decidedly, the English did not want to affiliate themselves to "Mother India'."
(source: The Saffron Swastika - By Koenraad Elst Voice of India ISBN 8185990697 p.243-244). Refer to Jesus Christ: Artifice for Aggression - By Sita Ram Goel
The determination of the age in which Vedic literature started and flourished has its consequences for the Aryan Invasion question. The oldest text, the Rg­Veda, is full of precise references to places and natural phenomena in what are now Panjab and Haryana, and was unmistakably composed in that part of India. The date at which it was composed is a firm terminus ante quem for the entry of the Vedic Aryans into India. They may have come from abroad or they may have been fully native, but by the time of the Rg­Veda, they were certainly Indians without memory of a foreign homeland.
(source: Astronomical data and the Aryan question - By Koenraad Elst). Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser.
The African Model
Alluding to the way in which the spectacular stone ruins of Great Zimbabwe were reviewed as a Phoenician creation, M Posnansky (1982) refers to “the notion that what was advanced in Africa’s past was the work of outside invaders, merchants or metal workers, variously derived from Phoenicia, South Africa, Israel, India and Indonesia. 
He adds that: 
“This was an idea that was extremely attractive to a White community that at no time amounted to even 10 % of the total population of Rhodesia. It served to justify their depreciation of Black capabilities and past achievements and their occupation of more than half of the best agricultural land. The preservation of White civilization ultimately retarded the discovery of Black civilization and hampered the progress of archaeology.” 
(source:  Colonial Indology: Sociopolitics of the Ancient Indian Past - By Dilip K. Chakrabarti  p. 26).
In Africa: Divide and Convert
"What a splendid instrument for spreading Christianity and civilization among the savage races of Africa.!" 

                 - Sir Henry Morton Stanley (1841-1904) the celebrated British African Explorer remarked, when inspecting  the original maxim gun.

(source: Eastern Religions & Western Thought - By Sir Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan p.341).  Refer to Jesus Christ: Artifice for Aggression - By Sita Ram Goel.
In understanding the methods of missionary scholars, it helps to look at the scene in Africa resulting from European colonial rule and Christian missionary activity. This will allow us to see the Aryan-Dravidian divide as almost a carbon copy.  Speaking of the Hutu-Tutsi conflict, anthropologist Jean-Pierre Langellier recently wrote in the French magazine Le Monde (reproduced in ‘Colonial Misconceptions’, Deccan Herald, November 28, 1996): 
"The idea that the Hutus and the Tutsis were physically different was first aired in the 1860s by the British explorer John Speke. The history of Rwanda (like that of much of Africa) has been distorted by Peres Blancs (or ‘White Fathers’) missionaries, academics and colonial administrators. They made the Tutsis out to be a superior race which had conquered the region and enslaved the Hutus. Missionaries taught the Hutus that historical fallacy, which was the result of racist European concept being applied to an African reality. At the end of the fifties, the Hutus used that discourse to react against the Tutsis."
The horrific Tutsi-Hutu conflicts in Africa in which millions of lives have been lost is a direct consequence of this colonial-missionary mischief. So creating dissensions using an artificial racial divide was a standard missionary tactic; we see this in operation even today in the northeastern states of India. The ‘Aryan-Dravidian’ divide was simply another application of the same tactic. So ‘divide and convert’ went hand in hand with ‘divide and rule’. The policy of ‘divide and rule’ made famous by colonial administrations owe a great deal to Christian theology and missionary activity. (Note: The origins of the Tutsi/Hutu conflicts in Rwanda traceable to Belgian colonial rule in that region. The Belgian Roman Catholic Church favored the Tutsis, admiring Tutsi leadership qualities, assuming that they could be well harnessed to serve the Church's own purposes. The church evangelized also, beginning with the Tutsis, leading more Tutsis to share in the benefits that came with associating with the colonizers' Roman Catholic culture. At the end of the war the League of Nations mandated Rwanda and its southern neighbor, Burundi, to Belgium as the territory of Ruanda-Urundi. The portion of the German territory, never a part of the Kingdom of Rwanda, was stripped from the colony and attached to Tanganyika, which had been mandated to the British. Sinhalese and Tamil conflict in Sri Lanka traceable to the English rule in Ceylon).  
In Rwanda, missionaries played a primary role in creating ethnic myths and interpreting Rwandan social organization -- not only for colonial administrators, but ultimately for the Rwandan population itself. The concepts of ethnicity developed by the missionaries served as a basis for the German and Belgian colonial policies of indirect rule which helped to transform relatively flexible pre-colonial social categories into clearly defined ethnic groups. 
Refer to Christian Churches and Genocide in Rwanda - Christianity and the Construction of Ethnicity - By Timothy Longman Vassar College). Refer to Jesus Christ: Artifice for Aggression - By Sita Ram Goel and Invasion Theories: Tools of the Destruction for the Colonists, Racists - By Saumitra Sen - indiacause.com and Hating Hindus in a 'Scholarly' Way - By Vishal Agarwal. Watch An Invasion through Conversion - videoyahoo.com. Refer to Columbus, The Indians, and Human Progress - By Howard Zinn. Watch The Bible is Bullshit - Penn & Teller examine the Bible
(source: A Hindu View of the World - By N. S. Rajaram p. 85). Refer to chapters on First Indologists and European Imperialism. Refer to Inside France's secret war in Central African Republic - By Johann Hari in Birao
Civilizational Graveyards? Modus Operandi of Christianity around the Globe
Loss of African Heritage?
Generations ago, European colonists and Christian missionaries looted Africa 's ancient treasures. Now, Pentecostal Christian evangelists - most of them Africans - are helping wipe out remaining traces of how Africans once worked, played and prayed.  
(For more refer to Christianity vs. the old gods of Nigeria - yahoonews.com September 4, 2007 and chapter on Conversion).
Racist Theory Behind Genocide in Africa

An African version of the infamous Aryan invasion theory propagated by missionaries and colonial rulers triggered the Hutu-Tutsi massacres. Most Indians are familiar with the Aryan invasion theory and its political misuse. Some are familiar also with its demolition by science, especially genetics, and the recent British admission that it was a political ploy used by them in their policy of divide and rule. While the theory has been fully discredited, some Western academics and their Indian followers are clinging to it out of concern for their academic survival. This was what was really behind the recent controversy over the California school curriculum. What most Indians, however, don’t know is that the Aryan-Dravidian racial divide was only one instance of the colonial-missionary tactic of divide and rule combined with divide and convert. This imaginary racial difference was emphasized by colonial officials during Belgian rule. The Belgian Government forced everyone to carry an identity card showing tribal ethnicity as Hutu or Tutsi. This was used in administration, in providing lands, positions, and otherwise for playing power politics based on race. This divisive politics combined with the racial hatred sowed by the invasion theory turned Rwanda-Burundi into a powder keg ready to explode.

A similar artificial division created in Africa was to have horrific consequences. The recent Hutu-Tutsi conflicts in which millions of lives were lost was a direct result of such a tactic applied by academics, colonial bureaucrats and missionaries.
It is worth noting that the period, between the two world wars, was the heyday of race theories in Europe . It seems the notion of superiority due to skin color—real or imagined as in this case—is so deeply ingrained in the European psyche that they cannot get out of it. Its politics has collapsed, not due to any dawn of enlightenment on its proponents but the defeat of Nazi Germany. It has continued however in Western academia as Indo-European Studies and other guises.

(source: Racist Theory Behind Genocide in Africa - By Pankaj Saksena). Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser.
Aryan Invasion of California – Global background
Fall of the Third Reich did not put an end to academic race theories that formed the core of its ideology. In various guises, their legacy continues in Western academia as well as in the politics of countries formerly under European rule. While avoiding overtly racial terms, scholars in disciplines like Indo-European Studies continue to uphold scientifically discredited and historically disgraced theories built around the Aryan myth. Some academics have resorted to media campaigns and political lobbying to save their theories and the discipline from natural extinction— a tactic that came to the fore when California education authorities attempted to remove these theories from their school curriculum. The legacy of racism persists in sectarian politics in South India, and most insidiously in Africa where it gave rise to the horrific Hutu-Tutsi clashes in one of the worst genocides in modern history. A singular feature of this neo-racist scholarship is the replacement of anti-Semitism by anti-Hinduism.

Mutated racism
In a remarkable article, “Aryan Mythology As Science And Ideology” (Journal of the American Academy of Religion1999; 67: 327-354) the Swedish scholar Stefan Arvidsson raises the question: “Today it is disputed whether or not the downfall of the Third Reich brought about a sobering among scholars working with 'Aryan' religions.” We may rephrase the question: “Did the end of the Nazi regime put an end to race based theories in academia?” An examination of several humanities departments in the West suggests otherwise: following the end of Nazism, academic racism may have undergone a mutation but did not entirely disappear.
History lesson: transplanting the poison tree

Why did India not go the way of Rwanda-Burundi? Not for lack of trying but because the cultural foundation of Hinduism proved too strong. It defeated the designs of politicians and propagandists masquerading as scholars. It is no coincidence that Rwanda and Burundi had been converted to Christianity, preparing the ground for sectarian conflict. Several church figures, including priests and nuns have been found guilty of complicity in the Tutsi massacres. As in India , Christianity was a colonial tool and missionaries little more than imperial agents.

Their failure in Hindu India is also what is behind the visceral anti-Hinduism of Witzel and his colleagues. It came to the fore during the recent California school controversy.
(source: Aryan Invasion of California – Global background - By N S Rajaram). Refer to Communist Historians: The Enemy Within – By Yvette Rosser.
Native Americans descended from a lost tribe of Israel?
From the time he was a child in Peru, the Mormon Church instilled in Jose A. Loayza the conviction that he and millions of other Native Americans were descended from a lost tribe of Israel that reached the New World more than 2,000 years ago.
"We were taught all the blessings of that Hebrew lineage belonged to us and that we were special people," said Loayza, now a Salt Lake City attorney. "It not only made me feel special, but it gave me a sense of transcendental identity, an identity with God."A few years ago, Loayza said, his faith was shaken and his identity stripped away by DNA evidence showing that the ancestors of American natives came from Asia, not the Middle East. For Mormons, the lack of discernible Hebrew blood in Native Americans is no minor collision between faith and science. It burrows into the historical foundations of the Book of Mormon, a 175-year-old transcription that the church regards as literal and without error.

For those outside the faith, the depth of the church's dilemma can be explained this way: Imagine if DNA evidence revealed that the Pilgrims didn't sail from Europe to escape religious persecution but rather were part of a migration from Iceland — and that U.S. history books were wrong.

Critics want the church to admit its mistake and apologize to millions of Native Americans it converted. Church leaders have shown no inclination to do so. Indeed, they have dismissed as heresy any suggestion that Native American genetics undermine the Mormon creed.

(source: Bedrock of a Faith Is Jolted - By William Lobdell, Times Staff Writer 2/16/06 LA Times.com). Watch An Invasion through Conversion - videoyahoo.com.














Om Tat Sat
                                                        
(Continued...) 




( My humble Pranam, Honour  and also gratefulness  to   Ms. Sushma Londhe ji for her  noble, magnanimous and eminent works on the   peerless  Wisdom of our Sacred Scriptures)
  
(My humble salutations to   , H H Swamyjis, Hindu Wisdom, great Universal Philosophers, Historians, Professors and Devotees   for the discovering  collection)


( The Blog  is reverently for all the seekers of truth and lovers of wisdom and also purely  a non-commercial)

Labels:

0 comments:

Post a Comment