no one cares?

>caring about Indian "people"
Sorry France bro

>>71901669
POO
>>71901963
IN
>>71902538
THE
>>71902832
LOO

DESIGNATED

you're all missing out on something here

>>71901669
Sorry op, you're misinformed.
There are two kinds of people who were originally called Aryan.

A group of people from Iran who spoke Avestan.
A group of people in the Indus Valley Civilisation who believed in Vedic deities and traditions - where race didn't matter, only beliefs and principles did.

>>71902931
Shut up toothpaste.

>>71901669
You only have part of it right. Aryans were a people who spread to not been India, Iran, and Europe. You can genetically find the haplo group within the upper class of each of those regions.

If you found something funny just show it France bro.
>inb4 poo not inside a loo

>>71903105
ok.

I don't know about the iranian branch you're talking about, they may have a common ancestor.

However, the people from the indus valley, the Arya, did not originally beleive in vedic deities and traditions. Vedism is a mix of both aryan traditions and tribal traditions from south indian people.

Long story short, there was a big war between the Arya and the south indian tribes (as depicted in the Mahabharata) and, even though the Arya won, only a few of them were left. Then, the two people assimilated and mixed their traditions and beleifs and the result is Vedism, and later on hinduism.

>>71903224
maybe.
In that case, I'm talking about the Arya people of northern India, not the other ones.

>>71903243
funnily enough, one of the main documents we have that compiles and testifies or Aryan tradition and lifestyle is the Kamasutra. Even though it has been changed and rewritten over the course of time, it is originally part of a large "encyclopedia" (of which we only have partial knowledge) that compiled all the arts women were to learn (the 64 arts), philosophy (they were not a religious people, they were philosophers), the art of warfare and use of weapons, etc.

They divided their men and women in regard to the size of their genitialia, having four categories for both men and women, and their whole social structure depended on that classification. Not in a simple way like, the men with the bigger penis were rulers and those with smaller ones were ruled over, but basically it had an importance in regard to both war and love, and certain positions/weapons were only used by certain categories of men.

They beleived that war was an art and all men learned how to use one specific weapon.

They also had a number of rituals and practiced ritualistic animal sacrifice on certain occasions.

They were hunters and farmers.

Their whole philosophy and social concept revolved aroung the idea of love and, to them, love (both emotionally and physically) was the founding principle of their society and identity.

>>71903470
>However, the people from the indus valley, the Arya, did not originally beleive in vedic deities and traditions. Vedism is a mix of both aryan traditions and tribal traditions from south indian people.
>Long story short, there was a big war between the Arya and the south indian tribes (as depicted in the Mahabharata) and, even though the Arya won, only a few of them were left. Then, the two people assimilated and mixed their traditions and beleifs and the result is Vedism, and later on hinduism.
I'm an Indian, and I don't even know where I should start correcting you. I don't like to be mean but you're horribly wrong here.

>>71904113
>you're horribly wrong here.

but I'm not.

What do you disagree with?

>>71904452
First, I must clear a few things about the origins and languages themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan

The English word "Aryan" is borrowed from the Sanskrit word ārya,[5] आर्य, meaning "noble" or "noble one".[2][3][4] Initially the term was used as a national name to designate those who worshipped the Vedic deities (especially Indra) and followed Vedic culture (e.g. performance of sacrifice, Yajna).[2][6]

The word ārya (Pāli: ariya), in the sense "noble" or "exalted", is very frequently used in Buddhist texts to designate a spiritual warrior or hero, which use this term much more often than Hindu or Jain texts. Buddha's Dharma and Vinaya are the ariyassa dhammavinayo. The Four Noble Truths are called the catvāry āryasatyāni (Sanskrit) or cattāri ariyasaccāni (Pali). The Noble Eightfold Path is called the āryamārga (Sanskrit, also āryāṣṭāṅgikamārga) or ariyamagga (Pāli). Buddhists themselves are called ariyapuggalas (Arya persons). In Buddhist texts, the āryas are those who have the Buddhist śīla (Pāli sīla, meaning "virtue") and follow the Buddhist path. Those who despise Buddhism are often called "anāryas".

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_frawley_1.html
A number of European scholars of the 19th century, such as Max Muller, did state that Aryan is not a racial term and there is no evidence that it ever was so used in the Vedas, but their views on this were largely ignored. We should clearly note that there is no place in Hindu literature wherein Aryan has ever been equated with a race or with a particular set of physical charac- teristics. The term Arya means "noble" or "spiritual", and has been so used by Buddhists, Jains and Zoroastrians as well as Hindus. Religions that have called themselves Aryan, like all of these, have had members of many different races. Race was never a bar for anyone joining some form of the Arya Dharma or teaching of noble people.

>>71905114
"Our study clearly shows that there was no genetic influx 3,500 years ago," said Dr Kumarasamy Thangaraj of CCMB, who led the research team, which included scientists from the University of Tartu, Estonia, Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, Chennai and Banaras Hindu University."

""There is no genetic evidence that Indo-Aryans invaded or migrated to India or even something such as Aryans existed". Singh, vice-chancellor of BHU, is a coauthor."

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-new-research-debunks-aryan-invasion-theory-1623744
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Aryan-Dravidian-divide-a-myth-Study/articleshow/5053274.cms
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indians-are-not-descendants-of-aryans-study/1/163645.html

1) Dravidian people were responsible for Indus Valley:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilisation#Historical_context_and_linguistic_affiliation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_peoples#Origins

>>71905172
Indus Valley was not invaded by "Aryans"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilisation#Collapse_and_Late_Harappan

>Around 1800 BCE, signs of a gradual decline began to emerge, and by around 1700 BCE, most of the cities were abandoned. In 1953, Sir Mortimer Wheeler proposed that the decline of the Indus Civilization was caused by the invasion of an Indo-European tribe from Central Asia called the "Aryans". As evidence, he cited a group of 37 skeletons found in various parts of Mohenjo-Daro, and passages in the Vedas referring to battles and forts. However, scholars soon started to reject Wheeler's theory, since the skeletons belonged to a period after the city's abandonment and none were found near the citadel. Subsequent examinations of the skeletons by Kenneth Kennedy in 1994 showed that the marks on the skulls were caused by erosion, and not violent aggression.[110] Today, many scholars believe that the collapse of the Indus Civilization was caused by drought and a decline in trade with Egypt and Mesopotamia.[111] It has also been suggested that immigration by new peoples, deforestation, floods, or changes in the course of the river may have contributed to the collapse of the IVC.[112] The Cemetery H culture was the manifestation of the Late Harappan over a large area in the south, and the Ochre Coloured Pottery culture its successor.

>>71905206
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_peoples
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilization

"The Harappan language is not directly attested and its affiliation is uncertain since the Indus script is still undeciphered. A relationship with the Dravidian or Elamo-Dravidian language family is favoured by a section of scholars"

"Dravidian languages show extensive lexical (vocabulary) borrowing, but only a few traits of structural (either phonological or grammatical) borrowing from Indo-Aryan, whereas Indo-Aryan shows more structural than lexical borrowings from the Dravidian languages.[14] Many of these features are already present in the oldest known Indo-Aryan language, the language of the Rigveda (c. 1500 BCE), which also includes over a dozen words borrowed from Dravidian. The linguistic evidence for Dravidian impact grows increasingly strong as we move from the Samhitas down through the later Vedic works and into the classical post-Vedic literature.[29] This represents an early religious and cultural fusion[30][note 1] or synthesis[32] between ancient Dravidians and Indo-Aryans.[33][31][34][35]"

The languages borrowed from each other.

>>71905206
Thanks for getting the knowledge out there. All people should know the real origin and meaning of the word Aryan, not the one which the Jews coined to demonize the National Socialists and ruin the word forever.

>>71903470
>Long story short, there was a big war between the Arya and the south indian tribes (as depicted in the Mahabharata) and, even though the Arya won, only a few of them were left. Then, the two people assimilated and mixed their traditions and beleifs and the result is Vedism, and later on hinduism.
1) Mahabarat is not meant to be taken literally. It's an epic. It has morals, teachings and is also considered to be a guide on the matters of spirituality.

Now look at
>>71905172
>""There is no genetic evidence that Indo-Aryans invaded or migrated to India or even something such as Aryans existed". Singh, vice-chancellor of BHU, is a coauthor."

>>71905206
>Indus Valley was not invaded by "Aryans"

So there goes the theory about the Aryas invading the South Indians. IVC was already on the decline before the migrations from the west occurred.

2) The South Indians, Dravidians, created the IVC and Sanskrit as well. There's no argument about that.

>>71905651
I was expecting hostility to be honest. Thanks for the surprisingly kind words.

>>71905689
ok thanks for sharing.

Since you seem to know a lot about the subject, can you tell me more about pre-vedic India?

>>71905999
>pre-vedic India
First things first.
Vedic period existed after the demise of the IVC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_period#Origins
>The commonly proposed period of earlier Vedic age is dated back to 2nd millennium BCE.[8] After the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilisation, which ended c. 1900 BCE,[9][10] groups of Indo-Aryan peoples migrated into north-western India and started to inhabit the northern Indus Valley.[11]

The following notes are important:

>>71906614
The Indo-Aryans were a branch of the Indo-Iranians, which originated in the Andronovo culture[12] in the Bactria-Margiana era, in present northern Afghanistan.[13] The roots of this culture go back further to the Sintashta culture, with funeral sacrifices which show close parallels to the sacrificial funeral rites of the Rig Veda.[14] The Indo-Aryans split-off around 1800–1600 BCE from the Iranians,[15] where-after they were defeated and split into two groups by the Iranians,[16] who dominated the Central Eurasian steppe zone[17] and "chased them to the extermities of Central Eurasia."[17] One group were the Indo-Aryans who founded the Mitanni kingdom in northern Syria[13] (ca.1500–1300 BCE). The other group were the Vedic people, who were pursued by the Iranians "across the Near East to the Levant (the lands of the eastern Mediterranean littoral), across Iran into India."[18]

For an overview of the current relevant research, see:

Michael Witzel (2001), "Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts", in Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies (EJVS) 7-3, pp 1-93
Shereen Ratnagar (2008), “The Aryan homeland debate in India”, in Kohl, PL, M Kozelsky and N Ben-Yehuda (Eds) Selective remembrances: archaeology in the construction, commemoration, and consecration of national pasts, pp 349-378
Suraj Bhan (2002), “Aryanization of the Indus Civilization” in Panikkar, KN, Byres, TJ and Patnaik, U (Eds), The Making of History, pp 41-55.
Anthony, David W. (2007), The Horse The Wheel And Language. How Bronze-Age Riders From the Eurasian Steppes Shaped The Modern World, Princeton University Press

>>71906744
Although there is an opposing view ...
Some writers and archaeologists have opposed the notion of a migration of Indo-Aryans into India.[19][20] Edwin Bryant used the term "Indo-Aryan Controversy" for an oversight of the Indo-Aryan Migration theory, and some of its opponents.[21] These ideas are outside the academic mainstream. Mallory and Adams note that two types of models "enjoy significant international currency," namely the Anatolian hypothesis, and a migration out of the Eurasian steppes.[22] According to Upinder Singh, "The original homeland of the Indo-Europeans and Indo-Aryans is the subject of continuing debate among philologists, linguists, historians, archaeologists and others. The dominant view is that the Indo-Aryams came to the subcontinent as immigrants. Another view, advocated mainly by some Indian scholars, is that they were indigenous to the subcontinent."[23]

An overview of the "Indigenist position" can be obtained from Bryant, Edwin F.; Patton, Laurie L., eds. (2005), The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and inference in Indian history, London: Routledge, ISBN 0-7007-1463-4

>>71906813
Now finally to your point
>Pre vedic India
You'll have to look at the IVC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilisation

That's all there is to it.

>>71901669
>spoiler: they were based

How?

>>71906893
ok, thanks a lot.

I'm happy I found someone who knows more than me about all this. I love the indian people, their philosophy and culture. I'm thinking of learning hindi, too.

I'll read your posts again because I don't have assimilated everything yet.

Thanks again.

>>71907080
No problem. Good luck in your journey. Just remember that there's still great debates about the Aryan migration theory.

>>71905764
Well who's to blame you for expecting hostility? Many people here claim to be against Jewish supremacy and then proceed to reclaim the word Aryan and change it's meaning to being of white skin.
Aryan≠racist

>>71907615
True. pol isn't redpilled.

>>71908399
You seem like an educated and rational person. Could I ask of you to check out this post I've made yesterday: >>71819196
And maybe contact me if it piques your interest.

>>71908756
You're far too kind.
Feels weird considering this is 4chan.

Anyway, people have been doubting Jewish tales for a while now.

http://www.religiouscriticism.com/bible/the-jews-were-never-slaves-in-egypt/

https://unitedhumanists.com/2016/04/21/were-jews-ever-slaves-in-egypt-the-evidence-doesnt-seem-to-add-up/

>>71901669
You mean Iranians?

>>71909510
>You're far too kind.
Feels weird considering this is 4chan.
Thank you. Same goes to you too.

>Anyway, people have been doubting Jewish tales for a while now.
Yes, but they became quite non-immune to them in the past 100 of years or so. In a world of today where being a victim is something to get respected for, the Jew sits on the throne of it all with his pathethic fabricated tales of agony.

>>71901669
Zoroastrianism is the true aryan religion.

This religion promote material and spiritual progress, and urge us to fight against evil both spirtually and physically.

Unlike christianity you can have an unlimited ammount of women, and you can slaughter your enemies, this religion is literally what the West need to defend himself against Shitslam.

>>71901669
Those old time Iranians or those Indo-Aryans?

>The religion of the Vedic period (also known as Vedism, ancient Hinduism, Brahmanism and Vedic Brahmanism[note 1]) was the religion of the Indo-Aryans of northern India.[5] It is a historical predecessor of modern Hinduism, though significantly different from it.

>>71912431
I admire Zoroastrianism very much but I can't really agree with you on Christianity or Islam.
The Christianity of today shouldn't reflect it's original image. If you want to look for some real Christianity read the Jefferson Bible and the Gospel of Thomas which contain only Christ's own words. You'll see that Christianity was indeed an Aryan religion for the short period of time until the Jews, with 'St Paul' on top made it a farce that it is today.
I understand your hostility to Islam at the moment, but as with Christianity, Islam degenerated over time. Sharia Law doesn't even come from the Qur'an in the first place. The Qur'an states:“There is no compulsion in religion.” Therefore, spirituality cannot be enforced through governmental or religious institutions.

>>71913356
>Therefore, spirituality cannot be enforced through governmental or religious institutions.
Well, you got that right.

I'm a gypsy senpai, we are the descents of the true aryans.

Nothing to be proud of desu.

>>71913356
Christianity and Islam are both semitic religions who defend semitic interests with pro semitic dogmas like :
-Arabs/Jews are the people of God
-Arab/Hebrew is a sacred language
-God was a jew
-The most Sacred place in the world is in Israel/Arabia

We are indo-european not semitic, these religions are against our race and divide us.