|
|
|
General Forum: Govt. and Politics | | Restore Telugu Pride | |
| As for Mr.Vachaspati, apparently you have convinced yourself that Aryans were foreigners and invaders. Apparently you do not know that there is a serious ongoing debate among historians regarding your fond belief that Aryans were "Invaders" - it is called "Aryan Invasion Theory" or AIT and it has many opponents - I suggest you atleast familiarize yourself with the topic before you spout your wisdom here.
...
It seems Mr.Aditya has lost his tempo.
The revival of the ongoing debate is due to Right Wing Fundamentalists who follow bigory. Aryans are invaders not only the sub-continent physically, but culturally too.
///We are proud of being called as relatives to Tamil culture.
..
If you have any friends who study Structural Linguistic Course, ask them. There is no debate over it. It's a bare fact. There are process on Indian culture with the name Sanskritization, Universalization and Parochialization. These are the technical concepts of either Sociology or Anthropology..that too were proven facts. It is because with the influence of the above concepts or processes...there is a Influence of Sanskrit over Andhra...that ultimately became Telugu. If U speak pure telugu, no one may understand it now. If U convince that you are pseudo people, I have no objection. After all, U got a friend here for support. But I need no one's help here.
Posted by: Mr. Vachaspathi V At: 3, Aug 2004 10:59:46 AM IST
We (I mean, pseudo people) are not proud of anything that is really great. We are proud of opposing and criticising our culture, our heritage, our religion, our history. We take our pride by following others' junk theories. We are proud of being called as relatives to Tamil culture. We are ready to ignore that Tamil culture is entirely different from ours. Why do we do so? Can anyone answer me? Aditya, do you have any clue?
Posted by: Bahud♥♥rapu Baatasaari At: 3, Aug 2004 9:54:32 AM IST
In the south Australia is the border not the Tamilnadu.
Posted by: Mr. M Kumar N At: 2, Aug 2004 9:51:26 PM IST
It is either from Africa or Australia;
350 Million Years Ago
Australia & Africa(America together) were drifted away from India when subcontinent in the midlle and intact with them;
Ex: Imagine you are pushing a cart using both hands; What your legs are doing at the same time? It's also pushing in other direction. Himalayas formation was similarway.
That's how Australia is separated from the center of the earth
Posted by: Mr. M Kumar N At: 2, Aug 2004 9:50:01 PM IST
Bahudoorapu,
I appreciate your two words of advice. Let us look at what I am saying and who I am arguing against:
1) I said Aryan Culture is a part of Telugu Heritage and we must be proud of it - Mr.Vachaspati spits back with an Christian propoganda article that claims that Hinduism did not exist and that Aryans were cruel invaders.
2) I said Buddhism has historic significance to Andhras as Acharya Nagarjuna was from here and he founded the Mahayana school of Buddhism, so we should be proud of it - I get strange 2 word responses in some unintelligible language from Mr.Nemalikanti that I can not understand.
So if we can not be proud of our Aryan Heritage and we can not be proud of our Buddhist Heritage, what the hell am I discussing here?
As for Mr.Vachaspati, apparently you have convinced yourself that Aryans were foreigners and invaders. Apparently you do not know that there is a serious ongoing debate among historians regarding your fond belief that Aryans were "Invaders" - it is called "Aryan Invasion Theory" or AIT and it has many opponents - I suggest you atleast familiarize yourself with the topic before you spout your wisdom here.
B.T.W, you have not replied regarding the correctness of your views. Obviously you take your lessons in history from a Missionary Polemicist. Before you accuse me of bigotry - read carefully - I say "Polemicist" - look it up in the dictionary if needed.
In the end, I do not like communicating with bigots like Mr.Vachaspati.
Posted by: Mr. Aditya Vedula At: 2, Aug 2004 9:45:28 PM IST
//Some one refering to formation of Continents. If that is the case, the original Indian part of land was the piece from Africa and the initial Indians are none but Tamilians/Keralaites/Simhalese. Not north Indians
...
Ha..HA...
Human beings yet to evolve on this planet by that time. There were no Tamils, Malayalees,Telugus, Europeans, at that time. There were only Australopithetucus AFricanus(is it confusing? if it is so, enter this word in any search engine...you will find millions of pages) at that time.
Posted by: Mr. Vachaspathi V At: 2, Aug 2004 7:31:33 PM IST
But the great scholars are still capable of saying that Tamilians are the true Indians(like aboriginals in Australia), rest are all like whites who occupies Australia
...
Another issue came before!
Yes. Australia belongs to Aboriginals! Anything wrong here!
But before, Dolicocephals (Tamils) came to India, there were natives in India!
It is also true.
//Vedas were existing for "m" number of years from now, but they were written only in the year "yyyy", which is some "n" number of years from now and m >> n (means, n is more recent to m). Now, every one knows that Vedas were in Sanscrit. And the same people also know that Sanscrit doesn't have script. But few says, Sanscrit was born only in the year "yyyy" and hence, it is not very old. How is this?
...Sanskrit got its form only when Aryans got settled in Indus Region. When the Aryans were in Central Asia or lower Volga Basin, it had in its proto-form...in which Boguz Kui appears! Aryans orally produced a stanza..that might have took, may be minimum of hundred years! Each and every hymn or stanza had the real time experiences or feelings of then Aryans. They represent their experiences that are so simple...and at the same time, represents the socio-economic conditions too.
//
So, what I want to suggest you is, just ignore those pseudo people and continue your argument with the guys who have little brains.
...o.k.
O.kE...!
vitanDa vAdamEdO chebitE mEmu kUDA telusukunTAm !
Posted by: Mr. Vachaspathi V At: 2, Aug 2004 7:25:47 PM IST
Any how it's all bits and pieces moreover a discontinued thread.
It's means Bhuddhism. Jai HIND
I hope you understand now why India has become secular state. To keep certain people away from politics; That's what history says.
Posted by: Mr. M Kumar N At: 2, Aug 2004 5:49:29 PM IST
Bahudoorapu, you are right, and I am NOT keen on starting an argument with someone like Mr.Vachaspati who bears ideological hatred to Hinduism and Hindu traditions, but am I to take it that people like him can speak whatever they want with scant respect for truth and other's beliefs?
Posted by: Mr. Aditya Vedula At: 29, Jul 2004 7:27:48 AM IST
---------------------------------------------
Aditya,
You DO need to take it. Reason, can you withstand vitanDa vAdamu ? Don't you have any sense? Yes, you do have. Hence, you cannot stand to that kind of irrelavent argument. Here, in this site, there are few great scholars and multiple degree holders, who can deviate the argument and turn it to their side and win the argument by making you to withdraw from it. As you are new to this site, I thought of giving you a tip.
Small example. Vedas were existing for "m" number of years from now, but they were written only in the year "yyyy", which is some "n" number of years from now and m >> n (means, n is more recent to m). Now, every one knows that Vedas were in Sanscrit. And the same people also know that Sanscrit doesn't have script. But few says, Sanscrit was born only in the year "yyyy" and hence, it is not very old. How is this?
Some one refering to formation of Continents. If that is the case, the original Indian part of land was the piece from Africa and the initial Indians are none but Tamilians/Keralaites/Simhalese. Not north Indians. But that piece of land was devided and became India much before man's birth(or evolution). But the great scholars are still capable of saying that Tamilians are the true Indians(like aboriginals in Australia), rest are all like whites who occupies Australia. mari idi vitanDa vAdam kAka inkEmavuddi? ilAnTi vAritO vAdinchagalamA manamu? . What I want to say is, some people want to shout against the fact and get the credit of "odd man".
I'll tell you one more thing. Hindus killed muslims in Godra. These great people shout only about this, but they won't say a single word about those muslims who burnt the Sabarmati train bogie where 100s of Hindus died.
These great people doesn't say a single word on those islamic religious heads who kept all their holes shut with lead, when 3 Indians(let me say that they are not Muslims) were kidnapped by Iraqi extremists, and those extremists warned Indian govt not to say against those islamic religious heads. That is how we safegaurd our "secular" image. These people also belong to those psedo category.
So, what I want to suggest you is, just ignore those pseudo people and continue your argument with the guys who have little brains.
Posted by: Bahud♥♥rapu Baatasaari At: 2, Aug 2004 2:44:15 PM IST
I am sorry folks, but Mr.Vachaspati is the kind of scholar our universities seem to be producing. They teach that so-called Aryans were foreigners and invaded and destroyed Indian civilization but the Mughals and their central asian predecessors were noble and brave warriors that brought great culture to India. This is the sad, sad situation.
This discussion begs the question: How can we restore Telugu Pride if we can not respect and accept our own history?
...
Well.
If Indians respect their own religion and civilisation, they must know their history first. Foreigners Brave like Indians, but defeated the later.Why? It's because Indians failed to notice the trends that are happening otherside of HIndukush. Aryans are foreigners...there is no doubt in it! That's what various universities too taught. Aryans were barbaic when they visited India. Hence, they destroyed or occupied Indian land by subliming the local folk by assimilating them into their own Varna system.....In fact, some say, Indus civilisation was ancient then aryans, but destroyed by Aryans. Indus civilisation has some advanced features like the present times, but destroyed. Hence, Indian started had to start from the beginning again!
Posted by: Mr. HAYAGREEVA MURTY Rachuri At: 28, Jul 2004 12:48:31 PM IST
It's correct. Like Mesapotamians or Egyptians, Indian never tried to record their achievements. They are ignorant of writing their own history. It's pity, somebody has to take up that task. But after 1960s, Indians re-constructed their own history.
Posted by: Mr. Vachaspathi V At: 2, Aug 2004 11:51:21 AM IST
| |
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
