None But India Bharat The Cradle Of Aryans Sanskrit Vedas Swastika

The divide between the North Indians and the South Indian Dravidians was created by the two British-initiated theories of the Aryan invasion of India (AII) and the Indo-European family of languages (IE). Both the theories AII and IE were mischievously engineered by the British, with their colonial and missionary agenda, guided by their world-known notorious policy, Divide and Rule. According to the AII, Aryans invaded India in about 1500 B.C. and got settled in North and forcibly pushed dark-skinned Dravidians to South. Aryans brought Sanskrit and composed the Vedas. The Dravidian Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam are the native languages of India, not Sanskrit. With abundant historical irrefutable evidence, it has been established that the alleged invading Aryans were originally from Aryavarta (India) who had gone overseas earlier than 1800 B.C. for trade, and had established their Vedic kingdoms in several countries. Even Greece was colonized by the Indo-Aryans. When in trouble in about 1500 BC, some of them attempted to return to India, the land of their ancestors. The rest were culturally absorbed. The returning Aryans were mistaken as invaders because they were traveling in armored horsedriven chariots. It was their return to, not invasion of India. Because of long cohabitation between Sanskrit-speaking Aryans and Europeans, as the result of Indian colonization, Sanskrit influenced several European languages, particularly Greek and Latin. Resulting philological resemblances prompted Sir William Jones to theorize the IE, that Sanskrit and European languages have a common origin. It has been proved that Sanskrit and European languages do not have a common origin and that there is significant resemblance between Sanskrit and the Dravidian languages, much more than between Sanskrit and European languages.

The divide between the North Indians and the South Indian Dravidians was created by the two British-initiated theories of the Aryan invasion of India' (AII) and the Indo-European family of languages (IE). Both the theories AII and IE were mischievously engineered by the British, with their colonial and missionary agenda, guided by their world-known notorious policy, Divide and Rule'. According to the AII, Aryans invaded India in about 1500 B.C. and got settled in North and forcibly pushed dark-skinned Dravidians to South. Aryans brought Sanskrit and composed the Vedas. The Dravidian Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam are the native languages of India, not Sanskrit. With abundant historical irrefutable evidence, it has been established that the alleged invading Aryans were originally from Aryavarta (India) who had gone overseas earlier than 1800 B.C. for trade, and had established their Vedic kingdoms in several countries. Even Greece was colonized by the Indo-Aryans. When in trouble in about 1500 BC, some of them attempted to return to India, the land of their ancestors. The rest were culturally absorbed. The returning Aryans were mistaken as invaders because they were traveling in armored horsedriven chariots. It was their return to, not invasion of India. Because of long cohabitation between Sanskrit-speaking Aryans and Europeans, as the result of Indian colonization, Sanskrit influenced several European languages, particularly Greek and Latin. Resulting philological resemblances prompted Sir William Jones to theorize the IE, that Sanskrit and European languages have a common origin. It has been proved that Sanskrit and European languages do not have a common origin and that there is significant resemblance between Sanskrit and the Dravidian languages, much more than between Sanskrit and European languages.

Nationalist and Revolutionary While a high school student, I actively participated in the Mahatma Gandhis 1942 movement Quit India. I felt disappointed because only a few prominent leaders like Gandhi and Nehru were imprisoned. On Sept. 9, 1945, under the patronage of the Dadu District British Collector, the town dignitaries including my grand father and Mr. Tuljaram Nagrani, the principal of the town High school, along with the matriculate students had assembled at the Hindu temple to celebrate the victory of the Allies at the WW II. Sweets were distributed. I threw the sweets on the floor. The reason I did this was not because I sided with the Axis powers. But because Indian soldiers were fighting for Britain, as India was not a free country. Next morning, the Principal got me in his office and whipped me several times on my palms and ordered me to leave the school and come back with my parent. The principal told my father that Jagat to pay a fine of Rs. 5 and threatened that in case of denial I will be rusticketed (expelled from school as a bad character student) and no school would admit me. I am proud of my father that he said that only Jagat to decide. I said that paying fine means admission of the guilt. In my opinion it was not a guilt. I, with recommendation of my class teacher Mr. Chandnani, got admission in the P. H. High School, Dadu, only about 50 miles away from my home town. In 1947 on the eve of partition, there was an accidently bomb explosion in Karachi, suspected of an RSS activity. Several RSS leaders were arrested. A Khalsa police officer secretly alerted my grand father to hide me to avoid arrest. I, along with a few RSS pracharaks, secretly reached Karachi to take a ship for Okha, Gujarat, then train to Baroda. In 1948, Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by Nathuram Godse. Because Godse was an RSS member, the whole RSS all over India was banned. I participated in the collective protest against the injustice of punishing the whole RSS organization because of the crime by its only one RSS member. Whole family can not be punished because of the crime of its one member. I was imprisoned in Baroda jail for four months. Thousands of RSS members all over India were imprisoned. Dr. Jagat K. Motwani

The articles in this survey of the Indo-Aryan controversy address questions such as: are the Indo-Aryans insiders or outsiders?

On Vedic civilization.

Despite the enormous amount of material about Nazism, there has been no substantial work on its emblem, the swastika. This original contribution examines the popular appeal of the archaic image of the swastika: the tradition of the symbol.

The leading voices in science studies have argued that modern science reflects dominant social interests of Western society. Following this logic, postmodern scholars have urged postcolonial societies to develop their own "alternative sciences" as a step towards "mental decolonization". These ideas have found a warm welcome among Hindu nationalists who came to power in India in the early 1990s. In this passionate and highly original study, Indian-born author Meera Nanda reveals how these well-meaning but ultimately misguided ideas are enabling Hindu ideologues to propagate religious myths in the guise of science and secularism. At the heart of Hindu supremacist ideology, Nanda argues, lies a postmodernist assumption: that each society has its own norms of reasonableness, logic, rules of evidence, and conception of truth, and that there is no non-arbitrary, culture-independent way to choose among these alternatives. What is being celebrated as "difference" by postmodernists, however, has more often than not been the source of mental bondage and authoritarianism in non-Western cultures. The "Vedic sciences" currently endorsed in Indian schools, colleges, and the mass media promotes the same elements of orthodox Hinduism that have for centuries deprived the vast majority of Indian people of their full humanity. By denouncing science and secularization, the left was unwittingly contributing to what Nanda calls "reactionary modernism." In contrast, Nanda points to the Dalit, or untouchable, movement as a true example of an "alternative science" that has embraced reason and modern science to challenge traditional notions of hierarchy.

Reminiscences of an Indian sociopolitical activist and former Marxist.