Topic started by RAGHAVAN (@ dsl254-101-215.nyc1.dsl.speakeasy.net) on Thu Sep 25 22:01:13 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

STOP THIS NONESENSE OF DRAVID ARYAN ETC. NO DRAVID RACE IS KNOWN TO EXIST. MOST OF US IN EVERY INCH OF BHARAT ARE PURE ARYANS. SO STOP THIS NORTH SOUT ETC DIFFERENCE, THIS ARE COMING FROM OUTSIDE OUR BORDERS.

Responses:

• Old responses
  
• From: Madhu (@ 192.193.221.149) on: Tue Oct 19 10:05:03 EDT 2004
  
  Narayanan,
  
  "Ethnically Brahmins are not Tamils !They are Aryans."
  
  You are partially correct. You can divide Brahmins into two categories. 1. Fair or light-skinned Brahmins who are miscegnated with Aryan, Dravidian, Iranians, Muslim invaders, Europeans. 2. Brown-skinned Brahmins who are racially Dravidian and have converted to Brahmins after Hindu rivivalism. They are similar to tamil Muslims. Vast majority of Tamil and Indian Brahimins are brown-skinned and these people must realize their loyality to Aryan culture is similar to Anglo-indian loyalty to British culture. Today no one pride him/herself as Anglo-Indian on Indian soil. Brahmins must reject their Aryan culture similar to Angl-Indians and embrace true Dravidian identity, Tamil.
  
  
• From: davie (@ ddn39041) on: Tue Oct 26 03:33:30 EDT 2004
  
  well all this basically sucks
  coz DRAVIDIANS ARE JUST ARYANS WHO SETTLED IN INDIA QUITE EARLY hence got tanned lil bit
  
  
• From: davie (@ ddn39041) on: Tue Oct 26 03:34:23 EDT 2004
  
  nothing wrong in mixing with the aryans coz they are just like brothers.
  
  
• From: DAVI (@ ddn39041) on: Tue Oct 26 05:07:02 EDT 2004
  
  
  =========================================================
  | DRAVIDIANS ARE ARYANS WHO SETTLED QUITE EARLY |
  =========================================================
  
  
  
• From: Nedunchezhiyan (@ ac9456d6.ipt.aol.com) on: Wed Oct 27 09:11:36 EDT 2004
  
  Davi don't speak nonsense. If Thamizhans settled in the so called Indian Union and that they came from Meditterian or something from the Aryan roots. How is that Aryan languages formed from Thamizh?
  
  
• From: davie (@ ddn39041) on: Sat Oct 30 04:38:21 EDT 2004
  
  tamil and sanscrit gave rise to many indian languages. just dont confuse with languages like urdu which may have no link with india in evolution.
  
  Tamil and sanscrit (dravidian languages) are as old as greek and some of us may be settlers dating to that time period or even sometime before
  i dont know the time period of evolution of hindi
  
  
• From: Nedunchezhiyan (@ cache-dtc-ad01.proxy.aol.com) on: Mon Nov 1 20:25:41 EST 2004
  
  Thamizh is a language and Sanskirit IS NOT A LANGUAGE. Realize the truth Davie. Sanskirit is maybe a dialect. You may contact THIRU A P MASILMANI if you need more information, he'd be glad to explain it to you.
  
  
• From: Nedunchezhiyan (@ cache-dtc-ad01.proxy.aol.com) on: Mon Nov 1 20:26:14 EST 2004
  
  Oh Thiru A P MASILMANI can be reached at apmasila@yahoo.com
  
  
• From: davie (@ nevarezcorp) on: Tue Nov 2 15:52:09 EST 2004
  
  
  ALL INDIANS ARE OF THE SAME MAKE. CAUCASIAN.
  
  most of the indians are not fair compared to other people in the world due to sun tanning. Dravidians are Aryans who settled quite early and so they are brown or kind of dark compard to the couunterparts (aryans)
  
  
  
• From: davie (@ nevarezcorp) on: Tue Nov 2 15:52:45 EST 2004
  
  hey my name is DAVID MASILLAMANI
  i like the last part of my name
  
  
• From: davie (@ meta114847.utep.edu) on: Tue Nov 2 18:18:14 EST 2004
  
  even in VEDHAS CASTE IS TO BE ASSUMED ONLY BASED ON CHARACTER. NOT BY BIRTH
  so even in olden days they were more united and equal.
  
  so it justifies my thinking that some sect of the community like thieves were assumed the lowest class.
  check back for more information!!!!!!!
  
  http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda
  
  
• From: davie (@ nevarezcorp) on: Wed Nov 3 02:08:43 EST 2004
  
  not based on color. i mean darker person is not assumed any low class. This mentality must be removed.
  so thats the point of the above argument.
  we had dravidians as kings.
  there were three gods according to veda. they were varuna aryaman and mitra.
  we had some non brahmins like viswamitra converting as brahmins for some reasons.
  so color does not decide the caste in ancient periods
  
  The nice thing about this forum is that I LEARN THINGS AS THINGS COME.
  
  sure enough there will be many websites and or journal papers released regarding on this issue
  
  
• From: DAVIE (@ sunivc) on: Sat Nov 6 02:58:02 EST 2004
  
  ITS TRUE THAT SKIN COLOR IS BECAUSE OF SUN. AND QUITE SURE PEOPLE DOING RESEARCH WOULD HAVE REALIZED THIS LONG LONG AGO
  
  
• From: davie (@ s0030140939) on: Mon Nov 8 22:09:50 EST 2004
  
  i) caste in ancient india was based on character rather than color or birth. eg) thieves were assumed lowest caste
  ii) dark people and non brahmins ruled india especially the south infact they constituted many brahmins. So there is no doubt that dark brahmins who are present today were existing even before a 2000 years as brahmins.
  iii) dravidian kings ruled south india
  iv) All indians are invaders at one period or the other. The list includes aryans and dravidians.
  BRAHMINS and BRAHMINISM WERE PRESENT IN INDIA EVEN BEFORE ARYAN INVASION
  EAT THIS
  
  
• From: davie (@ ctise4) on: Sun Nov 14 13:57:09 EST 2004
  
  It should now be crystal clear that anyone claiming a “separate,” “pre-Aryan” or “secular” Dravidian culture has no evidence to show for it, except his own ignorance of archaeology, numismatics and ancient Tamil literature. Not only was there never such a culture, there is in fact no meaning in the word “Dravidian” except either in the old geographical sense or in the modern linguistic sense ; racial and cultural meanings are as unscientific as they are irrational, although some scholars in India remain obstinately rooted in a colonial mindset.
  
  
• From: davie (@ e228-013.ecc.utep.edu) on: Mon Nov 15 15:08:12 EST 2004
  
  aryan and dravidian are terms introduced by some westerners/britishers who came to this country onced
  
  
• From: Nedunchezhiyan (@ ac8001e1.ipt.aol.com) on: Mon Nov 15 17:50:57 EST 2004
  
  davie why don't you stop bothering the westerners and try to seek the truth? If something is revealed then you blame the westerners for bringing things out of the shadow! Thats pathetic. Learn to accept the truth.
  
  
• From: davie (@ e228-013.ecc.utep.edu) on: Mon Nov 15 22:03:25 EST 2004
  
  we neverhad these terms before a 300 yrs.d
  the truth is that
  dravidians were kings. i mean kshatrias. we have enough or a ton of evidences.
  brahmins just advice kings dats all.
  
  
• From: Nedunchezhiyan (@ cache-rtc-ae05.proxy.aol.com) on: Thu Nov 18 20:33:12 EST 2004
  
  Brahmins got close to Thamizh Kings and alienated Thamizh Kings from people. Hence by bringing down the whole THAMIZH NADU! Thats how Thamizh Nadu fell into foreigners rule after the "Sangam Matuviya Kaalam" and then was rescued by Chozhars and then was lost by Thamizhars stupidity and now still enslaved to so called Indian Union!
  
  
• From: davie (@ universi-bh1wsz) on: Fri Nov 19 06:36:17 EST 2004
  
  ur logic is relevant
  
  

Want to post a response?