One-stop shop to make India 20 times richer

My analysis disproves the “Out of India” theory of the recent Hindutva fanatics

I knew the Hindutva people are wrong. ALWAYS wrong. Without fail.

But like any good scientist, I went into the question with an open mind. However, within 3 days of reading/ thinking it has become clear that the Out of India theory is blatantly wrong.

In other words, Sanskrit was NOT indigenous to India. Nor was the Rig Veda/its gods/moral concepts.

I’ve assembled my proofs in a little booklet called Into India or Out of India? Did Rig Vedic gods and Sanskrit come to India or go out of India? You can download it here.

Key proofs are listed below. Details in the booklet.

Proof 1: The Rig Veda was transmitted only within India. Why did its transmission fail everywhere else?               

Proof 2: All linguists have identified the proto-Indo-Aryan language in the steppes/ Turkey

Proof 3: “Rig Vedic gods” make their first written presence in North Syria– Its gods are ancient middle-Eastern gods

Proof 4: Rig Vedic poets were natural born horse riders, but the Indian horse is no better than a donkey

Proof 4A: How can a weaker culture – without the horse – dominate a stronger one?

Proof 5: No genuine war chariots in India: only carts.

Proof 6: Rig Vedic gods soon disappear in India 

Proof 7: Rig Vedic gods and people loved soma, but that’s only found in central Asian highlands

Proof 8: Rig Veda does not know about ceramic (fired) bricks, but Indus valley civilisation had discovered them. It had nothing, therefore, to do with the Indus Valley civilisation

Proof 9: Rig Veda knows about colder region plants and animals, but eastern forms of indo-Aryan have no idea bout India’s tropical plants and animals          

Proof 10: Rig Vedic Sanskrit has been significantly amended, and its gods have changed, as Vedic people moved into mainland India

We are now back to where Swami Dayanand Saraswati and even Tilak thought about the issue: that the Hindu religion is an import from somewhere in the West of India. Even the older Hindtuva fanatics did not make such assertions, about an Out of India theory.

Where precisely did all this start? I don’t think I have an answer. That’s a debate for scientists. For me the only question was: Are Hindutva fanatics right? And the answer is a resounding NO.

How did this language/ culture come into India? Was it an “invasion”, a “migration” or “assimilation”? I don’t know. Nor is that my area of interest – for now.

Sanjeev Sabhlok

View more posts from this author
7 thoughts on “My analysis disproves the “Out of India” theory of the recent Hindutva fanatics
  1. ATUL

    I am not sure if you are aware of all the arguments given in favor of OIT, but the most striking one to me was Chronological marking of names common in RV, Avesta and mittani names. This is one evidence which does have some weight as far as OIT is concerned. The argument basically relies on two things, names found in old books of rig veda and new ones. Most of the names in avesta and mittani names are common to new volumes but not to the old ones. Old volumes do give exact geographical account of stories involved such as Saraswati river which is definitely very close to modern India rather than to middle eastern part. From these two facts it is concluded that original rig veda existed in early forms earlier than avesta and mittani’s. In my opinion the transfer technology of vedic hymns were innovated later in India and that explains why Avesta and Zoroastrians did not have that included in their version. This also proves that Rig Veda words can not be taken to be unchanged since it was created, it definitely must have changed between the time when it was first created till the time an indigenous technology to transfer it in its frozen form was developed.

    For your references please see the following presentation

    http://ancientvoice.wdfiles.com/local–files/article%3Arigveda-and-avesta-the-final-evidence/The%20Out%20of%20India%20Theory%201%20-%20Chronology%20of%20the%20Rigveda.pdf

     
  2. ATUL

    I would also like to add to the above comment that there are still few things unresolved. Though Saraswati river is mentioned in Rig veda , there are historians who consider that it is actually Haraxvati region of Afghanistan which is being referred. Second there are many counter examples in the pronunciation and word conjuction where you would expect one to pre-date other but the opposite is true , its basically an inconsistent logic to base dates on grammatical accounts. The account presented in my previous comments is not about that, its actually about names and ‘names’ are one thing which are highly preserved in all of these texts hence the argument needs to be refuted on counter evidence basis to reject OIT.

     
  3. AD

    Sir, the “Proof #1: The Rig Veda was transmitted only within India. Why did its transmission fail everywhere else?”.. can I ask you where you got this from? Is this your own argument, or is it something that has been said before – that you have read from somewhere & seem to agree with?

     
  4. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    I don’t have to get it from “somewhere”. It is an obvious fact that never has any record of RV been found outside the Khyber pass on the West and Assam in the East. Assam I think still doesn’t have the RV culture; barely a few people who know Sanskrit.

    s

     
  5. Agnimitra

    “Proof #1: The Rig Veda was transmitted only within India. Why did its transmission fail everywhere else?””

    This is a very shallow question. But not unworthy of an answer. All you have to do is look at the authors of the RV. They were Rishis who were allied with the Vedic Aryans, not the entire Indo Europeans. They did priestly work and sacrifices for their patrons—THE PURUS.Angirasas, Vasistas and Visvamitras were Priests of the Purus. Only the Kutsas , Brighus etc were secular in their services. That is why Persians demonized the Angirasas—-they called them “Angra Mainyu” or evil spirits.

     
  6. thamizl

    I love how cowbelt people refuse to accept facts!

    Being a thamizl i can attest to the fact that my language IS NOT RELATED TO SANSKRIT!
    This is a big deal for hindu cowbelt nationals cus it means that thamils had their our own civilization before they mingled with indo-arians and adopted their religion.

     
  7. Ruchi

    I don’t agree with your theories. Geographical names of places, rivers and people are mentioned in the Vedas that are indigenous to India alone. Sanskrit in its closest form is spoken in India today. DNA testing proves the OUt of India theory since mitochondrial DNA in Europe can be trace back to the sub continent. I believe the aryans originated in the Tarim Basin region which is a stone throw from north India and made india its home from a very early period that it would only be fair to call India their homeland. Kurusektra is situated in the north India region and horses were mentioned in this war , it was a nuclear war , it’s obvious why horses bones were not found but it’s all there in the vedic records. I can find no other country that has more proof of being the homeland of the aryans besides India

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.