Who Created Harappan / Indus Valley Civilisation? | How Did It End? | Samvaad With Devdutt Pattanaik

[vasanthm]

What they formulated locally for scriptures is not relevant to the point made about their origin. Do not obfuscate needlessly. It doesn't help your cause.

What matters is that these people are FOREIGN to the subcontinent. They brought ideogies with them and refined those ideologies locally to create a religion (Vedism), which was contrarian to the established local customs prior to their arrival. Whether the locally syncretised practices are deemed "good" or "bad" is entirely subjective. To you, vedic ritual will be fantastic. To me, not so much.

It has been explained to you directly, multiple times, on multiple threads, that there is direct evidence that the customs of the Harappans were replaced by the usurpers who arrived from Eurasian lands (the Black Sea region).

New Study Says Harappans ate Meat, Were Especially Fond of Beef | NewsClick

The research team recovered 172 pottery fragments from five Harappan sites and conducted a lipid residue analysis on them.

www.newsclick.in

The case put forward against Islam being practiced by locals and against Muslim legacy being realised in the subcontinent is that it is "foreign" by origin. The precise same argument applies to Vedism. If you smash a mosque because it is "foreign", be sure to smash a vedic temple for the same reason.

Yes, vedism was ultimately accepted by locals. So was Islam.

We’ll decide what’s local to us and what we accept. You’re free to follow your Arabian desert cult, but we’re under no obligation to accept it or justify why we don’t. Trying to force a 'everything is foreign' equivalence is just lazy.

 

[Master Chief]

We’ll decide what’s local to us and what we accept. You’re free to follow your Arabian desert cult, but we’re under no obligation to accept it or justify why we don’t. Trying to force a 'everything is foreign' equivalence is just lazy.

Aryans were not lazy at all though respected Sir. It's a long way to the subcontinent from the Eurasian Steppe. Ukraine is marked in red for reference. It is commendable that some modern Indians have joined Uncle Putin in efforts to reclaim the Eurasian Vedic Homeland.



Islam travelled a similar or even shorter distance than Vedism.

If you remain concerned about venerating "local" practices, do consider buying a Big Mac.

 

[vasanthm]

Aryans were not lazy at all though respected Sir. It's a long way to the subcontinent from the Eurasian Steppe. Ukraine is marked in red for reference. It is commendable that some modern Indians have joined Uncle Putin in efforts to reclaim the Eurasian Vedic Homeland.

View attachment 172944

Islam travelled a similar or even shorter distance than Vedism.

If you remain concerned about venerating "local" practices, do consider buying a Big Mac.

View attachment 172945

Distance isn’t the argument, assimilation is. Vedism evolved here into something indigenous over millennia, Islam stayed anchored to an external core.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

Get your timelines right first and foremost. Furthermore, do not misrepresent me by creating a strawman argument. I explicitly stated in my preceding post:

"rivalry between aryans and the remnants of harappa's destroyed civilisation."

Never mentioned any timelines. I simply said your 'theory' is not backed up by records, I could've toned down the rhetoric a bit but comeon you can't explain away such a big mistake with a keyword. Remnants of harappans. What is even that? This is your own interpretation. I don't need another new theory.

When the Aryans arrived in the subcontinent. The original IVC was long gone.

Are you sure? But RigVeda mentions the Saraswati river which dried up resulting in the end of IVC, so it's probably an IVC person contribution right? Wild. The possibilities are endless.

The only "mistake" in our conversation is in your attempted strawman argument.

Not at all. Your argument was fundamentally flawed the moment you brought up a battle between remnants of IVC or whatever. But RV is clear it was a Vedic tribe that was defeated by another tribe. In essence that was a battle between established people of this land. That was your major mistake in assumption.

Although we are not sure what the Harappans spoke, the imagery of their script looked nothing like proto-IndoEuropean languages

We are not even sure if it's a script. There is no structure, they are symbols. Thats why deciphering it was impossible. There is not enough to make a full sentence or a passage.

The difference between you and modern Iranians or Pakistanis is a simple one

Sounds like a projection.

We know why India MUST preserve the out-of-India narrative at all costs - that is due to the desire to expunge islamic legacy across the subcontinent on the pretext of it being "invasive" while Vedism must be determined to be "native". However, despite this explanation for the rationale behind Indian obsessions in denying their own history, the facts to support this position are becoming increasingly scarce.

Well like I said before it's immaterial to the topic but for some reason you can't resist inserting it here, your religion.
How hard it is to understand, you are comparing events that happened nearly 4000 years ago with no archeological evidence and events which heavily rely on linguistics. The problem with linguistics is it can stretch anywhere from 500-1000 years.

Indians have no problem taking in migrants. Ancient India had no problem with integrating ideas of migrants either as long as they integrated well into the culture. But your narrative as Vedic people as some invaders who enforced their culture is a poorly written fiction you try so hard to prove, that comes from your own insecurity and trying to draw parallels with recent events to show that history is somehow repeating itself. Your interest in history is simply that and we see through the sly deception.

 

[Master Chief]

Distance isn’t the argument, assimilation is. Vedism evolved here into something indigenous over millennia, Islam stayed anchored to an external core.

It overtook local "native" practices, as a process of assimilation, preserving the presence of Shiva in an expanded pantheon and introducing a foreign language as the new lingua sacra.

Opposition to brahminism, casteism, beef abstinence was simply not tolerated. Violence was frequent between various invading groups and the tribes already settled in the subcontinent in the roughly 1000 year period between the fall of the IVC and the arrival of the Eurasian Steppe tribals. Violence was also frequent between different Aryan groups thereafter and eventually, between different dharmic groups under the same unified saffronist umbrella. This violence pre-dated Islam.

 

[Maira La]

Are you sure? But RigVeda mentions the Saraswati river which dried up resulting in the end of IVC, so it's probably an IVC person contribution right? Wild. The possibilities are endless.

Not very bright are you.. Which river does the I in IVC stand for? I'd let you take a guess.

Saraswati is/was some river in South-Central Asia along the banks of which the Indo-Aryans lived before migrating to South Asia.
It's not a South Asian river that dried up <-- this theory is made up to please right wing hindus.

 

[Master Chief]

Never mentioned any timelines. I simply said your 'theory' is not backed up by records, I could've toned down the rhetoric a bit but comeon you can't explain away such a big mistake with a keyword. Remnants of harappans. What is even that? This is your own interpretation. I don't need another new theory.

The remnants of Harappans were whomever was living there after the IVC collapsed. Most likely a mixture of those with original Harappan DNA and new arrivals from other regions.

Simple question to aid your comprehension: IF Harappans were completely replaced by Aryans at any point, why is Harappan DNA still the largest contributory genomic influence in modern Pakistanis and modern North Indians? You are simply denying reality by ignoring the very concept of Harappan remnant tribes.

Are you sure? But RigVeda mentions the Saraswati river which dried up resulting in the end of IVC, so it's probably an IVC person contribution right? Wild. The possibilities are endless.

No relevance to the point being discussed. Archaeological evidence anyway supports a definite decline and collapse of the IVC, before the arrival of Vedic cultists.

Not at all. Your argument was fundamentally flawed the moment you brought up a battle between remnants of IVC or whatever. But RV is clear it was a Vedic tribe that was defeated by another tribe. In essence that was a battle between established people of this land. That was your major mistake in assumption.

You simply cannot confirm that the tribe living in Harappa post-IVC was as Aryan in origin as those who attacked them in the scripture being discussed. You are speculating. The fact remains, inhabitants of what was once Harappa were involved in conflict with those who were not, as per hindu scriptures. Naturally, by that stage in history, it is entirely reasonable to assume that the "purity" of the precursor Harappan genome was already long lost. For this same reason, there is no pure Harappan genome left today - we are all (assuming you're not some pesky southie usurper of history) majority ORIGINAL Harappan and minority Aryan (+/- other minor contributors). The ORIGINAL Harappan genome had no Aryan contribution.

We are not even sure if it's a script. There is no structure, they are symbols. Thats why deciphering it was impossible. There is not enough to make a full sentence or a passage.

Agree with this. We do speculate, but, Indo-European languages generally did not follow this glyph-like pattern. One may regard the Harappan language as likely some form of linguistic isolate, like Sumerian cuneiform was. Anyway this is a digression.

Sounds like a projection.

Why would you think that? Find me a Pakistani who doesn't tolerate non-subcontinental ideologies.

Meanwhile,

Indigenous Aryanism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"Support for the IAT mostly exists among a subset of Indian scholars of Hindu religion and the history and archaeology of India,[10][11][12][13][5] and plays a significant role in Hindutva politics.[14][15][3][web 1][web 2] It has no relevance or support in mainstream scholarship."

Rather than accusing me of projecting, some introspection is warranted on India's civilisational trajectory.

Well like I said before it's immaterial to the topic but for some reason you can't resist inserting it here, your religion.
How hard it is to understand, you are comparing events that happened nearly 4000 years ago with no archeological evidence and events which heavily rely on linguistics. The problem with linguistics is it can stretch anywhere from 500-1000 years.

Indians have no problem taking in migrants. Ancient India had no problem with integrating ideas of migrants either as long as they integrated well into the culture. But your narrative as Vedic people as some invaders who enforced their culture is a poorly written fiction you try so hard to prove, that comes from your own insecurity and trying to draw parallels with recent events to show that history is somehow repeating itself. Your interest in history is simply that and we see through the sly deception.

Why is it "immaterial"? Perhaps to you it is because any logical deconstruction of the "nativist" narrative has serious ramifications for RSS politics in the subcontinent, politics that have existed since the era of Golwalkar himself.

It is of central importance to deploy logic and evidence to lay bare the hypocrisy of RSS and saffronism in general - that Islam is cursed as foreign while Vedism is venerated as "native".

Your kind are many in number, but sheer volume of propaganda cannot undermine logic, archaeology, genetics, and history.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

Not very bright are you.. Which river does the I in IVC stand for? I'd let you take a guess.

Saraswati is/was some river in South-Central Asia along the banks of which the Indo-Aryans lived before migrating to South Asia.
It's not a South Asian river that dried up <-- this theory is made up to please right wing hindus.

The bright one arrives with yet another retarded take. No Saraswati did not flow in South Central Asia. Not according to the Rig Veda, rivers mentioned in a geographical order, Ganga, Yamuna, Saraswati, Sutudri(Sutlej ) ... Sindhu so Sarasvati was flowing between Yamuna and Sutlej and you're mixing texts young Avestan although did mention Harahvaiti (helmand river probably ) but it's irrelevant as it's a different river and Vedas later talks about Sarasvati drying up like disappearing in the desert, nobody made it up lol!
Say the Brahamanas (texts) composed around 700BCE clearly talks about it. Man imagine the Right Wing from 700BCE saying things. By the time of Puranas Saraswati was mythical and suggesting subterrain flow which clearly dried up.
PS. stop wasting my time.

 

[Dalit]

Anyone who speaks truth have no place in Andbakhtstan aka Hindustan.

India has Hindutva culture. It doesn't have anything to do with Indus/Harappan civilisation.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

The remnants of Harappans were whomever was living there after the IVC collapsed. Most likely a mixture of those with original Harappan DNA and new arrivals from other regions.

Simple question to aid your comprehension: IF Harappans were completely replaced by Aryans at any point, why is Harappan DNA still the largest contributory genomic influence in modern Pakistanis and modern North Indians? You are simply denying reality by ignoring the very concept of Harappan remnant tribes

That's again a pointless discussion. You're clutching at straws, the battle of ten kings is not IVC vs Aryan war. It is simply an Aryan conflict that resulted in Bharata victory. By all means Bharata tribe also had mtDNA U2B2 from Rakhigarhi DNA, given the DNA study you quote did not come from Harappa, but Rakhigarhi in Haryana. Anyway you cut it, this doesn't prove your theory.

No relevance to the point being discussed. Archaeological evidence anyway supports a definite decline and collapse of the IVC, before the arrival of Vedic cultists.

??? Self contradictory to the point above.

You simply cannot confirm that the tribe living in Harappa post-IVC was as Aryan in origin as those who attacked them in the scripture being discussed. You are speculating. The fact remains, inhabitants of what was once Harappa were involved in conflict with those who were not, as per hindu scriptures. Naturally, by that stage in history, it is entirely reasonable to assume that the "purity" of the precursor Harappan genome was already long lost. For this same reason, there is no pure Harappan genome left today - we are all (assuming you're not some pesky southie usurper of history) majority ORIGINAL Harappan and minority Aryan (+/- other minor contributors). The ORIGINAL Harappan genome had no Aryan contribution.

Well duh! The tribe living in Harappa was Vedic tribe mentioned in Rig Veda. Your entire argument is trying to prove they were IVC remnants. They could be, and proves my point that Rig Vedic tribes are native to the region. The more you try, you're unknowingly proving my point lol!

Agree with this. We do speculate, but, Indo-European languages generally did not follow this glyph-like pattern. One may regard the Harappan language as likely some form of linguistic isolate, like Sumerian cuneiform was. Anyway this is a digression

Ah! More theories. It could be would be. You can't find cognate to Sanskrit yeah? There is no Sanskrit related texts or stories written outside India. Yeah? The closest language to Sanskrit is old Avestan? Yes? If it looks, acts, and eats like a chicken, it's just a chicken.
You're trying so hard (and failing) to prove Sanskrit is some foreign language.

Why would you think that? Find me a Pakistani who doesn't tolerate non-subcontinental ideologies.

Meanwhile,

Most of the Pakistanis? In this very forum I could find Pakistanis who oppose this idea of glorifying ancient Pakistan. Even you argued with them. This whole ancient Pakistan kang is an elite fad. Why is most Buddhist stupas out there without nose, why do you break these historical things. So I don't know man, your own people don't really care but keep fighting tho.

Why is it "immaterial"? Perhaps to you it is because any logical deconstruction of the "nativist" narrative has serious ramifications for RSS politics in the subcontinent, politics that have existed since the era of Golwalkar himself.

It is of central importance to deploy logic and evidence to lay bare the hypocrisy of RSS and saffronism in general - that Islam is cursed as foreign while Vedism is venerated as "native".

Your kind are many in number, but sheer volume of propaganda cannot undermine logic, archaeology, genetics, and history.

It is immaterial because we are talking about a different timeline. A time in history that fully relies on linguistics and archeological evidence. That's why your religion is immaterial to this discussion despite you dragging it over and over. You're trying to draw parallels as a group adopting new culture. RSS or safronisation or whatever is again immaterial to the topic, the RSS did not create Brahmanas or Vedas. You're trying to portray them as ancient RSS using Vedas themselves as a reference lol! But the fact remains Vedas are native, vedas, Brahamanas, Upanishads, puranas, smritis or srutis. The later sramana ( Buddha) movement, up to Sikhism is native to this land. But this doesn't make Islam or Christianity foreign or make people lesser much like Iranians who are proud of their traditions. I don't see Iranians going around dissing Zarathustra or Avestan, I'm yet to see an Iranian calling Avestan foreign and it isn't, it originated in Iran just like Sanskrit is to India. Both coexisted.

 

[Dalit]

The Hindutva are spreading their Hindu toxic hatred on PDF. It is time for moderators to step in and twist their skeleton necks. It is sickening to see how thesr Hindutva animals have destroyed the decorum of this forum.

 

[gangsta_rap]

Huh? Do you have any proof that the culture was alien to the local? How can worshipping deities living in Mountains of India, residing in rivers of India originating in the mountains of India be alien to the local custom?

But these aren't local to India ffs. Majority of the deities in the Indian pantheon are offshoots of the deities that steppe migrants worshipped (such as yemos and his cognate yama).

How would you explain the divergences between hindu and zoroastrian myths (such as div beings in avestan and deva beings in vedic myths?)

 

[Master Chief]

That's again a pointless discussion. You're clutching at straws, the battle of ten kings is not IVC vs Aryan war. It is simply an Aryan conflict that resulted in Bharata victory. By all means Bharata tribe also had mtDNA U2B2 from Rakhigarhi DNA, given the DNA study you quote did not come from Harappa, but Rakhigarhi in Haryana. Anyway you cut it, this doesn't prove your theory.

Not a pointless discussion at all. The DNA from Rakhigiri was representative of the IVC at the time, highly probable to be similar to the composition in Harappa itself (you're obfuscating AGAIN BTW by trying to now dissociate different parts of the IVC from one another). The point being made is simple - prior to the arrival of the Aryans as a mass migration (+/- aggressive invasion) into the subcontinent, their DNA was simply non-existent among IVC samples that we know of. Aryans were not somehow "representative" of the IVC - they usurped it. Every single way the genetic data is "cut", it proves externality of Aryans. I would argue it also proves their invasiveness, like a cancer - but you may well differ.

??? Self contradictory to the point above

Well duh! The tribe living in Harappa was Vedic tribe mentioned in Rig Veda. Your entire argument is trying to prove they were IVC remnants. They could be, and proves my point that Rig Vedic tribes are native to the region. The more you try, you're unknowingly proving my point lol!

Not really "self contradictory" at all. There was an intermediary population living on the ruins of Harappa, regarded to be more agrarian than the city builders of the antecedent intact IVC. This itself likely constituted a combination of migrants from multiple origin points and also some of the original Iranics of the IVC itself. In fact, the Rakhigiri data in Shinde's paper CONFIRMS this, rather than refuting it. The Rakhigiri specimen is from 2500-2000 BCE, the mature phase of the IVC. Collapse of the IVC began in 1900 BCE. Just when exactly are you postulating that "Aryan DNA" sneaked into the genome of the IVC if it WAS NOT THERE 100 years before the collapse of the IVC? If you bother to read the paper, it is even speculated that the female specimen may have been fleeing from other IVC sites due to climate effects.

It is your own researcher Shinde who actually REFUTES "Out of India" theory comprehensively, the more you read the works in question! It is duly confirmed, to anyone reading the data without Saffronised spectacles on, that (a) the Aryans (and whatever they brought with them) were foreign, and (b) the IVC itself was Iranic origin, and (c) NO substantive Aryan genomic influence existed in populations inhabiting Harappa until after the collapse of the IVC.

Modern genetic compositions for reference:



Let me elaborate further on the IVC itself. The IVC is self-evidently similar to the civilisations of the westerly located fertile crescent, not some sudden transformation of the local subcontinental elephant riders of the time or even more bizarrely still (as south Indian heritage hunters have suddenly added their worthy opinion to the calculus), some dravidian offshoot from the southerly located tree swinging community.

You can honestly look me in the eye and tell me that by some stroke of magic, the AASI hordes who had been eating bananas and building straw huts suddenly built a city 5000 years ago and morphed into this advanced urban society? Give me a break. The IVC was clearly built by migrants from the west.

Yes, the AASI marvelled upon the brilliance of these Iranic folk, and they mingled with them to create a new IVC stock lineage, but to suggest this magical transformation occurred within native tree swingers is a self serving delusion that is only marketable to sanghees and/or southies of similarly confused disposition.

You're trying so hard (and failing) to prove Sanskrit is some foreign language.

we have discussed the genomics, religion, culture, and language - all of which have demonstrable non-subcontinental derivation. Of all of these, THE MOST EVIDENCE of foreign derivation lies with the language of Sanskrit. It is wholly classified as an "Indo-European" language, different from "Dravidian" languages that are preserved in South India. There is more commonality between Sanskrit and Gallic and Polish than between Sanskrit and Tamil. It is a longstanding joke in linguistic circles that a billion strong horde in the year 2026 actually believe Sanskrit evolved from local languages. Invaders from Eurasian Steppe brought its precursors with them and then moulded a locally applied derivative of this foreign precursor tongue - that derivative being what you know as Sanskrit.

Open a new thread specifically regarding the linguistic derivation of Sanskrit if desired and I will join you there to spam more on this topic.

Most of the Pakistanis? In this very forum I could find Pakistanis who oppose this idea of glorifying ancient Pakistan. Even you argued with them. This whole ancient Pakistan kang is an elite fad. Why is most Buddhist stupas out there without nose, why do you break these historical things. So I don't know man, your own people don't really care but keep fighting tho.

I agree wholeheartedly that many uneducated and uncouth individuals have done plenty of harm to our pre-islamic history in Pakistan - that is mercifully changing now. But if you understood what I was trying to say, I was actually alluding to ANY foreign ideology to the subcontinent, which includes Islam by default. My point was that an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis must, by definition, be amenable and adaptable to a foreign ideology, i.e. rejection of an ideology is not automatic due to its foreign-ness. Rather, adoption of ideology is merit based, which holds true for any country i can think of, with one obvious exception.

Your last point is expanding on the Iranian perspective - I know Iranians who have studied this field and they are fully cognisant of the Aryan contribution to their national composition. But I don't wish to derail the thread further so we will simply have to differ on that, subjectively, unless an Iranian member himself wishes to comment further.

 

[safriz]

Hindus will be claiming everything.
The first wheel, fire , first spear. All were created by a Hindu.
خوش ، ؟

 

[r3alist]

We’ll decide what’s local to us and what we accept

You are not, history and archaeology will.

Never you mind, you are a continent away, far far away.

You’re free to follow your Arabian desert cult

As opposed to what? Trump worship?

You are more than welcome to do whatever you do....no one cares