If one accepts the Aryan Invasion Theory -- which states that tribes invading from Persia displaced the original inhabitants of the Indus Valley whoo moved into southern India -- there is evidence showing that Siva was worshipped by the inhabitants of the Indus Valley.
The invading Aryans did not have Shiva as one of their gods. Instead they absorbed Shiva into their god Rudra.
Shiva is woshipped throughout Tamil Nadu. Thus, the so-called Dravidian Religion is nothing but worship of Shiva and his sons Ganesha and Murugan (Karthik).
It is clear that nobody imposed Hinduism on the Tamilians. Instead, the Dravidian Religion was made part of Hinduism and even spread among the invading Aryans as witness the temple to Shiva (Vishwanath) in Varanasi and other places.
There are other religions that were imposed on the Dravidians by offers of monetary benefits or by force; e.g., Christianity and Islam. But nobody talks about Christianity or Islam being religions alien to the Dravidians.
Why not?
Te real trouble with Tamilians is that they have a serious inferiority complex. This was fed by Periyar, Annadorai and their followers and still continues under Karunanidhi. That is why you get posts from Tamilians about "Dravidian Religion". These guys don't have a clue about Indian history.
RE:Dravidian Religion
by vignesh vig on Aug 04, 2008 08:57 PM Permalink
"The invading Aryans did not have Shiva as one of their gods. Instead they absorbed Shiva into their god Rudra. " - Oh yeah? Did you know that Shiva is itself a Sanskrit word? Shiva is Popular in tamil Nadu because he married Meenakshi the doughter of Pandian King and became a Pandian King himself. Also Karthikeya(Muruga) married a Tamil woman (Valli). But you guys need to no that Pandian kings are Decendants of Manu himself who helped vishnu in his Matsya Avatar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manu_(Hinduism)
Therefore it is wrong to say that Shiva is southern god and Vishnu is from north.
Re: RE:Dravidian Religion
by Mr Pundit on Sep 19, 2008 12:27 PM Permalink
Siva is non-other than Adi bhagwan . Adi bhagwan is first thirthankar of dravidian religion. This religon is later known as jainism and today it is followed mostly by converted aryans. aborginal followers of jainism have been converted to dalits during bhakti movement, this is historical and proven fact vouched by most of non-brahmins historians across the globe, however missing from indian text books.
RE:Dravidian Religion
by Pradip Parekh on Aug 04, 2008 10:16 PM Permalink
dear vignesh ji, i am sure millions of hindus appreciate your posts. recently i was at a conference of india-experts in dallas. speaker after speaker provided lengthy wonderful proofs that clearly debunked the so-called aryan invasion theory. i agree that ait was a political cookup in support of britain's pre-conceived political need to legitimize their bloodsucking rule over a totally subjugated, totally robbed, very poor, very tired and very vulnerable hindus of those days. it is not different from the hindus of today in the same state of vulnerability who fall victim to the exploitative missionary machhars. it is a good thing that more and more indians are shedding this programmed mindset that heretofore lapped up anything coming out of western world without due critical examination. so, i drink a tall glass of lassi to your post. thank you.
RE:Dravidian Religion
by tamil boy on Aug 05, 2008 12:31 AM Permalink
Tamils - have an inferiority complex? Wow thanks- everywhere I go, I am told Tamils have a superiority complex!!!!! Mate- Dravidian - in context - does not mean a race or an ethnic people - it means Tamil politics. In the Past - dravidian also included more than just Tamils - e.g. like in ancient Rome - the empire was called the Roman empire - and then it disintegrated and languages evolved from old Roman langauge. Similarly - Dravidian or old Tamil was an old culture and language - which evolved into different derivative of old Tamil. Modern Tamil is one of these derivative, and is called Tamil because it is closest to this old langauge.
I think you are confusing local politics, what Dravidian actually means, and Tamil or Southy Indian history. South India History is not really well known outside TN and the West, the west because of the colonial past, trades with ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, Ancient Rome etc....
RE:Dravidian Religion
by vignesh vig on Aug 04, 2008 08:34 PM Permalink
For your info, no one in Tamil Nadu gives a damn about Aryan Dravidian etc. They are all pious Hindus. Dont take DK guys seriously. But I am amazed at these DK guys's ability to bring up North South hatred in a jiffy. They are no different from any other seperatist organization. And again I am saying that Aryan invasion theory is a figment of British Historian's Imagination to divide and Convert India.
RE:Dravidian Religion
by vignesh vig on Aug 04, 2008 09:42 PM Permalink
No one wants DMK or ADMK in tamilnadu. But there is no effective alternative to them!Both the national parties dont have base in TN. thats why ppl vote to one of these parties.
PS : Aryan actually means noble kind. Jaya is no way an Aryan.
RE:Dravidian Religion
by Devavrata Satya on Aug 04, 2008 09:51 PM Permalink
We can hope that BJP manages to establish a base there soon, like they've done in Karnataka. Now I am no big fan of the BJP. I think it is just another party out to grab power by any means possible. But I think it is better than these other parties.
Just a small correction - Arya means noble. Some British genuises mistook Arya for Aryan, and so conjured up this Aryan invasion theory, which was happily lapped up by EVR and his cronies to serve their own ends.
Re: Dravidian Religion
by Mr Pundit on Sep 19, 2008 12:24 PM Permalink
DRavidians followed sraminic systems and aryans followed brahminic ( vedic system).... Dravidians were never hindus. They way most of red-indians are converted to christianity, similarly dravidians were converted to dalitism during bhakti movement when 10000s of dravidians were mass murdered and their temples were converted. This is historical fact however missing from Indian brahminic history.
Dravidians were originally sramanic. even in indus valley non of vedic god's evidence was found. it was adi bhagwan of sramanic system. Same system was later known as jainism after 24th thirthankar when vedic torture ruined our social fabric. Infact non of vedic system has god worship system, except nature forces. These facts have been proven by most of non-brahminic scholars in India as well as all over world. But in india these historical facts will not show up. Couple of dravidian historians were murdered mysterically for bringing out these facts.
RE:Dravidian Religion
by Virgo on Aug 05, 2008 03:32 AM Permalink
There was no Aryan ivasion. It was the creation of the bigoted british historians. These bigot did not want to believe that the highly sophisticated Hindu vedic philosophy could not have been the creation of the 'lowly' natives. Hence they came up with the theory that Aryans from souther europe invaded India with and converted the natives to the vedic philosophy.
The fact is that Indian vedic philosophy originated in India and embraced and accomodated native ideas. There never was any clear division of Dravidian and Aryan BS before the British.
If you look at the Sinhalese peopple, they resemble the people of southern India more closely. However, their language and culture is highly sanscritised. You can see that in their names even. SL is a good proof that there never was a distinct and separate Dravidian or Aryan culture or religions. Just that some regional practices were different.
You will see the same trend in Karnataka, Kerala and Andhrapredesh.
Re: RE:Dravidian Religion
by Mr Pundit on Sep 19, 2008 12:30 PM Permalink
Moderator is brahmin, so he does approve this theory, where as aboriginal dravidians are mass murdered or converted during bhakti movement. dravidians were never hindus. it was adi bhagwan dravidian god who was named in sankrit as Siva.
Do some research to reach dravidian history which is mutilated by crafty brahmins.
vigneshji, mythology or imaginary stories cannot prove the historical facts.
