Source: TW
Summary
There are achievements by non Arya peoples all over that are great.
Agreed with the point on Non-Ārya contributions but most importantly, lest people be confused, Ārya contributions are exclusively for Hindus to claim, celebrate and boast. The historical origins & evolutionary lineage are highly overrated in the question of legacy. The Ārya contribution to Dharma is a pan-Hindu legacy for Hindus to enjoy and suffers no claims from those who are merely “fellow IEs”—an identity that means nothing to the Āryas.
RShis and their folk
The legacy of the Veda belongs primarily to those who survived the Rșis and secondarily to those whom the descendants of the Rșis saw as their “folks”.
The Rșis established the Samhitā corpus and their descendants successively conceived the Brāhmaņas, Āraņyakas & Upanișads (thereby completing the Vedic canon), the itihāsapurāņas, the Āgama/Tantra canon, etc. Eventually, some of the exalted descendants of the hoary Rșis would go on to master regional languages of “non-Ārya linguistic families” and contribute to the devotional canon in those languages.
Being IA, IE—all this means nothing.
Source: TW
… Likewise, the great Rși-s have left behind all connections with fellow IE/IA peoples and embraced Bhārata as their own, along with whatever else there was in Bhārata at their time. And every succeeding generation of Rșiputras and Śișțas renewed this commitment to Bhārata further & deeper. That’s the story.
So, one can keep harping on genetic connection and this or that IE homeland. But, even while understanding these origins can be deeply insightful, it does not mean much to us theologically.
Bhārata was where the Veda would serve as the base and raw material for inspiring the genesis of the Śaiva, Śākta, Vaișņava and other great traditions, the Itihāsapurāņas and Āgamas. The Veda was destined to have its fullest flowering and fulfilment in Bhārata alone.
shaiva flowering
The Rșis were inspired to see Rudra & his myriad forms. 30-40 generations later, a descendant of the Rși will see the Śaiva Dvārapāla Mahākāla as one of those Rudras. Yet another 20-30 generations later, someone will see this deity Mahākāla unfold within the Draviḍa, “Non-IA” deity Karuppu (the black one).
This was always the plan. Our highest deities were to have their lores, evolutes and ectypes all manifest in Bhārata alone and they impelled the Rșis from within to stick to Bhārata.
External inclusions
Somewhere in the deepest south of Bhārata, you will have a “non-Ārya”, Drāvida-haplogroup man who divines the futures of fellow men through the mystical revelations of an Ārya Rși. The Rșis have become connected to him despite the seeming lack of ethnic/hereditary connection.
… Their yet later descendants would go on to discover, through their mind’s eye, new lores concerning the gods worshiped by so-called, “non-Ārya” Draviḍas and Śabaras, as if these Deities were but their own “Ārya” Devas from the very beginning, albeit in a different skin & tongue.
Myth
Śaci Paulomi, the daughter of Puloman the Daitya king, chose to be with Indra.
Agni, Varuņa and Soma left the mysterious & primordial Asurapitā to join Indra (RV-Samhitā 10.124)
Internal rejects
Meanwhile, so-called IA IE Mazdayasni who hates the Devas will be forever hated and condemned by our Rși fathers in the heavens.
The Ārya sages chose Bhārata. Their descendants chose to identify the south, west & east as part of their universe rather than some far-flung IE cousins.
In fact, a pious Ārya would have affection for a Draviḍa who adopted Deva as Deivam into his native tongue and detest an accursed fellow “IE/IA tribe” which blasphemes the Daevas as evil.
Even if Āryas came to Bhārata from outside, the only ones who have a right to talk about them with a sense of inheritance are Hindus, particularly the heirs of the Rșis who are very much alive today.
Contribution to IE
All things considered - I tend to believe it is a great boon (indeed ‘Part of the Plan’) that there is the Hindu religion living to illuminate the other IE spheres as they may work to re-light. But the dynamic is clearly asymmetric - the H. do not have similar need in reverse.
I do believe that, especially within this modern world, various IE branches and their adherents are ‘Stronger Together’ (any Family is - when it acts like one). But the H. have proven for millennia that they - and effectively only they - have been able to also be Strong Alone. - CA Rollinson.
History
We don’t have to stand in the way of genuine historical conclusions. We just don’t care.
… You can only do so much with dry facts. For a living religion like ours, the theological metanarrative, the bigger picture is what is vastly more valuable.
Therefore, one should not pay attention to non-theological narratives, which are just an assemblage of dry facts with no divine inspiration, which try to problematise the validity of Hindudharma and posit irrelevant schisms between “IA” and “Non-IA” strands.