Brahmins (Aryans) came from outside India and founded their culture called as Hinduism later in India and made Dravidian (indigenous people of India) their slave. So Hinduism is a foreign religion.

In Sanskrit literature like Vedas, word Arya is used to mean noble people. Here is the proof how the scriptures use the word Arya:

kṛ̱ṇvanto̱ viśva̱mārya̍m | (Rig Veda 9.63.5)

Means;- “Make the whole world Noble (āryam).”

Comment: make everyone noble through instructing them in universal values of goodness and wisdom.

If Aryam or Arya is a race, how is it possible to make the whole world as Aryan race?

I have found more than one references to Arya in the Vedas themselves. Here is one such mantra from Yajur Veda:

YathA imAm vAcham kalyAnim AvadAni janebhyah (1) BrahmarAjanyAbhyAm sudrAya cha AryAya cha (2) SwAya cha aranAya cha (3)

…………

May i speak the sacred word to the masses of the people (janebhya) (1) to the brahmana, kshatriya, to the sudra and the Arya (2) and to our own men and the strangers.

Shukla Yajur Veda 26.2

Note that Brahmin, Kshatriya and Arya are all mentioned separately.

So, it implies that it is not necessary for an Arya to belong to a particular caste (varnas) like Brahmin or Kshatriya.

For more references check http://aryamantavya.in/arya-and-anarya/

Chattari-ariya-saccani, is one of the fundamental doctrines of Buddhism, said to have been set forth by the Buddha, the founder of the religion, in his first sermon, which he gave after his enlightenment. Chattari-ariya-saccani means Four-Noble-Truths. Even Buddhism scriptures refer noble person as Arya. In Buddhist texts, they called their people as āryas as those who have the Buddhist śīla (meaning “virtue” in Pali) and follow the Buddhist path. How is it possible for Buddhists to refer themselves as Arya if there was a invasion of a race called Aryan? Buddhists actually fought against Brahmanism. The Noble Eightfold Path is called as ariya magga in Pāli (path trodden by noble people). In Chinese Buddhist texts, ārya is translated as 聖 (approximately, “holy, sacred”, pinyin shèng, on’yomi sei). The spiritual character of the use of the term ārya in Buddhist texts can also be seen in the Mahavibhasa (ancient Buddhist text) and in the Yogacarabhumi (large and influential doctrinal compendium, associated with Sanskritic Mahāyāna Buddhism). The Mahāvibhasa states that only the noble ones (āryas) realize all four of the four noble truths (āryasatyāni) and that only a noble wisdom understands them fully. The same text also describes the āryas as the ones who “have understood and realized about the [truth of] suffering, (impermanence, emptiness, and no-self)” and who “understand things as they are”. In another text, the Yogācārabhūmi (Taishō 1579, vol. xx, 364b10-15), the āryas are described as being free from the viparyāsas.

Several Buddhist texts show that the ārya dharma was taught to everybody, including the āryas, Dasyus, Devas, Gandharvas and Asuras.

In many parts of the South India, if somebody (new) is supposed to be addressed respectably, the prefix “Ayya”, derived from “Arya” is used. The word Aryan has similar sound as Tamil word Ayya which means also noble. This shows that there is a good rapport between people who were speaking Sanskrit and Tamil.

Even Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar does not agree with Aryan invasion theory as in the book called ‘Who Were the Shudras?’ theorizes they were once ruling members of the Kshatriya class who oppressed Brahmin priests. This means even Shudras were belonging to Aryan race once upon a time as per the logic which contradicts the Aryan invasion theory. Check at

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12456378-who-were-the-shudras

Rajatarangini is a historical chronicle of early India, written in Sanskrit by the Kashmiri Brahman Kalhana. In Rajatarangini (c. 12th century CE), the author classifies the following five Brahmin communities as Pancha Dravida Brahmanaru, stating that they reside to the south of the Vindhyas:

• Karnataka (Karnataka Brahmins)
• Tailanga (Telugu Brahmins)
• Dravida (Brahmins of Tamil Nadu and Kerala)
• Maharashtraka (Maharashtrian Brahmins)
• Gurjara (Gujarati, Marwari and Mewari Brahmins)

If Dravida means indigenous people of India, why did Brahmin communities called themselves as Dravidas? Adi Sankara in Prasnothara Rathnamalika in which he introduces himself as “Dravida Sisu” to Mandala Mishra , He also later calls Thirugnana Sambanthar (a Brahman) as “Dravida Sisu”. The term Dravida was found in Manu Smriti and in Bhagavatha Puranam (Sanskrit literatures) , that was first used during British rule by Robert Caldwell (a missionary linguist) to mention with common name to call people of South India and their languages in 18th century. Thus, word Dravida is used in history to denote the southern part of India namely Tamil nadu, Kerala, Karnataka and Andra Pradesh. In historical time, the languages spoken in these States were called Dravidian languages and the people were called Dravidian.

The controversial book called Manusmriti mentions Dravidas (Chera , Chola and Pandyas) as Kshatriyas who swayed away from their religious duties. Below are the verse:

Verse 10.43

शनकैस्तु क्रियालोपादिमाः क्षत्रियजातयः ।
वृषलत्वं गता लोके ब्राह्मणादर्शनेन च ॥ ४३ ॥

śanakaistu kriyālopādimāḥ kṣatriyajātayaḥ |
vṛṣalatvaṃ gatā loke brāhmaṇādarśanena ca || 43 ||

But by the omission of the sacred rites, and also by their neglect of Brāhmaṇas, the following Kṣatriya castes have gradually sunk to the position of the low-born.—(43)

Verse 10.44

pauṇḍrakāścauḍradraviḍāḥ kāmbojā yavanāḥ śakāḥ |
pāradāpahlavāścīnāḥ kirātā daradāḥ khaśāḥ || 44 ||

The Puṇḍrakas, the Coḍas, the Draviḍas, the Kāmbojas, the Yavanas, the Śākas, the Pāradas, the Pahlavas, the Cīnas, the Kirātas, the Daradas and the Khaśas.—(44)

Reference:

https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201773.html

This means Dravidians were higher caste Shatriyas in the beginning and later downgraded to a lower case. So Aryan and Dravidian as separate races is so futile argument.

Let us see further contradictions. According to the Aryan Invasion theory,  India was invaded and conquered by nomadic light-skinned Indo-European tribes from Central Asia around 1500-1000 BC (Brahmins or Aryans), who overthrew an earlier and more advanced dark-skinned Dravidian civilization  from which they took most of what later became Hindu religion or culture. Thus Vedas, Puranas are stories written by Brahmins to deceive and keep the Dravidians as slave. Some intellectuals go to the extent that Vedas, Puranas are real successful stories of Aryan coming from foreign countries and conquering the Dravidians. That is why they say that Asuras like Ravana, Duryodhana, Mahishasura are Dravidians who fought with Aryans for their land that belongs to them and become martyr. This concept of Aryan Invasion is so silly.  Ravana is the son of Vishrava and Kaikesi and grandson of Pulastya and Pulastya is the Prajapati or one of the sons of Lord Brahma. So Ravana is actually a Brahmin.  Even Asuras in general are sons of devathas (agents of Hindu God). Aditi is the mother of all Devas and Diti the mother of all Asuras. Diti and Aditi were daughters of King Daksha Prajapati who is the son of Lord Brahma. So Asuras are all grandson of Lord Brahma from which the family of the devathas started.

Let us know more about what Purana gives information about Asura. Rishi Kashyapa married Aditi and Diti. Adithi served Rishi Kashyapa with a full pledged and pleasant mind without any hesitation as she loved him very much. By that Kashyapa was impressed and asked to demand a boon. As a result she asked to give noble sons. She gave birth to Devas. Dithi came to her stepsister and asked how Adithi got sons. She told how their husband was impressed by her service. Then Dithi went in odd time to get the boon by force. Kashyapa was not in mood and very busy in his Thapas and meditation. She disturbed his meditation and she did service in massaging his legs by force, although he has no pains. She demanded sons. Kashyapa said it was odd time as per Vedic custom, i.e. the time of sandya. She didn’t listen. As a result, Dithi got Dïtyas or Asuras having Thamo Guna. She repented afterwards. But of no use. So Aryans and Dravidians division which intellectuals are categorizing is not based on birth. It is based on quality or nature of soul (jeevathma).

Here are some more strong points:

1. As you know, Tolkāppiyam (Tamil: தொல்காப்பியம்,) is the most ancient extant Tamil grammar text and the oldest extant long work of Tamil literature. The word Tolkāppiyam is a attribute-based composite word, with tol meaning “ancient, old”, and kappiyam meaning “book, text, poem, kavya”. This text gives information about the ancient Tamil culture. It refers to Vedic Gods like Indra, Varuna, Vishnu, etc. Suppose if Vedic Gods belong to a foreign religion as some assume, why do they named this book as ancient? Weren’t the contemporary indigenous writers and kings of that era well aware that Vedic Gods are migrated from another land to Tamilnadu? Something is called as ancient if it belongs to the particular place. How can the scholars, people and the administrative class of that era are so ignorant of a culture that came from another country as some think? Even a common man of this current century knows that Jesus is a God of another land even after Christian missionaries trying so hard to assimilate it with our culture. The Tolkāppiyam was the book written by scholar and sung in king’s palace. So it must have been banned at that time if it calls foreign gods as native Gods.Tolkāppiyam mentions that to pronounce the Tamil letters one should refer Vedas. Since pronunciation is important in Vedas the author tells refer Vedas. And the author himself a very well versed in 4 Vedas. It’s also mentioned in that book. And in several Tamil sangam literature works sage agasthiya is mentioned as vadapal muni means one who came from North. In one of Tamil Sangam literature it was mentioned that lord Shiva gave Sanskrit to Sage Panini and Tamil to Sage Agasthya. Vedas are a holy scripture even for Dravidians. The verses of Paripādal (classical Tamil poetic work and traditionally the fifth of the Eight Anthologies (Ettuthokai) in the Sangam literature) describe the glory of Perumal in the most poetic of terms. Check this verse which talks that He is the secret in Veda: தீயினுள் தெறல் நீ;
   பூவினுள் நாற்றம் நீ;
   கல்லினுள் மணியும் நீ;
   சொல்லினுள் வாய்மை நீ;
   அறத்தினுள் அன்பு நீ;
   மறத்தினுள் மைந்து நீ;
   வேதத்து மறை நீ;
   பூதத்து முதலும் நீ;
   வெஞ் சுடர் ஒளியும் நீ;
   திங்களுள் அளியும் நீ;
   அனைத்தும் நீ;
   அனைத்தின் உட்பொருளும் நீ;In fire, you are the heat;
   in blossoms, the fragrance;
   among the stones, you are the diamond;
   in speech, truth;
   among virtues, you are love;
   in valour—strength;
   in the Veda, you are the secret;
   among elements, the primordial;
   in the burning sun, the light;
   in moonshine, its sweetness;
   you are all,
   and you are the substance and meaning of all.

   —Paripadal, iii: 63–68

   Those who say that Perumal is Dravidian God and Vishnu is Aryan God who were later assimilated by Brahmins should understand that there was no difference of Aryan religion and Dravidian religion from this verse. Refer at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perumal_(deity)

2. There is no reference that Indra, Varuna, Vishnu, etc. are Gods of another religion or country even in Sangam literature (earliest known literature of South India).
3. If Hindu religion came from another country, why does the Hindu scriptures have description of different rivers, forests, landscape, etc. that belong to Indian land? It must refer to land of Iran (from where Brahmins came as per some historians) and give description of different rives, landscape of Iran. But there is no such information in any Hindu Puranas. Why does they call India as sacred land if they have come from Iran? As common sense goes, they have to call Iran as sacred land but it is not the fact. There is also no information that Brahmins used to travel to Iran periodically as part of the pilgrimage. How can the religious people of that era so unreligious if they were not visiting their pilgrimage places?
4. It is common sense that people who came from another country are called with some term indicating them as foreigner. British men are called in India as Firangee (फ़िरंगी, فرنگی) which was borrowed from Persian (Farsi) which formed as a parallel of the Arabic word Firanj (فرنج) meaning the French or Franks (ancestors of the French people). Tamilans did not call Brahmins as foreigner or any similar word in their language. Brahmins are referred as one who looks inward (Anthanan or Paarppaan), just like in Vedic scriptures Brahmin is a title given based on their spiritual inclination.
5. If Vedas and Puranas are myth created by Brahmins, then why does the religions like Buddhism, Jainism which opposed Hinduism have similar concepts and characters of Hinduism? Lord Indra, Lord Varuna, Lord Yama, Lord Kubera, Goddess Lakshmi, Goddess Durga, etc are mentioned in Buddhism and Jainism. Even the concept of 7 lokas above and below the earth, 7 islands (Jambudvipa , etc) and 7 seas which originally came from Puranas are mentioned in Jainism and Lingayatha.
6. If there are too many similarities between seemingly 2 different cultures, then calling them as 2 different cultures or religions is like ignoring the intuition and inventing a new hyper-logic that contradicts the intuition. Every human have the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information that confirms or supports their prior beliefs and scholars are no exception.
7. If you are calling everything as cultural assimilation (more than 70 percent) then it means that Hindu religion as told in the scriptures is a copy of most of Dravidian religion or culture. Then, there is no nativity of their land or originality of their culture (Iran) in the Aryan religion anymore. Why don’t you follow it then?
8. If you go by oral tradition of tribal people or Dravidian classical texts, the Aryan Migration theory will simply fall down flat. Kuruba or Kurumba Community are a designated Scheduled Tribe in the Indian states of Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. In the oral epic of their Community there is a mention of gods – Brahma, Vishnu, Maheshwara. Since it is orally passed from one generation to another, there is no way it can be manipulated by any Brahmins or Aryans after invasion. The outline of the primary narrative is as follows: the first canto begins with a ‘creation legends’ and ends with the birth of Muddugonda and Muddavva, the forefathers of the shepherd community. The concept of the ‘creation legends’ also resembles with verses from Taittiriya Upanishad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halumatha_Kuruba_Purana

Basavanna who opposed Brahmins and Hindu religion infact worshipped Lord Shiva of Hindu religion. Some vachanas of Basavanna tell that Lingayaths do not worship Shiva who stays in Kailasa. Their Shiva is spread everywhere in this universe and He is not situated in one place as told in Puranas. But this is again simply confusion existing without understanding the real picture. Even Puranas give this same concept of Shiva. In Hinduism God has both personal and impersonal form. He is both decentralized (global) as well as centralized (local). Basavanna was calling the God as Kudala Sangameshwara in vachanas. It is actually the temple dedicated Lord Shiva of Hindu religion even before Lingayath religion started. The key idols that are found here are that of Basaveshwara, Neelamma, Ganesha and Nandi. A Shiva Linga with a small stone stupa stands just in front of the temple. During the festival of Mahashivratri, thousands of pilgrims take a dip at Kudalasangama, before going to the Shiva Linga, to seek blessings of Lord Shiva. Thus Basavanna who was opposing temple worship, holy bath in theerthas and other rituals of Hindu religion was still worshipping the Hindu God.

If you understand the Aryan and Dravidian culture (tribal religion) there are many common rituals, philosophy, legendary stories, etc. Both cultures will blend nicely. One is for class and another is for mass. So they are not 2 different culture or people. Agastya is a revered Vedic sage of Hinduism. He and his wife Lopamudra are the celebrated authors of hymns 1.165 to 1.191 in the Sanskrit text Rigveda and other Vedic literature. However, Agastya is considered by Dravidians as the “father of the Tamil language (Dravidian culture)”, to whom is attributed the origin of the Tamil grammar text Agastyam (Agattiyam).

Some historians tells that Lord Shiva is a Dravidian god and Vishnu is Aryan God but Lord Shiva was worshipped by Brahmins from long before and Vedas call him as Rudra. infact there are many temples of Shiva in North India than in South India (Dravidian area) .

Agastya appears in numerous itihasas and puranas including the major Ramayana and Mahabharata. He is one of the seven or eight most revered rishis in the Vedic texts, as well as a subject of reverence for being the first Tamil Siddhar in the Shaivism tradition, a Dravidian mata (culture). He is the principal figure and Guru in the ancient Javanese language text Agastyaparva, whose 11th century version survives. So you cannot say Puranas as myth created by Aryans.

Even temple worship of Dravidians is almost same as that of Aryan. The Boota-kola is the ritual of indigenous people of Dakshina-Karnataka (Mangalore, Udupi, etc). Bhootas are called as warriors or attendants of Shiva or Parvathi. This is mentioned in Puranas. In fact the ritual of worshiping the bhootas (good spirits) in a possessed  human souls (called as oracle in other civilization) was present in many cultures around the world (Greek, Nigeria, American civilization). Does that mean people of that country came and propagated their culture in India and Dravidians are not original inhabitants? The rituals and religious concepts are found similar in several cultures and religions because there is one God. That does not mean they are imported from another country always. Dravidians of Dakshina Kannada (Tulu speaking) drink a special kind of juice made from bark of a Aale tree on Aati Amavasya (astrology connection with Hindu religion). This is mentioned in Ayurveda.

Cultural appropriation can also happen if one culture is the classic version of another culture. Aryan culture is like a class version of Dravidian culture and Dravidian culture is the mass version of the Arya culture. Just like there are many versions of Christianity (Roman, Protestant, etc), it does not mean they are 2 different religions. They are just many versions of one religion or culture.

The deities worshipped in the ancient Tamil culture are actually same as Aryan deities. There was no invasion. All the hindu gods were worshiped by Tamizh people. I am quoting some references below:

1. Siva and Vishnu were repeatedly praised in Sangam literature. Many of the Ettuthokai books have started by praising either Lord Siva or Vishnu
2. Paripadal has many poems praising Lord Vishnu, including his Krishna, Balarama, Varaha and Narasimha avatars
3. All these books also associate Lord Siva and Vishnu with Vedas
4. None of these books talk about any “so called” invasion
5. Lakshmi (Seyyaal) and Vishnu (Thamarai Kannan) are mentioned in Thirukkural (and so is Vamana avatar)

The Aryan race is an obsolete historical race concept that emerged in the late-19th century to describe people of Proto-Indo-European heritage as a racial grouping. The Aryan invasion theory makes no sense when it comes to genetics. Even the PC version of the invasion theory, the “migration theory” has been refuted by various genetic studies, though some “linguists” couldn’t digest the facts .

In order to know who is a Brahmin according to scriptures and who is a Dalit (Shudra), check at

caste system or varnashrama is social superstitious belief of the Hinduism