Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Nov 2012 21:48

Too many Indians seem to imagine that claiming that something may have a connection with India is too far fetched and stupid. None of them to my knowledge seem to consider that India served as one of the warm friendly places to stay when the last ice age really turned cold 18,000 years ago. Sea levels were low and people could walk to India from west Asia. North Europe had permafrost for many thousand years and south Europe froze in winter. India froze never and had 2 crops a year, When the ice started melting 13000 years ago people started moving back to Europe.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 20 Nov 2012 22:15

On the Phoenix

"And the phoenix," he said, "is the bird which visits Egypt every five hundred years, but the rest of that time it flies about in India; and it is unique in that it gives out rays of sunlight and shines with gold, in size and appearance like an eagle; and it sits upon the nest; which is made by it at the springs of the Nile out of spices.

When looked at figuratively, this message is indeed quite overwhelming!

It means, every 500 years, Indian Civilization comes to Egypt, renews the foundations of Egypt's civilization (Nile), enlightening the Egyptian people (rays of sunlight) and bringing it prosperity (shines with gold).

Though it could also mean Pakistaniyat becoming a subject being taught at Al Azhar University in Cairo!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 20 Nov 2012 22:55

Caesarion

Parallel Lives: Life of Anthony
Author: Plutarch

$81

Caesarion, who was said to be Cleopatra's son by Julius Caesar, was sent by his mother, with much treasure, into India, by way of Ethiopia. There Rhodon, another tutor like Theodorus, persuaded him to go back, on the ground that [Octavian] Caesar invited him to take the kingdom.

Caesarion was executed by Octavius.

Of course, Rhodon seems to be the WKK sort and thus could only have given bad advice! But why would Cleopatra deem it fit to send her son, Caesarion, to India in the first place? The answer to that could be very illuminating!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 20 Nov 2012 23:00

Stone Circles and Stonehenge

A blog with a wealth of information

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 21 Nov 2012 02:23

>>But why would Cleopatra deem it fit to send her son, Caesarion, to India in the first place? The answer to that could be very illuminating!

It could be that she sent him to the only place where she knew he would be safe, the place where she came from. There is a line of speculation that "Cleopatra" is a corruption of "Keralaputri", and that the word "Nile" comes form "Nila" (which is by the way what it is called in Kerala) - "Nila nadhi" (nile river). Of course, Nila also means blue, which might explain why there is also a "Blue Nile" ...

Does anybody knows why the Nile is called that?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Nov 2012 02:56

Now, how can we prove such naming relationship? I am sure any language one could see similarities.. there used to be a joke/real? in tamil about Samson and Delilah are actually Sambasivam and Deivaleela. true/false?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 21 Nov 2012 03:17

>>Now, how can we prove such naming relationship?

I don't know. As I said, it's a line of speculation. I hadn't heard the one of Sambasivam & Deivaleela.
Plus, Cleopatra's mother's provenance is unknown. Cleopatra herself is not known well... and while we are at it, might as well throw this in the ring..

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 21 Nov 2012 03:21

RajeshA wrote:It seems that many mythological "beasts" known in Europe, have their origin in India

1) Phoenix <-- Garuda

2) Unicorn <-- Ekashringa

3) Griffin <-- ?

4) Dragon <-- Vritra

griffin is -- body of lion with head and wings of eagle.
Both are kings of animals and birds-
can Sharabha which is -- part lion and part eagle or bird be the one from India.

snowlion is the emblem of Tibet.(part of Indian subcontinent)
Also simurghi from Iran is a part animal and part bird.
Zu/Anzu/imdugud of sumeria.
simargi is from slavic conutries similarly.
Notice gargoyles seen in medieval churches/gothic structures etc.

see yali/vyalam or sarabham from Hindu epics - head of lion, tusk of elephant tail of serpent.
see the pictures of these and those seen in India -- somewhat similar.

many of the creatures described as seen in the west(of India) seem to be local adapations of those found in Indian subcontinent.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 21 Nov 2012 03:25

Cleopatra is corruptiuon of Kulputri

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 21 Nov 2012 03:34

cherub

They were originally a version of the shedu, protective deities sometimes found as pairs of colossal statues either side of objects to be protected, such as doorways.[3][4] However, although the shedu were popular in Mesopotamia, archaeological remains from the Levant suggest that they were quite rare in the immediate vicinity of the Israelites.[4] The related Lammasu (human-headed winged lions — to which the sphinx is similar in appearance), on the other hand, were the most popular winged-creature in Phoenician art, and so scholars suspect that Cherubim were originally a form of Lammasu.[4]

shedu

To protect houses, the lamassu were engraved in clay tablets, which were then buried under the door's threshold. They were often placed as a pair at the entrance of palaces. At the entrance of cities, they were sculpted in colossal size, and placed as a pair, one at each side of the door of the city, that generally had doors in the surrounding wall, each one looking towards one of the cardinal points.

all look similar with local variations to the practice of Indians even today.

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 21 Nov 2012 05:39

Nila is the name for Bharatapuzha, a river in Kerala

Nile is not called Nila in malayalam

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Nov 2012 05:50

Technically we need not necessarily postulate an Indian origin for each and every one of these putative links. I believe that accepting the possibility of links is good enough until further proof is obtained. The thing is that there was a belt of civilization extending from Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran and India 12000 years ago and far fewer people in the frozen North. India particularly probably did not even hiccup during the ice age which is so so romanticized now. Re-migration to the north probably started after 12000 ago years at which time here must have been floods wherever ice was melting.

But the belt of civilization probably led to great commonality in language and belief until the monotheistic religions came into being.

BajKhedawal · Post by **BajKhedawal** » 21 Nov 2012 09:36

purush mruga = half man half animal ( a devot shiv bhakt )
yali, shardula = half lion and half elephant

Panch Mukhi Hanuman saves you from above creatures.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Nov 2012 16:49

If one were to look closely at the ancient Egyptian society and religion, one would see that there are lots of parallels with Indian Civilization.

In fact the similarity is too much to be discounted as simply a chance occurrence. However there can be no doubt that it is Egypt which embraced many of the elements of Hinduism, however there is one big pre-Hindu custom among the Egyptians and that is to bury the dead in the desert.

Hinduism does not really impose itself in a way that the old customs are done away with, but rather Hinduism tends to create a fusion of the old and the new. As such cremation was not imposed, and the earlier practice of burying was continued. However the concept of soul and reincarnation from Hinduism and proto-Egyptian burial practices were integrated.

In Egypt itself there was always the consciousness that India was its civilizational home. That is why Cleopatra decided to send her and Julius Caesar's son, Caesarion to India in search of a safe haven.

What the Egyptians borrowed from India, was an institutionalized priesthood acting as counsel to the king, the pharaoh. Egyptians also borrowed the concept of divinity of the king. There was an influx of Indian ideas and stories into Egyptian mythology. Indian astronomy also found its way to Egypt as did Indian mathematics, which ultimately was used in the various architectural projects in Egypt. The concepts of soul, reincarnation, etc. were fused with Egyptian burial practices. However all these historic bonds need to be explored in much more detail.

SandeepA · Post by **SandeepA** » 21 Nov 2012 18:15

A quick Google search threw up this interesting blog on the Cleopatra - Kerala link.

http://pazhayathu.blogspot.in/2012/08/i ... raman.html

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Nov 2012 18:58

Yogesh Varhade is the President of Ambedkar Centre for Justice and Peace.

Published on Oct, 29, 2012
By Joseph Cotto
Yogesh Varhade on the grim reality of modern slavery: Washington Times

Joseph F. Cotto: The Indian caste system is not a concept with which many Americans are familiar. In a summary sense, how would you describe it?

Yogesh Varhade: The Indo-Aryan race from Middle Asia invaded India about 3500-4000 years ago (as per Indologists) by hook or by crook. Having destroyed the peaceful "Mahenjodaro and Harappa Civilisation", they started to impose their rules of enslavement. They created a socio-religious system to rule forever. The caste system is a product of their invention.

Here it is and how it works.

They divided the society into four categories, and a fifth was added later. Consider a five story building with watertight compartments and no elevator to go from one story to another.

1) Top story are the Priest Caste (Brahmins) with direct connections to God and Supreme in power. They can murder or rape but they cannot be punished by the king as per Divine Rules.

2) Below them are the Ruling Caste (Kshatriya) whose job was to rule. They have a little less power than Priest Caste but rule the masses.

3) Below them are the Business Caste (Vaishya) who have less power than Rulers. Mahatma Gandhi was of this caste. Wealth accumulation is their game through business.

4 ) Fourth is the Menial Labour (Shudra Caste) who serve all the three masters. They are not supposed to own house or property but serve the three high caste masters.

5) Fifth Caste is the lowest of the low (Untouchables and Tribals) serving all four masters. Those who refused to give up the practice of Buddhism and beef eating were outcaste - the untouchable. Those who ran into the forest from slavery became Tribals. They are not even part of the four tier caste system as mentioned in the Hindu Vedas.

The power is in ascending order and contempt is in descending order. You are born in your caste, you live in that caste as per duties assigned by Brahmins, and you die in that caste. Brahmins also created a theory that "since you committed a sin in last birth, you are born as low caste, and one must do duties assigned to that caste. One will be elevated to higher caste, even Brahmins, in next birth by being obedient (slave)."

The top three castes (Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya) are known as high caste who wear religious thread (mainly men) called Janava, and their population is less than 15%. By keeping the low caste illiterate and starving, they could rule the system.
This theory they made divine by stating that Brahmins are created by the God from his mouth, Kshatriya created by God from his arm, Vaishas created from his stomach, and the Shudras created by him from his legs.

This they made this a part of the religious scriptures written by God.

Women, who are 50 percent of humanity, and 85 percent of Shudras (low caste), as well as Ati-Shudras (the Untouchables), were prohibited from acquiring knowledge. This continued for nearly 3000 years as Kings were rulers and Brahmins were their advisors.

Under British rule, some Christian missionary schools developed along with Indian Shudra reformers schools. By keeping the masses illiterate and dependent for bare survival, and enforcing the Hindu code of ethics (called the Manu code of conduct) through the ruling caste, they maintained the status quo.

Here are the punishments for those who break the laws stated in the Manu code.

1) If a low caste utters Hindu Religious Hymns, molten lead should be put in his ears, his tongue should be cut off.

2) Brahmin gets pain if he sees Shudra, the low caste in good clothes, or have property. So Shudra should wear torn clothes, eat in a earthen pot, and do his duties.

3) Brahmin can rape or kill or take wives of the low caste but king cannot punish him except to expel him.

2500 years back, Siddhartha Gautama appeared in India. He was a prince who left his kingdom in search of truth. After extensive meditation, he found the truth that there is no high or low by birth but we become by our deeds.

There is no God as such controlling our lives, but our deeds (Kamma) do. Good thoughts, good deeds, good results and bad thoughts, bad deeds, bad results. He was the first to liberate women and started a nun’s order along with an order of monks.

After about 250 years, Emperor Ashoka the Great ruled India through Buddhism. He was the most benevolent king who brought equality, fraternity, liberty of thought and compassion for all. This was the golden period of Indian history when art, culture, and happiness reached the peak.

Brahminism lost its base with the masses and this was a major setback for the caste system.

In 185 BC a Brahmin General by name Pushamitra Sunga killed Emperor Bruhadraya, the grandson of Ashoka. This started to turn the tides. Still, up to 1200 AD, Buddhism ruled through the hearts and minds of the Indian people to some extent. However, the slaughter of peaceful Buddhist monks started by the Brahmins in 800 AD, who were later aided by Muslim invaders, became the last nail in the coffin of Buddhism.

Dr. Ambedkar was the tallest intellectual giant of twentieth century India. A principal architect of the Indian constitution and emancipator of the marginalised, as well as an Untouchable himself, he brought Buddhism back home on 14th October 1956 by peacefully converting one million people in one day. This was the largest religious conversion in human history without bloodshed.

I was a witness to that event and became Buddhist. Now there are 10 million Buddhists, mainly converts from Hindu low castes, and growing.

----------------------------------------

These are the idiotic notions of Indian history! In fact most of those in India who work under the name of Ambedkar, are in fact working against the country that Ambedkar helped build. It is one thing to speak out against poverty, casteism and exploitation in India, it is quite another to twist history and to portray it as foreign oppression.

These are the kind of fault-lines that would be exploited by all those groups who have sworn themselves against Indian Civilization and Hinduism.

Also please look at the Ambedkar Centre for Justice and Peace site. Does this site look like the usual Indian websites we see?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 21 Nov 2012 21:38

People will believe anything being written now-a-days, under the google-dom. Jesus Christ was born in Kerala would be the next faith related news. After all,.. there is nothing wrong in associating any God or head to the land of Gods, nah!?

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 22 Nov 2012 09:30

RajeshA wrote:Yogesh Varhade is the President of Ambedkar Centre for Justice and Peace.

This is the same guy who made an idiot of himself at a recent seminar of Rajiv Malhotra. The video was posted sometime back in burkha thread: http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1366322

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Nov 2012 10:44

Posting in full

http://www.haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.a ... 325&SKIN=B
"Fundamentals of Indology wrong" , "Max Mueller a Swindler" - Interview with Prof Prodosh Aich
14/06/2010 13:29:18 By Satish Misra

Question: Your book 'Lies with long legs' has recently been published. What is this about?

Answer: Whatever, we know about discoveries, scholars, scientists, are mostly not true. For example, when you get a book today there are references and these references go back 10, 20 or 30 years. They don't go back beyond that. On every page, one finds quotations but you will never find that a quotation has been challenged. One never checks whether that quotation is correct or not. It is just accepted. What ever is printed is accepted.

Q: So every word is taken as a gospel?

A: No, not as a gospel. It has been accepted in the academic world. And if you have 20 books on one subject, you can be sure that there would be another 20 books on the same subject but with almost same references. They will never go back to roots. What, I have done. I have tried to question. I put , to start with, a simple question. "Well you are telling me this. How do you know that it is true"? Then I look into the bibliography of these books. I find lot of authors and then I make the same exercise to find out what their references have been. In that way, I find the first author who invented rather coined the words like Aryans, Indo-Germans and Indo-Europeans.

Q: So, you have done a research on India?

A: No, that is not correct. As a matter of fact, I have not done any research. I wanted to know, who are these Aryans, Indo-Europeans and Indo-Germans and then tried to find out answers in the reference books and literature. I found out that none of the answers were satisfactory. I continued my search. It was not a research. Research is what you must publish. You have to publish every year, otherwise you will vanish. That is modern research. I did not do modern research, I wanted to know where they come from. How did they recognise these Aryans? Who did this? Then I was very astonished to see that Indo-Aryans are very young. It came in vogue in the 19th century rather was invented in the second half of the19th century.

Q: What was the purpose of inventing this word?

A: Now, you are taking things into realm of speculation. To my mind there are two reasons. One is that in 18th and 19th century. Christians were trying to find something else as heredity then Jewish religion. It was something like anti-Semitism And at that time, there was a fancy for the Orient without knowing what Orient meant. Whether Orient was Arabia, India, Persia or China, they had no idea about it in the 18th and 19th century. Through Persian translations, they knew that there was a vast amount of literature in India. They wanted to understand that. Portuguese were the first there and then the British, French, Dutch etc. None of them came to the idea to identify themselves with the people. But the Britishers concocted the story that Europeans and Indians were related to each other because they had the common heredity of the nomadic people coming from the area of Turkmenistan on the Chinese border. They were settled nomadic people. They had migrated to the West and they had migrated to the South-West. They are of the same breed and stock.

Q: Same stock?

Q: Yes, same stock. While the Britishers were robbing India taking away whatever they could, they said we have come to our own home. We have the common heredity. So the name of this came much later. It was done by Max Mueller in 1859. Can you imagine that Max Mueller maintained in 1859 that he read in Rigveda that Vedic people were singing about their land of origin and there they mention themselves as Aryans. And these people also went to the West and we are also Aryans. These were Indo-Aryans and we are European-Aryans.

Q: Max Mueller is a very renowned name in India. We have a Max Mueller Institute here where German language is taught and various other activities are conducted. In my understanding, Max Mueller had a command on Sanskrit language and he translated Vedas and other works of Sanskrit. How did he come to acquire immense knowledge of the ancient language which incidentally was not a spoken language?

A: Max Mueller. It is not his name. His name was Friedrich Maximillan Mueller. He did not publish in German. He did not get a job in Germany. He got a job with the East India Company in England. Most of his writings are in English. He was neither a scholar nor he knew Sanskrit. He was a swindler.

Q: You call him a swindler?

A: I call him a swindler. I can provide proofs in support of my assertion. I can reason it out also. Max Mueller had assumed that he was a scholar. From his own autobiography, from biographies written by his son and wife, from other biographies, from his other writings, and from his letters, we can reconstruct his life from birth to his death. After passing the High School, he never appeared in any examination rather never cleared any examination. So obviously he can not possess any academic degrees. Yet he calls himself a Master of Arts (MA). His wife calls him a Doctor of Philosophy. His wife maintains that he was a Ph. D. from the Leipzig University. There is no record at the Leipzig University or any proof that he appeared in any examination there. So how would you describe him:

Q: OK, but there are people who without going to school or university acquire knowledge of languages. So what about his knowledge of Sanskrit.

A: That is a different issue but one can't describe oneself as a scholar or ascribe degrees to oneself without clearing any examination. So far Sanskrit, Max Mueller never came to India. In his youth, he wanted to come to India but when he had money as his books were flooding market with the help of East India Company. But when he had plenty of money, he did not feel any need of coming to India. So the question arises that if had not learnt Sanskrit in India then he must have learnt it in Europe. So this is another part of my book 'Lies with long legs' as we have tried to find out who was the first person, the pioneer, who taught Sanskrit in Europe.

Q: So who was this person?

A: He was a nobody, He was a simple boy of 18 when he came to India as an ordinary soldier. He completed is term and roamed around in India and then reached France. There he said that he knew Sanskrit. Quality of his knowledge of Sanskrit was that he knew the Devnagri alphabet well but beyond that he could not make a distinction between the language and script.

Q :What was his name?

A: Alexander Hamilton was his name. There is a long story about him in the book because people said that he was a great Sanskrit scholar. So we traced his roots also. The most interesting thing while doing this book was that though all the material is available in the libraries, no one else worked on the available material. If some one claimed that a he was a scholar then nobody questioned that claim. Everyone started saying that the person was a scholar as it is written in printed words. It was presumed that if one taught Sanskrit to others then he knew Sanskrit.

Q: So it seems that follies went on multiplying?

A: No, Hamilton's students did not teach Sanskrit. Later came some others who said that they knew Sanskrit. They claimed that they have been auto-didactic and had learnt the language themselves. How can you learn Sanskrit without having a dictionary or without a proper grammar book?

Q: Sanskrit was never a spoken language so how can this be learnt without a teacher? The language had to be learnt systematically for 6 to 7 years so that one could translate works like the Vedas?

A: It is not your opinion alone Even some European thought the same. Unfortunately those who learnt Sanskrit systematically did not teach the language in Europe. Heinrich Roth was one such person who came to India and landed in Goa and from there was transferred to Agra. There he became the principal of a Jesuit college. He belonged to Jesuit order. In Agra, he learnt Sanskrit for six years, mastered the language so well that he "discussed" with the Brahmins in Sanskrit. Having understood the importance of Sanskrit, he compiled a grammar book with Latin explanatory notes added to it. As a matter of fact, he produced a simplified version of Panini's grammar, which was compiled at least 4000 years ago.

The Sanskrit grammar vanished in the Vatican library. It was traced in 1988 and all Indologists agree that quality of this grammar book was far superior to the ones upon
which Sanskrit was being taught in Europe. Others did not learn Sanskrit properly but they stoutly maintained that they knew Sanskrit.

You know how it happened? Someone talked to some Pundits and he came to know that there was something called Bhagvat Gita These Pundits were not professors or learned scholars of Sanskrit. Very near Calcutta, there was an university at Nadia. Varansi was nearby and one could have got in touch with professors there. They talked to Pundits in Calcutta, a small township built by the British, who claimed to know Sanskrit.

Q: But Brahmins or Pundits would not encourage any foreigner to learn Sanskrit and read religious book?

A: Who told you this? It is wrong. The story was told by William Jones. But is not based on facts. It was never sacred. Learning Sanskrit was a difficult task Brahmins had the privilege of servicing others by reciting Sanskrit texts to them. Whether they understood it or not was a different issue. This was inherited from one generation to other. They knew Sanskrit but how did the British learnt it. Christian mind created stories around fragments of information. Their stories are reflection of their minds. It was not the translation of Bhagvat Gita but what they sold it as Bhagvat Gita. Then Europeans who never came to India but learnt Sanskrit alphabets and saw Bhagvat Gita and recognised its alphabets. They could possibly recognise words but they did not understand it. So they would collect more book and apply their Christian mind and say that this is not logical so it has to be this or that. In this process, they were also trying to compile a dictionary. There was never a Sanskrit dictionary as grammar is the key to Sanskrit language. But they were trying to compile a dictionary word by word. So in this way they have transported a type of Sanskrit to Europe where I have doubts that it is Sanskrit at all. But the tragic part is that this Sanskrit has been imported back to India. This is what we learn in India with the help of the Sanskrit dictionaries. The standard dictionary of Sanskirt here is of Sir Monier Monier who also never came to India before compiling his dictionary in 1854. He collected all materials and prepared a dictionary diligently. But this dictionary was not available to Max Mueller. Max Mueller had only one dictionary written by one Wilson. He also stayed in Calcutta. He was a medical doctor. He served as Director of a mint because he had some knowledge of chemicals. He interacted with Bengali Pundits and he prepared the dictionary with the help of the Pundits of Calcutta in as late as 1819 when the first Sanskrit dictionary came out. At best, Max Mueller could have used this dictionary. Max Mueller was at a place where Wilson taught Sanskrit. Max Mueller observes in his biography that Wilson did not have enough knowledge of Sanskrit.

Q: So you make a dictionary without learning a language?

A: Possibly one could make a dictionary. Definitely not a good one. If you went to China and you met some Chinese and understood what they said and you understood it then make a dictionary.

Q: But with this kind of dictionary, one can't translate?

A: Definitely not. But did he translate? In order to translate, one has to have a command on both languages. I think he had command on German and English. But whatever you translate from Sanskrit and even if one has command on both languages, it would be reflection of one's mind. Max Mueller did not understand Sanskrit. He had never read a Sanskrit text. He had read Sanskrit text with the help of translation made by others.

Q: Hinduism came to created. Do you think Hindu way of life was a religion?

A: I don't know Sanskrit. But what ever I know sanatan dharma or dharma was not at all a religion, it was much more comprehensive.

Q: Do you think, there was a definite design behind it?

A: Absolutely Otherwise a company which had come to rob a country, to exploit a country, to create conditions for sustained exploitation, why should they spend money on Max Mueller to get market flooded with so called Indian literature? It was for creating an atmosphere. There is a letter written by Max Mueller to his wife that he has performed this role so that the educated Indians would never get back to their 3000 years roots. They will find their roots through our books.

Q: It sounds like Macaulay?

A: No, it is Max Mueller. The books have to be written in such a way that they don't get back to their roots.

Q: Were Max Mueller and Thomas Macaulay contemporaries?

A. Macaulay was a politician of a ruthless sort. He had formulated the purpose of the introduction of educational system as early as 1835. Thereafter, Macaulay was looking for a person who would translate the Sanskrit literature in a way that no Indian would be able to find way back to their roots. In 1854, he had identified Max Mueller to be that person when he was 31. Our country is the only country where modern sector has no way to go back to its roots without going through these books. Most of the educated persons read the English literature including the first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru; He was also a fan of this literature . Whatever he knew about India, he knew through this rubbish literature.

Q: So you want to say that they were able to capture the Indian mind?

A Absolutely It was their declared policy that we make the educational system in such a way as to be able to create a class of Indians who are Indians by blood but in their minds, sentiments, thinking and values they are Christians. They are like us. We have to confess that we are all children of Macaulay But now then, it did'nt function. And it was a mere accident that I wanted to know who were the Aryans. I had never thought to explore the literature of Indology. But once you put this question, you come to unexpected enlightenment.

Q: So your view would be that there were no Aryans and they never came from outside and they were all here?

A: It is not a mater of view. Findings are that mention of Aryan was first made by a person who was a swindler. He was neither a scholar nor he knew Sanskrit. But he claimed that in Rigveda there is a hymn. He did not mention which one In this mention, he claimed that people were singing and identifying themselves as Aryans. They came from outside. So whatever culture has been created in this area of the world has been created by foreigners. And he also belonged to this class of foreigners.

Q: You devote considerable space in your book to William Jones. What about him?

A: He had not written an auto- biography but lot of biographies have been written about him. He had left behind his letters. Two volumes of his letters have been published. If one goes through his biography from his childhood till he came to India, one finds out that William Jones was an opportunist. He did everything to make a career and ultimately he claimed that he knew 32 languages And it has come to be accepted by the educated community.

Q; What about his knowledge of Sanskrit?

A: In 1885, he has confessed in a letter to Charles Wittkins in Calcutta that he is too old to learn Sanskrit. But, it is absolutely certain that he did not have command over Sansrkit. He had no time to pick up Sanskrit.

Q: But he has translated some Sanskrit works?

A: Only one work he has published. That is Manu's laws but even this has been done by others, by hired Pundits. He has put his name on it. If one goes through his biographies and other material then one comes to a conclusion that he too was a fraud. But he was a
fraud of a greater caliber. He came to Calcutta to earn money. In five years, so much of money that he can go back to England and buy a seat in British Parliament. He had calculated that this much of money could be earned in London in 20 to 25 years. His sole objective was to earn 20 to 25,000 Pounds. While he was coming to India, he had a plan to write a world history according to his own design . And he did not need any other material but his own fantasy. So when he arrived in Calcutta, he started selling himself as a great oriental scholar. In the first year, he had invented one Indian God Kamdeva. And the way, he invented Kamdeva. I have documented in the book.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 22 Nov 2012 19:23

disha wrote:Johneeg, thanks for your hardwork and patience.

The third color photo of Krishna in the series is a very good example. Excellent color stone etc. Also the date is given 150-200 AD. This is another example of trade links with India all the way to Greece. I will not be surprised if there were Indians (from calicut/cochin) of Vaishnava sampradaya living in Greece and Italy.

Saar,
trade links may be one of the many possibilities. There are several interactions possible:
1) Political interaction(ambassadors, alliances, conquests...etc)
2) Religious/cultural interaction(missionaries, import/export of cultural values)
3) Social interaction(migrations, relationships like friendship and even marriage)
4) Trade interaction.

Generally, any long time interaction will involve all the above aspects. One leads to the other.

Next, Calicut/cochin may very well be one of the routes connecting India and Europe. But, other routes(both sea and land) must not be ignored. For example, there may be a sea route possible from Gujarat also. The silk route connecting Gandhar is famous.

disha wrote: Satyr/Vanara could be a tenous link and the image could be as well of vanara misinterpreted by the curator as satyr. Similarly the swastika has been found across many cultures including Hopi Indians. So it might be a global cometary event.

It seems one of the etymologies of Vanara is "Vane charati iti vanara" i.e. "that which roams in forests is vanara". This etymology works for any wild animal. The portrayals of Satyr in Greek art is uncannily reminding of Indian portrayals of Vanara. So, the connection may be there.

True. Swastika is found in many cultures. But, the question is of origin. Where did Swastika originated? The clue may lie in the extensive use of that symbol across the ages. I think Swastika originated in India and spread to other cultures. Most of the east-asian cultures acquired Swastika(the reverse swastika) through Buddhism.

Anyway, please note that I posted the pictures that show the prevalence of Swastikas along with reverence of horses, bulls, cows(and calves). This combination of Swastika, reverence of horses, bulls, cows(and calfs) is quintessentially Indian/Vedic in character.

disha wrote: Trade links between Greece/Rome to Southern India are confirmed and not surprising, even not surprising will be an exchange of trade consuls and diplomats and stationing of ambassadors going all the way back to 500 BC. The thrust is towards the "strength" of the trade link indicating a continuous flow of goods and not a one time event.

Here is the conjecture, if a trade link is effectively established in 500 BC., it gathers that effective trade would have begun at least 500 years prior to it. Pushing the date to 1000 BC. It strengthens the argument that trade was the underpinning of human evolution!

Trade is ONE of the many underpinnings of human societies. It would be narrow to focus only on that. Focusing only on trade links can lead to missing the big picture. It is possible that what is seen here is a similarity of culture, religion, society, beliefs and an active and continuous exchange of ideas(not just trade items). This kind of interaction shows that these civilizations were not isolated, but rather closely connected to each other(perhaps from the time of origin).

What is the primary motivation of the interaction is difficult to guess. It could be trade. It could be cultural/religious. It could be social. It could be political. It could be a combination of one or all of those factors. But, whatever the primary motivation, one can be sure that the other factors would be part of the interaction as secondary affects. That means, even if the primary motivation of the interaction was political, other factors like religion, trade, social interaction would become part of the parcel(sooner than later). In this particular case, we should concentrate on not merely trade links, but a much deeper relationship at cultural/religious/social/political level.

disha wrote: More importantly is the Rama/Sita/Lakshmana picture. If there is a link and a date attesting it, it will be great - and again it could be between 500 BC to 200 AD.

johneeG wrote:
Old painting of Rama & Sita in Italian homes
Rama-Seeta-Lakshmana walking through the forest in the order described in the Ramayana, a scene delineated in ancient Italian homes. Italian archaeologists express bewilderment at these paintings because they are unaware that ancient Europe including Italy practiced Hinduism.

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/photograph ... luence.htm

(Decorative Panel called the Campana Plaque, from Cerveteri) 550-525 BC Link

Link to a bigger picture: http://www.artelista.com/prints/scala/b ... 10853m.jpg

There is no identification of the characters in the above painting. They are supposed to be random inconsequential figures. The etruscan literature, if there was any, did not survive. So, 'historians' have no clue as to what they are. As such, it is open to speculation.

The place has been 'identified' as a 'tomb'. Infact, all the places from where the paintings have been found are 'identified' as 'tombs'.

From the same 'tomb' that the above painting was found, there are other two paintings:

Credit: The Campana Plaque, A Winged Genie Carries Off a Woman Accompanied by an Archer, c.550-525 BC (mural) (detail), Etruscan, (6th century BC) / Louvre, Paris, France / Giraudon / The Bridgeman Art Library

A bigger picture of the part of the painting:

Hermes carrying a woman, slab from Caere, Louvre, Paris, ~6th century B.C. Hermes (Latin, Mercury) is the messenger of the gods. According to Julius Caesar and other sources, the main god of the Celts was Hermes. Agni, the god of fire of the Rig Veda of India, has an important role as the messenger of the gods. Offerings to the fire are carried by Agni up to the abode of the gods. The Etruscan messenger may be like Agni, carrying the cremated soul to heaven.

http://www.maravot.com/Etruscan_Murals.html

If the woman is identified as Sita and the 'winged-archer' as Hermes/Agni, then this painting can be Sita-Agni pravesha episode. The other figure in the painting is Rama. Notice that figures of Rama and Sita are portrayed in the both pictures in identical manner.

There is no clear identification of the first picture, while the second picture is supposed to be some random woman(or is it her soul?) being carried away by hermes. But the irony is that the place has been 'identified' as tomb. Why would anybody paint a picture of fire-gods carrying the souls in a burial tomb? That is irrational. Moreover, it is known that the ancient Greek did not bury their dead but rather cremated them. Romans, AFAIK, also followed the custom until they were forcibly converted to christianity. So, wouldn't it be odd that the ancient italians(etruscans) bury their dead just like Greeks and Romans. I would imagine that the etruscans also cremated their dead. Even if it is conceded that the dead were buried, how is it that they are building elaborate tombs and painting on the walls of tombs?! Is it a rehash of egyptians?!

Anyway, it is equally possible to 'identify' the first painting as Rama, Sita and Lakshmana going to forest(the order of the painting is in the same order as described in Valmiki Ramayana). And the second painting as the Sita Agni-Pravesha.

Notice, that in the first plaque, there is another painting(of a man and woman):

It is not completely visible, so it is difficult to identify it. It would have been better if that painting was also visible properly. I tried to search on the net for a complete picture, but could not find it.

There is another painting in that tomb(whether it is related to the second painting or independent is not established).

The Campana Plaque, detail of a nude priest before an altar, from Cerveteri, c.550-525 BC (mural)
Image number: XIR 223243
Title: The Campana Plaque, detail of a nude priest before an altar, from Cerveteri, c.550-525 BC (mural)
Primary creator: Etruscan, (6th century BC)
Nationality: Etruscan
Location: Louvre, Paris, France
Credit: Giraudon
Medium: mural
Description: pretre nu devant un autel;
Date: 06th- (C06th-)
Categories: Egyptian, Greek, Roman and Etruscan
Dimensions: 125x58 cms

Here is a Link to bigger picture:
Link
The priest is not nude and is wearing both an upper and lower cloth as can be seen in the bigger picture. The priest standing before the fire altar. Look at the right hand near the mouth, perhaps, it signifies reading sacred hymns(or mantras) near the fire altar.

I'll post about other pictures later...
----
Peter ji,
I checked it and there is no 'tilok'. I don't know whether Stephan Knapp(not Frawley) was mistaken or it was deliberate. I am not going to report to him. But, others can do so, if they want to.

---
RajeshA ji,
fully concur with you about Egyptian culture having similarity with Hinduism. I wanted to post something on it. Perhaps, I'll do it. But one thing: It is very much possible that the 'Hindus of Egypt' accepted the burial method over cremation after careful deliberation. Egypt is a desert with very sparse vegetation. Cutting down trees for cremation would be costly in such circumstances. So, they may have resorted to burial. There is allowance for burial in such cases in Hinduism, AFAIK.

Abhibhushan · Post by **Abhibhushan** » 22 Nov 2012 19:43

Ref the Campana Plaque above.

Could the depiction be of drinking Soma at a Fire Alter by a worshiper?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Nov 2012 20:07

johneeG wrote:RajeshA ji,
fully concur with you about Egyptian culture having similarity with Hinduism. I wanted to post something on it. Perhaps, I'll do it. But one thing: It is very much possible that the 'Hindus of Egypt' accepted the burial method over cremation after careful deliberation. Egypt is a desert with very sparse vegetation. Cutting down trees for cremation would be costly in such circumstances. So, they may have resorted to burial. There is allowance for burial in such cases in Hinduism, AFAIK.

johneeG ji,

That is indeed a good explanation! But considering that Egypt has been a desert for a long time, it is possible that when Indians entered Egypt, the local custom was already one of burying the dead, and the Indians did not protest, again because of scarce wood.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 22 Nov 2012 23:10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyiZiXQy ... re=related

Not directly about OIT, but subtly promotes it - VS Ramachandran cuts loose - especially in the first 30 mins.

AbhiJ · Post by **AbhiJ** » 23 Nov 2012 00:04

Don't know if it is correct to post here.

But Jholwala Ding Dong AIT Nazi siting on the post of Chairman of Press Council of India and Former Chief Justice of Supreme Court:

What is India?

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 23 Nov 2012 06:08

JE Menon wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyiZiXQy ... re=related
Not directly about OIT, but subtly promotes it - VS Ramachandran cuts loose - especially in the first 30 mins.

JEM ji, thanks - that is a great video. His uncle was professor of mine long time back.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Nov 2012 22:24

Not specifically about OIT, per se, but one can easily imagine - since these traditions are easily older than most performance traditions in the world - how, long years ago, some such performance in some part of India, or by some travelling troupe, of whom there must have been many more then, wandered across the north-western frontier carrying their life-systems and mindscapes with them...

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/20 ... ine-night/

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Nov 2012 07:18

This is a good one. If someone could please get the pdf and put it where I can download it I would be grateful
Read online
http://ebookbrowse.com/aryan-invasion-m ... d281174166

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 28 Nov 2012 07:28

krisna wrote:
RajeshA wrote:It seems that many mythological "beasts" known in Europe, have their origin in India

1) Phoenix <-- Garuda

2) Unicorn <-- Ekashringa

3) Griffin <-- ?

4) Dragon <-- Vritra

griffin is -- body of lion with head and wings of eagle.
Both are kings of animals and birds-
can Sharabha which is -- part lion and part eagle or bird be the one from India.

snowlion is the emblem of Tibet.(part of Indian subcontinent)
Also simurghi from Iran is a part animal and part bird.
Zu/Anzu/imdugud of sumeria.
simargi is from slavic conutries similarly.
Notice gargoyles seen in medieval churches/gothic structures etc.

see yali/vyalam or sarabham from Hindu epics - head of lion, tusk of elephant tail of serpent.
see the pictures of these and those seen in India -- somewhat similar.

many of the creatures described as seen in the west(of India) seem to be local adapations of those found in Indian subcontinent.

Yep, Sharabha is very similar to Griffin, except the head. Are we sure that the head of Griffin as Eagle's head is not a modern day interpretation?

---

Jhujar wrote:Cleopatra is corruptiuon of Kulputri

There may be some merit in this speculation. Kulaputra/kulaputri means highborn. But, it seems, the Buddhists used it as a synonym for missionaries.

In the SDP, the Lord Sâkyamuni(s) encourages his disciples to spread the message in writing etc. His disciples are called Bodhisattvas, Mahâsattvas etc., and kula-putras, i.e. "family-sons" (often translated freely as "sons of good family").
The passage from the SDFP quoted above read:

"Therefore, young men of good family, you should after the complete extinction of the Tathâgata, with reverence, keep, read, promulgate, cherish, worship it."

In other words: Once Sâkyamuni(s) as passed away, it is up to the kula-putras to spread the SDP in various ways. The kula-putras is thus one of the many synonyms of a Buddhist missionary.

Link

This in itself is inconclusive. But when it is combined with the data point that Cleopatra's son was being sent(or already sent) to India, then there is a clear connection. So, maybe, the later day egyptian religion and empire was highjacked by the Buddhists through political power.

Cleopatra is supposed to have lived in 69-30 BCE. This was the time when the Buddhists were very active. X-nity is supposed to have been born just after this time.

There is early connection of India with X-nity. It is not mundane connection but a vital one in X-nity.

Saint Pantaenus (Greek: Πάνταινος; died ca. 200)[1] was a Christian theologian and a significant figure in the Catechetical School of Alexandria from around AD 180. This school was the earliest catechetical school, and became influential in the development of Christian theology. Pantaenus was a Stoic philosopher teaching in Alexandria. He converted to the Christian faith, and sought to reconcile his new faith with Greek philosophy. His most famous student, Clement, who was his successor as head of the Catechetical School, described Pantaenus as "the Sicilian bee".[2] Although no writings by Pantaenus are extant,[3] his legacy is known by the influence of the Catechetical School on the development of Christian theology, in particular in the early debates on the interpretation of the Bible, the Trinity, and Christology. He was the main supporter of Serapion of Antioch for acting against the influence of Gnosticism.

In addition to his work as a teacher, Eusebius of Caesarea reports that Pantaenus was for a time a missionary, traveling as far as India where, according to Eusebius, he found Christian communities using the Gospel of Matthew written in "Hebrew letters", supposedly left them by the apostle Bartholemew (and which might have been the Gospel of the Hebrews).

The wording is crafty. He did not travel 'as far as India'. He traveled TO India. The difference in the two wordings is that the wording of the wiki gives an impression that India was one of the several stops of Pantaenus. But, it seems that India was the goal/destination of Pantaenus. He was traveling to India. Why did he come to India? Well, he came to India for 'Gospel of Matthew' which was left there by one 'Bartholemew'. And it was written in Hebrew.

This piece flies in the face of all X-ian chronology. So, they are trying to make sense of it by connecting it to Syrian X-ians or the fake landing of 'Saint Thomas' in India. They have pushed both these later events into antiquity to make sense of Pantaenus's travel to India and finding Gospel in India. This is bogus. The Saint Thomas visit to India is bogus and pushing the syrian x-ian presence in India to 180 CE is also bogus.

What must be noted is that Pantaenus did not find the Gospel in Egypt, Europe, Africa or Middle-East Asia(or any other part of Asia). He found it explicitly in India and India alone. That means, Gospel was in India which Pantaenus found(or rather he brought that Gospel from India to Greece/Rome). Why was Gospel in India and who is this Bartholemew?

Because Gospel was created in India by Indians:

According to an early Christian tradition, a certain Pantaenus went to India, where he found a copy of the Gospel according to Matthew (see the discussion in Metzger, op. cit., p. 129 f.). It is reported to have been in Hebrew letters. It was said to have been brought there and left there - in India - by a certain Bar-tholomew. What are we to make of that?
The first piece of information is, as we have seen, quite true: The Gospel of Matthew has its home in India. But what about the second part - the legend of Bartholomew having brought it there?

The answer is simple - provided you know the Buddhist sources. Just like the disciples of Jesus often have more than one name, thus the disciples of Buddha also have more than one name. Maudgalyâyanas also has other names, and one of these is indeed one that can be translated as "son", bar, of thalama.

The early Christian tradition about Pantaenus going to India, where he found the Gospel of Matthew said to have been brought there by Bartholomew, now becomes clear. Matthew and Bartholomew are the same person - the Buddhist Maudgalyâyanas. So what Pantaenus found was the Gospel of Maudgalyâyanas - i.e. the MSV, or parts of it. That should not come as a surprise by now.

When the Buddhist gospels were eventually translated into other Oriental languages, it was the MSV version that was regarded as "canonical". This was the Gospel according to Maudgalyâyanas. And this was what Pantaenus found in India.

Link

In simple terms, Pantaenus carried a buddhist gospel named Mûlasarvâstivâdavinaya to Greece/Rome. It was written in Hebrew.

Buddhists have a long tradition for counting the number of words and syllables in their gospels. They also have a deep experience in translating Indian texts into foreign languages. It goes back to the time of king Asoka.

Link

So, if the Cleopatra has connection with India and in 30 BC and Pantaenus had a connection with India in 180 AD. Both are prominent connections. Gospel is central to X-nity and it was brought from India. The son of Ceasar and Cleopatra was being sent to India. That means a potential future king of Rome(and the last Pharaoh of Egypt) was being sent to India for safekeeping.

During this time, 100 BCE to 180 AD, Buddhism was predominant in India and actively sending various missionaries worldwide. So, it is very much possible that Cleopatra was a Buddhist by descent or conversion. Maybe Romans were unhappy with Ceasar's and later Mark Anthony's affair with Cleopatra because she was seen as a Buddhist missionary wanting to spread Buddhism in Rome. Otherwise, whats the big deal in Royalty having an affair?! In fact, it is egyptians who should be enraged, not Romans. But curiously, it is the otherway around.

Eventually, Buddhism did spread to Rome through Gospels.

---

RajeshA wrote:
johneeG wrote:RajeshA ji,
fully concur with you about Egyptian culture having similarity with Hinduism. I wanted to post something on it. Perhaps, I'll do it. But one thing: It is very much possible that the 'Hindus of Egypt' accepted the burial method over cremation after careful deliberation. Egypt is a desert with very sparse vegetation. Cutting down trees for cremation would be costly in such circumstances. So, they may have resorted to burial. There is allowance for burial in such cases in Hinduism, AFAIK.
johneeG ji,

That is indeed a good explanation! But considering that Egypt has been a desert for a long time, it is possible that when Indians entered Egypt, the local custom was already one of burying the dead, and the Indians did not protest, again because of scarce wood.

Saar,
What I had in mind was that there is no indigenous Egyptian religion apart from the Indian religion. Very much like Buddhism in China. Buddhism was taken to China from India. Periodically the Buddhism in China was reviewed; it involved either the Chinese Buddhists traveling to India or the Indian Buddhist masters going to China. Similarly, my hypothesis is that the Egyptian religion was Indian religion through and through which was periodically reviewed; either the egyptians traveled to India or the Indian masters went to Egypt.

There seems to be diverse views on desertification of Egypt. Some say it happened 2000 yrs ago, while others say it happened 4000 yrs ago. Some believe that it was a very fast process, while others believe that it was a gradual process. Regardless of when and how the desertification happened, the hypothesis is that the Egyptians(who followed the same religion as Indians) started burying thew dead(unlike the Indians) due to scarcity of wood. If the wood was not scarce, they would have cremated their dead just like Indians.

People generally ask why the Hindus cremate their dead. The question arises because it is different from burying the dead that is practiced in most of the world. But, if we go back in history, then it seems to me that burying was an exception and cremation a norm. So, the question should be why do some cultures bury their dead(especially in history).

The answer may lie in geography. The cultures located in places where the wood is/was scarce may have resorted to burying instead of cremation.

The world geographical map is illustrative:

Notice that Egypt, Israel and Saudi Arabia are part of the most arid area(Sahara) in the world(marked in red). No wonder, therefore, that the cultures in these places resorted to burying. The pagans of Saudi Arabia buried their dead. Islam continued the same practice. Jews of Israel/Judea bury their dead. Christians have inherited that practice from Jews.

So, the pagans(Hindus) in Egypt, Israel(Judea) and Saudi Arabia buried their dead due to scarcity of wood.

---

Was Alexander real or mythical figure?

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 28 Nov 2012 08:42

matrimc wrote:
JE Menon wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyiZiXQy ... re=related
Not directly about OIT, but subtly promotes it - VS Ramachandran cuts loose - especially in the first 30 mins.
JEM ji, thanks - that is a great video. His uncle was professor of mine long time back.

Saw this post earlier today and thought I'd watch it this evening.
But all I'm staring at is a sign: "...Youtube Account terminated due to multiple third-party notifications of copyright infringement."
Is this thread being watched?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 28 Nov 2012 08:48

johneeG
I did not know that Kulaputri could open the Janampatri of so many.
Check the new pre Buddhist burial site found in SWAT.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-new ... 63658.aspx

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 28 Nov 2012 11:06

Possibly Carl... I can't watch it anymore either. Same message. Will try to find other locations...

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 28 Nov 2012 11:12

JohneeG garu,

It is possible that most of these areas could be forests thousands of year's back. We need to keep the timeline in mind too.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 28 Nov 2012 13:54

JE Menon saar,

I missed out on the video!

What was it about?

Speaking generally, in case of good videos, it will be better if one simply downloads it and keeps it for posterity, especially if the uploader does not have copyrights over it.

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 28 Nov 2012 14:42

shiv wrote:This is a good one. If someone could please get the pdf and put it where I can download it I would be grateful
Read online
http://ebookbrowse.com/aryan-invasion-m ... d281174166

Shiv, I can email it to you if you can give me your email address.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Nov 2012 15:49

hanumadu wrote:
shiv wrote:This is a good one. If someone could please get the pdf and put it where I can download it I would be grateful
Read online
http://ebookbrowse.com/aryan-invasion-m ... d281174166
Shiv, I can email it to you if you can give me your email address.

Thanks.

Please use bennedose AT hotmail

hanumadu · Post by **hanumadu** » 28 Nov 2012 16:02

shiv wrote:
hanumadu wrote: Shiv, I can email it to you if you can give me your email address.
Thanks.

Please use bennedose AT hotmail

Done.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 28 Nov 2012 17:07

johneeG wrote:
johneeG wrote:RajeshA ji,
fully concur with you about Egyptian culture having similarity with Hinduism. I wanted to post something on it. Perhaps, I'll do it. But one thing: It is very much possible that the 'Hindus of Egypt' accepted the burial method over cremation after careful deliberation. Egypt is a desert with very sparse vegetation. Cutting down trees for cremation would be costly in such circumstances. So, they may have resorted to burial. There is allowance for burial in such cases in Hinduism, AFAIK.
RajeshA wrote:johneeG ji,

That is indeed a good explanation! But considering that Egypt has been a desert for a long time, it is possible that when Indians entered Egypt, the local custom was already one of burying the dead, and the Indians did not protest, again because of scarce wood.
Saar,
What I had in mind was that there is no indigenous Egyptian religion apart from the Indian religion.<snip>

Similarly, my hypothesis is that the Egyptian religion was Indian religion through and through which was periodically reviewed; either the egyptians traveled to India or the Indian masters went to Egypt.

johneeG ji,

what disconcerts me about this theory is that we need to keep the timeline under scrutiny.

Burial customs in ancient Egypt are also over 5000 years old. These customs can thus not be explained by any Egyptian-Indian contacts two thousand years ago.

Now there is also no need to discount that even the 5000 old Egyptian customs may have had Indian influence, but we will have to dig up a lot more evidence.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 28 Nov 2012 17:11

Rajesh Ji, if it may help but some very recent excavations in Western UP, Sanauli IIRC show burial mounds with skeletons 4000 years old with pots etc. Simple google will confirm that.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 28 Nov 2012 17:12

johneeG wrote:"Matthew and Bartholomew are the same person - the Buddhist Maudgalyâyanas."

If one wishes to read up more on this, there is a post from me in "Reverse Inculturation" Thread.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 28 Nov 2012 17:17

shiv wrote:This is a good one. If someone could please get the pdf and put it where I can download it I would be grateful
Read online
http://ebookbrowse.com/aryan-invasion-m ... d281174166

shiv ji, also made public for others here, in case the source is taken out:
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=7 ... 689B72!119