Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 09:36

shiv wrote:What I found amusing was SirJoyji's emotional appeals where he says "Ok there was no Aryan invasion" but please accept my appeal that "Aryan" is a harmless word.
No. Aryans is racist terminology and suddenly going back through the last 10 pages or so it appears that I have collected up dozen or so obviously racist examples of the usage of the word Aryan from western texts. I will place those references in a permanent place for easy checking later on. In fact I have thought of a way of using Twitter here and I will do that. Thanks to SriJoy continuing to "shout and wave it about"
An epicure dining at Crewe
found quite a large rat in his stew
Said the waiter 'Don't shout,"
"and wave it about"
Or the others will want one too


It has been corrupted into racist moniker, just like Swastika has been corrupted as a sign of racial superiorism in the west.
As i said, i will present evidence of i am back to my computer in about a week or so. Its clear it won't make a difference to you, but it will for rational posters.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Rudradev » 11 Jul 2017 09:37

SriJoy wrote:
Amdst all this bluster, still waiting for you to substantiate your allegation of Akso Parpola being 'racist European' category for favouring an Aryan-Dravidian divide in linguistics.


:rotfl:
So now the onus is on other people to substantiate the myriad statements you produce through sheer rectal extraction.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 09:41

SriJoy wrote:It has been corrupted into racist moniker, just like Swastika has been corrupted as a sign of racial superiorism in the west.

Let me not indulge in the mindless triumphalism that you chose to exhibit by saying 'Now you're learning"

This "racist moniker" remains racist to this day. None of the scholars you quote or name has lifted one finger to reverse the usage of Aryan as a "racist moniker"

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 09:43

\
Last edited by SriJoy on 11 Jul 2017 09:49, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 09:44

SriJoy wrote:Amdst all this bluster, still waiting for you to substantiate your allegation of Akso Parpola being 'racist European' category for favouring an Aryan-Dravidian divide in linguistics.

From "Indo Aryan controversy" edited by Edwin Bryant
Part II titled “Archaeology and Linguistics,” begins with Asko Parpola and
Christian Carpelan’s chapter “The Cultural Counterparts to Proto-Indo-European,
Proto-Yralic and Proto-Aryan.” Their contribution is to sketch out a scenario in
which the archaeological data matches the cultural and linguistic data in the hypothe-
ses of Indo-European expansion. They argue first through etymological data, and
then through archaeological discussion, that Indo-European and Uralic proto-
languages were both spoken in the archaeological cultures of Eastern Europe.
Building on the work of David Anthony (1995, 1998), they also attempt to correlate
Indo-European and Uralic linguistic groups with archaeological cultures


I have already quoted David Anthony's lies:
viewtopic.php?p=2180147#p2180147
shiv wrote:The following paragraph is from my own notes, unpublished
The Eurasian steppe region has many ancient graves in which horses or parts of horses have
been buried along with humans. Some of these burials are elaborate and seem to be the graves of
important or wealthy people. It is claimed that burials of this type are described in the Vedas. This
is patently untrue. Not a single verse in the Vedas describes how to dig or construct a grave. No
Vedic hymn describes the burial of a king. Yet one single word in one hymn of the Rig Veda
(10.18.13) is widely quoted by archaeologists, linguists and historians as linking the Rig Veda with
“kurgan” type burials in the Eurasian steppe. David Anthony, an anthropologist and author of the
book “Horse, Wheel and Language” has commented in a paper entitled “Archaeology and
Language” 13 by saying: “One hymn (Rigveda 10.18) describes a covered burial chamber with posts
holding up the roof, walls shored up, and the chamber sealed with clay—a precise description of
Sintashta and Andronovo grave pits.”


I repeat that no Vedic scholar agrees that the Vedas were meant for translation. They are not histories. Griffiths translation sounds stupid. Ancient Hindus look like stupid morons if you read the translation. The link below is what Griffiths wrote. (Rig Veda 10:18.1 to 10.18.14)
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10018.htm

Tell me where it says what David Anthony the archaeologist claims: "a covered burial chamber with posts holding up the roof, walls shored up, and the chamber sealed with clay"

These people are liars. Every single one of them.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 09:46

shiv wrote:
SriJoy wrote:It has been corrupted into racist moniker, just like Swastika has been corrupted as a sign of racial superiorism in the west.

Let me not indulge in the mindless triumphalism that you chose to exhibit by saying 'Now you're learning"

This "racist moniker" remains racist to this day. None of the scholars you quote or name has lifted one finger to reverse the usage of Aryan as a "racist moniker"


Hasn't happened yet, does not mean it will never happen.
As i said, if the jews can reclaim 'jew' from being a derogatory term, Hindus should show a bit more spine than you and reclaim Aryan. Jew didn't start off as a racist term (just like Aryan) but it remained a racist term for far longer than Aryan has.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 09:55

SriJoy wrote:Hasn't happened yet, does not mean it will never happen.
As i said, if the jews can reclaim 'jew' from being a derogatory term, Hindus should show a bit more spine than you and reclaim Aryan. Jew didn't start off as a racist term (just like Aryan) but it remained a racist term for far longer than Aryan has.

Aryan is not an Indian word. There is nothing to reclaim.

Please desist from making personal remarks.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 09:56

Here is how Asko Parpola words his "CYA" statement in Edwin Bryants book
This is the starting point for the following scenario, which is put forward as a
set of theses for further substantiation or falsification. Undoubtedly, many details
need adjustment and are subject to correction. However, this is a holistic attempt
to fit together several interacting factors, and it seems difficult to find any other
archaeological model which in general could equally well explain the areal and
temporal distribution of the Indo-European and Uralic languages and the internal
contacts between them at different times and in different places. This applies
especially if the invention of wheeled transport is taken as the terminus post quem
for the dispersal of Late Proto-Indo-European.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 09:57

shiv wrote:
SriJoy wrote:Hasn't happened yet, does not mean it will never happen.
As i said, if the jews can reclaim 'jew' from being a derogatory term, Hindus should show a bit more spine than you and reclaim Aryan. Jew didn't start off as a racist term (just like Aryan) but it remained a racist term for far longer than Aryan has.

Aryan is not an Indian word. There is nothing to reclaim.

Please desist from making personal remarks.


Jew is also not a Hebrew word. they reclaimed it.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jul 2017 10:01

SriJoy wrote:I do not follow. why would horses in Iraq, syria etc not be arabian horses, given that it is also part of Arabia ?!

See your above post. You still didn't answer the origin part. We are discussing about origins. Not where the horse trotted.

@Dipankar , you too. The origin of Horse is still debatable.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 10:03

On a related note: Whether its Anatolian hypothesis/Steppe hypothesis or Out of India hypothesis, linguists have never managed to explain their 'language evolution timeline'. they all assume a linear rate of linguistic change and thus, if Middle English changed to modern English inside of 500 years, Old english must've evolved from old German in 500-1000 years, which evolved from its ancestor over 500-1000 years, etc., till they get to PIE (proto Indo-European).
Yet, if we were to make a logical hypothesis, it'd mean language change accelerates with technological advancement- because technology introduces more words in a language (e.g.: before Iron age, there is no word for Iron in language. Just like there was no Uranium in any language before we actually discovered it. Before wheel existed, man from China is almost garanteed to never meet man from Ukraine. So Chinese cannot influence Ukrainian before a certain period of time). So i don't understand, why older languages, with less words in their vocabulary and less contact with foreigners, will mutate at the same approximate rate as the newer languages with far more inter-linguistic contact.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 10:03

SriJoy wrote:
shiv wrote:Aryan is not an Indian word. There is nothing to reclaim.

Please desist from making personal remarks.


Jew is also not a Hebrew word. they reclaimed it.

They cannot reclaim what they did not own. We cannot claim to reclaim what we never owned. Someone coined the racist term "Aryan". That is as you have repeatedly stated, an English word.

It is also as I have repeatedly stated, a racist term for white people and no Indian source has coined the term even if Indian have used it out of ignorance of its racist connotation

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Rudradev » 11 Jul 2017 10:05

shiv wrote:Here is how Asko Parpola words his "CYA" statement in Edwin Bryants book

This is the starting point for the following scenario, which is put forward as a
set of theses for further substantiation or falsification. Undoubtedly, many details
need adjustment and are subject to correction. However, this is a holistic attempt
to fit together several interacting factors, and it seems difficult to find any other
archaeological model which in general could equally well explain the areal and
temporal distribution of the Indo-European and Uralic languages and the internal
contacts between them at different times and in different places. This applies
especially if the invention of wheeled transport is taken as the terminus post quem
for the dispersal of Late Proto-Indo-European.


I think somebody's computer just exploded :(( :(( :((
:mrgreen:

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 10:08

syam wrote:
SriJoy wrote:I do not follow. why would horses in Iraq, syria etc not be arabian horses, given that it is also part of Arabia ?!

See your above post. You still didn't answer the origin part. We are discussing about origins. Not where the horse trotted.

@Dipankar , you too. The origin of Horse is still debatable.


Ok. Archaelogically we have Arabian horse in Assyria, decisively, from 1200 BC period. So why should we consider origin myths of people who came much later (Jews, who did not write the OT till 900-800 BC) as the 'origin story' ?
that myth about Solomon getting a gift, is as credible as stealing ' Huwawa, the God of seven shimmering auras, slain by Gilgamesh' from the far older Sumerians. Unless of course, you think Huwawa= Yahweh (name of Jewish God) and 'seven auras of Huwawa = seven heavens and seven hells' is all just a big coincidence.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 10:10

shiv wrote:
SriJoy wrote:
Jew is also not a Hebrew word. they reclaimed it.

They cannot reclaim what they did not own. We cannot claim to reclaim what we never owned. Someone coined the racist term "Aryan". That is as you have repeatedly stated, an English word.

It is also as I have repeatedly stated, a racist term for white people and no Indian source has coined the term even if Indian have used it out of ignorance of its racist connotation


Stop living in denial. Jews have reclaimed 'Jew' from being a racist word, to being an ethnically neutral term, to the point where Benjamin Netanyahu uses it in official speak. that is called reclamation- restoring a word describing a people,by the people described, to its proper context.

So my question to you, is if Jews can reclaim a foreign word used derogatively, why can't we use a word (Aryan), which is far closer to its original word (Arya) than Jew is to 'Yahud', in a context that pleases us ?

syam
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jul 2017 10:12

SriJoy wrote:Ok. Archaelogically we have Arabian horse in Assyria, decisively, from 1200 BC period. So why should we consider origin myths of people who came much later (Jews, who did not write the OT till 900-800 BC) as the 'origin story' ?
that myth about Solomon getting a gift, is as credible as stealing ' Huwawa, the God of seven shimmering auras, slain by Gilgamesh' from the far older Sumerians. Unless of course, you think Huwawa= Yahweh (name of Jewish God) and 'seven auras of Huwawa = seven heavens and seven hells' is all just a big coincidence.

So it's not Arabian horse but Assyrian horse. May be it's time to change the name from Arabian to Assyrian.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 10:13

syam wrote:
SriJoy wrote:Ok. Archaelogically we have Arabian horse in Assyria, decisively, from 1200 BC period. So why should we consider origin myths of people who came much later (Jews, who did not write the OT till 900-800 BC) as the 'origin story' ?
that myth about Solomon getting a gift, is as credible as stealing ' Huwawa, the God of seven shimmering auras, slain by Gilgamesh' from the far older Sumerians. Unless of course, you think Huwawa= Yahweh (name of Jewish God) and 'seven auras of Huwawa = seven heavens and seven hells' is all just a big coincidence.

So it's not Arabian horse but Assyrian horse. May be it's time to change the name from Arabian to Assyrian.


Sure. But what is Assyria, has been seen as 'core of Arabia' for almost 1500 years. So people will see it as semantics.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 10:20

SriJoy wrote:So my question to you, is if Jews can reclaim a foreign word used derogatively, why can't we use a word (Aryan), which is far closer to its original word (Arya) than Jew is to 'Yahud', in a context that pleases us ?


:rotfl: Wait wait wait!

Let me get this right.

YOU want ME to provide justification for doing something that YOU think needs to be done. Not my problem sir. Not my problem. You have to figure that one out for yourself.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 10:24

shiv wrote:
SriJoy wrote:So my question to you, is if Jews can reclaim a foreign word used derogatively, why can't we use a word (Aryan), which is far closer to its original word (Arya) than Jew is to 'Yahud', in a context that pleases us ?


:rotfl: Wait wait wait!

Let me get this right.

YOU want ME to provide justification for doing something that YOU think needs to be done. Not my problem sir. Not my problem. You have to figure that one out for yourself.


Classic dodge. My point is simple. Jew has been used derogatively to imply venal, money-grabbing christ-killers for centuries, before Jews started opposing the word's racist connotations and succeeded.
And Jew is not even a Hebrew word or close to its Hebrew counterpart (Yahud). Ergo, if far tinier demographics of Jews can re-define a racially derogative word to an ethnically neutral term, Indians too can re-define Aryan to the proper cultural context of 'Arya' in Sanskrit.
to not do so, would be to allow racists to succeed in defining a word borrowed from our language to define us incorrectly.

Until you can demonstrate why it is okay to re-define Jew from racially derogative to ethnically neutral and not okay to do so for Aryan, you have no case. Simple. Pleas of 'its not an original word' is fallacy,because Jew is also not a Hebrew word, neither is Swastika the perfect Sanskrit version of the word.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jul 2017 10:30

SriJoy wrote:Sure. But what is Assyria, has been seen as 'core of Arabia' for almost 1500 years. So people will see it as semantics.

So Assyrian Empire is Arabian Empire as in Ancient Arabian world. Seems like these arabians were big people. Allah(PBUH) must been very gracious to them.

Still doesn't explain the origin story. Admit it, old man. You have no idea about it.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 10:34

syam wrote:
SriJoy wrote:Sure. But what is Assyria, has been seen as 'core of Arabia' for almost 1500 years. So people will see it as semantics.

So Assyrian Empire is Arabian Empire as in Ancient Arabian world. Seems like these arabians were big people. Allah(PBUH) must been very gracious to them.

Still doesn't explain the origin story. Admit it, old man. You have no idea about it.


Almost all 'origin stories' of monotheism are plagiarism of older faiths. Ie, pure invention.
So i do not see what relevance a Jewish plagiarism from 800-900 BC has to do to counter archaeological evidence of an earlier time.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jul 2017 10:47

SriJoy wrote:Almost all 'origin stories' of monotheism are plagiarism of older faiths. Ie, pure invention.
So i do not see what relevance a Jewish plagiarism from 800-900 BC has to do to counter archaeological evidence of an earlier time.

That still doesn't explain Arabian Horse origin.

If it is plagiarism, then we have to stop calling it Arabian horse. But the whole world calls it arabian horse.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 10:49

syam wrote:
SriJoy wrote:Almost all 'origin stories' of monotheism are plagiarism of older faiths. Ie, pure invention.
So i do not see what relevance a Jewish plagiarism from 800-900 BC has to do to counter archaeological evidence of an earlier time.

That still doesn't explain Arabian Horse origin.

If it is plagiarism, then we have to stop calling it Arabian horse. But the whole world calls it arabian horse.


the whole world calls it Arabian horse because the region is called arabia NOW. Just like nobody says 'Volga is in Volga-Bulgaria' and says 'Volga is in Russia' because Volga-Bulgaria is Russia now.
I don't think origin of Arabian horse can be explained through mythologies.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jul 2017 10:54

SriJoy wrote:the whole world calls it Arabian horse because the region is called arabia NOW. Just like nobody says 'Volga is in Volga-Bulgaria' and says 'Volga is in Russia' because Volga-Bulgaria is Russia now.
I don't think origin of Arabian horse can be explained through mythologies.

That region is called Iran too NOW. May be we can call it Iranian horse.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4717
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby svenkat » 11 Jul 2017 10:55

Some random thoughts on Aryan themes in Indian polity.
1)The people of southern TN are darkest while Cashmeres are fairest.The skin colour becomes darker towards south and east.
2)THe aryan-dravidan meme is strongest in TN.East Bengali peasants converted to Islam.The majority of Hindus in East Bengal were chandalas(rechristened namashudras)
3)Bihar was the leader of the heterodox challenge.Buddha who rejected Vedas attained enlightenment in Gaya.
4)The greatest Shiva temple(in terms of prestige) is Vishwanath temple,Kashi in Eastern UP.
5)Afghans ridicule pakjabis as originally worshippers of shivalingam who were brought to the "Light of Islam" by Mahmud of Ghazni.
6)The greatest no ofhymns in Rigveda is for Indra,Varuna,Agni but Hinduism is defined by worship of Shiva,Narayana and Mother goddess.Narayana is not a word/term found in the samhita portion of vedas according to scholars.
7)Mother Goddess(Kali/Shakthi)worship is almost absent in Rigveda.
8)The Aryas worshipped by yagnas.Temple worship is the main mode of worship for hindus including brahmanas today.
9)The right to study vedas is strictly limited.Brahmanas have gotras.
10)The Rigvedas geography is NW India+Kubha river in afghanisthan according to scholars.The Yajurvedas geography indicates a shift towards Eastern UP+Mithila and awareness of southern people like andhras.
11)All evidence suggest that Aryas had an extraordinary tradition called vedas and those people were shifting to east and they were assimilating ideas/beliefs(Shiva/Narayana/Atman/Karma).In time West Punjab was becoming unorthodox and the centre of gravity of Arya people became UP.Yet in the far east,East Bengal was anaarya.These were vraatyas-beyond the pale.Paundra Vasudeva was the imposter par excellence.

Hindus of North India see themselves as defenders of Vedic heritage though in reality it is the southern brahmanas who defended vedic orthodoxy most as North India capitulated before muslim aggression.The north indian polity and society was incapable of resisting mlecchas.It seems as if something greater than literal veda was at work.(Karma?)Pakjab became muslim and perhaps even East Punjab would have succumbed but for the message of Veda.Nanak who rebelled against vedic literalism saved the day for "Hindu"Punjab.

There is a verse in Upanishad which I am not able to locate.May be some one in BRF can help.

"The Veda is there not for Vedas sake but for the sake of Atma"

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 11:01

syam wrote:
SriJoy wrote:the whole world calls it Arabian horse because the region is called arabia NOW. Just like nobody says 'Volga is in Volga-Bulgaria' and says 'Volga is in Russia' because Volga-Bulgaria is Russia now.
I don't think origin of Arabian horse can be explained through mythologies.

That region is called Iran too NOW. May be we can call it Iranian horse.


Sure. You will find that place names often don't follow rhyme or reason. I try to not get hung up on labels more than the contents of said label.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 11:08

svenkat wrote:Some random thoughts on Aryan themes in Indian polity.
1)The people of southern TN are darkest while Cashmeres are fairest.The skin colour becomes darker towards south and east.
2)THe aryan-dravidan meme is strongest in TN.East Bengali peasants converted to Islam.The majority of Hindus in East Bengal were chandalas(rechristened namashudras)
3)Bihar was the leader of the heterodox challenge.Buddha who rejected Vedas attained enlightenment in Gaya.
4)The greatest Shiva temple(in terms of prestige) is Vishwanath temple,Kashi in Eastern UP.
5)Afghans ridicule pakjabis as originally worshippers of shivalingam who were brought to the "Light of Islam" by Mahmud of Ghazni.
6)The greatest no ofhymns in Rigveda is for Indra,Varuna,Agni but Hinduism is defined by worship of Shiva,Narayana and Mother goddess.Narayana is not a word/term found in the samhita portion of vedas according to scholars.
7)Mother Goddess(Kali/Shakthi)worship is almost absent in Rigveda.
8)The Aryas worshipped by yagnas.Temple worship is the main mode of worship for hindus including brahmanas today.
9)The right to study vedas is strictly limited.Brahmanas have gotras.
10)The Rigvedas geography is NW India+Kubha river in afghanisthan according to scholars.The Yajurvedas geography indicates a shift towards Eastern UP+Mithila and awareness of southern people like andhras.
11)All evidence suggest that Aryas had an extraordinary tradition called vedas and those people were shifting to east and they were assimilating ideas/beliefs(Shiva/Narayana/Atman/Karma).In time West Punjab was becoming unorthodox and the centre of gravity of Arya people became UP.Yet in the far east,East Bengal was anaarya.These were vraatyas-beyond the pale.Paundra Vasudeva was the imposter par excellence.

Hindus of North India see themselves as defenders of Vedic heritage though in reality it is the southern brahmanas who defended vedic orthodoxy most as North India capitulated before muslim aggression.The north indian polity and society was incapable of resisting mlecchas.It seems as if something greater than literal veda was at work.(Karma?)Pakjab became muslim and perhaps even East Punjab would have succumbed but for the message of Veda.Nanak who rebelled against vedic literalism saved the day for "Hindu"Punjab.

There is a verse in Upanishad which I am not able to locate.May be some one in BRF can help.

"The Veda is there not for Vedas sake but for the sake of Atma"



All of the points you've made are true, but it doesn't mean origin has to be 'even further west and north', aka Ukraine. People forget the magnitude of India in ancient context. We were the largest civilization, by far, in population and wealth, till roughly 100 AD and pinnacle or Roman Empire/again for brief periods of 1st and 2nd millennium CE, till effectively, Industrial revolution and mughal-brit conquests.

So it is perfectly possible for Aryan culture to be initially present in a small area of Indian subcontnent- its foot-print matches upper reaches and oldest spots of IVC remarkably well. With fall of IVC, it is perfectly justified to correlate latter Vedic literary context, with IVC and earlier Vedic literary context as proto-IVC of Punjab(Pak and Indian) + Haryana region and North-east Rajasthan.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15623
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby chetak » 11 Jul 2017 11:21

^^^^^^^

@SriJoy

exactly, what are you saying?? That the AIT is right, alive and well??

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4717
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby svenkat » 11 Jul 2017 11:23

Sayana's veda bhasyas were the basis of goras translation of veda.Sayana considers Yajur Veda as the heart of Veda.For Veda was not a book to be studied in reading rooms,but to traditional brahmanas,Veda was to be lived by brahmanas and doing yagnas was the svadharma of brahmanas.

One can then argue that UP was the heart of Hindu civilisation but then the obsession with Rigveda has to be given up.My 2nayapaise.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 12:48

SriJoy wrote:
Until you can demonstrate why it is okay to re-define Jew from racially derogative to ethnically neutral and not okay to do so for Aryan, you have no case. Simple. Pleas of 'its not an original word' is fallacy,because Jew is also not a Hebrew word, neither is Swastika the perfect Sanskrit version of the word.


The reason is simple. You have an idea that I disagree with for reasons that I have stated before and will state again below. I am not going to debate your idea with you because there is no debate as far as I am concerned

Aryan is a racist word. That needs to be known by more and more people

Aryan is not an Indian word. We cannot reclaim what is not ours

There is absolutely no reason for us to claim the racist word Aryan as ours and then protest that it is not racist despite overwhelming printed literary evidence that it has never lost its racist connotation.

Finally, since you claim to be arguing a case, I must point out that shorn of your boasts, and shorn of rhetoric like "evidence to explode" other views; shorn of personal barbs like not having a spine or not dhoti shivering; and shorn
of emotional appeals about what Jews did you have not made any case for adopting a racist English word as an innocent Indian word.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 199
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jul 2017 13:10

SriJoy wrote:Sure. You will find that place names often don't follow rhyme or reason. I try to not get hung up on labels more than the contents of said label.

You contradict yourself, old man. First nothing big deal about it. But then it is big deal. Only it is big deal if India involved in it.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 15:39

shiv wrote:
SriJoy wrote:
Until you can demonstrate why it is okay to re-define Jew from racially derogative to ethnically neutral and not okay to do so for Aryan, you have no case. Simple. Pleas of 'its not an original word' is fallacy,because Jew is also not a Hebrew word, neither is Swastika the perfect Sanskrit version of the word.


The reason is simple. You have an idea that I disagree with for reasons that I have stated before and will state again below. I am not going to debate your idea with you because there is no debate as far as I am concerned

Aryan is a racist word. That needs to be known by more and more people

Aryan is not an Indian word. We cannot reclaim what is not ours

There is absolutely no reason for us to claim the racist word Aryan as ours and then protest that it is not racist despite overwhelming printed literary evidence that it has never lost its racist connotation.

Finally, since you claim to be arguing a case, I must point out that shorn of your boasts, and shorn of rhetoric like "evidence to explode" other views; shorn of personal barbs like not having a spine or not dhoti shivering; and shorn
of emotional appeals about what Jews did you have not made any case for adopting a racist English word as an innocent Indian word.


So you are implying, what Jews are capable of, Indians are not.
Impressive, o 'nationalist'.

As for emotional appeal about what Jews did, first off, your appeal is an emotional one as well and you are conflating an emotional appeal with an analogy.

As i said, in due time, i will show 'India is origin point and Aryan has been used before Aryan suepriority theory' by Euros, thereby proving that the word is perverted, not invented by racists like you claim.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby SriJoy » 11 Jul 2017 15:41

syam wrote:
SriJoy wrote:Sure. You will find that place names often don't follow rhyme or reason. I try to not get hung up on labels more than the contents of said label.

You contradict yourself, old man. First nothing big deal about it. But then it is big deal. Only it is big deal if India involved in it.


Ok, you have completely lost me. My point is, calling it an 'arabian horse' doesn't change the fact that Arabian horse is present in Assyria and has nothing to do with the hocus-pocus story of king solomon that'd imply arabian horse is Indian horse. It isn't.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33300
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 11 Jul 2017 16:31

SriJoy wrote:
So you are implying, what Jews are capable of, Indians are not.
Impressive, o 'nationalist'.

As for emotional appeal about what Jews did, first off, your appeal is an emotional one as well and you are conflating an emotional appeal with an analogy.

Once I (or anyone else) writes anything - the words are out of the writers hands and a reader is free to make whatever he wants out of them. But if I make 100 posts saying the same thing and you make a dozen different interpretations, barbs and pointless appeals - the hundreds who read BRF are able to reach conclusions about who is talking crap and who is not.

SriJoy wrote:As i said, in due time, i will show 'India is origin point and Aryan has been used before Aryan suepriority theory' by Euros, thereby proving that the word is perverted, not invented by racists like you claim.

I am no astrologer. I cannot see the future. I can only say what I know now and what I want for the future.

What I know now is that no matter where the word "Arya" was conceived it was always Arya was never a racist expression. Aryan is an English word that is used in a racist sense. I would be happy to be woken up at that future date when your prediction has come true - but having heard people predict things on this forum I know that no matter how much time passes one is told that the event "will come later". Add this to the "explosive evidence" that is still to come. So I am sceptical about astrological/ouija board/tea leaf reading predictions that come alongside boasts, barbs, appeals and convoluted rhetoric - which is all that you have offered as "evidence" against the fact that Aryan is a racist word. Arya is a different word. That is Indian all right. It does not need reclaiming. No one took it.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 11 Jul 2017 16:55

Shrikant Talageri's recent summary (10 July) on AIT. Good summary.

Of course, I wonder, how, even he, arrived at ~3000 BCE for the original home of PIE!

d. The evidence of linguistics shows that the different dialects (which later became distinct branches of Indo-European languages) were in contact with each other in an area of mutual influence in and around the Original Homeland (wherever this Homeland was located) till around 3000 BCE, and only started to separate and get cut off from each other at around that time.


http://talageri.blogspot.com/2017/07/th ... story.html

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9667
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Jul 2017 17:25

On "Arya" vs. "Aryan" - if the argument has come down to reiterating one's positions, I request, please drop it, until there are fresh arguments to be had? Thanks in advance!

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 652
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Primus » 11 Jul 2017 19:22

svenkat wrote:Some random thoughts on Aryan themes in Indian polity.
1)The people of southern TN are darkest while Cashmeres are fairest.The skin colour becomes darker towards south and east.
2)THe aryan-dravidan meme is strongest in TN.East Bengali peasants converted to Islam.The majority of Hindus in East Bengal were chandalas(rechristened namashudras)
3)Bihar was the leader of the heterodox challenge.Buddha who rejected Vedas attained enlightenment in Gaya.
4)The greatest Shiva temple(in terms of prestige) is Vishwanath temple,Kashi in Eastern UP.
5)Afghans ridicule pakjabis as originally worshippers of shivalingam who were brought to the "Light of Islam" by Mahmud of Ghazni.
6)The greatest no ofhymns in Rigveda is for Indra,Varuna,Agni but Hinduism is defined by worship of Shiva,Narayana and Mother goddess.Narayana is not a word/term found in the samhita portion of vedas according to scholars.
7)Mother Goddess(Kali/Shakthi)worship is almost absent in Rigveda.
8)The Aryas worshipped by yagnas.Temple worship is the main mode of worship for hindus including brahmanas today.
9)The right to study vedas is strictly limited.Brahmanas have gotras.
10)The Rigvedas geography is NW India+Kubha river in afghanisthan according to scholars.The Yajurvedas geography indicates a shift towards Eastern UP+Mithila and awareness of southern people like andhras.
11)All evidence suggest that Aryas had an extraordinary tradition called vedas and those people were shifting to east and they were assimilating ideas/beliefs(Shiva/Narayana/Atman/Karma).In time West Punjab was becoming unorthodox and the centre of gravity of Arya people became UP.Yet in the far east,East Bengal was anaarya.These were vraatyas-beyond the pale.Paundra Vasudeva was the imposter par excellence.

Hindus of North India see themselves as defenders of Vedic heritage though in reality it is the southern brahmanas who defended vedic orthodoxy most as North India capitulated before muslim aggression.The north indian polity and society was incapable of resisting mlecchas.It seems as if something greater than literal veda was at work.(Karma?)Pakjab became muslim and perhaps even East Punjab would have succumbed but for the message of Veda.Nanak who rebelled against vedic literalism saved the day for "Hindu"Punjab.

There is a verse in Upanishad which I am not able to locate.May be some one in BRF can help.

"The Veda is there not for Vedas sake but for the sake of Atma"


Mostly right, minor nitpicks.

6. Afghans themselves were once Hindus, but that's the typical attitude of muslims, older converts look down upon recent ones.
8. Arya Samaj does not worship in the traditional way, mainly yagnas (havan) and they have their own priests and temples. No idol worship, no designated deities like Shiva, Vishnu etc. Yet they are considered mainstream Hindus by most people, thus intermarriage is perfectly acceptable. Have several relatives who are Arya Samajis.
9. Other castes also have gotras, I am not a Brahmin but do have one.
10 and 11. Don't know much myself, but reading Michael Danino and others, it seems the eastward movement began once the Saraswati began drying up, although the basin of the mother river was massive and included over 3700 sites of the Harappan era.

The rest of your post is quite sensitive. I had alluded to the factors which led to the islamic conquest of north/north-west India on another thread and it became a difficult discussion to say the least. I think it is a sensitive topic and there are many reasons for the Hindu 'inability to resist mlecchas'. Suffice it to say there were many brave Hindus who fought almost impossible odds and resisted till the end. There were also many Hindus who became collaborators and facilitators for the invaders.

Agree with your last sentence.
Last edited by Primus on 11 Jul 2017 19:40, edited 1 time in total.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2862
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Dipanker » 11 Jul 2017 19:31

shiv wrote:
Rig Veda's mention of the number horse ribs coincided with the number of ribs Arabian horses have.


Volume/Verse ref. number ?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8337
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby UlanBatori » 11 Jul 2017 19:41

Perhaps the right answer to the Dravida question is that we should seek the word root in Tamizh, not Samskrtam. Incidentally, the words "choru" (rice), "vair" (stomach) etc cited in the pages posted by Guptaji, occur in Malayalam, not in modern Tamil. Cooked rice is now "shadam" in TN and Tamil-speaking Sri Lanka.

More and more, I begin to wonder whether one should not seek the origins of Tamizh in Malloostan, not the other way round. Or is there a drastic jump to say, Indonesia, Kampuchea or Vietnam for the answers?

Of course, one cannot expect the British of 1870 to understand that Malloostani and Tamizh were two different languages. Even many Macaulay-ejjikated North Indian proud desis today consider everyone south of the Vindhays to be "Madrasis".

sudarshan
BRFite
Posts: 1601
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby sudarshan » 11 Jul 2017 20:40

"Choru/Soru" is also colloquial (modern) Tamil for cooked rice, and probably more commonly used than "saadam." And "Vair" definitely exists in modern Tamil, though it's kind of colloquialized now. You can say "thoppai," but that commonly means "paunch," although it also refers to "stomach." "Kodal" is intestine. UB ji, how familiar are you with Tamil really :)? No offense intended.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chinmay, SRoy, TKiran and 30 guests