Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22872 » 11 Feb 2014 08:07

Please watch from ~36 mins. Rajiv Malhotra ji speaking on digestion of Sanskrit by computational linguistics, thought it is also relevant to this thread:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 17 Feb 2014 09:24

Don't know if these links were posted here - both from DFI

Evidence for the continuity between Harappan Signs and Brahmi letters
Now a 30 cm tall varaha found under the foundation of a home in Haryana is now providing an interesting clue into the later usage of the Indus-Saraswati script. This 2 kg, copper figure went on display for the first time in Brussels last year and will be exhibited at the National Museum in Delhi from March 6th for two months. According to the description which appeared in The Art Newspaper, “The figure has a cast relief on its chest of a unicorn-like animal, similar to motifs found on seals of the Harappa culture, which thrived until around 1900 BC.” But the most interesting part is the inscription above this creature; according to the curator Naman Ahuja the inscription represents “a combination of Harappan signs and Brahmi letters”, suggesting that it comes from “a period of overlap between the two cultures.”



A Study of the Indus Signs
Sometimes, in the ancient writing samples found in the Indian subcontinent, we find that amixture of Harappan and Brahmi features has been used. This definitely points towards acontinuous evolutionary process that transformed the Harappan script into the later dayBrahmi. This also explains why many of the Harappan signs seem to have been simply carriedforward (even in actual form) in the Brahmi script.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22872 » 21 Feb 2014 19:47

From:
The Root Of India-Pakistan Conflicts

Posting only the relevant part

Myth 1: Pakistanis = Descendents of the Indus Valley Civilization
The most aggressive identity engineering project is the theory of Pakistanis depicted as the 8,000-year-old people of the Indus Valley. This civilization is presented as different from the Ganges Valley civilization. The Indus and Ganges are depicted as the ancestral homelands of Pakistanis and Indians, respectively. Hence, they have always been separate people. Given this model, Pakistan's Indus Valley researchers are encouraged to show the links to the Middle East civilizations of Mesopotamia, so as to bring Pakistan and the Arab-Persian worlds into a single continuous historical-geographical identity since the beginnings of recorded history.

The following article titled, Separating Urdu from Sanskrit, published in the Urdu newspaper Jang, explains the construction of this theory of an 8,000-year-old Pakistan:

“Pakistani intellectuals have been looking for the roots of their separate identity in the remote past for the last two decades. They are not satisfied with the two-nation theory propounded by Iqbal, according to which religion was the basis of nationhood… They want to show that… the Indus and the Gangetic valleys have always been home to separate civilizations. Being the heir to the Indus valley civilization, Pakistan is a geographic entity whose roots go back to time immemorial…

“Hitherto, the generally held belief has been that Urdu came into being as a result of social contacts between the Muslims who came to India during the middle ages and the native population. So the language was taken to be a crossbreed of Turko-Persian-Arabic vocables with the local dialects. This is, in a nutshell, the view held by such eminent linguists as G.A. Griesson and Sir Charles Lyall, to mention only two. This theory presupposed that these dialects themselves were based upon, or rather were a by-product of Sanskrit.

“Khalid Hasan Qadiri [a new identity developer]… reaches the conclusion that Urdu has its roots in the languages of the Munda tribes who were the inhabitants of the Indus Valley in pre-Dravidian periods…. In this way we are led to believe that the Urdu language has a very well-defined and clear-cut grammar, absolutely different from Sanskrit in every respect. The very basic philosophy governing the grammatical structure of these two languages is totally different. And by any stretch of imagination one cannot state Urdu to have emanated from the sacred language of the Hindus. Grammatically speaking Urdu owes nothing to Sanskrit. Hence it cannot be grouped with the Aryan language either. It clearly belongs to some non-Aryan group of languages. And this view is supposed to give us some solace.”

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 28 Feb 2014 22:20

BRFites may find some of the blog articles I wrote, related to river Sarasvati, relevant (context of OIT. at a minimum - falsification of AIT)

Here are the links.

http://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2014/02/ ... -ramayana/

http://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2014/02/ ... -ramayana/

http://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2014/02/ ... arata-war/

http://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2013/07/ ... ayana-era/

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 28 Feb 2014 22:25

And here is another in support of assertion of 14,000+ years old continuous Indian civilization

In 2014, Gudhi-Padava would be celebrated on 31 March 2014. (Traditions can be very sticky)

http://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2014/02/ ... -festival/

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3320
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 28 Feb 2014 22:25

Nilesh sir on each of these (I read only the first one), can you also mention what is the modern city names. That will paint the context.
Thanks,
Ravi

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 01 Mar 2014 00:27

fanne wrote:Nilesh sir on each of these (I read only the first one), can you also mention what is the modern city names. That will paint the context.
Thanks,
Ravi

Fanne/Ravi ji,

Messengers (Ayodhya to Kekaya) took one route and Bharata appears to have different (similar but not identical) route.

The descriptions mention Hastinapura (keep in mind - Kuru-Panchala existed.. but this is long long time ago before Mahabharata) where they crossed Ganga. Also river Gomati while going eastward to Ayodhya.

Identification of Girivraja is not certain... but again based on specific rivers they crossed (e.g. Sutlej but also Bias).. somewhere near Amritsar/ Lahore but further North (northwest) of these places.. e.g. Sialkot, Jammu etc.

In not so modern times Kekaya kingdom is identified with border areas of Pakistan/Afganistan.

Since we are talking identification of locations going back some 14,000 years in antiquity, the challenges of identification of places are not surprising.

My guess is...something like (in terms of modern cities)

Jammu - Amritsar, Ludiana-kaithal-Jind/Gohana -North of Delhi-Lucknow- Ayodhya


RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Mar 2014 20:06

The Paracas Man



Published on Feb 11, 2014
By Mary-Ann Russon
Are Paracas Elongated Skulls a New Species, Aliens or a Hoax?: IBTimes

Initial DNA analysis of one of the 3,000-year-old elongated skulls found in Paracas, Peru, has revealed that they may not have been come from humans but from a completely new species, according to Paracas Museum assistant director Brien Foerster.

Foerster, who also runs his own tour group company in Peru and has authored 11 books on ancient history, told Ancient Origins that a geneticist who tested skull samples has found that they contain mutated DNA that does not match any known genetic DNA information in GenBank, an open-access sequence database of all the known genetic data in the world.

The unidentified geneticist told Foerster: "It had mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) with mutations unknown in any human, primate, or animal known so far. But a few fragments I was able to sequence from this sample indicate that if these mutations will hold we are dealing with a new human-like creature, very distant from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans."

"I am not sure it will even fit into the known evolutionary tree," the geneticist added.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1202
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

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

Postby Virendra » 04 Mar 2014 20:23

Unidentified geneticist? Why is such news always veiled in obscurity.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

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

Postby Lalmohan » 04 Mar 2014 20:28

Virendra wrote:Unidentified geneticist? Why is such news always veiled in obscurity.


because his name is probably von daniken

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 04 Mar 2014 21:18

Virendra wrote:Unidentified geneticist? Why is such news always veiled in obscurity.


From the interview, I gathered that the geneticist would come forward, only once he has sufficient evidence and his testing has been comprehensive, so that he can withstand the ensuing scrutiny from his peers!

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21142
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 15 Mar 2014 03:32

Rajiv Malhota Wins Again. Now they will chew and digest Swami Vivekanand's Vedantic teachings in WEST and spew it as Made in Religious China Known as Vaticana. I am sending this to RM.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson Shows Science And Religion Can Co-Exist In ‘Cosmos’
Nou You Know The reason Why this Series being Revived
But what about public theologian?

It might sound crazy, but the recent reboot of the television show Cosmos: A Personal Journey — Carl Sagan’s classic 1980s exploration of all things science, this time starring the charismatic Tyson and renamed “Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey” — is already attracting more attention for what it says about religion than astrophysics.The show, which premiered Sunday night, begins roughly as expected, with Tyson guiding viewers through a humbling and special-effect laden tour of our seemingly infinite cosmos. But things abruptly shift gears as the program enters its middle segment, with Tyson narrating an animated retelling of the life of Giordano Bruno, a 14th century Dominican friar who dared to make the bold claim that our universe is not confined to the solar system (with the sun at the center), but in fact home an infinite number of suns besides our own, each surrounded by worlds populated with intelligent beings.

Predictably, Bruno’s ideas weren’t exactly popular with the religious leadership of his day. Scene after scene shows him mocked and exiled for his passionate embrace of an infinite universe, and Bruno is eventually imprisoned and tortured by the religious “thought police.” Ultimately, despite Bruno’s repeated assertion that his controversial conviction is fueled by his deep love in “the Creator,” we see him burned at the stake for his beliefs.Bruno’s story makes for fantastic drama, but one can’t help but feel that his narrative seems a little out of place in Cosmos. Throughout the program’s hour-long runtime, Tyson repeatedly champions the merits of science and the scientific method; science is powerful, Tyson argues, because it operates using empirically verifiable evidence. Yet Bruno’s belief in an infinite universe was born not out of the evidence or scientific fact, but out of a fantastical vision. Tyson even says as much at the close of the segment: “Bruno was no scientist. His vision of the cosmos was a lucky guess, because he had no evidence to support it. Like most guesses, it could well turn out wrong. But once the idea was in the air, it gave others a target to aim at, if only to disprove it.”So why tell Bruno’s story? Some have interpreted the segment as an excuse to make a wholesale attack on religion. Spurred by an explosion of people who use religion deny the existence of climate change, the public wing of the scientific community has been more aggressive towards religion recently, with Bill Nye even going so far as to debate the merits of Creationism with Ken Ham at the Creation Museum in Kentucky. Thus, maybe Cosmos, produced by vocal atheist Seth MacFarlane, is using the drama of Bruno’s story to implicitly shame religious Americans by highlighting an example of oppression enacted by religious hierarchy.But a closer look at the segment reveals that Tyson and company may have in fact divised a far more effective way of disarming the science-v.-religion debate by venturing into what religious scholars sometimes classify as “public theology.” Others have rightly noted that the core message of the Bruno narrative isn’t that God doesn’t exist, but rather “your God is too small.” The “your” here is directed not at believers at large, but instead implicitly pointed at the small minority of conservative Christians who continue to doggedly insist that science is somehow incompatible with religion.
:rotfl: ( Tell this to Popp at V)
And make no mistake, they are a minority. Although it receives less airtime than fundamentalist theological strains, scientifically-informed theology is norm — not the exception — among modern American Christians. For every conservative pundit or elected official who tries to use the Bible to deny climate change, polls show that there are millions more religious Americans (read: the majority of almost every faith major faith tradition) who agree that the recent string of natural disasters were the result of climate change. In fact, a recent study conducted by Rice University found that not only do roughly half of American evangelicals believe that “science and religion can work together and support one another,” but that evangelical scientists actually practice their religion more than evangelical Protestants in the general population. Roman Catholicism has come a long way since Bruno’s day as well. Although admittedly embarrassingly late to the science game, the Vatican issued a formal apology to Galileo, who was also imprisoned for his scientific beliefs, in 1992, and now employs an official Vatican astronomer. There is even an entire book published by the Vatican dedicated to the discerning the theological challenges of life on other worlds (which is also the subject of some fantastic science fiction), and multiple popes have listed climate change as a primary concern for the church. And lest we forget, the Big Bang Theory was originally developed by none other than Georges Lemaître, a Belgian physicist, astronomer, and Catholic priest.
Tyson himself has made a point of praising this more nuanced brand of religious thought. In a recent interview on WNYC’s “Brian Lehrer Show,” he spoke about the Bruno segment and noted that the real problem isn’t religion per se, but the use of narrow theology to restrict the new ideas.“The issue there is not religion versus non-religion, or religion versus science,” Tyson said. “The issue is ideas that are different versus dogma.”To be sure, Tyson — who like Carl Sagan before him, describes himself as an agnostic, although not an atheist — isn’t likely to be writing theological tomes anytime soon. But perhaps Tyson’s Cosmos can continue to use stories like Bruno’s to assert a simple theological truth that millions of Christians have known for centuries: science might be a threat to intolerant religious people, but God and science are anything but incompatible. At its best, firm theological conviction like Bruno’s can actually work with science to produce fantastic, world-changing ideas — some of which might even be worth retelling in television shows hundreds of years down the line.Amen to that.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1202
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

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

Postby Virendra » 31 Mar 2014 11:54

Talageri has written again.
http://bharatabharati.wordpress.com/201 ... -talageri/
Does he own a blog or website ?

Aha .. Mr. Hock whom Talageri is dressing down and Elst is defending, belongs to the Angana Chatterji cabal !!
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6249&p=1423998&hilit=hans+hock#p1423998

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

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

Postby johneeG » 22 Apr 2014 23:00

Self-delete.

AbhiJ
BRFite
Posts: 494
Joined: 29 Sep 2010 17:33
Contact:

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

Postby AbhiJ » 23 May 2014 18:20

OIT Summarized:

You may find it surprising that much of
Christianity originated from India. Indeed,
over the centuries, numerous historians and
sages have pointed out that not only has
Hinduism had a predominant influence on
Christianity, but that many of the Christian rites could be directly borrowed from Hindu
(Vedic) India. French historian Alain Danielou had noticed as
early as 1950 that "a great number of events
which surround the birth of Christ - as it is
related in the Gospels - strangely reminded us
of Buddha's and Krishna's legends." Danielou quotes as examples the structure of
the Christian Church, which resembles that of
the Buddhist Chaitya; the rigorous asceticism
of certain early Christian sects, which reminds
one of the asceticism of Jain and Buddhist
saints; the veneration of relics, the usage of holy water, which is an Indian practice, and
the word "Amen," which comes from the
Hindu (Sanskrit) "OM." Another historian, Belgium's Konraad Elst, also
remarks "that many early Christian saints,
such as Hippolytus of Rome, possessed an
intimate knowledge of Brahmanism." Elst
even quotes the famous Saint Augustine who
wrote: "We never cease to look towards India, where many things are proposed to
our admiration." Unfortunately, remarks American Indianist
David Frawley, "from the second century
onwards, Christian leaders decided to break
away from the Hindu influence and show
that Christianity only started with the birth of
Christ." Hence, many later saints began branding Brahmins as "heretics," and Saint
Gregory set a future trend by publicly
destroying the "pagan" idols of the Hindus. Great Indian sages, such as Sri Aurobindu and
Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, the founder of the Art of
Living, have often remarked that the stories
recounting how Jesus came to India to be
initiated are probably true. Sri Sri Ravi
Shankar notes, for instance, that Jesus sometimes wore an orange robe, the Hindu
symbol of renunciation of the world, which
was not a usual practice in Judaism. "In the same way," he continues, "the
worshiping of Virgin Mary in Catholicism is
probably borrowed from the Hindu cult of
Devi." Bells too, which cannot be found today in
Synagogues, the surviving form of Judaism,
are used in church-and we all know their
importance in Buddhism and Hinduism for
thousands of years, even up to the present
day. There are many other similarities between
Hinduism and Christianity, including the use
of incense, sacred bread (prasadam), the
different altars around churches (which recall
the manifold deities in their niches inside
Hindu temples), reciting prayers on the rosary (Vedic japamala), the Christian Trinity (the
ancient Vedic trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and
Shiva as the creator, maintainer and
destroyer respectively, as well as Lord
Krishna as the Supreme Lord, the all-
pervading Brahman as the holy ghost, and Paramatma as the expansion or son of the
Lord), Christian processions, and the use of
the sign of the cross (anganyasa), and so
many others. In fact, Hinduism's pervading influence seems
to go much earlier than Christianity. American
mathematician, A. Seindenberg, has, for
example, shown that the Shulbasutras, the
ancient Vedic science of mathematics,
constitute the source of mathematics in the antique world of Babylon to Greece: "The
arithmetic equations of the Shulbasutras
were used in the observation of the triangle
by the Babylonians as well as in the
edification of Egyptian pyramids, in particular
the funeral altar in the form of pyramid known in the Vedic world as smasana-cit." In astronomy too, the "Indus" (from the
valley of the Indus) have left a universal
legacy, determining for instance the dates of
solstices, as noted by 18th century French
astronomer Jean Sylvain Bailly: "The
movement of stars which was calculated by Hindus 4,500 years ago, does not differ even
by a minute from the tables which we are
using today." And he concludes: "The Hindu
systems of astronomy are much more
ancient than those of the Egyptians-even the
Jews derive from the Hindus their knowledge." There is also no doubt that the Greeks heavily
borrowed from the "Indus." Danielou notes
that the Greek cult of Dionysus, which later
became Bacchus with the Romans, is a branch
of Shaivism: "Greeks spoke of India as the
sacred territory of Dionysus, and even historians of Alexander the Great identified
the Indian Shiva with Dionysus and mention
the dates and legends of the Puranas." French
philosopher and Le Monde journalist Jean-
Paul Droit recently wrote in his book, The
Forgetfulness of India, that "the Greeks loved so much Indian philosophy that Demetrios
Galianos had even translated the Bhagavad-
gita." Many Western and Christian historians have
tried to nullify this India influence on
Christians and ancient Greece by saying that
it is the West through the Aryan invasion, and
later the onslaught of Alexander the Great of
India, which influenced Indian astronomy, mathematics, architecture, philosophy-and
not vice versa. But new archeological and
linguistic discoveries have proved that there
never was an Aryan invasion and that there
is a continuity from the ancient Vedic
civilization to the Saraswati culture. The Vedas, for instance, which constitute the
soul of present day Hinduism, have not been
composed in 1500 B.C., as Max Muller
arbitrarily decided, but may go back to 7000
years before Christ, giving Hinduism plenty of
time to influence Christianity and older civilizations which preceded Christianity. Thus, we should be aware of and point out
the close links which exist between
Christianity and Hinduism (ancient Vedic
culture), which bind them into a sacred
brotherhood. Conscientious Christian and
Western scholars can realize how the world humanity's basic culture is Vedic through
proper research.


http://m.news24.com/news24/MyNews24/Chr ... m-20140518

Is the author a BRF Member?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 23 May 2014 18:40

The Out-of-India Theory says that Indians seeded many civilizations in Eurasia with our knowledge, language and to some extent with our genes as well.


I had not noticed this thread. I PROTEST!!!

What is described here is simply the famous GAC (Gypsy-Alien Certainty) that was expounded by that peerless and late departed Historian, my Evi 6th Coujin, MANY years ago.

The proof of GAC is all around us. For one thing, that European "civilization" came out of India is unmistakeable. The land path taken by the Gypsies is clear proof. A simple Google Satellite view of Afghanistan will show the unmistakeable crater shape of Afghanistan - either an asteroid strike or a hundred multi-megaton nukes.

The Pyramids, and various other artifacts, point clearly to an Alien influence in spreading very similar technological marvels and traditions all around the globe.

This thread should be called by the original term: GAC. :P

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 27 May 2014 13:21

Shripad Yesso Naik is the new Minister of State (with Independent Charge) of Culture and Tourism. Under the Ministry of Culture comes Archaeological Survey of India and National Archives of India.

Shripad Yesso Naik is the (4 time) MP from North Goa.

Smriti Zubin Irani is the new Minister of Human Resource Development, which includes School and Higher Education.

Smriti Zubin Irani is a Rajya Sabha MP from Gujarat.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

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

Postby johneeG » 29 May 2014 10:17

:D Saars,
Please refer to this post

Based on description within Vaalmiki Raamayana by Sugriva, I had said that the mountain Meru should be somewhere near Iran.

johneeG wrote:Meru mountain is somewhere in the region of Iran. Maybe Zagros Mountains(Iran) are Meru.


Imagine my surprise, when I came to know about Sumerian civilization. Now, I had glossed about sumerian civilization earlier, but I never connected it to Meru mountain.

But, it is exactly in the place where I expected the mountain Meru to be based on Sugriva's description in Vaalmiki Raamayana. So, one can say that Sumeru civilization is connected to Sumeru or Meru mountain mentioned in Bhaarathiya literature.

(There seem to be two ideas about Sumeru: a mountain on earth and some kind of celestial world/body. Sumeru is mentioned in both ways. It is similar to Kailasa mountain. For example, Kailasa mountain is on earth, but similarly there is supposed to be a celestial world named Kailasa also. So, there are two types of Kailasa. Similarly, the idea must be that there are two types of Meru/Sumeru mountain. One is a mountain on earth and another is a celestial body/world).

Wiki link to Sumerian civilization

So, Sumeru(or Meru) mountains must have been in the region where Sumerian civilization was present. Based on the connection between Sumeru mountain and Sumerian civilization, one can say that even the middle-east must have also been part of Bhaarath. This perfectly fits with the descriptions in Mahabhaaratha where Kambhoja(i.e. Iran) also participated in the war. This has far-reaching implications. If middle-east was also part of Bhaarath, then the descriptions of tower of Babel and single language point towards Bhaarath.

I think one can say that perhaps Ethiopia was the border of Bhaarath. That explains the mention of Ethiopia in Old Testament and Greek literature. So, Ethiopia was the port through which the Africa was connected to Bhaarath.

If middle-east was still part of Bhaarath, it also means that Egypt must have been Bhaarath's neighbour of sorts.

To explain the similarity: originally China was very small. Today China occupies even Tibet. So, Bhaarath is China's neighbour. If China had occupied its original borders and Bhaarath with its present borders would not have been the neighbour of China.

That means the theory that 'east of Sindhu is India' is bogus. Sindhu river does not form the border of Bhaarath. Maybe later(when middle-east was lost from Bhaaratha's grip), such a thing may have happened.

So, at the time of tower of Babel story, middle-east was still part of Bhaarath. But, then there were floods and later slowly it slipped out of Bhaarath's grip. There may have been another reconquest by Vikramaditya. But the dating Vikramaditya seems to be difficult.

By the time of 1BCE, middle-east seems to have become semi-autonomous but still connected to Bhaarath. At this time, Buddhism seems to have flourished in these areas. These Buddhist sects seems to have morphed into X-ist religion after nicean council.

Once the middle-east slipped out of Bhaarath, the connection between Europe and Bhaarath must have been cut off. That means Europe slipped into dark ages due to rise of X-ism(i.e. nicean Buddhism). This also means that starting from 1 BCE(atleast), malsI must have been in the making. I don't believe in the theory that Mo started malsI. I think malsI is synthesis of many different religions brought together by the various ruling groups over a long period of time.

----
Some of the modern geographic names which may have Sanskruth or Bhaarathiya origins:
Parashavedhi gem -> Parash -> Paras -> Parasi -> Persia(old name of Iran)
Sumeru(or Meru) mountain -> Sumerian civilization(ancient middle-eastern civilization).
Mithun (Couple/twins) -> Mittani(ancient middle-eastern civilization)
Irinam(barren) -> Iran(middle-eastern country)
Rushi (sage) -> Russia
Sura/Asura -> Syria/Assyria(middle-eastern countries).
Maali/Sumaali -> Mali/Somalia(African countries)
Malaya -> Malasia
Java
Arjuna (white) -> Argentina(South-American country)
dhanava -> danube river(river in Europe)
Pala-Sthana -> Palestine (Hebrew name of Israel).

According to Bhaarathiya literature, Parashavedhi gem is a gem that turns anything which it contacts into a gold. According to Bhaarathiya literature, Basmasura is a person who gained the power to burn to ashes anyone on whose head he placed his hand. Basmasura became greedy and eventually he burnt down himself as a consequence. The story of Parashavedhi gem and Basmasura may have been mixed to create the story of Midas touch. Midas is supposedly king of Pessinus, a city of Phrygia. Pessinus or Phrygia may be referring to Persia. The word Persia may have its origin in the word Paras. And Paras may have its origin in Parashavedhi.

Parashavedhi gem -> Parash -> Paras -> Parasi -> Persia(old name of Iran)

Mithun (Couple/twins) -> Mittani(ancient middle-eastern civilization)
It seems very little is known about the origins of the Mittani people. There seem to be many conflicting mentions about them. But, if Mithun is connected to Mittani, then it may be due to the fact that it is comprised of two rivers: Tigris and Euphrates. This may be similar to the naming of Punjab. The word Punjab seems to be corruption of the word 'Paanchala'. 'Pancha' means 'five' in Sanskruth. So, Paanchala means a land of five rivers. 'cha' becomes corrupted as 'ja'. 'Paanchala' becomes 'Punjab'. The corruption of 'cha' to 'ja' is seen in another similar corruption: The word 'Panja' means 'hand' in Hindhi. It is also the corruption of the word 'Pancha'. In that example also, 'cha' becomes 'ja'. (BTW, the english word 'Punch' may also have its origin in the Sanskruth word 'Pancha').

Israel was called Palestine. In Hebrew, it is called Palestina. Now, this is quite close to Pala-Sthana. Sthana, of course, means place in Sanskrit. Pala means guard or herdsman. Gopala means Cowherd. Pashupala means herdsman. Simply Pala means either a guard or herdsman. So, this place must be a place of herdsmen and designated as such in Sanskrit. Even the word Israel has the cognate 'Isha'. 'Isha' means 'Lord' in Sanskruth. Many of the Old Testament names seem to have the cognate 'Isha'. Isha-rael, Isha-mail, Ishaac...etc
Last edited by johneeG on 29 May 2014 10:49, edited 1 time in total.

chandrasekhar.m
BRFite
Posts: 317
Joined: 16 Dec 2009 20:27
Location: Long Island, NY

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

Postby chandrasekhar.m » 29 May 2014 10:48

shiv saar, you mentioned few pages ago that you are writing an ebook based on the evidence you have seen, your observations and conclusions. Is that still being planned?

It would be nice if it had a summary at the beginning explaining the various hypotheses and their current status and salient points of each.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

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

Postby johneeG » 29 May 2014 13:08

sameer_shelavale wrote:The word Zorashtra sounds an abbreviation of Saurashtra(Gujarati: સૌરાષ્ટ્ર, Hindi: सौराष्ट्र).
Saurashtriya then became Zorashtrian?

So, it should be no wonder that Shrikirshna is mentioned in their literature.

Link to post

Agnimitra wrote:
sameer_shelavale wrote:The word Zorashtra sounds an abbreviation of Saurashtra(Gujarati: સૌરાષ્ટ્ર, Hindi: सौराष्ट्र).
Saurashtriya then became Zorashtrian?

So, it should be no wonder that Shrikirshna is mentioned in their literature.

sameer ji, Shri Krishna is not mentioned in any primary Zoroastrian text. This book linked above was written last century, and the author is reconstructing history based on some of his primary references.
-------------

Vegetarianism in the poetic gathas and the primary Zoroastrian Texts
Highly discourages all meat eating. Especially and explicitly eating the flesh of the cow.

Link to post

So,
Saurashtra -> Zorashtra
Saura -> Zora
Maybe the greek name Zeus also is the corruption of Saura.

According to Wiki etymology of Zeus is connected to Dheva.

Now, 'Dheva' may refer to 'Indhra' while 'Surya' refers to Sun. So, Zeus could be a combination of both.

It seems to me that the Greek god Zeus is the combination of Surya and Indhra. Even in Bhaarathiya literature, Surya and Indhra are presented as alter-egos of each other.

There is a sun god in Greek also Apollo. Not surprisingly, Apollo is the son of Zeus. So, it again conveys that both of them are alter-egos.

The story of birth of Apollo is very similar to the story of birth of Ishmael(son of Abhraham and Hagar) and both of these stories have similarities to the story of Surya and Chaaya.

johneeG wrote:There is a story that Sun married Sangya, daughter of Vishwakarma. Vishwakarma is the divine architect. Sun had some children from Sangya. They were Yama, Yamuna, ...etc.(Yep, Yamuna and Yama are brother and sister. Both are blackish because Sun was very effulgent at the time). Sangya was unable to bear the effulgence of Sun, so she installed her duplicate and left for her father's home. Sangya's duplicate was Chaaya(Shadow). Sun did not realize this change. After sometime, Chaaya also became mother of some children(like Shani, ...etc). (Shani is also the son of Sun. But, they don't have a good relationship apparently). Chaaya started mistreating the children of Sangya. Then, Yama became suspicious and realized that it was not his mother. Then, Sun went to the house of Vishwakarma to get back his wife, Sangya. But, Sangya refused to come back until Sun's effulgence was reduced. Vishwakarma offered to reduce Sun's effulgence. This mediation was done by Shiva and Vishnu. So, Vishwakarma reduced the effulgence of Sun. The additional effulgence was used to carve a Thrishul and a Chakra. Vishwakarma gifted the Thrishul to Shiva and Chakra to Vishnu.

Sangya was still a bit angry with her husband. So, she took the form of a horse and went about roaming. Sun also transformed into a horse and followed her. They had two children in this form. They are called Ashwini twins. They became the medicine experts.

But, they were not accorded respect by Indhra. Indhra refused to accommodate them in heaven or give them share of Yagya. So, Ashwini twins took the help of Rushi Chyavana. He was an old Rushi who married a young princess named Sukanya. Ashwini twins helped Rushi Chyavana regain his youth. In return, Chyavana helped Aswini twins gain respect. Indhra also agreed. Sukanya is one of the acclaimed Pathivrathas. And Chyavanpraash may have its origin in the story that the medicine can prolong youthfulness.



The story of Apollo's birth:
wiki wrote:When Zeus' wife Hera discovered that Leto was pregnant and that Zeus was the father, she banned Leto from giving birth on "terra firma". In her wanderings, Leto found the newly created floating island of Delos, which was neither mainland nor a real island. She gave birth there and was accepted by the people, offering them her promise that her son would be always favourable toward the city. Afterwards, Zeus secured Delos to the bottom of the ocean. This island later became sacred to Apollo.

It is also stated that Hera kidnapped Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth, to prevent Leto from going into labor. The other gods tricked Hera into letting her go by offering her a necklace, nine yards (8 m) long, of amber. Mythographers agree that Artemis was born first and then assisted with the birth of Apollo, or that Artemis was born one day before Apollo, on the island of Ortygia and that she helped Leto cross the sea to Delos the next day to give birth to Apollo. Apollo was born on the seventh day (ἑβδομαγενής, hebdomagenes)[94] of the month Thargelion —according to Delian tradition—or of the month Bysios—according to Delphian tradition. The seventh and twentieth, the days of the new and full moon, were ever afterwards held sacred to him.


Story of Ismael's birth(son of Abraham):
wiki wrote:In Genesis 16, the birth of Ishmael was planned by the Patriarch Abraham's first wife, who at that time was known as Sarai. She and her husband Abram (Abraham) sought a way to have children in order to fulfill the Abrahamic covenant that was established in Genesis 15. Since Sarai had yet to bear Abraham a child, her idea was to offer her Egyptian handmaiden Hagar to Abraham, so that they could have a child by her. Abraham consented to a marital arrangement taking Hagar as his second wife[3] when he was in his late 85th year of age. Customs of that time dictated that, although Hagar was the birth mother, any child conceived would belong to Sarai and Abraham (Sarah and Abraham).[4]

Genesis 16:7-16 describes the naming of Ishmael, and Yahweh's promise to Hagar concerning Ishmael and his descendants. This occurred at the well of Beer-lahai-roi, located in the desert region between Abraham’s settlement and Shur. Hagar fled here after Sarai dealt harshly with her for showing contempt for her mistress following her having become pregnant. Here, Hagar encountered an angel of Yahweh who instructed her to return and be submissive to Sarai so that she could have her child there. The blessing that this child's father was promised was that Abraham's descendants would be as numerous as the dust of the earth. However, the promise would be to a son of Sarai; yet God would make of this child a great nation, who would be named Ishmael, because he was of the seed of Abraham.When Ishmael was born, Abraham was 86 years old.


There seem to be many such similarities. For example, the Krushna's act of punishing Kaliya snake is similar to Apollo killing the snake called Python.

Krushna punishing Kaliya:
Image
wiki wrote:Once Krishna and herdboys were playing ball, and while playing Krishna climbed up the Kadamba tree and hung over the river bank, the ball fell into the river and Krishna jumped after it. Kāliya rose up with his hundred and ten hoods vomiting poison and wrapped himself around Krishna's body. Krishna became so huge that Kāliya had to release him. So Krishna saved himself from every attack, and when he saw the Brij folk were so much afraid he suddenly sprang into Kāliya's head and assumed the weight of the whole universe, and danced on the naga's heads, beating time with his feet. Then Kāliya began to die. But then the naga's wives came and prayed to Krishna with joined palms, worshipping Krishna and praying for their husband.

Kāliya, recognizing the greatness of Krishna, surrendered, promising he would not harass anybody. So Krishna pardoned him and then let him go free to leave the river and go to Ramanaka Dwipa. Some identify it as Fiji.


Apollo killing python:
Image
wiki wrote:Four days after his birth, Apollo killed the chthonic dragon Python, which lived in Delphi beside the Castalian Spring. This was the spring which emitted vapors that caused the oracle at Delphi to give her prophecies. Hera sent the serpent to hunt Leto to her death across the world. To protect his mother, Apollo begged Hephaestus for a bow and arrows. After receiving them, Apollo cornered Python in the sacred cave at Delphi.[95] Apollo killed Python but had to be punished for it, since Python was a child of Gaia.

Hera then sent the giant Tityos to kill Leto. This time Apollo was aided by his sister Artemis in protecting their mother. During the battle Zeus finally relented his aid and hurled Tityos down to Tartarus. There he was pegged to the rock floor, covering an area of 9 acres (36,000 m2), where a pair of vultures feasted daily on his liver.


So, Apollo's acts in his youth are similar to the acts of Krushna in his childhood. BTW, notice the word Delphi which is very similar to Delhi or Dilli. Dilli is the city on the banks of Yamuna and Yamuna is the river in which Kaliya was supposed to have been punished by Krushna while Delphi is the place where python was punished by Apollo. There is definitely a connection. I think Greek version is inspired from Bhaarathiya version. It seems to me that the greek versions are the remixed versions where many Bhaarathiya figures or memes are remixed or synthesized to create new figures or memes.

Yahva (Vedhic name for Fire God) -> Jehova (Judaic god) -> Jove(Greek god) son of saturn.
Yoni (sanskruth for womb) -> Juno (Greek goddess, wife of Jove).
Shani (sanskruth name for saturn. Shani means slow. It is the slowest planet) -> Saturn (Greek god) -> Satan(OT and later used in NT).

Indhra/Surya -> Zeus (greek rain god)
Surya/Krushna -> Apollo (Greek sun god)
Brahma/Surya(Vivasvan) -> Abraham (judaic patriarch)
Saraswathy/Sangya -> Sarah (Abraham's first wife)
Chaya -> Hagar (Abraham's second wife)
Rudhra(Isha)/Yama -> Isaac (Abraham's son from Sarah)
Indhra/Shani -> Ishmael (Abraham's son from Hagar0
Kubhera -> Jacob (Abraham's son)
Swayambhuva Manu -> Adam (First man according to Old Testament)
Shatharupa -> Eve (Adam's wife and born from Adam)
Vaivasvatha Manu and Matsya Avathara -> Noah and his ark. (Story of flooding)

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jun 2014 00:22

johneeG garu,

If I may say so, there are different variants of AIT. We should give serious thought whether the second variant does not come and bite us in the backside as well, especially as the second is even more devious as it preys on our own native sources for legitimacy. The geographic center of gravity has to remain Bharatiya Upamahādvīpa.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22872 » 02 Jun 2014 21:28

JohneeG garu, message for you here:
viewtopic.php?f=24&t=4051&p=1665551#p1665551

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 03 Jun 2014 02:23

Why does this debate always look WESTWARDS? What about East, Southeast and North?

1. Kampuchea, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia, all have extensive SD culture, much purer (see Bali for instance) than what is currently seen in desh. I have been unable to find serious research on the origins of these.

2. Given the extensive treatment of Manasarovar (which by my reckoning is one of the most forbidding parts, even Mongolians dread that hike) is it not possible that there is a very strong NORTHERN component to SD origins?

3. If culture spread to Thailand, why was Myanmar bypassed, or was it? A coastal/river-based (BBC term is Riparian :P ) mode of spreading would have crossed the Ganga/Brahmaputra/Padma delta across present BD and gone into Myanmar, then Thailand, then Malaysia. Did the spread have to wait until ocean commerce spread from S.India to SL and Indonesia? Was the geography of Indonesia the same as it is today, given the extreme tectonics near Andamans/Aceh? IOW, was there a land link?

4. I have personally seen Sanskrit inscriptions above an arched doorway in downtown Fukuoka, Japan. Seemed the sort of ancient place where it might not be entirely advisable for round-eyed foreigners to go in and chit-chat.

Maybe a whole discussion should be focused on the North and East aspects. For instance why assume that Punjab was the origin of the Vedas? To me it sounds equally plausible that they came down from the Manasarovar region, spreading to Ulan Bator and down to Northern Arunachal.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 03 Jun 2014 02:49

UlanBatori wrote:4. I have personally seen Sanskrit inscriptions above an arched doorway in downtown Fukuoka, Japan. Seemed the sort of ancient place where it might not be entirely advisable for round-eyed foreigners to go in and chit-chat.

Buddhist Sanskrit texts and mantras in the Siddham script are common all over Japan, Korea, China and of course Tibet. The Katakana portion of Japanese script is modeled on Siddham.

Here is more information about Siddham, along with several images of its use in East Asia: More on Siddham and its encoding

The Siddham calligraphy looks a lot like East Asian scripts, but it is the same abugida script as Sanskrit. Anyway, I like the aesthetics of Siddham.

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54246
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 03 Jun 2014 03:05

UB, From Book Review thread:

A History of Early Southeast Asia: Maritime Trade and Societal Development, 100-1500 by Kenneth R. Hall
English | ISBN: 0742567613, 0742567605 | 2011 |

This comprehensive history provides a fresh interpretation of Southeast Asia from 100 to 1500, when major social and economic developments foundational to modern societies took place on the mainland (Burma, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam) and the island world (Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines).

Kenneth R. Hall explores this dynamic era in detail, which was notable for growing external contacts, internal adaptations of nearby cultures, and progressions from hunter-gatherer and agricultural communities to inclusive hierarchical states. In the process, formerly local civilizations became major participants in period's international trade networks.

Incorporating the latest archeological evidence and international scholarship, Kenneth Hall enlarges upon prior histories of early Southeast Asia that did not venture beyond 1400, extending the study of the region to the Portuguese seizure of Melaka in 1511. Written for a wide audience of non-specialists, the book will be essential reading for all those interested in Asian and world history.




UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 03 Jun 2014 06:56

Thanks. Need to spend some time on Googleswara tapas deep-searching beyond this. I suspect that Angkor Wat is a lot older than 100CE, and if such a huge complex came up, there must have been a looong history there BEFORE that. Too many wars have swept through, and the place is way too fertile and hospitable in climate, to have any hope of digging far back.

My version of Archaeology is that the climate has not changed dramatically in the past 15,000 to 20,000 years (no ice age in Malloostan) and the continents were pretty much where they are now, so established continuous human habitats and societies (as opposed to nomadic or annual-migration schemes and tribes) would have developed FIRST in places where one could survive and find food year-round. This means the equatorial zones where the winter does not go below freezing for weeks.

IOW, the first developments HAD to be in East Asia, JambuDwipa, northern Australia, Central America and Equatorial Africa. In other parts keeping warm and storing food would have posed major challenges to the earliest humans unless they had figured out Hibernation.

But there is little hope of finding traces of this except in the Vedas etc, and those are under attack from the Rakshasas always.

The counter to this theory could be that the need to provide for winter was a powerful DRIVER of technology and organized society, because you either got organized and disciplined enough to work ur butt off in summer and Fall to prepare for winter, or you died. So this could have led to the rise of Planning and Project Documents.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1202
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

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

Postby Virendra » 03 Jun 2014 15:43

UlanBatori wrote:Thanks. Need to spend some time on Googleswara tapas deep-searching beyond this. I suspect that Angkor Wat is a lot older than 100CE, and if such a huge complex came up, there must have been a looong history there BEFORE that. Too many wars have swept through, and the place is way too fertile and hospitable in climate, to have any hope of digging far back.

My version of Archaeology is that the climate has not changed dramatically in the past 15,000 to 20,000 years (no ice age in Malloostan) and the continents were pretty much where they are now, so established continuous human habitats and societies (as opposed to nomadic or annual-migration schemes and tribes) would have developed FIRST in places where one could survive and find food year-round. This means the equatorial zones where the winter does not go below freezing for weeks.

IOW, the first developments HAD to be in East Asia, JambuDwipa, northern Australia, Central America and Equatorial Africa. In other parts keeping warm and storing food would have posed major challenges to the earliest humans unless they had figured out Hibernation.

But there is little hope of finding traces of this except in the Vedas etc, and those are under attack from the Rakshasas always.

The counter to this theory could be that the need to provide for winter was a powerful DRIVER of technology and organized society, because you either got organized and disciplined enough to work ur butt off in summer and Fall to prepare for winter, or you died. So this could have led to the rise of Planning and Project Documents.

Please try to gather information on refugia and treeline during the Ice Ages. Perhaps content from Petraglia etc could help.
It is crucial to prove conclusively that there indeed was a climate/geography driven isolation in the Indian subcontinent during Ice ages (including the last one).
The divide that lead to consolidation of three separate language families here (IE, Dravidian and Munda).
When it is proven so, the far reaching implications would include demolition of linguistic questions like:
If IE originated from India, why does it spread from north India to Ireland in west and not even beyond Vindhyas in the south?

Regards,
Virendra

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 03 Jun 2014 16:39

Thx.
More on Siddham and its encoding
: Fascinating! Learned some already. Quick question: is it deliberate that Ssa (used in the Hindi/Sanskrit/Malloostani "Satru" for instance) is interchanged there with "Sha" (Shout)?

Looks like one can use this to transition to the Japanese, Korean and Mandarin smoothly from knowing Sanskrit. I must be hallucinating.
But the inscription I saw in Fukuoka was most definitely MUCH closer to Sanskrit Devanagari than this, because this inscription on the stone you showed, I would have ignored as being "Japanese" and thus indecipherable to me. The inscription seemed readable, I just could not figure out what it meant. Wish I had a photo but for whatever reason I don't seem to, despite passing by it some 4 times. One of these days, should sit down with a Google map of Fukuoka and retrace where and what it was, if it is still there.

If IE originated from India, why does it spread from north India to Ireland in west and not even beyond Vindhyas in the south?


But is this anywhere close to being true? I presume that "IE" refers to Indo-Oiropean meaning Sanskrit words and meanings (they don't use the Devanagari script in Ireland or Bavaria, so only words and meanings).

Look at Malloostani. All the prayers my Evil 6th Coujin was taught, are essentially Sanskrit though "in Malloostani". Very easy to relate to Sanskrit once E6C got over the sore ears that come from learning the grammar. So now we are to the southern tip of JD.

Cross the Paschima Ghattam and u r in TN. Look at the temples and modes of worship: there is EXTENSIVE worship of Sri Shiva and Parvati, all Himalayan origin if u think about it. AFAIK there is no natural snow in TN even in Ootacamund. Look at the words: sure there is difference but one can trace them back to similarity with Sanskrit. I cannot say which came first (i.e., whether the Bavarian/Austrian Nazis came charging down the Khyber Pass in their Panzer Mk 5 chariots drawn by horses with themselves being behind the horses as befits horses/ behinds, and drove all the "dravidians" down into the south). Then again, consider that TN/Malloostan have been far more habitable than Ganga Plain or Kashmir or Poonjab year-round, for ages, so by my theory civilization may have flourished down south, extended to the East and to the north and northwest. this would explain why early Pakistani Heritage sites like M'daro, Harvardappa etc were found where they were found. These were probably trading outposts for ppl setting out across the Sindhu and the Pakhtoonistan deserts into the savage badlands of the Khyber etc.

All history of these sites parrots the claim that they were "advanced" and had streets and water tanks and drainage and pakistans etc (but strangely no real claims of major temples..) but don't say HOW they developed all those. The findings are all of "seals" (What do u do with "seals" as a primary product I wonder..) and "pottery" and "beads". IMO these clearly indicate a trading post. The places that generated the products and the knowledge were far away.

However, there is clear claim in TN, Andhra etc that Sri Shiva is Maheswara, and this is intricately woven into the Himalayan abode, so it MUST have come from the North. No one sitting in Madurai or Mahabalipuram is going to independently come up with the notion of
TushAra sanghAta sSilAtalesham


The MahaBali /Vamana Avatara MAY have something to do with the time (far AFTER the origin of the Vedas and most of the Avataras, mind u!!) when the decent ppl of the Kingdoms of JD were driven down into the south/east/southeast per the petty jealosies of the local Devas (who had to be described as such because they carried AK-47s, IEDs, trishools etc), but since they were good ppl, there was no destruction associated with that - it was just that the most self-satisfied of the Devas got to keep Pakistan/Khalistan while SD flourished much more in the south. THAT would explain a lot. :eek: Including the term "Mahabalipuram" and the Onam legend of Malloostan.

Telugu certainly seems to have plenty of Sanskrit in it. So for that matter does Sinhala, though the script is much more like Oriya and Kannada (speaking from unchecked superstitions developed decades ago, I have not gone back and checked this fact...pls feel free to educate me on this). Then again, Oriya and Kannada also appear to have plenty of Sanskrit words in them.

All this tells me that there is no basis to the claim that IO (Indo_Oirpean) does not extend south of the Vindhyas. Some kingdoms such as Ayodhya did not extend south of the Vindhyas, I agree.

Then again, note that the Rakshasas were never pictured as ILLITERATE: they were all expert in Sanskrit, and as regularly as Pakis bursting IEDs, they used to go on Tapas and impress the heck out of all except Sri MV and get "varas" promising various clauses like
No human or beast can pest-e-sha'eed u, not in daytime or nighttime, not indoors nor outdoors, not with weapon or teeth


One naturally derives the result that there was a "civilization" with modern weaponry (for the time) in SL during the SR Avatara.

How difficult is it to reconcile the rest of the Puranas with the realization that civilization first developed in the southern/eastern regions?

The fog here may be due to the notion that
Indian (meaning Pakjabi) culture was spread to China and East Asia by Buddhist Monks

Why? Did Gautama Buddha actually order his followers to scatter and go convert ppl? I am not aware of any conversionist zeal among Buddhists (at least in SL), but I don't know about other places. Given the hostility that many Koreans feel towards EJs (there was quite a lot of "serves'em right" when a bunch of EJs were pest-e-sha'eeded by the Taliban) I don't think the Buddhists are HAPPY about EJs, but there does not seem to be counter-conversion either.

So I feel that Buddhism spread precisely because, and in areas where, there was already an ancient SD civilization in place. Those are about the only ppl who would accept strange notions like "Ahimsa" without eating those who preached that (imagine someone going to, say, Bilayat or Bavaria or Rome or Athens or Babylon in 300 BCE to preach that! They would have been directed straight to the CookPot!)

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 03 Jun 2014 19:55

IOW, I am respectfully suggesting that the basic assumption
"Scriptures were written on the banks of the Saraswati/ Sindhu/ Sapta Sindhu rivers"

should be opened to debate and re-consideration.

The Asuras from the west have tried to steal the Vedas and take them to the Bavarian forest etc.

But the reality may be that the original thinking and knowledge generation occurred over the larger Jambudweep/ East/SouthEast with an unexplained link to the Northern Arunachal (erroneously called Tibet) plateau and Manasarovar regions. After all, the Vedas are an amazingly CONCISE distillation of knowledge gained over what MUST have been many many millennia or Yugas. Discussion of that aspect is shut off with the "Sruti" statement, but it must still have been "Sruti" passed down and refined through the Yugas. It is clear that the "Puranas" have lots of content added all over the place, across the Yugas (mention of "much later" events in "much earlier" Puranas, most glaring example is "Bhavishya Purana").

The Sapta Sindhu region may have been one place where travelers, Rishis, all gathered for discussions, and met Asuras from the West for chai-biscoot-samosa as well, and exchanged colored beads for furs or whatever the asuras brought. But as far as I can make out, that region had to be a much later addition, a border if u will of the JD civilization.

What about the term "Jambu Dweepam"? Sorry I don't accept what is said here as the last word on this question. It sounds too much like an "explanation" given by a Chinmaya Mission "Sanayasi" after the deep and beautiful discourse by Swami Ranganathananda. What does "Jambu" mean? Why "Dweepam" (island)? What island? The Indian Subcontinent BEFORE it collided with Oiresia? Is this why the Himalayas became a central theme of SD, despite their being sooo far from the rest of JD/East Asia? Was someone watching as the Oiresia coastline gradually drew closer? Were there truly radical Magnitude 12 tectonics as the Plates collided, not over millions of years but in a few days?? :eek: Did someone watch as oceans drained out from the collision region and peaks rose from the ocean (along with all kinds of stuff...) .. and the former "coast" now became ever higher and colder?

IOW, was there memory passed down from a time when there was a super-cataclysmic event such as a large asteroid hitting, causing unimaginable changes to the planet including shoving continental plates against each other at massive (on tectonic scale) speed?

Was there a memory transfer through evolution from pre-human species?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54246
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 03 Jun 2014 22:31

Vintage Ulan Batori stuff.
Godd that you are on this thread.

BTW please visit the link language thread where I am inciting Klaus* to do some work on pursuing the Pisacha language and its modern remanants.

*Misfortunately he is la patha!

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4775
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

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

Postby Yayavar » 03 Jun 2014 22:35

UB - it could be still true that these were compiled along banks of Saraswati/Sindu if we consider it as continuous evolution from Indus-valley civilization(Harrappa/Mohenjodaro,Lothal etc). The knowledge seekers and providers could/would have come from all over the subcontinent.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 04 Jun 2014 01:37

UlanBatori wrote:
More on Siddham and its encoding
: Fascinating! Learned some already. Quick question: is it deliberate that Ssa (used in the Hindi/Sanskrit/Malloostani "Satru" for instance) is interchanged there with "Sha" (Shout)?

Looks like one can use this to transition to the Japanese, Korean and Mandarin smoothly from knowing Sanskrit.

Yep, the Sanskrit "श" phoneme is exactly like the "x (pinyin)" phoneme found in languages like Chinese - e.g., in the word "xie-xie" (thank you). Whereas in India we tend to pronounce it like a retroflex "ष" (in the north) or as "स" (in the south).

Sanskrit also has the phoneme "ळ" used in several Indian languages but lost in Hindi. That phoneme occurs in the very first word of the RgVeda.

So it seems that the Sanskritic varna-mala encompasses all types of phonemes, some of which are prominent in some languages and some in others. These phonemes include some from Tibeto-Burmese.

From all these languages Sanskrit selects only the primitive sounds. Sounds like "fa", "za", "Kha" (as in 'Khayaal'), etc. are accidental sounds that emerge from the Sandhi of primitives, and are not considered primitive phonemes themselves. E.g., कः + पुत्रः = "kaf.putraH"; or सः + कस्य = saKh.kasya.

In a similar vein, people often say that the Tamil alphabet is "different" from the standard Sanskrit varnamala. That's not really true. Tamil merely selects one mnemonic to represent each varga. Tamil grammar then has rules about which combination of aspirate/voiced phoneme it devolves to, depending on where in a word the mnemonic occurs. (Though in practice nobody follows the rules and it makes a royal mess of phonetic accuracy). Conceptually, this is a good idea, since it tries to create a "graceful degredation" of the phonetic script - it tries to ensure that the distance between phonemes should be proportional to the orthographical distance between the physical shapes of the glyphs. (Imagine the compatibility with handwriting recognition, text-to-speech synthesis, voice recognition, and other software algos)! This is where mnemonics come in handy. So Tamil's mnemonic script is also according to the Paninian varnamala, and is one step higher (more primitive) in that schema, than Devanagari and other Brahmic scripts.

Thus, the Sanskritic varna-mala is a psychoacoustic model of text and speech, from which various languages create their script based on either "graceful degredation" (modeled in varnamala primitives) or "progressive enhancement" (further customization and specialization of varna-mala aksharas).

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4775
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

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

Postby Yayavar » 04 Jun 2014 03:15

Agnimitra wrote:Yep, the Sanskrit "श" phoneme is exactly like the "x (pinyin)" phoneme found in languages like Chinese - e.g., in the word "xie-xie" (thank you). Whereas in India we tend to pronounce it like a retroflex "ष" (in the north) or as "स" (in the south).



Sanskrit has all three -श (as in shastra) ष (as in Shadyantra) स (as in Sandhi)

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 04 Jun 2014 03:29

viv wrote:Sanskrit has all three -श (as in shastra) ष (as in Shadyantra) स (as in Sandhi)

Yes, but practically speaking in India the sibilant "sha" often gets turned into a "sa" or the retroflex "Sha". In Chinese, they make a very clear distinction between the sibilant "sh" and the retroflex "Sha".

Maybe the sibilant "sha" (as in "shiva", "shambhu", "shambhala", "shankara") is more characteristic of languages native to the Tibeto-Burman family? Any linguists around to comment? Where is ManishH ji?

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby UlanBatori » 04 Jun 2014 03:42

In the purest of the Pure, meaning Malloostani, the aksharamAla goes

ya, ra (like Roop, or Teri Ma as used by Harbhajan, no equivalent in Angreji), la, va, sa (as in Shiva) sha (as in Shout, Ship, Shore, Show) sa (as in Sam) ha, lla (as in fuller but without the emphasis), zha (as in "Puzhu", meaning Pakistani. No English word, westerners usually cyaint say it but Russians can, there is neither z nor h in the sound), and Ra (as in Rain)


Nothing inferior about it. Samskrtam is a subset of this. One is either cultured enough to be able to pronounce pure Malloostani, or one is not. 8) :P

When Manna De sang
MAnasa maine varooooooooo
Mathuram ni nulli taroooooo
(with the roo mispronounced as in Rain, the ni and nulli as in Newton), Malloos were :shock: but swooned at the utterly phoren accent, and the song was an absolute all-time hit as a result. It was considered cute and :rotfl: to have these illiterate northerners trying to sing in such a cultured language.

Try repeating Kalidasa's immortal verse that ends:

...tushArasanghAta shilAtaleshvapi
and you will see some of this.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 04 Jun 2014 04:39

UlanBatori wrote:Nothing inferior about it. Samskrtam is a subset of this. One is either cultured enough to be able to pronounce pure Malloostani, or one is not. 8) :P

:mrgreen:

Yep, nothing inferior or superior. Hindi has lost a lot of the phonemes of Sanskrit, and doesn't have what Mallus or Tibetans can pronounce. Persian lost even more, especially after 1400 years of Arab lovemaking - but their language actually has more feminine grace as a result!

Sanskrit is a subset of all those phonemes taken together - a subset chosen based on certain criteria.

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4775
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

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

Postby Yayavar » 04 Jun 2014 04:46

As per the table here the alphabet seems to be the largest for Malayalam and Devnagari. Brahmi is close.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmic_scripts

We should all adopt Brahmi (modified to include all sounds) as Desi script common across desh :)

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 04 Jun 2014 04:53

viv wrote:We should all adopt Brahmi (modified to include all sounds) as Desi script common across desh :)

This idea has been in the works among the scientific community involved in digital technologies for Indian languages. But its not going to be a common script with the most number of distinct glyphs - rather, it will be mnemonic based - one mnemonic for each 'varga', modified for voiced and aspiration. If that is done, then it will have such an economy that a wristwatch-size keyboard would be possible!

Ok, this is getting OT here. We can take it to the Link Language thread if required.

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4775
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

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

Postby Yayavar » 04 Jun 2014 05:09

Agnimitra - yes, please elaborate on that thread more. Will read it there.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests