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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 13:40

ArmenT ji,

thanks.

I knew some history of this. But I just put up the comment to underline, that the relationship between horse and power is still alive till date!

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

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

Postby Lalmohan » 20 Jul 2012 13:58

naturally, the horse has been the most versatile of man's tools since first domesticated

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 13:59

fanne wrote:Why we are so hung up on 'horse' wrt to AIT discussion. I see three problems with it -
1. The AIT Nazis dictate the debate. They tell you what you need to prove for AIT to be wrong and when you prove that, they shift the goal post. It's akin to someone asking -prove that your father is your father. You go and get some people who were alive to testify. Those people are dismissed as liars. Then he shifts the goalpost and asks you to furnish a DNA report. You produce that, it says the DNA report is right only 98%, 2% it is wrong. Go bring a proof that is 100% right. In the meanwhile, the irony is that your father is your father and you are running pillar to post to prove this. You can take a stand, present the proof and ask the other guy to f...off. Remember Witzel does not need to be proved that AIT is false nor (he probably knows it is) the western world needs to be proved. It is the Maculite Indians, if you convince then, the job is done.

fanne ji,

thanks for you post.

I too have gone into some detail regarding the psychology of horse evidence demand. So just reposting from here and here.

.....................

Why is the horse evidence important? (from the AIT PoV)

The Rigveda speaks of the horse, to some extent glorifying it. So the Rigvedic people knew of the horse and the chariot. In India however the horse was not present until the (proto-)Rigvedic people came to India, and brought the horse and chariot with them. This happened after the Indus Valley Civilization because no horse remains have been found there or in India before the Rigvedic people brought the horse to India. Similarly no chariot remains have been found in India from a pre-Rigvedic age.

This means Rigvedic people knew of horse domestication, horse riding, chariot technology. Indus Valley Civilization people knew of no such thing.

Conclusion: Indus Valley Civilization precedes Rigvedic Age.

Why is the horse evidence irrelevant? (from the OIT PoV)

Assumptions are being made in the above AIT logic.

  1. The people who composed Rigveda, domesticated the horse

    Nowhere in Rigveda, there is any mention of the Rigvedic people domesticating the horse
    • no wild steppes, grasslands, etc.
    • no herds of wild horses roaming these grasslands.
    • no proto-Rigvedic Aryans cohabiting with the horse in such an environment
    • no capturing of the horses in the wild
    • no breaking of horses
    • no importance of the horse in pastoral life
    • no drinking of mare's milk
    • not necessary, but horse meat was not eaten

  2. One would find evidence of the horse in Indus Valley Civilization if horse had already been introduced
    • why would the bones of a horse be available in the middle of a city? If horses were to die, would they be left around. If horses were to be eaten, even then one would dispose of the bones, not in one's backyard.
    • most likely, horses would be in the royal stables, under a proper management, and when they died their remains would be carefully and dutifully disposed of either through cremation or through dumping them some distance away, perhaps in a pit, so that no diseases spread due to carcasses
    • considering that horses were traded with the Steppes, and there were only few in India, the possibility of finding the remains of those few horses would be even less.

  3. The people who composed Rigveda, had a memory of abundance of horses
    • hardly any common soldiers or even internal security people has access to horses either mounted, or chariot-riding
    • it was solely the preserve of the regal elite and the army generals
    • the prestigious position of the horse, itself points to its scarcity

  4. The horse was not domesticated such a long time ago as Rig Veda is dated by the proponents of Autochthonous Vedic Aryan Theory
    • The current understanding in archaeology is that horse was domesticated around 4000 BCE. The Botai findings put it at 3500 BCE.
    • This however only shows the earliest known date of domestication of horse. It has in the past been pushed back, so it can be again as more research is done. So it is possible that domestication happened earlier as well.
    • Many who propose OIT, can live with the 4000 BCE date as well.

  5. The horse cannot have been in India through trade in horses, only through introduction by proto-Rigvedic people
    • Actually Rigveda itself speaks of the Maruts who used to come from the North, crossing mountain passes, bringing their herd of horses to Indra's country.
    • Maruts need not be seen as belonging to the Vedic Aryans, but as an external agent, a different tribe, or a tribe identified by the Maruts as deities
    • Maruts are said to be allied with Indra, i.e. the regal power of the PUrus, from the PoV of the composers of Rigveda
    • Maruts come into the picture mostly after SudAs defeats the Anu Confederacy in the Battle of the Ten Kings, and moves into the Sapta-Sindhu area, thus making trade with the Maruts a possibility, who come through Afghanistan south, bringing their horses along, possibly from Central Asia, as the talk is mostly of mountains and rivers being in their way - Rasā, Krumu, Anitabha, Kubha, or Sindhu being in their path (RV 5.53.9).

.................................

AIT-wallas tell us, we need to show evidence of "pre-migration" horse remains, if we wish to upturn the Aryan Migration Theory. But we never challenge them why?

They just give us a AIT black box which says: show horse bones, disprove it! But we don't ask why should we show horse-bones. There were too few horses in a tropical climate to have left any bones in the few places where we have looked for them till date.

Somehow the AIT-Nazis are expecting us to show huge horse graveyards and remains of chariot-factories in every second corner in India. It is like saying either you show me the staff of Moses or accept that he didn't exist.

We don't deny that there were horses, but the climatic conditions are not conducive to finding too many remains of the few horses which were there.

----------

The question is set up very much like "Have you stopped beating your wife?".

"Have you found the remains of horses that proto-Rig Vedic people brought with them from Central Asia?"

Regardless of how you answer the question, you are accepting
  1. that the ancestors of Rig Veda composers were in Central Asia, and
  2. that they brought the horse to the Indian Subcontinent;

though you may think you are accepting only
  1. that the Rigvedic people used to use the horse.

Even if we were to find horse-bones prior to some proposed date of arrival, they would then say, "Oh, did the proto-Rig-vedic Aryans, then reach the Subcontinent earlier that initially expected, or was it just a scouting party of Aryans in India who forgot to tie up their horse. Some small group of Aryans could have come earlier to India!!!!

So we should stop this search for horse-bones and confront the AIT-Nazis by posing to them the question, "Why don't Rigvedic Indians and their descendants drink mare's milk?"

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 » 20 Jul 2012 14:01

fanne wrote:Why we are so hung up on 'horse' wrt to AIT discussion.

The horse argument, as you have pointed out is a dead horse being flogged. The people who composed the Rig Veda seem to be talking about events that they saw and experienced. They had horses and chariots. Unless they were lying those horses and chariots were there whether you find horse bones or not.

If they were lying then everything can be a lie. Any written or remembered memory can be a lie, including the Bible, Quran, ancient texts - anything. All lies. You can arbitrarily assign lies to anything. If you find one horse bone it is still a lie because they speak of hundreds of horses - where are the bones from 99+ horses? The argument about horses is a strawman.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 14:51

fanne wrote:2. The horse has been there (now the argument has shifted that all right it has been in Harappa or maybe in 3500 BC so what? Was it there 20,000 years ago?). The whole genesis of AIT was that Harappa does not have Horse and Since Vedic text is full of it, it means Harappa is of non vedic origin. Now when Horses were found in Harappa, the counter by AIT Nazis have been, that why these few and they are not that old. Please read the link and extracts. I don’t see why RajeshA has to make argument that horses were known to Vedic people and not originally from there. Vedic text only claims that they know of horses and not that they were originally from India (it may or may not be).

fanne ji,

you could direct the question to me directly! :)

Today basically the whole premise of some Central Asian Urheimat (homeland) for Aryans rests on two very thin matchsticks -

  1. one-way palatalization of front vowels, and
  2. paucity of horse in India even though the Vedas has numerous praises of the horse pointing at an earlier memory.

I've gone earlier into why the above is a bogus argument.

Now we have all sorts of evidence from Saraswati, to archaeological finds showing an uninterrupted continuity of civilization, genetic evidence, archaeoastronomical data, etc., and they have only a couple of two stupid arguments.

The point is it is not a question of trying to respond to demands for horse evidence from the AIT-Nazis. For the horse we just need an alternative narrative, and not heaps of evidence of horse bones. The latter is playing into the hands of the AIT-Nazis. The former not. If they say prove it right, we can retort it by saying "prove it wrong". But in order to say that you need to have an alternative narrative.

As of now, the horse is not considered as being indigenous to India, with herds of wild horses running all over the place. So in one's own narrative one has to explain

  1. How did the Vedics get to know of the horse even as they sat in India. If we had indigenous horse species fine, but if we didn't, then we would have imported.
  2. Where did we import from?
  3. How did the Horse came to be considered as divine and be associated with the Sun, Indra and the Maruts?
  4. And all that needs to cohere with our own history!

Having a coherent logical alternative theory of horse is important. It is also important that the AIT-Nazis cannot rip it up into pieces. Here the 34-ribs horse argument is unassailable. It completely cuts any imaginary migration-path from Central Asia.

Just because I am hypothesizing that horses were imported from Arabian Peninsula, does not mean that if tomorrow we find evidence of horse domestication in India, the earlier hypothesis would do any harm or negate it!

fanne wrote:3. Even though there is not widespread excavation and proof of horses or millennium old civilization sites in the Gangetic planes, it is simply a case of that we have not been excavating enough. Most of the cities of old times are still populated centers. You cannot just go and dig 100 feet ditch to uncover and we have not been trying either. So maybe some more focus is needed here.


Yes we need to do digging, but not because AIT-Nazis are demanding evidence, as you yourself said it.
Last edited by RajeshA on 20 Jul 2012 18:42, edited 1 time in total.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 15:31

A_Gupta wrote:Dear Moderator,
If you do not like this post, please delete it. I am posting it because I do think it conveys ideas appropriate to Bharat Rakshaks.

Missionaries are using Aryan Invasion Theory to create a new identity and to convert people. Their argument to various Indians is, simplified, and made explicit is as follows:

1. You probably suffer from social discrimination today.
2. Your parents or grandparents suffered from social AND legal discrimination in the past.
3. This discrimination has been in place for all of recorded history.
4. This history begins with the Aryan Invasion, when the Aryans started this system of discrimination. Specifically, they invented the "varna" (color) system to segregate their fair-skinned race from your dark-skinned ancestors.
5. You owe nothing to this age-old tradition, discrimination is inherent in it. Disown it and become a Christian, which will remake your identity. (As a side-effect, if your Indian identity is also erased, so much the better!)

What are the various responses?
1. Aryan Invasion did not happen.
2. Genetic studies show that nothing like this race segregation occurred, and therefore varna had nothing to do with race.
3. Comparative linguistics are bullsh*t.
etc.

Now, these responses above are interesting academic exercises. A recapitulation of the history created so far, examining all the evidence and all the premises, should be done as Indians become experts in this field.

A_Gupta ji,

Till here I find your post relevant!

A_Gupta wrote:But it will do nothing to address the root problem, which is the reality that large groups of people have the experience of actual discrimination OR at least have that very strong perception of it.

The fact is it is the reality of the social discrimination that opens a wedge among Indians, and not the Aryan Invasion Theory.

The real answer is to change the rules of the game.

If one has two knives stuck up one's bottom, it is obvious that one would need to take out both to ease the pain.

What is the need of falling into the logical fallacy of Either-OR?!

Another fact is that the Aryan Invasion Theory is a poison used to make the "social discrimination" wound infected, making it immune to healing! Aryan Invasion Theory takes the wound-healing process and converts it into an ideological rebellion which feeds off the situation of the wound remaining unhealed and thus keeps it that way, and through insurgency in fact deepens the wound.

A_Gupta wrote:History is IRRELEVANT!

1. Hinduism is not history-centric (please read Rajeev Malhotra's book or watch some of his videos).

Again the mistake is being made that if one is concerned here with the history, then it is somehow due to requirements of Hinduism, in which case, it would be wrong to pursue history.

Yes one reason for debunking AIT is because of considerations of saving Hinduism, especially among "Dalits" and "Dravidians"!

But studying history is not solely to debunk AIT, or to save Hinduism. As a nation, as a civilization, Indics need a history. Under Dharmic considerations it may be irrelevant, but as a civilization that sits in a comity of nations and civilizations, it is necessary.

Just because one studies history and finds it relevant in a nation's life, doesn't imply that one now considers Dharma history-centric. It is not Hinduism necessarily that one is trying to explain through the study of history. It is the past of a nation, of a civilization. Yes we don't need history to believe in Dharma, but we do need history to believe in us as a Nation.

A_Gupta wrote:History should not be made into a fatal distraction.

What is the meaning of "fatal distraction"?

Should then one just do one thing and one thing only! Should one stop doing and watching sports, or working, or reading, simply because all that would be "fatal distractions"!

A_Gupta wrote:2. Hindus are not bound by the "scriptures" in the way the British imagined or India's modern elite imagines. Hinduism, in any particular era, is not what is in the books, but what Hindus practice.

3. The Acharya Sabha should announce that *anyone* who is willing to take some simple vow (maybe of abstention from alcohol and beef) can become dvija, and will be fully embraced by Hindu society; that is the rule for this age.

4. All Hindus should honor the decision, whatever it is, in (3.)

---
About changing the rules of the game, I'm sure Kautilya, Sun-Tzu, Machiavelli all recommend doing it if you can, to meet on a battleground that gives you the advantage. I'm sure Panchatantra also has tales that teach the same.

Alexander beat Darius by choosing to do battle on ground where the Persian chariots would be less effective. Modern start-ups in Silicon Valley do not take the incumbents head-on, they try to change the game via new technology and innovation.

I'm sure that what I wrote above is hardly the only rules-changing transformation that is possible. I'm sure with focus the collected brains and IQ of Hindus can think of more and better.

This would be a great post... in some other thread!

lakshmikanth
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 27 Oct 2008 10:07
Location: Bee for Baakistan

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

Postby lakshmikanth » 20 Jul 2012 15:35

shiv wrote:I found the following blog and posted a comment. Interestin reply - almost proving my point
Hindutva Crazies on the Dating of the Rig Vedas

My post:
You say at the beginning of your rant:
“Generally, the Rig Vedas are said to begin around 3900 YBP.

Then you say:
“As Hindu culture is ahistoric in terms of dates and events, no one knows when these events took place.”

Only one statement can be correct.

Not sure why you are so keen to take on “Hindutva crazies” – you could ignore them, but you seem concerned enough about what Hindutva crazies say to actually write a rant about their beliefs.

Actually some of the things that “hindutva crazies” say might possibly be true and that is getting a whole lot of “scholarly” knickers in a right royal twist. That would, in my view, be a good reason for you to have your rant.

LOL


The reply:
Nothing controversial that those Hindu dogs say is correct. Nothing, nothing, nothing.

And you are banned.


I am going OT with a bit of pisko stuff here (apologies):

Robert Lindsay represents typical American white supremacist (closet or otherwise). They are the highest caste people, with all of us brown folks being of lower caste and hence less deserving of everything including being given an ear.

I have been on his blog and have been always amazed at the lack of compassion, hatred and lack of empathy for people, but at least he is honest about it.

I did notice one thing though and this is something that makes me wonder what the piskology behind it is:

I get called a casteist if I hold ANY generalized belief about a population based on caste. It is somewhat similar in piskological sense to racism.

Now Hindutva-vadi (or a follower of Hindutva) in its true meaning, is a follower of the principle of Hinduism and is synonymous to Hindu or a follower of any form of Sanatana Dharma. Thus Hindutva-vadi means anyone who follows any form of SD, from the Brazilian Hindus, American Hindus, the Yoga practitioners (including the so called Christian Yogas as well), to the standard Indian Hindu.

So shouldn't the people who blame Hindutva-vadis for everything wrong about India be called racist/casteist/communalists? Why does this generalization equaling racism miss its mentions?

Everytime I see the mention of the "Hindu" right wing, or the Hindu hawks I feel that it is a racist comment, because it discriminates against Indian Hindus who could be (and most likely are) more liberal than the accusers.

The term "Hindutva-vadi" is an attempt by the colonized DIE to equate a follower of Sanatana Dharma to an EJ! There is no equal of proselytizing in SD, and therefore there is no equal of Jihadism, or Evangelism in SD.

Any person who thinks Hindutva-vad means propagating Hinduism, and then equates Hinduism to caste-ism and then generalizes every follower of Sanatana Dharma as a casteist Hindu has done two things. He or she made a giant leap of logic that would make an Kindergarten student point out the logical fallacy, and he or she has proved himself to be no different than a casteist or a racist.

SD is a religion of empathy, it inherently requires one to be cerebral and in a state of peace and abundance. A desert religion is inherently reptilian, it thrives in fear, scarcity , fight of flight. When people say religion is the cause of so much pain and suffering, they think of the desert religion. SD on the other hand is the religion of empathic abundance.


We are truly blessed to be the inheritors of the great souls who originated this civilization.

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 » 20 Jul 2012 17:58

RajeshA wrote:As a nation, as a civilization, Indics need a history. Under Dharmic considerations it may be irrelevant, but as a civilization that sits in a comity of nations and civilizations, it is necessary.


I am reminded of a neo-Confucian saying:
Confucius say: When man 60, marry girl 25, like buying book for someone else to read.


Indians have always related to their own history via narratives. Looking at the crap that passes for "recorded history" I don't think any of those narratives were particularly false or inaccurate. Every civilization records its history in teh way its people see their own past.

Unfortunately India is an odd man out. Civilizations that were plundered and destroyed like the Incas and many African states, and had their history written for them by others in a way that suited the conqueror's civilizational narrative. India too had its history written by others in a way that suited their own civilizational narrative, but the civilization was not killed off. And because the civilization survives it is necessary for us to set the record straight and expunge the crap that has been written.

It must not be forgotten that the identity and self image of a people is often based on their history. As an aside I would judge that the average Indian in the US is able to hold his head up high because he has an identity and a history in a way that blacks in the US do not have. Their history has been killed and made into one of loser-slaves.

Indian history needs to be expunged of the nonsense that has been recorded by people who have no fundamental knowledge of the culture. It is ignorants such as these who will write stupid things like "fertility rite" or "where are the horse bones and are they caballus?"
Last edited by shiv on 20 Jul 2012 19:53, edited 1 time in total.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 18:36

Online Books

More 19th Century Euro-Aryan Superiority Stuff

Wikipedia wrote:Chamberlain's two-volume book, Die Grundlagen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century), published in 1899, became one of the many references for the pan-Germanic movement of the early 20th century, and, later, of the völkisch antisemitism of Nazi racial policy.


Image

Publication Date: 1899
Author: Houston Stewart Chamberlain
Die Grundlagen des 19. Jahrhunderts - I


Image

Publication Date: 1899
Author: Houston Stewart Chamberlain
Die Grundlagen des 19. Jahrhunderts - II


Image

Publication Date: 1912
Author: Houston Stewart Chamberlain
Die Grundlagen des 19. Jahrhunderts - I und II


Image
English Translation

Publication Date: 1912
Author: Houston Stewart Chamberlain
Foundations of the Nineteenth Century - Vol I

Publication Date: 1911
Author: Houston Stewart Chamberlain
Foundations of the Nineteenth Century - Vol II

All these books are searchable. Look for 'Aryans', 'Indians', etc.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 19:27

Indian gripe with National Socialists of Germany and elsewhere is the massive scale of appropriation of cultural goods and symbols they have done from Indians, and then went on to develop an ideology which considered Indians as inferior.

With this as the background, I'm linking a few videos here.

The Occult History of the Third Reich

The Occult History of the Third Reich, narrated by Patrick Allen and directed by Dave Flitton, is a 1991 four-part History Channel documentary regarding the occult influences and history of Nazi Germany and early 20th century Germany.


The documentary was originally shown and released in four parts in 1991.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 19:41

Here is a quote from the AIT-Sepoy Prof. Amartya Sen who says in “The Argumentative Indian”:

The Hindutva view of history…has, therefore, the double `difficulty' of (1) having to accept that the foundational basis of Hindu culture came originally from outside India, and (2) being unable to place Hinduism at the beginning of Indian cultural history and its urban heritage…Thus, in the Hindutva theory, much hangs on the genesis of the Vedas. In particular: who composed them (it would be best for Hindutva theory if they were native Indians, settled in India for thou­sands of years, rather than Indo-Europeans coming from abroad)? Were they composed later than the Indus valley civilization (it would be best if they were not later, in sharp contrast with the accepted knowledge)?...There were, therefore, attempts by the Hindutva champions to rewrite Indian history in such a way that these disparate difficulties are simultaneously removed through the simple device of `making' the Sanskrit-speaking com­posers of the Vedas also the very same people who created the Indus valley civilization!


These AIT-Sepoys are hung up on suppressing Hindutva-vadis, then really looking for the truth! Also they don't care for the various fissures that have opened up in India because of this bakwas theory. They just take the crumbs thrown by their gora masters, lapping up everything they say under the pseudonym "scientific", even though there is nothing scientific and everything racist!


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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 20:04


Prasanna
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 28
Joined: 25 May 2008 13:00

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

Postby Prasanna » 20 Jul 2012 20:29

RajeshA wrote:Here is a quote from the AIT-Sepoy Prof. Amartya Sen who says in “The Argumentative Indian”:

The Hindutva view of history…has, therefore, the double `difficulty' of (1) having to accept that the foundational basis of Hindu culture came originally from outside India, and (2) being unable to place Hinduism at the beginning of Indian cultural history and its urban heritage…Thus, in the Hindutva theory, much hangs on the genesis of the Vedas. In particular: who composed them (it would be best for Hindutva theory if they were native Indians, settled in India for thou­sands of years, rather than Indo-Europeans coming from abroad)? Were they composed later than the Indus valley civilization (it would be best if they were not later, in sharp contrast with the accepted knowledge)?...There were, therefore, attempts by the Hindutva champions to rewrite Indian history in such a way that these disparate difficulties are simultaneously removed through the simple device of `making' the Sanskrit-speaking com­posers of the Vedas also the very same people who created the Indus valley civilization!


These AIT-Sepoys are hung up on suppressing Hindutva-vadis, then really looking for the truth! Also they don't care for the various fissures that have opened up in India because of this bakwas theory. They just take the crumbs thrown by their gora masters, lapping up everything they say under the pseudonym "scientific", even though there is nothing scientific and everything racist!


I suggest you see this page for the real purpose of AIT
http://www.sabha.info/research/aif.html

Amartya Sen is a christian, he tries to paint all evidence conflicting with AIT as hindutvawadi imagination without debunking any of the archaeological evidences unearthed since it conflicts with his master's plan.

Purpose of inventing AIT and foisting it upon us was to convert and conquer India through christianity, the gungadins like Amartya sen are still following their master's plan.

Therefore, to make a new race of the Hindus, one would have to begin by undermining the very foundations of their civilization, religion, and polity, and by turning them into atheists and barbarians. Having accomplished this terrible upheaval, we might perhaps offer ourselves to them as lawgivers and religious teachers. But even then our task would only be half accomplished. -"Hindu manners, customs and ceremonies" by French Catholic missionary Jean-Antoine Dubois (1765-1848). The book was first published in 1817 at the request of the East India Company.

more here viewtopic.php?p=1311041#p1311041

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3454
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 20 Jul 2012 20:36

RajeshA ji,
Why the proof of horses remains being found (painting, tooth etc) from that period not enough to say horses were in India and AIT is wrong. Is it because though it does disprove that Harappa civilization was finished due to invading Aryans (as we find horse remains prior to that period), the goalpost has shifted now. The new goalpost is, since there is mention of so much of horses in Vedas, and only few Horse remains and since there are more horse remains in say Steppes that means Vedas was constructed in Steppes?

Well I guess there are many counters to that (some of course mentioned before by other esteemed members, you included)
- Indian environment, the rate of decay is much more than Steppes
- I read the argument that even human remains in India has been less from that period compared to Steppes, does that mean Steppes were heavily populated and India not (the reality is that even today we beat them in density and overall population by many times)
- There are mentions of many rivers, they surely flow in India, do they flow in Steppes, and are they tributaries of each other as mentioned?
-I have also read argument of many local Fauna in Rig-Veda can only be found in India and not at the place of AIT Aryan origin
- How many horse bones should be found before it can be conclusively proven that they were abundant in India as mentioned in Vedas- 3.14? 13? 72? 100,000? Do AIT Nazis decide that number?
-They do not find enough horse remains even prior to Mauryan Empire, does that mean that Aryan forgot to bring the horses till then?
-Is there abundant fossil remains of other animals/man from that period?
-if it is claimed that one of the big religion was born in middle east, but today we find more followers of that religion outside of ME, does that mean that religion did not arise there? So J was born in Europe? May be in Rome?
-We find more English speaker today in US or Maybe in India, doe s that mean the England got that language from India or US?
I guess even if we were to prove that horses were present in huge number in India at that time, they can say that Rigveda claims that it was created during creation itself (12.7 billion years ago), since there are no horses from that period, it is just a bunch of lies and ....
Ya we do not have the hold on the narrative, that is the only fault here, not lack of horse bone.
rgds,
fanne

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3454
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby fanne » 20 Jul 2012 20:49

Prasanna,
I don't know if Amtyasen religion is what you claim, but needless to say it doesn’t matter. He could be following the religion of his parents but still be compromised. As someone said, AIT persists because we do not have the initiative. The AIT Nazis want to keep the narrative and the initiative, as it is a tool to negate Hidutvadis and also further their agenda (conversion or more market access or a friendly population etc, check Hindutvadis....take your pick). For someone like Witzel, it is also to further the Third Reich, even though it has been politically and ideologically defeated, he wants to do his bit by carrying the flame of AIT and Aryan superiority.
rgds,
fanne

Prasanna
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 28
Joined: 25 May 2008 13:00

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

Postby Prasanna » 20 Jul 2012 21:20

fanne

Nobody gets nobel prize just like that, Amartya got his after years of doing his master's work. see him here batting for his master's "British identity" http://articles.economictimes.indiatime ... s-religion

and the Reich and its dreams of world conquest never died, they just went underground. their modus operandi changed from confrontation to infiltration. they have infiltrated every public organisation and are bidding their time to come out in the open when the time is right.

even a few are on this forum, trying to blend in and showing fake concern while deflecting attention from the convert and conquer threat.

check this thread viewtopic.php?p=1311771#p1311771

you cant miss the poster pushing the conversion agenda as nothing but peaceful while abusing the converts old religion. a smooth operator obviously paid for his agenda pushing.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 21:26

fanne wrote:RajeshA ji,
Why the proof of horses remains being found (painting, tooth etc) from that period not enough to say horses were in India and AIT is wrong. Is it because though it does disprove that Harappa civilization was finished due to invading Aryans (as we find horse remains prior to that period), the goalpost has shifted now. The new goalpost is, since there is mention of so much of horses in Vedas, and only few Horse remains and since there are more horse remains in say Steppes that means Vedas was constructed in Steppes?

fanne ji,

for a second let's forget about the AIT argument.

We know that there was no Aryan invasion or migration into India. Sanskrit is indigenous to India, and so are its speakers. Indians of all sorts, including those who sometimes called Indo-Aryans were living in India from time-immemorial, let's say > 50,000 years!

Now we also know that the Vedic Aryans used to hold the horse in great respect and it was considered divine! We know, they were using horses.

So we need a narrative of our own. We can say, horse was domesticated in India and they used that horse.

That however, regardless of AIT/AMT etc. may run into trouble, because most don't believe that horse was indigenous to the Indian Subcontinent. Even if it were, based on the bones we have found till date, one can't assign very long ages. We may go back as far as 3,500 BCE or so. But if horse was native to India, then it must have been here much much longer, domesticated or undomesticated. But the bones may not have survived that long. So we have no way of saying that it was native.

If we find bones from 3,500 BCE it strengthens our case that in India horse was already known, and no Aryans came into India two thousand years later in 1,500 bringing the horse for the first time into India. But does it demolish their case completely?

They can say, aw, well, then the Aryans came into India 3,500 BCE and brought the horse with them! It is not the date they give today, but there are those who may not be unencumbered by Christian dogma of beginning of the world, who may be willing to say, that Aryans came earlier and even helped build the Indus Valley Civilization cities. Some may say, that the Indo-Aryans simple killed the locals and took over their cities. Are we willing to accept that?

Their main fight is over Sanskrit. They want Sanskrit! If they can get Sanskrit and the rights over the 'early' Gods like Dyaus Pitar, Varuna, Ashwins, Indra, Ushas, etc., they are happy!

Are we willing to relinquish that? No, we are not!

That is why it is not sufficient to prove that because horse bones were here in 3,500 BCE, then there could not have been an Aryan Invasion. It just means they would have to date the invasion earlier.

So yes, they will keep on shifting goal posts.

What we need is a clean cut between India and Central Asia (as a source of immigration), between the Vedic Aryans and the Central Asian horse. The Indian horse cannot provide it, because its bones are not there from 10,000 years back. So we simply use a different horse - the Arab horse. We create our own complete narrative based on that. Simply consider it a more solid foundation for our narrative, where the Vedic Aryans have no connection with Central Asia, as immigrants.

If the AIT-Nazis and AIT-Sepoys protest, we can say our narrative is solid without any logical inconsistency and with plenty of proof, and for their narrative neither is their narrative solid, nor it has any archaeological, genetic, literary, astronomical or any other type of evidence.

In fact if we had indigenous horses in India it would have caused us a bigger problem. That would have meant that in Rigveda, the Vedic Aryans would have treated the horse differently. They would have spoken about the wild horse herds, about breaking the horse, about domestication, they would have romanticized life with the horse, they would have spoken about mare's milk and its benefits. If he had read such things in the Rigveda and not found sufficient evidence from the past of horse bones, then the AIT-Nazis would have had much more a case by saying the Vedic Aryans came from a place where there was abundance of horse. Today they can't make a case like that! All they can speak of is that the horse was revered, but that says nothing about the origin of horses.

The 34-ribbed horse from Vedas is our passport out of this AIT-bakwas!

So what we need is a solid narrative!

I personally feel, that the narrative I proposed is a solid one:
  1. [url]Procurement of Horses by Vedic Aryans[/url] and
  2. Divinity of Horse among Vedic Aryans.

But others are free to look for weak points.

fanne wrote:- How many horse bones should be found before it can be conclusively proven that they were abundant in India as mentioned in Vedas- 3.14? 13? 72? 100,000? Do AIT Nazis decide that number?
-They do not find enough horse remains even prior to Mauryan Empire, does that mean that Aryan forgot to bring the horses till then?
-Is there abundant fossil remains of other animals/man from that period?

Ya we do not have the hold on the narrative, that is the only fault here, not lack of horse bone.

Apart from AIT/AMT, it would still be difficult to prove that the horse was native to India, unless one finds loads of horse skeletons relatively well preserved from 10,000 years ago over a wide area!

I think it has to do with perception among horse-bone hunters. Indian Subcontinent is simply not considered as an original home of the horse. If we keep on trying to prove it, we will end up wasting too much of our energies. If they are found by chance someday, good and fine, but lets not make our defense of our indigenous origin based on that fluke. We would be stupid if we keep on suffering this AIT until we think we have found the conclusive horse bones from distant past and convinced everybody else. That would be playing their game.

Lets instead draw up a different narrative where we don't have to prove anything, because then we will have a lot more evidence in our favor, which will count, and they will have no evidence at all for their AIT/AMT.
Last edited by RajeshA on 20 Jul 2012 22:22, edited 1 time in total.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

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

Postby abhishek_sharma » 20 Jul 2012 21:54

>> Nobody gets nobel prize just like that, Amartya got his after years of doing his master's work.

Sorry, that is just bad argument. If you believe that Amartya Sen should not have got the Nobel prize then you should show that his work in *economics* is not good enough (or, there were other more eligible people than him). That might be possible, but you will have to make that case. His views on Hinduism/Christianity are not relevant.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 22:05

A_Gupta wrote:
RajeshA wrote:The Horse Hypothesis


Why is the Horse called Aśvaḥ?

Earlier I proposed that the horse got his name from the Sun!

In Punjabi we have a word - svah! Svah means ash, raakh! It is used for ash because ash is something that has been put out, its whole energy has been used up.

So A-svah would be the opposite of svah, something whose energy cannot be used up, something that is always energized, full of energy, lit up, something that can run and run and run.


First things to do would be to consult Panini and the other ancient grammarians. If it didn't occur to them, then it is unlikely to be true.

1) That's like saying if the ASI hasn't been able to recover horse skeletons than it is unlikely to be true!

Panini gave grammar rules. He probably didn't go and explain each and every word and its etymology. Even according to Panini the prefix 'a' is used to negate the stem.

Besides the Punjabi word svah for ashes could be outside of Sanskrit and may have been only in the Prakrit there, which may have contributed to Sanskrit. So A-svah may have been taken over in Sanskrit, whereas svah remained in Prakrit among the common people. Just speculation.

Indian Sanskritists can comment on whether they agree with this speculation or not. Some may agree. Others may disagree.

2) Sri Aurobindo writes in The Secrets of the Veda (Volume 15) Page 44

Sri Aurobindo wrote:The cow and horse, go and aśva, are constantly associated. Usha, the Dawn, is described as gomatī aśvavatī; Dawn gives to the sacrificer horses and cows. As applied to the physical dawn gomatī means accompanied by or bringing the rays of light and is an image of the dawn of illumination in the human mind. Therefore aśvavatī also cannot refer merely to the physical steed; it must have a psychological significance as well. A study of the Vedic horse led me to the conclusion that go and aśva represent the two companion ideas of Light and Energy, Consciousness and Force, which to the Vedic and Vedantic mind were the double or twin aspect of all the activities of existence.

It was apparent, therefore, that the two chief fruits of the Vedic sacrifice, wealth of cows and wealth of horses, were symbolic of richness of mental illumination and abundance of vital energy. It followed that the other fruits continually associated with these two chief results of the Vedic karma must also be capable of a psychological significance. It remained only to fix their exact purport.


This "The Secret of the Veda", Sri Aurobindo wrote between August 1914 - July 1916. That was before archaeological excavations started in Harappa in 1920, i.e. before somebody knew that the horse would become an issue. So he wasn't trying to "trick" somebody with an alternate definition of aśva.

Light and Energy are what we get from the Sun. So when the Horse is associated with the Sun it pertains to the Sun in its mode as giver of energy.

What I did earlier, was to further give credence to this view of Aśva - as the inextinguishable source of energy! Aśva first and foremost pertains to the Sun and only secondarily to the Horse due to analogous properties like speed, journey, power, etc..

3) The question is here one of providing a suitable narrative which fits Indigenism of Aryans. Whether it is truth or not, who can decide, so the truth aspect is really secondary.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 22:11

Prasanna wrote:check this thread viewtopic.php?p=1311771#p1311771

you cant miss the poster pushing the conversion agenda as nothing but peaceful while abusing the converts old religion. a smooth operator obviously paid for his agenda pushing.

Prasanna ji,

that is below the belt. One should be able to take up nuanced subjects as well and one deserves that his complete posting history be taken into consideration before judgments are passed on him.

You should take it up with the poster himself and please not on this thread.

Prasanna
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 28
Joined: 25 May 2008 13:00

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

Postby Prasanna » 20 Jul 2012 23:15

abhishek_sharma wrote:>> Nobody gets nobel prize just like that, Amartya got his after years of doing his master's work.

Sorry, that is just bad argument. If you believe that Amartya Sen should not have got the Nobel prize then you should show that his work in *economics* is not good enough (or, there were other more eligible people than him). That might be possible, but you will have to make that case.


It's connections and being a good slave that gets you the Nobel, if you don't believe it then tell me why obama was given the nobel peace prize? what has he done for world peace anyway?

abhishek_sharma wrote:His views on Hinduism/Christianity are not relevant.


Of course they are relevant, particularly when he regurgitates the same old fake invasion theory, which is in no way connected to his field of economics. He and his masters have an agenda. If you want to play blind then it's upto you.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

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

Postby abhishek_sharma » 20 Jul 2012 23:17

Nobel Peace prize is obviously politicized. Nobels in science/economics is a different matter.

>> If you want to play blind then it's upto you.

Don't go there. theek hai?

Prasanna
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 28
Joined: 25 May 2008 13:00

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

Postby Prasanna » 20 Jul 2012 23:25

@RajeshA

one look at this posts and you can see he is a new convert from shia islam to american christanity. His desperation to divide and conquer his old home iran reflects in the thread he started which aims to document "iran's faultines", see where this is going? the convert and conquer agenda. when iran gets invaded this year expected some heavy volume of propaganda posts on how iran is being liberated and civilized.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jul 2012 23:37

Prasanna ji,

I believe you are mistaken. Please remove your post. This thread is not for such discussions.

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 » 21 Jul 2012 09:25

I have a request for any BRFite who reads this. For all our bragging about past glory we are actually fools who still depend on an old and inaccurate translation of the Rig Veda by Griffiths from German to English.

A much better translation is available in Hindi 200 + MB that I have downloaded and there are significnt differences between this, which makes sense to the Indian, versus the gobbledygook of Griffiths
Link to Hindi
http://ia700405.us.archive.org/13/items ... -Hindi.pdf

But please. We need to memorize the Rig Veda (from recordings of chants) and then do a new translation. I will do what I can over tre next few years but I suggest that some others also take it up. It is a shame that controversies are raised by fake and inaccurate translations that lose the context. A person who does not grow up in a Vedic culture cannot get the context right.

I will explain all this in a later post that shows how this rubbish has been misused.

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

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

Postby Satya_anveshi » 21 Jul 2012 09:52

When one searches for "learn sanskrit" in G-chacha, the first link pops is that of IITM (http://acharya.iitm.ac.in/sanskrit/tutor.php). On that very page you get a link to Monier Williams Sanskrit dictionary. From what I read earlier on this thread, he belongs to the same colonial school and contemporary of Arthur Anthony McDonell and Friedrich Maximillian Müller and whose dictionary is contented by Indian pundits.

If there is a better alternative dictionary, can someone point out here? It may be possible for others to take it up with IITM and provide link to the appropriate dictionary.
Last edited by Satya_anveshi on 21 Jul 2012 10:02, edited 1 time in total.

Dhiman
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 13:56

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

Postby Dhiman » 21 Jul 2012 09:59

removing duplicate post
Last edited by Dhiman on 21 Jul 2012 10:04, edited 1 time in total.

Dhiman
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 13:56

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

Postby Dhiman » 21 Jul 2012 10:01

removing duplicate post
Last edited by Dhiman on 21 Jul 2012 10:03, edited 1 time in total.

Dhiman
BRFite
Posts: 527
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 13:56

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

Postby Dhiman » 21 Jul 2012 10:02

If horses were unknown to Indus Valley, then what is this:

Image

and this:

Image

and this:

Image

and this:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dxzVSI0zYQE/S ... orse1a.JPG

and this:

Image

and this definitely looks like a chariot to me:

Image

The crap people came up with in pre-internet days to delude others is amazing. I don't know about OIT, but rest assured AIT is pure mumbo-jumbo.

Theo_Fidel

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

Postby Theo_Fidel » 21 Jul 2012 10:08

Sea-Horses onlee.....

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 » 21 Jul 2012 10:22

Satya_anveshi wrote:When one searches for "learn sanskrit" in G-chacha, the first link pops is that of IITM (http://acharya.iitm.ac.in/sanskrit/tutor.php). On that very page you get a link to Monier Williams Sanskrit dictionary. From what I read earlier on this thread, he belongs to the same colonial school and contemporary of Arthur Anthony McDonell and Friedrich Maximillian Müller and whose dictionary is contented by Indian pundits.

If there is a better alternative dictionary, can someone point out here? It may be possible for others to take it up with IITM and provide link to the appropriate dictionary.


Monier Williams published by Motilal Banrsidas is very useful actually - simply because it is English-Sanskrit and has no agenda. I would recommend it. For Sanskrit English I use Vaman Shivram Apte.

But the thing to do is to become familiar with Sanskrit diction and pronunciation. I am already reasonably OK because I was taught to memorize many shlokas as a child, but I want to learn the Rig Veda by heart so as to be able to quote it from memory as part of discussions with translators.
Last edited by shiv on 21 Jul 2012 10:29, edited 2 times in total.

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 » 21 Jul 2012 10:27

Dhiman wrote:If horses were unknown to Indus Valley, then what is this:


These may look like horses, but are the Equus caballus? Were they domesticated? They may have been modelled in clay from the memory of something the modeller saw in Central Asia 500 years previously no? Hindu revisionsists and Hindutvadis are politically motivated. Not science minded like we are when we cook up stuff.

:mrgreen:

lakshmikanth
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 27 Oct 2008 10:07
Location: Bee for Baakistan

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

Postby lakshmikanth » 21 Jul 2012 11:58

shiv wrote:I have a request for any BRFite who reads this. For all our bragging about past glory we are actually fools who still depend on an old and inaccurate translation of the Rig Veda by Griffiths from German to English.

A much better translation is available in Hindi 200 + MB that I have downloaded and there are significnt differences between this, which makes sense to the Indian, versus the gobbledygook of Griffiths
Link to Hindi
http://ia700405.us.archive.org/13/items ... -Hindi.pdf

But please. We need to memorize the Rig Veda (from recordings of chants) and then do a new translation. I will do what I can over tre next few years but I suggest that some others also take it up. It is a shame that controversies are raised by fake and inaccurate translations that lose the context. A person who does not grow up in a Vedic culture cannot get the context right.

I will explain all this in a later post that shows how this rubbish has been misused.


shiv garu,

Thanks for the Hindi book above.

When I was reading about Rajiv Malhotra's 'untranslatable' a discussion that I had with one of my neuroscience friends (who is a pol-sci prof , massa land academia is a strange land sometimes) which illuminated me about there being a close feedback loop between immersive language (one which you are immersed in), thinking, logic and epistemology. Language gives you more logical constructs, which you can use to think vastly different scenarios, which then add new logical constructs and change your philosophical and epistemological discourse. If you end up interpreting a language while being immersed in another, it distorts the true contextual meaning. Hence understanding Rig-Veda completely can only be a personal journey, for each his own.

I think the only way to get a brain Sanskritized is to immerse it in Sanskrit so much so that every thought and logical construct ends up being in Sanskrit. I think that is the point we should aim for to even start such an initiative. Only then can true contextual, logical and epistemologically consistent interpretation of Rig-Veda occur.

So there are two challenges

1) Immersing yourself in Sanskrit (cutting out every other language occuring in the brain) and training it to think in Sanskritized terms, including forming abstract thoughts about mundane or non mundane stuff: Like wondering "Would it rain?" in Sanskrit instead of Hindi/Marathi/English and what not.
2) Once you are sufficiently immersed in Sanskrit, understanding Rig-Veda and linking it into the customs that are followed in India to this day, which should obviously have a logical continuity from the Vedic times. Eventhough most of what is Indian culture these days is a hybridized culture that is just a shell of what it ones was.

It would be a deep personal journey for who-ever undertakes it :). It would certainly be a rich and valuable undertaking as well. Good luck!

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 21 Jul 2012 12:13

"Prasanna",

You are a paki paid to inject a non-existent extreme right wing "agenda" in the hope and expectation that gullible people will be attracted to a self-destructive and narrow absolutist line of thinking like your fellow country-things. Some are. Go to a Chinese forum fool. You might have better success there.

Btw, this is an admin warning belated but necessary. You may continue posting but read forum guidelines CAREFULLY first.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 21 Jul 2012 12:33

>>If horses were unknown to Indus Valley, then what is this:

Are you kidding? These were carried by the Aryan invaders with them, and the last one in particular, in the anticipation they would need to have kids in the Indus valley region and therefore toy chariots would be necessary to play with... Who said the dating is definitive? Mikhail Weasel, the only true "expert" on horseshit, has certified that the horseshit from the steppes is identical to the horseshit from the Indus valley - which is why when his most dedicated students are graced by his presence, they stand up and extending hands say "Heil Shitler".

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jul 2012 15:58

JE Menon wrote:Mikhail Weasel, the only true "expert" on horseshit, has certified that the horseshit from the steppes is identical to the horseshit from the Indus valley - which is why when his most dedicated students are graced by his presence, they stand up and extending hands say "Heil Shitler".

:rotfl: :rotfl:

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jul 2012 16:00

shiv wrote:But the thing to do is to become familiar with Sanskrit diction and pronunciation. I am already reasonably OK because I was taught to memorize many shlokas as a child, but I want to learn the Rig Veda by heart so as to be able to quote it from memory as part of discussions with translators.

And doing piskology of Indologists and Sanskritists in Sanskrit would definitely be a big positive! :D

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jul 2012 16:03

Dhiman ji,

The last one looks like a bullock chariot, as the bullocks have humps. However all other look like Aryan horses, and I can count 36 ribs in each as well.



Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 14 guests