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

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

Postby AbhiJ » 16 Jan 2013 22:40

This needs to be deciphered but needs more scrutiny my garus.

http://www.goddessgift.com/goddess_names_list.htm

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

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

Postby johneeG » 16 Jan 2013 22:44

Klaus wrote: Image

IMO, its a crude rendering of the famous Shiva Nataraja, immortalized by the (later) Chola Bronzes. These would have come after this migration to Australia around 2230 BC.


To me, it seems like a frog or a fetus in womb. I am inclined to think that it is a fetus in womb.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7038
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 17 Jan 2013 01:10

whatever it is, dude has distended nuts.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54434
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 19 Jan 2013 00:40

partha wrote:Check this out, mates!

http://www.economist.com/news/science-a ... us-indians

Genetic evidence suggests that, four millennia ago, a group of adventurous Indians landed in Australia


Image

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 19 Jan 2013 01:29

supports the out of kerala model. ;)

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 » 19 Jan 2013 06:24

ramana wrote:
http://www.economist.com/news/science-a ... us-indians

Genetic evidence suggests that, four millennia ago, a group of adventurous Indians landed in Australia


Image


I would be very wary of this map and article because the areas in read are called "Dravidian regions". That means this paper considers Dravidian as a genetically separate race, which is the same as subscribing to the Aryan invasion theory where the superior Aryans brought their Aryan language from the Eurasian steppe, passed through Syria (Mitanni) in 1500 BC and gave Rig Veda to India in 1200 BC (4000 years ago) , after pushing Dasyus to the south 4000 years ago. These dasyus went to Australia and became the aborigines there.

We have many genetic papers that show that Aryan and Dravidian are not separate races.

Besides, do the Aborigines speak Dravidian languages?

Someone introducing some bullshit into a simple genetics paper about migration.

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 » 19 Jan 2013 06:38

I read an article recently where David Anthony, and avowed AIT protagonist is now shifting the goalpost by saying that language movement does not reflect in genetics but that an elite can impose heir language even without mixing with the local population.

David Anthony also relies on lies about the Rig Veda which I will come to in due course.

What Shri Anthony did not explain is how the elite in Mitanni (Syria) who serve as an important link in the AIT language movement theory disappeared completely and failed to leave any trace of their Aryan language in Syria, while they went to India and replaced all previous languages with Aryan languages leaving no trace of any earlier language. And yet they have left no genetic imprint in India.

Anthony claims to quote from he Rig veda (I think he is quoting Witzel) saying that pastoralist Aryans on horses defeated the dasyus who lived in "purs" (had houses). Now we get this paper that is going to say that dasyus went to south India and Australia. This is going to be used by evangelists to say that the naughty casteist people subjugated the aborigines who must turn to Jesus for salvation.

Anthony and others claim that Rig Veda 10.18 is refers to sati and also describes (in detail acc to Anthony) the construction of a kurgan like grave just like he found in Eurasia. The bullshiting that is still going on is amazing.

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 » 19 Jan 2013 06:55

I posted a response to the Economist article
The map that displays "Dravidian regions" in India perpetuates the same error that was made by 18th century linguists by assuming that Dravidians are a separate race from Aryans. Modern genetic studies have shown that there is no separate Aryan or Dravidian race, but there is a great variation in genes among Indians indicative of populations that were among the first "out of Africa" people. It is likely that one such subset of genes from south India match up with Australian Aborigines. But as far as genetics goes, according to recent papers, Indian genes tend to match the genes of other Indians more than those of either Europeans or Australian Aborigines.

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

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

Postby member_22872 » 19 Jan 2013 07:32

National Geographic Channel Announces Weekly Night Of Exploration Fridays Beginning January 11, 2013

Is anyone watching this shown NatGeo? one of the researcher is Spencer Wells. I started watching it today, wasnt aware of it. They are showing a second genetic line originating in Africa and going straight to Europe, the commentator says this happened 10k years after the first migration. Wasn't this disproved earlier? Can anyone who watched comment?

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10508
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

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

Postby Vayutuvan » 19 Jan 2013 07:34

Ramana garu

We were talking about "kooka burra" sometime back in this thread. ;)

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

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

Postby Klaus » 19 Jan 2013 08:47

venug wrote: They are showing a second genetic line originating in Africa and going straight to Europe, the commentator says this happened 10k years after the first migration. Wasn't this disproved earlier? Can anyone who watched comment?


Essentially the same thing being said in this BBC presentation too, it says that a new wave of migrants came to Europe via Turkey around 25,000 YBP (around the same time the final Neanderthals had withdrawn to the Gibraltar refuges).

This seems to be a popular theory propagated by the Brit establishment in general, perhaps it is an attempt to sub-consciously hint that Europe's diversity comes from multiple migrant waves and not the "thorny" route of breeding with Neanderthals (thereby burying that uncomfortable problem forever of 4-5% Neanderthal genetic make-up of pan-European populations). The Brits extend the same benefit of doubt to the Chinese too, previously the Chinese were happy to accept that a certain percentage of their genes might have come from Denisovians/Homo Erectus/Peking Man, the same theory of multiple genetic lines into Central Asia was given to get rid of that issue as well. Not sure of the CPC Politburo's influence or pressure on these matters of anthropology but I guess it must be tremendous to toe the line of Europe on this matter.


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

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

Postby member_22872 » 19 Jan 2013 19:45

Klaus ji thanks for the link, I think there are trials to resurrect European dead lines from North African lines. Oppenheimer in his book "Real Eve" says pp50-51:

Modern humans first left Africa over 120k years ago through an open northern gate...this foray ended in failure. Their second, successful venture set them on a path through Asia to the south and east, already well worn by their predecessors. Europe was by passed and ignored until 50k years ago.

There are basically two gates open out of Africa, the northern gate, over Sahara to the Levant and Europe, while the other led east, across the mouth of the Red Sea Yemen, Oman and India. Which gate was open depended on the glacial cycle and determined whether mamals, including humans, migrating Africa went north to Europe or east to Asia.

Today, Africa is physically linked to the Eurasian continent by only one of these corridors, via the Sinai Peninsula in the north. Normally an unforgiving dry desert, the potential route through the Sahara and the Sinai to the rest of the world opens, ...only when variations in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of its polar axis produce a brief episode of warming.

This fleeting event in geological time happens only once every 100k years or so, when the Sun's heat causes a polar meltdown and a warm and humid global climate ensures....But because this warm interlude is so brief, the North African weather-gate can act as deadly trap to migrants.

From page 53-54
The earlier interglacial, known to scientists as Eemian or Ipswichian, came 125k years ago, soon after the birth of our human family.. We know that early modern humans traveled out of sub-Saharan Africa into North Africa and Levant at a very early stage because their bones have been found in those places.

Thea early trails of modern humans sadly petered out in the Levant around 90k years ago. From climatic records we can see that there was a brief but devastating global freeze up and dessication 90k years ago that turned the whole Levant to extreme desert. ...We have no further physical evidence of modern humans in the Levant or in the Europe for another 45k years, until the Cro-Magnon people made their appearance 45-50k years ago and successfully challenged the Neanderthals.

European archeaologists who argue that Europeans arose separately from nothern African exodus may be Eurocentric and have a conviction that Cro-Magnons who moved into Europe no more than 50k years ago defined the beginning of our as 'modern humans.

There are real problems, however, in explaining how the sub-Saharan ancestors of Europeans could have got out through North Africa at that time. For A start, with an impassable Sahara desert in the way for the past 100k years, any late North African invasion of Europe could only have come from green refuge left in the North Africa, such as the Nile Delta, after the interglacial from over 100k years ago. The Europeans could not hve come directly, non-stop from Sub-Sahara 45-50k years ago unless they floated all the way down the Nile on logs - which the genetic story denies.

The line mentioned in the National Geographic is M143. I will try to see if the episode is made online somewhere.

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

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 19 Jan 2013 20:27

venug wrote:Klaus ji thanks for the link, I think there are trials to resurrect European dead lines from North African lines. Oppenheimer in his book "Real Eve" says pp50-51:

Modern humans first left Africa over 120k years ago through an open northern gate...this foray ended in failure. Their second, successful venture set them on a path through Asia to the south and east, already well worn by their predecessors. Europe was by passed and ignored until 50k years ago.

There are basically two gates open out of Africa, the northern gate, over Sahara to the Levant and Europe, while the other led east, across the mouth of the Red Sea Yemen, Oman and India. Which gate was open depended on the glacial cycle and determined whether mamals, including humans, migrating Africa went north to Europe or east to Asia.

Today, Africa is physically linked to the Eurasian continent by only one of these corridors, via the Sinai Peninsula in the north. Normally an unforgiving dry desert, the potential route through the Sahara and the Sinai to the rest of the world opens, ...only when variations in the Earth's orbit and the tilt of its polar axis produce a brief episode of warming.

This fleeting event in geological time happens only once every 100k years or so, when the Sun's heat causes a polar meltdown and a warm and humid global climate ensures....But because this warm interlude is so brief, the North African weather-gate can act as deadly trap to migrants.

From page 53-54
The earlier interglacial, known to scientists as Eemian or Ipswichian, came 125k years ago, soon after the birth of our human family.. We know that early modern humans traveled out of sub-Saharan Africa into North Africa and Levant at a very early stage because their bones have been found in those places.

Thea early trails of modern humans sadly petered out in the Levant around 90k years ago. From climatic records we can see that there was a brief but devastating global freeze up and dessication 90k years ago that turned the whole Levant to extreme desert. ...We have no further physical evidence of modern humans in the Levant or in the Europe for another 45k years, until the Cro-Magnon people made their appearance 45-50k years ago and successfully challenged the Neanderthals.

European archeaologists who argue that Europeans arose separately from nothern African exodus may be Eurocentric and have a conviction that Cro-Magnons who moved into Europe no more than 50k years ago defined the beginning of our as 'modern humans.

There are real problems, however, in explaining how the sub-Saharan ancestors of Europeans could have got out through North Africa at that time. For A start, with an impassable Sahara desert in the way for the past 100k years, any late North African invasion of Europe could only have come from green refuge left in the North Africa, such as the Nile Delta, after the interglacial from over 100k years ago. The Europeans could not hve come directly, non-stop from Sub-Sahara 45-50k years ago unless they floated all the way down the Nile on logs - which the genetic story denies.

The line mentioned in the National Geographic is M143. I will try to see if the episode is made online somewhere.


Venug, ji.. and not to discount 'multiple orgin' (not only Africa) hypothesis. Evidence is scant but it is there...

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6805
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

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

Postby CRamS » 19 Jan 2013 20:52

deleted. Wrong thread.
Last edited by CRamS on 19 Jan 2013 22:07, edited 1 time in total.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6805
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

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

Postby CRamS » 19 Jan 2013 20:59

deleted. Wrong thread.
Last edited by CRamS on 19 Jan 2013 22:07, edited 1 time in total.

sanjeevpunj
BRFite
Posts: 971
Joined: 04 Sep 2009 13:10

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

Postby sanjeevpunj » 19 Jan 2013 21:54

The greatest irony is that we sit and watch this shit on TV.Not content with that, we bring this shit out into every platform we are able to.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jan 2013 00:16

Must be Indian: Human Settlement in Australia: Dissident Voice
By Binoy Kampmark
Published on Jan 19, 2013

Race, ethnicity and origins are always up for political grabs. No one really wants to know that they were preceded by someone else, that they were not the first ones there. This is the Adam complex, and no culture is immune from it.

A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences conducted by German geneticists suggests that there was a “substantial gene flow between Indian populations and Australia about 4,230 years ago” (Sci-News, Jan 15).

The authors recapitulate the familiar theme of an isolated civilization on a continent holding “some of the earliest archaeological evidence for the expansion of modern humans out of Africa”. They note that the genetic history of Australians has not been examined in detail, finding an “ancient association between Australia, New Guinea, and the Manwanwa (a Negrito group from the Philippines)” and “a signal indicative of substantial gene flow between the Indian populations and Australia well before European contact, contrary to the prevailing view that there was no contact between Australia and the rest of the world.”

The study should not come as a surprise, though the reaction from Australia’s archaeological and broader scientific community will be of interest. The discussion of Indian roots in the Australian connection is probably bound to be troubling for the cognoscenti. It has become something of a shibboleth – the “oldest” civilization and the fact that isolated human existence began on the curiously shaped Australian continent some 40,000 years ago (give or take 10 thousand here and there – who cares?).

Scientists can be a sclerotic lot, often more keen to abide by manifestos and what their grant making bodies want than the raw pursuit of science. When native title came into vogue as an important feature of Australia’s legal and political landscape, the rush was on to show the continuous association of various indigenous peoples with their lands. Inconsistencies, or parallel accounts on such rock depictions as the Bradshaw (Gwion Gwion) paintings were ignored. What does not fit in the cosmos can be conveniently excised or simply ignored.

Most controversially for the stick in the mud community were suggestions by the greatest authority on the Bradshaws – Graham Walsh – who suggested that the sophisticated creations were the product of an Asiatic race before the last ice age. In an interview for Australian Story (ABC, Oct 14, 2002), this aficionado of rock art re-iterated those claims that terrified the establishment. “They’ve got to be in excess of 17,500 years, everything that’s on this panel – sort of 4 to 5 times the age of classic Egypt and the pyramids.” That culture had to have been mobile, using boats, and moving populations. Walsh has documented but a small section of the thousands of sites.

Other scientists, using optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) and 14C AMS techniques, have attempted to date the paintings. One study suggested a span of 1500 to 4000 years. Another came close to the Walsh figure of 17,000.

A clue on how this latest recent study on Holocene transfer between India and Australia might be treated can be gathered from the overwhelmingly negative response to Walsh. Walsh was the Galileo of the room, attacked by the Australian Archaeological Association for refusing to comply with the political program. He was, as it were, out of sync with the big project of the 1990s – seeking to find continuous cultural associations with land since 1788. The scientific had to square with the political. On December 18, 1995, the Association issued a media statement claiming that Walsh’s interpretations were “based on and encourage racist stereotypes.”

In 1996, the ideology of the association did not waver. The statement issued by the organisation then is worth considering, given that an observation is made merely to be ignored entirely. First, a sober note: “To argue for human cultural and genetic continuity in the Kimberly region over a minimum of 40,000 years is to argue for a degree of conservatism without parallel anywhere else in the world and which is at odds with the current archaeological record.”

Then, the blade is unsheathed. “Even so, there is no basis for ascribing Bradshaws, or any other prehistoric Australian rock art, to any other than the ancestors of Australian Aborigines.” True, there might have been involvement (genetic, cultural) “from adjacent areas of SE Asia”, but that counted for little in the categorisation of the peoples of the area as “Aboriginal”.

The response from various members of the indigenous community was also notable. Many indigenous elders dismissed the Bradshaws as “rubbish” art, barely worth a mention.

Ian McNiven and Lynette Russell, along with Michael Barry, Peter White and Darrell Lewis, were similarly interested in perpetuating the police man version of history and science, one that must abide by the appropriate political strictures lest it re-enforce racial “stereotypes”. Indigeneity is supreme, and hermetic. These academics, after all, know what the policemen of science want. Writing in 1997, McNiven and Russell claimed that, “Walsh, in refuelling a diffusionist debate, has resurrected a colonialist standpoint that has played into the hands of political conservatives and again placed Aboriginal people in the position of having to demonstrate authenticity and legitimacy.”

Walsh was an Indiana Jones keen to seek out the lost civilization when it was always there, governed by the indigenous populace. He was also – and the slur was never far away – funded at stages by the cash of pastoralists and media moguls. The indigenous population of the Kimberley, in contrast, had no reason to prove anything. Walsh, responding in 2000, decried this attitude as reminiscent of a “cultural Dark Ages” where logic and accuracy were excluded. “Emotional biases cloaked in the guise of scientific rigour are rapidly controlling the potential for voicing of contrary opinions.”

The anti-scientific gibberish spouted at Walsh and the Bradshaw paintings is not bound to stop there. Identity, framed in the political and cultural sense, is a dangerous and treasured thing. It remains to be seen whether the latest claims about an Indian genetic connection might be dismissed by the Australian community, both scientific and indigenous, as a “rubbish” link contrary to hermetic indigeneity.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.

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

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

Postby member_22872 » 20 Jan 2013 00:55

Nilesh ji,

I agree that the jury is still out. As times goes by, we could get a complete picture about Human evolution. This whole Eurocenterism reeks of racism even to this day. They have done great damage to many civilizations as you know. I am alright if truth makes Europe the home, but this constant goal post change to keep the racist attitudes alive giving me creeps. It took us to lots and lots of effort thanks to so many people here, to see through the western perfidy. But if this continues, it becomes very very difficult for common man to see truth from what is not.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 20 Jan 2013 16:34

Reposted from here.
Archaeometry, Volume 51, Issue 3, pages 457–466, June 2009

New Evidence for Early Silk in the Indus Civilization [Download]

Authors: I.L. Good¹, J.M. Kenoyer², and R.H. Meadow¹

¹ Peabody Museum, Harvard University, 11 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
² Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin at Madison, 5240 W. H. Sewell Social Science Building,1180 Observatory Dr., University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706 USA

Abstract:
Silk is an important economic fibre, and is generally considered to have been the exclusive cultural heritage of China. Silk weaving is evident from the Shang period c. 1600–1045 bc, though the earliest evidence for silk textiles in ancient China may date to as much as a millennium earlier. Recent microscopic analysis of archaeological thread fragments found inside copper-alloy ornaments from Harappa and steatite beads from Chanhu-daro, two important Indus sites, have yielded silk fibres, dating to c. 2450–2000 bc. This study offers the earliest evidence in the world for any silk outside China, and is roughly contemporaneous with the earliest Chinese evidence for silk. This important new finding brings into question the traditional historical notion of sericulture as being an exclusively Chinese invention.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21159
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 21 Jan 2013 01:06

Have we explored ancient Yemeni Indian connection, especially the queen Sheba and the so called fertility god and the temple she made for Nandi.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

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

Postby Klaus » 21 Jan 2013 11:03

venug wrote:Klaus ji thanks for the link, I think there are trials to resurrect European dead lines from North African lines. Oppenheimer in his book "Real Eve" says pp50-51:


venug ji, apologies for the delayed reply. I will expound on this in a later post when I have time.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

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

Postby Klaus » 21 Jan 2013 11:06

Jhujar wrote:especially the queen Sheba and the so called fertility god and the temple she made for Nandi.


The common Western sources seem to "malign" Sheba by associated the Queen with Solomon of Jerusalem. Another unproven allegation is that she was the one who introduced monotheism to her kingdom, after being influenced by Solomon.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21159
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 21 Jan 2013 11:14

Queen Sheba or queen Shobha? 8)

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

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

Postby johneeG » 21 Jan 2013 13:44

Jhujar wrote:Queen Sheba or queen Shobha? 8)


Saar,
I am trying to write a post on this topic. For some reason, I deviated and started writing within that post about the evolution of Europe and the rest of the world. That topic is taking too much time.

Anyway, I may post once I can complete. But, onething there is a lot of material.

About 'Sheba':
Shiva is the Lord of the Sabbath.
Shiva as Lord of Yoga, Fulfilling the Seven Chakras
Shiva meant Seven throughout the Ancient World.
Zechariah the Acharya and the Number Seven

How the Sabbath Got its Name:
Names of Shiva in the Old Testament
Relevant to the Sabbath: Sheba, Seba, Saba, Tsaba.

The Ancient Hebrew word Shabbath, meaning Sabbath,
Has its roots in Sheba meaning seven, and Shaba.

[To be studied in the pages to come:
Sabaoth, meaning the military lord of hosts
Has its root in Saba, which also transliterates as Sheba and Seba.
The Pillars erected to God in the Torah are named masseva or masseba.
Both variants used the name of Shiva or Siva.]

People raised in the Judeo-Christian tradition accept the name God as if it were the first and genuine name by which God was known to the ancient Hebrews. It was not. It is acknowledged even by the orthodox that Deity was addressed by various names, such as Baal, Adonai, Jah, Jehovah, El, El Shaddai, and El Kana. And we also know that divinity was not necessarily addressed as a singular entity as we see in the name Elohim which refers to a number of deities. In the common translations available to the public, however, the original male deity of Judaism is never addressed as Sheba, a transliteration of Shiva, for obvious reasons. It would disclose the original deity of Judaism as being the Hindu Shiva and the original Jews as being Sabeans, that is, followers of Saba aka Sheba and Seba, all of which are names of Shiva. The deity Shiva venerated by mainstream Hindus commands vegetarianism as a diet, compassion for animals, and does not respect castes or classes. He therefore does not at all fit in with what has become orthodox Judaism and Christianity, religions, or, more properly speaking, sects, which promote animal sacrifices as a diet, and elitist societies of rich and poor. The term, elitist societies of rich and poor, may be regarded as a euphemism for slavery in one degree or another. Slavery is an institution which is portrayed as acceptable in both the Old and New Testaments as well as in the Koran. As we shall see, point by point in this study, the original vegetarian and egalitarian values of Judaism were radically different from what orthodox Judaism has become.



Orthodox Jews ignore the root of the name of their place of study, the Yeshiva.

Shiva is known in the Old Testament as Sheba, Seba and Saba, Tsaba, as well as by other names. Shiva aka Sheba is the Lord of the Shabbath (Hebrew) and Sabbath (English). One easily sees the connection between the word Saba, which is interchangeable with Seba and Sheba, and the English word Sabbath. The etymology of the word Shabbath or Sabbath has been scrupulously ignored, as has, for example, the term yeshiva, meaning a school or academy for students of Judaism. The word is of course is a rather direct reference to Shiva, though it is not acknowledged to be so by the orthodoxy. When the relevant names of Shiva are aligned with the Hebrew and English designations of the seventh day, it is rather easy to see the etymological connection.

Sheba: Shabbath in ancient Hebrew.
The name Saba is easily seen to be the root of Sabbath in English

Sheba is an easily seen root of Shabbath, especially when we realize that ancient Hebrew is comprised of consonants, just as Saba is easily seen as the root of the English word Sabbath. As we examine the ancient Hebrew terms and names connected with the Sabbath, however, we will see that these correlations are not simply superficial or coincidental, but that they provide specific documentation of the Sabean tradition that gave birth to original Judaism.

Most of us are quite familiar with the term Sabbath day, the seventh day of rest which we understand as being derived from the sequence of days in Genesis: God creates the world in six days and rests on the seventh. And we are also familiar with the fourth commandment "Remember thou keep holy the Sabbath day." But we usually aren't informed as to the source or etymology of the word itself, Sabbath, or in Hebrew Shabbath.

7676 Shabbath in Hebrew is described as meaning intermission, the Sabbath, and every sabbath. It is a form of 7673.

7673 Shabath is a primitive root meaning to repose, to desist from exertion.


Understanding that the Shabbath or Sabbath is the seventh day, when we examine the roots of the Hebrew words Shabbath and Shabath, we come across a number of definitions that make more sense from a Hindu perspective than they do from a Jewish one, since they refer to a yogic process, which is now associated with Hinduism and somewhat with Buddhism and the Hopis, but not Judaism.

The Sabbath and Shiva as Lord of Yoga
"Sevening One's Self"

An examination of the names Sheba and Shaba, words which may be seen as roots of Shabbath (in English the Sabbath), deal with sevening one's self, and thereby reveal the ancient devotion that the original Jews had to Shiva as the Lord of Yoga, one who has "sevened himself," that is fulfilled his seven chakras. In the Hindu system of Yoga, which tradition has it was begun by Shiva himself, there are seven centers, the root chakra or center, corresponding to one's sexual energy, the power chakra above it, the solar plexus chakra above it, the heart chakra, the throat, the third eye and the seventh chakra at the top of the head.

The practitioner of Yoga, or for that matter, any human seeking spiritual perfection, is to deal with resolving, controlling or balancing sexual desires (the first center), resolving conflicts of power (the second center), controlling appetite addictions and using food for purification (the third and solar plexus center), controlling one's emotional attachments (the fourth and heart center), expression of one's will (the fifth and throat center), reception to the infusion of divinity through meditation (the sixth center in the third eye), all of which, when finally achieved, allow one to connect with divinity through the highest chakra in the top of the head. This is the briefest of summaries dealing with the chakra system and not meant in the slightest to detract from its profundity, a profundity, which, though mysterious, was recognized throughout those parts of the ancient world that gave birth to Judaism. Libraries and the internet will have material explaining the Yogic process in detail.

We can easily see moreover how the term Shabbath or Sabbath is related to numerous other words which reflect the seventh day aspect of the word. Namely: the word shaba and the words sheba (pronounced sheh' bah) and shibah (pronounced shib-aw') which are the feminine and masculine forms of the same word. The ancient Hebrew words Shaba and Sheba both refer to aspects of the Hindu Shiva as Lord of Yoga.

7650 shaba, a primitive root; to be complete; to seven oneself.

The latter part of the above definition, to seven oneself may be interpreted in numerous ways, among them that seven is part of a natural cycle, and that the seventh day completes or perfects the cycle, were it not for the word oneself, which brings the completion of the seven part cycle to a personal level. On the personal level the phrase to seven oneself makes little or no sense in the history of the orthodox Jews, but makes perfect sense in the history of Hinduism. The phrase refers to the ideal of the Yogic process, to eliminate all major negativity in one's spiritual centers and to activate their positive potentiality. Shiva is the Inventor of Yoga, and the Lord of Yoga. Shiva has nourished to the full his seven spiritual centers or chakras, and is now a fulfilled being elevated to divinity. It is Shiva who is being referred to as a divine model for human behavior, for in fulfilling the potentiality of each of his seven chakras, Shiva has sevened himself; he is a complete being.

Shiva was known throughout the world as the God of Seven.

Whereas the verb Shaba refers to the activity of becoming complete in one's self, the following definition of Sheba, a frequently used noun and root in the Old Testament Hebrew, means seven, but seven as the sacred full one. In other words, the nominative case refers to the same occurrence: that of being in the state of having fulfilled one's self, one's spiritual centers, and once again seven, the number of the chakras, is mentioned. Sheba means seven. The Shabbath is the seventh day. Sheba is merely a transliteration of Shiva, sometimes spelled as Sheva.

7651 sheba (fem) or shibah (masc), seven (as the sacred full one); as an adverb, seven times; a week.

To anyone who is not familiar with the Hindu system of Yoga featuring the development of one's seven spiritual centers, the above definition of seven as the sacred full one would be rather ambiguous, but to the Hindus and Buddhists, to the ancient Maya and Aztecs, who also revered the number seven and worshiped Shiva and Kali, and to the Hopis (though Hopis limit the centers to five), it is a system which meshes with their own. [The Aztec pantheon even has a vegetation goddess known as Kundalini (See Michael Jordan's Encyclopedia of Gods).]

Shiva is associated with the number seven over and over again in Hinduism, as is the God of Judaism, and Sheba in Hebrew means seven. The link between the Hindu deity Shiva and the number seven includes the fact that Shiva is Lord of the seven worlds, he lives in the place of seven rivers on earth and in Shivaloka, the highest of the seven worlds, he is Lord of Yoga, having mastered his seven spiritual centers, and his name means seven. Zechariah Sitchin in Lost Realms says that the name Elisheva in Canaan mean "my God is Seven." p. 82.

SHIBAH, meaning Seven in Genesis: 26: 33

Isaac's servants in the above scripture name the well shibah, meaning seven, to honor their God, Sheba, or Shiva, and thereby also to show that the wells are "owned" or cared for by Isaac (God laughed), the root of whose name is Isa, one of Shiva's other names. The well therefore has been named after Shiva as Isaac himself has been named after Isa.


Let us let the above definitions show us the relationship of our own English Seven to the German Sieben, and the Hebrew forms of the word, such as Seba and Sheba, words which go back to a Sanskrit source. Perhaps we can get somewhat of an idea of how influential central essential concepts of divinity are, and how spin-off material is related to the phonetic structure and mental significance of the original concept.

Insofar as the Sabbath was named after the seventh day of creation and Creation is the Creator's Harvest, we can see how the root of the word Sabbath is related with the following words meaning plenty, abundance and satisfaction.

The Lord of the Sabbath is the Lord of Creation,
and therefore the Lord of Plenty, the Harvest, Abundance.

7646 saba or sabea (defined the same) to sate, fill to satisfaction, have plenty of, satisfy with, suffice.

Saba is the name of God to the Ethiopian Sabeans, who erected pillars and offered vegetation to him. The Hebrew Seba and Sheba are transliterations of Siva and Shiva. It is indisputable that Saba, Seba, Sheba, and Sheva, all Hebrew words, are transliterations of Shiva's name and/or attributes.
Like the Dravidians in India, the Ethiopians also worshipped Krishna as Cainan or Kanneh, and Rama as Ramman or Rimmon. For verification that these were the names of the Ethiopian deities, look up Sheba, Seba, Saba, in James Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (1919 edition). Some Indian scholars affirm that Ethiopia may in fact be the mother culture of India, and given the evidence that the oldest human bones thus far found are Ethiopian, this would indeed be even more evidence to add to the fact that the Sabean religion was the first universal religion of the world. What is being conjectured is that the migrating Ethiopians became the aboriginal Shaivites who were later invaded by the Aryans.

7647 sabea, copiousness, abundance, plenteous.,

7649 sabea, satisfied in a pleasant or disagreeable sense, full of, satisfied with.


Sheba or Shiva, Lord of the Sabbath
was known as the Lord of Creatures, and Protector of Cattle,
The seven day cycle of creation and rest in Genesis 1
is a description of the Lord of the Sabbath, Sheba, or Shiva.
He was the Deity who commanded the vegetarian covenant of Genesis 1: 29-30.


"And God said `Behold I have given you every plant yielding seed which is upon the face of the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food. And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the air and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.'"

Mainstream Hindus for millennia have worshipped Shiva as the compassionate Lord of Creatures, or Shiva Pasupati. Thus, this same Shiva or Sheba, after whom the Shabbath was named, was also the compassionate deity commanding vegetarianism for all creatures, not just for humans. In other words, the vegetarian covenant which commands that all creatures eat plants and not other creatures is a logical covenant commanded by Shiva. We should also realize, that after the fall, in "Genesis" cattle are singled out as those who will suffer. The rewriter of the Torah was obviously countering the previous influence of Shiva, or Sheba, Lord of the Sabbath and Protector of Cattle.


Link

In the above article, grain has to be separated from chaff i.e. there are some good data-points mixed with lot of nonsense.

Shiva is neither vegetarian nor non-vegetarian. His devotees happen to be both vegetarian and non-vegetarian(even cannibals). Ethiopia being mother-culture of India is BS, as far as I can see.

Anyway, the pertinent point is the phonological similarity of
Shiva->Sheva->Shiba->Sheba->Seba->Saba->Tsaba->Sabbath.

Shiva, as a noun, can have both masculine and feminine forms. Shiva, in feminine, refers to Goddess Parvati.

Shiva, in sanskrit, means auspicious.

Also, notice:
Isha->Isaac.

Isha, in sanskrit, means Lord. Another form of 'Isha' is Ishwar.

Also notice that, seven day week is a Hindu concept, starting from Sunday(Adivara) and ending on the seventh day Saturday(Shanivara).

Hindu concept of seven day week is much older and has other associated astronomical issues. In Judaism, seven day week is taken for granted without any introspection on it. There is no development of ideas or background on the issue, which indicates that this concept was borrowed, ready-made, from another culture(most probably Hindus).

Judaism is not the only culture to do so. Other cultures have also done this. All of them have seven day week. But none of these cultures are old. And none of them have any associated astronomy with it to decide why it should be seven days and which day corresponds to which planet(or deity).

In Hinduism, seven day week is associated with lot of astronomy. Even the modern-day 'Hour' is derived from 'Hora' of Hinduism.

Also, the sanskrit word for a week is Saptah.
Saptah->Haptah(Persian)->Haftah->Afta(Urdu)

In sanskrit, Sapta means seven.

It is possible that Shabat(Sabbath) is a corruption of some derivative of Sapta.
Last edited by johneeG on 21 Jan 2013 14:53, edited 2 times in total.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jan 2013 14:09

johneeG ji,

you may like to cross-post your post on "Origins of Sabbath" in the "Reverse Inculturation" Thread in GDF.

That is the main thread dealing with the Vedic origins of Judeo-Christianity. There are several posts on the various pieces of evidence and indications that Shiva is actually Jehova, the God of Abraham.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9802
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

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

Postby Yagnasri » 21 Jan 2013 18:20

Baal the presiding deity of Makkha was worshpped in the form of a Pillar - Shivalinga?

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

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

Postby Klaus » 22 Jan 2013 09:14

Jhujar wrote:queen Shobha?


Possible. Another link for johneeG's post on Sabbath- the pre-Islamic Arabian pagans were Saba worshippers or Sabaists. However, excavations at the Yemeni site did not reveal any statue of a Nandi bull, it could be that it was transported back to the sub-continent secretly. The entrance to many of these temples have winged "dwarpalaks".

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

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

Postby Klaus » 22 Jan 2013 09:28

johneeG wrote: Ethiopia being mother-culture of India is BS, as far as I can see.


Perhaps it is an acknowledgement of humanity's origins in Ethiopia, albeit expressed in a garbled form due to cognitive dissonance.

I wonder why many Judeo-Christian texts (including Koran) make these links to Ethiopia in the first place. The judgement day texts take note of the rise of Ethiopia being linked to the "end-days" and links such as the one given in the previous posts link up Ethiopia and India as linked cultures.

What exactly is Ethiopia's role in the consciousness of the Judeo-Christian faiths?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 22 Jan 2013 09:55

Brit should have been Bharat at some point, and the word got shortened with a stiff upper lip.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21159
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 22 Jan 2013 10:45

Narayana Rao wrote:Baal the presiding deity of Makkha was worshpped in the form of a Pillar - Shivalinga?


Ball and Linga do go togther.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21159
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 22 Jan 2013 10:48

Klaus wrote:
johneeG wrote: Ethiopia being mother-culture of India is BS, as far as I can see.
Perhaps it is an acknowledgement of humanity's origins in Ethiopia, albeit expressed in a garbled form due to cognitive dissonance.I wonder why many Judeo-Christian texts (including Koran) make these links to Ethiopia in the first place. The judgement day texts take note of the rise of Ethiopia being linked to the "end-days" and links such as the one given in the previous posts link up Ethiopia and India as linked cultures. What exactly is Ethiopia's role in the consciousness of the Judeo-Christian faiths?


Indian landmass did break from Africa from location n very close to Ethipoia. This open up the possibility that the question of humanity's origin might be buried under Indian soil and not in prsent Africa.

Anand K
BRFite
Posts: 1115
Joined: 19 Aug 2003 11:31
Location: Out.

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

Postby Anand K » 22 Jan 2013 12:07

Klaus wrote:... What exactly is Ethiopia's role in the consciousness of the Judeo-Christian faiths?


I think it's the "ends of the Earth" thing.... I mean, of those lands still connected to the Roman world of those times and descended from the Sabaeans of Yemen. Always wonder why India and China find no direct mention in the Bible.

Anyway, there was considerable overlap and linkages between Ethiopia and Yemen; in fact for the Greeks and early Romans, "thiopia" referred to the entire Ethiopian-Somalian region and the southern half of the Arabian peninsula. The proselytizing mission to this ends of the earth is shown in episodes such as Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch and the Cornelius episode ..... there's also the "Queen of the South (like the earlier Queen of Sheba) rising in judgement" reference.

Klaus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2168
Joined: 13 Dec 2009 12:28
Location: Cicero Avenue

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

Postby Klaus » 22 Jan 2013 19:16

Jhujar wrote: Indian landmass did break from Africa from location n very close to Ethipoia. This open up the possibility that the question of humanity's origin might be buried under Indian soil and not in prsent Africa.


This opens up a gamut of basic questions on what we conventionally understand about "being human". What we do know about the extinct lines of bipedal apes outside of Africa is all through fossils alone.

The traditional anthropological definition of being human includes traits commonly associated with our species (or sub-species) such as speech, culture, clothing according to climate, cooking of food, art, communication, language, writing, jewelery, spirituality, religion, associated funerary practices etc. Anthropologists seem to make the mistake of assuming that other hominin species followed some or all of these practices, definitely not to the same extent we do. The conclusion is that these other hominins were not human enough.

Interestingly, the debate on Neanderthal classification (Homo Neanderthalensis vs Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis) is not settled yet, the same debate and benefit of doubt could be extended to all the Asiatic hominin species too. This would push the origin of AMH (Anatomically Modern Humans) much further back in time than 200k YBP and within Asia.

The cladistics approach to classification would put all hominin species under the same species banner, i.e a downgrade of Homo from a genus level to a species level. Instead, the term Australopithecine would occupy the genus level terminology.

Anand K- Thanks for clarifying!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54434
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 23 Jan 2013 05:28

Pioneer Book review:

LINK

Land of the Seven Rivers
Author: Sanjeev Sanyal
Publisher: Penguin, Rs499

The book showcases continuity in our civilisational customs and mannerisms by pointing out modern instances that have an uncanny resemblance to ancient traditions, writes Rajesh Singh

At the official launch of Land of the Seven Rivers in Delhi recently, a member of the audience appeared deeply agitated. Taking on the book’s author Sanjeev Sanyal for claiming that the Aryans never invaded India, she wondered if all that the many respected historians had been telling us over these decades about an Aryan invasion which took over the Indus-Saraswati Civilisation, had been untrue. “Great historians like RC Mazumdar”, she added. Sanyal answered pithily, “They were wrong.”

She is not alone in finding it difficult to come to terms with the reality. After all, generations of our students in schools and colleges have grown up learning that the Aryans were outsiders, that they forced their way into Indian territory and that they subjugated the native Indians (red Dravidians) and eventually drove them away south of the Vindhyas. In many educational curricula, the myth is still being perpetuated despite loads of fresh material which negate this theory.

Sanyal has merely used the fresh evidence to nail the lie in his book. One reason for the continuation of this myth, which ought to have been consigned to the dustbin, is because of the ideological leaning of those who have been writing history in this country. While in the initial years since Independence, there may not have been enough material to conclude that the invasion by Aryans was not a fact, the evidence dug up by many historians and archaeologists over the last few years has not just cast doubts over the long-held belief but has also effectively negated it. Yet, the burden of ideology continues to act like a blinker.

Sanyal, during his interaction with an impressive gathering at the launch of the book, pointed out that there was nothing like an ‘Aryan race’ and that the term ‘Aryan’ was used for people who were noble in deed; he was backed in this assertion by well-known author and a former corporate honcho Gurcharan Das, who shared the dais with him. Of course, there are many historians who will still debunk the thought, if not on evidence then on the premise that non-historians do not have the heft to come to such far-reaching conclusions. Yet, the fact is that Sanyal has merely presented some of the material which has been presented before the world by no less eminent historians in the course of taking a position.

When one talks of the so-called Aryan invasion, one cannot but get into the controversy that surrounds the existence and the disappearance of the Saraswati river, on the banks of which much of the Indus-Saraswati civilisation came into being and flourished for at least 3,000 years. Lopsided ideology has played a villainous role here too in shaping what we have been taught over the decades about this river which has been described in the Rig Veda in highly adulatory terms, with a hymn, the Nadistuti Sukta, especially dedicated to it. Sanyal devotes an entire chapter outlining the importance of the river in sustaining the ancient civilisation and traces the decline of the latter as a consequence of the former drying up for a variety of reasons — what really happened to the river and how remain a subject of intense debate for now.
The author delves into fresh material to assert that there indeed was a mighty Saraswati river (many historians more ideologically-oriented than historically-oriented had denied its very existence to begin with), that it indeed flowed into India from an Indian source (a Himalayan glacier, though it is still to be fully established whether the glacier indeed was the source or that the river was a seasonal one depending on monsoons), and that the Rig Veda is very specific in mentioning that the Saraswati flowed between the rivers Yamuna and the Sutlej, and it is as specific in tracing the flow right up to the Rann of Kutch in Gujarat.

But it would be a mistake to assume that the Land of the Seven Rivers is all about the Aryans and the Saraswati. It is more than that, although no overview of the country’s history and geography is possible without taking serious account of the two issues. The author wonderfully establishes the sense of continuity that has existed in our civilisational customs and mannerisms and points to many modern instances that have an uncanny resemblance to ancient traditions and customs.

Sanyal is persistent throughout in the book in dispelling the long-held notion that Indians do not have a sense of history. In his view, and it is one that cannot be easily faulted, there has been a complete interweaving of various stages of history — from ancient to modern — of the country. He calls it a “chain of history”. In pointing out the fallacy in the commonly held belief that ancient Indians wrote one formal history — Rajatarangini by Kalhana in the 12th century — Sanyal says that “it is important to recognise the degree to which this sense of continuity is deliberately maintained over generations”. At the introductory stage itself, Sanyal talks of this “misconception” in the following way: “This idea (that Indians never conceived of themselves as a nation and, consequently, never cared about their history) was often repeated by colonial-era officialdom”. Such a mindset exists in many historians to date.

One of the many “extraordinary continuities” he offers to put across his point in a forceful manner is a rather ordinary example. The ratio 5:4 implies that the length is a quarter longer than the breadth (1.25 times). “The ratio was commonly used in the town planning of Harappan cities in the third millennium BC... Over a thousand years later, the same ratio appears in Hindu texts like the Shatapatha Brahmamana and Shulbha Sutra that use the ratio in their precise instructions on how to build fire-altars for Vedic ceremonies.” Obviously, the ‘quarter’ has some meaning that had been passed on from an earlier time. Now, look at the continuing continuity, as the author reflects: “When 17th century Mughal emperor Aurangzeb wanted to praise his vassal Maharaja Jai Singh, he called his ‘Sawai’ (meaning that he was worth a quarter more than any other man).”

Sanyal ends his tryst with ‘The Counters of Modern India’, a journey, as he points out, began with Gondwana and has presently reached Gurgaon. Why Gurgaon? According to the author, if Gurgaon is managed properly (and it’s not for now), it has the potential to be the next Singapore — which, Sanyal believes, is the ideal for urban planning. And, why not Chandigarh, considered by many in the country’s to be the best planned city? Because, he says, the best that Chandigarh can become is Canberra — “which is not saying much.”




In Hyderabad we used to call fools "dhed" meaning 1.5.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 04:36

Published on Jan 21, 2013
By Kaleem Butt
Monasteries in ancient Sindh: Daily Times Pakistan

This article deals with the ancient monasteries and temples that were the educational hub of those times. It also sheds light on the state of education in Sindh before the Arab invasion. As we know, the only historical record found about Sindh is after the Arab invasion. Very little is written about the pre-Arab Sindh and I have tried to shed some light on that period of history. Details of temples and monasteries found in Sindh are mentioned, as it is known that religion has remained the centre of education in every age.

In every age, we find the influence of religion on education; priests and clergymen were considered to be the most learned people in ancient times. We find such examples in the Egyptian Civilisation, ancient Iraq, Persia, and others. Even in Semitic religions, including Judaism, Christianity and Islam, priests were taken as the most learned men, while churches and mosques were referred to as centres of education. The priests had enormous influence over the common people.

The same is the case with the ancient civilisation of Sindh. Sindhi is one of the oldest and major languages of South Asia, inheriting a rich culture, folklore, and a vast literature. Its literature can stand equal to any developed language of the world. According to some recent research, Sindhi is related to the Dravidian language and its ancestry dates back to the civilisation of Mohenjodaro (Allana, 2000). Dr Allana quoting Jahiz (864 A.D) writes that the people of Sindh are well advanced in Mathematics and Astrology. They have their own script for their language. While quoting Ibne-Nadim (955 A.D), Dr Allana writes that the people of Sindh spoke various languages and believed in different religions. They wrote their language in about 200 scripts. Out of them, nine were very common.

It seems probable that Sindh for a considerable time remained under the rule of barbarians from the west who had first overrun it, and that the Vedic Aryans, when at length they came in contact with the country, were unable to exercise influence comparable to that which they established over the rest of northern India. Traditions relating to Sindh are recorded in Sanskrit, Persian and Pali literature and afford a few glimpses of the political state of the country prior to the first definite date in its history (Lambrick, 1973).

Lambrick (1973) writes that the Mahabharata speaks of the kingdom of Sindh as a cultured and civilised land. He adds that the preserved stupas in Sindh indicate that they belonged to the Mahayana school of Buddhism. He also mentions the Buddhist monasteries in Thul Mir Rukan of Sakrand, and a stupa at Mirpur Khas — where the largest image of Buddha was found — which was gifted to Sri Lanka by Ayub Khan. The Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang travelled through Sindh in 642 AD; there were 10,000 Buddhist monks living in this country in several hundred monasteries. Although these religious centres may not have been vast complexes such as the universities of Nalanda and Vikramasila in Bihar, surely it is astonishing to say that in all we have roughly 15 sites in upper and lower Sindh about which it can be said with reasonable certainty that they were once Buddhist monasteries (Lohuizen, 1981).

Monasteries are also found in Badah, Thul Mir Rukan, Mari Sabar, Depar Ghangro, Brahmanabad, Mirpur Khas, Sudheranjo-Daro, Kafirkot, Banbhore, Thatta, Budhjo-Thakar and Naukot. All these were educational institutions teaching and preaching the teachings of Buddha.

Lohuizen (1981) writes that the votive tablets discovered at Mirpur Khas can be compared to similar objects from many Buddhist sites in India. Similar tablets have been found at other Buddhist sites in Sindh such as Sudheranjodaro. The more recent discoveries from such sites are from Korian to the west of Talhar in Tando Mohammad Khan, district Badin, and are kept at the Provincial Museum of Sindh at Hyderabad. Then there is the discovery at Brahmanabad of many fragments of Hindu stone images, one of which was the frame that surrounded an image, most elaborately carved with rings of little gods around the top and down the sides. In pre-Muslim layers a building was exposed, which obviously was a Shiva shrine, judging by the discovery of two lingas, one of which was still standing on its yoni. Tsang (642 AD) claims that there were about 30 major Hindu temples in Sindh, where people were educated about religion, culture and civilisation. According to Jafarey (1981), the Sindhis appear in the Rig-Veda to have settled well in the Indus Valley and to have completely Aryanised the region.

It is a well-known fact that Sindh has been invaded repeatedly by various tribes and nations. Every invader comes with the same mindset; first, he destroys the ongoing philosophy and then imposes what he believes in simply to enslave the natives. He destroys old structures and literature, while introducing new things as per his thinking. As The Times of April 6, 1843 writes quoting the words of Charles Napier: “The natives were so pleased and welcomed the British troops, and were also pleased on removal of their own tyrant rulers.”

Here is the list of different invasions of Sindh throughout the ages: Barbaric Aryans, who had no sense or respect for city life, invaded and destroyed the cities of Sindh in 3000 BC :roll: :lol: . In 520-515 BC, the Iranians invaded Sindh. Alexander in 326-325 BC. The Syrians in 305 BC. Greeks in 195 BC. The Hellenist King of Kabul in 155 BC. Sethians and Kushans in 120 BC-200 AD. The Turks in 50 AD-200 AD. The Ephthalites or the White Huns in 400-500 AD. Sassanids from Persia in the second half of the third century AD. The Arabs entered Sindh in 712 AD. Mohammad bin Qasim destroyed the great Shiva Temple in Debal (Lohuizen, 1981). The Arghuns in the 1500s AD. Turkhans in mid-16th century AD. Mughals in late 16th century AD.

In 1839, the Talpurs ruling Sindh signed treaties with the East India Company and handed over Karachi. Finally, on February 17, 1843, the British started ruling Sindh when Charles Napier conquered it, and the Englishmen ruled until 1947.

It is certain that a country that is invaded so many times loses its institutions, education, culture and civilisation, and it takes a long time to rebuild these things.

____________________________

All in all a somewhat confused writer! But perhaps in order to criticize the destruction of Sindhi culture at the hands of the Arabs and later day invasions, he is bringing in some fiction on Aryan invasions also. He talks at one place about barbaric Aryans and then he speaks of Vedic Aryans, and then he speaks of Sindhis being mentioned in the Rig Veda and how they completely Aryanized the region!

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 17:21

Kurdish is an Iranic language (according to the linguistic tree built by the Western linguists).

There are several Kurdish words which are similar to Avestan, and hence to Sanskrit. For the pleasure of linguists here, some examples

A Z 1 The language of Avesta - The Kurdish language - 1


B Z 2 The language of Avesta - The Kurdish language - 2


C Z 3 The language of Avesta - The Kurdish language - 3


The language of Avesta - The Kurdish language

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 17:34

Another thing that is quite surprising about the old religion of the Kurds - the Yezidis is their use of the peacock (peafowl) as a central theme. Wikipedia says:

In the Yazidi belief system, God created the world and it is now in the care of a Heptad of seven Holy Beings, often known as Angels or heft sirr (the Seven Mysteries). Preeminent among these is Tawûsê Melek (frequently known as "Melek Taus" in English publications), the Peacock Angel.


Image

Among several similarities to Vedic culture is the issue of seven holy beings, which reflects the Saptarishis among the Vedics.

Secondly their use of Peacock. Peacock is simply not found in present Kurdish regions. It is however found in the Indian Subcontinent.

In India one associates Sri Krishna with the peacock!

So due to the similarity in the language and various symbols, naturally questions arise!

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 17:42



Comment by N.S. Rajaram

N.S. Rajaram wrote:Mine was one of the early dissenting voices in the 'No Aryan invasion' dispute. R.C. Majumdar and others accepted it at first because the evidence (and science) to decisively demolish the myth did not exist in his time.

The main advocates of the Aryans as outsiders argument are academics in India and abroad, from Romila Thapar to Michael Witzel in the U.S. whose reputations (and careers) will disappear into the dustbin of history.

Arya simply means civilized. It is neither a nation, a race nor a language. The proper term for North Indian is Gauda, just as Dravida means South Indian. Indian tradition speaks of Panca Gauda and Panca Dravida Brahmanas. There is no reference to Panca Arya Brahmanas.

I am a Dravida becasue I was born in Mysore in South India, but I consider myself an Arya because I consider myself civilized. By losing my civilized behavior I can become an Un-Arya, but can never stop being a Dravida.

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

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

Postby AbhiJ » 25 Jan 2013 17:44

RajeshA wrote:Another thing that is quite surprising about the old religion of the Kurds - the Yezidis is their use of the peacock (peafowl) as a central theme. Wikipedia says:

In the Yazidi belief system, God created the world and it is now in the care of a Heptad of seven Holy Beings, often known as Angels or heft sirr (the Seven Mysteries). Preeminent among these is Tawûsê Melek (frequently known as "Melek Taus" in English publications), the Peacock Angel.


Image

Among several similarities to Vedic culture is the issue of seven holy beings, which reflects the Saptarishis among the Vedics.

Secondly their use of Peacock. Peacock is simply not found in present Kurdish regions. It is however found in the Indian Subcontinent.

In India one associates Sri Krishna with the peacock!

So due to the similarity in the language and various symbols, naturally questions arise!


Shivling in Armenia:

Image

Inside a type of archaic rural shrine called a Tukh Manuk (Black Youth). Extremely popular throughout Armenia, such shrines are often on hilltops just outside of villages, and have been linked by Prof. James Russell to a proto-Indo-European deity cognate with Krishna: an otherworldly beautiful young man inhabiting the boundary between settlement and wilderness. The Tukh Manuk cult is traditionally popular with women. Special prayers exist to be said at these shrines, where pilgrims gather to make sacrifices (Matagh) for the curing of illnesses and burn candles. As seen in the imagery here, the convergence of Christian and pagan traditions are typical of rural Armenian spirituality.

http://www.naregatsi.org/Zareh/pr3/photos.htm

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 17:48

Books for the Library

Image

The Origin of the Aryan Cult: A Saga of Early India
Author: L N Renu

Description:
The book is a sociological study of Vedic mantras that delineate a saga of our remote ancestors. A narrative of breathtaking dimensions, many may recognise it as another Indian epic. The other theme of this book is the question of Aryan origins. According to the author, there was never an Aryan race, only an Aryan cult. The Devas learned to kindle fire and articulate AUM and were the first to be called Aryans.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests