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.
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 » 25 Jan 2013 18:45

I am about 120 pages into a book I will definitely publish somewhere in due course. Personally I am convinced that there was never any such thing called "Avestan" which is a language cooked up by linguists.

Avestan is a language has been cooked up from "middle Persian" or Pahlavi (about 500 AD and later) - from which we have the only surviving Zoroastrian texts but all the meanings are taken from comparisons with Sanskrit. So like PIE, Avestan is a reconstructed language that is assumed to have been spoken by Zoroaster. There is no evidence from any Pari text that the language was called Avestan. The name came from the words "Zend Avesta". The first man to speak of "Zend Avesta" was a Frenchman called Perron who lived for 7 years with a Parsi priest in Gujarat and learned Parsi chants and tradition from him and later wrote a book called "Zend Avesta - ouvrage de blah blah"

It is likely that by Perron's time the name "Chhand upastha" had degenerated to a Parsi "Zond Avastha" which Perron promptly translated into French as Zend Avesta. The language - the oldest parts of which were called "Gathic" language after the "gathas" (songs) then came to be known as "Avestan" by the same AIT scolars.

It appears that the original language of the Avesta was Vedic sanskrit, but AIT people tend to refer to vedas and avesta as parallel streams that descended from a mythical common Indo-Iranian tradition for which there is no proof other than the usual AIT conjecture. Coming from Eurpe PIE became common Indo Iranian and then split according to AIT theory. AIT people see Zorosatrianism as a Persian religion because a Parsi Darius kicked ass. They tend to ignore the common Vedic origins

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 19:50

Yezidi Religious Tradition

The Yezidi (Yazidi) cosmology and religion is non-dual. They thus acknowledge an inactive, static and transcendental God who created, or “became”, Seven Great Angels, the leader of which was Tawsi Melek, the Peacock “King” or Peacock “Angel”.

Leading up to the creation of the cosmos, many Yezidis believe that the Supreme God was originally “over the seas”, a notion reminiscent of the Biblical passage: “And the Spirit of God (as seven Elohim) moved upon the face of the waters.” While playing with a white pearl, state the Yezidis, their Supreme God cast it into this cosmic sea. The pearl was broken and served as the substance from which the Earth and other planets and stars came into being.

The Supreme God then created or manifested a vehicle for completing the creation of the universe. This was the first and greatest angel, Tawsi Melek, the Peacock Angel. Since Tawsi Melek embodied the power and wisdom of the Supreme God he was easily able to know and carry out His bidding. Six more Great Angels were then created to assist Tawsi Melek in his work.

Soon after the Earth was created it began to shake violently. Tawsi Melek was then dispatched to Earth to stop the planet’s quaking, as well as to endow it with beauty and abundance. When Tawsi Melek descended to Earth, he assumed the form of a glorious peacock – a bird full of the seven primary and secondary colors. Landing in a place now known as Lalish, Tawsi Melek transferred his peacock colors to the Earth and endowed it with a rich flora and fauna.

Tawsi Melek then traveled to the Garden of Eden to meet Adam. The first human had been created without a soul, so Tawsi Melek blew the breath of life into him. He then turned Adam towards the Sun, symbol of the Supreme Creator, while stating that there was something greater than a human being and it should be worshipped regularly. Tawsi Melek then chanted a prayer for all humanity to daily repeat to the Creator, and he did so in the 72 languages that were going to be eventually spoken by the 72 countries and races that were destined to cover the Earth.

Then Eve was created. But according to the Yezidis before copulating the primal couple enrolled in a kind of competition to see if either of either of them could bring forth progeny independent of the other. They both stored their seed in a sealed jar and then after an incubation period opened them. Eve’s jar was opened and found to be full of insects and vermin, while inside Adam’s jar was a beautiful boy-child. This lovely child, known as Shehid bin Jer, “Son of Jar,” grew quickly, married, and had offspring. His descendants are the Yezidis. Thus, the Yezidis regard themselves descendants of Adam but not Eve.

Shehid bin Jer inherited the divine wisdom that Tawsi Melek had taught his father Adam and then passed it down to his offspring, the earliest Yezidis. It is this wisdom that has become the foundation of the Yezidi religion.


From the Flood to Sheikh Adi

According to the Yezidis, the Garden of Eden era corresponds to a Golden Age of wisdom and prosperity that once covered the planet. After this time of great spiritual light humankind increasingly resorted to self-serving behavior and darkness set in. A series of floods were then released to cleanse the Earth, the most recent of which occurred about 6,000 years ago. The Yezidi trace the crystallization of their religion into its present form back to this period 6,000 years ago.

Following the last flood the Yezidis settled in the Indian sub-continent. Then, about 4,000 years ago many of them began to migrate west, moving into ancient Persia and the Middle East, where they participated in the Sumerian, Babylonian and Assyrian civilizations. Eventually moving into northern Iraq and Iran, they were the original Kurds of Kurdistan. Here they dwelt until the time of their great Sufi reformer, Sheikh Adi, who oversaw the final modifications that shaped the Yezidi religion down until the present time. Under the unseen guidance of Tawsi Melek, Sheikh Adi composed a scripture, taught hymns and prayers and established the current Yezidi caste system. Shiekh Adi was entombed in Lalish, the ancient spot where the Peacock Angel first landed, making it the spiritual heartland of the Yezidis.

The Yezidi Caste System

The Yezidis have had a caste system since their modern founding in India. The system was updated and revised by Sheikh Adi, who established the current strata of classes. At the top of this heirachy is the Yezidi Prince, the “Mîr.” Just below him is the Baba Shiekh, the Yezidi “Pope,” and under him are the priest classes composed of Faqirs, Qewels and Kocheks. All these hierarchal positions are taken from two of the three main Yezidi castes, the Shiekhs and Pirs, while the majority of Yezidis are drawn from the caste of Murids, meaning “commoners.”

The Mîr or Yezidi Prince

The Mîr is the temporal and religious head of the Yezidis. He is recognized by the Yezidi to be the official representative of Tawsi Melek on Earth and represents his people at all national and international conferences. The role of Mîr is hereditary and currently drawn from one of the Sheikh families, known as the Çol family. Legend states that when Sheikh ‘Adi was dying three branches of Sheiks began quarrelling over who would be his successor. This disturbed Sheikh Adi, who spent many hours in prayer to the Supreme God for assistance in this matter.

Finally, Tawsi Melek was sent to Earth and proceeded to create a man from the spirit world or void, which in Kurdish translates as ‘çol’. This man and his eventual descendents then assumed the title of Mîr. Initially they were given as their palatial seat the village of Baadra in the Sheikhan region of the Yezidis, but they currently reside in the Sheikhan town of Eyn Sifni.

The Baba Sheikh

Like the Mîr, the Baba Shiekh also hails from the Shiekh caste and currently resides in the town of Eyn Sifni. Technically, the Baba Sheikh, meaning “Father” Sheikh, is the spiritual head of the Yezidis and the Mîr is the temporal head of the tribe, however in practice the Baba Shiekh remains subordinate to the Mîr in both temporal and spiritual matters. The Baba Sheikh is traditionally present at all important religious meetings and ceremonies of the Yezidis, especially those conducted at Lalish. Once a year the Baba Sheikh visits all the Yezidi villages to give his blessings and conduct ceremonies. During these visits he also resolves disputes among the villagers.

The Sheikh Caste
The Shiekh caste is the highest and most honored of the three castes; as mentioned, the highest offices within the Yezidis are drawn from it. Sheikh is an Arabic word that denotes a ruler, elder of a tribe, or a revered holy man. The Sheikh caste was founded by Sheikh Adi and originally drew its membership from the families descended from six of the Seven Great Angels (excluding Tawsi Melek) who had taken physical incarnation with Sheikh Adi.

Membership in both the Sheikh Caste and the Pir Caste that follows has become hereditary and often comes with special abilities. Each Sheikh and Pir family, for example, possesses some healing ability. Some families can cure snake bite, others madness, others fever, headache, arthritis, etc. A family’s spiritual power can be transferred to a sick person through the saliva of one of its members, or via soil from the family shrine.

The Pir Caste
The members of the Pir Caste are descended from Peer Alae, a holy man who had lived during the time of Sheikh Adi and was blessed with miraculous powers. Pirs are also said to be descended from the 40 or 42 disciples of Sheikh Adi. A Pir, which is a Kurdish word meaning “elder,” is an important mentor and official at all important Yezidi functions and meetings, both temporal and religious. Both Pirs and Sheikhs assist with marriages, circumcisions, funerals, and they take on the role of family advisor. Yezidi families of all three castes are required to adopt one Sheikh and one Pir as their guides for life.

The Murid Caste
The Murid Caste consists of the majority of Yezidis. The Murid Caste is the caste of “commoners” who generally do not serve the function of priest.

The Priest Classes

The Faqirs
The Faqirs are recognized to be the highest of Yezidi priests, and they hail from the highest caste, the Sheikh Caste. The name Faqir, meaning “Poor One,” is another name, for a Sufi. It is similar to the term “Dervish.” The Faqirs are directly descended from Sheikh Adi, himself a Faqir, and all those ascetic and enlightened Sufis that assisted him during his life. The Faqirs always lead any procession of Yezidi priests, and it is said that each Faqir family is blessed with supernatural powers and healing abilities passed down to them from their enlightened ancestors. They often carry a flask of sacred water to bless people, and it is said that they can even initiate a seeker into spiritual life through transference of spiritual power. They wear the sacred goat vest (the goat is a sacred animal among the Yezidi) as well as other distinguishing accoutrements, such as the traditional coarse black shirt and black turban of a Sufi Faqir. In whatever community they reside within they assume the role of chief priests and wisdom keepers. Often they are supported by other villagers through alms and tithing.

The Qewels
The Qewels are the bards and sacred singers. They bring forth religious knowledge, sacred hymns, songs and stories at special Yezidi gatherings and ceremonies, and they do so to the accompaniment of flutes, tambourines and other sacred instruments. Their roles are hereditary, and their wisdom is normally passed from father to son. They reside principally in the Beshiqe-Behzani region of northen Iraq.

The Kocheks
The Kocheks, or “seers,” are servants of the Sanctuary of Lalish. Because they are blessed with spiritual gifts, such as clairvoyance, they can psychically diagnose illness and they even know the fate of a soul after leaving the body of the deceased. There are only a few Kocheks left, and they mostly reside in the Sinjar Mountains of northern Iraq. The female counterpart of Kocheks are known as Faqras. They are recognized as holy women with supernatural power. Kocheks and Faqras can come from any of the three main castes.

Yezidi Holidays and Festivals

Yezidi religious year includes four holy festivals:

  • The New Year
  • The Feast of Sacrifice
  • The Feast of Seven Days, Sept 23-30
  • The first Friday of December feast following three days of fasting.

The Yezidi New Year

The Yezidi New Year, known as Sere Sal, meaning “Head of the Year”, is celebrated on a particular Wednesday of April, known as Red Wednesday. This day commemorates the Wednesday that Tawsi Melek first came to Earth millions of years ago in order to calm the planet’s quaking and spread his peacock colors throughout the world. Part of the New Year celebration is the coloring of eggs, which collectively represent Tawsi Melek’s rainbow colors that he blessed the world with and displays in his form of the Peacock Angel. The eggs are principally colored red, blue, green and yellow. Women also place blood-red flowers and shells of the colored eggs above the doors of the Yezidis so that Tawsi Melek can recognize their abodes.

New Year day begins with a banquet to honor the dead. At dawn, all Yezidi women go to the nearby cemeteries with pots of food while men remain behind in the villages. The graves quickly become transformed into tables for many plates of food, colored eggs, red flowers and framed photos of the deceased. While going from tombstone to tombstone the women eulogize each of the deceased with mournful singing and wailing. Afterwards tablecloths are spread on the ground between the graves and the women proceed to feast upon the offered food. Meanwhile, back in the villages, the men congratulate each other at the beginning of the New Year.

Parade of the Sanjaks

One of the most important events of the Yezidi New Year is the Parade of the Sanjaks or Parade of the Peacock. Bronze lamps surmounted with peacocks are taken from their normal home, the residence of the Yezidi Prince, and are paraded through many of the Yezidi villages. The Sanjaks, which came from the Yezidi homeland of India, are the most precious sacred objects among the Yezidi. Originally there were seven Sanjaks, one for each of the Seven Sacred Angels, but five were taken in 1892 by the Turkish Moslems. Of the two remaining Sanjaks, the largest and most sacred one is the Sheikhani Sanjak, the Sanjak directly associated with Tawsi Melek. The two Sanjaks are taken in procession to the Yezidi villages by the qewels, who then remain in each village for one night while giving discourses to the inhabitants on Yezidi spirituality.

The Sheikhani Sanjak

Fast of the Sacrifice
Around mid-February is a forty day fast which is observed only by Yezidi holy men in Lalish. At the completion of this fast is the Feast of Sacrifice, which commemorates when Abraham attempted to sacrifice his son Ishmail but then replaced a sheep for his son. On this day Yezidi also sacrifice a sheep, whose blood is believed to wash away their sins. The Baba Shiekh and other religious leaders sacrifice a sheep in Lalish. After making a pilgrimage to Mt. Arafat, the Lalish group sacrifices their sheep and then light sacred fires all over the valley. At night they perform the Evening Dance, wherein the head of the Faqirs leads the Yezidi priests in a sacred procession.

The Feast of the Seven Days

Observed during the beginning of October, the Feast of Seven Days, known as the Jema’iyye and referred to as ziyaret, “the pilgrimage”, is a sacred time when all Yezidis attempt to make the pilgrimage to Lalish in order to to unite as one people at their holiest shrine. Prevailing belief has it that there is an upper or heavenly Lalish where the Seven Great Angels gather at this time to shower there blessings on those assembled at the lower or worldly Lalish. Throughout the week-long event friendships are rekindled and important meetings take place among the Yezidi leaders, with both the Mir and Baba Sheikh in attendance.

The two most important events of the Feast of Seven Days are the Evening Dance and the Sacrifice of the Bull. The Evening Dance is performed by religious dignitaries every evening just after sunset in the court of the Sanctuary. Fourteen, or twice seven, men dressed in white, the color of purity, step to the music of qewels. They proceed in procession around a sacred torch that represents both the Sun and the Supreme God.. They are led in this walk by the head of the Faqirs, who is dressed in a black fur cape and conical hat. These are very sacred articles allegedly once worn by Sheikh Adi himself.

The Sacrifice of the Bull takes place on the 5th day of the week-long event. It signals the arrival of Fall and carries with it the Yezidis’ prayers for rain during the coming winter and a bountiful Spring. After guards fire a special gun salute, a small bull bursts forth from the main gates of the Sanctuary. The bull is chased by men of the Qaidy tribe up a hill to the Sanctuary of Shiekh Shem. Here the bull is caught and slaughtered. Afterwards, the meat is cooked and distributed among all the pilgrims present at Lalish.

During the week there are also continual baptisms of children and holy objects in the water of the White Spring. The silk cloths that represent the seven angels and normally cover their tombs in the Sanctuary are also re-baptized for the coming year. The final rite is the baptism of the “Throne of Shiekh Adi.” This is a wooden object resembling a funeral cot and covered with red silk. It is also baptized in the White Spring.

The Three Day Fast of December
The Three Day Fast of December is one all Yezidis are expected to observe. Fasting occurs from dawn until sunset, and the nights are given to feasting, merry making and some prayer.

La ilaha ila lah, Al shamis nur alah, Al huq habib alah

“We say this prayer when we first get up in the morning facing the Sun and when we put our head down to sleep.” – A Yezidi

Yezidis have five prayers they repeat daily: Nivêja berîspêdê (the Dawn Prayer), Nivêja rojhilatinê (the Sunrise Prayer), Nivêja nîvro (the Noon Prayer), Nivêja êvarî (the Afternoon Prayer), Nivêja rojavabûnê (the Sunset Prayer). However, most Yezidis only observe only two of these, the sunrise and sunset prayers. The Yezidi worshiper knows to turn his or her face toward the Sun during his or her worship, just as Tawsi Melek taught Adam, but if they observe the noon prayer they face Lalish. Prayers should be accompanied by certain gestures, and they must not be performed in the presence of outsiders. Wednesday, when Tawsi Melek first came to Earth, is the holy day when most prayers are observed, but Sunday, the day that the Peacock Angel was created, is also special. Saturday is the weekly day of rest and rejuvenation.

Death and Reincarnation

Death Rituals.

After death the body is washed, and clay or water from Lalish is placed in the mouth of the deceased. The body is buried immediately thereafter, the head pointing east and the face turned toward the north star. The procession to the cemetery is accompanied by singing, and for a man, possibly a dance performed by his mother or wife.

The Yezidis believe that at death they are brought into the presence of Sheikh Adi on the Sirat bridge for interrogation. The three questions are then posed to them covering their past sexual lives, including whether they married or had sexual relations with a non-Yezidi or someone of another cast. If their answers are acceptable, then Sheikh Adi acts as their intercessor with the Most High in order to move them into Paradise.

Heavenly Brothers and Sisters

During life each Yezidi undergoes a ritual wherein they become bonded to a “brother” or “sister” from a family different from the one they are born into. The sibling relationship thus established is to assist the Yezidi in the next world. According to tradition, your heavenly brother or sister will be waiting to assist your soul when you depart from this world.

Heaven and Hell

There are different theories regarding Heaven and Hell among the Yezidis. Some believe that Tawsi Melek created both Heaven and Hell and that a truly evil person is a candidate for the underworld, while other Yezidis believe that Tawsi Melek cried for seven-thousand years and extinguished the fires of Hell, thereby eliminating it. From this latter perspective all souls will either reincarnate in to a human form or ascend to Heaven for an eternity.

Reincarnation

The Yezidis’ belief in reincarnation is one of the remaining vestiges of their original homeland of India. Today, the Yezidis believe that they will continue to reincarnate until they achieve a certain level of soul purity. At that time they will be eligible to enter a heaven realm and exist there for an eternity. There is also the unusual belief that if a Yezidi soul becomes very impure through the performance of evil actions while on Earth it is liable to reincarnate into the body of a person associated with a different religion, such as Islam. The greatest punishment is to be evicted from the Yezidi religion.

_____________________________________________

Here you have people sitting in Kurdistan who have a religion with lot of similarities to that of Hindu-ism, and who claim they came from India!

Too bad we have so few connections with them today!

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 19:53

Yezidi Religious Tradition

The Peacock Angel in Hinduism

Since the Yezidis originated in India, the Hindus’ manifestation of Tawsi Melek is naturally very close to the Peacock Angel of the Yezidis.

The Hindus know Tawsi Melek as Murugan, the legendary son of Shiva and Shakti. Among his numerous alternate titles are Skanda, Sanat Kumara, Karttikeya, and Subramaniya Swami. Like the Yezidis Tawsi Melek, the Hindu Murugan is the king of the universe and moves through his domain as a young boy astride a peacock, or simply as a peacock. Similar to the Peacock Angel, Murugan’s sacred animals include not only the peacock but also the snake and the cock. The snake denotes that the essence of Murugan is pure energy (energy moves as a serpent spiral) and the cock denotes his affiliation as a solar deity. Murugan or Tawsi Melek are names for the cosmic energy that created the universe out of itself, as well as the savior who, like the cock, heralds the end of humanity’s darkness.

Murugan’s identity as one of seven angelic beings is manifest within some Hindu scriptures that refer to him as Sanat Kumara, the leader of the Seven Kumaras. These Kumaras are portrayed as brothers who assisted Sanat Kumara in the creation of the Earth and the enlightenment of humankind. According to the Puranas, the ancient legends of India, the Kumaras were the first to teach humanity the path to enlightenment.

Another heptad association with Murugan is the asterism of the Pleiades. One of Murugan’s names is Karttikeya, which is derived from Krittika, a Hindu name for the Pleiades. According to legend, when Karttikeya was first born on Earth he possessed seven heads, one for each star of the Pleiades, but he lost one of them and so now he has six. Thus, more than simply reflecting the Pleiades, Murugan is the Pleiades.

In metaphysics it is believed that our Solar System rotates around the Pleiades, and that the asterism is a special point of creation for our local galaxy. High frequency energy from a more refined universe is channeled through the Pleiades, specifically the star Alcyone, which then encodes it with a specific shape and destiny it will assume in our three dimensional universe. Because of its unique function of feeding and nurturing our galaxy, the Maya referred to the Pleiades as the “teats of the rattlesnake.” In agreement with many ancient cultures, the Maya maintained that the creator of the universe was a serpent, snake, or dragon which possessed a septenary nature. They therefore portrayed it with seven heads, tails, twists to its body, or teats (or all of the above). It was also represented as a rainbow (as it is among the Yezidis) or as a rainbow serpent (as it is among the Australian Aborigines) that encoded all energy with the seven colors, tones, etc. The Maya and others often referred to this septenary serpent as the Son of God who was born at the beginning of time from the union of the primal male/female principles manifesting as spiraling energy. From a geometrical perspective, this primal union created not only a spiral but a vesica pisces, the “eye” and “seed of life,” which became the “flower of life” and then kept multiplying to become eyes manifest all throughout the universe. These vesica pisces eyes represent the omniscience of the primal creator, such as Tawsi Melek. They were colored either green, or blue-green, the middle color that reflected the union of the male/female principles. Thus, the combination of the blue-green color produced a Son of God in the form of an all-seeing blue-green dragon (the word dragon is derived from all-seeing), a dragon-peacock, or simply a many-eyed peacock. He was the blue-green dragon creator of the Chinese and Quiche Maya, or he was the blue-green peacock of the Yezidis. But whatever his form, one of his principle homes was the seven stars Pleiades.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 25 Jan 2013 22:08

Yezidi Religious Tradition

There is an interesting belief about Prophet Zoroaster among Yazidis. They say that Zoroaster was a Yezidi who left them. When he returned they did not accept his religion. It is evident from Iranian history that Zoroaster came from the people who lived around Lake Urmia. He remained on Mt. Ararat for two years and then returned to his people as a prophet preaching a new religion. He spent ten years recruiting converts among the people around Urmia, but his efforts drew only one person to his beliefs. Finally, he went to the Persians, among whom he found fertile ground for his teachings.
R. Reshid writes that during the 6th century BC, Zoroastrianism spread to the land of the Medes, but did not become dominant because already in place was an indigenous and powerful religion preceding Zoroastrianism. Later, when Zoroastrianism gained strength, those who remained faithful to the old religion were called by the Zoroastrians as Deva Yasna meaning the Slaves of Dew, where Dew represents an angel. According to a number of Kurdish researchers, with some variations "Deva Yasna" has survived among the Kurds. The word dasni which is the name of a tribe of Yezidi Kurds and was the name of a Yezidi principality, is a variation of "Deva Yasna." Throughout history all Yezidis have been called "dasini."

According to the Kurdish scholar Tawfiq Wahbi, during the 4th and 5th centuries AD the majority of Kurds east of the Zagros, Cizir, Botan, Kirkuk, and those in the mountains of southeast Kurdistan were not Zoroastrians. The last emperor of the Medes, Rishti Vega-Azhi Dahak, killed Zoroaster, ruled his followers and overthrew Vishtaspa. His army reached the southwest of Afghanistan. During that attack, the army of the Medes inflicted cruelties on Zoroastrians. No doubt this explains in large measure why the Zoroastrians equated the name Azhi Dahak with oppression and cruelty.

Yezidis believe their religion to be ancient and to predate Islam by at least a thousand years. Although some foreign scholars maintain that Yezidism began with Sheikh Adi and view him as its founder, no Yezidi accepts this claim. In fact, Yezidis believe that prior to accepting Islam, all Kurds belonged to Yezidism.

__________

In "Chhand upastha"/"Zond Avastha"/"Zend Avesta" there are some passages which consider Devas to be enemies. Could it be that the "Devas" referred to, do not refer to Vedics at all but to Yezidis instead?

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 26 Jan 2013 01:56

I just had a idea and wanted to share it with others.

Old Egypt also had a pantheon of gods. Set was among them. He was considered the God of storms, the desert, chaos, , and foreigners. Wikipedia says,

Image

In art, Set is mostly depicted as a fabulous creature, referred to by Egyptologists as the Set animal or Typhonic beast. The Typhon has a curved snout, long, rectangular ears, a forked tail, and canine body; sometimes, Set is depicted as a human with only the head of the Set animal. It does not resemble any known creature, although it could be seen as a composite of an aardvark, a donkey, a jackal, or a fennec fox. Some early Egyptologists have proposed that it was a stylised representation of the giraffe, due to the large flat-topped 'horns' which correspond to a giraffe's ossicones. However, the Egyptians make a distinction between the giraffe and the Set animal.


So basically nobody knows what kind of animal is the Set animal. I propose that it is a Peacock!

1) And the "flat-topped horns" are the crest of the peacock.

2) The word Set comes from the Yezidi God, Tawûsê Melek, the Peacock Angel. Another name for the Tawûsê Melek is Setan/Shetan. This name is of course not used because otherwise the Muslims equate it with Shaitan, the Devil.

3) We also associate Peacock with rains. Set is the God of storms. Also of chaos. One could imagine that on too much rain the Nile could overflow and create chaos.

4) The fact that Set is the God of foreigners also point to his foreign origins.

So in all probability, the ancient Egyptians took the Yezidi Tawûsê Melek, the Peacock Angel, and integrated it into their own mythology as Set.

But Tawûsê Melek had his origins in India. The Yezidis equate him with Murugan.

Wikipedia says:
The earliest representations of what may be the Set animal comes from a tomb dating to the Naqada I phase of the predynastic period (3790 BC–3500 BC), though this identification is uncertain. If these are ruled out, then the earliest Set-animal appears on a mace head of the King Scorpion, a protodynastic ruler. The head and the forked tail of the Set animal are clearly present.


So the earliest appearance of Set in Egypt tells us just how long the Yezidis have been around. They themselves say 10,000 years. It also indicates around when the Yezidis (the Kurds) left Bharat.

Wikipedia says
During the Second Intermediate Period, a group of Asiatic foreign chiefs known as the Hyksos (literally, "rulers of foreign lands") gained the rulership of Egypt, and ruled the Nile Delta, from Avaris. They chose Set, originally Upper Egypt's chief god, the god of foreigners and the god they found most similar to their own chief god, as their patron, and then Set became worshiped as the chief god once again.
The Hyksos King Apophis is recorded as worshiping Set in a monolatric way: "[He] chose for his Lord the god Seth. He didn't worship any other deity in the whole land except Seth." Jan Assmann argues that because the Ancient Egyptians could never conceive of a "lonely" god lacking personality, Seth the desert god, who was worshiped exclusively, represented a manifestation of evil.[6]
When Ahmose I overthrew the Hyksos and expelled them from Egypt, Egyptian attitudes towards Asiatic foreigners became xenophobic, and royal propaganda discredited the period of Hyksos rule. Nonetheless, the Set cult at Avaris flourished, and the Egyptian garrison of Ahmose stationed there became part of the priesthood of Set.
The founder of the nineteenth dynasty, Ramesses I came from a military family from Avaris with strong ties to the priesthood of Set. Several of the Ramesside kings were named for Set, most notably Seti I (literally, "man of Set") and Setnakht (literally, "Set is strong"). In addition, one of the garrisons of Ramesses II held Set as its patron deity, and Ramesses II erected the so-called Four Hundred Years' Stele at Pi-Ramesses, commemorating the 400 year anniversary of the Set cult in the Delta.
Set also became associated with foreign gods during the New Kingdom, particularly in the Delta. Set was also identified by the Egyptians with the Hittite deity Teshub, who was a storm god like Set.

Now why would Asians, the Hyksos choose Set as their God during their rule over Egypt, and which God of theirs was most similar to Set?

It just says that the cult of Murugan may have been wide-spread in West Asia! Let's also not forget Teshub, the Hittite/Hurrian God of storms.

On Teshub Wikipedia says:
The sacred bull common throughout Anatolia was his signature animal

So Nandi comes here in the picture as well.

Just some thoughts!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54388
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 26 Jan 2013 02:23

RajeshA, That ties in wtih Bji's theory that ancient Egyptians were from India after the Dwaraka flooded.


Please write it up as blog post so it can be disseminated.


So Scorpion King who united upper and lower Egypt and created teh nation state of Egypt is a Hindu!!!

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10490
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

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

Postby Vayutuvan » 26 Jan 2013 02:54

shiv wrote:I am about 120 pages into a book I will definitely publish somewhere in due course.

Shiv ji

One small suggestion for the structure, if it is not already too late to change.

Please consider relegating a detailed purvapaksha (regurgitation of the main argument) of the AIT to an appendix but portray it negatively in the first chapter by putting each of the main points and how it is refuted in the subsequent chapters and point to the appendix for a detailed description. This way the readers would not lose interest in the whole book trying to understand the convoluted AIT itself and do not get into the book where their arguments are refuted point by point.

Essentially if you can make the first chapter concise so that it can be quoted in short conversations one engages in cocktail parties, it would be of enormous help.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 26 Jan 2013 03:10

ramana garu,

When the microbiologists start telling us the ancestral DNA of the Egyptians by looking more closely at the Egyptian Mummies using better techniques, then we may get an answer whether they were from India or not.

Nature 472, 404-406 (2011), Published online 27 April 2011
By Jo Marchant
Ancient DNA: Curse of the Pharaoh's DNA

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

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 26 Jan 2013 03:22

ramana wrote:RajeshA, That ties in wtih Bji's theory that ancient Egyptians were from India after the Dwaraka flooded.


Please write it up as blog post so it can be disseminated.


So Scorpion King who united upper and lower Egypt and created teh nation state of Egypt is a Hindu!!!

Subhash Kak has written paper showing connections between Hittite/Kassite (Kurd/Turky/Iraq) and Egypt and India.

Recently I read (writing of Dr. P V Vartak) where he mentions 'Mosul Spring Festival (Iraq) where in 1989 the festival committe (or govt. of Iraq.. under Saddam) released a postage stamp with a photo that appears similar to Krishna. Vartak goes on to link this with "Musal" (that killed Yadavas) via musal fight and Yadu dynasty gettting destroyed and remaining groups moving to NW and also near Hasitnapur.

Most of it appears to be far fetched, but may need some scrutiny before discarding it. (I know AIT lords and their sepoys would have cranked 50+ PhD theses out of such circumstantial/even fantastic conjectures.. but oh well, I digressed....again).

Yadus moving from Dwarka to NW and North after flooding of Dwarka is indeed attested in MBH text (and other Indian texts). I am curious to see the so called 'Postage stamp ' Vartak is referring to. I did search on Internet and did find postage stamps released during 'Mosul Spring Festival' ..but so far no figure like Krishna.

Yadus moving further west from NW India is realistic.

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 » 26 Jan 2013 06:07

matrimc wrote:
Please consider relegating a detailed purvapaksha (regurgitation of the main argument) of the AIT to an appendix but portray it negatively in the first chapter by putting each of the main points and how it is refuted in the subsequent chapters and point to the appendix for a detailed description.


I am not spending great effort on fighting AIT because there are now dozens of people who have done that. But AIT lives "indirectly" because all the false constructs that led to AIT still exist. It is those false constructs that I am going after. A lot of people are doing this work and even Romila Thapar has been put into downhill ski mode in some publications.

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 » 26 Jan 2013 06:52

RajeshA wrote:In "Chhand upastha"/"Zond Avastha"/"Zend Avesta" there are some passages which consider Devas to be enemies. Could it be that the "Devas" referred to, do not refer to Vedics at all but to Yezidis instead?


Kak and some others refer to the possibility of a earlier "Daeva" tradition in Iran as opposed to Vedic devas and Vedic asura and Parsi Asura.

But as I see it - there is precious little evidence of any such belief of "daevas" as separate from Vedic devas. As far as I can tell, the early Vedas pre -dated Zoroastrianism by at least 1000 years - probably more. Also Vedic lands extended up to Turkmenistanm, Afghanistan - the Oxus/Vakshu rivers and eastern Iran in an era when there is no mention of knowledge of Zoroastranism. On the other hand Iraq, as part of Assyria had a major city called Ashur and some kings apparently called themselves Ashur-this and Ashur-that. It is conceivable that the early Vedas could be referring to revered figures who were called Devas or Asuras with this tradition extending over a huge area all the way up to Iraq.

Zoroaster who came later was a descendant of Bhrigu but he selected one specific Asura for worship. Devas became representatives of evil forces. Indra deva is very clearly a negative force, as are the Ashvins (Nasatya). That is what makes Mitanni Vedic and not "Persian" (Zoroastrian). So Zoroaster could well have branched off from the Sapta Sindhu region but cold have come into conflict with other pre existing people who were already deva worshippers and also worshippers of other asruras.

Malati Shendge has written a book (mentioned in this thread earlier) connecting Harappa with Sumer/Assyria - but her story is not really credible because she creates names of tribes of Harappa out of thin air just like AIT and also supports AIT. Although Mary Boyce is also AIT I find her work more balanced. When she write of pre-Zoroastrian gods in Iran, they are all vedic. But she does not call them Vedic. She calls them 'Indo-Iranian". For similar reasons they do not call Mitanni gods as Vedic, they call it "Indo-Iranian" or "proto-Indo-Iranian"

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 » 26 Jan 2013 08:22

Europeans "saw" Zoroastrianism from the west after about 500 AD when Darius started causing Khujli. Ctesias of 400 BC records Zoroaster. For Europeans, Zoroastrianism was a "Persian" religion of Persians that they discovered from the Behistun inscriptions of Darius in Persia. So they thought it was Persian. You cannot see the connection with India unless you read translations of the Avesta and also have some background knowledge of the Vedas.

Of the sixteen lands of Zoroastrianism, about four remain unidentified. Of the remaining twelve, five of them are Vedic lands recorded in ancient Indian texts and one other lands was known to Vedic people. Zoroastrianism is very much an "eastern Persian/Afghan/Indian religion".

But Europeans do not see it that way. They like to think the language came from somewhere and split into Vedic and Zoroastrian branches. Ironically, Behistun is derived from Bistoun which was originally Bagastana - land of God where "Bag" is god, cognate with Bhagwan.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

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

Postby Arjun » 26 Jan 2013 10:22

shiv wrote:Malati Shendge has written a book (mentioned in this thread earlier) connecting Harappa with Sumer/Assyria - but her story is not really credible because she creates names of tribes of Harappa out of thin air just like AIT and also supports AIT.

No she does not support AIT - in fact she is very much against it.

But her own theory is equally fanciful in some parts...What she is claiming (based on my reading a few months back) is that the original Harappans migrated from the region of Sumer/Assyria and that they developed the language Sanskrit which is a derivative of Assyrian. These people called themselves Asuras, and they developed both Sanskrit and the Vedas. Subsequently the Devas (a group of people that existed in present day north-India) defeated them and borrowed from them both the language as well as the Vedas which they modified to portray the Devas as superior to the Asuras..

After Malati's book was written - the dates of the Harappan civilization have been pushed back by several thousand years, so the daughter of Sumerian civilization theory is no longer defensible.

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 » 26 Jan 2013 19:00

Arjun wrote:
shiv wrote:Malati Shendge has written a book (mentioned in this thread earlier) connecting Harappa with Sumer/Assyria - but her story is not really credible because she creates names of tribes of Harappa out of thin air just like AIT and also supports AIT.

No she does not support AIT - in fact she is very much against it.

But her own theory is equally fanciful in some parts...What she is claiming (based on my reading a few months back) is that the original Harappans migrated from the region of Sumer/Assyria and that they developed the language Sanskrit which is a derivative of Assyrian. These people called themselves Asuras, and they developed both Sanskrit and the Vedas. Subsequently the Devas (a group of people that existed in present day north-India) defeated them and borrowed from them both the language as well as the Vedas which they modified to portray the Devas as superior to the Asuras..

After Malati's book was written - the dates of the Harappan civilization have been pushed back by several thousand years, so the daughter of Sumerian civilization theory is no longer defensible.

Malati Shendge is a tricky one.

She theorizes that Harappa had people called the Rakshas, Pisachas, Asuras and Gandharvas. These acc to Shendge were tribes. They were all defeated by invading Aryans who made a religion out of their hero Indra. The Aryans themselves did not stay in Harappa. Anyhow this is what I gleaned from her book "Civilized Demons"

I am not in a position to dig deep enough to make a case for or against her views - but prima facie she seems too far out for me to include her views directly a a reference. The AIT people have equally far out views that are now accepted as truth though.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 26 Jan 2013 23:16

Published on Jan 21, 2013
By Razib Khan
The dam of ancient DNA starts to break: Gene Expression Blog @Discover

Finally, my understanding is that the next few years is going to see a revolution in our understanding of the human past because of the large number of ancient DNA studies which will come online.


It will really be interesting to know the DNA of Egyptian Pharaohs for example, and see if they had any Indian connections.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 27 Jan 2013 17:36

shiv saar,

this is for you :)

Ghrelin - What is Ghrelin?
The discovery of ghrelin was reported by Masayasu Kojima and colleagues in 1999. The name is based on its role as a ''growth hormone-releasing peptide'', with reference to the Proto-Indo-European root ''ghre'', meaning ''to grow''. The name can also be viewed as an interesting (and incidental) pun, too, as the initial letters of the phrase ''growth hormone-releasing'' give us "ghre" with "lin" as a usual suffix for some hormones.


Now the PIE would be used to give scientific names!

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 » 27 Jan 2013 18:32

Rajiv Malhotra speaking about someone (more details in hijab pisko thread) - very appropriate for leftist AIT Nazis of India
old guard of Indians who wanted to prove their credentials to other Indians by demonstrating how much Western theory they have mastered, and how much the Western academy loves them with recognition...such "India experts" dominate the Indian discourse on history, sociology, political thought,

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

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

Postby member_22872 » 27 Jan 2013 19:04

shiv garu, which one is hijab pisko thread? is this in GDF?

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 27 Jan 2013 19:14

venug ji,

that is this thread.

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

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

Postby member_22872 » 27 Jan 2013 19:30

Rajesh ji, Thank you.

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

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

Postby Sushupti » 29 Jan 2013 02:43

Sirpur was much more developed than Harappan Township, reveals archaeological excavations

SIRPUR (Chhattisgarh): A nondescript town on the banks of river Mahanadi in Chhattisgarh, Sirpur, is all set to catapult to international limelight as the excavations and the rare archaeological findings, during the last one decade, prove that the region was educationally, culturally and economically much more developed than the famous Township of Harappa in the Indus Valley Civilization.

One of the Budha Vihars, an ancient complex found during archaeological excavations, is being cited as four times bigger than Nalanda, with unmatched stone carvings - not even seen in Khajuraho. Other findings such as 22 Shiva temples, four Vishnu temples, 10 Budha Vihars, and three Jain Vihars, remains of an ancient market, an Ayurveda treatment centre, underground granary market and a sixth century 'Ayurvedic Snaan Kund' (an ancient spa), could put Sirpur in the list of the richest archaeological sites.

Located at a distance of about 90 kms from the state capital, Sirpur till now was known for the magnificent and ancient east facing Lakshamana temple built by Vasata, the mother of Mahasivagupta Balarjuna in 7th century AD, and the Gandeshwar temple, dedicated to Lord Shiva.

"There are 184 mounds with archaeological remains in an area spread over 29.25 square kilometres in Sirpur. In the last 11 years, 48 mounds have been exposed through archaeological excavation and steps have been taken for conservation of the sites," said octogenarian archaeologist and excavator AK Sharma, who is archaeological advisor to the Chhattisgarh government.

The Jains came here first Throwing light on the importance of the findings during the last one decade, he said the 28 Shiva temples belonged to Somvanshi period from 6th century to 10th century while the four Vishnu temples dated back to 5th and 6th century of Saratpuria era. But the three Jain Vihars of the 4th century and the findings like the huge statue of Lord Parshvanath Tirthankar indicate that Jains were the first to come to Sirpur as traders.

He said the region was a major trade centre during ancient period, much before it became the capital of Dakshinkaushal in the sixth century. Sharma said another important archaeological finding is that of an ancient market complex-considered as the biggest excavation so far in the world. The findings include materials from ancient grain market, iron market, metal market and even remains of ports on the banks of river Mahanadi. This ancient market was apparently an active trade centre from 6th century BC to as late as 18th century AD. "Archaeological artifacts up till the 18th century-such as silver coins of Mughal period and Tamrapatra of Kalchuri era-were found during excavations," he added. "Another important finding is the remains of an ancient treatment centre, with surgical facilities in Sirpur, dating back to 7th century.

The unearthed complex, apparently a 10-bed hospital where ancient surgical instruments were also recovered, is located in front of a Vishnu Temple and at a most suitable place for a treatment centre as per Vastu Shastra. Pointing out that moulds for making gold and silver ornaments, copper plates and stone inscriptions with dates have been found during excavations, Sharma said objects discovered during excavations also establish that there was a well-developed Brahmi script with Sanskrit as a language. Sharma claimed that Sirpur, which had a highly civilized society engaged in different trades apart from agriculture, was much more developed. "Inscriptions found here clearly indicate that people from different regions used to visit here. It had different forms of activity, making it richer than the Harappan culture," he said.

The Boudh Vihar, found during excavations, is magnificent and it's the biggest temple complex of 6th and 7th centuries to be covered so far. For the first time, stone carvings depicting sexual activity among animals have been found-a rarest form of carvings in Indian Archaeology. "Such carvings are not even seen in Khajurao and Ellora," he said. Important centre for Buddhist studies The region was an important centre for Buddhism from 6th to 10 century where, archaeologists say, more than 10,000 students used to pursue Buddhist studies. "The buildings were double-storied. Statues, with features of people from South East Asia, were among the archaeological artifacts found at Sirpur indicating that even students from these parts of the world used to visit the region," Sharma said. Being an important Buddhist centre, Chinese scholar and traveller Hiuen Tsang visited Sirpur in the 7th century and has mentioned the region in his travelogues.

http://m.timesofindia.com/city/bhopal/S ... 883313.cms

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 29 Jan 2013 02:46

Sushupti ji,

what is Sirpur's age? Was it there during Harappa's heyday?

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 29 Jan 2013 02:55

Published on Jan 13, 2013
By R Krishna
Book review: Thundergod: The Ascendance Of Indra: Daily News & Analysis

Indra, a vedic god, is a fascinating mythological character. The king of the devas commands rain clouds and thunder, is brave in battle against asuras who torment earth and its inhabitants,and has a lust for power that sometimes overpowers his better judgement.

Thundergod is part one of what’s been titled the Vedic trilogy. It’s a modern interpretation of the character and combines mythology with history. The devas are one of the many tribes that inhabit Eurasia and they share their lineage with Ikshvaaku, Yavana, Aditya and Asura tribes.

Indra is born of the union of Daeyus, king of a tribe, and a celestial being. He has golden hair, which further emphasises his Eurasian roots. According to a prophecy, Indra is the warrior destined to unite the Devas, Ikshvaakus, Yavanas, and Adityas, and then lead them in battle against the Asuras.

Daeyus is killed when Indra is just a baby. A sage called Mitra, who before renouncing the world was a renowned warrior of the Aditya clan, brings up Indra and four other orphans — Vayu, Agni, Varuna and Soma — at his ashram. The five grow up to be close friends and develop superhuman abilities when they kill a group of cursed beings called Pisachas. These abilities, however, have to be strengthened from time to time by drinking a brew that Soma perfects — not surprisingly, this brew is called “soma”.

While most of the book deals with magic and mythology, Thundergod does touch upon events that suggest historical authenticity. For instance, Indra attacks and conquers the city of Harappa. While there are many gaps in our knowledge of the Harappan civilisation, the coming of the Aryans and the vedic age, to depict Indra as the man who led Aryans into the Indus Valley is more than reinterpretation. It changes historical facts.

That criticism apart, the story is gripping. Though the Deva leadership is his by birthright, Indra has to prove himself to be a worthy leader. He challenges the regent’s son, who stakes claim to Deva leadership. His relationship with his wife, Sachi, is complicated since Indra is forced to kill her brother and (by accident) her father. Even after becoming king and raising a massive army, Indra nearly loses everything in his fight with the Asuras.

These changes of fortune, in fact, are reminiscent of Babur, who hailed from the same region and after several attempts to carve a kingdom in present-day Afghanistan, ultimately founded the Mughal empire in India.

Indra’s violence and vanity are brought out well by the author. For instance, after conquering Harappa, Indra, drunk on soma, orders the sacking of the city. When the chief priestess refuses to yield, Indra orders his commanders to rape her and worse, he watches as they obey him.

The deed doesn’t go unpunished. A vishkanya sent by the patron goddess of Harappa poisons Indra. Indra and his horde are forced to retreat to the Himalayas, where their task is to defeat the danavas (portrayed as dragons) who have dammed the rivers of the Indus valley. The book ends with the defeat of the danavas and the Devas meeting Manu.

There is an interesting twist in the end, which we will not spoil for you. Suffice to say that we look forward to read the next part of this trilogy.


Now anyone can reinterpret Indian Mythology. It's open season! Then the book would made into a movie, and this "exciting" "new" interpretation would become for many their idea of Indian mythology.

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

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

Postby Agnimitra » 29 Jan 2013 03:27

Folks, here's a thought.

What's the proof that the name "Iran" is linked with "Arya"? Usually the only evidence offered is that it is "etymologically" cognate due to roots "yrn". And the only ancient usage is give in an inscription that accompanies the investiture relief of the first Sassani king Ardashir I at Naqsh-e Rustam. In this inscription, the king's Middle Persian appellation is ardašīr šāhān šāh ērān while in the Parthian language inscription that accompanies the Middle Persian one the king is titled ardašīr šāhān šāh aryān (Pahlavi: ... ʼryʼn) both meaning "king of kings of Iranians".

So in the Middle Persian the roots are "yrn" whereas in Parthian it becomes "ryn", and both refer to the same "Aryan"?

But another thought occurred to me: In Sanskrit the term Arya has various etymological derivations, all referring to some particular meaningful characteristic, and it is a term used very widely and with the deepest cultural context. Yet, the "land of Aryas" never gets called "Iraan" in Sanskrit or any Indian language.

But in Sanskrit, iraNa (इरण) means "salt or barren", "desert".

Therefore, "airaNa" would mean "belonging to a salty or barren desert place". I suppose "iraaNa" would also have that connotation.

Can we have find ancient or medieval instances of that region being referred to as "iraaNa" in Sanskrit? If so, it could turn the Iranic claim on a dime. :mrgreen: I just happened to notice Iran being referred to as "iraaNa-desha" (इराणदेश) with the retroflex "n" (ण) rather than (न) in today's edition of Sudharma, and that made me curious as to whether the author chose that creatively, or from a past precedent.

[Also, "EeraNa" (ईरण) in Sanskrit means "painful and laborious evacuation of the bowels", and so "airaaNa" or "eeraaNa" would be one possessed of that characteristic. Just thought I'd throw that in there. :mrgreen: Sorry, slow day...]

Usually, Iranian claimants to the term "Aryan" treat it simply as an ethnonym. At best, it may have been a borrowed religious-cultural term that became treated like an ethnonym in that region. In medieval times, the word "mosalmaan" also became treated as an ethnonym in Iran, to differentiate from "Hendu". That is the baseline argument. But we could take it a lot further than "Arya" if we can relate "Iran" with their geography and topography.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 29 Jan 2013 03:54

Carl wrote:But another thought occurred to me: In Sanskrit the term Arya has various etymological derivations, all referring to some particular meaningful characteristic, and it is a term used very widely and with the deepest cultural context. Yet, the "land of Aryas" never gets called "Iraan" in Sanskrit or any Indian language.

But in Sanskrit, iraNa (इरण) means "salt or barren", "desert".

Therefore, "airaNa" would mean "belonging to a salty or barren desert place". I suppose "iraaNa" would also have that connotation.

Great Idea! :D

Dasht-e Kavir, also known as Kavir-e Namak or Great Salt Desert is a large desert lying in the middle of the Iranian plateau. It is Earth's 23rd largest desert. Dasht-e Lut, also spelled Dasht-i-Lut and known as the Lut Desert, is a large salt desert in southeastern Kerman Iran and is the world's 25th largest desert. The surface of the sand there has been measured at temperatures as high as 70.7 °C (159–160 °F), and it is one of the world's driest places.

Image Image

Considering that the whole Indus Valley was settled, and the Iranian plateau was a short distance from there, of course we would have had a way to refer to the region, and how would we do that? Of course we would be comparing it to the lush green region in Western Indian Subcontinent. We would be calling the region bare and desert like, and yes there is salt there as well.

Carl ji,

this is really a great find, because it was really Iran which gave 'Aryan' a different meaning than how we know it in Sanskrit - simply as 'Noble'.

Another interesting thing is why would iraNa (इरण) mean all three things at once: salt, barren and desert!

We need to dig deep on this!

Proof :mrgreen: from a German site: But in Sanskrit, iraNa (इरण) means "salt or barren", "desert".

P.S. I wonder if that is one of the reasons we call some girls 'Namkeen'! :wink: "Girl of the Salt People"!

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 29 Jan 2013 04:48

In Dr. Murlidhar H. Pahoja's Paper "Antiquity and Origin of the Term 'Hindu'", he says

In the Avestan Gatha 'Shatir', 163rd Verse speaks of the visit of Veda Vyas to the court of Gustashp and in the presence of Zorashtra, Veda Vyas introduces himself saying 'man marde am Hind jijad' 8 - I am man born in 'Hind'. Veda Vyas was an elder contemporary of Shri Krishna (3100 B.C.).


I have looked up the Gathas on the Internet but could not find this one. Would somebody be knowing of this?

Also need to check up, who were contemporaries of Veda Vyas on the Iranian side. Who was Gustashp? Who was Zorashtra? Is Zorashtra same as Zarathustra?

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

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

Postby Agnimitra » 29 Jan 2013 05:43

RajeshA wrote:Considering that the whole Indus Valley was settled, and the Iranian plateau was a short distance from there, of course we would have had a way to refer to the region, and how would we do that? Of course we would be comparing it to the lush green region in Western Indian Subcontinent. We would be calling the region bare and desert like, and yes there is salt there as well.

We need to dig deep on this!

In Marathi, Iran is called 'इराण'. (Marathi Wiki article on Iran). I have also written to Shri Sampat Kumar, editor of Sudharma, to ask him where he gets the word "इराण" from - is there a Sanskrit precedent from medieval or ancient times?

RajeshA wrote:P.S. I wonder if that is one of the reasons we call some girls 'Namkeen'! :wink: "Girl of the Salt People"!

:mrgreen: Well "namak" is a Persian word. And in that language itself, "bA namak" (salty) is a word for "cute". So maybe that usage seeped into Punjabi/Hindi.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21155
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 29 Jan 2013 05:59

Ka-Vir=like in Viran= lonly, god forsaken, empty place?

V"iran=physically empty and in case of Pakistan Miran=mentally empty.

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 » 29 Jan 2013 06:31

Carl wrote:Folks, here's a thought.

What's the proof that the name "Iran" is linked with "Arya"? Usually the only evidence offered is that it is "etymologically" cognate due to roots "yrn". And the only ancient usage is give in an inscription that accompanies the investiture relief of the first Sassani king Ardashir I at Naqsh-e Rustam. In this inscription, the king's Middle Persian appellation is ardašīr šāhān šāh ērān while in the Parthian language inscription that accompanies the Middle Persian one the king is titled ardašīr šāhān šāh aryān (Pahlavi: ... ʼryʼn) both meaning "king of kings of Iranians".

So in the Middle Persian the roots are "yrn" whereas in Parthian it becomes "ryn", and both refer to the same "Aryan"?


Like all linguistic excuses that have been accepted as fact this Iran-Aya link is also a "hint hint nudge nudge" idea. There are many hints that make the link easy to assume - "Ariana" mentioned by Greek historians, Ariyana Vaeja of the Venidad and a nearby Arya Vrata which is quoted as "proof" but Arya Varta was in India - the geography is clearly mentioned as south of Himalaya, north of Vindhya (Pariyatra), west of Prayag an Haridwar and east of Vinasana where the Saraswati dried up.

Ariyana Vaeja itself is unknown but many Zoroastrian territories are just north and west of Sapta Sindhu. One could say that at one stage (possible around 1000 BC), east of Sindhu was Aryavartha and west of Sindhu was Ariyana Vaeja. But Zoroastrians went and occupied all of modern Iran and eventually got into conflict with Greeks.

It suited the Aryan invasion theory to split Iran and India intro two different categories and cook up "sister languages" of Avestan (fully cooked up) and Old Indic (a cooked up name for Vedic Sanskrit). Very early on it was decided that language came to Iran and India from Europe side. There is zero evidence of the language in any of those areas at that time in the past and the whole history of Iran and India have been entirely cooked up by linguists using linguistic "evidence"

Of course we have discussed all of this earlier in this thread with linguists firmly ignoring any evidence outside the field of linguistics but pushing conveniently cooked up language theories as "proof". All this may be fine for steppe and Europe, but it breaks down as one moves towards India because India retains the linguistic evidence and, more recently archaeological and genetic evidence. Europe and the steppe have no retained linguistic evidence earlier than Mycenaean Greek from about 1200 BC. There is plenty of archaeology there - hence the desperate need to take one word from here and there to cook up a history by wild claims like "Aryan land", and "Royal grave digging in Rig Veda", One single word in one sukta (RV 10.18)- supposed to mean "pillar" (or support) is taken as proof that Rig Veda people were building wooden Kurgans.

David Anthony, widely quoted by ManishHji is an archaeologist What he does in his book is to take linguistic theories of PIE as fact and then fits the archaeological evidence to that. In fact early in his book he seats a target and says "now we have a target" to which findings can be fitted. his sort of bullshit is passed off as scholarship and becomes fact that gets supported by the type of Indian whom Rajiv Malhotra speaks of as a person who feels greater than other Indians because of their mastery of western thought.

Here is what David Anthony vomits. PIE is cooked up and a timeline is created, and that timeline iis used to fit Archaeological findings to complete the circular argument as "linguists support the archaeological finds" and "Archaeological finds support the linguists"
Archaic Proto-Indo-European (partly preserved only in Anatolian) probably
was spoken before 4000 BCE; early Proto-Indo-European (partly
preserved in Tocharian) was spoken between 4000 and 3500 BCE; and
late Proto-Indo-European (the source ofItalic and Celtic with the wagon/
wheel vocabulary) was spoken about 3500-3000 BCE. Pre-Germanic
split away from the western edge of late Proto-Indo-European dialects
about 3300 BCE, and Pre-Greek split away about 2500 BCE, probably
from a different set of dialects. Pre-Baltic split away from Pre-Slavic and
other northwestern dialects about 2500 BCE. Pre-Indo-Iranian developed
from a northeastern set of dialects between 2500 and 2200 BCE.
Now that the target is fixed in time, we can solve the old and bitter
debate about where Proto-Indo-European was spoken
.

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 » 29 Jan 2013 09:12

This site can do with some publicity
http://www.hermesonwings.com/history/th ... rl-statue/

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

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

Postby johneeG » 29 Jan 2013 21:35

Carl wrote:Folks, here's a thought.

What's the proof that the name "Iran" is linked with "Arya"? Usually the only evidence offered is that it is "etymologically" cognate due to roots "yrn". And the only ancient usage is give in an inscription that accompanies the investiture relief of the first Sassani king Ardashir I at Naqsh-e Rustam. In this inscription, the king's Middle Persian appellation is ardašīr šāhān šāh ērān while in the Parthian language inscription that accompanies the Middle Persian one the king is titled ardašīr šāhān šāh aryān (Pahlavi: ... ʼryʼn) both meaning "king of kings of Iranians".

So in the Middle Persian the roots are "yrn" whereas in Parthian it becomes "ryn", and both refer to the same "Aryan"?

But another thought occurred to me: In Sanskrit the term Arya has various etymological derivations, all referring to some particular meaningful characteristic, and it is a term used very widely and with the deepest cultural context. Yet, the "land of Aryas" never gets called "Iraan" in Sanskrit or any Indian language.

But in Sanskrit, iraNa (इरण) means "salt or barren", "desert".

Therefore, "airaNa" would mean "belonging to a salty or barren desert place". I suppose "iraaNa" would also have that connotation.

Can we have find ancient or medieval instances of that region being referred to as "iraaNa" in Sanskrit? If so, it could turn the Iranic claim on a dime. :mrgreen: I just happened to notice Iran being referred to as "iraaNa-desha" (इराणदेश) with the retroflex "n" (ण) rather than (न) in today's edition of Sudharma, and that made me curious as to whether the author chose that creatively, or from a past precedent.

[Also, "EeraNa" (ईरण) in Sanskrit means "painful and laborious evacuation of the bowels", and so "airaaNa" or "eeraaNa" would be one possessed of that characteristic. Just thought I'd throw that in there. :mrgreen: Sorry, slow day...]

Usually, Iranian claimants to the term "Aryan" treat it simply as an ethnonym. At best, it may have been a borrowed religious-cultural term that became treated like an ethnonym in that region. In medieval times, the word "mosalmaan" also became treated as an ethnonym in Iran, to differentiate from "Hendu". That is the baseline argument. But we could take it a lot further than "Arya" if we can relate "Iran" with their geography and topography.


There is a paper on 'Irina' linking it to Rann of Kutch by R.N. Iyengar.

Excerpts from the above source:
Irina in the Rgveda (RV)
The word Irin!a occurs in the 1st, 8th, and 10th mandalas of the RV, six times in all. These are listed with the original text and translation as given by Griffith, followed by relevant comments.
adha yad es!am sudine na sarur visvam erinam prus!ayanta senah! || (1.186.9)

So may the Maruts, armed with mighty weapons, rest here on heaven and earth with hearts in concord. As gods whose cars have dappled steeds like torrents, destroyers of the foe allies of Mitra. They hasten on to happy termination their orders when they are made known by glory. As on a fair bright day the arrow flieth over all the barren soil their missiles sparkle. (RV 1.186. 8-9)

Griffith translates the word erin!am (a+irinam) as barren soil, following Sayan a. The context is that of Maruts, who armed with their mighty weapons can discharge sparkling arrows over a region or place called erin!a. In hymn 8.4 addressed to Indra the word occurs once. In hymn 8.76 addressed to Asvins, it appears twice in its basic form as Irin!a.
yatha gauro apa kr!tam tr!s!yann ety averinam | (8.4.3)
madhvah! sutasya sa divi priyo nara patam gaurav iverine || (8.87.1)
ta vavr!dhana upa sus!t!utim divo gantam gaurav iverinam || (8.87.4)
Even as the wild-bull, when he thirsts, goes to the desert's watery pool
Come hither quickly both at morning and at eve, and with the Kan!vas drink thy fill.
Splendid, O Asvins, is your praise. Come fountain-like, to pour the stream.
Of the sweet juice effused-dear is it, Chiefs, in heaven-drink like two wild bulls at a pool.
Drink ye the Soma rich in meath, ye Asvins Twain: sit gladly on the sacred grass.
So, waxen mighty, to our eulogy from heaven come ye as wild-bulls to the pool.
(RV 8.4.3; 8.87.1, 4)
The interesting point here is that in all the three cases Irin!a is associated with a special animal called Gaura. This relation is analysed later in the present study. The next usage of Irin!a is in the tenth book, where tradition interprets it as dice board.
pravepa ma bahato madayanti pravateja irine varvr!atanah! | (10.34.1)
divya angara irine nyuptah! sitah! santo hr!dayam nirdahanti | (10.34.9)
Sprung from tall trees on windy heights, these rollers transport me as they turn upon the table. Dearer to me the die that never slumbers than the deep draught of Mujavan's own Soma.
Downward they roll, and then spring quickly upward, and, handless, force the man with hands to serve them. Cast on the board, like lumps of magic charcoal, though cold themselves they burn the heart to ashes. (RV 10.34.1, 9 )

The first verse refers to an object that supposedly sprung from tall trees at a height. This could refer to the nuts of the Vibhitaka tree out of which dice were made. The hymn in which the above two verses arise, is traditionally associated with dice play. The game was played by throwing the dice on flat ground. Hence, here dice board could be a secondary meaning of the word Irin!a. The word divya does not mean magic. It refers to something bright and perhaps celestial. The literal meaning of the second verse (10.34.9) above would be “Heavenly charcoals having ploughed into Irin!a, though cold, burn the heart.” Double meaning may be intended, but the primary meaning appears to be that of fiery objects falling from the sky in a place named Irin!a. RV (1.186.8-9) already quoted, where bright objects are mentioned as flying over Irin!a supports this inference.

Irina in the Nirukta
Nirukta of Yaska (Sarup 1967) an ancient reference on Vedic words, accepts two
meanings for the word Irin!a in RV (10.34)
Irin!am nirn!am rnateraparnambhavati| aparata asmadosadhaya iti va ||
Board (ir!in!am) is free from debt (nir!-r!n!am). It is derived from (the root) r!n! (to go) i.e. it
is distant. Or else, herbs have been removed from it.
Based on the above etymology of Yaska one can interpret the word irin!am as: that which was previously r!n!am, i.e. moving/flowing (thus fertile), became nir-rn!am i.e. nonflowing, non-fertile, without herbs, after being hit by fiery objects.

Irina in the Yajurveda
Taittiriya Samhita (TS) of the Krsna-Yajurveda refers to Irin!a in the legend of Visvarupa. The legend says, Visvarupa son of Tvas t r had three heads. Indra killed him by cutting off the heads, but was accused of being guilty. Earth agreed to take one-third of the guilt of Indra, in return for a boon. This (guilt) became Irin!a on the earth.

tr!tiyam brahmahatyayai prati agr!hn!at tat svakr!tam írin!am abhavat tasmad
ahitagnih! sraddhadevah! svakr!ta írin!e naava syed (TS 2.5.1.3)
A third of the guilt of killing a Brahman!a was taken (by earth). That (part of earth) became the self-created Irin!a. Therefore, the faithful fire worshipper should not stay in the self made Irin!a.

This legend of Visvarupa carries the footprints of orthodox Vedic people emigrating out of Irin!a, which for some special reason became uninhabitable. The translation of Irin!a as a natural fissure in earth by Keith (1914) does not convey the complete meaning of the above text. This can be inferred from other hymns, where pradara (fissure, opening) is prescribed only as an alternate place for certain rituals.

svakrta irine juhoti pradare vaitad vaai asyai nír!r!tigr!hitam nír!r!tigr!hita evainam nír!r!tya
grahayati (TS 3.4.8.5)

He offers in the self made (natural) Irin!a or in a fissure that is seized by Nir!r!ti. Certainly, in a place seized by Nir!r!ti, he makes him (the enemy) seized by Nir!r!ti.

It is to be noted that pradara meaning a fissure is an alternate to Irin!a, for offering a sacrifice. The word svakrta qualifies both Irina and pradara, hence the fissure was also a natural one in contrast to a man made opening. The two land-types are equivalent as far as the ritual is concerned but they are not physically identical. The place is said to have been seized by Nirrti, the deity of disaster and misfortune. In essence here TS equates Irin!a itself with disaster or misfortune. If Irina meant a region, the additional reference to pradara here may hint at the existence of a natural crater in that region. Through Nirrti a direction is also indicated for Irin!a as in the following text.

imam disam yantyesa vái nírrtyai| diksvayameva disí nírrtim niravadayate | svakrta írina upa dadhati pradare va | etad vai nírrtya ayatanam | sva evaìyátane nírrtim nirávadayate| (TS 5.2.4.3)
They go in this direction (to this quarter). This is the direction of Nirrti; verily in her own
direction he propitiates Nirrti. He places (it) in self-made Irina or in a fissure; that is the abode of Nirrti; verily he propitiates Nirrti in her own abode.

The independent Taittiriya Brahmana (TB) text corroborates the above statements. .
svakrta irine juhoti pradare va| etadvai raksasam ayatanam | sav eva ayatane raksamsi hanti| (TB I.7.9)
He offers in the self made Irina or in a fissure. This is verily the abode of demons. They
destroy demons in their own abode. TB (2.2.7) and TS (3.4.8.5) are similar.

The Satapatha Brahmana of the Shukla-Yajurveda also provides similar directions for locating Irina.

tena daksIinIa yanti sa yatra svakrItam verinIam vindati svabhrapradaram va || (5.2.3.2)
They go south, where the self-created (natural) verinIa is reached or a fissure due to a
whirlpool.

tabhiretam dísam yanti | esa vaí nairrti din nairrtyameva taddisi nírrtim dadhati sa yatra svakrtam verinam svabhrapradaro va syattadena upadadhyad yatra vaa asya avadiryate yatra va asya osadhayo na jaìyante nírrtiirhasyai tad grhnati nairrta eva tadbhumeh nírrtim dadhati (7.2.1.8 )

With them they go towards the southwest direction (quarter). That is the direction of NirIrIti. Verily he places NirIrIti in the abode of NirIrIti. He places those (bricks) in the self created VerinIa or in the fissure of a whirlpool. Verily NirIrIti grasps that part where there is a ground fissure or a place where no herbs grow. Thus, he places NirIrIti in that part of earth set-aside for NirIrIti.

Here Verina is a variant of Irina. Sayana explains the above Irina and svabhra-pradara as two alternate places, both in the southwest direction. The first is a natural region devoid of grass and the second a circular ground opening. Svabhra is usually taken to mean a deep pit or a hole. The above Vedic texts taken together indicate a direction associated with Nirrti and hence with Irina. This is clearly the southwest, which in later Sanskrit and other Indian languages became known by the word nairrtya. The texts indirectly hint at Irina as a region that suffered a natural disaster. It became uncultivable on its own without human intervention. This also implies that during the time of the 8th man d ala of RV, Irina was at least in parts inhabited. This was in all likelihood located southwest of a central region culturally important to the composers and followers of the Vedas.

The Maitrayan i-Samhita (3.2.4) has the following statement:
athaita nairrtih tisrastusapakva bhavanti etadvai nairrtamannasya yattusah…esahi
nirrtya dik, tah svakrta irine paracinidadhati…||

This connects Nirrti, Irina and the southwest direction without mentioning the pradara. This Samhita also knows Kuruksetra as the place where gods executed a sacrifice. It is known that the Vedic madhyadesa or central land was the area between the rivers Sarasvati and Dr sadvati including Kuruksetra (Bharadwaj 1986). Hence the broad outlines of Irina and Ran-of-Kutch seemingly agree. However, there are other constraints yet to be considered. It is observed that between RV and the Yajurveda, the latter is more concerned with Irina, but always in a negative sense. All Yajurveda texts highlight this place through the epithet Irinya (TS 4.5.9) referring to Siva, in the famous Rudrasukta.
This seems natural in that Rudra, one among the Godhead divided in three, responsible for destruction as per Hinduism should have been associated in early times with a region affected by a natural disaster.

Atharvan a-veda Samhita [vadantu prsnibahavo manduka irinanu|| 4.15.12] refers to Irina along with spotted frogs and river streams. This would be more in tune with the use of the word in RV 8th book, where Irin!a is a place with potable water.

Sutra Literature
Vedic Sutra literature describing the procedure of Agnicayana knows Irina quite well.

Baudhayana-Srauta-Sutra (10.22) prescribes,
daksinaya dvaropaniskramaya tMm disam yanti yatrasya svakrtam irin am spastam bhavati pradaro va|
They take these steps out through the southern door; go in the direction where the natural Irina is clear or a fissure (is seen).
The other Sutra texts (Katyayana-Sutra 9.16) have similar prescriptions associating Irina with Nir r ti, southwest and some times with south direction. The Asvalayana-grhya-sutra (5.5) of the RV branch, prescribes a test for the bride to be married based on the type of soil she selects. Among the eight identical mud spheres if the one from Irina were to be randomly selected the bride was considered to be unlucky [irinat adhanya]. But the Srauta-sutra of Asvalayana does not refer to Irina. There are several other Vedic ritualistic texts that progressively omit this word although the concept of pollution associated with Nir r ti and the southwest direction are retained in Vedic Hindu rituals to this day.

Irina in the Epics
Out side the Vedic texts, the earliest mention of Irina appears in the epics. Ramayan a describes the hermitage of Vasis t ha after an attack by Visvamitra as having become silent like a desert. [muhurtam iva nihsabdam asit irina-sannibham| Balakanda; 54.24 b].

In the Mahabharata the word occurs in two places. In the adi-parvan it is used in the sense of a barren or vacant land at the end of a forest.
[sa vanasya antam asadya mahad irinam asadat| taccapi atitya nrpatih uttamasrama samyutam| Adi-parvan, 64.2-3]

In the Anusasana- parvan, (Ch.139 v.24-26) while recounting the episode of River Sarasvati drying up, we read Utathya demanding Earth
darsayasva sthalam bhadre s!at!-sahasra-sata-hradam|
tatastad irinam jatam samudrasca apasarpitah! ||
tasmat desannadim caiva provaca asau dvijottamah!|
adrsyagaccha bhiru tvam sarasvati marum prati||
apunyah esa bhavatu desastyaktastvaya subhe|

Show me Dear, the place with six thousand one hundred water holes. And then that place became Irin!a and the sea was pushed aside. Then he said to the River ‘disappear from this place, O timid Sarasvati come towards the desert. Let this place, discarded by you, be devoid of merit’.
These verses imply that Irin!a and Maru were distinctly different regions. The above is an ancient literary reference to the sea receding to bring out a landform called Irin!a.
Mahabharata clearly associates this place with the drying up of River Sarasvati.

Irina in Classical Sanskrit

Pan ini (c 7th Cent. BC) the well known grammarian does not refer to Irin a, but mentions two generic suffixes or word endings -kaccha and -agni. The first refers to marshy land, the standard example being Bharu-kaccha (Bhr gu-kaccha, Broach). Examples with suffix -agni are Vibhujagni and Khan d agni (Agrawala 1953). These notations are still recognizable in the names Bhuj and Kan d ala in the Kutch district of modern Gujarat. The association of the suffix agni with Bhuj, which is the doorway to the ROK, is possibly the reminiscence of a natural fire that should have devastated this region. The earliest use of the word Irin!a in the classical literature is traceable to Kaut ilya (4th-3rd Cent. BC). In the classification of forts, Irin!am type of fort is described as being without water [nirudakastambam irinam va dhanvanam| Artha-sastra 2.3.1]

Manusmrti, which describes Aryans as those living east of River Sarasvati and north of the Vindhya Mountains( :eek: ), prohibits reciting Vedas while being in Irina.
[nadhiyita asvamarudho na vrksam naca hastinam| na navam na kharam nostram nerinastho na yanagah|| MS 4.120]
Several popular books on architecture refer to Irin!a-type fort. Maya-mata classifies forts as (Dagens 1995);
giri-vana-jala-pankerina-daivata-misran!i sapta durgan!i|
nadyabdhi-parivr!tam yajjaladurgam nirvanodam irin!am syat|| (Ch.10, 36b, 38b)

Here, forts are said to be of seven types, depending on their location. These are mountain, forest, water, marsh, Irin!a, natural, and mixed types. Usually Irin!a is explained as desert, since that type of fort is said to be in a place without water and trees. There are a few texts that replace Irin!a-durga with maru-durga. Br hat-samhita of Varaha-mihira, which is a standard reference on ancient geography does not cite Irin!a. Popular lexicons Amarakosa and its successor Trikan d a-ses a do not list this word. The Anekarthasamuccaya of Sasvata (5th-10th Cent) popularly known as Sasvatakosa, equates the words irin!a and iran!a as homonyms meaning desert. Yuan Chwang the famous Chinese traveler, who visited India in the 7th Century AD, mentions the name of a mountain that sounds like iran!a, located in modern Bihar. Obviously this had no connection with a saline land or desert. He did travel to North Gujarat but makes no mention of any special landscape like
the Ran .

Irina of Periplus
Irin a as being connected with the Ran-of-Kutch, gets independent validation from a Greek source. Periplus of the Erythrean Sea is a navigator’s guide belonging to 1st century BC. It is informative to quote extracts from this text as translated by McCrindle(1879). “After the river Sinthos is passed we reach another gulf, which cannot be easily seen. It has two divisions,-the Great and the Little by name,-both shoal with violent and continuous eddies extending far out from the shore, so that before ever land is in sight ships are often grounded on the shoals, or being caught within the eddies are lost.
Over this gulf hangs a promontory which, curving from Eirinon first to the east, then to the south, and finally to the west, encompass the gulf called Barake, in the bosom of which lie seven islands.” On this, McCrindle comments: “The first place mentioned after the Indus is the Gulf of Eirinon, a name of which traces remain in the modern appellation the Rana of Kachh. This is no longer covered with water except during the monsoon, when it is flooded by sea water or by rains and inundated rivers. At other seasons it is not even a marsh, for its bed is hard, dry and sandy; a mere saline waste almost entirely devoid of herbage, and frequented but by one quadruped – the wild ass.”


There is a yahoo group discussion on 'irina'. R N Iyengar, the author of the above paper, also participates in the discussion. I think he proposes a connection between the word 'irina' in MB and drying of the river Saraswati.

Personally, I am highly skeptical about these theories trying to associate geographic locations to the generic terms like 'irina'(barren/salty soil).

I thought Kambhoja refers to modern-day Iran and Bahlika refers to 'Bactria', northern parts of modern-day Afghanistan.

Reference to Kambhoja in MB:

Reference 1)

19 कदली मृगमॊकानि कृष्ण शयामारुणानि च
काम्बॊजः पराहिणॊत तस्मै परार्ध्यान अपि कम्बलान
19 kadalī mṛgamokāni kṛṣṇa śyāmāruṇāni ca
kāmbojaḥ prāhiṇot tasmai parārdhyān api kambalān

Sabha parva, Chapter 45, shloka 19,(Description of the grandeur of Rajsuya Yaga conducted by Yuddhishtira).
Link

Translation(K M Ganguly):
Yudhishthira supporteth eighty-eight thousand Snataka Brahmanas leading domestic
lives, giving unto each of them thirty slave-girls. Beside this, thousand other Brahmanas daily eat at his palace the best of food on golden plates. The king of Kambhoja sent unto him (as tribute) innumerable skins, black, darkish, and red, of the deer Kadali, as also numberless blankets of excellent textures. And hundreds and thousands and thousands of she-elephants and thirty thousand she-camels wander within the palace, for the kings of the earth brought them all as tribute to the capital of the Pandavas.

Link


Reference 2)

21 सुदक्षिणश च काम्बॊजॊ यवनैश च शकैस तथा
उपाजगाम कौरव्यम अक्षौहिण्या विशां पते
21 sudakṣiṇaś ca kāmbojo yavanaiś ca śakais tathā
upājagāma kauravyam akṣauhiṇyā viśāṃ pate

Udyoga Parva, Chapter 19, Shloka 21, (Description of Duryodhana's army before the war of MB)
Link

Translation(K M Ganguly):
And in the same way king Bhagadatta, gladdening the heart of Dhritarashtra's son, gave an
Akshauhini of troops to him. And the unassailable mass of his troops, crowded with Chins and Kiratas, all looking like figures of gold, assumed a beauty like to that of a forest of Karnikara trees. And so the valiant Bhurisravas, and Salya, O son of Kuru, came to Duryodhana, with an Akshauhini of troops each. And Kritavarman, the son of Hridika, accompanied by the Bhojas, the Andhas, and the Kukuras, came to Duryodhana with an Akshauhini of troops. And the body of his troops composed of those mighty soldiers, who wore on their persons garlands of many-coloured flowers, looked as graceful as a number of sportive elephants that have passed through a wood. And others led by Jayadratha, the dwellers of the land of Sindhusauvira, came in such force that the hills seemed to tremble under their tread. And their force, counting an Akshauhini, looked like a mass of clouds moved by the wind. And Sudakshina, the king of the Kambhojas, O ruler of men, accompanied by the Yavanas and Sakas, came to the Kuru chief with an Akshauhini of troops. And the body of his troops that looked like a flight of locusts, meeting with the Kuru force, was absorbed and disappeared in it. And similarly came king Nila, the resident of the city of the Mahishmati, with mighty soldiers from the southern country who carried weapons of pretty make. And the two kings of Avanti, accompanied by a mighty force, brought to Duryodhana, each a separate Akshauhini of troops. And those tigers among men, the five royal brothers, the princes of
Kekaya, hastened to Duryodhana with an Akshauhini of troops, and gladdened his heart. And from the illustrious king, of other quarters there came, O best of Bharata's race, three large divisions of troops.
And thus Duryodhana had a force which numbered eleven Akshauhinis all eager to fight with the sons of Kunti, and bristling with banners of various forms. And, O descendant of Bharata, there was no space in the city of Hastinapura even for the principal leaders of Duryodhana's army. And for this reason the land of the five rivers, and the whole of the region called Kurujangala, and the forest of Rohitaka which was uniformly wild, and Ahichatra and Kalakuta, and the banks of the Ganga, and Varana, and Vatadhana, and the hill tracts on the border of the Yamuna--the whole of this extensive tract--full of abundant corn and wealth, was entirely overspread with the army of the Kauravas. And that army, so arranged, was beheld by the priest who had been sent by the king of the Panchalas to the Kurus.'"

Link

In the above excerpt, Yavanas(Greeks?) and Shakas(Scythians?) may be the neighbours of Kambhojas(Iran/Persia?).


Reference 3)
32 उत्तरं चाभिमन्युं च काम्बॊजं च सुदक्षिणम
शिशून एतान हतान पश्य लक्ष्मणं च सुदर्शनम
आयॊधन शिरॊमध्ये शयानं पश्य माधव
32 uttaraṃ cābhimanyuṃ ca kāmbojaṃ ca sudakṣiṇam
śiśūn etān hatān paśya lakṣmaṇaṃ ca sudarśanam
āyodhana śiromadhye śayānaṃ paśya mādhava

Stri Parva, Chapter 20, shloka 32 (Gandhari's lamentations about those who died in the war. She is addressing Lord Sri Krishna)

Translation(K M Ganguly):
O Krishna, the ladies of the royal house of Matsya are dragging away the afflicted Uttara,
baffled of all her purposes, while lamenting in this strain. Those ladies, dragging away the afflicted
Uttara, themselves still more afflicted than that girl, are weeping and uttering loud wails at sight of the slain Virata. Mangled with the weapons and shafts of Drona, prostrate on the ground, and covered with blood, Virata is encompassed by screaming vultures and howling jackals and crowing ravens. Those black-eyed ladies, approaching the prostrate form of the Matsya king over which carnivorous birds are uttering cries of joy, are endeavouring to turn the body. Weakened by grief and exceedingly afflicted, they are unable to do what they intend. Scorched by the Sun, and worn out with exertion and toil, their faces have become colourless and pale. Behold also, O Madhava, those other children besides Abhimanyu—Uttara, Sudakshina the prince of the Kambhojas, and the handsome Lakshmana—all lying on the field of battle!’"

Link

Earlier, RajeshA ji posted an article of Birendra K.Jha about 'Unicorn's Vedic concept' in this thread. That article has a reference to Kambhoja:

When Rama was ruling at Ayodhya, his territory was extended up to the Middle East. In Assyrian & Mittani list Rama appears as Rimu or Rim. In Assyrian list, he comes as eleventh king (Ilusuma - Erisum I - Ikunum - Sargon I - Puzur Assur II - Naram Sin - Erisum II - Samsi Adad I - Isme Dagan I - Mut Askur- Rimu = Rama) & on the Mitnani clay list he is the seventh king (Ashur Shaduni. –Ashur Rabi – Ashur Nadin AhheI – Enlil Nasir II. – Ashur Nirari II. – Ashur Bel Nisheshu -- Ashur Rim = Rimu = Rama (title Ashur with Rama denotes respect and dignity in Ahurmajda culture, just like symbolism Arya (not to be confused with Maxmullers’ idea) used with Rama to denote respect and dignity in the Indian literature )– Ashur Nadin Ahhe II ). It is natural that during the Indian control many Vedic iconographies had been adopted & accepted by the Middle East people.

In between post , Cush Babylonians’ period & particularly in India the symbolism of Rama was identified with Vishnu (Unicorn) as an incarnation, where as in the Middle East it appears to have been known as a clan. The concept of Unicorn and its relation with Cush’s clan become such a strong element in Semetic culture that, Joseph of The Old Testament shows his relation with a popular clan having one horn, as called Reem in Hebrew. Even at the time of Kings James Version of Old Testament the term Reem kept a team of 70 translators wondering actually what it means in Hebrew. The first to translate the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek definitely was known to this fact that the word Reem is depicted as one-horned God - so they translated it as monoceros (one horn) God.

As said earlier the word Reem is associated with the King Rimu mentioned in Mittani & Assyrian clay list . This Rimu is Ayodhyapati Rama, which in our Vedic record is a Vishnu incarnation. (at the time of Mahabharat Indian borders have extended up to Kamboja (present Iran) Mahabharata verse Kamboja-Bahlika term in 6/75/17 testifies to this fact. It connects Kamboja with Bahlika or Bacteria as a joint term . At the time of Mahabharata war the king of Kamboj was allied with the Pandavas. It shows much before the appearance of Hebrew Rimu, the people of Middle East and Iran have good concept on the Vedic thought of One horned Vishnu, iconography & how Vishnu corelates with Rama. In Indian record after Rama, Krishna carried the concept of Unicorn as found in Mahabharat (see verse: buddhi-yogah sarathyam anayudha… ). Iran though in deep Rigvedic age was copying the entire concept of Vedic thought, except that in principle it was not believing in iconography or idol worship. In spite of such heavy resistance it allowed the iconography of Unicorn. The Yasna 42 (Avesta) describes the popular concept of Unicorn as followed in Middle East. This verse has been translated by L. H. Mills (From Sacred Books of the East, American Edition, 1898.) in such a way:

“And we worship the Good Mind (in the living) and the spirits of the saints. And we sacrifice to the fish of fifty-fins, and to that sacred beast the Unicorn which stands in Vouru-kasha, and we sacrifice to that sea of Vouru-kasha where he stands”

The symbolism of sacred beast Unicorn as in Semetic (Avesta), Middle East or Mesopotamia is a, Vedic thought and exactly corresponds with the Vedic Unicorn. The Middle East Unicorn has been found at Mesopotamia, which is preserved in British Museum as Cylinder seal of Mesopotamia No. 89538 (given below)

Image


Link


But, there may be some merit in Carl's theory that the word 'Iran' may be derived from 'Irina'(barren/salty soil). But, there is a possibility that this theory will be used for conjectures that whenever the word 'Irina' is used in Vedas(specially Rig Veda) or other scriptures, it refers to modern-day Iran. And I think such a theory would be a bogus theory. I am also highly skeptical about associating the modern-day Rann of Kutch with the word 'Irina' is Vedas and other scriptures.

The traditional reading of the word 'Irina' as barren/salty soil makes a lot more sense.
---
Carl wrote:
RajeshA wrote:P.S. I wonder if that is one of the reasons we call some girls 'Namkeen'! :wink: "Girl of the Salt People"!

:mrgreen: Well "namak" is a Persian word. And in that language itself, "bA namak" (salty) is a word for "cute". So maybe that usage seeped into Punjabi/Hindi.


It may be translation of the sanskrit word 'Lavanya'.

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

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 29 Jan 2013 21:43

JohneeG,

Great post. It will take me a while to read and digest the contents. I am also skeptical about RN Iyengar paper on Irina and drying of Sarasvati. I read it a year ago. However, as is the case with his papers in general, there are lot of useful nuggets in his work.. including this paper on Irina.

And while his timeline is extremely off (and can be falsified using geological evidence itself), number of his conclusions might be still valid for a remote time period. (Think of anlogy of transformation of data from one cartesian coordinate system to another).

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 29 Jan 2013 21:46

At the time of the early period of Vedas > ~8000 BCE it is highly improbable that the Rann of Kutch was there. We are talking about a period before the Yamuna turned eastwards, when Saraswati used to flow in full flow.

The salty, barren, desert like area known as Irina could only have referred to the region to the west of Indus.

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

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 29 Jan 2013 21:54

JohneeG and others,

On IndoArcheology Yahoo forum....

It is also interesting to see how likes of Brighanti and other try to define the scope of discussion in a narrow band which also includes deliberate digressions. In addition, anytime a serious discussion is going to happen, these AIT stalwarts get into pseduo-intellectual discusssions/digressions by quoting another authority (quoted with all the adjectives that can be mustered to prove the 'authoritativeness'.. not unlike fox news .. or now NDTV.. version as "But some people say..."

This is indeed smart desigs of AIT lords and their sepoys..

In words of Noam Chomsky...

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.
- Noam Chomsky

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

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 29 Jan 2013 22:44

RajeshA wrote:At the time of the early period of Vedas > ~8000 BCE it is highly improbable that the Rann of Kutch was there. We are talking about a period before the Yamuna turned eastwards, when Saraswati used to flow in full flow.

The salty, barren, desert like area known as Irina could only have referred to the region to the west of Indus.

RajeshA,

All Rigveda references RN Iyengar quote for 'IRINA' are from late Manadalas (per chronology of Shri. Shrikant Talegeri).. i..e 1, 8 and 10.

This fact is interesting (and RN Iyengar is indeed very good in extracting references from ancient literature).

If one understands that Vyasa edited, re-compiled Vedas, then we know that Sarasvati had dried up (and disappeared in places) by the time of MBH War (5561 BC). Thus Run of Kutch could have existed at that time. In fact there are references to it in MBH.

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

Thus, I don't think in quoting Rigveda (from manadala 1, 8 and 10) RN Iyengar is talking necessarily of early Vedic period.

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

I said in my previous post that his timeline can be falsified based on purely geological evidence. Quick highlights of my assertion include..

- receding of the sea happened on few occassions.. ~15000-20000 BC, a small blip ~7000 BC and then after significant increase in sea level.. again at around 2000 BC or after.. but never at other times.


From what I have read, RN Iyengar has hesitated to state specifically the timing he has for his theory. In the absence of a specific time period, his theory can not be analyzed, remains irrefutable (read Vague and confusing) and thus unscientifc.

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

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

Postby johneeG » 29 Jan 2013 23:54

RajeshA wrote:At the time of the early period of Vedas > ~8000 BCE it is highly improbable that the Rann of Kutch was there. We are talking about a period before the Yamuna turned eastwards, when Saraswati used to flow in full flow.

The salty, barren, desert like area known as Irina could only have referred to the region to the west of Indus.


I think his theory is:
Once upon a time('early Rig Veda', whatever that means), there was a place. That place was lush with grass and well-suited for settlement. Then, something terrible happened and the land turned into barren/salty(Irina). So, people left that place. Later, this event became part of the lore(Veda) and was transmitted through generations. Phonologically, 'Irina' is connected to 'rn' which links it to runn of kutch. 'rn' is also like Rin(Debt). Nairuti(South-west) is also connected to 'Irina'.

That is the summary of theory, as far as I could understand. Personally, I don't buy that Vedas were some personal experiences of people. I don't accept the view that Vedas were composed at different timelines(early vs later). Of course, people are going one step further and dividing even the a single Veda into early part and later part! I think all Vedas have same timeline. Further, my stand is that Vedas are extremely antique. Much much older than Ramayana. And Ramayana is much much older than MB. Anyway, as a Hindu, I believe that Vedas are divine revelations and not man-made literatures.

On an unrelated note,
there is supposedly 'indo-iranian language group' and 'indo-iranian races'.
there is supposedly 'indo-european language group' and 'indo-european races'.
there is supposedly 'indo-persian architecture'
there is supposedly 'indo-chinese region'.

But, there is no solely Indian group. Further, none of the above are supposed to have originated in India either. Frankly, I think that all of the above are only and only Indian. It is Indian language group, Indian races and Indian architecture that others want to claim as their own. It seems to me that India exported these to other regions. Other regions, at best, made some local variations to the Indian products.

My brother had an interesting argument:
I: Europeans claim that 'Aryans' came from Europe to India.
My Brother: How did Europeans know about the existence of 'Aryans' in the first place?
I: When they came to India, they found out about 'Aryans'.
My Brother: So, they did not know about the existence of 'Aryans' until they came to India, right?! If they didn't even know about their existence, then how can they claim that they are related to them?

Nilesh Oak wrote:JohneeG and others,

On IndoArcheology Yahoo forum....

It is also interesting to see how likes of Brighanti and other try to define the scope of discussion in a narrow band which also includes deliberate digressions. In addition, anytime a serious discussion is going to happen, these AIT stalwarts get into pseduo-intellectual discusssions/digressions by quoting another authority (quoted with all the adjectives that can be mustered to prove the 'authoritativeness'.. not unlike fox news .. or now NDTV.. version as "But some people say..."

This is indeed smart desigs of AIT lords and their sepoys..


Yep, that sepoy(or it a Lord) was calling out to the Mods for help. And he is making tall claims about timelines but is not even ready to reveal his timelines.

Anyway, it seems that sepoy is against identifying 'irina' with runn of kutch because apparently 'Aryans'(or is it 'harappans'?) were unfamiliar with sea?! :shock: :rotfl:

Apparently, AIT would be invalidated if 'rig vedics'(aryans or harappans?) had knowledge about sea. I read this assertion in that yahoo group discussion. Unable to locate it right now. But, I did not understand why the AIT would be invalidated if 'rig vedics' had knowledge about sea? Please somebody explain...

In words of Noam Chomsky...

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.
- Noam Chomsky


Clever strategy!

brihaspati wrote:Just a curiosity : why is Atharva Veda supposed to have only borrowed in a one-way sense, from RigVeda? Just based on the axiomatic claim that RigVeda is the universal/eternal/everlasting primary root? But it is acknowledged to have been rearranged over time. Hence it must have changed at least the forms of its representations and hence could not have been unaltered over time.

What rules out elements of Atharva Veda which are seen as "borrowings" from the Rig, from being the source from which RigVedic elements were reformulated/inspired?

Vyaas is supposed to have not only rearranged the internals of the Veda, but also reclassified the divisions into four etc. How do we rule out the relegation of Atharva Veda in the primacy ordering, because of existing/author morality/ethics/valuation criteria ? I am curious about this, because this relegation seems to run parallel to the AIT theorists who use the "lower rank" of the Atharva Veda, and claimed linguistic smiliarities to "classical sanskrit" to argue that Rig vedic sanskrit came before AV sanskrit which came before classical sanskrit. This in turn helps to establish that RigVedic Sanskrit came before/developed "outside" India.

Is it possible that the elevation of RigVeda, in primacy and claimed composition-period [only a "later" text can "borrow" from an "earlier one"], happened because of a particular moral and social/philosophical context out of competing moral and philosophical schools that had existed before? For example the Buddhists evaluated a lot of memes and concepts/texts on the basis of their moral hierarchies, in very much the same way that modern western ideologies elevate ceratin texts over all others?


As far as I know, traditional schools look at all Vedas as equally ancient. No primacy for any one Veda over the other. It is only the colonial indologists who started the trend of dating one of the vedas(or even a part of the vedas) as more ancient than another.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 30 Jan 2013 01:06

Nilesh Oak ji, johneeG ji,

the theory was that in the early Mandalas even though they were "heard" in the East first (let's say Western/Central UP) and the rivers were named from that region in those Mandalas e.g. I believe Mandala V, how come there was no mention of the Yamuna, and I said that was because at that time Yamuna still flowed in the West.

As far as the later Mandalas are concerned there is indeed mention of the Yamuna. I can't remember if Yamuna has already changed its flow in the late Mandalas or not.

Saraswati must have dried some time after first Yamuna turned East and Satluj turned West. I had thought that as Rig Veda speaks of Saraswati as the mighty river, Rann of Kutch must have appeared much later.

At the time of MB and Ved Vyas, that is somewhat later, there is of course evidence that Saraswati was not visible at places.

So I would say that the 'Irina' references in the Vedas could be from time before Rann of Kutch appeared, and as such refers to Iran.

We must also remember that Iran was not so expansive to its West as it is today.

So if we go by this theory, then the references to Irina refer to Iran, and Iran does not come from Arya/Aryan (Noble) but rather from Irina (salty/barren/desert).

But again it is just a theory!

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 » 30 Jan 2013 05:40

johneeG wrote:My Brother: So, they did not know about the existence of 'Aryans' until they came to India, right?! If they didn't even know about their existence, then how can they claim that they are related to them?

Your brother is an intelligent person and his logic is spot on.

Europe in the 18-19 centuries had found great civilizations in ruins in Syria and Iraq (Assyria) and these archaeological finds had actually thrown new light on biblical personalities. Until then these Europeans had believed that bible was ultimate in "ancient". But Assyria were semitic people and Jews were hated. Semitic people could not be allowed to grab history. Apparently Nietzsche has written about this feeling of loss.

It was exactly at this time that the Vedas and Sanskrit were "discovered". Since it was an "Indo-European" language and thought to be perfect and thought to be far older than any of the Assyrian stuff - the Europeans triumphantly appropriated the Vedas and made them the product of Aryans, with the language becoming Indo-Aryan languages. They went so far as to declare that Indian were Caucasians in appearance and bone structure. But many Europeans did not like being clubbed with blackies and negroid Indians. So it was decided that Indians had become corrupted by mixing with impure races.

In other words the name Aryan was needed to prove superiority over Semitic races of the middle east. Many others have written about this - and it will also appear in what I am writing



johneeG wrote:As far as I know, traditional schools look at all Vedas as equally ancient. No primacy for any one Veda over the other. It is only the colonial indologists who started the trend of dating one of the vedas(or even a part of the vedas) as more ancient than another.

Even if you ignore the idea that Atharva Veda is iron age and Rig Veda is pre-Iron age, there are other indicators suggesting that Rig Veda is older. In terms of content Atharva Veda apparently comes nowhere near Rig Veda and the other Vedas. The Rig serves as a philosophical underpinning of Indian culture, but the Atharva Veda is more about magical spells and incantations. The Zend Avesta (which is definitely later) was similar to the Artharva Veda (The Zend was, after all the Bhatgava Atharva Veda) and had similar spells and incantations. This is what led to the development of "Magi" in Iran. Those were the Magi known in ancient Greek records and the three wise men who visited Bethlehem when Christ was born were supposed to be Magi. I suspect the story was cooked up to give more respectability to the newborn Christ, assuming he actually existed.

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

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 31 Jan 2013 00:18

johneeG wrote:
As far as I know, traditional schools look at all Vedas as equally ancient. No primacy for any one Veda over the other. It is only the colonial indologists who started the trend of dating one of the vedas(or even a part of the vedas) as more ancient than another.


Not true. Ancient Indian literature has internal references for chronological developement. e.g. Yajnavalkya rejected Krishna Yajurved and created Shukla Yajurved. Two other Mahayuddhas (at least) - Dashy-yuddha and Dashrajna Yuddha are covered in Rigveda itself. Dasyuyuddha began with Pruthu Vainya and ended during the time of Divodasa. If these references are combined with what we know from Puranas, then the yuddha went on for 74 generations.

Vedas also have many astronomical references which can be dated ..spread over a period of at least 26000 years. It could be older, but then we need additional evidence beyond the phenomena of 'precession of equinoxes'.
-----------------
It is OT on this thread, but I may expand on this theme on other thread 'Archeoastronomy and dating of Indian texts ' (GDF) in future.

--------------------
To me, to say that (you did not say it.. but this thread in the past had such arguments) Rigveda are just words and is to be recited without understanding words (or that one may attempt understanding but one must fail in knowing the TRUE MEANING OF RIGVEDA in the final analysis) is epistemological nonsense.

I won't write more on this here.. since the very subject digressed the main discussion of this thread in the past.

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

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

Postby Agnimitra » 31 Jan 2013 00:37

Nilesh Oak wrote:To me, to say that (you did not say it.. but this thread in the past had such arguments) Rigveda are just words and is to be recited without understanding words (or that one may attempt understanding but one must fail in knowing the TRUE MEANING OF RIGVEDA in the final analysis) is epistemological nonsense.

Well the way you put it certainly sounds like nonsense. But I doubt anyone said exactly that! Perhaps if you had said "the ONE true meaning" then it makes more sense.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests