Link to original post
shiv wrote:Virendra - note both those posts are cut and paste - I just did not put them in quotes so the credit must go to the author of those links.
That said the more I read the more the links between India and the European bearers of R1A1a1 seem close.
For example, the word "bag", cognate of "bhagwan" has come up before as "God" in Iran. But in Europe - ranging from Russia to the Slavic nations to Poland the word for God is "bog"
In Russia, Poland and other nations there used to be two gods, bielobog and charobog (approximation of various similar names)
The word "bielobog" means white god. "biely" means white in Russian and other east Euroopean languages. I was unable to find a close cognate in Sanskrit other than "valaksh" . But he Kannada word for white is "bili" , cognate of Tamil "vellai" Ther is some connection there.
"Charobog" means black god. Now "char", "kar" etc seem to be related to Sanskrit "krishna" (black), Kannada too has "kari" meaning black, as Tamil has "karppu". Incidentally the Christian gilr name "kari" may be derived from Gaelic Ciardha (meaning black-haired one)
There are dep links that are not acknowledged by the type of anglosaxon scholarship that we tend to follow.
Link to original post
JE Menon wrote:>>"Charobog" means black god. Now "char", "kar" etc seem to be related to Sanskrit "krishna" (black), Kannada too has "kari" meaning black, as Tamil has "karppu". Incidentally the Christian gilr name "kari" may be derived from Gaelic Ciardha (meaning black-haired one)
The word Kara to mean black is used across a range of countries in the area encompassing Turkey, Greece, East Mediterranean, Slavic zone. Most often found in names, like "Karageorghis" (Black George) in Greece for instance, or "Kara Aydin" (in Turkey)... Of course, it is the K in CYMK which will be familiar to Graphic Designers standing for the colour channel representing Cyan, Yellow, Magenta and "Kara" (for black).
Indeed, we have only just begun scratching the surface... only now are we really scratching our own collective heads and saying "wait a minute, WTF"? And when a bunch of Yindoos begin doing that, the world better watch out... The shite is really going to hit the fan in the next decade.
'Karre' in Thelugu also means 'black' or 'dark'.
The word 'kara' may have been a simple corruption of the Sanskruth word 'kaala'. In Sanskruth, 'kala' means 'black'. In Hindhi, 'kala' means 'black'. There is even a rule in Sanskruth grammer(if my grammar is not wrong) which states that 'ra-la-yor abedhah'. It means 'ra' and 'la' are interchangeable. 'kara' may be a simple corruption of 'kala'.
The same phenomenon is perhaps seen in the words 'Rama' and 'Lama'.
'Kaali' means 'blacky'. The Goddess is called Kaali because She is black in color. 'Krushna' also means 'black' in Sanskruth. Shri Krushna is called so because He was also dark. Bala Rama was fairer.
So, Bielobog and Charobog may indeed be Bala Rama and Shri Krushna respectively. 'Bielo' sounds similar to 'Bala'(Rama), while 'Charo' has some phonetic similarity to Kara i.e. Kala.
So, Beilobog and Charobog may be corruptions of Bala-bhagwan and Kaala-bhagwan i.e Kara-bhagwan(i.e Krushna).
It is not unknown that words like Sanskrit were absent in Europe before 17th century. But such reference is ignored as and when it doesn't fit. The word aryan is Sanskrit isn't it.
But is it really true? Is'nt Iran just a corruption of Aryan? And is'nt Ireland also the land of Aryans?
So presumably the Celts and Iranians should have the word Aryan in their languages.
Many have suggested that Iran is taken from the word 'irinam' which means 'barren land'.Link to post about 'Irinam' Another post on same topicAnother post
Coming to the word 'Aryan':
Link to original post
Link to original post
Thatha(Sanskrit-Father)->Thatha(Telugu-Grand Father)->O Tats(Russian-Father)
Thatha(Telugu-Grand Father)->Dhadha(Hindi-Grand Father)->Dada(Father).
Amba(Sanskrit-Mother)->Amma(Telugu/Tamil-Mother)->Ammi(Arabic-Mother)->Mama(many langs- Mother)->Ma(Hindi-Mother)->Eom Ma(Korean-Mother)
suna(Sanskruth-son) -> son(english-son)
pilla(Thelugu-young one) -> pilla(Hindhi-puppy)->fille(french-son/daughter)
Arya is used in all languages(especially Indian languages) with or without corruption. Ayya(Thelugu), Appa(Tamil), Abba(Persian), Papa(Latin), Bapu(Gujrathi), Baba(Arabic), Bappa(Marathi), Pappa, Pai(Portuguese),...etc are all corruptions of Arya. Arya was used as honorific for elders(generally father). Its meaning is 'noble'.
If you were to talk in Sanskruth and want to call someone respectfully without using their name, what would you say?
Arya or Deva. These are used as honorifics in Sanskruth. All other languages being corruptions of Sanskruth, they also use the word Arya in various forms.
BTW, several abrahamic characters have their names ending in 'ayya'. For example,
All the above names end in 'ayya' kind of sound. Is it possible that 'ayya' is a suffix to their original names and 'ayya' is a honorific which is a corruption of 'arya'? In Thelugu, 'ayya' is a honorific and corruption of 'arya'.
sameer_shelavale wrote:The word Zorashtra sounds an abbreviation of Saurashtra(Gujarati: સૌરાષ્ટ્ર, Hindi: सौराष्ट्र).
Saurashtriya then became Zorashtrian?
So, it should be no wonder that Shrikirshna is mentioned in their literature.
Excellent saar. Now that you have said it, it is so straight-forward. Its embarrassing that I couldn't see it.
peter wrote:Well question still remains. How did "great Mahapurushas" got their gotras that are given in Rigved? Do not forget your position is that no historical rishi/gotra/brahmin/shudra in Rigved.
I thought gothras came from Rushis who started lineage. Gothra comes from the father's side. Even adoption is supposed to be allowed only within the Gothra. Marriage is prohobited within the Gothra to avoid incest(from father's side). Gothra of women changes at the time of Marriage. Post on Gothra
X-posting from Sanskruth thread:
Link to original post
Atri wrote: Agnimitra wrote:
^^^ अतीव रोचते !
--------------------Dilwale dulhaniya le jayenge
- RigVeda 10.71.4Today's Sudharma edition
has an editorial that quotes a portion of this mantra from the RigVeda's Saraswati Suktam:उत त्वः पश्यन् न ददर्श वाचं , उत त्वः श्रृण्वन् न श्रृणोत्येनम् ।
उतो त्वस्मै तन्वं विसस्रे जायेव पत्य उषति सुवासाः ॥ ऋग्वेदः १०.७१.४"One man looks at the Word, yet he does not see Her; One listens but does not hear Her.
But to another has She shown Her beauty, like a fond well-dressed bride does to her husband."
- RigVeda 10.71.4
Interesting. However, this ruchA is more interesting than u have discussed here from historical perspective.
The crude translation of this rucha, especially the last part is that vaakdevi reveals her beauty like a bride reveals her beautiful inner body to her husband which is wrapped under clothes for the society. Only he who can "see" vaakdevi can enjoy her in a way husband enjoys his wife.
Now, what is this "vaakdevi" which can be seen?
This is hint at presence of script and ability of vedic people to "write", gentlemen. Hidden in this erotic verse is a valuable information. Dr. P V Vartak has discussed this verse elaborately.
Yep, the following is pretty conclusive.
उत त्वः पश्यन् न ददर्श वाचं
'Seeing the word'(dhadharsha vaacham) definitely indicates script. This is quite conclusive.
johneeG wrote:And there are also Upa-Vedhas:
Medicine (Āyurvedha), associated with the Rigvedha
Archery (Dhanurvedha), associated with the Yajurvedha
Music and sacred dance (Gāndharva-vedha), associated with the Saamavedha
Military science (Shastrashastra), associated with the Atharvavedha
Upa-Vedha could mean knowledge branches derived from the Vedhas or it could also mean applied(i.e. practical) knowledge derived from the Vedhas. It is also clearly given which branch was derived from which Vedha.
This is also traditionally being studied by the Hindhus for more than 5000 years.
BTW, I wonder where the colonial EJ 'indologists' got 5000 year mark from? Just the good old creation day mentioned in THE BOOK?
The highlighted part was taken from Wiki, but it seems to be wrong. The Upa-Vedha associated with Atharvana Vedha is Sthapathya Vedha(i.e architecture).
Latin is very much influenced by Sanskruth. Take the good old months' names:
September, October, November, December.
September -> Saptham-vara (7th turn)
October -> Ashtam-vara (8th turn)
November -> Navam-vara (9th turn)
December -> Dasham-vara (10th turn)
'varam' means 'again'. It denotes a repetition. In India, one finds the word 'varam' is used for the days of the week as in Shani-vara(i.e. Saturnday or Saturday) because days of the week also get repeated.
'vara' becomes 'ber' in the latin version. Actually, there is a suthra in Sanskruth grammer called 'ba-va-yor abedhah'. It means 'ba' and 'va' are indistinct and can be used to replace each other.
Originally, September, October, November and December were 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th months respectively. Later, newer months were added. For example, August and July.
Original Roman calendar:
Calendar of Romulus
Roman writers attributed the original Roman calendar to Romulus, the founder of Rome around 753 BC. The Romulus calendar had ten months with the spring equinox in the first month:
Calendar of Romulus
Martius (31 days)
Aprilis (30 days)
Maius (31 days)
Iunius (30 days)
Quintilis  (31 days)
Sextilis (30 days)
September (30 days)
October (31 days)
November (30 days)
December (30 days)
Note that sextilis -> shat(6th)
Also note that the Calendar starts from Spring Equinox. This is also based on Hindhuism.
In India, Hindhu new year starts on Yuga-adhi(near spring equinox). In Thelugu and Kannada, Ugadhi is celebrated at the time. In Marathi, it is called Gudi Padwa. At almost the same time, Vikram Samvath new year also comes.
P.N. Oak in one of his books(I think 'Some Missing Chapters of World History') says that the word X-mas to denote Christmas is also based on the above.
He says that December was the 10th month of Roman Calender. And it is derived from Dasham(10th) in Sanskruth. In Roman notation, '10' is represented by 'X'.
Dasham-vara->December-> 10th month -> X-mas.
He says that the word 'mas' taken directly from the sanskruth word 'masa'(sanskruth for month). In sanskruth, 'masa' means 'month'.
So, X-mas, he says meant a 10th month which was celebrated as a festival.
Later, the church usurped it and gave it christian coloring. Thats why the church narrative is incoherent. It was not the only hijacking by the church.
In Hindhi also, 'vaaram' of Sanskruth becomes 'baar'. So, in Hindhi, it would be
Saathvi-baar -> 7th time ->
Aaatvi-baar -> 8th time
Navi-baar -> 9th time
Dasvi-baar -> 10th time
Shashti means 6th in Sanskruth. In Hindhi, Chatti means 6th.
See, how close they are phonetically:
Sanskruth -> Hindhi -> Latin
Shasti -> Chatti -> Sextilis
Saptham-vaaram -> Saathvi-baar -> Septem-ber
Ashtam-vaaram -> Aaatvi-baar -> Octo-ber
Navam-vaaram -> Navi-baar -> Novem-ber
Dasham-vaaram -> Dasvi-baar -> Decem-ber
johneeG wrote:Note the similarity in the sounding of the words:
'namas' & 'namaaz'(islamic prayer)
P N Oak suggested that the word 'Namaaz' is made up of two words 'Nama' and 'yaja'.
the word ‘Namaz’ derives from two Sanskrit roots ‘Nama’ and ‘Yajna’ (NAMa yAJna) meaning bowing and worshipping.
But, that seems to be wrong. A more straight-forward corruption would be from the Sanskruth word 'Namas' to 'Namaaz'.
Link to post
Speaking of mispronunciation, is it possible that Namaz is a mispronounced and corrupted copy/version of Vedas?
I am posting a video for comparative study:
Sama Veda parayanam(0:26 onwards)
People may have listened to Namaz from the loud speakers from mosque near their homes/offices/colleges/temples.
KLP Dubey wrote:This is a misleading comparison. First of all, the Arabs, Jews, and Christians do not consider the "Word" as eternal. They consider it the "word of god"
KL ji, to be fair, in the New Testament, we have: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
." - John 1.1
Also, in Islam, there was violent disagreement and schism between the Mutazilites and the Asharites about whether the Qur'an was the created word of god or whether it was co-eternal with god.
johneeG wrote:They are uncannily similar to Hindhu ones. Some have even shown the exact Hindhu ones that they imitate.
That is proof that these newer cults were derived from older Vaidhik branches with lots of corruption happening.
P N Oak gives an example:
LinkAnother controversial chapter from Brihadharanyaka Upanishadh seems to have close similarities to certain teachings of Koran
[Note: Another scholar points out that the following teaching from the Koran is exactly similar to the teaching of the Kena Upanishad (1.7).
"Sight perceives Him not. But He perceives men's sights; for He is the knower of secrets , the Aware."
"That which cannot be seen by the eye but through which the eye itself sees, know That to be Brahman (God) and not what people worship here (in the manifested world)."
A simplified meaning of both the above verses reads:
God is one and that He is beyond man's sensory experience.]
Link to post
KLP Dubey wrote:
Perfectly correct. I simply do not understand this obsession with finding history and geography in the Veda. It seems perverse in the extreme, and seems to be a recently developed illness.
It was common knowledge that Veda had no historical record in it. ...
You are factually incorrect. 3500 years ago a kingdom now known as mitanni signed some peace treaties with adjoining nations. This nation of mitanni used Vedic Gods in their treaties and the reason why these gods were used is clear from reading Rg Veda.
Have you come across this before?
Dubey Saar said that there is NO history in
Other historical records may use the contents of Vedhas. Other historical records may use the contents derived directly or indirectly from Vedhas.
Infact, the whole OIT is supposed to be trying to prove that everything is directly or indirectly derived/corrupted from India(which includes literature). So, the literature must be directly or indirectly derived from Vedha.
By quoting Mitannis, you are actually proving that Vedhas had the influence not just in India but in other empires of the world. So, its a thumbs up to OIT.
But, I can't understand how this proves that Vedhas contain history? It only proves that some historical records directly or indirectly revere the deities mentioned in Vedhas. Even today many records directly or indirectly revere the deities mentioned in Vedhas. That doesn't mean that Vedhas contain history.
Venug saar has already thrashed your stand from various angles. But, you continue to repeat the same thing without realizing that your stand is quite absurd.
This is just one of the reasons I don't take Rajesh Kochar too seriously.
BTW are you an AIT proponent?
Well he had an excellent section on why mitanni used vedic gods. rest of his book is crap.
What is AIT?
Pardon me but this has to take the cake.
Anyway, were you being serious while asking that question?
. I was just messing with Dipankar.
So, Peter you didn't clarify your stand. Do you have any stand? If so, what exactly is your stand? Are you an AIT/AMT proponent? Are you an OIT advocate?