Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
me-wonders

Hinduism and Aryan

133 posts in this topic

We hear of Aryans throughout history. Hinduism of Vedic culture is Aryan. Who are these people? Where did they come from? They are mixed into other cultures as well, and I would like to handle their influence on each culture separately, beginning with Hinduism.

http://suite101.com/...influence-a8025

Argument against Aryans being responsible for Hinduism, stating the religion existed before they arrived.

http://suite101.com/...ization-a174848

Because this thread is sort of coming from the Ice age thread, which involves a question of aliens. it might be fun to speculate about if the ancient writing speaks of a nuclear war between aliens? Then identify the area on earth where such a war could have occurred. This should tickle your curiosity.

History's lost lesson: Ancient nuclear war among Indus Valley ...

theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/.../historys-lost-lesson-ancient-n...

Jul 20, 2011 – Another curious sign of an ancient nuclear war in India is a giant crater near Bombay (above). The nearly circular 2,154-metre-diameter Lonar ...

Edited by me-wonders
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Current thought is that Ayrans were not a distinct "people." Rather they were likely originally members of one of the tribes present in India back then, and the name came to be used as an identifier, eventually as an identifier of people who really follow the Hindu tradition, rather than those who just go through the motions.

That's the way the word is used in the Rig Veda, as well as the Ramayana and Mahabharata.

Aryan later came to represent a language group and in that context it is no longer generally used - being replaced by the term Indo-European.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Current thought is that Ayrans were not a distinct "people." Rather they were likely originally members of one of the tribes present in India back then, and the name came to be used as an identifier, eventually as an identifier of people who really follow the Hindu tradition, rather than those who just go through the motions.

That's the way the word is used in the Rig Veda, as well as the Ramayana and Mahabharata.

Aryan later came to represent a language group and in that context it is no longer generally used - being replaced by the term Indo-European.

Harte

The link says the Aryans may have migrated from Russia during the ice age to Persia, then from Persia to India, and don't we know them as the Germans? Like your explanation seems to leave a lot unsaid. However, in your defense skimming through explanations of Aryans, many focus on the language and the Aryan India connection. Then I came to this http://iranpoliticsc...aps01/index.htm

012%20Aryan%20Migration%201st%20Wave%2010,000%20BC-2000%20BC%20Map.jpg

This goes with notions I have long held, but I could be wrong.

Edited by me-wonders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The link says the Aryans may have migrated from Russia during the ice age to Persia, then from Persia to India, and don't we know them as the Germans? Like your explanation seems to leave a lot unsaid.

The term "Aryan" as an identifier long precedes its connotations with Germany. The two must not be confused. Strictly speaking it's an antiquated term: Harte is correct about the preferable and more accurate term Indo-European. I can't say it for a fact, but it may have been Nazi Germany's twisted concept of "Aryan" that led to its diminished used in proper historical studies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The term "Aryan" as an identifier long precedes its connotations with Germany. The two must not be confused. Strictly speaking it's an antiquated term: Harte is correct about the preferable and more accurate term Indo-European. I can't say it for a fact, but it may have been Nazi Germany's twisted concept of "Aryan" that led to its diminished used in proper historical studies.

It started almost a century before the Nazis: http://en.wikipedia....hur_de_Gobineau

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This goes with notions I have long held, but I could be wrong.

And as there is no definitive proof for or against, you could be correct. Though looking at your map, I would put the start point for your migration lines right on top of where the number 5 is. Seems like a nice place to me, there on the river Irtysh, very nice :)

And from Midgard the migrations begin

51d4761f4ab8.jpg

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The term "Aryan" as an identifier long precedes its connotations with Germany. The two must not be confused. Strictly speaking it's an antiquated term: Harte is correct about the preferable and more accurate term Indo-European. I can't say it for a fact, but it may have been Nazi Germany's twisted concept of "Aryan" that led to its diminished used in proper historical studies.

To add to this the Indo-European language family appears to have originated in Anatolia c.8000 - 9500 BP and the genetics involved in the distribution of peoples in India both show no "Aryan Invasion - c.1500 BC" as such and grossly predate any alleged involvement by same by at least several millenia.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6097/957.full.pdf?keytype=ref&siteid=sci&ijkey=9%2FI0UU0.eTrdQ

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3234374/pdf/main.pdf

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The term "Aryan" as an identifier long precedes its connotations with Germany. The two must not be confused. Strictly speaking it's an antiquated term: Harte is correct about the preferable and more accurate term Indo-European. I can't say it for a fact, but it may have been Nazi Germany's twisted concept of "Aryan" that led to its diminished used in proper historical studies.

I have a problem with this reluctance to use the word Aryan. One reason begins with the explanations of history that involve the influence of Aryans who migrated to different areas. What do we do, just ignore these accounts of history?

Aryan Christianity was more influenced by Egyptian cosmology than Roman Catholicism, and in Russian was Orthodox Christianity. These different Christian belief systems, had consequences, and what happens if we just ignore this? When we ignore cause and effect, life appears much more chaotic than it is. We can not rule with reason, when we do not understand the reasoning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is gene research that does prove the Aryans did invade. http://www.davidicke...read.php?t=5665

And wikipedia says "Aryan /ˈɛərjən/ is an English language loanword derived from the Sanskrit ārya ('Noble').[1][2][3] In present-day academia, the terms "Indo-Iranian" and "Indo-European" have, according to many, made most uses of the term 'Aryan' minimal, and 'Aryan' is now mostly limited to its appearance in the term "Indo-Aryan" for Indic languages and their speakers."

Putting together the gene research and the Sanskrit word for "noble", we have a story to tell.

More interesting to me is the possibility that Vedic literature tells of nuclear war, and the scientific evidence that this is possible. But this is a whole different story from the one of the genetic and political consequences of an Aryan invasion.

Edited by me-wonders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is gene research that does prove the Aryans did invade. http://www.davidicke...read.php?t=5665

And wikipedia says "Aryan /ˈɛərjən/ is an English language loanword derived from the Sanskrit ārya ('Noble').[1][2][3] In present-day academia, the terms "Indo-Iranian" and "Indo-European" have, according to many, made most uses of the term 'Aryan' minimal, and 'Aryan' is now mostly limited to its appearance in the term "Indo-Aryan" for Indic languages and their speakers."

Putting together the gene research and the Sanskrit word for "noble", we have a story to tell.

More interesting to me is the possibility that Vedic literature tells of nuclear war, and the scientific evidence that this is possible. But this is a whole different story from the one of the genetic and political consequences of an Aryan invasion.

The only thing that that proves is you shouldn't be getting your outdated sources from a fringe site.

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I am coming from a lecture by a highly respected college professor, who explains the result of an Aryan invasion, but I can't copy and paste that lecture. Given the great amount of controversy over Aryans, where they came from and which cultures they influenced, you might be a little more diplomatic when disagreeing with someone, and it would be helpful if you clarify what your disagreement is.


  1. Indo-Aryan migration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_migration Models of the Indo-Aryan migration discuss scenarios of prehistoric ..... to Central Asia, but not as far as the seats of the Medes, Persians or Indo-Aryans".
    History and political background - Linguistics - Archaeology - Genetic anthropology

  2. Aryan Immigration | CAIS©
    www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Anthropology/aryans_immigration.htm The overwhelming majority of historical sources regard the people of present Persia (Iran) descendants of Aryans who are thought to have migrated from some ...

  3. Fraud on Aryans
    aryanfraud.blogspot.com/ Nov 2, 2006 – Jews spend a lot of money to undermine and destroy the Aryan Migration theory in Iran and Afghanistan. They try to deny that Persians have ...

  4. Images for Aryan migration to Persia
    - Report images

Edited by me-wonders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Of the 90 sources in your Wiki link the majority are over 10 years old and have been superceded by more current studies which show there was no "Aryan Invasion" into India.

2) Is not evidence of any kind of 'invasion' as is most commonly presented. And in regards to originating north of Persia actually says:

On the basis of above facts, the theory of Aryan migration from north toward the present Persia and Asia Minor does not seem feasible. What is more probable is that Aryans are native people who lived on this land due to its most favorable living conditions since antiquity. This is supported by abundant traces of civilizations found while there is no trace of any similar settlements in any nearby places.

3) Some anonymous persons blog isn't evidence of anything than their own personal belief.

4) Nice pictures, but they don't prove the claim of Aryan Invasion.

5) Has nothing to do with Aryan Invasions into India.

6) 1920's beliefs in "Pre" Indo-Aryans have no bearing on what we know now about the genetics of the people involved, which doesn't substantiate those earlier beliefs by any stretch of the imagination.

7) With the exception of the first sentence most of this is meaningless and has been shown to be incorrect several times over.

8) Links based solely on Wikipedia are of no real use to the discussion.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Of the 90 sources in your Wiki link the majority are over 10 years old and have been superceded by more current studies which show there was no "Aryan Invasion" into India.

2) Is not evidence of any kind of 'invasion' as is most commonly presented. And in regards to originating north of Persia actually says:

3) Some anonymous persons blog isn't evidence of anything than their own personal belief.

4) Nice pictures, but they don't prove the claim of Aryan Invasion.

5) Has nothing to do with Aryan Invasions into India.

6) 1920's beliefs in "Pre" Indo-Aryans have no bearing on what we know now about the genetics of the people involved, which doesn't substantiate those earlier beliefs by any stretch of the imagination.

7) With the exception of the first sentence most of this is meaningless and has been shown to be incorrect several times over.

8) Links based solely on Wikipedia are of no real use to the discussion.

cormac

Okay trash this thread. Obviously we are not going to fun with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Current thought is that Ayrans were not a distinct "people." Rather they were likely originally members of one of the tribes present in India back then, and the name came to be used as an identifier, eventually as an identifier of people who really follow the Hindu tradition, rather than those who just go through the motions.

That's the way the word is used in the Rig Veda, as well as the Ramayana and Mahabharata.

Aryan later came to represent a language group and in that context it is no longer generally used - being replaced by the term Indo-European.

Harte

Indo Saraswat would be more appropriate then Indo-European.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as there is no definitive proof for or against, you could be correct. Though looking at your map, I would put the start point for your migration lines right on top of where the number 5 is. Seems like a nice place to me, there on the river Irtysh, very nice :)

And from Midgard the migrations begin

51d4761f4ab8.jpg

Are you saying that the Aryans are the Israelites? The migrating Chosen ones? Looks like they left Egypt (Babylon) for India to breathe... From the desert to The place of abundant waters..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay trash this thread. Obviously we are not going to fun with it.

I dont think the intention here was to trash the thread, but rahter shed more light on the source material you supplied that would seem to have some incorrect information and be outdated.

I have toi agree with that as wiki is not a relible sourse of info (i mean I can edit it to say what I wanted it to say).

However this is a great tread and thanks for posting and i look forward to following it,

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying that the Aryans are the Israelites? The migrating Chosen ones? Looks like they left Egypt (Babylon) for India to breathe... From the desert to The place of abundant waters..

No, this is a picture of the Hyperboreans migrating from Siberia to colonise Europe. And I put the start point for this hypothetical migration under number 5 because that is on modern Omsk, which some believe to be built on Midgard, or it's central point. All nonsense :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think the intention here was to trash the thread, but rahter shed more light on the source material you supplied that would seem to have some incorrect information and be outdated.

I have toi agree with that as wiki is not a relible sourse of info (i mean I can edit it to say what I wanted it to say).

However this is a great tread and thanks for posting and i look forward to following it,

I dont think the intention here was to trash the thread, but rahter shed more light on the source material you supplied that would seem to have some incorrect information and be outdated.

I have toi agree with that as wiki is not a relible sourse of info (i mean I can edit it to say what I wanted it to say).

However this is a great tread and thanks for posting and i look forward to following it,

About out dated information. I intentionally collect very old books, because I do not trust people to be 100% honest, so when possible, I like to read history when it was being made. If a subject is really interesting, I will read many things about the subject. I didn't select the list of google leads, but just took the first half page, to demonstrate many things have been written and the ideas of Ayrans migrating to India connect with other ideas about them.

The professor I am listen to, was sure Ayrans migrated to India and he proceeds to discuss all the changes related to their arrival. The tapes of his lectures were made in 2003 and the professors selected by The Teaching Company are the absolute top professors. If someone has information to give, well that is what I am looking for. On the other hand, if all someone just wants to do is to attack what is being said, I am not interested.

If a thread is good or not, depends on everyone posting in them, not only their knowledge, but how well they are relating to one another. Occasionally someone shows up who knows nothing about the subject, and this person's only intention is to attack what is being said. There are thousands of things we can never be sure about, and it is much more fun to be okay with that.. The title "ancient mysteries and alternative histories" suggest that is what we are to be doing here, wondering and speculating for the fun of it.

This thread actually begins in the thread about the ice age civilization. That thread mentions the Veda and their holy book, as does the Jewish torah, carries stories that may be telling of aliens interfering with life on earth.

I think it is silly to get over hung up on a word or a name, because words have different meanings and names change a lot. In general several migrations came from the north, and the culture of all these people is basically different from the area we call the cradle of civilization. I think this is what really matters, the difference in the cultures that is caused by different climates and therefore different survival skills. I think we should give more consideration to the shift from Mother Earth to a sky God. I feel confident the Hebrews are a mix of these people, and that like the Veda, their holy book tells of aliens. I want to discuss these things with open minded people who enjoy speculation.

Oh, I wanted to mention the first link about Ayrans says this was a male invasion, and they were intent on breeding with the females. Because it is recorded, we know Genghis Khan, took great pleasure in having sex with as many females as possible, and a genetic study indicates that he fathered more children than anyone else we know of. These migrations were not whole families, but could have been predominately males, from a hunting culture, migrating into farming cultures which a basically different.

Edited by me-wonders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The professor I am listen to, was sure Ayrans migrated to India and he proceeds to discuss all the changes related to their arrival. The tapes of his lectures were made in 2003 and the professors selected by The Teaching Company are the absolute top professors.

The professor you're listening to can be as sure as he wants to be but the genetic studies, both mitochondrial and Y Chromosomal DNA, do not support the claim of an Aryan Invasion. It's one thing to speculate based on the facts, it's a whole different thing to speculate while disregarding them. And where genetics are concerned, his 2003 lectures are definitely dated.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contrary to your professor's 2003 lectures we can see genetics evidence, starting in 2001, that invalidates the Aryan Invasion Theory and continues through to other studies done in 2009 and 2011.

http://onlinelibrary...1.6510043.x/pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm....nihms103422.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm....74/pdf/main.pdf

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Genetic studies

Further information: Indo-Aryan migration

Most genetic studies indicate that there are clear genetic differences between Indian castes and tribal populations. They support the notion that there was a massive influx of Indo-European migrants into the Indian subcontinent around 3,500 years before present.[5]

A recent study published in 2009 has provided substantial evidence that the North Indian gene pool also includes numerous Central Asian Y-chromosomal lineages, which include both R1 and R2: "The results revealed that a substantial part of today's North Indian paternal gene pool was contributed by Central Asian lineages who are Indo-European speakers, suggesting that extant Indian caste groups are primarily the descendants of Indo-European migrants."[6]

In another 2009 study, it was found that the modern Indian population is a result of admixture between Indo-European-speaking groups (ANI) and Dravidian-speaking groups (ASI). According to Reich et al. (2009): "It is tempting to assume that the population ancestral to ANI and CEU spoke 'Proto-Indo-European', which has been reconstructed as ancestral to both Sanskrit and European languages, although we cannot be certain without a date for ANI–ASI mixture."[7] Recent research indicates a massive admixture event between ANI-ASI populations 3500 to 1200 years ago.[8]

These conclusions are contested by a study headed by geneticists S. Sharma and E. Rai and colleagues from the group of R. N. K. Bamezai, National Centre of Applied Human Genetics of the Jawaharlal Nehru University. Claiming that the results showed "no consistent pattern of the exclusive presence and distribution of Y-haplogroups to distinguish the higher-most caste, Brahmins, from the lower-most ones, schedule castes and tribals," the study proposed "the autochthonous origin and tribal links of Indian Brahmins" as well as the origin of R1a1* in the Indian subcontinent.[9]

A recent study on ancestral Indian populations said that there is a genetic relationship among all Indians, northern and southern, calling any Aryan migration into question.[10]

Wiki- Indigenous Aryan Theory

According to the various sources in that wiki article, there has been doubt as recently as 2009, as to whether there has been large group movements into the area. Both from Asia and from the Indo-Iranians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wiki- Indigenous Aryan Theory

According to the various sources in that wiki article, there has been doubt as recently as 2009, as to whether there has been large group movements into the area. Both from Asia and from the Indo-Iranians.

Quite often this gets ignored by either those who wish to portray Indians as more than they actually are, or those who wish to portray Indians as somehow being less than they are without the "Aryan Invasion" influence. Both sides of which do a great disservice to the indigenous peoples involved IMO.

cormac

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contrary to your professor's 2003 lectures we can see genetics evidence, starting in 2001, that invalidates the Aryan Invasion Theory and continues through to other studies done in 2009 and 2011.

http://onlinelibrary...1.6510043.x/pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm....nihms103422.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm....74/pdf/main.pdf

cormac

Why does the second link repeatedly reference that there has been massive genetic influxes into the North of India from 7000 to 3000 BP, and specifies that there are big differences between the Castes, specifically the Brahmans versus the lower castes? That would seem to me to actually indicate that there Had been invasions from the north of Indo-Iranians during the time in question.

In the last 3000–10 000 years, Northern-Western India has experienced an enormous amount of gene flow from different parts of the world, with the majority of this gene flow being maledriven (Bamshad et al. 2001).
The high level of gene flow that Northern India has experienced during the last 3000–8000 years (Majumder 1998) may have left a strong signature in the present day North Indian gene pool. The patterns of haplogroup/haplotype distribution observed in our studied populations may be reflective of the heavy contribution from Central Asian (or West Eurasian) and Middle Eastern lineages
A recent systematic comparison of Y lineages indicated that the Indian lower castes showed more similarity with tribal groups than with the upper caste populations, suggesting a tribal origin for the Indian lower castes (Thanseem et al. 2006).

From the 3rd link:

Importantly, the Pakistani (Indus Valley) populations differ substantially from most of the Indian populations and show comparably low genetic differentiation (within the FST range of 0.008–0.020) from European, Near Eastern, Caucasian, and Indian populations (Figure 1 and Figures S1 and S11). In agreement with previous Y-chromosome studies,41,42 the Brahmin and Kshatriya from Uttar Pradesh stand out by being closer to Pakistani (FST ¼ 0.006 on average) and West Eurasian populations (FST ¼ 0.030) than to other Indian populations (average FSTs 0.017 and 0.046, respectively) from the same geographic area (Figures S1 and S11). Similar to the patterns revealed by

Wouldn't this possibly be read to mean that the Brahman caste was influenced by a massive genetic infusion so it more closely matched western populations? This could be indicative of a invasion. Perhaps from the Muslims of 1500 years ago, or perhaps from an invasion from before that. If from the Muslims, you'd expect the Brahman group to more closely match Pakistani groups, which they do to an extent, but I would think it would be hard to proove that the Muslims only mixed with the Brahmans.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite often this gets ignored by either those who wish to portray Indians as more than they actually are, or those who wish to portray Indians as somehow being less than they are without the "Aryan Invasion" influence. Both sides of which do a great disservice to the indigenous peoples involved IMO.

cormac

That is kind of what I suspected. That studies can be made by Denigners just as well as by impartial researchers. But, without a education in how to really read Haplogroups and DNA analysis'es, how can anyone know what is real and what has been spin-doctored?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is kind of what I suspected. That studies can be made by Denigners just as well as by impartial researchers. But, without a education in how to really read Haplogroups and DNA analysis'es, how can anyone know what is real and what has been spin-doctored?

I started a post and must have hit a wrong button as it disappeared. In any case DieChecker, look at the list of haplogroups involved. With the exception of E1b1b1 which is African in origin, the rest don't originate in Central Asia as is alleged by the Aryan Invasion theorists. They either originate in the Middle East or, in the tentative case of R2, originate in Pakistan. Neither of which supports the Aryan Invasion Theory as it's often presented. The early Indians were already a combination of various haplogroups well before the AIT was ever thought of. And while it's possible there may be a Brahman/Muslim genetic connection, this greatly post-dates the AIT.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.