Vedic culture and its modern relevance

[Everdred]

One other thing. Look at R1b, which is a brother line of R1a. It is today most heavily represented in Western Europe (Spain, England and France), Camaroon in central Africa and the Bashkiers region of Russia. None of which is even close to the area just north and west of India where R1 is assumed to have started. If R1a is from India, then R1b would be too. But, the modern map would seem to indicate otherwise, yes?

I think it's safe to say that R1 started in Southwest Asia (e.g. Anatolia or Mesopotamia) rather than further East near India. An estimate for its time of origin is c. 18.5kya, though that should probably be revised to 30+kya. I think it's likely that R1b and R1a both originated in this same general area, with R1b perhaps in western or central Anatolia, and R1a perhaps to the east in the Southern Caucasus area.

Also, the one item from your wiki link that continuously gets glossed over in favor of an alleged AIT is this, which still remains true:

In short the actual studies concerning the prior origin of R1a or R1b make the AIT a moot point.

cormac

I'm not sure why you've highlighted that quote. All it says is that the study didn't find genetic evidence for the Aryan migration theory into India, since both principal ancestry components predate the hypothesized invasion (and quite significantly, at that).

On another note, I noticed this map on wikipedia:

The previous map I posted showed the distribution of R1a1a, while this shows a specific subclade. Note, however, that the distribution of this subclade corresponds very strongly with the western concentration of the distribution of R1a1a, but fails to show any of the subclade in Iran, Turkmenistan, or Kazakhstan. I'm not seeing any specific data on subclades in India, though. But given the distribution, it seems likely that R1a1a itself arose in some central area, perhaps the Southern Caucasus, and then some of these people migrated northward into the Pontic steppes, later gaining the above M-458 mutation, while the other part moved eastward into Iran, Pakistan, and India, presumably undergoing their own Y-DNA mutations.

I'm not sure how exactly that would affect the IE origins, though.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Everdred

[cormac mac airt]

I think it's safe to say that R1 started in Southwest Asia (e.g. Anatolia or Mesopotamia) rather than further East near India. An estimate for its time of origin is c. 18.5kya, though that should probably be revised to 30+kya. I think it's likely that R1b and R1a both originated in this same general area, with R1b perhaps in western or central Anatolia, and R1a perhaps to the east in the Southern Caucasus area.

I'm not sure why you've highlighted that quote. All it says is that the study didn't find genetic evidence for the Aryan migration theory into India, since both principal ancestry components predate the hypothesized invasion (and quite significantly, at that).

On another note, I noticed this map on wikipedia:

The previous map I posted showed the distribution of R1a1a, while this shows a specific subclade. Note, however, that the distribution of this subclade corresponds very strongly with the western concentration of the distribution of R1a1a, but fails to show any of the subclade in Iran, Turkmenistan, or Kazakhstan. I'm not seeing any specific data on subclades in India, though. But given the distribution, it seems likely that R1a1a itself arose in some central area, perhaps the Southern Caucasus, and then some of these people migrated northward into the Pontic steppes, later gaining the above M-458 mutation, while the other part moved eastward into Iran, Pakistan, and India, presumably undergoing their own Y-DNA mutations.

I'm not sure how exactly that would affect the IE origins, though.

That's just it, they predate it. And since the two groups are, more often than not, specifically claimed to originate in or near India by the AIT crowd the quote invalidates that claim. To me it's the difference between claiming R1a or R1b as opposed to, say, R1a1a1g or R1b1a2a1a1b. It's the level of specificity that I question coming from the AIT proponents, even if they were somewhat correct, which they haven't shown themselves to be.

cormac

[Harsh86_Patel]

1. Some peer reviewed papers on these aracheo astornomical events correlated to the epics would be highly welcome.

2. Kurgan does not originate from Kuru. The word Kurgan originates from Russian wgich in turn dervies it from turkish

http://www.yourdictionary.com/kurgan

Its a surpirse that you, inspite of an indian, beating about on drums about the glory of vedas and all , do not take into account the true meaning of Kuru or kauravas.

For your education : kuru - was an Indo-Aryan Tribe, based aorund delhi, Haryana and uttar pradesh, Hastinapur being their kingdom. In the Epic Mahabharatha, the Kauravas, the sons od King Dhritarashtra are mentioned as Kurus, though pandavas, sons of Pandu, Dhritarashtra's brother are not mentioned as Kurus since they were exiled out of the the kuru kingdom.

please note that the Kurus didnt get exiled out of the Indian Sub Continent into the siberian wilderness.They lived, fought, split up and died in their own lands.

3. Most of the Vedas and other religuious texts ahve been edited over thorugh out the ancient times. Few Asuras (evil in the earlier editions) turn into Devas (in the newer editions). Try varuna, Mitra...they were asuras in the old and what are they now?? Devas of course. Myths and fairy tales were constantly assimilated into the religious texts in the ancient times.

Dont buy it on the **** that people now, in India are following "cultural paradigms" from ancient times. NO. NO.NO. Cutlure, My Foot!!

The Indian Woman who is to be respected is treated as objects of lust and rape.

Though through your entire post i came against scarcely little that goes against what i said myself.

1)Kurrus were the defeated party and banishment of entire tribes was a common practice.

2)There is no argument on the definition of the term Kurru/Kauravas

The term Kaurava (Sanskrit: कौरव) is a Sanskrit term, that means the descendants of Kuru, a legendary king who is the ancestor of many of the characters of theMahābhārata.

The term is used in the Mahābhārata with two meanings:

• The wider meaning, to represent all the descendants of Kuru. This meaning, which includes the Pandava brothers, is often used in the earlier parts of popular renditions of the Mahābhārata.
  
• The narrower but more common meaning, to represent the elder line of the descendants of King Kuru. This restricts it to the children of King Dhritarashtra, as his line is the older line of descent from Kuru. It excludes the children of the younger brother Pandu, who founds his own line, the Pandava.
  

Hence the reason that Kurru-Gan/Gana literally translates to soldiers/subjects of Kurru.

3)Are you suggesting that every last soldier who fought from the Kurru side died in the battle..lol. Banishment was a common practice for the losing side,the pandavas were subjected to the same because they lost the gambling match and as a form of political vendetta.

4) There were deities that were added and or raised to prominence or fell from grace through the Vedas,it was a living changing mythology unlike the other prophetic religions or religions of the book.There is no single founder of Hinduism hence the reason that it is known as Sanatana Dharma or the eternal religion as there is no unilateral code that the religion follows.

5)Ancient Indian women before the advent of the Mughal raiders and dacoits used to roam barechested,kamasutra and other forms of sexual arts were patronised and courtesans were respected,the incidents of rape and the image of the timid Indian women with a veil/ghongat on her head is pretty much a recent reduction of the position of women in Indian society. Everyone who is born in India doesn't adhere to tenets of Hinduism,so some of them are bound to be rapists and thugs. Infact compared to the people of the book who are the main culprits in the reduction of the social status of the women should be held responsible for the current condition of women through the globe. For eg- Women can't become a pope,women can't go to the Masjid to pray and they have wear a veil etc.

There are only a few religions or pantheons that currently exist that give the same place to a woman and a man and Hinduism is one of them...most other major religions of the world are patriarchial and many openly designate women as a labrynth to hellfire.

[The_Spartan]

1. Harsh flogging the Kurgan Donkey to death

I have repeated this various time but once more wouldn't hurt eg- Kurrugan-Litereally translates in Sanskrit as 'soldiers of Kurru' which was the losing faction in the mahabharata and quite a few of the tribe were banished.

Well, repeating that "the moon is made of green cheese' umpteen times wont make it so.

I gave you the link to the etymological reasoning and meaning of the word KURGAN.

What you are doing is very typical of a Pseudo-whatever-ian or a fringie. When provided with links and matter that would require them to provide answers or further debate or even put their own theories on a weak stance, try the easiest route out - beat around the bush, carefully skirting the core issue.

Why not discuss the origin of the word - KURGAN.

It is stated substantially theat the word Kurgan evolved from the combination of Ghur and Khana literaaly meaning "Grave House" in Iranian. The word was borrowed into Turkish and into Scythian language and into tartar languages.

The culture which made these grave mounds or tumuli were predominant in Eastern Europe.

Lets see how does telling oneself or others a like 1000 times, make it a fact. After all it will still be a lie or piece of wishful thinking.

2. Hinduism is of course not of a single origin or founder. As i have stated in my various post in UM, Hinduism is an amalagamation of various religions that existed in the indian subcontient. Hinduism changed form many times over. it never had a "SINGLE" form that continued from antiquty to ther present. So the statement that Hindusim has archaelogical and cultural continuity is quite misleading. What excatly do you mean by archaeological continuity? dont other civilzations have archaeological continuity? The example of the gods was one of the few that Hinduism was edited over the ages.

3. Top knotch bigotry!!

Ancient Indian women before the advent of the Mughal raiders and dacoits used to roam barechested,kamasutra and other forms of sexual arts were patronised and courtesans were respected,the incidents of rape and the image of the timid Indian women with a veil/ghongat on her head is pretty much a recent reduction of the position of women in Indian society. Everyone who is born in India doesn't adhere to tenets of Hinduism,so some of them are bound to be rapists and thugs. Infact compared to the people of the book who are the main culprits in the reduction of the social status of the women should be held responsible for the current condition of women through the globe. For eg- Women can't become a pope,women can't go to the Masjid to pray and they have wear a veil etc.

There are only a few religions or pantheons that currently exist that give the same place to a woman and a man and Hinduism is one of them...most other major religions of the world are patriarchial and many openly designate women as a labrynth to hellfire.

The above makes you a first rate Bigot. period.

I am not a Hindu. I am a human. So according to your statment, does that give a probablilty that i may turn into a rapist or a thug.

Watch your words carefully, harsh.

Have you ever gone to the villages and country sides of india, Harsh??

HAve you seen the Lifestyle of Women over there, be it Hindu , Christian, or Muslim in the villages?? Huh?

I doubt it. You might have , for all things sure, born with a silver spoon, in some goddamn mansion in a metropolitaion city, a guy who doesnt know what india is.

Women, were and are still treat as second rated in those areas, irrespective of their religion.

And here comes a pseudo- mera bharath mahan guy beating on his drums.

get a life, will you.

[Harsh86_Patel]

1. Harsh flogging the Kurgan Donkey to death

Well, repeating that "the moon is made of green cheese' umpteen times wont make it so.

I gave you the link to the etymological reasoning and meaning of the word KURGAN.

What you are doing is very typical of a Pseudo-whatever-ian or a fringie. When provided with links and matter that would require them to provide answers or further debate or even put their own theories on a weak stance, try the easiest route out - beat around the bush, carefully skirting the core issue.

Why not discuss the origin of the word - KURGAN.

It is stated substantially theat the word Kurgan evolved from the combination of Ghur and Khana literaaly meaning "Grave House" in Iranian. The word was borrowed into Turkish and into Scythian language and into tartar languages.

The culture which made these grave mounds or tumuli were predominant in Eastern Europe.

Lets see how does telling oneself or others a like 1000 times, make it a fact. After all it will still be a lie or piece of wishful thinking.

2. Hinduism is of course not of a single origin or founder. As i have stated in my various post in UM, Hinduism is an amalagamation of various religions that existed in the indian subcontient. Hinduism changed form many times over. it never had a "SINGLE" form that continued from antiquty to ther present. So the statement that Hindusim has archaelogical and cultural continuity is quite misleading. What excatly do you mean by archaeological continuity? dont other civilzations have archaeological continuity? The example of the gods was one of the few that Hinduism was edited over the ages.

3. Top knotch bigotry!!

The above makes you a first rate Bigot. period.

I am not a Hindu. I am a human. So according to your statment, does that give a probablilty that i may turn into a rapist or a thug.

Watch your words carefully, harsh.

Have you ever gone to the villages and country sides of india, Harsh??

HAve you seen the Lifestyle of Women over there, be it Hindu , Christian, or Muslim in the villages?? Huh?

I doubt it. You might have , for all things sure, born with a silver spoon, in some goddamn mansion in a metropolitaion city, a guy who doesnt know what india is.

Women, were and are still treat as second rated in those areas, irrespective of their religion.

And here comes a pseudo- mera bharath mahan guy beating on his drums.

get a life, will you.

1.First we shall deal will the accusation of bigotry and who is the bigger Bigot.

Spartan-

"Dont buy it on the **** that people now, in India are following "cultural paradigms" from ancient times. NO. NO.NO. Cutlure, My Foot!!

The Indian Woman who is to be respected is treated as objects of lust and rape."

After stating this you have the kahones to call me a bigot lol.

Secondly i have gone and spent a lot of time in Villages etc and i freely interact with people from all walks of life,how does that change anything. If you are talking about rural societies in India,you have probably seen only the villages that are suffering from the psuedosickular rule of the Congress (who are a bunch of motherless politicians lead by the fake Nehru Gandhi family of conmen/women and illiterates).

You have probably not seen the villages that are independent, self sufficient in every way and have not fallen prey to consumerism like the rest of the world.

Any person living in these villages or countryside will be able to show you what actual hard and sincere work they are capable of and what is meaning of actual value addition. These are people that till the land and work like donkeys so the rest of the world can eat.DO not underestimate them or think of them as backward,they are the true identity of India since time immemorial and are no more lost as they once used to be under the repressive Congress rule. You should learn from these villages 'want not waste not',just because you can **** in an air-conditioned toilet doesn't mean that you are more advanced then these villagers.

I have seen the women in villages and most of them are much more fulfilled and happy compared to lost souls living in cities having all the so called comforts of modern technology,but that again is a different debate.

The reason why i talked about ancient Indian women roaming barechested and about Kamasutra is to highlight how open the Indian society was and the pantheon itself shows that man and women were held in equal regard,it was not until the raping and pillaging muslim barbarians started attacking Hindus in the Indian subcontinent that women were expected to not roam freely and keep close to their households.

For countless years these so called Muslim noble men attacked and pillaged India and engaged in Kidnapping and Raping the Kufr Hindu women which was completely Legal according to their Koran.The ghongat that Indian women wear now is like a equivalent of the Muslim Veil or Burkha since the Mughal barbarians followed the Sharia and any non-muslim women who had her face exposed could be raped by the muslims without any consequences.

Though your anti Indian rants definitely don't make you a Bigot.

BTW-women are treated as second rate citizens by the people of the book. Repression of women and treating women as second rate citizens was sadly a disease that few Indians caught from the western imperial chauvanists.

2. I have already talked about my interpretation of the word 'Kurrugan',so you can hold on to whatever suits your fancy.

3. I never said that if you are not a Hindu then you would surely be a rapist or criminal...lol. But i guess that your delicate sensitivities got assaulted because of your own confusion. All i stated was that there is difference between a person born in a Hindu family and a person who actually adheres to the Hindu value system,any person who truely adheres to the Hindu value system will not be a rapist.

4. The accusation of being a patriot is proudly accepted by me,but then i also believe the Hindu concept of 'Vasudeva Kutumbah' or in plain words- entire humanity is one family or a global community.

[Clobhair-cean]

3. I never said that if you are not a Hindu then you would surely be a rapist or criminal...lol. But i guess that your delicate sensitivities got assaulted because of your own confusion. All i stated was that there is difference between a person born in a Hindu family and a person who actually adheres to the Hindu value system,any person who truely adheres to the Hindu value system will not be a rapist.

Nice use of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

[Harsh86_Patel]

Nice use of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

Ok,though i got called a bigot for using a fallacy...lol.

[The_Spartan]

Ancient Indian women before the advent of the Mughal raiders and dacoits used to roam barechested,kamasutra and other forms of sexual arts were patronised and courtesans were respected,the incidents of rape and the image of the timid Indian women with a veil/ghongat on her head is pretty much a recent reduction of the position of women in Indian society. Everyone who is born in India doesn't adhere to tenets of Hinduism,so some of them are bound to be rapists and thugs. Infact compared to the people of the book who are the main culprits in the reduction of the social status of the women should be held responsible for the current condition of women through the globe. For eg- Women can't become a pope,women can't go to the Masjid to pray and they have wear a veil etc.

There are only a few religions or pantheons that currently exist that give the same place to a woman and a man and Hinduism is one of them...most other major religions of the world are patriarchial and many openly designate women as a labrynth to hellfire.

So, by your convoluted reasoning - any indian who is not ahindu has probability to turn into rapists and thugs , right??

So, of what religion were those henious criminals who raped a girl on a bus in delhi?? care to elucidate?

I am an Indian. So by your logic, i can be a rapist and thugh, huh?

Watch what you say, Harsh.

get abck to you on the rest - am at work right now.

Once again - watch what you say.

[Harsh86_Patel]

So, by your convoluted reasoning - any indian who is not ahindu has probability to turn into rapists and thugs , right??

So, of what religion were those henious criminals who raped a girl on a bus in delhi?? care to elucidate?

I am an Indian. So by your logic, i can be a rapist and thugh, huh?

Watch what you say, Harsh.

get abck to you on the rest - am at work right now.

Once again - watch what you say.

Lol...not only me but everyone in this community can watch what i am saying. And yes there is a chance for anyone to be a rapist and a thug.

The thugs who raped the girl on the bus or any other rapist are not human beings......if they do not qualify as humans how could you attribute any religion to them?.I suppose only humans can have or follow 'a' particular religion.

Again you confuse people who are born into a Hindu family and people who are Hindu.And yes i will reassert that those people who have embraced the Hindu value system completely will not indulge in rape (of course probability of any human being including you or me to make a mistake is never zero but in the case a Hindu ever commits such a crime he will by defunct seize to be a Hindu).A Hindu rapist is like a catholic pope with 5 children or a buddhist warlord or a illiterate doctor....etc.

Though i would not defend the heinous act of 'rape' in any form or manner,but at the same time i would also like to point out to you that rapes happen in all the countries in the world. If there is a rape case in the USA or the place that you currently reside in........i cannot give a blanket statement that none of the US citizens respect women,or in the later case that 'spartan doesn't respect women' because there are rape cases happening in the country he stays in.

You seem to represent a pessimist Indian who left the country for fairer pastures,but just cause you left India it doesn't give you the right to criticise those who stayed back. Many things have changed and are changing.So stop being a BIGOT.

P.S.-There are incidents in the US (considered to be the best country in the world) where a 20 year old has shot quite a few school children and his own mother.When it comes to the topic of Women rights the worst offenders are Muslim countries especially the Middle east where Sharia is practiced. So before we criticize other countries especially in context to women rights then one should never forget to check what is happening in their own neighbourhood.

Crimes happen in all countries but i fell nothing but contempt for any country which has legislations to legitimize crimes against women by imposing mundane laws like sharia and by considering the two women witnesses to be equal to one male witness etc as a State.

Edited March 20, 2013 by Harsh86_Patel

[kmt_sesh]

There need be no further discussion of rape or value judgements based on one's culture. Every culture has its flaws and its deviants—every single one.

But this is not the platform for discussing such issues, nor are such issues relevant to the topic of this discussion. Let it end.

kmt_sesh

[Harsh86_Patel]

It was never my intention to discuss such things on this blog, but i was pushed into it.

Though when a state/country legislates and implements Biased laws then i guess it would be fair to criticise such a state.Especially when state legislations go against basic human rights like right to equality.

Though consider this particular discussion as over from my side.

[Harsh86_Patel]

http://books.google.co.in/books?id=mCV5YKU7TIcC&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&dq=agastya+samhita+battery+description&source=bl&ots=i4u-HdqnlB&sig=a92pFMQSEnqjrECWFfKSz1EJ2YM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=sMFjUcq7OIeurAf0-YDwCA&ved=0CFoQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=agastya%20samhita%20battery%20description&f=false

An interesting read which highlights various ancient Indian concepts and knowledge regarding so called modern scientific concepts and principles.