Is Shaktism really pre-Vedic?

[Guest guest]

Namaste. I'm new to this group, though nmadasamy posted some of my comments earlier

today. I look forward to some interesting and enlightening discussions.

 

I've seen a number of remarks on the Shakti Sadhana org website suggesting that the Shakta

religion is "pre-Vedic." This claim perhaps reflects the conventional wisdom that the oldest

parts of the Vedas date to about 1800 BCE, shortly after the patriarchal Aryans invaded the

Indus Valley and imposed the caste system on the conquered indigenous (presumably

Dravidian) Goddess-worshipping population.

 

I invite you all to take a look at Koenraad Elst's 1999 book, Update on the Aryan Invasion

Debate, available online at http://voi.org/books/ait/. Elst makes out a case against the

Aryan Invasion Hypothesis. Rather, he suggests that Northern India was the original

homeland of Proto-Indo-European, and that the Rig Vedas were completed by 4000 BCE! I'm

not an expert on these matters, but Elst's scholarship appears to be sound, as far as I can

tell. I'm intrigued by the idea that we can document an unbroken tradition of sophisticated

religious thought and practice all the way back to the stone age.

 

I'd be interested to hear your opinions.

[Guest guest]

Dear Willendorfer:

 

Please note that a claim that something is "pre-Vedic" does not assume

the legitimacy of the Aryan Invasion theory, which no Indian (or

Westerner reasonably educated on the topic) has bought for years.

 

Most of the world's great religious systems can be assigned a "start

date" – at least approximately. For example, Islam was founded circa

600 CE by Mohammed; Christianity circa 30 CE by Jesus of Nazareth; and

Buddhism stretches back to the historical Buddha of circa 500 BCE.

Judaism is much older than these others – its "founding" can be traced

to between 1,800 and 1,500 BCE, based on the patriarch Abraham's birth.

 

Hinduism too could be said to date back to that time; that is, around

1,800 to 1,500 BCE – but only if the starting point for what we're

calling "Hinduism" is that moment when scholars say the rishis first

orally formulated the earliest revelations of the Rig Veda. And that's

a pretty big if, is it not? For starters, such a reckoning fails to

take into account the mysterious Saraswati River or Harappan culture

of c. 3,300-1,600 BCE. Current evidence suggests that this

civilization was recognizably "Hindu" in flavor and motif, whatever

its religious system might have been called at the time.

 

And although theories vary widely, modern scholarship has essentially

reached a consensus that that there was never any "Aryan invasion" per

se – that so-called Vedic culture was pretty much an organically

Indian development, fed by Saraswati culture at least as much as any

Indo-European, tribal or other influences.

 

Needless to say, one of the most pervasive of these "other influences"

is the amorphous, nearly indefinable body of rituals and practices

collectively known as "Tantra" – which in turn is believed to have

evolved largely out of the Goddess cults of early prehistory.

 

Thus, Srividya upasakas – as the present stewards of the world's most

sophisticated living religious tradition centered on the Divine Mother

– can truly consider themselves the direct heirs of the oldest living

religion of humankind; a tradition that, more palpably than any other,

"directs our gaze into the darkest depths of human prehistory," as

historian Thomas McEvilley wrote in 2002.

 

My two cents ...

 

DB

 

 

-, "willendorfer"

<willendorfer wrote:

>

> Namaste. I'm new to this group, though nmadasamy posted some of my

comments earlier

> today. I look forward to some interesting and enlightening discussions.

>

> I've seen a number of remarks on the Shakti Sadhana org website

suggesting that the Shakta

> religion is "pre-Vedic." This claim perhaps reflects the

conventional wisdom that the oldest

> parts of the Vedas date to about 1800 BCE, shortly after the

patriarchal Aryans invaded the

> Indus Valley and imposed the caste system on the conquered

indigenous (presumably

> Dravidian) Goddess-worshipping population.

>

> I invite you all to take a look at Koenraad Elst's 1999 book, Update

on the Aryan Invasion

> Debate, available online at http://voi.org/books/ait/. Elst makes

out a case against the

> Aryan Invasion Hypothesis. Rather, he suggests that Northern India

was the original

> homeland of Proto-Indo-European, and that the Rig Vedas were

completed by 4000 BCE! I'm

> not an expert on these matters, but Elst's scholarship appears to be

sound, as far as I can

> tell. I'm intrigued by the idea that we can document an unbroken

tradition of sophisticated

> religious thought and practice all the way back to the stone age.

>

> I'd be interested to hear your opinions.

>

[Guest guest]

Dear DB:

 

Your answer is well-put, IMJ. Thank you. I hope to learn more on this forum in the coming

weeks.

[Guest guest]

was it really stone age??????????/

 

willendorfer <willendorfer (AT) (DOT) ca> wrote: Namaste. I'm new to this group, though nmadasamy posted some of my comments earlier

today. I look forward to some interesting and enlightening discussions.

 

I've seen a number of remarks on the Shakti Sadhana org website suggesting that the Shakta

religion is "pre-Vedic." This claim perhaps reflects the conventional wisdom that the oldest

parts of the Vedas date to about 1800 BCE, shortly after the patriarchal Aryans invaded the

Indus Valley and imposed the caste system on the conquered indigenous (presumably

Dravidian) Goddess-worshipping population.

 

I invite you all to take a look at Koenraad Elst's 1999 book, Update on the Aryan Invasion

Debate, available online at http://voi.org/books/ait/. Elst makes out a case against the

Aryan Invasion Hypothesis. Rather, he suggests that Northern India was the original

homeland of Proto-Indo-European, and that the Rig Vedas were completed by 4000 BCE! I'm

not an expert on these matters, but Elst's scholarship appears to be sound, as far as I can

tell. I'm intrigued by the idea that we can document an unbroken tradition of sophisticated

religious thought and practice all the way back to the stone age.

 

I'd be interested to hear your opinions.

 

 

 

 

 

How low will we go? Check out Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.

[Guest guest]

Current evidence suggests that this civilization was recognizably "Hindu" in flavor and motif, whatever its religious system might have been called at the time.

************************

it was and is called "sanatana dharma" the Eternal rligion

my quarter cent

 

Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta > wrote:

Dear Willendorfer:

 

Please note that a claim that something is "pre-Vedic" does not assume

the legitimacy of the Aryan Invasion theory, which no Indian (or

Westerner reasonably educated on the topic) has bought for years.

 

Most of the world's great religious systems can be assigned a "start

date" – at least approximately. For example, Islam was founded circa

600 CE by Mohammed; Christianity circa 30 CE by Jesus of Nazareth; and

Buddhism stretches back to the historical Buddha of circa 500 BCE.

Judaism is much older than these others – its "founding" can be traced

to between 1,800 and 1,500 BCE, based on the patriarch Abraham's birth.

 

Hinduism too could be said to date back to that time; that is, around

1,800 to 1,500 BCE – but only if the starting point for what we're

calling "Hinduism" is that moment when scholars say the rishis first

orally formulated the earliest revelations of the Rig Veda. And that's

a pretty big if, is it not? For starters, such a reckoning fails to

take into account the mysterious Saraswati River or Harappan culture

of c. 3,300-1,600 BCE. Current evidence suggests that this

civilization was recognizably "Hindu" in flavor and motif, whatever

its religious system might have been called at the time.

 

And although theories vary widely, modern scholarship has essentially

reached a consensus that that there was never any "Aryan invasion" per

se – that so-called Vedic culture was pretty much an organically

Indian development, fed by Saraswati culture at least as much as any

Indo-European, tribal or other influences.

 

Needless to say, one of the most pervasive of these "other influences"

is the amorphous, nearly indefinable body of rituals and practices

collectively known as "Tantra" – which in turn is believed to have

evolved largely out of the Goddess cults of early prehistory.

 

Thus, Srividya upasakas – as the present stewards of the world's most

sophisticated living religious tradition centered on the Divine Mother

– can truly consider themselves the direct heirs of the oldest living

religion of humankind; a tradition that, more palpably than any other,

"directs our gaze into the darkest depths of human prehistory," as

historian Thomas McEvilley wrote in 2002.

 

My two cents ...

 

DB

 

-, "willendorfer"

<willendorfer wrote:

>

> Namaste. I'm new to this group, though nmadasamy posted some of my

comments earlier

> today. I look forward to some interesting and enlightening discussions.

>

> I've seen a number of remarks on the Shakti Sadhana org website

suggesting that the Shakta

> religion is "pre-Vedic." This claim perhaps reflects the

conventional wisdom that the oldest

> parts of the Vedas date to about 1800 BCE, shortly after the

patriarchal Aryans invaded the

> Indus Valley and imposed the caste system on the conquered

indigenous (presumably

> Dravidian) Goddess-worshipping population.

>

> I invite you all to take a look at Koenraad Elst's 1999 book, Update

on the Aryan Invasion

> Debate, available online at http://voi.org/books/ait/. Elst makes

out a case against the

> Aryan Invasion Hypothesis. Rather, he suggests that Northern India

was the original

> homeland of Proto-Indo-European, and that the Rig Vedas were

completed by 4000 BCE! I'm

> not an expert on these matters, but Elst's scholarship appears to be

sound, as far as I can

> tell. I'm intrigued by the idea that we can document an unbroken

tradition of sophisticated

> religious thought and practice all the way back to the stone age.

>

> I'd be interested to hear your opinions.

>

 

 

 

 

 

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Small Business.

[Guest guest]

The Aryan invasion theory is is a totally discarded hpothesis in academics. Newdevolopments in multi and interdisciplinary studies has uprooted this cleverly planted racial theory.Recent devolopments in archaeogeology, palaeoenvironment and palaeohydrology, along with osteobiographical analyses, taphonomical sciences and forensic anthropology have been instrumental in conducting the autopsy of Aryan invasion theory.

Regarding the genesis of Shakti cult we have emerging archaeological evidences from 9000 B.c on worship of femine cults- from Mesolithic to chalcolithic -in the SouthA sian Geo-cultural region.This region comprises Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Burma, Nepal and Srilanka.

In Vedic literature the concept of Usas, Vak, Ratri and Saraswati are the seeds from which the mighty concept of Devi devoloped nourished by the Upanishads, epics, and schools of Vedanta.In Taittiriya Aranyaka she is referred as Durga, Katyayani and Kanyakumari. In Kena Upanishad the devolopment is more transparent. She is UmaHaimavati the supreme knowlege of Brahman or Brahmavidya.Again she is Kali and Karali in Mundaka Upanishad.

With the decline of Indus-Saraswati civilization in 1500 B.C. we find large scale migration into three distinct regions-the Ganga valley, Deccan and western India.During the Mahabharata period which archaeologically is placed to 1200 B.C

the mighty concept of Durga-Mahishamardini becomes crystallized.A large number of sculptures of Parvati and Durga have been excavated from Ganga-Yamuna doab and central India.

There is an important reference in Vedic literature regarding how sage Yajnavalkya regained his lost knowledge of vedas from Sun who taught him in the form of Hayasirsa.Hence it is known as Vajasaneyi Samhita in vedic literature. In Lalitopakhyana we find Hayagriva imparting Lalitasahasranam to sage

Agastya. Both Hayasirsa-Soorya and Hayagriva are manifestations of Vishnu.The roots are clear.

The tantric literature and srividya upasana finds a genuine growth along three major river systems. The Ganga , Krishna-Godavari and Kaveri along with the Himalayan sub-regions. In the heart of Godavari in central India we find numerous temples of Yoginis and Saptamatrkas. It further spread to eastern India by 11 nth century. W efind numerous references in Kalika purana about Kamakhya in east.

Thus the concept of Devi underwent numerous courses of devolopment and became crystallized in Lalita sahasranama, Saundaryalahari and other such works by 800 AD.

sankara menon <kochu1tz > wrote:

Current evidence suggests that this civilization was recognizably "Hindu" in flavor and motif, whatever its religious system might have been called at the time.

************************

it was and is called "sanatana dharma" the Eternal rligion

 

my quarter cent