Guest guest Posted May 13, 2007 Report Share Posted May 13, 2007 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 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 13, 2007 Report Share Posted May 13, 2007 basically: sometimes protectors of imperialist philosophies -- like Ariyanism -- LIE. they decieve on purpose to maintain dominator status. even in recent Bhaktivedanta purports of bhag. Gita, Chaitanya himself brags to Arjuna that he is " the Lord of Decievers " and can decieve any man born. as the information age spreads, just as those men who deny that a Holocaust took place in Europe for the destruction and demoralization of global jewry... you have to look for yourself. there will be people who deny that ANYTHING happened to the Dravidians in the 1400s b.c. what is the " asura " philosophy? from whence did it originate? further: why was there an appearance of a gotama who rejected on many grounds the validity of caste. whenpeople have slaves, if they can via deciet and 'clever " lying maintain that mental slavery, they will. doing the research will be edifying and perhaps 'enlightening' to the seeker of historical fact. Gotama " Buddha " is quoted as being one who was against disrespecting of " sudras " and also who treated women as equals. who would that bother? who would be offended and threatenend by that? what sort of PRIDE would be offended. the aryan invasion UNDERSTANDING of archaleolgical history is NOT totally discarded. why? because harishankar harishankar SAYS it is? other sources say otherwise. but who is threatened by the possibility of manumitting *the mentally enslaved?* ** *WHAT'S NEXT? a insulting of Ambedkar* *a propping up of the archaic varnashramadhara system of dominion as noble, righteous?* ** *when does intellectual discussion give way to the Ku Klux Klan, adolf hitler's nihilism, and other sorts of " false righteousness " ? if there IS such a thing as creative intelligence, what if people who sought dominion were THREATENED by that -- and therefore LIED in order to create, well, a sort of Destructive Stupidity, that is NOT Shaivism or anything else...but lies, lies and unevolved rationalizations? As millions starve. as BILLIONS are unfairly oppressed?* ** On 5/13/07, harishankar harishankar <bsharishankar wrote: > > 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 <kochu1tz%40>> 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 > > Devi Bhakta <devi_bhakta <devi_bhakta%40>> 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 > > - <%40>, > " 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/.<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. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.