Guest guest Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 , isha shiva <adhin88 wrote:> Dear Suzanne, > Thank you. I have read about "Havilah" as being a reference to India. Expressions like "land of milk and honey" are already in the Vedas (with reference to the Nahushas> I believe that the Tarim mummy research was done by Hemphill. Victor Mair is, if I am not wrong, a protagonist of the migration of IE people from the Central-Asia (and Tarim) into the subcontinent. Dear Ishwa, I happen to agree in a large part with Victor Mair's theory. It parallels my own. The evidence seems overwhelming that these Tocharians were the only inhabitants to the north of India who we could reasonably assume were the "Aryan invaders"...but I don't believe they were "invaders" in the sense they arrived with vast armies and swept away everything before them. It was a slow gradual trickle filling in vast land areas that were vacated or sparsely settled. The DNA of myself and most northern Indians seems to reflect this Tocharian blend. The concept of monotheism is traced back to Akhenaten and then to Abraham, and is retained in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The concept arose in India at the same time that Abraham existed. So if we prove a link between Abraham and India, then we have proven the cultural foundations for these beliefs cannot be seperated as "Hindus' and 'Hebrews".... Best regards, Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 Dear Suzanne, Mair's theory is just a theory, nothing more. The AIT assumption was taken for long as a fact, till disproven. Its daughter AMT is nothing but a disguise of AIT, still without proof. The Tarim mummies didn't proof that some people migrated from there to India. It did proof that the people related to the mummies were intruders themselves in Xinjiang. Even though there is absolutely no evidence of small pocket migrations, the assumption is held by its protagonists, just because old ideas (having its origins in suspicious and dubious racial theories of the nineteenth century). Linking Abraham and India from one original monoculture are far removed from reality. It is a nice fantasy for the ones adhering to that, but it is not taken serious by any serious scholar. The Bible is a nice cultural multi-layered work of Israeli tribes, having adopted many story lines from more ancient (alien) cultures. It is important for abrahamitic cults, but it has no additional value for non-abrahamitic cultures who have suffered under their agressive, destructive religious zealots up to this very day, whose main target it is get as many souls as possible with whatever means. Apart from the academic issues, one of the greatest curses the world has witnessed is this "monotheism" as developed by the abrahamites. (Akhenaton rather got his solar Aton monotheism from his royal Hurri-Mitanni blood relatives. The Hebrews amongst the Hapiru contract-slaves have learnt this in the Egyptian delta before fleeing/migrating to Palestine.) While Judaism didn't display expansionism, its offsprings certainly did with some evil currents, even at the dearly cost of its parent branch. And the rest of the old and new world have clearly felt the impact of this monotheistic dogmatic doctrine. Countless cultures have been wiped out, even more people have been massacred, annihilated, etc. The world and academia don't need this "monotheism" or the abrahamitic monolithic thinking at all. There world of diversity has suffered enough from this, which is deeply rooted in some academic strongholds in Europe and the US. India doesn't need this at all. Live and let live. But abrahamitic zealots will never understand this or live up to this respectful way of living. kind regards, Ishwa - Suzanne Olsson Monday, November 24, 2008 1:56 PM Re: Havilah (reply to Ishwa) , isha shiva <adhin88 wrote:> Dear Suzanne, > Thank you. I have read about "Havilah" as being a reference to India. Expressions like "land of milk and honey" are already in the Vedas (with reference to the Nahushas> I believe that the Tarim mummy research was done by Hemphill. Victor Mair is, if I am not wrong, a protagonist of the migration of IE people from the Central-Asia (and Tarim) into the subcontinent. Dear Ishwa, I happen to agree in a large part with Victor Mair's theory. It parallels my own. The evidence seems overwhelming that these Tocharians were the only inhabitants to the north of India who we could reasonably assume were the "Aryan invaders"...but I don't believe they were "invaders" in the sense they arrived with vast armies and swept away everything before them. It was a slow gradual trickle filling in vast land areas that were vacated or sparsely settled. The DNA of myself and most northern Indians seems to reflect this Tocharian blend. The concept of monotheism is traced back to Akhenaten and then to Abraham, and is retained in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The concept arose in India at the same time that Abraham existed. So if we prove a link between Abraham and India, then we have proven the cultural foundations for these beliefs cannot be seperated as "Hindus' and 'Hebrews".... Best regards, Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2008 Report Share Posted November 26, 2008 Dear Suzanne and Ishwa, your discussion has raised a number of important issues. I think we have to distinguish between the 'man' called Jesus who very probably did exist about 2000 years ago and the movement called Christianity that appears to have only started to become a significant world religion around 300 CE when it became the religion of the already widespread Roman Empire. From what we can glean about Jesus from Mark's gospel and Thomas' apocryphal gospel Jesus comes across as a man of knowledge; that is a gnostic or what in Sanskrit a jnanim (I mean here gnostic in the sense of 'one who knows' and not a member of the heretic Christian movement called Gnostics]. But the movement we call Christianity, which although having examples among its ranks of people of great spirituality, and love and compassion for mankind, does on the whole appear to me to have, as has been suggested by Ishwa and other members of this group, a history of many wrongs to answer for.Suzanne, no one knows what Jesus did in the decade or more of his life he went missing, he could easily have journeyed to India from Palestine, and by doing so have been exposed to the type of knowledge he appears to have possessed, but he could also have been exposed to that knowledge much closer to home as right from the beginning of the second millennium before his birth the greater Middle East region appears to have had a number of large Indo-European societies that very possibly could have had similar religious philosophies to those of the Brahmins of India. The same is true about the possibility that the Hebrew Patriarchs could have come from Sumer and could have been Indo-Europeans; no one knows who the Sumerians really were and whether there was an Indo-European element present in their society. References in Sumerian and Vedic literature to the 'seven original seers' could be an indication of a link between those two societies. However, I am not too certain about the Bible as an accurate history of the Jews and how old a Hebrew tradition the story of the Patriarchs coming from Mesopotamia is? I to the school of thought that the Bible was largely compiled by elite Israelites in Babylon, during the time of the Exile, and that their purpose in composing and compiling it was to assist with the amalgamation of the loosely affiliated Jewish communities still residing in Palestine. Certainly there is earlier Hebrew material contained in it, but I believe that what we refer to as the Bible was mainly a creation of those elite Jews living in exile in Babylon; a city which at the time of the Exile was regarded as the centre of knowledge and learning in the ancient world. Much of the material in the Hebrew Bible appears to have been heavily influenced by the traditions, religion and stories of other earlier and contemporary cultures of the Middle East. Ishwa, I think people underestimate the influence that the Hurri-Mitannian society of Mesopotamia had on Egypt religious thought during the time of Amenophis III and IV that resulted from the arranged marriages between Amenophis III and Mitannian princesses. Each Mitannian princess being accompanied by a sizable retinue of skilled artisans and an armed escort must have meant there was a degree of cultural exchange between the two societies and one cannot underestimate what influence an attractive and intelligent princess, and most likely her accompanying advisor or priest, could have had on the Egyptian court. That this strong cultural interaction between the royal court of Egypt and what was very probably a culturally Vedic ruling elite in Mitanni should have happened around the time that Egypt developed its most monotheistic form of religion is significant; it is also significant that it was at this time that Akhenaten's hymns to Aten, which scholars see as having very strong parallels with hymns in the Hebrew Bible, were composed at this time.Bruce On 25/11/2008, at 9:52 AM, Isha wrote:Dear Suzanne, Mair's theory is just a theory, nothing more. The AIT assumption was taken for long as a fact, till disproven. Its daughter AMT is nothing but a disguise of AIT, still without proof. The Tarim mummies didn't proof that some people migrated from there to India. It did proof that the people related to the mummies were intruders themselves in Xinjiang. Even though there is absolutely no evidence of small pocket migrations, the assumption is held by its protagonists, just because old ideas (having its origins in suspicious and dubious racial theories of the nineteenth century). Linking Abraham and India from one original monoculture are far removed from reality. It is a nice fantasy for the ones adhering to that, but it is not taken serious by any serious scholar. The Bible is a nice cultural multi-layered work of Israeli tribes, having adopted many story lines from more ancient (alien) cultures. It is important for abrahamitic cults, but it has no additional value for non-abrahamitic cultures who have suffered under their agressive, destructive religious zealots up to this very day, whose main target it is get as many souls as possible with whatever means. Apart from the academic issues, one of the greatest curses the world has witnessed is this "monotheism" as developed by the abrahamites. (Akhenaton rather got his solar Aton monotheism from his royal Hurri-Mitanni blood relatives. The Hebrews amongst the Hapiru contract-slaves have learnt this in the Egyptian delta before fleeing/migrating to Palestine.)While Judaism didn't display expansionism, its offsprings certainly did with some evil currents, even at the dearly cost of its parent branch. And the rest of the old and new world have clearly felt the impact of this monotheistic dogmatic doctrine. Countless cultures have been wiped out, even more people have been massacred, annihilated, etc. The world and academia don't need this "monotheism" or the abrahamitic monolithic thinking at all. There world of diversity has suffered enough from this, which is deeply rooted in some academic strongholds in Europe and the US.India doesn't need this at all. Live and let live. But abrahamitic zealots will never understand this or live up to this respectful way of living. kind regards,Ishwa -Suzanne Olsson Monday, November 24, 2008 1:56 PM Re: Havilah (reply to Ishwa) , isha shiva <adhin88 wrote:> Dear Suzanne, > Thank you. I have read about "Havilah" as being a reference to India. Expressions like "land of milk and honey" are already in the Vedas (with reference to the Nahushas> I believe that the Tarim mummy research was done by Hemphill. Victor Mair is, if I am not wrong, a protagonist of the migration of IE people from the Central-Asia (and Tarim) into the subcontinent.Dear Ishwa,I happen to agree in a large part with Victor Mair's theory. It parallels my own. The evidence seems overwhelming that these Tocharians were the only inhabitants to the north of India who we could reasonably assume were the "Aryan invaders"...but I don't believe they were "invaders" in the sense they arrived with vast armies and swept away everything before them. It was a slow gradual trickle filling in vast land areas that were vacated or sparsely settled. The DNA of myself and most northern Indians seems to reflect this Tocharian blend.The concept of monotheism is traced back to Akhenaten and then to Abraham, and is retained in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The concept arose in India at the same time that Abraham existed. So if we prove a link between Abraham and India, then we have proven the cultural foundations for these beliefs cannot be seperated as "Hindus' and 'Hebrews"....Best regards,Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 Dear Bruce, Archaeologist Israel Finkelstein says that Bible was composed since the time of King Josiah from land of Judah around 7th century BC in order to attract northern Jews (from Kingdom of Israel) inventing a common past. I have to mention that the stories of Abraham and Moses (Patriarcs) are without historical reality. Finkelstein and others also claim that Exodus never happenned because there is no archaeological trace in the desert of 40 years of walking. Jews were Cananites and never migrated to a Prommesed Land because they were already there with a politheist type of religion. Jew Monotheism is an imposition precisely since Josiah's time. Carlos , Bruce Duffy <bwduffy wrote: > .... > The same is true about the possibility that the Hebrew Patriarchs > could have come from Sumer and could have been Indo-Europeans; no one > knows who the Sumerians really were and whether there was an Indo- > European element present in their society. References in Sumerian and > Vedic literature to the 'seven original seers' could be an indication > of a link between those two societies. However, I am not too certain > about the Bible as an accurate history of the Jews and how old a > Hebrew tradition the story of the Patriarchs coming from Mesopotamia > is? I to the school of thought that the Bible was largely > compiled by elite Israelites in Babylon, during the time of the Exile, > and that their purpose in composing and compiling it was to assist > with the amalgamation of the loosely affiliated Jewish communities > still residing in Palestine. Certainly there is earlier Hebrew > material contained in it, but I believe that what we refer to as the > Bible was mainly a creation of those elite Jews living in exile in > Babylon; a city which at the time of the Exile was regarded as the > centre of knowledge and learning in the ancient world. Much of the > material in the Hebrew Bible appears to have been heavily influenced > by the traditions, religion and stories of other earlier and > contemporary cultures of the Middle East. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Dear Carlos,Prof. Martin Haug suggested that Pentateuch preceded Rig Veda. As the date of Pentateuch was calculated to be in the 15th century BCE, indirectly from the date of King Solomon, Prof Max Muller suggested that the Aryans (whom he thought to be his ancestors) came to India in the 15th century BCE and thereafter they composed the Rig Veda. Fortunately however Prof. Max Muller, an honest man discovered his mistake and retracted. It is another thing that some crafty historians of the past stuck to the earlier views of Prof. Max Muller and did accept his retraction.Regards,Sunil--- On Wed, 11/26/08, Carlos Aramayo <cararam50 wrote:Carlos Aramayo <cararam50Subject: Re: Havilah (reply to Ishwa) Date: Wednesday, November 26, 2008, 3:05 PM Dear Bruce, Archaeologist Israel Finkelstein says that Bible was composed since the time of King Josiah from land of Judah around 7th century BC in order to attract northern Jews (from Kingdom of Israel) inventing a common past. I have to mention that the stories of Abraham and Moses (Patriarcs) are without historical reality. Finkelstein and others also claim that Exodus never happenned because there is no archaeological trace in the desert of 40 years of walking. Jews were Cananites and never migrated to a Prommesed Land because they were already there with a politheist type of religion. Jew Monotheism is an imposition precisely since Josiah's time. Carlos , Bruce Duffy <bwduffy > wrote: > .... > The same is true about the possibility that the Hebrew Patriarchs > could have come from Sumer and could have been Indo-Europeans; no one > knows who the Sumerians really were and whether there was an Indo- > European element present in their society. References in Sumerian and > Vedic literature to the 'seven original seers' could be an indication > of a link between those two societies. However, I am not too certain > about the Bible as an accurate history of the Jews and how old a > Hebrew tradition the story of the Patriarchs coming from Mesopotamia > is? I to the school of thought that the Bible was largely > compiled by elite Israelites in Babylon, during the time of the Exile, > and that their purpose in composing and compiling it was to assist > with the amalgamation of the loosely affiliated Jewish communities > still residing in Palestine. Certainly there is earlier Hebrew > material contained in it, but I believe that what we refer to as the > Bible was mainly a creation of those elite Jews living in exile in > Babylon; a city which at the time of the Exile was regarded as the > centre of knowledge and learning in the ancient world. Much of the > material in the Hebrew Bible appears to have been heavily influenced > by the traditions, religion and stories of other earlier and > contemporary cultures of the Middle East. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 29, 2008 Report Share Posted November 29, 2008 Sorry. Some crafty historians of the past did not accept his retracrtion and that is why the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) continues to appear in the text books till ytoday.--- On Fri, 11/28/08, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya wrote:Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjyaRe: Re: Havilah (reply to Ishwa) Date: Friday, November 28, 2008, 7:42 AM Dear Carlos,Prof. Martin Haug suggested that Pentateuch preceded Rig Veda. As the date of Pentateuch was calculated to be in the 15th century BCE, indirectly from the date of King Solomon, Prof Max Muller suggested that the Aryans (whom he thought to be his ancestors) came to India in the 15th century BCE and thereafter they composed the Rig Veda. Fortunately however Prof. Max Muller, an honest man discovered his mistake and retracted. It is another thing that some crafty historians of the past stuck to the earlier views of Prof. Max Muller and did accept his retraction.Regards,Sunil--- On Wed, 11/26/08, Carlos Aramayo <cararam50 > wrote:Carlos Aramayo <cararam50 >Subject: Re: Havilah (reply to Ishwa)Wednesday, November 26, 2008, 3:05 PM Dear Bruce, Archaeologist Israel Finkelstein says that Bible was composed since the time of King Josiah from land of Judah around 7th century BC in order to attract northern Jews (from Kingdom of Israel) inventing a common past. I have to mention that the stories of Abraham and Moses (Patriarcs) are without historical reality. Finkelstein and others also claim that Exodus never happenned because there is no archaeological trace in the desert of 40 years of walking. Jews were Cananites and never migrated to a Prommesed Land because they were already there with a politheist type of religion. Jew Monotheism is an imposition precisely since Josiah's time. Carlos , Bruce Duffy <bwduffy > wrote: > .... > The same is true about the possibility that the Hebrew Patriarchs > could have come from Sumer and could have been Indo-Europeans; no one > knows who the Sumerians really were and whether there was an Indo- > European element present in their society. References in Sumerian and > Vedic literature to the 'seven original seers' could be an indication > of a link between those two societies. However, I am not too certain > about the Bible as an accurate history of the Jews and how old a > Hebrew tradition the story of the Patriarchs coming from Mesopotamia > is? I to the school of thought that the Bible was largely > compiled by elite Israelites in Babylon, during the time of the Exile, > and that their purpose in composing and compiling it was to assist > with the amalgamation of the loosely affiliated Jewish communities > still residing in Palestine. Certainly there is earlier Hebrew > material contained in it, but I believe that what we refer to as the > Bible was mainly a creation of those elite Jews living in exile in > Babylon; a city which at the time of the Exile was regarded as the > centre of knowledge and learning in the ancient world. Much of the > material in the Hebrew Bible appears to have been heavily influenced > by the traditions, religion and stories of other earlier and > contemporary cultures of the Middle East. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 Sunil Bhattacharjya wrote: > Prof. Martin Haug suggested that Pentateuch preceded Rig Veda. As the >date of Pentateuch was calculated to be in the 15th century BCE, >indirectly from the date of King Solomon, Prof Max Muller suggested >that the Aryans (whom he thought to be his ancestors) came to India in >the 15th century BCE and thereafter they composed the Rig Veda. >Fortunately however Prof. Max Muller, an honest man discovered his >mistake and retracted. It is another thing that some crafty historians >of the past stuck to the earlier views of Prof. Max Muller and did >accept his retraction. Dear Sunil, Even with the controversial Aryan Invasion Theory and the dating of the Rig Veda after 1380 BC (as Witzel does), now the oral rigvedic tradition can be proved older than Pentateuch final writen form. The dating of Moses around 1500 is proved illusory. Regards, Carlos 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.