05-12-2006, 02:50 AM
Obviously someone who's never read the Ramayana.
not the real or complete version, no.[i doubt very many on this forum have read the whole real thing.
The Vanara were met as Rama travelled south.
precisely.
Since when do the Indians you call Austro Asiatic or Dravidian have tails and other features as described in the Ramayana?
the tails are the authors imagination. the ramayan is a epic story first and a piece of history later. the sanskrit word "vanara" means forest dwellers - like the austro asiatic vanavasis of india
The Vanara were a kind of monkey as described in Ramayana
and as confirmed by the Mahabharata (Hanuman's reappearance).
nope. they were the bhils, the santals, the other tribes of central india. the fictional characters of the talking monkeys of the ramayana are modelled on them.
Vali had a tail with which he carried the frightened Ravana around.
that has zero chance of being true whether the vanaras were austroasiatic men or monkeys !! the ramayan is NOT a piece of history, its a fable, of epic proportions.
Hanuman turned his tail into a seat at Ravana's court.
yeah right.
Stop talking about things you don't know.
i know that such claims are made in the ramayan. i also know that they arnt to be taken literally.
And, except for the AIT people and the Pakistani pan-Islamist groups operating under titles like Dalitstan, no knowledgeable and sane Hindu says that the Vanara were not monkeys but were instead the Dravidians/Austro Asiatics/all-except-your-close-circle.
really?? i learnt that the vanaras are a word for ANY forest dwelling living being, be it monkey or vanavasi man, from this forum. maybe we all believe in AIT or are all pakistanis.
Maybe you think that Vyasa and Valmiki didn't know they meant 'Austro Asiatic' not tail and confused the two.
maybe they modelled their monkey characters (in sanskrit, if i may point out) on monkey like forest dweling people - ie. the austro asiatics.
Then again, maybe you're just wrong.
or maybe its you.
Brahmi???? The west says that Brahmi was developed in the Middle-East somewhere.
wrong. its of indian construct. middle eastern script and sanskritic script run in opposite directions.
The South Indian Dravidianist groups say that it was a South Indian invention.
wrong. south indian, as also all north indian, script is a derivative of brahmi and not th other way round.
What's the point of (9) unless you want someone to tell you current theories (however right or wrong) don't support you?
brahmi is the original script of sanskrit, and the script of the Rg Ved most likely.
The Namboothiris are Brahmanas.
so they are !!
Malayalam is a Sanskritised version of an old South Indian language that had already been separate from Tamil for a long time.
well ok. still a sanskritised version. most likely formed after the arrival of the namboodhris to kerela.
Malayalam is not a version of Tamil, no more than Urdu being a version of Bengali.
root words of malayalee and tamil have a lot more in common than the root words of bengali and urdu. and if it isnt - its cos of the sanskrit influence
The brahmins of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka (including the Tulu/Bunt brahmins), Andhra are local brahmanas.
and since when did they appear on the horizon?? at the time of the vedas??
They are not Gowda Saraswats who came from the north in <b>recent</b> times (no offense to them either, just clarifying).
right. they came from the north in ANCIENT times (bringing hinduism with them)!!
The Namboothiris are thought to have come from the North too, but when it is not known. Obviously, it was much earlier than Sri Shankaracharya. On the other hand, many of the Namboothiris today might have just been the locals too - trained as brahmanas by those who came to teach from the North.
precisely. same applies for present day brahmins in tamil nadu, karnataka et al. either descendants of the original ones who came from the north (ramesh krishnan) or local trainees (and their descendants) of the aforementioned (radha krishnan)
Avestan is a later version of ancient Iranian.
avestan IS ancient iranian. parsi is a later iranian or later avestan whichever u prefer.
Ancient Iranian and Vedic Sanskrit are related.
yes. avestan and vedic sanskrit are cognate.
Which proves nothing.
which proves a lot. they have the same root words and come from the same people.
Tamil and Kannada are thought to be related. So?
if u subtract the sanskrit influence on kannada, then yes they are related. for the same reason as ^^^ and proving the same things
Did you invent Sanskrit?
no and nor did i claim to.
You didn't. What a surprise.
aah, so u expected me to eh??
Don't take credit for something you had no involvement in.
i didnt, now did i??
At least my father speaks Sanskrit, paternal grandfather's mother wrote letters in Sanskrit.
yeah, just whom did they learn the sanskrit from?? whom did south india learn sanskrit from??
My uncle on the paternal side's mother was a Hindu Scholar who debated philosophy in Sanskrit and won against male Brahmanas, and Jainas (not in Sanskrit).
proving what??? that sanskrit originated in tamil nadu and SSVC??
They are also all of them excellent in Tamil on my maternal side and Kannada on my paternal side.
proving what??? sanskrit originated in karnataka and not SSVC??
My grandfather taught Kannada, Sanskrit, Maths and Science to all the village children.
yeah so???
No varna-based discrimination. These children were all, without exception, good at learning. That includes their accomplishments in Sanskrit: essay writing, poetry, prose.
proving what my dear??
The Puranas only mention it at the time the regions N of the Vindhya were called Aryavarta. Eventually, Aryavarta would included the rest of India.
since eventually, hinduism would spread to all of india.
Krunvanto Visham Aryam. By the time the Chinese visited India, and Buddhist monks from South India travelled to China, the Chinese referred to South India as being part of Aryavarta and Bharatavarsha too. Geez.
so we got to learn from the chinese what is aryavarta and whats not?? columbus incidentally referred to usa as india. dont mean he was right.
Too many to list, but you'll be wondering who's that? Since communist, British and missionaries made sure no one in India would know the contribution of South Indians to Hinduism.
so how come Rg veda was compiled vy the members of the puru tribe?? and mahabharat was written by ved vaysa?? and not by tamilians?? can i have the names of emminent non-brahmin tamilians??
The Agamas are in Tamil and are ancient, they are as Hindu as other sacred Hindu writings.
really?? sacred like the vedas?? agamas as pillars of hinduism?? how old are the agamas?? as old as the Rg veda?
Narayana Guru in South India made great contributions to Hinduism in recent times. These you must know of.
sure. vivekananda and aurobindo made zero contribution to hinduism. all they did was write deravitives of hinduism and hindu philosophy. expound on hinduism. not create hindu scripture. no one reads mantras composed by them. same applies to all modern and mediaval day gurus.
To which temples in India are the Gods still seen visiting by the locals, villagers or otherwise? Uma and Maheshwaran, Lakshmi and Vishnu, Kartikeya, Indran, Suryan and all the others, South India is full of them.
cos its not located where rajasthan and u.p is. dont prove that the vedas are NOT entirely of sanskritic manufacture. btw, its surya not suryan, indra not indran, and maheswar (maha + ishwar) and not maheswaran. thats the correct sanskrit pronunciatian.
Even the most 'simple' villager knows how to do Surya Namaskaram. Do you?Without having to look it up online.
its surya namaskar (no M), both sanskrit words. vindicating my point again. and i dont believe in rituals.
They know how to ask the Gods to make it rain in the villages. Do you?
i dont believe in superstition either.
Do you see the Hindu Gods?
no. nor any other gods
Or are you only getting the silent treatment of Yahweh (who cannot be seen or heard or felt in this world) in your Brahmo-Samaji-Hare-Krishna reforms?
hare krishnas are a runaway sect of vaishnavs. i dont believe in yahweh or any other god. i am an agnostic (meaning i confess i dont know if god exists or not) and i am a brahmo for all practical purposes. (dont do rituals.)
Shiva and Uma, Vishnu and Lakshmi, the Devargal are not Dravidian or Vedic Aryan inventions. They are pan-Indian subcontinent Gods.
wrong. all are of sanskritic manufacture. very much vedic aryan inventians/concepts
These are the Gods of all the people down to Sri Lanka.
hinduism was exported to sri lanka too. dont make them aryan/sanskritic.
Bengal is still Shaktic isn't it? It was historically.
the worship of shakti (ie. durga and kali) is popular there yes. as ever.
Kashmir was Shaivaite and Shaktic. Afghanistan was very Shaivaite.
yes. and aryan.
Where are the Devargal still worshipped? Indra, Agni, Vayu, Varuna, Surya? The Navagrahas?
i am not sure what devargal means and which language it is. but indra, vayu (the lithuanian word for wind or breeze is "vajus", with the "j" pronounced as "y"), varun and agni (the first god ever mentioned in scripture, if the Rg Ved is indeed the oldest religious text) are all sanskrit names.
Where do we still know how to pronounce Sanskrit properly and not turn it into Hindi ('Mahabharat, Ramayan, Arjun, Bhim, Ram')?
in north india. cos the REAL pronunciatiation IS mahabharat and not mahabharatA, ram and not ramA, Arjun and not arjunA, ramayan and not ramayanA and yog and not yogA and shiv and not shivA........hahaha caught !!
Where are horses and dogs still given names like Arya?
woops !! does this have an ulterior motive?? horses were prized amongst the arya though. dunno if the rest valued it.
Where do people still give names of Gods and Goddesses to their children?
all over india.
Where do the villagers still tell the Ramayan<b>am</b>, Mahabharat<b>am</b> to their children?
in parts of india not unfortunate enough to have fallen in the hands of islam. now you answer me - where was ramayan and mahabharat stories based?? in which language were they written?? which language has a system where by maha+bharat becomes mahabharat??
Where do the brahmanas still pronounce the Vedic rites properly and invoke the Gods?
uttar pradesh (esp varanasi) - the cradle of hinduism.
Where do the 'simplest' villagers know that their ancestors were Hindu since the beginning of India,
north india. south india became hindu recently (ie. after hinduism was exported south and the ramayan and mahabharat taught to the locals and local brahmins manufactured)
in spite of villains hitting us over the head for centuries with the AIT/Christian/Dravidian-NorthIndian/Islamist theories? [Answer: South India. Possibly other parts of India, too - including the North]
wrong.
You are free to call a spade a spade.
as are you. now if you only would.
But please, stick to your day-job of identifying spades.
i have. and though you dont realise it, you too have, in these very posts of yours. you just vindicated me repeatedly !!
By the way, Pakistan's ISI called. They've fired all their ignorant pseudo-scholars. They want to hire you, because you're doing a better job than of all them. Though as ill-informed as those they sacked, they think you're more useful, being a Hindu.
so i am - an arya living on this side of the sindhu. and i am not surprised that you are in touch with the isi. Ltte too, i am sure.
No offense to other Hindus, Jains, etc. from North India. The only differences I see are regional.
then you dont see much !!
open your eyes. and ears. there'll be difference in what you'll see and what you'll hear.
not the real or complete version, no.[i doubt very many on this forum have read the whole real thing.
The Vanara were met as Rama travelled south.
precisely.
Since when do the Indians you call Austro Asiatic or Dravidian have tails and other features as described in the Ramayana?
the tails are the authors imagination. the ramayan is a epic story first and a piece of history later. the sanskrit word "vanara" means forest dwellers - like the austro asiatic vanavasis of india
The Vanara were a kind of monkey as described in Ramayana
and as confirmed by the Mahabharata (Hanuman's reappearance).
nope. they were the bhils, the santals, the other tribes of central india. the fictional characters of the talking monkeys of the ramayana are modelled on them.
Vali had a tail with which he carried the frightened Ravana around.
that has zero chance of being true whether the vanaras were austroasiatic men or monkeys !! the ramayan is NOT a piece of history, its a fable, of epic proportions.
Hanuman turned his tail into a seat at Ravana's court.
yeah right.
Stop talking about things you don't know.
i know that such claims are made in the ramayan. i also know that they arnt to be taken literally.
And, except for the AIT people and the Pakistani pan-Islamist groups operating under titles like Dalitstan, no knowledgeable and sane Hindu says that the Vanara were not monkeys but were instead the Dravidians/Austro Asiatics/all-except-your-close-circle.
really?? i learnt that the vanaras are a word for ANY forest dwelling living being, be it monkey or vanavasi man, from this forum. maybe we all believe in AIT or are all pakistanis.
Maybe you think that Vyasa and Valmiki didn't know they meant 'Austro Asiatic' not tail and confused the two.
maybe they modelled their monkey characters (in sanskrit, if i may point out) on monkey like forest dweling people - ie. the austro asiatics.
Then again, maybe you're just wrong.
or maybe its you.
Brahmi???? The west says that Brahmi was developed in the Middle-East somewhere.
wrong. its of indian construct. middle eastern script and sanskritic script run in opposite directions.
The South Indian Dravidianist groups say that it was a South Indian invention.
wrong. south indian, as also all north indian, script is a derivative of brahmi and not th other way round.
What's the point of (9) unless you want someone to tell you current theories (however right or wrong) don't support you?
brahmi is the original script of sanskrit, and the script of the Rg Ved most likely.
The Namboothiris are Brahmanas.
so they are !!
Malayalam is a Sanskritised version of an old South Indian language that had already been separate from Tamil for a long time.
well ok. still a sanskritised version. most likely formed after the arrival of the namboodhris to kerela.
Malayalam is not a version of Tamil, no more than Urdu being a version of Bengali.
root words of malayalee and tamil have a lot more in common than the root words of bengali and urdu. and if it isnt - its cos of the sanskrit influence
The brahmins of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka (including the Tulu/Bunt brahmins), Andhra are local brahmanas.
and since when did they appear on the horizon?? at the time of the vedas??
They are not Gowda Saraswats who came from the north in <b>recent</b> times (no offense to them either, just clarifying).
right. they came from the north in ANCIENT times (bringing hinduism with them)!!
The Namboothiris are thought to have come from the North too, but when it is not known. Obviously, it was much earlier than Sri Shankaracharya. On the other hand, many of the Namboothiris today might have just been the locals too - trained as brahmanas by those who came to teach from the North.
precisely. same applies for present day brahmins in tamil nadu, karnataka et al. either descendants of the original ones who came from the north (ramesh krishnan) or local trainees (and their descendants) of the aforementioned (radha krishnan)
Avestan is a later version of ancient Iranian.
avestan IS ancient iranian. parsi is a later iranian or later avestan whichever u prefer.
Ancient Iranian and Vedic Sanskrit are related.
yes. avestan and vedic sanskrit are cognate.
Which proves nothing.
which proves a lot. they have the same root words and come from the same people.
Tamil and Kannada are thought to be related. So?
if u subtract the sanskrit influence on kannada, then yes they are related. for the same reason as ^^^ and proving the same things
Did you invent Sanskrit?
no and nor did i claim to.
You didn't. What a surprise.
aah, so u expected me to eh??
Don't take credit for something you had no involvement in.
i didnt, now did i??
At least my father speaks Sanskrit, paternal grandfather's mother wrote letters in Sanskrit.
yeah, just whom did they learn the sanskrit from?? whom did south india learn sanskrit from??
My uncle on the paternal side's mother was a Hindu Scholar who debated philosophy in Sanskrit and won against male Brahmanas, and Jainas (not in Sanskrit).
proving what??? that sanskrit originated in tamil nadu and SSVC??
They are also all of them excellent in Tamil on my maternal side and Kannada on my paternal side.
proving what??? sanskrit originated in karnataka and not SSVC??
My grandfather taught Kannada, Sanskrit, Maths and Science to all the village children.
yeah so???
No varna-based discrimination. These children were all, without exception, good at learning. That includes their accomplishments in Sanskrit: essay writing, poetry, prose.
proving what my dear??
The Puranas only mention it at the time the regions N of the Vindhya were called Aryavarta. Eventually, Aryavarta would included the rest of India.
since eventually, hinduism would spread to all of india.
Krunvanto Visham Aryam. By the time the Chinese visited India, and Buddhist monks from South India travelled to China, the Chinese referred to South India as being part of Aryavarta and Bharatavarsha too. Geez.
so we got to learn from the chinese what is aryavarta and whats not?? columbus incidentally referred to usa as india. dont mean he was right.
Too many to list, but you'll be wondering who's that? Since communist, British and missionaries made sure no one in India would know the contribution of South Indians to Hinduism.
so how come Rg veda was compiled vy the members of the puru tribe?? and mahabharat was written by ved vaysa?? and not by tamilians?? can i have the names of emminent non-brahmin tamilians??
The Agamas are in Tamil and are ancient, they are as Hindu as other sacred Hindu writings.
really?? sacred like the vedas?? agamas as pillars of hinduism?? how old are the agamas?? as old as the Rg veda?
Narayana Guru in South India made great contributions to Hinduism in recent times. These you must know of.
sure. vivekananda and aurobindo made zero contribution to hinduism. all they did was write deravitives of hinduism and hindu philosophy. expound on hinduism. not create hindu scripture. no one reads mantras composed by them. same applies to all modern and mediaval day gurus.
To which temples in India are the Gods still seen visiting by the locals, villagers or otherwise? Uma and Maheshwaran, Lakshmi and Vishnu, Kartikeya, Indran, Suryan and all the others, South India is full of them.
cos its not located where rajasthan and u.p is. dont prove that the vedas are NOT entirely of sanskritic manufacture. btw, its surya not suryan, indra not indran, and maheswar (maha + ishwar) and not maheswaran. thats the correct sanskrit pronunciatian.
Even the most 'simple' villager knows how to do Surya Namaskaram. Do you?Without having to look it up online.
its surya namaskar (no M), both sanskrit words. vindicating my point again. and i dont believe in rituals.
They know how to ask the Gods to make it rain in the villages. Do you?
i dont believe in superstition either.
Do you see the Hindu Gods?
no. nor any other gods
Or are you only getting the silent treatment of Yahweh (who cannot be seen or heard or felt in this world) in your Brahmo-Samaji-Hare-Krishna reforms?
hare krishnas are a runaway sect of vaishnavs. i dont believe in yahweh or any other god. i am an agnostic (meaning i confess i dont know if god exists or not) and i am a brahmo for all practical purposes. (dont do rituals.)
Shiva and Uma, Vishnu and Lakshmi, the Devargal are not Dravidian or Vedic Aryan inventions. They are pan-Indian subcontinent Gods.
wrong. all are of sanskritic manufacture. very much vedic aryan inventians/concepts
These are the Gods of all the people down to Sri Lanka.
hinduism was exported to sri lanka too. dont make them aryan/sanskritic.
Bengal is still Shaktic isn't it? It was historically.
the worship of shakti (ie. durga and kali) is popular there yes. as ever.
Kashmir was Shaivaite and Shaktic. Afghanistan was very Shaivaite.
yes. and aryan.
Where are the Devargal still worshipped? Indra, Agni, Vayu, Varuna, Surya? The Navagrahas?
i am not sure what devargal means and which language it is. but indra, vayu (the lithuanian word for wind or breeze is "vajus", with the "j" pronounced as "y"), varun and agni (the first god ever mentioned in scripture, if the Rg Ved is indeed the oldest religious text) are all sanskrit names.
Where do we still know how to pronounce Sanskrit properly and not turn it into Hindi ('Mahabharat, Ramayan, Arjun, Bhim, Ram')?
in north india. cos the REAL pronunciatiation IS mahabharat and not mahabharatA, ram and not ramA, Arjun and not arjunA, ramayan and not ramayanA and yog and not yogA and shiv and not shivA........hahaha caught !!
Where are horses and dogs still given names like Arya?
woops !! does this have an ulterior motive?? horses were prized amongst the arya though. dunno if the rest valued it.
Where do people still give names of Gods and Goddesses to their children?
all over india.
Where do the villagers still tell the Ramayan<b>am</b>, Mahabharat<b>am</b> to their children?
in parts of india not unfortunate enough to have fallen in the hands of islam. now you answer me - where was ramayan and mahabharat stories based?? in which language were they written?? which language has a system where by maha+bharat becomes mahabharat??
Where do the brahmanas still pronounce the Vedic rites properly and invoke the Gods?
uttar pradesh (esp varanasi) - the cradle of hinduism.
Where do the 'simplest' villagers know that their ancestors were Hindu since the beginning of India,
north india. south india became hindu recently (ie. after hinduism was exported south and the ramayan and mahabharat taught to the locals and local brahmins manufactured)
in spite of villains hitting us over the head for centuries with the AIT/Christian/Dravidian-NorthIndian/Islamist theories? [Answer: South India. Possibly other parts of India, too - including the North]
wrong.
You are free to call a spade a spade.
as are you. now if you only would.
But please, stick to your day-job of identifying spades.
i have. and though you dont realise it, you too have, in these very posts of yours. you just vindicated me repeatedly !!
By the way, Pakistan's ISI called. They've fired all their ignorant pseudo-scholars. They want to hire you, because you're doing a better job than of all them. Though as ill-informed as those they sacked, they think you're more useful, being a Hindu.
so i am - an arya living on this side of the sindhu. and i am not surprised that you are in touch with the isi. Ltte too, i am sure.
No offense to other Hindus, Jains, etc. from North India. The only differences I see are regional.
then you dont see much !!
open your eyes. and ears. there'll be difference in what you'll see and what you'll hear.