I don't know what thread this goes into. Why not here.
Reading the following, I was reminded of how IIRC Konkan GSBs (GSBs from Gomantak to Maharashtra's Ko(n)kanastha/Chitpavan - sp? - Hindu communities) to Kerala Hindus recall the Hindu tradition that Parashurama reclaimed (large swathes of) the Konkan and Kerala land from the Ocean.
Don't quote me on this.
Via rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2011/07/dna-8000-year-old-advanced-civilisation.html
Photos plus captions over multiple pages
www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/slideshow_photos-8000-year-old-advanced-civilisation-in-konkan-coast_1547920
Seems I wasn't imagining it:
a) Konkan GSBs (Gomantak etc):
http://www.gsbkonkani.net/konkani.htm
Two things:
1. What, Bihar's entire history is not purely Buddhist as everyone always pretends it's ever been whenever they speak of its history? You mean to say it was a very Vedic Hindu centre at some point, long before Buddha and Buddhism even existed? "Ya don't say."
2. It's strange. I was going to get round to commenting on a bit from the news that mentioned "Witzel invades Thrissur to terrorise Hindus conducting Vedic rite". In specific, the comment was going to be about what it seemed to indicate concerning both Namboodiris's deeper ancientry in the south than is generally allowed and their indigenousness to Bharatam (I never suspected them of being anything but indigenous, but some absurd rumours had been set in motion in recent times that they weren't.) More on this some other time and in that thread on the Thrissur yagnya, if I can find it again.
I was going to mention in that future post how the only remaining brahmana communities which were still threatened with having an alien identity imposed on them by modern/alien history-writing were the GSBs and Chitpavans:
- The latter have variously been declared as Greeks elseZoroastrian Persians, since "apparently" they just "washed up on the Indian shore with no memory of their past. Ask any Chitpavan. 'Therefore' they *must* be Greek/Zoroastrian Persian, they couldn't possibly be indigenous Indians forget native brahmanas."
- TSPers have laughably attempted to declare GSBs (and all SBs) to be "jews who originally settled in Kashmir" all in order to claim Aishwarya Rai as a fellow 'abrahamic' or something. Except that bit of wishful thinking failed in multiple ways: as Aishwarya Rai explains of her family, they are Tulu, i.e. one of the ancient Hindoo communities that speaks one of the 5 ancient "dravoodian" tongues. A community that didn't wander south from the Saraswati River, from the little I know.
Anyway, as ridiculous as all that desperate nonsense about GSBs being aliens sounds (then again, oryans are japhetics and israelis are semites while dravoodians are hamites, when will Hindoos be free of biblical impositions?) the west took the story peddled by TSP about Rai seriously for some time, with several famous movie sites quoting some mad TSPer's book on Aishwarya Rai about how GSBs were supposedly originally Jewish people from Israel and that Aishwarya - on account of her light eyes and being from Mangalore where not only Tulus but also Konkanis reside - "must therefore be" a GSB-er and "hence it followed that she is of Jewish origins".
And if those multi-level jokes weren't carried too far already as it was, some American Jewish sites started alluding to not only Aishwyara Rai but also other Hindus of SB communities as being of Jewish origin.
Curious though. More than one Brahmana community has been slandered with an alien origin, as if their own view of their indigenous Indian + Hindoo (in this case brahmana) identity is entirely to be ignored. As if they couldn't possibly have passed on their religion from one generation to the next.
While Aishwarya Rai's indigenousness was never truly encroached on (since ignorant TSP's don't know anything about the south, and probably didn't know about Tulus) - lucky her - I'm curious whether one can read the above news as vindicating the SBs at last as being indigenous. (To think Hindus have to keep putting the never-ending stream of lies questioning their ancestry to rest.) In other words, my question is: could this bit of news free the SBs of the recently-invented christoislamic slander that they are supposedly "aliens and not even originally Hindu - they're pretending to be hereditary brahmanas i.e. of a Vedic history" and the accusations that they are somehow "Jews".
If the above does have any bearing on the movement of the GSBs into the Konkan, it could push the western-imposed timeframe of "4000 BCE is when the SBs dispersed from the Saraswati" to an earlier date.
b ) Oh look, seems I was not wrong about Kerala either:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File
arshuramsaraswats.jpg
Still following on from my elaborate guessing game (hey if western indologicals can start theorising grandiose theories about their unverifiable ancestors/history based on very neutral/silent data, can't I play my much fairer game of considering/imagining a relation between the Parashurama narrative and archeological discoveries?) -
So, onward with my hypothesising:
If the discovery off the coast does end up having some sort of connection to the above Parashurama narrative after all, does this mean people will finally stop threatening Parashurama with being a Persian/having reclaimed land in Persia (or whatever it was that they were threatening him with, I can't properly recall)?
Oh well, I guess we'll never know as long as Dharmics continue to allow christianism to rule over them: Like I said, if given half a chance, the christogovt will do its evil-christo-best to bury anything that predates "4004 BC". And certainly if such things were to turn out to have any bearing on Hindus, their history and indigenousness (and their ancestral Hindooness).
Reading the following, I was reminded of how IIRC Konkan GSBs (GSBs from Gomantak to Maharashtra's Ko(n)kanastha/Chitpavan - sp? - Hindu communities) to Kerala Hindus recall the Hindu tradition that Parashurama reclaimed (large swathes of) the Konkan and Kerala land from the Ocean.
Don't quote me on this.
Via rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2011/07/dna-8000-year-old-advanced-civilisation.html
Photos plus captions over multiple pages
www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/slideshow_photos-8000-year-old-advanced-civilisation-in-konkan-coast_1547920
Quote:[color="#0000FF"]Photos: 8000-year-old advanced civilisation in Konkan Coast?[/color]
Published: Thursday, May 26, 2011 on 21:13 IST | Updated: Thursday, May 26, 2011 on 21:21 IST
Caption 1:
Did the Konkan coast from Shrivardhan in Raigad to Vengurla in Sindhudurga host a human habitat around 8000 years ago? Did that population have well-developed engineering skills? Was there a unique Konkan culture in existence in 6000BC?
A new archaeological discovery, below sea level along the Konkan coast, could give answers to these questions. And explorers say the answer could well be a big ââ¬ËYes!ââ¬â¢
Caption 2:
Researchers have found a wall-like structure that is 24 kilometres long, 2.7 metres tall, and around 2.5 metres wide. The structure shows uniformity in its construction.
ââ¬ÅThe structure is not continuous throughout the 225 kilometres from Shrivardhan to Raigad, but it is uniform,ââ¬Â said Dr Ashok Marathe, professor, department of archaeology, Postgraduate and Research Institute, Deccan College, Pune.
ââ¬ÅIt has been found three metres below the present sea level. It has been constructed on the ancient sand beach, which was taken as the base for the construction. Considering the uniformity of the structure, it was obvious that the structure is man-made and not natural.ââ¬Â
Caption 3:
The joint expedition carried by Deccan College and the central governmentââ¬â¢s department of science and technology, was in progress from 2005.
ââ¬ÅWe were actually studying the impacts of tsunamis and earthquakes on the western coast when we first found this structure in Valneshwar,ââ¬Â said Marathe. ââ¬ÅThen we started talking with the locals and fisherfolks and we got news about more such structures below water.ââ¬Â
Caption 4:
Marathe added that, the uniformity also shows that the people who built it belong to the same culture from Shrivardhan to Vengurla.
However, deciding the age of the structure was done on the basis of sea level mapping.
Caption 5:
Bottom of the wall
ââ¬ÅThere have been extensive studies about the sea water coming inside the land,ââ¬Â said Marathe. ââ¬ÅThe wallââ¬â¢s base, that is ancient sand, is about six metres below the present sea level. Based on the calculations, experts from the National Institute of Oceanography found the age of the wall as around 6000 BC.ââ¬Â
According to him, the sea was away from its present coastline in 6000 BC and this wall could have been an effort to prevent the sea water from coming inside the human habitat.
[color="#800080"](Why do people keep saying things like "6000 BC" - according to the BC/AD timeline, there *was* no "6000 BC", where about 4004 "BC" is the max going backwards. But if, like the rest of us, you think that the planet existed for longer than that, you'd be using BCE and CE - for expressing things in a timeline that the west can understand.)[/color]
Caption 6:
Middle of the wall
The discovery has raised a number of questions.
How were these huge stones of Laterite and Deccan Trap variety transported to the coast?
What exactly was the purpose behind building the wall?
If the date of the walls is true then is it from around the same time as the Indus Valley Civilisation?
Why has there been no mention of this civilisation till now?
Marathe, who will retire in July 2011, has asked more people to come forward to take his work ahead and to try to find answer to these questions.
Caption 7:
Top of the wall
In the wake of a number of power projects coming on the Konkan coast and the growing discontent about the projects, this discovery could prove vital.
Marathe, though does not have much hope from the government mentioned that this, if studied properly could be a major chapter of human beingââ¬â¢s history.
ââ¬ÅIt is now up to the government how they treat my finding,ââ¬Â he said.
[color="#800080"](How do people think a christogovt will treat the finding of something older than "4004 BC"?)[/color]
Quote:Reading the following, I was reminded of how IIRC Konkan GSBs (GSBs from Gomantak to Maharashtra's Ko(n)kanastha/Chitpavan - sp? - Hindu communities) to Kerala Hindus recall the Hindu tradition that Parashurama reclaimed (large swathes of) the Konkan and Kerala land from the Ocean.
Don't quote me on this.
Seems I wasn't imagining it:
a) Konkan GSBs (Gomantak etc):
http://www.gsbkonkani.net/konkani.htm
Quote:Konkans and Konkani :
In our Puranas and other ancient writings there is a mention of 'Sapta Konkana' or seven Konkans. These seven Konkans were in the west coast of India. Although Konkani language is identified with an area geographically, it is surprising that only we, the Gowda Saraswat Brahmins are called 'konkanis', 'konkans' or 'konkanigaru'. To amplify further, although many others have Konkani as their mother-tongue, they are not called 'konkanis'. With this we can infer that originally we were the people who propagated and encouraged this language. In the above referred Konkanpatti even today we are referred to as Brahmins and not Konkanis as we are Gowda Saraswat Brahmins carrying out the duties expected of Brahmins.
Gowda Saraswat Brahmins :
Even this name Gowda Saraswat Brahmins refers to the places. Our ancestors in the days of yore, resided on the banks of the River Saraswati. There was a very severe drought lasting for many years as a result of which the river got dried up and they had to leave the place. They moved eastwards and reached a place called "Trihotrapura", the present day "Tiruhut" in the state of Bihar. In the olden days the Vedic literature was called "thrayee" and the "ritvijs" participating in the "yajnas" were "hotas". Therefore the very name "Trihotrapura" suggests that it could have been a prominent centre for learning Vedas. Incidentally this township was in Gowda Desha comprising of the present day states of Bihar and Bengal. The very name Gowda Desha was associated with the production of "guda" - jaggery. On account of our residing in both the Gowda Desha and Saraswat country, we acquired the name of Gowda Saraswat Brahmins. The subsequent story is known to everyone. [color="#800080"](Even to me it seems[/color] [color="#0000FF"]Lord Parashurama acquired and reclaimed land from the sea in the western part of our country which came to be known as Parashurama Srishti. To officiate the sacrifices he was going to perform, Lord Parashurama invited our ancestors and thus we reached Gomantak, the present day Goa.[/color]
Two things:
1. What, Bihar's entire history is not purely Buddhist as everyone always pretends it's ever been whenever they speak of its history? You mean to say it was a very Vedic Hindu centre at some point, long before Buddha and Buddhism even existed? "Ya don't say."
2. It's strange. I was going to get round to commenting on a bit from the news that mentioned "Witzel invades Thrissur to terrorise Hindus conducting Vedic rite". In specific, the comment was going to be about what it seemed to indicate concerning both Namboodiris's deeper ancientry in the south than is generally allowed and their indigenousness to Bharatam (I never suspected them of being anything but indigenous, but some absurd rumours had been set in motion in recent times that they weren't.) More on this some other time and in that thread on the Thrissur yagnya, if I can find it again.
I was going to mention in that future post how the only remaining brahmana communities which were still threatened with having an alien identity imposed on them by modern/alien history-writing were the GSBs and Chitpavans:
- The latter have variously been declared as Greeks elseZoroastrian Persians, since "apparently" they just "washed up on the Indian shore with no memory of their past. Ask any Chitpavan. 'Therefore' they *must* be Greek/Zoroastrian Persian, they couldn't possibly be indigenous Indians forget native brahmanas."
- TSPers have laughably attempted to declare GSBs (and all SBs) to be "jews who originally settled in Kashmir" all in order to claim Aishwarya Rai as a fellow 'abrahamic' or something. Except that bit of wishful thinking failed in multiple ways: as Aishwarya Rai explains of her family, they are Tulu, i.e. one of the ancient Hindoo communities that speaks one of the 5 ancient "dravoodian" tongues. A community that didn't wander south from the Saraswati River, from the little I know.
Anyway, as ridiculous as all that desperate nonsense about GSBs being aliens sounds (then again, oryans are japhetics and israelis are semites while dravoodians are hamites, when will Hindoos be free of biblical impositions?) the west took the story peddled by TSP about Rai seriously for some time, with several famous movie sites quoting some mad TSPer's book on Aishwarya Rai about how GSBs were supposedly originally Jewish people from Israel and that Aishwarya - on account of her light eyes and being from Mangalore where not only Tulus but also Konkanis reside - "must therefore be" a GSB-er and "hence it followed that she is of Jewish origins".
And if those multi-level jokes weren't carried too far already as it was, some American Jewish sites started alluding to not only Aishwyara Rai but also other Hindus of SB communities as being of Jewish origin.
Curious though. More than one Brahmana community has been slandered with an alien origin, as if their own view of their indigenous Indian + Hindoo (in this case brahmana) identity is entirely to be ignored. As if they couldn't possibly have passed on their religion from one generation to the next.
While Aishwarya Rai's indigenousness was never truly encroached on (since ignorant TSP's don't know anything about the south, and probably didn't know about Tulus) - lucky her - I'm curious whether one can read the above news as vindicating the SBs at last as being indigenous. (To think Hindus have to keep putting the never-ending stream of lies questioning their ancestry to rest.) In other words, my question is: could this bit of news free the SBs of the recently-invented christoislamic slander that they are supposedly "aliens and not even originally Hindu - they're pretending to be hereditary brahmanas i.e. of a Vedic history" and the accusations that they are somehow "Jews".
If the above does have any bearing on the movement of the GSBs into the Konkan, it could push the western-imposed timeframe of "4000 BCE is when the SBs dispersed from the Saraswati" to an earlier date.
b ) Oh look, seems I was not wrong about Kerala either:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File
arshuramsaraswats.jpgQuote:[color="#800080"](Image caption
Description Parshuramsaraswats.jpg
English: This painting showing Lord en
Still following on from my elaborate guessing game (hey if western indologicals can start theorising grandiose theories about their unverifiable ancestors/history based on very neutral/silent data, can't I play my much fairer game of considering/imagining a relation between the Parashurama narrative and archeological discoveries?) -
So, onward with my hypothesising:
If the discovery off the coast does end up having some sort of connection to the above Parashurama narrative after all, does this mean people will finally stop threatening Parashurama with being a Persian/having reclaimed land in Persia (or whatever it was that they were threatening him with, I can't properly recall)?
Oh well, I guess we'll never know as long as Dharmics continue to allow christianism to rule over them: Like I said, if given half a chance, the christogovt will do its evil-christo-best to bury anything that predates "4004 BC". And certainly if such things were to turn out to have any bearing on Hindus, their history and indigenousness (and their ancestral Hindooness).
Death to traitors.