04-01-2007, 05:38 AM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2007, 07:53 AM by Husky.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/india.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Siddis were Ethiopians kidnapped into slavery by the usual racists: islamis. The Ethiopians in India were brought by Indian muslims (=slavers).
One branch I hear managed to break free after a ship-wreck off coastal India near Goa I think, and so they were never converted to the scary religion but still remain African Religionists. I read that they also helped Hindus fight against the muslim oppressors.
But the others forcibly brought to India were not so fortunate and today they're all islamis, sadly.
That page has so many ridiculous mistakes in it ("Bengal was ruled by Abyssinians" said some Portuguese guy - of course he would, to colonial Europeans all Indians were Africans because they weren't white), but perhaps the following deserves a mention:
the page quotes someone saying that Buddha was an Egyptian priest, referring to some description of him with woolly hair. Yeah, sure. Why not. This is after all, the only version I hadn't yet heard. But how is it more likely than other random descriptions of the Buddha with red hair which the Oryanists like to hold up as proof for the Oryan ancestry of the Buddha? (And <i>they</i> think Sakhya Muni = Shaka Muni, mwahahahahaha). But then, they <i>need</i> an 'Oryan' Buddha to make the Central Asianists have practised and spread an 'Oryan' religion. Like these Pan-Africanists need an African Buddha to prove the same, but about Africans.
The oldest Egyptian culture was African. And it is hypothesised that the Sphinxes were possibly built by them, but scholars never seemed to agree about the dating of the Egyptian monuments. I've heard dates ranging from 10,000 years, 5,000 years, 3,000 years. Which is it?
But later, Egypt was taken over by another ethnic group and its culture. And this happened repeatedly until the time when Greece took over Egypt (Alexander's time certainly, before that possibly). Cleopatra of the 1st century BCE was a Greek, descended from Ptolemy I think.
When dating is in question, where's the proof that in 6th century BCE Egyptians were all still African?
Of course, this has no bearing on the Buddha, who was Indian, and of which there is no doubt. He was of a Kshatriya dynasty, and dynasty means you need to have been in India pretty long. 'Sakhya' in Muni also indicates this. But there need be no question of foreign origins for his ancestors either.
But why believe any Indian literature or tradition to this effect - none of which make mention of his Egyptian origins or ancestry? Why not believe some random European who thinks Buddha had 'woolly' or 'red' hair and, like Indologists, ignore the Indian tradition altogether or misinterpret it wherever useful to <i>make</i> Buddha fit the Oryan or African mould, depending on who is the one doing the appropriating.
Anyway, whether it's the Oryanists or the Pan-Africanists, they're all reconstructing history with very little knowledge of the places, figures, civilisations and people they are appropriating. They make huge mistakes and assumptions and try to imagine that black skin means African. The pictures of tribal and other South Indian people and 'dalits' at that link above makes bad argument. Just because they are dark doesn't mean they are African. (Same with Australian Aborigines or Fijians.) Most South Indians are dark. Then where are the pictures of many of the equally-dark Brahmanas of South India with a label beneath saying they are African too? The omission might be due to the fact that Pan-Africanists believe just as fervently in the racist AIT as the Oryanists.
Here's a hint: dark people can be appropriated as African only if they are from Africa in recent times - like the Siddis. Not if they lived in India for 5,000 or 10,000 years or more, say. In which case they are Indian.
Else what then, the whole world's brown people would be considered 'African'? That's no different from the ignorant racists among the Americans who think everyone in the world is either Caucasian ('white'), African or 'Chinese'.
There are a thousand sites like the one mentioned in the previous post. There's nothing different or special in this one to bring it up.
<b>CORRECTIONS:</b> lots of typos, spelling and plain absent-minded errors in the above are corrected; the changes are in blue.
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Apr 1 2007, 05:38 AM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Apr 1 2007, 05:38 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/india.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Siddis were Ethiopians kidnapped into slavery by But later, Egypt was taken over by another ethnic group and its culture. And this happened repeatedly until the time when Greece took over Egypt (Alexander's time certainly, before that possibly). Cleopatra of the 1st century BCE was a Greekfor his ancestors either.
But why believe any Indian literature or tradition to this effect - none of which make mention of his Egyptian origins or ancestry? Why not believe some random European who thinks Buddha had 'woolly' or 'red' hair and, like Indologists, ignore the Indian tradition altogether or misinterpret it wherever useful to <i>make</i> Buddha fit the Oryan or Else There are a thousand sites like the one mentioned in the previous post. There's nothing different or special in this one to bring it up.
<b>CORRECTIONS:</b> lots of typos, spelling and plain absent-minded errors in the above are corrected; the changes are in blue.
[right][snapback]66408[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In many pictures Buddha has mongol eyes.As he was near nepal,maybe he has some mongol ancestry also?(beside his african and european ancestry <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> )
Arheological speaking,the ruins of Egipt are older then thoose of Ethiopia or Sudan.If you wonder how faraonic egiptians look like,look at today egiptians.I belive that egiptians of today(and same about the greeks) have more subsaharian genes then thier ancestors.Was a big trade of slaves from Kush in ancient and medieval world.So big that even scandinavians have 0.6% subsaharian genes.
i read that an white can become black (whit broad nose) by staying 20000 years in a tropical habitat.
Ethiopians speak a semitic language by the way(not hamitic) but semito-hamitic was replace whit afro-asiatic because of racist conotations of the former term.
Some belive that Sphinx is 10000 years old because his erosion,who they belive was produce by rain ,which was a common thing in Egipt 10000 years ago .But the erosion of Sphinx is produce by salt not water.A phenomen stil happend today.So date for the Sphinx is 2600bc.
If we think at the genetic bottle-necks ,then we have 5 "races"-african(subsaharian),caucasian(including north africa !),mongol,australian,american.But are no clear cuts delimitations of these "races.Is clear that this bottle-necks are created by separation of continents by waters and deserts betwin.
Australian aborigenals are same geneticaly distant from africans as european are(even we are tented to see australians more close to africans because their dark complexion).
PS-i read that roma gypsy are the most genetic similar whit sinhala people.Qwestion-sinhala are people from Sri Lanka?Are the same whit the singhalese?
Tamils have equal Distribution of FourVarnas as north, except that Brahmins are little less. Vedas do not have castes. But Tholkappiam and Sangam Literaure has all that.
Sangam Literature(200BCE-200CE), Thol Kappiam(100-200CE), TIRUKURAL -250CE, Silapathikaram & Manimekhalai(300CE) EACH ONE them regards Vedas highly an I Can post literal Tamil if fonts are availble.
Ofcourse False Researches tried to claim a Artificial Tamil Vedas and I QUOTE vERBATIM BY A Communist Researcher in this.
concludes :
âThe Aryan-Dravidian or Aryan-Tamil dichotomy envisaged by some scholars may have to be given up since we are unable to come across anything which could be designated as purely Aryan or purely Dravidian in the character of South India of the Sangam Age. In view of this, the Sangam culture has to be looked upon as expressing in a local idiom all the essential features of classical âHinduâ culture. M. G. S. Narayanan, âThe Vedic-Puranic-Shastraic Element in Tamil Sangam Society and Culture,â in Essays in Indian Art, Religion and Society, p. 128.
Nilakanta Sastri goes a step further and opines,
âThere does not exist a single line of Tamil literature written before the Tamils came into contact with, and let us add accepted with genuine appreciation, the Indo-Aryan culture of North Indian origin.â
The falsehood of a Separate Tamil NanMarai was well ANALYSED BY Communist Scholar V.Krishnamurthy, and I quote from his article.
The Author analyses the above names usage in Tamil Old Lit, and finds the earliest in a Copper Plate Grants called as âParvathiva sekara puram copper platesâ issued by Aay King Kokkarunan Thadakkan giving Paddy Grants to the Practices of Paviziyam, Thaththiriyam and Thalavarkarams. This Pandiyan Copper Plate is earlier than Nachinaarkiniyar writing the Commentary for Tholkappiyam.
Communist Scholar Mr.V.Krishnamurthy then goes on to analsyse these with the Assistance of S.C.Bannerjiâs âDharma Sutras- A study in that Origin and Developmentâ and finds from Veda developed Samhitas and Sutras.
· Paviziyam refers to Apasthamba Sutra from Yajur Vedic School.
· Thaththiriyam is from Yajur Vedic School, i.e., Thaththiriya Prmana- and its brach Vaikaana dharma Sutra
· Thalavarkara is from Sama Veda School,, referring Gowthama Dhara Sutra.
Now for the benefit of Doubters who have been always cheated by ThaniTamil movement Scholars- Devaneya Pavanar in his book âOppiyan Mozhi Nuulâ written in 1939, has analysed the same and came to the same conclusion, of the fact that Nachinarkiniyar claim of Tholkappiyam being written before Vedas being written is just a wrong Prideful claim and the names Paviziyam, Thaththiriyam, Thalavarkarams and Atharvanam are Part of Indian Vedas. Devanyan when this Meaningless book of KA.SU.Pillai- âThiruNanMarai Vilakkamâ raised a controversy has to give clarification
Separate matter. About this paragraph:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nilakanta Sastri goes a step further and opines,
âThere does not exist a single line of Tamil literature written before the Tamils came into contact with, and let us add accepted with genuine appreciation, the Indo-Aryan culture of North Indian origin.â<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Nilakanta Sastri obviously did not question the Oryans or even the AIT, so his explanation incorporates them. I think such explanations ought to be revisited based on what we today know did not happen (AIT). And in that case, I think we may turn back to what we traditionally knew about our country and its beliefs (Sanatana Dharma).
Without presupposing the AIT or existence of Oryans, the case becomes simpler. Ancient Hindu Tamils eventually received Vedic knowledge which had passed South from the Northwest where the Vedas were composed. (All other areas of India only got the Vedas from the NW anyway, so in this matter, time is all that separates the inundation of various regions of India with the Vedas). Later, much after the incorporation of Vedic knowledge, Tamils started writing the literature down. By this time the Vedic Hindu elements had long become part of the older Hindu traditions that Tamil Nadu (and the rest of India) already had.
04-03-2007, 12:22 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2007, 12:28 PM by Husky.)
To do with my own post 104:
In case anyone is wondering what I mean with 'Hindu' Indians (including Tamils) 'before the Vedas', guess I'll have to explain, although I am sure I wrote about this long ago in some other thread at IF.
To put it in a simple way: Well, what do we call all the Indians before Buddhism? Followers of Sanatana Dharma. Similarly, what were Indians before Jaina literature or the Vedas? The same. Or, if one were to take a western phrase, we were 'animists' - all of India was 'polytheistic, animistic, semi/fully idolatrous heathens'. So we remained after the Vedas, too, of course <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo--> (since it was no change of religion in the first place) as were Indians after Buddhism for the most part.
Before Madhya Pradesh, Kashmir or Orissa or Bengal and elsewhere in the North got the Vedas from the NW, they too were ... followers of Sanatana Dharma / 'animists'. As were the peoples of the Southern regions. As were the pre-Vedic NW Indians themselves (also 'polytheistic animists'). Moreso since we can ignore the AIT fantasy. The Vedas were founded on the existing cosmogony of India's Sanatana Dharma. They don't set out a new religion, they expanded the knowledge on it: explaining this newly received knowledge <i>within</i> the eternal Dharma of India.
Besides, as per old tradition, the pan-Indian Gods have been known and revered in Tamil Nadu for longer than the Vedas have been known of. And I am certain this is true for all North Indian places as well.
Since the AIT fell through for me, I can easily turn back to traditional Indian (and Tamil) understanding of our past. No more need for the recent christocolonial inventions about this - not for me.
I quoted Tholkappiyam in TSC Avarangal Fonts, which was downoaded, where as my postings where in Tsc Cuthuma. Can you Kindly get this Tamil Fonts downloaded, as Most of the Sangam Lit. downloaded from Project Madurai are in this Fonts.
I do not agree AIT, but when we quote Old Authors, we maintain Verbatim. Even though many Authors do not fully believe AIT STILL they wrote the words incoming Aryans, when referring, we need not take it seriously.
My Point is There is not a Single word in Tamil Lit. about Separate Aryan or Dravidian Race.
<!--QuoteBegin-Husky+Apr 3 2007, 12:19 PM-->QUOTE(Husky @ Apr 3 2007, 12:19 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ancient Hindu Tamils eventually received Vedic knowledge which had passed South from the Northwest where the Vedas were composed. (All other areas of India only got the Vedas from the NW anyway, so in this matter, time is all that separates the inundation of various regions of India with the Vedas). Later, much after the incorporation of Vedic knowledge, Tamils started writing the literature down. By this time the Vedic Hindu elements had long become part of the older Hindu traditions that Tamil Nadu (and the rest of India) already had.
[right][snapback]66476[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
doesn't that imply that parts of india outside the north west part had religions different from vedic hinduism, and converted to hinduism only after vedic knowlegde reached their part of the subcontinent.
did parts of india have some other religion apart from Hinduism and buddhism (which itself sprung from hinduism) or not. seems very likely that vedic hinduism was originally limited to those parts of india which spoke/understood sanskrit.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I quoted Tholkappiyam in TSC Avarangal Fonts, which was downoaded, where as my postings where in Tsc Cuthuma. Can you Kindly get this Tamil Fonts downloaded, as Most of the Sangam Lit. downloaded from Project Madurai are in this Fonts.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Karunanidhi pays homage to slain LTTE leader
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In his poem, written in a manner as if Karunanidhi was addressing it to Thamilchelvan, the Chief Minister said by dying "(you) turned yourself into fertiliser, for the sake of the struggle for (Tamil) rights."
A prolific writer, Karunanidhi added in his poem:
The 'Utham Purush' that you are,
Your life is not extinguishable nor
Would you let your brethren die;
Selva, you have carved a place for yourself
In every Tamil habitat and heart;
Where have you gone?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This homage to Lankan Tamil of a branded terrorist org is very enlightening. <!--emo&:thumbdown--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Karunanidhi cares more for Tamil from a black-listed organization in Lanka than any security personnel in India, why? Surely there are thousands of cops and security personnel who put their lives in the line of fire every day to save the miserable hides of these politicians, how about a tribute to them or their family?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Until last year, the Tamils used to celebrate their New Year Day on 14 April. That day usually falls on the first day of Chitrai which used to be the first month of the Tamil calendar. Chitrai has now been unceremoniously pushed from its prime position to the third spot. For no fault of hers, she has lost her position to another Tamil month, Thai, thanks to Karunanidhi. At his behest, The Tamil Nadu Assembly passed last year a fiat which decreed that the Tamil New Year day would henceforth be shifted to 14 January â the first day of the month of Thai, which used to be the tenth month of the Tamil Calendar. Presumably, from now onwards, the tenth month will become the first month and the original first month will have to be satisfied with the third position.
....
In the year 1921, a few Tamil scholars belonging to a movement called âThe Pure Tamil Movementâ, which sought to detoxify Tamils of the Aryan poison, affirmed that it would be a wanton insult to the hoary Tamil Culture, if the Tamils continued to accept the first of Chitrai as the beginning of their New Year. The position, according to them, rightly belonged to the first of Thai, the day of Pongal, the harvest festival of the Tamils. There was no logic in their contention as both Chitrai and Thai are months in a calendar whose origin can be traced back to the Hindu religious, and hence non-Tamil, sources. But logic and âThe Pure Tamil Movementâ were not exactly coeval. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Yesterday, the TV news channel which Kalaignar (Tamil for 'Artist') Karunanidhi began as poor competetion to his grand-nephew Maran's SUN TV, named after him, Kalaignar TV, aired live a programme which gave us all scintillating moments of this senile geriatric's literary skills.
Vairamuthu, a film song writer and scumbag dravidian Green Tamil with Red blood and Black skin (pl take it from me, this is how they describe themselves, in red, green and black), regaled audiences with this narrative.
The occasion was also of towering national importance - scumbag dravidian Green, Red and Black anti-Hindu Tamil failed poets doubling as court-jesters felicitating their one-foot-in-the-grave Chief Minister for standing Hindu customs and traditions on their head by declaring January 14 the Tamil New Years' Day.
Just as Justice Markandey Katju did not have the courage to refer to the harijans by name and sought to hide his naked anti-Hinduism behind the fig-leaf 'Hindu', just so these scumbags did not have the courage to refer to 'Hindus' by name and preferred to beat up the brahmins (a profitable green,red and black political industry).
How scumbag Vairamuthu compared April 14 and January 14. This is a free translation of the dravidian Tamil vomit -
Vairamuthu's First bout of vomit
So used are our fishermen and women to the smell of dried fish that they cannot sleep without the nauseating smell and so they place a pillow of stinking dried fish under their heads at night.
Educating these people to appreciate the smell of fragrant flowers is an uphill task.
Just as uphill is the task of dravidian tamils to wean away the people of Tamil Nadu from the stench of brahminical April 14 to smell the fragrance of January 14.
It is the responsibility of all our men gathered here to educate the women of your household to greet each other and others on Januray 14, not on the occasion of 'Pongal' but as Tamil New Years' Day.
The vomit was enthusiastically endorsed and welcomed by the artist chief minister with enough strength and energy to nod his head vigorously.
Vairamuthu's second bout of diahorrea
I had the privilege of travelling with the honourable artist by flight from Chennai to Madurai to campsign for the Thirumangalam bye-elections.
An airhostess approached our artist and offered him some butter.
Our inimitable literary genius artist chief minister told her, "I dislike both butter and Bhattar. Both are saturated with "kozhuppu".
(Kozhuppu in Tamil is both saturated fat and arrogance)
To which the air-hostess replied, "Sir I belong to the Bhattar community'.
Oh, this is better.
(The implication being that the lady had the courage to admit to the green,red and black dravidian anti-hindu chief minister that she was a brahmin)
Vairamuthu's second bout of diahorrea was welcomed by loud guffaws of laughter from all the scumbag dravidian tamil ministers of the Tamil Nadu government present at the function.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> )
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo--> (since it was no change of religion in the first place) as were Indians after Buddhism for the most part.
