Why Vedic Gods are absent in 4500 years old Indus Valley Civilisation?

[coffee_rules]

Tell him about Lemuria, he will run with it.

10 hours ago, Moochad said:

You missed the key part 

 He's just trying to peddle his AIT agenda again. 

 

 

 

Tell him about Lemuria, he will run with it. Afrikans talked Tamil and ****. 

[Real McCoy]

1 hour ago, diga said:

+1 .. Lame rod should google Aditi/Diti/Kashyapa & finally Kashmir :)

lol at lame rod . This guy should tell his countrymen that his religion is a copy of an already existing religion at that place with added material for personal benefit like he did some posts back. I would like to see how his fellow countrymen would react to that. He dare not do that otherwise he wouldn't be alive to type this.

So what does he do. He comes to push his "atheism" to another religion which already doesn't discriminate against atheists. I had a chance to interact with a white american "intellectual" in Orkut back in the day where he was pointing to so called superstitions in Hinduism. I said to him to concentrate on superstitions in Christianity in his own country rather than going half a world away to criticize another religion. He said the christians in his own country are too adamant in their beliefs I was like if you can't captivate your own people why are you trying to captivate others. He was like I can't save my own so I'm trying to save others. I told him we don't need to be saved and we can take care of our own. I also told him nobody respects someone who can't change his own country but takes liberties in advising other countries.

Imagine a problem in our country that rarely happens in developed countries say public urination. What if I don't have the gumption to question whoever is pissing on Indian roads but I go to America and tell them not to piss on their roads. This is absurd logic. That dude cannot realize this basic logic. It happens mr. lame rod doesnt either. He questions Hinduism too much with some questions against Islam thrown in just to make sure others believe he is an atheist. But disappears when his islamic country commits terrorism against us and other countries when some mulla quotes from quran like ghazwa-e-hind urging the stupid people to fight

I recommend Hindus should be just as adamant as Christians and Muslims as my orkut friend said. That will deter others from attempting this behavior in the future.

[Muloghonto]

50 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

lol at lame rod . This guy should tell his countrymen that his religion is a copy of an already existing religion at that place with added material for personal benefit like he did some posts back. I would like to see how his fellow countrymen would react to that. He dare not do that otherwise he wouldn't be alive to type this.

So what does he do. He comes to push his "atheism" to another religion which already doesn't discriminate against atheists. I had a chance to interact with a white american "intellectual" in Orkut back in the day where he was pointing to so called superstitions in Hinduism. I said to him to concentrate on superstitions in Christianity in his own country rather than going half a world away to criticize another religion. He said the christians in his own country are too adamant in their beliefs I was like if you can't captivate your own people why are you trying to captivate others. He was like I can't save my own so I'm trying to save others. I told him we don't need to be saved and we can take care of our own. I also told him nobody respects someone who can't change his own country but takes liberties in advising other countries.

Imagine a problem in our country that rarely happens in developed countries say public urination. What if I don't have the gumption to question whoever is pissing on Indian roads but I go to America and tell them not to piss on their roads. This is absurd logic. That dude cannot realize this basic logic. It happens mr. lame rod doesnt either. He questions Hinduism too much with some questions against Islam thrown in just to make sure others believe he is an atheist. But disappears when his islamic country commits terrorism against us and other countries when some mulla quotes from quran like ghazwa-e-hind urging the stupid people to fight

I recommend Hindus should be just as adamant as Christians and Muslims as my orkut friend said. That will deter others from attempting this behavior in the future.

Hindus need to fight not just Christianity and Islam but also western liberalism, that is a product of monotheism of ‘divine transmissions’ being rejected. 

 

However, Hindus can only do this, if we see Hinduism as analogous to ‘ Greek philosophy’ and not analogous to a religion only. This is because while religion  dominates Hindu thought, Hinduism is really an amalgam of various nastik and astik components and there is atheism within the framework of Hindu philosophy, such as carvaka and lokayata 

[vayuu1]

56 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Hindus need to fight not just Christianity and Islam but also western liberalism, that is a product of monotheism of ‘divine transmissions’ being rejected. 

 

However, Hindus can only do this, if we see Hinduism as analogous to ‘ Greek philosophy’ and not analogous to a religion only. This is because while religion  dominates Hindu thought, Hinduism is really an amalgam of various nastik and astik components and there is atheism within the framework of Hindu philosophy, such as carvaka and lokayata 

don't forget, rationalists like gargi vachaknavi, who use to  question the processes. 

[Alam_dar]

13 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

Again you are asking empirical evidence from a civilization thats millenia old. What do you mean by yoga seals, paintings lol. They just put their deity on it. Yogic posture is supported by his pose. I don't know why you are persisting with this topic unless you are another missionary troll bent on conversion.

The Indus Valley Civilisation consisted of:

(1) More than 1000 settlements. Many of the cities had the population above 50,000 people

(2) The total population of this civilisation was above 1 Million. 

(3) Thousands of excavations were done and thousands of houses were found. But there was not a SINGLE TEMPLE found in all these 1000 settlements. 

(4) There was not a single statue of any Hindu God was found, although people in this civilisations were experts in making the statues as we could see the dancing girl and the priest king. 

(5) There is no seal or painting where people are praying in any temple or to any god. 

(6) Actually in whole India, there are no signs of Hinduism or Hindu gods till 3500 years ago. There are cave paintings in India, but again no Hindu gods or temples etc. 

(7)  If one goes by a chronological order, one can say the signs of first Hindu  gods started from 3rd century BC. 

This means no signs of Hindu gods between the end of the Indus valley civilisation (4500 years ago) and start of finding of signs of Hindu gods about 2300 years ago. This is a period of 2200 years where no sculpture of Hindu god were present. 

 

How can you explain this break of 2200 years in making of Hindu gods sculptures? 

Now the only excuse presented by modern Hindus is this that Hindu Religion is hundred and thousands of years old (since the beginning of this earth), but fashion of making sculptures of Hindu gods started only in 3rd century BC . Before that it was considered something like HARAM while it was a monotheistic religion. 

 

But by this token, it would have also been Haram to make sculpture of Hindu gods in Indus valley civilisation and then indeed Pashupati seal has nothing to do with Lord Shiva. 

 

I don't consider there is any weight to this excuse of modern Hindus.

 

Let us look at the History of Hindu Religion from wikipedia:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hinduism#Pre-Vedic_religions_(until_c._1750_BCE)

 

//The history of Hinduism is often divided into periods of development. The first period is the pre-Vedic period, which includes the Indus Valley Civilisation and local pre-historic religions, ending at about 1750 BCE. This period was followed in northern India by the Vedic period, which saw the introduction of the historical Vedic religion with the Indo-Aryan migrations, starting somewhere between 1900 BCE to 1400 BCE.^{[22][note 3]} The subsequent period, between 800 BCE and 200 BCE, is "a turning point between the Vedic religion and Hindu religions",^[25] and a formative period for Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. The Epic and Early Puranic period, from c. 200 BCE to 500 CE, saw the classical "Golden Age" of Hinduism (c. 320-650 CE), which coincides with the Gupta Empire. //

 

Therefore, the Hindu religion was born about 800 BCE and then it started evolving till 200 BCE when it took the final shape and we saw for the first time the presence of Hindu gods and the Hindu Temples.  This is making the perfect sense. 

 

Quote

Cernunos is not in a yoga position. He is just sitting with folded legs. folded legs doesnt constitute yoga. And how did you find the similarity. By checking the wiki article?

Cernunnos is at least in half yoga position with one leg as in the Pashupati seal (with one leg). 

Secondly, Cernunnos has the horns as in the Pashupati seal. While Lord Shiva has no horns. Here is one more sculpture of Lord Cernunnos where you could see his horns which clearly resemble the Pashupati seal.

 

 

While look at Lord Shiva, who has no horns at all:

 

Edited November 5, 2019 by Alam_dar

[Muloghonto]

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

The Indus Valley Civilisation consisted of:

(1) More than 1000 settlements. Many of the cities had the population above 50,000 people

(2) The total population of this civilisation was above 1 Million. 

(3) Thousands of excavations were done and thousands of houses were found. But there was not a SINGLE TEMPLE found in all these 1000 settlements. 

There also wasn’t a single workshop found. Or a single residence of the rulers. 

Doesnt mean they didn’t exist. 

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

(4) There was not a single statue of any Hindu God was found, although people in this civilisations were experts in making the statues as we could see the dancing girl and the priest king. 

We found seals of Shiva, thank you very much. 

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

(5) There is no seal or painting where people are praying in any temple or to any god. 

We don’t have a single seal or painting where Muslims are praying to Allah either. 

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

(6) Actually in whole India, there are no signs of Hinduism or Hindu gods till 3500 years ago. There are cave paintings in India, but again no Hindu gods or temples etc. 

Pashupati seal and aditi statues say otherwise. Hinduism in any case is evolutionary religion, so not finding a particular God isn’t relevant.

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

 

(7)  If one goes by a chronological order, one can say the signs of first Hindu  gods started from 3rd century BC. 

If one goes chronologically based on evidence we can say that first signs of Islam are from 900s AD.

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

This means no signs of Hindu gods between the end of the Indus valley civilisation (4500 years ago) and start of finding of signs of Hindu gods about 2300 years ago. This is a period of 2200 years where no sculpture of Hindu god were present. 

Pashupati seal says otherwise. Btw we recently found a terracotta seal showing Arjun and Krishna dated between 300-2300 BC by bioluminescence. 

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

How can you explain this break of 2200 years in making of Hindu gods sculptures? 

Same way we explain the ‘break’ in palatial residences: there isn’t any. 

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Now the only excuse presented by modern Hindus is this that Hindu Religion is hundred and thousands of years old (since the beginning of this earth), but fashion of making sculptures of Hindu gods started only in 3rd century BC . Before that it was considered something like HARAM while it was a monotheistic religion. 

Nope. No such thing as haram in Hinduism: we don’t have the statues because statues didn’t become important till rise of Buddhism. Vayu puraan mentions this btw.

 

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

I don't consider there is any weight to this excuse of modern Hindus.

Except this is an excuse invented by you, not modern Hindus.

 

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Therefore, the Hindu religion was born about 800 BCE and then it started evolving till 200 BCE when it took the final shape and we saw for the first time the presence of Hindu gods and the Hindu Temples.  This is making the perfect sense. 

False. Hindu religion has always evolved and continues to evolve. Chaitanya added a dimension to it in 1300s. Brahmo samaj and Arya Samaj added another in 1800s. Savarkar added another in 1920s.

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Cernunnos is at least in half yoga position with one leg as in the Pashupati seal (with one leg). 

Cross legged isn’t a yoga pose. It’s how humans sit.

8 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Secondly, Cernunnos has the horns as in the Pashupati seal. While Lord Shiva has no horns. Here is one more sculpture of Lord Cernunnos where you could see his horns which clearly resemble the Pashupati seal.

 

 

While look at Lord Shiva, who has no horns at all:

 

Yes. Earlier depictions of Shiva. Since we already have evidence of gene flow from India to Central Asia much more than otherwise ( DNA haplotype R1 evolved in Indian subcontinent) as well as archaeological evidence ( IVC site Shortugai on the Amu Darya is the first ever evidence of any archaeological movement in or out of Central Asia from the subcontinent), the steppe barbarians got influenced by Indian civilization. That is the most logical conclusion.

[Real McCoy]

@Alam_dar Why don't you go to peepee or gooppoop or any pakistani forums and raise this atheist crusade over there. I'm sure the broad minded people over there will listen more to your scientific and empirical views there.

[Moochad]

10 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Tell him about Lemuria, he will run with it.

Tell him about Lemuria, he will run with it. Afrikans talked Tamil and ****. 

This bhaijaan already claimed in another thread that 'Soodurs' are African and Upper castes were white oppressors. 

 

[Moochad]

11 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Most important thing is where did Aryans come from? Did they have vedic religion at the place they came from? Where that place is?

https://www.anandranganathan.com/2014/08/11/indiana-jones-and-the-troublesome-aryans/

 

 

[Alam_dar]

On 11/5/2019 at 5:44 AM, rkt.india said:

Most important thing is where did Aryans come from? Did they have vedic religion at the place they came from? Where that place is?

Here is the "Most Recent Research"  from year 2017, which has already made clear that:

 

(1) The migration took place from Central Asia to India.

(2) This migration was one sided and not the opposite is true i.e. migration out of India. 

(3) Earlier people denied any Aryan migration towards India, while they made a scientific error by studying ONLY the mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter). But this later study corrected this scientific error by studying the Y-DNA and proved that indeed Aryan migration towards India took place, but it were mainly the "MEN" who came to India, and not the women. 

 

Link:

Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question.

The reason for the difference in mtDNA and Y-DNA data is obvious in hindsight: there was strong sex bias in Bronze Age migrations. In other words, those who migrated were predominantly male and, therefore, those gene flows do not really show up in the mtDNA data. On the other hand, they do show up in the Y-DNA data: specifically, about 17.5% of Indian male lineage has been found to belong to haplogroup R1a (haplogroups identify a single line of descent), which is today spread across Central Asia, Europe and South Asia. Pontic-Caspian Steppe is seen as the region from where R1a spread both west and east, splitting into different sub-branches along the way...

So in a nutshell: R1a is distributed all over Europe, Central Asia and South Asia; its sub-group Z282 is distributed only in Europe while another subgroup Z93 is distributed only in parts of Central Asia and South Asia; and three major subgroups of Z93 are distributed only in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Himalayas. This clear picture of the distribution of R1a has finally put paid to an earlier hypothesis that this haplogroup perhaps originated in India and then spread outwards. This hypothesis was based on the erroneous assumption that R1a lineages in India had huge diversity compared to other regions, which could be indicative of its origin here. As Prof. Richards puts it, “the idea that R1a is very diverse in India, which was largely based on fuzzy microsatellite data, has been laid to rest” thanks to the arrival of large numbers of genomic Y-chromosome data.

 

 

[coffee_rules]

42 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Here is the "Most Recent Research"  from year 2017, which has already made clear that:

 

(1) The migration took place from Central Asia to India.

(2) This migration was one sided and not the opposite is true i.e. migration out of India. 

(3) Earlier people denied any Aryan migration towards India, while they made a scientific error by studying ONLY the mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter). But this later study corrected this scientific error by studying the Y-DNA and proved that indeed Aryan migration towards India took place, but it were mainly the "MEN" who came to India, and not the women. 

 

Link:

Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question.

The reason for the difference in mtDNA and Y-DNA data is obvious in hindsight: there was strong sex bias in Bronze Age migrations. In other words, those who migrated were predominantly male and, therefore, those gene flows do not really show up in the mtDNA data. On the other hand, they do show up in the Y-DNA data: specifically, about 17.5% of Indian male lineage has been found to belong to haplogroup R1a (haplogroups identify a single line of descent), which is today spread across Central Asia, Europe and South Asia. Pontic-Caspian Steppe is seen as the region from where R1a spread both west and east, splitting into different sub-branches along the way...

So in a nutshell: R1a is distributed all over Europe, Central Asia and South Asia; its sub-group Z282 is distributed only in Europe while another subgroup Z93 is distributed only in parts of Central Asia and South Asia; and three major subgroups of Z93 are distributed only in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Himalayas. This clear picture of the distribution of R1a has finally put paid to an earlier hypothesis that this haplogroup perhaps originated in India and then spread outwards. This hypothesis was based on the erroneous assumption that R1a lineages in India had huge diversity compared to other regions, which could be indicative of its origin here. As Prof. Richards puts it, “the idea that R1a is very diverse in India, which was largely based on fuzzy microsatellite data, has been laid to rest” thanks to the arrival of large numbers of genomic Y-chromosome data.

 

 

There is 2019 DNA analysis from the Rakhigarhi excavation that is proving R1A can eb sampled and shown that it is so old and it is spread from India and outwards even before proving that it is a East euro strain. Genetic science is fairly new and early to conclude the AIT. So, debating on the AIT Issue with gene data is futile. The one thing it shows, if the particular population shows most diversity in that strain, that most likely it is originated from that place and it is has shown that the max diversity is in India. 

 

In any case, even if R1a is not from India, it will not say if Sanskrit and Culture (Caste system) came from them. We need linguistic and archealogical evidence. Linguistics are just theories, while Archeology cant be definitive. Absence of archealogical evidence, is not proof of a theory, it's just that it has not been found yet. Till now AIT has not been proven from lingusitic or archealogy, while there is enough evidence to disprove AIT. There is no trace of Aryans leaving a trail from theor homeland to India, lingusitic side as well. ALl lingusitics is proving that India is spreading the language (RigVedic Sanskrit) to EU and not the other way around.

 

We have journos like Tony Joseph making stories of AMT (Aryan Migration Theory now) and also able to connect genetic data to the caste system as well. We have enough jokers in India who buy that stuff. Genetics has proven Brahmins formed the caste system! Wankers.

Edited November 6, 2019 by coffee_rules

[Muloghonto]

The entire R tree originates in India. Eastern India to be precise, with its proliferation tied to a WNW (west-northwest) vector closely tracing the Himalayan countour. If anything, Indo-Malay region has more claims to R origin than north of Hindu Kush. 

[Alam_dar]

2 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

There is 2019 DNA analysis from the Rakhigarhi excavation that is proving R1A can eb sampled and shown that it is so old and it is spread from India and outwards even before proving that it is a East euro strain. Genetic science is fairly new and early to conclude the AIT. So, debating on the AIT Issue with gene data is futile. The one thing it shows, if the particular population shows most diversity in that strain, that most likely it is originated from that place and it is has shown that the max diversity is in India. 

This 2019 study is no way about the Aryan Invasion Theory, while this woman existed about 2800 years BCE, while the Aryans invasion happened much later than this. Then how could this woman could have the Aryan DNA? 

//

https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blink/know/rakhigarhi-the-village-that-treads-on-history/article29407406.ece#

 

The village, about 150 km from Delhi in neighbouring Haryana, hit the headlines across the world last week when the DNA extracted from a woman who lived there around 4,500 years ago yielded clues to the much-debated ancestry of ancient Indians. The study, published in the science journal Cell, is the end result of a five-year-long excavation in Rakhigarhi by a team of researchers led by Vasant Shinde, vice-chancellor of Pune’s Deccan Postgraduate and Research Institute.

The DNA samples extracted from the ancient Rakhigarhi inhabitant showed that she belonged to a population now known to be the ancestors of most South Asians. The studies showed that she was not of Aryan descent — her DNA did not have the Steppe pastoralist ancestry — highlighting that the Aryan migration to the region happened after the IVC declined. 

//

 

More about this study of 2019 is here:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/09/genome-nearly-5000-year-old-woman-links-modern-indians-ancient-civilization

https://frontline.thehindu.com/arts-and-culture/heritage/article29507212.ece

Edited November 6, 2019 by Alam_dar

[Muloghonto]

15 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

This 2019 study is no way about the Aryan Invasion Theory, while this woman existed about 2800 years BCE, while the Aryans invasion happened much later than this. Then how could this woman could have the Aryan DNA? 

//

Evidence beats aryan invasion theory. Duh. Aryan steppe DNA is nonsense, since most geneticists agree that R clade originates in India

 

[coffee_rules]

1 hour ago, Alam_dar said:

This 2019 study is no way about the Aryan Invasion Theory, while this woman existed about 2800 years BCE, while the Aryans invasion happened much later than this. Then how could this woman could have the Aryan DNA? 

//

https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blink/know/rakhigarhi-the-village-that-treads-on-history/article29407406.ece#

 

The village, about 150 km from Delhi in neighbouring Haryana, hit the headlines across the world last week when the DNA extracted from a woman who lived there around 4,500 years ago yielded clues to the much-debated ancestry of ancient Indians. The study, published in the science journal Cell, is the end result of a five-year-long excavation in Rakhigarhi by a team of researchers led by Vasant Shinde, vice-chancellor of Pune’s Deccan Postgraduate and Research Institute.

The DNA samples extracted from the ancient Rakhigarhi inhabitant showed that she belonged to a population now known to be the ancestors of most South Asians. The studies showed that she was not of Aryan descent — her DNA did not have the Steppe pastoralist ancestry — highlighting that the Aryan migration to the region happened after the IVC declined. 

//

 

More about this study of 2019 is here:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/09/genome-nearly-5000-year-old-woman-links-modern-indians-ancient-civilization

https://frontline.thehindu.com/arts-and-culture/heritage/article29507212.ece

A lot of genetic scientists have proved that R1a originated from India and went to EU. There are migrations always, Nobody is denying. It doesn't prove there is a Aryan DNA and it shows they spoke Sanskrit in Steppe. If we give a DNA of a Indian, they can't say he speaks Marathi/Gujarati. How can you priove AIT with genetics.  We can always go back 70000 years and prove that DNA origination from Africa to Indian SC. So, let's not mix culture/civilization roots to DNA. 

 

Rakhigarhi proves that Indians were indegenously settled in this region for more than 7000 years. Even the Agriculture was indegenous to the regions. Iranian DNA was not seen in Rakhigarhi. They must have taught Agriculture and went back ! If Rat/Mouse DNA is checked all leads it back to India, as Rats move with food grains. 

 

Listen to Raj Vedam who explains the Geneology politics who is fighting the OIT theory with western money power.

 

https://youtu.be/1bsyi4zYHP0

 

 

Even the ASI / ANI data is fabricated. They have mixed Andaman tribals DNA with south Indians to generate artificial differential between ANI and ASI. Otherwise, ANI ad ASI are very similar. There was no mixing of Andamanis with SIs after they settled in Andaman and lived there for 10000 years in isolation

[rkt.india]

16 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Here is the "Most Recent Research"  from year 2017, which has already made clear that:

 

(1) The migration took place from Central Asia to India.

(2) This migration was one sided and not the opposite is true i.e. migration out of India. 

(3) Earlier people denied any Aryan migration towards India, while they made a scientific error by studying ONLY the mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter). But this later study corrected this scientific error by studying the Y-DNA and proved that indeed Aryan migration towards India took place, but it were mainly the "MEN" who came to India, and not the women. 

 

Link:

Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question.

The reason for the difference in mtDNA and Y-DNA data is obvious in hindsight: there was strong sex bias in Bronze Age migrations. In other words, those who migrated were predominantly male and, therefore, those gene flows do not really show up in the mtDNA data. On the other hand, they do show up in the Y-DNA data: specifically, about 17.5% of Indian male lineage has been found to belong to haplogroup R1a (haplogroups identify a single line of descent), which is today spread across Central Asia, Europe and South Asia. Pontic-Caspian Steppe is seen as the region from where R1a spread both west and east, splitting into different sub-branches along the way...

So in a nutshell: R1a is distributed all over Europe, Central Asia and South Asia; its sub-group Z282 is distributed only in Europe while another subgroup Z93 is distributed only in parts of Central Asia and South Asia; and three major subgroups of Z93 are distributed only in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Himalayas. This clear picture of the distribution of R1a has finally put paid to an earlier hypothesis that this haplogroup perhaps originated in India and then spread outwards. This hypothesis was based on the erroneous assumption that R1a lineages in India had huge diversity compared to other regions, which could be indicative of its origin here. As Prof. Richards puts it, “the idea that R1a is very diverse in India, which was largely based on fuzzy microsatellite data, has been laid to rest” thanks to the arrival of large numbers of genomic Y-chromosome data.

 

 

Did we have vedic culture in central Asia?

[coffee_rules]

4 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Did we have vedic culture in central Asia?

Yes, they had caste system as well. Holi khelte aayethe Bharat pe.

[Alam_dar]

On 11/7/2019 at 11:15 AM, rkt.india said:

Did we have vedic culture in central Asia?

 

20 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

Yes, they had caste system as well. Holi khelte aayethe Bharat pe.

 

It seems that the outsiders had to introduce the caste system in order to dominate the local population in name of religion. 

 

 

 

[Alam_dar]

On 11/6/2019 at 11:58 PM, coffee_rules said:

A lot of genetic scientists have proved that R1a originated from India and went to EU.

This has been finally denied by the 2017 Study. 

There is no further study which is challenging the 2017 Study. 

 

On 11/6/2019 at 11:58 PM, coffee_rules said:

There are migrations always, Nobody is denying.

According to the the AIT, it was not a simple migration, but it was an invasion. 

On 11/6/2019 at 11:58 PM, coffee_rules said:

Listen to Raj Vedam who explains the Geneology politics who is fighting the OIT theory with western money power.

It is actually exactly the opposite. 

It is the "Indian Nationalistic Pride" which is coming the way of neutral scientific studies. The denial of AIT and support of OIT is due to this Pride only, unfortunately. 

 

Only due to this Pride, the Indian professors (who took part in the study themselves) are taking out contradictory conclusions from the 2019 study of the Harrapan Woman. Same is with the Indian Media. Same is here with you and me.  You blame me for hating India. But I don't agree with you and consider myself to be neutral. 

[Alam_dar]

This article explains it fully how the influence of Hindutva and their Indian Pride is influencing the scientific studies. 

 

https://scroll.in/article/936872/two-new-genetic-studies-upheld-aryan-migration-theory-so-why-did-indian-media-report-the-opposite

 

Two new genetic studies upheld Indo-Aryan migration. So why did Indian media report the opposite?

Science is proving India's incredible diversity. But this clashes directly with Hindutva’s racially nativist understanding of the subcontinent.

 

The spread of the Steppe pastoralists and their descendants from the East European Steppe to India. Note: The arrow only shows the most plausible route. Source: The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia. | Maps: Stamen, Design: Nithya Subramanian

 

On the podium to explain the two new papers of which they are among the co-authors were Vasant Shinde, an archaeologist and vice-chancellor of Deccan College, and Niraj Rai, head of the Ancient DNA lab at the Birbal Sahni Institute for Palaeosciences.

 

Taken together, the studies – one in Cell, the other in Science – painted a fascinating genetic picture of how groups as diverse as local hunter gatherers, Iranian farmers and pastoralists from the Pontic steppe grasslands in Eastern Europe mixed to form most of the modern South Asian population.

 

However, as the question at the press conference on the historical existence of gods demonstrated, this detailed science published on September 5 was also accompanied by the inevitable politics that hangs over any exploration of human origins. The sharp ascendance of Hindu nationalism in India has resulted in a nativist movement that places great emphasis on the claim that most of India’s peoples have indigenous roots – a narrative that sits uncomfortably with the very eclectic origins of the country’s modern populations.

 

As a consequence, though the genetic studies themselves were rather clear, many in the media misrepresented the results to suit this political narrative. In fact, even the co-authors of the papers themselves seemed to disagree on the conclusions that can be drawn from the research.

Media confusion

The Economic Times reported that the research raises doubts over the “long-held theory of Aryan invasion or migration into South Asia”. Amar Ujala, one of India’s largest Hindi newspapers, was more emphatic: “The Aryan invasion theory proved completely false; India is the guru of South Asia.”

 

The theory of the Aryan invasion (or migration) was first put forward by Western scholars during the colonial age. It maintained that a race of European or Central Asian “Aryans” swept into the subcontinent displacing the indigenous Indus Valley Civilisation. These Aryans were said to have introduced key elements of Indian culture such as the Sanskrit language – which gave rise to the Indo-Aryan branch of languages spoken all across north, west and east India today – as well as the Vedas, the foundational texts of Hinduism.

This went against Hindutva’s own imagination of India, in which all significant cultural development was held to be indigenous.

 

Academic split

These results were not only misinterpreted in the media, they also led to a split in how the authors of the landmark studies and other genetic scientists interpreted them. Vasant Shinde, co-author on both studies, put out a press release on September 6 where he argued that the new data “completely sets aside the Aryan Migration/Invasion Theory” and also proves that the “Harappans were the Vedic people”.

When Scroll.in spoke to Shinde, he explained his point further. “This is not a migration but a movement of people,” Shinde argued. “And the movement from the Steppe is not large.”

Vasant Shinde speaks to the media during his press conference in Delhi on September 6, 2019. Credit: Shoaib Daniyal

Shinde also disagreed with the linguistic conclusions in the research, claiming that they were not based on any scientific proof. “The Harappans were speaking Sanskrit since they were so advanced,” Shinde told Scroll.in.

 

American geneticist and science writer Razib Khan did not agree with Shinde’s conclusions. “This research points strongly to the fact that Aryans migrated to the Indian subcontinent,” said Khan. “Steppe ancestry is found in almost every group in India. And Steppe ancestry maps to the spread of Indo-Aryan language migration”.

 

What about the Shinde’s conclusion that the people of the Indus Valley Civilisation were the same as the Vedic people? “I at least cannot make such an interpretation,” Vagheesh Narasimhan, co-author of the Science study told Scroll.in. “This proposition makes jumps that I am not comfortable with.”

 

Another co-author on the Science paper, Niraj Rai chose his words carefully when it came to Shinde’s claim of equating the Indus Valley Civilisation with the culture that authored the Vedas. “This is not my statement; I don’t agree with this statement,” said the geneticist.

 

Nick Patterson, another co-author, and one of the main movers along with geneticist David Reich of the endeavour to genetically decode South Asian origins had much the same point to make while speaking to Scroll.in: “While I am always willing to listen, I disagree with Dr Shinde that the people of the Indus Valley spoke an Indo-European language.”

 

Two new papers

Thanks to the Cell paper released on September 5, we now know that the people of the Indus Valley had no Steppe DNA. They mainly had a mixture of Iranian-farmer-related DNA as well as some DNA from Ancient Ancestral South Indians.

The Steppe population came in from grasslands in Eastern Europe corresponding to modern-day Ukraine, Russia and Kazakhstan. The genetic research identifies that this Steppe ancestry burst into India during a “narrow time window” dated between 2,000 BC and 1,500 BC.

The spread of the Steppe pastoralists and their descendants across ancient Eurasia. The Steppe population is identified here using the name Yamnaya which refers to an ancient archaeological culture on the Pontic Steppe. It is the Yamnaya people who spoke the a language which was the ancestor of every Indo-European language in existence today, be it Bhojpuri or Welsh. The arrows show plausible routes while the years refer to rough estimates of when the Yamnaya and their descendants arrived in a place. Source: The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia.

Once these Steppe people entered India, a great churning ensued. They mixed with the Indus Valley people to create what is now called the Ancestral North Indian grouping. However, a significant portion of the people of the Indus Valley Civilisation were pushed south when the Steppe people entered. They then mixed with the Ancient Ancestral South Indians to form a group known as the Ancestral South Indian population.

For the next 2,000 years, Indians mixed freely. As a result, most modern South Asians are some mix of Ancestral North Indian and Ancestral South Indian. However, this great churning stopped around 1,900 years ago when Indian society calcified into thousands of endogamous groups who do not intermarry across caste lines – a societal structure maintained till today.

 

There are however some exceptions to this narrative. The Bengalis and Mundas, an Adivasi people of eastern India, “have significant amounts of ancestry from South East Asia”, noted Razib Khan, and cannot be explained using this Ancestral North Indian-Ancestral South Indian model.

How this explains modern India

...

Much of this Steppe ancestry is male, the research shows. This means that Steppe migrants “were more successful at competing for local mates than men from the local groups” – which tells us something about the aggressive nature of Indo-Aryan migration into India.

 

In simpler language, David Reich explains that the preponderence of male Steppe DNA means that this encounter between the Steppe pastoralists and the people of the Indus Valley Civilisation “cannot have been entirely friendly”.

 

This male bias is standard for Indo-European migration. In fact, when these Steppe pastoralists reached Europe, Reich’s research found an even larger proportion of male Steppe genes. In large parts of Western Europe, Steppe migrants almost completely displaced local males in a short time span, leading to one Danish archeologist postulating that the coming of these Indo-European speakers “must have been a kind of genocide”.

ADVERTISEMENT

This pattern, wrote David Reich in his 2018 book Who We Are and How We Got Here, “is exactly what one would expect from an Indo-European-speaking people taking the reins of political and social power 4,000 years ago and mixing with the local peoples in a stratified society, with males from the groups in power having more success in finding mates than those from the disenfranchised groups”.

 

This ancient encounter is, incredibly, reflected even in the present-day Hindu caste system, with Steppe DNA correlated with upper-caste status. “Groups that view themselves as being of traditionally priestly status, including Brahmins who are traditional custodians of liturgical texts in the early Indo-European language Sanskrit, tend (with exceptions) to have more Steppe ancestry than expected on the basis of ANI-ASI mixture,” says the research in Science.

 

While this new genetic research backs it up, this claim has been made before by experts using only linguistics and archaeology. In his remarkable 2007 book The Horse, The Wheel, and Language, David Anthony, a professor of anthropology and one of the world’s leading authorities on Indo-European migration, pointed out that funeral sacrifices at Sintashta, an archaeological site all the way out on the Russian Steppe “showed startling parallels with the sacrificial funeral rituals of the Rig Veda”.

 

....

 

What about Shinde’s claim that the Indus Valley Civilisation was the same as the Vedic civilisation, with both speaking Sanskrit? This is, in fact, an assertion that has long been made by many Hindutva supporters as a way to claim that key cultural markers of modern Hinduism such as Sanskrit or the Rig Veda have completely indigenous origins.

 

However, there is little data to support this theory. In fact, this recent genetic research backs up the claim that the Indus Valley Civilisation was completely different from the Vedic people.

 

The Science paper points out that the former probably spoke a Dravidian language, while we know that the Vedic people spoke an Indo-European language: Sanskrit.

 

This gap is further widened by the fact that there was no Steppe DNA found in the Rakhigarhi woman, providing yet another data point in favour of Indo-Aryan migration (this data was also egregiously misinterpreted by the Times of India). After all, Steppe DNA and Indo-European language is highly correlated – so it is rather unlikely that the Rakhigarhi woman spoke an Indo-European language like Sanskrit. Rather than the Indus Valley Civilisation and the Indo-Aryans being the same, the genetic data points to the fact that the latter followed the former chronologically as a result of Steppe migration.

 

The politics of it

This enquiry into the origin of modern Indians has set off hectic political debate in India. David Reich recounted how politics played a part in his work. Given the significant Steppe ancestry in the Ancestral North Indian component, Reich had originally termed this group “West Eurasians” – a move that received violent pushback from Reich’s Indian collaborators, who controlled the access to genetic material. Reich recounts these discussions as the “tensest 24 hours of my scientific career”.

 

“At the time I felt that we were being prevented by political considerations from revealing what we had found,” he complained.

 

Eventually, a nomenclatural solution was found. Names were chosen for the two ancestral groups that seemed to suggest to the layman that they had solidly subcontinental origins: the earlier discussed Ancestral North Indians and Ancestral South Indians. “The ANI are related to Europeans, central Asians, Near Easterners and people of the Caucasus,” wrote Reich, but with those 100% subcontinental names, “we made no claim about the location of their homeland or any migrations”.

 

While all people are interested in their origins, why do feelings in India run especially deep? Reich, in an interview to Scroll.in in February, put forward a cultural argument, noting that in contrast to India, its Muslim-majority 1947 twin Pakistan doesn’t seem to care very much about the ancient past. It is similar to the situation in much of the West, Reich noted: “In Europe, there’s almost no emotionality at all about the ancient farmers or Bronze Age people or hunter-gatherers. There’s in fact, no emotion about the dead.”

 

To Reich’s cultural argument, there is also a political layer. India is today dominated by the politics of Hindutva or Hindu nationalism, an ideology which is fiercely nativist. Vinayak Savarkar, the founder of Hindutva and a foundational thinker for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, based his nationalism on nativism arguing that for a true Indian, India had to be both his pitribhumi (ancestral land) and punyabhumi (the land of his religion).

 

“A Hindu therefore could not be descended from alien invaders,” said historian Romila Thapar, explaining how Hindutva saw the world. “Since Hindus sought a lineal descent from the Aryans, and a cultural heritage, the Aryans had to be indigenous.”

 

Much the same argument was echoed by Madhav Golwalkar, the highly influential second chief of the Rashtriya Swayasevak Sangh, the parent organisation of the BJP: “Hindus came into this land from nowhere, but are indigenous children of this soil always from time immemorial”. It is this racial factor that, as per Gowalkar, “is by far the important ingredient of a nation”.

 

Even as Golwalkar and Savarkar’s ideas spread with the rise of the BJP, scientific research started to point the other way, providing strong proof that, driven by events such as Indo-Aryan migration, India’s peoples have incredibly heterogeneous origins. This research might not fit the dominant politics of the day but really, is it such a surprise that India is diverse? For most Indians, this genetic research would only be confirmation of their everyday, lived reality as part of this remarkable subcontinent.