Strong DNA Evidence for Aryan migration - hindu.com article

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/how-genetics-is-settling-the-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece

The article in Hindu is claiming very strong DNA evidence for Aryan Migration into India.

Any comments from scholars here? Is Original Inhabitants Theory DEAD???

--

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[Praveen R. Bhat]

Namaste Venkateshji,

The Hindu article clearly has ill-motive as you can see from the last paragraph of the article, especially note the last line "What is abundantly clear is that we are a multi-source civilization, not a single-source one, drawing its cultural impulses, its tradition and practices from a variety of lineages and migration histories. The Out of Africa immigrants, the pioneering, fearless explorers who discovered this land originally and settled in it and whose lineages still form the bedrock of our population; those who arrived later with a package of farming techniques and built the Indus Valley civilization whose cultural ideas and practices perhaps enrich much of our traditions today; those who arrived from East Asia, probably bringing with them the practice of rice cultivation and all that goes with it; those who came later with a language called Sanskrit and its associated beliefs and practices and reshaped our society in fundamental ways; and those who came even later for trade or for conquest and chose to stay, all have mingled and contributed to this civilization we call Indian. We are all migrants."

AIT, not original inhabitant, is a theory which was refuted many times over by many and now its just being represented by replacing the word invasion with migration. The confusing jargon printed in the article is meant to misguide the readers to think that author "connect the dots" knowing the research well. That is completely untrue. Moreover, the author makes a convenient jump on Sanskrit, based on the 17.5% of the male lineage showing the Y-chromosomal spread! As for the research paper, some find the research funding itself suspect; I leave that to your discretion. The research conclusion also begs the question: whatever happened to this Aryan civilisation with its language that left no trace at its origin?

Finally, to quote Raj Vedam ji (from IHAR, http://www.iharweb.org/) who counters these kinds of theories meant to attack the Ancient Indian heritage: these kind of people use the spotty y-chromosomal data because the maternal mtDNA tells a strong opposing story and the invading men spreading their DNA sporadically is no indication of migration. However, the a woman's presence in the DNA record indicates permanence. Further, he says that the y-chromosome is withered, shrunk, bombarded with the mutation debris of relentless evolution over thousands of years and might become extinct in time (as is debated in scientific circles) when the gender itself will be determined by some other segment of the DNA!

जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी।

--Praveen R. Bhat
/* येनेदं सर्वं विजानाति, तं केन विजानीयात्। Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known! [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Prf. Michael Witzel gives the link to the original paper as 

https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12862-017-0936-9

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

There is another research on Konkan Brahmins and Central Asian ancestry. Some are saying they are Crypto Jews.

https://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-ancestors-of-konkanstha-brahmins

"... non-recombining uniparental contributions in Chitpavan-brahmin Mediterranean or East European type as shown by 20% (HV, U3) mtDNA lineages and highly frequent (R1a and L) Y-haplogroups. The admixture and PC analyses reflected genetic association of Chitpavan-brahmin with Iranian, Ashkenazi-Jews (Turkey), Greeks (East Europe) and to some extent with Central Asian Turkish populations elucidating their distinct Nordic, “Scytho-Iranian” ancestry."  -----------abstract from the research paper of Sonali Gaikwad and VK Kashyap. National DNA Analysis Centre, Kolkata.

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

नमस्ते,

A stupid friend is more dangerous than a clever enemy. Unfortunately there is no dearth of the friendlies in India (and in NRI community), the author of The Hindu article being one. The controversial newspaper continues to hold sway (terror) over IAS aspirants who perforce consume its outpourings in order to clear the coveted exam.

To people who can exercise their brains some points have become clear now:

1) Yavana-s have accepted by now that IE homeland is not in Europe (rules out Greeks, Nordics etc permanently).

2) The question is then between central/west Asia vs. South Asia (Afgan-India region).

Further, R1a is patrilinear, so this rules out migration: there was an invasion either from west Asia to south-east Asia or from the south-east Asia to the west Asia.

3) The R1a subgroups common to central and south-east Asia shows more diversity in south Asia. This is called the “founder’s effect” according to which the origin point of a species is likely in the place where it has a greater diversity. So, India satisfies this criterion.

From Yavanas’ point-of-view, therefore, finding a workaround answer to 3) is of utmost importance. One way is to suggest that multiple people came to India in multiple timelines. But this goes against economy of ideas. It is like saying someone spraying bullets on a crowd and only one person in the crowd getting hit by all the bullets.

4) There is also no explanation of presence of high levels of R1a in many tribes of India (which includes north-eastern and southern tribes of India); with continued focus on propaganda, there never will be.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

On another list,

Sri Jijith Namaduri Ravi posted as follows:

Dear All
 
Genetics / human genome data, is like an unfinished, but developing
picture, that is slowly emerging, like archaeology. The picture will be
finished only when genomes of the people of the whole world at current
times upto a resonable past of a few 1000s of years back, is mapped with
reasonable data density and with minimal sampling biases.
 
Data density and sampling biases are a huge problem in genomic research.
This has given rise to varying claims by different research groups.
 
Besides, there is a tendency to equate genetic migration to linguistic
migration. Language migrations need not always follow genetic migration.
Language is a mental phenomenon while genes are a phyical bodiy phenomenon.
 
At this stage where data collection is still unfinished, researchers can
only play with statistical data containing sampling biases. It is
unfortunate that science is used this way to score political points.
 
One issue i noticed after i re read this Hindu writeup is that it is mum
about the amount of ancestral DNA sampled from Indian Subcontinent yet make
sweeping statement about Aryan migration to India as fully solved. The
researchers only have some ancestral DNA from Eurasia and the rest is
modern DNA from Eurasia and Indian Subcontinent. So the conclusion about
migration from Steppes to Europe is proovable with this data set but no
finalizing conclusion can be made about migration from Steppes to India.
Besides genetic migration need not always mean a linguistic migration. So
it is equally possible that a few genes came to India from steppes yet Indo
European language originated in India and migrated westward, keeping origin
of Sanskrit in India and geography of Vedic seers lying within India, like
the UP, Hariyana Punjab region proposed by Shrikant Talageri.
 
Here is what i wrote in an fb discussion on this:-
 
It is interesting to note the authors conclusion that everyone in India is
a migrant sounding like an excuse for all invasions into India like the
British and Islamic. Why would a land locked country like India be a target
of migration all over from west north and east? If we take migration from
steppes to India in isolation we may somehow be inclined to believe it. But
he then says west asian farmers too migrated to India and not vice versa,
that East Asians (Austro Asiatic Munda speakers) too migrated to india and
not vice versa, Tibeto Burman Garos migrated from north east asia to India
and not vice versa, it is then the pattern of migration sounds absurd and
sinister motive start getting visibility.
 
Here is a piece of land abundant in resources with highest genetic
diversity second only to East Africa which is more probable to be a
'SOURCE' of migration rather than as a 'DESTINATION' much like the East
Africa, the original human homeland and source of all human migration. The
only probable explanation making sense is to consider Indian Subcontinent
as one of the major secondary source of human migration after original
migrants from Africa arrived in India along its southern, peninsular
shoreline where it is not locked by the formidable Himalayas. When
population density of the Indian Subcontinent increased some inhabitants
crossed the formidable himalayan barrier and went in all directions- to
west, east and north.
 
Any invading army would be able to march to india through Himalayas only
when technology evolved and supported it like with the Alexander's armies.
 
Even European colonization of India was never through the high Himalayas
but via the sea route and coastal regions. Only costal regions are open
enough for massive migrations to India which can make big genomic shifts.
 
It is a cleverly crafted piece with poor understanding of the mitochondrial
DNA and without any proper link to original researcher's works as far as i
can see and instead talk about email communcation with researchers etc.
The concluding paragraph also give away the poor understanding of the
article author Mr Tony Joseph.
 
All signs of dubiousness
 
 
Regards
Jijith

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

On indology list, 

Prof. Dean Michael Anderson posted as follows:

Thanks for posting this. It looks like a good summary. I do have one comment, however, about interpreting the findings.

Unfortunately,  because this situation has become very politicized, I have to begin with a disclaimer: I have no political agenda nor do I have any problem with the existing theory -- scholars feel that that is where the evidence leads us.

The article says: "Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC..."

It has been many years since I studied genetics so please correct me if I make a mistake. There are two points:

1) Genetics does not deterministically identify languages or cultures. Following Michael Witzel's dictum that, "pots don't speak", we can say that "genes don't speak" either.

2) Unless there's been a major revolution that I missed (which is possible), these genetic studies don't allow a very accurate dating like "sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC".

So what this research tells us is that at some time in an indeterminate past a group of people speaking a language we don't know entered India in significant enough numbers to affect the genetic record.

This can be used in conjunction with other studies to validate the theory but, by itself, it is not clinching. It does, however, appear to argue against the Out of India Theory, if by that you mean a significant population outflow.

Best,

Dean

[विश्वासो वासुकेयः]

It's been quite clear for a while now (in paper after paper). I am tempted to remind this list of this thread - https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/bvparishat/A$20summary$20of$20Aryan|sort:relevance/bvparishat/yUHi_V9tS8Y/JQYS_y8PCgAJ  .

There's some thoroughly confused denial here: https://swarajyamag.com/ideas/genetics-might-be-settling-the-aryan-migration-debate-but-not-how-left-liberals-believe (See https://twitter.com/guNagarbhaH/status/876978373632958464 for a hint of why) . It's all well and good to keep waiting on Indian aDna, but at the very least the reasonable should stop spreading their "conviction" that AIT is baseless and OIT is historically more tenable - and perhaps start preparing for an alternative to the "we hindus never invaded anyone" type stories which sadly stem from misunderstanding and insecurity.

शनिवार, 17 जून 2017 को 1:19:14 पूर्व UTC-7 को, Venkatesh Murthy ने लिखा:

[Nagaraj Paturi]

1. The contemporarily relevant and effective and real political aspect of the whole debate lies in the potential of and past use of the Aryan Invasion /Immigration Theory to justify the British (Modern European Nations')  invasion of India and opposition to and ridiculing of the Indian Freedom Struggle or Indian National Movement on that basis. It also has connections with norh Indians and upper castes particularly Brahmins being picturized as the ancient invaders of India and other Indians being victims of that from ages.' "conviction" that AIT is baseless is rooted in these contemporary consequences'. 

2.  OIT is being brought in as alternative to AIT  as an alternative to the AIT explanation to the linguistic data of 'IE family' of languages being found spoken across a wide area including India. A third/ alternative explanation , other than AIT and OIT is perhaps there in the mind of Sri Vishvas-ji. He is welcome to present the same.  

3. "We Hindus never invaded anyone" kind of statements come up in a different context than these language studies. It is in the context of comparing with the past imperialist attempts of global level invasions, some of them inspired by the intentions of spread of religion that people say that such invasions on such global scale, particularly those inspired by the intentions of spread of religion never originated from ancient India. 

4. The 'Aryan race', 'Dravidian race' notions, misnomers created on the basis of certain theorizations within the comparative studies of languages were discarded based on the sound arguments that 'race' is a biological anthropological notion and within that framework, Arayan race, Dravidian race are not valid concepts. Gradually the concept of race itself got discarded in the field of Physical Anthropology. Now, these gene studies are being employed as an alternative to race based approach from within biology.

5. Modern academics are an interesting species. When some people argue for undoing medieval wrongs of violence through contemporary violence, they arguably justifiably say we can not progress if we hang on to medieval wrongs and rights. But the same academics never stop arguing for undoing prehistoric 'wrongs' ( knowing fully well that the degree of accuracy of historical conclusions decreases with the length of time we go into the past.) through contemporary actions. As long as such arguments demonizing a section of Indians based on the not yet conclusively settled theorizations in prehistory continues, contesting those fragile theorizations is expected to continue. 

6. Sri Vishvas-ji is welcome to enlighten us about his stand regarding the issue , educating us about the pitfalls in the statements like those of Dean Muichael Anderson which is quoted in the immediately previous post to his within the context of the contemporary consequences of these theories.   

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-19 22:26 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

1. The contemporarily relevant and effective and real political aspect of the whole debate lies in the potential of and past use of the Aryan Invasion /Immigration Theory to justify the British (Modern European Nations')  invasion of India and opposition to and ridiculing of the Indian Freedom Struggle or Indian National Movement on that basis. It also has connections with norh Indians and upper castes particularly Brahmins being picturized as the ancient invaders of India and other Indians being victims of that from ages.' "conviction" that AIT is baseless is rooted in these contemporary consequences'. 

​

​Yes, I agree. But this reaction is based in folly and a sad sign of our current intellectual state. One can quite easily be a abhimAni hindu, accept evidence in favor of AIT and repudiate enemy narratives (just think of the great patriot bAlagangAdhara TiLak). We don't even need to be apologetic about any Aryan Invasion, dominance and consolidation (quite the opposite - we can derive pride in it and explore exactly why such stunning success came to pass) - all we have to do is reject the fake equivalence of Aryan invasion with the genocidal invasions of the mlecCha-s in India, the America-s and Australia (which is exactly what PV kANe did - never spilt any ink propping OIT up AFAIK).

 

​Furthermore, वीरभोग्या वसुन्धरा - nature does not care for moral justifications like "oh we're unjust victims of atrocious foreign dominance. we never did such a thing to others". That's so defeatist and pitiable (besides being false).​ Who are we trying to convince? Does the Pakistani or Chinese nationalist waste any breath justifying his aggression or defense on some inane theory of moral superiority?

2.  OIT is being brought in as alternative to AIT  as an alternative to the AIT explanation to the linguistic data of 'IE family' of languages being found spoken across a wide area including India. A third/ alternative explanation , other than AIT and OIT is perhaps there in the mind of Sri Vishvas-ji. He is welcome to present the same.  

No I don't. 

 

3.

​​

"We Hindus never invaded anyone" kind of statements come up in a different context than these language studies. It is in the context of comparing with the past imperialist attempts of global level invasions, some of them inspired by the intentions of spread of religion that people say that such invasions on such global scale, particularly those inspired by the intentions of spread of religion never originated from ancient India. 

Oh - 

​

"We Hindus never invaded anyone" is one of the things I expect to hear whenever I start discussing with a nice old uncle - often in an attempt to establish moral superiority relative to muslims and christian colonists (with no reference to global scale) :-)

what a thing to be proud of, and what a contrast with stories of raghu's digvijaya which included the huNa-s and persia! Well, at least if this OIT delusion dies, they can reverse this attitude. So, *that* is the connection, even if no language issue is being referenced in such statements.

 

 6. Sri Vishvas-ji is welcome to enlighten us about his stand regarding the issue , educating us about the pitfalls in the statements like those of Dean Muichael Anderson which is quoted in the immediately previous post to his within the context of the contemporary consequences of these theories.

​Regarding Dean's two points:

"1) Genetics does not deterministically identify languages or cultures. Following Michael Witzel's dictum that, "pots don't speak", we can say that "genes don't speak" either."

True, it's not deterministic - yet it is highly correlated, and that's sufficient.

"2) Unless there's been a major revolution that I missed (which is possible), these genetic studies don't allow a very accurate dating like "sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC"."

​

​Yes, apparently, his knowledge of the state of genetic​ studies is quite outdated ( a pic https://imgur.com/B8QB5zS ). Top geneticists and journals are not pulling stuff out of some 2005 era data.

--

--
Vishvas /विश्वासः

[Sathya Narayanan N]

Adding to Prof. Nagaraj ji points,

"It also has connections with norh Indians and upper castes particularly Brahmins being picturized as the ancient invaders of India and other Indians being victims of that from ages."

Some references and there conclusions are below. These references actually destroy the claim that North Indians/Brahmins/Upper caste invaded India.
Every community or a call it a "unique group of people" have both ANI and ASI genes.

Now the funders of the genetics based experiment might attempting a different method to validate there past invasions and current invasions in academic and socio-political space of India.

Actually most of the descendants are an admixture of ANI and ASI. In theory no one can make a claim as a invader or a sufferer.


My prediction is, the newer line of attack might be pointing to the developments in Indus Valley civilization, which has stopped the practice of endogamy(Vedic Scriptures).
Because the articles from Nature say there was a admixture of genes some thousands of years before. Suddenly it got stopped.

"Number puzzle

Indian populations, although currently huge in number, were also founded by relatively small bands of individuals, the study suggests. Overall, the picture that emerges is of ancient genetic mixture, says Reich, followed by fragmentation into small, isolated ethnic groups, which were then kept distinct for thousands of years because of limited intermarriage — a practice also known as endogamy.

This genetic evidence refutes the claim that the Indian caste structure was a modern invention of British colonialism, the authors say. "This idea that caste is thousands of years old is a big deal," says Nicole Boivin, an archaeologist who studies South Asian prehistory at the University of Oxford, UK. "To say that endogamy goes back so far, and that genetics shows it, is going to be controversial to many anthropologists." Boivin fears that the study might be 'spun' by politicians seeking to maintain caste structures in India, and she calls on social scientists and geneticists to collaborate on such "highly politicized" issues."

Reference:
1. https://kalavaivenkat.wordpress.com/2016/05/07/musings-on-ait-genetics-and-accusations-of-racism/

2.  http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090922/full/news.2009.935.html

Caste divisions

Now, a team led by David Reich of the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Lalji Singh of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology in Hyderabad, India, has probed more than 560,000 SNPs across the genomes of 132 Indian individuals from 25 diverse ethnic and tribal groups dotted all over India².

“There are populations that have lived in the same town and same village for thousands of years without exchanging genes.”

The researchers showed that most Indian populations are genetic admixtures of two ancient, genetically divergent groups, which each contributed around 40-60% of the DNA to most present-day populations. One ancestral lineage — which is genetically similar to Middle Eastern, Central Asian and European populations — was higher in upper-caste individuals and speakers of Indo-European languages such as Hindi, the researchers found. The other lineage was not close to any group outside the subcontinent, and was most common in people indigenous to the Andaman Islands, a remote archipelago in the Bay of Bengal.

The researchers also found that Indian populations were much more highly subdivided than European populations. But whereas European ancestry is mostly carved up by geography, Indian segregation was driven largely by caste. "There are populations that have lived in the same town and same village for thousands of years without exchanging genes," says Reich.

Chakravarti notes that the study can't establish a rough date for when the ancient mixing between the two ancestral populations took place. "There are very curious features of the data that are hard to explain," he says, adding: "This is not the end of the story."

3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3769933/

4. https://hms.harvard.edu/news/genetics-proves-indian-population-mixture-8-8-13

“Only a few thousand years ago, the Indian population structure was vastly different from today,” said co–senior author David Reich, professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School.

regards,

sathya

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri Vishvas-ji wants to see 2005 as outdated and wants to go with Balagangadhara Tilak, P V Kane etc. 

What a sense of contemporaneity from the person seeing 'folly' in well meaning Indians not less scholarly than the 'top' in his eyes!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 0:12 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

Sri Vishvas-ji wants to see 2005 as outdated and wants to go with Balagangadhara Tilak, P V Kane etc. 

​shrI nAgarAj-jI fails to note that the distinction between:
* shrI vishvAs-jI refering to genetics papers and data from​ 2005 as outdated and
* shrI vishvAs-jI refering to the hindu polemics of 1890-s or 800AD as relevant

 

What a sense of contemporaneity from the person seeing 'folly' in well meaning Indians not less scholarly than the 'top' in his eyes!

There is not a shadow of doubt that several well meaning Indians are less scholarly than the "top" I mentioned in genetics (with great shame and sadness I note that this includes some Indian geneticists who give gyAn to the journalists while blissfully being coauthors in academic papers saying the opposite) .

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The point of Genetics Prof. Anderson mentioned is about the accuracy in the time calculations of the occurrence of the past event that the present Genetics. If you have information about which 2005-2017 development in Genetics improved accuracy in this regard, please share it with the list.  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> True, it's not deterministic - yet it is highly correlated, and that's sufficient. 

- What is correlated with what? The DNA of the persons and the languages they spoke and they have been speaking are highly correlated?  How is the language data collected, documented and used for correlation in the project? 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Speaking of obsolescence ,

1. The word 'Aryan' used in the acronym AIT and used in the present news article is obsolete. 

2. Invasion as a concept with regard to the IE speakers' movement from outside Indic subcontinent into India, is obsolete. It is now replaced with migration. 

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> what a thing to be proud of, and what a contrast with stories of raghu's digvijaya which included the huNa-s and persia! 

true!

since the stories of Raghu's digvijaya speak of an east to west movement and Sri Vasuki-ji wants to take pride in the Aryan invasion from west to east which is now believed by the 'top' not to have occurred at all as invasion but is believed to have occurred as 'migration' by the same 'top' ! What an upamaanauchitya! What a lakhya suited to the lakshaNa under discussion!

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 1:38 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

The point of Genetics Prof. Anderson mentioned is about the accuracy in the time calculations of the occurrence of the past event that the present Genetics. If you have information about which 2005-2017 development in Genetics improved accuracy in this regard, please share it with the list.  

I already did (if one cared to follow up on the pic I posted). Two things spring to mind:
* Availability of aDNA.
*  ​Use of whole genome data rather than microsatellites and Y chromosome.

Prof. Anderson at least humbly admits that he has not kept up with the field of genetics​. Others should take a hint. Geneticists have themselves been warning so clearly for a while now:

* First, a paper from 2006 is wildly out of date for this field. The methods used have been superseded. Instead of using one locus, the Y chromosome, and focusing on microsatellites (which have upsides and downsides), researchers now look at the whole genome. Probably the best paper to read on the latest results is Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India. The authors date the admixture between two different lineages in the subcontinent to “1,900 to 4,200 years ago.” - Razib Khan

*  Today, Dr. Underhill says there is no comparison between the kind of data available in 2010 and now. “Then, it was like looking into a darkened room from the outside through a keyhole with a little torch in hand; you could see some corners but not all, and not the whole picture. With whole genome sequencing, we can now see nearly the entire room, in clearer light.” - the hindu article.

​

​

2017-06-20 1:42 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com>:

> True, it's not deterministic - yet it is highly correlated, and that's sufficient. 

- What is correlated with what?

​With each other.​ 

 

The DNA of the persons and the languages they spoke and they have been speaking are highly correlated?  How is the language data collected, documented and used for correlation in the project? 

It's obvious isn't it? Take dominance of Turkish in Turkey, of Spanish in South and middle America, of English in North America, Australia and Africa, of Arabic in Egypt and North Africa, of Chinese in Tibet and the Uighur land, Japanese in Hokkaido, Russian in Eastern Siberia. They were all accompanied by fairly massive invasions and gene movement. Why - even Indic influence in South East Asia was accompanied by great population movement and domination (~5% of Cambodian ancestry seems to be Indian)

And I am not even mentioning the early domination of PIE descendents in Europe (Greek, Romance and Germanic languages vs Etruscan, Basque or Eteocretan).

2017-06-20 1:48 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com>:

Speaking of obsolescence ,

1. The word 'Aryan' used in the acronym AIT and used in the present news article is obsolete. 

I'll leave this for now :-)

 

2. Invasion as a concept with regard to the IE speakers' movement from outside Indic subcontinent into India, is obsolete. It is now replaced with migration. 

 

One can continue fantasizing - "migration" is mostly a euphemism for "invasion" and "dominance" (probably a concession given absence of hard archaeological evidence of battles). PIE speakers did not come to dominate lands from Ireland (note connection with "Arya") to India and even further east without battles.

​

2017-06-20 2:00 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com>:

> what a thing to be proud of, and what a contrast with stories of raghu's digvijaya which included the huNa-s and persia! 

true!

since the stories of Raghu's digvijaya speak of an east to west movement and Sri Vasuki-ji wants to take pride in the Aryan invasion from west to east which is now believed by the 'top' not to have occurred at all as invasion but is believed to have occurred as 'migration' by the same 'top' ! What an upamaanauchitya! What a lakhya suited to the lakshaNa under discussion!

This fixation on direction funny. As admirers of dasharatha, we are happy to take pride in conquests in all 10 directions. And if you want for some reason to insist on Eastward invasion, go ahead and take Chola raids on shrIvijaya and vijayanagaran raids on Burma. The contrast with the "oh we don't invade, we're so noble" remains. PS: it is shrI vishvAsa btw (vAsuki is a patronymic.)

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear friends,

Is this thread not getting hyperbolic?

We can get more focus if we reorient the discussion on the origin of the Vedic Language.

I think we have to be more technical than making piecemeal assertions.  We have to do

some reconstruction into the spoken language system in India about 5000BC.  Yes or

no to Indo-European is not relevant to find the answer.  But the task is hard.  We should
go at it with whatever resources we have.

Best regards,

BM

 

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:26 AM, विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com> wrote:

2017-06-20 1:38 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

The point of Genetics Prof. Anderson mentioned is about the accuracy in the time calculations of the occurrence of the past event that the present Genetics. If you have information about which 2005-2017 development in Genetics improved accuracy in this regard, please share it with the list.  

I already did (if one cared to follow up on the pic I posted). Two things spring to mind:
* Availability of aDNA.
*  ​Use of whole genome data rather than microsatellites and Y chromosome.

Prof. Anderson at least humbly admits that he has not kept up with the field of genetics​. Others should take a hint. Geneticists have themselves been warning so clearly for a while now:

* First, a paper from 2006 is wildly out of date for this field. The methods used have been superseded. Instead of using one locus, the Y chromosome, and focusing on microsatellites (which have upsides and downsides), researchers now look at the whole genome. Probably the best paper to read on the latest results is Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India. The authors date the admixture between two different lineages in the subcontinent to “1,900 to 4,200 years ago.” - Razib Khan

*  Today, Dr. Underhill says there is no comparison between the kind of data available in 2010 and now. “Then, it was like looking into a darkened room from the outside through a keyhole with a little torch in hand; you could see some corners but not all, and not the whole picture. With whole genome sequencing, we can now see nearly the entire room, in clearer light.” - the hindu article.

​

​

2017-06-20 1:42 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

> True, it's not deterministic - yet it is highly correlated, and that's sufficient. 

- What is correlated with what?

​With each other.​ 

 

The DNA of the persons and the languages they spoke and they have been speaking are highly correlated?  How is the language data collected, documented and used for correlation in the project? 

It's obvious isn't it? Take dominance of Turkish in Turkey, of Spanish in South and middle America, of English in North America, Australia and Africa, of Arabic in Egypt and North Africa, of Chinese in Tibet and the Uighur land, Japanese in Hokkaido, Russian in Eastern Siberia. They were all accompanied by fairly massive invasions and gene movement. Why - even Indic influence in South East Asia was accompanied by great population movement and domination (~5% of Cambodian ancestry seems to be Indian)

And I am not even mentioning the early domination of PIE descendents in Europe (Greek, Romance and Germanic languages vs Etruscan, Basque or Eteocretan).

2017-06-20 1:48 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

Speaking of obsolescence ,

1. The word 'Aryan' used in the acronym AIT and used in the present news article is obsolete. 

I'll leave this for now :-)

 

2. Invasion as a concept with regard to the IE speakers' movement from outside Indic subcontinent into India, is obsolete. It is now replaced with migration. 

 

One can continue fantasizing - "migration" is mostly a euphemism for "invasion" and "dominance" (probably a concession given absence of hard archaeological evidence of battles). PIE speakers did not come to dominate lands from Ireland (note connection with "Arya") to India and even further east without battles.

​

2017-06-20 2:00 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

> what a thing to be proud of, and what a contrast with stories of raghu's digvijaya which included the huNa-s and persia! 

true!

since the stories of Raghu's digvijaya speak of an east to west movement and Sri Vasuki-ji wants to take pride in the Aryan invasion from west to east which is now believed by the 'top' not to have occurred at all as invasion but is believed to have occurred as 'migration' by the same 'top' ! What an upamaanauchitya! What a lakhya suited to the lakshaNa under discussion!

This fixation on direction funny. As admirers of dasharatha, we are happy to take pride in conquests in all 10 directions. And if you want for some reason to insist on Eastward invasion, go ahead and take Chola raids on shrIvijaya and vijayanagaran raids on Burma. The contrast with the "oh we don't invade, we're so noble" remains. PS: it is shrI vishvAsa btw (vAsuki is a patronymic.)

--

--
Vishvas /विश्वासः

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

Nagraj-ji,

What Vasuki has presented here (going by the snippet he shared) is very interesting – indeed something that no Yavana scholar has professed to date – yet is the only possible scenario if AIT were to be really true.

I think this thesis should be discussed more freely on BVP (since Yavana-s have not shown the requisite moral/ intellectual honesty).

I think the propounder should come on BVP and shed lights on it. Personally I have clarity on my own stand (and know where someone may go wrong) stated earlier in this thread, but I am sure the proposed Iranian origins (near but not quite the Indo-Afgan region) of this Dharmika branch could be of some interest to someone like Dr N R Joshi.

Thanks

KT

[Achyut Karve]

Dear friends,

Good point Bijoy Misraji.   Moreover migration in itself proves nothing vis a vis the vedic language.  If for a minute we grant that the orign of the Vedic language is outside India is it not the responsibility of those propounding the theory to tell why the vedic language became extinct in the land of its origin.  This reminds me of Ptolmey who not being in a position to conceive of a rotating earth made the whole sky revolve round the earth.  According to our tradition words are said to be नित्य this goes with the rider that the permanence is in the land of their origin.  In addition many of the letters of the Vedic language are not to be seen elsewhere outside India on the other hand all the letters and many words are used in Modern Indian Languages.  Is it not a mystery that Sanskrit Pandits, Vidvans and scholars fall such an easy prey to the ideas proposed by vested interests in the West just because there are references to descriptions of foreign lands in the scriptures. What could be more natural than India being the birth place or orign of the Vedas. 

Achyut Karve.

[gobind medini]

I do not know whether we can take Raghu's digvijaya as a historical record. However, Aryan migration, whether from India or towards India cannot be refuted because Indo-Aryan (IA) linguistic evidence is available in three regions remotely located from each other: (1) India (Vedic IA), (2) Iran (Avestan IA), and (3) Syria (Mitanni IA). The last evidence is the oldest (1400BC) concrete evidence. Interestingly, according to linguistic experts the Vedic and Mitanni IA which are separated from each other by a longer physical distance are closer to each other linguistically than Avestan IA.

The spread of Hinduism (including Buddhism) is not through invasion except with the possible exception of Rajendra Chola-I of Tamil Nadu. However, both Hinduism-Buddhism (particularly, the latter) had spread in South East Asia much before the said Chola aggression (11th century) without invasion or force. This is a unique phenomenon. Various explanations are available, all of them may be true to various degrees. However, this spread (even taking into account possible Chola exception) will have to be distinguished from forceful or coercive proselytizing spread of other religions.

Ultimately everything boils down to types and degrees. For example, one or two temples might had been destroyed by the so called Hindu kings, but usually the secular apologist of other proselytizing religions invariably use this example to suggest that temple and icon destruction has happened in all religions forgetting that icon worship has never been resisted in Hinduism.. while this was the case in most of the other religions.

At the moment, what needs to be remembered without bothering about these theories is to remember the IA contribution (not as a racial group but as a multi-thread linguistic group) to the culture of India by way of Sanskrit language and its literature, linguistic theories, philosophical and theological schools, astronomy, and mathematics. Further, IA contribution is not only by way of Sanskrit but also by IA-Prakrit languages like Pali, ardha-Magadhi. This contribution is made by accepting the local deities, local culture, and practices. In fact these local deities are more popular then the Rigvedic dominant deities (Indra, Mitra, Varuna, and Nasatya) found in Mitanni inscriptions.

g

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

There is a Yazidi community in Iraq with similarity to Hinduism. Kindly see this -

https://www.quora.com/Are-Yazidi-tradition-and-culture-similar-to-those-of-Hindus

To the question how Vedic Religion is not there in Iran, Iraq and other places now is because it was driven out like Parsi religion from Persia. OR Parsi religion could have displaced Vedic religion there. I think study of Parsi religion history is required to fully understand what happened.

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 7:38 GMT-07:00 gobind medini <gome...@gmail.com>:

I do not know whether we can take Raghu's digvijaya as a historical record.

​I did not mean to suggest that it be taken as historical record. Just as a study in contrasting attitudes towards aggression on our part.​

 

However, Aryan migration, whether from India or towards India cannot be refuted because Indo-Aryan (IA) linguistic evidence is available in three regions remotely located from each other: (1) India (Vedic IA), (2) Iran (Avestan IA), and (3) Syria (Mitanni IA). The last evidence is the oldest (1400BC) concrete evidence. Interestingly, according to linguistic experts the Vedic and Mitanni IA which are separated from each other by a longer physical distance are closer to each other linguistically than Avestan IA.

Why did you forget Finnish?

• "In The Indo-Iranian Substratum, Alexander Lubatsky points out that the oldest borrowings into Finno-Ugric (FU) are from IA and not IIr. The speakers of FU didn’t live in the vicinity of India. Their contacts with the IE speakers happened further to the West. If OIT were correct then one must expect IIr speakers to have constituted the vanguard in the westward out flux from India and transmitted loan words into FU. It would’ve resulted in the attestation of IIr loans in the oldest strata of FU. However, that is not the case. The loan words in the oldest strata are from IA which suggests that they were directly transmitted from IA to FU." [KV16]

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Borrowings are a different story than direct genetic linguistic relation. Mitannni (more precisely Hittite ) language and Avestan are considered to have a direct genetic relation with the Vedic in as much as all the three are considered to be descendants of proto-Indo-European. 

Finno-Ugric is a different language family without any genetic relation with the Vedic or Avstan or Mitanni (Hittite).

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 9:18 GMT-07:00 Achyut Karve <achyut...@gmail.com>:

Moreover migration in itself proves nothing vis a vis the vedic language.  If for a minute we grant that the orign of the Vedic language is outside India is it not the responsibility of those propounding the theory to tell why the vedic language became extinct in the land of its origin. 

​You're mistaken about claims made about the origin of the vedic language: ​The dominant ancestor of vedic (proto indo-iranian -> proto indo european) language and religion ​came from outside, not the "late" vedic language. 

2017-06-20 9:57 GMT-07:00 Venkatesh Murthy <vmur...@gmail.com>:

To the question how Vedic Religion is not there in Iran, Iraq and other places now is because it was driven out like Parsi religion from Persia. OR Parsi religion could have displaced Vedic religion there. I think study of Parsi religion history is required to fully understand what happened.

Same applies to the above​ as well.​ When rephrased to refer to the ancestor of vaidika religion, this question makes more sense and gains importance. A relevant excerpt:

• "Why were the Lithuanian heathens most successful in holding out against the Christian steamroller?" [MT16]
• "The answer we present is related to the unusual archaism of their language and potentially religion. Thus, we posit that they were in many ways parallel to the Hindus. The Hindus were remarkably successful in preserving their Indo-Aryan archaism and their now withering Iranian cousins in preserving their Avestan traditions in face of several assaults. This relates to a well-developed ritualist caste with a powerful oral tradition and specifically a grammatically tradition that allowed preservation of the language, especially in ritual, close to its old Indo-European state. While this was potentially ancestral to the Indo-Europeans as suggested by the Roman ritualist guild, the combination with a rigorous grammatically oriented oral tradition is clearly attested best in the Indo-Aryans and then the Iranians [Notably, of the local Indian languages Tamil, a non-Aryan language, was the next best in its preservation of archaic tradition in India precisely because it adopted the Aryan linguistic methodology very early in its history]. Hence, we hypothesize that the Lithuanians had such a tradition which approached the Indo-Iranian state to certain degree [Totally contra-Rowell, who rather idiotically asserts that Germanic, Slav and Balt pagans built shrines to imitate Christians! A sign of how deep-rooted Abrahamistic prejudices are in academia]. ... In support of this we have evidence from whatever scraps of information survive regarding the heathen Lithuanian state that they had a well-organized ritualist guild along with the duchy elite with whom they intermarried – a parallel to the brahma-kṣatra elite of the Hindus."  [MT16]

 

This reminds me of Ptolmey who not being in a position to conceive of a rotating earth made the whole sky revolve round the earth. 

​Indeed, one must favor the most parsimonious explanation. ​I wonder who's Ptolmey here?

​​

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Sri Venkatesh Murty-ji,

Parsi religion is nothing but Zoroastrianism  which is also called Avestan religion. Its close connection with Vedic 'religion' is very well known and well established. 

In Mitanni what you see is some sparse connections. 

Whereas in Parsi/Zoroastrian/ Avestan religion the relationships with Vedic are abundant. 

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 10:35 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

Borrowings are a different story than direct genetic linguistic relation. Mitannni (more precisely Hittite ) language and Avestan are considered to have a direct genetic relation with the Vedic in as much as all the three are considered to be descendants of proto-Indo-European. 

Finno-Ugric is a different language family without any genetic relation with the Vedic or Avstan or Mitanni (Hittite).

​No disagreement with the above. My Finnish interjection to " because Indo-Aryan (IA) linguistic evidence is available in three regions remotely located from each other"​ still holds anyway.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

>  If for a minute we grant that the orign of the Vedic language is outside India is it not the responsibility of those propounding the theory to tell why the vedic language became extinct in the land of its origin. 

A related question, Sri Achyut Karve-ji, is why the the speakers of proto-Indo Iranian who after migrating to India and after their language evolved into Vedic started all of a sudden composing hymns while they wrote only prose during their life in Syria. In prehistoric studies usual pattern is that musical compositions precede discursive prose writings. But in this case, interestingly, as per AIT, during their life in Syria the ancestors of the Vedic people write discursive prose about how to raise, maintain horses and after they migrate to a new land India, they forget prose writing and start composing musical hymns. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The point useful for the discussion is only 

because Indo-Aryan (IA) linguistic evidence is available in three regions remotely located from each other

Finno-Ugric's borrowings have no role to play.  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 10:56 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

because

​​

Indo-Aryan (IA) linguistic evidence is available in three regions remotely located from each other

​​

Finno-Ugric's borrowings have no role to play.  

​False. ​

​

Finno-Ugric's borrowings are part of ​relevant Indo-Aryan (IA) linguistic evidence, and they are in a region remotely located form the others.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Then borrowings of English words into Telugu, Kannada etc. should be part of the theory genetic connection between English and Telugu and Kannada. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 10:53 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

A related question, Sri Achyut Karve-ji, is why the the speakers of proto-Indo Iranian who after migrating to India and after their language evolved into Vedic started all of a sudden composing hymns while

​​

they wrote only prose during their life in Syria. In prehistoric studies usual pattern is that musical compositions precede discursive prose writings. But in this case, interestingly, as per AIT, during their life in Syria the ancestors of the Vedic people write discursive prose about how to raise, maintain horses and after they migrate to a new land India, they forget prose writing and start composing musical hymns. 

​This again is based on a misapprehension - rather several misapprehensions. Firstly, how would one conclude that the mittani are the Indo-Aryans who invaded India and not a cousin branch?​ Secondly, how does one know that the mittani did not a vedic-like oral tradition?

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 11:01 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

Then borrowings of English words into Telugu, Kannada etc. should be part of the theory genetic connection between English and Telugu and Kannada. 

​​They could indeed be part of a discussion of the range of influence and origin of ​English speakers. The borrowings show that Englishmen influenced Telugu and kannada speakers at some point before such borrowings showed-up. (This sub-thread would have been unnecessary​, btw, if you'd cared to read my excerpt and the article linked with the excerpt..)

[Nagaraj Paturi]

That is the story, sir ! 

As per the current AIT narrative the speakers of the proto-Indo-Iranian who were the Mitanni, were the ones who migrated to India. 

If they were the cousin branch and were not the 'invaders' , 'migrants' , who were the 'invaders' , 'migrants' , who later started composing hymns?

Yes, how do you know that whatever was not there in Vedic hymns was not known to the Vedic people? But logical positivism demands evidence for both the oral compositions of the Mitanni and non-hymn compositions of the Vedic. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 11:10 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

As per the current AIT narrative the speakers of the proto-Indo-Iranian who were the Mitanni, were the ones who migrated to India. 

If they were the cousin branch and were not the 'invaders' , 'migrants' , who were the 'invaders' , 'migrants' , who later started composing hymns?

​

​I don't think that there is "the" story - rather there are many possible stories which fit the data (from AIT perspective). ​I know for sure that some interested people I know don't think

​that the miTTAni are the invaders

.

​ The invasion likely happened in mu​ltiple waves. For example:

• "We suspect that similarly there were multiple waves of Indo-European invasions into India. Most of these were waves were Indo-Aryans or at best Iranians, though there might have additionally even been a kentum type non-Indo-Iranian wave – sort of a mirror image of the western branch of Indo-Aryans (Mittani superstrate) that appeared in West Asia [Footnote 2]. We discern several such waves based on Indo-Aryan literary tradition: 1) The pa~nchajana (who may have come in more than one wave); 2) the ikShvAku (these two are early waves); 3) the shalva-s; 4) the pANDava-s" [MT11]

​

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

For every point that anyone under the sun makes with regard to AIT /OIT the answer is from the gospel whose details are in an older post of BVP here

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Narayan Joshi]

June 20, 2017

 Dear V Murthy, There is no need to guess about Parsi people and religion. There are inscriptions of kings of Persian empire of the know history in Iran. They are printed in books. One has to go to library and search. History of Hurrians, Mitanni, Celtic (god Aryamna brother of Indra) are available. I had written in the past on BVP many more details.

Dear Kalicharan, Thanks for mentioning my name in connection with this subject. History of Hittite (Troy) is available. History of Turkish people (Vrika-wolf people) is available. Mahabharata Kuru Kula was part of Vrika Kula of the sage Atri.  NRJOSHI

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 18:52 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

For every point that anyone under the sun makes with regard to AIT /OIT the answer is from the gospel whose details are in an older post of BVP here

​When all else fails and when one is unable to repair flaws in arguments one puts forth, one resorts to ad-homineim? That's rather disappointing.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

All has not fallen apart. This is only a middle of the course reminder. There is a lot in the previous posts.that has not been answered from the gospel. There are no Ad Hominem comments made against Sei Vishvas-ji. It was a reminder of a previous post about the source of Sri Vishvas-ji. Ad Hominem means attacking the person. Revealing the personal information that is kept hidden by the author of the source is not called Ad Hominem. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

​​2017-06-20 20:15 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

Ad Hominem means attacking the person. Revealing the personal information that is kept hidden by the author of the source is not called Ad Hominem. 

It is strange to imagine that ​"Gospel" was meant as a complement to the source (whoever it is) and those who​ like to quote him (among others) seriously.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Gospel is a metaphor indicating that the quoting.  person repeatedly brings the same source as answer to all points  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The time period under question is not the 'Mahabharata time'. or Ikshvaku time etc. 

The AIT theorists try to connect the Mitanni date and the date given by them to the earliest Vedic 'compositions' through migration now and invasion previously. 

The 'Veerabhoktas' of the Indian part of the Vasundharaa as a descendant of whom Sri Vishvas-ji wants to feel proud , if belong to a different time period than this, are not related to this dot-connecting at all. 

Only if these Veerabhoktas of India, coming from outside India, belong to a date earlier than the the date given by the 'top' to the earliest Vedic 'compositions, it becomes part of AIT debate. Otherwise, these Veerabhoktas should be considered as the Bhoktas of the Vasundharaa already having the Vedas prior to their arrival.  

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 20:24 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

Gospel is a metaphor indicating that the quoting.  person repeatedly brings the same source as answer to all points  

​Which of course, is false - I've quoted David Reich, Razib Khan and Kalavai Venkat in this thread.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 20:38 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

The time period under question is not the 'Mahabharata time'. or Ikshvaku time etc. 

​...​

Only if these Veerabhoktas of India, coming from outside India, belong to a date earlier than the the date given by the 'top' to the earliest Vedic 'compositions, it becomes part of AIT debate.

​No - if one wave appears after ​the earliest vedic composition (which anyway is likely to have started in distant lands) and influences later Indo-Aryan tradition (close to the vedic period), it is still relevant.

 

Otherwise, these Veerabhoktas should be considered as the Bhoktas of the Vasundharaa already having the Vedas prior to their arrival.  

​

Part of the veda-s you mean (given the qualification "early" in the prior sentence). That's fine - no problems with that.

-- 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

vedic composition (which anyway is likely to have started in distant lands)? 

'top' does not agree. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

AIT theorists do not consider any 'Invasion' (as per their old model) or 'migration' (as per their current model) later to their date of composition of earliest Veda, as part of AIT.    

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-20 22:42 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

vedic composition (which anyway is likely to have started in distant lands)? 

'top' does not agree. 

​I am sorry, who is this 'top'. 

​​

2017-06-20 22:58 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

AIT theorists do not consider any 'Invasion' (as per their old model) or 'migration' (as per their current model) later to their date of composition of earliest Veda, as part of AIT.    

The AIT theorists try to connect the Mitanni date and the date given by them to the earliest Vedic 'compositions' through migration now and invasion previously. 

​

​And as in the above you keep acting as if "AIT theorists" are one unanimous quorum whose theory is exactly as you (mis?)state, despite being shown otherwise.

[Bijoy Misra]

Let me again alert.

By borrowing third party sources and asserting does not make research.

If any of you has done some independent work or has created a full paper,

you should post.  Of course, we are free to delete, which I did.

BM

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-21 8:14 GMT-07:00 Bijoy Misra <misra...@gmail.com>:

Let me again alert.

By borrowing third party sources and asserting does not make research.​ 

If any of you has done some independent work or has created a full paper,

you should post. ​​

​​You are living in a fantasy universe if you think we're presenting original research here or in most other BVP threads.​ We're just discussing and evaluating various ideas.

​

Of course, we are free to delete, which I did.

​

Since you're using gmail, here is how you mute a conversation: http://www.guidingtech.com/15384/what-is-gmail-mute-how-to-use-it/​

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear Viswas,

While I respect what you are saying, this statement is erroneous.  Most postings are thoughtful

and are individually created with previously unseen arguments.  Lately however superficiality is
increasing and discussion is entering into trivia. 

Since you are good in what you do, let me suggest to you to start working on a review paper

with the title "The origin of the Vedic Language".  It would be productive on your part.  Don't copy
from anywhere, be independent.  Read the original.  Reflect hard and analyze.  Give it a year. 

Best wishes,

BM 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

>I am sorry, who is this 'top'. 

The 'top' are the AIT theorists and their Geneticist supporters. 

> And as in the above you keep acting as if "AIT theorists" are one unanimous quorum whose theory is exactly as you (mis?)state, despite being shown otherwise.

> as if "AIT theorists" are one unanimous quorum

--- Suitable response that can counter my

 "AIT theorists do not consider any 'Invasion' (as per their old model) or 'migration' (as per their current model) later to their date of composition of earliest Veda, as part of AIT.  "

would have been by citing one AIT theorist other than your previously quoted source which considers 'Invasion' (as per their old model) or 'migration' (as per their current model) later to their date of composition of earliest Veda, as part of AIT. That shows, then that AIT theorists differ in their opinion about whether to consider even 'Invasion' (as per their old model) or 'migration' (as per their current model) later to their date of composition of earliest Veda, as part of AIT or not. 

>whose theory is exactly as you (mis?)state

---- You may give the right statement of the theory from the AIT theorists other than your previous source that proves my 

"AIT theorists do not consider any 'Invasion' (as per their old model) or 'migration' (as per their current model) later to their date of composition of earliest Veda, as part of AIT.  "

as a misstatement . 

>despite being shown otherwise.

Quoting from the same blog not belonging to the professional discipline dealing with the issue is not any showing.  

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-21 10:28 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

>I am sorry, who is this 'top'. 

The 'top' are the AIT theorists and their Geneticist supporters. 

That is falsehood. ​No geneticist implies in his work that there was just ONE wave of IA invaders or migrants. All they say is that they came into India in some time interval (say "1,900 to 4,200 years ago"). In fact, going by other known migrations, multiple waves are indeed the norm - For example the distinct waves of puritans, Germans, Irish, Italians coming to America. 

​On the other hand​, some of them do seem to favor multiple waves, read - http://www.unz.com/gnxp/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/?highlight=waves .

​And, where non-geneticists are ​concerned, you are wrong as well. Here is Taligeri examining Witzel :

""

But even here, Witzel sees two waves of invasion after the earliersettlement of the four tribes in the Punjab: “The next wave isrepresented by the PUru, although their movement into thesubcontinent had also become a done deed by the time most Vedichymns were composed. The PUru are thus included among the ‘FivePeoples’ whom they initially dominated. Finally, the PUru containeda subtribe, the Bharatas, who were the latest intruders and whothoroughly disturbed the status quo.”

38

...
The Rigveda was composed by the priests of the PUrus and theBharatas, and “most of Rgveda was composed as the PUru and theBharata were moving into the Panjab. Portions composed before thePUru assumed a central role in the Panjab (in about threegenerations) were subsequently recast in their style.”

[Here,incidentally, Witzel suggests a phenomenon roughly similar to that suggested by scholars like Pargiter and Shendge, who visualise parts of the Rigveda being already in existence in the Punjab beforethe arrival of the Vedic Aryans, and being revised and incorporated bythe Vedic Aryans into their text. But while these parts, according toPargiter and Shendge, were originally composed by non-Aryans intheir non-Aryan language, Witzel sees them composed by non-VedicAryans belonging to an earlier wave of invasions.]

""

​In other words, beyond doubt, you were confidently misrepresenting AIT scholarship and fooling yourself and this list.​ Better be more thoughtful and careful as shrI bijoy rightly suggests. Do better homework.

>whose theory is exactly as you (mis?)state

---- You may give the right statement of the theory from the AIT theorists other than your previous source that proves my 

"AIT theorists do not consider any 'Invasion' (as per their old model) or 'migration' (as per their current model) later to their date of composition of earliest Veda, as part of AIT.  "

as a misstatement . 

First of all, I don't buy your ridiculous claim that there is no mutual disagreement among AIT theorists (see quotes above). Also the blog I quoted for example is an AIT theorist which contradicts your unsourced quotes. 

Secondly, as to the migration postdating the earliest vaidika hymns, you may refer to AIT theorists like bAlagangAdhara TiLak, or later ones like M Witzel, either in the original or quoted by shrIkAnta taligeri. Here is an excerpt where he correctly summarizes some of their thoughts: "Indra is generally accepted by even the most conservative ofinvasionist scholars as a symbol of the invading Aryans: at the veryleast as a God invoked by them in their battles against the non-Aryans." (identifying such hymns with RV hymns is left out as an exercise)

 

>despite being shown otherwise.

Quoting from the same blog not belonging to the professional discipline dealing with the issue is not any showing.  

By your admitted identification (which I dont comment on), he is indeed strongly placed in a professional discipline that enables him to comment thoughtfully on the issue (much more so than the present company). Willful blindness does not do one credit. Well, anyway, now I've shown other sources.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-19 23:33 GMT-07:00 विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) <vishvas...@gmail.com>:

2017-06-19 22:26 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

1. The contemporarily relevant and effective and real political aspect of the whole debate lies in the potential of and past use of the Aryan Invasion /Immigration Theory to justify the British (Modern European Nations')  invasion of India and opposition to and ridiculing of the Indian Freedom Struggle or Indian National Movement on that basis. It also has connections with norh Indians and upper castes particularly Brahmins being picturized as the ancient invaders of India and other Indians being victims of that from ages.' "conviction" that AIT is baseless is rooted in these contemporary consequences'. 

​

​Yes, I agree. But this reaction is based in folly and a sad sign of our current intellectual state. One can quite easily be a abhimAni hindu, accept evidence in favor of AIT and repudiate enemy narratives (just think of the great patriot bAlagangAdhara TiLak). We don't even need to be apologetic about any Aryan Invasion, dominance and consolidation (quite the opposite - we can derive pride in it and explore exactly why such stunning success came to pass) - all we have to do is reject the fake equivalence of Aryan invasion with the genocidal invasions of the mlecCha-s in India, the America-s and Australia (which is exactly what PV kANe did - never spilt any ink propping OIT up AFAIK).

 

​Furthermore, वीरभोग्या वसुन्धरा - nature does not care for moral justifications like "oh we're unjust victims of atrocious foreign dominance. we never did such a thing to others". That's so defeatist and pitiable (besides being false).​ Who are we trying to convince? Does the Pakistani or Chinese nationalist waste any breath justifying his aggression or defense on some inane theory of moral superiority?

​An additional note:

Shrikant Taligeri has a section on the "Hindu Invasionist School"​, quoting fine patriots like BG TiLak, S.D. Kulkarni and vIra sAvarkar. Reading it should disabuse one of the strange notion that OIT type delusion is a necessary aspect of Hindu reaction to enemy propaganda.

""

V.D. (Veer) Savarkar, who more or less accepted Tilak’s hypothesis,takes equal pride in the “achievements” of the Aryans, but is less inclined to stress the “extermination” of the inferior races, and, infact, tries to suggest that the non-Aryans were relatively few  in number, and that most of them welcomed the Aryan invaders with open arms.

""

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> ​In other words, beyond doubt, you were confidently misrepresenting AIT scholarship and fooling yourself and this list.

My sanskaara lies in not being provoked to use a similar rash language against you. 

> Better be more thoughtful and careful as shrI bijoy rightly suggests. Do better homework.

-- Prof. Bijoy Mishra's message was specifically addressed to you. 

What more could I have expected from someone who sticks to the invasion view which has been  replaced by migration and  who argues that वीरभोग्या वसुन्धरा - nature does not care for moral justifications and who wants to take pride as a descendant of invaders from outside India and who says does the Pakistani or Chinese nationalist waste any breath justifying his aggression or defense on some inane theory of moral superiority? (implying that morals have no place in veerabhojana of any land) 

With the hope that the list by now realized who is leading the list to morally unscrupulous invasionism and who is trying to keep the insider's view of the Vedas and the Vedic culture tuned to academic studies, I withdraw from this  rantful conversation that does not spare even respectful elders and calls them to be living in fantasy universe and so on. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

For reasons of conflict of interest, I leave the moderatoon of this particular thread to my co-moderator Prof. JSR Prasad.

[विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki)]

2017-06-21 11:39 GMT-07:00 Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>:

With the hope that the list by now realized who is leading the list to morally unscrupulous invasionism and who is trying to keep the insider's view of the Vedas and the Vedic culture tuned to academic studies, I withdraw from this  rantful conversation that does not spare even respectful elders and calls them to be living in fantasy universe and so on. 

Having satisfactorily called shrI nAgarAja patUri's bluff about his representation of AIT, ​I withdraw from this conversation as well. I am reminded of the list's reaction when I similarly pointed out shrI bijoy's misrepresentation of a 2009 Nature paper )​ I stand by my criticism of his misplaced prejudice with regards to sources and inadequate use of scholarly care in his responses, but clarify that such criticism, being meant in the noble spirit of आसतो मा सद्गमय, need not be taken otherwise. 

"सम्मानाद्ब्राह्मणो नित्यमुद्विजेत विषादिव । अमृतस्येव चाकाङ्क्षेदवमानस्य सर्वदा ।।" - मनुः

"सुलभाः पुरुषा राजन् सततं प्रियवादिनः । अप्रियस्य च पथ्यस्य वक्ता श्रोता च दुर्लभाः ।।"

[Nityanand Misra]

I have known and interacted in personal capacity with both Prof. Paturi and Vishvas Vasuki for some time. They are both well-meaning people and it is unfortunate this discussion has turned acrimonious. 

Vishvas is to be complimented for his unflinching faith in scientific evidence. No doubt, scientific evidence cannot be denied. However, I am not sure if there is anybody on this forum who understands genetics and statistics well enough to critically evaluate the summary of the research findings as quoted from the Manasataramgini (MT) blog. I can evaluate the statistical aspects of the studies but I do not know genetics well enough. A cross-domain expert is needed. Vishvas did try to get in Dr. David Reich last year, but there was perhaps no response. 

Aravind Iyer (the suspected author of MT) seems to be an expert, but ... and this is a big but, he can make mistakes. For example, he seems to be well-versed in Sanskrit, but makes a basic schoolboy error here in saying that taraMgiNI is Sanskrit for waves. As any dictionary including the Amara Kosha would tell the reader, taraṅgiṇī is Sanskrit for river, and not waves. This example shows that a review matters, even more so in the field of science. I would have no problem in taking on face value a publication by Iyer in a journal, but I would not blindly trust an informal piece of writing (like a blog) by him. Unfortunately, his anonymity and some incredulous claims on the his MT blog like his sites have been hacked by somebody who impersonates him on multiple social media platforms do not help matters. I think this is what Prof. Paturi had in mind when he called the blog a gospel: I too cannot put my blind faith in it.

Having said that, Vishvas does seem to be more conversant with the AIT versions and literature than Prof. Paturi. It is natural given Vishvas's background in applied science. If Prof. Paturi has inadvertently misrepresented anything, Vishvas can certainly correct him without the acrimony. I am sure Prof. Paturi, like most people in this forum, are open to being corrected. This is not to be seen as a victory or calling a bluff, nor it should be seen as a defeat. I hope Vishvas restates his positions and summarizes the thread, without the acrimony, for the benefit of all.

As for me, I am not interested in contributing to the discussion in this thread, since anything that is said in these matters has the potential of opening a can of worms and leads to a loss of time (which I am terribly short of).

[Nityanand Misra]

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 11:33:00 UTC+8, Nityanand Misra wrote:

Unfortunately, his anonymity and some incredulous claims on the his MT blog like

I meant incredible claims. Malapropism!

[Jsr Prasad]

=======Moderators' Note=======

Sri Vishwas,

दुस्तर्कात् सुविरम्यतां श्रुतिमतस्तर्कोsनुसन्धीयताम् । You have crossed all limits of propriety and courtesy in insulting the elders and others.  Knowing good English and involving in pure vitaNDA is not the criteria of a good scholarship. You are under moderation now.

No more posts in thread please.

THE THREAD IS CLOSED

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

J.S.R. Anjaneya Prasad,
Associate Professor, Dept. of Sanskrit Studies,
School of Humanities, University of Hyderabad,
Prof. C.R. Rao Road, Hyderabad - 500 046
Tel: +91-40-2313 3803

।। पुरुषोऽयं लोकसम्मितः ।।