Genetic evidence suggests the origins of Indian caste populations

Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by Singh, May 14, 2013.

  1. LalTopi

    LalTopi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    508
    Likes Received:
    229

    No, I meant why post this 2001 article when other more recent studies contradict the Aryan Invasion Theory or even the Aryan Migration Theory for that matter. E.g. Daredevil posted the same article as you at the beginning of the AIT thread, but also posted this article written in 2006, which contradicts genetic differences amongst caste populations:

    http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/religion-culture/1403-aryan-invasion-theory.html#post13108
     
  2. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    25,476
    Likes Received:
    12,201
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    @Singh, you might find this interesting about Indra: Indra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Regarding Brahma, I do not think it is a post, but one divine individual; although the word Brahman is a post, and many people can be a Brahman. The contrast here is, that only one person can be Indra at a given time, but any number of persons can be a Brahman.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  3. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    246
    Location:
    varanasi
    @pmaita

    this is what you wrote

    if you are not aware of anything, why are you showing your ignorance?

    I completely know hellenic and hellenization but do you know how these words come into being?

    the greeks ( including ionians ) called themselves hellas and from this we get a very frequent word philhelene meaning friend of greeks in parthian coins.
    hellenic and hellenization are modern words just like indian and indianization.
     
  4. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    246
    Location:
    varanasi

    Look, similar sounds mean nothing but for anyone who relates seljuq turks with seleucids, it is hard to understand that.

    Guhadatta or guhaditya was a historical king of 6th century ad and we have coins of him ( many thousand discovered from agra) in which it is written " sri guhil" .

    the term guhilot is just like term dehelvi or banarasi meaning someone hailing to that.

    guhil and guhilot are remarkably close but anyway this is irrelevant as we have historical records of guhilots from guhadutta to jaitrasingh in forms of inscriptions and coins.

    need a source?

    read any book of rajasthan history.

    " rajasthan through ages " by Dasarth Sharma, a professional historian who chaired IHC is my recommendation.


    when you have whole geneaology from guhaditya to rana sanga and that too verified by inscriptions, you can not dismiss that away.



    read the book recommended by me.


    I know reza shah pehlavi and that it is an iranian surname and i was not disputing but only telling that similar sounding names mean nothing when they have different meaning and etymology.

    and be rest assured, I have read more on chalukyan history than any south indian dynasty for it is my favourite dynasty.

    i was just pointing out your eroneous way of matching names and then making wild assumptions on chauhan being yavan when the original word is chahman which later got corrupted to chauhan and even then chauhan is not yavan.


    you are advising me to look at geographical location of chalukyas but do you realize the time gap between your yavanas and chauhan.





    In one of the posts, i had said that those looking for scythian and greek ancestry of chauhans and guhilots are just PN Oak on the other side.

    he thought christianity was krishnaniti and you think yavana= chauhan.

    both of you do not take into account distances of time, space and context.

    for you people marwari birlas are nothing but turks as the tribe of Taimur lang was barlas never mind the different sounding r.
     
  5. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    25,476
    Likes Received:
    12,201
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    What do you mean by relating Seljuk Turks with Seleucids? Please elaborate? What exactly was said? Please quote. Don't be like Joseph Goebbels - prove it.

    I am not disputing Guhaditya and Guhilot. I am saying these two words do not sound as similar as Yavan and Chavan/Chauhan.


    Where are the inscriptions? Is it on a piece of rock? Where was it found? Where is it now? In a museum? Are there any pictures? Share it with us.




    Anything I can check online?



    There are lots of things that you should not be disputing, which you keep disputing, for example the "Seljuk" part of your post, or the other post where you said the Red Sea was in the Balkans.

    I am not asking what your favourite dynasty is.

    In this particular case, I already said I have no solid proof, but how did you know it was erroneous? I searched for "Chamana" but found nothing.

    What time gap? How does that even matter? Mughal rule ended long time back, but does that mean their descendants do not live anymore?


    Not sure what that sentence means.

    You have this habit of drawing inane parallels. When I linked Russia with Ukraine, two neighbours, you drew a parallel by linking Mongolia and Azerbaijan. Now, if I link a bicycle with a motorcycle, you will draw a parallel by linking a bullock cart with a space shuttle.

    Time and space? We are not discussing physics or Big Bang Theory here.

    No, you are making that up.
     
  6. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    246
    Location:
    varanasi
    @pmaitra

    OK I give up because

    1. it is not good for my health in this forum if i debate with someone who has authority of banning me.

    2. History is not the main focus of this forum so a tiny member like me can not convince any senior when the topic is deebated in alone.

    let others join the debate and only then it can be resumed as on net one can face severe dishonesty.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  7. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    25,476
    Likes Received:
    12,201
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    No one is going to ban you simply because you are disagreeing with him. Secondly, I do not shy away from admitting my mistakes, and you are witness to that.

    It is also not about seniority, but about writing posts and providing some kind of support/links/citations/references for it, and this applies especially to you, simply because you are the one who brought in Joseph Goebbels, and called @Iamanidiot wrong, when actually you were wrong and he was correct. On top of that, you were calling him names. Minimum decency requires you offer an apology to him (not to me).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  8. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    246
    Location:
    varanasi
    You are also witness to the fact that i do not participate in armoury threads. reason is lack of knowledge on my part but on historical topics i am a bit comfortable.

    Laman idiot was not correct on any account.

    Erythrean sea refers to red sea as well as arabian sea and I do not recall greeks marrying with brahmins being mentioned in that book so I was not at all wrong.
     
  9. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,636
    Likes Received:
    2,873
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    Aiyyooo :facepalm: When did I say Chauhan doesn't sound similar to Yavana. A lot of things in this world sound similar.
    My point was, just this similarity in sound is not a good basis. :tsk:

    PrithviRajVijaya, HammirMahaKavya, SurjanCharitra as well as the Vansha Bhaskar specify Chahamana, as the progenitor of Chauhans.
    They also mention Pushkar as his birth place.
    This is an example I'm quoting from the second Sarga of PrithviRajVijaya:
    [​IMG]

    This is the verse 12 of the Harshanath inscription of 961 A.D issued by VigrahaRaj Chauhan:
    L-12:*आद्य: श्री गूवकाख्यप्रथितनरपतिश्चाहमानान्वयोभूत्
    श्री मन्नागाय्वलोकप्रकरनृपसभालब्धवीरप्रतिष्ठ: ।
    यस्य श्री हर्षदेव वरभवनमयी भौतली कीर्तिमूर्ति
    [​IMG]

    The same primary sources have been analyzed and referenced by many of the later historians (like Dasharatha Sharma:Early Chauhan Dynasties, Chauhan Kul Kalpadrum by Bhimbhai Desai etc) on numerous occasions.

    Regards,
    Virendra
     
    pmaitra likes this.
  10. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    25,476
    Likes Received:
    12,201
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Ok, I get it you did not say that, and also, just to clarify what I was saying:
    • Yavana and Chavan/Chauhan sound similar, and although I do not have any solid proof, there is a possibility the term came from Yavanas. Of course, this could be a coincidence.
    • I am not contesting your claim about Guhaditya and Gehlot; all I said they do not sound as similar (I think we have clarified that between ourselves by now).
    Now, regarding similarity in sounds, I would like to draw your attention to the following.

    Noun-Adjective-Substantive
    In Sanskrit, as well as Proto-Indo-European, and therefrom, Russian (Slavonic) and German (Germanic) languages, there is an usage of a noun, and there is an adjective that is derived from that noun, and that adjective is also used as a noun in its own right. Some examples:
    • Gandhara - Gandhari
    • Kaikeya - Kaikeyi
    • Kshetra - Kshatriya (Graeco-Persian Satrapi)
    • Vishnu - Vaishnava
    • Chanak - Chanakya

    There are plenty of examples, where you see how a noun (place, profession, or heritage), can be used to define another person (adjective), and that definition can itself be used as a noun (substative).

    My point is that similarity in sound is a very important link, especially for the type of grammar that Sanskrit, Avesthan, and Proto-Indo-European languages use.

    Two more examples:
    Russian - agoin -> agnivaya
    German - vierbeinende (vier = 4, bein = leg) -> vierbeinende; in a particular context that I had read meant a dog (four legged).


    Thank you. That was very informative. I did search for "Chamana" but did not find anything online. Now yo have provided screenshots, so thank you for that.
     
  11. SinghSher1984

    SinghSher1984 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Amritsar
    being found in the upper castes. In contrast, for paternally inherited Y-chromosome variation each caste is more similar to Europeans than to Asians. Moreover, the affinity to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans, particularly East Europeans

    This is propoganada as which upper castes, and what kind of East Europeans, from what time period?

    The scythian migrations from which many Jatt, Tarkhan, Gujjar, and Rajput clans are descended from are the answer,(kshatriyas) and 500-500 (bc-ad) the time period.

    End of discussion, it's already well-known.

    This is not anything new, and the whole asian thing? Well of course how do you think people got to SE asia by land? Through India.

    So pretty much, yes we've had migrations, with the fathers marrying Indian women, and adopting Indian culture.

    This is part of the reason why the Muslims weren't taken that seriously because people thought they would assimilate as well.

    End thread. /
     
  12. Simple_Guy

    Simple_Guy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2013
    Messages:
    759
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    Delhi
    Hello everyone. Hope this is right thread.

    From the timesofindia

    Some place they are Khatri but in Rajasthan Mehta are Rajput?? What is the Chauhan connection
     

Share This Page