What was the state of faith in ancient India and subcontinent?

[Peter]

Guys what @jus was saying is true. There is genetic and linguistic evidence behind AIT/AMT. However I believe that for the sake of a unified nation we should not promote such ideas. There is a famous saying in Bengali that a bitter truth should never be told.( opriyo sotti kotha valo noy.)

 

[TejasMK3]

Guys what @jus was saying is true. There is genetic and linguistic evidence behind AIT/AMT. However I believe that for the sake of a unified nation we should not promote such ideas. There is a famous saying in Bengali that a bitter truth should never be told.( opriyo sotti kotha valo noy.)

Garbage, there is no genetic proof, there has been literally no gene flow into India, it is well know at this point.. The linguistic "proof" is nothing more than a theory....well not even that, even the theory has many holes, that cannot be explained, which makes the whole migration (no one even talks about Invasion these days), completely suspect. Archeological, geographic and genetic evidence is very clear that there was movement outwards from UP area to the west (Iran/Punjab).

 

[archie]

Guys what @jus was saying is true. There is genetic and linguistic evidence behind AIT/AMT. However I believe that for the sake of a unified nation we should not promote such ideas. There is a famous saying in Bengali that a bitter truth should never be told.( opriyo sotti kotha valo noy.)

There is not a shread of evidence for AIT.. Just the timeline is so not logical le alone other proof

AMT is migration from India outward to other regions there is a possibility..

 

[Peter]

There is a debate or a controversy surrounding the AIT issue and I would not like to discuss it further.

(As for linguistics I can give some examples but let us not waste time on debating such things in a defense forum. Also a lot of genetic tests have been performed which have thrown out contradicting results. The AIT has never been debunked officially.)

 

[TejasMK3]

Whatever there is a debate to the AIT issue and I would not like to discuss it further.

Could you post proof for what you posted, head over the AIT thread,
I've never heard anyone state there is genetic evidence Even the hardcore AMT people only hang on to the "linguistic theory" , besides the champions of AIT himself has accepted AIT is fake, and hang on to AMT as their last hope.
http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/centerforindicstudies/conf2006article.pdf


Interestingly, Witzel stated, for the first time to many in the audience, that he and his colleagues no longer subscribe to Aryan invasion theory.

AMT is migration from India outward to other regions there is a possibility..

That is OIT or the Out of India theory, AMT is basically a step down from AIT when the "invasion" thing was proved to be fake, these guys mellowed to down to create a theory about people coming in batches over a period of time and "integrating peacefully". Again has huge problems even from the linguistic side.

 

[Peter]

Could you post proof for what you posted, head over the AIT thread,
I've never heard anyone state there is genetic evidence Even the hardcore AMT people only hang on to the "linguistic theory" , besides the champions of AIT himself has accepted AIT is fake, and hang on to AMT as their last hope.
http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/centerforindicstudies/conf2006article.pdf


Interestingly, Witzel stated, for the first time to many in the audience, that he and his colleagues no longer subscribe to Aryan invasion theory.

That is OIT or the Out of India theory, AMT is basically a step down from AIT when the "invasion" thing was proved to be fake, these guys mellowed to down to create a theory about people coming in batches over a period of time and "integrating peacefully". Again has huge problems even from the linguistic side.

Sir,

There is a thread here in DFI itself titled Aryan Invasion Theory or something. It is an extremely long thread with a lot of numbers and sources thrown in. You can search for that.(You will get the genetic evidence/links there along with the other linguistic similarities.)

As I have said I have no wish to debate AIT here. Let us keep to our own views regarding the issue. Cheers.

 

[TejasMK3]

Sir,

There is a thread here in DFI itself titled Aryan Invasion Theory or something. It is an extremely long thread with a lot of numbers and sources thrown in. You can search for that.(You will get the genetic evidence/links there along with the other linguistic similarities.)

As I have said I have no wish to debate AIT here. Let us keep to our own views regarding the issue. Cheers.

Yeah I mentioned that thread in my post, head over it and read.
Basically you have no links..not even one to show "solid proof".... .Anyone who follows that topic knows genetic evidence is zero..

 

[Peter]

Yeah I mentioned that thread in my post, head over it and read.
Basically you have no links..not even one to show "solid proof".... .Anyone who follows that topic knows genetic evidence is zero..

I do have proofs. Here are some links.


This is for AMT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_migration_theory#Genetics:_no_large-scale_invasion

http://www.quora.com/How-does-genetic-analysis-explain-Aryan-invasion-theory(Go through the second answer.)

India has one of the genetical most diverse populations in the world. The history of this genetic diversity is the topic of continued research and debate. A recent series of research papers, by Reich et al. (2009), Metspalu et al. (2011), and Moorjani et al. (2013), make clear that India was peopled by two distinct groups ca. 50,000 years ago, which form the basis for the present population of India.[web 11][139] These two groups mixed between 4,200 to 1,900 years ago (2200 BCE-100 CE), whereafter a shift to endogamy took place.[140] Several studies show significant differences between northern and southern India, and higher and lower castes, with northern India and the higher castes showing stronger relatedness to West Eurasian DNA.[web 12][web 13][web 14] Several studies rule out the possibility of a large-scale "invasion" by Indo-Aryans,[141] but do show traces of later influxes of genetic material,[21][web 1] while others have argued for the possibility of genetic influx by Aryan migrations.[22] Genetic studies also show that language shift is possible without a change in genetics

So it does acknowledge AMT.

Genetical studies reveal that broadly two genetic groups can be discerned in India, namely "Ancestral North Indians" and "Ancestral South Indians."[139][web 11][note 27][140][note 28][web 15][web 13] These two distinct groups peopled India ca. 50,000 years ago, and formed the basis for the present population of India.[web 16]

Reich et al. (2009) discerned

... two ancient populations, genetically divergent, that are ancestral to most Indians today. One, the “Ancestral North Indians” (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, while the other, the “Ancestral South Indians” (ASI), is as distinct from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other.[web 17]

 

[Peter]

In short there were two groups-ANI and ASI. They intermixed and gave rise to modern Indians.

 

[TejasMK3]

In short there were two groups-ANI and ASI. They intermixed and gave rise to modern Indians.

Yes, but from within India, no one came from outside.

 

[Peter]

Yes, but from within India, no one came from outside.

We all came from Africa now happy vai.

 

[TejasMK3]

We all came from Africa now happy vai.

You dont seem to know the difference between ANI/ASI and the aryan theory ..?
There has been no specific gene flow from outside to ANI populations,
http://www.newslaundry.com/2014/08/11/indiana-jones-and-the-troublesome-aryans/ (A very good write up if you are new to the topic)

From the link i posted above in my previous post:
Leading evidences come from population genetics, which were presented by two leading researchers in the field, Dr. V. K. Kashyap, National Institute of Biologicals, India, and Dr. Peter Underhill of Stanford University in California. Their results generally contradict the notion Aryan invasion/migration theory for the origin of Indian civilization.

Underhill concluded "the spatial frequency distributions of both L1 frequency and variance levels show a spreading pattern emanating from India", referring to a Y chromosome marker. He, however, put several caveats before interpreting genetic data, including "Y-ancestry may not always reflect the ancestry of the rest of the genome"

Dr. Kashyap, on the other hand, with the most comprehensive set of genetic data was quite emphatic in his assertion that there is "no clear genetic evidence for an intrusion of Indo-Aryan people into India, [and] establishment of caste system and gene flow."

Michael Witzel, a Harvard linguist, who is known to lead the idea of Aryan Invasion/migration/influx theory in more recent times, continued to question genetic evidence on the basis that it does not provide the time resolution to explain events that may have been involved in Aryan presence in India.

Dr. Kashyap's reply was that even though the time resolution needs further work, the fact that there are clear and distinct differences in the gene pools of Indian population and those of Central Asian and European groups, the evidence nevertheless negates any Aryan invasion or migration into Indian Subcontinent.

Witzel though refused to present his own data and evidence for his theories despite being invited to do so was nevertheless present in the conference and raised many questions. Some of his commentaries questioning the credibility of scholars evoked sharp responses from other participants.
************************

Other sources.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7263/full/nature08365.html

No trace of “demographic disruption” in the North-West of the subcontinent between 4500 and 800 BCE; this negates the possibility of any massive intrusion, by so-called Indo-Aryans or other populations, during that period.
Deep late Pleistocene genetic link between contemporary Europeans and Indians, provided by the mtDNA haplogroup U, which encompasses roughly a fifth of mtDNA lineages of both populations. Our estimate for this split [between Europeans and Indians] is close to the suggested time for the peopling of Asia and the first expansion of anatomically modern humans in Eurasia and likely pre-dates their spread to Europe.”
Haplogroup U, being common to North Indian and “Caucasoid” populations, was found in tribes of eastern India such as the Lodhas and Santals, which would not be the case if it had been introduced through Indo-Aryans. Such is also the case of the haplogroup M, another marker frequently mentioned in the early literature as evidence of an invasion: in reality, haplogroup M occurs with a high frequency, averaging about 60%, across most Indian population groups, irrespective of geographical location of habitat. Tribal populations have higher frequencies of haplogroup M than caste populations.”

Answer about this from U.S. anthropologists Kenneth Kennedy, John Lukacs and Brian Hemphill.

mtDNA haplogroup “M” common to India (with a frequency of 60%), Central and Eastern Asia (40% on average), and even to American Indians; however, this frequency drops to 0.6% in Europe, which is “inconsistent with the ‘general Caucasoidness’ of Indians.” This shows, once again, that “the Indian maternal gene pool has come largely through an autochthonous history since the Late Pleistocene.” U haplogroup frequency 13% in India, almost 14% in North-West Africa, and 24% from Europe to Anatolia. “Indian and western Eurasian haplogroup U varieties differ profoundly; the split has occurred about as early as the split between the Indian and eastern Asian haplogroup M varieties. The data show that both M and U exhibited an expansion phase some 50,000 years ago, which should have happened after the corresponding splits.” In other words, there is a genetic connection between India and Europe, but a far more ancient one than was thought.
If one were to extend methodology used to suggest an Aryan invasion based on Y-Dna statistics to populations of Eastern and Southern India, one would be led to an exactly opposite result: “the straightforward suggestion would be that both Neolithic (agriculture) and Indo-European languages arose in India and from there, spread to Europe.” The authors do not defend this thesis, but simply guard against “misleading interpretations” based on limited samples and faulty methodology.
The Chenchu tribe is genetically close to several castes, there is a “lack of clear distinction between Indian castes and tribes.

Thangaraj and Singh at a press conference.

- Twenty authors headed by Kivisild - Archaeogenetics of Europe - 2000.
"This paper rewrites history... there is no north-south divide."
"There is no truth to the Aryan-Dravidian theory as they came hundreds or thousands of years after the ancestral north and south Indians had settled in India."
The study analysed 500,000 genetic markers across the genomes of 132 individuals from 25 diverse groups from 13 states. All the individuals were from six-language families and traditionally upper and lower castes and tribal groups. "The genetics proves that castes grew directly out of tribe-like organizations during the formation of the Indian society."
"Impossible to distinguish between castes and tribes since their genetics proved they were not systematically different."
The present-day Indian population is a mix of ancient north and south bearing the genomic contributions from two distinct ancestral populations - the Ancestral North Indian (ANI) and the Ancestral South Indian (ASI).
"The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part,'' said Thangarajan. He added, "At a later stage, 40,000 years ago, the ancient north Indians emerged which in turn led to rise in numbers here. But at some point of time, the ancient north and the ancient south mixed, giving birth to a different set of population. And that is the population which exists now and there is a genetic relationship between the population within India."
The study also helps understand why the incidence of genetic diseases among Indians is different from the rest of the world. Singh said that 70% of Indians were burdened with genetic disorders and the study could help answer why certain conditions restricted themselves to one population. For instance, breast cancer among Parsi women, motor neuron diseases among residents of Tirupati and Chittoor, or sickle cell anaemia among certain tribes in central India and the North-East can now be understood better, said researchers.
The researchers, who are now keen on exploring whether Eurasians descended from ANI, find in their study that ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with any other population across the world.

When Homo sapiens migrated out of Africa, he first reached South-West Asia around 75,000 BP, and from here, went on to other parts of the world. In simple terms, except for Africans, all humans have ancestors in the North-West of the Indian peninsula. In particular, one migration started around 50,000 BP towards the Middle East and Western Europe: “indeed, nearly all Europeans — and by extension, many Americans — can trace their ancestors to only four mtDNA lines, which appeared between 10,000 and 50,000 years ago and originated from South Asia

Lluís Quintana-Murci,Vincent Macaulay,Stephen Oppenheimer,Michael Petraglia,and their associates

Based on 728 samples covering 36 Indian populations, it announced in its very title how its findings revealed a “Minor Genetic Influence of Central Asian Pastoralists,” i.e. of the Indo-Aryans, and stated its general agreement with the previous study. For instance, the authors rejected the identification of some Y-DNA genetic markers with an “Indo-European expansion,” an identification they called “convenient but incorrect ... overly simplistic.” To them, the subcontinent’s genetic landscape was formed much earlier than the dates proposed for an Indo-Aryan immigration: “The influence of Central Asia on the pre-existing gene pool was minor. ... There is no evidence whatsoever to conclude that Central Asia has been necessarily the recent donor and not the receptor of the R1a lineages.”
“Dravidian” authorship of the Indus-Sarasvati civilization rejected indirectly, since it noted, “Our data are also more consistent with a peninsular origin of Dravidian speakers than a source with proximity to the Indus....” They found, in conclusion, “overwhelming support for an Indian origin of Dravidian speakers.”
The frequencies of R2 seems to mirror the frequencies of R1a (i.e. both lineages are strong and weak in the same social and linguistic subgroups). This may indicate that both R1a and R2 moved into India at roughly the same time or co-habited, although more research is needed. R2 is very rare in Europe.

Sanghamitra Sengupta, L. Cavalli-Sforza, Partha P. Majumder, and P. A. Underhill. - 2006.


There are plenty more. Studies by Nature magazine, MIT and many others :

These are a bit more authoritative than a quora answer and references to wiki

 

[anupamsurey]

Hinduism was essence of Indian subcontinent, and it will be an essence of subcontinent (though subdued, and corrupted).
Hinduism was a great contributor for prosperity of India in past, but it has gone crazy in middle ages, even historian agree that Hinduism and India prospered till Gupta. and some media would love to point out the Indo Aryan migration and inception of Hinduism, but it has been proved to be bullshit even scientifically.

Hinduism had its extension from central asian countries (finding of Ganesha Idol-was in news) to Asia pacific.then there was Zoraster who made people deviate from Hinduism, he vilified previous gods and started fire worshiping cult, then there were Mahavir, and buddha who modified hinduism and their followers gave new names to these new cults,much of Hindu practices today, comes from middle ages, which are basically corrupted and watered down version of Hinduism.
the vedic society in its original aspect has power to transform India and Indians and achieve new heights, I was listening to Tarekh fateh and he rightly pointed out, if Indians follow true form of Hinduism then noone can stop us from becoming the hub of the world again.

 

[Razor]

Hinduism was essence of Indian subcontinent, and it will be an essence of subcontinent (though subdued, and corrupted).
Hinduism was a great contributor for prosperity of India in past, but it has gone crazy in middle ages, even historian agree that Hinduism and India prospered till Gupta. and some media would love to point out the Indo Aryan migration and inception of Hinduism, but it has been proved to be bullshit even scientifically.

Hinduism had its extension from central asian countries (finding of Ganesha Idol-was in news) to Asia pacific.then there was Zoraster who made people deviate from Hinduism, he vilified previous gods and started fire worshiping cult, then there were Mahavir, and buddha who modified hinduism and their followers gave new names to these new cults,much of Hindu practices today, comes from middle ages, which are basically corrupted and watered down version of Hinduism.
the vedic society in its original aspect has power to transform India and Indians and achieve new heights, I was listening to Tarekh fateh and he rightly pointed out, if Indians follow true form of Hinduism then noone can stop us from becoming the hub of the world again.

What do you mean Zoraster started a "fire worshiping cult".
Doesn't "hinduism" already have fire worship?

Also I think the rigvedic "religion" is different from "hinduism" (which can't really be called a religion because of it's amazing plurality.)

I think the kalash people of pakisstan follow customs close to the rigvedic (or pre-rigvedic) systems. Previously the nuristanis of pak also follwed these customs but now they have been converted to islam (by coercion.)
Kalash are under threat; there are just a few thousand of them left, though they are trying their best.

 

[OneGrimPilgrim]

What do you mean Zoraster started a "fire worshiping cult".
Doesn't "hinduism" already have fire worship?

i can't recall the name, but i had read long back that it was one of the Maharshis who had taught Persians fire/solar science directly or indirectly (will have to relook; can't recall much except this).

 

[Ancient Indian]

I too want to say some thing. . . .

Vedas are not in sanskrit. The language used in it is called Vedic language.

Sanskrit is degenerated form of the old language.

So if you try to create some thing with sanskrit, you won't get any graphic effects.

 

[OneGrimPilgrim]

don't know about that; perhaps 'sandhya' bhaasha (called the 'twilight' language)? there're still some rare scriptures and treatises in this language, said to be with yogis and monks high in the mountains. told to be very tough to understand (esoteric mostly i think).