Skirmishs at LOC, LAC & International Border

[Indrajit]

...........and a made up "god" parshuram as authentic without any proof at all , .

The story of Parshuram is quite interesting. He gets a brief mention in the Rig Veda without any of the stories. Those came after, Parsu meant ax in later language usage and so a story of the name emerged. Such stories are abundant, the story of Vishwamitra being a king confronting Vasishta, the supposed story of King Bharata from whom India gets its name ( the name derivation from the King is correct, the stories are fiction)......many such stories were made up over time.

 

[sorcerer]

Gunfight breaks out in woods in south Kashmir's Tral
A gunfight broke out between militants and the security forces in Branpatri forests area of Kahlil Tral in south Kashmir’s Pulwama district on Wednesday morning.

 

[Bhadra]

Gunfight breaks out in woods in south Kashmir's Tral
A gunfight broke out between militants and the security forces in Branpatri forests area of Kahlil Tral in south Kashmir’s Pulwama district on Wednesday morning.

Need to clear those ares thoroughly as the Amarnath yatra starting from Chandanwadi will be otherwise effected. The communal Jihadis want to show their presence in those areas to pose a threat to Yatra Route.

 

[Bhadra]

The story of Parshuram is quite interesting. He gets a brief mention in the Rig Veda

Can you give a reference ?

the story of Vishwamitra being a king confronting Vasishta

What was the issue in contest ?

the supposed story of King Bharata from whom India gets its name ( the name derivation from the King is correct, the stories are fiction)......many such stories were made up over time.

If a derivative exists the source from which it is derived must also exist. That is simple logic of science. Why are you fictionalising it? Your logic is not logical ..... please comment.

 

[Vijyes]

If a derivative exists the source from which it is derived must also exist. That is simple logic of science. Why are you fictionalising it? Your logic is not logical ..... please comment.

In general, Puranas have a severe distortion of historical facts as these puranas were written at a time of degradation whereby universities like takshashila were ruined and Gurukulas converted yo Buddhist viharas and bhakti tamples. We must take all these later account of puranas (after buddhism got entrenched, after 1AD) with a pinch of salt.

Parashuram is mentioned in Mahabharata and Ramayana very clearly. There are his attributes shown like he refusing to teach kshatriyas and Karna duping him to be a Brahman, he fighting Bhishma to protect the honour of the woman whom he kidnapped but refused to marry.

The later purana retards just wrote anything and everything, mixing up names of kings, inventing new names based upon their understanding of its literal meaning rather than real life name and so on. Puranas and bhakti retards are just low IQ people who unfortunately became Brahmans due to system being degraded to hereditary fashion. These people write extremely ridiculous things which made no sense and had no factual consistency.

So, as far as original sources of Ramayana, Mahabharata and the importance of Parashuram in terms of names given to places (Parashuram kund) and considering Parashuram as 6th Avatar of Vishnu, it makes lot of sense to say that Parashuram was an important figure in history.

Most important point of Parashuram being a slayer or controller of kings (as shown in Mahabharata), makes it appear that Parashuram could actually have been in a position higher than kings in the society and could actually be real head of society. It also confirm with Vedic thought of Brahmans being the supreme Varna and above Kshatriyas. If Brahmans had to live under Kshatriyas commands and Kshatriyas "Alms and gifts", Brahmans could have never been above Kshatriyas. The Parashuram fits in here to show how Brahmans were the real rulers and hence maintained the Vedic thought of Brahman supremacy. Similar analogy of Pope in medieval world commanding Christianity also offers an explanation of how the clergy can dominate the nobility, giving further credence to the idea of Parashuram

 

[Floydian]

Or you can call, Employment centre for Ambedkar Chaaps....

Absolutely..............................!!

 

[Indrajit]

Can you give a reference ?

Mentioned only as Jamadagni's son.

What was the issue in contest ?

I dont know if you are asking about the known story of king vishwamitra wanting kamadhenu and then attempting to becoming Vasishta's equal as a sage....in reality, he was however a main presence even at the time of the Rig veda being the principal advisor to King Sudas even before Vasishta got that post, senior if you will. Also Mandala III is generally rated as older than Mandala VII for that very reason. At best, contemporaries, certainly the story doesn't wash.

If a derivative exists the source from which it is derived must also exist. That is simple logic of science. Why are you fictionalising it? Your logic is not logical ..... please comment

The Rig veda is the oldest text of information known, Bharata is mentioned in the Rig veda but only as a person from the past, the great ancestor of Divodas and Sudas, the kings of the Rig veda. They are called the Bharatas in his honour, a clan of the Purus. Later descendants include the Pandavas. However there is no other mention of King Bharata since he was a figure of the past. Any stories of later origin, unknown even to the Rig veda of a king preceding even its composition can hardly have reality concerning that character.

 

[IndianHawk]

Can you give a reference ?



What was the issue in contest ?



If a derivative exists the source from which it is derived must also exist. That is simple logic of science. Why are you fictionalising it? Your logic is not logical ..... please comment.

Bharat comes from king bharat who is mentioned in rigveda. Bharat won the war against 10 king coalition with help of his priest vashisht.

You have no clue of Indian history and yet keep posting all kind of bullshit all over.

Why not go and actually read and learn before asking stupid questions.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Bhadra]

Bharat comes from king bharat who is mentioned in rigveda. Bharat won the war against 10 king coalition with help of his priest vashisht.

You have no clue of Indian history and yet keep posting all kind of bullshit all over.

Why not go and actually read and learn before asking stupid questions.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

I have asked for a reference..
So you stupidingly supreme educated man instead resort to abuses ... No reference..

Tu jo likhega wo Brahmawakya hai ........:bs:

 

[Indrajit]

Bharat comes from king bharat who is mentioned in rigveda. Bharat won the war against 10 king coalition with help of his priest vashisht.

You have no clue of Indian history and yet keep posting all kind of bullshit all over.

Why not go and actually read and learn before asking stupid questions.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Not Bharata, that was his descendant Sudas who was involved in the Dasarajna yuddha and while Vasishta was his advisor, the opposite side had Sudas's former advisor, Vishwamitra as their advisor.

 

[Indrajit]

Bharat comes from king bharat who is mentioned in rigveda. Bharat won the war against 10 king coalition with help of his priest vashisht.

You have no clue of Indian history and yet keep posting all kind of bullshit all over.

Why not go and actually read and learn before asking stupid questions.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Tone not helpful, none of us are experts, best to disagree without being disagreeable. Making it personal is pointless.

 

[Prashant12]

One terrorist killed.

 

[Indrajit]

I have asked for a reference..

Maybe of interest to you, the name was Rama, the parsu suffix creating plenty of interest. Remember that Jamadagni was a Brigu who were originally connected to the Asuras and the name Jamadagni is a proto Iranian name, not Aryan. One of the possibilities for Parsu suffix was maybe it referred to the fact they were an Anu/Iranian tribe before crossing over to the Aryans (the cross over of the Brugus is an accepted position). The Parsu connection to the Ax probably came much later, as did his being a Brahmin since caste is unknown to the Rig veda the Purusha Sukta in the last 10th mandala being thought generally as an later interpolation to justify caste.

 

[Vijyes]

Bharat comes from king bharat who is mentioned in rigveda. Bharat won the war against 10 king coalition with help of his priest vashisht.

You have no clue of Indian history and yet keep posting all kind of bullshit all over.

Why not go and actually read and learn before asking stupid questions.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Bharat comes from Bharata clan, a form of dynasty. Bharata king was a play by Kalidasa called "abhijana shakuntalam".

Maybe of interest to you, the name was Rama, the parsu suffix creating plenty of interest. Remember that Jamadagni was a Brigu who were originally connected to the Asuras and the name Jamadagni is a proto Iranian name, not Aryan. One of the possibilities for Parsu suffix was maybe it referred to the fact they were an Anu/Iranian tribe before crossing over to the Aryans (the cross over of the Brugus is an accepted position). The Parsu connection to the Ax probably came much later, as did his being a Brahmin since caste is unknown to the Rig veda the Purusha Sukta in the last 10th mandala being thought generally as an later interpolation to justify caste.

Varna is not caste. Varna is based on character, motive and talent. Caste is hereditary. Parashuram was a Brahman as seen in Mahabharata and Ramayana where it is clearly mentioned so.

 

[dude00720]

In general, Puranas have a severe distortion of historical facts as these puranas were written at a time of degradation whereby universities like takshashila were ruined and Gurukulas converted yo Buddhist viharas and bhakti tamples. We must take all these later account of puranas (after buddhism got entrenched, after 1AD) with a pinch of salt.

Parashuram is mentioned in Mahabharata and Ramayana very clearly. There are his attributes shown like he refusing to teach kshatriyas and Karna duping him to be a Brahman, he fighting Bhishma to protect the honour of the woman whom he kidnapped but refused to marry.

The later purana retards just wrote anything and everything, mixing up names of kings, inventing new names based upon their understanding of its literal meaning rather than real life name and so on. Puranas and bhakti retards are just low IQ people who unfortunately became Brahmans due to system being degraded to hereditary fashion. These people write extremely ridiculous things which made no sense and had no factual consistency.

So, as far as original sources of Ramayana, Mahabharata and the importance of Parashuram in terms of names given to places (Parashuram kund) and considering Parashuram as 6th Avatar of Vishnu, it makes lot of sense to say that Parashuram was an important figure in history.

Most important point of Parashuram being a slayer or controller of kings (as shown in Mahabharata), makes it appear that Parashuram could actually have been in a position higher than kings in the society and could actually be real head of society. It also confirm with Vedic thought of Brahmans being the supreme Varna and above Kshatriyas. If Brahmans had to live under Kshatriyas commands and Kshatriyas "Alms and gifts", Brahmans could have never been above Kshatriyas. The Parashuram fits in here to show how Brahmans were the real rulers and hence maintained the Vedic thought of Brahman supremacy. Similar analogy of Pope in medieval world commanding Christianity also offers an explanation of how the clergy can dominate the nobility, giving further credence to the idea of Parashuram

Commie Alert. FYI -: Offtopic also.

 

[Indrajit]

Bharat comes from Bharata clan, a form of dynasty. Bharata king was a play by Kalidasa called "abhijana shakuntalam".

Correct but the founder of the Bharata clan was Bharata himself and the Bharatas get their name from him.

Varna is not caste. Varna is based on character, motive and talent. Caste is hereditary. Parashuram was a Brahman as seen in Mahabharata and Ramayana where it is clearly mentioned so

Yes, true in Ramayana and Mahabharata but as I mentioned not true of the Rig Veda which has no mention of varna except for the part suspected of later interpolation in the last,i.e. 10th Mandala. The caste comes with the story from a later time.

Caste was hereditary by the time of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. If it was based on anything other than that, Parasurama would clearly have been an Kshatriya by that reckoning.

 

[IndianHawk]

I have asked for a reference..
So you stupidingly supreme educated man instead resort to abuses ... No reference..

Tu jo likhega wo Brahmawakya hai ........:bs:

Apply that to your own self. Don't post anything without source. Don't make any claim without source! If you want to disapprove me provide source or shut up .

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Indrajit]

Also most of Indian population will come under out caste(outside the 4 Varna) or shudras , ......

Shudras are one of the four Varnas.

 

[IndianHawk]

Tone not helpful, none of us are experts, best to disagree without being disagreeable. Making it personal is pointless.

He is posting bullshit after bullshit thread after thread. He can't accept simple facts. Ask others for sources while all his rhetoric is based on futile imagination. My tone for him is very generous.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[IndianHawk]

Correct but the founder of the Bharata clan was Bharata himself and the Bharatas get their name from him.




Yes, true in Ramayana and Mahabharata but as I mentioned not true of the Rig Veda which has no mention of varna except for the part suspected of later interpolation in the last,i.e. 10th Mandala. The caste comes with the story from a later time.

Caste was hereditary by the time of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. If it was based on anything other than that, Parasurama would clearly have been an Kshatriya by that reckoning.

Varna turned into permanent caste in later vedic period .(900-600BCE) and became hereditary.

Parshuram was bramhan and as such was a teacher of weaponary too. So was dronacharya in Mahabharata. So bramhan could use weapons and still be bramhan.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk