Before Shaolin there was India.

[9th]

And no, I don't care to argue/debate this (been there, done that many years back).

[Nungali]

I would recommend not spreading crap like that. The Nazis appropriated Indian traditions and history to give their ridiculous claims validity.

 

If you don't like Indian traditions and their narrative thereoff, you are free to not read, learn, share that. Don't spread BS and malign what is a living breathing system (only non-abrahamic tradition in it's original form in the world still standing, Daoism is experiencing revival, but it was all but decimated by Chairman Mao and his goons).

 

,only non-abrahamic tradition in it's original form in the world still standing ???

 

Do you mean mainstream world wide organised religious traditions ???,

[Nungali]

There was never any Aryan race.

 

Arya is a term that means "Noble" in Sanskrit and has been used since the dawn of the Vedic civilization, from the times of the Indus-Sarasvati Valley.

 

So, while there is no basis for the Nazi-Aryan link beyond the fantasies of the Nazis themselves, the statement that the "Aryans" were conquering Nomads from Central Asia/Europe is also a disproven affair (basically all speculations wrt any "Aryan invasion" or "Aryan Migration" is suspect and will over the next 2-3 decades be completely eradicated).

 

The vedic people were the ancestors of all the original people of the Indian subcontinent. And no, I don't care to argue/debate this (been there, done that many years back).

I am stating the opposite (except the Nazi bit) dogmatically and I wont argue it either

 

I never new the Vedic people found India totally unpopulated! (Gosh what happened to all the Australoids - whose genes can be traced back to small indigenous groups still in India today ... smacks of 'Terra Nullias' ... no, no one there - just some black fellas - looks like it's ours then )

 

Aryan race is a Nazi mis-nomer ... what does race even mean anyway? I have seen no hint that Proto-Indo Europeans, whose culture settled in Aryana (from whence the name was derived ; 'Aryans' ) were a 'race' nor that they battled with the people of Mongoloid cultures and languages (again not a 'race').

[Nungali]

Anyway getting back to the topic (sort of ).

 

I watched medieval battle dudes ... impressed ... asked the guy ... some of those moves you did looked like (insert what you will)

did you train in that ?

 

He snuffed at that "anything that works can look similar, we all have the same body, and movements follow the same laws.

 

 

However ,,, a particular form of art may have passed to China from India and developed there ... I doubt it took over all Chinese arts extant at the time though.

[Nungali]

You would do well to read some non-western narratives on this matter (especially some by indian scholars who don't have euro-centric axes to grind in this regard).

I would be happy to read papers on this view except I haven't found one written by a non-Indian ... ? And the one's I did read that were written by an Indian seemed .... agitated and adamant (just as I was about no Australoids being in India - above)

[xor]

http://controversialhistory.blogspot.fi/2007/07/myth-of-chinese-martial-arts-origin.html

 

I found this a good read.

[dwai]

http://controversialhistory.blogspot.fi/2007/07/myth-of-chinese-martial-arts-origin.html

 

I found this a good read.

Regarding source of Martial Arts. Imho, all martial arts evolved into arts. They were first means for self-defense, then means for warfare and finally evolved into arts.

 

It is ludicrous to suggest that China didn't have it's own martial traditions prior to the arrival of Bodhidharma. It is also ridiculous to defend/debate influence from India on China and vice versa. Of course there was cross pollination. All cultures that have interacted have shared knowledge.

 

My personal opinion is that most of India and China's esoteric traditions (and some martial arts are included) share a common ancestry in the himalayan mountains.

[dwai]

I am stating the opposite (except the Nazi bit) dogmatically and I wont argue it either

 

I never new the Vedic people found India totally unpopulated! (Gosh what happened to all the Australoids - whose genes can be traced back to small indigenous groups still in India today ... smacks of 'Terra Nullias' ... no, no one there - just some black fellas - looks like it's ours then )

 

Aryan race is a Nazi mis-nomer ... what does race even mean anyway? I have seen no hint that Proto-Indo Europeans, whose culture settled in Aryana (from whence the name was derived ; 'Aryans' ) were a 'race' nor that they battled with the people of Mongoloid cultures and languages (again not a 'race').

The Vedic people are from the Indian subcontinent. They didn't move in from Central Asia or Europe as the common prevalent myth indicates.

[RongzomFan]

My personal opinion is that most of India and China's esoteric traditions (and some martial arts are included) share a common ancestry in the himalayan mountains.

 

They would trace firmly back to South India.

 

Mahayana developed in Andhra Pradesh, and then spread throughout Asia carrying along with it Ayurveda etc.

 

Chakras, hatha yoga etc. are first mentioned in Mahayana

Edited October 23, 2013 by RongzomFan

[Nungali]

The Vedic people are from the Indian subcontinent. They didn't move in from Central Asia or Europe as the common prevalent myth indicates.

 

'Vedic people' ? I am talking about their ancestors ... before there were Vedas , hence before there were Vedic people; the proto-Indo-Europeans who lived in the 'lost land of Soma' and came from a Homeland OUTSIDE of India ... that even some Indian scholars locate at the North Pole! And also a location that the Tibetans targeted as a source of their 'gnosis' (to the west) ... again, pre-Vedic and of course pre- Buddhist ... but I am repeating myself here ... its all in my previous post ... <sigh> but I suppose 'some types' will see what they want within it as opposed to reading what I actually wrote.

 

I am well aware of theories that an Indian sub-continent people went through the Hindu Kush and into Pre- Aryana and helped the people located there become the PIE people and then moved back to India but by definition these people have to be pre-Vedic as Vedas were written much later , the same as the European components in their mixed culture were pre-Avestan as the Avestas were not comopsed either at that time.

 

I am well aware there are two view as to where ONE OF THE MANY TYPES of Indians came from but I feel it is slanted away from the non Vedic origin view.

'

Hands up here whoever knows what Avestas are and what role it plays in later religious development.

 

Now ... same question re Vedas.

Edited October 24, 2013 by Nungali

[dwai]

'Vedic people' ? I am talking about their ancestors ... before there were Vedas , hence before there were Vedic people; the proto-Indo-Europeans who lived in the 'lost land of Soma' and came from a Homeland OUTSIDE of India ... that even some Indian scholars locate at the North Pole! And also a location that the Tibetans targeted as a source of their 'gnosis' (to the west) ... again, pre-Vedic and of course pre- Buddhist ... but I am repeating myself here ... its all in my previous post ... <sigh> but I suppose 'some types' will see what they want within it as opposed to reading what I actually wrote.

 

I am well aware of theories that an Indian sub-continent people went through the Hindu Kush and into Pre- Aryana and helped the people located there become the PIE people and then moved back to India but by definition these people have to be pre-Vedic as Vedas were written much later , the same as the European components in their mixed culture were pre-Avestan as the Avestas were not comopsed either at that time.

 

I am well aware there are two view as to where ONE OF THE MANY TYPES of Indians came from but I feel it is slanted away from the non Vedic origin view.

'

Hands up here whoever knows what Avestas are and what role it plays in later religious development.

 

Now ... same question re Vedas.

You can look towards India to learn about the Avesta too (the Parsis are the last living group of zoroastrians on the planet)

 

The Vedic people were the proto-vedic people as well. They were indigenous to India (and no major wave of immigration from outside have happened to the Indian sub-continent since the exodus out of Africa).

 

So there were no aryan xenophobes and brutes in their chariots that invaded the Indian subcontinent. Neither did anyone overthrow the "Dravidian" natives from the so-called Indus Valley Civilization.

 

Genetic data shows hardly any variations between the north and southern indian populations. So, there goes the "two races theory".

 

Indian mythology separates two categories of entities - Devas and Asuras. Interestingly enough, Avestha (Aveda) calls their divine/deities "Ahura" (Asura). It is suspected that the Vedic people split into two groups early on, with one migrating farther west-ward (towards modern Iran and Iraq) and formed the Zoroastrians. Those that stayed back were the Aryas (Vedic people).

 

I could go on..

Edited October 24, 2013 by dwai

[RongzomFan]

I am well aware there are two view as to where ONE OF THE MANY TYPES of Indians came from but I feel it is slanted away from the non Vedic origin view.

 

There are many types of Indians?

 

I've travelled all throughout India, and they all look the same, act the same etc.

 

And I'm Indian.

Edited October 24, 2013 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

"However, our earlier studies using mtDNA and Y-chromosome marker, suggests that the ANI are approximately forty-thousand year old. " - prominent genetics expert

 

 

Aryan Migration Theory is bogus.

Edited October 24, 2013 by RongzomFan

[Zhongyongdaoist]

Hands up here whoever knows what Avestas are and what role it plays in later religious development.

 

I do. Among other things I read the Gathas years ago in Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie's translation. Read about him here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Sylvan_Guthrie

[Nungali]

There are many types of Indians?

 

I've travelled all throughout India, and they all look the same, act the same etc.

 

And I'm Indian.

Then I am sure you must be familiar with them then ... please excuse my ignorance ... I have never been to India ... actually I have never been to a place where " they all look the same, act the same etc. " .

 

India is more homogenous than I thought ... apparently even more so than the small rural town I live in in Australia ... where everyone doesn't look the same (but similar ... I mean , they all have 1 head, some arms and legs, etc. ) ... they certainly all don't act the same though.

[Nungali]

You can look towards India to learn about the Avesta too (the Parsis are the last living group of zoroastrians on the planet)

 

And thankyou to India for giving them refuge. However in more modern times they have located in other countries as well.

 

The Vedic people were the proto-vedic people as well. They were indigenous to India (and no major wave of immigration from outside have happened to the Indian sub-continent since the exodus out of Africa).

 

Since out of Africa ?

 

So there were no aryan xenophobes and brutes in their chariots that invaded the Indian subcontinent. Neither did anyone overthrow the "Dravidian" natives from the so-called Indus Valley Civilization.

 

Genetic data shows hardly any variations between the north and southern indian populations. So, there goes the "two races theory".

 

What two races theory? You keep imagining I am saying some things (that I are not) and getting agitated at what yourself are claiming I am saying . Again ... not races ... I used the word " type " deliberately , it is explained below in another post..

 

Indian mythology separates two categories of entities - Devas and Asuras. Interestingly enough, Avestha (Aveda) calls their divine/deities "Ahura" (Asura).

 

"Indian mythology" ... what a vague claim and term. There is a distinct difference in the relationship between Deva and Asura in the earliest Vedas than there is in the latter Vedas. They used to work together didn't they ... pulling that giant snake to turn the milk to butter to reveal the hidden elixir ... it was supposed to be shared but then the naughty 'Devarti' Indians' stole it didn't they ? ... Didn't share ... Naughty !

 

 

After that we see a distinct difference in both sets of scripture; Devi eventually becomes a bad thing and eventually carries through to today where we have words derived from Avestan such as div (early meanings: divine, ) and later meanings evolving all the way to English (deviate, devil, etc.)

 

 

While conversely, of course, the other side's deity gets demonised ... or at least down graded (see the significance of Asuras in early Vedas compared to later ones).

 

 

It is suspected that the Vedic people split into two groups early on, with one migrating farther west-ward (towards modern Iran and Iraq) and formed the Zoroastrians. Those that stayed back were the Aryas (Vedic people).

 

I could go on..

 

Yes , I supposed you could ... you could go on to say that ALSO it is suspected that the PIE people split into two groups early on, one leaving the area and migrating south-eastwards into India (where there was already an established culture ) and the other eventually migrating farther west-ward (towards modern Iran and Iraq) and formed the Zoroastrians. Those that stayed back in that area can be traced through history by studying the ancient history of that area (little known ... compared to other ).

 

 

If any one is interested in what I consider if not valid, but a very interesting side of the story try this site, its quiet well done has great resources, maps, images, etc.

 

 

It IS a Zoroastrian site but that just gives it an interesting perspective and view.

 

http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/index.htm

[Nungali]

"However, our earlier studies using mtDNA and Y-chromosome marker, suggests that the ANI are approximately forty-thousand year old. " - prominent genetics expert

 

 

Aryan Migration Theory is bogus.

 

Ani are ONE TYPE ( the ' prominent genetic expert' may realise that ... hard to tell as the quote is so short. )

 

Here is a longer one that might explain TYPE a bit more to those that see all Indians as one homogenous all act and look alike genetically the same people (from a number of 'prominent genetic experts' ...... with references ;

 

Basu et al. (2006) emphasize that the combined results from mtDNA, Y-chromosome and autosomal markers suggest that "(1) there is an underlying unity of female lineages in India, indicating that the initial number of female settlers may have been small; (2) the tribal and the caste populations are highly differentiated; (3) the Austroasiatic tribals are the earliest settlers in India, providing support to one anthropological hypothesis while refuting some others; (4) a major wave of humans entered India through the northwest; (5) the Tibeto-Burman tribals share considerable genetic commonalities with the Austroasiatic tribals, supporting the hypothesis that they may have shared a common habitat in southern China, but the two groups of tribals can be differentiated on the basis of Y-chromosomal haplotypes; (6) the Dravidian tribals were possibly widespread throughout India before the arrival of the Indo-European-speaking nomads, but retreated to southern India to avoid dominance; (7) formation of populations by fission that resulted in founder and drift effects have left their imprints on the genetic structures of contemporary populations; (8) the upper castes show closer genetic affinities with Central Asian populations, although those of southern India are more distant than those of northern India; (9) historical gene flow into India has contributed to a considerable obliteration of genetic histories of contemporary populations so that there is at present no clear congruence of genetic and geographical or sociocultural affinities."[10]

 

Modern anthropologists classify Indians as belonging to one of four major ethno-racial groups, which overlap significantly because of racial admixture: Caucasoids, Australoids, Mongoloids and Negritos. The Caucasoids are largely confined to the north and generally speak Indo-Aryan languages and extends till the plains of Assam Valley; Australoids are found in the south and generally speak Dravidian languages; Mongoloids are largely confined to the hills of Northeastern region of the country and for the most part, speak Tibeto-Burman languages; and Negritos are found on the Andaman Islands located on the southeastern side of the country. These speak a language known simply as Great Andamanese, a linguistic isolate not related to any known language. And finally, Austroasiatic languages are spoken by only tribals or Adivasis, who can be of either Australoid or Mongoloid racial stock.[11]

 

According to a major 2009 study published by Reich et al. using over 500,000 biallelic autosomal markers, the modern Indian population is composed of two genetically divergent and heterogeneous populations which mixed in ancient times (about 1,200–3,500 BC), known as Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI). ASI corresponds to the Dravidian-speaking population of southern India, whereas ANI corresponds to the Indo-Aryan-speaking population of northern India.[12][13]

 

Genetic evidence provides proof that modern day Indian population was derived from two major ancestral populations — ancestral north Indians (ANI) and ancestral south Indians (ASI), and they both don't have major genetic differences.Till 4,200 years ago, the two populations grew independently and produced many more groups but there was no admixture between them. But during the time period between 1,900 years and 4,200 years, the ANI-derived populations and ASI-derived populations mixed together to form the modern day population.The ANI population is related to West Eurasians (people of Central Asia, the Middle East, the Caucasus and Europe); the ASI population is distinctly related to the indigenous Andaman Islanders.[14] The admixture of the populations between the two ancestral groups was rampant for an extended period before endogamy became the norm.The period of admixture coincides with increasing population density in the central and downstream portions of the Gangetic system, and deurbanisation of the Indus civilization.Caste, which came later, drastically reduced the chances of admixture making it nearly zero .[15]

 

1.^ Jump up to: a b c Vijay Mishra (2007). The Literature of the Indian Diaspora: Theorizing the Diasporic Imaginary. Taylor & Francis US. pp. 256–. ISBN 978-0-415-42417-2. Retrieved 19 November 2012.

2.^ Jump up to: a b c Sagarika Dutt (28 November 2006). India in a Globalised World. Manchester University Press. pp. 176–. ISBN 978-0-7190-6900-0. Retrieved 19 November 2012.

3.Jump up ^ Race Reporting for the Asian Population. Factfinder2.census.gov (5 October 2010). Retrieved on 2012-11-19.

4.Jump up ^ C. S. Kuppuswamy (28 February 2003). MALAYSIAN INDIANS: The third class race. South Asia Analysis Group

5.Jump up ^ Chandru (26 November 2009). "The Indian Community in Myanmar". Southasiaanalysis.org. Retrieved 2011-12-28.

6.Jump up ^ K. Kesavapany; A. Mani; Palanisamy Ramasamy (2008). Rising India and Indian Communities in East Asia. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. pp. 537–. ISBN 978-981-230-799-6. Retrieved 19 November 2012.

7.Jump up ^ Imagens, Factos, Notícias, Informações e História sobra Goa India. SuperGoa. Retrieved on 2012-11-19.

8.Jump up ^ "CSO Emigration". Census Office Ireland. Retrieved 29 January 2013.

9.^ Jump up to: a b राजभाषा. Rajbhasha.nic.in. Retrieved on 2012-11-19.

10.Jump up ^ "Ethnic India: A Genomic View, With Special Reference to Peopling and Structure". Genome.cshlp.org. Retrieved 2011-12-28.

11.Jump up ^ Indian Genome Variation Consortium (2005). "The Indian Genome Variation database (IGVdb): A project overview". Human Genetics 118 (1): 1–11. doi:10.1007/s00439-005-0009-9. PMID 16133172.

12.Jump up ^ Nature. "Reconstructing Indian population history : Abstract". Nature. Retrieved 2011-12-28.

13.Jump up ^ "Abstract/Presentation". Ichg2011.org. 12 October 2011. Retrieved 2011-12-28.

14.Jump up ^ Priya Moorjani , Kumarasamy Thangaraj , Nick Patterson, Mark Lipson, Po-Ru Loh, Periyasamy Govindaraj, Bonnie Berger, David Reich, Lalji Singh (August 8). "Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India". The American Journal of Human Genetics. pp. http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002–9297(13)00324–8. Retrieved 10 August 2013

15.Jump up ^ "Population admixture happened in India for 2,300 years". The Hindu. August 9, 2013. Retrieved August 10, 2013

[Nungali]

 

I do. Among other things I read the Gathas years ago in Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie's translation. Read about him here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Sylvan_Guthrie

I am sure you would have I did say hands up didn't I? When what I I really needed was a poll.

 

What I meant is ... and now that I have you here; In your opinion would you say more people (in the mainstream i.e. in the 'Western World" culture {regardless of location} or others but with access to internet and forums such as these) are more familiar with the Vedas than the Avestas (let's exclude India and Iran).

 

That was the trust of my question . In my environs many people know of the Vedas and most know little of the Avestas and related material (Ferdowski, etc. ) (Excepting a few Iranian friends who were taught about it at school.)

[Nungali]

And the PIE people imported martial arts into India and then they went to China

 

 

 

( I'm joking.)

Edited October 24, 2013 by Nungali

[Zhongyongdaoist]

 

I do. Among other things I read the Gathas years ago in Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie's translation. Read about him here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Sylvan_Guthrie

I am sure you would have I did say hands up didn't I? When what I I really needed was a poll.

 

What I meant is ... and now that I have you here; In your opinion would you say more people (in the mainstream i.e. in the 'Western World" culture {regardless of location} or others but with access to internet and forums such as these) are more familiar with the Vedas than the Avestas (let's exclude India and Iran).

 

That was the trust of my question . In my environs many people know of the Vedas and most know little of the Avestas and related material (Ferdowski, etc. ) (Excepting a few Iranian friends who were taught about it at school.)

 

That was the trust of my question . In my environs many people know of the Vedas and most know little of the Avestas and related material: Well, where I grew up everyone new about that. It is part of a three piece suit. A jacket, pants and a-vesta.

 

Seriously though, just about no one knows anything about them.

[Nungali]

 

That was the trust of my question . In my environs many people know of the Vedas and most know little of the Avestas and related material: Well, where I grew up everyone new about that. It is part of a three piece suit. A jacket, pants and a-vesta.

 

Oh ... you have nice Armani suit ? or just an Italian accent ?

 

Seriously though, just about no one knows anything about them.

 

Hmmm .... just like the Neo-Platonists ...

[RongzomFan]

ASI corresponds to the Dravidian-speaking population of southern India, whereas ANI corresponds to the Indo-Aryan-speaking population of northern India.[12][13]

 

 

People twist the studies. For example, one of the Harvard authors of the studies you cite says "Our paper basically discards Aryan theory."

 

But internet people like you are smarter than Harvard geneticists.

Edited October 24, 2013 by RongzomFan

[Yulaw]

What I find amazing about discussions like this is that people can except that Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Sir Isaac Newton can come up with calculus independent of one another but those same people can't seem to except that it is possible for people of antiquity to figure out how to beat the hell out of each other, back when they had to for survival, all by themselves without any input at all from another person or culture

 

Chinese martial arts did not come from India or Africa and there is no "reputable" historical evidence to back up such claims that it did.....

 

 

 

 

it also had nothing to do with alien space Nazis either

Edited October 24, 2013 by Yulaw

[RongzomFan]

What I find amazing about discussions like this is that people can except that Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Sir Isaac Newton can come up with calculus independent of one another but those same people can't seem to except that it is possible for people of antiquity to figure out how to beat the hell out of each other, back when they had to for survival, all by themselves without any input at all from another person or culture

 

Chinese martial arts did not come from India or Africa and there is no "reputable" historical evidence to back up such claims that it did.....

 

I don't know about martial arts, but much of the culture of Asia comes from Andhra Pradesh.

[Yulaw]

Not knowing much about Andhra Pradesh I really can' comment, but a quick web search produced date of around 800BCE to 700BCE

 

There ha already been 3 Chinese dynasties by that time

 

•Xia Dynasty About 1994 BCE - 1766 BCE
•Shang Dynasty 1766 BCE - 1027 BCE
•Zhou Dynasty 1122 BCE -256 BCE
•Qin Dynasty 221 BCE - 206 BCE
•Early Han Dynasty 206 BCE - 9 AD

 

And Qin has had a rather sizable impact on East Asia

 

But this thread is not about culture it is about Shaolin Martial arts

Edited October 24, 2013 by Yulaw