prashantacmet
New member
kapil, I am also a naive. we came learn together. i will consider your points
Mythology Vs Genetics
- Thread starter vivekkaliyar
- Start date
vivekkaliyar
New member
yes jats are mixed .
actually pure scythian blood doesn't even make sense . it is universal that when ever men migrates they starting mating with local women .
in fact genetic purity doesn't even exist in world .
actually there is no mention in of hindu dharam. outsider started calling people of india as sindh (river) .whcich later became universal as hindu .
but describing our ancestor as vedic / hindu bring more loop holes .
Even I read that PURANAS were written in the maurya period(actually very late some where between in great saka era(1000 YEARS) . so not even before mahabharat .
maurya started kingdom near magadha ( near modern bihar, orissa ). this area is not invaded by scythians . maurya was from north west india .
it is mentioned as jats defeated hunas .which means jats arrived before hunas .
IMPORTANT THING . jats called themselves as jats because they know it . when a jat boy is born he is denoted as jats first later hindu or sikh or kshatriya or kisan etc . which proves our tribal nature rather than caste based .
some loop holes are there as defining vedic . vedas do define 4 varnas ( now known as cast) . our status is still like a puzzle . it seems we became hindu /vedic and still our actual staus not known . ( trying to get some status) .
being ancient or vedic people . vedic / hindu culture image must be reflected in our culture ,philosphies ,customs ,attitude etc .But It is no where .
we do ancestor worships (JATHERA) and our ancestor comes first before God . WHICH MORE akin to scythic nature rather than vedic .
you are right . the above mention statements distinguish hunas and jats (early sakas) .
In jats each clan(gotra) is like a subtribe having there own ruling system (khap system) . which is just like ruling parliament of subtribe .
later invaders do merged in us but they are minority .
jats (getaes) were the majority thats why we still have Name and custom similiar everywhere .
((Presence of boold of scythians ,hunas ,celts bats etc) in Us can be described like this .)
thats why each gotra trace ancestory differently .
[/quote]Yes, this is really a question[/QUOTE]
soon i will post some anomalies in these chandravanshi lineage . which will proves the corrupted lineages data by brahmins . which just they did to get high status by royal dynasties .
vivekkaliyar
New member
sir ,
it is not proved that jats are ancestors of romas . there has been some possible links as per jat mutation .
Romas and jats don't even share haplogroup data .
jats are r1a and romas are haplogroup H . finding jat mutation doesn't prove this .
if they are descendents of jats .then y Dna paternal lineage must have proved this Already.
even i read that instead jats and pathans do share some y dna paternal lineaga .
they are link
Vivek, I do not dispute your argument. In that case, the article quoted by Kapil in this regard may not be authentic. There is, however, a great resemblance between the Romas and the North Indians, but they may not necessarily share any lineage with Jats. Physical features of most of the people in Northern part of India (and also some parts of Pakistan) consisting of different social groups including Jats, are almost similar. On the first sight, the Roma people can easily pass off as North Indians, but not necessarily Jats.
jitendershooda
New member
Nice discussion friends. Keep debating.
prashantacmet
New member
But it may be possible that scythians migrated to that place. As founder of maurya dynasty chandragupta is termed shudra in purans. But there are some historians who believe that chandra gupta came from north-west (punjab region) and he was a saka , even the chankya was not a brahman but a saka scholar ( I can search the references for you. Probably it has been discussed on this site too.
I don't agree with you. Rig veda is oldest scripture available and no other caste in India is more vedic than Jats .
Ancestors worship is not a alien concept for other castes. I have seen brahmin, rajputs and other castes doing the same and please don't confuse with vedic and hindu. vedic is a monotheism concept while hindusim is polytheism. We may not be good Hindus but even today we are better vedic. I guess that it was not just like that scythians just took the local wife, they also gave their daughters. it was a both side assimilation...and some of these formed a group and calling themselves Jats.
It will be a good info to read........
Hows is that?
prashantacmet
New member
Arya samaj was founded by swami dayanand ji to revive the old vedic dharma (that belive in one God). In the satyathra prakash, swami ji has explained many rigvedic hymns representing its monotheistic nature. As far as I know in vedic religion worshiping of natural elements like fire earth, water etc is OK but it believes in one God. later on, Brahmins interpreted these things in different way and whole concept was corrupted and Hinduism had come up. This is my little knowledge on this subject. Correct me if wrong
Arya samaj was founded by swami dayanand ji to revive the old vedic dharma (that belive in one God). In the satyathra prakash, swami ji has explained many rigvedic hymns representing its monotheistic nature. As far as I know in vedic religion worshiping of natural elements like fire earth, water etc is OK but it believes in one God. later on, Brahmins interpreted these things in different way and whole concept was corrupted and Hinduism had come up. This is my little knowledge on this subject. Correct me if wrong
I have checked on google and found your version correct. There are many references so anyone can google it.
Last edited:
VP ji, Can you privide one reference please from the actual source. I am just trying to learn not trying to prove anyone wrong. I thought there was Indra, Rudra , Yama, Sarasvati and others in Vedic Period. May be others are demi god but they were worshipped as GOD or devta.
The stress on monotheism concept happened after Islamic movement in India where as Ved itself doesnt mention it clearly. Even though there is one parmatma but its very different to Islamic concept of monotheism. Not everyone agree on it. God was actaully worshiped in Different forms. And later there were different braches in Hinduism like one who follow Vishnu consider Shiva as demi god and vice versa other woship Kali mata etc. Some consider Shiv and Vishnu to be same. I think they are same part of one shakti but appear in diff forms in our texts.
It was different to the concept of Abrahamic religions. All old religion in the world were similar to Vedic like ancient Greeko-Roman, Arabic. I am not an Ayra Samaji but i think Arya Samaj is against ancestor worship but almost all Jats who are not arya samaji (mailnly in Punjab and North Haryana and Rajasthan) actively do ancestor worship which was/is also common among ancient tribes world wide not only in India.
The stress on monotheism concept happened after Islamic movement in India where as Ved itself doesnt mention it clearly. Even though there is one parmatma but its very different to Islamic concept of monotheism. Not everyone agree on it. God was actaully worshiped in Different forms. And later there were different braches in Hinduism like one who follow Vishnu consider Shiva as demi god and vice versa other woship Kali mata etc. Some consider Shiv and Vishnu to be same. I think they are same part of one shakti but appear in diff forms in our texts.
It was different to the concept of Abrahamic religions. All old religion in the world were similar to Vedic like ancient Greeko-Roman, Arabic. I am not an Ayra Samaji but i think Arya Samaj is against ancestor worship but almost all Jats who are not arya samaji (mailnly in Punjab and North Haryana and Rajasthan) actively do ancestor worship which was/is also common among ancient tribes world wide not only in India.
Last edited:
Vipin, here is just one link. Others will follow in due course., time permitting.
http://www.jbeonlinebooks.org/eBooks/hinduism/documents/02-chap-hinduism.pdf
VP ji your link just confirm what I was saying. Gods were worshipped in Different forms. Where does it say what you were saying? I mean which page?
This is similar to ancient Greek and other culture and is different to the concept of God of Abrahamic religions which are very specific when it comes to GOD and worship.
This is similar to ancient Greek and other culture and is different to the concept of God of Abrahamic religions which are very specific when it comes to GOD and worship.
prashantacmet
New member
Vipin, monotheism did not come into picture in islamic era, it was there before that (judaism, christainity)..any way, let me clarify I never used monotheism in the reference of abrahmic religions. May be I did not use correct word , by "monothesim" I meant only " who believe in one God who is formless, omnoptent and omnipresent (not focusing on worship methods)". Have you ever read "Satyarha Prakash", It amy clear the things for you about Vedic dharma. I had an "ebook" version for that but I misplaced that..as far as your 'devta" and "asur" things is considered these were human beings just like us in the hymns of Rigveda (as per swami dayanand ji) , brahmins later interpreted them as Gods so you are telling the hinduism version of Rigveda not arya samajic version (though don't take these as expert comments). May be dayanand deswal ji can clarify this, he has a good knowledge about arya samaj
So you mean to say Devtas and Asuras were humans and rest natural elements like God of Rain, fire, music, wind, all these river goddess represent one GOD who cannot be defined or these were not Gods but just something whom they worshipped?
How come we started ancestor worship as thats not considered vedic by Arya Samaji. Did bhramin influence us to do so? If yes that doesnt make sense to me as lot of tribes all over the world used to do that even Arabs. Yes Arya Samaji has different version of Vedas/Vedic but we cannot assume that everyone accept that view.
We just had one form of worship which was ancestor worship. Now some people worship Hanuman as well. So we are not vedic then? Same is the case with Punjabi Jats. But then again bhramin has no respect among people who do ancestor worship. Bhramins are treated as downgraded caste and cheat.
----> No disrespect intended to any particluar religion or school of thought.
How come we started ancestor worship as thats not considered vedic by Arya Samaji. Did bhramin influence us to do so? If yes that doesnt make sense to me as lot of tribes all over the world used to do that even Arabs. Yes Arya Samaji has different version of Vedas/Vedic but we cannot assume that everyone accept that view.
We just had one form of worship which was ancestor worship. Now some people worship Hanuman as well. So we are not vedic then? Same is the case with Punjabi Jats. But then again bhramin has no respect among people who do ancestor worship. Bhramins are treated as downgraded caste and cheat.
----> No disrespect intended to any particluar religion or school of thought.
Last edited:
In the world, yes, but in India it was stressed by Muslim saints/preachers and sufis who were successful in converting many people.
Islam has a very strict view on this and idol worship
Last edited:
Look through the following excerpts which substantiate that just before its evolution into the Hindu religion Vedic religion used to believe in just one GOD. Aryasamaji also, who follow the Vedic way of life, believe in one GOD which they call as OM.
Vedic religion evolved into the Hindu paths of Yoga and Vedanta, a religious path considering itself the 'essence' of the Vedas, interpreting the Vedic pantheon as a unitary view of the universe with 'God' (Brahman) seen as immanent and transcendent in the forms of Ishvara and Brahman. These post-Vedic systems of thought, along with later texts like Upanishads, epics (namely Gita of Mahabharat), have been fully preserved and form the basis of modern Hinduism. The ritualistic traditions of Vedic religion are preserved in the conservative Śrauta tradition, in part with the exception of animal sacrifice, which was mostly abandoned by the higher castes by the end of the Vedic period, partly under the influence of the Buddhist and Jain religions, and their criticism of such practices[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_period
prashantacmet
New member
Yes..rightly said..and natural elements were worshiped but they were not GODS. God concept in Rigveda (as per swami dayanand ji ) "who is one , formless, ominipotent and omnipresent" and I am not insisting that aryasamji version is flawless it may be wrong
Let me explain this, things got corrupted as time passed by. For example , just take Islamic religion, it has many branches with slight variation on beliefs. Sufism does not represent the correct version of kuran. One of my muslim friend told me taht what is going on dargah in Ajmer 9worshipping type) that is not valid in Kuran, the muslims who go to dargah, they are called with a different name ( I don't remember that now), a muslim who adopts the Kuran completely never goes to dargah, and nother example why there is fight between Muslims and christains while both are abrrhmic religions because Muslims believe that christaisn corrupted teh monotheism concept and they considered Christ as "son of God" (muslim believes that there can be no son of God).
So i just want to say that things changes with time, interpretations of old scriptures changes with time and people adopt them.
So as far as ancestors worshiping is not concerned, it was not there initially but after scythians invasions this trend was accepted . today you can see PEER worshipping among jats and I don't know why and when jats accepted worshiping Muslim DEVTAS. Anyway, this my guess or I can say my general understanding after reading some Jat history and other books and it may be wrong. There are countless version of history and it is really hard for a common man to make a general opinion. So this is the conclusion what i read by now and i am not adamant about my view . It may change as some one educate me
No.. some jats are worshiping hanuman, ram, krishana, shiva, vaishnoi devi, shahkumbri devi, sirdi baba. aren't they doing? Let me explain again if a muslim drinks that does not mean he will not remain Muslim. So whatever jats are doing that doe snot matter but they were always inclined for "single God' concept and that's why in the timeline most of the Jats converted into Islam and sikhism and even in among Hindus most of the arya samaji are jats. A Jat hardly can be Brahminic Hindus and whatever brahimins preached after vedas and upnishad that is Hinduism. How hard people try to relate modern hinduism with vedic but it will never make sense
Last edited:
Sorry, I should have made it clear by we in that instance I meant my ancestors not all jats.
Its bit confusing or should we say various people's interpretation in the past has made it confusing.
Anyway I will look into this in detail later.
Anyway I will look into this in detail later.
Last edited:
It is not proved failed, go and discuss on some international forum where people have high quality knowledge. Do you know what is Aryan ? Aryan belonged to a proto-IE group who were first speaker of proto-IE languages from which all IE languages descended. Scythians were also Iranic(IE) speaker, hence Aryan(Indo-European)vivekkaliyar said:
No one has closed this theory, lol. There is politics involved in India.
Scythian or Saka were more dominant in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. BTW these tribes like Saka, Huna and Aryans were of similar origins, all three are said to be originated in South Russia/Central Assia. All were aggressive people in comparison of veddoid people of India. Modern day Brahmins are not pure aryan, they are mixed with aboriginals so there is regional difference in phenotype of Brahmins which depends upon extant of their admixture. Both mythology and genetics tell us about mixing of Brahmins with Shudras like Vedvyas marrying with Nishada girl. There are Sakadwipya Brahmins who are said to be descendant of Scythian Brahmins.
Some Neo-Nazis say that it was genetic mixing which led to fall of Aryans in India and Indo-Aryans get defeated by Scythians, Hunas,etc. Although, I don't believe in complete genetic-determinism. Racialism beings discrimination, racism and ethno-centrism are two different things. There is nothing wrong in being ethno-centric, human is social animal as Aristotle told.
I don't take history so seriously. There are no Aryans or Scythian today, they are extinct people even if they existed in past. We are Jats, Hindus and obviously Indians, not Aryans or Scythians or Hunas. Scientists also says that human evolved from monkeys, so don't get into much tension. Philosophically saying mythology and science, both are part of illusion. Our ancestors believed that they descended from moon or sun, we believe that we descended from monkey or chimpanzee, after 1000s of year God knows what will our next generation believe.
Who told you that ? Indians are barbarian for Pakistanis and Pakistani are babberian for Indians. West is barbarian for Islamists and Islamists are barbarian for west. There is no proof that Scythians were barbarian (Greeks called Scythian barbarian, in fact it is not clear if all Scythian were same because ignorant greeks must have put lot of people together just like ignorant Indians used to refer every foreigners as Malecha ), neither there is solid evidence of genetic relationship between Jats and Scythian.
Last edited: