Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 23rd, 2013, 10:37 AM   #41

Rakshasa's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 410

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1991sudarshan View Post
This Argument is ridiculous, Tribal people working in Brahmins land. By Hindu tradition , Brahmins should not own anything and should earn their living through alms. During the Pallava period, the Kings of Pallava dynasty gave lands to the Brahmins to win their support. But technically , Brahmins were not land lords. But things changed during the colonial period, in my province i.e erstwhile Madras Presidency, Brahmins took up the Law as their profession, during the same period, other Brahmins would have become landlords. But it is very foolish to tell Brahmins owned lands from the prehistoric times. This is nothing but a propaganda.

I agree that the Austronesian people were once spread through the Indian Sub-continent, but there are no written records about their civilization and that is why the Austronesian(in India) studies are confined to the scholarly world. I am wondering about the Dravidian- Austronesian relationship.


Actually it was the Brahmins who started working in the court of various kings in different regions of India gradually over a period of centuries. And the theory that Brahmins were supposed to be living on alms is ridiculous. 60% of Uttarakhand's population is Brahmins. Do you think that 60% of the people were living on alms given by the remaining few?

There are inscriptions all over India dating to different time period recording the transfer of land to the Brahmins by fanatic Hindu kings. Read Kalhana's Rajtarangini for example, which mentions that the fanatic Hindu kings there, while oppressing Buddhists, transferred many villages to the Brahmins and invited them from as far as the country of Kamboja (Pakistan). Sungas, Senas, Peshwas etc were all Brahmin dynasties.

One thing many conditioned Hindus do not realize today is that "Brahmin" is a name of a clan/tribe. And the Rishis/Rsis were the actual priests of Brahmin tribe who conducted Vedic ceremonies and compiled Brahmanic scriptures. Also, the original outlook of Brahmins (and Rishis) was just like any other Central Asian or European people. They had huge beards and long hair. But sometime down the line (I think after the rise of Shankara), Brahmin adopted many features of Shramanic religions like bald head (with a pony tail to maintain distinction), orange/yellow robes etc. The early emphasis of Vedas is in acquiring wealth and prosperity and many Brahmanists even criticize Buddhists and Jains for walking away from it. But after the rise of Shankara, they started giving more emphasis to renunciation, nirvana etc.


When Rig Veda mentiones the four Varnas, it ascribes professions to different varnas, it does NOT give definitions to the varnas. For example, Brahmins are supposed to take up roles of leadership, priesthood etc, Kshatriyas should take up roles of soldiers, etc. It is NOT a definition, make no mistake. It is a recommendation or perhaps even a suggestion. Early Brahmins recorded early non-Aryan Indian kings like Nandas, Mauryas etc as "Shudras" even though they were rulers. Do you think Nandas, Mauryas really cared? Or even knew about these scriptures that Brahmins were creating? They were probably fringe groups who were putting down their opinions, but it was not an established caste system. For instance, Brahmins also call the Greeks and Chinese as warriors/Kshatriyas, but do the Greeks and Chinese identify themselves as "Kshatriyas"? They do not even know. Same with most of the India in the early days.
Rakshasa is offline  
Remove Ads
Old March 23rd, 2013, 10:45 AM   #42

Rakshasa's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 410

Ibbetson summarised the popular and currently received theory of caste as follows:
(1) that caste is an institution of the Hindu religion, and wholly peculiar to that
religion alone;
(2) that it consists primarily of a fourfold classification of people in general
under the heads of Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Sudra;
(3) that caste is perpetual and immutable, and has been transmitted from
generation to generation throughout the ages of Hindu history and myth without
the possibility of change.


(note: the above are popular misconception the below are refutation of the above)

To each of these points he believed there to be a convincing reply. Firstly, he argued, caste
was more of a social than a religious institution, and that conversion from Hinduism to
Islam has not necessarily the slightest effect upon caste. Secondly, he pointed out that
there are Brahmins who are looked upon as outcasts by those who under the fourfold
classification would be classed as Sudras, that there is no such thing as a Vaishya existing,
it is very doubtful that there is such as thing as a Kshatriya, and that Sudra has no present
significance save as a convenient term of abuse to apply to someone you consider lower
than yourself. He finally concluded that nothing could be more variable and difficult to
define than caste, and that 'the fact that a generation is descended from the ancestors of
any given caste creates a presumption, and nothing more, that that generation also is of the
same caste, a presumption liable to be defeated by an infinite variety of circumstances.


"Race, Caste and Tribe in Central India: The Early Origins of Indian Anthropometry"
Crispin Bates.
Rakshasa is offline  
Old March 23rd, 2013, 01:44 PM   #43

Jinit's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: India
Posts: 5,255
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakshasa View Post
Actually it was the Brahmins who started working in the court of various kings in different regions of India gradually over a period of centuries. And the theory that Brahmins were supposed to be living on alms is ridiculous. 60% of Uttarakhand's population is Brahmins. Do you think that 60% of the people were living on alms given by the remaining few?
As far as I know the land grants were given to the temples for their maintainance and not to the individual brahmins just in the fashion similar to the land grants given to the Buddhist monasteries and universities. and in any case land grants to the non rulling parties weren't common custom before the satavahanas. What sudarshan has said is true for most of the part of the Indian history. Even during the height of Vijayanagar empire, Krishna dev raya's move to put the brahmins on the rulling position was criticized by the other people.

Quote:
There are inscriptions all over India dating to different time period recording the transfer of land to the Brahmins by fanatic Hindu kings. Read Kalhana's Rajtarangini for example, which mentions that the fanatic Hindu kings there, while oppressing Buddhists, transferred many villages to the Brahmins and invited them from as far as the country of Kamboja (Pakistan). Sungas, Senas, Peshwas etc were all Brahmin dynasties.
First even if its true that the Kings granted land to the Brahmins than how come it prove that the King was fanatic? and as far as Rajatarangini is concerned Mihirkula is the only hindu king that is criticized for destroying the stupas in Gandhara. Kalhana also mentions that the monumental statue of Buddha once stood in Srinagar before it was destroyed during the Islamic Jihad, which is highly impossible if the atmosphere would have been really hostile towards buddhist institutions. Anyway I haven't read the Rajatarangini so please site the particular chapters that mentions these fanatic hindu kings and their correlation with Brahmins. Btw Kalhana himself was a brahmin.

As for the Peshwas, Peshwas also granted fiefdoms to the Holkars, Scindia and Gaekwads and none of them were brahmins but peasants and shepherds.

Quote:
One thing many conditioned Hindus do not realize today is that "Brahmin" is a name of a clan/tribe. And the Rishis/Rsis were the actual priests of Brahmin tribe who conducted Vedic ceremonies and compiled Brahmanic scriptures. Also, the original outlook of Brahmins (and Rishis) was just like any other Central Asian or European people. They had huge beards and long hair. But sometime down the line (I think after the rise of Shankara), Brahmin adopted many features of Shramanic religions like bald head (with a pony tail to maintain distinction), orange/yellow robes etc. The early emphasis of Vedas is in acquiring wealth and prosperity and many Brahmanists even criticize Buddhists and Jains for walking away from it. But after the rise of Shankara, they started giving more emphasis to renunciation, nirvana etc.
Do you have any substantial evidances to prove this thesis? otherwise I assume that this is also one of those flawed theories based on particular propagandas and agendas.

Last edited by Jinit; March 23rd, 2013 at 01:49 PM.
Jinit is offline  
Old March 23rd, 2013, 02:39 PM   #44

Aberc's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 686

Quote:
Also, the original outlook of Brahmins (and Rishis) was just like any other Central Asian or European people. They had huge beards and long hair.

Pretty much all Indians back then had long hair. Only difference is Indians would(especially elites) make a knot out of it and wear a turban. Not let it free flow like some Middle Easterners and Central Asians.

Click the image to open in full size.

And you just grouped together Central Asia and Europe like they were the same people. Here is an representation of Brahmins from the Sanchi Stupa.

Click the image to open in full size.
The Miracle of Wood and Fire


Quote:
The below-most panel represents the later episode of this story. The brahmanas wanted to do fire oblation however they were not able to do so. They were not able to spilt wood and fan fire without Buddha’s consent. After his consent, they were able to spilt wood and fan the fire to put oblation in that.
Sanchi ? Buddham Dhammam Sangham

Yes, they had beards(so did a lot of villagers), but their "out look" looks nothing like Central Asians or Europeans. These people above are the most simplest looking people/society I have seen in the reliefs.


Quote:
By Hindu tradition , Brahmins should not own anything and should earn their living through alms.
What sudarshan said sounds rather true when you look at the relief.

Quote:
Brahmins also call the Greeks and Chinese as warriors/Kshatriya
I have heard these groups being called barbarians far more times. Usually being grouped with Central Asians, Persians, etc.

Last edited by Aberc; March 23rd, 2013 at 04:32 PM.
Aberc is offline  
Old March 23rd, 2013, 08:29 PM   #45
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 639

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakshasa View Post
beeh,

My only issue is that in India the pre-Aryan culture and people/race are completely neglected and sidelined in an effort by Aryan historians to portray everything Indian to be related to Vedas, Sanskrit, Brahmins etc. Furthermore, the pre-Aryan people are portrayed by them as primitive and barbaric who were "civilized" by Aryans when they imposed their culture onto them.

Are you going to tell me that caste system is non-existent in India? Are you going to tell me that every Hindu doesn't identify himself or herself as a caste first and as a nationality later, which is anyway an imposed concept over them?

Brahmins and Hindus in general have the right to glorify their culture, but they have no right to denigrate that of the natives.

Nobody has a problem giving importance to pre Vedic CULTURE in India, but you are talking as if the Indians who invented Vedic culture were not the same people who who invented and practiced pre Vedic culture.

There is no such thing as a 'Indo-Aryan' people separate from their brothers who didn't take up Vedic culture. The Lower caste are not a separate people as caste is not hereditary according to the Vedas. By your argument the Aristocracy of Europe is another Race from regular Europeans because over time they only married other aristocrats.

Look brother, we don't know what the pre Vedic Culture of India was like, how can we talk about it? If you know something about it, I'd love to hear it. Just stop repeating Racial divide and rule infomercials invented for political reasons outside of India.

Look Brother this is a Indian Albino Family


Click the image to open in full size.

Now, there are Batshit crazy people in India right now preaching that Europeans are the historic and 'only' enemy of Aryans as they fought mainly at night due their Albino mutation. That the reason ancient Indians hated them was because the Sun had cursed them. God had cursed them. They cite the Avesta, Christian Bible, the Jewish Torah, and the Koran as remembering how God had cursed his enemies with leprosy, pale skin.

These people are the perfect example of what happens when facts are twisted for agenda. They are no different from those North Europeans who believe that the ancient Greeks and Romans were 'Nordic'. They are no different from those hypothesizing that there is a 'Indo-Aryan' people separate from other Indians.

Show me one instance of an Arya stating that people within the boundaries of Bharata are foreigners? That the 'lower' caste are a separate people. Even in the Arthashastra, the Shudra are classified as being Arya.


Why are people so hell bent on believing in 'Indo-europeans' when there isn't any archeological evidence for them? Are all the Japanese in Japan who can speak english today descended from Euro-japs?


Religions and languages can spread without needing a 'Indo-european'. I don't see anything out there about Vedic culture spreading to the Middle east and then carried by Farmers to Europe. Vedic culture spread all over East and South Asia as well but nobody proposes that there is a 'Indo-oriental' homeland somewhere in a rainbow.



I can actually understand the anger the athiests feel, someone spreads a narrative that cannot be validated in any way and we are all supposed to just dismiss all rationality because, why? There isn't a reason, its all emotion in a tea cup. At some point, on earth, there have to be adults, who have to work and buy Christmas presents and not hope Santa's off the bottle.
beeh is offline  
Old March 23rd, 2013, 08:42 PM   #46

1991sudarshan's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2011
From: São Tomé de Meliapore
Posts: 1,810

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakshasa View Post
Actually it was the Brahmins who started working in the court of various kings in different regions of India gradually over a period of centuries. And the theory that Brahmins were supposed to be living on alms is ridiculous. 60% of Uttarakhand's population is Brahmins. Do you think that 60% of the people were living on alms given by the remaining few?
Click the image to open in full size.

Uttarakhand was previously part of uttarpradesh , Uttarpradesh was also a part of British Raj. It is no surprise that the Brahmins became Landlords during the British Raj.
1991sudarshan is offline  
Old March 24th, 2013, 05:02 AM   #47

Dreamhunter's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 3,764
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1991sudarshan View Post
Thanks for the Clarification. I mean the Austro-Asiatic people. Are they are any theories relating Dravidian languages and Austro_Asiatic languages. I read in a News paper that the Australian aborigines are related to Indians genetically.
So, these Austro-Asiatics in India, who - as you said - formed rulng elites in some parts of India, where did they originally come from? Were they indigenous to India, or did they also migrate from some place else, like the Eastern Himalayas, Southern Yunnan, Southern Tibet etc.?
Dreamhunter is online now  
Old March 24th, 2013, 05:50 AM   #48

1991sudarshan's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2011
From: São Tomé de Meliapore
Posts: 1,810

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamhunter View Post
So, these Austro-Asiatics in India, who - as you said - formed rulng elites in some parts of India, where did they originally come from? Were they indigenous to India, or did they also migrate from some place else, like the Eastern Himalayas, Southern Yunnan, Southern Tibet etc.?
No definite information to these questions. The absence of archeological remains of pre Indus period is that the people of succeeding civilization could have utilized them. Like, how the British used the brick of IVC structures for the railways.

The geneticists hold the view the Austro-Asiatic people should have brought the rice cultivation along with them.
1991sudarshan is offline  
Old March 24th, 2013, 05:57 AM   #49

Dreamhunter's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 3,764
Blog Entries: 1

That's interesting. That's what I believe too. The Austro-Asiatics - ancestors of modern day mainlandic South-East Asians - were the first purveyors of rice cultivation technology. Not Indians, not Chinese.
Dreamhunter is online now  
Old March 24th, 2013, 06:11 AM   #50

1991sudarshan's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2011
From: São Tomé de Meliapore
Posts: 1,810

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamhunter View Post
That's interesting. That's what I believe too. The Austro-Asiatics - ancestors of modern day mainlandic South-East Asians - were the first purveyors of rice cultivation technology. Not Indians, not Chinese.
The Linguists should compare Austro_asiatic language with the IVC script. So far, the linguists could not reach to any conclusion by comparing Dravidian and Indo Aryan language with the IVC script.
1991sudarshan is offline  
Closed Thread

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
caucasoids, india, indoaryans



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who are the Aryans? Mohammed the Persian General History 66 January 1st, 2017 05:28 PM
Indo-Aryans and Semites Disciple Middle Eastern and African History 30 February 15th, 2014 04:06 PM
The First Indo-China War The Amyclae Asian History 13 December 24th, 2012 08:59 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.