Bade bhai aise mat boliye. I just said before the great floods i. e. 10,000 BC.Originally Posted by narenderkharb
By the way I dont believe that Vedas are millions years old. Nor do I think that they are divine. God, who is supposed to have given Vedas could have easily ensured that people dont forget them!
- In the ordinary course of nature thousands upon thousands are born every day, but he alone is truly born whose birth leads to the elevation of his race.
I'm quoting from my first (starting) post of this thread:
[Jati means sub-jat i.e. you r jat it's ok but which Jat r u? whether Tomar, Dahiya, Dalal, .. etc. Here among Jats all jatis (clans) used 2 b equal like modern jat goths/gotras, where no one claims superiority over others unlike Rajputs. Every jat is proud of his jati i.e. clan but at the same time treats other clan of jats also with equal dignity. So proud of their clan jats are that they never changed their clan for thousands of years inspite of variations in languages, places, religions, their deadly friendly and deadly enemical alliances, their social, economic n political status etc. This word jati was later misused and mis-enterpreted by later pauranic people for their benefit as were vedas varna vyavastha were misused by them. There is Hyme in Rigveda "I'm poet, My father is physician, my mother grinds corn...etc"
Similar is with Goth n gotra is sanskritised form of Goth. It again means U r Goth/Got (means Jat) is o.k. but which Got r u? whether Bisla, Brar, Sandhu,..? this sub-got was called gotra. I've seen jats speaking many languages but all used the word got and not gotra for their clan name. These two names Jat and Got are found with little variations all over world in general and Eurasia in particular.]
Indus valley (Modern Jat) area in Indo-Gangetic plane was much ahead of other parts in material culture is a common archeological fact. As material culture was developing and spreading in central, south and east india, lot of collective efforts were required for example for agriculture etc; n for agriculture clearing of forests was required. Rainfall in north west india was much lesser as compared to east and central india; it is still so and any primary or middle class geographical book mentions it. While normal forests in north west India (due lesser rainfall) could be easilly cleared with copper/brass implements and it was usually found there particularly in Khetri mines of Rajasthan, in further east iron was required which was not much known that time. If you notice Herodotus, he often says that Jats arms were made of brass and gold, not only in India but else where also. Iron is conspicuous by its absence.
Thick forests of central and east gangetic plain and south india had to be cleared by burning them. Why Agni is given such an important place in Aryan and Hindu literature is due this reason also along with others. Yagna did not use to be like the one we Arya Samaji's do it today in a short pit in a room or ground. Yagna used to be the burning of forests and clearing the land for agriculture. Big Yagna used to be the big task i.e. burning of big forest land to get big agriculture land for more produce so as to feed big armies, these big armies in turn used to make the king more powerful so as to defeat his adversaries and make him chakravarti. Essentially this art of burning forest or Yagna started coming to be practiced as an essential art/science. Every Jat/aryan was supposed to know it and it was almost as compulsary made for them as is the compulsary primary education for all in modern India. Later Yagna started to treated as a ceremony for any Big, Good and Collective work. This art and some similar ones were later handed over to a particular group known as Brahmins who'd assist the kings and big tribal lords in such tasks. They were also given the task of making the local population as civilised i.e. assimilating them into this Aryan or Hindu fold. Slowly and gradually their manipulation of this power in their favour taking advantage of the local tribal peoples innocense braught about Brahmanism and Casteism in India.
However, when this new system was braught back to Jats, they got baffled and rejected it. Jats casts were Jatis/Goths as mentioned above and all enjoyed equal status irrespective of their numbers and financial/political powers. Every jati people were free to adopt any profession. If you notice in Mahabharat a Rathwan (Modern Driver) enjoyed no less status than warrior (ref. Krishna and Shalya). Maharathi used to be a big respectable title. Jat could think of Brahman just as one of other working groups like Nai, who used to play a role in matrimonial alliances. However, Jat even if quite dominant in village was quite free to mix with all Badhai, Teli, Kumhar, Mali, .......and all casts. It is evident by common sense from the common saying "Jat re Jat tere sir pe khat...Teli re Teli tere sir pe Kolhu". That a Teli is freely mixed up with a Jat.
This Yagna theory of burning the forests for agriculture is further justified by the fact that they were more common in Indian Jats that too particularly even more towards east and south. There used to be group of local or even Jat people opposing that. These people wanted to remain as it is in the forests. Ramayan theory seems to be understood in this respect. Here is a contrast between Ramayan and Mahabharat. Which one older and how old is not be argued but certainly the area of Ramayan is in the east and south of Mahabharat. This is because of more rainfall and thicker vegetation.
I dont recall that other Jats outside India practicing Yagna/Yajya, though Horse Sacrifice and Sun worshipping by Jats is mentioned by Herodotus but it is bit different from ashwamedh yagya by Solar dynasty's Rama.
With the introduction of Iron and clearing of these jungles, the stage was now clear for big agricultural lands. This provided big produce and extra storage of food grains etc. which were suitable for maitaining big armies. Here started the age of Mahajanpadas having Jats as their overlords. There were perhaps 16 mahajanpadas. Ayodhya, Kashi, Ujjain, Magadh etc. These kings were very very powerful. The Great warriors like Allexander etc. retreated back safely on hearing of their armies. Abundant number of Elephants was another power with them. This all became possible due to surplus produce.
Another impact of this surplus produce was to give time to the people to think in peace time. This resulted in many philosophies, theories, sciences, religions etc. Jainism and Budhism are just two of them. In fact there were as many as 62 sects at that time in that area. Presence and influence of Jats there can be easilly judged or guessed by the simple fact that most of these sects or religions were not very favourable to Brahminism. Early Jats migrated towards east not along the tarck of ganges due to thick forests. They rather did so along the foothills of himalayas where rivers encountered in the way were not so wide as they are in the plain area. Jungles also were not as thick as they were in the plain area due mountainous and stoney land. It is due that reason that we find Jat repuclics of Malla, Lichhavi etc. in this region. The constitution and administrative system of these republics were almost the same as they are of north-west indian jats. It may be recalled that Samudra Gupta Jat was very proud of his Lichhavi mother.
During this process, migration and passage of time local forest people were being made civilised, taught aryan and hindu ways of living and some of Jats were getting mixed with them gradually. Slowly original Jat or vedic system was being corrupted in this process and Jats jati system was being incorrectly transformed into a new jati system which is known today as modern jati/caste system. Jats jatis equalities were being converted into unequal jatis. rigvedic system where a person can choose his profession as per his abilities irrespective of his father and jati (as I quoted earlier in rigvedic hyme) was being transformed into jati/caste system where work for every jati was being made traditional and ancestral.
Tevatia Saab,2. Under certain conditions beyond their control they migrated from Scandinavia back to Malwa region, their homeland, after hundreds of years. When they came back they were known as Gutta or Guttan, as mentioned in Sunda inscription by Tewatiaji. Gutta later on got changed to Gupta.
3. Jat may be the origin of Ujjain explained as under:
Jat .....Jatt (As in Punjab)
Jatt .....Jutt
Jutt ..... Gutt(J.....G)
Gutt ....... Guttan (As mentioned in Sunda inscription)
Guttan ........Gutian
Gutian..........Gutyan
Gutyan.........Gutjan (Y....J)
Gutjan..........Utjan (G’silent as Gunnis ,19, in Malwa becomes Unnis in Hindi)
Ut+Jan.........Ă*Ujjan (meaning noble people)
Ujjan .........Ujjain
****************************
Gupta and Barbarian have the same meaning
Gupt(a) means iin hindi Secret, hidden or little known. Once I discussed the word barbarian(often attached with arayans) word with Romila Thapar's research scholar. She explained that it meant little known people. It is true also. Not only Aryans but getae, guts etc. are called barbarians by herodotus also. I'll quote from history chapter "persian wars" describing the fight of massageate queen tomyris with Cyrus the great around 5-6 century BC, when cyrus was killed; "First they faught on horse back with arrows, then with spears etc. n in last both the armies came on hand to hand fighting. In all the bloody wars in which these barbarians engage themselves this war was the fiercest"
Number Ek : ye jo aapney ujjain se Jaat bana diya ye to bhai sahab ENGLISH mein hi ban sakta hai , Raam Ki Soo agar yehi aap hindi mein likh ke dekhengey to aapke LOGIC ki hi HINDI ho jayegi.
Number do : Mera hindi ka gyaan thoda kum hai isiliye mujhey hindi shabd "buuber" ka meaning aapse poochhna tha , kahi ye sanskrit se liya hua hindi word to nahi hai ??? pata nahi shayad aap ispe kuchh roshni daal sakein !!
number 3 :
ek baat main bhojna chahoonga ki HUM JAAT (aur in general) saarey ke saarey bhartiya itne INFERIORITY COMPLEX ke shikaar kyon hain ke baar baar , hazaar bar hum ghoom fir ke kisi na kisi tarah apne aapko EUOPEAN saabit karney ki koshish karte hai ?
Rathi Sahb ji, thanx for reading my posts carefully. I'm happy. To the best of my knowledge I reply to your querries:
1. Derivation of Ujjain from Jat/Gut is not mine. Its a post by Burdak ji. However, I'd like to mention that Aryans like present day Jats did not speak any one language. Even today language of Jats varies at every 50 kilometers. Even then mainly they speak punjabi, haryanvi, khadi boli, braj, shekhawati etc. Aryans spoke numerous languages world over. Even Indian Aryans did not speak sanskrit. Sometimes sanskrit used to be a court language as in case of Guptas but common people spoke their the vernacular language. They also speak many languages. That group of languages is called the Indo-European languages. These languages are still spoken in the major part of Indian sub-continent, Central and West Asia and in entire Europe. When words go from one language to another one in this group, they change as per certain rules and not at random. There is a well set law governing this variation which is known as Grimmes Law of Variation. Burdak ji may be applying this law.
number 2. The word "bubber" jo aap mujh se poochhna chahte hain us ka ishara shayad barbarian se hai. This is true that one of the meanings of this word is known as "little known", "alien", "outsider" etc. from china to europe. It is frequently used with aryans, Jats, guts, and their alike tribes like tatar, saka, hun etc. Guptas were little known people it is true and thats why their origin is doubtful and controversial to non-Jat historians, knowingly or unknowingly, like other jat emperors like kanishka, harsha etc. I do not know much sanskrit but Vaise me is shabd per prakash dalne ke koshis kar raha hun:
Barbarian comes from the French barbarien or Medieval Latin barbarinus, from Latin barbaria, from Latin barbarus, from the ancient Greek word βάρβαρος (barbaros) which meant a non-Greek, someone whose (first) language was not Greek. The word is imitative, the bar-bar representing the impression of random hubbub produced by hearing spoken a language that one cannot understand. Similar imitative forms are found in other languages, such as Sanskrit barbara-, "stammering", "non-Aryan", and the forms are connected to a reconstructed Proto-Indo-European *baba-, "to stammer".........Originally the term is empty of content beyond 'not Greek'. The Greeks encountered scores of different foreign cultures, including the Egyptians, Persians, Phoenicians, Etruscans, Romans, Carthaginians, Kurdish, Basques, which had no characteristics in common. It is not the case that Greeks automatically despised all alien cultures. In fact, they were aware of the greater antiquity of the much more developed civilisations of Egypt, the Levant and Mesopotamia, and Persia from whom they borrowed extensively. Plato Statesman 262de rejects the Greek–barbarian dichotomy as a logical absurdity on just such grounds: dividing the world into Greeks and non-Greeks tells one nothing about the second group. In Homer the term appears only once (Iliad 2.867), in the form barbarophonos ("of incomprehensible speech"), used of the Carians fighting for the Trojans. Notably the Trojans themselves, who despite bearing Hellenized names in the Homeric telling are emphatically not Greek, are not called barbaroi. such as Thrace and the Tauric Chersonese (Crimea), while from Asia Minor came above all Lydians, Phrygians and Carians. It is hard not to despise the people you ................Out of those sources the Hellenic stereotype was elaborated: barbarians are like children, unable to speak or reason properly, cowardly, effeminate, luxurious, cruel, unable to control their appetites and desires, politically unable to govern themselves. These stereotypes were voiced with much shrillness by writers like Isocrates in the 4th century BC who called for a war of conquest against Persia as a panacea for Greek problems. Ironically, many of the former attributes were later ascribed to the Greeks, especially the Seleucid kingdom, by the Romans........ However, the Hellenic stereotype of barbarians was not a universal feature of Hellenic culture. Xenophon, for example, wrote the Cyropaedia, a laudatory fictionalised account of Cyrus, the founder of Persian empire, effectively a utopian text. In his Anabasis, Xenophon's accounts of the Persians and other non-Greeks he knew or encountered hardly seem to be under the sway of these stereotypes at all.
The renowned rhetor Demosthenes made derogatory comments in his speeches, using the word "barbarian."
Barbarian is used in its Hellenic sense by Paul in the New Testament (Romans 1:14) to describe non-Greeks, and to describe one who merely speaks a different language (1 Corinthians 14:11). The word is not used in these scriptures in the modern sense of "savage". .......Historically, the term barbarian has seen widespread use. Many peoples have dismissed alien cultures and even rival civilizations as barbarians because they were unrecognizably strange. The Greeks admired Scythians and Eastern Gauls as heroic individuals— even in the case of Anacharsis as philosophers—but considered their culture to be barbaric. The Romans indiscriminately regarded the various Germanic tribes, the settled Gauls, and the raiding Huns as barbarians all. The Chinese (Han Chinese) of the Chinese Empire regarded the Xiongnu, Tatars, Turks, Mongols, Jurchen, Manchu, and Europeans as barbaric. The Chinese used different terms for barbarians from different directions of the compass. Those in the east were called Dongyi (东夷), those in the west were called Xirong (西戎), those in the south were called Nanman (南蛮), and those in the north were called Beidi (北狄). However, despite the conventional translation of such terms (especially 夷) as 'barbarian', in fact it is possible to translate them simply as 'outsider' or 'stranger', with far less offensive cultural connotations. The use of the translation 'barbarian' may have been a deliberate attempt by European powers to justify their policies against China.
The Japanese adopted the Chinese usage. When Europeans came to Japan, they were called nanban (南蛮), literally Barbarians from the South, because the Portuguese ships appeared to sail from the South.
number 3 : I appreciate your patriotism and pride of being Indian. But your logic as you've quoted in your earlier quote that because hindi is closer to sanskrit as compared to english french etc. thats why Aryans went from India to Europe is no sound. Following is your quote:
Same is true with The Aryan Invasion theory, we have read about the Aryan invasion so many times in schools that we blinfoldedly beleive every bit of it !!! My questions here is, WHAT LANGUAGE DID SO CALLED ARYANS SPOKE ??? French, English or German ??? You guessed it right , by account of all records Sanskrit is considered THEIR LANGUAGE !! Now tell me, what languages are closer to Sanskrit ?? Frech ,German ,Sweedish or all the Indian lanuages ???
Here I'd like to stress that sanskrit is not just one language. Languages of Indian Aryans used to be made systematic from time to time by the grammrians. Sanskrit means systematic. Like out of all indian languages today hindi is derived which is having many english, urdu, persian, arabic words also in it. Similar was the case with sanskrit from time to time. Vedas sanskrit is not the same as that of Panini's. Hindi or other indian languages are close to sanskrit because sanskrit is mainly derived from these Indian languages. Otherwise any other indo-european language viz. marathi, bengali, punjabi, pashtoon, persian, french, german, english, ..etc. are as much aryan as hindi is.
Comparing the jat clans with european surnames does not mean slave mentality. Where have I said that Jats came from europe? And not only me but all say them Indo-European that is where Indo i.e. India comes first. I feel no history book calls aryas and these languages as Euro-Indian
its always Indo-european. We are searching here Jat history. Let us go where our search leads us to. If we predetermine our result what are we searching for then?
If our languages and clans are similar to central asian and europeans then shall we say no its wrong. And if we say yes where does it mean that we are inferior to them? Or we migrated from there? As I said earlier that the very word Indo-European presupposes or makes it more probable that origin might have been India only. But one must always be open to logic.
Anyway, good to hear from you. Please keep it up.
The Indo-European languages are a family of several hundred languages and dialects (443 according to the SIL estimate), including most of the major languages of Europe, as well as many in Southwest Asia, Central Asia and Southern Asia. Contemporary languages in this family include Hindi, Bengali, German, English, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish (each with more than 100 million native speakers), as well as numerous smaller national or minority languages. Indo-European is the largest family of languages in the world today, with its languages spoken by approximately 3 billion native speakers; the second largest family of tongues is Sino-Tibetan........
dacia in romania is same as dahiya (jat) in india
What makes Jat so powerful so as to claim the ancestor or at least the most important tribe of Indo-european cultures. You may yourself search for such historical facts on net. Purpose of this thread is to explore the roots of Jats in the world n not just in India only. Jat looks to be an Inter-continental tribe who wrote his name by blood on the vast plains of Asia and Europe. Jat clans or the places named after modern Indian Jat clans are invariably found in all the indo-european languages speaking people's area. Following threads may be useful in this context in our search. However, I again caution that we need not necessarilly fully agree with them but they are worth reading
Ancient Romanian history starting with early Indo-European tribes and later on developing in early European civilizations. Today's Romania is a direct descendent of those tribes "Getae" named by the Greeks and "Dacian" by Romans.
THE CHRONOLOGICAL BEGINNING - Chronological description of events starting with The Big Bang
DECEBAL - King of Dacia (Ancient Romania), his forts and castles mostly located in Orastie Region
THE GETAE - Early Romanian civilization as described by Herodotus and other early historians
[b]HERODOT-Napoleon Bonaparteonce said: "History is written by the winner" - and he's right! find here some fairly objective History texts written by the "Father of our History" - Herodot
can u not decipher this indus valley script? long back some james princep in 1837 deciphered this script of Asokan pillars. Kharb its too simple. the trident trishul is there in this script. n shiva was a combination of vedic god rudra (means rulane wala) n tamil god murugan.
Last edited by sktewatia; March 21st, 2006 at 02:43 AM.
Smith tried to construct Indian History thru upnishad, puranas, etc. n if he did n concluded then his conclusions are certainly correct. he attributed his history 1/3 of it revolves around the the invasion of allexander. Curious enough this allexander's invasion finds no mention n e where in all sources of indian history. hence pourus is also missing.
History of India (whether ancient, medieval, modern and post modern) can never be written by ignoring jats. in fact where ever jats were found all over the world, no history can be written by deliberately ignoring them.
lotus_a2001: Dr Savescue is trying 2 fathom the jat empire by ignoring jats. he is sadly mistaken!
lotus_a2001: he'll die out of his own imagination. there was no hoistory n no battle worth its name where jat blood did not irrigate the mother earth.
lotus_a2001: well i'm talking about the major battles n major civilizations only
lotus_a2001: soka, danbluefire, india was not that easy 2 b conqured n retained by jats till 2day inspite of all odds.
y this ramayna is there in england? y vanir n daugir god is thr in england? or in scandinavia?
why kaalidas is called the shakespear of india.
rather its other way round.
why shakespear is not called as the kaalidas of europe?
i'll please invite a youngman Nadar from western UP. the Tikaits panchayat. The Sarvkhap panchayat.
I remember this "nadar"
he put up a very logical question about "Suraj mal n Rana Pratap"
but "nadar" got was never heard of in jats.
btr "Nadar" sahib will u put a few words, about u?
re chhore jat ke!!!!
yo kaalidass 16*2=8 tha. bhai va jat tha. va jo chandragupta vikram tha va bhi bhai 16*2=8 tha. te bhai in saare jattan ne va saka hun kushan saare bhajja diye. bhai un ssaare e na bheekh mangi ek jato, hum bhi jat sen. te jattan ne bolya bhai such bolen sen te in ne bhi jat banya lo. te bhai "nadar" te bhai va bhi jat banya liye te bhai ke bura karya? jatt te va the hi bhai!
danbluefire: prajapati was the father of daksa?
lotus_a2001: daksha perhaps himself was prajapati
lotus_a2001: he had 3 daughters
lotus_a2001: diti, aditi, danu
lotus_a2001: from them 3 branches of jats were born
lotus_a2001: daitya or assurs (c the capital of assur/assyria is ninenveh, meaning 99 in hindi, the greatest binary number, u may relate arab/arabia in hindi means 100 crores, kharab means 100 arab, 1 crore= 100 lakh= 10 million, by the all these powerful numbers are jat clans in india) from diti.
lotus_a2001: aditya (meaning sun, solar race) or deva (c sunny deol/deval, sun of dharmendra jat)
lotus_a2001: from danu danav jats/modern danes/nordic branch of aryans/tallest in the world till today/the scandinavians were born
lotus_a2001: originally all these three were brothers n all were jats. Dev, Assur and Danavs. They continued to fight with one another but marriage alliances were also very common among them
Posting Permissions
Find latest started threads
Originally Posted by narenderkharb
