Chronology of Indian History --Newer discussions

[nrao]

Dr. Singh, you have provided good information and covered a lot of ground so far so naturally there are questions. While the case made for location of Uttarakuru is impressive, I do not think it is conclusive. First natural question has to be with time frame. In all the links that you have provided so far, date or timeframe is missing. That is very important.

For instance, if you say that these "Aryans" came from outside, then do you agree with current theory of circa 1200 BC or are you talking about earlier times. Since you cited Purans as one of the evidence, it may be important to take that view regarding that. Current view of various tribes is best summed in following url:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F...Kuru_tribe.JPG

This deals with arriving at Kuru tribes. I arrive to our current date using this method.

My understanding is that there are 40 generations of Puru/Bharat tribe followed by Kuru before we finally come to Kauravas as we know it. If you take 3 generations in a century using present calendar (giving each person about 33 years of life expectancy), then 40 generations will provide around 1200 years so moving into 3rd millennium BC
for the start of this line of history (I am using 1000 BC as the base year of current Mahabharat war). Do you place Uttarakurus in this time frame or some other time-frame, like before, after or during. If they arrived earlier than say Puru/Bharat times, say around 2500 BC and they 'invaded' then who did they invade as Harappans were not really in decline at this. If you place them later then where do you place them in the above geneology, if you think that makes sense at all. We can discard my speculation if all of above is nonsense. Dr Bhagwan Singh, who I quoted earlier in reference to Dr Witzel and the conference at the India Internal center, claims in his book, that both Vedic believers and non-vedic socities were living at the same place. Do uttarkurus have a prior time frame than Harappan timeframe?

There is an alternative location provided for uttarakurus by Dr. Witzel again. I quote from his paper which can be found on internet:

" Towards the end of the Vedic period, Kashmir indeed seems to appear in the texts: it may be indicated by the name Uttara-Madra, which occurs in the later part of AB 8.14 in a list of Vedic kingdoms and the titles of their kings. The country mentioned along with it, UttaraKuru, should, however, be sought in Himachal Pradesh, for example in an area including the Kulu Valley, the ancient Kulūa. Indeed, Madra was still known, even to the later Råjataranginīs, as the land immediately south of Kashmir."

I am also curious about the 1000 years Dev-Daitya war, where was this fought and who are the people being talked about in it?

In continuation of the above identification of Uttrakuru, we quote Tibetan document cited by Dr. Buddha Prakash according to which ''this land lay in the direction of the Tarim Valley somewhere in eastern Turkestan. The change of climate and inroad of sandy waste, perhaps, led to the dispersal of the Kurus from there. one of their sections reached Iran, swept through the corridor between the southern foot of the Elburz range and the northern pasture lands in the basin of lake Urmiyah and, beyond that, in the steppe country in the lower basin of the rivers Aras and Kur, adjoining the west coast of the Caspian Sea. From there they travelled on still further westward over the watershed between the basins of the aras and the Qyzyl Irmaq (Halys) and debouched into the Anatolian Peninsula to settle in the region, called the Kuru Plain, Koroupedion, after their name, which like its Indian countrer part Kurukshetra was the scene of memorable battles.." pp.116-117.

[lrburdak]

We have some content on Jatland about Shanti Parva. See chapter 39 here - [Wiki]Shanti Parva Mahabharata Book XII Chapter 39[/Wiki]

I quote from this -

"Vaisampayana said, 'At the time the Parthas entered the city, thousands upon thousands of the citizens came out to behold the sight. The well-adorned squares and streets, with crowd swelling at each moment looked beautiful like the ocean swelling at the rise of the moon. The large mansions that stood on the street-sides, decked with every ornament and full of ladies, seemed to shake, O Bharata, with their weight. With soft and modest voices they uttered the praises of Yudhishthira, of Bhima and Arjuna, and of the two sons of Madri. And they said, 'Worthy of all praise art thou. O blessed princess of Panchala, that waitest by the side of those foremost of men even like Gautami by the side of the (seven) Rishis. Thy acts and vows have borne their fruits, O lady!' In this strain, O monarch, the ladies praised the princess Krishna. In consequence of those praises, O Bharata, and their speeches with one another, and the shouts of joy (uttered by the men' ), the city became filled with a loud uproar. Having passed through the streets with such behaviour as befitted him, [Yudhishthira]] then entered the beautiful palace (of the Kurus) adorned with every ornament. The people belonging to the city and the provinces, approaching the palace, uttered speeches that were agreeable to his ears, 'By good luck, O foremost of kings, thou hast vanquished thy enemies, O slayer of foes! By good luck, thou hast recovered thy kingdom through virtue and prowess. Be, O foremost of kings, our monarch for a hundred years, and protect thy subjects virtuously like Indra protecting the denizens of heaven.'

I have highlighted some key words - City, Palace, Street, Palace of Kuru. Indra protecting the denizens

This shows a well developed Urban habitation and Indra is protecting it. We need to identify it. Aryans were not Urban people. They were not having cities and palaces. This description fits to the habitation of Nagavanshis who gave name to Nagar.

[DrRajpalSingh]

Burdakji,

Good idea to find out further evidences to make out clear view about the location of the scene described.

One perplexing line in the quote : ''In this strain, O monarch, the ladies praised the princess Krishna. ''

Who is this princess Krishna ?

Regards,

[DrRajpalSingh]

I have truncated your text because of one particular piece of information namely, location of Sarasvati, placing it in between Drsadvati and Apaya (Kurukshetra). Interesting indeed -

" ... In the Rgvedic period, in the territory of the Drsadvati, sarasvati and Apaya, later known as Kurukshetra, on account of the association of the Kurus, the Bharata kings are said to have kindled the sacred fire.'' {Rigveda, III.23}."

Friend,

I will try to reconcile the statement after making further attempt whether Rigveda referred Drsadvati is rightly identified as the Present Ghaggar or does it refer to the old Yamuna as identified by archaeologists flowing towards Mitathal (an old cite near Bhiwani explored and excavated partially by Dr. Suraj Bhan former Head of History Department, K U University).

If the latter identification as serialized by Buddha Prakash in the above quotation and supported by Dr. Suraj Bhan is accepted then the location is okay. If some other yard stick is applied to reject it then the 'current' prevalent S D A identification. After going through relevant researches I will be in a position to come back to the topic.

In the meantime, other suggestions/discussion on the issues raised regarding location of the Devaloka of Rigaveda/Puranas and Pitrloka of Avesta, which was one and the same in remote past, are invited.

If some more clarifications pour out during the discussion that would further add to our knowledge about this very significant historical aspect of great importance.

Thanks and regards

[DrRajpalSingh]

Dr. Singh, you have provided good information and covered a lot of ground so far so naturally there are questions. While the case made for location of Uttarakuru is impressive, I do not think it is conclusive. First natural question has to be with time frame. In all the links that you have provided so far, date or timeframe is missing. That is very important.

For instance, if you say that these "Aryans" came from outside, then do you agree with current theory of circa 1200 BC or are you talking about earlier times. Since you cited Purans as one of the evidence, it may be important to take that view regarding that. Current view of various tribes is best summed in following url:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F...Kuru_tribe.JPG

This deals with arriving at Kuru tribes. I arrive to our current date using this method.

My understanding is that there are 40 generations of Puru/Bharat tribe followed by Kuru before we finally come to Kauravas as we know it. If you take 3 generations in a century using present calendar (giving each person about 33 years of life expectancy), then 40 generations will provide around 1200 years so moving into 3rd millennium BC
for the start of this line of history (I am using 1000 BC as the base year of current Mahabharat war). Do you place Uttarakurus in this time frame or some other time-frame, like before, after or during. If they arrived earlier than say Puru/Bharat times, say around 2500 BC and they 'invaded' then who did they invade as Harappans were not really in decline at this. If you place them later then where do you place them in the above geneology, if you think that makes sense at all. We can discard my speculation if all of above is nonsense. Dr Bhagwan Singh, who I quoted earlier in reference to Dr Witzel and the conference at the India Internal center, claims in his book, that both Vedic believers and non-vedic socities were living at the same place. Do uttarkurus have a prior time frame than Harappan timeframe?

There is an alternative location provided for uttarakurus by Dr. Witzel again. I quote from his paper which can be found on internet:

" Towards the end of the Vedic period, Kashmir indeed seems to appear in the texts: it may be indicated by the name Uttara-Madra, which occurs in the later part of AB 8.14 in a list of Vedic kingdoms and the titles of their kings. The country mentioned along with it, UttaraKuru, should, however, be sought in Himachal Pradesh, for example in an area including the Kulu Valley, the ancient Kulūa. Indeed, Madra was still known, even to the later Råjataranginīs, as the land immediately south of Kashmir."

I am also curious about the 1000 years Dev-Daitya war, where was this fought and who are the people being talked about in it?

Friend,

Welcome comments and contribution to discussion for which you deserve thanks.

Every point posted by me is open for scrutiny using historical research tools for further improvement as I do not claim finality on this very serious issue being a hot bed of discussion for over hundred years among the scholars.

Kindly point out any specific discrepancy in the Identification of the Uttarkuru region in my post under reference. Your reference to advent of Kurus in India i.e. Dakshin Kuru region is a later day happening than to elucidated in our earlier discussion. Kindly re-read the earlier posts and then share with us your opinion on this point please.

We have to properly understand the historical process which resulted in Deva-Asura battles and consequent migration of Devas/pitras/Asuras in various directions.

Friend it is emerging from the researches on the issue that 'Aryans' did not move in one lot from Devaloka/Pitrloka and scatter in various parts of the Asian and European countries in one go.

Their migration resulted on account of fight between two groups for supremacy in their ancient location known as Devasura battle which is said to be a long drawn affair.
But before jumping to deciding the chronology of various waves that entered from time to time into India from Central Asia including the Kurus, first we have to accept the fundamental identification of the ancient abode of the Aryans, Devas and Asuras, as Central Asia or to reject it with the help of sources in a convincing way ? We are still waiting for comments of many more scholars on the issue and hope to hear from them soon.

If Central Asia is accepted by us all, only then we could move further to take up discussion of other aspects as raised in your very good post !



Till then, bye !

[DrRajpalSingh]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F...Kuru_tribe.JPG

Rao Sahib,

This very link posted by you makes my identification of Uttarkuru further clear and contains details about later Indian Kurus also .

Thanks.

[DrRajpalSingh]

The forces of rigidity and intransigence always offer stubborn resistance against multiplicity of outlooks, which steer clear of dogmas and well entrenched myths in the minds of people on one pretext or the other. under the present thread title, an humble and tentative attempt has been made so far to determine the old abode of the 'Aryans' i.e. Devloka-Pitrloka.

Now we turn to the people about whom references have been made in Rigveda-Puranas and Avesta and other ancient sources inhabiting the ancient abode of the people who later on were designated as Indo-Aryans, Indo-Iranians and Indo-Europeans.

According to the Bhagavata Purana --III, 10, 27-28, Devasarga (Daivic creation) with its eight fold division comprised, 1. Devas, 2. Pitrah, 3. Asuras, 4. Gandharvas and Apsaras, 5. Yaksas and Raksasas, 6. Siddhas, Charanas and Vidyadharas, 7. Bhutas, Pretas and Pisachas, and; 8. Kinnaras, Kimpurusas and Aswamukhas.

Over these people living in the abode of gods, ruled kings who have been designated as gods and whose names have been stated in various treatises authored in the ancient times.

Historians have tried to identify these gods and people and tried to arrive at certain conclusions about the history of the region starting from the times of FLOOD as mentioned in Biblical, Chaldean, Indian and Iranian traditions with the help of archaeology, which has turned many accepted facts into myths and many a myth into a fact of history. By now, many sites have been excavated and confirmation of the Flood myth as an historical fact has been confirmed.

To understand the story of Devasura Battle we have to first agree that the people inhabiting the Devalok-Pitrloka region continued to use their original language in somewhat modified scale at the later stage of their lives even after their migration to outside regions and had been designated as 'Aryan' on the basis of the language they used to speak and write. So the designation 'Arya' carried no racial reference initially but referred to only the linguistic affinity of the people which comprised so many groups and subgroups as identified by means of study of different books of the ancient period by the researchers.

For a proper understanding of the migration of these people from Devaloka-Pitraloka to other regions/ places a study of these peoples fight among various groups for supremacy known as 'Devasura Yudha' has to be identified in all its dimensions.

[DrRajpalSingh]

IDENTIFICATION OF THE EIGHT GROUPS OF ' Devaloka' PEOPLE:2

4. Gandharvas and Apsaras which have been identified as closely connected with the Devas as their minstrels and dancers respectively. The gandharvas seem apart from being divine minstrels to have been a powerful group of people as they are said to have in the later part of history ruled over some part of India. When they left Devloka and started to live in modern day Gandhara region they came to be known as Gandharas or the people from Gandhara situated on both sides of the river Indus.

5. Yaksas and Raksasas people:

If we go through the contents of MBT Shantiparva Book XII, Chapter 39 we find who the Raksasas were as is depicted through the dialogues of the Brahmanas and ultimately killing the person who did not belong to their creed and ideology for uttering some unpleasant words to Yudhistra:

" 'Then all those Brahmanas, O king, loudly said, 'These are not our words. Prosperity to thee, O monarch!' Those high-souled persons, conversant with the Vedas, with understanding rendered clear by penances, then penetrated the disguise of the speaker by means of their spiritual sight.' And they said, 'This is the Rakshasa Charvaka, the friend of Duryodhana. Having put on the garb of a religious mendicant, he seeks the good of his friend Duryodhana. We have not, O thou of righteous soul, said anything of the kind. Let this anxiety of thine be dispelled. Let prosperity attend upon thee with thy brothers.'"Vaisampayana continued, 'These Brahmanas then, insensate with rage, uttered the sound Hun. Cleansed of all sins, they censured the sinful Rakshasa and slew him there (with that very sound). Consumed by the energy of those utterers of Brahma, Charvaka fell down dead, like a tree with all its sprouts blasted by the thunder of Indra. Duly worshipped, the Brahmanas went away, having gladdened the king with their benedictions. The royal son of Pandu also, with all his friends, felt great happiness."

This means the Raksasas were a separate category of the human beings, who have been included in the eight categories of the inhabitants of the Devaloka in the preceding post.

It is also learnt that Yakas were also a category of very powerful people with Kubera as their king.

Further, it also comes out that Ravana, the ruler of the Lanka was step brother of Kubera, this leads one to wonder if both the Yakas and Rakasas were kindred persons.

6. Siddhas, Charanas and Vidyadharas: Dr. D P. Misra has identified them on the basis of his study of various Puranas Sidhas as settled Aryans and Charanas as nomadic Aryanas and has also added the word of caution that their final identification remains elusive. He finds no definite clue to know for certainty about who the Vidyadharas were.

7. Bhutas, Pretas and Pisachas: were human beings who later came to be considered goblins or evil spirits. Pisachas must have been a group belonging to learned people because the language used by them is known as Pisachi which was once ranked among the literary Prakrits of India. Bhutas have been identified as ancestors of the Bhotas of Bhutan also.

8. Kinnaras, Kimpurusas and Aswamukhas:The kinnaras and aswamukhas are both said to have had horse-like mouths hence it is difficult to differentiate between the two. little is known about the Kimpirisas. Dr. Misra considers them as effeminate race of the people.

Comments of the scholars are welcome to improve the identification.

Thanks
.

[DrRajpalSingh]

IDENTIFICATION OF THE EIGHT GROUPS OF ' Devaloka' PEOPLE: 1

The discussion so far reveals that the population of the Devaloka was heterogenous and not homogenous even when it was the homeland of the Devas or Pitrah or the ancient most Aryas. But before proceeding further to analyse the cause of the battle, we shall try first to identify the first three groups of people i.e. 1. Devas, 2. Pitrah, and, 3. Asuras of Devaloka,who indulged in the long drawn battles known as Devasura Yudha in the annals of ancient history and literature.

Devas have been fully described in indian tradition and it seems the Indian Devas and Iranian Pitrah both words are used interchangeably.

The Avesta describes 'Pitrah,' equivalent to gods of Indian tradition, as ancestors or originators of the Iranian-Aryans, who lived with the Devas in the Devaloka are referred to as Pitrah. The rulers of the Devaloka are known in Indian tradition as Devas, and according to Amarkosa, Asuras are designated as 'Purva-devahs.' Mahabharata also describes Devas and Asuras as brothers. Hence the three words designating three groups of people become one bigger group.

This identification needs further illumination, therefore, cooperation of the scholars is requested.

Thanks

[lrburdak]

Burdakji,

Good idea to find out further evidences to make out clear view about the location of the scene described.

One perplexing line in the quote : ''In this strain, O monarch, the ladies praised the princess Krishna. ''

Who is this princess Krishna ?

Regards,

Rajpalji

If you go further in this chapter you find Charvaka opposing Pandavas. We also find here in this chapter Dhaumya Rishi. Dhaumya was Preceptor of the Pandavas, who accompanied them during their exile to the Kurujangala forest, singing Sama hymns addressed to Yama, Lord of Death. It was located between the Saraswati and Yamuna rivers, and forms the majority of what is now the modern state of Haryana. Indraprastha, now Delhi, was its capital.

In the epic times (final centuries BC), the region between the triangle of Thaneshwar, Hissar and Hastinapur was distinguished by three different names:

(1) Kuru-Jangala equal to Rohtak, Hansi, Hissar

(2) Kuru-rashtra proper between the Ganga and Yamuna with its capital at Hastinapura and

(3) the Kuru-kshetra comprising Thaneshwar, Kaithal and Karnal.

This was the western part of Kuru. It was filled with forests like Khandava (eastern Hariyana), Rohitaka (Rohtak) and numerous other bush-lands. King Dhritarashtra gave this land to Yudhisthira to end the rivalry between the Pandavas and Kauravas. Yudhisthira developed the waste-land into a prosperous country to the envy of the Kauravas. His brother Arjuna, with the aid of Krishna, cleared the Khandava Forest, after the destruction and re-habitation of the settlements of Nagas, Danavas and Rakshasas who dwelled in those regions. Mayasura was the chief architect of the constructions of the new kingdom, such as the royal court of Yudhisthira at Indraprastha.

[DrRajpalSingh]

Rajpalji

If you go further in this chapter you find Charvaka opposing Pandavas. We also find here in this chapter Dhaumya Rishi. Dhaumya was Preceptor of the Pandavas, who accompanied them during their exile to the Kurujangala forest, singing Sama hymns addressed to Yama, Lord of Death. It was located between the Saraswati and Yamuna rivers, and forms the majority of what is now the modern state of Haryana. Indraprastha, now Delhi, was its capital.

In the epic times (final centuries BC), the region between the triangle of Thaneshwar, Hissar and Hastinapur was distinguished by three different names:

(1) Kuru-Jangala equal to Rohtak, Hansi, Hissar

(2) Kuru-rashtra proper between the Ganga and Yamuna with its capital at Hastinapura and

(3) the Kuru-kshetra comprising Thaneshwar, Kaithal and Karnal.

This was the western part of Kuru. It was filled with forests like Khandava (eastern Hariyana), Rohitaka (Rohtak) and numerous other bush-lands. King Dhritarashtra gave this land to Yudhisthira to end the rivalry between the Pandavas and Kauravas. Yudhisthira developed the waste-land into a prosperous country to the envy of the Kauravas. His brother Arjuna, with the aid of Krishna, cleared the Khandava Forest, after the destruction and re-habitation of the settlements of Nagas, Danavas and Rakshasas who dwelled in those regions. Mayasura was the chief architect of the constructions of the new kingdom, such as the royal court of Yudhisthira at Indraprastha.

Burdakji,

Thanks for providing some very important sign posts to identify various elements involved in the Mahabharata battle [which took place after a gap of considerable time after the Devasura Battle], like:

1. groups of people like Danavas, Rakshasas , Nagas etc.
2. personages Yama, Yudhistra, Arjuna, Charvak, Mayasura, Dharitrashtra etc.
3. regions occupied by Kurus at that time, and
4. The chronology for the epic times (final centuries BC ?).

However, entry of Nagas, and prayer to Yama seem to me two most important issues [which could perhaps shed further light on Devasura Battle] to be taken up for further discussion before we take up the critical scrutiny of all the issues involved.

Who really Yama is who is being described as the god of death and who are the Nagas, the snake worshippers, or some other people; what was their connexion with the Devas etc needs thorough probing ?

Kindly keep sharing information on any of the points emerging during the course of discussion.

Thanks.

[DrRajpalSingh]

In some ancient texts it is mentioned that Manu and Yama were two sons of Vaisvastha and hence brothers. It also comes to knowledge that Indra after defeating the armies of black Dasyus granted land to Manu. This means he became ruler over the region conquered by the Indra.

Now the question arises whether Yama remained an ordinary citizen or became ruler.

Satapatha Brahmana comes to our aid to clarify this question. "Yama, the son of Vivasvata has been called a king. The Pitras are his subjects." --[13/4/3/6]

This averment is also verified by the Vayu Purana in the words: "Yama, the son of Vivasvata, was crowned to rule over the kingdom of the Pitrs."

The above quotes confirm that like his brother Manu, Yama was a ruler.

Under the circumstances, Yama becomes a human being and as such he has been described in the Iranian tradition as contained in their literature making part of the Avesta with a minor difference of spelling where he has been spelled as 'Yima' and his realm has been identified as Pitrloka as is case with the Indian tradition.

If this postulation is accepted, then we can easily understand how a royal person ruling over the ancestors of the Iranian Aryans hamlet/region in Central Asia known as Pitralok, in the latter times came to be associated with the lordship of Death, in whose praise the Pandava's preceptor Dhaumya sang Sama hymns [addressed to Yama, Lord of Death as quoted from Mahabharata by Shri L R Burdak. ]

Comments of the readers are invited on this identification of Manu and Yama.

[narenderkharb]

Pitras are just ancesstors both devas and Asuras ..Bhoot Paret Pisachas were/are nothing ..Yama may be a historical figure but his yamloka with Pret pisachas and bhoots are just mythical stories.

[narenderkharb]

Dr Saheb



After a good start ,we have suddenly lost our focus. Are you sure we have finally settled Abode of Aryans controversy?



If you agree with Burdak Saheb Post regarding Kuru Jangal Kurukshetra than N Rao has a genuine question regarding time frame for arrival of Kurus and its impact on Harappan civilization that you must address.



Also you seems to have an ambiguity in your views regarding kurulands.



May I request you like Ravi ji to post your own critical views along with the quoted refernces.

[narenderkharb]

There is an alternative location provided for uttarakurus by Dr. Witzel again. I quote from his paper which can be found on internet:

" Towards the end of the Vedic period, Kashmir indeed seems to appear in the texts: it may be indicated by the name Uttara-Madra, which occurs in the later part of AB 8.14 in a list of Vedic kingdoms and the titles of their kings. The country mentioned along with it, UttaraKuru, should, however, be sought in Himachal Pradesh, for example in an area including the Kulu Valley, the ancient Kulūa. Indeed, Madra was still known, even to the later Råjataranginīs, as the land immediately south of Kashmir."

We have to see his paper but he seems to have errored here as this will be in direct contravention of Aittreya Brahmana location north of Himalayas along with other ancient records attesting same.

Even Rajtarangani mention Uttrakuru lands north of kashmere not south of it,in expeditions of Lalitaditaya .

If we see critically Witzel has correlated to two unrelated things .Madra with Uttrakuru locations.Utrrakuru and uttramadra were nearby lands not madra and uttrakuru .So we can discard this secondary observation that contradicts primary data available in A.B. And other sources.

Wiki has a good article on location of Uttrakuru .

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

[narenderkharb]

An interesting observation though a digression is...

Both Herodotus and Puranas seems to agree with life style of people of Uttrakuru .

Herodotus calls these lands ..land of MessaGetae and Ancient texts refer it as lands of Devas /Aryas Uttrakuru./Uttramadra etc.

Interesting observation is both agree on existence of freelove in society.

Puranas dignifying it as allowed by Rishis and Gods and Herodotus taking opposite view.

There is a mention of Saitri rajaya......Is it for kingdom of Tomyris??? may be .....may be not.

[lrburdak]

Burdakji,

.... However, entry of Nagas, and prayer to Yama seem to me two most important issues [which could perhaps shed further light on Devasura Battle] to be taken up for further discussion before we take up the critical scrutiny of all the issues involved. Who really Yama is who is being described as the god of death and who are the Nagas, the snake worshippers, or some other people; what was their connexion with the Devas etc needs thorough probing ?

Regarding Yama we have info on Wikipedia at - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yama

In Hinduism, Yama or Yamarāja is the god of death, belonging to an early stratum of Vedic mythology. In the Vedas, Yama is said to have been the first mortal who died. By virtue of precedence, he became the ruler of the departed.

Yama is the lokapala ("Guardian of the Directions") of the south. Three hymns (10, 14, and 35) in the 10th book of the Rig Veda are addressed to him.

He was sometimes the son of Surya, the sun god & Usha, and sometimes the son of Vivasvat & Saranya. In Sanskrit, Yama's name can be interpreted to mean "twin", and in some myths, he is paired with a twin sister Yami or Yamuna. In these myths, they are the first pair of humans in the world.

It also provides info about Yama's abode.

If we take corrupted form of Yama to be Jama then we have a Jat clan named - [Wiki]Jama[/Wiki].

Jam (जाम) Jama (जम) is a [Wiki] Muslim Jat clan [/Wiki] found in Pakistan. Jam/Jamhot clan is found in Afghanistan.[An Inquiry Into the Ethnography of Afghanistan By H. W. Bellew, The Oriental University Institute, Woking, 1891, p.136,181 ]

Jam (Urdu: جام) means Sardar, Nawab or King. It is not a tribe, but the title given to the leading Royal family of a Jamot tribe or state. The title of Jam is the Sindhi equivalent for Chaudhari.[A glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province By H.A. Rose Vol II/B , p.168]

Regarding Nagavanshi people we have lot of historical info on Jatland Wiki . We have history of Jats very intimately connected with them, which may bee seen here - [Wiki]Nagavansh[/Wiki]

For Danavas, Rakshasas, Bhutas, Pishachas we do not have much info but I believe they were class of people.

[DrRajpalSingh]

Dr Saheb



After a good start ,we have suddenly lost our focus. Are you sure we have finally settled Abode of Aryans controversy?



If you agree with Burdak Saheb Post regarding Kuru Jangal Kurukshetra than N Rao has a genuine question regarding time frame for arrival of Kurus and its impact on Harappan civilization that you must address.



Also you seems to have an ambiguity in your views regarding kurulands.



May I request you like Ravi ji to post your own critical views along with the quoted refernces.

Friend,

Thanks for your comments. However, regarding reply to your last line first, the sources being quoted by me to advance my postulations carry my comments automatically. If some objections are raised or clarifications are sought on specific points I have always tried to reply them.

We have not lost sight of the target of identification of the forgotten abode of the Aryans. Moreover, till we reach the final stage of discussion, I think, all of us must keep the discussion open for betterment of the existing knowledge level of the topic being put here. That is important aspect because there is always scope of improvement if we are open to accept the well supported by sources findings. If anyone has some specific question/s that would be taken care of, this I can assure you, Kharb Sahib, Raviji and every participant.

None seems to have opposed the Central Asian Abode of the 'Aryans' so far. However, the discussion continues and suggestions for and against could emerge any time, so I think.

The overwhelming interest of the scholars leads one to hope that much penetrating comments and feed backs from all of us are coming in future to stimulate the research further.

Regards

[nrao]

It was to illustrate that Witzel may have error'd again. His earlier errors and wrong identification of peoples were rightly pointed out by Bhagwan Singh and this may be another one of those instances. However, it may be also wrong to project our current knowledge of geography when discussing this matter. When we say beyond mountains or Himalayas, does it really mean that you cross all the chains till there are no himh shikahs. I am not sure. I have been to Srinagar 3 times and I can tell you that after many hours of bus trip, when you reach the valley, it seems beyond Himalayas and it appears flat too for quite a while. Try that sometime in winters too.

We have to see his paper but he seems to have errored here as this will be in direct contravention of Aittreya Brahmana location north of Himalayas along with other ancient records attesting same.

Even Rajtarangani mention Uttrakuru lands north of kashmere not south of it,in expeditions of Lalitaditaya .

If we see critically Witzel has correlated to two unrelated things .Madra with Uttrakuru locations.Utrrakuru and uttramadra were nearby lands not madra and uttrakuru .So we can discard this secondary observation that contradicts primary data available in A.B. And other sources.

Wiki has a good article on location of Uttrakuru .

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

[nrao]

Rajpal ji, dates batiyeh! Reminds me of Kishore kumar song: ये क्या हुआ, कब हुआ, क्यो हुआ, कैसे हुआ ... blah blah....

Friend,

Thanks for your comments. However, regarding reply to your last line first, the sources being quoted by me to advance my postulations carry my comments automatically. If some objections are raised or clarifications are sought on specific points I have always tried to reply them.

We have not lost sight of the target of identification of the forgotten abode of the Aryans. Moreover, till we reach the final stage of discussion, I think, all of us must keep the discussion open for betterment of the existing knowledge level of the topic being put here. That is important aspect because there is always scope of improvement if we are open to accept the well supported by sources findings. If anyone has some specific question/s that would be taken care of, this I can assure you, Kharb Sahib, Raviji and every participant.

None seems to have opposed the Central Asian Abode of the 'Aryans' so far. However, the discussion continues and suggestions for and against could emerge any time, so I think.

The overwhelming interest of the scholars leads one to hope that much penetrating comments and feed backs from all of us are coming in future to stimulate the research further.

Regards