|
Post by Tautalos on Nov 9, 2005 8:47:50 GMT -5
Yes, but they mantain essential points in common. Only the ancient Baltic pagans have kept the fire-worshiping and similar Deities that are in common with vedic Indians and ancient iranians. Germanic traditions only had a few things in-common with indo-iranians, while other Europeans are so different, Not really. Concerning the fire issue, take a look at the importance of the Sacred Bonfire of the Fatherland, permanently kept alive by the Vestals, virgin priestesses of Vesta, the Roman Goddess of the Fire and the Household. In Rome, the household religion is crucial - it's the familiar religion of the familiar spirits, ancestors and protective Deities. In each household, there was a sacred bonfire, that could only be fed with sacred wood. Every newborn child was carried around the bonfire and on the tenth day, the father decided wether he accepted the child or not - in Aryan India, the period was of twelve days. The great sacred bonfire of the city was a reflex of that private, familiar, bonfire. In Greek equivalent to Vesta is Hestia. But that is not being discussed. Not necessarily. Also, in what concerns traditions, the Basques might have Indo-European influences as well. Nevertheless, the Indo-European essence is what defines the national Slavic identity. Also, the fact that the big changes that you referred, however influent, did not erase the common ancestry, this fact is to be kept in mind. Which are mostly of Indo-European origin. That's just another reason to enhance the Indo-European alliance - instead of one thing in common (polytheism) we have two things in common (polytheism and ethnic root).
|
|
|
Post by Tautalos on Nov 9, 2005 8:53:05 GMT -5
Well that person who wrote those articles is in minority. Of course he is in minority. That's why there is a need to widespread the idea. Also, I really doubt that the vast majority of Hindus would oppose to this ideal, if they are informed about it.
|
|
RUDRA
Full Member
Posts: 189
|
Post by RUDRA on Nov 10, 2005 15:42:26 GMT -5
(while the Greeks were alway influenced by the middle-east) From where exactly did you get that idea?. Greeks always had an middle-east connection, and plus they influenced the rest of middle-east later on. Greeks in their history came up with many new innovations, but in process they would have had borrowed ideas from many different people, to make something totally new(This iS true for every nation in the world). You act like the middle-eastern connection is totally bad thing, many good things came out of the middle-east, even civilization. you are totally right about this, I just saying that tolerating religious ideas and diversity isn't only found in indo-european traditions.
|
|
RUDRA
Full Member
Posts: 189
|
Post by RUDRA on Nov 10, 2005 16:15:18 GMT -5
Not really. Concerning the fire issue, take a look at the importance of the Sacred Bonfire of the Fatherland, permanently kept alive by the Vestals, virgin priestesses of Vesta, the Roman Goddess of the Fire and the Household. In Rome, the household religion is crucial - it's the familiar religion of the familiar spirits, ancestors and protective Deities. In each household, there was a sacred bonfire, that could only be fed with sacred wood. Every newborn child was carried around the bonfire and on the tenth day, the father decided wether he accepted the child or not - in Aryan India, the period was of twelve days. The great sacred bonfire of the city was a reflex of that private, familiar, bonfire. In Greek equivalent to Vesta is Hestia. Ok fire for Vestal virigns (greek/roman) and bonfire(northern european) are survival of indo-european traditions. But for the vedic indians, iranians, and baltic peoples have an fire obsession. Not so much the romans who let a few virigns take care of it, and other europeans only lit bonfire on special occucaions, but not every day. The Basques were isolated from other europeans for long-time, so I doubt it, plus the religion of christ also came very late to them. Slavic national identity, lanuage, and few other things are all that remain. Most their culture and religion was/is non indo-european. Did not change their anicent origins, but they became a new peoples all when they mixed with the anicent europeans. Only slavs and baltic people have some what of Indo-European genetic connection. While the rest of the europeans are mostly anient europeans who adopted a new Indo-European lanuage. Modern indians are not vedic peoples, we are today hindus, jains, buddists and sikhs. polytheism is not the only things that binds together some of these religions. But its a common religious philosophy: moksa, dhrama, karma, avatar, and recarnation(and so forth). If an alliance would be struck, then these things would have to be worked out.
|
|
RUDRA
Full Member
Posts: 189
|
Post by RUDRA on Nov 10, 2005 16:24:09 GMT -5
Well that person who wrote those articles is in minority. Of course he is in minority. That's why there is a need to widespread the idea. Also, I really doubt that the vast majority of Hindus would oppose to this ideal, if they are informed about it. I really don't oppose an alliance either, but I am being realistic here. For long term relation and common understand you need more than just common origin, and worship for gods/goddesses.
|
|
|
Post by Tautalos on Nov 10, 2005 22:23:47 GMT -5
Not really. Concerning the fire issue, take a look at the importance of the Sacred Bonfire of the Fatherland, permanently kept alive by the Vestals, virgin priestesses of Vesta, the Roman Goddess of the Fire and the Household. In Rome, the household religion is crucial - it's the familiar religion of the familiar spirits, ancestors and protective Deities. In each household, there was a sacred bonfire, that could only be fed with sacred wood. Every newborn child was carried around the bonfire and on the tenth day, the father decided wether he accepted the child or not - in Aryan India, the period was of twelve days. The great sacred bonfire of the city was a reflex of that private, familiar, bonfire. In Greek equivalent to Vesta is Hestia. Ok fire for Vestal virigns (greek/roman) and bonfire(northern european) are survival of indo-european traditions. But for the vedic indians, iranians, and baltic peoples have an fire obsession. Not so much the romans who let a few virigns take care of it, Those «few virgins» were sacred virgins. If they violated their castity, they would be put to death. Their ritual was crucial in ancient Rome; also, the religion of the householf cannot be forgotten in the Roman spirituality. Read «The Ancient City», written by Cumont, and see the common points between Vedic and Roman ritual. The sacred fire of the city ought to be lighten up every day throughout the year. That's why their language is completely different from their neighbours. Indeed, the difference between Basques and Indo-Europeans is a gap, even in what concerns the distance between Basques and Castillans, their closest neighbours. Actually, the essence of their culture, religion and language is indeed Indo-European. They remained essentially Indo-European. Moreover, the most purely Indo-European language alive is not an Indian one, but the Lithuanian (from the Baltic). That's not solidly defined yet. Actually, a language cannot widespread just by comercial contacts or aristocracies. In those times, when there was neither television, nor airplane, nor radio, no language could be widespreaded without a significant movement of populations. That's just another reason to enhance the Indo-European alliance - instead of one thing in common (polytheism) we have two things in common (polytheism and ethnic root). I can't see why would there be a need to agree about those issues in order to form a political-ethnic-spiritual alliance.
|
|
RUDRA
Full Member
Posts: 189
|
Post by RUDRA on Nov 14, 2005 20:54:51 GMT -5
Those «few virgins» were sacred virgins. If they violated their castity, they would be put to death. Their ritual was crucial in ancient Rome; also, the religion of the householf cannot be forgotten in the Roman spirituality. Read «The Ancient City», written by Cumont, and see the common points between Vedic and Roman ritual. vestal virgins were there for the political/religious purpose of the city state. I am talking about the household fire and fire being in many important ceremonies, like in the indo-irani religious traditions. I agree on that, but I was talking about the Bonefire which were only used on rare & special occucations(holidays). Basque traditions are very similar to other europeans. Just Like the irish had a day for the playing of the games, so did the Basque. They both did similar things in the games, like weight-lifting challenges. They also believed in mythological creatures like were-wolves, serpect dragons, imps, and giants. Their goddess Mari and their fire-snake god are found in many central and eastern europe traditions too. There is most likely even more, but that's all I know of. YOu are right, the essence of their culture, religion and language is indeed Indo-European, still compair modern finn-Uralic peoples to slavs to see their vast non-Indo-European major influence is even greater. The Baltic peoples are people who have kept the most indo-european tradations alive, even I pointed it out before. So it no surpise they kept most in their language also. But there tons of north indian languages that are not studied because the so isolated and little known. my guess is their many languages like the kalash, pahari, kashimri, and dardi which would have been isolated from outside influences for a long time, and remained purely Indo-European. You are right, we still don't known 100%, where these indo-europeans came from. though most europeans still have mostly pre-indo-european blood. As for western europeans,(British, Celts, french, dutch, and iberians) they are still mostly 100% ancient non-indo-eurupean peoples who have adapted a new language, and everybody know this for sure now.
|
|
RUDRA
Full Member
Posts: 189
|
Post by RUDRA on Nov 14, 2005 20:59:28 GMT -5
Modern indians are not vedic peoples, we are today hindus, jains, buddists and sikhs. polytheism is not the only things that binds together some of these religions. But its a common religious philosophy: moksa, dhrama, karma, avatar, and recarnation(and so forth). If an alliance would be struck, then these things would have to be worked out. I can't see why would there be a need to agree about those issues in order to form a political-ethnic-spiritual alliance. For a political allience, you don't need much, only a common enemy, that being islamic extremism and christian missioners(this secound crisis, modern western pagans don't face much as indian peoples today).Even Jews can make some kind of temporary alliance with hindus too. A jew and a euro-pagan would have the same chances, no discrimination is there between the two for hindus. A common ethnic origin, well this one will be throw out of the window the quickest. To indians, european culture is foreign(christian or pagan), even though british culure is well known. Culturally(mainly because of islam) indians feel more closer to middle-eastern world-view than they do to an european pagan one. As for a long lasting spiritual connection, you need to agree on or find similarities in some of these religious philosophies, because without it, we would only have a temporary allience. And both groups would go their own ways afterwards. You should remember, There is a spiritual understanding, a similar religious world between lets say a japanese Zen buddhist and lingayat hindu living in bangalore. The same can't be said for surviving european traditions and modern hinduism today.
|
|
RUDRA
Full Member
Posts: 189
|
Post by RUDRA on Nov 14, 2005 21:18:28 GMT -5
The biggest problem I have with this indo-European union, is that in the process many of the non-indo-european traditions and contributions (IN EUROPE, INDIA AND the MIDDLE-EAST) gets forgotten or gets swept underneath the rug
|
|
geo
Full Member
hellene
Posts: 135
|
Post by geo on Nov 15, 2005 10:58:13 GMT -5
From where exactly did you get that idea?. Greeks always had an middle-east connection, and plus they influenced the rest of middle-east later on. Greeks in their history came up with many new innovations, but in process they would have had borrowed ideas from many different people, to make something totally new(This iS true for every nation in the world) You make a short description of the general exchange mechanisms that exist between civilizations. I didn't ask for that. I asked from where did you get the idea that the Greeks were always influenced by the middle-east, in matters of religion specifically: in the paragraph i quoted, you refer to a natural phenomenon, the celts (obviously meaning the irish celts) worshiping deities from britain and france (largely inhabited also by celts), and then you refer to the greeks and middle-east in the same manner. One would expect to find the greeks worshipping deities from the middle-east, no? The Celts I believe worship mainly ancient Deities from Britain and France, and not of Indo-European origins. Besides the Baltic pagans, most other Indo-European started worshiping ancient european Deities(while the Greeks were alway influenced by the middle-east) As for a long lasting spiritual connection, you need to agree on or find similarities in some of these religious philosophies, because without it, we would only have a temporary allience. And both groups would go their own ways afterwards. You should remember, There is a spiritual understanding, a similar religious world between lets say a japanese Zen buddhist and lingayat hindu living in bangalore. The same can't be said for surviving european traditions and modern hinduism today. I agree. From my point i cannot see any "long lasting spiritual connection" between me and a hindu, other than whatever 'connections' are dictated by general awareness of polytheistic religions (an insight that may vary from man to man) or sympathy for another polytheistic religion that's being fought by the known monotheisms etc. Borrowing your words, my "long lasting spiritual connection" is with the european native cultures. Something more- i see a lot of writing being done about indoeuropeans, in the above text you proceeded to say that the celts did not worsip indoeuropean deities. This kind of talk is based on nothing, there is absolutely no archaeological or mythological clue to show that some part of the european religious total was 'inserted' or 'imported' on previous religious systems from india. There is no arcaeological or mythological clue of the very existence of 'indoeuropeans' as the kind of homogenous civilizational total that could influence the whole european continent.
|
|
RUDRA
Full Member
Posts: 189
|
Post by RUDRA on Nov 15, 2005 14:45:51 GMT -5
For the Greeks the bulk of their influence comes from older people of the same region, like Minoans and others. what I meant to SAY WAS they have some middle-eastern influence in religion and culture. Forgive me, but I don't know much about Greek culture and history. But I have heard goddess Hecate having an eastern origin, plus Heracles has many similarities with Gilgamesh. Dionysus is another mysterious god, who could have eastern origin. Plus mythical creatures like the Chimera, Sphinx, griffin, and Apis all have a middle-eastern origins, and they were found in anicent greek beliefs.
unity is made on some similarities both groups shared together. So if ancient indo-europeans were already worlds apart in many religious beliefs among each other, then there is no and was never this common link, and there is nothing built on.
ALSO there is absolutely no archaeological or mythological evidences to show that ancient Deities from Britain and France are mostly of Indo-European origins, or any other origins. But my point is that since western europe was the last place to accept an Indo-European influence, shouldn't they have the weakest ties, and the most older religious tradition intact. Plus their is no evidences that indo-europeans completely wiped out or supplanted the existences of older-europeans religions. The ancient britians were an advanced peoples making stone-henge's and etc, why wouldn't the Celtic take in some of there solar worship, astronomical priesthood, and etc.
|
|
geo
Full Member
hellene
Posts: 135
|
Post by geo on Nov 16, 2005 7:51:42 GMT -5
For the Greeks the bulk of their influence comes from older people of the same region, like Minoans and others. Minoans were greeks. Gramiki b is found to be a greek dialect. But I have heard goddess Hecate having an eastern origin, plus Heracles has many similarities with Gilgamesh. Dionysus is another mysterious god, who could have eastern origin Hecate is perfectly greek. She is the greek concept of the three-faced goddess (trinity) that is also met elsewhere in europe (see goddess Brigit of the celts). It's ridiculus ro say that the son of zeus is of middle-eastern origin because he has similarities with gilgamesh. The god of wine is perfectly greek too, perfectly in agreement with the greek psyche and mythos. Plus mythical creatures like the Chimera, Sphinx, griffin, and Apis all have a middle-eastern origins, and they were found in anicent greek beliefs. Chimaira was daughter of tyfonas and echidna and mother of sphinx. She is found in Iliad, she is found in Theogony, therefore she's out of greek mythos. The grypes were more used as decorative signs rather than divine beings. Appis is the egyptian version of the worship of bull as a symbol of fertility, something that is found literally wherever bulls existed. It's perfectly natural that some elements were held in various levels of similarity with the neighbouring civilizations of scythia and egypt (east and south) as well as the etruscans on the west. Worshipping of deities from the middle-east (specifically) is a totally different thing though. The Hellenic, as well as many other polytheistic religions, had a 'bright' side and a 'dark' side in total balance. The fact that a large part of modern thinking (which is basicaly christian thinking) directs its research towards dividing the two sides, accepting a priori the 'bright' side as greek while recognizing all types of eastern influences on the 'dark', this fact has to do exclusively with the researchers' psychosynthesis and not with the hellenic religion itself. As for the other matters, i think you need to be more specific in your writing.
|
|
|
Post by Tautalos on Nov 16, 2005 19:16:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by greatness on Nov 16, 2005 20:02:56 GMT -5
It is high time for the most civilized well mannered and good,open hearted races of the earth (South Europeans,Shia Persians and Indians)to get together again and go back to their original root. Yes very ture. If we all went back to our roots we's be better off.
|
|
|
Post by Tautalos on Nov 18, 2005 6:21:03 GMT -5
Those «few virgins» were sacred virgins. If they violated their castity, they would be put to death. Their ritual was crucial in ancient Rome; also, the religion of the householf cannot be forgotten in the Roman spirituality. Read «The Ancient City», written by Cumont, and see the common points between Vedic and Roman ritual. That means that the Aryan religious root was efective not only on a familiar level, but also on a national level. I spoke about that as well. Not greater - abundant, but of secondary importance. The Kalash? Aren't they a pagan folk that dwells in a part of Pakistan? No, that is not known for sure. Nobody knows which is the «Indo-European gene», so to speak. Some theories point to a gene that is dominant in Ukraine, or in Poland. Still, it is not well known yet.
|
|