The Collision that Formed India: What genetics reveals about Indian origins

[Sandeep0159]

Vsdoc guy claimed Hindus got corrupted due to mixing and we are Persian(zoorastrian) descendants and hence they are racially superior while we are stinky sanghis

That's why I refuted his comments and he was banned at the other forum for his baseless claims.
On one hand he claims that the Indo-Aryans mixed with locals while Parsis remained unmixed hence they are racially superior.
And on the other hand he posted an article(the one above) which clearly mentions that the y-DNA of Brahmins remained unaltered mostly due to strict community endogamy which RUBBISHES his previous claim.
Basically he is refuting his own claims.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Vsdoc guy claimed Hindus got corrupted due to mixing and we are Persian(zoorastrian) descendants and hence they are racially superior while we are stinky sanghis

This theory of migration into India from Iran has been completely debunked by nearly every historian. cotton was Indian crop and this used to be exported all over the world. Indians taught Iranians farming.

 

[Sandeep0159]

This theory of migration into India from Iran has been completely debunked by nearly every historian. cotton was Indian crop and this used to be exported all over the world. Indians taught Iranians farming.

Sir, is there any concept which is similar to our 'Pravara' within the Zoroastrian community?

 

[vsdoc]

May I remind the membership here that this is not d f i.

And vsdoc, favourite pan defence world hate figure that he is, is not the topic of discussion.

Thanks.

@Sandeep0159 Brahmin endogamy in pockets is irrefutable.

What is also irrefutable is that Brahmins make up less than 2% of world Hindus.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in that statement.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Sandeep0159]

May I remind the membership here that this is not d f i.

And vsdoc, favourite pan defence world hate figure that he is, is not the topic of discussion.

Thanks.

@Sandeep0159 Brahmin endogamy in pockets is irrefutable.

What is also irrefutable is that Brahmins make up less than 2% of world Hindus.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in that statement.

Cheers, Doc

So what? Also it is an equally irrefutable fact that all those seers who contributed to Vedic liturgy were Brahmins and it is the Brahmins who still carry forward the Vedic heritage passed onto them by their ancestors, will do the same without hesitation for the next 10000 years.
So one can't remove the Brahmins out of the equation just because they make up a lesser bunch. To be precise, the research regarding the origins of R1 haplogroup which is essential to decode the Indo-Europeans' relation with Vedic people is incomplete without autochtonous y-DNA study of Brahmins.

 

[vstol Jockey]

May I remind the membership here that this is not d f i.

And vsdoc, favourite pan defence world hate figure that he is, is not the topic of discussion.

Thanks.

@Sandeep0159 Brahmin endogamy in pockets is irrefutable.

What is also irrefutable is that Brahmins make up less than 2% of world Hindus.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in that statement.

Cheers, Doc

You are correct about Brahmins. We are just 5.5% of Indian population and about 2% of world hindu population. And ask any Brahmin, he will tell you that his roots are River Saraswati in Brahmvarsh which was situated between River saraswati, River Istravadi and river Yamuna. The present day Jaipur and Ajmer area was Brahmvasha.
People are completely wrong about Indus Valley civilization being older to Saraswati. Its the other way around. When british came to India, they saw only Indus as Saraswati had become extinct and all the excavations were called Indus Valley but now Rakhigarhi has shown that Saraswati river civilization was thriving much before Indus valley. Not even one of our Puranas or Vedas talk about Indus as center of civilisation. They all talk about River saraswati only. Indus is described as just one of the rivers.

 

[Sandeep0159]

You are correct about Brahmins. We are just 5.5% of Indian population and about 2% of world hindu population. And ask any Brahmin, he will tell you that his roots are River Saraswati in Brahmvarsh which was situated between River saraswati, River Istravadi and river Yamuna. The present day Jaipur and Ajmer area was Brahmvasha.
People are completely wrong about Indus Valley civilization being older to Saraswati. Its the other way around. When british came to India, they saw only Indus as Saraswati had become extinct and all the excavations were called Indus Valley but now Rakhigarhi has shown that Saraswati river civilization was thriving much before Indus valley. Not even one of our Puranas or Vedas talk about Indus as center of civilisation. They all talk about River saraswati only. Indus is described as just one of the rivers.

Not to forget the fact that there are more IVC sites along the Saraswati banks within India than along the Indus in Pakistan- the oldest (Bhirrana,HR) and largest (Rakhigarhi,HR) being in India, and not in Pakistan as erroneously concluded by the British. The Civilisation must be renamed as Saraswati Civilisation hereafter.

 

[Deathstar]

So what? Also it is an equally irrefutable fact that all those seers who contributed to Vedic liturgy were Brahmins and it is the Brahmins who still carry forward the Vedic heritage passed onto them by their ancestors, will do the same without hesitation for the next 10000 years.
So one can't remove the Brahmins out of the equation just because they make up a lesser bunch. To be precise, the research regarding the origins of R1 haplogroup which is essential to decode the Indo-Europeans' relation with Vedic people is incomplete without autochtonous y-DNA study of Brahmins.

Ironically Parsis number even less than Brahmins

 

[vsdoc]

So what? Also it is an equally irrefutable fact that all those seers who contributed to Vedic liturgy were Brahmins and it is the Brahmins who still carry forward the Vedic heritage passed onto them by their ancestors, will do the same without hesitation for the next 10000 years.
So one can't remove the Brahmins out of the equation just because they make up a lesser bunch. To be precise, the research regarding the origins of R1 haplogroup which is essential to decode the Indo-Europeans' relation with Vedic people is incomplete without autochtonous y-DNA study of Brahmins.

So what?

That was exactly the essence of my post elsewhere to which you and others took great umbrage.

And now you are agreeing.

It's not uncommon for me.

I say things in a way that triggers people.

But they come to exactly the same conclusion on their own or guided at a more remote instance.

Cheers, Doc

 

[vstol Jockey]

One of the biggest problems with what has been posted by @vsdoc is that OIT is what happened and not AIT. A river dries up down the source and not up the source. Same is true about population migration. if we believe ANI and ASI theory, we find that ASI have remained in large numbers within their native place while ANI has mixing. Does this not support OIT. How is it that people who came to India some 4k years back have disappeared completely or changed to a different group? How is that possible? The new worlds like US, NZ & Aus very inhabited by people from Europe and Europe still has sizeable population of the original settlers. Where are those Aryands who came to India and created ANI.
The story goes much farther back than 4k years. It goes back to 12-15k years. The first exodus out of Brahmvasha took place after the war between the grandson of Dhadhichi and Lord Varuna. This resulted in such damage that part of Btahmvarsha was made inhospitable for human beings. It was then that the Pushkar lake was formed to remove the radiation fallout of the weapons used in that war. The waters of Pushkar lake are the waters of saraswati river. Even Sambhar lake was fed by Saraswati. It was during the exodus out of brahmvarsha that people went to west to Iran and east towards Gangetic plains. My Gotra roots migrated in the first exodus to Gangetic plains and that is why Righi Bhardwaj made his Ashram at Prayagraj. The second exodus happened after another 3-4k years and this is the time of the great flood/deluge. The last happened during the times of Lord Parshurama when he decided to kill every Kshatriya above the age of 16.
India became BharatVarsha after that exodus. The people who inhabited Indus valley were the same people who migrated from Saraswati river due to the intense radiations from those wars. Can anyone explain to me why we have a desert between two major rivers? Has it happened anywhr wlse on earth? Why is is peculier to Rajasthan only?
The land was rendered unfurtile and bareft of any vegetation due to nuke radiation.

 

[Sandeep0159]

So what?

That was exactly the essence of my post elsewhere to which you and others took great umbrage.

And now you are agreeing.

It's not uncommon for me.

I say things in a way that triggers people.

But they come to exactly the same conclusion on their own or guided at a more remote instance.

Cheers, Doc

Sirji, this discussion started with you saying that the Indo-Aryans mixed with locals and hence were not ethnically superior to the rather homogenous Parsis i.e, Iranians. And u started this thread with an article which clearly states that the yDNA of Brahmins which they took as specimen, didn't change at all.

You are contradicting your own stance.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Not to forget the fact that there are more IVC sites along the Saraswati banks within India than along the Indus in Pakistan- the oldest (Bhirrana,HR) and largest (Rakhigarhi,HR) being in India, and not in Pakistan as erroneously concluded by the British. The Civilisation must be renamed as Saraswati Civilisation hereafter.

Exactly. Even I want the history corrected to give River Saraswati its due place in our History.

Ironically Parsis number even less than Brahmins

Parsis number less due to their extremely close bonding but Brahmins number less as they were ethnically cleansed by muslim and christian invaders to somehow scuttle Hindu Dharma. They wanted to kill Brahmins so that Sanatan Dharma dies.

 

[vsdoc]

Ironically Parsis number even less than Brahmins

Yes.

But look at Parsis against the world Persian population.

When you look at world Brahmins versus world Hindus.

The wholescale conversion of Persia was more rebellion of laiety against the emperor and priesthood than it was the Arab sword.

More on that later.

Cheers, Doc

 

[Sandeep0159]

One of the biggest problems with what has been posted by @vsdoc is that OIT is what happened and not AIT. A river dries up down the source and not up the source. Same is true about population migration. if we believe ANI and ASI theory, we find that ASI have remained in large numbers within their native place while ANI has mixing. Does this not support OIT. How is it that people who came to India some 4k years back have disappeared completely or changed to a different group? How is that possible? The new worlds like US, NZ & Aus very inhabited by people from Europe and Europe still has sizeable population of the original settlers. Where are those Aryands who came to India and created ANI.
The story goes much farther back than 4k years. It goes back to 12-15k years. The first exodus out of Brahmvasha took place after the war between the grandson of Dhadhichi and Lord Varuna. This resulted in such damage that part of Btahmvarsha was made inhospitable for human beings. It was then that the Pushkar lake was formed to remove the radiation fallout of the weapons used in that war. The waters of Pushkar lake are the waters of saraswati river. Even Sambhar lake was fed by Saraswati. It was during the exodus out of brahmvarsha that people went to west to Iran and east towards Gangetic plains. My Gotra roots migrated in the first exodus to Gangetic plains and that is why Righi Bhardwaj made his Ashram at Prayagraj. The second exodus happened after another 3-4k years and this is the time of the great flood/deluge. The last happened during the times of Lord Parshurama when he decided to kill every Kshatriya above the age of 16.
India became BharatVarsha after that exodus. The people who inhabited Indus valley were the same people who migrated from Saraswati river due to the intense radiations from those wars. Can anyone explain to me why we have a desert between two major rivers? Has it happened anywhr wlse on earth? Why is is peculier to Rajasthan only?
The land was rendered unfurtile and bareft of any vegetation due to nuke radiation.

Sir, sorry for going OT, but can I know which Gotra you belong to? I believe you must be from Angirasa Paksha, considering your knowledge regarding the Saraswati and Fire. Afaik ,Angirasas and Bhrigu line are the real successors of Agni tradition.
Sorry for asking, hope you don't mind a kid asking this.

I am a Kaushika, belonging to Krishna Yajurveda shakha.

 

[vstol Jockey]

Sir, sorry for going OT, but can I know which Gotra you belong to? I believe you must be from Angirasa Paksha, considering your knowledge regarding the Saraswati and Fire. Afaik ,Angirasas and Bhrigu line are the real successors of Agni tradition.
Sorry for asking, hope you don't mind a kid asking this.

I am a Kaushika, belonging to Krishna Yajurveda shakha.

I am Angira-Brahspati-Bhardwaj Rigveda thritiya & Dasham Mandala. I do not belong to any pravar or shakha which makes me a direct descendent from that lineage.
Atri, Angira and Bhrigu are considered the biggest Rishis among Brahmins. Bhardwaj Gotra is also called Traya Rishi Gotra as we had three major rishis in our Lineage. Infact we had four. Rishi garg was Son of Rishi Bhardwaj born out of his wedding with a Kshatrani girl Susheela. Rishi Garg was the kulguru of Yadus.
Raja Bharat after whom our nation is named, married three times but did not have a son. So he adopted Rishi Bhardwaj as his son and named him the Yuvraj of Bharat. But Rishi Bhardwaj was more interested in reading about vedas and wanted to pusue knowledge. So he created Bhimanyu from his Mantra shakti and gave him to Raja Bharat. The Ikshwaku clan then continued from Bhardwaj putra Bhimanyu and after 19 generations, Lord Rama was born in this line.

 

[Sandeep0159]

And my guess was right, u are from Angirasa Paksha. I will have my Upanayana samskara done next Uttarayanam, so as of now have no right to say my Pravara. But my Father told me our rishi parampara.
Viswamithra- Aghamarshana- Kaushika Tryarisheya.

 

[vsdoc]

Sirji, this discussion started with you saying that the Indo-Aryans mixed with locals and hence were not ethnically superior to the rather homogenous Parsis i.e, Iranians. And u started this thread with an article which clearly states that the yDNA of Brahmins which they took as specimen, didn't change at all.

You are contradicting your own stance.

No I am not.

What I said, and what this OP piece says, is much the same.

I am confused that you do not see it.

Mixing happened for the large chunk of the population.

Parsis, as I've explained, are NOT modern day Iranians.

They clump closely to modern day Iranian Zoroastrians. Both groups practicing strict endogamy aside from two discreet genetic admixture pulses.

One male Crete and the other female Indic.

Modern day Iranians (mainly the 60 odd million Persians, not counting the obvious ethnic imports of the past 1000+ years) on the other hand have three major genetic admixture epochs.

Turkic.

Indic.

African.

In addition to a brief Arab pulse. I've made a post about this elsewhere. The details escape me offhand now ...

When we came to India, because of the numbers, only the priestly class was left undisturbed. The Athrvan (male Osta, female Osti).

The remaining three over the next waves were coalesced into a common class (dissolving the older Persian hierarchy) called the Behdinan/Behdinin (Gender neutral Behdin).

All Parsi Athrvan originate from 4 original male high priests.

Later subdivided as the colony grew and spread inland in 5 Panthaks (like parishes I guess).

Cheers, Doc

 

[vstol Jockey]

Guys what @vsdoc posted were not his views but an article. Please remember that and do not attack him unneccesarily.

 

[Sandeep0159]

No I am not.

What I said, and what this OP piece says, is much the same.

I am confused that you do not see it.

Mixing happened for the large chunk of the population.

Parsis, as I've explained, are NOT modern day Iranians.

They clump closely to modern day Iranian Zoroastrians. Both groups practicing strict endogamy aside from two discreet genetic admixture pulses.

One male Crete and the other female Indic.

Modern day Iranians (mainly the 60 odd million Persians, not counting the obvious ethnic imports of the past 1000+ years) on the other hand have three major genetic admixture epochs.

Turkic.

Indic.

African.

In addition to a brief Arab pulse. I've made a post about this elsewhere. The details escape me offhand now ...

When we came to India, because of the numbers, only the priestly class was left undisturbed. The Athrvan (male Osta, female Osti).

The remaining three over the next waves were coalesced into a common class (dissolving the older Persian hierarchy) called the Behdinan/Behdinin (Gender neutral Behdin).

All Parsi Athrvan originate from 4 original male high priests.

Later subdivided as the colony grew and spread inland in 5 Panthaks (like parishes I guess).

Cheers, Doc

Can you provide a research paper regarding the genetic admixture of modern day Parsis of India because when I searched all I've found is only M-DNA of your group which established that you people have Iranian paternal lineage but Indian maternal lineage due to your paternal ancestors intermixing with local populace when they first came to the shores of Gujarat during Sri Jadi Rana time.

I agree your Iranian paternal roots, but what I found is your haplogroup is NOT R1a in general, but J2. Unlike us Brahmins who showed maximum frequency of R1a haplo within S.Asia.

Please share a cited paper about the same. Would like to have a detailed read.

Also, please tell about the four high priests which u've mentioned. Thanks in advance.

 

[Sandeep0159]

I am Angira-Brahspati-Bhardwaj Rigveda thritiya & Dasham Mandala. I do not belong to any pravar or shakha which makes me a direct descendent from that lineage.
Atri, Angira and Bhrigu are considered the biggest Rishis among Brahmins. Bhardwaj Gotra is also called Traya Rishi Gotra as we had three major rishis in our Lineage. Infact we had four. Rishi garg was Son of Rishi Bhardwaj born out of his wedding with a Kshatrani girl Susheela. Rishi Garg was the kulguru of Yadus.
Raja Bharat after whom our nation is named, married three times but did not have a son. So he adopted Rishi Bhardwaj as his son and named him the Yuvraj of Bharat. But Rishi Bhardwaj was more interested in reading about vedas and wanted to pusue knowledge. So he created Bhimanyu from his Mantra shakti and gave him to Raja Bharat. The Ikshwaku clan then continued from Bhardwaj putra Bhimanyu and after 19 generations, Lord Rama was born in this line.

Yes, sir. Atri, Angira and Bhrigu are exalted rishis who has contributed to a large portion of the Vedic corpus.
From what I learned from my grandpa and my own digging online I came to know that my own line comes from the same Vaivasvata Manu.
Vivasvan-> Ila (sibling of Ikshwaku, preceptor of Chandra/Aila lineage) ->Pururavas ->Amavasu -> Jahnu Maharshi ->Kusha -> Kushika -> Gadhi -> Viswamithra Gaathin -> Aghamarshana rishi -> Kaushika.
So a Chandravanshi brahmana.

Took a lot of effort to remember the line, must admit I was clueless at first.