BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok

Subject: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 03:15 PM

This is priceless. Even better than the Beggar's Opera one:
Hindu Origin of Judaism

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Rapparee
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 03:36 PM

Yessirree, only whoever wrote that fergot that all us poor benighted human beans had to be taught things like how to build a pyramid and pick our noses and breath by alien beans from outer space. I kin prove this by a linguistic analysis of the dialects spoken in the Upper Volta Region of Siberia, right near where that there thing blew up back a few years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 04:15 PM

But they were veggans don't forget that all important fact. Von Daniken did which is why he isn't taken seriously....

Though, truly, the guy hasn't a clue about linguistics in general and Hebrew in particular.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 05:29 PM

The article in the link makes a lot of flat assertions, without any backup about who says so or his qualifications, on what scriptural or academic basis, and so on. I wouldn't be inclined to put any trust in it at all.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 06:04 PM

I speak and read/write Hebrew, his conclusions are the funniest, silliest thing I've heard in a while, that's why I posted it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: robomatic
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 07:03 PM

I enjoyed it, will bookmark it for my Hindu buds.

robo

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 07:12 PM

If the Hebrew's anything to go by, I suspect the Sanskrit's rather bad too.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: John O'L
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 09:21 PM

Although a lot of what I saw in the article is obviously rubbish, I thought it was a pretty well accepted possibity that Hinduism and Judaism may both have their origins in Zoasterism.

Not so?

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Rapparee
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 11:05 PM

My wonderful little brother studied Russian, Hebrew, and Spanish when he was in high school. He studied them at the same time.

As a result of his efforts to assist his brothers in every way possible, I can say "bubble gum" and "I crave your body" in Hebrew. I can say hello and ask for vodka in Russian, and say "Beer! please" and "How much for the night?" in Spanish. (Actually, I can say more than that in Spanish, but that's pretty much all he taught us.)

He said that he didn't want us to get thirsty or horny in Mexico, Israel or Russia. Naturally, his two brothers have been to Germany, France, the UK, Ireland, Scotland, Korea, Vietnam, Japan, and Canada. Apart from the four hours he spent in Juarez on day, he hasn't been to Mexico, Israel or Russia either.

By the way, I returned the favor to him for French.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Sorcha
Date: 18 Jun 05 - 11:06 PM

LOL! Intersting tho...just 'might' be worth some real research...

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: mack/misophist
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 12:24 AM

Backtrack to the main page. This guy thinks he knows everything.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: sixtieschick
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 03:09 AM

The tone of the essay sounds like it was written by someone from ISKCON (Hare Krishna). I can't follow how some of the Sanskrit is supposed to relate to Hebrew. For instance, there are three "s" letters in Sanskrit, and two of them are pronounced more or less "sh." These differences are ignored in the essay.

However, folks in the ancient world did communicate. Parts of India, Africa and the Middle East traded with each other and there was presumably some cross-fertilization of language and culture. So why not some Sanskrit influences on Hebrew, and visa versa? They may not the ones stated in this article, but there could be connections.

By the way, one of the the oldest synagogues in continuous use is in Cochin, on the west coast of India. It was started in A.D. 79.

Miriam

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 03:10 AM

main page

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 03:13 AM

Are their linguistic connections because Hebrew and Sanskrit are Indo -European languages?

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 03:34 AM

I dunno.. it's all Greek to me!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 03:56 AM

Ah, Greek another Indo -European language

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 04:31 AM

There might be, but nothing in his article is true.
I could do a point by point examination if anyone's interested.
BTW Rapaire, I do know swear words in more than a dozen languages, but Russian is the best.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 04:40 AM

all of the Sanskrt Hindu references are correct, i just don't know how they correlate to Judaism.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 05:26 AM

Les, Sanskrt is an Indo-Aryan language, but here is another similar theory: Hebrew place names in India and Kashmir

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 05:38 AM

okay, here's a site for Engliash words we speak from Sanskrit

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 05:54 AM

according to wikipedia sanskrit is an indo-european AND and Indo Aryan language which became a parent language for the Indo Aryan languages.

The Rig Veda is the earliest known document written in Sansrit, and scholars standardly date the Rig-Veda to the 2nd millennium BC on grounds of its references to late bronze age culture (horse-drawn chariots; mostly bronze, but some iron weapons) and to the assumption that Vedic culture post-dates the Indus Valley Civilisation. It is commonly held to have been completed between 1500 BC and 1200 BC. Nevertheless the hymns were certainly composed over a long period - several hundred years at least. Some, mostly Indian, writers have used astronomical references in the Rig-Veda to date it to the third and even the 4th millennium BC.

The oldest surviving Sanskrit grammar is Pạ̄nini's Ạṣtādhyāyī ("Eight-Chapter Grammar") dating to ca. the 5th century BC. It is essentially a prescriptive grammar, i. e. an authority that defines (rather than describes) correct Sanskrit, although it contains descriptive parts, mostly to account for Vedic forms that had already passed out of use in Panini's time.

(from wikipedia)

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 06:00 AM

wikipedia on Hebrew comments that Hebrew is an Afro-Asiatic language. This language family is generally thought by linguists to have originated somewhere in northeastern Africa, and began to diverge around the 8th millennium BCE, although there is much debate about the exact date and place. (The theory is espoused by most archeologists and linguists, but at odds with traditional reading of the Torah.) One branch of this family, Semitic, eventually reached the Middle East; it gradually differentiated into a variety of related languages.

The common ancestor of Hebrew and Phoenician is called Canaanite, and was the first to use a Semitic alphabet distinct from Egyptian. One ancient Canaanite document is the famous Moabite Stone; the Siloam Inscription, found near Jerusalem, is an early example of Hebrew. Less ancient samples of Old Hebrew include the ostraka found near Lachish which describe events preceding the final capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian captivity of 586 BCE.

The most famous work originally written in Hebrew is the Hebrew Bible, though the time at which it was written is a matter of dispute (see dating the Bible for details). The earliest extant copies were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, written between the 2nd century BCE and the 1st century CE.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 06:00 AM

So, is it like this:
Hebrew and Sanskrit, and for that matter most European and many western asian languages, have words in common because they have a common origin in a language spoken in norther asia/southern Europe a long time ago and that language spread and evolved as farming did?

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 06:57 AM

Yes. It's just another case of someone going oh these words sound similar....

Allen

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 06:58 AM

I don't know, les, but I know that language is like culture - someone travels and they bring their words and ideas with them. For example, Bathurst and Melville Islands are known as the Tiwi Islands, populated by the Tiwi peoples. Melville Island was the home of the Tiwi Aborigines (it is now an Aboriginal Reserve) for thousands of years. In 1644 Abel Tasman became the first European to officially sight the island although he incorrectly assumed that it was part of the northern coast of Australia.

In 1818 Phillip Parker King, the son of NSW Governor Philip Gidley King, explored the island. King found to his surprise that the Aborigines knew some Portuguese words suggesting that they had made contact with Portuguese sailors and that a Portuguese ship had possibly been wrecked nearby.

There is also some evidence that ...it appears that the Portuguese Captain Christovao de Mendonça could have led his fleet of caravels down the east coast of Australia in 1522, sailing south as far as today's Warnambool and mapping the coast as he went... (McIntyre, K. G. (1982). The Secret Discovery of Australia. Sydney: Picador.)

this evidence is reinforced by the fact that there are Portuguese words in some Aboriginal languages on the west coast of Australia, suggesting that some sailors stayed and were accepted into the local tribal communities. (Brandenstein, C. von, (1970), Portuguese loanwords in Aboriginal languages of northwestern Australia: a problem of Indo-European and Finno-Ugrian comparative linguistics, in Wurm, S. & D. Laycock (eds), Pacific linguistic studies in honour of Arthur Capell, Pacific Linguistics, Series C-13, pp. 617-50)

freda

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 09:13 AM

Oh, heck, Le Scar, I can cuss (at least a little bit) in Spanish, French, German, Russian, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Arabic, Irish Gaelic, Swahili, and English. My brother didn't teach me (most) of that, it's a natural talent. 8-)

BTW, he doing volunteer work as an ESL teacher for three Mexican ladies. He expects that the group he volunteers for is going to send him a Vietnamese family shortly. (The USAF taught him Vietnamese.)

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 09:47 AM

Yeah well, it's fluent in Russian. That's highschool with Russian kids for you. Seriously, sounds like your brother has some great opportunities.

Anyway here's a few points

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: robomatic
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 12:11 PM

The Hindu tie-ins are pretty obviously only superficially researched and seem to be a very few linguistic similarities of no consequence.

I've heard some good and more believable references to tying together Hebrew with Egyptian and possibly Hittite sources, i.e. Esther from Ishtar etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 01:03 PM

Sumerian and Babylonian sources are closer for most words.
Not quite sure about Esther, written differently.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 01:12 PM

OOPS, had a quick look, I spoke too hastily. Esther is indeed Ishtar just as Mordechai is a form of Marduk.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 03:15 PM

Hey, my mother was named Esther -- you don't think...nah, can't be.

This ranks right up there with the British being the "Lost Tribe" of Israel (based upon linguistic pseudo-analysis and the Mayas being the descendants of Lost Atlantis and/or Mu and/or Lemuria (based upon wishful thinking).

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 03:17 PM

I think its one religion trying to prove that they are the root of another religion. very suss.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: John O'L
Date: 19 Jun 05 - 07:41 PM

Suss perhaps freda, if you are an interested party with a barrow to push, (like the author of the article) but very interesting if you are an impartial observer who would like to know where it all came from, how and why.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Jun 05 - 01:49 AM

I've met more than one Iranian quite positive that the Persians are the root of just about all culture, and the Zoroastrians the root of Judaism and much more. Pretty laid back if not actually hostile about Islamic overlay on Persian culture.

Subject: RE: BS: Sanskrit Theories Run Amok
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 20 Jun 05 - 04:15 AM

That's an age old resentment of the Iranians.