Phylos Galaxy - Landrace discussion

[Elmer Bud]

I don't know if you've just misunderstood my post or you're intentionally twisting it, but either way you're misrepresenting what I said

what I said was that the myths about Shiva and cannabis are very recent in the Indian scheme of things, ie most originated only in the last couple of hundreds of years or so

Westerners tend to fixate on Hinduism, when Islamic cannabis culture has played a much bigger role in Indian cannabis than most outsiders realise

about Phylos:

cannabis was domesticated in many different places at many different times

the diversity of cannabis is fundamentally a result of selection by humans

just those two facts alone should be enough to see that Phylos is up against major obstacles, never mind whether - for related reasons - this genetic approach is even applicable to a plant like cannabis

side note:

I notice you threw the well-intentioned comment another poster made about your mental health back in their face. Fwiw, I'd second what they said - there's a pattern of behaviour in your posts that strongly suggests your mental health isn't good and that you should not be using cannabis. Do yourself a favour, give that some thought

G `day Ngakpa

You can go take a long walk off a short pier . Taking your mental health diagnosis with you .

Disagree with you ? Oh get off the herb mate . Your psychotic . lol .Or you`re a wrongun .

Dr Ngakpa ;
Just the other day you told Water he should get off the herb . Previously you told Roms he had mental health issues .Now you `re tellin me the same .

At this rate there will be no smokers left to buy seeds !


Since we are giving out free advice .
Stick to strain hunting . There`s no money in being an internet forum psychologist .

Gold Artifacts Tell Tale of Drug-Fueled Rituals and "Bastard Wars"

Thanks for sharin

EB .

 

[Elmer Bud]

 

[therevverend]

Cannabis has little at all to do with Brahminism; the whole 'Soma is cannabis' thing is bollocks; all the myths about Shiva and cannabis are very late creations in the scheme of things

You're wrong about this. Cannabis use by Hindus is ancient and pre-dates Islam. Hindus that have a generally negative opinion of cannabis, never smoke it and view hashish as a dangerous addictive drug, will partake of bhang on holy days. Literature from the 10th century CE refers to Bhang as 'Indracanna', the food of Indra.

In the Bhavishya Puran (book of the future) from 550 BCE it is stated that 'one who wishes to see the number of sons and daughters increase must worship Kama in the hemp plant.' Cannabis has been used since medieval times in Buddhist and Hindu tantric rituals.

Hindu shastra scriptures refer to Shiva telling the Goddess Parvati to know the benefits derived from Bhang since it's worship deifies one. The Gonds and Kouls revere the hemp plant as one of their objects of animistic worship. Cannabis is a huge part of the Festival of Holi, Diwali, Sripanchali, weddings, funerals, every part of Hindu life.

The idea that Shiva has only been associated with cannabis and Sadhus for a couple centuries is laughable. I can pull out references all day long of cannabis used as an offering in temples to Devi, Ganesha, and Shiva. Sadhus have used cannabis as an aid to meditation for thousands of years.

No one knows what Soma is but bhang or some sort of cannabis concoction is as good a guess as any. I haven't found more evidence that Soma is Ma Huang or a mushroom or booze then it's a cannabis preparation. Soma is made by squeezing plant parts and mixing with milk which sounds a lot like Bhang. Over time the original drug and use was lost with only the bare bones of the ritual left. The same thing has happened with Haoma. Arguing about what is and is not Soma is a waste of time.

The Aryans that wrote the Rig Veda were Central Asians and certainly used cannabis. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Mughals who were Muslims arrived in the 16th century from Central Asia when cannabis use in India was exploding. This coincided with the Europeans bringing the pipe to India which revolutionized hashish consumption.

The Mughals were stoners and loved their Hashish and certainly cannabis is just as important to the Muslim as the Hindu in the Indian Subcontinent. But cannabis use was widespread throughout India and a part of Hindu worship long before the Muslims arrived.

It sounds to me like you've been talking to some snooty Westernized Hindus who have bought in on the Drug War and believe cannabis is bad for Hinduism. By convincing Westerners that cannabis is not part of Hindu culture, is foreign and brought by the evil Muslims to lead India astray they can convince themselves of this. Nationalism is rampant in India right now and old traditions like Bhang are embarrassing for some of the new breed of Hindu.

Of course Muslims have their own dirty little drug habit. Here's a link to an article about how Muslims, Sufis, and hashish are struggling to make it in the modern world.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1414141

The one thing I'll add, these writers always add that the idea that Hashish is not an intoxicant, is all right for Muslims to use is a minority opinion. This is not true. It is a minority opinion as far as Wahabists and their kind are concerned. There are plenty of other sects of Islam where the highest judge views hashish as halal. As Islam has modernized and Hashish has been demonized these voices of reason have been drowned out by all the nuts.

 

[funkyhorse]

Neuroscientists and psychiatrists dont understand the brain, they can detect hormones or they can detect symptoms but they can only speculate about how they interact or mute and neurocience and psychiatry is far from understanding how the brain works
Genetists dont undertand genes, they can detect genes, create beautiful galaxies but have no clue how they interact or mute

Asperger syndrome has been erased from DSM-V in the year 2013 as a diagnosis entity due to the bastardization on diagnose. It seems you dont need to be autistic anymore to get a diagnosis of asperger syndrome. Families with this diagnosis in Usa spend between expenses and income lose about 80.000u$s a year, at least until adulthood. This diagnosis has become a huge business backed by big pharmaceutical corporations paying a lot of incentives to doctors for treatments of any kind that people dont really need.


As a therapy for everybody in this forum, I suggest this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_disintegration


There are coincidences between Phylos and neuroscientists
We seem to be living in a society of greek gods, where anyone with a nobility title of "Doctor" is immediately put up on a pedestal and his/her word taken for granted without asking any backup or proof for their findings or diagnosis. And if it is done is between pairs. Baically some science are becoming a consensus of pairs and if you dont belong you are an inferior who has to adore the word of the greek gods without questioning, who the fuck are you to question or to understand more than the doctor, right?

I am looking into Phylos a little bit. I see they go to every single cannabis fair at any corner of the globe. I see at every single fair, doctors in powerpointism delight and hypnotize small audiences all over the world. They are supposed to be a business with the main objective of analyzing samples at 300$ a piece.
How many tests people order from them a month? How can you have a business running and paying all of those high salaries and labs at these prices?

What I do see in their website more than once are the words intellectual property.
I see a Usa centered universe which have OG Kush, Blueberry and Skunk at the center. If this is the center of the galaxy, there must be a huge black hole in the middle of that galaxy they are not telling about.

Is this a Usa government backed project?



For everybody:
Interesting mental issues coming up in this thread, nothing is casual, too many coincidences in these industries
I love biodiversity. And neurodiversity as well
Please, dont confuse obsession with passion for knowdledge.
Dont diagnose the others if you dont want the others to diagnose you.
There is geniality in disorders science dont understand.
Thanks everybody, I learn a lot with you and I hope to keep learning.
Maybe you can find this article interesting:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/07/secrets-of-the-creative-brain/372299/

Have a nice weekend everybody and thanks everybody for the shared knowdledge

 

[Water-]

.

 

[ngakpa]

Cannabis use by Hindus is ancient and pre-dates Islam. Hindus that have a generally negative opinion of cannabis, never smoke it and view hashish as a dangerous addictive drug, will partake of bhang on holy days. Literature from the 10th century CE refers to Bhang as 'Indracanna', the food of Indra.

there's plenty I agree with in your post and is spot on, but in fairness, you're mostly just strawmanning me there

and that said, most of what you've written actually proves my point that cannabis is overall a late thing in Brahminism ('Hinduism'), with its role, antiquity, and significance in 'Hindu culture' significantly overstated by Westerners

10th century is what I mean by late in the Hindu scheme of things; most of the popular Western works on cannabis that mention legends about Shiva and cannabis neglect to mention that everything indicates those myths are even later creations, most from the last couple of hundred years or so

iirc, the earliest clear Indian reference to using cannabis to get high is c. 7th century CE - it refers to bhang

but Indian dope culture only really gets on a major roll c. 11th to 13th century CE once influences from Central Asian Islam kick in in a major way, to start with largely through the qalandars

Bhavishya Puran (book of the future) from 550 BCE

compared to the Vedas the Puranas are late works, so I can tell you now that BCE is wrong...

according to Wikipedia the date of the Bhavishya Purana is 5th century CE, and even then I doubt that's accurate

the Puranas that exist now have been revised extensively with loads of stuff added in, a lot from post 11th century CE and post 16th century CE - the stuff you mention about Kama is very likely to be an example of that type of late material

Cannabis has been used since medieval times in Buddhist and Hindu tantric rituals.

yes, as said, it has a minor role in some tantras, which are already very marginal things, if we're clear on what Tantra really is (which is not the 'spiritual' rutting stuff Westerners are into)... in fact those tantras are mostly pre-medieval; they're mostly an example of exactly the type of marginal pre-Muslim use I'm talking about

Hindu shastra scriptures refer to Shiva telling the Goddess Parvati to know the benefits derived from Bhang since it's worship deifies one.

yeah, but dates?

The Gonds and Kouls revere the hemp plant as one of their objects of animistic worship.

that's animism

Cannabis is a huge part of the Festival of Holi, Diwali, Sripanchali, weddings, funerals, every part of Hindu life.

the role cannabis plays in these things depends heavily on region, class, and caste (nb, class and caste are two different things), and you're establishing nothing about antiquity here

The idea that Shiva has only been associated with cannabis and Sadhus for a couple centuries is laughable. I can pull out references all day long of cannabis used as an offering in temples to Devi, Ganesha, and Shiva.

you're now well into strawman mode

it's clear that a late Veda, the Atharva Veda (c. 800 BCE), mentions bhang as a plant; it's clear there's been cultivation on the Central Asian margins of India since c. 500 BCE in the Himalaya for example

but then look at the very ambivalent attitudes to cannabis in the Himalaya... Rajput and Brahmin castes in the Himalaya refuse to have cannabis growing on their land, for example... only low castes cultivate it... and there's no use of it tradtionally in regions like Kumaon at festivals such as Durga Puja and Holi etc etc etc., where it's heavily frowned on

I wrote more about this here https://therealseedcompany.wordpress.com/2018/08/30/nanda-devi-and-tall-tales-from-the-himalayas/

'cannabis is part of Brahminical culture' is not something anyone can say without having to add 1001 exceptions

Sadhus have used cannabis as an aid to meditation for thousands of years.

the sadhu orders as we know them now are nothing like that old - there's a claim the Dashnami orders were founded in the 8th century CE by Shankara, but that's very doubtful... they're a much later post-Islamic thing, and more to the point this has nothing to do with sadhu practices involving cannabis

it's classic Orientalism to go 'India... sadhus... meditation... thousands of years...'

where's the evidence for any of this?

No one knows what Soma is but bhang or some sort of cannabis concoction is as good a guess as any.

well, as good as any indication that Soma is not cannabis is that among the earliest mentions of Soma also list bhang as being a totally different plant

The Aryans that wrote the Rig Veda were Central Asians and certainly used cannabis.

maybe - but who knows for sure?

and as you've made clear yourself, Brahminical cannabis use = drinking bhang

the smoking culture we have now is a late thing, and it's certainly not an intergral part of any 'Hindu' path, even in say the Jhuna Akhara, which is one of the wilder sadhu groups where most sadhus smoke all day long

I don't think it's a coincidence that the Mughals who were Muslims arrived in the 16th century from Central Asia when cannabis use in India was exploding. This coincided with the Europeans bringing the pipe to India which revolutionized hashish consumption.

this is the point

cannabis use was widespread throughout India and a part of Hindu worship long before the Muslims arrived.

that's just you making an assertion out of the blue though mate, you've not backed that up with evidence...

you may be right, but fact is that what evidence there is for the pre-Muslim era is very slim; there's afaik the one reference from South India c. 7th century

It sounds to me like you've been talking to some snooty Westernized Hindus who have bought in on the Drug War and believe cannabis is bad for Hinduism. By convincing Westerners that cannabis is not part of Hindu culture, is foreign and brought by the evil Muslims to lead India astray they can convince themselves of this. Nationalism is rampant in India right now and old traditions like Bhang are embarrassing for some of the new breed of Hindu.

you're not wrong that there's a strand of anti-cannabis rhetoric in India that has its roots in Western ideas, mainly Evangelism

but you're guilty of classic Orientalism if you think that Indians only have anti-cannabis ideas because they're parroting Westerners

there are strands of viciously anti-cannabis opinion in India that have nothing to do with the West

Hindus largely viewed charas (which btw is what Afghans and Turkestanis called sieved resin) as a foreign Central Asian thing, and long before Western influence - (and btw if you know the history of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission, you'll know that it's the Hindus on the Commission who wanted cannabis banned for cultural reasons, and the Westerners who wanted it legal for cultural and economic reasons)

Aurangzeb, himself a Turkic Muslim, banned charas smoking and used to chop the hands off qalandars, long before any Indian gave much of a toss about what the British thought about anything... in the same era, British merchants were hanging out with qalandars getting stoned

the only form of cannabis use that has any kind of 'respectability' or orthodox status in India is consuming bhang, and above all bhang drinking. That applies in the Hindu context especially. Everything else - which means smoking - is strictly marginal, including smoking ganja, and above all smoking charas...

There's absolutely feck all scriptural or ritual basis for cannabis smoking in any of Hinduism, whereas there's a ton of evidence that it's the Muslims, above all the qalandars, who pioneered chronic sacramental cannabis use and brought it to India.

If you're interested I wrote a bit about that here: https://therealseedcompany.wordpres...-hashish-the-straight-dope-on-cannabis-resin/

 

[ngakpa]

just to add, people spinning conspiacy theories about the motives behind Phylos and Open Cannabis Project should listen to this:

it's clear the motive is anti big business patenting well established 'prior art' genetics

https://youtu.be/PsSwMNOTyqA?t=2173

 

[Water-]

This is so full of BS its not worth replying to.

To anybody that does not know better,
be aware,
ngakpa is not an authority on Indian culture or history and much of what he wrote can be argued against with plenty of facts to back it up.

Im not going to waste my time doing that though, because this is thread is about phylos and it should stay that way.


happy holidays everyone

 

[ngakpa]

and much of what he wrote can be argued against with plenty of facts to back it up.

Im not going to waste my time doing that though

definitely, I for one am ready to take your word for it based on just your loveable personality

 

[Water-]

Through all that supposed study, it is sad that you never understood their teachings on ego

 

[ngakpa]

Through all that supposed study, it is sad that you never understood their teachings on ego

'their' teachings...

...cough cough... looks like you might be giving yourself away a touch there, mate

way I see it, caring about the truth about traditional cannabis culture ultimately comes down to respect for people and tradition

Asia isn't just a palate for Western people's fantasies

anyway, an MA in Indian Religions is just an academic qualification - history, philosophy, languages - I have zero pretensions to being spiritual, so the jibe is way wide of the mark...

shall we get back to cannabis, or do you want to do more of your personalised tired old 'one two' troll routine?

1. 'you know nothing and have no credentials'

- accused person shares some knowledge, mentions some credentials

2. 'you're an egotist'

repeat ad nauseam

this is an interesting topic and these threads would be much nicer without the toxic atmosphere, you know?

 

[Water-]

I used the word "their" because I am not Indian.

And both your name and avatar are spiritual in nature, so I think maybe you are presenting yourself as "spiritual".

this is has gone completly absurd and pretty dumb.

I know the Holidays can be a tough on people.
I hope you find peace and end whatever is making you suffer.

 

[Kalbhairav]

among Westerners there's an Orientalist assumption that

1. Cannabis has strong and ancient links to Brahminism (so-called Hinduism) and Buddhism

2. Cannabis culture is always ancient

Both assumptions are wrong

Cannabis has little at all to do with Brahminism; the whole 'Soma is cannabis' thing is bollocks; all the myths about Shiva and cannabis are very late creations in the scheme of things

As for Buddhism, that has next to no connection to cannabis use; it was likely a reaction against it in early days; what little involvement there is entails only very marginal use in Tantra

About the history in Indochina:

It's pretty clear that ganja cultivation and consumption in Indochina post-date the Khmer Empire. All the indications I see are that ganja smoking only became a common popular habit on the back of the spread of tobacco. That applies to the Coromandel and Malabar, plus all Southeast Asia

Don't want to wade in here but can I just point out that your phrase 'Brahminism' - as a reference to purist Vedandic Hinduism has absolutely nothing to do with the Shivism cults. As such cannabis has played a role for a very long time in certain religious sects in India and most importantly in Nepal. Unfortunately you can never take Hinduism as a whole (or the Mahayana Buddhism of Nepal for that matter).

It's true that cannabis probably has nothing to do with soma. But, there are other references to Shivism and cult of poisons (I don't have the transliteration from the Sanskrit right now) that have used cannabis since before the common era. The roots of these traditions stem from the Nepalese/Indian Tantric traditions of the Naths/Siddha/Aghora traditions and cannot be grouped with Vedantic Brahminism. I could go on but will leave it there.

This is an area I've studied at depth at university level.

 

[ngakpa]

Don't want to wade in here but can I just point out that your phrase 'Brahminism' - as a reference to purist Vedandic Hinduism has absolutely nothing to do with the Shivism cults. As such cannabis has played a role for a very long time in certain religious sects in India and most importantly in Nepal. Unfortunately you can never take Hinduism as a whole (or the Mahayana Buddhism of Nepal for that matter).

It's true that cannabis probably has nothing to do with soma. But, there are other references to Shivism and cult of poisons (I don't have the transliteration from the Sanskrit right now) that have used cannabis since before the common era. The roots of these traditions stem from the Nepalese/Indian Tantric traditions of the Naths/Siddha/Aghora traditions and cannot be grouped with Vedantic Brahminism. I could go on but will leave it there.

This is an area I've studied at depth at university level.

not sure why you've taken the phrase Brahminism to be "a reference to purist Vedandic [sic, ahem] Hinduism"

that's way wide of the mark

about Shaivism:

if you know India well, then you know that the most strongly Shaivite regions are always the "casteist" regions

Shaivism is very much part of what is meant by Brahminism, in fact it's arch culprit number one when it comes to the shitty old caste system

about Tantra:

Tantra is really it's own thing and needs to be seen apart from Brahminism and Buddhism

on your point about traditions like the Naths:

how can the Naths be from before the common era?

I've seen some early estimates, but the consensus is Goraknath lived around the 11th century CE. For sure Naths as they are now are a medieval phenomenon with some modern touches. Also, it's a bit of a stretch to call them Tantric.

Same goes for Aghoris - what's the evidence for pushing them so far back in time? They're afaik a medieval thing, late first early second millennium... Siddha can mean many things, but likely the same CE point applies

the Vedas, the Jains, the Pali Nikayas etc. of the Buddhists - that's the really old stuff...

 

[Kalbhairav]

Thanks for the detailed reply.

It would be interesting to know your sources because I bet all are based on a very centric view that unfortunately doesn't fit with most of the niche findings. Many of the scholastic written material is for the benefit of trying to piece together a larger picture. Scholars know that a lot of what they write is subject to change. I know because I've spoken with some who are very much a part of the pan Asian pursuit. Historical reference is difficult to come by from source because most of the earliest traditions are oral, not written. For example; there's assumptions that Tantra is pre-Vedic. Now if this were true then it would throw everything you just said into question. Many of the dates you've mentioned are hagiographic in nature and unfortunately can't ever be a true point of origin. More on this later.
As some of the leading scholars have pointed out, the individual sects of Shiva, from point of origin, cannot be called Vedic. They might be now out of convenience but it certainly can't be lumped together Brahinism from a point of historical reference.

I wouldn't go as far to say that what you hold as fact is wrong, but it certainly isn't true. I realise I haven't specifically answered your points and will get round to it in the next day or two. And, will get more onto the point of cannabis.

Just for reference; I've spent 3+ years in India/Nepal very much involved in the above.

I have to go and do family stuff. Happy holidays all.

 

[ngakpa]

Hi, thanks for the reply

I mentioned only one date which is that the consensus is that Goraknath likely lived around 11th century. Nobody knows for sure, but the idea that he lived BCE is implausible

What evidence is there for Tantra being older than the Vedas?

I'm up for discussing this, but I find a regular thing on here is getting strawmanned

You're taking Brahminism to mean some idea of "pure Vedic Hinduism", whereas I was hoping my last post made it pretty clear that's not what Brahminism means

Shaivism as it exists today is something much later than the Vedas, and much later than the Pali Nikayas

To understand why the Nikayas are relavant, case in point: for much of his career the historical Buddha taught in and around Varanasi, what is now Shiva's city

There are plenty of encounters with dreadlocked ascetics in the Nikayas, but there's not a trace of Shaivism or Shiva... See posts earlier about the Puranas being 11th to 16th century fusions

Since we're waving credentials around: I've been living and travelling in and around South Asia for more than two decades, and I've got an MA in Indian Religions, for what that's worth...

I've also spent plenty of time with sannyasin, Naths, Tantrikas, lamas, Zen monks and so on and so on, so I can speak from direct experience not just abstract study, though frankly that's a crap distinction to make, as anyone who knows how these things work can tell you

 

[Roms]

Shaivism as it exists today is something much later than the Vedas, and much later than the Pali Nikayas

Shiva baba cult is pre-Vedic hey... I suggest the read of a real good inisider indologist named Alain Daniélou. Enjoy bOoM ShIvA!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_Daniélou

I've also spent plenty of time with sannyasin, Naths, Tantrikas, lamas, Zen monks and so on and so on, so I can speak from direct experience not just abstract study, though frankly that's a crap distinction to make, as anyone who knows how these things work can tell you

Direct experience is not necessarily the truth! Everything depends on the interpretation of the result obtained. Abstract studies also help for the result are you understand. Phylos Galaxy is a good exemple imho.

Vibes Kailbhairav, thanks for your historic clarifications!

 

[geneva_sativa]

this was news a while back,,, 2,700 year old burial site contain 2 pounds of Cannabis inside,,,

https://academic.oup.com/jxb/article/59/15/4171/518859


IMO, there is much more to the picture, than meets the eye,,, why not tread humbly into the past ?

who can really speak with authority, when so much is hidden from an easy perusal ?

 

[Kalbhairav]

Hi, thanks for the reply

I mentioned only one date which is that the consensus is that Goraknath likely lived around 11th century. Nobody knows for sure, but the idea that he lived BCE is implausible

It isn't implausible because, as I stated, you're using hagiographical references which can only be dated from a written manuscript. There is evidence in archaeological findings/carbon dating that can trace Goraknath murti to much earlier. This also coincides with the supposed traditional propagator of the Nath sect, Dattatreya. This figure is much much earlier. The reference to Shiva being a devotee of Dattatreya (even though Shiva is supposedly one third of this being) is partly testament to this. Just because the Nath tradition as we know it only has contemporary beginnings as an organised sect doesn't mean it isn't old.

I guess you haven't read any material about Goraknath being older than Buddhism either? That Goraknath was Buddhist? This leads on to my next point.

You cannot define Buddhist or Shivism from the modern stand point. the pan Himalayan region would of been devoid of borders and you wouldn't of been able to tell ascetics apart. Their practices were shared freely amongst each other which why deities such Maha Kala, Kalbhairav are prevalent in many different clan societies in the Himalayan region. It was only through the organised schools and the transmission of Buddhism through the historical figure Atiśa that asceticism was literally culled.

This is the problem with these debates, they are based only on the writings of the literary classes connected with the organised religion or monasteries. They were the only people who had a tradition of recording anything which leaves a lot thin on the ground. I could go on forever about this.......

What evidence is there for Tantra being older than the Vedas?

I can point to many scholastic sources that stipulate that Tantra may be older than the Vedas.

Here one
The Roots of Tantra
edited by Katherine Anne Harper, Robert L. Brown

Here's another
https://www.integralworld.net/bjonnes1.html

There's a lot of material out there but I'll leave it at that for a min..

You're taking Brahminism to mean some idea of "pure Vedic Hinduism", whereas I was hoping my last post made it pretty clear that's not what Brahminism means.

I take Brahminism to mean:
"the complex sacrificial religion that emerged in post-Vedic India ( c. 900 BC) under the influence of the dominant priesthood (Brahmans), an early stage in the development of Hinduism."

As it is defined in the dictionary.. By pure Vedic Hinduism I mean exactly as stated above; the roots of Veda.

And all I was saying is that it's pretty clear that the form of the prototypical Siva, Rudra, was an outside influence upon the Vedas: Rig Veda 7.21.5 and 10.99.3 shows the Vedic people being against Phallus (Lingam) worshippers which suggests an earlier manifestation.

The much later story of Daksha in the Puranas reveals the name - Vedabahya - a name of Shiva used by Daksha which means ‘outside the Vedas’.

This suggests, as many scholars have pointed out, to there being an older origin for 'Shivism' (<- this word of course being a modern concept).

Shaivism as it exists today is something much later than the Vedas, and much later than the Pali Nikayas

I beg to differ. I'm amazed you think the Nikayas are old.

Prehistoric paintings at the Bhimbetka rock shelters (dated pre-10,000 BCE period) show pictures of Shiva dancing, a Trishula and Nandi

To understand why the Nikayas are relavant, case in point: for much of his career the historical Buddha taught in and around Varanasi, what is now Shiva's city

Before the Buddha made his first sermon in Varanasi, what was there before?

There are plenty of encounters with dreadlocked ascetics in the Nikayas, but there's not a trace of Shaivism or Shiva... See posts earlier about the Puranas being 11th to 16th century fusions

Exactly WHERE were the Nikayas written and by whom? Answer this first with absolute certainty and then I'll give my reply.

There are plenty of encounters with dreadlocked ascetics? Are you sure they had dreadlocks? Did they immediately tell the author that they followed such and such a tradition? There's a great many problems to you using this as your only point of reference. Please look beyond to older sources. And, please, List all the sects that the Nikayas mention if you want to go deeper.

Since we're waving credentials around: I've been living and travelling in and around South Asia for more than two decades, and I've got an MA in Indian Religions, for what that's worth...

I've also spent plenty of time with sannyasin, Naths, Tantrikas, lamas, Zen monks and so on and so on, so I can speak from direct experience not just abstract study, though frankly that's a crap distinction to make, as anyone who knows how these things work can tell you

Oh yeah, me too!! MA in Pan Himalayan religion but add on another 10 years to your 20 though. So lets not swing dicks as that surely isn't the point here. I only mentioned it before as you sounded so sure of yourself about how much time you'd spent there etc etc..

about Shaivism:

if you know India well, then you know that the most strongly Shaivite regions are always the "casteist" regions

Shaivism is very much part of what is meant by Brahminism, in fact it's arch culprit number one when it comes to the shitty old caste system

Firstly, again, it's 'class' before 'caste'. You're using Orientalist terminology that's outdated (I'm picking, I know). Are you really blaming Shivism as the sole 'culprit' to a system that is absolutely askew to how it once was?

Paradoxical isn't it that traditionally Lord Shiva excepts all who worship him no matter what religion or caste, whether ghost, animal, demon, deva or human. Again, look to the references to Shiva/Rudra being outside the Vedas.

about Tantra:

Tantra is really it's own thing and needs to be seen apart from Brahminism and Buddhism

I'm amazed that you think Tantra is apart from Buddhism. Are you going to try and be sneaky and say that scripture that was written hundreds of years after the historical Buddha's passing is a good source? Hasn't your reading lead you to the belief that the historical Buddha used practices that were Tantric in origin? And if you haven't, how could you miss it? The reference to the Buddha using the Peacock mantra to heal snake bite (although that's not Tantric) is a good start, plus the hagiographical transmission stories of Buddhism to Tibet. Tantra taught by the Buddha to be given throughout Tibet?

I've seen some early estimates, but the consensus is Goraknath lived around the 11th century CE. For sure Naths as they are now are a medieval phenomenon with some modern touches. Also, it's a bit of a stretch to call them Tantric.

Same goes for Aghoris - what's the evidence for pushing them so far back in time? They're afaik a medieval thing, late first early second millennium... Siddha can mean many things, but likely the same CE point applies

Let me ask you, what are some of the specific practices/yogas/pujas of the Nath sect? If you can't answer that question then you can't say they're not tantric. If you say Hatha is their main stay then I'm afraid Hatha yoga (as we know it from Patanjali) is all tantric in origin. Patanjali as you might know wasn't just one person and the text was written over a long period. They are all techniques that have older tantric roots. Look it up.

The Aghora cannot be viewed by assumptions that they existed when they were first documented. Their origins are very very old with some even saying that their practices influenced the highest yoga tantras of the modern Mahayana schools. There are theories that Padmasambhava was in fact an Aghori.

the Vedas, the Jains, the Pali Nikayas etc. of the Buddhists - that's the really old stuff...

Yes, very old but only the tip of the iceberg..

Back to cannabis -

If you look up in 'Shamanism and Tantra in the Himalayas' (Thames & Hudson, 2002) there's a paper written on some of the techniques used by modern day Shamans/Tantrica of Nepal. Of course there's a lot in their practices that aren't old but many that have roots that go back before the common era. The assumption that they're so old stems from their use of rituals that have vast similarities with other ancient cultures. One of these is the burying of snakes beneath a plot of cannabis during certain lunar cycles. The snake represents the Naga that live beneath the earth as per cosmological understanding and imbues the cannabis with special properties to give knowledge/foresight and healing powers etc.

Some scholars believe that Naga cult is older than Vedas, that the Vedas assimilated these old religions into one. It's rituals like these that could have roots from a very early era. But of course, we're talking about a plant that's probably been around in the Himalayas for very long time (possibly the origin of cannabis?), why wouldn't a plant with narcotic properties be very much a part of Himalayan early clan culture and society?

There's also references to 'yogic' practices associated with poisons. These are now associated with Viṣakaṇṭha, the form of Shiva who drank the poison from the churning of the ocean, as per the Samudra manthan mythology. This sect still survives as a Shivite sect but the practice stems to much older tantric practices. The aspirant takes narcotics/alcohol/arsenic etc in small doses and then has to maintain control over his functions and eject the poison from his body. Or in most cases just ride them out without losing concentration. Cannabis is the main stay of this group as per its Viṣakaṇṭha focus. If they can't eat they drink/eat/smoke cannabis; if they can't sleep they do the same; if they're ill, they do the same etc etc. Their whole lives revolves around taking cannabis and other poisons. The aim is to overcome and control what the drug does to the body and mind. They travel in groups with a leader who takes nothing (as he's supposedly already mastered the discipline). If one of the group starts giggling or loses concentration in the high then they get smacked with a big stick.

Point being is that cannabis could be (most likely) native to the Indic region which would presuppose a use before Islamic influence.

Modern scholars miss so much when they try to put everything together. Of course, they only have certain historical references to go by but that doesn't mean they're right when there's counter evidence to suggest a different scenario. There's a lot that doesn't fit still and history of the Indic cultures is very complex.

 

[GoatCheese]

Come on, guys. This thread should be about Phylos and landrace dna