Phylos Galaxy - Landrace discussion

[therevverend]

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

No. Vajrayana Buddhism dates back to the 3rd Century CE. It's probably the Buddhism that the West is most familiar with. In the form of Tibetan Buddhism. Which has been spread to China and Mongolia and Europe and Japan and all sorts of other places. The Dalai Lama is a 'Tantric Buddhist. Bhairava and all the Buddhist deities borrowed from Hinduism are Tantric. They have nothing to do with 'true Buddhism' and I'm not sure the Buddha would be impressed but they're what the West views as Buddhism.

What you consider 'real Buddhism' is restricted to Sri Lanka.

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

You're exactly right and I apologize but when someone who professes to be some sort of expert says something as ignorant and crazy as 'Cannabis only became a part of Hinduism a couple hundred years ago' it begs a reply. And that Tantric Buddhism is not 'Buddhism'. Good God I don't think I've ever met a Buddhist who wasn't in the Vajra school of Buddhism. Hell Richard Gere is a Vajrayana Buddhist right?

 

[therevverend]

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

You mean the way you know it. Because you're the expert and smarter then all of us? It's going to be a waste of time finding references because you'll nick and pick about any dates older then 1100 CE because it doesn't fit your pet theory. You don't like references to animists but the animist beliefs were around before anything else. Evidence for cannabis has been found at the Indus River site at Harappan that's 3000-4000 BCE.

You mention the Islamic Invaders from Central Asia as if they were the first ones. The Aryans were from Central Asia, the Sakas, the Huns, the Kushans and dozens of others. Why would the Muslims be the first to use cannabis and bring it to India?

An irony here is that you're saying that Indian texts that were written over a thousand year ago were edited later to add references to cannabis. I'm finding scholars who are saying the exact opposite, that over a thousand years later references to cannabis were omitted or changed to express a negative attitude towards cannabis because Muslims use cannabis. I find this to be much more likely considering your and others attempts to erase cannabis from mainstream Hinduism.

God fucking dammit I hate computers I've been typing for 30 minutes and I hit something and it all vanished. I can't write it all over again, at least not now. Fucking A. I hate keyboards this happens way too much. To summarize I can pull out dozens of ancient references to cannabis use in Hinduism, lots of evidence that Soma is Bhang, and I can't find half of my reference books. Cannabis has been found at the Indus River site that's 3000-4000 years old.

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...

Really? Going professional on us? Well I've got my credentials right here in my...FUCK YOU!!! I've been to India too but I don't feel compelled to mention it in every post I make...

 

[therevverend]

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

What what what? No that's not true. Everything you say is not true. Sadhus have been around for thousands of years. Alexander encountered sadhus. Have you forgotten about Kalanos the 'Naked Philosopher'? I'll reference you to a website I'm sure you'll appreciate.

https://dainikroshni.blogspot.com/2015/12/sadhu-defeats-alexander-great.html

Buddha hung out with Sadhus when he was eating a hemp seed a day. The Mahabharata and Ramayana are full of Sadhus I find it surprising that a self professed expert in oriental religion doesn't know this stuff. How long have the Kapalikas been around? Hsan Tsang from the 7th century talks about naked guys walking around covered in ash and dressed in bones.

Of course you'll say the Sadhus then are completely different then the Sadhus now. The orders are different, the ones back then hated cannabis. There's no recorded evidence, as if Sadhus have a membership sign in sheet made out of granite that lasts thousands of years and records how much each order smoked. If an aghori from today was transported back in time a couple thousand years you couldn't tell the difference. And I'm sure his brothers from the past would have a stash of cannabis readily available.

All this stuff is so ancient, you brush off few centuries or a thousand years like it's meaningless. The USA is only 2 centuries old! And you're snorting at orders founded in the 8th CE like they're nothing!

You'll notice almost alll these references are from Westerners or other outsiders. It's no surprise that references to cannabis explode in the 16th century. When westerners began travelling to India and recording their observations. Even less of a surprise that we know a lot more about India after Muslims arrived, before that India was very much it's own world.

Of course I'm sure you'll say strawman...blah blah....tantric blah blah. Whether you like it or not sex and drugs are part of Hinduism. Tantric Hinduism has been around for a long long time. If you believe Gandhi and Vivekananda and Ngpaka Hindus have always been vegetarians, have sex only to procreate, cannabis and alcohol are evil vices forced onto them by Muslims, Christians, and other outsiders.

The other argument you've used is that everyone has a different opinion on all this stuff. If you celebrate Holi in one place they get high, in another place they don't. This is how India and Hinduism is! Of course you'll find places where nobody uses cannabis and hasn't used it for thousands of years. Throw a rock and you'll hit a caste that's been using cannabis for 10,000 years.

Of all the world's religions cannabis places a larger role in Hinduism by far then any other. Your argument is that cannabis is a Muslim thing? How many Muslims believe Allah uses bhang! You can find bhang in the Vedas you certainly can't find it in the Koran! Muslim cannabis users are a much much smaller % of the total amount of Muslims then Hindus who use cannabis including bhang. This is all ridiculous, and of course it has nothing to do with Phylos which makes it more ridiculous but it's ridiculous!

Good God you're naming your strains after Hindu Gods and then saying cannabis has nothing to do with Hinduism! Did you ask the Hindus that grew those strains how long cannabis has been growing in the Parvati Valley? As long as it's been named the Parvati Valley? Cannabis Indica isn't called Indica because it's native to Afghanistan. It's because back in the 18th century, over 200 years ago, which is a very very long time, when Europeans discovered drug cannabis they discovered it from Southern India being grown by Hindus! This is like arguing which came first the chicken or the egg? Your answer is they both came from Central Asia?

 

[therevverend]

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.

Feck? it rhymes with Peck? I don't know is that a Cambridge accent or something?

Obviously because smoking is a NEW WORLD TRADITION. NOBODY SMOKED CANNABIS BEFORE COLUMBUS. The Koran, the Vedas were all written long before anyone smoked cannabis. The qalandars WERE ALREADY IN INDIA BY THE 16TH CENTURY!! This is the dumbest, straw maniest, thing I've ever read! Or anyone has ever read! In the history of mankind! Chronic sacramental use of cannabis was already in place before the Qalandar orders were formed! In the form of ingestion. All cannabis users had to ingest cannabis before the 16th century.

In the 16th century Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Christians, all started smoking cannabis and tobacco. Does that prove any FUCKING thing? I'm guessing this is the root of much of your brain fuckery. I'm not saying Hindus used cannabis 200 years ago, or 1000 years ago, or 1500 years ago. Or that Hindus were using cannabis as they were writing the Vedas. Of course they were using cannabis in their spiritual rituals all this time. I'm saying Hindus were using cannabis before the Vedas were written. Before they were Hindus.

This is where this whole shitty discussion ties back into Phylos and becomes relevant again. There's a reason most Phylos samples trace back to southern India. Because the Hindus in Southern India have been growing cannabis for a long long long time. Cannabis has been cultivated in the Indian Subcontinent for thousands of years. It was not brought by Central Asian invaders as some (one?) would have you believe.

When did cannabis arrive in SE Asia? How old is the Hindu culture there? When did cannabis arrive in Indonesia? How old is the Hindu culture there? Cannabis arrived in Madagascar along with settlers from SE Asia. Who brought cannabis with them. When did that happen? If you believe cannabis use started with smoking you are the wrong person to be playing at expert.

Next you'll be arguing that cannabis use in China began in Eastern Turkestan...

 

[frostqueen]

Wow, this sure devolved into another tedious dick measuring contest.

 

[ngakpa]

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

yep, fair comment

to get back to that point

pollen evidence from the western Indian Himalaya indicates that cannabis cultivation first began there c. 500 BCE

for people with a sincere interest in this topic, it's clear that's what you'd expect

i.e., the big historic popularisation of cannabis use and consumption is an Iron Age phenomenon that was instigated by Central Asian nomadic cultures, as represented only in the latest of the Vedas and in the 'Scythians'

re. the responses from a couple of posters above:

you're totally misrepresenting what I said, whether you realise it or not...

 

[ngakpa]

Obviously because smoking is a NEW WORLD TRADITION. NOBODY SMOKED CANNABIS BEFORE COLUMBUS. The Koran, the Vedas were all written long before anyone smoked cannabis.

except like, you know, the Scythians etc. etc. etc.

 

[ngakpa]

If you believe cannabis use started with smoking

oh, right...

do you want to let the archeologists know, or shall I?

smoking predates drinking, there's literally the archeological record to prove it...

 

[ngakpa]

I I'm amazed you think the Nikayas are old.

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

ohhh, mate...

look, I will try to keep this clearly to cannabis, ok:

obviously the Himalaya is the prime candidate for the region of India where cannabis has existed for longest

we know cannabis pollen records indicate 500 BCE as when cultivation in the western Indian Himalaya first started... same goes for Nepal

the earliest texts for the historical Buddha are from the same era: c. 6th to 5th century BCE, and they provide extensive evidence for what was going on right at the foot of the Himalaya along the Ganges Plain, from Uttar Pradesh to Bihar, plus a lot more

they were oral texts, memorised and spoken, and evidence indicates that is in fact a more accurate form of transmission than writing

so the Nikayas, the sermons of the historic Buddha, weren't "written"

they're 6th or 5th century BCE texts, from areas directly to the south of the Himalaya on the Ganges Plain

and to answer your question, I know they refer to "dreadlocked ascetics" because I've read the Nikayas, including translating sections of them from the Pali (Prakrit)

so, you can read the Nikayas and you will find no reference to Shiva, cannabis, Tantra, or the rest

and you will not find earlier Indian material than that outside the Vedas, Jainism, and a handful of Brahminical stuff

point being:

there's feck all evidence for cannabis use at this early date outside the pollen evidence for cultivation in the Himalaya,

in the Himalaya it involved non-Aryan non-Brahminical cultures: the Scythians and the Khasa, who had arrived from Central Asia

the problem is, this is an interesting topic, but the responses you're giving are so far wide of the mark and just keeping strawmanning away... and y'know, it gets pretty tiresome, doubly so when it's obvious when you're dealing with faith-based half-baked research...

I've got no problem with people indulging in whatever fantasies they like, but it's a problem when they insist everyone else has to pretend it's true too

as for 'feck', it's from Ireland, as in 'feck off cup':

[YOUTUBEIF]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwcXtWFWic[/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[ngakpa]

all the stuff below is you strawmanning, again

literally none of this is stuff I said, but to respond:

What you consider 'real Buddhism' is restricted to Sri Lanka.

I said nothing about what's 'real Buddhism' and what isn't

'real Buddhism' is not a term I would ever use

but it's clear you're referring to Theravada Buddhism

that's found in Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Burma, India, and even southern China, not just Sri Lanka

the Sri Lankan ordination lineage even had to be reintroduced from Thailand at one point...

someone who professes to be some sort of expert says something as ignorant and crazy as 'Cannabis only became a part of Hinduism a couple hundred years ago' it begs a reply.

I didn't say that, as I guess we're both well aware

And that Tantric Buddhism is not 'Buddhism'.

and I didn't say that either...

Tantra needs to be understood as it's own thing, which intersects with Buddhism and 'Hinduism'

---

...anyway, it's sad, but this subforum is kind of a horrible place really, isn't it?

 

[ngakpa]

Wow, this sure devolved into another tedious dick measuring contest.

yes, that

plus the people who are clearly psychotic or otherwise unwell

plus the people with user names and profile pics that suggest some pretty nasty proclivities and you think 'is this a place where I want to spend any more of my time

to which the answer is definitely 'no, it isn't'

 

[Guest]

Off topic but so interesting...I love reading about other cultures,especially oriental civilizations appear to me so exotic and mysterious .It 's a shame that this conversation cannot be held in another thread with more respect to each other.It would be great read.Well,I don't really mind the name calling as long as you keep posting interesting stuff. Really now,have a toke and get along.

To be back on topic, is seed DNA different than plant tissue DNA from same plant,or is it that they don't have the tech to decode from seed?I think RSC strains would be awesome checkpoints for Phylos.

 

[gaiusmarius]

i have to admit i have very little knowledge on any of this stuff, but it's important to keep the discussion civil. telling people to fuck or feck off is never conducive to a good discussion.

maybe we should move all these posts into their own thread on this stuff?

 

[Kalbhairav]

^Yes, to that gaiusmarius^

I'm out; it's definitely an interesting conversation on many levels but possibly a bit too fragmented.

Have fun all

 

[frostqueen]

yes, that

plus the people who are clearly psychotic or otherwise unwell

plus the people with user names and profile pics that suggest some pretty nasty proclivities and you think 'is this a place where I want to spend any more of my time

to which the answer is definitely 'no, it isn't'

What gets me is that he literally said 'fuck you!', a bannable offense, along with his entire attitude... but no ban. How does that work, exactly? I've seen a lot of great contributors banned here for a lot less.

I mean, how hard is it to just discuss things like a grownup? Then I see people tag the guy as 'helpful' and just think great, yeah, definitely let's encourage rudeness and hostility. It's like fourth grade at recess.

I can see why so few people really step forward to contribute here. Kinda low brow.

 

[Hrpuffnkush]

your conspiracy has been shot down so many times, why not just give it up?

mmmm he's not that far off ,

where has it been shot down at?

where are my 12+ samples that rob brought in to phylos march 2014 ? lol close to 5 years later there 3 up there , not say that they were stolen or lost what ever there excuse is. ,

They sure didn't respect the samples or the people help them start there galaxy

 

[Hrpuffnkush]

Pre64 , SamWatson was all over IC bugging people for samples and pushing 64 , have seen him on here as much since then ?

Telling me the BOEL wants it Legal. LOL. Classic

 

[Water-]

Sorry I looked back a few pages and I couldnt find what you are talking about and I dont exactly remember what the conspiracy was?

im not interested in arguing though anyway, so you are going to have to let it go.

sorry to hear that you had a bad experience with rob.

 

[meizzwang]

Excuse the redundancy if this has already been asked (there's a lot of outside noise in this thread so I didn't read it all), but does anyone have a link to how we can contribute samples to the phylos galaxy? And considering hrpuffnkush's comment, who are the legit people to contact?

 

[CannaRed]

Phylos
https://phylos.bio/sims/cart