[removed]

The paper you linked argues that the inscription found in Crete can probably be an indo Aryan language. Doesn't mean that it wasn't the other way around. Also one of the major issues with Indian archeology is that ancient Indians didn't really keep a lot of records and most of the records were passed orally rather than in any written form

[removed]

Further proof that if you make something really cool people will adopt it anywhere. True for even thousands of years ago I guess.

[removed]

[deleted]

Well, linguistically the Indian subcontinent is only home to a single branch of the wider Indo-European language family, the Indo-Aryan branch, and you'd expect that the originating region for the wider family to be home to multiple branches. Plus you have the inter-relation of Greek and Indo-Aryan language evidenced here: https://hasp.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/journals/ejvs/article/view/19770

Of coutse the southern Dravidian language and cultural groups are distinct from the northern groups, but it seems likely that some form of migration by cousins to the Hittites, Slavs, Celts and so on did occur very anciently.

Archaeological and linguistic evidence points overwhelmingly elsewhere. The prevailing hypothesis on the origin of Indo-European languages is the Kurgan Hypothesis. It suggests an origin in the Pontic steppe among a migratory people, who then spread westward into Europe and east and then south into Persia and India.

I’m not sure I understand the concept of a ‘right’ to influence. I don’t think it’s really avoidable. If you live in a world where conquest/raiding is the norm even in far flung places, influence is inevitable. Some of it might be from peacefully trading goods, or sharing stories, but more will come from plunder being taken back to one homeland or another. And all of these are unavoidable.

By virtue of being part of culture A, any time one spends in a medium of culture B will necessitate enculturation in both directions.

The language of ‘right to’ implies a different decision could have been made at all.

Considering that much of this came about in spaces formed by conquest tells us that harm was undeniably a factor.

Isn’t this just how culture/thought develops? Apart from an isolationist model, isn’t it a given that being in contact with other cultures and religions will give rise to cross-contamination?

As for whether respect was present or not, I have no idea. I’d think it would be hard to say, but if anyone has sources that shed light onto this I’m interested.

I found the history of young Nazi's partaking in encouraged duels; and intentionally slashing their faces and enhancing the gruesome scars quite interesting.

The Mensur scar became known as a ‘Duelling Scar’, or in later years the ‘Nazi Duelling Scar’, and it became a fashion trend amongst upper class German men. They would often pack the scar with horse hair to make the scar much more gruesome.

Can you give me the source of those evidence.

Weh hsve archeological evidence pointing it to being the other way around, and linguistic evidence backs this - the northern Indian languages shares descent but not the southern Dravidian language group for example. Plus we can see the evidence of the linguistic and cultural drift from the common source up in the steppe rather than a spread from India west.

That also sounds really interesting and I'd love to read more into it

What is your favorite obscure event in history, mine would be the Baxter rebellion

Curious, why couldn't have Sanskrit been the influence on Latin, Persian etc ?

Could the Indo-Europeans be native to India who migrated west and took their ideas there?

My M.A. thesis was on this topic. I was initially enthusiastic about the exciting prospect that Pyrrho "reinvented" Buddhism in Ancient Greece (ref. Kuzminsky), but the empirical evidence simply isn't there yet. The scepticism propounded by Sanjaya Belathiputta (sp?) seems like a better match at present, though I'm looking forward to future scholarship on the topic

I read the article and felt it answered all of these questions adequately. Panini was not a contemporary scholar, he was describing Sanskrit centuries ago. We knew that his machine worked, but could not follow his instructions now. (That's what the 'machine' was, a set of grammer instructions that produced perfectly correct Sanskrit words. It was a conceptual machine.)

Rishi cracked what Panini meant in his instructions, and now we have a way to construct close to perfect Sanskrit.

I think it was implying that at the time, it was one of the great intellectual achievements as it was well known how to use it. After finding the machine over 2000 years later, the process had been lost.

That's an awesome work. I referenced it repeatedly in my M.A. thesis, which was about the question of Buddhist influence on Pyrrho of Elis. I strongly agree that anyone interested in East-West comparative philosophy should absorb this book. Cheers

"Greek Philosophers such as Pyrrho really did bring back eastern ideas to Greece and wrote extensively about Buddhism. "

What did he have to say about Buddhism?

Then how did the Indo-European languages arrive in India? How can you explain Sanskrit’s clear relationship to Latin, Greek, Persian, Hittite? The Indo-Europeans barely changed the genetic landscape of India, but they had a profound impact on the language and religion of the subcontinent.

The bent knee in full figure reliefs or sculpture depicting Buddha or bodhisattvas.

Cool article, but too bad it doesn't go into more detail about this "rule" and how it works exactly. And what is this thing we're talking about? A stone, codex, machine, or abstract ideas? If it generated so many errors and was inaccurate, then why was it previously "considered to be one of the great intellectual achievements in history" if this student had to figure it all out in 2022? The article leaves me with more questions than answers, unfortunately.

Yet there is no proof of Aryan people writing the Vedas.

AFAIK you are correct, but there’s no reason they couldn’t have influenced/respected/reinforced one another’s beliefs over the centuries as complementary philosophies. OP asked about the surviving legacy of Greek Hinduism and as a practicing stoic I thought it novel at least to throw in my 2 cents