Part-1: About the Sanskrit
Word OM
Dear Ram Varmha and Friends,
Hi. Thank you for
your letter. I was not able to respond to your inquiries earlier because
of lack of time. You are a valuable member of this group and your contributions
have always been appreciated. Your question about OM is a tricky and sensitive
one as you also have noted in your letters. I did not want to get
involved in a subject which I did not know much about particularly its use in
the Indian religious culture. I will give you my views on OM now, but
before that let me briefly respond to your other points.
In your posting
dated 12/7/06 11:31 AM entitled: "Re: [bcn2004] Re: [hrl_2] I would like
to see examples of internal derivations of Turkish words", you said:
Sanskrit falls into the category of
Indo-European languages. Do you find that Sanskrit words
are also encrypted form of Turkish words?
Polat Kaya: Let
me just say that if Sanskrit is as the Latin and Greek languages, which is said
to be the case, then it is most likely that Sanskrit is also a manufactured
language from Turkish. However, this we will see as we try to analyze
some Sanskrit words. I must also say that I will not consider any
Sanskrit word for analysis if no meaning for it is given as I am not a
magician.
You said:
"Firstly, it will be interesting to see if
your technique works here too, with Sanskrit words. Otherwise, it may not be
advisable to use "Indo-European Languages" as the language family
that usurped Turkish words under guise. It may be appropriate to
limit the words of languages you show being of Turkish descent as just
European than Indo-European."
Polat Kaya: I
can understand your concern regarding Sanskrit being a manufactured language,
however, the term "Indo-European" has been coined by others. I have
nothing to do with its coining. And they keep saying that Sanskrit is the
earliest of the "Indo-European" languages. I have great doubt
that a "proto-IE" language of the type that is presently labelled as
"Indo-European" ever existed in the distant past. If the world
was speaking one language, it would be easier to manufacture many other
languages from that one language than creating totally new languages from
scratch and independent of each other. Particularly, when that one
universal language has all the building blocks of syllabic words (such as
Turco-Sumerian) which can be used as building blocks to build a variety of
languages from that model language. Additionally, if we allow restructuring
and linguistic wrapping to change the nature of the original text, there should
be no problem in coming up with a language like Sanskrit. However, with your
help and understanding we will tackle some Sanskrit words during our
discussion. I must also point out that I do not mean to offend anyone in my
analysis of these words.
You said:
"Secondly, are there any historical
evidence that you can provide which shows that there was a systematic effort to
encrypt Turkish words Indo-European. By this I mean, do you think a group
of people, Indo-Europeans, gathered together and decided to take a bunch of
Turkish words, encrypt them for the use in Indo-European languages. What
logic would you attribute to that? Would they have done that at one sitting or
in the course of generations or longer? What would they have gained by
that? If they were clever enough to encrypt Turkish words to Indo-European,
could they not have fashioned their own vocabulary using non-Turkish
words?"
Polat
Kaya: If the languages were being
manufactured from a model language rather secretly, one would not expect
those who did it to come forward and declare "this is what we are
doing". They would do it secretly and behind closed doors, that is, "cabalistically".
I have already pointed out that even the word "CABAL" said to
be from Hebrew word "qabbalah" was
actually from the Turkish word "kapali" meaning
"closed, secret, behind closed doors." Have you ever heard of a
secretive group preparing to commit a coup-detat coming
forward and declaring what they are going to do? I believe your
answer would be NO. Similarly, those manufactured languages from the
model language of Turkish, would not declare it or admit it easily. Have
you ever seen those exposes on TV where they secretly videotape criminals
in the act and then confront them with the video evidence? You will
note that even when the criminal sees the damning video of his crime, he never
admits to his crime. In fact, they even get belligerent and threaten to
call the police or they just walk away.
Thus in this regard there is no historical evidence stating that such events
took place on such and such a date or place. Akkadians did it to the
Sumerian language. And most probably that constituted the model for
others to do the same. Presently, the evidence is the multitude of words
that have been recorded in dictionaries where we get words defined with certain
meanings. The fact that many of them can be shown to have been made up
from words and phrases of Turkish is clear cut evidence that it has been done.
From the probability point of view, it is not expected to find these
correspondences.
I do think that a "group" affiliated with Aryans jointly
decided to have their own languages different from the one language that was
spoken at the time. Language is a most important means of communication in the
lives of people. In the hands of politicians, who in their deceptive and
exploitative minds who want to exploit anything and everything anywhere, it is
an extremely effective tool to control and manage the affairs of people.
Particularly, if a controlling group has a different language than the commonly
spoken language, that provides a lot of economic, political, and military
advantage for the group.
Of course they would not have done it in one sitting. Language making is an
ongoing process so that nobody would know about it except those who regularly
did such word manufacturing and also kept track of it. Religious organizations
are the perfect grounds for such activities. As I said, they would have
gained a language that would make each group a core for a nation based on the
language that they are speaking. It is a very important consideration.
All concocted languages, no matter how small the group that speaks it,
have been used against the main body in dividing and controlling the main body
of people. There are presently, secret organizations working under the
guise of religion who would like to divide nations into smaller units based
even on the dialects of the same language that people talk - and after the
division is complete, they take over the rest as the targetted unit. When
people are not united, they are subject to attacks by other groups who have
agendas of their own ambitions.
There is no question that they were clever and very knowledgable people about
the model language that they wanted to utilize for their purpose. They were
also clever enough to follow the easiest path in achieving their goal.
Manufacturing a language from a model language is far easier than
creating a new one from nothing. They took the easy way by
altering the names, words and phrases of the target language -
knowing that no one would know the difference and nothing would be missing to
attract the attention of the owners. So they did it very cleverly.
Of course they could have used non-Turkish words - providing that there
were non-Turkish words then. What they did first was define a concept in
Turkish and then they restructured that defining Turkish phrase into another
format. Of course after the foundation stones of the new language were in
place, they also generated new rules for the new language and also new words
from already restructured words. This made life for the "nation
builders" quite comfortable. Since ancient times the religious groups
everywhere have been in the forefront of people in any community. Mostly
they were the ones who taught the young and impressionable and shaped the
behaviours of society. They did this everywhere. It was in the best
interest of the religious groups to be active in this field because it brought
easy wealth and distinction.
You said:
"What benefit would they have gained in
encrypting Turkish words into Indo-European words and hiding the truth from the
world? Was it because the Indo-Europeans disliked the Turks that they found it
necessary to hide the fact that the words they used from Turkish had to be
encrypted?"
Polat Kaya:
As I said above, the religious groups had the most benefit from it.
Having a distinct language for their religious rituals made them special
in the eyes of the public - and the only ones who understood what was being
said and what was being done. It is undeniable that they received great
benefits for what they were doing.
My answer to
your second comment is NO. People do not start life hating each other.
Hate is a feeling that one develops after he/she meets and interacts with
others. Even in present day Europe, those who may "hate" Turks do not
even know the Turks. They have been indoctrinated by their church-fathers
to hate Turks. In such a social feeling, the Church has played the most
decisive role. Religious groups are in the best position to generate and spread
hatred. If the ancient Turkish culture and language were being used worldwide,
it is then expected that some groups would want to rise up to a similar
situation. In order to achieve that, they start the smear and hate
campaign, as we keep seeing examples of in present times.
You said:
Permit me to give you a few Sanskrit
(I-E) words for you to find encrypted Turkish equivalents. Kindly find the
Turkish equivalents and then we can compare the meanings of the Sanskrit words
with what you consider are Turkish equivalents.
1. OM
2. Vinaza
3. Kale
4. Vibhirita
5. Buddhi
Polat Kaya: First
of all, if you are expecting me to associate any Sanskrit word that comes to
your mind as a test of what I am saying, that would be an unfair and
unreasonable expectation. You cannot expect me to know all things everywhere.
I never claimed such a capability. As I said earlier, I am not making
"gravity measurements". I am only showing you and others that
"languages are man made and many of them have been generated from a
progenitor language which I call "Turkish". So you should not expect
that I will have an answer for any word that comes to your mind. But as
the discussion develops, I will show you that most likely Sanskrit words have
also been made up and restructured from Turkish.
You asked me about
the Sanskrit word OM together with other words. In fact you first asked
about OM almost a year ago. I will dwell on OM first before I go to other
words. As I am an alien to the ancient Indian religious system, I had to make
some research in the subject matter and understand the concept that uses OM as
a religion base. In the process and to my surprise, I found that the word
OM was an altered form of a Turkish word, although it is not used in Turkish
culture as it is used in Indian religious culture. In my presentation below, I
beg the forgiveness of my Artemis lady readers for my being candid, and since
this is a scientific discussion forum, I can confidently say that the word OM
is an altered form of the Turkish word "AM". This word is not
used as a base of a religion in Turkish culture, although it is a word that
should not be voiced readily, particularly in the presence of women. The
Turkish word "AM" represents a very important concept for all of us
since AM is the "birth" place of us all. It is the place where
human conception and creation takes place. It is the place where the union
between man and woman takes place. It is the place that makes woman special for
man and drives men to turn around women as a moth turns around a candle flame.
In Turkish the word AM is the name of the creative genital of a woman.
It is the sacred thing that attracts man to woman and binds man to woman.
Furthermore this name is also the same in Turkish for the animal
kingdom. So, AM is an extremely important part of human regeneration,
creation, continuity and survival on earth. And I say that this ancient Turkish
word AM has been introduced into ancient Indian religious concept in the form
of the so-called "Sanskrit" word OM.
In this regard I
have the fllowing definitions of OM from an online Sanskrit dictionary:
From online Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon, http://webapps.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/tamil/recherche, we have the following definition:
|
1 |
om |
ind. (%{av} Un2. i , 141 ; originally %{oM} = %{AM}
, which may be derived from %{A} BRD.) , a word of solemn affirmation and
respectful assent , sometimes translated by `" yes , verily , so be
it "' (and in this sense compared with Amen ;
it is placed at the commencement of most Hindu1 works , and
as a sacred exclamation may be uttered [but not so as to be heard by ears
profane] at
the beginning and end of a reading of the Vedas or previously to any prayer ;
it is also regarded as a particle of auspicious salutation [Hail!] ; %{om}
appears first in the Upanishads as a mystic monosyllable ,
and is there set forth as the object of profound religious meditation , the
highest spiritual efficacy being attributed not only to the whole word but
also to the three sounds %{a} , %{u} , %{m} , of which
it consists ; in later times %{om} is the mystic name for the Hindu1 triad ,
and represents
the union of the three gods , viz. a (Vishn2u) , %{u} (S3iva) , %{m}
(Brahma1) ; it may also be typical of the three Vedas ; %{om}
is usually called %{praNava} , more rarely %{akSara} , or %{ekAkSara} , and
only in later times %{oMkAra}) VS. S3Br. ChUp. &c. ; (Buddhists
place %{om} at the beginning of their %{vidyA@SaDakSarI} or mystical
formulary in six syllables [viz. %{om@maNi@padme@hUM}] ; according to T.
%{om} may be used in the following senses: %{praNave} , %{Arambhe} ,
%{svIkAre} , %{anumatau} , %{apA7kRtau} , %{asvIkAre} , %{maGgale} , %{zubhe}
, %{jJeye} , %{brahmaNi} ; with preceding %{a} or %{A} , the %{o} of %{om}
does not form Vr2iddhi (%{au}) , but Gun2a (%{o}) Pa1n2. 6-1 , 95.) |
Polat Kaya: As it
is noted, the first entry in this definition states that OM was originally AM.
This proves me correct. AM is another monosyllabic word of a
monosyllabic language that Turkish is. The definition that it consists of three
sounds, {a}, {u} and {m} is also interesting because, these three
make the Turkish phrase "AM U" meaning "it is AM (OM)".
OM (AMU) is also said to be Brahman which is the Hindu creator God.
In this regard, AMU is very much like the Sumerian ANU and the Turkish
HAN-O.
In the Sanskrit
definition above, it is also said that {om} is the mystic name for the Hindu1 triad
and represents the union of the three gods, viz. a (Vishn2u) , {u} (S3iva) ,
{m} (Brahma1). I want to come back to
this "triad' aspect of the word in another discussion.
We must also note
that in the above definition, OM is also compared with the word AMEN which is a
prominent name in the ancient Masarian pantheon. In that ancient
pantheon, AMEN or AMIN or AMUN or OMEN was the name of the creator Sky-God.
This I explained in my paper where I presented my reading of title
cartouche of the wrongly read name of "TUTANKHAMEN". I also
explained AMEN AMON, OMEN, MENO also represented the "human being"
himself/herself from the Turkish word "MEN" meaning "I am"
which has been altered into English as "MAN". In ancient
Turanian religious understanding of GOD and MAN, MAN (Turkish "MEN")
is very much at the heart of the MAN - GOD relation. In that very ancient
concept, MAN is GOD and GOD is MAN (MEN). In addition to this understanding, we
must also note that the word AMEN, when viewed as "AM-EN" is the
Turkish word "AM'IN" meaning "of AM". Thus, even in
this context, the word OM is from Turkish AM. The suffix "-IN, -UN"
in AMEN or AMIN is the Turkish verbal possessive suffix meaning "of".
Since OM (AM) has
the creative power, it may be called "godly". In this regard, I
see that it is also embedded in the name MITRA meaning God. In my earlier
posting in which I discussed the term "SHAB-E YALDA" (from Turkish
"YIL BASHIDI), I also mentioned that MITRA, with M to N shift, was an
altered form of the Turkish word TANRI meaning GOD. In the context of OM,
when the name MITRA is rearranged as "AMTIR", we find the Turkish
word "AMTIR" meaning "it is AM (OM)", that is, it is the
female genital organ. Again we find that the Turkish name of this female
creative organ is secretly embedded in the name MITRA. Is this a coincidence or
just a clever arrangement of Turkish words?
All of this clearly
shows that Sanskrit has also used Turkish words as source for at least some of
its definitions, and the ancient Indian religion makers have used this Turkish
word (i.e., AM) in an altered and disguised way to come up with a
"religous" concept for themselves. We will explore some more Sanskrit
words in order to see validity of what I am saying in the case of Sanskrit.
In ancient Turanian
GOD concept, GOD is both male and female. It does not have a mother or
father. It has a duality nature; it is both white and dark. While
Judeo-Christianity is God's DARK (KARA) aspect, the Turanian religious concept
constitutes the White (AK) aspect of God. This very fact has much to do in the
formation of the words for European languages from Turkish. The words of
European languages are the broken up versions of the straightforward language
of Turkish. For example, compare DARK with Turkish KARA meaning
"black" or "dark". The word DARK is an altered form
of Turkish KARA with some linguistic wrapping. When DARK is
rearranged as "KRAD", it is an altered form of the Turkish word
"KaRADI" meaning "it is black". As in countless
European language words, the Turkish suffix -DI or -TI has been used as the
wrapping and disguising element in the formation of "DARK".
At this point I
must bring to your attention that the front particle in the English words
AMNION and AMNIOTIC (as in Amneotic fluid) is nothing but the Turkish word AM.
When the word AMNIOTIC is rearranged letter-by-letter as
"AMTIN-OCI" where letter C is K, I find the Turkish expression
"AMTAN AKI" (AMDAN AKI) meaning "fluid from female
genital", that is, the fluid that flows before giving birth. So the source
of this so-called "English" word is totally Turkish, although it has
been restructured, Anglicised and disguised from Turkish. The etymology
provided in dictionaries for the word "AMNION" is totally bogus and
dishonest. Here it is:
AMNION defined as: "[From
Greek, the membrane round the fetus, diminitive of amnos meaning
lamb]. A thin membrane forming a closed sac surrounding the embryos of
reptiles, birds and mammals. It contains a serous fluid, the amniotic
fluid, in which the embryo is immersed." [Webster's Dictionary, 1947,
p. 35].
Actually, the word
AMNION represents a placenta. The concept of AMNION has no relation with
the Greek word AMNOS meaning "lamb". So the given etymology is
a total unfounded concoction. When the word AMNION is rearranged letter-by-letter
as "AMIN-ON", I find the Turkish phrase "AMIN ÖN" meaning
"front of AM" which is a misnomer. Actually in Turkish, there
are several words for placenta. They are:
1)
SON meaning the "late one" or "after
one" referring to the placenta which drops last, that is, after the birth
of the baby;
2)
EȘ meaning "mate":
and
3)
IKIZ meaning "the twin of baby".
4)
MEȘIME meaning "afterbirth,
placenta". For example, there is the Turkish word MAȘIMEI
DÜNYA meaning "SKY", that is, "the placenta around the
earth". This definition regards the "sky" as a "placenta
around the earth". MEȘIME
is attributed to Arabic. In fact MEȘIME,
in the form of "EM- EȘIM", is the altered and
Semitized form of the Turkish definition "AM EȘIM"
meaning "the mate of AM".
So, it seems that
many non-Turkish groups have benefited from this Turkish word and used it in
words related to "AM" (OM).
An
online paper, in describing the Sanskrit word TANTRA, at url http://www.luckymojo.com/tktantradefinition.html ,
gives a statement as follows:
"Tantra
(a Sanskrit word which means "woven together") is a term loosely
applied to several divergent and even contradictory schools of Hindu yoga in
which the sexual union of male and female is worshipped either in principle or
in human practice. It has also come to be applied to sex-based religious
practices developed in other religions, including Bon,
Tibetan Buddhism, Taoism, Christianty, Judaism, and Transcendentalism."
First
of all Ram, my question to you is: is this a faithful and accurate definition
to you regarding the Indian religious culture?
Secondly,
the Sanskrit term "TANTRA" also has a form of the Turkish word
"TANRITI"meaning "it is GOD" embedded in it. Thus,
the term TANTRA seems to give an air of "godliness" in the eyes of
yoga operators.
It
appears to me that the ancient words always had more than one meaning, but the
meanings associated with them were defined in Turkish word formations found in
them. The so-called "Hebrew" cabalists looking for hidden
meanings in ancient words are most likely looking for such concealments defined
in Turkish and found in any word.
TANTRA
in the rearranged forms of:
a)
"ARTANT" is a form of the Turkish word "ARTANDI" meaning
"it is that which increases in number".
b)
"RATANT" is a form of the Turkish word "yaRATANTi" meaning
"it is creator", and also
c)
"RATANT" is a form of the Turkish word "uRATANTI"
(ÜRETENTI) meaning "it is that which multiplies".
d)
"R-ATANT" is a form of the Turkish word "öRü ATANDI" (ÖRÜ
EDENDI) meaning "it is that which makes woven together".
All
of these are qualities of God and also found im OM (AM).
The use of the word
OM is described very clearly in an online paper which also identifies the thing
that OM represents, at url:
http://www.arcane-archive.org/religion/hinduism/kalajapalingam-1.php
The description
given in this religious ritual called KALAJAPALINGAM may be interesting reading
material in understanding the identity of OM. In the description of this
ritual, if what is being done to a woman is carried out under the guise of
"religion", then, it can be said that such a ritual is an effective
and cunning way of seducing and exploting women.
It seems that he
word OM (AM) itself as a sound has a resonating quality about it. When
the word OM is said, the lips close and the sound reverberates in the mouth and
in the bones of the skull. The word when repeated loudly many times, must
create a sense of hallucination in the mind of the participant. Probably, this
is the reason the Indian Tantra practitioners repeat the word so many times in
their "religious" unions with women. In this regard, the online paper
at url: http://www.arcane-archive.org/religion/hinduism/kalajapalingam-1.php is
rather very enlightening. I hope you will give your views regarding this
writing.
With regard to OM,
I cannot conclude my response to you without mentioning the following:
I want to say that
the Turkish word AM (OM) is also the name for the unnamed BOX that the
so-called "Greek" mythological "God" ZEUS (from Turkish
"SÖZ meaning "word") gave to the first model of woman named
"PANDORA". She was not supposed to open that box.
Supposedly out of curiosity, PANDORA opened the "BOX", and with that
act, all the evil things, except "hope" for man and woman, escaped
out of it and spread in the world before the BOX was closed. This
so-called BOX, referred to in the mythology, is actually a metaphor
representing the genital box of woman - which is AM in Turkish. And in
this world, this BOX is a very important and sensitive source of endless
problems between man and woman.
Lastly, in this
"Greek" mythology, the name PANDORA is also sourced from Turkish.
When the name PANDORA is rearranged as "APA-NDOR" or
"P-ANADOR", I find the Turkish expression "APA ANADUR"
meaning "she is the grandmother", that is, she is the ancestoral
mother of all mankind as well as the model mother of all women since her
creation. Obviously, PANDORA is a restructured and Hellenized form of the
Turkish expression "APA ANADUR" meaning "She is the
grandmother", So she has been blamed for all the evils that man had
to endure since that time. As it is known, PANDORA (APA-ANA)
mythologically was the first model of "woman" and hence, she is the
personification of the first "mother".
To sum up, I can
say that in this essay, I have demystified the identity of the Sanskrit word OM
and its hidden aspects as related to the Turkish word AM. Obviously, the
early Brahman priests took the Turkish word AM, converted it to OM, and used it
as a basis for a new religion where women were expected to participate fully.
My very best wishes
to you and to all,
Polat Kaya
09/01/2007
Ram
Varmha wrote:
Dear Dr. Kaya,
Sanskrit falls into the category of
Indo-European languages. Do you find that Sanskrit words
are also encrypted form of Turkish words?
Firstly, it will be interesting to see if your
technique works here too, with Sanskrit words. Otherwise, it may not be
advisable to use "Indo-European Languages" as the language family
that usurped Turkish words under guise. It may be appropriate to
limit the words of languages you show being of Turkish descent as just
European than Indo-European.
Secondly, are there any historical evidence
that you can provide which shows that there was a systematic effort to
encrypt Turkish words Indo-European. By this I mean, do you think a group
of people, Indo-Europeans, gathered together and decided to take a bunch of
Turkish words, encrypt them for the use in Indo-European languages. What
logic would you attribute to that? Would they have done that at one sitting or
in the course of generations or longer? What would they have gained by
that? If they were clever enough to encrypt Turkish words to Indo-European,
could they not have fashioned their own vocabulary using non-Turkish
words?
What benefit would they have gained in
encrypting Turkish words into Indo-European words and hiding the truth from the
world? Was it because the Indo-Europeans disliked the Turks that they found it
necessary to hide the fact that the words they used from Turkish had to be
encrypted?
Permit me to give you a few Sanskrit
(I-E) words for you to find encrypted Turkish equivalents. Kindly find the
Turkish equivalents and then we can compare the meanings of the Sanskrit words
with what you consider are Turkish equivalents.
1. OM
2. Vinaza
3. Kale
4. Vibhirita
5. Buddhi
Given below is the accepted range of
Indo-European languages. Are you saying that they are all derived from Turkish?
http://www.krysstal.com/langfams_indoeuro.html
I sincerely mean no disrespect towards
you. Just curious regarding the continued stream of Indo-European words
that presumably came from Turkish.
Thanking you and wishing you the best.
Regards,
Ram
Polat Kaya <tntr@...> wrote:
Dear Petr Hrubis,
Thank you for
writing. I do not know how long you have been following my writings, but there
seems to be some misunderstanding of what I am saying and showing.
If you think that I
am "transforming" Turkish words and phrases to try and catch a fit in
some Indo-European word, that would be wrong thinking. What I am doing is
deciphering words of European "languages" back into Turkish because
those words have been manufactured from Turkish by way of restructuring Turkish
words and phrases. For example, please read carefully my recent writings
about the words "ARITHMETICA" and "MATHEMATICUS"
(The
remainder is cut. )