Search Results
7/9/2025, 11:32:58 AM
>>509906450
>In Bө and Bön the question of the bearing of Indo-Iranian culture and religion on Bön is brought up many times and through the study of rituals, myths, legend, religious texts and scholarly works it is clearly demonstrated that the ‘Indo-Iranian influence’ is actually for the most part proto-Indo-Iranian and goes back to prehistory, to the widespread international culture of Prehistoric Bön of Eurasia (a term coined by the author). Because the phenomenon of Prehistoric Bön of Eurasia was (and to some extent still is) an international one, we cannot speak of the ‘influence’ of one culture on another but rather we should explain this from the perspective of the pan-Eurasian Ur-religion
>In chapters VI and XV this question is approached via a comparative study of the deities of the proto-Indo-Iranian, Vedic, Zoroastrian, Bönpo, Bө Murgel and Tibetan Buddhist pantheons such as Mithra-Ahura, Mitravaruna, Ahura Mazda and Hormuzd Yazad, Nyipangse, Hormusta Tengeri, Pehar and so on
>The Gumilev-Kuznetsov theory (point 2) is critically appraised and demonstrated to be without any substance. The origins of the Gesar/Geser epic are traced to the figure of the archetypical superhero of proto-Mongol and proto-Iranian cultures and the possible location and ethnic identity of the lost kingdom of Phrom are explored
>Bө and Bön brings in new arguments which show that the ‘Central Asian Buddhism theory’ (point 1) falls short of the mark as the definite source of Indo-Iranian influence on Bön in general and, indeed, on Yungdrung Bön in particular. This is demonstrated here through thorough and critical examination of connections between Bön-Buddhism-Shamanism/Tengrism which is based on oral and written sources, cultural parallels, history and above all, on the comparative study of rituals and myths of Bön and Bө Murgel
>In Bө and Bön the question of the bearing of Indo-Iranian culture and religion on Bön is brought up many times and through the study of rituals, myths, legend, religious texts and scholarly works it is clearly demonstrated that the ‘Indo-Iranian influence’ is actually for the most part proto-Indo-Iranian and goes back to prehistory, to the widespread international culture of Prehistoric Bön of Eurasia (a term coined by the author). Because the phenomenon of Prehistoric Bön of Eurasia was (and to some extent still is) an international one, we cannot speak of the ‘influence’ of one culture on another but rather we should explain this from the perspective of the pan-Eurasian Ur-religion
>In chapters VI and XV this question is approached via a comparative study of the deities of the proto-Indo-Iranian, Vedic, Zoroastrian, Bönpo, Bө Murgel and Tibetan Buddhist pantheons such as Mithra-Ahura, Mitravaruna, Ahura Mazda and Hormuzd Yazad, Nyipangse, Hormusta Tengeri, Pehar and so on
>The Gumilev-Kuznetsov theory (point 2) is critically appraised and demonstrated to be without any substance. The origins of the Gesar/Geser epic are traced to the figure of the archetypical superhero of proto-Mongol and proto-Iranian cultures and the possible location and ethnic identity of the lost kingdom of Phrom are explored
>Bө and Bön brings in new arguments which show that the ‘Central Asian Buddhism theory’ (point 1) falls short of the mark as the definite source of Indo-Iranian influence on Bön in general and, indeed, on Yungdrung Bön in particular. This is demonstrated here through thorough and critical examination of connections between Bön-Buddhism-Shamanism/Tengrism which is based on oral and written sources, cultural parallels, history and above all, on the comparative study of rituals and myths of Bön and Bө Murgel
Page 1