Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2256
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Jarita » 21 Jul 2017 08:12

SriJoy wrote:
thank you. Indeed. that is always a tantalizing option and quite possibly true- that Ramayana or Mahabharata are ultimately stories from species homo sapiens pre-history, slowly mutating and adding layers through time.
I am just a bit skeptical, because i find it easier explained via random chance discoveries of stuff as well, instead of such a super-long collective consciousness. For e.g., what do you find easier to believe- the resemblence of dragons and dinosaurs is because mankind lived at one time side by side or that one day, some earthquake exposed a dinosaur skeleton somewhere which mutated into a 'dragon' myth ?!



Non, I am not saying that Ramayana and Mahabharata are some collective memory, layer upon layer et al. The absence of Human sub species from the Mahabharata are very telling because it is supposed to have occurred much after the Ramayana. Collective memory was not lost so there was nothing to stop the layering from continuing. The only place where the dragons and dinosaurs analogy would apply is the story of flying humans et al (if one were to go by the "rational" argument which itself is limited). There is too much interwoven in the Ramayana about another human sub specie and it is mentioned as a matter of fact (there are 2 additional mentioned). What is fascinating about the Ramayana is not necessarily the sequence of the story but the reference to entities, place et al. That is very telling of the time which is why I keep going back to the hypothesis that the Ramayana occurred during a time when multiple human species walked the earth but they were at the end of their time (dwindling). It is the last overlap phase (again abandoning the linearity of human civilization which states that humans were tree jumping primates only and now have spacecraft - I AM NOT REFERRING TO THE YUGAS so please do not try and dismiss it as religious; I am saying that while the trend of human civilization is upwards, we have had up cycles and down cycles in that trend itself & epics such as the Ramayana reflect that - and that upcycle could have reflected different agriculture, plants et al) of multiple human species.
So when was the last conceivable overlap cycle - could be 10-12000 years ago or to be adventurous enough 30,000+. I would also like to ask the Ramayana experts on this thread if they can mention food items and distinct life conveniences that the Ramayana calls out that may not be biased by the superimposition of later thought.
Also, to me OUT of INDIA is limited. Perhaps India represents the microcosm of the continued cultures of the world that were in existence through eons. That space has now shrunk and is now India which is why Geography might be limited. Perhaps the world was India in different cycles but now what represents that thought, ethos and genetic legacy is just pockets in India.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 08:39

Jarita wrote:Also, to me OUT of INDIA is limited. Perhaps India represents the microcosm of the continued cultures of the world that were in existence through eons. That space has now shrunk and is now India which is why Geography might be limited. Perhaps the world was India in different cycles but now what represents that thought, ethos and genetic legacy is just pockets in India.

There is every possibility that Greek itself was influenced by language from India. There are many references that point out the similarity of the Zoroastrian holy book with the Atharva Veda.

It s interesting that the Zoroastrian language has the sound changes sa->ha

"sapta-sindhu" becomes "hapta hindu".

It is also interesting to note that Greek has the same sound changes serpent-serpere (Latin)-herpes, hepta-septa etc

It is possible (but not provable by me) that Greek itself was influenced by the language of the Zoroastrians, which in turn is contemporaneous with the Atharva Veda - which is more recent than the Rig Veda

It is alleged that the word "Hindu" comes from the Greeks. But as per existing records and hypothesis - the word "Hindu" was used earlier by the Zoroastrians though not for people

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2852
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Rudradev » 21 Jul 2017 08:51

Shiv,

Be careful who you challenge! Remember the terrible promise spoken here last week?

SriJoy wrote:
Keep running away from the fact- i will post evidence of this after coming weekend to completely blow apart your nonsensical view that 'Aryan has always been a racist term like Chink/Gook' .


And sure enough, when the weekend was over, this eminently credible, rational, scientific, and knowledgeable person followed through, presenting a big steaming heap of truly explosive evidence....


...oh wait.

:rotfl:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 09:18

Rudradev wrote:And sure enough, when the weekend was over, this eminently credible, rational, scientific, and knowledgeable person followed through, presenting a big steaming heap of truly explosive evidence....

Well you know - "This weekend" could, like the dates of Ashoka, Panini, Vedas etc be off by a few weeks, months, years, decades or centuries. We have to accept the word of parsimonious paper parsers on these matters.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 09:51

SriJoy wrote: Whats the point in harping about 'evil racist colonials' while quoting a case that is not 'evil racist colonials' by your own admission ?!

there is no 'dogmatic belief' in the case of Ashoka's dating. Unless of course,you think sticking to facts is dogmatic.......


I did not speak of racist colonials in reference to Ashoka's dates and your suggestion that I might have done that is a bluff. Add this bluff of yours to the series of imprecise statements you have made and we get what you call "facts". And sticking to your version of "facts" is your dogma. And you have attempted to protect your dogma with boasts about your scientific ability.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 10:26

No reference to racist colonials there sir or in any of my posts relating to Emperor Ashoka. Please stop bluffing.

Your credibility does not exist any more and one more bluff does not change anything. But I will point out a blatant lie when it is so obvious.

I must also point out how far you have fallen from your insistence that you believe in science and can parse any scientific paper - to a point where you need to bluff to make yourself feel better. In fact this is the story of everything related to AIT - people bluffing openly and blatantly and attributing all sorts of motivations to those who disagree. The fact that you disagree with AIT will not help you get away from the fact that your own "facts" are approximations and bluffs, based on the same logic that AIT proponents have used.

You have yourself previously analysed me as having an inferiority complex. And here you say I need to save face. My emotions and mental state do not cover up the lies that you choose to post. Personal comments about me are irrelevant to everything except your need to make yourself feel better by taking a dig at me. You hope that others will laugh and you can earn a brownie or two. That is too blasé a tactic to come from an eminent scientist such as yourself, don't you think? :D

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 10:44

SriJoy wrote:You specifically said, and i quote "
If you look at all the conclusions about dates that have been made by linguists and "historians" LOL
" . We all see what the reference to linguists and historians are/were. Either way, i guess it'd be too much to ask for you to stop trying to save face to the point of falsifying your comments and backtracking from it ignomiously.

Where have I said racist colonials? You are trying to wriggle free from a bluff to my emotions.

If it makes you feel better let me say "OK I am trying to save face" - but where have I disputed Ashoka's dates and said racist colonials?

I may have lost face and be profoundly embarrassed - but you are still lying.
Last edited by shiv on 21 Jul 2017 10:46, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 10:50

Word search for "Racist colonial" written by shiv" on the forum gives 1 result

You are a liar SriJoy. Do not accuse me of saying things that I did not say.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 10:52

SriJoy wrote:
SriJoy wrote:


In this very thread, multiple times towards linguists and historians.
Either way, you quoted my post about Ashoka and made a tirade about fudgy datings. When i pointed out Ashoka is one of the most, if not the most water-tight dating in Indian history prior to 1000 AD, you chose to say 'it was not about Ashoka'. Even though your quoted text had no preamble to anything else. As i said, i am not going to humiliate you further for your huffy Chinese-esque shooting from the hip and then getting aggressive (calling me a bluffer) for pointing out your quote was irrelevant to Ashoka. Clearly, you have no concept of apologizing for being mistaken or giving the wrong impression.

Backing out are we? I wonder who is trying to save face now? :rotfl:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 21 Jul 2017 12:22

SriJoy wrote:
What you are engaging in, is a demonstration to this forum on 'how to be a wordplay pedant to try and save face and always offer a passive-aggressive facile comment when exposed, instead of tendering something sincere'.

So this is how the engineer scientist backs up his shaky claims - with lies, psychoanalysing others and asking rhetorical questions about the structure of replies.

And you want sincerity from me? I recall that you first brought up the term ego when referring to me. I wanted to make sure that your hurt ego makes you want to respond to every barb from me, and you did that with predictable regularity. Your buttons get pressed easily.

But this is my last reply to you for now. I will henceforth only see your replies if someone quotes you and may comment as soon as you say something silly. Till then..

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5704
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby krisna » 21 Jul 2017 14:24

Regarding Ashoka,he was sort of a king in India not very famous . Just like any other many kings.
But got resurrected as a famous king known for peace after Kalinga war somewhere in early last century.he was not fully peace maker post Kalinga war.
Indian history does not make much of him but he became pretty famous after several centuries.
Whereas other kings are well known for a long time.
Lot of myths fly about him.

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5704
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby krisna » 21 Jul 2017 14:36

^^^^My post clearly mention Indian history. Not SE Asia history etc.
Interesting his re emergence last century.
Anyway it will be OT here probably.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4970
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby ShauryaT » 21 Jul 2017 18:13

shiv wrote:There is every possibility that Greek itself was influenced by language from India.
There is every possibility that ancient Greek thought was influenced by India. Pythagoaros beliefs in the all pervading soul. Plato's works cannot be distinct from the ways of Upanishads. Mithra the Vedic god not only found presence in Iran but west of Iran too. Apolionius the heathen found his groundings in India. Lucian the great inspiration of the reformists who's works were resurrected in the 15th century acknowledged India to be goddess of philosophy. The naked fakirs of Ethiopia too had contact and influence from Indian souls. Buddhist thought was in wide influence in Mesopotamia. There was a time, when much of the travel was from India out. The argument that we had influence in Iran, Mesopotamia, Africa but Greek thought the fountain head of western philosophy was immune to our influence does not hold .Our colonized minds have to understand this fact. If one understands this and then reviews Mehrgarh, one may accept OOI as a probability. Indian minds have to get off this notion of the horse theory as the only way for people to travel or indeed that war was the only reason for people to migrate or that plunder was the only motivation for humans. The the entire edifice of western scholarship and its presuppositions, PIE included needs to be thrashed.

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 674
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Primus » 21 Jul 2017 20:04

SriJoy wrote:^^
Genealogically, it is impossible for Mahabharata war to be >5561 BCE. All Puranas are emphatic for the number of years between Parikshit and Mahapadma Nanda and the latter is garanteed to be between late 400s/early 300s BCE. For Mahabharata to be >5561 BCE , Mahapadma Nanda has to be 2000 BCE or even more ancient. Which is pretty much impossible thanks to Ashokan pillars.


Srijoy Ji, if I may, have read this and other threads of general interest where you have been so prolific.

I don't know what your day job is - maybe you did mention it but I've forgotten now. In any case, most of us have jobs that allow us a certain expertise in a specific area, esp. after 30-plus years of experience doing the same thing day in and day out. Knowledge comes not just from reading but from long years of training in the discipline, studying, practicing what one has learnt and from just having seen so much in our given field. Now, somebody can look it all up on google and other websites and claim to be an expert but when you dissect their claims it becomes obvious that their knowledge is at best very superficial and not based on a foundation of deep study and practice.

You come across as somebody who seems to have mastered everything under the sun. History - not just of ancient, medieval and modern India but also the rest of the world; science - not just anthropology, but also paeleantology, archaeology, astronomy, genetics, agriculture and genealogy ; mythology - not just the Greek and Indian epics but also all the smriti literature including the vedas and the lineage of various ancient historical dynasties.

You get where I'm going? NOBODY can be an expert on everything and yet from your posts it appears that you claim to be. You make sweeping statements saying 'this is simply impossible because THAT did not happen in the year that you say it happened' or 'so and so succeeded this guy in the year blah..blah'. It is one thing to say 'I believe this is what may have happened' and another to say 'this IS what happened'.

You are dogmatic in your opinions and beliefs and yet we don't know where you get your data from that makes you so certain of your facts. On a different thread you had said you read Wikipedia and other sources, but have you actually studied history or any of the other disciplines (where you make such emphatic statements) as a serous pursuer of knowledge or in a formal training program?

Yes, I know internet forums are a heady thing and nothing beats the thrill of proving somebody wrong or coming back at someone with a witty rejoinder. If you are good at paronomasia the lure of literary one-upmanship is an irresistible force, we get it. Some of us are jaded warriors and have seen it all, yet we still take the bait, a bit too often and against our better judgment, I confess. I am as guilty as anyone else, what can I say.

Just trying to say, don't lose it. Your opinion matters but only up to a point. There comes a tipping point after which your posts lose all relevance except to those who may wish to continue the 'keyboard kontest' just for fun.

Just a bit of (unsolicited) advice from me. Apologies if it upsets you, not my intent at all.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2852
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Rudradev » 21 Jul 2017 21:00

What happens when a deeply Colonized Mind begins to confuse its abject worship of white skin, and ritual deification of Western academia, for “scientific expertise” or “rational thinking”?

Numerous opportunities to study this phenomenon appear on this very thread. They are critical to examine, because they illustrate how pervasive the colonization of the Indian “educated” class continues to be… a pathology at the very root of our problems with false narratives, such as the Aryan Invasion Theory, finding acceptance in our own society.

Consider this brilliant statement:

SriJoy wrote:the big assumption in the statement 'genetics cannot say if earlier ancestor species were ALSO domesticated', is that the earlier ancestor species died out.

And that is a rather extraordinary claim for these same food-crops cultivated: in 2017, the most advanced nations struggle with seed containment for many crops in open-air environments. plenty of grains make it to the wild. Especially in climates highly suitable for them.


Now, even a grade-school student could easily look up that the total number of species ever to have existed on earth is approximately 5 billion. The total number of species currently alive on earth is estimated between 10 million and 14 million. Of which only 1.2 million have been documented, and over 86% have not yet been described.

So in fact, more than 99% of all species that lived on earth at one time or another are now extinct. This happened as a result of selection… natural as well as artificial. In the context of cultivating grains, artificial selection pressure is enormous and exponentially iterative, breeding out the “less fit” varieties generation after generation.

Yet this brilliant parser of science considers it an “extraordinary claim” that "earlier ancestor species" of present-day cultivated crops died out.

Why? Because it is an inconvenient reality that does not fit what his Colonized Mind derives from the publications of White scientists in Western academia. His "parsing" of such publications (which is pathetically error-prone in itself) leads him to believe there is “overwhelming”, “emphatic” evidence that grain cultivation could not have occurred before 9500 BCE or anywhere else on earth other than certain well-defined geographical areas.

Let’s dig a little deeper into a publication that this Mentally Colonized person himself posted ( viewtopic.php?p=2179353#p2179353 ) as “genetic evidence” that rice cultivation originated ONLY in the Yangtze valley of China, and ONLY in 9500 BCE (not before).

http://www.pnas.org/content/108/20/8351.abstract

From “Results”:

We resequenced portions of 630 genes on rice chromosomes 8, 10, and 12 at ∼100-kb intervals in multiple accessions (Table S1) of O. sativa indica (n = 20) and tropical japonica (n = 16) as well as O. rufipogon (n = 20) and a single accession of O. nivara, O. barthii, and O. meridionalis (data may be downloaded from http://puruggananlab.bio.nyu.edu/Rice_data/). We obtained 255.9 ± 2.09 kb of sequence data for each accession. A total of 2,800 SNPs in indica, 2,070 SNPs in tropical japonica, and 7,274 SNPs in O. rufipogon were identified. As expected, the mean silent site nucleotide diversity (π) was lower in O. sativa (π = 0.0037 for indica and 0.0028 for tropical japonica) compared with O. rufipogon (π = 0.0079) across all three chromosomes.

The classification of accessions was confirmed based on results of a STRUCTURE (37) population stratification analysis (Fig. S1). These results suggest that our sample had four ancestral populations (K = 4), which corresponds to O. sativa ssp. indica, O. sativa ssp. tropical japonica, and two O. rufipogon clusters. There was only a marginal difference, however, in the likelihood values between K = 3 and K = 4, which is associated with the splitting of O. rufipogon into two subpopulations.


How interesting! The grand total of the number of varieties they examined in this study? SEVEN. Two of O. rufipogon; one each of O.sativa ssp indica and O. sativa ssp tropical japonica; and one each of O. nivara, O. barthii, and O. meridionalis.

Rigorous no? Enough to provide “emphatic” and “overwhelming” evidence, according to the Colonized Mind we are studying?

Maybe not, when you consider that the total number of DESCRIBED and catalogued varieties of rice is 90,000.
http://www.riceassociation.org.uk/conte ... eties.html

And by current estimates, the catalogued 90,000 would account for about 14% of ALL the varieties out there (a reasonable estimate, being that 86% of all currently extant species have not been identified or described).

ANY one of these approximately 650,000 (minus SEVEN :P) varieties of rice currently in existence in the world… whether it is at present wild or cultivated, could bear the genetic signatures of ancestral cultivation that originated (a) outside the Yangtze valley (b) before 9500 BCE. And this total of 650,000 represents only the varieties of rice in existence today. A reasonable estimate for the number of varieties that died out would be over 99 X 650,000. ANY of those could bear signatures of cultivars that did not come from the Yangtze Valley, or coalesced earlier than 9500 BCE.

So the study presented by our Colonized Mind as “overwhelming” evidence of his supposedly “scientific” conclusion is already woefully inadequate to reach it.

But that’s not all!

One would expect that to furnish such clinching evidence, the study in question would have examined at least the entire rice genome, no? 24 chromosomes and 430 Mbp (million base pairs of DNA).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC526008/

Unfortunately not. The study posted by our Colonized Mind as “overwhelming” evidence looked at a total of THREE chromosomes. And not the entire chromosomes either. Just 255.9 ± 2.09 kbp according to their paper. Around 0.005% of the rice genome was actually examined by multiple sequence analysis in this study… and our Colonized Mind touts it as an “emphatic” conclusion. :mrgreen:

There are other problems with the study as well. One, it relies on a “molecular clock” hypothesis which has run into major trouble over the last decade (essentially, the idea that base-substitution mutations accrue along all DNA molecules at more-or-less uniform rates… something that has been demonstrated to be false with the discovery of differential mutation “hotspots” at diverse chromosomal loci). Two, its use of the Bayesian estimator involves the rolling-up of some highly questionable assumptions for the value of N(sub)e, or effective population size, a key parameter in the attribution of a posterior probability distribution when estimating time to most recent common ancestor.

But we don’t even need to go that far. The yawning gap between what the study actually shows, and the abject nonsense that our Colonized Mind claims that it shows, would be obvious to any sixth-pass student with a middle-school level of general knowledge.

What explains the existence of such a gap? The inevitable conflation, in the typical colonized Indian mind, of Western academic claims with Gospel (there is no more appropriate word) Truth. This is the tragic byproduct of an ingrained psychological deficit, whereby anything a white person says takes on the status of religion for some Indians… even to the extent of uncritically glorifying the white person’s gospel as “science” while excoriating one’s own belief systems and traditions as “superstition” and “dogma”.

Quite sad, really.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2256
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Jarita » 21 Jul 2017 21:22

There are some foods alluded to in ancient texts.

Healthy Foods

Red/Brown Rice
Mung bean (Vigna radiata)
Untouched (pure) rain water
Rock salt
Jivanti or Jiwanti (Leptadenia Reticulata)
Spinach leaf
Deer meat
Quail
Iguana meat
Rohu fish (roho labeo or Labeo rohita)
Sesame oil
Cow’s milk
Clarified butter (Ghee)
Boar’s fat
Fat grease of white swan
Chicken flesh, Goat fat
Ginger
Raisins
Sugarcane Jaggery are the best available healthy foods in this world.



Unhealthy Foods
Black gram (white lentils, Urad)
River’s water during rainy season
Mustard spinach
Cow’s meat
Pigeon
Frog
Milk and Clarified butter of a sheep,
Kusum (Schleichera oleosa) oil
Buffalo fat & grease
Water Crow
Elephant meat and fat
Potato
Thickened Sugarcane

Reference: Healthy and Unhealthy Foods in Ayurveda | Vedics

Does any worthy have references of food items from the Ramayana. I do not find the rice references contradictory at all since there are plenty of heirloom varieties of rice that have grown all over the worlds river basins. Some do not look anything like the rice we eat today. It is conceivable there is another grain referenced here. I don't want this discussion to devolve into meat non-meat so please desist. I am just curious as to what the diet and crucial items at that stage were.
There are crucial datapoints in the Ramayana - some superimposed by a later attempt to comprehension; and others that are so emphatic that it is obvious they occurred. To me reference to a grain with the word RICE could be a later superimposition since an older variety of ancient grain could have become extinct. However Vanar/ deer etc are repeatable references.
At a certain level the Ramayana is such a primodial text because beyond the story, it speaks to our human evolution.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2256
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Jarita » 21 Jul 2017 21:40

What did Rama look like? Yes the beauty standards then were different from now :) . Look at the reference to Rama as 96 inches. Perhaps the metrics are different. Also look at color references. This is why I posit a radical thought, was this another human sub specie that went extinct or did some crucial human genes switch off. Could humans have lost colors and features? We know that the Native Americans despite living in the same belt as the Africans remain brown because three switches have become inactive. Hence the human of Ramayana's time could look very different and coexist with other human sub species-:

We can find description of Rama and Lakshmana in Sri Sundara Kanda, the 5th Canto of Srimad Ramayana.

5. “Listen O’ Mother; Ram’s effulgent like the sun;
forbearing like the Mother Earth; in fame outruns
Indra, the Lord of devatas and in knowledge
Brihaspati, the most revered of the sages.”
176 Finding the Mother
6. “He treats with love this whole of universe;
a Messiah to the good and virtuous.
He knows no bias; an ant or a giant the same
for him; he helps the poor, distressed and lame.”
7. “With devotion performs he time-honoured mundane duties
and makes others perform; unlike the common royalties
who consider scruples as obsessions of hoi polloi
and gad around in an eternal search of virgin joys.”
8. “An expert he’s in regal skills and strategies.
Respects brahmins; follows age-old customs
explains the four Vedas to pundits’ eulogies.
Yet so humble and diffident remains our Ram.”
9. “He’s broad-shouldered; his hands as long as they touch knees.
His eyes with ruddy tinge exude enamouring
ardour for friends and scary fire to enemies.
His neck a conch; his voice the swash of ocean springs.”
10. “Like skies, blue-skinned he is,
with vast benign expanse inside.
Well-built with fine chiselled features;
his walk reminds of lion’s strides.”

11. “Ram’s every limb, aspect and mien display
superior royal traits and noble sway.”
12. “His chest, his wrists and fists are diamond-strong
His hands, eye-brows and testicles are long.
His hair-ends, testicles and knees again
in equal size, emblazon regal signs.”
13. “His convex chest, rich navel region
his slightly bulged belly muscles, curved throat;
his thunderous voice and manly walk, connote
so well that he’s a true patrician.
His rubicund eye-corners, palms and feet;
his rosy nails confirm he’s from elite.”
Finding the Mother 177
14. “His hair, penis and lines on his foot soles
are smooth and indicate he’s rich and bold.
His voice, his walk and navel are sublime;
the marks of glory, fame and life of prime.”
15. “He has three folds on his belly; his breasts,
nipples and lines on his two soles are squat;
his neck; penis, his back and calf muscles
are short. He has three hair-whorls on vortex.”
16. “He has four lines each on his thumb, forehead,
on palms and soles; the signs of a well-read
of one who’s an expert in four Vedas
who has long life and whose renown ageless.”
17. “At ninety-six inches in height, with even shape,
with lovely lips, sharp nose, firm chin and sparkling eyes

he looks a demigod in super human drape;
as men goggle agape and lovely women vie.”
18. “The vital pairs of limbs fourteen of his body
namely, eye-brows, nostrils, the ears, the lips, the breasts
elbows, the wrists, the knees, the testicles, buttocks,
the hands, the feet, the brawn on his buttocks are all
equal in size, denoting signs of royal life.”
19. “He has four long and strong canine teeth; his imperial strides
remind of the treads of four imposing animals of pride;
the lion, tiger, a bull and elephant; unique and odd.
His style and appearance make him look like a Living God.”
20. “And lo, O’ Mother, Lakshmana, the brother dear
of Ram and Ma Sumitra’s son is Ram’s alike,
by looks and character, by walk and talk, from front and rear
by love and raging ire; by likes and gross dislikes.”
178 Finding the Mother
21. “But Ram in nimbus blue, looks like an ebony statue
and Lakshmana is like a large nugget in golden hue.”

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 674
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Primus » 21 Jul 2017 21:45

^^^

RD Ji, I have suspected for a while that our friend is basically a 'Wikipedia Warrior' and is quite adept at it. It is quite easy to see the pattern. Shame, really because it would have been so much better had he focused on a small section where anybody can educate themselves and discuss facts with an open mind - so difficult to find these days.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2256
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Jarita » 21 Jul 2017 22:10

There are three videos on dating of the Mahabharata using astronomical events (please excuse me if this has been mentioned before).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt1mBTIjSso

Are there any such astronomical references in the Ramayana? The classes of evidence for dating
- Co-existence of multiple species
- Existence of food/places/species/ habits
- Archaeological evidence (much of this thread is about that)
- Genetic evidence
- Astronomical evidence

Are there any astronomical events that can be dated.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2256
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Jarita » 21 Jul 2017 22:45

What explains the existence of such a gap? The inevitable conflation, in the typical colonized Indian mind, of Western academic claims with Gospel (there is no more appropriate word) Truth. This is the tragic byproduct of an ingrained psychological deficit, whereby anything a white person says takes on the status of religion for some Indians… even to the extent of uncritically glorifying the white person’s gospel as “science” while excoriating one’s own belief systems and traditions as “superstition” and “dogma”.

It's not a gap but it's become the information grid by which all assumptions are made and theories constructed. I can tell you what the whole bunch of them believes and it is not their fault - we all grew up like this.

Ramayana and Mahabharata are wondrous fairy tales much like Harry Potter. For the historian or archeologist in this mold they will reluctantly, benevolently say - OK perhaps fragments of this existed and the so called kingdoms were little villages and the story of course embellishes. With that presumption what happens is that the entire exploration becomes a process of "not this", "not that" and retrofitting into the model of some small time tribes and creating a theory. Like a rubberband it keeps snapping back to the original hypothesis which no one will admit to because they don't even know how deep in their psyche it is embedded. Again having grown up with that crowd I can understand what is happening and it is not malicious or deliberate. You cannot ask a person to become a gymnast at 30. The entire thinking is calcified.
The only way to break out of this molasses moat is to undergo scientific training and thinking in both inductive and deductive methods and frankly most of the crowd gets into the conventional/liberal art where the linear methodology and underlying information grids are further reinforced. It's impossible.

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 674
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Primus » 21 Jul 2017 23:30

Jarita wrote:
It's not a gap but it's become the information grid by which all assumptions are made and theories constructed. I can tell you what the whole bunch of them believes and it is not their fault - we all grew up like this.

Ramayana and Mahabharata are wondrous fairy tales much like Harry Potter. For the historian or archeologist in this mold they will reluctantly, benevolently say - OK perhaps fragments of this existed and the so called kingdoms were little villages and the story of course embellishes...................


Sad to say, I too was one such person growing up, accepting the Western version of our epics being mere myths.

I may have mentioned this before, but in the late 80s, BBC had this version of Mahabharata by the 'famous' Peter Brooks that was welcomed with rave reviews and won some awards too. They had this black dude playing Bhishma, fighting with a wooden pole, the people were wearing cotton robes and the homes were mud huts. The whole thing was depicted as if taking place in some village in the desert. There was an 'international' cast which was supposed to be an innovation.

It was a horrible production but of course the Coconuts loved it.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2852
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Rudradev » 21 Jul 2017 23:51

Primus wrote:^^^

RD Ji, I have suspected for a while that our friend is basically a 'Wikipedia Warrior' and is quite adept at it. It is quite easy to see the pattern. Shame, really because it would have been so much better had he focused on a small section where anybody can educate themselves and discuss facts with an open mind - so difficult to find these days.


Primus ji, yes, Google and Wikipedia have spawned a profusion of attention-seeking poseurs who attempt to overwhelm online discussions with the twin armaments of sheer volume and halfway-decent English grammar (how sad that this is still taken by many Indians as a sign of "education"). But I think the key element isn't being "adept" in most cases, it's simply devoting plenty of time and effort to cultivating the appearance of being "adept". Very unfortunate that such an abundance of time and energy are not directed towards worthwhile pursuits.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2256
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Jarita » 22 Jul 2017 00:42

^^^
With due respect, your method of thinking is not trivial and follows the conventional method. In that it is certainly adequate but not excellent. I enjoy your posts.
Alas, in what I do if I follow the conventional I would be ostracized.
The only issue is that you believe your way is the highway and everything else is 'bible thumper" One can be irreligious and use evidence such as new genetic findings, astronomical coincidences to construct a new narrative.I am not married to the stories of Ramayana and Mahabharata but genuinely believe that the Ramayana contains nuggets of crucial information about human evolution. That is all I am stating in light of the new findings that A)Multiple species walked together, B)Human evolution might have been cyclical.
You argue a straight trajectory. Very recent history itself proves that wrong. The ancient Romans were more advanced than the medieval Europeans. You have proof just within the last 4000 years. Likewise with the ancient Egyptians and Meopotamians.
The dates for Indus Valley keep getting pushed backwards. They had flushable toilets which disappeared for centuries from India.
On a larger scale is it not conceivable that the Ramayana represents a different stage of Human advancement and evolution with different genetic switches.
Just as one respects your view of recent history - Ashoka is recent/ one might want to respect others worldview too.

Anyways, I will keep digging for more information

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9790
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 22 Jul 2017 01:39

Haha, the ancients are "inferior"? Really? Let's just think about one now-dead person - say Einstein. I'll stick to the West, because now Mr SriJoy, your biases are very clear. Is Einstein inferior? Is Einstein inferior to you because he lacked a mobile phone and the Internet and 3-D printers, and you have them?

Well, you say, Einstein died within the last century, let's go much further back. Or you say, Einstein has forgotten more than you will ever know. OK. What about Shakespeare? Shakespeare didn't know relativity either. Does it make Shakespeare inferior? And so on.

What can you take pride in? How much of this modern knowledge that makes the ancients inferior to "us" have **you** contributed to? Next to zero? Then how can you take any pride in modern "superiority"?

There are things that are ageless that one can admire and be proud of even in long-dead people. Creativity is one of them. Character is another. And now I understand why Shiv was kvetching about you. You, SriJoy, lack character. Am ignoring your posts henceforth.
Last edited by A_Gupta on 22 Jul 2017 01:46, edited 1 time in total.

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 674
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Primus » 22 Jul 2017 01:40

SriJoy wrote:
PS: Primus: I am what you'd call a 'career student'. Whenever I have time, i take a course- when its not for professional upgrade, its for leisure. I hold degrees in Electrical Engineering and software design. I also hold a minor in history(India focus obviously) and have enough credits to get a bachelors in arts in a few years too-predominantly archaeology & philosophy but as you are well aware, arts focus can be very diverse. these days working for contract work, what can i say, its a 'feast or famine' for work. Hence some days you see me here for hours, some weeks you don't.


Srijoy Ji, thank you for that clarification.

We are, many if not most of us, educated in some professional sphere or the other. Given the plethora of Indians in Engineering/IT/Software, it is a given that the majority here on BRF would belong to one of those disciplines. I doubt there are more than a handful of 'pure science' scholars here but I may be wrong.

I too am a man of science and hold four advanced degrees/boards from three different countries. In my field I would be considered to be in an 'envious' position in terms of sheer qualifications, training and experience. But I am sure there are many here who are equally if not more 'qualified' than I am in their respective spheres.

Many of us, myself included also pursue other interests beside the daily bread and butter stuff. Some are darned good at those 'passions' and would be able to make a career out of it if they chose to. However, when it comes to serious claims and assertions of 'expertise' I dare say that they too would defer to the real pros who have spent a lifetime studying the said art/science.

The point I am making is that while a good post-dinner conversation is something we can all be good at given our varied interests outside of our main work arena, to lay claim to a much higher level of knowledge and expertise especially in such broad areas as you have smacks o more than a little, if I may say so, hubris. Heck even in my own specialty I cannot say I know everything and do have to look it up from time to time. How then can we believe that you indeed possess a deep knowledge and understanding of all the topics you have touched upon here at BRF?

As far as our Hindu epics, our own story and our civilization is concerned, my own contention is that there is much that we still do not know and what is legend or lore today may turn out to have been the truth all along. It does not hurt to keep an open mind, nothing is proven to be 100% wrong (or right) forever.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2256
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Jarita » 22 Jul 2017 02:28

Don't want any exploding heads here but a worthy had once told me that the Mahabharata occurred 400000 years ago and we close to the end of Kaliyuga.
Again not a theory I subscribe to but they had written some long papers about it.

syam wrote:SriJoy, I found this image in old archives.
Image
40000 years old cave painting found in UP. That animal suspiciously looking like horse. :D

Misra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 77
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 09:03

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Misra » 22 Jul 2017 03:27

SriJoy wrote:the fundamental paradigm of scientific training is to not consider anything true without corroborative evidence. ... half-baked claims written by half-literate men thousands of years ago...


your summary dismissal of the human mind of the past as 'half-literate' is really a self-goal, i.e., a goal against yourself.

science itself today is not what it used to be--much of what passes off as science is dictated by someone's desire to exploit some aspect of the physical world, i.e., by technology rather than any basic desire to know. (try getting funded if you simply wanted to know, say, how/if being clean shaven vs. having a full length beard affects your perception. first thing they’ll ask you is 'what is the use?’) a lot of what you write illustrates cartesian anxiety. but the indian seekers of the past (and many today!) approached the self from a different direction altogether.

your use of the term 'religion' and 'belief' in your posts w.r.t. india and indians of the past is essentially an etic perspective--that of an outsider. the terms as they are used today are imports and became prevalent perhaps only in the last few centuries. the highest objective of indians had always been 'liberation/mukti', higher than the numerous gods they consciously designed to help them get there. imo, this is an important point to devote some amount of thought to. the corollary will then suggest itself: that india had always been a land of seekers rather than that of believers. (seeking and yearning to know is the essence of being human. it is also the basis of science. much of what you write in this thread comes across as "wanting to have an unshakeable belief in science". but "belief in science" sounds, to me, like an oxymoron. at the very least it is, or should be, unnecessary to take refuge in in a debate.) the whole culture and way of life was systematically built up and groomed over many, many centuries with this one goal of 'mukti' in mind at all times. the extent of such organization around that single goal and the amount of 'seeking' that must have made that possible is, to me, truly mind boggling. this organization has survived in some form or the other in today's india and is precisely the reason why the millions living in abject poverty do not revolt like the poor have in other places/cultures on the planet. 'he bhagwan tum mujhe mukti kyon nahin de dete' (god why don't you give me 'mukti') was a common refrain in movies until not so long ago....

sudarshan
BRFite
Posts: 1612
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby sudarshan » 22 Jul 2017 06:47

Rudradev ji, thanks for summarizing that amazing paper that SriJoy keeps referring to. I suspected many of the things you said in your post, but genetics is not my field, and at the time I raised some of the same points you mentioned, I got a seemingly convincing answer from SriJoy (which of course was presented so confidently, that it made it seem like (s)he was an expert in the field). Now I see that (like I suspected) the conclusions that (s)he was drawing from the paper, are simply not valid. And far from being an expert in the field, SriJoy seems to lack even a basic idea of how science works, and how not to jump to unsupportable conclusions from preliminary research.

When I saw the word "Bayesian" in the paper, I was fairly sure right there that the end results could not be claimed as "certainties" or "absolute truth." Again, thanks for confirming this.

sudarshan
BRFite
Posts: 1612
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby sudarshan » 22 Jul 2017 06:51

SriJoy wrote:Sure, character, resourcefulness, creativity, etc. are all noteworthy in an individual. And make no mistake, i don't think Varahamihira was less capable than you or I. I think he knew way less.If you could go back in a time machine, fetch Aryabhatta or Varahamihira back to our time and then spent years educating them, they'd most likely be just as capable as you or I.
Do you take lessons in life, about problem-solving from a 5 year old kid ? No ? Maybe its because you, the adult is far more capable due to possessing far more information than a child. Well, compared to you or I, Vyasa, Valmiki, Newton, Galen, Aryabhatta- they are all children. So why should you or I follow the words of these ancients, if you are not ready to follow a child as your team leader at work ? Because most of us, are victims of reflexive ancestor-worship syndrome. takes a lot of de-conditioning to realize that.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

OK, I think my ignore list is going to gain one more entry.

Misra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 77
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 09:03

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Misra » 22 Jul 2017 08:13

:eek:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 22 Jul 2017 09:01

There is some interesting word play that happens in the English language. If you look at Intelligence agencies - the name itself announces "Intelligence". But intelligence agencies are all about information and the dumbed down view is information=intelligence. In fact that is rubbish. The ability to parse and use information appropriately is intelligence, not availabilty of information.

Nowadays information is available to anyone with basic reading skills and in internet connection. But that does not translate to intelligence. I could probably write a book on the subject but let me stick to an example

You are on the first floor of a burning building and the only escape route is a window overlooking a swimming pool. There is no one to help you. You are on your own.

Information: You will die in the building
Information: You could jump out of the window and still die.
Information: Normally you would never even consider jumping into the pool from your window

How does this information make you intelligent?

The choice you make with available information constitutes intelligence. Not the availability of information. Too much faith in information does not actually constitute intelligence.

Parse and arse are two different words. That is also information. Confusing one for the other is unintelligent Just sayin..

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 22 Jul 2017 09:10

OT:

The post linked below exemplifies the difference between those who have information versus those who have knowledge
viewtopic.php?p=2188636#p2188636

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2917
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Dipanker » 22 Jul 2017 09:47

SriJoy wrote:the fundamental paradigm of scientific training is to not consider anything true without corroborative evidence. A book is not evidence. A book is a statement of claim. Yet, we 'evil, western educated people' who overturn centuries of mythological propaganda masquerading as facts inside religion, must somehow, use 'lack of evidence is not evidence of lack' to shore up half-baked claims written by half-literate men thousands of years ago, because it comes from our favorite religion/fairytale. We are not dogmatic when we use the same methodology to overturn biblical nonsense masquerading as truths. then, it is a very worthwhile persuit- but when applied to Hindu epics, we are evil, colonized minds who need curing.
Sounds very scientific, doesn't it ?

there is nothing scientific about entertaining the possibility of cities in an era and age when there is zero evidence anywhere in the world for cities or agriculture. Such concession, is wishful thinking and a microcosm why OOI is dismissed as nonsense- because hack jobs try to wish Hindu epics to be true, despite when there is no basis to it being true. Even our own epic literature admits this, by relegating Ramayana and Mahabharata as smriti literature.

Pity, too many chip-on-shoulder Indians feeling inadequate in face of overwhelming accomplishments of the west in the last 500 years (so much so, it has changed the world to the point where ancient Rishis, Gurus and prophets are less educated than middle school children) spend more time in wishful thinking of wishing our epic literature to be true, instead of investigating works of lesser minds for clues into their frame of existence.

this is also why Indian history is so politicized and poorly understood by Indians- as this thread is evidence, we as a whole spend 1000x the energy wishing our religious literature was true, getting into mental gymnastics and such, while we show ZERO interest in actual history or focus attention on the actual history of India- what caused the Gupta collapse really ? Why did India fall behind in technology between 800-1000 AD, despite being home to the large majority of universities in the world ?
What really is the date for Buddha and how do we reconcile Shishunaga with Pradoyotas ? Nope. All those are 'boring'. Only thing that matters, is trying to wish myths and religious moralistic stories, altered countless times, to be true, so we can fulfill our obsession with being 'first/original at everything' to compensate for being dismissed as 'primitives' by earlier batch of western scholars tinged with racism. None of you actually care about Indian history or unravelling it. that is a prima-facie veneer to mask the quest to fulfill the need to elavate religious literature as truth. And just like those half-baked muslims or christians, the believing Hindus here use identical 'logic' and mental gymnastics.

Once you can move past the mental slavery of reflexive ancestor worship and realize, that these very-same ancestors who wrote or read these epics are as much inferior to us, the post-industrial man, as naked hunter-gatherers with no writing, no free-standing construction skills were to them, you will start to see things more objectively. Until then, its back to the same ritual of wishing your favorite epic to be true, because of basic cultural affinity and ancestor worship. Same reason why bible-thumpers try to wish fancy stories of the bible or its timeframe to be true.


Now I don't agree with everything you write, and I do feel at times you and some of the other posters too could use the lesson from "Vidya Dadati Vinyam", but what you wrote above in baseball analogy is a homerun, out of park! In cricket a sixer!

Sometime truth can be bitter but I believe our guiding principle should be "Satyamev Jayate".

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1299
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 22 Jul 2017 10:00

SriJoy wrote:Sure. Science today is objective driven, not information driven. that still doesn't change the fact that the average person today knows vastly more than the most educated person from 1000 years ago. Any grade-12 child schools exponents like Aryabhatta or Newton.


For all I know you may be a thought experiment bot - without information I may not be scientifically objective about this! :twisted: :P



Not that I subscribe to above, but to assume science does not have some self-awareness, that seems in short supply today, is a gross mistake.
Your argument that person today is more educated than person 1000 yrs ago - is a bizarre syndrome ~ Temporal Social Darwinism
(Yes I came up with it!) The adocity to evaluate frameworks and people and the context they existed in from the narrow key hole of today is not scientific by your own narrow definition of it :mrgreen:

To compare the wrote learning of a grade-12 kid to the inherent genius of Aryabhatta is a reflection of your thinking and achievement :P

Finally - If you want to ponder - riddle the difference between Science and Pramanas (if you have not educated yourself on the schools of SDharma philosophy, please do so before you write a tome to further eliminate all doubt about your achievements!)

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1299
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 22 Jul 2017 10:09

Srijoy wrote:Pity, too many chip-on-shoulder Indians feeling inadequate in face of overwhelming accomplishments of the west in the last 500 years (so much so, it has changed the world to the point where ancient Rishis, Gurus and prophets are less educated than middle school children) spend more time in wishful thinking of wishing our epic literature to be true, instead of investigating works of lesser minds for clues into their frame of existence.


A wise friend once said - "The way you treat your elders and your ancestors is exactly how the ones deciding your old age home are going to treat you." Same applies here I suppose! :mrgreen:

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1299
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 22 Jul 2017 10:18

SriJoy wrote:Once you can move past the mental slavery of reflexive ancestor worship and realize, that these very-same ancestors who wrote or read these epics are as much inferior to us, the post-industrial man, as naked hunter-gatherers with no writing, no free-standing construction skills were to them, you will start to see things more objectively. Until then, its back to the same ritual of wishing your favorite epic to be true, because of basic cultural affinity and ancestor worship. Same reason why bible-thumpers try to wish fancy stories of the bible or its timeframe to be true.


Ok, looks like marching orders from the Communist Politburo ~ we should also blow up Buddha statues and burn all scripture by inferior men! :eek:
There have been millions massacraed with such macabre thinking by post-industrialized man that are so superior to all them ancient fakirs!
The logic will be lost on you - My grandma had better thinking and she may have scolded - GodThee! (you will get the pun if you know Telugu!) :mrgreen:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 22 Jul 2017 11:14

Hmmm - need to get a few things straight. Forceful rhetoric and paragraphs spent in attempting to shame and psycholanalyse still don't negate some fundamental facts

1. Did my past have a people who gave us the Vedas? yes. Do we have dates for them? No. Did they exist? It can be argued that they did not exist at all. There is no evidence of their having existed. One can argue that the people who believe in their existence are simply indulging in ancestor worship based on mental slavery. These are fine words - but the idea that they existed cannot be dismissed for lack of evidence.

2. Does my past give me a large volume of epics - particularly the Ramayana and Mahabharata? Yes. Are these stories? Certainly. Are these stories completely mythical? I cannot prove that they were real, but does that make them mythical? Would the content of the stories be completely fictional? Flying talking birds. Fighting monkeys? Mountains being carried? Chap with ten heads? I like to believe these to have been true. But are they lies? Are the false stories? Do they describe seemingly impossible beings and events? Yes, many parts fit this description, but parts of the story are perfectly credible and the stories have themselves been handed down over centuries indicating an author or series of authors. So the stories are not totally incredible and could be based on real events. Maybe if I look at my own ancestors as primitive people with less intelligence than me, I can imagine that a fight between two villages has been hyped up to create these fan-tas-tic stories. Let me set aside part of my personality to what is called rationality and imagine this latter idea to be true, casting aside my superstitious ancestor worship and mental slavery.

So what part of the stories is credible. The human emotions are credible. The moral lessons are credible. Some of the weapon classes are credible and the idea of cities is credible. We cannot find archaeological proof of morals and emotions. What about cities and weapons? We have not found any yet. Does that mean that the cities did not exist?

Here I must rationalize and ask, "Do we have any proof of ancient cities at all?" Yes, a few. There is evidence of human habitation in urban centers of the Harappan civilization dating back 5000 to 6000 years ago. It is likely that the construction of cities probably evolved over 1000 years - so I think a 5000 BC dates for urban conglomerations called cities is not outside the realms of possibility. The Mahabharata has a reference to a palace that was burnt down. That was not a stone or brick palace, and wood does not necessarily survive 7000 years. So the lack of evidence of cities from 5000 BC does not mean that they could not have existed.

So there are credible parts of the Ramayana and Mahabharata that can be dismissed as rubbish on rhetorical grounds but that is not proof that everything in those tales was impossible or incredible.

3. On a completely different note, could sentient apes have been present say 12000 years ago? No Indian story claims that they lived in cities. Only humans lived in fixed settlements.

If I say "Perhaps sentient, non human apes existed alongside humans 12000 years ago, would this be "ancestor worship", or "science fiction" or a "hypothesis that has no proof at present". This is where the person with the most powerful rhetoric can score sixes and home runs. But this is not cricket or that American sport - what's it called - assball or something

More, much much more, in due course..

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 22 Jul 2017 15:13

It takes a great deal of time and effort to p.arse rhetorical constructs being peddled as likely historic events

I did a word search for "civilizaton collapse"
search.php?keywords=civilization+collapse&terms=all&author=&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Here is what I got
SriJoy wrote:Pan-India business as in practically every kingdom in India was involved in the war. I don't get your supposition. I don't think simple & gradual settlement of these regions is cause for such a big war, but a huge migration pulse leading from IVC collapse is definitely a cause for India-wide strife.


The collapse of the Indus Valley civilization was slow (see below). It was not a sudden catastrophic event leading to a pulse of migration. If the Mahabharata was was caused by a pulse of migration there is no mention of that in the story. Even if the Indus valley had 1 million people at the time of collapse India is too large a country to feel a pulse of migration all over India. It would take many months to go even 500 km. Famine and pestilence and deaths of huge populations are normal in such migrations - not victorious armies teaching language, The refugees from a catastrophic collapse would be in no state to fight settled residents in the East who were already using iron by the early 2nd millennium BC as per archaeological evidence. So a pulse of migration leading to a war is a cock and bull story

In another post the pulse vanishes. There is no pulse but "dispersal" over 1800 years leading to the spread of Indo European languages
SriJoy wrote:On the other hand, archaeologically and population modelling-wise, collapse of IVC leading to spread of IE languages is far more sustainable for the following reasons:

1. IVC was gigantic for its day. <snip>So we have definite evidence of massive demographic presence in IVC and its subsequent dispersal, as the period of 1900 BC-100 BC sees much sparser population in Indus Valley and thus, centre of gravity of Indic civilization during historic times has been Ganges valley and not the Indus.

Eh? What was that again? There was no sudden collapse? Only dispersal over 1800 years? Then what caused the "pan India" war?

SriJoy wrote:So i see it as 'we need conditions ripe for a pan-India war involving many actors' to give some historical credibility to Mahabharata. One such condition that immediately jumps out, is the collapse of Indus Valley civilization and its ramifications. Nothing of that sort jumps out about 5000 BC.

The only thing that jumps out at me is a load of bullshit

You see the date of the Mahabharata war is
SriJoy wrote:I see 2000 BC-1800 BC as the most likely date for Mahabharata war due to this : we have two very compelling reasons being present in that timeframe for a pan-India war : competition for IVC-bearers colonizing middle and eastern Ganges AND shift from bronze to Iron creating new power nodes challenging the old centres of power.


The entire Mahabharata was was between families of Indo-European speakers as per the story. It was not about the spread of language or expansion of Aryavarta. But we can ignore that when we want to push a load of crap in 10,000 posts

But in a series of muddled posts characterized mainly by word diarrhoea I am informed that
1. Indus Valley civilization "dispersed" in the period 1900 - 100 BC . Indus valley civilization also collapsed suddenly causing a pulse of migration leading to a pan India war. This guy can't make up his mind whether it was slow or fast. Only what is convenient to claim for the moment

2. War led to the spread of Indo European language. We can ignore the fact that all the warring parties were already Indo-European speakers and they did not migrate anywhere. They stayed in Aryavarta

3. War was caused by collapse and change from bronze to Iron. It does not matter that the war took place in North West India but Iron was used by the "Losers" along the Ganga whom the migrating IVC people defeated. The people who were using iron by 1800 BC got defeated by the Bronze age Indo-European speakers of the IVC

Unfortunately (for the rest of us) digging up the number of bluffs this man uses to push his shaky case is a painful exercise. but it is a useful lesson in the way Srijoy, in the manner of Witzel, Doniger and Pollock uses his excellent control over language to obfuscate and muddle

Then we get this gem
SriJoy wrote:My 'acceptance of dates' vary by case by case basis, because as i mentioned, some dates are set in stone, some are relatively accurate, some are not at all. And i've already stated- in absence of direct evidence, i will always favour the more probabilistic theory instead of blind wishful thinking of a highly improbable idea being 'possible and i will hold on as truth' because 'religious literature i love says so'.
Hence i prefer Mahabharata around IVC period, Ramayana as younger than 12000 BC period, etc.


His truth based on your mental state and not on any solid evidence. SriJoy's psychoanalysis of your mental state is the reason for his dissing what you say.

This man is good. He has read a lot. But what he says is neither science nor accurate. Just rhetoric.

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 674
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Primus » 22 Jul 2017 17:22

^

I my line of work I am frequently besieged by googlers who have already diagnosed themselves and know what needs to be done because they 'read it somewhere on the net'. When I ask them 'then why come to me' they have no answer. I gently suggest they should perhaps read 'Three Men In a Boat' too, they miss the irony.

If 'reading up on the net' provided real knowledge then we would not need long years of formal training in anything, Google University would enable each one of us to become an overnight expert in anything we chose to - from astronomy to genetics to fundamental physics.

That is what is happening here. Regurgitation of just-read material from Wikipedia, hastily assembled but with enough bombast thrown in to convince a fawning-follower or two that the master has indeed spoken the truth.

It is a pity.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2917
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Dipanker » 22 Jul 2017 18:55

Knowledge is knowledge whether available online electronically or as hard copy in printed form. Today people can earn a degree online in hosts of subjects at all levels, including PHD's in some. Heck, I took a whole bunch of online courses from many of the top universities just to experience the quality of their teaching standard, and I must say I was impressed. Did I learn from them? I certainly hope so!

If I want to refer something I can either go to library and spend lot of time digging up the material or I can access the same material online in a much quicker pace. I don't see how spending hours and hours in library going through hard copies provides better learning than same information accesses much quicker online.

Disparaging online learning is nonsensical and a bigger pity.
Last edited by Dipanker on 22 Jul 2017 19:15, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], KJo and 28 guests