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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
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 19:09

Great rhetoric is not only a great substitute for facts, it actually gets accepted as fact after a while. Like "Islam means peace"

Consider this:

An observation with evidence to back it up becomes fact
An observation without evidence is not fact - it could just be an assumption or even a bluff

But imagine a series of observations. For example:
Asha's dead body has been found
Asha was last seen with Kishore on a surveillance video
Kishore killed Asha


Asha is dead (fact)
Asha was last seen with Kishore (fact)
Kishore killed Asha (assumption)

The suggestion that Kishore killed Asha is easy to make. It is not fact. It is not even evidence. But when it is made with sufficiently convincing sounding language, the assumption can get passed on as fact

"Asha's body has been found. Kishore was last seen with her. Asha was a nice girl. I can't imagine she had enemies. Kishore is a jerk. Kishore and Asha may have been arguing and what obviously jumps out at me is that Kishore killed Asha."

Now look at this series of observations
Indus Valley Civilization collapsed by 1800 BC (fact)
Collapsing civilizations that I know of lead to conflict (personal observation, not fact)
A war must have occurred when the Indus valley civilization collapsed (assumption)
That was the Mahabharata war (assumption)


This is entirely a rhetorical construct based on one fact, a personal opinion and an assumption.

And people are being told that they are wrong and that this rhetorical construct represents the truth.

What fascinates me is the "image" created before all this
1. I am an engineer
2. I swear by science
3. I believe in accuracy, precision and evidence based conclusions
4. I am highly educated

Amazing stuff. I have seen many characters who use such tactics - but the "Boastful self advertisement to set the baseline" is an interesting one.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
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 19:17

Dipanker wrote: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.

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.

No one that I know of has suggested going to a library - so here you are making several rhetorical constructs

1. All online learning has not been dissed That's a half-lie. Wikipedia learning has been dissed
2. "I don't see how spending hours and hours in library going through hard copies provides better learning ". Fair enough. But no one other than you has said that so it has no connection with what anyone has said
3. "Disparaging online learning is nonsensical and a bigger pity. " this statement is a personal opinion

Knowledge and reading are two different things. If I read one fact I do not yet know that there may be two facts. Only after reading two facts do I realise that more than one fact can represent "knowledge". Deciding which of those facts are closer to the truth or if they are true at all or if both are true are a function of intelligence.

So reading books or reading online are only a path to knowledge but not knowledge per se. The fact of reading can only be conflated with knowledge or intelligence by assumptions.

sudarshan
BRFite
Posts: 1556
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

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

Postby sudarshan » 22 Jul 2017 19:28

Once again confusing "information gathering" with "learning." If learning were that simple, anybody could just go online, gather a ton of information, and gain a PhD out of it. The actual PhD process, alas, is not so simple. The process consists of making an original contribution to the chosen field, and the learning isn't about information gathering, it is about acquiring tools to analyze, design experiments, correctly collect data, and then interpret data to arrive at the right conclusions while simultaneously avoiding the wrong or unsupported conclusions. That's the real learning.

So Dipanker's strawman statement that "you think spending hours in libraries is better learning than spending the same hours online" is pure nonsense, and reveals a mindset which has no clue what "learning" really is. This seems to be the typical Indian school-kid mentality, where rote-memorization of facts counts as "learning," and the only thing to worry about is the source of those facts! For one - nobody even mentioned libraries, and for two - whether you gather information online or in a library, it makes no difference, because neither of these is really "learning."

Learning is about building and correctly exercising your creativity and innovation skills, as opposed to gathering information. But of course there are people ("scientists?") like SriJoy, who think people with less information are inferior to people with more information, regardless of their level of creativity or innovation :roll:.
Last edited by sudarshan on 22 Jul 2017 19:35, edited 3 times in total.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9612
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 22 Jul 2017 19:30

Jarita wrote:Ramayana and Mahabharata are wondrous fairy tales much like Harry Potter.


This is an assumption. Certainly Ramayana and Mahabharata don't belong in the category of "history". But whatever they are, Ramayana, Mahabharata have played the role of "civilization-generators/sustainers" as can be seen, e.g., by how they diffused into South-East Asia, and influenced the cultures there. Harry Potter is not in that category. Nor for that matter are the Greek epics, the Illiad and Odyssey. Calling Ramayana, Mahabharata "fairy tales like Harry Potter" is, IMO, pure ignorance.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
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 19:31

There once was a man from the coast
who loved melted shit on toast
when the toast saw the shit
it collapsed in a fit
for the shit was it's grandfather's ghost



An assumption remains an assumption and not fact, even if it is a "reasonable assumption" or an assumption based on the similarity of a set of circumstances to a different set of circumstances leading to the conclusion that both sets of circumstances will lead to the same conclusion. Long sentence - a confusing rhetorical construct to back up an assumption. But an assumption nevertheless.

Calling this science and placing the value of such rhetorical constructs over an above others' views because others are "believers of religion". "worshippers of ancestors", "jealous of western knowledge" are like layers of butter on a crisp piece of shit to try and pass the shit off as toast

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9612
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 22 Jul 2017 20:08

While I think the preponderance of the evidence is that the Ashokan inscriptions help date Ashoka Maurya grandson of Chandragupta Maurya, I'd like to just highlight some of the assumptions behind them:

1. All the various rock inscriptions are from the same era; and none of them are forgeries, etc. (yes, there are fake inscriptions in the record.)
Supporting this is:
- the script
- the language
- the common provenance of the rocks used for the inscription.

This also serves to tie the "Piyadasi" in most of the inscriptions and the "Asoka Piyadasi" in the Maski inscription.

2. The inscriptions refer to the rulers "Turamara", "Antikona" (originally read as by Princeps as Gongakena), "Maga/Mako" and "Alikasunari". Another refers to "Antiyako Yona Raja". The identifications are Turamara - Ptolemy; Antikona/Antiyako - Antigonus; Maga - Magas; Alikasunari - Alexander; but Mountstuart Elphinstone notes: 'But it is at least equally probable that "the record aimed at a vague selection of the more generally known Greek names to complete the list". See Prinsep's Essays (edited by Thomas), vol ii, pp. 18-30- ED.'

3. We note there were Antiochus I, II, III, IV; the Antiochus of the above is identified as either I or II. The Alexander is identified with Alexander II of Epirus; Epirus had an Alexander I also (no Alexander III); but Macedonia had Alexanders 1-IV; III was Alexander the Great. I'm pretty certain a bunch of other dynasties also had Alexanders. Similarly Antigonus is a common rulers' name. Magas is much less common. Maga/Mako is identified as Magas of Cyrene. Notice that Cyrene/Cyrenaica is the eastern area of modern Libya. Ptolemies go from I to XII.

So certain assumptions are made here, in particular this is not a "vague selection of names".

4. Then there is the big assumption that "Asoka Piyadasi" is a Maurya king. This is the most commonly attacked assumption among Indian traditionalists.

As I said initially, the preponderance of the evidence is that convention is right. But it is not so firm that it cannot be upset.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9612
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 22 Jul 2017 20:59

Another thing to note is that it seems people "understand" or "explain" literature like the Ramayana or Mahabharata **only if** they can map it onto some category of literature found in the Western canon.

People will probably admit that if Indians had gone west in Greek times, they would have found e.g., works by Herodotus that would likely not map onto any category of literature in the then-Indian canon.

If the Indian canon does not contain all categories of literature, then why should we assume that the Western canon does?

Ancient Indian literature does not have history as it is understood in the West. The Bible as understood in the West does not map cleanly onto any Indian category. Likewise, the West does not have anything akin to the Rg-Veda - Samhita and Upanishads. Similarly the West does not have any literature category that plays the role that the Mahabharata or Ramayana play in Indian culture.

It is a sad state of affairs when Indians believe they can understand what the Ramayana is **only** by mapping it onto a category of Western literature. "History", "Fairy Tale", "Fable", etc. Such is the poverty of logic, knowledge and imagination. "Ramayana is a fairy tale" - there, I have "understood" the Ramayana. What a self-delusion!

If you want to **empirically** (rather than by spinning fantasies or theories) determine what category of literature the Ramayana is, then one way is to understand the role it played (and plays) in Indian civilization. The meaning of long-lasting literature like the Ramayana or the Bible is not just its "text-historical" meaning; one must go into how it is used. My bet is that if this is done honestly and objectively, the idea of mapping it onto some variety of the Western canon will go away. It belongs to a category of its own.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4853
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 22 Jul 2017 21:43

SriJoy wrote:Not all Indians. As Indian philosophies like Charvaka or Ajivika shows, the assumptive & unsubstantiated ideology of 'Mukti' has not been the goal of all Indians. Our highly affluent material culture for most of our recorded history also shows that as a society,we were more focussed on material gain rather than unsubstantiated 'after-death' goals.
BS of the first order. Do you actually know how many adhered to Charvaka, when, where. Where are the original manuscripts of this teachings?

All these religious ideologies (religious, as it involves God/Gods/Spirits/collective consciousness etc) are unsubstantiated and were created by people who knew nothing of black holes, galaxies, neutron stars, red giants, theory of special relativity, etc. Ie, they are inferior, outdated ideologies seeking to comfort people by guessing about the unknown. Well guess what- some of us don't need said comfort. We are perfectly fine being a finite being, in a finite time and end up extinguished and as worm food or algae-food and not knowing the 'ultimate reality'.

Ultimately, the only thing that matters, is fulfilling Neitzche's concept of 'Ubermenschen' : One is happy and fulfilled when one gets what one wants and one is sad,dejected and frustrated when one does not get what one wants. Ofcourse, one can extinguish 'want' to get happy but given a choice between extinguishing desire and fulfilling desire, we all know what majority of species homo sapiens would prefer.
Karl Marx would be proud of your half baked rhetorical statements. We are here as a continued civilization for X 1000's of years. Charavaka or Karl Marx are nowhere to be found and are blips, deranged blips in this journey. I am convinced now you have no "insight" or real depth of learning. Our civilizational learnings knows how to treat desire, its nuances, stages, practices. Fulfilling of desire is one of our objectives however it is not the desire of material things only. Desire itself is governed by Dharma for without it, you get a Mao type of doctrine, where power flows from the barrel of a gun and there is no scope for humans to be any different from animals. What makes humans different is our ability to control our desire and NOT act in our self interests at all times. This is a conscious ability to make choices that animals cannot. For even animals can fulfill their desires. You seem to have not learnt a 101 level of lesson in human behavior and wax eloquent and make broad sweeping systems with no real knowledge.

Do you have knowledge of Sanskrit. Have you read the original epics, vedas and upanishads in Sanskrit. If you do not know Sanskrit or have not read and thought about these teachings of many 1000's of years old, can we conclude you are illiterate and have less knowledge, insight and learning than even the average village boy had in India in 2000 BC? I certainly am illiterate on this matter compared to the village boy 1000's of years in the past.

Srijoy: Your biases are clear and do not think anyone is going to read your posts and take it at face value that you represent an honest quest for learning and an open mind. A discussion board like this is meant for sharing not preaching. Unsolicited advice, do not stop this quest and keep seeking, maybe some day you will build that invaluable thing called insight.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
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 21:53

SriJoy wrote:.
Ultimately, the only thing that matters, is fulfilling Neitzche's concept of 'Ubermenschen' : One is happy and fulfilled when one gets what one wants and one is sad,dejected and frustrated when one does not get what one wants.

:rotfl:
This is one of the most banal pieces of idiocy I have read in my life. This statement sounds more like the description of a puppy dog's behaviour than some philosopher's pearls. What's this crap all about? Apart from the pretentiousness of using that stupid unpronounceable name that makes brown man feel that he is way up there with white man this moronic quote has nothing to do with this thread.

Either this Nietshit guy knew nothing of life or Srijoy is pretending to be wise. And failing by a big margin.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2756
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 22 Jul 2017 22:19

sudarshan wrote:So Dipanker's strawman statement that "you think spending hours in libraries is better learning than spending the same hours online" is pure nonsense, and reveals a mindset which has no clue what "learning" really is. This seems to be the typical Indian school-kid mentality, where rote-memorization of facts counts as "learning," and the only thing to worry about is the source of those facts! For one - nobody even mentioned libraries, and for two - whether you gather information online or in a library, it makes no difference, because neither of these is really "learning."


I am sorry to say but it is actually your post which is a depiction of school kid mentality since you find it so easy to start hurling labels of "school kid mentality" on others. That to me is classic "school kid mentality".

Why stoop to this level? Agree to disagree and move on.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2756
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 22 Jul 2017 23:19

shiv wrote:No one that I know of has suggested going to a library - so here you are making several rhetorical constructs

1. All online learning has not been dissed That's a half-lie. Wikipedia learning has been dissed
2. "I don't see how spending hours and hours in library going through hard copies provides better learning ". Fair enough. But no one other than you has said that so it has no connection with what anyone has said
3. "Disparaging online learning is nonsensical and a bigger pity. " this statement is a personal opinion

Knowledge and reading are two different things. If I read one fact I do not yet know that there may be two facts. Only after reading two facts do I realise that more than one fact can represent "knowledge". Deciding which of those facts are closer to the truth or if they are true at all or if both are true are a function of intelligence.

So reading books or reading online are only a path to knowledge but not knowledge per se. The fact of reading can only be conflated with knowledge or intelligence by assumptions.


I disagree with dissing Wikipedia too. IMO Wikipedia could be a good starting point. Most of these articles have good number of references. Sometime it takes weeks before one can read all of them. Then one can go on dig up more resources based on those references. Learning does not have to stop at the Wiki main article itself.

IMO it is wrong to assume that people get all their information/knowledge from Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an important tool but certainly not be all end all.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

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

Postby syam » 22 Jul 2017 23:40

During EIC time, they used to pay 1000 pagodas for Oriental Scholars. That was totally big amount.

No wonder we had so many researchers .

sudarshan
BRFite
Posts: 1556
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

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

Postby sudarshan » 23 Jul 2017 00:09

shiv wrote:
SriJoy wrote:.
Ultimately, the only thing that matters, is fulfilling Neitzche's concept of 'Ubermenschen' : One is happy and fulfilled when one gets what one wants and one is sad,dejected and frustrated when one does not get what one wants.

:rotfl:
This is one of the most banal pieces of idiocy I have read in my life. This statement sounds more like the description of a puppy dog's behaviour than some philosopher's pearls. What's this crap all about? Apart from the pretentiousness of using that stupid unpronounceable name that makes brown man feel that he is way up there with white man this moronic quote has nothing to do with this thread.

Either this Nietshit guy knew nothing of life or Srijoy is pretending to be wise. And failing by a big margin.


The way I understand it, Nietzche's Uebermensch concept was meant in the sense of - why worry about God and afterlife, this notion of afterlife comes from dissatisfaction with your current earthly life, ditch all that, don't worry, have curry, and all will be well. This concept was adopted by the Nazis to mean "superior (Aryan) race." Along with the antithesis - "Untermensch." Of course, the Nazis were not the originators of the AIT, the British were, but interesting that SriJoy used this specific term here. Probably just coincidence.

sudarshan
BRFite
Posts: 1556
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

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

Postby sudarshan » 23 Jul 2017 00:17

Dipanker wrote:
sudarshan wrote:So Dipanker's strawman statement that "you think spending hours in libraries is better learning than spending the same hours online" is pure nonsense, and reveals a mindset which has no clue what "learning" really is. This seems to be the typical Indian school-kid mentality, where rote-memorization of facts counts as "learning," and the only thing to worry about is the source of those facts! For one - nobody even mentioned libraries, and for two - whether you gather information online or in a library, it makes no difference, because neither of these is really "learning."


I am sorry to say but it is actually your post which is a depiction of school kid mentality since you find it so easy to start hurling labels of "school kid mentality" on others. That to me is classic "school kid mentality".

Why stoop to this level? Agree to disagree and move on.


Really? We shouldn't stoop to such levels, instead just agree to disagree and move on? That's such a noble thought, coming from you. Just to refresh your memory, here's what you wrote on page 71 of this thread:

Dipanker wrote:Don't we just love our morning cup of Soma! Soma most likely is amanita muscaria. Display of such fertile imagination can only be attributed to a dose of choicest mushroom!

On the brighter side the story of Arundhati walking in front of Ashwasthama Naro va Kunjaro...oops excuse my Soma, I mean Vashistha!! points to antiquity of Sanskrit language as Arundhati and Vashistha being both Sanskrit names, Sanskrit must be older than 12,000 BC!


So suggesting that other posters are on some intoxicant is okay then, and that's not "stooping?" What value did your elaborate smart-ass snickering above (which is the entirety of your post, not just some extract) contribute to this thread? Maybe you should learn to follow your own noble advice.

Also to point out, neither your snickering post from page 71, nor your current post addresses any of the points I raised - whether about Arundhati/Vashishta, or about rote mentality versus actual learning. You just chose the easy way out of snickering in one instance, and objecting to the "hurling labels" in the other instance, following which you pretend to be some noble reasonable soul.

My last on this.

P.S.: "Agreeing to disagree" and "moving on" is exactly what I did after that post of yours on page 71, which is why I didn't respond to that provocation at that time. But now that you specifically brought it up....
Last edited by sudarshan on 23 Jul 2017 02:06, edited 1 time in total.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2244
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

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

Postby Jarita » 23 Jul 2017 02:00

A_Gupta wrote:
Jarita wrote:Ramayana and Mahabharata are wondrous fairy tales much like Harry Potter.


This is an assumption. Certainly Ramayana and Mahabharata don't belong in the category of "history". But whatever they are, Ramayana, Mahabharata have played the role of "civilization-generators/sustainers" as can be seen, e.g., by how they diffused into South-East Asia, and influenced the cultures there. Harry Potter is not in that category. Nor for that matter are the Greek epics, the Illiad and Odyssey. Calling Ramayana, Mahabharata "fairy tales like Harry Potter" is, IMO, pure ignorance.



Did you read my whole post?
I am saying there is a section of society that believes that.
In my other posts you will clearly see what I believe

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2244
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

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

Postby Jarita » 23 Jul 2017 02:04

Really, honestly don't care about debates. Sorry...
I am just looking for Gyan from those who have studied human evolution - around using parallel existence of human sub species as a dating parameter for the Ramayana.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 23 Jul 2017 06:30

Dipanker wrote:I disagree with dissing Wikipedia too. IMO Wikipedia could be a good starting point. Most of these articles have good number of references. Sometime it takes weeks before one can read all of them. Then one can go on dig up more resources based on those references. Learning does not have to stop at the Wiki main article itself.

IMO it is wrong to assume that people get all their information/knowledge from Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an important tool but certainly not be all end all.

Oh absolutely. I am certain that Wikipedia serves as a commonly cited source of information. But it has developed a poor reputation and dissing Wikipedia is a way of questioning a person's sources of information. Reputation is important, and portals like CNN and NYT that are often far from unbiased have built up solid reputations where a person who questions Wikipedia may accept something from the NYT.

"Building up an image" of something that one endorses and sullying the reputation of something that one wishes to oppose is not science. These are tactics that are used in arguments to score points.

Let me point out how you too are guilty of endorsing such tactics while you shed tears about Wikipedia.

On this forum Srijoy has built up his own image by writing of how much of a scientist he is, how he believes in evidence based facts and not superstition, and further - in order to diss others viewpoints he criticizes them for things like ancestor worship, jealousy of the west and in my case an inferiority complex. You could have chosen to stay out of this, but here is a statement made by SriJoy that you enthusiastically endorsed:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6848&p=2188651&hilit=homerun#p2188651
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.


And your rah rah rah response to that:
what you wrote above in baseball analogy is a homerun, out of park! In cricket a sixer!


I put it to you that your tears for Wikipedia are fake and tears of convenience only because it goes against your argument. In my next post I will once again repeat the manner in which a date for the Mahbharata has been arrived at without the basic courtesy of examining what others have said for validity.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 23 Jul 2017 06:38

Here is how I arrive at the dates for the Mahabharata war

1. I am highly educated, a scientist
2. I believe something only if there is evidence for it
3. I have such a broad skill set that I can pretty much understand a scientific paper of any speciality
4. Indians are still stuck in ancestor worship
5. They have no achievements of note - they haven't even built free standing buildings
6. People who take religion sources information literally are the equivalent of bible thumpers
7. This makes me right and others wrong

Having said that this is how I date the Mahabharata
1. Indian Valley Civilization collapsed around 1900 BC
2. Civilizational collapse often leads to war
3. Therefore a war occurred around 1900 BC
4. That was the Mahabharata war

This is such a load of bullshit it does not merit being taken seriously - but this dung is protected by being produced in short liquid squirts spattered across scores of rhetorical posts.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 23 Jul 2017 07:04

I have often stated in the past (though not recently) that the most cocky and arrogant people all come down to earth the day they see bright red blood in their toilet bowl , or when they feel a tight crushing pain in the chest that leaves them gasping for breath.

So what has this got to do with this thread?

It is OK for humans to be proud of human achievements or their own personal achievements. It is probably not OK to mock those who have achieved less - but then again the people who are mocked can't do anything about it so it is unstoppable. But being cocky about those who admire or worship nature is actually stupid and I say yet again that this is where science that promised so much in the 60s has started showing signs of being frayed at the edges and old. But I digress.

When we speak of human achievements we take so many things for granted. When you sleep, your body is relaxed and rested. And limp. You don't hear or see things that an person who is awake would. But you keep on breathing and your heart keeps on beating. Your intestines are working digesting your peanut masala and chicken tikka while your liver handles last night's booze. It is when these things start failing that you begin to see the limits of human achievement and ask if there is anything beyond human achievement. This is not to be critical human curiosity or endeavour but to point out that mockery of those who have looked at existence from a different perspective gets shown up as a load of garbage where science and technology fail.

And science and technology - while moving in leaps and bounds from our perspective is also showing massive signs of failure, of being unable to address some very basic issues. Forget Hindu dharma and philosophy - which I consider to be superior to any other way of understanding out existence - but science is having a tough time keeping away Bible thumpers and mullahs - simply because of overconfidence and cockiness in what science can and cannot do.

And to sully the reputation of true scientists we have boastful rhetoricians who say "science science science" and all they produce is rhetoric rhetoric rhetoric like any Mullah. Bah. What a ludicrous joke this thread has become

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6733
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 23 Jul 2017 12:24

Jarita wrote:Really, honestly don't care about debates. Sorry...
I am just looking for Gyan from those who have studied human evolution - around using parallel existence of human sub species as a dating parameter for the Ramayana.


Jarita, first welcome back.

The question above is addressed (fairly lightly but addressed nevertheless) in Yuval Noah Harari's book Sapiens. Good read, and there are some references too. I don't have it with me now, unfortunately. Taken and may not get it back from my kids.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1557
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 23 Jul 2017 15:45

Jarita wrote: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.

There are more than 130 claims for the dating of Mahabharata and about dozen for the dating of Ramayana. Most of them (but not all) claim 'astronomy evidence' as their basis.

One such researcher claims that Mahabharata has 215+ , and Ramayana has 575+ astronomy references/observations/descriptions.

This researcher has personally asked Dr. and Prof. mentioned in the video clip above to have a dialogue (via email, getting together in person, debate, online debate - moderated or otherwise). Both Dr. and Prof. are scared to death to face this researcher. Prof. was avoiding making an eye contact or making a basic gesture of handshake with this researcher for 2 days at a conference. Dr. is clueless about astronomy to dare participate into anything. But he is a good filmmaker. Prof. is also clueless about method of science and poor in his inferential acumen.

There is too much fun (or boring stuff) to be described about this Dr. and Prof. duo. But mostly it is a boring.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

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

Postby syam » 23 Jul 2017 15:48

Sorry for OT.
Last few pages remind me of this old story,

In a mother’s womb were two babies.

“Do you believe in life after delivery?” one twin asks.

“Why, of course. There has to be something after delivery. Maybe we are here to prepare ourselves for what we will be later,” the other replies.

“Nonsense,” says the first. “There is no life after delivery. What kind of life would that be?”

The second responds, “I don’t know, but there will be more light than here. Maybe we will walk with our legs and eat from our mouths. Maybe we will have other senses that we can’t understand now.”

The first replies, “That is absurd. Walking is impossible. And eating with our mouths? Ridiculous! The umbilical cord supplies nutrition and everything we need. But the umbilical cord is so short. Life after delivery is to be logically excluded.”

But the second insists, “I think there is something, and maybe it’s different than it is here. Maybe we won’t need this physical cord anymore.”

The first replies, “Nonsense. Moreover, if there is life, then why has no one ever come back from there? Delivery is the end of life. In the after-delivery, there is nothing but darkness and silence and oblivion. It takes us nowhere.”

“Well, I don’t know,” says the second, “but certainly we will meet Mother, and she will take care of us.”

The first replies, “Mother? You actually believe in Mother? That’s laughable. If Mother exists, then where is she now?”

The second says, “She is all around us. We are surrounded by her. We are of her. It is in her that we live. Without her, this world would not and could not exist.”

Says the first: “Well I don’t see her, so it is only logical that she doesn’t exist.”

But then the second twin answers, “Sometimes, when you’re in silence and you focus and you really listen, you can perceive her presence, and you can hear her loving voice, calling down from above.”

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

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

Postby Primus » 23 Jul 2017 16:58

JE Menon wrote:The question above is addressed (fairly lightly but addressed nevertheless) in Yuval Noah Harari's book Sapiens. Good read, and there are some references too. I don't have it with me now, unfortunately. Taken and may not get it back from my kids.


I'm in the same boat JEM. My son took my copy!

One thing I wanted to state a bit earlier when ancients humans were being dismissed as uncivilized, ignorant and clueless. Harari claims they knew more about their own world than the humans who came after, each of them physically fitter and very knowledgable about the seasons, the wild crops, animals, and could each survive on his own. In addition they all knew everyone in their groups very well. In that sense subsequent humans have lost all ability to live without extreme dependence on the very science and tech that is supposed to help us 'grow' (whatever that really means). I doubt any of us could survive today on our own without all the accouterments of modern living (heck my daughter wouldn't survive a day without the iPhone).

Becoming 'civilized' and more advanced has actually enslaved us to the very science that was to have liberated us from the boundaries of geography and climate.

He also writes as you know, about 'happiness' and what is it that makes humans happy. I am no philosopher (our friend will probably claim expertise in this too), but from simply having lived this long know that it is not technology or science. Will leave it at that.

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 637
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

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

Postby Primus » 23 Jul 2017 16:59

^^
Very touching, Syam. There is a lesson in there somewhere :-)

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9612
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 23 Jul 2017 17:41

shiv wrote:Here is how I arrive at the dates for the Mahabharata war

1. I am highly educated, a scientist
2. I believe something only if there is evidence for it
3. I have such a broad skill set that I can pretty much understand a scientific paper of any speciality
4. Indians are still stuck in ancestor worship
5. They have no achievements of note - they haven't even built free standing buildings
6. People who take religion sources information literally are the equivalent of bible thumpers
7. This makes me right and others wrong

Having said that this is how I date the Mahabharata
1. Indian Valley Civilization collapsed around 1900 BC
2. Civilizational collapse often leads to war
3. Therefore a war occurred around 1900 BC
4. That was the Mahabharata war

This is such a load of bullshit it does not merit being taken seriously - but this dung is protected by being produced in short liquid squirts spattered across scores of rhetorical posts.


+108

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2244
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

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

Postby Jarita » 23 Jul 2017 18:36

JE Menon wrote:
Jarita wrote:Really, honestly don't care about debates. Sorry...
I am just looking for Gyan from those who have studied human evolution - around using parallel existence of human sub species as a dating parameter for the Ramayana.


Jarita, first welcome back.

The question above is addressed (fairly lightly but addressed nevertheless) in Yuval Noah Harari's book Sapiens. Good read, and there are some references too. I don't have it with me now, unfortunately. Taken and may not get it back from my kids.




Thanks - will read ASAP.
Another fundamental assumption is the cyclical nature of Human development - were these ancients in possession of skills, abilities and physical attributes we have lost ( I am not talking about flying etc). Could their physical structure and coloring be different.
On the matter of Rama himself, he is described as dark with blue eyes. The strange part is that hunter gatherers have been described as such the more north we go. The lightening of skin color in correspondence with eye color only happened after agriculture was completely evolved and meat removed substantially from diet. Yet vestiges remained.
I am curious as to the existence of an advanced civilization in some ways and not so advanced in others ( no cars, iPhones etc of course) with a different look and walking in parallel with other species ( those towards the end of their time).
Look I recall that Chanakya had himself mentioned a paste which when put on soles of feet could make humans commute very fast. Much knowledge was lost in the burning of Taxila and Nalanda.
So these advanced civilizations of the past I am referring to might have realized human potential of a kind much further. Such as a sixth sense, physical abilities and and insight into the multi dimensional universe which they expressed through the parables that have become our epics.
Last edited by Jarita on 23 Jul 2017 18:59, edited 1 time in total.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9612
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 23 Jul 2017 18:50

This, IMO, though dealing with the 19th-21st century, is relevant to this thread.
https://swarajyamag.com/culture/de-demo ... ay-in-2017

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2244
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

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

Postby Jarita » 23 Jul 2017 19:16

Primus wrote:
JE Menon wrote:The question above is addressed (fairly lightly but addressed nevertheless) in Yuval Noah Harari's book Sapiens. Good read, and there are some references too. I don't have it with me now, unfortunately. Taken and may not get it back from my kids.


I'm in the same boat JEM. My son took my copy!

One thing I wanted to state a bit earlier when ancients humans were being dismissed as uncivilized, ignorant and clueless. Harari claims they knew more about their own world than the humans who came after, each of them physically fitter and very knowledgable about the seasons, the wild crops, animals, and could each survive on his own. In addition they all knew everyone in their groups very well. In that sense subsequent humans have lost all ability to live without extreme dependence on the very science and tech that is supposed to help us 'grow' (whatever that really means). I doubt any of us could survive today on our own without all the accouterments of modern living (heck my daughter wouldn't survive a day without the iPhone).

Becoming 'civilized' and more advanced has actually enslaved us to the very science that was to have liberated us from the boundaries of geography and climate.

He also writes as you know, about 'happiness' and what is it that makes humans happy. I am no philosopher (our friend will probably claim expertise in this too), but from simply having lived this long know that it is not technology or science. Will leave it at that.


Yes indeed. So many words and so much force fitting of timelines and abilities from our limited vantage point is a brutalization of our past really.
Again I will state, in our own recent history we have seen how primitive the Europeans of the Middle Ages were relative to the Romans of the past. How primitive Indians of the Middle Ages were relative to Indians of IVC.
Where did our ancient knowledge of the planets and their properties come from? Where did our knowledge of conception come from - Ayurveda laid out step by step process of a fetus? I could go on and on.
In so many words and so much force fitting the true magic of these ancient civilizations is lost.
How they experienced the world, what did they know? How they lived?
During the times of Ramayana life was simpler externally ( no tech that we know off and obviously they were not eating paneer makhani everyday - more like deer and cows products and some basic grains/ vegetables etc) but the inner world was likely very rich. Their perception of the universe much deeper/ of its multi dimensional nature.
They knew much that we have lost the ability to know. I believe it's not just knowledge but actual ability has gone.
If we were to be transported to their world we would be destroyed but if vice versa they might survive ( other than modern disease)
And their perception defines these epics because we have lost that experiential aspect. Let me explain - Varuna actually arose from the ocean for them. That was their reality and their interconnectedness with existence. That perception is a reality (quantum theory).
You can see remnants in some of the Indian tribes today who will say - the wind told them this and that when you ask how did you know the direction of a car coming from afar (this is fast disappearing). Their experience with existence is their reality.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9612
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 23 Jul 2017 23:09

This question is for Nilesh Oak. There is a bit of a preamble to the question.

The Ashokan inscriptions are dated via the mention of four rulers - Ptolemy, Alexander, Antigonus and Magas.

I'm no expert on dynasties, but the situation seems to me to be the following:

If the Ashokan inscriptions had only mentioned one of Ptolemy, Alexander, Antigonus, or even any two of them, we'd be hard pressed to date them, because there are quite a few Ptolemies, Alexanders and Antigonuses. My guess is that even all three of them were mentioned, there would be more than one era that can be found where there were a contemporaneous Ptolemy, Alexander and Antigonus.

Magas however seems to be rare or perhaps even unique.

Thus Magas fixes the date of the Ashokan inscription, and Ptolemy, Alexander, Antigonus provide confirmation by the circumstance of one of each being contemporary to Magas. Magas is the lynchpin, the other three are support.

Similarly, I imagine in the astronomical information in the Mahabharata and Ramayana, there are some lynchpins and others are supporting. Of course, the analysis is much more difficult, because there are a lot of observations.

My question is - has this type of analysis already been done? or if not, is there enough information in your publications to do that analysis?

Thanks in advance!

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35291
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 24 Jul 2017 07:12

Gus wrote:
sudarshan wrote:What words do you find common between Tamil and Sanskrit? It is well known that Tamil has a lot of loan words from Sanskrit, known as "vadach-chol" (i.e., northern words, or words from the northern language (Sanskrit)). The Tamil script by itself couldn't express some of the sounds in Sanskrit, which is why more letters were added on (like sha, ha, etc.) just so people could write out those loan words.


and old sangam tamil or even stuff like Thirukkural will leave modern tamils befuddled. They can read but cannot understand the meaning of the words much less the meaning and context of entire verse / sentence.

There's a reason we have 'Konar Urai' type books that explain Thirukkural because we lost ability to understand the words directly.


Gus, you bring an interesting point. Most languages have multiple versions, oldest, older, old, new, newer, newest... Tamil or Kannada or Malayalam almost all languages have versions and dialects. Old Tamil can never be understood, forget that I can't understand some hard text book Tamizh. Why I say you are touching an interesting point here is that this argument makes Sanskrit unique.

Answer: It never changed or morphed to multiple versions. The 2000 odd Dhatus remained abstract classes (words) for derivation, and the object oriented nature of Sanskrit verb roots remained unchanged. There is no way it could change and will continue to be so till a new big-bang theory can be framed.

sudharshan ji, I would think even if it is common or loaned word, it would not have brought in a new meaning to Dhatus. It simply has to be derived from this 2100 dhatus only.

So, given the nature of derivation, and the nature of attribution, we can conclude, Sanskrit has most likely remained unchanged over the years, and has no reason to borrow words from other languages to make new meanings.

Also, I am not saying, just because Sanskrit didn't change or borrowed words, and Tamil borrowed it, means Sanskrit is older (not a temporal argument). It is highly likely, that spoken Sanskrit co-existed with spoken Tamil since eons and there is no emphatic evidence exist to say which came first or which direction language spread. But, given the "loan word periods", we can say it had some migration. If we can prove Old Tamil has no loan word, so be it!

We are still open to say, the buckus-panini form is more a structured language form after archaic Tamilian and Lemurian :) infections. We have no data but probably guess that Panini learned something from Sage Agasthya. oh well, we can never prove any form of migration from written scripts but only perhaps spoken (Pre-panini days) times for which we have no data to prove which came first.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 24 Jul 2017 08:27

This post is proof that the effort required to rebut bullshit is an order of magnitude higher that that required to produce it.

"Guns Germs and Steel" is a 1997 book. I read it in 2000 but I still have my (hard) copy from the era before Kindle. But after seeing, on one thread a statement "recommending" that book- it occurs to me that the style of argumentative rhetoric here is taken straight from that book. And some of it from his other work "Collapse"

Diamond argues (rightly) that astronomers and historians (a strange selection of dissimilar specialists) cannot conduct experiments to prove or disprove events that may have taken place far in the past or might occur in the distant future. So far so good.

Diamond goes on to argue that observation of events past for which we have evidence can .. let me stop at this unfinished sentence because this is where rhetoric and clever words can replace the hard binary of science.

So I restart the sentence : observation of events past for which we have evidence can _______________________________ (fill blank from choices below)
1. serve as a useful pointer to events in the future
2. provide us with the exact knowledge we need to predict what is likely to occur in future
3. point to how future events will pan out

The concatenation of astronomy and history is an unfortunate one because beyond the rhetoric it is easier to reach conclusions about astronomical events which have a degree of mathematical regularity than human behaviour which does not have the regular predictability that one may like to assume if that is convenient.

If a supernova is occurring now, and you find evidence of supernovas that may occurred in the distant past and have evolved into what is visible now, one can reasonably predict that supernovas may occur again based on some physical principles and will evolve in a particular way. All credit to Diamond for explicitly stating that these methods cannot be ported to history - but yet he uses these methods in a way that can be misused to reach nonsensical conclusions as has been done by "historians" like David Anthony and nobodies like SriJoy

If a mass human migration has occurred in the past and is recorded in history as a mass migration that occurred from a particular reason - it is pretty easy to reach back into recent history and check the reasons. But accuracy requires honesty. The "mass" in mass migration need to be defined and without defining that a generalization about mass migrations would be utter rubbish. But even after defining that well the reasons for mass migration of humans fall into more than one category
1. People have migrated en masse in large numbers because of natural disasters such as earthquakes, volcanoes, floods and drought . Here the duration of the event is critical. Earthquakes are sudden. Floods could be sudden and temporary or a repeated and increasing annual phenomenon. So the rate of migration would be different in each case. Drought is typically an annually recurrent phenomenon and gradual drying of an area over decades would cause slow migration. An earthquake causing alteration of a river may cause floods in one area and drought in another.

2. Disease is also a "natural phenomenon" and migrations have occurred due to pestilence - usually plague, cholera or smallpox. But since diseases travel with humans the migration is usually temporary

3. Human causes of mass migration can be war. The Bangladesh crisis was a recent one. Baluchistan, Somalia, Syria are recent examples. The thirty years war in Europe that lead to the peace of Westphalia caused multiple mass migrations and 25% of the population of Europe was wiped out due to famine and disease, not genocide. Typically mass migrations such as these are a consequence of conflict. The migrants are refugees, not warriors. They are not migrating to make war, but to find peace.

4. Economic migration: This may be forced or voluntary. Slavery from Africa and workers transported for India to Trinidad, or Africa or even the UK are examples. The US is an example of migrants moving out of Europe for economic and social reasons. Europeans typically decimated the indigenous populations that they migrated to in the last 500 years. This is true of the continental US, South America and Australia. But this did not happen in India although the methods used were similar. I will not bother going into details. Interestingly, Jared Diamond too skims over India just like Huntington skims over India in his "Clash of Civilizations"

Now here is a statement made earlier
SriJoy wrote: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.


This is as straightforward a collection of bluffs based on one fact in a single sentence:

The Indus Valley Civilization is generally accepted to have "collapsed". This is true. But it was never a sudden collapse. There is archaeological evidence of gradual depopulation over centuries. In the case of the IVC - migration out of the IVC were not warriors trying to conquer people. Heck no weapons have been found in the IVC. And even with a sudden mass migration of people due to natural disaster, historic precedents indicate that they migrate as refugees looking for succour, not as warriors looking to conquer. Finally the "India-wide strife" assertion is an out and out bluff.

And guess what the defence of bluff is?
1. I have an inferiority complex and I post here to save face
2. We believe in blind ancestor worship
3. We do not subscribe to evidence based conclusions
4. We are jealous of the west (This is straight form Jared Diamond - who couched his views in more polite terms :) )
5. SriJoy is an engineer
6. SriJoy is a career student
7. He has studied history at least in part from a popular book by jared Diamond
8. He believes in accuracy
9. Given time he can parse any scientific paper

OK Ok fine. But how do the above observation serve as "evidence" that what he says is right, when most of the posts are masterful word-play?

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1557
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 24 Jul 2017 16:08

A_Gupta wrote:This question is for Nilesh Oak. ......

Similarly, I imagine in the astronomical information in the Mahabharata and Ramayana, there are some lynchpins and others are supporting. Of course, the analysis is much more difficult, because there are a lot of observations.

My question is - has this type of analysis already been done? or if not, is there enough information in your publications to do that analysis?

Thanks in advance!


Yes, the very objective, intent, content and core of my both books is precisely dedicated to this type of analysis.
+

There is enough information in my books (and blogs...spread out in bits and pieces)and also youtube videos for anyone to do this analysis.

--
Sticking to only astronomy relevant evidence, for now....

Both epics have linchpins. The linchpins come from what I call 'astronomy observations' due to long term phenomenon of 'Precession of Equinoxes'.

(of course these are simplifications. reality is far more interesting and on a much more firmer footing than Ashoka inscription might be)

Mahabharata

(1) Arundhati-Vasistha observation - linchpin par excellence. Shows that (mathematical certainty, scientific triangulation of explanation-prediction-testing- blah blah) Mahabharata war not possible anytime after 4508 BCE or anytime before 11091 BCE.

This is a unique event (na bhuto, except one time shown above) (Bhavishyati - yes, 11,000 years from now)

(2) Set of Bhishma Nirvana observations - not a unique phenomenon because the descriptions by themselves will repeat once every ~26000 years for about 3500 year time interval, in every cycle of precession of equinoxes.

Then why is the also a linchpin.

This is a linchpin, because the phenomenon was only possible during ~7000 BCE through 3700 BCE, in the last 15000 years! So, unless someone is claiming Mahabharata war more than 26,000 year ago, this set of evidence is linchpin

(3) 30+ observaions/analogies/descriptions of the season/sky during the war lead us to the conjecture that war occurred during the Sharad season

30+ observations/analogies/descriptions of the phases of the moon corroborate that war was occurred during the bright phase/Shukla paksha of the month (i.e. beginning with around Amawasya and ending just after full moon)

~5+ specific references/observations - positions of moon lead to the conclusion that Margashirsha was the month (lunar month) of the war

This means war occurred during the shukla paksha of Margashirsha and during the season of Sharad.

This by itself puts a lower limit of ~4000 BCE on the plausible timing of Mahabharata war

(4) Combine evidence of (3) with (2) and, again , we have another support for war not anytime after ~4500 BCE

The rest of the astronomy evidence (200+) goes in 'supporting' these inferences and assist in identifying specific year (5561 BCE) of the timing of MBH war.

Ramayana

(1) Ramayana does not have 'UNIQUE' evidence like AV observation

(2) It has 4 specific and independent astronomy observations (or set of them) that all point to 10,000 BCE or before

e.g.

(2-a) Chaitra as the lunar month that occurred during Sharad season (10500 BCE - 15000 BCE)

(2-b) Ashwin as the lunar month that occurred during Vasanta seasong (11800 BCE - 16500 BCE)

(2-C) Sun setting near pushya during Hemant season (11500 BCE - 17500 BCE)

(2-d) Brahmarashi/Vega/Abhijit as pole star during Ramayana times ( 10,000 BCE - 14000 BCE)

These are linchpins.

The rest of the astronomy evidence (500+) goes in 'supporting' these inferences and assist in identifying specific year (12209 BCE) of the timing of Rama-Ravana war.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9612
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 24 Jul 2017 16:30

Thanks, Nilesh, that is great! I think this allows the chains of inference to be charted very clearly.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1557
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 24 Jul 2017 17:15

A_Gupta wrote:Thanks, Nilesh, that is great! I think this allows the chains of inference to be charted very clearly.

Thank you.

The youtube video below is what I created to prepare my colleague who was going to present at the Mahabharata Manthan conference in New Delhi (19-21 July 2017).

It was meant to be a private video, so it was prepared off the cuff (impromptu) and final presentation has few minor modifications from what you will see.

Shared with BRF community for whatever value it may bring..

https://youtu.be/ryTJHrnkL4A

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7726
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

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

Postby Gus » 24 Jul 2017 18:05

SaiK wrote:Also, I am not saying, just because Sanskrit didn't change or borrowed words, and Tamil borrowed it, means Sanskrit is older (not a temporal argument). It is highly likely, that spoken Sanskrit co-existed with spoken Tamil since eons and there is no emphatic evidence exist to say which came first or which direction language spread. But, given the "loan word periods", we can say it had some migration. If we can prove Old Tamil has no loan word, so be it!


Not an 'expert' or even an 'amateur expert' on "pandaya thamizh" - but I don't think there's much loan words or derivations from sanskrit in old tamil. There's a lot of loan words and modified loan words used now to the point of maybe 25% or even more depending on who you talk to. It is funny how language chauvinism works but that's another thread...

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 24 Jul 2017 20:32

A very interesting paper (Nilesh Oak has quoted something from this paper earlier but I only just saw the paper today - and downloaded and archived as well..
Tracing the Vedic Saraswati River in the Great Rann of Kachchh

Let me summarize what the authors say.

From 17,000 years ago to 10,000 years ago the Great Rann of Kutch appears to have mixed sediments from the Indus and another river running parallel to the Indus - with sediments similar to the Ghaggar-Hakra river.

The tentative conclusions are that there could have been a river corresponding to the Saraswati (modern Ghaggar-Hakra) separate from the Indus from 17,000 years ago (the start of the measurements in the paper) to 10,000 years ago. They quote studies placing the drying of Saraswati around 6000 years ago. It appears the Rann of Kutch may have actually been a bay and not a low lying swamp when the sea levels were lower in the ice age (ice age lasted up until 10,000 years ago). But after that, although the sea levels rose the land has also risen 100 meters and the Saraswati never really reached the Arabian sea but simply contributed (along with the Indus) to Thar desert sediments which need further study as per the authors

The authors have been honest enough to provide a couple of other alternate explanations for these findings. Too honest if you ask me the kind of honesty not seen among AITians for 200 years till today.

But the authors do seem to feel that their findings reflect a Saraswati river. So we are looking at a river that was huge 17000 years ago - probably reaching the Arabian sea. From 10,000 to 6000 years ago it was draining into the desert ("vinasana" mentioned in the Mahabharata). This suggests to me that the Mahabharata can be dated anytime from 8000 BC (10000 ybp) to 4000 BC (6000 ybp). This fits in well with Nilesh Oak's studies.

My ancestors told me all this and I worship them and I must set aside a few expletives against all those racist white buggers who are so sooo much superior to us. I burn with envy as I type this. How I wish we were better historians. Like that onlee..

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 24 Jul 2017 21:16

In connection with the paper whose summary I posted above, I want to point out that David Frawley has sourced many quotes from the Vedas that speak of the Saraswati draining into the sea. If we were to correlate this with the paper it means that the Vedas refer to a time period between 17,000 years ago and 10,000 years ago. From 10000 to 6000 years the Saraswati was draining into the desert. The Mahabharat war appears to have been in this period.

What this also does is to put a huge square rod up the backside of the "IndoEuropean language spread" theory because that damn language was smoking chillums in Hindoostan - party in that hated Gujarat

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32842
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 24 Jul 2017 21:43

Nilesh Oak wrote:
Shared with BRF community for whatever value it may bring..

https://youtu.be/ryTJHrnkL4A

Super video thanks

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1557
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 24 Jul 2017 22:36

shiv wrote:In connection with the paper whose summary I posted above, I want to point out that David Frawley has sourced many quotes from the Vedas that speak of the Saraswati draining into the sea. If we were to correlate this with the paper it means that the Vedas refer to a time period between 17,000 years ago and 10,000 years ago. From 10000 to 6000 years the Saraswati was draining into the desert. The Mahabharat war appears to have been in this period.

What this also does is to put a huge square rod up the backside of the "IndoEuropean language spread" theory because that damn language was smoking chillums in Hindoostan - party in that hated Gujarat

Shiv,

You might have seen this before, if not, what you wrote above and what this geology paper states is what I showed/inferred to be the case for the timing of Rigveda (especially older Mandalas - 6,3, 7,4,2 ), based on hydrology/geology/genealogies of Rishis and Kings from Rigveda and epics,

. Also how all this fits with Ramayana and Mahabharata.

https://youtu.be/cYFmDqBXJo4?list=PLYOS ... ds34G_jQap

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2756
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 25 Jul 2017 02:23

Ram lived in Treta yug. We are living in Kaliyug now. In between there was Dwapar yug which was 864,000 years long.
Assuming that we are x years into Kaliyug and Ram breathed his last y years before the end of Treta, that should make Ramayana at least (y + 864,000 + x) years old.

I am surprised why people ignore this approach to dating Ramayana? This sounds like the more logical approach to me.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chanakyaa, Ramesh and 49 guests