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.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4854
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jul 2017 02:49

Dipanker wrote: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.
I do not understand your post at all. Do you know that there are multiple interpretations of what a Yuga is. Do you know where is the above calculation of Yuga come from? Is the Bhagwat Puraan there to document history? There are a 1000+ stories in the Bhagwat Puraan, have you read them? Is this what you take from it, how to date Yugas? Were the authors trying to date the MBH and Ramayan, while describing these Yugas or were they trying to document Indian History?

This is part of the reason, I do not like this attempt to date history using our shrutis and smritis. People instantly take unreasonable and out of context examples from the text in an attempt to defame its use. Instead of the design construct of these works being taught, generations of Indians grow illiterate about these works and its messages. Works that one should read as it is part of our heritage and try to derive the correct lessons adding today's context, accepting some, discarding some and the one who is able to do this well, would be wise. We do not use these works as Gods laws but derive lessons from it. Now, some genius will try to date the Dasha Avatar from the Bhagwatam. Sad, Dipanker read the source texts they are part of your heritage.
Last edited by ShauryaT on 25 Jul 2017 03:03, edited 1 time in total.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2768
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 25 Jul 2017 02:57

Also from the abstract of the paper above:

The persistence of such a river during the Harappan Bronze Age and the Iron Age Vedic period is strongly debated.


Is this accepted chronology on the forum? If so then the Vedic period can't be older that say 1800 BC or so as per this paper, right?

Did the Mahajanapadas grow up during Vedic period? Or are they older? If they are assumed to be of Vedic period then Mahabharata which mentions these Mahajanapadas can't be older than them, meaning Mahabharata can't be older than say 1800 BC. Bibek Debroy dates it to around 1100 BC. BB Lal, who dug up Hastinapuri, to 950 BC.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9615
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 25 Jul 2017 02:58

The cyclic nature of time in Hindu cosmology should be understood by all.
1.
e.g., do you want to date the Indras in this story?
http://arunsmusings.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... inity.html

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9615
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 25 Jul 2017 03:00

Dipanker wrote:Also from the abstract of the paper above:

The persistence of such a river during the Harappan Bronze Age and the Iron Age Vedic period is strongly debated.


Is this accepted chronology on the forum? If so then the Vedic period can't be older that say 1800 BC or so as per this paper, right?


If the Vedic Saraswati dried up by 6000 years before present, then it wasn't present in the "Iron Age Vedic period" (given the currently accepted dates for the Iron Age), and so the Vedas have to predate the "Iron Age Vedic period".

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4854
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jul 2017 03:14

Dipanker wrote: Bibek Debroy dates it to around 1100 BC.
Bibek Debroy is just stating what the BORI authors stated. Their work started nearly 100 years back. They did not seek to date MBH and largely went by what was held convention then. This held convention was still dictated by western indologists then with their colored lenses. What they did achieve is to get to a version of originality of the text by reconciling the multiple versions in existence then and now. Read let us say the translation by Ganguly and by Debroy to understand the differences in the underlying texts. Debroy is acting as a translator not staking an independent claim. Knowing him he will do so, only after it is certified in triplicate, till then he will be very nuanced in his pronouncements. As the various steams of evidence and hypotheses are synthesized we will get better information on the dates. Till then best to encourage honest researchers.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4854
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 25 Jul 2017 03:28

I am sure this must have been presented earlier in this thread but since the discussion is happening again, I want to post this paper by Subhash Kak on the date of the MBH.

The Mahabharata and the Sindhu-Sarasvati Tradition

Concluding Remarks
The material from the Mahabharata and the Puranas provides us many tangled hints. Given the extensive nature of the king-lists and the teacher-lists it is impossible that the origin of the Mahabharata-Purana tradition could be brought down to the beginning of the second millennium BC as espoused by the proponents of the theories of Aryan invasion and migration. The Mahabharata War occurs at the 94th generation in these lists, and even if one were to assign just 20 years for each generation and assume that the lists were exhaustive, one would have to account for nearly 2,000 years before the War which, even in the most conservative dating for the War, takes us square into the beginnings of the Integration Era of the SS Tradition.

The Epic and Puranic evidence on the geographical situation supports the notion of the shifting of the centre of the Vedic world from the Sarasvati to the Ganga region in early second millennium BC. O.P. Bharadwaj’s excellent study of the Vedic Sarasvati using textual evidence12 supports the theory that the Rgveda is to be dated about 3000 BC and the Mahabharata War must have occurred about that time.

The Mahabharata clearly belongs to a heroic age, prior to the rise of the complexity of urban life. The weapons used are mythical or clubs. The narrative of chariots could be a later gloss added in the first millennium BC. The pre-urban core events of the Epic would fit the 3137 BC date much better than the 1924 BC. But this would suggest that the Puranic tradition at a later time conflated earlier events with the destructive earthquakes of 1924 BC and remembered the later event accurately using the centennial Saptarsi calendar. The Indic kings of West Asia are descendents of Vedic people who moved West after the catastrophe of 1924 BC.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2768
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

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

Postby Rudradev » 25 Jul 2017 04:12

RE: The cyclic nature of time, and claims made about the "superiority" of present-day humans to those who lived in centuries past. But otherwise OT.

The one-time "futurist" Robert Gordon has written a book with the misleading title "The Rise and Fall of American Growth". However it is not about America specifically, and doesn't focus exclusively on "growth" in the traditional sense of GDP or geopolitics.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/book ... -were.html

It is about the technological progress of humankind over the last couple of centuries in general... driven, we must admit, largely by Western science and technological entrepreneurship.

It argues (quite convincingly) that the pace of science-driven technological progress that took off about 1870 peaked about 100 years later, and by that by 1970, the high-acceleration phase was permamently over.

From the review (linked above) of this book by Paul Krugman:


Robert J. Gordon, a distinguished macro­economist and economic historian at Northwestern, has been arguing for a long time against the techno-optimism that saturates our culture, with its constant assertion that we’re in the midst of revolutionary change. Starting at the height of the dot-com frenzy,
he has repeatedly called for perspective: Developments in information and communication technology, he has insisted, just don’t measure up to past achievements. Specifically, he has argued that the I.T. revolution is less important than any one of the five Great Inventions that powered economic growth from 1870 to 1970: electricity, urban sanitation, chemicals and pharmaceuticals, the internal combustion engine and modern communication.


In “The Rise and Fall of American Growth,” Gordon doubles down on that theme, declaring that the kind of rapid economic growth we still consider our due, and expect to continue forever, was in fact a one-time-only event. First came the Great Inventions, almost all dating from the late 19th century. Then came refinement and exploitation of those inventions — a process that took time, and exerted its peak effect on economic growth between 1920 and 1970. Everything since has at best been a faint echo of that great wave, and Gordon doesn’t expect us ever to see anything similar.

...

As [Gordon] says, “Except in the rural South, daily life for every American changed beyond recognition between 1870 and 1940.” Electric lights replaced candles and whale oil, flush toilets replaced outhouses, cars and electric trains replaced horses. (In the 1880s, parts of New York’s financial district were seven feet deep in manure.)
...

Aside from its being an interesting story, however, why is it important to study this transformation? Mainly, Gordon suggests — although these are my words, not his — to provide a baseline. What happened between 1870 and 1940, he argues, and I would agree, is what real transformation looks like. Any claims about current progress need to be compared with that baseline to see how they measure up.

And it’s hard not to agree with him that nothing that has happened since is remotely comparable. Urban life in America on the eve of World War II was already recognizably modern; you or I could walk into a 1940s apartment, with its indoor plumbing, gas range, electric lights, refrigerator and telephone, and we’d find it basically functional. We’d be annoyed at the lack of television and Internet — but not horrified or disgusted.

By contrast, urban Americans from 1940 walking into 1870-style accommodations — which they could still do in the rural South — were indeed horrified and disgusted. Life fundamentally improved between 1870 and 1940 in a way it hasn’t since.


Now, in 1940 many Americans were already living in what was recognizably the modern world, but many others weren’t. What happened over the next 30 years was that the further maturing of the Great Inventions led to rapidly rising incomes and a spread of that modern lifestyle to the nation as a whole. But then everything slowed down. And Gordon argues that the slowdown is likely to be permanent: The great age of progress is behind us. But is Gordon just from the wrong generation, unable to fully appreciate the wonders of the latest technology? I suspect that things like social media make a bigger positive difference to people’s lives than he acknowledges. But he makes two really good points that throw quite a lot of cold water on the claims of techno-optimists.

First, he points out that genuinely major innovations normally bring about big changes in business practices, in what workplaces look like and how they function. And there were some changes along those lines between the mid-1990s and the mid-2000s — but not much since, which is evidence for Gordon’s claim that the main impact of the I.T. revolution has already happened.

Second, one of the major arguments of techno-optimists is that official measures of economic growth understate the real extent of progress, because they don’t fully account for the benefits of truly new goods. Gordon concedes this point, but notes that it was always thus — and that the understatement of progress was probably bigger during the great prewar transformation than it is today.

So what does this say about the future? Gordon suggests that the future is all too likely to be marked by stagnant living standards for most Americans, because the effects of slowing technological progress will be reinforced by a set of “headwinds”: rising inequality, a plateau in education levels, an aging population and more.


It’s a shocking prediction for a society whose self-image, arguably its very identity, is bound up with the expectation of constant progress. And you have to wonder about the social and political consequences of another generation of stagnation or decline in working-class incomes.



Basically this guy Gordon has thrown cold water on the hubris of the tech-triumphalists for whom every new app, gadget, or startup is a "revolutionary" new innovation that will fundamentally make the world a better place. He says that on the scale of changes that alter the course of history, whatever progress really mattered took place between 1870 and 1970, and since then we're only pretending. No doubt things like Moore's law will provide for an exponential increase in processing power, data storage etc. but the whole focus of information technology is so narrowly focused and self-limiting (despite what the Apple/Google marketing people say) that it will never have a fraction of the impact on history, or serve as a profound driver of changes in the economy, in the way that radio or railroads or aviation or antibiotics did.

Why am I posting this here? Briefly, IF one accepts Robert Gordon's thesis, two things become apparent:

1) In relation to this thread, I wanted to point out that the teleological argument for a perpetually linear (or asymptotically rising) expansion of human ability and agency through the ages, on the basis of continuous and ongoing improvements in science and technology, is far from won. In fact, history almost certainly progressed in cycles, as our ancients have always said, and as Gordon is one of the few thinkers in the West to belatedly recognize. There were spurts of great advancement alternating with periods of stagnation and downfall. What Gordon argues is that the "downfall" doesn't necessarily come as a result of some great disaster (World War III, or climate change, or meteor strike)... it just happens. Like many organisms that grow in furious spurts and then become dormant, perhaps the capacity of human societies to develop is also self-limiting (and, at some point, self-renewing).

It is important to note that this could have been true for our ancestors in India as well. There could have been civilizations that collapsed into slow decadence without earthquakes or floods or drought or barbarian invasions as necessary *causes* of decline (such eventualities may have helped things along, but the decline may have occurred independently in any case, as it has with America).

Corollary: Saying "X must be so many centuries later than Y because societies contemporaneous with X had P,Q,R technological/agricultural/literary/scientific abilities while societies contemporaneous with Y did not"... doesn't hold any water whatsoever. Even in the last 150 years we've seen the West peak in terms of advancement, and then start on the way down, with no obvious identifiable cause for retardation or reversal.

2) What this means for the sake of the Strategic Issues and International Relations Forum in general: The USA (and its Western allies) have reached their apex, exhausted their capacity to make significant advances at the rate prior to 1970, and aren't going to see rapid progress anytime soon.

Today, other countries (including India) have a lot of catching up to do to get to the level of USA 1970 for a majority of their citizens. The good news for them is that the West is slowing down hugely; so that even if "developing" countries take another 100 years to catch up, the further strides taken by the West between 1970 and 2070 will be negligible compared to the 1870-1970 period. Thus the target for developing countries to meet in order to equal the West's standard of living is moving much less rapidly than it was 50 years ago, if indeed it is moving significantly at all.

So at some point in the coming century, ceteris paribus, a version of the world where all countries have more or less equal standards of living that still look recognizably the way things did in say 2010, is more likely than a version of the world where some countries are in Star Trek reality while others have bullock carts and illiteracy. A great equalization is afoot. IF you accept Gordon's theory :)

But that is ceteris paribus. Among other things, Islam will be a great tool for those interested in the preservation of inequality to assure that this happens. But now I'm going seriously OT so will stop :mrgreen:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 25 Jul 2017 05:33

Dipanker wrote: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.

Despite your sarcasm, you may not have realized that you just turned on a light that shows how right you are, but you still need to open your eyes to see.

Of course Ram could well have lived more than 864,000 years ago. If he did why should it worry anyone else - especially people who call themselves "scientists". It turns out that science per se does not give a damn if Ram's life was 864,000 years ago or indeed 864 million years ago. That idea does not make a whit of a difference to science as we know it - no more than talk of reincarnation, for example.

So who exactly got upset with the idea that Ram lived 864000+x years ago. If you look at "recorded history" with a modicum of honesty, it was Christians and the Christian religion that opposed the idea. And it was European Christian scholars (such as Huxley's ilk) who posed as scientists who tried to use "science" and "rationality" to mock and tear down the Hindu belief that Ram may have lived 864,000 years ago. Hindus had a "framework" on which they modelled their lives and this framework was torn down viciously and vindictively under the guise of science. It was not science. It was political meddling with religion that set the trend.

Now let us come back to your post and how you remain sightless despite turning on a light. Now we have proper scientific papers and people like Nilesh Oak who have all applied rigorous scientific method to the issue and have come up with dates that conflict with the dates that 19th century Christian-scholar-scientists were comfortable with. You have lived all your life subscribing to that latter framework, and suddenly you find science being thrown back at you to shake that framework. The science is rigorous and you cannot fault it - so you are moving the goalpost back to 864,000 years and asking "Why don't you guys go back to believing that?" in a sarcastic post with a mealy mouthed reference to what sounds like a "more logical approach" to you.

You are right sir. You are right. You probably don't even understand how right you are because you did not use logic to come up with that - only emotion. That 864000 years date should have been left well alone to let Hindus live by their idiotic superstitious ancestor worship dates. Instead those dates were meddled with, mocked and changed under the guise of science. And when the same Hindus come up with more rigorous science to tear down your existing framework that has allowed you to recognize sixers and home runs when Hindus are mocked, suddenly you do a u-turn and would prefer to go back to 864000 years that was easier to mock and reject.

No sir - your blinkers and sarcasm hold no water at all. If you are going to believe in the "science" that you and your engineer-historian homerun scoring idol go by then you have to allow space for dates such as those that Nilesh Oak and that Saraswati paper have come up with. Or else you guys need to STFUP and let Hindus live by that 864000 date. But it is too late for that - so eating crow is all that is going to happen for people with such dogmatic faith in what political Christians of the 19th century started.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 25 Jul 2017 05:52

Dipanker wrote:Also from the abstract of the paper above:

The persistence of such a river during the Harappan Bronze Age and the Iron Age Vedic period is strongly debated.


Is this accepted chronology on the forum? If so then the Vedic period can't be older that say 1800 BC or so as per this paper, right?

If you think this reply represents the "chronology of the forum" please wipe your mind free of that delusion. This is MY reply to YOU.

No. You are using terminology that has no formally accepted basis and you are asking if the "forum" accepts it. Even if you consult your Wikipedia you find that the Iron age seems to have moved back from 1000 BC to 5000 BC or some such date. You are also quoting from the abstract alone without reading the entire paper. The authors have been more polite than I would be in rejecting crap. They have stated very mildly what is contested. That is all.

Dipanker wrote:Did the Mahajanapadas grow up during Vedic period? Or are they older? If they are assumed to be of Vedic period then Mahabharata which mentions these Mahajanapadas can't be older than them, meaning Mahabharata can't be older than say 1800 BC. Bibek Debroy dates it to around 1100 BC. BB Lal, who dug up Hastinapuri, to 950 BC.

Mahajanapadas are merely people who lived by a certain set of beliefs and behavioural norms.

Let me illustrate with an example that you can understand more easily with the type of education that you seem to have received

Imagine a date 5000 years from today - 7017 AD when archaeologists and historians are looking at the past. One person finds that a particular area in had evidence of Christians way back in 100 AD and he says "Christianity existed 7000 years ago" Another person finds evidence of Christianity in 2000 AD and say "Christianity existed 5000 years ago

They are both correct. Christianity lasted so long that an earlier and a later date can both be correct. One particular date proposed by one person is not incompatible with and earlier or later date. Mahajanapadas could have existed from way back in 5000 BC to 1000 BC. Think nothing of it.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9615
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 25 Jul 2017 17:09

This following is a quote from Heinrich Zimmer:

"It should be observed that the traditional texts allude only very seldom to the fact that the mythological events which they are describing and extolling take place again and again, recurring every four billion three hundred and twenty million years, i.e., once every kalpa. That is because, from the viewpoint of the short-lived human individual such a prodigious circumstance may be temporarily disregarded. But it cannot by totally and finally dismissed; for the short-lived individual, in the round of his transmigrations, remains involved, somehow, somewhere, under one mask or another, throughout the whole course of the protracted span. In one of the Puranic accounts of the deeds of Vishnu in his Boar Incarnation or Avataar, there occurs a casual reference to the cyclic recurrence of the great moments of myth. The Boar, carrying on his arm the goddess Earth whom he is in the act of rescuing from the depths of the sea, passingly remarks to her:

"Every time I carry you this way...."

For the Western mind, which believes in single, epoch-making, historical events (such as, for instance, the coming of Christ, or the emergence of certain decisive sets of ideals, or the long development of invention during the course of man's mastery over nature) this casual comment of the ageless god has a gently minimizing, annihilating effect. It vetoes conceptions of value that are intrinsic to our estimation of man, his life, his destiny and task.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1558
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 25 Jul 2017 22:20

Details of my first FB live chat @ INDIC BOOK CLUB (30 July 2017, 7 PM Indian Standard time)

https://www.facebook.com/Indicbookclub/ ... 9729830185

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2768
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 26 Jul 2017 05:48

Here comes the AIT/AMT, an article by Rajesh Kochhar in IE, nothing new here, no new reference is given.

The Aryan chromosome
Where did the Aryans come to India from? When did they migrate? Genetics is now beginning to affirm archaeological and literary evidence.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4854
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Jul 2017 06:03

Dipanker wrote:Here comes the AIT/AMT, an article by Rajesh Kochhar in IE, nothing new here, no new reference is given.

The Aryan chromosome
Where did the Aryans come to India from? When did they migrate? Genetics is now beginning to affirm archaeological and literary evidence.

My best answer to the above article is this book. I know it sounds crazy but no crazier than the article above. For those, who have not read this book read it for the pure fun and pleasure of the imagination.

Return Of The Aryans

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2768
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 26 Jul 2017 06:34

ShauryaT wrote:
Dipanker wrote:Here comes the AIT/AMT, an article by Rajesh Kochhar in IE, nothing new here, no new reference is given.

The Aryan chromosome

My best answer to the above article is this book. I know it sounds crazy but no crazier than the article above. For those, who have not read this book read it for the pure fun and pleasure of the imagination.

Return Of The Aryans


Only problem is so far the older R1a are from Central Asia, So this book will make sense only if R1a older than Central Asian R1a are found in Indian subcontinent.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2768
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

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

Postby Rudradev » 26 Jul 2017 06:49

Dipanker wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:My best answer to the above article is this book. I know it sounds crazy but no crazier than the article above. For those, who have not read this book read it for the pure fun and pleasure of the imagination.

Return Of The Aryans


Only problem is so far the older R1a are from Central Asia, So this book will make sense only if R1a older than Central Asian R1a are found in Indian subcontinent.



"Older R1a"?

Do you have any idea what R1a even is? Do you think it is like bhaji in the subzi mandi, with "older" wilted ones and crisp fresh new ones?

Apparently you speak with as much authoritative knowledge of genetics as Rajesh Kocchar, or for that matter Tony Joseph.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2768
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 26 Jul 2017 06:57

Rudradev wrote:
Dipanker wrote:
Only problem is so far the older R1a are from Central Asia, So this book will make sense only if R1a older than Central Asian R1a are found in Indian subcontinent.



"Older R1a"?

Do you have any idea what R1a even is? Do you think it is like bhaji in the subzi mandi, with "older" wilted ones and crisp fresh new ones?

Apparently you speak with as much authoritative knowledge of genetics as Rajesh Kocchar, or for that matter Tony Joseph.


No I don't. I don't claim any expertise whatsoever and I consider myself a consumer of information than a producer of information in this field.

So tomorrow somebody writes a paper proving older R1a have been found on Indian subcontinent, I will be perfectly o.k. with that.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4854
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

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

Postby ShauryaT » 26 Jul 2017 07:00

OK, you want to speak DNA, then let us speak DNA. Has this article been posted here? I am Not an expert by any means.

The Aryan Invasion Issues « ANI, ASI, R1a and Indian ancestral origins

Y-DNA (male lineages) too migrated from India to Europe

The Silva et al write about R1a branches as their prime evidence. They write (on page 14 of their published pdf document):

“R1a-M17 (R1a-M198 or R1a1a) accounts for 17.5% of male lineages in Indian data overall, and it displays significantly higher frequencies in Indo-European than in Dravidian speakers”. Perhaps Silva has not studied all the papers honestly. This matter has been sorted out much earlier. It has been found that it is not only Indian but in certain Austro-Asiatic tribes of India, its frequency has even been higher than the IE speakers (Sahoo 2006; Sengupta 2006; Sharma 2009; Underhill 2010), and I will not discuss any further this naïve statement by Silva.

Now examine another statement,

“Moreover, not only has R1a been found in all Sintashta and Sintashta derived Andronovo and Srubnaya remains analysed to date at the genome-wide level (nine in total) [76, 77], and been previously identified in a majority of Andronovo (2/3) and post-Andronovo Iron Age (Tagar and Tachtyk: 6/6) male samples from southern central Siberia tested using microsatellite analysis, it has also been identified in other remains across Europe and Central Asia ranging from the Mesolithic up until the Iron Age (Fig. 5).”

Now this statement is a clear example of academic deception. The authors do not reveal here that the ancient samples from Sintashta etc belonged to which branch—Indian branch or European branch. The fact is that they all belonged to the Indian branch Z93. Mathieson has clarified this matter unequivocally:

“Further evidence that migrations originating as far west as central Europe may not have had an important impact on the Late Bronze Age steppe comes from the fact that the Srubnaya possess exclusively (n=6) R1a Y-chromosomes (Supplementary Data Table 1), and four of them (and one Poltavka male) belonged to haplogroup R1a-Z93 which is common in central/south Asians, very rare in present-day Europeans, and absent in all ancient central Europeans studied to date.” (Mathieson 2015: page 2 of pdf full article in Nature). Link: https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v ... 16152.html

Clearly, Silva did not read this article before sitting down to write a paper.

The European branch never came to India but the Indian branch did go to Europe. Underhill wrote, ““Importantly, the virtual absence of M458 chromosomes outside Europe speaks against substantial patrilineal gene flow from East Europe to Asia, including to India, at least since the mid-Holocene.” (Underhill 2010:Abstract)” Had people come from Europe to India or even from Ukraine to India, this European branch R1a-M458 must have arrived to India.



On the other hand the Indian branch R1a-Z93 is present in Europe up to Hungary and Poland. Even in Sintashta, which is considered the Cradle of Europe’s Indo-European culture and language, the ancient DNAs recovered are of the Indian R1a-Z93 and not the European variety, which was reproduced only after the main trunk reached well inside Europe.

Extremely poor knowledge of Silva of the wider picture like human associated migrations of animals, diseases etc

There have been other studies which indirecly prove migration from India to Europe.

Otzi Man and H. pylori infection :

Otzi Man or the European Iceman was recovered from the Alps frozen. His mtDNA and Y-DNA reflected Iranian ancestry, yet the Helicobactor pylori bacteria recovered from his stomach was of the Indian breed. This finding established that fact that the H. pylori infection reached Europe from India (read details in the link).

Link: http://www.nature.com/news/famous-ancie ... on-1.19127

Mice Migration:

The domestic mouse is a domestic pest of farming culture. It has been shown by a large number of studies that the domestic mice, shrew and rat have originated in India, were domesticated in India, and they migrated with the humans with the Neolithic migration. It is an indirect or circumstantial evidence of Indian origin of farming culture and the Indo-European speakers.

Link: https://www.academia.edu/2504657/Of_Mic ... ce_and_men


Cow Migration:

It had been found that all the zebu cows of the world are of Indian origin (Chen). Link:

https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/27 ... -the-South

It has been shown that the Ukrainian cows, as well as East European Piedmont etc and Mongolian and Even South Chinese cows migrated from India in a domesticated form long back. Even the Central Asian cattle recovered from Neolithic and Bronze Ages belong to Indian variety (Zebu). (Chen; Kantanen).

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19603063

The authors also show a gross ignorance of published literature pertaining to the migration issues. Man did not migrate alone. It migrated with its diseases, its pets and pests.



They Do Not Know about Recombinant Technology:

The most sophisticated method of study for the purpose of finding out the Out of Africa route was adopted by the Genographic Project which was funded by IBM, the computer giant. The method was so refined that it could map each step of a thousand mile journey. This method was the most accurate also. It produced the following map of the routes of human migration. It was based on the study of recombination. Every time a sperm is formed or an ovum is formed there is meiosis in which parts of chromosomes crossover. This crossing over takes place in each generation at a different point of the chromosome causing a permanent print of the past all ancestors on the chromosome.

This study found that the humans first came to India (from Africa) and then migrated to all over the world as depicted in this map.

Geno Project Human Migration Map_print

Link Genographic Project web site. http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/photo/35881.wss

also, https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pres ... /35877.wss

Silva does not know that only southern route to India is the valid route.

It has been settled so many times by several repeated studies that the modern man came out of Africa from the horn of Africa (Djibouti) crossing Bab-el-Mandeb Strait then through coastal Arabia to Sind-Gujarat region of India (Quintana-Murci 1999; Oppenheimer 2003; Maccaulay 2005; Mellars 2006; Thangaraj 2005; Field 2007; Armitage 2011; Mele 2012). And it has also been conclusively decided that the human migration out of Africa took place only once and not the second time again.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 26 Jul 2017 07:34

Dipanker wrote:No I don't. I don't claim any expertise whatsoever and I consider myself a consumer of information than a producer of information in this field.

Interesting. I don't know if you deal with science at all in your day to day life, or with the biological sciences. An amateur interest in the issue of the so called "Aryan migration bringing the Indo-European language to India" would be understandable.

But I will repeat what needs to be known. It was an earlier bunch of "Indologist" liars who conjured up the idea that the languages came from somewhere to India with no evidence of the direction or identity of languages. It was all speculation stemming from the idea that a superior and well developed language must have come from a superior people who only existed in Europe. This information made it into the "scholarly works" of the day and was not challenged or refuted till efforts started recently (maybe 20 years?). So the "scholarly information" available about languages is that Indo-European languages spread from somewhere to somewhere else and that one such porting of language was a migration of a cooked up race of people called Aryans who came from the North and West of India to the South and East. The racist motivation underlying this theory are still there to be seen for those who look for it, but people searching for information do not go into motivations and spread information blindly without looking into its authenticity.This is what I call "Error number 1"

There is an "Error number 2".

Error number 2 is the fact that genetics researchers trying to correlate their genetic findings with people migration went to the "available scholarly information" on migration and found the racist motivated garbage that Indo-Euroepan languages travelled in a particular direction. They then started writing in their genetic papers that they had found evidence of an "Aryan migration" and had therefore stumbled upon the direction that languages travelled.

To repeat what I have said earlier yet again
1. Is there genetic evidence of people coming to India? Yes. there is genetic evidence of people moving out of India as well as in R1a1a1 M17)
2. Does this tell us that a particular language moved in any direction? No
3. Are there "Aryan genes". No
4. Then how did genetics researchers prove that languages came to India along with Aryans? They did not prove any such thing. They found some genes that appeared to have come to India and said "Maybe these were genes carried by Aryans who came with language to India".

Genetics researchers do not know that there were no "Aryans". Arya was a title applied to people who followed the Vedas and dharma in the Mahajanapadas. The original and only place where the word "Arya" occurs is in Sanskrit texts from India. The word "Aryan" was cooked up by "scholars" who happened to be racist as well and had clear racist (and religious-Christian) motivations for placing a cooked up "race of Aryans" somewhere far away from the place where the word "Arya" was discovered. Genetics researchers are barking up a non existent tree when they speak of genes belonging to non existent "races" carrying language for which no genetic or archaeological proof is available

This unfortunately is the state of "science" in this day and age.

This information has been picked up and swallowed whole by people such as yourself.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5924
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

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

Postby disha » 26 Jul 2017 10:09

Dipanker wrote:Only problem is so far the older R1a are from Central Asia, So this book will make sense only if R1a older than Central Asian R1a are found in Indian subcontinent.


I was pulling my hair out after reading the above statement.

Put it this way sir - your ability to understand genetics is zero - but ability to tie into a particular viewpoint and push it however wrong it is based on your zero understanding of genetics is infinite.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6735
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 26 Jul 2017 10:27

Sometimes I think the only solution to all this is entertainment... I really mean that. Put together a billion bucks, should be doable in Bollywood, engage the top movie CGI folks, come up with a 100 part series of the Mahabharatha, where all the characters who are described with skin colour etc are rendered exactly as is, and the rest are a mixture of the existing human colours. Production values will have to be the best in movie history. Zero change to the story, total fidelity with the Sanskrit text and English or other language transliteration shown ahead of crucial scenes, vedic references underscored and the best sub-titling money can buy.

That will be the end of all the invasion myths, and will possibly result in the end of the world's faith systems as we know it.

That's all, you just have to put it out there in visual form. No real human actors, let them kill each other to secure voice roles. Originals in English and Sanskrit spoken only. All other languages sub-titling. I want Amitabh's voice for Sri Krishna. Hugh Jackman, who has Indic leanings, can be Arjuna... The voice role cast has to be truly international, so that everyone can have a piece of it.

If Reliance had any cojones, this would have started five years ago. And they would be spending $ 2 billion on it. That will be something history will remmember them for a thousand years from now.

And then it will truly be, Out of India... Unquestionably.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1146
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 27 Jul 2017 19:38

Nilesh Oak wrote: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.

But none of the pre war astronomical observations match in your dating system. And that doesn't worry you?

Further it is not good to bad mouth others like this "Both Dr. and Prof. are scared to death to face this researcher."

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 789
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

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

Postby SriJoy » 27 Jul 2017 20:13

Pulikeshi wrote:
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:


Non sequitur. It can be empirically demonstrated that we have far more information available at our fingertips than the entire repository of knowledge of ancient civilizations. Unless ofcourse, you want to indulge in speculative 'they knew of space-ships but left no evidence of it' nonsense.

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


I am sure there are people in hill tribes of Amazon, illiterate and all- who are bigger geniuses than you or I but they have no means of expressing said genius, since genius without education is unable to contribute to the larger discourse of information. Nobody is denying Aryabhatta's genius. Or Galn or Newton. But they have nothing to teach us- yet, if were able to resurrect them or bring them here via time machine, a high school kid could teach them things they couldn't dream of. Hence the futility of trying to derive moral lessons from people who are inferior in knowledge to us. If the quest is to understand the phenomenal universe, we have left those ancients far, far behind and their speculations are little more than academic interest to us- outside of those who engage in overt or covert ancestor worship, holding those with far lesser knowledge than us as some sort of guide to us.


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!)


I simply have no time for morals and philosophies concieved by people with far less information than me at their disposal. Feel free to engage in such pointless ancestor worship.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 789
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

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

Postby SriJoy » 27 Jul 2017 20:15

Pulikeshi wrote:
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:


One can treat their senile grandparents with utmost care and duty and still keep in mind they are senile and their ramblings have no contributions towards our awareness of existence. Similar concept applies. One can respect the accomplishments of one's ancestors and also realize that they were far, far inferior to us in their comprehension of the phenomenal reality, simply due to the fact that they had far, far less information at their disposal.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 789
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

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

Postby SriJoy » 27 Jul 2017 20:20

Pulikeshi wrote:
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:


red herring. When Japan tossed out their antiquated and irrelevant Bushido code, they didnt blow anything up or turn communist. When Scandinavia tossed aside ramblings of a desert cult from 2000 years ago, it also didn't turn commie or blow things up. Hence your scaremongering is irrelevant. Perhaps the biggest failure of Indian civilization has been to innovate philosophies and ideas relevant to the modern world in the last 1000+ years- atleast in terms of common practice and i wonder, if its thinking like yours that turned us from hero to zero at the eve of Islamic conquest.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 789
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

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

Postby SriJoy » 27 Jul 2017 21:21

shiv wrote: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


1. Sudden is a relative term once one leaves the realm of mathematics and differential time. In geological terms, 100 kilo years is a sudden change. In genetic terms, 10 kilo years is a sudden change. In historical terms, 100-200 years ( upper and lower limit of IVC collapse) is also a sudden change.

2. IVC was the largest civilization of its time and proportionately speaking, its the largest urban civilization ( as a % share of urban development for its timeframe). It has several cities- Harappa, Mohenjo Daro, Rakhigarhi who are estimated to've been 60-80K in population. Atleast 20 sites which are estimated to've been over 20,000 in population. And IVC has so far well over a 1000 sites. As such, its population has been estimated to've been 5-15 million people. Such a sudden pulse of people moving in over literally just a few generations, is a sudden migration pulse. Migration history has shown that large scale migrations mostly result in extensive and protracted warfare the world over. It is fairly straightforward that desperate, migrational people will gun for already settled areas first instead of being peacenicks who will chop down forests and create their own land.

3. What the mahabharata claims or does not claim is irrelevant. It is smriti literature and as such, imprecise, altered and self-admitted as not to be held as unimpeachable. It is not shruti literature like the Vedas, where one can make a reasonable assumption based on absence/presence of evidence.

4. Bronze vs Iron is an irrelevant argument regarding warfare. Because Bronze compares favorably with Iron (not steel, of which we have no evidence whatsoever of presence prior to 500s BC). Bronze age ended not because Bronze was an inferior product (bronze is almost as hard and doesn't rust as iron, which is why earliest evidence of iron is of trinkets and jewelery, not weapons), but because bronze is a 2 metal product, which rarely occur close together, whereas Iron is a single metal product. Thus, bronze requires greater logistical presence of controlling far and wide places for these deposits, while iron does not.

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?


You sir, are a master of misdirection and misinformation. You quoted ONE text of mine, which is a clear typo, where i missed the 8 for 1800. Every other post of mine demonstrates that i've said IVC collapses around 1800 BC. and even if not, your faceteous claims are easily repelled by a simple google search which shows IVC to've collapsed by 1800 BC. Except for Pirak, a solitary site in Pakistan, i do not know of any other IVC site surviving into 1st millenium BC. And even if there are a dozen or so of them, it still represents a collapse for a civilization boasting over 1000 sites.

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


:rotfl:
sorry to burst your religion-inspired babble but analysis of sudden pulses of migration in world history (over 100-200 year period) show extensive alliances, massive warfare across several fronts, etc. Ofcourse, you are gonna argue all the other world parallels that hold for rest of the world, should be tossed aside for India in a modelling scenario because of your precious religious narrative.

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


When two cousin lines of the same dynasty fight for the throne, its called a civil war. I realize religious literature has colored this simple fact.

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


good doctor, you might want to leave iron vs bronze arguments to those who are better suited. You are also clearly ignorant of the fact that The New Kingdom Egypt using bronze weapons like the Khopesh sword defeated the 'Sea peoples invasion' using iron, as evidenced by the steleas of Egypt. Even then, it is irrelevant because someone with a bronze sword is hardly at a disadvantage versus an iron sword (not steel).

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


Unfortulately, your beleif-driven propaganda is far in tune with Witzel than anyone else on this site.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 789
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

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

Postby SriJoy » 27 Jul 2017 21:29

ShauryaT wrote: BS of the first order. Do you actually know how many adhered to Charvaka, when, where. Where are the original manuscripts of this teachings?


We have no idea of the following of Vedic religion (which evolved into the Hinduism we recognize), Charvaka, Ajivika and other sects in the 1st millenium BC/1st millenium CE. What we do know, from inference of Chinese monks travelling through India during the Gupta to Kannauj triangle period, is that Buddhism & Jainism were the most organized and preferred religion of the ruling and educated classes of that period while Vedanta Hinduism was a rising force. Beyond those, its mere speculation towards the actual numbers of adherents. Even so, even if Charvaka, Lokayata, Ajivika were a minority, they are still as representational of Indian thought as any other, just as Sikhism or jainism are one of the representatives of Indian religions today amongst the others.
Being in majority does not mean it is the only legitimate representation of Indic thought.


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.


I guess since I left India, the trend is for every half-baked thinker from India to allege communism for any anti-religious thought. For its ironic to say Karl marx, a proponent of collective rights, would've been proud of utterances of Neitzche, who was an exponent of individualism.
Humans are also animals and your descrete differentiation between humans and animals is incorrect. Self control and awareness, between species as well as individuals, is a scale, not a 'yes/no' descrete function.

Also, knowledge of Sanskrit is irrelevant- Sanskrit is a language. Knowing more languages or less does not represent information or knowledge, for i am sure you will agree that a PhD in Engineering who is mono-lingual, posesses far more knowledge than a multi-lingual tapori in streets of Mumbai.

As for my biases - sure, i hope it is clear, that i have no time for (and neither does OOI) have any time or space for half-baked unsubstantiated religious nonsense polluting a quest that is about information and empiric thought in a field that has chronic shortage of both (history).

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 789
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

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

Postby SriJoy » 27 Jul 2017 21:33

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.


To all readers: the fallacy of Shiv's thinking is self evident by the two bolded parts: reflexive judgement in the first part and then a self-admission of ignorance (what it this crap all about?) following it. Classic example of religion polluting evidence-based thinking, where one puts the cart before the horse and rejects ideas incompatible with their unsubstantiated beliefs before even knowing what they are.

Shiv, if you don't know what Neitzche wrote, i suggest you read his works (Thus spoke Zarathustra is a good starting point i think) before passing judgement.
English, as every language you will find, does not have precise words for every concievable thought. Just as Ubermenschen and Untermenschen may be unpronouncable obscure words for you, so too is words like 'Dharma' to non-Indic speakers. The golden rule applies.

SriJoy
BRFite
Posts: 789
Joined: 20 Apr 2017 23:21

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

Postby SriJoy » 27 Jul 2017 21:44

sudarshan wrote:
shiv wrote: :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.


Indeed. One has ultimately two choices in life re: desire. Option1: fulfill all the desires. Option2: eliminate desire. In a way, Ubermenschen is the antithesis of Hindu-Buddhist-Jain concept of Nirvana, which is bliss from lack of material attachment. Simple fact is, given a choice between eliminating desire and fulfilling all desire, i don't think it is a contest as to which option the overwhelming majority of species homo sapiens will find more attractive. Simply because we ultimately live in a material universe.

As for plagiarism from the Nazis, Indians should be acutely aware of how seemingly benevolent ideas, such as Swastika or Aryan or even economics based classifications (origins of caste) can be utterly twisted. Should not reflect on its original meaning.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1146
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 27 Jul 2017 21:58

SriJoy wrote:....
sorry to burst your religion-inspired babble but analysis of sudden pulses of migration in world history (over 100-200 year period) show extensive alliances, massive warfare across several fronts, etc. Ofcourse, you are gonna argue all the other world parallels that hold for rest of the world, should be tossed aside for India in a modelling scenario because of your precious religious narrative.

....

As we have seen earlier in the case of your assertion to the effect that no astronomy existed in Vedas IVC demise is also showing your shallow comprehension.

Have you heard of a river known as Saraswati?

How is this river described in Vedas?

How is this river described in Mahabharata?

How did this river dryup according to modern Science and what is the timeline of this river drying up? (Hint : See research from Woodshole).

Primus
BRFite
Posts: 639
Joined: 06 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: Ground Zero

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

Postby Primus » 28 Jul 2017 03:10

JE Menon wrote:Sometimes I think the only solution to all this is entertainment... I really mean that. Put together a billion bucks, should be doable in Bollywood, engage the top movie CGI folks, come up with a 100 part series of the Mahabharatha, where all the characters who are described with skin colour etc are rendered exactly as is, and the rest are a mixture of the existing human colours. Production values will have to be the best in movie history. Zero change to the story, total fidelity with the Sanskrit text and English or other language transliteration shown ahead of crucial scenes, vedic references underscored and the best sub-titling money can buy.

That will be the end of all the invasion myths, and will possibly result in the end of the world's faith systems as we know it.

That's all, you just have to put it out there in visual form. No real human actors, let them kill each other to secure voice roles. Originals in English and Sanskrit spoken only. All other languages sub-titling. I want Amitabh's voice for Sri Krishna. Hugh Jackman, who has Indic leanings, can be Arjuna... The voice role cast has to be truly international, so that everyone can have a piece of it.

If Reliance had any cojones, this would have started five years ago. And they would be spending $ 2 billion on it. That will be something history will remmember them for a thousand years from now.

And then it will truly be, Out of India... Unquestionably.


It has been a long time fantasy of mine to have a director of Peter Jackson's caliber do a truly Indic version of the Mahabharata and not the 'symbolic' crap put out by Peter Brooks years ago. Given the enormous difficulty of a fully live-action production, a hybrid like Warcraft would be a great way to go, or maybe do the other extreme - a Miyazaki style Anime like Spirited Away. If Bahubali can prove to be as popular as it has been, I an only imagine the enormous appeal such a venture would have. It would blow GoT out of the water. 10 seasons, with 10 episodes each would be ideal.

If only the Ambani's and their ilk thought more of Dharma than themselves.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 28 Jul 2017 07:23

SriJoy wrote:
Shiv, if you don't know what Neitzche wrote, i suggest you read his works (Thus spoke Zarathustra is a good starting point i think) before passing judgement.

Classic advice from a man who cannot get people to agree with him "You read what I read and you will start thinking like me". Amazing how SriJoy finds it necessary to advise random trolls on the internet about what they should be reading - only because they disagree with his concoctions.
Last edited by shiv on 28 Jul 2017 07:36, edited 1 time in total.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 28 Jul 2017 07:35

SriJoy wrote:1. Sudden is a relative term once one leaves the realm of mathematics and differential time.

A defensive downhill ski if ever I saw one when you saw the problem with your usual tactic applying semantics where precision was necessary


SriJoy wrote:3. What the mahabharata claims or does not claim is irrelevant. It is smriti literature and as such, imprecise, altered and self-admitted as not to be held as unimpeachable. It is not shruti literature like the Vedas, where one can make a reasonable assumption based on absence/presence of evidence.
So the war may not have occurred - rendering useless your idea that it was a war that followed the "sudden collapse" of the IVC

SriJoy wrote:4. Bronze vs Iron is an irrelevant argument regarding warfare.
You brought up the subject - but you post so much crap that you don't want to wade through it yourself

SriJoy wrote:You sir, are a master of misdirection and misinformation.
You started it


SriJoy wrote:When two cousin lines of the same dynasty fight for the throne, its called a civil war. I realize religious literature has colored this simple fact.

:rotfl: Trash. cousins fighting is family disagreement, not civil war This is misdirection and misinformation but hardly "masterful"

SriJoy wrote:good doctor, you might want to leave iron vs bronze arguments to those who are better suited.
Boss you are the doctor, You are the one analysing me, my motivations and giving me advice about what I should read and what I should avoid I am not asking you to stop writing crap and moving the goalpost every time you are caught with your virtual pants down. I am only reminding you of what you wrote.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 28 Jul 2017 07:41

SriJoy wrote:I guess since I left India, the trend is for every half-baked thinker from India to allege communism for any anti-religious thought..

This guy thinks that he was holding the fort when he was in India and all this has started after he left, insinuating that his presence was needed to cover others views with his with voluminous crap.

Amazing instance of "Going out of India gave me perspective that no one else can have" Srijoy seems to think no one else goes, and seems to imagine that no one can go out, spend a decade or two and return to get an even better perspective than what he imagines he knows

sudarshan
BRFite
Posts: 1561
Joined: 09 Aug 2008 08:56

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

Postby sudarshan » 28 Jul 2017 07:46

SriJoy wrote:Shiv, if you don't know what Neitzche wrote, i suggest you read his works (Thus spoke Zarathustra is a good starting point i think) before passing judgement.


So let me get this straight. You don't want to do read Nilesh's books before passing judgment, but others should read the books you suggest (however irrelevant to the topic) before passing judgment?

If your argument is that archaeo-astronomy doesn't work because astronomy is periodic (leave aside for a moment how amateurish this statement is), then my argument is that European philosophy cannot possibly have got anything right, because a bunch of people who abandoned their native culture in favor of an imported religion from Asia, cannot be trusted to think straight. So why should I read Nietzsche, when it has been conclusively proven (see above) that he could not think straight?

Your notions about agriculture starting only after 9500 BC and only in China, based on your erroneous interpretations of some paper in the field, have been (conclusively, decisively, and permanently, of course, as is *always* the case in science) shown to be false by Rudradev. So what exactly prevents you from taking your own advice and reading up on archaeo-astronomy before judging?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 28 Jul 2017 08:44

sudarshan wrote:
SriJoy wrote:Shiv, if you don't know what Neitzche wrote, i suggest you read his works (Thus spoke Zarathustra is a good starting point i think) before passing judgement.


So let me get this straight. You don't want to do read Nilesh's books before passing judgment, but others should read the books you suggest (however irrelevant to the topic) before passing judgment?

If your argument is that archaeo-astronomy doesn't work because astronomy is periodic (leave aside for a moment how amateurish this statement is), then my argument is that European philosophy cannot possibly have got anything right, because a bunch of people who abandoned their native culture in favor of an imported religion from Asia, cannot be trusted to think straight. So why should I read Nietzsche, when it has been conclusively proven (see above) that he could not think straight?

Your notions about agriculture starting only after 9500 BC and only in China, based on your erroneous interpretations of some paper in the field, have been (conclusively, decisively, and permanently, of course, as is *always* the case in science) shown to be false by Rudradev. So what exactly prevents you from taking your own advice and reading up on archaeo-astronomy before judging?

A huge ego that can be poked at will and it responds with anger and wriggling and "same to you" :lol:

Misra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 72
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 09:03

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

Postby Misra » 28 Jul 2017 09:11

SriJoy wrote:One can treat their senile grandparents with utmost care and duty and still keep in mind they are senile and their ramblings have no contributions towards our awareness of existence. Similar concept applies. One can respect the accomplishments of one's ancestors and also realize that they were far, far inferior to us in their comprehension of the phenomenal reality, simply due to the fact that they had far, far less information at their disposal.


Code: Select all

  _________________
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
      ignorance







  _________________
 
      knowledge
  _________________


true seekers--including true scientists--identify neither with 'knowledge' (which is a limited space) nor with 'information' (which is its poorer cousin) but with 'ignorance' (which is infinite and the real solution space)

information is fluff and its worshippers give themselves away too easily

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9615
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 28 Jul 2017 09:26

Environmental protection laws exist, no? Even for BRF?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32914
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 28 Jul 2017 09:50

SriJoy wrote:One can treat their senile grandparents with utmost care and duty and still keep in mind they are senile and their ramblings have no contributions towards our awareness of existence. Similar concept applies.

One can crap a stinking turd out on the pavement and still keep in mind that it is temporary and will be gone soon and one can deny crapping on the pavement and realize that the crap has no contributions towards our awareness of our existence. Similar "wisdom" applied by you.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6735
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 28 Jul 2017 10:22

>>One can treat their senile grandparents with utmost care and duty and still keep in mind they are senile and their ramblings have no contributions towards our awareness of existence.

Seriously dude? Or just poorly phrased?

Either way, it seems perhaps you may feel more comfortable in the apparently exalted company of your peers, which I for one seemingly am not and judging from the responses neither are most others.

Back to the thread topic gentlemen, we are veering into the territory of Neitszche, Marx and such like... The ignore button exists (unlike for me, unfortunately).

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1273
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

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

Postby Pulikeshi » 28 Jul 2017 11:39

SriJoy wrote:One can treat their senile grandparents with utmost care and duty and still keep in mind they are senile and their ramblings have no contributions towards our awareness of existence.


Lets hope you become a grandparent soon! :P
My last on this topic!


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chaitanya, Rampy, samirdiw, SSharma, sudeepj, Varuna, wasu and 71 guests