LokeshC wrote: vnmshyam wrote:I had to leave India to know more about her and more importantly the truth about our history. Truly, it's always darkest right underneath the candle!
This is a personal story:-
I used to watch Baba Ramdev's stuff out in the US and do some yoga with him. Some of the things he told sounded funny but many of them made total sense.
So on one fine India vacation, I find sitting with my dad (75+ ) watching Baba Ramdev's camp being raided by CONgi goons in uniform and I feel sad. My dad turns to me and says "Dhongi Baba deserves what he got". I was out of breath and livid with rage. Soon after that we had a raging yelling match that lasted an hour that ended with my frightened dad sleeping at my cousin's house. I do not blame him given his age, my size and how angry I was at him (there is also the issue of a feet of height difference between me and him).
That was the turning point for me, I realized how much people have been brainwashed. I really had to get into my brain and scrub out everything the Angrezi media had implanted in me. BRF did me a huge favor in that respect. My dad is still a sekoooolar congi and I keep telling him that his generation must die out for our nation to improve.
We dont talk much anymore, let alone politics or religion.
Sorry to know about the rift between you and your dad, saar. I think yelling matches are no good for convincing people. As soon as someone is told aggressively that he is wrong, then ego kicks in and he starts defending the idea. He is not defending the idea, he is defending his ego. This applies to all of us. Nobody likes to be told that they are wrong.
So, I think the right strategy is 'slow poison' or 'passing on the info' i.e keep giving small infos to people. All these small infos/opinions have cumulative over a period of time. Time and cumulative factor are the important aspects. If you notice, this is exactly how the mainstream media also tries to do its job. It prepares its audience in small incremental doses until they are ready to listen to them in more sympathetic manner.
What sort of info to pass?
It depends on the audience. Knowing which buttons to push in your audience will help you in convincing them more easily, I think.
For example, your father felt that Ramdev Baba was a dongi i.e fake. It would be interesting to know why he felt like that. If he thought that Ramdev Baba was just in the business of making money, then one can say that he is like any other business person(perhaps with the added bonus of rooted in Bhaarathiya culture). Think of Ramdev Baba as an entrepreneur. A man from humble beginnings rises to a level and in the process also makes Yoga and Ayurvedha hugely popular and affordable/accessible to many Bhaarathiyas. Its a success story. If some foreigner had done it, people would have gone gaga over it.
So, even if the Baba is a fake one(which in itself is just biased view), he is still a huge success both economic wise and cultural wise. He has made yoga and ayurvedha popular and affordable(which means better health for people and that means lesser medical costs which translates to good living). And Baba has earned name, fame and money in the process. Thats a very good model of success. Its a win win model. Most other corporates hardly have such a win win model.
I think it takes some time for people to change their views and people should be given time to adjust their opinions. Expecting people to suddenly change their views maybe unfair because its not possible for people to change views suddenly.
Passing small bits of info is a useful method because it gives people time to absorb the info in small doses. Most of the people turn off when they are barraged with lots of info that they cannot handle. They will simply turn off their mind and think that the person giving this info is some nutjob or loony or weird or conspiracy theorist ...etc.
On the other hand mainstream media's power is because people are constantly exposed to it, so it can mould views in slow and methodical manner in incremental doses. Once the audience has been prepared, then they will be more sympathetic to accept without questioning. For example, most people will accept anything that is put out by the mainstream media without questioning(this is especially true for the convent educated or sauve folks. The rustic folk may still raise doubts/questions because their minds have not been prepared adequately by the media and education).
So, telling people things that are too big or sudden for them and then expecting them to change their views suddenly is a bit unfair. For example, in 2009, most people found it simply unbelievable that an elected PM would want to give away a national territory. But, now, after seeing all other antics, people over time(and time is the most important factor) have become more sympathetic to the view that such a thing can happen.
But, time factor only works when someone plans seeds. Time helps the seeds in sprouting. If the seeds are not planted, then the time makes no change. So, someone needs to raise the ideas, even if they are considered taboo. Initially, if the ideas are considered taboo, there will be opposition and ridicule to it. I think the right thing is raise the issue and give people time to absorb it. And then come back and try again another time.
For example, most people who are brainwashed into believing the stories of Thaj Mahal and Shah Jahan would find the idea of Thejo Mahalaya very difficult to accept. So, initially, it is enough to convey that the official story does not stick i.e. Shah Jahan's so-called love for one of his harem-mates is hard to swallow. And to think that he would splurge resources for such a thing when he was constantly engaged in quelling rebellions is highly dubious.
If Modi or BJP come to power, I hope they open the entire Thaj corridor to people(even the ones that were sealed by the Shah Jahan or the brits) and make a proper archeological survey.
LokeshC wrote:Re:Swastika rotation: I did not know that the indic one can go both ways, I always knew that the swastika that my community used was the 'other way' than the one Hitler used.
Doesn't one represent creation and the other destruction?
No - one represents the male force and the other the female force just as ying and yang.
The neointerpretation is wrt the Nazi rightfacing one with 45 Deg rotation which somehow got coerced into destruction and the nyth has spread.The Indic version and meaning is a representation of male and female forces/spirit.
I think there are two types: Hindhu one and Buddhist one. Buddhist one seems to have been taken by the Nazis. Buddhist one itself is most probably inspired from Hindhu one. Anyway, Swasthika is an ancient symbol used in many cultures. So, those who think that Swasthika represents Nazis are wrong. Infact, Nazis wrongly tried to usurp the Swasthika.
Link to post
disha wrote:^^^ JohneeG, the site from Stephen Knapp is known and also his many talks.
The problem with the photographic evidence is that most of them are unattested.
True. I think Stephen Knapp should have mentioned the sources more precisely for the pictures.
For example, Art Photo#6 in Vedic influence in art across the word. It is mentioned that it is found in the museum of corinth. However it is not connected to say any other identification like the catalogue number of the artefact, even the catalogue number of the museum's inventory will do. This then makes it difficult to trace its historicity, for example - when was it found? Which layer was it found? What other images and objects were excavated around it? Where was it actually found? Could it describe a settlement of Indians in Greece? Or was it a trade item?
Given that none of the above can be answered, the evidence above is negated. Worse, if one is going to take down such an important clue, they now know where to find it. Here is all the catalogue of images taken from the archeological site of Corinth, Greece. http://ascsa.net/research?v=default
Thanks for that link you provided. I searched that site and found the Art Photo#6.
Title: Pastoral mosaic with shepherd
Category Code: bw
Roll Number: 059
Frame Number: 22
Photographer: Ioannidou - Bartzioti
Old Negative: bw-9598
It seems that the mosaic depicting a pastoral scene was part of a larger floor from a Roman villa found at Ancient Corinth from 150-200 AD.
Pastoral scenes are also commonly found, for example in the aforementioned Roman Villa4
and also from Anaploga5. With regard to geometric elements, intersecting circles, fields of peltae,swastika meander, guilloche and stepped squares are among the more usual elements found6. It could be said in fact that the closest parallels for the Corinthian mosaics can be found in Patras and in Sparta7. For example, a group of mosaics from Patras8 and the mosaic from the property of Paraskevopoulou in Sparta compare well with that of the Mosaic House in the Forum
It seems Swastikas were popular in ancient Greece and ancient Italy.
Ancient greek coin hemidrachm swastika
Ancient Pompeii floor Swastika
English: Corinthia, Corinth. Circa 550-500 BC.
Stater (Silver, 8.61 g). Pegasos, with curved wing, flying to left; below, koppa. Rev. Incuse in the form of a swastika to left
. BCD Corinth 3 (this coin). Ravel - (P-/T 54). Very rare and remarkably attractive, perfectly centered and one of the best examples of this type known. Good extremely fine. From the collections of APCW and BCD, Lanz 105, 26 November 2001, 3. This is one of the finest of all archaic Corinthian staters known. Instead of walking, as on the earliest examples of this type, Pegasos is clearly flying here since all his hooves are diagonal and not flat on the ground. The swastika patterned incuse on the reverse is actually a very ancient solar symbol, found in many parts of the world, and has no political meaning.
10499. MACEDON, AKANTHOS, Circa 470-390 BC. AR Tetrobol (15mm, 2.40 g). Forepart of bull left, head right; Π, swastika, and olive spray above / Quadripartite incuse square. SNG ANS -; SNG Copenhagen -. Good VF, toned. Rare combination of control marks. Ex CNG.
Cows and Bulls seem to be respected icons in ancient Greece.
9385. ILLYRIA, EPIDAMNOS-DYRRHACHIUM, 400-350 BC. AR Stater, Sear 1890. Cow stg. r. looking back at suckling calf/DUR and club around square containing double stellate pattern. EF. Fine old cabinet toning. Excellent example.
disha wrote:Others for example are Art Photos #10 and #11.
Stephen Knapp has not mentioned the name of Archeological Site, so I could not find them. I'll search some more...
But, it seems there are a figures named 'Satyr' in ancient Greek literature. Most of the depictions of 'Satyr' in Greek art are similar to Art Photo # 10 (Vali and Sugreeva).
520–500 BCE, from VulciAttic painted vases depict mature satyrs as being strongly built with flat noses, large pointed ears, long curly hair, and full beards, with wreaths of vine or ivy circling their balding heads. Satyrs often carry the thyrsus: the rod of Dionysus tipped with a pine cone.
Satyrs acquired their goat-like aspect through later Roman conflation with Faunus, a carefree Italic nature spirit of similar temperament. Hence satyrs are most commonly described in Latin literature as having the upper half of a man and the lower half of a goat, with a goat's tail in place of the Greek tradition of horse-tailed satyrs. Mature satyrs are often depicted in Roman art with goat's horns, while juveniles are often shown with bony nubs on their foreheads.
Their habitat is the forests and mountains.
So, it seems the Satyrs are supposed to be half-man half-horse in ancient Greek and they were transformed into half-man half-goat in Roman culture.
But, it must be noted that half-man half-horse thingy is the modern day interpretation of Greek art. The art only shows a man like being with a tail and pointed ears(which are interpreted as horse ears. What if those are monkey ears?).
Is it possible that Satyrs are the grecian portrayal of 'Vanaras'(of Ramayana)? Those pointed ears of Satyrs can also be interpreted as monkey ears. Satyrs are supposed to dell in woodlands and are generally depicted as reveling merry making. This depiction tallies with the depiction of 'Vanaras'. In fact, the description of the features of Satyr, particularly the fun-loving nature, are more apt for a half-man half-monkey than half-man half-horse(or half-goat).
Satryrs are depicted as carrying a rod tipped with a pine cone. Maybe it is a depiction of a mace (Vanaras are depicted as carrying a mace in India).
Link to post
disha wrote:Satyr/Vanara could be a tenous link and the image could be as well of vanara misinterpreted by the curator as satyr. Similarly the swastika has been found across many cultures including Hopi Indians. So it might be a global cometary event.
It seems one of the etymologies of Vanara is "Vane charati iti vanara" i.e. "that which roams in forests is vanara". This etymology works for any wild animal. The portrayals of Satyr in Greek art is uncannily reminding of Indian portrayals of Vanara. So, the connection may be there.
True. Swastika is found in many cultures. But, the question is of origin. Where did Swastika originated? The clue may lie in the extensive use of that symbol across the ages. I think Swastika originated in India and spread to other cultures. Most of the east-asian cultures acquired Swastika(the reverse swastika) through Buddhism.
Anyway, please note that I posted the pictures that show the prevalence of Swastikas along with reverence of horses, bulls, cows(and calves). This combination of Swastika, reverence of horses, bulls, cows(and calfs) is quintessentially Indian/Vedic in character.