Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 18 Sep 2012 07:15

A_Gupta wrote:Shiv, also remember, per AIT, the IndoAryans moved into an area as large as Western Europe, and with a large population, and managed to pick up so little non-IE.

This is just one more example of dozens that we have seen where inconvenient facts are dismissed by a bunch of people whose propensity for using ad hominem, colorful put-downs, psychological profiling and rhetoric is far better that their ability to see logic and use scientific method.

Every single Indian comes on to this thread not believing that he has been learning lies and bluff from the very western institutions he was taught to respect. Gyanodaya is a slow process.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

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

Postby johneeG » 18 Sep 2012 08:51

ramana wrote:
johneeG wrote:.... I don't understand these people, they criticize a thing and turn around do the same thing...like Idol worship(hint: Kabba). I came across a site that claims Mecca was a Lord Shiva's temple, that may explain the worship of Moon.



Is it possible to have a u tube on this!

May be there is one already.


Ramana garu,

KAABA A HINDU TEMPLE TAKEN OVER BY MUSLIMS

KING VIKRAMADITYA INSCRIPTION ON A GOLD DISH HUNG INSIDE THE KAABA
In pure scientific study about the Historical Muhammad raises basic questions concerning the prophet's role as a moral paragon; the sources of Islamic law; and the God-given nature of the Koran. The scientists even doubt the existence of Muhammad. Scientists say that the Koran is a not a product of Muhammad or even of Arabia, but a collection of materials stitched together to meet the needs of a later age. There was no Islam until two or three hundred years after the traditional version at around 830CE. The Arab tribesmen who conquered in the seventh century vast territory were not Moslems, but were persons who worshiped idols and are scientists call them pagans.

Even though Prophet Muhammad was born in the full light of history the earliest document date about a century and a half after his death. Not only does this long lapse of time cast doubt on their accuracy, but internal evidence strongly suggests the Arabic sources were composed in the context of intense partisan quarrels over the prophet's life. The earliest sources like papyri, inscriptions, and coins on the prophet's life, contradict the standard biography. An inscription and a Greek account fix Muhammad's birth in 552, not 570. Muhammad's career took place not in Mecca but hundreds of kilometers to the north. Yehuda Nevo. The classical Arabic language was developed not in today's Saudi Arabia but in the Levant.

Long before Islam came in to existence, Kaaba, in Mecca in Saudi Arabia was a pilgrimage site. The word Kaaba might have come from the Tamil Language which originated around 1700BC. In Tamil Nadu Kabaalishwaran temple is Lord Shiva’s temple and Kabaali refers to Lord Shiva.(May be Arabic language is related to Brahmi script -johneeG The black stone at Kaaba is held sacred and holy in Islam and is called "Hajre Aswad" from the Sanskrit word Sanghey Ashweta or Non-white stone. The Shiva Lingam is also called Sanghey Ashweta. So what is in Kaaba could be the same what Hindus worship. The pedestal Maqam-E-Ibrahim at the centre of the Kaaba is octagonal in shape. In Hinduism, the pedestal of Brahma the creator is also octagonal in shape. Muslim pilgrims visiting the Kaaba temple go around it seven times. In no other mosque does the circumambulation prevail. Hindus invariably circumambulate or Pradakshina, around their deities. This is yet another proof that the Kaaba shrine is a pre-Islamic. In Shiva temples Hindus always practice circumambulation or Pradakshina. Just as in Hinduism, the custom of circumambulation by muslim pilgrims around the entire Kaaba building seven times shows that the claim that in Islam they don’t worship stones is not true.

Allah was one of the deities in Kaaba long before Islam was founded. It might come as a stunning revelation to many that the word ‘ALLAH’ itself is Sanskrit. In Sanskrit language Allah, Akka and Amba are synonyms. They signify a goddess or mother. The term ‘ALLAH’ forms part of Sanskrit chants invoking goddess Durga, also known as Bhavani, Chandi and Mahishasurmardini. The Islamic word for God is., therefore, not an innovation but the ancient Sanskrit appellation retained and continued by Islam. Allah means mother or goddess and mother goddess.

The King Vikramaditya inscription was found on a gold dish hung inside the Kaaba shrine in Mecca, proving beyond doubt that the Arabian Peninsula formed a part of his Indian Empire. (Ref: page 315 of a volume known as ‘Sayar-ul-Okul’ treasured in the Makhtab-e-Sultania library in Istanbul, Turkey). King Vikrama’s preachers had succeeded in spreading the Vedic Hindu sacred scriptures in Arabia and Arabs were once followers of the Indian Vedic way of life. The annual fair known as OKAJ which used to be held every year around the Kaaba temple in Mecca and the present annual hajj of the Muslims to the Kaaba is of earlier pre-Islamic congregation. . Even to this day ancient Siva emblems can be seen. It is the Shankara (Siva) stone that Muslim pilgrims reverently touch and kiss in the Kaaba.

Muslims shave their head and beard and don special sacred attire that consists of two seamless sheets of white cloth. One is to be worn round the waist and the other over the shoulders. Both these rites are remnants of the old Vedic practice of entering Hindu temples clean and with holy seamless white sheets. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, the Kaaba has 360 idols. Traditional accounts mention that one of the deities among the 360 destroyed when the place was stormed was that of Saturn; another was of the Moon and yet another was one called Allah. That shows that in the Kaaba the Arabs worshipped the nine planets in pre-Islamic days. In India the practice of ‘Navagraha’ puja, that is worship of the nine planets, is still in vogue. Two of these nine are Saturn and Moon. In India the crescent moon is always painted across the forehead of the Siva symbol. Since that symbol was associated with the Siva emblem in Kaaba it came to be grafted on the flag of Islam.

The Hindu Vedic letter in Sanskrit "OM" if seen in a mirror one can see the Arabic numbers 786 and this is the most sacred number for Muslims and copies of the Arabic Koran have the mysterious figure 786 imprinted on them. In their ignorance simply they do not realize that this special number is nothing more than the holiest of Vedic symbols misread and none of the Arabic scholar has been able to determine how they chose 786 as the sacred for them. In short muslims are also going around Siva Lingam at Kaaba, seven times as Hindus go around it seven times.

A few miles away from Mecca are a big signboard which bars the entry of any non-Muslim into the area. This is a reminder of the days when the Kaaba was stormed and captured solely for the newly established faith of Islam. The object in barring entry of non-Muslims was obviously to prevent its recapture. Kaaba is clothed in a black shroud. This custom also originated from the days when it was thought necessary to discourage its recapture by camouflaging it.

Another Hindu tradition associated with the Kaaba is that of the sacred stream Ganga (sacred waters of the Ganges river). According to the Hindu tradition Ganga is also inseparable from the Shiva emblem as the crescent moon. Wherever there is a Siva emblem, Ganga must co-exist. True to that association a sacred fount exists near the Kaaba. Its water is held sacred because it has been traditionally regarded as Ganga since pre-Islamic times (Zam-Zam water).


http://krishnajkaaba.blogspot.in/2005/04/kaaba-hindu-temple-taken-over-by.html


There are videos on utube which make the same point more vividly(and convincingly), because it is a visual medium.

This video explain about 786:


This is an old video of Haj(it is islamic propaganda/devotional video). But, it corroborates the following:
]Muslims shave their head and beard and don special sacred attire that consists of two seamless sheets of white cloth. One is to be worn round the waist and the other over the shoulders. Both these rites are remnants of the old Vedic practice of entering Hindu temples clean and with holy seamless white sheets.


Mute the video, cover the title of the video, and show the video to someone from 1:13 to 2:27, they will think that its a hindu pilgrimage:


Anyone who has even cursory knowledge of Hindu customs and attires during pilgrimage can easily see that the above video matches it perfectly.

But, just to make a comparative point, I am posting videos of same rituals done by Hindus during pilgrimage:

This is a video of tonsure/head-shaving at the bank of Ganga(0:51 onwards):


This video illustrates attires:


---
Ramana garu,
there is one more thing:
I was reading about a conversation between Rama Tirtha and a group of Islamic scholars, when they came to meet him. He was also making thew same point that Islam is nothing but a misunderstood and corrupt form of Hinduism/Vedic religion. Obviously, the muslims were not ready to accept this theory, so he tried to make his point by showing how AUM(sacred vedic sound) is part of Koran, yes Koran.

Rama replied gently: ‘Please listen to what is now being said. In the very beginning of your Koran, at the top, are three letters, alif (A), lam (L) and mim (M). Can any of you or any learned Mulawi of Islam explain what these three letters mean?' The Moslems replied that this was a secret which Allah had kept to himself. Swami Rama laughed heartily at this remark and said: ‘When God has revealed the entire Koran for the benefit of mankind, as the Muslims claim, it is very strange that he has kept its very heading a secret. No. It is not so. If you, the Muslims who put full faith in the Koran do not know the secret of the letters A, L, M, Rama will tell you what they signify. Alif, lam and mim are nothing but alif (A), wao (O) and mim (M), that is, AOM or OM.'

The Muslims objected that the letter L is not the same as the letter O, but Swami Rama pointed out to them that in Arabic grammar L is pronounced O when it falls between a vowel and a consonant, as in the names Shamsuddin, which is written Shamsaldin, or Nizamuddin, which is written Nizamaldin. The letter lam (L) becomes silent and gives the sound of the Arabic letter pesh (O or U). Therefore ALM is no secret; it is clearly and unambiguously OM and nothing but OM. It is Kufra, heretical or a sin, to blame God for keeping it a secret.


-----
Ramana garu,
I was searching youtube for the above videos, when I came across an interesting video. The below video uses the same info that I posted last night. Moreover, the time when the video is posted is just after I posted it in TSP thread. More interestingly, it is a rabid EJ account. So, some EJ lurker took the info and made a video.

[youtube]74FpCxzhJaQ&feature=plcp[/youtube]

As you see, EJs won't mind using the above info.

KLP Dubey
BRFite
Posts: 1310
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby KLP Dubey » 18 Sep 2012 09:01

There is already some sort of an effort to *try and officially appropriate* the Vedic world-heritage and make it a "European heritage". See here, it seems a small and rather amusing enterprise currently (funded by some private Spanish outfit), but has a certain dangerous potential:

http://dnghu.org/
http://dnghu.org/en/indo-european%20revival/

These poor sods are proposing to make "Indo-European" the official language of the European Union. :rotfl:

One of these guys has developed a "complete Indo-European language course":

http://dnghu.org/en/indo-european%20language%20learning/

Note the very first lesson:

1. Karolā: Āla Ana!
2. Anā: Āla Karola!
3. Karolā: Wlējesi?
4. Anā: Wlējō, prijēsna. Eurōpājóm didkskō.
5. Karolā: Eurōpājóm didkskesi?
6. Anā: Jāi.
7. Karolā: Egō-qe Eurōpājóm didkskō. Slwēj’
8. Anā: Slwēj’

1. Karola: Hallo Ana!
2. Ana: Hallo Karla!
3. Karola: How are you?
4. Ana: I am fine, thanks. I am learning European.
5. Karola: Are you?
6. Ana: Yes
7. Karola: I am learning European as well. Goodbye!
8. Ana: Goodbye!


The "Indo-" in "Indo-European" is already dropped. The intention is to never create the thought in the young mind as to why the fawk there is an "Indo-" there in the first place. It is now sought to be portrayed as a "European" heritage despite the fact that it came from India.

I'm not saying these clowns will be successful in their effort. Convincing an economically and culturally weary people to learn (en masse) an ugly-sounding language full of defective pronunciations - is going to be a hard sell for sure - but one must keep an eye on this kind of "formalized PIE quackery", and use it to full effect in enlightening Indians about how far this fraud has gone.

Call me a chauvinist, but honestly - what a world of difference between the perfect pronunciation of the Vedic sound and the defective stammering of these dingbats!

Namaskar,

Kishen Lal

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52816
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 18 Sep 2012 09:04

A new presentation given at Inst of Math Sciences uses Markov chain analysis and shows that Indus script is a language and the script is for words not alphabets.

My son informs me those are called logograms.

Shiv might post that presentation in due course.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3167
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_20317 » 18 Sep 2012 10:14

Thanks Nilesh ji, that diagram really helped.

Ramana ji, the SIVC script being a logographic writing system could well be the reason why people in those times used to put extraordinary emphasis on the spoken word or the Vedic learning practices based on oral traditions.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 18 Sep 2012 10:21

ramana wrote:
Shiv might post that presentation in due course.


:D So you are on bcc

Will upload later today along with some other things

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 18 Sep 2012 10:25

KLP Dubey wrote:Call me a chauvinist, but honestly - what a world of difference between the perfect pronunciation of the Vedic sound and the defective stammering of these dingbats!

l


No chauvinism. It took an earlier post of yours for the penny to drop for me. Many IE languages are pathetic mispronunciations of simple words and an inability stemming from lack of rigor in language training to move the tongue and mouth in ways required to make full use of them. There is a very nice term for hitting the wrong note in music - "apaswara". I wonder what the equivalent is for mispronunciation.

KLP Dubey wrote:
The "Indo-" in "Indo-European" is already dropped. The intention is to never create the thought in the young mind as to why the fawk there is an "Indo-" there in the first place. It is now sought to be portrayed as a "European" heritage despite the fact that it came from India.


I think this is a good thing. This will prevent Indian AIT sepoys from worrying about other Indians looking for their own past.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 18 Sep 2012 14:14

AIT is one leg of the British monster that still roams the minds of Indians. It has of course been discussed elsewhere, but just recapitulating here for the benefit of the visitors, the other leg was to destroy the indigenous education system in India and to replace it with something very British, with English.

An earlier post on this.

Sometimes even the Anglo-American keyboard soldiers forget or deliberately leave a few gems of truth lying around on Wikipedia, perhaps as a memory flag they planted in India.

English Medium Education during The British Raj

_____

British records show that indigenous education was widespread in the 18th century, with a school for every temple, mosque or village in most regions of the country. The subjects taught included Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, Theology, Law, Astronomy, Metaphysics, Ethics, Medical Science and Religion. The schools were attended by students representative of all classes of society. Gandhi is said to have described the traditional educational system as a beautiful tree that was destroyed by British rule.

The Charter Act of 1813 decreed that English would be taught in the Indian education system although not as a replacement for indigenous languages. Instead, it was anticipated that English would co-exist with Oriental studies as a means by which moral law could be reinforced.

The 1817 publication of James Mill's History of British India proved to be a defining text in the theories of how education policies should be formed (ed. Horace Hayman Wilson: London, Piper, Stephenson and Spence, 1858). Mill advocated the introduction of European knowledge to counter balance Indian traits judged to be irrational. Instilling ideals of reason would accordingly 'reform' Indians by the example of Western systems of thought and outlook. His ideas discredited Indian culture, language and literature even as its assumptions of moral superiority authorised and justified the presence of the British in India.

The current system of education, was introduced and funded by the British in the 19th century, following recommendations by Thomas Babington Macaulay. Traditional structures were not recognized by the British government and have been on the decline since.

Thomas MacAulay's infamous 'Minute On Indian Education' (1835) encapsulates both the overt and covert agendas for such a policy.

The term 'Macaulay's Children' is used to refer to people born of Indian ancestry who adopt Western culture as a lifestyle. It is usually used in a derogatory fashion, and the connotation is one of disloyalty to one's country and one's heritage.
The passage to which the term refers is from his 'Minute on Indian Education' delivered in 1835. It reads:

"It is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population."

In 1835 Lord William Bentninck revitalised the earlier Charter Act with his New Education Policy which determined that English should be the official language of the courts, diplomacy and administration. Prior to this Persian had been the accepted language of diplomacy. Bentninck's motive was ostensibly to "regenerate" society, but the ramifications were boundless. From this moment on only those with Western style education and a knowledge of English were eligible for government employment or for a career in public life.

In 1854 Sir Charles Wood published his Education Dispatch which was aimed at widening the availability of Western oriented knowledge. Universities were established under the London examining model in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras.
Lord Ripon's Hunter Commission of 1882 somewhat belatedly advocated that there should be increased provision of education at primary level and for women. The theory was that there would be a subsequent rise in the calibre of applicants for third level entry.

The inevitable result was that an Indian-based education was viewed as being second rate in comparison to an English medium education.

India

The success of this 'Indian Education Policy' can perhaps be measured, by the content of the recent address of Dr Manmohan Singh the Prime Minister of India:

"Of all the legacies of the Raj, none is more important than the English language and the modern school system. That is, of course, if you leave out cricket! Of course, people here may not recognise the language we speak, but let me assure you that it is English! In indigenising English, as so many people have done in so many nations across the world, we have made the language our own. Our choice of prepositions may not always be the Queen’s English; we might occasionally split the infinitive; and we may drop an article here and add an extra one there. I am sure everyone will agree, Nevertheless, that English has been enriched by Indian creativity as well and we have given you back R.K. Narayan and Salman Rushdie. Today, English in India is seen as just another Indian language."

_____

The words above by our honorable PM should really be engraved in golden letters, and we should all feel ashamed that due to our faulty Queen's English, our PM had to hung his head in shame while giving the above speech! :((

Anyway,

the gentleman by the name of Horace Hayman Wilson kindled my interest. It seems the gentleman, was a keen Sanskrit scholar. He also translated Rajatarangini and wrote the first Sanskrit-English dictionary in 1819. I guess he was aware of the civilization-cide the British were about to embark on, and he just felt guilty.

I just went through a list of all "-cide" words on killing! And I did not find one word for "killing of civilizations", even though it would be one of the most appropriate words to describe European history.

Perhaps 'politismocide', 'culturocide' or simply 'civilizationcide'!

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 18 Sep 2012 14:14

A brilliant presentation by some SDREs of the Institute of mathematical Sciences about the Saraswati-Sindu civilization and the Indus script
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3JNY4I ... Y4czQ/edit

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 18 Sep 2012 14:23


Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 14:37

KLP Dubey wrote:The "Indo-" in "Indo-European" is already dropped. The intention is to never create the thought in the young mind as to why the fawk there is an "Indo-" there in the first place. It is now sought to be portrayed as a "European" heritage despite the fact that it came from India.

I'm not saying these clowns will be successful in their effort. Convincing an economically and culturally weary people to learn (en masse) an ugly-sounding language full of defective pronunciations - is going to be a hard sell for sure - but one must keep an eye on this kind of "formalized PIE quackery", and use it to full effect in enlightening Indians about how far this fraud has gone.

Call me a chauvinist, but honestly - what a world of difference between the perfect pronunciation of the Vedic sound and the defective stammering of these dingbats!

Namaskar,

Kishen Lal

Your points are important. We should take such threats serioulsy. See, europeans show tenacity to learn sanskrit so as to translate them, not an easy taks by any means. They are capable of showing such tenacity in popularizing ...at least.. as archaic...ancient cultural stuff of europe.. worth presereving.. type of arugment.

Interestingly, it will solve the problems for those affected by closure of 'linguistics' department worldwide. They can be esteemed teachers and trainers teaching 'european'.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 14:53

ravi_g wrote:Ramana ji, the SIVC script being a logographic writing system could well be the reason why people in those times used to put extraordinary emphasis on the spoken word or the Vedic learning practices based on oral traditions.

ravi-g,

Great point. Thus unless there is emphasis on oral tradition, the same stuff would soon be pronounced in multiple different ways and original meaning could be lost completely.

e.g. Music.. Sa Re Ga Ma Pa Dha ni Sa, would lose all meaning if not conveyed via oral tradition.

In fact that is the challenge in interpreting SSVC per Sullivan code. Sue (Sullivan) has done great job, however while she simply interprets them something like say.. 'Ni sa ga ma pa ni sa, sa ni dha pa ma pa ga ma ga re sa' and leaves it at that , someone like me ( a sales guy and no more) can add value, simply because I happen to know few Indian languages good stock of vocabulary and thus may blurt out ....only as an analogy.. in above case... ah.. that is Raga Bihag!

I will post SSVC seal which Sue has deciphered "nta -ra -ma -kam - ni " and interpreted it as based on each sound and 'Monier williams dictionary'. I looked at it for few mins, tried permetations and combinations stuff while swirling my red wine and blurted..."Ratna- Manikam'! Now many Indians would not only undestand this, but also might be familiar with this combination of words.. referring in general to 'precious stones'.

My point being....oral tradition is critical and one can see genious behind those who insistd on oral tradition, ....and how far on tangent one may go in the absence of oral tradition. as far as PIE -Pontic Steepe- European -Antolia...

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 14:57

shiv wrote: I wonder what the equivalent is for mispronunciation.

PIE

Let's add PIE= mispronounciation in Indian research/language. Afterall English absorbs/creates some 40K new words (or whatever the right number is) each year.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 15:11

In the context of PIE, but especially in the context of ever expanding rules, exceptions, changing laws, new laws, hypotehsizing of every increasing older substrates and super-substrates and supra-substraes, specific rules applicable to understand changes in (From PIE to that language) IE languages, ..... thought of this quote from a genius.

"Any fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius-and a lot of courage-to move in the opposite direction.​" -- Albert Einstein

For those curious, Popper's writings on simplicity, falsifiability and corroboration are good reads.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 15:48

ShyamSP wrote:
Nilesh Oak wrote:Image


Thank you for simplifying the complexity for aam admi.

May your Arundati tear all that wicked joy of all the w*easels. :D

Thank you. I am glad it worked.

But to make things complex is a job of a fool. The figure below shows 'Delta in RA -Right ascension' measurement which shows relative separation of Arundhati and Vasistha with respect to position of 'North Celestial pole' at any given time.

See if you can relate above picture with one below, and also realize why separation between Arundhati and Vasistha was at its highest (with Arundhati walking ahead of Vasistha) when NCP was around 5561 BC (7571 BP = 5561 BC + 2010 AD).

North Celestial Pole -NCP moves along the circle and completes one roudn in ~26K years.

Hint: Draw lines from a given point of NCP to Arundhati and Vasistha. Remember, the daily motion of these stars around the point of NCP is anticlockwise (in the picture above)

Negative Delta-RA implies 'Arundhati walking ahead of Vasitha.. portion of the circle- arc -defined by end points of 11091BC and 4508 BC.
Image
BTW, small blip around 20000 BP is an error (my thick thumb.. when I entered data few years ago). I am 100% certain of it. No probability involved.
Last edited by Nilesh Oak on 18 Sep 2012 21:01, edited 2 times in total.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

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

Postby johneeG » 18 Sep 2012 15:50

Prem Kumar wrote:
JE Menon wrote:Well, to begin with, it apparently helps if you are from Europe and believe that anything worthwhile East of Greece (and that because you have no choice, since anything West of Greece was pretty crappy too) came after the flowering of Greek civilisation. It also helps if you have a sneaking sense of appreciation for the whole Aryan thing developed by the Third Reich. OK, don't show it much, but that little twinge of pleasure you feel inside when you read the RV and feel all "Aryan" is a good indicator. Finally, it does not hurt at all, if your name rhymes with schnitzel.


LOL. Feeling "Aryan" = good. Feeling "Indian" = not so good.

The West first appropriated Greece. Then appropriated Sanskrit. A feel good PIE/Aryan hypothesis followed. To show your secular credentials, you place PIE in the middle of nowhere, where no existing civilization could claim credit.

These migration theories seems to follow a scaffolding pattern. Propose one theory and use it while it lasts. When it gets too flimsy, propose a 2nd scaffolding theory and discard the old one. Look how AIT has been discarded in favor of AMT, with Schnitzel casually mentioning "who speaks of AIT anymore?" as if he had been an AMT proponent from day one. This is intellectual dishonesty of the highest sort & if done in say Physics, would have made him a pariah in the scientific community.

I have a feeling that, if Indians become sufficiently de-racinated and no longer "own Sanskrit", AIT-Nazis and Linguists will gladly accept India as the homeland. They just dont want us to be full of ourselves in the interim


Saar,
your post got me thinking. I searched for a post of Ramana garu.


ramana wrote:Pressed for time. Will jot down my thoughts and weave a para or two later.

-----------

Reading the book, The Chosen by Avi Bekker, an Israeli diplomat and scholar-activist.
He explains the concept of jews as "chosen' people from the Talmud and the Bible.
The Talmud makes it a burden to be chosen as they have to live up to high ideals.
The Bible makes repeated assertions that jehovah "chose" them over the others.
The Jews assert their choseness as exclusive to themselves.
-From 12th century scholars(Maimonidies) to 20th Century Hollywood non-practising Jews.

Both Christians(Gentiles) and Musilms claim that they supersede the Jews in being Chosen.

They both acknowledge that Jews were thte first 'chosen' people in the Bibile and the Koran.

The Christians say that beliveing in Christ as the savior transfers the Choseness to his followers.

The Muslims say that Muhammad is the last prophet and he got the revaltation from Gabriel and thus they are the final chosen.


Thus the clash between these three groups.

Its the root of the ME/Israel/Palestine problem.
-----------

The author doesn't address how the chosen interact with the non -chosen people outside the Middle East.


I belive this idea of being 'chosen' drives the interaction more than the evanjelical conversion/jihadi submission etc. Both the later groups want to increase their fold as they allow conversion. Judaism is only by birth through the mother and has this handicap.

Add to the mix the envy of the Greeks and Romans over the 'chosen' Jews.
They didn't have any prophets nor any covenant with any of their gods on Mt Olympus or whereever.
I think they appropriated Christianity as a way to get around the idea of not being 'chosen" and took it with them into savage Europe. They transformed Jehovah inot a kind loving God.


This left the rest of the non-Jewish folks in Middle East kind of orpahned.
Along came Muhammad and got them into Islam as a new way of being chosen by Allah this time. Allah has all the bad attributes of Jehovah. He is very jealous, intolerant of other gods, very monotheistic and he is very particular to choose Muhammad to be his last prophet!

It was these Islamised Arabs who invaded Sindh and got the shock of their life to find a non-Judaic 'chosen' people: the Hindus.
Hindus were the antithesis of the Abrahamic religions: multiple gods, loving and spiteful gods and even godesses. The gods were not monks but had beautiful wives/consorts. The chosen is to beivle and live a life of Dharma. Their spirtual literature celebrated full lives and not celibiate lifestyle.
The Arabs paid special attentiion to Brahmins who they thought were key to the religion and the temples and killed and destroyed many. Their own scribes write glorious accounts of their mis-deeds.
The later Turks were not so particular in being chosen and just killed indiscriminately all the Hindus. Their invasions were more like razas or raids.
-----------------
Come to modern age. The Europeans and their surrogates Americans are still hung up on being 'chosen' by conversion. Their assault on Hindusim is more at a physical(mass conversions) and intellectual level(AIT). The AIT is their weapon against the non-Judaic chosen Hindus.
-----------------

More later.


The west seems to be obsessed with the idea of being chosen people. What does chosen mean? It means, they are chosen by a super-human factor to succeed. It means that they are designed to win. It means that they are superior to others. They want to believe that they are chosen people. They want others to believe this.

Just look at their reaction to Vedic civilization. They declared that 'Aryan' is a race and said that they are superior to the other(local-'Dravadian'). Then, they said that Aryans are related to them genetically. Conclusion, they are superior... they are chosen people. So, all the achievements of 'Aryans' are now, their achievements. They can feel happy that their ancestors were not losers, but were important people.

Who chose them is irrelevant...God, evolution, nature, genes, or whatever. The ideology that tells them they are chosen is also irrelevant...X-nity, Aryan race(Nazi/AIT), american exclusivism, or whatever. The ultimate point is always the conclusion that they are the chosen people, superior to everyone else, that normal rules don't apply to them, that they are bound to win and rule the world.

We can easily understand how this concept gives rise to colonialism, slavery, racism, exploitation, genocide, ...etc.

Being chosen people is not enough, you have to stop others from having that privilege(otherwise being chosen is meaningless). So, they can never acknowledge that another civilization can be superior to them in any field in benevolent manner. If some civilization is superior to them, then they are cast in a villian's role, otherwise they are portrayed as losers.
For example,
a) if another civilization is richer than them, then they will say that they are morally superior to the rich but pervert 'other' civilization. Such an evil people need to be defeated and destroyed.
b) if another civilization is poorer or powerless, then they will say that the 'other' it is a loser civilization with nothing worthwhile. Such useless people need to be subjugated.

The 'other' can never be acknowledged as superior and benevolent. The 'other' cannot be allowed to be superior physically, mentally and/or morally.

The god, nature, science, technology or whatever else is only useful as long as it can be used to prove that they are superior. The standards can change, the methods can change, the criteria can change. But the conclusion must be same: their superiority.

I think this obsession with being chosen people stems from a deep seated insecurity with regard to their history, culture and civilization. We have a thread to explore the insecurities of Indians, maybe we need to explore the insecurities of these people that led them to foist ideologies which proclaim their superiority based on flimsy things like color, false narratives and lies.

The interesting thing is that Europe and Arabia seem quite content with themselves, as long as they were pagan. It is only after adopting Abrahamic concepts, that they start showing a keen sense of insecurity with respect to other civilizations.

It seems the insecurities of early tribes of Israel with respect to other civilizations(like Egypt) are projected into the chosen people concept.

---
I think you are right, if if Indians become sufficiently alienated from vedic civilization, then AIT-Nazis and Linguists may have no problem in accepting India as the original homeland of all the civilization.

They may themselves formulate OIT:
India was the original homeland of humanity where humanity developed(or was born with) exceptionally high standard of civilization. Sanskrit is the most perfect language and mother of all other languages of the world. Vedas are epitome of knowledge.

These highly advanced people, later, migrated to Europe. The exact reason for migration is difficult to establish. Maybe a huge famine or floods. But, they migrated and the land was left empty.

Later, this land was occupied by barbaric people who migrated from other regions(say central asia or antartica). In short, Europeans are the descendents of Vedic people. And the present occupiers of India are strangers unrelated to those Vedic people.

Then, some kind of Vedic X-nity may be developed keeping in line with this theory. Needless to say that this theory will also find support in all branches of popular 'science'.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 18 Sep 2012 16:30

I think the general feeling is that the Europeans are trying to rob India of our Sanskritic heritage. On the one hand they discontinued Sanskrit in Indian schools as the medium of teaching and introduced English instead making English defacto the standard by which an individual's progress as apt for civilian administration, scientific work, academic life, and business could be measured. On the other hand they were also complicit in taking away many Sanskrit texts to Britain, etc. The Europeans also took an overly keen interest in studying the Sanskrit texts in the past 250 years. As Sanskrit's popularity has receded in India compared to earlier times, in the West many Sanskrit schools are coming up!

So over the last 200 years, one sees a shift of Sanskrit from India to the West.

But we Indians also have had our role to play in this. Here is something N.S. Rajaram wrote in Indiavine on April 28, 2005.

N.S. Rajaram wrote:Here is what I found. In December 1949, Ambedkar, supported by Professor Nizamuddin raised the issue of making Sanskrit the national language. He was supported also by a large number of memebrs from Tamil Nadu. Ambedkar was also the first to sign it on 12 December 1949. Two days earlier, on December 10, at the working meeting of the All India Scheduled Caste Federation meeting, he explicitly stated that Sanskrit should be the national language. He was oppose mainly by North Indian members, mainly B.P. Maurya (though he later regretted it).

Ambedkar expressed his disappointment at a press conference the same evening. Many of the positions taken by AMbedkar would be denounced today as "Brahminical."

The issue was debated among the Congress members from 20 to 25 December 1949. Vote was taken on December 25, with 77 in favor of Sanskrit and 77 against. Satyanarayanan, who was presiding over the Congress party members did not cast the deciding vote. The result was a deadlock and with that (and Rajendra Prasad favoring Hindi over Sanskrit) Hindi was adopted.

This was reported in The Hindustan (Hindi edition of The
Hindustan Times).

There must be others who are more knowledgeable on the issue.

Rajaram


Many such decisions by certain individuals in our past really cause civilizational tremors through time!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 18 Sep 2012 17:36

Published on August 2011, revised October 2011
By Dominik Wujastyk, University of Vienna
Indian Manuscripts

How many Indian manuscripts are there? The National Mission for Manuscripts in New Delhiworks with a conservative figure of seven million manuscripts, and its database is approaching two million records.

The late Prof. David Pingree, basing his count on a lifetime of academicengagement with Indian manuscripts, estimated that there were thirty million manuscripts, if one counted both those in public and government libraries, and those in private collections.

Foranyone coming to Indian studies from another field, these gargantuan figures are scarcelycredible. But after some acquaintance with the subject, and visits to manuscript libraries in India,it becomes clear that these very large figures are wholly justified. The Jaina manuscript libraryat Koba in Gujarat, which only started publishing its catalogues in 2003, has an estimated 250,000manuscripts. The Sarasvati Bhavan Library in Benares has in excess of 100,000 manuscripts. There are 85,000 in various repositories in Delhi. There are about 50,000 manuscripts in the Sarasvati Mahal library in Thanjavur in the far South. Such examples are easily multiplied acrossthe whole subcontinent. And these are only the public libraries with published catalogues. A one-year pilot field-survey by the National Mission for Manuscripts in Delhi, during 2004-2005, documented 650,000 manuscripts distributed across 35,000 repositories in the states of Orissa,Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, and field participants in that project report that they only scratched the surface.

The former maharajas often collected huge private manuscript libraries, only some of which are publicly available today. And it is very common for a modest Brahman family today,living away from urban centres, to have a cupboard containing two or three thousand manuscripts, handed down from a learned grandfather, perhaps. A reader unfamiliar with theIndian case, and thinking such numbers inconceivable, might assume that these are fragments orsingle leaves, a kind of trans-continental Geniza. That is not the case. These millions of Indian manuscripts are mostly full literary works, typically consisting of scores or hundreds of closely-written folios, most often in Sanskrit, and containing works of classical learning on logic,theology, philosophy, medicine, grammar, law, mathematics, yoga, tantra, alchemy, religion,poetry, drama, epic, and a host of other themes. Throughout history, Indian society has vigorously privileged higher learning, and the record of over two and a half millennia of artisticand intellectual work has been transmitted in manuscript form to the twentieth century.

In spite of the great time-depth of Indian culture, and the large numbers of surviving manuscripts, the graph of surviving manuscript numbers against time peaks in the earlynineteenth century. There are numerically more Indian manuscripts surviving from the 1820s and 1830s than from any other period of history. There are a number of reasons for this. First,the smaller numbers before the nineteenth century can be explained by the environmental conditions in most of South Asia, that are hostile to birch bark, paper and palm leaf. The monsoon climate, and the work of insects, mould, and rodents, have destroyed millions of early manuscripts. This is why some of the very oldest manuscripts in Sanskrit have been discovered not in India, but in the dry, desert conditions of Central Asia, in caves, stupas or buried libraries on the Silk Route.

These truly ancient manuscripts are of immense historical importance,especially for the study of Buddhism. But numerically they are a tiny fraction of the survivinglegacy. Another reason for the nineteenth-century peak is the demise of the traditionalprofession of manuscript scribe, in the face of the rise of printing in the nineteenth century. Firstlithography, and later moveable-type technologies were applied to the reproduction of Sanskritworks on a large scale, especially by publishers in Bombay and Calcutta. Some scribes wereemployed to write lithographic prints, but many migrated into secretarial and administrativeposts within the government, a migration that had already begun in Mughal times.

An Indian manuscript written on hand-made Indian paper has a typical physical lifetime of two to three centuries, after which it becomes increasingly fragile and illegible, and a new copy must be created.

Of course, much depends on handling and use. If carefully preserved, and perhaps revered rather than read, paper manuscripts may survive longer, but paper manuscripts in South Asia are rare from before 1500. Palm leaf manuscripts are more robust, and can last a millenniumor more if treated well. For example, the Wellcome Aṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā (“The Perfectionof Wisdom in 8000 verses”) is datable to about 1075 CE, and is still in almost pristine condition.

Palm leaf manuscripts tend to wear around the edges. Scribes knew this and often left largemargins, so even after hundreds of years, the text area of the manuscript remained intact. Butwhen material costs obliged them to write close to the edges of the palm leaf, then splitting and erosion of the leaf could lead to loss of text. Thus, the Wellcome copy of the Niśvāsatattvasaṃhitā (“The Tantra of Sighs”), written on paper in Nepal in 1912, preserves letters from the edges of the ninth-century palm leaf exemplar in Kathmandu that have been broken and lost since 1912, thus giving the London apograph independent text-historical value.

Birch bark was the most fragile writing support used widely in early India, being associated especially with Kashmir. Surviving birch bark manuscripts flake and split when handled, and present almost insurmountable problems for the conservator, with encapsulation often being the only recourse.While it may seem strange that our knowledge of such ancient literature should depend on suchrecent manuscripts, this is often the case also for Greek and Latin learning.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 18 Sep 2012 18:03

By Centre for Policy Studies
AMARABHĀRATĪ - Saṁskṛtam and the Resurgence of Indian Civilization

The Greater India encompassed by Saṁskṛtam

Daṇḍin the great Sanskrit poet and scholar (c.7th century) declared:

Saṁskṛtaṁ nāma daivīvāk anvākhyāta maharṣibhiḥ
Saṁskṛtam is the divine language as expounded by the ancient sages

Around the same time, I-tsing the renowned Chinese Buddhist Monk records that:

Even in the Island of Pulo Condore (in the south) and in the country of Suli (in the north), people praise the Sanskrit Sutras [of Pāṇini]; How much more then should people of the Divine Land (China) and the Celestial Store House (India), teach the real rules of the language.

The Island of Pulo Condore is off the Vietnam coast in Southeast Asia and the country of Suli is Sogdiana, the region surrounding Samarqand, in Uzbekistan of Central Asia. It is said that I-tsing stayed in the capital of Srīvijaya (present day Palembang in Sumatra of Indonesia) for six months in 671 AD to learn Sanskrit Grammar. He then proceeded to India where he spent fourteen years. On his return journey he spent several years at Palembang so that he could translate the large number of Indian texts that he had collected. He mentions that the Buddhacarita of Aśvaghoṣa was as popular in Southeast Asia as it was in India. He also recommends that other Chinese Buddhists proceeding to India should break journey in Srīvijaya, for obtaining the necessary training in Sanskrit and Indian acāra as there were more than a thousand monks in Srīvijaya who “lived by the same rules as those prevailing in India”.

While the Central Asian regions were soon to lose their Indian cultural moorings, the capital of the Sumatran kingdom remained a centre of [Indian] learning for several centuries. We have for instance, “another Chinese source, recording that in 1017 envoys from thence brought bundles of Sanskrit books, folded between boards. The active pursuit of Indian learning is further also shown by the existence of texts dealing with grammar, prosody and lexicography, part of which have, though unfortunately in a more or less corrupted form, been handed down to us.”

This extraordinary phenomenon of “Greater India” or “Further India” encompassing a large part of the Asian continent, where Sanskritic learning and public discourse flourished for several millennia, has baffled most of the modern scholars. Commenting on this, an American scholar remarks:

The spread of Sanskrit happens not only with extraordinary speed over vast space, but in a way that seems quite without parallel in world history… What is created in the period that covers roughly the millennium between 200 or 300 and 1300 (when Angkor is abandoned) is a globalized cultural formation that seems anomalous in antiquity. It is characterized by a largely homogeneous political language of poetry in Sanskrit along with a range of comparable cultural political practices (temple building, city planning, even geographical nomenclature) throughout it …a common, a Sanskrit culture.

______

Read the whole story!

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11214
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 18 Sep 2012 18:50

^^^
The two centuries before European colonization established itself decisively on the Indian subcontinent (ca. 1550-1750) constitute one of the most innovative eras in Sanskrit intellectual history. Thinkers began to work across disciplines far more intensively than ever before, to produce new formulations of old problems, to employ a strikingly new discursive idiom and present their ideas in what were often new genres of scholarly writing. Concurrent with the spread of European power in the mideighteenth century, however, this dynamism began to diminish. By the end of the century, the tradition of Sanskrit systematic thought – which for two millennia or more constituted one of the most remarkable cultural formations in world history – had more or less vanished as a force in shaping Indian intellectual life, to be replaced by other kinds of knowledge based on different principles of knowing and acting in the world.


One of my colleagues took two years off of work and mastered Sanskrit, wrote a commentary on Madhavacharya, now teaches Sanskrit classes in his spare time - we all cannot do that, but we need to pledge "our lives, fortunes and sacred honor" to rebuild this tradition.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 18 Sep 2012 19:04

Published on August 01, 2012
By N.S. Rajaram
Beyond The Aryan Invasion – Look East And South: Folks Magazine

______________
As several experts like Manansala and Kennedy have pointed out, the skeletal record shows that in most ways the Indian population is quite unique. More advanced genetic analysis leads to a similar conclusion— that the Indian population is very ancient to which the contribution of Eurasian strains is negligible to non-existent. It is a different story when we compare Indian and Southeast Asian populations. Paul Kekai Manansala points out:

“The overall genetic picture indicates a very old biological relationship, probably extending in part at least to the original migration out of Africa.” The current understanding is that Africa was the original home of the entire human population now distributed all over the world. The overall genetic picture of Indians is that they are closely related to the Southeast Asians, going back tens of thousands of years. In contrast, their links to Eurasia or Europe find no scientific support. As a result, one thing can safely be asserted: Indians are ancient inhabitants of India and Southeast Asia (or Greater India) and not recent immigrants.

Vedic people were maritime, not Eurasian nomads

From all this it is safe to conclude that in order to understand the origins of the Vedic civilization, and its history, it is necessary first to drop the west-northwest bias that has dominated discourse for nearly two centuries, and replace it with an East-Southeast orientation. One of the keys to this is recognizing the maritime background of Vedic civilization. In this context it is worth recording that the Rigveda is preeminently an Indian document. While there are occasional references to the lands beyond the Indus, these are greatly exceeded by references to oceans and maritime activity. Prayers for the safety of ships and navigators occur in many parts of the Rigveda. This again shows a southern-peninsular rather than a northwestern orientation.

Recognizing this will allow scholars to break free of the shackles of the northwest, particularly the Aryan Homeland myth, which has been a major obstacle to a rational study of India. The next logical step is to explore links between the Vedic Civilization and movements from the south and the east, and the resulting exchanges of people and ideas between different regions. Ecological changes, notably the ending of the last Ice Age contributed to it in a major way, in the form of two momentous developments. First, rising sea levels led inhabitants of the coastal regions, and possibly also from now submerged regions, to move to the interior and the north seeking safer ground. Next, the melting of ice caps in the north resulted in the release of the rivers of the northern plains—making this formerly arid region fertile and inhabitable.

These two epochal events are encapsulated in the two most significant myths of ancient India— the Flood Myth of Manu and the Indra-Vritra Myth. The Rigveda appears to be the product of the mix of two groups of people: tribes and ruling families that inhabited the north and poets and sages from the coastal regions and the south — some possibly from beyond the seas — who brought with them their maritime memories and experiences. This explains why the Rigveda, though composed in the Sarasvati heartland, abounds in oceanic symbolism and maritime activity. But soon the distinction between the northern rulers and the southern sages came to be blurred as the two groups became intermixed.

It is therefore no accident that the two most important seer families of the Rigveda — the Vasishthas (including brother Agastya) and the Bhrigus — should have strong maritime connections. It is important also to know that the south or the peninsular India and beyond was known to the Vedic people, especially the seer families. But much information about it has been overlooked or misinterpreted in attempts to make data fit the northwestern orientation of scholars over the better part of two centuries. Even so-called ‘nationalistic’ scholars like Tilak and Savarkar have not been able to escape its hold. The main point is that in studying the Vedas, science demands that we pay much greater attention to the south and southeast than has been the case so far. This calls for a radical reorientation.

Southern contribution

Recognizing the southern contribution to the Vedic civilization clarifies many literary, linguistic and historical puzzles in the ancient texts. It is inconceivable that these poets and sages, who brought with them the oceanic imagery and the maritime experiences that pervade the Rigveda did not also bring linguistic elements and spiritual ideas that went into the Vedic language and literature. It becomes clear that many ancient peoples and even places have been grossly misidentified in attempts to fit history and geography to the idea of an ‘expansion of Aryans’ from the northwest to the south and southeast.

For example, the Ramayana has been misinterpreted as the expansion of Aryan civilization into the peninsula. In reality, what Rama found in the south, even in Lanka, was a Vedic civilization. Rama was enchanted by the purity of Sanskrit spoken by Hanuman. The Uttarakanda of the Ramayana is a goldmine of information about the southern, largely maritime people known as the ‘Rakshasa’. The river Narmada appears to have served as the boundary between the ‘spheres of influence’ of the Rakshasas of the south and Ikshvakus and Bharatas of the north, with the Yadus somewhere in between. And Rakshasa leaders often retreated to Rasatala — the ‘nether lands’ (or ‘Down Under’) — when threatened. This Rasatala was probably part of Indonesia or some other region of Monsoon Asia.

So, what we have is not any ‘expansion of Aryans from the northwest and the north’, but a free exchange of people and ideas among different regions— much as it has existed throughout history including today. And this included lands beyond the oceans. It was interrupted, as previously noted, during the period European domination of the region. Naturally enough, they looked at history and culture of the region through Eurocentric glasses.

Mahabharata says “Look east”

The extraordinary thing is that there is a passage in the Mahabharata (Udyoga Parva 108), which explicitly points to the east as the earliest source.

“This quarter is called purva [east and also ancient] O! Brahmana, for the reason that in far older times, it was first overspread by the Devas. Here first chanted the Vedas, the glorious God who promotes the welfare of the worlds. Here was recited to the chanters of the Vedas, the Savitri by Savitar the Sun God. [Sic: The famous Gayatri mantra.]… Here in the old days of yore, O best among the twice born, took place the birth, the acquisition of renown and death— of the famous rishi Vasishta.”

In summary, bringing in this southern and eastern orientation to ancient India resolves many of the puzzles and paradoxes that plague current theories that carry a west-northwest bias. This bias was created during the three centuries of European domination through colonialism. It began with the coming of the Portuguese and ended with the exit in rapid order of the British, the Dutch and the Portuguese (in Goa). That this discredited interpretation has persisted in Western academia is only to be expected. It has persisted in India because Indian scholars and other leaders still haven’t gained the self confidence to challenge the West.

What all this suggests is that looking south and east is an important but sadly neglected area that merits serious study. Of one thing we can be certain: trying to explain the origin and growth of the Vedic Civilization in terms of migrations/invasions a few thousand years ago runs into formidable scientific and literary obstacles. We should learn from this experience and first build a scientific foundation that makes use of all data available today. Only then can we hope to recover the history of that hoary age based on the records they left behind.

If supporters of the Aryan myth want to hang on to their gospel, it is their prerogative—just as it is their prerogative to believe in a Flat Earth. But call it a theory and expect others to accept it as true is asking too much. As Albert Einstein once said: “A theory must not contradict empirical facts.”
______________


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52816
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 18 Sep 2012 20:25

Bji, Klaus, Shiv, Nilesh and RajeshA,

So based on the Inst of Math Sciences presentation Indus script is word based or logograms. So trying to decipher the alphabets using cryptanalysis techniques ie statistical letter counting wont get us there.

There is another 'dead' language' of that region, Pisacha which if we map its locations over the greater Indus Valley Civilzation sites could be useful marker.

Maybe Pisacha developed from IVC script and then went on to become Prakrit and Sanskrit?


Klaus, do you see why I ask you to map the Pisacha locations!

Also there are stories of how someone or the other was able to learn Sanskrit in a short time. Was every grammarian (Panini, Hala contemporary) a new modifier of the language?

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

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

Postby johneeG » 18 Sep 2012 22:34

shiv wrote:
KLP Dubey wrote:Call me a chauvinist, but honestly - what a world of difference between the perfect pronunciation of the Vedic sound and the defective stammering of these dingbats!

l


No chauvinism. It took an earlier post of yours for the penny to drop for me. Many IE languages are pathetic mispronunciations of simple words and an inability stemming from lack of rigor in language training to move the tongue and mouth in ways required to make full use of them. There is a very nice term for hitting the wrong note in music - "apaswara". I wonder what the equivalent is for mispronunciation.



Speaking of mispronunciation, is it possible that Namaz is a mispronounced and corrupted copy/version of Vedas?

I am posting a video for comparative study:
Sama Veda parayanam(0:26 onwards)
[youtube]6OyetBRM9X8&feature=plcp[/youtube]

People may have listened to Namaz from the loud speakers from mosque near their homes/offices/colleges/temples.
----
I am posting an old discussion that took place before this thread was started:

johneeG wrote:My theory(still in evolving process, yet to crystallize):

Evolution/devolution of ideas/philosophies:
Image

PS: I'll write about it later...


brihaspati wrote:there can be a branch from Moses 2.0 to Islam.


brihaspati wrote:We should keep johneeG's hypotheses as open. Influence diagrams cannot be formed right now - with not enough material to either reject or accept. There are tantalizing clues towards common origins.

The written records stuff is not so straightforward. If they were written on perishable stuff long before say the 2500 BCE mark, they will simply not survive. Catastrophic destruction of population centres would also have contributed.

My hypo about MB was that it was a three layered story, with some elements coming from the 5700-6000 BCE era [offshore port cities sinking into the sea - this was the period of last rapid sea-level rise - sinec then - up to 3000 BCE, water levels actually fell by about 3 m]. I read about the tentative dating of structures in the gulf of Cambay indicates a similar period much later than my original hypo. But no persihable reocrds survive anywhere from that period.

Question is why did nt they use terracotta or rock carvings like in ME or Egypt. Maybe they did - when parts of them moved off after the disaster - when they colonized ME and Egypt. I mentioned about the early landmarks-words in Egypt - k-r-m-t, "black earth" - very very close to -kr-sna-m(ri)t(tika), or "d-r-s" or with added "-t" for upper Egypt [south] meaning "red/dry earth" with tantalizing - "d-hu-sar".

Compare the verses extolling the "sun-disk" in the Aten glyphs of Amarna, the Hebrew Bible extolling of Yahweh [Yha] and the Vedic "sun" extolling.


johneeG wrote:
Carl wrote:How is Vedic religion related to Egyptian 1.0 and Hebrew 1.0 religions? TIA.


The blue lines indicate possible influences. So, its a conjecture.

Everyone agrees that Vedic religion is the oldest religion. And that India was one of the grandest centres of human civilization. India was also always rich and powerful having huge influence. We know that Judaism 1.0(Hebrew 1.0) and Egyptian 1.0 were pagan and polytheistic. Generally, people assume that Judaism was always monotheistic, but thats not true. There seems to have been a lot of struggle, violent purging and murders to steer Judaism in the direction of monotheism. So, Judaism 1.0 is being considered as pagan and polytheistic, while Judaism 2.0 is being seen as an evolving monotheism.

Now, the presumptions being made in the conjecture(that Hinduism has possible influences on Judaism 1.0, Egyptian 1.0, Arabian Paganism and Greek ) are:
a) There was contact among Judaism 1.0, Egyptian 1.0 and India through trade or other means.
b) This contact must have lead to interactions and export/import of art, culture, religion and philosophy.
c) Since India was renowned cultural(religious and philosophical) centre, the influence of India on other cultures woulds have been considerably greater than their influence on India. And there is a thumb rule that the rich and powerful country's culture is also accepted by other countries. And there is no doubt that India was one of the most powerful and rich countries(if not the richest and strongest).
d) India's influence would be particularly great on pagan and polytheistic cultures.

Some of my doubts are:
a) What is the exact nature of relation among Judaism 1.0, Egyptian 1.0, Arabian Paganism and Greek?
b) Was Greek always Hellenistic? or was there preceding version?
c) Buddhism seems to be a big enigma. It seems that Buddha's date was shifted to suit the western bias of Indologists. It seems that Buddha was a much older figure. We also know that Buddhism was always missionary. So, what exactly is the role of Buddhism within and without India?

Bji,
Regarding Islam and Judaism 2.0, what kind of influence do you suggest?
a) Primary Influence or main influence?
b) secondary influence? or
c) possible influence?


brihaspati wrote:^^^main influence, with the iconoclastic branch of Byzantine [and not the iconodule branch] christianity as secondary.

Judaism, Egyptian both could have been mediated by Canaanite and in roots - Mesopotamian/Sumerian - in turn probably driven by emigre pushed out by floods from the west coast of India.

The pre-Mosaic phase was the Sumerian-Canaanite Baal worship. The post mosaic phase is the Akhenaten solar cult from Egypt interacting with Judaic to create the Mosaic. The 18th dynasty foundation was by a possibly remarkable woman, and we know not much about the transition. Interestingly - the founding mother - is described through a myth that is very similar to Indian traditions.


Carl wrote:Subhash Kak writes: Rigvedic roots of Semitic gods?
The different Semitic gods have cognates in the Vedic pantheon. Yam may be connected to the Vedic Yama who in RV 10.10.4 is seen as being born from the waters, and Mot to the Vedic Mrityu, death. But more to the point, Ila represents Agni as in Yajurveda (VS) 2.3, whereas Ilaa represents Earth, speech, and flow. There is also the Vedic Yahvah. As an epithet it is associated with movement, activity, heaven and earth; it means the sacrificer and Agni, the chief terrestrial god. It is associated with energy like the Yahwah of the Semites. The name Yahvah occurs 21 times in the Rigveda [i]. It may be compared to Shivah, an epithet for auspiciousness in the Rigveda, that later is applied regularly to Rudra.

Are Ila and Yahvah like El and Yahweh just by coincidence? We don't know, but we certainly do know of the Vedic-god worshiping Mitanni of North Syria who could have served as the intermediaries in connecting the Indians and the Semites.

An example:

पर वो यह्वं पुरूणां विशां देवयतीनाम ।
अग्निं सूक्तेभिर्वचोभिरीमहे यं सीमिदन्य ईळते ॥ [RigVeda 1.36.1]

RigVedic meaning of Yahvah (a Name of Agni):

1 yahva mf(%{I4})n. restless , swift , active (applied to Agni , Indra and Soma) RV. ; continually moving or flowing (applied to the waters) ib. (= %{mahat} Sa1y.) ; m. = %{yajamAna} , a sacrificer Un2. i , 134 Sch. ; (%{I}) f. du. heaven and earth RV. ; pl. the flowing waters (with %{sapta} , `" the seven great rivers "') ib. (cf. Naigh. i , 15).

2 yahvat mf(%{a4tI})n. ever-flowing (waters) RV.

Predictably, EJ sources want to debunk any linkage of Semitic god to Vedic tradition. One website called "Karma to Grace" :lol: has this to say - link
Yahweh is the unique name given to the God who revealed Himself in the Old Testament.
[...]
Is Yahvah the same as Yahweh? Well, let us ask the question more correctly, “Is hwhy the same as यह्व?” Can you read these two? Do you know what they say? Is there a linguistic tie between the two? Is the “H” of Hebrew represented here (there are two “H” sounds in Hebrew) the same as the “h” in Sanskrit? Are the vowels the same? The vowels aren’t even written in Hebrew, so we can’t easily know if they are the same as the Sanskrit ones. The “v” of Jahvah and the “w” of Yahweh —are we sure they are the same? In English they are quite different—one is a fluid and one is a fricative, and they represent completely unique sounds in English. “Wow” and “Vow” are completely different words and though they could be connected phonetically, we still do not identify them as the same words. Do they represent different sounds in Hebrew and Sanskrit? ..... {on and on in this vein}

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 22:55

ramana wrote:Bji, Klaus, Shiv, Nilesh and RajeshA,

So based on the Inst of Math Sciences presentation Indus script is word based or logograms. So trying to decipher the alphabets using cryptanalysis techniques ie statistical letter counting wont get us there.

According to Sue Sullivan, SSVC script is based on logograms, more appropriately -ideograms (similar to chinese).

My chinese friend told me, while traveling through rural china.. that "if you understand chinese language characters, you understand chinese culture" and gave me many illustrations of it. In fact it allowed me to start recognizing symbols.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 18 Sep 2012 23:14

Nilesh Oak wrote:Peter ji,

No dear. Apples and oranges. Having multiple theories about future unknown is fine and healthy. But having a million theories about what has already happened and is written clearly in a book is not kosher.

This is about multiple theories about what happened in the 'unknown past'. In any case, you do recognize that there are multiple proposals for the timing of MBH War. How did you make your selection from these multiple proposals down to Prof. Achar's - 3067 BC

That is the first one I read and liked what I saw.

[..]
I am not familiar with your work.

I think Arundhati and Mizhar are not going to yield much for Mbh timing.

Nilesh Oak wrote:You are not in a bad company. Many had the same view as you are articulating. Fortunately, this is no longer a matter of guesswork. I have shown that Arundhati/Vasistha did yield the most important clue in the context of dating of MBH War. It placed a firm bounded interval for plausible timing of MBH war from 4508 BC to 11091 BC.

I still disagree. You cannot just choose a single reference from the entire corpus and say that it is sufficient. Have you considered what ifs? And do remember the what ifs bite you if you have a single point of failure. What if the software you are using has a bug? What is the accuracy in decimal places of the software you are using? Does it take into account earth's slow down? etc etc.

Also as RN Iyengar talks about the pole star moving about reference from Mahabharata Bhishma Parva in his paper do you even have a visible pole star in 4508 BC?

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 18 Sep 2012 23:23

Nilesh Oak wrote:Peter ji,
Raghavan and Achar concur and I quote Raghavan:

Achar must (and better) concur with Raghavan if he is going to insist on date proposed by Raghavan. My point is there is problem with this date whichever way you look at it.

Researchers have gone through hoops and loops (e.g. P V Holay, P V Vartak, P V Kane, SenGupta, Mohan Gupta and many others), bending it backward and forward to match this duration of 58 days for Bhishma on bed of arrows. This is because everyone is clear on translation. If you are unwilling to accept it, I would encourage you to post the original verse here. We have many here who know Sanskrit (ManishH, Atri, Brihaspati and many more).

So this argument for translation...I am on this bed of arrow.. AND have not slept for 58 days..... is ridiculous.

How? Do you know (I don't) which version of Mahabharata "Sriman Vidwan Melma Narasimha Thathacharya swamigal avl" was using? Achar and I think Iyengar too seems to suggest that the BORI verses are sometimes not the best and infact there might be verses missing from it (only Achar says this).

Nilesh Oak wrote:
Besides let us not forget that Bhishma Ashtami is when the demise of Bhisma is celebrated.

Traditions have value and they do carry kernel of truth, but at best, they could be used as supporting arugments for soemthing that is been clearly corroborated by stronger evidence.

I am afraid in this discussion the "tradition" matches with planetarium software that Achar is using for Bhishma's last day. It fell on an Ashtami and people worship/remember him on that day.

Why don't you tell us from your planetarium software if Achar's date for Bhishma's demise did not fall on an Ashtami?

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 18 Sep 2012 23:27

Nilesh Oak wrote:Peter ji,


Image
'Kaumude masi' is month of lotuses. Now depending on the time one is proposing, it could coincide with lunar month of Kartika, but the reference is not saying Kartika explicitly.

Please read RN Iyengar's paper. He also translates this as Kartika.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 18 Sep 2012 23:44

Nilesh Oak wrote:Image
According to these verses Referece (V) above -
Saturn is near Rohini (done, good for 3067 BC)

But also Mars going 'vakri' near Jyeshtha/Anuradha! This is not the case for year 3067 BC and what Achar has done is 'hand waving' hoping that no one notices and also hoping that many such as you - Peter ji - would be content accepting explanation coming from a Professor.


Ok. Why would a professor of physics do "hand waving" so that no one notices? Is'nt it being a bit disrespectful? He can be wrong. Fine. But why do you question his motives?

I come back to the original point I made that why don't we carefully read the scholars who have done the work before us and see how they can be right. Instead of rushing to prove them wrong.

Any way here is the map from Achar which clearly shows the retrograde motion of Mars. So it could be that your planetarium software needs an update or you try the software he has used (to atleast baseline his results).

Here is the retrograde look of mars in a picture:
Figure 4 shows the star map for the jyeshtha amvsya day, which is also a solar eclipse day. The retrograde loop of Mars in that year is also shown superposed in the figure. The retrograde motion of Mars before reaching jyeshtha had occurred several months earlier.

Krishna's departure:
Image

Eclipse and mars loop
Image

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 23:47

Peter ji,

That is the first one I read and liked what I saw.

By this, I presume you mean work of Achar. Each one of us has to begin somewhere and you began somewhere. That was a great move. Question is did you look at his work critically? Based on what you have said so far, you have not. On the contrary, now you are getting on 'justificatory' bandwagon. This is all good. We don't truly understand the limitations (but also strenghts) of a given theory unless we try to defend it.


I am not familiar with your work.

My book is 'When did the Mahabharata War happen? The Mystery of Arundhati', available in paperback and Kindle via Amazon. If would also be happy to send you a PDF copy of me book, if you are interested to read it. I would appreciate you critiquting it and would love to receive your feedback.


I still disagree.

What are you disagreeing about?

You cannot just choose a single reference from the entire corpus and say that it is sufficient.

I never said that. I said it defines a plausible interval of ~6500 years within which one may search for the timing of Mahabharata war. In fact we can never be certain about any proposal (not unlike well tested theory). We can talk, scientifically speaking, only in terms of more likely and less likely.

Have you considered what ifs? And do remember the what ifs bite you if you have a single point of failure.

I have considered what if(s). And I would be the happiest person if such 'what ifs' bites me, because that would mean while my theory (and proposal) is falsified, a better theory is taking over my proposal. In case you missed it, I do consider my theory and proposal ---on the dating of Mahabharata War, to be best that is out there.
What if the software you are using has a bug? What is the accuracy in decimal places of the software you are using? Does it take into account earth's slow down? etc etc.

The software is Voyager 4.5 from Carina soft. And if you can show the software has a bug, at a minimum Carina soft and more likely rest of astronomy community would be thankful to you (depending on extent of bug). You could be a hero.


Also as RN Iyengar talks about the pole star moving about reference from Mahabharata Bhishma Parva in his paper do you even have a visible pole star in 4508 BC?

If you quote specific reference of R N Iyengar and also his interpreation, I will be happy to comment on it. It is not clear from your statement above what specifically you are referring to.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 18 Sep 2012 23:51

Nilesh Oak wrote:Image

Are you saying that Achar is not only 'selective' when it comes to astronomy references from MBH text, but also in selecting who to call 'scholar'.

I am afraid that is your bad reading. Achar has analysed 150+ references from Mahabharata and condensed them into a full sequence. The sequence starting from Krishna's departure on a peace mission to Hastianpur and ending at Bhishma's samadhi matches perfectly with his dates.

Regarding Sengupta what is wrong is agreeing in parts with his work?

Nilesh Oak wrote:Who is he referring to (Kochhar? Witzel? Farmer?)when he states that "Only Raghavan takes these references as astronmical.. and all other scholars treat them in some other fashion".

He is referring to Kochar, Siddharth and Sengupta.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 18 Sep 2012 23:58

Peter ji,

You wrote
Raghavan and Achar concur and I quote Raghavan:


I wrote
Achar must (and better) concur with Raghavan if he is going to insist on date proposed by Raghavan. My point is there is problem with this date whichever way you look at it.

Researchers have gone through hoops and loops (e.g. P V Holay, P V Vartak, P V Kane, SenGupta, Mohan Gupta and many others), bending it backward and forward to match this duration of 58 days for Bhishma on bed of arrows. This is because everyone is clear on translation. If you are unwilling to accept it, I would encourage you to post the original verse here. We have many here who know Sanskrit (ManishH, Atri, Brihaspati and many more).

So this argument for translation...I am on this bed of arrow.. AND have not slept for 58 days..... is ridiculous.


In response, today, you wrote.
How? Do you know (I don't) which version of Mahabharata "Sriman Vidwan Melma Narasimha Thathacharya swamigal avl" was using? Achar and I think Iyengar too seems to suggest that the BORI verses are sometimes not the best and infact there might be verses missing from it (only Achar says this).

By 'How?' I interpret it to mean 'what makes me think the translation is ridiculous'. We can not resolve the issue unless we quote specific verse from MBH text, do you agree?

I agree with Achar and Iyengar and others, that BORI Critically edited verses are sometimes not the best. BORI does list all the verses (at least from multipel MSS they employed in creating critical edition) in their Critical edition itself so one can always check what was included and what was not.

Since you are accpeting translation of Sriman Vidwan Melma Narasmha via Achar/Raghavan, onus is on you to provide which verse Sriman Vidwan used to translate what he translate.

I am afraid in this discussion the "tradition" matches with planetarium software that Achar is using for Bhishma's last day. It fell on an Ashtami and people worship/remember him on that day.

Why don't you tell us from your planetarium software if Achar's date for Bhishma's demise did not fall on an Ashtami?


Date proposed by Vartak (5561 BC), Holay (3143 BC), Gupta (1952 BC) for Bhishma Nirvana also match with Magha Shuddha Ashtami. What made you select Achar and not any of these 3 proposals?

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 19 Sep 2012 00:04

Nilesh wrote

'Kaumude masi' is month of lotuses. Now depending on the time one is proposing, it could coincide with lunar month of Kartika, but the reference is not saying Kartika explicitly.


Peter wrote

Please read RN Iyengar's paper. He also translates this as Kartika.

Is this a voting contest? I said 'Kaumude masi' means 'month of lotuses' and it could coincide with month of Karitika.. depending on timing proposed (due to seasons, location. change in lunar month with respect to season is due to precession of equinoxes).

In any case, this interpreation of Achar has not brought him in trouble, yet. So ignore it for now. I would also ask you to go back to our communication(s) in this thread and respond to specific questions I raised about proposal of Achar. Asking questions and requesting responses is a two way process!

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 19 Sep 2012 00:13

Nilesh Oak wrote:Image
So per Achar/Raghavan,

War began on 22 Nov 3067 BC

They also acccpet war lasted for 18 days (correct me if I misquoted them)

Thus War ended on 9 Dec 3067 BC

Peter ji, would you be kind to quote the day of Balarama, as asserted by Achar/Raghavan, when he returned from Sarasvati Tirthyatra to witness the fight between Bhima and Duyrodhana? This is critical.

Here it is (let me know if you disagree). Achar/Raghavan claim the day of return of Balrama to be = 12 December 3067 BC, 3 days after the War was over!


Are you familiar with this concept:
"The thirteenth day has been made again into the fifteenth (day) by Rahu, like during the Bharata war, brining destruction to us...."



Nilesh Oak wrote:
I don't know about you but to me it seems like a perfect match of dates and time.



Since you have access to planetarium like software why don't you see if Achar is right for at least these days and shlokas that he has quoted? This will be a good starting point for the debate.

Peter ji,
You missed the entire point. What Achar has shown usign Planetarium software does match for the days he has claimed when MBH war occured. The SMALL problem is, the dates proposed by Achar/Raghavan DO NOT match/corroborate/validate astronomy observations form MBH text, but rather CONTRADICT them.

Are you saying that you have tested each of the eight points Achar mentions starting from Krishna's departure to the time Bhishma dies and it matches?

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 19 Sep 2012 00:21

Nilesh Oak wrote:
I am not familiar with your work.

My book is 'When did the Mahabharata War happen? The Mystery of Arundhati', available in paperback and Kindle via Amazon. If would also be happy to send you a PDF copy of me book, if you are interested to read it. I would appreciate you critiquting it and would love to receive your feedback.

Congratulations! I may have seen it today but did not realise it was written by you. Sorry my bad.

Nilesh Oak wrote:
You cannot just choose a single reference from the entire corpus and say that it is sufficient.

I never said that. I said it defines a plausible interval of ~6500 years within which one may search for the timing of Mahabharata war. In fact we can never be certain about any proposal (not unlike well tested theory). We can talk, scientifically speaking, only in terms of more likely and less likely.

I think Achar has defined a very clear methodology on how a series of dates need to be matched.

Nilesh Oak wrote:
Have you considered what ifs? And do remember the what ifs bite you if you have a single point of failure.

I have considered what if(s). And I would be the happiest person if such 'what ifs' bites me, because that would mean while my theory (and proposal) is falsified, a better theory is taking over my proposal. In case you missed it, I do consider my theory and proposal ---on the dating of Mahabharata War, to be best that is out there.

My concern is why is there no convergence between your software and Dr Achar's? Have you tried reproducing the results on different softwares? Achar has.

Nilesh Oak wrote:
What if the software you are using has a bug? What is the accuracy in decimal places of the software you are using? Does it take into account earth's slow down? etc etc.

The software is Voyager 4.5 from Carina soft. And if you can show the software has a bug, at a minimum Carina soft and more likely rest of astronomy community would be thankful to you (depending on extent of bug). You could be a hero.

Well understanding the limitation of Voyager would be a good idea.

Nilesh Oak wrote:
Also as RN Iyengar talks about the pole star moving about reference from Mahabharata Bhishma Parva in his paper do you even have a visible pole star in 4508 BC?

If you quote specific reference of R N Iyengar and also his interpreation, I will be happy to comment on it. It is not clear from your statement above what specifically you are referring to.

Here is the verse: ध्रुवं प्रज्वलितो घोरमपसव्यं प्रवर्तते । My question still stands.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 19 Sep 2012 00:28

Nilesh wrote.

According to these verses Referece (V) above -
Saturn is near Rohini (done, good for 3067 BC)

But also Mars going 'vakri' near Jyeshtha/Anuradha! This is not the case for year 3067 BC and what Achar has done is 'hand waving' hoping that no one notices and also hoping that many such as you - Peter ji - would be content accepting explanation coming from a Professor.


Peter responded today..

Ok. Why would a professor of physics do "hand waving" so that no one notices? Is'nt it being a bit disrespectful? He can be wrong. Fine. But why do you question his motives?


Achar translates 'Saturn afflicting Rohinii' because that is the case for 3067 BC. Although MBH verse is clear about Mars going 'vakri' near Jyestha/Anuradha and afflicting Chitra, Achar simply says "Mars went retrograde and straight again. Chtira was afflicting a graha". I called this handwaving because Achar could not show Mars going retrograde near Jyeshtha/Anuradha for 3067 BC (using whatever software he used). and he remained clueless about 'Mars afflicting Chitra' and thus stated (handwaving again) that 'Chitra was afflicted by a graha'

This is called 'scientific criticism'. No question of being disrespectful to anyone. Are you admitting that he is wrong? Do you have better explanation than 'handwaving'?

I come back to the original point I made that why don't we carefully read the scholars who have done the work before us and see how they can be right. Instead of rushing to prove them wrong.

I agree. Not sure how do we 'measure' carefully.. but let's use 'time' as proxy. How long are you carefully reading Achar's work and what efforts have you made to test his finding using Planetarium software or any other astronomy software....before deciding that his work is acceptable to you?


Any way here is the map from Achar which clearly shows the retrograde motion of Mars. So it could be that your planetarium software needs an update or you try the software he has used (to atleast baseline his results).

I do not see 'Mars' anywhere in the first map, do you?
In the second map, I see 'Mars' in the region of Shravana, 3-4 nakshatra space away from Jyeshtha/Anuradha. Nothing 'retrograde' about it...either with information provided or with location of Mars.

Do you know what retrograde motion is? and Do you know what kind of data would be required in support of retrograde motion of a specific planet near a specific Nakshatra?

Here is the retrograde look of mars in a picture:
Figure 4 shows the star map for the jyeshtha amvsya day, which is also a solar eclipse day. The retrograde loop of Mars in that year is also shown superposed in the figure. The retrograde motion of Mars before reaching jyeshtha had occurred several months earlier.

What is the point of showing a picture Mars where Mars was doing ANYTHING close to RETROGRADE by your own (or Achar's) admission. In addition you (or Achar) clearly state that "The retrograde motion of Mars, before reaching Jyeshta, had occured several months earlier"
This means, in 3067 BC, Mars did not go retrograde near Jyeshtha/Anuradha, as is required per MBH text.
I rest my case.

Krishna's departure:
Image

Eclipse and mars loop
Image[/quote]

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

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

Postby peter » 19 Sep 2012 00:52

Nilesh Oak wrote:Peter ji,

You wrote
Raghavan and Achar concur and I quote Raghavan:


I wrote
Achar must (and better) concur with Raghavan if he is going to insist on date proposed by Raghavan. My point is there is problem with this date whichever way you look at it.

Researchers have gone through hoops and loops (e.g. P V Holay, P V Vartak, P V Kane, SenGupta, Mohan Gupta and many others), bending it backward and forward to match this duration of 58 days for Bhishma on bed of arrows. This is because everyone is clear on translation. If you are unwilling to accept it, I would encourage you to post the original verse here. We have many here who know Sanskrit (ManishH, Atri, Brihaspati and many more).

So this argument for translation...I am on this bed of arrow.. AND have not slept for 58 days..... is ridiculous.


Nilesh Oak wrote:In response, today, you wrote.
How? Do you know (I don't) which version of Mahabharata "Sriman Vidwan Melma Narasimha Thathacharya swamigal avl" was using? Achar and I think Iyengar too seems to suggest that the BORI verses are sometimes not the best and infact there might be verses missing from it (only Achar says this).

By 'How?' I interpret it to mean 'what makes me think the translation is ridiculous'. We can not resolve the issue unless we quote specific verse from MBH text, do you agree?

I agree with Achar and Iyengar and others, that BORI Critically edited verses are sometimes not the best. BORI does list all the verses (at least from multipel MSS they employed in creating critical edition) in their Critical edition itself so one can always check what was included and what was not.

Since you are accpeting translation of Sriman Vidwan Melma Narasmha via Achar/Raghavan, onus is on you to provide which verse Sriman Vidwan used to translate what he translate.


Nilesh Oak wrote:
I am afraid in this discussion the "tradition" matches with planetarium software that Achar is using for Bhishma's last day. It fell on an Ashtami and people worship/remember him on that day.

Why don't you tell us from your planetarium software if Achar's date for Bhishma's demise did not fall on an Ashtami?


Date proposed by Vartak (5561 BC), Holay (3143 BC), Gupta (1952 BC) for Bhishma Nirvana also match with Magha Shuddha Ashtami. What made you select Achar and not any of these 3 proposals?

Question you have to ask is, what is the value, when a series of dates starting from Krishna's departure to Hastinapur to the demise of Bhishma match in Achar's methodology? Why this series of dates do not match in Vartak, Holay , Gupta and others?

BTW dating of Mahabharata has a big impact on AIT/OIT debate and the dating of RgVeda and Brahamanas.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 19 Sep 2012 01:12

Today, Peter wrote....

I am afraid that is your bad reading. Achar has analysed 150+ references from Mahabharata and condensed them into a full sequence. The sequence starting from Krishna's departure on a peace mission to Hastianpur and ending at Bhishma's samadhi matches perfectly with his dates.

Please produce 150+ references analyzed by Achar. NO HANDWAVING PLEASE. LIST OF 150+ references from Mahabharta.

If you want to produce his 'CONDENSED' list, after listing 150+ refernces I am ok with it, but not until I see a list of 150+, so that I understand (or you can explain) what methodology he used to condense it.

Regarding Sengupta what is wrong is agreeing in parts with his work?

Do you know which part of Sengupta work Achar agreed with? If you do, then I can elaborate. I will bring up the point when appropriate. We are far far away from getting there.

He is referring to Kochar, Siddharth and Sengupta.

Kocchar does lip service to word 'astronomy' and continues with his agenda (Vedic people). I have not read work of Siddarth, so can not comment. Sengupta does refer to astronomy evidence and very much like Achar, ignores/waffles/handwaves.. anytime astronomy observation of MBH text does not corroborate Sengupta proposed date. So while Sengupta's work is been falsified and shown to be of inferior quality, Achar has not done any better.

Any specific rationale why Achar chose work of these 3 researchers for criticism, especially when there are many other astronomy based works, of much higher quality than each of these 3 researchers or all 3 of them combined.. works of Vartak, Ketkar, Karndikar, Dixit, Lele, Modak, Iyengar, Shastri, Kane, Vaidya, Holay, Gupta, Khedwal, Daftari, Jaiswal.. long list.

MurthyB
BRFite
Posts: 698
Joined: 18 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: "Visa Officer", Indian Consulate #13,451, Khost Province, Afghanistan

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

Postby MurthyB » 19 Sep 2012 01:20

johneeG wrote:They may themselves formulate OIT:
India was the original homeland of humanity where humanity developed(or was born with) exceptionally high standard of civilization. Sanskrit is the most perfect language and mother of all other languages of the world. Vedas are epitome of knowledge.

These highly advanced people, later, migrated to Europe. The exact reason for migration is difficult to establish. Maybe a huge famine or floods. But, they migrated and the land was left empty.

Later, this land was occupied by barbaric people who migrated from other regions(say central asia or antartica). In short, Europeans are the descendents of Vedic people. And the present occupiers of India are strangers unrelated to those Vedic people.

Then, some kind of Vedic X-nity may be developed keeping in line with this theory. Needless to say that this theory will also find support in all branches of popular 'science'.


They already did this with Greek culture in the 19th century. At around the time that Lord Elgin was systematically relieving the Parthenon of its valuable marble frescos ("Elgin's marbles"), many British historians looked at the present day Greeks, who appeared swarthy and somewhat hideous looking to their eyes, and decided that the classical Greeks of Periclean Athens had, in fact, gotten on a boat and sailed around to England, and that the English were the real heirs of that Greece.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 19 Sep 2012 01:29

Nilesh wrote

So per Achar/Raghavan,

War began on 22 Nov 3067 BC

They also acccpet war lasted for 18 days (correct me if I misquoted them)

Thus War ended on 9 Dec 3067 BC

Peter ji, would you be kind to quote the day of Balarama, as asserted by Achar/Raghavan, when he returned from Sarasvati Tirthyatra to witness the fight between Bhima and Duyrodhana? This is critical.

Here it is (let me know if you disagree). Achar/Raghavan claim the day of return of Balrama to be = 12 December 3067 BC, 3 days after the War was over!


In response, Peter wrote (today)...

Are you familiar with this concept:
"The thirteenth day has been made again into the fifteenth (day) by Rahu, like during the Bharata war, brining destruction to us...."

No, I am not familiar with this concept. Why don't you explain. Please include relevant MBH text.

Peter wrote

Are you saying that you have tested each of the eight points Achar mentions starting from Krishna's departure to the time Bhishma dies and it matches?

Please read my responses to 8 or whatever number of points you quoted in your initial posts. I responded to each one of them. Here is quick summary of those points + many many more.....

(1) MBH text says (1 reference) that Bhishma was lying on the bed of arrows for 58 days/nights. Achar/Raghavan can only show 47 days. They fail to show 58 days.

(2) MBH War , per Achar/Raghavan is over on 9 Dec 3067 BC. THEIR Balarama, does not arrive at Kurukshetra 3 days after the war. This is in direct conflict with MBH text. I quoted this 3 times by now and you are trying to avoid the issue. What part of the question is not clear ?

(3) Achar is silent on all astronomy evidence of Bhishma Adhyaay 3 (20+ specific astronomy observations). Achar is silent on astornmy observation of Arundhati. Achar is silent on 30+ observations of phases of the moon and positions of the moon, while he mentions one incident related to Moon and makes a big deal about it. When (and if) we get there, I will demonstrate.. what a disaster that is...for his proposal.

(4) Achar claims to accept astronmy observations of Udyoga parva as valid, but handwaves specific referencs from this very list...vakri motion of Mars and related nakshatras!

(5) Achar is also silent on astronomy obsevations from Bhishma (except Saturn in chapter 2) , Drona, Karna, Shalya parvas

(6) Achar is silent on all chronological observations (except 2 - 58 days and Magha S 8) related to duration of Bhishma Nirvana from Shanti and Anushasan Parvas.

I have analyzed 200+ astronomy observations (every single observation I could locate in MBH text) in my book. If you find additional one, I will test those additional astronomy observations.
Last edited by Nilesh Oak on 19 Sep 2012 02:13, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests