Vedic mythology collobarate with science?

[Clobhair-cean]

1)More logical to whom?does your logic define actual events that happened millenias ago?It is equally logical to assume that the population was seperated and hence lost out on a lot of it's cultural knowledge.

Because while we have a lot of examples of isolation-based conservation, almost none of populations that for some reason got separated and lost all their knowledge, including some which are among the most basic things humans do.

2)Regarding genetic studies:

http://indianrealist...netic-evidence/

http://vivekajyoti.b...study-that.html

http://frontiers-of-...study-that.html

I post peer-reviewed scientific articles, you reply with crackpot blog posts, well played, sir.

And gosh, did you even read these? They agree with what I've been saying!

From the first article:

"“The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part,”"

There are equal no of genetic studies that negate any real genetic divide between North Indians and South Indians and assert the contrary.If you have issues with info on wiki then why not go and update it to your level of currentness.

Put dates for suspected colonisation of Southern India so i can better demolish your thesis as indicated by the genetic studies that you have posted.Using genetic studies to extrapolate population migration is a very stupid and fallacious excercise in it's present form and i can elaborate on the inaccuracies which seep in the inference section.If you are going to assume then i will put forward some other popular assumptions.Though these have nothing to do with Vedic culture but i would still entertain you,list down the crux of your argument for your migration theory and i will put forward mine,don't only post links but please elaborate in your own words.

Please do, you great geneticist, demolish the findings of the peer-reviewed papers I posted. I agree with them, so their positions are my positions.

3)I have spent more time and interacted with slum dwellers in bombay then you have so lets not question my knowledge of slums in Mumbai.

I don't believe you. If you did, you would not have called these communities prehistoric. Or maybe you just don't know what "prehistoric means".

4)Regarding superficial comparisons please elaborate on the nation credited to be the first democracy and compoare their systems with a modern democracy,do the differences in approach discredit the underlying concept.This is a subjective opinion so you can have your own.

This makes no sense. At the most basic level, democracy is still a complicated thing. Here's one basic definition:

"a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives"

You can't compare this with " this thing is everywhere in this work of fiction, and there's a real thing, which is kinda everywhere, but not really. Therefore, they are the same".

5)Thanks for giving your opinion on IQ tests but you still didn't answer my question:is it a supremacist practice?

No it's not, but you do realise that you are making less and less sense now?

6)There were culture with advance intelligence in history of civilization,you can deny and remain ignorant.Urbanisation is not a requirement for advance intelligence which can exist even without Urbanisation.

Yes, intelligence exists without urbanisation. Intellectual achievements don't, not after a certain stage. And no, there were no cultures with more advanced intelligence, because people in general have the same intellectual capacity no matter where or when they live.

7)Regarding evidence for effectivity of Ayurveda go search yourself other then western medical sources,wiki often gives a non-biased view from both sides of an argument.It is surprising how you quote from Wiki in this instance.

Wikipedia is not a scientific source. While it is a great resource for general information, if you want medical information, go to medical journals. There have been practically no proper studies that prove the efficacy of Ayurveda.

And no, there is no both sides when it comes to empirical data. Either something has been proven, or not.

8)You talk of how many people were saved in ancient times by disease that probably didn't manifest in those times at a scale that we observed fairly recently.When was Aids observed in modern civilization and why did it spread? When has cancer become prominent and a major disease and under what circumstances? Why were there epidemics of small pox?Was it because of hygeine issues?Could small pox epidemics have been prevented by principles of hygeine?

AIDS is a new thing, that's true. But Cancer has been around since humanity, though probably not on today's scale simply because people didn't live long enough. Now smallpox, that's a different matter. Smallpox, on the other hand, was been killing millions of people since Classical Antiquity, or even earlier. The Antonine Plague, that was most probably a smallpox epidemic, killed 5 million inhabitants of the Roman Empire in 168-180 CE.

And it seems that hygiene did not matter. Europeans of the 16th century had hideous hygiene. But the people in the Americas were the complete opposite, they bathed regularly, and their cities were remarkably clean, with excellent waste management infrastructure. In general, the people of the Americas (apart from maybe peoples on the edges, like the Fuegians) were taller, fitter and healthier than the Europeans. They were also cleaner and had a much more balanced and healthy diet. Yet, in 100 years, 90% of them, maybe up to 150 million people were gone, mostly thanks to smallpox, introduced from Europe. The reasons of this are perfectly understood thanks to modern medical science. And, smallpox has now been eradicated thanks to a vaccination programme.

9)Age of similar ideas can indicate which was inspired from which.

Not without a proof of contact. We have evidence that the Maya used zero before the Greeks. So, by your logic, the Greeks must have stole the knowledge from the Maya. Makes sense.

10)OMG the justification that you gave for 'Horse Power' and the rejection for 'Goat powered' is very convincing to us in this age since we never used 'Goat power'.

Oh come on! The Vedas don't speak of "goat power". They speak of actual chariots drawn by actual goats. If you can't understand the difference, then you are truly a lost cause.

11)I am not weaseling out on anything,i still maintain that as many people who wan't to 'read' the Vedas in original Sanskrit can read it and not only in India but even in foreign countries which are now having entire departments dedicated to such studies.

And like i said it the no. of people who can see images and interpret them will always be more then people who can 'read' a particular language.Countless generations of Indians till the present date can recognise and interpret images of vedic Gods and lores.If peoples ability to intrerpret pictures or images impresses you then you can find it all around the world in all cultures through out the world and is not a statement on current relevancy of their culture or a statement on their advance intelligence or the antiquity of their culture.So i don't understand the point you are trying to make regarding the interpretations of images etc?

You still haven't answered my question: How many Indians can read the Vedas in their original Sanskrit?

Because in Australia, we have populations of people who are not only able to understand and interpret images left by their ancestors 40.000 years ago, they've been adding new and new images as the centuries rolled by. It is as if all the Indians could read the Vedas (I'm not insinuating that the Vedas are anywhere near 40.000 years old), and continued to write more chapters up until this very moment, in the same language and same style.

Accept it. Vedic culture is younger and less continuous than Australian Aboriginal culture.

12)Checking out if an article has been published in JIES.I will leave it at that,since you cast the doubt why don't you justify your doubt by showing it wasn't published in JIES until then i will considered the matter settled.

Once again, you made the claim, you have the burden of proof. Why should I go out of limb to prove your statement?

13)Regarding your thesis,it is surprisingly represented on WIKI,you can call it the Negrito thesis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito

Your point being? Even this article says that these people are probably the descendants of Proto-Australoids. So we are on the same page now, I presume, as you have been coming up with proofs of my claims for a while now.

14)Still waiting for gems of Andamanese culture or any lore or texts that can attest to the antiquity of their advance culture or intellect,please don't weasel out on this request since you claimed that their culture has to be older then the vedic culture.

I presented you with ample genetic evidence. There are no texts, because they don't have a writing system and no claims were made to their advanced culture, because there is none. We also have linguistic evidence linking the Ongan languages with Proto-Austranesian. There is other circumstantial linguistic evidence available. It is a well-known fact of linguistics that over time, languages tend to diversify and places with older human inhabitance have more linguistic variety. For example, Europe has about 220-230 languages, for 740 million people. Kenya, on the other hand, has a population of 38 million, with 129 languages. In the 18th century, there were about 7000 Andamanese, and they spoke at least 13 completely different languages.

And, despite your vile supremacist rhetoric, they have no advanced intellect, as there is no intellectual difference between cultures. Their intellect is just as advanced as that of the Industry moguls of Mumbai, the hipsters of Portland or the Inuit whalers.

15)Brhman doesn't need to deal with antimatter,people who claimed it's existence need to deal with it and demonstrate it under laboratory conditions but if i remeber correctly antimatter would explode if it comes in contact with matter so it conveniently can never be observed or it's existence cannot be proved. According to vedic mythology there is a continous interaction between the manifest and the unmanifest.

Once more, you are wrong. You're getting good at this. We have in fact observed antimatter on a number of occasions. Google PS210 Experiment for one example. And there is no interaction between matter and antimatter.

16)Strict format requirements for academic papers is probably a brain child of the intellectually vaccuous and a rigid biased mind set of traditional dogma, the practice is not really a hallmark of academic intelligence but probably a source of occupation for text editors and a sort of obsessive mental mastrubation for people who can't give importance to content but are more preoccupied by the presentation.Probably it is for people who can't really add to intellectual academic content and rather try to disguise their garbage by strict formatting as the meaning of the content is vaccuous and the only way the paper can earn a right of passage is due to it's formatting.

The only way a paper can earn a right of passage is its content. But you can't present content objectively and clearly if you don't follow the clear and simple guidelines. If you can't remove yourself from the language, you also probably failed from removing yourself from the results.

17)http://en.wikipedia....damanese_people

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Onge_people

Was trying to search for Andamanese culture/religion couldn't find anything.But the stupid suggestion of them migrating out of africa 50,000 years back really stood out but atleast they used words like 'seems to have' instead of has.And i was pretty astounded by the small population size and how can you determine a dang from such a small statistical group.

You really don't get science, do you? First of all, science does not deal with absolutes. It uses "seems to have" instead of "has", because it interprets the available evidence and is open to error-correction. This is fairly basic stuff, you know, and apart from crackpots, no-one really takes up on it.

And then you bring in statistics and prove that you have no concept of yet another field. If you want to know something about a population of 100 million, 700 is a small statistical group. If you want to know something of a population of 700, then 700 covers the whole population and it is impossible to get a more correct result, if your methodology is correct, of course.

And please, once more, do tell me why the science of genetics has it ALL wrong, as opposed to you, who are, I suppose, a highly qualified expert in both anthropology and biology.

Dont seem to be a very cultured or friendly sort.

Which means exactly nothing. The age of a culture has nothing to do with its friendliness or the technical developments of the members.

[Harsh86_Patel]

Since you put a random array of confused self defeating statements i will reply to the jist of your points:

1)It is you who initially equated people not using fire as a sign of them being ancient,i gave you an example of how that cannot be a reason to attest age of a culture,you probably have visited a slum with a Guide to take you around the bylanes and have no clue of what sort of ancient people stay in slums and especially the imports from rural villages,but i guess the guide forgot to show you that.I am friends with many people who have been living in slums since long amount of times and they often have seperate area for the new immigrants and those parts are usually nasty.You wont be able to differentiate their living conditions from tribals only it is worse for them because of the pollution and filth.

2)I don't have access to peer reviewed papers but i do have access to reports that are based on peer reviewed papers and i often check the sources.

3)The first time you have acknowledged the date of your supposed negrotid migration theory after a lot of coaxing from my side and you put it at around 65000 B.P. .You can have the date for the migration of negrotids but i am talking about culture.Can you attest the age of their culture or their cultural history?if you can't then no point talking about them.Your claims of their culture being older them the Vedic culture is based on your personal opinions and you wont be able to produce an ioata of proof (even circumstantial) for the same.Like is said that you can consider the whole of humanity as the most ancient culture but that really is a non-argument in this topic.

4)'Isolation based conservation' as opposed to 'Isolation based non-interference' as opposed to 'isolation based evolution' why they could have come up with their own stuff after being isolated which might be completely opposed to what they adhered to before being isolated.This again is a non-argument,as again you can't produce any circumstantial evidence also of the age of their so called culture.

5)I have no fight with the geneticists and their studies as they are empirical in nature but i do have a bone to pick with stupid migration theories propounded and inferred from these genetic studies by biased and prejudiced historians and linguists.This is what happens when you let a linguist etc draw conclusions based on genetic studies.The result of the scientific studies are not contested the infference drawn is contested.But again here we are not talking about the age of the culture of people so no point digressing on these imaginary migration theories.

6)Whether you like it or not ancient Greece is credited for the worlds first democracy though it was a simplistic form but underlying principle was the same as a modern complex democracy.You can deny the Greeks this acheivement but the world does not.It was important to point this out in this discussion as this is the sort of comparison i am trying to draw with modern concepts and ancient indian concepts.So you can try to ridicule these comparisons but this only demonstrates you prejudice and the tendency to not give credit to the ancients.By the way the first welfare state was established by Rama a part of the Vedic culture and mythology.

7)How many Indians can read the Vedas in original sanskrit? How many Europeans can read the Bible in original Hebrew?.What has this question got to do with anything related to our discussion.Are you suggesting that the relevancy of christian culture has changed with the translation of the bible into english or various other European languages?Is it a criterion for you to establish cultural contuinity that all people following the culture have to speak the original language?

Tamil speaking populace is a subset of the original Sanskrit speaking or Indo Aryan speaking populace,Agastya was a sanskrit speaking vedic rishi who has been credited with creating Tamil.I am only mentioning this since undue obsession of promoting an ancient language is often observed in "some" Tamilians.I can acknowledge the beauty of Sanskrit and can also preserve it in many technological ways but it is not necessary for me to learn it and speak it every day.Though i am also highly appreciative of Tamil and Sangam literature and credit them to be monumental acheivements as well.

8)Mayans could have created the Zero before the Greeks but as far as i know that Zero was first used by Ancient Indians along with so called 'Arabic numerals' that we still used and they are credited with it.If there is proof that the Mayans did it before Greeks then it should be put down in history books in the same order.

Did you know that Mayans tracked Venus (Shukra) and formulated their calendar (Shukracharya was the leader of the Asuras) and Ancient Indians tracked the movement of Jupiter (Brihaspati) and also based their calender on the same (Brihaspati was the leader of the Devas).

Lot of circumstantial evidence now exists to suggest that m any cultures that were thought to be previously isolated were not really isolated and the debate rages on.But you can definitely attest that the Greeks had a lot of contact with Ancient India.

9)I still find it funny that how can you provide genetic evidence for a Culture or a 'Way of life'.You are only tagging on the racial lines ever since the start,you probably equate imaginary races with imaginary cultures and it demonstrates a very classical Eurocentric racial mind set which is presently being propounded by a "few" seperatist Tamilians in India.

10)Regarding your commentary on anti matter,worry no more all you have to do is go to Wiki before you move on to more complex sources:

In particle physics, antimatter is material composed of antiparticles, which have the same mass as particles of ordinary matter but have opposite charge and quantum spin. Antiparticles bind with each other to form antimatter in the same way that normal particles bind to form normal matter. For example, a positron (the antiparticle of the electron, with symbol e+) and an antiproton (symbol p) can form an antihydrogen atom. Furthermore, mixing matter and antimatter can lead to the annihilation of both, in the same way that mixing antiparticles and particles does, thus giving rise to high-energy photons (gamma rays) or other particle–antiparticle pairs. The end result of antimatter meeting matter is a release of energy proportional to the mass as the mass-energy equivalence equation, E=mc² shows.^[1.

Please read the last sentence.

11)I would not like to digress on format requirements for research papers,but i don't beleive that only one format can be the right format to convey any written information in a paper and anyone who beleives so has to be obsessed with the format rather then the content.

12)Science doesn't deal with absolutes.Thank you very much for reaffirming this but historical interpretations of genetic population studies are stupid and are more related to the mental biases of the interpreter and not to science.

13)I am still waiting for you to elaborate on the Andamanese culture and from what i gathered they nearly killed the people who tried to contact them but one fellow was successful in interacting with them.So don't weasel out on this request.(My Prediction-all you would end up telling me is there were 10 tribes and speak different languages,but many acknowledge themselves to be Hindu all mentioned in Wiki).But i agree that the violent tendencies of these people is comparable to the "few LTTE terrorists" who are also Tamil speaking seperatists in India and i would like to call them people who are products of the British imperialistic historical propoganda.(The imaginary Aryan Dravidian divide and alienation of South Indian Dravidian from the North Indian European descent Aryans was actively promoted as a divide and rule policy of the British empire)

14)You want western medicine proponents to acknowledge Ayurveda in mainstream papers?But to each his own.The only reason i mentioned Ayurveda is since it is complex and thoroughly documented Medical system that was formulated in antiquity.An organised medical system was my point.

15)You can adhere to your translations of the Vedas but let me tell you that if you do not acknowledge symbolism in ancient texts then your understanding of them will suffer,this is true not only of the Vedas but any ancient texts that you try to translate and understand.The advantage with the Vedas is that the culture is still present hence you should rely on translations made by the people still ascribing to the culture rather then foreign translations.

So if you are just going to throw non-arguments and self defeating statements then there is no point of this discussion.

Edited October 9, 2012 by Harsh86_Patel

[Clobhair-cean]

Since you put a random array of confused self defeating statements i will reply to the jist of your points:

1)It is you who initially equated people not using fire as a sign of them being ancient,i gave you an example of how that cannot be a reason to attest age of a culture,you probably have visited a slum with a Guide to take you around the bylanes and have no clue of what sort of ancient people stay in slums and especially the imports from rural villages,but i guess the guide forgot to show you that.I am friends with many people who have been living in slums since long amount of times and they often have seperate area for the new immigrants and those parts are usually nasty.You wont be able to differentiate their living conditions from tribals only it is worse for them because of the pollution and filth.

Um, no. I went into the heart of each and every slum I visited, with the help of anthropologists working with the communities and talked to many inhabitants. No ancient people live in any of the slums. In fact, I also visited Kani communities in the Kalakkad Mundathurai forest, and they were also remarkably modern, even though they were as rural as you get in mainland India. You can't compare them with hunter-gatherers.

2)I don't have access to peer reviewed papers but i do have access to reports that are based on peer reviewed papers and i often check the sources.

If I have access, you have access.

3)The first time you have acknowledged the date of your supposed negrotid migration theory after a lot of coaxing from my side and you put it at around 65000 B.P. .You can have the date for the migration of negrotids but i am talking about culture.Can you attest the age of their culture or their cultural history?if you can't then no point talking about them.Your claims of their culture being older them the Vedic culture is based on your personal opinions and you wont be able to produce an ioata of proof (even circumstantial) for the same.Like is said that you can consider the whole of humanity as the most ancient culture but that really is a non-argument in this topic.

So, you agree that the people are that old, and that genetic information is valid. I'll remember this. Then, culture. We know that these people have been isolated for longer than almost any other population on earth. What comes from that? No invasions, no immigration and therefore: a continuous evolution of their original culture. If you think about it for a sec, it's kind of obvious.

4)'Isolation based conservation' as opposed to 'Isolation based non-interference' as opposed to 'isolation based evolution' why they could have come up with their own stuff after being isolated which might be completely opposed to what they adhered to before being isolated.This again is a non-argument,as again you can't produce any circumstantial evidence also of the age of their so called culture.

Tell me one single people that, when left to its own devices and with no outside interference or contact, threw out their original culture and invented something from scratch. It does not happen. If there was no outside contact, the culture is as old as the people.

5)I have no fight with the geneticists and their studies as they are empirical in nature but i do have a bone to pick with stupid migration theories propounded and inferred from these genetic studies by biased and prejudiced historians and linguists.This is what happens when you let a linguist etc draw conclusions based on genetic studies.The result of the scientific studies are not contested the infference drawn is contested.But again here we are not talking about the age of the culture of people so no point digressing on these imaginary migration theories.

But scientific studies ARE constantly contested, that's the point of science. I know that you are so much more knowledgeable then all the linguists and historians in the world, but if three independent sciences have evidence that point to one conclusion, in this case the migration patterns of early humans, then there is probably something to it. Or they are all lying, and you (plus the few crackpots you use as sources, like Fomenko) are the only keepers of the sacred truth. Which is more possible?

6)Whether you like it or not ancient Greece is credited for the worlds first democracy though it was a simplistic form but underlying principle was the same as a modern complex democracy.You can deny the Greeks this acheivement but the world does not.It was important to point this out in this discussion as this is the sort of comparison i am trying to draw with modern concepts and ancient indian concepts.So you can try to ridicule these comparisons but this only demonstrates you prejudice and the tendency to not give credit to the ancients.By the way the first welfare state was established by Rama a part of the Vedic culture and mythology.

You are once again dragging something into this debate that makes no sense. Yes, the greeks invented democracy, no-one disputes that. I thought your point was that the base concepts of Greek and modern democracy are the same, just like Vedic "science" and modern science. This is demonstrably false, as the underlying concept of democracy is much more clearly defined than whatever you read into the Vedas.

And really, welfare state? Equal opportunity (one of the core principles of a welfare state) in ancient India? Lol. Just lol. You do realise that a king can not institute a welfare state, as aristocracy itself flies in the face of the other main principle of a welfare state, the equitable distribution of wealth.

7)How many Indians can read the Vedas in original sanskrit? How many Europeans can read the Bible in original Hebrew?.What has this question got to do with anything related to our discussion.Are you suggesting that the relevancy of christian culture has changed with the translation of the bible into english or various other European languages?Is it a criterion for you to establish cultural contuinity that all people following the culture have to speak the original language?

Tamil speaking populace is a subset of the original Sanskrit speaking or Indo Aryan speaking populace,Agastya was a sanskrit speaking vedic rishi who has been credited with creating Tamil.I am only mentioning this since undue obsession of promoting an ancient language is often observed in "some" Tamilians.I can acknowledge the beauty of Sanskrit and can also preserve it in many technological ways but it is not necessary for me to learn it and speak it every day.Though i am also highly appreciative of Tamil and Sangam literature and credit them to be monumental acheivements as well.

Not many. But European Culture is not a continuation of ancient Jewish culture. It has very little to do with it, actually. The vast majority of religious Jews, who are the direct continuation of that culture, on the other hand, can still read the Hebrew Bible perfectly fine.

By the way the New Testament (eg. the Christian part of the Bible) was written in Greek. At least try to know what you are bringing to an argument.

And I truly don't know why are you trying to drag Tamil into this discussion. But, by the way, just a small correction: Agastya is not credited with creating Tamil. He's credited with creating Tamil literature, the language existed before him. But I won't go into this discussion with a Hindi fundamentalist.

8)Mayans could have created the Zero before the Greeks but as far as i know that Zero was first used by Ancient Indians along with so called 'Arabic numerals' that we still used and they are credited with it.If there is proof that the Mayans did it before Greeks then it should be put down in history books in the same order.

Did you know that Mayans tracked Venus (Shukra) and formulated their calendar (Shukracharya was the leader of the Asuras) and Ancient Indians tracked the movement of Jupiter (Brihaspati) and also based their calender on the same (Brihaspati was the leader of the Devas).

Lot of circumstantial evidence now exists to suggest that m any cultures that were thought to be previously isolated were not really isolated and the debate rages on.But you can definitely attest that the Greeks had a lot of contact with Ancient India.

Yes, the Mayans and Indians tracked the same celestial objects. They were looking at the same sky after all. I'm sure they both knew about the Sun too. What a coincidence!

Why can you definitely attest that there was contact between India and ancient Greece before Alexander The Great's Camping? (Which Aristotle's Metaphysics most probably predates by decades)

9)I still find it funny that how can you provide genetic evidence for a Culture or a 'Way of life'.You are only tagging on the racial lines ever since the start,you probably equate imaginary races with imaginary cultures and it demonstrates a very classical Eurocentric racial mind set which is presently being propounded by a "few" seperatist Tamilians in India.

No I don't. In this specific case, when we talk about a long-isolated people, we can safely assume, for reasons I cited above, that their culture is also ancient. Genetics says nothing about culture. Genetics and history, in certain circumstances, are a different matter.

Yet again with the Tamils. You do have a beef with those guys, do you?

10)Regarding your commentary on anti matter,worry no more all you have to do is go to Wiki before you move on to more complex sources:

In particle physics, antimatter is material composed of antiparticles, which have the same mass as particles of ordinary matter but have opposite charge and quantum spin. Antiparticles bind with each other to form antimatter in the same way that normal particles bind to form normal matter. For example, a positron (the antiparticle of the electron, with symbol e+) and an antiproton (symbol p) can form an antihydrogen atom. Furthermore, mixing matter and antimatter can lead to the annihilation of both, in the same way that mixing antiparticles and particles does, thus giving rise to high-energy photons (gamma rays) or other particle–antiparticle pairs. The end result of antimatter meeting matter is a release of energy proportional to the mass as the mass-energy equivalence equation, E=mc² shows.^[1.

Please read the last sentence.

And? This general description of antimatter has no bearing on this debate.

11)I would not like to digress on format requirements for research papers,but i don't beleive that only one format can be the right format to convey any written information in a paper and anyone who beleives so has to be obsessed with the format rather then the content.

And that's a good clue towards understanding why you have such a hard time dealing with scientific concepts.

12)Science doesn't deal with absolutes.Thank you very much for reaffirming this but historical interpretations of genetic population studies are stupid and are more related to the mental biases of the interpreter and not to science.

Nope, they are related to data. Pure data. You know, that's what science is about. But please elaborate why modern genetics is "stupid", and why you know much better than tens of thousands of researchers who spent many years earning their Phds.

13)I am still waiting for you to elaborate on the Andamanese culture and from what i gathered they nearly killed the people who tried to contact them but one fellow was successful in interacting with them.So don't weasel out on this request.(My Prediction-all you would end up telling me is there were 10 tribes and speak different languages,but many acknowledge themselves to be Hindu all mentioned in Wiki).But i agree that the violent tendencies of these people is comparable to the "few LTTE terrorists" who are also Tamil speaking seperatists in India and i would like to call them people who are products of the British imperialistic historical propoganda.(The imaginary Aryan Dravidian divide and alienation of South Indian Dravidian from the North Indian European descent Aryans was actively promoted as a divide and rule policy of the British empire)

We know a few crucial things. That they are hunter-gatherers and that until modern contact, they did not master fire. Just like the other, provenly ancient culture, the Aboriginal Australians. Gee, I wonder if there's a connection. They have no written language. Some of their languages show a correlation with Proto-Austranesian (link), which together with the genetic evidence that even you stopped disputing, tell us that they've been there for a very long time. Oh wait, I'm sorry, all the linguists are stupid. Never mind. You know, it's mighty convenient to declare that everyone else in the world is just plain wrong, especially the experts, but that should make you think that maybe it's not them, but you.

And why you keep bringing up Tamils, I honestly do not know.

14)You want western medicine proponents to acknowledge Ayurveda in mainstream papers?But to each his own.The only reason i mentioned Ayurveda is since it is complex and thoroughly documented Medical system that was formulated in antiquity.An organised medical system was my point.

Yes, because if it was good at curing or preventing diseases, it would have been incorporated into science-based medicine by now.

An organised medical system that does not work is of no use.

15)You can adhere to your translations of the Vedas but let me tell you that if you do not acknowledge symbolism in ancient texts then your understanding of them will suffer,this is true not only of the Vedas but any ancient texts that you try to translate and understand.The advantage with the Vedas is that the culture is still present hence you should rely on translations made by the people still ascribing to the culture rather then foreign translations.

So if you are just going to throw non-arguments and self defeating statements then there is no point of this discussion.

I have no idea why you included this here. Makes no sense.

[Harsh86_Patel]

1)Good you went to slums in one particular state with anthropologists,you should have tried social workers and they could have probably highlighted the deplorable social/economical/technological conditions of so many slum dwellers.In mumbai you can find a wide variety of people from the most rural villages (where there is no electricity/water supply/or cement structures) living in the slums.

2)I am surprised that you find it difficult to believe that isolated "small" populations can forget their own original culture and invent a new one especially if we are talking about 65000 years.Also at some point of time all homo sapiens did have a common origin how do you suggest that such a variety of different cultures developed without throwing out the old and inventing the new?.Either ways you still fail to put forward any information on their culture as it is now or any attestation to it's age.You yourself claimed in another post that cultural practices/ideas can emerge seperately in seperate cultures independant of each other so whats to prevent you from beleiving that people can invent or give rise to a completely different culture over a period of 65000 years.In either scenario if you can put forward some information on Andamanese culture then we can also hopefully draw some similes between them and the Vedic people.(Them not knowing how to make fire is the only thing you mention).

3)How can you state definitively that the andamanese culture was perfectly isolated,just because no foreigners came and mated with them?This is a prime example of stupid assumptions made by linguists and historians using perfectly empirical genetic data.Looking at the size of this population it could have very well been 10 men and 10 women who spawned the whole population.In India the practice of strictly marrying in one's own community is still practiced by many groups but the population has increased so much hence intermingling couldn't have been prevented.Probably the Andamanese also believed in the same and due to their small sized population they could have maintained genetic isolation i.e no mating with outsiders.This is no statement on their culture or whether they did have any cultural exchanges.For all i know and care 10 illiterate(=people who didn't know much of their actual culture) pairs "could" have been shipwrecked or exiled and isolated and spawned the small population inventing their own cultural practices borne out of their ignorance,either from India or Africa.

4)Migrations did happen but fallacious interpretations by historians and linguists of genetic data also happens.Prejudice and bias also acts on historians and linguists.

5)So you don't seem to have an issue in acknowledging that the ancient Greeks did invent democracy even after acknowledging the large amount of differences between the original and current versions of democracy but you can't share similar acknowledgement for concepts spawned or first broached by other ancient cultures.

And yes i said welfare state and it has been very well described in the Epic Ramayana,what makes you think a Monarchy can't give rise to a welfare state?Every great Hindu king believed in the concept of a welfare state taking inspiration from Ramayana and RamaRajya and establishing a welfare state was a necessity for a Hindu king to be called Great until invasions from foreign hordes of greedy barbarians,your notions of aristocracy are also Eurocentric (though you did ignore Arthur).But you can keep on dismissing concepts out of the Vedas if it satisfies you.

6)When you talk about the Bible i feel you are unable to comprehend simple things.The typical Christian bible comprises of the Old testament and the New Testament and both are equally Christian though the old testament was isolated for the Jews, and i was talking of Christians.There are direct continuations of the Vedic culture and there are a lot of people who read the Vedas in the original Sanskrit in India as well as in other countries.There are entire institutions and gurukuls that are dedicated to the Vedas and Sanskrit.The question you should be asking is that how many people can understand the Vedas? since any person who can read Hindi (national language of India) can read Sanskrit since the script is essentially the same.But your lame duck statement of many people can read the Hebrew bible in Europe settles the question you asked me i guess.

Agstya was a vedic rishi and was the one who is credited with inventing Tamil and spawning sangam literature,Agstya in no way authored all of Sangam literature as you suggested.It is very strange that when i talk of Vedic culture which is common to all Indians and so is Sanskrit you label me a 'Hindi' fundamentalist,atleast say 'Hindu' Fundamentalist which would be your intended label for me.It is strange how we label people who talk or praise Vedic culture to be Hindu fundamentalist when we have never accused anyone of being a Greek fundamentalist or even European fundamentalist but nevermind.Using 'Hindu fundamnetalist' is the easiest way of obstructing discussions of this sort and used by many western acadamicians so i won't single you out,though there are a bunch of brainwashed Indians who would also probably call me the same.

7)You thing of suspected geographical isolation of a small group of people to be some magical preserving principle for their culture,a culture which you provide no information on or any circumstantial evidence of the date of their culture.I never had any issue with Tamilians and i was very careful in highlighting words like "few" "some" but you conveniently ignored those in insinuating that i have an issue with them.

8)Do you know that original Vedic culture was also not written i.e. didn't have a script.It was spread by word of mouth but the Vedas (content) is still dated by mainstream according to when it was suspected to have been penned down.So not having a written script or written attestation will pretty much disqualify any objective dating of Andamanese culture by mainstream historians,not something i would accept but sadly it is still the case.If not having a script is a similarity between cultures for you then you can also include the original Vedic culture in the list.

9)I put the description of anti matter to highlight my statement that yes matter and anti-matter do interact in an explosive fashion.

10)I never disputed genetic studies in the first place,what i disputed was the inference drawn by stupid linguists/historians(not a universal statement for all) from this Genetic data.I have said this same thing so many times i am not saying it again.So i said some linguists/historians are stupid and "never" said "modern genetics" is "stupid".I keep on refering to "some" Tamils because many arguments given by you are used by "some" Tamils for harboring seperatist agendas.

Will give an example,

Genetics can probably highlight with some accuracy when two different geographical population stopped mating with each other,thats it.....who came from where and went where are all assumptions made by linguists/historians playing fill in the blanks.

11)Your comment on Ayurveda is again very shallow since you can only see a Medicinal/Healing system with western medicine (allopathy) as an index and i have tried to show you many examples of preventive practices in Ayurveda that do not have a parallel in western medicine which begins with the onset of disease.Principles of hygeine and a disciplined lifestyle having a strict daily routine have been described in Ayurveda in ancient times as a part of being healthy and fighting disease.But nevermind since you cannot draw a simile it pointless to highlight a concept to you.Having an organised medical system irrespective of your current notions of it's effectivity is also an acheivement.

14)The Mayans following Venus to map their calendar and the Indians following Jupiter to do the same is a direct correlation with specific information mentioned in Vedic culture,though they didn't call them Mayans but called them Asuras(those who follow venus as their guru or pathfinder).

13)Your assertion that if the Vedas say 'a goat drawn cart' it has to be taken literally is very amusing.

[Clobhair-cean]

1)Good you went to slums in one particular state with anthropologists,you should have tried social workers and they could have probably highlighted the deplorable social/economical/technological conditions of so many slum dwellers.In mumbai you can find a wide variety of people from the most rural villages (where there is no electricity/water supply/or cement structures) living in the slums.

I am well aware of the deplorable social/economic/technological conditions of the slum dwellers. But poverty and primitiveness are not the same, that's what you don't seem to understand.

2)I am surprised that you find it difficult to believe that isolated "small" populations can forget their own original culture and invent a new one especially if we are talking about 65000 years.Also at some point of time all homo sapiens did have a common origin how do you suggest that such a variety of different cultures developed without throwing out the old and inventing the new?.Either ways you still fail to put forward any information on their culture as it is now or any attestation to it's age.You yourself claimed in another post that cultural practices/ideas can emerge seperately in seperate cultures independant of each other so whats to prevent you from beleiving that people can invent or give rise to a completely different culture over a period of 65000 years.In either scenario if you can put forward some information on Andamanese culture then we can also hopefully draw some similes between them and the Vedic people.(Them not knowing how to make fire is the only thing you mention).

You know how the various cultures of the world emerged? Through interaction with each other. Contemporary English culture, for example is the result of the British Celts taking over from whoever settled the islands after the Ice Age, followed by Roman, Gaelic, Anglo-Saxon, Norse and Norman French (+Latin). Then it all got messed up and became a mishmash of European, Asian, African, American cultures. In contrast, the Icelanders, who were in relative isolation (not nearly as complete as the Andamanese), still speak a language that's practically Old Norse with words added for new inventions and their culture is the closest we have to that of their ancestors who first arrived to the island a bit more than a thousand years ago. Isolation conserves. That's why all the known uncontacted peoples seem to live under prehistoric conditions.

3)How can you state definitively that the andamanese culture was perfectly isolated,just because no foreigners came and mated with them?This is a prime example of stupid assumptions made by linguists and historians using perfectly empirical genetic data.Looking at the size of this population it could have very well been 10 men and 10 women who spawned the whole population.In India the practice of strictly marrying in one's own community is still practiced by many groups but the population has increased so much hence intermingling couldn't have been prevented.Probably the Andamanese also believed in the same and due to their small sized population they could have maintained genetic isolation i.e no mating with outsiders.This is no statement on their culture or whether they did have any cultural exchanges.For all i know and care 10 illiterate(=people who didn't know much of their actual culture) pairs "could" have been shipwrecked or exiled and isolated and spawned the small population inventing their own cultural practices borne out of their ignorance,either from India or Africa.

No. No-one knew about these people. Up until the 18th century, there was little to no outside interaction with these peoples, who were referred to as brutish cannibals by all accounts. They weren't up for socialising. They were not 10 illiterate (even illiterate people knew how to make a bloody fire in the past. It's not rocket science) people, because then we would find genetic traces of their ancestry. We don't. If they were shipwrecked Indonesians, for example, we would know that they came from Indonesia, because their genetic makeup would be closer to Indonesians and not Ancestral South Indians and their language would not be related to Proto-Austronesian.

4)Migrations did happen but fallacious interpretations by historians and linguists of genetic data also happens.Prejudice and bias also acts on historians and linguists.

Yes, it happens, and I'm sure you can find all the since thoroughly refuted turn of the century scientists you want. Contemporary migration theories are supported by historical, archaeological, genetic, ethnographic and linguistic data. Either all these fields are in a vast conspiracy, or you are wrong. I would guess it's the latter.

5)So you don't seem to have an issue in acknowledging that the ancient Greeks did invent democracy even after acknowledging the large amount of differences between the original and current versions of democracy but you can't share similar acknowledgement for concepts spawned or first broached by other ancient cultures..

Yes, absolutely. Some concepts were invented a long time ago. But not string theory, elemental particles, mechanical flight or any of the nonsense you claim to be found within the Vedas.

And yes i said welfare state and it has been very well described in the Epic Ramayana,what makes you think a Monarchy can't give rise to a welfare state?Every great Hindu king believed in the concept of a welfare state taking inspiration from Ramayana and RamaRajya and establishing a welfare state was a necessity for a Hindu king to be called Great until invasions from foreign hordes of greedy barbarians,your notions of aristocracy are also Eurocentric (though you did ignore Arthur).But you can keep on dismissing concepts out of the Vedas if it satisfies you.

Yes, a Monarchy can not give rise to a welfare state, as it necessitates the existence of an unequal distribution of resources. How did Hindu kings establish the equality of opportunity for all their subjects (you do realise that the mere existence of a king-subject relationship destroys the possibility of equal opportunity and therefore the possibility of a welfare state).

How would you define a welfare state?

6)When you talk about the Bible i feel you are unable to comprehend simple things.The typical Christian bible comprises of the Old testament and the New Testament and both are equally Christian though the old testament was isolated for the Jews, and i was talking of Christians.There are direct continuations of the Vedic culture and there are a lot of people who read the Vedas in the original Sanskrit in India as well as in other countries.There are entire institutions and gurukuls that are dedicated to the Vedas and Sanskrit.The question you should be asking is that how many people can understand the Vedas? since any person who can read Hindi (national language of India) can read Sanskrit since the script is essentially the same.But your lame duck statement of many people can read the Hebrew bible in Europe settles the question you asked me i guess.

How many people in India can read the Vedas in Sanskrit? Still waiting. I am now curious, because you obviously can't or won't produce a simple number. I wonder why.

European culture is NOT based on the Bible. It is an amalgamation of Greek, Pagan, Jewish and Christian thought, and whatever else came after. The Hebrew Biblie isn't all that important for non-Jews. But all this does not matter, as we aren't comparing the Vedas to Europe, but to a culture (the Aboriginal Australians), some members of which have an unbroken line of cultural continuity that goes back at least 40.000 years.

Agstya was a vedic rishi and was the one who is credited with inventing Tamil and spawning sangam literature,Agstya in no way authored all of Sangam literature as you suggested.It is very strange that when i talk of Vedic culture which is common to all Indians and so is Sanskrit you label me a 'Hindi' fundamentalist,atleast say 'Hindu' Fundamentalist which would be your intended label for me.It is strange how we label people who talk or praise Vedic culture to be Hindu fundamentalist when we have never accused anyone of being a Greek fundamentalist or even European fundamentalist but nevermind.Using 'Hindu fundamnetalist' is the easiest way of obstructing discussions of this sort and used by many western acadamicians so i won't single you out,though there are a bunch of brainwashed Indians who would also probably call me the same.

No, I wanted to call you a Hindi fundamentalist, as you perpetuate North Indian supremacist untruths and deny the existence of South Indian culture and peoples. But I will leave it at that, because I'm not debating politics or vicious ideologies.

And WTF? People are labelled Greek and European fundamentalists all the time! Give me a break.

7)You thing of suspected geographical isolation of a small group of people to be some magical preserving principle for their culture,a culture which you provide no information on or any circumstantial evidence of the date of their culture.I never had any issue with Tamilians and i was very careful in highlighting words like "few" "some" but you conveniently ignored those in insinuating that i have an issue with them.

It is not magical, it is natural. And the evidence is not circumstantial, as we know that they live in prehistoric conditions, we know that they lived in isolation for around 50-70000 years, and we know that they are linguistically related to other ancient groups, but not to more modern populations.

8)Do you know that original Vedic culture was also not written i.e. didn't have a script.It was spread by word of mouth but the Vedas (content) is still dated by mainstream according to when it was suspected to have been penned down.So not having a written script or written attestation will pretty much disqualify any objective dating of Andamanese culture by mainstream historians,not something i would accept but sadly it is still the case.If not having a script is a similarity between cultures for you then you can also include the original Vedic culture in the list.

It is not a similarity between cultures, but having a writing system entails a certain level of development that would arise with commerce or historiography, in most cases (though there are exceptions, like the Celts)

9)I put the description of anti matter to highlight my statement that yes matter and anti-matter do interact in an explosive fashion.

Not in nature. If it did , there wouldn't be any antimatter left, because there is more matter than antimatter in the universe and when mixed (artificially), they destroy each other.

Genetics can probably highlight with some accuracy when two different geographical population stopped mating with each other,thats it.....who came from where and went where are all assumptions made by linguists/historians playing fill in the blanks.

Nope. For example, let's take a simplified case. if we have a hypothetical population that has markers that links them with the Ainu of Hokkaido, Siberian peoples, the Inuit and the Lakota and now they live around modern-day Chicago, then we can infer that their ancestors migrated from around Hokkaido, through the Bering Sea and into North America. We can then correlate that with archaeological, ethnographic and linguistic evidence and if the original, genetic thesis is supported by the other fields then voilá, we have a migration theory. But the core of the theory came from genetics, from the intermixing with peoples that live along the hypothetical route.

11)Your comment on Ayurveda is again very shallow since you can only see a Medicinal/Healing system with western medicine (allopathy) as an index and i have tried to show you many examples of preventive practices in Ayurveda that do not have a parallel in western medicine which begins with the onset of disease.Principles of hygeine and a disciplined lifestyle having a strict daily routine have been described in Ayurveda in ancient times as a part of being healthy and fighting disease.But nevermind since you cannot draw a simile it pointless to highlight a concept to you.Having an organised medical system irrespective of your current notions of it's effectivity is also an acheivement.

It's not my notions of efficacy. It's evidence-based. There is no evidence for the vast majority of Ayurveda's claims. Of course, hygiene and exercise help. But you can reach this by trial and error. Without the germ theory of disease, it's all up to magic and does not stem from understanding, just observation. and Ayurveda does not include this most crucial medical discovery.

14)The Mayans following Venus to map their calendar and the Indians following Jupiter to do the same is a direct correlation with specific information mentioned in Vedic culture,though they didn't call them Mayans but called them Asuras(those who follow venus as their guru or pathfinder).

Wait, now you say that the Vedic people knew about the Mayans? that is sooo rich! And based on what, that there is a mention of some people who follow the brightest object in the night sky? It clearly couldn't have been some other people nearby, it HAD to be the Mayans. Only they have the ability to look up at night.

Not that the Mayans only used a Venus-based calendar or that said calendar was the most important for them.

13)Your assertion that if the Vedas say 'a goat drawn cart' it has to be taken literally is very amusing.

If it is amusing, I wonder what would be the term for the interpretation of "goat-drawn cart" as "jet plane". Oh, I know. Lunacy. That's it.

BTW, have you noticed how you have steadily shifted the debate from the wobbly claims that there is any connection between the Vedas and string theory, the Higgs Boson and mechanical flight to attacking a side comment I made that the Andamanese are most probably a much older than Vedic culture. Well played, sir. Not that I am not glad to debate anything, but this is a fairly lame tactic.

[Harsh86_Patel]

1)I reassert all the comparison i have made before of modern concepts and concepts mentioned and talked about in the Vedas.There are direct comparisons with implications or concepts used in String theory,Higgs Boson,Mechanical flight etc etc with the concepts in the vedic culture.

2)How do you suggest different cultures evolved in areas thought to geographically isolated?For eg Mayan cultuer and Vedic culture.Please answer since you claim that a culture can develop only by cultural exchange between two different cultures.

3)Your ideas of cultural preservation are childish where you leave no space for a geographically isolated people to have their own new ideas and concepts and the capability to overwite the old beliefs even over a period of 65000 years especially when they didn't have written language or an systematic oral transmission tradition.

4)Contemprary migration theories are supported by baised Linguist and Historians and Ethanographers often having no sort of Archaelogical evidence and by misinterpreting genetic data.Gentic studies can only indicate which existing populations had sexual contact and the approximate time the contact stopped but it in no way can indicate from where the people migrated to which place.Genetic studies cannot attest to the age of a culture.There is no archeological evidence for your Negrotid migration theory and all you can state is that some of these people had sexual contact at some period of time and the migration from Africa to Australia is mere conjecture and and does not have any archeological evidence.

5) "even illiterate people can make fire"-----we are talking about 65000 B.P. not about modern illiterates who can use a lighter or matchstick.Such a lack of imagination.The migratory groups could have been very small populations that could have migrated from any location to any location and could have spawned a culture,there is no way to determine who migrated from where based on present population sizes.Archeological evidence for such migrations are non-existent and this opens up a wide gap for biased linguists and historians to fill and also for stupid linguists and historian to fill (they may have made errors unknowingly).

6) I never gave any statement against South indian culture since it is essentially Vedic,same mythology,same pantheon,same people and same geography and a whole lot of archeological evidence to suggest cultural continuity since millenias.It is people like you who would wan't to differentiate between North Indians and South Indians on basis of imaginary racial lines and non-existant cultural differences.Hindi is not my native language i come from a region in India which has been a port city since antiquity and harbors or harbored people from all sorts of perceived races and cultures present throughout the world called 'Gujurat'.You forget that i do not accept that the Vedic culture was brought by the so called Aryans from central Europe and i believe it to be native and belonging to North/South Indians alike.Vedas do not belong to North Indians but to all Indians and the World.

7)"A monarchy cannot give rise to a welfare state"-----you display a most biased understanding of Monarchy or the concept of a 'King'.This statement is only true when the king is a money grubbing,greedy,supremacist pig.A righteous Hindu king had to insure equitable distribution of wealth and to provide state sponcered fundamental ammenities to all his subjects for him to be called Great.

8)4.7 % of the global population can read the Vedas in original Sanskrit (it is also the hindi speaking population since the scripts are essentially the same).How many European christians can read the bible in original hebrew or greek? Does not knowing the original language of a book decrease the relevance of cultural practices associated with it?.This question is a non-argument and demonstrates your ignorance of what i previously stated.

9)The example you gave of inferring population migrations is a very good example to highlight my doubts of the same.There is no way to determine that the people migrated from Japan to America or America to Japan in the absence of 'archeological evidence' and when such imaginary migrations have supposed to have taken place 65000 years B.P. you can have absolutely no archeological evidence and stating the same is only by assuming that the present population size is retained in the original homeland which is a fallacy.

For eg- if the original population size of negortids was 10000 located in Central Europe and population groups of 1000 migrated to 10 different geographical location then 8 out of the 10 could have died out and 1 of the groups that migrated to Africa might have been favoured by circumstances and multiplied and continued till the present as a major representative of their so called race.It wouldn't mean that where ever in the world you find negrotids you can assume that they came from Africa.(this is a hypothetical example).Finding one random skeleton in a random location cannot be extrapolated to represent the origins of that particular race/species under the pain of being daft.

10)Regarding levels of antimatter and matter in the universe.Any definitive comments on the same can only highlight your arrogance,have you explored the whole Universe?Does it have an end?How can you state that the amount of Matter is more then Anti matter in the universe?(probably it is the case in the part of the Universe which we have observed).

11)Again you try to dismiss ayurveda as magic when there it doesn't claim any supernatural cures,it is a well organised system based on prevention,diagnosis and cure with strict guidelines none of them based on magic.Why would so many people,not only illiterate or economically backward but even educated and from 1st world countries ascribe to Ayurveda in modern times,the reason the system is still alive and decently popular is not because it is ineffective.

Either ways my intent is not to defend Ayurveda or Western medicine but to draw a comparison with the concept of organized medical/healing systems.

12)Everybody can look up in the night but how many times you come across specific information in an ancient text regarding a supposedly geographically seperated culture and which part of the sky they were looking at and for what intentions.

13)Once again you pull out a date of 40000 B.P. for Aboriginal culture right out of nowhere.Please provide some sort of evidence for the date.And pictures painted on cave walls existed throughout the world which can be interpreted by lay modern people even today so cave paintings cannot attest to the age of an existing culture.Man has been painting on walls ever since he evolved or was created.

Even the people in India are ancient and have been in India since millenias though they have had contact with other people,but can this be used to say that the Vedic culture is 100000 years old?

14) In a different era saying a engine is running on '100 horse power' could be termed as lunacy and saying it is '50 elephant power' may be in fashion.

It is you who has shifted the debate instead of evaluating the veracity of the information i have posted and discussing it objectively you have taken the discussion to refutations of Ayurveda and imaginary population migrations.You cannot deny with valid information any of the comparison i made other then by just denying to see the connection followed by a lot of self defeating garbage that has got nothing to do with the original topic.You have linked ancient population migrations to be evidence of the age of present day cultures and demonstrated your ignorance.On the way you have tried to belittle the Vedas and are unwilling to acknowledge that the ancient indians were intellectually advance (you took this statement to be supremacist for some odd reason) and did broach upon complex concepts in antiquity.For eg-the Earth being billions of years old is something that is common knowledge to us at present and wasn't always so.

[Clobhair-cean]

1)I reassert all the comparison i have made before of modern concepts and concepts mentioned and talked about in the Vedas.There are direct comparisons with implications or concepts used in String theory,Higgs Boson,Mechanical flight etc etc with the concepts in the vedic culture.

Now you're just making you look like a buffoon. You are going around, pointing at crude drawing of stick figures in the Vedas and claiming that they are just like the Mona Lisa, because both have arms and a head.

But let's just see. Anyone who reads this tread, could you please state how convinced are you by Harsh's assertions?

2)How do you suggest different cultures evolved in areas thought to geographically isolated?For eg Mayan cultuer and Vedic culture.Please answer since you claim that a culture can develop only by cultural exchange between two different cultures.

How can you state such obvious falsehoods?

Neither of these were geographically isolated cultures. Vedic Civilisation thrived smack in the middle of Northern India, surrounded by hundreds, if not thousands of cultures and the Maya also had numerous neighbours with whom they interacted frequently. Hell, one of their principal deities, Feathered Serpent was made up by the Olmecs or even some earlier culture.

3)Your ideas of cultural preservation are childish where you leave no space for a geographically isolated people to have their own new ideas and concepts and the capability to overwite the old beliefs even over a period of 65000 years especially when they didn't have written language or an systematic oral transmission tradition.

Primitive cultures, when they have no chance to develop, are known to sustain themselves for extremely long amounts of time, look at the Aboriginal Australians. Of course they evolve their culture, but they don't throw out the old and invent a new one, that only happens through foreign exchange.

Do you have a counterexample? No? Well, thank you very much.

4)Contemprary migration theories are supported by baised Linguist and Historians and Ethanographers often having no sort of Archaelogical evidence and by misinterpreting genetic data.Gentic studies can only indicate which existing populations had sexual contact and the approximate time the contact stopped but it in no way can indicate from where the people migrated to which place.Genetic studies cannot attest to the age of a culture.There is no archeological evidence for your Negrotid migration theory and all you can state is that some of these people had sexual contact at some period of time and the migration from Africa to Australia is mere conjecture and and does not have any archeological evidence.

Yet another blanket statement that makes every Linguistic, Historic and Ethnographic researcher look like a biased liar and you the sole guardian of truth.

There's really no point in arguing with someone who rejects all evidence that doesn't support his beliefs as "biased" or "stupid". But anyway. Let's look at the Negritos, because you seem to have developed an obsession.

We know that they have traits that link them to both Aboriginal Australians and Africans, and that they are genetically distant from other Asians. We know that Aboriginal Australians arrived to their present-day lands somewhere around 450000 years ago. We know that Africans have always been in Africa, since humans evolved there (Yes, I know, humans were not evolved, because evolution is just another biased lie, but let's just roll with this now). What does this mean? That the Negritos arrived in the first migration wave that colonised Southern Asia and Australia and that they had no contact with modern Asians who came later.

And no, this doesn't mean that they just didn't have sex with Asians even though they could have. People don't work that way, and there are no historical records of any significant contact with the from before the 18th century, even though they were surrounded by people who had a habit of meticulously writing down their history and observations.

5) "even illiterate people can make fire"-----we are talking about 65000 B.P. not about modern illiterates who can use a lighter or matchstick.

Oh sweet Jesus on a pogo stick! Everyone could light a fire back then, because it was the cornerstone of their survival! It was like opening a tin can! It was probably one of the first things people learned.

Such a lack of imagination.The migratory groups could have been very small populations that could have migrated from any location to any location and could have spawned a culture,there is no way to determine who migrated from where based on present population sizes.Archeological evidence for such migrations are non-existent and this opens up a wide gap for biased linguists and historians to fill and also for stupid linguists and historian to fill (they may have made errors unknowingly).

It also leaves a wide gap for non-biased linguists, historians and ethnographers to fill, and they are doing a great job. Even though you reject their findings off-hand.

6) I never gave any statement against South indian culture since it is essentially Vedic,same mythology,same pantheon,same people and same geography and a whole lot of archeological evidence to suggest cultural continuity since millenias.It is people like you who would wan't to differentiate between North Indians and South Indians on basis of imaginary racial lines and non-existant cultural differences.Hindi is not my native language i come from a region in India which has been a port city since antiquity and harbors or harbored people from all sorts of perceived races and cultures present throughout the world called 'Gujurat'.You forget that i do not accept that the Vedic culture was brought by the so called Aryans from central Europe and i believe it to be native and belonging to North/South Indians alike.Vedas do not belong to North Indians but to all Indians and the World.

Then OK, you are just a plain-old North Indian nationalist. You are like the Turkish nationalist who claim that there are no Kurds, only Mountain Turks. And once more, i state that I won't be bogged down in any debate around this topic.

But what a nice little straw-man you have here. Aryans coming from Central Europe? You realise that contemporary Indo-Aryan migration theory states no such thing. It's all in your head. Please read about things instead of making them up.

7)"A monarchy cannot give rise to a welfare state"-----you display a most biased understanding of Monarchy or the concept of a 'King'.This statement is only true when the king is a money grubbing,greedy,supremacist pig.A righteous Hindu king had to insure equitable distribution of wealth and to provide state sponcered fundamental ammenities to all his subjects for him to be called Great.

Yes, just like pure socialism, that never existed.

If the king distributes the wealth, then it means that he possesses the wealth. In modern welfare states, the State possesses the funds (which it receives through taxation) which it then redistributes among the population. Even if he gives it all away, it still defeats the purpose of equitable distribution, because it is his money and the people are his subjects.

One question: Did the son of a peasant have the same opportunities as the son of a king? Could they both become kings in a direct competition?

8)4.7 % of the global population can read the Vedas in original Sanskrit (it is also the hindi speaking population since the scripts are essentially the same).How many European christians can read the bible in original hebrew or greek? Does not knowing the original language of a book decrease the relevance of cultural practices associated with it?.This question is a non-argument and demonstrates your ignorance of what i previously stated.

Ha, nice try! English and Croatian scripts are also basically the same, they still can't read each others newspapers. How many people in India can read the Vedas in Sanskrit? Why are you so unwilling to answer?

Probably a few thousand at best. But we are not talking about Europeans (well, you are, but most of what you say makes little sense anyway). We are comparing Aboriginal Australians to Indians.

9)The example you gave of inferring population migrations is a very good example to highlight my doubts of the same.There is no way to determine that the people migrated from Japan to America or America to Japan in the absence of 'archeological evidence' and when such imaginary migrations have supposed to have taken place 65000 years B.P. you can have absolutely no archeological evidence and stating the same is only by assuming that the present population size is retained in the original homeland which is a fallacy. For eg- if the original population size of negortids was 10000 located in Central Europe and population groups of 1000 migrated to 10 different geographical location then 8 out of the 10 could have died out and 1 of the groups that migrated to Africa might have been favoured by circumstances and multiplied and continued till the present as a major representative of their so called race.It wouldn't mean that where ever in the world you find negrotids you can assume that they came from Africa.(this is a hypothetical example).Finding one random skeleton in a random location cannot be extrapolated to represent the origins of that particular race/species under the pain of being daft.

We covered this before.

10)Regarding levels of antimatter and matter in the universe.Any definitive comments on the same can only highlight your arrogance,have you explored the whole Universe?Does it have an end?How can you state that the amount of Matter is more then Anti matter in the universe?(probably it is the case in the part of the Universe which we have observed).

Yes, of course, we're talking about he observable universe. We can state it, because we've seen in. The asymmetry of matter and antimatter is a well-known fact.

11)Again you try to dismiss ayurveda as magic when there it doesn't claim any supernatural cures,it is a well organised system based on prevention,diagnosis and cure with strict guidelines none of them based on magic.Why would so many people,not only illiterate or economically backward but even educated and from 1st world countries ascribe to Ayurveda in modern times,the reason the system is still alive and decently popular is not because it is ineffective.

Either ways my intent is not to defend Ayurveda or Western medicine but to draw a comparison with the concept of organized medical/healing systems.

It is magic, because it is based on magical concepts such as the five elements and and three energies that have no bearing tor reality, and it tries to have an effect without having an idea about the underlying cause of disease.

People also ascribe to acupuncture and homeopathy, even though they demonstrably have no medical benefits. That doesn't mean anything. Try to refrain from common logical fallacies, such as this argumentum ad populum, please.

But I'm not debating that it was a concept of medicine. Probably even Neanderthals had concepts of medicine. I'm saying that it is a historical relic that has been far surpassed by evidence-based medicine.

12)Everybody can look up in the night but how many times you come across specific information in an ancient text regarding a supposedly geographically seperated culture and which part of the sky they were looking at and for what intentions.

You gave me a funny. We are talking about Venus. The second brightest object in the night sky. Would you draw profound conclusions about the visitors of different parts of New York noting the Empire State Building?

13)Once again you pull out a date of 40000 B.P. for Aboriginal culture right out of nowhere.Please provide some sort of evidence for the date.And pictures painted on cave walls existed throughout the world which can be interpreted by lay modern people even today so cave paintings cannot attest to the age of an existing culture.Man has been painting on walls ever since he evolved or was created.

The paint has been dated to that period. End of story. Now you'll say that dating is useless, but frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.

Cave paintings that have been continuously painted in more or less the same style for tens of thousands of years, that can be interpreted by the people whose ancestors made them can attest to the age of a culture.

Even the people in India are ancient and have been in India since millenias though they have had contact with other people,but can this be used to say that the Vedic culture is 100000 years old?

No, because there is absolutely no connection between Vedic culture and the people who lived in India 100000 years ago. Nothing. Nada. The oldest traces of Vedic culture are a few thousands years old.

14) In a different era saying a engine is running on '100 horse power' could be termed as lunacy and saying it is '50 elephant power' may be in fashion.

Yes. But even if they meant "goat power" chariots, that would still have absolutely nothing to do with mechanical flight. Nothing. Show me an airplane. A diagram of an engine. Show me a description that is unambiguously an airplane and not a wooden chariot drawn by animals. You can't.

It is you who has shifted the debate instead of evaluating the veracity of the information i have posted and discussing it objectively you have taken the discussion to refutations of Ayurveda and imaginary population migrations.You cannot deny with valid information any of the comparison i made other then by just denying to see the connection followed by a lot of self defeating garbage that has got nothing to do with the original topic.You have linked ancient population migrations to be evidence of the age of present day cultures and demonstrated your ignorance.On the way you have tried to belittle the Vedas and are unwilling to acknowledge that the ancient indians were intellectually advance (you took this statement to be supremacist for some odd reason) and did broach upon complex concepts in antiquity.For eg-the Earth being billions of years old is something that is common knowledge to us at present and wasn't always so.

Lol. Just lol. You truly don't even try to understand what you are reading.

[Harte]

Now you're just making you look like a buffoon. You are going around, pointing at crude drawing of stick figures in the Vedas and claiming that they are just like the Mona Lisa, because both have arms and a head.

But let's just see. Anyone who reads this thread, could you please state how convinced are you by Harsh's assertions?

I have stopped reading it because the posts Harsh makes are inane.

And looooong.

I was lucky to see this question, to tell you the truth.

Harte

[Mr Right Wing]

Few similes i found which stood out quite prominently-

1)Concept of 'Brhman' or an underlying eternal vibration that is manifest in all things in the universe which has 10 directions/dimensions and the String theory.

2)Pantheism and the God particle being the particle that makes up all matter.

3)The 'Dasavatar of Vishnu' and the supposed evolutionary history from life i.e from water to land to human etc.

4)Yoga and Pranayam and Physiotherapy and Breathing techniques.

5)Karma and the philosophy/science of 'cause and effect'.

6)Mechanised flight in Rig Veda and modern mechanised flight.

These concepts are elaborately described in the Vedas and the Puranas and hence cannot be dismissed as attempts of comparison with 'hind sight' alone

Non-duality is the unification of being and non-being -

1. Being is the reality you experience.

2. Non-being are all the possible realities which have been excluded.

In Quantum Physics the unification of being and non-being is called a superposition (multiverse) -

1. Being is the reality you experience.

2. Non-being are all the possible realities which have been excluded.

Pantheism, Buddhism and Taoism are non-duality religions. In each the mind is at the centre of the universe and creates reality by decaying non-duality into its being and non-being parts. Each put their followers through meditative practices to reunify being and non-being back into non-duality.

Dissociation from reality to the point you have no awareness of it results in being and non-being unifying back into non-duality. The aim of meditation is to achieve this state by dissociation through trance - what I call the 'empty mind' state. To have the mental strength to do this a person needs to build up their life-force energy (brahman) -

1. Breathing techniques increase a persons feelings of mental strength.

2. Having sex without orgasm increases a persons feeling of mental strength.

3. Working oneself into a state of ecstasy also does it.

4. Some drugs do it.

[Harsh86_Patel]

There you go again on a spree of false and stupid statements like:

1.Culture can evolve only with foreign exchange.Lol lol lol.

2.If all cultures can evolve only with foreign interactions then how did the first cultures evolve inorder to interact with each other.

3.You are clearly stating that geographical isolation will cause mental stasis in the population and will take away the ability of the people to come up with a whole new culture/ideas.

4.Your frail attemp of labelling me a north indian nationalist seems even more flimsy then ever,there are quite a few hindu nationalists (not really anything derogatory about the term other then in minds of pseudoseculars and western imperialists and supremacists) and they are distributed in the North and South equally in India.

5.Let people read the thread and be convinced or unconvinced you do not need to call on them they can do that themselves.I believe there are many on UM who can look at it a open minded manner and contribute more coherently.

6.Pure socailism never existed in what time period?Can you deny that it could have existed in prehistory or say before 1 B.C as an index? Pointless falacious blanket statements.Son of a peasant could become a king by a direct challenge or ashvamedha yagna.A king collecting food etc on behalf of his people and distributing it equally is also a welfare state,the king is only incharge or administration and doesn't own everything in his kingdom.

7.Please put up your 'Archeological evidence' for negrotid migration theory,also please put forward gems of Andmananese culture and any attestation of it's date.You have been weaseling out on both requests.

8.Now you shift to "primitive culture" but i will give you that.Since you request me for an example of a "primitive culture" developing from scratch then all primitive cultures were developed from scratch and not by mutual cultural interactions,after which some culture evolved on their own as well as with subsequent cultural exchanges from foreign cultures.Suggesting that a group of isolated small population cannot come up with their own and completely new culture over a period of 65000 years is ludicrous.How do you think primitive cultures first came into existence was it because of the 'globe trotters' interacting with everyone around the world and imparting their culture and learning from others?

Also can you please state the opposite of "primitive"?will it be by any chance "advance"?

9.Your biases and lack of critical thinking is evident when you acknowledge the present Aboriginal culture to be 40000 years old by dating cave paintings but you suggest that the Vedic culture couldn't have been older then few thousand years.There are cave painting from prehistory in India as well and Indians today also can reproduce same sort of cave paintings,Genetics say that people were populating the Indian subcontinent since tens of thousands of years,so why can't you then acknowledge by your own logic that the Vedic culture is 100000 years old.Your reasoning for stating the present aboriginal culture is 40,000 years old is a joke probably their language is only 1000 years old before which they could have been making grunting sounds etc and their present culture is just 500 years old.

10.Why doesn't the UN and world governments ban alternative medicine since it is all quackery and magic according to you?

11.Five elements and 3 energies (you mean body tendencies) are not magic.

12.My astonishment was not with the fact that ancient people could see venus but it was with the fact that Vedas mention the Asuras who live on the opposite side of the world as opposed to the Devas used to follow Venus and the devas used to follow Jupiter.

13.Show me an example of even one horse in the engine of your car and i will fulfill your request.

14.Sanskrit and hindi have the same script and same pronounciation and many words are also the same i knowing Hindi can read Sanskrit and pronounce it perfectly.The question you should be asking is how many people can understand Sanskrit.You answer my question regarding how many Christians can read the Bible in original Hebrew or Greek and does it have any bearing on relevancy of present Christian culture?.There are "millions" of people in India that can read Vedas in Sanskrit and still do especially the priestly Brhamin class,all forms of traditional rituals and there are a hell of lot of traditional rituals in India are still performed in Sanskrit along with Yajna's and Poojas which are done on every auspicious occasions.Hindi is a direct deravative of Sanskrit.Below is a good excerpt from wiki though i am not in complete agreement with the dates provided.

Modern-day India

Influence on vernaculars

Sanskrit's greatest influence, presumably, is that which it exerted on languages of India that grew from its vocabulary and grammatical base; for instance, Hindi is a "Sanskritized register" of the Khariboli dialect. However, all modern Indo-Aryan languages, as well as Munda and Dravidian languages, have borrowed many words either directly from Sanskrit (tatsama words), or indirectly via middle Indo-Aryan languages (tadbhava words).^[5] Words originating in Sanskrit are estimated to constitute roughly fifty percent of the vocabulary of modern Indo-Aryan languages,^[40] and the literary forms of (Dravidian) Malayalam andKannada.^[5] Literary texts in Telugu are lexically Sanskrit or Sanskritized to an enormous extent, perhaps seventy percent or more.^[41]

Sanskrit is prized as a storehouse of scripture and as the language of prayers in Hinduism. Like Latin's influence on European languages and Classical Chinese's influence on East Asian languages, Sanskrit has influenced most Indian languages. While vernacular prayer is common, Sanskrit mantras are recited by millions of Hindus, and most temple functions are conducted entirely in Sanskrit, often Vedic in form. Of modern day Indian languages, Nepali, Bengali, Assamese, Konkani and Marathi still retain a largely Sanskrit and Prakrit vocabulary base, while Hindi and Urdu tend to be more heavily weighted with Arabicand Persian influence. The Indian national anthem, Jana Gana Mana, is written in a literary form of Bengali (known as sadhu bhasha); it is Sanskritized to be recognizable but is still archaic to the modern ear. The national song of India, Vande Mataram, which was originally a poem composed by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay and taken from his book called 'Anandamath', is in a similarly highly Sanskritized Bengali.Malayalam, Telugu and Kannada also combine a great deal of Sanskrit vocabulary. Sanskrit also has influence on Chinese through Buddhist Sutras. Chinese words like 剎那 chànà (Devanāgarī: क्षण kṣaṇa'instantaneous period of time') were borrowed from Sanskrit.

Revival attempts

Main article: Sanskrit revival

The 1991 and 2001, census of India recorded 49,736 and 14,135 persons, respectively, with Sanskrit as their native language.^[1] Since the 1990s, efforts to revive spoken Sanskrit have been increasing. Many organizations like the Samskrta Bharati are conducting Speak Sanskrit workshops to popularize the language. The state of Uttarakhand in India has ruled Sanskrit as its second official language. The CBSE(Central Board of Secondary Education) of India has made Sanskrit a third language (though it is an option for the school to adopt it or not, the other choice being the state's own official language) in the schools it governs. In such schools, learning Sanskrit is an option for grades 5 to 8 (Classes V to VIII). This is true of most schools affiliated to the ICSE board too, especially in those states where the official language isHindi. Sudharma, the only daily newspaper in Sanskrit has been published out of Mysore in India since the year 1970. Since 1974, there has been a short daily news broadcast on state-run All India Radio.

Indian newspapers have published reports about several isolated villages, where, as a result of recent revival attempts, large parts of the population, including children, are learning Sanskrit and are even using it to some extent in everyday communication:

• Mattur in Karnataka^[42]
  
• Mohad, District: Narasinhpur, Madhya Pradesh
  
• Jhiri, District: Rajgadh, Madhya Pradesh^[43]
  
• Kaperan, District: Bundi, Rajasthan
  
• Khada, District: Banswada, Rajasthan
  
• Ganoda, District: Banswada, Rajasthan^[44]
  
• Bawali, District: Bagapat, Uttar Pradesh
  
• Shyamsundarpur, District: Kendujhar, Orissa^[45]
  

Symbolic usage

In the Republic of India, in Nepal and Indonesia, Sanskrit phrases are widely used as mottoes for various educational and social organizations (much as Latin is used by some institutions in the West). Themotto of the Republic is also in Sanskrit.

India

Republic of India 'सत्यमेव जयते' Satyameva Jayate "Truth alone triumphs" Supreme Court of India 'यतो धर्मस्ततो जयः' Yato Dharmastato Jayaha "Whence dharma, thence victory" Goa 'सर्वे भद्राणि पश्यन्तु मा कश्चिद्दुःखभाग्‌भवेत्' Sarve Bhadrāni Paśyantu Mā Kaścid Duhkhabhāg bhavet "May all perceive good, may not anyone attain unhappiness"^[46] Life Insurance Corporation of India 'योगक्षेमं वहाम्यहम्', Yogakshemam Vahāmyaham "I shall take care of welfare" (taken from the Bhagavad Gita)^[47] Indian Navy 'शं नो वरुणः' Shanno Varuna "May Varuna be peaceful to us" Indian Air Force 'नभःस्पृशं दीप्तम्' Nabhaḥ-Spṛśaṃ Dīptam "Touching the Sky with Glory" (from Bhagavad Gita: XI, Verse 24)^[48] Mumbai Police 'सद्रक्षणाय खलनिग्रहणाय' Sadrakshanaaya Khalanigrahanaaya "For protection of the good and control of the wicked" Indian Coast Guard 'वयं रक्षामः' Vayam Rakshāmaha "We protect"^[49] All India Radio 'बहुजनहिताय बहुजन‍सुखाय‌' Bahujana-hitāya bahujana-sukhāya "For the benefit of all, for the comfort of all" Rajputana Rifles 'वीरभोग्या वसुन्धरा' Veerabhogya Vasundhara "The earth is fit to be ruled by the brave"

Other countries

Nepal 'जननी जन्मभूमिश्च स्वर्गादपि गरीयसी' Janani Janmabhūmisca Svargādapi garīyasi "Mother and motherland are greater than heaven" Indonesian Navy 'जलेष्वेव जयामहे' Jalesveva Jayamahe "On the sea we are victorious" Aceh Province 'पञ्चचित' Pancacita "Five Goals"

Many of the post–Independence educational institutions of national importance in India and Sri Lanka have Sanskrit mottoes. For a fuller list of such educational institutions, see List of educational institutions which have Sanskrit phrases as their mottoes.

Interaction with other languages

Further information: Silk Road transmission of Buddhism, Hinduism in Southeast Asia, Indianized kingdom, and Sanskritisation

Sanskrit and related languages have also influenced their Sino-Tibetan-speaking neighbors to the north through the spread of Buddhist texts in translation.^[50] Buddhism was spread to China by Mahayanistmissionaries sent by Emperor Ashoka mostly through translations of Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit texts, and many terms were transliterated directly and added to the Chinese vocabulary. (Although Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit is not Sanskrit, properly speaking, its grammar and vocabulary are substantially the same, both because of genetic relationship, and because of conscious implementation of Pāṇinian standardizations on the part of composers. Buddhist texts composed in Sanskrit proper were primarily found in philosophical schools like the Madhyamaka.) The situation in Tibet is similar; many Sanskrit texts survive only in Tibetan translation (in the Tanjur).

In Southeast Asia, languages such as Thai and Lao contain many loan words from Sanskrit, as do Khmer, Vietnamese to a lesser extent, through Sinified hybrid Sanskrit. For example, in Thai, the Rāvana—the emperor of Sri Lanka is called 'Thosakanth' which is a derivation of his Sanskrit name 'Dashakanth' ("of ten necks").

Many Sanskrit loanwords are also found in Austronesian languages, such as Javanese particularly the old form from which nearly half the vocabulary is derived from the language.^[51][52] Other Austronesian languages, such as traditional Malay, modern Indonesian, also derive much of their vocabulary from Sanskrit, albeit to a lesser extent, with a large proportion of words being derived from Arabic. Similarly,Philippine languages such as Tagalog have many Sanskrit loanwords, although more are derived from Spanish.

A Sanskrit loanword encountered in many Southeast Asian languages is the word bhāṣā, or spoken language, which is used to mean language in general, for example bahasa in Malay, Indonesian and Tausug,basa in Javanese, Sundanese, and Balinese, phasa in Thai and Lao, bhasa in Burmese, and 'phiesa in Khmer.

Usage in modern times

See also: Sanskrit in the West

Many of India's and Nepal's scientific and administrative terms are named in Sanskrit, as a counterpart of the western practice of naming scientific developments in Latin or Greek.^{[citation needed]} The Indian guided missile program that was commenced in 1983 by DRDO has named the five missiles (ballistic and others) that it has developed as Prithvi, Agni, Akash, Nag and Trishul. India's first modern fighter aircraftis named HAL Tejas.

Recital of Sanskrit shlokas as background chorus in films, television advertisements and as slogans for corporate organizations has become a trend. The opera Satyagraha by Philip Glass uses texts from theBhagavad Gita, sung in the original Sanskrit.

Recently, Sanskrit also made an appearance in Western pop music in two recordings by Madonna. One, "Shanti/Ashtangi", from the 1998 album Ray of Light, is the traditional Ashtanga Vinyasa Yoga chant referenced above set to music. The second, "Cyber-raga", released in 2000 as a B-side to Madonna's album Music, is a Sanskrit-language ode of devotion to a higher power and a wish for peace on earth. The climactic battle theme of The Matrix Revolutions features a choir singing a Sanskrit prayer from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad in the closing titles of the movie. Composer John Williams featured choirs singing in Sanskrit for Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom^[53] and in Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace.^{[citation needed]}

The Sky1 version of the title sequence in season one of Battlestar Galactica 2004 features the Gayatri Mantra, taken from the Rig Veda (3.62.10). The composition was written by miniseries composer Richard Gibbs.

Sanskrit has also seen a significant revival in China. Musicians such as Sa Dingding have written pop songs in Sanskrit.^[54]

Computational linguistics

There have been suggestions to use Sanskrit as a metalanguage for knowledge representation in e.g. machine translation, and other areas of natural language processing because of its relatively high regular structure.^[55] This is due to Classical Sanskrit being a regularized, prescriptivist form abstracted from the much more complex and richer Vedic Sanskrit. This leveling of the grammar of Classical Sanskrit began during the Brahmana phase, and had not yet completed by the time of Pāṇini, when the language had fallen out of popular use.^{[citation needed].}

I hope i have addressed your issue of people who can read Vedas in Sanskrit now even if you don't know Sanskrit you can still read the Vedas in a variety of different languages

And translations made by traditional Indians are more accurate then Translations made by Foreigners.Now can we focus on the content.

[Harsh86_Patel]

Non-duality is the unification of being and non-being -

1. Being is the reality you experience.

2. Non-being are all the possible realities which have been excluded.

In Quantum Physics the unification of being and non-being is called a superposition (multiverse) -

1. Being is the reality you experience.

2. Non-being are all the possible realities which have been excluded.

Pantheism, Buddhism and Taoism are non-duality religions. In each the mind is at the centre of the universe and creates reality by decaying non-duality into its being and non-being parts. Each put their followers through meditative practices to reunify being and non-being back into non-duality.

Dissociation from reality to the point you have no awareness of it results in being and non-being unifying back into non-duality. The aim of meditation is to achieve this state by dissociation through trance - what I call the 'empty mind' state. To have the mental strength to do this a person needs to build up their life-force energy (brahman) -

1. Breathing techniques increase a persons feelings of mental strength.

2. Having sex without orgasm increases a persons feeling of mental strength.

3. Working oneself into a state of ecstasy also does it.

4. Some drugs do it.

To have mental strength get inspiration and inner peace a person needs to experince his oneness with Brhman. Life force is often linked to Chi or Kundalini.

Buddhism is a form of hinduism which is inspired from the concept of 'Nirguna Brhmana' i.e worshipping through meditation and/or persuit of knowledge to reach a state of enlightenment and acheive Mukti (ultimate liberation).Nirguna brhman does not require the follower to worship Idols or do yajnas and poojas and was a way of worship meant for the intellectual since it does not give any physical qualitites to God or asks any rituals to be performed or followed.

[Harsh86_Patel]

I have stopped reading it because the posts Harsh makes are inane.

And looooong.

I was lucky to see this question, to tell you the truth.

Harte

You were lucky to spot the sentence you highlighted in the short posts made by my friend here.Though nothing much in these long posts regarding the topic so you didn't miss anything special.

[Mr Right Wing]

To have mental strength get inspiration and inner peace a person needs to experince his oneness with Brhman. Life force is often linked to Chi or Kundalini.

Buddhism is a form of hinduism which is inspired from the concept of 'Nirguna Brhmana' i.e worshipping through meditation and/or persuit of knowledge to reach a state of enlightenment and acheive Mukti (ultimate liberation).Nirguna brhman does not require the follower to worship Idols or do yajnas and poojas and was a way of worship meant for the intellectual since it does not give any physical qualitites to God or asks any rituals to be performed or followed.

My understanding is that non-duality is all there is. In such a state where everything possible has unified into oneness there is no room for a seperate 'God being' to exist or even a seperate self. Such concepts are illusions based on a belief that only the being part of non-duality is real.

We dont have Chi or Kundalini in the West we have a concept we call life-force energy. Our medieval alchemy was about increasing a persons life-force energy and it involved some strange practices based on non-duality -

1. Breathing exercises increase it.

2. Urination, menstration, excrement and bleeding reduce it.

3. Drinking your morning golden coloured urine prevents this loss (this was the foundation of the Golden Dawn movement).

4. Our legends of vamparism come from blood drinking to increase ones life-force energy.

5. Other bizarre rituals revolving around menstration and excrement.

[Clobhair-cean]

There you go again on a spree of false and stupid statements like:

1.Culture can evolve only with foreign exchange.Lol lol lol.

Prove me wrong.

2.If all cultures can evolve only with foreign interactions then how did the first cultures evolve inorder to interact with each other.

The first tribal systems grew and evolved through constant interactions with other tribes.

3.You are clearly stating that geographical isolation will cause mental stasis in the population and will take away the ability of the people to come up with a whole new culture/ideas.

Geographic, linguistic and cultural isolation and the lack of ability to develop (no plants, animals, lands for agriculture) is the best way to conserve culture. It's not a mental stasis.

4.Your frail attemp of labelling me a north indian nationalist seems even more flimsy then ever,there are quite a few hindu nationalists (not really anything derogatory about the term other then in minds of pseudoseculars and western imperialists and supremacists) and they are distributed in the North and South equally in India.

There is no such thing as a Hindu Nationalist, as Hindu is not a nation but a religion. And I never said anything about Hindus, no idea why you keep bringing it up.

6.Pure socailism never existed in what time period?Can you deny that it could have existed in prehistory or say before 1 B.C as an index? Pointless falacious blanket statements.Son of a peasant could become a king by a direct challenge or ashvamedha yagna.A king collecting food etc on behalf of his people and distributing it equally is also a welfare state,the king is only incharge or administration and doesn't own everything in his kingdom.

In any time period. Socialism is a 19th century concept and it can not be applied to previous economic and social establishments.

Asmvamedha yagna is not a challenge, but a ritual sacrifice of a horse conducted by the king. Try again.

7.Please put up your 'Archeological evidence' for negrotid migration theory,also please put forward gems of Andmananese culture and any attestation of it's date.You have been weaseling out on both requests.

I have no archaeological evidence. But I have presented ample genetic and linguistic data, which is fine for contemporary scientist, but not you. Tough luck.

8.Now you shift to "primitive culture" but i will give you that.Since you request me for an example of a "primitive culture" developing from scratch then all primitive cultures were developed from scratch and not by mutual cultural interactions,after which some culture evolved on their own as well as with subsequent cultural exchanges from foreign cultures.Suggesting that a group of isolated small population cannot come up with their own and completely new culture over a period of 65000 years is ludicrous.How do you think primitive cultures first came into existence was it because of the 'globe trotters' interacting with everyone around the world and imparting their culture and learning from others?

Yes, cultures evolved through constant interactions with their neighbours.

Also can you please state the opposite of "primitive"?will it be by any chance "advance"?

I see where you are going, but twisting language is the lowest form of rhetoric.

9.Your biases and lack of critical thinking is evident when you acknowledge the present Aboriginal culture to be 40000 years old by dating cave paintings but you suggest that the Vedic culture couldn't have been older then few thousand years.There are cave painting from prehistory in India as well and Indians today also can reproduce same sort of cave paintings,Genetics say that people were populating the Indian subcontinent since tens of thousands of years,so why can't you then acknowledge by your own logic that the Vedic culture is 100000 years old.Your reasoning for stating the present aboriginal culture is 40,000 years old is a joke probably their language is only 1000 years old before which they could have been making grunting sounds etc and their present culture is just 500 years old.

Is there a demonstrable connection between Vedic culture and the cave paintings? No. Is there a demonstrable connection between the cave paintings and contemporary Australian Aboriginal culture? Yes. Case closed.

I can't acknowledge it, because there is no reason to believe that Vedic culture is older than a few thousand years. There is no evidence to back up this statement.

10.Why doesn't the UN and world governments ban alternative medicine since it is all quackery and magic according to you?

Why the hell would they? They don't even have the authority to do that, let alone the motive.

11.Five elements and 3 energies (you mean body tendencies) are not magic.

Well, it sure isn't reality.

12.My astonishment was not with the fact that ancient people could see venus but it was with the fact that Vedas mention the Asuras who live on the opposite side of the world as opposed to the Devas used to follow Venus and the devas used to follow Jupiter.

No they don't. The Asuras are also in constant warfare with the Devas, their brothers. Are you suggesting that the Vedic people were in constant warfare with the Maya? You are a funny guy.

13.Show me an example of even one horse in the engine of your car and i will fulfill your request.

I have no car and this request is stupid.

14.Sanskrit and hindi have the same script and same pronounciation and many words are also the same i knowing Hindi can read Sanskrit and pronounce it perfectly.The question you should be asking is how many people can understand Sanskrit.You answer my question regarding how many Christians can read the Bible in original Hebrew or Greek and does it have any bearing on relevancy of present Christian culture?.There are "millions" of people in India that can read Vedas in Sanskrit and still do especially the priestly Brhamin class,all forms of traditional rituals and there are a hell of lot of traditional rituals in India are still performed in Sanskrit along with Yajna's and Poojas which are done on every auspicious occasions.Hindi is a direct deravative of Sanskrit.Below is a good excerpt from wiki though i am not in complete agreement with the dates provided.

Heh, none of this wall of text features the number I asked for: how many people can read the Vedas in Sanskrit. It is highly entertaining to watch you fail.

English is the descendant of Old English, just like Hindi comes from Sanskrit.

You speak English, can you, without google or a dictionary, tell me what this means:

"Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum,

þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,

hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon."

[Harsh86_Patel]

My understanding is that non-duality is all there is. In such a state where everything possible has unified into oneness there is no room for a seperate 'God being' to exist or even a seperate self. Such concepts are illusions based on a belief that only the being part of non-duality is real.

We dont have Chi or Kundalini in the West we have a concept we call life-force energy. Our medieval alchemy was about increasing a persons life-force energy and it involved some strange practices based on non-duality -

1. Breathing exercises increase it.

2. Urination, menstration, excrement and bleeding reduce it.

3. Drinking your morning golden coloured urine prevents this loss (this was the foundation of the Golden Dawn movement).

4. Our legends of vamparism come from blood drinking to increase ones life-force energy.

5. Other bizarre rituals revolving around menstration and excrement.

i agree with your ideas on non-duality with a few modifiers.Here is a good conversation that happened between Einstein and Rabindranth Tagore.Tagore highlights the essential hindu concept of God (which is not necessarily a seperate being).

http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2012/04/27/when-einstein-met-tagore/

[Mr Right Wing]

i agree with your ideas on non-duality with a few modifiers.Here is a good conversation that happened between Einstein and Rabindranth Tagore.Tagore highlights the essential hindu concept of God (which is not necessarily a seperate being).

http://www.brainpick...ein-met-tagore/

Thanks heres one you might like -

[media=]

[/media]

Acquiring information creates reality. You need a mind to acquire information. Hence there is no objective material reality only a mind gaining information.

The process of gaining information results in the illusions of being instead of the truth of non-duality (superposition).

Edited October 10, 2012 by Mr Right Wing

[Harsh86_Patel]

Prove me wrong.

The first tribal systems grew and evolved through constant interactions with other tribes.

Geographic, linguistic and cultural isolation and the lack of ability to develop (no plants, animals, lands for agriculture) is the best way to conserve culture. It's not a mental stasis.

There is no such thing as a Hindu Nationalist, as Hindu is not a nation but a religion. And I never said anything about Hindus, no idea why you keep bringing it up.

In any time period. Socialism is a 19th century concept and it can not be applied to previous economic and social establishments.

Asmvamedha yagna is not a challenge, but a ritual sacrifice of a horse conducted by the king. Try again.

I have no archaeological evidence. But I have presented ample genetic and linguistic data, which is fine for contemporary scientist, but not you. Tough luck.

Yes, cultures evolved through constant interactions with their neighbours.

I see where you are going, but twisting language is the lowest form of rhetoric.

Is there a demonstrable connection between Vedic culture and the cave paintings? No. Is there a demonstrable connection between the cave paintings and contemporary Australian Aboriginal culture? Yes. Case closed.

I can't acknowledge it, because there is no reason to believe that Vedic culture is older than a few thousand years. There is no evidence to back up this statement.

Why the hell would they? They don't even have the authority to do that, let alone the motive.

Well, it sure isn't reality.

No they don't. The Asuras are also in constant warfare with the Devas, their brothers. Are you suggesting that the Vedic people were in constant warfare with the Maya? You are a funny guy.

I have no car and this request is stupid.

Heh, none of this wall of text features the number I asked for: how many people can read the Vedas in Sanskrit. It is highly entertaining to watch you fail.

English is the descendant of Old English, just like Hindi comes from Sanskrit.

You speak English, can you, without google or a dictionary, tell me what this means:

"Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum,

þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,

hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon."

1."First tribal system grew with interactions with other tribes". Clearly first doesn't have any meaning to you.Was talking of the first culture not interacting groups of tribals which would still be limited to a geographical extent.I never suggested that an entire culture is created by one person,obviously it is based on interactions between a group of people.You are already wrong in what you assert that a culture cannot evolve by itself in a group of of people.

2. I thought culture was based on the thought process and not on lack of ability to develop materially.Lack of ability to develop(plants,animals,agriculture etc) leads to degeneration of intellectual processes and hence lack of culture not to preservation of culture.

3.Socialism is a 19th century concept lol XD.Probaly the word "Socialism" was coined in 19th century.You brought up socialism i was talking about welfare state.In the ashwamedha yagna if any individual blocks the path of the horse then it is a challenge to the rule of the king and the king has to fight the challenger.The yagna was done to establish the authority of the King's positon and to give a chance to the naysayers to challenge the kings rule from any part of his kingdom.

4.You acknowledge the lack of archeological evidence for your migration theory is a good step in the direction of being intellectually honest,All that remains in the absence of archeological evidence is that we can conclusively say that these two population were interacting sexually till a certain period of time and there is no real way of determining which people migrated from where.The linguist and historians can coloberate with each other and decide their truths in the absence of any real evidence (they can blow each other till the end of eternity).

will continue tommorow

[Clobhair-cean]

Nah, don't bother, based on this last piece of nonsense, I think this discussion has hit diminishing returns when it comes to funniness. I got bored.

If anyone wants to take up my mantle, go ahead, I'm sure you can coax a lot of new and entertaining nonsense out of Harsh.

Edited October 10, 2012 by Clobhair-cean

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Nah, don't bother, based on this last piece of nonsense, I think this discussion has hit diminishing returns when it comes to funniness. I got bored.

If anyone wants to take up my mantle, go ahead, I'm sure you can coax a lot of new and entertaining nonsense out of Harsh.

And the translation of this before you go, and we all go mad not being able translate

"Hwæt. We Gardena in geardagum,

þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,

hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon."

[Clobhair-cean]

The literal translation is

"What. We Spear-danes in days of yore,

tribe-kings, glory heard

how those nobles did great deeds"

Seamus Heaney, whose version is I think the best, transliterated it like this:

"So. The Spear-danes in days gone by

and the kings who ruled them had courage and greatness.

We have heard of those princes' heroic campaigns."

These are the first three lines of the epic Beowulf, the most complete poetic work known in Old English.

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

The literal translation is

"What. We Spear-danes in days of yore,

tribe-kings, glory heard

how those nobles did great deeds"

Seamus Heaney, whose version is I think the best, transliterated it like this:

"So. The Spear-danes in days gone by

and the kings who ruled them had courage and greatness.

We have heard of those princes' heroic campaigns."

These are the first three lines of the epic Beowulf, the most complete poetic work known in Old English.

Thanks. That's a very dramatic change in, what, 1000 years, with only "we" the same.

[Grandpa Greenman]

I never mix religion and science. Religion doesn't use scientific method and science doesn't use faith.

[Harsh86_Patel]

My understanding is that non-duality is all there is. In such a state where everything possible has unified into oneness there is no room for a seperate 'God being' to exist or even a seperate self. Such concepts are illusions based on a belief that only the being part of non-duality is real.

We dont have Chi or Kundalini in the West we have a concept we call life-force energy. Our medieval alchemy was about increasing a persons life-force energy and it involved some strange practices based on non-duality -

1. Breathing exercises increase it.

2. Urination, menstration, excrement and bleeding reduce it.

3. Drinking your morning golden coloured urine prevents this loss (this was the foundation of the Golden Dawn movement).

4. Our legends of vamparism come from blood drinking to increase ones life-force energy.

5. Other bizarre rituals revolving around menstration and excrement.

Drinking one's own Urine is still practiced by a few Hindus along with drinking cow urine,ofcourse in small quantities.And there are a lot of direct correlation between various pre christian cultures in Europe and Hinduism including the Celts and Druids.

[Harsh86_Patel]

Thanks heres one you might like -

[media=]

[/media]

Acquiring information creates reality. You need a mind to acquire information. Hence there is no objective material reality only a mind gaining information.

The process of gaining information results in the illusions of being instead of the truth of non-duality (superposition).

That is what the concept of 'Maya' says in hinduism,it is an illusory material world which is not real but just a construct of our senses and clouded consciousness.The aim of the Hindu yogi is to see beyond this artificial material construct and be one with the superlative consciousness.

The modern cults based on collective consciousness and mind controlling snake cults etc all ride on this ancient Hindu concept by twisting it to confer with their paranoid theories.

[Harsh86_Patel]

I never mix religion and science. Religion doesn't use scientific method and science doesn't use faith.

Religion? I made sure not to bring issues of religious indoctrination,this was a comment on ancient Vedic concepts and not religion of any sort.I am a non-believer of any sort of religious indoctrination or intellectual obstructionism but luckily the religion i was born into i.e Hinduism doesn't have any strict indoctrinations,it doesn't ask me to believe anything as a attestation to my faith,i can pretty much reject all forms of religious practices or presupposition,persue and believe empirical science and continue to be a Hindu without there being any contradictions in my faith.Hinduism cannot be understood as a by the book religion,it is rather a set of values and philosophies.Any which ways this thread was about Vedic culture and subsets of the various cultural practices/concepts collaberating with modern scientific concepts and not any religion.