Internet existed during Mahabharata period: Tripura CM

[Muloghonto]

The one thing that surprises me, is that whenever it comes to Ramayana, Mahabharata, Illiad, Oddessey or any such old epic, people mostly fall in two camps : either the 'lost technology and advanced civilization of the past' camp or 'hocus pocus nonsense drivel' camp.

The former gets upset at the latter, when they see tech similarities and go ' see, see, they must've had it'. The latter goes towards 'even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes, so pure coincidence'.

 

Yet, there is a third option, right under own nose, that almost EVERYONE ignores : science fiction.

 

We can show, that while science fiction as its own genre is relatively new (last 200 years ?), yet sci-fi can be very realistic and often predictive of something similar in the past.

Anyone who read 20,000 leagues under the sea knows what i am talking about : Jules Verne wrote it 50 years before any actual submarine existed and 100 years prior to a deep sea submarine. Yet, the concept is more or less very similar - a giant, pressurized vessel with power, turning a propeller to go from point A to B underwater. 

The same concept applies to Mahabharata/Ramayana : the flying chariots and missiles and stuff like that, are psuedo-sci-fi. People back then, could imagine what 'future tech' could look like and its not a huge leap of imagination, to go from 'hmm, today we have a mechanical device, powered by wind (boat) to go from point A to B on the waters, maybe tomorrow we will have a mechanical device that will fly from point A to B'. 

 

 

[Stradlater]

5 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Susruta Samahita does have plastic surgery in it. It specifically talks about how you can cut skin from the forehead, up to a certain depth, but keep it attached to the bridge of the nose, then flip it backwards to where the nose goes and suture it, to replace a torn/ripped off/cut off nose. That, is plastic surgery- a surgical procedure, specifically designed to alter the apperance of a person, serving no other physiological need.

 

Thanks. Didn't know it. Seems like afterall there was some grain of Truth in what Modiji said.

 

[MechEng]

2 hours ago, Singh bling said:

And the same Kashmiri priests can't save themselves from Muslim invaders .They are now converted or living as refugees in India kicked from their homeland.Where were/are their spells??

Paaji you're asking me as if I'm the leader of the pandits 

 

The detailed description is given in the book the travels of marco polo, some name like that.

[beetle]

If he says so...it must be true.

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, Garuda said:

Marco Polo felt his religion better because he had sex with little boys. Foolish Indians who had sex with their wives. I don't know how some foreigner's account is somehow better than our own. Can't you see 15th century foreign accounts of India were to disparage India and for invasion to save India from heathenness to convert to Abrahamic faiths. I find better accounts from Chinese historians who had no stake in ruling India.

We have 'records of our own' from that era ?! really ? name the desi chronicler/historian/traveller who left behind said accounts. 
Indian history is seen as inherently unreliable, because when it comes to history, we don't have a SINGLE historian by name, until Kalhana- who makes several errors in his own writing. 
Its like any nameless, random research paper vs a research paper with the researcher's name attached - inherenty the latter is more credible. 

[Muloghonto]

Just now, Garuda said:

Maybe to you. We didnt have enough historians in that era because we were controlled by outsiders for a millenium and history is recorded by victors not by subjects of the victor.

Maybe to me ?

To all people buddy, a paper with an author's name is more credible than a random paper with no author's name. 

Responsibility IS credibility. 

And being controlled by outsiders = no record of our own means we have no records of our own. So your premise of 'why trust foreigners over our own' falls flat on its face- because we don't have any of our own in the first place. 

Also, your motives for Marco Polo is incorrect. When Hulegu Khan utterly annihilated Baghdad and destroyed the Khilafat, the Vatican is on record to calling him an enlightened heathen, favored by God, for smiting the evil Saracens. Marco polo is still within the same Mongol framework of time (only 20-30 years after Hulegu IIRC). So why would he look upon Hindus, who are also enemies of the evil, hated muslims, with ill-conceptions, especially when christian missionary activity was at 0 in India at that time ?

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, Garuda said:

Vatican said that because hulegu khan would have been an ally opposed to the Khilafat and Saracens whom the vatican feared. Even the title is "enlightened heathen" which means as much as he is enlightened he is still a heathen. He doesnt get full marks from his masters. Think about the relationship between US and Saddam. in the 80s he was a good ally. in 90s and further he was an enemy.

Also please tell me where you are from bro.

Ofcourse not- nobody gets full marks from clergy unless they are of the same religion. Hindus too had the concept of mlechcha. 

I am a desi who's settled in US-Canada for decades. 

Either way, your premise of Marco Polo being off-base, because he is  X-tian who hates Hindus is way off target, as we have demonstrable evidence of Christians of 13th century treating ANY non-christian who hates muslims with 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' dictum. 

I'd rather trust Marco Polo, than hinduvtas 700 years later making up crap about times they have no written records of...

Edited April 19, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, Garuda said:

enemy of my enemy is my friend is not always true. nations and religions have freinds but they dont last long.

We are talking within 20-30 years of Pope being nice to a heathen when Marco Polo wrote about heathens (us & Chinese).

So you have failed to demonstrate, why/how it is not true in THIS case, when we have evidence of it being true for the same period. 

 

1 minute ago, Garuda said:

Id urge you trust neither historians marco polo or hindutva. hindutva is basically a copy of the former colonizers mentality.

LOL. I don't trust historians. I trust sources, depending on their credibility by actually reading them. 

 

1 minute ago, Garuda said:

US is far away from India why does it bother you that some idiot here talks about mahabaratha. We have made fun of this guy and I expect meme creators to rip him a new one. There is enough awareness among the public.

Why are you so concerned to hide your shame ?
It bothers me, for the same reason it bothers people of desi origin to see india going to hell in a handbasket. 

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

 

strawman.

 

Marco polo had made plenty of false claims

 

 

 

 

yep he has. However, my original point still stands - Indian history is seen as less credible than western/chinese history by ALL scholars - Indians, westerners, Arabs, Chinese, Japanese, etc. 

Simply because what passes for Indian history, is a bunch of authorless stories from the Purans, while in those cultures for eg (Greek, Roman, Chinese), people left their name, when they wrote it, who ruled when they wrote it , which year they did what, etc etc. 
Ie, far more credible scholarship than an authorless, dateless book that can be modified willy-nilly.

Indians simply need to accept the fact that while their math works were superior to that of said westerners/Chinese and their medicinal studies were atleast on par, if not better, Indians were poorer at recording history and therefore, Indian history is less reliable/credible than western/Chinese histories.

 

Edited April 19, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, MultiB48 said:

Even Marco Polo's existence is doubted as are his travels .Lets not judge those ancient chronicles by modern standards. ,even modern day authority struggle to live up to reality eg us invasion of iraq

Marco polo's existence is not doubted lol. Some sections of his travels are doubted, but most of it, is not. 

I am judging ancient chronicles, by ancient Chronicles standards. Anyone who's read Arrian, Livy, Diodotus, Faxian, Sima Qian can easily see, they are orders of magnitude greater scholarly work than the Purans. They sate their sources, they even go as far as to state how reliable they consider their sources. Shiji ( written by Sima Qian) for eg, draws a CLEAR line between the Xia dynasty, which is their 'mythical' dynasties and the Zhou, where actual history of China begins. Purans ? they draw no such line between the legends of Mahabharata, Ramayana or such, all the way to the rulers of their times of writing.

As i said, actually READ the sources. It becomes crystal clear, that Indians were weaker than the Chinese, Romans and Greeks in keeping record of their history. So it is seen as less reliable. 

[sergio04]

Tripura CM was questioning that how Sanjay was able to see the Mahabharat from a long distance, was there anything like Internet involved or what?That was his POV but unfortunately media is highlighting a certain portion that is making him a laughing stock.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

[zen]

21 minutes ago, sergio04 said:

Tripura CM was questioning that how Sanjay was able to see the Mahabharat from a long distance, was there anything like Internet involved or what?That was his POV but unfortunately media is highlighting a certain portion that is making him a laughing stock.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk
 

So an inquiry is turned in to a joke, most likely, by the libtards  

 

PS Divya Dristi  

 

Edited April 19, 2018 by zen

[coffee_rules]

Ancient Dharmic texts like Vedas, Upanishads, Mahabharata have information about the scientic advances that the Vedic civilization was aware of, far more earlier than when Western scientists discovered them. Astronimical data, star positions  are used to prove the age of Mahabharata text being written in 5000 bce or so. But these star positions are cyclical happens every few thousands of earth years, so who knows exactly when those events happened. 

 

We should be proud of things like cosmological calculations, rhinoplasty, advanced trigonometry etc and not superficial jingoistic information like Internet, nuclear missiles, aeroplanes, plastic surgery on Shri Ganesh etc.

 

This requires real reading and proper scientic reasearch as is done by Indoligists. There is already so much better to be 'proud' of Mahabharata.

 

Unfortunately, all this gets sidelined when libturds mock people like this CM and highlight only these RW gawars. The other real  efforts of Indologists is lost in this mockery.

Edited April 19, 2018 by coffee_rules

[Muloghonto]

5 hours ago, Garuda said:

My shame. Why I should be ashamed of myself. You said you were a desi - doesnt mention nationality. Are you an Indian or a Pakistani? And do tell why I should be ashamed of myself?

Indian. 

Didn't know Pakistanis even used that term. 

If its not your shame, then stop whining about justified focus on heinous crimes from India.

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Ancient Hindu texts like Vedas, Upanishads, Mehabharata have information about the scientic advances that the Vedic civilization was aware of, far more earlier than Western scientists discovered them. Astronimical data, star positions  are used to prove the age of Mahabharata text being written in 5000 bce or so. But these positions are cyclical, so who knows exactly when those events happened. 

 

We should be proud of things like cosmological calculations, rhinoplasty, advanced trigonometry etc and not superficial jingoistic information like Internet, nuclear missiles, aeroplanes, plastic surgery on Shri Ganesh etc.

 

This requires real reading and proper scientic reasearch as is done by Indoligists. There is already so much better to be 'proud' of Mahabharata.

 

Unfortunately, all this gets sidelined when libturds mock people like this CM and highlight only these RW gawars. The other real  efforts of Indologists is lost in this mockery.

So if i write a text today and cut-paste a star position from the Mahabharata, my text is then 5000 years old, right ?

The writing style of the Mahabharata, the peoples mentioned, geographies described, etc. makes it a story from 2000-1600 years ago, in its current form. 

[Muloghonto]

6 hours ago, MultiB48 said:

Thats interesting ,i haven't read up on it ,could you post something more on the topic , specially relating to the distinction between the mythical times and start of actual history.Regarding indian history doesn't the jain and buddhist texts do something similar .

Jain and Buddhist texts are of higher quality than the Purans, but not by much. I don't know what you mean by post more - you want passages of writing style from these books ?

 

The biggest problem with Jain and Buddhist texts, is they are very weak on names. Proper historians from that era, such as the Roman, Chinese ones i mention, use the names of their emperors/Consuls etc. properly. Jains & Buddhists, liberally mix names with titles with made-up names as they feel like. Take for eg, the most famous of all Magadh rulers from the Jain & Buddhist sources. No, its not Ashoka or Chandragupta Maurya as people assume. It is Mahapadma Nanda. The same person, is referred to as Mahapadma, Nandanadeva, Nandakula, Magadhajeya. It took painstaking research to tie all these names together as the one person, Mahapadma Nanda. And he is the most easily documented of the Magadh rulers after Ashoka and Chandragupta Maurya. So the dozens of lesser known rulers, stand no chance and hence so much confusion about Indian history. 

Edited April 19, 2018 by Muloghonto

[coffee_rules]

5 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

So if i write a text today and cut-paste a star position from the Mahabharata, my text is then 5000 years old, right ?

The writing style of the Mahabharata, the peoples mentioned, geographies described, etc. makes it a story from 2000-1600 years ago, in its current form. 

I don't have the time or patience to argue with a doubtful man like you., who ridicules all ancient to be inferior. That western colonial view of the age of mahabharata is parroted by academics based on ignorant peer reviews who have no authority on Sanskrit.  But this data gathered is from original scriptures and not from xerox copes. some of it is presented here..

 

[Muloghonto]

22 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

I don't have the time or patience to argue with a doubtful man like you., who ridicules all ancient to be inferior.

They were not inferior beings to us. But their knowledge, understanding and concept of reality was far, far inferior that of us now. So people with far inferior concept of reality, have no basis to tell us how to live our lives. Its a simple fact that the Rishis, munis, prophets and such of ALL religions, knew less about the universe than grade-9 kids do. So if we are taking lessons on how live our lives from those same inferior knowledge Rishis and Munis, we might as well take 'how to live your life' lessons from someone with grade 9 education only. That, is an inescapable fact.

Quote

That western colonial view of the age of mahabharata is parroted by academics based on ignorant peer reviews who have no authority on Sanskrit.  But this data gathered is from original scriptures and not from xerox copes. some of it is presented here..

 

That isn't a western colonial view lol. Thats the view of those who've actually READ the original texts. When the book itself mentions the Saka, the Yavana, etc. it means the book CANNOT be older than 3,000 years, as those groups did not exist back then. The writing style is younger than Panini, which means it cannot be, again, older than 2500 years ago. Just like how if tomorrow a book mentions Canadians, it cannot be over 200 years old, because there was no Canada, thus no Canadians, as a word, more than 200 years ago. And if the same book uses ' you whatzup Shazzam ?  nothing much dawg' lingo, it means its no older than 1960 AD.

And a lot of those 'western scholars' are people who can speak fluent Sanskrit and know more Sanskrit than 99.99% hinduvta idiots. So your racist argument, actually has no merit. 

Edited April 19, 2018 by Muloghonto

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, Garuda said:

You fool we are discussing some comments by a CM. Why should I be ashamed when he made those comments. Im responding to your comments telling "You Indians" which makes me think you are not from this country. your an internet coward if i saw one.

i don't live in India anymore, so i don't consider myself Indian but a person of Indian origin. 

My comment, is regarding you getting hot and bothered about rape crime stories from India. As i've already demonstrated, those stories are very much justified.

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, Garuda said:

In fact I dont know about anyone who trusts Marco Polo's historical anecdotes who also knows about huble khan or wahtever and the pope praising him over the khilafat kingdom. must be a padosee.

Not surprised, since most Indians have zero clue about history- as i said, its a cultural thing, Indian culture is inferior to western/chinese culture when it comes to understanding and recording history. With more focus on 'hinduvta version', Indian understanding of history, is also regressing. 

 

You are new here, so i will do you a favor. If you don't believe me, ask around to those who've been here for a while - don't challenge muloghonto on history. Will save you a lot of time and humiliation if you can take that piece of advice.