punjabi_khota Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Oh no, Mr. Vijay struck the death blow to a so far logical debate with this loony story again about radiation and crap from Mahabharata. ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nballa Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 glad to know we were a nuclear power before 5000 BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 The name's Vijay Dinanath Chauhan. The radiation levels are wrt it being a war waged with many "astras" or weapons that caused huge explosions...and captured in the mahabharata as explosions that tore the skin out of people, fried them alive, etc. I agree. Weapons technology was very advanced then.. in fact the Brahmos missile was developed from the vedic knowledge of Brahmastra. I read it somewhere on wikileaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surajmal Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Just that? I didn't find the Arthashastra a great book at all. In fact I was appalled at how Chanakya mentions about caste system and what work shudras should do, etc. Like I mentioned in a post before it was between 3000 BC - 1000 BC when the Brahminism became the main form of Hinduism. Chankaya was around 1400-1500 BC and India was truly in a dark age at around that time with Brahminism ruling the roost. It is because of Brahminism and the 4 century drought that people started losing faith in religion and Buddhism started taking roots. I think women in India were pretty much ruling the roost before what is termed the modern age of India...3100 BC or before kali yuga. Kali Yuga is the era in civilizational evolution where human society dips to new lows so it is no surprise that books like Arthahastra while definitely great works they also reflect their times. T,S,P,C - during that time the society was such that women were no different from 19th - 20th century house wives. There was the occasional great woman but generally they were considered the lesser species just like we continue to do today. you got your dates wrong. Chanakya was Chandragupta's teacher, lived between 370 BCE (approx) and 280 BCE (approx). Mauryan empire was actually the beginning of a golden period (chalukyas, guptas, palas, cholas and few others follow mauryan). You need to read up on Indian history again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 glad to know we were a nuclear power before 5000 BC. :hatsoff: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surajmal Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 vijay has ruined the thread. Instead of posting links to archaelogical dig sites (Yes places mentioned in Mahabharat are all real: Check ASI's website), he goes on a slant regarding weapons nonsense :facepalm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manny_Pacquiao Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 vinay has singlehandedly destroyed any credibility (there wasn't any to begin with, but still) that the geeta had. all hail the power of TRIZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravishingravi Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 could someone please explain this verse from bhagvad gita for me: "Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures." [bhagavad Gita 7:20] What part did you not understand ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punjabi_khota Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 :hatsoff: :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 The prosecutors in Tomsk city alleged that the texts of the book termed practitioners of other religions as fools, demons and pigs. Something has been lost in translation or taken out of context... :hmmm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamy Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Great stuff, Vijay :) As far as I understand, the function of Science is inquiry, not prejudice. Where is then the oft-heralded difference between Science and Religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 you got your dates wrong. Chanakya was Chandragupta's teacher, lived between 370 BCE (approx) and 280 BCE (approx). Mauryan empire was actually the beginning of a golden period (chalukyas, guptas, palas, cholas and few others follow mauryan). You need to read up on Indian history againSorry, you got the dates wrong and I dont blame you coz in school even I learned that Alexander's visit coincided with Maurya dynasty founding. But that was a wrong chronology devised by the early European Indologists and has been carried on since then and taught to us in schools. However, our own records (which have been existing since the birth of modern india - 3100 BC) and even many European Indologists books also show that the chronology is wrong. Alright the cause of the confusion is because of the existence of two similarly named grandfather-grandson pairs who existed around 1200 years apart. Chandragupta-Asoka. The first of them were the ones from the Maurya dynasty. The second of them were from the Gupta dynasty. Our (local Indian not modern European) history books have been recording history as a continuous process. This is the lineage we have of modern India - Bharata Kings - 1006 years from 3102 BC - 2096 BC approx Then the first of the Magadha dynasties comes in - Pradyota Dynasty - 138 years (5 monarchs) 2100 BC - 1940 BC approx Sisunaga dynasty - 360 years (10 kings) 1940 BC - 1600 BC approx Nanda dynasty - 100 years (9 kings) 1600 BC - 1500 BC approx Maurya dynasty - 316 years (12 kings) - 1500 - 1200 BC approx Sunga dynasty - 300 years (10 kings) Kanva dynasty - 85 years (4 kings) Andhra dynasties - 506 years (32 monarchs) Then come the Guptas. The Guptas, not the Mauryas, were the contemporaries of Alexander. You can find many resources on the internet and in libraries all over the country with the actual chronology. Here's an excerpt from an article http://www.mahanbharat.net/articles/bharatiya-timeline Accounts of Megasthenis (Greek Ambassador to Chandragupta courts), mention Sandracottus (Chandragupta) as Alexander's contemporary. Sir Jones mapped Sandracottus to Chandragupta Maurya. Thus: Maurya dynasty was placed in 300 BC. Nanda dynasty placed in the range: 400 BC - 300 BC. Gautam Buddha, Mahavir Jain, & Ajatshatru placed in 500 BC. Adi Shankara placed 1000 years after Buddha in 800AD. Shalivahan dynasty placed in 40 BC. Gupta dynasty placed in 400 AD. Halt! There are two Chandragupta: Chandragupta Maurya and Chandragupta Gupta. It was Chandragupta Gupta who was the contemporary of Alexander. 1. The Greek records mention the kings before and after Sandracottus to be Xandramas and Sandrocyptus. The kings before and after Chandragupta Maurya were: Mahapadma Nanda and Bindusar. The kings before and after Chandragupta Gupta were: Chandramas and Samudragupta. The phonetic similarity is quite apparent for Chandragupta Gupta and not Maurya. 2. Greek records are silent about important figures like: Chanakya, Ashoka (kingdom much bigger than his Gradfather Chandragupta's.) 3. Greek records do not mention the presence Buddhist monks who were very common in Maurya time. 4. Inscription on a Greek Tomb: "Here lies Indian Sramanacharya, Shakya monk from Bodh Gaya". Sramanacharya went to Greece with his Greek pupils. The tomb marks his death about 1000 B.C. Which means Buddha existed before 1000 BC. 5. The names of contemporary kings found on Ashokan inscriptions are Amtiyoka, Tulamaya, etc. Amtiyoka ruled Afghanistan around 1475 BC, which then appears to be the approximate date of Ashoka. (the grandson of Maurya Chandragupta.) So a correct timeline for Indian History is: 3138-1634 BCE Shishunga and earlier dynasties 1634-1534 BCE Nanda 1534-1319 BCE Maurya 1294 BCE Kanishka of Kushan Dynasty 327 BCE Chandragupta Gupta 57 BCE Vikramaditya Gupta 1887-1807 BCE Gautam Buddha Why? 1864-1792 BCE Mahaveer Jain Why? 509- 477 BCE Aadi Shankaracharya Why? A lot of unlearning needs to be done and I have plans to work on a public interest litigation to correct our books with the actual chronology. I was planning to post a full chronology of modern India since 3102 BC but haven't gotten around to...will do it in the nerd section or this section soon enough. Then we can discuss and debate the chronology...why it went wrong, etc It is a revelation and hits you hard the first time you come across the actual chronology. Here is one ebook you might wanna refer to (will post many more) - http://jambudveep.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/the-plot-in-indian-chronology.pdf Here is a blog page on the development of the Hindu religion...you will see me arguing in some of the comments section with the author on some posts :-) http://19000years.blogspot.com/2011/02/hinduism-timeline-for-16000-years.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vijay.Sharma Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Apologies for diverting the thread to some posts on Indian history...I believe they were necessary. The folks who are making ad hominem attacks on me need to realize that by shouting things at me facts don't change. It is just that some of us are aware of certain recent developments in the study of history of the world while others are not as aware. I too was taken aback when I learned of the discrepancies. And these discrepancies exist not just in Indian history but in history of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganeshran Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 vinay has singlehandedly destroyed any credibility (there wasn't any to begin with, but still) that the geeta had. all hail the power of TRIZ Do you consider the Gita a crappy book because its a work of fiction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajiv Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Screw this, won't drink vodka anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rajiv Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 :hatsoff: ..it looks like pomphret to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikred Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 Screw this' date=' won't drink vodka anymore[/quote'] ......and no more playing Russian Roulette. :hitler: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Manny, Prior to DNA matching how did people could have determined who was their Daddy? And what did you think the probability for a child calling dady to his Daddy?? Even though DNA test is availble why arent they determining it now? If you are so hell bent for evidence of what other people believe isnt itobvious that you start from your home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 vinay has singlehandedly destroyed any credibility (there wasn't any to begin with' date= but still) that the geeta had. all hail the power of TRIZ Vijay has posted examples of historical relevance and you called it crappy without providing even a one liner to back it up. Yet he has destroyed it's credibility. :two_thumbs_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts