Scientific evidence that Hindu civilization is more than 15,000 years old

[Shankranthi]

I'm using my brain, primarily, and trying to understand your motive and reasoning for attempting such audacious endeavours.

So you want to psycho analyse a anonymous poster ? ......... you suspect a conspiracy ? or just can't handle reality ?

 

[zip]

All idol worshippers are not indian hindus by race in past idol worshippers either killed by wrath and punishment of ALLAH ALMIGHTY due to natural clamities like earthquake, flood and storms and some moved back towards right path and followed instruction of Prophets（P.B.U.H）and only in india idol worshippers continued and they will also end in final battle near return of Hazrat Esa A.S

Everything which has a start will have an end ..thats natural law ..be it started from 15000 years back or 2000 ...Truth doesnt need you but you need truth to see everything clearly so dont worry you can curse and lie all your life that wont make an iota of difference..

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

So you want to psycho analyse a anonymous poster ? ......... you suspect a conspiracy ? or just can't handle reality ?

There seems to be a trend coming out of India of all sorts of claims, and in most cases are nothing but hot air.

 

[Shankranthi]

this method is not widely accepted by the academics nor the science peoplessss

In any case for a Giraffe to live in India, the suitable conditions would have only existed a LONG LONG time ago. How did the Giraffe make it over the Himalayas ?

How did its picture end up as a rock painting ?

OTOH there is a carving of a Giraffe on the Konark Sun Temple.

So did Giraffe exist in India or was there international Trade in animals that brought a Giraffe to the coast of Orrisa ?

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

How you can quote a roughly translated verse, mentioning TWO pole stars, then use the Earth’s axis rotational cycle of 26,000 years to CONCLUDE that Hindu society is 15 thousand years old, is just speculative. And then call that scientific evidence is just silly.

Considering the text use a stationary earth model, where the SUN rotates around the earth, you can easily manipulate the words to match any meanings you want.

 

[Shankranthi]

There seems to be a trend coming out of India of all sorts of claims, and in most cases are nothing but hot air.

I have posted Facts backed by scientific evidence.

YOU OTOH had posted opinion based on hot air.

So what does this trend say ?

 

[El Sidd]

In any case for a Giraffe to live in India, the suitable conditions would have only existed a LONG LONG time ago. How did the Giraffe make it over the Himalayas ?

How did its picture end up as a rock painting ?

OTOH there is a carving of a Giraffe on the Konark Sun Temple.

So did Giraffe exist in India or was there international Trade in animals that brought a Giraffe to the coast of Orrisa ?

Some say that the land masses of the earth were joined together as one before they separated.

Anyhow this is easily explainable since merchants from the area now known as India had contact from Africa to South America.

There are Sindhi and Balouchi tribes living in South America. Sea merchants.

History of Man is a lost knowledge only shared with a few. So do not burden yourself with this buddy

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

how many ancient Sanskrit speakers from 800BC are there today?

you guys cant even understand speakers from different states WITHIN India, never mind a thousand years ago.

 

[Shankranthi]

How you can quote a roughly translated verse, mentioning TWO pole stars, then use the Earth’s axis rotational cycle of 26,000 years to CONCLUDE that Hindu society is 15 thousand years old, is just speculative. And then call that scientific evidence is just silly.

That is not a "rough translation" Sanskrit is a very precise language and the Surya Siddhartha is a well known and studied text. It has a history of being studied without break ever since it was produced. The current Hindu calendar is still based on the Surya Siddhantha.

Beyond that you are oversimplifying the cross referenced data.

how many ancient Sanskrit speakers from 800BC are there today?

lol.... are you kidding me ? Must be at least 1000 in Varanasi alone. Also Sanskrit has not changed since the time it was compiled by panini. It cannot change since it is self correcting and has built in error correction due to strict rules.

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

That is not a "rough translation" Sanskrit is a very precise language and the Surya Siddhartha is a well known and studied text. It has a history of being studied without break ever since it was produced. The current Hindu calendar is still based on the Surya Siddhantha.

Beyond that you are oversimplifying the cross referenced data.



lol.... are you kidding me ? Must be at least 1000 in Varanasi alone. Also Sanskrit has not changed since the time it was compiled by panini. It cannot change since it is self correcting and has built in error correction due to strict rules.

put the words you quoted into a sanskrit dictionary http://spokensanskrit.org/ and see what results you get. the words dont match up to the translation in the article.

for example "dhruvayo" means having a firm resting-place you have translated as HORIZON.

The word madhye.... could mean any of these

मध्ये ind. madhye between
मध्ये indecl. madhye amongst
मध्ये indecl. madhye within
मध्ये ind. madhye in the presence of
मध्ये ind. madhye in the midst
मध्ये loc. madhye in the middle
मध्ये loc. madhye among
मध्ये loc. madhye in

 

[Shankranthi]

Some say that the land masses of the earth were joined together as one before they separated.

Anyhow this is easily explainable since merchants from the area now known as India had contact from Africa to South America.

There are Sindhi and Balouchi tribes living in South America. Sea merchants.

History of Man is a lost knowledge only shared with a few. So do not burden yourself with this buddy

And here you are rejecting the history of man documented in various Hindu texts.

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

The point is you can TWIST and TURN the words to obtain a RESEMBLANCE of what you want.

 

[El Sidd]

And here you are rejecting the history of man documented in various Hindu texts.

I am only questioning the lost in translation part for academics

 

[Shankranthi]

put the words you quoted into a sanskrit dictionary http://spokensanskrit.org/ and see what results you get. the words dont match up to the translation in the article.

for example "dhruvayo" means having a firm resting-place you have translated as HORIZON.

The word madhye.... could mean any of these

मध्ये ind. madhye between
मध्ये indecl. madhye amongst
मध्ये indecl. madhye within
मध्ये ind. madhye in the presence of
मध्ये ind. madhye in the midst
मध्ये loc. madhye in the middle
मध्ये loc. madhye among
मध्ये loc. madhye in

This is what happens when those who do not know sanskrit or the vast body of Hindu texts as references, attempts to understand sanskrit.

Same thing happened when the british attempted to "translate" the vedas ending up wit a laughable translation that talks about "eating beef" and " eating intestines of dogs".

Ksitija is horizon, not dhruvayo. (also its "ध्रुवतारे" Dhruv Tare/Tara )

Dhruv Tare refers to the pole start know as Dhruv Nakshtra. There is a hindu text referring to its origin as well.


"मेरोरुभयतो मध्ये " refers to Middle of the Meru Mountain i.e. the Pole star is supposed to be right above the Meru mountain. Meru Mountain refers to the North Pole, and the Dhruv star is on top of the North pole.

The point is you can TWIST and TURN the words to obtain a RESEMBLANCE of what you want.

No you cant.

Only someone with ZERO understanding of sanskrit can make such an absurd claim.

Someone who thinks Sanskrit is like english.

I am only questioning the lost in translation part for academics

There is nothing "lost in translation" if you know both sanskrit and English like 1000's of Indians today.

Unlike the past translations which was done by the british who neither know Sanskrit, not its context.

 

[El Sidd]

There is nothing "lost in translation" if you know both sanskrit and English like 1000's of Indians today.

Unlike the past translations which was done by the british who neither know Sanskrit, not its context.

I am not talking about lost in translation from Sanskrit to English.

I am talking about translation from Sanskrit to Sanskrit.

What are you trying to prove? Just be clear about it man we cant go in circles