Sunday, September 4, 2016

What is the supremacy clause of Hindu nationalists?


The supremacy clause in the United States states that whatever the various kooky laws that each state or jurisdiction can impose on its constituents ,if it goes against the spirit and the letter of the U.S Constitution then the Constitution takes precedent.

Similarly I have to wonder what takes precedence for Hindu nationalists- Hinduism or the nation. And no they are not synonymous. If they were ,we would have seen atleast something analogous to joint Christian efforts such as the Crusades, Lepanto or Vienna in combating Islamic extremism. There are none ,so therefore Hindus have not constituted a nation. Of course that doesnt mean they cant start. However in order to do that, we have start rethinking about our countries and its border. For example -why are Muslim Kashmir and Christian and tribal northeast in India while Nepal and Sri Lanka are not? This of course involved boldness ,strategic thinking and far reaching vision that no one expects of Hindutvadis and who can blame them? I mean these are guys who believe Burma was a part of Bharatavarsha though Afghanistan was not!

So again I ask you which is it- is it Bharatmata or is it Shiva, Durga, Vishnu etc etc. Well let us analyze their own views.

Savarkar , the godfather of Hindutva defined a Hindu not on his ideological or theological bent neither his allegiance to a certain set of scriptures and rituals but the the ancient resident of a country with vaguely defined borders-Bharatavarsha.

The RSS had often advocated that Bharatmata should be considered the supreme deity of Hindus with Shiva,Vishnu, Devi etc taking a backseat!

I will be a tad honest that may upset such those Hindus who revere India as a nation state but don't care for Hindutvadis- the question to ask is this- is Hinduism better off in the Republic of India or when it was divided into warring states? Keep in mind there was no united polity of Bharatavarsha when Rama, Krishna, Arjuna,Vishwamitra, Buddha, Vikaramaditya, Patanjali, Ramanuja, Shankaracharya etc etc walked the earth. However with the republic of India we are awash with Matas, babas, swamis of the most base and fraudulent nature. Which do you choose?

Perhaps you can say both. Well its possible but over here I'm speculating but it seems to me that we have given up a lot that of Vedic and Puranic tradition(both good and bad) in order to be prostrate ourselves before Bharatmata.

For now India should exist if only because of Pakistan, China and other threats such as new avatars of East India company in some multinationals. Though in fairness it may well be Indian government may itself become the new East India company(witness the Indian troops stationed in Afghanistan to protect Indian interests and increasingly aggressive positions in the Arabian Sea). Keep in mind, many imperial ventures started out as self defense particularly to curb piracy. Arabs had a cassus bellum of invading Sindh when Muslim orphans from Sri Lanka en route to Baghdad were captured by pirates based in Sindh. English adventurism was bolstered by Spanish depredations who the former paid back in the same coin. The U.S marine corps were formed with the express intent of smashing the Barbary pirates in North Africa who would capture U.S merchant fleets for ransom (hence the Marine Corp hymn "From the Halls of Montezuma  To the shores of Tripoli ;")

We have witnessed the heroic actions of Indian sailors in dealing with Somali pirates. And they may follow the same career path of the former European naval powers. But sic transit Gloria, Europeans had traded their religious fervor for secular nationalist Gloria. Their saints and relics for Britannia and Marianne. Looks like we are doing the same.

At some point like Britannia, Bharat Mata will turn into an Asura trying to devour the Devas and we may have to smash it when the time comes

India is increasingly for me what Vatican is for Catholics, Jerusalem for Jews or Mecca for Muslims. And I anticipate it will be the same for the residents of a future balkanized India(the term Balkanized has acquired a negative connotation, I don't consider always a bad thing).

So I have decided which is more important to me . It is Hinduism. BJP/RSS/VHP need not respond, I already know their answer.


91 comments:

  1. Caste, cows, curry, sati forever!

    "sakal malech karo ran ghata"

    Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji Maharaj Sache Patsah

    Very enlightening blog..

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What is this stuff called Hinduism?

    Vaishnavaism or Shaivaism or Shaktism? Or Smarthaism?

    So called Hinduism which is nothing but a arbitrary grouping of some Indian religions have no future since it does not have any basis in reality. A silly English colonial creation.

    Religion and spirituality belong to a barbaric past when man had no understanding.

    Hindutva represents ideology of future since it is based on real history and geography of India.

    After all, what is the problem? Once we worshipped Devas like Indra. Then they were dumped to make way for gods like Vishnu and Shiva. Now Hindutvavadis like myself wants a new deity called BHARATAMBA as supreme deity for all natives of India.

    If you are so much concerned about tradition, I suggest you should return to original Vedic gods like Indra (at whose expense Vishnu and Shiva became popular).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What do you mean you "want" a new deity? Are you going to create one out of thin air?

      Delete
    2. What is this stuff called Hinduism?

      Vaishnavaism or Shaivaism or Shaktism? Or Smarthaism? "

      All of the above


      "So called Hinduism which is nothing but a arbitrary grouping of some Indian religions have no future since it does not have any basis in reality. A silly English colonial creation. "

      When are you going to ditch the silly English creation called India?

      Religion and spirituality belong to a barbaric past when man had no understanding."

      Man had plenty understand, he just chanelled his understanding in a religious form. Not that his understand was perfect mind you.


      Hindutva represents ideology of future since it is based on real history and geography of India. "

      LOL, how exactly does a united, centralized India gel with "real history" and geography. Can you show me an instance when India was united from head to toe with a centralized bureaucracy recognized by all regions as it was today. The closest were the Mauryas and the Mughals but their hold over entirety of India barely lasted a 100 years each. The Mauryas had no lasting effect, indeed the memories of their glory were resurrected by the British. Mughals have much more pervasive influence if only because they were more recent and ruled with a heavy Islamic hand.
      Once again a united India is a legacy of the British. So Hindutva is simply indulging in fantasy.


      "After all, what is the problem? Once we worshipped Devas like Indra. Then they were dumped to make way for gods like Vishnu and Shiva. "




      Dieties represent evolution of understanding. A relatively primitive people could envision storm gods ,fire, wind etc representing senses and sense based philosophies but more sophisticated people could create abstract philosophies which are represented by Vishnu and Shiva.


      "Now Hindutvavadis like myself wants a new deity called BHARATAMBA as supreme deity for all natives of India. "

      Since when are Hindutvadis the Popes and Imams of Hinduism? If the "natives" (what a condescending word) of India prefer to not to honor this ridiculous diety, that is their right.


      "If you are so much concerned about tradition, I suggest you should return to original Vedic gods like Indra (at whose expense Vishnu and Shiva became popular)."

      I explained why people Vishnu and Shiva take prominence over Vedic gods. Though replaced is the wrong word. They superseded and syncretized many Vedic dieties. Vishnu and Savitr are mentioned in the Rg Veda as a solar diety ,while Rudra is a prototype of Shiva with which were merged elements of Indra as well.
      Indeed Koenraad Elst wrote an interesting essay on the same
      http://www.bharatvani.org/books/ait/ch47.htm

      I dont agree with everything there but the reasoning is sound. Vedic gods simply found a new home and attributes in Puranic gods


      All in all, you sound like the type of the type of dimwit I was talking about. He who thinks religion is silly but wants an ideology named after a religion in order to protect the practitioners of the religion. And feels the best way of achieving this is to tear down the foundation of the religion and turn into some monstrosity of a hyper nationalism masquerading as religion. And you wonder why people laugh at you.

      Delete
  4. =============What is this stuff called Hinduism?Vaishnavaism or Shaivaism or Shaktism? Or Smarthaism? "All of the above======================
    Preposterous. None of them have an agreement on who is the supreme creator. If a set of faiths do not even have unanimity about who is the supreme creator, then they are not sects, but separate religions. Only Smarthas accept that all gods are aspects of same creator. Hardcore Vaishnavas never miss a chance to belittle Shiva or Shakti. Shaivas and Shakteyas for their part , do not give much importance to Vishnu in their literature. So much for one single Hindu religion!


    ========="So called Hinduism which is nothing but a arbitrary grouping of some Indian religions have no future since it does not have any basis in reality. A silly English colonial creation. "

    When are you going to ditch the silly English creation called India?==========================
    If India is a silly English creation, then what is this thing that ancient Indian writers called as Greeks called India, Arabs called Al-Hind and Turks called Hindustan? Even ancient Indian books speak about a land called Bharatavarsha or Jambudweep which spans between Himalaya and Cape Comorin. Yet for you India was invented by British.

    ===========Man had plenty understand, he just chanelled his understanding in a religious form. Not that his understand was perfect mind you.==========================


    ============ LOL, how exactly does a united, centralized India gel with "real history" and geography. Can you show me an instance when India was united from head to toe with a centralized bureaucracy recognized by all regions as it was today. The closest were the Mauryas and the Mughals but their hold over entirety of India barely lasted a 100 years each. The Mauryas had no lasting effect, indeed the memories of their glory were resurrected by the British. Mughals have much more pervasive influence if only because they were more recent and ruled with a heavy Islamic hand.
    Once again a united India is a legacy of the British. So Hindutva is simply indulging in fantasy.===============

    Nationalism argues that people who share common cultural traits should be brought together under a single government. If a people were not united by a common government in past, then they will be united under a single flag in future. And united India is not a legacy of British. It was largely united only because its people wanted it to be united. If not, India would have fallen into fragments after British had left. People like yourself are stuck in past. Hindutvavadis like us look into future.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vaishnava and Shaivas compete for the same trophy -the acknowledgment of their favored diety as Brahman. I really dont see an issue. It seems have the Dayanand Saraswati's disease of viewing Hinduism through a Biblical monotheistic lens while claiming to reform it.

      I say there was a great civilization called Bharatavarsha which encompasses the geographic description you mentioned but that was not a nation but a collection of warring ethnic groups having common religious beliefs similar to Europe. It is bizarre you want to dismiss Hinduism as the only thing that united ancient Indians while at the same time trying to hold onto the idea of an Indian nation state that never existed.

      What the Greeks, Arabs or Turks thought is not relevant as they had very vague knowledge of India.

      United India today wouldnt be possible without the following

      1) An centralized administration
      2) Nationalist aspirations
      3) A common struggle against an oppressor
      4) A standing army
      5) Railways

      All of these were a legacy of the British. The Maratha reconquests liberated much of India from Muslim rule but could not consolidate their gains and split into warring fiefdoms after Panipat. I am not saying we should be grateful to the British for whatever they have done. They had achieved a top down political unity for their benefit and at the expense of exploitation of masses of Indians. But lets acknowledge reality and recognize that this level of centralization never before occurred in Indian history.

      What future do Hindutvadis look to? Pray tell. You have these clowns patenting cow urine and doing incredible damage to Hindu scholarship by engaging in crank notions of Vedic space travel, Ganesha story as head transplant,establishing jyotish(astrology) and palmistry as courses in universities etc. Hindutvadis like Savarkar were certainly future oriented- he ridiculed Hindus for practicing astrology while Americans and Soviets were in a space race but alas he was a rarity.

      Delete
    2. LOL. YSV Rao, you seem stupider than I initially thought.

      India was known as a single nation even since the mauryan days. And around 1569, when akbar laid siege on the ranthambor fort, the ruler of the fort decided to make peace with the akbar. One of the conditions was that the ruler would not be forced to go past the indus river for military conquests or to rule the territory in that area. That shows that the boundaries of india were well known even back then.

      And if you cared to read mahabharatha or ramayana, you would see that there is a mention of space travel in vimanas. In ramayana, the pushpaka vimana was used. In mahabharatha, arjuna used a different vimana to leave earth and meet his father indra. There was scalar technology back then as well, where a warrior would be able to power up a weapon by feeding mantras of a specific frequency.

      Delete
    3. Ancient Indians believed that India was surrounded in all directions by samudra of which the Indus river was a segment. Thus crossing the Indus carried the same taboo as crossing the ocean aka kalapani.

      Delete
    4. That depends on what time period you mean by "ancient". In mahabharatha times which has been dated to about 5500 BC, yuddhistira had sent his four brothers in all four directions to conquer territories (prior to performing the rajsuya yagna). Bhima and arjuna both travelled outside of the borders of ancient bharatvarsha. If they believed india was surrounded in all directions by water, then they would not have gone outside india's borders to conquer.

      And also, in the ranthambor example I provided above, the time period was 1569. The hindu rulers would have known by that time that india is not surrounded by waters on all sides as previous muslims had enetered india from the west using cavalry forces.

      Also, man singh, bhagwandas, and todar mal (all hindus) were involved in campaigns of akbar outside the boundaries of india. So I doubt that there was a taboo regarding stepping outside of india's borders.

      Delete
    5. @Milin Patel

      Mauryan empire barely lasted 200 years, shorter than the British presence in India and its memory was all but erased until the British epigraphists resurrected it.
      People remember the Guptas far more than the Mauryas.
      Furthermore Maurya was an empire which composed of many nations such as Magadha, Anga, Kalinga, Vidarbha, Andhra etc.
      Clearly you dont know the difference between empires,nations and civilizations. It is shocking I have to explain such basic things to you.

      In the case of Akbar, the Indus river since the end of the Gupta era was a divider of Iranic and Indic civilizations, not countries. India was spoken as a geographic region roughly corresponding to current day India but not as a country.
      Your ignorance is truly astounding.

      As for the claims of secret weapons in Mahabharata, vimanas etc, I can only LOLL. Take this scalar technology talk and shove it up your guru Vadakayil's ample bottom.

      Delete
    6. @Milin Patel

      Please stop pulling random dates out of Vadakayils ass. Mahabharat by tradition is dated to around 3100 BC. But the likelihood is that the historical incidents which inspired the epic occurred around 1700-1300 BC which coincided with the age of chariot warfare in the near East as well.


      Brahmins were forbidden from travelling to the areas of West Punjab,Afghanistan and Sindh by the Puranic age which was considered mleccha by then. The distaste for travelling abroad by sea seems to be a trait associated with "poorbiyas" people of U.P and Bihar. Even as late as the 1800s, the East India company preferred Tamil troops to those of north central India because they had no issue with crossing seas to see action in Burma, Egypt, Java etc.
      One of the reasons poorbiyas were disproportionately placed under indentured servitude is that they would lose face on crossing the sea whether Fiji or Suriname or South Africa and would be unlikely to return.

      OTOH , traders whether Gujarati, Tamil or Telugu (the main trading communities) seemed exempt from this taboo.

      Delete
    7. I agree that mauryan empire lasted for a short period of time. But it still unified all the warring clans in india, right? And there were probably many empires before that time as well that covered entire india (for a lot of them we probably dont have any written history today). One such example is the empire yuddhistira had in mahabharatha.

      The maghada, anga, kalinga... were not names of nations, but names of clans instead. It was chandragupta maurya who unified these clans and formed the mauryan empire.

      I agree with your claim that that during akbar's time, India was a civilization and thats why there was a division at the Indus river. But this division always existed as India always existed as a civilization. This common civilization always unified the different clans within india (into a nation) and they considered anybody coming from the west into india a foreigner/invader. But they didnt consider other clans as invaders or foreigners. That shows that it was the common civilization that kept the different clans unified in the form of the nation.

      And if you cared to read mahabharatha, you would realize the presence of scalar technology. For example, a warrior would produce various frequencies of sound in the form of a mantra and that would power up a shaft that the warrior is using.

      For example, after arjuna finds out jayadratha had kidnapped draupadi, he picked up a shaft and powered it with mantras and that shaft travelled 2 miles, and killed jayadratha's horse:

      "Meanwhile Bhima and Arjuna, learning the enemy was full two miles ahead of them urged their horses to greater speed in pursuit of him. And the mighty Arjuna performed a wonderful deed, killing the horse of Jayadratha although they were full two miles ahead of them. Armed with celestial weapons undaunted by difficulties he achieved this difficult feat with arrows inspired with Mantras. And then the two warriors, Bhima and Arjuna, rushed towards the terrified king of Sindhu whose horses had been slain and who was alone and perplexed in mind.

      http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03269.htm

      Delete
    8. Hey YSV,

      I am not a fan of vadakayil. The mahabharatha war did not happen in 3100 BC or from 1300-1700BC. It happened around 5500 BC. Take a look at this link:

      http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/mahabharat/mahab_vartak.html

      It seems in the mahabharatha war, the foreign tribes like the mleechas, sakas, yavanas... all died off, as well as many of the tribes in india. That caused lots of south indians with asi ancestry moved northwards and mix with the north indians, and after a few generations, their progeny went out of india and repopulated the regions that were previously ruled by the mleechas, sakas, yavanas,...

      That is supported by this research paper : http://www.cell.com/ajhg/pdf/S0002-9297(13)00324-8.pdf

      The paper says that there was major ani asi mixing around 64 - 144 generations ago. Since in mahabharatha days, one generation would be about 50 years, the mixing would have been from 5200 BC - 1200BC, and that period begins just after the mahabharatha war date of 5500 BC.

      Brahmins may have not crossed india's boundaries (even al beruni mentioned that), but that didnt apply to the other three varnas. Kshtriyas, even from mahabharatha times, crossed india's boundaries...

      Delete
    9. This PV Vartak fellow is a top-notch crank who claims to have visited various planets in the Solar System using vimanas. Please don't waste your valuable time reading idiots like Vartak.

      Delete
    10. Can you find flaws in his argument, instead of landing personal attacks on him?

      Delete
    11. I'm very sorry. You are right;I can't find any flaws in the argument that you can visit various planets on Vedic vimanas.

      Delete
    12. LOL. Vartak does not claim that he visited planets on vimanas in the link I posted above.

      Delete
    13. Here read this:

      http://www.speakingtree.in/blog/astral-travel-to-mars-part-1

      Now decide if you really want to take Mr Vartak seriously.

      Delete
    14. I took a look at that link, and it didnt say anything about vimana travel. Instead, it talks about an astral projection to mars. I have also heard of others who say they have astral projections to higher dimensions, so I don't find it impossible. And if we look at mahabharatha, drona left his body and had an astral projection on the 15th day of the war to another dimension. Arjuna had something similar when he worshipped shiva. So I dont see astral projections to different dimensions as something impossible.

      Even if you believe astral projections are a myth, you should still read what he says on other issues. It would be foolish to dismiss everything that one says just because you don't agree with what that person's stance on a particular issue.

      So, I think we should first look at Vartak's argument in the link I provided above.

      Delete
    15. I can't believe there are people believing this astral projection crap in 2016. I guess it has been a waste of time talking to you. You are beyond hope.

      Delete
    16. You don't believe in astral projections. Ok. But there are still lots of people even in 2016 that believe in it. By the way, tell me what happens to the atman when one dies. Where does it go?

      Delete
    17. There is no evidence that atman exists. When we die, neural activity in our brain comes to a stop. Our consciousness is the product of neural activity, so our consciousness is destroyed upon death. We no longer exist after death even if our body takes a while to start decomposing.

      Delete
    18. Actually, we do have evidence that the atman exists. The atman is the space in an atom, surrounding the nucleus where the electrons move around in.

      And about consciousness, you still have consciousness even after death as the atoms that your are made up off just reorient themselves in a new conformation. The do not get destroyed. Since consciousness is a property of the individual atoms, a dead person is still conscious.

      Take an atom and place it in a gravitational field. It will respond to that field as it has some level of consciousness. Moksha is about raising the level of consciousness of this atom!

      Delete
    19. You are talking nonsense on multiple levels.

      Where did you come up with this weird definition of atman? There is no peer-reviewed scientific paper that gives this definition. In all likelihood, you learnt this from some crank like Vartak or PN Oak. They don't qualify as scientists.

      Like I said above, consciousness is the result of neural activity in the brain. When you die, all metabolic activities stop, hence neural activity also stops. There is no hunger, thirst, pain, or pleasure. There is no consciousness.

      If a dead person is conscious, then why do we say that he is dead? What is the difference between death and coma?

      The gravitational field is a warping of space-time. The atom moves through the warped space-time, giving the impression that it is being influenced by an invisible force. The atom does not need to be conscious for that to happen.

      "Moksha is about raising the level of consciousness of this atom!"

      I know what you're doing. You people think that if you couch your religious beliefs in scientific jargon like atom, electron, gravity etc, then your audience will be impressed by your erudition and accept your preaching uncritically. This is what the Christian creationists used to do. They are now in the rubbish bin of history and you too are destined for the same fate.

      Delete
    20. I disagree with Prem Chand on the issue of atma. I believe it exists. Please note I didnt refer to Prem chand as a nutcase or crackpot even as we have differences of opinion.
      Those are reserved for who incredibly wild unsubstantiated claims such as Vadakayil, Oak, Knapp, Vartak etc.

      Regarding astral projection, there doesnt seem to any evidence for this in the scriptures. Those are my guide to any supernatural occurences or entities, so Im skeptical in this matter. Astral projection seems more like a new age western concept.

      But I did enjoy the Insidious horror series which is based on astral projection! ;-)

      Delete
    21. I took a look at the article regarding the Mahabharata revisionist dating and these are just some of the problems I have:

      1. Assigning x number of years in a generation: Just as in yojana, the distance is not clearly defiend and is left upto the subject to be defined as seen fit, similarly the vamsha or generation doesn't really specify the number of years therein. And just with yojana and nimesha, these have been manipulated to prove Hindus knew the speed of light, Vartak uses or rather misuses the flexible duration of generation to stretch out the years as he sees fit.

      2. In reference to the Aihole inscription on when the Jain temple was constructed which is given as 3375 years after the Mahabharat war. Or 556 in the Shalivahana Shaka era.

      Seems pretty straight forward but not for our hero Varkak! Evidently this is also open to interpretation , this is what he says!

      "Here the verse does not specifically say the Shalivahan Shaka but Scholars have taken granted that it is Shalivahan Shaka without any base or reasoning. The verse may have mentioned some other Shaka kings from ancient era. "

      He just simply assumes they must have been taking some other Shaka king in the hoary past as a reference! So therefore the Shaka era should be backdated by a few thousand years!
      This is absurd on many levels, Mr. Vartak being a Maharashtrian should know that Shalivahana Shaka calendar is followed in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra, Telengana and Gujarat ie. regions where Satavahana's political and cultural influence was strong. Not to mention these areas were affected by the intrustion of Shakas or Sakas(Scythians) whom Gautapmiutra Satakarni (the main candidate for Shalivahana or most likely a composite of other Satavahana kings).

      There were no Scythians during the time of Mahabharatas. Yes they were mentioned as being created from the udders of Vasishta's cow. This part of the Mahabharat dates to Puranic age. The cow didn't just yield Sakas but also Hunas,Pahlavas and Yavanas but Andhras and Dravidas.

      This is most likely a reference to the "impure" beef eating peoples invading Aryavarta, the abode of Vishwamitra (modern day Afghanistan is associated with Vasishta) after the collapse of the Mauryan empire.


      Anyway, just by examining the first few paragraphs and all the false assumptions, ignorance and misinformation of the author are evident. So we can safely dismiss his opinion on that matter.

      Delete
    22. Hey YSV,

      So you believe the atman exists, right? So, what happens to it after one dies?

      And astral projections are described in the mahabharatha. For example, take a look at how drona left his body on the 15th day of the war, just prior to his death by dhristadyumna.

      Delete
    23. This is in reply to your comment about the Mahabharata dating by Vartak:

      1. Actually, Vartak uses the number of years ruled by a king as one generation. And even if you don’t want to use that, then take a look at the mahabharatha. One generation in those days ranged from about 40-50 year. Arjuna was between 45-50 years old when he became father. Yuddhistira would have been around 55-60 years old, and others like Abhimanyu, were about 40 years old when they became father. Using this info, it seems like the mahabharatha dates somewhere from 5000 BC – 7000 BC. It is not possible to get an exact date, as the length of a generation would vary from generation to generation.

      2. There were saka kings even during mahabharatha times, and they were conquered by the pandavas prior to the rajsuya yagna. Here is a passage from mahabharatha mentioning them:

      And the son of Pandu then reduced to subjection the fierce Mlechchas residing on the sea coast, as also the wild tribes of the Palhavas, the Kiratas, the Yavanas, and the Sakas. And having subjugated various monarchs, and making all of them pay tributes, Nakula that foremost of the Kurus, full of resources, retraced his way towards his own city. And, O king, so great was the treasure which Nakula brought that ten thousand camels could carry it with difficulty on their backs. And arriving at Indraprastha, the heroic and fortunate son of Madri presented the whole of that wealth unto Yudhishthira.

      http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m02/m02031.htm

      Delete
    24. Hey Prem Chand,

      Yes there is no peer reviewed journal article that gives this definition of the atman, but that is because the atman was a very old term, and its nature is described in our ancient texts. The ancients believed the entire universe (parmatman) to be a continuum of energy, and every point on this continuum is the atman. Although we a different model of atoms today, the definition still applies, if we consider the vast empty space in the atom as the atman.

      You said consciousness is a product of neural activity in the brain, right? So, the brain gives us consciousness. But the brain is made up of neurons, so it can only give us consciousness if the neurons themselves are conscious. Likewise, the neurons can only give us consciousness if the atoms that make it up are consciousness.

      Why do certain atoms and molecules only react in a certain way, or why do certain atoms have an affinity for certain other atoms? It is because they are conscious beings.

      We say a dead person is dead because we do not get a reply from that person. That still does not mean that the person is not conscious.

      If the atom and the gravitational field are not conscious, then how does the invisible force know what to exert a force on? Also, even small atoms produce a gravitational field...

      Delete
    25. "The ancients believed the entire universe (parmatman) to be a continuum of energy, and every point on this continuum is the atman."

      I care about facts and evidence more than mere beliefs. The ancients believed in a lot of things that were untrue. They thought that the earth was the at centre of the Universe, diseases were caused by gods or demons etc etc. What you are talking about is a metaphysical belief system called pantheism. It is not a scientific theory. Hence you cannot mix it with modern scientific concepts like atoms.

      "But the brain is made up of neurons, so it can only give us consciousness if the neurons themselves are conscious."

      No, that does not obtain. A car contains many parts inside it which on their own cannot be used for transportation. Put together, these parts work to provide transportation. Individual neurons may not be conscious, but put together they form the brain which generates consciousness. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

      "Why do certain atoms and molecules only react in a certain way, or why do certain atoms have an affinity for certain other atoms?"

      Because they have differently shaped valence orbitals. This is 12th standard chemistry.

      "We say a dead person is dead because we do not get a reply from that person. That still does not mean that the person is not conscious."

      Then what is the difference between a dead person and person who is in coma sir?

      "If the atom and the gravitational field are not conscious, then how does the invisible force know what to exert a force on?"

      It exerts a force on everything nearby. Everything near a massive object like the Earth gets attracted to it. This is because the presence of Earth in the vicinity warps space-time, just like a heavy object placed in the middle of a rubber sheet warps the sheet.

      Delete
    26. "I care about facts and evidence more than mere beliefs. The ancients believed in a lot of things that were untrue. They thought that the earth was the at centre of the Universe, diseases were caused by gods or demons etc etc. What you are talking about is a metaphysical belief system called pantheism. It is not a scientific theory. Hence you cannot mix it with modern scientific concepts like atoms."

      Ancient India did not believe that the Earth was at the centre of the universe, or that diseases were caused by gods/demons... They had surgeons in the past to treat diseases. In the mahabharatha, after yuddhistira gets bady injured by karna on the 17th day of the war, he is treated and brought back to life my many surgeons. The belief the ancients had is similar to the Tesla's akasha/ether theory, which has not been disproved. There are flaws in the theory that the universe is made up of atoms with a nucleus and electrons. Read Dewey Larson's work.

      "No, that does not obtain. A car contains many parts inside it which on their own cannot be used for transportation. Put together, these parts work to provide transportation. Individual neurons may not be conscious, but put together they form the brain which generates consciousness. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts."

      Ok. I agree with that. But in a car there is a component that controls the movement of the rest of the car. What is so special in the neurons of the brain that makes them generate consciousness?

      "Because they have differently shaped valence orbitals. This is 12th standard chemistry."

      You have just told me that the shape of the valence orbitals determines the type of atoms/molecules it will react with. Ok. But what in the atom makes it recognize other atoms with the desired valence orbital structure?

      "Then what is the difference between a dead person and person who is in coma sir?"

      No difference!

      "It exerts a force on everything nearby. Everything near a massive object like the Earth gets attracted to it. This is because the presence of Earth in the vicinity warps space-time, just like a heavy object placed in the middle of a rubber sheet warps the sheet."

      If the Earth can exert a force on space-time, wouldnt space time exert an equal but opposite force, and return space-time to its original position, thus no warping of space-time?

      Delete
    27. My point about about the ancients is that they can be wrong sometimes. You said the ancients believed in paramatman. So what? That doesn't prove that it is true. You can arrive at the truth only through logic and evidence. So far you have provided no evidence for the existence of atman.

      "What is so special in the neurons of the brain that makes them generate consciousness?"

      The brain, which is made of neurons, is capable of processing a huge amount information. It has 100 billion neurons. That is 1 followed by 11 zeros. 25% of the energy consumed by the body goes just to the brain. That's why the brain is special. Its complex structure can produce consciousness just like the complex structure of a TV produces videos.

      "But what in the atom makes it recognize other atoms with the desired valence orbital structure?"

      Electrostatic attraction. Like the attraction between magnets.

      The Earth does not exert a force on space-time. It merely warps space-time. Hence Newton's 3rd law does not apply.

      Just out of curiosity, how old are you? You seem completely ignorant of even high school science and basic common sense. You are claiming that there is no difference between coma and death. If the average Indian is this dumb, I weep for the future of my country.

      Delete
    28. "My point about about the ancients is that they can be wrong sometimes. You said the ancients believed in paramatman. So what? That doesn't prove that it is true. You can arrive at the truth only through logic and evidence. So far you have provided no evidence for the existence of atman."

      Yes, the ancients can be wrong sometimes, but the existence of the atom is proven with the science, and since the nature of the atman matches with that of an atom, an atom can be considered the atman.

      "The brain, which is made of neurons, is capable of processing a huge amount information. It has 100 billion neurons. That is 1 followed by 11 zeros. 25% of the energy consumed by the body goes just to the brain. That's why the brain is special. Its complex structure can produce consciousness just like the complex structure of a TV produces videos."

      I study neuroscience and know all that, but you still didnt explain how the brain produces consciousness. There is not much difference in the neurons in the brain and those outside the brain. The major difference would be the presence of myelin sheaths in the neurons of the brain as opposed to the absence of it in the peripheral nervous system neurons. But that does not make much a difference in the mechanism in which the neurons convey info. The myelin sheath just speeds up the rate at which action potentials are propagated. They all conduct action potentials (the neurons in the brain and the ones outside of the brain), which just involves the transfer of ions across the membrane. So the process in which they transfer info is the same for the neurons in the brain and those outside the brain.

      "Electrostatic attraction. Like the attraction between magnets."

      Exactly. And how do positive charges know to get attracted to positive charges and get repelled from negative charges.

      "The Earth does not exert a force on space-time. It merely warps space-time. Hence Newton's 3rd law does not apply."

      If it does not exert a force on space-time, how does it manage to warp space-time?

      "Just out of curiosity, how old are you? You seem completely ignorant of even high school science and basic common sense. You are claiming that there is no difference between coma and death. If the average Indian is this dumb, I weep for the future of my country."

      I am 21 yrs old, and live in Canada (not India). And I said that at the micro level there is no difference between life or coma or death, as nothing gets destroyed (at the micro level).

      Delete
    29. "and since the nature of the atman matches with that of an atom, an atom can be considered the atman."

      But you have so far not established that the atman exists through evidence and reason. The only basis you have given for the existence of atman is this: "The ancients believed the entire universe (parmatman) to be a continuum of energy, and every point on this continuum is the atman." Unfortunately, this does not count as evidence for atman's existence. So why do you believe in it?

      You use your brain for thinking, memorizing, recognizing patterns and other complex activity. But you can't use the neurons outside your brain for that, can you? The reason is that the brain has vastly more neurons (100 billion) and they form a huge number of synapses (somewhere in the quadrillions I think). You don't find these features outside the brain. That's why the brain produces consciousness, while the spinal chord can't.

      "And how do positive charges know to get attracted to positive charges and get repelled from negative charges."

      Because of a fundamental force of nature called electromagnetic interaction. The other fundamental forces are gravity, strong and weak nuclear force.

      "If it does not exert a force on space-time, how does it manage to warp space-time?"

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_RhISgoXUs

      "And I said that at the micro level there is no difference between life or coma or death, as nothing gets destroyed (at the micro level)."

      Okay, then what is the difference between death and coma at the macro level?

      Delete
    30. @Milin Patel

      Your reply to my objections is completely nonsensical. Did you even read my post or did you just bulldoze with your talking points regardless?

      1.It is impossible for Sakas to be have been present in the Mahabharat era
      2. Much of Mahabharata was composed in the Puranic age and had in mind contemporary or relatively recent events such as Ajatashatru(represented by Jarasandha) or the Saka, Yavana invasions.
      3. Once again please try to get this to your thick skull. You cannot redefine the duration of a generation as you see fit to retrofit your pet dates as per Oak, vartak and other cranks. The Aihole inscription had a date for Mahabharata in mind. This did not please his highness Vartak so he just redefined the length of a generation to fix the dating.

      I am not really arguing for the veracity of the date of the Mahabharata. If it is 5000 or 6000 b.c well and good, but the evidence is shoddy at best. It is pitiful that you cant comprehend clear common sense arguments when they are presented to you on a silver platter.

      Delete
    31. YSV,

      LOL. Is there any evidence that the mahabharatha was composed in the Puranic age? If so, then please present the evidence. Yes, the mahabharatha after it was written by vyasa was edited by brahmins to comply with the social norms of the period, but to say that sakas, yavanas, mleechas were later additions to the epic sounds very foolish. They have been mentioned time and time again in the epic. Also, as mentioned in the mahabharatha over 1.6 billion people died in the war. Are you saying that all of these 1.6 billion people that died were from ancient bharatvarsha?

      That Aihole inscription only mentions Saka king. This Saka king could be an ancient one. Sakas are mentioned many times in the mahabharatha.

      And about the length of a generation, every person back then would have children once they would be past 40 yrs old. So the shortest a generation could be would be 40 years.

      Delete
    32. Prem Chand,

      "But you have so far not established that the atman exists through evidence and reason. The only basis you have given for the existence of atman is this: "The ancients believed the entire universe (parmatman) to be a continuum of energy, and every point on this continuum is the atman." Unfortunately, this does not count as evidence for atman's existence. So why do you believe in it?"

      Atman is an ancient term. To see if the atman actually exists, you would have to see its nature as describes by hindu religious texts, and then compare that with what we have found in science. The nature of an atman matches the description of the empty space in an atom, and hence, we can consider the atman as the empty space in the atom. Hence, the atman exists.

      "You use your brain for thinking, memorizing, recognizing patterns and other complex activity. But you can't use the neurons outside your brain for that, can you? The reason is that the brain has vastly more neurons (100 billion) and they form a huge number of synapses (somewhere in the quadrillions I think). You don't find these features outside the brain. That's why the brain produces consciousness, while the spinal chord can't."

      So what is so special in the complex neural circuits formed via the synaptic connections in the brain? What makes one ciruit responsible for a specific function and another one responsible for another function. In other words, what makes one circuit responsible for thinking and another one responsible for memorizing (even though both circuits involve the same mechanism (the transfer of Na and K ions across the membrane) to send a signal?

      "Because of a fundamental force of nature called electromagnetic interaction. The other fundamental forces are gravity, strong and weak nuclear force."

      Electromagnetic interaction deal with the interaction of particles with the same and opposite charges. But what makes, lets say a positive charge, want to attract to a negative charge and repel from another positive charge. "Electromagnetic interaction" simply describes the phenomenon. I am asking for the basis of this phenomenon.

      "Okay, then what is the difference between death and coma at the macro level?"

      The difference is in the structure of the morphogenetic consciousness field that keeps the individual together. This field is what forms and maintains the various organ systems in the body. It ensures the entry of O2 and exit of CO2... When one dies, this field is no longer intact and begins to degenerate causing the organ systems to also degenerate. However, this degeneration of the morphogenetic consciousness field does not happen when one is in coma.

      Delete
    33. No. The similarities between atman and atom are too trivial for there to be a connection between them. You are just engaging in apologetics for your pantheistic beliefs by co-opting the prestige of modern science.

      "So what is so special in the complex neural circuits formed via the synaptic connections in the brain?"

      Where are you going with this line of questioning? I am a not a neuroscience scholar, hence I don't know the details of the brain's chemistry. But I have provided enough justification for the theory that the brain produces consciousness. I will also mention that people who had brain injuries have reported problems with their consciousness. This is sufficient evidence to show that the brain produces consciousness. Its your turn to justify your atman theory using the brain's functioning.

      "But what makes, lets say a positive charge, want to attract to a negative charge and repel from another positive charge. "Electromagnetic interaction" simply describes the phenomenon. I am asking for the basis of this phenomenon."

      Did you watch the youtube video whose link I gave in the previous comment?

      "The difference is in the structure of the morphogenetic consciousness field that keeps the individual together."

      "Morphogenetic consciousness field" More complicated sciency sounding words used to provide cover for your beliefs. Anyway, you said that a dead person in conscious. But if their "consciousness field" degenerates or whatnot, how can they be conscious?

      Delete

    34. "LOL. Is there any evidence that the mahabharatha was composed in the Puranic age? "

      I never said it was composed but compiled in the Puranic age. Pitiful that you don't know the difference.

      "If so, then please present the evidence. Yes, the mahabharatha after it was written by vyasa was edited by brahmins to comply with the social norms of the period,"

      So there goes your Kurus were vegetarian and only vegetarians can enter heaven theory.

      " but to say that sakas, yavanas, mleechas were later additions to the epic sounds very foolish"

      hahaha, so you are saying that Scythians, Huns and Greeks existed in 5500 B.C? Is this your position? And think about this for a second. Scythians were roaming the steppes invading India for 5 millennia! It is unparalleled in Neolithic history for nomads to wander that long.
      While we know that the first chance the Scythians got, they settled down and merged into the Vedic population . In fact it was Rudradaman who is famous the first known Sanskrit inscription.

      "Also, as mentioned in the mahabharatha over 1.6 billion people died in the war. Are you saying that all of these 1.6 billion people that died were from ancient bharatvarsha?"

      hahahahaha!!!! Do you really believe that 1.6 billion people were killed in the Mahabharata war? Heck was earths population even that much. You are really a joke a minute. where is the evidence for this. And please don't point to the Mahabharata as evidence. You seem no better than a jihadi kook when asked for evidence of veracity of the Quran, he points to the Quran!


      Delete
    35. YSV,

      "I never said it was composed but compiled in the Puranic age. Pitiful that you don't know the difference."

      Wrong. You said "Much of Mahabharata was composed in the Puranic age and had in mind contemporary or relatively recent events such as Ajatashatru(represented by Jarasandha) or the Saka, Yavana invasions.". You said composed, not compiled, so you should better be careful of what you intend to say before you say it.

      "So there goes your Kurus were vegetarian and only vegetarians can enter heaven theory."

      I never claimed Kurus were vegetarian. Some of them may have been vegetarian, and others may have eaten meat. I just said that people residing in indralok (not heaven) were vegetarians. And yes, there were many changes in the social norms in india. When megasthenes came in 300 BC, he noted that India was a vegetarian country. With later invasions, non vegetarianism started to appear. It wasnt very prevalent during harshavardhana's time, but it became much more prevalent due to muslim invasions. Al beruni records a list of non veg foods that the kshatriyas, vaishyas, and shudras are allowed (and prohibited) to eat. Brahmins were vegetarians though, as mentioned by Al beruni. So... since indians were vegetarians before foreign invasions it seems likely that the vegetarian lifestyle may have been encouraged, even in the times of mahabharatha and ramayana. So possibly a lot of the references to meat eating were later additions to the epic. For example, when draupadi is in exile with her husbands, she meets jayadratha and offers him over 50 animals for breakfast. Now do you seriously think draupadi would have over 50 cooked animals with her at the moment (to offer to jayadratha), and don't you think that many animals would be much much more than would be needed to feed jayadratha and the major people that are accompanying him? Here is the text from vana parva section CCLXV:

      I offer thee fifty animals for thy train's breakfast. Besides these, Yudhishthira himself, the son of Kunti, will give thee porcine deer and Nanku deer, and does, and antelopes, and Sarabhas, and rabbits, and Ruru deer, and bears, and Samvara deer and gayals and many other animals, besides wild boars and buffaloes and other animals of the quadruped tribe.'

      http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03265.htm

      [See, it doesnt even pass a simple test of logic]

      "hahaha, so you are saying that Scythians, Huns and Greeks existed in 5500 B.C? Is this your position? And think about this for a second. Scythians were roaming the steppes invading India for 5 millennia! It is unparalleled in Neolithic history for nomads to wander that long.
      While we know that the first chance the Scythians got, they settled down and merged into the Vedic population . In fact it was Rudradaman who is famous the first known Sanskrit inscription. "

      Yeah, there were foreign tribes living their way of life for a long time. Who says they were nomads at the time of mahabharatha. And they were not invading india in the mahabharatha days, instead, the pandavas invaded their territory and extracted tribute from them. Later, conflicts among these different tribes would have forced one tribe to leave their native territory, and they would have looked towards bharatvarsha for a new home, and thus, the later invasion. I am saying that these tribes were not always nomads.

      "hahahahaha!!!! Do you really believe that 1.6 billion people were killed in the Mahabharata war? Heck was earths population even that much. You are really a joke a minute. where is the evidence for this. And please don't point to the Mahabharata as evidence. You seem no better than a jihadi kook when asked for evidence of veracity of the Quran, he points to the Quran!"

      Yes, I believe over 1.6 billion people died in the war, and about 240 000 survived. The earths population back then was probably much more than people now believe it to be. I think most people would give the estimate of like 5 million people, but that estimate has no basis...

      Delete
    36. Prem Chand,

      "No. The similarities between atman and atom are too trivial for there to be a connection between them."

      Can you please elaborate on this?

      "Where are you going with this line of questioning? I am a not a neuroscience scholar, hence I don't know the details of the brain's chemistry. But I have provided enough justification for the theory that the brain produces consciousness. I will also mention that people who had brain injuries have reported problems with their consciousness. This is sufficient evidence to show that the brain produces consciousness. Its your turn to justify your atman theory using the brain's functioning."

      Yes, the brain would be associated with consciousness, but I don't think it would produce consciousness. As far as I know, there is no research to date that shows what in the brain would produce consciousness. Have we managed to create a mini brain that in turn would generate consciousness? No.

      "Did you watch the youtube video whose link I gave in the previous comment?"

      Ok. So, why do some electrons release photons, and why do other electrons accept these photons (to produce the electromagnetic interaction). What is the reason/basis of this phenomenon?

      "Anyway, you said that a dead person in conscious. But if their "consciousness field" degenerates or whatnot, how can they be conscious?"

      A dead person is conscious in the sense that all the atoms that make up the person retain their consciousness even after death. The morphogenetic consciousness field degenerates, though, causing the body to degenerate as well as the consciousness of the person as a whole. After I die, the atoms that make me up will retain their consciousness, but there will be a loss in consciousness of the entire human being called "Milin Patel", as I will not be able to recall who I am, but individual atoms would be able to recall what they did when they were a part of "Milin Patel".

      Delete
    37. YSV,

      "I never said it was composed but compiled in the Puranic age. Pitiful that you don't know the difference."

      Wrong. You said "Much of Mahabharata was composed in the Puranic age and had in mind contemporary or relatively recent events such as Ajatashatru(represented by Jarasandha) or the Saka, Yavana invasions.". You said composed, not compiled, so you should better be careful of what you intend to say before you say it."

      I stand corrected. I apologize. I meant compiled, not composed. So we are in agreement on this?

      As to meat eating, I think it was Hsuien Tsang who noticed in much of north india meat eating was discouraged. Not sure about Megasthenes. But later on, people noticed in Vijaynagar and Mysore, people were eating boars, buffaloes and even lizards!!

      Point is dietary habits change from region to region and era to era. We cant judge the past personalities by our penchant for vegetatarianism.

      Sakas and Yavans were considered outsiders and invaders not to mention barbaric. People to the north or Uttara Kuru were said to have a nomadic lifestyle.
      I'm sure there were barbaric tribes back then but probably they weren't named as Indians distaste for foreign invaders was such that they didn't even bother learning their names. Heck even in the medieval era, Muslims were alternately called Yavanas and Turks when they weren't Greek origin at all and many Muslims were not Turk but of Afghan, Persian, Tajik,Arab or even native origin.

      Delete
    38. Your claim that 1.6 billion people died in 5000 BC is not worth commenting on. It is simply comical that you take the scriptures so literally.

      Delete
    39. The atom is a fundamental unit of baryonic matter. Which is only about 5% of stuff in the Universe. Atman, according to the scriptures, is an all-pervading force that inhabits the entire world. One has nothing to do with the other. Since you believe in the atman, you have assumed that atoms and atman are interrelated somehow. However, there is not scientific or logical basis for this assumption. It is simply an extension of your metaphysical belief system.

      "As far as I know, there is no research to date that shows what in the brain would produce consciousness."

      Like I said, people with brain injuries have reported problems with their consciousness. Now you explain your view of how consciousness is created in us, using logic and evidence.

      "Have we managed to create a mini brain that in turn would generate consciousness? No."

      Have we created artificial sphincters that produce feces? No. So feces do not come out of sphincters.

      Electrons accepting or releasing photons is a quantum mechanical event. Most QM events are stochastic ie their occurrence cannot be determined in terms of cause and effect. We can only measure the probability that a QM event happens.

      "A dead person is conscious in the sense that all the atoms that make up the person retain their consciousness even after death."

      Evidence?

      "The morphogenetic consciousness field degenerates,"

      Evidence?

      "but there will be a loss in consciousness of the entire human being called "Milin Patel", as I will not be able to recall who I am,"

      Where does the "I" exist at this point? Is it still in the body?

      Delete
    40. YSV,

      "I stand corrected. I apologize. I meant compiled, not composed. So we are in agreement on this?"

      Ok. So you mean compiled. I would have to disagree with you on this. I believe the mahabharatha and ramayana were composed and compiled by vyasa and his students around 5000 BC. This text was probably edited by later generations, though. The foreign tribes like the sakas and yavanas are an important part of the text and are often mentioned throughout the war, in bhisma parva, drona parva, and karna parva.

      "As to meat eating, I think it was Hsuien Tsang who noticed in much of north india meat eating was discouraged. Not sure about Megasthenes. But later on, people noticed in Vijaynagar and Mysore, people were eating boars, buffaloes and even lizards!!"

      Actually, megasthenes says that india is a vegetarian nation. He says:

      The people of India live upon grain, and are tillers of the soil; but we must except the hillmen, who eat the flesh of beasts of chase (Indika, pg 222).

      And the vijaynagar empire was formed in 1336, which is after muslim rule was established in India, so some islamic influence may have been present even in the lifestyle of the people there.

      "Point is dietary habits change from region to region and era to era. We cant judge the past personalities by our penchant for vegetatarianism."

      I agree with that statement, but it seems that majority of India was vegetarian and vegetarianism was preferred prior to the influence of foreign invasions (as shown by Megasthenes' records on the lifestyle of Indians).

      "Sakas and Yavans were considered outsiders and invaders not to mention barbaric. People to the north or Uttara Kuru were said to have a nomadic lifestyle."

      I agree with that. Indians did consider these foreign tribes barbaric.

      "I'm sure there were barbaric tribes back then but probably they weren't named as Indians distaste for foreign invaders was such that they didn't even bother learning their names. Heck even in the medieval era, Muslims were alternately called Yavanas and Turks when they weren't Greek origin at all and many Muslims were not Turk but of Afghan, Persian, Tajik,Arab or even native origin."

      I think the terms sakas, yavanas,.. were originally referred to as tribes, but later the name stuck with the people living in a particular region. After the mahabharatha war (by this time, the saka and yavana tribes had died out), south indians moved to northern india, and mixed. After a few generations, their progeny moved out of india to the regions that were occupied earlier by the sakas and yavanas, and hence the descendents of this progeny that moved out were referred to as sakas or yavanas (depending on the region outside of india that they inhabited).

      Delete
    41. YSV,

      "Your claim that 1.6 billion people died in 5000 BC is not worth commenting on. It is simply comical that you take the scriptures so literally."

      Actually, mahabharatha is not a scripture. It is history written as a poem. Yes there are exaggerations, but this does not seem to be an exaggeration. In udyoga parva, it mentioned that hundreds of billions of soldiers collected in virata desh. This seems to be an exaggeration. Now take a look at the text that mentions the amount of deaths in the kurukshetra war:

      Vaishampayana said, "Hearing these words of Vasudeva that were disagreeable to her, Gandhari, with heart exceedingly agitated by grief, remained silent. The royal sage Dhritarashtra, however, restraining the grief that arises from folly, enquired of Yudhishthira the just, saying, ‘If, O son of Pandu, thou knowest it, tell me the number of those that have fallen in this battle, as also of those that have escaped with life!’

      "Yudhishthira answered, ‘One billion 660 million and 20,000 men have fallen in this battle. Of the heroes that have escaped, the number is 240,165.’

      "Dhritarashtra said, ‘Tell me, O mighty-armed one, for thou art conversant with everything, what ends have those foremost of men attained.’

      http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m11/m11025.htm

      I don`t think yuddhistira would exaggerate or lie to Gandhari about the number of people that died. And anyways, of the people that survived, the number given seems like an exact value. So I think yuddhistira gave an honest value for the number of people that died in the war. I don`t see it as an exaggeration.

      Delete
    42. "Which is only about 5% of stuff in the Universe. "

      Do you have any evidence to back up this statement? If things like electrons and neutrinos comprise this other 95%, then they are still the atman as electrons and neutrinos are manifestations of the atman.

      "Like I said, people with brain injuries have reported problems with their consciousness. Now you explain your view of how consciousness is created in us, using logic and evidence."

      I believe that every point/atom in the universe has consciousness. The morphogenetic consciousness field causes these conscious atoms to orient themselves (in response to the field) in various conformations to form the various conscious life forms. In short, it is the morphogentic field that produces the unified consciousness that each individual experiences as a whole.

      Take a look at this:

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4224074/

      https://portals.mum.edu/Customized/Uploads/ByDate/2013/September_2013/September_25th_2013/Vol.%204%20Consciousness-Based%20Education%20and%20Physics13125.pdf#page=35

      "Have we created artificial sphincters that produce feces? No. So feces do not come out of sphincters."

      We can directly observe the process of how feces come out of sphincters. But we cannot directly observe how the brain produces consciousness.

      "Electrons accepting or releasing photons is a quantum mechanical event. Most QM events are stochastic ie their occurrence cannot be determined in terms of cause and effect. We can only measure the probability that a QM event happens."

      In that case, if there is no guarantee of certainty, how would you know that it is the photon that is producing the electromagnetic interaction?

      "Evidence?"

      http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v8/n9/abs/nnano.2013.170.html

      "Where does the "I" exist at this point? Is it still in the body?"

      Yes, it is still the consciousness of the entire body, as a whole.

      Delete
  5. ==============Dieties represent evolution of understanding. A relatively primitive people could envision storm gods ,fire, wind etc representing senses and sense based philosophies but more sophisticated people could create abstract philosophies which are represented by Vishnu and Shiva.================

    Even if that is true, it still does not alter the fact that old Vedic gods were dumped in favour of new gods like Vishnu, Shiva, Parashakti, Ganesha and so on. You say that Pauranic religion represents sophistication. Upanishads talks about formless creator of universe and yet you say that advent of new gods represents advancement in religious thought?

    ================Since when are Hindutvadis the Popes and Imams of Hinduism? If the "natives" (what a condescending word) of India prefer to not to honor this ridiculous diety, that is their right.=============================
    Hindutvavadis are popes and imams of Hindutva and not Hinduism. Native only means inhabitant of a land. For NRIs like you BHARATAMBA may be a ridiculous deity. But it was precisely because most Indians for last 100 years have chosen to worship this deity that today there is a country called Indian Union. Had this emotional and religious fervour been missing, India would have had become another Europe.


    ==================I explained why people Vishnu and Shiva take prominence over Vedic gods. Though replaced is the wrong word. They superseded and syncretized many Vedic dieties. Vishnu and Savitr are mentioned in the Rg Veda as a solar diety ,while Rudra is a prototype of Shiva with which were merged elements of Indra as well.
    Indeed Koenraad Elst wrote an interesting essay on the same
    http://www.bharatvani.org/books/ait/ch47.htm
    I dont agree with everything there but the reasoning is sound. Vedic gods simply found a new home and attributes in Puranic gods==========================
    Vishnu and Rudra are no more than minor deities in Rigveda and if my memory is right, same is the case with Shakti or her forms , Ganesha, Skanda and so on in Rigveda. Even if one were to accept that present Indian gods have Vedic connection, still it remains a fact that main Vedic deities like Indra was dethroned and relegated to status of godlings.
    And even more importantly – none of the major Hindu religions like Vaishnavaism, Shaivaism or Shakteyaism have any need for Vedas. They do not care much for Vedas beyond paying lip service.
    To say that Rigvedic religion and Shavaism/Vaishnavaism/ Shaktism are one and the same is as non-sensical as claiming that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all one religion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems you are incapable of reading what I write or you are quite ignorant of Vedic and Puranic philosophy. Indra, Varuna ,Agni etc werent dumped as much as they were updated ,replaced and syncretized as the understanding of Prakriti vs more abstract concepts in Samkhya philosophy.

      Re Bharatamba

      And I say to you this diety has no basis in Vedas and Puranas but is an amalgamation of the ideas of the semi Anglicized Bankim Chandra Chaterjee and the concept of nation as female diety already popular in Europe as Lady Britannia, Marianne of France etc. Heck even Americans at one point had Columbia(which still adorns the movie studio logo of the same name).
      Show me any reference to Bharatmata before the arrival of the British. Can you do it? If not , why not? If yes, then you are in a bit of a pickle as you have your Bharatamba replacing other dieties , a process which you seem to abhor.

      I never said Vishnu and Rudra were major dieties in the Vedas. Do you even read what I write?I said they had evolved into the dieties that we know them today as Vishnu and Shiva?

      The Puranas which establish Vaishnavism, Shaivism and Shaktism have many of their concepts derived from the Vedas. They just go beyond them. Why is this so hard to understand?

      Delete


  6. ================All in all, you sound like the type of the type of dimwit I was talking about. He who thinks religion is silly but wants an ideology named after a religion in order to protect the practitioners of the religion. And feels the best way of achieving this is to tear down the foundation of the religion and turn into some monstrosity of a hyper nationalism masquerading as religion. And you wonder why people laugh at you.=============================================
    There was something called Hindu and Hindustan just like European and Europe when all mighty English conquered India. But to say that native faith of India is Hinduism is as preposterous as saying that native faith of Europe is Europeanism! Sorry – we cannot accept the fact that there was a religion called Hinduism. Does any Agama, Purana or Veda uses that word?
    Original meaning of Hindu simply means a person fully Indian by ancestry and belief. Even an atheist if he is an ethnic Indian without any loyalties outside subcontinent is Hindu as per our Karl Marx, VD Savarkar. That would mean a non-Indian who start to worship gods like Shiva or Vishnu can become a Shaiva or Vaishnava, but never a Hindu.
    As for those who laugh at us, they are free to do so. But we do not care, for Indian posterity belongs fully to us.
    Before 2014, world laughed at us. Now many are no longer laughing. Within a decade nobody will be laughing. And let me tell you a truth – history was always created by idiots and dreamers because only they have the courage to put idea into practice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Hindu" is a thoroughly arbitrary name thrown about by Persians and then later Turkic Muslims. We use it as a matter of convenience though Dharmic religions is a better term and thankfully is gaining traction.

      Oh great another Modi bhakt! Should we start April 2014 as Modi Samvat? What exactly has he done that has revolutionary exactly? I get his appeal and I tentatively supported him but only as the lesser of three evils.

      Delete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Absolute loyalty to following: 1. Mother 2. Father 3. Guru Sahib 4. Homeland

    Akhand Aryavarta for Aryaputra with Sovereign Sikh State as heartbeat of such land. Amritsar is our spiritual capital and Lahore is our political capital.

    Current whittled down rakshasic 'india' is temporary.

    Deg Teg Fateh: Natural Law superior to worldly laws of 'indyan constitution'.

    Future of Dharm is bright: future belongs to Scythian vegetaryans - our glorious lineages (gotras) are eternal. (Actually to the Divine, our ancestry is utterly irrelevant.) All that matters is our pyar (love/affection) for Him.

    Dhan Baba Nank our grandfather and Dhan Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji our father.

    Sanskritize/saffronize/civilize: our lineages are Eternal. We have nowhere to go but up: "dharti hor parai hor hor" Jap ji of Guru Nanak Dev Sahib ji. Earth like planets belong to Aryavartan sages, saints and seers.

    Earth belongs to the MahaPurakh, in other words, "beauty is welcome everywhere".

    Semitic slavery is simply hideous. Better to be slim and free than a fat slave. YogRishi RamDev is good man. Health is wealth - yoga superior to allopathic english medical fraud.

    Ignorance of law is no excuse. Natural law is superior to worldly laws based on fraud colonial english paperwork known as 'constitution': we need Dharam, not fraud laws that promote genocide of everything that is good, true, beautiful and sacred. Natural law (dharam) is highest.

    Personally I love Inder dev: I know he is as real as I know my own name. Akal Purakh's magnanimity, greatness and grandeur cannot be conceived by little minds.

    I enjoy this blog. Keep up the good work.

    India's past is pretty bad, but our future is bright. Let's live in present to spread truth everywhere. Earn honest living. Share with needy. And always remember Rab (God).

    Live in mode of Truth: Satvic life is best. Ahimsa in thought word and deed. Settle all disputes non-violently. Let us stop fighting with each other once and for all.

    Another good website is Agniveer. Let us fight enemies of Dharam instead of each other. Why must citizens of Aryavarta quarrel with each other when our enemies are salivating at the thought of enslaving us yet again? Ahimsa works with fellow Dharmics (Zarathustrians/Jains/Sikhs/Buddhists/Vedics-'hindus').
    One fine day Kalki will return and save the day. Waiting for Satjug.
    Nietzche says Hinduism can never produce a cypress, that hinduism is a creeper. Let us prove him wrong. Study some Schopenhauer - he was friendly to our Dharmic worldview.
    Hindu might mean thief but Muslim is same as dirty, and not just because their houses are unclean.

    We can start to improve Bharat by reducing our use of angreji language and going back to language of our Gods, sages, saints and seers.

    Friends of India please develop durdristi - prudence and patience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scythians are vegetarians??!! THis is news to me! Are you a Jat by any chance? Jats often entertain notions of Scythian ancestry. Most likely Jats were an Indo Aryan pastoralists who migrated from Sindh region after the Baloch invasions from Iran around the 11th centurty to find a new home in Punjab, Haryana, and UP. Jats have absolutely no Saka gotras, though some Rajputs as well as Saurashtrans have Saka as well as Huna gotras. Names like Jwala, Chawla and Saxena stand out.

      India's past is mixed, it has good moments and bad like many other nations. If India was united by the British, Im afraid British customs are part of Republic of India's DNA and that includes the English language.What would the common language be? Forget Tamils, even Marathis(whose language is quite close to Hindi), PUnjabis(ditto) ,Bengalis and Oriyans will object to Hindi as a national language as these peoples look down on Hindi speakers as riff raff and are proud (justifiably) of their literary heritage in their respective languages.

      We have little in common with Zoroastrians. Sassanids and Achaeminind who followed this faith looked down upon Vedic people and Vedic people returned the favor by calling them mlecchas. Panini who was from Gandhara then under Achaeminind rule or rather a satrapy doesnt even mention them as his disgust for them was so intense even though he was from the border region and looked more Northern Persian than Indian (he had brown hair and blue eyes much like Kapoors do today).

      Agniveer is a crank spewing an lot of unsubstantiated rubbish. I have corrected his collosal blunder on the dietary habits and rituals in the Vedic era earlier last year under a three part series on meat eating and Vedic sacrifices. CHeck it out


      Delete
    2. Hey YSV,

      It seems like you call everyone that disagrees with you a crank or a crackpot. Agniveer always backs up his claims with evidence from the vedas where vegetarianism is preferred. Even in mahabharatha, only people who were vegetarian could enter indra lok.

      Delete
    3. Seems like this nutcase Prabhnoor you also are incapable of doing any critical thinking or research and just mindlessly swallow any propaganda like gallons of cow urine you no doubt consume

      Seems that I have to shove any contrarian opinion down to your throat, well here goes

      http://empiresoflight.blogspot.ae/2014/12/animal-sacrifices-are-intrinsic-to.html
      http://empiresoflight.blogspot.ae/2014/12/animal-sacrifices-were-intrinsic-to.html
      http://empiresoflight.blogspot.ae/2014/12/animal-sacrifices-were-intrinsic-to_11.html

      Over here, I pretty take apart pretty much each and every one of Agniveer/Vadakayil dishonest and illiterate interepretation of Vedic verses(Mahabharat doesn't count due to reasons I explained therein) and expose them for the frauds and fools that they are.

      But then understanding it will require an IQ higher than what you possess.

      Delete
    4. I looked at the first post and a bit of the second post on animal sacrifices. The first is just a rant on vadakayil. What a way to gain popularity! Anyways... The second post had some sanskrit that you showed the translations for. I will get back to you once I find time to translate them myself, as it seems like you have got the translation from sacred texts website (from some Maurice Bloomfield who translated the hymns in 1897).

      The ones from mahabharatha you posted dont count as they are from a highly interpolated santi parva. But take a look at this from vana parva:

      Vaisampayana said, "And the city of Indra which Arjuna saw was delightful and was the resort of Siddhas and Charanas. And it was adorned with the flowers of every season, and with sacred trees of all kinds. And he beheld also celestial gardens called Nandana--the favourite resort of Apsaras. And fanned by the fragrant breezes charged with the farina of sweet-scented flowers, the trees with their lord of celestial blossoms seemed to welcome him amongst them. And the region was such that none could behold it who had not gone through ascetic austerities, or who had not poured libations on fire. It was a region for the virtuous alone, and not for those who had turned their back on the field of battle. And none were competent to see it who had not performed sacrifices or observed rigid vows, or who were without a knowledge of the Vedas, or who had not bathed in sacred waters, or who were not distinguished for sacrifices and gifts. And none were competent to see it who were disturbers of sacrifices, or who were low, or who drank intoxicating liquors, or who were violators of their preceptors' bed, or who were eaters of meat, or who were wicked.

      http://sacred-texts.com/hin/m03/m03043.htm

      This shows that drinking liquor or eating meat is not recommended in sanatana dharma. But, you still will find some characters that indulge in meat and liquor consumption in mahabharatha, as nobody was perfect.

      Delete
  11. We (those of entirely vegetarians lineages) know we are and that's good enough for us. We are establishing Ahimsa programs globally (ahimsa dairies, ahimsa apiaries, ahimsa wool, etc. as well as rejection of entire monsanto/mcdonalds/marriot/marxist/malthusian maniacs. We Dharmics recognize one another by the Bhag on our faces (glow created by imbibing Naam).
    Sikh Archives is not a bad site unfortunately they reject obvious superiority of Vegetarian Ethic. I suspect there is a Pak/Saudi connection. Sri Prabhupada is greatest Bengali of modern times - his four regulative principles are actually foundation of Cosmic or Natural Law.
    Many sects of North Bharat have historically always been completely vegetarian - no meat no fish no eggs. This is fact. Pity 'indians' know each other less than foreigners - that's why we are the laughingstock of the world - bloody abrhamic cults are in their dying days... Guru Sahib loves all. RamDev is one of India's finest. We need organic grains/pulses/leafy greens - Kaljug agriculture is rakshasic - boycott kosher khand - get Gurhd sugars - the hebraic chrislamic milk mafia is doomed to end in failure. Knaida is an aboriginal hellhole better known as Gaza Strip of the New World. Soon I will purchase Ahimsa milk products.
    I repeat there are entire vegetarain lineages still intact after many millennia of perverse foreign rule. Peta is anti-Dharmic fraud as they are against Holi celebration - I love all Dharmic festivals, especially Lohri - fanatics only celebrate holidays related to Sikhi - such fanatics will probably make tweezers illegal... Kindly refrain from guessing my ancestry: it is private except I will say this, I am not trash from the test tube: lucky to have Sikh parents. We know the origins of ourselves and our beloved ancestors better than any genetic test or internet expert. Science of day keeps changing. Only Dharm (Natural Law) is eternal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "We (those of entirely vegetarians lineages) know we are"

      Vegetarianism is lifestyle choice , not a lineage.

      "entire monsanto/mcdonalds/marriot/marxist/malthusian maniacs"

      I get your gripes about Monsato and Macdonalds though I think its foolish. What did the Marriot hotel chain do anything to you LOL. And you are very much a Malthusian if you are against implementing technology in agriculture.

      Sikh Archives is not a bad site unfortunately they reject obvious superiority of Vegetarian Ethic. I suspect there is a Pak/Saudi connection."

      Hahahaha. Now just because someone isnt for vegetarians , they Pak or Saudi agens?! Now I have heard everything.

      "Sri Prabhupada is greatest Bengali of modern times"

      No,he is not. There is a plethora of Bengali luminaries to choose from. IMO he is somewhere at the bottom.

      "|boycott kosher khand - get Gurhd sugars - the hebraic chrislamic milk mafia is doomed to end in failure. Knaida is an aboriginal hellhole better known as Gaza Strip of the New World. Soon I will purchase Ahimsa milk products."

      And here we go with that trash. If these crackpot anti semitic theories are an integral part of your worldview, I would recommend you desist from commenting here.

      Kindly refrain from guessing my ancestry: it is private"

      Eh? You are one who brought up the great Scythian vegetarians. I just filled in the blanks of your crank claims? If you want to remain private then dont go around talking about your ancestry and your religion not to mention talking crap about other religions, cultures and lifestyles.

      Delete
    2. @prabhnoor

      In your enthusiasm for bashing the "abrahamics", you seem to have forgotten that Sikhism itself has an abrahamic root. "Rab"- this word comes from a semitic root related to the Hebrew word "rabbi" meaning master, lord, teacher etc.

      Delete
    3. Good point! There is also waheguru (wahe- derived from arabic word for "one"),akhal takhat , qurbani and host of other words and Semitic monotheist ideas enshrined in their scripture. While it is true that the British emphasized that Sikhs was seperate was Hinduism but the seeds were there for them to work with. Of course neither di Bhindranwale nor Indira Gandhi help matters any.

      Delete
  12. typo: "we know who We are

    Is wide awake Indian gentile blogger a trustworthy source of information?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What use is it asking me since you already seem to have made your mind about it? I can tell from these crackpot theories of yours. As you can tell, I dont think much of heavy breathing websites brimming with unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

      Delete
  13. Wahe is Persian: Aryan
    Guru is most Dharmic of words
    Non-veg are plague upon Dharti Mata

    ReplyDelete
  14. This guy Milan Patel Is A retard! He is speaking like he lived in those ages! Donot reply to this assol milan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL. Just because my opinion is different than yours, that makes me a retard? Haha!

      Delete
  15. @YSV & Premchnd

    Pranam to both of u :) Also superb articles from YSV and good discussions. YSV though i was absent from ur blog for a long time,still by force of our old friendship,I request a post on fidel castro and che guevara from u,as per ur convenience and time :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @JAM

      Nice to see you here again JAM :)

      Delete
    2. Hey Jam, welcome back. Honestly I dont know what about Castro and Guevera I can say that that hasnt been said already. But I was rather irked at Narendra Modi tribute to Castro on occasion of his death. will say something about that shortly!

      Delete
  16. @YSV

    Did u discuss on castro in the meantime?then i have missed it.but on che guevara i remember ur discussions in comment section.anyway YSV can u give a gist of what ur opinion on castro is,here in the comments section or as a separate post?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Captain Ajit Vadakayil is an Israeli hasbara source http://vadakayilzioniststooge.blogspot.in/
    😝😝😝😝😝 lol .... imagaine our mallu man who sailed 30 yrs who introduced word R to indian was actually his "chillar" agent this is greatest back swing in history

    ReplyDelete
  18. Dear YSV,

    Can you do a post on Israel and Zionism. After all, since you have spent some years there you may have some authentic views on them. Just a request.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Another informative blog… Thank you for sharing it… Best of luck for further endeavor too. For more information visit legal herbal empire for sale

    ReplyDelete
  20. @YSV

    What do the conservative arab muslims think when they see kurdish women fighting with men side by side against ISIS?i am asking because Saudi&UAE are particularly well known for the social limitations on women. And a second question,did the population in arab peninsula become more civilized with the advent of islam by Muhammad,or was it better before the introduction of islam?On this front,traditional scholars have held the view that arab peninsula became more civilized with the advent of islam,in the sense that it was even worse before islam.While a new group of hindutva scholars argue the opposite,they claim that the area had a thriving pagan culture,which was wiped out by the introduction of islam.I would love to know ur neutral opinion on this matter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ysv it would be better if u increase the recent comments window ,or else it is becoming hard to keep track of all the discussions.

      Delete
    2. Even Kurdish men are uncomfortable with their women fighting in the field. I saw a Russia Today documentary on these women and for them military service is not a time pass or something to check mark on their resume like many stupid Western feminists joining their respective country's militaries. This is for them literally life or death. Or even worse in their eyes, sexual slavery. A parallel can be made with the LTTE but unlike the LTTE the participation is mostly voluntary.

      Saudi Arabia and UAE are very different countries. Even talking to a woman in a public place is made impossible while UAE has beaches and nightclubs where women wear revealing clothing and while pre marital sex is indeed a crime it is not it is actively prosecuted by the law enforcement authorities.
      The only clear cut advantage of women post Islam compared to pre Islamic Arabian pagan culture is Prophet Mohd ending the practice of female infanticide. Every other Islamic aspect of Islamic culture concerning women is a mixed blessing at best.

      Delete
    3. @YSV

      thanks for the response.what do u think about the pre islamic pagan culture?was it better or worse,compared to the islamic society?

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. Pre Islamic Arab culture of raiding,plunder, rape and violence is pretty much the same as the Islamic doctrine of war. What differentiates both of course was that the former was more tolerant of other religions.
      Women were often warriors, chiefs and traders but they were also subjects of female infanticide. Much of these customs prevailed during the early years of Islam when they were a mobile expanding society but once they settled down the patriarchal restrictive norms we associate with Islam came into being
      From the Arab point of view Islam was well..a godsend. Suddenly these backward tribes in a nowhere corner were now the centre of the world and brought them untold prestige and riches.

      Delete
  21. @YSV

    Is this just a perception or it is a fact that Shias do seem to be more tolerant and inclusive of nonmuslim philosophies than sunnis,in general?Even Shia boards in india often come out in support of Hindu issues like Ram mandir etc.And shias do seem to be open about adoption nonmuslim worship methods as well.But what is ur perception on this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with this. As to why? I can only speculate. Perhaps because for the most part Shias were on the fringes of the Islamic world and made common cause with and adopted over time the beliefs and practices of other religions.
      Some Shia sects gave rise to other religions such Druze which is not considered Islamic.
      Shia Iran may be a theocracy but it is far more tolerant of religions such as Judaism,Christianity and Zoroastrianism than Saudi Wahhabis where no observation of other religion than Islam is permitted. Heck Iran is even superior to so called secular Muslim countries such as Egypt, Syria and Lebanon in this regard.

      Shia in Iran have considerably adopted various Zoroastrian practices. It is not without reason Nowruz is a big deal in Iran but hardly any bother about the Islamic New Year.

      Delete
    2. YSV
      thanks a lot for ur reply _/\_ I have been reading about the shia interpretation of quran for some time now.It seems shias have stressed a lot on the ayats of mercy and tolerance in the quran.I guess that is the source of their tolerance to nonmuslim cultures.Do u think the original islam was meant to be Shia islam,as per prophet muhammad's thinkings?Or was sunni islam the way Muhammad had wanted global islam to be?

      Delete
    3. jam and ysv I wuld like to add that in Quran there is no reference to mecca and medina as holy site for Islam , pre Islamic tradition "Late Islamic masculinization of the Arabian Goddess, Al-Lat or Al-Ilat—the Allatu of the Babylonians—formerly worshipped at the Kaaba in Mecca. It has been shown that 'the Allah of Islam' was a male transformation of 'the primitive lunar deity of Arabia.' Her ancient symbol the crescent moon still appears on Islamic flags, even though modern Moslems no longer admit any feminine symbolism whatever connected with the wholly patriarchal Allah."

      Delete
  22. "The Annals of Ashurbanipal said Arabia was governed by queens for as long as anyone could remember....

    "Mohammed's legends clearly gave him a matriarchal family background. His parents' marriage was matrilocal. His mother remained with her own family and received her husband as an occasional visitor....

    "Pre-Islamic Arabia was dominated by the female-centered clans. Marriages were matrilocal, inheritance matrilineal. Polyandry—several husbands to one wife—was common. Men lived in their wives' homes. Divorce was initiated by the wife. If she turned her tent to face east for three nights in a row, the husband was dismissed and forbidden to enter the tent again

    Doctrines attributed to Mohammed simply re-versed the ancient system in favor of men. A Moslem husband could dismiss his wife by saying 'I divorce thee' three times. As in Europe, the change from matriarchate to patriarchate came about only gradually and with much strife.

    "Mohammedan scriptures, often erroneously thought to have been written by Mohammed. Moslems don't believe this. But many don't know the Koran was an enlarged revised version of the ancient Word of the Goddess Kore, revered by Mohammed's tribe, the Koreshites (Children of Kore), who guarded her shrine at Mecca

    "The Koran is a not 'a product of Muhammad or even of Arabia,' but a collection of earlier Judeo-Christian liturgical materials stitched together to meet the needs of a later age."

    Who Was Mohammed?
    Like that of Buddha, Jesus, Moses, et al., Mohammed's historicity is questionable. He seems to be yet another religious figurehead invented to create a "state" religion. His "history" is full of fantastic legends, but even if we were to find a "historical person" there, it would not be one of very high or affable character.

    "Of women, his taste ran to widows with a temper... For recreation he delighted in cobbling shoes. Perhaps his greatest joy was when he beheld the severed heads of his enemies.

    "His dislikes were just as varied. He detested silk-lined clothes, interest charges, dogs, others' lies, Jews and Christians. He hated poets, and said, 'Every painter will be in hell.'
    Strange indeed was the character of the prophet. How could such a person inspire such reverence and devotion? It is one of the puzzles of history.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Islam is not religion of peace as portrayed by other intellectual idiots Islam, which means "submission," is built upon older myths and traditions and was designed to usurp the power of Christians, Jews and women. lastly few years ago
    FRAUD HISTORAIN NAMED CAPTAIN AJIT VADAKAYIL WROTE ABOUT KODANGALLUR BEING ORIGIN OF ISLAM ADDED MANY BULLSHIT THEROY OF KABBA BEING SHIVA TEMPLE ETC.FIRST OFF U HAVE ESTABLISH WHETHER MAN NAMED MOHAAMED EXISTED I INTIAALY BELIVED IT B TRUE ,BUT LATER AFTER READING MANY ARTICLE I REALSISED HE WAS SHOOTING TWO TARGET WITH HIS BULLSHIT THEORY ,HE WANTED TO MAKE KERALA AS CENTER FOR ORGIN OF ISLAM XIANITY AND JUDAISM
    THEN HE HAD AXE TO GRIND AGAINST HIS FELLOW MALLU CASTE NAMBOODRIS SO COMBINE TWO
    U WILL GET THE IDEA OF HIS HATE CAMPAIGN AND HIS MAALU PRIDE

    http://ajitvadakayil.blogspot.in/2011/07/muslim-history-in-kerala-capt-ajit.html

    ReplyDelete
  24. I will add few more points later as it will b too long

    ReplyDelete