Sugriva’s Atlas - 14000 years back

[Nungali]

 

5 minutes ago, dwai said:

If you actually listen to what is being said, he (Sugriva) gives the description of the path but tells them to go no further than a certain point

 

 

 

There is a 'path'  from India to Antarctica ?

 

5 minutes ago, dwai said:

as he calls the Antarctic region "Yama's Kingdom" (Yama is the God of Death/underworld in the Hindu tradition).

 

 

"  That Yama's kingdom was in India is no doubt ....   the realm ruled by Yama is said to be the lower heavens adjoining Earth, though his realm extends through the universe in the upper and middle regions of the earth.  ....  Scriptures say that the land between the Vātarani (also known as Vasātapta^[21]) and Vaivasvati rivers was Yama's Kingdom. ......   Yama's kingdom celebrated as a joyful place ....

Yama's domain was no tyrannical kingdom ..."

 

http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Yama#Yama.27s_Kingdom

 

 

 

Sounds more like Airyana Vaeja in the Palmir's

[dwai]

44 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

There is a 'path'  from India to Antarctica ?

Straight down on the Indian Ocean. You know that ancient Indians were also a great maritime civilization, right?

 

44 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

"  That Yama's kingdom was in India is no doubt ....   the realm ruled by Yama is said to be the lower heavens adjoining Earth, though his realm extends through the universe in the upper and middle regions of the earth.  ....  Scriptures say that the land between the Vātarani (also known as Vasātapta^[21]) and Vaivasvati rivers was Yama's Kingdom. ......   Yama's kingdom celebrated as a joyful place ....

Yama's domain was no tyrannical kingdom ..."

 

http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Yama#Yama.27s_Kingdom

 

 

 

Sounds more like Airyana Vaeja in the Palmir's

I think he (Nilesh) thinks it is Antarctica from the description provided in the Ramayana, and also because other texts have something like this to say ---

Quote

The Bhagavata Purana describes Naraka as beneath the earth: between the seven realms of the underworld (Patala) and the Garbhodaka Ocean, which is the bottom of the universe. It is located in the South of the universe. Pitrloka, where the dead ancestors (Pitrs) headed by Agniṣvāttā reside, is also located in this region. Yama, the Lord of Naraka, resides in this realm with his assistants.^[3] The Devi Bhagavata Purana mentions that Naraka is the southern part of universe, below the earth but above Patala.^[4] The Vishnu Purana mentions that it is located below the cosmic waters at the bottom of the universe.^[5] The Hindu epics too agree that Naraka is located in the South, the direction which is governed by Yama and is often associated with Death. Pitrloka is considered as the capital of Yama, from where Yama delivers his justice.^[6]

 

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, dwai said:

Straight down on the Indian Ocean. You know that ancient Indians were also a great maritime civilization, right?

 

Now you have done it !     Thats one of my favourite subjects !

 

  Amongst the remains of the oldest ocean going boats yet found  ( off the coast of Oman ) included ;  - fragments of  reed boats -  lumps of bitumen,  imprinted with reed bundles, ropes and mats   ,   an Indus valley ivory comb, an Indus valley copper trading seal, various Indian carnelian beads, and quantities of broken pottery containers from the Indus valley  A copper axe and a necklace of copper beads, both of possible Indus valley origin.

 

We dont have much as far as images go though

 

 

It is thought the birds where used as a navigation aid .

 

But maybe the carvers of these images where not as skilled as the boat builders ? Here is a model of the concept from British Museum

 

 

Some people dont  think its possible but check this out ;

 

The longest known raft voyage in history , started in Ecuador  went  13,000 km across the Pacific and ended up landing just up the coast from my location  ( east coast Australia ) ! 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vital_Alsar_Pacific_raft_expeditions

Then there is that whole 'Eden in the East ' cultural dispersal  idea for an originating centre of civilisation - that relies wholly (and is central to the theories about origins , especially of Chinese , Americans and Polynesians ) on very early sea craft skills .

 

6 hours ago, dwai said:

 

I think he (Nilesh) thinks it is Antarctica from the description provided in the Ramayana, and also because other texts have something like this to say ---

 

 

 

I think   he   thinks that as well     

 

But hindupedia doesnt seem to . Its a matter of translation and comparison of often obscure texts .  I have been witness to enough discussion , debate and outright fight  .... amongst fellow Hindus  themselves  .... including that all Hindus originally  came from the Arctic  .

[dwai]

6 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Now you have done it !     Thats one of my favourite subjects !

 

  Amongst the remains of the oldest ocean going boats yet found  ( off the coast of Oman ) included ;  - fragments of  reed boats -  lumps of bitumen,  imprinted with reed bundles, ropes and mats   ,   an Indus valley ivory comb, an Indus valley copper trading seal, various Indian carnelian beads, and quantities of broken pottery containers from the Indus valley  A copper axe and a necklace of copper beads, both of possible Indus valley origin.

 

We dont have much as far as images go though

 

 

It is thought the birds where used as a navigation aid .

 

But maybe the carvers of these images where not as skilled as the boat builders ? Here is a model of the concept from British Museum

 

 

Some people dont  think its possible but check this out ;

 

The longest known raft voyage in history , started in Ecuador  went  13,000 km across the Pacific and ended up landing just up the coast from my location  ( east coast Australia ) ! 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vital_Alsar_Pacific_raft_expeditions

There has been a discovery of the original dwaraka (Krishna’s capital) off the gulf of cambay and dated to, varyingly, between 5-9K years ago. The Indian oceanographic institute and Archaeological society of India are studying it. 

Until the 17th Century, Indian ship builders were considered among the best in the world. 
https://www.newindianexpress.com/lifestyle/spirituality/2018/aug/12/the-mythical-city-of-dwarka-1855600.html

 

6 minutes ago, Nungali said:

Then there is that whole 'Eden in the East ' cultural dispersal  idea for an originating centre of civilisation - that relies wholly (and is central to the theories about origins , especially of Chinese , Americans and Polynesians ) on very early sea craft skills .

 

 

 

I think   he   thinks that as well     

 

But hindupedia doesnt seem to . Its a matter of translation and comparison of often obscure texts .  I have been witness to enough discussion , debate and outright fight  .... amongst fellow Hindus  themselves  .... including that all Hindus originally  came from the Arctic  .

Yes there certainly is lot of disagreement internally too.  
 

But in order to find the truth, first step is to acknowledge the new evidence, and in fact not dismiss textual evidence, just because! 

[Nungali]

It is not  the  textual evidence  that is  dismissed   'just because' .    It is certain people's interpretation of textual evidence .   Some  Indian scholar's  interpretations seem more valid than others . 

 

Eg. Tilak gave lots of textual evidence , astronomy, ritual analysis , etc to show the Vedic Homeland was in the Arctic and they migrated down though Central Asia into north India .   Since that was written, science has moved on and discovered a lot more , so Tilak is out of fashion , unpopular and sometimes raged against .

 

They are the reasons I  dismiss Tilak's interpretation of text .  That does not mean I am rejecting a particular interpretation ' just because'    it is  religious text .

 

 

[dwai]

10 hours ago, Nungali said:

It is not  the  textual evidence  that is  dismissed   'just because' .    It is certain people's interpretation of textual evidence .   Some  Indian scholar's  interpretations seem more valid than others . 

 

Eg. Tilak gave lots of textual evidence , astronomy, ritual analysis , etc to show the Vedic Homeland was in the Arctic and they migrated down though Central Asia into north India .   Since that was written, science has moved on and discovered a lot more , so Tilak is out of fashion , unpopular and sometimes raged against .

 

They are the reasons I  dismiss Tilak's interpretation of text .  That does not mean I am rejecting a particular interpretation ' just because'    it is  religious text .

 

 

Yes Tilak’s version is not accepted. I think you’re missing a point — academia used to have all the power in this, and the ones sitting in western universities ruled the roost. I’ve been involved (not active anymore) in an effort to wrest control from these academics for the past 20 odd years, just so Indian scholars can get a chance to put their opinions out without being rejected without even a proper hearing. 
 

Now, mind you, many of these Indian scholars are exemplars in their own fields (and I dare say, order of magnitude smarter than the academics who are “experts” of indology), as many are not “professional” indologists. Meaning, they spend (have spent) a significant portion of their lives dedicated to a project that gave them no practical return on interest. Things are changing now. There are departments of such studies in Indian universities, especially in some of the most elite technical universities - they get government grants so they can research without the interference and gaslighting by the likes of Wendy Doniger, Michael Witzel etc. 

[Apech]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

Yes Tilak’s version is not accepted. I think you’re missing a point — academia used to have all the power in this, and the ones sitting in western universities ruled the roost. I’ve been involved (not active anymore) in an effort to wrest control from these academics for the past 20 odd years, just so Indian scholars can get a chance to put their opinions out without being rejected without even a proper hearing. 
 

Now, mind you, many of these Indian scholars are exemplars in their own fields (and I dare say, order of magnitude smarter than the academics who are “experts” of indology), as many are not “professional” indologists. Meaning, they spend (have spent) a significant portion of their lives dedicated to a project that gave them no practical return on interest. Things are changing now. There are departments of such studies in Indian universities, especially in some of the most elite technical universities - they get government grants so they can research without the interference and gaslighting by the likes of Wendy Doniger, Michael Witzel etc. 

 

 

Nothing personal but this sounds slightly deranged.

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

 

Nothing personal but this sounds slightly deranged.

Why deranged? And what sounds deranged?  

[Nungali]

5 hours ago, dwai said:

Yes Tilak’s version is not accepted. I think you’re missing a point — academia used to have all the power in this, and the ones sitting in western universities ruled the roost. I’ve been involved (not active anymore) in an effort to wrest control from these academics for the past 20 odd years, just so Indian scholars can get a chance to put their opinions out without being rejected without even a proper hearing. 
 

Now, mind you, many of these Indian scholars are exemplars in their own fields (and I dare say, order of magnitude smarter than the academics who are “experts” of indology), as many are not “professional” indologists. Meaning, they spend (have spent) a significant portion of their lives dedicated to a project that gave them no practical return on interest. Things are changing now. There are departments of such studies in Indian universities, especially in some of the most elite technical universities - they get government grants so they can research without the interference and gaslighting by the likes of Wendy Doniger, Michael Witzel etc. 

 

No I am not missing that point at all .  I have written on this very subject many times on TDBs  . I have also cited Toby Wilkensons's preface to ' Genesis of the Pharaohs' as an excellent expose of these past researches and an introduction to 'evidence based research ' .    And Wilkenson points out  how archaeology has advanced since the study of the subject has increased in places like India and Africa and other places - actually, if you think India has it bad , its much worse in Africa - but I have educated historian contacts there too that fill me on new discoveries and developments .    I have told you numerous times I am in contact with such people and often discuss things with them .   Many Indian scholars have trouble with crank Indian youtubes as well and as I have said many times ; they fight amongst themselves  .... and that fight is usually between the crank youtuber and the  Indian academics you mention .

 

You do realise   that a driving ambition to " ....wrest control from these academics for the past 20 odd years, just so Indian scholars can get a chance to put their opinions out ... "  is possibly clouding the research results and conclusions , just like the attempt was  to mix up 'western superiority ' with research ?

 

 

Eg ;  one's definition of  'a civilisation '  .

 

Just for further info I am not pushing any particular group or origin point . I am a multi hypothesis person . I think things manifest the way nature dictates , and common sense usually supplies an answer .  Humans where around from an early period , they travelled all over the place , groups have multi-origins , there is no such thing as a pure group, sub species or 'race ', we all come from 'somewhere else ' , we are all mixed up ,  'back migration' is common sense  ... etc etc .

 

Such is my  ' derangement '   .  

 

 

 

Edited February 13, 2021 by Nungali

[dwai]

45 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

No I am not missing that point at all .  I have written on this very subject many times on TDBs  . I have also cited Toby Wilkensons's preface to ' Genesis of the Pharaohs' as an excellent expose of these past researches and an introduction to 'evidence based research ' .    And Wilkenson points out  how archaeology has advanced since the study of the subject has increased in places like India and Africa and other places - actually, if you think India has it bad , its much worse in Africa - but I have educated historian contacts there too that fill me on new discoveries and developments .    I have told you numerous times I am in contact with such people and often discuss things with them .   Many Indian scholars have trouble with crank Indian youtubes as well and as I have said many times ; they fight amongst themselves  .... and that fight is usually between the crank youtuber and the  Indian academics you mention .

I agree on this. But then there is also the risk of discarding someone’s genuine research and scholarship (and not unfounded) purely on the basis of “credentials”. Let me explain.  There are many Indian scholars classically trained in the Indic philosophical traditions (which get thrown under the bus of “Hindu religion” by many academics). They had to study and understand many aspects, which included study of epics (Puranas and Itihaasa, enchanted get categorized as mythology and wished away). By what authority can a western academic (who often relies on these very scholars to provide them with translations and commentary) then claim that these are “native informants” and not peers? That is specifically what happened since the time of the emergence of indology in the west! 
Many Indian academics (until recently) are essentially heirs/agents of western academia - and so their rejection of genuine scholarly work by “native” experts is questionable in many cases. 
 

There is now a movement in place called “swadeshi indology” which is working to eliminate that kind of mentality. This came about after repeated attempts to engage formal academia in dialog, which was essentially dismissed in the most patronizing and condescending manner. 
 

https://swarajyamag.com/culture/swadeshi-indology-conference-where-the-western-claims-fell-silent

45 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

You do realise   that a driving ambition to " ....wrest control from these academics for the past 20 odd years, just so Indian scholars can get a chance to put their opinions out ... "  is possibly clouding the research results and conclusions , just like the attempt was  to mix up 'western superiority ' with research ?

 

 

Eg ;  one's definition of  'a civilisation '  .

Who gets to decide what constitutes civilization (or anything else for that matter) and what doesn’t? Why must a civilization as ancient and mature as India or China (for eg) accept the rules set by the west? 
 

There is a very deep-rooted assumption inherent in the kind of statement you made, which is not necessarily valid.  (and I’m not accusing you of anything, so that we’re clear). Much like, most of the western worldview is influenced by a judeochristian lens. And so, it’s interpretation/study of civilizations such as India or China also suffer from an inherent bias thereof (legacy of the European imperalist agenda). I know this kind of thought can be shocking , or even infuriating for many, but I present to you that, it is a genuine concern. History is a narrative of cultures and civilizations. What, say, is possible in the case of ancient Egypt (no one is left to challenge the western view on it), is not so for India, China, Japan and so on. These are older and far more mature civilizations, and so they are entitled to their own narrative (and inspection, as well as rejection of the western paradigm). 

45 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Just for further info I am not pushing any particular group or origin point . I am a multi hypothesis person . I think things manifest the way nature dictates , and common sense usually supplies an answer .  Humans where around from an early period , they travelled all over the place , groups have multi-origins , there is no such thing as a pure group, sub species or 'race ', we all come from 'somewhere else ' , we are all mixed up ,  'back migration' is common sense  ... etc etc .

 

Such is my  ' derangement '   .  

 

 

 

I am on the same page as you on this. I only think that it is imperative to have a level playing field before real dialog can happen, especially in the context of history, anthropology and so on. I would love to see academic studies of western cultures in the Indic context, “reversing the gaze”,  in an anthropological sense. Can you imagine what the outcome would be? Especially if we considered a hypothetical scenario where Indians (or Chinese) had colonized Europe and studied their ways? 
 

[Apech]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

Why deranged? And what sounds deranged?  

 

Academia has opposing ideas and a narrative history which is continually revised.  This even happens in hard science.  It's normal.  This has happened in Anglo-Saxon history, Norse history ... in fact every history, Egyptology is replete with it.  Why do you think Indian history is going to be any different?

 

 

[Apech]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

 

I am on the same page as you on this. I only think that it is imperative to have a level playing field before real dialog can happen, especially in the context of history, anthropology and so on. I would love to see academic studies of western cultures in the Indic context, “reversing the gaze”,  in an anthropological sense. Can you imagine what the outcome would be? Especially if we considered a hypothetical scenario where Indians (or Chinese) had colonized Europe and studied their ways? 
 

 

But they didn't.  Europe colonised the rest of the world because of a number of specific causal factors.  Those causal factors arose because of the previous history in Europe.  It's not a a kind of tit for tat situation.  You have to identify why the Judeo-Christian heritage/culture, industrialisation, massive population growth, a series of historical 'accidents', etc. etc. allowed the Brits to colonise India ... and why/how it was maintained for 200 years and why it ended.  Its not good vs. bad, black vs. white and so on, it's nuanced and all too human.

 

 

[dwai]

6 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

But they didn't.  Europe colonised the rest of the world because of a number of specific causal factors.  Those causal factors arose because of the previous history in Europe.  It's not a a kind of tit for tat situation.  You have to identify why the Judeo-Christian heritage/culture, industrialisation, massive population growth, a series of historical 'accidents', etc. etc. allowed the Brits to colonise India ... and why/how it was maintained for 200 years and why it ended.  Its not good vs. bad, black vs. white and so on, it's nuanced and all too human.

 

 

You do know that a lot of the industrialization of Britain (and consequently Europe) was done on the back of India?

For example, Textile mills, etc only developed when the Indian textile framework was systematically dismantled by the British.

 

https://www.thefridaytimes.com/weaving-misery/

Edited February 14, 2021 by dwai

[dwai]

15 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Academia has opposing ideas and a narrative history which is continually revised.  This even happens in hard science.  It's normal.  This has happened in Anglo-Saxon history, Norse history ... in fact every history, Egyptology is replete with it.  Why do you think Indian history is going to be any different?

 

 

Precisely my point. It’s time to dismantle the western narrative of Indian history  

[Apech]

4 minutes ago, dwai said:

You do know that a lot of the industrialization of Britain (and consequently Europe) was done on the back of India?

For example, Textile mills, etc only developed when the Indian textile framework was systematically dismantled by the British.

 

https://www.thefridaytimes.com/weaving-misery/

 

Machinery .. the industrial revolution ... have you heard of that?

[Apech]

5 minutes ago, dwai said:

Precisely my point. It’s time to dismantle the western narrative of Indian history  

 

Why do you think it is 'western'.?

[dwai]

4 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Why do you think it is 'western'.?

Why do you think it is not?  

[dwai]

22 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Machinery .. the industrial revolution ... have you heard of that?

https://asiancenturyinstitute.com/development/1568-britain-s-shameful-colonisation-of-india

Quote

Britain’s devastation of India

Tharoor provides us with a devastating portrait of how the British decimated the Indian economy through these centuries. In 1700, India was the world’s richest country, accounting for some 27% of global GDP. But in 1947, when India achieved its independence, India had been reduced to one of the world’s poorest countries, with just over 3% of global GDP.  

The British took thriving industries -- like textiles, shipbuilding, and steel -- and destroyed them through violence, taxes, import tariffs, and imposing their exports and products on the back of the Indian consumer. They taxed the Indian peasantry at a level unknown under any other rulers, and through torture and cruelty they extracted vast sums of money which they shipped off to England.  

Tharoor quotes the young American historian and philosopher, Will Durant, who visited India in 1930: “The British conquest of India was the invasion and destruction of a high civilisation by a trading company utterly without scruple or principle, careless of art and greedy of gain, over-running with fire and sword a country temporarily disordered and helpless, bribing and murdering, annexing and stealing, and beginning that career of illegal and ‘legal’ plunder which has now gone on ruthlessly for one hundred and seventy-three years.”

P.S. But that chicken tikka masala was a good contribution by the British  

 

P.P.S. I want to make it clear, I’m not cross, upset, angry etc etc about this stuff. We’ve been having a meaningful (imho) exchange in a respectful manner. My intention isn’t to make anyone ‘uncomfortable’ by sharing my views. I certainly have more than a casual interest in the subject being an Indian-born/raised member of the world community. I don’t bear ill-will towards either the British or westerners in general  

 

Sometimes these things can be lost in the midst of discussions which are contentious to say the least. So I wanted to take the time to make sure my two companions who are actively participating, and others who are watching with semi-interest (or others who think it’s like watching a car-wreck) - I welcome your participation. I think this is the most meaningful discussion I’ve had on this topic in a while now.   

Edited February 14, 2021 by dwai

[Nungali]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

I agree on this. But then there is also the risk of discarding someone’s genuine research and scholarship (and not unfounded) purely on the basis of “credentials”. Let me explain.  There are many Indian scholars classically trained in the Indic philosophical traditions (which get thrown under the bus of “Hindu religion” by many academics). They had to study and understand many aspects, which included study of epics (Puranas and Itihaasa, enchanted get categorized as mythology and wished away). By what authority can a western academic (who often relies on these very scholars to provide them with translations and commentary) then claim that these are “native informants” and not peers? That is specifically what happened since the time of the emergence of indology in the west! 

 

  ?

 

'Native informants' have always been a huge part in the collation of anthropological research .  Thats why anthropologists go out 'into the field' , live with tribes , adopt their ways while they do it , and even sometimes undertake initiation into their societies .  I mean, just look at  some of the stuff I have posted about Australian indigenous . Where did you think a large proportion of   that info comes from ?

 

 - 'native informants ' .

 

and its not JUST IF someone is a native informant either  .... it also depends on whether they are 'crackers' or not !  That is, making weird claims that are obviously wrong as some type of 'excuse' when confronted with facts .

 

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

Many Indian academics (until recently) are essentially heirs/agents of western academia - and so their rejection of genuine scholarly work by “native” experts is questionable in many cases. 

 

Ah yes ... those Indian researches that agree with us non cranks must be  agents of western academia .  And Marxists  ... dont forget the Marxists .

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

There is now a movement in place called “swadeshi indology” which is working to eliminate that kind of mentality. This came about after repeated attempts to engage formal academia in dialog, which was essentially dismissed in the most patronizing and condescending manner. 
 

https://swarajyamag.com/culture/swadeshi-indology-conference-where-the-western-claims-fell-silent

 

That link virtually says nothing in its 2 paragraphs of info . It does admit right at the beginning

 

" The recently concluded Swadeshi Indology Conference in Chennai was historic in more ways than one. For a change, the mainstream media (MSM) did not cry foul ... "

 

and the gist of it states :

 

" The conference brought together scholars from various parts of the globe who were interested in the topic not in a reductive academic sense, which often produces knowledge about India through a subject-object binary as in Western Indology, but in an integral and organic sense. The paper presenters did not have to use repetitive Western theoretical chicanery, the hallmark of many academic conferences, where box-office intellectuals/academics meet and sustain a mutual admiration society. Here the topics of research were the researchers’ way of life; the researchers lived their research "

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

Who gets to decide what constitutes civilization (or anything else for that matter) and what doesn’t? Why must a civilization as ancient and mature as India or China (for eg) accept the rules set by the west? 

 

We already had this discussion about  the word civilisation . If you really want to know who gets to decide what it means , I would suggest people who use and study that language  ... that is English etymologists   .  Just like Hindu linguists get to decide what asabhya and sabhya  means .

 

Civilisation : 

 

Civilizations are intimately associated with and often further defined by other socio-politico-economic characteristics, such as centralization, the domestication of both humans and other organisms, specialization of labour, culturally-ingrained ideologies of progress and supremacism, monumental architecture, taxation, societal dependence upon farming and expansionism.^{[3][4][5][7][8][9]}

 

. Civilizations are organized densely-populated settlements divided into hierarchical social classes with a ruling elite and subordinate urban and rural populations, which engage in intensive agriculture, mining, small-scale manufacture and trade. Civilization concentrates power, extending human control over the rest of nature, including over other human beings.^[11]

 

Civilization, as its etymology (see below) suggests, is a concept originally associated with towns and cities. The earliest emergence of civilizations is generally connected with the final stages of the Neolithic Revolution, culminating in the relatively rapid process of urban revolution and state-formation, a political development associated with the appearance of a governing elite  "

 

- Wiki.

 

- you dont like what the word means ?  You think English linguists are some type of fascists by declaring what their word means and Indians and Chinese should be able to change the meaning to suit their whim and back up their claims .

 

 

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

There is a very deep-rooted assumption inherent in the kind of statement you made, which is not necessarily valid.  (and I’m not accusing you of anything, so that we’re clear).

 

 

Oh yes, very clear that  you state there is a deep rooted assumption in the kind of statements I made  ... but you are not accusing me of anything  .

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

 

 

Much like, most of the western worldview is influenced by a judeochristian lens. And so, it’s interpretation/study of civilizations such as India or China also suffer from an inherent bias thereof (legacy of the European imperalist agenda).

 

 

We did this - Toby Wilkenson ... evidence based research ...    etc .

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

 

I know this kind of thought can be shocking , or even infuriating for many, but I present to you that, it is a genuine concern.

 

Oh yes, shocking and infuriating  to 'many'   ...  but not me of course even though I just explained it above . 

 

so i wonder why you  keep harping on it !

 

But I dont want to rain on your emotive parade

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

 

History is a narrative of cultures and civilizations. What, say, is possible in the case of ancient Egypt (no one is left to challenge the western view on it), is not so for India, China, Japan and so on. These are older and far more mature civilizations, and so they are entitled to their own narrative (and inspection, as well as rejection of the western paradigm). 

 

A triple LOL followed by an "Ohhhhhh ! "    Good one !

 

if you knew ANYTHING about Egyptology you would have encountered ' Afrocentric  ' opposition .

 

Its not 'their own narrative' we need , its their own research and scientists .  Due to this and the Chinese contribution ( for example ) our knowledge has increased .

 

1 hour ago, dwai said:

I am on the same page as you on this. I only think that it is imperative to have a level playing field before real dialog can happen, especially in the context of history, anthropology and so on. I would love to see academic studies of western cultures in the Indic context, “reversing the gaze”,  in an anthropological sense. Can you imagine what the outcome would be? Especially if we considered a hypothetical scenario where Indians (or Chinese) had colonized Europe and studied their ways? 
 

 

I urge you to look up modern scientific writings  on ( that come from all sorts of  people ... you do realise that one can be a scientists and a black African or - and not harp on this past -and in some cases lingering -  racial divide BS  )  'evidence based research ' , 'evidence based practice '  and 'Metascience' .

 

 

[Nungali]

40 minutes ago, dwai said:

You do know that a lot of the industrialization of Britain (and consequently Europe) was done on the back of India?

For example, Textile mills, etc only developed when the Indian textile framework was systematically dismantled by the British.

 

https://www.thefridaytimes.com/weaving-misery/

 

Maybe retitle this thread

 

'What the nasty colonisers did to the Indians'   , remove the stuff about anthropology and archaeology ... and we will probably whole heartedly agree with you !

[dwai]

2 minutes ago, Nungali said:

Oh yes, very clear that  you state there is a deep rooted assumption in the kind of statements I made  ... but you are not accusing me of anything 

I wanted to quickly respond to this. The reason this was not meant as an accusation is because I consider this conditioning to be inherent in a particular world view. You’re not the first person I’ve had such discussions with. Most are unaware of this subtle conditioning. I will elaborate further in a subsequent post. 

[dwai]

5 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Maybe retitle this thread

 

'What the nasty colonisers did to the Indians'   , remove the stuff about anthropology and archaeology ... and we will probably whole heartedly agree with you !

 But you see, these are not unrelated. Indian history narrative was manufactured/manipulated by the European colonizers to justify the “nasty stuff” they did to India. 

Edited February 14, 2021 by dwai

[Nungali]

4 minutes ago, dwai said:

I wanted to quickly respond to this. The reason this was not meant as an accusation is because I consider this conditioning to be inherent in a particular world view. You’re not the first person I’ve had such discussions with. Most are unaware of this subtle conditioning. I will elaborate further in a subsequent post. 

 

And, I suppose you are not accusing me of this subtle unaware conditioning ?   

 

 

No matter how  many posts I have  made  about this  particular subject to show you   I am well aware of the dynamic .

 

But I AM accusing YOU of having a  'certain subtle conditioning '     

[Nungali]

13 minutes ago, dwai said:

 But you see, these are not unrelated. Indian history narrative was manufactured/manipulated by the European colonizers to justify the “nasty stuff” they did to India. 

 

What ?   Europeans  got whole lot of different and non English scientists  to fake the date of IVC evidence  to cover up the fact  and or  'justify' the nasty stuff  the British  did to India .

 

 

I really think you have messed up your own thread here . 

 

Let's just say ; yes , India did have  smart and intelligent and 'civilised ' people living in it  14.000 years back . 

 

( And  Yes, the way to get to Antarctica from  India is by going  directly south .  ) 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Nungali

[dwai]

9 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

And, I suppose you are not accusing me of this subtle unaware conditioning ?   

 

 

No matter how  many posts I have  made  about this  particular subject to show you   I am well aware of the dynamic .

I didn’t see that awareness come across in your posts. Maybe we can drill down into it. 

9 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

But I AM accusing YOU of having a  'certain subtle conditioning '     

That is certainly possible, or maybe because of the fact that I straddle both “worlds”, I am aware of the subtle inherent conditioning I referred to.