Jesus Christ lived in India

So is this thread a prideful rant that India is the spiritual fatherland of all, the superior, the best, above all other nations of the world. What the hell does it matter, i didnt think there was once piece of evidence that Jesus even lived, let alone in India. I've heard he was taught in Egyption temples, he was married, he was gay ect etc, none have any real proof. The only thing that matters was his teachings, complete waste of time this thread.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head here Phil.

 

'Guts' have nothing to do with it. This is an issue which is 100% speculation, and you've proven nothing.

 

India was the motherland of our race, and Sanskrit the mother of Europe's languages: she was the mother of our philosophy; mother, through the Arabs, of much of our mathematics; mother, through the Buddha, of the ideals embodied in Christianity; mother, through the village community, of self-government and democracy. Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all. ~ Will Durant.

And what do you think my previous posts and the OP in this thread contains, fool.

As a priest of the Saint Thomas Christian Church of South India once commented : "You cannot understand the teachings of Jesus if you do not know the scriptures of India."

And that is the reason why you are eagerly reading all the posts in this thread, and still have not left it yet and keeps coming back for more.

 

I would not be surprised if Jesus lived in India, at some point in time.


Also, it wouldn't surprise me if there was no mention of this in the Bible.

Perhaps, early Christians wanted to promote a more "occidental" bent to Christianity, away from what are considered to be "eastern religions".

 

Guts indeed have a lot to do with it. I believe that it is a crime that even though there is such staggering evidence to prove that Jesus was in India, the church still ignores it , which is not surprising, considering what they have done to Joan and Cervetes and the other appaling stuff and you yourself are following that line.

And I believe with all the proofs and facts I have furnished in this thread, I indeed have shown that there is a very good probability that Jesus indeed lived in India during the 'unknown years'.

 

The original language in India was a Dravidian language...that most likely got pushed down south when the Central Asian nomads (sometimes called "Aryans") came to India with both their language and their Vedic religion.

Also, Sanskrit comes from an Older Proto-Indo-European language but it was one of the oldest attested Indo-European languages (c. 1700 BCE)...it was Vedic Sanskrit (however this could have been because there was a writing system for it and we haven't found many earlier IE languages that were written). However I'm sure that European languages were more influenced by the Indo European lanuage in Anatollia (Turkish penisula) which was Hittite.


Sorry blame it on the Lost Languages and Decipherments class...

 

The term dravida itself comes from sanskrit. And it is common knowledge that tamil , the so-called dravidian language of south india, where I come from, was created by Agastya rishi, the hindu enlightened master.Tamil and the other so-called dravidian languages came later after sanskrit, and this has been stated by scholars themselves.

The so-called aryan invasion theory, eagerly propounded by racist european scholars have been denounced by Swami Vivekananda and Swami Dayananda and Aurobindo themselves.

There is no mention of any blonde or redhaired or blue-eyed guy in the vedas and you don't find them in India as well.

Even Krishna , who teaches Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita, is described in all hindu scriptures as black-skinned, the colour of dark thunderclouds.
The same with Lord Rama and Vishnu who were black skinned,and who were worshipped by the ancient Indians. Same with Arjuna, Vyasa,Draupadi, Damayanti and others.

Can you imagine Odin or Tyr or Thor, who were worshipped by the scandinavians being black-skinned guys, which they are not.

Also can you imagine Zeus, Apollo, Hercules, who were worshipped by the greeks being black-skinned, which again they were not.

From this itself you can understand the absurdity of this theory.

According to Trautman , "That the racial theory of Indian civilization still lingers is a miracle of faith. Is it not time we did away with it?"

We don't believe that Sanskrit comes from 1700 B.C. or that it comes from an another older attested Indo-european language.


According to our own calendar, Krishna was born in July 20 , 3227 B.C. And from the Mahabharatha and Srimad Bhagavatham, we see him learning from a guru the scriptures and arts and sciences and the vedas as well, which obviously is in sanskrit.

In the Gita, Krishna himself criticizes some of ' the flowery words' of the vedas.
From this itself you can see that the vedas and sanskrit date to more than 3227 B.C.


Also the sarasvati river is also mentioned in the vedas and in the mahabharatha as well.

(from the wikipedia)
According to palaeoenvironmental scientists the desiccation of Sarasvati came about as a result of the diversion of at least two rivers that fed it, the Satluj and the Yamuna. "The chain of tectonic events … diverted the Satluj westward (into the Indus) and the Palaeo Yamuna eastward (into the Ganga) … This explains the ‘death’ of such a mighty river (the Sarasvati) … because its main feeders, the Satluj and Palaeo Yamuna were weaned away from it by the Indus and the Gangaa respectively”. This ended at c 1750, but it started much earlier, perhaps with the upheavals and the large flood of 1900, or more probably 2100. P H Francfort, utilizing images from the French satellite SPOT, finds that the large river Sarasvati is pre-Harappan altogether and started drying up in the middle of the 4th millennium BC; during Harappan times only a complex irrigation-canal network was being used in the southern region of the Indus Valley. With this the date should be pushed back to c 3800 BC.


This in itself shows that sanskrit and the vedas existed before the middle of the 4th millenium BC.


And I also want to bring Rama into this. Rama according to our calendar lived around 7000 B.C.( I don't remember the exact year). We see him too studying the scriptures in sanskrit and studying from the sages Vasishta and Vishwamitra.

In fact Vasishta's discourses to Prince Rama's questions, known as the Yoga Vasishta , is world famous.

 

Just because the name commonly used in English comes from Sanskrit doesn't mean that the language existed after it.

The word Aryan that I term for Central Asians that moved into India is not the same as the racist Aryan of Hitler's own demented mind. I mean it in the term of the name for the people of their time; as I said before these were Central Asian people possibly from the Oasis Vally Civilization (Oxus) or nomads in Eastern Iran. Very unlikely they were blonde haired and blue eyed.

What does this have to do with anything? See above what I meant by the word "aryan" . I use it in the term the people used for themselves; not in the Western and/or Nazi use of the term.

I said that was when it was attested. This means as a writing system. It is probably possible that it existed before that...but it didn't show up as a writing system til about 1700 BCE.

Also, not only was there Proto Indo-European...there was a language before it. Some scholars even believe the languages groups may have come from it. It is called Proto-Nostratic. This Nostratic Hypothesis was formed and researched by Sir Colin Renfrew.

The notstratic languages are a hypotetic language superfamily-- many languages are thought to have evolved from Proto-Nostratic

So the Heirarchy would be like this:

Nostratic:

-Afro Asiatic
- Kartivelian
- Dravidian
- Eurasiatic - Indo European, Uralic, Altaic

This language would probably have been spoken by the Kebaran, who were the predessors of the Natufians of the levant around 12,000 - 10,000 BCE (the end of the last Ice Age).

Mmm...I would be careful taking these stories and putting them up with history....

The third and second mel. BCE was the time of the Indus Valley Civilization.

[/quote]

Also the sarasvati river is also mentioned in the vedas and in the mahabharatha as well.

This in itself shows that sanskrit and the vedas existed before the middle of the 4th millenium BC.
[/quote]

The Saraswati River did dry and move...this is true...this is often credited with the End of the Indus Valley Civilization. But I think your wikipedia entry has the dates wrong. These are my dates from my professor of my Archaeology of the Heritage of Asia class. My professor, MR Mughal, is one of the leading names in Indus Valley archaeology since 1970, and I think I would take his word over wikipedia:

Early Indus or Harappan: 3400-2500 BCE
Mature Indus or Harappan: 2500-2000 BCE
Late Indus or Harappan: 2000-1400 BCE

During this time, the language was heiroglyphic in nature, and we do not have enough examples to decipher it yet.

Earth movements caused the river to shift, and the peoples moved with the river. However by the Late Indus period, the IV peoples were trading with people in Central Asia. So the two possible senarios are that the Central Asian people moved with the Indus and the IV peoples kept moving South, or they intermixed with eachother.

Once again, I would be careful with using the Mahabharat and Ramayan as true timelines of history. Actually in general I would be careful when using archaeology to justify religion. This is how fanatism starts.

The first city states of Sumer aren't even before 7000 BCE ...the first ones, and they are still very much in their Neolithic stage, are from the Ubaid period in Mesopotamia...which is 5900 - 4300 BCE. The first real state level society isn't until Uruk which is 4000 - 3100 BCE, also in Mesopotamia.

Like I said...you must be very careful.

And these dates are alll from scholarly sources and the notes from the archaeology classes (I'm studying for finals). I would also be wary using wikipedia. It is edited by whomever wants to.

 

Actually I'd read maybe 30% of the posts in this thread, it didnt seem worth the effort reading it all. I've now decided to go through it all. And I have found no facts or evidence.

Interesting you repeat this.

If this was stated by one of the great Christian saints or mystics then granted I may take notice. But this is one priest out of hundreds of thousands, most priests would disagree with the above statement. The fact the priest is from India makes the chance of bias high. You have again just provided an obscure source, people who probably based their belief on heresay than cold hard physical evidence.

'After crucifixion , he returned back to India where he lived in Kashmir till his death. This has been stated by the Indian spiritual masters Paramahamsa Yogananda , Satya Sai Baba, Osho and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar.'

What makes the above people correct, what facts or evidence did they provide?

What physical facts? where?

The only facts you have produced is that some people you believe are spiritual masters believed Christ lived in India.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

other sources

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_christianity.asp

 

This is stated by scholars and research ,not me.And I too am speaking a so-called dravidian language, which clearly has many sanskrit terms in it.

And I also mean to say that no central asians has moved into India. Indian civilization, just like in the present, has influenced the world in the past as well.

The word Aryan clearly means in the hindu scriptures, a wise person and gentleman,a man of character. And this is why the black-skinned Krishna addresses the dark-skinned Arjuna as an arya, in the bhagavad gita.

The proper term for idiots and perverts like Hitler and Goebbels is the term asura, meaning demon.

Again we don't agree with that . Because of Krishna who clearly spoke and wrote in sanskrit in and around 3200 B.C. in the mahabharatha and bhagavatham.

We hindus believe that these so-called ' stories' are real and that is why we worship Krishna . We have the birthday of Krishna and other dates of events in Krishnas life. And this is why Krishna's birthday in India and all over the world is celebrated in pomp.

The recent discovery of a submerged city in the sea of Gujarat, in the bay of Cambay, which is eerily similar to Dwaraka which was submerged under the sea after Krishna's death in Gujarat, has made a lot of news recently.

And we believe that the third and fourth up to the seventh millenium B.C. minimum , itself belonged to the vedic civilization.And the recent discovery of the Sarasvati river as I stated before in my previous post, confirms this.

Also the sarasvati river is also mentioned in the vedas and in the mahabharatha as well.

This in itself shows that sanskrit and the vedas existed before the middle of the 4th millenium BC.

AndI wish to mention again that the sarasvati river is mentioned many times in the rig vedas and the mahabharatha.

And why not. Our own calendar marks the birthdays of Krishna and Rama,and the other events in their lives. This has nothing to do with fanaticism.

Moses and Jesus's lives are accepted without any problems, even though scholars have to create their birthdays and their lives are seen as part of history by Jews and christians in spite of flimsy evidence.

On the other hand we have numerous books and detailed literature on Rama and especially Krishna' life. So we have every right to use the Mahabharatha and Ramayana as timelines of history.

Also I don't think we should be sure of anything, as new evidences are coming up again and again, which is making us revise our views on history. And the recent discovery of the river bed of the Sarasvati by sattelites and the discovery of the submerged city in Gujarat in the bay of cambay reminding us of dwaraka in Gujarat are shining examples.

 

i don't quite see what difference it would make, who lived where or when.

as for that guy in question, as far as i know, no one knows what he did from his 13th birthday until his 30th. nor for that matter from after he was a year old until he was 11 either.

i just think there's too much focus everywhere on the personality cult that what he tried to teach seems to have devolved into. same goes for mohammid and all the rest of the revealers of organized beliefs of every kind.

=^^=
.../\...

 

Aren't you showing a certain bias and prejudice here, mentioning that only if something is "stated by one of the great Christian saints or mystics", most likely of Western origin and white, is a prerequite before you "may take notice"... hmmm.

Uhm, they are in fact, spiritual masters.

Eh, you demand fact and physical evidence that Jesus lived in India.
Likewise, I demand facts and physical evidence to the contrary.
Prove that he didn't.

 

<<<And I have found no facts or evidence.>>>

Coming from a guy like you , I am not surprised. Western scholars themselves have written books stating that Jesus lived in India. And what is there in this thread is just a sample. Read the proofs in here and go through the books I have stated in my OP. I will also be furnishing more proofs over here.

If I have repeated this, I did so in order to get the message into your thick skull.

The Indian catholic priest Anthony de Mello, has also stated Jesus's teachings with an eastern perspective underpinning it. And his books were bestsellers and immensely popular. And this is the reason why de Mello, was reprimanded and strictly warned by the Catholic church, they didn't excommunicate him, as exhorted by many catholic priests, because of his popularity, and they feared that his martyrdom would immensely damage the churchs cause.

And I myself know of fearless christian scholars in India who state that Jesus has lived in India. A christian friend of mine, keeps a picture of Jesus in a yogic posture in his living room. Many christians in India and abroad practice the hindu and buddhist culture and religion.

They have stated their views on this matter, which they have every right to do so . Even the atheist Nehru, in his letters to his daughter Indira Gandhi, states that there is an oral tradition in India stating that Jesus lived in India.

And as for the facts and evidence, go through Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's " Hinduism and Christianity." You will get what you want. And this is just one of the books .

 

<<<<<While many instances are quoted in support of this theory, the following points makes it difficult to accept this theory.

1. Jesus Christ himself never mentioned anything even remotely about India or Hinduism. None of his disciples every mentioned any thing about it in the Bible.

2. There is practically very little in common between his teachings and the main tenets of Hinduism except in matters of ethics and moral conduct.

3. It is hard believe that Jesus Christ lived in Kashmir, and being a great personality as he is, would have remained silent. He would have definitely made his presence felt in the region through his teachings. Besides it is hard to accept that he would have gone to Kashmir all alone without any of his trusted followers accompanying him.

It is also a well known fact that after the death of Jesus Christ and long before Europe was Christianized, one of the Apostles of Christ, St. Thomas, traveled to India probably across the Arabian Sea and landed in what is now known as Kerala. He said to have lived there for sometime and converted some to Christianity, whose descendents practice a very ancient form of Christianity till date. St Thomas was however killed by the natives who were probably irked by his activities. >>>>>


It is very obvious that these guys have not gone through the books that I have mentioned. I myself was like one of these guys , intuitively feeling a link between Jesus and India, but not able to substantiate it, till I came across the works of the books mentioned in the OP, and also the works of Yogananda, Swami Abhedananda, Sai Baba, and Osho.


<<<<1. Jesus Christ himself never mentioned anything even remotely about India or Hinduism. None of his disciples every mentioned any thing about it in the Bible.>>>>>

And I don't think that is the case as Nicodemus states that jesus went to India.
Also one has to understand that Jesus had only 4 years to give his teachings in Palestine after he returned back. The people at that time , were slaves, and not having much intellectual or cultural literacy. They would not have been able to understand advanced philosophy and metaphysics, which Jesus learned in India. And that is why he taught to them in parables.

Also there is a chance that the proud jews would have rejected his teachings if he pointed out their source to India. And hence he prudently must have kept quiet about it.

Also Jesus, like all enlightened masters, was a man of few words, and devoted his energies to elevating the moral and spiritual life of the Jews, rather than discussing the origin of his teachings, which was just an intellectual exercise , and served no spiritual purpose .



<<<<<2. There is practically very little in common between his teachings and the main tenets of Hinduism except in matters of ethics and moral conduct.>>>>>

And as I have stated before,there is definetely a lot in common between the teachings of Jesus and the dharmic religions Hinduism and Buddhism of India.

For example, Jesus quotes "Love thy neighbour".

The Buddha himself , in the Lalitavistaras, states, "Through love alone can hate be vanquished; through perfect love evil may be overcome … Speak no harsh words to your neighbour, and he will respond to you in like terms."


It should be mentioned that the term 'neighbour' is clearly used by the Buddha.

Another similarity of Jesus with the Buddha is that both had stated that one should reciprocate evil or injury with good and love.

As Swami Vivekananda said, Jesus ,Buddha and LaoTse are the only prophets in the world who have stated that one should reciprocate evil or injury with love and good.

This above teaching of Jesus is far removed from the ' eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth' teaching of Judaism , in which he was born .

The teachings of chastity and renunciation too by Christ , is not found in Judaism, but are found in Buddhism and Hinduism.

Also , Jesus's teaching of " I and my Father are one " is similar to the Upanishadic teachings of monism or pantheism. An example of this is the verse in the Upanishads ," Aham Brahmasmi ", which means " I am He".

There are much more of these striking similarities in the books I have mentioned that are more than mere coincidences.




With respect to Jesus not telling about anyone about his travels, I think that is wrong. Jesus had a disciple called Thomas , and we all know his doubting and skeptic nature. In fact the phrase ' doubting Thomas' is based upon this trait of Thomas.

And it is a fact that Thomas came to India and died in south India , near Madras in Tamil Nadu, and his church and tomb is still there.

According to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Thomas was slightly skeptic about Jesus's teachings, and doubted them , in spite of his faith in Jesus and love for him.
It was in this effect that Jesus exhorted him to travel to India and discover these teachings for himself.

And I believe this is the reason why Thomas came to India, lived there and died there.


One should also understand that Jesus's teachings of renunciation, chastity , non-violence, the triune God, and his own statement that " I and my Father are one" ( which is strikingly similar to the Upanishadic verse " I am He" and other teachings of monism or pantheism), are not at all found in the Judaic tradition, but are at the same time found in the Hindu-Buddhist religious traditions in India.


It should be understood that Jesus also only had a limited time to propagate his teachings in Palestine. I believe if he had more time to propagate his teachings, and if he was not persecuted and crucified by the Jewish priests and the Romans, he would have mentioned about his travels to India in detail ,to his disciples.
Also he was not supplanting Judaism, but only integrating into it the teachings of the Hindu-Buddhist traditions.
There is also the probability that Jesus did not mention the source of his teachings publicly, as he must have felt that this might compel the proud and prejudiced Jews to reject his teachings because they were foreign.


MIRACLES OF JESUS



The miracles that Jesus performed can also be clearly related to the yogic powers one obtains through incessant practice of yoga and through enlightenment.

As Swami Vivekananda himself said " As long as one is under the control of the mind, one is a slave of nature. But when one has conquered the mind completely, nature becomes the slave of that person."

The ancient Indian enlightened master , yogi and philosopher, Patanjali, compiled the Yoga Sutras, with the explanation of the various yogic powers that one obtains through yoga. And these yogic powers and their effects are very similar to the 'miracles ' performed by Jesus.

Krishna, Banda Singh Bahadur, Adi Shankaracharya, Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Lahiri Mahasaya,Shirdi Sai Baba, Sri Yukteshwar, Paramahamsa Yogananda and many others have clearly manifested their yogic powers in a very similar fashion like Jesus Christ.

Swami Vivekananda , with his highly logical and scientific frame of mind, observed and described the various yogic powers that came to him.
There is also a letter of his to a fellow monk of the Ramakrishna order, where he describes the yogic powers in the form of clairvoyance, developed in some of his European disciples , after a few months practice of yoga.

Paramahamsa Yogananda , in his classic "Autobiography of a Yogi " , too mentions his yogic powers, and also that of his master, and fellow yogis.


<<<<3. It is hard believe that Jesus Christ lived in Kashmir, and being a great personality as he is, would have remained silent. He would have definitely made his presence felt in the region through his teachings. Besides it is hard to accept that he would have gone to Kashmir all alone without any of his trusted followers accompanying him.>>>>>

Not only did Jesus live in Kashmir but his tomb is also there in Kashmir in Pahalgam. And I also know of Israelis who have visited that place.
There is an interesting narrative of a conversation between Jesus and an Indian king in Kashmir, which has survived centuries.

I have read it and I will put it over here.


<<<<<It is also a well known fact that after the death of Jesus Christ and long before Europe was Christianized, one of the Apostles of Christ, St. Thomas, traveled to India probably across the Arabian Sea and landed in what is now known as Kerala. >>>>>

That is correct, and I myself am from Kerala.



<<<<<
He said to have lived there for sometime and converted some to Christianity, whose descendents practice a very ancient form of Christianity till date. St Thomas was however killed by the natives who were probably irked by his activities>>>>>

He is believed to have been martyred by some people hostile to him, not necessarily the natives. Anyway his remains are in a tomb in south India.

 

Some say Egyptian, some say this, some say that.

In your opinion. What fact?, did God come down and point a finger, doubt it.

Fine no problem, some people also believe Jesus was decended from E.T., that they dropped him from a spaceship. I love fairy tales also.

Yep there is an oral tradition for alot of wacko ideas. Doesnt make them true.

If Jesus, Buddha, Krishna were enlightened masters etc, their teachings are bound to be similar. This doesnt mean they all had to come from India or come into contact with Indian scripture.

The above can come about from a logical reasoning, you don't need to be taught it from another. People like Einstein came to conclusions from their own reasonings. Jesus could easily have done this.

What does this prove. I know people from England who visit Roswell looking for alien spaceships.

 

And find out the facts for yourself using your own logic, fool.

They are definetely spiritual masters, and Yoganandas works are world famous. There is definetely something in them which is making the world stand up and take notice.

Stick to the facts, fool.

Every legend has its factual basis.

And it also doesnt necessarily mean that Jesus should not come to India. The australian enlightened master Barry Long gave up his lucrative career and came to India, where he had his spiritual experiences and enlightenment.And we see numerous restless youths from all over the world travelling to India in search of answers. And hence it is quite probable Jesus too as a youth came to India, due to his questions and doubts which we clearly see in the Bible, when he was young,asking to the jewish priests, and they were unable to answer him.

As I stated before, stick to the facts.

 

both languages have been around for a long time...overtime dravidian languages probably aquired Sanskrit loanwords. Languages are not static...they change often.

This is so Ethno Centric. This kind of attitude create fanaticm. And I promise that many have moved into the Indian subcontinant. Now and in antiquity. No Central Asians? What do you call the Mughals?

I know. That's why I was trying to tell you that that's not the way I meant this term.

Believe or don't believe what you want. I'm telling you what we have archaeological evidence for. Which I know I am right because I have scholarly sources to back up this evidence. Until you find posing archaeological evidence (I mean true evidence with site reports and the like not random speculation), this is what will hold true in the archaeological record.

And many Christians believe the Bible is real. But there is no evidence to support it either and then fanaticism comes when trying to search for the evidence...which, I may add, has ruined many a beautiful archaeological site by unscientific excavation and treasure hunting and produced a rediculous amount of forgeries from the Middle Ages to the Present.

And people thought they found Atlantis many times over. Furthermore, just because it seems like it, doesn't mean it actually is. They thought they had Jesus's ossuaries, but its most likely either a well done fake, or there are just many people with those names, or people played with them to make them say what they wanted. Because of people who cheat and peudoarchaeology you have to keep a skeptical eye about almost everything.

Well regardless of what you believe, those dates that I gave you are the present chronology of the IVC based on fact and the current archaeological record. Until we have more evidence, it also stands that the first state level society is the Ubaid and the Uruk periods in Mesopotamia. And even those aren't as old as you credit.

And yes, the Saraswati River did dry and move, my professor was the one of the people who worked on the development of that theory. In the Vedas I know that Saraswati was a river goddess. This is true.

Oh it means everything in the world that you do not look for archaeological things based on religion. Most of Biblical archaeology is based in fanaticisms itself, and forgeries. This too will happen if you continue to specular with a religious lens. One example is the "bridge" that people though they saw in a satellite image between India and Sri Lanka...which turned out to be a forgery. More fanatism is teh burning of the mosque in Ayodhya. Just because the city in the bay reminds you of Dwaraka, doesn't mean it is. And if perchance it is Dwaraka, doesn't mean that everything you find there will be just like in the Mahabharat, unless you use this lens of religion to analize everything--which would be fanatical and against archaeological ethics. This is why there are so many treasure hunters, so many speculators, fakes and forgeries, because people want history to say what they want it to say, instead of what it does say. Archaeology is more scientific than that. There is research involved, lab work, and statistical analysis, there is tediously recorded excavation to use what we know in the fields of earth science to help us learn of climates and old water levels of the region. You rarely find treasure, you some times find pottery caches, those are the greatest treasures of all. Everyone wants to romanticize and make archaeology about proving our well known stories and histories true, but unfortunetely, it will not indulge you as such unless it is ready to. Most of history is propeganda also...even writen texts that we find. This is why you cannnot view archaeology with religious lens. Because then there will be falsities and people who pour private money to try and treasure hunt, and ruining a perfectly good site that may have so much more to tell us than just that one thing the treasure hunter may be looking for; pour your money instead into a scientific archaeological excivation and let people who have trained for years uncover the past. Everyday, I am honoured to work and learn from such people who have changed the way we look at history, who have saved countless antiquities from the hands of the markets and put them out in the world for the public to see, and who can read ancient texts and analyze soils and pollen and who can use pot sherds to reconstruct sites. This is real archaeology. Sometimes you get lucky and find treasure or the answer to a legend, but if that what you are going in looking for. All you will get is sorrow and you will ruin any chances or truly uncovering the past.

 

What is mind, what is consciousness?

Do you have a mind, are you conscious?

If you believe you have a mind, a consciousness, show me your mind, your consciousness, where is it, what does it look like, what does it taste like, how does it smell, how does it sound like, how does it feel to touch, take a picture of it, measure it, put it in a box and show the whole world your mind, your consciousness, if the only things you believe in are those you can point your finger at.

 

Quite amusing to see you assert emphatically on a language which I have been speaking since birth.

The earliest epigraphic records date to around 200 BCE[6] and the oldest literary work in Tamil has been dated variously between 1st BCE and 5th CE.
This is way after Sanskrit , if you care to look.

Fanaticism in your dictionary. As they say, one mans freedom fighter, is another mans terrorist.

And I don't need your promise based on no facts at all.

Now, yes. The mughals were from Uzbekistan.

Emphasize this every where, who the true aryans are , and who the asuras are.

Well, you can believe what you want to believe. Everyone is free to do so. And we believe in what our scriptures states.

Archaeological evidence like the sarasvati rivers bed, and the recent finding of the submerged city is just the tip of the ice berg , and more will come in the future.

Well if you belive Jesus 's life is not real, then stop using the christian calendar , the B.C. and A.D. business.

Atlantis is not found, but the submerged city in Gujarat , where Krishna lived, was indeed found by archaeologists and deep sea divers, and the buildings were photographed, and pottery and other items taken from them.
This was published in the newspapers and professional magazines , which has created a sensation in India. And I believe more is to come.

And I believe all these theories made by scholars in the past, should be revamped, considering the fact that sarasvati dried up in the middle of the 4th millenium B.C and the fact that the sarasvati river is mentioned and praised many times in the rig vedas. This is definetely the logical thing to do, and scholars themselves are citing this.

Must say , you don't know much. The vedas point out to the river sarasvati.

The goddess sarasvati, is the goddess of wisdom, learning and knowledge , who is worshipped by all hindus, and has nothing to do with any river.

And what about the so-called fanaticism of the demolition of the mosque in Ayodhya.

It is a fact that the temple of Rama existed there in the 15 th century, marking the birthplace of Rama. It was destroyed by Babar, and hindus ever since the 15th century have been trying to get it back.

Archaeological evidence have clearly proved that a massive temple existed in the very site of the babri masjid.

If the hindus went and destroyed the Kaaba in Mecca, wont the muslims wage a jihad and try to get it back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babri_Masjid

YAWN ....

Let me get this straight to you. We don't trust the western pseudo-scholars, who after studying the vedas with a dictionary, started saying that blonde and blue-eyed idiots came from outside India, and invaded India.
This was a purposeful attempt on the part of these pseudo-scholars to claim a heritage much older than theirs, and to show that they too were civilized and cultured in the past, (which neither their ancestors nor their descendants were.)

They purposefully ignored the fact that there is no mention of any blonde hair or red hair or blue eyes in the vedas or any hindu scripture. They also purposefully ignored the fact that Vishnu, Rama and Krishna ,as told by all the hindu scriptures were black-skinned. All that mattered to them was their own racist beliefs.
The black-skinned Krishna in the Gita addresses the dark-skinned Arjuna in the Gita as an aryan , which means noble and wise and righteous person.

The european idiots, ignored all this, and started claiming in the 19th century that the term aryan is the name for the white race and other crap, and took our noble swastika without our permission, and made it a symbol of racism, which is hated all over the world now.

And we know clearly well, how the hindu terms aryan and swastika was used by the idiot hitler and his servile cronies to put some pseudo-white european 'superman', with blonde hair and blue eyes becoming the ideal and not wisdom or righteousness as taught by the rishis and Krishna.

If Krishna had been alive at that time, He would have sanctioned a dharma yuddha or holy war against these asuras, and would have crushed them with an iron fist.

And we all know what damage these perverts have done to the world and even doing now, and the european pseudo-scholars are clearly responsible for this.

Ambdekar also claimed that the racialist and invasionist interpretation of the Rig Veda is "a perversion of scientific investigation" by western scholars who are on a mission "to prove what they want to prove, and do not hesitate to pick such evidence from the Vedas as they think is good for them."