05-08-2006, 02:25 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe that India was the earliest civilization in the world. I also think that India has had more influence in human culture than any other land. I also believe that there was a migration of people from India into the Middle East and Europe, and the so-called Indo-European languages are derived from that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is also what I believe. Now, how do we transform this into an objective fact.
I think there already too much evidence, the most significant is the fact that Sanskrit is a common language of Indo-Europeans and Sanskrit being the language of the Arya people of India, shows the directionality. The other evidence comes from the Greek and Egyptian records.
I think there has been considerable evidence produced from credible sources and amply presented. Only, that it has not penetrated into the mainstream domain, it's the privilege of those who choose to study it.
I think we are continuely having to fight the null hypothesis i.e., there is enough evidence and the means to present it, but the scholarly community is not about to accept it, because it is too extraordinary.
This is not just exclusive to Hinduism, the same is happening with parapsychologists. If an idea is too separated from what is considered acceptable according to our understanding of reality, it is often just dismissed.
I find it very hard to talk about Ancient Indian history and Hinduism with my peers, because the ideas are so largely alien to them and it contradicts everything they have learnt. For example, if I tell them it was not Newton who first proposed the theory of gravity and motion, but it was Aryabhatta and before him the Vaiseshika school, I am often just greeted with disinterest. I thus have to become selective in who I share my knowledge with.
I think there is definite proof of the advanced level of science. For instance, the Hindu physiology, mapping the human body as an intriciate energy system, with energetic centres(chakras), pathways(nadis) and of a Kundalini mechanism at the base of the spine, almost like a potential spiritu-eletrical energy. It is based on this model of the human body, that Yoga is based, and there is no contention that Yoga does not significantly promote health and well being.
This model of the human body, is today gathering a lot of scientific backing, with mainstream science discovering others centres in the body(as a network of many nerves merging at a single point) and parallels drawn to the central nervous and endrocine glands.
Another recent discovery, is the existence of the nasal cycles, which in Yoga, known as the Ida and Pingla Nadis, are considered of great importance in causing the Kundalini energy to rise and are known as the pathways to the brain. So slowly, but surely, a lot of these yogic theories are being proven by science(rediscovered)
Yoga has been the most succesful tradition carried into the West, and through Yoga, many westerners have made contact with India and Hinduism. Now, it seems like it is the turn of Ayurveda to become the next big Indian system to flourish in the west. I think we need to promote these more, and naturally the rest will follow.
That is also what I believe. Now, how do we transform this into an objective fact.
I think there already too much evidence, the most significant is the fact that Sanskrit is a common language of Indo-Europeans and Sanskrit being the language of the Arya people of India, shows the directionality. The other evidence comes from the Greek and Egyptian records.
I think there has been considerable evidence produced from credible sources and amply presented. Only, that it has not penetrated into the mainstream domain, it's the privilege of those who choose to study it.
I think we are continuely having to fight the null hypothesis i.e., there is enough evidence and the means to present it, but the scholarly community is not about to accept it, because it is too extraordinary.
This is not just exclusive to Hinduism, the same is happening with parapsychologists. If an idea is too separated from what is considered acceptable according to our understanding of reality, it is often just dismissed.
I find it very hard to talk about Ancient Indian history and Hinduism with my peers, because the ideas are so largely alien to them and it contradicts everything they have learnt. For example, if I tell them it was not Newton who first proposed the theory of gravity and motion, but it was Aryabhatta and before him the Vaiseshika school, I am often just greeted with disinterest. I thus have to become selective in who I share my knowledge with.
I think there is definite proof of the advanced level of science. For instance, the Hindu physiology, mapping the human body as an intriciate energy system, with energetic centres(chakras), pathways(nadis) and of a Kundalini mechanism at the base of the spine, almost like a potential spiritu-eletrical energy. It is based on this model of the human body, that Yoga is based, and there is no contention that Yoga does not significantly promote health and well being.
This model of the human body, is today gathering a lot of scientific backing, with mainstream science discovering others centres in the body(as a network of many nerves merging at a single point) and parallels drawn to the central nervous and endrocine glands.
Another recent discovery, is the existence of the nasal cycles, which in Yoga, known as the Ida and Pingla Nadis, are considered of great importance in causing the Kundalini energy to rise and are known as the pathways to the brain. So slowly, but surely, a lot of these yogic theories are being proven by science(rediscovered)
Yoga has been the most succesful tradition carried into the West, and through Yoga, many westerners have made contact with India and Hinduism. Now, it seems like it is the turn of Ayurveda to become the next big Indian system to flourish in the west. I think we need to promote these more, and naturally the rest will follow.