Is history actually written by victors ?

Shashank

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
866
944
Ban galore
Why did you stop short? And if you did, why are you bragging about it now? To demonstrate your tolerance?

It isn't your tolerance in question here, it's your credulity. Figure out the difference.
I stopped short because I saw both sides were crossing limits in anger.you are no sain and have your own agenda here. Only reason I didn't reply to them because they didn't cry victim like you.
Being saint and pretending to be. A saint are 2 different things.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
12,190
7,717
Mumbai
@Golden_Rule &@Arvind

You gentlemen are conflating history and mythology - two different topics . History as we understand it today is different from itihasa of Vedic times . The former is a discipline which needs verification on the ground - literally through archaeology , textual evidence , linguistics and tertiary sources if any . The latter is a matter of belief . I'm sure you'd understand the difference between the two and see the fallacy of your arguments .


To cite an analogy - The lack of the Big 3 ( as described above ) is the reason why AIT is a theory , nothing more nor less . That's also why the OIT is a theory too . But as theories go , there seems to be a gradual shift towards OIT away from AIT which some of it's proponents are now renaming as AMT , given a gradual uncovering of new evidence , certain new archaeological finds , re examination of old ways of analysis , etc mostly by a bunch of mavericks but not necessarily so .

I guess within a few decades this matter pending since nearly two centuries should see a satisfying conclusion .
 
Last edited:

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
I stopped short because I saw both sides were crossing limits in anger.you are no sain and have your own agenda here. Only reason I didn't reply to them because they didn't cry victim like you.
Being saint and pretending to be. A saint are 2 different things.
I am not sure that you would know the difference. First, what I am refuting is superstitious claptrap; if you have any doubt about that, you can mention it. One of them has gone on record saying that a purely speculative piece by a theoretician is actually capable of yielding information about aerodynamics. Others point to the past achievements of thinkers and want to equate that with the Scientific Method (it is hoped that you are aware of the difference between a scientific spirit and the very specific Scientific Method). If you knew that this was wrong, why did you keep quiet? and if you do not know that this is wrong, how can you judge my contentions?

I notice that your role was to sit down for a comfortable chat about who did what to whom in the Mahabharata; that in itself shows that you are yourself not aware of the difference between history and fable.

Incidentally, I am not angry, and have not been right through this discussion; just alternately scornful and amused.

Finally, I referred this discussion to three people who have the illusion that tolerating bhakts in large numbers might have a beneficial effect on the popularity of this forum. This was to show them that they are wrong.
 

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
I stopped short because I saw both sides were crossing limits in anger.you are no sain and have your own agenda here. Only reason I didn't reply to them because they didn't cry victim like you.
Being saint and pretending to be. A saint are 2 different things.
And one last thing: these ignorant people are not fit for a discussion on any subject requiring knowledge and expertise. I do not consider them to be of my grade. This may sound arrogant, but to the neutral, it is a fact. Again I repeat: my agenda is to defend history from these bigots and revisionists, who understand nothing and haven't the intention of trying to understand.

It is for you to understand this and get on board or to try to cope with this confusion, using a limited repertory. That is entirely up to you.
 

Seiko

Active member
Dec 1, 2017
241
167
Gods Own Country
Actually, Duryodhana was called Suyodhana the good one, it was his Mamaji Shakuni who scripted the whole thing as retaliation for Duryodhana enslaving Gandhara kings and putting them to death in penal colony It was Afghanistan which was Gandharis place of birth.
Bhishma, not Suyodhana!!
 

Shashank

Well-Known member
Dec 4, 2017
866
944
Ban galore
And one last thing: these ignorant people are not fit for a discussion on any subject requiring knowledge and expertise. I do not consider them to be of my grade. This may sound arrogant, but to the neutral, it is a fact. Again I repeat: my agenda is to defend history from these bigots and revisionists, who understand nothing and haven't the intention of trying to understand.

It is for you to understand this and get on board or to try to cope with this confusion, using a limited repertory. That is entirely up to you.
As the topic says "is history written by Victor's?" It's open forum for everyone to discuss and debate various version of history. Just because you read a book of history that doesn't mean that the only version of history and should be treated as such. Everyone has his/her right of interpretation just like you.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bali78 and Aravind

bonobashi

Well-Known member
Dec 3, 2017
889
410
As the topic says "is history written by Victor's?" It's open forum for everyone to discuss and debate various version of history. Just because you read a book of history that doesn't mean that the only version of history and should be treated as such. Everyone has his/her right of interpretation just like you.
Dear Sir,

This is the fundamental mistake that you are making. It is not versions of history that we are discussing; it is areas and elements that are not at all accepted as history by historians. These are attempts by politicians to produce material that will justify them and their ideology. Please try to understand that the Mahabharata is not acceptable as history anywhere in the world, and that our bhakts insisting on it being so merely makes us the laughing stock of the whole world.

Everybody may interpret history; it is not for anyone or anyone to define what should be history and what should not. Only historians, not these forum correspondents.
 

Golden_Rule

Boundless Seeker
Dec 6, 2017
990
667
USA
No. Much of it may be fact; I am not going through it item by item. But what did we do with it? Nothing.
Thanks for the acknowledgement! What did we do with it? We Indians preserved the knowledge, but lost the means to use it for the purpose it was meant for. You have to infer from the civilizational and cultural contexts that ancient Indian culture was knowledge based with focus on mind, intellect and the supreme spirit vs. Egyptian and other cultures which focused more on the physical manifestation of ego - the pyramids, mummies, tombs, graves, etc.

A corollary to your admission - if you have ever thought how we reached those state of knowledge in such diverse fields except for a scientific approach?

And if it is certainly for a scientific approach, have we not witnessed "discovery" of science in the recent decades more than the western world supposedly discovered in the rest of the past? Having just proven that understanding of science is evolutionary, we are yet to witness several discoveries which are still hidden from western scientists. And this could very well involve totally new concepts and understanding of science and of our existence.

A little first step in that direction is the "Theory of Everything" and "String Theory" which unifies matter and energy. This is where science has advanced as of today. And what would stop any of us to think that the next logical step for scientist would be to get in control of it and to measure it. But it is impossible for scientists to do it with their present approach and means.

Probably there are other means to understand the same advanced scientific knowledge and much beyond it.

This is how we can connect our admission of Indian history as agreed above to a certain method they adopted, for which we are yet to agree upon!!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Aravind

Aravind

Wolfpack
Dec 5, 2017
1,158
1,245
Badacow7
Bhishma, not Suyodhana!!
Nope it was Suyodhana who did it, after a verbal spat by Bheema that he was son of a mother who husband died earlier 'it was due to Gandharis Manglik status,she was married to a ram and it was killed to nullify its effect,later got married to Dhritarasthra' When Suryodhana found out her family was responsible for it, he waged war,enslaved all family of Kings sons more than a hundred sons and fed them meager rations, father or shakuni fed him all the rations so atleast one could survive to avenge them and granted him a boon to make Dice from his femur bone. That is how Shakuni came to be.
 

Aravind

Wolfpack
Dec 5, 2017
1,158
1,245
Badacow7
It still remains pertinent. You have studied everything and learnt nothing. Someone who says out loud that the Vymanik Shastra has any practical value desperately needs re-education. As for Ghazi, if you knew the origin of the word, a participant in a Ghazwa, you wouldn't be talking rubbish. Look it up. You might learn something.
Hitler sent his Anhernerbe to tibet, India to gather information. You would discard anything Indian its part of Macaulayism.
Ghazwa ended after prophets death.
Ghazi was also bestowed to people who slayed 100 pagans later,
Every Islamic ruler wanted the title of a Ghazi from Timur, to Tipu sultan. It was a title earned for slaying kafirs.
 

Aravind

Wolfpack
Dec 5, 2017
1,158
1,245
Badacow7
I don't think that they did. I think it's a fable, like all fables for the credulous. Wishing someone Merry Xmas doesn't involve believing the fairy tales linked with it. Unlike your involvement, where every detail is swallowed up whole.
So if it was a fable why the grand pomp. festival, or greeting Xmas?
 

Aravind

Wolfpack
Dec 5, 2017
1,158
1,245
Badacow7
On the ignorant and superstitious, certainly, whether they are Hindu - or Muslim, or Christian. Your female family members? If you don't know how to read English, not my problem. Ask for a translator. :D
Sorry, i am a native Indian, not a brown coconut (brown on outside, white inside) Angrez sahib. Yes you did mention my female family members in previous posts remember, or should i paste your insults here again.
 

Aravind

Wolfpack
Dec 5, 2017
1,158
1,245
Badacow7
LOL.

You actually think that von Braun sent up rockets based on Vymanika Shastra? Nothing more needs to be said. You stand fully exposed by yourself.

And don't keep talking about your female family members. Go through your own family tree, and you will see that not a single female is mentioned on it. Only the males. Don't divert attention and strive for victimhood.
YOGA was called hocus pocus,is now worldwide acknowledged and a 10 billion $ Industry. Robert, Oppenheimer also quoted Gita after nuke explosion.
Go back to your posts you did mention female family members , now dont try the escape route when caught.
 

Aravind

Wolfpack
Dec 5, 2017
1,158
1,245
Badacow7
WHAT is written in the Mahabharata is important, not when it was written. To take such vague references and retro-fit a geographic model to it is more or less on the lines of the learned idiot who professed to present the aerodynamics of the Pushpaka Vimana to a scientific audience.

You might find it useful for passing the time on a forum such as this, that seems to have vast tolerance for such idiocy. but it won't last for more than two minutes anywhere else (gatherings of bhakts excepted).
What is your problem with 'Bhakt' i thought such words were not used in this forum according to Mods.
 

Aravind

Wolfpack
Dec 5, 2017
1,158
1,245
Badacow7
@Golden_Rule &@Arvind

You gentlemen are conflating history and mythology - two different topics . History as we understand it today is different from itihasa of Vedic times . The former is a discipline which needs verification on the ground - literally through archaeology , textual evidence , linguistics and tertiary sources if any . The latter is a matter of belief . I'm sure you'd understand the difference between the two and see the fallacy of your arguments .


To cite an analogy - The lack of the Big 3 ( as described above ) is the reason why AIT is a theory , nothing more nor less . That's also why the OIT is a theory too . But as theories go , there seems to be a gradual shift towards OIT away from AIT which some of it's proponents are now renaming as AMT , given a gradual uncovering of new evidence , certain new archaeological finds , re examination of old ways of analysis , etc mostly by a bunch of mavericks but not necessarily so .

I guess within a few decades this matter pending since nearly two centuries should see a satisfying conclusion .
Itihas is our history, Westerners call our history as mythology, the word Myth is applied to anything Pre- Jesus. The world was only 2000 yrs old,the time line now pushed back to 4000 years as per Western thought.
 

Pankaj

IAF Fan
Dec 3, 2017
217
90
New Delhi
SUBEDAR JOGINDER SINGH - A Film By Simerjit Singh

The biopic is about the real story of 1962 Indo-China war hero Subedar Joginder Singh where he commanded 21 Sikh Soldier and they fought against 1000s of Chinese.