Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:18 AM   #41
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linschoten View Post
Would you regard Mughal architecture as not being properly Indian?
sir, this is not correct to say but it is fact that mughal architecture is nothing but persian architecture.

the differences between indian mughal architecture and pre existing indian architecture are too great.

let us look at them .

this one is from 500 ad india, uttar pradesh

Click the image to open in full size.


this one is from 11th century india


Click the image to open in full size.




all these were pre islamic arts.




now look at this building from Persia


Click the image to open in full size.




match the persian building with this " Indian " mughal building


Click the image to open in full size.



could you tell which two are related ?

i am sure first two are inferior ( as per western tastes ) but they are indian .

last two are better but obviously are not indian and they are more related to each other.


do you really think Akbar's tomb is related to temples i posted ?
avantivarman is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:18 AM   #42

Bharata's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Forum
Posts: 269

Quote:
Originally Posted by avantivarman View Post
bharata , you know very well that apart from south india, all parts of india had same language till 600 ad a situation i see unrivalled .

yet why did we divide ?

Europe never had a single language as its dominating force and when it had in antiquity , it was united as under Roman empire.
I think divide started from satavahana times itself so in 2500 years[frequent incursions from north west also] it is possible for country to change into a continent
[South is very big so you cant eliminate it]
Bharata is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:22 AM   #43
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bharata View Post
I think divide started from satavahana times itself so in 2500 years it is possible for country to change into a continent
[South is very big so you cant eliminate it]
now this is not correct.

the southern areas were " indianized " progressively and it was complete by 200 ad.

and the fact remains that our medium sized empires were also not greater than other middle sized kingdoms in middle east and east asia like korea and japan.
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:36 AM   #44
Suspended until August 12th, 2014
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,542

Quote:
Originally Posted by avantivarman View Post
this was what i had in my mind when i joined this forum but most of them are not facts.
What it is not fact that India's religion Buddhism dominated China for thousands of years?

You are not actually giving any reasons why anything I have told you(or Hamilcar told you earlier) is not true. You just keep harping on "I use to believe this, but now I don't" you sound like a rebel without a cause. What are you trying to prove? You call yourself a "Hindu nationalist" do you think admitting "China was better than us" You will be respected as objective on the forum?

Quote:
show me evidences that kung fu, chinese medicine , were learnt from indians.
Well, one can clearly see the similarities between Chinese medicine and Indian medicine and martial arts, but how would you know, you neither seem to have studied Chinese history or your Indian history. After all, it is not Indian history, but Chinese history itself that records Bodhidharma brought superior medicine and martial arts to China, and started the Shaolin kung fu tradition. A famous Chinese intellectual even admits India dominated China culturally and China learned much of her mathematics from her.


Quote:
and finally, arab chronicles mention chinese porcelain as having high status and value., what have they said for indian cotton and steel ?
the thing is apart from steel and zinc metallurgy, medicinal things and maths, there is no technical area where indians surpassed chinese.
What is this a pissing contest or something? Maths, crucible steel and zinc metallurgy are not small fry, they are advanced technologies and knowledge. So India did not develop paper, but it could produce high grade steel. Besides, a lot of the mechanical arts of India have been lost. We don't actually know what kind of technologies ancient India had - we only find references in literature - and the references we do find describes explosives, wooden robots, mechanical computers, flying aircraft, missiles and microscopes. Some sound too fantastic, but some we have actually found.

Last edited by Joshua A; December 7th, 2012 at 05:43 AM.
Joshua A is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:46 AM   #45

Bharata's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Forum
Posts: 269

Quote:
Originally Posted by avantivarman View Post
now this is not correct.

the southern areas were " indianized " progressively and it was complete by 200 ad.

and the fact remains that our medium sized empires were also not greater than other middle sized kingdoms in middle east and east asia like korea and japan.
oral language predates written languages[so add 500 more years] and oriya,telugu and kanada script completely different from hindi.
I think ashoka attacking kalinga itself tells it was different country.
Bharata is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 05:51 AM   #46
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua A View Post
What it is not fact that India's religion Buddhism dominated China for thousands of years?

You are not actually giving any reasons why anything I have told you(or Hamilcar told you earlier) is not true. You just keep harping on "I use to believe this, but now I don't" you sound like a rebel without a cause. What are you trying to prove? You call yourself a "Hindu nationalist" do you think admitting "China was better than us" You will be respected as objective on the forum?



Well, one can clearly see the similarities between Chinese medicine and Indian medicine and martial arts, but how you would you, you neither seem to have studied Chinese history or your Indian history. After all, it is not Indian history, but Chinese history itself that records Bodhidharma brought superior medicine and martial arts to China, and started the Shaolin kung fu tradition. A famous Chinese intellectual even admits India dominated China culturally and China learned much of her mathematics from her.




What is this a pissing contest or something? Maths, crucible steel and zinc metallurgy are not small fry, they are advanced technologies. So India did not develop paper, but it could produce high grade steel. Besides, a lot of the mechanical arts of India have been lost. We don't actually know what kind of technologies ancient India had - we only find references in literature - and the references we do find describes explosives, wooden robots, mechanical computers, flying aircraft, missiles and microscopes. Some sound too fantastic, but some we have actually found.
1. It is fact buddhism dominated china for thousands of years but islam originating in Arabia impacted india much more than buddhism impact on arabia ( if there was any along with hinduism ) so by extending your logic, arabs are greater than indians as their religion impacted us, ours not.



2. I have no reason to be proclaimed as objective as please look at my earlier posts .

3. that bodhidharma taught martial arts is a hoax and this is well known.
the fact is that the text that mentions such thing is of 16 th century some 1100 years later than his arrival.

btw, some muslims in india claim that persians brought silk so by your logic a white indophobic may use that as ' look even indians believe such thing '.



4. I am more than sure that you are talking about lin yutang and hu shih who talked about chinese being dominated by india for 2,000 years.

that is for another thread.


5. finally, out of robots, explosives, super computers , what have we found actually ?
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 06:28 AM   #47
Suspended until August 12th, 2014
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,542

Quote:
Originally Posted by avantivarman View Post
1. It is fact buddhism dominated china for thousands of years but islam originating in Arabia impacted india much more than buddhism impact on arabia ( if there was any along with hinduism ) so by extending your logic, arabs are greater than indians as their religion impacted us, ours not.
Apples and oranges. Arabia invaded and colonized India, that is why Mughal culture appeared in India. India did not invade and colonize China, China accepted Buddhism itself, because it was superior to their own culture.
Moreover, Mughal culture was not successful in replacing the indigenous Hindu culture of India, this is clearly evidenced by the fact that the majority of Indians are still Hindu. Hindus were very proud of their culture, this is why they stuck to it. The British colonialists recognized this, this is why they spread loads of propaganda against Hinduism, mistranslated the scriptures and created the AIT theory and then abolished India's indigenous education system and replaced it with the English system, so the new generations of Indians would learn the British versions and feel ashamed about their culture and accept the British as their rulers. To a large extent the British were successful.

British colonial scholars are on record stating their intentions, so what I am telling you is unadulterated fact.

Quote:
3. that bodhidharma taught martial arts is a hoax and this is well known.
the fact is that the text that mentions such thing is of 16 th century some 1100 years later than his arrival.
Funny, the current history of India, Buddhism and Ashoka is based on 600-700 year older texts In any case if you are right, then yes that does make the Bodhidharma story dubious. However, the fact that we can find clear correspondences between Chinese medicine and martial with their older Indian counterparts, suggests the Chinese learned it from the Indians.

For example acupressure points and the the therapeutic stimulation of them is first described in the Sushruta Samhita(SC: 600BCE; LC: 2000BCE) In Ayurverda they are called marma points and they are far better mapped than they are in the Chinese system. In Indian martial arts, skilled strikes to these points is used to attack the person, just like in Kung Fu. The description of prana vayus and the central nadis sushmuna, ida and pingala described first in the Upanishads and in other old Indian literature, is found in Chinese medicine where they are called merdians, chi, ying and yang. As we can find clearly far older Indian texts that describe them before they appear in China, it is clear China has learned this from India.

Quote:
4. I am more than sure that you are talking about lin yutang and hu shih who talked about chinese being dominated by india for 2,000 years.

that is for another thread.
He is very humble to admit India dominated China culturally, because it is true. What is your problem in accepting this truth? You are Indian aren't you?


Quote:
5. finally, out of robots, explosives, super computers , what have we found actually ?
You misrepresented what I told you. I said wooden robots and mechanical computers They are described in Indian texts - and today we know they actually exist - we have found wooden robots in ancient Greece and also in Baghdad. We have found exactly the same mechanical computer described in the Indian text samrangasutadhar, the antikeythra mechanism. Now that very same text describes a flying aircraft and even its engine.
Joshua A is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 06:44 AM   #48
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua A View Post
Apples and oranges. Arabia invaded and colonized India, that is why Mughal culture appeared in India. India did not invade and colonize China, China accepted Buddhism itself, because it was superior to their own culture.
Moreover, Mughal culture was not successful in replacing the indigenous Hindu culture of India, this is clearly evidenced by the fact that the majority of Indians are still Hindu. Hindus were very proud of their culture, this is why they stuck to it. The British colonialists recognized this, this is why they spread loads of propaganda against Hinduism, mistranslated the scriptures and created the AIT theory and then abolished India's indigenous education system and replaced it with the English system, so the new generations of Indians would learn the British versions and feel ashamed about their culture and accept the British as their rulers. To a large extent the British were successful.

British colonial scholars are on record stating their intentions, so what I am telling you is unadulterated fact.



Funny, the current history of India, Buddhism and Ashoka is based on 600-700 year older texts In any case if you are right, then yes that does make the Bodhidharma story dubious. However, the fact that we can find clear correspondences between Chinese medicine and martial with their older Indian counterparts, suggests the Chinese learned it from the Indians.

For example acupressure points and the the therapeutic stimulation of them is first described in the Sushruta Samhita(SC: 600BCE; LC: 2000BCE) In Ayurverda they are called marma points and they are far better mapped than they are in the Chinese system. In Indian martial arts, skilled strikes to these points is used to attack the person, just like in Kung Fu. The description of prana vayus and the central nadis sushmuna, ida and pingala described first in the Upanishads and in other old Indian literature, is found in Chinese medicine where they are called merdians, chi, ying and yang. As we can find clearly far older Indian texts that describe them before they appear in China, it is clear China has learned this from India.



He is very humble to admit India dominated China culturally, because it is true. What is your problem in accepting this truth? You are Indian aren't you?




You misrepresented what I told you. I said wooden robots and mechanical computers They are described in Indian texts - and today we know they actually exist - we have found wooden robots in ancient Greece and also in Baghdad. We have found exactly the same mechanical computer described in the Indian text samrangasutadhar, the antikeythra mechanism. Now that very same text describes a flying aircraft and even its engine.
1. I could see I was wrong about arab comparison as theirs was based on genocide of native people of india but our contribution to chinese culture was owing to superiority of indian thought.

BTW, Mughals or for that matter, anyone had no guts to destroy indian civilization but they harmed us considerably.

2. I did not object to other points but bodhidharma story is a fraud.

108 marma points are clearly of indian origin .

3. HU Shih the great chinese novelist was humble to accept that india made great contribution to china but we need to show same humbleness.


4. Samrang Sutradhara is not any ancient text but it is written by Bhoja who could not save Somnath from the hitler for india - mahmud ghaznavi.

perhaps ghaznavi had ICBMs as compared to engines of Bhoja.
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 07:57 AM   #49
Suspended until August 12th, 2014
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,542

Quote:
4. Samrang Sutradhara is not any ancient text but it is written by Bhoja who could not save Somnath from the hitler for india - mahmud ghaznavi.
No, I know it is not an ancient text. It is a compilation, because a lot of works were lost in Vaastu vidya. So it attempts to compile the knowledge from the past.
Joshua A is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 08:23 AM   #50
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua A View Post
No, I know it is not an ancient text. It is a compilation, because a lot of works were lost in Vaastu vidya. So it attempts to compile the knowledge from the past.
the countries like japan and korea which have history of 1500 years would call it very ancient but for me anything after Harsha is not ancient as we are not 1500 year old civilization but twice that age atleast so our standards must be high.

but the fact is that Bhoja could not have any sufficient technology or we would have seen 1,000s of temples in Mathura alone.
avantivarman is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
2200, china, india, outsmarted


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
india china avantivarman Asian History 147 October 25th, 2012 05:01 AM
China and India Thessalonian Asian History 15 September 22nd, 2011 10:00 AM
India - China Lord Keviv Asian History 2 September 21st, 2011 01:27 AM
China Vs. India Isoroku295 Speculative History 25 August 31st, 2011 05:34 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.