Myth Of Greece in the West

I was brought up by Colonial British Christian's in 1960's. My parents in their good wisdom thought education was good for me but unfortunately for me it was a Xtian education. My mother a devout Hindu started my journey to explore what was God.(Xians turned me away from my culture towards "science") In Summer of 2009 I visited Rome and its museums what I saw was that pre christian civilisation of Rome and Greece both Pagan were very similar to Hindus today.

I lay down some assumptions for my analysis

Indian is an English word; Hindu is a Persian word: Aryan is what we are called
Aryan language is Sanskrit country Aryavrat and date back 5000BCE and before
Aryans arose along the banks of the Saraswati in Pak Punjab Gujarat region.
Aryans the spread all the way to Ireland(Eire/Aryan) over time.

Aryans have 16 main sanskars they live and die by 1. Naming children 2. Marriage 3. Relationships eg father mother 4. Ayurveda was followed. eg women should grow their hair long men to cut thiers. and more the Hindus will know
They espoused Dharam of the VEDAS which dated back to an indeterminate period in time more then 10,000 years ago.

ARYANS TODAY

English is a Indian language
Maths deal in Hindu numerals
Although there are Xians today they follow above mentioned pagan rituals the took from.

Aryan gods some english words .......there are many more
MANU god of man = Man
AGNI goddess of fire = igneous (latin) = Ignite
SARASWATI = SARAH
A-BRAMHA = ABRAHAM (husband of above)
and the list goes on.... currently my latest favourite is the following sloka from
Mudkopunishad (thrutheeya mundaka mantra 1)

There are two birds on a tree one called ATMA and the other JEEVE the later is peckng at an apple while the other looks on.
this is the story of Adam(Atma) and Eve (Jeeve) note even the words are similar for they are Indo european.

The entire bible is a corrupt and degraded version of Upanishads while the English language is incapable of being exact unlike sanskrit.

WHY THE CURRENT MISCONCEPTIONS

1 The cult of Xians combined with the violent pagan Romans went on to destory all pagan(Hindu/Aryan) temples
2 Todays western history continues to peddle the falsehood of Greek Roman (Pagan) origins of western civilisation and here why
Greece era 800BCE to 100BCE Greeks disappered for good
Roman era 100BCE to 400 ACE Rome dissapeared for good
similarly Saraswati era 10000bce till today (as Hindus ) carries on
Arabs study and store all Greek writings 600ACE till 1200ACE
Europe is run by barbarians and Xians no civil soicety exsists 400ACE till 1200ACE

The BIG LIE by the XIAN church

Aristotle Plato Pythoragous Galen and all Greeks were translated from GREEK into ARABIC by Muslims around era 700ACE TO 1100 ACE

So from 400BCE till 1200ACE WESTERN CIVILISATION DID NOT exist nothing that is why they call it the dark ages.
Here is the big lie!!!! the Xtian church translated ARABIC writings into LATIN and in effect the Xians rediscovered their own roots back to the Roman empire. From then on all Roman Greek studies were revived and remember there was no country called Greece it was part of Muslim Ottoman empire till 1800ACE.
The BRITS being good Xians and violent to boot recreated a huge empire modelled on Rome(under which millions of peoples died) and was as brutal wanting to recreate former Greek glory invaded the Ottoman Empire (being Muslim) and completely destroying it by 1800ACE
In 30th August 1832 Britain France and Russia (all Xians) RE CREATED GREECE and drew its current borders in what is known as the London Protocol. Just as Israel and Pak have come into existence today. So they perpetuated the myth of the power of Greece and denied all Arab scholars their dues for bringing Greek thought to Europe via Andalusia southern Spain and all the Muslim centers of learning such as . Cordoba Granada etc. In-fact Oxford university was founded as a monastery to study theses Arabic texts in around 1200ACE this period in the West is called the Renaissance.

Hindus NEVER disappeared and all humanity stands to gain by spreading VEDAS back to former glory.
and that is why RIG VEG is today a UN HERITAGE DOCUMENT.

Religion or Dharam

Religion is not some universal category or universal existent, so that all cultures traditions should have a a correspondence. Religion is only a Semitic construct that is their truth claim. Indian traditions have category of Dharma, that just means "support like mother and support is also measure". Dharma of "something" is that what supports that "something" and is also its measure of reality. That is why Dharma has Dharma. The Dharma of Dharma is "Sat" (i.e ultimate existence). (Again "Sat does not mean truth but existence.). Or we have Dharma Patni but no religious wife. All existents have Dharma but no religion.

So if we do not have a concept of religion (as it does not exit), then translating Dharma as religion is a disastrous error in understanding categories. With the outcome we are facing crisis of misunderstandings hence rejections of cultural traditions lock stock and barrel. One cannot study Physics without maths likewise to understand Dharam Sanskrit is pre requisite because the English language is an inferior tool.

Hindus and Science

Aryan Scientific Contribution to Europe and other World Civilizations
Prior to Industrial Revolution

Many eyebrows were raised at the title of this seminar. Deep rooted
disbelief that how can earlier civilizations can be contributors to
any “Science”, as we understand it today? Science means rational,
logical, objective thinking, something which did not exist in the
earlier people in adequate quantity. The life of these earlier people
was governed by religion i.e. superstition, which is inherently,
devoid of “scientific temper” and ‘free will”, the hall mark and
pre-requisite of scientific development. Once this premise is accepted
without debate, then West as birth place of all Science is the forgone
conclusion.
Religion as anti science is 100% a modern western construct and we
need to understand this thoroughly well. Religion in this case is
Christian religion and Science means modern Western science. This
incompatibility of religion with science in the West automatically
gets grafted on non-Western religions and their relation with science.
Concept of Religion in West and East differs radically in many
respects. In the Western concept of religion, it must have a Prophet
and a Book and the followers must abide by the teaching of both. In
the eastern religion specially Hinduism, the concept of Dharma ,
incorporates no single Prophet or book and followers are free to
choose , accept or reject philosophy of life, which suits them best

What is India

India, (Aryavrata) is not a mere geographical expression, not a mere political entity.. India is the Motherland of those who see and follow Dharma (righteousness)

Dr. K.M.Munshi

Interfaith and Hindus

Interfaith Dialogue” refers to interaction between two or more religious
traditions, at both individual and institutional levels, leading to
understanding of values and respecting them, resulting in prevalence of
communal amity.
The compulsion to participate in interfaith dialogues arises due to two
reasons. First, when the ‘state’ fails to take care of the majority
community and panders to the minority communities; second, when the
minority communities, emboldened by the state’s pandering, go overboard and
interfere with the cultural customs and religious practices of the majority
community, resulting in conflict and disorder.

*Hindu Dharma and secularism*

Hindus have co-existed with other indigenous creeds (Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs
and others) without problems for ages, and the peace and harmony prevailing
in this great Hindu land was affected only with the advent of Abrahamic
faiths, mainly Islam and Christianity, which oppressed the Hindu majority in
various ways.
Despite being at the receiving end for several hundred years, the Hindu
majority was magnanimous at the time of independence and addressed
minorities with concern while framing the Constitution, and ensured their
safety, security and religious freedom. India even refrained from enacting a
‘Common Civil Code.’ The Hindu majority never treated Christians and Muslims
as descendents of ‘invaders,’ but as fellow citizens.

*Sanatana Dharma* has been the character and culture of this great nation.
Hindu culture treats the world as a divine family - *Vasudaiva Kutumbakam* -
and welcomes outsiders as aspects of divinity - *Atithi Devo Bhava!
Such exalted concepts make words like ‘secularism’ hollow and redundant in
the Hindu ethos. Monotheistic religions have no space for non-believers (in
Allah or Mohammed or Yahweh or Jesus). Christianity introduced the concept
of secularism in western society in order to end sectarian fratricide; as
Hindus have no concept or tradition of such murderous sectarianism,
secularism in India can at best be a quality of administration by the state.
But the post-independence state has failed to understand this imported
notion of secularism, and hence, far from steering clear of all religion,
successive governments have failed even to treat all religions equally.

*The privileged minorities*

Minorities have been given extra privileges by an extra-solicitous
Constituent Assembly. Beginning with Article 14, up to Article 30, they have
been granted many freedoms, with the Hindu majority getting a raw deal. This
has emboldened the minorities to provoke, hurt and disrespect the Hindu
majority, while working to achieve their religious objectives. This has
naturally resulted in repeated conflicts.

India has undergone major demographic changes in the 60 years since
independence; the ineptness of Congress and other political parties has lost
Hindu bhoomi in many states to minorities. All political parties have failed
the Hindus, and particularly after the arrival of the foreigner-led UPA at
the centre, a Christian agenda is being silently achieved to the detriment
of this Hindu nation. Simultaneously, Muslim fundamentalists are being
encouraged to wage war (jihad) against the nation.

India lost huge territory when Pakistan was born, along with the current
Bangladesh. Since then, the north-east has been Christianised; Kashmir is in
trouble; so is Goa; 50% of Kerala is lost to minorities; large parts of
Maharashtra, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh have become Islamic; a large portion of
Karnataka, Andhra and Tamil Nadu have become Christianised.

Churches and missionaries of all denominations have become the second
largest land owners in the country - next only to the government - and have
been building churches and prayer houses anywhere and everywhere, totally
disproportionate to their flock. A similar mushrooming of mosques
disproportionate to Muslim population is also cause for concern.

History shows that both Islam and Christianity have been more ‘political’ in
nature rather than ‘spiritual;’ they have spread worldwide through invasions
and persecutions. India has borne the brunt of both Islam and Christianity
through jihad and conversions respectively. Both religions have been
successful, thanks to an inept political class and immature people who get
carried away by ‘secular’ machinations of the political class and the
Machiavellian agenda of the clergy of the Abrahamic faiths.

The unholy nexus between pseudo-secular politicians and minority community
leaders, aided and abetted by foreign-funded media houses, has caused
immense damage to the character of this Hindu nation. When things go beyond
tolerance, the majority reacts spontaneously, as happened in Gujarat,
Orissa, Karnataka and Jammu (Amarnath). After such reactions, the Hindu
majority reverts to its usual tolerant self, hoping that the minority with
which conflict took place would also settle down, but the
‘Marxist-media- minority’ nexus plays ugly ‘victimhood’ games in the
international arena, bringing disrepute to the country.

In between, minority community leaders organize so-called interfaith
dialogues to create a false picture of reconciliation, and successfully
complete the exercise by forcing their pre-conceived ‘resolutions’ on the
few ‘secularised’ Hindu leaders, using jugglery of words and making them
sign a declaration accepting resolutions advantageous to minorities only.

*Roman Catholics vs. other denominations*

The Vatican is very clever in conducting such farcical exercises. The prime
objective of the Vatican is Christianisation of the whole world. The same
was pronounced by Pope John Paul II when he gave a “catholic” call for
evangelization of Asia, particularly India, during his visit to the country
in November 1999. He had the audacity to give such a call standing on Indian
soil, that too, as India’s state guest! The Vatican has a history of
achieving its objectives by creating divisions among local people leading to
conflicts, and later through a healing touch by rehabilitation, education
and healthcare.

While other Christian denominations are aggressive and overt in their
evangelical activities, Roman Catholics are covert and subtle. The Catholic
leadership doesn’t restrain the other denominations from indulging in
aggressive evangelization, purely for the reason that this differentiation
helps them to create concepts like “ethical” and “unethical” conversions, or
“forced” and “unforced” (voluntary) conversions.

The Catholic leadership always blames other denominations for “unethical”
and “forced” conversions during these so-called interfaith dialogues, in
order to convince leaders of other faiths to accept the dangerous concept of
“ethical” conversions. It achieved success in one such farcical dialogue at
the Vatican in May 2006, where leaders whose names have not been made public
in India, went ahead and signed a declaration accepting the resolutions
prepared by the Vatican and the World Council of Churches!

There is another motive behind the Vatican’s interfaith dialogues. That is
to indirectly put pressure and restrictions on other denominations which
poach its targetted community for harvesting.

In this fight for “harvest” between various denominations, one question
arises - what is the need for Hindus to agree for such dialogues and why
should they participate? Hindus don’t indulge in blasphemy of other faiths,
gods, and scriptures; they don’t indulge in conversion activities; they
don’t interfere in other religious traditions; they don’t meddle with other
faiths. On the contrary, Hindus have been amicable to others and they have
been tolerating the propaganda (however provocative) of other religions.

*Dhimmitude and disunity*

How are they reciprocated? By hacking bodies (jihad) and harvesting souls
(conversions) ! Much of the so-called tolerance is simply dhimmitude, the
result of being beaten up or beaten down for ages. Dhimmitude resulted from
Nehruvian secularism and impacted Hindus so much that they cannot see the
monster standing gleefully before their eyes; they are still in deep
slumber.

Some religious leaders are averse to identifying themselves and their
‘teachings’ as ‘Hindu;’ they are more interested in marketing their wares in
a global market, than in spreading dharma among the masses in the remotest
hamlets. Some Hindu leaders are so magnanimous (naïve?) that they preach
“all faiths are the same”! Faiths and custom-oriented traditional mathams
have lost out to personality- oriented and business-oriented ‘cults.’

Hindu Identity

Without our Hindu identity, connection and continuity, we may feel disoriented and rudderless.If we are not active, assertive with self-esteem, the world around us is going to be a dangerous place for Hindus.We need to understand and recognize our Dharma and our role in preserving, practicing, protecting and promoting it. We must not only preserve the gains of our Sanathan Dharma, and maintain intact those just institutions that may have been established by our great Rishies for the benefit of all those who are living and those who are to be born.
We have an obligation and responsibility as part of those who think, care about, or are in any way influenced by Hindutva, to promote it. We were not meant to stand alone. We need to belong to the larger world Hindu community. Only where there is a mutual commitment will we find people prepared to work themselves for the preservation for the good of fellow Hindus.

Sanskrit not just a Language

I. Sanskrit is more than a language. Like all languages, its structures and categories contain a built-in framework for representing specific worldviews. Sanskriti is the name of the culture and civilization that embodies this framework. One may say that Sanskriti is the term for what has recently become known as Indic Civilization, a civilization that goes well beyond the borders of modern India to encompass South Asia and much of Southeast Asia. At one time, it included much of Asia.

II. Interactions among different regions of Asia helped to develop and exchange this pan-Asian Sanskriti. Numerous examples involving India, Southeast Asia and China are given.

III. Sanskrit started to decline after the West Asian invasions of the Indian subcontinent. This had a devastating impact on Sanskriti, as many world-famous centers of learning were destroyed, and no single major university was built for many centuries by the conquerors.

IV. Besides Asia, Sanskrit and Sanskriti influenced Europe's modernity, and Sanskrit Studies became a large-scale formal activity in most European universities. These influences shaped many intellectual disciplines that are (falsely) classified as “Western”. But the “discovery” of Sanskrit by Europe also had the negative influence of fueling European racism since the 19th century.

V. Meanwhile, in colonial India, the education system was de-Sanskritized and replaced by an English based education. This served to train clerks and low level employees to administer the Empire, and to start the process of self-denigration among Indians, a trend that continues today. Many prominent Indians achieved fame and success as middlemen serving the Empire, and Gandhi's famous 1908 monograph, “Hind Swaraj,” discusses this phenomenon.

VI. After India's independence, there was a broad based Nehruvian love affair with Sanskrit as an important nation-building vehicle. However, successive generations of Indian intellectuals have replaced this with what this paper terms “Sanskrit Phobia,” i.e. a body of beliefs now widely disseminated according to which Sanskrit and Sanskriti are blamed for all sorts of social, economic and political problems facing India's underprivileged classes. This section illustrates such phobia among prominent Western Indologists and among trendy Indians involved in South Asian Studies who learn about Sanskrit and Sanskriti according to Western frameworks and biases