Guest guest Posted June 1, 2006 Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 im discussing a thing with a muslim man, that says that iraq and sumeria is the cradle of civilisation, i claim that india is, because that are scriptures older then their 8000 year old civilisation.. i was know wondering if any of u got any link or such, wich is sumhow scientific, that can prove me right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaea Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 im discussing a thing with a muslim man, that says that iraq and sumeria is the cradle of civilisation, i claim that india is, because that are scriptures older then their 8000 year old civilisation.. i was know wondering if any of u got any link or such, wich is sumhow scientific, that can prove me right? google things like "saraswati lake" or "david frawley". The lake, which was actually situated in the middle east, was a meeting place for the ancient sages of india. Saraswati river's course is clearly described in Vedas, but the river and lake dried up 5000 years ago, which proves the Vedas are at least older than that. Satellite images now prove that the river and lake did exist - all of this is welll documented in the works of David Frawley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 thnX i will do that, any more will also be good.. Haribol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaea Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 thnX i will do that, any more will also be good.. Haribol also try the archaeolgy series written by arnold cremo (iskcon devotee) - VERY scientific and boring at time but it has the juice, so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kulapavana Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 im discussing a thing with a muslim man, that says that iraq and sumeria is the cradle of civilisation, i claim that india is, because that are scriptures older then their 8000 year old civilisation.. there were many ancient civilizations all over the world, some leaving very impressive artifacts. however, Vedic civilization is the oldest because it even speaks about events that happened in previous episodes of creation, let alone 8000 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yegan Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 Vedic civilization is the oldest because it even speaks about events that happened in previous episodes of creation, let alone 8000 years ago. Unfortunately this is not an indication that vedic civilization is the oldest as far as scientifical evidence is concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaea Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 thnX i will do that, any more will also be good.. Haribol also look up the underwater cities off the coast of Gujarat - there is some speculation that the city is 7000 years old. Some people also saying this was the original Dwaraka, but in my opinion it can't be (judging from descriptions in SB and Mahabharata). sorry for giving you points one by one - i'm just posting as i remember stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kulapavana Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 Unfortunately this is not an indication that vedic civilization is the oldest as far as scientifical evidence is concerned. that depends on the scientist. the analysis of a language is used routinely to establish age of a text, as well as the contents of the text itself is used to establish the age of civilization that created it. even if you think Vedas are a fantasy, it is a fantasy FAR more advanced than that of Jules Verne for example. Thus one can safely conclude that if it took western civilization some 4500 years to produce Jules Verne, it must have taken a bit longer to produce the Vedas - which are dated by the scientists as at least 3000 years old. yes, that is not a method equally reliable as counting growth rings on a tree, but it is one certainly used in science. dating old stones used and reused in construction of various buildings is at least equally speculative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 Don't forget to point to what is timeless in the vedas. Age of cultures means nothing when measured against that which is eternal. I would suggest to let him believe what he likes concerning such things, state your difference of opinion, and then ask him to explain something on the nature of the soul. Be his friend. Take him to the level on which things really matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 im discussing a thing with a muslim man, that says that iraq and sumeria is the cradle of civilisation, i claim that india is, because that are scriptures older then their 8000 year old civilisation.. i was know wondering if any of u got any link or such, wich is sumhow scientific, that can prove me right? Indian civilisation has gone through many phases and at one time included Afghanistan. The Indus Valley civilisation is one of the oldest as well as the ruins near Mahabalipuram where divers have found artifacts that date from 6000 BC. During this date these civilisations were already well developed, so therefore they must have developed even earlier. The Vedic civilisation is thought to be very ancient as they describe events that scientists date at 6500 BC. Iraq was once Mesapotamia which was also a great ancient civilisation which included the Assysians, Sumerians, Babylonians and Akkadians. It is not the oldest in the world but one of the oldest, probably developed at the same time as the Vedic civilisation in India. Some stories from the bible actually originated from ancient sumerian stories that were altered. However during the time of these ancient civilisations, the Mesapotamians were not muslims, since Islam didn't exist at that time, but were polytheists that worshipped different gods for different things, such as the goddess Ishtar. This proves that the Abrahamics were wrong to believe that polytheists were primative and unintelligent as ancient Rome, Greece, Egypt were also built by polytheists. Next to Mesapotamia you had another great ancient civilasation, the Persians who were also polytheists in the early years and later became monotheists through Zorastrianism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 Don't forget to point to what is timeless in the vedas. Age of cultures means nothing when measured against that which is eternal. I would suggest to let him believe what he likes concerning such things, state your difference of opinion, and then ask him to explain something on the nature of the soul. Be his friend. Take him to the level on which things really matter. they also say that their koran is ageless so that arent a scientific approach.. i just whant to show him that arabia isnt the cradle of anything then islam.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 they also say that their koran is ageless so that arent a scientific approach.. i just whant to show him that arabia isnt the cradle of anything then islam.. There may be eternal truths in the Koran and if so a devotee will naturally respect those truths just as he does when he encounters them in the Veda. Perhaps that is the whole book or maybe just one verse. Same with the Bible. We aspire to be swanlike, taking the nectar and leaving the rest. When taking the nectar the swan does not become involved with rejecting that which is not nectar. That happens automatically when all he takes is the nectar. What is involved here Govinda prabhu? Is it just a case of "my land of birth is better than your land of birth?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2006 Report Share Posted June 4, 2006 What is involved here Govinda prabhu? Is it just a case of "my land of birth is better than your land of birth?" im from sweden and he is from iraq.. the thing is that he said that the region of iraq is the cradle of civilization, and this is not so, he claim that it is becaus it has 6.000 years of history and so forth, and because i know that there are historical and archeological proofs that the vedic civilization is older, i just wanna show him this.. has nothing to do with my land and religion is better.. i just wanna set the facts straight.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.