From: Mermaid . (britannica@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Jan 15 2002 - 10:25:07 MST
[Hermit 1] /me points out to the Mermaid that this is called a non-sequitur
- just as the alleged claim in the Surya Siddhanta is a non-sequitur. It
does not follow. There is no "therefore" despite it being asserted (in
Yash's claim) and implied (in yours).
[Mermaid]You found the claim dubious. I provided a book which by its very
existence proves the existence of the work called Surya-Siddhanta. These are
not 'dubious' or obscure claims made by Yash. In fact, Varahamihira,
Bhaskara, Brahmagupta, Aryabhatta et al are all pretty well known for their
astronomical<forgive the double entendre> claims. Bhaskaracharya and his
works attracted a lot of interest and were widely read when in the early 90s
an Indian dancer called Chandralekha performed a dance-drama ... Lilavati, a
mathematical treatise written by Bhaskara for his daughter of the same name.
Chandralekha performed all over the world and Lilavati was a beautiful
presentation of mathematics and art. Unfortunately, it is a live dance
performance. I doubt if there are any recordings of it.
[Hermit 1] However Yash made the assertion that this is a quotation -
presumably a quotation of a translation - as it does not appear to me to be
written in Sanskrit. For it to be valid, Yash needs to provide at least the
page number, book title, author, publisher and year of publication cited
(although for the purpose the source chapter and line or verse would also be
useful), in order to support his quotation. I may check the translation once
I have the location
[Hermit] - I have not the time, nor the inclination, nor the resources to
check <em>all</em> inflated claims, misrepresentations or spurious bullshit
cited by kooks on a mission from the gods or to inflate
the importance of their or somebody else's culture - or to read every book
published by some house of exotica (http://www.kessinger-publishing.com/ -
not exactly OUP) that either Yash or Mermaid asserts is relevant.
[Mermaid]I know you dont have the time to check claims presented because you
are spending it all trashing anyone who doesnt toe your line. Thats why I
gave you one end of the thread if you choose to follow it up.
[Mermaid]Btw...OUP also publishes Bibles...:) *shrug*
[Hermit]Particularly not while "Hindus believe that the Surya Siddhanta was
produced by devine [sic] revelation and came from Surya the Sun God."
[http://users.hartwick.edu/~hartleyc/hindu/suryahistory.html accessed
2002-01-11]
[Mermaid]Well, they do. But we know that the Sun God doesnt exist. We know
that the book does exist. Hmm..can you think of any other astronomer on the
other side of the Arabian Sea who made significant discoveries in his field
and was also a theist..hmmmm...
[Hermit 1] I am challenging this claim simply because I find it unlikely in
the extreme that a work which is as referenced and cited by "Indian
astronomers" as this one, which has been used by as many charlatans
(Jyotishi) as this one, where the members of both groups have probably heard
of gravity, where members of both groups would give their balls to find a
piece of information of any modern significance, where a purportedly good
annotated translation exists, and where members of both groups would
undoubtedly assume the purported quotation held vast significance, yet have
not realized this and shouted the news from the roof-tops as a "validation"
of their assertions of significance.
[Mermaid]I understand. You are absolutely right to doubt and challenge.
Thats why I provided the amazon link where you can purchase the book and
clarify any doubts you may have...if you care to be thorough and accurate,
that is. No pressure.
[Hermit 1] So I am suggesting that the most likely answer (given that Yash
(and Mermaid) are proven to (at best) engage in distortion) and particularly
as it seems that there is no prior art leading up to it, and no art
dependent upon it, by anyone, that this assertion is, like the other
assertions made by Yash and Mermaid which I could trivially show to be false
or incomplete and misleading, simply untrue.
[Mermaid]Please do not attempt such pettiness. It doesnt become you even
though you tend to be extremely fond of exercising it so very often these
days.
[Mermaid]Also...I fully support Yash in his<i am sorry if Yash is female and
mentioned it..I am so confused by this flurry of mails without any order
whatsoever> quest to find something that intrigues him. I wish him all the
best for his journey of discovery. I am not prepared to discourage or
dissect his intentions. This, by no means implies that I support his
claims<although I so not see him making any big, significant claim that he
deserves such acrinomy from some in CoV> or agree with him. If I can assist
anyone in their quest for knowledge, I will do it. As far as the subject
matter is concerned, I am not interested. I have ice mountains to climb.
[Hermit 1] If Mermaid or Yash assert that the claim is true, an accessible
reference should be cited to allow for independent validation of the claim.
[Mermaid]www.amazon.com and search for 'surya-siddhanta'. And all the
nonsense about 'proof of burden' laying with Yash doesnt apply here. This is
not a debate. This is about learning. Everyone gains. So if you have nothing
to add in terms of agreement or disagreement accompanied with something more
than your instinct, I suggest you leave Yash alone and not obstruct his
path. Time wasted here is time not spent reading or researching. And this I
ask in the name of the quest for knowledge you claim to prize so dearly.
[Hermit 1] Subsequently, Yash came back claiming that his quotation is cited
from the references he provided. Having perused those references, the only
one supposedly "citing" this is:
http://www.users.totalise.co.uk/~anu/facts.html
The page acknowledges "These were taken from the Unserstanding [sic]
Hinduism booklet available from the magnificent Shri Swaminarayan Mandir in
Neasden, London, UK" - yet another religious source attempting to claim
scientific significance in order to bolster the believability of their
faith. As I have previously observed, this is not particularly persuasive.
Even more so, as like Yash, this page does not contain a citation but only
an unsupported assertion.
[Mermaid]That is the reason why I gave the information about a book
published on the subject. A book that is not a commentary but a direct
translation of Surya-Siddhanta. That is also the reason I mentioned that
*anyone* with time and inclination can research it. The message was directed
to Yash as well as it was meant for you.
[Hermit 1] It should be further noted that none of the more rigorous sources
appear to make the claim proffered here and that Yash found it necessary to
quote this particular source which appears to have similar religious
objectives and motivations to misrepresent things as Yash himself. Virians
are invited to draw their own conclusions.
[Mermaid]There was no 'science' during the times of ancient Indians. That is
why priests were mathematicians and religious men were also astronomers. But
the study of the skies and numbers did exist. They learned to combine their
knowledge with the most predominant feature of their lives ... their
religion. This is no big mystery and this doesnt discount the knowledge of
the times.
"At the end of the day, those listening to this non-discussion will decide
on the truth of the proposition. As most of them will not perform the
research, they will probably decide based on whether my opinion or yours is
better justified and thus carries more weight." - Hermit, CoV.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:39 MDT