Gentoo Studies

[Vishal Agarwal]

Appropos the numerous posts on the lack of relevant qualifications of the
opponents of the AIT, I think that a formal education in liguistics,
philology etc. does (as with any other specialized area of study) equip one
with the formal discipline and tools required for pursuing an investigation
in that branch of knowledge. However, although important, it is not a must.
For instance, I have a graduate degree in a particular area of Engineering
and have won International recognition in the same. But I have come across
people who do not have any relevant University degree and yet have a greater
understanding and knowledge in that area. For that matter, Bill Gates does
not have a college degree but all the same, he knows more than I, in the
area of Corporate Finance even though I might possess an MBA from a top 10
school. Intelligent people can indeed acquire a thorough understanding of a
specialized area of study without pursuing formal education therein.
My point is this--considering that the views of Dr. Rajaram etc. are gaining
wider currency everyday, it is not in the interests of Indologists to hide
merely behind their academic credentials. Academic arguments should be
countered with academic arguments, or else the debate gets debased to the
levels described in the article "Zydenos vs. Rajaram: A Case Study in the
Aryan Invasion Polemic"
Available at http://members.xoom.com/KoenraadElst/articles/zydenbos.html
For instance, one could say that book "Astronomical Code of the Rigveda" by
Sri Subhash Kak  is based solely on the arrangement of hymns in the Sakala
Rigveda, whereas the extant manuscripts of Asvalayana, Samkhayana and
Baskala recensions show a different arrangement. (These manuscripts are
hardly mentioned in their works by modern Indologists, although several
exist in libraries in Gujarat, Rajasthan etc.)

The AIT has been analyzed from many aspects (Linguistics, archeology,
Philology, Sociology, Anthropology, Astronomy etc.) by scholars. The
findings of scholars of all the different areas of specialization should
logically converge. Why is it then that the astronomical data presented by
the opponents of AIT point to a different period? The question is-are all
these sciences mentioned above equally accurate? Is Astronomy as accurate as
say Linguistics? If no, then the less accurate data and analysis should give
way to more accurate data and analysis.

The dispute over the supposed date of arrival of Aryans parallels the recent
controversy over the date of the Sphinx at Gizeh in Egypt. Geologists, who
have studied the erosion patterns on the statue are adamant in declaring
that the structure has to be at least 9000 years old, because desert
flooding could along have resulted in the erosion patterns found on the
Sphinx, and it is well known that no such desert flooding has occurred in
the last 8-9 thousand years. Egyptologists, who have traditionally dated the
Sphinx in the 3rd Millennium BCE are obviously up in arms and say that this
is opposed to the "well established' chronology of the Pharoanic dynasties.
The geologists, in response to this, have rightly pointed out that the so
called established chronology was really established on the basis of a mass
of baseless assumptions and speculations more than a century ago, and are
uncritically accepted by modern Egyptologists.

Is the scenario different from that in the case of Indology? While modern
Indologists rightly point out that Indology has advanced a lot since the
days of Max Mueller et al, the fact remains that in many matters, the highly
speculative chronologies of these pioneers are still accepted as Brahmavakya
by them.

Therefore, it often appears that Professional Indologists are scared to
question highly prestigious and 'well established' theories. This is where
the advantage of Sri Kak etc. lies. (Not to disparage the members of this
list The fact that they are not dependent on Linguistics et al for their
bread and butter means that they are not obliged to advocate, propagate,
uphold or accept prestigious yet wrong theories for fear of a reprisal from
the Establishment. And this hesitation is not peculiar to Indology. Having
been in graduate Science and Engineering research for long, I have seen
Scientists do the same, although not to same extent. It is possible to get
up to a Master's degree in Science/Engineering with a negative experiment
results (although PhD requires the researcher to come up with a positive
result in general)

Regards,

Vishal



----Original Message Follows----
From: Lars Martin Fosse <lmfosse at ONLINE.NO>
Subject: Re: Gentoo Studies
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 21:45:29 +0200

Swaminathan Madhuresan schrieb:

 >
 > Curious thing about Kak, Frawdley, Talagiri, Rajaram, & their
 > schoolers: None has any formal, university degrees in Linguistics
 > or Archaeology.

That is an important prerequisite for their scholarship, and they are
proud of it. They have no faith in Western scholarship such as
philology, linguistics etc, and they prefer to construct their own
version of scholarship.

Lars Martin Fosse


_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com