The western scholars have misguided us about our past. This is very much true in contest of above research. Let say Mohan jo Daro.This is wrongly written & pronounced.This is sentence of Sindhi Language,IE,Moan jo Daro, which means Mound of Dead people.Moaa is abuse given by womens in Kuch & sindh. Afterwords,the western scholars will write Mohan is Aryan & he came from out side.
Re: 'Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Aryan Singh on Sep 01, 2009 09:57 AM
Nobody came from outside/Inside. It was all one world where kingdoms kept shifting. India ws not a single country during Krishan himself, in the Indian subcontinent. Also the fight between Arya and Dravid was not racial but for the fertile land of the area.
Re: Re: 'Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by tajender on Sep 06, 2009 01:57 AM
aryan are outsiders not indian DNA HAS ESTABLISHED THIS TRUTH.as they came before muzlims they shld leave india bfore muzlims.
I look forward to the documentary. It will be nice to use BCE (before the common era)and ACE (after the common era) rather than old fashioned ones (BC and AD).
Dr Pandit should stick to his profession. When you start doing research on the basis of preconceived notions, then you're biased and tend to over look facts. References to Jesus being the son of Krishna is really laughable. Let us see some of the attributes of Krishna and Jesus.
1) Krishna had 1600 wives and don't know how many were keep but Jesus always kept himself pure from worldly sensuality. Of course, people have tried to connect Jesus to various women, but their theories have been just mere source of entertainment, not facts.
2) Krishna preached Pandawas to kill their cousins but Jesus preached forgiveness. In fact, he did ultimate sacrifice of himself.
3) Krishna was lavish king lived in a palace but Jesus was very poor.
Dr Pandit says Jesus never claimed that he omnipotent or Omnipresent which is absolutely incorrect.
God and his son theory is being misunderstood by most of the people (even Christians). Jesus was God manifested in flash. The body taken by Jesus is called son, again one has to do deeper research in order to find the truth.
Dr. Pandit religion is a matter of faith, not everything can be proven. Irrespective of your findings, people who believe will continue to believe. Even if you had proven otherwise, people in India and around the world would continue to worship their God, they do not need your stamp.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Jayakwadi Jayakwadi on Sep 01, 2009 05:53 AM
go through your massage and you will realise,How preoccupied and brainwashed you area.And if that is the case then you have no right to point finger at others.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Aryan Singh on Sep 01, 2009 09:01 AM
Vivek, If you listen to all enlightened people (Krishna, Jesus, Buddha, Osho), you will get the same message that we are all one originated and connected via a central one being. The esoteric knowledge is so difficult to explain that it has created different impression in the minds of people of different culture. Hence cultural differences only created minor differences. Core is the same. Again there are two ways of getting enlightenment and Moksha. One by abandoning the world and one by Karma in the name of god. Both take to the same destination. Who knows if Jesus spoke about the both and second one got missed while writing. Also who knows the things in bible are exactly the same as it was told by Jesus. One thing is sure. He never asked for separate religion and fight.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Hit Him on Sep 01, 2009 05:52 AM
>> again one has to do deeper research in order to find the truth. ----- you are right here and applies to you first. Dr. Pandit's research is definitly better than yours. so keep you dirty mouth shut and eyes open.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by shashwat kirwai on Sep 01, 2009 11:04 AM
It seems u know nothing abt krishna or mahabharata not even abt story of his having 1600 wives Krishna had devoted his time on earth for upliftment of women the great war he staged on kurukshetra was for teaching a lesson to a world in which there was an increase in disrespect towards women as he knew the fact that a society which does nit respects its womesn had no right to exist.
Re: Re: Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by JGN on Sep 01, 2009 09:22 PM
Yes; just like a mentally deranged arab who screwed a six year old gir1 at the age of 53 years!!
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by ashish sharma on Sep 01, 2009 12:21 PM
Must watch for you "The Man from earth" .. A very nice ..gripping movie..I don't say everything is correct in this movie but a must watch for people like you.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Aryan Singh on Sep 01, 2009 09:30 AM
Does having many wives make someone bad ? Lord Krishna was the biggest family man till date and wanted to show the people the power of Karma by Bhakti even by being in family (even the largest). This is a direction to any family person to achieve enlightenment and Moksha, by devoting all your Karma to the god. Read core of bible, Koran, Gita, Buddha, they all speak about the mindfulness and Karma devoted to the god. Esoteric knowledge is complex and need teaching by examples. Mohammed himself taught many things via examples in his life.
Re: Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Vivek Chaudhary on Sep 02, 2009 03:19 AM
I never said that Krishna was good or bad, I was trying to make a point of reference that if Jesus was born to Krishna then he should have acquired some of the traditions of that time. That's all. I have read Gita, some Koran, and Ramayana, and trying to get hands on our old Vedas. I completely agree with you that we can learn from all great leaders.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by ashish sharma on Sep 01, 2009 12:21 PM
Must watch for you "The Man from earth" .. A very nice ..gripping movie..I don't say everything is correct in this movie but a must watch for people like you.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by jaggu on Sep 01, 2009 08:57 AM
Vivek , Please shut up.
Dr Pandit is 100% right and in fact it is plain truth backed with hard evidence on the facts - it will hurt many people and drive some godmen out of jobs - but " Satyameva Jayate"...
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Jayesh on Sep 01, 2009 12:45 PM
Hey Vivek Chaudhary, Have u ever gone through GITA, I think no. Bcoz The question raised by u are childish.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by JGN on Sep 01, 2009 12:47 PM
Vivek Chaudhary, Lord Krishna had 16008 wives (not 1600) and that remains the unbroken world record even today. Jesuss was impotent. So he did not marry. Poor Mohd tried his level best but he could not reach any where near Lord Krishna!!
Re: Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Religionofidol on Sep 01, 2009 04:48 PM
What 16008 wives 16008 wives in the entire board u are shouting. I doubt he was a man or not(i think GAY)
Re: Re: Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by JGN on Sep 01, 2009 09:27 PM
Why are you jealous of him? Your Jesusss was an impotent and Mohd could not reach anywhere near that figure!! Poor fellow got only "second hand materials" except for one 6 year old child-bride!!!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by tajender on Sep 06, 2009 05:04 AM
it is matter to be jealous, 1603 wives then cuncubines,then neighbours wife RADHA.he was the only one who could satisfy that sex maniac.
Re: Lord Krishna existed. School texts are wrong'
by Bharat Bhushan on Sep 01, 2009 07:59 AM
WHO WAS MARY MAGDALENE? APPARENTLY SHE WAS RICH LADY AND SHE FINANCED HIM. HER EVERYTHING WAS AT HIS DISPOSAL.
While knowing a ruler named Krishna existed may well be proven, there is no way to prove that there was anything divine about him.
I wonder how the sheep will take to a historical verification of a foreign "Kushan" ruler - descended from the Sakas of Central Asia, (BTW, when the Kushan's ruled they kept their language and customs in court as quite distinct from the population they ruled in India). Most definitely not integrated into the general Indian culture.
Re: js
by Pranav B on Sep 01, 2009 07:44 PM
Yo...that way you cannot prove and no body proved beyond doubt about divinity of other "messengers" as well. Just read Gita and you will see the Divinity in Krishna (and you will start seeing Divinity in you)
Re: Re: js
by Aryan Singh on Sep 01, 2009 09:20 AM
Indian goverment still work on British ruler mindset. Britishers being foreigners of different faith had all interests in disapproving our great history (though not date bound). The most notable historians of foreign origin like Col. James Todd, Al Bruni etc. has approved the existence of Lord Krishna atleast. Arab for long had acknowledged the existence of Lord Krishna. Britishers propaganda had succeeded in making our own people doubtful despite all the evidences. History is not written properly. For example dravidian kings are not given any important place throughout.
Please watch Enemies of Reason - Slaves to Superstition on you tube. You will come to know how much bulllsshhittt are all this astrology is about and the blind faiths on all this mythology. Wake up
Re: Re: Watch Enemies of Reason - Slaves to Superstition on Yout
by righty rightwinger on Sep 01, 2009 03:52 AM
You guys are doing a good job in exposing these fraudsters.
aryans or vedics are only 13% they `were different from natives. temples wre owned by brahamins so they were virtually owners of entire wealth of the nation.like now corporates are owners all employee are slaves.through temples they were running institution of slavery. moghuls gave the right of ownership to indian peasants for te first time in indian history.
Re: brahaminical deeds
by Fried Yakov on Sep 01, 2009 04:34 AM
So every one of us can go and camp in Jama Masjid????? Would Bhikhari (oops Bukhari) allow us too since all of us peasants have the ownership?
Re: brahaminical deeds
by JGN on Sep 01, 2009 09:43 AM
mailerumsfield, you have been writing the same trash for a long time now. Canyou tell us who all included in the 13% mentioned by you?
The Brahmins were not owners of temples or lands. Dronacharya was very poor and was not even able to give some milk to his son. When he asked his friends to show him some milk, he was given water mixed with rice-flour. Krishna's friend Sudhama was also very very poor!! Which Brahmin had ruled any part of our Country during the last 1000 years?
Re: Re: brahaminical deeds
by mailerumsfield on Sep 01, 2009 12:06 PM
brahamins always enjoyed the best fruits of state without accountability.khatr1s used to die while they enjoye the fruits of occupation. like now.they own establishment&make money.others are paid so little,for survival only.
Re: Re: brahaminical deeds
by Aryan Singh on Sep 01, 2009 02:35 PM
Brahmins have been mostly poor throughout the history, except for few kings like Pushyamitra Shung of Magadh, Satavahans (Satkarnis of Maharashtra) etc.
Re: brahaminical deeds
by Aryan Singh on Sep 01, 2009 02:32 PM
You don not know history. Most Moghuls were the worst so far. Worse than Britishers. Brahmin dominance was broken many times by buddhism and jaininsm. Jains described them below Shudra.Read history properly. During around 1000 years after Bddha, people had great kings like Ashok, Kanishka, Shalivahan, Shalendra, Harshvardhan etc.
Re: brahaminical deeds
by jaggu on Sep 01, 2009 08:59 AM
MOghuls sent wealth & slaves from India to middle east were the greatest villians to our country.
Re: Re: brahaminical deeds
by mailerumsfield on Sep 01, 2009 11:12 AM
when why u lie.high caste sent 72 lacs crores to swiss bank.moghuls were true nationalist&builders of india that is why not even single person was hungry or beggers.
even today middle east is injecting 40billion dollars/year in indian economy from last 30 yrs which is responsible for middle class properity in india.
Re: Re: brahaminical deeds
by JGN on Sep 01, 2009 09:44 AM
jagu, Moghuls not only sent wealth but thier soldiers converted the natives of our Country at the point of sword or at the pain of ra*pe. Musliims in present day India are their descandants. These poor guys are suffering from "STockholm Syndrome"!
Re: Re: Re: brahaminical deeds
by mailerumsfield on Sep 01, 2009 11:15 AM
soldiers were fighting under command of rajputs.u bl00dy sangh1s do nothing except spreading streo type lies. hind00 samaj was created at the point of sword not conversion. conversion is liberation from brahaminical slavery&humiliation.
Re: Re: Re: Re: brahaminical deeds
by Aryan Singh on Sep 01, 2009 02:39 PM
Look into the history. During the religious atrocities of Aurangjeb (worst so far, all rajputs of Rajasthan were supporting him. Marrying their daughters to muslim rulers. It were only Maratha and Jats who had spine to fight with fanatic Aurangjeb.
Re: Re: Re: Re: brahaminical deeds
by JGN on Sep 01, 2009 12:49 PM
hahahahahhahahahahaaha!!!! Still you are not liberated. You are still the slaves of Arab imperialism. Toothless Arabs can marry minor gir1s at Hyderabad, Calicut, Decca, Lahore, Karachi, etc but no musliim from any of these places can marry an Arab gir1.
Re: brahaminical deeds
by Pranav B on Sep 01, 2009 02:02 AM
there u go..a mull*ah trying to rewrite history now. Okay..mull*ahs had done their job...dalits would not be suffereing in the 21st century. Mull*ahs - You guys took the wealth from India and did not do a thing to India or the lower casts of India. Stop blaming others and take some responsibility. India become a poor country due to you guys and the British.
This message is for Dr Pandit and more so for the various people leaving comments here
Dr Pandit.. I have not see your documentary, where can i see it ? At this stage , going by the contents of your interview, i have this to say>. You have verified a date proposed by Dr Achar based on astronomical observations in ancient Indian texts. But just because an eclipse and other conjunctions are mentioned in a book (in this case the Mahabharat) , does the event described become true ? Its rather like reading Isaac Asimov's books (Foundation series) 1000 years from now and coming to the conclusion that everything he wrote was true and existed. This is a logical objection. I would indeed be very proud if Krishna had actually existed and there was incontrovertible proof.. but let me not say anything further till I am able to see the documentary.
To the others who leave comments>>> I think even if Krishna had existed , going by the quality of the discussion here, he would have preferred to die ! Where is the need to discuss the superiority of one religion over another, one region over the other, one race over the other ?
Finally , a question to Dr Pandit and all others. Let us assume that Krishna DID exist. How will this improve the quality of life for the people of India ?
Re: Does it Matter that krishna existed ?
by Pranav B on Sep 01, 2009 12:23 AM
Yo..do not talk like one of those JNU Communists!!! there are all sort of guys in this world including abusive ones. Learn to ignore them. You cannot have a perfect world.
Lord Krishna did exist...there is no doubt about it. How it will improve quality of life...just try to practice what he preached. You will see your quality of life improving by many folds...and in that process you will improved quality of other lives as well. Most improtantly, Lord Krishna's proven existence(to people like you) will close some of the leftist, missionary and communist shops who are propogating all non-sense in this country.
When is the government building the Rama Temple. If the government has money (600crore annually) for the Haj pilgrimage, it is obligated to save at least 7 times as much for a temple in Ayodhya. Government needs to respect the history of the people or face the consequences!
Re: Ram Temple
by mailerumsfield on Sep 01, 2009 01:08 AM
r1am never existed in ayodhya.he was backward hence he is worshipped through h1anuman(abrahamin)
