[neutralid]

Wikipedia's entry and discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Indian_mathematics/Archiv...

While there is some level of whitewashing going on, there's a lot of hyperbole of what was discovered during the Vedic period.

Not sure why there's even a need to amplify/attenuate the contributions. There are Indian mathematicians today who are making significant contributions. Probably more productive to focus on mathematical developments in general rather than assigning credit to the past. Assigning credit to a culture is problematic. What about the culture enabled the mathematical development?

Perhaps one day we'll move past assigning credit and towards purely developing ideas in the spirit of the Upanishads written in anonymity.

[shripadk]

> there's a lot of hyperbole of what was discovered during the Vedic period

Where is the hyperbole? All I see is whitewashing of what was discovered during the Vedic period. If you need to understand what whitewashing means: Abrahamic texts/scriptures are classified as History but Hindu scriptures are classified as "Mythology". If this is not systematic whitewashing explain to me what is.

[neutralid]

https://www.cnet.com/news/ancient-indian-aircraftspaceship-o...

[shripadk]

This is precisely what I call Western whitewashing. You are quoting some random and unscientific paper (Vaimanika Sastra) as part of the Vedic period. That piece of paper (Vaimanika Sastra) was written in 1918 by some unknown (Pandit Subbaraya Shastry) and his paper was put forth by G.R Josyer (another unknown).

How can you compare an unscientific paper written in the close of 20th century with Vedic scriptures (Vedas and the Upanishads) written 2000 years ago?

EDIT: Again, just to confirm we are on the same page: I'm talking about whitewashing of discoveries during the Vedic period. Not papers written in the 20th century by unknowns.