[pramalin]

It is really pathetic to see how people try to defend their fundamental beliefs without any substance. People are brainwashed to believe that vedic scriptures are full of knowledge (I was a victim too. I used to recite some parts of the scriptures like purusha suktam). In reality, the scriptures are filled with filth like procedures of sacrificial, bestiality and orgy rituals, calls upon gods to slaughter their enemies (who have stolen their herds), etc.

Ambedkar was very diplomatic in his criticisms towards them. Osho was not so kind. See: http://www.osho.com/library/online-library-rigveda-tulsidas-...

You can also see that the site claims that Jyotish is astronomy but it actually means astrology.

Here is the description of Saturn in one of the texts "Parashara Hora Sastra" http://archive.org/stream/ParasharaHoraSastra/BrihatParashar...

29. [Saturn] has an emaciated and long physique, has tawny eyes, is windy in temperament, has big teeth, is indolent and lame and has coarse hair.

What is legit or scientific about it?

[mayanksinghal]

> What is legit or scientific about it?

Nothing. And no one here is claiming that all parts of these texts are to be taken as absolute fact with empirical proof. Most of it, as you mention, is riddled with imaginary stories probably because scientific discovery was being carried out by religious philosophers of that time.

However, there are parts of these texts that are legitimately impressive, philosophically or scientifically - and a blanket denial of that would be just as unjust as the 'filth'.

[pramalin]

But the site says: ... [sages] wrote Vedas - the manual of vibrations. Following this many field of science evolved ...

I have provided references to show that the basic 4 vedas are tribal in nature and there is no basis to claim them as the origin of other scientific oriented texts. I am not denying all of the texts as bad.

[s-topper]

It is really pathetic to see how people are quick to snub off anyone or anything that's related to Hinduism, ancient Hindu works, scriptures etc as propaganda, brainwash etc. Is it some kind of reverse propaganda??

>>>You can also see that the site claims that Jyotish is astronomy but it actually means astrology.

Where? They do mention it as "astrology".

>>>In reality, the scriptures are filled with filth like procedures of sacrificial, bestiality and orgy rituals, calls upon gods to slaughter their enemies (who have stolen their herds), etc.

>>>29. [Saturn] has an emaciated and long physique, has tawny eyes, is windy in temperament, has big teeth, is indolent and lame and has coarse hair.

What is legit or scientific about it?

Have you heard of mythology, euhemerism, and personification? Out of all those stuff on that site, you zeroed-in on sacrificial rituals, description of Saturn, and dismissed everything as "filth"? Then, what is your say on Ganit Shastra, Kaam Shastra, Khagol Shastra to name a few?

Based on that logic, all these below must be filth and their sole purpose is to brainwash people:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_mythology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norse_mythology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_mythology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_mythology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mythologies

[pramalin]

>Where? They do mention it as "astrology". //Astronomy - Rig Veda (2000 BC) refers to astronomy. Astronomy is called Jyotish.// The site claims Jyotish as astronomy. I'm saying it is just Astrology and showed an example from the text to indicate that it is not talking astronomy. There is no problem in treating and considering the text as myth. The problem is they are claimed as science.

[russellsprouts]

Astronomy was the same as astrology until 1700 or so. Kelsey, who discovered the law of planetary motion, was an astrologer. Copernicus was an astrologer. After Newton formulated in universal gravitation, went into occult studies.

Astrology is different from astronomy in the present day, but not in the past.