7 ms·
> vastu shastra, which is astrological woo. I'd give you that in its current marketed form it is astrological bullshit, but originally Vastu Shastra was a form
by monsterix 13y ago
> vastu shastra, which is astrological woo.
I'd give you that in its current marketed form it is astrological bullshit, but originally Vastu Shastra was a formal form of science [1] grounded on engineering principles and urban design. All persevering to obtain a 'calm' for the dweller.
One can still infer from the high precision N-S-E-W positioning of fairly huge ancient Hindu temples, historical remains of homes and dwellings, monasteries and other artefacts. Even the 1000+ step staircases in some of the forts and fortresses [2][3], transoceanic bridges [4] suggest the quality of math that was in play.
The choice and placement of stone, wood and metal w.r.t Sun, tropical climate and other ergonomic needs is simply mind blowing. Math has to be at the root of it.
Obviously not many records exist to substantiate the level of skill and academia prevalent at the time. I wish someone undertook a journey to research and substantiate just about "everything" that we have from Egypt to Indonesia (Hindu kingdoms spanned that far, yes!). At the risk of being shooed away by existing pride.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vastu_shastra http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vastu_shastra
Even the wikipedia here, for example, says ... "while Vastu had long been essentially restricted to temple architecture..." which is completely wrong, and they defeat it in the third paragraph where they define "the Sanskrit word vastu means a dwelling or house with a corresponding plot of land" which is what Vaastu Shastra was all about, not temples alone.
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ChandBaori.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ChandBaori.jpg
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chand_Baori http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chand_Baori
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge
- wrongc0ntinent 13y ago>Math has to be at the root of it. Numerology is just as likely of a root.
- monsterix 13y agoAll right, scepticism taken. Look at these images: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qzhiolzuxsw/UK0HEPH7x4I/AAAAAAAAH8g/nJJp53oeilI/s1600/ChandBaori19.jpg http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qzhiolzuxsw/UK0HEPH7x4I/AAAAAAAAH8... http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a7UIHnAfmH0/UK0Ga-RmigI/AAAAAAAAH5I/Q7hjypv5Z9g/s1600/ChandBaori1.jpg http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-a7UIHnAfmH0/UK0Ga-RmigI/AAAAAAAAH5... http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/chand-baori.html http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/chand-baori.html http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/chand-baori.html http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/chand-baori.html This is just an example. What do you think has higher probability of being used to build this? 1. Math and calculations or 2. Numerology?
- wrongc0ntinent 13y agoNumerology doesn't exclude calculations. "Root" makes it sound like the purpose of building the very nice step well is to prove a mathemathical point. I'd venture to say its primary purpose had something to do with water. Patterns and repetition is what I see beyond that, which are fairly prevalent in art and architecture exactly because you can get to them by simple experimentation.
- monsterix 13y ago> I'd venture to say its primary purpose had something to do with water. Got it. I volunteer to move out of this discussion because you could have as well said that primary purpose of stairs had something to do with going up or down? Most architecture around the world from Eiffel tower to Pyramids to Angkorvat has something to do with proving a point. Usually the point is that 'we have achieved this engineering marvel, we have the capability to build this'. By your logic people possibly got to Eiffel tower or Golden gate by simple pattern and repetition, even experimentation, devoid of any math. That's just plain stupid.
- wrongc0ntinent 13y agoThat's really not the conclusion you should be getting if you apply (my?) logic. Of course math is involved. But those things were not built for the sake of math, their "roots" are in their respective functions (building something impressive, something religious, or crossing a bay). Edit: I just checked your [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam%27s_Bridge reference. You seem to be saying that this geological formation ("transoceanic bridge") is about mathematics too, implying it's man-made. If that's the case, we're playing by different rules of what "logic" means, and our discussion is completely pointless, no offense intended.
- option_greek 13y agoa society where math is common might build such structures without thinking too much about math. like the bridges or dams we build today.
- xerophtye 13y ago>from Egypt to Indonesia (Hindu kingdoms spanned that far, yes!). wait, what?? Clear to elaborate? I know alexander had a huge kingdom, i know gnehis khan conquered a very very large area of land. I know muslims had an ENORMOUS empire but this looks like news to me. So clear to elaborate? Specifics?
- diadara 13y agoDepends on how do you define a Hindu kingdom. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hindu_distribution.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hindu_distribution.png
- xerophtye 13y agoI'd define it as places RULED by Hindus (preferably a single central monarch)
- kops 13y agoI have never heard of ancient Indian kingdoms going beyond present day afganistan[1]. This falls quite a bit short of Egypt. On the eastern side though, Indonesia seems to have had Hindu kings[2]. I do recollect reading somewhere that at some point of time Indonesia was controlled from Kalinga but can't seem to find a reference any more. I don't think that the whole area from Afganistan till Indonesia was ever under a single king at any point of time. But I am not much of a historian so wouldn't really bet on any of this stuff. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indonesia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indonesia
- xerophtye 13y agoI suppose hinduism could spread that far. I mean consider this, Buddhism actually originates from India. Buddha was a Hindu Prince! And yet its all over the far east (and ironically not much in India). So i suppose Hinduism could spread that far too. (Well Islam and Christianity sure spread a lot!) Btw, I think you are right about the whole area not being in Hindu control at one point in time. The largest Indian kngdom i remember was of Ashoka, and even that din't completely cover all of modern day India+Pakistan (he gave up war right before conquering the south-most tip because he converted to Budhism). I think Muslims actually ruled all of the south-asian subcontinent at one time. The Mughals