Vedic Mathematics or Vedic Nonsense ?

Lets multiply 98 by 76. Under prevalent system, you will do something like this:

First, 98 * 6 = 588.

Second, 98 * 70 = 6860 (Actually, 98 * 7 = 686, then just put 0 at the end)

Finally, 588 + 6860 = 7448

In case of vedic mathematics, you would go something like this:

I have deliberately kept this simple, because, teaching vedic maths is not the scope of this article. It is enough, if you get the idea. If, however, you want to understand it in detail, just google for it.

As you must have figured out by this time, that the so called “vedic mathematics”  does not comprise any separate branch of mathematics or herald some new form of mathematics. It is nothing but some clever tricks to solve elementary arithmetic and algebra and is similar to the speed mathematics, popularised by Trachtenberg and many other such authors.

The whole mumbo-jumbo of vedic mathematics is a result of a book called, ‘Vedic Mathematics’ written by Jagadguru Swami Shri Bharati Krishna Tirthaji Maharaja, and published posthumously in 1965. Swamiji was the Sankaracharya of Govardhan Math of Puri, India, and curiously, it appears that prior to pursuing a life of a sage, he had acquired a masters degree in mathematics.

In the book, Swamiji claims to have “rediscovered” or “reconstructed”, the mathematical laws, which were hidden in cryptic hymns (slokas) of the vedic scriptures, and reveals to us these laws in form of mathematical aphorisms (sutras). Strangely though, he neglects to mention the specific slokas, from where he “rediscovered” the laws. He thought it would be enough if he mentioned that all of these are from vedas, and accordingly mentions in the passing that the appendix (parishishta) of the Atharva Veda contained all these sutras. His book contains a total of 16 sutras and 13 corollaries (The above example is from the third sutra called Ūrdhva Tiryagbhyām, which translates into, “Vertically and Cross-wise”)

The problem is, Atharva Veda just does not have any such parishishta. From where he got hold of that parishishta is anybody’s guess. Nowhere in any book of Vedas, and not even in the appendages, like the Sulbasutras, which were later added to the main texts, can these sutras be found. Dr. Kim Plofker, in the chapter Indian Mathematics, pg 387, from the book The Mathematics of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India, and Islam: A Sourcebook makes this point:

These sutras are often said to represent an ancient mathematical system ‘rediscovered’ or ‘redeveloped’ from the Vedic scriptures, but there is no record of them in traditional study of the Vedas.

A group of intellectuals from India, concerned by the self-destructive attempt to introduce “vedic mathematics” in the Indian primary school, jointly issued a pamphlet, where they made the same point:

As has been pointed out earlier on several occasions, the so-called ‘Vedic Mathematics’ is neither ‘Vedic’ nor can it be dignified by the name of mathematics…The book assembled a set of tricks in elementary arithmetic and algebra to be applied in performing computations with numbers and polynomials. As is pointed out even in the foreword to the book by the General Editor, Dr. A.S. Agarwala, the aphorisms in Sanskrit to be found in the book have nothing to do with the Vedas. Nor are these aphorisms to be found in the genuine Vedic literature.

The term “Vedic Mathematics” is therefore entirely misleading and factually incorrect. Further, it is clear from the notation used in the arithmetical tricks in the book that the methods used in this text have nothing to do with the arithmetical techniques of antiquity.

Many of the sutras, deal with decimals and calculus, which were unknown in India during the time, that is generally attributed to the composition of the Vedas. That the arithmetic, described in that book does not confirm to the vedic era, is noticed by many scholars. The following observations by Jan Hogendijk, in Nieuwe Wiskrant, (Vol 23), is relevant:

The word “Vedic” in the title of the book suggests that these calculations are authentic Vedic Mathematics. The question now arises how the Vedic mathematicians were able to write the recurrent decimal fraction of 1/19, while decimal fractions were unknown in India before the seventeenth century.

Prof. S.G.Dani, in his 1993, article Myths and Reality: On ‘Vedic Mathematics’, published in Frontline, India, also makes a similar observation:

The contents of the swamiji’s book have practically nothing in common with what is known of the mathematics from the Vedic period or even with the subsequent rich tradition of mathematics in India until the advent of the modern era; incidentally, the descriptions of mathematical principles or procedures in ancient mathematical texts are quite explicit and not in terms of cryptic sutras…While certain elements preliminary to calculus have been found in the works of Bhaskara II from the 12th century and later Indian mathematicians in the pre-calculus era in international mathematics, such crystallised notions as the derivative or the integral were not known.

It is also claimed that this vedic mathematics can be applied in all fields of science and will actually be far more effective and easier than conventional methods. Nothing can be further from the truth. The so called mental mathematics, is applicable only in some specific cases and cannot be applied without the same amount of labour, and in some cases much more, than what is required under conventional method. Prof. S.G.Dani, in the same article cited above,wonders aloud:

…why such methods are not commonly adopted for practical purposes. One main point is that they turn out to be quicker only for certain special classes of examples. For a general example the amount of effort involved (for instance, the count of the individual operations needed to be performed with digits, in arriving at the final answer) is about the same as required by the standard methods; in the swamiji’s book, this is often concealed by not writing some of the steps involved, viewing it as “mental arithmetic.” Using such methods of fast arithmetic involves the ability or practice to recognize various patterns which would simplify the calculations. Without that, one would actually spend more time, in first trying to recognize patterns and then working by rote anyway, since in most cases it is not easy to find useful patterns.

The main texts of Vedas are notorious for their ambiguity, partly because of the antiquity of sanskrit, in which it is written and partly because of complete lack of reference to detailed or precise measurements or quantification etc. In fact one can interpret a sloka in any way he/ she desires. There is also no archeological evidence that can be used as a counter reference. Many of the true vedic sutras are simple statements with no proof or method of derivation being given. For example, the famous sutra from Baudhayana Sulbasutra, goes like this (B. Datta, The science of the Sulba):

The rope which is stretched across the diagonal of a square produces an area double the size of the original square

This is now recognised as the earliest result of what we today call Pythagorus’s Theorem. (Budhiyana preceded Pythagorus by about 200 years). But strangely enough, the author of the sutra does not give any hint of  how it was arrived at, nor does he point to any source that he may have referenced. This lays open a wide range of possibilities. Was it simply copied from the Greeks (as some argue) or was is the Indian branch of mathematics that split from a common source and created both the Indian and Greek systems (as other argue) or was it plain indigenous (as yet others argue) ?

This vagueness in the vedas, provides a fertile breeding ground for obscurantism, and its proponents would do just about anything to forward their agenda. Something that is a matter of scholarly debate will be dragged into the dirty arena of politics of communalism and blind nationalism. What is even more disgusting is that, the educated elite would indulge in such nonsense, giving undue credence to the whole filth.

It is unfortunate that in spite of the credible people, coming out in the open and pointing out the fraud perpetrated in the name of the Vedas, this vedic nonsense continues to live on in public fantasy.

add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , ,

66 Responses to “Vedic Mathematics or Vedic Nonsense ?”

  1. acyuta Says:

    The works of prof. Seidenberg provide more insight into this politicized issue. Anti-traditionalists claim Vedas are man-made fables (the axiom of Indology) while pro-traditionalists claim Vedas contain much useful info. Let everyone judge for himself.

  2. seo blog Says:

    This is a really interesting blog post,I have added your blog to my favourites I really like it,keep up the good work!

  3. Pandu das Says:

    The purpose of the Vedas from the human point of view is experessed by Vyasadev in the the first verse of the Vedanta Sutra: athato brahma jijnasa. This human life is for inquiring about the Supreme Brahman. Vyasadev spoke the Bhagavat Purana to answer this question. The Supreme Brahman is identified in verse 1.3.28 as follows: Krsnas tu bhagavan svayam. Sri Krishna is the original Supreme Personality of Godhead. Krishna famously spoke Bhagavad-gita, emphasizing to Arjuna, “man mana bhava mad bhakto…” “Always think of Me, become My devotee, worship Me, and offer homage to Me. Thus you will come to Me without fail. I promise this because you are My very dear friend.” Sankaracarya also taught the same thing, “bhaja govindam bhaja govindam bhaja govindam…”

    How will criticizing the Vedas help you at the time of death?

    In Isopanishad, Mantra 8, it is mentioned that the Personality of Godhead is the self-sufficient philosopher who has been fulfilling everyone’s desires since time immemorial. Consequently, for those who want to forget Him, Krishna gives that person the intelligence to forget Him. One who is envious of Krishna will naturally find fault with the Vedas, as Krishna presents things in such a way for him.

    The purpose of the Vedas is not to provide “useful information,” althought he karma-kanda portions would seem like that. As Krishna says in Bhagavad-gita 2.46, “All purposes served by a small well can at once be served by a great reservoir of water. Similarly, all the purposes of the Vedas can be served to one who knows the purpose behind them.” Well, the purpose of the Vedas is the same as Sankaracarya advises, “Just worship Krishna.” The rest is just a distraction.

    If you don’t want to worship Krishna, then you should not be surprised that He makes it appear to you that the Vedas are all nonsense. I’m sorry but you’ve missed the point. Hari bol.

  4. Twit Says:

    Pandu das wrote:
    “How will criticizing the Vedas help you at the time of death?”

    First, I am not criticizing the Vedas. Somehow I get the feeling that you have not read the above piece or if you have read it, may be you did not understand it.

    Second, at the time of my death, other than doctors or medicines and my family, I would not need any help from the vedas. Thank you very much for your concern.

    You further wrote:
    “If you don’t want to worship Krishna, then you should not be surprised that He makes it appear to you that the Vedas are all nonsense.”
    Ah, the faith.

  5. Devadeva Says:

    Ah, the skepticism. Another chosen paradigm.
    At the time of death doctors and medicines won’t help, others – based on one’s karma – will decide where to move next. Believe it or not.

    http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/dying.htm

  6. devadeva Says:

    Ah, the skepticism. Another chosen paradigm.
    At the time of death doctors and medicines won’t help, others – based on one’s karma – will decide where to move next. Believe it or not.

    http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/dying.htm

  7. Twit Says:

    devadeva wrote:
    “Believe it or not.”

    NOT

  8. devadeva Says:

    Then you’ll have to wait until death and see for yourself. Tough luck.

  9. mehak Says:

    it”s very confuzing

  10. Twit Says:

    mehak, which part is confusing ?

  11. Pranay Says:

    Excellent post Twit. I was intrigued by ‘Vedic Mathematics’ but never quite looked it up in enough detail to understand what it really was.

  12. Roy Says:

    You guys have too little knowledge and too narrow mind.
    I remember someone who once looked at my Tensor calculus book
    and started making comments without having any clue of it. The title of your article sounds exactly like that.
    I doubt how much education you have in Mathematics. However if you have any, then try to educate yourself from the following URLS:

    Department of Mathematics, Brown University
    http://www.brown.edu/Departments/History_Mathematics/lila/lilavati_stdtechs.html

    College of Engineering & Mathematical Sciences, University of Vermont
    http://www.emba.uvm.edu/~cooke/history/seconded/solutions/answer.pdf

  13. Roy Says:

    FYI: Let me also give you a glimpse of the Vedic Mathematics (which is not exactly the computational tricks those you mentioned).

    The First Concept of the InfinityIn Veda:
    ———————————————-
    oḿ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaḿ

    pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate

    pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya

    pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate
    The above hymns of the Isha Upanishad of the Yajurveda (400 BC) states:

    oḿ — the Complete Whole; pūrṇam — perfectly complete; adaḥ — that; pūrṇam — perfectly complete; idam — this phenomenal world; pūrṇāt — from the all-perfect; pūrṇam — complete unit; udacyate — is produced; pūrṇasya — of the Complete Whole; pūrṇam — completely, all; ādāya — having been taken away; pūrṇam — the complete ; eva — even; avaśiṣyate — is remaining.

    The “Complete Whole”, that is said here must contain everything both within and beyond our experience, otherwise He cannot be complete. When the “Complete Whole” is taken away from the “Complete”, what remains is the “Complete Whole” itself.

    The First Conception of the Binary Number System
    ———————————————————-
    Pingala was an Ancient Indian musical theorist who authored the famous Chandas Shastra (chandaḥ-śāstra, also Chandas Sutra chandaḥ-sūtra), a Sanskrit treatise on prosody considered one of the Vedanga. He developed advanced mathematical concepts for describing the patterns of prosody in the 400 BC.

    The shastra is divided into eight chapters. It was edited by Weber (1863). It is at the transition between Vedic meter and the classical meter of the Sanskrit epics. The 10th century mathematician Halayudha commented and expanded it. Pingala presents the first known description of a binary numeral system. He described the binary numeral system in connection with the listing of Vedic meters with short and long syllables. His discussion of the combinatorics of meter, corresponds to the binomial theorem. Halayudha’ s commentary includes a presentation of the Pascal’s triangle (called meru-prastaara). Pingala’s work also contains the basic ideas of Fibonacci number (called maatraameru ).

    Use of zero is sometimes mistakenly ascribed to Pingala due to his discussion of binary numbers, usually represented using 0 and 1 in modern discussion, while Pingala used short and long syllables. Four short syllables (binary “0000”) in Pingala’s system, however, represented the number one, not zero. Positional use of zero dates from later centuries and would have been known to Halayudha but not to Pingala.

    [Further Reading:
    1. B. van Nooten und G. Holland, Rig Veda, a metrically restored text, Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England, 1994
    2. H. Oldenberg, Prolegomena on Metre and Textual History of the Ṛgveda, Berlin 1888. Tr. V.G. Paranjpe and M.A. Mehendale, Motilal Banarsidass 2005 ISBN 81-208-0986-6]

    Roots of Modern Trigonometry
    ———————————–
    Though its authorship is unknown, the Surya Siddhanta (c. 400) contains the roots of modern trigonometry. This ancient text uses the following as trigonometric functions for the first time:

    * Sine (Jya).
    * Cosine (Kojya).
    * Inverse sine (Otkram jya).

    Cosmological Time-cycles
    ——————————
    * The average length of the sidereal year as 365.2563627 days, which is only 1.4 seconds longer than the modern value of 365.2563627 days.
    * The average length of the tropical year as 365.2421756 days, which is only 2 seconds shorter than the modern value of 365.2421988 days.

    [Refer: Vedic Evidence of the Sidereal Year – by Glen R. Smith]

    Some of othe Vedic works are:
    ————————————
    * All four arithmetical operators (addition, subtraction, multiplication and division).
    * A definite system for denoting any number up to 1055 and existence of zero.
    * Prime numbers.
    * Arithmetical sequences, the decreasing sequence 99, 88, … , 11 is found in the Atharva-Veda.
    * Pythagoras’s theorem, geometric, constructional, algebraic and computational aspects known. A rule found in the Satapatha Brahmana gives a rule, which implies knowledge of the Pythagorean theorem, and similar implications are found in the Taittiriya Samhita.
    * Fractions, found in one (or more) of the Samhitas.
    * Equations, 972x(2) = 972 + m for example, found in one of the Samhitas. [Note: x(2) = Sqare of x]
    # Examples of the rule of three (and profit and loss and interest).
    # Solution of linear equations with as many as five unknowns.
    # The solution of the quadratic equation (development of remarkable quality).
    # Arithmetic (and geometric) progressions.
    # Compound Series (some evidence that work begun by Jainas continued).
    # Quadratic indeterminate equations (origin of type ax/c = y).
    # Simultaneous equations.
    # Fractions and other advances in notation including use of zero and negative sign.

    We can keep going….

  14. Roy Says:

    On the other side – You’ll hardly ever hear such a modest concept of creation of the universe what you get in The Rig Veda (3000-2000 BC):

    [Translation]
    At that time there was neither
    existence nor non-existence,
    neither the worlds nor the sky.
    There was nothing that was beyond.
    There was no death, nor immortality.
    There was no knowledge of the day and night.
    That one alone breathed, without air, by itself.
    Besides that there was nothing.

    Darkness there was enveloped by darkness.
    All this was one water, without any distinction.
    It was inactive, covered by void.
    That one became active by the power of its own thought.
    There came upon it at first desire,
    which was the first seed of the mind.

    Men of vision found in their meditative state,
    the connection between the Being and the Non-Being.
    All gods were subsequent to this creative activity.
    Then who knows from where this came into existence!
    Where this creation came from ,
    whether He supported it or not,

    He who is controlling it from the highest of the heavens,
    He perhaps knows it or He knows it not ! (Rig Veda X.129)

    [For more explanation click here – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaGleromH4Y&feature=related
    ]

  15. Twit Says:

    Roy,

    Let me first thank you for stopping by and trying to make a case for vedic mathematics. But, it seems, you have only read the title of my post and for some reason drew your conclusion without going into the links that I have provided. Also, you don’t seem to have read the book “Vedic Mathematics”, which started all this. It would help if you actually read the book.

    Let me also remind you, that, Swamiji, had himself mentioned in the preface of the book, that these sutras were derived from the hymns of Atharva-Veda. Hence, your charitable quote mining, from all over the vedic texts, and some non-vedic texts, although impressive, is still pretty futile.

  16. critiq Says:

    Dear Twit,

    Good post !

    It pays to write about something very important and better if one do not understand anything about, to gain cheap publicity….. I thank all modern day developers of Microprocessors and FPGA / DSP systems for not reading shit posts like this…. good that they are busy developing (or re-inventing) systems based on 8X8 and 16X16 multipliers (vedic origin).

    Keep it up ! nice attempt to get more hits for the blog…. very cheap thinking though.

  17. Twit Says:

    Dear critiq,

    It helps one to be a better critique, if one actually reads what one is being critical of.

    And I am pretty sure, that “modern day developers of Microprocessors and FPGA / DSP systems” are not looking into vedas for their understanding of classical physics.

    Also, since wordpress.com does not allow ads, number of hits does not really matter.

  18. Umesh: ഉമേഷ് Says:

    Dear Twit,

    Agree with you 100%. Thanks!

  19. Manoranjan Says:

    Have gone through Veda. I am sure you must not have read. You are jealous of the book and the tricks provided there. Try to understand then write something in the blog.

  20. Amit Kriplani Says:

    Namastey my dear Friend,

    I liked your post. And I assume you have read through the book “Vedic Maathematics” and THE VEDAS. And I thank you for taking interest in these marvelous treasures.

    But I would suggest you go through these books once again, because i think you havent understood a bit of it. And by the way if writng something even 0.1% close to any of the VEDA seems to be so easy, then why don’t you try writing one.

    With regards

  21. Twit Says:

    Manoranjan & Amit,

    Thank you for stopping by and speaking your minds out.

    The purpose of this write-up was not to criticise any vedic text but to merely lay bare, one typical mental gymnastic, that certain people love to indulge in.

    I am not surprised that you have missed the point. Shooting the messenger is the best way to refute the message.

  22. Quest_for_earnest_bliss Says:

    THIS IS AMAZING! May be not many of us know that the root cause of discoveries has always been the radical notions. BOYS AND GIRLS there are far more important aspects of life than arguing about what came first the hen or the egg. VEDIC OR NOT, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I know one thing for very sure that as a scientist I need a reason and my reasoning is that there is only one thing that keep you going till the very end and that my friend is FAITH. I have not read any of the vedas neither I have any collections of books to indulge myself in the fight of “Vedic Mathematics or Vedic Nonsense ?”. The reason being just above the title of the post I saw a link to “21st Dec, 2012 : The day before forever” WELL Mr. Twit is that really so important that with only few years remaining for our most precious time on earth we argue about maths originating from veds or not or we should just acknowledge the beauty of the brain who could come up with these wounder full ideas.

  23. Quest_for_earnest_bliss Says:

    Dear Mr critiq I really liked the way you said “And I am pretty sure, that “modern day developers of Microprocessors and FPGA / DSP systems” are not looking into vedas for their understanding of classical physics.”

    As a matter of fact me and my fellow Ph.D. students completed a design of faster DSP processor entirely based on vedic maths. I dont care whether one likes to call it vedic or not. All I care is that “To achieve something we dont need to do different things we just need to do things differently”

  24. Quest_for_earnest_bliss Says:

    I don’t know how many of you know that that The American president Mr Obama was facing real difficulty in organizing the people from his own part for the Health care Bill. While he was delivering his speech a member of opposition shouted on him and said “You are a liar.” This incidence proved to be a turning point for Mr. Obama as the members of his party forgot their difference and united they stood along side Mr Obama.
    Well Mr. Twit you did a fantastic job that when you wrote the words “Vedic Nonsense”, you helped many good people to come together and make all the sense out of vedas and educating people who are facing the problem of understanding the fact that vedas are not only for old people with time to kill but it for the young one to o if they want to excel in maths. Good work.

  25. Twit Says:

    Quest_for_earnest_bliss,

    First you claim that you “have not read any of the vedas” and then in the very next post you claim “me and my fellow Ph.D. students completed a design of faster DSP processor entirely based on vedic maths“. Can you please elaborate, how it is possible to ‘base’ a design on ‘vedic maths’, without first going through the vedas.

    Anyway, if you and your ‘fellow Ph.D students’ have indeed completed a design for ‘faster DSP processor entirely based on vedic maths’, then you can rest assured that I am St. Paul.

    You have said that, “as a scientist I need a reason and my reasoning is that there is only one thing that keep you going till the very end and that my friend is FAITH“. By saying so, you have successfully blurred the line between scientific procedure and obscurantism and ensconced yourself within the realms of the latter.

    • Vinoth Says:

      Dear Twit,

      I think you have forgot to write the steps to multply 98 & 76 in prevalent system.

      98 8*6=48 write 8 & carry forward 4
      x6 9*6=54 add carry forward 4 & 54

      588

      98 8*7=56 write 6 & carry forward 5
      X7 9*7=63 add carry forward 5 & 63

      686 put 0 at the end, it is 6860

      6860 add the 1s 0+8=8
      0588 add the 10s 6+8=14 write 4 & carry forward 1
      —- add the 100s 8+5=13 add the carry forward 1.
      13+1=14 write 4 & carry forward 1.
      7448 add the 1000s 6+0=6 add the carry forward 1. 6+1=7

      You are used to it and not knowing the value of Vedic math

    • Vinoth Says:

      Dear Twit,

      I think you have forgot to write the steps to multply 98 & 76 in prevalent system.

      98 8*6=48 write 8 & carry forward 4
      x6 9*6=54 add carry forward 4 & 54

      588

      98 8*7=56 write 6 & carry forward 5
      X7 9*7=63 add carry forward 5 & 63

      686 put 0 at the end, it is 6860

      6860 add the 1s 0+8=8
      0588 add the 10s 6+8=14 write 4 & carry forward 1
      —- add the 100s 8+5=13 add the carry forward 1.
      13+1=14 write 4 & carry forward 1.
      7448 add the 1000s 6+0=6 add the carry forward 1. 6+1=7

      You are used to it and not knowing the value of Vedic math.

  26. lalithsai Says:

    hai, I’am lalith sai.I’am studying class7th.I’am intrested in vedic maths so can you send teach me by mailing me please.
    thank you

  27. Arun Says:

    I believe that from the perspective of science, mathematics and philosophy – i.e., ALL fields of human endeavour that are concerned with the understanding of reality and our relation to it – the Vedas are junk, mere priestly nonsense. Upanishads *may* have some philosophical merit, but even that is dubious – I don’t think there’s anything in them that a quiet afternoon’s contemplation won’t teach you. All of these are important historical documents and part of our national heritage, but if it’s truth that you seek, then rational enquiry is the way to go. Thank God that the Europeans weren’t drinking Soma!

    I consider myself a Hindu, and I say this with all the respect. The Vedas do not contain any truth. It’s claimed that yeah, may not be physical truths, but they are oceans of *spiritual wisdom*. But what exactly is that – “spiritual wisdom”? Maybe it’s a way of transcending our mundane world, similar to the arts. But it most certainly doesn’t have anything to do with reality and our quest for truth.

  28. Arun Says:

    > And by the way if writng something even 0.1% close to any of the VEDA seems to be so easy, then why don’t you try writing one.

    I’ll take a shot. Here is a rik – someone just need to translate it into sanskrit.

    “O Varuna-Mitra the slayer of enemies, O Indra the giver of cows, accept this our offering of Soma, and may the truth that thou art me and I am thee shine on me.”

    That took me 1 minute. That BTW contains consmic sounds of truth that I heard in my state of deep transcendence. I could go on if someone would pay me for more Soma!

  29. yuvraj Says:

    i had lttl reasearch on gallens divn .kindly give so dat i ll ad minetoo

  30. arup Says:

    this site is very interesting.i am now feeling strong on mathematics

  31. manju Says:

    noooon sanse

  32. Stuart Trusty Says:

    Arun, you may have the words right, but you may not be singing the tune correctly. As I understand the Vedic tradition, each mantra is comprised of a vibration achieved through a procession of sacred syllables that unlock some particular flavor of divine expression or mental representation of conscious thought. We can make up our own mantra, but it might not yield the same effect. Nonetheless, per your example, any context for a sacred name such as Varuna or Indra would probably constitute a de facto invocation of divine intelligence.

    Twit, it can be very frustrating to try to break into contemporary Vedic thought at a very advanced technical level, especially when the old guard of priests offer no new insight to the seeker, and particularly as the seeker bangs his hands loudly at the temple doors in protest. Vedic knowledge, and in particular Puranic knowledge, remains in many respects an open book, and the keys to the breadth and depth of its information are not only in the text itself, but often held within the institution of the overaching faith which has sole authority over these texts all the way down to the “end user” level. Much of the traditional and more occluded knowledge is only available through the hands of a hierarchy of priests, and it is administrated in close community and distributed in the best interests of all concerned, and at such a time as it is deemed most appropriate and auspicious.

    Science can’t bust down the doors of Hinduism, nor can it loot the temple for a set of information that can only be internally validated. It is a path that reveals through the light within, and that path is unique to each, and it is custom tailored to every seeker, from the greatest to the lowest.

    I can suggest to you one thing with a moderate degree of likelihood, adn that is Jagadguru Swami Shri Bharati Krishna Tirthaji Maharaja probably had some help, and he could not reveal his sources, nor could he publicly attribute those that revealed the information, nor the variant texts that were availed to him. That was probably the deal for letting the information out into the wild. He may have been brilliant, but for those that have the eyes to see it, the depths of Vedic Mathematics thinks you, you do not think it.

    Cheers,
    S.

  33. Sid Says:

    This secretive behaviour is something which makes people suspect the authenticity / validity of such teaching.

    The whole process is a ‘search for truth’ is it not? What makes the whole vedic teachings a little difficult to accept is that the only proof for validity is that it is ‘written’ and what is written cannot be questioned – if you do, you go to hell or get born again and again … basically you are simply not encouraged to find things for yourself. Same is the problem when it comes to the Bible, whereas Buddhism says ‘be a light unto yourself’. If Buddha could be enlightened why not us? Should we really have not faith in our own abilities? after all we are part and parcel of God.

    Skepticism existed long way back. It does not need modern mind, just a logical mind. Follow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C4%81rv%C4%81ka

    What is hinduism?
    There are so many philosophies, people usually refer to only a few of them. Why? History is what is written down not what really happened … and so can easily be altered.

    Research with an open-mind perhaps can lead us to the truth.

    The article content is not much but people’s reactions to it is more interesting.

  34. indian Says:

    Twit

    article is continuation of the west’s attempt to ignore and nullify the vedic (Indian) contribution to the world

  35. Mike Says:

    There is a saying in Hindu mythology, “Vinashakaale Vipareetha Bhuddi” meaning, over intelligence may invite destruction. For the one’s who critisize krishna, vedas and gita, I bet you have not even read your own religious text. Pity on you west guys.

    • vedick Says:

      No it “vinashkale vipreet buddhi” is often misinterpreted, just like alot of indian sciptures which were a scientific take on life rather than religious as is now interpreted by ppl after ages of brainwash from islamic as well as colonial rule … it only means ” a negative mind brings destruction upon itself” and correctly so … and the author of this article has gone through the misinterpreted version of vedic math , which is kinda obvious as there are numerous ways (and subtle ones) to get ur answers.

  36. G.Schmit Says:

    Hmmm….The Vedic culture convey great meaning and projects rich culture. Early Vedic translations from Sanskrit to German language illustrates its importance on mankind. Well, for some who like to comment falsely upon Vedas, maybe they should read it before throwing comments in such blogs.

    Even I too remember an age old saying for those who blindly spread falsehood without understanding the truth. “When a bunch of stubborn fools believe that a rabbit has only one leg, the wise do not argue with them. They move away with a smile. “

  37. Desi Says:

    The title “Vedic Mathematics or Vedic Nonsense” tells less about the subject and more about the author. It might be true (and it is) that some peole make ridiculous claims about Vedic Mathematics. For example some coaching institutes try to sell common arithmetic shortcuts in the name of Vedic Mathematics.
    But should that give a person claiming to be pursuing knowledge the right to treat the subject in such a superficial manner. Though in relpy to some posts he is taking a different poistion, the original intent seems to make fun of something he doesn’t know much about. I don’t believe that he has read Prof. Seidenberg on Shulbashutra.
    Here, I would like to quote from Konraad Elst. This is on the question of who borrowed from where–whether Shulbasutra was the source of babylonian mathematics (and Greek mathematics)or vice-versa.
    “However, Seidenberg was told by the indologists that these Sutras, or any Vedic text for that matter, were definitely written later than 1700 BC. But mathematical data cannot be manipulated just like that, and Seidenberg remained convinced of his case: “Whatever the difficulty there may be [concerning chronology], it is small in comparison with the difficulty of deriving the Vedic ritual application of the theorem from Babylonia. (The reverse derivation is easy)… the application involves geometric algebra, and there is no evidence of geometric algebra from Babylonia. And the geometry of Babylonia is already secondary whereas in India it is primary.”18 To satisfy the indologists, he said that the Shulba Sutra had conserved an older tradition, and that it is from this one that the Babylonians had learned their mathematics: “Hence we do not hesitate to place the Vedic (…) rituals, or more exactly, rituals exactly like them, far back of 1700 BC. (…) elements of geometry found in Egypt and Babylonia stem from a ritual system of the kind described in the Sulvasutras.” [http://www.bharatvani.org/books/ait/ch23.htm]
    There is much more in ancient texts that what we know as on date. That is not to say that everyhting that we know today about science and mathematics was known there. That will be a ridiculous claim, as ridiculous as the statemenst made in the current blog. But definitely there is a need to study the texts a lot before we form any opinion.
    My advice to the author is that he should study and do more research before pronouncing fatwas.

  38. Mahesh Says:

    Vedic mathematics by Jagadguru Swami had written about 15 books and they were lost and in a rush just before his death published only one. Even in one book there are many fundamental concepts that take you to high algebra as explained by Roy. Example that you give is simple arithmetic that were very useful before calculators were invented. Even that process in English would be slow than when said in Sanskrit. I have no knowledge of Sanskrit to give an analysis explanation but I have understood the deeper concept that numbers processed in Sanskrit language orally would give answers in language form. Sanskrit only became a written language about 6 thousand years ago and the very nature of Sanskrit language hugh quantities of words could be expressed and memorized and mathematics may too been expressed in language form. To give you a similar example let us take Pythagoras theorem for it to be understood easily it has to be decimal form now which did not exist during Pythagorus time. They had Greek numerals which are like Roman numerals. So simple example 3 of squared + 4 squared=5 squared. This in Greek numerals would be difficult here I will use Roman numerals as they are similar. III squared + IV squared=V Squared. Even simple process of multiplying in Greek is difficult. I wonder if Pythagorus did that theorem. But the same theorem was done in trig form in India as sin A squared + cos A squared = 1. This is no mumbo jumbo because we don’t understand the very deep concepts brought out in it’s simplest forms in Sanskrit.

  39. Harisha Says:

    गोपीभाग्य मधुव्रात श्रुड्.गीशोदधिसन्धिग ।
    खलजीवित खाताव गलहालारसन्धर ॥
    Oh (Krishna) the fortune of the Gopis, the destroyer of the demon Madhu, protector of cattle, the one who ventured the ocean-depths, destroyer of evildoers, one with plough on the shoulder and the bearer of nectar, may (you) protect (us).
    This is a sloka in praise of Lord Krishna.
    Under KaTaPaYaadi system of representing the alphabets into their numerical equivalents, if you convert the above words into their numerical equivalents, what obtains is the value which in mathematical terms is the value of π correct to 31 digits, which is
    Pi = 3.1415926535897932384626433832792.

    • Harisha Says:

      Incidentally this sloka was written sometime in 4th Century AD that was the time when most of the Europeans were jumping from trees like bushmen.

  40. Kamal Says:

    Why did you want to use “Vedic Nonsense” when you had the word “Nonsense”. I dont want to comment anything about Vedic mathematics or your interpretation of that. All I want you to know is that by using the word Vedic along with Nonsense not just hurts sectarians and hindus but also others who see Vedas as pure knowledge and nothing more.

    One may view Vedas as nothing but a poem, but the other may not just view it but also incorporate its true meaning. It is upto the perceptiveness of viewer.

    Vedas means Pure knowledge, hence whether you degrade it or hate it. It is like the sun which wont stop shining the minds which requires it.

    I wont ask you to stop criticizing things that you feel isnt correct, but never criticize those things that you know nothing about.
    (Ex: You mention shlokas, but Vedas are made up of only mantras.
    The main texts of Vedas are notorious for their ambiguity – Can you tell me if the Quantum Science that we speak of isnt ambiguous. Naturally it the ambiguity that can breed things, else it will remain stagnant.

    The main purpose of Vedas being a guide for the Human to understand the Universe (Paramatma) and it was upto him on how to interpret the facts and seek his goal.)

    You better read Vedas to understand what they are before commenting on them. – This statement is nowhere related to you using it to denounce Vedic mathematics. It is for using Vedas so liberally in your article without understanding it.
    )

    Atleast Vedas are far more scientific compared to all those Sacred texts of other religions.

  41. vatsal Says:

    well guys we only have a 100 year max life span………….
    Why worry what happened 5 k years b4………..
    Just think of now……….
    Would anyone ever wish to meet god after death and there u will be judged………..
    if god created us in their image in their own likelihood, who created them ????
    the God is always associated that he resides within us, in everyone of us………..Be Good, be satisfied, dont expect the fruits,………as being bad is not necessary for the society, we humans have no boundary for satisfaction, we always expect the fruits of our work which kills the surprise…..
    So for me, after death there is a Giant Blank………nothing much……dead end……..

  42. Elisha Rathmell Says:

    India as a country has made it big in many fields of art like music or movies, dancing and painting etc. It remains home for some of the best talents that the world has ever seen. All these artists today have made a mark on the international front owing it to their skills and religious practice. They have taken the Indian art, culture, music and dance beyond geographic boundaries. In case of the Indian singers, their soothing voices have reached out to and won many hearts globally. When it comes to Bollywood Hindi music, old is gold proves to be true. Eminent composers and singers like Mohammed Rafi, Kishore Kumar, Lata Mangeshkar, S.P. Balasubramaniam etc. have created music that everyone loves to listen to even today. ..

    My current website
    <'http://www.beautyfashiondigest.com/best-facial-hair-removal-for-women/

  43. Alisha Singh Says:

    Vedic maths is based on sixteen sutra’s or principles . Using Vedic maths Does not mean that you can use it for some time only but it is a use of principles which can be used for the life time . It helps us to solve calculations mentally with sufficient practice. In competitive exams where time is less and Questions are more vedic maths helps a lot. Many schools and colleges has vedic maths as a complete subject for the students to solve the questions easily and fast. One of the vedic math online course available is http://www.wiziq.com/course/1507-vedic-mathematics-complete-certified-course . The instructor Gaurav Tekriwal is the President of the Vedic Maths Forum India.

  44. whammYJi Says:

    use base-six to look at the twin primes (because
    all primes are 6n plus or minus one;
    pretty

  45. whammYJi Says:

    what is the canonical digital representation
    of base-one acounting (hint:
    induction on base-nine

  46. Swati Says:

    hey,
    Nice information shared ,, vedic math is just a tecnique to calculate fast so there is no harm to learn it as soon as possible..
    To learn fast and solve the problems in limited period of time vedic mathematics playes an important role. It can be applied in competitive exams.
    and now its easy to lean vedic math online also one of the site I came across was http://www.wiziq.com/course/1507-vedic-mathematics-complete-certified-course
    This vedic math online course may be helpful for all those who are scared of mathematics.

  47. ゴダン 財布 Says:

    服 ファッション メンズ ゴダン 財布 http://huweibisfo.onlinecheesejp.com/

  48. vedick Says:

    Hey twat ,
    I believe u don’t know much about math as what you have written here is like using big formulas on small and silly equations … see when u multiply 98*76 = (100*76) – (2*76) = 7600 – 152 = 7448 … hows that for vedic math … there are numerous easy ways to solve it … even algebra and calculus and please don’t post crap online… the are innocent fools who’d believe anything

  49. vedick Says:

    And just so u guys understand what vedic maths really is … a little open minded Google search will help… here is a few easy tips n tricks
    On squaring nos. Ending with 5
    15^2= (1*2,5^2)=225… i.e., (first no. * no. After that) then place the square of 5
    25^2=(2*3,5^2)=625
    35^2=(3*4,25)=1225
    And these are on Google… i dunno where this guy does his research but he’s kinda pathetic
    I could give u ways to square any no. Right in your mind without pen and papers … that’s the power vedic maths possesses

  50. Immortal meluha Says:

    haha twit is just a twat… forgive him ..for his nonsence

  51. Dr. Goutam Mukherjee Says:

    Who called the Vedic Mathematics as nonsense didn’t comment on the alternative method shown in Swamiji’s book to calculate 1/19. Actually alternate methods of any mathematical problems must be welcome. One should learn all possible methods, and should also acquire the capability to apply the easiest one in case to case basis. There should not be a sense of competition amongst various alternatives.
    The original writer of “Vedic Nonsense” forgot to tell one point that the very “Place Value” concept was introduced in mathematician of India. Prior to that numbers used to written by using very peculiar symbols e.g. Babilonians and/or peculiar ideas. e.g the Roman number symbols: I, V X, L, C, D and M (not beyond that) and the rule of addition (if in descending order – VI, XI, LX etc. ) and subtraction if consecutive two are in ascending order (IV, IX, XL etc.).
    Without the Place Value concept, Mathematics, as we know today would not have existed at all !

  52. S.Jagannatha Says:

    We have to bear in mind that the book published post humously. We do not know what name Swamiji had in his mind for his book. Responsibility of calling the book “Vedic” Mathematics and instigating so many controversies goes to the editor.

  53. Thanalakshmi.p Says:

    Vedic maths-very nice formulae

  54. Jove Says:

    Parishista exists…I know three people from japan working on it. Even Buddhist texts also mention the Atharvaveda Parishista. I’ve got the references. If “YOU” don’t know it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.

  55. RajaRamVizag Says:

    Hey Twits.,

    Lets say that I wrote a book on your mother saying she gave me a blowjob and she does the same to everyone. Then who will you scold?? Your mother or me???

    I hope you get my point. If some other wrote some shit about your mother, that doesn’t mean your mother has to be. It truly means the author is idiot.

    I don’t care whether it is published or not, just want to explain you the truth.

    Thank you.

  56. Christina Belgir Says:

    Good but simple formula is more better

  57. PRAVEEN Says:

    After reading the article it seems that the author has scratched the surface and has come to conclusions, it does not seem like he has studied vedas and many people from the west have written many such articles based on their limited understanding of vedas. It is sad to see these kind of articles. Indian mathematical system had the knowledge of decimals long before people in europe and elsewhere moved from hunter-gatherers. The final comment is this that the method of calculation is wrong as well. Maybe I will find time soon to write a detailed explanation

  58. RAJVEER SINGH Says:

    U all will die fighting about the source of knowledge and enlightenment. But how many of you will really apply that knowledge .
    this is the reason people start arguing about the origin of knowledge .
    i want to tell you all , : knowledge never created , never will die .
    it is just found .
    you will find life in many places in universe and also below your feet , beneath the earth crust ..
    There are many worlds.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: