Talk:Vimana
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have no problem with Wikipedia containing UFO garbage, so long as it's labeled as such. Someone fix please this page, so we know which parts of its fantastical claims are disputed and which parts aren't....--Carl 15:28, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I feel that the content of the article at present indicates quite well that the Vimanas are currently mythological devices... So all that is described can be clearly interpreted to be fiction... until proven otherwise. So there need be no dispute on the neutrality. The NPOV dispute is not justified. Prashanth 00:50, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I agree. I am now satisfied that in its present form, the article is neutral. --Carl 03:20, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
It is true that Vimanas are part of a worldwide mysterious appearance of flying vehicles, sometimes amazingly well described (i.e. technical details) and always containing similarities. Myths from the Near East (Ezekiel, Henoch, Exodus), myths from South America (Bep Kororoti), and the presented myths from India (Vimanas).
How much of this "UFO garbage" is garbage? User:Stefan Kruithof
- Last time I looked into this, most of the "technical details" associated with Vimanas were from the Vimana-shastra (or something like that) which was supposedly ancient but was in fact produced by some twentieth century pandit, supposedly by autodictation. Not to say that "UFO garbage" isn't an impolite term for it... -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽
How about a separate article to Toaplan's arcade game Vimana? [1]
- That's fine, just put a link to Vimana (video game) at the top of this article and write it. --Carl 11:48, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This isn't really "UFO garbage," because it's something that the ancient (Asian) Indians wrote extensively about, and even if it's not true and just stories, it's part of history, just like Greek and Roman myths are a part of history. And Ezekiel and Exodus are not myths.129.15.167.97 06:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
While interesting, there is a big lack of source evidence. I'd appreciate it if someone could back up the otherwise fascinating quotes from these ancient indian texts with page/chapter numbers and what translation or book edition they got the quote from. Otherwise it could just as likely be made up. BV, 23.1.07
- Anyone could have written this page and made it up out of whole cloth. Is this the fate of Wikipedia, to be the repository of all the world's lunatic theories? I have read many Vedas, etc., and never encountered anything remotely like this. I agree with the above anon. user, Ezekiel and Exodus are not myths, and I'm not sure this article even rises to the level of "myth". It's just pure rubbish. Do we have to have an exhaustive analysis of every crazy thing ever written in the history of man? No server is big enough to hold the world's babblings... Nirigihimu 15:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Sources are a big issue with this article. The Mahabharata passage cited "Gurkha flying in his swift..." is cut together from different parts that are used out of context, according to Colin Biggs, this widely cited fake excerpt of the Mahabharata was introduced by Charles Berlitz in his 1974 book The Bermuda Triangle (chapter 8). It is fake. A wild regrouping of phrases he used to support his theory. There is a minor posibility that he used an other thranslation or even tried to translate himself, yet given the current official translation that passage is just fake and should be removed. there are other passages in the Mahabharata that are better suited to examplify Vimana. --AnaxolCortez 22:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Being a Hindu I have read the Epics Ramayana and Mahabharata and I and 99.99% of Indians(i.e 20% of the world) knows that in Ramayana Ravana of Lanka(Sri Lanka) used a Vimana. Ramayana is the story of king Rama and the major chunk deals with the kidnapping of his wife Sita by Ravana and the invasion of Lanka by Rama to rescue Sita. Ravana is supposed to have used his Puspaka Vimana to Kidnap Sita and it also mentions a mid-air fight with a bird Jatayu which tried to rescue Sita. Also the weapons used are also common knowledge. In fact the description of destruction caused by BrahmAstra is very similar to the nuclear weapon. In Mahabharata many such weapons are described. Most of them Chemical based.
For the Ignorants I would like to mention that India performed surgeries around 2000 years ago and has a book for it. Most of such surgeries were performed in Europe only in the 19th century. In fact the nose cosmetic surgery mentioned in the book is still used and is called the Indian method.
Most of the medicines patented every year used most of the ingredients used by Indians for thousands of years and documented in the ancient text Ayurveda and most of them include an Indian scientist.
Yoga is practiced in India for thousands of years and there are written texts for it. It has exercises for specific internal functions of the human body when the rest of the world didn't even know the functions of each internal organ. They taught meditation to the whole world.
There are many other ancient texts on Mathematics, Astronomy and many such subjects.
I agree some sections of the article needs to be edited/changed but most of the objections are due to the fact that people can't accept that Indians were so advanced. Indians were the first to Built an Urban city and the Indus valley civilization was much bigger in size then all the ancient civilizations put together. There are hundreds of settlement sites from almost Afghanistan to the south of India stretching for many hundreds of miles.
User:Nirigihimu please check the meaning of Encyclopedia. It is supposed to include everything.
07:09, 8 July 2007 User:Slkanth
- Could someone please say which of the matter in the section Vimana#Mahabharata comes from the Vaimanika Shastra? Some people seem to treat the Vaimanika Shastra as part of the Mahabharata, but almost certainly the Vaimanika Shastra is spurious and was written around or after 1900 AD. Also, the Mahabharata including later additions is enormous and a more detailed reference for each item quoted would be useful. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Noncompliant tag
I've added the tag due to statements like, "However, a Google image search by User:Robsahl found several archeological websites about the skeletons at Mohenjo Daro..." —Viriditas | Talk 11:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
These are only cutlural cross references and are to some extent absolutely correct, the only modification required is that of the UFO theory as even if it is true the topic is debatable hence I am editing the aricle to make it neutral .
[edit] Seems good
This appears to be a categorical listing and brief summary of ancient indian mythologies, why is this in question? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.242.87 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- The answer to your question is found in the noncompliant tag, in the form of links to Wikipedia policies. If you have time to improve the article so that it meets those policies, then remove the tag. —Viriditas | Talk 22:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

