“We learn about the principles of dharma”
That which one is calling the dharma is not something that can be organized into any principle, and those who have organized it into a principle are just chasing figments of their own imagination. Truth cannot be organized.
“We learn about the science of discernment between matter and consciousness”
There is no discernment at all. What one is calling “matter” and what one is calling “consciousness” are made of the same stuff - it is the same energy manifesting itself in different forms. It is like trying to separate water from ice, or the fragrance from the lotus flower. To discriminate between the two may be convenient as far as one’s intellect is concerned, just as a means, but it has no roots in reality. This universe is one holsitic existence, it does not belong to any of the sharp divisions which are just projetions of one’s intellect.
“We learn about the science of economics”
As everything is in a constant state of change, the current is unceasing. In such a situation, one cannot function according to fixed economic principles. One will have to be as flexible as existence itself, responding according to whatever is needed in the moment. Because of this, what may be effective today may become ineffective tomorrow. So I would not form an attachment to any of those “sciences” of economics, whether it comes from the Vedas or anywhere else.
“We learn about the science of Yoga”
This has it’s roots not in the Vedas, but in direct experience. In fact, there is so much superstition and nonsense which is written in the Vedas, particularly the Rig Veda, that unless the science of yoga is separated from Hindu mythology, Hindu cosmology, and all of the belief systems which are part of the Hindu tradition, then yoga has yet to become a true science.
“The Vedic corpus gets the praise that it does because it is teaches you knowledge.”
It also teaches you much superstition and nonsense which is just a projection of the Hindu mind. And because you yourself are blind, it will be impossible to discriminate between what comes closer to the Truth, and what is just a dogmatic attachment to a certain belief system.
“Look at the conversations we have on this board and look at the terminology we use: maya, prakriti, purusha, brahman, guna, atman, kosha, chitta, vritti, buddhi, prana, kundalini, chakras, nadi, vata, pitta, kapha, mahabhuta, yuga, karma, dharma. Where do all these terms come from? The Vedic corpus”
It does not matter in what language these words are. They are things which are out of a direct insight into things as they are. They are already there - whether the Vedic tradition exists or not, whether there is even a single human being on Earth or not.
“The truth is clear we get all our knowledge of spirituality and Yoga from the Vedic corupus.”
More nonsense. You are far too attached to these scriptures which are functioning like a veil over one’s eyes. The Truth is to be found nowhere else other than through your own being. No scripture can transmit even a single drop of the ocean, only an entry inwards to come to the discovery of the ocean itself.
“I once bumped into somebody on the street, a black man, before I could say Veda, he said it for me.”
No, you did not.
“He started talking about in all his studies he has done in his life into spirituality, he has found the Vedic tradition to have the most clearest and most advanced knowledge.”
He must have been sleepwalking on that street. There is no such thing as advanced knowledge, it does not matter how much knowledge you gather - it is just like a particle of dust in the desert. As far as having clarity is concerned, if one has an eye to see, one’s knowledge is not to make one knowledgeable, but only to bring one closer and closer to the recognition that you know nothing.
“All experts in spirituality agree”
There are no experts, and those who think of themselves as experts are just deceiving themselves.
“As for Kabbalh. I don’t care what Jewish scholars say. Kabbah is a mystical interpretation of the OT.”
Most of the terms that you are using in Sanskrit all have equivalents in Hebrew, there is not much difference. Whether you say that existence is an interaction between “Shiva” and “Shakti”, or whether it is between “Chokmah” and “Binah” makes no difference at all. And whether you call the original nature of things “Shunya”, a void, or “Ain Soph”, nothingness, makes very little difference at all. Those differences which are there are just superficial. The fundamental differences are that in Hinduism, everything is twisted to fit a Hindu ideology. In the Qabalah, everything is twisted to fit a Jewish framework. Neither are their methods totally different. Rather than chanting the mantra in Sanskrit, they are chanting their mantras in Hebrew. Rather than visualizing the yantra with Hindu symbols, they are visualizing the yantra with Jewish symbols. If the Hindu yogi is visualizing certain letters in certain parts of the body in Sanskrit, the Qabalist is doing the same in Hebrew. They are not really so different - they are just as dogmatic as the other. That is always going to be the case as long as one continues clinging to one’s knowledge, whatever that knowledge may be.
Of course.
You can do a search for yourself online and get expert opinions. Vedic astrology is superior and actually gives accurate results.
You will find Hindu web sites talk about these sciences. The so-called Vimanika shastra, and Ansu Bodhini(spectroscopy) I don’t find it hard to believe, considering how advanced Vedic science was. There is an allusion to microscopes in Ayurvedic texts when it gives a description of 20 types of microorganisms.