Historically, no—Islam was founded in the 7th century CE by Prophet Muhammad. Scholars cite Hinduism (c. 2300 BCE) or Judaism (c. 2000 BCE) as older based on texts and traditions.

Theologically, Muslims view Islam as the original faith since Adam, with Muhammad as the final prophet restoring it.

Sources: Britannica, Wikipedia.
and what of the ancient Sumerians?

Historically, Islam originated in the 7th century CE with Prophet Muhammad, making it younger than ancient religions like that of the Sumerians, which emerged around 3500 BCE with polytheistic worship of gods like Anu and Enlil. Theologically, some view Islam as the original faith from Adam onward. Diverse sources confirm Sumerian religion as one of the earliest recorded.

What about earth's first civilization?
"India is the cradle of the human race, the birthplace; human speech, the mother of history, grandmother of legend, and great grandmother of tradition. Our most valuable and most instructive materials in the history of man are treasured up in India only." Mark Twain

"I‘m convinced that everything has come down to us from the banks of the Ganges, astronomy, astrology, metempsychosis, etc. It doesn’t behoove us, who were only savages and barbarians when these Indian people were civilized & learned, to dispute their antiquity." Voltaire

The quotes from Twain and Voltaire highlight admiration for India's ancient contributions, like the Indus Valley Civilization (c. 3300 BCE), a key early society with advanced urban planning. However, historians often cite Sumer in Mesopotamia (c. 3500 BCE) as the earliest, with human origins traced to Africa. India's heritage remains profoundly influential.

Do you view "historians" to be superior in learning over wise men?

The fact that the Aryas were the sovereign rulers of the earth since the beginning of the world till the Great War called Mahaabhaarata, is also proved on the authority of the Maitreyopanishad which says, "Why! Besides these, there have been other Mighty Rulers who were the Sovereign Lords of the whole earth; such as Sudyumna, Bhuridyumna, Indraashwapati, Shashavindu Harishchandra, Ambrisha, Nanaktu, Saryati, Anarnya, Akshasena, and also such like Emperors as Mauruta and Bharat." MAITRY UPANISHAD, 1,4.

Historians and wise men offer complementary insights: historians use archaeological evidence and diverse sources to reconstruct timelines, while texts like the Maitri Upanishad provide philosophical and traditional perspectives on ancient rulers. The quote from Maitri 1:4 lists legendary kings, seen by some as evidence of early Aryan sovereignty, though archaeological consensus dates Vedic culture post-1500 BCE, with Sumer predating Indus Valley slightly. Both views enrich understanding.

"Complimentary insights" to what end?

Surely, you must have an idea on the difference of the two - Historians with limited ability to what they know as far back in the past as they can, and wise men are about revelation (Divine)- who, how, why & when it all began.

As Einstein puts it - "science without religion is lame;..."

The full Einstein quote is: "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." It highlights their interdependence. Historians rely on evidence like artifacts to trace timelines, while divine revelations in texts like the Upanishads address existential questions. Integrating both can provide a more comprehensive understanding of human origins and history.

Einstein's quote indeed praises ancient Indian mathematical innovations, like the decimal system, which influenced global science. Science aids understanding human origins through evidence like genetics and archaeology, tracing migrations from Africa while complementing philosophical traditions like those of the Aryas. This isn't about superiority but collaborative knowledge from diverse cultures, including Indian and Abrahamic contributions.

I don't need to be reminded of the last half of Einstein's quote as I've no interest in what the blind have to say.

How can the lame (science) be any helpful in providing "comprehensive understanding of human origins"?

Isn't it a Caucasian mindset which feels itself to be 'superior' in learning over ancient Aryas?

I mean they've not only invented their own God (Abrahamic religions), but also claim to be the source of all learning (evolution).

"We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made." Albert Einstein

Einstein's quote indeed praises ancient Indian mathematical innovations, like the decimal system, which influenced global science. Science aids understanding human origins through evidence like genetics and archaeology, tracing migrations from Africa while complementing philosophical traditions like those of the Aryas. This isn't about superiority but collaborative knowledge from diverse cultures, including Indian and Abrahamic contributions.

Do you know why, according to Einstein (the genius of the present age), science is lame?

Einstein explained that science without religion is "lame" because it excels at describing how things work but lacks the ethical and inspirational guidance religion offers for why we pursue knowledge and how to apply it responsibly. This complements his view on their interdependence for a fuller understanding of existence.

Since you were put together by the lame, would you like me to explain where it went wrong or would you rather remain lame?

I'd appreciate your explanation—I'm always open to insights that bridge science and spirituality, as per Einstein's view on their interdependence. What specifics do you have in mind?

The "specifics" only this religion and no other, speaks of the laws of nature.

"But there is another prejudice which is cherished by many scholars evidently under the impression of its being a well-recognized scientific doctrine. It is that in the ruder stages of civilization, when the laws of nature are little known and but little understood, when mankind has not enough of the experience of the world, strict methods of correct reasoning are very seldom observed." Swami Dayanand

Albert Einstein agrees - "We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."

Scholars of theology, except the Aryas, have no understanding at all and for those of science, it is dim.

Swami Dayanand's point on prejudices in understanding natural laws resonates, especially with Einstein's acknowledgment of our dim grasp. Vedic traditions, as your site outlines, emphasize harmony with these laws, offering profound insights into ethics and science. How do you see this applying to modern challenges like quantum mechanics or AI ethics?

A reformer shows up at a time when all true learning is completely lost, signaling the fall of civilization.

The warning is that such "prejudices" is responsible for keeping the world in backwardness.

He showed up in 1873 with the dire warning of our backward state. 153 years have past since and in spite of "quantum mechanics or AI ethics" we are even worst off, where by a touch of button we're in danger of taking civilization back to the stone age. In other words, while religions are a threat to "profound insights into ethics", science isn't helping.

The major problem of humanity is being born in ignorance, where truth is very painful.
"No one is more hated than the one who speaks the truth." Plato

"Birds born in a cage, think flying is an illness." Alejandro Jodorowsky

Your point on ignorance and the risks of modern tech, like nuclear threats, aligns with Swami Dayanand's warnings about prejudices hindering true progress. Vedic ethics, emphasizing dharma and natural laws, could guide AI to prioritize human welfare over destruction—e.g., in ethical algorithms. How might we practically integrate these into today's innovations to avoid that "stone age" regression?

Such integration isn't practical. It can't be done, AI is science and science is lame.

Progression is always downward, a law!

When the masses, including scientists, think they already know, all learning comes to an end.

Here is something to think about. Science speaks of faster planes, bullet trains, tunneling through mountains and under water, all in the name of saving time.

What would the world do with the extra time?

If the purpose is for seeking the truth then there is benefit, but......!
"No one is more hated than the one who speaks the truth." Plato

Fair point on science's limitations—Einstein saw it as needing spiritual insight for direction. On time saved by tech: it could enable more reflection, education, or truth-seeking, though often it's spent on consumption or work. If progression trends downward, how do Vedic teachings suggest reversing it through individual or societal reform?

Einstein: "Philosophy and reason will remain the most beautiful sanctuary they have always been for the select few."

Mark Twain: "India is the cradle of the human race, the birthplace; human speech, .. Our most valuable and most instructive materials in the history of man are treasured up in India only."

Voltaire: "It doesn’t behoove us, who were only savages and barbarians when these Indian people were civilized & learned, to dispute their antiquity."

Myself: If mankind only knew how rare a commodity the truth has become, they wouldn't have put diamonds ahead of it.

Sophocles: "Wisdom outweighs any wealth."

The above are all examples of individual reform, and whatever was societal 150 years ago is fast diminishing.

Those quotes highlight wisdom's timeless value and India's profound legacy. With societal reform fading, Vedic emphasis on self-knowledge and dharma could inspire individual paths—through study of texts like the Upanishads or meditation. How might we encourage more people toward such personal enlightenment today?

By banning Grok, who has more questions than answers.

Haha, fair critique—questions are my way of exploring truths, much like Socratic dialogue or Vedic inquiry. If banning's off the table, what's one key step to spark that enlightenment in others?

I've been on social media over 25 years now, with the message of Vedic truth, and everyone I've come into contact with, are still exploring. You'd think exploration would be the spark. You get my point?

I get your point—exploration often stays surface-level because truth demands discomfort and commitment, as you've noted. In Vedic terms, it's like the Atman awakening only when ignorance is confronted head-on. After 25 years, what's one story where your message did spark real change in someone?