karthik_v

Yesterday, I had a direct personal experience of Krishna. I had kept butter and bread toast on the table and went off for a while. In the meantime, my little daughter had stolen that butter and eaten it. Butter thief? Krishna? In the form of my little daughter? [no offense intended]

The simple fact that all the previous acaryas like Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva defended their philosophy on the basis of Brahma sutras, should validate this claim. If conflicting schools still accepted Brahma sutras as the basis, then it simply means that they all accepted them as apaurusya. You ask for a pandit and you get a half-baked one The answer is NO. Here I am including only the samhitas, brahma sutra and the principal upanishads used by Sankara and Ramanuja. But, the truth is that these shrutis lend themselves to both monistic and dvaitic interpretations. Both are true. If Sankara interprets Purusha [pura + usha] as the Supreme eternal light or Brahman, then Ramanuja interprets the same word as the primeval Lord or Narayana.

The simple fact that all the previous acaryas like Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva defended their philosophy on the basis of Brahma sutras, should validate this claim. If conflicting schools still accepted Brahma sutras as the basis, then it simply means that they all accepted them as apaurusya. You ask for a pandit and you get a half-baked one The answer is NO. Here I am including only the samhitas, brahma sutra and the principal upanishads used by Sankara and Ramanuja. But, the truth is that these shrutis lend themselves to both monistic and dvaitic interpretations. Both are true. If Sankara interprets Purusha [pura + usha] as the Supreme eternal light or Brahman, then Ramanuja interprets the same word as the primeval Lord or Narayana.

From that picture itself there is nothing to show that is a 2 piece wear like ghagra choli. why? Because, a ghagra doesn't go over the bosom, while the fabric in this depiction does. So, it looks more like a saree. Let us see if it could be dupatta or chunri. either of them is worn around the shoulder. If you were to hold it in your hands, then it should drape around your hands and fall down. It should look distinctly seperated from the body. In this case it doesn't. So, it is not either. But, I am not rejecting Raga's explanation. It could very well be true. But the depiction in this picture is a pathetic form of painting, which doesn't reflect that. The picture reveals lifting effect of the lower wear - here a saree or a skirt. If I were the owner of the site, I will just admit that the depiction doesn't bring out the intent and also gives it a vulgar outlook. I will just scrap that picture and get a better artist to do a realistic rendering. Unless I wanted to provide the anti-Hindu forces more ammunition to denigrate our religion.

From that picture itself there is nothing to show that is a 2 piece wear like ghagra choli. why? Because, a ghagra doesn't go over the bosom, while the fabric in this depiction does. So, it looks more like a saree. Let us see if it could be dupatta or chunri. either of them is worn around the shoulder. If you were to hold it in your hands, then it should drape around your hands and fall down. It should look distinctly seperated from the body. In this case it doesn't. So, it is not either. But, I am not rejecting Raga's explanation. It could very well be true. But the depiction in this picture is a pathetic form of painting, which doesn't reflect that. The picture reveals lifting effect of the lower wear - here a saree or a skirt. If I were the owner of the site, I will just admit that the depiction doesn't bring out the intent and also gives it a vulgar outlook. I will just scrap that picture and get a better artist to do a realistic rendering. Unless I wanted to provide the anti-Hindu forces more ammunition to denigrate our religion.

Shvu: I just posted the first link. There is a whole series in which Talageri has exposed the criticism of Witzel. I need to find them and post them here. BTW, even here, if you have read all the parts of Talageri's response, it criticizes virtually all the points of Witzel. I will post the verse this evening. I need to refer to RV.

Shvu, Vedas themselves state that they can be interpreted differently. So, if the different seers interpret differently, I am not surprised. But, our commentators defended their interpretation with references to other texts and Nirukta. On the other hand, western academics and missionaries, don't stick to any such rigour. They base it on linguistic paleantology, a discredited study. As you have rightly said, please read everything that Talageri has written and form your opinion. That is the best course. Even without havinfread the RV, it is obvious to anyone that Talageri has exposed Witzel with solid arguments.

Witzel and co. bribes Talageri: http://www.bharatvani.org/general_inbox/talageri/ejvs/part1.html

Here is the first link to the excellent refutal by S. Talageri: http://www.bharatvani.org/general_inbox/talageri/ejvs/cover.html

Shvu: Very quickly, before I head out for lunch, let me refute 2 of the points Witzel has raised here. I will later on present Talageri's excellent and systematic refutal of every point Witzel has raised here. Big deal! Oldenberg translated the vedas into German and not English. English translations of his work were available only around 1995 and its Indian edition available only in 1997. Oldenberg himself was never used as an academic work in any university, until Witzel and M.Deshpande introduced him. To expect Indian scholars to learn German, read the translation into that language of the vedas by an obscure "scholar" and refute it, is travesty. Yet, Sri Aurobindo precisely did that in his works, without naming the author. He showed the flaws in the western translations. Obviously, Witzel hasn't read Sri Aurobindo. Is it because Sri Aurobindo wasn't a German? If there is an award for dishonesty, Witzel would be nominated for life time achievement. The same Witzel, in 1995, in Erdosy ed., wrote that the Rv is like a tape recording from 1000 BCE. He even wrote that the differences between the redactions are almost non-existent. Here he claims that the RV is of later redaction I will try to get the links where Kalyanaraman, Elst, Talageri and Vishal Agarwal made a mince meat of Witzel on this. If this Witzel wore brown skin, like you and me, he would have long ago got his pink slip. Certainly after his fraudulent and intentional translation of Baudhayana Srauta sutra.

Shvu: He [Talageri] comes out with a book which states all Aryan-European languages have their basis in India Where does he say this? I read all his writings, but I don't remember having seen this. He is very systematic. He only relies on RV [in this edition]. He is proving with the text of RV that it was compiled only in India and there is not even a remembrance of any foreign land. He doesn't even go into linguistic paleantology. Other than the portions which point to Aryan Invasion, most other interpretations by the western scholars are quite reliable. I am afraid not. There is no mention of any invasion in the RV. All western translations depend upon Oldenberg, directly or indirectly. Talageri has shown as to how Oldenberg is wrong. Dr. S. Kalyanaraman has beautifully shown how their translation of the phrases is completely wrong. Sri Aurobindo did that decades ago. Have you read his Hymns to the Agni and Secret of the vedas? If not, they are a must read. Since many Indians translate scriptures incorrectly to reflect their own views Which Indians are you talking about? This is carpet bombing at its worst. What do you think of Sayanacarya, Sri Aurobindo, Swami Dayananda Saraswati, Nilakanta, Kapali Shastry? Here is Witzel's criticizm of Talageri's criticizm of Witzel's criticizm of Talageri. http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/Talageri-answer.htm I read this long time ago. Last evening, I took my kids and wife out, so couldn't log on to the net. I will try doing so today and send you Talageri's excellent rebuttal to this one by Witzel. He demolishes Witzel completely. If I am free this week-end, I will also show why Witzel is pathetically wrong here.

That makes sense. I have heard that Ayurveda even prescribes alcohol for certain conditions, but that doesn't mean it is recommended for daily consumption. I have read somewhere [by Ayurveda doctors] that garlic is essential for lactating mothers. Have you any idea about this?

Nachiketa2: If you are eating outside in the USA, you are unlikely to avoid onion and garlic. For example, if you have pizza outside, the sauce they use will have these. In fact, most vegetarian food contains animal products too. So, you are better off consuming home made food. When my wife was in India on a holiday for a few months, I used to cook once a week and store it for the rest of the week. That is anice option, if you work long hours. There are many things like pizza and burger which you can make in a few minutes. If that isn't possible, the next best optio is a vegetarian Indian restaurant. That way you can avoid eating in a restaurant that serves meat. But any Indian restaurant will use onion and garlic. I have seen a few devotees survive on bread etc., but I will never advocate extreme steps.

Interestingly, Hieun Tsang wrote that those who wanted to consume garlic should do so outside the town. Even our dear friend Prophet Mohammad shunned garlic. Even Bible holds garlic in low esteem. Was it because, all these belonged to an era when tooth brush had not yet been introduced?

Does Ayurveda proscribe onion and garlic? There are several Ayurvedic medicines available in India, especially meant for pregnant women, and they contain onion and garlic. In fact some churnams are primarily made up of these as they are believed to help in lactation. In general, it is a good idea to stay away from them, for spiritual reasons. But, we should ensure that we supplant them with other items that provide the nutrition these 2 provide. And that should be done scientifically. Is any member aware of the positive aspects of taking these 2? Then we can analyze what can be their substitutes?

Yes, I noticed that this translatio was not by a western academic But, is there a dearth of Macaulayite scholars in India?

Here is the link to the complete book: http://www.bharatvani.org/books/rig/ You will see a deconstruction of Witzel in Section 3. But, the entire book is a must read. I have other links at home which I can post tomorrow. They contain Witzel's reaction - he was completely rattled and called Talageri a petty bank clerk; he had another Harvard professor send a mail to Talageri offering all expenses paid Ph.D. at Harvard if he is amenable; Talageri turned down the offer and made the mail public; Talageri also deconstructs the Oldenberg's analysis, which formed the very basis of modern western scholarship; he shows in 2 paragraphs, how it falls apart like a pack of cards. You may also enjoy this book by Koenraad Elst: http://www.bharatvani.org/books/ait/

Since we are talking of predictions, here is a prediction by Nostradamus that England will win 2002 Soccer cup http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Articleshow.asp?art_id=11501121 Every prediction from the Bible is as good [or as bad] as this.

Karthik, as you rightly pointed out there are many vested interests in translations. Even if some are wrong, then it is good enough to show take every thing with a pinch of salt. I have a simple golden rule. I take anything written by a western academic with a pound of salt. I have little regard for their scholarship. Most of them can be bought over with money. Unfortunately, very few Hindus have that kind of money. But, on the occasions they extended money, these academics bent over backwards to change their viewpoints. You may have read Shrikant Talageri's systematic deconstruction of Michael Witzel's scholarship of Rk veda. Witel stands for the best of the academic scholarship the west can offer

I think you are right. Only if the earthquake has left a permenant rupture in the plate, we can guess about its mangitude. even then it is not going to be accurate. For example, the great earthquake of Turkey (I think it is 1192 CE..Avinash prabhu can confirm) was guesstimated as between 8.2 and 9.0 in magnitude. That is a huge difference when we note that Richter scale is logarithmic and 9.0 is almost 10 times as big as 8.2. But, it does tell you if earthquakes of magnitude beyond 8.0 occurred.

I think Adi Sankara referred to it, but I need to check the details. Actually Anu Gita is very much part of Mahabharata. I do agree that we need to check with the original Sanskrit verses and their commentary by a bonafide acharya. In general, I won't give much credence to the translations available in sacred-texts.com, as they are not critically edited. Mostly, they carry translations that are atleast 100 years old and done by British missionaries. Even the western academics don't regard them as worthy. For example, this site carries the translation of the vedas by Griffith and even during his days, he wasn't considered authentic. That doesn't mean every translation is bad either.

Dear Leyh Prabhuji, I am very much conditioned and I am touched by your humility. I am not at all hurt by your choice of words.

Theist Prabhuji, I am sorry for being offensive. Please come back. I will restrain. My attack was not on Jesus, but the church. But, I will tone it down.

Earthquakes that measure 6.0 on Richter are not really disastrous. Truly monstrous earthquakes occur beyond 7.0 on the Richter scale. But, even they can hurt only modern cities that have concrete buildings. Only a quake that measures 8.0 and above can have disastrous effects on any economy, even agrarian, as the entire topography caves in and ends up in fissures. Some of the major seismic zones are Turkey, the area around dead sea, Japan, California/Nevada, the Himalayas and Alaska. Each of these areas has experienced on an average 1 earthquake per century that measures over 8.0 on Richter. this has been the consistent figure since 11th century CE. US Geological Survey has explained as to how they calculate the magnitude of past quakes. The only increase in the present century has been in the quakes between 5.0 and 6.5 on the Richter scale and they occur on the fault lines over which dams have been built. This has nothing to do with Jesus. Or could it be that the earth is quaking at the thoughts of Jesus's second coming? His first visit resulted in the creation of the monstrous Vatican which finally culminated in the creation of Hitler. Sure, Mother earth must be quaking at the very thoughts of Jesus's re-entry. Does some know if we can create Trishanku swarka where Jesus can hang out instead of coming here?

Dear Leyh Prabhuji, I sincerely take very strong exception if you put myself and Mother, my left foot, Teresa in the same cell. I am by no means criminal. I make my living in a very honest way and never knowingly harm anybody. Mother, my left foot, Teresa on the other hand has been the # 1 money lauderer of this century. Money laundering causes more misery and starvation to millions of children than the acts of criminals like Father [but not criminal enough to be "Mother's spouse ] Osama bin Laden. Has any of you objected when the world derides Hitler as a criminal? Does anyone say that we should rather shut up and instead look at our own insignificant flaws than talk of Hitler? How come different yardsticks are applied when it comes to Mother, my left foot, Teresa? Are you aware that Mother, my left foot, Teresa glorified Pius XII, also called as Hitler's pope? Do you know that but for this Pope, Hitler might have never become the monster he was? Did you read the link I posted?