Guest guest Posted February 19, 2009 Report Share Posted February 19, 2009 Namaste Narasimha & other Sanskrit Scholars, One pending issue with me which i wish to put in front of all of you for clarifications- Take instance of Jyotish Classics. I've seen Scholars (Who are having knowledge of Jyotisha as well as Sankrita) debating endlessly on a particular verse . one or two lines or sometimes even a couple of words in a verse seems to create great confusions. we have seen that different scholars tend to interpret and derive different meaning from a same verse. i took the example of jyotish classics because we are more familiar with controversies in that area. This confusion is also applicable in other literature of Sanskrit language. Why Sanskrit (Held as the finest language and mother of all the other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a bold comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit) should create so much confusions among the scholars. is it that ambiguous or the writers didn't wrote in a clutter-less fashion or the current generation is not sharp enough to grasp the right meaning. Whatever may be the case, why a verse should fail to give one a simple undisputable meaning at least literally like in our modern languages? Warm Regards, Utpal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2009 Report Share Posted February 19, 2009 Dear Utpalji Held as the finest language and mother of all the other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a bold comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit Can you provide some references for this? Really interesting. -Regards Rajarshi The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra--- On Fri, 20/2/09, utpal pathak <vedic_pathak wrote: utpal pathak <vedic_pathak Sanskrit as a language !!! Date: Friday, 20 February, 2009, 10:44 AM Namaste Narasimha & other Sanskrit Scholars,One pending issue with me which i wish to put in front of all of you for clarifications-Take instance of Jyotish Classics. I've seen Scholars (Who are having knowledge of Jyotisha as well as Sankrita) debating endlessly on a particular verse . one or two lines or sometimes even a couple of words in a verse seems to create great confusions. we have seen that different scholars tend to interpret and derive different meaning from a same verse. i took the example of jyotish classics because we are more familiar with controversies in that area.This confusion is also applicable in other literature of Sanskrit language.Why Sanskrit (Held as the finest language and mother of all the other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a bold comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit) should create so much confusions among the scholars. is it that ambiguous or the writers didn't wrote in a clutter-less fashion or the current generation is not sharp enough to grasp the right meaning. Whatever may be the case, why a verse should fail to give one a simple undisputable meaning at least literally like in our modern languages?Warm Regards,Utpal Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 I would like to caution ourselves from getting into arguments whether or not Sanskrit is mother of all languages. One Arabic professor making such claim does not add much credibility to the argument unless he has some compelling reasons to make such statement. With in India, we find so called scholars arguing that Sanskrit came from other languages. You go south and will find quite a few Tamilians claim Sanskrit is not moth of Tamil. I would definitely be interested to see why the Arabic professor felt what he felt; how ever, the more important and basic question Utpal had is: Why is the knowledge written down in such disputable manner. Why it is not written in simple words. Utpal, your observation is true. For a long time the knowledge is passed on orally and there are quite a few corruptions in the scriptures as we have today. Some of the scriptures have redundancy built in to ensure the corruptions are checked to a large extension. Coming to the different meanings, it could be on purpose to some extent to ensure only the individuals with correct attitude has the intution to understand it. This could have been brought in by the people who passed on the knowledge as they were seeing India getting invaded. They carriers of knowledge may have purposefully created the ambiguities. Best regards, Vijay , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14 wrote: > > Dear Utpalji > Â > Held as the finest language and mother of all the > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a bold > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit > Â > Can you provide some references for this? Really interesting. > Â > -Regards > Â Rajarshi > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > --- On Fri, 20/2/09, utpal pathak <vedic_pathak wrote: > > utpal pathak <vedic_pathak > Sanskrit as a language !!! > > Friday, 20 February, 2009, 10:44 AM Namaste Narasimha & other Sanskrit Scholars, > > One pending issue with me which i wish to put in front of all of you > for clarifications- > > Take instance of Jyotish Classics. I've seen Scholars (Who are > having knowledge of Jyotisha as well as Sankrita) debating endlessly > on a particular verse . one or two lines or sometimes even a couple > of words in a verse seems to create great confusions. we have seen > that different scholars tend to interpret and derive different > meaning from a same verse. i took the example of jyotish classics > because we are more familiar with controversies in that area. > > This confusion is also applicable in other literature of Sanskrit > language. > > Why Sanskrit (Held as the finest language and mother of all the > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a bold > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit) should create so > much confusions among the scholars. is it that ambiguous or the > writers didn't wrote in a clutter-less fashion or the current > generation is not sharp enough to grasp the right meaning. Whatever > may be the case, why a verse should fail to give one a simple > undisputable meaning at least literally like in our modern languages? > > Warm Regards, > > Utpal > > > > > > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger./invite/ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Dear Vijay & Rajarshi, First of all let me clarify - When i wrote that 'Sanskrit is mother of all languages' it was a reference-less statement however i really wonder who can quote reference for this particular claim. But any ways, i apologize for the same. Why i said so because i have always heard this from my elders. Also the many Sanskrit words in our regional languages also add to that. but i know that is a controversial statement. Regarding Arabic Teacher - My Company organized classes for learning Arabic language for interested employees. The teacher was a Lebanese citizen. I didn't attend the class. One of my colleagues told me afterwards that One day during some relevant discussion, the teacher made a comment that Basis of Arabic Language is Sanskrit. Some colleagues vehemently opposed that in the class the matter ended there. That is what i was informed. I know nothing more about why the teacher said so. *** Vijay, Your views are not out of place. I also thought that way but unfortunately the ambiguity in today's available Sanskrit literature have caused many confusions. Warm Regards, Utpal , " Vijaya Kumara Lakshmi Narayana Rao Pingali " <pvklnrao wrote: > > I would like to caution ourselves from getting into arguments whether > or not Sanskrit is mother of all languages. One Arabic professor > making such claim does not add much credibility to the argument unless > he has some compelling reasons to make such statement. > > With in India, we find so called scholars arguing that Sanskrit came > from other languages. You go south and will find quite a few Tamilians > claim Sanskrit is not moth of Tamil. > > I would definitely be interested to see why the Arabic professor felt > what he felt; how ever, the more important and basic question Utpal > had is: Why is the knowledge written down in such disputable manner. > Why it is not written in simple words. > > Utpal, your observation is true. For a long time the knowledge is > passed on orally and there are quite a few corruptions in the > scriptures as we have today. > > Some of the scriptures have redundancy built in to ensure the > corruptions are checked to a large extension. > > Coming to the different meanings, it could be on purpose to some > extent to ensure only the individuals with correct attitude has the > intution to understand it. This could have been brought in by the > people who passed on the knowledge as they were seeing India getting > invaded. They carriers of knowledge may have purposefully created the > ambiguities. > > Best regards, > Vijay > , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Utpalji > > Â > > Held as the finest language and mother of all the > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a bold > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit > > Â > > Can you provide some references for this? Really interesting. > > Â > > -Regards > > Â Rajarshi > > > > > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > --- On Fri, 20/2/09, utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> wrote: > > > > utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> > > Sanskrit as a language !!! > > > > Friday, 20 February, 2009, 10:44 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Narasimha & other Sanskrit Scholars, > > > > One pending issue with me which i wish to put in front of all of you > > for clarifications- > > > > Take instance of Jyotish Classics. I've seen Scholars (Who are > > having knowledge of Jyotisha as well as Sankrita) debating endlessly > > on a particular verse . one or two lines or sometimes even a couple > > of words in a verse seems to create great confusions. we have seen > > that different scholars tend to interpret and derive different > > meaning from a same verse. i took the example of jyotish classics > > because we are more familiar with controversies in that area. > > > > This confusion is also applicable in other literature of Sanskrit > > language. > > > > Why Sanskrit (Held as the finest language and mother of all the > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a bold > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit) should create so > > much confusions among the scholars. is it that ambiguous or the > > writers didn't wrote in a clutter-less fashion or the current > > generation is not sharp enough to grasp the right meaning. Whatever > > may be the case, why a verse should fail to give one a simple > > undisputable meaning at least literally like in our modern > languages? > > > > Warm Regards, > > > > Utpal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to > http://messenger./invite/ > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 Elders do tell Sanskrit is mother of many languages. I do believe in this. How ever, this is my belief and hence I can not convince other on validity of such a claim. The follow verse (in Sankrit) claims the status for Sanskrit: divyam, bhavyam, subodham cha, suddham artha pradayinim jananeem bahu bhashaNam vandae girvaNa bharateem Best regards, Vijay , " utpal pathak " <vedic_pathak wrote: > > Dear Vijay & Rajarshi, > > First of all let me clarify - When i wrote that 'Sanskrit is mother > of all languages' it was a reference-less statement however i really > wonder who can quote reference for this particular claim. But any > ways, i apologize for the same. Why i said so because i have always > heard this from my elders. Also the many Sanskrit words in our > regional languages also add to that. but i know that is a > controversial statement. > > Regarding Arabic Teacher - My Company organized classes for learning > Arabic language for interested employees. The teacher was a Lebanese > citizen. I didn't attend the class. One of my colleagues told me > afterwards that One day during some relevant discussion, the teacher > made a comment that Basis of Arabic Language is Sanskrit. Some > colleagues vehemently opposed that in the class the matter ended > there. That is what i was informed. I know nothing more about why > the teacher said so. > > *** > > Vijay, > > Your views are not out of place. I also thought that way but > unfortunately the ambiguity in today's available Sanskrit literature > have caused many confusions. > > Warm Regards, > > Utpal > > > , " Vijaya Kumara Lakshmi Narayana > Rao Pingali " <pvklnrao@> wrote: > > > > I would like to caution ourselves from getting into arguments > whether > > or not Sanskrit is mother of all languages. One Arabic professor > > making such claim does not add much credibility to the argument > unless > > he has some compelling reasons to make such statement. > > > > With in India, we find so called scholars arguing that Sanskrit > came > > from other languages. You go south and will find quite a few > Tamilians > > claim Sanskrit is not moth of Tamil. > > > > I would definitely be interested to see why the Arabic professor > felt > > what he felt; how ever, the more important and basic question > Utpal > > had is: Why is the knowledge written down in such disputable > manner. > > Why it is not written in simple words. > > > > Utpal, your observation is true. For a long time the knowledge is > > passed on orally and there are quite a few corruptions in the > > scriptures as we have today. > > > > Some of the scriptures have redundancy built in to ensure the > > corruptions are checked to a large extension. > > > > Coming to the different meanings, it could be on purpose to some > > extent to ensure only the individuals with correct attitude has > the > > intution to understand it. This could have been brought in by the > > people who passed on the knowledge as they were seeing India > getting > > invaded. They carriers of knowledge may have purposefully created > the > > ambiguities. > > > > Best regards, > > Vijay > > , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Utpalji > > > Â > > > Held as the finest language and mother of all the > > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a > bold > > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit > > > Â > > > Can you provide some references for this? Really interesting. > > > Â > > > -Regards > > > Â Rajarshi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > --- On Fri, 20/2/09, utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> wrote: > > > > > > utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> > > > Sanskrit as a language !!! > > > > > > Friday, 20 February, 2009, 10:44 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Narasimha & other Sanskrit Scholars, > > > > > > One pending issue with me which i wish to put in front of all of > you > > > for clarifications- > > > > > > Take instance of Jyotish Classics. I've seen Scholars (Who are > > > having knowledge of Jyotisha as well as Sankrita) debating > endlessly > > > on a particular verse . one or two lines or sometimes even a > couple > > > of words in a verse seems to create great confusions. we have > seen > > > that different scholars tend to interpret and derive different > > > meaning from a same verse. i took the example of jyotish > classics > > > because we are more familiar with controversies in that area. > > > > > > This confusion is also applicable in other literature of > Sanskrit > > > language. > > > > > > Why Sanskrit (Held as the finest language and mother of all the > > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a > bold > > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit) should create > so > > > much confusions among the scholars. is it that ambiguous or the > > > writers didn't wrote in a clutter-less fashion or the current > > > generation is not sharp enough to grasp the right meaning. > Whatever > > > may be the case, why a verse should fail to give one a simple > > > undisputable meaning at least literally like in our modern > > languages? > > > > > > Warm Regards, > > > > > > Utpal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to > > http://messenger./invite/ > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 Dear Vijay, I wasn't convincing any body about Sanskrit ! one do write something which one believes fully or partially and that doesn't mean that it is always to convince people about one's belief. Thank you for the verse. it'll be useful a one. Warm Regards, Utpal , " Vijaya Kumara Lakshmi Narayana Rao Pingali " <pvklnrao wrote: > > Elders do tell Sanskrit is mother of many languages. I do believe in > this. How ever, this is my belief and hence I can not convince other > on validity of such a claim. The follow verse (in Sankrit) claims the > status for Sanskrit: > divyam, bhavyam, subodham cha, suddham artha pradayinim > jananeem bahu bhashaNam vandae girvaNa bharateem > > Best regards, > Vijay > , " utpal pathak " <vedic_pathak@> > wrote: > > > > Dear Vijay & Rajarshi, > > > > First of all let me clarify - When i wrote that 'Sanskrit is mother > > of all languages' it was a reference-less statement however i really > > wonder who can quote reference for this particular claim. But any > > ways, i apologize for the same. Why i said so because i have always > > heard this from my elders. Also the many Sanskrit words in our > > regional languages also add to that. but i know that is a > > controversial statement. > > > > Regarding Arabic Teacher - My Company organized classes for learning > > Arabic language for interested employees. The teacher was a Lebanese > > citizen. I didn't attend the class. One of my colleagues told me > > afterwards that One day during some relevant discussion, the teacher > > made a comment that Basis of Arabic Language is Sanskrit. Some > > colleagues vehemently opposed that in the class the matter ended > > there. That is what i was informed. I know nothing more about why > > the teacher said so. > > > > *** > > > > Vijay, > > > > Your views are not out of place. I also thought that way but > > unfortunately the ambiguity in today's available Sanskrit literature > > have caused many confusions. > > > > Warm Regards, > > > > Utpal > > > > > > , " Vijaya Kumara Lakshmi Narayana > > Rao Pingali " <pvklnrao@> wrote: > > > > > > I would like to caution ourselves from getting into arguments > > whether > > > or not Sanskrit is mother of all languages. One Arabic professor > > > making such claim does not add much credibility to the argument > > unless > > > he has some compelling reasons to make such statement. > > > > > > With in India, we find so called scholars arguing that Sanskrit > > came > > > from other languages. You go south and will find quite a few > > Tamilians > > > claim Sanskrit is not moth of Tamil. > > > > > > I would definitely be interested to see why the Arabic professor > > felt > > > what he felt; how ever, the more important and basic question > > Utpal > > > had is: Why is the knowledge written down in such disputable > > manner. > > > Why it is not written in simple words. > > > > > > Utpal, your observation is true. For a long time the knowledge is > > > passed on orally and there are quite a few corruptions in the > > > scriptures as we have today. > > > > > > Some of the scriptures have redundancy built in to ensure the > > > corruptions are checked to a large extension. > > > > > > Coming to the different meanings, it could be on purpose to some > > > extent to ensure only the individuals with correct attitude has > > the > > > intution to understand it. This could have been brought in by the > > > people who passed on the knowledge as they were seeing India > > getting > > > invaded. They carriers of knowledge may have purposefully created > > the > > > ambiguities. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Vijay > > > , rajarshi nandy <rajarshi14@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Utpalji > > > > Â > > > > Held as the finest language and mother of all the > > > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a > > bold > > > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit > > > > Â > > > > Can you provide some references for this? Really interesting. > > > > Â > > > > -Regards > > > > Â Rajarshi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 20/2/09, utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> wrote: > > > > > > > > utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> > > > > Sanskrit as a language !!! > > > > > > > > Friday, 20 February, 2009, 10:44 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Narasimha & other Sanskrit Scholars, > > > > > > > > One pending issue with me which i wish to put in front of all of > > you > > > > for clarifications- > > > > > > > > Take instance of Jyotish Classics. I've seen Scholars (Who are > > > > having knowledge of Jyotisha as well as Sankrita) debating > > endlessly > > > > on a particular verse . one or two lines or sometimes even a > > couple > > > > of words in a verse seems to create great confusions. we have > > seen > > > > that different scholars tend to interpret and derive different > > > > meaning from a same verse. i took the example of jyotish > > classics > > > > because we are more familiar with controversies in that area. > > > > > > > > This confusion is also applicable in other literature of > > Sanskrit > > > > language. > > > > > > > > Why Sanskrit (Held as the finest language and mother of all the > > > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a > > bold > > > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit) should create > > so > > > > much confusions among the scholars. is it that ambiguous or the > > > > writers didn't wrote in a clutter-less fashion or the current > > > > generation is not sharp enough to grasp the right meaning. > > Whatever > > > > may be the case, why a verse should fail to give one a simple > > > > undisputable meaning at least literally like in our modern > > > languages? > > > > > > > > Warm Regards, > > > > > > > > Utpal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to > > > http://messenger./invite/ > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Dear Friends, Because our all Vedas,Puranas,Ramayan are written in Sanskrit only.Which ancient Granth available to us is in Sanskrit only,why any one have objection to say 'Sanskrit is mother language " ? That period where Sanskrit is main language East to West,North to South so it used thoroughly and we have all the " Shastra " in Sanskrit.To understand it is difficult because the link from that period to Mugalkal we lost by offender cause,they burn all most all our literature to destroy our culture and History.After Mugalkal English came and the impose English.Now English is International language,after 22 century if people will say English is mother language. Thanks, M.S.bohra , " utpal pathak " <vedic_pathak wrote: > > Dear Vijay, > > I wasn't convincing any body about Sanskrit ! one do write something > which one believes fully or partially and that doesn't mean that it > is always to convince people about one's belief. > > Thank you for the verse. it'll be useful a one. > > Warm Regards, > > Utpal > > , " Vijaya Kumara Lakshmi Narayana > Rao Pingali " <pvklnrao@> wrote: > > > > Elders do tell Sanskrit is mother of many languages. I do believe > in > > this. How ever, this is my belief and hence I can not convince > other > > on validity of such a claim. The follow verse (in Sankrit) claims > the > > status for Sanskrit: > > divyam, bhavyam, subodham cha, suddham artha pradayinim > > jananeem bahu bhashaNam vandae girvaNa bharateem > > > > Best regards, > > Vijay > > , " utpal pathak " > <vedic_pathak@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Vijay & Rajarshi, > > > > > > First of all let me clarify - When i wrote that 'Sanskrit is > mother > > > of all languages' it was a reference-less statement however i > really > > > wonder who can quote reference for this particular claim. But > any > > > ways, i apologize for the same. Why i said so because i have > always > > > heard this from my elders. Also the many Sanskrit words in our > > > regional languages also add to that. but i know that is a > > > controversial statement. > > > > > > Regarding Arabic Teacher - My Company organized classes for > learning > > > Arabic language for interested employees. The teacher was a > Lebanese > > > citizen. I didn't attend the class. One of my colleagues told me > > > afterwards that One day during some relevant discussion, the > teacher > > > made a comment that Basis of Arabic Language is Sanskrit. Some > > > colleagues vehemently opposed that in the class the matter > ended > > > there. That is what i was informed. I know nothing more about > why > > > the teacher said so. > > > > > > *** > > > > > > Vijay, > > > > > > Your views are not out of place. I also thought that way but > > > unfortunately the ambiguity in today's available Sanskrit > literature > > > have caused many confusions. > > > > > > Warm Regards, > > > > > > Utpal > > > > > > > > > , " Vijaya Kumara Lakshmi > Narayana > > > Rao Pingali " <pvklnrao@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I would like to caution ourselves from getting into arguments > > > whether > > > > or not Sanskrit is mother of all languages. One Arabic > professor > > > > making such claim does not add much credibility to the > argument > > > unless > > > > he has some compelling reasons to make such statement. > > > > > > > > With in India, we find so called scholars arguing that > Sanskrit > > > came > > > > from other languages. You go south and will find quite a few > > > Tamilians > > > > claim Sanskrit is not moth of Tamil. > > > > > > > > I would definitely be interested to see why the Arabic > professor > > > felt > > > > what he felt; how ever, the more important and basic question > > > Utpal > > > > had is: Why is the knowledge written down in such disputable > > > manner. > > > > Why it is not written in simple words. > > > > > > > > Utpal, your observation is true. For a long time the knowledge > is > > > > passed on orally and there are quite a few corruptions in the > > > > scriptures as we have today. > > > > > > > > Some of the scriptures have redundancy built in to ensure the > > > > corruptions are checked to a large extension. > > > > > > > > Coming to the different meanings, it could be on purpose to > some > > > > extent to ensure only the individuals with correct attitude > has > > > the > > > > intution to understand it. This could have been brought in by > the > > > > people who passed on the knowledge as they were seeing India > > > getting > > > > invaded. They carriers of knowledge may have purposefully > created > > > the > > > > ambiguities. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Vijay > > > > , rajarshi nandy > <rajarshi14@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Utpalji > > > > > Â > > > > > Held as the finest language and mother of all the > > > > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a > > > bold > > > > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit > > > > > Â > > > > > Can you provide some references for this? Really interesting. > > > > > Â > > > > > -Regards > > > > > Â Rajarshi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The upsurge (of consciousness) is Bhairava - Shiva Sutra > > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 20/2/09, utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > utpal pathak <vedic_pathak@> > > > > > Sanskrit as a language !!! > > > > > > > > > > Friday, 20 February, 2009, 10:44 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste Narasimha & other Sanskrit Scholars, > > > > > > > > > > One pending issue with me which i wish to put in front of > all of > > > you > > > > > for clarifications- > > > > > > > > > > Take instance of Jyotish Classics. I've seen Scholars (Who > are > > > > > having knowledge of Jyotisha as well as Sankrita) debating > > > endlessly > > > > > on a particular verse . one or two lines or sometimes even a > > > couple > > > > > of words in a verse seems to create great confusions. we > have > > > seen > > > > > that different scholars tend to interpret and derive > different > > > > > meaning from a same verse. i took the example of jyotish > > > classics > > > > > because we are more familiar with controversies in that area. > > > > > > > > > > This confusion is also applicable in other literature of > > > Sanskrit > > > > > language. > > > > > > > > > > Why Sanskrit (Held as the finest language and mother of all > the > > > > > other language - One Arabic language teacher recently made a > > > bold > > > > > comment that basis of Arabic language is sanskrit) should > create > > > so > > > > > much confusions among the scholars. is it that ambiguous or > the > > > > > writers didn't wrote in a clutter-less fashion or the > current > > > > > generation is not sharp enough to grasp the right meaning. > > > Whatever > > > > > may be the case, why a verse should fail to give one a > simple > > > > > undisputable meaning at least literally like in our modern > > > > languages? > > > > > > > > > > Warm Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Utpal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to > > > > http://messenger./invite/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.